Skip to comments.HISTORY OF THE HUGUENOTS
Posted on 06/19/2009 3:54:08 PM PDT by alpha-8-25-02
click here to read article
Hey, these are my ancestors...
“Beg to differ.”
Beg all you like. I like history, not begging.
“Did not happen, to this day there has been no exhoneration.”
Again, read Frale’s book.
“Jacques de Molay, last Grand Master of the Templar Knights, was burned stake on an island in the river Seine in Paris, Ile de la Cité, on 18 March 1314. The supression took place in 1307.”
Yes, and the pope did not arrest him. Philip did. The pope was told the Templars committed crimes. He had no reason at that time to doubt Philip.
“This Turtledove (fiction?)?
Harry Norman Turtledove (born June 14, 1949) is an American novelist, who has produced works in several genres including alternate history, historical fiction, fantasy and science fiction.”
Yep. Great author of alternative fiction. You might as well read him since you’re investing so much time into such.
.....It has been in our family lore. The name was FORCE. Specifically, one name is Solomon Force. They came to the Midwest from NY in the 1830's. Earlier than that I haven't been able to trace with certainty.
I think these FORCE ancestors were Patriots in the American Revolution. A nice book end to my other ancestors who I think were Loyalists who fled to Canada.
No thank you, I do not intentionally read “fiction”.
That's a job an "empty suit" could handle. His promotion to bishop was of the same order.
His brilliance became known LATER ON.
Now, regarding missionaries, irrespective of where the Jesuits were headquartered, their access to French lands and concessions required approval by the French government - and if I recall correctly that came about at the conclusion of the Thirty Years War ~ which took papal powers in such matters and assigned them to the secular states. Richilieu appears to be the guy to credit with all the negotiations that led to the Treaty of Westphalia although he died right before the Congress.
Prior to that Treaty some of the more powerful nation states (e.g. France and Spain) regularly told Popes to take a hike and dictated from their own capitals where missionaries of which orders were allowed. England, of course, took an even more devious course, and the Swedes didn't care.
BTW, all the top commanders and principals in the Thirty Years War were fairly close relatives ~ like a small town full of feuding clans.
Get over it.
It sounds like you and I are making the same point.
Likewise in England it was a top down, Henry VIII led, rebellion. In Switzerland the protestant princes tried at one point to starve out the catholics in seige. Zwingli himself was, if I recall correctly, killed in battle. In Lutheran lands the state church was simply replaced with one loyal to princes supporting lutheranism.
In most cases there was an incredible amount of money and lands siezed by the princes supporting the “reformation”. Persecution of Catholics who remained loyal to Rome in protestant lands was real and deadly.
It was all 16th and 17th century politics ~ not religion as we know it today.
A nice book end to my other ancestors who I think were Loyalists who fled to Canada.
Yeah, i also had both Patriots and Loyalists..
Force is not a Huguenot name...
Who did Solomon Force marry ???
But it could be Anglicized...
Our Sicard became = Sicar, Sicart, Secor, Secord, Secort Secoy plus the original Sicard
Each family can trace its beginnings back to Ambroise Sicard, born in Marmac, La Rochelle, France 1631
And his 3 sons and 2 daughters...
Ambroise Jr, Daniel, Jacques(James) Silvia, Marie
Ambroise had a daughter, Madelaine, born in NYC in 1688, the first baby baptised in the French Huguenot Church there.
My line became Secord’s with Daniel’s son, also named Daniel, born in New Rochelle in 1698..
That Daniel’s son, born and baptised Jacques (James) in New Rochelle in 1732, became a Loyalist with his brothers, John and Peter and their sons, including my Stephen..
The rest of the “Sicards” and many of the De Forests were Patriots...
They also took both sides of the Civil War, make that the War between the States, make that the War of Northern Aggression..
I think we were all on the same side for WWI, WWII, Korea, Vietnam, and now...
The situation was very different in predominantly Protestant England, where a series of lesser revolutions and civil wars produced an evolution toward parliamentary representative government.
Apparently you unintentionally post fiction, however.
Talk about some reparations, I could use some!
Hugh and Series?
Stormhands doesn’t sound French....:>)
Good point. It was the usurpation of culture, even going so far as to institute a 10-day week. (Resulting in one of my favorite sayings of all time... The beasts of the field taught the revolutionaries a lesson in practical theology). The Bolshies really admired this aspect of the FRev.
The French Revolution was bad because so many of the people who could have produced peaceful evolution and increased prosperity were already gone! You ought to ask yourself why Catholic countries (and Orthodox ones like Russia) were so backward, then exploded into violence and chaos. It just might have something to do with the fact that their large monopolistic, corrupt, and flagrantly anti-Biblical church establishments were repulsive to many. If a wealthy established institution wallows in corruption, allies itself with abusive political elites, and massacres all dissidents, explosion (or massive cynicism like that seen in many Catholic cultures) is inevitable.
You are really a piece of work. So the church made them pay what they can afford. And that makes it better.
“Regarding “empty suit” he was selected for his first position solely because HIS FAMILY simply needed someone in a position to control the flow of money from the bishopric into their pockets, and his older brother had turned down the job to join a religious order.”
Great, you can read Wikipedia. And what you just wrote is irrelevant. He is not known for his first position. He is known for his diplomatic mastery over much of European affairs.
“That’s a job an “empty suit” could handle. His promotion to bishop was of the same order.”
“His brilliance became known LATER ON.”
I never said otherwise. You, however, did. If he possessed brilliance in his position, then he was not an empty suit.
“Now, regarding missionaries, irrespective of where the Jesuits were headquartered, their access to French lands and concessions required approval by the French government - and if I recall correctly that came about at the conclusion of the Thirty Years War ~ which took papal powers in such matters and assigned them to the secular states.”
Again, irrelevant. Your claims were the following:
1) “...Richelieu was promoted most often because so many powerful figures around him thought of him as a useful idiot, an empty suit...”
2) “One article says he granted the Jesuits a monopoly on the fur trade ~ which suggests he either hated the Recollects, but hated the Jesuits more (getting them cooked on tribal campfires throughout the Ohio Country)...”
3) “...or he wanted to get them out of the country.”
4) “After Richilieu it was amazing that the Jesuits still existed.”
And apparently those claims are false.
“Richilieu appears to be the guy to credit with all the negotiations that led to the Treaty of Westphalia although he died right before the Congress.”
Wow, what an empty suit, huh? That was only one of the most important treaties in history. Gee, he was clearly a moron.
“Prior to that Treaty some of the more powerful nation states (e.g. France and Spain) regularly told Popes to take a hike and dictated from their own capitals where missionaries of which orders were allowed. England, of course, took an even more devious course, and the Swedes didn’t care.”
All irrelevant to what we’re discussing.
“BTW, all the top commanders and principals in the Thirty Years War were fairly close relatives ~ like a small town full of feuding clans.”
No. Von Tilly and Wallenstein were not close relatives, for instance. Were they related at all? I doubt it.
Everybody has to have a first job you know.
I must say, I find the inside of the cathedral at Geneva quite depressing.
I believe he was made a saint some time back.
Graf von Tilly and Reichsgrafen von Waldstein, Herren von Wartenberg ~ it’s inescapable that they were relatives ~ need to check what the Mormons have on them. I’m betting they had at least one Great Grandmother in common.
Do you see any similarities?
First is the Huguenot Cross also called the La Rochelle Cross
Second is the Scottish Knights Templar Cross
Both Huguenots and Knights Templar had a presence in La Rochelle and were persecuted by the French King
The Knights Templar had a strong presence in La Rochelle since before the time of Eleanor of Aquitaine, who exempted them from duties and gave them mills in her 1139 Charter. La Rochelle was for the Templars their largest base on the Atlantic Ocean,, and where they stationned their main fleet. From La Rochelle, they were able to act as intermediaries in trade between England and the Mediterranean. There is a legend that the Templars used the port of La Rochelle to flee with the fleet of 18 ships which had brought Jacques de Molay from Cyprus to La Rochelle. The fleet would have left ladden with knights and treasures just before the issuance of the arrest warrant against the Order in October 1307
Huguenot rebellionsUnder Henry IV the city enjoyed a certain freedom and prosperity until the 1620s, but the city entered in conflict with the central authority of the King Louis XIII with the Huguenot rebellion (1622). A fleet from La Rochelle fought a royal fleet of 35 ships under the Charles de Guise in front of Saint-Martin-de-Ré, but was defeated on 27 October 1622, leading to the signature of the Peace of Montpellier.
Do you think there is a connection?
“The French Revolution was bad because so many of the people who could have produced peaceful evolution and increased prosperity were already gone! You ought to ask yourself why Catholic countries (and Orthodox ones like Russia) were so backward, then exploded into violence and chaos.”
Why would I ask myself a question that makes no sense because the premise is faulty? Catholic countries were the great western powers in the 16th and 17th centuries. Spain? Conquered much of the world. Portugal too. France? The same. The Protestant country England did the same. Holland (with a more mixed population) did too. The fact that some of those countries then declined (and later rose again by the way) has nothing to do with the religion of their people.
“It just might have something to do with the fact that their large monopolistic, corrupt, and flagrantly anti-Biblical church establishments were repulsive to many.”
No. Muslim countries were superior to Christian ones throughout the Middle Ages and Ottoman Turkey easily outmatched all Protestant countries combined until the 18th or 19th century. Were the Muslims, or Turks specifically, Biblical? How about China in the 17th century?
“If a wealthy established institution wallows in corruption, allies itself with abusive political elites, and massacres all dissidents, explosion (or massive cynicism like that seen in many Catholic cultures) is inevitable.”
And yet it never happened. The Church protected the poor - as is seen by the results of the Protestant Revolution in England where the government had to enact laws to help exterminate the poor because they were too Protestant to aid them. Clearly, the fact that non-Catholics existed in Catholic countries means they were not massacred.
“Everybody has to have a first job you know.”
Maybe. But a man is either brilliant or he isn’t. You can say a man is an empty suit and then in a later post say he was later brilliant and be taken seriously.
BTW, by the time of the English invasion of Canada, Jews were allowed to be members of the White Coats and could advance quite high in rank. This was far and away more progressive than England at the time.
“One of the many Jesuits eaten near my old hometown of Indianapolis was Father Brebeuf.”
(sigh) St. Jean de Brébeuf was not eaten. His heart was. The Hurons were apparently hoping to attain his courage by doing so.
“I believe he was made a saint some time back.”
1930 or so.
What I am saying, and it is indisputable, is that free societies, capitalism, and limited government are unique outgrowths of Reformation culture, esp. that of Great Britain and its colonies.
Part, all of him ~ makes little difference. He was eaten (in part), but cooked (as a whole). The Hurons were not completely savage!
“Graf von Tilly and Reichsgrafen von Waldstein, Herren von Wartenberg ~ its inescapable that they were relatives ~ need to check what the Mormons have on them. Im betting they had at least one Great Grandmother in common.”
I wouldn’t bet money on that. I could be wrong, but I doubt they’re related.
Yes, France was once a great nation, a leader in science, the center of European civilization for much of history. But running through its history was an absolutist, intolerant, tendency caused, in large part, by the alliance of a corrupt, anti-Biblical, materialistic church with a grasping central monarchy. Britain avoided that by embracing Reformation culture, which ultimately led to freedom and advancement of the masses of people, without the class warfare and anti-clericalism seen in Catholic countries.
They’re all Europeans. I think you attributed unsubstantiatable motives to them. They’ve rarely needed a reason to do things.
You are certainly correct about that.
"The Family" is still around, and fairly well assimilated into normal life. They continue to exhibit greater than average abilities.
Believe it or not there are hundreds of people at work, on their own, unpaid, voluntarily digging through a millenium of European records trying to tie together a complete genealogy for them.
“Conquest of the New World by Catholic powers like Spain was rapacious exploitation of the native people by warlords who were little better than pirates.”
Oh, and the Protestant Dutch and English had no pirates and never took advantage of natives? ROFLMAO! You never heard of Edward Teach or Henry Morgan?
“That’s why Latin America is incapable of political stability, free economies, and limited government, much like its European parent nations.”
So there’s no corruption in the UK? Are you serious?
“As for Islam and Turkey, you seem to share Hussein 0bama’s nitwit ideas.”
No, I’m just reporting the facts. Can you refute them?
“The Turks were central Asian nomads known for nothing but extreme cruelty and violence.”
Yep. Then again, that’s how some people probably felt about the Dutch and English 300 years ago. And extreme cruelty and violence in no way means a nation will not accomplish economic, military or scientific success. Holding on to those things might be a different matter, however.
“Islam was a parasitic culture whose so-called achievements were actually due to the residual cultures of the dhimmis of the once-great cultures they defeated militarily (Byzantium, Persia, Egypt, India).”
That might be so. Then again, the British were parasites and so were the Dutch. They raided Spanish ships and became rich (off treasure the Spanish mined or stole from South America). Britain became rich - or thought it had - through it’s mercantile policies and conquering of overseas colonies (including US until 1775/1776).
“Merely attaining power by military force, plunder, and enslavement is not admirable.”
Tell that to the Brits. And how do you think the Dutch did not get rich by conquest of overseas colonies and the looting of entire nations?
“Heck, the Soviet Union and Communist China would be great societies by your criteria.”
And they weren’t in terms of power and influence? How much of our debt does China now own? Oh, and yeah, and what’s their population again? Four times that of the USA? Yeah, China is a great power. I would not want to live there. I would not want to live in a 16th century Britian either, however.
“What I am saying, and it is indisputable, is that free societies, capitalism, and limited government are unique outgrowths of Reformation culture, esp. that of Great Britain and its colonies.”
That may be - although someone could make a very good case that capitalism existed already in 14th century Florence. Then again, it is indisputable that ideas like individualism, individual rights, natural law rights are all products of the Middle Ages. See Brian Tierney, The Idea of Natural Rights.
And by the way, there is no system of government on earth more oriented toward limited government than feudalism - and that was very medieval. Our modern society today is much more centralized, in fact.
“Part, all of him ~ makes little difference. He was eaten (in part), but cooked (as a whole). The Hurons were not completely savage!”
He was not cooked. The Hurons poured boiling water over him to mock baptism.
The Danish King had murdered a bunch of Swedish nobles. The Vassa King (I believe he was called) had to create a new nobility to get his country back in business. He brought in wealthy, intelligent, highly trained or ruthless men from other countries.
Within a short time he became the King of The North with the takeover of Finland. He extended Sweden into Litnuania, Latvia, Estonia, Poland, the German States, Denmark, Scandia, etc.
By the time the Danish Phase of the Thirty Years War came around he and his successors had secured a permanent alliance with France.
There was little persecution of Catholics in the Scandinavian lands ~ mostly because there weren't enough Catholics to bother with, and where there were lots of Catholics the Swedish church simply didn't attempt the Lutheran alternative.
Kind of a shorthand reason about why Poles are Catholics.
Personally I always thought traditional Vietnamese noodle dishes sucked.
I like Chinese food much more. More flavor.
Why dont you trace some of the families...
The Knights Templar were hated and hunted...
The family name was Poythress. It is said by some in the family that they fled to Holland and took a ship from Holland and eventually went to Scotland by way of the North Sea. From there they went to Ireland. When they came to America, they settled in VA. Some in the family said that they were Scots-Irish.
You know, I'm not real happy to hear about how my Catholic ancestors suffered for their faith under the likes of Cromwell or William of Orange. But, it's time to move away from that stuff, not wallow in it.
We're in the 21st Century, and Christianity is under attack. If people can't see how dredging up old animosities is not playing in to the hands of satan himself, then we are doomed.
I’ve also heard I’m descended from one line of French Huguenots that escaped the “unpleasantness”, but haven’t been able to fully research the line.
Now that there's funny, I don't care who you are.
TN: It would appear that he is referencing the burning at the stake of a masonic knight Jacques DeMolay and some of his fellow Knights Templar in response and compliance with a papal request. Phillip the Fair of France was an outstanding monarch. His daughter Isabella married Longshanks’ lavender son Edward II in an attempt at uniting dynasties which turned out disastrously because of Edward II’s faggotry. Isabella went back to France became involved with a French knight and then returned to dismember Edward II alive. You can bet that it was the French knight who sired Edward III by Isabella and not lavender Edward II. If so, Edward III was guilty of patricide for ordering the execution of that knight after Edward III attained the age when he could be crowned king.
The system of government was a theocracy which encouraged the mortification of the flesh, celebrated death and depopulated most of occitania. Marriage was considered immoral. Weaving cloth was promoted as the highest form of existence and the material culture (think farming, manufacturing, and craftsmanship) was considered part of the "bad" side of life.
The cathars worshiped a duality that mortified the physical body as evil and elevated the spiritual principles to the extent that monastic life was the pinnacle of human existence. The family was considered just plain wrong. Children were left to die and were seen as manifestations of the evil of the physical world.
It was generally considered by the rest of the european western world that the several hundred years of Cathar culture had resulted in a kernel of insanity that could destroy Christianity.
The Cathar culture was developed over several hundred years, under the nose of the catholic church and is believed to have been imported from Malta - home of the Knights Templar who also had found their way into a deviant Christian culture. (They could afford the lifestyle)
Even Raymond of Toulouse, when by the pope asked to intervene and militarily take over the province declined the first time he was asked on the grounds that it wasn't his fight and why should he spend money doing work that wasn't going to enrich him?
Eventually he went into the Cathar region and slaughtered every man woman and child on the premise that 'God will know his own' or 'kill them all, god will sort them out. Cathar culture could not be stopped otherwise.
The Cathar church had become very rich and their monasteries were loaded with booty by the time Raymond made his move. He was the only local noble willing and able to 'take back' occitania for western civilization.
The 'Islamic revolution' and spread of anti-christian culture has nothing on the Cathar civilization. The extent of the depopulation of the area is still felt today. Southeastern france is a curiosity. French tourists bus around Languedoc and visit historical sites like we go to civil war re-enactments.
There is nothing in western culture remotely close to the Cathar culture for us to see and experience in order to understand why they were a 'heresy'. But the facts speak for themselves and the Cathar world was a cancer that was metastasizing itself on the body of western tradition.
I only knew because the name survived through many males down to my g-grandmother..
Plus we had my g-g-grandfather’s Bible with his history...
Plus the name is one of the most famous amongest the Loyalists...
and not because of Laura Ingersolll Secord...
(Laura was married to the brother of my Stephen..)
(I tossed that in because obscue people want to be related to her..LOL)
Anyhoo there were many Secords who were Loyalists...
James, John and Peter were 3 brothers and many of their sons were also...
(I know it sounds like the Mount of transfiguration...but that was their names..
Except James had been baptised Jacques as a baby...)
“The Secords of Canada”
and many Loyalists came from Huguenot families...
They are wrongly called “French Canadian”...
THe families did not start out that way...
They were born in the US...
They came originally from France helped mainly by England...
They swore alliegencew to the English Crown...
They taught their children and childrens children to be loyal to the country that saved them...
The US was English for about 100 years...
In my family the grandson and g-grandson of the originals and his sons became Loyalists...
If you have some Loyalist blood in your lines, that may be a Huguenot family...
However tens of thousands of Americans went north ...
Can you ask the person you heard it from for more info ???
Accoding to the movie Brave Heart, it was William Wallace who sired Edwaqrd III...
and Edward Wallace who was dismembered...
But I know a little of the Knights Templar...
From what I’ve read they were the good guys...
I doubt if Ed III would have known it was his father...
Isabella would never have told...
And his name was? My direct ancestor, Peter Anderson, (b. before 1620 in the Gotenburg area) arrived in New Sweden on the Kalmar Nykel (sp.?) and became the skipper of the Governor's boat that he used to access his house on an island near what is now Philadelphia. He sailed back to Amsterdam to collect his wages, returned to Sweden to collect a bride, and brought her back to New Sweden where they settled to establish a farm and raise their family in Kingsessing. He and his family were among the founders of Gloria Dei (Swedish) Church and are listed on the roll.