瓦尔特·司各特是英国著名的历史小说家和诗人。他生于苏格兰的爱丁堡市，父亲是位律师。司各将毕业于爱丁堡大学，当过律师，担任过副郡长、高等民事法庭书记宫等职。
司各特热爱苏格兰家乡，从小对故乡丰富的历史传说和民间歌谣产生了浓厚的兴趣。一八○二年至一八○三年间他搜集整理并出版了《苏格兰边区歌谣》，引起人们的注意，也为他日后的创作打下了基础。一八○五年，司各特创作的叙事长诗《末代歌者之歌》出版，轰动了英国文坛，给他带来了声誉。此后他又创作了长诗《玛密恩》和《湖上夫人》等。在这些叙事诗里，司各特运用浪漫抒情的手法描绘了苏格兰瑰丽的自然景色，叙述了苏格兰和英格兰古老的历史传说，引起了人们极大的兴趣，奠定了自己在英国文坛上的诗人地位。
一八一四年，司各特匿名出版了一部以苏格兰詹姆士党人一七四五年起义为题材的历史小说《威弗利》，受到读者极其热情的欢迎。这时，拜伦已在诗坛上崭露头角，司各特自叹不如，于是决心转到小说创作方面。
从一八一四年到一八三二年司各特去世为止，他一共创作了二十余部历史小说，其中最为胜炙人口的有以苏格兰历史为背景的《中洛辛郡的心脏》、《修墓老人》、《红古罗伯》，以英格兰历史为背景的《艾凡赫》和以法国历史为背景的《惊婚记》。
司各特的历史小说气势磅礴，宏伟壮丽，出色地反映了英格兰、苏格兰和欧洲历史重大转折时刻的矛盾冲突。在他的笔下，历史事件毫不枯燥，总是和故事人物悲欢离合的曲折遭遇有机地结合在一起。
司各特的创作对欧洲历史小说起了开创作用，被尊为历史小说的创始人。英国的狄更斯、斯蒂文森，法国的雨果、巴尔扎克、大仲马，的普希金，意大利的曼佐尼，美国的库柏等著名作家都曾受到司各特的深刻影响。
《惊婚记》是司各特的代表作品之一。这部小说出版于一八二三年，不但受到英国读者的喜爱，还在欧洲掀起了一股司各特热，尤其在法国引起的反响之热烈超过了司各特以前的所有作品。
这部小说把我们带到了充满浪漫情趣的中世纪时期的法国，它以十五世纪法国国王路易十一反对封建割据势力的斗争为历史背景。小说主人公是一个初到法国宫廷充任国王贴身卫士的苏格兰青年昆丁·达威特。喜爱冒险的青年读者一定会被昆丁在法国遇到的种种惊险的遭遇吸引住。故事的主要情节是：昆丁爱上了一位为逃婚到法王宫廷避难的贵族少女，国王和少女的保护人勃艮第公爵为夺取对少女财产的控制权进行了种种明争暗斗；昆丁也卷进了这场斗争，但他终于靠自己的勇气和智慧避开了国王设下的一道道陷附，救出了少女，并且获得了她的爱情。
司各特小说里的主人公往往写得不及小说里的次要人物和真实的历史人物那么生动和吸引人。例如，《艾凡赫》里的骑士艾凡赫和《修墓老人》里的主人公亨利·莫顿都常常受到批评家的指责，说他们是缺乏鲜明个性用5徊于斗争双方之间的主人公。然而，在《惊婚记》这部小说里，主人公昆丁却写得非常真切感人。他那单纯善良、正直坚定、诚恳执着的性格正和小说里描写的历史人物路易十一那虚伪狡诈、残忍自私的性格正好形成强烈的对照，他为了拯救一个弱女子而奋不顾身的忘我精神也就更加使读者为之激动。昆丁·达威特无疑是司各特笔下最受读者喜爱的主人公之一。
不过，在《惊婚记》里强烈地吸引了读者的，还不只是这对恋人种种千钧一发的历险，而是和这对恋人的遭遇紧密相联的巨大历史时期的矛盾和斗争，尤其是法国国王和强大的封建贵族首领勃艮第公爵之间的勾心斗角、阴谋诡计和明争暗斗。司各特在这部小说的序里特别声明：“昆丁的小小爱情纠葛只是为了故事的进展而采用的一种手段。”司各特描绘的重点是著名的历史人物路易十一，虽说为了故事情节结构的要求，他并没有让这个历史人物作为小说的主人公。
十五世纪的法国正处于外患内乱之中。国内封建诸侯飞扬跋扈，为所欲为，各据一方，和法国国王分庭抗礼。而由于发展生产的要求，新兴的市民阶层迫切要求统一的政权、强有力的法治和安定的社会秩序。历史发展就这样把建立一个中央集权的封建君主国家的要求提到了日程上。司各特以他敏锐的洞察力描绘了主张统一的路易十一和割据称雄的大贵族勃艮第公爵之间的尖锐斗争，并且通过路易十一在这场斗争中获得的成就反映了历史发展的主要趋势。
路易十一有着复杂而鲜明的性格。司各特在小说里表现了路易十一为实现中央集权而进行的斗争，并且指出他的斗争是符合历史发展要求的。然而，司各特也毫不隐讳地表现了路易十一在这场斗争中采取的不光彩的阴谋手段。路易十一始终是以表面伪装友好，实际暗挖墙角的办法对付凶猛、暴躁的勃艮第公爵的。在处理贵族少女伊莎贝尔逃婚事件时，路易十一一方面假意派昆丁护送伊莎贝尔回到列日市主教府去，另一方面又玩弄诡计，挑动恶霸贵族“胡子”威廉半路拦劫抢亲，以便夺取伊莎贝尔的领地，在公爵身边安下一颗钉子。由于昆丁的警惕，此计没有成功，他又挑动列日市民，造成“胡子”威廉攻进主教府，杀死公爵的同盟者列日主教的流血事件。总之，路易十一善于利用各种手段来达到他的目的。在他看来，为了达到自己的目的，使用任何阴谋手段都是合法的。司各特描绘的路易十一这个形象充分揭示了他性格中狡诈、虚伪、冷酷、自私以及迷信天命的一面。但是，另一方面，司各特也表现了路易十一在统一法国的过程中所显示出的雄才大略和他善于摆脱困难处境的智谋和才干。他在公爵率领大军即将进犯法国疆土的紧急时刻只身拜访公爵，寻求和平解决办法。然而公爵正巧得到列日主教死讯，大为震怒，路易十一被他监禁起来，生命受到极大威胁。这时，路易十一又一次施展手腕，乘“胡子”威廉进犯公爵领土之际，向公爵提出共同惩罚“胡子”威廉的方案，使自己从“阶下囚”一跃而成为公爵的同盟者，从而解除了公爵对法国领土的威胁。这样，司各特笔下的这个历史人物路易十一不但得到了符合历史真实的描绘，而且形象鲜明生动，具有作为特殊个人的人性。他把历史人物写活了。英国评论家托玛斯·卡莱尔对司各特这方面的贡献作过极为中肯的评价。他说，司各特的历史小说指出了这样一条真理，那就是：
“过去时代的世界里实际上充满了活生生的人，而不是条约草案、公
文卷宗、论争和关于人的抽象概念。他们不是抽象概念，也不是图解和定
理；而是人，穿着浅黄牛皮上衣或者别样的外衣和马裤，面颊上有红晕，
胸中蕴藏着，具有人的语言、相貌和生命力！人是一个小小的词，却
包含着多么大的意义！”
路易十一就是司各特的历史人物中最突出的具有“人的语言。相貌和生命力”的形象，他那虚伪狡猾、善于玩弄阴谋的性格是那样真实，那样充满说服力，所以这个形象一再受到各国评论家的推崇和赞扬。
司各特在《惊婚记》里用他富于感染力的笔调描绘了许多栩栩如生的事件和场面，尤其在后半部，从“胡子”威廉攻下主教府开始，矛盾一步步展开和激化，情节进入，像路易十一深入公爵城堡的场面，路易十一在被监禁时命令刽子手特里斯丹惩罚欺骗了他的星相家的场面，以及后来国王和公爵重新和好、共谋惩治者的场面，每个场面都紧紧扣人心弦。但是，在尖锐的斗争中又时时掺杂着喜剧的因素，刀光剑影之中不时听见幽默的笑声，这也是司各特的特殊风格吧。
雨果曾经撰文赞扬《惊婚记》，用三句话概括了司各特的成就，他说：“司各特把历史的伟大灿烂，小说的趣味和编年史的那种严格的精确结合了起来。”《惊婚记》正是这三者出色的结合的光辉范例。
Among those who were the first to ridicule and abandon the self denying principles in which the young knight was instructed and to which he was so carefully trained up, Louis XI of France was the chief. That sovereign was of a character so purely selfish -- so guiltless of entertaining any purpose unconnected with his ambition, covetousness, and desire of selfish enjoyment -- that he almost seems an incarnation of the devil himself, permitted to do his utmost to corrupt our ideas of honour in its very source. Nor is it to be forgotten that Louis possessed to a great extent that caustic wit which can turn into ridicule all that a man does for any other person's advantage but his own, and was, therefore, peculiarly qualified to play the part of a cold hearted and sneering fiend.
The cruelties, the perjuries, the suspicions of this prince, were rendered more detestable, rather than amended, by the gross and debasing superstition which he constantly practised. The devotion to the heavenly saints, of which he made such a parade, was upon the miserable principle of some petty deputy in office, who endeavours to hide or atone for the malversations of which he is conscious by liberal gifts to those whose duty it is to observe his conduct, and endeavours to support a system of fraud by an attempt to corrupt the incorruptible. In no other light can we regard his creating the Virgin Mary a countess and colonel of his guards, or the cunning that admitted to one or two peculiar forms of oath the force of a binding obligation which he denied to all other, strictly preserving the secret, which mode of swearing he really accounted obligatory, as one of the most valuable of state mysteries.
To a total want of scruple, or, it would appear, of any sense whatever of moral obligation, Louis XI added great natural firmness and sagacity of character, with a system of policy so highly refined, considering the times he lived in, that he sometimes overreached himself by giving way to its dictates.
Probably there is no portrait so dark as to be without its softer shades. He understood the interests of France, and faithfully pursued them so long as he could identify them with his own. He carried the country safe through the dangerous crisis of the war termed "for the public good;" in thus disuniting and dispersing this grand and dangerous alliance of the great crown vassals of France against the Sovereign, a king of a less cautious and temporizing character, and of a more bold and less crafty disposition than Louis XI, would, in all probability, have failed. Louis had also some personal accomplishments not inconsistent with his public character. He was cheerful and witty in society; and none was better able to sustain and extol the superiority of the coarse and selfish reasons by which he endeavoured to supply those nobler motives for exertion which his predecessors had derived from the high spirit of chivalry.
In fact, that system was now becoming ancient, and had, even while in its perfection, something so overstrained and fantastic in its principles, as rendered it peculiarly the object of ridicule, whenever, like other old fashions, it began to fall out of repute; and the weapons of raillery could be employed against it, without exciting the disgust and horror with which they would have been rejected at an early period, as a species of blasphemy. The principles of chivalry were cast aside, and their aid supplied by baser stimulants. Instead of the high spirit which pressed every man forward in the defence of his country, Louis XI substituted the exertions of the ever ready mercenary soldier, and persuaded his subjects, among whom the mercantile class began to make a figure, that it was better to leave to mercenaries the risks and labours of war, and to supply the Crown with the means of paying them, than to peril themselves in defence of their own substance. The merchants were easily persuaded by this reasoning. The hour did not arrive in the days of Louis XI when the landed gentry and nobles could be in like manner excluded from the ranks of war; but the wily monarch commenced that system, which, acted upon by his successors, at length threw the whole military defence of the state into the hands of the Crown.
He was equally forward in altering the principles which were wont to regulate the intercourse of the sexes. The doctrines of chivalry had established, in theory at least, a system in which Beauty was the governing and remunerating divinity -- Valour, her slave, who caught his courage from her eye and gave his life for her slightest service. It is true, the system here, as in other branches, was stretched to fantastic extravagance, and cases of scandal not unfrequently arose. Still, they were generally such as those mentioned by Burke, where frailty was deprived of half its guilt, by being purified from all its grossness. In Louis XI's practice, it was far otherwise. He was a low voluptuary, seeking pleasure without sentiment, and despising the sex from whom he desired to obtain it. ... By selecting his favourites and ministers from among the dregs of the people, Louis showed the slight regard which he paid to eminent station and high birth; and although this might be not only excusable but meritorious, where the monarch's fiat promoted obscure talent, or called forth modest worth, it was very different when the King made his favourite associates of such men as the chief of his police, Tristan l'Hermite. .
Nor were Louis's sayings and actions in private or public of a kind which could redeem such gross offences against the character of a man of honour. His word, generally accounted the most sacred test of a man's character, and the least impeachment of which is a capital offence by the code of honour, was forfeited without scruple on the slightest occasion, and often accompanied by the perpetration of the most enormous crimes ... It is more than probable that, in thus renouncing almost openly the ties of religion, honour, and morality, by which mankind at large feel themselves influenced, Louis sought to obtain great advantages in his negotiations with parties who might esteem themselves bound, while he himself enjoyed liberty. He started from the goal, he might suppose, like the racer who has got rid of the weights with which his competitors are still encumbered, and expects to succeed of course. But Providence seems always to unite the existence of peculiar danger with some circumstance which may put those exposed to the peril upon their guard. The constant suspicion attached to any public person who becomes badly eminent for breach of faith is to him what the rattle is to the poisonous serpent: and men come at last to calculate not so much on what their antagonist says as upon that which he is likely to do; a degree of mistrust which tends to counteract the intrigues of such a character, more than his freedom from the scruples of conscientious men can afford him advantage. .
Indeed, although the reign of Louis had been as successful in a political point of view as he himself could have desired, the spectacle of his deathbed might of itself be a warning piece against the seduction of his example. Jealous of every one, but chiefly of his own son, he immured himself in his Castle of Plessis, intrusting his person exclusively to the doubtful faith of his Scottish mercenaries. He never stirred from his chamber; he admitted no one into it, and wearied heaven and every saint with prayers, not for forgiveness of his sins, but for the prolongation of his life. With a poverty of spirit totally inconsistent with his shrewd worldly sagacity, he importuned his physicians until they insulted as well as plundered him. .
It was not the least singular circumstance of this course, that bodily health and terrestrial felicity seemed to be his only object. Making any mention of his sins when talking on the state of his health, was strictly prohibited; and when at his command a priest recited a prayer to Saint Eutropius in which he recommended the King's welfare both in body and soul, Louis caused the two last words to be omitted, saying it was not prudent to importune the blessed saint by too many requests at once. Perhaps he thought by being silent on his crimes he might suffer them to pass out of the recollection of the celestial patrons, whose aid he invoked for his body.
So great were the well merited tortures of this tyrant's deathbed, that Philip de Comines enters into a regular comparison between them and the numerous cruelties inflicted on others by his order; and considering both, comes to express an opinion that the worldly pangs and agony suffered by Louis were such as might compensate the crimes he had committed, and that, after a reasonable quarantine in purgatory, he might in mercy he found duly qualified for the superior regions ... The instructive but appalling scene of this tyrant's sufferings was at length closed by death, 30th August, 1483.
The selection of this remarkable person as the principal character in the romance -- for it will be easily comprehended that the little love intrigue of Quentin is only employed as the means of bringing out the story -- afforded considerable facilities to the author. In Louis XI's time, extraordinary commotions existed throughout all Europe. England's Civil Wars were ended, rather in appearance than reality, by the short lived ascendancy of the House of York. Switzerland was asserting that freedom which was afterwards so bravely defended. In the Empire and in France, the great vassals of the crown were endeavouring to emancipate themselves from its control, while Charles of Burgundy by main force, and Louis more artfully by indirect means, laboured to subject them to subservience to their respective sovereignties. Louis, while with one hand he circumvented and subdued his own rebellious vassals, laboured secretly with the other to aid and encourage the large trading towns of Flanders to rebel against the Duke of Burgundy, to which their wealth and irritability naturally disposed them. In the more woodland districts of Flanders, the Duke of Gueldres, and William de la Marck, called from his ferocity the Wild Boar of Ardennes, were throwing off the habits of knights and gentlemen to practise the violences and brutalities of common bandits.
(Chapter I gives a further account of the conditions of the period which Quentin Durward portrays.)
A hundred secret combinations existed in the different provinces of France and Flanders; numerous private emissaries of the restless Louis, Bohemians, pilgrims, beggars, or agents disguised as such, were everywhere spreading the discontent which it was his policy to maintain in the dominions of Burgundy.
Amidst so great an abundance of materials, it was difficult to select such as should be most intelligible and interesting to the reader: and the author had to regret, that though he made liberal use of the power of departing from the reality of history, he felt by no means confident of having brought his story into a pleasing, compact, and sufficiently intelligible form. The mainspring of the plot is that which all who know the least of the feudal system can easily understand, though the facts are absolutely fictitious. The right of a feudal superior was in nothing more universally acknowledged than in his power to interfere in the marriage of a female vassal. This may appear to exist as a contradiction both of the civil and canon laws, which declare that marriage shall be free, while the feudal or municipal jurisprudence, in case of a fief passing to a female, acknowledges an interest in the superior of the fief to dictate the choice of her companion in marriage. This is accounted for on the principle that the superior was, by his bounty, the original granter of the fief, and is still interested that the marriage of the vassal shall place no one there who may be inimical to his liege lord. On the other hand, it might be reasonably pleaded that this right of dictating to the vassal to a certain extent in the choice of a husband, is only competent to the superior from whom the fief is originally derived. There is therefore no violent improbability in a vassal of Burgundy flying to the protection of the King of France, to whom the Duke of Burgundy himself was vassal; not is it a great stretch of probability to affirm that Louis, unscrupulous as he was, should have formed the design of betraying the fugitive into some alliance which might prove inconvenient, if not dangerous, to his formidable kinsman and vassal of Burgundy.
(Some of these departures from historical accuracy, as when the death of the Bishop of Liege is antedated, are duly set forth in the notes. It should be mentioned that Mr. J. F. Kirk, in his elaborate History of Charles the Bold, claims that in some points injustice has been done to the Duke in this romance. He says: "The faults of Charles were sufficiently glaring, and scarcely admitted of exaggeration; but his breeding had been that of a prince, his education had been better than that of other princes of his time, his tastes and habits were more, not less, refined than theirs, and the restraint he imposed upon his sensual appetites was as conspicuous a trait as his sternness and violence.")
Abbotsford, 1830.
Quentin Durward was published in June, 1823, and was Scott's first venture on foreign ground. While well received at home, the sensation it created in Paris was comparable to that caused by the appearance of Waverley in Edinburgh and Ivanhoe in London. In Germany also, where the author was already popular, the new novel had a specially enthusiastic welcome. The scene of the romance was partly suggested by a journal kept by Sir Walter's dear friend, Mr. James Skene of Rubislaw, during a French tour, the diary being illustrated by a vast number of clever drawings. The author, in telling this tale laid in unfamiliar scenes, encountered difficulties of a kind quite new to him, as it necessitated much study of maps, gazetteers, and books of travel. For the history, he naturally found above all else the Memoirs of Philip de Comines "the very key of the period," though it need not be said that the lesser chroniclers received due attention. It is interesting to note that in writing to his friend, Daniel Terry, the actor and manager, Scott says, "I have no idea my present labours will be dramatic in situation; as to character, that of Louis XI, the sagacious, perfidious, superstitious, jocular, politic tyrant, would be, for a historical chronicle containing his life and death, one of the most powerful ever brought on the stage." So thought the poet, Casimir Delavigne -- writing when Scott's influence was marked upon French literature -- whose powerful drama, Louis XI, was a great Parisian success. Later Charles Kean and Henry Irving made an English version of it well known in England and America.
司各特热爱苏格兰家乡，从小对故乡丰富的历史传说和民间歌谣产生了浓厚的兴趣。一八○二年至一八○三年间他搜集整理并出版了《苏格兰边区歌谣》，引起人们的注意，也为他日后的创作打下了基础。一八○五年，司各特创作的叙事长诗《末代歌者之歌》出版，轰动了英国文坛，给他带来了声誉。此后他又创作了长诗《玛密恩》和《湖上夫人》等。在这些叙事诗里，司各特运用浪漫抒情的手法描绘了苏格兰瑰丽的自然景色，叙述了苏格兰和英格兰古老的历史传说，引起了人们极大的兴趣，奠定了自己在英国文坛上的诗人地位。
一八一四年，司各特匿名出版了一部以苏格兰詹姆士党人一七四五年起义为题材的历史小说《威弗利》，受到读者极其热情的欢迎。这时，拜伦已在诗坛上崭露头角，司各特自叹不如，于是决心转到小说创作方面。
从一八一四年到一八三二年司各特去世为止，他一共创作了二十余部历史小说，其中最为胜炙人口的有以苏格兰历史为背景的《中洛辛郡的心脏》、《修墓老人》、《红古罗伯》，以英格兰历史为背景的《艾凡赫》和以法国历史为背景的《惊婚记》。
司各特的历史小说气势磅礴，宏伟壮丽，出色地反映了英格兰、苏格兰和欧洲历史重大转折时刻的矛盾冲突。在他的笔下，历史事件毫不枯燥，总是和故事人物悲欢离合的曲折遭遇有机地结合在一起。
司各特的创作对欧洲历史小说起了开创作用，被尊为历史小说的创始人。英国的狄更斯、斯蒂文森，法国的雨果、巴尔扎克、大仲马，的普希金，意大利的曼佐尼，美国的库柏等著名作家都曾受到司各特的深刻影响。
《惊婚记》是司各特的代表作品之一。这部小说出版于一八二三年，不但受到英国读者的喜爱，还在欧洲掀起了一股司各特热，尤其在法国引起的反响之热烈超过了司各特以前的所有作品。
这部小说把我们带到了充满浪漫情趣的中世纪时期的法国，它以十五世纪法国国王路易十一反对封建割据势力的斗争为历史背景。小说主人公是一个初到法国宫廷充任国王贴身卫士的苏格兰青年昆丁·达威特。喜爱冒险的青年读者一定会被昆丁在法国遇到的种种惊险的遭遇吸引住。故事的主要情节是：昆丁爱上了一位为逃婚到法王宫廷避难的贵族少女，国王和少女的保护人勃艮第公爵为夺取对少女财产的控制权进行了种种明争暗斗；昆丁也卷进了这场斗争，但他终于靠自己的勇气和智慧避开了国王设下的一道道陷附，救出了少女，并且获得了她的爱情。
司各特小说里的主人公往往写得不及小说里的次要人物和真实的历史人物那么生动和吸引人。例如，《艾凡赫》里的骑士艾凡赫和《修墓老人》里的主人公亨利·莫顿都常常受到批评家的指责，说他们是缺乏鲜明个性用5徊于斗争双方之间的主人公。然而，在《惊婚记》这部小说里，主人公昆丁却写得非常真切感人。他那单纯善良、正直坚定、诚恳执着的性格正和小说里描写的历史人物路易十一那虚伪狡诈、残忍自私的性格正好形成强烈的对照，他为了拯救一个弱女子而奋不顾身的忘我精神也就更加使读者为之激动。昆丁·达威特无疑是司各特笔下最受读者喜爱的主人公之一。
不过，在《惊婚记》里强烈地吸引了读者的，还不只是这对恋人种种千钧一发的历险，而是和这对恋人的遭遇紧密相联的巨大历史时期的矛盾和斗争，尤其是法国国王和强大的封建贵族首领勃艮第公爵之间的勾心斗角、阴谋诡计和明争暗斗。司各特在这部小说的序里特别声明：“昆丁的小小爱情纠葛只是为了故事的进展而采用的一种手段。”司各特描绘的重点是著名的历史人物路易十一，虽说为了故事情节结构的要求，他并没有让这个历史人物作为小说的主人公。
十五世纪的法国正处于外患内乱之中。国内封建诸侯飞扬跋扈，为所欲为，各据一方，和法国国王分庭抗礼。而由于发展生产的要求，新兴的市民阶层迫切要求统一的政权、强有力的法治和安定的社会秩序。历史发展就这样把建立一个中央集权的封建君主国家的要求提到了日程上。司各特以他敏锐的洞察力描绘了主张统一的路易十一和割据称雄的大贵族勃艮第公爵之间的尖锐斗争，并且通过路易十一在这场斗争中获得的成就反映了历史发展的主要趋势。
路易十一有着复杂而鲜明的性格。司各特在小说里表现了路易十一为实现中央集权而进行的斗争，并且指出他的斗争是符合历史发展要求的。然而，司各特也毫不隐讳地表现了路易十一在这场斗争中采取的不光彩的阴谋手段。路易十一始终是以表面伪装友好，实际暗挖墙角的办法对付凶猛、暴躁的勃艮第公爵的。在处理贵族少女伊莎贝尔逃婚事件时，路易十一一方面假意派昆丁护送伊莎贝尔回到列日市主教府去，另一方面又玩弄诡计，挑动恶霸贵族“胡子”威廉半路拦劫抢亲，以便夺取伊莎贝尔的领地，在公爵身边安下一颗钉子。由于昆丁的警惕，此计没有成功，他又挑动列日市民，造成“胡子”威廉攻进主教府，杀死公爵的同盟者列日主教的流血事件。总之，路易十一善于利用各种手段来达到他的目的。在他看来，为了达到自己的目的，使用任何阴谋手段都是合法的。司各特描绘的路易十一这个形象充分揭示了他性格中狡诈、虚伪、冷酷、自私以及迷信天命的一面。但是，另一方面，司各特也表现了路易十一在统一法国的过程中所显示出的雄才大略和他善于摆脱困难处境的智谋和才干。他在公爵率领大军即将进犯法国疆土的紧急时刻只身拜访公爵，寻求和平解决办法。然而公爵正巧得到列日主教死讯，大为震怒，路易十一被他监禁起来，生命受到极大威胁。这时，路易十一又一次施展手腕，乘“胡子”威廉进犯公爵领土之际，向公爵提出共同惩罚“胡子”威廉的方案，使自己从“阶下囚”一跃而成为公爵的同盟者，从而解除了公爵对法国领土的威胁。这样，司各特笔下的这个历史人物路易十一不但得到了符合历史真实的描绘，而且形象鲜明生动，具有作为特殊个人的人性。他把历史人物写活了。英国评论家托玛斯·卡莱尔对司各特这方面的贡献作过极为中肯的评价。他说，司各特的历史小说指出了这样一条真理，那就是：
“过去时代的世界里实际上充满了活生生的人，而不是条约草案、公
文卷宗、论争和关于人的抽象概念。他们不是抽象概念，也不是图解和定
理；而是人，穿着浅黄牛皮上衣或者别样的外衣和马裤，面颊上有红晕，
胸中蕴藏着，具有人的语言、相貌和生命力！人是一个小小的词，却
包含着多么大的意义！”
路易十一就是司各特的历史人物中最突出的具有“人的语言。相貌和生命力”的形象，他那虚伪狡猾、善于玩弄阴谋的性格是那样真实，那样充满说服力，所以这个形象一再受到各国评论家的推崇和赞扬。
司各特在《惊婚记》里用他富于感染力的笔调描绘了许多栩栩如生的事件和场面，尤其在后半部，从“胡子”威廉攻下主教府开始，矛盾一步步展开和激化，情节进入，像路易十一深入公爵城堡的场面，路易十一在被监禁时命令刽子手特里斯丹惩罚欺骗了他的星相家的场面，以及后来国王和公爵重新和好、共谋惩治者的场面，每个场面都紧紧扣人心弦。但是，在尖锐的斗争中又时时掺杂着喜剧的因素，刀光剑影之中不时听见幽默的笑声，这也是司各特的特殊风格吧。
雨果曾经撰文赞扬《惊婚记》，用三句话概括了司各特的成就，他说：“司各特把历史的伟大灿烂，小说的趣味和编年史的那种严格的精确结合了起来。”《惊婚记》正是这三者出色的结合的光辉范例。
Among those who were the first to ridicule and abandon the self denying principles in which the young knight was instructed and to which he was so carefully trained up, Louis XI of France was the chief. That sovereign was of a character so purely selfish -- so guiltless of entertaining any purpose unconnected with his ambition, covetousness, and desire of selfish enjoyment -- that he almost seems an incarnation of the devil himself, permitted to do his utmost to corrupt our ideas of honour in its very source. Nor is it to be forgotten that Louis possessed to a great extent that caustic wit which can turn into ridicule all that a man does for any other person's advantage but his own, and was, therefore, peculiarly qualified to play the part of a cold hearted and sneering fiend.
The cruelties, the perjuries, the suspicions of this prince, were rendered more detestable, rather than amended, by the gross and debasing superstition which he constantly practised. The devotion to the heavenly saints, of which he made such a parade, was upon the miserable principle of some petty deputy in office, who endeavours to hide or atone for the malversations of which he is conscious by liberal gifts to those whose duty it is to observe his conduct, and endeavours to support a system of fraud by an attempt to corrupt the incorruptible. In no other light can we regard his creating the Virgin Mary a countess and colonel of his guards, or the cunning that admitted to one or two peculiar forms of oath the force of a binding obligation which he denied to all other, strictly preserving the secret, which mode of swearing he really accounted obligatory, as one of the most valuable of state mysteries.
To a total want of scruple, or, it would appear, of any sense whatever of moral obligation, Louis XI added great natural firmness and sagacity of character, with a system of policy so highly refined, considering the times he lived in, that he sometimes overreached himself by giving way to its dictates.
Probably there is no portrait so dark as to be without its softer shades. He understood the interests of France, and faithfully pursued them so long as he could identify them with his own. He carried the country safe through the dangerous crisis of the war termed "for the public good;" in thus disuniting and dispersing this grand and dangerous alliance of the great crown vassals of France against the Sovereign, a king of a less cautious and temporizing character, and of a more bold and less crafty disposition than Louis XI, would, in all probability, have failed. Louis had also some personal accomplishments not inconsistent with his public character. He was cheerful and witty in society; and none was better able to sustain and extol the superiority of the coarse and selfish reasons by which he endeavoured to supply those nobler motives for exertion which his predecessors had derived from the high spirit of chivalry.
In fact, that system was now becoming ancient, and had, even while in its perfection, something so overstrained and fantastic in its principles, as rendered it peculiarly the object of ridicule, whenever, like other old fashions, it began to fall out of repute; and the weapons of raillery could be employed against it, without exciting the disgust and horror with which they would have been rejected at an early period, as a species of blasphemy. The principles of chivalry were cast aside, and their aid supplied by baser stimulants. Instead of the high spirit which pressed every man forward in the defence of his country, Louis XI substituted the exertions of the ever ready mercenary soldier, and persuaded his subjects, among whom the mercantile class began to make a figure, that it was better to leave to mercenaries the risks and labours of war, and to supply the Crown with the means of paying them, than to peril themselves in defence of their own substance. The merchants were easily persuaded by this reasoning. The hour did not arrive in the days of Louis XI when the landed gentry and nobles could be in like manner excluded from the ranks of war; but the wily monarch commenced that system, which, acted upon by his successors, at length threw the whole military defence of the state into the hands of the Crown.
He was equally forward in altering the principles which were wont to regulate the intercourse of the sexes. The doctrines of chivalry had established, in theory at least, a system in which Beauty was the governing and remunerating divinity -- Valour, her slave, who caught his courage from her eye and gave his life for her slightest service. It is true, the system here, as in other branches, was stretched to fantastic extravagance, and cases of scandal not unfrequently arose. Still, they were generally such as those mentioned by Burke, where frailty was deprived of half its guilt, by being purified from all its grossness. In Louis XI's practice, it was far otherwise. He was a low voluptuary, seeking pleasure without sentiment, and despising the sex from whom he desired to obtain it. ... By selecting his favourites and ministers from among the dregs of the people, Louis showed the slight regard which he paid to eminent station and high birth; and although this might be not only excusable but meritorious, where the monarch's fiat promoted obscure talent, or called forth modest worth, it was very different when the King made his favourite associates of such men as the chief of his police, Tristan l'Hermite. .
Nor were Louis's sayings and actions in private or public of a kind which could redeem such gross offences against the character of a man of honour. His word, generally accounted the most sacred test of a man's character, and the least impeachment of which is a capital offence by the code of honour, was forfeited without scruple on the slightest occasion, and often accompanied by the perpetration of the most enormous crimes ... It is more than probable that, in thus renouncing almost openly the ties of religion, honour, and morality, by which mankind at large feel themselves influenced, Louis sought to obtain great advantages in his negotiations with parties who might esteem themselves bound, while he himself enjoyed liberty. He started from the goal, he might suppose, like the racer who has got rid of the weights with which his competitors are still encumbered, and expects to succeed of course. But Providence seems always to unite the existence of peculiar danger with some circumstance which may put those exposed to the peril upon their guard. The constant suspicion attached to any public person who becomes badly eminent for breach of faith is to him what the rattle is to the poisonous serpent: and men come at last to calculate not so much on what their antagonist says as upon that which he is likely to do; a degree of mistrust which tends to counteract the intrigues of such a character, more than his freedom from the scruples of conscientious men can afford him advantage. .
Indeed, although the reign of Louis had been as successful in a political point of view as he himself could have desired, the spectacle of his deathbed might of itself be a warning piece against the seduction of his example. Jealous of every one, but chiefly of his own son, he immured himself in his Castle of Plessis, intrusting his person exclusively to the doubtful faith of his Scottish mercenaries. He never stirred from his chamber; he admitted no one into it, and wearied heaven and every saint with prayers, not for forgiveness of his sins, but for the prolongation of his life. With a poverty of spirit totally inconsistent with his shrewd worldly sagacity, he importuned his physicians until they insulted as well as plundered him. .
It was not the least singular circumstance of this course, that bodily health and terrestrial felicity seemed to be his only object. Making any mention of his sins when talking on the state of his health, was strictly prohibited; and when at his command a priest recited a prayer to Saint Eutropius in which he recommended the King's welfare both in body and soul, Louis caused the two last words to be omitted, saying it was not prudent to importune the blessed saint by too many requests at once. Perhaps he thought by being silent on his crimes he might suffer them to pass out of the recollection of the celestial patrons, whose aid he invoked for his body.
So great were the well merited tortures of this tyrant's deathbed, that Philip de Comines enters into a regular comparison between them and the numerous cruelties inflicted on others by his order; and considering both, comes to express an opinion that the worldly pangs and agony suffered by Louis were such as might compensate the crimes he had committed, and that, after a reasonable quarantine in purgatory, he might in mercy he found duly qualified for the superior regions ... The instructive but appalling scene of this tyrant's sufferings was at length closed by death, 30th August, 1483.
The selection of this remarkable person as the principal character in the romance -- for it will be easily comprehended that the little love intrigue of Quentin is only employed as the means of bringing out the story -- afforded considerable facilities to the author. In Louis XI's time, extraordinary commotions existed throughout all Europe. England's Civil Wars were ended, rather in appearance than reality, by the short lived ascendancy of the House of York. Switzerland was asserting that freedom which was afterwards so bravely defended. In the Empire and in France, the great vassals of the crown were endeavouring to emancipate themselves from its control, while Charles of Burgundy by main force, and Louis more artfully by indirect means, laboured to subject them to subservience to their respective sovereignties. Louis, while with one hand he circumvented and subdued his own rebellious vassals, laboured secretly with the other to aid and encourage the large trading towns of Flanders to rebel against the Duke of Burgundy, to which their wealth and irritability naturally disposed them. In the more woodland districts of Flanders, the Duke of Gueldres, and William de la Marck, called from his ferocity the Wild Boar of Ardennes, were throwing off the habits of knights and gentlemen to practise the violences and brutalities of common bandits.
(Chapter I gives a further account of the conditions of the period which Quentin Durward portrays.)
A hundred secret combinations existed in the different provinces of France and Flanders; numerous private emissaries of the restless Louis, Bohemians, pilgrims, beggars, or agents disguised as such, were everywhere spreading the discontent which it was his policy to maintain in the dominions of Burgundy.
Amidst so great an abundance of materials, it was difficult to select such as should be most intelligible and interesting to the reader: and the author had to regret, that though he made liberal use of the power of departing from the reality of history, he felt by no means confident of having brought his story into a pleasing, compact, and sufficiently intelligible form. The mainspring of the plot is that which all who know the least of the feudal system can easily understand, though the facts are absolutely fictitious. The right of a feudal superior was in nothing more universally acknowledged than in his power to interfere in the marriage of a female vassal. This may appear to exist as a contradiction both of the civil and canon laws, which declare that marriage shall be free, while the feudal or municipal jurisprudence, in case of a fief passing to a female, acknowledges an interest in the superior of the fief to dictate the choice of her companion in marriage. This is accounted for on the principle that the superior was, by his bounty, the original granter of the fief, and is still interested that the marriage of the vassal shall place no one there who may be inimical to his liege lord. On the other hand, it might be reasonably pleaded that this right of dictating to the vassal to a certain extent in the choice of a husband, is only competent to the superior from whom the fief is originally derived. There is therefore no violent improbability in a vassal of Burgundy flying to the protection of the King of France, to whom the Duke of Burgundy himself was vassal; not is it a great stretch of probability to affirm that Louis, unscrupulous as he was, should have formed the design of betraying the fugitive into some alliance which might prove inconvenient, if not dangerous, to his formidable kinsman and vassal of Burgundy.
(Some of these departures from historical accuracy, as when the death of the Bishop of Liege is antedated, are duly set forth in the notes. It should be mentioned that Mr. J. F. Kirk, in his elaborate History of Charles the Bold, claims that in some points injustice has been done to the Duke in this romance. He says: "The faults of Charles were sufficiently glaring, and scarcely admitted of exaggeration; but his breeding had been that of a prince, his education had been better than that of other princes of his time, his tastes and habits were more, not less, refined than theirs, and the restraint he imposed upon his sensual appetites was as conspicuous a trait as his sternness and violence.")
Abbotsford, 1830.
Quentin Durward was published in June, 1823, and was Scott's first venture on foreign ground. While well received at home, the sensation it created in Paris was comparable to that caused by the appearance of Waverley in Edinburgh and Ivanhoe in London. In Germany also, where the author was already popular, the new novel had a specially enthusiastic welcome. The scene of the romance was partly suggested by a journal kept by Sir Walter's dear friend, Mr. James Skene of Rubislaw, during a French tour, the diary being illustrated by a vast number of clever drawings. The author, in telling this tale laid in unfamiliar scenes, encountered difficulties of a kind quite new to him, as it necessitated much study of maps, gazetteers, and books of travel. For the history, he naturally found above all else the Memoirs of Philip de Comines "the very key of the period," though it need not be said that the lesser chroniclers received due attention. It is interesting to note that in writing to his friend, Daniel Terry, the actor and manager, Scott says, "I have no idea my present labours will be dramatic in situation; as to character, that of Louis XI, the sagacious, perfidious, superstitious, jocular, politic tyrant, would be, for a historical chronicle containing his life and death, one of the most powerful ever brought on the stage." So thought the poet, Casimir Delavigne -- writing when Scott's influence was marked upon French literature -- whose powerful drama, Louis XI, was a great Parisian success. Later Charles Kean and Henry Irving made an English version of it well known in England and America.
请看这幅画像吧，再请看这幅，
这是两个兄弟的逼真写照。
《哈姆雷特》
十五世纪后半叶酝酿了一系列对未来有影响的事件，结果使法国上升到一种实力可畏的地位。自那以后这地位往往是欧洲国家的主要嫉妒对象。但在这之前，法国不得不为其自身的生存与占领了它最美好的省份的英国人进行斗争。但是，尽管国王尽了最大努力，人民进行了英勇抵抗，也难以使剩下的国土免遭异族的蹂躏。何况这还不是它惟一的危难！占有王室领土的各个亲王——特别是勃艮第公爵和布列坦尼公爵——如此随便地对待其封建臣属关系，以致他们常以最小的借口毫无顾忌地打起旗号来反对君主——法国国王。在和平时期，他们各自为政，称霸一方。勃艮第家族除占有名为勃艮第的地区以外，还占有弗兰德最美丽、最富饶的部分。它是如此的富贵和豪强，以致无论是讲排场还是讲实力都丝毫不逊于法国国王。
国王底下的一些小的藩属也效仿大的封建领主，按其距君主权力的远近、领地的大小或城堡实力的强弱，尽量闹独立。这些小暴君不再受法律制约，尽可以犯下最疯狂的、难以想象的残酷暴行而逍遥法外。仅欧维尔尼一地据说就有三百多个这种独立贵族。对他们来说，、谋杀、劫掠都是极普通的、司空见惯的行径。
除了这些罪孽以外，那渊源于法国和英国之间的旷日持久的战争也给这个忧患深重的王国添加了不少苦难。为数众多的兵痞从最勇敢、最成功的冒险家当中自选首领，聚结成帮，在法国的各个地区形成了由其他各国的社会渣滓拼凑而成的兵痞集团。这些可资雇佣的武士能在一个时期内把他们的武力卖给出价最高的买主。而当这种劳役没有市场时，他们就自行发动战争，夺取城堡作为掩护的据点。他们抓俘虏，索赎金，从不设防的村寨及其周围的乡间勒取贡物，由于这种种掳掠的行径而获得了刮毛家和剥皮家的恰如其分的称号。
尽管多忧的国事给人们带来了种种恐惧和不幸，但小贵族仍与高一等的王公一样以挥霍无度来光耀门庭。他们的部属也上行下效，挥霍民脂民膏，极尽拙劣炫耀之能事。男女之间的交往充满了一种浪漫的骑士风情，但经常由于过度放纵而变得不甚体面；游侠的语言仍被使用，其礼规也仍被遵守，但它所提倡的高贵纯洁的爱情和仁爱的行为已不再能弥补和抵偿其过火的表现。在每个小宫廷举行的竞技比武和欢娱宴乐，把所有游荡的冒险家都吸引到了法国。而一旦来到法国，他们就很少不把他们轻率的勇气和养撞的冒险精神付诸行动，而他们自己更为幸运的祖国并不为之提供自由的舞台。
正是在这个时期，仿佛是为了在危机四伏中拯救他们美好的王国，路易十一登上了摇摇欲坠的皇位，而路易十一的性格，尽管其本身，却像古代医书所说，性质相反的毒素具有以毒攻毒的效力那样，足以对付和克服，并在很大程度上抵消时弊。
虽然路易工具有足够的勇气来实现任何一个有用的目的，但他却丝毫没有罗曼蒂克的骁勇或通常与此相联的傲气，而这种傲气能使得一个人即使早已获得实惠，但为了赢得某种荣誉感仍然继续战斗。他沉着，狡黠，深切地关注自身的利益。一旦他的自尊心和感情妨碍了他的利益，作出任何牺牲，他都在所不惜。他很注意对所有接近他的人掩饰自己的真实感情和意图。他经常引用一句话：“一个国王不知道如何装警作哑，他就不知道如何治理国家。对他来说，一旦他认为自己戴的帽子知晓他的秘密，他就会毫不犹豫地把它扔进火里。”无论是当时还是别的时代，都没有人能更好地懂得如何利用别人的弱点，懂得什么时候该避免由于不合时宜地放纵自己的弱点而让别人占了上风。
就其天性来说，他喜欢报复，残酷无情，甚至经常从下令执行死刑当中寻找乐趣。在他若无其事地判处死刑时，固然不会动恻隐之心去宽恕死回，但另一方面，也没有任何复仇之心会刺激他采取为时过早的暴力行动。在他的猎获物还没有完全置于捕捉范围内，在一切逃跑希望都必然落空以前，他很少扑向他们。他的行动都是那样着意地加以掩饰，以致他的成功一般都是他首次昭告世人，但其实在暗中一直苦心营求的目标。
同样，在有必要去贿赂一个敌对亲王的宠信或大臣以避免任何迫在眉睫的进犯或打破任何针对他结成的联盟时，路易王的贪婪和吝悭便让位于表面的慷慨大方。他喜欢纵情欢乐，但无论是美女还是狩猎——尽管二者都是他的头等爱好——都绝不会使他怠忽日常公务和朝政。他对人的洞察是深刻的。他曾经通过他亲身在其中厮混过的各阶层人物的私生活来寻求这种了解。同时，尽管他生性傲慢，但他却能以一种当时被认为是极为反常的、对武断划分的社会阶层的忽视，毫不犹豫地从最底层提拔有用之材，并委以重任。他知人善任，因而很少对他们的素质感到过失望。
然而，这个奸狡而能干的君主也是个矛盾的混和体，因为人性很少是划一的。虽然他本人是人类当中最虚伪、最不诚恳的一个，但他一生当中某些最大的错误却恰好是由于过分轻信别人的荣誉感和诚实。产生这些错误似乎是归因于一种过于精细的策略体系，促使路易王对他意欲征服的人表面装出毫不怀疑的信任姿态；因为就他总的表现来看，他和历代暴君一样狐疑和猜忌。
路易王正是依靠他那令人生畏的性格，从当代鲁莽的骑士般的君主当中脱颖而出，上升到一个驯兽师的地位。驯兽师凭借高超的智能和策略，通过分发食物和棍棒惩戒，终于能驾驭那些野兽。要不是多亏驯兽师的权术它们，它们本会依靠单纯的体力把他撕碎。在完成这一令人生畏的人物性格的刻画以前，还有另外两个特点值得一提。
第一个特点就是路易王的过分迷信，这也可以说是上苍用来惩罚那些拒不听从宗教指引的人们的一种通病。路易王从不打算放松玩弄权术来平息他的那些勾当所引起的悔恨，而是通过迷信的礼拜、严厉的自我罚罪，以及对圣职人员的慷慨馈赠，近乎徒劳地舒解这种苦痛感。与上面特点有时离奇地联系在一起的第二个特点是爱好低级趣味和卑微的逸乐，尽管他是他那个时代最有头脑的，至少是最狡黠的君主。既然他自己就是一个富于机智的人，自然很欣赏社交谈话中的笑话和俏皮话，其程度超过人们仅根据其性格的其他特点所能揣摩的地步。他甚至卷人一些喜剧性的。暧昧的桃色事件，其洒脱的程度与他性格中那种惯常的戒备和妒忌很不协调。他如此喜爱这一类低贱的风流韵事，以致他的许多放荡淫逸的轶闻被收入书籍收藏家熟知的一个集子里，而在收藏家眼里（这书可不适于任何别的人看），那个完整的版本是很珍贵的。
通过这位君主那极不宽厚，却坚强有力而又十分审慎的性格，上苍终于乐意以急风暴雨或和风细雨来恩威并用的方式，让伟大的法兰西民族重新享受到一个有法度的政府的好处，而在他登基时法国人几乎已经把这种好处丧失殆尽。
在他继承王位以前，路易王已经显露出他的某些，而不是他的才干。他的原配妻子，苏格兰的玛格丽特，是在她丈夫的宫廷中“被谗言恶语中伤而死的”。如果不是路易王的鼓励，本不会有闲言碎语私下传播来伤害那位和善而受委屈的公主。他是个忘恩负义、叛逆不孝的儿子，一度企图阴谋劫持他的父亲，甚至还公开向他宣过战。由于他所犯的第一个罪过，他被放逐到后来被他治理得井井有条的皇太子领地；而由于所犯的第二个罪过，他被完全流放，投奔勃艮第公爵和他的儿子，依靠他们的怜悯，几乎是他们的仁慈来度日。在一四六一年他父亲驾崩以前，他一直在勃艮第公爵父子那儿享受着周到的礼遇，但这种礼遇日后并没有得到善报。
在他的王朝刚开始的时候，路易王几乎被法国的大藩属因反对他而组成的一个同盟所压倒，为首的是勃艮第公爵，更恰当地说，是他的儿子夏荷洛伊伯爵。他们征召了一支强大的军队，封锁了巴黎，在巴黎城下打了一场胜负未定的仗，使得法国国君濒于垮台的边缘。在这种将会两败俱伤的情形下，通常是较为明智的统帅获得战场上的实惠，但不一定是军事上的荣耀。在蒙特勒里战斗中显示出超人胆略的路易王审慎地利用战争胜负未定的特点，使得胜利看来像是属于他的。他善于看风使舵，直到搞垮敌人的同盟为止。在强大的藩属之间进行挑拨离间方面，他表现出了非凡的才干，致使那旨在推翻法国君主的“促进公众福利同盟”最终自行解体，并且再也不会东山再起，令人胆战心惊。从这个时期起，路易王借助于约克和兰开斯特之间的内战，摆脱了来自英国的危险之后，便开始像一个冷酷而能干的医生那样，花了好几年功夫来疗治机体的创伤，更确切地说，就是时而通过缓和疗法，时而通过烈火与钢刀，来阻遏致命的坏疽病的蔓延。兵痞集团为所欲为，贵族们不受惩罚的压迫，虽然他无法有效地制止，但他尽力设法减轻。通过不懈的努力，他逐渐取得了更多的主权；或者说削弱了能与之抗衡者的权力。
然而法国国王仍然疑虑重重，忧心如焚。“促进公众福利同盟”的成员尽管内部不和，但只要存在着，就会像一条受伤的蛇一样，有重新联合再度变得危险起来的可能。不过，更大的威胁在于当时欧洲最大的亲王之一勃艮第公爵与日俱增的权势。由于他的公国与法国的王位之间只有极淡的臣属关系，所以地位与它不相上下。
查尔斯公爵绰号叫“大胆的查尔斯”，或雅称“勇猛的查尔斯”，这是因为他的勇敢总是和鲁莽、狂热联系在一起。他继承了勃艮第公爵的冠冕，但把它熔化了，改成一顶御用的皇冠。这位公爵的性格在各方面都和路易十一形成鲜明的对比。
后者沉着、有头脑、狡诈，从来没有过激行为，也从不放弃任何一件可能成功的事，不管它的前景如何渺茫。公爵的天赋则完全不同。他铤而走险，因为他酷爱冒险；他临危不惧，因为他藐视困难。路易王从不为了感情而牺牲自己的利益，查尔斯则相反，从不为了其他的考虑而牺牲感情，甚至他的一时兴致。尽管他们亲戚关系很近，尽管公爵和他父亲在路易王作为太子到他们那儿时给过他支持，但彼此之间存有戒心和仇视。勃艮第公爵看不起国王谨慎的策略，把他力求通过结盟、收买和其他间接方式谋取利益的做法归因于他的怯懦；假若他是国王的话，他就会用武力来攫取。他同样仇视国王，这不仅是因为国王对他以前得到的恩惠忘恩负义，还因为他父亲在世时，国王的大使对他本人也有过感情上的伤害和责难，而最重要的一点，是路易王对根特、列日及弗兰德的另一些大城市里的不满居民暗中给予支持。这些骚动的城市害怕失去他们的权益，同时也为他们的财富感到骄傲，于是经常发动叛乱来反对君主勃艮第公爵，而且从不会在路易王的宫廷得不到暗中鼓励，因为路易王总是抓住一切机会兴风作浪，在他那过分强大的藩属的领土上制造混乱。
对公爵的轻蔑和仇视，路易王予以同样有力的回敬。不过他用更厚的面纱来掩饰真实感情。像他这样一个有深谋远虑的人不可能不蔑视那种从不放弃一个目标、不管坚持下去多么危险的冥顽的固执，以及那种着手某件事而不考虑将遇到的障碍的莽撞和急躁。不过路易王仇视查尔斯甚至超过他轻视查尔斯，而他的轻视和仇视，由于都混杂着畏惧，便显得更为强烈。他把勃艮第公爵比作一条发疯的公牛。他知道疯牛的进犯，即使闭着眼睛，也是可怕的。路易王畏惧的不单是勃艮第诸省份的财富，也不单是其好战的、训练有素的居民，以及众多的人口。其元首的个人气质也有许多危险堪虞之处。他本人就是勇敢的化身，而他把这种勇敢发展到了近乎轻率冒失的边缘。此外，他挥金如土。他的宫廷，他本人和他的扈从都显得富丽堂皇。所有这些都表现出勃艮第家族的传统的豪华。因此，“大胆的查尔斯”几乎把当代性情相投的火暴汉子都吸引了过来为他服务。像这样一伙坚定的冒险家跟随着一个和他们性格同样莽撞不羁的首领会企图干什么样的事情，路易工看得十分清楚。
还有另外一个情况也增加了路易工对这一势力过大的藩属的敌意。他对他的恩惠是欠有债的，但他并不想偿还、报答，只是经常需要和他周旋，甚至忍受有损于他帝王尊严的不时发作的坏脾气。除了把他作为“亲爱的勃艮第堂弟”对待以外，别无他途。
我们这个故事始于一四六八年，是他们积怨最深的时候，尽管一如往常，他们之间暂时处于一种貌似平静的休战状态。我们将发现，首先列人舞台的这个人物是属于这样一种等级和社会地位：为了阐明其性质本来是毋需长篇论述两个伟大王侯的相对情况的。但大人物的感情以及他们的争端与和解都牵涉到所有接近他们的人。当我们继续讲这个故事时，我们将会发现这个开场白对于理解我们准备讲述其冒险经历的这个人物的历史是很有必要的。
HAMLET
The latter part of the fifteenth century prepared a train of future events that ended by raising France to that state of formidable power which has ever since been from time to time the principal object of jealousy to the other European nations. Before that period she had to struggle for her very existence with the English already possessed of her fairest provinces while the utmost exertions of her King, and the gallantry of her people, could scarcely protect the remainder from a foreign yoke. Nor was this her sole danger. The princes who possessed the grand fiefs of the crown, and, in particular, the Dukes of Burgundy and Bretagne, had come to wear their feudal bonds so lightly that they had no scruple in lifting the standard against their liege and sovereign lord, the King of France, on the slightest pretence. When at peace, they reigned as absolute princes in their own provinces; and the House of Burgundy, possessed of the district so called, together with the fairest and richest part of Flanders, was itself so wealthy, and so powerful, as to yield nothing to the crown, either in splendour or in strength.
In imitation of the grand feudatories, each inferior vassal of the crown assumed as much independence as his distance from the sovereign power, the extent of his fief, or the strength of his chateau enabled him to maintain; and these petty tyrants, no longer amenable to the exercise of the law, perpetrated with impunity the wildest excesses of fantastic oppression and cruelty. In Auvergne alone, a report was made of more than three hundred of these independent nobles, to whom incest, murder, and rapine were the most ordinary and familiar actions.
Besides these evils, another, springing out of the long continued wars betwixt the French and English, added no small misery to this distracted kingdom. Numerous bodies of soldiers, collected into bands, under officers chosen by themselves, from among the bravest and most successful adventurers, had been formed in various parts of France out of the refuse of all other countries. These hireling combatants sold their swords for a time to the best bidder; and, when such service was not to be had, they made war on their own account, seizing castles and towers, which they used as the places of their retreat, making prisoners, and ransoming them, exacting tribute from the open villages and the country around them -- and acquiring, by every species of rapine, the appropriate epithets of Tondeurs and Ecorcheurs, that is, Clippers and Flayers.
In the midst of the horrors and miseries arising from so distracted a state of public affairs, reckless and profuse expense distinguished the courts of the lesser nobles, as well as of the superior princes; and their dependents, in imitation, expended in rude but magnificent display the wealth which they extorted from the people. A tone of romantic and chivalrous gallantry (which, however, was often disgraced by unbounded license) characterized the intercourse between the sexes; and the language of knight errantry was yet used, and its observances followed, though the pure spirit of honourable love and benevolent enterprise which it inculcates had ceased to qualify and atone for its extravagances. The jousts and tournaments, the entertainments and revels, which each petty court displayed, invited to France every wandering adventurer; and it was seldom that, when arrived there, he failed to employ his rash courage, and headlong spirit of enterprise, in actions for which his happier native country afforded no free stage.
At this period, and as if to save this fair realm from the various woes with which it was menaced, the tottering throne was ascended by Louis XI, whose character, evil as it was in itself, met, combated, and in a great degree neutralized the mischiefs of the time -- as poisons of opposing qualities are said, in ancient books of medicine, to have the power of counteracting each other.
Brave enough for every useful and political purpose, Louis had not a spark of that romantic valour, or of the pride generally associated with it, which fought on for the point of honour, when the point of utility had been long gained. Calm, crafty, and profoundly attentive to his own interest, he made every sacrifice, both of pride and passion, which could interfere with it. He was careful in disguising his real sentiments and purposes from all who approached him, and frequently used the expressions, "that the king knew not how to reign, who knew not how to dissemble; and that, for himself, if he thought his very cap knew his secrets, he would throw it into the fire." No man of his own, or of any other time, better understood how to avail himself of the frailties of others, and when to avoid giving any advantage by the untimely indulgence of his own.
He was by nature vindictive and cruel, even to the extent of finding pleasure in the frequent executions which he commanded. But, as no touch of mercy ever induced him to spare, when he could with safety condemn, so no sentiment of vengeance ever stimulated him to a premature violence. He seldom sprang on his prey till it was fairly within his grasp, and till all hope of rescue was vain; and his movements were so studiously disguised, that his success was generally what first announced to the world the object he had been manoeuvring to attain.
In like manner, the avarice of Louis gave way to apparent profusion, when it was necessary to bribe the favourite or minister of a rival prince for averting any impending attack, or to break up any alliance confederated against him. He was fond of license and pleasure; but neither beauty nor the chase, though both were ruling passions, ever withdrew him from the most regular attendance to public business and the affairs of his kingdom. His knowledge of mankind was profound, and he had sought it in the private walks of life, in which he often personally mingled; and, though naturally proud and haughty, he hesitated not, with an inattention to the arbitrary divisions of society which was then thought something portentously unnatural, to raise from the lowest rank men whom he employed on the most important duties, and knew so well how to choose them, that he was rarely disappointed in their qualities. Yet there were contradictions in the character of this artful and able monarch; for human nature is rarely uniform. Himself the most false and insincere of mankind, some of the greatest errors of his life arose from too rash a confidence in the honour and integrity of others. When these errors took place, they seem to have arisen from an over refined system of policy, which induced Louis to assume the appearance of undoubting confidence in those whom it was his object to overreach; for, in his general conduct, he was as jealous and suspicious as any tyrant who ever breathed.
Two other points may be noticed to complete the sketch of this formidable character, by which he rose among the rude, chivalrous sovereigns of the period to the rank of a keeper among wild beasts, who, by superior wisdom and policy, by distribution of food, and some discipline by blows, comes finally to predominate over those who, if unsubjected by his arts, would by main strength have torn him to pieces.
The first of these attributes was Louis's excessive superstition, a plague with which Heaven often afflicts those who refuse to listen to the dictates of religion. The remorse arising from his evil actions Louis never endeavoured to appease by any relaxation in his Machiavellian stratagems (on account of the alleged political immorality of Machiavelli, an illustrious Italian of the sixteenth century, this expression has come to mean "destitute of political morality; habitually using duplicity and bad faith." Cent. Dict.), but laboured in vain to soothe and silence that painful feeling by superstitious observances, severe penance, and profuse gifts to the ecclesiastics. The second property, with which the first is sometimes found strangely united, was a disposition to low pleasures and obscure debauchery. The wisest, or at least the most crafty sovereign of his time, he was fond of low life, and, being himself a man of wit, enjoyed the jests and repartees of social conversation more than could have been expected from other points of his character. He even mingled in the comic adventures of obscure intrigue, with a freedom little consistent with the habitual and guarded jealousy of his character, and he was so fond of this species of humble gallantry, that he caused a number of its gay and licentious anecdotes to be enrolled in a collection well known to book collectors, in whose eyes (and the work is unfit for any other) the right edition is very precious.
(This editio princeps, which, when in good preservation, is much sought after by connoisseurs, is entitled Les Cent Nouvelles Nouvelles, contenant Cent Histoires Nouveaux, qui sont moult plaisans a raconter en toutes bonnes compagnies par maniere de joyeuxete. Paris, Antoine Verard. Sans date d'annee d'impression; en folio gotique. See De Bure. S)
By means of this monarch's powerful and prudent, though most unamiable character, it pleased Heaven, who works by the tempest as well as by the soft, small rain, to restore to the great French nation the benefits of civil government, which, at the time of his accession, they had nearly lost.
Ere he succeeded to the crown, Louis had given evidence of his vices rather than of his talents. His first wife, Margaret of Scotland, was "done to death by slanderous tongues" in her husband's court, where, but for the encouragement of Louis himself, not a word would have been breathed against that amiable and injured princess. He had been an ungrateful and a rebellious son, at one time conspiring to seize his father's person, and at another levying open war against him. For the first offence, he was banished to his appanage of Dauphine, which he governed with much sagacity; for the second he was driven into absolute exile, and forced to throw himself on the mercy, and almost on the charity, of the Duke of Burgundy and his son; where he enjoyed hospitality, afterwards indifferently requited, until the death of his father in 1461.
In the very outset of his reign, Louis was almost overpowered by a league formed against him by the great vassals of France, with the Duke of Burgundy, or rather his son, the Count de Charalois, at its head. They levied a powerful army, blockaded Paris, fought a battle of doubtful issue under its very walls, and placed the French monarchy on the brink of actual destruction. It usually happens in such cases, that the more sagacious general of the two gains the real fruit, though perhaps not the martial fame, of the disputed field. Louis, who had shown great personal bravery during the battle of Montl'hery, was able, by his prudence, to avail himself of its undecided character, as if it had been a victory on his side. He temporized until the enemy had broken up their leaguer, and showed so much dexterity in sowing jealousies among those great powers, that their alliance "for the public weal," as they termed it, but in reality for the overthrow of all but the external appearance of the French monarchy, dissolved itself, and was never again renewed in a manner so formidable. From this period, Louis, relieved of all danger from England by the Civil Wars of York and Lancaster, was engaged for several years, like an unfeeling but able physician, in curing the wounds of the body politic, or rather in stopping, now by gentle remedies, now by the use of fire and steel, the progress of those mortal gangrenes with which it was then infected. The brigandage of the Free Companies (troops that acknowledged no authority except that of their leaders, and who hired themselves out at will), and the unpunished oppression of the nobility, he laboured to lessen, since he could not actually stop them; and, by dint of unrelaxed attention, he gradually gained some addition to his own regal authority, or effected some diminution of those by whom it was counterbalanced.
Still the King of France was surrounded by doubt and danger. The members of the league "for the public weal," though not in unison, were in existence, and, like a scotched snake (see Macbeth. III, ii, 13, "We have scotch'd the snake, not kill'd it."), might reunite and become dangerous again. But a worse danger was the increasing power of the Duke of Burgundy, then one of the greatest princes of Europe, and little diminished in rank by the very slight dependence of his duchy upon the crown of France.
Charles, surnamed the Bold, or rather, the Audacious, for his courage was allied to rashness and frenzy, then wore the ducal coronet of Burgundy, which he burned to convert into a royal and independent regal crown. The character of this Duke was in every respect the direct contrast to that of Louis XI.
The latter was calm, deliberate, and crafty, never prosecuting a desperate enterprise, and never abandoning one likely to be successful, however distant the prospect. The genius of the Duke was entirely different. He rushed on danger because he loved it, and on difficulties because he despised them. As Louis never sacrificed his interest to his passion, so Charles, on the other hand, never sacrificed his passion, or even his humour, to any other consideration. Notwithstanding the near relationship that existed between them, and the support which the Duke and his father had afforded to Louis in his exile when Dauphin, there was mutual contempt and hatred betwixt them. The Duke of Burgundy despised the cautious policy of the King, and imputed to the faintness of his courage that he sought by leagues, purchases, and other indirect means those advantages which, in his place, the Duke would have snatched with an armed hand. He likewise hated the King, not only for the ingratitude he had manifested for former kindnesses, and for personal injuries and imputations which the ambassadors of Louis had cast upon him, when his father was yet alive, but also, and especially, because of the support which he afforded in secret to the discontented citizens of Ghent, Liege, and other great towns in Flanders. These turbulent cities, jealous of their privileges, and proud of their wealth, were frequently in a state of insurrection against their liege lords, the Dukes of Burgundy, and never failed to find underhand countenance at the court of Louis, who embraced every opportunity of fomenting disturbance within the dominions of his overgrown vassal.
The contempt and hatred of the Duke were retaliated by Louis with equal energy, though he used a thicker veil to conceal his sentiments. It was impossible for a man of his profound sagacity not to despise the stubborn obstinacy which never resigned its purpose, however fatal perseverance might prove, and the headlong impetuosity which commenced its career without allowing a moment's consideration for the obstacles to be encountered. Yet the King hated Charles even more than he contemned him, and his scorn and hatred were the more intense, that they were mingled with fear; for he know that the onset of the mad bull, to whom he likened the Duke of Burgundy, must ever be formidable, though the animal makes it with shut eyes. It was not alone the wealth of the Burgundian provinces, the discipline of the warlike inhabitants, and the mass of their crowded population, which the King dreaded, for the personal qualities of their leader had also much in them that was dangerous. The very soul of bravery, which he pushed to the verge of rashness, and beyond it -- profuse in expenditure -- splendid in his court, his person, and his retinue, in all which he displayed the hereditary magnificence of the house of Burgundy, Charles the Bold drew into his service almost all the fiery spirits of the age whose tempers were congenial; and Louis saw too clearly what might be attempted and executed by such a train of resolute adventurers, following a leader of a character as ungovernable as their own.
There was yet another circumstance which increased the animosity of Louis towards his overgrown vassal; he owed him favours which he never meant to repay, and was under the frequent necessity of temporizing with him, and even of enduring bursts of petulant insolence, injurious to the regal dignity, without being able to treat him otherwise than as his "fair cousin of Burgundy."
It was about the year 1468, when their feuds were at the highest, though a dubious and hollow truce, as frequently happened, existed for the time betwixt them, that the present narrative opens. The person first introduced on the stage will be found indeed to be of a rank and condition, the illustration of whose character scarcely called for a dissertation on the relative position of two great princes; but the passions of the great, their quarrels, and their reconciliations involve the fortunes of all who approach them; and it will be found, on proceeding farther in our story, that this preliminary chapter is necessary for comprehending the history of the individual whose adventures we are about to relate.
这是两个兄弟的逼真写照。
《哈姆雷特》
十五世纪后半叶酝酿了一系列对未来有影响的事件，结果使法国上升到一种实力可畏的地位。自那以后这地位往往是欧洲国家的主要嫉妒对象。但在这之前，法国不得不为其自身的生存与占领了它最美好的省份的英国人进行斗争。但是，尽管国王尽了最大努力，人民进行了英勇抵抗，也难以使剩下的国土免遭异族的蹂躏。何况这还不是它惟一的危难！占有王室领土的各个亲王——特别是勃艮第公爵和布列坦尼公爵——如此随便地对待其封建臣属关系，以致他们常以最小的借口毫无顾忌地打起旗号来反对君主——法国国王。在和平时期，他们各自为政，称霸一方。勃艮第家族除占有名为勃艮第的地区以外，还占有弗兰德最美丽、最富饶的部分。它是如此的富贵和豪强，以致无论是讲排场还是讲实力都丝毫不逊于法国国王。
国王底下的一些小的藩属也效仿大的封建领主，按其距君主权力的远近、领地的大小或城堡实力的强弱，尽量闹独立。这些小暴君不再受法律制约，尽可以犯下最疯狂的、难以想象的残酷暴行而逍遥法外。仅欧维尔尼一地据说就有三百多个这种独立贵族。对他们来说，、谋杀、劫掠都是极普通的、司空见惯的行径。
除了这些罪孽以外，那渊源于法国和英国之间的旷日持久的战争也给这个忧患深重的王国添加了不少苦难。为数众多的兵痞从最勇敢、最成功的冒险家当中自选首领，聚结成帮，在法国的各个地区形成了由其他各国的社会渣滓拼凑而成的兵痞集团。这些可资雇佣的武士能在一个时期内把他们的武力卖给出价最高的买主。而当这种劳役没有市场时，他们就自行发动战争，夺取城堡作为掩护的据点。他们抓俘虏，索赎金，从不设防的村寨及其周围的乡间勒取贡物，由于这种种掳掠的行径而获得了刮毛家和剥皮家的恰如其分的称号。
尽管多忧的国事给人们带来了种种恐惧和不幸，但小贵族仍与高一等的王公一样以挥霍无度来光耀门庭。他们的部属也上行下效，挥霍民脂民膏，极尽拙劣炫耀之能事。男女之间的交往充满了一种浪漫的骑士风情，但经常由于过度放纵而变得不甚体面；游侠的语言仍被使用，其礼规也仍被遵守，但它所提倡的高贵纯洁的爱情和仁爱的行为已不再能弥补和抵偿其过火的表现。在每个小宫廷举行的竞技比武和欢娱宴乐，把所有游荡的冒险家都吸引到了法国。而一旦来到法国，他们就很少不把他们轻率的勇气和养撞的冒险精神付诸行动，而他们自己更为幸运的祖国并不为之提供自由的舞台。
正是在这个时期，仿佛是为了在危机四伏中拯救他们美好的王国，路易十一登上了摇摇欲坠的皇位，而路易十一的性格，尽管其本身，却像古代医书所说，性质相反的毒素具有以毒攻毒的效力那样，足以对付和克服，并在很大程度上抵消时弊。
虽然路易工具有足够的勇气来实现任何一个有用的目的，但他却丝毫没有罗曼蒂克的骁勇或通常与此相联的傲气，而这种傲气能使得一个人即使早已获得实惠，但为了赢得某种荣誉感仍然继续战斗。他沉着，狡黠，深切地关注自身的利益。一旦他的自尊心和感情妨碍了他的利益，作出任何牺牲，他都在所不惜。他很注意对所有接近他的人掩饰自己的真实感情和意图。他经常引用一句话：“一个国王不知道如何装警作哑，他就不知道如何治理国家。对他来说，一旦他认为自己戴的帽子知晓他的秘密，他就会毫不犹豫地把它扔进火里。”无论是当时还是别的时代，都没有人能更好地懂得如何利用别人的弱点，懂得什么时候该避免由于不合时宜地放纵自己的弱点而让别人占了上风。
就其天性来说，他喜欢报复，残酷无情，甚至经常从下令执行死刑当中寻找乐趣。在他若无其事地判处死刑时，固然不会动恻隐之心去宽恕死回，但另一方面，也没有任何复仇之心会刺激他采取为时过早的暴力行动。在他的猎获物还没有完全置于捕捉范围内，在一切逃跑希望都必然落空以前，他很少扑向他们。他的行动都是那样着意地加以掩饰，以致他的成功一般都是他首次昭告世人，但其实在暗中一直苦心营求的目标。
同样，在有必要去贿赂一个敌对亲王的宠信或大臣以避免任何迫在眉睫的进犯或打破任何针对他结成的联盟时，路易王的贪婪和吝悭便让位于表面的慷慨大方。他喜欢纵情欢乐，但无论是美女还是狩猎——尽管二者都是他的头等爱好——都绝不会使他怠忽日常公务和朝政。他对人的洞察是深刻的。他曾经通过他亲身在其中厮混过的各阶层人物的私生活来寻求这种了解。同时，尽管他生性傲慢，但他却能以一种当时被认为是极为反常的、对武断划分的社会阶层的忽视，毫不犹豫地从最底层提拔有用之材，并委以重任。他知人善任，因而很少对他们的素质感到过失望。
然而，这个奸狡而能干的君主也是个矛盾的混和体，因为人性很少是划一的。虽然他本人是人类当中最虚伪、最不诚恳的一个，但他一生当中某些最大的错误却恰好是由于过分轻信别人的荣誉感和诚实。产生这些错误似乎是归因于一种过于精细的策略体系，促使路易王对他意欲征服的人表面装出毫不怀疑的信任姿态；因为就他总的表现来看，他和历代暴君一样狐疑和猜忌。
路易王正是依靠他那令人生畏的性格，从当代鲁莽的骑士般的君主当中脱颖而出，上升到一个驯兽师的地位。驯兽师凭借高超的智能和策略，通过分发食物和棍棒惩戒，终于能驾驭那些野兽。要不是多亏驯兽师的权术它们，它们本会依靠单纯的体力把他撕碎。在完成这一令人生畏的人物性格的刻画以前，还有另外两个特点值得一提。
第一个特点就是路易王的过分迷信，这也可以说是上苍用来惩罚那些拒不听从宗教指引的人们的一种通病。路易王从不打算放松玩弄权术来平息他的那些勾当所引起的悔恨，而是通过迷信的礼拜、严厉的自我罚罪，以及对圣职人员的慷慨馈赠，近乎徒劳地舒解这种苦痛感。与上面特点有时离奇地联系在一起的第二个特点是爱好低级趣味和卑微的逸乐，尽管他是他那个时代最有头脑的，至少是最狡黠的君主。既然他自己就是一个富于机智的人，自然很欣赏社交谈话中的笑话和俏皮话，其程度超过人们仅根据其性格的其他特点所能揣摩的地步。他甚至卷人一些喜剧性的。暧昧的桃色事件，其洒脱的程度与他性格中那种惯常的戒备和妒忌很不协调。他如此喜爱这一类低贱的风流韵事，以致他的许多放荡淫逸的轶闻被收入书籍收藏家熟知的一个集子里，而在收藏家眼里（这书可不适于任何别的人看），那个完整的版本是很珍贵的。
通过这位君主那极不宽厚，却坚强有力而又十分审慎的性格，上苍终于乐意以急风暴雨或和风细雨来恩威并用的方式，让伟大的法兰西民族重新享受到一个有法度的政府的好处，而在他登基时法国人几乎已经把这种好处丧失殆尽。
在他继承王位以前，路易王已经显露出他的某些，而不是他的才干。他的原配妻子，苏格兰的玛格丽特，是在她丈夫的宫廷中“被谗言恶语中伤而死的”。如果不是路易王的鼓励，本不会有闲言碎语私下传播来伤害那位和善而受委屈的公主。他是个忘恩负义、叛逆不孝的儿子，一度企图阴谋劫持他的父亲，甚至还公开向他宣过战。由于他所犯的第一个罪过，他被放逐到后来被他治理得井井有条的皇太子领地；而由于所犯的第二个罪过，他被完全流放，投奔勃艮第公爵和他的儿子，依靠他们的怜悯，几乎是他们的仁慈来度日。在一四六一年他父亲驾崩以前，他一直在勃艮第公爵父子那儿享受着周到的礼遇，但这种礼遇日后并没有得到善报。
在他的王朝刚开始的时候，路易王几乎被法国的大藩属因反对他而组成的一个同盟所压倒，为首的是勃艮第公爵，更恰当地说，是他的儿子夏荷洛伊伯爵。他们征召了一支强大的军队，封锁了巴黎，在巴黎城下打了一场胜负未定的仗，使得法国国君濒于垮台的边缘。在这种将会两败俱伤的情形下，通常是较为明智的统帅获得战场上的实惠，但不一定是军事上的荣耀。在蒙特勒里战斗中显示出超人胆略的路易王审慎地利用战争胜负未定的特点，使得胜利看来像是属于他的。他善于看风使舵，直到搞垮敌人的同盟为止。在强大的藩属之间进行挑拨离间方面，他表现出了非凡的才干，致使那旨在推翻法国君主的“促进公众福利同盟”最终自行解体，并且再也不会东山再起，令人胆战心惊。从这个时期起，路易王借助于约克和兰开斯特之间的内战，摆脱了来自英国的危险之后，便开始像一个冷酷而能干的医生那样，花了好几年功夫来疗治机体的创伤，更确切地说，就是时而通过缓和疗法，时而通过烈火与钢刀，来阻遏致命的坏疽病的蔓延。兵痞集团为所欲为，贵族们不受惩罚的压迫，虽然他无法有效地制止，但他尽力设法减轻。通过不懈的努力，他逐渐取得了更多的主权；或者说削弱了能与之抗衡者的权力。
然而法国国王仍然疑虑重重，忧心如焚。“促进公众福利同盟”的成员尽管内部不和，但只要存在着，就会像一条受伤的蛇一样，有重新联合再度变得危险起来的可能。不过，更大的威胁在于当时欧洲最大的亲王之一勃艮第公爵与日俱增的权势。由于他的公国与法国的王位之间只有极淡的臣属关系，所以地位与它不相上下。
查尔斯公爵绰号叫“大胆的查尔斯”，或雅称“勇猛的查尔斯”，这是因为他的勇敢总是和鲁莽、狂热联系在一起。他继承了勃艮第公爵的冠冕，但把它熔化了，改成一顶御用的皇冠。这位公爵的性格在各方面都和路易十一形成鲜明的对比。
后者沉着、有头脑、狡诈，从来没有过激行为，也从不放弃任何一件可能成功的事，不管它的前景如何渺茫。公爵的天赋则完全不同。他铤而走险，因为他酷爱冒险；他临危不惧，因为他藐视困难。路易王从不为了感情而牺牲自己的利益，查尔斯则相反，从不为了其他的考虑而牺牲感情，甚至他的一时兴致。尽管他们亲戚关系很近，尽管公爵和他父亲在路易王作为太子到他们那儿时给过他支持，但彼此之间存有戒心和仇视。勃艮第公爵看不起国王谨慎的策略，把他力求通过结盟、收买和其他间接方式谋取利益的做法归因于他的怯懦；假若他是国王的话，他就会用武力来攫取。他同样仇视国王，这不仅是因为国王对他以前得到的恩惠忘恩负义，还因为他父亲在世时，国王的大使对他本人也有过感情上的伤害和责难，而最重要的一点，是路易王对根特、列日及弗兰德的另一些大城市里的不满居民暗中给予支持。这些骚动的城市害怕失去他们的权益，同时也为他们的财富感到骄傲，于是经常发动叛乱来反对君主勃艮第公爵，而且从不会在路易王的宫廷得不到暗中鼓励，因为路易王总是抓住一切机会兴风作浪，在他那过分强大的藩属的领土上制造混乱。
对公爵的轻蔑和仇视，路易王予以同样有力的回敬。不过他用更厚的面纱来掩饰真实感情。像他这样一个有深谋远虑的人不可能不蔑视那种从不放弃一个目标、不管坚持下去多么危险的冥顽的固执，以及那种着手某件事而不考虑将遇到的障碍的莽撞和急躁。不过路易王仇视查尔斯甚至超过他轻视查尔斯，而他的轻视和仇视，由于都混杂着畏惧，便显得更为强烈。他把勃艮第公爵比作一条发疯的公牛。他知道疯牛的进犯，即使闭着眼睛，也是可怕的。路易王畏惧的不单是勃艮第诸省份的财富，也不单是其好战的、训练有素的居民，以及众多的人口。其元首的个人气质也有许多危险堪虞之处。他本人就是勇敢的化身，而他把这种勇敢发展到了近乎轻率冒失的边缘。此外，他挥金如土。他的宫廷，他本人和他的扈从都显得富丽堂皇。所有这些都表现出勃艮第家族的传统的豪华。因此，“大胆的查尔斯”几乎把当代性情相投的火暴汉子都吸引了过来为他服务。像这样一伙坚定的冒险家跟随着一个和他们性格同样莽撞不羁的首领会企图干什么样的事情，路易工看得十分清楚。
还有另外一个情况也增加了路易工对这一势力过大的藩属的敌意。他对他的恩惠是欠有债的，但他并不想偿还、报答，只是经常需要和他周旋，甚至忍受有损于他帝王尊严的不时发作的坏脾气。除了把他作为“亲爱的勃艮第堂弟”对待以外，别无他途。
我们这个故事始于一四六八年，是他们积怨最深的时候，尽管一如往常，他们之间暂时处于一种貌似平静的休战状态。我们将发现，首先列人舞台的这个人物是属于这样一种等级和社会地位：为了阐明其性质本来是毋需长篇论述两个伟大王侯的相对情况的。但大人物的感情以及他们的争端与和解都牵涉到所有接近他们的人。当我们继续讲这个故事时，我们将会发现这个开场白对于理解我们准备讲述其冒险经历的这个人物的历史是很有必要的。
HAMLET
The latter part of the fifteenth century prepared a train of future events that ended by raising France to that state of formidable power which has ever since been from time to time the principal object of jealousy to the other European nations. Before that period she had to struggle for her very existence with the English already possessed of her fairest provinces while the utmost exertions of her King, and the gallantry of her people, could scarcely protect the remainder from a foreign yoke. Nor was this her sole danger. The princes who possessed the grand fiefs of the crown, and, in particular, the Dukes of Burgundy and Bretagne, had come to wear their feudal bonds so lightly that they had no scruple in lifting the standard against their liege and sovereign lord, the King of France, on the slightest pretence. When at peace, they reigned as absolute princes in their own provinces; and the House of Burgundy, possessed of the district so called, together with the fairest and richest part of Flanders, was itself so wealthy, and so powerful, as to yield nothing to the crown, either in splendour or in strength.
In imitation of the grand feudatories, each inferior vassal of the crown assumed as much independence as his distance from the sovereign power, the extent of his fief, or the strength of his chateau enabled him to maintain; and these petty tyrants, no longer amenable to the exercise of the law, perpetrated with impunity the wildest excesses of fantastic oppression and cruelty. In Auvergne alone, a report was made of more than three hundred of these independent nobles, to whom incest, murder, and rapine were the most ordinary and familiar actions.
Besides these evils, another, springing out of the long continued wars betwixt the French and English, added no small misery to this distracted kingdom. Numerous bodies of soldiers, collected into bands, under officers chosen by themselves, from among the bravest and most successful adventurers, had been formed in various parts of France out of the refuse of all other countries. These hireling combatants sold their swords for a time to the best bidder; and, when such service was not to be had, they made war on their own account, seizing castles and towers, which they used as the places of their retreat, making prisoners, and ransoming them, exacting tribute from the open villages and the country around them -- and acquiring, by every species of rapine, the appropriate epithets of Tondeurs and Ecorcheurs, that is, Clippers and Flayers.
In the midst of the horrors and miseries arising from so distracted a state of public affairs, reckless and profuse expense distinguished the courts of the lesser nobles, as well as of the superior princes; and their dependents, in imitation, expended in rude but magnificent display the wealth which they extorted from the people. A tone of romantic and chivalrous gallantry (which, however, was often disgraced by unbounded license) characterized the intercourse between the sexes; and the language of knight errantry was yet used, and its observances followed, though the pure spirit of honourable love and benevolent enterprise which it inculcates had ceased to qualify and atone for its extravagances. The jousts and tournaments, the entertainments and revels, which each petty court displayed, invited to France every wandering adventurer; and it was seldom that, when arrived there, he failed to employ his rash courage, and headlong spirit of enterprise, in actions for which his happier native country afforded no free stage.
At this period, and as if to save this fair realm from the various woes with which it was menaced, the tottering throne was ascended by Louis XI, whose character, evil as it was in itself, met, combated, and in a great degree neutralized the mischiefs of the time -- as poisons of opposing qualities are said, in ancient books of medicine, to have the power of counteracting each other.
Brave enough for every useful and political purpose, Louis had not a spark of that romantic valour, or of the pride generally associated with it, which fought on for the point of honour, when the point of utility had been long gained. Calm, crafty, and profoundly attentive to his own interest, he made every sacrifice, both of pride and passion, which could interfere with it. He was careful in disguising his real sentiments and purposes from all who approached him, and frequently used the expressions, "that the king knew not how to reign, who knew not how to dissemble; and that, for himself, if he thought his very cap knew his secrets, he would throw it into the fire." No man of his own, or of any other time, better understood how to avail himself of the frailties of others, and when to avoid giving any advantage by the untimely indulgence of his own.
He was by nature vindictive and cruel, even to the extent of finding pleasure in the frequent executions which he commanded. But, as no touch of mercy ever induced him to spare, when he could with safety condemn, so no sentiment of vengeance ever stimulated him to a premature violence. He seldom sprang on his prey till it was fairly within his grasp, and till all hope of rescue was vain; and his movements were so studiously disguised, that his success was generally what first announced to the world the object he had been manoeuvring to attain.
In like manner, the avarice of Louis gave way to apparent profusion, when it was necessary to bribe the favourite or minister of a rival prince for averting any impending attack, or to break up any alliance confederated against him. He was fond of license and pleasure; but neither beauty nor the chase, though both were ruling passions, ever withdrew him from the most regular attendance to public business and the affairs of his kingdom. His knowledge of mankind was profound, and he had sought it in the private walks of life, in which he often personally mingled; and, though naturally proud and haughty, he hesitated not, with an inattention to the arbitrary divisions of society which was then thought something portentously unnatural, to raise from the lowest rank men whom he employed on the most important duties, and knew so well how to choose them, that he was rarely disappointed in their qualities. Yet there were contradictions in the character of this artful and able monarch; for human nature is rarely uniform. Himself the most false and insincere of mankind, some of the greatest errors of his life arose from too rash a confidence in the honour and integrity of others. When these errors took place, they seem to have arisen from an over refined system of policy, which induced Louis to assume the appearance of undoubting confidence in those whom it was his object to overreach; for, in his general conduct, he was as jealous and suspicious as any tyrant who ever breathed.
Two other points may be noticed to complete the sketch of this formidable character, by which he rose among the rude, chivalrous sovereigns of the period to the rank of a keeper among wild beasts, who, by superior wisdom and policy, by distribution of food, and some discipline by blows, comes finally to predominate over those who, if unsubjected by his arts, would by main strength have torn him to pieces.
The first of these attributes was Louis's excessive superstition, a plague with which Heaven often afflicts those who refuse to listen to the dictates of religion. The remorse arising from his evil actions Louis never endeavoured to appease by any relaxation in his Machiavellian stratagems (on account of the alleged political immorality of Machiavelli, an illustrious Italian of the sixteenth century, this expression has come to mean "destitute of political morality; habitually using duplicity and bad faith." Cent. Dict.), but laboured in vain to soothe and silence that painful feeling by superstitious observances, severe penance, and profuse gifts to the ecclesiastics. The second property, with which the first is sometimes found strangely united, was a disposition to low pleasures and obscure debauchery. The wisest, or at least the most crafty sovereign of his time, he was fond of low life, and, being himself a man of wit, enjoyed the jests and repartees of social conversation more than could have been expected from other points of his character. He even mingled in the comic adventures of obscure intrigue, with a freedom little consistent with the habitual and guarded jealousy of his character, and he was so fond of this species of humble gallantry, that he caused a number of its gay and licentious anecdotes to be enrolled in a collection well known to book collectors, in whose eyes (and the work is unfit for any other) the right edition is very precious.
(This editio princeps, which, when in good preservation, is much sought after by connoisseurs, is entitled Les Cent Nouvelles Nouvelles, contenant Cent Histoires Nouveaux, qui sont moult plaisans a raconter en toutes bonnes compagnies par maniere de joyeuxete. Paris, Antoine Verard. Sans date d'annee d'impression; en folio gotique. See De Bure. S)
By means of this monarch's powerful and prudent, though most unamiable character, it pleased Heaven, who works by the tempest as well as by the soft, small rain, to restore to the great French nation the benefits of civil government, which, at the time of his accession, they had nearly lost.
Ere he succeeded to the crown, Louis had given evidence of his vices rather than of his talents. His first wife, Margaret of Scotland, was "done to death by slanderous tongues" in her husband's court, where, but for the encouragement of Louis himself, not a word would have been breathed against that amiable and injured princess. He had been an ungrateful and a rebellious son, at one time conspiring to seize his father's person, and at another levying open war against him. For the first offence, he was banished to his appanage of Dauphine, which he governed with much sagacity; for the second he was driven into absolute exile, and forced to throw himself on the mercy, and almost on the charity, of the Duke of Burgundy and his son; where he enjoyed hospitality, afterwards indifferently requited, until the death of his father in 1461.
In the very outset of his reign, Louis was almost overpowered by a league formed against him by the great vassals of France, with the Duke of Burgundy, or rather his son, the Count de Charalois, at its head. They levied a powerful army, blockaded Paris, fought a battle of doubtful issue under its very walls, and placed the French monarchy on the brink of actual destruction. It usually happens in such cases, that the more sagacious general of the two gains the real fruit, though perhaps not the martial fame, of the disputed field. Louis, who had shown great personal bravery during the battle of Montl'hery, was able, by his prudence, to avail himself of its undecided character, as if it had been a victory on his side. He temporized until the enemy had broken up their leaguer, and showed so much dexterity in sowing jealousies among those great powers, that their alliance "for the public weal," as they termed it, but in reality for the overthrow of all but the external appearance of the French monarchy, dissolved itself, and was never again renewed in a manner so formidable. From this period, Louis, relieved of all danger from England by the Civil Wars of York and Lancaster, was engaged for several years, like an unfeeling but able physician, in curing the wounds of the body politic, or rather in stopping, now by gentle remedies, now by the use of fire and steel, the progress of those mortal gangrenes with which it was then infected. The brigandage of the Free Companies (troops that acknowledged no authority except that of their leaders, and who hired themselves out at will), and the unpunished oppression of the nobility, he laboured to lessen, since he could not actually stop them; and, by dint of unrelaxed attention, he gradually gained some addition to his own regal authority, or effected some diminution of those by whom it was counterbalanced.
Still the King of France was surrounded by doubt and danger. The members of the league "for the public weal," though not in unison, were in existence, and, like a scotched snake (see Macbeth. III, ii, 13, "We have scotch'd the snake, not kill'd it."), might reunite and become dangerous again. But a worse danger was the increasing power of the Duke of Burgundy, then one of the greatest princes of Europe, and little diminished in rank by the very slight dependence of his duchy upon the crown of France.
Charles, surnamed the Bold, or rather, the Audacious, for his courage was allied to rashness and frenzy, then wore the ducal coronet of Burgundy, which he burned to convert into a royal and independent regal crown. The character of this Duke was in every respect the direct contrast to that of Louis XI.
The latter was calm, deliberate, and crafty, never prosecuting a desperate enterprise, and never abandoning one likely to be successful, however distant the prospect. The genius of the Duke was entirely different. He rushed on danger because he loved it, and on difficulties because he despised them. As Louis never sacrificed his interest to his passion, so Charles, on the other hand, never sacrificed his passion, or even his humour, to any other consideration. Notwithstanding the near relationship that existed between them, and the support which the Duke and his father had afforded to Louis in his exile when Dauphin, there was mutual contempt and hatred betwixt them. The Duke of Burgundy despised the cautious policy of the King, and imputed to the faintness of his courage that he sought by leagues, purchases, and other indirect means those advantages which, in his place, the Duke would have snatched with an armed hand. He likewise hated the King, not only for the ingratitude he had manifested for former kindnesses, and for personal injuries and imputations which the ambassadors of Louis had cast upon him, when his father was yet alive, but also, and especially, because of the support which he afforded in secret to the discontented citizens of Ghent, Liege, and other great towns in Flanders. These turbulent cities, jealous of their privileges, and proud of their wealth, were frequently in a state of insurrection against their liege lords, the Dukes of Burgundy, and never failed to find underhand countenance at the court of Louis, who embraced every opportunity of fomenting disturbance within the dominions of his overgrown vassal.
The contempt and hatred of the Duke were retaliated by Louis with equal energy, though he used a thicker veil to conceal his sentiments. It was impossible for a man of his profound sagacity not to despise the stubborn obstinacy which never resigned its purpose, however fatal perseverance might prove, and the headlong impetuosity which commenced its career without allowing a moment's consideration for the obstacles to be encountered. Yet the King hated Charles even more than he contemned him, and his scorn and hatred were the more intense, that they were mingled with fear; for he know that the onset of the mad bull, to whom he likened the Duke of Burgundy, must ever be formidable, though the animal makes it with shut eyes. It was not alone the wealth of the Burgundian provinces, the discipline of the warlike inhabitants, and the mass of their crowded population, which the King dreaded, for the personal qualities of their leader had also much in them that was dangerous. The very soul of bravery, which he pushed to the verge of rashness, and beyond it -- profuse in expenditure -- splendid in his court, his person, and his retinue, in all which he displayed the hereditary magnificence of the house of Burgundy, Charles the Bold drew into his service almost all the fiery spirits of the age whose tempers were congenial; and Louis saw too clearly what might be attempted and executed by such a train of resolute adventurers, following a leader of a character as ungovernable as their own.
There was yet another circumstance which increased the animosity of Louis towards his overgrown vassal; he owed him favours which he never meant to repay, and was under the frequent necessity of temporizing with him, and even of enduring bursts of petulant insolence, injurious to the regal dignity, without being able to treat him otherwise than as his "fair cousin of Burgundy."
It was about the year 1468, when their feuds were at the highest, though a dubious and hollow truce, as frequently happened, existed for the time betwixt them, that the present narrative opens. The person first introduced on the stage will be found indeed to be of a rank and condition, the illustration of whose character scarcely called for a dissertation on the relative position of two great princes; but the passions of the great, their quarrels, and their reconciliations involve the fortunes of all who approach them; and it will be found, on proceeding farther in our story, that this preliminary chapter is necessary for comprehending the history of the individual whose adventures we are about to relate.