EXTRACTS FROM :
A. Spicer
`The French-speaking Reformed
community and their Church in Southampton 1567-c. 1620'.
(unpublished Ph.D. thesis, University of Southampton,1994)
....................................................
THE EXILES AND THEIR ANTECEDENTS
On the 21
December 1567 a group of about fifty men and women gathered
in
the chapel of Sr. Julien, a part of the medieval hospital of God's House.
They
met together to celebrate the Lord's Supper; the names of those who
received
the sacrament were carefully recorded. This was the first service of
the
newly established French-speaking Reformed church in Southampton.
The survival of the register of the French church from
the very beginnings
of
the community has provided a unique opportunity to analyse the origins of
the
initial settlers and to establish their motives for migrating to Southampton.
The
names of 166 settlers are recorded in the Registre between 21 December
1567
and 2 January 1569, and the origins of 66 per cent can be firmly established.
Sixteen
were either English or Channel Islanders and ten came from France, but the
majority came from the Southern Netherlands: Antwerp (7), Armentiθres area
(10), Bruges (1), Liθge (1), Tournai (13) and Valenciennes(51).
AImost a third of the initial settlers came from
Valenciennes, a town now
in
Northern France but which in the sixteenth century was in the Southern
Netherlands
under the jurisdiction of the Habsburgs. This group of settlers
also
included those who were to be the most prominent members of the community
during
the first twenty years of its history: Mathieu
Sohier, Arnoul le Clercq and Jean de Beaulieu. While close family
relationships and business connections might be expected to develop within a
refugee community, in the case of the Southampton community those links had
aIready been forged before the strangers had been forced to leave the Southern
Netherlands. At least twenty-six of the fifty-one people who originated from Valenciennes
came from two families, the Sohiers and
their distant relatives the de Beaulieus. A further six people were described
as servants of these famiIies.
Mathieu Sohier and bis
brother Jehan were among those present at
the first
celebration
of the Lord's Supper held in December 1567. Also in the congregation
were
their sister Wauldrue Sohier with ber husband (Guillaume Coppin) and family, their
cousin Jehan le Mesureur and his family, and also Arnoul le Clercq (another
cousin of Mathieu Sohier) with his family. Mathieu Sohier's niece, Catherine des Plus, and
bis widowed mother Jehanne de Caignoncle, also joined the Church within the
first twelve months of its establishment. Other members of Mathieu Sohier's immediate family joined other
exile communities. His brothers Pierre and Claude
Sohier both became members of the French church in London while Cornille Sohier and his sister Marie Sohier with her husband, Christopher de
Faloise, settled in Rye.
The Sohiers
were a prosperous Valenciennes family headed by Mathieu
Sohier pere and his wife Jehanne de Caignoncle. Although Mathieu Sohier
described
himself as a merchant, he had begun to invest in the countryside.
His
will, drawn up in 1557, referred to property and manorial rights in the
seigneurie
of Bailloel and the fief of Haussy, as well as on rural properties and in
Valenciennes itself. These interests later appear in the records of the Conseil
des Troubles. Even as late as 1593, the Sohier
lands at Haussy were referred to by Mathieu
Sohier's son and namesake in his will. The family also had a limited
interest in the public rentes issued by the city of Valenciennes
although they proved a less lucrative investment than trade and so did not
attract many merchants. Such investment in seigneuries, land and rentes
not only provided a financial return but it also opened the route for possible
social advancement. However the Sohiers'
holdings do not match those belonging to the wealthy Calvinist merchants such
as Vincent Resteau and the wealthy wine merchant Michel Herlin, whose
properties and interests were scattered throughout Hainaut.
A further gauge of the family's economic standing can
be obtained from the
value
of the property that was confiscated from the Sohiers
and their relatives
by
the Conseil des Troubles. The household goods of Jean le Thieullier, the
cousin of Jehanne de Caignoncle, realised 527 livres tournois 3s 3d.
Guillaume Coppins household goods may only have realised 83 livres tournois 2s, yet in a will drawn up in 1566,
he made bequests in excess of 4,100 livres tournois.
The Sohiers were distantly related to the ancient
Sohier de Vermandois family Of Mons who had held several positions of local prominence in
Valenciennes in the past. This may have
served to enhance the social standing of Sohiers;
the family certainly possessed the wealth and status to marry into the leading
families of the town. Mathieu Sohier had
married Jehanne de Caignoncle, the sister-in-law of Jacques le Clercq and the
sister of Nicolas de Caignoncle, another prominent Valenciennes merchant. Their
children also made advantageous marriages, some into ιchevinale
families: Pierre married Anne de la Fontaine
dit Wicart; Mathieu married Catherine
Resteau, the daugnter of Franηois Resteau and Anne Godin.
The
familys economic status and marriage alliances therefore placed them
amongst the mercantile elite of
Valenciennes. While the government of the city
rested in the hands of a tight
oligarchy of echevinale families who dominated the Magistrat, the merchant
families controlled the Conseil Particulier which served as an important
adjunct to the Magistrat. Some bourgeois families such as the de Caignoncles
and the le Mesureurs did serve for short periods on the Magistrat but other
wealthy merchants such as Michel Herlin and Vincent Resteau were excluded. The Sohiers were probably represented on the Conseil
Particulier. Although there are no lists of those who served on the Conseil
Particulier, the membership usually included the constables of the bourgeois
militia. Arnoul le Clercq and Guillaume Coppin were both constables in 1553
while Jehan le Mesureur and Jehan Sohier
were amongst those appointed to act as the captains of the Town Watch at the
bungled execution of the Maubruslez in 1562.
For all their economic success and
social status, the Sohiers did not assume a prominent rτle in
Valenciennes Lacking the wealth of the Herlins and the prestige of such
established families as the le Boucqs, they do not appear frequendy in the
political life of the city. They may in fact have chosen to direct their energy
towards commerce rather than becoming involved in civic affairs. The family
might also have been `disqualified' on account of suspicions about their
religious orthodoxy. In 1544, Jacques Sohier,
probably the nephew of Mathieu Sohier, had been arrested in the company of `dogmatiseurs'
. There is however stronger evidence to link the Sohiers with heresy in
Valenciennes
By the
late 1540s the Reformed movement had begun to recover from the fierce bout of
persecution which had followed the arrest and execution of
Pierre Brully in l545. The hostility
towards the religious policy of Brussels among the magistrates of Valenciennes
was particularly conducive to such a
recovery.The civic authorities
resented in particular the jurisdiction of the
special commission set up by central
government to try cases in the wake of
Brully's preaching and alleged that
it contravened their privileges. Further-
more, the torture of suspected
heretics and the confiscation of their property
ula contrary to the privileges of
Valenciennes. A placard issued on 20 Nov-
ember 1549 upheld Charles V's claim
to the confiscated property in the case
of heretics and initiated a
long-running dispute between the government and
the Valenciennes authorities. The placard
seems to have coincided with the execution ofMichelle de Caignoncle, the widow
of the bourgeois Jacques le
Clercq, and the confiscation of her
goods. This no doubt heightened the
concern of the Valenciennes
authorities about the issue of confiscated property.
Michelle
de Caignoncle was the sister of Jehanne de Caignoncle and so was closely
related to the Sohiers. The accounts of the
confiscation of her property reveal that amongst those who received payments
from her estate were Georges des Plus and Mathieu
Sohier. The sale of her moveable goods raised 1212 livres tournois
4s 12d, a sizeable sum.21 Although the privileges of the citizens of
Valenciennes did not protect the widow of a bourgeois, such as Michelle
de Caignoncle, her execution revealed that thic class was not exempt from the
powers of the Inquisition. She was in fact the only member of a merchant family
to be executed in Valenciennes during Charles V's reign and merited inclusion
in Jean Crespin's martyrology.
The Calvinist movement grew in strength during
the 1550s and the Sohiers continued to be
actively involved. Jehan le Mesureur, a cousin of Jehanne de Caignoncle and
later a refugee in Southampton, assumed an important role in the emerging
church. He was a member of an informal group of wealthy Calvinists which
predated the first formal Calvinist
consistor in Valenciennes organised by Ambroise Wille of Tournai in 1563. Jehan
le Mesureur examined Paul Chevalier prior to his appointment as the Calvinist
minister in December 1561. He may also have helped to organise the
psalm-singing demonstrations, the chanteries, in the autumn of 1561.
The power of
the Calvinist in Valenciennes was vividly demonstrated in 1562 in the Maubruslez
affair. Following the arrest of two deacons, Maillart
and
Fauveau, the Calvinists put pressure on the Magistrat and reminded them
of their
responsibilities as godly magistrates, while also threatening civil dis-
order.On
the other side the Regent demanded action against Maillart and
Fauveau as
she believed that the spread of heresy in the city was due to the
failure of
the civic authorities to deal effectively with the problem. After vacil-
lating the Magistrat
solved its dilemma by appointing a Town Watch to super-
vise the
execution and to maintain order, which included thirty loyal Catholics
thirty
suspected Calvinists. These included Michel Herlin and Jehan de
Lattre, as
well as Jehan le Mesureur and Jehan Sohier.
The release of the
Maubruslez by the crowd in Valenciennes
revealed the extent to which the
Calvinists
had undermined the authority of the I.
The Regent blamed the Magistrat for the Maubruslez
affair and attempted to ensure that office-holding in Valenciennes was
restricted to loyal Catholics. The appointment to the Magistrat of
suspected Calvinists, such as Michel Herlin, Bertrand Gruel and also Guillaume
Coppin in July 1562 and Jehan Ie Mesureur in July 1563, demonstrates the
failure of this policy. Margaret of Parma also appointed her `conseiller et
maistre d'hostel' to supervise the implementation of the placards in
Valenciennes. Still the Calvinists continued to defy the government and in the
spring of 1563 they held a series of open-air sermons. The central government
punished Valenciennes by imposing a garnison on the town in May 1563 and in september
a futher placard was issued.
..
...............................................................................................
.....Indeed
the close commercial links between the Walloon towns and Antwerp may suggest
that in many cases this migration was merely a transfer of business location.
The Sohiers
and de Beaulieus were actively involved
in Antwerps overseas trade and became part of the city's merchant community,
in which Calvinists were Particularly well-represented The Walloons formed a
close knit group in Antwerp, living in the same area of the city and forming
close business and personal ties. This strengthened existing relationships and
new links were established. In 1564 Cornille Sohier
married Marie, the daughter of Francois Cocquiel dit le Merchier one of the
leading and wealthiest Tournai Calvinists. Other later settlers in Southampton
may have been part of this Walloon community: Anthoine Jurion had moved to
Antwerp from Hainaut by 1558 and the van Santuoort family may have been related
to the prominent Antwerp Calvinist of that name.
The government used spies to identify the
leading Calvinists in Antwerp. One of these was a merchant, Philippe Dauxy, who
sent a list to Margaret of Parma of the leading Calvinists from the Walloon
towns. On the list of Valenciennes Calvinists he identified:
Jehan de Beulieu,
beaufils de Jan van Hof leur rabby, et Nicola de Beaulieu, beaufils de Sr
Caerle Cocquel, et tous leurs freres compaignons dont Jan Damman est lung
Dauxy also produced Les moyens pour remedier au desastre
d'Anvers which gives further details about the Calvinists Adrien de Ia
Barre, an associate of Jan Damman and compaignon de Jan de Beazulieu, pres les
freres mineurs appears in this second memorandum. It also suggested that Jan van Hof and Jean de
Beaulieu were members of the consistory in Antwerp. A further report from
another spy, Geronimo de Curiel denounced the company of Jan Damman (i.e.
including Jean de Beaulieu and Adrien de Ia Barre). From these spy reports, it
appears that de Beaulieu was a significant figure within Antwerp's Reformed
community.
Although none of these reports refer
to the Sohiers, the family was associated
with the Antwerp Calvinists. The contract of marriage between Cornille Sohier and Marie Cocquiel dit le
Merchier, was witnessed by Denis des Maistres, a prominent Calvinist who had
fled from Tournai to Antxverp and was denounced by Dauxy. Furthermore Nicolas
du Vivier, a leading member of the Antwerp church acted on behalf of the Sohiers. Mathieu
Sohier and his wife Catherine Resteau seem to have been closely linked
to the Calvinist cause in Antwerp and were cited to appear before the Conseil
des Troubles for having sheltered a Calvinist minister in their home.
During
1566, Antxverp like other parts of the Southern Netherlands experienced the
wave of hedge-preaching and then the Iconoclastic Fury of the Wonderjaar.An
agreement was quickly reached between Orange and the Reformed community assumed
a more public role during the remainder of 1566. They were involved in
formulating the Three Million Guilders request. Ostensibly an attempt to
purchase religious freedom from Philip II, this was in reality intended to
finance troops to defend the Reformed churches should the Request fail. Mathieu, Cornille and Claude Sohier and Arnoul le
Clercq all contributed to the Three Million Guilders Request, though de
Beaulieu's name is surprisingly absent. Brederode agreed at meeting in Antwerp
in February 1567 to protect the Reformed churches, if they financed the
necessary military forces. Arnoul le Clercq was one of the two people appointed
to collect the 20,000 florins that had been apportioned to the Valenciennes
church. While the Reformed community in Antwerp played a prominent part in
1566-1567, the Calvinists there were spared the traumas and persecutions
experienced by their coreligionists in the Walloon towns of Valenciennes and
Tournai. Consequently many of the Protestants, who were later cited to appear
before the Conseil des Troubles or whose property was to be confiscated,
had been able to escape from the city and to dispose of their property.
.
The refugees were directed to Southampton by the Queen. The govem- ment
was no doubt responding to the informaI approaches which had been made by the
Corporation conceming the establishment of an alien community.
Southampton was probably not completely unknown to the strangers. There
were long-established trading links between Rouen and Southampton, and the de
Beaulieu family had factors in Rouen and Dieppe for the trade with Valenciennes
and Antwerp. There were also connections between the Calvinist communities in
Rouen and the Walloon towns. Furthermore a branch of the Sohier family had emigrated to the Channel Islands
from Mons in the early sixteenth century. There were strong trading links
between Southampton and the Channel Islands and the Sohiers
also visited the port.
The
Corporation's opinion about the establishment of the community had aIready been
canvassed in a letter sent by Bishop Home to John Caplin. This letter has not
survived but the Corporation's response to it has. The Corporation's letter is
dated 29 May, only two weeks after the refugees' initial petition. They wrote
that since 'certayne persons being destitute of dwelling places for them and
there family wysheth to have abode in the Towne of Southampton' and if 'theye
wilbe quiet persons there cane but do good amongest us ... and thinke we maye
and shalbe hable well to have a hundreth or more of them'.
The refugees then
wrote to the Mayor and Corporation of Southampton conceming the establishment
of a community and their plight. They claimed that they could not 'endure and
abide our consciences to be burdened and in especiall to beare the intolerable
clogge of the Spanish Inquisicon: Wee have determined with our selves without
regard either of the losse of our goodes or native Contrey to seeke out an
other place of habitacon where it may be lawfull for us to live more quietly
and Christian like'.
.
During this period
several refugee merchants played an active role in the town's overseas trade:
Jean de Beaulieu, Arnoul le Clercq, Mathieu Sohier
and Anthoinedu Quesne. The first three merchants were aIl related and came from
Valenciennes. They also belonged to an extensive commercial network, the
experience of which undoubtedly contributed to their mercantile activities in
Southampton.
Mathieu
Sohier was the younger
brother of Claude Sohier, an Antwerp
merchant who with his companions had retained factors at Rouen, Dieppe and
London. Sohier's factor at Rouen seems to
have been Henri de Beaulieu and at Dieppe, Augustin de Beaulieu.In Apri11567 Claude Sohier claimed that he had to leave Antwerp
to see to his business affairs in Dieppe, Rouen and other places in England and
France, but that he did not intend to move abroad. However Claude Sohier died in London in 1568 and his will
refers to his business interests on the continent; he divided his interest and
stock in companies, including the company at Valenciennes, between his wife and
children. Claude's brothers Mathieu, Pierre and
Camille Sohier were amongst those who were appointed as the executors of
the will. Although Pierre, Jehan and Camille Sohier
were aIl involved in Claude Sohier's
business affairs, the extent of Mathieu Sohier's
involvement is unclear.
The
business affairs of Jean de Beaulieu before 1567 are much clearer. He was a
member of an Antwerp company with Jan Damman and Adrien de la Barre which had
goods and interests at Seville. Henri de Beaulieu, Jean's brother, was
apparently resident in Seville in 1564. He had business dealings with his
distant relatives, the Malapert brothers who had also migrated from
Valenciennes
to Antwerp.'5 He may have also had commercial links with his
father-in-law,
Jan van Hof, who was based in Loondon.
These two examples provide some indication of
the mercantile background and experience which some of the refugee merchants
possessed. Unfortunately little evidence has survived concerning the activities
of Mathieu Sohiers's cousin, Arnoul le
Clercq, before 1567. Little is known about Anthoine du Quesne; he became a
member of the French church in April 1573, but it is not clear from where he
originated.
Besides this experience, the merchants
possessed the necessary funds to become actively involved in Southampton's
commercial life. The refugee merchants seem to have evaded the confiscation of
their goods by the Conseil des Troubles. Mathieu
Sohier and his wife certainly seem to have managed to dispose of their
property before they left Antwerp. Other refugees were less
fortunate;
one merchant, Roland Petit, was described by Jean de Beaulieu as
`beinge a
pooreman by reason of the stay of his goods beyond the seas.
Mathieu Sohier's
brother-in-law, Guillaume Coppin, was forced, in October 1572, to revise his
will due to his losses ihe Netherlands. His wife was left
only
Coppin's moveable goods and jewels after his debts had been settled
instead of
the 2,700 livres which she had first been promised. Coppin's son's
legacy of
1,400 livres tournois was reduced to 300 with a further 400 livres
tournois `when liberty shall be in the Low
Countries and that profit and the
saleof my
goods which are at Valenciennes may be made and that my testa-
ment may be
effected'. In fact Coppin's dilapidated position was such that he
seems to
have been in receipt of poor relief from the Threadneedle Street
Church.
Some indication of the extent to which the
merchants were able to retain their assetsis revealed in the 1571 lay subsidy
returns. Jean de Beaulieu was assessed as having moveable goods worth £20, Mathieu Sohier goods worth £15 and Arnoul le
Clercq also £15. While this was considerably less than the £50 assessment for
John Crooke and also that of Richard Goddard senior (£50) assessement for John
Crooke and also that Richard Goddard
senior (£30), it did mean that the refugees had similarbresources to Southampton
merchants such as Nicholas Caplin (£20), Lawrence Williams (£15), William
Staveley (£20) and greater resources than those of men such as Richard Etuer
(£6), Richard Goddard Junior (£8), Andrew Studley (£7) and John Errington (£5).
These men formed the small &lite of wealthy Southampton merchants
identified by Thomas, who engaged in the Gascon and Spanish trades.
Mathieu Sohier also had the means to lease West
Hall for two years from the Southampton Corporation at £12 per annum in 1570.
This substantial
property,
complete with cellars and warehouses, had in the past been occupied
by Italian
merchants.
Le Clercq and Sohier
tend to overshadow other refugees who traded on a smaller scale and less
widely. Refugees such as Emery Durant, Pierre Thieu-
Det,
Gaspard Desert and Pierre Trenchant appear infrequently in the royal port
books.importing goods from St. Malo, Rouen and Caen. More significant was the
cross-Channel trade of men such as Guillaume Hersent and Robert Cousin who
regularly traded with Northern France. The small scale of this trade was no
doubt a reflection on the merchants' more limited means; in 1571 Durant and
Cousin were assessed as having goods worth £3 and Hersent less than that, so he
was subject to the poll tax.
This
first reference to the refugee merchants appears in the petty customs accounts
in March 1568 when Mathieu Sohier paid 2d
on a barrel of oil; Jean de Beau1ieu imported barrels of butter, soap, `pack
threde', rape oil, one packet of Holland cloth, one of [earthern] ware and two
bundles of teasels. In 1568-69 Mathieu Sohier
was recorded as importing 27' tuns of wine. The petty custom accounts also
refer to goods being imported and exported by other refugee merchants such as
Arnoul le Clercq and Augustin de Beaulieu.A
clearer
picture of the strangers' involvement in overseas trade can be seen from
surviving port books. These are dominated by the activities of Arnoul le
Clercq and Mathieu Sohier, Jean de Beaulieu apparently having
left Southampton before the period covered by these records.
Trade with Spain, Portugal and the Atlantic
islands was dominated by the small elite of Southampton merchants who possessed
the resources to charter vessels for such long journeys and were involved in
what was essentially a luxury trade. This therefore excluded many refugee
merchants, although Mathieu Sohier and
Arnoul le Clercq did play a small role in this trade. In 1577, Mathieu Sohier chartered the Dove of Hampton
for a voyage to Lisbon. In 1575-76 le Clercq imported to Southampton one tun of
`secke cask' compared with the 120tuns and 16 butts of `seck cask' imported
from Andalucia by Southampton merchants. Besides wine, they imported cargoes of
figs, raisins, ginger, brimstone, oil and Spanish salt and iron from Andalucia,
Ayamonte, Bilbao and St. Sebastian. The exiles also traded occasionally with
the Atlantic islands of the Azores and the Canaries. In June 1574 the John
of
Hampton returned to Southampton with
eighteen tuns of Canary wine for
Mathieu Sohier and
Anthoine du Quesne. The
principal commodity
imported
from the Azores was green woad; in 1574 the Angel of Poole returned with
3 score and 15 quintals of green woad for Arnoul le Clercq. However the elite
Southampton merchants also dominated this trade and only insignificant
quantities were imported by the refugee merchants.
The refugee merchants were more actively
involved in the town's trade with South Western France. This trade attracted
only a few of the wealthiest
Southampton
merchants because of the necessary investment of capital in large ships for the
long voyage and because it was a trade in semi-luxury goods. In 1575-76 for
example the Dove of Hampton sailed from Southampton on 28 November 1575
for Bordeaux, carrying cloth for le Clercq, Sohier
and Richard Etuer and returned to Southampton from La Rochelle on 28 February
1526 carrying 30 weighs of bay salt and 3 tuns of Rochelle wine for the merchants. The Dove of Hampton,
sailed with another cargo for the merchants to La Rochelle on 9 April 1576 and
returned to Southampton on 24 July 1576. The refugee merchants generally seem
to have traded as individuals but on one occasion there was a combined venture between
refugee and native merchants. In a
contract for the Flying Dove of Hampton in February 1583, the
tonnage of the ship was divided between Richard Goddard (25 tons), Peter
Janverain (12 tons), John Exton (5
tons), Alexander Pendry (5 tons), Mathieu Sohier
(5 tons) and Arnoul le Clercq (15 tons).
The refugee merchants only imported a limited quantity of
wine into Southampton during 1575-76,
a mere 9,5 tuns of Gascon wine compared with
the 96 tuns of Gascon wine imported
by the Southampton merchants. Wine was not the only cargo which came to
Southampton from South West France; bar salt was the principal import for the
refugee merchants. ln 1575-76,320 weighs of bay salt were imported to
Southampton and its satellites, from La Rochelle, including one cargo of 70
weighs imported by one William Lounde of Yarmouth. The refugee merchants
therefore accounted for 12.6 percent of the imported bay salt compared with the
54.3 percent imported by Southampton merchants. The town's importation of
Toulouse woad had gradually been replaced by green woad from the Azores but
small quantities of woad were still imported by refugee and Southampton
merchants.
The refugees' imports
from South Western France seem to be of only limited significance. However, the
ships chartered by le Clercq and Sohier did not always retum directly to
Southampton. ln September 1576, Arnoul le Clercq and Mathieu Sohier with
Richard Etuer chartered the Dove of Hampton 'for one viage from hence
[Southampton] to Rochell and ther to tarrie sixe dayes and from thence to
Burdeux ther to tarrie xvijj dayes to unlade & also to relade &c and
from thence to tarrie at Guarnzie two rides to have awnswere of the merchants
whether he shall goe to St. Mallowes or Suthampton,. ln September 1578 the
merchants chartered the Dove of Hampton again to La Rochelle and then to
Charente, the ship was then 'to reterne within th'isle of Wighte for annswere
wher they shall passe to Midlebroughe, Duncarke or ostende in Flanders'. The
ship retumed to Southampton from Middelburg
on the 29 December 1578. The
merchants chartered the same ship for similar voyages in October 1579 and
November 1580.
The involvement of le
Clercq and Sohier in trade between La
Rochelle and Middelburg may in fact have been a continuation of their business
interests from before the Troubles. Middelburg was the main entrepτt for
foreign wines into the Netherlands, in particular those from Western France.
This trade had originally been handled by the Rochelais, but after 1555 the
wine trade between La Rochelle and the Netherlands came to be dominated by
merchants from the Netherlands and England as weIl as by German merchants. These
merchants from the Netherlands had sirnilarly taken over the importation
of wine from Bordeaux. The activities
of the refugee merchants perhaps should be seen in this context rather than
assuming that their interests were confined to trading directly between
Southampton and the Western French ports. It is difficult to assess the significance of this trade network, but
perhaps some insight can be gained from one cargo which went to Middelburg via
Southampton. ln a contract dated January 1577, le Clercq hired the Grey
Falcon of London to transfer 171 'butts of wines of sheres
cornmonlie called Seckes' from Southampton to Middelburg which was to be
delivered to one Jasper Craiet.
The
refugee merchants imported goods from the Netherlands, presumably ., after
their cargoes from La Rochelle or Bordeaux had been unloaded. The Dove of
Hampton had sailed to Bordeaux but returned from Middelburg in 1578 with
1,200 lb of madder for Mathieu Sohier, 1,200
lb for Richard Etuer and 2,400 lb of madder and 4,000 lb of hops for Arnoul le
Clercq. The ship sailed to La Rochelle on 27 January 1579 and returned in April
from Middelburg, with a cargo of 3,000 lb of hops, 1,400 lb of madder, 3 lasts
of pitch and tar and 2 lasts of Flernish soap for Arnoul le Clercq.
Goods
were not solely imported from the Netherlands by le Clercq and Sohier as a result of this triangular trade
network. They also traded directly with the Netherlands. As has been seen le
Clercq had hired the Grey Falcon of London in 1577 to sait to Middelburg;
in the same year he chartered the Pros- penty of Rye to Sluis in
Flanders and then on to Bruges. The refugee mer- chants also imported goods
from the Netherlands through Dunkirk, Flushing and Ostend. The use of a range
of Netherlands ports may have been due to the political difficulties which made
Antwerp inaccessible. Generally bags of hops and madder were imported but small
quantities of cloth also appear. ln .1575-76, for example, Arnoul le Clercq
imported 38 pieces of Ghentish cloth into Southampton and in addition English
merchants imported small quantities of says, Holland cloth and mockadoes.
Southampton's trade with the Netherlands was generally limited and declined
after 1580. It was not a trade which generally attracted the more important
merchants and even the refugees' direct trade with their homeland seems to have
been limited.
The town's trade with
the Baltic was also limited but reached its peak during the late 1570s. The
partnership of Etuer, Sohier and le Clercq
also played a role in this trade. The Peter of Hampton returned from
Danzig in August 1575 with a cargo of 9 lasts of pitch and tar, 50 bales of
flax, 1,500 lb of hemp and 20 kegs of eels. Similar cargoes were imported in
the Dove of Hampton in September 1579 and the Lyon of Hampton in
August 1581.
Like
many of the lesser merchants Arnoul le Clercq and Mathieu
Sohier were also involved in the cross-Channel trade with Northem
France. Occasionally cargoes were imported from Calais but their cargoes were
gener- ally similar to those which were imported from the Netherlands.
According to the port books, Arnoul le Clercq and Mathieu
Sohier seem to have been less actively involved in trade with Rouen than
the lesser merchants, Robert Cousin and Guillaume Hersent. Cousin imported a
variety of goods from Rouen which were often related to the production of the
'new draperies' such as teasels, woolcards and woad. He also imported small
quantities of Norm- andy canvas, vinegar, paper, prunes, rape oοl and, on one
occasion, a tun and one 'ponchion' of French wine, from Rouen and other Norman
ports. Cousin seems to have traded regularly until bis death in 1584. Hersent
also imported small quantities of vinegar, Normandy canvas, teasels etc. from
Norman ports but in particular he regularly imported woad from Caen. ln
1580-81, for example, he imported 56,000 lb of woad.
Le Clercq
and Sohier were more actively involved in
trade with St. Malo. The importation of canvas from Brittany represented a
significant element of Southampton's import trade until the mid-1580s. The
quantity of canvas imported by the refugee merchants seems to have varied. ln
1575-76 the refu- gee merchants do Dot seem to have imported any goods from St.
Malo. ln 1580-81 however Arnoul le Clercq imported 69! 'fardels' of vitry canvas,
3 'fardels' of Rumbelo canvas and a further 90 bolts of unspecified canvas from
St. Malo, as wel as 3,100 lb of prunes. The Breton
trade, however, generaily attracted the lesser merchants due to the lower costs involved; in
particular small-scale Southampton merchants and merchants from Salisbury and
the Channel Islands dominated the importation of canvas.
While
the refugee merchants imported a range of different goods to Southampton, they
had only one major export, the cloths of the 'new draperies'. Although the
export of the 'old draperies', in particular the Winton or Hampshire kerseys
reached its height in the 1570s, the refugee merchants rarely exported these
cloths. An analysis of the surviving Exchequer Port Books reveals the extent of
the trade in the 'new draperies' as well as the distribution of these exports.
The export of says and bays
increased rapid1y until 1579-80; the total number of says exported in that year
was twice the quantity exported in 1573- 74. The export of says declined in
1580-81 (which may be linked with the beginnings of the town's economic decline
in the early 1580s) and collapsed in 1583-84 to less than half the total in
1573-74. This collapse in exports was probably precipitated by the outbreak of plague,
which lasted from April 1583 through to April 1584 and caused seventy-one
deaths in the French community. The collapse also coincided with the departure
of Mathieu Sohier and Arnoul le Clercq from
Southampton. ln 1583-84, the refugee merchants exported a mere thirty-four
says, less than a third of the cloths of the 'new draperies' which were
exported.
The export of bays
from Southampton was dominated by non-refugee merchants. ln some years there
was a single large consignment of bays exported by one merchant, and this does
distort the figures. For example in 1575-76, William Merryvall of Salisbury
exported 55 bays to Bayonne. ln 1580-81, 50 bays were sent to the Azores by the
Southampton merchants Richard Biston, Edmund Caplin and John Crooke. It is
surprising that the refugee merchants did not become involved in the
exportation of bays, but before 1579 the principal markets for bays seem to
have been in areas such as Andalucia, Bayonne and the Azores, which were
dominated by the ιlite of Southampton merchants.
As can be seen from Table III; the
refugee merchants dominated the export of says. The table analyses the refugee
merchants' share of the export of says. ln 1573-74 the refugees exported 75.7
percent of the gays which left Southampton and 81.85 percent in 1578-79. The
refugees' share of the exports declined after 1578-79, even though the total
number of says exported peaked in 1579-80. The sharp fall in the refugees'
share of say exports in 1575-76 to a mere 45.8 percent of the total is intriguing.
Arnoul le Clercq's share of say exports fell to a mere 17.6 percent and may in
part account for the decline. However the fall may have been due to the
increase in the customs duties for refugees. Permission for the refugees to be
exempt from the higher strangers customs rate for goods produced by the new
techniques was for a period of seven years. Presumably this exemption ended in
1574 and they would have had to pay a higher rate for the export of says.
Consequently Southampton merchants were then able to export the cloths of the
'new draperies' more cheaply than the refugees. However any such faIl in the
refugees' share of say exports was temporary and they had clearly recovered
their dominance by 1578-79.
An
analysis of the surviving royal port books for 1567-85 reveals the distribution
of 'new drapery' exports from Southampton. Initially Spain and Portugal, in
1573-74, accounted for 15.8 percent of these exports but this had declined
rapidly. By 1580-81 it accounted for only 5.9 percent of say exports and at its
lowest point, a mere 2.2 percent. Although in 1573-74 le Clercq sent 37 says
and Sohier 8 says to Spain and Portugal, no
other refugee merchants were attracted to this trade. From this date the
refugees' exports to lberia declined, possibly as a result of the restoration
of the strangers' rate of customs which made it more difficult for the refugee merchants to compete in that market.
The English merchants generally maintained a steady trade in the 'new drapery'
cloths with Iberia but this was on a very small scale. ln particular they
exported significant quantities of bays; in 1573-74, 114 bays were exported
which accounted for 81.1 percent of total bay exports. The significance of
these bay exports also declined over this period. The exports to Iberia slumped
in 1578-79, possibly due to the establishment of the Spanish Company, although
the data for 1579-80 shows a recovery.
The export trade with
the Atlantic islands underwent similar changes. lnitially the refugee merchants
actively exported the 'new draperies' to the Azores and other Atlantic islands;
in 1573-74, le Clercq exported more says to the Atlantic islands than any other
merchant. However after that date, the refugee merchants ceased to be involved
in this trade which seems to have fallen to the English merchants who exported
says and in particular significant quantities of bays. Again the reason for
this may have been the restoration of the strangers' rate of customs.
The principal
destination for the 'new draperies' was France. The more lucrative trade was
with the ports of Western France, in particular Bordeaux and La Rochelle. In
this period this area accounted for between 15.6 percent and 32.6 percent of
the total number of says which were exported. Small quantities of bays were
exported to South Western France, principally to Bayonne. La Rochelle and
Bordeaux were both important for the import of wine to Southampton and the
export of the 'new drapery' cloths represented the other half of this trade for
the refugee merchants. Arnoul le Clercq and Mathieu
Sohier were the major exporters of says to these ports. By 1579-80 other
refugee merchants had also begun to export cloth. Le Clercq's son-in-Iaw, Jean
le Mercier, exported says to Bordeaux and La Rochelle; two other Southampton
refugees, Gaspard Desert and Peter Pochι, also exported small quantities to
Bordeaux. Previously English mercnants had exported the '0ld draperies' as well
as quantities of tin, wax and lead to these ports but they gradually began to
encroach upon the refugees' domination
of say exports.In 1580-81, English merchants exported more says than the
refugee merchants to La Rochelle and Bordeaux.
The
ports of Northem France generally attracted the lesser merchants presumably
because this trade required less capital. However the level of trade was
significant and in some years was the principal destination for say exports.
The cloths were exported to several Norman ports: Dieppe, Caen, Rouen,
Honfleur, Quillebeuf-sur-Ie-Seine and Le Havre. The volume of these exports
fluctuated during this period. ln 1573-74, 19.1 percent (64 says) of the total
number of says exported from Southampton sent to Northem France. This increased
to 62 percent (319! says) in 1578-79 only to faIl to 22.8 percent (146 says) in
1580-81. This trade was dominated by the refugees and generally only negligible
quantities were exported by non-refugee merchants. Although le Clercq and Sohier were actively involved in this trade,
significant quantities of the 'new draperies' were also exported by other refugees. ln
1579-80, Sohier and le Clercq accounted for
33.9 percent of the says exported to Northem France but other refugee merchants
exported 65.3 percent of the says. In this cross-Channel trade, two principal
merchants stand out: Guillaume Hersent and Robert Cousin. Generally, however,
the quantities of says exported by these other refugee merchants were quite
modest.
Rouen was one of the destinations
for cloth exported to Northem France. Goods sent to this city had to be sold
immediately after unloading unless a congι was obtained from the
municipal authorities permitting the merchants to store their goods. Since many
Spanish, Italian and Flemish merchants tended to avoid the need to apply for congιs
by retaining legally resident factors in Rouen, the majority of the congιs
refer to English merchants. Although merchants from Southampton were
amongst those who applied for congιs from the Rouen authorities, only
three congιs refer to the refugee merchants. This suggests that the
refugees either sold their goods immediately on arrival in Rouen or that they
exploited their contacts in Rouen's 'Flemish' community. Jehan le Mesureur may
have acted as a factor; certainly he arranged a congι on behalf of
Arnoul le Clercq and Mathieu Sohier, in
which he was described as a 'stippulant, (A 'stippulanf" was
probably a broker.) In a congι authorised in June 1572, the merchants
stored their goods at the home of Richard le Nud's widow who may have passed
through Southampton in 1569. The final congι was issued to Robert Cousin
in November 1575.82 The value of the congιs as a source for studying
Rouen trade declines from the mid-1570s onwards, as the information they
contain becomes less detailed.
Significant
quantities of the 'new draperies' were also exported to Brittany and the
Channel Islands during this period. Initially the refugee merchants were not
attracted to this trade, but by 1580-81 they exported 59.3 per cent of the says
sent to Brittany and the Channel Islands. The cloths were principally exported to
St. Malo with smaller quantities of cloths being sent to Morlaix and
Nantes.
Only negligible
quantities of the 'new draperies' were exported to the-Netherlands. Le Clercq
and Sohier were the only merchants who
exported cloths there but even so it remained a very small part of their export
trade.This should not perhaps be surprising in view of the political situation
in the Netherlands but also because the 'new drapery' cloths were produced
there anyway. In fact, Orange had reluctantly granted the Merchant Adventurers
in 1573 safe passage for four ships to sail along the Scheldt estuary, which
was controlled by the rebels, to Antwerp so long as they only contained English
produce and not the 'new draperies' which would compete with the Dutch
textile industry.
The 'Flemish'
community in Rouen seems to have attracted several of the early refugee
settlers in Southampton. Indeed some of these merchants may have had earlier
links with Rouen for there were trading links between that city and both
Antwerp and Valenciennes. Henri de Beaulieu, who stood as the god-father for
bis nephew Jean de Beaulieu in 1570, apparently migrated to Rouen. Similarities
in the heraldry of the de Beaulieus and the fact that the Rouen Henri de
Beaulieu originated from Valenciennes, suggest that the sponsor in Southampton
and bis namesake in Rouen were in fact one and the same person. He had been the
factor of Claude Sohier and settled in Rouen
from about 1568 onwards where he may have remained during the disorders in the
Netherlands. In June 1571 Henri de Beaulieu became a naturalised Frenchman. He
took an active part in Rouen's commercial life and by 1576 was described as a
citizen of Rouen. Pierre de Beaulieu, the brother of Jean and , Henri de
Beaulieu, also appears to have settled in Rouen. He had been admitted to the
first Lord's Supper in Southampton, but was active in Rouen
between 1570 and
1572.
Nicholas
Dorville was another exile who settled in Rouen after being admitted to the
Lord's Supper in Southampton in 1567. He traded with Rouen and was described in
March 1571 as being resident in England but by November, Dorville had settled
in Rouen. He was also involved in commerce with Henri de Beaulieu. Dorville's
uncle, Jehan le Mesureur also migrated to Rouen where in February 1572 he
arranged a congι on behalf of Arnoul le Clercq and Mathieu Sohier. Dorville was not recorded again in
Southampton after December 1567 and the final entry relating to le Mesureur is
dated 18 July 1568.
The migration to Rouen began very
soon after the establishment of the exile community in Southampton. Other
refugee merchants traded for slightly longer before leaving the town. In May
1571 Jean de Beaulieu claimed that he had 'occupied and used the makinge of
bayes & sayes and nothinge ells' but 'for theise iiij or v monthes space he
hathe litle or nothinge tradid the makinge of bayes and sayes as before'. Yet
according to the town's petty customs books, he had been actively involved in
the town's trade before 1570. De Beaulieu seems to have migrated soon after
1571, for in that year he was assessed for the lay subsidy and paid bis 'stall
& art' dues and was described in October as being resident in 'Hampton,.
Although he apparently had lodgings in London by May 1571, he does not appear
in any of the surveys of aliens made in the capital. A similar move to London
was made by de Beaulieu's brother Augustin although his name does periodically
reappear in the Southampton archives.
The
impact of such merchants on the economy of Southampton was limited when set
beside the contribution of merchants like Arnoul le Clercq and Mathieu Sohier who traded from Southampton
throughout the 1570s. By the early 1580s Southampton had begun to experience
economic difficulties. In 1582 an account of the decayed state of Southampton
was written by an anonymous author. After recounting the town's prosperity
earlier in the sixteenth century, the author went on to identify the reasons
for Southampton's decline. He stated that:
The
most part of our Merchants were nowe become rych and so taryed at home taking
their rest, and in their places sett yong men to the seas for their factors,
trusting them with great stockes: so that these factors in short rime by their
factorshippes and provision allowed them, gott good sommes of money, and fell
to occupying for them selves lustely: but in shorter tyme then they had to gett
this wealth, by lusteness, banquetting and gamming, they spent away all their
owne, and yet were so bolde with their Masters as to consume their substance,
and so brought them home such accomptes as manie of them feele the smarte
therof unto this daye. ln this article you must understande that after a man
bath borne anie good office in the towne, it is some discredit unto him to goe
any more to the seas, but must srill tarie at home & keepe some state and
countenance. This case and state ys manie rimes dearly bought.
The author clearly
had some particular merchants in mind when he wrote this moralistic attack
though the reference to holding municipal office would suggest that the refugee
merchants were not amongst the accused.
The memorialist went
on to identify piracy as a more pressing problem, as weIl as the trade in prize
goods. He wrote:
For these eight or
tenne yeares last past pyrates have styll haunted about these costes, who have
not only taken manie ships bounden into this port and sold away their
commodities . . . to the great hindrance of our Merchants. . . [they] have also
robbed and spoyled many of our Merchants even at their owne dores, & so
sold away their good as it were before their owne faces, to the undoing of many
which shall never be able to recover themselves againe.
Piracy was certainly something which affected the refugee merchants
directly. Some refugees such as Jean de Beaulieu were actively involved in
financing the operations of the Sea Beggars and benefited from the trade in
prize goods. Other Southampton merchants, possibly including the refugees,
merely traded in the prize goods auctioned at Meadhole. While dealing in prize
goods could be lucrative, piracy damaged trade. A petition came before the
Privy Council in 1575 concerning the Black Raven which had been carrying
£.1,000 worth of goods for Arnoul le Clercq, Richard Etuer and one Roger Perrye
of Poole when it was attacked by Portuguese pirates. Unfortunately the
appropriale port book has not survived so it is impossible to identify the
cargo or the ship's destination. The merchants obtained letters of reprisaI
'for the staie of certein Portingalls' goodes in recompense of the losse of a
ship called the BlackRaven . . . spoiled by the subjectes of the Kinge of
Portingall'. A ship called the Flying Ghost was seized together with its cargo of salt.
However Andrew Ruiz, based at Nantes and a member of the prominent Spanish
merchant family, claimed that the cargo of salt belonged to him. The dispute
was still unresolved in February 1577. This is the only recorded case of
refugee merchants having experienced financial losses and difficulties as a
result of piracy but given the prevalence of freebooters in this period, it
would be surprising if this experience was unprecedented.
The Spanish trade was of particular
importance for the town's economy but with the establishment of the Spanish
Company in 1577 the memorialist suggests that trade became increasingly
restricted. While this may have been the case, the Southampton merchants were
not entirely excluded from the trade with Spain as has been sometimes implied.
In fact when the Company was established in 1577 twenty-six Southampton
merchants were listed as founder members, including Richard Etuer who had close
links with the refugee community. Furthermore it was possible for ports such as
Yarmouth to continue to trade with the Iberian peninsula ignoring the monopoly
of the Spanish Company. In view of the limited trade that the refugee merchants
had with Spain and Portugal before 1577, the establishment of the Company
probably did not seriously affect their business interests.
The
refugees with their burden of a higher rate of customs duties after 1574 may
have experienced financial difficulties as a result of the farming of customs
duties. The farming of customs was certainly another complaint made by the
anonymous memorialist in 1582 who implied that this resulted in the stricter
collection of the customs. Whether this had any great impact is unclear because
apart from several specific instances of fraud, the port books seem generally
to have been reliable.
These problems may
have contributed to the economic decline of Southampton but in any event Arnoul
le Clercq and Mathieu Sohier left
Southampton in 1583. Le Clercq made a 'stall & art' payment of 20s
in 1582 and in the following year exported three consignments of cloth from
Southampton. In July 1582, however, le Clercq had appointed Jean le Mercier as
his attorney for collecting and paying debts. Le Clercq migrated to Middelburg
although he does not seem to have become a member of the Walloon church in the
town. He exported cargoes of herrings to Southampton from Middelburg in 1585
and 1586 and a further cargo of raisins in April 1587. Two of these cargoes
were transported in the Flying Dave of Hampton, a ship which le Clercq
had used white he was living in Southampton and which he again hired when he
was in Middelburg in December 1585.
ln
1583 Mathieu Sohier made a payment of 6s
8d for his 'stall & art' dues; this is the last reference to him
living in Southampton. A 'Duch' merchant called Mathieu Sohier was recorded in a survey of
strangers in London in 1583 as living in Walbrooke ward in the company of a
distant relative and prosperous merchant, Guido Malapert. Although Sohier continued occasionally to import and export
goods through Southampton, he remained in London until his death in 1605
The Refugees and Overseas Trade, c.
1585-c. 1595
The econornic decline of Southampton in the early 1580s was exacerbated by the political situation in the Netherlands and the renewaI of war against Spain. ln the Netherlands, the Company of Merchant Adventurers had left Antwerp for the relative safety of Middelburg in October 1582. Antwerp surrendered to Parma's forces in August 1585 and further anxiety was caused amongst the Merchant Adventurers by the Spanish capture of Sluis, which threatened the island of WaIcheren. These events combined with the difficulties being experienced at Emden, the Company's German mart, resulted in a faIl in the export of English cloth. The consequent unemployment amongst the clothworkers was exacerbated by the poor harvest of 1586. The combination of social crisis and heightened anxiety about possible Spanish attack may have played some part in the Hampshire Beacon Plot of 1586 when a group of plotters, who included several weavers and tailors, intended to loot barns and storehouses for grain. The crisis of 1586-87 ended with the Merchant Adventurers' establishment of a suitable outlet for English cloths at Stade. The significance of such a dislocation for Southampton's commerce is debatable as the trade with the Netherlands was of only rninor importance during Elizabeth's reign.
As
a result of Parma's reconquest of Brabant and Flanders, which culminated with
the faIl of Antwerp in August 1585, Elizabeth concluded the Treaty of Nonsuch
by which she agreed to provide assistance openly to the Dutch cause. This
disrupted not only trade with the Netherlands but aIso with Spain. The
situation worsened when Philip Il seized English ships in December 1585, in
reprisaI for Drake's actions in the Caribbean. With the renewal of civil war in
France trade became more difficult as the west coast of France and the Channel
became the haunt of pirates.
The
disruption of trade with Iberia and the Atlantic islands bore much more heavily
on Southampton than the difficulties in the Netherlands. The trade with Spain
had been an important element of the town's prosperity until the outbreak of
hostilities when it generaIly ceased. A lirnited degree of trade was maintained
by alien merchants using alien ships, in some cases with the protection of the
English authorities. Commerce with the Azores was also technicaIly affected
following the annexation of the Portuguese kingdom and empire by Philip II in
1580 but a regular trade does seem to have continued, in spite of losses
through privateering.
Privateering became
an important element of the town's trade during the Spanish war. Merchants,
such as John Crooke, John Errington and Richard Goddard, had all been actively
involved in trade with Spain and the Atlantic Islands but finding this trade
disrupted by war, resorted to privateering in order to obtain their imports.
One of the largest shipowners in Southampton Henry Ughtred, received letters of
reprisal from the Duke of Anjou in 1582 authorising him to equip three ships to
sail against the Spaniards at Peru and 'other islands'. One of his ships, the Susan
Fortune attacked the Portuguese fishing fteet off Newfoundland that summer.
One ship which was taken as a prize during this period, was the Jacques of
Dieppe with its cargo which belonged to one Nicholas
Sohier of Rye, presumably a relative of Mathieu
Sohier's brother Comille. Privateering became an important element in
Southampton's economy and was probably partly responsible for the revival in
trade between 1592 and 1596. It seems that there was also a brief recovery in
the town's trade with France and the Channel Islands in the early 1590s but
this faded by the end of the century.
Between
1585 and 1595, only one refugee merchant, Jean le Mercier, matched the activity
of le Clercq and Mathieu Sohier in the
town's overseas trade. Le Mercier originated from Tournai and was the son of
Franηois Cocquiel dit le Merchier, a prominent Calvinist merchant who had
migrated to Antwerp and was associated with the Sohiers.
He first appeared in Southampton in 1579 when he married the daughter of Arnoul
le Clercq. Le Mercier first became involved in Southampton's overseas trade in
the early 1580s. He exported 18 says to Bordeaux in September 1580 and the
following month a further 14 says were sent to La Rochelle; in August 1584 he
exported 6 gays to St. Malo with Arnoul le Clercq. But it was not until 1585
that le Mercier played a prominent part in the town's trade. However le
Mercier's commercial connections were not as extensive as those of bis
father-in-law, Arnoul le Clercq, or those of Mathieu
Sohier, but this may in part have been due to the foreign situation.
Although le Mercier
does not seem to have traded with Spain, he apparently imported one cargo of
green woad from the Azores in 1588. He imported wine from Bordeaux, as weIl as
raisins and prunes on occasion, and salt from La Rochelle. Trade with these
ports even attracted one of the town's smaller merchants whose trade was
normally confined to Northern France. Guillaume Hersent imported bay salt,
dates and oats from La Rochelle in 1588-89. Le Mercier's trade with South
Western France does seem to have been less frequent than that of le Clercq and Sohier but again this may have been due to the
political situation. In fact it became necessary to protect the wine fleet to
Bordeaux with a convoy against pirates, which was financed by a levy imposed on
the imported goods.
Le Mercier traded
regularly with Middelburg with several cargoes being imported each year. It is
unclear what, if any, links there were between le Mercier and le Clercq who had
migrated to Middelburg in 1583. Le Mercier imported goods which had been
produced or manufactured in the Netherlands such as hops, madder, rape oil and
'Holland linings' but he also imported goods which were redistributed through
Middelburg in particular sack wine but also pitch and tar, cables and tarred
ropes from the Baltic. Trade with the Low Countries was however always liable
to disruption on account of the war there.
.
Trade
with the ports of Western France only graduaIly recovered from their low point
in 1583-84. ln 1580-81,209 says had been exported there but this total was not
exceeded until 1588-89 when 471! says were exported from Southampton to these
ports. To an extent this disruption may have been due to the dangers caused to
shipping by the renewal of piracy in this area after 1585. Arnoul le Clercq and
Mathieu Sohier had played an important rloe
in this trade before they left Southampton in 1583 but generally the
consignments sent to La Rochelle and Bordeaux before 1588-89 were exported by
substantial Southampton merchants such as John Crooke and George Heaton. Sohier did, however, still continue to export some
cloths, as did Richard Etuer, through Southampton although he was now resident
in London. The refugees' share of the 'new drapery' cloths which were exported
to these ports graduaIly increased so that by 1590-91 they were responsible for
66.8 percent of the says exported to the Western French ports and by 1593-94
this had increased to 81.4 percent of says. Le Mercier began again to export
cloths to these ports front 1587-88 and the totals increased to 165 says by
1593-94. However by this date other refugee merchants such as Claude Moutonnier
and Pierre le Gay had also begun to export significant quantities of the 'new
draperies' to these ports. Other members of the French cornmunity also exported
smaIler quantities. For example Jean Hersent exported 145 says to La Rochelle
in 1593-94, Balthasar des Maistres exported 86 says, Charles Heslin 60 says,
Daniel Seulin 27 says and Peter Pochι exported 16 says. The latter four
merchants sent aIl of the cloths which they exported during that year to La
Rochelle.
La Rochelle was
certainly the principal destination for 'new drapery' exports in Western
France, with 1,120 of the 1,185 says exported to these ports being sent to that
city. .A variety of cloths was exported to
La Rochelle by English merchants but those exports front Southampton seem to
have been particularly prized. The trade however remained in the hands of
English merchants with the cloths being sold to the La Rochelle merchants by commissionaires
who were resident in the town. By the end of the sixteenth century one of
these commissionaires was Charles Heslin. Heslin had become increasingly
involved in exporting cloths to Western France and by January 1599 had migrated
to La Rochelle. ln 1624 Daniel Hersent had two resident factors in La Rochelle.
The settlement of an agent in the town perhaps reflects the importance of this
cloth trade with La Rochelle for the refugee community by the end of the
century.
While the trade in
the 'new draperies' with La Rochelle prospered, the cross- Channel trade with
the Northern French ports of Normandy declined. Only in 1593-94 did the total
number of gays exceed the totals reached in 1580-81 and even this was below the
peak of 319,5 gays in 1578-79. In that year 62 percent of the total number of
say exported were sent to Northern French ports but in 1593-94 they accounted
for a mere 8.2 percent of say exports.In 1588-89 no cloths at all were recorded
as exported to these ports perhaps as a result of the royal proclamation
forbidding exports not only to Norman ports but also to those of Picardy and
Brittany.
.
Conclusion
The refugee merchants
clearly made a substantial contribution to Southampton's overseas trade in the
second half of the sixteenth century. While there were a number of small
traders who regularly engaged in the cross-Channel tradee, the principal
benefit to Southampton's economy came from a very small group of prominent
merchants: Arnoul le Clercq, Mathieu Sohier
and Jean le Mercier. In importing goods to Southampton, these merchants were
generally engaged in a similar trade to the indigenous Southampton merchants.
However their most important contribution was in the development of a new
export trade, the 'new draperies'. These merchants rarely encroached upon the
types of goods exported by Southampton merchants. Refugee merchants were
responsible for on average about 70 percent of the says exported from
Southampton between 1573 and 1580. The merchants' contribution to Southampton's
overseas trade was however tempered by war and plague as
..
Initially
some members of the stranger communities in London and Sandwich retumed to the
Netherlands to purchase yarn. One Cool Boye often returned to Tournai while a
refugee from Sandwich went to purchase yarn at Tourcoing. A certain Franηois
Ente, who had been banished from the Netherlands, had been seen buying yarn in
Armentiθres. There is no evidence to suggest that the refugees in Southampton
made similar journeys to the Netherlands to purchase yarn, perhaps because of
the distances involved. Arnoul le Clercq, Mathieu Sohier,
Augustin de Beaulieu, Jean de Beaulieu and Robert Cousin occasionally imported
sacks of wool, but there is no evidence about where these sacks originated. At
Norwich small quantities of finer grades of wool were imported but generally
these seem to have been brought to the city by sea from London.
Evidence
of this entrepreneur/merchant form of industrial organisation can also be seen
in the Southern Netherlands as weIl as in the manufacture of the 'new
draperies' in England.
Two forms of
organisation can be discerned in the production of the 'new draperies' in
Southampton. Initially the 'new draperies' were manufactured by households, a
group of workmen organised under their master. By the early seventeenth century,
merchants as weIl as those involved in the finishing processes, bought cloth
which was dyed and finished before being exported. This form of organisation of
the cloth industry may indeed have existed from the establishment of the
community. Refugees such as le Clercq, Sohier
and de Beaulieu were not only actively involved in the town's overseas trade,
exporting the 'new draperies', but also manufactured these cloths. ln
Valenciennes, from where these men had originated, the wealthier marchands
de saye seem to have operated their own workshops as weIl as trading in the
finished cloths. The entrepreneur/merchant system was weIl established by the
early seventeenth century. Entrepreneurs such as Jean Rochefort and Robert le
Page, were involved in the manufacture of the 'new draperies', as weIl playing
a prominent foie in the town's overseas trade.
.
In 1584 a delegation was sent from
the French Church which included Walerand Thevelin, Mathieu
Sohier, Guillaume Hersent and Pierre le Gay to congratulate Home's
successor, Thomas Cooper, on rus appointment as Bishop of Winchester.
They asked the Bishop to continue to look favourably on maintaining their
church as rus predeηessor had done.
The provincial
churches therefore seem to have enjoyed a degree of independence before
the adoption of the single discipline and the regular meeting of colloquies.
The churches occasionally sought advice from London or else other churches
might request assistance or information. The colloquies however became more influential
and the refugee churches came to be bound by their decisions. The brethren of
So:uthampton were urged by the Colloquy in 1581 to visit Rye 'pour coriger
tels vices qu'ils rangent a la Discipline comme les autres Eglises'. In
1610, the church was rebuked for failing to introduce mereaux (tokens)
for those who were to be admitted to the Lord's Supper after this had been
agreed upon by the colloquy. The decline of the church's independence clearly
coincided with the congregation's increasing financial dependence on the
Threadneedle Street Church.
The exile churches
had long standing links with the continental churches, these contacts seem to
have been closer with the Walloon churches in the Netherlands than with the
Reformed churches in France. Anthoine Lescaillet represented the Walloon
churches at the Synod of Dordrecht in 1578 and at Middelburg in 1581.58 There
is no record of a minister being sent to the meetings of the French
National Synods; their contact with the exile churches was limited and
generally confined to the French church in London. The Frenchspeaking
provincial churches generally looked to the Netherlands whereas in London the
French influence was much stronger. The colloquies sought to establish their
position vis ΰ vis the continental churches, with appeals that these
churches should not recognise those who retumed to the continent without a
testimony from their churches. The colloquy even wrote to the Synods of France
and the Low Countries 'pour rafrκchir la memoire de l'union que nous avons
avec eus en Doctrine et gouvernement de l'Eglise,.
In Southampton the
church was govemed by the consistory which maintained discipline within the
community. The consistory had been formed before the first administration of
the Lord's Supper in December 1567 and may have existed as early as September
1567 when Robert Home referred in a letter to the 'minister and eldres of that
churche'. There is only a partial record of the membership of the consistory
but initially there seem to have been five eIders and two deacons. The number
of deacons may have increased because in 1589 there is a reference to 'two of
the deakens of the frenche churche'. By the early eighteenth century there
were three deacons and four eIders, who were bath members of the consistory
until the office of deacon was abolished in 1706. Besides the consistory
there is a single refer- ence to a 'Lecteur' in Southampton in 1618.
The consistory was
composed of the most prominent members of the exile community. At different
rimes the leading refugee merchants (Arnoul le Clercq, Mathieu
Sohier, Jean le Mercier, Pierre le Gay and Jean Hersent) were all
members of the consistory. They had the wealth and status to provide the
community with the necessary leadership through the consistory . However
this fairly oligarchical composition
should perhaps be expected in such a small community. There was also a
remarkable degree of consistency in the compo- sition of the consistory; for
example, Guillaume Hersent is recorded as being a member of the consistory in
1573, 1580, 1584 and bis son Jean Hersent was recorded as a member in 1589,
1598, 1606, 1610 and 1615. The initial mem- bers of the consistory were
predominantly Walloon: Jehan le Mesureur (who had been a member of the Valenciennes
proto-consistory in 1561), Arnoul le Clercq, Mathieu
Sohier aIl originated from Valenciennes and were in fact cousins. Marc
le Blanc who was a deacon also came from Valenciennes while Anthoine Jurion, an
eIder, came from Hainaut. Although the departure of le Clercq and Sohier from Southampton in c. 1583
undoubtedly resulted in some changes in the composition of the consistory, the
Walloon influence continued. By 1589, Pierre le Gay, Jean le Mercier and
Vincent Nιrin of Valenciennes had become members of the consistory. Although
the Walloon character of the consistory was retained through such figures,
French refugees did become members of the consistory. The earliest being
Gaspard Desert of Dieppe who was recorded as an eIder in 1573; the Hersents,
Estienne Latelais and Claude Moutonnier are further examples.
.
Marriage was another area of concern for the consistory. The procedures for the betrothal, the reading of the banns and the wedding were aIl carefully defined by des Gallars' Discipline and later by the Synod of Emden in 1571. In particular the need for obedience to one's parents and the need for their consent in the case of minors was emphasised. Marriages contracted without permission were declared void.
The Southampton
consistory had to deal with several disputes concerning betrothals. ln 1580 Jan
le Vasseur and Perronne Jorre were betrothed in the house of the Mayor, Bernard
Courtmill, in the company of the Archbishop's Lieutenant, Mathieu Sohier, Richard Etuer and Jan Ric. The
couple made their promises of marriage after the invocation of the name of God
by Walerand Thevelin, then their banns were to be read on three Sundays,
following the established custom. However when the marriage took place
three months later, the entry commented 'deuant que le presche fut acheuι
s'en fuit hors le temple, et la Ville, et le pais, Abandonnant sa femme.
Mariage fet par Justice et force du costι de Jan'
.
Privateering persisted in the Southampton
area into the 1590s, attracting on occasion merchants and members of the local
gentry, such as Sir Henry Ughtred, and became an important element of the
town's cornmercial life.There are however few references to the continuing
links between the refugee cornmunity and privateering. A certain Sohier of Rye, perhaps the brother of Mathieu Sohier, combined trading with La Rochelle
and the Spanish peninsula with spying and privateering. He was given letters
permitting him 'to goe to the coast of Spaine to discover there the preparacon
by sea which we thought a thinge verie necessarie for manie respects'. Sohier had however abused his letters of
safe-passage by attacking several French ships and then using the letters to
avoid arrest. In 1577 a dispute arose concerning Machuel Massicot who was
described as being a Southampton merchant stranger, who had redeemed a ship
together with its cargo which had been taken by privateers to St. Helen's Point
off the Isle of Wight. Generally the refugee merchants, in particular Jean le
Mercier, were more actively involved in the purchase of prize goods and also
smuggling goods from Northern France.
..
.. according to an ordinance from
the Corporation in 1553 strangers were obliged to sell canvas in that hall. The
refugees may have been required to sell their cloth in some other hall for in
1574 the Court Leet complained that Mathieu Sohier,
Arnoul le Clercq and 'others that make serge and estamell Dot to sell the same
by Retaile for we are enformed that they doo se1l many & dyvers tymes by
retaile'. The allegation was repeated in 1575. The complaints may relate to
some unidentified regulations concerning the sale of the 'new draperies' or may
simply reflect the more general hostility about the retail sale of goods by
'strangers".
.
. The concem to
prevent the erosion of the town's privileges led the Corporation to pursue a
legal action against a London merchant and in 1607 to obtain an
Act of Parliament which confirmed a charter of Henry VI, in particular 'restrayninge aIl
Marchants not beinge free of the Liberties of ci the said Towne, to buy or to sell
any manner of Merchandize within the Same Liberties therof'. None of the
French community contributed towards the legal costs for
obtaining this statute.
The Corporation was
however prepared to sell licences to members of the French community to aIlow
them to pursue trades from which they were
excluded under the terms of the original settlement. Furthermore licences
were sold that permitted the refugees to breach the town ordinances. Mathieu Sohier paid 40s in 1582-83 'for licence to sell certaine myllstonnes'
and in 1571-72, l0s was 'Re. of a frentche man for lysens to sell three
tonns of ffrentche wynns which he could not sell in the Towne'. Pierre Thieudet
paid 40s in 1572-73 'for lycencinge him to open bis shoppe windowes'.
Probably the most significant concession was granted to Jean le Mercier who was
fined in July 1587 'for that he had solde certaine canvais and raisons &
browne paper beinge forraine bought and solde to Bartholomew yatt of newberrye
and to divers other & for leaue to sell freelye tyll michelmas by the
consent of the whole magestratts'. Mercier was fined £6 13s 4d; during
the following mayoralty, £6 13s 4d was received from Mercier 'for a
fine'. These fines seem to have, in effect, acted as a licence to trade
although the payments are not recorded in every year. This compounding is
confirmed in 1588-89, when it was noted that le Mercier's payment gave him
leave to buy and sell his commodities as in Mr. Studley's time.
..
Although
there were some wealthy members of the French church such as Jean de Beaulieu, Mathieu Sohier and Arnoul le Clercq, they do not
appear to have forged links with the burgesses beyond their business contacts.
..
The lay
subsidy returns provide a clearer impression of the distribution of the
refugees. ln 1571 the wealthiest refugees were scattered around the town: Jean
de Beaulieu and Robert Cousin lived in the ward of Holy Rood; Emery Durant and
Jan de Bavais in the ward of St. Lawrence and Gilles Seulin in the ward of AlI
Saints. A similar pattern can be seen in the exile community at Norwich. The
wealthier members of the community seem to have lived amongst the wealthier
native inhabitants, although there were exceptions: Mathieu
Sohier and Arnoul le Clercq bath resided in the ward of SS. Michael
& John where some of the poorest members of the community lived. Twenty-seven
aliens were recorded as merely paying a polI contribution in the lay subsidy.
This ward also contained the highest number of undertenants and so presumably the
cheapest accommodation. There were also more substantial properties within the
ward including the West Hall, which Mathieu Sohier
leased at £12 per annum from 1570. In fact, Mathieu
Sohier was recorded as having six undertenants in this ward in 1578 and
1579.76 By 1599 the wealthier members of the community were similarly scattered
around the town but the poorer members of the community had also corne to live
in the ward of Holy Rood (24 aliens were recorded as making only polI
contributions) as well as the ward of SS. Michael & John (15 polI contributions).
Relations
between the refugee community and their hasts therefore seem to have been
relatively cordial. Yet curiously when the Queen visited Southampton for
several days in 1591, the refugees were for reasons unknown not able to gain
access to the Queen in order to thank her for the protection which she had
afforded the community and were obliged to express their thanks outside the
town. The Queen 'respondit
fort humainement louant Dieu de qu'il luy donnoit puissance de recueillir et
faire bien aux poures estrangers, et disant qu'elle scauoit bien que les
prieres desdits seruoyent beaucoup sa Conseruation'.
..
Exiles
also remembered their relatives and property overseas when it came to drawing
up their wills. Robert Cousin bequeathed to his sister living in Tournai £200
together with 'my bedd furnished, and the moictie of aIl the lynnen that
serveth for to' be used in my howse'. Other refugees claimed property that they
had left overseas and so continued to bequeath it in their wills, although
their estates may weIl have been confiscated by the Conseil des Troubles. Gilles
Seulin referred in his will to a farmn in Hainaut and further references to
property overseas were made by Guillaume Coppin and Mathieu
Sohier in wills drawn up after they had migrated from Southampton.
lndeed Jane Seneschal gave her son power of attorney to recover property at
Armentiθres in 1576.
..
Five marriages were
recorded as having taken place in the parish churches. The first such marriage
took place in 1585 and may be attributed to the community's temporary lack of a
rninister. The children from this marriage were baptised in the French church
between 1588 and 1596. The baptisms of the sons of another couple married
outside the French Church were recorded in the church's register, suggesting
that the couple were reconciled with the church. However, there is no further
reference in the Registre to the three other such marriages. Pierre
Thieudet obtained a marriage licence in order to marry Elizabeth Clement of
Dibden in 1609, but there is no reference to the marriage in the records of the
French church.
Although
language was a significant barrier between the townspeople and the refugees, it
bas been suggested that it could also provide an indicator of the gradual
integration of the French community. This can be exarmined through the language
used in wills, although wills can be problematic as they are not always written
by the testator; Walerand Thevelin, for example, occasionally acted as a
scribe. The wills of Jane Sohier [Jehanne de
Caignoncle] (1569), Francois Bourgayse (1583) and Georgette Loys (1583) were
aIl written in French. The will of Anthoine Jurion (1578) was translated from
French by John Vovert in Southampton while Dionysius le Blanq translated into
English the will of Robert Cousin in 1584. It is interesting to note that the
will of Gilles Seulin for which Walerand Thevelin had acted as the amanuensis
in 1583 survives in the records of the Prerogative Court of Canterbury in
English without any note that it had been translated. Later wills tended to be
written in English, although the wills of Jean Rochefort (1606) and Robert le
Page (1612) were both written in French. Rochefort had only joined the French
Church in December 1594. The will of Mathieu Sohier,
one of the initial settlers in Southampton, was also written in French in 1593
after he had rnigrated to London.lol Perhaps the use of French was more common
in a large community such as existed at London, than in Southampton.
.
These
WaIloon and French distinctions survived in Southampton for a long time. At
first this was no doubt due to the domination of the close-knit WaIloon
oligarchy. Arnoul le Clercq and Mathieu Sohier
were not only the leading refugee merchants but they also played an important
rτle in the religious life of the community as members of the consistory.
Although the Walloon influence was weakened by their departure and the influx
of French refugees, it still persisted.16 The distinction between the WaIloon
and French refugees was most clearly identified in the community's marriage
patterns.
The refugee merchants
played a significant rτle in the town's overseas trade. Although they could not
compete with the wealthiest Southampton merchants, exiles such as Arnoul le
Clercq, Mathieu Sohier and Jean le Mercier
not only contributed to the town's established trade, they also opened up new
areas of trade. These merchants dominated the exports of the 'new draperies'
and developed markets for these cloths in Western France.
1604 marks a
tuming-point for the Southampton community. The exiles had played an active
roIe in the town's commercial life although by the early seventeenth century
they no longer dominated the 'new draperies'. As in other communities, the
process of assimilation and the retum of exiles to the continent, served
steadily to weaken the community. This decline accelerated after 1604, probably
in part due to the impact of the plague epidemic of 1604 which resulted in more
than 150 deaths. In spite of the influx of refugees from the Ile de Rι in 1628,
by 1635 there were only an estimated thirty-six members of the congregation.
The church had been experiencing financial difficulties since about 1610 and
during the first half of the seventeenth century became increasingly dependent
on the Threadneedle Street church for financial support.
The
weakness of the Southampton church was revealed by their response to the
attacks made by Archbishop Laud upon the privileges of the foreign churches.
Laud had a general policy to establish total religious conformΞty in the
Anglican Church, and he regarded the quasi-independent 'stranger' churches as
an anachronism hich merely served to encourage the English Puritans. In April
1634, representatives of the exile churches of Kent (Canterbury, Sandwich and
Maidstone) were summoned and questioned as to their liturgy, the number of
their members who had been born in England and whether or not these members
attended their parish church. A synod of aIl the exile churches was held in
order to discuss Laud's attack upon their privileges. The Southampton church
lacked the money to send a delegate to this meet- ing.
ln June 1635, the
Archbishop's Vicar-General, Sir Nathaniel Brent, visited the French church in
Southampton and questioned the minister, Daniel Sauvage. As in the case of the
'stranger' churches in Kent, he was questioned about the church's liturgy and
how many members of the church were born in England. Of the fifteen heads of
families who attended the church only six were aliens, the remainder were
natives of England. Brent therefore ordered these natives to attend their
parish churches. The congregation briefly resisted but in October obeyed
Brent's order. Southampton was the only foreign church which submitted to
Laud's attack upon their privileges.
The status quo was
restored on Laud's downfall and Sauvage continued to serve the church until his
death in 1655. By then the French church must have seemed like a relic from a
by-gone age for it had lost much of its raison d'κtre. The community which it
had been designed to serve had faded away as members drifted back to the
continent or entered the local parish churches. There was little need for a
separate church conducting services in the French language and the paucity of
entries in the Registre are suggestive of a congregation in terminal
decline. The sudden influx of French Huguenots, fleeing from the religious
persecution of Louis XIV from the 1660s transformed the circumstances of the
French church in Southampton.
It is perhaps ironic that the
refugees, so keenly sought by the town in 1567 and who had made such an
important contribution to the economy of the town, should have left so little
to remind us of their passage. Even the street names such as French Street and
Rochelle Lane recall the presence of the medieval French-speaking community.
Few of those who today visit the French church at God's House will be aware
that the first Calvinists in Southampton were not Huguenots but Walloon
Netherlanders who hailed from the cities of Valenciennes and Tournai.
retour chez les SOHIER  
back to the SOHIER  
terug naar de SOHIER