“I AM BELIEVED TO BE INITIATED INTO THE SECRETS OF THE GREATS”:

SECRECY, INTELLIGENCE, AND SELF-FASHIONING IN THE WRITINGS OF MESDAMES DE BLAU AND DU NOYER

A THESIS SUBMITTED TO THE GRADUATE DIVISION OF THE UNIVERSITY OF HAWAI‘I AT MĀNOA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF

MASTER OF ARTS

IN

HISTORY

MAY 2021

By

Miranda M. Kam

Thesis Committee:

Matthew Lauzon, Chairperson Kieko Matteson Kathryn Hoffmann

Keywords: gender, women’s writing, Franco-Dutch diplomacy, War of the Spanish Succession ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I would like to thank the members of my committee, Dr. Matthew Lauzon, Dr. Kieko

Matteson, and Dr. Kathryn Hoffmann, for their guidance and support. All three inspired my initial interest in French history and literature and I appreciate everything that I have learned from them. I am especially grateful to Dr. Lauzon, without whom this thesis would not have been possible. I would also like to thank Dr. Peter Arnade for his supervision and comments during the preparation of an earlier version of the first chapter of this thesis.

i ABSTRACT

This thesis considers two women—Marie-Madeleine de Saint-Paul de Seroskerque, Madame de

Blau (1681?-1749) and Anne-Marguerite Petit Du Noyer (1663-1719)—who traveled between

France and the Dutch Republic and respectively engaged in secret and public diplomacy during the peace negotiations to end the War of the Spanish Succession. Mme de Blau served as a pseudo-spy for the French court during the peace conference in Geertruidenberg (1710) and

Mme Du Noyer reported on the peace negotiations in Utrecht (1712-1714) in the Lettres historiques et galantes, the Nouveau mercure galant and the Quintessence des Nouvelles. This thesis examines the Fonds Blau (Archives Nationales, AP 25/1) and Mme Du Noyer’s published works in an attempt 1) to study how the women attempted to use their positions within diplomatic intelligence networks to negotiate their personal status and what their attempts suggest about the limitations of their gender status and positions within elite society, 2) to explore the connections and instabilities between secrecy and publicity, the public and the private, and informal and formal diplomacy during Louis XIV’s reign, and 3) to consider the women’s self-fashionings through analysis of the representational strategies employed in their accounts. This thesis will attempt to reveal common themes and strategies between the women’s accounts while simultaneously emphasizing the generic diversity of these sources and differences in the women’s stories. This thesis will argue that in order to achieve their personal goals, the women needed to represent themselves in ways that did not transgress social norms.

This included de-emphasizing their liminal identities and depicting themselves as ‘good’ mothers and loyal subjects of Louis XIV.

ii TABLE OF CONTENTS

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS……………………………………………………………….………...i ABSTRACT………………………………………………………………………………….…...ii LIST OF TABLES....……………………………………………………..………………………iv INTRODUCTION….………………………………………………………………….………….1 Women, Diplomacy, and the Louisquatorzian Information State.…………………….….3 Liminal Identities and Discursive Self-Fashionings.…………………………………….12 Secrecy, Publicity, and the Public Sphere under Louis XIV………………………….…17 Sources and Methodology.……………………………………………………………….21 CHAPTER 1. MME DE BLAU’S SECRET MISSION IN GEERTRUIDENBERG…………...26 Kinship Networks and Elite Connections………………………………………………..27 Reconstructing Mme de Blau’s Mission…………………………………………………35 Exposing the Secret and Petitioning for Compensation…………………………………48 Mme de Blau’s (Limited) Successes………………………………………………….….53 The Public, the Private, and Women Diplomats…………………………………………64 CHAPTER 2. MME DU NOYER’S REPORTING ON PEACE IN UTRECHT.………………70 Autobiography and Literary ‘Masks’ in Du Noyer’s Works…………………………….72 The Quintessence des Nouvelles—Libel or Panegyric?...... 84 Galanterie and Histoire in Early Modern French Women’s Writing……………….….101 The Lettres historiques et galantes and the Nouveau mercure galant………………….105 The fêtes galantes and Displays of Women’s Talents………………………….………124 The Mariage précipité and the Consequences of Female Ambition…………………...129 CONCLUSION….……………………………………………………………………………...149 BIBLIOGRAPHY….…………………………………………………………………………...157

iii LIST OF TABLES

Table 1. Mme de Blau’s mission expenditures from her “Mémoire de dépence pour pour [sic] lentretiens des personne de qui javois besoin pour executé les intention du Roy,” n.d., A.N., 25 AP/1, folder 1, document 13……………………………………………………………………..43

Table 2. Mme Du Noyer’s published works by title, nominal author, format, and publication details.…………………………………………………………………………………………....76

iv INTRODUCTION

When I began developing this project, my intention was to use Marie-Madeleine de

Saint-Paul de Seroskerque, Madame de Blau (1681?-1749) and Anne-Marguerite Petit Du Noyer

(1663-1719) as case studies in order to study women’s roles in early modern European diplomacy and how diplomacy offered certain women an opportunity to exercise power and advance their personal status.1 Both women operated in the arenas of information collection and management between France and the Dutch Republic during the peace negotiations to end the

War of the Spanish Succession. Mme de Blau was born an elite Dutch Protestant. She later converted to Catholicism and acted as an agent of Louis XIV in the Dutch Republic during the peace negotiations in Geertruidenberg. During her mission, she clandestinely relayed information to French ministers and aided the French plenipotentiaries with their maneuverings until the end of the war. Mme Du Noyer was a bourgeois French Protestant who fled France twice after the revocation of the Edict of Nantes. While in religious exile in The Hague, she reported on the War of the Spanish Succession and the Congress of Utrecht to francophone audiences through her journalistic endeavors and other publications. These include her Lettres historiques et galantes (7 vols., 1704/7?-1717),2 her Mémoires (5 vols., 1710), and two periodicals: the short-lived

1 I approximate 1681 as Mme de Blau’s year of birth based on her claim to have been 24 when she married Thomas de Blau in 1705 (25 AP/1 Fonds Blau, Archives Nationales, Pierrefitte-sur-Seine, France, folder 1, document 6). This collection is henceforth cited as A.N., 25 AP/1. 2 While some bibliographers like Quéard and Barbier suggested that the Lettres historiques et galantes were first published in seven volumes in 1704 in Cologne, more recent attempts by scholars to locate this edition have been unsuccessful and it remains unclear when the Lettres historiques et galantes first appeared. Alain Nabarra doubted the existence of this 1704 edition and dated the publication of the Lettres historiques et galantes’s seven volumes as 1707-1717. He dated the first publications of Volumes 2-7 of the Lettres historiques et galantes: Vol. 2 (1708), Vol. 3 (1710), Vol. 4 (1711), Vol. 5 (1712), Vol. 6 (1713), Vol. 7 (1717). While the Lettres historiques et galantes indicate ‘Pierre Marteau, Libraire à Cologne’ as its publisher, in actuality, their publisher was Pierre Husson in The Hague (Alain Nabarra, “Lettres historiques et galantes” in Jean Sgard, Dictionnaire des journalistes (1600–1789), Édition électronique revue, corrigée et augmentée; Alain Nabarra, “Correspondances réelles, correspondances fictives: les Lettres historiques et galantes de Mme Dunoyer ou ‘la rocambole’ d’un ‘petit badinage établi d’abord pour le plaisir,” in Femmes en toutes lettres: Les épistolières du XVIIIe siècle, eds. Marie-France Silver and Marie- Laure Girou Swiderski (Oxford: Voltaire Foundation, 2000), 9-11). 1 Nouveau Mercure galant des Cours de l’Europe that she created and operated from November to

December 1710 and the long-running Quintessence des Nouvelles (1689-1730), which she directed from sometime in 1711 until her death in May 1719. The juxtaposition of secret and public diplomacy between these women’s stories offers a compelling framework in which to consider women’s roles in Franco-Dutch diplomacy during the War of the Spanish Succession.

Moreover, both Mme de Blau and Mme Du Noyer are absent from most ‘traditional’ historical accounts of the war and they remain understudied within the field of diplomatic history.3

In this thesis, I begin to rectify this omission by reconstructing their roles in diplomatic intelligence networks and by situating Mmes de Blau and Du Noyer within the broader histories of women and diplomacy and French diplomacy during Louis XIV’s reign. However, this thesis is ultimately less about the women’s diplomatic roles, successes, and failures as mediators of information than it is about how the women attempted to use diplomacy as an opportunity to negotiate their personal statuses and the ways that they navigated the various gendered, social, and political constraints that regulated them through their ‘self-fashionings,’ mobility, and the discursive strategies within their texts. Although Blau and Du Noyer enjoyed many ‘freedoms’

3 For example, neither Blau nor Du Noyer are mentioned in Arsène Legrelle, La Diplomatie française et la succession d’Espagne, vol. 4, La Solution (1700-1725) (Paris: Librairie Cotillon, F. Pichon, 1892), 459-577. Notable exceptions include Lucien Bély, Espions et ambassadeurs (Paris: Fayard, 1991); Lucien Bély, “Les larmes de Monsieur de Torcy. Un essai sur les perspectives de l’histoire diplomatique à propos des conférences de Gertruydenberg (mars-juillet 1710),” Histoire, économie et société 2ᵉ année, no. 3 (1983): 429-456; Lucien Bély, L’art de la paix en Europe: Naissance de la diplomatie moderne XVIe-XVIIIe siècle (Paris: Presses universitaires de France, 2006); Stéphanie Cespedes, “L’histoire d’une famille à l’époque moderne: La famille Blau” (unpublished M.A. thesis, Université Paris-Est Marne-la-Vallée, 2008); Henriette Goldwyn and Suzan van Dijk, “Madame Du Noyer Presenting and Re-presenting the Peace of Utrecht,” in Performances of Peace Utrecht 1713, eds. Renger E. de Bruin, Cornelis van der Haven, Lotte Jensen and David Onnekink (Leiden and Boston: Brill, 2015), 95-113. Also, Mme Du Noyer is featured in Casimir? Freschot, Histoire amoureuse et badine du congrès et de la ville d’Utrecht (Liège: Jacob Le Doux, 1713). Casimir Freschot was a historian known for his Histoire du Congrès et de la Paix d’Utrecht (Utrecht: Guillaume van Poolsum, 1716). See Heinz Duchhardt, “‘Dieu veuille que cette Paix soit de longue durée …’ The History of the Congress and the Peace of Utrecht by Casimir Freschot,” in Performances of Peace Utrecht 1713, eds. Renger E. de Bruin, Cornelis van der Haven, Lotte Jensen and David Onnekink (Leiden and Boston: Brill, 2015), 114-122. 2 that most women in early modern Europe did not have, they still needed to behave and represent themselves in ways that complied with social expectations in order to ‘successfully’ act on their ambitions.

Women, Diplomacy, and the Louisquatorzian Information State

As women who participated in ‘international’ politics and intelligence gathering, Mme de

Blau and Mme Du Noyer were not particularly unique. For example, Élisabeth Charlotte,

Duchesse d’Orléans (1652-1722), recounted to one of her correspondents an episode during which she attempted to relay to Louis XIV information that she had received through her personal correspondence with a French refugee in Holland.4 She claimed that although Louis

XIV had initially thanked her for the information, “le soir il dit en riant: « Mes ministres soutiennent que vous êtes mal instruite et qu’on ne vous a pas écrit un mot de vérité ».”5 Once her information proved to be accurate, she claimed, “M. de Torcy vint me dire que je devrais lui faire part des nouvelles que je recevais” and admitted to her that “‘Vos nouvelles se sont trouvées fort bonnes.’”6 She quipped back to the minister that “‘Un grand et habile ministre doit en effet en avoir de plus sûres que moi, et il sait tout,’” earning herself an admonishment from the king.7

In her correspondence, the Duchesse d’Orléans had few kind words to describe Jean-

Baptiste Colbert, Marquis de Torcy, the ‘toad’ whose surveillance of the post regularly disrupted

4 Élisabeth Charlotte, Duchesse d’Orléans, Correspondance complète de Madame Duchesse d’Orléans née Princesse Palatine, mère du régent, ed. and trans. M.G. Brunet (Paris: Charpentier, 1857), 1:247. 5 Ibid. “In the evening he laughed: ‘My ministers insist that you are ill-informed and that you have not been written a word of truth.’” 6 Ibid. “M. de Torcy came to tell me that I should inform him of the news that I received”; “‘Your news was found to be very good.’” 7 Ibid. “‘A great and able minister must indeed have surer [news] than I do, and he knows everything.’” 3 her epistolary exchanges.8 She went so far as to accuse Colbert de Torcy of deliberately withholding and delaying her correspondence just to inconvenience her. Writing to one of her regular correspondents, Raugräfin Luise (1661-1733), she indicated her suspicion that Colbert de

Torcy had prevented her letters from reaching the Princess of Wales “on purpose to set the

Princess against me and to make Her Grace believe that I do not care about her.”9 In a separate letter to Luise, she expressed similar sentiments, commenting, “I am glad that my letters have reached you in good order. Monsieur de Torcy is by no means my friend: if he could find something to harm me, he would be sure to do it” and describing one of the intensive processes by which Colbert de Torcy and the cabinet noir monitored correspondence traveling in and out of Paris.10 Regardless of the veracity of her claims, the Duchesse d’Orléans’s clashes with

Colbert de Torcy suggest the minister’s recognition of the potential power and utility of women’s epistolary networks as spaces for the transmission of information.

Colbert de Torcy’s preoccupation with controlling information flows is indicative of the larger bureaucratic apparatus that characterized the office of foreign affairs during Louis XIV’s reign. Colbert de Torcy’s uncle, Jean-Baptiste Colbert, whom Jacob Soll aptly crowned ‘the information master,’ constructed a complex administrative system that intertwined information management, secrecy, publicity, and the state that his nephew later continued.11 In this system, the collection, censorship, and preservation of information functioned as instruments of statecraft

8 Ibid., 1:77. 9 Élisabeth Charlotte, duchesse d’Orléans, A Woman’s Life in the Court of the Sun King: Letters of Liselotte von Der Pfalz, 1652-1722, ed. and trans. Elborg Forster (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1984), 207. 10 Ibid, 208. “That the letters are properly sealed does not mean anything; they have a material made of mercury and other stuff that can be pressed onto the seal, where it takes on the shape of the seal. After it is taken off and permitted to dry in the air, it becomes very hard, so that it can be used as a seal. They take off all the original sealing was, making sure to note whether it is black of red. After they have read and copied the letters, they neatly reseal them and no one can see that they have been opened.” (December 2, 1717). 11 Jacob Soll, The Information Master: Jean-Baptiste Colbert’s Secret State Intelligence System (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 2009). 4 and royal power both domestically and abroad as the regulation of information became a way to inform political policy, control nobles, sway public opinion, and influence historical memory.12

The agents and components encompassed within the spheres of ‘intelligence’ were diverse. John

C. Rule and Ben S. Trotter proposed categorization of “Intelligence gatherers […] into roughly seven non-exhaustive and overlapping categories: those in the immediate war zone; agents secreted at or near strategic sites; spies on missions; gadflies living at court or in major urban centres; deep-seated spies (or moles); diplomats recruited by a foreign power; and spymasters directing field operations.”13 In his numerous works, Lucien Bély has extensively examined the diverse—at times, competing—aspects of intelligence gathering and exchange, including espionage, diplomacy, aristocratic sociability, letter writing, the press, censorship, travel, sociability, and social networks.14

Not only were women active participants in these arenas, but as James Daybell suggested in his examination of women’s intelligence networks in Elizabethan England, “Gender was also in some ways an advantage, one that sometimes allowed women to operate below the radar of surveillance, and that under a female monarch structurally allowed them access to kinds of intelligence and information denied to men because of their own gender.”15 Yet, it is only recently that scholars have begun to consider women’s involvement in the collection and management of diplomatic intelligence. This oversight is largely a consequence of historians’ focus on ‘formal’ and ‘public’ diplomatic acts that overlooked the ‘informal’ and ‘private’

12 Ibid.; John C. Rule and Ben S. Trotter, A World of Paper: Louis XIV, Colbert de Torcy, and the Rise of the Information State (McGill: Queen’s University Press, 2014). 13 Rule and Trotter, A World of Paper, 349. 14 e.g., Bély, Espions et ambassadeurs; Bély, L’art de la paix. 15 James Daybell, “Gender, Politics and Diplomacy: Women, News and Intelligence Networks in Elizabethan England,” in Diplomacy and Early Modern Culture, eds. Robyn Adams and Rosanna Cox (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2011),114. 5 interventions in which women were more likely to participate.16 These severances of the private from the public and of the informal from the formal are anachronistic. In early modern European political and diplomatic cultures, these categories were highly unstable and ‘informal’ personal networks could become powerful political and diplomatic tools.

Since the emergence of the ‘New Diplomatic History’ and calls for expanded definitions of ‘politics’ and ‘diplomacy’ during the 1980s and 1990s, historians have actively worked to blur these distinctions, thus allowing the incorporation of women and other ‘informal’ actors into international political history.17 Much of the work intersecting women, diplomacy, politics, and information exchange has focused on the roles of noblewomen in early modern European transregional marriage arrangements and kinship networks.18 Michaela Hohkamp suggests that the women who partook in such marriages “served as instruments” for the furtherment of their

16 With the exception of queenship, most early modern European women did not have access to ‘formal’ political power. That is not to say that there were no exceptions. For example, Renée du Bec Crespin, the Maréchale de Guébriant, who accompanied Marie Louise de Gonzague to Poland, is considered to be one of the first to have had the title of ambassadrice ‘in her own right.’ See Albert Vandal, “Un Mariage politique au XVIIe siècle—Marie de Gonzague à Varsovie,” Revue des Deux Mondes 55 (1883): 671-695; Anuschka Tischer, “Eine französische Botschafterin in Polen 1645-1646, Die Gesandtschaftsreise Renée de Guébriants zum Hofe Wladislaws IV,” L’Homme 12, 2 (2001): 305-321; Lucien Bély, L’art de la paix, 213-224. 17 See Karin Aggestam and Ann Towns, “The gender turn in diplomacy: a new research agenda,” International Feminist Journal of Politics 21, no. 1 (2019): 9-28. 18 To list a few other examples of works that address this type of marriage diplomacy and dynastic marriage among the elite nobility in early modern Europe: Michaela Hohkamp, “Transdynasticism at the Dawn of the Modern Era: Kinship Dynamics among Ruling Families,” in Transregional and Transnational Families in Europe and Beyond: Experiences since the Middle Ages, eds. Christopher Johnson, David Warren Sabean, Simon Teuscher, and Francesca Trivellato (New York and Oxford: Berghahn Books, 2011), 93-106; Clarissa Campbell Orr, ed., Queenship in Europe, 1660-1815: the role of the consort (Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press, 2004); Isabelle Poutrin and Marie-Karine Schaub, eds., Femmes & pouvoir politique. Les princesses d’Europe XVe- XVIIe siècle (Paris: Éditions Bréal, 2007); Dorothea Nolde, “Princesses voyageuses au XVIIe siècle: Médiatrices politiques et passeuses culturelles,” Clio 28 (2008): 59-76; Géraud Poumarède, “Mazarin, marieur de l’Europe. Stratégies familiales, enjeux dynastiques et géopolitique au milieu du XVIIe siècle,” Dix-septième siècle 243, no. 2 (2009): 201-218; Giulia Calvi and Isabelle Chabot, eds., Moving Elites: Women and Cultural Transfers in the European Court System (Florence: EUI Working Papers, 2010); Joan Lluís Palos and Magdalena Sánchez, eds., Early Modern Dynastic Marriages and Cultural Transfer (London and New York: Routledge, 2015); Carolyn Harris, Queenship and Revolution in Early Modern Europe: Henrietta Maria and Marie Antoinette (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2016); Helen Watanabe-O’Kelly and Adam Morton, eds., Queens Consort, Cultural Transfer and European Politics, c.1500-1800 (London and New York: Routledge, 2016), James Daybell and Svante Norrhem, eds., Gender and Political Culture in Early Modern Europe, 1400-1800 (London and New York: Routledge, 2016). 6 natal family’s interests, “kept families and houses in touch with each other and that marriages both played a role for constructing vertically structured lineages and dynasties and served as instruments for creating horizontal transfamilial and transdynastic networks.”19 However, it is important to note that women were not necessarily relegated to roles as passive ‘instruments.’ As

Silvia Z. Mitchell and others have demonstrated, women were actively involved in the arrangement of marriages and the maintenance of their long-distance networks; Mitchell proposes that “rather than thinking of them as pawns of male rulers, we should also consider these women as agents of diplomatic change.”20 Several of these studies underscore the liminal character of these queens and princesses, who, to be ‘successful’ intermediaries, needed to navigate between maintaining the identity and ties that they had formed in their natal family and court and efficaciously integrating into those of their husbands.

The position of the women within kinship networks, the ritualized household, and client- patron relationships granted women proximity to power, which could equate to legitimate, albeit

‘informal,’ political influence. As Barbara J. Harris suggested in her study of elite women in early modern England:

Overwhelming evidence exists that they [elite women] participated with enthusiasm, persistence, and success in all the activities connected to forming, maintaining, and exploiting patronage networks. What lay behind this phenomenon was the fact that the world of kinship, the great household, client/patron relations, and the court conflated concerns that we would label as either personal or political and virtually ignored the distinction between the public and the private. Thus women moved unselfconsciously into the world of politics as they fulfilled their responsibilities as wives, mothers, and widows; when they did so, they engaged with surprising frequency in activities that even the dichotomies of contemporary social paradigms would recognize as political and public.21

19 Hohkamp, “Transdynasticism at the Dawn of the Modern Era,” 95. 20 Silvia Z. Mitchell, “Marriage Plots: Royal women, marriage diplomacy and international politics at the Spanish, French and Imperial Courts, 1665-1679,” in Women, Diplomacy and International Politics Since 1500, eds. Glenda Sluga and Carolyn James (London and New York: Routledge, 2015), 99. 21 Barbara J. Harris, “Women and Politics in Early Tudor England,” The Historical Journal 33, no. 2 (1990): 260. 7 Sharon Kettering made similar arguments about women’s domestic patronage power in early modern France, with the acknowledgement that “only women of the royal family were able to distribute political patronage in their own name” and that “women of the royal family had unique powers and privileges not enjoyed by other noblewomen.”22 While most women were unable to serve as patrons, they could benefit from patron-client relationships as clients. According to

Kettering, in return for a client’s service, obedience, and loyalty, “A patron assists and protects his clients, providing them with offices, arranging profitable marriages, finding places for their children, helping them with lawsuits or tax problems. He gives them economic aid and opportunities for career advancement and offers protection from the demands of others.

Patronage also refers to material rewards: a patron has the power to distribute goods and resources, especially political offices and favors.”23

Within elite families and kinship networks, some women’s proximity to powerful men granted them patronage power and made them appealing targets for ambassadors. Examining this phenomenon in seventeenth- and eighteenth-century Sweden, Peter Lindström and Svante

Norrhem emphasize the mutual benefits of these patron-client relationships as “The interaction between women and diplomats (or people near diplomats) gave way for both parties to circumvent both standing and temporary regulations which restricted men’s actions. By actively approaching women, diplomats also offered a platform from which women could act in a way that they otherwise could not have done.”24 Ambassadors’ wives too had the potential power to

22 Sharon Kettering, “The Patronage Power of Early Modern French Noblewomen,” The Historical Journal 32, no. 4 (1989): 818. e.g., Ruth Kleinman, “Social Dynamics at the French Court: The Household of Anne of Austria.” French Historical Studies 16, no. 3 (1990): 517-535. 23 Sharon Kettering, Patrons, Brokers, and Clients in Seventeenth-Century France (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1986), 3. 24 Peter Lindström and Svante Norrhem, “Diplomats and Kin Networks: Diplomatic strategy and gender in Sweden, 1648-1740,” in Gender and Political Culture in Early Modern Europe, 1400-1800, eds. James Daybell and Svante Norrhem (London and New York: Routledge, 2017), 68-88. 81. 8 circumvent ceremonial regulations and to significantly contribute to the diplomatic mission. In the last decade, a number of historians have considered the agency of women who served as ambassadresses alongside their ambassador husbands in diplomatic ‘working couples’ or

‘Arbeitspaare,’25 a concept that Heide Wunder developed to describe the synergistic partnership between husband and wife in the early modern German household.26 Recent studies have highlighted ambassadresses’ abilities to enter and forge affective ties and patron-client relations in ‘female’ spaces to which the ambassador did not have access, the ceremonial ambiguities that the ambassadress’s ‘informal’ role created and that the ‘working couple’ could in turn exploit, and, as Laura Oliván Santaliestra has shown, the ‘dynastic capital’ that certain ambassadresses could bring to the ambassadorial mission.27

Their positions within foreign courts allowed some ambassadresses to operate as important mediators of information. For example, Marie Gigault de Bellefonds, Marquise de

Villars and wife to the French ambassador to Spain from 1679 to 1681, aided (and potentially impeded) the French ambassadorial mission by acting as an intermediary between the new

25 Some examples include Alain Hugon, Au service du Roi Catholique: « Honorables ambassadeurs » et « divins espions ». Représentation diplomatique et service secret dans les relations hispano-françaises de 1598 à 1635 (Madrid: Casa de Velázquez, 2004); Madeline Bassnett, “‘All the Ceremonyes and Civilityes’: The Authorship of Diplomacy in the Memoirs of Ann, Lady Fanshawe,” The Seventeenth Century 26, no. 1 (2011): 94-118; Laura Oliván Santaliestra, “Gender, Work and Diplomacy in Baroque Spain: The Ambassadorial Couples of the Holy Roman Empire as Arbeitspaare,” Gender & History 29, no. 2 (August 2017): 423–445; Laura Oliván Santaliestra, “Lady Anne Fanshawe, Ambassadress of England at the Court of Madrid (1664-1666),” in Women, Diplomacy and International Politics Since 1500, eds. Glenda Sluga and Carolyn James (London and New York: Routledge, 2015), 68-85; Florian Kühnel, “‘Minister-like cleverness, understanding, and influence on affairs’: Ambassadresses in everyday business and courtly ceremonies at the turn of the eighteenth century,” in Practices of Diplomacy in the Early Modern World c. 1410-1800, eds. Tracey A. Sowerby and Jan Hennings (London and New York: Routledge, 2017), 120-146; Ezequiel Borgognoni, “Marie Gigault de Bellefonds, Ambassadress of France. Gender, Power and Diplomacy at the Court of Charles II of Spain, 1679-1681,” Primavera-verano 20 (2020): 7-30. 26 Heide Wunder, He is the Sun, She is the Moon: Women in Early Modern Germany (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1998). 27 Oliván Santaliestra, “Gender, Work and Diplomacy in Baroque Spain,” 424. 9 Spanish queen Marie Louise d’Orléans, the Marquis de Villars, and Louis XIV.28 Her proximity to the Spanish queen well positioned her to promote French interests and made her a ‘threat’ within the Spanish court as they perceived her to be a potentially dangerous foreign influence.

Her position also allowed her to function as an informant for members of her social circle in

France to whom she sent tantalizing details about the Spanish court and other ‘exotic’ curiosities alongside Spanish luxury products and gifts from the Spanish queen.29 Mme de Sévigné acknowledged, “Mme de Villars mande mille choses agréables à Mme de Coulanges: c’est chez elle qu’on vient apprendre les nouvelles. Ce sont des relations qui font la joie de beaucoup de personnes: M. de la Rochefoucauld en est curieux; Mme de Vins et moi en attrapons ce que nous pouvons.”30

Beyond fulfilling semi-formal roles as ambassadresses, women accessed diplomatic power through a variety of processes, most of which resist precise categorization. They did so through their positions as mistresses, spies, journalists, ladies-in-waiting—to provide just a few examples. Their roles could be informal, semi-informal, or formal, appointed or self-appointed, sanctioned by the state or at odds with it. Marie-Anne de La Trémoille, the Princesse des Ursins is one of the more extensively studied examples of a woman who operated as a diplomatic agent during the War of the Spanish Succession. As camarera mayor to Elisabeth Farnesse, Philip V’s queen, she wielded considerable influence over the Spanish monarchs. This led to many

28 Borgognoni, “Marie Gigault de Bellefonds, Ambassadress of France”; Matthew Lauzon, “The Ambassador’s Wife: The Marquise de Villars and the Uses of Matrimonial Teams in Louis XIV’s Diplomacy” (presentation, History Workshop, University of Hawai‘i at Mānoa, March 3, 2017). 29 Marie Gigault de Bellefonds, marquise de Villars, Lettres de Madame de Villars à Madame de Coulanges (1679- 1681), ed. Alfred de Courtois (Paris: H. Plon, 1868). 30 Marie de Rabutin-Chantal, marquise de Sévigné, Lettres de Madame de Sévigné, de sa famille et de ses amis, ed. Louis Jean Nicolas (Paris: L. Hachette, 1862), 6:284. “Mme de Villars tells Mme de Coulanges a thousand pleasant things: it is at her place that we come to learn the news. Many people enjoy these accounts: M. de la Rochefoucauld is curious about them; Mme de Vins and I catch what we can.” 10 eighteenth- and nineteenth-century accounts portraying her as mastermind puppeteer who controlled the Spanish throne and whose ‘masculine’ ambitions teetered on ridiculousness and ultimately led to her disgrace and expulsions from Spain.31 Recently, historians have resisted this characterization, opting instead to highlight her function as an intermediary and examining how that position granted her access to power. Anne-Madeleine Goulet, for example, has demonstrated how La Trémoille functioned as a self-appointed cultural intermediary between

Rome and Paris through the creation of her ‘French’ salon in Rome. Goulet has suggested that

La Trémoille’s ‘unofficial’ actions allowed her to cultivate connections, increase her and her family’s standing, and demonstrate her utility to the French court, which in turn led to her appointment as camarera mayor to the Spanish queen.32 Corina Bastian has suggested that the

Princesse des Ursins’s dual loyalties to the Spanish and French crowns afforded her greater freedom of movement than the French diplomats and that this freedom allowed her to play a significant role as a diplomatic intermediary between the two courts. Bastian has also highlighted

La Trémoille’s extensive correspondence with Mme de Maintenon as an important space for negotiation during the war.33

31 For examination of the Princesse des Ursins in the Mémoires of Saint-Simon, see Marianne Cermakian, “Le dessous des cartes: Saint-Simon et la princesse des Ursins,” Cahiers Saint-Simon 2 (1974): 31-40; Anka Muhlstein, La Femme soleil—les femmes et le pouvoir: une relecture de Saint-Simon (Paris: Denoël-Gonthier, 1976). 32 Anne-Madeleine Goulet, “Le cercle de la princesse des Ursins à Rome (1675-1701): un foyer de culture française,” Seventeenth-Century French Studies 33 (2011): 60-71; Anne-Madeleine Goulet, “Il caso della princesse des Ursins a Roma (1675-1701) tra separatezza e integrazione culturale,” Recercare 23, no. 1/2 (2011): 175-187; Anne-Madeleine Goulet, “The Princesse des Ursins, Loyal Subject of the King of France and Foreign Princess in Rome,” trans. Rebekah Ahrendt, in Music and Diplomacy from the Early Modern Era to the Present, eds. Rebekah Ahrendt, Mark Ferraguto, and Damien Mahiet (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2014), 191-208; Anne-Madeleine Goulet, “Marie-Anne et Louise-Angélique de La Trémoille, princesses étrangères à Rome (1675-1701): Choix culturels, artistiques et politiques,” in Europäische Musiker in Venedig, Rom und Neapel (1650-1750), eds. Anne- Madeleine Goulet and Gesa Zur Nieden (Kassel: Bärenreiter, 2015), 377-396. 33 Corina Bastian, Verhandeln in Briefen: Frauen in Der Höfischen Diplomatie Des Frühen 18. Jahrhunderts (Cologne: Böhlau Verlag, 2013); Corina Bastian, “‘Paper Negotiations’: Women and diplomacy in the early eighteenth century,” in Women, Diplomacy and International Politics Since 1500, eds. Glenda Sluga and Carolyn James (London and New York: Routledge, 2015), 107-119. 11 Although there have been numerous studies that have contributed to the inscription of women in early modern European diplomatic history and have given serious reconsideration of women whose accounts historians had previously dismissed as salacious affairs, frivolous fictions, or dangerous examples of female ambition, there remains room for more holistic approaches to the study of women and diplomacy. For example, a significant amount of the work in the field has focused on the biographies of individual women or of women of a particular group, like queen’s consorts, ladies-in-waiting, or ambassadresses. However, as demonstrated by important works like Women, Diplomacy and International Politics Since 1500 and Das

Geschlecht der Diplomatie, the comparison of individual cases can help to reveal more general themes and changes across women’s experiences.34 Although it by no means provides a comprehensive account of women and diplomacy, the juxtaposition of Mme de Blau and Mme

Du Noyer highlights several key issues that can help scholars to understand women’s roles in diplomatic information exchange during the peace negotiations to end the War of the Spanish

Succession and diplomacy as a context in which early modern women negotiated their sociopolitical status and self-representations.

Liminal Identities and Discursive Self-Fashionings

Despite having operated in the seemingly antagonistic realms of secrecy and publicity,

Blau and Du Noyer’s personal histories share several superficial commonalities: both women traveled between France and the Dutch Republic and maintained ties in both, they both

34 Glenda Sluga and Carolyn James, eds., Women, Diplomacy and International Politics Since 1500 (London and New York: Routledge, 2015); Corina Bastian, Eva Kathrin Dade, Hillard von Thiessen, and Christian Windler, eds., Das Geschlecht der Diplomatie: Geschlechterrollen in den Außenbeziehungen vom Spätmittelalter bis zum 20. Jahrhundert (Cologne: Böhlau Verlag, 2013). 12 converted from Protestantism to Catholicism, they both married French Catholics from whom they later became estranged, and they both emphasized their need to independently provide for their children in their written accounts. Mme de Blau was born in Holland to an elite Protestant family. As a young teenager, she traveled with her mother to France, where the persecution of

French Huguenots would force the pair to separate.35 While her mother returned to Holland,

Louis XIV detained Blau in Paris, keeping her in Catholic convents until 1705, when he arranged her marriage to a French Catholic.36 Although Blau’s mother disowned her for converting to

Catholicism, Blau maintained some of her familial ties in the Dutch Republic, particularly with her sisters. These connections made Mme de Blau an appealing tool for Louis XIV during the peace negotiations.

Mme Du Noyer, by contrast, was born to a Protestant bourgeois family in Nîmes. In the aftermath of the revocation of the Edict of Nantes, she escaped to Holland in January 1686 to join members of her paternal family who had previously fled France as Huguenot refugees. At the behest of her maternal uncle Cotton and aunt Saporta, the latter of whom had raised Du

Noyer after her mother’s death, she returned to Paris in December 1686. Cotton placed her in the

Maison des Nouvelles Catholiques and the Maison de l’Union chrétienne before arranging her marriage to an ‘ancien’ Catholic. She later fled France again in 1701 with her two daughters,

Anne-Marguerite and Olympe ‘Pimpette’ Du Noyer. Du Noyer spent much of this second exile in the Dutch Republic, where she remained until her death in 1719 and from whence she published her works and reported on the peace negotiations. Although she never rejected her

French identity, she nonetheless appealed to foreign states and expressed criticism of Louis

35 Unsigned mémoire addressed to the Duc du Maine, 1726, A.N., 25 AP/1, folder 1, document 6. 36 Ibid. 13 XIV’s policies. While both Blau and Du Noyer converted to Catholicism, Du Noyer claimed that her conversion was superficial and that, at heart, she remained a ‘true’ Protestant.

Early modern European women’s liminal positions within and across transfamilial and transregional networks allowed them to operate as (semi-)informal diplomatic and political agents. However, liminal identities were both a benefit and a risk. For example, Jonathan

Spangler has suggested that although the Lorraine-Guise’s status as foreign princes and princesses had the potential to make them suspicious within the French court because their relatives served other monarchs, it also well positioned them to operate as escorts during marriage arrangements and foreign ambassadorial visits.37 Mme de Blau and Mme Du Noyer’s mobility and plural identities facilitated their participation in diplomatic processes. However, by crossing geopolitical borders and teetering along the metaphorical borders of political loyalty and religious identity during a period of war and heightened Huguenot persecution in France, Mmes de Blau and Du Noyer also provoked their contemporaries’ anxieties. As Protestant women who infiltrated French Catholic families, who ultimately became estranged from their husbands, and who consequently needed to independently provide for their children, the two women not only subverted gendered expectations, but also threatened the Catholic French state.

Liminal identities were particularly perilous in regards to diplomacy, espionage, and the mediation of ‘secret’ information, all of which already involved varying degrees of dissimulation. Discussing the relationship between espionage and liminal identities in the twentieth century, Erin Carlston suggests that

In the case of spies, who by definition pass as something other than what they are, questions about loyalty become especially fraught with anxiety. Naturally, not all spies are traitors to their own nations, but in one sense all are treacherous; they are supposed to lie and deceive, to perform loyalties that they do not actually feel. So a spy’s capacity for

37 Jonathan Spangler, The Society of Princes (Farnham and Burlington: Ashgate, 2009), 39. 14 dissimulation, which makes him useful, also makes him irremediably dangerous, since his employer—his country, usually—can never be sure that even the most apparently patriotic and dependable spy is not really a double agent, working in the interests of a foreign power.38

The Other’s ability ‘to pass’ and dissimulate through inauthentic expression made them a source of anxiety and a potential threat to state and sovereign.39 Mmes de Blau and Du Noyer actively dissimulated their ‘true’ familial, political, and religious loyalties and identities, donning both sartorial and discursive disguises. During her mission, Mme de Blau likely engaged in espionage; in her accounts, she described “disguising [herself]” to attain information, manipulating her relations in the Estates General, and deceiving French ministers in order to fulfill Louis XIV’s will.40 Not only did Mme Du Noyer claim that she had retained her Protestant faith as an ‘inauthentic’ Catholic convert, but she also described sartorially disguising herself as a boy during her first flight from France,41 misleading and hiding from French ministers and ambassadors abroad, and serving and appealing to enemies of France. Yet, she continued to identify as a Frenchwoman and in two of her publications, Du Noyer reported on elite affairs from the narrative position of loyal French Catholic noblewomen.

However, the ability to appropriately disguise one’s true persona was not necessarily negative in early modern France and it was at times appropriate—or even desirable—to fashion oneself in different ways according to the occasion. Knowledge of how to adapt oneself in order to appropriately appear in public was an essential component of elite society in early modern

Europe. Self-fashioning was also recognized as a useful tool in early modern diplomatic

38 Erin Carlston, Double Agents: Espionage, Literature, and Liminal Citizens (New York: Columbia University Press, 2013), 4. 39 Ibid., 5. 40 Unsigned draft of a letter to an unspecified recipient, n.d., A.N., 25 AP/1, folder 1, document 50. 41 Anne-Marguerite Petit Du Noyer, Mémoires de Madame Du N**, Écrits par Elle-même, 5 vols. (Cologne [The Hague]: Pierre Marteau [Husson], 1710), 1:195-6. 15 discourse. In a letter to the Marquise d’Huxelles, François de Callières praised the Marquis de

Villars’s ability to “[se conforme] aux moeurs des Espagnols pendant qu'il était ambassadeur en

Espagne. L’homme habile est une espèce de Protée qui se transforme en différentes figures selon l’occasion et le besoin […].”42 For Callières, the Marquis de Villars’s ability to ‘transform’ himself and adopt foreign customs was not a danger or source of anxiety, but a sign of the

Marquis’s talent as an ambassador in a foreign court. As long as the transformations were superficial and restricted to “les choses indifférentes comme les modes des habits de cérémonie et la manière de vivre,” they were useful tools.43 However, he commented, “il faut qu’il soit toujours le même dans les choses essentielles, c'est-à-dire toujours juste, ferme, honnête; modéré, véritable, officieux, bienfaisant, reconnaissant, fidèle à ses amis et à ses promesses.”44 In order for their transformations and dissimulations to not become threats to society, the individual needed to retain their ‘essential’ internal characteristics and remember their loyalties. The issue with liminal identities was that an individual’s internal loyalties and self-expressions already appeared ambiguous. Although their plural identities in certain ways benefited Mmes de Blau and Du Noyer by affording them opportunities, contemporaries’ concerns regarding the women’s potential dissimulations and questionable allegiances risked hindering their movements and opportunities for self-advancement. In their writings and other self-representations, Mmes de

Blau and Du Noyer needed to dissuade contemporary concerns by suppressing their multiple identities and fashioning themselves as women with consistent religious and political loyalties.

42 François de Callières, Letters (1694-1700) of François de Callières to the Marquise d’Huxelles, ed. Laurence Pope (Lewiston, Queenston, Lampeter: The Edwin Mellen Press, 2004), 214. “[conform] to the customs of the Spaniards while he was Ambassador to Spain. The skilled man is a kind of Proteus who transforms himself into different figures according to the occasion and the need […].” 43 Ibid. “indifferent things like the fashions of ceremonial clothes and the way of life.” 44 Ibid. “it is necessary that he is always the same in essential things, that is to say always just, firm, honest; moderate, genuine, unofficial, beneficent, grateful, faithful to his friends and his promises.” 16 Secrecy, Publicity, and the Public Sphere under Louis XIV

Although one might be tempted to relegate Mme de Blau and Mme Du Noyer to

‘diverging’ spheres of aristocratic dissimulation and publicity, these were not stable categories.

In The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere, Jürgen Habermas outlined the transition during the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries from the public realm of the state and court to a bourgeois public sphere.45 He demarcated an intermediary literary public sphere that functioned as a ‘bridge’ between the ‘town’ of civil society and the court, uniting noblemen and members of an upper intellectual bourgeoisie in salons and coffeehouses.46 Some scholars have viewed the publicity and sociability of this new public sphere and the emergent Republic of Letters that valued openness, discussion, and reciprocal exchange as a threat to the secrecy of the public sphere of the court.47 However, the relationship between the literary public sphere of print, sociability, and the Republic of Letters and the public sphere of aristocratic secrets and absolutist monarchy was not strictly oppositional. Bély, for example, has described the role of secrecy under Louis XIV as an essential political strategy that penetrated nearly all aspects of his reign and served as a form of protection for both the king and state.48 Yet, he also suggests that “The secret permits us perhaps to discover an essential step between the aristocratic ideal and bourgeois culture.”49

The emergent literary public sphere was a permeable intermediary space for the nobility and upper bourgeoisie; as Soll has remarked, “the Republic of Letters itself was neither a truly

45 Jürgen Habermas, The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere: An Inquiry into a Category of Bourgeois Society, trans. Thomas Burger (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1991). 46 Ibid., 30. 47 Dena Goodman, The Republic of Letters: A Cultural History of the French Enlightenment (Ithaca and London: Cornell University Press, 1994), 14. 48 Bély, Les Secrets de Louis XIV. 49 Ibid., 24. 17 public entity, nor was it always polite and run by clear rules. It was a world of esoteric knowledge, with its own codes of conduct, learned languages, and elite networks, and of course, strong ties to various states and noble patronage networks.”50 Colbert supported institutions within the Republic of Letters, thus linking the state to various areas of scholarship and civil society, but he also attempted to regulate the information flows within the Republic of Letters through censorship, the banning of libelous works that he deemed to be threats against monarchical authority, and an overall “policing of intellectual life.”51 However, despite their desire to restrict the importation of foreign news sources into France, French officials had little ability to prevent the circulation of banned texts.52 Beyond banning texts, French officials also used propaganda as a tool to regulate information flows and the court of public opinion domestically and abroad.53 As Joseph Klaits demonstrated, this became a prominent strategy during the War of the Spanish Succession when Colbert de Torcy used state-sponsored propaganda abroad and periodicals published in France as royal mouthpieces and tools for negotiation to varying degrees of success.54 By working closely with Colbert de Torcy and diplomats, propagandists could better position themselves to act on their political ambitions. For example, Klaits suggested that Jean de la Chapelle attempted to use his authorship of the pamphlet Lettres d’un suisse as “the stepping-stone to a diplomatic career.”55

The press also played an important role during the peace negotiations as an intermediary between elite diplomats and the literate public. In their introduction to Performances of Peace,

50 Soll, The Information Master, 10. 51 Ibid., 120-139; 138. 52 Joseph Klaits, Printed Propaganda Under Louis XIV: Absolute Monarchy and Public Opinion (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1976), 37-57. 53 Ibid., 8. 54 Ibid., 58-85. 55 Ibid., 118. 18 Renger E. de Bruin, Cornelis van der Haven, Lotte Jensen, and David Onnekink underscore the significant role that publicity played during the peace negotiations in Utrecht, stating,

Although decision-making about war and peace was almost exclusively the domain of princes and ministers, the people’s insatiable hunger for military news stimulated governments to publicly justify war policy. The booming media informed the general public about the peace negotiations and facilitated public reflection on the diplomatic process. The public performance of peace became more important even though, at the same time, many forms of diplomatic communication and rituals remained invisible to the people at large.56

While intimate knowledge of the peace negotiations, social games, and lives of political elites remained inaccessible to the majority of people, the periodical press offered readers penetrating glimpses—both real and imagined—into these otherwise exclusive affairs. Jeremy Popkin has suggested that for early modern readers, “To read about ministers and monarchs was to establish a kind of contact with these privileged spheres […] The political gazettes were, of course, sparing with such titillating details. What they did provide, however, was a representation of the powerful at work.”57 Through these textual representations, Popkin claims, “members of the newspaper audience learned to think in the same terms as their rulers. In the sphere of imagination, they, too, could decide questions of peace and war, implement reforms, appoint and dismiss ministers. Newspaper readers came to think in terms of political realities and learned to exercise informed judgment about political problems.”58 The periodical press was a significant tool of public diplomacy that diplomats used to interact with foreign publics and regulate the dissemination of news.59 Through her reporting on elite affairs, Mme Du Noyer not only

56 Renger E. de Bruin, Cornelis van der Haven, Lotte Jensen, and David Onnekink, introduction to Performances of Peace: Utrecht 1713, eds. Renger E. de Bruin, Cornelis van der Haven, Lotte Jensen, and David Onnekink (Leiden and Boston: Brill, 2015), 4. 57 Jeremy Popkin, “New Perspectives on the Early Modern Press,” in News and politics in early modern Europe (1500-1800), ed. Joop W. Koopmans (Leuven, Paris, Dudley, MA: Peeters Publishers, 2005), 19. 58 Ibid. 59 Helmer Helmers, “Public Diplomacy in Early Modern Europe: Towards a new history of news,” Media History 22, nos. 3-4 (2016): 401-420. 19 “initiated” her readers “into the secrets of the Greats,”60 but also attempted to use her publications to textually inscribe herself into elite social spheres and masquerade as one of Rule and Trotter’s aforementioned ‘gadfly’ information gatherers.

The tension between the veiling and unveiling of secrets and private affairs is a shared theme in Blau and Du Noyer’s stories and writings. In addition to inciting their contemporaries’ mistrust, secrecy hindered both Blau and Du Noyer’s desires for recognition. To exploit their positions as managers of secret information, the women needed to paradoxically expose and decode the secrets that they managed for a wider audience. However, by ‘going public,’ Du

Noyer not only threatened aristocratic secrets, reputations, and the ‘international’ public image that French state actors had methodically constructed, but also transgressed the limits of

‘acceptable’ gendered behavior. Elizabeth Goldsmith and Dena Goodman have stated that

Publishing and writing for a public were the acts by which a political culture was formed and a public sphere was constituted. By engaging in these discursive practices, individuals became agents in this new sphere of politics and power. Women as well as men participated; they were both its subjects and its objects. But the decision to ‘go public’ by publishing cut deeply into the gendered fabric of early modern France, and the women who made it often paid a price not extracted from their male peers.61

While this process of exposing secrets is more evident in the case of Mme Du Noyer who made her living through publishing, Mme de Blau too had to unveil the secrets of her mission to

French officials amid the administrative turnover following Louis XIV’s death in order to receive compensation. Moreover, ‘private’ accounts and correspondence could always come under the scrutiny of someone other than their intended recipient, as Colbert de Torcy’s cabinet noir and Mme de Sévigné’s allusions to the act of public reading in salons demonstrate.

60 Anne-Marguerite Petit Du Noyer, Lettres historiques et galantes, 5th ed. (Cologne [The Hague]: Marteau [Husson], 1733, XXXV, 2:274. 61 Elizabeth C. Goldsmith and Dena Goodman, introduction to Going Public: Women and Publishing in Early Modern France, eds. Elizabeth C. Goldsmith and Dena Goodman (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1995), 2-3. 20 Contemporaries’ concerns related to the women’s roles in the management of secret information and public life compounded with the anxieties that surrounded the women’s liminal identities and potential dissimulations. To mitigate this, in their attempts to gain recognition and secure material benefits, Mme de Blau and Mme Du Noyer needed to negotiate their plural identities and represent themselves as women who did not transgress social norms. They needed to fashion themselves as ‘good’ mothers and loyal subjects whose personal ambitions did not conflict with the institution of the family and—perhaps more importantly—the interests of the French state.

Sources and Methodology

This thesis will draw primarily from two sets of sources: the Fonds Blau and Mme Du

Noyer’s published works. The Fonds Blau (25 AP/1) is a collection of private origins that entered the French Archives nationales in 1904 as the “Legs de Mme de Blau.”62 The four folders that comprise the collection contain a variety of documents relating to Mme de Blau and her secret mission, Louis François de Blau (1709-1762, Mme de Blau’s second son), and Marie

Alexandre Camille de Blau (b.1753, son of Louis François).63 The most complete accounts of

Mme de Blau’s life and diplomatic activities are the mémoires that Blau and her allies produced several years after her mission in their attempts to secure the continuation of her pension and the reimbursement of her légitime that she had spent in service to the king with interest and back payments.

62 Henry Camps and Sandrine Lacombe, Fonds Blau (1709-1825) (electronic finding aid, Archives Nationales, Pierrefitte-sur-Seine, France, 2018). 63 Dates are taken from a request by Marie Alexandre Camille de Blau’s widow to an unspecified ‘duc’ during the Restoration, n.d., A.N., 25 AP/1, folder 4, document 3. 21 Mme Du Noyer’s published works include the Lettres historiques et galantes, the

Mémoires de Madame Du N**, the Nouveau mercure galant, and the Quintessence des

Nouvelles. Her Mémoires and Lettres historiques et galantes were popular works that received numerous re-editions both during and after her lifetime. I reference primarily the first edition of the Mémoires (1710) and the earliest digitized edition for each volume of the Lettres historiques et galantes that I could locate online. When possible, I used editions published during Du

Noyer’s lifetime in The Hague by Pierre Husson—Du Noyer’s chosen publisher.64 Some difficulties with using later editions of the Lettres historiques et galantes include the inclusion of letters that address incidents that occurred after Du Noyer’s death and the removal of the dedications that begin each volume.65 Issues of the Nouveau mercure galant and Quintessence des Nouvelles are more difficult to locate and there are no known complete collections of the

Quintessence.66 I consulted the limited number of issues of the Quintessence that are available on

RetroNews. For the Nouveau mercure galant, my analysis is limited to the few selections that Du

Noyer republished in the fourth and fifth volumes of her Lettres historiques et galantes.

64 Unless otherwise stated, I cite Anne-Marguerite Petit Du Noyer, Mémoires de Madame Du N**, Écrits par Elle- même, 5 vols. (Cologne [The Hague]: Pierre Marteau [Husson], 1710). The editions of the Lettres historiques et galantes that I cite are: Anne-Marguerite Petit Du Noyer, Lettres historiques et galantes, vol. 1, 4th ed. (Cologne [The Hague]: Marteau [Husson], 1714); Anne-Marguerite Petit Du Noyer, Lettres historiques et galantes, vol. 2, 5th ed. (Cologne [The Hague]: Marteau [Husson], 1733); Anne-Marguerite Petit Du Noyer, Lettres historiques et galantes, vol. 3 (Cologne [The Hague]: Marteau [Husson], 1710); Anne-Marguerite Petit Du Noyer, Lettres historiques et galantes, vol. 4 (Cologne [The Hague]: Marteau [Husson], 1711); Anne-Marguerite Petit Du Noyer, Lettres historiques et galantes, vol. 5 (Cologne [The Hague]: Marteau [Husson], 1712); Anne-Marguerite Petit Du Noyer, Lettres historiques et galantes, vol. 6 (Cologne [The Hague]: Marteau [Husson], 1713); Anne-Marguerite Petit Du Noyer, Lettres historiques et galantes, vol. 7 (Cologne [The Hague]: Marteau [Husson], 1718). Because of variations between editions, I will also include letter numbers in my citations. 65 See Nancy O’Conner, introduction to Mme Dunoyer, Lettres historiques et galantes: de deux dames de condition dont l’une était à Paris et l’autre en Province, ed. Nancy O’Conner (Rennes: Presses universitaires de Rennes, 2012). 66 Issues from Du Noyer’s Nouveau mercure galant are rare; the only known copy is in the Bibliothèque publique et universitaire de Genève. The most complete collection of the Quintessence des Nouvelles is in the Bibliothèque de l’Arsenal (Jean-Daniel Candaux, “Nouveau Mercure galant, des Cours de l’Europe,” in Dictionnaire des journalistes (1600–1789)). 22 The accounts within these sets of documents can only provide limited insight into the lives of Blau and Du Noyer and they are rife with contradictions. While works by some of Mme

Du Noyer’s critics can provide an external perspective that helps to situate her claims, there are no comparable sources against which to cross-reference Mme de Blau’s accounts in the French archival material—although, there may be Dutch sources that expand on, corroborate, or contradict the accounts in the Fonds Blau. Archival fictions have long been the concern of many historians and women’s writings are particularly vulnerable to accusations of embellishment and fictionalization. Accounts of espionage and secret information also tend to play on the romanesque.67 While there are numerous accounts of the War of the Spanish Succession and peace conferences, because Mmes de Blau and Du Noyer are largely absent from these accounts, it is difficult to reconstruct their diplomatic activities and biographical information beyond what they themselves wrote. Although this thesis will attempt to consider the women’s stories, social milieux, and familial networks, it will do so primarily through discursive analysis of their narrative accounts. It is therefore less concerned with accurately reconstructing Mme de Blau and Mme Du Noyer’s actions than it is with the women’s discursive self-fashionings, representations of events, and their attempts to use said representations as the basis of their claims for recognition.

Since Timothy Hampton’s Fictions of Embassy,68 more scholars have focused on the connections between diplomacy and literature, leading to the development of what Tracey A.

Sowerby and Joanna Craigwood refer to as a ‘diplo-literary’ field. The contributions in the final section of their Cultures of Diplomacy and Literary Writing in the Early Modern World consider

67 Bély, Espions et ambassadeurs, 125-6. 68 Timothy Hampton, Fictions of Embassy: Literature and Diplomacy in Early Modern Europe (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 2009). 23 the use of literary approaches in the study of diplomatic texts to facilitate a broader understanding of the documents.69 Bastian has suggested that one should consider the ‘how’ in addition to the ‘what’ of women’s diplomatic actions.70 Women’s accounts and correspondences were more than mere instruments for the transmission of information, their writings were also spaces in which they discursively negotiated their status. Reading the documents in the Fonds

Blau with a focus on discursive strategies alongside Du Noyer’s published works reveals some similarities in how the women textually negotiated their status. In their accounts, Blau, Du

Noyer, and their allies rewrote the history of the negotiations, inserting Blau and Du Noyer into the events and accentuating women’s diplomatic agency. They underscored the women’s gendered sacrifices as daughters, wives, and mothers and used motherhood and the women’s longing to provide and secure placements for their children to justify their actions and desires.

Instead of representing themselves as ‘ambitious’ women, Blau and Du Noyer portrayed themselves as victims of the various political, religious, and familial trials that they endured. My first impression of these sources was that these similarities between the women’s accounts and the resemblances between the women’s personal histories were some of the more compelling results from comparison of these sources. However, the differences between the women’s stories, self-representations, outcomes, and the generic differences between their writings are perhaps more significant as they more closely reflect the different freedoms and constraints that governed the women’s lives and the extent to which both Blau and Du Noyer were able to

‘successfully’ navigate them.

69 Tracey A. Sowerby and Joanna Craigwood, eds., Cultures of Diplomacy and Literary Writing in the Early Modern World (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2019), part IV “Diplomatic Documents.” 70 Bastian, Verhandeln in Briefen, 13. 24 Jonathon Dewald has described shifts in seventeenth-century French aristocratic culture that resulted in nobles’ increased concern with individuality and personal ambition despite increased demands for their subservience to the traditional concerns of the family, the state, and ethical and religious ideals.71 He argues that tensions between personal desires and social expectations became the basis of modern French culture. Although personal ambition and court intrigues were essential elements of aristocratic society in which both men and women participated,72 women needed to take particular care to regulate their behavior and to comply with gendered social norms. Tensions between personal ambition, the family, the state, and religion are key features of both Mmes de Blau and Du Noyer’s stories. This thesis will consider these tensions—alongside the instabilities between publicity and secrecy, public and private life, and informal and formal diplomacy—in the two women’s mediation of secret information during the peace negotiations to end the War of the Spanish Succession and their attempts to use the negotiations to accumulate and wield ‘informal’ power, advance their individual and familial statuses, and subvert the gendered, religious, familial, and political constraints that limited them.

To their contemporaries, Blau and Du Noyer’s subversion of these constraints combined with their liminal identities, personal ambitions, and dissimulations in their dealings with ‘secret’ information represented potential societal dangers. This thesis will propose that Blau and Du

Noyer’s ability to use diplomacy to advance their personal status was dependent on their ability to represent themselves as women who did not transgress the social limitations of their gender, who were consistent in their religious identities, and who were loyal subjects of the monarchs they served.

71 Jonathan Dewald, Aristocratic Experience and the Origins of Modern Culture: France, 1570-1715 (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1993). 72 Ibid., 15-44; Wendy Gibson, Women in Seventeenth-Century France (London: Macmillan, 1989), 141-167. 25 CHAPTER 1. MME DE BLAU’S SECRET MISSION IN GEERTRUIDENBERG

In 1710, Mme de Blau travelled with her husband to the Dutch Republic under Louis

XIV’s orders to aid the French plenipotentiaries during the peace negotiations in

Geertruidenberg. By 1708, Louis XIV had expressed willingness to surrender the Spanish inheritance to Charles, thus restoring the balance of power in Europe and resolving the central problematic of the War of the Spanish Succession and in 1710, he sent Melchior Cardinal de

Polignac and Nicolas Chalon du Blé, Maréchal d’Huxelles as plenipotentiaries to the peace conference in Geertruidenberg (March-July 1710). The peace agreement would have required

Louis XIV not only to rescind his support for his grandson, but also to provide military aid to the

Grand Alliance in support of its efforts to remove Philip V from the Spanish throne. Ultimately,

Louis XIV was unwilling to agree to these conditions and, like previous Franco-Dutch attempts at negotiating peace, the conference collapsed. While the French court blamed the Dutch for this failure, many contemporaries and certain historians attributed it to Louis XIV’s ambition, pride, and disingenuous intentions.73 Polignac and Huxelles would later redeem this failure alongside

Nicolas Mesnager as the French plenipotentiaries to the Congress of Utrecht (1712-13), which successfully concluded with the signings of the treaties of Utrecht.

Born in Holland to an influential Dutch family with connections to political elites, Mme de Blau was well positioned to assist the French diplomatic efforts and she continued to operate

73 David Onnekink, “Pride and Prejudice: Universal Monarchy Discourse and the Peace Negotiations of 1709- 1710,” in Performances of Peace Utrecht 1713, eds. Renger E. de Bruin, Cornelis van der Haven, Lotte Jensen and David Onnekink (Leiden and Boston: Brill, 2015), 69-91. As Onnekink has demonstrated, certain Dutch politicians, like Grand Pensionary Anthonie Heinsius, suspected the French of using the negotiations as part of a scheme to manipulate public opinion and to distract and divide the Allies. He argues “that the failure of the peace negotiations was caused not so much by a stalemate or French unreliability but, to a substantial degree, by Dutch prejudice regarding French pride, warmongering and cunning” (90). See also Legrelle, La Diplomatie française et la succession d’Espagne; John C. Rule, “France and the Preliminaries to the Gertruydenberg Conference, September 1709 to March 1710,” in Studies in Diplomatic History: Essays in Memory of David Bayne Horne, eds. Ragnhild M. Hatton and Matthew S. Anderson (London: Longman, 1970), 97-115; Bély, “Les larmes de Monsieur de Torcy.” 26 as an agent of the French court in the Netherlands until the end of the war.74 Despite their failure to bring the war to a close, the negotiations in Geertruidenberg were a significant opportunity for

Mme de Blau to cultivate influential patron-client relations and to accumulate benefits from the

French crown in return for her service. Although she and her allies purported that she played a significant role as an agent of France in Holland, Mme de Blau is absent from most accounts of the War of the Spanish Succession and she remains understudied by historians. Lucien Bély first referenced her in a 1983 article and he also overviewed Mme de Blau’s mission in Espions et ambassadeurs, in which he classified Blau as a woman for whom ambition and a “taste for adventure” were primary motivators.75 Although this may be an accurate depiction, a closer reading of the documents reveals a more complex picture. This section will consider how Mme de Blau attempted to use her mission to secure social and financial benefits for herself and her descendants through her cultivation of patron-client relations and her and her allies’ construction of a narrative that emphasized her service and sacrifices to the French crown. It will do so with particular attention to the discursive strategies that Mme de Blau, her allies, and her descendants employed to represent her actions while attempting to contextualize her story within both the multigenerational Blau familial legend and early modern French diplomatic history.

Kinship Networks and Elite Connections

To understand how Mme de Blau became an agent of the French court in her natal lands, one must first consider the kinship and patronage networks to which she belonged. In her

74 Request by Marie Alexandre Camille de Blau’s widow to an unspecified ‘duc’ during the Restoration, n.d., A.N., 25 AP/1, folder 4, document 3; Unsigned request addressed to “son altesse serenissime Monseigneur le Duc,” n.d., A.N., 25 AP/1, folder 1, document 4. 75 Bély, “Les larmes de Monsieur de Torcy”; Bély, Espions et ambassadeurs, 181. 27 master’s thesis, Stéphanie Cespedes provided an in-depth analysis and reconstruction of Blau’s familial and patronage networks through her reading of the Fonds Blau in conjunction with parish records, convent records, and genealogical dictionaries.76 Unfortunately, there is little verifiable evidence regarding Mme de Blau’s life in the French archival sources before her marriage to Thomas de Blau, a “jentilhome dauvergne,” in 1705.77 Based on her own accounts,

Mme de Blau traveled to France with her mother, Marie Imans van Serooskerke (Gallicized as

Seroskerque) when she was approximately 13-14 years old.78 After the revocation of the Edict of

Nantes and the expiration of her passport, Mme de Seroskerque returned to the Dutch Republic, leaving her daughter in France in the care of one of the women in her service.79 Louis XIV then detained Blau in France because of her Protestant faith, placing her with the Nouvelles

Catholiques and the Cordeliers before marrying her to the Catholic Thomas de Blau when she was 24 years old.80 Although there are no statements of abjuration in the Fonds Blau and

Cespedes found no mention of Mme de Blau in the registers of the Nouvelles Catholiques,81 the

Maréchal de Tessé certified “que Madelle de St. Paul hollandoise, et huguenotte, sétant convertie, et le feu Roy l’ayant fait mettre aux nouvelles catholiques sa Majesté la maria ensuitte a M. de Blau […].”82 Decades later, René Cerveau would memorialize her as a woman who

“vécut toujours selon les vrais principes de la Religion & de la piété,” but from whom the

76 Cespedes, “La famille Blau.” 77 Unsigned mémoire addressed to the Duc du Maine, 1726, A.N., 25 AP/1, folder 1, document 6. It is unclear whether the Blau family belonged to the upper bourgeoisie or the nobility of the robe in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. See Cespedes, “La famille Blau,” 50-52. 78 Unsigned mémoire addressed to the Duc du Maine, 1726, A.N., 25 AP/1, folder 1, document 6. 79 Unsigned partial mémoire, n.d., A.N., 25 AP/1, folder 1, document 7. 80 Unsigned mémoire addressed to the Duc du Maine, 1726, A.N., 25 AP/1, folder 1, document 6. 81 Cespedes, “La famille Blau,” 43. 82 Unsigned copy of a certificate signed by Tessé and Guyon, original document prepared October 2, 1722, A.N., 25 AP/1, folder 1, document 9. “that Mademoiselle de St. Paul, Dutchwoman and Huguenot, having converted, and the late King having placed her with the Nouvelles Catholiques his Majesty then married her to M. de Blau […].” 28 Catholic church denied the sacraments on her death bed because of her refusal to submit to the papal bull Unigenitus.83 The heightened persecution of Huguenots in France in the aftermath of the revocation of the Edict of Nantes offers one possible explanation for Mme de Blau’s forced separation from her family.

Despite “les fréquente demende quelle luy fessoit [à Louis XIV] de luy acroiré un pasport pour aller en hollande, rejoindre la mere, qui la fessoit menassé de la désérité et de luy donné la malédiction au quas quelle n’executa pas ces ordre,” Blau remained cloistered until 1705, when she claimed Louis XIV forced her to marry M. de Blau to protect her from Mme de

Seroskerque.84 In addition to her threats of disinheritance, Mme de Seroskerque conspired with foreigners at Versailles to retrieve her daughter; one of Mme de Blau’s mémoires describes her mother’s collaboration with a “Mde de mariercront pour lors embassadrisse en frence de la cour de dannemarque” and a “Mr de nieuport enbassadeur en frence,” who acted “pour enlever la supliente.”85 While kidnappings within ‘transnational’ families during this period were not unusual, Mme de Blau’s accounts do not mention any preexisting personal connections at the

French court that would explain the efforts to keep her there. The great lengths to which Louis

XIV went to prevent Mme de Blau from returning to Holland and reuniting with her family suggest that perhaps more than religious issues were at play. In Mme de Blau’s accounts, the king clearly saw value in keeping her in France and tying her to France through marriage.

83 René Cerveau, Nécrologe des plus célèbres défenseurs et confesseurs de la vérité du dix-huitième siècle; Contenant les principales circonstances de la Vie et de la Mort des Amis de la Vérité de l’un & de l’autre Sexe, & sur-tout des persécutions qu’ils ont souffertes au sujet du Formulaire & de la Bulle Unigenitus, & de la part des Jésuites. Première partie (1760), 212-3. “always lived according to the true principles of Religion and piety.” 84 Unsigned mémoire addressed to the Duc du Maine, 1726, A.N., 25 AP/1, folder 1, document 6. “The frequent requests that she made to him [Louis XIV] to grant her a passport to go to Holland, to join the mother, who threatened to disinherit her and to curse her if she did not execute these orders.” 85 Ibid. “Mde de Mariercront at the time ambassadress to France of the court of Denmark”; “efforts that Monseigneur de Nieuport ambassador to France made to kidnap the supplicant.” 29 However, one should exercise caution regarding Mme de Blau’s descriptions of events. Although the majority of the documents attest that the marriage was forced, in a draft of a mémoire, Mme de Blau suggested that it was she who had asked Louis XIV for permission to marry Thomas de

Blau at the suggestion of one of Thomas’s relatives.86 This hints that Mme de Blau’s desire to escape the convent might have been the true motivation behind her marriage to Thomas de Blau, not Louis XIV’s volition; although, this would be difficult, if not impossible, to verify.

In addition to covering the expenses of her marriage celebration in full,87 Louis XIV ordered Michel Chamillart (1652-1721)—at the time, Louis XIV’s controller general of finances and secretary of state for war—to grant Mme de Blau a pension of 6,000 livres as a dowry that she would receive in addition to the 800-livre pension that Louis XIV had allocated to her when she first entered the convent.88 While the prospect of financial gain might have been a motivation behind Mme de Blau’s marriage, ultimately, Mme de Blau did not see her pension until many years after her marriage due to the death of Anne-Jules de Noailles, Maréchal de Noailles (1650-

1708), who was meant to deliver it to her.89 Realizing that she would otherwise never receive her pension, Mme de Blau returned to Versailles in 1709 to seek the payments that were due to her.

While she was there, she learned of her mother’s death and immediately began the process of obtaining a passport to return to Holland. Although her mother had disinherited her for

86 Unsigned partial mémoire, n.d., A.N., 25 AP/1, folder 1, document 7. “[…] mde la contesse de chavagnaque qui est canillac parente de Mr de blau en son nom et pensionner qui luy proposa Mr de blau pour mary, et luy conseilla descrire au Roy […]” / “Mme la Comtesse de Chavagnaque, née Canillac, who is a relative of Mr de Blau and pensioned, who proposed Mr de Blau to her [Mme de Blau] as a husband, and advised her to write to the King […].” 87 Unsigned request addressed to the Cardinal de Noailles, n.d., A.N., 25 AP/1, folder 1, document 3. 88 Unsigned partial mémoire, n.d., A.N., 25 AP/1, folder 1, document 7. The exact figure of Mme de Blau’s pension varies between documents. A request addressed to the Duc du Maine from Mme de Blau claims that Louis XIV accorded her a pension of 800 livres when she entered the convent and that this pension continued after her marriage, when she received an additional pension of 6,000 livres as a dowry (Ibid.). A later mémoire addressed to Saint-Mégrin claims that she had a pension of 1,600 livres before her marriage, when she received an additional pension of 6000 livres (“mémoire concernant les petit enfans de Madame de Blau à Monsieur le duc du St Mégrin,” n.d., A.N., 25 AP/1, folder 2, document 7). 89 Unsigned mémoire addressed to the Duc du Maine, 1726, A.N., 25 AP/1, folder 1, document 6. 30 converting to Catholicism, Blau was still entitled to a légitime of 22,000 florins that she needed to collect.90 While she was in the Dutch Republic, Louis XIV “fut informé du credit qu’elle avoit et sa famille” by one of his agents in Holland and ordered her immediate return to France “sous peine de desobeissance.”91 If she did not return to France within fifteen days, she would lose both her pension and the king’s protection.92 Upon her arrival at Versailles, Mme de Blau received her commission to aid the French in the negotiations in Geertruidenberg.

Examination of Mme de Blau’s familial relations is integral to understanding why Louis

XIV would maneuver to keep her in France and select her to be one of his diplomatic agents. As

Cespedes examined, Marie-Madeleine de Blau originated from an influential Dutch family with connections to the Estates-General.93 Mme de Blau claimed to be—or someone writing on her behalf purported that she was—a “parente proche de la messons de wassenaer d’obdame et de presque tout Mrs les éstat génereaux.”94 Several of Mme de Blau’s family members held influential political positions in the Dutch Republic, including a brother-in-law who was a burgomaster and Anthonie Heinsius, Grand Pensionary of Holland and a prominent anti-French figure during the War of the Spanish Succession, was one of her uncles.95 Her family also had

90 Unsigned request addressed to the Cardinal de Noailles, n.d., A.N., 25 AP/1, folder 1, document 3. Légitime was the “Droit que la loy donne aux enfans sur les biens de leurs pere & mere & qui leur est acquis, ensorte qu’on ne les en peut priver par une disposition contraire” / “Right that the law gives to children over the property of their father & mother & that is granted to them, so that they cannot be deprived of it by a contrary provision” (Antoine Furetière, Dictionnaire universel (The Hague and Rotterdam: Arnout and Reinier Leers, 1690), 2:448). 91 Ibid. “was informed of the credit she had and her family”; “under penalty of disobedience.” 92 Unsigned partial mémoire, n.d., A.N., 25 AP/1, folder 1, document 7. 93 Cespedes, “La famille Blau,” 34-39. 94 Unsigned partial mémoire, n.d., A.N., 25 AP/1, folder 1, document 7. “close relative of the house of Wassenaar, of Obdam, and of almost all of Mrs. the Estates-General.” 95 Cespedes, “La famille Blau,” 37. Certified copies of two letters from the Comte de Maurepas to Sieur Disque, letters dated 1727, copies dated 1731-2, A.N., 25 AP/1, folder 1, documents 136-137. “dans cette circonstance le monarque [Louis XIV] pour dernière ressource eût recours a la dame de blau qu’il savoit tenir aux meilleure famille de la holande et être la niéce du grand pensionnaire de ce tems la” / “in this circumstance the monarch [Louis XIV] as a last resource resorted to the Dame de Blau whom he knew to be important to the best family in Holland and to be the niece of the Grand Pensionary of that time” (“mémoire concernant les petit enfans de Madame de Blau à Monsieur le duc du St Mégrin,” n.d., A.N., 25 AP/1, folder 2, document 7). 31 close relations with the Orange-Nassau. Mme de Blau stated that her mother was in the service of the Orange-Nassau as the “premier dame dhonneur de la prinsesse dorenge” and that it was

“par ceux deux [le prince et la princesse d’Orange] a qui elle avoit rendu plusieur servisse a cette cour de venire en frence pour y voir la cour de frence elle obtin un congeé de la princesse daurenge et vin a paris sous un pasport du roy, pour six mois.”96 Proximity to those in positions of authority could equate to legitimate political power in early modern Europe and, as members of noblewomen’s entourages, women regularly accessed political power through their participation in the ritualized household.97

Mme de Blau purportedly had a particularly close relationship with the Baron of Obdam.

Polignac alluded, “Ma hollandaise ou plutôt celle de M. le Mal de Tessé veut absolument venir icy, moins pour intriguer que pour voir M. d’Obdam. Ne me nommés point, je vous supplie mais faites sur cela ce que vous jugerés à propos. On dit que son mary n’est point sans mérite, je le croy, mais pour rien ne le voudrois être.”98 This comment inspired Bély to remark that “Parfois la politique croisait les intrigues amoureuses. C’est le cas pour cette Madame du Blau […].”99

Gauging the accuracy of Polignac’s claim is difficult since there are few mentions of Obdam in

96 Unsigned partial mémoire, n.d., A.N., 25 AP/1, folder 1, document 7. “Princess of Orange’s first lady-in-waiting”; “by those two [the Prince and Princess of Orange] to whom she had rendered many services at this court to come to France to see the French court there she obtained leave from the Princess of Orange and came to Paris under a passport from the king, for six months.” 97 See Nadine Akkerman and Birgit Houben, eds., The Politics of Female Households: Ladies-in-Waiting across Early Modern Europe (Leiden: Brill, 2014); Anne Somerset, Ladies-in-Waiting: From the Tudors to the Present Day (London: Weidenfeld & Nicolson, 1984); Olwen Hufton, “Reflections on the Role of Women in the Early Modern Court,” The Court Historian 5, no. 1 (2000): 1-13; Kettering, “The Patronage Power of Early Modern French Noblewomen.” 98 Archives du ministère des Affaires étrangères, Correspondance politique, Hollande 223, fol. 182 cited in Bély, “Les larmes de Monsieur de Torcy,” 444 and Bély, Espions et ambassadeurs, 177. “My Dutchwoman, or rather that of M. the Mal de Tessé, absolutely wants to come here, less to intrigue than to see M. d’Obdam. Do not name me I beg you but do with that what you judge appropriate. It is said that her husband is not without merit, I believe it, but for nothing would want him to be.” 99 Bély, “Les larmes de Monsieur de Torcy,” 444; Bély, L’art de la paix, 449-450. “Sometimes politics crossed with romantic affairs. This is the case for this Madame du Blau […].” 32 the Fonds Blau. It is probable that the two had some degree of interaction during her mission or that Obdam supported her from afar; Blau, for example, wrote that “le yack de Mr le barron dobdame éstoit a bruxcelle a matendre.”100 Nonetheless, it would be misleading to reduce Mme de Blau’s motivations to a romantic affair as Polignac implied.

Mme de Blau clearly understood the basis of her mission to be her Dutch relations and

Louis XIV’s desire to leverage her against said personal connections to attain passports for the

French plenipotentiaries to travel to Geertruidenberg. A letter from Mme de Blau to an unspecified ‘Sire’ recounts,

Le Roy [Louis XIV] estant informé du credit, que ma famille avoit en hollande, ordonna mon retour au bout de deux mois, j’obeit et me rendit en france; ma famille desirant de me revoir me solliciterent pour retourner, Le Roy se servit de cette occasion, et me fit leur mander comme de moy mesme, que si ils accordoient les pasports pour les Plenipotantiers que Le Roy ne feroit pas de difficulté de me donner le mien, ausitost ma famille membre des états generaux consentirent a les donner pour gertruidenberg et un yack vint a Bruxcelles pour me conduire en hollande.101

Passports were instruments of monarchical power as they allowed states to regulate travel. They were of particular importance during periods of war when the surveillance of foreigners and espionage were of great concern. Passports permitted the continuation of travel for commercial, diplomatic, and political purposes during war.102 As Bély remarks, “Passports were at once signs and objects of a negotiation.”103 Not only were passports needed to guarantee the safety of

100 Unsigned draft of a letter to an unspecified recipient, n.d., A.N., 25 AP/1, folder 1, document 50. “Mr the Baron of Obdam’s yacht was in Brussels to wait for me.” 101 Letter from Mme de Blau addressed to ‘sire’ to receive reimbursement for her expenses during her secret mission, n.d., A.N., 25 AP/1, folder 1, document 2. “The King [Louis XIV] being informed of the credit that my family had in Holland, ordered my return after two months, I obeyed and returned to France; my family wishing to see me again asked me to return, the King took advantage of this opportunity and made me inform them as if from myself, that if they granted the passports for the plenipotentiaries that the King would not have difficulty giving me mine, immediately my family, member of the Estates-General agreed to give them for Geertruidenberg and a yacht came to Brussels to take me to Holland.” 102 Bély, Espions et ambassadeurs, 610-653. 103 Ibid., 618. 33 travelling negotiators and the members of their entourages, but the conditions and permissions that would allow negotiators to safely travel were also subject to negotiation between states.

Despite their purpose of regulating the movements of foreigners and preventing espionage, passports were not infallible guards against dissimulation since voyageurs could travel under false identities and pretexts. Bély also notes that “The passport also served as a mask for secret negotiators,” which was the case for Mme de Blau.104 The passport that Colbert de Torcy, Tessé, and Pontchartrain acquired for Mme de Blau’s mission authorized travel for “Sr. de Blau, allant en Hollande pour ses affaires particulieres avec sa femme, une femme de chambre et deux valets,” hiding Mme de Blau’s ‘true’ purpose for travel behind the guise of ‘personal affairs.’105

Despite what Blau implied, it is difficult to believe that Louis XIV had been previously unaware of her connections when one considers his efforts to detain her in convents, to arrange her marriage at Versailles, and to accord her a pension several years prior. Mme de Blau and her allies likewise frequently portrayed her as a hostage whom Louis XIV had calculatingly kept from and weaponized against her family. However, it is uncertain the extent to which this was true or whether she portrayed herself as a victim of royal authority in an attempt to garner sympathies and further justify her claims for compensation. Did Louis XIV victimize Mme de

Blau because of her connections and ‘outsider’ status in France or did she choose to operate as his emissary, motivated by a ‘taste for adventure’ and the prospect of further establishing herself and her descendants at the French court through her interactions with those in positions of power? Through their cautious manipulations of their representations of events, Mme de Blau, her allies, and her descendants deliberately obfuscated not only the answer to this question, but

104 Ibid., 619. 105 Passport authorizing M. and Mme de Blau’s travel to Holland, May 4, 1710, A.N., 25 AP/1, folder 1, document 48. “Sr. de Blau, going to Holland on private business with his wife, a chambermaid and two valets.” 34 the ‘reality’ of Blau’s mission, presenting her not only as a vital actor in the French diplomatic efforts, but also as a ‘proper’ woman and mother who only acted out of her ‘selfless’ desires to serve the French state and to provide for her children.

Reconstructing Mme de Blau’s Mission

‘Secret diplomacy’ is a pivotal theme in Blau’s story, but it is precisely because of her mission’s purported secrecy that it is difficult to ascertain her exact objectives beyond what she claimed in her requests for reimbursement and compensation. The procurement of passports for the French plenipotentiaries is the most explicit of Mme de Blau’s contributions to the French diplomatic efforts in Geertruidenberg. In accounts of her mission, Mme de Blau emphasized— and perhaps inflated—the significance of her role, going so far as to claim “[…] quil éstoit désidé par Mrs les éstat que les conférence ne commenceroit pas que je ne fusse arrivé en hollende, telle éstoit le marchés qui avoit ésté fait, lors que jobtin les pasport pour les plenipotentiere […]” and “[…] les conference en hollende ne devoit commencé qua mon arriveé comme ce nestoit que moy soeulle qui avoit optenus des pasport de Mrs […].”106 Although it seems unlikely that these statements were entirely truthful, whether Mme de Blau believed them to be is another question. It seems plausible that she might have exaggerated her contributions after the fact to justify her requests for reimbursement and compensation for her family.

106 Unsigned draft of a letter to an unspecified recipient, n.d., A.N., 25 AP/1, folder 1, document 50. “[…] That it was decided by Mrs the Estates that the conferences would not start until I had arrived in Holland, such was the deal that had been made, when I obtained the passports for the plenipotentiaries […]”; “[…] The conferences in Holland should not have started until my arrival, as I alone had obtained Monseigneurs’ passports […].” 35 Beyond the securing of passports for the French plenipotentiaries, the parameters of Mme de Blau’s mission included acts of espionage, reporting back to French officials, and other tasks as required to realize Louis XIV’s objectives. As she explained in the letter to ‘Sire,’

Je resus avan de partir les instructions dabord du Roy, et ensuite par ses ordres de Mr. Le Marechal de Tessé, qui estoit du segret et aqui j’adressois mes lettres, sous le caractaire des chifres, qui m’avoient esté donnez, aussi bien que les adresses; mes ordres furent de faire alonger les conferances de gertrudemberge, de rendre suspect touttes les propositions des Plenipotantiers, d’empecher que les estats ne consentissent a leurs demandes et fissent une ligue contre l’espagne et la France ouvertem [sic] ouvertement, affin quils puissent se retirer sans rien conclure, comme s’etoit l’intention du Roy, et que pendant ce temps la Le Roy et La Renne anne s’occupoient des moyens de se desunir dela ligue de lempreur et de la Hollande […].107

Both Tessé and Pontchartrain received ‘secret orders’ from Louis XIV “d’instruire lad. Dame

Deblau de ses intentions [celles du Roy], ce qui fut fait en trois ou quatre conferences secrettes

[…]” and both served as contacts for Mme and M. de Blau during her mission.108 To protect the secret, only a few were privy to the reality of her mission and, because written correspondence was both an essential means of communication and a potential risk,109 the conserved correspondence from the mission is muddled by vague language and code that worked to obscure

Blau’s actions. The correspondence from Tessé and Pontchartrain to M. and Mme de Blau includes a diverse cast of characters, including: ‘le Romain’ (Polignac), ‘le fagot d’épines’

(Pontchartrain), ‘notre ami’ (Obdam?), ‘mon voysin,’ ‘son amy qui loge du mesme costé’

107 Letter from Mme de Blau addressed to ‘sire’ to receive reimbursement for her expenses during her secret mission, n.d., A.N., 25 AP/1, folder 1, document 2. “I received before leaving the instructions first from the King, and then by his orders from Mr. the Maréchal de Tessé, who was informed of the secret and to whom I addressed my letters, written in codes, that were given to me, as well as the addresses; my orders were to prolong the conferences at Geertruidenberg, to make suspect all the plenipotentiaries’ propositions, to prevent the states from consenting to their requests and openly openly [sic] making a league against Spain and France, so that they can withdraw without concluding anything, as was the King’s intention, and that during this time the King and Queen Anne occupied themselves with the means of separating themselves from the league of the emperor and Holland.” 108 Unsigned request addressed to the Cardinal de Noailles, n.d., A.N., 25 AP/1, folder 1, document 3. “The King gave secret orders to Mrs. the Marshall of Tessé and Pontchartrain to instruct said Dame de Blau of his intentions, which were made in three or four secret conferences.” 109 Bély, Espions et ambassadeurs, section 1, chapter 4 “La lettre ouverte,” 134-162. 36 (Colbert de Torcy?), ‘la petite femme,’ and ‘le petit mari’ (Mme and M. de Blau). The correspondence also contains seemingly nonsensical phrases like: “Le style d’oracle dont vous vous servés pour m’esclaircir de la situation ou sont les affaires est pis que celuy de calchas & je deffie tous les sorciers de rien comprendre a ce que vous m’avés voulu dire […].”110 Louis

François de Blau revealed the identities of some of the codenames in the excerpts from his parent’s correspondence that he copied and cataloged; as he noted in the document’s margins, “il faudroit avoir la clef et l’intelligence de leurs convention pour conoitre tout le suite de les lettres.”111 Although there are no ciphered letters within the Fonds Blau, accounts of her mission indicate that Mme de Blau and her correspondents used ciphers to conceal the information within her letters. The security of her correspondence seems to have been a significant concern for Mme de Blau and fearing that someone had compromised their first set of ciphers in June 1710, she

‘renewed’ them.112

While the secrecy of her mission and its limited records make it difficult to reconstruct her mission, Mme de Blau used her privileged knowledge and lack of ‘official’ written commission to her advantage to construct a narrative of the negotiations in which she played an essential role. As Bély states, by necessity “Le diplomate partage donc une partie des secrets du

110 Letter from the Maréchal de Tessé to Mme de Blau, July 14, 1710, A.N., 25 AP/1, folder 1, document 24. “The oracle style you used to inform me of the situation where matters are is worse than that of Calchas & I challenge all wizards to understand anything of what you wanted to tell me [...].” Calchas is a seer in Greek mythology. 111 “Extraits de plusieurs lettres de Mrs. les Mareschal de Tessé, abé de polignac, et ministres relatives et pour constater les services dela dme. de Blau dans les conferences de gertrudenberg, ses depences par ordre du Roy et ses ministres, suivant son mémoire et le raport des dtes. Lettres […]” copied by Louis François de Blau, n.d., A.N., 25 AP/1, folder 1, document 14. “it would be necessary to have the key and the understanding of their convention to be able to understand all the rest of the letters.” 112 Unsigned request addressed to the Cardinal de Noailles, n.d., A.N., 25 AP/1, folder 1, document 3. “le Mr. Delachapelle pour lors commis de Mr. Depontchartrain delivra les chiffres et les adresses a la Dame Deblau, qui les renovella quelques temps apres dans la crainte que les premiers ne fussent decouvertes par une lettre du 4 juin 1710” / “Mr. Delachapelle at the time a servant of Mr. de Pontchartrain delivered the codes and addresses to the Dame de Blau, who changed them some time after out of fear that the first ones were discovered through a letter from June 4, 1710.” 37 souverain et de son Conseil. Il connaît les décisions prises ou une partie d’entre elles, les vues de son prince et les buts de sa politique étrangère.”113 Blau represented herself as having possessed intimate knowledge of Louis XIV’s ‘true’ intentions, of which she claimed most of his emissaries and ministers were unaware. Insisting that peace was not Louis XIV’s goal at

Geertruidenberg, Blau reiterated that “[…] lidee du roy éstoit de faire connestre a son peuple, et a toute lurope quil desiroit la paix, en consentent au partage de lespagne, en donnent a philipe 5 le royaume de naple, et de Sisille, […] Voila ce qui a parut au publique.”114 “La verité,” she claimed, was that Louis XIV “prenoit ces mesure segrette,” implemented “par moy et sonmain,”

“pendans ce temps la lon travaillait en engletre a rompre la ligue cettoit la le but de ma commission, jay donc bien réussy […].”115 Considering that Mme de Blau and her allies composed the majority of her accounts several years after the completion of the negotiations at

Geertruidenberg, Bély rightfully questions whether this narrative is a “Belle interprétation a posteriori d’un échec présenté comme une volonté française, ou réel cynisme d’État.”116

Through this rewriting of history, Mme de Blau metamorphosed the memory of the negotiations in Geertruidenberg from the French humiliation and failure that her contemporaries recognized it to be into a success story realized only through her own actions and Louis XIV’s strategizing.

In Mme de Blau’s version of events, the ‘unofficial’ and ‘informal’ supersede both the

‘official’ accounts of the negotiations at Geertruidenberg and the negotiations’ ‘official’ actors.

113 Bély, Les Secrets de Louis XIV, 287. “The diplomat therefore shares some of the secrets of the sovereign and his Council. He knows the decisions made or a part of them, the views of his prince and the goals of his foreign policy.” 114 Unsigned draft of a letter to an unspecified recipient, n.d., A.N., 25 AP/1, folder 1, document 50. “[…] the king’s idea was to make known to his people and to all of Europe that he wished for peace, by consenting to the division of Spain, and by giving Philip V the kingdom of Naples, and of Sicily, […] That is what appeared to the public.” 115 Ibid. “The truth”; “took these secret measures”; “by me and his hand”; “during this time that we worked in England to rupture the league that was the goal of my commission, I therefore succeeded […].” 116 Bély, Espions et ambassadeurs, 178. “A fine interpretation a posteriori of a failure presented as a French will, or real state cynicism.” 38 Mme de Blau described how she provided vital ‘on-the-ground’ support to the plenipotentiaries and French ministers—particularly, Polignac—by disguising herself and accessing the places and information that they could not; she claimed, “[…] je receu ordre d’informer incessament

Mr. Le Cardinal de Polinacque du souterin de cette negotiation, faute de confiance pour luy faire scavoir, je prit le party de me deguiser et d’aller en poste a gertruidemberge, le Roy luy envoya aussy un courier, pour luy dire quil me donnast connoissance detouttes les pratiques qui sepassoient, affin de me guider suivant loccasion.”117 She described herself as having played a more significant role than the ‘official’ actors, asserting that while she worked to fulfill Louis

XIV’s ‘true’ objectives, “[…] Les Plenipotentiers de france n’avoient n’ulle connoissance de ce mistere et leur zele estoit si sinsere dans la poursuitte dela paix, qu’ils croioent que Le Roy souhettoit […].”118 In her narrative, it was she who acted on and fulfilled the king’s intentions.

Moreover, she continued to act as an instrument of Louis XIV in the Netherlands after the departure of the French plenipotentiaries; she claimed that after their departure, “je reste encore en hollande trois mois, et donné les avis de tout, je ne pouvais pas manquer d’instructions […] j’ay continué mes Relations jusquá la fin definitive a la paix.”119

None of Blau’s letters from the period of her mission are conserved in the collection, but if one believes the obsequious language in Tessé and Pontchartrain’s letters, Mme de Blau communicated useful information through her correspondence. For example, in his letters to

117 Unsigned draft of a letter to an unspecified recipient, n.d., A.N., 25 AP/1, folder 1, document 50. “[...] I received orders to inform Mr. Cardinal of Polignac of the underground of this negotiation incessantly, for want of confidence to tell him, I decided to disguise myself and go on duty to Geertruidenberg, the King also sent him a courier, to tell him that he gave me knowledge of all the practices that happened, in order to guide me according to the occasion.” 118 Letter from Mme de Blau addressed to ‘sire’ to receive reimbursement for her expenses during her secret mission, n.d. (likely produced in 1723), A.N., 25 AP/1, folder 1, document 2. “[…] The French Plenipotentiaries had no knowledge of this mystery and their zeal was so sincere in the pursuit of peace that they believed the King wished […].” 119 Ibid. “I remained in Holland for three months, and gave advice about everything, I could not miss instructions […] I continued my accounts until the definitive end of the peace.” 39 Mme and M. de Blau, Pontchartrain repeatedly employed formulaic phrases in which he thanked her for transmitting information from the Dutch Republic: “Je vous suis tres obligé Madame de l’attention que vous avez a m’informer des nouvelles qui vous viennent de hollande je vous prie de me la continuer avec la méme exactitude.”120 Mme de Blau integrated her Dutch relations into her information network. In February 1710, Tessé asked Mme de Blau to share information that she had received in a letter from one of her sisters.121 However, it is unclear which of Mme de

Blau’s sisters interacted with the French ministers—Blau had at least two: Agnès and

Cornelia.122 In the summer that same year, he asked Mme de Blau to “assurer l’aimable petite sœur de tous mes respects […].”123 Tessé likewise told M. de Blau, “assurés de mes Respects vostre aimable épouse & belle sœur pour laquelle sans la Connoistre j’ay pris de l’inclination.”124

Tessé had direct communication with at least one of Mme de Blau’s sisters in Holland, as indicated by her having sent Tessé a packet to pass along to M. and Mme de Blau.125

Beyond her preexisting familial networks, during her mission, Blau constructed a network of informants and collaborators whose information she then relayed to French ministers like Pontchartrain and Tessé. For example, in May 1713, she reported to Pontchartrain information from one of her correspondents in Dusseldorf regarding the Archduke’s refusal to consent to the terms in the Peace of Utrecht.126 Her correspondent(s) in Dusseldorf was a

120 Letter from Pontchartrain to Mme de Blau, March 30, 1712, A.N., 25 AP/1, folder 1, document 34. Letters from Pontchartrain to Mme de Blau February 15, 1712-July 12, 1713, A.N., 25 AP/1, folder 1, documents 32-46. “I am much obliged to you, Madame, for the attention you have in informing me of news that comes to you from Holland, I beg you to continue it for me with the same exactitude.” 121 Letter from the Maréchal de Tessé to Mme de Blau, February 22, 1710, A.N., 25 AP/1, folder 1, document 15. 122 Camps and Lacombe, Fonds Blau. 123 Letter from the Maréchal de Tessé to Mme de Blau, July 28, 1710, A.N., 25 AP/1, folder 1, document 26. “to assure the lovely little sister of all my respects […].” 124 Letter from the Maréchal de Tessé to M. de Blau, June 2, 1710, A.N., 25 AP/1, folder 1, document 21. “assure of my Respects your lovely wife and sister-in-law for whom without knowing her I have taken a liking to.” 125 Letter from the Maréchal de Tessé to M. de Blau, September 20, 1710, A.N., 25 AP/1, folder 1, document 31. 126 Letters from Pontchartrain to Mme de Blau, 10 and 31 May, 1713, A.N., 25 AP/1, folder 1, documents 43-44. 40 recurring source of information in her correspondence with Pontchartrain and Tessé in 1712-

1713.127 Her son wrote that her correspondence with Pontchartrain proved that “[s]a mere entretenoit des correspondances dans les cours etrangeres par une personne de confience quelle entretenoit a ses fraits etdelaveu du ministre a dusseldorph.”128 Her correspondence with

Pontchartrain also suggests that Blau operated as a sort of patron/broker for those who worked in her service. For example, in February and August 1712, Pontchartrain wrote to Mme de Blau on the subject of the passports that she had requested on behalf of a “Sr. Arnold Pierre Blezon hollondois.”129

Before her departure, Pontchartrain ordered Mme de Blau “d’employer sa legitime de

22000. florins au service de l’etat, qu’il luy en seroit tenue compte tres exact a son retour, et qu’elle devois s’attendre a une recompence digne du Roy, aussy bien que pour les services qu’elle avoit dejat rendue au subjet des passeports.”130 The French foreign office was responsible for paying a variety of expenses related to ambassadorial-related costs, reimbursements, administrative costs, pensions, travel fees, and gratifications, including the pensions paid to new converts. Rule and Trotter calculated the office’s total expenditures for 1714 to be 5,186,043 livres.131 Individual earnings were hierarchical and could differ drastically.132 As Rule and

127 e.g., Letters from Pontchartrain to Mme de Blau, March 30, 1712-August 24, 1712, A.N., 25 AP/1, folder 1, documents 34-39; Letter from Tessé to Mme de Blau, March 12, 1713, A.N., 25 AP/1, folder 1, document 112. 128 “Extraits de plusieurs lettres de Mrs. les Mareschal de Tessé, abé de polignac, et ministres relatives et pour constater les services dela dme. de Blau dans les conferences de gertrudenberg, ses depences par ordre du Roy et ses ministres, suivant son mémoire et le raport des dtes. Lettres […]” copied by Louis François de Blau, n.d., A.N., 25 AP/1, folder 1, document 14. “[his] mother maintained correspondence in foreign courts by a person of confidence whom she maintained at her expense according to the minister to Dusseldorf.” 129 Letter from Pontchartrain to Mme de Blau, February 15, 1712, A.N., 25 AP/1, folder 1, document 32; Letter from Pontchartrain to Mme de Blau, August 10, 1712, A.N., 25 AP/1, folder 1, document 38. 130 Unsigned request addressed to the Cardinal de Noailles, n.d., A.N., 25 AP/1, folder 1, document 3. “to use her 22,000-florin légitime in the service of the state, that it would be accurately accounted for upon her return, and that she should expect a recompense worthy of the King, as well as for the services she had already rendered on the subject of passports.” 131 Rule and Trotter, A World of Paper, 294. 132 Ibid., 291. 41 Trotter noted, “For those who laboured covertly, the costs of clandestine operations, including travel, bribes, and sending secret messages, could be quite high, but the tradeoff for all the cash expended was potentially valuable information.”133 Blau was no exception and the costs of her mission quickly surpassed the 8,000 livres that she had saved between 1705-1709 and her

22,000-florin légitime.134 From 1709 to 1710, Mme de Blau spent the equivalent of 59,951 livres on mission-related expenses for which she did not receive compensation. The expense lists in the

Fonds Blau divide Mme de Blau’s expenditures into three categories: 1) travel costs related to her return to France in August 1709 under Louis XIV’s orders, 2) the costs of gifts that she brought to Holland under the orders of French ministers, including a dictionary, copies of one of

Lully’s operas, ornate snuffboxes, clothing, wigs, and swords, and 3) the costs that Mme de Blau incurred as she “executed the King’s intentions” (Table 1).135 The items in this third category of her expense list provide some insight into Mme de Blau’s mission and the modes of information collection that she employed. While most of the documents in the Fonds Blau pertaining to her mission emphasize her travels and “les services considerables qu’elle [Mme de Blau] a rendüs tant a la france qu’á l’espagne, les Risques et les dangers de sa vie qu’elle á courus lorsqu’elle s’est deguisée,”136 the expense lists reveal Blau’s reliance on the anonymous individuals—the informants, deputies, couriers, interceptors, servants, interpreters, etc.—whom she retained in her service.

133 Ibid., 282. 134 Unsigned draft of a letter to an unspecified recipient, n.d., A.N., 25 AP/1, folder 1, document 50. 135 “Mémoire of the costs that the lady of B…. spent, by order of the King during the voyages that she made to Holland for which she requests the reimbursement; Mr. the Marshall of Tesse and the minister were aware of them in 1709-1710,” n.d., A.N., 25 AP/1, folder 1, document 13. 136 Unsigned request addressed to the Cardinal de Noailles, n.d., A.N., 25 AP/1, folder 1, document 3. “The tremendous services she [Mme de Blau] rendered to both France and Spain, the Risks and dangers to her life that she incurred while she disguised herself.” 42 Table 1. Mme de Blau’s mission expenditures from her “Mémoire de dépence pour pour [sic] lentretiens des personne de qui javois besoin pour executé les intention du Roy,” n.d., A.N., 25 AP/1, folder 1, document 13. Payments are in Dutch florins and French livres. Reason for Payment Payment Service of an informant at a rate of 20 florins per day for three months, twelve 2,040 days. florins Service of a different informant at a rate of 15 florins per day for three months, 1,650 twenty days. florins Interception of a letter “that was of consequence for the good of the thing.” 500 florins Modification of a passport. 900 florins Service of a “man of trust” who delivered Blau’s letters during a four-month 3,800 period. florins Numerous trips that Mme Blau took to follow up on the information that she 1,090 received from her informants. florins Fifteen meals for a deputy while travelling to and from Geertruidenberg. 4,560 florins Payment to the servants of individuals with whom Blau stayed who “served [her] 1,500 in [her] discoveries” and to the children of the households. florins Fees involving a commission in Amsterdam and “good tea for the wife of a man 260 who was devoted to [her].” florins Mme de Blau’s expenses from an eight-day stay in Amsterdam that she made 770 with the Allied plenipotentiaries at the end of July 1710. florins Delivery costs of letters during a four-month period. 350 florins Service of an interpreter at a rate of 150 florins per month for four months. 600 florins Cost to rent a furnished “country house” where Mme de Blau composed her 1,070 mémoires and listened to the reports from the individuals whom she employed. florins Transportation costs for Mme de Blau and her guests to the rented house. 1,850 florins Food-related costs during her stay at the house. 1,090 florins Transportation costs for Mme de Blau’s return to Brussels. 150 florins Transportation costs for seven people by carriage. 210 livres Food-related costs during her travels. 647 livres

43 Although he too is absent from the descriptions of the mission in his wife’s petitions, the correspondence suggests that Mme de Blau worked in coordination with her husband as part of an Arbeitspaar. Like Mme de Blau, M. de Blau corresponded and met with French officials, serving as an intermediary between them and his wife. M. de la Chapelle, for example, wrote to

M. de Blau to request that he remind Mme de Blau of her promise to aid in the release of one of his relatives, a Mr. de Montbrun, who was a brigadier in Louis XIV’s army and a military prisoner in Holland.137 Tessé suggested that M. de Blau also played an important role in the mission’s potential successes; he wrote to M. de Blau in a letter dated March 17, 1710 that

“Vous et Mme de Blau Monsieur estes sans doute plus importants que vous ne croyez peut estre.”138 Tessé’s letters to the pair reveal their coordinated efforts. Explaining his decision to respond to separate letters from M. and Mme de Blau with one letter, he wrote to Mme de Blau that “Comme il ny á rien de caché entre vous & luy je puis fort bien en croyant Repondre a vostre Lettre Repondre a la sienne […].”139

M. de Blau regularly corresponded with Tessé, especially regarding the Blau’s financial woes. Tessé wrote to M. de Blau in July 1710 to inform him of the difficulties that he had encountered in acquiring the funds that the couple had requested for their mission without

Colbert de Torcy’s involvement.140 The next month, Tessé wrote to M. de Blau advising against his plans to return to Paris and leave his pregnant wife in Holland without first receiving Louis

137 Letter from M. de la Chapelle to M. de Blau, June 26, 1710, A.N., 25 AP/1, folder 1, document 124. 138 “Extraits de plusieurs lettres de Mrs. les Mareschal de Tessé, abé de polignac, et ministres relatives et pour constater les services dela dme. de Blau dans les conferences de gertrudenberg, ses depences par ordre du Roy et ses ministres, suivant son mémoire et le raport des dtes. Lettres […]” copied by Louis François de Blau, n.d., A.N., 25 AP/1, folder 1, document 14. “You and Mme de Blau Monsieur are without a doubt more important than perhaps you believe.” 139 Letter from the Maréchal de Tessé to Mme de Blau, June 23, 1710, A.N., 25 AP/1, folder 1, document 23. “As there is nothing hidden between you & him, I can very well believe to Respond to your Letter Respond to his […].” 140 Letter from Tessé to M. de Blau, July 25, 1710, A.N., 25 AP/1, folder 1, document 25. 44 XIV’s permission. A note presumably in Mme de Blau’s hand in the margins of one of Tessé’s letters to the couple explains, “on est chagrin du retour mais je navais plus dargent et lon ne men envoiez pas.”141 Tessé wrote to M. de Blau that Pontchartrain had informed him that, “cela

[demander permission au Roy] luy estoit necessaire pour le mettre en estat d’obtenir si il peut quelque grace ou gratification, a l’egard de l’autre homme qui loge au dessous dudit fagot despines [Colbert de Torcy?] […].”142 Both M. and Mme de Blau did evidently return to Paris, but whether they did so together and did so with or without royal authorization is unclear.

During this return, Tessé arranged for M. de Blau to meet with Colbert de Torcy. In

September 1710, Tessé wrote to M. de Blau advising him, “preparés vous a un entretien teste a teste avec Mr de Torcy dont Certainement le fagot d’epines [Pontchartrain?] ne sera ny ne doit estre informé […].”143 During this meeting, he instructed M. de Blau that,

sans vous faire nommer vous luy fassiés dire que c’est un homme de ma part qui le demande mais comme pour parler d’affaires principalement avec nos ministres qui n’ont pas toujours assés le loisir d’escouter j’estime que vous pourriés faire un mémoire des choses principales dont vous auriéz a l’esclaircir & que vous auriés a luy dire, je crois que dans la suite si vous trouvés un chemin de propositions apparentes il conviendra peutestre que vous fassiés un voyage secret je ne scay si Mr vostre chere epouse y consentira […].144

M. de Blau, therefore, played an important role in the couple’s attempts to remedy their financial situation. His wife’s position, actions, and connections facilitated his own interactions with

141 Letter from Tessé to M. and Mme de Blau, August 30, 1710, A.N., 25 AP/1, folder 1, document 29. “They are upset by the return but I had no more money and they are not sending me any.” 142 Letter from Tessé to M. de Blau, August 9, 1710, A.N., 25 AP/1, folder 1, document 28. “That [asking permission from the King] was necessary for him to put him in a position to obtain, if he can, some grace or gratification, with regard to the other man who lodges below the said bundle of spines [Colbert de Torcy?] [ …].” 143 Letter from the Maréchal de Tessé to M. de Blau, September 8, 1710, A.N., 25 AP/1, folder 1, document 30. “prepare yourself/yourselves for a one-on-one interview with Mr. de Torcy of which the bundle of spines [Pontchartrain?] will certainly not be informed.” 144 Ibid. “without naming yourself you will make him say that it is a man on my behalf who asks for it but as if to talk mainly about business with our ministers who do not always have enough leisure to listen I think that you could make a mémoire of the main things that you would have to clarify & that you would have to tell him, I believe that in the continuation if you find a path of apparent proposals it will perhaps be appropriate for you to make a secret voyage I do not know if Mr your dear spouse will consent to it […].” 45 ministers. It is unclear if Mme de Blau too met with Colbert de Torcy, though she did return to

Paris and presumably spent time at Versailles in September 1710; Tessé, for example, wrote to

M. de Blau: “Nous avons fait chercher l’abbé de polignac & moy vostre aimable epouse, mais elle estoit retournéé a paris dans le tems que je suis venu icy [à Versailles].”145 Nonetheless, it is evident that M. and Mme de Blau worked in collaboration both with each other and with the few

French ministers who were privy to the mission.

The secrecy that shrouded Mme de Blau’s mission had its disadvantages as the ministers who were unaware of Blau’s commission could pose obstacles to the mission’s success. Colbert de Torcy, in particular, hindered the mission’s progress. Letters from Tessé to Mme de Blau detail Colbert de Torcy’s attempts to prevent her from obtaining a passport and his efforts to delay her departure “pour des raisons quil ne pouvoit dire.”146 Aware of Blau’s orders, Tessé and

Pontchartrain intervened on her behalf and Tessé informed Louis XIV of the situation. Tessé warned Mme de Blau of the potential consequences of Colbert de Torcy’s ignorance in regards to her mission: “Je suis trés aise que vous ayés receu reponce du Romain [Polignac], & qu’il vous ouvre son cœur mais il faudroit qu’il rendist conte a son amy qui loge du mesme costé & plus bas que le fagot dépines [Colbert de Torcy?] de tout ce que vous faites pour son service & de l’utilité dont vous luy estes Car je scay que jusqu’a present il n’en á pas encore escrit un mot,

& cela est necessaire pourque les graces de ce sorte la puissent marcher.”147 Colbert de Torcy’s

145 Letter from the Maréchal de Tessé to M. de Blau, September 20, 1710, A.N., 25 AP/1, folder 1, document 31. “We sent for the Cardinal of Polignac and I your pleasant wife, but she had returned to Paris in the time that I came here [to Versailles].” 146 “Extraits de plusieurs lettres de Mrs. les Mareschal de Tessé, abé de polignac, et ministres relatives et pour constater les services dela dme. de Blau dans les conferences de gertrudenberg, ses depences par ordre du Roy et ses ministres, suivant son mémoire et le raport des dtes. Lettres […]” copied by Louis François de Blau, n.d., A.N., 25 AP/1, folder 1, document 14. “for reasons that he could not say.” 147 Letter from the Maréchal de Tessé to Mme de Blau, July 14, 1710, A.N., 25 AP/1, folder 1, document 24. “I am very pleased that you have received a response from the Roman [Polignac], & that he opens his heart to you, but he must report to his friend who lives on the same side & lower than the bundle of spines [Colbert de Torcy?] about all 46 ignorance of the mission made him suspicious of Mme de Blau’s reasons for travelling. In a draft of a letter to an unspecified recipient (Polignac?) Blau claimed,

il vous souviendra Mgr quapres votre retour de jerdruidenberg Mr le marquis de Torsy pour lors ministre des affair étrengere, vous insinua quil soubsonnet que jestois alleé en hollende dans le mesme temps du congres; et que je pouroit bien avoir esté chargeé d’affere secrette, […] le Roy voulloit que Mr de Torsy, nut aucune connessence des ordre que javois éu, et que sur le refut quil me fit, de me délivre mon pasport pendans la tenüe du congres, le Roy luy dit (quesque vous voullé qune fame fasse dans vos affere, lessés la aller elle minportune donné le luy.)148

During this time, she claimed, “je resus pour lors défence de vous révélleé le segret de ma commission […] le mesme maréchal [Tessé] me dit quil falloit vous paroitre un esprit borneé, et batre la canpagne sans vous rien déclaré.”149 Clearly, the recipient of her letter did at some point learn the secret of her mission as she wrote to him to seek his protection for her service on behalf of France: “Permaite moy en vous assurent de mon profond respect de vous demende lhonneur de votre protection, je suis assés heureusse d’optenir cette grace, connéstent comme je fais, votre zelle, pour le soutiens de la frence jay lieux désperer en vous un protecteur, ayent éu lhonneur de la servire aú dépend de tout mon bien, et au risque de ma vie en .1709. et en .1710.”150

Her dual loyalties as an elite Dutchwoman and agent of the French court in her natal lands were paradoxical. Not only did Mme de Blau serve a foreign court, but within these

that you do for his service and the utility that you are to him Because I know that so far he has not yet written a word about it, and that is necessary so that graces of this kind can work.” 148 Unsigned draft of a letter to an unspecified recipient, n.d., A.N., 25 AP/1, folder 1, document 50. “You remember Mgr that after your return from Geertruidenberg Mr the Marquis de Torcy at the time minister of foreign affairs, insinuated to you that he suspected that I had gone to Holland at the same time of the congress; and that I could have been charged with a secret affair, […] the King wanted Mr de Torcy to have no knowledge of my orders, and that upon the refusal he made to me to deliver me my passport during the congress, the King told him (what do you want a woman to do in your affairs, let her go she is disturbing me, give it to her.)” 149 Ibid. “I was at the time prohibited from revealing to you the secret of my commission […] the same Marshall [de Tessé] told me that I had to appear small-minded to you, and to travel around the countryside without reporting anything to you.” 150 Ibid. “allow me by assuring you of my profound respect to ask you for the honor of your protection, I am rather happy to obtain this grace, knowing like I do, your zeal, for the support of France I have reason to hope in you a protector, having had the honor to serve it at the expense of all my savings, and at the risk of my life in 1709 and 1710.” 47 documents, she described how she actively deceived her relatives and subverted the interests of her relations in the Estates-General as part of her service to France. Although Mme de Blau and her allies frequently identified her as an ‘hollandaise,’ these invocations are to some extent hollow; in her French accounts, Mme de Blau shed any appearance of loyalty to her Dutch ties and portrayed herself as nothing less than one of Louis XIV’s devoted subjects. In actuality, it is more likely that Mme de Blau functioned as an intermediary between France and the Dutch

Republic since she maintained connections in both through her networks, correspondence, and travels between the two. This makes the absence of correspondence from and limited mentions of her Dutch ties within the Fonds Blau especially striking. Her insistence on her fidelity to

Louis XIV in her accounts was probably an attempt to shield herself from accusations like those of Colbert de Torcy and to make a more convincing argument for her and her family’s compensation and recognition by the French court.

Exposing the Secret and Petitioning for Compensation

Mme de Blau’s mission-related expenses from 1709-1710 with fourteen years of interest amounted to 101,916 livres.151 After Louis XIV’s death, secrecy was no longer compatible with

Mme de Blau’s desires for recognition and compensation. Although the administrative apparatus under the Regency was perhaps not that drastic of a shift from that during Louis XIV’s reign,152 the bureaucratic reorganizations and shifts in personnel that occurred between Louis XIV and

Louis XV’s reigns was likely an obstacle in Mme de Blau’s quest for compensation due to her

151 “Mémoire of the costs that the lady of B…. spent, by order of the King during the voyages that she made to Holland for which she requests the reimbursement; Mr. the Marshall of Tesse and the minister were aware of them in 1709-1710,” n.d., A.N., 25 AP/1, folder 1, document 13. 152 Rule and Trotter, A World of Paper, 148. 48 mission’s secrecy and consequent lack of written records. In order to receive reimbursement for her mission and the continuation of her unpaid pension, Mme de Blau needed to first reveal the secret of her mission to prove to the Duc d’Orléans, Louis XV, and their administrative personnel that she merited the continuation of the benefits that Louis XIV had previously granted to her. She did this in part through the creation of mémoires—targeted toward royal patrons including the Cardinal de Noailles, the Duc de Bourbon, the Duc du Maine, the Duc d’Orléans, and Louis XV—in which she and her allies described her service to the French monarchy and the compensation that Louis XIV and his ministers had promised to her. In these mémoires, Blau and her allies followed the generic conventions of the royal petition. According to Jens Ivo Engels,

Les auteurs [des placets] se pliant à un modèle assez précis, organisent le texte autour de trois aspects, à savoir le pétitionnaire, la demande et le roi. Apparemment, c’est le devoir de l’auteur de les organiser suivant un schéma convenu afin de garantir (ou de rendre possible) le succès de la démarche. Le solliciteur devait être présenté comme un sujet fidèle, méritant les bienfaits du monarque. Il devait légitimer sa demande par un nombre d’arguments acceptés ou même revendiqués dans le contexte spécifique du « langage des placets ». Pour solliciter une faveur du roi, on se devait d’invoquer, d’une manière convenue, ses vertus afin de lui imposer le devoir moral d’accorder la grâce. En plus, il était important de souligner que le roi signifiait un « dernier ressort ».153

Patron-client relations played a significant role in these petitions as individuals relied on the support of ministers in order to successfully appeal to the king. Requests to ministers followed a similar formula to those sent to kings; as Engels notes, “On a donc l’impression que sur le plan

153 Jens Ivo Engels, “Dénigrer, espérer, assumer la réalité. Le roi de France perçu par ses sujets, 1680-1750,” Revue d’histoire moderne & contemporaine 50-3 (2003): 119. “The authors [of royal petitions], following a fairly precise model, organize the text around three aspects, namely the petitioner, the request and the king. Apparently, it is the author’s duty to organize them according to an agreed pattern in order to guarantee (or make possible) the success of the process. The petitioner was to be presented as a faithful subject, deserving of the monarch’s blessings. He had to legitimize his request with a number of arguments accepted or even claimed in the specific context of the ‘language of royal petitions.’ To solicit a favor from the king, one had to invoke, in an agreed manner, his virtues in order to impose on him the moral duty to grant grace. In addition, it was important to stress that the king represented a ‘last resort.’” 49 rhétorique, le roi et ses ministres sont interchangeables. Parfois, les auteurs ne se sont même pas donnés la peine de rédiger deux textes différents, leur envoyant la même version.”154

Despite the use of code and other measures to keep her correspondence secret, letters from her mysterious correspondents paradoxically became evidence that Mme de Blau used to reveal her secret mission. Her request to the Cardinal de Noailles explains, “[…] Le succez des negotiations qui ont durées jusqu’à la paix definitive á repondu entierement aux souhaits de sa majesté la dame Deblau a entre les mains les lettres tant de Mrs. Le Maal. De Tessé,

Depontchartrin, Lachapelle, que celles de Mrs les Plainipotentiaires, et le resultat des conferences de gertruidemberge qu’elle offre de justifier comme aussy d’instruire du secret dont elle avoit eté chargée pour cette negotiation.”155 Mme de Blau also relied on testimony from witnesses who could corroborate her actions during her mission. Chamillart reported that

La Dame de Blau a receu les ordres du feu Roy en 1710. par Mr. Le comte de Pontchartrain concernant les negotiations secrettes, Le Sieur Delachapelle son premier commis apresent secrettaire delamarinne delivra les chiffres et les adresses a la Dame de Blau, Monsieur le cardinal Depolinaeque, Monsieur le marechal de Tessé, Monsieur le duc de Villeroy, ont connoissance desd. negotiations, sans neantmoins en avoir seul le secret dans le temps., Les Personnes cy nommez luy renderont themoignange de ce donc elle á esté capable […].156

154 Ibid., 121. “One therefore gets the impression that rhetorically speaking, the king and his ministers are interchangeable. Sometimes, the authors did not even bother to write two different texts, sending them the same version.” 155 Unsigned request addressed to the Cardinal de Noailles, n.d., A.N., 25 AP/1, folder 1, document 3. “the success of the negotiations that lasted until the definitive peace responded entirely to the wishes of his majesty the Dame de Blau has in her hands letters as many from Mrs. the Maal. De Tessé, Pontchartrain, Lachapelle, as those from Mrs the plenipotentiaries, and the result of the conferences of Geertruidenberg that she offers to justify as well as to inform of the secret with which she was charged for this negotiation.” 156 “Mémoire concernant le rapport que M. Dechamillard a fait à son Altesse Royale, par son ordre à l’avennement de sa Regence sur ce qui concernoit la Dame Deblau hollandoise,” presented August 9, 1722, A.N., 25 AP/1, folder 1, document 1. “The Dame de Blau received the late king’s orders in 1710 by Mr. the Comte de Pontchartrain concerning the secret negotiations, Sir de la Chapelle his first servant at present secretary of the navy delivered the codes and the addresses to the Dame de Blau, Monsieur the Cardinal de Polignac, Monsieur the Maréchal de Tessé, Monsieur the Duc de Villeroy, have knowledge of said negotiations, without nonetheless being alone informed of the secret in the past., the persons named here will serve as witnesses of what she was capable […].” 50 Tessé, in particular, operated as a sort of ‘protector’ for Mme de Blau.157 Not only did he attest that the promises that Blau claimed Louis XIV had made to her were accurate, but he also validated her account of the mission, certifying that her mission’s intention was “alonger les conferences quy se temoine audit St gertruidenberg affin de donner le temps aux negociations secrettes quy se faisoint pour la Rupture de la ligue quelle a couru beaucoup de Risque dans ce voyage […].”158 Tessé aided Mme de Blau in revealing her mission to potential patrons like the

Cardinal Dubois and decoding her claims. Mme de Blau wrote, “mes preuve sont entre mes mains, je leurs ay dit a laureille le segret et le tour de ma négautiation cettoit de lalgebre pour eux

[…] Mr le cardinal du bois y entendent mieux parcequ il fute instruit par Mr le maréchal de

Tesse […].”159 The mémoire to the Cardinal de Noailles too attests that “Apres tant de marques aussy eclaires et certaines, prouvées par Certifficats et autres pieces justificatives, atestées par

Mr. Le Marechal de Tessée avant son depart pour l’Espagne a son altess serénissime

Monseigneur le Duc Comme a Mr. Demorville en presence de S.A.S., et par Monseigneur léveque Defreius,” who annotated and submitted Mme de Blau’s mémoires to the Duc d’Orléans after having learned of her story from the late Cardinal Dubois.160 However, Mme de Blau was not content to leave others to attest to her actions during her secret mission; Chamillart reported that “La Dame de Blau souheteroit avoir l’honneur d’instruire par elle mesme S.a.R. [le Duc

157 Cespedes, “La famille Blau,” 79-80. 158 Unsigned certificate concerning Mme de Blau prepared by Tessé, n.d, A.N., 25 AP/1, folder 1, document 8. “to prolong the conferences that are held at the aforesaid St. Geertruidenberg to give time to the secret negotiations that took place to rupture the league that she ran a lot of risk on this voyage […].” 159 Unsigned draft of a letter to an unspecified recipient, n.d., A.N., 25 AP/1, folder 1, document 50. “My evidence is in my hands, I told them orally the secret and the trick of my negotiation was algebra for them […] Mr. Cardinal Dubois understands it better because he was informed by Mr. Marshal de Tessé [ …].” 160 Unsigned request addressed to the Cardinal de Noailles, n.d., A.N., 25 AP/1, folder 1, document 3. “After so many clear and certain marks, proven by Certificates and other supporting documents, attested by Mr. Marechal de Tessé before his departure for Spain to his serene highness Monsignor the Duke as to Mr. Demorville in the presence of [His Serene Highness], and by Monsignor the Bishop of Fréjus.” 51 d’Orléans?] sur le secret de cette negotiation, affin que si elle en avoit besoing par la suitte, elle fut en etat de luy rendre ses services.”161

To some extent, Mme de Blau played to the stereotype that although women had the potential to be trusted confidants, their confidence was tenuous and women were a threat to secrecy; as Guillaume Hanotin articulates, “ces qualités de confidentes peuvent faire craindre l’ébruitement ou la diffusion de nouvelles, c’est-à-dire de rompre le secret. Si les femmes représentent un atout majeur pour l’information, elles constituent donc également sa principale menace.”162 To mitigate negative consequences of exposing her story, Mme de Blau and her allies employed gender as a strategy and invoked her role as a mother. They emphasized that

Blau only sought reimbursement and compensation so that she could adequately provide for her children and fulfill her maternal obligations independently from her estranged husband, whom, by the mid 1720s, Mme de Blau no longer trusted to provide for their children.163 The tale that these documents tell is one of multilayered sacrifice. On one level is Mme de Blau’s maternal self-sacrifice for her children; the documents depict her as a mother who always saved money for her children and “s’est toujours privée des agrements de la vie, pour assurer du pain a ses enfans apres sa mort.”164

161 “Mémoire concernant le rapport que M. Dechamillard a fait à son Altesse Royale, par son ordre à l’avennement de sa Regence sur ce qui concernoit la Dame Deblau hollandoise,” presented August 9, 1722, A.N., 25 AP/1, folder 1, document 1. “The Dame de Blau would wish to have the honor of informing HRH [the Duc d’Orléans?] herself of the secret of this negotiations so that if he needed it afterwards, she would be in a position to offer him her services.” 162 Guillaume Hanotin, “Femmes et négociations diplomatiques entre France et Espagne au XVIIIe siècle,” Genre & Histoire 12-13 (2013), paragraph 20. “these qualities of [female] confidants can lead to fears of the spread or the diffusion of news, that is to say, to break the secret. If women represent a major asset for information, then they also constitute its main threat.” 163 Unsigned request addressed to “son altesse serenissime Monseigneur le Duc,” n.d., A.N., 25 AP/1, folder 1, document 4. A request to the Duc de Bourbon states, “La Dame Deblau a crut par la confiance qu’elle avoit au Roy mettre partie de ses pensions et son bien propre a couvert, afin d’empecher que son Mary ne put luy dissiper par sa mauvaise conduitte, et setrouver en etat d’avoir un fond pour etablir ses Enfans.” / “The Dame de Blau believed by the trust she had in the King to conceal a part of her pensions and her own property, so as to prevent her husband from using it up through his poor behavior, and to find herself in a state to have a fund to establish her children.” 164 Ibid. “has always deprived herself of life’s leisures, to assure that her children will have bread after her death.” 52 Another aspect of this narrative is Mme de Blau’s self-sacrifice for the French monarchy, which not only encompassed the time, effort, and money that she expended in the service of

Louis XIV, but also the sacrifice of the futures that she had envisioned for her children and to which she had already given impetus. Her request to the Duc de Bourbon emphasized that

“L’intention de la Dame Deblau á toujours eté d’epergner pendant qu’elle n’avoit que de petits enfans qu’elle fesoit n’ourir en auvergne, pour trouver dequoy les mieux ellever et les etablir quand ils seroient grands, n’ayant demandé au Roy sur les pensions que proportionement a ses besoins,” and that she was only requesting “le payement des arrerrages de la pension de 6000

[livres]. comme son rembourcement de 22600. florins et les interets depuis 1709” due to her because “Ils sont en age ajourdhuy.”165 Worse than the sacrifices that she had made for the

French court would be to suffer the injustice of having the “fruit de ses travaux” go to waste.166

While Mme de Blau argued that she had willingly sacrificed her children’s futures for her service to Louis XIV, she nonetheless prioritized her maternal role as she attempted to use her mission and the connections to influential figures that she had developed during it to benefit her children.

Mme de Blau’s (Limited) Successes

Did Mme de Blau prevail in her efforts to use her mission as the basis for acquiring monetary and social benefits for her and her children? In regards to finances, Mme de Blau did succeed in recovering her pension, but there is no evidence in the Fonds Blau that she received

165 Ibid. These figures vary across the documents. Several of Mme de Blau’s other requests declare her légitime to have been 22,000 florins. “The Dame de Blau’s intention was always to save while she only had small children that she fed in Auvergne, to find something to best raise and establish them when they would be grown, only having asked the King about pensions proportional to her needs”; “the back payment of the pension of 6000 [livres], like her reimbursement of 22600 florins and the interests since 1709”; “they are of age today.” 166 Ibid. “fruits of her labors.” 53 reimbursement for her légitime and it is unclear if she was able to attain the interest and back payments from her pension that she had requested. Blau claimed that as compensation for her services, Louis XIV had raised her pension shortly before his death, but the documents provide conflicting information as to the amount of the increase.167 In 1716, upon receipt of Tessé’s certificates, the Duc d’Orléans approved the continuation of her pension in full and exempted her from paying the dixième.168 However, in a 1726 request to the Duc du Maine, either Blau or one of her allies asserted that “Mgr le duc a reduit la supliente a 2800 [livres] pour tante substistence, este este [sic] aubligé de vivre dans les confin dune provience, pour cacher la misere ou lon la reduit avec 5 enfans.”169

Her children and grandchildren did inherit her pension, but it was significantly reduced from the 6,800 livres that Mme de Blau had once enjoyed. A request to Saint-Mégrin produced after the death of Louis François de Blau shows the pension’s gradual decrease, stating that “Mg.

Le duc réduisit cette pension à 4800 [livres] et Mg. Le cardinal de fleurÿ a 2800 [livres] mais ce ministre suppléoit à ce detranchement chaque anneé par une gratification considérable et il existe une lettre de luy par laqu’elle il assurer la dame de blau de toute la protection du Roÿ et du soin que luÿ même aura en tous tems d’aller au de tout de tous ses besoins” and that after Mme de

Blau’s death, the pension further reduced to 2,400 livres.170 While Blau and her descendants

167 Ibid.; Unsigned mémoire addressed to the Duc du Maine, 1726, A.N., 25 AP/1, folder 1, document 6; “mémoire concernant les petit enfans de Madame de Blau à Monsieur le duc du St Mégrin,” n.d., A.N., 25 AP/1, folder 2, document 7. 168 Letter from Mme de Blau to the Duc de Bourbon, June 16, 1724, A.N., 25 AP/1, folder 1, document 52. 169 Unsigned mémoire addressed to the Duc du Maine, 1726, A.N., 25 AP/1, folder 1, document 6. “Mgr the duke reduced the supplicant to 2800 [livres] for subsistence, was was [sic] forced to live in the confines of a province, to hide the misery to which she and her 5 children were reduced.” 170 “mémoire concernant les petit enfans de Madame de Blau à Monsieur le duc du St Mégrin,” n.d., A.N., 25 AP/1, folder 2, document 7. “Mg. the duke reduced this pension to 4800 [livres] and Mg. The Cardinal de Fleury to 2800 [livres] but this minister compensated for this deduction each year with a considerable gratuity and there is a letter from him in which he assures the Dame de Blau of all the King’s protection and the care that he himself will have at all times to meet all of her needs.” 54 claimed that Louis XIV had intended to compensate her for her service “desque l’etat de ses finances le luy permettroit dela rembourser de ses depenses,”171 his death left most of these promises unrealized. The deaths of the Cardinal Dubois and the Duc d’Orléans similarly impeded Mme de Blau’s efforts.172 Though, Mme de Blau was ultimately able to pass her pension on to her descendants, albeit in a reduced state.

The documents concerning Mme de Blau in the Fonds Blau, therefore, are not only the remnants of Mme de Blau’s peculiar story, but also the crux of a multigenerational familial legend that justified the continued payment of her pension to her descendants until the

Revolution. Louis François de Blau catalogued the letters that his parents had received during his mother’s mission, highlighting passages that praised their actions and emphasized Mme de

Blau’s service.173 Her children and grandchildren continued the narrative of service and loyalty to the French king that Mme de Blau had begun. In documents concerning the transfer of his mother’s pension, Louis François de Blau not only detailed his mother’s actions, but also inscribed himself into the familial legend through his description of his service to the French

171 For example, Ibid., “La dame de Blau a son retour d’hollande en 1714 fut aceuilli du Roy avec toute les marques de sa bien-veillance et flatté de sa part d’un traittement qui ne lui laisseroit rien a regreter de son droit d’ainesse perdu, de sa legitime consommeé, et de sa service rendu elle attendit tranquillement les effets des bonté du Roy si solemnellement promisea le roy mouru en 1715 au moment deles effectuers et sans l’avoir fait.” / “The Dame de Blau upon her return from Holland in 1714 was welcomed by the King with all the marks of his benevolence and flattered on his behalf with a treatment which would leave her nothing to regret for her lost birthright, for her spent légitime, and for her service rendered she calmly awaited the effects of the King’s kindness so solemnly promised the king died in 1715 at the time of carrying them out and without having done so.” Louis XIV “as soon as the state of his finances would allow him to reimburse her expenses.” 172 Letter from Mme de Blau addressed to ‘sire’ to receive reimbursement for her expenses during her secret mission, n.d. (likely produced in 1723), A.N., 25 AP/1, folder 1, document 2. “S.a.R. Mgr. Le Duc D’Orleans estoit sur le point de descider s’estant fait instruire a fond par Mr. Le Marechal de Tessé dont le certificat est joint au mémoire, j’avois lieu de tout esperer quand Dieu a disposé aussy de luy” / “HRH Mgr. The Duc D’Orleans was about to decide, having been thoroughly instructed by Mr. Le Marechal de Tessé whose certificate is attached to the mémoire, I had reason to hope for everything when God also disposed of him.” 173 “Extraits de plusieurs lettres de Mrs. les Mareschal de Tessé, abé de polignac, et ministres relatives et pour constater les services dela dme. de Blau dans les conferences de gertrudenberg, ses depences par ordre du Roy et ses ministres, suivant son mémoire et le raport des dtes. Lettres […]” copied by Louis François de Blau, n.d., A.N., 25 AP/1, folder 1, document 14. 55 monarchy.174 After Louis François’s death in 1762, the Blau family continued to use this narrative of multigenerational service to the French crown to justify the continuation of their pension.175 Writing during the Restoration to request the transfer of her late husband’s pension to their children, Marie Alexandre Camille de Blau’s widow recapitulated the stories of Mme de

Blau’s service to Louis XIV and Louis François de Blau’s service to Louis XV before adding to the familial history her late husband’s contributions to counterrevolutionary efforts in the Army of Condé. Like Mme de Blau, she invoked the documents to support her claims, writing that “les mémoires de la cour, et les pièces que j’ai en mains peuvent le prouver” and “Je suis munie de toutes les pièces qui justifient le droit perpétuel de cette pension dans la famille.”176 Marie

Alexandre Camille’s widow argued that the continuation of the pension was a matter of justice, honor, and glory. Although she was willing to sacrifice the pension’s full monetary value to the needs of the state, she claimed that she wanted to retain the pension as a symbol of royal acknowledgement of the Blau family’s sacrifices.177

Mme de Blau was somewhat more successful in her efforts to use her mission to build useful patron-client relations. Although Tessé claimed that Mme de Blau did not have “un gout

174 Request from Louis François de Blau to the Duc de Choiseul, n.d., A.N., 25 AP/1, folder 2, document 5. 175 “mémoire concernant les petit enfans de Madame de Blau à Monsieur le duc du St Mégrin,” n.d., A.N., 25 AP/1, folder 2, document 7. 176 Request by Marie Alexandre Camille de Blau’s widow to an unspecified ‘duc’ during the Restoration, n.d., A.N., 25 AP/1, folder 4, document 3. “The court’s mémoires, and the documents that I have in hand can prove it”; “I am armed with all the documents that justify the perpetual right of this pension in the family.” 177 Ibid. “En considérant tous les droits de mes enfans sur la Pension accordée par Louis XIV, successivement réduite et bornée à l’époque de l’émigration à si peu de chose, je suis trop pénêtrée aujourd’hui des besoins de l’Etat pour en vouloir retirer tout ce que la Justice pourrait prétendre. Je fais volontiers ce sacrifice à l’intérêt, mais je n’en veux point faire à l’honneur, à la Gloire de conserver dans ma famille un gage de reconnaissance de mon souverain.” / “By considering all the rights of my children to the Pension granted by Louis XIV, successively reduced and limited during the time of emigration to so little, I am too engrossed today with the needs of the State to want to collect everything that Justice could claim. I gladly make this sacrifice to the interest, but I do not want to make it to the honor, to the Glory of retaining in my family a token of my sovereign’s recognition.” 56 bien vif” for interacting with the French ministers at Versailles,178 Mme de Blau’s secret mission nonetheless allowed her to foster influential connections at the French court. In addition to operating as an agent of Louis XIV and regularly corresponding with French ministers, Mme de

Blau served the Duc and Duchesse du Maine. It is not clear what the parameters of Mme de

Blau’s service to the Duc and Duchesse were, but between 1712 and 1713, the Duchesse du

Maine wrote to Mme de Blau regarding an attempt by Lambert Gasparini, a former secretary to the premier president of the parlement of Dombes, to publish “un libelle très injurieux, non seulement contre S.A.S et Mme la duchesse du Maine, mais encore contre Presque tous les princes de la maison royale, dont il parle en terms fort insolents” as revenge for the Duc du

Maine having driven him from Dombes.179 According to the Duchesse, “il va frequemment a Utrec ou il frequente ches les plenipotentiaires, et ou il fait voir un nouveau libelle ou il attaqua tout de nouveau lhonneur de la maison de Mr le duc du maine.”180 In one of his numerous letters to Sossiondo, a French administrator in Dunkerque and one of Gasparini’s collaborators,

Pontchartrain wrote, “Il a depuis dix jours envoyé à la plupart des princes et des personnes de distinction de cette cour l’extrait ci-joint d’un livre dont il s’avoue hautement l’auteur, quoique rempli d’horreurs et de mensonges. Ce détail fait connaître que Gasparini doit être regardé comme un monstre public. C’est pourquoi le Roi a donné ordre à MM. ses plénipotentiaires de

178 Letter from the Maréchal de Tessé to Mme de Blau, October 29, 1712, A.N., 25 AP/1, folder 1, document 110. “a very lively taste.” 179 “Voysin aux intendants militaires sur la frontière,” April 15, 1713, in Archives de la Bastille, documents inédits recueillis et publiés, ed. François Ravaisson (Paris: A. Durand et Pedone-Lauriel, 1882), 95. “A very offensive libel, not only against [His Serene Highness] and Madame la Duchesse du Maine, but also against almost all the princes of the royal household, of whom he speaks in very insolent terms.” Letters from the Duchesse du Maine to Mme de Blau, 1712-3, A.N., 25 AP/1, folder 1, documents 82-106. This correspondence between the Duchesse du Maine and Mme de Blau is the only evidence of female patronage in the Fonds Blau and there is no evidence of Mme de Blau’s correspondence with other women in this collection. 180 Letter from the Duchesse du Maine to Mme de Blau, September 6, 1712, 25 AP/1, folder 1, document 83. “he frequently goes to Utrecht where he frequents the plenipotentiaries, and where he shows a new libelous pamphlet where he attacked again the honor of the house of the Duc du Maine.” 57 faire demander cet homme aux états généraux, et qu’ils empêchent la distribution des livres qu’il a faits.”181 Numerous French and foreign officials became involved in this affair, which highlights the French state’s significant concern with libel as a threat to the French aristocracy’s public reputation both domestically and abroad. Eventually, both Gasparini and Sossiondo were imprisoned in France.182

While officials worked to resolve the matter, the Duchesse du Maine appealed to individuals—like Mme de Blau—who were within her personal patronage network. She seemed to expect that Mme de Blau would use her position in Holland to offer her counsel and would work to resolve the scandal; she wrote to Blau, “Je continueray a vous imformes de tout ce que japrendray sur le malheureux gaspariny, et je croy que vous voudrés bien me donner des conseils sur cette affaire en attendant que vous y puissiés travailler plus directement.”183 This was possibly not Mme de Blau’s first encounter with Sossiondo; during her first return to Holland in

1709, Louis XIV had ordered Pontchartrain to write to a “Sr. Sausiondo a amsterdam commissaire des eschanges des prissoniers de guerre” to inform Mme de Blau of her orders to return to France.184 The Duchesse implored Mme de Blau “employer son credit pour faire en sorte qu’on sempare de la personne de cet homme et de les papiers” and in return offered her

181 “Pontchartrain à Sossiondo, commissaire de la marine à Dunkerque,” April 16, 1713, in Archives de la Bastille, 97. “In the last ten days he has sent to most of the princes and distinguished persons of this court the attached excerpt from a book which he loudly admits to being the author, though full of horrors and lies. This detail makes it known that Gasparini must be regarded as a public monster. This is why the King gave orders to MM. his plenipotentiaries to request this man from the States General, and that they prevent the distribution of the books he has made.” 182 Bély, Espions et ambassadeurs, 282. Ravaisson, Archives de la Bastille, 95-108. 183 Letter from the Duchesse du Maine to Mme de Blau, August 21, 1712, 25 AP/1, folder 1, document 82. “I will continue to inform you of all that I learn about the unfortunate gasparini, and I believe that you will give me advice on this affair until you can work there more directly.” 184 Unsigned request addressed to the Cardinal de Noailles, n.d., A.N., 25 AP/1, folder 1, document 3. “Sr. Sausiondo in Amsterdam commissioner for the exchange of prisoners of war.” 58 protection from any potential consequences: “je lui promets que touts les moyens quelle employera pour en venir a bout ne pouront luy attirer aucune affaire.”185

Mme de Blau’s informal actions on behalf of the Duchesse necessitated a level of secrecy similar to that of her original mission. For example, the Duchesse du Maine sent her “un homme fidel” who would ensure the security of their correspondence; she wrote, “il puis vous assurer quil ny a aucun risque de luy confier votre lettre” and insisted that “il est très necessaire que je sache au plus tost tout ce qui vous a esté dit je vous donne parolle que vous ne serés commise en rien et que je vous garderay en secret inviolable mandés moy donc le plus en detail quil vous sera possible tout ce que vous a conté s [Sossiondo?] […].”186 Like the French ministers with whom

Blau corresponded during her mission, the Duchesse thanked Blau for informing her of the news that she received from Holland.187 Despite the Duchesse’s attempts to keep Mme de Blau’s involvement a secret, Pontchartrain was vaguely aware of Blau’s service to the Duchesse; he wrote to Mme de Blau, “Jespere aussy que vous voudrez bien me marquer en quoy consiste la negociation donc vous estes chargée par Mad. La Duchesse du maine.”188 Mme de Blau’s service not only allowed to develop a patron-client relationship with the Duchesse du Maine, but it also granted her access to the Duc du Maine, to whom Blau sent a petition and various requests between 1714 and 1734.189

185 Letter from the Duchesse du Maine to Mme de Blau, September 6, 1712, 25 AP/1, folder 1, document 83. “to use her credit to make sure that she gets hold of this man and the papers and I promise her that whatever means she uses to deal with it will not bring her any issue.” 186 Letter from the Duchesse du Maine to Mme de Blau, September 19, 1712, 25 AP/1, folder 1, document 86. “a loyal man”; “he can assure you that there is no risk in entrusting him with your letter”; “it is very necessary that I know as soon as possible all that was said to you I give you my word that you will not be committed to anything and that I will keep you in inviolable secrecy so tell me as much in detail as possible that everything that S. [Sossiondo?] told you […].” 187 Letter from the Duchesse du Maine to Mme de Blau, July 8, 1712, 25 AP/1, folder 1, document 99. 188 Letter from Pontchartrain to Mme de Blau, September 21, 1712, A.N., 25 AP/1, folder 1, document 40. Pontchartrain wrote to Mme de Blau, “I also hope that you will want to indicate to me of what the negotiation with which Madame la Duchesse du Maine charged you consists.” 189 Letters from the Duc du Maine to Mme de Blau, 1714-1734, A.N., 25 AP/1, folder 1, documents 58-81. 59 Mme de Blau’s courtly connections and clientage aided her attempts to secure suitable positions for her children.190 As she wrote, “l’un [de mes fils] est mousquetaire gris depuis huit mois, c’est S.a.R. qui en á fait les frais, mon second fils chevallier est page de S.a.S. Mr. Le Duc

Dumaine, le troisieme fils n’a point encore d’employ, est agé de 11 ans.”191 One of her sons was able to apprentice under the Duc du Maine presumably because of Blau’s previous service to the

Duc and Duchesse. Her eldest daughter, with whom Mme de Blau was pregnant when she embarked on her mission and who had consequently “partagée [les] fatigues, [les] inquetudes, et a couru les mesmes risques” as her mother,192 had hopes “qu’elle auroit un jour la qualtité de fille d’honneur dans sa maison [celle de l’infante Reine] elle á eu l’honneur comme fille de condition de luy estre presentée et l’infante Reine la honnorée de ses caresses et de son attachement

[…].”193 Mme de Blau expressed a desire that her younger daughter would eventually be able

“suivre les traces naturelles de sa soeure” with a royal recommendation.194

However, Mme de Blau’s contacts were limited in their ability to support her maneuverings and ambitions. In 1729, on the topic of her sons, Fleury explained to Mme de

Blau, “Je voudrois bien, Madame, qu’il fut aisé de faire ce que vous souhaités pour Mrs. vos fils, mais il y a tant de reformes à remplir que je ne prevoit pas qu’on soit si tost en estant de donner à l’ainé la compagnie que vous demandés pour luy,” but informed her that “a l’égard du cadet je

190 See Cespedes, “La famille Blau,” 80-102. 191 Letter from Mme de Blau addressed to ‘sire’ to receive reimbursement for her expenses during her secret mission, n.d. (likely produced in 1723), A.N., 25 AP/1, folder 1, document 2. “One [of my sons] has been a gray musketeer for eight months, it is HRH who paid the fees, my second son, knight, is a page of [His Serene Highness] Mr. the Duc du Maine, the third son does not yet have employment, [he] is 11 years old.” 192 Ibid. “shared [the] fatigue, [the] worries, and ran the same risks.” 193 Ibid. “that one day she would have the position of a fille d’honneur in her house [that of the Infanta] she had the honor as a fille de condition to be presented to her and the Infanta honored her with her caresses and her attachment […].” 194 Ibid. “My second daughter, who is ten years old, is still too young to ask for graces for her, those that I will receive from [Your Sacred Majesty] will give her an opportunity to follow in the natural footsteps of her sister, a recommendation from [Your Sacred Majesty] near to the King of France will be all my and all of my family’s happiness.” 60 parlerai volontiers á m. darmenomoille pour lui procurere son avencement dans les occasions.”195

Surveying some of the responses that she received from her contacts, it seems plausible that these limitations were at least in part because Mme de Blau’s requests were either unreasonable or were simply outside of her contacts’ purviews. In response to her request for a lettre de cachet to detain her husband, the Duc du Maine politely informed her that “[…] quant a la lettre de cachet que vous semble desirer, il ne m’est pas possible de la demander, et mesme il la faudroit d’une rigueur peu commune pour qu’elle imposâst silence a un homme du caractere de vostre mari […].”196 When she called on the Duc du Maine again to aid her in a dispute with her brother-in-law, Nicolas van Assendelft, over the inheritance that her sister had bequeathed to

Blau and her children,197 he replied, “[…] vous scauvés tres bien que je ne suis pas en estat de vous en [avis] donner sur tout cela, n’etant poins assés au fait de la manière dont les affaires se traittent en hollande, non plus que des formalités qui s’y observent sur le fait des testaments et codiciles […]” and advised her to act independently.198 In response to a request to increase her pension in the aftermath of her sister’s death, Fleury replied that although he was sympathetic to

195 Letter from the Cardinal de Fleury to Mme de Blau, June 30, 1729, A.N., 25 AP/1, folder 1, document 118. “I would like, Madame, for it to be easy to do what you wish for Mrs. your sons, but there are so many discharged soldiers to replace that I do not foresee that we are so close in giving the elder the company that you asked for him,” “with regard to the younger I will gladly speak to mr. darmenomoille to procure him his advancement on the occasions.” 196 Letter from the Duc du Maine to Mme de Blau, January 30, 1729, A.N., 25 AP/1, folder 1, document 63. “[…] as for the lettre de cachet that you seem to desire, it is not possible for me to ask for it, and even it would have to be of an unusual severity for it to impose silence on a man the character of your husband […].” 197 Mme de Blau’s sister, Cornelia Briochet de Saint Paul, died c.1731. 198 Letter from the Duc du Maine to Mme de Blau, October 30, 1731, A.N., 25 AP/1, folder 1, document 74. “[…] you know very well that I am not in a position to give you some [advice] on all this, not being very assiduous in the way of how business is handled in Holland, nor the formalities which are observed there in the act of wills and codicils […].” 61 her situation, “les affaires de la conjoncture presente m’empechent de pouvoir contribuer a votre consolation, et il n’est pas possible d’augmenter la pension dont vous joüissée.”199

Mme de Blau’s conflict with her brother-in-law highlights the limits of Mme de Blau’s transregional networks; her contacts at the French court could not intervene in her disputes in the

Dutch Republic. Yet another testament to her tenacity, Mme de Blau traveled to Holland immediately following her sister’s death around 1732 and again in 1737,200 presumably to resolve the issue herself. She also wrote to van Assendelft to plead her case, invoking similar strategies to those that she had used to recuperate her pension.201 Despite her efforts and her assertion that “la cour, et le haut conseille, ont prononce en ma faveur,” it is unclear if Mme de

Blau ever resolved the issue with her brother-in-law or received the inheritance from her sister.202

Her familial connections and Dutch identity that had originally made her attractive to

Louis XIV also made her suspect in France. On April 14, 1727, Jean-Frédéric Phélypeaux, comte de Maurepas and French secretary of state, wrote a letter authorizing the detention and surveillance of Mme de Blau and her two daughters in Boulogne-Sur-Mer; he suspected that they had travelled to Boulogne-Sur-Mer “avec dessein depasser ensemble a la haÿe ou la ditte dame a

199 Letter from the Cardinal de Fleury to Mme de Blau, June 26, 1731, A.N., 25 AP/1, folder 1, document 120. “the affairs of the present situation prevent me from being able to contribute to your consolation, and it is not possible to increase the pension that you enjoy.” 200 Royal authorization for Mme de Blau to spend six more months in Holland, October 19, 1732, A.N., 25 AP/1, folder 1, document 139; Passport authorizing Mme de Blau and her chambermaid to travel to Holland, March 11, 1737, A.N., 25 AP/1, folder 1, document 140. 201 Mémoire and letter from Mme de Blau to Nicolas van Assendelft, April 14, 1737 (date of mémoire) May 18, 1737 (date of letter), A.N., 25 AP/1, folder 1, document 141. For example, Blau declared “si je navois pas ésté mere; vous nussiez james entendu aucunne demende de ma part.” / “if I had not been a mother; you would never have heard any requests on my behalf.” 202 Ibid. “the court, and the high council, pronounced in my favor.” 62 un beaufrere Bourguemestres” without royal authorization.203 It appears that Mme de Blau wrote to the Duc du Maine for assistance. In a letter dated April 26, 1727, he responded that he would intervene on her behalf, “mais quelque chose que je luy puis dire en vostre faveur, je croy que c’est a vous á le détromper sur ce qu’on vous impute ce qui a pû donner ce soubçon est sans doute de vous estre transplantée trop prés dela frontiere.”204 However, it seems that she had already done exactly that. In a letter dated the same day as that of the Duc’s, Maurepas explained that “Sur la bonne foÿ quÿ paroist dans les lettres de la dame de Blaü, jaÿ obtenüe que sa détention et celles de ses filles ne dureroit pas plus longtemps” with the caveat that “sy on s’apercevoit quelles voulussent passer en paÿs estrangers, vous les feriz’ arrester sans difficulté.”205 Similar to Colbert de Torcy’s earlier accusations, this incident represents women’s mobility and transregional networks as menaces to monarchical power that required close monitoring, but unlike before, Mme de Blau no longer benefited from the protection of Louis

XIV or Tessé, the latter of whom had died in 1725.

Mme de Blau’s ‘successes’ in her attempts to use her service to Louis XIV as the basis for securing benefits and influential connections for her and her family were tenuous. It appears that she had the greatest success during the first decade or so following the conclusion of her mission and, with the passage of time and the deaths and changing statuses of some of her key supporters, the influence of her connections gradually decreased. Cespedes suggests that Mme de

203 Certified copies of two letters from the Comte de Maurepas to Sieur Disque, letters dated April 14, 1727 and April 26, 1727, copies dated March 12, 1732, A.N., 25 AP/1, folder 1, document 136. “with aim of escaping together to the Hague where the said lady has a brother-in-law [who is a] burgomaster.” 204 Letter from the Duc du Maine to Mme de Blau, April 26, 1726, A.N., 25 AP/1, folder 1, document 60. “but something that I can say to him in your favor, I believe that it is up to you to disabuse him of what has been imputed to you what could have caused this suspicion is undoubtedly that you passed too close to the border.” 205 Certified copies of two letters from the Comte de Maurepas to Sieur Disque, letters dated April 14, 1727 and April 26, 1727, copies dated March 12, 1732, A.N., 25 AP/1, folder 1, document 136. “On the good faith that appears in the Dame de Blau’s letters, I managed that her detention and that of her daughters will not last any longer”; “if we sense that they want to go to foreign lands, you will have them arrested without difficulty.” 63 Blau had diminished access to the French court after Louis XIV’s death because many of her contacts were within Mme de Maintenon’s sphere of influence.206 Similarly, the turnover of court and administrative officials during the Regency and Louis XV’s reign likely impacted her contacts’ influence. As regent, the Duc d’Orléans reduced the status of Louis XIV’s legitimized children—a group to which the Duc du Maine belonged. The Duc and Duchesse du Maine alongside figures like Polignac and Villeroy—all individuals who could serve as witnesses to

Blau’s actions—conspired against the Duc d’Orléans and at least temporarily suffered politically and socially for their actions in either prison or exile. Mme de Blau did send requests to characters like Fleury, who wielded considerable power and influence during Louis XV’s reign, but she did not enjoy the same degree of patronage that she had with figures like Tessé. While her allies certainly did contribute to her ability to act on her ambitions, when they were unable to assist her, she nevertheless continued to act on her own behalf and one should not understate her initiative in these undertakings nor the power of her persistence.

The Public, the Private, and Women Diplomats

Mme de Blau ‘succeeded’ because her influence and ambitions derived from the ‘private’ realm of the family, her interventions were limited to secret and semi-informal diplomacy, and her exposing of her secret mission was contained within the sphere of elite courtiers and generically constrained to royal petitions. In early modern France, women could perform public service so long as they did so privately and/or secretly. Blau represents just one example of this phenomenon. Numerous ambassadresses, mistresses, missionaries, ladies-in-waiting, among other women could and did access diplomatic processes through their personal ties, kinship

206 Cespedes, “La famille Blau,” 78-9. 64 networks, and patron-client relationships. Women’s ‘private,’ ‘informal,’ and personal connections could well position them to serve Louis XIV and act on his desires. As long as they operated within these areas and did not overtly subvert the authority of the state they served, women could enjoy significant freedoms and wield substantial power. However, if they went or threatened to ‘go public’ with their stories or otherwise openly participated in politics and diplomacy, the women needed to take particular care to avoid overstepping the limitations of their gender and social status.

For example, during the Franco-Dutch War (1672-1678), Isabelle-Angélique de

Montmorency, Duchesse de Châtillon operated as a diplomat for Louis XIV in the German states. She married Christian Louis of Mecklenburg in a clandestine diplomatic marriage, purportedly without Louis XIV’s knowledge or authorization. Nicole Reinhard has highlighted the peculiar nature of the marriage; a 37-year-old former frondeuse who neither spoke German nor fully comprehended the political situation in Mecklenburg, the Duchesse de Châtillon was a unusual choice of bride and Reinhard suggests that this reflected Christian Louis’s lack of political assiduity.207 As Christian Louis was already married to another woman, the Catholic church and France would not recognize his marriage to the Duchesse as legitimate.208 Reinhard demonstrates how the ambiguities of her marriage allowed the Duchesse to simultaneously present herself as a ‘German princess’ while continuing to use her family name, which emphasized her status as an elite member of French nobility with connections to Louis XIV and the royal family.209 Eventually, the couple married after the death of Christian Louis’s first wife.

207 Nicole Reinhard, “Les relations internationales à travers les femmes au temps de Louis XIV,” Revue d’histoire diplomatique 3 (2003): 206. 208 Ibid., 208. 209 Ibid., 212. 65 Although the Duchesse encountered difficulties integrating herself into political life in

Mecklenburg, she was able to forge some connections using her talents in the sphere of feminine sociability.210

According to Reinhard, the Duchesse viewed her marriage-related travels as a “political mission in the name of the king.”211 Although she returned to France after a series of military, political, and marital failures, the personal connections that she had constructed during her time in Mecklenburg remained useful.212 During the Franco-Dutch War, the Duchesse played a similar function to that of Mme de Blau during the War of the Spanish Succession; the Duchesse traveled to aid in ‘unofficial’ peace negotiations, using her connections as tools and her personal affairs as a pretext for travel.213 In her analysis of the discursive strategies within the Duchesse’s writings, Anne-Pauline Crepet examined how she used emotion—particularly affliction—as a political strategy.214 Crepet suggests,

les stratégies qu’elle a mises en œuvre afin de s’insinuer habilement dans une société dominée par les hommes, condamnables car hypocrites et artificieuses pour certains, ont certainement été nécessaires en raison des contraintes qui ont pesé sur elle en tant que femme et veuve. Cette affliction de circonstance a donc vraisemblablement été déterminée par des considérations pragmatiques et a été le fruit de décisions mûrement réfléchies, ayant pour objectif de lui permettre de se frayer un chemin dans le monde de la diplomatie.215

210 Ibid., 216-17. 211 Ibid., 215. 212 Ibid., 218. 213 Ibid., 225. 214 Anne-Pauline Crepet, “« Mais elle connaît l’art de feindre, étant femme »: la duchesse de Châtillon, entre émotion ostentatoire, séduction et stratégie politique,” Le Monde français du dix-huitième siècle 2, no. 1 (2017): article 5. 215 Ibid., 19. “the strategies that she implemented in order to skillfully insinuate herself into a society dominated by men, condemnable as hypocritical and artificial for some, were certainly necessary because of the constraints which weighed on her as a woman and widow. This circumstantial affliction was therefore probably determined by pragmatic considerations and was the fruit of carefully considered decisions, aimed at enabling her to find her way into the world of diplomacy.” 66 In order to overcome the constraints of her status and gender, the Duchesse employed tools, like emotion, that her male counterparts did not need to use. Crepet points to the Duchesse’s multiple appointments as a negotiator as potential evidence of the success of her strategy.

How Mme de Blau and her allies represented her story and actions is equally as significant. They excused her dissimulations during her mission as part of her loyal service to the

French crown. In the mémoires, Blau’s sacrifices and deliberate subversion and manipulation of her Dutch ties during her mission obscure her natal identities and mark her discursive naturalization as a French Catholic—a representation that the influential French officials with whom she collaborated and the royal patrons to whom she appealed corroborated. Furthermore,

Blau and her allies framed her requests for recognition and compensation not as evidence of

Blau’s personal ambitions, but as proof of her gendered commitment to provide for her French

Catholic children who would themselves grow up to serve the monarchy. When considering

Mme de Blau’s assimilation into French court culture and her ability to serve as a diplomatic intermediary, it is important to note that as an elite Dutchwoman, Blau was already integrated into the privileged spheres of elite cultures, secrecy, and aristocratic patronage. Hamish Scott proposed identification of a homogenous ‘transnational’ early modern European diplomatic culture in which elite diplomatic actors used a common language of symbolic rituals and artifacts.216 While there are aspects of this argument that are not entirely convincing, it is possible that Mme de Blau might have had an easier time efficaciously adapting to French court culture because of her elite background. Still, the personal ‘successes’ that resulted from her

216 Hamish Scott, “Diplomatic culture in old regime Europe” in Cultures of Power in Europe during the Long Eighteenth Century, eds. Hamish Scott and Brendan Simms (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007), 58-85. 67 mission were largely dependent on her ability to navigate her multiple identities and to present herself before French officials as one of their loyal compatriots.

That is not to say that it was only noblewomen for whom diplomacy offered opportunities for personal advancement. For example, in the early eighteenth century, Marie Petit, a Parisian

‘commoner’ who owned and operated a gaming house, accompanied Jean-Baptiste Fabre, the appointed French envoy to the Safavid Empire, after he failed to repay the significant sum of money that she had lent to him. After Fabre’s death during their travels, she appointed herself as his successor. While her actions led to attempts from her contemporaries to delegitimize her authoritative position through accusations of sexual deviancy, Matthew Lauzon has demonstrated that although ambassadrices like Mme de Guilleragues and Elisabeth Girardin, who made similar claims to participation in diplomacy and also endured accusations of sexual impropriety, of the three, only Petit was arrested upon her return to France.217 She also never received compensation for the sums owed to her, despite the promises of French officials. He argues that this treatment of Petit was not because she was a woman attempting to wield legitimate diplomatic authority, but that “It is more likely that by publicly performing her identity as a sociable and urbane French woman in Muslim Aleppo during a period of tension between Christians and Muslims, Petit was causing a scandal that threatened to damage the standing of Roman Catholicism and especially of Catholic missionaries in the Muslim Middle

East.”218 Lauzon suggests Petit’s self-alignment with anti-Catholic groups, threats to publicly parade herself as a Muslim, and her failure to publicly conform to local standards of propriety as potential explanations for the outcome of Petit’s ‘mission.’ What was dangerous to the French

217 Matthew Lauzon, “‘In the Name of the Princesses of France’: Marie Petit and the 1706 French Diplomatic Mission to Safavid Iran,” Journal of World History 25, no. 2/3 (June/September 2014): 341-371. 218 Ibid., 359. 68 diplomatic mission was not Petit’s assumption of a diplomatic post, but her refusal to conform to standards of public self-representation.

Although Mme de Blau was marginally successful in using her mission and service to the monarchy to elevate her status, her ‘successes’ were limited and tenuous. Her story reflects the limited opportunities for self-advancement that she had both as an independent woman and as a member of the petty nobility. While her mobility was a source of freedom and power, she was subject to surveillance by French officials who regulated her movements through passports and royal authorizations. The generic conventions of the documents in the Fonds Blau reflect the constraints of her position within French aristocratic society. Her ‘success’ was dependent on her persistence and ability to represent herself in ways that conformed to the standards of acceptability within French aristocratic society. This necessitated the careful negotiation of her plural identities within her accounts and her self-fashioning as a woman who held her loyal service to the French monarchy above her family and self and who, despite the unusualness of her mission, nonetheless conformed to gendered expectations by retaining her influence to the private and secret.

69 CHAPTER 2. MME DU NOYER’S REPORTING ON PEACE IN UTRECHT

Mme Du Noyer is another example of a woman for whom diplomacy represented an opportunity for self-advancement. Unlike Mme de Blau who operated within the realm of aristocratic secrets and whom scholars have largely forgotten, Mme Du Noyer engaged with diplomacy in the literary public sphere and her works continued to remain of public interest as evidenced by their numerous re-editions through the present day. However, despite the extraordinariness of Mme Du Noyer’s ability to make a living through publishing as a woman in the early eighteenth century and her contributions as one of the first female journalists,219 her contemporaries—and, until recently, scholars—generally granted more attention to the

‘scandalous’ details of Du Noyer’s personal life that made her ‘notorious’ and readily dismissed her journalistic endeavors and other published works as outrageous ‘libel.’220 A review of a nineteenth-century English translation of Mme Du Noyer’s Lettres historiques et galantes, for example, begins: “If the lady here brought under our notice had not chanced to occupy a place in the biography of so important a personage as Voltaire […] her name itself might now be forgotten. As it is, few students of literary history are unaware of the fact that early in the eighteenth century, behind the broad shield of Dutch freedom, she traded in more or less coarse libels upon the living and the dead, in attacks upon the purest and highest reputations.”221 It is only within the last few decades that historians and literary scholars have given Mme Du Noyer

219 Caroline Rimbault, “La presse féminine de langue française au XVIIIème siècle: Production et diffusion,” in Le Journalisme de l’Ancien Régime, ed. Pierre Rétat (Lyon: Presses universitaires de Lyon, 1982), 199-216; Soledad Soria Berrocosa, “Invisibles, oubliées, émancipées: Les femmes journalistes françaises avant l’heure,” Feminismo/s 34 (December 2019): 53-77. 220 Suzan van Dijk was one of the first to argue against this representation, highlighting instead Du Noyer’s work as a journalist. Suzan van Dijk, Traces de femmes. Présence féminine dans le journalisme français du XVIIIe siècle (Amsterdam and Maarssen: APA Holland University Press, 1988). 221 Frederick Hawkins, review of The Correspondence of Madame Dunoyer, Florence L. Layard, trans. and ed., 2 vols, in The Academy, no. 952 (August 2, 1890): 83. 70 and her works ‘serious’ consideration within the contexts of women in the Huguenot diaspora, women in publishing, and women in journalism. Few studies have considered the role of Mme

Du Noyer’s reporting of the War of the Spanish Succession and the peace negotiations to conclude the war in diplomatic history.222

As many literary scholars have shown, early modern women’s authorship was inherently political.223 For Mme Du Noyer, publishing was both a way to financially provide for herself and her two daughters and a mode of resistance against the various gendered, social, religious, and political constraints that she faced as a Protestant bourgeois Frenchwoman.224 She negotiated these constraints in her published works in her efforts to rehabilitate her public image, advance her personal standing through literary patronage, and gain recognition and acceptance from her social contemporaries. The War of the Spanish Succession and the Congress of Utrecht provided

Du Noyer numerous opportunities to attract curious readers, appeal to influential patrons, and discursively situate herself within elite society. From her position in religious exile in Holland,

Du Noyer collected, mediated, and reported information concerning military maneuvers, courtly machinations, and the peace negotiations to francophone audiences in her Lettres historiques et galantes, Nouveau mercure galant, and the Quintessence des Nouvelles from the perspectives of eyewitnesses to and occasional participants in the events. Marion Brétéché has argued that it was

222 Exceptions to this include: Goldwyn and van Dijk, “Madame Du Noyer Presenting and Re-presenting the Peace of Utrecht”; Bély also briefly mentioned Du Noyer in his chapter, “Les métamorphoses de l’information” in Espions et ambassadeurs, 236-261. 223 e.g., Joan E. DeJean, Tender Geographies: Women and the Origins of the Novel in France (New York: Columbia University Press, 1991); Colette H. Winn, and Donna Kuizenga, eds. Women Writers in Pre-Revolutionary France: Strategies of Emancipation (London and New York: Garland Publishing, 1997). 224 Henriette Goldwyn, “Mme Du Noyer: Dissident Memorialist of the Huguenot Diaspora,” in Women Writers in Pre-Revolutionary France: Strategies of Emancipation, eds. Colette H. Winn, and Donna Kuizenga (London and New York: Garland Publishing, 1997), 2:117–126. 71 this self-proclaimed witness position from which Du Noyer wrote that allowed her to elevate her public status and make a living as a professional author.225

However, Mme Du Noyer’s self-exposure in the literary public sphere transgressed the limits of socially acceptable behavior for a woman of her station. Although Mme Du Noyer tried to appeal to the same arenas of aristocratic patronage as Mme de Blau and attempted to use similar discursive tactics to represent herself and her actions in order to achieve her aims, Mme

Du Noyer’s ‘successes’ and the resulting impacts to her reputation differed significantly. This section will argue that Mme Du Noyer’s personal ambitions, the perceived flexibility of her religious identity and political loyalties, combined with her inability to represent herself as a

‘proper’ mother, wife, and daughter left her vulnerable to her contemporaries’ derision and, ultimately, negatively impacted her ability to realize her objectives.

Autobiography and Literary ‘Masks’ in Du Noyer’s Works

Mme Du Noyer’s reporting was multi-layered and made use of multiple genres and narrative voices. The diversity of her works allowed her to report on a variety of subjects from different narrative positions; however, it also made it difficult for her contemporaries—and later scholars—to distinguish between Mme Du Noyer and her various narrators. Mme Du Noyer’s

Mémoires are the most comprehensive account of her life and the work in which one can most explicitly locate Du Noyer’s authorial and narrative character. The Mémoires cover the period from her birth in 1663 until their publication in 1710, with Volumes two through five focusing on her second flight from France and life in religious exile (1701-1710). Her Mémoires are, as

225 Marion Brétéché, “Faire profession de témoignage: les pratiques d’écriture d’Anne-Marguerite Dunoyer (1707- 1719),” Études Épistémè 19 (2011): 66-85, paragraphs 12-13. 72 Isabelle Trivisani-Moreau has suggested, a ‘centripetal’ work that centers Mme Du Noyer as an authorial character with the gravity to pull in and hold around her a whole constellation of other characters—namely, her familial relations, patrons, and the diverse cast of individuals whom she encountered during her travels.226

According to her Mémoires, Du Noyer was born in Nîmes to a bourgeois Protestant family. After her mother’s death, her father left her in the care of her maternal aunt Saporta, who raised her. After the revocation of the Edict of Nantes and the resulting intensification of

Huguenot persecution, Du Noyer and Saporta attempted to flee to The Hague in 1686, but only

Du Noyer managed to escape. She returned to France later that same year after; she attributed her return to the deception of her maternal uncle Cotton, who she claimed had falsely informed her that Saporta was dying. After her return, Cotton placed her in several convents in Paris and Du

Noyer eventually converted to Catholicism and married Guillaume Du Noyer in 1688. After the marriage, the couple moved to the provinces and Mme Du Noyer maneuvered to find political positions for her husband. The couple produced three daughters, Anne-Marguerite (b. 1689),

Marie (died at the age of two), and Catherine Olympe ‘Pimpette’ (b. 1692) and a son. Not wanting her daughters to be raised as Catholics and concerned that her husband was squandering their finances, Mme Du Noyer fled from France a second time with Anne-Marguerite and

Olympe in 1701, abandoning her husband and son. She and her daughters travelled between The

Hague and London as she appealed for financial support and attempted to arrange suitable marriages for her daughters. During her exile, publishing became a way for her to financially provide for her children and to justify her choices to her social contemporaries.

226 Isabelle Trivisani-Moreau, “Vers un usage public du privé: Mme Du Noyer entre Lettres historiques et galantes et Mémoires,” in Dialogues intérieurs: les écrits des mémorialistes dans leurs Mémoires, eds. Myriam Tsimbidy and Frédéric Charbonneau (Paris: Garnier, 2015), 139. 73 Unlike her Mémoires, Du Noyer’s other publications do not center around her authorial character. Trivisani-Moreau describes the Lettres historiques et galantes as a ‘centrifugal’ work focused less on its narrative figures than on the communication of ‘public news,’ current events, historiettes, verses, and songs.227 One could similarly apply this characterization to the Nouveau mercure galant and the Quintessence des Nouvelles. Although she alluded to autobiographical elements within these works, the events upon which she reported and the stories that she relayed within them superseded and ‘diluted’ the personal. Du Noyer also employed tactics of authorial distancing (Table 2).228 For example, while Mme Du Noyer was the nominal ‘I’ behind the

Quintessence des Nouvelles, mentions of her auctorial character are infrequent and Du Noyer discursively distanced herself from this ‘I,’ at times referring to herself in the third person as

‘Madame du Noyer.’ This process of authorial distancing is more explicit with the Lettres historiques et galantes and Nouveau mercure galant. The nominal author of the Nouveau mercure galant is a Comtesse de L.. M... and the Lettres historiques et galantes purport to be the

‘true’ correspondence between deux dames de condition dont l’une est à Paris et l’autre en

Province (I will refer to these characters as ‘the woman in Paris’ and ‘the woman in the provinces,’ although the latter does travel beyond France) authored by Mme de C***. When

Jacques Bernard mentioned in his review of the Mémoires de Madame Du N** that Mme Du

227 Ibid. 228 Michel Gilot, Jean Sgard, D. Koszul and Robert Granderoute, “Le journaliste masqué: Personnages et formes personnelles,” in Le Journalisme d’Ancien Régime, ed. Pierre Rétat, new edition (Lyon: Presses universitaires de Lyon, 1982), 285-314. Gilot et al. propose that Du Noyer’s reporting is characterized by “une narration primesautière qui permet toutes les libertés, les digressions, les indiscrétions; mais dans cet amusant babillage, l’intervention personnelle tend à se diluer. Madame Dunoyer est sans doute une « spectatrice », mais qui n’a pas réussi à centrer son regard ni à créer un personnage narrateur: le « je » n’implique pas forcément une « personne ».” / “A jaunty narrative that allows all freedom, digressions, indiscretions; but in this amusing babble, personal intervention tends to dilute itself. Madame Dunoyer is undoubtedly a ‘spectator,’ but who has not succeeded in centering her gaze or in creating a narrator character: the ‘I’ does not necessarily imply a ‘person’” (paragraph 20). 74 N** was also responsible for the Lettres historiques et galantes,229 Du Noyer went so far as to retort, “je ne sai pas pourquoi vous mettez mon Livre en paralelle avec les Lettres Historiques &

Galantes? & moins encore pourquoi vous mettez ce dernier sur mon compte? […] vous n’y avez pas vû mon nom avec lequel celui de Madame de C.. n’a nul raport; & je ne comprens pas comment vous pouvez parler si positivement d’une chose de laquel vous ne sauriez être sûr.”230

Despite Mme Du Noyer’s denials, later editions of the Lettres historiques et galantes—some of which Du Noyer’s publisher released during her lifetime—would nonetheless carry her name.231

229 Jacques Bernard, review of Mémoires de Madame Du N**. Écrits par Elle-même., Nouvelles de la République des Lettres (December 1709): Article V, in Nouvelles de la république des lettres mois de juillet à décembre 1709, 33:681-688. 230 Anne-Marguerite Petit Du Noyer, Mémoires de Madame du N**, Écrits par Elle-même, 2nd ed. (Cologne [The Hague]: Marteau [Husson], 1711), 1:n.p. “I do not know why you compare my Book with the Lettres Historiques & Galantes? & even less why you attribute it to me? […] You did not see my name with which that of Madame de C.. has no relation; & I do not understand how you can speak so positively about something of which you cannot be certain.” 231 e.g., Anne-Marguerite Petit Du Noyer, Lettres historiques et galantes, 5 vols. (Cologne [The Hague]: Pierre Marteau [Husson], 1718). 75 Table 2. Mme Du Noyer’s published works by title, nominal author, format, and publication details. Title Nominal author Format Original publication information Lettres Mme de C*** The ‘true’ Cologne [The Hague]: Pierre historiques et correspondence between Marteau [Husson], 1704/7?- galantes Mme Dunoyer “deux dames de 1717, 7 vols. (later editions condition dont l’une est as early as à Paris et l’autre en 1718) Province.” A combination of discussion of contemporaneous events, songs, poems, and historiettes. Mémoires de Mme Du N** Mémoires detailing Cologne [The Hague]: Pierre Madame Du Mme Du N**’s life in Marteau [Husson], 1710, 5 N**. Écrits religious exile and her vols. par Elle-même disastrous attempts to marry her daughters to influential suitors. Nouveau Comtesse de Monthly periodical November-December 1710, mercure galant L..M.. inspired by Donneau de “A La Haye, chez Etienne des cours de Visé and Dufresny’s Foulque, Marchand Libraire, l’Europe Mercure galant dans le Poote.” presented as a one-sided epistolary exchange from the Comtesse de L..M.. in Paris to an ‘amie’ in the provinces. Quintessence Mme Du Noyer Twice-weekly lardon “Se vend à la Haye, chez la des Nouvelles (implicit) that included reports on Veuve de Meyndert Uytwerf, Historiques, current events alongside dans le Spuystraat.” Critiques, verses and panegyrics. Politiques, At various times, Morales et “Et à Amsterdam, chez Jean Galantes Oosterwyk, sur le Dam.” (during the [1712-1715] period 1711- “Et à Amsterdam, chez May 1719) Steenbouwer & chez Uytwerf sur le Rockin, vis-à-vis, la Porte de la Bourse.” [1715- 1719]

76 The numerous parallels between Mme Du Noyer and the fictional woman in the provinces in the Lettres historiques et galantes contributed to the conflation of the two by her contemporaries and in later scholarship. Superficially, the woman in the provinces’s travel itinerary invokes Mme Du Noyer’s own travels from Paris to the French countryside, The Hague, and Utrecht, where both claimed to have witnessed the peace proceedings. The anonymously authored Mémoires de M. Du Noyer and Lettres nouvelles furthermore authorized an autobiographical reading of the Lettres historiques et galantes by ‘confirming’ Mme Du Noyer to be the woman in the provinces.232 However, the division of characters between the countryside and the city is a common trope within epistolary literature. The fictional correspondence between

Du Noyer’s characters primarily serves as a pretext for the circulation and discussion of news within the Lettres historiques et galantes and is but a pale imitation of women’s affective epistolary exchange. The anonymous epistolists are not fleshed out characters, but depersonalized mouthpieces that Mme Du Noyer used to relay her reports and commentaries.233

Nonetheless, the similarities between Mme Du Noyer and the woman in the provinces presumably added an additional layer of interest and amusement for readers; Trivisani-Moreau has suggested that the parallels and divergences between Mme Du Noyer’s life and those of the fictional correspondents in the Lettres historiques et galantes “engagent le lecteur dans un jeu

232 The narrator of the Mémoires de M. Du Noyer claims that Mme Du Noyer “fut réduite à la seule compagnie d’une Dame à peu près de même calibre, qui est celle dont elle parle dans ses Lettres Galantes & Historiques” / “was reduced to only the company of a Lady close to the same caliber, the one of whom she speaks in the Lettres Galantes & Historiques.” [Les mémoires de M. Du Noyer, Écrits par lui-même in Anne Marguerite Petit Du Noyer, Lettres historiques et galantes, Vol. 10 (Paris and Avignon: François Seguin, 1790), 54]. The Lettres Nouvelles purport to be the correspondence between the woman in Paris and a Mme D., the author of the Lettres historiques et galantes [Lettres Nouvelles, Galantes, Historiques, Morales, Critiques, Satyriques, & Comiques, de Madame D. Ouvrage beaucoup plus curieux que les precedents, & très-utiles pour bien comprendre les premiers (Nîmes: Claude Bon Ami, 1713)]. 233 Henriette Goldwyn, “Journalisme polémique à la fin du dix-septième siècle: Le cas de Mme Dunoyer,” in Femmes savantes, savoir des femmes: du crépuscule de la Renaissance à l’aube des Lumières: actes du colloque de Chantilly (22-24 septembre 1995), ed. Colette Nativel (Geneva: Droz, 1999), 251. 77 d’inversion et de transposition qui donne tout son sel à la lecture: à côté des prétendus éloges du gouvernement de la France, les constats sur la misère et la faim dues aux guerres prennent un tout autre poids. La dénonciation use ici du regard naïf, mais de double d’un tout autre enjeu, celui de captiver les lecteurs sur le long terme.”234 The fictional women function as literary

‘masks’ whose French Catholic identities and professed loyalty to the French monarchy allowed

Mme Du Noyer to dissimulate her criticisms; it is only by reading the Lettres historiques et galantes alongside Du Noyer’s Mémoires that readers can attempt to peel back the multiple layers of fictionalization and irony within her works to ‘unlock’ her ‘true’ sentiments.

Du Noyer’s liberal self-references in the later volumes of the Lettres historiques et galantes makes her use of literary dissimulation, irony, and authorial distancing strategies even more convoluted. For example, in the fourth volume of the Lettres historiques et galantes, the woman in the provinces sends the woman in Paris several excerpts of the Nouveau mercure galant, including “verses in praise of Milord Marlborough.”235 The woman in Paris responds, “Si je ne savois pas que vous êtes bonne Françoise, je croirois quasi que les Vers que vous dites avoir pris dans le Mercure Galant de Hollande, seroient de votre façon. J’y trouve vôtre stile, mais non pas vos sentimens; car je ne crois pas que le commerce de nos ennemis vous ait gâté le cœur, & que vous fussiez capable de chanter une valeur si fatale à vôtre Patrie.”236 Like Du

234 Trivisani-Moreau, “Vers un usage public du privé,” 150. “engage the reader in a game of inversion and transposition that gives all its salt to the reading: next to the supposed praises of the French government, the statements on the poverty and hunger due to the wars take on a whole new weight. The denunciation uses here a naive gaze, but doubles as a whole different issue, that of captivating readers in the long term.” 235 Du Noyer, Lettres historiques et galantes, LXI, 4:222. Not only did Du Noyer compose verses to Marlborough, but she also dedicated the fourth volume of her Mémoires to him in the hopes that “la triste état où je me trouve, Vous ayez la Charité d’employer Votre autorité pour me faire obtenir les restitutions & le réparations que je demande” / “the sad state in which I find myself, You have the Charity to use Your authority to obtain for me the restitutions & reparations that I request” (4: n.p.). 236 Ibid., LXII, 4:245. “If I did not know that you are a good French woman, I would almost believe that the verses that you say to have taken in the Mercure Galant of Holland, were in your style. I find there your style, but not your feelings; for I do not believe that the business of our enemies has spoiled your heart, and that you are capable of singing a value so fatal to your Homeland.” 78 Noyer with Bernard, the woman in the provinces facetiously denies her—and by extension, Du

Noyer’s—authorship of the Nouveau mercure galant. When the woman in Paris confronts her again with her suspicions,237 the woman in the provinces insists, “écoutez donc, Madame: la

Comtesse de L.. M.., c’est elle qui va parler, & non pas moi.”238 Beginning in the fifth volume of the Lettres historiques et galantes, Du Noyer also frequently cited herself in the third person as the author of the Quintessence des Nouvelles; however, it was not until the seventh volume that she regularly named ‘Madame du Noyer’ as the periodical’s author. This simultaneously distinguishes Mme Du Noyer from both the Lettres historiques et galantes’s female narrators/narratees and Mme de C***. Du Noyer’s self-citation also worked to legitimize her work as a journalist and validated her claims to participation in elite society through her self- positioning within the fictional women’s elite social stratum.239

Still, both Du Noyer’s contemporaries and later scholars read the Lettres historiques et galantes—particularly the letters by the woman in the provinces—as Du Noyer’s ‘real’ correspondence and used the Lettres alongside her Mémoires to establish Du Noyer’s biography.

Adelaïde Cron has examined the impacts of the contradictory unity and ‘polygraphy’ both within and across Du Noyer’s works.240 She places special emphasis on the role of later editions of Du

Noyer’s works that grouped together the Lettres historiques et galantes and Mémoires— sometimes in conjunction with the Mémoires de M. Du Noyer and the Lettres nouvelles—in

237 Ibid, LXXXII, 4:297. “à vous parler franchement, je vous croirois fort capable de supléer au texte, & d’avoir un peu aidé à cette prétenduë Comtesse de L. M.” / “to speak to you frankly, I would believe you very capable of supplementing the text, & of having helped a little this supposed Countess of L. M.” 238 Ibid., LXXXIII, 4:305. “Listen, Madame: the Comtesse de L.. M.., she is the one who is going to speak, & not me.” 239 Brétéché, “Faire profession de témoignage,” paragraph 33. 240 Adelaïde Cron, “Polygraphie ou mémoires éclatés? L’œuvre de Mme Dunoyer, entre journalisme et autobiographie,” Papers on French seventeenth century literature 38, no. 74 (2011): 159-170. 79 authorizing an ‘autobiographical’ reading of the Lettres historiques et galantes.241 As Cron remarks, scholars have consistently emphasized the textual unity within Du Noyer’s corpus over its diversity, treating her works as “un massif mémorialiste à voix multiples.”242 Arnelle, for example seamlessly switched between the Mémoires de Madame Du N**, the Lettres historiques et galantes, and the countermemoirs when discussing Mme Du Noyer’s biography in her annotated edition of the Mémoires and Lettres historiques et galantes.243 More recently, Regine

Reynolds-Cornell attempted to establish Du Noyer’s biography through a similar cross-reading that treats the fictional woman in the provinces and Mme Du Noyer as one in the same.

Reynolds-Cornell likewise conflated the disparate representations of Mme Du Noyer across her and her adversaries’ works.244

Du Noyer did address episodes from her life in the Lettres historiques et galantes and

Nouveau mercure galant through the ‘neutral’ third-person narration of the fictional women. For example, in the December 1710 issue of the Nouveau mercure galant, which Du Noyer later republished in the fifth volume of the Lettres historiques et galantes, she addressed her disastrous attempts to marry her youngest daughter, Olympe ‘Pimpette’ Du Noyer, to Jean

Cavalier (1681-1740) that ended with Olympe’s marriage to, impregnation by, and separation from a man masquerading as the German Count of Winterfelt.245 This incident, reminiscent of a

241 Ibid., 163, 166. 242 Ibid., 164. “a massive memorialist work in multiple voices.” 243 Anne Marguerite Petit Du Noyer, Mémoires et Lettres Galantes de Madame du Noyer (1663-1720), ed. Arnelle [Mme de Clauzade] (Paris: Louis Michaud, 1910); Arnelle [Mme de Clauzade], Les Filles de Madame Du Noyer, 1663-1720 (Paris: Fontemoing, 1921?). 244 Regine Reynolds-Cornell, Fiction and Reality in the Mémoires of the Notorious Anne-Marguerite Petit Du Noyer (Tübingen: G. Narr Verlag, 1999). 245 Du Noyer, Mémoires de Madame Du N**. Cavalier agreed to marry Olympe and convinced Du Noyer to change her will to make him executor and the sole inheritor in the event of Olympe’s premature death (4:281). Cavalier broke his promise, purportedly marrying another woman while Du Noyer and Olympe were staying in London. Shortly after, a man claiming to be the Count of Winterfelt expressed interest in marrying Olympe. The women were overjoyed that Olympe was marrying into such an ‘illustrious’ family. Only after swindling Du Noyer out of her 80 plot from one Molière’s comedies,246 was the subject of the fourth and fifth volumes of Mme Du

Noyer’s Mémoires and became the subject of the satirical play Le Mariage précipitié (1713). Du

Noyer used her need to explain the ‘truth’ behind her behaviors in regards to this episode to justify the Mémoires’s publication despite her disingenguous assertion that “J’ay toûjours été de l’avis de ceux, qui disent que la Femme la plus estimée, ou pour mieux dire, la plus estimable, est celle dont on parle le moins.”247 She concluded the fifth and final volume of the Mémoires reiterating that Cavalier’s ‘crimes’ ‘forced’ her to publish her story in order to justify her behaviors to the public.248

In the Nouveau mercure galant, the Comtesse de L.. M.. relays a description of the series of incidents, naming neither Du Noyer nor her daughter, and expresses sympathy for the women alongside her hopes that officials will punish the men responsible for their misfortune. She critiques those who had blamed the women for their victimization, writing, “Tel est le sort des malheureux, par le panchant qui nous porte à blâmer plûtôt qu’à compâtir!” and that “quoi que ces Femmes se soient attiré tous leurs malheurs, par un peu d’imprudence, il me semble qu’elles en sont trop cruellement punies.”249 However, she does not unconditionally defend Du Noyer;

money, traveling with the two women to Brussels, marrying, and impregnating Olympe, did the man reveal himself to actually be a Catholic from Brussels (5:277). 246 Du Noyer herself acknowledged that the episode was not dissimilar to the plot of Molière’s Le bourgeois gentilhomme: “Je ne pouvois me consoler d’avoir été la dupe de ce fripon, & d’avoir été joüée tout comme Moliére fait joüer le Bourgeois Gentilhomme, quand il lui fait croire que le fils du Grand Turc épouse sa fille” / “I could not console myself for having been the dupe of this rogue, & for having been played just as Molière makes the Bourgeois Gentleman play, when he makes him believe that the son of the Grand Turk is marrying his daughter” (Ibid., 5:293). 247 Ibid., 1:1. “I have always been of the opinion of those who say that the most esteemed woman, or to put it better, the most estimable, is that of whom one speaks the least.” 248 Ibid., 5:400. 249 Du Noyer, Lettres historiques et galantes, LXXXIII, 5:361; 362. “Such is the fate of the unfortunate, by the sign that leads us to blame rather than to punish!”; “although these Women have brought themselves all their misfortunes, by a little recklessness, it seems to me that they are too cruelly punished for it.” 81 parroting the criticisms against Mme Du Noyer that depicted her as a dangerously ambitious woman and ‘unnatural’ mother, the Comtesse remarks:

Ce qui m’étonne c’est qu’on dit que la Mére a de l’esprit. J’en doute, car on connoît, dit- on, à l’œuvre l’ouvrier; & son esprit l’auroit bien mal servie dans cette occasion. C’est pourtant aux Mariages & aux Testamens où le génie des gens doit paroître: ainsi je n’ai pas une idée fort avantageuse de celui de cette Dame-là; & il faut que sa vanité, & l’envie de faire la Fortune de sa Fille, l’ait bien aveuglée. Il y a des Femmes qui n’éxaminent rien quand il s’agit de satisfaire cette vanité, & qui diroient comme la Mére de Néron, quelque cher qu’on voulût leur vendre l’élévation de leurs enfans: N’importe que je meure, pourvû qu’ils régnent.250

Another perplexing defense/criticism of Du Noyer’s maternal role appears in the seventh volume of the Lettres historiques et galantes. The woman in the provinces sends the woman in Paris copies of love letters sent between Voltaire and Olympe, in which Voltaire disparaged Mme Du

Noyer, advised Olympe to keep secrets from her mother, and encouraged her to flee to Paris.251

While the characters name ‘Arouet’ as the instigator, the mother and daughter remain anonymous. Although the characters express their horror at Voltaire’s behavior and the language that he had used to discuss the mother, the woman in Paris nonetheless admits that “En vérité cette Mére est bien incommode, & bien impolie de les exposer à toutes ces peines par une sévérité à contre-tems; ne sait-elle pas bien que dans les Républiques, les volontez sont libres & ne dèvroit-elle point mettre la bride sur le cou à sa fille.”252

250 Ibid., 5:362-3. “What amazes me is that they say the Mother is witty. I doubt it, because we know, it is said, to the work, the worker; & her wit would have served her very poorly in this instance. It is, however, at Weddings & Testaments where the genius of people must appear: thus I do not have a very advantageous idea of that of that Lady; & her vanity, & the desire to make her Daughter’s Fortune, must have blinded her. There are Women who examine nothing when it comes to satisfying this vanity, and who would say like the Mother of Nero, however costly one might want to sell them the promotion of their children: It does not matter if I die, as long as they reign.” 251 Ibid., CVI, 7:177-235. Du Noyer dated the letters in the Lettres historiques et galantes to the end of 1713 through early 1714. See Arnelle, Les Filles de Madame Du Noyer; Marcel Fabre, Voltaire et Pimpette de Nîmes (Nîmes: Castanier Frères et Alméras, 1936); Voltaire, Les Amours de Pimpette ou Une saison en Hollande. Correspondance de Voltaire avec Olympe du Noyer, ed. Jacques Cormier (Paris: L’Harmattan, 2009). 252 Du Noyer, Lettres historiques et galantes, CVII, 7:242. “In truth this Mother is very bothersome, and very rude to expose them to all these pains by an overdue harshness; does she not know well that in Republics, wills are free & she should not put the bridle on her daughter’s neck.” 82 Instead of fruitlessly attempting to locate the line between fact and fiction in Du Noyer’s corpus, this section will focus on her modes of reporting and (self-)representation with particular consideration of the polyphony, generic diversity, and inherent tensions both within and across

Du Noyer’s writings due to their multiple layers of fictionalization. While Du Noyer used her writings to appeal to potential patrons and to access elite society, she did so while trying to reveal aristocratic secrets in the emergent Republic of Letters. She identified as a devout

Protestant, appealed to enemies of France, and critiqued Louis XIV and the upper echelons of

French society while hiding behind the personas of loyal French Catholic women. Moreover, although she at times attempted to represent herself as a ‘proper’ woman, wife, and mother and largely centered her reporting within the ‘feminine’ domains of epistolary writing, the

‘particular,’ and the galant, she nonetheless circumvented gendered social expectations by exposing herself—and the subjects of her writings—to public scrutiny and by commenting on issues that her contemporaries considered to be beyond women’s expertise. Unlike Mme de

Blau, whose generically constrained accounts limited her discursive self-fashioning and marked her adherence to the conventions of aristocratic society as a loyal French Catholic, Du Noyer’s use of generic diversity, fictionalization, irony, and embellishment had the potential to liberate herself from the constraints to which she was subject. However, the contradictions, inconsistencies, and dissimulations within Mme Du Noyer’s works also reinforced the liminality of her religious and political identities during a dangerous period of war and religious persecution, exasperated her contemporaries’ anxieties on the subject of female ambition, and contributed to Du Noyer’s negative reputation among her contemporaries and her complicated legacy in literary history.

83 The Quintessence des Nouvelles—Libel or Panegyric?

Mme Du Noyer’s most immediate mode for reporting on the war and peace negotiations was the periodical press. She was able to capitalize on publishing to the degree that she did because of her geographical location in the Dutch Republic. Compared to the rigorous royal censorship that yoked the domestic French press in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, the

Dutch press enjoyed relative freedom in its coverage of foreign affairs.253 This ‘freedom’ perhaps contributed to the Dutch press’s negative reputation among French elites. In 1720, for example, the Duchesse d’Orléans warned that

Nothing is more full of lies than gazettes and newspapers. Here in France, if one wants to do someone a nasty turn, one asks a third person to write the news one wants to spread on a piece of paper, wraps this around a gold coin, and addresses it ‘To the gazeteer of Holland,’ and at the next mail one can be sure to find everything that was on the scrap of paper in the Dutch newspapers. I have never done this myself, but I have often seen others do it. So these papers cannot be too reliable, because partiality is always involved.254

The relative lack of censorship of the Dutch press not only facilitated Du Noyer’s access to circulating information about the War of the Spanish Succession and the peace negotiations in

Utrecht, but also enabled her admittance to the literary public sphere. Bored by the content of

‘official’ periodicals within France, members of the French public turned to the ‘scandalous’ and

‘léger’ nouvelles à la main clandestinely produced in France. Eugène Hatin correlated French officials’ increasing regulation of the domestic French clandestine press with the rise of the

French press abroad. Able to benefit from both the freedoms of the Dutch press and French

253 Eugène Hatin, Les gazettes de Hollande et la presse clandestine aux XVIIe et XVIIIe siècles (Paris: chez René Pincbourde, 1865), 88; 16. Hatin comments that despite the Dutch press’s reputation for being ‘free,’ authorities did regulate the Dutch press, particularly in regard to its coverage of domestic affairs, which he notes was common practice in early modern Europe. Robert Darnton has published extensively on the clandestine circulations of literary works in France e.g., Robert Darnton, The Forbidden Best-Sellers of Pre-Revolutionary France (New York: W.W. Norton, 1995); Robert Darnton, The Literary Underground of the Old Regime (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1982). 254 Duchesse d’Orléans, A Woman’s Life in the Court of the Sun King, 255. 84 language’s wide linguistic reach, the French-language Dutch press became an important way to circulate censored information and inform public opinion.255

Taking inspiration from the Mercure galant, Mme Du Noyer created the monthly

Nouveau mercure galant. However, Du Noyer only published two issues dated November 1710 and December 1710 before the periodical ended due to the death of its seller.256 Her next journalistic endeavor was more enduring. From sometime in 1711 until her death in 1719, Du

Noyer authored the Quintessence des Nouvelles, a biweekly lardon.257 The revised 1727-edition of Furetière’s Dictionnaire universel defined lardon three ways: 1) a literal strip of lard, 2) a word to figuratively describe “Brocard, raillerie, mot piquant,” and 3) “un petit feuillet de nouvelles particulieres que l’on donne outre la gazette […] parce qu’il renferme ordinairement quelque brocard, quelque piquante raillerie contre quelqu’un” and because the long strips of paper physically resembled the first definition of lardon.258 However, instead of dismissing all lardons as libelous, this third definition distinguishes between lardons “qui n’étoient que des grossieres satires” and those “dont les traits sont fins & delicats.”259

255 Hatin, Les gazettes de Hollande, 30-35. 256 According to Du Noyer, Lettres historiques et galantes, LXXXI, 5:291. 257 The dates for her first and last issues as author of the Quintessence des Nouvelles are disputed as there is no clear demarcation between her and her predecessor. For example, Alain Nabarra argued that her first issue was December 31, 1710, no. 1 [Alain Nabarra, “Lettres historiques et galantes” in Dictionnaire des journalistes (1600–1789); van Dijk proposes that her first issue was sometime in April 1711 (van Dijk, Traces de femmes, 122). 258 Antoine Furetière, Dictionnaire universel, reviewed, corrected, and augmented by Henri Basnage de Beauval & Jean-Baptiste Brutel de La Rivière (The Hague: Chez Husson, Johnson, Swart, van Duren, Le Vier, La veuve van Dole, 1727), 3:n.p. The first edition of the Dictionnaire universel (1690) does not include the third definition referencing gazettes (2:423). “Barbe, mockery, quip”; “A little leaflet of particular news that is given in addition to the gazette [...] because it usually contains some barb, some biting mockery against someone.” Hatin, Les gazettes de Hollande, 107-115. 259 Ibid. “which were only gross satires”; “whose features are fine & delicate.” Also noteworthy is the comment that “On dit d’une femme qu’elle est le lardon de son quartier, quand elle instruit les gens de tout ce qui s’y passe; qu’elle en sait toutes les nouvelles” / “One says of a woman that she is the lardon of her neighborhood, when she educates people about everything that happens there; that she knows all the news,” which genders the collection of this type of information as feminine. 85 Early issues of the Quintessence des Nouvelles fit better into the first category than the latter.260 The Duchesse d’Orléans, for example, complained to Sophia of Hanover in 1692, “I am quite embarrassed that such foolishness is being told about me and am not looking forward to reading the Lardon or the Quintessence des Nouvelles, for when this nonsense reaches Holland, I will be properly lampooned, although I certainly do not deserve it.”261 Knowledge of the

Quintessence and its contributors is fragmented as much of what is known comes from within the periodical’s existing issues. Jean-Maximilien Lucas (1646-1697) founded the periodical in

1689 in Amsterdam under the title La Quintessence des Nouvelles. Originally from Rouen,

Lucas, a Calvinist, became a citizen of Amsterdam where he was a ‘marchand-libraire.’ His involvement in the publication and distribution of French-language periodicals and banned books led to some legal issues. At the request of one of Louis XIV’s ambassadors, the Comte d’Avaux,

Amsterdam banned French-language gazettes in 1686. Later that year, the Comte wrote to Louis

XIV about “Lucas’s punishment” that stemmed from officials’ desire to please Louis XIV.262

Like the libel case between Gasparini and the Duc and Duchesse du Maine, this showcases the link between satirical libel and public diplomacy as well as the role that diplomats played in moderating information to protect state interests and public reputations. In 1694, Lucas encountered some more legal problems related to the Quintessence’s publication after which he moved his operation to The Hague.263

260 Chloé Baril, “Situation politique des lardons hollandais,” in Gazettes et information politique sous l’Ancien Régime, eds. Henri Duranton and Pierre Rétat (Saint-Étienne: Publications de l’Université de Saint-Étienne, 1999), 137-144. 261 Duchesse d’Orléans, A Woman’s Life in the Court of the Sun King, 77. 262 Jean Sgard, “Lucas,” in Dictionnaire des journalistes (1600–1789). 263 Ibid. 86 The periodical transformed over the course of its publication, adopting various subtitles depending on its author. In the early days of its publication up until the time when Du Noyer inherited control of the periodical, its authors claimed to share insight into the secret affairs of elites and openly criticized Louis XIV through sharp attacks on his militaristic policies, ambition, pride, and desire for religious unity at the expense of his subjects. For example, in issues of the Quintessence from December 1710 through April 1711, Du Noyer’s direct predecessor, Nicolas Gueudeville (1652-1721?), described Louis XIV as “the Majesty of

Despotism” and criticized the opulence at the French court and the promotion of Louis XIV’s dynastic ambitions at the expense of his people.264 Parroting the voices of the French people, he wrote, “Que je souffre, Loüis! j’offre plus: que je meure! / Pourvû que ton Philipe en sa place demeure.”265

Although some have attributed these issues to Mme Du Noyer,266 their tone, content, and format suggest otherwise. Suzan van Dijk suggested that, when compared to the Quintessence’s previous authors, “Ce que Madame Dunoyer abandonne, c’est le caractère anti-français. Sans doute à son époque, était-ce devenu moins urgent qu’à celle de Lucas. Mais c’était aussi son amour de la noblesse et de la royauté qui lui rendait impossible d’attaquer Louis XIV. Si on a dit de sa Quintessence qu’elle était antifrançaise, c’était faute de la distinguer de celle des rédacteurs précédents.”267 While she occasionally included critiques of Louis XIV and the French court, particularly in regards to their treatment of French Protestants, she never overtly rejected her

264 Quintessence des Nouvelles, March 23, 1711, no. 25. 265 Quintessence des Nouvelles, December 29, 1710, no. 1. “How I suffer, Louis! I offer more: how I die! / As long as your Philip in his place remains.” 266 See footnote 257 above. 267 van Dijk, Traces de femmes, 125. “What Madame Dunoyer abandons is the anti-French character. Undoubtedly, in her time it had become less urgent than in Lucas’s. But it was also her love for nobility and royalty that made it impossible for her to attack Louis XIV. If her Quintessence has been said to be anti-French, it was a mistake in distinguishing it from that of previous editors.” 87 French identity and her criticisms against Louis XIV’s policies in the Quintessence were neither as frequent nor as sharp as those of her predecessors.268 For example, when she announced Louis

XIV’s death, Du Noyer remarked of his reign

qu’on pourroit [le] regarder comme très-glorieux, si les mauvais conseils n’avoient pas prévalu sur le bon cœur de ce Prince, & ne lui avoient pas fait en quelque manière, ternir une infinité de vertus par la rigueur qu’il a exercée contre ses sujets Protestants, c’est la le seul endroit qui pourra faire du tort à sa Mémoire. Le Seigneur veuille le lui avoir pardonné, d’autant mieux qu’il l’a fait par ignorance, & qu’il a cru faire service à Dieu en persecutant ses Enfans. […] excepté la persecution exercée contre les Protestans, le Regne de Louis le Grand, pourroit être proposé pour modèle à la posterité.269

The fictional women in the Lettres historiques et galantes also circulate a version of this announcement and lament the loss of their monarch.270 Du Noyer notably did not write an epitaph for the king in the Quintessence; she rationalized this absence, stating, “ne me croyant pas capable de la bien faire moi-mêmes, & celles qui sont venuës à la connoissance m’ayant pas paru tout-à-fait convenables, pour un si grand Roi j’ai cru qu’il étoit plus à propos de garder le silence, & de se couvrir du voile qu’un fameux peintre mit autrefois sur le visage d’Agamennon, laissant à des mains plus habiles & à des plumes plus delicates que la mienne, le soin de traiter dignement des sujets aussi délicats.”271 Perhaps, Du Noyer’s silence was because she did not

268 Ibid., 100. Despite what one might expect from a French Huguenot who claimed to have fled France twice because of religious persecution, van Dijk calculates that the Protestant plight occupied a relatively small percentage of the subject matter in the Quintessence des Nouvelles. 269 Quintessence des Nouvelles, September 2, 1715, no. 70. “that one could regard [him] as very glorious, if bad advice had not prevailed over the good heart of this Prince, and had not made him in some way, tarnish an infinity of virtues by the rigor that he exercised against his Protestant subjects, it is the only place that will be able to harm his memory. The Lord wants to have forgiven him, all the better that he did it out of ignorance, & that he believed he was doing God a service by persecuting his Children. […] Except for the persecution exercised against the Protestants, the Reign of Louis the Great, could be proposed as a model for posterity.” 270 Du Noyer, Lettres historiques et galantes, CX, v. 7. 271 Quintessence des Nouvelles, September 23, 1715, no. 76. “not believing myself capable of doing it well myself, & those which came to knowledge having seemed quite suitable to me, for such a great King I believed that it was more appropriate to remain silent, & to cover oneself with the veil that a famous painter once put on Agamennon’s face, leaving to more skillful hands and more delicate words than mine, the care of treating such delicate subjects with dignity.” 88 want to face criticisms like a certain Londoner who had composed an unflattering portrait of

Louis XIV and whose predicament she had reported on just a week prior.272

However, when one considers Du Noyer’s greater literary corpus, van Dijk’s assertion that Du Noyer’s fascination with nobility prevented her from ever criticizing it too harshly seems more plausible. In her Mémoires, Mme Du Noyer detailed the persecution that she and her family had faced in the aftermath of the Edict of Nantes. Not only was Louis XIV responsible for the hardships that she faced during her exiles, but she claimed that Louis XIV had personally desired and orchestrated her conversion to Catholicism and marriage to the Catholic Guillaume

Du Noyer.273 Yet, when she described visiting Versailles with her new husband to appeal to

Louis XIV for the return of her property that officials had confiscated during her flight and “pour remercier le Roi de l’intérêt qu’il avoit bien voulu prendre en moi, & d’un Brevet de six cens livres de Pension que Sa Majesté m’avoit envoié le lendemain de mon Mariage sans que personne l’eût solicité,”274 she constructed a narrative in which she played a heroine who had won Louis XIV’s recognition, admiration, and unwavering support—and, by extension, that of the entire court as well.275 Later in the Mémoires, Mme Du Noyer described a second visit to

Versailles that she made with her two daughters just before making her second escape from

France so that she could “rendre [s]es derniers hommages à sa Majesté, qui, avec sa bonté

272 Quintessence des Nouvelles, September 12, 1715, no. 73. 273 Du Noyer, Mémoires de Madame Du N**. Mme Du Noyer purported that Jean-Baptiste Antoine Colbert, Marquis de Seignelay had informed her uncle that the king “souhaite que la Niéce que vous avez fait venir de Hollande soit bonne Catholique […]” / “wishes that the Niece that you made return from Holland be a good Catholic” (2:72). 274 Ibid., 2:123-4. “to thank the King for the interest he had kindly taken in me, and a patent of six hundred livres of Pension that His Majesty had sent me the day after my Wedding without anyone having solicited him.” 275 Ibid. She claimed that after some gentle reminders, Louis XIV remembered her story in perfect detail and relayed it to members of the court, who were captivated by her personal history. After sharing her story, she claimed that Louis XIV continued to speak with her throughout the evening (2:126-8). According to Mme Du Noyer, after she requested the return of her property in Nîmes, not only did Louis XIV return her property and grant her all that she had asked, but she claimed that he granted her an additional 300-livre pension (2:132). She wrote that “When I was back in Paris the whole family came to congratulate me on the way I had succeeded in Versailles” (2:133). 89 ordinaire [lui] fit l’honneur de [lui] parler pendant son souper & de dire bien des choses avantageuses pour [s]a petite fille” and at which time she claimed her daughters attended a royal ball and danced with princes.276 Certainly, one should be skeptical when reading Du Noyer’s accounts, but they nonetheless exemplify Mme Du Noyer’s noble ‘fantasies’ and suggest the extent to which her desire for recognition and acceptance from the elite nobility may have superseded many of the qualms that she had about Louis XIV and his court—or that she was at least willing to overlook her concerns in order to marry her daughters upward and to establish her own reputation.277

Regardless, Mme Du Noyer’s contemporaries reproached her for comments within her reporting that they deemed to be anti-French and libelous. An anonymous—and possibly fictional—correspondent writing to M. Du Noyer in his Mémoires asserted that although, “je ne prétends point lui disputer non plus les beaux talens qu’elle a reçu de la nature,” “l’usage qu’elle en fait est très-blamable, puisque son principal exercice est la pasquinade, & elle la traite si grossiérement, & déshonore tous les jours tant d’honnêtes gens, que je m’étonne qu’il ne s’en soit pas rencontré encore quelqu’un qui lui ait cassé bras & jambes, ou l’ait jettée dans quelque canal.”278 Although Du Noyer alleged that Cavalier had orchestrated an assassination attempt against her in order to silence her and steal her wealth,279 it does not appear that anyone caused

276 Ibid., 2:262-3. “To pay [her] last respects to his Majesty, who, with his ordinary kindness [to her] did the honor to speak [her] during his supper & to say many advantageous things for [her] young daughter.” 277 The Mémoires de M. Du Noyer offers an alternative account that describes this visit to Versailles not as the ‘success’ that Mme Du Noyer claimed, but rather a humiliating incident in which Mme Du Noyer, disregarding court protocols, made a fool of herself (32). The woman in Paris in the Lettres nouvelles similarly refutes Du Noyer’s account of her second visit to Versailles (149). 278 Mémoires de M. Du Noyer, 168. “I do not claim to dispute with her nor the fine talents that she received from nature,” “the use which she makes of it is very blamable, since her principal exercise is the pasquinade, & she treats it so tactlessly, & dishonors so many honnête people every day, that I am astonished that no one has yet met someone who has broken her arms & legs, or thrown her into some canal.” 279 Du Noyer, Mémoires de Madame Du N**, 5:293. 90 bodily harm to Mme Du Noyer for her writings. Some of the acts of revenge against Mme Du

Noyer that the correspondent addressed include the bestowal of a new nickname, Alikruk (a

Dutch word for a type of snail), and the theatricalization of her conflict with Cavalier and

Winterfelt.280 He claimed that because of her libelous writing, “Tout tremble en ce Pays à ce nom de Quintessence: Madame du Noyer s’est rendue redoutable.”281 Her role as the author of the

Quintessence and a mediator of information granted her power; however, her ‘misuse’ of this power made her a menace to society.

Ultimately, Du Noyer’s fascination with nobility and desire to acquire elite patrons prevented her from perpetuating the blatantly satirical tone of the Quintessence’s previous authors. In his portrait of Mme Du Noyer in his Histoire amoureuse et badine du congrès et de la ville d’Utrecht, the historian Casimir Freschot noted that “C’est à la faveur de ce doucereux lardon qu’elle s’insinue dans la grace de ceux dont elle espere quelque chose, en les loüant à toute outrance, & dans le ton le plus superlatif. Apres quoy elle va se faire payer du charbon qu’elle a employé pour échaufer l’alambic & en faire distiller la quintessence de sa flatterie.”282

The anonymous author of “An Account of Madam Du Noyer’s Person and Writings” in a 1716

English translation of the Lettres historiques et galantes similarly suggested that “as she is very liberal of her Elogiums, this Paper gave her an Opportunity, during the Congress of Utrecht, to offer her Compliments to all the Ambassadors and their Ladies round; was a considerable advantage to her.”283

280 Mémoires de M. Du Noyer, 169-173. 281 Ibid., 201. “All trembles in this Land at this name Quintessence: Madame du Noyer made herself formidable.” 282 Freschot, Histoire amoureuse et badine du congrès…, 248-9. “It is thanks to this dulcet lardon that she insinuates herself into the grace of those from whom she hopes for something, by praising them to every excess, and in the most superlative tone. After that she goes to get paid for the charcoal she used to heat the still & distill the quintessence of her flattery.” 283 “An Account of Madam Du Noyer’s Person and Writings” in Anne-Marguerite Petit Du Noyer, Letters from a lady at Paris to a lady at Avignon containing a particular account of the city, the politicks, intrigues, gallantry, and 91 Her compliments presumably did grant her the attention of various influential figures—or at least allowed her to pretend that they did. In the Quintessence, Du Noyer herself recounted an

“a rather pleasant adventure” that she had with “le Courier du Maréchal de Villars,” Claude

Louis Hector de Villars—the son of Louis XIV’s diplomatic power couple Pierre and Marie de

Villars—who distinguished himself as a successful military leader within the French army and a hero of the War of the Spanish Succession. During this encounter, the courier informed Du

Noyer, “Madame je suis fort aise d’avoir l’honneur de vous voir, & de pouvoir dire à Mr. de

Villars que vous étes en bonne santé. Je m’assure que cela lui fera bien du plaisir, & je m’en ferai un fort grand de m’aquitter des Commissions que vous voudrez bien me donner pour lui.”284 Previously in the Quintessence, Mme Du Noyer had expressed criticisms of Villars’s behaviors and militaristic—not diplomatic—ambitions.285 She nonetheless claimed to have responded, “Quoi que je ne sache pas […] quel est l’interêt que Mr. de Villars me fait l’honneur de prendre en moi, ni sur quel ton vous m’en parlez, je vous prie pourtant, quoi qu’il en soit, de lui faire mes complimens.”286 Whether or not this encounter actually occurred, it demonstrates

Du Noyer’s attempts to use her writing to discursively elevate her status and her desire to present herself as an important person within the social sphere of the elite agents.

If one believes Freschot and the Mémoires de M. Du Noyer, Du Noyer’s reputation and work as the author of the Quintessence “lui ont attiré de quelques-uns des Ministres qui y sont

secret history of persons of the first quality in France. Written by Madam Du Noyer. The second edition. To which is Added, An Account of the Author’s Person and Writings, 2nd edition (London: W. Mears and J. Browne, 1716), 1:3. 284 Quintessence des Nouvelles, Oct. 27, 1712, no. 86. “Madame, I am very glad to have the honor to see you, and to be able to tell Mr. de Villars that you are in good health. I assure myself that it will give him great pleasure, and I will take great pleasure in carrying out the Commissions that you will give to me for him.” 285 Quintessence des Nouvelles, August 17, 1711, no. 67; August 27, 1711, no. 70; October 5, 1711, no. 81; February 11, 1712, no. 12. 286 Quintessence des Nouvelles, Oct. 27, 1712, no. 86. “Although I do not know […] what is the interest that Mr. de Villars does me the honor of taking in me, nor in what tone you speak to me about it, I beg you however, whatever the case to pay him my compliments.” 92 rassemblés, la curiosité de la voir” and allowed her to “[faire] la ronde chez la plupart des

Ministres” during the Congress of Utrecht.287 The correspondent in the Mémoires de M. Du

Noyer attempted to delegitimize Du Noyer’s journalistic endeavors and praises for elites by suggesting that money was her sole motivator: “moyennant un écu, elle vous déclare le plus honnête homme, frippon ou cocu.”288 The correspondent furthermore proposed that Mme Du

Noyer’s purpose for travelling to Utrecht was to earn money so that she could repay her debts and suggested that the contents of her reports reflected the payment that she received from the various ministers; he explained that Du Noyer’s ‘unflattering’ reports of France in the

Quintessence were because “Elle a débuté par des visites chez ceux de France. Elle accompagne ses pas de quatre petits Vers à la louange de chacun de ces Seigneurs. M. l’Abbé de Polignac les lui a payé un Ducat la piece. M. Mesnager autant, M. le Maréchal ne s’est point trouvé si libéral, elle n’en a reçu que deux. La pauvre France s’en est ressentie dans la Quintessence suivante, il y a eu un article fulminant contr’elle.”289 While he acknowledged the limited successes of Du

Noyer’s preliminary round of visits in Utrecht, he could not help but invoke the humiliations that

Du Noyer had suffered by Cavalier’s hands: “Ses productions d’esprit lui ont valu quelque chose; mais il faudroit bien des Epigrammes, des Madrigaux, des Sonnets, pour rembourser les quatorze mille florins de Cavalier, & les frais de nôce de Madame la Comtesse [Olympe].”290

However, according to these accounts, despite her initial ‘success,’ Du Noyer’s controversial

287 Mémoires de M. Du Noyer, 203. “[to make] the rounds with most of the Ministers.” 288 Ibid., 168. “for one écu, she declares you the most honnête man, fripon or cuckold.” 289 Ibid., 203. “She began with visits to those of France. She accompanies her steps with four little verses in praise of each of these Lords. M. l’Abbé de Polignac paid her a Ducat each. M. Mesnager as much, M. le Maréchal was hardly as liberal, she only received two. Poor France felt it in the following Quintessence, there was a fulminating article against it.” 290 Ibid., 203-4. “Her witty productions were worth something to her; but it would take many Epigrams, Madrigals, Sonnets, to reimburse the fourteen thousand florins of Cavalier, & the wedding expenses of Madame la Comtesse [Olympe].” 93 reputation impeded her later attempts to acquire patrons. Freschot, for example, claimed that although Mme Du Noyer met with Polignac, “ayant appris dans la suite que les desseins & la conduite du Roy prenoient quelquefois une mauvaise odeur dans ses lardons, on lui deffendit de plus aprocher de la maison […].”291 Still, like Mme de Blau, Du Noyer’s position within information networks allowed her to patronize influential figures and granted her power—even if her critics cast her publishing power as a public danger.

When one considers the incident with Gasparini, his travels to Utrecht, and his meetings with plenipotentiaries during the congress to slander the Duc du Maine alongside Lucas’s own history with public diplomacy and perceptions of his work by diplomats like the Comte d’Avaux, one begins to understand the threat that libels posed to individual, monarchical, and state reputations and how it could undermine officials’ public diplomatic efforts to shape public perceptions through the regulation of the news.292 It remains unclear the extent to which Du

Noyer’s contemporaries would have considered her publications to be ‘libelous’ and whether or not the Quintessence and Du Noyer’s work formed part of the propaganda machine during the

War of the Spanish Succession. However, her purported meetings with plenipotentiaries and other influential elites during the Congress of Utrecht, her role as the author of a French- language Dutch lardon, combined with her occasional criticisms of French policies suggest that she could very well have acted as non-state propagandist. When one considers this possibility, one might view Freschot and M. Du Noyer’s criticisms of Mme Du Noyer and her works as attempts to use her gender to rhetorically discredit her as a propagandist in order to protect the

291 Freschot, Histoire amoureuse et badine du congrès …, 253-4. “Having learned later that the King’s intentions and conduct sometimes took on a bad odor in her lardons, she was forbidden from approaching the house any more […].” 292 Helmers, “Public Diplomacy in Early Modern Europe”; Joad Raymond, “Les libelles internationaux à la période moderne: étude préliminaire,” trans. Claire Boulard Jouslin, Etudes Epistémè 26 (2014): n.p. 94 interests of the French state. However, in order to fully explore this angle, one would need to locate sources that demonstrate how diplomats referred to the Quintessence and its public reception.

Although Mme Du Noyer’s critics berated her for publishing ‘pasquinades,’ in her quantitative analysis of the Quintessence’s contents, Suzan van Dijk suggested that, Du Noyer’s

Quintessence was not the satirical lardon that the periodical had been during its past iterations, but something between a gazette and a mercure.293 In the first mention of the Quintessence in the

Lettres historiques et galantes, the character of the woman in Paris describes it as “une espéce de

Gazette […] qu’une Dame Françoise fait à la Haye.”294 While Du Noyer did report and comment on current events, unlike ‘true’ gazettes, the Quintessence’s use of the lardon’s single-page format prevented elaboration on the news.295 When she inherited the periodical, its full title was

La Quintessence des Nouvelles Historiques, Critiques, Politiques, Morales & Galantes. The subject matter of Du Noyer’s reports was diverse; she published accounts of military and ambassadorial movements, ceremonial entries, festivities, and the impacts of natural disasters.

She also included copies of political documents, speeches, orders, letters, historiettes, alongside panegyrics, birth announcements, death announcements, and other various ‘curiosities’ and events in accordance with the periodical’s title. Generic heterogeneity is a common feature of Du

Noyer’s publications. Allison Stedman has argued that seventeenth-century ‘hybrid’ literary writers wrote with the goal of creating pleasure and liberating content in the style of their

Renaissance predecessors and that this literary emphasis on individualized and heterogeneous

293 van Dijk, Traces de femmes, 92. 294 Du Noyer, Lettres historiques et galantes, LXXXVI, 5:451. “A type of Gazette [...] that a French Lady makes in The Hague.” 295 van Dijk, Traces de femmes, 97-103. 95 ideals represented a form of militant rebellion against the monarchy not dissimilar to the

Fronde.296 She especially emphasizes the gendered implications of heterogeneous literature since it “opened up the socio-literary field to such a degree that women no longer needed the mediation of the salon to engage with it on equal footing with men.”297 Whether or not one reads the ‘hybrid’ qualities of Du Noyer’s works as an act of gendered resistance, it is nonetheless demonstrative of the stylistic liberties that Du Noyer could take within her writings.

Mme Du Noyer re-published information from other periodicals and she cited much of the information that she relayed with the ambiguous ‘on’: ‘on dit,’ ‘on prétend,’ ‘on parle,’ ‘on

écrit,’ etc. As her predecessor noted, “Le Sieur On est l’Historien le plus cité dans le

Nouvellisme, & en même tems le plus suspect.”298 Although, one should note that these discursive formulas were not unique to the periodical press.299 One of Freschot’s critiques of

Mme Du Noyer was “Comme tout ce qu’elle y dit de nouvelles n’est que ce qu’on a lû dans les

Gazettes, on ne lit cette Quintessence que comme un amusement & pour avoirir [sic] occasion de donner quelque coup de gaule à sa friperie.”300 While ‘pleasure’ and ‘amusement’ are common themes in Du Noyer’s journalistic works, she did not merely regurgitate public news. As Alain

Nabarra commented, “Devant son lecteur, madame Dunoyer fait le tri de l’information, la

296 Allison Stedman, Rococo Fiction in France, 1600-1715: Seditious Frivolity (Lewisburg: Bucknell University Press, 2013). 297 Ibid., 129. 298 Quintessence des Nouvelles, February 19, 1711, no. 16. “The Sir On is the most cited historian in News writing, and at the same time the most suspect.” 299 For example, Chris Given-Wilson, Chronicles: The Writing of History in Medieval England (London and New York: Hambledon and London, 2004), 8-10. Given-Wilson details similar discursive formulas in Medieval chronicles. Chroniclers would use these phrases to distinguish between events that they had witnessed first-hand and those to which they were not eyewitnesses. While use of these structures could indicate a rumor, “In general, however, they tended to use phrases such as ut fertur not as an excuse for the retailing of unsubstantiated rumors, but in order to indicate either genuine doubt or a reluctance to engage with controversial topics” (10). 300 Freschot, Histoire amoureuse et badine du congrès …, 249. “As all that she says [in the Quintessence] of news is nothing but what one read in the Gazettes, one reads this Quintessence only as an amusement & to have the opportunity to beat her old things.” 96 commente, l’accrédite. Elle révèle et évalue la source de la nouvelle, et s’attache à préciser le degré de certitude qu’on peut lui accorder; ce n’est qu’un « bruit de Ville », un « bruit qui court », un « bruit commun », une « chose très incertaine » […].”301

When relaying ‘le bruit’ in Utrecht that Queen Anne had ordered the Duke d’Ormont

“d’agir offensivement contre les François jusques à novel ordre,” she cautioned readers, “On prêtend qu’un Courier dépêché par Son Altesse Monsr. le Prince Eugene, à nos Seigneurs les

Etats, a porté cette nouvelle; mais quoi qu’elle soit déjà dans quelques Gasettes, nous n’oserions la donner pour sûre, & cela mérite confirmation; Ainsi nous n’avons garde d’en parler affirmativement, puis que nous n’en avons rien appris que par la voix publique, qui est très souvent sujette à caution.”302 She brazenly informed her readers: “Ces nouvelles nous viennent de France, ainsi elles ne doivent pas être suspectes,”303 “Mais ces nouvelles porroient bien s’être alterées en passant par la France, qui est un Païs un peu suspect là-dessus,”304 and “On parle toujours de la Paix. Les nouvelles qui viennent de France la disent sûre; mais comme c’est un endroit suspect, on n’est pas obligé d’y ajoûter foi.”305 Perhaps for want of space, Du Noyer’s commentaries were generally sparse and she more often than not left her audience to formulate

301 Alain Nabarra, “Mme Dunoyer et La Quintessence: La rencontre d’une journaliste et d’un journal,” in Femmes savantes et femmes d’esprit: Women Intellectuals of the French Eighteenth Century, eds. Roland G. Bonnel and Catherine Rubinger (New York: Peter Lang, 1994), 57-8. “Before her reader, Madame Dunoyer sorts through the information, comments on it, accredits it. She reveals and assesses the source of the news, and endeavors to specify the degree of certainty that one can give to it; it is only a ‘City rumor’ a ‘rumor going around,’ a ‘common rumor,’ a ‘very uncertain thing’ [...].” 302 Quintessence des Nouvelles, June 6, 1712, no. 45. “to act offensively against the French until the new order”; “One claims that a Courier sent by His Highness Monsr. Prince Eugene, to our Lords the States, brought this news; but even though it is already in some Gazettes, we would not dare present it as certain, and that merits confirmation; So we are careful not to speak of it affirmatively, since we only learned about it through the public voice, which is very often subject to caution.” 303 Quintessence des Nouvelles, 3 August 1711, no. 63. “This news comes to us from France, so it should not be suspicious.” 304 Quintessence des Nouvelles, 24 August 1711, no. 69. “But this news may well have changed as it passed through France, which is a region a bit suspicious about that.” 305 Quintessence des Nouvelles, 16 November 1711, no. 94. “One still talks about Peace. The news that comes from France says it is certain; but since it is a suspicious place, one is not obliged to give credence to it.” 97 their own opinions of the news items and stories that she recounted “car tout Historien &

Nouvelliste doit être impartial, & se contenter de raporter les faits, sans y joindre ses decisions; ainsi nous laisserons à nos Lecteurs le soin de décider […].”306 This was especially the case for topics that she wryly acknowledged as being outside of women’s ‘sphere.’307

Du Noyer framed herself as the center of a vast—if limited— epistolary network that provided her with material for her periodical. Her ‘correspondents’ not only fed her information, but also supplementary riddles, historiettes, and verses with which to fill her Quintessence.308

She published lengthy excerpts from the letters that she purported to have received. It is plausible that she composed at least a few of these correspondences herself as many of them contained compliments of Du Noyer and her journalistic work and thus served a secondary function of validating her work as a journalist. In one such ‘reproduced’ letter, one of Mme Du Noyer’s correspondents from Paris suggested that he had nothing to share with her because “vous étes parfaitement bien instruite de ce qui se passe ici” and, despite his eye-witness position in Paris, he claimed that it was she who had informed him of the news: “que dis-je instruire, vous vous instruisez vous-mêmes, nous qui sommes ici à portée de savoir les choses, comme on dit, de la

306 Quintessence des Nouvelles, October 3, 1718, no. 80. “Because any Historian & News writer must be impartial, & content themself with reporting the facts, without attaching their decisions to them; so we will leave it to our Readers to decide […].” 307 e.g., Quintessence des Nouvelles, October 15, 1711, no. 85. “Ce seroit une matiére à embelir notre Quintessence, si elle n’étoit pas déjà un peu trop égayée pour un stile feminin. Il faut donc mieux s’en tenir à la simple narration, & laisser au public la liberté d’y faire des annotations à sa mode” / “It would be material to embellish our Quintessence, if it was not already a little too amusing for a feminine style. It is therefore better to stick to simple narration, & leave the public the freedom to make annotations as they see fit.” 308 Quintessence des Nouvelles, October 13, 1712, no. 82. For example, the author of an anonymous letter from Paris sent her a riddle, “Car je m’imagine que vous étes à présent dans un grand embaras; obligée de donner des nouvelles au public, & n’en avoir que de fâcheuses à lui anoncer, cette situation est triste, & vous avez besion de tout votre esprit, pour pouvoir vous tirer d’affaires dans une conjoncture aussi délicate. […], je vous plains, & pour vous donner matiére d’égayer un peu votre Quintessence, voici un Enigme que je vous envoye” / “Because I imagine that you are now in a great embarrassment; obliged to give news to the public, & have nothing but bad news to tell them, this situation is sad, & you need all your spirit, to be able to get out of trouble in such a delicate situation. […], I pity you, & to give you material to brighten up your Quintessence a little, here is an Enigma that I am sending to you.” 98 premiere main; & il faut que quelque Lutin vous les révelle d’avance, puis qu’au pié de la Lettre, il est bien des particularitez que votre Quintessence a été la premiere à m’apprendre.”309 He concluded, “Il faut donc s’il vous plaît, Madame, que vous me dispensiez de vous parler des nouvelles publiques, & que je me retranche à vous en donner de particulieres.”310

This division between ‘public’ and ‘particular’ news in Du Noyer’s Quintessence extends beyond differences in the scale or source of a report’s subject matter. As van Dijk suggests, with this distinction, “[Du Noyer] entend bien opposer, dans les paroles de ses « correspondants », le réel et l’imaginé, et exprimer sa préférence pour les choses de l’imagination—auxquelles elle mélange pourtant celles de la réalité.”311 Unable to access the meetings between sovereigns and diplomats that occurred beyond her and her correspondents’ reach, Du Noyer was limited in her reporting of public news to speculation of ‘les bruits de Paix’ that “peuvent être mal-fondez” and that she maintained “nous n’oserions y faire d’attention trop serieuse, ni les débiter sur ce ton là.”312 She repeatedly acknowledged the limits of ‘public’ news and her own social station noting that, despite the “des conjectures & des raisonnemens” speculating peace based on the movements of elite characters, “comme il ne nous est pas permis de chercher à deviner ce que nos Souverains jugent à propos de nous taire, nous attendrons qu’il leur plaise de nous le faire sçavoir; & sans donner carriere à notre imagination, nous ne parlerons que des choses qui nous

309 Quintessence des Nouvelles, November 7, 1715, no. 89. “You are perfectly well informed of what is going on here”; “what I say to instruct, you find out about yourself, we who are here within range to know things, as one says, first hand; & some Goblin must reveal them to you in advance, since to the letter, there are many peculiarities of which your Quintessence was the first to inform me.” 310 Ibid. “So you must please, Madame, excuse me from telling you about public news, & I must entrench myself with giving you particular ones.” 311 van Dijk, Traces de femmes, 108-9. “[Du Noyer] intends to oppose, in the words of her ‘correspondents,’ the real and the imagined, and to express her preference for the things of imagination—with which she nevertheless mixes those of reality.” 312 Quintessence des Nouvelles, October 26, 1711, no. 88. “may be wrong, we would not dare to pay too much attention to it, nor to say it that way.” 99 sont connuës, & point du tout d’affaires d’Etat, puis que sur les Dieux & les Grands silence.”313

During the lulls in the news from the Congress of Utrecht, she similarly commented,

On n’a jamais tant publié de nouvelles qu’on en publie à l’heure qu’il est: cependant plus on cherche à les aprofondir, & plus on voit qu’il ne resulte de tout cela que des incertitudes, & que toutes ces nouvelles n’ont que des conjectures pour fondement, puis que les Puissances n’ont garde de faire part de leurs secrets au public ni mêmes à des particuliers capables de les reveler; ainsi il est beaucoup plus sage d’attendre que nos Souverains nous aprennent leur volonté, & de nous y conformer d’avance, sachant bien qu’ils ne se détermineront que pour ce qui sera le plus avantageux à l’Etat & aux sujets qui en sont les membres.314

Yet, despite having just discursively submitted herself to monarchical power, she continued,

“Après ce fondment posé, s’il nous est permis pour réjouir les Lecteurs, de parler de tout ce que l’on apprend d’incertain, & de contradictoire […]” and discussed the circulating reports and falsehoods on the subject of the peace processes.315 One of the few ‘certainties’ which Du Noyer could relay to her readers was the ongoing galanteries in Utrecht celebrating Carnaval: “Ce qu’il y a encore de sür, c’est qu’on continuë à se bien divertir dans ce Païs là [Utrecht].”316 ‘Particular’ news from the galant celebrations provided Du Noyer an opportunity to liberate herself from the limitations of the ‘public’ news that was subject to sovereign will, to whet readers’ curiosities, and to gain admission to elite society through her fictionalizations.

313 Quintessence des Nouvelles, June 9, 1712, no. 46. “conjectures & reasonings”; “as we are not allowed to guess what our Sovereigns think about keeping us quiet, we will wait until they please to let us know; & without giving quarry to our imagination, we will only talk about things that are known to us, & not at all State affairs, since on the Gods & the Greats silence.” 314 Quintessence des Nouvelles, February 9, 1713, no. 12. “One never published so much news as one publishes at the present time: however, the more one tries to deepen them, the more one sees that all this results in only uncertainties, and that all this news only has conjectures for its foundation, since the Powers are careful not to share their secrets with the public or even with individuals capable of revealing them; thus it is much wiser to wait until our Sovereigns inform us of their will, & to comply with it in advance, knowing full well that they will only decide for what will be most advantageous to the State and to the subjects who are its members.” 315 Ibid. “After this foundation has been laid, if we are permitted to please the Readers, to speak of all that we learn that is uncertain, & contradictory [...].” 316 Ibid. “What is still certain, is that one continues to amuse oneself in this region [Utrecht].” 100 Galanterie and Histoire in Early Modern French Women’s Writing

Galanterie and histoire are common threads between the Lettres historiques et galantes,

Nouveau mercure galant, and Quintessence. When Du Noyer inherited the Quintessence, galanterie and histoire were already titularly defining features of the periodical. Under Du

Noyer’s tenure as author of the Quintessence, the verses, galant tales, and historical details served a practical purpose in the periodical: they acted as filler for when Du Noyer lacked confirmed news that she could report due to postal delays.317 On a deeper level, Du Noyer’s accounts of the galant festivities in which diplomats and other elites partook during the peace congress demonstrate her fusion of public news, ‘particular’ insights into the lives of elite characters, fictions, embellishments, and ‘pleasures’ that allowed Du Noyer to simultaneously satiate readers’ curiosities and construct an ‘alternative history’ focused on the interests of female readers that she would expand on in the sixth volume of the Lettres historiques et galantes.

The seventeenth-century usage of ‘galanterie’ regulated a variety of behaviors related to court sociability, pleasure, and gender relations. Furetière defined galant as an “Homme honneste, civil, sçavant dans les choses de sa profession,” “un homme qui a l’air de la Cour, les matieres agreables, qui tâche à plaire, & particulierement au beau sexe. En ce sens on dit, que c’est un esprit galant, qui donne un tour galant à tout ce qu’il dit; qu’il fait des billets doux, & des vers galants,” and noted that “On dit aussi au feminin, une femme galante, qui sçait vivre,

317 Quintessence des Nouvelles, January 30, 1716, no. 9. In one instance, she informed readers: “As the bad routes delay the arrival of the Post, & that this delay leaves us in a kind of poverty of news, we are going to supplement it by inserting here the copy of a Letter which we have just received, & which contains a galant adventure. It is still fulfilling our title, since galant news are within our domain, as well as the Historical, Political, Moral & Critical.” 101 qui sçait bien choisir & recevoir son monde.”318 Galant also referred to an “Amant qui se donne tout entier au service d’une maistresse,” a man who “est habile, adroit, dangereux, qu’il entend bien les affaires,” or “qui entretient une femme ou une fille, avec laquelle il a quelque commerce illicite, & au feminin, quand on dit, C’est une Galante, on entend toûjours une Courtisane.”319 He defined galanterie not only as “Ce qui est galant,” but also “On dit aussi figurément & avec hyperbole, Cette affaire-là n’est qu’une pure galanterie, pour dire, Ce n’est pas une chose de consequence.”320 The verb galantiser, he defined as “Courtiser les Dames.”321 Additional definitions in the Dictionnaire de l’Académie françoise for galant include “Un homme qui cherche à plaire aux Dames” and for galanterie, a remark that “Il se prend plus particulierement pour les devoirs, les respects, les services que l’on rend aux Dames.”322

Despite its potential dangers—particularly to a woman’s reputation—, galanterie was nonetheless a sphere in which women were visible actors. Faith Beasley has demonstrated how seventeenth-century French women writers played on distinctions between Histoire

(History/general history) and histoire (story/particular history) to challenge women’s exclusion from dominant historical narratives.323 Centered within the ‘particular’ domain of galanterie,

318 Furetière, Dictionnaire universel (1690), 2:138. “An honest, civil man, shrewd in the things of his profession”; “a man with airs of the Court, pleasant matters, who strives to please, & especially the fairer sex. In this sense one says, that he is a galant mind, who gives a galant turn to everything he says; that he writes sweet notes, and galant verses”; “One also says in the feminine, a galant woman, who knows how to live, who knows how to choose and receive her world.” 319 Ibid., “Lover who gives himself entirely to the service of a mistress”; “is skillful, astute, dangerous, he understands matters well”; “who looks after a woman or a girl, with whom he has some illicit exchange, and in the feminine, when one says, She is a Galant, one always means a Courtesan.” 320 Ibid. “That which is galant”; “One also says figuratively & with hyperbole, This affair is nothing but pure galanterie, to say, It is not a thing of consequence.” 321 Ibid. “To court the Ladies.” 322 Dictionnaire de l’Académie françoise (Paris: Veuve de Jean Baptiste Coignard and Jean Baptiste Coignard, 1694), 1:508. “A man who seeks to please the Ladies”; “It is taken more particularly for the duties, the respects, the services that one renders to the Ladies.” 323 Faith E. Beasley, Revising Memory: Women’s Fiction and Memoirs in Seventeenth-Century France (New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press, 1990). For example, as is the case for many occupations, in both Furetière’s Dictionnaire universel and La Dictionnaire de l’Académie françoise, there is no feminine form of historien. 102 women writers’ histoires galantes threatened to replace ‘real’ historical writing. In many ways, this distinction between general and particular history mirrors the contrast between public and particular news in Du Noyer’s journalism. Beasley defines H/histoire as:

Histoire, or general history, can be defined as the account of recognizable, verifiable political events in the public sector. What I will continue to call particular history, in contrast, is centered on the personal and the less universally known and can be considered as telling ‘the secret motivations for the memorable events we have learned about from general history’ […], as Abbé de Charnes defines it in his defense of La Princesse de Cleves. Particular history seeks to reveal the details and reasoning that underlie the public matters of general history, the motives and passions that determine officially recorded events, and it includes, in addition, actions that are excluded from the general record. ‘Particular history,’ however, is not synonymous with what modern historians call ‘private history’ because […] the content of this account is not severed completely from that of general history or from the public sphere […].324

Unlike dominant ‘general’ historical narratives that excluded most women, ‘particular’ history showcased women as visible actors and centered on domains like the court in which women wielded power. Women were not only active agents of ‘particular history,’ but also its chief chroniclers through their production of histoires galantes and other forms of historical fiction.325

Mme d’Aulnoy’s works—which Du Noyer repeatedly cited in her Lettres historiques et galantes—are an example of this phenomena.326 She famously began her Mémoires de la cour d’Espagne (1690): “Ce n’est pas dans l’Histoire generale, que l’on apprend de certaines particularitez qui plaisent ordinairement plus que l’Histoire même. Quand on les sçait une fois,

324 Ibid., 29. 325 Ibid., 31; Dejean, Tender Geographies, 138. 326 For the application of Beasley’s argument to d’Aulnoy’s work, see Nathalie Hester, “Travel and the Art of Telling the Truth: Marie-Catherine d’Aulnoy’s Travels to Spain,” Huntington Library Quarterly 70, no. 1 (2007): 87-102. Du Noyer cited d’Aulnoy’s Mémoires de la cour d’Angleterre several times throughout the Lettres historiques et galantes and in her Mémoires. In the first few volumes of the Lettres historiques et galantes, Du Noyer also falsely attributed one of her own galant tales to Mme d’Aulnoy; in Letter XLII, the woman in Paris sends her correspondent “My Lady” the ‘true’ ‘nouvelles angloises’ purportedly authored by Mme d’Aulnoy sometime after the Treaty of Ryswick (Lettres historiques et galantes, LXII, 3:24-261). As Henriette Goldwyn has demonstrated, Du Noyer falsely appropriated Mme d’Aulnoy’s name to lend legitimacy to her writing (Henriette Goldwyn, “L’inscription d’un lectorat féminin dans une des Lettres historiques et galantes de Mme du Noyer,” in Lectrices d’Ancien Régime, ed. Isabelle Brouard-Arends (Rennes: Presses universitaires de Rennes, 2003), 93-101). 103 on s’en souvient toûjours avec plaisir; & cette raison m’a persuadé que je pouvois écrire avec quelque succez, plusieurs choses secrettes qui se sont passees à Madrid depuis l’année 1679. jusqu’en 1681. […].”327 It is because particular history is more amusing than general history that d’Aulnoy’s anonymous female narrator elects to inform her readers of the secrets of the Spanish court following the marriage of Carlos II and Marie Louise d’Orléans. Fictionalization allows the narrator to penetrate elite secrets. Through her self-integration into Marie Louise’s intimate circle, the narrator is able to report on the various personalities at the court, operating as a pseudo-spy for her readers and positioning herself in a powerful intermediary role not unlike

Mme de Villars.328 As Ellen R. Welch suggests, “Although she plays a marginal role in some of the events she recounts, for the most part the narrator is a mysterious ‘blank,’ reduced to the role of the reader’s eyes and ears in Madrid.”329 Du Noyer’s fictional epistolists in the Lettres historiques et galantes serve a similar function for readers from their respective stations in

Utrecht and Versailles during the peace negotiations. As was the case with Mme Du Noyer,

Mme d’Aulnoy’s use of an anonymous and depersonalized narrator whose travels mirrored her own led her contemporaries and later scholars to conflate author and narrator.330 Although d’Aulnoy copied entire sections from the widely circulated manuscript Mémoires de la cour

327 Marie-Catherine Le Jumel de Barneville, comtesse d’Aulnoy, Mémoires de la Cour d’Espagne (Pairs: Claude Barbin, 1690), 1:1-2. “It is not in General History that one learns of certain particularities that ordinarily please more than History itself. When one knows them once, they always remember them with pleasure; & this reason convinced me that I could write with some success, several secret things that happened in Madrid from the year 1679. until 1681. […].” 328 For example, in his introduction to Mme de Villars’s Lettres, Alfred de Courtois compared Mme de Villars to Mme d’Aulnoy. 329 Ellen R. Welch, A Taste for the Foreign: Worldly Knowledge and Literary Pleasure in Early Modern French Fiction (Newark, DE: University of Delaware Press, 2011), 90. 330 See Melvin D. Palmer, “Madame d’Aulnoy’s Pseudo-Autobiographical Works on Spain,” Romanische Forschungen 83, 2/3 (1971): 220-229; Paul Courteault, “Le voyage de Mme d’Aulnoy en Espagne,” Bulletin Hispanique 38, no. 3 (1936): 383-384. Mme d’Aulnoy’s mother, the Marquise de Gudanes, was also possibly an agent of the French court in Spain (Alfred Morel-Fatio, “La Marquise de Gudanes, agent politique en Espagne à la fin du XVIIe siècle,” Revue historique t. 47, fasc. 1 (1891): 78-82). 104 d’Espagne that scholars generally attribute to the Pierre de Villars,331 some historians continued to cite d’Aulnoy’s fictionalized account well into the nineteenth century.332 Du Noyer’s works, by contrast, never enjoyed this legitimacy as some of her contemporaries and later scholars readily dismissed her work as a disingenuous account plagued by ‘libelous’ attacks, embellishment, and the repetition and recirculation of ‘old’ news.

The Lettres historiques et galantes and the Nouveau mercure galant

Unlike the Quintessence, in which genre and format necessitated more commentary on public/general news, the ‘particular’ and ‘galant’ assume a more prominent position in Du

Noyer’s Lettres historiques et galantes, blurring the lines between the fictional and non-fictional.

Du Noyer’s use of fictionalization was a powerful tool that allowed her to discursively elevate her status through her purported associations with influential elites, particularly during the

Congress of Utrecht. The seven-volume collection covers the period from just before the signing of the Peace of Ryswick (1697) until sometime in 1716 and first appeared between 1704/7?-

1717. In his review of the Lettres, Bernard wrote,

Ces Lettres contiennent diverses Nouvelles publiques, accompagnées d’ordinaire de jolies reflexions; & un grand nombre de Nouvelles ou d’Historiétes particuliéres; le plus souvent avec les noms de ceux qui y ont la meilleure part. On n’oserait assurer que toutes ces aventures soient vraies; il n’y a même nulle apparence, ni que dans celles qui sont vraies, on n’y ait ajouté certaines circonstances, pour les rendre plus agréables: mais je puis dire que j’ai été surpris d’y lire quelques aventures assez surprenantes, que je sais très certainement être arrivées, à peu près comme on les raconte.333

331 Pierre de Villars, Mémoires de la cour d’Espagne de 1679 à 1681, ed. M.A. Morel-Fatio (Paris: Plon, 1843). 332 e.g., Legrelle, La Diplomatie française et la succession d’Espagne. See R. Foulché-Delbosc, Introduction to Mme d’Aulnoy, Travels into Spain (London and New York: Routledge, 2014 [1930]). 333 Jacques Bernard, review of Lettres Historiques & Galantes par Madame de C*** Ouvrage curieux, in Nouvelles de la République des Lettres Mois de Juillet 1708 (Amsterdam: Pierre Mortier, 1708), 104. “These Letters contain various public News, usually accompanied by pretty reflections; & a large number of particular News or Historiettes; most often with the names of those who have the best part in them. We would not dare assure that all these adventures are true; there is not even any appearance, nor that in those which are true, certain circumstances 105

Bernard clearly recognized that within Du Noyer’s Lettres, the categories of ‘history’ and

‘fiction’ are fluid and unstable. However, for him, Du Noyer’s use of fictionalization and embellishment was not a ‘negative’ that devalued her work, but rather an aspect that made her work more enjoyable.

Alex Sokalski highlighted Du Noyer’s use of fiction in her ‘non-fictional’ narrations through analysis of her “Histoire de l’Abé de Buquoit.” In the ‘histoire’ that spans across several letters in the fifth volume of the Lettres historiques et galantes, Du Noyer detailed Bucquoy’s escape from the Bastille. Sokalski argued that Du Noyer transformed Bucquoy into a ‘hero’ through her constructed narration, which starkly contrasts with less sympathetic and less glorious descriptions of his character that underscored his dangerous qualities and more questionable motivations.334 Still, eighteenth-century writers like Dennis Diderot, François Gayot de Pitaval, and the Marquis de Sade possibly drew from the Lettres historiques et galantes within their writings as did nineteenth-century writers like Alexandre Dumas, Charles Hugo, and Gérard

Nerval.335 In the Faux saulniers (1850), Nerval’s narrator touches on the relationship between history and fiction in the Lettres historiques et galantes, describing his encounter with a

‘bibliophile’ who warned him: “Ne vous servez pas des Lettres galantes de madame Dunoyer pour écrire l’histoire de l’abbé de Bucquoy. Le titre seul du livre empêchera qu’on ne le considère comme sérieux,”336 as the narrator’s professed intention is to write about Bucquoy

have not been added to them, to make them more pleasant: but I can say that I was surprised to read some rather surprising adventures there, that I certainly know to have happened, more or less as they are told.” 334 Alex Sokalski, “Madame Du Noyer, the Abbé de Bucquoy and the Birth of a Narration,” Lumen 13 (1994): 157- 167. 335 O’Conner, introduction to Mme Dunoyer, Lettres historiques et galantes, 26. 336 Gérard de Nerval, Œuvres complètes de Gérard de Nerval, vol. 4, Les Illuminés. Les Faux Saulniers (Paris: Michel Lévy Frères, 1868), 284. “Do not use Madame Dunoyer's Lettres galantes to write the history of Abbé de Bucquoy. The title of the book alone will prevent it from being considered serious.” 106 “parler de ce personnage d’une façon historique et non romanesque.”337 For some of Du Noyer’s contemporary critics, fictionalization within her writings delegitimized her ‘historical’ work.

This sentiment persisted among nineteenth- and early twentieth-century critics and contributed to

Du Noyer’s complicated legacy as an author.

Auto-plagiarism likewise played an important role within Du Noyer’s reporting and was another point of criticism against her works. In the fourth and fifth volumes (1711-1712) of the

Lettres historiques et galantes, Du Noyer’s fictional epistolists circulate sections from the

Nouveau mercure galant. From the fifth volume onward, Du Noyer regularly incorporated recycled content from the Quintessence, frequently citing herself as its author. This process of self-citation enabled Du Noyer to cross-promote her works and compliment herself using the

Lettres historiques et galantes’s narrators as mouthpieces. She likewise advertised forthcoming volumes of the Lettres historiques et galantes in the Quintessence, including an eighth volume that never came to fruition.338 While other scholars have dismissed these sections of the Lettres historiques et galantes as a form of ‘auto-plagiarism’ and blatant self-promotion, Henriette

Goldwyn and Suzan van Dijk have suggested that they are the result of a “two-tier system of reporting the events, consisting of an immediate, day-to-day version, in the Quintessence, and a reworked, further developed narrative, reissued numerous times over the eighteenth century in her successful collection entitled Lettres historiques et galantes.”339 Although they were not periodicals like the Quintessence and Nouveau mercure galant, the Lettres historiques et

337 Ibid., 282. “to talk about this character in a historical and non-fictional way.” 338 For example, an advertisement for the fifth volume of the Lettres historiques et galantes appeared in Quintessence des Nouvelles, June 30, 1712, no. 52. Advertisements for the sixth volume appeared in Quintessence des Nouvelles, May 15, 1713, no. 40 and May 22, 1713, no. 42. She mentioned the seventh volume in Quintessence des Nouvelles, October 31, 1715, no. 87; July 19, 1717, no. 57; August 19, 1717, no. 66. She teased the eighth volume in Quintessence des Nouvelles, October 10, 1718, no. 82 and October 13, 1718, no. 83. 339 Goldwyn and van Dijk, “Madame Du Noyer Presenting and Re-presenting the Peace of Utrecht,” 96. 107 galantes were nonetheless a journalistic endeavor and a key component in Du Noyer’s reporting strategy.

This process of rewriting and republishing allowed Du Noyer to revisit her narration of events and to report from more personal witness-positions. Brétéché explains, “Tandis que dans la Quintessence, l’auteure met en scène un détachement vis-à-vis de la quête de l’information— ce qui ne va pas à l’encontre de l’expression d’une certaine subjectivité—, dans les Lettres, ses correspondantes sont personnellement impliquées dans le récit des nouvelles. Si la journaliste et les épistolières sont toutes trois témoins des faits qu’elles rapportent, elles ne se tiennent pas à la même distance des événements et c’est ce qui explique les variations discursives.”340 Beyond their identification as deux dames de condition dont l’une est à Paris et l’autre en Province, the two characters in the Lettres historiques et galantes are not unlike the narrator in d’Aulnoy’s

Mémoires de la cour d’Espagne in that they are anonymous and possess few defining traits.

Their primary purpose is to provide literary ‘masks’ that allowed Du Noyer to witness, comment on, and transmit news from the perspective of the fictional women’s geographical locations and social positions.341 The narrators’ positions within and connections to the elite circles of

Versailles, Aix-la-Chapelle/Aachen, and the Dutch Republic authorized Du Noyer’s commentary on the ‘secret’ information that Du Noyer herself was largely unable to gain access. Her fictional elite narrators also allowed Du Noyer to masquerade as a social elite and to insert pseudo- fictionalized versions of herself into high society.342

340 Brétéché, “Faire profession de témoignage,” paragraph 32. “While in the Quintessence, the author stages a detachment from the quest for information—which does not go against the expression of a certain subjectivity—, in the Lettres, her correspondents are personally involved in the news accounts. If the journalist and the letter writers are all three witnesses to the facts they report, they do not maintain the same distance from the events and this explains the discursive variations.” 341 Goldwyn, “Journalisme polémique à la fin du dix-septième siècle,” 251. 342 Suzan van Dijk, “Madame Dunoyer, ou comment tirer parti de son travail,” Documentatieblad Werkgroep Achttiende Eeuw 18 (1986): 16. 108 Like the Lettres historiques et galantes, Du Noyer presented her Nouveau mercure galant as a series of letters in which a Comtesse de L..M.. relays galant anecdotes, poetry, commentary on foreign courts, reports of military movements, and other news relating to des Cours de l’Europe from her position in Versailles to a female friend in the provinces. As with the two narrators in the Lettres historiques et galantes, the Comtesse’s witness position authorizes and legitimizes Du Noyer’s reporting on the private lives of elites. The Comtesse attributes the

‘insider’ information that she relays to her connections and social position at Versailles; she assures her friend, “[…] s’il ne s’agit que de vous apprendre les sentimens de la Cour là-dessus,

& de certifier la vérité de certains faits, j’ose assurer que vous ne pouviez pas mieux tomber, puisque le rang que je tiens ici, & les liaisons que j’ai avec les Personnes qui sont le plus avant dans la confidence de nos Divinitez, font que je n’ignore presque rien de ce qui se passe dans notre Cour.”343 She guarantees her correspondent omniscient, first-hand accounts of the innerworkings of Versailles: “Ainsi éclairant les choses de près, vous pourrez compter que les nouvelles que je vous donnerai seront de la premiére main.”344 For foreign courts, she claims,

“comme les liaisons que j’ai dans plusieurs Cours étrangeres, & même ennemies, m’obligent d’y entretenir des correspondances, je vous ferai part de toutes les nouvelles que je saurai de tous ces divers Païs, & ne me bornerai point à celles de Paris.”345 During a period of war, she locates herself within a powerful information network capable of penetrating both domestic and enemy

343 Du Noyer, Lettres historiques et galantes, LXXVII, 5:137. “[…] If it is only a question of educating you of the Court’s sentiments on this subject, and of certifying the truth of certain facts, I dare assure that you could not have hoped for better, since the rank that I maintain here, & the connections that I have with the Persons who are the most ahead in the confidence of our Divinities, make it that I am unaware of almost nothing of what takes place in our Court.” 344 Ibid. “So shedding light on things up close, you can count that the news I will give you will be first-hand.” 345 Ibid., 5:144. “As the connections that I have in several foreign Courts, and even enemy [Courts], oblige me to maintain correspondences there, I will inform you of all the news that I will know of all these diverse regions, and will not limit myself to those of Paris.” 109 secrets. However, she assures her correspondent that she will not use her intermediary position for anything beyond ‘satisfying’ her correspondent’s curiosities and “procuring pleasure” for her reader “en [lui] contant bien des petites choses qui se passent ici, & qui ne viennent point à la connoissance de tout le monde […].”346 The Comtesse veils her exposure of court secrets behind the premise of a ludic game: she remarks, “Quel plaisir d’intriguer les curieux! De savoir ce qu’on pensera de mon Ouvrage, sans que ce que l’on en dira puisse m’être suspect de complaisance ou de malignité!”347 While the Comtesse maintains that she possesses no malintent, her anonymity made her a threat and her claims exemplify the power—and potential dangers—of early modern women’s epistolary exchanges.

Women’s letters were important vehicles for the transmission of information, tools in the maintenance of long-distance networks, powerful weapons in social and dynastic political games, and important spaces for negotiations.348 Women and their writings also posed a potential threat to monarchical secrecy.349 The Comtesse presents her Nouveau Mercure Galant as an alternative to Dufresny’s, explaining to her reader, “Je m’en serois formée un tout oposé, & à l’éxemple de Boileau, j’aurois voulu apeller un chat, un chat. Mais, Madame, toutes les réflexions que vous me faites faire là-dessus, me font tout d’un coup naître l’envie de supléer à la timidité de Mr. Dufresni, en vous donnant tous les mois les nouvelles qu’il suprime.”350 One

346 Ibid., 5:143-144. “to procure pleasure”; “by telling [her] many little things that happen here, & that do not come to everyone’s knowledge […].” 347 Ibid., 5:143. “What a pleasure to intrigue the curious! To know what people will think of my Book, without my being suspected of indulgence or deviousness!” 348 For example, see Elizabeth Goldsmith, ed., Writing the Female Voice: Essays on Epistolary Literature (Boston: Northeastern University Press, 1989); James Daybell, ed., Early Modern Women’s Letter Writing, 1450-1700 (New York: Palgrave, 2001); Jane Couchman and Ann Crabb, eds., Women’s letters across Europe, 1400-1700: form and persuasion (Aldershot and Burlington, VT: Ashgate, 2005); Bastian, Verhandeln in Briefen; Bastian, “‘Paper Negotiations,’” 107-119. 349 For the use of secrets and threats to secrecy under Louis XIV, see Bély, Les Secrets de Louis XIV. 350 Du Noyer, Lettres historiques et galantes, LXXVII, 5:142-3. “I would have formed one entirely opposite, & like Boileau, I would have liked to call a cat, a cat. But, Madame, all the reflections that you make me do on this subject 110 could interpret the Comtesse’s promise to give her readers the news that “[Dufrény] suppresses” as an allusion to the Mercure galant’s limitations due its royal privilege. By circulating banned materials in France, the fictional women in the Lettres historiques et galantes too threaten monarchical authority through their subversion of royal censorship. The woman in the provinces sends excerpts of the Nouveau mercure galant to the woman in Paris “parce qu[’elle sait] que les

Livres imprimez en Hollande ne peuvent pas entrer en France.”351 To circumvent royal censors, the woman in the provinces deliberately divides the excerpts across several letters to avoid alerting French officials as to their contents.

Though she suspects “qu’il ne fait pas fort l’éloge de la France,” the woman in Paris requests that her correspondent continue to send her excerpts from the Nouveau mercure galant.352 She justifies her interest in the Nouveau mercure galant despite its potentially anti-

French character because it offers a respite from the monotony of French censorship; she writes to the woman in the provinces, “Je ne doute point que ces Historiettes qu’on a insérées là-dedans ne soient très jolies, & qu’assaisonnées du sel satirique, dont la liberté du Païs permet l’usage, & qui réveillent l’apétit du Lecteur dégoûté par la fade flaterie, elles ne plaisent infiniment.”353

Furetière defined ‘historiette’ as a “Petite Histoire meslée d'un peu de fiction ou de galanterie.”354 As a ‘hybrid’ literary form, it was not subject to the limitations of generic convention and could therefore pose a threat to monarchical authority and aristocratic secrets.

Tallemant des Réaux, for example, wrote in the introduction to his Historiettes that “Mon

all of a sudden give me the desire to supplement the timidity of Mr. Dufresni by giving you every month the news that he suppresses.” 351 Ibid., LXI, 4:222. “because [she knows] that Books printed in Holland cannot enter France.” 352 Ibid., LXII, 4:245. “that it does not praise France very much.” 353 Ibid., LXXVIII, 5:156. “I have no doubt that these Historiettes that have been inserted therein are very pretty, & only seasoned with satirical salt, of which the freedom of the region allows the use, & that awakens the appetite of the reader disgusted by the bland flattery, they please infinitely.” 354 Furetière, Dictionnaire universel (1690), 2:263. “Little History mixed with a little fiction or galanterie.” 111 dessein est d’écrire tout ce que j’ai appris et que j’apprendrai d’agréable et digne d’être remarqué, et je prétends dire le bien et le mal sans dissimuler la vérité, et sans me servir de ce qu’on trouve dans les Histoires et les Mémoires imprimés. Je le fais d’autant plus librement que je sais bien que ce ne sont pas choses à mettre en lumière, quoique peut-être elles ne laissassent pas d’être utiles.”355 Like Du Noyer’s fictional Comtesse, through his portraits of elite courtiers, he promised to unveil and ‘bring to light’ their secrets.

While the circulation of banned materials is clear resistance against royal censorship, this is not the only allusion to the women’s subversion of royal authority in the Lettres historiques et galantes. In earlier volumes, Du Noyer used her fictional narrators to express criticisms of Louis

XIV’s military policies and willingness to sacrifice his subjects for the sake of his dynastic ambitions.356 Like Du Noyer in the Quintessence,357 Du Noyer’s fictional Catholic women lament the persecution of Protestants in France throughout their correspondence and they highlight Protestant concerns in their discussion of the war and peace negotiations.358 Even

355 Gédéon Tallemant des Réaux, Les Historiettes: Mémoires pour servir à l’histoire du XVIIe siècle, ed. Monmerqué (Paris: Alphonse Levavasseur, 1834), 1:1. “My purpose is to write down all that I have learned and will learn that is pleasant and worth noting, and I claim to tell the good and the bad without concealing the truth, and without using what one finds in Histories and printed Memoirs. I do it all the more freely as I know very well that these are not things to bring to light, although perhaps they do not fail to be useful.” 356 Du Noyer, Lettres historiques et galantes. In the second letter of the collection, after detailing the ‘pleasures’ of elites at Versailles and briefly commenting on France’s “sad state” in the aftermath of the Nine Years’ War, the woman in Paris instructs the woman in the provinces, “Brûlez cette Lettre de peur qu’elle ne me fasse brûler / “Burn this Letter lest it burn me” (II, 1:24). When war looms once more on the horizon, she expresses a sentiment similar to that which Nicolas de Gueudeville would later articulate in the Quintessence, professing “voilà encore de quoi abîmer le Roiaume, avant qu’il ait eu le temps de se rétablir des desordres de la Guerre passée; & franchement je croi que nous païerons cher la Couronne d’Espagne, que le Roi a achetée à son Petit-fils à nos dépens” / “this is enough to ruin the Kingdom, before it has had time to recover from the disorders of the past War; & frankly I believe that we will pay dearly for the Crown of Spain, which the King bought his Grandson at our expense” (XXXII, 2:234-5). 357 e.g., “On apprend avec douleur que la persécution se renouvelle en France contre les Protestans […]” / “We learn with sorrow that persecution is happening again in France against the Protestants […]” (Quintessence des Nouvelles, October 31, 1712, no. 87). 358 e.g., “je plains fort les pauvres Huguenots qui en soufrent à tous égards” / “I greatly pity the poor Huguenots who suffer from it in all respects” (Du Noyer, Lettres historiques et galantes, LIL, 4:30). “On continuë à tourmenter plus que jamais ici les pauvres Protestans, & cela me fait de la peine” / “We continue to torment the poor Protestants here more than ever, and it pains me” (Ibid., XCVI, 6:274). 112 though religion factored very little into the actual negotiations, in the Lettres historiques et galantes, the prospect of peace is inextricably linked to Du Noyer’s concerns as a Protestant woman. As Freschot recognized, the Catholic identities of her fictional narrators offered Du

Noyer “un masque dont elle se couvre pour lancer des traits contre cette religion.”359 Irony was another rhetorical device that Du Noyer used to authorize her commentary on religion and other issues that her contemporaries considered to be beyond women’s expertise. For example, after expressing her hopes for the liberation of Protestant galley slaves with the conclusion of the peace of Utrecht, the woman in the provinces concludes, “Mais c’est assez moralisé, & je vois bien que je ne sçaurois rester aujourd’hui dans ma Sphere. Tantôt j’ai donné dans la Rétorique, je me mêle à présent de faire la Theologienne: ainsi je crois que je ferai mieux de finir ma Lettre, que de continuer à parler sur un ton qui ne me convient pas, & qui pourroit vous ennuïer […].”360

Du Noyer also regularly employed this strategy of inauthentic compliance with the gendered limitations that women faced in the Quintessence.361

359 Freschot, Histoire amoureuse et badine…, 272. “a mask with which she covers herself to throw criticisms against this religion.” 360 Ibid., LXXXIX, 6:16-7. “But that is enough moralizing, and I see well that I would know to stay in my Sphere today. Soon I gave in to the Rhetoric, I am now involved in playing the Theologian: thus I believe that I would do better to finish my Letter, than to continue to speak in a way that does not suit me, and that could bore you […].” 361 e.g., Quintessence des Nouvelles, Oct. 7, 1717, no. 60. Du Noyer similarly commented on religious issues in the Quintessence before noting that “nous sortons de notre sphére” / “we are exiting our sphere” and citing the maxim: Il n’est pas bien honnête, & pour beaucoup de causes, Qu’une femme étudie & sache tant de choses. Former aux bonnes mœurs l’esprit de ses enfans, Faire aller son ménage, avoir l’œil sur ses gens, Et regler sa dépense avec économie, Doit être son étude & sa Philosophie.

It is not honest, & for many causes, That a woman study & know so much. To educate in good moral standards the spirit of her children, To clean, to keep an eye on her people, And to adjust her expenses economically, Must be her study & her Philosophy. and indicating that “Suivant cette maxime nous n’en dirons pas d’avantage en matiére de Theologie” / “Following this maxim we will not say more on the matter of Theology.” 113 Du Noyer’s use of the epistolary form not only reinforced the authority of her narrators as witnesses to events and allowed Du Noyer to hide her critiques behind the façade of her French

Catholic narrators, it also inscribed Du Noyer into a noble literary genre in which women were considered to possess particular talent. This lent legitimacy to her writings and journalistic endeavors. As Goldwyn remarks, “Grace à son choix du genre épistolaire, genre littéraire qui possède ses quartiers de noblesse, ses auteurs reconnus, ses règles et ses modelés, elle tente de s’inscrire dans une tradition littéraire bien établie et de rehausser ainsi les mérites des journalistes, gazetières, nouvellistes, profondément méprisées.”362 One could make the same argument with her decision to publish her Mémoires. Despite her claims and repeated attempts to associate herself with the nobility, as Bernard noted in his review of the Mémoires, “Quel que rang qu’elle tienne dans le Monde, on peut dire pourtant, sans lui faire tort, qu’elle n’y est pas assez connuë, pour que son seul nom donne de la curiosité de savoir les particularitez de sa vie.”363 By publishing her Mémoires, she nonetheless attempted to present herself as someone of importance.364

362 Goldwyn, “Journalisme polémique à la fin du dix-septième siècle,” 252. “Thanks to her choice of the epistolary genre, a literary genre which has its quarters of nobility, its recognized authors, its rules and its models, she tries to fit into a well-established literary tradition and thus enhance the merits of journalists, gazetteers, short story writers, deeply despised.” 363 Bernard, review of Mémoires de Madame Du N**, 683. “Whatever rank she holds in the World, one can say, however, without doing her wrong, that she is not well enough known there, so that her name alone gives curiosity to know the peculiarities of her life.” 364 In response to Bernard’s review of her Mémoires, Du Noyer wrote, “Quoi que cette même Femme, par les Révolutions où elle a eu part, ou par je ne sai quel caprice de la fortune, ait eu l’honneur d’être connuë par plusieurs Rois, & d’autres Souverains, & qu’elle ait eu quelques fois le bonheur d’en recevoir des éloges: quoi qu’elle ait été en relation avec les Personnes de France les plus distinguées & les plus illustres par leur rang & par leur génie; quelle aparence, dis-je, avec tout cela, qu’elle eût dû mériter vôtre attention, & que vous eussiz voulu décendre du sublime de vôtre Sphére, pour faire des Annotations sur une chose d’un si petit relief?” / “Whatever this same Woman, by the Revolutions in which she took part, or by I do not know what whim of fortune, had the honor of being known by several Kings, & other Sovereigns, & that she has had the good fortune to receive praise sometimes: whatever she has been in connection with the most distinguished Persons of France & the most illustrious by their rank & by their spirit; what appearance, I say, with all this, that she should have deserved your attention, and that you would have wanted to descend from the sublime of your Sphere, to make Annotations on something of such little originality” (Du Noyer, Mémoires, 2nd ed., 1:n.p.). 114 As Du Noyer framed them to be the reciprocal exchange between two women, women’s interests and concerns are at the core of the Lettres historiques et galantes.365 When the woman in the provinces circulates the excerpts from the Nouveau mercure galant, she prefaces it by informing the woman in Paris, “Mais je sauterai toutes les nouvelles de guerre, qui seroient vieilles à présent, & dont la récapitulation ne pourroit qu’être ennuyeuse pour vous & pour moi.

Je me contenterai de prendre toutes les petites Historiettes, & les endroits les plus intéressans du

Livre.”366 The woman in Paris agrees with the woman in the provinces: “je vous dispense de bon cœur de toutes les nouvelles de guerre: une Avanture galante contée avec esprit me fait plus de plaisir que le recit d’une Bataille, ou le détail d’un Siége: chacun doit parler de ce qui lui convient, & le tenir dans sa sphére.”367 In the Lettres historiques et galantes, military news has no place in women’s ‘sphere’; what ‘pleases’ women are the historiettes, galant tales, and affective exchanges between the two correspondents.

Du Noyer’s Nouveau mercure galant, as she represented it in the Lettres historiques et galantes, is not merely an imitation of Donneau de Visé and Dufresny’s Mercure galant, but an alternative intended to appeal to women’s interests. As the woman in Paris declares to the woman in the provinces,

Je ne fais point de paralelle entre ce Mercure & celui de Mr. du Fresny; ils sont d’un caractére si different qu’ils ne se departent point l’un l’autre. Mr. du Fresny sera plus du goût des Savans, & moi qui aime qu’on apelle un chat, un chat & qui ne cherche que des Galanteries dans un Mercure Galant, je déciderai pour celui de Madame de L., M .., parce qu’il me semble qu’il remplit mieux son tître; & parce que, graces à la médiocrité de mon génie, je suis moins curieuse des mœurs & coûtumes de la République des fourmis, & de l’habileté des araignées & des chenilles, quoi que ces observations soient très belles &

365 Goldwyn, “L’inscription d’un lectorat féminin dans une des Lettres historiques et galantes de Mme du Noyer.” 366 Du Noyer, Lettres historiques et galantes, LXXVII, 5:147-8. “But I will skip all the news of war, which are old by now, & the recapitulation of which could only be boring for you & me. I will content myself with taking all the little Historiettes, & the most interesting places in the Book.” 367 Ibid., LXXVIII, 5:156-7. “I willingly dispense you from all the news of war: a galant Adventure recounted with wit gives me more pleasure than the story of a Battle, or the detail of a Seat: everyone must speak about what suits him, and keep it in his sphere.” 115 plus curieuses que je ne la suis du dénoûment de quelque intrigue Galante; & votre Baron Danois, votre Conte Suédois & les autres Héros du Mercure imprimé en Hollande, m’intéressent beaucoup plus que toutes les découvertes de l’Académie des Sciences, quelques utiles qu’elles puissent être.368

However, if galanteries are more appealing to the woman than esoteric commentaries, that is not to say that the woman is incapable of appreciating Dufresny’s work; she adds, “Cela ne m’empêche pourtant pas de rendre justice à qui elle est duë, & d’estimer les choses ce qu’elle valent […].”369

Unlike the Quintessence and the periodical press, in the Lettres historiques et galantes, novelty is not nearly as important as the appearance of novelty; the women justify their inclusion of ‘old’ news and anecdotes so long as they are ‘new’ to them.370 Moreover, the talented epistole can restore novelty to ‘old’ news with literary talent; the woman in the provinces, for example, informs the woman in Paris that “Quoi que je sûsse déja une partie des nouvelles dont vous m’avez fait part, la manière dont vous les contez, leur donne un tour de nouveauté qui m’a fait un vrai plaisir.”371 While one can approximate the chronology of the Lettres historiques et galantes by referencing the current events that the women discuss in their letters, unlike the periodical press that reinforced stricter notions of time,372 the Lettres historiques et galantes reflect the inconsistencies and instabilities of the post and, consequently, occur beyond ‘regular’

368 Ibid., LXXXII, 5:299-300. “I make no parallel between this Mercure and that of Mr. du Fresny; they are of such a different character that they do not stray from each other. Mr. du Fresny will be more the taste of Savants, and I who likes that one calls a cat, a cat & who only seeks Galanteries in a Mercure Galant, I will decide for that of Madame de L., M .., because it seems to me that it fulfills its title better; & because, thanks to the mediocrity of my genius, I am less curious about the manners & customs of the Republic of ants, & the skill of spiders & caterpillars, although these observations are very beautiful & more curious that I follow it from the conclusion of some Galant intrigue; & your Danish Baron, your Swedish Count & the other Heroes of the Mercure printed in Holland, interest me much more than all the discoveries of the Academy of Sciences, however useful they may be.” 369 Ibid., 5:300. “This does not prevent me, however, from giving justice to whom it is due, and from valuing things what they are worth […].” 370 Ibid., XXXI, 2:214. 371 Ibid., LIII, 4:49. “Whatever I already know about some of the news you told me about, the way you tell it, gives it a novel twist that truly pleased me.” 372 Popkin, “New Perspectives on the Early Modern Press,” 20-1. 116 conceptions of time. Du Noyer modified the chronology of some of the events that the women discuss, compressing events that occurred over several months—or even years—into one letter and most of the letters do not contain dates. The correspondence between the two women in the

Lettres historiques et galantes is not continuous; they acknowledge multi-year gaps within their correspondence that presumably parallel the time between each volume’s publication. Janet

Altman explained in her analysis of epistolary narration, “Epistolary discourse is a discourse marked by hiatuses of all sorts: time lags between event and recording, between message transmission and reception; spatial separation between writer and addressee; blank spaces and lacunae in the manuscript. Yet it is also a language of gap closing, of writing to the moment, of speaking to the addressee as if he were present. Epistolary discourse is the language of the ‘as if’ present.”373 The women themselves reiterate their preference for sentimentality over chronology; the woman in Paris writes, “& que je vous conte les faits comme ils se présentent à ma mémoire,

& sans observer de Chronologie: Car après tout il n’importe guére que Pascal soit devant, ou

Pascal soit derriére: il me semble que vous n’avez guére plus d’éxactitude que moi là-dessus, & que vous commencez par ce qui vous touche le plus […].”374 The woman in the provinces concurs, telling the woman in Paris, “Vous avez raison, Madame, de ne pas vous attacher scrupuleusement à la Chronologie, & de parler des choses selon l’ordre avec lequel elles se présentent à votre mémoire.”375

373 Janet Gurkin Altman, Epistolarity: Approaches to a form (Columbus, OH: Ohio State University Press, 1982), 140. 374 Du Noyer, Lettres historiques et galantes, CII, 7:61. “& that I tell you the facts as they appear in my memory, & without observing Chronology: Because after all it hardly matters whether Pascal is in front, or Pascal is behind: it seems to me that you hardly have any more accuracy than me on this, & that you start with what touches you the most […].” 375 Ibid., CIII, 7:69. “You are right, Madame, not to stick scrupulously to the Chronology, & to speak of things in the order in which they present themselves to your memory.” 117 Du Noyer’s reporting of the Congress of Utrecht in the Lettres historiques et galantes combines discussion of ‘general history’ with the ‘particular’ histories that elicit pleasure in the sphere of feminine curiosity. The woman in the provinces first mentions having briefly visited

Utrecht to “voir ses anciens Amis” in Letter LXXXV that she sends from Aix-la-Chapelle

(Aachen).376 She claims to have met with Huxelles, Polignac, and Mesnager and relays a short description of each.377 In her response, the woman in Paris demands information from the woman in the provinces so that she may be well equipped to participate in the social games of

Versailles: “On ne parle que d’Utrecht dans toutes les Conversations: & je voudrois bien pouvoir en parler à mon tour; mais je n’ose de peur de faire quelque qui pro quo, & de prendre Vaugirard pour Rome.”378 This marks a departure from earlier sections of the Lettres historiques et galantes in which the woman in Paris’s insight into the French court granted the woman in the provinces social power.379 She reproaches the woman in the provinces for her inadequate reporting in previous letters: “S’il vous avoit plu de m’en dire quelque chose de particulier dans la Lettre où vous m’en parlez, je me serois donné des airs là-dessus, & j’aurois fait la capable & la savante tout comme une autre. Mais vos narrations sont si peu circonstanciées, & vôtre stile si laconique, que vous me faites enrager […].”380 To ‘punish’ the woman for her lack of assiduity, she demands “une rélation d’Utrecht, de sa situation, de son origine, de son Gouvernement, düssiez

376 Ibid., LXXXV, 5:444; 446. “to see her former Friends.” 377 Ibid. 378 Ibid., LXXXVIII, 6:8. “We only talk about Utrecht in all Conversations: & I would like to be able to talk about it in my turn; but I dare not for fear of doing something quid pro quo, and taking Vaugirard for Rome.” 379 Ibid., XXXV, 2:274. The woman in the provinces writes to the woman in Paris: “on me croit initiée dans les secrets des Grands, & je ne dois cette haute opinion qu’à la bonté que vous avez de m’informer de ce qui se passe” / “I am believed to be initiated into the secrets of the Greats, & I owe this high opinion only to your generosity in informing me of what happens.” 380 Ibid., LXXXVIII, 6:8-9. “If you had pleased to tell me something in particular in the Letter in which you spoke to me about it, I would have played off of it, & I would have acted capable & knowledgeable just like any other. But your narrations are so sparsely detailed, and your style so laconic, that you make me enraged […].” 118 vous y aller faire un second voiage exprès pour cela. J’espére que vous ne me refuserez pas cette grace; & je vous assure que je ne cesserai de vous la demander, jusques à ce que je l’aie obtenuë.”381

Before returning to Utrecht, the woman in the provinces proposes that she could satisfy her correspondent’s curiosity from Aix-la-Chapelle/Aaachen through self-study, “après quoi,” she promises her correspondent, “je vous mettrai en Etat de parler d’Utrecht devant les

Hollandois, sans craindre de tomber dans le défaut du Singe dont parle la Fontaine, qui pour avoir apellé le Pirée son Cousin, fut replongé dans la Mer.”382 Her next letter to the woman in

Paris contains a 35-page History of Utrecht with a map of the city as an ‘amusement.’383 She assures the woman in Paris of the map’s accuracy and promises to commission more engravings of places of interest in Utrecht pertinent to the peace negotiations, pledging that “je prétens vous faire connoître Utrecht tout comme si vous y aviez été vous-même.”384 The woman in the provinces vows to travel to Utrecht for the sole purpose of being able to “speak knowledgeably about [the Congress]” to her correspondent.385

Utrecht is not the only instance in the Lettres historiques et galantes in which the woman in the provinces’s travels serve to inform and entertain the woman in Paris. In earlier volumes, the woman in Paris explains how the woman in the provinces’s travels and descriptions of

‘foreign’ locales serve her as a form of imaginary travel. She writes, “En vérité, Madame, il y a

381 Ibid., 6:9-10. “an account of Utrecht, of its situation, of its origin, of its Government, should you go there and make a second journey on purpose for that. I hope you will not deny me this grace; & I assure you that I will not stop asking you for it, until I have gotten it.” 382 Ibid, LXXXIX, 6:18. “after which I will enable you to speak of Utrecht in front of the Dutch, without fear of falling into the fault of the Monkey of which La Fontaine speaks, who for having called Piraeus his cousin, was plunged back into the sea.” 383 Ibid., XCI, 6:33-68. 384 Ibid., 6:68-9. “I claim to introduce you to Utrecht just as if you had been there yourself.” 385 Ibid., 6:68. 119 plaisir d’avoir commerce de Lettres avec vous: quoi! non seulement vous me donnez des nouvelles du Payis où vous êtes, mais encore vous m’apprenez ce qui se passe dans les Roiaumes

étrangers.”386 The woman in the provinces likewise proclaims, “Vous voyez, Madame, que je vous transporte jusques dans les lieux où je n’ai pas encore été, & que je vous donne quasi la

Carte de l’Europe!”387 The woman in Paris admits to the woman in the provinces that

“Quelqu’envie que j’aie de vous revoir, je ne puis savoir mauvais gré à vos Voiages, ils me rendront habile femme, & il me semble que je suis même déja assez bonne Géographe!”388

Women’s travels—both real and imagined—were means to escape confinement and find independence. The epistolary space was an extension of this liberating mobility that allowed women to ‘travel’ through the exchange of correspondence.389

At the start of the Lettres historiques et galantes, the woman in the provinces’s purported motivation for travel was her devotion to her husband and Louis XIV. She laments to the woman in Paris the regulation of her movements: “mais vous savez que je ne suis pas maîtresse de ma destinée, il faut que je suive celle de mon Epoux, & que je le suive lui-même par tout où les ordres du Roi l’obligent d’aller.”390 Despite this claim, the women’s husbands are otherwise absent from the Lettres historiques et galantes, which further contributed to the conflation of Du

Noyer with the woman in the provinces. With her travels to Utrecht, the woman in the provinces abandons this pretext. While the purpose of her first voyage to Utrecht was to socialize with the

386 Ibid., XXXVI, 2:295. “In truth, Madame, it is a pleasure to exchange Letters with you: what! not only do you give me news from the regions where you are, but also you tell me what happens in Foreign Kingdoms.” 387 Ibid., LXVII, 4:245. “You see, Madame, that I transport you to places where I have not yet been, & that I almost give you the Map of Europe!” 388 Ibid., XLVI, 3:325-6. “Whatever want that I have to see you again, I cannot begrudge your Travels, they will make me an adept woman, & it seems to me that I am even already a rather good Geographer!” 389 Elizabeth C. Goldsmith, “‘Savoir la carte’: Travel, Self-Advancement, and Survival in Letters by Women,” BIBLIO 17 168 (2006): 15-31. 390 Du Noyer, Lettres historiques et galantes, XXI, 2:2. “but you know that I am not mistress of my destiny, I must follow that of my spouse, & that I follow him himself wherever the King’s orders oblige him to go.” 120 French ambassadors, the woman claims that the purpose for her second is to transmit news to and to satisfy the curiosities of the woman in Paris; she tells her “je ne suis venuë ici [au

Congrès] que pour vous en dire des nouvelles.”391 She assures the woman in Paris that “Vous voyez, Madame, que je vous rends un compte bien exacte de tout ce qui se passe ici. Plaisirs,

Afaires, Politique, Dévotion, je fais tout passer en revûë devant vous, & je vous rends de votre chambre avant spectatrice du célébre Congrès d’Utrecht.”392 By reading her correspondent’s letters, the woman in Paris—and by extension, the (female) reader—too can become a spectator to the events of the negotiations.

Freschot was highly critical of these sections of the Lettres historiques et galantes that contain the woman in the provinces’s descriptions of Utrecht. He highlighted the inaccuracies within Du Noyer’s work, remarking that “ce n’est pas dans l’Histoire seule, & où il s’agit du raisonnement que Madame D.N. montre d’être peu instruite. C’est dans la connoissance du materiel même de la Ville, dont chacun se peut instruire par ses yeux. Elle avoit promis à

Madame sa correspondante d’y aller expressement pour s’en informer, & pour prendre part, comme elle l’insinue adroitement aux plaisirs qui y regnent. […].”393 He explained her lack of erudition, commenting, “Mais bien loin que sa qualité lui ait donné les moyens de prendre part aux divertissements publics, elle y a été en un état tres pauvre, & seulement pour Mendier quelques gratification des Ambassadeurs. C’est pourquoy elle est si mal instruite des choses dont

391 Ibid., XCIII, 6:134. “I only came here [to the Congress] to tell you news about it.” 392 Ibid., XCVII, 6:360. “You see, Madame, that I give you a very exact account of everything that happens here. Pleasures, Affaires, Politics, Devotion, I review everything before you, & I make you from your room before spectator of the famous Congress of Utrecht.” 393 Freschot, L’histoire amoureuse et badine…, 267-8. “it is not in History alone, & where it is about the reasoning that Madame D.N. shows to be poorly educated. It is in the knowledge of the material of the City itself, which everyone can learn through their eyes. She had promised to Madame her correspondent to go there expressly to inform herself about it, & to take part, as she adroitly insinuates in the pleasures that reign there. […].” 121 les plus idiots peuvent prendre connoissance […].”394 While Freschot asserted that history, politics, and religion “ne sont point de sa competence,”395 he suggested that

Son fort est de rapicer de petites historiettes déjà usées, de repeter comme elle fait dans ce 6. Tome ce qu’elle a fait dans les autres. Les gazettes & les relations des sieges & des batailles qu’elle a lû ailleurs, de tailler à torts & à travers des Jansenistes & des Jesuites, & de larder ce beau mêlange de petits vers le plus souvent fades & éstropies. Tout cela passe à la faveur de son discours souvent assés poli, quoy qu’elle ne laisse pas de le defigurer aussi plusieurs fois par des figures fort impropres ou par des termes hors d’usage.396

Therefore, as Brétéché has noted,397 Freschot’s harshest criticisms were not of the sections of her work in ‘particular’ history, but of her attempts to comment on ‘general’ history, geography, politics, and religion—areas that he considered to be beyond her expertise, social station, and gender.

In the fourth volume of the Lettres historiques et galantes, the woman in Paris ironically announces, “Mais comme il ne me convient pas d’aspirer à la gloire d’Historienne, je céde cet honneur à tant de beaux Esprits que la générosité de ce Prince [Charles VII] a mis à leur aise, & qui sont doublement engagez à faire éclater le zéle qu’ils doivent avoir pour lui; & Pallaprat,

Capistron, & tant d’autres s’aquiteront beaucoup mieux de cet emploi, que ne le pourroit faire une femme, condamnée par Moliére, à ne faire que coudre & filer!”398 She acknowledges to the

394 Ibid., 268. “But far from her quality giving her the means to take part in public entertainment, she was there in a very poor state, & only to beg some gratuity from the Ambassadors. That is why she is so ill-educated about the things that the most foolish can learn about […].” 395 Ibid., 272. “are not her competence.” 396 Ibid., 272-3. “Her strength is in piecing together little historiettes that are already worn out, to repeat as she does in this 6. Volume what she did in the others. The gazettes & the reports of the sieges & of the battles that she read elsewhere, to cut wrongly & through Jansenists & Jesuits, & to lard this beautiful mixture of the most often bland & abridged short verses. All this goes through her often rather polite speech, which she does not fail to also disfigure several times by very inappropriate turns of phrase or by terms that are no longer used.” 397 Brétéché, “Faire profession de témoignage,” paragraphs 23-25. 398 Du Noyer Lettres historiques et galantes, LIL, 4:37-8. “But as it does not suit me to aspire to the glory of Historian, I cede this honor to so many beautiful Spirits that the generosity of this Prince [Charles VII] has put at their ease, & who are doubly committed to expose the zeal they must have for him; & Pallaprat, Capistron, & so many others will carry out this job much better than a woman, condemned by Moliére, to do nothing but sew & spin!” 122 woman in the provinces that, by contrast, “Pour vous, Madame, vous n’avez point subi cette condamnation; vous en avez apellé comme d’abus; & la maniere dont vous paroissez versée, comme on dit dans les saintes Lettres, fait bien voir que vous ne vous êtes pas toûjours amusée à la bagatelles & je m’imagine que les voïages auront ajoûté bien des nouvelles connoissances à celles que vous aviez déja!”399 The woman in the province’s mobility allows her to liberate herself from the limitations of her gender. This is true of Du Noyer as well; her escapes from

France allowed her to flee the confines of familial expectations, marriage, and religious persecution to independently establish herself as a female author and ‘historian.’ Goldwyn has suggested that “En se cachant derrière l’ironie, elle [Mme Du Noyer] s’assume en tant qu’historienne, une historienne exilée et marginalisée, dont la version des faits ne correspond jamais à celle, approuvée, que rédigent les historiens stipendiés par le roi. En faisant la nique à ceux qui désirent reléguer la femme aux tâches domestiques, les [Lettres historiques et galantes] portent un témoignage qui, pour ne pas être officiel, n’en reste pas moins historique.”400

As the woman in the provinces explains in her reports on the negotiations, “il ne s’agit pas ici d’instruire un juge, mais de satisfaire la curiosité d’une Dame qui a envie de sçavoir ce qui se passe à Utrecht.”401 The histories, stories, and descriptions that the women exchange among themselves reflect this idea. Instead of sending the woman in Paris factums and

399 Ibid., 4:38. “For you, Madame, you have not suffered this condemnation; you called it as abusive; & the way in which you appear versed, as they say in the Holy Letters, shows that you have not always amused yourself with trifles & I imagine that the travels will have added much new knowledge to that which you already had!” 400 Goldwyn, “Journalisme polémique à la fin du dix-septième siècle,” 255. “By hiding behind the irony, she [Mme Du Noyer] assumes herself as a historian, an exiled and marginalized historian, whose version of the facts never corresponds to that, approved, that the historians paid by the King write. By nodding to those who wish to relegate women to domestic chores, the [Lettres historiques et galantes] bear a testimony which, while not being official, is nonetheless historic.” See also Michèle Froment, “La « Dame pasquine » et le peintre d’histoire: Saint-Simon et Madame du Noyer,” Cahiers Saint Simon 4 (1976): 51-56. 401 Du Noyer Lettres historiques et galantes, XCII, 6:156. “This is not about educating a judge, but about satisfying the curiosity of a Lady who wants to know what is happening in Utrecht.” 123 information briefs, the woman in the provinces sends maps and descriptions that she thinks that the woman would enjoy more.402 After relaying a lengthy list of the Congress’s attendees, the woman in the provinces expresses concern that her correspondent would find the information boring and teases the content of her next letter: the magnificent celebrations in Utrecht to honor the birth of the Prince of Brazil.403 Although the woman in Paris responds expressing the enjoyment that she had experienced while reading the letter, she nonetheless notes her greater interest in the celebrations and pleasures of Utrecht, admitting, “Je conviens pourtant avec vous, que je puis me passer de ce superflu, & qu’il me sufit de connoître ces Messieurs par leurs noms

& surnoms: c’en est assez pour l’usage que j’en veux faire, & j’aime bien mieux qu’au lieu de cela vous me donniez une Relation exacte de la Fête que le Comte de Tarouca a donnée en l’honneur de la naissance du Prince du Bresil.”404

The fêtes galantes and displays of women’s talents

Du Noyer’s descriptions of the celebrations and festivities in which the Congress’s attendees partook thread together the Quintessence and the Lettres historiques et galantes. In the

Quintessence, Du Noyer composed preliminary descriptions of the numerous balls, masquerades, plays, and diners that she later expanded on in the sixth volume of the Lettres historiques et galantes. While, as Freschot suggested, one can assume that Mme Du Noyer would have had difficulty gaining admittance to these festivities, the fictional narrators of the Lettres historiques

402 Ibid, XCII, 6:156. 403 Ibid., XCV, 6:253-4. 404 Ibid., XCVI, 6:255-6. “I agree with you, however, that I can do without this superfluous thing, and that it suffices for me to know these Gentlemen by their names & nicknames: this is enough for the use I want to make of them, & I would much rather that instead of that you give me an exact Account of the Celebration that the Count of Tarouca hosted in honor of the birth of the Prince of Brazil.” 124 et galantes would not have encountered such limitations; as a dame de condition, the woman in the provinces could access areas that Du Noyer herself could not. Using the woman in the provinces as her narrator permitted Du Noyer to report on the festivities from the position of someone who was personally implicated in them.

Most of Du Noyer’s descriptions of the fêtes galantes during the peace negotiations occur in Letters XCVII and XCIX of the Lettres historiques et galantes. The first of these letters, which the woman in the provinces describes as a “Lettre si pleine de Rien,”405 contains descriptions of the Fêtes Portugaises hosted by two of the Portuguese plenipotentiaries—the

Count of Tarouca and Don Louis d’Acunha (Luís da Cunha)—over three days in January 1713 to honor the birth of the Prince of Brazil. They were not the first celebrations upon which Du Noyer had reported in Utrecht or that she had viewed as “les préludes de la Paix.”406 However, according to Du Noyer, the opulence and magnificence of the Fêtes Portugaises surpassed those that had come before. Du Noyer began reporting on the preparations for the festivities as early as

December 5, 1712.407 Most of her preliminary descriptions are located in the January 12 and 16,

1713 issues of the Quintessence.408 As she had with the previous festivities, she viewed the

“Festin magnifique” that “a rassemblé dans une même Table, ceux que des interêts differens avoient depuis long-tems desunis” as “Un si heureux assemblage ne peut qu’être d’un bon augure pour la Paix […].”409 Despite this presaging, she contained her descriptions of the celebrations to the galanteries and magnificences. While she acknowledged the public’s desire to

405 Ibid., XCVII 6:383. “Letter so full of Nothing.” 406 Ibid., XCVII, 6:364. “the preludes of the Peace.” Quintessence des Nouvelles, February 11, 1712, no. 12. 407 Quintessence des Nouvelles, December 5, 1712, no. 97. 408 Quintessence des Nouvelles, January 12, 1713, no 4; January 16, 1713, no. 5. 409 Quintessence des Nouvelles, January 12, 1713, no 4. “Magnificent feast”; “brought together to the same Table, those whom different interests had for a long time divided”; “Such a happy assembly can only be a good omen for Peace [...].” 125 read “une relation éxacte de ce qui s’est passé dans les belles Fêtes que Messeigneurs les Comtes de Tarouca & Don Loüis d’Acunha ont données en l’honneur de la naissance du Prince du

Bresil,” she refused to mention anything beyond the ‘merveilles’ because she claimed that the elite attendees wanted her to contain her reporting to superficial descriptions of the ‘beautiful’ and ‘magnificent.’410 Nonetheless, Du Noyer understood the galant festivities to be spaces for the mediation of peace and she alluded to the negotiations in her descriptions of the celebrations.411

The Fêtes Portugaises were just one of the many festivities that occurred in early 1713 during Carnaval. Du Noyer wrote, “On est si fort occupé de plaisir à Utrecht, qu’on n’y parle pas beaucoup d’affaires” and that “on eût dit qu’on n’avoit jamais fait autre chose à Utrecht que d’aller en Masque au Bal, & les Dames s’y sont très bien tirées d’affaire.”412 These fêtes galantes were prime opportunities for elite women to ‘shine’ with their beauty, talents, and charms, which

Mme Du Noyer memorialized in her descriptions and with her words of praise for the women.

Describing the masquerade portion of the Fêtes Portugaises, Du Noyer wrote that

les deux Demoiselles Skadé, filles du Tresorier General de la Province, ont beaucoup contribué au plaisir de ces charmantes Fêtes, & y ont beaucoup brillé, de même que quantité d’autres Dames dont la Ville d’Utrecht peut se faire honneur. Ce fut la fille du Baron d’Engelbrecht, Ministre du Roi de Suede, qui fit l’ouverture du Bal du Comte de Tarouca où toutes les Puissances feminines, c’est-à-dire les Dames de la premiere

410 Quintessence des Nouvelles, January 16, 1713, no. 5. “an exact report of what happened during the beautiful Celebration that Messeigneurs the Counts of Tarouca & Don Loüis d’Acunha threw in honor of the birth of the Prince of Brazil”; “beyond that, […], it seemed to us that their Excellencies did not wish for us to detail it.” 411 Du Noyer, Lettres historiques et galantes, XCIX, 6:451-3. For example, both Du Noyer and the woman in the provinces described how at one of the Count of Denhof’s parties, “We danced at his place until five in the morning” while “Mr. the Count of Sinzendorf retired to a corner of the Hall with the Abbé de Polignac, & they conversed for more than three hours face to face. Mylord Strafford had left the party at midnight to go and hold his at the Bishop of Bristol’s lodgings with the Ministers of Their High Powers. The Conference lasted until three in the morning, & the Barrier Treaty between Holland & Great Britain was settled there, & the Guarantee of Succession to that Crown in the House of Hanover was renewed.” She also recounted this in Quintessence des Nouvelles, February 6, 1713, no. 11. 412 Quintessence des Nouvelles, January 12, 1713, no. 4; January 16, 1713, no. 5. “One is so busy having fun in Utrecht that they do not talk much about business there”; “one had said that we had never done anything else in Utrecht than going masked to the Ball, & the Ladies got out of trouble well there.” 126 distinction, parurent avec éclat, & dans des habits somptueux. Elles furent regalées d’une manière convenable à leur rang, & à la magnificence de celui qui donnoit le regal, On peut voir une description de tout cela dans le suplement de la Gasette d’Utrecht, & nous n’en parlons que succintement, de peur de n’en pas parler assez juste, & de déranger les choses.413

Du Noyer’s citation of the Gazette d’Utrecht is significant as it reveals the limitations of her ability to access and accurately report on news that occurred within elite spaces. Unlike Du

Noyer, the woman in the provinces personally bears witness to the exploits of these women and serves to validate Du Noyer’s reporting. For example, discussing the Prussian ambassadresses

(the Countess of Denhof and Madame Markchalck), the woman in the provinces proclaims that

“Ces deux Dames font l’admiration du Congrès, & pourroient avec raison faire celle de tout l’Univers: car on n’a jamais rien vû de plus charmant” and cites the verses that Du Noyer had composed in honor of the women in the Quintessence to justify her claim.414 She insists to the woman in Paris “qu’il n’entre point de flaterie là-dedans. Je parle pour avoir vû; & l’on peut dire qu’il n’est rien de plus charmant que ces deux Dames là.”415 She likewise parrots Du Noyer’s favorable portraits of other women from the Quintessence, including the Countess of

Wartemberg and the Duchesse de St. Pierre.416

413 Quintessence des Nouvelles, January 16, 1713, no. 5. 414 Du Noyer, Lettres historiques et galantes, XCV, 6:221-223. “These two Ladies are the admiration of Congress, & could rightly be that of the whole Universe: for we have never seen anything more charming.” e.g., Quintessence des Nouvelles, October 31, 1712, no. 87. Du Noyer described a party “où la belle Madame Marschalck, Epouse de son Excellence Mr. Marschalck de Bieberstein brille, & fait l’admiration de tous ceux qui la voyent. Voici des vers qui out été faits, non pas à sa loüange, car on ne sçauroit jamais la louër assez; mais qui donnent une idée, quoi que très foible, du mérite de cette charmante Dame” / “where the beautiful Madame Marschalck, Wife of His Excellency Mr. Marschalck of Bieberstein shines, & is admired by all who see her. Here are some verses which have been written, not to her praise, for one would never know how to praise her enough; but which give an idea, although very weak, of the merit of this charming Lady.” 415 Du Noyer Lettres historiques et galantes, 6:223-4. “that no flattery enters into this. I speak for having seen; & one could say there is nothing more charming than these two Ladies.” 416 Du Noyer had dedicated the first and/or second volume of the Lettres historiques et galantes (depending on the edition) to the Count of Wartemberg. 127 Not only were the festivities spaces in which women shined, but organizers formulated them with women’s enjoyment in mind. During Carnaval, for example, the Congress’s attendees threw multiple fêtes each week as part of a series of parties inspired by the gâteau des rois. In the

Lettres historiques et galantes, the woman in the provinces details these entertainments in Letter

XCIX. When it was the Maréchal d’Huxelles’s turn to host, instead of choosing one woman to be his queen, he selected all of the eligible women.417 According to Du Noyer, Tarouca was also particularly attuned to women’s desires; the woman in the provinces remarks that he “fait de son mieux pour procurer de l’agrément à ces belles Dames” and that he threw “une Fête publique, que sa politesse l’engagea de donner aux Dames, parce qu’il s’aperçût que la Mascarade de Don

Louis d’Acunha leur avoit fait beaucoup de plaisir.”418 While Freschot made similar comments praising women’s talents in the Congress’s galanteries in his Histoire amoureuse et badine du

Congrès d’Utrecht, libertinism and debauchery reign supreme in his descriptions of the

Congress’s ‘vie amoureuse.’419 That Du Noyer suppressed these damaging representations of women within her accounts suggests her prioritization of women’s concerns and her female audience.

Despite her detailed descriptions, it is clear in the Quintessence that Du Noyer did not witness the celebrations first hand. Relaying information of the Fêtes Portugaises, she informed readers that “il doit y avoir eu hier Mascarade […] Quand nous saurons ce qui s’y sera passé, nous pourons en dire un mot” and she expressed with certainty that the Duchesse de St. Pierre must have attended the ball on the second night of the festivities, not because she had seen her

417 Ibid., XCXI, 6:487. 418 Ibid., XCV, 6:224; XCXI, 6:360-1. “does his best to please these beautiful Ladies”; “a public Party, that his politeness compelled him to give to the Ladies, because he noticed that the Masquerade of Don Louis d’Acunha gave them great pleasure.” 419 Freschot, Histoire amoureuse et badine…. 128 there, but because “[la duchesse] le promit Samedi passé à Monsg. le Comte de Tarouca […].”420

By contrast, the woman in the provinces details her attendance at the Fêtes Portugaises alongside the Duchesse de St. Pierre.421 She indicates that Mme Du Noyer too was in attendance at

Tarouca’s party, claiming that “Mr. le Comte de Tarouca voulut bien aussi que la personne qui fait la Quintessence fût spectatrice de cette Scene [la Comédie de la Femme Juge & Partie].”422

Beyond her frequent citation of the Quintessence, the woman in the provinces’s embellished descriptions allowed Du Noyer to inscribe herself as a participant in and witness to the events.

The Mariage précipité and the Consequences of Female Ambition

The anonymous correspondent in the Mémoires de M. Du Noyer provides an account of the festivities in Utrecht that differs significantly from those of Mme Du Noyer. In his version of events, a fictionalized version of Mme Du Noyer pays for her ambition with public humiliation.

The correspondent claimed that because she had so greatly offended the Portuguese plenipotentiaries with the panegyrics that she had composed to honor of the birth of the Prince of

Brazil,423 when she went to visit with them after having traveled to Utrecht so that she could report on the Carnavalesque festivities, they did not receive her; still, this ‘Mme Du Noyer’ persisted in her efforts and attended the celebrations.424 During the Fêtes Portugaises, the correspondent described her overindulgence in food and alcohol while she “a soigneusement

420 Du Noyer, Lettres historiques et galantes, XCXI, 6:360-1. “There must have been a Masquerade yesterday [...] When we know what will have happened there, we will be able to say a word about it”; “[The Duchess] promised it last Saturday to Monsg. the Count of Tarouca […].” 421 Ibid., XCVII, 6:340. 422 Ibid., 6:349. “Mr. the Count of Tarouca also wanted the person who makes the Quintessence to be a spectator of this Scene [the Comedy la Femme Juge & Partie].” 423 In addition to publishing several verses to honor the Prince of Brazil in the Quintessence, Mme Du Noyer also dedicated the seventh volume of the Lettres historiques et galantes to him. 424 Mémoires de M. Du Noyer, 205. 129 examiné le détail de tout ce qui s’y est passé pour en parer la Quintessence.”425 In his description of the third night of the festivities, ‘Madame du Noyer’ becomes synonymous with ‘La

Quintessence.’ The correspondent, for example, reported to M. Du Noyer that ‘La Quintessence’ drank a glass of a purgative liquor, became ill while dancing, and ‘infected’ the room with an odor so strong that the party’s attendees chased ‘La Quintessence’ from the fête and evacuated the room. He claimed that this incident was no accident and that Mme Du Noyer fell victim to a plot to humiliate her.426 One could read this episode as both an attempt to humiliate Du Noyer and as a metaphor of the effects that the ‘libelous’ claims that Du Noyer published in the

Quintessence had on elite society.

According to the correspondent, no sense of shame could restrict Du Noyer’s opportunism and ambitions. Even after having suffered repeated humiliations during the Fêtes

Portugaises, he claimed that she continued her manoeuvres to interact with influential characters during the Congress.427 Eventually, he claimed that Du Noyer’s maladroit attempts to interact with elites and gain patrons backfired and prevented her from realizing her goals. Despite her hopes to visit with other women, the correspondent claimed that Du Noyer’s negative reputation and outrageous behaviors made it so that most of the congress’s participants were unwilling to receive her.428 The only exception that the correspondent noted was the Countess of Dohnhof to

425 Ibid., 205-6. “carefully examined the detail of everything that happened there to adorn the Quintessence.” 426 Ibid., 205-209. 427 Ibid., 209-210. “Vous vous attendrez peut-être à voir partir le lendemain Madame du Noyer. Non, mon cher ami, c’étoit la veille des Rois, la plus grande partie des Ministres étoient venus chez Mylord Comte de Strafford; elle ne manqua pas d’y venir” / “You might expect to see Madame du Noyer leave the next day. No, my dear friend, it was the eve of the [day of] Kings, the greater part of the Ministers had come to see Mylord Count of Strafford; she did not fail to come there.” He described how Du Noyer embarrassed herself once more in the ‘chambre des Dames’ during this gathering, but again warned M. Du Noyer “Ne soyez pas assez téméraire de penser que cette seconde scene l’ait renovoyée à la Haye” / “Do not be rash enough to think that this second scene sent her back to The Hague” (210-11). 428 Ibid., 211-212. 130 whom ‘Mme Du Noyer’ presented verses and who gave Du Noyer “Une jolie tabatiere doublée d’une piece de quatre pistoles” as payment for the verses’ publication in the Quintessence.429

Despite this initial ‘success,’ the correspondent described Du Noyer’s multiple humiliations and missteps while visiting with the Countess of Dohnhof.430 The visit concluded when a secretary “alla se jetter aux pieds de Madame la Comtesse, lui fit une longue harangue en

Allemand; prononça souvent les noms de Thomasseau, d’Alikruk & Garmaat”—Du Noyer’s unflattering nicknames—and informed the Countess about the upcoming performance of the

Mariage précipité, the play that satirized Du Noyer’s efforts to marry her youngest daughter to a

German noble.431 The Mariage précipité soon dominated the conversation, but because she had never learned German, “[Mme Du Noyer] fut donc obligée de concentrer sa petite colere, prendre son petit bâton, enfiler son petit chemin vers son petit taudium, avec la petite & courte honte, & ne penser plus à revenir à l’Hôtel de Madame la Comtesse, qui lui fit dire par le même

Secrétaire, de ne se plus donner les petits soins de retourner chez elle,” marking the limitations of the bonds of their patron-client relationship.432

Risking social exile from the elite society to which she had worked so hard to gain entry, the fictionalized Mme Du Noyer attempts to prevent the play’s performance. Speaking to

Dohnhof’s secretary, she ‘feigns’ ignorance as to the motivations of the play’s author: “Quel sujet […] pourrois-je avoir donné à quelqu’un d’écrire contre moi? Je suis une femme de

429 Ibid. “A pretty snuffbox lined with a four-pistole piece.” 430 Ibid., 213. For example, he claimed that Du Noyer was going to tell the Prussian countess that “The gentlemen who had the honor of being at his table were hardly polite, and that the Nobility of France knew incomparably better how to live.” 431 Ibid. “went to throw himself at the feet of Madame la Comtesse, made her a long harangue in German; often pronounced the names of Thomasseau, Alikruk & Garmaat.” 432 Ibid., 214. “[Mme Du Noyer] was therefore obliged to concentrate her little anger, take her little stick, enter her little path towards her little hut, with little & short shame, & no longer think of returning to the Residence of Madame la Comtesse, who had her told by the same Secretary, not to take the pains to return.” 131 condition; j’ai eu autrefois un rang dans le monde, j’ai tout abandonné pour ma Religion, je n’ai jamais dit ni fait mal à personne, & graces à Dieu, je me repose sur ma conscience sans reproche, sur mon pouvoir & celui de mes amis.”433 In response, the secretary describes a conversation that he had with the author of the play, noting that even as a ‘friend’ coming to her defense, “Je n’ai pu cependant m’empêcher de rendre justice à l’Auteur. Il vous dépeint au naturel.”434

In a reversal of roles, this fictionalized Du Noyer becomes a ‘toy’ for the entertainment of the elites whom she had ‘disparaged’ in her publications. Though she claims “je me flatte d’un assez grand crédit dans les sept Provinces, pour qu’une femme comme moi ne soit point le jouet du Public,”435 she acknowledges the limits of her connections, noting “il s’agit ici de divertir à mes dépens ce grand nombre de Seigneurs qui sont ici. Si la Piece se trouve du goût de quelques- uns, je prévois malheureusement que mon crédit ne pourra point empêcher qu’on ne la joue chez eux.”436 Spectators’ enjoyment of the play overrides any arguments that Du Noyer could make to prevent her public humiliation. If one believes Freschot’s account, Du Noyer appealed to women on the basis of female solidarity “pour épargner cette honte a leur sexe,” but because her name did not explicitly appear in the play, “on ne crut pas devoir priver le public du plaisir de la voir representer, en épargnant a elle seule un peu de chagrin.”437

According to M. Du Noyer’s correspondent, ‘Mme Du Noyer’ wrote to various persons for support after returning to The Hague, but despite her delusion “que ses Lettres auroient

433 Ibid., 215. “Which subject [...] could I have given someone to write against me? I am a woman of standing; I once had standing in the world, I gave up everything for my Religion, I never said or hurt anyone, & thanks be to God, I rest on my conscience without reproach, on my power & that of my friends.” 434 Ibid., 217. “However, I could not help but do justice to the Author. He portrays you naturally.” 435 Ibid., 215. “I pride myself on having enough credit in the seven Provinces, so that a woman like me is not the plaything of the Public.” 436 Ibid., 217-8. “This is about entertaining at my expense so many Lords who are here. If the Play is to the liking of a few, I unfortunately foresee that my credit will not be able to prevent its performance in their homes.” 437 Freschot, Histoire amoureuse et badine…, 249-50. “to spare their sex from shame”; “no one believed it necessary to deprive the public of the pleasure of seeing it performed, saving to her alone a little grief.” 132 beaucoup de crédit auprès de ceux à qui elles les écrivit,” she was unable to find individuals who were willing to support her.438 He claimed that her in-person appeals to Huxelles and Mesnager were equally unsuccessful. In a request to Passionei, the fictional Mme Du Noyer justifies her desire to stop the play on the grounds that it defamed not only herself, but her husband, her family, and Catholicism.439 The correspondent claimed that this rhetorical strategy only succeeded in securing her a meeting with the count during which she purportedly used her religious identity as leverage, proposing that “si ses instantes prieres étoient exaucées, qu’une telle grace lui fût accordée, & sur-tout par les bontés du Ministre du S. Pere, cela seroit capable de lui faire changer, pour la cinquieme fois de Religion, & retourner au sein de l’Eglise.”440

Having exhausted her other options, she then appeals to the Duchesse de St. Pierre, who arranges a meeting between Du Noyer and the play’s Arlequin. Despite her praises for the Duc and Duchesse de St. Pierre, Arlequin, and his wife in the Quintessence and her begging to

Arlequin to spare her reputation, neither the Duchesse nor Arlequin are able or willing to do more to help Du Noyer’s cause. The Duchesse informs Du Noyer that “Nous sommes […] dans un Pays où je n’ai nulle autorité, je me ferois un plaisir de vous obliger. J’ai, comme vous l’avez souhaité, envoyé chercher Arlequin, je ne puis rien autre chose.”441 She reproaches Du Noyer’s behavior, suggesting that the anonymous author was justified in his lampooning of her and that

438 Mémoires de M. Du Noyer, 220-1. “That her Letters would have much credit from those to whom she wrote them.” 439 Ibid., 222-3. “Comédie diffamatoire contr’elle, contre son épous, & contre toute sa famille, qui est Catholique Romaine. Elle se flatte MONSEIGNEUR, que VOTRE EXCELLENCE ne souffrira jamais que l’on joue impunément des Catholiques Romains […]” / “Defamatory comedy against her, against her husband, & against all her family, who is Roman Catholic. She flatters herself MONSEIGNEUR, that YOUR EXCELLENCE will never tolerate that one performs Roman Catholics with impunity […].” 440 Ibid., 223-4. “if her immediate prayers were answered, that such a grace was granted to her, and especially by the kindness of the Minister of the Holy Father, that would be able to make her change her Religion for the fifth time, and return to the bosom of the Church.” 441 Ibid., 225-6. “We are […] in a region where I have no authority, I would be happy to oblige you. I, as you wished, sent for Arlequin, I can do nothing else.” 133 “Il court un bruit que vous avez très-mal parlé de l’Auteur dans vos mémoires; un chacun l’applaudit, & trouve sa vengeance digne d’un galant homme.”442

Despite this warning, ‘Mme Du Noyer’ continues to threaten Arlequin with her

Quintessence. The author(s) of the Mémoires de M. Du Noyer and the Lettres nouvelles depicted the Quintessence as a weapon at Mme Du Noyer’s disposal. In M. Du Noyer’s correspondent’s account, ‘Mme Du Noyer’ declares in response to the play: “[…] je ne puis m’imaginer qu’il y ait dans tout le monde un homme assez téméraire pour oser m’attaquer, Avez-vous lu hier la

Quintessence? Y avez-vous remarqué la tournure avec laquelle j’ai turlupiné ce Moine défroqué, qui a eu l’audace de rimailler contre moi? […] Que je sache donc une fois le nom de ce téméraire

Auteur Comique; il se ressentira de la cruelle vengeance que je lui prépare […].”443 The

Duchesse de St. Pierre is not the only woman whose voice Mme Du Noyer’s critics appropriated to reprimand her behavior. In the Lettres nouvelles, they turn Mme Du Noyer’s own character against her; Mme D.’s correspondent in Paris—clearly meant to be a version of the woman in

Paris in the Lettres historiques et galantes—chides her for having exposed their private correspondence to public scrutiny and expresses her fear of finding her name and story within

Mme D.’s works.444 The woman in Paris criticizes Mme D.’s use of libel within her reporting and the friendship between the women rapidly disintegrates over the four Lettres nouvelles.

442 Ibid., 225-6. “There is a rumor that you have spoken very badly about the Author in your memoirs; everyone applauded him, & finds his vengeance worthy of a galant man.” 443 Ibid., 218-9. “[…] I cannot imagine that there is in everyone a man reckless enough to dare to attack me, Did you read the Quintessence yesterday? Did you notice the turn of phrase with which I annoyed this defrocked Monk, who had the audacity to write doggerel against me? […] Once I know the name of this imprudent Comic Author; he will feel the cruel revenge that I am preparing for him […].” 444 Lettres Nouvelles, 5. “je tremblois à chaque feüille d’y trouver mon nom” / “I trembled at every leaf to find my name there”; Ibid., 147. “je tremble déja de voir mon Histoire sous la presse” / “I am already trembling from seeing my Story in the press.” 134 Despite the threat of “the Quintessence’s terror,” M. Du Noyer’s correspondent claimed that the actors performed the play due to public demand and that “jamais spectacle ne fut plus complet & plus applaudi. Un chacun y a reconnu son caractere. Ce ne fut, depuis le commencement jusqu’à la fin, qu’exclamations. […] depuis le Congrès que la Comédie se joue à

Utrecht, il ne s’y est jamais trouvé compagnie si nombreuse.”445 Despite Mme Du Noyer’s vows of vengeance,446 he claimed that due to its popularity, “Cette Piece est la conversation générale des assemblées. On n’entend parler d’autre chose dans tous les lieux publics” and that it was translated into other languages and performed by other companies.447 He sent M. Du Noyer a copy of the play that forms part of his Mémoires, further circulating and publicizing Mme Du

Noyer’s humiliation.

The printed play purports to have been “Mise au Théâtre par M * *, & représentée pour la premiere fois, par les Comédiens Italiens & François, le vingtieme Mars 1713, à Utrecht.”448

However, it is unclear whether this play was ever performed. Louis César de la Baume le Blanc,

Duc de la Vallière later described it as a “piece absurde & mal écrite, qui n’est connue que parce que c’est une satyre amere contre Madame du Noyer, qui par ses lettres a eu quelque réputation.”449 In the ‘Avis au lecteur,’ the author warned his readers, “Ne t’attends pas de voir

445 Les mémoires de M. Du Noyer, 220; 229-230. “never has a show been more attended & more applauded. Everyone recognized her character there. It was, from the beginning to the end, nothing but exclamations. […] the Comedy has played in Utrecht since the Congress, there has never been such a large company there.” 446 Ibid., 228. “I am a woman ruined of honor and reputation; but I will avenge myself.” 447 Ibid., 230. “This Play is the general conversation of the Assemblies. One does not hear anything else in all public places.” 448 Le Mariage précipité, Comédie En trois Actes, Mise au Théâtre par M**, & représentée pour la premiere fois, par les Comédiens Italiens & François, le vingtieme Mars 1713, à Utrecht (Utrecht: aux dépens de l’Auteur, 1713). 449 Louis César de la Baume le Blanc, Duc de la Vallière, Bibliothèque du théâtre françois depuis son origine: contenant un extrait de tous les ouvrages composés pour ce théâtre, depuis les mystères jusqu’aux pieces de Pierre Corneille, une liste chronologique de celles composées depuis cette dernière époque jusqu’à présent, avec deux tables alphabétiques, l’une des auteurs et l’autre des pieces (Dresden: Michel Groell, 1768), 3:312. “absurd & badly written piece, which is only known because it is a bitter satire against Madame du Noyer, who by her letters has had some reputation.” 135 Scarron, Moliere, Corneille, & tant de Grands ressuscités. Ne t’amuse point, non plus, à chercher les regles de la Comédie,” explaining that “la seule intention que j’ai eue a été de me réjouir.”450

The work tells the story of Madame Kurkila—an anagram of Alikruk and “a woman who is ambition itself”—and draws heavily from Mme Du Noyer’s trials with Cavalier and her daughter’s marriage to the false Count of Winterfelt.451 After Kurkila defames him in her periodical for his refusal to marry her daughter, the Cavalier-inspired character enacts his revenge by having a stable boy dress up as a Count de Wavrefelt and sending him to seduce

Kurkila and her daughter through his praises of her works and the prospect of making the daughter a Countess.

Kurkila’s work as the author of “La Gazette, Pasquinades, Lettres Galantes &

Historiques, les Mémoires de madame Kurkila, Satires & Turlupinades de la même main” is the primary reason behind the numerous humiliations that this character suffers to both her body and reputation throughout the play.452 Even the seller of Kurkila’s periodical reinforces the belief that her writings were nothing more than libelous ‘lies’ when he informs her that “Il en est de même de tout ce que vous dites & écrivez; vous forgez de jolis mensonges, vous déshonorez je ne sais combien d’honnêtes gens, & puis on vous l’a dit. Si vous continuez, vous aurez des affaires

[…].”453 The final scene in which those against whom Kurkila had written return for their revenge is the aggregated punishment for all of her past offences. They force her to delegitimize her authorial role through an admission that “Je suis une femme qui ne mets que ce que je reçois

450 Mémoires de M. Du Noyer, 235-6. “Do not expect to see Scarron, Moliere, Corneille, & so many resurrected Greats. Do not have fun looking for the rules of Comedy, either”; “the only intention I had was to rejoice.” 451 Ibid., 241. 452 Ibid., 341. “La Gazette, Pasquinades, Lettres Galantes & Historiques, Memoirs of Madame Kurkila, Satires & Distasteful Jokes by the same hand.” 453 Ibid., 292. “It is the same with everything you say & write; you forge pretty lies, dishonor I don’t know how many honest people, & then you have been told. If you continue, you will have problems […].” 136 dans mes lettres.”454 The final stage direction is for the characters to tear off her clothes so that

Arlequin is ‘en chemise’ while warning the audience—and Mme Du Noyer—that “Si Madame

Kurkila étoit une fois aussi bien gouspillé d’effet, comme elle le vient d’être en effigie, elle cesseroit bientôt ses pasquinades.”455

The critiques against Mme Du Noyer in the Mémoires de M. Du Noyer and the Lettres nouvelles are indicative of a greater issue than ‘libel,’ which, as already demonstrated, was a reductionist descriptor for Du Noyer’s journalistic works. Joan Dejean has described the relationship between the Mémoires de Madame Du Noyer and the Mémoires de M. Du Noyer as a ‘family docudrama’ that reflects larger debates on the issue of female notoriety and women’s personal freedom. She suggests that

The Mémoires de Madame Du Noyer defines female notoriety as the woman’s decision to challenge the State and its official religion in the person of the individual to whom they have delegated authority over her. The memoirs reveal important consequences for the French nation if notorious women are allowed to infiltrate Catholic families: the loss of capital (the narrator demands that her husband return her dowry, which she claims he is squandering) and the loss of children as loyal citizens. In his revenge, ‘Mr. Des Noyers’ becomes the spokesman for all those who fear the public cost of women’s personal freedom.456

Female ambition threatened the institutions of the state and the family. The anonymous author of

“An Account of Madam Du Noyer’s Person and Writings” suggested that although “Religion was what she pretended for so doing [leaving France],” in actuality,

her natural Inconstancy was the real Motive. She went to Holland with two Daughters and Money enough to have supported her honourably, if the desire of serving God in Spirit and in Truth, had been the sole Cause of her Flight: But her head continually running upon vast Undertakings, and filled with I know not what Ideas of Grandeur, she launch’d out into such profuse Expence, that instead of well settling her Daughters, when

454 Ibid., 358. “I am a woman who includes only what I receive in my letters.” 455 Ibid., 358-9. “If Madame Kurkila was once as well scolded, as she has just been in effigy, she would soon cease her pasquinades.” 456 Dejean, Tender Geographies, 147-8. 137 they were marriageable, she ruin’d their Reputation, and herself became a Prey to such as knew how to make Advantage of her weak side.457

In her Mémoires, Mme Du Noyer described M. Du Noyer as a cruel and ‘unnatural’ father, who abandoned his daughters through his refusals to accommodate Mme Du Noyer’s demands for financial support.458 Not unlike Mme de Blau, to defend and justify her actions,

Mme Du Noyer described the sacrifices that she had endured in her attempts to provide better lives for her daughters.459 She claimed to have consumed nothing but bread and water for an entire year of their exile “Pour la faire meilleure à [s]es enfans,”460 described herself as “une bonne Mére, qui avoit tout sacrifié pour la [sa fille] conduire dans la voye du Salut,”461 and claimed that she worked “from the morning until the evening” to provide for her youngest daughter after the eldest’s return to Paris.462 Du Noyer even framed her abandonment of her son in Paris as another of her maternal sacrifices so that her daughters could be free from the

Catholic convents in which their father had placed them.463 Unlike her own marriage arrangements, Du Noyer insisted “j’aimerois mieux mourir, que de forcer l’inclination de mes

Filles. Qu’elles m’avoient suivie volontairement lorsque j’étois sortie de France; & que je ne voulois pas les contraindre dans des choses aussi essencielles que celles où il s’agissoit du salut, ou du bonheur de la vie. Qu’ainsi je le priois de me dispenser d’interposer l’autorité de Mére,

457 “An Account of Madam Du Noyer’s Person and Writings” in Du Noyer, Letters from a lady at Paris, 1:1-2. 458 Du Noyer, Mémoires de Madame Du N**, 3:84-5. 459 Ibid., 2:248-9. This seems to be a common feature of Huguenot women’s escape narratives. See Carolyn Lougee Chappell, “‘The Pains I Took to Save My/His Family’: Escape Accounts by a Huguenot Mother and Daughter after the Revocation of the Edict of Nantes,” French Historical Studies 22, No. 1 (Winter 1999): 1-64 and her Facing the Revocation: Huguenot Families, Faith, and the King’s Will (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2016). 460 Du Noyer, Mémoires de Madame Du N**, 3:134. “To make it better for [her] children.” 461 Ibid., 3:45. “a good Mother, who had sacrificed everything to lead [her daughter] in the way of Salvation.” 462 Ibid., 5:393. 463 Ibid., 2:237. 138 puis que j’avois résolu de ne m’en pas servir.”464 She maintained that her daughters had willingly followed her and that all of the humiliations and sufferings that they endured had been by their choice.

Both the Mémoires de M. Du Noyer and the Lettres nouvelles employ the testimony of

Mme Du Noyer’s eldest daughter, Mme Constantin [Anne-Marguerite Du Noyer], to refute these claims and to depict Mme Du Noyer as an ‘unnatural’ mother, who had sacrificed her children’s wellbeing and reputations for her own ambitions. In her mémoire within the Mémoires de M. Du

Noyer, Constantin explained how her mother pressured her into her marriage with reassurances that “c’est un homme d’un âge avancé, il a du bien, c’est un homme de guerre, nous sommes dans un temps de la plus sanglante du monde, un boulet de canon ou un coup de mousquet t’en aura bientôt délivrée, tu seras une jeune veuve avec de bon argent comptant, il faut se marier une fois dans la vie par intérêt, & la seconde pour ses plaisirs.”465 Like the Mémoires de M. Du Noyer themselves,466 Constantin functions as a ‘key’ that exposes Mme Du Noyer’s dissimulations. In the Lettres nouvelles, the woman in Paris writes to Mme D., “Plus je lis vos Memoires, Madame,

& plus je trouve que lorsqu’il s’agit de vous faire honneur, vous savez parfaitement emprunter les masques que vous avez oubliez sur les noms pour en couvrir la verité, & que vous passez legrement sur ce qui ne seroit point à votre avantage. Nous les examinons souvent vôtre chere

464 Ibid., 3:216. “I would rather die, than force the inclination of my Daughters. That they had followed me voluntarily when I left France; & that I did not want to force them into things as essential as those where it was about salvation, or the happiness of life. Thus I beg him to excuse me from interposing maternal authority, since I have resolved not to use it.” 465 Mémoires de M. Du Noyer, 141-2. “he is a man of an advanced age, he has possessions, he is a man of war, we are in the bloodiest time of the world, a cannon ball or a musket shot will soon have delivered you from him, you will be a young widow with good money upfront, one must marry once in life for interest, and the second for pleasures.” 466 Ibid., 4. ‘Avis au lecteur’: “Servez-vous utilement de celui-ci, comme étant la clef pour pénétrer dans les Mémoires que Madame du Noyer, alliée d’un Moine défroqué, a jugé à propos de donner au Public; ainsi vous pourrez vous-même discerner le vrai d’avec le faux” / “Use this one usefully, as being the key to penetrate into the Memoirs that Madame du Noyer, ally of a defrocked monk, judged advisable to give to the Public; so you can discern the true from the false yourself.” 139 Fille & moi […].”467 ‘Constantin,’ through the woman in Paris’s letters, accuses her mother of rewriting events to protect her reputation and to present herself as a ‘good’ mother. She horrifyingly describes one of their visits with the Count of Dohna during which her mother became inebriated, encouraged her daughters to follow her example, and all three of them fell into unconsciousness. Constantin claimed that her account differed significantly from what Du

Noyer had described in her own writings and that “C’est une de ces avantures […] que ma Mere a pris un très-grand soins de deguiser, je ne puis vous rendre un compte exact de ce qui se passa depuis que j’eus perdu connoissance je vous dirai seulement, que par un bonheur extrême je me reveillai lors qu’un page se mettoit en devoir d’executer ce que j’aurois horreur de vous nommer.”468 The anonymous correspondent in the Mémoires de M. Du Noyer similarly accused

Mme Du Noyer of failing to protect her daughters’ honor and alleged that Mme Du Noyer had sold her younger daughter’s virginity to the Count of Dohna for the price of twenty-five pistoles.469

In Mme Du Noyer’s Mémoires, the Count of Dohna was simultaneously one of Du

Noyer’s most supportive patrons and the source of many of her misfortunes. While planning her second escape from France, she claimed that he had promised “de me bien servir dans mes desseins, d’emploier, pour me faire avoir une Pension, son crédit, & celui, de ses Amis; & en cas de mauvais succès, de partager même sa bourse avec moi, chose que je n’aurois eu garde d’accepter” and Du Noyer expressed gratitude for having found a well-connected patron and ‘a

467 Lettres nouvelles, 149. “The more I read your Memoires, Madame, & the more I find that when it comes to doing you honor, you know perfectly well how to borrow the masks that you have forgotten on the names to cover up the truth, and that you pass lightly on this which would not be to your advantage. We often examine them your dear Daughter & I […].” 468 Ibid., 149-150. “It is one of those adventures, your dear Daughter tells me, that my Mother has taken great care to disguise, I cannot give you an exact account of what happened after I lost consciousness, I will only tell you, out of extreme happiness I awoke when a page set about executing what I would hate to name to you.” 469 Mémoires de M. Du Noyer, 181. 140 good protector’ in foreign lands in which she had no credit.470 Arnelle wrote that certain individuals suspected that Du Noyer’s ‘true motivation’ for leaving France in 1701 was to “obéir aux secrètes instructions diplomatiques du comte de Dohna et de lui servir d’espionne.”471

However, Arnelle provided no references for this claim and there is no clear evidence of this in

Mme Du Noyer’s works. While Dohna’s protection had some utility, as Du Noyer foreshadowed,

“je n’aurois jamais pensé que sa protection & son amitié deussent faire un jour le plus grand de mes crimes, & causer mes plus grands chagrins.”472

When Dohna offered her eldest daughter a position within his wife’s entourage, Mme Du

Noyer asked him to instead arrange her daughter’s marriage. He complied and arranged for Mlle

Anne-Marguerite Du Noyer to marry Constantin, a cavalryman in the Allied army. Upon travelling to the Dutch Republic and meeting her daughter’s future husband, Du Noyer soon realized that Constantin was not at all as Dohna had purported him to be. One of her allies informed her that Constantin was decades older than he claimed, was a hypochondriac, and that

Dohna had arranged the marriage, not for the benefit of Du Noyer and her daughter, but as compensation for Constantin’s past service to him as a squire.473 Despite these revelations, Du

Noyer claimed that her daughter nonetheless chose to go through with the marriage to protect her reputation.474 The marriage ended disastrously with Constantin attempting to steal Mme Du

Noyer’s jewels, temporarily imprisoning her, and abandoning his wife. Mme Constantin

470 Du Noyer, Mémoires de Madame Du N**, 2:255. “To serve me well in my intentions, to employ, to get me a pension, his credit, & that of his Friends; & in case of bad success, to even share his resources with me, something I would have been careful about accepting.” 471 Du Noyer, Mémoires et Lettres Galantes, ed. Arnelle, 74. “to obey the secret diplomatic instructions of the Count of Dohna and to serve him as a spy.” 472 Du Noyer, Mémoires de Madame Du N**, 2:255. “I never would have thought that his protection & his friendship should one day make the greatest of my crimes, & cause my greatest sorrows.” 473 Ibid., 3:209. 474 Ibid. 141 eventually reunited with her father in Paris, where she entered a Catholic convent. Despite this,

Du Noyer still dedicated the first volume of her Mémoires to the Count of Dohna and both fictional women in the Lettres historiques et galantes lament his death; the woman in Paris writes, “je vous assure que j’ai pleuré le pauvre Comte de Dohna, que j’avois vû ici bien des fois,

& qui étoit un très joli homme. Nos ennemis perdent en lui un bon Général. […]. Je vous avouë que dans cette ocasion sa mort a été un rabat-joïe pour moi.”475

The fluidity of Mme Du Noyer’s religious identity combined with her convenient prioritization of self-interest over religion, the family, and state were further points of criticism against her. In her reading of Mme Du Noyer’s Mémoires, Reynolds-Cornell has suggested that

“Madame Du Noyer seems to have rationalized religion as a set of rules that were not necessarily linked to faith but were part of a socially useful convention.”476 During her first flight from

France in 1686, Reynolds-Cornell claims that in his letters to his niece, Cotton “expressed the opinion that Anne-Marguerite had only used religion as a pretext to leave, that she showed

‘neither a good nature, nor feelings of gratitude, piety or even religion,’ and that she had only left them to ‘be in high society.’”477 While Du Noyer maintained that religion was her justification for leaving France, her descriptions of her encounters with members of high society—including some Catholics—and her explicit attempts to forge powerful connections with both Protestants and Catholics during her exiles seem to support this observation.478

475 Du Noyer, Lettres historiques et galantes, XC, 6:21. “I assure you that I cried for the poor Count de Dohna, whom I had seen here many times, & who was a very attractive man. Our enemies lose in him a good General. […]. I confess to you that on this occasion his death was a killjoy for me.” 476 Reynolds-Cornell, Fiction and Reality, 58. 477 Ibid., 29. Her translations and emphasis from a 1739 edition of the Mémoires, no page number provided. I was unable to locate the original passage in the 1710 edition. 478 Du Noyer, Mémoires de Madame Du N**, Vol. 1. Although one should be suspicious of Du Noyer’s claims, Du Noyer described her attempts to find a position for herself in a German court using her connections with elite women like the Countess of Dohna, though her uncle forced her to depart before she could find a position in a foreign court (1:231). She also claimed to have socialized among elites in Geneva (1:231-2). She claimed that during 142 During her first exile, Du Noyer maintained contact with Cotton and Saporta. Cotton urged her to rejoin them in France, informing her that royal authorities had confiscated her property in Nîmes and threatening to disinherit her unless she complied with his will.479 Du

Noyer used the argument of religious conviction to justify her disobedience, but she eventually returned to Paris later that year after she claimed Cotton falsely informed her that Saporta was dying.480 Although she maintained that her family’s manipulation of her affections were the reason for her return, financial and social constraints may have been her ‘true’ motivation. In addition to Cotton’s threat of disinheritance and the seizure of her property by the French crown, she had overstayed her welcome with her aunt and uncle in The Hague and tensions between them impeded her attempts to forge connections and access elite society.

Upon her return, Du Noyer converted to Catholicism and married M. Du Noyer. She insisted that she did so against her will and only after having endured constant surveillance and a misery-inducing cloistering; she claimed that her conversion was inauthentic and that, internally, she retained her Protestant identity. The French refugee community nonetheless viewed her return to France and her marriage as betrayals. The Mémoires were in part an attempt by Du

Noyer to justify her actions to French refugees, to correct their assumptions, and to reassure them of her Protestant loyalty. Her desire for reacceptance by the French refugee community in The

Hague likewise influenced her decision to seek protection in Holland during her second exile.481

a sojourn in Würtemberg en route to The Hague, she was offered a position within the court, but opted to continue on her journey (1:262-3). 479 Ibid., 1:285. 480 Ibid., 1:296. 481 Ibid., 1:390-1. For example, she describes her interactions with a Mme de Conte, a Protestant woman whom Du Noyer convinced to aid in her escape plot; Du Noyer wrote that “Elle m’avoit blâmée au commencement: mais depuis que je lui avois fait voir les Lettres que mon Oncle C** & Madame S** m’avoient écrites, elle trouvoit que j’étois fort excusable, & me plaignoit beaucoup” / “She had blamed me at the beginning: but since I had shown her the Letters which my Uncle C** & Madame S** had written to me, she found that I was very excusable, & pitied me very much.” “Ce qui me déterminoit pour la Hollande, c’est que je croiois devoir réparer par mon retour le 143 However, according to her Mémoires, she nonetheless remained at odds with her fellow French refugees not only in The Hague, but in London as well.482 While Mme Du Noyer insisted that she remained loyal to the Protestant cause, in his Mémoires, ‘M. Du Noyer’ asserted, “je dois dire & avouer à sa louange, que depuis la Dragonade, jamais nouvelle convertie n’a été plus exacte aux devoirs de l’Eglise Romaine, qu’elle affecte tant d’avoir en horreur.”483 That Mme Du

Noyer dedicated some of her works to and published verses in honor of elite Catholics lends further credence to the idea that Mme Du Noyer’s religious loyalties were, in at least certain respects, situationally dependent and socially motivated.

In the Lettres nouvelles, the woman in Paris facetiously comments, “Il semble même que vous n’avez pas eu sujet de vous louër des personnes de vôtre Nation & Religion. Je m’étonne fort qu’une personne de vôtre merite n’aye pas fait plus d’impression sur leurs esprits; ils auront

été sans doute jaloux de vos belles qualitez […].”484 Not only did Mme Du Noyer unsuccessfully petition for pensions from the Grand Pensionary in Holland and from William III and Anne in

England “pour faire subsister [s]es jeunes Proselites,”485 but many of the verses and dedications that she published in her works were intended for foreign recipients with loyalties to enemies of

France. She dedicated the first edition of her Mémoires to: the Count of Dohna (Vol. 1), Henri de

Massue, Marquis de Ruvigny (Vol. 3), John Churchill Duke of Marlborough (Vol. 4), and the

scandale que j’y avois donné autrefois, en m’en allant en France, quoi que ce n’eût pas été dans de mauvaises intentions […]” / “What determined me for Holland was that I believed I had to repair by my return the scandal that I had given there in the past, by going to France, although it was not with bad intentions […]” (Ibid., 2:299). 482 Ibid. At the beginning of the fourth volume of her Mémoires, Du Noyer claimed that French refugees sabotaged her efforts to secure a pension, ridiculed her, and spoke ill of her to her daughters which led to Constantin’s return to Paris. Du Noyer insisted that they were jealous of her ability to attract the attention of elites. 483 Mémoires de M. Du Noyer, 47-8. “I must say & confess to her praise, that since the Dragonnade no new convert has been more exact in the duties of the Roman Church, that she feigns to loathe so much.” 484 Lettres Nouvelles, 6. “It even seems that you did not have reason to praise yourself with people of your own Nation & Religion. I am very surprised that someone of your merit has not made a greater impression on their minds; they will no doubt have been jealous of your fine qualities […].” 485 Du Noyer, Mémoires de Madame Du N**, 2:316. “to support [her] young Proselytes.” 144 Marquis de Pascale (Vol. 5). While the second volume of the 1710-edition of the Mémoires has no dedication, Du Noyer dedicated the second volume of the second edition (1711) to Armand de

Bourbon, Marquis de Miremont, whom she acknowledged as a supporter of her uncle Cotton and

French Protestants.486 She also dedicated several volumes of her Lettres historiques et galantes to influential non-French characters, including Baron de Chalesac/Bogislas de Kameke, chamberlain to the Prussian king (Vol. 1, 4th ed., 1714), Prince Eugene of Savoy (Vol. 4, 1711), the Viscount Bolingbroke (Vol. 6, 1713), and Don Emanuel, Infant of Portugal (Vol. 7, 1718).487

Her dedication to the Marquis de Pascale in the fifth volume of the Mémoires is noteworthy because of his position as a minister to Louis XIV. In the dedication, she alluded to the support that she had received from him during her trials with Cavalier and Winterfelt, questioning, “Que serois-je devenuë sans Votre secours, MONSEIGNEUR, lors qu’après avoir

été trompée de la plus cruelle maniére du monde, je me trouvois sans argent & sans appui dans une Terre Etrangére [Bruxelles], livrée à mes plus cruels ennemis, & sans espérance de pouvoir

échapper aux desseins qu’ils avoient formez, & même tenté d’éxecuter contre mes jours?”488

Within the content of the fifth volume of the Mémoires, she claimed that without his support, “je n’aurois jamais pu me tirer de ce gouffre de malheurs, & que j’aurois péri dans ce coupe-gorge où St. Pierre auroit pû venir se joindre à Bavons & nous assassiner […].”489 In the supplement to the Mémoires, Du Noyer also claimed that Cavalier had sabotaged her ability to meet with Louis

486 Du Noyer, Mémoires, 2nd ed., 2:2-5. 487 Some of the dedications change between the editions published during and after her lifetime. Many later editions of the Lettres historiques et galantes omit the dedications. 488 Ibid., 5:n.p. “What would I have become without Your help, MONSEIGNEUR, when after having been deceived in the cruellest manner in the world, I found myself without money & without support in a Foreign Land [Brussels], delivered to my cruelest enemies, & without hope of being able to escape the intentions that they had formed, & even tried to execute against my days?” 489 Ibid., 5:364. “I could never have pulled myself out of this abyss of misfortune, & that I would have perished in this murderous area where St. Pierre could have come to join in Bavons & assassinate us […].” 145 François Henri Colbert de Croissy, brother to the Marquis de Torcy, “qui avoit grande envie de

[la] voir.”490 She included a copy of a letter that she purported to have received from Croissy, dated December 24, 1708, in which he volunteered to appeal to his brother on her behalf should she need it.491 Certainly, one should question the veracity of these claims, but they nonetheless suggest that Mme Du Noyer maintained at least an opportunistic sense of loyalty to, admiration for, and desire for recognition from members of the French nobility.

Du Noyer also expressed Anglophilic tendencies in her work. Beyond her appeals for a pension and her eloges to Queen Anne as an ‘arbiter of peace and war’ and ally of French

Protestants,492 Du Noyer provided detailed descriptions of her time in England, including descriptions of Westminster, the habits of English royalty that she observed during her return from her first exile, and Queen Anne’s coronation, which she claimed she and her daughters had attended. In the Quintessence, she justified her “Vœux de la Quintessence pour Sa Majesté le Roi de la Grande-Bretagne, George premier,” suggesting that “ne sera-t-il point permis à la

Quintessence de lui présenter son hommage comme Angloise naturalisée, comme Hollandoise par une longue habitation en Hollande, & comme très zèlée pour un Monarque que le Ciel a orné de tant de vertus, & qu’il a fait naître pour le soutien des Loix & de la Religion.”493 Although Du

Noyer wrote this about ‘la Quintessence,’ this description could easily apply to Du Noyer herself. The woman in the provinces describes her successes, noting that “Ses souhaits [ceux de

Mme Du Noyer] furent éxaucez; le Roi lui fit l’honneur de s’entretenir souvent avec elle; & pour marque de sa bienveillance, l’honora du don de sa Médaille en or. Une aussi précieuse faveur

490 Ibid., 5:450. “who had a great desire to see [her].” 491 Ibid., 5:452. “However, if my Brother can be of any use to you, I will be very happy to help you near him […].” 492 Du Noyer, Lettres historiques et galantes, XCIX, 6:503. 493 Quintessence des Nouvelles, September 10, 1714, no. 71. 146 excita d’abord l’envie de tous ses compatriotes […].”494 She describes a similar instance during which the Princess of Wales accepted Du Noyer’s panegyric and, like the king, gifted her a gold medallion in return.495 In 1715, one of Du Noyer’s ‘correspondents’ from London commented,

“Je n’ai jamais douté de votre zéle pour notre Auguste Monarque, & je le vois briller avec plaisir dans vos Ouvrages.”496 Du Noyer’s appeals to and admiration for foreign monarchs and officials within her journalistic works could be symptomatic of the events upon which she reported and not her actual sentiments. Nonetheless, they demonstrate the flexibility of her loyalties, especially as it pertained to her native France.

Mme Du Noyer’s publications only provide limited insight into her ambitions, impacts, and successes. One would need to look beyond the works of Mme Du Noyer and her critics to gain better insight into these areas. While Mme Du Noyer’s Mémoires provide background information regarding her self-representations, her social stations, the constraints that she faced, and the strategies that she used to subvert them, they only address her life through 1710. In her journalistic works that appeared from 1710 until her death, her use of depersonalized narrative forms and adoption of literary masks obscure her authorial figure and dissimulate her ‘true’ sentiments. Extrapolating potential patterns of behavior from her Mémoires and cross-reading her works against the Mémoires de M. Du Noyer, the Mariage précipité, and the Lettres nouvelles, nonetheless suggest that the instability of her religious identity and political loyalties combined with her subversion of gender norms as a woman who abandoned her family and

‘went public’ exasperated her contemporaries’ anxieties, made her a victim of public ridicule,

494 Du Noyer, Lettres historiques et galantes, CVIII, 7:322-328. 495 Ibid., 7:361-364. 496 Quintessence des Nouvelles, November 21, 1715, no. 93. 147 negatively impacted her ability to forge influential connections, and led to her lasting reputation as a ‘notorious’ woman who slandered elites in her works. While Du Noyer attempted to access aristocratic patronage networks through her participation in the literary public sphere, it would be difficult to determine whether or not she was successful in her efforts. Satirical works like the

Mémoirs de M. Du Noyer and the Lettres nouvelles ridiculed her efforts to access aristocratic spheres of influence, but one should not take these works as fact. Still, based on her works, it appears that despite her clear understanding that influential connections equated to social and political power, unlike Mme de Blau, Mme Du Noyer was limited in her ability to acquire such connections and access elite spheres of patronage.

However, Du Noyer’s seemingly unrestricted mobility, ability to free herself from her family, and freedom of stylistic literary form in her works suggest that she was somewhat successful in liberating herself from gendered constraints that regulated women’s behaviors.

Although she never renounced her French identity, as a non-state actor who expressed criticisms against the French crown and praised their enemies, she and her writings threatened French interests in the arena of public opinion. Because she operated in exile in The Hague, her texts would likely have been difficult for French officials to censor. These freedoms made her a threat to the family, church, and state, which explains her critics’ attempts to humiliate and delegitimize her through their dismissals of her journalistic and historical writings and their emphasis on her ‘outrageous’ behaviors, personal ambitions, and dissimulations.

148 CONCLUSION

In their attempts to use diplomacy to negotiate their status and benefits, both Mme de

Blau and Mme Du Noyer discursively manipulated their representations of events and self. In their accounts, they and their allies constructed alternative histories in which the women were key participants in the negotiations. In their self-fashionings, both women represented themselves in ways that dissimulated their loyalties, motivations, and sentiments in order to give the appearance of their adherence to the limits of their gender and social status. Yet, Mme Du

Noyer became ‘notorious’ for her actions and personal life, whereas scholars have largely ignored Mme de Blau.

To explain why the women had drastically different outcomes in terms of their ability to

‘achieve’ their personal goals and establish the legacies that they desired, one should acknowledge the generic differences between the sets of documents that contain each woman’s story and how genre influenced the discursive strategies that the women employed in their accounts and the ways that scholars have studied them. The Fonds Blau is a curated ‘private’ collection intended to showcase Mme de Blau and her descendants’ service to the French monarchy in order to appeal to patrons and to justify the continuation of Mme de Blau’s royal pension across several generations of her family. Mme de Blau’s accounts were restricted to the formulaic structure of royal appeals and intentionally obscured her Dutch identity, Protestant ties, and potential intra-familial conflict. While Mme de Blau needed to reveal her dissimulations and secrets in order to be compensated, she did so within the confines of the elite society to which she already belonged. As previously stated, anachronistic divisions between the public and the private posed numerous historiographical issues in the study of women and diplomacy since many women’s diplomatic actions occurred within the ‘private’ spheres of the family and

149 personal relationships. By focusing on ‘public’ diplomatic acts, historians obscured these

‘private’ interventions that were equally significant. The structure of the archives further contributed to women’s exclusion from diplomatic history; although the Fonds Blau contains documents related to Mme de Blau’s diplomatic mission, the collection’s ‘private’ status severs it from ‘official’ diplomatic archival documents.

Mme Du Noyer, by contrast, highlighted and exploited her liminal identities through her use of French Catholic noblewomen as narrators in the Nouveau Mercure Galant and the Lettres historiques et galantes. Her multi-layered fictionalizations and wearing of literary ‘disguises’ within her works dissimulated her ‘authentic’ sentiments and convoluted her constructions of self; not only did this entice readers and allowed her to report on subjects from which her social status excluded her, but it gave her protection to express her concerns as a French Protestant and to appeal to influential figures serving enemy states. However, by ‘going public’ with her misfortunes in an attempt to justify her actions and redeem her reputation, Du Noyer also invited her contemporaries’ mockery and, if one believes her critics, she counterproductively alienated herself from the social spheres to which she desperately wanted access. Women could exercise considerable political and diplomatic power so long as their influence remained secret or private.

By ‘going public,’ Mme Du Noyer transgressed the limits of social acceptability for a woman of her status.

When Du Noyer’s successor, Jean Rousset de Missy, announced her death in the

Quintessence, he advised readers to

Faire l’Eloge de cette Dame, que ses malheurs, autant que son Esprit, ont renduë célébre, c’est lui rendre ce qu’elle a gracieusement accordé à tant de Personnes que leur mérite, leurs vertus, l’éclat de leurs actions avoient dans la Société. Quatre traits, qui se trouvent rarement réunis dans une même personne, sont tout son portrait, je veux dire une

150 naissance distinguée jointe à un grand atachement à sa Religion: Un esprit au dessus de son sexe, qui a brillé au milieu d’une longue & continuelle adversité.497

However, this characterization of Du Noyer was contentious. Du Noyer’s contemporaries dismissed her ‘panegyrics’ as dangerous libel and her “great attachment to her religion” is another point of dispute. Her religious inconsistencies combined with her lack of discernment in her appeals to potential patrons limited her capacity for self-advancement and alienated her from

French refugee communities in London and The Hague. During her second exile, she described how French refugees treated her with derision, socially excluded her, spread rumors about her and her daughters, and sabotaged her patronage attempts because of her past conversion to

Catholicism. They accused her of being a bad mother for allowing her daughters to drink coffee and jump rope; they also accused Du Noyer and her daughters of engaging in sexually deviant behaviors. Du Noyer claimed that her interactions with aristocrats fueled the jealousy of her fellow refugees and furthered the chasm between them. Instead of being the asset that it was for

Blau, Du Noyer’s purported connections further ostracized her from her compatriots and coreligionists. For example, she claimed that French refugees in London circulated rumors accusing her of maintaining ties in France and of having inappropriate relations with a Catholic

Spanish ambassador.498 The Mémoires de M. Du Noyer likewise claimed that she had ‘allied’ herself with a ‘defrocked monk.’ In these Mémoires, ‘Mme Constantin’ furthermore attempted to delegitimize her mother’s authorial role by accusing her of writing collaboratively with this

497 Quintessence des Nouvelles, June 1, 1719, no. 44. “To praise this Lady, whose misfortunes, as much as her intellect, have made famous, is to return to her what she has graciously granted to so many People that their merit, their virtues, the brilliance of their actions had in the society. Four features, which are rarely found united in the same person, are her whole portrait, I mean a distinguished birth combined with a great attachment to her Religion: A spirit above her sex, that shone in the middle of a long & continual adversity.” 498 Du Noyer, Mémoires de Madame Du N**, 3:53-58. 151 ‘defrocked monk.’499 Not only did these rumors serve to alienate Mme Du Noyer from Protestant refugee communities and patrons, but they also had the potential to further distance her from

Catholics as well.

Although Mme Du Noyer attempted to represent herself as having been born into a family with noble ties,500 her ‘distinguished birth’ is questionable. She was born into a bourgeois

Protestant family and did not have access to the familial influence or connections that Blau did.

Moreover, Du Noyer did not grow up within aristocratic cultures, which helps to explain her humiliating missteps in her appeals to elite patrons, if one believes the Mémoires de M. Du

Noyer. Beyond her family’s limited influence, Mme Du Noyer’s loyalty to her family was tenuous as showcased by her descriptions of her abandonment of her maternal aunt and uncle when she escaped France in 1687, her repeated dismissals of their requests for her to return to

France, her abandonment of her paternal aunt and uncle in The Hague when she eventually returned to Paris, and her other escape attempts. Unlike Mme de Blau whose power stemmed from her influential lineage and familial connections, in her Mémoires, Du Noyer described her family as frequent antagonists and obstacles to her maneuvers. She alleged that her various relatives verbally poisoned her father against her on his deathbed,501 impeded her attempts to socialize and secure elite patronage during her first exile in the Dutch Republic, coerced her into returning to France, and pressured her into converting to Catholicism and marrying M. Du

499 Mémoires de M. Du Noyer, 139. “Ce même Moine défroqué ne manquoit pas un jour à venir chez nous, ma mere & lui composoient ces Mémoires ou du moins lui; il y donnoit ce tour d’Auteur auquel elle n’étoit point encore stylée” / “This same defrocked monk did not miss a day to come to our place, my mother and he composed these Memoirs or at least he [did]; he gave it that Authorial style in which she was not yet skilled.” 500 Du Noyer, Mémoires de Madame Du N**, 1:1-2. She described her father as “un bon Gentilhomme de ce païs-là [Nîmes]” / “a good Gentleman of that region [Nîmes]” and attempted to associate her bourgeois mother with nobility, writing that she “qui étoit de même nom & de même famille que ce fameux Confesseur d’Henri IV, dont le Neveu rempli aujourd’hui la place auprès de Louis XIV” / “Who was of the same name & of the same family as this famous Confessor of Henri IV, whose nephew now fills the place near Louis XIV.” 501 Ibid., 1:70-5. 152 Noyer. She claimed that during her second exile, her relatives sabotaged her attempts to acquire a pension in England, spread rumors about her within the French refugee community, and spoke ill of her to her daughters, among other personal attacks.

Du Noyer’s most threatening defiance of the institution of the family was perhaps her

‘theft’ of her daughters from her husband, her abandonment of her son, and her deliberate sacrifice of her daughters’ reputations in the hope of securing power and influence for herself through their marriages. Although Mme Du Noyer wrote against these accusations and attempted to justify her behavior in her works by emphasizing the sacrifices that she had made as a mother and the ‘continual adversity’ that she had endured as a Protestant woman, the outrageous behaviors that she and her critics described were perhaps more impactful than her discourse. The

Mémoires de M. Du Noyer and the Lettres Nouvelles further challenge Mme Du Noyer’s claims through their appropriation of the voices of M. Du Noyer, Mme Constantin, and the character of woman in Paris to expose the ‘truth’ behind Mme Du Noyer’s disreputable actions and to paint her as an unscrupulous wife, mother, and societal menace. As a letter from M. Du Noyer that

Mme Du Noyer included in her Mémoires reads, “Mais quand on quitte son Mari, on est capable de tout.”502 Du Noyer’s apparent prioritization of her personal ambitions at the expense of her political, religious, and familial loyalties and obligations made her dangerous. As a woman who could abandon her husband and sacrifice her children, Mme Du Noyer had proven the

‘unacceptable’ lengths to which she could and would go to achieve her personal goals.

Mme de Blau too became estranged from her husband and cited her maternal sacrifices in her royal petitions, but unlike Du Noyer, Blau had the support of influential allies and collaborators who corroborated her claims. Although she also converted to Catholicism while in

502 Ibid., 3:64. “But when someone leaves their husband, they are capable of everything.” 153 France, unlike Mme Du Noyer, her conversion was apparently more lasting and her allies attested to its authenticity.503 Mme de Blau’s personal connections are key to understanding the social power that she wielded and her moderately successful efforts to recover her pension and find placements for her children. By contrast, Mme Du Noyer rejected and undermined those around her; her interests conflicted with those of her family and the French refugees with whom she interacted. In the fourth volume of her Mémoires, she explained her withdrawal from society while in The Hague, writing, “Comme je commençois à connoître la mauvaise foi que régne dans le monde, je m’en retirois entiérement. Je ne voyois presque personne: je ne sortois que pour aller à l’Eglise […].”504 In a society in which connections equated to power and protection, her self-isolation was a poor political strategy. Despite Du Noyer’s numerous appeals and self- reported encounters with elite characters, it seems that her patronage appeals were not nearly as efficacious as Blau’s and that she did not enjoy the protection of many allies. While her liminal positions had the potential to be advantageous, Du Noyer’s inconsistencies in her self- fashionings were polarizing and alienated her from potential supporters across the communities to which she belonged.

Unlike Du Noyer’s disingenuousness expressions, resistance against social norms, and potential role as a non-state diplomatic actor who threatened French diplomacy with libelous propaganda, Mme de Blau’s dissimulations and actions during her mission were sanctioned by

Louis XIV’s will. However, although her intermediary status between France and Holland granted her opportunities to cultivate relationships with powerful individuals during her mission, like Du Noyer, it also made her a potential risk to the French state as evidenced by Colbert de

503 Cerveau, Nécrologe des plus célèbres défenseurs et confesseurs de la vérité du dix-huitième siècle, 212-3. 504 Du Noyer, Mémoires de Madame Du N**, 4:4. “As I began to know the bad faith that reigns in the world, I completely withdrew from it. I hardly saw anyone: I only went out to go to Church […].” 154 Torcy and Maurepas’s misgivings over her motives and the restrictions that they imposed on her mobility. To avoid arousing suspicions, both women needed to negotiate the tensions between their personal ambitions and gendered social expectations; they needed to consistently represent themselves in ways that did not portray their actions and motivations as risks to the institutions of the family and the French state. Although it may seem like Mme de Blau was able to more effectively represent herself in these ways when compared to Mme Du Noyer because of her

‘successes,’ one should recall that generic conventions restricted her accounts, that her

‘successes’ were limited, and that Blau remained firmly within the confines of aristocratic society. By contrast, Mme Du Noyer’s frequent unregulated travel—both real and fictional through her writings—, her subversions against French officials, and her use of fictionalization in her popular works that permitted her to discursively elevate her status, access elite social spheres, and critique monarchical authority from behind a multi-layered veil of literary disguises seem to suggest that she wielded considerable freedoms—or that she was at least able to represent herself as such. However, Du Noyer’s unregulated behaviors, dissimulations, and

‘going public’ with aristocratic secrets provoked her contemporaries’ anxieties and led to her critics’ attempts to delegitimize her writings. This both contributed to her exclusion from diplomatic history and negatively impacted her legacy in literary history. Certainly, both Blau and Du Noyer had considerable latitude in their abilities to act as mediators of information, to use their diplomatic roles as an opportunity for self-advancement, and to travel as independent women; however, their obligations to their families, the state, and their status as women still constrained Blau and Du Noyer and limited their ability to act on their personal ambitions.

155 While this thesis has attempted to draw attention to Mmes de Blau and Du Noyer within the context of diplomatic history, it only provides a limited Francocentric perspective of their stories. Further research is needed on the reception of their writings in order to more comprehensively evaluate the women’s diplomatic roles and their ability to use their diplomatic contributions to elevate their personal statuses, particularly in the case of Mme Du Noyer. Dutch archival sources might also help to elucidate Mme de Blau’s early life and familial connections in Holland to provide an alternative narrative to the Fonds Blau. Although comparison of the two case studies can only provide limited insight into women’s roles in Franco-Dutch diplomacy during the War of the Spanish Succession, it nonetheless suggests the utility of comparing individual women across categories and highlights the numerous intersections between the public and the private, secrecy and publicity, and formal and informal influence in Blau and Du

Noyer’s stories and in the ways that they represented themselves and their actions. One might attempt to further explore these issues and the thematic similarities between the women’s discursive strategies within the broader contexts of women and diplomacy and women’s possibilities for self-advancement in early modern France.

156 BIBLIOGRAPHY

Primary Sources Archival Fonds Blau, 25 AP/1. Archives nationales, Pierrefitte-sur-Seine, France.

Print Aulnoy, Marie-Catherine Le Jumel de Barneville, comtesse d’. Mémoires de la Cour d’Espagne. 2 vols. Pairs: Claude Barbin, 1690.

———. Travels into Spain. Edited by R. Foulché-Delbosc. London and New York: Routledge, 2014 [1930].

Bernard, Jacques. Review of Lettres Historiques & Galantes par Madame de C*** Ouvrage curieux, in Nouvelles de la République des Lettres Mois de Juillet 1708, 103-5. Amsterdam: Pierre Mortier, 1708.

———. Review of Mémoires de Madame Du N**. Écrits par Elle-même., Nouvelles de la République des Lettres (December 1709): Article V. In Nouvelles de la république des lettres mois de juillet à décembre 1709. Vol. 33, 681-688.

Callières, François de. Letters (1694-1700) of François de Callières to the Marquise d’Huxelles. Edited by Laurence Pope. Lewiston, Queenston, Lampeter: The Edwin Mellen Press, 2004.

Dictionnaire de l’Académie françoise. 2 vols. Paris: Veuve de Jean Baptiste Coignard and Jean Baptiste Coignard, 1694.

Du Noyer, Anne-Marguerite Petit. Letters from a lady at Paris to a lady at Avignon containing a particular account of the city, the politicks, intrigues, gallantry, and secret history of persons of the first quality in France. Written by Madam Du Noyer. The second edition. To which is Added, An Account of the Author's Person and Writings. 2nd ed. 2 vols. London: W. Mears and J. Browne, 1716.

———. Lettres historiques et galantes par Madame de C***. Ouvrage curieux. Vol. 3. Cologne [The Hague]: Pierre Marteau [Husson], 1710.

———. Lettres historiques et galantes par Madame de C***. Ouvrage curieux. Vol. 4. Cologne [The Hague]: Pierre Marteau [Husson], 1711.

———. Lettres historiques et galantes par Madame de C***. Ouvrage curieux. Vol. 5. Cologne [The Hague]: Pierre Marteau [Husson], 1712.

———. Lettres historiques et galantes par Madame de C***. Ouvrage curieux. 4th ed. Vol. 1. Cologne [The Hague]: Pierre Marteau [Husson], 1714.

157 ———. Lettres historiques et galantes de deux dames de condition dont l’une était à Paris et l’autre en Province. Edited by Nancy O’Connor. Rennes: Presses universitaires de Rennes, 2012.

———. Lettres historiques et galantes, de deux Dames de Condition, dont l’une étoit à Paris, & l’autre en Province. Où l’on voit tout ce qui s’est passé de plus particulier, depuis le commencement du Siécle jusques à present; la Relation du Congrès d’Utrecht; les Harangues des Seigneurs & Officiers du Parlement. 5 vols. Cologne [The Hague]: Pierre Marteau [Husson], 1718.

———. Lettres historiques et galantes, de deux Dames de Condition, dont l’une étoit à Paris, & l’autre en Province. Où l’on voit tout ce qui s’est passé de plus particulier, depuis le commencement du Siécle jusques à present; la Relation du Congrès d’Utrecht; les Harangues des Seigneurs & Officiers du Parlement. 5 vols. Cologne [The Hague]: Pierre Marteau [Husson], 1733.

———. Lettres historiques et galantes, de deux Dames de Condition, dont l’une étoit à Paris, & l’autre en Province. Par Madame de C***. Ouvrage Curieux. Vol. 7. Cologne [The Hague]: Pierre Marteau [Husson], 1718.

———. Lettres historiques et galantes, de deux Dames de Condition, dont l’une étoit à Paris, & l’autre en Province. Par Madame de C***. Ouvrage Curieux. Où l’on trouve les Plans & la Description de la Ville d’Utrecht; une Rélation de ce qui s’y est passé de plus particulier pendant la tenuë du Congrès; avec les Armes de tous les Ambassadeurs. Vol. 6. Cologne [The Hague]: Pierre Marteau [Husson], 1713.

———. Lettres historiques et galantes, par Madame Du Noyer, Ouvrage Curieux. Nouvelle Édition corrigée, & augmentée de plusieurs Lettres très-interessantes. Paris and Avignon: François Seguin, 1790. 11 vols. [Vols. 10-11 are the Mémoires de Monsieur Du Noyer, Écrits par lui-même., Le Mariage Précipité, comédie en trois actes, Mise au Théâtre par M**, & représentée pour la premiere fois, par les Comédiens Italiens & François, le vingtieme Mars 1713, à Utrecht, and the Mémoires de Madame Du Noyer, Ecrits par elle-même].

———. Mémoires de Madame Du N**. Écrits par Elle-même. 5 vols. Cologne [The Hague]: Pierre Marteau [Husson], 1710.

———. Mémoires de Madame Du N**. Écrits par Elle-même. 2nd edition. Vol. 1. Cologne [The Hague]: Pierre Marteau [Husson], 1711.

———. Mémoires et Lettres Galantes de Madame du Noyer (1663-1720). Edited by Arnelle [Mme de Clauzade]. Paris: Louis Michaud, 1910.

Freschot, Casimir. Histoire amoureuse et badine du congrès et de la ville d’Utrecht. Liège: Jacob Le Doux, 1713.

158 Furetière, Antoine. Dictionnaire universel. 3 vols. The Hague and Rotterdam: Arnout and Reinier Leers, 1690.

———. Dictionnaire universel. Reviewed, corrected, and augmented by Henri Basnage de Beauval & Jean-Baptiste Brutel de La Rivière. 4 vols. The Hague: Chez Husson, Johnson, Swart, van Duren, Le Vier, La veuve van Dole, 1727.

Lettres Nouvelles, Galantes, Historiques, Morales, Critiques, Satyriques, & Comiques, de Madame D. Ouvrage beaucoup plus curieux que les precedents, & très-utiles pour bien comprendre les premiers. Nîmes: Claude Bon Ami, 1713.

Le Mariage précipité, Comédie En trois Actes, Mise au Théâtre par M**, & représentée pour la premiere fois, par les Comédiens Italiens & François, le vingtieme Mars 1713, à Utrecht. Utrecht: aux dépens de l’Auteur, 1713.

Orléans, Élisabeth Charlotte, duchesse d’ (Liselotte von Der Pfalz). Correspondance complète de Madame Duchesse d’Orléans née Princesse Palatine, mère du régent. Edited and translated by M.G. Brunet. 2 vols. Paris: Charpentier, 1857.

———. A Woman’s Life in the Court of the Sun King: Letters of Liselotte von Der Pfalz, 1652- 1722. Edited and translated by Elborg Forster. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1984.

Ravaisson, François, editor. Archives de la Bastille, documents inédits recueillis et publiés. Paris: A. Durand et Pedone-Lauriel, 1882.

Sévigné, Marie de Rabutin-Chantal, Marquise de. Lettres de Madame de Sévigné, de sa famille et de ses amis. Edited by Louis Jean Nicolas. 14 vols. Paris: L. Hachette, 1862.

Tallemant des Réaux, Gédéon. Les Historiettes: Mémoires pour servir à l’histoire du XVIIe siècle. Edited by Monmerqué. Vol. 1. Paris: Alphonse Levavasseur, 1834.

Villars, Marie Gigault de Bellefonds, Marquise de. Lettres de Madame de Villars à Madame de Coulanges (1679-1681). Edited by Alfred de Courtois. Paris: H. Plon, 1868.

Villars, Pierre, Marquis de. Mémoires de la cour d’Espagne de 1679 à 1681. Edited by M.A. Morel-Fatio. Paris: Plon, 1843.

Voltaire. Les Amours de Pimpette ou Une saison en Hollande. Correspondance de Voltaire avec Olympe du Noyer. Edited by Jacques Cormier. Paris: L’Harmattan, 2009.

Periodicals La Quintessence des Nouvelles Historiques, Critiques, Politiques, Morales et Galantes

159 Secondary Sources Aggestam, Karin and Ann Towns. “The gender turn in diplomacy: a new research agenda.” International Feminist Journal of Politics 21, no. 1 (2019): 9-28.

Akkerman, Nadine and Birgit Houben, editors. The Politics of Female Households: Ladies-in- Waiting across Early Modern Europe. Leiden: Brill, 2014.

Altman, Janet Gurkin. Epistolarity: Approaches to a form. Columbus, OH: Ohio State University Press, 1982.

Arnelle [Mme de Clauzade]. Les Filles de Madame Du Noyer, 1663-1720. Paris: Fontemoing, 1921?.

Baril, Chloé. “Situation politique des lardons hollandais.” In Gazettes et information politique sous l’Ancien Régime, edited by Henri Duranton and Pierre Rétat, 137-144. Saint- Étienne: Publications de l’Université de Saint-Étienne, 1999.

Bassnett, Madeline. “‘All the Ceremonyes and Civilityes’: The Authorship of Diplomacy in the Memoirs of Ann, Lady Fanshawe.” The Seventeenth Century 26, no. 1 (2011): 94–118.

Bastian, Corina. “‘Paper Negotiations’: Women and diplomacy in the early eighteenth century.” In Women, Diplomacy and International Politics Since 1500, edited by Glenda Sluga and Carolyn James, 107-119. London and New York: Routledge, 2015.

———. Verhandeln in Briefen: Frauen in Der Höfischen Diplomatie Des Frühen 18. Jahrhunderts. Cologne: Böhlau Verlag, 2013.

Bastian, Corina, Eva Kathrin Dade, Hillard von Thiessen, and Christian Windler, editors. Das Geschlecht der Diplomatie: Geschlechterrollen in den Außenbeziehungen vom Spätmittelalter bis zum 20. Jahrhundert. Cologne: Böhlau Verlag, 2013.

Beasley, Faith Evelyn. Revising Memory: Women’s Fiction and Memoirs in Seventeenth- Century France. New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press, 1990.

Bély Lucien. L’Art de la paix en Europe: naissance de la diplomatie moderne, XVIe-XVIIIe siècle. Paris: Presses universitaires de France, 2007.

———. Espions et ambassadeurs au temps de Louis XIV. Paris: Fayard, 1991.

———. “Les larmes de Monsieur de Torcy. Un essai sur les perspectives de l’histoire diplomatique à propos des conférences de Gertruydenberg (mars-juillet 1710).” Histoire, économie et société 2ᵉ année, no. 3 (1983): 429-456.

———. Les Secrets de Louis XIV: Mystères d’État et pouvoir absolu. Paris: Tallandier, 2013.

160 Borgognoni, Ezequiel. “Marie Gigault de Bellefonds, Ambassadress of France. Gender, Power and Diplomacy at the Court of Charles II of Spain, 1679-1681.” Primavera-verano 20 (2020): 7–30.

Brétéché, Marion. “Faire profession de témoignage: les pratiques d’écriture d’Anne-Marguerite Dunoyer (1707-1719).” Études Épistémè 19 (2011): 66-85.

Bruin, Renger E. de, Cornelis van der Haven, Lotte Jensen and David Onnekink, editors. Performances of Peace: Utrecht 1713. Leiden and Boston: Brill, 2015.

Calvi, Giulia and Isabelle Chabot, editors. Moving Elites: Women and Cultural Transfers in the European Court System. Florence: EUI Working Papers, 2010.

Camps, Henry and Sandrine Lacombe. Fonds Blau (1709-1825). Electronic finding aid, Archives Nationales, Pierrefitte-sur-Seine, France, 2018.

Carlston, Erin. Double Agents: Espionage, Literature, and Liminal Citizens. New York: Columbia University Press, 2013.

Cermakian, Marianne. “Le dessous des cartes: Saint-Simon et la princesse des Ursins.” Cahiers Saint-Simon 2 (1974): 31-40.

Cerveau, René. Nécrologe des plus célèbres défenseurs et confesseurs de la vérité du dix- huitième siècle; Contenant les principales circonstances de la Vie et de la Mort des Amis de la Vérité de l’un & de l’autre Sexe, & sur-tout des persécutions qu’ils ont souffertes au sujet du Formulaire & de la Bulle Unigenitus, & de la part des Jésuites. Premiere partie. 1760.

Cespedes, Stéphanie. “L’histoire d’une famille à l’époque moderne: La famille Blau.” Unpublished M.A. Thesis, Université Paris-Est Marne-la-Vallée, 2008.

Chapman, Sara. “Patronage as Family Economy: The Role of Women in the Patron-Client Network of the Phélypeaux de Pontchartrain Family, 1670-1715.” French Historical Studies 24, no. 1 (2001): 11-35.

Crawford, Katherine. Perilous Performances: Gender and Regency in Early Modern France. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2004.

Crepet, Anne-Pauline. “« Mais elle connaît l’art de feindre, étant femme »: la duchesse de Châtillon, entre émotion ostentatoire, séduction et stratégie politique.” Le Monde français du dix-huitième siècle 2, no. 1 (2017): article 5.

Cron, Adélaïde. “Polygraphie ou mémoires éclatés? L'œuvre de Mme Dunoyer, entre journalisme et autobiographie.” Papers on French seventeenth century literature 38, no. 74 (2011): 159-170.

161 Couchman, Jane and Ann Crabb, editors. Women’s letters across Europe, 1400-1700: form and persuasion. Aldershot and Burlington, VT: Ashgate, 2005.

Courteault, Paul. “Le voyage de Mme d’Aulnoy en Espagne.” Bulletin Hispanique 38, no. 3 (1936): 383-384.

Darnton, Robert. The Forbidden Best-Sellers of Pre-Revolutionary France. New York: W.W. Norton, 1995.

———. The Literary Underground of the Old Regime. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1982.

Davis, Natalie Zemon. “Gender and Genre: Women as Historical Writers, 1400-1820.” In Beyond their Sex: Learned Women of the European Past, edited by Patricia H. Labalme, 153-182. New York: New York University Press, 1980.

———. “Women in Politics.” In A History of Women in the West, edited by Natalie Zemon Davis and Arlette Farge, Vol.3, 167-183. Cambridge: Harvard UP, 1993.

Daybell, James, editor. Early Modern Women’s Letter Writing, 1450-1700. New York: Palgrave, 2001.

———. “Gender, Politics and Diplomacy: Women, News and Intelligence Networks in Elizabethan England.” In Diplomacy and Early Modern Culture, edited by Robyn Adams and Rosanna Cox, 101-119. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2011.

Daybell, James and Svante Norrhem, editors. Gender and Political Culture in Early Modern Europe, 1400-1800. London and New York: Routledge, 2016.

DeJean, Joan E. Tender Geographies: Women and the Origins of the Novel in France. New York: Columbia University Press, 1991.

Dewald, Jonathan. Aristocratic Experience and the Origins of Modern Culture: France, 1570- 1715. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1993.

Duchhardt, Heinz. “‘Dieu veuille que cette Paix soit de longue durée …’ The History of the Congress and the Peace of Utrecht by Casimir Freschot.” In Performances of Peace Utrecht 1713, edited by Renger E. de Bruin, Cornelis van der Haven, Lotte Jensen and David Onnekink, 114-122. Leiden and Boston: Brill, 2015.

Engels, Jens Ivo. “Dénigrer, espérer, assumer la réalité. Le roi de France perçu par ses sujets, 1680-1750.” Revue d’histoire moderne & contemporaine 50-3 (2003): 96-126.

Fabre, Marcel. Voltaire et Pimpette de Nîmes. Nîmes: Castanier Frères et Alméras, 1936.

162 Froment, Michèle. “La « Dame pasquine » et le peintre d’histoire: Saint-Simon et Madame du Noyer.” Cahiers Saint Simon 4 (1976): 51-56.

Genette, Gérard. Narrative discourse: an essay in method. Translated by Jane E. Lewin. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1980.

Gibson, Wendy. Women in Seventeenth-Century France. London: Macmillan, 1989.

Gilot, Michel, Jean Sgard, D. Koszul and Robert Granderoute. “Le journaliste masqué: Personnages et formes personnelles.” In Le Journalisme d’Ancien Régime, edited by Pierre Rétat, new edition, 285-314. Lyon: Presses universitaires de Lyon, 1982.

Given-Wilson, Chris. Chronicles: The Writing of History in Medieval England. London and New York: Hambledon and London, 2004.

Goldsmith, Elizabeth C. Exclusive Conversations: The Art of Interaction in Seventeenth-Century France. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1988.

———. Publishing Women’s Life Stories in France, 1647-1720: from Voice to Print. Aldershot: Ashgate, 2001.

———. “‘Savoir la carte’: Travel, Self-Advancement, and Survival in Letters by Women.” BIBLIO 17 168 (2006): 15-31.

———, editor. Writing the Female Voice: Essays on Epistolary Literature. Boston: Northeastern University Press, 1989.

Goldsmith, Elizabeth C. and Dena Goodman, editors. Going Public: Women and Publishing in Early Modern France. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1995.

Goldwyn, Henriette. “L’inscription d’un lectorat féminin dans une des Lettres historiques et galantes de Mme du Noyer.” Lectrices d'Ancien Régime, edited by Isabelle Brouard- Arends, 93-101. Rennes: Presses universitaires de Rennes, 2003.

———. “Journalisme polémique à la fin du dix-septième siècle: Le cas de Mme Dunoyer.” In Femmes savantes, savoir des femmes: du crépuscule de la Renaissance à l’aube des Lumières: actes du colloque de Chantilly (22-24 septembre 1995), edited by Colette Nativel, 247-56. Geneva: Droz, 1999.

———. “Mme Du Noyer: Dissident Memorialist of the Huguenot Diaspora.” In Women Writers in Pre-Revolutionary France: Strategies of Emancipation, edited by Colette H. Winn, and Donna Kuizenga, 2:117–126. New York and London: Garland Publishing, 1997.

Goldwyn, Henriette and Suzan van Dijk. “Madame Du Noyer Presenting and Re-presenting the

163 Peace of Utrecht.” In Performances of Peace Utrecht 1713, edited by Renger E. de Bruin, Cornelis van der Haven, Lotte Jensen and David Onnekink, 95-113. Leiden and Boston: Brill, 2015.

Goodman, Dena. The Republic of Letters: A Cultural History of the French Enlightenment. Ithaca and London: Cornell University Press, 1994.

Goulet, Anne-Madeleine. “Le cercle de la princesse des Ursins à Rome (1675-1701): un foyer de culture française.” Seventeenth-Century French Studies 33 (2011): 60-71.

———. “Marie-Anne et Louise-Angélique de La Trémoille, princesses étrangères à Rome (1675-1701): Choix culturels, artistiques et politiques.” In Europäische Musiker in Venedig, Rom und Neapel (1650-1750), edited by Anne-Madeleine Goulet and Gesa Zur Nieden, 377-396. Kassel: Bärenreiter, 2015.

———. “The Princesse des Ursins, Loyal Subject of the King of France and Foreign Princess in Rome.” Translated by Rebekah Ahrendt. In Music and Diplomacy from the Early Modern Era to the Present, edited by Rebekah Ahrendt, Mark Ferraguto, and Damien Mahiet, 191-208. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2014.

———. “Il caso della princesse des Ursins a Roma (1675-1701) tra separatezza e integrazione culturale.” Recercare 23, no. 1/2 (2011): 175-187.

Habermas, Jürgen. The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere: An Inquiry into a Category of Bourgeois Society. Translated by Thomas Burger. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1991.

Hampton, Timothy. Fictions of Embassy: Literature and Diplomacy in Early Modern Europe. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 2009.

Hanotin, Guillaume. “Femmes et négociations diplomatiques entre France et Espagne au XVIIIe siècle.” Genre & Histoire, 12-13 (2013): n.p.

Harris, Barbara J. “Women and Politics in Early Tudor England.” The Historical Journal 33, no. 2 (1990): 259-281.

Harris, Carolyn. Queenship and Revolution in Early Modern Europe: Henrietta Maria and Marie Antoinette. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2016.

Hatin, Eugène. Les gazettes de Hollande et la presse clandestine aux XVIIe et XVIIIe siècles. Paris: chez René Pincbourde, 1865.

Hawkins, Frederick. Review of The Correspondence of Madame Dunoyer, Translated and edited by Florence L. Layard. In 2 vols. In The Academy, no. 952 (August 2, 1890): 83-4.

164 Helmers, Helmer. “Public Diplomacy in Early Modern Europe: Towards a new history of news.” Media History 22, nos. 3-4 (2016): 401-420.

Hester, Nathalie. “Travel and the Art of Telling the Truth: Marie-Catherine d’Aulnoy’s Travels to Spain.” Huntington Library Quarterly 70, no. 1 (2007): 87-102.

Hohkamp, Michaela. “Transdynasticism at the Dawn of the Modern Era: Kinship Dynamics among Ruling Families.” In Transregional and Transnational Families in Europe and Beyond: Experiences since the Middle Ages, edited by Christopher Johnson, David Warren Sabean, Simon Teuscher, and Francesca Trivellato, 93-106. New York and Oxford: Berghahn Books, 2011.

Hufton, Olwen. “Reflections on the Role of Women in the Early Modern Court.” The Court Historian 5, no. 1 (2000): 1-13.

Hugon, Alain. Au service du Roi Catholique: « Honorables ambassadeurs » et « divins espions ». Représentation diplomatique et service secret dans les relations hispano- françaises de 1598 à 1635. Madrid: Casa de Velázquez, 2004.

Kettering, Sharon. Patrons, Brokers, and Clients in Seventeenth-Century France. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1986.

———. “The Patronage Power of Early Modern French Noblewomen.” The Historical Journal 32, no. 4 (1989): 817-841.

Klaits, Joseph. Printed Propaganda Under Louis XIV: Absolute Monarchy and Public Opinion. Princeton, N.J: Princeton University Press, 1976.

Kleinman, Ruth. “Social Dynamics at the French Court: The Household of Anne of Austria.” French Historical Studies 16, no. 3 (1990): 517-535.

Kühnel, Florian. “‘Minister-like cleverness, understanding, and influence on affairs’: Ambassadresses in everyday business and courtly ceremonies at the turn of the eighteenth century.” In Practices of Diplomacy in the Early Modern World c. 1410-1800, edited by Tracey A. Sowerby and Jan Hennings, 120-146. London and New York: Routledge, 2017.

Lauzon, Matthew. “The Ambassador’s Wife: The Marquise de Villars and the Uses of Matrimonial Teams in Louis XIV’s Diplomacy.” Presentation, History Workshop, University of Hawai‘i at Mānoa, March 3, 2017.

———. “‘In the Name of the Princesses of France’: Marie Petit and the 1706 French Diplomatic Mission to Safavid Iran.” Journal of World History 25, no. 2/3 (June/September 2014): 341-371.

165 Legrelle, Arsène. La Diplomatie française et la succession d’Espagne. 5 vols. Paris: Librairie Cotillon, F. Pichon, 1888-1892.

Lindström, Peter and Svante Norrhem. “Diplomats and Kin Networks: Diplomatic strategy and gender in Sweden, 1648-1740.” In Gender and Political Culture in Early Modern Europe, 1400-1800, edited by James Daybell and Svante Norrhem, 68-88. London and New York: Routledge, 2017.

Lluís Palos, Joan and Magdalena Sánchez, editors. Early Modern Dynastic Marriages and Cultural Transfer. London and New York: Routledge, 2015.

Lougee Chappell, Carolyn. Facing the Revocation: Huguenot Families, Faith, and the King’s Will. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2016.

———. “‘The Pains I Took to Save My/His Family’: Escape Accounts by a Huguenot Mother and Daughter after the Revocation of the Edict of Nantes.” French Historical Studies 22, No. 1 (Winter 1999): 1-64.

Mitchell, Silvia Z. “Marriage Plots: Royal women, marriage diplomacy and international politics at the Spanish, French and Imperial Courts, 1665-1679.” In Women, Diplomacy and International Politics Since 1500, edited by Glenda Sluga and Carolyn James, 86-106. London and New York: Routledge, 2015.

Morel-Fatio, Alfred. “La Marquise de Gudanes, agent politique en Espagne à la fin du XVIIe siècle.” Revue historique t. 47, fasc. 1 (1891): 78-82.

Muhlstein, Anka. La Femme soleil—les femmes et le pouvoir: une relecture de Saint-Simon. Paris: Denoël-Gonthier, 1976.

Nabarra, Alain. “Correspondances réelles, correspondances fictives: les Lettres historiques et galantes de Mme Dunoyer ou ‘la rocambole’ d’un ‘petit badinage’ établi d’abord pour le plaisir.” In Femmes en toutes lettres: Les épistolières du XVIIIe siècle, edited by Marie- France Silver and Marie-Laure Girou Swiderski, 7-22. Oxford: Voltaire Foundation, 2000.

———. “Mme Dunoyer et La Quintessence: La rencontre d’une journaliste et d’un journal.” In Femmes savantes et femmes d’esprit: Women Intellectuals of the French Eighteenth Century, edited by Roland G. Bonnel and Catherine Rubinger, 45-76. New York: Peter Lang, 1994.

Nerval, Gérard de. Œuvres complètes de Gérard de Nerval. Vol. 4, Les Illuminés. Les Faux Saulniers. Paris: Michel Lévy Frères, 1868.

Nolde, Dorothea. “Princesses voyageuses au XVIIe siècle: Médiatrices politiques et passeuses culturelles.” Clio 28 (2008): 59-76.

166 Oliván Santaliestra, Laura. “Gender, Work and Diplomacy in Baroque Spain: The Ambassadorial Couples of the Holy Roman Empire as Arbeitspaare.” Gender & History 29, no. 2 (August 2017): 423–445.

———. “Lady Anne Fanshawe, Ambassadress of England at the Court of Madrid (1664-1666).” In Women, Diplomacy and International Politics Since 1500, edited by Glenda Sluga and Carolyn James, 68-85. London and New York: Routledge, 2015.

Onnekink, David. “Pride and Prejudice: Universal Monarchy Discourse and the Peace Negotiations of 1709-1710.” In Performances of Peace Utrecht 1713, edited by Renger E. de Bruin, Cornelis van der Haven, Lotte Jensen and David Onnekink, 69-91. Leiden and Boston: Brill, 2015.

Orr, Clarissa Campbell, editor. Queenship in Europe, 1660-1815; the Role of the Consort. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press, 2004.

Palmer, Melvin D. “Madame d’Aulnoy’s Pseudo-Autobiographical Works on Spain.” Romanische Forschungen 83, 2/3 (1971): 220-229.

Popkin, Jeremy. “New Perspectives on the Early Modern Press.” In News and politics in early modern Europe (1500-1800), edited by Joop W. Koopmans, 1-27. Leuven, Paris, Dudley, MA: Peeters Publishers, 2005.

Poumarède, Géraud. “Mazarin, marieur de l’Europe. Stratégies familiales, enjeux dynastiques et géopolitique au milieu du XVIIe siècle.” Dix-septième siècle 243, no. 2 (2009): 201-218.

Poutrin, Isabelle and Marie-Karine Schaub, editors. Femmes & pouvoir politique. Les princesses d’Europe XVe-XVIIe siècle. Paris: Éditions Bréal, 2007.

Raymond, Joad. “Les libelles internationaux à la période moderne: étude préliminaire.” Translated by Claire Boulard Jouslin, Etudes Epistémè 26 (2014): n.p.

Reinhard, Nicole. “Les relations internationales à travers les femmes au temps de Louis XIV.” Revue d’histoire diplomatique 3 (2003): 193-230.

Reynolds-Cornell, Regine. Fiction and Reality in the Mémoires of the Notorious Anne- Marguerite Petit Du Noyer. Tübingen: G. Narr, 1999.

Rimbault, Caroline. “La presse féminine de langue française au XVIIIème siècle: Production et diffusion.” In Le Journalisme de l’Ancien Régime, edited by Pierre Rétat, 199-216. Lyon: Presses universitaires de Lyon, 1982.

Rule, John C. “France and the Preliminaries to the Gertruydenberg Conference, September 1709

167 to March 1710.” In Studies in Diplomatic History: Essays in Memory of David Bayne Horne, edited by Ragnhild M. Hatton and Matthew S. Anderson, 97-115. London: Longman, 1970.

Rule, Jon C. and Ben S. Trotter. A World of Paper: Louis XIV, Colbert De Torcy, and the Rise of the Information State. McGill: Queen's University Press, 2014.

Scott, Hamish. “Diplomatic culture in old regime Europe.” In Cultures of Power in Europe During the Long Eighteenth Century, edited by Hamish Scott and Brendan Simms, 58- 85. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007.

Sgard, Jean, editor. Dictionnaire des journalistes (1600–1789). Édition électronique revue, corrigée et augmentée. dictionnaire-journaux.gazettes18e.fr.

Sluga, Glenda and Carolyn James, editors. Women, Diplomacy and International Politics Since 1500. London and New York: Routledge, 2015.

Sokalski, Alex. “Madame Du Noyer, the Abbé de Bucquoy and the Birth of Narration.” Lumen 13 (1994): 157-167.

Soll, Jacob. The Information Master: Jean-Baptiste Colbert’s Secret State Intelligence System. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 2009.

Somerset, Anne. Ladies-in-Waiting: From the Tudors to the Present Day. London: Weidenfeld & Nicolson, 1984.

Soria Berrocosa, Soledad. “Invisibles, oubliées, émancipées: Les femmes journalistes françaises avant l’heure.” Feminismo/s 34 (December 2019): 53-77.

Sowerby, Tracey A. and Jan Hennings, editors. Practices of Diplomacy in the Early Modern World c. 1410-1800. New York: Routledge, 2017.

Sowerby, Tracey A. and Joanna Craigwood, editors. Cultures of Diplomacy and Literary Writing in the Early Modern World. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2019.

Spangler, Jonathan. The Society of Princes. Farnham and Burlington: Ashgate, 2009.

Stedman, Allison. Rococo Fiction in France, 1600-1715: Seditious Frivolity. Lewisburg: Bucknell University Press, 2013.

Takeda, Junko Thérèse. “‘The Princesses’ Representative’ or Renegade Entrepreneur? Marie Petit, the Silk Trade, and Franco-Persian Diplomacy.” In Colonization, Piracy, and Trade in Early Modern Europe: The Roles of Powerful Women and Queens, edited by Estelle Paranque, Nate J. Probasco, and Claire Jowitt, 141-166. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2017.

168 Tischer, Anuschka. “Eine französische Botschafterin in Polen 1645-1646, Die Gesandtschaftsreise Renée de Guébriants zum Hofe Władislaws IV.” L’Homme 12, 2 (2001): 305-321.

Trivisani-Moreau, Isabelle. “Vers un usage public du privé: Mme Du Noyer entre Lettres historiques et galantes et Mémoires.” In Dialogues intérieurs: les écrits des mémorialistes dans leurs Mémoires, edited by Myriam Tsimbidy and Frédéric Charbonneau, 137-150. Paris: Garnier, 2015. la Vallière, Louis César de la Baume le Blanc, duc de. Bibliothèque du théâtre françois depuis son origine: contenant un extrait de tous les ouvrages composés pour ce théâtre, depuis les mystères jusqu'aux pieces de Pierre Corneille, une liste chronologique de celles composées depuis cette derniere époque jusqu'à présent, avec deux tables alphabétiques, l'une des auteurs et l'autre des pieces. Dresden: Michel Groell, 1768. van Dijk, Suzan. “Madame Dunoyer, ou comment tirer parti de son travail.” Documentatieblad Werkgroep Achttiende Eeuw 18 (1986): 15–21.

———. Traces de femmes. Présence féminine dans le journalisme français du XVIIIe siècle. Amsterdam and Maarssen: APA Holland University Press, 1988.

Vandal, Albert. “Un Mariage politique au XVIIe siècle—Marie de Gonzague à Varsovie.” Revue des Deux Mondes 55 (1883): 671-695.

Watanabe-O’Kelly, Helen and Adam Morton, editors. Queens Consort, Cultural Transfer and European Politics, c.1500-1800. London and New York: Routledge, 2016.

Welch, Ellen R. A Taste for the Foreign: Worldly Knowledge and Literary Pleasure in Early Modern French Fiction. Newark, DE: University of Delaware Press, 2011.

———. A Theater of Diplomacy: International Relations and the Performing Arts in Early Modern France. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2017.

Winn, Colette H. and Donna Kuizenga, editors. Women Writers in Pre-Revolutionary France: Strategies of Emancipation. London and New York: Garland Publishing, 1997.

Winn, Colette H. and Lauren King, editors and translators. The Huguenot Experience of Persecution and Exile: Three Women’s Stories. Toronto: Iter Press, 2019.

Wunder, Heide. He is the Sun, She is the Moon: Women in Early Modern Germany. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1998.

169