Notice: This is the official website of the All Empires History Community (Reg. 10 Feb 2002)

  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

Why southern France became protestant in 16th c.?

 Post Reply Post Reply
Author
Roberts View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain

aka axeman

Joined: 22-Aug-2005
Location: Riga
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1138
  Quote Roberts Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: Why southern France became protestant in 16th c.?
    Posted: 15-Dec-2008 at 23:04
Wasn't northern france the more urbanized, mercantile region, like Champagne, Picardy who during the wars of religion were bastions of Catholicism. So why was it in the southern region around Guyenne that the hugenots really took off?
Back to Top
edgewaters View Drop Down
Sultan
Sultan
Avatar
Snake in the Grass-Banned

Joined: 13-Mar-2006
Location: Canada
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2394
  Quote edgewaters Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16-Dec-2008 at 00:31
I can only speculate, but I notice that southern france was always religiously unusual ... the Pope even waged a two decade long Crusade there, the Albigensian Crusade, which claimed hundreds of thousands of lives (estimates run from 200 thousand to a million).
Back to Top
Parnell View Drop Down
Suspended
Suspended

Suspended

Joined: 04-Apr-2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1409
  Quote Parnell Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16-Dec-2008 at 17:46
Southern France had a tradition for religious innovation. The Albigensian's and Cathars being good examples.
Back to Top
Menumorut View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar

Joined: 02-Jun-2006
Location: Romania
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1423
  Quote Menumorut Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16-Dec-2008 at 19:37
The South of France was colonized in 13-14th centuries, 700 new towns called Bastides have been built by French kings.

In such a new social medium the apparition of ideas of reform is easy to understand.

Back to Top
edgewaters View Drop Down
Sultan
Sultan
Avatar
Snake in the Grass-Banned

Joined: 13-Mar-2006
Location: Canada
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2394
  Quote edgewaters Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16-Dec-2008 at 20:13

Originally posted by Roberts

Wasn't northern france the more urbanized, mercantile region, like Champagne, Picardy who during the wars of religion were bastions of Catholicism. So why was it in the southern region around Guyenne that the hugenots really took off?

Just to add - I think you might be making an erroneous assumption here, that the rise of Protestantism was associated with urban, mercantile populations. In fact it tended to spring up in societies that were on Europe's periphery and distant from the most urbanized regions. During the high medieval period, the great centres of education, craftsmanship, and urban culture were mostly the Italian city-states like Genoa and Venice, which were of course strongly Catholic.

England and Germany did have some major urban centres and a good deal of mercantile activity, but not in as great a concentration and not with the same sort of urban culture - that's partially why the Renaissance came late in these areas.

Back to Top
Parnell View Drop Down
Suspended
Suspended

Suspended

Joined: 04-Apr-2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1409
  Quote Parnell Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16-Dec-2008 at 21:40
The Italian city states were too close to the yoke of Rome however. The origins of capitalism can be seen in Northern Europe, and to some extent helped along by the Hanseatic League.
Back to Top
edgewaters View Drop Down
Sultan
Sultan
Avatar
Snake in the Grass-Banned

Joined: 13-Mar-2006
Location: Canada
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2394
  Quote edgewaters Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16-Dec-2008 at 23:50

Originally posted by Parnell

The Italian city states were too close to the yoke of Rome however. The origins of capitalism can be seen in Northern Europe, and to some extent helped along by the Hanseatic League.

Indeed, however this doesn't mean that Northern Europe in the medieval period, or even shortly thereafter, was any sort of cultural powerhouse. The primary cultural centres were the Italian city-states and republics. Hanseatic trade was important but still, Baltic and North Sea trade as a whole was small potatoes compared to the Meditteranean (and the Hanseatic League itself was fairly minor next to groups like the Medici).

Capitalism happens quite a bit later on - between the time of Martin Luther and the time of Adam Smith, alot happens, including things like the discovery of the New World, the colonization of India, etc. The centres of culture and trade shift during this time - access to the Atlantic becomes much more important than access to the Meditteranean, for instance. The importance of cities like Genoa, Florence, and Venice diminishes considerably, while the importance of cities like London and Amsterdam skyrocket.



Edited by edgewaters - 16-Dec-2008 at 23:58
Back to Top
Roberts View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain

aka axeman

Joined: 22-Aug-2005
Location: Riga
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1138
  Quote Roberts Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17-Dec-2008 at 00:00
Originally posted by edgewaters



Hanseatic trade was important but still, Baltic and North Sea trade as a whole was small potatoes compared to the Meditteranean (and the Hanseatic League itself was fairly minor next to groups like the Medici).

I wouldn't say so. Baltic sea grain trade was extremely important to European early modern commercial powerhouse Netherlands which regarded it as "mother of all trades". Overall the Baltic and North Sea region trade was more stable than Meditteranean, because the later was hampered by rampart piracy (Berber and Turkish corsairs of 16th and 17th century) which disrupted trade lines and depopulated entire coasts in Aragon, France and Italy.
Back to Top
edgewaters View Drop Down
Sultan
Sultan
Avatar
Snake in the Grass-Banned

Joined: 13-Mar-2006
Location: Canada
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2394
  Quote edgewaters Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17-Dec-2008 at 00:59

Originally posted by Roberts

I wouldn't say so. Baltic sea grain trade was extremely important to European early modern commercial powerhouse Netherlands which regarded it as "mother of all trades".

For the Netherlands I'm sure it was - I doubt they saw Meditteranean trade as very relevant, since they had little opportunity to participate in it. But overall, grain trade on the Baltic was hardly the most important trade in the world, or even in Europe - silk and spices were quite a bit more important, for instance. Not to mention Spanish and Portuguese colonial enterprises. Plus, during the Reformation, the Netherlands had not yet shaken off the Spanish. 

International trade itself, in fact, wasn't even that important during the early Reformation and really wouldn't be until the period of the Enlightenment. Banking was quite important, but that was still dominated by places like Florence and Venice and Genoa until the foundation of the Royal Exchange and the Amsterdamsche Wisselbank in the 1560s, by which time Protestantism had mostly taken root wherever it was going to take root. By the next century, the most important financial centres were Amsterdam, London, and Hamburg - but that's a long time after the main action of the Reformation, it's just before the Enlightenment.

The Protestant countries did indeed eventually become dominant centres of economic and cultural influence, but they became Protestant before that happened.

Overall the Baltic and North Sea region trade was more stable than Meditteranean, because the later was hampered by rampart piracy (Berber and Turkish corsairs of 16th and 17th century) which disrupted trade lines and depopulated entire coasts in Aragon, France and Italy.

Yes, but consider how much trade was happening just to support that much piracy ...

Back to Top
gcle2003 View Drop Down
King
King

Suspended

Joined: 06-Dec-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 7035
  Quote gcle2003 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17-Dec-2008 at 11:31
All I can say is this is a much deeper question than it looked like at first sight.
Back to Top
Parnell View Drop Down
Suspended
Suspended

Suspended

Joined: 04-Apr-2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1409
  Quote Parnell Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17-Dec-2008 at 13:53
Historians like to analyse LOL
Back to Top
gcle2003 View Drop Down
King
King

Suspended

Joined: 06-Dec-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 7035
  Quote gcle2003 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17-Dec-2008 at 14:58
A similar question might be why did Protestantism not develop in Russia (or the Slav countries in general)?
 
I think one needs to distinguish rather carefully between the Protestantism of Calvin and predestination and the (arguably miscalled) Protestantism of, e.g. Lutherans, Methodists and Anglicans. 
Back to Top
edgewaters View Drop Down
Sultan
Sultan
Avatar
Snake in the Grass-Banned

Joined: 13-Mar-2006
Location: Canada
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2394
  Quote edgewaters Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17-Dec-2008 at 16:18

Originally posted by gcle2003

A similar question might be why did Protestantism not develop in Russia (or the Slav countries in general)?

Alot of the issues that the early Protestants had with the church simply weren't issues in the Orthodox church. The Catholic church allowed only the Latin gospel, while the Orthodox church invented the Cyrillic alphabet so that the gospels could be translated into the Slavic languages. Neither did the Orthodox church practice indulgences and pardons, which were one of the biggest issues in the Reformation (just look at Martin Luther's 95 theses: the majority of them are about the sale of pardons and indulgences).

Back to Top
Roberts View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain

aka axeman

Joined: 22-Aug-2005
Location: Riga
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1138
  Quote Roberts Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17-Dec-2008 at 16:31
Originally posted by gcle2003

A similar question might be why did Protestantism not develop in Russia (or the Slav countries in general)?

Protestantism didn't develop in Orthodox countries for the reasons mentioned by edgewaters above.
As for other "Slavic" countries protestantism was quite strong - Jan Huss in Bohemia and later Bohemian brothers movement.
Poland (later Polish- Lithuanian Commonwealth) was exceptionally tolerant to all religions and most of its cities and large part of nobility became protestant. Counter reformation started only with fiercely catholic Swedish king Sigismund in the end of 16th century.
Back to Top
gcle2003 View Drop Down
King
King

Suspended

Joined: 06-Dec-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 7035
  Quote gcle2003 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17-Dec-2008 at 16:38
I had more in mind the Calvinist and similar doctrines. It wasn't just Protestants that objected to the sale of indulgences and pardons.
 
If you consider Anglicans as Protestants, then arguably you could end up considering the Orthodox the same way, since, while not in communion, they recognise each other in many ways
 
It's generally safer I think to class the religions that recognise the apostolic successsion and the one church (even if divided) as catholic, and reserve Protestant for those that reject the succession and prefer the concept of local self-governing congregations.
Back to Top
Akolouthos View Drop Down
Sultan
Sultan
Avatar

Joined: 24-Feb-2006
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2091
  Quote Akolouthos Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17-Dec-2008 at 17:11
I might have missed it in the thread, and if so I apologize, but I think that the fact that southern France was closer to the ideological cradle of the Calvinistic brand of the Reformation in Geneva, and far from the royal center of power might have had a great deal to do with it. Keep in mind that Geneva existed, for quite a while, to promote the Reformation, and Calvin became sort of an ideological bureaucrat, complete with a government stipend. As far as the slow spread of the Reformation further north, I would assume that the proximity to the crown might have been responsible for the hindrance.
 
Originally posted by edgewaters

Alot of the issues that the early Protestants had with the church simply weren't issues in the Orthodox church. The Catholic church allowed only the Latin gospel, while the Orthodox church invented the Cyrillic alphabet so that the gospels could be translated into the Slavic languages. Neither did the Orthodox church practice indulgences and pardons, which were one of the biggest issues in the Reformation (just look at Martin Luther's 95 theses: the majority of them are about the sale of pardons and indulgences).

Quite so. Thinking on this has reminded me of a thread Byzantine_Emperor wanted to start regarding the short-lived dialogue between the Orthodox and the reformers, and another involving the person of Cyril Lucaris. I think by the time of Calvin, the Swiss Reformation was too far removed from the original concept of the Christian Church for any dialogue to bear fruit, but I've always considered it a bit of a historical enigma why the discussion with the Lutherans did not accomplish more.
 
Originally posted by gcle2003

If you consider Anglicans as Protestants, then arguably you could end up considering the Orthodox the same way, since, while not in communion, they recognise each other in many ways
 
It's generally safer I think to class the religions that recognise the apostolic successsion and the one church (even if divided) as catholic, and reserve Protestant for those that reject the succession and prefer the concept of local self-governing congregations.
 
The dialogue with the Anglicans, for many years, looked to be productive. Indeed, well into the twentieth century there were hopes for reunion, which appeared a possibility on at least two occasions I can think of. That said, the ideological changes undergone by the Anglican Church over the course of the latter half of the century have put such hopes on indefinite hold. One of the major problems is that, since the collapse of the British Empire and the resulting stratification of the independent -- or, perhaps, autocephalous to borrow from eastern parlance -- churches which comprise the Anglican communion, some Orthodox have lamented that we no longer know with whom to speak. The archbishop of Canterbury remains the obvious choice, but the ideological differences between the Church of England and the American Episcopal Church -- to say nothing of the even greater differences between both and the Anglican Communion in the Third World -- present us with a problem. Ironically, it is now the Anglican Communion in Africa that is attempting to call, albeit with perhaps undue rancor, the lands from which she was converted back to the traditions that they once espoused.
 
-Akolouthos


Edited by Akolouthos - 17-Dec-2008 at 17:20
Back to Top
edgewaters View Drop Down
Sultan
Sultan
Avatar
Snake in the Grass-Banned

Joined: 13-Mar-2006
Location: Canada
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2394
  Quote edgewaters Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17-Dec-2008 at 17:34

Originally posted by gcle2003

I had more in mind the Calvinist and similar doctrines. It wasn't just Protestants that objected to the sale of indulgences and pardons.

True, but the Calvinists are part of the Reformation as well. 

Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Bulletin Board Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 9.56a [Free Express Edition]
Copyright ©2001-2009 Web Wiz

This page was generated in 0.049 seconds.