or her private purse[10].

Pleasant was existence in this chateau. There was no dearth of company
to throng around the prince in exile, and the dauphin allowed no
prejudice of mere likes and dislikes, no consideration of duty towards
his host to hamper him in making useful friends. A word here and
a word there, aptly thrown in at a time when Philip's anger had
exasperated, when Charles had failed to conciliate, were very potent
in intimating to many a Burgundian servant that there might come a
time when a new king across the border might better appreciate their
real value than their present or future sovereign.

Hunting was a favourite amusement, but the dauphin did not confine his
invitations to sportsmen. The easy accessibility of the little court
attracted men of science and of letters as well as others capable of
making the time pass agreeably. When there was nothing else on foot,
it is said that the company amused themselves by telling stories,
each in turn, and out of their tales grew the collection of the _Cent
Nouvelles Nouvelles_[11], named in imitation of Boccaccio's _Cento
Novelle_.

The first printed edition of this collection was issued in Paris, in
1486, by Antoine Verard, who thus admonishes the gentle reader: "Note
that whenever _Monseigneur_ is referred to, Monseigneur the Dauphin
must be understood, who has since succeeded to the crown and is King
Louis. Then he was in the land of the Duke of Burgundy." Another
editor asserts that _Monseigneur_ is evidently the Duke of Burgundy
and not Louis, and later authorities decide that Anthony de la Sale
wrote the whole collection in imitation of Boccaccio, and that the
names of the narrators were as imaginative or rather as editorial as
the rest of the volume.

If this be true, it maybe inferred that the author would have given an
appearance of verisimilitude to his fiction by mentioning the actual
habitues of the dauphin's court. The name of the Count of Charolais
does not appear at all. The duke tells three or more stories according
to the interpretation given to _Monseigneur_. With three exceptions
the tales are very coarse, nor does their wit atone for their
licentiousness. Possibly Charles held himself aloof from the kind of
talk they suggest. All reports make him rigid in standards of morality
not observed by his fellows. That he had little to do with the court
is certain, whatever his reason.

Louis did not confine himself to the estate assigned hi