Edition of the Edict of Nantes. Good Intentions of the Edict of Nantes
So, the long-awaited peace did not bring complete satisfaction to either side, however external war it was necessary to finish at all costs, since it was impossible to delay any longer with the settlement of the internal confessional issue, over the solution of which the advisers of Henry IV had struggled since his renunciation of Protestantism. Having triumphantly taken possession of Amiens, Henry took the initiative in his own hands, having obtained from the assembly, which met in Châtellerault, that she sent four deputies for consultations to him, "endowed with full powers for negotiating and making decisions."
These negotiations, dedicated to finding a difficult compromise between the demands of representatives of the two faiths, lasted several months and ended with the drafting of a document that went down in history under the name of the Edict of Nantes. This document contains several separate parts: 98 general articles, signed on April 13, 1598, were supplemented on May 2 by special articles, further expanding the freedoms granted to Protestants. Attached to the edict, two royal privileges of April 13 and 30 regulated the status of fortresses; these privileges were never registered by Parliament and rested solely on the royal word.
The Edict of Nantes was very similar in content to the edict of Poitiers in 1577, but even more liberal: it expanded the freedoms regarding the worship of the Protestant worship, and made many more actual concessions to the Protestants. Now they enjoyed the same civil rights as the Catholics; they were to be admitted to universities, and Catholic preachers were forbidden to attack their faith. In order to legally guarantee their rights, the edict provided for the establishment of a chamber in the Parliament of Paris, which included Catholics and Protestants on an equal footing. Similar chambers were created in Rouen, Rennes, Bordeaux, Castres and Grenoble. In addition to these legal guarantees, which civilly equalized them with Catholics, the Protestants received a number of privileges: they remained organized in the party, retained their synods, received 100 fortresses for eight years, including such important ones as Montpellier, La Rochelle and Montauban. Thus, the Catholic state took upon itself the burden of providing guarantees directed against itself: a state was created within a state, more powerful than the royal power, at least militarily, because the Protestants could muster an army of 25 thousand people, then as the regular royal army did not exceed ten thousand. Therefore, it is not surprising that the Edict of Nantes ran into active resistance from the Catholic majority. However, during the period of initial euphoria that accompanied the announcement of this document, they managed to sign it without much difficulty.
The main difficulties began after the celebrations on the occasion of the signing of the Edict of Nantes had died down: it was not enough to sign this document, it still had to be registered by the parliaments - Paris and provincial. In particular, one very remarkable case complicated this procedure.
Catherine of Bourbon, sister of Henry IV, never renounced Protestantism and openly performed a Reformed cult at the Louvre, gathering up to 1500 people in attendance and thereby flagrantly violating the limits set by the Edict of Nantes. But what could one say to the king's sister? Yet she was nowhere near as free in other respects. As we remember, the royal brother strongly opposed her marriage to the Count of Soissons. He doomed her to live in the shadow of Gabrieli d'Estre, and finally decided to marry her to Henry of Lorraine, Duke of Bar. The forty-year-old old maid Catherine did not oppose this marriage, which was concluded for reasons public interest. The only obstacle was the difference in faith. She resolutely refused to renounce Protestantism, and special permission from the pope was required for mixed marriages. The close relationship between the bride and groom also raised objections. However, Henry IV neglected all these circumstances. The marriage was performed by his paternal brother, the illegitimate Charles of Bourbon, who was made Archbishop of Rouen. True, he refused to conduct the marriage ceremony in the church, since Catherine was not a Catholic. Then Henry IV invited his bastard brother to perform the sacrament of marriage in the study of his hunting castle Saint-Germain. More in form than in substance, the archbishop tried to protest, declaring that this was not a consecrated place. "My office is a hallowed place," the king retorted, "and my presence is worth a mass." There was nothing left but to submit, and the prelate married Catherine and the Duke of Bar.
Such a gross violation of the rules catholic church only a few months after the publication of the Edict of Nantes, the Catholics were severely offended and their opposition made even more bitter. At the head of the opposition movement was the Parlement of Paris, which, despite numerous written royal orders, repeatedly postponed the registration of the edict, which prevented practical application its provisions. Deciding to put an end to this, Henry IV ordered Parliament to come to him at the Louvre on February 7, 1599, in order to listen to his will, and the members of Parliament had no choice but to obey: on February 25, 1599, the Edict of Nantes was registered by the Parlement of Paris.
It remained to break the resistance of the provincial parliaments. This required a lot of patience from the king: the Parliament of Rennes was the last to register the edict on August 23, 1609. Somewhat earlier, in the first months of the same year, after long explanations about their unwillingness to register the edict, this was done by the parliaments of Toulouse, Bordeaux and Aix-en-Provence.
As you can see, religious appeasement was carried out not only by the force of arms, but also thanks to the authority of the king - not so much moral (we will keep silent about morality), but based on the same force. Since Henry IV could directly influence society with his authority, peace, although somewhat artificial, reigned in the kingdom, allowing its revival to take place.
There were still many problems to be solved: the king had no legitimate heir, the country lay in ruins, neighboring states were hostile or unfriendly, the state treasury was in a catastrophic state. Henry IV had 12 years to solve them. For this short term he deserved the name, which much later was awarded to him by the apologists of the Bourbon dynasty - Henry the Great.
EDICT OF NANTES 1598 - a law signed by the French king Henry IV on August 13, 1598 in the city of Nantes; over-the-shil Re-li-gi-oz-nye (gu-ge-not-skie) wars in France.
The Edict of Nantes was the first attempt to create your own ro-da de-la-ra-tion of the rights of subjects of the French monarchy not-for-wee-si -mo from their con-fes-sio-nal-noy affiliation. Having given the Edict of Nantes, Henry IV continued to live in a way of religious acceptance, someone-rui without-success-push-but tried the weight of the next co-ro-li from the dynasty of Va-lua (edicts of Charles IX, Gen-ri-ha III, etc.). The Edict of Nantes declared the official re-li-gi-her some-li-cism, returned some-personal church-vi con-fi-sko-van-nye over time -we are lands, but at the same time, pre-dos-tav-lyal French gu-ge-no-there is free-bo-du ve-ro-is-po-ve-da-niya. In the Edict of Nantes, dek-la-ri-ro-va-lis-va-pro-tes-tan-tov on the race-by-the-same-im-s-st-vom, about-ra-zo-va- nie, court, medical assistance, taking on public duties. At the same time, the Edict of Nantes oh-ra-ni-chi-vale is possible from-the-right-le-cult of the cult of pro-tes-tan-ta-mi: in major cities ro-dah, episcopal re-zi-den-qi-yah and their ok-re-st-no-stay (Paris, Tou-lu-za, Di-jon, Reims, Chartres, etc. ) bo-go-serving would-lo for-pre-sche-but, moreover, sp-tsi-al-but ho-va-ri-va-elk, which is under “ok-re-st- no-stu” in-no-ma-et-xia ter-ri-to-ria from 2 to 5 leagues. On pro-tes-tan-tov on-la-ha-moose, you must-for-tel-st-in you-pay-chi-vat de-sya-ti-well in favor of the Gal-Li-Kan church -vi (see Gal-li-kan-st-vo), do not work during some kind of personal holidays; the servants of the pro-testant churches (as well as some personal spirit-ho-ven-st-vo) were-in-bo-well-da-lied from not-se- niya military service-would and ta-li. For su-deb-nyh times-bi-ra-tions on de-lams pre-hundred-vi-te-lei re-for-mi-ro-van-noy re-li-gyi created-yes-va-lis special pa-la-you with par-la-men-tah in Pa-ri-same, Tou-lu-ze, Bor-do and Gre-noble-le, co-hundred-yav-shie on-po-lo-vi -well, from pro-tes-tan-tov. According to the Edict of Nantes, in the cities, where it would be possible to resolve the cult, it was possible to open about -tes-tant-sky schools and aka-de-mi (Mon-to-ban, Se-dan, Nimes, etc.). An important part of the edik-ta became secret articles, pre-du-smat-ri-vav-shie saving for gu-ge-no-ta-mi for - not-may-my by them since the time of the religious wars of the cities-cre-po-stays and uk-re-p-lyon-ny places (La Ro-chelle, Mont-to-ban, Mont-pe-lier, Nimes, Niort, etc.), many of them were port-ta-mi. This is the right to complain for 8 years with the possibility of extension.
The Edict of Nantes met with sharp opposition from the side of Rome. ku-rii, some-lich. du-ho-ven-st-va and par-la-men-tov, some-rye for-ty-well-whether his re-gi-st-ra-tion for several de-sya-ti-le- ty. Paris par-la-ment for-re-gi-st-ri-ro-val Edict of Nantes only after the change of pre-si-den-ta in 1599, Rouen-sky par-la-ment - in 1610. The Edict of Nantes did not satisfy the same gu-ge-no-tov, considering the concessions from the side of the ko-ro-left-authority of non-dos -ta-precise-us-mi. However, for some time, the Edict of Nantes provided internal political stability in France.
Svyatoslav Gorbunov V last days more and more often one has to observe a growing misunderstanding between people, which turns before our eyes into a genuine tragedy of morals. One way or another, conflicts of worldviews, attracting witnesses to the events of the past and having acquired the most unreasonable - blind and uncompromising, intolerant - form by the will of fate and circumstances, manifest themselves both within the walls of academic institutions and on the stairs. scientific libraries, and in cafeterias, on the streets, even in private conversations of loved ones. Perhaps such an aggravation of relations will someday be considered a special sign of our time, but I would like to hope that we will still be remembered by posterity for something else. Walking on a hot June day through the old galleries of the Louvre and talking about destinies modern world, I tried to remember whether there was a place in the long history of real tolerance. Has history been built only on violence and endless conflicts? At some point, two pictures caught my eye, similar friend at each other like reflections in a mirror. On the canvases by Frans Pourbus the Younger (Frans Pourbus II) was depicted Henry IV of Navarre - the good old King Henri (le bon roi Henry)
as the French still call it. And here’s what seemed remarkable to me: in both portraits, the king is shown strikingly similar, the only difference is in the color of the veil in the background and in the fact that in one of the paintings Heinrich appears before the viewer in military armor, and in the other - in a modest “civilian”. Such a dualism could not but occupy my mind, and my memory immediately betrayed a familiar one from numerous novels and history books formula: "King by right of conquest and by right of birth, conciliator of France." It was this conciliatory meaning of the figure of King Henry that seemed to me especially significant in the context of the very intolerance that is manifesting itself today, which I thought about at that time. 
Frans Pourbus the Younger. Portrait of Henry of Navarre in armor. 1610. Louvre, Paris Probably not a single professional historian, and just a person familiar with the history of France in the 16th century, will doubt that the role that fell to Henry's lot was very difficult. Society was heated to the limit, destructive religious wars between Catholics and Huguenots tore the country apart, flaring up with new force then here and there. Against this background, the well-known tragedy of St. Bartholomew's Night was only a vivid, but short-lived episode of those waves of violence that again and again overwhelmed the territory of a once completely peaceful state. Religious conflict, political instability, the opposition of the Catholic League, led by Guise, the royal court and the Protestants, who gained considerable strength, turned the “pearl of Europe”, as Erasmus of Rotterdam once spoke of France, into an eternally burning camp of violence and general hostility. 
Edict of Nantes. Revision of the document presented to the Parlement of Paris in February 1599. National Archives of France The end of this enmity, which exhausted the people and destroyed the best representatives of the state, could only be put to rest by Henry IV, who issued the famous conciliatory Edict of Nantes in 1598. Being politically very experienced and reasonable person, the king understood that it was impossible to resolve the contradictions that had accumulated and settled in the souls of people by force of arms. At least, they tried to do this more than once before him, but with each such attempt, the enmity only intensified. Religion mixed with politics, and politics became ideology. The most important link that could once again bind the nation was tolerance - a simple understanding of universal human unity, which was so lacking and ordinary people and members of the upper classes. Henry himself, as you know, treated the issues of religious ideology in a very utilitarian way: suffice it to recall that for the sake of the highest expediency (and sometimes just for the sake of saving his life), he changed his confessional affiliation several times, becoming either a Catholic or a Huguenot. The words attributed to him, “Paris is worth a mass,” referring to the period of accession to the throne and the next conversion to the Catholic faith, have become a proverb among the people (although Henry, apparently, never said these words). 
Frans Pourbus the Younger (1569−1622).
Portrait of Henry IV. 1610. Louvre, Paris In any case, condemn Henry for such "inconsistency" from the today it is difficult if we remember that the basis of his “deal with conscience” was the desire for peace, for which, as if for a young man who had gone on a long journey, the country so yearned. And, of course, the new king, who managed to fight on the side of different parties, understood that only tolerance and relative equality could become a guarantee of peace.
The result was the Edict of Nantes, a remarkable historical document, so different in style from all other conciliatory treaties that preceded it. For more than a century, his text has attracted the attention of researchers from all over the world. Many eminent historians, sociologists and religious scholars devoted their work to its analysis, and almost all of them agree on one thing: it was the Edict of Nantes - the edict of tolerance - that put an end to the bloody era religious wars and set the country back on the path to prosperity.
But still, what was Heinrich's program? How could he rid society of decades of hatred and prejudice? We find the answer in the very text of the edict, which has 93 general articles and 36 more secret decrees. And the most remarkable in the context of the present day seems to me the very first article historical document, which reads: " BeforeTotal memory both everyone, whathappened from toy And from another sides from start Martha 1585 of the year before on theshego coronation And in flow othergih previous to that unrest, will blotted out, how as if nothingnot happened. Neither our generalnym prosecutors, neither otherwise persons, thstate And private, not willallowed never And neither on what about mention about this or presledovat judicial in order in what wouldthen neither It was tribunals And jurisdictionI"(quoted from: Reader on the history of the Middle Ages. M., 1950. T. 3. S. 173). Thus, the memory of everything that had divided French society for almost the entire previous century was “erased”. No one was officially allowed to mention the past and interpret the tragedies that had occurred within the framework of the current day, so as not to revive the conflicts extinguished by the edict. And this decision seems to be very wise from the standpoint of modernity. 'Cause as we all know old grudge can always be used as powerful weapon for future conflict. Like a catalyst for a chemical process, it acts, inflamed accidentally or purposefully by evil or narrow-minded minds, with which the world is always full. And only its blissful oblivion can prevent this "armed conflict". And it is no coincidence that this oblivion is referred to in the edict with the addition of “above all” (premièrement). Edict beforeTotal cleared the minds and thereby cooled the passions. Perhaps this was precisely its hidden effectiveness.
The remaining articles of the edict, both the general and the secret part of it, deal with particular issues. Thus, Catholic worship was introduced wherever it was stopped as a result of the war, the Reformed religion ceased to be considered criminal, and no one was allowed to persecute Calvinists, wherever they lived. Of course, it is a mistake to believe that the document established complete equality between confessions. So, the Reformed religion was not allowed to the court, Protestant meetings, worship in Paris and other important lands for the king were banned. But his main motive - freedom of conscience, religion and forgetting the old strife for the sake of the coming world - was undoubtedly the most important and expensive part of the royal will.
It is not surprising that initially the society remained dissatisfied with the provisions of the issued document. Catholics were not satisfied with the wide concessions to the Protestants, the Protestants, on the contrary, saw in him insufficient support for their rights, but the main objective- the reconciliation of the nation, based on freedom - they carried out. And now, according to the edict signed in April 1598 under Nantes, for the first time in many decades, the long-awaited and blissful peace spread over France, which became the basis for the development of society and the state.
Later, the era of the reign of Henry IV and the actions of the Edict of Nantes, the French will call "the good age in the history of France." The basis of this era can be considered harmony within society, which is always the most important element of human development. And even the political drama at La Rochelle in 1627-1628 was perceived, probably already in a completely different way, as part of something completely alien, unlike the internal hostility of the last century.
In fact, the effect of the Edict of Nantes continued until the reign of Louis XIV, who was a zealous and consistent Catholic. In 1661, when its importance began to diminish, the persecution of Protestants resumed in the country, and with its complete abolition in 1685, France lost several hundred thousand people due to emigration, many of whom were the real flower of their country.
And yet, the memory of the age of tranquility, of King Henry and that fateful edict has survived to this day, because it was thanks to the foundations of tolerance that society was able to restore its position and forget about the nightmare of internal strife and wars for at least one century. And therefore, naturally and no longer so sarcastically, the words of an old French song glorifying peacetime Henry: « Vive Henry Quatre! Vive ce roi vaillant!.. «
Perhaps ours too modern society one day we will have to take such a conciliatory step, leaving behind all strife and clashes - the most important step of tolerance, opening the way to an era of genuine social, civilizational and moral development.
Edict of Nantes- granted the Frankfurt Protestants religious rights. Compiled by order of the French King Henry IV and approved in Nantes (April 13, 1598). It consisted of 93 articles and 36 secret decrees; the latter were not considered by Parliament and were not included in its minutes. Its publication was preceded by countless complaints from the Huguenots and lengthy negotiations with them by the king. Not a single E. XVI century. did not provide such extensive tolerance as Nantes. Subsequently, he gave reason to accuse the Huguenots of forming a state within a state. E. Nantes granted full equality to Catholics and Protestants. The first article E. introduced Catholic worship wherever it was discontinued. The Catholic clergy were given back all their former rights and estates. Calvinism was tolerated wherever it was before. All the nobles who held the highest judicial positions had the right to perform Calvinistic worship and to admit outsiders to it. In the castles of ordinary nobles, archpriests were allowed. worship, if the number of Protestants did not exceed 30 people and if the castles were not located in an area where Catholic owners exercised the right supreme court. In cities and villages where the Huguenots were allowed to worship until 1597, this right was restored. Calvinistic worship was formally forbidden in Paris and some cities closed to it on the basis of capitulations; but Protestants were allowed to live there. In all other places, the Huguenots could have churches, bells, schools, and hold public office. By religious motives it was forbidden to disinherit relatives, attack the Huguenots and persuade their children to convert to Catholicism. All those sentenced to punishment for religious beliefs were pardoned. The government pledged to help the Huguenots with subsidies for schools and churches. In addition, the Huguenots were granted a number of privileges of a political, judicial and military nature: they were allowed to convene periodic meetings (consistory, synods), keep deputies at the court to submit petitions and complaints through Sully, Morne and d'Aubigne. In Paris, a judicial chamber (Chambre de l'Edit) was established for the Protestants of Normandy and Brittany, in Castres for the Toulouse district, in Bordeaux and Grenoble - mixed chambers (Chambres miparties), for the Provence and Burgundy Provence. The exiles were returned to their homeland. In the power of the Huguenots were left for 8 years 200 fortresses and fortified castles that belonged to them until 1597 (places de sûreté); the garrisons were kept here at the expense of the king, and the chiefs were subordinate to the Huguenots. The main fortresses were: La Rochelle, Saumur and Montauban. The Pope called Nantes E. impious. The Huguenots demanded even more, interpreting E. in the sense of expanding its content. Henry IV persuaded the parliaments with great tact to enter the edict into their minutes; only the Rouen parliament persisted until 1609. state seal, Henry called it "eternal and irrevocable", protected it from misinterpretations, sometimes limiting it or expanding it temporarily, especially in relation to the term of the fortresses owned by the Huguenots. During the accession of Louis XIII, the regency approved the E. of Nantes, deciding that it should be "observed inviolably." Richelieu robbed the Protestant party of its political influence, but the principle of religious tolerance remained in force. In 1629, E. Nimes (édit de grâce) was published, repeating the articles of the Edict of Nantes. After the death of Louis XIII, a declaration was issued (July 8, 1643) in which the Protestants were granted free and unrestricted practice of their religion and the Edict of Nantes was affirmed "as far as it turned out to be necessary." Louis XIV declared in a declaration on May 21, 1652: "I wish that the Huguenots do not stop completely using the Edict of Nantes." Reluctantly obeying Nantes E., cathol. the clergy under Louis XIV tried by all means to destroy it or paralyze its significance. Since 1661, religious persecution began. In the 9th st. Nantes E., worship was allowed in those places where it was performed in 1596 and 1597. On this basis, Catholics began to destroy Protestant churches in other places. On April 2, 1666, Louis issued a declaration in which the principle of freedom, recognized by E. Nantes, was destroyed. Finally, on October 17, 1685, Louis XIV signed at Fontainebleau E. the abolition of E. Nantes. This document was drawn up by Chancellor Letellier. The king says in it that the Nantes E. was compiled by his ancestor in favor of the Huguenots with the intention of joining them to the bosom of the Catholic Church, but since the best and most numerous part of the subjects converted to Catholicism, the Nantes E. turns out to be superfluous. It was ordered to destroy the last temples of the Huguenots and their schools. In the VII Art. it said: "We forbid any concession in favor of the Reformed religion." The clergy showered the king with praise; Bossuet called the king a new Constantine, a new Charlemagne. Innocent XI in a papal letter (December 13, 1685) congratulated Louis on the accomplishment of a great pious deed. The consequences of the abolition of Nantes E. for France were sad: trade fell into decline, Protestants emigrated in hundreds of thousands - to London (more than 30 Calvinist churches immediately appeared there), to Sweden, Denmark, Russia, America, and most of all to Holland.
Wed Élie Benoit, "Histoire de l'Édit de Nantes"; Bernard, "Explication de l'Édit de Nantes" (H., 1666); Meynier, "De l'execution de l'Édit de Nantes dans le Dauphiné"; O. Douen, "La Révocation de l'Édit de Nantes à Paris" (H., 1894); J. Bianquis, "La Révocation de l'Édit de Nantes a Rouen" (Rouen, 1885); Vaillant, "La Révocation de l'Éd. de Nantes dans le Boulonnais"; R. Reuss, "Louis XIV et l'Église protestante de Strasbourg au moment de la Révocation" (P., 1887).
The French Republic has always proclaimed the separation of Church and State. Unlike others European countries, where religion is an integral part of political and social life, France sought to make laws guided primarily by secular motives. However, this was not always the case. As early as 400 years ago, the repeal of the Edict of Nantes (1685) entailed severe repressions against Protestants. The possibility of carrying out such a policy indicates that in the 17th century the church was inseparable from the state. On October 18, 1685, Louis XIV signed the Edict of Fontainebleau, which forbade the administration of Protestant rites throughout the entire French kingdom. From now on, one single religion became obligatory, the religion that the king himself professed - Catholicism. Thus, the Edict of Nantes, signed in 1598, was canceled.
Henry IV, signing the Edict of Nantes, freed Protestants from the obligation to attend Catholic services, and also granted the right to have their own fortified cities and fortresses and an armed army. However, this peacekeeping has always been regarded by the authorities as a temporary measure. Throughout the 17th century the status of the Protestants underwent serious changes, and their situation worsened more and more. Since 1626, the time of the conclusion of peace in Ales, Louis XIII cancels one of the most important articles of the Edict of Nantes - permission to create his own army.
Starting from the reign of Louis XIV (meaning his personal rule, without a regency, which began in 1661), the political and socio-economic situation of the Protestants is deteriorating. Until 1685, the Edict of Nantes was officially valid throughout the country, but the implementation of its provisions became more and more difficult, numerous amendments and restrictive conditions were adopted. Between 1661 and 1679 The royal council passes about twelve restrictive edicts, which testify to the transition from a policy of tolerance to real despotism. All these amendments were collected in a kind of an anthology called "Catholic Decisions" and published in 1668.
The idea that it was necessary to do away with the Reformed religion in France was born not only in the minds of the royal ministers. From the provinces, mainly from the areas where the Protestants were most widely represented (Lower Languedoc, Béarn, Cévennes, Vivares, Dauphine) began to receive more and more complaints from bishops, commissaries, local parliamentarians and simply zealous Catholics against the Huguenots, who, according to local population, sought to overthrow the royal power. The reformists were accused of all mortal sins: they are bad subjects and want to kill the king (didn't they execute Charles I in 1649?), they are republicans and enemies of the king and honest people. Of course, all this was fiction, since 1629 more than one and a half million Protestants living in France no longer have any power and influence in own country they cannot even openly express their opinion in the electoral bodies. The "Huguenot Republic", which was supposed to be organized after the example of the United Provinces, remained a dream. The accusations of disloyalty also turned out to be groundless, the Huguenots were one of the most devoted supporters of the young Louis XIV during the Fronde (1648-1653).
In the 80s of the XVII century. repressions are intensified against Protestants, as well as against individual dissatisfied locally and in the provinces. The monarchy tends to increasingly absolutize its power. Continuing the policy of Richelieu and Mazarin, Louis XIV seeks to unify state structure so that all subjects obey only one monarch and are all of the same faith. Protestants did not fit well into such projects. In addition, the king suspected their leaders of having relations with the Protestants of other countries, thinking that they were preparing a rebellion against his person.
The repressions against the Huguenots well reflect the context of the era. In 1678, the peace treaty signed at Niemwegen ended the Dutch War, in which France was opposed by a huge Protestant country. Despite the fact that France lost many territories it had previously captured, Alsace and Lorraine, as well as other lands along the Rhine, were transferred to it. All this strengthened the authority of the royal power. In addition, the king received support from the French clergy in his conflict with Pope Innocent XI, which was unfolding around the same time. In 1682, the highest church hierarchs created Declaration in four articles which proclaimed the independence of the king of France from the papacy. Another document has also been released, titled Pastoral Warning in which Protestants were accused of schism.
Now, when the power of the king was absolute, when the Catholic faith was recognized as the only correct one in the state, the accusation of treason was more terrible than the accusation of heresy. The Huguenots were executed not so much because they were bad Christians, but because they did not want to recognize the absolute power of the king, that is, they became rebels and enemies of the people.
From July 1682 to October 1685, eighty-three restrictive decrees concerning Protestants are issued from the royal office. For example, according to the decree of August 30, 1682, they were forbidden to gather together and sing anywhere except in churches, with the obligatory presence of a pastor. The police were charged with the duty to monitor the implementation of this decree. In parallel, the temples already built by the Huguenots were destroyed.
Victims of segregation by the king, the Huguenots were outlawed in their own country. In August 1683 were banned mixed marriages between Catholics and Huguenots, in October 1685 a decree was issued on occupations permitted to Protestants. Of the permitted professions, only agriculture and trade remained. Protestants, of course, did not remain indifferent witnesses to such treatment. Wherever possible, with different means organized resistance. The main forms of protest were mass hunger strikes and peaceful demonstrations. The reaction of the king was only an increase in repression. In Poitou in 1681, in the Dauphine, Cévennes and Bas-Languedoc in 1683, and then in the continuation of 1685-1686. martial law is introduced, which means that the soldiers are quartered directly in the houses of the protesters. The mission of the army in this case is to return them to the fold of the Catholic Church. Such a policy was called dragonade, its result - several thousand dead and forced flight of 200,000 people.
In the autumn of 1685, the king receives news that Protestants are converting en masse to Catholicism. Now he can officially abolish the Edict of Nantes, since it is no longer necessary. The country's king announced the following: "We see that the best and most of our subjects, who called themselves Reformed, gladly returned to the bosom of the Catholic Church; hence we believe that the execution of the Edict of Nantes becomes useless.
This legal fiction, however, was perceived in France as legitimate and necessary, which again contributed to the growth of the authority of Louis XIV, who was now rightfully considered a land collector and the most Catholic monarch. This authority, however, was strengthened only in France. In neighboring states, on the contrary, the image of the king faded, which was in no way facilitated by the Protestant refugees who flooded all of Europe. Among the refugees there were many knowledgeable people, artisans and scribes. It was they who shot arrows of sarcasm and criticism towards the French king, comparing him with Nebuchadnezzar. Herod, and even with the devil himself.
In 1686, in his work Fulfillment of the prophecies Pastor Pierre Juriot foretold the overthrow of the French king, which would follow his decision to defeat the Electoral Falcon (1688-1689). Then, wrote Juriot, Europe would call Louis to account. In France itself, voices were also heard against universal Catholicization, Vauban in his " Memoirs of the memory of the Huguenots(1689) criticizes the king's ambition to rule over minds but not over bodies."
From 1702 to 1713 the authorities brutally suppress the protestant uprising that engulfed the Cévennes. The participants in the uprising were called kamizars, because of the white shirts worn over their clothes. However, Louis XIV fails to completely subdue the Camisars, and he is forced to make concessions. More and more French people see him as a tyrant, not a champion of religion.
It wasn't until a hundred years later that Protestants were finally free to practice their religion. It was granted to them in 1789. The French Revolution that followed shortly afterwards declared all religions to be equal and allowed every citizen to choose their own faith.