Edict of 19 April

Last updated
Portrait of Charles IX of France, under whom the edict was issued, by Francois Clouet Bemberg Fondation Toulouse - Portrait de Charles IX - Francois Clouet - Inv.1012.jpg
Portrait of Charles IX of France, under whom the edict was issued, by François Clouet
Portrait of Catherine de' Medici Catherine de Medicis Louvre.jpg
Portrait of Catherine de' Medici

The Edict of 19 April was a religious edict promulgated by the regency council of Charles IX of France on 19 April 1561. The edict would confirm the decision of the Estates General of 1560-1 as regarded the amnesty for religious prisoners. The edict would however go further in an effort to calm the unrest that was sweeping France, outlawing the use of religious epithets and providing a pathway for religious exiles to return to the country. Despite not being an edict of toleration for Protestantism, the more conservative Catholics would interpret the edict as a concession to the Huguenots, leading to the Parlement of Paris to remonstrate the crown. The edict would be endorsed and furthered in the more sweeping Edict of July a few months later, before it in turn was superseded by the first edict of toleration, the Edict of Saint-Germain.

Background

Prior edicts

The growth of Protestantism in France, under Henry II of France was of great concern to the king. He passed several edicts, hoping to stamp the religion out, with first the Edict of Châteaubriant in 1551, then the Edict of Compiègne in 1557, and finally the Edict of Ecouen in 1559. [1] [2] He was not however able to devote his full attentions to the stamping out of the new sect in France, distracted as he was by the Italian Wars. With their conclusion at the Peace of Cateau Cambresis King Henry hoped to change his attentions to matters at home, but an accident during a joust took his life. [3] With the kings sudden death, the young François II took the throne, his policy directed by his maternal uncles, François, Duke of Guise and Charles, Cardinal of Lorraine. [4] They initially sought continuity with the prior regime, passing four more edicts between the death of Henri and February 1560, in which they decreed any house found to have held Protestant worship, would be razed, landlords who harboured Protestant tenants, would be prosecuted. [5]

The crisis that ensued from the Amboise conspiracy offered an opportunity for them to change tactics in the face of concerted opposition. The first Edict of Amboise (1560) published a week before the attempt on the castle separated the concept of heresy from that of sedition as two separate crimes, with those convicted of the former prior to the edicts publication, to be freed on amnesty. [6] The Edict of Romorantin continued in this more liberal framework, transferring the trial of heresy cases to the purview of the ecclesiastical courts, which lacked the ability to sentence defendants to death. While this did not abolish the death penalty for heresy as they could still refer cases to the Parlements for sentencing, it acted as a de facto abolition of the death penalty for heresy. [7]

Estates general and the death of François II

The Italian wars had pushed France into serious debt, which combined with the religious crisis and young king, left the government of France on very shaky footing. [8] As a result in August the Guise oversaw the convocation of the Estates General, to meet in December, to help solve France's various issues. [9] Before they could meet however, the young François acquired an ear infection while out hunting, his condition worsened, and he died on 5 December. [10] This created a new crisis as while he had been young, he had been technically old enough to rule, whereas now, his brother Charles would require a regency council. Catherine de' Medici using the leverage of the imprisoned Louis, Prince of Condé, negotiated Antoine de Bourbon out of his rights as first prince of the blood to the regency, securing it for herself. [11]

While the estates were unable to come to any broad solution to France's religious crisis, it was agreed, that an amnesty, upon the lines of that of Amboise be issued for all religious prisoners, of which there had been a considerable increase during the tumult that followed the conspiracy of Amboise across France. [12]

Crisis

Courtly crisis

Protestant growth in France, continued apace in early 1561, and with it a violent Catholic backlash. [13] The Catholic fear was only furthered by what they saw at court, with the return of Condé to council in early 1561, and the more open Protestantism of Gaspard II de Coligny and Odet de Coligny. [14] This turbulence peaked in the month of April, during Easter, with the crown selecting Jean de Monluc as the courts Lenten preacher, a bishop known to be highly sympathetic to Protestantism. This, combined with libellous rumours about the young king singing psalms (an activity Catholics would not engage in at this time) convinced many conservative Catholics in the court that the monarchy was becoming Protestant. [15]

The religiously conservative Anne de Montmorency and the duke of Guise, outraged at Monluc's sermon, travelled together into the servants quarters on Easter Sunday, to hear a more reliably Catholic sermon. They would follow this up with an exchanging of the kiss of peace under the auspices of François de Tournon, temporarily putting their long running feud on hold to work together against the crown becoming Protestant. Shortly thereafter, both families and their retinues departed court, leaving Catherine politically isolated with Condé and Coligny. [16]

The situation in Paris in particular was fast deteriorating in April 1561. Protestants, growing in confidence from their influence at court, began more openly meeting to worship in the city, gathering in the Pre-aux-Clercs to hear Easter sermons. Noble Protestants also met in the house of the Duke of Longjumeau, among them Léonor d'Orléans, duc de Longueville, to hear sermons, to the knowledge and apathy of the court. This infuriated many Catholic students, who marched on the residence. Longjumeau, aware of this, stocked arms in his house, and when the angry crowd approached, he and the others inside, fought their way out of the building, leaving several dead and dozens wounded. Longueville, angry at this popular intrusion on his residence, appealed to the Parlement to punish the students responsible. The Parlement prohibited the students from further attempts on his property, but also declared to Longueville, that his property would be forfeit if he did not leave Paris, and exile himself to his chateau, which he promptly did. [17]

The Parlement, distraught at the crisis in the city, deputised President Christophe de Thou and Procureur Général Bourdin to travel to Catherine to implore her and the chancellor, Michel de l'Hôpital to find a solution to this wave of unrest, and restore order to the kingdom. On 18 April l'Hôpital presented the edict they had drawn up in response to quiet the unrest. [15]

Terms of the edict

The first clause of the edict concerned itself with the prohibition of religious epithets, singling out 'Huguenot' and 'Papist' respectively as two terms that would be prohibited from being thrown at people. [18] The edict then moved on to the topic of private houses. Here it broke with past edicts and stated that the only acceptable time for entry into a private citizens house where heretical preaching is suspected is with a warrant, and conducted by officials. [19] The edict then offered a re-affirmation of the agreed upon decision of the estates in January, outlining again that all those imprisoned for heresy were to be released without a requirement for a formal recantation. [20] Those who had been exiled from France for their heresy would be permitted to return, and reclaim their property if they agreed to live as 'good Catholics.' Further those abroad who decided they did not wish to abjure Protestantism, the requirement for returning, would be granted permission to sell their assets. [18]

Legacy

Reactions

Catholics

The publication of the edict only furthered the anger of the more militant parts of the Catholic population. The ambassador to Spain, de Chantonnay, angrily demanded an audience with Catherine which he received, lambasting her for bringing the Catholics of the country to the brink of despair. [13] She retorted that, the king, the council and herself remained resolutely committed to living and dying as Catholics, and that the edict was a necessary measure to quiet the troubles which were consuming France. [21] It did not escape the attention of many conservative Catholics that the edict which prohibited the invasion of homes to search for (still) illegal Protestant services coincided with the attack on the residence of Longueville. [17]

The enforcement of the edict depended much upon the will of the governor and magistrates in the province. Anne de Joyeuse the governor of Languedoc complained to Catherine that his magistrates were confused by the diversity of the edicts they had received over the last few years, suggesting Parlement should be allowed to remedy this muddled situation so that Protestants in the legal profession could not use the confusion to their advantage. [22] Catherine responded that it was necessary to deal with the legislative ambiguities in a moderate fashion until such time a council could be called. [23]

Parlement of Paris

The edict was disseminated directly to the provincial baillage and senechaussee courts, alongside the governors of the realm, so that they could quickly enforce its terms. This infuriated the Parlement of Paris, which took it as its prerogative that all prospective legislation was to be properly examined by their court, prior to it being published, let alone distributed to lower courts. [24] The Parlement set about drawing up a remonstrance to the crown in May, under the direction of Baillet, Chambon and Faye of the moderate conservative faction that comprised the majority of the court. [19]

Their remonstrance began with a lengthy denunciation of the way the edict had been published, decrying it as unconstitutional and of dubious legality if any case created by it was appealed to their court. After six paragraphs of this the remonstrance moved on to the substance of the edict. The first issue it took was with the prohibition of insults from either Protestants or Catholics on the matter of religion. While this didn't directly approve of the diversity of religion the Parlement read this to mean that it was acceptable Protestants openly exist in the country, and thus that two religions were now tolerated. [19] The Parlement noted that no prior king of France had ever been found to be a heretic, and that France had a 'proud' tradition of dealing with heresy going back to the Albigensian Crusade. The remonstrance noted that while it agreed it was certainly laudable to try and combat sedition, that this edict would do quite the opposite, by communicating to Protestants that their heresy was acceptable, it would cause them to multiply, thus compounding the sedition in the country. They counter proposed that to solve sedition the king should make it clear he would die in the faith of his forebears, and compel all his subjects to swear to uphold the Catholic faith. The Parlement then turned its attentions to the specific terms, decrying how 'Papist' was being treated as a slur, despite obedience to the Pope on religious matters being a commendable thing, not deserving of placement alongside this newly invented word 'Huguenot.' [25]

The prohibition on entry into residences without a warrant to investigate religion was critiqued as 'contradicting prior edicts' which called for suspected heretical services to be banned. The notion of allowing ex-heretics to return to live in France was derided as likely to cause great scandal and difficulty. Further the term 'good Catholics' was unacceptable to the Parlement, because the heretics think of themselves as Catholic already, thus they felt it should be made clear that they are to live in obedience to the Roman church as had the kings forebears. The provision on allowing practicing heretics to sell their assets and keep the money was also attacked. The Parlement argued this contravened the law on prohibiting the taking of money out of France to aid the kings enemies. [25] On the matter of amnesty for religious prisoners, the court asked the king to enforce prior edicts, which called for ex-religious prisoners to be expelled from the kingdom on release. Finally the Parlement ended with an attack on the present state of the church, calling for the king to oversee a reform in the morals of the clergy and a return to ecclesiastical elections for church office. [26]

Catherine retorted to the Parlement that Lorraine had approved of the terms agreed at the estates general in January, and further noted that this edict was only a provisional measure, to calm France, until such time a church council could solve the religious question. [22] While the Parlement considered trying to remove l'Hôpital from office, they moved on their focus to attacking the ordinance of Orléans. [27] [28]

Protestants

The edict proved a boon to Protestants, as their numbers continued to grow through early 1561. John Calvin remarked in a letter that he was astonished at the amount of preachers that France was now requesting be sent from Geneva to manage communities in the country. [29] The aristocratic Protestants too were emboldened, and on 11 June presented a petition to the crown asking for temples to worship in, so that they might dispel the libellous rumours as to what Protestants get up to in their nightly services. [30]

Subsequent edicts

Having received this petition, and still being pressured by conservative Catholics in court and Parlement to retreat from the edict of 19 April, Catherine decided to host a pourparlers in the hopes such a discussion could provide a more definitive and satisfactory edict on the religious question. [30] Hosted by Hòpital they would host 3 sessions of grandees to discuss the matter. [31] After some heated discussion it was agreed that Protestantism would remain banned, but that Protestants would be allowed to sell their possessions before leaving the kingdom, with no return to the era of burnings that had occurred in the 1550s. The edict closed the loophole in Romorantin that allowed for the death penalty, fully removing it as a penalty, alongside corporal punishment. [32] This edict in turn would be superseded by the far more ambitious and radical Edict of Saint-Germain in January 1562, which for the first time provided textual tolerance to Protestant worship in outlined areas of France, as opposed to what had been seen as implicit non textual tolerance through the prohibition of investigating houses. [33] The controversy over this edict would lead to first the Massacre of Vassy and then the French Wars of Religion in April 1562. [34]

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Francis II of France</span> King of France from 1559 to 1560

Francis II was King of France from 1559 to 1560. He was also King of Scotland as the husband of Mary, Queen of Scots, from 1558 until his death in 1560.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">French Wars of Religion</span> 1562–1598 Catholic-Protestant conflicts

The French Wars of Religion refers to the period of civil war between French Catholics and Protestants from 1562 to 1598. Between two and four million people died from violence, famine or disease directly caused by the conflict, and it severely damaged the power of the French monarchy. One of its most notorious episodes was the St. Bartholomew's Day massacre in 1572. The fighting ended with a compromise in 1598, when Henry of Navarre, who had converted to Catholicism in 1593, was proclaimed King Henry IV of France and issued the Edict of Nantes, which granted substantial rights and freedoms to the Huguenots. However, Catholics continued to disapprove of Protestants and of Henry, and his assassination in 1610 triggered a fresh round of Huguenot rebellions in the 1620s.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Michel de l'Hôpital</span> French statesman and lawyer (1506–1573)

Michel de l'Hôpital was a French lawyer, diplomat and chancellor during the latter Italian Wars and the early French Wars of Religion. The son of a doctor in the service of Constable Bourbon he spent his early life exiled from France at Bourbon's and then the emperors court. When his father entered the service of the House of Lorraine, he entered the patronage network of Charles, Cardinal of Lorraine. Through his marriage to Marie Morin, he acquired a seat in the Paris Parlement. In this capacity he drew up the charges for the king, concerning the defenders of Boulogne who surrendered the city in 1544, before taking a role as a diplomat to the Council of Trent in 1547. The following year he assisted Anne d'Este in the details of her inheritance to ensure she could marry Francis, Duke of Guise.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Louis de Bourbon, 1st, Prince of Condé</span> 1st Prince of Condé

Louis de Bourbon, 1st Prince of Condé was a prominent Huguenot leader and general, the founder of the Condé branch of the House of Bourbon. Coming from a position of relative political unimportance during the reign of Henri II, Condé's support for the Huguenots, along with his leading role in the conspiracy of Amboise and its aftermath, pushed him to the centre of French politics. Arrested during the reign of Francis II then released upon the latter's premature death, he would lead the Huguenot forces in the first three civil wars of the French Wars of Religion before being executed after his defeat at the Battle of Jarnac in 1569.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Amboise conspiracy</span>

The Amboise conspiracy, also called Tumult of Amboise, was a failed attempt by a Huguenot faction in France to gain control over the young king Francis II and to reverse the policies of the current administration of Francis, Duke of Guise and Charles, Cardinal of Lorraine through their arrest, and potentially execution. Malcontent factions of Huguenots had been chafing under the French crown since the reign of Henry II and with the arrival of a new young king, saw their chance to take power for themselves. However the plot was uncovered ahead of time, and the Guise were ready for them. As such hundreds would be arrested, and many killed. Louis, Prince of Condé was suspected of involvement, however he was able to flee south, and it was only after some months that the Guise were able to put him on trial. Shortly thereafter, the sickly Francis II died, their hold on the administration collapsed, and with it the conviction of Condé. This tumult would be one of the key steps in the collapse of crown authority that led to the French Wars of Religion.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Edict of Saint-Germain</span> 1562 French decree on religious tolerance

The Edict of Saint-Germain, also known as the Edict of January, was a landmark decree of tolerance promulgated by the regent of France, Catherine de' Medici, in January 1562. The edict provided limited tolerance to the Protestant Huguenots in the Catholic realm, though with counterweighing restrictions on their behaviour. The act represented the culmination of several years of slowly liberalising edicts which had begun with the 1560 Edict of Amboise. After two months the Paris Parlement would be compelled to register it by the rapidly deteriorating situation in the capital. The practical impact of the edict would be highly limited by the subsequent outbreak of the first French Wars of Religion but it would form the foundation for subsequent toleration edicts as the Edict of Nantes of 1598.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Peace of Saint-Germain-en-Laye</span> 1570 treaty between France and the Huguenots

The Peace of Saint-Germain-en-Laye was signed on 8 August 1570 by Charles IX of France, Gaspard II de Coligny and Jeanne d'Albret, and ended the 1568 to 1570 Third Civil War, part of the French Wars of Religion.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Peace of Longjumeau</span> 1568 treaty which ended the second phase of the French Wars of Religion

The Peace of Longjumeau was signed on 23 March 1568 by Charles IX of France and Catherine de' Medici. The edict brought to an end the brief second French Wars of Religion with terms that largely confirmed those of the prior edict of Amboise. Unlike the previous edict it would not be sent to the Parlements to examine prior to its publication, due to what the crown had felt was obstructionism the last time. The edict would not however last, and it would be overturned later in the year, being replaced by the Edict of Saint-Maur which outlawed Protestantism at the beginning of the third war of religion.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Charles I, Cardinal de Bourbon</span> French cardinal

Charles de Bourbon, Cardinal de Bourbon, Archbishop of Rouen was a French noble, prelate and disputed King of France as the Catholic Ligue candidate from 2 August 1589 – 9 May 1590. Born the third son of Charles of Bourbon, Duke of Vendôme and Françoise d'Alençon he was destined for a career in the church. As a member of the House of Bourbon-Vendôme he was one of the premier Prince du sang. Already having secured several sees, he was made a Cardinal by Pope Paul III in January 1548. In 1550 he received the office of Archbishop of Rouen making him the Primate of Normandy. The following year the promotion of Bourbon to Patriarch of the French church was threatened by King Henry II to secure concessions from the Pope. During the Italian Wars which resumed that year he played a role supporting Catherine de Medici's regency governments in France and briefly holding a lieutenant-generalship in Picardy. In 1557 the Pope appointed the Cardinals Bourbon, Lorraine and Châtillon as the leaders of an inquisition in France to root out heresy. The effectiveness of their inquisition would be obstructed by both the king and the Parlements and by July 1558 their appointments were voided by the Parlement of Paris.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Edict of Compiègne</span> 1557 French decree adding the death penalty to the persecution of Protestants

The Edict of Compiègne, issued from his Château de Compiègne by Henry II of France, 24 July 1557, applied the death penalty for all convictions of relapsed and obstinate "sacramentarians", for those who went to Geneva or published books there, for iconoclast blasphemers against images, and even for illegal preaching or participation in religious gatherings, whether public or private. It was the third in a series of increasingly severe punishments for expressions of Protestantism in France, which had for an aim the extirpation of the Reformation. By raising the stakes, which now literally became matters of life and death, the Edict had the result of precipitating the long religious crisis in France and hastening the onset of armed civil war between armies mustered on the basis of religion, the series of French Wars of Religion, which were not settled until Henri IV's edict of toleration, the Edict of Nantes (1598).

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Louis de Bourbon, Duke of Montpensier</span> Duke of Montpensier

Louis de Bourbon, Duc de Montpensier was the second Duke of Montpensier, a French Prince of the Blood, military commander and governor. He began his military career during the Italian Wars, and in 1557 was captured after the disastrous battle of Saint-Quentin. His liberty restored he found himself courted by the new regime as it sought to steady itself and isolate its opponents in the wake of the Conspiracy of Amboise. At this time Montpensier supported liberalising religious reform, as typified by the Edict of Amboise he was present for the creation of.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Surprise of Meaux</span> Failed French coup by aristocratic Huguenots

The surprise of Meaux was a failed coup attempt by leading aristocratic Huguenots which precipitated the second French War of Religion. Dissatisfied with their lot, and under the pretext of fear of extermination, Louis, Prince of Condé and Gaspard II de Coligny plotted to seize the king, Charles IX, while he was staying near Meaux. Alerted by the mustering of the Huguenots, the royal court made a dash for Paris, fighting off attempts to break through to them en route. Their plan foiled, the Huguenots laid siege to the city, beginning the second war. The event would be of lasting importance in the reputation it gave its architects for sedition.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Charles, Prince of La Roche-sur-Yon</span>

Charles de Bourbon, Prince de la Roche-sur-Yon,, was a Prince of the Blood and provincial governor under three French kings. He fought in the latter Italian wars during the reign of Henri II, commanding an army during the 1554 campaign into the Spanish Netherlands.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Trial and execution of Anne du Bourg</span> Religious conflict in France

The trial and execution of Anne du Bourg was a critical event in the history of religious conflict in Paris, prior to the outbreak of the French Wars of Religion three years later. Anne du Bourg a judge in the Paris Parlement, would be executed, after calling the King Henry II an adulterer and blasphemer, and refusing to affirm the Real presence. He would be garrotted and burned on 23 December 1559. Several of his colleagues who had been arrested along with him, would be forced to recant their beliefs before returning to re-join the court. His trial would inflame religious tensions in Paris, leading directly to the assassination of President Minard, and contributing to the powder keg that exploded in the riot of Saint Medard a few months later.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Edict of July</span>

The Edict of July, also known as the Edict of Saint-Germain was a decree of limited tolerance promulgated by the regent of France, Catherine de' Medici, in July 1561. Whilst it emphasised a continued commitment to banning Huguenot worship in France, it granted pardon for all religious offenses since the reign of Henry II, who had died two years earlier, which was a victory for the Protestant community. A further Protestant victory was in the reaffirmation of the removal of the death penalty for heresy cases. The edict would be overtaken by events, and ultimately left unenforced as France moved first to the landmark Edict of Saint-Germain and then into the Wars of Religion.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Estates General of 1560-1</span>

The Estates General of 1560-1 was a national meeting of the three estates of France, the clergy, nobility and commoners convoked by François II, though he would die before it could begin. It represented the first meeting of the estates general in 76 years, the last one having been convened by Charles VIII at Tours. Meeting at Orléans the estates would be tasked with providing solutions to the crowns dire fiscal problems, a legacy of the Habsburg–Valois Wars, and the growing religious problem caused by the Reformation. The estates would however be unable to finish their deliberations, with Catherine de' Medici proroguing the session, and reconvening the estates general at a later date in 1561 at Pontoise, where she sought a more agreeable selection of delegates. Ultimately the work of the estates would solve neither the crowns fiscal insolvency or the religious conflict, which exploded in the Wars of Religion.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Edict of Romorantin</span> 1560 French edict on punishing heretics

The Edict of Romorantin, was a decree designed to alter the prosecution of heretics, promulgated by the King of France, François II, in May 1560. The decree came in the wake of the Amboise conspiracy in which many Protestant Huguenots had participated. Conscious that the previous policy of persecution embodied in the edicts of Châteaubriant and Compiègne had thus failed, the crown and the chancellor altered their strategy by distinguishing for the first time between heretics and rebels. The edict would transfer the prosecution of heretics who had committed no other offence to the ecclesiastical courts, which lacked the power to give death sentences. The edict would be confirmed in January 1561 then superseded, first by the Edict of July, which maintained its provision concerning ecclesiastical courts, and by the more radical Edict of Saint-Germain.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Edict of Saint-Maur</span> 1568 religious edict

The Edict of Saint-Maur was a prohibitive religious edict, promulgated by Charles IX of France at the outbreak of the third war of religion. The edict revoked the tolerance that had been granted to Protestantism, in the edicts of Saint-Germain, Amboise and the peace of Longjumeau. The edict forbade the exercise of any religion other than Catholicism in the kingdom of France, and gave Protestants 15 days to vacate the kingdom. Ultimately the edict would be overturned in the landmark peace of Saint-Germain-en-Laye at the end of the third religious war in 1570 which restored recognition to Protestantism, alongside many other concessions.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Edict of Amboise (1560)</span> French decree on religion

The Edict of Amboise (1560) was a decree that created the framework to separate heresy from sedition, promulgated by the young king Francis II on the advice of his council and mother Catherine de' Medici. The edict was the first promulgated in France that lessened the persecution of Huguenots through the provision of amnesty for past religious crimes on the condition the offender returned to the Catholic fold. The edict was published during the Amboise conspiracy whilst the royal court was resident in the Château d'Amboise and their authority over France was shaken. It would be superseded first by the Edict of Romorantin in May of the same year, then the Edict of July and finally the Edict of Saint-Germain

<span class="mw-page-title-main">François Olivier</span> French politician (1487–1560)

François Olivier, Sieur de Leuvillé was Chancellor of France from 1545 to his death in 1560. After having spent his early career serving in the Parlement and chancelleries of the royal family he was elevated to the prestigious role of Chancellor of France upon the disgrace of Guillaume Poyet.

References

  1. ↑ Knecht, Robert (2010). The French Wars of Religion 1559–1598. Routledge. p. 22. ISBN   9781408228197.
  2. ↑ Holt, Mack (2005). The French Wars of Religion 1562-1629. Cambridge University Press. p. 41. ISBN   9780521547505.
  3. ↑ Knecht, Robert (2010). The French Wars of Religion 1559–1598. Routledge. pp. 21–9. ISBN   9781408228197.
  4. ↑ Salmon, J.H.M. (1975). Society in Crisis: France during the Sixteenth Century. Metheun & Co. p. 125. ISBN   0416730507.
  5. ↑ Carroll, Stuart (2009). Martyrs and Murderers: The Guise Family and the Making of Europe. Oxford University Press. p. 111. ISBN   9780199596799.
  6. ↑ Sutherland, Nicola (1980). The Huguenot Struggle for Recognition. Yale University Press. p. 105. ISBN   0300023286.
  7. ↑ Thompson, James (1909). The Wars of Religion in France, 1559–1576: The Huguenots, Catherine de Medici and Philip II. Chicago University Press. p. 44.
  8. ↑ Carroll, Stuart (2009). Martyrs and Murderers: The Guise Family and the Making of Europe. Oxford University Press. p. 103. ISBN   9780199596799.
  9. ↑ Carroll, Stuart (2009). Martyrs and Murderers: The Guise Family and the Making of Europe. Oxford University Press. p. 124. ISBN   9780199596799.
  10. ↑ Knecht, Robert (2010). The French Wars of Religion, 1559-1598. Routledge. p. 29. ISBN   9781408228197.
  11. ↑ Sutherland, Nicola (1984). Princes Politics and Religion 1547-89. Hambledon Press. p. 64.
  12. ↑ Thompson, James (1909). The Wars of Religion in France, 1559-1576: The Huguenots, Catherine de Medici and Phillip II. Chicago University Press. p. 79.
  13. 1 2 Sutherland, Nicola (1980). The Huguenot Struggle for Recognition. Yale University Press. p. 124. ISBN   0300023286.
  14. ↑ Roelker, Nancy (1996). One King, One Faith: The Parlement of Paris and the Religious Reformation of the Sixteenth Century. University of California Press. p. 250. ISBN   0520086260.
  15. 1 2 Roelker, Nancy (1996). One King, One Faith: The Parlement of Paris and the Religious Reformation of the Sixteenth Century. University of California Press. p. 251. ISBN   0520086260.
  16. ↑ Carroll, Stuart (2009). Martyrs and Murderers: The Guise Family and the Making of Europe. Oxford University Press. pp. 143–4. ISBN   9780199596799.
  17. 1 2 Baird, Henry (1880). History of the Rise of the Huguenots in Two Volumes: Vol 1 of 2. Hodder & Stoughton. p. 476.
  18. 1 2 Baird, Henry (1880). History of the Rise of the Huguenots in Two Volumes: Vol 1 of 2. Hodder & Stoughton. p. 477.
  19. 1 2 3 Roelker, Nancy (1996). One King, One Faith: The Parlement of Paris and the Religious Reformation of the Sixteenth Century. University of California Press. p. 252. ISBN   0520086260.
  20. ↑ Romier, Lucien (1924). Catholiques et Huguenots a la Cour de Charles IX. Perrin et Cie. p. 114.
  21. ↑ Romier, Lucien (1924). Catholiques et Huguenots a la Cour de Charles IX. Perrin et Cie. p. 115.
  22. 1 2 Romier, Lucien (1924). Catholiques et Huguenots a la Cour de Charles IX. Perrin et Cie. p. 116.
  23. ↑ Romier, Lucien (1924). Catholiques et Huguenots a la Cour de Charles IX. Perrin et Cie. p. 117.
  24. ↑ Marejol, Jean (1983). La Reforme, la Ligue, l'Edit de Nantes: 1559–1598. Tallandier. p. 56. ISBN   9782235014250.
  25. 1 2 Roelker, Nancy (1996). One King, One Faith: The Parlement of Paris and the Religious Reformation of the Sixteenth Century. University of California Press. p. 253. ISBN   0520086260.
  26. ↑ Roelker, Nancy (1996). One King, One Faith: The Parlement of Paris and the Religious Reformation of the Sixteenth Century. University of California Press. p. 254. ISBN   0520086260.
  27. ↑ Marejol, Jean (1983). La Reforme, la Ligue, l'Edit de Nantes: 1559–1598. Tallandier. p. 57. ISBN   9782235014250.
  28. ↑ Roelker, Nancy (1996). One King, One Faith: The Parlement of Paris and the Religious Reformation of the Sixteenth Century. University of California Press. p. 257. ISBN   0520086260.
  29. ↑ Baird, Henry (1880). History of the Rise of the Huguenots in Two Volumes: Vol 1 of 2. Hodder & Stoughton. p. 478.
  30. 1 2 Thompson, James (1909). The Wars of Religion in France 1559-1576: The Huguenots, Catherine de Medici and Phillip II. Chicago University Press. p. 103.
  31. ↑ Roelker, Nancy (1996). One King, One Faith: The Parlement of Paris and the Religious Reformations of the Sixteenth Century. University of California Press. p. 255. ISBN   0520086260.
  32. ↑ Potter, David (1997). The French Wars of Religion: Selected Documents. Palgrave Macmillan. pp. 27–8. ISBN   0333647998.
  33. ↑ Thompson, James (1909). The Wars of Religion in France 1559-1576: The Huguenots, Catherine de Medici and Phillip II. Chicago University Press. p. 129.
  34. ↑ Potter, David (1997). The French Wars of Religion: Selected Documents. Palgrave Macmillan. pp. 73–5. ISBN   0333647998.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.