florida state university college of visual arts, theatre and dance ...

FLORIDA STATE UNIVERSITY
COLLEGE OF VISUAL ARTS, THEATRE AND DANCE
ASSERTING ROYAL POWER IN EARLY SEVENTEENTH-CENTURY PARIS:
LOUIS XIII, MARIA DE’ MEDICI, AND THE ART AND ARCHITECTURE
OF REFORMED RELIGIOUS ORDERS
By
JULIANNE PARSE SANDLIN
A Dissertation submitted to the
Department of Art History
in partial fulfillment of the
requirements for the degree of
Doctor of Philosophy
Degree Awarded:
Spring Semester, 2009

The members of the Committee approve the Dissertation of Julianne Parse Sandlin defended on
March 23, 2009.
Approved:
________________________________________
Richard Emmerson, Chair, Department of Art History
___________________________________________________
Sally McRorie, Dean, College of Visual Arts, Theatre and Dance
________________________________
Robert N. Neuman
Professor Directing Dissertation
________________________________
William Cloonan
Outside Committee Member
________________________________
Jack Freiberg
Committee Member
________________________________
Paula Gerson
Committee Member
The Graduate School has verified and approved the above named committee members.
ii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The completion of my dissertation only came about with the support and encouragement
of numerous people. I would first like to thank my professors, beginning at the University of
South Carolina with Dr. Beverly Heisner and Dr. Charles Mack, who introduced me to the field
of architectural history and the potential meanings that could be conveyed with buildings. At
Florida State University, I am extremely indebted to each of my professors but especially those
serving on my committee. With much patience, encouragement, and critique, Dr. Robert
Neuman, Dr. Jack Freiberg, and Dr. Paula Gerson, allowed me to develop my skills and to
pursue my scholarly interests. Their expertise in their respective fields contributed to my work,
shaping my approach to art history. A special thanks is reserved for my committee chair, Dr.
Robert Neuman, whose own experience with French architectural history of the Ancien Régime
fueled my search for a dissertation topic. I appreciate his guidance, his not-so-subtle prompts to
start writing, and his willingness to stick with me over the years. I am also grateful for support
from the Estate of Penelope Mason and the Samuel H. Kress Foundation, from which I received
funding to pursue research in France.
The second group I would like to thank is made up of my friends and family. Without
their support and encouragement, my task would have been much more difficult. I am especially
indebted to my parents, who instilled in me the belief that I could achieve anything, and my
parents-in-law, who likewise reinforced my ability to complete this project. It is with much
regret that Army and Dad are not here to see the end result. My greatest thanks go to my
husband, Brian. Not only has he assisted me with library books, copying, editing, and computer
issues, he has also supported me mentally, financially, physically, and spiritually. Although the
process took a little bit longer than he bargained for and he had to listen to more art history
discussions than any outsider should have to, I simply could not have achieved this without him.
iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS
List of Figures vi
Abstract xiii
1. INTRODUCTION 1
2. THE HISTORICAL CONTEXT: FACTORS PROMPTING
ROYAL PATRONAGE OF CHURCHES 16
Wars of Religion 17
The Reign of Henri IV 22
Catholic Reformation in France 27
Reigns of Maria de’ Medici and Louis XIII 31
3. LOUIS XIII AND THE CHURCH OF THE FRENCH ORATORY:
AN EXPRESION OF SOVEREIGN AUTHORITY 49
The Congrégation des Pères de l’Oratoire de France and Its Church 50
The Church as a Symbol of Louis XIII 55
Factors Influencing Louis XIII’s Decision 64
Conclusion 71
4. SAINT-LOUIS-DES-JÉSUITES: LOUIS XIII’S MOVE
TOWARDS ABSOLUTISM 85
The Church 86
The Foundation Stone 88
Louis XIII and the Need for an Authoritative Image 96
Interior Decorative Program of Saint-Louis-des-Jésuites 101
Richelieu’s Façade 106
5. MARIA DE’ MEDICI AND PARISIAN CHURCHES:
THE USE AND DISUSE OF ROYAL SIGNS 123
The Regent Queen’s Support of Churches, from 1610 to 1617 125
The Minims of the Place Royale 125
Discalced Carmelites of the rue de Vaugirard 128
Récollets 132
iv

Jacobins of the rue Saint-Honoré 133
Summary 134
Maria de’ Medici’s Support of Churches after Her First Exile 135
Filles du Calvaire 135
Notre-Dame-de-Pitié 140
Conclusion 146
6. FROM NOTRE-DAME-DES-VICTOIRES TO NOTRE-DAME-DE-PARIS: 158
THE SHIFTING PRIORITIES OF LOUIS XIII (1629-1638)
The Augustins Déchaussés and the Construction of Notre-Dame-des-Victoires 160
Additional Churches Supported by Louis XIII 166
Sainte-Chapelle 166
The Chapel of St. Ursula at the Sorbonne 169
The Cathedral of Notre-Dame of Paris 171
France and Spain 173
Conclusion 177
7. CONCLUSION 187
FIGURES 190
APPENDICES 286
A. TIMELINE OF MAJOR EVENTS 286
B. PERMISSION TO USE IMAGES 288
BIBLIOGRAPHY 290
BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH 312
v

LIST OF FIGURES
1. Philippe de Champaigne, Louis XIII, c. 1655. Oil on Canvas. Prado Museum. 108 x
86 cm. (Artstor)
2. Peter Paul Rubens, Maria de’ Medici, 1622. Oil on canvas. 130 x 108 cm. Madrid,
Prado. (Artstor)
3. Frans Pourbus the Younger, Henri IV, King of France, c. 1610. Oil on wood. 39 x 25
cm. Musée du Louvre. (Artstor)
4. Clément Métezeau and Jacques Lemercier, Church of the French Oratory, Paris, begun
1621. View of the apse. (Photo by J. Sandlin)
5. French School, Pierre de Bérulle, seventeenth century. Oil on canvas. (Baudouin-
Matuszek, 137, fig. 135)
6. Anonymous, Plan of the Church of the Oratoire (with parts remaining to be built in a
lighter tone), c. mid-eighteenth century. Drawing. Paris, Bibliothèque nationale de
France. (Gady, 231, fig. 155)
7. Jean Marot, Veue de l’église de l’Oratoire et de le maison, c. 1660. Engraving. Paris,
Bibliothèque nationale de France. (Biver, fig. 69)
8. Clément Métezeau and Jacques Lemercier. Church of the Oratory, Paris, begun 1621.
View of interior towards apse. (Photo by J. Sandlin)
9. Clément Métezeau and Jacques Lemercier. Church of the Oratory, Paris, begun 1621.
View of interior towards apse. (Dumolin and Outardel, 132)
10. Saint-Nicolas-des-Champs, Paris, begun 1397. General view of the interior. (Bos,
243, fig. 124)
11. Michel Etienne Turgot, Plan de Turgot, 1739. Detail showing the Church of the
Oratory. Engraving. (Kyoto University Library, http://edb.kulib.kyoto-u.ac.jp/exhibite/f28/image/01/f28l0018/
f28l0018_1_1.html.)
12. Michel Etienne Turgot, Plan de Turgot, 1739. Detail showing the Louvre and its
quarter with the Church of the Oratory to the left. Engraving. (Pérouse de Montclos,
66)
13. Reconstructed map of the Louvre and its quarter around 1650. (Le Louvre et son
quartier, 1984, 34, fig. 46)
vi
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202

14. Clément Métezeau and Jacques Lemercier, Church of the French Oratory, Paris, begun
1621. View of the apse. (Photo by J. Sandlin)
15. Saint-Germer-de-Fly, view of Lady Chapel, thirteenth century. (Branner, Court Style) 204
16. Sainte-Chapelle, Paris, begun 1242. Exterior view. (Weiss, 13, fig. 1) 205
17. Sainte-Chapelle, upper chapel, Paris. Stained glass, coronation scenes from the book of
Numbers. (Weiss, plate IV)
18. Aubin-Louis Millin, Chartreux Convent. Entrance Portico, 1790. Engraving. (Bos,
302, fig. 172)
19. Jacques Lemercier, Church of the Oratory, Paris, 1625. Vault at crossing. (Photo by J.
Sandlin)
20. Michel Félibien, Saint-Denis Treasury, detail of plate I, from Histoire de l’abbaye
royale de Saint-Denis en France, 1709. Etching. (Frolow, 198, fig. 72)
21. Écu d’or of Louis XIII, 1642. Paris, Bibliothèque nationale de France. 210
22. Diocletian’s Palace, Split, c. 300-306 AD. Peristyle courtyard. (Photo courtesy of
Leigh Ann Delp)
23. Jacques Androuet du Cerceau, Tribunal of the Ballroom of the Louvre, in Les Plus
Excellents Bastiments de France, 1576. Engraving. (Zerner, 191, fig. 197)
24. Jacques Lemercier (?), Élévation du transept et d’une partie du choeur de l’église de
l’Oratoire de Paris, c. 1622. Drawing. Quimper, Bibliothèque Municipale. (Gady,
34, fig. 23)
25. Map of territories during the Thirty Years’ War, 1618-1643. (Moote, map 4) 214
26. Project of the Enlargement and Junction of the Louvre and the Tuileries, c. 1600.
Fresco from the Galerie des Cerfs de Fontainebleau (reconstructed). (Le Louvre et son
quartier, 67, fig. 44)
27. Peter Paul Rubens, Triumph of Rome, 1622. Oil sketch. The Hague, Mauritshuis.
(Fumaroli, 90, fig. 1)
28. Jean Marot, Le Portail de l’Eglise de la Maison Professe des R. P. Jésuites de Paris,
dans la rue St. Antoine, c. 1660. Engraving. Paris, Bibliothèque nationale de France.
(Biver, fig. 60)
29. Philippe de Champaigne, Richelieu, 1633-1640. Oil on canvas. 260 x 179 cm.
London, National Gallery. (Mérot, 186, fig. 203)
30. Etienne Martellange and François Derand, Plan of Saint-Louis-des-Jésuites, after 1641.
vii
203
206
207
208
209
211
212
213
215
216
217
218

(Dumolin and Outardel, 136) 219
31. Saint Louis, obverse (left), Façade of Saint-Louis-des-Jésuites, reverse (right), 1627.
Cast brass. 5.99 cm. diameter. London, British Museum. (Jones, 296, fig. 342)
32. Edme Moreau, Façade of Saint-Louis-des-Jésuites, 1643. Engraving. Paris,
Bibliothèque nationale de France. (Montgolfier, 28, cat. 16)
33. Andrea Sacchi and Jan Miel, Urban VIII Visiting Il Gesù, Rome, 1639-1641. Oil on
Canvas. 336 x 247 cm. Rome, Galleria Nazionale di Arte Antica. (Harris,
Seventeenth-Century Art and Architecture [Prentice Hall, 2005], xiii, fig. 0.1)
34. Etienne Martellange and François Derand. Saint-Louis-des-Jésuites, Paris, 1627-1641.
View of interior towards the apse. (Dumolin and Outardel, 137)
35. Foundation Stone of Saint-Louis-des-Jésuites, c. 1627. Engraving. Paris, Bibliothèque
nationale de France.
36. After Matteo de' Pasti, Sigismondo Pandolfo Malatesta, obverse (top), San Francesco
at Rimini, reverse (bottom), 1450. Bronze. 4 cm. diameter. Washington, D.C.,
National Gallery of Art. (Laurie Schneider Adams, Italian Renaissance Art [Westview
Press, 2001], 173, fig. 8.13 [reverse], 175, fig. 8.17 [obverse])
37. G. Bonsegni, Il Gesù, reverse (top), Cardinal Alessandro Farnese, obverse (bottom),
1568. Bronze. 4. 92 cm diameter. Rome, Il Gesù, sacristy. (Lucas, 37, cat. No. 85)
38. Pierre Regnier, Louis XIII, obverse (left), Part of façade of the Louvre, reverse (right),
1624. Silver. 3.4 cm. diameter. London, British Museum. (Jones, 136, fig. 95).
39. Detail of Kings rose windows (top). Detail of History of Relics rose window (bottom).
Paris, Sainte-Chapelle. (Weiss, 1992, 33, figs. 23 and 24)
40. Etienne Martellange and François Derand. Saint-Louis-des-Jésuites, Paris, 1627-1641.
View of left transept, showing St. Louis Receiving the Crown of Thorns (c. 1641)
above entrance to side chapel. (Photo by J. Sandlin)
41. Etienne Martellange and François Derand. Saint-Louis-des-Jésuites, Paris, 1627-1641.
Interior view of apse. (Photo by J. Sandlin)
42. Edme Moreau, Section of the Choir and Cupola of Saint-Louis-des-Jésuites, c. 1643.
Engraving. Paris, Bibliothèque nationale de France. (Montgolfier, 23, cat. 12)
43. Edme Moreau, High Altar of Saint-Louis-des-Jésuites, 1643. Engraving. Paris,
Bibliothèque nationale de France. (Montgolfier, 35, cat. 28)
44. Simon Vouet, Presentation in the Temple, 1640-1641. Oil on canvas. 383 x 250 cm.
Paris, Louvre. (Thuillier, 313, fig. 51)
viii
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233

45. Simon Vouet, Apotheosis of St. Louis, 1640-1641. Oil on canvas. 275 x 175 cm.
Rouen, Musée des Beaux-Arts. (Thuillier, 314, fig. 52)
46. Etienne Martellange and François Derand. Saint-Louis-des-Jésuites, Paris, 1627-1641.
Detail of vault over high altar. (Photo by J. Sandlin)
47. Etienne Martellange and François Derand. Saint-Louis-des-Jésuites, Paris, 1627-1641.
Interior view of dome and vault of left transept. (Photo by J. Sandlin)
48. Detail of Edme Moreau, Right side of Nave and Choir, 1643. Engraving. Paris,
Bibliothèque nationale de France. (Montgolfier, 24, cat. 13)
49. Etienne Martellange and François Derand. Saint-Louis-des-Jésuites, Paris, 1627-1641.
Detail of a cartouche on the vault in the apse. (Photo by J. Sandlin)
50. Chronicle of France: ms. Douce 217, fol. 265: Scenes from the Life of St. Louis, end of
fourteenth century. Bodleian Library. (Artstor)
51. Michel Corneille, Saint Louis Receiving the Crown of Thorns, c. 1639-1642. Oil on
canvas. 282 x 356 cm. (Picart, fig. 2)
52. Jacques de Lestin, The Death of Saint Louis, c. 1639-1642. Oil on canvas. 282 x 356
cm. (Châtelet, p. 202)
53. Studio of Simon Vouet, Louis XIII Presenting a Model of the Church to Saint Louis, c.
1639-1642. Oil on canvas. 288 x 359 cm. (Constans)
54. The Emperor Otto I (912-73) Presenting a Model of His Church at Magdeburg, 962-
968. Ivory. 13 x 11.3 x 0.8 cm (Artstor)
55. Etienne Martellange and François Derand, Saint-Louis-des-Jésuites, Paris, 1627-1641.
View of façade. (Photo by J. Sandlin)
56. Israël Silvestre, Church of the Hôpital St. Louis, c. 1650-55. Engraving. Paris,
Bibliothèque nationale de France. (Ballon, 187, fig. 131)
57. Plan of the Church of the Minims. (Ciprut, 1954, 154, fig. 2) 246
58. Jean Marot, Le couvent des Minimes de la Place Royale, before 1657. Engraving.
Paris, Bibliothèque nationale de France. (Biver, fig. 58)
59. Plan of Saint-Joseph-des-Carmes. (Dumolin and Outardel, 129) 248
60. Saint-Joseph-des-Carmes, Paris, 1613-1620. View of interior towards high altar.
(Photo by J. Sandlin)
61. Saint-Joseph-des-Carmes, Paris, 1613-1620. Exterior view of façade. (Dupuy, 1) 250
62. Jean Marot, Eglise des Carmes Deschausses. Engraving. Paris, Bibliothèque nationale
ix
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
247
249

de France. (Hautecoeur, 1, pt. 3:221, fig. 72) 251
63. After Jean Marot, Eglise des Carmes Deschausses, detail of entrance to forecourt.
Engraving. Paris, Bibliothèque nationale de France. (Hautecoeur, 1, pt. 3:221, fig. 72)
64. Medal of Maria de’ Medici, c. 1628. Paris, Bibliothèque nationale de France.
(Kohlers, 393)
65. Jean-Baptiste-Michel Jaillot, detail of Plan du Quartier Saint-Martin, 1775. (Jaillot,
vol. 2, Xe quartier)
66. Michel Etienne Turgot, Plan de Turgot, 1739. Detail showing the Convent of the
Récollets. Engraving. (Kyoto University Library, http://edb.kulib.kyotou.ac.jp/exhibit-e/f28/image/01/f28l0016/f28l0016_2_2.html.)
67. Jean-Aimar Piganiol de la Force, detail of Plan et Description du Quartier du Palais
Royal, 1765. (Piganiol de la Force, vol. 2)
68. Jean-Baptiste-Michel Jaillot, detail of Plan du Quartier du Palais Royal, 1775.
(Jaillot, vol. 1)
69. Michel Etienne Turgot, Plan de Turgot, 1739. Detail showing the Convent of the
Filles du Calvaire. Engraving. (Hustin, vol. 2, after pg. 76)
70. Plan of the Convent of the Filles du Calvaire, drawn by Michel Peytonneau, 1789.
Paris, Archives Nationales S. 4649. (Hustin, vol. 2, after pg. 40)
71. Nicolas-Michel Troche, Façade of Notre-Dame-du-Calvaire, c. 1800-1840. Drawing.
(Troche, 527)
72. Henri Gisors, restored façade of Notre-Dame-du-Calvaire, Paris, c. 1845.
(vacanceo.com)
73. Henri de Gisors, detail of restored façade of Notre-Dame-du-Calvaire, Paris, c. 1845.
(http://www.flickr.com/photos/atp19/28709064/)
74. Henri de Gisors, detail of restored façade of Notre-Dame-du-Calvaire, Paris, c. 1845.
(http://www.flickr.com/photos/atp19/61229805/)
75. Jacques de Bie, Device for Maria de’ Medici, 1611. Engraving. (Bie, plate 104) 264
76. Foundation Stone of Notre-Dame-de-Pitié, c. 1628. Engraving. Paris, Bibliothèque
nationale de France. (Baudouin-Matuszek, 159, fig. 168)
77. Plan of the church of Notre-Dame-de-Pitié. (Ciprut, 188) 266
78. I. van Merlen, View of the church of Notre-Dame-de-Pitié (Sainte-Elisabeth).
Engraving. Paris, Bibliothèque nationale de France.
x
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
260
261
262
263
265
267

79. After Claude Chastillon, Carosel at the Place Royale, 1612. Engraving. Bibliothèque
nationale de France. (Ballon, 58, fig. 41)
80. Anonymous, View of the church of Notre-Dame-de-Pitié (Sainte-Elisabeth), c. 1644.
Engraving. Paris, Bibliothèque nationale de France.
81. Notre-Dame-des-Victoires, Paris, 1629-1740. View of façade.
(http://www.flickr.com/photos/ndalls/430628280/sizes/o/)
82. Michel Etienne Turgot, Plan de Turgot, 1739. Detail showing Notre-Dame-des-
Victoires in relation to the Place des Victoires. Engraving. (Schieder, fig. 172, 207)
83. Current plan of Notre-Dames-des-Victoires. Engraving. Paris, Bibliothèque nationale
de France. (Hautecoeur, 1, pt. 3:415, fig. 155)
84. Notre-Dame-des-Victoires, Paris, 1629-1740. View of interior towards apse. (La
Basilique Notre-Dame des Victoires, 27)
85. Notre-Dame-des-Victoires, Paris, 1629-1740. Flanking wall of transept showing
walled-up gallery above side chapel. (Photo by J. Sandlin)
86. Saint-Louis-des-Jésuites, Paris, 1627-1641. Flanking wall of transept showing gallery
above side chapel. (Photo by J. Sandlin)
87. Foundation Stone of Notre-Dame-des-Victoires, 1629. Engraving. (Schieder, fig. 164,
198)
88. Pierre Lepautre, Exterior view from the Southeast of the Versailles Chapel, 1714-1715.
Engraving. (Edmunds, 21, fig. 8)
89. Detail of a window at the Sainte-Chapelle, St. Louis and Robert d’Artois bearing the
Relics, thirteenth century. Stained Glass. (Bottineau, plate 73)
90. View of ceiling of Versailles chapel, depicting Antoine Coypel, God the Father in
Glory (above nave), 1709-1710, and Charles de La Fosse, Resurrection (above apse),
1709-1710. (http://www.flickr.com/photos/feuilllu/186226653/sizes/l/)
91. Eugène Viollet-le-Duc, Reconstruction of the reliquary in the form of the Sainte-
Chapelle, from Dictionnaire raisonné de l’architecture française, vol. 1, 1854.
(Lenoir, fig. 1, 258)
92. Grégoire Huret, Christ Giving the Crown of Thorns to Louis XIII, seventeenth century.
Engraving. (Edmunds, 200, fig. 154)
93. Israël Silvestre, Vue de la place de la Sorbonne, mid seventeenth century. Engraving.
(Gady, 325)
94. Anonymous, View of Notre-Dame-de-Paris, seventeenth century. Engraving.
xi
268
269
270
271
272
273
274
275
276
277
278
279
280
281
282

(Bottineau, plate 4) 283
95. Plan de l’eglise de Notre-Dame de Paris. Engraving. (Erlande-Brandenburg, p. 249). 284
96. François Mansart and Jacques Lemercier. Val-de-Grâce, 1645 to 1669. Paris, France.
(Artstor) 285
xii

ABSTRACT
This study examines early seventeenth-century Parisian churches supported by French
monarchs, concentrating on the manner in which the buildings illuminate the political goals of
the patrons. Specifically it focuses on the reign of King Louis XIII (1610-1643), a period during
which the king’s mother Queen Maria de’ Medici ruled as regent from 1610 to 1617. During the
king’s reign twenty-one new places of worship were constructed in Paris, making it one of the
most active phases of church building in the entire history of the French capital. Of the twenty-
one churches built during this period, ten received support from the current monarch. Scholars
traditionally attribute the volume of construction to the impact of the Catholic Reformation and
the subsequent establishment of numerous reformed religious groups in Paris. While the
religious renewal that swept France in the early seventeenth century certainly fueled the
construction of churches, the factors prompting Louis XIII and Maria de’ Medici to support such
a high number of buildings remains unexplored in the literature. By investigating the
architecture, painting, and sculpture of these churches in tandem with the historical and political
context of the period, the buildings reveal how they took on additional meaning beyond
reflecting the devout Catholic state. Instead of Maria de’ Medici and Louis XIII only using the
churches as symbols of their religious beliefs, they supported them as a means of pursuing their
political objectives, goals that varied depending upon who was in control of the throne.
Specifically, Maria de’ Medici became a patron of ecclesiastical institutions to promote her
authority while demonstrating her support of the Catholic faith, its institutions, and its allies. In
contrast, Louis XIII advocated the sovereignty of the state, contributing to churches that honored
French kingship and the monarch’s divine right to rule through their architecture, painting, and
sculpture.
xiii

CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
This study examines early seventeenth-century Parisian churches supported by French
monarchs, concentrating on the manner in which the buildings illuminate the political goals of
the patrons. Specifically it focuses on the reign of King Louis XIII (1610-1643), a period during
which the king’s mother Queen Maria de’ Medici ruled as regent from 1610 to 1617 (figs. 1 and
2). During Louis XIII’s reign twenty-one new places of worship were constructed in Paris,
making it one of the most active phases of church building in the entire history of the French
capital. Of the twenty-one churches built during this period, ten received support from the
current monarch. Scholars traditionally attribute the volume of construction to the impact of the
Catholic Reformation and the subsequent establishment of numerous reformed religious groups
in Paris. 1 While the religious renewal that swept France in the early seventeenth century
certainly fueled the construction of churches, the factors prompting Louis XIII and Maria de’
Medici to support such a high number of buildings remains unexplored in the literature. By
investigating the architecture, painting, and sculpture of these churches in tandem with the
historical and political context of the period, we can understand how the buildings took on
additional meaning beyond reflecting the devout Catholic state. Instead of the monarchs only
using the buildings as symbols of their religious beliefs, Maria de’ Medici and Louis XIII
supported the churches as a means of pursuing their political objectives, goals that varied
depending upon who was in control of the throne. Specifically, Maria de’ Medici became a
patron of ecclesiastical institutions to promote her authority while demonstrating her support of
the Catholic faith, its institutions, and its allies. In contrast, Louis XIII advocated the
sovereignty of the state, contributing to churches that honored French kingship and the
monarch’s divine right to rule through their architecture, painting, and sculpture.
1

The Buildings
Of the ten newly-built churches receiving support from the French rulers, Maria de’
Medici provided aid for seven, including those built for the Minims of the Place Royale (begun
1611), the Discalced Carmelites (begun 1613), the Récollets (begun 1614), the Jacobins on the
rue Saint-Honoré (begun 1614), the first chapel for the French Oratorians (begun 1616), the
Filles du Calvaire (begun 1625), and the Religious of St. Elizabeth (begun 1628). Louis XIII
secured royal support for four of the buildings, including the second structure for the church of
the French Oratorians (begun 1621), Saint-Louis-des-Jésuites (1629-41), Notre-Dame-des-
Victoires (begun 1629), and the chapel of the Sorbonne (begun 1634). In addition to the newly
constructed buildings, Louis XIII also provided aid for projects at two existing churches in the
French capital: the Sainte-Chapelle, a major royal foundation, and Notre-Dame-de-Paris, the
cathedral of the French capital. 2 The form of royal support received by each church varied
widely, ranging from financial contributions to royal titles, to having the monarch participate
directly by placing the ceremonial first stone of the building.
The majority of the newly-built churches were constructed for reformed religious orders
recently established in Paris, the one exception being the chapel of the Sorbonne, which is most
frequently associated with Louis XIII’s first minister, Cardinal Armand-Jean du Plessis de
Richelieu. The architectural styles, features, and plans of the buildings vary widely as do the
accompanying paintings and sculptures. Despite the range of ecclesiastical architecture covered
in this study, generally speaking they exhibit common features found in other early seventeenthcentury
Catholic churches: longitudinal plans with single naves bordered by side chapels,
classical features with pilasters, entablatures, and round arches, and clear, even lighting with a
focus on the high altar. It is through an examination of the specific details of the architecture and
decoration that the political objectives of the patrons are revealed.
Historical and Political Context
In 1610 following the assassination of King Henri IV (1589-1610), Maria de’ Medici
became regent for Louis XIII, who at age nine was too young to rule. As regent the queen faced
many of the challenges that had confronted her husband, central among which were the
2

conflicting religious and political opinions between the moderate and conservative Catholics.
Originating during the Wars of Religion, the forty-year civil conflict over the rights of
Protestants waged during the sixteenth century, the differences between the two groups centered
on the best method of dealing with the heretical religion. Seeking to eliminate completely the
Protestant faith, the conservatives believed that the most effective way of achieving their goal
was to form alliances with the pope and other Catholic powers to create a united Europe that
would be effective in combating heresy. 3 Known for their ardent support of the pope, the
conservatives viewed the pontiff as having supreme authority over the Church, even when it
infringed upon the right of the French monarch.
By the time Maria de’ Medici became regent, Parisian conservatives were embodied by
the dévots, a group made up of clerics and lay persons that sought to participate actively in the
Catholic Reformation. 4 Among the ways the dévots brought change to the French church was
through fostering the establishment of numerous reformed religious foundations, which included
groups such as the Society of Jesus, the Discalced Carmelites, and the French Oratorians. The
rate at which these and other religious organizations formed institutions in Paris is astonishing.
Indeed, fifty houses were founded in Paris between 1598 and 1640, and the majority of royal
patronage was devoted to the churches built for these religious groups.
In contrast to the conservatives were the moderate French Catholics, loyalists to the
crown. They believed in tolerating the existing rights of the Protestants and securing the
autonomy of the state. 5 In addition to limiting the growing authority of other Catholic powers,
notably the Habsburgs and Spain, the moderates sought to preserve the traditional liberties of the
Gallican church, with the king, not the pope, holding a number of privileges pertaining to control
of the French Church. Although they recognized the pope as sovereign in spiritual matters, they
did not believe he had any jurisdiction in temporal affairs. In their view papal power was second
to that wielded by the king, the leader of the Gallican church. The authority of the sovereign
derived from the illustrious history of French kingship, which included among others King Louis
IX (1226-1270), who in1297 was canonized and became the model for the ideal monarch. St.
Louis was even addressed by the papal chancery as a “most Christian king,” an epithet
appropriated by subsequent French leaders that came to signify the sovereignty of the ruler and
the privileged status of the state. 6
3

The Patrons: Maria de’ Medici and Louis XIII
A Florentine by birth, Maria de’ Medici married Henri IV in 1600, becoming the queen
of France. Apart from alleviating war debts and helping to validate the king’s conversion in
1593 to Catholicism, the primary goal of the union was to issue a male heir for the throne, which
occurred in the year following the marriage. 7 Maria’s role as royal consort only changed in 1610
with the death of the king. Over the course of the next twenty years she first acquired immense
power as regent and second, following Louis XIII’s taking of the throne in 1617, endeavored to
regain her elevated status while serving from 1622 to 1630 as counselor for her son. The queen’s
patronage of ecclesiastical architecture corresponds to these two stages.
The primary goals pursued by the queen during the regency were promoting the Catholic
faith and confirming her right to rule during the minority of her son Louis XIII. 8 To achieve
these objectives, she fostered relationships with the dévots, promoted the establishment of
numerous reformed religious orders, and established a court full of fellow Italians and others
loyal to the pope. She also sought alliances with other Catholic states, resulting in the Franco-
Spanish pact of 1612, a double marriage alliance with the Spanish royal family involving Louis
and his sister Elisabeth. Backing up her political actions during this phase was the support she
gave to five churches for reformed religious orders. By 1617 her hold on power was so complete
that Louis XIII had to stage a coup d’état to assume his personal reign, leading to the queen’s
temporary exile and four years of exclusion from the court. After being allowed to rejoin the
royal council in 1622, Maria de’ Medici sought to regain the authority she had wielded as regent.
Among the ways she pursued this goal was to support churches that she then used to promote her
agenda.
After assuming control of the throne in 1617, Louis XIII took several years to form a
consistent policy of state. By the early 1620s his most pressing concern was loyalty to the state
from all French subjects, prompting Louis for the first half of his reign to address seditious
elements at home rather than dealing with foreign affairs. 9 Upon realizing that the dévots and
other religious groups favored policies that threatened to undermine his authority, Louis XIII
took steps to limit their influence and to curtail their activities. Included in his actions was the
decision to support the churches of these potentially subversive groups. By initiating a patronage
relationship, he created expectations in which the recipients felt it necessary to reciprocate the
4

king’s beneficence. In this manner he helped to lessen the potential threat to royal power posed
by groups such as the dévots and the Jesuits.
In the 1630s, following the permanent exile of Maria de’ Medici from France in 1631 and
a resolution of the threat from reformed religious orders, Louis’s greatest concern became the
continued expansion of Spanish and Habsburg power. Desiring to limit the influence of these
states, the king embarked upon an increasingly active role in the Thirty Years’ War. As a result
Louis XIII shifted his focus from the support of reformed religious orders and chose to dedicate
his patronage to buildings such as the Sainte-Chapelle and Notre-Dame-de-Paris that best
symbolized France’s privileged status among the very states with which he was at war.
History of the Scholarship
The fundamental studies of seventeenth-century Parisian churches are contained in broad
surveys of French architecture. 10 Among these Maurice Dumolin and Georges Outardel’s Les
églises de France: Paris et la Seine, Amédée Boinet’s Les églises parisiennes, XVIIe siècle, and
Paul and Marie-Louise Biver’s Abbayes, monastères et couvents de Paris des origines à la fin du
XVIIIe siècle are the most comprehensive, providing a near encyclopedic survey of Parisian
churches. Typical of these works is the emphasis they place on descriptive and stylistic analysis
rather than questions of meaning, characterizing the buildings as adopting contemporary Roman
designs while retaining a French character. More recent studies provide a greater sense of
historical context for seventeenth-century churches in France, but they still tend to view the
surge in ecclesiastical architecture as a result of the impact of the Catholic Reformation, failing
to consider other factors beyond religious history as forces behind the creation of the buildings. 11
Despite their shortcomings, these works are essential to understanding seventeenth-century
Parisian churches. They also provide critical descriptions and stylistic examinations of original
buildings that are either no longer extant or extensively renovated.
Scholarly investigations into other areas of seventeenth-century French art frequently
engage social and political concerns, notably the influence of the patron. This is particularly
evident with secular architecture and with commissions related to King Louis XIV (1643-1715).
For the period of time under consideration in this work, patronage studies are well represented
for people close to Louis XIII, especially Maria de’ Medici and Cardinal Richelieu. The queen
5

has been the focus of a wealth of art historical scholarship, including several studies that
recognize her support of religious institutions in Paris. Among these is Géraldine Johnson’s
work, which as part of a larger study of the queen’s patronage of the arts portrays the aid
provided by Maria de’ Medici to churches as a function of her promotion of Catholicism in
France. 12 Additionally Anne Bertrand’s dissertation on Philippe de Champaigne and his patrons
considers the artist’s work for Maria de’ Medici, focusing on the Carmelite Convent in the
Faubourg Saint-Jacques. 13 As part of the section on the Carmelites, which seeks to demonstrate
that the royal patronage was linked to seventeenth-century political and religious strategies,
Bertrand acknowledges Maria de’ Medici’s support of churches by briefly discussing several of
the other religious institutions favored by the queen, including the Filles du Calvaire, also
covered in this study. 14 Along with other recent studies, these works have shaped my
understanding of the queen as a patron of the arts, emphasizing the need of Maria de’ Medici to
legitimize her position during the regency and her desire to regain her authority following her
fall in 1617. 15 Despite this scholarship acknowledging the queen’s support of churches, the bulk
of research continues to focus on commissions related to paintings, most especially Peter Paul
Rubens’s Medici cycle (1621-1625), leaving open the need for an investigation into the subject
covered here. 16
Scholars have long noted the art patronage of Cardinal Richelieu, and in addition to his
interest in painting and sculpture, several studies have investigated his support of architecture. 17
Among these Paolo Berdini’s article, “The Sorbonne and Richelieu: Theological Controversies
and Urban Renewal in XVIIth Century Paris,” published in 1991, examines the Cardinal’s
patronage of the Sorbonne chapel, providing a model example of a study merging the political
and religious goals of a French patron. Focusing on Richelieu’s resolution of a theological
controversy between Gallican and Tridentine parties within the Sorbonne College, the author
presents the architecture as more than a French building adorned with classical motifs. Instead,
he argues that the twofold character of the dispute inspired a church for which the design and
decorative program were likewise dual in their purpose and presentation. By expanding the
search for influences on the design to contemporary events occurring at the Sorbonne, the author
not only adds to my own research but also contributes to my methodological approach.
One of the largest gaps in the literature is for Louis XIII. Scholarship traditionally
characterizes the king as a weak ruler lacking an interest in the arts, which explains the lack of
6

attention to his patronage. 18 Within the last twenty years, several studies have revised this
picture of the king, arguing instead that he was a self-sufficient leader with an active artistic
policy. 19 In 1992 Anne Le pas de Sécheval wrote a doctoral thesis, based largely on archival
documents, cataloging the king’s patronage of the arts, including several of the churches
presented in this study. 20 A few years later Marc Fumaroli wrote an article abut the king’s
rejection of the last scene of a tapestry series designed by Peter Paul Rubens representing the Life
of Constantine, arguing that Louis viewed the image as a threat to his temporal authority. 21 Each
of these works is critical in establishing that Louis XIII had an interest in the patronage of the
arts and that he was aware of its power to convey political messages.
Several studies have been devoted to individual Parisian churches dating to the
seventeenth century, providing invaluable archival material in addition to reconstructing the
buildings’ original form. 22 A few of these focus on the influence of individual patrons, moving
beyond personal religious concerns to show that ambition and political ideals drove the
construction of the building. 23 One such study that considers a church covered in this work is
Martin Schieder’s essay on Notre-Dame-des-Victoires, which argues that Louis XIII’s patronage
of the church played a role in the formation of the absolutist state and helped to legitimize the
Bourbon dynasty. While this work is valuable because it places the building within the political
context of early modern France, it ignores Louis XIII’s early involvement with the Oratory and
Saint-Louis-des-Jésuites by suggesting that Notre-Dame-des-Victoires was the first church
supported by the king.
By far, the architectural projects of the Society of Jesus have received the most scholarly
attention of the religious groups discussed here. Within the vast field of literature, scholars have
traditionally focused on two themes: viewing the Gesù, the mother church of the order in Rome,
as the prototypical example of Counter-Reformation church design and arguing for and against
the idea that the Jesuits imposed a monolithic artistic and architectural program on all of their
commissions throughout the world. Recent scholarship has done much to answer these issues by
finding that the Society developed numerous solutions for the appropriate Catholic Reformation
church, and that instead of having an institutional approach to design, it allowed factors such as
regional styles and preferences and the influence of non-Jesuit patrons to determine the final
project. 24
7

Although studies employing contextual methodologies have rarely been used for the
buildings treated in my study, several of the religious groups that built the churches have been
the subject of this type of scholarship. In an extensive study of the French Oratorians, Charles
Williams discusses the history of the congregation and examines the evolving spiritual and
doctrinal concerns of Pierre Bérulle, the group‘s founder. 25 The book provides fundamental
insights into the social and political domains with which Bérulle had to negotiate as head of the
Oratory, but it omits discussion of art and architecture. In a book exploring French royal support
of the Society of Jesus, Eric Nelson argues that Louis XIII’s father provided ecclesiastical
patronage to the Jesuit Order as part of his efforts to define royal influence over the Catholic
Church in France. 26
One other field of scholarship contributes greatly to my research, that of French history.
Specifically, works by authors such as Barbara Dieffendorf, Mack Holt, Michael Wolfe, and
Sharon Kettering have shaped my understanding of the political, religious, and social history of
the period, providing me with a basis for understanding the historical context. 27 Among these,
Sharon Kettering’s studies of seventeenth-century patronage have made an especially important
contribution to my work on Louis XIII. Characterizing patronage relationships, she argues that
the obligatory reciprocity of the patron client exchange created expectations that led to reliance
and occasionally trust and loyalty. 28 This idea is central to my assertion that Louis XIII
believed he could control the potentially subversive religious groups through financial support of
their church es.
Organization of the Chapters
My dissertation begins with a chapter that presents the religious and political context of
the late sixteenth and early seventeenth centuries in France. Its purpose is to illuminate the
circumstances that led up to Maria de’ Medici’s regency and Louis XIII’s reign, demonstrating
that the French monarchs were in need of a powerful tool to express their individual political
agendas. Using well-known historical material, I discuss the Wars of Religion, the reign of
Henri IV, and the Catholic Reformation in France to show the manner in which each of these
factors had a bearing on the policies of Maria de’ Medici and Louis XIII. Not only did these
8

events affect their individual reigns, they ultimately contributed to the royal support of churches,
prompting the monarchs to use the buildings as vehicles through which to attain their objectives.
The next four chapters examine the monarchs’ involvement with the churches, seeking to
establish the effects of the royal support and to demonstrate the reasons for the patronage. I
begin with the reign of Louis XIII, with chapter two focusing on the king’s interest in the church
of the French Oratory, begun in 1621 for the Congrégation des Pères de l’Oratoire de France. In
1623 Louis XIII named the church, which was adjacent to the palace of the Louvre, as his new
royal chapel, decreeing that state funds be provided to help with construction costs. Although
the fathers of the congregation had enjoyed the patronage of Maria de’ Medici since the society’s
founding in Paris in 1611, Louis’s decision to support the church was not a beneficent gesture
towards his mother. Instead I propose that it was a challenge to the conservative French
Catholics known as the dévots, a group with close ties to Maria de’ Medici and the Oratorian
congregation.
To challenge the subversive tendencies of the Oratory’s supporters, Louis XIII
appropriated the building for his own use and made plans to draw it into the royal precinct. In
addition he enhanced the existing structure with monarchical symbols and meaningful features
that transformed the church into a sign of royal authority. In doing so Louis XIII not only
tempered the political ambitions of his mother and other dévots, but he also established an
interest in ecclesiastical architecture as a sign of his royal will, which he expanded on throughout
the remainder of his reign.
Chapter three looks at the monarch’s connection to Saint-Louis-des-Jésuites, a Parisian
church built for the Society of Jesus’s maison professe and dedicated to Louis IX (1226-1270),
France’s only sainted king. When construction began in 1627, Louis XIII provided royal funds
to assist with the new church, making him at the time the largest contributor to the building. He
also participated in the ceremonial placing of the foundation stone and commissioned the striking
of two medals to commemorate his patronage of the building. The king’s actions occurred
shortly after the appearance in Paris of a Jesuit publication challenging monarchical authority, a
work that rekindled the belief of French loyalists that the Society of Jesus acted as a promoter of
papal power over the state’s rights.
As I seek to demonstrate in this chapter, the Jesuit publication prompted Louis XIII to
become the church’s primary benefactor, providing him with a means to assert his authority over
9

the Society. By dedicating royal funds to the construction of Saint-Louis-des-Jésuites and by
commissioning medals that depicted images of model rulers with absolute power, Louis affirmed
his sovereign rights. In the wake of the king’s actions, the Jesuits turned their church into an
artistic program venerating French kingship, a statement which became most visible in a series
of four paintings by various artists depicting scenes from the life of St. Louis. A further
acknowledgement of Louis XIII’s authority came from contributions to the same church by
Cardinal Richelieu, who like the Jesuits turned his patronage of the façade and high altar into an
expression of the power of the French monarchy.
The next chapter considers Maria de’ Medici. Although the queen’s support of churches
began prior to that of her son, I have placed this section here to best illuminate her two distinct
approaches to patronage, which correspond to the stage of her regency (1610-1617) and the time
in which she served as a counselor to the king (1622-1630). Studying the churches from the
different periods reveals two different types of buildings. The five churches supported by the
queen during the regency lack any visual reference to the royal aid they received, while the two
begun after her return from exile and admittance into the royal council include prominent
imagery explicitly linking them to their patron.
Although Maria de’ Medici supported more Parisian churches than her son, the primary
focus of this study is Louis XIII. Three chapters are devoted to him in contrast to one for the
queen. This decision stems in part from the fact that in comparison with Maria de’ Medici’s
patronage, far less attention has been devoted to the king. Equally important is the fact that the
queen’s actions are best understood when viewed as a response to the king’s support of churches.
To account for the striking differences between those churches begun from 1610 to 1617
and those from the 1620s, I examine the queen mother’s distinct objectives during her reign as
regent and her role as counselor to the king. During the regency Maria de’ Medici had two
primary concerns: the promotion of the Catholic faith and the legitimization of her right to rule
for her minor son, a position threatened by her foreign status and her gender. My research shows
that by contributing to the construction of churches for religious orders, the queen helped to
legitimize her rule by participating in an established tradition of French monarchs while at the
same time promoting the ideals of the Catholic Reformation. The absence of visual signs tying
the churches to Maria de’ Medici limited fears of control by a foreign queen while suggesting
that the push for reform came solely from the religious groups. In contrast, upon admittance to
10

the royal council in 1622 the queen’s greatest desire was to regain the authority she had obtained
at the end of the regency. The search for power prompted Maria to turn once again to churches
but this time to use prominent visual signs that advertised her support of the building. By using
personal symbols and royal imagery to express her devotion to Louis XIII and to promote her
elevated status as the mother of the king, Maria de’ Medici sought to secure greater authority
within the realm.
Returning to Louis XIII, the fifth chapter considers the last churches supported by the
king. In 1629 Louis became the founder of the Parisian monastery of the Augustins Déchaussés,
granting it royal privileges and placing the first stone of its church Notre-Dame-des-Victoires.
Following this grand gesture of support, the king neglected to direct any royal funds to assist
with construction of the church, instead choosing from the early 1630s onwards to focus his
spending on churches with established connections to the state, specifically the Sainte-Chapelle,
Notre-Dame-des-Victoires, and the chapel of the Sorbonne.
The result of this decision was that Notre-Dame-des-Victoires was the last church for a
reformed religious order in Paris to benefit from Louis XIII’s patronage. In light of the king’s
active contributions during the 1620s to these institutions, the abrupt decision to no longer
support them during the following decade assumes greater significance. My purpose in this
chapter is to demonstrate that royal neglect of Notre-Dame-des-Victoires stemmed from shifting
priorities in the French government, concerns that moved from worries about internal struggles
with conservative Catholics and rebellious Huguenots to an international focus on the expansion
of Habsburg forces. In 1633 shortly after Louis XIII turned his attention to the Sainte-Chapelle,
France embarked upon an increasingly active role in the Thirty Years’ War, seeking to limit
Spanish growth. By choosing to support ecclesiastical buildings historically linked to the French
state, Louis moved away from using churches as tools to promote his authority over potentially
subversive religious groups. Instead he focused on architecture that in the face of external
threats would advance the country’s privileged status among all Christian nations. As with the
church of the French Oratory and Saint-Louis-des-Jésuites, these buildings demonstrate that
Louis XIII continued to employ ecclesiastical architecture as a visual sign of the most pressing
concerns of the state, further defining the use by seventeenth-century French monarch of the arts
as political tools.
11

1 Marie-Laure Deschamps-Bourgeon, "Le Grand Siècle et le siècle des Lumières," in
Dictionnaire des églises de Paris, ed. Georges Brunel (Paris: Editions Hervas, 1995), 41-46;
Maurice Dumolin and George Outardel, Les églises de France: Paris et la Seine (Paris: Librairie
Letouzey et Ané, 1936), ix, 126-96 and passim; Louis Hautecoeur, Histoire de l'architecture
classique en France, 7 vols. (Paris: Picard, 1966), 1:216-24; Claude Mignot, "The New Rome,
1527-1700: The Century of Louis XIII (1594-1660)," in The Art and Spirit of Paris, ed. Michel
Laclotte (New York: Abbeville Press, 2004), 1:311; Jean-Marie Pérouse de Montclos, Histoire
de l'architecture française (Paris: Caisse nationale des monuments historiques et des sites, 1989),
167-69; Bernard Violle, Paris, son Eglise et ses églises: histoire, art, foi, 2 vols. (Paris: Cerf,
2004), 2:66-72.
2 Louis XIII also contributed support to the Abbey church of Saint-Denis. This topic needs
further study and has yet to be incorporated into my study.
3 For this characterization of the conservative Catholics, see Barbara B. Diefendorf, From
Penitence to Charity: Pious Women and the Catholic Reformation in Paris (Oxford: Oxford
University Press, 2004), 11-13, 78-82. More bibliographic sources for this topic are provided in
chapters one and two of the present study.
4 For the term dévot, see ibid., 11-13, 78-82, 89-91.
5 For an introduction to the moderates, see Mario Turchetti, "Middle Parties in France during the
Wars of Religion," in Reformation, Revolt and Civil War in France and the Netherlands, 1555-
1585, ed. Philip Benedict, et al. (Amsterdam: Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences,
1999), 165-83. Further bibliography is provided in chapters one and two, below.
6 For the history and meaning of this epithet, see Colette Beaune, The Birth of an Ideology:
Myths and Symbols of Nation in Late-Medieval France, trans. Susan Ross Huston (Berkeley:
University of California Press, 1991), 172-93.
7 For this characterization of the marriage, see Bernard Barbiche, "Marie de Médicis, reine
régnante, et le Saint-Siège: agent ou otage de la Réforme catholique?" in Le "siècle" de Marie
de Médicis: Actes du Séminaire de la Chaire Rhétorique et Société en Europe (XVIe-XVIIe
siècles) du Collège de France sous la direction de Marc Fumaroli de l'Académie française, ed.
Françoise Graziani and Francesco Solinas (Alessandria: Edizioni dell'Orso, 2003), 41-42; Michel
Carmona, Marie de Médicis (Paris: Fayard, 1981), 16-20.
8 For a bibliography of Maria de’ Medici, see chapter four. For two works that especially
emphasize the queen’s goals, see Katherine Crawford, Perilous Performances: Gender and
Regency in Early Modern France (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2004), 59-97;
Géraldine A. Johnson, "Imagining Images of Powerful Women: Maria de' Medici's Patronage of
Art and Architecture," in Women and Art in Early Modern Europe: Patrons, Collectors, and
Connoisseurs, ed. Cynthia Lawrence (University Park, PA: The Pennsylvania State University
Press, 1997), 126-53.
12

9 For a bibliography of Louis XIII, see chapters one and two. For Louis’s concern with loyalty to
the state, see A. Lloyd Moote, Louis XIII, the Just (Berkeley: University of California Press,
1989), 46.
10 Paul and Marie-Louise Biver, Abbayes, monastères et couvents de Paris des origines à la fin
du XVIIIe siècle (Paris: Éditions d'histoire et d'art, 1970); Reginald Theodore Blomfield, Three
Hundred Years of French Architecture, 1491-1794 (London: A. Maclehose, 1936); Anthony
Blunt, Art and Architecture in France, 1500 to 1700, 5 ed. (New Haven: Yale University Press,
1999); Amédée Boinet, Les églises parisiennes, XVIIe siècle (Paris: Les Editions de Minuit,
1962); Yvan Christ, Églises parisiennes actuelles et disparues (Paris: Éditions Tel, 1947);
Dumolin and Outardel, Églises de France; Hautecoeur, Architecture classique; Walter F.
Lonergan, Historic Churches of Paris (London: Downey, 1896); Pérouse de Montclos,
Architecture française.
11
Deschamps-Bourgeon, "Le Grand Siècle et le siècle des Lumières," 41-58; Mignot, "New
Rome," 298-377; Violle, Paris.
12 Johnson, "Imagining Images," 134-35. Additional works that mention the queen’s support of
religious institutions include: Jean-François Dubost, "Reine, regente, reine mère," in Marie de
Médicis et le Palais Luxembourg, ed. Marie-Noëlle Baudouin-Matuszek (Paris: Délégation à
l'Action Artistique de la Ville de Paris, 1991), 143; Deborah Marrow, "The Art Patronage of
Maria de' Medici" (Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Pennsylvania, 1978), 24, 41-42; Claude
Mignot, "L'architecture française au temps de Marie de Médicis," in Marie de Médicis: un
gouvernement par les arts, ed. Paola Bassani Pacht, et al. (Paris: Somogy éditions d'art, 2003),
34; Nicolas Sainte-Fare Garnot, "L'action caritative," in Marie de Médicis et le Palais
Luxembourg, ed. Marie-Noëlle Baudouin-Matuszek (Paris: Délégation à l'Action Artistique de la
Ville de Paris, 1991), 162.
13 Anne Bertrand, "Art and Politics in Counter-Reformation Paris: The Case of Philippe de
Champaigne and his Patrons (1621-1674)" (Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Pittsburgh, 2000),
113-87.
14 Ibid., 118-27. In addition to the Filles du Calvaire the other religious institution is the parish
church of Saint-Germain-l’Auxerrois. Both churches are additional places for which the queen
may have commissioned Philippe de Champaigne to do work.
15 For two works that especially emphasize Maria de’ Medici’s search for legitimization between
1610 and 1617 and desire for power between 1621 and 1631, see Crawford, Perilous
Performances, 59-97; Johnson, "Imagining Images," 126-53. Additional works focusing on
Peter Paul Rubens’s Medici Cycle (1621-1625) at the Luxembourg Palace contribute to the
thesis that Maria de’ Medici worked to increase her authoritative role during the reign of Louis
XIII. These include: Fanny Cosandey, La reine de France: Symbole et pouvoir, XVe-XVIIIe
siècle (Paris: Gallimard, 2000), 333-60; Marrow, "Maria de' Medici;" Ronald Forsyth Millen and
Robert Erich Wolf, Heroic Deeds and Mystic Figures: A New Reading of Rubens' Life of Maria
13

de' Medici (Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1989). For several notable
exhibition catalogs contributing to Maria de’ Medici’s role as a patron, see Marie-Noëlle
Baudouin-Matuszek and Béatrice de Andia, Marie de Médicis et le Palais du Luxembourg (Paris:
Délégation à l'Action Artistique de la Ville de Paris, 1991); Caterina Caneva and Francesco
Solinas, eds., Maria de' Medici (1573-1642): una principessa fiorentina sul trono di Francia
(Livorno: Sillabe, 2005); Sara Mamone, Paris et Florence: deux capitales du spectacle pour une
reine Marie de Médicis, trans. Sophie Bajard (Paris: Seuil, 1990).
16 For two exceptions that consider Maria de’ Medici’s role in relation to architecture, see Marie-
Noëlle Baudouin-Matuszek, "Un palais pour un reine mere," in Marie de Médicis et le Palais du
Luxembourg, ed. M. N. Baudouin-Matuszek and Béatrice de Andia (Paris: Délégation à l'Action
Artistique de la Ville de Paris, 1991), 170-223; Mignot, "Marie de Médicis," 29-41. Baudouin-
Matuszek’s essay considers Maria de’ Medici’s Luxembourg Palace; Mignot’s essay is a survey
of French architecture during the early seventeenth century.
17 Hilary Ballon, "The Architecture of Cardinal Richelieu," in Richelieu: Art and Power, ed.
Hilliard Todd Goldfarb (Montreal: Montreal Museum of Fine Arts, 2002), 246-59; Paolo
Berdini, "The Sorbonne and Richelieu: Theological Controversies and Urban Renewal in
XVIIth Century Paris," Arte cristiana 79, no. 745 (1991): 251-76; Claude Mignot, "Richelieu et
l'architecture," in Richelieu et le monde de l'esprit, ed. André Tuilier (Paris: Imprimerire
nationale, 1985), 55-60.
18
Most recently Ballon, "The Architecture of Cardinal Richelieu," 258, stated that the king
lacked an interest in architecture.
19 For the leading historian proposing that Louis XIII was a self-sufficient king, not dependent
for every idea on Cardinal Richelieu, see Moote, Louis XIII.
20
Anne Le Pas de Sécheval, "La politique artistique de Louis XIII" (Thèse de doctorat,
Université de Paris-Sorbonne, 1992).
21 Marc Fumaroli, "Cross, Crown, and Tiara: the Constantine Myth between Paris and Rome,
1590-1690," Studies in the History of Art 48 (1995): 88-102.
22 For works covering churches presented in this study, see Jean-Marie Barbiche, "Les Augustins
déchaussés de Notre-Dame-des-Victoires (1629-1790)" (Thèse, Ecole nationale des chartes,
2007); Louis Blond, La maison professe des Jésuites de la rue Saint-Antoine à Paris, 1580-1762
(Paris: Éditions Franciscaines, 1956); Martine Constans, L'église Saint-Paul-Saint-Louis de
Paris (Paris: Editions de la Tourelle, 1977); Alexandre Gady, Jacques Lemercier, architecte et
ingénieur du roi (Paris: Editions de la Maison des sciences de l'homme, 2005); Auguste-Marie-
Pierre Ingold, L'église de l'Oratoire Saint-Honoré (Paris: Poussielgue frères, 1887); Edouard
Lambert, Notice historique sur l'église de Notre-Dame des Victoires (Paris: Curot, 1872); Le Pas
de Sécheval, "Politique artistique;" Bernard de Montgolfier, ed., Saint-Paul-Saint-Louis: les
Jésuites à Paris (Paris: Musée Carnavalet, 1985).
14

23 For these types of studies on churches not covered in this work, see Martha Mel Edmunds,
Piety and Politics: Imaging Divine Kingship in Louis XIV's Chapel at Versailles (Newark:
University of Delaware Press, 2002); Jennifer G. Germann, "The Val-de-Grâce as a Portrait of
Anne of Austria: Queen, Queen Regent, Queen Mother," in Architecture and the Politics of
Gender in Early Modern Europe, ed. Helen Hills (Burlington, VT: Ashgate, 2003), 47-61.
24 John Alexander, "Shaping Sacred Space in the Sixteenth Century: Design Criteria for the
Collegio Borromeo's Chapel," Journal of the Society of Architectural Historians 63 (2004): 164-
79; Gauvin Alexander Bailey, "'Le style jésuite n'existe pas': Jesuit Corporate Culture and the
Visual Arts," in The Jesuits: Cultures, Sciences, and the Arts 1540-1773, ed. John W. O'Malley
et al. (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1999), 38-89; Jeffrey Chipps Smith, Sensuous
Worship: Jesuits and the Art of the Early Catholic Reformation in Germany (Princeton:
Princeton University Press, 2002).
25
Charles E. Williams, The French Oratorians and Absolutism, 1611-1641 (New York: Peter
Lang, 1989).
26 Eric Nelson, The Jesuits and the Monarchy: Catholic Reform and Political Authority in
France (1590-1615) (Aldershot: Ashgate, 2005).
27 For representative works of each of these others, see Diefendorf, Penitence; Mack P. Holt, The
French Wars of Religion, 1562-1629 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995); Sharon
Kettering, French Society, 1589-1715 (Essex: Pearson Education Limited, 2001); Michael
Wolfe, The Conversion of Henri IV: Politics, Power, and Religious Belief in Early Modern
France (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1993).
28
Sharon Kettering, "Gift-Giving and Patronage in Early Modern France," French History 2, no.
2 (1988): 131-51.
15

CHAPTER 2
THE HISTORICAL CONTEXT: FACTORS PROMPTING
ROYAL PATRONAGE OF CHURCHES
The regency of Queen Maria de’ Medici (1610-1617) and the personal reign of her son
King Louis XIII (1617-1643) each began on shaky ground: Maria ruled following the
assassination of her husband King Henri IV (1589-1610), and Louis assumed full control of the
throne after a coup d’état exiling his mother. Each change of power placed the kingdom of
France in the hands of a relatively inexperienced ruler whose lack of governmental control,
combined with the realm’s political uncertainty and religious divisions, made the country
vulnerable to civil disorder and foreign invasion. As part of their efforts to overcome these
obstacles, the queen and king required visual tools that could communicate their individual
agendas to the public, functioning as symbols of the most pressing concerns of each of their
reigns. Among the methods they both chose was the patronage of Parisian churches.
The decision to use ecclesiastical architecture as a means of expressing their individual
goals was the outcome of certain crucial developments in French history emerging in the halfcentury
before the two reigns—the Wars of Religion, the rise and reign of Henri IV, and the
effect of the Catholic Reformation in France, especially Paris. 1 The purpose of this chapter is to
demonstrate how these issues continued to exert influence on the seventeenth-century monarchs’
reigns, contributing to the king and queen’s decisions to provide assistance for churches. By also
examining the monarchs’ approach to foreign affairs and religious divisions during the respective
reigns, this chapter will show the manner in which the distinctive handling by Maria and Louis
of each issue further led them to support religious institutions. As I will demonstrate in this and
later chapters, they chose to become patrons of new churches to express visually their personal
monarchical goals, which for Maria was the assertion of her own power and the promotion of a
strong Catholic Europe, while for Louis it was an autonomous and loyal state.
To show how the religious and political issues affecting Maria de’ Medici and Louis XIII
drove the monarchs to use churches as tools during each of their reigns, I draw from secondary
sources of French history. While the scholarship for this period acknowledges the intricate
16

nature of the religious and political problems confronting the kingdom, the complexity has led to
numerous interpretations. Among the various readings of early modern French history, certain
analyses contributed more than others to the foundation of my thesis. Because of the diverse
approaches to the period, I will first present the major points of view of historical scholarship
relative to the Wars of Religion, the kingship of Henri IV, and the Catholic Reformation in
France. I will then present the key developments of each event as they relate to my topic,
followed by a discussion of how the complex matters of the previous monarchies continued to
affect the individual reigns of Maria and Louis. This material will elucidate the king and queen’s
reasons for wanting to manifest visually their individual goals through the building of churches.
Wars of Religion
For nearly forty years before the turn of the seventeenth century, France was involved in
a series of civil and religious wars known today as the Wars of Religion. 2 Consisting of eight
battles occurring from 1562 to 1598, the conflict grew out of religious differences and
aristocratic rivalries between the Catholics and the French Protestants, or Huguenots. By the
1580s the wars were no longer simply divided along Catholic and Protestant lines. Instead
differing sects among the Catholics, including a group willing to allow a limited degree of
religious freedom and another vowing to put an end to Protestantism at any cost, emerged to give
a new character to the ongoing conflict. Thus the last two decades of the Wars of Religion
witnessed three competing factions: Huguenots, militant Catholics, and moderate Catholics.
The division between Catholics was the key development of the Wars of Religion that continued
to affect the reigns of Maria de’ Medici and Louis XIII.
Scholars of the Wars of Religion interpret the conflicts as developing from either social,
political, or religious issues. Prior to the 1970s researchers viewed the wars as having been
shaped by political motivations, namely the rivalry between Protestant and Catholic aristocrats
vying for power in the French court following the sudden death of Henri II (1547-1559). 3 In the
last quarter of the twentieth century scholars began using a social approach to explain the Wars
of Religion. Following notable French historians such as Natalie Zemon Davis, they argue that
the conflicts arose from socio-economic tensions and popular forces within the bourgeois and
noble classes. 4 Surprisingly, seeing the wars as essentially a religious conflict has only emerged
17

in the last twenty years as a serious approach for this period. Denis Crouzet for example,
challenges the conventional political interpretation by arguing that a collective mentality of
eschatological fear caused Catholics to take up arms against the Protestants.
y
5 Also using a
religious approach to the wars is Mack Holt, who views the battles as being fought primarily
over matters of faith, but that faith had a social rather than a theological meaning. 6
While scholars continue to debate the meaning of the Wars of Religion, one aspect on
which they agree and the feature that most informs my research is the three-sided struggle that
emerged following the St. Bartholomew’s Day massacre in 1572. 7 The battle lines that were
initially drawn between the Huguenots and Catholics took on a third dimension when divisive
elements developed among adherents to the Roman faith. On one side of the disagreement
historians recognize a group of conservative Catholics, who believed that the Huguenots should
not hold any religious rights. On the other side were more moderate members of Catholicism,
who despite viewing the Reformed faith as heretical, thought that in order to bring peace to the
country the religious minority would have to be granted some degree of toleration. The lack of
unity within Catholicism not only complicated further the ongoing battles, but it also failed to
dissipate by the end of the Wars of Religion, instead finding new forms of discord in the
seventeenth century. This dimension of the conflict greatly impacted the reigns of Maria de’
Medici and Louis XIII, contributing to each monarch’s decision to support churches.
The origins of these differences can best be understood by exploring the major events of
the wars. First among these is the expansion of Protestantism in early sixteenth-century France,
a development that Robert Knecht characterizes as being due in large part to the inaction of the
reigning monarchs. 8 The new faith made its first appearance in Paris in 1519 in the form of
Martin Luther’s creed. 9 Despite a censure on Protestantism by the Faculty of Theology at the
University of Paris, King François I (1515-1547) favored many of the humanistic ideas
associated with the Reformed religion and did little to curb the movement‘s initial growth in
Parisian circles. 10 As the Reformed faith spread through the provinces, the French parlements,
or courts of law, increasingly prosecuted acts of heresy, but François I’s prolonged militar
campaigns in Italy against Emperor Charles V prevented the king from acting on the domestic
issue once he realized the extent of the dissenting religious movement. 11
When Henri II succeeded his father François I in 1547, he too became involved in the
wars against the Habsburg Empire, leaving little time to deal with the growing heretical
18

movement. Thinking he would turn his attention to the issue of Protestantism in 1559 following
the end of his military campaigns, his unexpected death in June of the same year prevented this,
instead bringing to the throne his ten-year-old son François II (1559-1560). The new king’s
youth and inexperience nullified the authoritative role of the monarch, allowing members of the
staunchly Catholic house of Guise to assume control of the royal council. 12 The Guise family’s
newly acquired power triggered dissatisfactions with other aristocratic families, notably
members of the house of Bourbon, who in addition to being the nearest cousins to the king, and
thus first princes of the blood, were also recent converts to the Reformed faith. 13 The court’s
ensuing political instability, brought on by the tense relationship between the Guise and Bourbon
aristocrats, was only exacerbated by growing religious tensions between the Huguenots and the
Catholics. Members of the Reformed churches became increasingly militant through public
displays of preaching and abstention from Catholic processions and services. In response to the
outward rejection of traditional orthodoxy, Catholics escalated public attacks against Protestants
and persecuted the heretics in the courts.
The French monarchy continued to remain a central part of the religious problems during
the regency of Catherine de’ Medici, Henri II’s widow, who ruled for her ten-year-old son
Charles IX (1560-1574) following the death of François II. Adopting a policy of moderation that
gave the Protestants limited freedom of worship, the queen hoped to limit escalating religious
tensions and to prevent Huguenots from provoking Catholics. 14 While Catherine de’ Medici
thought that her strategy of moderation would give her time to develop a plan that would
ultimately reunite France under one Christian confession, the members of the Reformed churches
had different ideas. Upon receiving these rights, the Protestants took advantage of the situation
by engaging in prohibited acts, including gathering in assemblies, taking possession of more
churches, and performing acts of iconoclasm. Catholics retaliated with equally offensive acts of
religious violence ranging from invading known sites of Huguenot worship to setting fire to
Protestant churches.
In March 1562 these actions led to a clash between the two faiths, marking the beginning
of the first of the eight religious wars. The fighting was prompted by the duke of Guise, who
along with his entourage invaded a barn in the town of Vassy in Champagne where Protestants
were worshiping, leaving as many as fifty unarmed worshipers dead and injuring another one
hundred fifty. As characterized by Mack Holt, starting with this conflict, the battles established a
19

pattern that would be repeated in each subsequent war over the next four decades: a military
campaign in which neither side could defeat the other definitively was followed by a
compromise peace that the crown could neither administer nor enforce. 15
The next major stage in the development of the division between Catholics occurred in
the years following the St. Bartholomew’s Day massacre. One of the most infamous events of
the Wars of Religion, the massacre was touched off by a failed attempt in Paris on 22 August
1572 to assassinate Admiral Coligny, the leader of the Huguenots. 16 In response to the attack on
their leader’s life the Huguenots demanded retribution, which was quickly misinterpreted as a
royal threat, provoking the crown to launch a pre-emptive strike on prominent Protestant leaders
in the capital. 17 As the king’s guards carried out the orders during the night of 23 August, the
Catholic populace took the directive as royal consent to murder all members of the Reformed
faith, sparking a week of violence in which Catholics killed up to three thousand Protestants of
all ages and social classes. By mid-September the riot had spread to at least eight major
provincial cities and possibly took another seven thousand lives. 18
Apart from a dramatic decrease in membership in the Reformed churches, the years
following the massacre witnessed the emergence of two approaches among Catholics to deal
with the Protestants. The first of these was advocated by the moderates. Never an officially
organized political party, they were more concerned with the survival of the French state than
religious unity. 19 Composed mainly of royalist-leaning jurists, theologians, and statesmen, the
moderates recognized that religious divisions were hurting the country by causing a seemingly
endless cycle of civil war. Seeking to maintain the monarchy’s established policy of moderation,
they certainly believed that the Reformed religion was heretical but were willing to tolerate
Protestantism until peace could be established in the country.
The second approach belonged to the conservatives, who wanted to deny Protestants any
form of religious freedom. This group developed a militant component in June 1584 following
the death of Francis, duke of Anjou, younger brother of the childless King Henri III (1574-1589)
and next in line for the throne. 20 His death made Henri de Bourbon, first prince of the blood, the
closest heir to the French crown. For the militant Catholics, the problem with this situation was
that Henri de Bourbon was a Protestant and the Huguenots’ most powerful military leader. With
the urging of prominent nobles, a Catholic association known as the League sprang up across
France with the intention of extirpating the Protestants and avoiding a heretical king. 21
20

The members of the League, known as Leaguers, were so against the idea of
Protestantism that they were willing to go to great extremes to ensure a Catholic monarch,
including challenging the authority of their own king by recognizing Charles, cardinal of
Bourbon, who was the only Catholic prince of the blood, as heir to the throne. They even went
so far as to form a secret alliance with Spain’s King Philip II (1556-1598), in which the League
agreed to help Spain fight Protestantism in France and the Netherlands. 22 In addition, they
favored the papacy by claiming that the pope had supreme authority, even over secular affairs
traditionally governed by the king. For the Leaguers, a Protestant king was simply antithetical to
the history of France. French rulers had been Catholic since the time of Clovis (481-511).
Because of this, militant Catholics insisted that the king’s Catholic religion was a fundamental
law of the kingdom. In fact the Leaguers wanted so much to avoid the Protestant Henri de
Bourbon that they were willing to supersede Salic Law, a French custom requiring royal lineage
to pass from the king to the closest and eldest male heir, with a new directive requiring that the
sovereign be Catholic. 23
Despite the Leaguers’ opposition to Henri de Bourbon’s succession to the throne, the
Huguenot leader became the king of France following the death of Henri III. Taking the name
Henri IV (1589-1610), in 1593 he renounced the Protestant faith and converted to Catholicism.
But it was the king’s moderate approach to his new faith that allowed him to find the solution to
ending the Wars of Religion. Influenced by the royalist Catholics’ toleration of Protestantism,
Henri IV issued the Edict of Nantes in 1598 that granted the Huguenots limited rights to worship.
This measure along with the king’s willingness to forgive the Leaguers was instrumental in
helping the battle-weary country end the civil wars and embark on a period of domestic peace.
Nonetheless, a sense of division remained among the Catholics. The militant Catholics who had
been intent on ridding the country of Protestantism gave up their military campaigns against the
heretics, but in their overarching goal to reunite the country in the Catholic confession they
maintained close ties with Habsburg Spain and the Papal States. In contrast the moderate
Catholics pushed ahead with their policy to ensure the stability of the French state, which meant
protecting it from foreign threats. This discord did not disappear after the death of Henri IV.
Instead it continued during the reigns of Maria de’ Medici and Louis XIII, and as a key influence
on the political strategies adopted by each monarch, it would affect each monarch’s reason for
supporting religious foundations.
21

The Reign of Henri IV
The move from prince of the blood to king of France was not an easy process for Henri
IV, nor was his conversion to Catholicism a light-hearted decision (fig. 3). Although Henri III
had formally recognized him as heir to the throne prior to his assassination by a religious fanatic
in 1589, Henri IV still had to convince the people of France that he was their legitimate king.
His immediate concern following his rise to the throne was fighting the Catholic League, which
had only grown more powerful with the realization of a Protestant king. Henri also recognized
that despite his belief in the Reformed religion, as the king of France he needed to be Catholic
and that to fulfill his coronation oath he would have to protect the faith from attack. 24 In 1593 he
let it be known that he wanted to receive instruction in the Catholic faith, and in July of the same
year he formally abjured Protestantism at the Abbey Church of Saint-Denis. Although he would
continue fighting the most militant of the Leaguers until 1598, his absolution by French bishops
at his conversion and acceptance by Pope Clement VIII in 1595 effectively ended the Catholic
League because it was sufficient proof for the majority of the faithful of Henri’s legitimacy as
king. 25
The purpose of this section is to examine the reign of Henri IV, demonstrating the
manner in which his major actions would contribute to the subsequent rulers’ decisions to
support churches. During this period the once-Protestant prince established himself not only as
an absolute king sanctioned by a Catholic God but he also reaffirmed the French crown’s
Catholic character. 26 In addition to ending the Wars of Religion, his other major
accomplishments included rebuilding the country‘s infrastructure and restoring the city of Paris.
The history of the first Bourbon ruler is critical to my study because Henri’s demonstration of the
close association between Church and State influenced the future reigns of his wife and son.
The majority of scholars studying Henri IV focus on the king‘s political ambitions,
portraying him as an opportunist who waited until it was most advantageous to become
Catholic. 27 Instead of considering his personal attitudes towards matters of faith, these scholars
view his religion only as a bargaining point to be used for political ends. 28 Over the last twenty
years scholars such as Ronald Love and Michael Wolfe have taken exception to this theory by
arguing that it removes the king‘s actions from the context of sixteenth-century faith and
examines them through politics alone. 29 Church and state had always been intimately connected
22

in France, making the religious beliefs of the king integral to his political goals. Thus these
scholars argue that matters of faith have to be considered in conjunction with political theory
when studying this period. This approach is critical to my argument because Henri IV’s
conversion was the only way that the king could continue the Catholic traditions so important to
the French monarchy. Among these were the legend of the first French Christian king, the piety
of the sainted Louis IX, and the prestige of the God-given fleurs-de-lis, all of which Gallic
monarchs had used to express the kingdom‘s esteemed status. Louis XIII would liberally
employ these traditions, while Maria de’ Medici would often conspicuously neglect them.
Among the most notable acts performed by the king was his conversion to Catholicism in
1593, a decision which Michael Wolfe argues was extremely significant in early modern France.
By rejecting his Protestant faith, Henri IV initiated the end of the Wars of Religion, allowing for
the rebuilding of France and setting in motion the process by which he would exercise royal
authority. As mentioned previously, Henri’s abjuration of Protestantism played an important
role in getting the majority of Catholics to recognize the Bourbon leader as the legitimate king of
France. The militant Catholics created the League because of the threat of a Protestant king, but
Henri’s subsequent conversion substantially weakened the group’s power by putting an end to
the cause that had united the members. Thus one of the major points of contention of the eighth
and final War of Religion was resolved.
The Protestants’ desire for rights to worship, however, still had to be addressed. To bring
relief to his one-time religious allies who had stood by him for so long, Henri IV proclaimed the
Edict of Nantes in 1598, which provided limited rights of worship for members of the Reformed
religion. 30 The king, who supported reuniting France under one Christian faith, viewed the edict
as a temporary measure of religious coexistence, not as a policy of toleration. Indeed two
attempts were made during Henri‘s reign to join the Protestants and Catholics. One project
intended to unite the two confessions under one patriarch, who would only answer to the king,
while the other sought to create a model comparable to the Church of England. 31 Although
neither of these ideas came to fruition, the edict, combined with Henri’s defeat of the last of the
League warlords, also in 1598, provided an end to the civil wars. Despite the appearance of
peace, the monarchy’s continued toleration of Protestantism aggravated the conservative
Catholics, perpetuating the division among the faithful.
23

The king’s second major accomplishment was the reconstruction of the state, an
undertaking that included economic recovery in addition to rebuilding infrastructure and cities.
After nearly forty years of civil war the kingdom was in economic and physical ruin. The
historians Mark Greengrass and Roland Mousnier both focus on the manner in which the king
and his ministers introduced policies that brought about a period of economic recovery and
prosperity, inaugurating the physical renewal of the country, especially the capital city of Paris.
4.
32
In addition to a budgetary surplus and a more favorable commercial environment, France’s
financial recovery included considerable reduction of foreign debt. In 1600 Henri married the
daughter of the grand duke of Tuscany, Maria de’ Medici, whose substantial dowry included the
forgiveness of a large sum owed by France to the duchy. 33 Apart from the marriage, much of the
kingdom’s prosperity was due to strategies initiated in 1599 by Maximilien de Béthune (1559-
1641), the duke of Sully, Henri’s chief adviser for financial affairs. By raising taxes in 1603, the
king was able to increase revenues to improve the country’s infrastructure, including roads,
bridges, and waterways.
Additional revenues were also devoted to rebuilding Paris, a vast project that Hilary
Ballon has addressed most recently. 34 During the last War of Religion the capital came under
the control of the Paris League, known as the Seize, and was held under siege from 1589 to 159
The resulting destruction, combined with Henri’s desire to return the royal court to Paris after
two centuries of itinerancy, rendered urban renewal a necessity for the king. In 1594 Henri
began by making the Louvre a suitable royal residence and continued with construction in 1598
of a new bridge, the Pont Neuf, across the Seine. He then embarked on a series of projects that
helped transform the once-battered city into an appropriate royal capital. These projects included
creating the Place Royale (1605) and the Place Dauphine (1607), extending the axis of the Pont
Neuf across the Left Bank into the rue Dauphine (1607), and establishing and building the
Hôpital St. Louis (1607). 35
Henri IV’s urban renewal plans for Paris, which resulted in distinctive settings and
buildings, made an impression on Maria de‘ Medici and Louis XIII. As Ballon demonstrates, in
addition to creating a city that was worthy of being the seat of the royal court, which it would
remain throughout the reigns of Henri‘s wife and son, the project became a visual testament to
the king’s desire to centralize the power of the state. 36 Henri IV knew that a capital city was
fundamental to achieving his idea of a centralized government. 37 Although other factors, such as
24

estoring economic prosperity and solving religious tensions, advanced his authoritative rule,
Henri also used highly visible buildings and spaces as effective tools in conveying his political
goals, a factor which I argue was critical to the role of ecclesiastical architecture during the
reigns of his wife and son.
The third aspect of the reign of Henri IV covered in the literature is his emphasis on
beliefs and traditions connected to French kingship, and which were perceived as proof of God’s
preference for France. Many of his subjects viewed Henri as the restorer of the kingdom,
responsible for reinstating the splendor and glory that France had enjoyed during the Middle
Ages, typified by the reign of King Louis IX (1226-1270), the first French king to be canonized.
The saintly monarch had other important ties to Henri IV, for not only was he the model of the
ideal sovereign, but it was through his youngest son that the Bourbon line descended. These
associations, along with other actions by the king, helped Henri to reaffirm the French crown’s
Catholic character. From the time of Clovis, the second Gallic king, the French monarchy had a
fundamental association with Catholicism. According to legend, on the day Clovis was to be
baptized a dove descended from heaven carrying an ampoule filled with holy chrism with which
to anoint the sovereign. 38 The divine gift, a symbol of God’s preference for the kingdom of
France, bestowed an incomparable privilege upon Clovis and all future kings. During the
subsequent centuries the French kings continued to receive special blessings marking their
favored status in Christendom. During the coronation ceremony the king received Communion
of both species, that is bread and wine, which was otherwise reserved only for the priests. 39
Upon receiving the Eucharist, the king seemed to possess the ability to heal through touch people
affected by scrofula, a lymphatic infection causing skin lesions. 40 This Christ-like gift of
thaumaturgical power, together with his right to receive the Eucharistic bread and wine,
distinguished the French king from all other monarchs as having sacerdotal as well as secular
power. 41
A further instance of the French king’s privileged status was the monarch’s right to be
addressed by the title of Rex christianissimus, the “most Christian king.” 42 Although the phrase
had been used sporadically for French kings since the reign of Pepin (751-768), it acquired new
meaning in the fourteenth century when kings began to require their subjects to address them by
the title. At this time publicists convinced the people that it had always been used for the French
monarchy, even since the reign of Clovis. These developments actually resulted from a dispute
25

etween Philip IV (1285-1314) and Pope Boniface VIII (1294-1303) over who had the ultimate
authority in temporal affairs. As leader of the spiritual world the pope believed that his religious
authority superseded any temporal power possessed by secular rulers. His influence extended to
the right to govern without a council and even to tax foreign churches. Philip IV countered him
by arguing that the French king, who ruled by divine right descending directly from God,
recognized no superior in the world. This meant that in addition to not interfering with secular
affairs, the pope held no authority over churches in France. In this dispute lay the origins of
Gallicanism, the theory of the independence of the French Church and king from papal
interference. 43 Although the precise nature of the Gallican liberties would fluctuate during the
following centuries, according to Jotham Parsons, at the time of Henri IV the theory had
developed into a political ideology placing the crown in opposition to the papacy and rejecting
the Church’s involvement with ecclesiastical jurisdiction. 44 This central idea of Gallican thought
is critical to this study, especially considering Louis XIII’s desire for an autonomous state and
Maria de’ Medici’s initial actions that distanced her from these French traditions.
Henri IV decided to convert from Protestantism to Catholicism not only because he knew
it would help to end the Wars of Religion, but also because he knew that from its beginnings the
French crown was intimately tied to the Catholic Church. The connection between church and
state meant that the king ruled French society in part through religion, and should Henri IV have
a faith other than Catholicism, he would lose a degree of control over his subjects. 45 The
relationship, however, went far beyond the religious liturgy involved in the king’s coronation. It
ensured that the kingdom of France, in addition to being chosen by God before all other people,
was the most Christian nation and the promised land. 46 Moreover, as the head of the Gallican
Church, Henri recognized that he could maintain French autonomy from the papacy. The king’s
reaffirmation of the French crown’s Catholic traditions did little to strengthen its ties with Rome,
but it did reinforce the kingdom’s powerful and independent status as the most Christian nation.
Following the king’s assassination, Henri’s widow would endeavor to moderate the privileged
position of France within Catholic Europe, while Louis would seek to reassert it.
26

Catholic Reformation in France
Following the end of the Wars of Religion, the Catholic Church in France was in a state
of disarray. In addition to having to tolerate the Huguenot faith, Catholics also found that their
church buildings were destroyed, the clergy was absent, revenues were uncollected, and church
property had been seized for use other than religious purposes. Despite the lack of order, efforts
to reform the French Catholic Church could now proceed with the return of peace to the country.
In contrast with other Catholic states, the primary vehicle for reform of the Church in
France was not through the decrees of the Council of Trent but rather through the efforts of
reformed religious orders and the dévots, a group of clerics and laypeople seeking to bring about
religious renewal. As this study shows, both the dévots and the reformed religious orders would
contribute greatly to Maria de’ Medici and Louis XIII’s decisions to act as patrons of churches.
After a brief review of the Catholic Reformation and current trends in scholarship for the
movement in France, this section will consider the Gallic response to the movement during the
Wars of Religion and again during the reign of Henri IV. I will then examine the manner in
which reform was brought to France, specifically through the dévots and the reformed religious
orders. Br presenting the main characteristics of each group, I will set the stage for considering
how they influenced the two seventeenth-century monarchs.
The Catholic Reformation was the Church’s response to the transforming religious world
of the sixteenth century. These changes most frequently refer to the Protestant Reformation,
which challenged the most closely held doctrines of Catholicism, but they also include the search
by laypeople for spirituality and order. 47 One of the most important achievements for the
Catholic Church during the sixteenth century was the Council of Trent, an assembly of high-
ranking clergy that met in three distinct periods from 1545 to 1563 to define policies of faith and
to address issues of reform. 48 To clarify Catholic doctrines of faith challenged by Protestant
beliefs, the council took up a range of topics including guidelines for scripture, justification,
original sin, and the seven sacraments. It also sought to bring about increased order and
spirituality in the Church by tackling matters of reform, such as the elimination of abuses and the
importance of the bishop and the parish priest in the ministry of the Church. As Robert Birely
notes an important consequence of the council was the increasing power and prestige of the
papacy. 49 In addition to the pope controlling the interpretation of the council, as bishop of the
27

universal Church, he was recognized as having received his powers directly from God, implying
he had complete authority to rule all Christians. 50
Prior to the 1980s most studies of the Catholic Reformation in France took a theological
approach to the subject. Scholars viewed the reform effort as the papacy’s attempt to implement
throughout Catholic Europe the decrees established at the Council of Trent. 51 Although the
declarations were never officially adopted in France, scholars have studied their Gallic reception
through the acts of groups sympathetic to the decrees. The theological approach to these matters
focuses on contemporary religious theory and practice. Scholarship dating to the last twenty
years has explored the Catholic Reformation through social and cultural issues that analyze the
movement’s impact on the populace. 52 Works by authors such as Barbara Diefendorf and
Elizabeth Rapley, which examine the efforts of specific groups such as women and the dévots,
capture a better sense of the period, focusing on those agents that were actually affecting reform
rather than concentrating on official doctrines of the Church. 53
The French kingdom’s first encounter with the reform movement was negligible. The
Council of Trent was intended to include clergy from all of Catholic Europe, but no delegates
from France attended the first two meetings because they took place in Trent, a town located
within the border of the Holy Roman Empire. 54 François I in 1545 and then Henri II in 1551,
who were both engaged in wars with the Empire, feared that by having the council meet in an
imperial city, the Holy Roman Emperor Charles V would have an unfair advantage with the
papacy. Several French bishops were able to attend the last council meeting, which took place in
1562. The Wars of Religion had started by this time, meaning that the French crown, in its
efforts to appease both sides of the religious conflict, allowed the clergy to participate in the
council.
Upon completion of the meetings, the main goal of the attendees was to implement the
decrees. To become law in France, they first had to be ratified by the king, then approved by the
courts, and finally put into practice by the clergy. The rulers of France, however, refused to
receive the decrees for several reasons, including fear of worsening relations with the Protestants
and the unwillingness of Rome to compromise on certain issues. In fact as part of Henri IV’s
requirement to receive absolution, he had promised Pope Clement VIII that he would make the
decrees part of French law, but he neglected to do so after being forgiven. 55 As Alain Tallon
points out one of the most important reasons for not allowing the decrees was their infringement
28

on Gallican liberties. 56 If the decrees had become law, legal issues traditionally adjudicated by
French courts would have been controlled by Catholic clerics and the pope’s newly acquired
power over all of Christianity would have infringed on the French king’s autonomous right to
rule both the Church and state.
Despite the fact that the decrees of the Council were not made law in France, Catholic
reform still came to the Gallic kingdom. Elements of reform sanctioned at Trent were being
used by some of the French clergy as early as 1564. The Cardinal of Lorraine and the other
bishops attending the council professed the faith of the Tridentine canons and shared it with
provincial councils wanting to participate in reform. 57 One of the bishops, Nicolas Psaume from
Verdun, even published the decrees for his diocese upon his return from Trent. 58 By 1590 nearly
all of the ecclesiastics had adopted the Roman breviary and the missal of Pius V.
When Henri III’s death in 1589 made a Protestant king a reality in France, an intense
spirituality developed among many of the militant Catholics living in Paris. Known as the
dévots, this group of Parisian clerics and laypeople tried to impose its own moral code and model
of Christianity on others. 59 Emerging from League circles associated with the Wars of Religion,
the members retained many of the conservative religious beliefs, specifically no toleration for the
Protestant faith and a desire to form alliances with other Catholic states. Just as important, the
dévots worked to implement the decrees of the Council of Trent. Thus it was through the efforts
of this spiritually-inclined group that many of the reform efforts of the Catholic Reformation
were transmitted to the capital city.
One of the central figures of the dévots was Madame Barbe Acarie. Married to Pierre
Acarie, a Parisian magistrate and member of the League who was exiled when Henri IV rose to
power, Madame Acarie remained in the city with family and began holding meetings with others
who shared her spiritual interests. 60 Included in her circle were prominent nobles and clerical
leaders, such as Michel de Marillac, her cousin Pierre de Bérulle, and the Capuchin father
Benedict of Canfield. The financial and political support of groups such as the one around
Madame Acarie fostered the establishment of numerous new and reformed religious orders in
Paris. 61 Madame Acarie herself even helped to bring a group of Spanish Discalced Carmelite
nuns to the capital.
Reformed religious orders such as the Discalced Carmelites were the second major
vehicle through which Church reform came to France. Frequently coming from established
29

houses in Italy and Spain, these religious groups often formed close associations with the dévots,
sharing similar ideological beliefs including the fundamentally heretical nature of Protestantism
and the absolute authority of the pope. Together they worked to introduce to the populace of
Paris many of the spiritual ideas promoted at the Council of Trent. 62 The influx first began in the
early 1560s, with the Jesuits coming in 1561, followed by the Capuchins in 1575. But with the
threat of continued war and a looming crisis of royal succession, few religious orders found Paris
to be an environment conducive to establishing new houses. This changed when Henri IV
created a stable government.
In addition to efforts by dévots such as Madame Acarie, Henri IV encouraged reformed
religious orders to settle in Paris. Not only did the king support the restoration of the
Augustinians and Capuchins and the introduction of the reformed Carmelites and the friars of St.
John of God, he also allowed the return of the Jesuits, who had been expelled in 1594. 63 Henri
knew that the religious groups would most likely build monasteries once they secured funding.
The new construction would help to build up Parisian quarters, reinforcing the king’s own urban
renewal plans. By encouraging the establishment of the institutions, Henri also demonstrated the
sincerity of his conversion, which some conservative Catholics doubted following the signing of
the Edict of Nantes and the continued lack of official support for the decrees of the Council of
Trent. 64
The combined efforts of Henri IV and the dévots set the stage for the establishment of
fifty new religious foundations in the capital city between 1598 and 1640. For many of these
groups, which included religious orders and congregations, the need arose to construct
monasteries that would include suitable places for members to worship. The result was the
building of nineteen churches for religious foundations in Paris during this period. With seven
additional places of worship for other religious institutions also constructed during this time, the
first half of the seventeenth century was one of the most active times of church building in the
capital, providing numerous opportunities for royal support. 65
Both the dévots and the reformed religious orders exerted influence during the reigns of
Louis XIII and Maria de’ Medici. The fact that there were new churches for the king and queen
to support stemmed directly from the establishment of so many reformed religious orders in the
French capital. But more than providing the basis for royal patronage, the dévots and the
religious organizations provided the impetus for each monarch’s support. For Maria de’ Medici,
30

the agents of reform reflected her core beliefs, providing a vehicle through which she could
demonstrate her support of the Catholic Church, the papacy, and its allies. As for Louis XIII the
same groups functioned as a challenge to his quest for autonomous rule and loyalty to the state,
creating the need for him to patronize the churches in an effort to demonstrate his sovereign
authority.
Reigns of Maria de’ Medici and Louis XIII
On 14 May 1610, having just left the Louvre on his way to see the Duke of Sully, Henri
IV was stabbed by François Ravaillac, a religious fanatic intent on committing regicide.
st the pope.
66 By
the time his carriage made it back to the royal palace, the king was dead. The murderer, a
barrister from Angoulême who had once been a lay brother in the Feuillants order, was angry
that Henri IV had made no attempt to convert the Protestants following the Edict of Nantes. 67
He thought that by allowing the members of the reformed religion to remain heretics, the king
had failed his duty to God and was waging a war again
Following his imprisonment and subsequent questioning, Ravaillac maintained his claim
that he alone planned and carried out the assassination. Most of the interrogators assumed that
the assassin had had assistance from the Spanish Netherlands. Prompting these beliefs were
Henri IV’s plans to march on the duchy of Jülich, near the United Provinces, with the hopes of
bringing about a shift in power within the Holy Roman Empire. 68 In anticipation of this military
campaign and because Louis XIII at age nine was too young to rule, Henri had named Maria de’
Medici as regent and only the day before his assassination had further ensured her authority by
crowning her queen in a ceremony at Saint-Denis. 69
Henri’s official actions surrounding the appointment of his wife as regent for what he
thought would be a temporary absence proved to be of utmost importance for the transition to the
regency government. In fact as Michael Hayden demonstrates because of Henri’s safeguards,
royal power was transferred quite smoothly to Maria de’ Medici. 70 While the king’s actions had
facilitated an efficient shift in government, religious tensions between Catholics and Protestants
and the continuing negative relations with Habsburg Europe persisted during the regency and the
reign of Louis XIII. Religious tensions and foreign affairs both played a role in the
assassination of the king, and they would continue to be key issues affecting the later reigns.
31

Although concerns over international relations and discord between religious factions
would involve both mother and son, their approach to each of these matters differed due to
unique circumstances characterizing the separate reigns. Scholars have established that the
greatest issues affecting Maria de’ Medici’s reign were the queen’s foreign standing and inferior
female rank, which required constant reassertion of the legitimacy of power. Upon securing this
power, the queen was reluctant to relinquish it to her son, spending her remaining time in France
trying to regain it. Furthermore, her Roman Catholic faith made it difficult for her to sympathize
with the rights of the Gallican Church. Louis XIII, on the other hand, found that his need for his
subjects’ loyalty to the state played the greatest role during his reign. This desire had several
origins: his mother’s deceptive policies at the end of the regency, concern with dissident
religious groups seeking to undermine his authority, and increasing fears of Habsburg expansion.
Each of these factors would be the king’s foremost concern at different times during his reign,
leading to alternative solutions for each case. Understanding the special circumstances arising
during each reign and the manner in which the monarch dealt with the issues will help to
illuminate the reasons that Maria and Louis chose to support churches as a means of expressing
their political goals.
While scholars almost always portray Maria de’ Medici as an ambitious but stubborn
regent seeking to legitimize her rule, divisions are found between French and Italian historians.
Scholars of early modern France display a nationalistic bias by calling into question the queen’s
intellect and French patriotism. More importantly, they emphasize the queen’s allegiances to
Catholic interests and the Habsburg Empire by concentrating on Maria’s Italian connections and
Spanish heritage. 71 The one exception to this approach is A. Lloyd Moote, who presents the
queen mother’s actions throughout the king’s life in a nuanced way, providing a moderated
assessment of the Catholic and Spanish devotion. 72 The more limited Italian scholarship devoted
to the queen steers away from her personal interests and instead focuses on governmental
policies enacted during her tenure. 73 The scholarship stressing the religious and political context
of the queen’s reign is conceptually valid with my argument, which emphasizes Maria’s Catholic
and Spanish interests in addition to the need for legitimacy.
Upon becoming regent, Maria de’ Medici found she had to prove that she had the right as
regent and queen mother to exercise power. Henri IV had officially legitimized her right to rule
by naming her regent and crowning her at Saint-Denis, but the queen had to fight contemporary
32

perceptions that deemed unacceptable the idea of a woman dealing in matters of state. 74 Her
situation was further complicated by the fact that she was Italian-born. This foreign status
conjured up too many parallels with Catherine de’ Medici, whose regency following the sudden
death of her husband coincided with the disastrous Wars of Religion. 75 Scholars have noted that
in an effort to avoid another outbreak of civil war given, which seemed likely given the queen’s
tenuous hold on power, Maria’s official policy strove to placate internal rivalries by curtailing
any actions that would be perceived as outwardly favoring one side over the other. 76 But as my
study demonstrates, the queen contradicted her official policy of impartiality with her patronage
of ecclesiastical architecture, betraying her personal biases.
Maria de’ Medici discovered that the same parties creating the religious tensions of the
late sixteenth century were still active in 1610. While the initial divisions between Huguenots,
militant Catholics, and moderate Catholics remained, the uncertainty with the new government
following the death of Henri IV triggered additional anxieties within the groups. The Huguenots
feared the new political climate and the on-going reform by the Catholics. With the crown no
longer in the hands of the once Protestant king who was sympathetic to them but instead
controlled by a devout, foreign Catholic, the Huguenots worried that religious persecution might
be renewed. To pacify their concerns and to avoid an outbreak of civil war, the queen
republished the Edict of Nantes numerous times during her regency. 77
Adding to the queen’s problems were continuing divisions among the French Catholics.
The conservative side of French Catholicism, which grew out of the sixteenth-century Leagues,
now consisted of people such as ultramontanists, clergy loyal to the pope, and dévots. 78 Viewing
heresy as the primary danger, the conservative group admired the Spanish monarchy’s solidarity
with Rome and complete rejection of the reformed religion. This group hoped that Maria de’
Medici and her council would adopt a similar policy, even though it involved the risk that might
replace royal control in certain areas of the French Church. In contrast, the moderate branch of
Catholicism, closely associated with the Gallican ideology of preserving French monarchical
power, resisted efforts to implement the reforms established at the Council of Trent for fear they
would lead to increased jurisdiction by the papacy. The moderates, consisting primarily of
magistrates, were willing to tolerate the heretical faith to insure a sovereign state ruled only by
their king. Unlike the militant members of Catholicism who were pro-papaland pro-Spain, this
group feared a powerful Habsburg Europe with strong ties to Rome. 79
33

Although Maria never claimed to belong to either side, she was close to several dévots
including Michel de Marillac, a key figure at court, and Father Jean Suffren, a royal confessor,
and had included staunch Catholics and Italians in her entourage.
n,
80 Furthermore, her approach
to foreign affairs indicates that she was inclined to favor policies benefiting Spain, the Empire,
and the papacy. 81 Immediately following the death of Henri IV, the queen scaled down an attack
the king had intended to launch against the Habsburgs at Jülich-Cleves. Avoiding interference
with Imperial and Spanish forces became the queen’s standard response to Habsburg aggressio
a tactic that eventually allowed the states to gain more power in Europe. She also initiated a
double marriage alliance involving her two oldest children with the Spanish royal family. Louis
XIII would marry Anne of Austria, the Spanish infanta, while his closest sister Elisabeth (1602-
1644) was betrothed to the future Philip IV of Spain.
Although the queen’s favorable actions towards Spain pleased conservative Catholics,
who hoped for further alliances between the two countries, it distanced France from its Protestant
and Savoyard allies. The marriage pact with Spain troubled the Protestant powers of the
Netherlands, Rhineland, and Switzerland, which viewed the union of the two Catholic states as a
potential threat. 82 The queen’s new attitude towards Spain meant that she challenged the duke of
Savoy, with whom Henri IV had worked to make peace, when the Savoyard announced he had
territorial designs on Spanish Milan. 83
Maria maintained strong relations with the papacy, and her government’s positive
relationship with Catholic Spain certainly pleased the pope. 84 Yet, the monarchy continued to
refuse the decrees of the Council of Trent, an action that can be accounted for by examining the
Estates General of 1614. 85 At this meeting of the kingdom’s three estates, the third order
primarily made up of state servants in major judicial and financial offices called for the
monarchy to reaffirm its authority to rule by divine right. The proposal reflected the third
estate’s Gallican will against papal intervention in French affairs. Opposed to this were the
reform-minded bishops of the first estate, who called for the queen to suppress the proposal
because they wanted to make the decrees of the Council of Trent law in the realm. But to have
accepted the Tridentine doctrines would have infringed on the rights of the French monarchy and
the courts of justice. Avoiding obvious favoring of either side of the debate, the queen and her
advisors persuaded the third estate to omit the Gallican article. Maria then suggested that the
members of the clergy themselves introduce the reform of faith and morals into their dioceses in
34

the spirit of the council, which they did the following year at the General Assembly of the French
Clergy.
The events surrounding the third estate’s proposal reveal two major points concerning
Maria’s reign. First, she wanted to avoid conflict within the state by refusing to allow either the
Gallican principle of divine right, which favored the autonomy of the state, or the acceptance of
the Tridentine reforms, which benefited the conservative Catholics. Second, by suggesting that
the bishops introduce the spirit of the decrees within their dioceses, she effectively endorsed the
Catholic reforms and showed her preference for papal order. Maria performed few official state
actions that proclaimed her willingness to support the papacy and the rest of Catholic Europe, but
when viewing the scope of her actions relating to religious differences and foreign affairs, we
can see her partiality to the cause for a united Catholic Europe. She expressed this partiality in
the churches she supported.
Ultimately Maria de’ Medici acquired a great deal of power as regent, obliging Louis
XIII in 1617 to force her from her position so he could assume the throne. During this seven year
period she supported five newly-constructed churches for reformed religious orders, including
the Minims, the Discalced Carmelites, the Récollets, the Jacobins, and the French Oratorians.
The patronage allowed the queen to express her conservative backing of the Catholic
Reformation, a statement she could not make through official policy without running the risk of
inciting renewed aggression from the Huguenots. Her patronage also signaled her defense of
papal and Spanish policies to unite all of Europe under one faith. Following Louis XIII’s
accession to the throne, as Maria endeavored to regain the authority she had wielded as regent,
she again became a patron of churches for reformed religious orders, using the buildings as tools
to signify her continued search for power and ongoing support of conservative Catholic ideology.
The pursuits of the queen mother were key elements of the dissenting forces affecting her son,
ultimately compelling the king to assert his sovereign authority.
Louis XIII’s greatest concern was a need for fidelity to his person and the state.
Scholarship has often misconstrued this desire for loyalty as a dependence on others, a perceived
weakness most frequently demonstrated in Louis’s relationship with his first minister, Cardinal
Richelieu. Scholars argue that Richelieu was the official policy maker while the king was
merely a figurehead. 86 In the last twenty years, new research has begun to show that the king
and cardinal had a much more collaborative association whereby Richelieu would make policy
35

suggestions but leave the decisions to the king. 87 These newer studies demonstrate that Louis
XIII was a compelling and self-sufficient ruler, independent of his ministers. Scholarship such
as this has had a considerable impact on my work because it shows that Louis XIII controlled his
government by enacting his own agenda and following his personal policies. Most important for
my work are recent studies by Marc Fumaroli and Anne Le Pas de Sécheval that take this revised
interpretation of Louis XIII and apply it to works of art associated with the king, demonstrating
his awareness of the potential power of such creations to convey his political motives. 88
The king’s first challenge to his loyalty came from his mother. As the eldest son of the
previous king, Louis XIII’s position as sovereign of France should have gone uncontested, but
Maria de’ Medici threatened her son’s status by refusing to relinquish her hard-won power.
According to French law a king remained a minor until he became thirteen years old, and since
Louis was only nine at the time of his father’s death, Maria would act as regent until 1614. On 2
October 1614 Louis went to the Parlement of Paris to proclaim formally his majority. Knowing
that at age thirteen he was still too young to rule, the king requested that his mother continue as
regent, a post at which she was more than willing to continue until forced out three years later.
Scholars have emphasized how Maria controlled every aspect of Louis’s life, ranging
from directing who Louis could have as playmates to managing the type of decorations he could
have in his room. 89 Even after he attained his majority and married Anne of Austria in 1615, the
queen mother kept intruding on his personal affairs and directing matters of state. These actions
have led scholars to believe that the queen and her ministers were more concerned with
protecting their own power than developing Louis’s skills in state craft. 90 In 1617 events came
to a head as Maria allowed her favorite minister Concino Concini, marshal of Ancre, to gain
excessive power. In addition to trying to make himself a duke and peer of the realm, he
provoked a rebellion among the nobles, created financial irregularities in the government, and
favored a close relationship between France and the papacy. 91 The marshal’s behavior caused
Louis and his close advisors to worry that with the queen mother’s assistance Concini would
usurp royal authority. On 24 April 1617 as the marshal entered the outer gates of the Louvre, he
was arrested, and after resisting his captors he was shot and killed. Because Maria herself
wielded too much influence and her favoritism had allowed Concini to gain so much power,
Louis exiled his mother to the royal palace at Blois and inaugurated his personal reign. 92 Yet
even after four years of banishment when the queen mother was allowed to return to court in
36

1621, she still sought to regain her previous authority. As part of this tactic, she maintained her
association with the dévots and encouraged policies advocating strong ties with other Catholic
countries.
The second enduring challenge to Louis’s reign came from religious groups. Not only
did the Huguenots threaten his authority, but Catholic factions also sought to temper his power.
At issue with the Protestants was their tendency to create a state-within-a-state, defying the laws
of the kingdom. In 1620 in the Huguenot territory of Béarn in the southwest of France,
Protestants refused Catholics the right to worship. Perceiving the prohibition as a lack of respect
to the crown, the king decreed that the territory would have to permit the practice of the faith,
and marched on the region to enforce his edict of toleration. 93 Protestant defiance occurred the
following summer in the region near the western port city of La Rochelle, where Huguenots
unnerved by increasing Catholic assaults confronted the French state by raising troops. Louis
reacted by mounting a military campaign against any armed Protestant town that refused to
surrender. Subsequent Huguenot uprisings every year until 1630 made military campaigns to the
southeast of France an annual event for Louis XIII.
It is important to know that the king did not see the Huguenots’ faith as necessarily
disloyal to his royal power. 94 While he wished that members of the “so-called reformed
religion” would return to Catholicism, he respected their religious beliefs and refused to force
conversion. 95 Instead he adopted the principal of liberty of conscience and even went so far as to
declare himself their special protector and safeguard. 96 Louis did, however, dislike the
Huguenots’ unwillingness to tolerate Catholic worship in Protestant territories. 97 In addition to
seeing this refusal and the Protestants’ growing defiance as a threat to his authority, the king saw
these acts as a challenge to the French state‘s Catholic customs.
Louis himself was quite religious; he encouraged the establishment of reformed orders,
exhibited high moral standards, and even stopped in churches during military campaigns to
participate in services. 98 Contemporaries were assuredly aware of his piety, as demonstrated in
this anonymous Frenchmen’s letter from 1619: “Since St. Louis, I have never seen a king so
pious and devout, and who so abhors vice and esteems virtue as he.” 99 Louis XIII fostered the
connections between him and Louis IX. In addition to saying a daily prayer in honor of his
predecessor and favorite saint, Louis XIII also secured from the pope a bull proclaiming that on
25 August all the kingdom of France would observe the day of St. Louis and celebrate the office
37

as a double feast. 100 The king’s regard for his faith made him well aware of the bonds between
the French crown and its Catholic traditions, which he would employ as part of his political
strategy.
Despite the king’s religiosity and adherence to Catholic beliefs, Louis XIII spent the
better part of ten years trying to control the conservative faction of his faith. Embodied by the
dévots, this group abhorred the king’s tolerance of the Protestants, arguing that the sect should
have no religious rights. In addition to thinking that France should form alliances with other
Catholic states, specifically Spain, the conservatives tended to consider papal authority as
superseding that of the king. 101 Adding to Louis’s problems with this group was Maria de’
Medici’s close association with a number of dévots, an association that during the regency had
allowed many conservatives to gain power within the government. After his mother’s return to
court in 1621, Louis recognized the continued bonds maintained by Maria and the dévots and
their common quest for renewed authority.
Although the king’s precise stance on the rights of the Gallican Church remains
undocumented, his actions attest to a natural bias towards the moderate side of his faith. 102 In
contrast to the conservatives, this faction of French Catholicism sought to put matters of state
before religion. It viewed the expansion of other Catholic states as an attempt at universal
monarchy, and to prevent foreign encroachment into French territory the moderates avoided
making alliances with Austrian and Spanish forces. 103 To show that such a policy did not
conflict with their faith, the moderates emphasized their king’s devout character and reminded
people of his connections to Saint Louis. As for Louis XIII, he debated in favor of the need for
royal authority and refused to have an ecclesiastic or confessor confer on his political
decisions. 104 Like his moderate subjects, Louis XIII’s primary concern was protection of the
Gallic kingdom, even at the expense of a united Catholic France.
The final threat to Louis’s reign came from Habsburg power, which threatened to encircle
France. To protect the autonomy of his state, Louis developed a foreign policy that was in
opposition to Habsburg Spain and Austria. The strategy developed slowly at first because the
king was conflicted over the idea of fighting another Catholic state at the same time he was
waging war against the Huguenots. 105 He knew that he could join forces with the Holy Roman
Emperor Ferdinand III of Habsburg, who was battling Protestant subjects in Bohemia and
Hungary, and forcefully subdue the current uprisings by the Huguenots in his own country. By
38

1621 the growing Habsburg territories made Louis realize that Spanish and Austrian expansion
were more threatening to France than the disloyalty of the members of the Reformed faith. From
this point on, Louis worked against Habsburg interests during the first phase of the Thirty Years’
War (1618-1630). 106 Although more than a decade would pass before France officially entered
the war, the king demonstrated his disfavor with Austria and Spain by strengthening the state’s
ties with the Protestant Dutch Republic, the Gray leagues in the Alps, and the Rhenish and Upper
Palatinates in Germany. He also forged new coalitions with Savoy and Venice. At the same time
he distanced France from the papacy by favoring Protestant control of the Val Tellina passes in
northern Italy.
As the “most Christian king” of the most Christian nation, Louis recognized the potential
value of building churches to express his state goals. His royal patronage reinforced his
commitment to the Catholic faith. While the French dévots and other Catholic states might have
doubted the king’s sincerity given his toleration of Protestantism, by helping to build churches in
his capital city Louis XIII publicly stated his commitment to his religious beliefs. His support of
churches also buttressed the traditional role of Catholicism in the French kingdom, strengthening
the close associations between the Gallican Church and the royal house. This became of utmost
importance to Louis as first his mother and the dévots and later Habsburg Europe challenged his
authority. Building churches in his capital allowed the king to emphasize the storied connection
between Christianity and the crown, reminding would-be challengers of his sacerdotal status and
his divine right to complete authority within his realm.
In the following chapters I will further explore the connection between the French
monarchs and ecclesiastical architecture. The study of each church will investigate the
building’s painting, sculpture, and architecture, demonstrating how each place of worship can be
understood as a political statement revealing the goals of its patron.
39

1 I use the terms Catholic Reform and Catholic Reformation instead of Counter-Reformation
throughout this work because they suggest that this period in the history of the Catholic Church
was not merely a response to the Protestant Reformation but that the Church was also making
significant reform efforts. For more on the use of these terms, see Robert Bireley, The
Refashioning of Catholicism, 1450-1700: A Reassessment of the Counter Reformation
(Washington, DC: The Catholic University of America Press, 1999), 2-8; Louis Chatellier, The
Europe of the Devout: The Catholic Reformation and the Formation of a New Society, trans.
Jean Birrell (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989), ix.
2 For recent general studies of the French Wars of Religion, see Philip Benedict, "The Wars of
Religion, 1562-1598," in Renaissance and Reformation France, 1500-1648, ed. Mack P. Holt
(Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002), 147-75; Denis Crouzet, Les guerriers de Dieu: la
violence au temps des troubles de religion, vers 1525-vers 1610, 2 vols. (Seyssel: Champ Vallon,
1990); Barbara B. Diefendorf, "The Religious Wars in France," in A Companion to the
Reformation World, ed. R. Po-chia Hsia (Malden, MA: Blackwell, 2004), 150-68; Holt, French
Wars; Robert J. Knecht, The French Civil Wars, 1562-1598 (Harlow, England: Pearson, 2000);
J. H. M. Salmon, Society in Crisis: France in the Sixteenth Century (New York: St. Martin's,
1975).
3 For two interpretations stressing the political motivations of the Wars of Religion, see Arlette
Jouanna, Le devoir de révolte: La noblesse française et la gestation de l'état modern, 1559-1661
(Paris: Fayard, 1989); Lucien Romier, Les origines politiques des guerres de religion, 2 vols.
(Paris: Perrin, 1913-1914).
4 Natalie Zemon Davis, "The Rites of Violence: Religious Riot in Sixteenth-Century France,"
in Society and Culture in Early Modern France, ed. Natalie Zemon Davis (Stanford: Stanford
University Press, 1976), 152-87; Barbara B. Diefendorf, Beneath the Cross: Catholics and
Huguenots in Sixteenth-Century Paris (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1991); Denis Richet,
"Aspects socio-culturels des conflits religieux à Paris dans la seconde moitié du XVIe siècle,"
Annales, économies, sociétés, civilisations 32 (1977): 764-89.
5 Crouzet, Guerriers.
6 Holt, French Wars. For an additional interpretation of religious and social issues, see Philip
Benedict, Rouen during the Wars of Religion (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1980).
7 The phrase “three-sided” struggle is used in Diefendorf, Penitence, 30; Diefendorf, "Religious
Wars," 163. For additional references to the three sides of the Wars of Religion, see Benedict,
"Wars of Religion," 161-63; Crouzet, Guerriers, 2: 367, 550-73; Holt, French Wars, 126-27;
Knecht, Civil Wars, 181, 252-53.
8 Knecht, Civil Wars, 44-63.
40

9 For the rise of Protestantism in France, see ibid; Marc Venard, "La grande cassure (1520-
1598)," in Histoire de la France religieuse, ed. Jacques Le Goff and René Rémond (Paris: Seuil,
1988), 222-47.
10 The Faculty of Theology was a respected institution that was often called upon to adjudicate
on matters of Christian dogma. For more on the Faculty’s role with Protestantism, see Knecht,
Civil Wars, 45.
11 For further information on the prosecution of heresy and the failure of French kings to
suppress Protestantism, see William E. Monter, Judging the French Reformation: Heresy Trials
by Sixteenth-Century Parlements (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1999).
12 The males of the Guise family were “foreign” princes, naturalized Frenchmen who traced
their family origins to a country outside France. The Guise, who ruled the duchy of Lorraine,
which at that time lay outside France, became related to the French royal family by Claude de
Lorraine’s marriage to Antoinette de Bourbon. Knecht, Civil Wars, 34-35.
13 For more on the contentious relationships between the Catholic and Huguenot nobles, see
Stuart Carroll, Noble Power during the French Wars of Religion: The Guise affinity and the
Catholic Cause in Normandy (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998).
14 Catherine de’ Medici also sought to ease Protestant jealousy at court, favoring members of
the Reformed faith by appointing them to high-ranking positions. For instance, she named
Antoine de Bourbon as lieutenant general of the kingdom. For more on her policy of
moderation, see Diefendorf, "Religious Wars," 153; Holt, French Wars, 45.
15 Holt, French Wars, 56.
16
For a full account of the massacre and the events leading up to it, see Diefendorf, Beneath the
Cross, 91-106.
17 A number of Protestant nobles were in Paris to celebrate the wedding of the Huguenot prince
Henri de Bourbon, the future Henri IV, with the king‘s sister, Marguerite de Valois.
18 The total number of deaths from the massacres is difficult to estimate due to partisan reports
and the geographical scope of the event. For these numbers, see Diefendorf, "Religious Wars,"
159. For other estimates of the total number of people killed, see Philip Benedict, "The Saint
Bartholomew's Massacres in the Provinces," The Historical Journal 21 (1978): 207; Holt,
French Wars, 94.
19 This group is occasionally referred to as “politiques,” but in sixteenth-century France the
word had derisive connotations and was rarely used in contemporary texts. For more on this
group including its social composition and its various approaches to toleration, see Diefendorf,
Beneath the Cross, 174; Holt, French Wars, 109; Turchetti, "Middle Parties,” 165-83.
41

20 Henri III was the third of four sons from the marriage of Henri II and Catherine de’ Medici.
He came to the throne following the death of his brother Charles IX in 1574.
21 League is from the French ligue. For an introduction to the League, see Mark Greengrass,
France in the Age of Henri IV: The Struggle for Stability, 2nd ed. (London: Longman, 1995),
42-72. For more specialized studies, see Jean-Marie Constant, La Ligue (Paris: Fayard, 1996);
Nicolas Le Roux, "The Catholic Nobility and Political Choice during the League, 1585-1594:
The Case of Claude de La Châtre," French History 8 (1994): 34-50.
22 The alliance is known as the Treaty of Joinville (signed 31 December 1584), which
committed Spain and the French Catholic League to defend the Catholic faith and to extirpate
Protestantism from France and the Netherlands. For more on this alliance, see Knecht, Civil
Wars, 219; Geoffrey Parker, The Grand Strategy of Philip II (New Haven: Yale University
Press, 1998), 172.
23 This act was known as the Law of Catholicity, which was published in a manifesto in 1585.
For more on these events, see Wolfe, Conversion, 36-38.
24 Holt, French Wars, 131-35.
25 For Henri’s conversion to Catholicism, see Wolfe, Conversion, 123-58. For Henri’s
absolution by Pope Clement VIII, see ibid., 172-76.
26 For Henri IV as an absolute ruler and the degree to which his rule was complete, see Hilary
Ballon, The Paris of Henri IV: Architecture and Urbanism (New York; Cambridge, MA:
Architectural History Foundation; MIT Press, 1991), 3-4; Wolfe, Conversion, 1-5, 190-91.
27 For this interpretation of Henri IV’s conversion, see Jean Pierre Babelon, Henri IV (Paris:
Fayard, 1982); Janine Garrisson, Henri IV (Paris: Editions du Seuil, 1984); Quentin Hurst, Henry
of Navarre (London: Hodder and Soughton, 1937); Auguste Poirson, Histoire du règne de Henri
IV, 4 vols. (Paris: Didier, 1865-1866).
28 For a summary of the literature, see Ronald S. Love, "Winning the Catholics: Henri IV and
the Religious Dilemma in August 1589," Canadian Journal of History 24 (1989): 362-63.
29 For scholarship that applies this approach to Henri IV, see Ronald S. Love, Blood and
Religion: The Conscience of Henri IV 1553-1593 (Montreal: McGill-Queen's University Press,
2001); Love, "Winning the Catholics," 361-79; Nora M. Sutherland, Henry IV of France and the
Politics of Religion, 1572-1596, 2 vols. (Bristol, UK: Elm Bank, 2002); Wolfe, Conversion.
30 For a summary of the major articles of the Edict of Nantes and reactions to the
proclamation’s impact on Protestants and Catholics, see Roland Mousnier, The Assassination of
Henry IV. The Tyrannicide Problem and the Consolidation of the French Absolute Monarchy in
the Early Seventeenth Century, trans. Joan Spencer (London: Faber and Faber, 1973), 143-58.
42

For a recent translation of the edict, see Richard L. Goodbar, ed., The Edict of Nantes: Five
Essays and a New Translation (Bloomington, MN: The National Huguenot Society, 1998).
31 In the late 1590s the Calvinist theologian, Jean de Serres, made the suggestion to unite the
two confessions under one patriarch, who would develop a new liturgy and sacraments
determined by reciprocal concessions. In 1607 Jean Hotman de Villiers suggested the model
comparable to the Church of England. For more on these two attempts, see Holt, French Wars,
170; Venard, "Grand cassure," 313.
32 For France’s financial recovery, see Greengrass, France, 172-81; Mousnier, Henry IV, 184-98.
33 For Henri’s marriage to Maria de’ Medici, see Mousnier, Henry IV, 152. Henri had been
married to Marguerite de Valois since 1572. The pope, however, decided to annul the childless
marriage, which allowed the king to marry Maria in April 1600.
34 For Henri IV’s urban renewal of Paris, see Ballon, Henri IV.
35 Henri had two other projects that were abandoned after his death, the Place de France (1609)
and the Collège de France (1610). For more on the unfinished projects as well as the completed
ones, see ibid.
36 Ibid., 12.
37 Ibid., 5.
38 For this legend and its meaning, see Beaune, Ideology, 77-79.
39 Richard A. Jackson, Vive le roi! A History of the French Coronation from Charles V to
Charles X (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1984), 22.
40 For the history of the king’s ability to heal scrofula, see Marc Bloch, The Royal Touch:
Sacred Monarchy and Scrofula in England and France, trans. J. E. Anderson (London:
Routledge and K. Paul, 1973).
41 Ibid., 69-81; Jackson, Vive le roi, 22, 33.
42 For the history and meaning of this epithet, see Beaune, Ideology, 172-93.
43 For an introduction to Gallicanism, see Jotham Parsons, The Church in the Republic:
Gallicanism and Political Ideology in Renaissance France (Washington, D. C.: The Catholic
University of America Press, 2004), 3-8.
44 This definition of Gallicanism at the time of Henri IV is given in ibid., 97.
45 Wolfe, Conversion, 48.
43

46 Beaune, Ideology, 176.
47 For this definition of the Catholic Reformation, see Bireley, Refashioning, 2. For important
additional literature on the Catholic Reformation, see John Bossy, Christianity in the West, 1400-
1700 (New York: Oxford University Press, 1985); Jean Delumeau, Catholicism between Luther
and Voltaire: A New View of the Counter-Reformation (London: Burns and Oates, 1977); H.
Outram Evennett, The Spirit of the Counter-Reformation (Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press, 1968); John O'Malley, "Was Ignatius Loyola a Church Reformer: How to Look at Early
Modern Catholicism," Catholic Historical Review 77 (1991): 177-93.
48 For an overview of the council’s goals and actions, see Bireley, Refashioning, 45-57.
49 Ibid., 57-58.
50 Mousnier, Henry IV, 160.
51 Two examples of this scholarship are found in Paul Broutin, La réforme pastorale en France
au XVIIe siècle, 2 vols. (Paris: Desclée, 1956); Raymond Deville, The French School of
Spirituality: An Introduction and Reader, trans. Agnes Cunningham (Pitsburgh: Duquesne
University Press, 1994).
52 Numerous sources exist for this type of scholarship, which mainly focuses on regional
examples of popular belief. Among the most important sources, which also provides a general
introduction to the Catholic Reformation in France, see Barbara B. Diefendorf and Virginia
Reinburg, "Catholic Reform and Religious Coexistence," in Renaissance and Reformation
France, ed. Mack P. Holt (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002), 176-201. For additional
recent sources on the Catholic Reformation in France, see Robin Briggs, Communities of Belief:
Cultural and Social Tension in Early Modern France (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1989), 364-80;
Kettering, French Society, 96-106; Élisabeth Labrousse and Robert Sauzet, "La lente mise en
place de la réforme tridentine (1598-1661)," in Histoire de la France religieuse, ed. Jacques Le
Goff and René Rémond (Paris: Seuil, 1988), 321-474; Denis Richet, "La Contre-reforme
Catholique en France dans la premiere moitié du XVIIe siècle," De la Réforme à la Révolution:
études sur la France moderne (1991): 83-95.
53 Diefendorf, Penitence; Elizabeth Rapley, The Dévotes: Women and Church in Seventeenth-
Century France (Montreal: McGill-Queen's University Press, 1990).
54 For the French kingdom’s relationship with the Council of Trent, see Alain Tallon, La
France et le Concile de Trente (1518-1563) (Rome: École française de Rome, 1997).
55 Mousnier, Henry IV, 160, 66-67.
56 Tallon, France, 412.
44

57 Venard, "Grand cassure," 298-302.
58 Ibid., 301.
59 For the dévots, see Chatellier, The Europe of the Devout: The Catholic Reformation and the
Formation of a New Society; Diefendorf, Penitence, 11-13, 78-82; Diefendorf and Reinburg,
"Catholic Reform," 189-96; Labrousse and Sauzet, "Réforme tridentine," 342-51; Rapley, The
Dévotes.
60 For more on Madame Acarie, see Emily Bowles, A Gracious Life: Being the Life of Barbara
Acarie (London: Burns and Oates, 1879); Charles E. Williams, The French Oratorians and
Absolutism, 1611-1641 (New York: Peter Lang, 1989), 9-38.
61 In Paris seventy new monastic communities were founded between 1600 and 1650; forty-six
communities for women, twenty-four communities for men. For these statistics, see Orest
Ranum, Paris in the Age of Absolutism: An Essay (University Park, PA: The Pennsylvania State
University Press, 2002), 171.
62 Bireley, Refashioning, 57.
63 For Henri’s relationship with the Jesuits, see Nelson, Jesuits. For the establishments of the
religious orders, see Joan Evans, Monastic Architecture in France, from the Renaissance to the
Revolution (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1964); Mousnier, Henry IV, 170.
64 For Catholics doubting the sincerity of Henri IV’s conversion, see Mousnier, Henry IV, 169-
70.
65 In addition to the nineteen churches built for religious orders or congregations, seven more
were built for other institutions. These included three hospital chapels, two parish churches, one
funerary chapel, and one university chapel. My definition of a church is a free-standing building
independent of other structures or an edifice attached to other buildings, such as a college,
hospital, or dormitories, that remains architecturally distinctive from its surroundings. I do not
consider chapels enclosed within a larger building, such as a private chapel within a residence.
66 For a description of these events, see Mousnier, Henry IV, 21-26.
67
Ravaillac was asked to leave the order because of visions he was having. For Ravaillac’s
history and motives, see ibid., 27-38.
68 Henri’s exact military plans are ambiguous. The scenario presented here comes from ibid.,
21. For additional scenarios and the political climate in Europe at this time, see J. Michael
Hayden, "Continuity in the France of Henry IV and Louis XIII: French Foreign Policy, 1598-
1615," The Journal of Modern History 45, no. 1 (1973): 3-12.
69 Mousnier, Henry IV, 22.
45

70 Hayden, "Continuity," 12.
71 Louis Batiffol, Marie de Médicis and the French Court in the XVIIth Century (Freeport, NY:
Books for Libraries Press, 1970); Carmona, Marie de Médicis; André Castelot, Marie de
Médicis: les désordres de la passion (Paris: Perrin, 1995); Philippe Delorme, Marie de Médicis
(Paris: Pygmalion, 1998); Jean-François Dubost, "Reine, regente, reine mère," in Marie de
Médicis et le Palais Luxembourg, ed. Marie-Noëlle Baudouin-Matuszek (Paris: Délégation à
l'Action Artistique de la Ville de Paris, 1991), 100-57; Elizabeth W. Marvick, Louis XIII: The
Making of a King (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1986), 120-60.
72 Moote, Louis XIII..
73 Maria Luisa Mariotti Masi, Maria de Medici (Milan: Mursia, 1993); Salvo Mastelione, La
Reggenza di Maria de' Medici (Florence: G. D'Anna, 1962).
74 Johnson, "Imagining Images," 35, 38; Kathleen Wilson-Chevalier, "Women on Top at
Fontainebleau," Oxford Art Journal 16, no. 1 (1993): 131.
75 Johnson, "Imagining Images," 130-31.
76 Moote, Louis XIII, 44.
77 Ibid., 46.. The edict was reissued eight days after Louis’s accession to the throne and again
in 1612, 1614, and twice in 1615.
78 For the term Ultramontanist, see ibid., 45.
79 Ibid. Diefendorf, Beneath the Cross, 174. For further discussion of the Catholic division
leading up to the regency, see Mousnier, Henry IV, 158-70.
80
For the dévots, see Carmona, Marie de Médicis, 127, 442-43. For the Italians, see Dubost,
"Reine," 127-37.
81 For Maria’s foreign policy, see Hayden, "Continuity," 14-24.
82 Moote, Louis XIII, 48.
83 For the duke of Savoy and France, see Hayden, "Continuity," 16, 20.
84 Ibid., 21.
85 For an account of the following events, see J. Michael Hayden, France and the Estates
General of 1614 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1974), 131-40.
46

86 Louis Batiffol, Le roi Louis XIII à vingt ans (Paris: Calmann-Lévy, 1910); Clay Elliott
Burlingham, "The King and the Cardinal: The Emergence of Majesty" (Ph.D. Dissertation, The
University of Saskatchewan, 1999); Philippe Erlanger, Louis XIII: Le stoïcien de la monarchie
(Paris: Perrin, 1972); Wilmer Hunt McCorquodale, "The Court of Louis XIII: The French Court
in an age of Turmoil, 1610-1643" (Ph.D. Dissertation, The University of Texas at Austin, 1994);
Charles Romain, Louis XIII: Un grand roi méconnu, 1601-1643 (Paris: Hachette, 1934); Louis
Vaunois, Vie de Louis XIII (Paris: Del Duca, 1961).
87 Georges Bordonove, Les Bourbons de Henri IV à Louis XV, 1589-1774 (Paris: Pygmalion,
2005); Pierre Chevallier, Louis XIII, roi cornélien (Paris: Fayard, 1979); Marvick, Louis XIII:
The Making of a King; Moote, Louis XIII.
88 Fumaroli, "Cross,” 88-102; Le Pas de Sécheval, "Politique artistique.”
89 For examples of Maria’s controlling aspects over her son, see Moote, Louis XIII, 58, 85.
90 Chevallier, Louis XIII, 150-51; Moote, Louis XIII, 58-59.
91 Holt, French Wars, 175. For a biography of the marshal, see Hélène Duccini, Concini:
Grandeur et misère du favori de Marie de Médicis (Paris: A. Michel, 1991).
92 Carmona, Marie de Médicis, 325-44; Chevallier, Louis XIII, 133-72; Moote, Louis XIII, 89-
96. Marie’s exile only lasted until 1621; the next year Louis allowed her to rejoin his council.
The queen mother was exiled permanently in 1631 as the outcome of another showdown of royal
power, known as the Day of the Dupes, in November 1630.
93 After a quick show of force by the king’s troops, the territory was incorporated into the
French state and Catholics were allowed to practice their faith. For the king’s problems with the
Huguenots from 1620 to 1630, see Chevallier, Louis XIII, 223-36, 325-41; Moote, Louis XIII,
121-30.
94
For Louis’s thoughts on Protestantism, see Batiffol, Louis XIII, 262-81; Chevallier, Louis XIII,
236-37.
95 Batiffol, Louis XIII, 274.
96 Ibid.
97 Moote, Louis XIII, 120-21.
98 For further discussion of Louis’s attitudes towards religion, see Batiffol, Louis XIII, 254-319.
Chevallier, Louis XIII, 236-37, 86; René Laurentin, Le voeu de Louis XIII: Passé ou avenir de la
France (Paris: OEIL, 1988), 103. For another source, which in its daily chronicle of Louis’s life
also provides an account of the king’s routine religious activities, see Jean Héroard, Journal de
47

Jean Héroard, ed. Edouard de Barthélemy and Eudoxe Soulié, 2 vols. (Paris: Firmin Didot
Frères, Fils et cie, 1868).
99 Bibliothèque nationale, ms. fr. 20742, fol. 59.
100 Although the feast of St. Louis had been celebrated at individual institutions, such as at Saint-
Denis, since the king’s canonization in 1297, Pope Paul V was the first to order that it be
celebrated throughout the kingdom; see Paul Perdrizet, Le Calendrier parisien à la fin du moyen
âge: d’après le bréviare et les livres d’heures (Paris: Les belles letters, 1933), 210; Batiffol,
Louis XIII, 259. A copy of the bull was published in the Mercure françois 5 (1618): 271-73.
101 Moote, Louis XIII, 178, 82, 94.
102 Ibid., 67.
103 Ibid., 178.
104 Batiffol, Louis XIII, 261-62; Moote, Louis XIII, 67. .
105 Moote, Louis XIII, 131.
106 For a general history of the Thirty Years’ War, see David Maland, Europe at War, 1600-
1650 (Totowa, NJ: Rowman and Littlefield, 1980). For Louis XIII’s involvement with and
attitudes towards the war, see Chevallier, Louis XIII, 195-96, 225, 457-98; Aleksandra D.
Lublinskaya, French Absolutism: The Crucial Phase, 1620-1629, trans. Brian Pearce
(Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1968); Moote, Louis XIII, 131-35, 79-80,206-13;
Victor L. Tapié, France in the Age of Louis XIII and Richelieu (New York: Praeger, 1975), 97-
115.
48

CHAPTER 3
LOUIS XIII AND THE CHURCH OF THE FRENCH ORATORY:
AN EXPRESSION OF SOVEREIGN AUTHORITY
In 1623 Louis XIII proclaimed the church of the French Oratory in Paris as the royal
chapel of the palace of the Louvre and decreed that state funds be provided to help with
construction costs (fig. 4). The church, for which construction was begun in 1621 in the quartier
of the Louvre, was the mother church of the Congrégation des Pères de l’Oratoire de France, a
society of secular preachers that had enjoyed the patronage of Maria de’ Medici, Louis XIII’s
mother, since its founding in 1611. Louis’s decision to support the church was not a beneficent
gesture towards his mother. Instead I propose that it was a challenge to conservative French
Catholics known as the dévots, a group with close ties to Maria de’ Medici and the Oratorian
congregation. The dévots, who were dissatisfied with France’s continued toleration of
Protestantism, looked to Rome for leadership and favored alliances with other Catholic powers
even at the expense of French rights.
Scholarship has traditionally characterized Louis XIII as a weak ruler lacking an interest
in the arts, yet within the last twenty years the historian A. Lloyd Moote and the art historians
Anne Le Pas de Sécheval and Marc Fumaroli have recognized that he was a self-sufficient leader
with an active artistic policy (fig. 1). 1 Building on those revisionist studies, this chapter
considers one example in which Louis XIII’s interest in the arts intersected with his political
goals, a subject that has not been previously addressed in the literature. I argue that Louis XIII,
who as king of France was the head of the Gallican Church, patronized the church of the French
Oratory, a duty previously fulfilled by Maria de’ Medici, to counter the political threat posed by
the dévots. To accomplish this goal he transformed the church into a manifestation of his
political will, ordering its incorporation into the palace of the Louvre and embellishing it with
monarchical symbols that evoked the sovereignty of France.
Existing scholarship on the architecture of the French Oratory’s church, largely based on
the extensive collection of the congregation’s own archival documents, generally seeks to clarify
the building’s construction history, its original design, and the authorship of the plans. 2 The only
study of the building that departs from this approach is the doctoral thesis by Le Pas de Sécheval,
49

which uses the seventeenth-century records to testify to Louis XIII’s support of the church and,
as part of the author’s larger goal, to show that the king had an active interest in the arts. While
Le Pas de Sécheval’s documentation of the king’s patronage details an important aspect of the
church, the brevity of the section on the French Oratory leaves a number of unanswered
questions, most important of which is why Louis XIII became a patron of this particular building
and how did his support impact the design? Several other studies related to the church of the
Oratory focus on elements of the interior decorative program, notably the high altar and the side
chapels. 3 Although these works help to elucidate the manner in which the arts reflected the
religious practices followed by the congregation, the function and dates of creation for these
components fall outside the scope of this study, which focuses on Louis XIII’s support during the
1620s. Further components missing from the scholarship are iconographical readings and
contextual studies of the church’s architectural vocabulary and urban placement. By merging
the previous archival studies with current analyses of early seventeenth-century religious and
political forces, my study uncovers the impact of royal support on the building and the meaning
of the resulting architectural form.
In demonstrating my thesis, I will first discuss the origins and purpose of the
congregation and analyze the architecture of the church. This will reveal the factors influencing
the design and establish the origins of the structure before Louis XIII’s involvement. I will then
examine the manner in which the king, through appropriating the building and enhancing it with
monarchical symbols, transformed the church into a royal chapel. Understanding the royal
contributions to the design will bring to light the meaning that Louis XIII wanted the church to
convey. Finally, I will investigate the political and religious context surrounding the Oratorians
and their supporters to elucidate the motives that prompted Louis’s support of the church.
The Congrégation des Pères de l’Oratoire de France and Its Church
The church of the French Oratory was built for the Congrégation des Pères de l’Oratoire
de France, a religious congregation of secular priests founded in Paris on 10 November 1611 by
the Parisian Pierre de Bérulle (fig. 5). 4 Forming part of the movement that responded to the
Council of Trent’s calls for reform, the French group was loosely modeled after Italian lay
confraternities and secular congregations such as Philip Neri’s Roman Oratory. An examination
50

of the French Oratory’s church shows that the fathers incorporated a number of architectural
features associated with Catholic reform while at the same time remaining sensitive to traditional
French ecclesiastical styles. The combination of sources suggests that the fathers did not have a
single purpose that they hoped to achieve by applying a specific style of architecture. As this
analysis of the building will demonstrate, the Oratorians instead wanted to create a building that
represented their dual interests, showing their desire for reform while also acknowledging the
congregation’s French origins. The inadvertent result of their efforts was a structure that Louis
XIII would later appropriate for his own political goals.
The primary objective of the French Oratory was to restore the priesthood to the purity of
the first years of the Church and to make it a virtuous institution devoid of luxury, ambition, and
ignorance. 5 The founding members believed that the disheveled state of the secular clergy had
left too many citizens of France without legitimate preachers. 6 They found that in addition to a
lack of seminaries, priests baptized without making unction, performed marriages without having
the proper authority, and practiced the sacrament of reconciliation without knowing the formula
of absolution. To address these issues, the congregation dedicated itself to the instruction of
priests.
The French Oratory developed from the Italian movement of fifteenth-century lay
confraternities, groups which were eventually joined by members of the clergy and became
congregations of clerks regular. 7 One of the organizations to have a direct influence on Bérulle
was the Oblates of St. Ambrose, founded in 1581 by Charles Borromeo, whose constitution
became a model for the Oratorians in France. 8 The Roman Oratory, whose approach to
preaching and instructing parishioners provided a model for other priests, inspired Bérulle’s
future course. 9 The French congregation, however, remained entirely distinct from the Italian
religious foundations. In addition to its members not taking solemn vows, the Oratoire de France
differed from the other groups primarily in its organization. It was a centralized congregation
governed by a superior general, a position first held by Pierre de Bérulle, and all of the members
were dependent upon the local bishop for the exercise of their ecclesiastical functions.
The French Oratory’s first house was the pre-existing Hôtel de Petit-Bourbon in the
faubourg Saint-Jacques, on the left bank and outskirts of Paris. 10 Although the house had a
chapel and was in an area that was popular with religious orders, the growing size of the
congregation and a desire for a place closer to the center of the city prompted Bérulle to look for
51

a more appropriate location. 11 In January 1616 the congregation moved to a new site, situated
on the right bank, off the rue Saint-Honoré and adjacent to the grounds of the Louvre palace,
where it soon began building a chapel. 12
In the summer of 1621, having outgrown the original chapel, the French Oratory began
building a new church, which would serve the congregation until it was disbanded in 1792. The
plan, begun on the design of Clément Métezeau and continued in 1622 with modifications by
Jacques Lemercier, consists of a single nave of three bays followed by a crossing with nonprojecting
transepts and a choir of three bays ending in a semicircular apse (fig. 6). 13 Bordering
each side of the choir and nave are chapels. The major features of this plan, including a single
nave, side chapels, and non-projecting transepts, were by the early seventeenth century common
elements in churches of reformed religious orders that followed the tenets of the Catholic
Reformation. 14 Examples of plans with these same features were present in Paris by the time
Bérulle’s congregation began construction, the Discalced Carmelite church of Saint-Joseph-des-
Carmes (begun 1613) being one such example (fig. 60). In addition to the numerous chapels
accommodating the priests’ need to say mass, the other principal feature found at the French
Oratory demonstrating the call for reform was the spacious nave that facilitated preaching to
large crowds. This was the result of not including the traditional rood screen, providing clear,
unobstructed views of the high altar.
Several features, however, distinguish the layout from other early seventeenth-century
designs. Among these are the three bays of equal size placed on both sides of the transepts,
creating symmetrical spaces on either side of the crossing and making the church the first
seventeenth-century example in Paris of the combination plan. 15 A second unique element is a
narrow corridor encircling all but the main façade of the ground floor. An anonymous plan from
the mid-eighteenth century shows openings in the rear walls of the chapels that allowed access to
the corridor, permitting communication between the chapels and the other parts of the church
(fig. 6). 16 Similar passageways at the church at the Escorial (1563-1584) and at the church of
San Fedele in Milan (begun 1569) could have influenced the Paris design. 17
Another distinctive feature found on the plan of the Oratory suggests a specific French
influence, the oval chapel grafted onto the apse. Clearly visible from the exterior in a lateseventeenth-century
engraving, the two-story elliptical structure rises above the low, rectangular
sacristies framing either side of the chapel (fig. 7). 18 While similar ideas could be found in
52

contemporary Parisian churches, such as the semi-circular apsidal chapel at Saint-Joseph-des-
Carmes, the one at the French Oratory differs significantly because of its two-story oval form
and its dedication to the Virgin. Designed by Lemercier after 1622, the Oratory’s structure
appears to have been drawn from the Gothic tradition of projecting axial apsidal chapels
dedicated to the Virgin, examples of which are found at the Cathedral of Notre-Dame at Amiens
(begun c. 1220) and the parish church of Saint-Gervais-Saint-Protais (begun 1494) in Paris. 19
As with the plan, the church’s interior incorporates many features found in contemporary
designs used by the reformed religious orders. Among these are giant Corinthian pilasters,
which line the nave and choir while supporting a broad entablature with a projecting cornice (fig.
8). Above is a masonry barrel vault, articulated with ribs and punctuated by tall, round arched
windows featuring transparent glass and painted borders. 20 A restrained use of decorative
sculpture and the elimination of stained glass windows create a reserved interior design, which
further accorded with the reforms of the Catholic Church. 21 These architectural features contrast
with other aspects of the interior that are typically associated with the Gothic period. Not only
does the central hall comprising the nave and choir have tall, narrow proportions, but it is
surrounded by a three-part interior elevation, elements common to medieval French ecclesiastical
designs.
A further analysis of the interior reveals several details deriving from specific Parisian
sources. The first level of the nave elevation is a series of arcades, whose only break in
repetition apart from the entrance are low square-headed passageways leading from each side of
the transept directly to the outer corridor (fig. 9). The otherwise continuous sequence of arches
creates a space that is otherwise unusual for early seventeenth-century churches with transepts.
Instead of stepping-back at the crossing, the arcades form a U-shaped area that defines the
narrow span of the nave and choir. Although the projection of the crossing is clearly visible in
the upper stories, the lack of retreat on the ground floor combined with the vertical emphasis of
the pilasters initially creates the feeling of being in a soaring, single-nave church without
transepts. A possible Parisian source for this effect is Saint-Nicolas-des-Champs, begun in 1397
(fig. 10). 22 Although the church differs in other respects from the French Oratory, its lack of
transepts results in a tall and narrow, U-shaped nave with continuous arcading on the ground
floor. The similarity between the two spaces can be accounted for by the close tie that existed
53

etween the Oratory’s founder and Saint-Nicolas-des-Champs: it was the Bérulle family’s parish
church. 23
The gallery level, fronted by a balustrade, also consists of arcades, but unlike those of the
lower floor the arches are flattened and are only found in the choir and the nave (fig. 9). At this
level the transepts retreat, revealing large, open seating areas that function as tribunes and that
connect the galleries in the nave and choir. 24 Another Parisian church, Saint-Gervais-Saint-
Protais (begun 1494), which also has tribunes in the transepts, could have served as the model for
this arrangement. 25
Despite the dissolution of the congregation in 1792 and the subsequent varied uses of the
building, including a place for public meetings, a military magazine, and a warehouse for the
Opéra de la place Louvois, the interior has changed little since its completion. The most
noticeable modifications occurred after 1811 when the church was converted into a Protestant
place of worship, a function which it still serves. Found in the area around the apse, the changes
include paneling against the arcades, a doorway in the once open central arch, and in the center
bay of the gallery a sculpted cross placed in front of wall, which was originally punctuated by
windows (fig. 8). 26
In September 1625 the congregation halted construction of the church when it was unable
to purchase two plots of land on which it intended to build the last two bays of the nave. 27 At
that stage the building, as recorded in the annals of the congregation and visible on an
eighteenth-century city view known as the Plan of Turgot, consisted of the axial chapel, the
28
choir, the transept, and one bay of the nave (fig. 11). To create a functioning place of worship,
the congregation transformed the choir and transept into the nave and erected a wooden façade,
which would remain in place until the building’s completion in 1745. The oval rotunda, initially
intended to serve as a chapel dedicated to the Virgin, then became the choir. 29 Despite the
interruption in construction, by the end of 1625 services were held in the church. 30 Work was
pursued on the interior until at least 1635 as indicated by a gift of windows from Louis XIII and
continued monetary donations from the royal treasury. 31 The unfinished state of the church did
not deter a number of distinguished guests from attending the congregation’s services. In
addition to members of the court making regular appearances to hear the sermons and music,
Louis XIII and his wife Queen Anne of Austria attended jubilee services in 1626. 32
54

Since the nave was incomplete, the church lacked a proper façade, resulting in the
finished apsidal end taking on a significant role representing the church in the urban setting (fig.
4). This section of the church has two slender stair towers rising at the juncture of the oval
chapel and the choir, an arrangement that augments the visual presence of this area. 33 The lower
arcading was added in the nineteenth century. The buildup of forms echoes through the rest of
the exterior, which rises in three tiers. The building is relatively plain on its lower levels while
its upper tier, embellished with sweeping volute-shaped buttresses crowned with pots-à-feu, is
topped with a tall, narrow roof typical of the medieval French tradition.
Numerous texts written by Pierre de Bérulle explain the Christ-centered theology
practiced by the French Oratorians. 34 Yet among the extensive documents there are no records
of the congregations’ architectural preferences, making it difficult to determine initially the
influences affecting the design of the church. Furthermore, other than the Oratory’s small
provisionary chapel begun in 1616, there were no immediate architectural precedents on which
to base the design. The completion of the church in 1745 by the architect Pierre Caqué, who
finished the remaining section of the nave and the façade more or less according to the
seventeenth-century plans, is of critical importance in understanding the original intentions of the
Oratorians. 35 By analyzing the architecture as it was conceived in the early 1620s, it can be
demonstrated that the fathers wished to incorporate architectural features associated with
Catholic reform while remaining sensitive to traditional French ecclesiastical styles. The
Oratorians’ dual focus on the Church’s reform efforts and the congregation’s French origins
would bring the religious group to the attention of Louis XIII, who two years after construction
began took an unexpected interest in this place of worship.
The Church as a Symbol of Louis XIII
In December 1623, Louis XIII began supporting the congregation’s church. His
assistance ranged from bestowing honorary titles and gifts of money to the inclusion of royal
symbols on the building, functioning as a means to demonstrate his sovereign will. The king’s
only previous support of a Parisian church had come in February of the same year, at which time
he donated funds to the Feuillants of the rue Saint-Honoré to help with completion of the façade.
This church had been patronized by Henri IV and Maria de’ Medici during the first decade of the
55

seventeenth century, prompting scholars to suggest that Louis simply continued the royal support
of his predecessors. 36 The question that arises with the church of the French Oratory is what
prompted the king’s unexpected interest, especially when he had previously shown little interest
in the religious group or in ecclesiastical architecture in general?
Among the motivating factors was the need to provide a royal chapel at the palace of the
Louvre. As recorded in the annals of the congregation, Louis XIII decided “by his own will and
without having been solicited by anyone…to take the church to serve as the chapel of his
castle.” 37 As the palace chapel, the church of the Oratory would fulfill a much needed
component of the Louvre, which had lacked a free-standing chapel capable of serving the court
since 1527 when King François I had demolished the existing one. 38 Although each royal
apartment had a small chapel for private ceremonies, the only facilities available for larger
services were the parish church of Saint-Germain-l’Auxerrois and a chapel at the nearby Hôtel
du Petit Bourbon, both of which were located to the east of the Louvre. 39
To make the church part of the royal precinct, the king called for his architect Clément
Métezeau to incorporate it into the urban fabric of the palace. He wanted a design where the
church “could enter into the general plan of the Louvre and to form part of it.” 40 Louis had been
planning to complete the Grand Design of the Louvre, a project initially conceived by King
Henri II and designed by Pierre Lescot between 1551 and 1559 that would quadruple the size of
the medieval palace. Although the plan would only be realized in the 1660s, it consisted of
doubling the existing western wing and then building three additional wings to form a new
square court, or Cour Carrée. The completed structure is visible on the 1739 Plan of Turgot (fig.
12). As seen in the eighteenth-century print, the design called for the extension of the palace to
the north and east, thus bringing the Louvre closer to the church of the Oratory but with existing
buildings continuing to separate physically the two structures. To integrate the new royal chapel
into the overall plan, Louis called for the removal of some of these buildings so that a direct path
would unite the longitudinal axis of the church with the central entrance of the Louvre’s new
northern wing. 41
Although the royal council suspended plans for the completion of the Grand Design in
1626, a move that also prevented the church from being integrated into the palace, the proximity
of the two buildings reinforced their connection. The Church of the Oratory was on a block
adjacent to the grounds of the Louvre and thus a short walk from the palace (fig. 13). Having a
56

proper palace chapel was vital to Louis XIII’s desired image. The kings of France ruled by
divine right, meaning that they received their authority not from any earthly source, but directly
from God. The presence of a prominent chapel at the seat of the ruler’s government functioned
as a reminder of this source of power and the king’s independence from any temporal force.
Following his announcement that the building would serve as the chapel of the Louvre,
Louis XIII provided the Oratoire de France with additional titles and gifts befitting its royal
status. The king declared that the Oratorian preachers would serve as chapelains ordinaires to
himself and all future kings, a role and title that gave the priests all the privileges accorded to the
domestics of the maison du roi. 42 In 1627 he awarded the congregation ten thousand livres
from the royal treasury to assist with construction of the church, a sum that Louis XIII intended
to be renewed every year until completion of the building but which due to a shortage of funds in
the royal coffers was only given up to 1634. 43
Appropriating the building, however, and drawing it into the context of the Louvre was
only the first step. In addition Louis sought to affirm visually his connection with the building
and the Oratorians through the imposition on the structure of potent royal symbols. The
architecturally significant apsidal end of the church was one element of this program, a feature
made even more important considering it is the part of the building directed towards the Louvre
(fig. 14). When the king and court approached the church from the palace, most likely along the
rue du Louvre (today the rue de l’Oratoire), they would have first seen the projecting oval chapel
with two prominent stair towers rising up behind it to frame the roof of the apse. The towers,
the building’s most striking exterior feature, provided the church with two important signs
associated with the French monarchy, twin towers and the fleur-de-lis.
Towers had long played a practical role in ecclesiastical architecture, housing the bells
that sounded the hours of the day and providing stairways that allowed access to the upper areas
of the building. 44 Beginning in the Romanesque period, the functional necessities of the form
made towers a common feature, and they remained present throughout the seventeenth century,
with designs planned for notable churches such as Saint-Sulpice (1646-1775) in Paris and
Sant’Agnese in the Piazza Navona (1653-1667) in Rome. 45 The twin towers at the church of the
Oratory certainly fulfilled the practical purpose of providing access to the galleries and the roof,
but their placement at the juncture of the apse and the rotunda is unusual. The feature is most
commonly associated with the front of buildings, where the towers’ placement on the primary
57

façade drew visual emphasis to the main entrance. A tradition, however, existed in Northern
Italy and the regions of Alsace and Lorraine that placed them at the east end next to the choir or
apse, accenting the location of altars. 46 The arrangement spread from Lorraine to France and by
the mid-eleventh century was present in the Ile-de-France, Saint-Germain-des-Prés in Paris
providing one example. Variations on twin towers located to the east of the transepts continued
in the following centuries, providing formal sources for the Oratory. Among these is the Lady
Chapel at Saint-Germer-de-Fly, a large almost free-standing rectangular structure abutting the
apse of the church (fig. 15). 47 At this juncture, two stair towers flank each side of the chapel.
Like many of the precedents, the Oratory’s towers corresponded to the location of the
high altar in the apse, emphasizing the building’s liturgical center. Another aspect that
contributed to the unusual position was the incomplete state of the nave, making it impractical to
even consider having towers at the front of the church. The building needed the stair towers to
access the upper areas; the placement of the towers next to the apse provided a solution to the
problem presented by the unfinished nave.
While these factors contributed to the location of the towers, I believe the foremost
reasons came from the symbolism of the form and the 1623 designation of the church as a royal
chapel. 48 Towers were part of a venerable symbolic tradition in architecture. Not only did they
enhance the monumentality of a structure, but towers also announced the presence of a
prominent edifice within an urban setting. 49 Buildings with twin-towered facades carried
additional meaning. Dating back to antiquity, the form functioned as a symbol of rulership,
identifying city gateways and royal palaces. 50 Revived during the Carolingian period, twintowered
facades on churches became a sign of royal patronage, symbolizing the merging of
heavenly and earthly powers such as occurs at Charlemagne’s palace chapel at Aachen. 51 The
use of twin towers on ecclesiastical architecture to connote authority expanded beyond the Holy
Roman Empire to include among others French kings, who adopted the form for palace projects
such as the thirteenth-century Sainte-Chapelle in Paris and the fourteenth-century royal chapel at
Vincennes (fig. 16). Even in the seventeenth-century the form retained its meaning, as
demonstrated by Pope Paul V’s decision to promote papal primacy by adding towers to St.
Peter’s Basilica. 52
The towers’ symbolism combined with Louis XIII’s desire to unite the new palace chapel
with the proposed design of the Louvre, provided the architect with two potent reasons to
58

develop the striking design. Just as the placement of twin towers on the west façade of a church
drew visual emphasis, the example at the Oratory accentuated the section closest to the Louvre,
drawing it into the context of the palace and emphasizing its relationship with the royal building.
Added to this was the long association of twin towers with rulership. Their placement at the end
of the church closest to the seat of power endowed the church with forceful symbolism,
signifying the French Oratory’s status as the palace chapel.
Enhancing the prominent visual emphasis generated by the twin towers was a fleur-de-lis,
the emblem of the French monarchy, displayed on the top of each cupola (fig. 14). Although the
symbol began appearing on royal coins and seals in the twelfth century, legends claimed the
fleur-de-lis originated in the fifth century with Clovis (481-511), the first Christian king of
France. The story recounts that the then pagan king, on the verge of a great battle with rivals,
miraculously received from an angel a shield adorned with lilies. 53 Aided by the heaven-sent
armor, Clovis went on to win the battle and to convert to Christianity, adopting the divine
insignia as the royal arms of France. The story of Clovis’s gift from heaven was added to the
other honors bestowed on French monarchs, including the anointment at the royal sacre with
holy chrism delivered by a dove from heaven, the right to receive Communion of bread and
wine, which was otherwise reserved for priests, and the ability to heal through touch people
affected by the disease scrofula. 54 Taken together, these privileges demonstrated that France
enjoyed the special approval of God and held an elevated status among other Christian
kingdoms. 55
As a royal symbol, the fleur-de-lis appeared on the crown’s jewelry, books, textiles, and
buildings to promote the power of the French monarchy. Of the buildings, palace chapels were
some of the first to receive this distinction, most notably the Sainte-Chapelle in Paris, begun in
1242 by King Louis IX (1226-1270). Here glaziers included fleurs-de-lis on blue backgrounds
as part of heraldic devices in windows illustrating the coronation of kings (fig. 17). 56 Religious
foundations receiving royal support also had a history of incorporating the fleur-de-lis. The
thirteenth-century Abbey of Saint-Denis, another project associated with Louis IX, employed the
royal emblem to reinforce the authority of the throne. 57 The decoration of the interior and
exterior included paintings and reliefs of the fleur-de-lis, some of which can still be seen on the
dado and door jambs of the south transept portal.
59

The emblem continued to be included on buildings with royal associations in the
subsequent centuries. The Premonstratensian convent at Joyenval, enjoying the favor of the
royal family in the fifteenth century, received from Charles VII the right to display the French
coat of arms above the main entry of its church. 58 Similarly the Parisian convent of the
Chartreux, founded by St. Louis in 1257, included the royal arms above the central arcade of a
portico begun there in 1505. The heraldic emblem was placed within a shield and set against a
background covered with additional fleurs-de-lis, an arrangement that clearly recalled the royal
foundation (fig. 18). 59 By the sixteenth century the emblem had become a common feature on
royal châteaux: as a finial at Chambord, in sculptural reliefs at Blois, and depicted in the arms of
France on the façade of the west wing of the Louvre.
The fleur-de-lis, whether included as part of the royal arms or as an individual motif, was
an important signifier of the French monarchy. To the Gallic rulers, it represented God’s
preference for the kingdom of France and the privileged status of it leaders over any other earthly
ruler. The prestige conferred by the fleur-de-lis made it a symbol of the French king’s power.
Louis XIII’s decision to patronize the church of the Oratory and the ensuing placement of the
fleurs-de-lis on the building’s most prominent exterior feature was one way that the king visually
demonstrated the sovereignty of his rule and that of the French state.
Jacques Lemercier incorporated the fleur-de-lis into at least one other part of the
building—at the center of the groined vault over the interior crossing where it was visible to all.
The arrangement originally consisted of a square frame with protruding rectangular arms
surrounding a hollowed-out octagon (fig. 19). 60 The oculus, which has since been closed and
covered with a relief of a dove, opened to a campanile placed at the center of the roof, which is
visible on the Plan of Turgot. 61 In the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries the rectangular arms
surrounding the oculus ended in a single fleur-de-lis, but these were removed at some point, most
likely during the French Revolution. While the motif, which resembled a Greek cross with a
fleur-de-lis at the end of each arm, was certainly a reminder to all worshipers of Louis XIII’s
desire to assert his authority, its history derived from another privilege bestowed on the kingdom
of France.
The design, known as a croix fleurdelisée, originated in the thirteenth century with
reliquaries meant to commemorate the transfer of a relic of the True Cross to France during the
reign of Philip Augustus (1180-1223). 62 The oldest known example of such a cross reliquary is
60

one offered by Philip Augustus to the Abbey of Saint-Denis in 1205 and depicted in Félibien’s
seventeenth-century engraving of the church’s treasury where the tri-lobe terminations of the
cross recall the form of a fleur-de-lis (fig. 20). 63 As the popularity of this type of reliquary grew
during the thirteenth century, the form was adapted for other uses. At the Sainte-Chapelle one of
the statues of the twelve Apostles located on the interior of the upper chapel holds a disk
containing a Greek cross with arms ending in fleurs-de-lis. 64 The appearance of a croix
fleurdelisée is especially appropriate at this royal chapel, which housed additional pieces of the
True Cross and the other relics of the Passion acquired by Louis IX.
The importance conferred on the kingdom of France by the True Cross was so great that
in the thirteenth century royal mints began using the image on the reverse of coins and continued
doing so into the eighteenth century. 65 Indeed, in 1642 Louis XIII issued an écu d’or with a
croix fleurdelisée on the reverse (fig. 21). As Rebecca Zorach has shown, coinage was thought to
have a memory-preserving function. 66 The ruling monarch’s face on the coin supported the
king’s legitimacy throughout the extent of the French nation. 67 A similar effect could be
achieved with just the king’s symbolic body on gold coins such as the écu d’or, which had the
royal coat of arms displayed within a shield. 68 The croix fleurdelisée on the reverse served as a
reminder that the kingdom of France possessed the most important relics in Christendom. By
incorporating the motif of the fleur-de-lis into the church of the Oratory, Louis XIII not only
reinforced the connection of his new palace chapel to the Sainte-Chapelle but he reaffirmed the
prestige of the French capital, the city in which many of the relics of Christ’s Passion were
enshrined. 69
Yet another motif on the interior of the church, surprisingly not mentioned in the
literature, further illustrates the king’s sovereign will, a serliana in the gallery of the apse’s axial
bay (fig. 8). Jacques Lemercier was the architect who introduced the design, and it is the first
example of the motif in his work as well as in Parisian religious architecture. 70 The serliana, a
central arch framed by two smaller rectangular openings supported on columns, was an antique
architectural motif associated with Roman imperial ceremonies. 71 The courtyard of Diocletian’s
palace at Split is a well known example where the emperor’s appearance in the central arch
would have provided an honorific setting and emphasized the leader’s sovereign rule (fig. 22).
The Renaissance architect Bramante revived the serliana, employing it in 1507 as a window in
the Vatican’s Sala Regia, a throne room for the reception of dignitaries visiting the papal
61

esidence. Similar to its use in antiquity, the motif became associated with ceremonial
appearances of the pope, demonstrating the Christian leader’s power and will.
Lemercier certainly became familiar with the serliana during his travels to Italy and from
studying versions in the architectural treatises of Sebastiano Serlio and Andrea Palladio, copies
of which were in his personal library. 72 It is also possible that Lemercier knew of the design
from French examples, most likely spread through its inclusion in Sebastiano Serlio’s Fourth
Book, first published in 1537. The serliana is known in at least two instances of French religious
architecture dating from the sixteenth century, the cloisters of the cathedral of Laon and
Guillaume Philandrier’s northern transept of the church of Le Grand-Andely in Normandy. 73
Other examples are found in domestic designs, including the Hôtel d’Assézat in Toulouse (begun
1555). The motif also appears in Jacques Androuet du Cerceau’s Premier livre published in
1559. 74
While these examples were probably used as decorative motifs, a version in Lescot’s
west wing of the Louvre undoubtedly retained the serliana’s imperial symbolism. Found in the
Salle des Caryatides, a ceremonial room on the ground floor of the palace, the motif consists of a
central arch supported on each side by groups of four fluted Doric columns and flanked by two
rectangular openings (fig. 23). 75 It spans the width of the room and is raised on six low steps.
To the rear of the arrangement is a wall with a centrally placed fireplace framed by two doors
that originally led to the state apartments. Although the purpose of this arrangement is not
known, it has been known as the tribunal even since the sixteenth century when Jacques
Androuet du Cerceau labeled it this in his book, Les plus excellents bastiments de France. 76
Like the serliana, a tribunal evokes imperial Rome because it was a podium from which the
emperor rendered justice. The symbolism of the ensemble is further enhanced by the inclusion
of pediments over each of the serliana’s rectangular bays, elements that also evoke a privileged
status. The combination of the architectural forms in the Louvre, which made an impressive
entryway for the king from the state apartments, has led scholars to view the motif as part of
77
Henri II’s imperial aspirations.
The demonstration of royal authority by the Louvre serliana suggests a similar use for the
motif in the French Oratory. Lemercier may have initially intended to include a serliana in every
bay of the gallery following the decorative repetition of the motif in Palladio’s design for the
façade of the Vincenza basilica (begun 1549). A drawing from around 1622 known as the
62

Quimper elevation, possibly by Lemercier, shows three serlianas in the transept and two inverted
versions of it as a continuous motif in the choir, suggesting that it would have been repeated
throughout the gallery level (fig. 24). 78 Two other engravings, one by Jean Marot from around
1660 and another by an anonymous artist from the mid-eighteenth century, also include the
serliana as a repeating motif in their elevations. Although these images provide strong evidence
for the existence of more than one serliana in the church, they all show significant discrepancies
differences compared to the interior, especially in the upper portions of the transept. They most
likely record possible design solutions conceived by Lemercier, who ultimately chose to use only
one serliana. 79
The designation of the church as the royal chapel most certainly affected the architect’s
design. This hypothesis is supported by a detailed description of the building’s interior dated
1625, which fails to mention any serliana. 80 The architectural motif could only have been built
in the following years, while construction of the nave was stopped but work on the interior
continued. Since the serliana only turns up several years after the church became a royal chapel, I
propose that Lemercier altered his original plan of the repeating decorative design in favor of a
single motif, which would call to mind the power of the monarchy.
The serliana in the church of the Oratory is located in the gallery, the area in palace
chapels traditionally reserved for the use of the king. Since the church lacked a state portrait of
the reigning sovereign, a traditional sign that literally stood for the monarch in his absence, the
serliana’s primary purpose was to represent the king. 81 Placed in the axial bay above the
altarpiece, the serliana originally stood in an opening between the apse and the oval rotunda; a
window in the rotunda, directly across from the serliana, looked out towards the Louvre. This
architectural motif was thus a symbolic evocation of the king: looming above the celebration of
the holy mass, it reiterated the building’s function as a palace chapel and reinforced the power of
the monarchy.
Indeed, a sign representing the reigning monarch was needed at the new royal chapel. On
25 March 1626 Louis XIII along with his brother and all the princes and lords of the court visited
the oratory to celebrate the universal jubilee, of which the Church of the Oratory was one of the
designated stations. 82 On this occasion, the congregation arranged for the king to sit on a dais
covered with a canopy, which was placed under the arcade separating the choir from the nave.
The following day Anne of Austria, along with Maria de’ Medici and all the ladies of their
63

courts, attended a similar ceremony. Despite the king’s success at appropriating the building and
visually connecting it to the French monarchy, the jubilee is the only known record of Louis XIII
visiting the royal chapel of the Louvre.
Factors Influencing Louis XIII’s Decision
The church of the French Oratory, through its proximity to the Louvre and the
superimposition of the royal symbols of the fleur-de-lis and the serliana, symbolically reinforced
the king’s position vis-à-vis the church and state. But I would like to suggest another reason why
Louis XIII suddenly decided in 1623 to support the church and to refashion it into a statement of
his sovereign will. I believe he did it for the purpose of suppressing the supporters of the French
Oratory, specifically the dévots and Maria de’ Medici, with whom he was in conflict. The
political and religious beliefs held by these supporters, which were frequently in opposition to
those pursued by Louis XIII, forced the king to recognize the need to assert his royal power.
The dévots were a group of extremely pious and generally anti-royalist French Catholics
that emerged in early seventeenth-century France. Composed of clerics and lay persons,
including the founder of the French Oratory Pierre de Bérulle, the members of the group sought
to nurture their own piety and to participate actively in the Catholic Reformation that was then
sweeping France. To achieve their goals, the dévots worked towards the implementation of
some of the reforms issued in the decrees of the Council of Trent, which had yet to be officially
accepted by the king of France. One of the ways they were able to introduce reform was by
fostering the establishment of numerous religious foundations, one of which was the French
Oratory. 83
Many of the dévots had previously belonged to the group of late-sixteenth-century
militant Catholics, known as Leaguers, who were quite wary of Henri IV’s accession to the
throne of France. The once Protestant king’s continued tolerance of the heretical religion led the
conservative Catholics to look to Rome for leadership. The dévots, who were literally devoted
to Rome, challenged the rights of the Gallican church by viewing the pope as the supreme
authority over spiritual and temporal matters. They also favored French alliances with other
Catholic powers seeking to create a united Europe that could combat the heretical faith.
64

The founder of the French Oratory’s association with the dévots highlights some of the
reasons that would eventually compel Louis XIII to be suspicious of the conservative Catholics,
specifically their willingness to put matters of faith before the concerns of the state. Pierre de
Bérulle first became acquainted with the dévot movement in 1594 when his mother’s cousin
Madame Barbe Acarie moved into the hôtel de Bérulle following the exile of her husband Pierre
for his support of the League. 84 Although she always remained a layperson, Madame Acarie
was well known for her mystic visions and ascetic, saintly life. 85 Along with other dévots,
which included leading religious figures and influential aristocrats, she provided an important
stimulus to the lay patronage that was essential to the success of Catholic reform in France. 86
After 1598 when she returned to her own Parisian home, Madame Acarie welcomed fellow
dévots who sought to nurture their spirituality. The members of this group exerted a strong
influence on Bérulle as his frequent visits to the Hôtel de Acarie allowed him to discover an
intense form of theology and a desire for reform. 87
The future leader of the Oratory was further introduced to the dévots through his
education. After studying with the Jesuits from 1592 to 1594 at the Collège of Clermont in
Paris, Bérulle began studying theology at the Sorbonne where he worked with André du Val, a
past Leaguer and leading participant in the dévot party. 88 Bérulle’s increasing contacts with the
conservative religious group concerned members of his family, who were strong supporters of
the monarchy and, despite their Catholic faith, fervent anti-Leaguers. 89 Even when Bérulle
decided to pursue theology, his future course of study met resistance from his maternal uncles,
who controlled his finances after the death of his father in 1582 and who wanted him to follow in
the family’s tradition of jurisprudence. 90
Bérulle continued to distance himself from his family’s royalist affiliation as he became
increasingly involved with causes supported by the dévots. In 1599 he entered the Capuchin
house on rue Saint-Honoré in Paris with the goal of taking his priestly vows. The members of the
religious group, made up of a number of former Leaguers who shared many of the dévots’
ideological beliefs, were currently out of royal favor for opposing a law of the kingdom that
forbade exorcism. 91 Bérulle’s connections with the religious group strengthened his ties to
conservative Catholics, a bond that was only reinforced when in 1600 he went on a retreat with
the Jesuits at their house in Verdun where he performed the Spiritual Exercises of Ignatius
Loyola. 92 The Jesuits, who had been expelled from France in 1594 for fear that some members
65

of the society were planning regicide, continued to be viewed as a threat to the French
government. In 1604 Bérulle helped Madame Acarie and other dévots establish a convent
of
Spanish Discalced Carmelites in Paris, an act that aroused the suspicion of Henri IV at a time
when the king was experiencing tense diplomatic relations with Spain,. 93
The dévots were also instrumental in encouraging Bérulle, who was struggling to
determine his future course as a priest, to found a religious congregation. He had been ordained
at the Capuchin house in 1599, but because he was uncertain that his vocation lay with the
religious order, he refrained from taking solemn vows. Bérulle believed that instead of being
called to the monastic life with sacred vows, God wanted him to be a secular priest. 94 From
around 1601 the major path he considered pursuing was to establish a congregation dedicated to
restoring the priesthood. 95 At first Bérulle was skeptical as to whether he was the right person to
establish such a congregation, but a number of influential people with connections to the dévots
encouraged him to found the group. Among the notable religious figures were Henri de Gondi,
the bishop of Paris; Dom Beaucousin, a vicar at the Carthusian monastery in Paris; and the
Baroness Jeanne de Chantal, the founder of the Visitation de Sainte-Marie. 96 Bérulle also had
the support of powerful lay people, including Madame Acarie; Michel de Marillac, the future
keeper of the seals; the Marquise de Maignelay, who was the sister of the bishop of Paris; and
even the Regent Queen Maria de’ Medici. 97
Shortly after Bérulle first convened the French Oratory on 10 November 1611, Maria de’
Medici emerged as the congregation’s most powerful supporter (fig. 2). The queen’s desire to
assist the new religious organization stemmed from the ideological beliefs she shared with those
who had encouraged Bérulle to start the Oratory. Although she never publicly claimed to have
partisan attitudes towards the conservative Catholics, the queen’s actions implied that she did.
She had close ties to several dévots and she loaded her council with staunch French and Italian
Catholics. Moreover her foreign policy favored alliances with the papacy and the other Catholic
crowns of Europe. 98
By supporting the congregation, Maria de Medici not only developed a close connection
with the French Oratory, but she also found a means through which she could promote her
political agenda. The first favors provided by the queen came one month after the founding of
the congregation when she asked for and obtained from the king letters patent authorizing the
establishment of the congregation and declaring it a royal foundation. 99 Because Louis XIII at
66

eleven years old was only king in name, the acting regent’s official request to establish the
Oratory was merely a procedural formality. A year and a half later, the queen along with Bishop
Gondi requested Pope Paul V to issue the bull Sacrosanctae Romaneae Ecclesiae, which
formally instituted the French Oratory in Paris. 100
In addition to securing the proper documents to legally create the congregation, on 2
January 1612 Maria de’ Medici declared herself the founder of the French Oratory. 101 The
honorary title had originally been reserved for the Marquise de Maignelay, who had donated fifty
thousand livres to the Oratory with the request that she could be a participant in the prayers. 102
Upon hearing of the queen’s desire for this distinction, the marquise willingly gave it up as long
as the priests would still honor her request. The congregation was quite pleased to have received
such support. To thank the queen, Bérulle included a dedicatory inscription to her in the newly
published version of Giovanni Pietro Guissano’s Life of St. Charles Borromeo, which the
Oratorian Nicolas de Soulfour had just translated from Italian to French. 103 Bérulle,
who
negotiated a reconciliation between Louis XIII and his mother in1619, remained an intimate
friend and advisor to Maria de’ Medici until his death in 1629.
The congregation’s move in 1616 to a house adjacent to the grounds of the Louvre
further reinforced the Oratory’s connections to Maria de’ Medici, who was then residing at the
royal palace. Upon relocating to the new house, Bérulle’s first priority was building a chapel. 105
Maria immediately showed her continued support by paying for this structure, which Bérulle
helped to build with his own hands and in which mass was being held later that year. 106
The queen would have undoubtedly continued to support the congregation in her search
for political control had Louis XIII not exiled her in 1617 for wielding too much power and
influence. 107 While the banishment lasted until 1620 and Maria was only welcomed back to
court and admitted to the king’s council in early 1622, the strong foundation she had provided
for the French Oratory allowed the fathers to promote the growth of the order. By 1619 the
members of the French Oratory were considering building a new and larger church. The
prestigious location of the house and the congregation’s emphasis on preaching meant that it
attracted numerous people. The original chapel also lacked adequate space to accommodate the
growing number of priests. After buying several neighboring properties, the congregation broke
ground for a new church in the summer of 1621 with the ceremonial blessing and placing of the
first stone occurring the following September. 108
67
104

Upon reentering the royal council in 1622, Maria de’ Medici began to renew her attempts
to gain political control. Since the death in 1621 of Louis XIII’s favorite minister Charles
d’Albert, duc de Luynes, the ruling body had lacked a strong figure who wielded considerable
influence with the king. 109 The king’s significant loss gave the queen mother the chance to think
that she could fill this position. But as the papal nuncio Corsini recorded, Louis was “full of
suspicion that she wants to overpower him.” 110 Louis demonstrated his concern by postponing
until 1623 his request to Pope Gregory XV to make Maria’s advisor Armand-Jean du Plessis de
Richelieu a cardinal, a condition that was one of the terms of their latest reconciliation. He also
refused to invite Richelieu to join the royal council until 1624. By limiting the authority of his
mother’s advisor, the king hoped to limit Maria’s own passion for power.
In addition to the Queen Mother’s renewed search for authority, changing conditions on
the international landscape forced Louis XIII to alter his foreign policy. Spanish and Austrian
forces, aided by papal troops, were encroaching on the territory of French allies. Louis XIII had
initially felt conflicted about fighting fellow Catholic leaders, but by 1623 the expanding
Habsburg threat became too great for his religious conscience. 111 The most direct evidence of
the king’s shift in foreign policy comes from his actions over the crisis of the Alpine pass at Val
Tellina, where Spain aided by papal troops overthrew the Protestant Grisons, giving the Iberian
government easy passage from its territories in Milan to those in the Netherlands (fig. 25). 112
France, an ally with the Grisons, viewed the Spanish incursion as a threat. As a consequence
France sought renewed alliances with Venice and Savoy with the mutual goal of removing the
Spanish forces from the region. From this point on Louis XIII worked against Habsburg
interests during the first phase of the Thirty Years’ War (1618-1630) and demonstrated that he
would no longer tolerate the expansion of other states in the name of a Catholic Europe. 113
The French stance against Spain was exacerbated by deception on the royal council.
Chancellor Nicolas Brûlart de Sillery, a dévot and long-time supporter of the French Oratory,
and his son Puysieux, who assisted his father on the council and favored reconciliation with
Spain, were at this time secretly diverting money intended for foreigners who could aid the
French against the Habsburgs. 114 Although these actions were only discovered in 1624, at which
time the Brûlarts were banished from the court, they must have been prompted by Spain’s
increasingly aggressive stance and intolerance of the Protestant faith.
68

As the dévots and Maria de’ Medici, bolstered by Spain’s recent expansion into
Protestant territory, continued to threaten Louis XIII’s authority, a specific event in August 1623
made the king realize that becoming the primary benefactor of the church of the French Oratory
was one way to suppress the congregation’s supporters. On 29 August, when the church was “a
building already so advanced,” the Marquis de la Vieuville, the superintendent of finances,
commanded the treasury of France to issue an ordinance stating that construction must stop. 115
Past scholarship has argued that the superintendent’s reasons stemmed from concerns that the
church would engage the royal coffers in excessive expenses when it came time to complete the
Grand Design of the Louvre. 116 The project, along with the planned extension of the gardens to
the north of the palace, would require the space then occupied by the church (fig. 26). La
Vieuville, one of whose primary concerns was reducing state expenditures, feared that the crown
would have to reimburse the congregation for the cost of its church when the royal treasury
acquired the French Oratory’s land. 117
Although the minister certainly viewed the church of the French Oratory as an obstacle to
continued fiscal responsibility, I propose that it was primarily his political views that made him
stop construction. 118 La Vieuville was a bon français, meaning he feared Habsburg and papal
expansion. 119 He thought that the Spanish king and Holy Roman Emperor were aiming at
universal monarchy and that France should work to contain these forces rather than aiding them.
Like others who shared his beliefs, he felt that France should maintain its traditional Protestant
and Catholic allies to stave off encroaching states. His convictions were so strong that in 1624
he advised the king to send a special envoy to the Southern Alps to plan a clandestine military
campaign aimed at clearing Val Tellina and Grisors of the Catholic invaders. At the same time
he courted established French connections by making alliances with Savoy and Venice,
arranging a treaty with the Dutch, and negotiating a marriage contract with England for Louis’s
sister, Henrietta. 120 La Vieuville knew that the protectors of the Oratory, specifically the dévots
and Maria de Medici, were sympathetic towards Habsburg and papal forces. His strong dislike
for the supporters’ politics combined with his ambitious approach to cutting state expenditures
led him to view the congregation’s church as a project of ardent Catholics willing to allow
foreign incursion in France to combat heresy.
Louis XIII was certainly aware of the superintendent’s actions. Shortly after the treasury
banned construction, Michel de Marillac met with the king on behalf of the congregation to
69

emind him that at present there was only an incommodious chapel. 121 Despite the king’s
acknowledgement that he was not indisposed to the French Oratory having a church, he refused
to overturn La Vieuville’s command. Several weeks later, the superintendent convinced the king
that halting construction was not enough and that the building must be razed to avoid future costs
when it came time to complete the Grand Design. 122 While the meetings suggest that the king
was complicit with La Vieuville’s decisions, they also prove that Louis was well acquainted with
the church of the French Oratory in 1623.
La Vieuville’s actions, which brought the congregation’s church to the forefront of Louis
XIII’s attention, provided the impetus that drove the king to start supporting the French Oratory.
As Marc Fumaroli has demonstrated, the king was well aware of the power of art to convey
political messages. 123 In 1622 Louis rejected the last scene of a tapestry series representing the
Life of Constantine, which was designed by Peter Paul Rubens and intended for Maria de’
Medici’s Luxembourg Palace (fig. 27). The offending image, inspired by recent publications
chronicling papal interpretation of Constantine’s reign, illustrated an allegory of the Triumph of
Rome with the papacy and the cross as the leading forces in the iconographical program. 124 The
king and his advisors viewed the image as a celebration of the Constantine foundation myth that
promoted the temporal and spiritual supremacy of the pope. The direct reference to the primacy
of Rome in a work of art for the queen mother was further interpreted as a reflection of her
compliance to the will of the pope instead of to the king.
Just as Louis had recognized the meaning within the tapestry, he knew that a newly built
church next to his palace could likewise convey political significance. Less than a month after
the Treasury banned construction of the church, the ordinances were reversed allowing work to
resume. 125 I propose that the king, aware of the urgent need to limit the influence of both the
queen mother and the dévots, came to view the church of the French Oratory as a symbol of
those wishing to challenge his authority. To counter these forces, Louis XIII ordered La
Vieuville to rescind the prohibitions against the church, and he became the primary patron of the
French Oratory. By imposing his support on the congregation, he transformed the church into a
sign of his political will and used the building as a means to convey the sovereignty of the
nation.
70

Conclusion
Undoubtedly, Louis XIII’s decision to turn the church of the French Oratory into a sign
of his sovereign will made an impact on those to whom it was directed, albeit temporarily. By
the end of the 1620s Maria de’ Medici was again seeking power and authority. Her goal was to
make Michel de Marillac, the keeper of the seals and her personal favorite, the principal minister
at the expense of Louis’s current choice, Cardinal Richelieu, who had effectively held this
position since his entry to the royal council in 1624. 126 The Queen Mother’s persistent pursuit of
the ministerial change led to a confrontation with Louis on 11 November 1630, known as the
Day of Dupes, at which time Maria was forced to choose reconciliation with Richelieu or
exile. 127 Thinking she could rally support from sympathetic European courts, Maria chose the
latter and, failing to find the needed assistance, she ultimately died in obscurity in Cologne in
1643.
The leader of the French Oratory gained renown and influence at the French court
through his connections to Maria de’ Medici. Bérulle not only facilitated the diplomatic
arrangements necessary for the marriage of Henriette of France, the sister of Louis XIII, to
Charles Stuart, the heir to the English throne, he also helped negotiate a number of treaties
between France and Spain. 128 Despite these achievements and the honor of a cardinalate in 1627,
Bérulle’s religious motivation caused him to clash with Richelieu, leading the minister to greatly
diminish his fellow cardinal’s influence at court. 129
Although Maria de’ Medici never achieved the power she sought and Pierre de Bérulle
failed to create a united Catholic Europe, the church of the French Oratory remained an
important institution for the French court. The royal status conferred by Louis XIII naming it the
royal chapel made the church a popular place during the rest of his reign and that of Louis XIV,
during which time the king’s mother, wife, and brother were all frequent visitors. 130 It fulfilled
its duties as a palace chapel by hosting numerous members of the court, who came to participate
in religious ceremonies, and by funeral services for many important figures, including Maria de’
Medici and Louis XIII. More importantly, the church became the first of several examples
through which Louis XIII, exercising his sovereign rule, would use ecclesiastical architecture to
demonstrate his political policies.
71

1 Fumaroli, "Cross," 88-102; Le Pas de Sécheval, "Politique artistique;”; Moote, Louis XIII.
2 The archives of the French Oratory are now held at the Archives Nationales. The most
important documents for the architecture are found in series H 3579, MM 562, MM 600, and
MM 623. Series MM 623, Annales de la Maison de l’Oratoire établie près le Louvre à Paris, is
the source from which this study draws the most information. It provides chronological entries
of numerous and varied events from 1611 to 1782.
Important surveys of seventeenth-century Parisian ecclesiastical architecture that discuss the
church of the Oratory include Biver, Abbayes, 497-506; Boinet, Eglises parisiennes, 78-93;
Dumolin, Eglises de France, 131-34.
Specialized architectural scholarship for the church includes Véronique de Becdelievre-Lambert,
"Recherches sur l'œuvre architecturale de la Congrégation de l'Oratoire de France aux XVIIe et
XVIII siècles, d'après le recueil des Archives nationales" (Thèse, Ecole nationale des chartes,
1977); Gady, Lemercier, 230-36; Ingold, Oratoire; Le Pas de Sécheval, "Politique artistique,"
418-29.
3 Frédéric Cousinié, "'Vaste fracas d'ornements' ou 'fiction symbolique': le motif de la gloire
dans les églises parisiennes des XVIIe et XVIIIe siècles," in Histoires d'ornement: Actes du
colloque de l'Académie de France à Rome Villa Medicis, 27-28 juin 1996, ed. Patrice Ceccarini
(Paris; Rome: Klincksieck; Academie de France à Rome, 2000), 171-201; Jacques Foucart-
Borville, "Les tempietti et sacraires eucharistiques dans la France des XVIe et XVIIe siècles,"
Gazette des Beaux-Arts 132, no. 1559 (1998): 245-56; Françoise de La Moureyre, "Les trois
mausolées du Cardinal de Bérulle: nouveaux documents," Gazette des Beaux-Arts 118, no. 1475
(1991): 213-20.
Rights to the chapels were sold for five hundred écus, which were used to help construct the
church. The chapels, of which none were supported by the king, were sold to family members of
the congregation or conservative French Catholic supporters of the congregation. For the sale of
chapels, see Biver, Abbayes, 498-501; Boinet, Églises parisiennes; Église réformée de l'Oratoire
du Louvre, (Paris: Association Presbytérale de l'Église Réformée de l'Oratoire du Louvre, 1999),
5-7.
A simple high altarpiece and tabernacle are all that are known until 1684, when François Anguier
replaced the existing ones.
4 Sources for Pierre de Bérulle and the French Oratory focus on their spiritual influence during
the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. Important sources for this work include Jean Dagens,
Bérulle et les origines de la restauration catholique (1575-1611) (Paris: Desclée de Brouwer,
1952); Michel Houssaye, Le Père de Bérulle et l'Oratoire de Jésus. 1611-1625 (Paris: Plon,
1874); Michel Houssaye, M. de Bérulle et les Carmélites de France. 1575-1611 (Paris: Plon,
1872); Paul Albert Klevgard, "Society and Politics in Counter-Reformation France: A Study of
72

Bérulle, Vincent de Paul, Olier, and Bossuet." (Ph.D. Dissertation, Northwestern University,
1971); Stéphane-Marie Morgain, La théologie politique de Pierre de Bérulle (1598-1629) (Paris:
Publisud, 2001); Williams, French Oratorians.
5 Klevgard, "Society and Politics," 120-21; Williams, French Oratorians, 81-87.
6 In addition to Pierre de Bérulle, the founding members included Jean Bence and Jacques
Gastaud, two doctors of theology from the Sorbonne, Paul Métezeau and François Bourgoing,
two bachelors of theology from the Sorbonne, and Nicolas Caron, the curate of Beaumont. For
this list, see Archives Nationales MM 624 f. 1.
For a characterization of the Congregation’s perceived state of the secular clergy, see Houssaye,
Père de Bérulle, 3-6.
7 Examples of the lay confraternities include Bernardino da Feltre’s Oratory of Saint Jerome in
Vicenza and Gian Antonio Bellotti’s Oratory of Eternal Wisdom in Milan; examples of clerks
regular include the Theatines in Rome (1524) and the Barnabites in Milan (1530). For further
information on the influential historical models, see Dagens, Bérulle, 90-91.
8 Williams, French Oratorians, 84.
9 Bérulle learned about Philip Neri’s Oratory from Brûlart de Silléry, the French ambassador to
Rome, and from François de Sales. For further information, see Houssaye, Bérulle et les
Carmélites, 249; Williams, French Oratorians, 71.
10 The Hôtel de Petit-Bourbon was torn down during the building of the Val-de-Grâce.
11 Other religious houses in the faubourg included the Carmelites and the Ursulines. For more on
the popularity of the area with religious orders, see Barbara B. Diefendorf, "Contradictions of the
Century of Saint: Aristocratic Patronage and the Convents of Counter-Reformation Paris,"
French Historical Studies 24, no. 3 (2001): 477. For Bérulle’s search for a new house, see
Houssaye, Père de Bérulle, 32.
12 Archives Nationales MM 623 f. 31, 32. The congregation’s new site consisted of the buildings
and property comprising the Hôtel du Bouchage.
13 A debate exists in the scholarship over whether Métezeau or Lemercier was the first architect
of the church. The most recent interpretation is by Alexandre Gady, who argues that Métezeau
provided the original design at the end of 1620 or the bginning of 1621 and that except for
designing a square apsidal chapel his plan corresponded to the church as it was built. In 1622
when the walls were raised above the ground Chancellor Nicolas Brûlart de Silléry, a protector
of the congregation, found fault with the current design and requested that Lemercier replace
Métezeau. Because the foundations had already been placed, the new architect’s only
modification to the plan was replacing the square chapel with an oval rotunda. The remainder of
73

the church, including the interior and exterior elevations, the design of the vault, and the façade,
was by Lemercier. For this argument, see Gady, Lemercier, 33, 230-31.
Since Gady offers the most recent and complete discussion of the building’s formal sources and
reviews the earlier scholarship, I will adhere to his attribution.
14 Two examples of plans featuring these elements found in Rome and used by reformed religious
orders are Il Gesù (for the Society of Jesus; begun in 1568 by Giacomo Barozzi da Vignola) and
Sant’Andrea della Valle (for the Theatines; begun in 1591 by Giacomo della Porta).
A number of works discuss the characteristics of ecclesiastical architecture influenced by the
Catholic Reformation; see John Alexander, "Shaping Sacred Space in the Sixteenth Century:
Design Criteria for the Collegio Borromeo's Chapel," Journal of the Society of Architectural
Historians 63 (2004): 164-79; Marcia B. Hall, Renovation and Counter-Reformation: Vasari
and Duke Cosimo in Sta. Maria Novella and Sta. Croce 1565-1577 (Oxford: Clarendon Press,
1979), 1-15; Milton Joseph Lewine, "The Roman Church Interior" (Ph.D. Dissertation, Columbia
University, 1960); Evelyn Carole Voelker, "Charles Borromeo's Instructiones fabricae et
supellectilis ecclesiasticae, 1577. A translation with commentary and analysis." (Ph.D.
Dissertation, Syracuse University, 1977).
15 Gady, Lemercier, 98; Hautecoeur, Architecture classique, 1, pt. 3:428.
16 Hautecoeur, Architecture classique, 1, pt. 3:436.
17 For the similarity to the plan of the Escorial, see Gady, Lemercier, 232-33. An additional
passageway was placed between the two chapels on each side of the transept, providing access
from the corridors to the crossing of the church. The passageways were closed after 1811.
18 In 1821 the chapel was divided into two floors. The sacristies are no longer extant. For further
discussion of the chapel at the Church of the French Oratory, see Boinet, Églises parisiennes, 86,
n. 1; Gady, Lemercier, 101-03, 232.
19 Projecting axial chapels became popular in Paris in the mid-seventeenth century, being added
to sixteenth-century buildings such as Saint-Etienne-du-Mont and Saint-Eustache and included in
newly built churches such as Saint-Roch. For the history of projecting axial Virgin chapels and
their use in Parisian churches, see Françoise Hamon, "La Chapelle de la Vierge en l'église Saint-
Roch à Paris," Bulletin monumental 128 (1970): 229-37; Abby McGehee, "The Virgin Chapel at
Saint-Gervais-Saint-Protais: Embellishment and Devotion in Late Gothic Paris," Journal of the
Society of Architectural Historians 67, no. 3 (2008): 363-70.
20 Several earlier seventeenth-century churches including that of the Feuillants (begun 1601), the
Petits-Augustins (begun 1608), and Saint-Joseph-des-Carmes had barrel vaults punctuated with
windows, but they were made of carpentry and covered with plaster. The example at the French
Oratory is the first in Paris to be made of masonry; see Gady, Lemercier, 235.
74

Clear glass with colored borders of flowers, arms, and cartouches became the standard treatment
in seventeenth-century Paris. For more on the treatment of glass in seventeenth-century French
churches, see Jean Lafond, "De 1560 à 1789," in Le vitrail français, ed. Marcel Aubert, André
Chastel, and Louis Grodecki (Paris: Éditions Deux Mondes, 1958), 267-69.
21 For the reserved interior as a style reflecting the reforms of the Catholic Church, see Lewine,
"Roman Church," 72-85. As Evonne Levy notes, Lewine’s thesis has been challenged by more
recent scholarship; see Alexander, "Sacred Space," 164-79; Stefano Della Torre, "Il problema del
dei riferimenti classicisti nell'architettura post-tridentina," in I Tempi del Concilio: Società
religione e cultura agli inizi dell'Europa moderna, Trento 27-30 ottobre 1994 (Trent: Camera di
commercio, industria, artigianato e agricoltura di Trento, 1995), 219-27; Evonne Levy,
"Architecture and Religion in Seventeenth-century Rome," Studiolo 2 (2003): 223.
22
For Saint-Nicolas-des-Champs, see Agnès Bos, Les églises flamboyantes de Paris XVe-XVIe
siècles (Paris: Picard, 2003), 242-47.
23 For the Bérulle family’s parish church, see Houssaye, Bérulle et les Carmélites, 81.
24 Gady, Lemercier, 235. The twentieth-century configuration of tiered wooden seats in the
tribunes blocks the original elevation, which consists of three bays, each with an arched window
topped by an elaborately sculpted frame. Above and still visible is a tall centrally placed arched
window flanked by two decorative niches.
25
For the tribunes at Saint-Gervais, which date from the third quarter of the sixteenth century,
see Bos, Églises flamboyantes, 192.
26 The paneling was transferred in 1811 from Saint-Louis-du-Louvre, a medieval church between
the Louvre and the Tuilieries that Napoleon destroyed. The cross was placed in the axial bay of
the gallery in 1930. Another change was the addition in 1821 of balconies in the chapels to
provide more seating. For these changes, see Église réformée de l'Oratoire du Louvre, 8-10.
27 Archives Nationales, MM 623 f. 111. The property belonged to Sieur Morel and Sieur de
Montreuil. No indication is given as to why the men refused to sell, but the congregation was
able to acquire the parcels of land in 1627 and in 1654.
28 Ibid.
29 Germain Brice, Description de la ville de Paris et de tout ce qu'elle contient de plus
remarquable. Reproduction de la 9e éd. (1752), 4 vols. (Paris: Minard, 1971), 227; Henri Sauval,
Histoire et recherches des antiquites de la ville de Paris, 4 vols. (Paris: Moette et Chardon,
1724), 1: 432.
30 Archives Nationales, MM 623 f. 112, written in September 1625, states that although the
church was not finished, as soon as it was in a state that could celebrate mass, people rushed to
furnish the necessary liturgical items.
75

31 Archives Nationales, MM 600, Visites de l’Oratoire, 1742-1780, f. 4, states that construction
stopped in the 1640s.
In December 1631 Louis XIII gave the congregation 900 francs for three large windows; see
Archives Nationales MM 623 f. 161. The court gave the congregation ten thousand livres in
1633 and 1634 for work on the church; see Archives Nationales MM 623 f. 182, 183.
32 Archives Nationales MM 623 f. 115.
33 The exterior elevation of the projecting rotunda had been altered by the 1889 erection of a
monument to Gaspard de Coligny and by the creation of arcading along the rue de Rivoli.
34 Bérulle published four books and wrote numerous other works. For an introduction to his
writing, see Deville, French School, 29-57; William M. Thompson, ed., Bérulle and the French
School: Selected Writings (New York: Paulist Press, 1989). For his complete works, see Pierre
Bérulle, Oeuvres complètes du Cardinal de Bérulle, ed. Jacques-Paul Migne (Paris: Migne,
1856).
35
The façade loosely follows Lemercier’s design, a version of which is in Marot’s Petit recueil.
For the façade, see Gady, Lemercier, 234.
36 Le Pas de Sécheval, "Politique artistique," 408.
37 Archives Nationales MM 623 f. 94; “de son proper movement et sans en avoir été sollicité par
qui que ce soit…prendre la notre pour server de chapelle à son château.” The royal brevet
announcing the king’s decision on 23 December 1623 refers to the church as the king’s royal
oratory [son oratoire royal]. The brevet was recorded in the congregation’s annals; Archives
Nationales MM 623 f. 95. A royal arrêt from 17 July 1624, also recorded in the annals, refers to
the church as the royal chapel [chapelle royalle]; Archives Nationales MM 623 f. 102.
38 The existing chapel, dating from the fourteenth century, was destroyed when François I tore
down the west wing of the medieval Louvre. For a discussion of royal chapels at the Louvre
during this period, see Lawrence Robert McGinniss, "Royal Chapel Projects for Louis XIV at St.
Denis, the Louvre and the Invalides, 1664-1683" (Ph.D. Dissertation, Columbia University,
1974), 82-90.
39 Ibid. The chapel of the Petit-Bourbon, an hôtel owned by the Bourbon family, was then
serving as the royal chapel. It should not be confused with the Hôtel de Petit-Bourbon, which
functioned as the French Oratory’s first house in the faubourg Saint-Jacques. Louis XIII
announced that he would raze the chapel at the Bourbon family’s hôtel upon completion of the
church of the Oratory. For the razing of the chapel, see Archives Nationales MM 623 f. 94.
40 Archives Nationales MM 623 f. 94; as quoted in Ingold, Oratoire, 21-22.
76

41 Archives Nationales MM 623 f. 102. The annals of the congregation record the royal arrêt
published on 17 July 1624, which clarified the king’s intentions to make the church part of the
general plan of the Louvre. It reads: “Sa Majesté aiant résolu de prendre une partie des
Bâtiments de l’Oratoire selon l’etendue du dessein qu’elle a fait faire de son château du Louvre
et que l’église commence par les Prêtres de l’Oratoire sera tournée d’autre sens pour la
correspondence à son dessein, en sorte qu’elle reponde justement au milieu du Bâtiment du
Louvre, pour être la ditte [sic] église tenue pour Chapelle Royalle.”
42 Archives Nationales MM 623 f. 95: “…que les Prêtres y demeurant ont et à l’avenier soient
dits et assumes ses chapelains et des roys ses successeurs.”
The chapelains ordinares of the king were low in the hierarchy of the clergy of the maison du
roi. For this division within the maison du roi, see Marcel Marion, Dictionnaire des institutions
de la France au XVIIe et XVIIIe siècles (Paris: A. Picard, 1923), 346-47.
43
For the congregation’s records of these gifts, see Archives Nationales MM 623 f. 121, 150-51,
166-68, 182-83.
44 For the practical component of the towers, see Roger Stalley, Early Medieval Architecture
(New York: Oxford University Press, 1999), 123.
45 For churches in Paris, see Hélène Rousteau-Chambon, Le gothique des Temps modernes.
Architecture religieuse en milieu urbain (Paris: Picard, 2003), 141-44. For a complete list of the
Roman churches with twin towers, which symbolize the Church triumphant, see Sarah McPhee,
Bernini and the Bell Towers: Architecture and Politics at the Vatican (New Haven: Yale
University Press, 2002), 206, n. 66.
46 For twin towers at the eastern end of churches, see Charles B. McClendon, Imperial Abbey at
Farfa: Architectural Currents of the Early Middle Ages (New Haven: Yale University Press,
1987), 86-89. For towers at the east end emphasizing the placement of altars, see Stalley, Early
Medieval Architecture, 123.
47 For the Lady Chapel at Saint-Germer-de-Fly, see Robert Branner, Saint Louis and the Court
Style in Gothic Architecture (London: Zwemmer, 1965), 93-96.
48 Although archival documents do not provide evidence as to when construction of the towers
began, it seems to have occurred during the reign of Louis XIII, see Christ, Églises parisiennes,
36; Le Pas de Sécheval, "Politique artistique," 428.
49 For general symbolism associated with towers, see Robert Bork, "Into Thin Air: France,
Germany, and the Invention of the Openwork Spire," The Art Bulletin 85, no. 1 (2003): 25;
Magda Révész-Alexander, Der Turm als Symbol und Erlebnis (Haag: Martinus Nijhoff, 1953).
50 Richard Krautheimer, Early Christian and Byzantine Architecture, 4th ed. (New York: Penguin
Books, 1986), 155-56.
77

51 For twin-towered facades associated with royal patronage, see Jack Freiberg, The Lateran in
1600: Christian Concord in Counter-Reformation Rome (Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press, 1995), 14; E. Baldwin Smith, Architectural Symbolism of Imperial Rome and the Middle
Ages (Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1956), 77-92.
52 Adding towers to St. Peter’s Basilica had been a feature of the project from the mid-fifteenth
century. For the meaning of the twin towers at the basilica and the pope’s reasons for adding
them, see McPhee, Bernini, 190-208.
53 Multiple stories exist for the French legend of the fleur-de-lis. For a discussion of the history
and symbolism of the fleur-de-lis in France, see Beaune, Ideology, 201-25; Anne Lombard-
Jourdan, Fleur de lis et oriflamme: signes célestes du royaume de France (Paris: CNRS éditions,
2002).
54 The king’s anointment with the holy chrism at his coronation stems from the legend that on the
day Clovis was to be baptized a dove descended from heaven carrying an ampoule filled with the
oil. Supposedly, French kings continued to be anointed with this same holy chrism at each
coronation ceremony. For more on these miracles and the privileges they bestowed on the
monarchy, see Beaune, Ideology, 77-79; Bloch, Royal Touch; Jackson, Vive le roi, 22, 33.
55
For the fleur-de-lis as a sign of God’s special approval of France, see Beaune, Ideology, 219;
Jackson, Vive le roi, 33.
56 To my knowledge, the Sainte-Chapelle is the earliest example of a royal building using the
fleur-de-lis as part of a program depicting royal power. For this aspect of the artistic program,
see Beat Brenk, "The Sainte-Chapelle as a Capetian Political Program," in Artistic Integration in
Gothic Buildings, ed. Virginia Chieffo Raguin, Kathryn Brush, and Peter Draper (Toronto:
University of Toronto Press, 1995), 201-02.
At Saint-Denis, Sumner Mcknight Crosby found reliefs resembling fleurs-de-lis on column bases
in the eighth-century church and on one capital in the twelfth-century church. Due to the early
date of the eighth-century examples and the isolated twelfth-century example, it is difficult to say
that these reliefs were meant to represent the monarchy. For these reliefs, see Sumner McKnight
Crosby and Pamela Z. Blum, The Royal Abbey of Saint-Denis: From its Beginnings to the Death
of Suger, 475-1151 (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1987), 72, 76, 147.
57 For the fleur-de-lis in the thirteenth-century church of Saint-Denis, see Caroline Astrid
Bruzelius, The Thirteenth-Century Church at St-Denis (New Haven: Yale University Press,
1985), 12, 72.
58 The Joyenval convent claimed to have the original fleur-de-lis shield given to Clovis during
the battle. For more on the legend and the relic, see Beaune, Ideology, 215-17, 21-23.
59 Bos, Églises flamboyantes, 301-02.
78

60 Archives de la Médiathèque de l’Architecture et du Patrimoine, document 0081/075/01/12/8/1
(information for years 1909-1995).
61 The octagon was filled in during the 1980s due to too much stress on the vault. At this point
the current motif with the dove against a sunburst was put into place.
62
Anatole Frolow, Les reliquaires de la Vraie Croix (Paris: Institut français d'études byzantines,
1965), 141.
63 Ibid.
64 The crosses on the disks, of which each of the Apostles holds, are thought to be symbolic of
the crosses that the officiating priest traced on the walls of a new building during the dedication
ceremony. For the symbolism and the ceremony, see Robert Branner, The Painted Medallions in
the Sainte-Chapelle in Paris (Philadelphia: American Philosophical Society, 1968), 9. Only
three of the statues are original; the remaining nine are heavily restored from fragments or
nineteenth-century copies. For the statues, see Francis Salet, "Les Statues d'apôtres de la Sainte-
Chapelle conservées au musée de Cluny," Bulletin monumental 109 (1951): 135-56; Francis
Salet, "Nouvelle note sur les statues d'apôtres de la Sainte-Chapelle," Bulletin monumental 112
(1954): 357-63.
65 For the inclusion of this motif on royal coins, see Arthur Engel and Raymond Serrure, Traité
de numismatique du moyen âge, 3 vols. (Bologna: Arnaldo Forni, 1964), 3: 946-89 passim.
66 Rebecca Zorach, Blood, Milk, Ink, Gold: Abundance and Excess in the French Renaissance
(Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 2005), 206, 14-25.
67 Ibid., 206.
68 Ibid.
69 French buildings are known to have images that are also found on coins. For this topic, see
Jean Pierre Babelon, "Architecture et emblématique dans les médailles de Henri IV," Revue de
l'art, no. 58-59 (1983): 21-40. For the prestige conferred upon Paris as the city housing a large
number of the Passion Relics, a status which in the thirteenth century made it renowned as the
new Holy Land, see Daniel H. Weiss, Art and Crusade in the Age of Saint Louis (Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press, 1998), 15.
70 Gady, Lemercier, 235. Lemercier will also use this motif at the château of Richelieu and in
the avant-cour of the Palais-Cardinal in Paris.
71 For discussions of the meaning of the serliana in antique and Renaissance architecture, see
Nicola Courtright, "The Vatican Tower of the Winds and the Architectural Legacy of the
Counter Reformation," in IL 60: Essays Honoring Irving Lavin on his Sixtieth Birthday, ed.
79

Marilyn Aronberg Lavin (New York: Italica Press, 1990), 117-44; Roger J. Crum, "'Cosmos, the
World of Cosimo': The Iconography of the Uffizi Façade," Art Bulletin 71, no. 2 (1989): 237-53;
Stanislaw Wilinski, "La Serliana," Bollettino del Centro Internazionale di Studi di Architettura
Andrea Palladio (1969): 399-429.
72 For Lemercier’s travels in Italy from 1607 to 1611, see Gady, Lemercier, 19-20. Lemercier
had an extensive library, of which architectural works only counted for one percent. Other
notable architectural works were four editions of Vitruvius, two versions of the Regole by
Vignola, and works by Philibert Delorme and Jacques Androuet du Cerceau. For more on his
library, see Gady, Lemercier, 79-81.
73 For more on sixteenth-century examples of the serliana in France, see Jean-Jacques Gloton,
"Le traité de Serlio et son influence en France," in Les traités d'architecture de la Renaissance:
Actes du colloque tenu à Tours du 1er au 11 Juillet 1981, ed. Jean Guillaume (Paris: Picard,
1988), 413-14.
74
Ibid. The upper two floors of the Hôtel d’Assézat closely resemble folio 154 from Serlio’s
fourth book.
75 For descriptions of this room, see Volker Hoffmann, "Le Louvre de Henri II: un palais
impérial," in Bulletin de la Société de l'Histoire de l'Art français Paris (1982), 10-12; Henry
Lemonnier, "Jean Goujon et la Salle des Cariatides au Louvre," Gazette des Beaux-Arts 35
(1906): 177-94; David Thomson, Renaissance Paris: Architecture and Growth 1475-1600
(London: Zwemmer, 1984), 90.
76 Hoffmann, "Louvre," 10.
77 For a discussion of Henri II’s attempts to include imperial imagery in the Louvre, see ibid., 7-
15.
78 For the repetition of the motif, see Gady, Lemercier, 34, 235.
79 Gady, Lemercier, 235, proposes that Lemercier initially intended to include a serliana in each
of the gallery’s bays but then modified the design during construction to include only the current
motif.
80 The description can be found in Archives Nationales MM 623 f. 111-12.
81 For the state portrait as a sign of the reigning monarch, see Peter Burke, The Fabrication of
Louis XIV (New Haven, CT: London: Yale University Press, 1992), 9.
82 For a description of this event, see Archives Nationales MM 623 f. 115.
80

83 For the origins and political and religious views of the dévots, see Chatellier, Europe of the
Devout; Diefendorf, Penitence, 11-13, 78-82; Henry Phillips, Church and culture in seventeenthcentury
France (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997); Rapley, The Dévotes, 75-76.
84 For the biography of Barbe Acarie, see Bowles, Gracious Life; François Bruno de Jésus-
Marie, La belle Acarie: Bienheureuse Marie de l'Incarnation (Paris: Desclee de Brouwer, 1942).
85 Williams, French Oratorians, 55.
86 Diefendorf, "Contradictions," 471. Notable figures included in Madame Acarie’s circle were
the Carthusian vicar Dom Beaucousin; François de Sales, bishop of Geneva; Benoit de Canfeld,
a Capuchin mystic; Michel de Marillac, the royal keeper of the seals; and the Marquise de
Maignelay, the sister of the bishop of Paris.
87 Houssaye, Bérulle et les Carmélites, 110-13.
88 For Bérulle’s education, see ibid., 89-122.
89 For Bérulle’s family history, see Dagens, Bérulle, 13-15; Houssaye, Bérulle et les Carmélites,
71-88; Klevgard, "Society and Politics," 47-48.
90 Klevgard, "Society and Politics," 48.
91 The ban on exorcisms centered on the case of Marthe Brossier, who in 1599 was believed to
be possessed. Henri IV prohibited the rite for fear that the resulting crowds would stir up
passionate feelings against him by former Leaguers. For more on the controversy, see Houssaye,
Bérulle et les Carmélites, 151-53; Williams, French Oratorians, 33-35.
92 For Bérulle’s time with the Capuchins, see Houssaye, Bérulle et les Carmélites, 151-53. For
Bérulle’s trip to Verdun, see ibid., 193-97. Verdun, in northeast France, was not under French
rule at this time, which made it possible for the Jesuits to have a house.
93 Williams, French Oratorians, 56-57.
94 Houssaye, Bérulle et les Carmélites, 196.
95 Williams, French Oratorians, 71.
96 Houssaye, Père de Bérulle, 13-16; Houssaye, Bérulle et les Carmélites, 442. The Visitation of
Sainte-Marie, or Visitadines, were another reformed religious order originating in early
seventeenth-century France.
97 Houssaye, Père de Bérulle, 13-16.
98 Barbiche, "Marie de Médicis,” 49.
81

99 Archives Nationales MM 562 f. 3-5.
100 Archives Nationales MM 562 f. 6; Archives Nationales MM 623 f. 15.
101 “A ce cause Sa Majesté se declare fondatrice de la ditte maison et congregation.” Archives
nationales MM 562 f. 5. Maria de’ Medici also declared herself founder of several additional
religious groups in Paris. For more on these, see chapter four.
102 Houssaye, Père de Bérulle, 30-31.
103 Ibid., 119. The book was published in Paris in 1615.
104 For the reconciliation, see Klevgard, "Society and Politics," 54.
105 “Comme [Bérulle] ne l’a acheté que pour en fair une maison d’oraison et de priers, son
premier soin a été d’y pratiquer une chapelle.” Archives Nationales MM 623 f. 32.
106 “La Reine mère qui fait bâtir la principale chapelle de notre église…” Archives Nationales
MM 623 f. 91.
107
For an account of these events, see Carmona, Marie de Médicis, 325-44; Chevallier, Louis
XIII,133-72; Moote, Louis XIII, 89-96.
108 For the properties, see Archives Nationales MM 623 f. 56, 67, 68, 74. For the ceremonial
blessing and placing of the first stone, see Archives Nationales MM 623 f. 78. Officiating the
ceremony was Jean-Pierre Camus, the bishop of Belley. The stone was placed by Hercule de
Rohan, duc de Montbazon, in the name of King Louis XIII, who did not attend the ceremony
because of a siege against the Protestants.
109 For a discussion of the void of power, see Chevallier, Louis XIII, 261-68.
110
“Le roi est plein du soupcon qu’elle ne veuille l’assujettir”; ibid., 270. Chevallier does not
provide a source for the quote.
111 Moote, Louis XIII, 131.
112 For a discussion of these events, see Maland, Europe at War.
113 For a general history of the Thirty Years’ War, see ibid. For Louis XIII’s involvement with
and attitudes towards the war, see Chevallier, Louis XIII, 195-96, 225, 457-98; Lublinskaya,
French Absolutism; Moote, Louis XIII, 131-35, 79-83, 206-13; Tapié, France, 97-115.
114 For the Brûlarts’ actions and downfall, see Chevallier, Louis XIII, 267; Moote, Louis XIII,
108.
82

115 For the congregation’s records of this event, see Archives Nationales MM 623 f. 91.
116 Le Pas de Sécheval, "Politique artistique," 419-20.
117 For the congregation’s records, which state that the crown would have to reimburse the
French Oratory, see Archives Nationales MM 623 f. 90.
Charles de La Vieuville served as superintendent of finance two different times, from January
1623 to August 1624 and again from September 1651 to January 1653. During his first
superintendency he enacted policies that reduced military expenditures from 23 million livres to
12 million livres while non-justified expenses by the king and operating costs in departments
such as ordinary receipts and extraordinary expenses similarly fell. For more on his financial
policies, see Françoise Bayard, Joël Félix, and Philippe Hamon, Dictionnaire des surintendants
et contrôleurs généraux des finances du XVIe siècle à la Révolution française de 1789 (Paris:
Comité pour l'Histoire Économique et Financière de la France, 2000), 50-53.
118 Anne Le Pas de Sécheval and Charles Williams believe that the reason for La Vieuville’s
actions against the Oratorians was his preference for the Society of Jesus. This claim is based on
a phrase found in the Oratory’s annals where a powerful but unnamed friend of the congregation
accuses La Vieuville of wanting to cause trouble for the Oratorians because another religious
community, assumed to be the Jesuits, was jealous of their royal support. For more on this
argument, see Le Pas de Sécheval, "Politique artistique," 421; Williams, French Oratorians, 211.
I have not found any evidence that La Vieuville had any preference for the Jesuits. In fact the
only religious group that he is known to have supported was the Parisian convent of the
Minimes, where he was buried. For more on this support, see Bayard, Félix, and Hamon,
Surintendants, 53.
119
For La Vieuville characterized as a bon français, see Chevallier, Louis XIII, 280; Moote,
Louis XIII, 135.
120 Bayard, Félix, and Hamon, Surintendants, 52; Chevallier, Louis XIII, 280.
121 Archives Nationales MM 623 f. 91.
122
Archives Nationales MM 623 f. 93. This occurred on 13 September 1623 in a private
meeting with the king.
123 Fumaroli, "Cross," 89-102.
124 The publications were Justus Lipsius’s De Cruce libri tres, published in 1594, and the ninth
volume of Cesare Baronius’s Annales Ecclesiastici, published in 1600. For further discussion of
these texts, see ibid.; 89-91. For a discussion of the tapestry, Fumaroli, "Cross," 93.
83

125 Archives Nationales MM 623 f. 93. The reversal of the ordinance takes place sometime
between 13 to 17 September.
126 Cardinal Richelieu officially became principal ministre in 1629, but he had held the title of
premier ministre and been the most powerful voice on the council since 1624.
127 For accounts of these events, see Carmona, Marie de Médicis, 433-71; Robert J. Knecht,
Richelieu (London: Longman, 1991), 34-41; Moote, Louis XIII, 216-24.
128 Deville, French School, 42-43.
129 Williams, French Oratorians, 244.
130
Louis Batterel, Mémoires domestiques pour servir à l'histoire de l'Oratoire, 4 vols. (Geneva:
Slatkine Reprints, 1971), 3: 3, 4: 153.
84

CHAPTER 4
SAINT-LOUIS-DES-JÉSUITES: LOUIS XIII’S MOVE TOWARDS ABSOLUTISM
In December 1641 Louis XIII declared Saint-Louis-des-Jésuites, a Parisian church built
for the Society of Jesus’s maison professe, as a royal foundation (fig. 28). 1 Completed after
more than fourteen years of work, the church included many references to the Gallic monarchy
and especially to St. Louis (Louis IX; 1226-1270), the only canonized French ruler and the
church’s patron saint. In addition to depictions of the holy king on the high altar, in the
transepts, and the dome, the artistic program included royal allusions such as fleurs-de-lis,
crowns, and images of other historic French leaders. The references to St. Louis and the French
monarchy paid tribute to the kingdom’s illustrious past and to the church’s major benefactor
Louis XIII, who descended from the holy king and bore his name (fig. 1). The artistic program
was, however, more than a method of thanking the current king for his generosity. Instead it was
a way for the Jesuits to affirm the power of the French monarchy, a much needed statement in
the wake of a controversy sparked by Jesuit publications challenging royal authority.
As the flagship church for the Society of Jesus in France, Saint-Louis-des-Jésuites is a
much-studied royal monument representing the flourishing of the Catholic Reformation in
seventeenth-century Paris. 2 While the scholarship documents the church’s history, its numerous
works of art, and Louis XIII’s role as a benefactor, little effort has been devoted to exploring the
king’s reasons for supporting Saint-Louis-des-Jésuites. The most frequent explanation is that the
king had a life-long affection for the religious group, a hypothetical fondness based on the fact
that Louis XIII always had a Jesuit confessor. 3 The dearth of information is especially evident
for two medals commissioned by Louis XIII to mark the placement of the foundation stone at the
church, a ceremony in which the king personally participated. 4 No study has sought to examine
the king’s actions surrounding these medals, which I argue along with the ceremonial placing of
the first stone were central components of Louis’s patronage. A further component missing from
the scholarship is the manner in which certain seventeenth-century Jesuit publications, which
discussed the legitimacy of regicide, influenced the relationship between the monarchy and the
Society of Jesus and how they affected royal support of Saint-Louis-des-Jésuites.
85

By examining the precise manner of the king’s support and by considering the impact of
Jesuit statements questioning royal authority, I argue that Louis XIII became the church’s
primary benefactor because of his need to assert his authority over the Society of Jesus. By
dedicating royal funds to the construction of Saint-Louis-des-Jésuites and by commissioning
medals that promote an image of an absolute king, Louis affirmed his sovereign rights. In the
wake of the king’s actions, the Jesuits created an artistic program in their church that venerated
French kingship.
After presenting the origins of the Jesuit foundation and the design of Saint-Louis-des-
Jésuites to define the manner in which the Society benefitted from royal support, I will turn to
the foundation medals. By demonstrating that the medals connected Louis XIII to model rulers
especially known for their exercise of sovereign authority, I will show that the king used the
objects to construct an image of himself as an absolute monarch. In the next section I will
investigate the Society of Jesus’s position in seventeenth-century France, focusing on the manner
in which the group’s views on royal power were perceived, an analysis of which will reveal
Louis XIII’s motives for asserting his authority. I will then consider the Jesuits’ efforts to create
in the interior of Saint-Louis-des-Jésuites an environment demonstrating the order’s reverence
for St. Louis and the French monarchy, a veneration which is most visible in a series of four
paintings found in the transept showing scenes from the life of Louis IX. Finally, I will look at
the king’s first minister Cardinal Armand-Jean du Plessis de Richelieu and his involvement with
Saint-Louis-des-Jésuites, which I will argue further illuminates the king’s move towards an
absolute government (fig. 29).
The Church
In 1625 the superior general of the Society of Jesus Muzio Vitelleschi approved a plan
for a new church at the Parisian maison professe, a house for the religious who had taken their
vows and the administrative center for the Jesuit province of France. 5 The seventeenth-century
structure would be the third church dedicated to St. Louis constructed on the site, and as was
typical of Jesuit architecture, the design retained local building traditions. The history of the
maison professe as the hub of Jesuit activity in France began in 1580 when Cardinal Charles de
Bourbon donated land bordering the rue Saint-Antoine in the Marais quarter to the Society of
86

Jesus. 6 Along with the gift of land were funds to build a chapel. The cardinal, a descendent of
St. Louis, placed only one restriction on his donation—that the Jesuit building must be dedicated
to France’s holy king to whom no Parisian church was then dedicated. In 1584 having outgrown
the original chapel, the fathers began to build a second one, also dedicated to St. Louis and which
like its predecessor was a simple rectangular structure set parallel to the rue Saint-Antoine. 7
The construction of the third church, which started in 1627, resulted from the continued
growth of the order’s maison professe. Louis XIII, having most likely heard about the fathers’
decision to build a new church from his confessor Jean Arnoux, himself a member of the house,
resolved to assist the Jesuits’ endeavors. In 1619 the king gave the congregation the place de
Birague, a public space between the existing chapel and the rue Saint-Antoine. 8 He then donated
the area encompassing a section of the remnants of the thirteenth-century city wall built by King
Philip Augustus (1180-1223), which paralleled the congregation’s property to the east. 9 The land
provided the Society with enough space to begin plans to expand its religious complex. From
1618 to 1629 the Jesuits contributed to the royal gifts and further enlarged their territory by
purchasing several properties adjacent to the land the already possessed. 10
Louis XIII continued to assist the congregation, providing funds for the construction of
the new church. Beginning in 1627 he allotted annually two thousand livres of revenue from the
royal abbey of Notre-Dame-de-la-Couronne in Angoumois to the fathers of the maison
professe. 11 Between 1627 and 1629, the king gave the Jesuits additional money to help with
construction, making him at the time the largest contributor to Saint-Louis-des-Jésuites. 12
The building’s first architect was Etienne Martellange, a French-born member of the
Society of Jesus who was known for his study of medieval and Renaissance churches in
France. 13 Setting the structure perpendicular to the rue Saint-Antoine, Martellange designed a
building consisting of a single nave of four bays bordered by communicating side chapels, a
slightly projecting transept, a choir of one bay, and a semicircular apse (fig. 31). 14 The choir is
flanked on both sides by an additional chapel with the sacristy located beyond the chapel on the
left. Two years into construction, Martellange was replaced by the Jesuit architect François
Derand, who in addition to developing plans for the dome designed a new façade. 15
Martellange’s design for the front of the church, preserved on the reverse of one of the
foundation medals, is characterized by its central bay, which is made up of a colossal, threestorey,
recessed arcade under a triangular pediment (fig. 32). Derand’s façade eliminated the
87

arcade, replacing it with a projecting block composed of three distinct stories, each of which is
framed by double engaged columns (figs. 33).
Although the Society’s superior general requested that Saint-Louis-des-Jésuites be as
large as the Gesù in Rome, creating a Gallic church worthy “of the saint for whom it carried the
name, of the city of Paris, and of the most Christian king,” a smaller construction site prevented
this from becoming a reality. 16 Nonetheless, authors have consistently remarked on the
similarities between the two buildings (fig. 34). 17 While Saint-Louis-des-Jésuites certainly shares
a number of features found in the Gesù, most notably its plan, closer sources can be found in
contemporary Parisian ecclesiastical designs. By 1625 the arrangement of a single nave bordered
by side chapels, a slightly projecting transept, and a choir with a semicircular apse was the most
common plan employed for newly constructed churches in the capital, with similar examples
found at the church of the Feuillants, Saint-Joseph-des-Carmes, and the church of the Oratory. 18
The interior elevation of Saint-Louis-des-Jésuites likewise has a precedent in Parisian
architecture. Remarkably similar to the church of the Oratory, the Jesuit building has a threepart
elevation with ground floor arcades of rounded arches, arcaded tribunes, and clerestory
windows that cut deeply into the barrel vault (figs. 35 and 8). Adding to the similarity is the
articulation of the walls with the giant Corinthian pilasters supporting a prominent and
continuous entablature. Unlike the Gesù, the nave elevation at Saint-Louis-des-Jésuites lacks the
alternating rhythm that exists between the opening of the chapels and the piers. Instead the near
identical size of each chapel combined with the slender piers and tall arcades creates a space that
feels more open. 19 Indeed the effect is more analogous to Gothic plans with side aisles rather
than post-Tridentine churches such as the Gesù with its separate and nearly enclosed chapels
(fig. 34). The similarities between the plan and elevation to Parisian examples demonstrate the
Jesuit architects’ sensitivity to local traditions, a fact also noted by modern scholars. 20
The Foundation Stone
Louis XIII may have decided to support Saint-Louis-des-Jésuites because of his
allegiance to its patron saint—his namesake and the king from whom the Bourbon dynasty
descended. The gifts of land and money were an appropriate way to honor a religious foundation
engaged in building a new and grand church dedicated to the holy king of France. But another
88

demonstration of royal support, also by Louis XIII and for Saint-Louis-des-Jésuites, suggests that
an additional reason drove the king to become the patron. The year construction began on the
church, the king participated in the ceremonial placing of the foundation stone and
commissioned the striking of two medals to commemorate his patronage of the building, events
that scholars have yet to interpret. While it was not unusual for the sovereign to do one or the
other, the combination of these two acts by a king was unprecedented for French ecclesiastical
architecture. As I will demonstrate, Louis XIII deliberately chose to bring the ceremonial
placing of the foundation stone and the commissioning of two medals together because he sought
to obtain from the Jesuits recognition of his absolute right to rule.
On Sunday 7 March 1627, accompanied by the court, Louis XIII proceeded to the Jesuits’
maison professe for the services celebrating the blessing of the first stone of the new church. 21
Following a sermon and vespers in the Jesuits’ existing place of worship, the court and members
of the Society of Jesus moved outside to the area where the foundations for the new building
were already laid. Here the archbishop of Paris Jean-François de Gondi officiated the Roman
rite, which called for the consecration of the ceremonial first stone following the blessing of the
site of the future high altar. 22 Once it was time to place the first stone, Louis XIII stepped in to
perform the ritual. Using a silver trowel with an ebony handle, the king took the medals
specifically struck to commemorate the occasion and mortared them to a marble plaque, creating
the foundation stone. 23
In addition to being described in guidebooks such as Piganiol de la Force’s Description
historique, the foundation stone is also recorded in an anonymous engraving at the Bibliothèque
Nationale (fig. 36). 24 The print includes a central rectangle, representing the stone, which
depicts in the four corners one of the faces of each of the two medals. Surrounding the rectangle
are enlarged versions of the medals, making the objects’ text and images easy to read. At the
center of the composition is a Latin inscription, reading: “To God all powerful and grand—
Louis XIII built this temple for St. Louis, who marked the entire earth with his arms and mind,
so that France could honor him as her king, love him as her father, and venerate him here in
25
God’s temple as a saint.” Centered above and below the inscription is explanatory text for
the
engraving.
The obverse of the first medal, in the upper left-hand corner, depicts a profile portrait of
St. Louis, dressed in a fleur-de-lis-covered garment, holding a scepter and wearing a crown with
89

a halo surrounding his head. The medal’s reverse, on the opposite side of the engraving, shows
Martellange’s design for the façade of Saint-Louis-des-Jésuites. In the lower left corner the
obverse of the second medal presents a profile portrait of Louis XIII dressed in armor with a
large ruff and a sash, typical of contemporary state portraits. 26 Each of the images is
accompanied by an inscription, which will be addressed below. The reverse of the portrait of
Louis XIII bears no image, but simply consists of Latin text, which reads: “To God all powerful
and great—Louis XIII dedicated this building to St. Louis in the year 1627 in order to have as a
protector in heaven the founder of his race, of his name, and of his kingdom.” 27
The tradition of casting medals for placement in the foundations of new buildings began
in the fifteenth century, with the earliest known example being Matteo dei Pasti’s 1454 medal of
San Francesco in Rimini. 28 Pasti’s medal depicts a profile portrait of the patron Sigismondo
Malatesta on the obverse with Alberti’s initial design for the façade of the church on the reverse
(fig. 37). Subsequent examples followed the same pattern, such as Julius II’s foundation medal
for Saint Peter’s designed in 1506 by Caradosso Foppa, featuring Bramante’s exterior design for
the basilica. Although the Roman Catholic rite for the blessing of th foundation stone did not
require medals, by the seventeenth century it was customary to include them as a means of
commemorating the event.
The use of medals to celebrate construction of a new church was also a feature at Jesuit
foundations. In 1568 Cardinal Alessandro Farnese commissioned G. Bonsegni to create a
foundation medal to commemorate the start of construction on the Gesù, the Jesuit mother
church for which he was the patron. 29 Like other foundation medals, it showed a profile portrait
of Cardinal Farnese on the obverse with Giacomo da Vignola’s design for the façade on the
reverse (fig. 38). The fact that the Gesù’s patron, rather than the superior general of the society,
was the one to commission a medal to commemorate the event provided a precedent for future
Jesuit churches.
Although documentary evidence revealing the person responsible for commissioning the
medals for Saint-Louis-des-Jésuites is lacking, tradition dictates that it was Louis XIII. In France
the ruling monarch used medals to commemorate royal occasions and major events; foundation
medals for works connected to the king certainly fell within this realm. 30 King Charles IX
(1560-1574) and his mother Queen Catherine de’ Medici were the first French leaders to
commemorate such an event when in 1566 they placed medals bearing their portraits in the
90

foundation of the newly begun city wall of the faubourg Saint-Honoré. 31 Subsequent French
monarchs continued the tradition, setting the precedent for Louis XIII to include medals when he
participated in the ceremonial placement of the first stone.
Louis’s first opportunity came in August 1610, at which time the young king placed the
foundation stone along with a commemorative medal for the construction of a new building at
the château de Vincennes. 32 The medal, which portrayed a portrait bust of Louis XIII on the
obverse and an inscription recording that it was the first year of his reign on the reverse, lacked
any pictorial representations of the new château. Indeed it was only in 1624 that medals
depicting the design for façades began to appear in France. 33 To mark the start of construction
of the pavillon d’Horloge at the palace of the Louvre in that year, Louis XIII included a medal in
the foundation stone, which now followed the Italian format with a profile portrait of the patron
on the obverse and an elevation of the new building on the reverse (fig. 39).
Providing support for religious foundations by participating in the ceremonial placement
of the first stone was another tradition to which Louis XIII was certainly accustomed. In 1611 he
bestowed this honor on the Reformed Penitents’ church of Notre-Dame-de-Grâce at their
convent on the rue de Picpus and again in 1616 for the façade of the parish church of Saint-
Gervais-Saint-Protais. 34 In 1621, on his return to Paris from battling the Huguenots in southwest
France, Louis stopped in Toulouse and laid the first stone of the new church at the Jesuits’
house. 35 While each of these acts honored the religious institutions, at no time did Louis XIII
commission medals to commemorate the occasion.
Having the monarch, the head of the Gallican church, assist religious institutions was a
long-established tradition that reinforced the king’s divine right and God’s preference for the
people of France. Some of the kingdom’s earliest rulers had founded important abbeys,
including that of Clovis for the Abbey of Saint-Pierre-et-Saint-Paul around 510 and that of
Dagobert for the future Abbey of Saint-Denis in 630. Others placed the first stone of the church;
Charles V did so with the chapel of the college of Beauvais in 1375 and Henri III with the Jesuit
College at Clermont in 1582. Kings also gave gifts of land or money. Most notable as a model
for Louis XIII was his parents’ support of the church of the Feuillants in 1601—his father placed
the first stone and his mother donated over three thousand livres for construction costs. 36
The foundation ritual at Saint-Louis-des-Jésuites, however, differed in several significant
ways from these precedents. In addition to the Louis actually setting the dedicatory plaque in
91

place, the event was the first time that he or any other king also commemorated the ceremony
with a foundation medal. The king’s exceptional interest in the ritual at Saint-Louis-des-Jésuites
was in part to be expected: he directed royal funds to the project and bore the same name as the
patron saint of the church. Yet the king’s attention to this particular event indicates that it carried
a much greater meaning than simply continuing the tradition of royal participation in the
ceremony. I suggest that Louis XIII used the ceremony to express his divine right to rule with
absolute authority, a meaning he conveyed directly with the foundation medals, which
established typological links between himself, St. Louis, and Old Testament kings.
Located on the lower left corner of the foundation stone, the portrait medal of Louis XIII
explicitly established this connection (fig. 36). Its most significant feature is the encircling Latin
legend, which reads: “Triumphs as David, builds as Solomon.” 37 The specific reference to the
biblical kings was quite appropriate because since the Middle Ages David and Solomon had been
the primary models for Christian princes. 38 David and Solomon were seen to have benefited
from the special blessing of God, having been appointed by God and each achieving victory over
his enemies with divine aid,. David was especially esteemed as a model for those kings seeking
both triumph and piety. A defender against tyranny with his victory over Goliath, David
appealed to later kings, who viewed their contemporary struggles with political and military
threats as analogous to the one the Philistine posed to the Israelites. 39 David’s religious devotion
revealed itself through his harp playing in praise of God, his desire to build a temple for the Ark
of the Covenant, and his atonement for his transgressions. 40
Like his father, King Solomon served as a model for rulers. His proverbial wisdom and
justice certainly provided much inspiration, but it was Solomon’s role as the builder of the
temple of Jerusalem that most exemplified his pious nature and his support of religion. 41 In some
instances Christian rulers seeking similar renown constructed churches to emulate the Old
Testament king, as Vasari intimated was the case when Grand Duke Cosimo I de’ Medici
remodeled the Florentine churches of S. Maria Novella and S. Croce. 42 Likewise King Philip II
of Spain, who was said to be like Solomon, constructed the Escorial in part to evoke the Jewish
temple. 43
While European rulers were frequently compared to the Old Testament kings, this
association with French monarchs had existed since the Carolingian period. 44 The Frankish
King Pepin (751-768) established the tradition of rulers modeling themselves on David,
92

specifically through consecration with holy oil, recalling the way David had been anointed by
Samuel. 45 The typological links to David were further developed at the end of the fifteenth
century during the reign of Charles VIII (1483-1498). As part of a treatise backing the king’s
claims to Naples, the French writer Liénard Baronnat wrote that the domus David had become
the house of the most Christian king of France, implying that God’s preference for the Israelites
46
now extended to the French. The esteem with which David was held continued in the
seventeenth century, at which time the Jesuit Father Nicolas Caussin referred to him as among
f the earth.” 47
“the most holy monarchs” and included him with “the great ones o
Solomon served as a model for French kings since the Capetian dynasty. The Old
Testament king was especially suited as a typological parallel for Louis IX, whom
contemporaries praised for his acts of justice and admired for his construction of numerous
churches. 48 Indeed throughout the tenure of his reign Louis IX established religious foundations
and built churches, some of the most notable of which include the royal Abbey of Royaumont, a
palace chapel at Saint-Germain-en-Laye, and the thirteenth-century reconstruction of Saint-
Denis. 49 As Daniel Weiss has shown, the Sainte-Chapelle of Paris best demonstrates the
connection between Louis IX and Solomon. 50 Apart from constructing the chapel as a means of
emulating his Old Testament model, Louis IX used a section of the stained glass to associate his
reign with that of the builder of the Temple of Jerusalem, depicting both himself and Solomon as
kneeling kings in adjacent windows (fig. 40). By equating his rule with that of Solomon, he
showed that the king of France likewise profited from the preferred status of God. 51
The direct importance of Solomon to Louis XIII in the seventeenth century is
demonstrated by the publication in 1617 of an anonymous pamphlet dedicated to the king titled
Le Salomon de la France. 52 Appearing shortly after the coup d’état, through which the king was
able to assume his personal reign, and intended as a guide for a virtuous monarch, the pamphlet
repeatedly compared the wisdom and justice of Louis XIII to that of Solomon. It also presented
the Old Testament king as an authoritative ruler on whom Louis could model his reign, stating:
“Inside your kingdom you are not less the sovereign of your people and temporal lord of the
clergy than Solomon was in his because your power is ordered from God as was his.” 53 The
quote functioned as a contemporary reminder of Louis XIII’s divine right, confirming that his
authority to rule came directly from God as opposed to any earthly source.
93

Although David and Solomon had traditionally served as important models for French
kings, Louis XIII was the first to allude to either of them on a medal. By referencing the Old
Testament kings in a new medium and as part of a public ceremony, Louis XIII firmly
established a connection to the model rulers and furthered the tradition begun by past French
monarchs. The foundation medal proved to be a means through which he could testify to the
virtues he possessed, that he too was pious, wise, and just and that of all the Christian rulers, the
French king had the special blessing of God. The medal’s legend affirmed that just as David had
triumphed over Goliath, Louis XIII would triumph over any threats to his rule. Moreover, as
Solomon, who had built the temple, was the absolute sovereign in his land, so too was Louis,
who constructed Saint-Louis-des-Jésuites.
Complementing the message conveyed by the image of Louis XIII were the other medals
on the foundation stone (fig. 36). The medal in the upper right-hand corner depicted
Martellange’s design for the façade of Saint-Louis-des-Jésuites, an image which functioned as a
visual testament to the building. The other medal on the right side, the reverse of the king’s
portrait medal, only bore an inscription, but it too was intended to add to the image of the
monarch by drawing connections to St. Louis. Its inscription focuses on the seventeenth-century
king’s many ties to the saint, stating that Louis IX was for Louis XIII “the founder of his race, of
his name, and of his kingdom.” Louis XIII’s reverence of his predecessor is further
demonstrated in the medal depicting a profile portrait of St. Louis (fig. 32).
As the only sainted French king, Louis IX was the model of Christian piety. Shortly
following his death in 1270, biographies began to appear that emphasized his virtue, faith, and
humility and praised his charity towards the poor and the sick. 54 His devout nature was further
enhanced by the transfer of the relics of the Passion to France and the legends surrounding his
fearless acts during the Crusades. It was, however, only in the seventeenth century that his role
as a political model began to affect ideas of kingship. 55 The change was brought about in large
part by Louis XIII’s revival of the cult of St. Louis. 56 Of all the saints, Louis XIII preferred his
namesake and patron the best. 57 In addition to saying a daily prayer in his honor, in July 1618 he
obtained from Pope Paul V a bull proclaiming that on 25 August all the kingdom of France
would observe the day of St. Louis and celebrate the office as a double feast. 58 The Mercure
françois recorded the Parisian celebration that took place the following month, noting that the
streets were lined with tapestries and fireworks were displayed on the Seine. 59 As for the king,
94

he celebrated the feast with his court at the only Parisian church dedicated to his ancestor, Saint-
Louis-des-Jésuites.
Between 1618 and 1630 Louis XIII’s enthusiasm for the cult was matched by a surge in
publication of panegyrics and biographies of St. Louis. 60 As Alain Boureau has shown, the texts
worked to present an image of the king as a model Christian prince, but the reasons for which the
individual authors did this varied considerably. In Pierre Matthieu’s Histoire de Sainct Louys
(1618), the king’s historiographer praised St. Louis for his preservation of the rights of the
Gallican Church. 61 On the other side Cardinal Robert Bellarmine, a Jesuit with strong ties to
Rome, published in 1619 his De Officio principis, which characterized Louis IX as an
ultramontanist king distinguished for his loyalty to the pope. 62
Two texts from this period, however, added the theory of absolutism to representations of
St. Louis. In the first, the Panégyrique du Roy Sainct Louys (1618), Etienne Molinier depicts St.
Louis as the prototype of the absolute sovereign in the moral sense, meaning that Louis had
absolute standards of morality that eventually paved the way for the monarch to have total
control of the government. 63 The second, Précepts du roi sainct Louys (1627) by Adam
Théveneau, was based on the Enseignements written by Louis IX to his son and heir Philip III
(1270-1285). In the text Théveneau argues that the monarchical government is based on a neofeudal
contract in which “God left the Kings all rights and profits,” and that the only function of
the nobles, Church, and Parlement is to council or execute royal prerogatives. 64
The publication of these works coincided with the growth of the absolute monarchy in
France. Although a government in which the king’s power was subject to no institutional
limitations other than divine law had existed in France since the early sixteenth century,
contributions by Cardinal Richelieu, one of Louis XIII’s highest ministers, to the theory of
kingship gave rise to a more secular form of absolutism wherein the interests of the state could
override the normal processes of law. 65 The publications claiming that the origins of absolutism
dated to the reign of Louis IX helped to justify the growing control of the seventeenth-century
monarch.
The depiction of St. Louis on the foundation medal bolsters the message found in the
works of Molinier and Théveneau. The crowned and haloed Louis IX, shown in profile to recall
the tradition begun by Roman emperors, rests a scepter over his right shoulder. The fleur-de-lis,
the emblem of French kings, enhances the royal dignity of the portrait through its repeated use
95

on the robe and crown and at the end of the scepter. Together these elements evoke the
authoritative image of a sovereign king in full control of his government and people.
Reinforcing the medal’s significance is the legend encircling the medal: “For his authority, the
earth gave him altars and God gave him heaven.” 66 The text proclaims that in reward for his
sovereign reign, Louis IX received the divine honor of sainthood.
By placing this medal on the same foundation stone with his own profile portrait, Louis
XIII created a typological parallel between himself and the Capetian king, justifying his own
ambitious drive towards an absolutist state. Together with the other medals, each of which was
struck multiple times and circulated, the representation of St. Louis helped to spread Louis XIII’s
desired image of the sovereign ruler of the state. When the medals were combined with the
official ceremony for the placing of the first stone, they became an undeniable message directed
to those French subjects who sought to challenge the absolute authority of the king.
Louis XIII and the Need for an Authoritative Image
In the 1620s abundant opportunities existed for Louis XIII to demonstrate his authority
with the ceremonial placing of the first stone. Apart from royal projects at the Louvre and the
construction of a hunting lodge at Versailles, a number of religious organizations began building
churches in Paris. In addition to two other Jesuit foundations constructing chapels, reformed
orders of the Franciscans, Benedictines, and Augustinians as well as the Oratorians sought to add
new places of worship to their institutions. 67 Yet, Louis XIII chose the church of the Society of
Jesus’s maison professe, the order’s most prestigious place of worship in Paris, as the favored
site at which to demonstrate his authority. I argue that the decision resulted from the king
desiring to assert his divine right over French members of the Society of Jesus and other
conservative religious groups that he suspected of doubting his absolute authority. Since the
Jesuits’ official arrival in the Gallic state in 1562, people had suspected that the order’s loyalties
lay with Rome rather than France, a belief that exploded in 1626 with a publication by Antonio
Santarelli.
Among the primary reasons for French distrust of the Society was a fourth vow taken by
certain members. In addition to the three oaths of poverty, chastity, and obedience taken by all
Jesuits, those fathers having professed their religious vows, known in France as coadjuteurs
96

formés, made an additional promise of obedience to the pope. 68 Although it simply meant that
the Jesuit agreed to go on ministry anywhere in the world deemed necessary by the pontiff of the
Catholic Church, the oath was often perceived as a declaration of loyalty to Rome. 69 Fueling
this concern was the Society’s continued support of papal control over bishops. Those with
Gallican sentiments, the belief in the kingdom’s independence from papal interference,
considered the policy to be an infringement on the French Church’s long-standing independence
from the Holy See. 70 The Jesuit devotion to the papacy troubled many French subjects, who
viewed any favors towards Rome with suspicion.
The Society’s strong ties to Spain and the connections to the League were additional
marks against the Jesuits. Not only were the first five superior generals of the Society born
subjects of the Spanish monarchy, but to French observers in the late sixteenth century the
Jesuits appeared to support Spain’s imperial ambitions. 71 By 1594 anti-Jesuit rhetoric also began
to assign the Society a leading role in the League, the movement of militant French Catholics
refusing to accept the Protestant Henri of Navarre as the heir presumptive of the crown. 72 As an
alternative to the heretical king, the League had settled on Cardinal Charles de Bourbon, the next
in line for the throne after Navarre and a member of the militant group. Strengthening the
Jesuits’ connection to the League was the cardinal’s role as patron, which included donating land
on which to build the first Parisian maison professe and providing funds to construct a chapel
dedicated to St. Louis. These connections led opponents of the Society to assert that the Jesuit
house had even served as a meeting place for the League. 73
The greatest issue prompting distrust of the Society was its connection to publications
sanctioning tyrannicide for deposed rulers, a doctrine that stemmed from the Jesuits’ belief in the
indirect power of popes over kings. The idea was that a legitimate ruler could be unseated by
public authority, such as a king’s excommunication by a pope, and once toppled the unlawful
monarch could be slain for continuing to reign without the appropriate power. 74 These views
were most clearly expressed by the Spanish Jesuit Juan de Mariana (1535-1624) in the sixth
chapter of the first book of his De rege et Regis institutione, published in 1599. 75 Containing a
discussion of appropriate times for tyrannicide, the author argues for the right of citizens to
remove the once-lawful ruler who holds the laws of the land and religion in contempt. 76 Mariana
built his case by citing a number of precedents from history, but his most recent example was
Jacques Clément’s assassination in 1589 of Henri III of France. The murder of the childless
97

king, who backed the Protestant Henri of Navarre as the legitimate heir, according to Mariana
gave “an eternal honor to France.” 77
While the book’s initial publication did little to stir the people of France, Mariana’s work
received much unwanted publicity following the murder of Henri IV in 1610 by François
Ravaillac. No evidence existed that Ravaillac had ever read De Rege or had any ties to the
Society of Jesus, but Mariana’s subversive writings were perceived by some as having instigated
the assassination, thus connecting the Jesuits to the act of regicide. 78 The Parlement of Paris, the
highest law court in the land, condemned the book, and less than a month after the death of the
king it was burned publicly in front to the cathedral of Notre-Dame-de-Paris.
The court had long feared that the Society sought to compromise the Gallican state. On
two previous occasions plots had been made to take the life of Henri IV, and in each case the
assassin had a connection to the Society. In 1593 Pierre Barrière was arrested for conspiring to
murder the king, a plan that he claimed was encouraged by the Jesuit rector in Paris, Father
Varade. Then in December 1594 Jean Chastel tried to assassinate Henri IV at a Parisian hôtel.
In the ensuing inquisition into Chastel’s motives, he admitted to having studied for three years at
the Jesuit Collège of Clermont. Following this second attempt on the life of the king, the
Parlement began to look for a way to prohibit the society’s ministry in France. Although it was
unable to establish any complicit involvement by the Jesuits in the assassination attempts, the
Parlement succeeded in labeling them as promoters of tyrannicide, banning the Society from its
jurisdiction until 1603. 79
The strong reaction to Mariana’s work in 1610 is not surprising given Gallican
sentiments towards the Society. To prevent further repercussions against the Jesuits, the superior
general Claudio Acquaviva sent a decree to the French fathers forbidding any discussion of
tyranny, but members residing in other countries continued to aggravate matters by publishing
books advocating the temporal power of the pope over sovereign monarchs. 80 The Italian Robert
Bellarmine and the Belgian Martin Becan both wrote treatises on the right of the Roman pontiff
to depose rulers for heresy while the German Jacob Keller and the Spanish Francisco Suárez
published works specifically dealing with the validity of tyrannicide. 81 Igniting further
controversy was the condemnation of each of the foreign texts by the Parlement and the
University of Paris, acts which angered Pope Paul V, who had specifically praised the work of
Suarez in a special laudatory brief. 82 The entangled situation only cooled when a second decree
98

sent by General Acquaviva to all the provinces banning any discussion of tyrannicide halted
further publications. 83
For the first nine years of Louis XIII’s personal reign, the situation between the pro-
Gallican institutions and the Society of Jesus remained stable. The Parlement of Paris and other
supporters of Gallicanism continued to view the Society with suspicion, but the lack of
contentious Jesuit works prevented further confrontation between the two sides. Renewing the
debate, however, was the arrival in Paris in February 1626 of a publication that once again
challenged the sovereign authority of the king. Written in 1625 by the Italian Jesuit Antonio
Santarelli, the Tractatus de haeresi took up the earlier theses of authors such as Bellarmine on
the indirect power of popes over kings. 84
While Santarelli’s work avoided any discussion of tyrannicide, it was perceived in France
as furthering the ideas of Mariana and Suarez. An anonymous pamphlet described it as “a book
full of blood, to instruct and encourage assassins against sovereign kings and princes.” 85 The
Parlement of Paris immediately proceeded to censure the book, publicly burning the offensive
work and summoning the Jesuits to sign a written condemnation of it. 86 Threatened with
expulsion if they did not agree, the fathers consented to a declaration stating their rejection of the
ideas presented by Santarelli and their belief that the king held his power from God alone. The
Faculty of Theology at the Sorbonne likewise voted to make its disapproval known, declaring the
work to be false, erroneous, and interfering with the supreme authority of the king. 87 The history
of similar Jesuit publications and the assassination of the two previous French kings simply made
the book too contentious.
The rising tide of Gallican sentiment against Santarelli’s book and the Society of Jesus
was countered by a faithful following of ardent French Catholics whose loyalty lay with Rome.
Included in this group was the ultramontane faction of the university faculty. Led by the well-
known dévot André Duval, this minority argued that while the views presented in the Tractatus
de haeresi were misguided, they were not entirely contrary to scripture as the faculty’s censure
claimed. 88 The general assembly of clergy, meeting in Paris in the spring of 1626, also debated
the issue, but like the university faculty, it too became divided between the Ultramontanists and
the Gallicans. 89 Pope Urban VIII (1623-1644) was upset when the Paris fathers agreed to sign
Parlement’s condemnation of the book, but he was outraged when the Faculty of Theology voted
to place its own censure on Santarelli’s work. 90 Because of the faculty’s prestigious status in the
99

Catholic world, any objection it made carried significant moral authority. 91 Indeed the pope
threatened to halt all diplomatic ties between France and Rome if something was not done about
the Sorbonne’s censure.
The escalating debate between the Ultramontanists and the Gallicans deeply troubled the
crown. Detesting the ideas presented by Santarelli, Louis XIII worried about the potential action
that could be taken by certain French subjects whose loyalty to the Catholic faith was stronger
than to the kingdom. He was also concerned about the aggressive stance taken by the Paris
Parlement and the Faculty of Theology, both of which continued to pursue punishment for the
Society even following the signed condemnation of the Tractatus de haeresi. 92 Louis considered
these actions as an infringement upon his sovereign duties. 93 Seeing a threat to royal authority
from both sides, the king knew he must step in to prevent either the Gallicans or the
Ultramontanists from gaining too much control of the conflict.
To exercise his powers over the French institutions, Louis XIII issued a royal decree on 6
November ordering all parties to cease discussion of the topic. 94 Then in January he forced the
faculty to revoke its censure of the Santarelli book. 95 These efforts reminded the involved
parties of the limits of their jurisdiction in matters of faith and law. As for the fate of the
Ultramontanists, scholars suggest that the crown was satisfied with the Jesuits’ decision to sign
96
Parlement’s written condemnation. I believe, however, that Louis XIII found an additional
method by which to remind the Society and its supporters of his royal authority. Just two months
after the Faculty of Theology retracted its censure, the king participated in the ceremonial
placement of the first stone of Saint-Louis-des-Jésuites. I argue that for this event Louis XIII
specifically commissioned medals conveying messages of model rulers with absolute power and
defenders against tyranny to assert his sovereignty over those whose loyalties may have
remained with Rome.
An important precedent provided the king with a model for this approach. As Eric
Nelson has shown, Louis XIII’s father Henri IV, who also recognized dual threats to his
authority, had taken advantage of Parlement’s banishment of the Society to expand and define
royal power. 97 On one side, he felt that the Parlement’s actions toward the Jesuits signaled an
extension of the court’s rights into those traditionally held by the king. 98 On the other side, he
knew that the acceptance of a religious society that purported to be loyal to Rome was a potential
threat to the crown. To remedy the situation, Henri IV crafted the Edict of Rouen, allowing the
100

Jesuits to return to Paris as long as members of the order adhered to the strict regulations
enforced by the crown. 99 By making the law solely contingent upon royal authority, Henri IV
acted outside the boundaries of the Paris Parlement and strengthened his sovereign rights.
Henri IV’s treatment of the Jesuits, in which he set the limits for the Society’s
participation in France and rewarded the fathers with royal support as a means to expand his
authority, surely influenced Louis XIII’s own understanding of these matters. To show that the
Society’s success in France continued to depend upon the king, in 1627 following the Santarelli
Affair, Louis provided additional royal funds to assist with construction of Saint-Louis-des-
Jésuites. The monetary gift was coupled with the king’s participation in the ceremonial placing
of the first stone and the commemoration of the event with medals. By becoming the primary
benefactor, Louis XIII proclaimed that the church could only be completed with royal support.
His financial gifts also initiated a patron-client exchange, creating a situation in which the Jesuits
would feel obligated to respond to the king’s support. 100 Reinforcing the king’s financial control
over the Society were the medals, visual testaments to Louis’s authority to rule without the threat
of papal interference. The fathers at the Parisian maison professe understood Louis XIII’s
actions, and they embarked on an artistic program to decorate the interior of the church that
affirmed their loyalty to the French monarchy.
Interior Decorative Program of Saint-Louis-des-Jésuites
Saint-Louis-des-Jésuites’ original decorative program had a dual focus, reflecting
traditional Jesuit themes, but it also paid tribute to St. Louis and the French monarchy. 101 The
two visual systems often overlapped, merging Gallican symbolism with references to the Society
of Jesus, most notably in the liturgical heart of the church, the high altar and dome. 102 One area
in which the focus on France stands out is in the transepts, where four paintings depicting scenes
from the life of St. Louis are prominently placed on the lateral walls (fig. 41). While the transept
chapels were originally dedicated to the Jesuit Saints Ignatius and Francis Xavier, the prominent
position, large scale, and subject matter of the images make them the most obvious expression of
the Society’s effort to honor French kingship. 103 This act of paying tribute to the patron saint of
the church allowed the fathers to visually demonstrate their loyalty to the French kingship,
functioning as a response to their patron’s generosity.
101

The current arrangement of the apse at Saint-Louis-des-Jésuites is considerably altered
from the time of Louis XIII. Today the curving wall of the apse is clearly visible behind the
altar, showing four faux arcades, each containing a nineteenth-century painting of one of the four
evangelists, surmounted by the tribune (fig. 42). In the seventeenth century a three-storey retable
composed of a central section and two curving sides filled the width of the apse and rose to the
height of the entablature (fig. 43). Although the altarpiece was dismantled following the
expulsion of the Jesuits in 1762, a contemporary engraving preserves the original design as
begun in 1638 and completed in 1641 (fig. 44).
The print most clearly demonstrates the dual emphasis of the interior. The focus of the
ensemble was a large canvas at the center of the first level depicting Simon Vouet’s Presentation
in the Temple from 1641 (fig. 45). 104 To either side of the painting the altarpiece consisted of
twin Corinthian columns, then niches holding statues of Saints Ignatius and Francis Xavier. Both
Spaniards were among the most important saints for the Jesuits: Ignatius Loyola founded the
Society and was its first superior general while Francis Xavier was one of the original members
and especially active in missionary work. 105 Pope Gregory XV had canonized the men in 1622,
adding to their popularity.
On the second level of the retable, above the Presentation in the Temple, was a painting
of the Apotheosis of St. Louis (c. 1641) also by Simon Vouet (fig. 46). 106 Framed by twin
columns and topped with a pediment, the image shows St. Louis draped in a fleurs-de-lis-
covered mantle being carried to heaven by two angels. Cherubs at the king’s feet struggle to lift
the crown of France while two more, floating above, hold the crown of thorns. The image is
completed by the royal regalia seen in the lower left corner: the hand of justice and the royal
scepter rest on a pillow, which in turn is placed on blue and gold fabric emblazoned with the
fleur-de-lis. Additional images signifying the importance of French kingship are found at either
end of the altarpiece’s first level, St. Louis on the right and Charlemagne (768-814) on the left
(fig. 44). 107 References to the monarchy are also included in the retable’s second level, where
two aedicules, containing cartouches with the royal arms, were topped with crowns decorated
with fleurs-de-lis. The devices appeared next to statues representing St. John and St. Mary
Magdalene. Both saints looked up to a painting depicting the Virgin Mary, who in turn raised
her eyes to the crucified Christ on top of the ensemble.
102

The combination of royal imagery, Jesuit saints, and scenes from the life of Christ
imparted to the altarpiece several functions. 108 The first was the Jesuit belief that art should be
used as a tool to enhance the worshiper’s knowledge and religious experience. 109 Not only does
it portray the mysteries of the faith and the presence of Christ in the central painting, its upper
tier reminded viewers of God’s sacrifice. 110 Second, the inclusion of Jesuit saints emphasized
the Society’s foundation and its missionary objectives. The final function was to demonstrate
the close relationship between God and the French monarchy, a relationship that granted the king
the right to rule directly from God. 111 By placing the most illustrious kings and the royal arms
and crown next to the central images of the altarpiece, the ensemble reinforced the divine right of
French monarchs.
The twin themes of the interior are further carried over to the area of the dome. The
Jesuit belief in the universality of the Catholic Church presents itself at the merging of the ribs
on the choir’s vault, nearly directly above the high altar. 112 Here a sculptural relief depicts God
the Father holding a globe surmounted by a cross within a circular field surrounded by clouds
and angel heads (fig. 47). It certainly referred to the Jesuit mission to spread Christianity
throughout the world, but also suggested the wide-reaching power of the Church.
The Jesuit symbolism is countered with the theme of French kingship in the drum of the
dome (fig. 48). It is articulated with sixteen paired pilasters, which alternatively frame four large
arched windows and four grisaille paintings of important French kings. In addition to St. Louis
and Charlemagne, the other figures represent Clovis (481-511), the first Christian king of France,
and King Robert (996-1031), renowned for his piety. Although the original images were
destroyed in the Paris Commune of 1871 and replaced in 1873 with paintings by Paul-Joseph
Blanc, seventeenth-century engravings of the dome indicate that the lost images also represented
the same kings standing in niches (fig. 43). 113
The combined symbolism was originally distributed throughout the rest of the interior.
One example is the frieze of the entablature, encircling the interior. Today it is decorated with
foliage mixed with cherubim’s heads and the monograms of Christ and the Virgin Mary, but
prior to the French Revolution it consisted of fleurs-de-lis and martyrs’ palms interspersed with
the monogram of the Society of Jesus, the abbreviation IHS topped with a cross (fig. 49).
Another allusion to French kingship is found in the cartouches located above the clerestory
windows in the hollowed-out space of the barrel vault. A few of the shields still show the letter
103

L surmounted by a royal crown and flanked by martyrs’ palms, while others have the
monograms of Sts. Ignatius and Francis Xavier or are simply blank (fig. 50). The clerestory
windows in the nave and transept, some of which are original, likewise indicate the royal
program by including golden fleurs-de-lis and the blue letter L in the colored borders framing the
transparent glass. 114
The twin focus of the interior demonstrated the dual allegiance pursued by the French
Jesuit fathers. While the Gallican imagery promoted loyalty to the French crown, the Jesuit
symbols recalled the mission of the Society and its allegiance to the pope. To avoid any
suggestion that the Jesuit’s twin goals might be construed as offensive to the crown, I propose
that the fathers of the maison professe introduced one additional example of their devotion to the
French monarchy—three paintings in the transepts showing scenes from the life of St. Louis and
one dedicated to Louis XIII and Louis IX. Dating between 1639 and 1642 and coming from the
studio of Simon Vouet, the series included St. Louis Receiving the Crown of Thorns, St. Louis
Leaving for the Crusade and Leaving the Country to his Mother, Louis XIII offering the Model of
the Church to St. Louis, and The Death of St. Louis. 115 Each painting hung on one of the lateral
walls of the transepts, above an arched passageway leading to the side chapels (fig. 41). 116 While
previous scholarship has focused on attribution and stylistic analysis, the series represents a new
manner of depicting the life of St. Louis in works of art, an approach chosen specifically by the
Jesuits to correspond to the function of the paintings. 117 When viewed as a series, the images
work together to prominently display the French fathers’ acceptance of the king’s divine right.
Except for Louis XIII offering the Model of the Church to St. Louis, each of the paintings
depicts a major event from the life of Louis IX, common themes for works of art devoted to the
saint. Previous series tended to focus on images illustrating Louis IX’s humility and piety,
depicting scenes such as the king washing feet, administering to the poor, or burying the bones of
crusaders, an example of which is found in the fourteenth-century manuscript The Chronicle of
France (fig. 51). 118 Contrasting with this tradition, the works at Saint-Louis-des-Jésuites stress
another aspect of the king’s life. Instead of emphasizing the humble and pious nature of the
saint, the scenes depict heroic events, aggrandizing the actual facts of the story and drawing
attention to Louis IX’s divine-like status.
St. Louis Receiving the Crown of Thorns shows Christ, elevated on a bank of clouds,
handing the precious relic to a kneeling Louis IX (fig. 52). 119 The French crown and royal
104

scepter along with two angels accompany the event, which takes place in an elaborate
architectural setting. The painting is an extensive departure from the actual story, in which Louis
IX bought the relic in 1239 from Emperor Baldwin II. On one level, the image reiterates the
king’s acquisition of the most holy relics of Christendom, marking the French kingdom’s
privileged status among all other nations. On a much more elevated level, it forcefully states the
divine right of French kings. Showing Christ handing the crown to the monarch asserts Louis’s
divine-like status, reinforcing the close connection between church and state in France.
In a similar manner The Death of St. Louis exhibits an idealized portrayal of the actual
event, which occurred in 1270 in Tunis while the king was on his second crusade (fig. 53). 120
Louis IX, placed on the floor, covered with the royal mantel, and surrounded by courtiers, gazes
upwards to the priest bestowing the last rites. A dramatic cloth of honor hangs behind the group
huddled around the king while on the left acolytes bearing liturgical instruments patiently wait in
a classically-styled interior. The one painting no longer in existence is St. Louis Leaving for the
Crusade and Leaving the Country to his Mother. While no record of the image exists, the artistic
license taken in the other two scenes suggests a similar approach for this work. It depicted the
king’s departure in 1248 on his first crusade, an event which by all accounts ended in disaster.
Given the heroic nature of the other paintings, this one most-assuredly presented the king as a
confident statesman, who would lead his followers to military victory.
The remaining image, Louis XIII offering the Model of the Church to St. Louis, featuring
a scene not taken from the saint’s life, further defines the divine-like status of French kings by
introducing a portrait of Louis XIII into the series (fig. 54). Prominently placed on the transept
wall to the right of the high altar, it depicts the seventeenth-century king aided by angels lifting a
large scale and accurate model of the Society of Jesus’s church to St. Louis, who reaches out to
receive it. Behind Louis XIII, three Jesuit fathers kneel in reverence while several laypeople
witness the event. The scene takes place in an architecturally defined setting, which with the
suggestion of piers and arcades recalls the interior features of Saint-Louis-des-Jésuites.
Drawing from a long tradition of paintings showing donors presenting a model of a
church to a holy figure, it exhibits several of the functions associated with this type of art. 121 In
addition to serving as an expression of thanks for royal support, it also perpetuates the memory
of the patron. Most importantly, the painting functions as a statement of Louis XIII’s authority
and power. Representations of a ruler or other secular power donating a church model to a holy
105

figure first occurred in the west on a small ivory plaque from a series known as the Magdeburg
Ivories (fig. 55). 122 Showing Otto I (962-973) presenting a model of his church at Magdeburg to
Christ, this work and subsequent examples following the same format would have been used as
political statements, emphasizing the particular needs of the sovereign. 123 The idea retained a
powerful meaning in seventeenth-century France, stressing the connection between church and
state.
As with the serliana at the church of the French Oratory, the portrait of Louis XIII as
donor functioned as a reminder of the sovereign’s presence. In addition, by placing the current
king and patron of the church in a painting that belonged to a series of images emphasizing the
hallowed status of St. Louis, the Jesuits acknowledged that Louis XIII benefitted from the same
divine right practiced by the holy monarch. The meaning is enhanced by the familial ties
connecting the two kings and their shared name, which also appeared in the dedication of the
church; in the painting it is visually strengthened by the similar royal vestments worn by each
monarch. The inclusion of the Jesuit fathers in the painting and the setting’s similarities with
Saint-Louis-des-Jésuites further affirms the Society’s acceptance of royal authority in France.
Together with the other three paintings in the series, Louis XIII offering the Model of the Church
to St. Louis provided the Jesuit fathers with one further means of using the interior to venerate
French kingship and dispel any suspicions that remained of the order’s motives.
Richelieu’s Façade
While the Jesuits focused on the interior of Saint-Louis-des-Jésuites, Cardinal Richelieu
concentrated on the exterior, donating in 1631 twelve thousand livres to help with construction
of the façade (fig. 56). 124 Two years later he gave an additional thirty-six thousand livres for the
same project, making his contributions surpass those given by Louis XIII. As construction of the
church drew to a close, Richelieu again provided assistance, financing in large part the high altar,
for which he also donated Simon Vouet’s Apotheosis of St. Louis. The cardinal’s support of the
church was highly visible: not only did he incorporate his family arms into the high altar and the
façade but he also included his name above the building’s central entrance. 125 To some
observers, Richelieu’s benevolence towards the church outshone that of the king, adding to the
perception that Louis XIII lacked an interest in the arts. 126 An examination of the façade and the
106

cardinal’s actions during the years leading up to his support, however, reveals that Richelieu, like
the Jesuits, was honoring the king.
Facing the rue Saint-Antoine, the façade of Saint-Louis-des-Jésuites as designed by
François Derand consists of a three-storey, centrally projecting section flanked by two-storey
recessed sides, originally ornamented with rich sculpture and reliefs (fig. 33). 127 Above the
ground floor, raised on a podium and articulated with three monumental entryways, is an
entablature, which in the seventeenth century was adorned with fleurs-de-lis, letter Ls
surmounted with crowns, and martyrs’ palms. At its center was a marble plaque with a Latin
inscription in gold letters stating: “King Louis XIII built this basilica for King Saint Louis:
Cardinal Armandus, Duke of Richelieu, built the façade in 1634.” 128 Immediately above the text
was a segmented pediment containing an escutcheon with three chevrons, the arms of Richelieu.
The upper two levels prepare the viewer for the themes found in the interior, the dual
devotion to the Society of Jesus and to French kingship. At the center of the second story was an
elliptical rose window adorned with the order’s monogram, which was replaced with a clock in
the early nineteenth century. 129 Niches in the façade’s outer bays originally held statues of St.
Ignatius and St. Francis Xavier. 130 The uppermost tier of the façade focused on France. At its
center was a statue of St. Louis with the arms of France and Navarre and the crown of France
above in a triangular pediment. 131 Reinforcing the royal imagery were crowned letter Ls placed
between the paired Corinthian columns that framed the central niche.
The façade certainly honored Richelieu. With gold text stating that he paid for the façade
and his family arms immediately above the entrance, the cardinal ensured that his contributions
to the building were unmistakable. His support of the building marked the emergence of his
interest in architecture, demonstrated by the creation over the next ten years of the Palais
Cardinal in Paris and the town of Richelieu in addition to the rebuilding of the Sorbonne chapel
and the remodeling of several châteaux. 132 As Hilary Ballon states, Richelieu believed that the
glory of the state could reveal itself through architecture. 133 While the cardinal’s involvement
with the façade was boldly displayed above the main entrance, Louis XIII’s role as the builder of
the church took the primary place of importance as the first part of the inscription makes clear.
The institution of the monarchy is given further consequence with the entablature covered with
royal symbols and the upper-most storey dedicated to St. Louis. When viewed in conjunction
with the medals placed in the church’s foundation stone, the statue of the saint at the pinnacle of
107

the façade reiterates the place of the monarch within his kingdom: the sovereign has absolute
authority, answering to no one but God, who is symbolized by the cross on top of the gable.
Richelieu’s need to finance a structure making such a statement can be understood by looking at
events leading up his support of the façade.
In 1630 in an event known as the Day of Dupes, Louis XIII was forced to decide between
his mother and Richelieu, both of whom were the king’s closest advisors. 134 The forced decision
resulted from unreasonable demands made by Maria de’ Medici, who effectively told her son
that he must choose one of them as an advisor because she could no longer work with the
cardinal. The fallout between the two had been gaining momentum since 1628 when, following
Richelieu’s victory over the Huguenots at Languedoc, the queen mother noticed that the cardinal
was gaining too much power. Jealous that her own authority was in jeopardy, Maria became
consumed with fear that she might lose her position, driving her to make the ultimatum to the
king.
Richelieu had come to power as part of Maria de’ Medici’s entourage, and it was only
through the queen mother’s insistence that the cardinal became in 1624 a member of the king’s
highest council. Indeed as superintendent of Maria’s household until 1630, Richelieu shared the
queen mother’s goals of creating a united Catholic Europe combating heresy and enabling the
triumph of the Church. 135 Even until 1630 he believed in many of the goals of the dévots and
respected the Council of Trent. 136 But following the exile of Maria de’ Medici and his pledge of
allegiance to the king, the cardinal changed his position, fully aligning himself with Gallican
principles and the sovereignty of the state. 137
In part to prove his allegiance to the king, I propose that Richelieu decided to support
Saint-Louis-des-Jésuites, contributing to the building’s function as a testament to French
kingship. Richelieu placed the first stone of the façade in 1634, marking the start of
construction. While the façade provided the cardinal with the opportunity to glorify his name, it
more importantly underscored the move towards an absolute government. Just as the Jesuits
following the Santarelli affair used the interior to express their loyalty to the king, Richelieu four
years later following the Day of Dupes channeled his funds into a façade that glorified the
French monarchy and extolled the sovereign’s authority. Louis XIII’s satisfaction with both
parties’ efforts to prove their loyalty is evident. In 1641 upon completion of the church the king
108

declared Saint-Louis-des-Jésuites to be a royal foundation, granting it the highest honors
warranted by that lofty designation and his own role as patron. 138
109

1 Today it is the parish church of Saint-Paul-Saint-Louis. In 1762 the Parlement of Paris
suppressed the Society, forcing the closing of the church and its house for the religious. In 1767
the royal priory of the Couture was transferred to the property and the church was named Saint-
Louis-de-la-Courture-Sainte-Catherine. The French Revolution forced the closing of the priory.
In 1802 following the demolition of the nearby parish church of Saint-Paul, the one-time Jesuit
church reopened as the parish church of Saint-Paul-Saint-Louis.
2 For the church, see Louis Blond, La maison professe des Jésuites de la rue Saint-Antoine à
Paris, 1580-1762 (Paris: Éditions Franciscaines, 1956); Constans, Saint-Paul-Saint-Louis; E. de
Ménorval, Les Jésuites de la rue Saint-Antoine. L'église Saint-Paul-Saint-Louis et le lycée
Charlemagne (Paris: Aubry, 1872); Pierre Moisy, Les églises des Jésuites de l'ancienne
assistance de France (Rome: Institutum Historicum Societatis Iesu, 1958), 248-51; Bernard de
Montgolfier, ed., Saint-Paul-Saint-Louis: les Jésuites à Paris (Paris: Musée Carnavalet, 1985).
Important surveys of seventeenth-century ecclesiastical architecture that discuss the church are
Biver, Abbayes, 436-56; Boinet, Eglises parisiennes, 94-135; Dumolin and Outardel, Eglises de
France, 136-40.
3 The practice of having a Jesuit as the royal confessor was instituted by King Henri IV in 1603
as part of the terms allowing the religious group to return to Paris after a period of banishment.
For Louis XIII’s affection towards the Jesuits, see Robert Bireley, The Jesuits and the Thirty
Years War: Kings, Courts, and Confessors (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003), 15;
Blond, Maison professe, 57. The only other interpretation is given in Le Pas de Sécheval,
"Politique artistique de Louis XIII," 431-68, who uses the church as an example of Louis XIII’s
participation in the arts of the Catholic renewal.
4 For studies that mention the medals, see Babelon, "Architecture," 37; Mark Jones, A Catalogue
of the French Medals in the British Museum. Volume Two, 1600-1672 (London: British Museum
Publications, 1988), 296; Fernand Mazerolle, Les Médailleurs français du XVe siècle au milieu
du XVIIe, 3 vols. (Paris: Imprimerie nationale, 1902-1904), nos. 699 and 819.
5 Blond, Maison professe, 77.
6 For the history of the Parisian maison professe, see ibid; Ménorval, Les Jésuites, 23-136. Pierre
Delattre, ed., Les établissements des Jésuites en France depuis quatre siècles: répertoire topobibliographique
publié à l'occasion du quatrième centenaire de la fondation de la Compagnie de
Jésus (1540-1940), 5 vols. (Enghien, Belguim: Institut Supérieur de Théologie, 1955), 3:1259-
1307.
The Society of Jesus, officially recognized as a new religious order in 1540 by Pope Paul III,
only received limited legal recognition in France in 1562. The following year the Society
established its first Paris foundation, the Collège de Clermont. In 1764 the order was banned
from France. For the standard work on the Society of Jesus in France, see Henri Fouqueray,
110

Histoire de la Compagnie de Jésus en France: des origines à la suppression (1528-1762), 5
vols. (Paris: Picard, 1910-1925).
7 The church and its placement parallel to the street is recorded on the Plan de Vassalieu (1609),
a copy of which is at the Bibliothèque nationale de France.
8 Claude Malingre, Les antiquitez de la ville de Paris Contenans la recherche nouvelle des
fondations & establissemens des eglises. La chronologie des premiers presidens, aduocats &
procureurs generaux du Parlement. preuosts des marchands & escheuins de ladite ville. (Paris:
P. Rocolet, 1640), 662.
9 Dumolin and Outardel, Églises de France, 136.
10 Archives Nationales S 1014 contains contracts for the Society’s purchase of houses.
11 Blond, Maison professe, 92-93. The control of the abbey was turned over to the Jesuits in
1638.
12 Folio 256 r. from register 797 of the Archives des Affaires étrangères records an unspecified
amount of royal funds being given for work at Saint-Louis-des-Jésuites from 1627 to 1629; folio
reprinted in Edouard-Jacques Ciprut, "Notes sur quelques travaux au Louvre en 1627-1629,"
Bulletin de la Société de l'Histoire de l'Art Français (1954): 182-83.
13 Montgolfier, ed., Saint-Paul-Saint-Louis, 20. For a monograph on Martellange, see E.-L.-G.
Charvet, Étienne Martellange, 1569-1641 (Lyon: Glairon-Mondet, 1874).
14
Apart from a few minor changes in access to the sacristy, the plan of the church remains the
same today.
15 Martellange was most likely replaced due to the professed fathers’ vocal dislike of the original
façade. For the debate over the façade, see Pierre Moisy, "Martellange, Derand et le conflit
baroque," Bulletin monumental 110 (1952): 237-61.
16
Blond, Maison professe, 61. Saint-Louis-des-Jésuites is 61 x 28 meters while the Gesù is 70 x
36 meters.
17 For eighteenth-century authors who claimed that Martellange used the Gesù as his model, see
Brice, Description 2:186; Jean Aimar Piganiol de la Force, Description historique de la ville de
Paris et de ses environs, 10 vols. (Paris: Libraires associés, 1765), 5:4. For a twentieth-century
author who states the plan reproduces that of the Gesù, see Boinet, Églises parisiennes, 105.
18 Louis Hautecoeur notes that this type of plan owed its popularity to the manner in which it
allowed for the liturgical needs of the Catholic Reformation rather than the renown of the Gesù.
Specifically, it allowed for clear, unobstructed views of the high altar, provided ample room for
people to hear preaching, and made available numerous altars at which to say mass. For a
111

discussion of the plan and its popularity in France, see Hautecoeur, Architecture classique, 1, pt.
3:405-18.
19 Le Pas de Sécheval, "Politique artistique," 441.
20 Scholars now recognize a lack of stylistic unity among Jesuit churches, a topic long debated by
architectural historians. For a recent state of the literature concerning Jesuit architecture, see
Bailey, "Le style jésuite,” 38-46.
21 For descriptions of the ceremony, see Blond, Maison professe, 58; Fouqueray, Histoire, 4:247-
48.
22 The custom of blessing the site of a new church dated at least to the sixth century, with the
first clear mention of a ceremonial first stone in the Roman Pontifical only occurring in the
thirteenth century. The local bishop usually officiated at the rite. A more elaborate ceremony,
which is essentially the same today, appeared in 1572. For a further description of the ceremony,
see C. H. Meinberg, "Cornerstone," in New Catholic Encyclopedia, ed. Catholic University of
America (New York: McGraw Hill, 1967), 4: 335-36.
23 The specifics of Louis XIII setting the foundation stone were recorded in a letter from Père
Tacon to the superior general of the Society dated 10 March 1627, Archivum Romanum
Societatis Iesu, Francia, fundat. colleg. Volume 1, n. 9; as quoted in Fouqueray, Histoire, 4:247-
48.
24 For the description of the foundation stone, see Piganiol de la Force, Description historique,
5:2-3.
25 “D. O. M. S. LUDOVICO QUI TOTUM ORBEM IN TEMPLUM DEI ARMIS ANIMISQ.
DESTINAVIT LUDOVICUS XIII HOC TEMPLUM EREXIT UT QUEM GALLIA COLUIT
UT REGEM AMAVIT UT PATREM HIC VENERETUR UT COELITEM ANN MDCXXVII.”
D. O. M., abbreviated on the print, stands for “Deo Optimo Maximo.” For help with translating
all the Latin phrases in this chapter, I would like to thank Dr. Richard Emmerson and Rick
Bessey.
26
The description of the king’s attire, including being dressed in armor, is found in Mazerolle,
Médailleurs français, 2: no. 800.
27 “D. O. M. S. LUDOVICO LUDOVICUS XIII EXSTRUXIT AN MDCXXVII UT QUEM
AUCTOREM HABET GENERIS NOMINIS AC REGNI EUNDEM HABEAT AETERNAE
SALUTIS ADIUTOREM.”
28 John L. Varriano, "The Architecture of Papal Medals," in Projects and Monuments in the
Period of the Roman Baroque, ed. Hellmut Hager and Susan Scott Munshower (University Park,
PA: Pennsylvania State University, 1984), 69-70.
112

29 For the medal, see Thomas M. Lucas and Evonne Levy, eds., Saint, Site, and Sacred Strategy:
Ignatius, Rome, and Jesuit Urbanism (Vatican City: Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, 1990), 151.
Another example of a foundation medal for a Jesuit church was Cardinal Ludovico Ludovisi’s
commission in 1626 for S. Ignazio in Rome, see Cesare Johnson, "Le medaglie della prima pietra
della chiesa di S. Ignazio a Roma," Medaglia Torino 8, no. 15 (1978): 11-19.
30 Jones, French Medals, 9-11.
31 Adrien Blanchet and Aldophe Dieudonné, Manuel de numismatique française, 5 vols. (Paris:
Picard, 1988), 3:116.
32 For the medal, see Babelon, "Architecture," 36; Blanchet and Dieudonné, Manuel, 117;
Mazerolle, Médailleurs français, 2: no. 800. For accounts of additional foundation medals
associated with Louis XIII, see Babelon, "Architecture," 36-39; Blanchet and Dieudonné,
Manuel, 117-21.
33 Up to this point, the closest similarity is offered by medals commissioned to commemorate the
construction of bridges. For the medals, see Jones, French Medals, nos. 119-22.
34 For the Reformed Penitents, see Jean-Pierre Willesme, ed., Les Ordres mendiants à Paris
(Paris: Editions Paris-Musées, 1992), 207. For Saint-Gervais-Saint-Protais, see Dumolin and
Outardel, Églises de France, 96.
35 Fouqueray, Histoire, 3:469.
36 Le Pas de Sécheval, "Politique artistique," 408.
37 “VICIT UT DAVID AEDIFICAT UT SALOMON.”
38 For the principle themes used to connect medieval and early modern rulers to the Old
Testament kings, see Friedrich Polleross, "Between Typology and Psychology: The Role of the
Identification Portrait in Updating Old Testament Representations," Artibus et Historiae 12, no.
24 (1991): 89-94.
39 Ibid., 89.
40 Ibid., 90.
41 Ibid., 91.
42 For a discussion of Vasari’s interpretation of Grand Duke Cosimo I as the new Solomon, see
ibid., 94; Zygmunt Wazbinski, L'Accademia Medicea del disegno a Firenze nel cinquecento:
idea e istituzione (Florence: Leo S. Olschki, 1987), 151-52.
113

43 For Philip II as Solomon and the Escorial as the temple of Jerusalem, see Juan Rafael de la
Cuadra Blanco, "King Philip of Spain as Solomon the Second: the Origins of Solomonism of the
Escorial in the Netherlands," in The Seventh Window: the King's Window Donated by Philip II
and Mary Tudor to Sint Janskerk in Gouda (1557), ed. Wim de Groot (Hilversum: Verloren,
2005), 169-80.
44 Other non-French rulers compared to King David include King Henry VIII and Emperor
Ferdinand II. For the association of French kings with David since the Carolingian period, see
Ernst Kantorowicz, Laudes Regiae: A Study in Liturgical Acclamations and Mediaeval Ruler
Worship (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1946), 56-58; Robert W. Scheller, "Ensigns
of Authority: French Royal Symbolism in the Age of Louis XII," Simiolus 13, no. 2 (1983): 119;
Robert W. Scheller, "Imperial Themes in Art and Literature of the Early French Renaissance:
The Period of Charles VIII," Semiolus 12, no. 1 (1981-1982): 58.
45 Kantorowicz, Laudes Regiae, 57.
46 Scheller, "Imperial Themes," 58. Baronnat published his treatise in 1491.
47 Nicolas Caussin, The holy court. Or the Christian institution of men of quality With examples
of those, who in court have flourished in sanctity, trans. Thomas Hawkins (Paris: English
College Press, 1626), 1, 100. This is the first of five volumes written by Caussin for Louis XIII.
48 For Louis IX’s similarities to Solomon, see Jacques Le Goff, Saint Louis (Paris: Gallimard,
1996), 392-96, 592-94; Daniel H. Weiss, "The Three Solomon Portraits in the Arsenal Old
Testament and the Construction of Meaning in Crusader Painting," Arte medievale 6, no. 2
(1992): 27. For Louis IX’s reputation for justice, see Margaret Wade Labarge, Saint Louis:
Louis IX, Most Christian King of France (Boston: Little, Brown, 1968), 169-78; Le Goff, Saint
Louis, 644-47.
49 For buildings associated with Louis IX, see Branner, Saint Louis.
50 Weiss, "Three Solomon," 27-30.
51 Ibid., 30. The section of glass is found in two window cycles at the west end of the south wall
in the upper chapel. Weiss makes his argument based on the two rose windows above the
lancets, one of which depicts a kneeling St. Louis while the other shows a kneeling Solomon.
52 Le Salomon de la France, ou Le rappart de nostre Roy à Salomon, en sa sagesse par la
Justice, et la Clemence, (Paris: Pierre Chevalier, 1617).
53 Ibid., 32.
54 For a discussion of the biographies, see Beaune, Ideology, 91-99.
114

55 During the late Middle Ages, the cult of St. Louis was used by a number of parties, each of
which used it for their own purposes, limiting the influence of the saint. For the weakened state
of the cult of St. Louis during the late Middle Ages and the influence of the saint as a model ruler
in the seventeenth century, see ibid., 17-18, 90-125. For seventeenth-century French attitudes
towards St. Louis, see Alain Boureau, "Les enseignement absolutistes de Saint Louis 1610-
1630," in La monarchie absolutiste et l'histoire en France: Théories du pouvoir, propagandes
monarchiques et mythologies nationales: colloque tenu en Sorbonne les 26 - 27 mai 1986 (Paris:
Université de Paris-Sorbonne, 1987), 79-97; Nathan Edelman, Attitudes of Seventeenth-Century
France toward the Middle Ages (New York: King's Crown Press, 1946), 86-93, 236-45; Manfred
Tietz, "Saint Louis roi chrétien: Un mythe de la mission intérieure du XVIIe siècle," in La
conversion au XVIIe siècle: Actes du XIIe Colloque de Marseille, janvier 1982 (Marseille:
Centre Méridional de Rencontres sur le XVIIe siècle, 1983), 56-69.
56 Boureau, "Les enseignements," 81.
57 For the king’s attitude towards St. Louis, see Batiffol, Louis, 259.
58 A double feast, or duplex feast, is the name given to more important festivals. Although the
feast of St. Louis had been celebrated at individual institutions, such as at Saint-Denis, since the
king’s canonization in 1297, Pope Paul V was the first to order that it be celebrated throughout
the kingdom; see Paul Perdrizet, Le Calendrier parisien à la fin dun moyen âge: d'après le
bréviaire et les livres d'heures (Paris: Les belles lettres, 1933), 210. A copy of the bull was
published in the Mercure françois 5 (1618): 271-73.
59 For a description of the Parisian celebration of the feast, see Mercure françois 5 (1618): 276.
60 For a discussion of the numerous texts, see Boureau, "Les enseignements," 79-97.
61 Ibid., 82.
62 Ibid.
63 Ibid., 83.
64 Adam Théveneau, Les Précepts du Roy Sainct Louys à Philippes III son fils pour bien vivre et
régner: Tirez des Histoires de France et des Registres de la Chambres des Comptes avec le
discours sur chacun d'iceux de Me A. Théveneau Advocat en Parlement ou sont reportez et
interpretez plusieurs ordonnances touchant la police tant spirituelle que temporelle (Paris: J.
Petitpas, 1627), 3.; as quoted in Boureau, "Les enseignements," 91.
65
For the development of the absolute monarchy, see Knecht, Richelieu, 135-47; Moote, Louis
XIII, 155-74.
66 “PRO SCEPTRIS ARAS DAT TELLUS ET DEUS ASTRA.”
115

67 The Jesuit foundations building churches were the Collège de Clermont (begun 1628) and the
Noviciate (begun 1630). Three Franciscan churches were started during this period, including
the Capucins-du-Marais (begun 1624), the Récollets House in the Faubourg Saint Martin (begun
1630), and Sainte-Elisabeth (begun 1628). The Ursulines began building a church at their
monastery in 1627, while the reformed Augustinians started Notre-Dame-des-Victoires in 1629
(this church will receive support from Louis XIII). The Filles du Calvaire, a reformed order of
Benedictines, started construction in 1629. The French Oratorians began construction on a
church in 1621.
68 For the division of religious ranks within the order, see John O'Malley, The First Jesuits
(Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1993), 345-56. For the name of the professed
fathers in France, see Montgolfier, ed., Saint-Paul-Saint-Louis, 13-16.
69 John O'Malley, "The Fourth Vow in Its Ignatian Context: A Historical Study," Studies in the
Spirituality of Jesuits 15, no. 1 (1983): 1-45.
70 The belief that Jesuits supported papal control over bishops stemmed from the Society’s help
in defeating a proposal at the final session of the Council of Trent that would have declared the
institution of bishops as iure divino. For a discussion of these events, see J. H. M. Salmon,
"Catholic Resistance Theory, Ultramontanism, and the Royalist Response, 1580-1620," in The
Cambridge History of Political Thought, 1450-1700, ed. J. H. Burns (Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press, 1991), 231.
71 For French attitudes towards the Society during this period, see Nelson, Jesuits, 21-24.
72 For works attributing the initiative of the League to the Jesuits, see ibid., 24-36.
73 Ibid., 31.
74 Guenter Lewy, Constitutionalism and Statecraft During the Golden Age of Spain: A Study of
the Political Philosophy of Juan de Mariana (Geneva: Droz, 1960), 134.
75 Juan de Mariana, De rege et regis institutione libri III (Toledo: Pedro Rodríguez, 1599).
76 For analyses of Mariana’s work see Harald E. Braun, Juan de Mariana and Early Modern
Spanish Political Thought (Aldershot, England: Ashgate, 2007); Lewy, Constitutionalism.
Braun argues that Mariana’s work was negatively received outside of Spain because it focused
too heavily on the author’s stance on regicide, which was only discussed in chapter six of book
one of De rege. Lewy argues that Mariana’s work contained an elaborate defense of tyrannicide.
77 Lewy, Constitutionalism, 69, n. 69.
78 Ibid., 142.
116

79 For the Parlement of Paris’s attitude towards the Society and its desire to remove it from
France, see Nelson, Jesuits, 46-49. The regional parlements at Rennes, Rouen, and Dijon also
banished the Society for promoting regicide, but those in Bordeaux, Aix, and Toulouse allowed
the religious group to stay; see Eric Nelson, "Interpreting the Edict of Rouen: Royal Patronage
and the Expansion of the Jesuit Mission in France," Archivum Historicum Societatis Iesu 72, no.
144 (2003): 406.
80 Lewy, Constitutionalism, 143. The decree was sent on 6 July 1610.
81 The specific publications are: Robert Bellarmine, Tractatus de potestate summi pontificis in
rebus temporalibus adversus Gulielmum Barclaium (Cologne: Agrippa, 1610); Jacob Keller,
Tyrannicidium sev scitum catholicorum de tyranni internecione adversus Calviani ministri
calumnias (Munich: N. Henricum, 1611); Martin Becan, Controversia Anglicana de potestate
Regis et pontificis, contra Lancelottum Andream (Mainz: Mogunt, 1612); Francisco Suarez,
Defensio fidei catholicae et apostolicae adversus Anglicanae sectae errors, cum responsione ad
apologiam pro juramento fidelitatis (Coimbra: Coloniae Agripinae, 1613).
For a discussion of these works in relation to the temporal power of the pope over sovereign
monarchs, see Bireley, Jesuits, 13-15; Harro Höpfl, Jesuit Political Thought: The Society of
Jesus and the State, c. 1540-1630 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004), 315-38;
Lewy, Constitutionalism, 144-46.
82 For the Parlement’s and university’s reactions to the texts, see Bireley, Jesuits, 14. For Pope
Paul V’s approval of Suarez’s publication, see Ludwig von Pastor, The History of the Popes:
From the Close of the Middle Ages, trans. Ernest Graf, 38 vols. (London: Routledge and Kegan
Paul, 1952), 26: 27-28.
83 Lewy, Constitutionalism, 147. The decree was sent on 1 August 1614.
84 Antonio Santarelli, Tractatus de haeresi, schismate, apostasia, sollicitatione in sacramento
Poenitentiae, et de potestate Romani Pontificis in his delictis puniendis (Rome: B. Zannetti,
1625). For the most thorough accounts of the events surrounding the reception of this work in
Paris, which is known as the Santarelli affair, see Fouqueray, Histoire, 4:140-90; Victor Martin,
Le Gallicanisme politique et le clergé de France (Paris: Editions Auguste Picard, 1929), 163-
244.
85 Responses aux considérations sur le livre de Sanctarel jésuite, (France [?]: 1626). A copy of
the pamphlet is in the Bibliothèque nationale de France.
86 The Parlement of Paris condemned the book on 13 March 1626; the Jesuits signed the
condemnation of the book on 16 March. For these events, see Fouqueray, Histoire, 4:146-59.
87 The faculty of theology censured the work on 4 April 1626, see ibid., 4:172-75. For the
faculty’s statement about the book, see Pastor, History, 28:395.
117

88 Laurence Brockliss, "Richelieu, Education, and the State," in Richelieu and his Age, ed. Joseph
Bergin and Laurence Brockliss (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1992), 259-60.
89
Christian Jouhaud and Suzanne Toczyski, "Richelieu, or 'Baroque' Power in Action," Yale
French Studies, no. 80 (1991): 199.
90 For the pope’s views on the Santarelli affair, see Pastor, History, 28:394-97.
91 Brockliss, "Richelieu," 255.
92 The day after the Jesuits signed the condemnation, the Parlement, unsatisfied with the results,
attempted to bring a case of high treason against the Society; see Fouqueray, Histoire, 4:159. In
October 1626 the faculty demanded that their censure be read publicly every year as a reminder
of the Jesuit connection to works advocating the absolute power of the pope; see Brockliss,
"Richelieu," 260.
93 For Louis XIII’s concern for his authority, see Martin, Le Gallicanisme, 229.
94 On 3 May and 18 July Louis XIII issued similar decrees, which had little effect on the debate.
95 The faculty revoked the censure on 2 January 1627; see Martin, Le Gallicanisme, 229-31.
96
Richelieu stated that the court was content with the Jesuits’ decision to sign the condemnation;
see Fouqueray, Histoire, 4:159.
97 Nelson, Jesuits, 6.
98 For Henri IV’s relationship with the Paris Parlement, see ibid., 39-41, 82-95.
99 The stipulations in the edict required each member to take a loyalty oath before a royal officer,
respect the established rights and privileges of French bishops in the spiritual and temporal
realms, and deny his right to preach, administer the sacraments, or hear confession of non-Jesuits
without special permission. Additional regulations included a requirement that all Jesuits
working in France be French citizens and that a member of the Society had to reside at the court.
For further examination of the edict, see Nelson, "Interpreting the Edict," 405-26.
100 Sharon Kettering proposes the idea of a patron-client exchange and the resulting obligation of
reciprocation. For more on this topic, see Kettering, "Gift-Giving," 131-51.
101 Most of the original artwork was removed in 1792, at which time it was taken to a warehouse
where it was stored with other works seized during the French Revolution. For the works of art
removed from the church, see Boinet, Églises parisiennes, 130-33.
102 The high altar was dismantled when the Jesuits left the church in 1762. For the high altar, see
Fréderic Cousinié, Le Saint des Saints: Maîtres-autels et retables parisiens du XVIIe siècle
118

(Aix-en-Provence: Université de Provence, 2006), 214-20; Frédéric Cousinié, "La constitution
d'un système dévotionnel: Le maître-autel de l'église de la maison professe des Jésuites de Paris
au XVIIe siècle," in Memory and Oblivion: Proceedings of the XXIXth International Congress
of the History of Art held in Amsterdam, 1-7 September 1996, ed. Wessel Reinink and Jeroen
Stumpel (Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1999), 609-17; Jacques Thuillier, Barbara
Brejon de Lavergnée, and Denis Lavalle, Vouet: Galeries nationales du Grand Palais, Paris, 6
novembre 1990 - 11 février 1991 (Paris: Réunion des musées nationaux, 1990), 310-13; Jacques
Vanuxem, "Les Jésuites et la peinture au XVIIe siècle à Paris," La revue des arts 8 (1958): 85-
91.
103 The transept chapel on the left was originally dedicated to St. Ignatius and the one on the right
to St. Francis Xavier. The dedications changed following the Jesuits’ departure from the church.
Today the left transept is the chapel of the Sacred Heart while the right is dedicated to the Virgin.
104 Jean Vanuxem has shown that the paintings in this section of the high altar changed according
to the liturgical calendar. The other two paintings were The Resurrection of Christ, c. 1640, by
Claudes Vignon (Church of the Minims de Toulouse) and The Souls of Purgatory, c. 1640, by
Philippe de Champaigne (Musée des Augustins de Toulouse). For more on the practice, see
Vanuxem, "Les Jésuites," 85-91.
105 For the Society’s devotion to the saints, see Smith, Sensuous Worship, 158.
106 Emile Mâle argues that the Jesuits, who frequently decorated their churches in France with
images of St. Louis, were the driving force behind devotion to the cult in the seventeenth
century, see Emile Mâle, L'art religieux après le Concile de Trente (Paris: Armand Colin, 1932),
432-34.
For The Apotheosis of Saint Louis, which was commissioned by Richelieu, see Thuillier, Brejon
de Lavergnée, and Lavalle, Vouet, 310-15.
107 In the seventeenth century Charlemagne was seen as one of the great French kings; see
Edelman, Seventeenth-Century France, 86-87.
The idea for this part of the altarpiece most likely derived from an example in the Jesuit chapel at
the college of La Flèche. Executed by the architect Pierre Corbineau from 1633 to 1636, the
altarpiece also had statues of St. Louis and Charlemagne framing those of St. Ignatius and St.
Francis Xavier. For a comparison between the two altars, see Cousinié, Le Saint, 215. The
origin for both altarpieces may have been the new retable in the palace chapel of Fontainebleau,
which Louis XIII had dedicated in 1633 and which had statues of St. Louis and Charlemagne.
For this altarpiece, see Edmunds, Piety and Politics, 208.
108 Cousinié, "La constitution," 609-17.
109
For this function of the altar, see ibid., 609-14. For a discussion of the Society’s use of art,
see Smith, Sensuous Worship, 52-53.
119

110 For the meaning of the central painting, see Thuillier, Brejon de Lavergnée, and Lavalle,
Vouet, 312.
111 Cousinié, "La constitution," 610.
112 Bernard Violle, Paris, 2:255.
113 For the paintings by Paul-Joseph Blanc, see Boinet, Églises parisiennes, 107.
114 It was common in early seventeenth-century Parisian churches to have windows with
transparent panes surrounded by stained glass borders. For more on stained glass windows
during this period, see Lafond, "De 1560 à 1789," 257-71. For the windows at Saint-Louis-des-
Jésuites, see Boinet, Églises parisiennes, 130.
115 Jacques de Lestin, who worked in Vouet’s studio, painted The Death of St. Louis, the only
work for which there is a signature; see William R. Crelly, The Painting of Simon Vouet (New
Haven: Yale University Press, 1962), 194. Saint Louis Receiving the Crown of Thorns from
Christ is attributed to Michel Corneille, who also worked in Vouet’s studio; see Thuillier, Brejon
de Lavergnée, and Lavalle, Vouet, 48.
116 All of the paintings except for Louis XIII Presenting the Model of the Church were removed
from the church during the Revolution. In 1949 St. Louis Receiving the Crown of Thorns and
The Death of St. Louis were returned. The three paintings hang in their original location with
Christ in the Garden of Olive Trees (1826) by Eugène Delacroix occupying the fourth spot. St.
Louis Leaving for the Crusade is still missing.
117 For previous research, see Crelly, Simon Vouet, 194; Montgolfier, ed., Saint-Paul-Saint-
Louis, 41-45; Thuillier, Brejon de Lavergnée, and Lavalle, Vouet, 48-49.
118 Chronicle of France, Bodleian Library, ms. Douce 217, fol. 265: Scenes from the life of St.
Louis. Other examples include Jean Pucelle’s Book of Hours of Jeanne d’Evreux, in The
Cloisters, ms. 54.1.2, and Jean Pucelle’s Romance of the Rose, in the Bodleian Library, ms.
Douce 332 (late fourteenth/early fifteenth century).
119 For Michel Corneille, the artist attributed to this work, see Yves Picart, "Michel Corneille, un
des premiers collaborateurs de Simon Vouet. Aperçus sur sa vie et sa carrière," in Simon Vouet:
Actes du colloque international, Galeries nationales du Grand Palais, 5-6-7 février 1991, ed.
Stéphane Loire (Paris: Documentation Française, 1992), 455-71. This painting bears the arms of
the Marquis de Cinq-Mars, grand écuyer de France, and Marie de Fourcy, suggesting that these
people paid for the work.
120 For Jacques de Lestin, the artist of this work, see Albert Châtelet and Jacques Thuillier,
French Painting, from Fouquet to Poussin (Geneva: Skira, 1963), 202-05; Jean-Pierre Sainte-
Marie, ed., Jacques de Létin, Troyes 1597-1661: Musée des Beaux-Arts de Troyes (Troyes: Le
Musée, 1976). This painting carries the arms of Louis Brûlart, seigneur du Broussin and
120

Rancher, master of the Eaux-et-Forêts, and the arms of Madelieine Colbert de Villacerf, Brûlart’s
wife, suggesting that this couple paid for the painting.
121 For the function of donor-model paintings, see Elizabeth Lipsmeyer, "The Donor and His
Church Model in Medieval Art from Early Christian Times to the Late Romanesque Period"
(Ph.D. Dissertation, Rutgers University, 1981), 30-110, 12.
122 This type of image derives from the Eastern Imperial tradition; see ibid., 52-54.
123 For a discussion of this type of image, see ibid., 52-78.
124 For Richelieu’s contributions to the façade, see Blond, Maison professe, 63.
125 The only works to analyze Richelieu’s role in the façade are Le Pas de Sécheval, "Politique
artistique," 436-39; Moisy, Les églises, 68-69. Le Pas de Sécheval argues that Richelieu’s goal
was to contribute to the king’s support, making the church part of a larger policy to turn France
into the premier center for the arts. Moisy claims that Richelieu’s support was inspired by
aesthetics, arguing that the Cardinal’s financial gifts were the catalyst behind the switch to
Derand’s façade.
126 Germain Brice and Piganiol de la Force both privilege the gifts of Richelieu; see Brice,
Description, 2:173-74; Piganiol de la Force, Description historique, 5:4.
127
The present day structure is from the seventeenth century, but nearly all of the decoration is
post-French Revolution.
128 “SANCTO LUDOVICO REGI, LUDOVICUS XIII, REX BASILICUM: ARMANDUS
CARDINALIS, DUX DE RICHELIEU, BASILICAE FRONTEM POSUIT MDCXXXIV”
129
The clock was first installed in 1627 at the parish church of Saint-Paul. It was moved to its
present location in 1806.
130 Today the niches hold statues of St. Catherine on the left and St. Anne on the right.
131
The current sculpture and reliefs in this section are nineteenth-century reproductions of the
originals.
132
The châteaux are Richelieu and Rueil. For an overview of Richelieu’s interest in architecture,
see Ballon, "Cardinal Richelieu," 246-59.
133 Ibid., 258.
134 For these events, see Knecht, Richelieu, 34-41.
121

135 For a discussion of Richelieu’s beliefs prior to becoming principal minister, see Fumaroli,
"Richelieu," 24.
136 For Richelieu’s religious views, see Jean de Viguerie, "Richelieu théologien," in Richelieu et
la Culture: Actes du Colloque international en Sorbonne, ed. Roland Mousnier (Paris: Centre
National de la Recherche Scientifique, 1987), 37-39.
137 Fumaroli, "Richelieu," 124-25.
138
The letters patent were registered by the Parlement of Paris on 12 March 1642, see Blond,
Maison professe, 67.
122

CHAPTER 5
MARIA DE’ MEDICI AND PARISIAN CHURCHES:
THE USE AND DISUSE OF ROYAL SIGNS
From 1611 to 1628 Maria de’ Medici supported the construction of seven churches for
recently established religious orders in Paris, the Minims of the Place Royale (begun 1611), the
Discalced Carmelites (begun 1613), the Récollets (begun 1614), the Jacobins on the rue Saint-
Honoré (begun 1614), the French Oratorians (begun 1616), the Filles du Calvaire (begun 1625),
and the Religious of St. Elizabeth (begun 1628) (fig. 2). 1 The queen’s contribution to each
building varied considerably, ranging from helping the religious acquire land to placing the first
stone of the church to providing funds for construction. Although the only extant churches are
the Discalced Carmelites’ Saint-Joseph-des-Carmes and the Religious of St. Elizabeth’s Notre-
Dame-de-Pitié (today Sainte-Elisabeth), an examination of contemporary descriptions and
engravings presents an intriguing pattern of support by Maria de’ Medici. The five buildings
begun prior to 1617, while Maria de’ Medici was regent and before her first banishment from
court, lack any visual reference to the royal aid they received. Indeed only the churches for the
Filles du Calvaire and the Religious of St. Elizabeth, both begun after the queen mother’s return
from exile and her admittance into the royal council, included prominent imagery explicitly
linking the buildings to their royal patron.
To account for the striking differences between those churches begun from 1611 to 1617
and those from the 1620s, I propose that one must look to the queen mother’s distinct objectives
first during her reign as regent and then in her role as counselor to the king. During the regency
Maria de’ Medici had two primary concerns: the promotion of the Catholic faith and the
legitimization of her right to rule for her minor son, a position threatened by her foreign status
and her gender. By contributing to the construction of churches for religious orders, the queen
helped to legitimize her rule by participating in an established tradition of French monarchs and
at the same time promoting the ideals of the Catholic Reformation. The absence of visual signs
tying the churches to Maria de’ Medici limited possible fear of control by a foreign queen while
suggesting that the initiative for reform came solely from the religious groups. In contrast, upon
admittance to the royal council in 1622 the queen’s greatest desire was to regain the authority she
123

had exercised by the end of the regency. The search for power prompted Maria to turn once
again to churches but this time to use prominent visual signs that advertised her support for the
building. By using personal symbols and royal imagery to evoke her devotion to Louis XIII and
to promote her elevated status as the mother of the king, Maria de’ Medici sought to secure
greater authority within the realm.
Maria de’ Medici has been the focus of a wealth of art historical scholarship, including
several studies that recognize her support of religious institutions in Paris. Among these is
Géraldine Johnson’s work, which as part of a larger study of the queen’s patronage of the arts
portrays Maria de’ Medici’s aid to churches as a function of her promotion of Catholicism in
France. 2 Additionally Anne Bertrand’s dissertation on Philippe de Champaigne and his patrons
considers the artist’s work for Maria de’ Medici, focusing on the Carmelite Convent in the
Faubourg Saint-Jacques. 3 As part of the discussion of the Carmelites, which seeks to
demonstrate that the royal patronage was linked to seventeenth-century political and religious
strategies, Bertrand acknowledges Maria de’ Medici’s support of churches by briefly discussing
several of the other religious institutions favored by the queen. 4 Along with other recent
studies, these works have shaped my understanding of the queen as a patron of the arts,
emphasizing Maria de’ Medici’s need to legitimize her position during the regency and her
desire to regain her authority following her fall in 1617. 5
Even with scholars acknowledging the queen’s support of churches, the bulk of research
continues to focus on commissions related to paintings, leaving open the need for an
investigation into the subject presented here. 6 To overcome the gap in the literature, this chapter
seeks to examine Maria de’ Medici’s role as a patron of Parisian ecclesiastical architecture. One
of my primary goals is to establish the manner in which the queen contributed to the construction
of each building. By drawing from contemporary descriptions and archival accounts, I will
demonstrate that Maria de’ Medici provided aid to each religious organization, ultimately
leading to the construction of a church. This process also allows me to reconstruct the state of
each building during the early seventeenth century, a critical aspect of this study since only two
of the churches remain extant and both of these have been altered. By determining the original
architecture and decoration, I will then be able to prove that those churches begun from 1610 to
1617 were devoid of royal imagery while the two from the 1620s were explicitly tied to Maria
de’ Medici through the use of visual cues. The final aspect of this chapter is a consideration of
124

the reasons for the queen’s shift in approach to adorning the churches, which I seek to resolve by
examining the primary goals of the regency and those during the years in which she served on
the king’s council.
The Regent Queen’s Support of Churches, from 1610 to 1617
From 1610 to 1617, the period during which Maria de’ Medici reigned as regent for her
son Louis XIII, the queen supported the construction of five churches for Parisian religious
communities. This period also marked the beginning of her patronage of the Carmelite Convent
of the faubourg Saint-Jacques, for which the queen would eventually commission a series of
paintings by Philippe de Champaigne for the existing church. 7 French churches receiving royal
support traditionally bore imagery in the form of royal arms, monograms, crowns, fleurs-de-lis,
or other appropriate symbols, providing testimony of their illustrious patrons. Prior to the
regency, this practice had occurred most recently at the church of the Hôpital St. Louis, begun in
1607 at the behest of Henri IV and which included on its façade the royal arms, statues of the
king and queen, and an inscribed marble tablet honoring the reigning monarch (fig. 57). 8 Yet for
those churches supported by Maria de’ Medici in the years immediately following the death of
the king, visual and textual sources provide no indication that these buildings had any similar
decoration. I propose that the dramatic shift away from royal tradition arose from the queen’s
need to assert her right to rule as regent and her desire to promote the Catholic faith, factors that
led her to prohibit the use of state imagery on the churches.
Except for the chapel of the French Oratorians, discussed in chapter three, this section
will examine the churches supported by Maria de’ Medici during the regency. For each church I
will present its building history, focus on its state during the early seventeenth century, and
establish the manner in which the queen provided aid. I will also consider the motives for the
royal assistance. By examining the challenges of the regency and the objectives pursued by
Maria de’ Medici during this period, I will address the reasons behind the range of churches the
queen supported and why they lacked visual references to royal patronage.
The Minims of the Place Royale
The Order of the Minims, founded in Calabria in 1453 by St. Francis of Paula, was first
established in France in 1482. The fathers arrived in the kingdom at the request of the ailing
125

King Louis XI (1461-1483) and immediately developed a close relationship with the crown. 9
The ties were maintained during subsequent reigns: Anne de Bretagne, wife of King Charles
VIII (1483-1498), founded a monastery at Nigeon, and Henri III (1574-1589) followed with one
at Vincennes. In 1609 shortly after the order’s establishment in the French capital Henri IV
continued the royal connection, granting by letters patent the right of the order to found its
Parisian house on a piece of land near the Place Royale and making a gift of twenty-four
thousand livres to help with construction. 10 Though the Minims was not one of the newlyestablished
reformed orders of the sixteenth century, it actively participated in the Catholic
Reformation and contributed to the revitalization of the Church. 11
In September 1611 Jean de La Cross, Bishop of Grenoble, placed the first stone of the
church of the Minims of the Place Royale, marking the start of construction. 12 Although the
church would only be finished in 1677, substantial parts of the building were completed between
1611 and 1628, as shown on a reconstructed plan (fig. 58). During this time the Minims saw the
erection of a church with a single nave of four bays flanked by side chapels surmounted by
tribunes. The altar was placed in a rectangular choir, which was flanked by side chapels that
would later form the transept. The design fused contemporary Italian models with traditional
Gothic elements, combining Doric pilasters and a prominent entablature with ribbed vaults on
the interior and with flying buttresses articulating the exterior (fig. 59). Beginning in 1630
additional sections were added to the existing structure, including three apsidal chapels and a
projecting octagonal chapel on the left side of the nave. In 1657 work began on the grand portail
designed by François Mansart and completed by Pierre Thévenot.
Following the death of Henri IV, as the Minims prepared to start construction of their
church, Maria de’ Medici sought to strengthen existing royal ties with the order by attempting to
become the founder of the recently established monastery. To achieve this status, the queen had
Louis XIII confirm the letters patent issued by his father while she repaid the Minims the
expense they had incurred to acquire the land for their monastery. 13 She also expressed her
desire to place the first stone of the church, a task which ultimately proved inconvenient due to
health reasons and which was instead completed by the bishop of Grenoble in her name. 14
Despite her request to be the founder of the church, the order never granted Maria de’ Medici
this distinction. Instead the duc de La Vieuville bought the title of founder from the monastery
126

and in 1614 was given the right to put his arms over the high-altar and the main entrance and to
possess a chapel behind the choir. 15
Although Maria de’ Medici never received the official designation of patron, her support
of the Minims of the Place Royale was so well known that authors of seventeenth- and
eighteenth-century guide books frequently cite her as the founder. 16 The strong association
between the queen and the order suggests that some type of visual sign recognizing the royal
patronage would be expected on the church, yet none of the contemporary images or descriptions
provide evidence for this. Indeed the only reference to Maria de’ Medici’s support of the church
on the site was a Latin inscription on the foundation stone, which read: “Maria de’ Medici, very
pious and serene queen of France, once wife of Henri IV and now widow, and mother of Louis
XIII, also king of France, placed the first stone of this church, which is dedicated in honor of the
Virgin Mother of God, the day of her birth, 8 September of the year 1611, with all the sentiments
of Christian piety and wishes of all bliss.” 17
The first half of the inscription focuses on Maria de’ Medici, accentuating her
distinguished position as the queen of France, widow of Henri IV, and mother of the current
king. The emphasis placed upon her official titles draws attention to one of the primary
obstacles faced by Maria de’ Medici in the years following the death of her husband: her right to
rule as regent for the minor Louis XIII. Although Henri IV officially legitimized her authority
by naming her regent and crowning her at Saint-Denis, the queen had to fight contemporary
perceptions that deemed unacceptable the idea of women dealing in matters of state. 18 The
opinions were heightened in the kingdom of France where Salic law prevented the royal line
from passing through female descendents. The queen’s situation was further complicated by the
fact that she was foreign-born. This foreign status conjured up too many parallels with Catherine
de’ Medici, whose regency following the sudden death of her husband coincided with the
disastrous Wars of Religion. 19 A final threat to Maria de’ Medici’s authority came from the
princes of the blood, who claimed that as the king’s closest male heirs their right to rule as regent
trumped that of the queen. 20 In part to assert her legitimacy in the face of such challenges, Maria
turned to the public ceremony of placing the first stone, using the inscription to stress her
sovereign claims based on her status as queen, widow, and mother.
The validation provided by the inscription contributed to the ongoing history between the
crown and the religious order. By continuing to favor an order first supported by French royalty
127

in the fifteenth century and most recently by Henri IV, Maria de’ Medici demonstrated her
willingness to follow tradition and to perpetuate the patronage initiated by her husband. By
maintaining these connections the foreign queen asserted her right to rule as regent.
Although it cannot be certain whether the duc de La Vieuville’s right to be the founder of
the monastery or a personal decision by Maria de’ Medici explains the absence of royal imagery
in the church, the queen undoubtedly used her support of the order to legitimize her claims to the
throne. The remaining churches receiving aid from the regent likewise functioned as political
tools, aiding the queen’s assertion of her right to rule. An examination of these buildings will
illuminate the second goal pursued by Maria de’ Medici, the promotion of the Catholic faith.
Discalced Carmelites of the rue de Vaugirard
In June 1610 a group a Discalced Carmelites arrived in Paris from Italy with the hopes of
establishing a monastery. Although a Carmelite convent had existed in the capital since 1603,
efforts to found a community of reformed males only proved successful following the death of
Henri IV. At this time the regent-queen Maria de’ Medici, who had been a strong supporter of
the female Carmelites since their establishment in Paris, persuaded Louis XIII to authorize the
community that his father had previously shunned. 21 A month after arrival of the Discalced
Carmelites, the minor king issued letters patent authorizing the religious group to form a
monastery in Paris.
The following year the fathers established their community in a house on the rue de
Vaugirard in the faubourg Saint-Germain. Nicolas Vivien, master of the Chambres des Comptes,
donated the house and property and provided additional funds to construct a monastery on the
site, leading him to be named the community’s founder. 22 As work on the buildings progressed,
plans were begun to construct a church dedicated to St. Joseph. 23
Built from 1613 to 1620 by an unknown architect, the extant church of Saint-Joseph-des-
Carmes preserves much of the original seventeenth-century structure. 24 Its plan consists of a
single nave of two bays, a non-projecting transept, and a rectangular choir of one bay, beyond
which is a semi-circular apse, closed off from the rest of the church by a wall at the back of the
high altar (fig. 60). Bordering either side of the nave are two chapels framed by large piers. The
nave and transepts are covered with a barrel vault while a small dome, only the second to be built
in Paris, rises over the crossing supported on a drum on pendentives (fig. 61). 25
128

While the structure remains largely intact, the interior has changed. Except for the dome,
drum, and pendentives, which were painted in 1647 with scenes of important Carmelite saints,
the nave and transepts were originally coated with white paint, reflecting the modest disposition
of the religious order. 26 Following the French Revolution, at which time the altars were
dismantled and much of the artwork removed, restorers painted the interior and adorned the
pilasters and entablature with a faux-marble finish, giving the church its current appearance. 27
Changes were also made to the exterior in 1867 when the architects Louis and Lucien Dovillard
rebuilt the façade (fig. 62). Although a few decorative elements were added to the new structure,
it retains much of the original design, visible in an anonymous engraving after Jean Marot (fig.
63). The seventeenth-century two-story structure, articulated with Doric pilasters on the ground
floor, had four niches holding statues of the order’s chief saints. 28
Despite the cosmetic changes to the church, no evidence exists to suggest that plans were
made to honor the queen. Contemporary documents including the annals of the monastery prove
that the lack of images alluding to Maria de’ Medici was not due to a prohibition by the
Discalced Carmelites. Pierre Brûlart and René de Rieux each bought rights to chapels, which
were then decorated with their personal arms. 29 In addition, the engraving depicting the exterior
of the church clearly shows a coat of arms above the entrance to the forecourt, but this is not the
coat of arms of Maria de’ Medici, which is known from the reverse of a contemporary medal, but
presumably that of Nicolas Vivien (figs. 64 and 65).
Several factors raise the expectation that the fathers would have wanted to incorporate
royal signs on their newly built church, expressing their appreciation of the queen’s support. In
addition to securing the Discalced Carmelites’ establishment in Paris, Maria de’ Medici likely
played a role in finding additional patrons for the church. The queen’s closest friend was
Leonora Galigaï, a member of Maria’s household since her days in Florence, who along with her
husband Concino Concini, exerted considerable influence during the regency. Prior to
construction of Saint-Joseph-des-Carmes, and perhaps at the urging of the queen, Galigaï
promised financial aid to the fathers for their church, presenting them with a magnificent design
by an unknown architect. 30 But when the Carmelites requested changes be made to reduce its
opulence, Galigaï refused and revoked the pledged funds. Despite this setback, Maria de’
Medici resolved to resume progress on the church, securing the continued support of Nicolas
Vivien in addition to that of Henri de Gondi, bishop of Paris. 31
129

The queen would have also welcomed the addition of a monastery to the faubourg Saint-
Germain. In September 1611, three months after the Discalced Carmelites settled at their house
on the rue de Vaugirard, Maria de’ Medici purchased an hôtel from François de Luxembourg and
began work on the future Luxembourg Palace. The queen’s new residence, located just to the
east and on the same street as the religious community, would be enhanced by the presence of
the new monastery with its distinguished patrons and royal ties.
The queen’s only formal assistance to the church occurred on 20 July 1613, at which time
she placed the building’s ceremonial first stone. 32 Located in a large pillar to the right of the
high altar, the marble stone carried an inscription in Latin stating: “Maria de’ Medici, Queen
Mother, placed the foundation stone of this church in 1613.” 33 Although the inscription like the
one for the church of the Minims reiterates Maria’s role as queen and mother, helping to justify
her current position of power, its brevity suggests that the queen wanted to avoid drawing
attention to the ceremony.
Considering the queen’s contributions to Saint-Joseph-des-Carmes and the fathers’
willingness to allow personal coats of arms by illustrious patrons, I propose the lack of royal
imagery stemmed from a desire by Maria de’ Medici to limit the elaborate honors that her
support might have provided. This discretion resulted from the second goal of the regency: the
promotion of the Catholic faith. Maria de’ Medici was undoubtedly a fervent Catholic, a trait
she acquired through her Italian culture and family tradition. 34 Indeed upon arriving at the
French court, she worked to secure the triumph of the true faith, pushing for the return of the
Jesuits, earning the support of the conservative Catholics, and encouraging the acceptance of the
decrees of the Council of Trent. 35 While the first two points were achieved prior to the regency,
the latter remained an unresolved issue for the queen.
Since the last session of Trent, French leaders had been hesitant to ratify the council’s
proposed reforms. This included Henri IV, who had agreed to accept the decrees as part of his
absolution by Pope Clement VIII but neglected to fulfill his promise. The caution stemmed from
fears that the reforms would infringe on Gallican liberties. 36 Accepting the decrees meant that
legal issues traditionally adjudicated by French courts would have been controlled by Catholic
clerics while the pope’s newly acquired power as bishop of the universal Church would have
encumbered the French king’s right to autonomous rule of the Church and state.
130

Although upon becoming regent Maria de’ Medici saw an opportunity to authorize the
reforms, her tenuous hold on power prevented her from forcing loyal Frenchmen to submit to
Catholic control. Instead, at the Estates General of 1614, which included a heated debate
between the reform-minded bishops and pro-Gallican state servants over the issue, the queen
suggested that in the spirit of the council the members of the clergy introduce the articles of
reform into their dioceses. 37 By proposing the conciliatory option that the priests take it upon
themselves to bring reform to the French Church, Maria de’ Medici avoided the pro-Gallican
backlash that was sure to threaten her authority had she officially sanctioned the decrees. At the
same time, by her actions she implicitly endorsed the Catholic reforms and demonstrated her
preference for greater papal authority.
Even prior to the Estates General, the queen’s approval of the Tridentine decrees was
already evident in her willingness to found numerous reform orders in the French capital, a
process that attracted those groups most capable of disseminating Catholic reforms to the people
of France. By 1610 the establishment of these reformed religious orders was, however, in direct
contrast to the desires of Henri IV. In his efforts to rebuild the city of Paris following the Wars
of Religion, the king had initially welcomed the religious houses, which typically constructed
monasteries and helped to revive neighborhoods. Later in his reign, Henri IV felt that the same
institutions were taking up too much valuable land and, with their frequent exemption from
taxation, burdening the economy. 38 In 1610 the king was especially opposed to welcoming any
order with strong ties to Spain, a country he was planning to take military action against at the
time of his assassination.
By granting the Discalced Carmelite Order, which had originated in Spain, the right to
settle in Paris a mere two months after the death of Henri IV, Maria de’ Medici confirmed that
one of her priorities as regent would be the promotion of the Catholic faith. The action not only
went against Henri IV’s opposition to the establishment of reformed orders, but it also countered
his resistance to ratifying the decrees of the Council of Trent. I argue that Maria de’ Medici,
fully aware that her actions might aggravate those factions seeking to remove her from the
regency, purposefully limited images or other indications of her support of reformed order
churches. The lack of visual cues connecting the queen to the churches’ role in promoting
Catholic ideology would lead people to believe that the reforming efforts came directly from the
religious orders, not from the crown.
131

Like Saint-Joseph-des-Carmes the remaining churches supported by Maria de’ Medici
during the regency were also built for religious orders promoting the reforms of the Church.
Similarly they too lack any visual signs connecting them to their royal patron. As with the
Discalced Carmelites, my contention is that the queen intentionally prevented the communities
from using her personal imagery in an attempt to avoid an open association with the
promulgation of the decrees of the Council of Trent. A brief survey of the remaining two
churches will establish the manner in which Maria de’ Medici provided support and will confirm
the absence of royal signs.
Récollets
In 1603 a Parisian merchant named Jacques Cottard established the religious order of
Récollets at a house in the faubourg Saint-Martin, located to the north of Paris, outside the city
walls. 39 A reformed order of Franciscans, the Récollets had originated in Spain and first came to
France in 1592. Within a year of its establishment in the capital, the reformed order began to
benefit from royal support. Henri IV quickly authorized the community with letters patent and in
1606 gave it a large piece of land adjacent to its garden; Maria de’ Medici declared herself
founder of the Parisian monastery and protector of its reform.
Although the Récollets built a chapel from 1604 to 1606, it soon proved too small,
forcing them to begin construction on a larger one in 1614. 40 As founder of the monastery,
Maria de’ Medici supported the Récollets’ new construction, placing the first stone of the new
church dedicated to the Annunciation of the Holy Virgin. As depicted on Jaillot’s Plan du
Quartier Saint-Martin, the building was located with its flank parallel to the rue des Récollets
and consisted of a narthex followed by a longitudinal nave with the high altar at the far end (fig.
66). Along the right side of the nave were four chapels of various sizes and different orientations
while beyond the high altar was a large rectangular choir with numerous stalls. As described in
eighteenth-century guidebooks, the interior was nearly entirely covered with woodwork and
adorned with a number of paintings by a member of the community, known only as brother
Luc. 41 Little is known of the exterior, which is depicted on Turgot’s Plan de Paris, except that
the façade had a large arched window above the porch while a small bell tower rose from the
peaked roof about halfway along its length (fig. 67).
Despite the prominent support given to the monastery by Henri IV and Maria de’ Medici,
contemporary descriptions fail to mention the use of any royal imagery as part of the decorations
132

of the church. Although the possibility exists that the authors simply neglected to refer to such a
detail, the description of other family arms in the building negates this explanation. Indeed in
Piganiol de la Force’s account of the Récollets’s church, the guide specifically mentions the arms
of Françoise de Crequi, the wife of Maximilien de Béthune II, adorning the chapel of the Virgin
in which Françoise was buried. 42 The lack of royal images connecting the religious group to the
queen of France, a much more prestigious patron than Françoise de Crequi, indicates that the
symbols were intentionally excluded from the design.
Jacobins of the rue Saint-Honoré
In 1611 Maria de’ Medici authorized Sebastien Michaëlis, the prior of the Dominican
convent at Saint-Maximin, to establish a reformed community in Paris. Like the French capital’s
existing Dominican community, the members of the reformed group were referred to as the
Jacobins after the rue Saint-Jacques where the religious were first installed in the thirteenth
century. A year after the establishment of the reformed community Henri de Gondi, the bishop
of Paris, gave the religious fifty thousand livres, which along with donated land on the corner of
the rue Saint-Honoré and the rue de la Sourdière, allowed the Jacobins to begin construction of
their monastery.
Visible on Piganiol de la Force’s Plan et Description du Quartier du Palais Royal
between the parish church of Saint-Roch and the Place de Louis le Grand, the monastery had at
its center the community’s church, also begun in 1612 (fig. 68). Despite its prominent location
on the prestigious rue Saint-Honoré, the building received little interest from seventeenth- and
eighteenth-century authors of guidebooks. 43 In fact Luc-Vincent Thiéry wrote that “Neither the
church, nor the buildings of the monastery have anything remarkable,” while Germaine Brice
noted that little existed with which the curious could be satisfied. 44 Subsequent authors have
continued this trend, choosing to focus on the monastery’s role beginning in 1789 as the meeting
place of the radical Club des Jacobins rather than the seventeenth-century architecture. 45
Even with these drawbacks, a general idea of the building can be gathered from the
existing sources. Located in a large courtyard opening onto the rue Saint-Honoré, the church
was a simple rectangular structure. Its plan, depicted on Jaillot’s Plan du Quartier du Palais
Royal, consisted of a single nave of five bays flanked by side chapels and a rectangular chevet,
which abutted one of four buildings forming the monastery’s cloister (fig. 69). Little is known of
the nave’s elevation other than it had a cornice on which rested a barrel vault, covered in plaster
133

and pierced with windows. The façade consisted of a centrally placed arched doorway
surmounted by an arcade of windows and topped with a simple pediment.
Although Henri de Gondi was the primary benefactor of the Jacobins of the rue Saint-
Honoré, Maria de’ Medici provided further support for the religious. In addition to authorizing
the establishment of the reformed order in Paris, she also paid for the construction of the Saint-
Hyacinthe chapel, located to the right of the high altar. Despite its prominent position within the
church and the patronage of the queen of France, the chapel was only described as having a
painting of St. Hyacinthe by Nicolas Colombel and a silver reliquary acquired by Anne of
Austria containing a relic of the saint. 46 A great deal more attention was devoted to the chapel
directly across the nave, bought by Catherine de Rougé du Plessis Belliere, widow of François de
Blanchefort de Crequi, maréchal de France. Descriptions of it include a detailed account of the
altar, with Ionic columns, an entablature, and a pediment, in addition to the kneeling statue of the
marshal. 47 The attention given to the latter chapel suggests that the one supported by Maria de’
Medici lacked more noteworthy elements, including royal insignia such as the royal arms,
monograms, or fleurs-de-lis.
Summary
Although Maria de’ Medici’s contribution to the churches she supported during the
regency varied considerably, the one consistent element is the lack of royal imagery tying the
buildings to their prestigious patron. The dual forces behind this approach to religious
architecture were the queen’s need to legitimize her authority and her desire to promote the
Catholic faith. The introduction of the Tridentine reforms through the establishment of numerous
religious orders and the lack of visual signs referencing the sovereign authority of a foreign
queen helped Maria de’ Medici to accomplish the overarching goals of the regency.
By 1617 Maria de’ Medici’s grip on power seemed assured. She had recently squelched
a rebellion ignited by Henri II de Bourbon, prince of Condé, while succeeding to fill the royal
council with numerous advisors sharing her political outlook. 48 Reinforcing the queen mother
was the growing power assumed by her favorite advisor, Concino Concini, who after securing
increasingly lucrative titles within the kingdom was on the verge of making himself duke and
peer of the realm. 49 Royal circles outside the sphere of Maria de’ Medici increasingly held the
ambitious advisor in disfavor. Not only had he provoked a rebellion among the nobles, but he
134

also created financial irregularities in the government and supported a close relationship between
France and the papacy.
Driven by fears that Concini, aided by the queen mother’s favoritism, would soon attempt
to usurp royal authority, Louis XIII and his advisors concocted a plan that on 24 April 1617 led
to the murder of the royal advisor. The outcome of the assassination was the inauguration of
Louis XIII’s personal reign and the exile from court for the next four years of Maria de’ Medici.
A few years after her return in 1621, the queen mother would once again become a patron of
Parisian ecclesiastical architecture but this time with different goals and outcomes.
Maria de’ Medici’s Support of Churches after Her First Exile
In stark contrast to the earlier religious works supported by Maria de’ Medici, the
churches from the 1620s displayed a close association with the queen mother. Begun following
Maria’s return to court and admittance to the royal council, the churches for the Filles du
Calvaire and the Religious of St. Elizabeth included personal symbols and royal signs that in
addition to providing visual testimony to the prestigious patron called attention to the queen
mother’s agenda. While scholars have recognized Maria de’ Medici’s association with each
church and the incorporation of her personal symbols on the church of the Filles du Calvaire, an
examination of the queen’s intentions especially in comparison with the lack of royal symbols
during the regency is missing from the literature. 50 I propose that the new approach to
ecclesiastical architecture must be viewed as an attempt by Maria de’ Medici to regain the
authority she formerly wielded as regent and a reaction to Louis XIII’s challenge to her search
for power.
Filles du Calvaire
The first religious group supported by Maria de’ Medici following her return from exile
was the Filles du Calvaire, which she established in 1622 on a piece of land adjacent to the
Luxembourg Palace (fig. 70). The Filles du Calvaire, a reformed order of Benedictines, was
founded in 1617 in Poitiers by Father François Le Clerc du Tremblay and was brought to Paris in
1620 by Elisabeth Damours, widow of Monsieur de Lauzon, councilor of the Paris Parlement. 51
Maria de’ Medici had several reasons to want to support the religious group. In 1618 she helped
found the second convent of the Filles du Calvaire, located in Angers, naming herself its
135

protector and establishing a close connection with the order. 52 In addition, by supporting the
foundation of yet another religious institution in Paris, Maria continued to promote the reforms
of the Council of Trent. While these factors initiated the queen mother’s beneficience towards
the Filles du Calvaire, I argue that the essential reason for the support was the opportunity it
provided to counter recent actions by Louis XIII that sought to limit his mother’s perceived
authoritative reach. By including specific imagery that evoked her elevated status as the mother
of the king of France and her devotion to the French state, Maria de’ Medici challenged Louis
XIII’s attempts to curb her power.
Two years after the Filles du Calvaire’s arrival in Paris, Maria de’ Medici encouraged the
group to relocate to a piece of land adjacent to her new palace, which was then under
construction. 53 She initially gave the religious five arpents of land immediately to the west of
the Luxembourg palace, but following the advice of her architects she decided to move the
location of the convent to accommodate construction of the Petit-Luxembourg. 54 The new site,
contiguous to the former location, consisted of a triangular-shaped space with one side bordering
the rue de Vaugirard, another backing up to Luxembourg gardens, and the third next to the Petit
Luxembourg (figs. 70 and 71). In addition to donating land, the queen mother provided the
Filles du Calvaire with an annual income of one thousand livres, which along with gifts from
Madame Damours provided funds to build the convent and to sustain the religious. 55 The
construction of a new convent in such close proximity to the queen’s palace unquestionably
linked the religious institution to Maria de’ Medici.
In 1625 the queen mother strengthened her ties with the Filles du Calvaire by starting
construction of the convent’s church Notre-Dame-du-Calvaire, built by the master mason Marin
de la Vallée perhaps on the plans of Salomon de Brosse. 56 Located perpendicular to the street
with its entrance directly on the rue de Vaugirard, the building was a simple rectangular structure
with three bays (fig. 71). The choir of the religious and the cloister were added to the back of the
church, and a chapel de la reine, an oratory for Maria de’ Medici, was created in the first two
bays of the right aisle. 57 In 1631 the bishop of Saint-Pol-de-Léon blessed the church and
celebrated its first mass. That same year Philippe de Champaigne began work on the choir’s
retable, a commission by Maria de’ Medici featuring the Crucifixion with the Virgin Mary, St.
Mary Magdalene, and St. John flanked by Christ in the Garden of Gethsemane and a
Resurrection of Christ and surmounted with God the Father Surrounded by Angels. 58
136

Today little exists of the Filles du Calvaire’s original church. After becoming national
property in 1790, the building functioned in a variety of capacities, serving first as a stable and
later as a warehouse for the Odéon Theater and a kitchen for the Grand Chancellor. 59 In the
1840s plans were made to realign the rue de Vaugirard, forcing the demolition of Notre-Damedu-Calvaire,
which projected into the area proposed for the changes to the street. To preserve at
least a section of the church, the architect Henri de Gisors decided to rebuild the façade at a site
farther back on the property. The original three-story façade, preserved in a drawing by Nicolas-
Michel Troche following desecration suffered during the French Revolution, was articulated with
pilasters and included a large, centrally-placed arched window projecting into the gable. This
upper section was pierced with two oculi and topped with a sculpture of a pelican (fig. 72).
Gisors’s façade, today part of the residence of the president of the French Senate, features a bust
of Maria de’ Medici in an elaborately conceived pediment and apart from the pelican retains
little of the original design (fig. 73).
As with the church of the Minims and Saint-Joseph-des-Carmes, Maria de’ Medici
contributed to the ceremonial placing of the first stone of Notre-Dame-du-Calvaire. Placed on 6
April 1625 by Marie de Bragelongne, wife of Claude Bouthillier, secretary of state, the stone
included a silver medal with the following inscription: “To the glory of God and the Holy Virgin
his mother, Maria de’ Medici placed the first stone of this church and monastery so that as she
recognizes the Mother of the King of Kings as the conserver of the kingdom and of the royal
line, and as the model and example of her life and name, she can have her in heaven as the
mediator of her eternal soul, in the year of our redemption 1625.” 60
Although the queen had included inscriptions with the foundation stones of previous
churches, the text on this one went a step further by establishing a connection between the
earthly Maria and the heavenly Mary. By stating that the Virgin is the mother of the King of
Kings, Maria de’ Medici alluded to her status as the mother of the king of France, effectively
comparing her earthly role to the celestial one. The inscription then proceeded to affirm that not
only was the Virgin Mary the namesake and patron saint of Maria de’ Medici, but that the
mother of God would also mediate in heaven on the queen’s behalf.
The comparisons between the Virgin Mary and Maria de’ Medici did not stop with the
text. Indeed they continued with the visual signs explicitly connecting the church to the queen.
Among the most prominent of these was the monogram of Maria de’ Medici used on the façade
137

and in the entablature of the choir of the religious. Although the only evidence of the motif is
from textual sources, the monogram most likely resembled the crowned letter M visible on the
current building’s highly restored façade (fig. 74). 61 The letter was not only intended to recall
Maria de’ Medici and her regal status but it also evoked the Virgin Mary, the queen of heaven
who shared the name of the queen of France. Reinforcing the comparisons was the placement of
a relief of the pietà on the door, destroyed during the French Revolution, evoking the role of both
Marys as mother. 62 As construction drew to a close in 1631, a new allusion to the two queens
was made when the church’s bell was blessed and named Marie.
Marian iconography had consistently been employed in works of art featuring Maria de’
Medici, thus the idea that the queen of France would use her support of the church to equate
herself with the Virgin Mary is not surprising. Indeed as noted by scholars, such imagery ranged
from an engraving in an almanac from 1611 in which the queen mother was placed next to and
touching the Virgin Mary to Rubens’s Medici Cycle in the Luxembourg Palace, which draws
comparisons between the two Marys’ lives. 63 As Deborah Marrow has shown, Maria de’ Medici
had a number of reasons to encourage the association with her patron saint. In addition to being
extremely religious and even considering becoming a nun, the queen mother had since 1610 been
a widow, a status that was perceived to be as chaste as a virgin. 64 Contemporaries recognized
her attachment to the Virgin, writing that every Saturday she visited a place dedicated to her and
that she sought to expand her cult everywhere. 65 The queen mother’s partiality for the Virgin is
clearly expressed in a letter of advice written in 1625 to her daughter Henrietta, in which she
mentions: “Jesus Christ’s Holy Mother, to whom I exhort you to have an especial devotion.” 66
Maria de’ Medici’s personal history and her devotion to the Virgin Mary made the mother of
God an ideal figure for the queen of France to use in creating her own identity.
A new-found status of the Virgin Mary in seventeenth-century France made the mother
of God an especially appropriate model for Maria de’ Medici. Following the Wars of Religion, a
revival of Marian devotion brought about the Virgin’s elevation from a mere intermediary
between God and man to that of an equal to Christ, “seated in the council of the Father.” 67 The
elevation of the Virgin Mary coincided with Maria de’ Medici’s desire upon returning to court in
1621 to regain the power she once wielded as regent. Within a year the queen mother was well
on her way to achieving this goal with Louis XIII’s decision to allow her to join the royal
council. In 1624 she consolidated her power as the king acceded to her demands to place
138

Cardinal Richelieu on the same council, giving Maria someone she thought would be a powerful
ally. At the same time the queen’s authoritative gains were enhanced by her newly acquired
status as the figure head of the dévot party, the conservative group that championed a united
Catholic Europe and favored alliances with Rome and Spain. I propose that at the church of the
Filles du Calvaire, Maria de’ Medici evoked her elevated position through the church’s Marian
symbolism. In doing so the queen mother asserted her divine right to rule, proclaiming that she
wielded legitimate authority equal to the power held by Louis XIII.
An additional image on the church’s façade further connected the building to its patron:
the pelican perched on top of the gable (fig. 75). Depicted with its wings folded back and striking
its chest with its beak, the bird was a personal device of Maria de’ Medici. Following the death
of Henri IV the queen mother took the bird and the Latin motto, “Tegit Virtute Minores,” as a
device, which Jacques de Bie depicted in his collection of French medals from 1634 (fig. 76). 68
The maxim, meaning she protects her children by her virtue, was an appropriate saying for a
regent queen guarding the throne for her minor son. Complementing the motto was the pelican,
which because of its sacrificial character had long been a symbol of Christ. 69 Following the
Council of Trent the bird acquired a general meaning of charity. 70 In the Iconologia’s entry for
kindness, Cesar Ripa connects the bird to parental devotion, noting that the pelican “to prevent
its young from starving to death, pierces its chest with its beak, feeding them with its own
blood.” 71 Seventeenth-century emblem books further encouraged the association, making the
bird a model of parental love. 72
While scholars have recognized the pelican at Notre-Dame-du-Calvaire as a symbol of
Maria de’ Medici’s charity, in seventeenth-century France the bird also embodied a monarch’s
compassion. 73 The prince who desired to be a good leader should be self-sacrificing for the
welfare of his people, just as the pelican was willing to injure itself for the lives of its chicks. 74
The Christological foundation of the symbol reminded viewers that rulers owed their position
and power to God. For Maria de’ Medici, who specifically chose the bird as a device, the layers
of meaning acquired by the pelican brought additional significance to her decision to place the
bird at the apex of the church’s façade. In addition to being a well-known symbol of the queen’s
charitable acts towards the Filles du Calvaire and her devotion to her children, the pelican
functioned as a reminder of the sacrifices she had made for the people of France.
139

The queen certainly believed that she suffered many hardships stemming from the ill
treatment endured at the hands of her son. After seven years of loyal service to Louis XIII,
reigning as regent while he remained too young and inexperienced to handle the burdens of
kingship, Maria de’ Medici felt she was indecorously treated by being exiled from court while
her closest advisor Concini was murdered and her best friend Léonora Galigaï was tried and
executed for witchcraft. Despite the indignities suffered by the queen, she thought that by
consenting to assist her son as a member of the royal council she could prove her devotion to the
people of France.
Although Louis XIII asked Maria de’ Medici to join his council, her insatiable desire for
power and continued association with conservative Catholics forced the king to remain
suspicious of her motives. 75 As part of his efforts to exert his own authority and to limit his
mother’s growing sense of power, Louis XIII turned to the church of the French Oratory (fig. 4).
Not only was it a symbol of the dévot party’s goals to form a united Catholic Europe allied with
Rome and Spain, it also represented Maria de’ Medici, who as founder of the congregation had
used it along with other religious organizations to secure her power during the regency. As I
have shown in chapter two, to curb the growing confidence of Maria de’ Medici and the
conservative Catholics, Louis XIII appropriated the church of the French Oratory, naming it the
palace chapel of the Louvre and converting it into a symbol of his sovereign authority.
This event was certainly in the mind of the queen mother as work progressed on her
palace. Indeed I argue that Louis XIII’s decision to use the new royal chapel as a sign of his
political will was the impetus behind Maria de’ Medici’s sudden change in approach to
supporting churches. Less than two years after her son’s action, the queen mother began
construction of a church for a newly established reformed order, located adjacent to her palace.
The combination of the church’s urban placement, the inscription on the foundation stone, and
the personal symbols explicitly tying the building to the queen mother, turned it into an
expression of her political will. Although Maria de’ Medici used the Marian symbolism to assert
her right to rule, she incorporated the pelican to demonstrate her devotion to Louis XIII and her
benevolence towards the French kingdom.
Notre-Dame-de-Pitié
In April 1628, three years after work began on Notre-Dame-du-Calvaire, Maria de’
Medici placed the first stone of Notre-Dame-de-Pitié for the Religious of St. Elizabeth, the last
140

eligious institution she supported while living in Paris. Similar to several of the other churches
supported by the queen, the ceremony allowed Maria to establish strong connections with the
religious group. This event, however, differed from the previous ceremonies because it included
visual elements referencing the queen mother, specifically two medals commissioned for the
foundation stone and an anonymous print depicting them on the stone (fig. 77). Since only a
small section of Notre-Dame-de-Pitié would be completed during the life of Maria de’ Medici,
the queen’s personal signs and royal symbols incorporated in the medals and the print became
critical tools that, as with the church of the Filles du Calvaire, demonstrated the patron’s elevated
status while again responding to actions by Louis XIII.
In 1613 Father Vincent Mussart established the convent of the Religious of St. Elizabeth,
one of the Third Orders of St. Francis, in the Marais quarter of Paris. 76 The following January
Louis XIII authorized the group with letters patent while Maria de’ Medici named herself
founder of the convent, granting it all the privileges of a royal foundation. 77 Over the next
decade the religious acquired land and funds, which allowed them to begin construction in 1628
on a convent situated on the corner of the rue du Temple and the rue Neuve-Saint-Laurent (today
rue du Vertbois). Included in the plans for the convent was a church consisting of a nave of three
bays flanked only to the north by a side aisle and a choir of one bay terminated by a flat chevet
(fig. 78). 78 To the right of the choir was a chapel of the Virgin and to the left was a large
rectangular room designated for the religious. In 1628 the master mason Louis Noblet began
work on the church, but construction stopped within the year, leaving the chapel of the Virgin as
the only finished section of the building. Work resumed in 1643, and two years later the church,
shown in a contemporary engraving, was complete (fig. 79). 79 Nonetheless, the only portion of
Notre-Dame-de-Pitié known to the order’s founder was the chapel from 1628.
Despite the incomplete state of the church, Maria de’ Medici publicized her support
through the use of the two medals and the anonymous print. Of the medals, only the one
depicting the portrait of Maria de’ Medici on its obverse and the queen’s royal arms on its
reverse is known to still exist (fig. 65). 80 The only document to record the other medal, which
includes a Pietà and an image of St. Elizabeth of Hungary, is the print of the foundation stone. 81
Although the inscriptions on the medals are in Latin while those on the print are in French, in all
other respects the print appears to record an accurate representation of the medals. Similar to the
print commemorating the ceremony at Saint-Louis-des-Jésuites, this one shows at the center of
141

the image the rectangular foundation stone with its dedicatory inscription and four circles
representing medals (fig. 36). Framing the stone are enlarged versions of the medals that allow
the viewer to see easily the images and accompanying inscriptions. Explanatory text also in
French and an elaborate arabesque border composed of crowns and fleurs-de-lis complete the
ensemble.
The enlarged medals on the print bring together the Religious of St. Elizabeth and the
convent’s prestigious founder. Those in the upper half concentrate on the church’s dedication
and patron saint, depicting the Pietà on the left and Elizabeth of Hungary on the right. The
seated Virgin Mary holding the dead Christ on her lap is a reminder of the church’s dedication to
Our Lady of Mercy. Its legend, which states: “She gave him a temple and he gives her several,”
not only recalls Mary’s role as a vessel for Christ but also the naming of numerous churches after
the mother of God. 82 Opposite it is a profile portrait of the order’s patron saint, Elizabeth of
Hungary, dressed in a religious habit and holding a palm with three crowns representing her
states as virgin, queen, and widow. The accompanying text reads: “She had contempt for the
earthly crowns in order to deserve celestial ones, and the queens raise some souls to her,” an
allusion to the saint’s aversion to earthly power. 83
Maria de’ Medici, who likewise experienced life in stages as a virgin, queen, and widow,
found many similarities between her life and that of St. Elizabeth of Hungary (1207-1231). The
daughter of King Andrew II of Hungary, the saint was married to the landgrave Ludwig IV of
Thuringia to forge political connections between their two states, much as the French queen was
married to Henri IV. 84 The landgrave’s death in 1227 after six years of marriage left Elizabeth a
widow in a foreign land and the mother of the heir to the throne, again prefiguring events in the
life of Maria de’ Medici. Although the future saint never acted as regent for her son, instead
entering in 1228 the Third Order of St. Francis, she was renowned for her charitable acts, leading
to her canonization in 1235, four years after her death. Elizabeth’s devotion to St. Francis of
Assisi, demonstrated through her service as a tertiary in the order, resonated with the French
queen. Maria de’ Medici not only ranked St. Francis of Assisi among her favorite saints, but she
was reported to have the cordon from his habit among her relics. 85
The second medal on the print, shown in the lower half, affirms the implied closeness
between the saint and the queen mother. Its obverse reveals a profile portrait of Maria de’
Medici surrounded by an inscription referring to her as the august queen of France and
142

Navarre. 86 The reverse depicts the queen mother’s royal arms—half showing the arms of France
while the other half presents the arms of the Medici and the house of Austria—topped with a
French crown and surrounded by a cord. 87 Its legend reads: “The lilies grow while they
flourish,” which when presented with the royal arms suggests that France prospered under the
stewardship of Maria de’ Medici. 88
Tying the medals together is the foundation stone’s inscription, which states: “To the
glory of God and to the very holy Virgin his mother, Marie de Mediciz [sic] placed the first stone
of this church and monastery so that as she honors and recognizes this Mother of the king of
Kings for the conservator of the kingdom and of the royal line and for the model and example of
her life and of her name, she will also have her in heaven as a mediator of her eternal salvation,
the year of our redemption 1628.” 89 Nearly identical to the one found at the church of the Filles
du Calvaire (1625), the inscription again emphasizes the Virgin Mary’s role as the mother of the
King of Kings and the model for Maria de’ Medici’s life, establishing connections between the
queen of France and the queen of heaven. The bond is reinforced visually by the medallic
images of the two Marys, one shown reigning augustly while the other suffers her sorrows,
placed one on top of the other on the left side of the print.
By supporting a religious order devoted to St. Elizabeth of Hungary and its church
dedicated to the Virgin Mary, Maria de’ Medici built on her previous patronage of ecclesiastical
architecture. In addition to continuing to promote the reforms of the Catholic faith by backing
yet another religious order, she employed imagery on the medals and used the inscription on the
foundation stone to enhance the comparison between herself and the Virgin Mary. Moreover the
queen mother drew on the similarities between her life and that of St. Elizabeth, intimating once
again that the parallels endowed her with an elevated status. Complementing these ideas were
the medallic faces showing the church’s patron and her family arms, both of which reiterated
Maria de’ Medici’s role as queen of France and matriarch of the royal family. By placing this
medal on the same foundation stone with images of the Virgin Mary and St. Elizabeth of
Hungary, Maria de’ Medici explicitly aligned herself with the holy figures, equating her power
with that of theirs.
Although the medals and the foundation stone expressed the manner in which the queen
desired to be viewed, the one-time event of the placing of the first stone and its limited audience
combined with the incomplete state of the church prevented the knowledge of Maria de’
143

Medici’s patronage of the Religious of St. Elizabeth from reaching a broad group of spectators.
Helping to counter the limited exposure was the anonymous print. Engravings such as this
belonged to the category of seventeenth-century French prints recording historical events.
Typically engraved and sold shortly after the specific occasion, the prints depicted scenes
ranging from royal weddings and coronations to the signing of treatises and military victories. 90
Although recently built architecture was a feature of some examples, such as the 1612 engraving
of the Place Royale showing the celebrations in honor of Louis XIII’s engagement to Anne of
Austria, prints depicting the foundation stone of recently begun churches appear to be rare (fig.
80). To my knowledge, the only other existing example in Paris at this time is the one completed
for Saint-Louis-des-Jésuites. 91
In addition to following the same format, the prints from Notre-Dame-de-Pitié and Saint-
Louis-des-Jésuites share a number of striking similarities, including the tendency of the medals
to mirror one another in their formula. In both prints one of the images in the upper register is a
portrait of the church’s patron saint, specifically St. Louis and the Virgin Mary. The others on
this level are intended to evoke the actual building: the medal for Saint-Louis-des-Jésuites
achieves this by depicting the proposed design for the façade while the one for Notre-Dame-de-
Pitié accomplishes it through an image of the mourning Virgin Mary, which recalls the
dedication of the church. The similarities are carried over to the medallic faces at the bottom,
where a profile portrait of the royal patron is shown in each print’s lower left corner.
Compounding the parallel features is that both portraits of Louis XIII and Maria de’ Medici are
placed below images representing the holy figure after whom they were named.
Typical of prints for the period, both images had a specific purpose beyond merely
recording an historical event, a strategy which is hinted at through the choice of language. 92 All
of the text on the print from Saint-Louis-des-Jésuites is written in Latin, meaning that in addition
to copying the exact lettering from the medals and the inscription, the engraver also used the
Roman language for the explanatory text. By using Latin, the Jesuit print restricted its audience
to priests and scholars, specifically the Ultramontanists to whom Louis XIII most directed his
message to accept the absolute authority of the king. Conversely the example for Notre-Damede-Pitié
only used French, intentionally translating the text from the medals and the inscription to
the common language. This arrangement allowed the print to reach a much broader group,
144

addressing the literate upper class in addition to academics and the religious, ultimately helping
to spread Maria de’ Medici’s intended message to the populace of Paris.
The print for Saint-Louis-des-Jésuites was most likely made shortly after the placing of
the first stone in March 1627; the one for Notre-Dame-de-Pitié was made at least a year later in
April 1628. The rarity of such printed material commemorating the placing of the foundation
stone combined with the similarities between the two images leads me to argue that Maria de’
Medici borrowed her son’s method of challenging his adversaries as a means of voicing her own
desires. The queen mother believed she needed to pursue this course of action because of recent
actions by Louis XIII that she felt limited her influence in the kingdom.
In 1627 the king was planning a siege against the Protestant stronghold of La Rochelle, a
port city on the western coast thought to be colluding with England. The expected long duration
of the battle and the city’s distance from Paris necessitated that a regent be named for northern
France during the king’s absence. Fully aware of his mother’s political experience and hoping to
keep her content, Louis XIII appointed Maria de’ Medici to this position shortly before his
departure in September. Although the queen mother was certainly pleased with the authoritative
title, she quickly became jealous over the close relationship that developed between Louis XIII
and Richelieu, both of whom were at the siege. 93 Maria feared that the cardinal’s influence
would come to dominate the king, lessening the impact of her own opinions. The anxiety of
losing her central standing as the closest advisor to the king made her dissatisfied with the post
of regent.
Adding to the queen mother’s concerns was the treatment of the Protestant problem at La
Rochelle. Louis XIII and Richelieu regarded the uprising as a crime against the state, leading
them to revoke any political rights held by the Protestants but to allow the continued practice of
religious freedom. 94 The official policy was not welcomed by Maria de’ Medici and the dévots,
who wished for the eradication of the heretical faith and the consolidation of Europe under
Catholicism. 95 With the siege at La Rochelle, Maria realized that her political goals were rarely
followed when they differed from those of the king, the queen mother found the honorary title of
regent of northern France to offer few opportunities to wield significant power within the state. 96
Once again in an effort to assert her authority, Maria de’ Medici turned to her role as a
patron of ecclesiastical architecture. Similar to her experience with the Filles du Calvaire, the
queen mother believed that Louis XIII was attempting to limit her influence, prompting her to
145

use her support of the Religious of St. Elizabeth as a means of defending her authoritative rights.
Likewise mirroring events at Notre-Dame-du-Calvaire, Maria de’ Medici sought to counteract
the limitations placed on her power by copying a strategy employed by Louis XIII. Although the
manner in which the queen planned to incorporate royal symbols into the architecture of Notre-
Dame-de-Pitié is not known, the circulation of the commemorative medals and the print of the
foundation stone provided Maria de’ Medici with effective tools to promote her political agenda.
Conclusion
In 1645, three years after the death of Maria de’ Medici, Notre-Dame-de-Pitié was
completed. An anonymous engraver recorded all the details of the façade in a print (fig. 81).
Included in the image is a relief in the tympanum above the entrance depicting the Virgin Mary
holding the dead Christ on her lap, while niches on the second level hold statues of St. Elizabeth
of Hungary and St. Francis of Assisi. These elements call to mind those features on the
foundation stone’s first medal, concentrating on the church’s dedication and patron saint. Also
included in the façade’s design are numerous references to the French monarchy. Not only are
the royal arms of France prominently displayed in the segmented pediment, but a statue of St.
Louis is shown in the niche on the lower left side. In addition the arms of Anne of Austria,
mother of the reigning Louis XIV, are placed above the lower level niches while a cross adorned
with fleurs-de-lis tops the whole ensemble.
Following the intention of Maria de’ Medici, the completed façade clearly evoked the
French monarchy. Yet its references to French kingship were not meant to commemorate the
original patron; instead they evoked Louis XIV, the newest sovereign of the Bourbon dynasty,
and his mother, the regent of France. Even if Maria de’ Medici had lived to see the completion
of Notre-Dame-de-Pitié, she would not have seen a building ornamented with royal symbols that
expressed her authority. Maria’s unrelenting quest for power, culminating in 1630 with the Day
of Dupes when Louis XIII was forced to choose between his mother and Richelieu, precluded
any hopes the queen mother had of continuing to employ Parisian ecclesiastical architecture as a
tool to promote her agenda.
Maria de’ Medici sought to regain the authority she once wielded as regent, compelling
her to abandon the pattern of support established during the regency in favor of one that
146

advertised her connection to churches through the use of personal signs and royal symbols.
Seemingly illogical, the inspiration for this decision came from the very person she was reacting
against. Indeed Louis XIII, who became a patron of ecclesiastical architecture out of a need to
express his political will, drove Maria de’ Medici to use the same method as a means of
articulating her own agenda.
147

1 The dates represent the start of construction for each of the churches. For the French
Oratorians, the building begun in 1616 was the congregation’s provisory chapel.
2 Johnson, "Imagining Images," 134-35. Additional works that mention the queen’s support of
religious institutions include: Dubost, "Reine," 143; Marrow, " Maria de' Medici," 24, 41-42;
Mignot, "Marie de Médicis," 34; Sainte-Fare Garnot, "L'action," 162.
3 Bertrand, "Art and Politics," 113-87.
4 Ibid., 118-27. The other religious institutions are the Filles du Calvaire and the parish church
of Saint-Germain-l’Auxerrois, two additional places for which the queen may have
commissioned Philippe de Champaigne to do work. For the Filles du Calvaire, Bertrand briefly
discusses a possible commission for a retable by Philippe de Champaigne. She concludes that
not enough information has survived to reconstruct the iconographical program. Maria de’
Medici’s commission for two wood panels for Saint-Germain-l’Auxerrois remains
unsubstantiated.
5 Two works that especially emphasize Maria de’ Medici’s search for legitimization between
1610 and 1617 and desire for power between 1621 and 1631 are: Crawford, Perilous
Performances, 59-97; Johnson, "Imagining Images," 126-53. Additional works focusing on
Rubens’s Medici Cycle at the Luxembourg Palace contribute to the thesis that Maria de’ Medici
worked to increase her authoritative role during the reign of Louis XIII. These include:
Cosandey, Reine de France, 333-60; Marrow, "Maria de' Medici;" Millen and Wolf, Heroic
Deeds. For several notable exhibition catalogs contributing to Maria de’ Medici’s role as a
patron, see Baudouin-Matuszek and Andia, Marie de Médicis; Caneva and Solinas, eds., Maria
de' Medici; Mamone, Paris et Florence.
Outside of the time period under consideration here but still demonstrating Maria de’ Medici’s
use of the arts to legitimize power is the Galerie de la Reine at Fontainebleau. Built from 1600
to 1610, the gallery according to Nicola Courtright included imagery intended to express the
concepts of the power of queens. For this argument, see Nicola Courtright, "A Garden and a
Gallery at Fontainebleau: Imagery of Rule for Medici Queens," The Court Historian 10, no. 1
(2005): 73-81.
6 For two exceptions that consider Maria de’ Medici’s role in relation to architecture, see
Baudouin-Matuszek, "Un palais,” 170-223; Mignot, "Marie de Médicis," 29-41. Baudouin-
Matuszek’s essay considers Maria de’ Medici’s Luxembourg Palace; Mignot’s essay is a survey
of French architecture during the early seventeenth century.
7 The founders of the Carmelite convent, established in Paris in 1603, chose to use the existing
buildings of the old Priory of Notre-Dame-des-Champs, including its church. Since a church was
not constructed for the Carmelites, the queen’s patronage of this convent will not be included in
this chapter. For more on Maria de’ Medici’s connection with the Carmelite convent, see
Bertrand, "Art and Politics," 128-87.
148

8 The interior balcony above the entrance was also decorated with the monograms of Henri IV
and Maria de’ Medici. For the church, see Ballon, Henri IV, 186-90; Dumolin and Outardel,
Eglises de France, 126-28.
9 Louis XI requested that the founder of the order come to France with the hopes that St. Francis
of Paula could cure him. For the history and establishment of the order in France, see Pierre
Helyot, Dictionnaire des ordres religieux; ou, histoire des ordres monastiques, religieux et
militaires, 4 vols. (Paris: Chez l'Éditeur, 1847-1859), 2:981-96; Odile Krakovitch, "Le couvent
des Minimes de la Place-Royale," Fédération des Sociétés Historiques et Archéologiques de
Paris et Ile-de-France 30 (1979): 98-111; J. S. Whitmore, The Order of Minims in Seventeenth-
Century France (The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff, 1967), 1-7.
10 Krakovitch, "Minimes," 108-10.
11 For this characterization of the Minims, see Whitmore, Minims, 6.
12 For the church of the Minims at the Place Royale, see Biver, Abbayes, 425-32; Allan Braham
and Peter Smith, "Mansart Studies V: The Church of the Minimes," Burlington Magazine 107
(1965): 123-32; Edouard Jacques Ciprut, "Documents inédits sur l'ancienne église des Minimes
de la Place Royale," Bulletin de la Société de l'Histoire de l'Art Français (1954): 151-74;
Krakovitch, "Minimes," 87-258; Victoria Sanger, "Le 'portail' de l'église des Minimes, 1657-
1665," in François Masart: le génie de l'architecture, ed. Jean-Pierre Babelon and Claude
Mignot (Paris: Gallimard, 1998), 233-37.
13 For the letters patent, see Krakovitch, "Minimes," 110. For Maria de’ Medici repaying the
Minims the amount it cost to buy the land, see Biver, Abbayes, 425; Jacques-François Blondel,
Architecture françoise, ou recueil des plans, élévations, coupes et profils, 4 vols. (Paris: Jombert,
1754), 2:145; Piganiol de la Force, Description historique 4:438-39.
14 For the placing of the first stone, see Annales de l’Ordre des Religieux minims et en particulier
de la Province de France, Bibliothèque nationale, ms. Fr. 23126; reprinted in Ciprut,
"Documents inédits," 157-58. For the health concerns, see Hilarion de Coste, Les Eloges et les
vies des reynes, des princesses, et des dames illustres en pieté, en Courage & en Doctrine, qui
ont fleury de nostre temps, et du temps de nos Peres. Avec l'explication de leurs Devises,
Emblémes, Hieroglyphes, Divisez en deux tomes et dediez à la Reyne Regente (Paris: Sébastien
Cramoisy et Gabriel Cramoisy, 1647), 496.
15 Krakovitch, "Minimes," 110. No visual documents exist showing the duc’s arms.
16 Among the authors recognizing Maria de’ Medici as the founder of the church were Blondel,
Architecture françoise, 2:145; Antoine Martial Le Fèvre, Description des curiosités des églises
de Paris et des environs (Paris: Cl. P. Gueffier, 1759), 248-49; Piganiol de la Force, Description
historique, 4:438-39.
149

17 “MARIA MEDICAEA, PIENTISSIMA ET SERENISSIMA FRANCORUM REGINA,
HENRICI IV. OLIM CONJUX, NUNC VIDUA, ET LUDOVICI XIII. FRANCORUM REGIS
MATER; EXTRUENDI HUJUS TEMPLI ERGO, QUOD HONORI B. DEI GENITRICIS
MARIAE VOTUM ET DICATUM EST, EJUSDEM VIRGINIS NATALI DIE, ET 6. IDUS
SEPTEMB. 1611. PRIMARIUM LAPIDEM PRO FUNDAMENTO POSUIT, CHRISTIANE
PRORSUS ET FELICITER.” Germain Brice recorded the inscription in its original Latin while
Hilarion de Coste translated it to French; see Brice, Description 2:217; Coste, Les éloges, 494.
18 Henri IV named Maria de’ Medici as regent on 13 May 1610, the day before he was
assassinated, in preparation for a military campaign against the duchy of Jülich. For
contemporary perceptions of women as rulers, see Johnson, "Imagining Images," 131; Wilson-
Chevalier, "Women," 35, 38.
19 Johnson, "Imagining Images," 130-31.
20 For the ongoing challenges between the princes of the blood and Maria de’ Medici, especially
during the first four years of the regency, see Carmona, Marie de Médicis, 234-48. Katherine
Crawford argues that Maria de’ Medici created an image of divine motherhood to counteract the
princes of the blood; see Crawford, Perilous Performances, 74-79.
21 For Maria de’ Medici’s favorable disposition towards the Discalced Carmelites, see André
Hallays, Le couvent des Carmes, 1613-1913 (Paris: Librairie Bloud, 1913), 8-9.
22 The master of the Chambres des Comptes was a high-ranking position in the sovereign courts.
For an account of Nicolas Vivian’s extensive support for the Parisian community of Discalced
Carmelites, see Archives Nationales, LL 1500, Martirologe de la sacristie du Couvent de Saint
Joseph des Carmes Déchausséz, fols. 1-5.
23 This was the first church in Paris dedicated to St. Joseph.
24 For Saint-Joseph-des-Carmes, see Biver, Abbayes, 398-416; Boinet, Eglises parisiennes, 42-
66; Dumolin and Outardel, Églises de France, 128-31; Michel Dupuy, L'église Saint-Joseph-des-
Carmes (Paris: Editions SAEP, 1993); Hallays, Le couvent; Jacques Vanuxem, Saint-Joseph des
Carmes (Paris: Editions du Cerf, 1946). Since 1875 the church has been part of the Institut
Catholique de Paris.
25 The dome is made of wood covered in plaster. The first dome in Paris was at the chapel des
Louanges at the convent of the Petits-Augustins from 1608.
26 The paintings in the crossing were done by the Flemish painters Bertholet Flémalle and
Walthère Damery. The dome depicts the prophet Elijah rising to the sky on a chariot of fire
while the drum shows the prophet’s disciples. The pendentives show scenes from the life of the
Virgin Mary, St. Teresa, St. John of the Cross, and St. Mary Magdelene of Pazzi. For the
paintings, see Biver, Abbayes, 406; Boinet, Églises parisiennes, 59. For Carmelite art in general,
150

see Mâle, L'art religieux, 443-53; Yves Rocher, ed., L'art du XVIIe siècle dans les carmels de
France: Musée du Petit Palais, 17 novembre 1982-15 février 1983 (Paris: Le Musée, 1982).
27 In 1792 the church and convent became a prison; after the Revolution, the church became a
public dance hall. In 1797 Mademoiselle de Soyécourt, a Carmelite nun, bought the church and
started renovations, which included rebuilding the high altar and the chapels. The restoration of
the church took place well into the nineteenth century.
28 A record of the original statues does not exist; most likely the saints were the Virgin Mary, St.
Teresa, St. John of the Cross, and St. Mary Magdelene of Pazzi.
29 Archives Nationales, LL 1500, fols. 8, 10.
30 Boinet, Églises parisiennes, 43-44. No drawings of this plan exist.
31 Hallays, Le couvent, 11.
32
A seventeenth-century account of the ceremony and the stone’s placement is given in
Malingre, Les antiquitez, 391.
33
MARIA MEDICEA REGINA MATER, FUNDAMENTUM HUIUS ECCLESIAE POSVIT,
ANNO 1613.
34 Several studies characterize Maria de’ Medici’s fervent Catholicism, including Carmona,
Marie de Médicis, 124-29, 96-200; Dubost, "Reine," 108-9.
35 Dubost, "Reine," 108-9.
36
For the French concerns with accepting as law the decrees of the Council of Trent, see Tallon,
France, 412.
37
For Maria de’ Medici’s approach to dealing with the Tridentine decrees at the Estates General,
see Hayden, Estates General, 131-40.
38
For the king’s feelings towards the religious houses, see Houssaye, Bérulle et les Carmélites,
255-58.
39 For the history of the Récollets, see Pascale Gatignol, Catherine Martos, and Jesús Rodríguez,
Du Couvent des Récollets a l'Hôpital Villemin: destinées d'un batiment parisien (1604-1989)
(Paris: Ecole d'Architecture Paris-Villemin, 1990), 31-37; Helyot, Dictionnaire, 3:333-41.
40 For modern sources for the church, see Biver, Abbayes, 287-93; Gatignol, Martos, and
Rodríguez, Du Couvent des Récollets, 61-65; Hautecoeur, Architecture classique, 1, pt. 3:218.
For eighteenth-century guidebooks that reference the church, see Brice, Description, 2:48-50;
Michel Félibien, Histoire de la ville de Paris, 5 vols. (Paris: G. Desprez, 1725), 2:1267-68; Jean-
151

Baptiste-Michel Renou de Chevigné Jaillot, Recherches critiques, historiques et topographiques
sur la ville de Paris, 5 vols. (Paris: Lottin, 1775), 2, Xe quartier:32-33; Piganiol de la Force,
Description historique, 4:68-73.
The building is extant, but it has not been used as a church since 1789 when it was seized during
the Revolution and remade for use as barracks and then a spinning mill. In the nineteenth
century the church and the convent were used as a hospice and then a military hospital. Today
the complex houses the Centre International d’Accueil et d’Echanges des Récollets, a residency
program for artists and writers, and the Ordre des Architectes d’Ile de France.
41
For the paintings by Brother Luc, see Brice, Description, 2:49; Piganiol de la Force,
Description historique, 4:69.
42 Piganiol de la Force, Description historique, 4:71.
43 The guidebooks frequently include entries for the Jacobins of the rue Saint-Honoré, but they
rarely discuss the architecture; see Brice, Description, 1:278-82; Antoine-Nicolas Dézailler
d'Argenville, Vies des fameux architectes depuis la Renaissance des Arts, avec la description de
leurs ouvrages, 2 vols. (Paris: Chez Debure l'aîné, 1787), 88-90; Félibien, Histoire, 2:1292;
Jaillot, Recherches critiques, 1:39-41; Le Fèvre, Description des curiosités, 208-09; Piganiol de
la Force, Description historique, 2:431-47.
44
Brice, Description, 1:278; Luc-Vincent Thiéry, Le voyageur à Paris, 2 vols. (Paris: Hardouin
et Gattey, 1789-1790), 1:150.
45 For instance, see Violle, Paris, 1:204-14. In this work the Jacobins of the rue Saint-Honoré
are only discussed in the sections covering the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, with the
major focus being on the period of the Revolution. The only modern authors to discuss the
seventeenth-century architecture are Biver, Abbayes, 365-73; Hautecoeur, Architecture
classique, 1, pt. 3:222.
46 For the chapel’s placement, see Biver, Abbayes, 368. For the painting and reliquary, see Brice,
Description, 1:279; Piganiol de la Force, Description historique, 2:433.
47
For descriptions of this chapel, see Brice, Description, 1:279-80; Piganiol de la Force,
Description historique, 2:433-34.
48 The three most recent additions to the royal council were Claude Barbin, Cladue Mangot, and
Armand-Jean du Plessis, bishop of Luçon. For the events leading up to the first exile of Maria
de’ Medici, see Carmona, Marie de Médicis, 325-44; Chevallier, Louis XIII, 133-72; Moote,
Louis XIII, 87-96.
49 For actions pursued by Concini, see Hélène Duccini, Faire voir, faire croire. L'opinion
publique sous Louis XIII (Seyssel: Champ Vallon, 2003), 270-89.
152

50 For works that recognize the incorporation of Maria de’ Medici’s personal symbols into the
church of the Filles du Calvaire, see Boinet, Églises parisiennes, 150; Marie-Odile Bonardi,
"Essai d'iconographie de l'amour au XVIIe siècle: le pélican et le coeur," Dix-septième siècle 50,
no. 4 (1998): 643; Lucienne Portier and Paul Ricoeur, Le pélican: histoire d'un symbole (Paris:
Editions du Cerf, 1984), 127.
51 For the Filles du Calvaire and their establishment in Paris, see Biver, Abbayes, 346-48; Helyot,
Dictionnaire, 1:565-77; Nicolas-Michel Troche, "Embellissements de Paris: Ancien monastère
des Filles du Calvaire, rue de Vaugirard," Revue archéologique 3 (1846): 523-26.
52 For Maria de’ Medici’s early connection to the Filles du Calvaire, see Helyot, Dictionnaire,
1:573-74; Piganiol de la Force, Description historique, 7:169-70.
53
From 1620, when the Filles du Calvaire arrived in Paris, until 1622 the religious resided in a
house in the faubourg Saint-Germain.
54 The Petit Luxembourg was an hôtel constructed in the early 1620s on land adjacent to the
Luxembourg Palace and bordering the rue de Vaugirard. Maria de’Medici gave the hôtel to
Cardinal Richelieu in 1627. For the donation of land to the Filles du Calvaire, see Arthur Hustin,
Le Luxembourg: son histoire domaniale, architecturale, décorative et anecdotique, 1611-1911
(Paris: Imprimerie du Sénat, 1911), 51-53.
55 Piganiol de la Force, Description historique, 7:170.
56 For the church, see Biver, Abbayes, 346-48; Boinet, Églises parisiennes, 147-51; Hautecoeur,
Architecture classique, 1, pt. 3:227; Piganiol de la Force, Description historique, 7:269-73;
Troche, "Filles du Calvaire," 522-28. The texts do not provide further information on the
manner in which the queen contributed to the construction of the church other than she had the
chapel built. The original church was of such poor construction that it had to be rebuilt to the
same design in 1629.
57 For the chapel, see Boinet, Églises parisiennes, 149. Unlike the rest of the church, the chapel
de la reine was not demolished in the 1840s, being incorporated into the residence of the
president of the French Senate.
58 For the commission, see Bertrand, "Art and Politics," 124-25. Noting that the retable is
entirely lost, Bertrand argues that the available information is insufficient to reconstruct the
iconographical program of the commission.
59 The convent suffered a similar fate, being used as a prison until it was destroyed in 1852.
60 For unknown reasons the queen was not able to attend the ceremony. The inscription was
recorded in French in Piganiol de la Force, Description historique, 7:271-72. The inscription in
French reads: “A la gloire de Dieu, et de la Très-Sainte Vierge sa Mère. Marie de Médicis a
posé la premiere pierre de cette Eglise et monastere, afin que comme elle reconnoît cette Mere
153

du Roi des Rois pour la conservatrice du Royaume et de sa royale lignée, et pour le modele et
exemplaire de sa vie et de son nom, aussi elle la puisse avoir dans le Ciel pour médiatrice de son
salut eternel, l’an de notre Rédemption 1625.”
61 For the monogram of Maria de’ Medici on the interior or exterior of the church, see Boinet,
Églises parisiennes, 150; Piganiol de la Force, Description historique, 7:272-73.
62 For the statue, see Troche, "Filles du Calvaire," 525. Neither Troche’s discussion of the statue
nor images of the façade prior to its reconstruction indicate the placement of the Pietà on the
door. Presumably it was on the trumeau between the two doors or on the tympanum above the
entrance.
63 For the Marian imagery in the almanac, see Crawford, Perilous Performances, 74. For
Rubens’s Medici cycle, see Marrow, "Maria de' Medici," 149-55. Marrow discusses the debate
in the literature over the use of Marian imagery in the Medici cycle, concluding that most
scholars recognize its presence to varying degrees. She then proceeds to analyze the Marriage of
Maria de’ Medici in the cycle as one image supporting this thesis.
64 Marrow, "Maria de' Medici," 152.
65 Coste, Les éloges, 493.
66
Letter written to Henrietta on 15 June 1625 in Amiens; letter cited in Carmona, Marie de
Médicis, 544.
67 For the elevated status of the Virgin Mary, see Paul Renaudin, "La dévotion mariale dans
l'École Française du XVIIe siècle," La vie spirituelle, ascétique et mystique 54 (1938): 152. The
theme is further discussed in Elaine Rubin, "The Heroic Image: Women and Power in Early
Seventeenth-Century France, 1610-1661" (Ph.D. Dissertation, George Washington University,
1977), 11-12, 136-37.
68 Jacques de Bie, La France métallique contenant les actions célèbres tant publiques que
privées des Rois et des Reines (Paris: J. Camusat, 1636), plate 104. Hilarion de Coste records
that Maria de’ Medici took the emblem as a device; see Coste, Les éloges, 498-500.
69 For the pelican’s Christological character, see José Julio García Arranz, "Image and Moral
Teaching Through Emblematic Animals," in Aspects of Renaissance and Baroque Symbol
Theory, 1500-1700, ed. Peter M. Daly and John Manning (New York: AMS Press, 1999), 98.
Medieval bestiaries depicted pelican chicks cruelly pecking their parents, leading to the illtreated
adult bird killing its offspring. In its grief the pelican struck its chest, spilling its blood
and miraculously revived the dead young.
70 For a general history of the pelican as a Christian symbol, see Portier and Ricoeur, Le pélican.
For the changing status of the pelican following the Council of Trent, see Bonardi, "Essai
d'iconographie," 643.
154

71 Cesare Ripa, Iconologie, ou explication nouvelle de plusieurs images, emblèmes, et autre
figures (Paris: Mathieu Guillemot, 1644), 33-34.
72 Bonardi, "Essai d'iconographie," 643.
73 For works that cite the pelican as a symbol of Maria de’ Medici’s charity, see ibid; Portier and
Ricoeur, Le pélican, 127.
74 For the pelican as a symbol of a ruler’s sacrifice for the good of his or her people, see Arranz,
"Emblematic Animals," 97-98; Daniel S. Russell, "Perceiving, Seeing and Meaning: Emblems
and Some Approaches to Reading Early Modern Culture," in Aspects of Renaissance and
Baroque Symbol Theory, 1500-1700, ed. Peter M. Daly and John Manning (New York: AMS
Press, 1999), 78.
75 Scholars attribute Louis XIII’s decision to allow his mother to join the royal council to filial
duty following her exile after the coup d’état in 1617.
76 For the Religious of St. Elizabeth, see Helyot, Dictionnaire, 2:144-50. For the establishment of
the convent in Paris, see Biver, Abbayes, 128-29; Boinet, Églises parisiennes, 136-37; Jaillot,
Recherches critiques, 4:38-40; Piganiol de la Force, Description historique, 4:356-59.
77 Boinet, Églises parisiennes, 136.
78 For the church, see Biver, Abbayes, 128-30; Boinet, Églises parisiennes, 137-46; Edouard-
Jacques Ciprut, "Les constructeurs de l'église Sainte-Élisabeth à Paris," Bulletin de la Société de
l'Histoire de l'Art Français (1954): 186-201; Dumolin and Outardel, Églises de France, 140-42;
Hautecoeur, Architecture classique, 1, pt. 3:224.
79 The church, which was used as state property during the French Revolution, underwent
significant remodeling in the nineteenth century. Today it is a single nave church of four bays
flanked by chapels on each side. It terminates in a semi-circular apse followed by an
ambulatory. Only the first three bays of the nave and the four side chapels to the north represent
the original seventeenth-century church. For the history of the church following the seventeenth
century, see Boinet, Églises parisiennes, 139; Dumolin and Outardel, Églises de France, 141-42.
80 For the medal, see Johann David Köhlers, "Eine vortrefliche Medaille von der Königin in
Frankreich, Maria de' Medices, als Wittwe," Der Wöchentlichen historischen Münz-Belustigung
(1731): 393-94; Mazerolle, Médailleurs français, 2:no. 695.
81 Several other cases exist in which a document records a medal but the actual object can no
longer be found. Among these is a variant of Pisanello’s medal of John VIII Paleologus (1438-
1439), owned by Paolo Giovio, who cites its existence in a letter quoted by Vasari; see Irving
Lavin, "Pisanello and the Invention of the Renaissance Medal," in Italienische Frührenaissance
und nordeuropäisches Spätmittelalter: Kunst der frühen Neuzeit im europaïschen
155

Zusammenhang, ed. Joachim Poeschke and Francis Ames-Lewis (Munich: Hirmer, 1993), 73.
Another example is a text that describes seven medals made for the foundation stone of the
church of S. Ignazio in Rome but of which only three were actually included with the stone; see
Cesare Johnson, "Le medaglie della prima pietra della chiesa di S. Ignazio a Roma," Medaglia
Torino 8, no. 15 (1978): 15-16. I would like to thank Tanja Jones for discussing the cases with
me and for providing relevant sources.
82
The French legend reads: ELLE LVY A DONNE VN TEMPLE ET IL LVY EN DONNE
PLVSIEVRS.
83 The French legend reads: ELLE MESPRISE LES COVRONNES TERRESTRES POUR
MERITER LES CELESTES ET LES ROYNES LVY DRESSE DES AMES.
84 For the life of St. Elizabeth, see Nesta de Robeck, Saint Elizabeth of Hungary: A Story of
Twenty-four Years (Milwaukee, WI: Bruce Publishing Company, 1954).
85 For the queen’s devotion to St. Francis, see Coste, Les éloges, 493.
86 The French legend reads: MARIE ROYNE AVGVSTE DE FRANCE ET DE NAVERRE; the
Latin version is: MARIA AVG GALL ET NAVAR REGIN.
87 The image on the reverse was not commissioned specifically for the ceremony at Notre-Damede-Pitié.
It was also used with a different legend on the medal placed on the foundation stone of
the Luxembourg Palace. The practice of reusing medals for more than one commemorative
ceremony was employed by other French monarchs in the seventeenth century; see Blanchet and
Dieudonné, Manuel, 3:120. For the medals at the Luxembourg Palace, see Adrien Blanchet,
"Médailles de Marie de Médicis et d'Henri IV," Revue numismatique (1905): xxvi.
88 The French legend reads: LES LIS CROISSENT LORS QU’ILZ FLORISSENT; the Latin
version is: CRESCVNT DVM FLORENT.
89 The inscription in French reads: A LA GLOIRE DE DIEV ET DE LA TRESS. VIERGE SA
MERE, MARIE DE MEDICIZ A pose la premiere pierre de ceste Eglise et Monastere afin que
comme elle honore et recognoist ceste Mere du Roy des Roys pour la Conservatrice du Royaume
et de sa Royalle lignee et pour le modelle et exemplaire de sa vie et de son nom. Aussy Elle la
puisse avoir dans le Ciel pour mediatrice de son Salut eternel. L’AN DE NOSTRE
REDEMPTION MDCXXVIII.
90 For a discussion of the categories of seventeenth-century French prints, see Marianne Grivel,
Le commerce de l'estampe à Paris au XVIIe siècle (Geneva: Droz, 1986), 138-60. For scenes of
contemporary events, see ibid., 157-60. Examples of these images are found at the Bibliothèque
ationale Département des Estampes in the Hennin Collection and in the series of the Histoire de
France (Qb1), the series in which is found the engraving of the foundation stone of Notre-Damede-Pitié.
156

91 These were not the only examples of foundation stones with four medallic faces surrounding
the dedicatory inscription. One example is from August 1628 for the reconstruction of the
church at the Jesuit College at Clermont. One of the medals featured the portrait of the king with
the arms of the city of Clermont on the reverse. The other medal is not known. For this
example, see Blanchet and Dieudonné, Manuel, 3:120. Another example was made for Notre-
Dame-des-Victoires, begun 1629, which will be addressed in the following chapter.
One explanation for the rarity of these images is the print medium. It is possible that many more
examples of this type of print existed than have been preserved. For a discussion of some of the
challenges presented by this medium, see Henri Zerner, "Introduction," in The French
Renaissance in Prints: from the Bibliothèque nationale de France, ed. Karen Jacobson (Los
Angeles: Grunwald Center for the Graphic Arts, University of California Los Angeles, 1994),
25.
92 The propagandistic nature of seventeenth-century French prints is a common thread in the
literature. Several works that discuss this aspect of the medium include: Cynthia Burlingham,
"Portraiture as Propaganda: Printmaking during the Reign of Henri IV," in The French
Renaissance in Prints: from the Bibliothèque nationale de France, ed. Karen Jacobson (Los
Angeles: Grunwald Center for the Graphic Arts, University of California Los Angeles, 1994),
139-51; Grivel, Commerce, 99.
93 Traditional scholarship portrays the French government from 1624 to 1630 as a triumvirate
ruled by Louis XIII, Richelieu, and Maria de’ Medici; see Carmona, Marie de Médicis, 421-31;
Chevallier, Louis XIII. A different interpretation is offered by A. Lloyd Moote, who suggests
that the roles were far from equal. He argues that Maria de’ Medici was dissatisfied with her lack
of influence for several years before she made Louis XIII choose between her and Richelieu; see
Moote, Louis XIII, 168, 201-05.
94 For Louis XIII’s treatment of La Rochelle, see Moote, Louis XIII, 194-98.
95 For the views held by Maria de’ Medici and the dévots on the siege at La Rochelle, see
Dubost, "Reine," 122; Moote, Louis XIII, 194.
96 For Maria’s dissatisfaction with being regent, see Moote, Louis XIII, 168, 205.
157

CHAPTER 6
FROM NOTRE-DAME-DES-VICTOIRES TO NOTRE-DAME-DE-PARIS:
THE SHIFTING PRIORITIES OF LOUIS XIII (1629-1638)
Throughout the 1620s Louis XIII supported a number of newly established reformed
religious orders in Paris, contributing to the façade of the church of the Feuillants and providing
aid for the construction of the church of the French Oratorians and Saint-Louis-des-Jésuites. In
1629 the king’s record as a patron of ecclesiastical architecture prompted a community of
Discalced Augustinians to ask the sovereign to be the founder of its monastery and church, a
request to which he agreed. In December of the same year Louis XIII honored the reformed
order by naming its monastery a royal foundation and placing the first stone of its church Notre-
Dame-des-Victoires (fig. 82). Because of the king’s past associations with religious groups and
bolstered by his early show of support, the Augustins Déchaussés anticipated royal funding for
their church, modeling their project after earlier buildings receiving financial contributions from
the monarch. In the end, however, the monks’ attempts were in vain, and they became the last
reformed religious order in Paris to receive any support from the king. Beginning in the early
1630s Louis XIII instead chose to focus royal funds on churches with established connections to
the state, starting with the Sainte-Chapelle and continuing with the chapel of the Sorbonne and
Notre-Dame-de-Paris.
In light of Louis XIII’s active contributions during the 1620s to churches of reformed
religious orders, the king’s abrupt decision to no longer support them during the following
decade must be considered as a significant change. My purpose in this chapter is to demonstrate
that royal neglect of Notre-Dame-des-Victoires stemmed from shifting priorities in the French
government, concerns that moved from worries about internal struggles with conservative
Catholics and rebellious Huguenots to an international focus on the expansion of Habsburg
forces. In the early 1630s as Louis XIII turned his attention to the Sainte-Chapelle, the king no
longer needed to control the reformed religious orders to buttress his claims as leader of the
Gallican church. Alternatively France was becoming increasingly active in the Thirty Years’
War, forcing the king to take action against a growing Spanish threat. I argue that the king, by
choosing to support ecclesiastical buildings with established histories with the French kingdom,
158

moved away from using churches as tools to promote his authority over potentially subversive
religious groups. Instead he focused on buildings that not only symbolized his divine right but
that also recalled France’s preeminent position in Christendom. By using royal funds to restore
or rebuild these churches, Louis XIII used the buildings as a form of visual propaganda,
promoting the country’s privileged status among all Christian nations.
Scholars have traditionally viewed Notre-Dame-des-Victoires in light of its relation to
Louis XIII’s victory in 1628 over the Huguenots at La Rochelle and the king’s vow in 1638 to
the Virgin Mary, placing France under her protection. 1 More recent studies have moved away
from these interpretations, which place too much emphasis on events only tangentially related to
the church. Among the scholars who have provided new readings of the building is Anne Le Pas
de Sécheval, who briefly considers the church as one of several ecclesiastical structures receiving
special privileges from Louis XIII. 2 She contends that the fathers of the monastery asked Louis
XIII to protect their foundation only in the hopes that he would pay for the church.
Another explanation is provided by Martin Schieder. He argues that in opposition to
royal policy from the dévot party, Louis XIII used the church to demonstrate the legitimacy of
his rule, marking the start of the Bourbon dynasty’s support of sacred architecture. 3 While
Schieder’s thesis mirrors my argument for Saint-Louis-des-Jésuites and the French Oratorians,
his work lacks consideration of other churches supported by Louis XIII. By examining Notre-
Dame-des-Victoires in isolation, he fails to recognize that since 1623 the king had used churches
as political tools to combat religiously motivated groups seeking to subvert his authority. Most
recently Jean-Marie Barbiche examined the monastery of the Augustins Déchaussés from its
origins to its closure during the French Revolution, arguing that its multiple contacts with the
monarchy for nearly one hundred fifty years and its artistic riches dating from the lateseventeenth
and eighteenth century made it one of the principal religious establishments of
Paris. 4 Although Barbiche’s archival-based study lacks an extensive analysis of Louis XIII’s
motives, it offers the most thorough reconstruction of the church and provides careful
documentation of royal support.
Despite their narrowly defined focus, each of these studies has contributed to shaping my
view of Notre-Dame-des-Victoires in relation to Louis XIII and as an example of the king’s
involvement with the arts. Still needed, however, is an examination of this building’s unique
position as the last church of a reformed religious order to be given royal support during the
159

eign of Louis XIII. By looking at it in relation to other examples of ecclesiastical architecture
receiving financial aid from the king, especially those built after 1630, I argue that Louis XIII’s
pattern of support responded to the major concerns facing the French government during the
1630s.
In demonstrating my thesis, I will first consider the Augustins Déchaussés’ plans for
Notre-Dame-des-Victoires, which I propose the fathers based primarily on Saint-Louis-des-
Jésuites. By looking to the most recent church to have received royal support, the reformed
Augustinians demonstrated their desire to secure the monarch’s favor while confirming the
king’s renown as a patron of reformed religious orders. I will then examine the manner in which
Louis XIII contributed to the Sainte-Chapelle, the chapel of the Sorbonne, and Notre-Dame-des-
Paris. Each church had a historical connection with the French monarchy, bonds which helped
to promote the divine right of kings and the France’s privileged position in Christianity as the
New Holy Land. The chapter will close with an examination of France’s increasingly active role
in the Thirty Years’ War, demonstrating that the state’s shifting concerns from internal struggles
to an international focus on the threat of Spanish growth mirrored the king’s changing approach
to ecclesiastical architecture.
The Augustins Déchaussés and the Construction of Notre-Dame-des-Victoires
In December 1629 shortly after Louis XIII placed the ceremonial first stone, construction
started at Notre-Dame-des-Victoires. Just three years later with only the choir finished to the
entablature all work stopped. This marked the first of many interruptions in construction that
delayed completion of the work until 1740. Despite the brief duration of this first construction
phase, the Augustinian fathers were already in the process of creating a church that would honor
Louis XIII through architecture, ceremony, and painting. The inspiration for a building
functioning as an encomium to the sovereign came from Saint-Louis-des-Jésuites, the most
recent church supported by the king. My contention is that the Augustins Déchaussés, with the
goal of convincing Louis XIII that Notre-Dame-des-Victoires was just as worthy of royal
support, intentionally borrowed features celebrating the French monarchy from the Jesuit church
for use in their own building program. Ultimately the Discalced Augustinians proved
160

unsuccessful in their attempt, a failure that resulted from Louis XIII’s changing foreign policy
and not from Notre-Dame-des-Victoires’ dependence upon the Jesuit church.
The Augustins Déchaussés were a reformed order of the Grand Augustinians, originating
in Portugal around 1565. 5 They first established themselves in France in 1595 in the diocese of
Grenoble, obtaining in 1607 permission to found a house in Paris. The following year
Marguerite de Valois, who had made a vow to establish a monastery in Paris, invited the fathers
to the capital, offering to build a church for them. 6 After the princess’ patronage dissolved in
1612, forcing the Augustins Déchaussés to return to southern France, the religious group was
able to locate permanently in Paris in 1619, settling on the right bank outside the city walls near
the porte Montmartre. 7 In 1628 the group moved closer to the center of Paris, purchasing a
house near the faubourg Saint-Honoré, just to the north of the future Place des Victoires (fig. 83).
At this time work began on a monastery, designed by François Galopin, while construction of
Notre-Dame-des-Victoires on the plans of Pierre Le Muet started one year later in December
1629.
Due to the congregation’s constant struggle to secure funding, completion of the church
only occurred in 1740. Following the first interruption in construction in 1632, work resumed for
brief intervals in 1642, 1656, and 1663. 8 In 1737 the fathers received authorization to borrow up
to two hundred thousand livres to finish the church, which was achieved in 1740 under the
direction of the architect Jean-Sylvain Cartault. Although the building suffered cosmetic
damages during the French Revolution and again in the Commune of 1871, the structure
remained largely intact, functioning throughout the nineteenth century as a parish church. In
1927 Pope Pius XI raised it to the title of minor basilica.
Although Pierre Le Muet’s involvement with Notre-Dame-des-Victoires only lasted from
1629 to 1632, scholars agree that the architect’s original plan remained largely unchanged during
the subsequent building campaigns. 9 The limited alterations during the building’s long
construction history and the lack of modifications to the structure since its completion are
significant because no record of Le Muet’s original design exists. Thus a reconstruction of the
seventeenth-century plan is based on the current building along with archival documents
recording the order’s history in Paris. Today the church consists of a single nave of four bays
bordered by communicating side chapels, followed by non-projecting transepts at the crossing,
and a choir of three bays terminated by a polygonal apse (fig. 84). Flanking each side of the
161

choir are two additional rooms. Those closest to the transept are original to the design and
function as chapels. Of the other two rooms, the one on the left and to the rear was at first the
ground floor of one of the monastery’s buildings, also begun in 1629. 10 Realizing that
construction of the church would be slow, the Augustinian fathers converted this room into a
provisional chapel, which served the congregation until the consecration of the church in 1666.
At present it is divided into two spaces, with the larger area functioning as an additional chapel
and the smaller one as a vestibule. The other remaining room located to the right of the choir on
the plan is the church’s current sacristy. It was built in the nineteenth century, making it the one
area in this part of the church not original to the seventeenth-century scheme.
Apart from this addition, the only other major changes to Le Muet’s design occurred
prior to the building’s completion in 1740. The first was the decision in 1663 by the architect
Gabriel Le Duc to forgo plans to build a tall dome over the crossing, opting instead for a shallow
hemispherical cover, which would be adorned in the late 1730s with a glory wrought in stucco
relief by Charles Rebillé (fig. 85). 11 The second modification took place during the last
construction campaign, at which point the fathers requested that the nave be extended from three
to four bays. 12
Le Muet’s plan for Notre-Dame-des-Victoires is typical for Parisian ecclesiastical
architecture at this time, including single naves bordered by side chapels, non-projecting
transepts, and a spacious choir with a projecting apse. A number of other architectural elements,
less often encountered in early seventeenth-century France, suggest that the building had a
specific model, namely Saint-Louis-des-Jésuites. 13 Among the similarities are the
communicating side chapels, which in both buildings are separated by broad arches, creating a
more open design (fig. 31). In addition each church has two chapels framing the choir, and the
Augustinian building originally had plans for a prominent dome similar to the one in the Jesuit
building. And even though Notre-Dame-des-Victoires lacks galleries in the nave, they were
present above the four chapels bordering the transepts until 1740 when they were walled in (fig.
86). 14 Built from 1663 to 1665 by Gabriel Le Duc and presumably part of Le Muet’s original
design, they would have provided a further visual connection to the Jesuit church (fig. 87).
Additional architectural features such as the barrel vault, the arched clerestory windows, and the
prominent pilasters and entablature add to the similarities between the two churches (figs. 85 and
35).
162

Though the major branches of the Discalced Augustinian order found in Italy, Spain, and
France shared common goals for reform, they varied considerably. Not only did the fathers
practice different observances, but they lacked a uniform approach to architecture. 15 The
absence of rules governing ecclesiastical architecture meant that the individual congregations
were free to choose the form of their own churches. Aware of the financial contributions the
king had bestowed on the Society of Jesus and hoping to secure their own royal patronage, the
Parisian Augustins Déchaussés chose the architecture of Saint-Louis-des-Jésuites as the model to
follow for their own church.
Although the assertion that Pierre Le Muet based his design of Notre-Dame-des-Victoires
on the Jesuit church remains hypothetical, two other incidents support my argument. One of
these relates to the ceremonial placing of the first stone for the Augustinian church. On 9
December 1629 at a service presided over by the archbishop of Paris, Louis XIII placed the first
stone of the building in a pillar on the left side of the choir. 16 Recorded on a print, the stone
follows a familiar format, consisting of the obverse and reverse of two silver medals surrounding
the dedicatory Latin inscription (fig. 88). 17 Appropriate for an Augustinian church named Notre-
Dame-des-Victoires, the medallic faces in the upper corners depict the Virgin Mary holding the
Christ Child and St. Augustine with a model of the church. The obverse and reverse of the
remaining medal focus on the royal patron, showing a portrait of Louis XIII and the arms of
France and Navarre.
The foundation stone clearly repeats the design used at Saint-Louis-des-Jésuites (begun
1627) and Notre-Dame-de-Pitié (begun 1628), the two most recent churches in Paris to have
benefitted from royal support (figs. 36 and 77). Just as with the two previous examples, a print
commemorating the event features enlarged versions of the medals surrounding a rectangle
representing the foundation stone. While the similarity between the designs of the prints is quite
close, the one for Notre-Dame-des-Victoires differed in one key respect. As recorded in the
order’s archives, the Augustins Déchaussés commissioned the print and presented a copy of it on
white satin to the king. 18 Among the authors recording the ceremony was Piganiol de la Force,
who also described the same event for Saint-Louis-des-Jésuites and Notre-Dame-de-Pitié. 19
Lacking from this or any other record of the ceremonies for the placing of the first stone at the
Jesuit or Religious of St. Elizabeth churches is the suggestion that the monks or nuns were
responsible for making their prints.
163

Moreover not all foundation stones for churches receiving royal support followed this
format. Two such examples from the 1620s are the church of the French Oratory and Notre-
Dame-du-Calvaire. The Oratorian foundation stone consisted of two silver plaques, each of
which was engraved with an inscription, while the one for the Filles du Calvaire simply had one
medal with an inscription. 20 When viewed in connection with the architectural similarities
between Notre-Dame-des-Victoires and Saint-Louis-des-Jésuites, I propose that the monks
copied the design and the idea of creating a print with the hope of securing funding for their
church from the king.
Until the partially constructed Notre-Dame-des-Victoires was consecrated in 1666,
services were held in the provisional chapel on the ground floor of one of the monastery’s wings.
A work of art recorded in this chapel and dating from 1632 demonstrates that the monks also
looked to Saint-Louis-des-Jésuites for inspiration concerning the correct manner in which to
create an appropriate setting for a church receiving royal aid. Although the painting no longer
exists, an inventory records that it first hung above the high altar of the provisional chapel before
being moved to the completed church. 21 Featuring the same figures shown on the medals for the
foundation stone, the painting depicted the Virgin Mary holding the Christ Child, who carried a
palm in his hand, surrounded by angels holding palms, crowns of laurels, and flowers. The
Virgin offered one of these crowns to Louis XIII, who knelt before the celestial figures, dressed
in his royal vestments and with a laurel wreath on his head. A winged angel, placed next to the
king, offered a bare sword to the Virgin while St. Augustine, located on the opposite side of the
painting and clad in the Discalced Augustinian habit, leaned back to view Mary and Christ.
In addition to recalling details of the medals associated with the foundation stone, the
painting evoked a passage from the letters patent, which established the church as a royal
foundation. Stating the reasons for the monarchical support of the Discalced Augustinians, the
legal document read: “To mark forever the piety and devotion that we have for the glorious
Virgin Mary,” the king desires to found the church and convent, dedicating it “to Our Lady of
Victories in thanks of such glorious success that heaven has favorably left us by the intervention
of the Virgin.” 22 The painting, depicting Louis XIII kneeling before the Virgin Mary and
crowned with a laurel wreath, evoked the reason given in the letters patent for the royal support,
which referred to the belief that the Mother of God had interceded on behalf of the king on 28
October 1628, bringing the military battle at La Rochelle to a close.
164

Despite this strong statement providing the motivating factor for establishing the church
as a royal foundation, the idea to make this gesture did not originate with the king. Instead on 5
Novemeber 1629, a month before the ceremonial placing of the first stone, Anselme de Sainte-
Marguerite, the prior of the monastery, and Fulgence de Sainte-Monique, a member of the order,
secured an audience with Louis XIII at the château of Saint-Germain-en-Laye, requesting that
the king be the founder of the church. 23 The Augustins Déchaussés had voted to make the
French monarch their benefactor, but the conditions leading to that decision are unknown. 24
Jean-Marie Barbiche speculates that the victory at La Rochelle prompted the fathers to use the
defeat of the Huguenots to their advantage. He suggests that the reformed Augustinians
presented themselves as preachers converting the heretics, comparing their role to that of Louis
XIII. 25 Adding to this interpretation, I propose that the king’s involvement with other churches
in the capital must be considered. In addition to building on the momentum of La Rochelle, the
king’s renown as a patron of reformed religious orders encouraged the fathers to seek the aid of
the French monarch.
The painting that was once above the high altar of the provisional chapel further supports
this claim. By featuring the Virgin Mary handing the crown to Louis XIII, the painting presented
the conferral of power directly from heaven to the monarch, legitimating the French king’s
authority and semi-divine status. As discussed in chapter three, similar images were in the
process of being completed for Saint-Louis-des-Jésuites. In addition to sculptural decorations of
crowns, fleurs-de-lis, and the royal arms, the interior program of the Jesuit church featured
numerous representations of French kings. 26 Among these was St. Louis, whose apotheosis was
found in the second tier of the altarpiece (fig. 46). The royal imagery not only honored the
church’s patron, but as with the altarpiece at Notre-Dame-des-Victoires it reinforced the divine
right of French monarchs. 27
As with the architecture for their church and the design and print of the foundation stone,
the Augustins Déchaussés looked to Saint-Louis-des-Jésuites for inspiration for the interior of
their place of worship. Prompting the monks to follow the examples at the Jesuit church were
the king’s generous donations to Saint-Louis-des-Jésuites to assist with construction. Believing
that if they too created a space venerating French kingship, then Louis XIII would help to pay the
cost of building a church that he had already named a royal foundation, the Augustins
Déchaussés intentionally borrowed features from the most recent church supported by the king.
165

Additional Churches supported by Louis XIII
After the ceremonial placing of the first stone in December 1629, Louis XIII provided no
further assistance to the Augustins Déchaussés, leaving the monks to fund construction of their
church and monastery. 28 By 1632 the monetary sources were exhausted, resulting in the first of
numerous interruptions in construction. A variety of reasons are often cited for the king’s
neglect of Notre-Dame-des-Victoires, including a lack of funds due to frequent military
campaigns and the death of the king in 1643. 29 An additional factor suggested by Anne Le Pas
de Sécheval is Louis XIII’s preoccupation with other churches during the 1630s, preventing the
30
king from financially supporting the Augustins Déchaussés. This latter reason is certainly
convincing, especially considering that between 1630 and 1638 the king committed royal funds
to the Sainte-Chapelle, the chapel of the Sorbonne, and Notre-Dame-de-Paris. Lacking from this
explanation, however, is the acknowledgement that not one of these three churches was built for
reformed religious orders. Indeed Notre-Dame-des-Victoires marks the end of a decade during
which all of Louis XIII’s patronage of religious institutions in the capital city was dedicated to
monasteries of orders focusing on reform. Since churches for these institutions continued to be
built throughout the 1630s, the lack of this type of structure cannot account for the king’s new
interest. 31
The three Parisian churches receiving royal funding during the 1630s functioned
individually as a palace chapel, a college chapel, and the cathedral of Paris. More importantly,
each represented a venerable tradition in French history emphasizing the divine right of kings
and marking the state’s privileged position in Christianity as the New Jerusalem. By shifting his
funding priorities to these buildings, Louis XIII signaled a change in his government. No longer
was he as concerned with the claims of the dévot party, so closely aligned with the reformed
religious orders and which sought to strengthen a united Catholic Europe. Instead his foremost
concern became the increasingly expanding territory of the Habsburg rulers. I argue that Louis
XIII, fearing Spanish incursion on French soil, used these churches as political tools, promoting
France’s privileged status among all Christian nations.
Sainte-Chapelle
On 26 July 1630 as some plombiers worked at the Sainte-Chapelle, a fire broke out on
the building’s roof (fig. 16). 32 After sending word to the governor of Paris requesting aid, the
166

treasurer and the canons set about the task of securing the chapel’s most sacred relics, located in
the grande chasse on the high altar and directly under the burning trusses. Since the great
reliquary was locked, the religious had to force it open and move the holy objects within it to the
sacristy. Saving the relics, which included a number of relics of Christ’s Passion, was of critical
importance because they had made the Sainte-Chapelle a locus sanctus, turning Paris into the
New Jerusalem. 33 Louis IX, who built the thirteenth-century chapel to house the relics, wanted
to establish France as the successor to the Holy Land. Not only did the relics entitle Louis IX to
claim that he and all subsequent French kings were the leaders of a new chosen land, they also
functioned as sacred objects with the power to protect the dynasty and kingdom. 34
Although Louis XIII was visiting Lyon at the time of the fire, upon receiving word of the
disaster he quickly set about making decisions and allocating royal funds for the repairs, which
would include rebuilding the roof and steeple. Anne Le Pas de Sécheval has argued that the
rapid response to the Sainte-Chapelle fire provided Louis XIII with an opportunity to show his
reverence for St. Louis. 35 While the king’s devotion to his ancestor certainly prompted action, it
was likely due to more than personal veneration. Instead, the eminent position retained by the
Sainte-Chapelle in seventeenth-century France forced Louis XIII to act quickly to secure the
building housing the Passion relics. Through the process of restoring the chapel, the king
rediscovered that the building sheltering the kingdom’s palladium functioned as a political tool,
symbolizing France’s continued position as the chosen land.
The high regard in which the Sainte-Chapelle was held in the seventeenth century is
evident from a variety of sources. In addition to claiming that the chapel was second only to the
cathedral of Notre-Dame in worthiness of being seen, authors of contemporary guidebooks
commended it for the collection of holy relics. 36 Among these were the crown of thorns, a piece
of the true cross, iron from the lance, a portion of the sponge, part of Christ’s robe, and nails
from the cross. 37 The authors credited the acquisition of each sacred object to the pious St.
Louis, who was praised for creating a chapel that not only represented royalty but appeared to be
designed by “a hand more than human.” 38 The kingdom’s comparison to the Holy Land even
still held sway, as shown in writings by Jean-Pierre Camus, the Bishop of Belley, who in 1620
praised France as the New Jerusalem. 39
The importance of the Sainte-Chapelle to the Bourbon dynasty remained so great that
Louis XIV used the thirteenth-century building as the principal source of inspiration for his
167

palace chapel at Versailles, designed by Jules Hardouin-Mansart and constructed from 1689 to
1710 (fig. 89). In addition to each chapel having the same plan, interiors with two distinct levels,
and similar exterior silhouettes, both include pictorial references to the Passion relics. 40 At the
Sainte-Chapelle, stained glass windows in the central section of the east side showed the Passion
narrative, while panels on the south side featured the history of the relics, as for example the
image depicting St. Louis and Robert d’Artois Bearing the Relics (fig. 90). 41 At Versailles,
reliefs on the spandrels and piers facing the nave depict scenes from the Passion, while Antoine
Coypel’s ceiling painting of God the Father in Glory (1709-1710) includes many relics housed at
the Sainte-Chapelle (fig. 91). 42 As Martha Mel Edmunds demonstrates, the celebration of the
Passion relics at Versailles was intended as a significant reference to Louis IX’s chapel, marking
its continued place of honor during the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. 43
Prior to the fire of 1630, Louis XIII had also paid tribute to the holy chapel. In 1612 he
and his mother donated seven thousand livres to the Sainte-Chapelle for velvet wall hangings
embroidered with golden fleurs-de-lis. 44 Then in 1626 the Chambre des comptes, acting on
behalf of the king, commissioned a reliquary for the Sainte-Chapelle modeled after the
thirteenth-century building. Placed on the high altar under the grande chasse, the reliquary
symbolized the tradition of St. Louis, specifically the establishment of France as the new Holy
Land by the acquisition of the most renowned relics of Christianity (fig. 92). 45 The reliquary’s
function was to hold the numerous relics that no longer had their original container, many of
which had gone missing during the political volatility of the second half of the sixteenth
century. 46 Indeed from the start of the Wars of Religion in 1562 a number of the works from the
treasury mysteriously disappeared. During the League’s control of Paris, the canons of the
chapel brought further depletion to the collection when they were forced to sell relics and
reliquaries to support their daily needs and those of the Leaguers. The stability achieved by the
Bourbon government secured the treasury while renewing the Sainte-Chapelle’s place of honor
within the French kingdom.
Evidence of the king’s preoccupation with the chapel and its relics is visible in Grégoire
Huret’s undated print of Christ Giving the Crown of Thorns to Louis XIII (fig. 93). 47 In this
image, which shows Christ handing the crown of thorns to the kneeling king, Louis XIII
reaffirms the concept that France as owner of the holy relics is God’s chosen land. The theme is
reinforced by symbols of royal power shown in the background. Two angels standing behind the
168

king hold the French crown, scepter, and hand of justice while beyond them is a background of
classical architecture, including an entablature with metopes decorated with additional crowns.
Not only does the crown of thorns in the print recall the Sainte-Chapelle, but along with the
emblems of power held by the angels it functions as an attribute of Louis IX, reiterating his role
in securing the most holy relics and establishing France’s preeminent place in Christendom. 48
Since the Sainte-Chapelle’s essential function was to house the Passion relics, which
made France the New Holy Land, Louis XIII recognized that all available royal resources
including a personal gift of money must be dedicated to restoring the damage caused by the
fire. 49 Although the restoration project would only be complete in the 1660s, the channeling of
funds into this project contributed to the lack of financial assistance to Notre-Dame-des-
Victoires. By turning his attention to the Sainte-Chapelle, the king discovered that churches with
established connections to the French kingdom could also be effective political tools, functioning
as visual propaganda to reinforce France’s privileged status with God.
The Chapel of St. Ursula at the Sorbonne
As work proceeded on the Sainte-Chapelle, two additional opportunities to support
churches connected to the French kingdom presented themselves to Louis XIII, the chapel of the
Sorbonne and Notre-Dame-de-Paris. In 1634 work began at the Sorbonne on a new chapel of St.
Ursula, designed by Jacques Lemercier. It replaced the existing structure, which had been on site
since the fourteenth century (fig. 94). The plans for the chapel followed in the wake of work
undertaken by Cardinal Richelieu in 1626 to rebuild the fifteenth-century collegial structures. 50
The building is most frequently associated with the French minister, who conceived of it as a
personal funerary chapel and provided a vast sum to ensure its construction. Less well known is
the financial contribution to the building by Louis XIII, who in 1633 gave twelve thousand livres
to help with construction. 51
While the king may have seen the work at the Sorbonne as a way to enhance the beauty
of the capital, he had several other reasons to contribute to the rebuilding of the chapel. 52 Among
these was the Sorbonne’s long history in France. The institution was founded in 1257 by Robert
de Sorbon, the chaplain and confessor to Louis IX, and approved by the pope in 1259. To
facilitate development of the college, the thirteenth-century king donated land and houses along
the rue Coupe-Gueule (today the rue de la Sorbonne), ensuring that the masters and students
would have a place to study. 53 Because the Sorbonne, which had only grown in prestige since its
169

founding, was first supported by St. Louis, the king’s contribution to the seventeenth-century
chapel provided another opportunity to emulate the holy French monarch.
A further factor prompting royal support of the chapel was the opportunity it provided the
king to express his gratitude towards Cardinal Richelieu, the minister whose services he had
chosen to retain even at the expense of his mother’s exile. Although Louis XIII was initially
suspicious of Maria de’ Medici’s favorite, by the Day of the Dupes Richelieu had proven his
willingness to serve the king and state exclusively. 54 Indeed, to prove further his loyalty to the
crown, Richelieu donated considerable sums in 1631 and 1633 to Saint-Louis-des-Jésuites for
the construction of its façade, contributing to an ensemble that glorified the French monarchy
and extolled the sovereign’s authority. It seems reasonable to suggest that, in a show of respect
for the minister’s generous support of the Jesuit church, Louis XIII returned the honor by
contributing to Richelieu’s latest building project.
Apart from the opportunities afforded by the chapel to honor St. Louis and to thank the
French minister, I also propose that the most decisive reason Louis XIII had for supporting the
Sorbonne was Richelieu’s resolution of an ongoing debate. Since 1554 the college was the
official seat of the faculty of theology of the University of Paris, a group primarily comprised of
Gallicans promoting the authority of the state above that of the pope. The other major body at
the college was the doctors of the Sorbonne, who in contrast to the faculty tended to be more
conservative, advocating ultramontane policies benefitting papal powers. 55 The ideological
differences often impacted public thought, especially when theological publications advancing a
certain position forced the other side to issue a public censure. 56
The debates continued throughout the first part of the seventeenth century with the
publication of Gallican tracts by Edmond Richer and ultramontane volumes such as those by the
Jesuits Bellarmine and Santarelli, each of which provoked tension. Richelieu, elected as
proviseur or governor of the Sorbonne in 1622, often had to play the role of moderator, settling
the disputes between the two bodies. 57 A decisive instance in which the minister had to
intervene in the division at the Sorbonne occurred in 1629. The issue centered around the
doctors’ request that students must subscribe to all pontifical decrees, a point refused by the
faculty who argued that royal power held authority over ecclesiastical bodies. 58 To settle the
controversy, Richelieu made the faculty recognize the full authority of the pope in the Church,
but adhering to his concern for the state he also proclaimed that this authority could not be
170

exercised to the detriment of royal power. As noted by André Tuilier, although the minister did
not authorize complete control by the king, he implicitly recognized the autonomy of royal
authority in regards to ecclesiastical power. 59
This action by the highest elected official of the Sorbonne made the institute a defender
of the monarchy. Not only had the college become a symbol of royal power, but its origins
provided Louis XIII with a further means of venerating his sainted ancestor. Together these
features endowed the Sorbonne with a venerable tradition in French history. By defending the
authority of the king, it emphasized divine right; by originating under the support of Louis IX, it
functioned as a reminder of France’s preeminent position in Christendom.
The Cathedral of Notre-Dame of Paris
Following the monetary donations to the Sorbonne, Louis XIII embarked on a series of
actions that would mark his role as patron of Notre-Dame-de-Paris, the last church the king
would support in the French capital. As with the other two churches receiving royal favors
during the 1630s, the king recognized that with its established connection to the French kingdom
Notre-Dame could also serve as an effective political tool.
The cathedral of Paris held an important place within the kingdom, functioning
symbolically as the first church of France (fig. 95). Its illustrious position derived not only from
its having been the seat of the bishop since its inception in the fourth century, but also from its
role as the cathedral of Paris, serving as the ecclesiastical authority for the Gallic capital. 60
Notre-Dame-de-Paris’s status was further enhanced by its ties to the French monarchy. In
addition to being the site of many royal weddings and baptisms, the church functioned from the
thirteenth century onward as the focal point for royal funerals, with the religious service held
there before interment of the body at Saint-Denis. 61 And while the coronation of French kings
almost always took place at Reims cathedral, the monarch’s first official entry into the city after
the ceremony was celebrated every time in a religious ceremony at Notre-Dame-de-Paris. 62 The
cathedral’s early Christian origins combined with its role during royal rituals, ensured that the
building became intimately connected in the public’s mind with the monarchy, strengthening the
ties between church and state and reinforcing the notion of the king’s divine right.
The cathedral’s elevated status continued throughout the seventeenth century with
contemporary writers remarking that the church was the most august and dignified place of
worship in France. 63 Louis XIII contributed to the positive outlook by working to further raise
171

its position within the kingdom. In 1622 he convinced Pope Gregory XV (1621-1623) to name
the church the seat of the archbishop, an honor which had been sought by French kings since at
least the early fifteenth century. 64 Finally the capital of the kingdom, the city in which French
bishops traditionally held their assemblies, attained the privilege of being the principal see for
the region.
The king’s interest in the edifice began in the 1630s, at which time Louis directed his
attention to the chapel of the Virgin, an area located adjacent to the rood screen and to the right
of the choir’s entrance (fig. 96). Located near the liturgical center of the church, this space was
first created in 1627 when Anne of Austria erected an altar. 65 According to Claude Malingre, the
altarpiece consisted of a centrally-placed domed niche adorned with the arms of France and
Spain and containing a miraculous image of the Virgin. 66 Although the chapel is no longer in
existence, contemporary documents indicate that Louis XIII gave two gifts to this chapel, the
first of which was a silver lamp, donated in 1636 in thanks for the prosperity bestowed on the
kingdom of France by the Virgin Mary. 67 Intended to be lit in perpetuity, it was adorned with
six candelabras and decorated with angels, the royal arms, and fleurs-de-lis. Two years later the
king again demonstrated his devotion to the chapel by offering a large cross. 68
Louis XIII’s most significant gesture to Notre-Dame-de-Paris occurred in December
1637 with the drafting of a vow dedicating his person, the state, the crown, and the French
subjects to the Virgin Mary. 69 Louis made the oath in thanks for military victories achieved
against the Huguenots and more recently Habsburg forces, especially the taking of Corbie in
1636 on the border of the Spanish Netherlands. 70 The vow was especially important to the
cathedral because it not only venerated the church’s patron saint, but it also contained a promise
to build a new high altar, which would consist of a sculpture of the Virgin Mary holding the dead
Christ with Louis XIII kneeling at their feet. Although construction of the altar would only occur
in 1699, the vow along with the gifts of the lamp and cross marked the importance of Notre-
Dame-de-Paris to Louis XIII. 71
The publication of the vow in 1638 is often interpreted as an example of the king’s
devotion to the Virgin Mary, whose status was further enhanced by the establishment that same
year of a procession in Paris celebrating the Feast of the Assumption. 72 Two additional events
occurring close in time to the declaration of the vow are also viewed as being connected to the
oath. The first incident was the birth in September 1638 of the dauphin after twenty-two years of
172

a childless marriage for Louis XIII and Anne of Austria. 73 Because the conception of the heir to
the French throne took place shortly after the drafting of the vow, the public saw the arrival of
Louis XIV as a sign of divine appreciation for dedicating France to the Virgin Mary.
The second event was the kingdom’s growing involvement in a war against the
Habsburgs. 74 In the vow to the Virgin Mary, Louis XIII claimed that “the greatest enemy forces
of this crown” were rallying to conspire the ruin of France. 75 Considering that the Gallic
kingdom was at that moment heavily engaged in the Thirty Years’ War, the said enemy must be
Spain, which posed the most significant threat to France. The vow also stated that a divine hand
forcefully supported the justice of Louis XIII’s cause, suggesting that God sanctioned France’s
aggressive tactics against Spanish troops. 76 I propose that by using the vow as a means to justify
his war with Spain, while in the same oath promising to build a new high altar to glorify Notre-
Dame-de-Paris, Louis XIII delineated his approach to ecclesiastical architecture during the
1630s. As structures symbolizing the French monarchy, the churches would be used as tools
against growing external threats.
The king’s support of Notre-Dame-de-Paris drew attention to the divine right of French
kings. By connecting his acts of patronage to the Virgin Mary’s delivery of prosperity and
military victories to France, Louis XIII reinforced the central place of the cathedral within the
kingdom. The favor that the Queen of Heaven showed towards France combined with Notre-
Dame-de-Paris’s close associations with the monarchy made the cathedral a testament to the
direct line of power from God to sovereign. In a similar manner, the support Louis gave to the
two other churches during the 1630s emphasized additional important aspects of the French
monarchy, justifying attacks against fellow Catholic rulers during the Thirty Years’ War. While
his prompt attention to repairing the Sainte-Chapelle signaled the building’s continued role as a
symbol of France’s position as the New Jerusalem, his contribution to the Sorbonne chapel
facilitated its position as a symbol of royal authority.
France and Spain
The Thirty Years War began in 1618, just one year after Louis XIII assumed personal
control of his government. Despite several French attacks against Iberian forces during the
1620s, more than fifteen years elapsed before France officially declared war against Spain.
173

Scholarship shows that the reasons for the delay stemmed from domestic problems plaguing the
king throughout the first half of his reign, troubles centering on familial conflicts and religious
divisions. Upon resolving these issues, the king turned his attention to the growing danger posed
by Habsburg Spain and Austria, a threat which I will demonstrate altered the king’s support of
ecclesiastical architecture.
Indeed the French government’s new stance against expanding Habsburg forces occurred
in 1633, shortly after the fire at the Sainte-Chapelle and the same time at which Louis XIII
shifted his patronage priorities from churches for religious orders to those connected to the state.
My contention is that it was the fear of increasing Habsburg power that drove the king to support
the churches he did in the 1630s. By choosing ecclesiastical buildings with established histories
with the French Kingdom, Louis XIII signaled a move away from concerns with internal
divisions to focusing on presenting a united front. Instead of using churches as a tool to promote
his authority over religious groups seeking to subordinate royal power to the will of the pope, he
focused on buildings that could advance the country’s privileged status among all Christian
nations. An investigation of the timeline and events leading up to France’s entry into the war
will clarify Louis XIII’s decision to support churches with venerable French traditions.
Scholars agree that Louis XIII initially backed the empire during the Thirty Years’ War,
but by 1624 his policy had switched to an anti-Habsburg one. 77 Starting as a civil conflict, the
war pitted the Holy Roman Emperor Ferdinand of Austria against his Protestant subjects in
Bohemia and Hungary. As a fellow Catholic ruler facing his own troubles with the Huguenots,
Louis XIII felt inclined to support the emperor even though he knew that the authority Ferdinand
stood to gain upon defeating the heretics was a threat to the Bourbon dynasty. 78 Despite this
concern, in December 1619 the king’s confessor convinced Louis to send aid to the empire,
followed a year later with mediators, who settled a truce.
Believing that the lands to the east of his border were at peace, Louis turned his attention
to concerns on the home front, specifically reintegrating his mother into court life and embarking
on annual campaigns against the Protestants in the south of France. Over the next several years,
however, Spanish expansion became part of the Thirty Years’ War, threatening France and
leading Louis XIII to mark definitively his aggression towards Habsburg interests. The specific
event was the crisis of the alpine pass at Val Tellina, where Spain aided by papal troops
overthrew the Protestant Grisons, giving the Iberian government easy passage from its territories
174

in Milan to those in the Netherlands (fig. 25). 79 An ally with the Grisons, France saw the
Spanish incursion as a threat to its security, leading the Gallic kingdom to seek renewed alliances
with Venice and Savoy with the goal of ridding the region of the enemy forces. From this point
on Louis XIII worked against Habsburg interests, refusing to tolerate the expansion of other
states in the name of a Catholic Europe. 80
Despite the French kingdom’s action against Spain, studies of the period point out that
internal division prevented Louis XIII from taking an active role in the Thirty Years’ War. 81
Among the primary domestic issues plaguing the king were continuing challenges from the
Huguenots, a group which Louis and his advisors viewed as trying to create a state within the
state. In 1627 a significant siege at the western port of La Rochelle dramatically reduced the
rights of the Protestants. Two years later the king further restricted the actions of the rebellious
heretics, finally securing a satisfactory resolution to the decade-long conflict. 82
The other major factor distracting Louis XIII from foreign affairs was the Queen Mother.
In addition to her continued quest for power following her return to court in 1621, the queen’s
close association with the dévots and other religious groups troubled the king. He suspected his
mother and the religious groups of fostering hopes of securing alliances with Spain and the
papacy to create a united Catholic Europe, even at the expense of French sovereignty. While
Louis XIII asserted his power over these groups in part by supporting the church of the French
Oratorians in 1623 and Jesuit Saint-Louis-des-Jésuites in 1627, the internal conflict resulting
from the goals of the conservative Catholics was only resolved as a consequence of the Day of
the Dupes. Following Maria de’ Medici’s refusal to reconcile with Richelieu, the king dismissed
many of his mother’s advisors, whom he feared were plotting to undermine his minister. 83
Among those relieved from their positions were notable dévots such as Michel de Marillac, his
brother Louis, and François de Bassompierre. The removal from power of these figures and
Maria de’ Medici’s flight from France in 1631 were decisive actions that ended the more than
ten-year division between the dévots and the crown.
With his mother out of the picture and with the Huguenot problem settled, Louis
expected to turn his attention to foreign affairs, but again familial disputes thwarted these plans.
Following the Day of the Dupes, Gaston, duc d’Orléans, the king’s only brother and the heir to
the throne, fled France, first entering the Spanish territory of Besançon, then traveling to the anti-
French duchy of Lorraine (figs. 25 and 97). 84 The reason for his flight stemmed from a dispute
175

with Cardinal Richelieu, who refused to confer titles of privilege upon the duc’s favorites in
exchange for Gaston’s support of the minister following Maria de’ Medici’s removal from
power. In 1632 the king’s brother joined Maria de’ Medici in the Spanish Netherlands, and with
the help of Henri II, duc de Montmorency he raised an army largely comprised of foreign
mercenaries to defeat the cardinal minister. The invasion of France on 1 September proved
disastrous for the insurgents; Montmorency was captured, tried, and executed. As for Gaston, he
was pardoned by his brother but by the end of the year had again departed for Spanish territory.
As noted by scholars, the French heir’s decision to seek shelter with an enemy of his
homeland was just one additional event contributing to the complex web of affairs making up the
Thirty Years’ War. 85 France’s position in the conflict was further convoluted by official policy
on Austria and Spain. While France wanted to prevent Emperor Ferdinand from gaining too
much authority, its greatest concern was Spain, whose territorial expansion threatened to
surround the Gallic country. 86 To counter this threat, Louis XIII and his ministers chose an
indirect tactic, opting from the early 1630s to avoid outright conflict with Spain by fighting a war
by proxy. Instead of confronting its enemy, France persuaded its Swedish allies to engage in
combat against the emperor, thus preventing Austrian forces from aiding Spanish pursuits.
Coinciding with the king’s new approach to Spain was his shift in patronage of
ecclesiastical architecture. In 1629 Louis XIII made his last act of support to a reformed
religious order by naming Notre-Dame-des-Victoires a royal foundation; following the fire at the
Sainte-Chapelle in 1630, the king began directing royal funds to churches with established
connections to the French state. In addition to the holy chapel, the Sorbonne in 1634 and Notre-
Dame-de-Paris beginning in 1636 were the beneficiaries of the sovereign’s support.
The king’s overriding concern with foreign policy is further visible in the strategy to
secure the French borders, most notably those next to the duchy of Lorraine, the strategically
located territory on France’s eastern frontier whose duke Charles IV was assisting the Austrian
emperor (fig. 25). More importantly, it separated Spanish-controlled Franche Comté from the
Spanish Netherlands, preventing the Iberian Peninsula from controlling a continuous swath of
land to the east. In addition to its strategic location making it a target of French invasion, the
duchy became the focus of Louis XIII’s ire when the king discovered that Gaston had secretly
married Princess Marguerite of Lorraine during his first flight from France. 87 The prospect of
the future king of France forming such binding alliances with the enemy was untenable to the
176

king. In 1633 Louis XIII, marking the kingdom’s new stance against expanding Habsburg
forces, sent troops into Lorraine, forcing its leaders to flee and securing it as a French province
the following year. With the guarantee of lucrative positions for his favorites, Gaston returned to
his homeland in 1634, agreeing to the Parlement of Paris’s terms annulling his marriage to
Marguerite.
While Louis XIII’s goal of avoiding outright war with his greatest rival lasted for several
years, in the end Spain forced the king’s hand, making France declare war. The offending
incident was the Spanish entry into Trier in March 1635, a Protestant state that had placed itself
under the protection of the French king. 88 The blatant incursion against a territory under the
defense of France prompted an official declaration of war against Spain in May of the same year,
initiating a formal campaign between the two states that would only be settled in 1659.
As Louis XIII’s concerns over familial conflicts and religious divisions lessened, the king
became increasingly involved with the Thirty Years’ War. Mirroring these developments were
changes in the types of ecclesiastical architecture supported by the French monarch. No longer
were churches for reformed religious orders the focus of his patronage, but instead Louis XIII
channeled royal resources into those examples of sacred architecture that would best advance
France’s privileged status among all Christian nations.
Conclusion
The impact that Louis XIII’s support of churches during the 1630s had on the outcome of
the Thirty Years’ War is not conclusive. While the king’s promotion of the Sainte-Chapelle, the
chapel of the Sorbonne, and Notre-Dame-des-Victoires certainly did little to dissuade Philip IV
from pursuing his territorial expansion, by the early 1640s Spain’s position in the war had
deteriorated. 89 Although the war between the two states would only end officially in 1659, the
people of France may have interpreted the royal patronage of three of the most important
churches to the monarchy as factors contributing to the long Spanish decline.
Another issue contributing to the ambiguous impact of the king’s support was the death
of Louis XIII in 1643, only five years after his last major act of patronage at Notre-Dame-de-
Paris. Would Louis have continued to provide aid to churches, and if so, what type of
ecclesiastical institutions would have received the funding? Despite the king’s failing health and
177

his preoccupation with the war, Louis’s past actions suggest that had he had time he would have
continued to use churches as tools demonstrating his political agenda, focusing on those that
would advance the kingdom of France.
Although my argument that Louis XIII’s support of churches had an impact on the
Habsburg states is hypothetical, royal patronage certainly affected the people of France, most
notably Queen Anne of Austria. As regent for the minor Louis XIV, she maintained her
husband’s wars against the Habsburgs forces. This course of action was unexpected, considering
that the queen just four days after the death of Louis XIII had the Paris Parlement overturn the
king’s mandate that following his demise a council would continue his prescribed policy on all
issues of foreign policy. 90 Thus Anne of Austria and her closest adviser Cardinal Jules Mazarin
acquired all authority over the fate of France’s involvement in the war. Further contributing to
the surprise behind the queen’s actions was the fact that the leaders of the enemy forces were her
brother King Philip IV of Spain and her brother-in-law Emperor Ferdinand III of Austria. 91 With
the guidance of Mazarin but also aware of the kingdom’s preeminent place of power in
Christianity, Anne of Austria chose to continue the war. Armed with the knowledge of Louis
XIII’s patronage of churches and my assertion that it was aimed at sending a message to foreign
states, it is possible to conjecture that the queen was influenced by her husband’s support of the
Sainte-Chapelle, the Sorbonne, and Notre-Dame-de-Paris.
An additional sign that Louis XIII’s patronage of ecclesiastical architecture had an impact
on the queen was her support of religious institutions. The most well known of these examples is
the Val-de-Grâce, begun in 1645 by François Mansart in fulfillment of a vow for the birth of
Louis XIV (fig. 98). 92 But the queen also brought prestige to the reformed Augustinians, visiting
Notre-Dame-des-Victoires numerous times and establishing a confraternity there in 1656. 93
Indeed following the death of Louis XIII, Anne of Austria went to the church for various
services at least thirteen times. Although she never provided any financial assistance for
construction, the queen’s association with the monastery endowed it with prestige, reiterating the
influence conveyed by royal patronage.
178

1 For studies that view the church in this manner, see Louis Blond, Notre-Dame des Victoires et
le Voeu de Louis XIII: Origine et publication du Voeu (Paris: Presses Modernes, 1938); G.
Breffy, Notre-Dame des Victoires (Paris: Letouzey et Ané, 1925); Edouard Lambert, Notice
historique sur l'église de Notre-Dame des Victoires (Paris: Curot, 1872). For general surveys of
the church, see Biver, Abbayes, 204-22; Boinet, Eglises parisiennes, 152-72; Dumolin and
Outardel, Eglises de France, 143-45; La Basilique Notre-Dame des Victoires. Sanctuaire Marial
au coeur de Paris, (Paris: La Basilique Notre-Dame des Victoires, s.d.).
2 Le Pas de Sécheval, "Politique artistique,” 429-30. Le Pas de Sécheval’s analysis of Louis
XIII’s support of Notre-Dame-des-Victoires is limited to two pages, precluding any in-depth
discussion of the topic.
3 Martin Schieder, "Fondation royale et temple des arts: L'église Notre-Dame-des-Victoires à
Paris," in Place des Victoires: Histoire, architecture, société, ed. Isabelle Dubois, Alexandre
Gady, and Hendrik Ziegler (Paris: Editions de la Maison des Sciences de l'Homme, 2003), 197-
213.
4 Barbiche, "Augustins déchaussés."
5 For the history of the reformed Augustinian order, see ibid., 1-12; Pierre Thomas Nicolas
Hurtaut, Dictionnaire historique de la ville de Paris et de ses environs, 4 vols. (Geneva: Minkoff
Reprint, 1973), 1: 346-51; Lambert, Notice historique, 3-14.
6 Marguerite de Valois was the daughter of King Henri II and the first wife of Henri IV.
7 For reasons that are not clear, in 1612 Marguerite de Valois broke the contract that she had
made with the Augustins Déchaussés, forcing the fathers to return to monasteries in Avignon and
Villars-Benoît. Possible causes were the princess’ aversion to the fathers’ vigorous evangelism
and violations in the contract; see Barbiche, "Augustins déchaussés," 17.
8 For the construction history, see ibid., 329-31. The other architects known to have worked on
the church in the seventeenth century include Libéral Bruant, most likely in 1656, and Gabriel Le
Duc in 1663.
9 The first person to suggest this is Father Isidore de Sainte-Madeleine, who wrote a history of
the monastery in the eighteenth century. The original manuscript burned, but Edouard Lambert
had previously made a copy of it. For the copy, see Bibliothèque Historique de la Ville de Paris,
ms. CP 3548. For later scholars agreeing with this statement, see ibid., 26; Schieder, "Fondation
royale," 203.
10 This room is the only existing part of the monastery, which was destroyed in 1858.
11
For the work of Rebillé, see Schieder, "Fondation royale," 205. The dome was not built due to
the high cost of constructing it.
179

12 Barbiche, "Augustins déchaussés," 329.
13 Schieder suggests that the church was influenced by the Gesù; see Schieder, "Fondation
royale," 204.
14 Barbiche, "Augustins déchaussés," 334.
15 Joan Evans states that the order lacked a homogenous style of art or architecture; see Evans,
Monastic Architecture, 77. For a lack of unity in observances among the congregations in Spain,
Italy, and France, see Charles Warren Currier, History of Religious Orders (New York: Murphy
and McCarthy, 1894), 311.
16 The archbishop of Paris at this time was Jean-François de Gondi. The placement of the
foundation stone in the choir is recorded in Archives Nationales LL 1477, Registres capitulaires,
1678-1724, fol. 1.
17 The foundation stone is described in a number of sources; see Archives Nationales LL 1477,
Registres capitulaires, 1678-1724, fol. 1; Barbiche, "Augustins déchaussés," 26-27; Lambert,
Notice historique, 22-26; Piganiol de la Force, Description historique, 3:85.
18 This fact was recorded by Father Isidore de Sainte-Madeleine, who wrote the manuscript
history of the monastery, which later burned (see note 9). For other authors that had seen the
original archival document, see Lambert, Notice historique, 22, n. 1; Piganiol de la Force,
Description historique, 3:85.
19 For Saint-Louis-des-Jésuites, see Piganiol de la Force, Description historique, 5:2-3. For
Notre-Dame-de-Pitié, see ibid., 4:356-59.
20 For the foundation stone for the church of the French Oratorians, see Archives Nationales MM
623, fol. 78; Ingold, Oratoire, 14. For the stone at Notre-Dame-du-Calvaire, see Piganiol de la
Force, Description historique, 7:271-72.
21 For the painting, see Lambert, Notice historique, 88-89.
22
Archives Nationales L 923, Lettres Patentes du Roy, de la Fondation Royale du Monastere de
Notre-Dame des Victoires, fol. 2.
23 For the meeting and its results, see Lambert, Notice historique, 13-14.
24 For the vote, see ibid., 13.
25
For Barbiche’s interpretation of the events leading to the royal foundation, see Barbiche,
"Augustins déchaussés," 24-25.
180

26 Although the interior of Saint-Louis-des-Jésuites was only completed in the early 1640s, plans
would have been underway by the time the Augustins Déchaussés chose the subject for their
high altarpiece.
27
For the imagery at Saint-Louis-des-Jésuites reinforcing the divine right of French monarchs,
see Cousinié, "La constitution," 610.
28 On 6 January 1638 Louis XIII granted the Parisian monastery the right to include the royal
arms in its insignia. Other than this privilege, no additional services were provided to the
Augustins Déchaussés. For this event, see Barbiche, "Augustins déchaussés," 40.
29 Le Pas de Sécheval, "Politique artistique," 438; Schieder, "Fondation royale," 208-09.
30 Le Pas de Sécheval, "Politique artistique," 438.
31 For example, the church of the Jesuit Noviciate was begun in 1630 and Notre-Dame-des-
Anges for the Visitandines was begun in 1632.
32 For the fire and the events that immediately followed it, see Sauveur-Jérome Morand, Histoire
de la Sainte-Chapelle Royale du Palais (Paris: Clousier et Prault, 1790), 205-06.
33 For the relics endowing the Sainte-Chapelle with the status of the locus sanctus and Paris the
New Jerusalem, see Weiss, Art and Crusade, 11-77.
34 For the relics as protectors of the dynasty and kingdom, see Claudine Billot, "La fondation de
Saint Louis. Le collège des chanoines de la Sainte-Chapelle (1248-1555)," in Le trésor de la
Sainte-Chapelle, ed. Jannic Durand, Marie-Pierre Laffitte, and Dorota Giovannoi (Paris: Réunion
des Musées Nationaux, 2001), 99.
35 Le Pas de Sécheval, "Politique artistique," 415-17.
36 For the Sainte-Chapelle in comparison with Notre-Dame-de-Paris, see Claude de Varennes, Le
Voyage de France, dressé pour la commodité des françois et des étrangers (Paris: N. Le Gras,
1687), 198. For sources noting the collection of relics, see Félibien, Histoire, 1:294; Antoine
Martial Le Fèvre, Description des curiosités des églises de Paris et des environs (Paris: Cl. P.
Gueffier, 1759), 68; Piganiol de la Force, Description historique, 1:71; Sauval, Histoire, 1:445;
Varennes, Le voyage, 198; Philippe de Villers, Journal d'un voyage à Paris en 1657-1658 (Paris:
B. Duprat, 1862), 93.
37 The list of Passion relics held at the Sainte-Chapelle varies among the authors, but each source
mentions the crown of thorns. For the lists, see Félibien, Histoire, 1:294-96; Morand, Sainte-
Chapelle, 40; Piganiol de la Force, Description historique, 1:71; Sauval, Histoire, 1:445.
38 For the architecture representing royalty, see Sauval, Histoire, 1:445. For a “hand more than
human” designing the building, see Le Fèvre, Description des curiosités, 68.
181

39 Jean-Pierre Camus, Premières homélies diverses (Cambrai: De la Rivière, 1620), 12-14; as
cited in Thomas Worcester, Seventeenth-Century Cultural Discourse: France and the Preaching
of Bishop Camus (New York: Mouton de Gruyter, 1997), 193.
40 The Sainte-Chapelle has two separate floors, while the Versailles chapel’s interior is defined
by a ground floor topped with a tribune. For the suggestion that both chapels have two interior
levels and for the other similarities, see Edmunds, Piety, 79-80.
41 Ibid., 197.
42 The sculptural reliefs were made by Guillaume Coustou between 1699 and 1710. Some of the
relics depicted in the ceiling painting are the reed, the cross, the lance, the sponge, and the crown
of thorns. For discussion of the reliefs and the painting, see ibid., 131-52.
43 For the relationship between the depictions of the Passion in the Versailles chapel and the
Sainte-Chapelle, see ibid., 195-202.
44 Jannic Durand, "Heurs et malheurs, XVIe -- XVIIe siècles," in Le trésor de la Sainte-
Chapelle, ed. Jannic Durand, Marie-Pierre Laffitte, and Dorota Giovannoi (Paris: Réunion des
Musées Nationaux, 2001), 239.
45 For the reliquary and its symbolism of St. Louis, see Magalie Lenoir, "La châsse en forme de
Sainte-Chapelle, 1625-1791," in Le trésor de la Sainte-Chapelle, ed. Jannic Durand, Marie-
Pierre Laffitte, and Dorota Giovannoi (Paris: Réunion des Musées Nationaux, 2001), 257.
46 For the damage to the treasury during the sixteenth century, see Durand, "Heurs," 236-38.
47 The only discussion of this print is found in Edmunds, Piety, 200. Suggesting that the print is
a source for a sculptural relief at Versailles featuring the crown of thorns, Edmunds describes the
image.
Many of Huret’s prints are not dated. By 1623, while living in Lyon, he was already making
prints of Louis XIII. In 1635 he moved to Paris, where he soon began making works depicting
religious themes. Considering these points, it is entirely possible that Christ Giving the Crown of
Thorns to Louis XIII was made not long after the fire at the Sainte-Chapelle. For Huret and his
work, see Emmanuelle Brugerolles and David Guillet, "Grégoire Huret, dessinateur et graveur,"
Revue de l'art, no. 117 (1997): 9-35.
48 For Louis IX’s attributes, see Anne Giraudon, "Louis XIII et saint Louis dans la gravure
française du XVIIe siècle," in Regards sur le passé dans l'Europe des XVIe et XVIIe siècles.
Actes du colloque organisé par l'Université de Nancy II, ed. Francine Wild (Bern: Peter Lange,
1997), 390.
49 For the king’s monetary gift, see Durand, "Heurs," 239.
182

50 For Richelieu’s involvement with the rebuilding of the Sorbonne and especially the chapel, see
Berdini, "Sorbonne," 251-76; Gady, Lemercier, 248-53. For the Sorbonne and the chapel in
general, see Boinet, Églises parisiennes, 208-27; Claude Mignot, "La chapelle et maison de
Sorbonne," in Richelieu et le monde de l'esprit, ed. André Tuilier (Paris: Imprimerie nationale,
1985), 87-93; Roger-Armand Weigert, L'Eglise de la Sorbonne (Paris: Cerf, 1947).
51 For the king’s financial contribution to the construction of the chapel, see Boinet, Églises
parisiennes, 210.
52
For the king’s belief that the new church would contribute to the beauty of Paris, see Gady,
Lemercier, 248.
53 For Louis XI’s involvement with the Sorbonne, see Boinet, Églises parisiennes, 208; Hastings
Rashdall, The Universities of Europe in the Middle Ages (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1895), 488-
89; André Tuilier, Histoire de l'Université de Paris et de la Sorbonne, 2 vols. (Paris: Nouvelle
Librairie de France, 1994), 117-19.
54 Moote characterizes the relationship between Louis XIII and Richelieu, noting that the
minister vowed repeatedly throughout his tenure to serve the king and state; see Moote, Louis
XIII, 163-64.
55 Scholars often note the ideological division between the faculty and the doctors; see Berdini,
"Sorbonne," 257; Brockliss, "Richelieu,” 254; André Tuilier, "Richelieu théologien et la
Sorbonne," in Richelieu et le monde de l'esprit, ed. André Tuilier (Paris: Imprimerie nationale,
1985), 285-86.
56 Brockliss, "Richelieu," 254.
57 For Richelieu’s role as a moderator, see Tuilier, "Richelieu théologien," 285-87.
58 For the controversy, see ibid.
59 Ibid., 287.
60 For a general history of Notre-Dame-de-Paris, see Yves Bottineau, Notre-Dame de Paris and
the Sainte-Chapelle, trans. Lovett F. Edwards (New York: Rand McNally, 1965); Alain Erlande-
Brandenburg, Notre-Dame de Paris (New York: Harry N. Abrams, 1999); Allan Temko, Notre-
Dame of Paris (New York: Viking Press, 1955).
61 An example of a royal wedding at Notre-Dame-de-Paris was Henri IV’s first marriage to
Marguerite de Valois. Although most royal baptisms took place at the cathedral, a plague
circulating in Paris forced Louis XIII in 1606 to receive the rite at Fontainebleau. For the events,
see Chevallier, Louis XIII, 54. For Notre-Dame-de-Paris’s role in royal funerals, see Avner Ben-
183

Amos, Funerals, Politics, and Memory in Modern France, 1789-1996 (Oxford: Oxford
University Press, 2000), 18.
62
Moshe Sluhovsky, Patroness of Paris: Rituals of Devotion in Early Modern France (Leiden:
Brill, 1998), 73.
63 For Notre-Dame-de-Paris as the first church of the kingdom, see Sauval, Histoire, 1:368. For
descriptions of it as the most august and dignified, see Varennes, Le voyage, 197.
64 For the cathedral becoming the seat of the archbishop, see Pierre Blet, "L'Eglise de Paris et les
Gondi," in Huitième centenaire de Notre-Dame de Paris (Congrés des 30 mai - juin 1964), ed.
Gabriel Le Bras (Paris: Vrin, 1967), 353-53.
65 For the chapel, see Le Pas de Sécheval, "Politique artistique," 411-15; Maurice Vloberg,
Notre-Dame de Paris et le voeu de Louis XIII (Paris: Frazier-Soye, 1926), 22-23.
66 Malingre, Les antiquitez, 25-26.
67 For the lamp in the Chapel of the Virgin, see Blond, Notre-Dame des Victoires, 37; Le Pas de
Sécheval, "Politique artistique," 411. The altarpiece from 1628 was replaced at an unknown date
with a more impressive work. The chapel itself was dismantled in 1708 during the
reconstruction of the choir; see Le Pas de Sécheval, "Politique artistique," 413.
68 For the king’s gift of a cross, see Le Pas de Sécheval, "Politique artistique," 411.
69
The vow was published publicly in February 1638. For a copy of the vow, see Blond, Notre-
Dame des Victoires, 14-19.
70 For Louis XIII’s reasons for making the vow, see Chevallier, Louis XIII, 547-48; Moote, Louis
XIII, 260. For the military victory at Corbie, see Chevallier, Louis XIII, 517-19.
71 The construction of the altar was part of a reworking of the choir, a collaborative project
supervised by Robert de Cotte; see Robert Neuman, Robert de Cotte and the Perfection of
Architecture in Eighteenth-Century France (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1994), 19
and n. 67, 222. For the project, see Nicolas Sainte Fare Garnot, La Vierge, le roi, et le ministre.
Le décor du choeur de Notre-Dame de Paris au XVIIe siècle (Arras: Musée des Beaux-Arts
d'Arras, 1996).
72 For the king’s devotion to the Virgin Mary, see Le Pas de Sécheval, "Politique artistique," 411.
For the procession celebrating the Feast of the Assumption, see Chevallier, Louis XIII, 548.
73 For the vow’s connection to the birth of Louis XIV, see Blond, Notre-Dame des Victoires, 95-
96; Chevallier, Louis XIII, 552-53; Moote, Louis XIII, 260.
184

74 A. Lloyd Moote also makes the point that the vow was connected to the war against the
Habsburgs; see Moote, Louis XIII, 260.
75 “Les plus grandes forces des Ennemis de cette Couronne se sont rallies pour conspirer sa
ruine.” In the Vow of Louis XIII, published 10 February 1638; as cited in Blond, Notre-Dame
des Victoires, 15.
76 “…Main divine soustint avec tant de force la justice de nostre cause.” In the Vow of Louis
XIII, published 10 February 1638; as cited in ibid.
77 A. Lloyd Moote and Nora M. Sutherland believe that Louis XIII held an anti-Spanish position
from the early 1620s; see Moote, Louis XIII, 132-35; Nora M. Sutherland, "The Origins of the
Thirty Years War and the Structure of European Politics," English Historical Review 107, no.
424 (1992): 618-20.
78 For Louis XIII’s views on entering the conflict, see Moote, Louis XIII, 131-32. For the
Habsburg conflict with Bohemia and Hungary, see Geoffrey Parker, "The War for Bohemia," in
The Thirty Years' War, ed. Geoffrey Parker (London: Routledge, 1997), 43-55.
79 For a discussion of these events, see Maland, Europe; Geoffrey Parker, Europe in Crisis, 1598
to 1648, 2 ed. (Oxford: Blackwell, 2001), 142-43; Tapié, Age of Louis XIII, 142,46, 49-53.
80 For a general history of the Thirty Years’ War, see Maland, Europe; Parker, Europe;
Sutherland, "Thirty Years War," 587-625. For Louis XIII’s involvement with and attitudes
towards the war, see Richard J. Bonney, "France's 'war by diversion'," in The Thirty Years' War,
ed. Geoffrey Parker (London: Routledge, 1997), 129-37; Chevallier, Louis XIII, 195-96, 225,
457-98; Lublinskaya, French Absolutism; Moote, Louis XIII, 131-35, 79-83, 206-13; Tapié, Age
of Louis XIII, 97-115.
In 1627, while England was encouraging the Huguenots of La Rochelle to rebel against the
crown, France formed a brief but not enduring alliance with Spain. For this alliance, see
Sutherland, "Thirty Years War," 620.
81 Scholars agree that domestic issues prevented France from fully engaging in the Thirty Years’
War; see Bonney, "'War by diversion'," 134; Moote, Louis XIII, 131; Parker, Europe, 143-45;
Sutherland, "Thirty Years War," 618-20.
82 Known as the Grace of Alais, the treaty allowed the Huguenots to keep their religious rights
but it stressed that the Protestant state within France no longer existed. For more on the treaty,
see Moote, Louis XIII, 202-03.
83 For the dismissals, see ibid., 222-23; Tapié, Age of Louis XIII, 235-36.
84 In thanks for the support shown by the duke of Orléans following the Day of Dupes, Richelieu
had agreed to make Antoine de l’Age, marquis de Puylaurens a duke and M. Le Coigneux a
185

cardinal; see Paul de Musset, Puylaurens (Paris: Michel Lévy Frères, 1856), 33; Tapié, Age of
Louis XIII, 237. For Gaston’s actions during this period, see Moote, Louis XIII, 224-28; Tapié,
Age of Louis XIII, 237, 306-07, 310.
85 Tapié characterizes the complexity of the War as “a mass of small individual actions, each
with its own particular significance;” see Tapié, Age of Louis XIII, 311. Also noting the intricacy
behind the conflict, Sutherland argues that to fully understand the Thirty Years’ War, one must
view it as the third of four periods during which European states struggled against the power of
the Habsburg Empire; see Sutherland, "Thirty Years War," 589.
86 Bonney, "'War by diversion'," 132.
87 For Gaston’s marriage and the implications it held for Lorraine, see Tapié, Age of Louis XIII,
301.
88 For this event, see Parker, Europe, 176.
89 Factors that contributed to Spain’s deteriorating position were heavy naval losses, continued
conflicts with France and the Netherlands, and in 1640 the revolt of Catalonia and Portugal. For
these issues, see ibid., 185-86.
90
For the formation of the council, see Chevallier, Louis XIII, 635-37. For Anne of Austria’s
actions, see Parker, Europe, 194.
91 Parker, Europe, 194.
92 For Anne of Austria and the Val-de-Grâce, see Germann, "Val-de-Grâce" 47-61.
93 The confraternity was Notre-Dame-des-Sept-Douleurs. For the queen’s association with the
reformed Augustinians, see Barbiche, "Augustins déchaussés," 41-44.
186

CHAPTER 7
CONCLUSION
The first half of the seventeenth century in Paris witnessed a sudden increase in the
construction of ecclesiastical architecture, making it one of the most active times of church
building in the capital city. As frequently noted in the scholarship, the activity was directly
related to the impact of the Catholic Reformation, which had its greatest influence in Paris at this
time. Less well known is the significance of royal patronage, especially during the reign of
Louis XIII. During this thirty-three year period, when construction started on twenty-one
churches, Maria de’ Medici and Louis XIII contributed individually to ten of the buildings. The
motives behind the monarchs’ support of such an impressive number of churches have been the
focus of this study. Specifically I have endeavored to show that Maria de’ Medici became a
patron of ecclesiastical institutions to promote her authority while demonstrating her support of
the Catholic faith, its institutions, and its allies. Seeking to advance the sovereignty of the state,
Louis XIII contributed to churches that through their architecture, painting, and sculpture
honored French kingship and the monarch’s divine right.
The historical context of early seventeenth-century France was a decisive factor
contributing to the monarchs’ decisions to become patrons of churches. Among the key issues
leading up to this period were the Wars of Religion. Not only did this conflict pit Huguenots
against Catholics, it also created a divide among those practicing the Roman faith, leading to two
distinct agendas pursued by the moderates and conservatives. Aligned with the moderate
ideology, Louis XIII would find himself working against the conservatives for nearly half of his
personal reign while in contrast his mother joined their forces, seeking to further the orthodox
policy. Two other issues influencing the period were the reign of Henri IV, which reiterated the
close connection between Church and state, and the Catholic Reformation in France, which
provided the impetus for the building of so many churches. Each of these developments in
French history contributed to the king and queen’s decisions to provide assistance for
ecclesiastical architecture.
187

One of the key contributions of this study is the recognition that Louis XIII supported
churches as a means of achieving his political goals. The king first became a patron to secure
loyalty to his person and to the state. In 1623 he named the church of the French Oratory as his
new royal chapel, decreeing that state funds be provided to help with construction costs.
Although the fathers of the congregation had previously enjoyed the patronage of Maria de’
Medici, Louis’s decision to support the church was not a gesture of goodwill towards his mother.
Instead I have argued that it was a challenge to the conservative French Catholics known as the
dévots, a group with close ties to Maria de’ Medici and the Oratorian congregation. Fearing that
the supporters of the Oratory sought to undermine his authority by looking to Rome for
leadership and favoring alliances with other Catholic powers, Louis XIII appropriated the
church, transforming it into a sign of royal authority. By tying the church of the French Oratory
to royal power, the king sent a message to the dévots reminding them of his sovereign rights.
Saint-Louis-des-Jésuites, begun in 1627 by the Society of Jesus, posed many of the same
problems. The goal of my research has been to show that Louis XIII, responding to a Jesuit
publication challenging monarchical authority and to popular beliefs alleging the society’s
subversive activities, diverted royal funds to the construction of the church and commissioned
medals for the foundation stone showing images of model rulers with absolute power. To affirm
their loyalty to the monarchy, the Jesuits incorporated within their church an artistic program
venerating French Kingship, of which a similar tactic was adopted by Cardinal Richelieu for the
building’s façade.
By 1629 when the Augustins Déchaussés began plans to build Notre-Dame-des-
Victoires, Louis XIII was well known in the capital for his support of reformed religious orders,
prompting the reformed Augustinians to seek royal assistance. After agreeing to become the
founder of the monastery and placing the first stone of the church, the king neglected to direct
any further support to the religious group. Instead he chose from the early 1630s onwards to
focus his spending on churches with established connections to the state, specifically the Sainte-
Chapelle, Notre-Dame-des-Victoires, and the chapel of the Sorbonne. As my research suggests,
by supporting ecclesiastical architecture with long histories associated with the French kingdom,
Louis XIII moved away from using churches as tools to promote his authority over potentially
subversive religious groups. No longer was he as concerned with using churches as tools to
188

secure loyalty to himself and the state. Instead he wanted to focus on buildings that in the face of
external threats would advance the country’s privileged status among all Christian nations.
Contributing to the king’s new direction as a patron of churches was the resolution of
internal struggles in the French state. Central among the issues was his mother, whose
overriding concern with power and her shared ideology with conservative Catholics were
visually manifested in the two distinct phases of her support of churches. As regent, Maria de’
Medici had two primary concerns: the promotion of the Catholic faith and the legitimization of
her right to rule for her minor son, a position threatened by her foreign status and her gender. By
contributing to the construction of churches for religious orders, the queen helped to legitimize
her rule by participating in an established tradition of French monarchs while at the same time
promoting the ideals of the Catholic Reformation. The absence of visual signs tying the
churches to Maria de’ Medici limited fears of control by a foreign queen while suggesting that
the push for reform came solely from the religious groups. In contrast, upon admittance to the
royal council in 1622 the queen’s greatest desire was to regain the authority she had obtained at
the end of the regency. The search for power prompted Maria to turn once again to churches but
this time to use prominent visual signs that advertised her support of the building. By using
personal symbols and royal imagery to evoke her devotion to Louis XIII and to promote her
elevated status as the mother of the king, Maria de’ Medici sought to secure greater authority
within the realm.
Securing power was a key issue for both monarchs. The churches to which Louis XIII
and Maria de’ Medici contributed each demonstrated monarchical authority, whether it was
through visual symbols asserting the divine right of kings or merely by means of a royal act that
connected the building to the sovereign. Attesting to this symbolic power is the treatment
suffered by each church during the French Revolution. Nearly every ecclesiastical institution in
Paris was a victim of desecration during this period, showing the close connection that continued
to exist well into the eighteenth century between Church and state. The effacement of nearly all
royal symbols on the buildings covered in the study reiterates the fact that the public understood
their meaning. Despite these attempts to destroy the royal record and the current function of
many of the buildings is far removed from the original intention, the monarchs’ presence
continues to exist in the form of medals, prints, and textual descriptions.
189

Figure 1. Philippe de Champaigne, Louis XIII, c. 1655. Oil on Canvas. Prado Museum.
108 x 86 cm. (Artstor)
190

Figure 2. Peter Paul Rubens, Maria de’ Medici, 1622. Oil on canvas. 130 x 108 cm. Madrid,
Prado. (Artstor)
191

Figure 3. Frans Pourbus the Younger, Henri IV, King of France, c. 1610. Oil on wood. 39 x 25
cm. Musée du Louvre. (Artstor)
192

Figure 4. Clément Métezeau and Jacques Lemercier, Church of the French Oratory, Paris,
begun 1621. View of the apse. (Photo by J. Sandlin)
193

Figure 5. French School, Pierre de Bérulle, seventeenth century. Oil on canvas. (Baudouin-
Matuszek, 137, fig. 135.)
194

Figure 6. Anonymous, Plan of the Church of the Oratoire (with parts remaining to be built in a
lighter tone), c. mid-eighteenth century. Drawing. Paris, Bibliothèque nationale de France.
(Gady, 231, fig. 155)
195

Figure 7. Jean Marot, Veue de l’église de l’Oratoire et de le maison, c. 1660. Engraving. Paris,
Bibliothèque nationale de France. (Biver, fig. 69)
196

Figure 8. Clément Métezeau and Jacques Lemercier. Church of the Oratory, Paris, begun 1621.
View of interior towards apse. (Photo by J. Sandlin)
197

Figure 9. Clément Métezeau and Jacques Lemercier. Church of the Oratory, Paris, begun 1621.
View of interior towards apse. (Dumolin and Outardel, 132)
198

Figure 10. Saint-Nicolas-des-Champs, Paris, begun 1397. General view of the interior. (Bos,
243, fig. 124)
199

Figure 11. Michel Etienne Turgot, Plan de Turgot, 1739. Detail showing the Church of the
Oratory. Engraving. (Kyoto University Library, http://edb.kulib.kyoto-u.ac.jp/exhibite/f28/image/01/f28l0018/f28l0018_1_1.html.)
200

Figure 12. Michel Etienne Turgot, Plan de Turgot, 1739. Detail showing the Louvre and its
quarter with the Church of the Oratory to the left. Engraving. (Pérouse de Montclos, 66)
201

Figure 13. Reconstructed map of the Louvre and its quarter around 1650. (Le Louvre et son
quartier, 1984, 34, fig. 46)
202

Figure 14. Clément Métezeau and Jacques Lemercier, Church of the French Oratory, Paris,
begun 1621. View of the apse. (Photo by J. Sandlin)
203

Figure 15. Saint-Germer-de-Fly, view of Lady Chapel, thirteenth century. (Branner, Court
Style)
204

Figure 16. Sainte-Chapelle, Paris, begun 1242. Exterior view. (Weiss, 13, fig. 1)
205

Figure 17. Sainte-Chapelle, upper chapel, Paris. Stained glass, coronation scenes from the book
of Numbers. (Weiss, plate IV)
206

Figure 18. Aubin-Louis Millin, Chartreux Convent. Entrance Portico, 1790. Engraving. (Bos,
302, fig. 172)
207

Figure 19. Jacques Lemercier, Church of the Oratory, Paris, 1625. Vault at crossing. (Photo by
J. Sandlin)
208

Figure 20. Michel Félibien, Saint-Denis Treasury, detail of plate I, from Histoire de l’abbaye
royale de Saint-Denis en France, 1709. Etching. (Frolow, 198, fig. 72)
209

Figure 21. Écu d’or of Louis XIII, 1642. Paris, Bibliothèque nationale
de France.
210

Figure 22. Diocletian’s Palace, Split, c. 300-306 AD. Peristyle courtyard. (Photo courtesy of
Leigh Ann Delp)
211

Figure 23. Jacques Androuet du Cerceau, Tribunal of the Ballroom of the Louvre, in Les Plus
Excellents Bastiments de France, 1576. Engraving. (Zerner, 191, fig. 197)
212

Figure 24. Jacques Lemercier (?), Élévation du transept et d’une partie du choeur de l’église de
l’Oratoire de Paris, c. 1622. Drawing. Quimper, Bibliothèque Municipale. (Gady, 34, fig. 23)
213

Figure 25. Map of territories during the Thirty Years’ War, 1618-1643. (Moote, map 4)
214

Figure 26. Project of the Enlargement and Junction of the Louvre and the Tuileries, c. 1600.
Fresco from the Galerie des Cerfs de Fontainebleau (reconstructed). (Le Louvre et son quartier,
67, fig. 44)
215

Figure 27. Peter Paul Rubens, Triumph of Rome, 1622. Oil sketch. The Hague, Mauritshuis.
(Fumaroli, 90, fig. 1)
216

Figure 28. Jean Marot, Le Portail de l’Eglise de la Maison Professe des R. P. Jésuites de Paris,
dans la rue St. Antoine, c. 1660. Engraving. Paris Bibliothèque nationale de France. (Biver, fig.
60)
217

Figure 29. Philippe de Champaigne, Richelieu, 1633-1640. Oil on canvas. 260 x 179 cm.
London, National Gallery. (Mérot, 186, fig. 203)
218

Figure 30. Etienne Martellange and François Derand, Plan of Saint-Louis-des-Jésuites, after
1641. (Dumolin and Outardel, 136)
219

Figure 31. Saint Louis, obverse (left), Façade of Saint-Louis-des-Jésuites, reverse (right), 1627.
Cast brass. 5.99 cm. diameter. London, British Museum. (Jones, 296, fig. 342)
220

Figure 32. Edme Moreau, Façade of Saint-Louis-des-Jésuites, 1643. Engraving. Paris,
Bibliothèque nationale de France. (Montgolfier, 28, cat. 16)
221

Figure 33. Andrea Sacchi and Jan Miel, Urban VIII Visiting Il Gesù, Rome, 1639-41. Oil on
Canvas. 336 x 247 cm. Rome, Galleria Nazionale di Arte Antica. (Harris, Seventeenth-Century
Art and Architecture [Prentice Hall, 2005], xiii, fig. 0.1)
222

Figure 34. Etienne Martellange and François Derand. Saint-Louis-des-Jésuites, Paris, 1627-
1641. View of interior towards the apse. (Dumolin and Outardel, 137)
223

Figure 35. Foundation Stone of Saint-Louis-des-Jésuites, c. 1627. Engraving. Paris,
Bibliothèque nationale de France.
224

Figure 36. After Matteo de' Pasti, Sigismondo Pandolfo Malatesta, obverse (top), San
Francesco at Rimini, reverse (bottom), 1450. Bronze. 4 cm. diameter. Washington, D.C.,
National Gallery of Art. (Laurie Schneider Adams, Italian Renaissance Art [Westview Press,
2001], 173, fig. 8.13 [reverse], 175, fig. 8.17 [obverse])
225

Figure 37. G. Bonsegni, Il Gesù, reverse (top), Cardinal Alessandro Farnese, obverse (bottom),
1568. Bronze. 4. 92 cm diameter. Rome, Il Gesù, sacristy. (Lucas, 37, cat. no. 85)
226

Figure 38. Pierre Regnier, Louis XIII, obverse (left), Part of façade of the Louvre, reverse
(right), 1624. Silver. 3.4 cm. diameter. London, British Museum. (Jones, 136, fig. 95).
227

Figure 39. Detail of Kings rose windows (top). Detail of History of Relics rose window
(bottom). Paris, Sainte-Chapelle. (Weiss, 1992, 33, figs. 23 and 24)
228

Figure 40. Etienne Martellange and François Derand. Saint-Louis-des-Jésuites, Paris, 1627-
1641. View of left transept, showing St. Louis Receiving the Crown of Thorns (c. 1641) above
entrance to side chapel. (Photo by J. Sandlin)
229

Figure 41. Etienne Martellange and François Derand. Saint-Louis-des-Jésuites, Paris, 1627-
1641. Interior view of apse. (Photo by J. Sandlin)
230

Figure 42. Edme Moreau, Section of the Choir and Cupola of Saint-Louis-des-Jésuites, c. 1643.
Engraving. Paris, Bibliothèque nationale de France. (Montgolfier, 23, cat. 12)
231

Figure 43. Edme Moreau, High Altar of Saint-Louis-des-Jésuites, 1643. Engraving. Paris,
Bibliothèque nationale de France. (Montgolfier, 35, cat. 28)
232

Figure 44. Simon Vouet, Presentation in the Temple, 1640-1641. Oil on canvas. 383 x 250 cm.
Paris, Louvre. (Thuillier, 313, fig. 51)
233

Figure 45. Simon Vouet, The Apotheosis of St. Louis, 1640-1641. Oil on canvas. 275 x 175 cm.
Rouen, Musée des Beaux-Arts. (Thuillier, 314, fig. 52)
234

Figure 46. Etienne Martellange and François Derand. Saint-Louis-des-Jésuites,
Paris, 1627-
1641. Detail of vault over high altar. (Photo by J. Sandlin)
235

Figure 47. Etienne Martellange and François Derand. Saint-Louis-des-Jésuites, Paris, 1627-
1641. Interior view of dome and vault of left transept. (Photo by J. Sandlin)
236

Figure 48. Detail of Edme Moreau, Right side of Nave and Choir, 1643. Engraving. Paris,
Bibliothèque nationale de France. (Montgolfier, 24, cat. 13)
237

Figure 49. Etienne Martellange and François Derand. Saint-Louis-des-Jésuites, Paris, 1627-
1641. Detail of a cartouche on the vault in the apse. (Photo by J. Sandlin)
238

Figure 50. Chronicle of France: ms. Douce 217, fol. 265: Scenes from the Life of St. Louis, end
of fourtheenth century. Bodleian Library. (Artstor)
239

Figure 51. Michel Corneille, St. Louis Receiving the Crown of Thorns, c. 1639-1642. Oil on
canvas. 282 x 356 cm. (Picart, fig. 2)
240

Figure 52. Jacques de Lestin, The Death of Saint Louis, c. 1639-1642. Oil on canvas. 282 x 356
cm. (Châtelet, p. 202)
241

Figure 53. Studio of Simon Vouet, Louis XIII Presenting a Model of the Church to Saint Louis,
c. 1639-1642. Oil on canvas. 288 x 359 cm. (Constans)
242

Figure 54. The Emperor Otto I (912-73) Presenting a Model of His Church at Magdeburg, 962-
968. Ivory. 13 x 11.3 x 0.8 cm (Artstor)
243

Figure 55. Etienne Martellange and François Derand, Saint-Louis-des-Jésuites, Paris, 1627-
1641. View of façade. (Photo by J. Sandlin)
244

Figure 56. Israël Silvestre, Church of the Hôpital St. Louis, c. 1650-55. Engraving. Paris,
Bibliothèque nationale de France. (Ballon, 187, fig. 131)
245

Figure 57. Plan of the Church of the Minims. (Ciprut, 1954, 154, fig. 2)
246

Figure 58. Jean Marot, Le couvent des Minimes de la Place Royale, before 1657. Engraving.
Paris, Bibliothèque nationale de France. (Biver, fig. 58)
247

Figure 59. Plan of Saint-Joseph-des-Carmes. (Dumolin and Outardel, 129)
248

Figure 60. Saint-Joseph-des-Carmes, Paris, 1613-1620. View of interior towards high altar.
(Photo by J. Sandlin)
249

Figure 61. Saint-Joseph-des-Carmes, Paris, 1613-1620. Exterior view of façade. (Dupuy, 1)
250

Figure 62. After Jean Marot, Eglise des Carmes Deschausses. Engraving. Paris, Bibliothèque
nationale de France. (Hautecoeur, 1, pt. 3:221, fig. 72)
251

Figure 63. After Jean Marot, Eglise des Carmes Deschausses, detail of entrance to forecourt.
Engraving. Paris, Bibliothèque nationale de France. (Hautecoeur, 1, pt. 3:221, fig. 72)
252

Figure 64. Medal of Maria de’ Medici, c. 1628. Paris, Bibliothèque nationale de France.
(Köhlers, 393)
253

Figure 65. Jean-Baptiste-Michel Jaillot, detail of Plan du Quartier Saint-Martin, 1775. (Jaillot,
vol. 2, Xe quartier)
254

Figure 66. Michel Etienne Turgot, Plan de Turgot, 1739. Detail showing the Convent of the
Récollets. Engraving. (Kyoto University Library, http://edb.kulib.kyoto-u.ac.jp/exhibite/f28/image/01/f28l0016/f28l0016_2_2.html.)
255

Figure 67. Jean-Aimar Piganiol de la Force, detail of Plan et Description du Quartier du Palais
Royal, 1765. (Piganiol de la Force, vol. 2)
256

Figure 68. Jean-Baptiste-Michel Jaillot, detail of Plan du Quartier du Palais Royal, 1775.
(Jaillot, vol. 1)
257

Figure 69. Michel Etienne Turgot, Plan de Turgot, 1739. Detail showing the Convent of the
Filles du Calvaire. Engraving. (Hustin, vol. 2, after pg. 76)
258

Figure 70. Plan of the Convent of the Filles du Calvaire, drawn by Michel Peytonneau, 1789.
Paris, Archives Nationales S. 4649. (Hustin, vol. 2, after pg. 40)
259

Figure 71. Nicolas-Michel Troche, Façade of Notre-Dame-du-Calvaire, c. 1800-1840.
Drawing. (Troche, 527)
260

Figure 72. Henri Gisors, restored façade of Notre-Dame-du-Calvaire, Paris, c. 1845.
(vacanceo.com)
261

Figure 73. Henri de Gisors, detail of restored façade of Notre-Dame-du-Calvaire, Paris, c. 1845.
(http://www.flickr.com/photos/atp19/28709064/)
262

Figure 74. Henri de Gisors, detail of restored façade of Notre-Dame-du-Calvaire, Paris, c. 1845.
(http://www.flickr.com/photos/atp19/61229805/)
263

Figure 75. Jacques de Bie, Device for Maria de’ Medici, 1611. Engraving. (Bie, plate 104)
264

Figure 76. Foundation Stone of Notre-Dame-de-Pitié, c. 1628. Engraving. Paris, Bibliothèque
nationale de France. (Baudouin-Matuszek, 159, fig. 168)
265

Figure 77. Plan of the church of Notre-Dame-de-Pitié. (Ciprut, 188)
266

Figure 78. I. van Merlen, View of the church of Notre-Dame-de-Pitié (Sainte-Elisabeth).
Engraving. Paris, Bibliothèque nationale de France.
267

Figure 79. After Claude Chastillon, Carosel at the Place Royale, 1612. Engraving.
Bibliothèque nationale de France. (Ballon, 58, fig. 41)
268

Figure 80. Anonymous, View of the church of Notre-Dame-de-Pitié (Sainte-Elisabeth), c. 1644.
Engraving. Paris, Bibliothèque nationale de France.
269

Figure 81. Notre-Dame-des-Victoires, Paris, 1629-1740. View of façade. (http://www.
flickr.com/photos/ndalls/430628280/sizes/o/)
270

Figure 82. Michel Etienne Turgot, Plan de Turgot, 1739. Detail showing Notre-Dame-des-
Victoires in relation to the Place des Victoires. Engraving. (Schieder, fig. 172, 207)
271

Figure 83. Current plan of Notre-Dames-des-Victoires. Engraving. Paris, Bibliothèque
nationale de France. (Hautecoeur, 1, pt. 3:415, fig. 155)
272

Figure 84. Notre-Dame-des-Victoires, Paris, 1629-1740. View of interior towards apse. (La
Basilique Notre-Dame des Victoires, 27)
273

Figure 85. Notre-Dame-des-Victoires, Paris, 1629-1740. Flanking wall of transept showing
walled-up gallery above side chapel. (Photo by J. Sandlin)
274

Figure 86. Saint-Louis-des-Jésuites, Paris, 1627-1641. Flanking wall of transept showing
gallery above side chapel. (Photo by J. Sandlin)
275

Figure 87. Foundation Stone of Notre-Dame-des-Victoires, 1629. Engraving. (Schieder, fig.
164, 198)
276

Figure 88. Pierre Lepautre, Exterior view from the Southeast of the Versailles Chapel, 1714-
1715. Engraving. (Edmunds, 21, fig. 8)
277

Figure 89. Detail of a window at the Sainte-Chapelle, St. Louis and Robert d’Artois bearing the
Relics, thirteenth century. Stained Glass. (Bottineau, plate 73)
278

Figure 90. View of ceiling of Versailles chapel, depicting Antoine Coypel, God the Father in
Glory (above nave), 1709-1710, and Charles de La Fosse, Resurrection (above apse), 1709-1710.
(http://www.flickr.com/photos/feuilllu/186226653/sizes/l/)
279

Figure 91. E. Viollet-le-Duc, Reconstruction of the reliquary in the form of the Sainte-Chapelle,
from Dictionnaire raisonné de l’architecture française, vol. 1, 1854. (Lenoir, fig. 1, 258)
280

Figure 92. Grégoire Huret, Christ Giving the Crown of Thorns to Louis XIII, seventeenth
century. Engraving. (Edmunds, 200, fig. 154)
281

Figure 93. Israël Silvestre, Vue de la place de la Sorbonne, mid seventeenth century.
Engraving. (Gady, 325)
282

Figure 94. Anonymous, View of Notre-Dame-de-Paris, seventeenth century. Engraving.
(Bottineau, plate 4)
283

Figure 95. Plan de l’eglise de Notre-Dame de Paris. Engraving. (Erlande-Brandenburg, p. 249)
284

Figure 96. François Mansart and Jacques Lemercier. Val-de-Grâce, 1645 to 1669. Paris,
France. (Artstor)
285

1589 Henri IV becomes king of France.
1593 Henri IV converts to Protestantism.
1600 Henri IV marries Maria de’ Medici.
1601 Birth of Louis XIII (27 September).
APPENDIX A
TIMELINE OF MAJOR EVENTS
1610 Death of Henri IV; Maria de’ Medici becomes regent for Louis XIII.
1611 Construction starts on the church of the Minims of the Place Royale.
The French Oratory is founded in Paris.
1612 Construction starts on the church of the Jacobins (reformed Dominicans) on the rue
Saint-Honoré.
1613 Construction starts on the Discalced Carmelite church of Saint-Joseph-des-Carmes.
1614 Construction starts on the church of the Récollets of the faubourg Saint-Martin.
1616 Construction starts on the first chapel for the French Oratory.
1617 Louis XIII inaugurates his personal reign following a coup d’état exiling his mother;
Maria de’ Medici is exiled from the court.
1621 Maria de’ Medici is allowed to return to court.
The French Oratory begins constructing a new church to replace its existing place of
worship.
1622 Maria de’ Medici admitted to the royal council.
1623 Louis XIII names the church of the French Oratory as the royal chapel of the palace
of the Louvre.
1624 Cardinal Armand Jean du Plessis de Richelieu allowed to join the royal council.
1625 Construction starts on Notre-Dame-du-Calvaire, the conventual church for the Filles
du Calvaire of the rue de Vaugirard.
286

1626 Antonio Santarelli’s Tractatus de haeresi appears in Paris.
1627 Construction starts Saint-Louis-des-Jésuites, the third church built on the site and
dedicated to St. Louis.
Louis XIII places the ceremonial first stone for Saint-Louis-des-Jésuites on 7 March.
1628 Construction starts on Notre-Dame-de-Pitié, the conventual church for the Religious
of St. Elizabeth.
1629 Construction starts on Notre-Dame-des-Victoires for the Discalced Augustinians of
the Place des Victoires.
Louis XIII names the Discalced Augustinians’ monastery a royal foundation and
places the first stone of Notre-Dame-des-Victoires.
1630 Fire at the Sainte-Chapelle (26 July)
Day of Dupes (November)
1631 Maria de’ Medici flees France.
1634 Construction starts on a new chapel of St. Ursula at the Sorbonne.
1635 France officially enters the Thirty Years’ War.
1636 Louis XIII donates a silver lamp to the chapel of the Virgin in Notre-Dame-de-Paris.
1637 The vow of Louis XIII is drafted, which dedicates the king, the state, the crown, and
the French subjects to the Virgin Mary. The vow will be published the following
year.
1638 Louis XIII donates a large cross to the chapel of the Virgin in Notre-Dame-de-Paris.
Louis XIV is born.
1641 Louis XIII declares Saint-Louis-des-Jésuites a royal foundation.
1642 Death of Maria de’ Medici (3 July); death of Cardinal Richelieu (4 December).
1643 Death of Louis XIII (14 May).
287

Bibliothèque nationale de France
Département de la reproduction
Quai François Mauriac
F-75706 PARIS CEDEX 13
reproduction@bnf.fr
11 April 2009
Dear département de la reproduction:
APPENDIX B
PERMISSION TO USE IMAGES
I am completing a dissertation (thèse de doctorat) at Florida State University (USA)
entitled “Asserting Royal Power in Early Seventeenth-Paris: Louis XIII, Maria de’ Medici, and
the Art and Architecture of Reformed Religious Orders.” I would like your permission to reprint
in my dissertation the images listed below:
Image 1—found on the Banque d’images
cote cliché: RC-A-38318
cote du document: MONNAIE ROYALE LOUIS XIII ACQ 1975-339
légende: Monnaie de Louis XIII. Croix fleurdelisée
Image 2—found on microfilm at the département des estampes
Title: Inscritio marmoris in fundamento Ecclesce S. Ludovici…
VA 248 B
Image 3—found on microfilm at the département des estampes
Title: Portail de l’Eglise du royal Monastere des Religieuses de St. Elizabeth
H26410
VA 242 C
Image 4—found on microfilm at the département des estampes
Title: L’Eglize et convent des filles Saincte Elizabeth
H26404
VA 242 C
I understand that I may be required to pay fees to use these images in an academic publication
(thèse de doctorat) with less than 500 disseminated copies. I also agree to credit each image with
the caption “Bibliothèque nationale de France.”
288

The requested permission extends to any future revisions and editions of my dissertation,
including non-exclusive world rights in all languages. These rights will in no way restrict
republication of the material in any other form by you or by others authorized by you. This
authorization is extended to University Microfilm Inc./ ProQuest Information and Learning, Ann
Arbor, Michigan, for the purpose of reproducing and distributing copies of this dissertation.
Your signing of this letter will also confirm that you own the copyright to the above-described
material. No response to this request will constitute implied permission for such use.
If these arrangements meet with your approval, please sign this letter where indicated below and
return it to me at the address listed below. Thank you very much.
Sincerely,
Julianne Parse Sandlin
2142 Victory Garden LN
Tallahassee, FL 32301
USA
PERMISSION GRANTED FOR THE
USE REQUESTED ABOVE:
______________________________
Name
Date: ________________________
289

BIBLIOGRAPHY
Archival Sources
Archives Nationales de France
L 923 Lettres Patentes du Roy, de la Fondation Royale du Monastere de Notre-Dame des
Victoires
LL 1477 Registres capitulaires, 1678-1724
LL 1500 Martirologe de la sacristie du Couvent de Saint Joseph des Carmes Déchausséz
MM 562 Inventaires et titres, 1600-1789
MM 600 Visites de l’Oratoire, 1742-1780
MM 623 Annales de la Maison de l’Oratoire établie près le Louvre à Paris
MM 624 Annales de la Maison de l’Oatoire établie près le Louvre à Paris
S 1014 Bien des establissements religieux supprimes à la Revolution
Archives de la Médiathèque de l’Architecture et du Patrimoine
Document 0081/075/01/12/8/1 (information for years 1909-1995)
Published Primary Sources
Bérulle, Pierre. Oeuvres complètes du Cardinal de Bérulle. Edited by Jacques-Paul Migne. Paris:
Migne, 1856.
Bie, Jacques de. La France métallique contenant les actions célèbres tant publiques que privées
des Rois et des Reines. Paris: J. Camusat, 1636.
Blondel, Jacques-François. Architecture françoise, ou recueil des plans, élévations, coupes et
profils. 4 vols. Paris: Jombert, 1754.
Brice, Germain. Description de la ville de Paris et de tout ce qu'elle contient de plus
remarquable. Reproduction de la 9e éd. (1752). 4 vols. Paris: Minard, 1971.
Caussin, Nicolas. The holy court. Or the Christian institution of men of quality With examples of
those, who in court have flourished in sanctity. Translated by Thomas Hawkins. Paris:
English College Press, 1626.
290

Coste, Hilarion de. Les Eloges et les vies des reynes, des princesses, et des dames illustres en
pieté, en Courage & en Doctrine, qui ont fleury de nostre temps, et du temps de nos
Peres. Avec l'explication de leurs Devises, Emblémes, Hieroglyphes, Divisez en deux
tomes et dediez à la Reyne Regente. Paris: Sébastien Cramoisy et Gabriel Cramoisy,
1647.
Dézailler d'Argenville, Antoine-Nicolas. Vies des fameux architectes depuis la Renaissance des
Arts, avec la description de leurs ouvrages. 2 vols. Paris: Chez Debure l'aîné, 1787.
Félibien, Michel. Histoire de la ville de Paris. 5 vols. Paris: G. Desprez, 1725.
Héroard, Jean. Journal de Jean Héroard. Edited by Edouard de Barthélemy and Eudoxe Soulié.
2 vols. Paris: Firmin Didot Frères, Fils et cie, 1868.
Jaillot, Jean-Baptiste-Michel Renou de Chevigné. Recherches critiques, historiques et
topographiques sur la ville de Paris. 5 vols. Paris: Lottin, 1775.
Le Fèvre, Antoine Martial. Description des curiosités des églises de Paris et des environs. Paris:
Cl. P. Gueffier, 1759.
Le Salomon de la France, ou Le rappart de nostre Roy à Salomon, en sa sagesse par la Justice,
et la Clemence. Paris: Pierre Chevalier, 1617.
Malingre, Claude. Les antiquitez de la ville de Paris Contenans la recherche nouvelle des
fondations & establissemens des eglises. La chronologie des premiers presidens,
aduocats & procureurs generaux du Parlement. preuosts des marchands & escheuins de
ladite ville. Paris: P. Rocolet, 1640.
Mariana, Juan de. De rege et regis institutione libri III. Toledo: Pedro Rodríguez, 1599.
Piganiol de la Force, Jean Aimar. Description historique de la ville de Paris et de ses environs.
10 vols. Paris: Libraires associés, 1765.
Responses aux considérations sur le livre de Sanctarel jésuite. France (?): 1626.
Ripa, Cesare. Iconologie, ou explication nouvelle de plusieurs images, emblèmes, et autre
figures. Paris: Mathieu Guillemot, 1644.
Santarelli, Antonio. Tractatus de haeresi, schismate, apostasia, sollicitatione in sacramento
Poenitentiae, et de potestate Romani Pontificis in his delictis puniendis. Rome: B.
Zannetti, 1625.
Sauval, Henri. Histoire et recherches des antiquites de la ville de Paris. 4 vols. Paris: Moette et
Chardon, 1724.
291

Théveneau, Adam. Les Précepts du Roy Sainct Louys à Philippes III son fils pour bien vivre et
régner: Tirez des Histoires de France et des Registres de la Chambres des Comptes avec
le discours sur chacun d'iceux de Me A. Théveneau Advocat en Parlement ou sont
reportez et interpretez plusieurs ordonnances touchant la police tant spirituelle que
temporelle. Paris: J. Petitpas, 1627.
Thiéry, Luc-Vincent. Le voyageur à Paris. 2 vols. Paris: Hardouin et Gattey, 1789-1790.
Varennes, Claude de. Le Voyage de France, dressé pour la commodité des françois et des
étrangers. Paris: N. Le Gras, 1687.
Villers, Philippe de. Journal d'un voyage à Paris en 1657-1658. Paris: B. Duprat, 1862.
Secondary Sources
Alexander, John. "Shaping Sacred Space in the Sixteenth Century: Design Criteria for the
Collegio Borromeo's Chapel." Journal of the Society of Architectural Historians 63
(2004): 164-79.
Arranz, José Julio García. "Image and Moral Teaching Through Emblematic Animals." In
Aspects of Renaissance and Baroque Symbol Theory, 1500-1700, edited by Peter M. Daly
and John Manning, 93-108. New York: AMS Press, 1999.
Babelon, Jean Pierre. "Architecture et emblématique dans les médailles de Henri IV." Revue de
l'art, no. 58-59 (1983): 21-40.
______. Henri IV. Paris: Fayard, 1982.
Bailey, Gauvin Alexander. "'Le style jésuite n'existe pas': Jesuit Corporate Culture and the
Visual Arts." In The Jesuits: Cultures, Sciences, and the Arts 1540-1773, edited by John
W. O'Malley and et al, 38-89. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1999.
Ballon, Hilary. "The Architecture of Cardinal Richelieu." In Richelieu: Art and Power, edited by
Hilliard Todd Goldfarb, 246-59. Montreal: Montreal Museum of Fine Arts, 2002.
______. The Paris of Henri IV: Architecture and Urbanism. New York; Cambridge, MA:
Architectural History Foundation; MIT Press, 1991.
Barbiche, Bernard. "Marie de Médicis, reine régnante, et le Saint-Siège: agent ou otage de la
Réforme catholique?" In Le "siècle" de Marie de Médicis: Actes du Séminaire de la
Chaire Rhétorique et Société en Europe (XVIe-XVIIe siècles) du Collège de France sous
la direction de Marc Fumaroli de l'Académie française, edited by Françoise Graziani and
Francesco Solinas, 41-56. Alessandria: Edizioni dell'Orso, 2003.
292

Barbiche, Jean-Marie. "Les Augustins déchaussés de Notre-Dame-des-Victoires (1629-1790)."
Thèse, Ecole nationale des chartes, 2007.
Batiffol, Louis. Le roi Louis XIII à vingt ans. Paris: Calmann-Lévy, 1910.
———. Marie de Médicis and the French Court in the XVIIth Century. Freeport, NY: Books for
Libraries Press, 1970.
Baudouin-Matuszek, Marie-Noëlle. "Un palais pour un reine mere." In Marie de Médicis et le
Palais du Luxembourg, edited by M. N. Baudouin-Matuszek and Béatrice de Andia, 170-
223. Paris: Délégation à l'Action Artistique de la Ville de Paris, 1991.
Baudouin-Matuszek, Marie-Noëlle, and Béatrice de Andia. Marie de Médicis et le Palais du
Luxembourg. Paris: Délégation à l'Action Artistique de la Ville de Paris, 1991.
Bayard, Françoise, Joël Félix, and Philippe Hamon. Dictionnaire des surintendants et
contrôleurs généraux des finances du XVIe siècle à la Révolution française de 1789.
Paris: Comité pour l'Histoire Économique et Financière de la France, 2000.
Beaune, Colette. The Birth of an Ideology: Myths and Symbols of Nation in Late-Medieval
France. Translated by Susan Ross Huston. Berkeley: University of California Press,
1991.
Becdelievre-Lambert, Véronique de. "Recherches sur l'œuvre architecturale de la Congrégation
de l'Oratoire de France aux XVIIe et XVIII siècles, d'après le recueil des Archives
nationales." Thèse, Ecole nationale des chartes, 1977.
Ben-Amos, Avner. Funerals, Politics, and Memory in Modern France, 1789-1996. Oxford:
Oxford University Press, 2000.
Benedict, Philip. Rouen during the Wars of Religion. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,
1980.
———. "The Saint Bartholomew's Massacres in the Provinces." The Historical Journal 21
(1978): 205-25.
———. "The Wars of Religion, 1562-1598." In Renaissance and Reformation France, 1500-
1648, edited by Mack P. Holt, 147-75. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002.
Berdini, Paolo. "The Sorbonne and Richelieu: Theological Controversies and Urban Renewal in
XVIIth Century Paris." Arte cristiana 79, no. 745 (1991): 251-76.
Bertrand, Anne. "Art and Politics in Counter-Reformation Paris: The Case of Philippe de
Champaigne and his Patrons (1621-1674)." Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Pittsburgh,
2000.
293

Billot, Claudine. "La fondation de Saint Louis. Le collège des chanoines de la Sainte-Chapelle
(1248-1555)." In Le trésor de la Sainte-Chapelle, edited by Jannic Durand, Marie-Pierre
Laffitte and Dorota Giovannoi, 98-105. Paris: Réunion des Musées Nationaux, 2001.
Bireley, Robert. The Jesuits and the Thirty Years War: Kings, Courts, and Confessors.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003.
______. The Refashioning of Catholicism, 1450-1700: A Reassessment of the Counter
Reformation. Washington, DC: The Catholic University of America Press, 1999.
Biver, Paul and Marie-Louise. Abbayes, monastères et couvents de Paris des origines à la fin du
XVIIIe siècle. Paris: Éditions d'histoire et d'art, 1970.
Blanchet, Adrien. "Médailles de Marie de Médicis et d'Henri IV." Revue numismatique (1905):
xxiii-xxvi.
Blanchet, Adrien, and Aldophe Dieudonné. Manuel de numismatique française. 5 vols. Paris:
Picard, 1988.
Blet, Pierre. "L'Eglise de Paris et les Gondi." In Huitième centenaire de Notre-Dame de Paris
(Congrés des 30 mai - juin 1964), edited by Gabriel Le Bras, 345-58. Paris: Vrin, 1967.
Bloch, Marc. The Royal Touch: Sacred Monarchy and Scrofula in England and France.
Translated by J. E. Anderson. London: Routledge and K. Paul, 1973.
Blomfield, Reginald Theodore. Three Hundred Years of French Architecture, 1491-1794.
London: A. Maclehose, 1936.
Blond, Louis. La maison professe des Jésuites de la rue Saint-Antoine à Paris, 1580-1762. Paris:
Éditions Franciscaines, 1956.
______. Notre-Dame des Victoires et le Voeu de Louis XIII: Origine et publication du Voeu.
Paris: Presses Modernes, 1938.
Blunt, Anthony. Art and Architecture in France, 1500 to 1700. 5 ed, Pelican History of Art. New
Haven: Yale University Press, 1999.
Boinet, Amédée. Les églises parisiennes, XVIIe siècle. Paris: Les Editions de Minuit, 1962.
Bonardi, Marie-Odile. "Essai d'iconographie de l'amour au XVIIe siècle: le pélican et le coeur."
Dix-septième siècle 50, no. 4 (1998): 639-48.
Bonney, Richard J. "France's 'war by diversion'." In The Thirty Years' War, edited by Geoffrey
Parker, 129-37. London: Routledge, 1997.
Bordonove, Georges. Les Bourbons de Henri IV à Louis XV, 1589-1774. Paris: Pygmalion, 2005.
294

Bork, Robert. "Into Thin Air: France, Germany, and the Invention of the Openwork Spire." The
Art Bulletin 85, no. 1 (2003): 25-53.
Bos, Agnès. Les églises flamboyantes de Paris XVe-XVIe siècles. Paris: Picard, 2003.
Bossy, John. Christianity in the West, 1400-1700. New York: Oxford University Press, 1985.
Bottineau, Yves. Notre-Dame de Paris and the Sainte-Chapelle. Translated by Lovett F.
Edwards. New York: Rand McNally, 1965.
Bowles, Emily. A Gracious Life: Being the Life of Barbara Acarie. London: Burns and Oates,
1879.
Boureau, Alain. "Les enseignement absolutistes de Saint Louis 1610-1630." In La monarchie
absolutiste et l'histoire en France: Théories du pouvoir, propagandes monarchiques et
mythologies nationales: colloque tenu en Sorbonne les 26 - 27 mai 1986, 79-97. Paris:
Université de Paris-Sorbonne, 1987.
Braham, Allan, and Peter Smith. "Mansart Studies V: The Church of the Minimes." Burlington
Magazine 107 (1965): 123-32.
Branner, Robert. The Painted Medallions in the Sainte-Chapelle in Paris. Philadelphia:
American Philosophical Society, 1968.
———. Saint Louis and the Court Style in Gothic Architecture. London: Zwemmer, 1965.
Braun, Harald E. Juan de Mariana and Early Modern Spanish Political Thought. Aldershot,
England: Ashgate, 2007.
Breffy, G. Notre-Dame des Victoires. Paris: Letouzey et Ané, 1925.
Brenk, Beat. "The Sainte-Chapelle as a Capetian Political Program." In Artistic Integration in
Gothic Buildings, edited by Virginia Chieffo Raguin, Kathryn Brush and Peter Draper,
195-213, 341-48. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1995.
Briggs, Robin. Communities of Belief: Cultural and Social Tension in Early Modern France.
Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1989.
Brockliss, Laurence. "Richelieu, Education, and the State." In Richelieu and his Age, edited by
Joseph Bergin and Laurence Brockliss, 237-72. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1992.
Broutin, Paul. La réforme pastorale en France au XVIIe siècle. 2 vols. Paris: Desclée, 1956.
Brugerolles, Emmanuelle, and David Guillet. "Grégoire Huret, dessinateur et graveur." Revue de
l'art, no. 117 (1997): 9-35.
295

Brunel, Georges. Dictionnaire des églises de Paris: catholique, orthodoxe, protestant. Paris:
Hervas, 1995.
Bruno de Jésus-Marie, François. La belle Acarie: Bienheureuse Marie de l'Incarnation. Paris:
Desclee de Brouwer, 1942.
Bruzelius, Caroline Astrid. The Thirteenth-Century Church at St-Denis. New Haven: Yale
University Press, 1985.
Burke, Peter. The Fabrication of Louis XIV. New Haven, CT: London: Yale University Press,
1992.
Burlingham, Clay Elliott. "The King and the Cardinal: The Emergence of Majesty." Ph. D.
Dissertation, The University of Saskatchewan, 1999.
Burlingham, Cynthia. "Portraiture as Propaganda: Printmaking during the Reign of Henri IV."
In The French Renaissance in Prints: from the Bibliothèque Nationale de France, edited
by Karen Jacobson, 139-51. Los Angeles: Grunwald Center for the Graphic Arts,
University of California Los Angeles, 1994.
Caneva, Caterina, and Francesco Solinas, eds. Maria de' Medici (1573-1642): una principessa
fiorentina sul trono di Francia. Livorno, Italy: Sillabe, 2005.
Carmona, Michel. Marie de Médicis. Paris: Fayard, 1981.
Carroll, Stuart. Noble Power during the French Wars of Religion: The Guise affinity and the
Catholic Cause in Normandy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998.
Castelot, André. Marie de Médicis: les désordres de la passion. Paris: Perrin, 1995.
Charvet, E.-L.-G. Étienne Martellange, 1569-1641. Lyon: Glairon-Mondet, 1874.
Chatellier, Louis. The Europe of the Devout: The Catholic Reformation and the Formation of a
New Society. Translated by Jean Birrell. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989.
Chevallier, Pierre. Louis XIII, roi cornélien. Paris: Fayard, 1979.
Christ, Yvan. Églises parisiennes actuelles et disparues. Paris: Éditions Tel, 1947.
Ciprut, Edouard-Jacques. "Les constructeurs de l'église Sainte-Élisabeth à Paris." Bulletin de la
Société de l'Histoire de l'Art Français (1954): 186-201.
______. "Documents inédits sur l'ancienne église des Minimes de la Place Royale." Bulletin de
la Société de l'Histoire de l'Art Français (1954): 151-74.
______. "Notes sur quelques travaux au Louvre en 1627-1629." Bulletin de la Société de
l'Histoire de l'Art Français (1954): 182-85.
296

Constans, Martine. L'église Saint-Paul-Saint-Louis de Paris. Paris: Editions de la Tourelle, 1977.
Constant, Jean-Marie. La Ligue. Paris: Fayard, 1996.
Cosandey, Fanny. La reine de France: Symbole et pouvoir, XVe-XVIIIe siècle. Paris: Gallimard,
2000.
Courtright, Nicola. "A Garden and a Gallery at Fontainebleau: Imagery of Rule for Medici
Queens." The Court Historian 10, no. 1 (2005): 55-84.
______. "The Vatican Tower of the Winds and the Architectural Legacy of the Counter
Reformation." In IL 60: Essays Honoring Irving Lavin on his Sixtieth Birthday, edited by
Marilyn Aronberg Lavin, 117-44. New York: Italica Press, 1990.
Cousinié, Frédéric. "La constitution d'un système dévotionnel: Le maître-autel de l'église de la
maison professe des Jésuites de Paris au XVIIe siècle." In Memory and Oblivion:
Proceedings of the XXIXth International Congress of the History of Art held in
Amsterdam, 1-7 September 1996, edited by Wessel Reinink and Jeroen Stumpel, 609-17.
Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1999.
______. Le Saint des Saints: Maîtres-autels et retables parisiens du XVIIe siècle. Aix-en-
Provence: Université de Provence, 2006.
______. "'Vaste fracas d'ornements' ou 'fiction symbolique': le motif de la gloire dans les églises
parisiennes des XVIIe et XVIIIe siècles." In Histoires d'ornement: Actes du colloque de
l'Académie de France à Rome Villa Medicis, 27-28 juin 1996, edited by Patrice
Ceccarini, 171-201. Paris; Rome: Klincksieck; Academie de France à Rome, 2000.
Crawford, Katherine. Perilous Performances: Gender and Regency in Early Modern France.
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2004.
Crosby, Sumner McKnight, and Pamela Z. Blum. The Royal Abbey of Saint-Denis: from its
beginnings to the death of Suger, 475-1151. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1987.
Crouzet, Denis. Les guerriers de Dieu: la violence au temps des troubles de religion, vers 1525vers
1610. 2 vols. Seyssel: Champ Vallon, 1990.
Crum, Roger J. "'Cosmos, the World of Cosimo': The Iconography of the Uffizi Façade." Art
Bulletin 71, no. 2 (1989): 237-53.
Cuadra Blanco, Juan Rafael de la. "King Philip of Spain as Solomon the Second: the Origins of
Solomonism of the Escorial in the Netherlands." In The Seventh Window: the King's
Window Donated by Philip II and Mary Tudor to Sint Janskerk in Gouda (1557), edited
by Wim de Groot, 169-80. Hilversum: Verloren, 2005.
297

Currier, Charles Warren. History of Religious Orders. New York: Murphy and McCarthy, 1894.
Dagens, Jean. Bérulle et les origines de la restauration catholique (1575-1611). Paris: Desclée
de Brouwer, 1952.
Davis, Natalie Zemon. "The Rites of Violence: Religious Riot in Sixteenth-Century France." In
Society and Culture in Early Modern France, edited by Natalie Zemon Davis, 152-87.
Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1976.
Delattre, Pierre, ed. Les établissements des Jésuites en France depuis quatre siècles: répertoire
topo-bibliographique publié à l'occasion du quatrième centenaire de la fondation de la
Compagnie de Jésus (1540-1940). 5 vols. Enghien, Belguim: Institut Supérieur de
Théologie, 1955.
Della Torre, Stefano. "Il problema del dei riferimenti classicisti nell'architettura post-tridentina."
In I Tempi del Concilio: Società religione e cultura agli inizi dell'Europa moderna,
Trento 27-30 ottobre 1994, 219-27. Trent: Camera di commercio, industria, artigianato e
agricoltura di Trento, 1995.
Delorme, Philippe. Marie de Médicis. Paris: Pygmalion, 1998.
Delumeau, Jean. Catholicism between Luther and Voltaire: A New View of the Counter-
Reformation. London: Burns and Oates, 1977.
Deschamps-Bourgeon, Marie-Laure. "Le Grand Siècle et le siècle des Lumières." In
Dictionnaire des églises de Paris, edited by Georges Brunel, 41-58. Paris: Editions
Hervas, 1995.
Deville, Raymond. The French School of Spirituality: An Introduction and Reader. Translated
by Agnes Cunningham. Pitsburgh: Duquesne University Press, 1994.
Diefendorf, Barbara B. Beneath the Cross: Catholics and Huguenots in Sixteenth-Century Paris.
Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1991.
______. "Contradictions of the Century of Saint: Aristocratic Patronage and the Convents of
Counter-Reformation Paris." French Historical Studies 24, no. 3 (2001): 471-500.
———. From Penitence to Charity: Pious Women and the Catholic Reformation in Paris.
Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004.
———. "The Religious Wars in France." In A Companion to the Reformation World, edited by
R. Po-chia Hsia, 150-68. Malden, MA: Blackwell, 2004.
Diefendorf, Barbara B., and Virginia Reinburg. "Catholic Reform and Religious Coexistence." In
Renaissance and Reformation France, edited by Mack P. Holt, 176-201. Oxford: Oxford
University Press, 2002.
298

Dubost, Jean-François. "Reine, regente, reine mère." In Marie de Médicis et le Palais
Luxembourg, edited by Marie-Noëlle Baudouin-Matuszek, 100-57. Paris: Délégation à
l'Action Artistique de la Ville de Paris, 1991.
Duccini, Hélène. Concini: Grandeur et misère du favori de Marie de Médicis. Paris: A. Michel,
1991.
______. Faire voir, faire croire. L'opinion publique sous Louis XIII. Seyssel: Champ Vallon,
2003.
Dumolin, Maurice, and George Outardel. Les églises de France: Paris et la Seine. Paris:
Librairie Letouzey et Ané, 1936.
Dupuy, Michel. L'église Saint-Joseph-des-Carmes. Paris: Editions SAEP, 1993.
Durand, Jannic. "Heurs et malheurs, XVIe -- XVIIe siècles." In Le trésor de la Sainte-Chapelle,
edited by Jannic Durand, Marie-Pierre Laffitte and Dorota Giovannoi, 236-41. Paris:
Réunion des Musées Nationaux, 2001.
Edelman, Nathan. Attitudes of Seventeenth-Century France toward the Middle Ages. New York:
King's Crown Press, 1946.
Edmunds, Martha Mel. Piety and Politics: Imaging Divine Kingship in Louis XIV's Chapel at
Versailles. Newark: University of Delaware Press, 2002.
Église réformée de l'Oratoire du Louvre. Paris: Association Presbytérale de l'Église Réformée de
l'Oratoire du Louvre, 1999.
Engel, Arthur, and Raymond Serrure. Traité de numismatique du moyen âge. 3 vols. Bologna:
Arnaldo Forni, 1964.
Erlande-Brandenburg, Alain. Notre-Dame de Paris. New York: Harry N. Abrams, 1999.
Erlanger, Philippe. Louis XIII: Le stoïcien de la monarchie. Paris: Perrin, 1972.
Evans, Joan. Monastic Architecture in France, from the Renaissance to the Revolution. New
York: Cambridge University Press, 1964.
Evennett, H. Outram. The Spirit of the Counter-Reformation. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press, 1968.
Foucart-Borville, Jacques. "Les tempietti et sacraires eucharistiques dans la France des XVIe et
XVIIe siècles." Gazette des Beaux-Arts 132, no. 1559 (1998): 245-56.
Fouqueray, Henri. Histoire de la Compagnie de Jésus en France: des origines à la suppression
(1528-1762). 5 vols. Paris: Picard, 1910-1925.
299

Freiberg, Jack. The Lateran in 1600: Christian Concord in Counter-Reformation Rome.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995.
Frolow, Anatole. Les reliquaires de la Vraie Croix. Paris: Institut français d'études byzantines,
1965.
Fumaroli, Marc. "Cross, Crown, and Tiara: the Constantine Myth between Paris and Rome,
1590-1690." Studies in the History of Art 48 (1995): 88-102.
______. "Richelieu, Patron of the Arts." In Richelieu: Art and Power, edited by Hilliard Todd
Goldfarb, 15-47. Montreal: Montreal Museum of Fine Arts, 2002.
Gady, Alexandre. Jacques Lemercier, architecte et ingénieur du roi. Paris: Editions de la Maison
des sciences de l'homme, 2005.
Garrisson, Janine. Henri IV. Paris: Editions du Seuil, 1984.
Gatignol, Pascale, Catherine Martos, and Jesús Rodríguez. Du Couvent des Récollets a l'Hôpital
Villemin: destinées d'un batiment parisien (1604-1989). Paris: Ecole d'Architecture
Paris-Villemin, 1990.
Germann, Jennifer G. "The Val-de-Grâce as a Portrait of Anne of Austria: Queen, Queen
Regent, Queen Mother." In Architecture and the Politics of Gender in Early Modern
Europe, edited by Helen Hills, 47-61. Burlington, VT: Ashgate, 2003.
Giraudon, Anne. "Louis XIII et saint Louis dans la gravure française du XVIIe siècle." In
Regards sur le passé dans l'Europe des XVIe et XVIIe siècles. Actes du colloque
organisé par l'Université de Nancy II, edited by Francine Wild. Bern: Peter Lange, 1997.
Gloton, Jean-Jacques. "Le traité de Serlio et son influence en France." In Les traités
d'architecture de la Renaissance: Actes du colloque tenu à Tours du 1er au 11 Juillet
1981, edited by Jean Guillaume, 407-23. Paris: Picard, 1988.
Goodbar, Richard L., ed. The Edict of Nantes: Five Essays and a New Translation.
Bloomington, MN: The National Huguenot Society, 1998.
Greengrass, Mark. France in the Age of Henri IV: The Struggle for Stability. 2nd ed. London:
Longman, 1995.
Grivel, Marianne. Le commerce de l'estampe à Paris au XVIIe siècle. Geneva: Droz, 1986.
Hall, Marcia B. Renovation and Counter-Reformation: Vasari and Duke Cosimo in Sta. Maria
Novella and Sta. Croce 1565-1577. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1979.
Hallays, André. Le couvent des Carmes, 1613-1913. Paris: Librairie Bloud, 1913.
300

Hamon, Françoise. "La Chapelle de la Vierge en l'église Saint-Roch à Paris." Bulletin
monumental 128 (1970): 229-37.
Hautecoeur, Louis. Histoire de l'architecture classique en France. 7 vols. Paris: Picard, 1966.
Hayden, J. Michael. "Continuity in the France of Henry IV and Louis XIII: French Foreign
Policy, 1598-1615." The Journal of Modern History 45, no. 1 (1973): 1-23.
Hayden, J. Michael. France and the Estates General of 1614. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press, 1974.
Helyot, Pierre. Dictionnaire des ordres religieux; ou, histoire des ordres monastiques, religieux
et militaires. 4 vols. Paris: Chez l'Éditeur, 1847-1859.
Hoffmann, Volker. "Le Louvre de Henri II: un palais impérial." In Bulletin de la Société de
l'Histoire de l'Art français Paris, 7-15, 1982.
Holt, Mack P. The French Wars of Religion, 1562-1629. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press, 1995.
Höpfl, Harro. Jesuit Political Thought: The Society of Jesus and the State, c. 1540-1630.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004.
Houssaye, Michel. Le Père de Bérulle et l'Oratoire de Jésus. 1611-1625. Paris: Plon, 1874.
———. M. de Bérulle et les Carmélites de France. 1575-1611. Paris: Plon, 1872.
Hurst, Quentin. Henry of Navarre. London: Hodder and Soughton, 1937.
Hurtaut, Pierre Thomas Nicolas. Dictionnaire historique de la ville de Paris et de ses environs. 4
vols. Geneva: Minkoff Reprint, 1973.
Hustin, Arthur. Le Luxembourg: son histoire domaniale, architecturale, décorative et
anecdotique, 1611-1911. Paris: Imprimerie du Sénat, 1911.
Ingold, Auguste-Marie-Pierre. L'église de l'Oratoire Saint-Honoré. Paris: Poussielgue frères,
1887.
Jackson, Richard A. Vive le roi! A History of the French Coronation from Charles V to Charles
X. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1984.
Johnson, Cesare. "Le medaglie della prima pietra della chiesa di S. Ignazio a Roma." Medaglia
Torino 8, no. 15 (1978): 11-19.
301

Johnson, Géraldine A. "Imagining Images of Powerful Women: Maria de' Medici's Patronage of
Art and Architecture." In Women and Art in Early Modern Europe: Patrons, Collectors,
and Connoisseurs, edited by Cynthia Lawrence, 126-53. University Park, PA: The
Pennsylvania State University Press, 1997.
Jones, Mark. A Catalogue of the French Medals in the British Museum. Volume Two, 1600-1672.
London: British Museum Publications, 1988.
Jouanna, Arlette. Le devoir de révolte: La noblesse française et la gestation de l'état modern,
1559-1661. Paris: Fayard, 1989.
Jouhaud, Christian, and Suzanne Toczyski. "Richelieu, or 'Baroque' Power in Action." Yale
French Studies, no. 80 (1991): 183-201.
Kantorowicz, Ernst. Laudes Regiae: A Study in Liturgical Acclamations and Mediaeval Ruler
Worship. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1946.
Kettering, Sharon. French Society, 1589-1715. Essex, UK: Pearson Education Limited, 2001.
______. "Gift-Giving and Patronage in Early Modern France." French History 2, no. 2 (1988):
131-51.
Klevgard, Paul Albert. "Society and Politics in Counter-Reformation France: A Study of
Bérulle, Vincent de Paul, Olier, and Bossuet." Ph. D. Dissertation, Northwestern
University, 1971.
Knecht, Robert J. The French Civil Wars, 1562-1598. Harlow, England: Pearson, 2000.
______. Richelieu. London: Longman, 1991.
Köhlers, Johann David. "Eine vortrefliche Medaille von der Königin in Frankreich, Maria de'
Medices, als Wittwe." Der Wöchentlichen historischen Münz-Belustigung (1731): 393-
400.
Krakovitch, Odile. "Le couvent des Minimes de la Place-Royale." Fédération des Sociétés
Historiques et Archéologiques de Paris et Ile-de-France 30 (1979): 87-258.
Krautheimer, Richard. Early Christian and Byzantine Architecture. 4th ed. New York: Penguin
Books, 1986.
La Basilique Notre-Dame des Victoires. Sanctuaire Marial au coeur de Paris. Paris: La
Basilique Notre-Dame des Victoires.
La Moureyre, Françoise de. "Les trois mausolées du Cardinal de Bérulle: nouveaux documents."
Gazette des Beaux-Arts 118, no. 1475 (1991): 213-20.
302

Labarge, Margaret Wade. Saint Louis: Louis IX, Most Christian King of France. Boston: Little,
Brown, 1968.
Labrousse, Élisabeth, and Robert Sauzet. "La lente mise en place de la réforme tridentine (1598-
1661)." In Histoire de la France religieuse, edited by Jacques Le Goff and René
Rémond, 321-474. Paris: Seuil, 1988.
Lafond, Jean. "De 1560 à 1789." In Le vitrail français, edited by Marcel Aubert, André Chastel
and Louis Grodecki, 257-71. Paris: Éditions Deux Mondes, 1958.
Lambert, Edouard. Notice historique sur l'église de Notre-Dame des Victoires. Paris: Curot,
1872.
Laurentin, René. Le voeu de Louis XIII: Passé ou avenir de la France. Paris: OEIL, 1988.
Lavin, Irving. "Pisanello and the Invention of the Renaissance Medal." In Italienische
Frührenaissance und nordeuropäisches Spätmittelalter: Kunst der frühen Neuzeit im
europaïschen Zusammenhang, edited by Joachim Poeschke and Francis Ames-Lewis, 67-
84. Munich: Hirmer, 1993.
Le Goff, Jacques. Saint Louis. Paris: Gallimard, 1996.
Le Pas de Sécheval, Anne. "La politique artistique de Louis XIII." Thèse de doctorat, Université
de Paris-Sorbonne, 1992.
Le Roux, Nicolas. "The Catholic Nobility and Political Choice during the League, 1585-1594:
the Case of Claude de La Châtre." French History 8 (1994): 34-50.
Lemonnier, Henry. "Jean Goujon et la Salle des Cariatides au Louvre." Gazette des Beaux-Arts
35 (1906): 177-94.
Lenoir, Magalie. "La châsse en forme de Sainte-Chapelle, 1625-1791." In Le trésor de la Sainte-
Chapelle, edited by Jannic Durand, Marie-Pierre Laffitte and Dorota Giovannoi, 257-58.
Paris: Réunion des Musées Nationaux, 2001.
Levy, Evonne. "Architecture and Religion in Seventeenth-century Rome." Studiolo 2 (2003):
219-52.
Lewine, Milton Joseph. "The Roman Church Interior." Ph. D. Dissertation, Columbia University,
1960.
Lewy, Guenter. Constitutionalism and Statecraft During the Golden Age of Spain: A Study of
the Political Philosophy of Juan de Mariana. Geneva: Droz, 1960.
Lombard-Jourdan, Anne. Fleur de lis et oriflamme: signes célestes du royaume de France. Paris:
CNRS éditions, 2002.
303

Lonergan, Walter F. Historic Churches of Paris. London: Downey, 1896.
Love, Ronald S. Blood and Religion: The Conscience of Henri IV 1553-1593. Montreal:
McGill-Queen's University Press, 2001.
———. "Winning the Catholics: Henri IV and the Religious Dilemma in August 1589."
Canadian Journal of History 24 (1989): 361-79.
Lublinskaya, Aleksandra D. French Absolutism: The Crucial Phase, 1620-1629. Translated by
Brian Pearce. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1968.
Lucas, Thomas M., and Evonne Levy, eds. Saint, Site, and Sacred Strategy: Ignatius, Rome, and
Jesuit Urbanism. Vatican City: Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, 1990.
Maland, David. Europe at War, 1600-1650. Totowa, NJ: Rowman and Littlefield, 1980.
Mâle, Emile. L'art religieux après le Concile de Trente. Paris: Armand Colin, 1932.
Mamone, Sara. Paris et Florence: deux capitales du spectacle pour une reine Marie de Médicis.
Translated by Sophie Bajard. Paris: Seuil, 1990.
Marion, Marcel. Dictionnaire des institutions de la France au XVIIe et XVIIIe siècles. Paris: A.
Picard, 1923.
Mariotti Masi, Maria Luisa. Maria de Medici. Milan: Mursia, 1993.
Marrow, Deborah. "The Art Patronage of Maria de' Medici." Ph.D. Dissertation, University of
Pennsylvania, 1978.
Martin, Victor. Le Gallicanisme politique et le clergé de France. Paris: Editions Auguste Picard,
1929.
Marvick, Elizabeth W. Louis XIII: The Making of a King. New Haven: Yale University Press,
1986.
Mastelione, Salvo. La Reggenza di Maria de' Medici. Florence: G. D'Anna, 1962.
Mauzaize, P. J. "Une fondation royale de l'ancien Paris: Le couvent des Capucins de la rue
Saint-Honoré." Bulletin de la société de l'histoire de Paris et de l'Ile-de-France 112
(1985): 49-96.
Mazerolle, Fernand. Les Médailleurs français du XVe siècle au milieu du XVIIe. 3 vols. Paris:
Imprimerie nationale, 1902-1904.
McClendon, Charles B. Imperial Abbey at Farfa: Architectural Currents of the Early Middle
Ages. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1987.
304

McCorquodale, Wilmer Hunt. "The Court of Louis XIII: The French Court in an age of Turmoil,
1610-1643." Ph. D. Dissertation, The University of Texas at Austin, 1994.
McGehee, Abby. "The Virgin Chapel at Saint-Gervais-Saint-Protais: Embellishment and
Devotion in Late Gothic Paris." Journal of the Society of Architectural Historians 67, no.
3 (2008): 362-87.
McGinniss, Lawrence Robert. "Royal Chapel Projects for Louis XIV at St. Denis, the Louvre
and the Invalides, 1664-1683." Ph.D. Dissertation, Columbia University, 1974.
McPhee, Sarah. Bernini and the Bell Towers: Architecture and Politics at the Vatican. New
Haven: Yale University Press, 2002.
Meinberg, C. H. "Cornerstone." In New Catholic Encyclopedia, edited by Catholic University of
America, 335-36. New York: McGraw Hill, 1967.
Ménorval, E. de. Les Jésuites de la rue Saint-Antoine. L'église Saint-Paul-Saint-Louis et le lycée
Charlemagne. Paris: Aubry, 1872.
Mignot, Claude. "La chapelle et maison de Sorbonne." In Richelieu et le monde de l'esprit, edited
by André Tuilier, 87-93. Paris: Imprimerie nationale, 1985.
______. "L'architecture française au temps de Marie de Médicis." In Marie de Médicis: un
gouvernement par les arts, edited by Paola Bassani Pacht, Thierry Crépin-Leblond,
Nicolas Sainte Fare Garnot and Francesco Solinas, 29-41. Paris: Somogy éditions d'art,
2003.
______. "The New Rome, 1527-1700: The Century of Louis XIII (1594-1660)." In The Art and
Spirit of Paris, edited by Michel Laclotte, 298-377. New York: Abbeville Press, 2004.
______. "Richelieu et l'architecture." In Richelieu et le monde de l'esprit, edited by André
Tuilier, 55-60. Paris: Imprimerire nationale, 1985.
Millen, Ronald Forsyth, and Robert Erich Wolf. Heroic Deeds and Mystic Figures: A New
Reading of Rubens' Life of Maria de' Medici. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton
University Press, 1989.
Moisy, Pierre. Les églises des Jésuites de l'ancienne assistance de France. Rome: Institutum
Historicum Societatis Iesu, 1958.
———. "Martellange, Derand et le conflit baroque." Bulletin monumental 110 (1952): 237-61.
Monter, William E. Judging the French Reformation: Heresy Trials by Sixteenth-Century
Parlements. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1999.
305

Montgolfier, Bernard de, ed. Saint-Paul-Saint-Louis: les Jésuites à Paris. Paris: Musée
Carnavalet, 1985.
Moote, A. Lloyd. Louis XIII, the Just. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1989.
Morand, Sauveur-Jérome. Histoire de la Sainte-Chapelle Royale du Palais. Paris: Clousier et
Prault, 1790.
Morgain, Stéphane-Marie. La théologie politique de Pierre de Bérulle (1598-1629). Paris:
Publisud, 2001.
Mousnier, Roland. The Assassination of Henry IV. The Tyrannicide Problem and the
Consolidation of the French Absolute Monarchy in the Early Seventeenth Century.
Translated by Joan Spencer. London: Faber and Faber, 1973.
Musset, Paul de. Puylaurens. Paris: Michel Lévy Frères, 1856.
Nelson, Eric. "Interpreting the Edict of Rouen: Royal Patronage and the Expansion of the Jesuit
Mission in France." Archivum Historicum Societatis Iesu 72, no. 144 (2003): 405-26.
———. The Jesuits and the Monarchy: Catholic Reform and Political Authority in France
(1590-1615). Aldershot, England: Ashgate, 2005.
Neuman, Robert. Robert de Cotte and the Perfection of Architecture in Eighteenth-Century
France. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1994.
O'Malley, John. The First Jesuits. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1993.
———. "The Fourth Vow in Its Ignatian Context: A Historical Study." Studies in the
Spirituality of Jesuits 15, no. 1 (1983): 1-45.
O'Malley, John. "Was Ignatius Loyola a Church Reformer: How to Look at Early Modern
Catholicism." Catholic Historical Review 77 (1991): 177-93.
Parker, Geoffrey. Europe in Crisis, 1598 to 1648. 2 ed. Oxford: Blackwell, 2001.
______. The Grand Strategy of Philip II. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1998.
———. "The War for Bohemia." In The Thirty Years' War, edited by Geoffrey Parker, 43-55.
London: Routledge, 1997.
Parsons, Jotham. The Church in the Republic: Gallicanism and Political Ideology in
Renaissance France. Washington, DC: The Catholic University of America Press, 2004.
Pastor, Ludwig von. The History of the Popes: From the Close of the Middle Ages. Translated
by Ernest Graf. 38 vols. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1952.
306

Perdrizet, Paul. Le Calendrier parisien à la fin dun moyen âge: d'après le bréviaire et les livres
d'heures. Paris: Les belles lettres, 1933.
Pérouse de Montclos, Jean-Marie. L'architecture à la française: XVIe, XVIIe, XVIIIe siècles.
Paris: Picard, 1982.
Phillips, Henry. Church and culture in seventeenth-century France. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press, 1997.
Poirson, Auguste. Histoire du règne de Henri IV. 4 vols. Paris: Didier, 1865-1866.
Polleross, Friedrich. "Between Typology and Psychology: The Role of the Identification Portrait
in Updating Old Testament Representations." Artibus et Historiae 12, no. 24 (1991): 75-
117.
Portier, Lucienne, and Paul Ricoeur. Le pélican: histoire d'un symbole. Paris: Editions du Cerf,
1984.
Ranum, Orest. Paris in the Age of Absolutism: An Essay. University Park, PA: The
Pennsylvania State University Press, 2002.
Rapley, Elizabeth. The Dévotes: Women and Church in Seventeenth-Century France. Montreal:
McGill-Queen's University Press, 1990.
Rashdall, Hastings. The Universities of Europe in the Middle Ages. Oxford: Clarendon Press,
1895.
Renaudin, Paul. "La dévotion mariale dans l'École Française du XVIIe siècle." La vie spirituelle,
ascétique et mystique 54 (1938): 150-77.
Révész-Alexander, Magda. Der Turm als Symbol und Erlebnis. Haag: Martinus Nijhoff, 1953.
Richet, Denis. "Aspects socio-culturels des conflits religieux à Paris dans la seconde moitié du
XVIe siècle." Annales, économies, sociétés, civilisations 32 (1977): 764-89.
———. "La Contre-reforme Catholique en France dans la premiere moitié du XVIIe siècle." De
la Réforme à la Révolution: études sur la France moderne (1991): 83-95.
Robeck, Nesta de. Saint Elizabeth of Hungary: A Story of Twenty-four Years. Milwaukee, WI:
Bruce Publishing Company, 1954.
Rocher, Yves, ed. L'art du XVIIe siècle dans les carmels de France: Musée du Petit Palais, 17
novembre 1982-15 février 1983. Paris: Le Musée, 1982.
Romain, Charles. Louis XIII: Un grand roi méconnu, 1601-1643. Paris: Hachette, 1934.
307

Romier, Lucien. Les origines politiques des guerres de religion. 2 vols. Paris: Perrin, 1913-1914.
Rousteau-Chambon, Hélène. Le gothique des Temps modernes. Architecture religieuse en milieu
urbain. Paris: Picard, 2003.
Rubin, Elaine. "The Heroic Image: Women and Power in Early Seventeenth-Century France,
1610-1661." Ph.D. Dissertation, George Washington University, 1977.
Russell, Daniel S. "Perceiving, Seeing and Meaning: Emblems and Some Approaches to
Reading Early Modern Culture." In Aspects of Renaissance and Baroque Symbol Theory,
1500-1700, edited by Peter M. Daly and John Manning, 77-92. New York: AMS Press,
1999.
Sainte-Fare Garnot, Nicolas. "L'action caritative." In Marie de Médicis et le Palais Luxembourg,
edited by Marie-Noëlle Baudouin-Matuszek, 158-63. Paris: Délégation à l'Action
Artistique de la Ville de Paris, 1991.
______. La Vierge, le roi, et le ministre. Le décor du choeur de Notre-Dame de Paris au XVIIe
siècle. Arras: Musée des Beaux-Arts d'Arras, 1996.
Salet, Francis. "Les Statues d'apôtres de la Sainte-Chapelle conservées au musée de Cluny."
Bulletin monumental 109 (1951): 135-56.
———. "Nouvelle note sur les statues d'apôtres de la Sainte-Chapelle." Bulletin monumental 112
(1954): 357-63.
Salmon, J. H. M. Society in Crisis: France in the Sixteenth Century. New York: St. Martin's,
1975.
Sanger, Victoria. "Le 'portail' de l'église des Minimes, 1657-1665." In François Masart: le génie
de l'architecture, edited by Jean-Pierre Babelon and Claude Mignot, 233-37. Paris:
Gallimard, 1998.
Scheller, Robert W. "Ensigns of Authority: French Royal Symbolism in the Age of Louis XII."
Semiolus 13, no. 2 (1983): 75-141.
———. "Imperial Themes in Art and Literature of the Early French Renaissance: The Period of
Charles VIII." Semiolus 12, no. 1 (1981-1982): 5-69.
Schieder, Martin. "Fondation royale et temple des arts: L'église Notre-Dame-des-Victoires à
Paris." In Place des Victoires: Histoire, architecture, société, edited by Isabelle Dubois,
Alexandre Gady and Hendrik Ziegler, 197-213. Paris: Editions de la Maison des Sciences
de l'Homme, 2003.
308

Sluhovsky, Moshe. Patroness of Paris: Rituals of Devotion in Early Modern France. Leiden:
Brill, 1998.
Smith, E. Baldwin. Architectural Symbolism of Imperial Rome and the Middle Ages. Princeton,
New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1956.
Smith, Jeffrey Chipps. Sensuous Worship: Jesuits and the Art of the Early Catholic Reformation
in Germany. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2002.
Stalley, Roger. Early Medieval Architecture. New York: Oxford University Press, 1999.
Sutherland, Nora M. Henry IV of France and the Politics of Religion, 1572-1596. 2 vols. Bristol,
UK: Elm Bank, 2002.
______. "The Origins of the Thirty Years War and the Structure of European Politics." The
English Historical Review 107, no. 424 (1992): 587-625.
Tallon, Alain. La France et le Concile de Trente (1518-1563). Rome: École française de Rome,
1997.
Tapié, Victor L. France in the Age of Louis XIII and Richelieu. New York: Praeger, 1975.
Temko, Allan. Notre-Dame of Paris. New York: Viking Press, 1955.
Thompson, William M., ed. Bérulle and the French School: Selected Writings. New York:
Paulist Press, 1989.
Thomson, David. Renaissance Paris: architecture and growth 1475-1600. London: Zwemmer,
1984.
Thuillier, Jacques, Barbara Brejon de Lavergnée, and Denis Lavalle. Vouet: Galeries nationales
du Grand Palais, Paris, 6 novembre 1990 - 11 février 1991. Paris: Réunion des musées
nationaux, 1990.
———. "Richelieu théologien et la Sorbonne." In Richelieu et le monde de l'esprit, edited by
André Tuilier, 277-92. Paris: Imprimerie nationale, 1985.
Tietz, Manfred. "Saint Louis roi chrétien: Un mythe de la mission intérieure du XVIIe siècle." In
La conversion au XVIIe siècle: Actes du XIIe Colloque de Marseille, janvier 1982, 59-
69. Marseille: Centre Méridional de Rencontres sur le XVIIe siècle, 1983.
Troche, Nicolas-Michel. "Embellissements de Paris: Ancien monastère des Filles du Calvaire,
rue de Vaugirard." Revue archéologique 3 (1846): 520-29.
Tuilier, André. Histoire de l'Université de Paris et de la Sorbonne. 2 vols. Paris: Nouvelle
Librairie de France, 1994.
309

Turchetti, Mario. "Middle Parties in France during the Wars of Religion." In Reformation, Revolt
and Civil War in France and the Netherlands, 1555-1585, edited by Philip Benedict,
Guido Marnef, Hank van Nierop and Marc Venard, 165-83. Amsterdam: Royal
Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences, 1999.
Vanuxem, Jacques. "Les Jésuites et la peinture au XVIIe siècle à Paris." La revue des arts 8
(1958): 85-91.
______. Saint-Joseph des Carmes. Paris: Editions du Cerf, 1946.
Varriano, John L. "The Architecture of Papal Medals." In Projects and Monuments in the Period
of the Roman Baroque, edited by Hellmut Hager and Susan Scott Munshower, 69-81.
University Park, PA: Pennsylvania State University, 1984.
Vaunois, Louis. Vie de Louis XIII. Paris: Del Duca, 1961.
Venard, Marc. "La grande cassure (1520-1598)." In Histoire de la France religieuse, edited by
Jacques Le Goff and René Rémond, 187-319. Paris: Seuil, 1988.
Viguerie, Jean de. "Richelieu théologien." In Richelieu et la Culture: Actes du Colloque
international en Sorbonne, edited by Roland Mousnier, 29-42. Paris: Centre National de
la Recherche Scientifique, 1987.
Violle, Bernard. Paris, son Eglise et ses églises: histoire, art, foi. 2 vols. Paris: Cerf, 2004.
Vloberg, Maurice. Notre-Dame de Paris et le voeu de Louis XIII. Paris: Frazier-Soye, 1926.
Voelker, Evelyn Carole. "Charles Borromeo's Instructiones fabricae et supellectilis
ecclesiasticae, 1577. A translation with commentary and analysis." Ph. D. Dissertation,
Syracuse University, 1977.
Wazbinski, Zygmunt. L'Accademia Medicea del disegno a Firenze nel cinquecento: idea e
istituzione. Florence: Leo S. Olschki, 1987.
Weigert, Roger-Armand. L'Eglise de la Sorbonne. Paris: Cerf, 1947.
Weiss, Daniel H. Art and Crusade in the Age of Saint Louis. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press, 1998.
______. "The Three Solomon Portraits in the Arsenal Old Testament and the Construction of
Meaning in Crusader Painting." Arte medievale 6, no. 2 (1992): 15-38.
Whitmore, J. S. The Order of Minims in Seventeenth-Century France. The Hague: Martinus
Nijhoff, 1967.
Wilinski, Stanislaw. "La Serliana." Bollettino del Centro Internazionale di Studi di Architettura
Andrea Palladio (1969): 399-429.
310

Willesme, Jean-Pierre, ed. Les Ordres mendiants à Paris. Paris: Éditions Paris-Musées, 1992.
Williams, Charles E. The French Oratorians and Absolutism, 1611-1641. New York: Peter
Lang, 1989.
Wilson-Chevalier, Kathleen. "Women on Top at Fontainebleau." Oxford Art Journal 16, no. 1
(1993): 34-48.
Wolfe, Michael. The Conversion of Henri IV: Politics, Power, and Religious Belief in Early
Modern France. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1993.
Worcester, Thomas. Seventeenth-Century Cultural Discourse: France and the Preaching of
Bishop Camus. New York: Mouton de Gruyter, 1997.
Zerner, Henri. "Introduction." In The French Renaissance in Prints: from the Bibliothèque
Nationale de France, edited by Karen Jacobson, 15-31. Los Angeles: Grunwald Center
for the Graphic Arts, University of California Los Angeles, 1994.
Zorach, Rebecca. Blood, Milk, Ink, Gold: Abundance and Excess in the French Renaissance.
Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 2005.
311

Education:
Teaching Experience:
National Award:
BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH
Julianne Parse Sandlin
Ph.D. FLORIDA STATE UNIVERSITY, 2009
Major Field: Renaissance and Baroque Art of Western Europe
Minor Field: Medieval Art and Architecture of Western Europe
Dissertation: Asserting Royal Power in Early Seventeenth-Century Paris:
Louis XIII, Maria de’ Medici, and the Art and Architecture of
Reformed Religious Orders
Advisor: Robert Neuman
M.A. UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 2001
Area of Specialization: Architectural History
Thesis: Curved Façades in Seventeenth-Century French Architecture
B. S. APPALACHIAN STATE UNIVERSITY, 1996
Major: Housing and Interiors
Minor: Art
Appalachian State University, Department of Art
Instructor, Academic Year 2008 – 2009
Renaissance Art (Major themes of European Art, 1400-1600)
Southern Baroque Art and Architecture
Survey of World Art (1400 to Present), multiple sections
Florida State University, Department of Art History
Instructor of Record, various appointments from 2002 to 2007
Southern Baroque Art and Architecture
Survey of Western Art, I
Survey of Western Art, II
Taught Honors Program section in Spring 2005
Samuel H. Kress Travel Fellowship in the History of Art (2006)
312

Publication:
“The Ca’Dario: A Message from a Cittadino.” Athanor 22 (2004).
313