These reasons must be my excuse for venturing to write a new book upon an old subject. It is now nearly thirty years since the appearance of the late Professor Henry M. Baird’s excellent work, _The Rise of the Huguenots_ (New York, 1879), and little that is comprehensive has since been written upon the subject in English, with the exception of Mr. A. W. Whitehead’s admirable _Gaspard de Coligny, Admiral of France_ (London, 1904). But the limitations imposed by biographical history compel an author inevitably to ignore movements or events not germane to his immediate subject, which, nevertheless, may be of great importance for general history. Moreover, a biography is limited by the term of life of the hero, and his death may not by any means terminate the issue in which he was a factor—as indeed was the case with Coligny. An enumeration of the notable works—sources and authorities—which have been published since the appearance of Professor Baird’s work may serve to justify the present volume. First and foremost must be mentioned the notable _Lettres de Catherine de Médicis_, the lack of which Ranke deplored, edited by the late Count Hector de la Ferrière and M. Baguenault de la Puchesse (9 vols.), the initial volume of which appeared in 1880. Of diplomatic correspondence we have the _Ambassade en Espagne de Jean Ebrard, seigneur de St. Sulpice de 1562 à 1565_ (Paris, 1902), edited by M. Edmond Cabié, and thé _Dépêches de M. Fourquevaux, ambassadeur du roi Charles IX en Espagne, 1565-72_, in three volumes, edited by the Abbé Douais (Paris, 1896). Other sources which have seen the light within the last three decades are M. Delaborde’s _Vie de Coligny_ (3 vols., 1877-), the title of which is somewhat misleading, for it is really a collection of Coligny’s letters strung upon the thread of his career; the Baron Alphonse de Ruble’s _Antoine de Bourbon et Jeanne d’Albret_ (4 vols., 1881); M. Ludovic Lalanne’s new annotated edition of _D’Aubigné_ (1886), and the new edition of Beza’s _Histoire ecclésiastique_ (ed. of Baum, 1883). Finally, among sources should be included many volumes in the “Calendar of State Papers.” Professor Baird has rightly said that “Too much weight can scarcely be given to this source of information and illustration.” His praise would probably have been even greater if he could have used the correspondence of Dale and Smith as freely as he did that of Throckmorton and Norris.