The outbreak of the Thirty Years' War followed upon a
revolution in Bohemia, which was precipitated by Rudolph's
attempt to evade the Royal Charter, extorted from him in 1609
by the estates. Its chief feature was a guarantee of freedom of
conscience to Bohemians so long as they adhered to certain
recognized creeds; but it also involved questions of authority
over lands with respect to their use for religious purposes.
The difficulties with the Royal Charter, which had led to
Rudolph's downfall in Bohemia, were left to confront Matthias.
SAMUEL R. GARDINER
Whether it would have been possible in those days for a Catholic king to
have kept a Protestant nation in working order we cannot say. At all
events Matthias did not give the experiment a fair trial. He did not,
indeed, attack the Royal Charter directly on the lands of the
aristocracy. But he did his best to undermine it on his own. The
Protestants of Braunau, on the lands of the Abbot of Braunau, and the
Protestants of Klostergrab, on the lands of the Archbishop of Prague,
built churches for themselves, the use of which was prohibited by the
abbot and the archbishop. A dispute immediately arose as to the rights
of ecclesiastical land-owners, and it was argued on the Protestant side
that their lands were technically crown lands, and that they had
therefore no right to close the churches. Matthias took the opposite
view.
On his own estates Matthias found means to evade the charter. He
appointed Catholic priests to Protestant churches, and allowed measures
to be taken to compel Protestants to attend the Catholic service. Yet
for a long time the Protestant nobility kept quiet. Matthias was old and
infirm, and when he died they would, as they supposed, have an
opportunity of choosing their next king, and it was generally believed
that the election would fall upon a Protestant. The only question was
whether the Elector Palatine or the Elector of Saxony would be chosen.
Suddenly in 1617 the Bohemian Diet was summoned. When the Estates of the
kingdom met they were told that it was a mistake to suppose that the
crown of Bohemia was elective. Evidence was produced that for some time
before the election of Matthias the Estates had acknowledged the throne
to be hereditary, and the precedent of Matthias was to be set aside as
occurring in revolutionary times. Intimidation was used to assist the
argument, and men in the confidence of the court whispered in the ears
of those who refused to be convinced that it was to be hoped that they
had at least two heads on their shoulders.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account