marie seong-hak kim L’Hôpital and de Thou each epitomized a humanist statesman with the vision of an ideal, pristine justice system. L’Hôpital advocated royal legislative power as an instrument to achieve that goal and tried to educate the magistracy in the French national image, in terms of “French law.”139 The goal of judicial reforms was that “our justice be purely and smoothly (purement et nettement) administered.”140 On their part, judges invoked the principle of the common good and solemnly reasserted their roles as guardians of justice. De Thou defended the sanctity of precedents and judicial practices. L’Hôpital believed in innovation through royal legislation whereas de Thou believed in renovation through jurisprudence. Eventually, the exigency of civil war imposed immense burdens on both. L’Hôpital wrote after retirement: “If I were a private person, all I would ask for would be to live in peace with everyone…. [But as] chancellor, the chief of justice of France under Your Majesties, … I inevitably offended everyone who infringed your authority, rights, domains, laws and ordinances, but I never feared to incur hostility and enmity . . . .”141 Even Hotman, who had shared L’Hôpital’s concept of sovereign legislation and heartily embraced the codification program, came to find the chancellor's unyielding apology of royal authority hard to reconcile with his own religious and constitutional conviction. De Thou, for his part, was compelled to defend the claims of the Parlement of Paris against royal pacification policy in times of confessional conflicts. Yet, he summed up his devotion to the crown and public service on his deathbed: “I always wanted, to my last breath, to continue to serve the public.”142 This article has argued that historical unfolding in sixteenth-century France was shaped by constitutional, religious, political, and administrative issues, and that it was also swayed by both public and private interests. The consolidation of the robe nobility in the midst of religious 139 Salmon, John H. M. 1991 p. 469. 140 Ordinance of Moulin, 1566, art. 14, in Isambert, François 1821-1833, vol. 14 p. 194. 141 Kim, Seong-Hak 1997 p. 172. 142 Filhol, René 1937 p. 55, note 3. 165 Conclusion
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjYyNDk=