The Spoils of War 153
division of the spoils. In the early autumn of 1536 (once Bern had dealt with the
question of Geneva) the Bernese council addressed what it thought was a straight-
forward demand to Fribourg: would the latter share the burden of administering
the conquered territories, or did it intend to keep hold of districts which it might
subsequently hand back to Savoy? Fribourg’s riposte was swift and pointed: why
should it help defend such a large area when it had gained so little territory itself?718
To make matters worse, Fribourg’s envoys in late September not only demanded
that more territory be ceded; they insisted that the Catholic faith be retained there.
In short, Fribourg demanded control of half the Vaud. Bern’s mood darkened—it
compiled a hitherto overlooked résumé of the council minute-books covering the
entire negotiations from May 1536 onwards719—with the accusation that Fribourgers
were guilty of having resisted the siege of Yverdon, though the Fribourg council
asserted that these men had disobeyed orders.720
Bern’s reply to Fribourg’s effrontery was first of all to refuse to discuss the
apportionment of rents and revenues from the conquered territories,721 and then
to threaten to reclaim the places which it had voluntarily surrendered (such as
Romont and Rue), since, as Bern mordantly observed, most of the Vaud had been
conquered with no military assistance from Fribourg whatever.722 Bern then
softened its stance—possibly at the urging of Confederal mediators723—by indicating
that it might be prepared to hand over Bulle, the lordships of La Roche724 and
Corbières, and possibly Gruyère itself.725 In fact, since Bern had subjugated the
bishopric of Lausanne it was reluctant to let go of the episcopal communes.
By December Bern had extracted oaths of submission from Avenches, the lordship
of La Roche, and Bulle.726 Fribourg counterposed by demanding Combremont,
Romainmôtier, the bailiwick of Bulle, and, not least, the abbey of Payerne.727 At the
end of the year the convents of Payerne and Romainmôtier, and the bailiwick of
Bulle were finally ceded to Fribourg. The fate of Combremont was left hanging;728
718 EA IV, 1c, 755–6 (no. 460: 2; 3) (Aug. 1536); AEF, Diplomatische Korrespondenz a) Bern:
72 (8 Sept. 1536); Missivale 11, fo. 7r–v (12 Sept. 1536): das wir vch so ein grosse lanndtschafft gegen
so wenig plätzenn alls wir beherrschenn zubewärenn helffen müßtent. The identical phrase is in SABE,
Unnütze Papiere, Freiburg 391, no. 102.
719 SABE, Unnütze Papiere, Freiburg 391, no. 100: Vs den Rhatsmanualen gezogen 1536. It is to
be regretted that there is no equivalent protocol for Fribourg.
720 EA IV, 1c, 765–6 (no. 468: I; II) (Sept. 1536). Solothurn faced the same accusation. SASO,
Missiven 16, pp. 25–6 (4 Feb. 1536).
721 AEF, Instruktionsbuch 3, fo. 9r–11r (23 Sept. 1536).
722 SABE, Teutsche Missiven-Buch 24 W, pp. 357–8 (8 Oct. 1536).
723 Solothurn had suggested mediation in November, though whether it took place is unclear.
SASO, Ratsmanuale 28, pp. 326–7 (4 Nov. 1536). Mediators from Zürich, Luzern, Schwyz, and Basel
(a nice confessional balance!) are only attested from April 1537. EA IV, 1c, 824–6 (no. 500) (April
1537). In a curious twist, Bern’s envoys refused to preside; instead they requested that Basel should
hear Fribourg’s claims and Schwyz Bern’s.
724 In the German sources Zur Flue or von der Flü. Gasser, Territoriale Entwicklung, 169–70;
Castella, ‘Mémoire inédit’, 480; HLS, s.v. La Roche [de Rupe, von der Flü].
725 AEF, Diplomatische Korrespondenz, Savoie (1511–1569), 8/12 Oct. 1536.
726 EA IV, 1c, 790–1 (no. 482: d; e) (Nov. 1536).
727 EA IV, 1c, 804–5 (no. 487: I) (Dec. 1536).
728 EA IV, 1c, 805–6 (no. 488: a; b; c; h) (Dec. 1536); AEF, Missivale 11, fo. 27v (28 Dec. 1538);
Vasella, ‘Krieg Berns’, B 296.