On 26 June 1574, Gabriel de Lorges, comte de Montgomery and Huguenot commander, was executed in Paris. Propaganda condoning his fate quickly appeared. Printed discourses claimed that not only was Montgomery a ‘true monster … born to subvert and ruin this kingdom’ and leader of conspirators and rebels, but that he had shown ‘sacrilegious disloyalty’. Over a period of thirteen to fourteen years, he had taken up arms against the king no less than five times (suggesting that the Crown had been more than patient with him), and that in the end he had been ‘salarie’, that is had received his just desserts as a non-repentant rebel.2 By contrast, other sources report that on the scaffold he refused to confess or repent, declaring that ‘he would die for his religion, that he had not committed treason, nor anything else against his prince’, and prayed ‘as those of his religion’ did.3 Montgomery’s execution thus divided contemporary opinion. His gratuitous cruelty and repeated sedition were cited as justification for his sentence, whereas his piety and restraint contradicted this same verdict. This event might seem disconnected from the better-known St Bartholomew’s Day massacres which preceded it, but, when seen in its wider context, it forms part of an apparent shift in the French monarchy’s attitude which was embodied in its enforcement of judicial violence. In turn, this change in approach can best be seen as a royal response both to the radicalization of the Huguenot movement and to the fears of subsequent plots, involving both Protestants and Catholics, in the wake of the massacres.

中文翻译：

---

皇家司令部的暴力：司法“时刻”（1574–1575）

1574 年 6 月 26 日，蒙哥马利伯爵和胡格诺派指挥官加布里埃尔·德·洛尔热 (Gabriel de Lorges) 在巴黎被处决。宽恕他命运的宣传很快就出现了。印刷的话语声称蒙哥马利不仅是一个“真正的怪物……天生就是为了颠覆和毁灭这个王国”和阴谋者和叛乱者的领袖，而且他还表现出“亵渎神明的不忠”。十三至十四年间，他向国王拿起武器不下五次（说明王室对他已经很耐心了），最后他是“工薪族”，也就是2 相比之下，其他消息来源称，他在脚手架上拒绝认罪或悔改，声称“他会为自己的宗教而死，他没有犯下叛国罪，也没有其他任何事情”。反对他的王子'，并“像他的宗教一样”祈祷。3 蒙哥马利的处决因此分裂了当代的意见。他的无端残忍和反复煽动被引用作为判刑的理由，而他的虔诚和克制与同样的判决相矛盾。这一事件似乎与之前著名的圣巴塞洛缪节大屠杀无关，但从更广泛的背景来看，它构成了法国君主制态度明显转变的一部分，这种转变体现在执法司法暴力上。反过来，这种方法的变化最好被视为对胡格诺派运动的激进化以及对大屠杀之后涉及新教徒和天主教徒的后续阴谋的恐惧的皇家回应。他的无端残忍和反复煽动被引用作为判刑的理由，而他的虔诚和克制与同样的判决相矛盾。这一事件似乎与之前著名的圣巴塞洛缪节大屠杀无关，但从更广泛的背景来看，它构成了法国君主制态度明显转变的一部分，这种转变体现在执法司法暴力上。反过来，这种方法的变化最好被视为对胡格诺派运动的激进化以及对大屠杀之后涉及新教徒和天主教徒的后续阴谋的恐惧的皇家回应。他的无端残忍和反复煽动被引用作为判刑的理由，而他的虔诚和克制与同样的判决相矛盾。这一事件似乎与之前著名的圣巴塞洛缪节大屠杀无关，但从更广泛的背景来看，它构成了法国君主制态度明显转变的一部分，这种转变体现在执法司法暴力上。反过来，这种方法的变化最好被视为对胡格诺派运动的激进化以及对大屠杀之后涉及新教徒和天主教徒的后续阴谋的恐惧的皇家回应。这一事件似乎与之前著名的圣巴塞洛缪节大屠杀无关，但从更广泛的背景来看，它构成了法国君主制态度明显转变的一部分，这种转变体现在执法司法暴力上。反过来，这种方法的变化最好被视为对胡格诺派运动的激进化以及对大屠杀之后涉及新教徒和天主教徒的后续阴谋的恐惧的皇家回应。这一事件似乎与之前著名的圣巴塞洛缪节大屠杀无关，但从更广泛的背景来看，它构成了法国君主制态度明显转变的一部分，这种转变体现在执法司法暴力上。反过来，这种方法的变化最好被视为对胡格诺派运动的激进化以及对大屠杀之后涉及新教徒和天主教徒的后续阴谋的恐惧的皇家回应。