War or Peace? 123
ships with Fribourg.467 But it failed to renew its alliance with Savoy: the Burgrecht
with Geneva remained the stumbling block.468 Here the first signs of exasperation
with Geneva began to emerge. The city had so far been unable to defray any of
Bern’s war expenditure, prompting Bern to wonder whether it would not be better
if Geneva abandon the Burgrecht and come to its own settlement with Savoy. That
would allow Bern (and Fribourg) to forge a fresh alliance with Savoy, unencum-
bered by the incubus of Geneva.469 Should the latter demur, Bern proposed that it
be excluded from any stake in a possible Vaud mortgage.470
Geneva did refuse,471 so stalemate ensued. The carousel of negotiations began
slowly to revolve again. Savoy now proposed that St-Julien and Payerne be annulled
so that the parties could start afresh with a clean slate, albeit with a twist: failure to
keep up reparation payments by Savoy should now incur a fine of 1000 écus, with
Romont and Yverdon as sureties or else the assets of Genevan citizens!472 The
Genevan council found itself squeezed between continuing Savoy duress in defi-
ance of the treaties473 and Bern’s anger at the city’s failure to pay compensation.474
The Bernese council in any case faced resistance from its own territorial subjects to
any further military assistance for Geneva, who declared that the Burgrecht had
been signed without their knowledge or consent.475
The Bernese council managed to overcome its irritation sufficiently to be willing
to resurrect the old Burgrecht of 1477 concluded with Duke Philibert and even to
contemplate retaining its Burgrecht with Geneva.476 Throughout the first half of
1532 the intricate quadrille of multilateral diplomacy allowed strange rumours
to spread: that Fribourg was planning its own campaign against Savoy (in revenge
for lack of payment),477 or that Bern had been promised 11,000 écus by Savoy to
refrain from fresh hostilities.478
The two cities could on occasion give the impression that outstanding compen-
sation was uppermost in their minds, not the liberties or security of Geneva. Duke
Charles was aware of their cupidity, for in response to Bern’s threat to go to war
467 EA IV, 1b, 1246–7 (no. 666) (Jan. 1532); 1266, (no. 674) (Jan. 1532).
468 EA IV, 1b, 1233 (no. 658) (Dec. 1531).
469 AEF, Diplomatische Korrespondenz a) Bern: 63 (Dec. 1531).
470 EA IV, 1b, 1247 (no. 667: 1; 2; 4) (Jan. 1532).
471 EA IV, 1b, 1247 (667: to 2) (Jan. 1532).
472 EA IV, 1b, 1267 (no. 675: I; II, 5, 6, 8) (Jan. 1532).
473 EA IV, 1b, 1272–8 (no. 679: c; z) (Jan. 1532). Duke Charles had also failed to pay the pensions
due to the other cantons.
474 AEF, Diplomatische Korrespondenz a) Bern: 64 (Jan. 1532). Bern’s envoys doubted whether
the Genevan council would have the commons on its side in any future assault from Savoy since the
Burgrecht had been concluded without its approval. Compare the argument of Bern’s subjects at
footnote 475!
475 EA IV, 1b, 1280–1 (no. 681: I) (Jan. 1532).
476 EA IV, 1b, 1284 (no. 687: I; II) (Feb. 1532).
477 EA IV, 1b, 1283–4 (no. 686: I, 1; I, 2) (Feb. 1532); 1305–6 (no. 699: I; II) (March 1532).
Fribourg did not necessarily deny the accusation, but claimed it was facing an emergency. That unpaid
debts underlay the matter was made clear in September: AEF, Diplomatische Korrespondenz a) Bern:
66 (8 Sept. 1532).
478 AEF, Diplomatische Korrespondenz a) Bern: 65 (July 1532).