of the Helvetic republic. But in 1803, on the creation of the canton of Vaud by the Act of Mediation, it became its capital. The bishop of Lausanne resided after 1663 at Fribourg, while from 1821 onwards he added “and of Geneva” to his title.
Besides the general works dealing with the canton of Vaud (q.v.), the following books refer specially to Lausanne: A. Bernus, L’Imprimerie à Lausanne et à Morges jusqu’à la fin du 16ième siècle (Lausanne, 1904); M. Besson, Récherches sur les origines des évêchés de Genève, Lausanne, Sion (Fribourg, 1906); A. Bonnard, “Lausanne au 18ième siècle,” in the work entitled Chez nos aïeux (Lausanne, 1902); E. Dupraz, La Cathédrale de Lausanne ... étude historique (Lausanne, 1906); E. Gibbon, Autobiography and Letters (3 vols., 1896); F. Gingins and F. Forel, Documents concernant l’ancien évêché de Lausanne, 2 parts (Lausanne, 1846–1847); J. H. Lewis and F. Gribble, Lausanne (1909); E. van Muyden and others, Lausanne à travers les âges (Lausanne, 1906); Meredith Read, Historic Studies in Vaud, Berne and Savoy (2 vols., 1897); M. Schmitt, Mémoires hist. sur le diocèse de Lausanne (2 vols., Fribourg, 1859); J. Stammler (afterwards bishop of Lausanne), Le Trésor de la cathédrale de Lausanne (Lausanne, 1902; trans. of a German book of 1894). (W. A. B. C.)
LAUTREC, ODET DE FOIX, Vicomte de (1488–1528),
French soldier. The branch of the viscounts of Lautrec originated
with Pierre, the grandson of Archambaud de Grailly,
captal de Buch, who came into possession of the county of Foix
in 1401. Odet de Foix and his two brothers, the seigneur de
Lescun and the seigneur de l’Esparre or Asparros, served Francis
I. as captains; and the influence of their sister, Françoise de
Châteaubriant, who became the king’ mistress, gained them
high offices. In 1515 Lautrec took part in the campaign of
Marignano. In 1516 he received the government of the Milanese,
and by his severity made the French domination insupportable.
In 1521 he succeeded in defending the duchy against the Spanish
army, but in 1522 he was completely defeated at the battle of
the Bicocca, and was forced to evacuate the Milanese. The
mutiny of his Swiss troops had compelled him, against his wish,
to engage in the battle. Created marshal of France, he received
again, in 1527, the command of the army of Italy, occupied the
Milanese, and was then sent to undertake the conquest of the
kingdom of Naples. The defection of Andrea Doria and the
plague which broke out in the French camp brought on a fresh
disaster. Lautrec himself caught the infection, and died on
the 15th of August 1528. He had the reputation of a gallant
and able soldier, but this reputation scarcely seems to be justified
by the facts; though he was always badly used by fortune.
There is abundant MS. correspondence in the Bibliothèque Nationale, Paris. See the Works of Brantôme (Coll. Société d’Histoire de France, vol. iii., 1867); Memoirs of Martin du Bellay (Coll. Michaud and Poujoulat, vol. v., 1838).
LAUZUN, ANTONIN NOMPAR DE CAUMONT, Marquis
de Puyguilhem, Duc de (1632–1723), French courtier and
soldier, was the son of Gabriel, comte de Lauzun, and his wife
Charlotte, daughter of the duc de La Force. He was brought
up with the children of his kinsman, the maréchal de Gramont,
of whom the comte de Guiche became the lover of Henrietta
of England, duchess of Orleans, while Catherine Charlotte,
afterwards princess of Monaco, was the object of the one
passion of Lauzun’s life. He entered the army, and served under
Turenne, also his kinsman, and in 1655 succeeded his father as
commander of the cent gentilshommes de la maison du roi. Puyguilhem
(or Péguilin, as contemporaries simplified his name)
rapidly rose in Louis XIV.’s favour, became colonel of the royal
regiment of dragoons, and was gazetted maréchal de camp. He
and Mme de Monaco belonged to the coterie of the young
duchess of Orleans. His rough wit and skill in practical jokes
pleased Louis XIV., but his jealousy and violence were the
causes of his undoing. He prevented a meeting between Louis
XIV. and Mme de Monaco, and it was jealousy in this matter,
rather than hostility to Louise de la Vallière, which led him to
promote Mme de Montespan’s intrigues with the king. He asked
this lady to secure for him the post of grand-master of the
artillery, and on Louis’s refusal to give him the appointment
he turned his back on the king, broke his sword, and swore
that never again would he serve a monarch who had broken
his word. The result was a short sojourn in the Bastille, but he
soon returned to his functions of court buffoon. Meanwhile,
the duchess of Montpensier (La Grande Mademoiselle) had
fallen in love with the little man, whose ugliness seems to have
exercised a certain fascination over many women. He naturally
encouraged one of the greatest heiresses in Europe, and the
wedding was fixed for the 20th of December 1670, when on the
18th Louis sent for his cousin and forbade the marriage. Mme
de Montespan had never forgiven his fury when she failed to
procure the grand-mastership of the artillery, and now, with
Louvois, secured his arrest. He was removed in November
1671 from the Bastille to Pignerol, where excessive precautions
were taken to ensure his safety. He was eventually allowed
free intercourse with Fouquet, but before that time he managed
to find a way through the chimney into Fouquet’s room, and
on another occasion succeeded in reaching the courtyard in
safety. Another fellow-prisoner, from communication with
whom he was supposed to be rigorously excluded, was Eustache
Dauger (see Iron Mask).
It was now intimated to Mademoiselle that Lauzun’s restoration to liberty depended on her immediate settlement of the principality of Dombes, the county of Eu and the duchy of Aumale—three properties assigned by her to Lauzun—on the little duc de Maine, eldest son of Louis XIV. and Mme de Montespan. She gave way, but Lauzun, even after ten years of imprisonment, refused to sign the documents, when he was brought to Bourbon for the purpose. A short term of imprisonment at Chalon-sur-Sâone made him change his mind, but when he was set free Louis XIV. was still set against the marriage, which is supposed to have taken place secretly (see Montpensier). Married or not, Lauzun was openly courting Fouquet’s daughter, whom he had seen at Pignerol. He was to be restored to his place at court, and to marry Mlle Fouquet, who, however, became Mme d’Uzès in 1683. In 1685 Lauzun went to England to seek his fortune under James II., whom he had served as duke of York in Flanders. He rapidly gained great influence at the English court. In 1688 he was again in England, and arranged the flight of Mary of Modena and the infant prince, whom he accompanied to Calais, where he received strict instructions from Louis to bring them “on any pretext” to Vincennes. In the late autumn of 1689 he was put in command of the expedition fitted out at Brest for service in Ireland, and he sailed in the following year. Lauzun was honest, a quality not too common in James II.’s officials in Ireland, but had no experience of the field, and he blindly followed Richard Talbot, earl of Tyrconnel. After the battle of the Boyne they fled to Limerick, and thence to the west, leaving Patrick Sarsfield to show a brave front. In September they sailed for France, and on their arrival at Versailles Lauzun found that his failure had destroyed any prospect of a return of Louis XIV.’s favour. Mademoiselle died in 1693, and two years later Lauzun married Geneviève de Durfort, a child of fourteen, daughter of the maréchal de Lorges. Mary of Modena, through whose interest Lauzun secured his dukedom, retained her faith in him, and it was he who in 1715, more than a quarter of a century after the flight from Whitehall, brought her the news of the disaster of Sheriffmuir. Lauzun died on the 19th of November 1723. The duchy fell to his nephew, Armand de Gontaut, comte de Biron.
See the letters of Mme de Sévigné, the memoirs of Saint-Simon, who was Lauzun’s wife’s brother-in-law; also J. Lair, Nicolas Fouquet, vol. ii. (1890); Martin Hailes, Mary of Modena (1905), and M. F. Sandars, Lauzun, Courtier and Adventurer (1908).
LAVA, an Italian word (from Lat. lavare, to wash) applied
to the liquid products of volcanic activity. Streams of rain-water,
formed by condensation of exhaled steam often mingled
with volcanic ashes so as to produce mud, are known as lava
d’acqua, whilst the streams of molten matter are called lava di
fuoco. The term lava is applied by geologists to all matter of
volcanic origin, which is, or has been, in a molten state. The
magma, or molten lava in the interior of the earth, may be
regarded as a mutual solution of various mineral silicates, charged
with highly-heated vapour, sometimes to the extent of super-saturation.
According to the proportion of silica, the lava
is distinguished as “acid” or “basic.” The basic lavas are
