New-York tribune., 1905-07-09

Diane de Poiters all sufficient resource, and
considered that he was rendering enough honor
to his Italian bride in making her his Queen
and the mother of his children. Catherine had
to watch in silence the exercise of an unlawful
devotion public and so complete that she and
her husbands mistress might just as we'll have
changed places. But in GATHERINGS conduct
down to the day of Henri's tragic death we
may find key to her whole character. She
hated but she smiled. and she bided her time
Miss Sichel has a good passage on the central
source Of her heroines demeanor first as neg
lected Queen and then as a powerful regent:
She was indeed as great if not as startling a
villain tradition has made her. not, as tradi-
ton says from having bad feelings, but from hav-
mass of Indifference. Indifference was the dominant
note of her character-was no longer negative
quality but positive power-and entire indiffer-
ence means entire cynicism. The person who be
comes cynic is often no more than a sentimental
ist in disguise, but Catherine was a serious eynic
sees things as they are. never as tbey NAV be
ohe drove common sense to its absolute conclusion
deTnns her So severeiv as ioes the srieF e I,J3s
description of her q feU, 49, - g. u tOy
news me Eve; She has grown ten years younger"
mas come out of bad Illness
To such a woman the infideIity Of a husband
was not matter for Mysteries: it was an in
ner wound to be kept alive in silence and in
secrecy and when the moment for revenge
came it was moment to be used without pity
as without passion Miss SicheI says that her
mind "had the width of an unfurnished room
in a marble paIace-vast. mysterious, unIiveI
In. and perilOuSy cold" She might have said
as much about GATHERINGS heart. which seems
to have been as bleak her mind. The dark
Fforentine had her womanly impulses. no doubt
Children could sometimes touch her, and, in her
curious way. she unquestionably loved a great
deal the man who loved her so little. Yet /
when all is said, the best account of her char
acter is that which was written in a few words
by Venetian Ambassador at the French court
NAn her actiOns.'' he said, have ever been
ruled and guided by most powerful desire
the desire to reign" She wanted power wanted
1t more than anything else in the world and it
was because she cherished this tremendous de-
sire that she committed all her sins 1t was
not mere lust of blood which brought about the
massacre which left the bIackest of all the
stains upon her character; it Catherines
Willingness to go to any lengths when her po-
Etical fortunes were at stake.
She was not, at bottom. irrevocabIy opposed
to the Reformation. On the contrary as Miss
Sichel is careful to point out giving chapter and
verse for her argument, Catherine would have
been delighted if she could have brought the
Huguenots into the fold of a peaceful France
by peaceful means. But when they threatened.
III her opinion, the fabric she bent on
building up. they had to go to the wall. She
IS painted in this book a creature who could
be attractive enough in many of the relations
OF life so long as it suited her book but who
became, on provocation, kind of dehumanized
shape of dread. The reader shrinks. of course |
from contact with so grim type. At the same |
time, he cannot but be impressed by that whicn
repels him. and he follows Miss SichePs story
Win unnagslnS attention 1t is to be hoped
that the remaining portion of that story will
be published without much delay, and this not
alone because Miss Sichel writes so vividly Of
Catherine. but because she sheds so much Hgh.
upon GATHERINGS contemporaries and upon her
time The other personages in this volume
Diane de Poitiers the King, Jeanne de Navarro
and dozen more, are all admirably sketched
and the author shows in her chapters ON Ron
sard and his followers that she is as much at
home In literary as in political history.