152 The Swiss and Their Neighbours, 1460–1560
Bernese secretary Pierre Girod divulged the plan to a Gruyère official in the presence
of some Gruyère subjects, who were naturally dismayed.707 Fribourg tried to brazen
the matter out by denying all knowledge of the proposal, pinning the blame (quite
falsely) on the Gruyère castellan, Georges de Corbières.708 What is remarkable
about the affair (apart from unmasking Fribourg’s true intentions) is that the
proposed partition was to run north-eastwards from the defile of the river Saane at
its highest point of La Tine (in German Bocken), describing exactly the division
between the Upper and Lower Gruyère which would result from the counts’
bankruptcy in 1555 and the forced sale of the county to Bern and Fribourg.
The outstanding conquests were completed by April. The capture of Castle
Chillon, which posed a threat to Bern’s mandement of Aigle, was accomplished at
the end of March,709 though its captain was able to escape by boat across the lake.
Bern called on both Geneva and Lausanne to supply ships to ferry troops to the
siege, with artillery sent overland by Lausanne.710 The Bernese army under Hans
Franz Nägeli then headed back to Lausanne to expel the bishop.711 It called upon
the commune to seize the bishop’s castle, which it did with alacrity.712 Bern’s
commanders assured the magistrates that the city would be allowed to retain its
liberties,713 but in reality it had to succumb to Bern’s overlordship.714 The bishop,
Sébastien de Montfalcon, left Lausanne in March, and the cathedral canons
surrendered their wealth in two stages, a first part to the city in September 1536,
a second tranche to the Bernese commissioners in February 1537.715 Not until
1538, however, did the bishop and city formally submit, a condition of which
being that both must abandon their Burgrechte with Fribourg.716 In the bishopric
Fribourg’s hopes of preserving its links with Avenches and Lucens were dashed;
both communes submitted reluctantly to Bern, though Bulle was quick to offer
itself to Fribourg.717 The confessional divide ruled out, it would seem, any possibil-
ity of a common lordship.
Just as the fate of the county of Gruyère was not settled until more than a year
after the initial conquest of the Vaud, so too the territorial disputes between
Bern and Fribourg dragged on into 1537. In essence, the quarrels over individual
communes or lordships, where both sides might have legitimate claims, reflected
the broader principle of joint defence of the Vaud, and its implications for a just
707 EA IV, 1c, 844 (no. 514) (June 1537). 708 Courtray, ‘Proposition’, 210–12.
709 EA IV, 1c, 658 (no. 402: to a; to b; to h 2) (March 1536). Fribourg reported to the Catholic
cantons that Bern was in fact preparing to invade Gruyère rather than storm Chillon.
710 A full account in Gilliard, Eroberung, 119–26 [196–210]; SABE, Teutsche Missiven-Buch 24
W, pp. 223–4 (29 March 1536); RCG, vol. XIII, ed. Émile Rivoire, Victor van Berchem, and Frédéric
Gardy (Geneva, 1940), pp. 496, 499; Cuendet, Traités, 102; Chavannes, Extraits, 240; Poudret,
Maison de Savoie, 179.
711 EA IV, 1c, 663–4 (no. 404: note 6) (March 1536); 674 (no. 411: II, 3) (April 1536).
712 Vasella, ‘Krieg Berns’, B 91, 218; Gilliard, Eroberung, 130 [217].
713 Vasella, ‘Krieg Berns’, B 217. 714 Vasella, ‘Krieg Berns’, B 301–2.
715 Helvetia Sacra, 1, 4, 148, 366. The commissioners also received what had already been handed
over to the city.
716 EA IV, 1c, 916 (no. 554) (Dec. 1537); 941 (no. 568) (Feb. 1538); SABE, Teutsche Missiven-Buch
24 W, p. 603 (20 Feb. 1538); AEF, Diplomatische Korrespondenz a) Bern: 74 (20 Feb. 1538).
717 EA IV, 1c, 693 (no. 425: d) (May 1536); Gilliard, Eroberung, 131 [219].