(Studies in the History of Christian Traditions 156) D.J.B. Trim-The Huguenots_ History and Memory in Transnational Context (2011)

8/19/2019 (Studies in the History of Christian Traditions 156) D.J.B. Trim-The Huguenots_ History and Memory in Transnationa…

1/342

Te Huguenots: History and Memoryin ransnational Context


2/342

Studies in the History o

Christian raditions

General Editor

Robert J. BastKnoxville, ennessee

In cooperation with

Henry Chadwick, CambridgePaul C.H. Lim, Nashville, ennessee

Eric Saak, LiverpoolBrian ierney, Ithaca, New York

Arjo Vanderjagt, GroningenJohn Van Engen, Notre Dame, Indiana

Founding Editor

Heiko A. Oberman†

VOLUME 156

Te titles published in this series are listed at brill.nl/shct


3/342


4/342

Walter C. Utt


5/342

Te Huguenots:

History and Memory in

ransnational Context

Essays in Honour and Memory o Walter C. Utt

Edited by

David J. B. rim

LEIDEN • BOSTON

2011


6/342

Cover Illustration: Joseph-Nicolas Robert–Fleury, ‘Scène de la Saint–Barthélemy, assassinat deBriou, gouverneur du Prince de Conti, 24 août 1572’, 1833 (Paris, musée du Louvre, inv. 7673)

Tis book is printed on acid-ree paper.

Library o Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Te Huguenots : history and memory in transnational context : essays in honour and memoryo Walter C. Utt / edited by David J.B. rim. p. cm. -- (Studies in the history o Christian traditions, ISSN 1573-5664 ; v. 156) Includes bibliographical reerences and index. ISBN 978-90-04-20775-2 (hardback : alk. paper) 1. Huguenots--History. I. rim, D. J. B.(David J. B.) II. Utt, Walter C.

BX9454.3.H88 2011 284’.509--dc22 2011015899

ISSN 1573-5664ISBN 978 90 04 20775 2

Copyright 2011 by Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, Te Netherlands.Koninklijke Brill NV incorporates the imprints Brill, Global Oriental, Hotei Publishing,IDC Publishers, Martinus Nijhoff Publishers and VSP.

All rights reserved. No part o this publication may be reproduced, translated, stored ina retrieval system, or transmitted in any orm or by any means, electronic, mechanical,photocopying, recording or otherwise, without prior written permission rom the publisher.

Authorization to photocopy items or internal or personal use is granted by Koninklijke Brill NVprovided that the appropriate ees are paid directly to Te Copyright Clearance Center,222 Rosewood Drive, Suite 910, Danvers, MA 01923, USA.Fees are subject to change.


7/342

CONENS

Acknowledgments .................................................................................... viiContributors ............................................................................................... xiAbbreviations ........................................................................................... xiiiIn Appreciation o Walter Utt ................................................................xv Stanley G. PayneWalter C. Utt, My Colleague .................................................................xxi

Eric Anderson

1. Te Huguenots and the Experience o Exile (Sixteenth towentieth Centuries): History, Memoryand ransnationalism ........................................................................1

D. J. B. rim

2. Te Huguenots and the St Bartholomew’s Massacre ...................... 43 H. H. Leonard

3. ‘Sham o Liberty o Conscience’: Huguenotsand the Problem o Religious olerationin Restoration England .................................................................. 69

Gregory Dodds

4. How Dangerous, the Protestant Stranger?Huguenots and the Formation o British Identity,c.1685–1715 ................................................................................... 103

Lisa Clark Diller

5. Strains o Worship: Te Huguenotsand Non-conormity .................................................................... 121

Robin Gwynn

6. Te Huguenots and the European Warso Religion, c.1560–1697: Soldiering in National

and ransnational Context .......................................................... 153 D. J. B. rim


8/342

vi

7. Models o an Imagined Community:Huguenot Discourse on Identity and Foreign Policy ............ 193

David Onnekink

8. Te Huguenots in British and HanoverianExternal Relations in the Early Eighteenth Century .............. 217

Andrew C. Tompson

9. Exile, Integration and European Perspectives:Huguenots in the Pays de Vaud ................................................ 241

Vivienne Larminie

10. estaments o Faith: Wills o HuguenotReugees in England as a Window on their Past .................... 263

Randolph Vigne

11. Te Memory o the Huguenots inNorth America: Protestant History and Polemic ................... 285

Paul McGraw

Index ........................................................................................................ 305


9/342

ACKNOWLEDGMENS

Tis book was created in the belie that examining history and mem-ory through the lens o a particular transnational community—theHuguenots—in the longue durée has the potential to provide uncom-mon and valuable insights into the academically ashionable areas omemory and transnationalism. It is the editor and contributors’ beliethat the essays that ollow also cast new light on several aspects o

Huguenot history. Yet while this book is intended as a contribution toscholarship in its own right, it also has another purpose.

It is a (very belated) estschrif or the late Walter C. Utt (1921–85),long-time Proessor o History at Pacific Union College, in Angwin,Caliornia. Given that he was an historian o early-modern France,perhaps the French term hommage is more appropriate in this casethan the German estschrif . Regardless o term, this collection o stud-ies on Huguenot history, chiefly o the late–seventeenth and earlyeighteenth centuries—a subject o which Walter Utt became a mas-

ter—is intended to commemorate an outstanding teacher and excel-lent scholar, who, at his untimely death, lef behind only onemonograph, a handul o articles, and two historical novels. His pass-ing was untimely in that, although he was not young at his death (atage 64), he was not particularly elderly, and indeed he is still survivedby two brothers now in their eighties, which suggests the world oscholarship lost many productive years. Happily, Utt’s second mono-graph (and masterwork), on Claude Brousson, was posthumouslybrought to publication.* However, the admiration a number o schol-ars and ormer students elt or Walter Utt, and the sense that his careerwould, in happier circumstances, have produced more excellent books,prompted the idea o a volume in his honour and memory, to mark the25th anniversary o his death.

Tis book owes a great deal to the support o the Walter C. UttEndowment at Pacific Union College and o two Presidents o PUC,

* Walter C. Utt and Brian E. Strayer, Te Bellicose Dove: Claude Brousson andProtestant Resistance to Louis XIV, 1647–1698 (Brighton and Portland, Oreg.: SussexAcademic Press, 2003).


10/342

viii

Richard Osborn and his successor, Heather Knight. Te Utt Endowmentprovided a generous subsidy towards the cost o publication and

also unded my appointment to a second year as Walter Utt Proessoro History at the college, which provided the necessary time to com-plete editorial work. I grateully acknowledge the members o theEndowment’s board or their practical and moral support: Vic Aagaard,Bruce Anderson, Eric Anderson, Martha Utt-Billington, ArleenDowning, Steve Herber, Wayne Jacobsen, Nancy LeCourt, GrantMitchell, Amy Rosenthal, David Westcott, and Elle Wheeler. I am alsograteul to John Collins, Paul McGraw, Dick Osborn and Leo Ranzolin,who took the practical steps to turn the Utt Endowment’s financial sup-

port into an extension o my tenure o the Utt Chair at PUC. Above all,I am beholden to Bruce and Audrey Anderson, without whom this est-schrif would certainly have been neither commenced nor completed.

I appreciated the efficient and enthusiastic support o AdugnawWorku, Gilbert Abella, Karen Tomas and other librarians at PacificUnion College Library in developing the Walter Utt collection in theLibrary and in obtaining materials needed or chapters 1, 6 and 11. Inaddition, I am greatly indebted to the Folger Shakespeare Library, or

awarding me a ellowship in 2009, and to the supremely competentand considerate reading room staff or their help during time at theFolger in 2009 and 2010, when the introduction was researched anddrafed, and my own essay revised.

For permission to use Joseph–Nicolas Robert–Fleury’s ‘Scène de laSt–Barthélemy’ (1833) on the cover I am obliged to France’s Réuniondes musées nationaux and I thank Cristina Sanchez o its Agence pho-tographique or her help in obtaining an image o this evocativepainting.

I am grateul to Bruce Anderson, Eric Anderson, Peter Balderstone,Felicity Stout and Wendy rim or helpul conversations about historyand memory; and to Lisa Diller, Greg Dodds, Matthew Glozier, DavidOnnekink, and Randolph Vigne, or arranging or participating in con-erence panels on Huguenot history that were very helpul in develop-ing chapters in this volume. Finally, I take this opportunity toacknowledge my indebtedness and gratitude to Robin Briggs, MarkGreengrass, Alan James, David Parrott, Guy Rowlands, and RandolphVigne—rom them, over the last 15 years, in many enlightening and

enjoyable conversations, I have learned much about the Huguenots,early-modern France, and good scholarship. It is a pleasure to be


11/342

ix

part o the community o scholars—the transnational ‘republic oletters’—that was vitally important to many o the people examined in

the chapters that ollow.

David rimAngwin, Cali., Reading, Berks., and Washington, DC,

2009 and 2010


12/342


13/342

CONRIBUORS

Eric Anderson is President o Southwestern Adventist University; hispublications include Race and Politics in North Carolina, 1872–1901 (Louisiana State University Press, 1981).

Lisa Clark Diller is Assistant Proessor o History at Southern AdventistUniversity.

Gregory Dodds is Proessor o History at Walla Walla University andthe author o Exploiting Erasmus: Te Erasmian Legacy and ReligiousChange in Early Modern England (University o oronto Press, 2009).

Robin Gwynn is a distinguished authority on Huguenot history andseventeenth-century English history, on which he has publishedwidely; he was Director o the 1985 British ‘Huguenot Heritage’ tercen-tenary commemoration under the patronage o Queen Elizabeth II.

Vivienne Larminie is Research Fellow at Te History o Parliament. As

well as publishing on seventeenth-century England, she contributedseveral entries on Huguenots to the Oxord Dictionary o NationalBiography and has written on religion in the Pays de Vaud.

H. H. Leonard held the Walter Utt Chair o History at Pacific UnionCollege in 2002, afer teaching or 32 years at Newbold College inEngland.

Paul McGraw is Proessor o History at Pacific Union College.

David Onnekink is Assistant Proessor o History at the UniversiteitUtrecht, in the Netherlands. He is the author o Te Anglo-DutchFavourite, the career o Hans Willem Bentinck, 1st Earl o Portland( Ashgate, 2007) and editor or co-editor o our other books.

Stanley G. Payne is Hilldale–Jaume Vicens Vives Proessor o HistoryEmeritus at the University o Wisconsin–Madison. He is a leadingauthority on both the history o European ascism and the history oSpain, and the author o ourteen books on Spanish and modern

European history.


14/342

xii

Andrew C. Tompson is College Lecturer in History at Queens’ College,University o Cambridge. He is the author o Britain, Hanover and the

Protestant Interest (Boydell & Brewer, 2006) and George II (YaleUniversity Press, 2011).

D. J. B. rim, a Fellow o the Royal Historical Society, is Director o theArchives o the Seventh-day Adventist Church, and held the WalterUtt Chair o History at Pacific Union College in 2008 and 2009. Hisrecent publications include, as co-editor, Humanitarian intervention—a history (Cambridge University Press, 2011) and European Warare1350–1750 (Cambridge University Press, 2010).

Randolph Vigne, a Fellow o the Society o Antiquaries and one o thepreeminent scholars o the Huguenot diaspora, was or many yearsEditor o the Huguenot Society o Great Britain and Ireland. He haspublished widely on the history o minorities.


15/342

ABBREVIAIONS

NB: Abbreviations used in only one chapter are indicated in theootnotes o the respective chapters.

Add. MS BL: Additional Manuscripts AHR American Historical ReviewBL Te British Library, London

Bodl. Bodleian Library, OxordBull. SHPF Bulletin de la Société de l’Histoire du

Protestantisme FrançaisCSPD Calendar o State Papers DomesticCSPF Calendar o State Papers, Foreign

Series, o the Reign o Elizabeth I Dunan-Page, Religious Culture Anne Dunan-Page (ed.), Te

Religious Culture o the Huguenots,1660–1750 (Ashgate: Aldershot,

2006)EHR English Historical ReviewFHS French Historical StudiesGwynn, ‘Conormity’ Robin Gwynn, ‘Conormity, Non-

conormity and Huguenot Settle-ment in England in the LaterSeventeenth Century’, in Dunan-Page, Religious Culture, 23–41

HJ Te Historical Journal HMC Royal Commission on Historical

Manuscripts [Historical Manu-scripts Commission], calendars andreports

HSQS Huguenot Society o London [later,o Great Britain and Ireland], QuartoSeries

HSP Proceedings o the Huguenot Society

[originally o London; later o GreatBritain and Ireland ]LPL Lambeth Palace Library


16/342

xiv

MS(S) Manuscript(s)OxDNB Oxord Dictionary o National

Biography . Oxord: Oxord Univer-sity Press, 2004.

PRO Te National Archives (UK), at TePublic Record Office, Kew, England

repr. ReprintSCJ Sixteenth Century Journal SP State PapersUtt & Strayer, Bellicose Dove Walter C. Utt and Brian E. Strayer,

Te Bellicose Dove: Claude Brousson

and Protestant Resistance to Louis XIV, 1647–1698, (Brighton andPortland, Oreg.: Sussex AcademicPress, 2003)

Vigne & Littleton, Strangers Randolph Vigne and CharlesLittleton (eds.), From strangers tocitizens. Te integration o immigrantcommunities in Britain, Ireland

and colonial America, 1550–1750 (London/Brighton & Portland Oreg.:Huguenot Society o Great Britainand Ireland/Sussex Academic Press,2001)

Wing Wing, Donald. Short-itle Catalogueo Books Printed in England, Scotland,Ireland, Wales, and British Americaand o English Books Printed in Other

Countries 1641–1700, 2nd edn, rev.and ed. John J. Morrison, CarolynW. Nelson, Matthew Seccombe, et al ,4 vols. (New York: Modern LanguageAssociation o America, 1982–98)

WMQ Te William and Mary Quarterly


17/342

IN APPRECIAION OF WALER C. U

Stanley G. Payne

Walter Utt returned to Pacific Union College in 1951 as assistantproessor o history, the junior member o a two-man HistoryDepartment chaired by George Meldrum. Te division o labour wassimple: Proessor Meldrum taught American history and Proessor Utt

taught European history. So limited a ocus seems strange nowadays,but in those years even the large university history departments didnot go very ar beyond European and American history. At PUC thisrequired what today would be considered a heavy teaching schedule,involving a wide range o courses rom the introductory to advancedand specialized upper division offerings.

Walter Utt threw himsel into this broad curriculum with energyand youthul enthusiasm. Tose o us who were history majors got alarge dose o courses by two proessors, but this did not strike any o us

as unusual, nor do I remember that we were ever bored. Classroomteaching at that time involved little or nothing in the way o visualaids, much less electronic projection, placing a special burden on pro-essors to present lectures that were clear, interesting, pedagogicallyeffective, and also not tedious.

Walter Utt had begun to teach, in so ar as I recall, as a teachingassistant during his doctoral studies at UC-Berkeley, and immediatelyrevealed that he had a special calling. Good teaching on the college oruniversity level involves a combination o intellect, organization, styleor method, and personality, and he excelled in all o these. Only later,afer I mysel began to teach, did I appreciate the amount o workinvolved in preparing those courses, particularly during his firstsemesters.

Over the years I have had teachers and also colleagues who were notalways prepared or their classes and filled the gap by simply ‘wingingit,’ shooting the breeze in semi-scholarly ashion to fill in the time, oreliciting an unusual amount o student discussion and participation in

order not to have to do very much o their own in that particular class.I do not recall that this ever happened once in the case o ProessorUtt’s courses. Some lectures were naturally a little more dense thanothers, but all were seriously prepared and engaging.


18/342

xvi .

Te Utt lecture style involved the preparation o basic lecture notesor each class, but these were rather inormal and consisted simply o a

list o main points to be covered. Proessor Utt had a natural eloquence,precision and wit that turned these into a colorul and absorbing dis-course or the ull class period. Te era o entertaining students hadscarcely begun in the 1950s, and each class seriously ocused on themain narrative and problems o history, with no time wasted.Nonetheless, these were never highly ormal classes and certainly notdry-as-dust history. His lectures were delivered in a direct, engagingand conversational style, ull o personalities and colourul anecdotesby way o illustration, so that in act in the great majority o cases they

managed to be entertaining, as well.Te way history was done in those days, not merely at PUC but

almost everywhere, gave prominence to political history and publicaffairs, the major ramework o history. Tat meant little attention tominorities or women, and even less to the kinds o trivial themes insocial and socio-cultural history that at the present time occupy somuch o the program o the annual convention o the AmericanHistorical Association. Even in secular institutions, the idea o history

as ‘transgressive’ was largely unknown. Tis was, in a word, basic his-tory—the major issues, events and personalities o the European andWestern past. It was in act excellent preparation or urther studybecause it built a basic platorm o knowledge and gave students a seri-ous ocus or their current and continuing work. I have always been

very grateul or it.Proessor Utt’s energy was very rarely wanting, which was surprising

in view o his physical limitations. Tere was perhaps one episode ayear (or possibly not even that ofen) that required a ew days in bed,

and there might also be another occasion when his health was parlousand he was barely able to come to class, but even on the latter days hecarried things off in his normal manner. Tat he was able to teach us soeffectively and continue a ull work schedule year afer year, despitepersonal disability, was an inspiration to us all. Tere was never a sin-gle semester, during my years at PUC, in which this resulted in anysignificant hindrance to his teaching, and, in act, in most semesters itcaused none at all. For me personally, his was a courageous examplerom which I greatly profited, and which stimulated me to try to show

the same determination and perseverance.As a Christian institution, PUC involved much more or the

aculty than teaching classes. Its proessors have always had greater


19/342

. xvii

responsibility as personal examples and as spiritual and social guidesthan is the case in secular institutions. Despite the heavier load—and

in part because o the comparatively small size o the aculty—theyhave also been in closer personal contact with their students than is thecase in a larger college or university, or even than in other small liberalarts colleges.

Walter Utt’s personal relations with the students were as importantas his classroom teaching. In those days college lie was more ormalthan in the twenty-first century, in terms o dress, deportment and alsothe tenor o relations between students and aculty. At PUC, nonethe-less, there was a certain kind o inormality and more contact with the

aculty, or at least some members o the aculty, than I would find inmy graduate education at Claremont and Columbia. Walter Uttexcelled in these inormal relations, first in terms o his witty, person-able and highly approachable classroom manner and then in the wayhe dealt with students either individually or in very small groups. Hewas sympathetic and understanding, but he never pandered or patron-ized, holding his students up to the mark not merely in their classroombut also in other responsibilities.

In my own case, I began my education in Angwin as a sixteen-year-old senior at PUC Prep in 1950 and then entered the college in theollowing year. Tus my matriculation coincided with the arrival oProessor Utt in the History Department. Even beore I finished highschool I planned to become a history major, and by 1951 I was becom-ing strongly oriented to Modern European history, also Proessor Utt’smain field, so that his courses became my principal ocus rom the verybeginning.

He was extraordinarily kind and even, I would say, attentive to me,

and during the course o the nearly our years at PUC I spent what wasprobably an inordinate amount o time in the history departmentitsel, then conveniently located in Irwin Hall. (I should point out,however, that this was not a matter o privilege, because there was aairly steady flow o students in and out o the department office.) Tisinvolved innumerable conversations, rom the brieest chats to occa-sional lengthier discussions, more than one could count, and created apersonal bond that eventually became very strong. Proessor Utt wasyoung enough that he seemed more approachable and understanding

than the older proessors, and was rarely too busy to talk. For me hebecame an indispensable mentor, not so much because o whatI learned in any particular class, but simply as a role model and a


20/342

xviii .

mentor in a broader sense in terms o values, attitude and a kind oproessionalism. In the 1950s, the term o ‘being there or’ someone

had not yet developed, but Walter Utt was always there or his stu-dents—or me and or many others.

I did deect briefly. In 1953, as I neared my nineteenth birthday,I had the idea o transerring to San Francisco State College (as it wasthen called), to enjoy a more sophisticated lie in the big city, thoughI had very little money. It was as near as I ever came to a youthul rebel-lion. Only one month’s residence and a ew days o classes in my newsurroundings were enough to convince me that I was making a bigmistake, and that I would be better off both personally and pedagogi-

cally finishing up my work at PUC—a conclusion that was absolutelycorrect. Proessor Utt welcomed me back with open arms, and nary aword o reproach.

One o the great advantages o PUC in the 1950s was that an excellentcore curriculum existed, so that students really did get a basic educa-tion—a true liberal education– something that in the twenty-first cen-tury no longer exists in most American colleges and universities o anykind. Tis meant that one learned the things during those our years

that one really needed to learn, both inside and outside the classroom.Te two-proessor history department did not have means to offercertain kinds o specialized courses, nor was there very much in theway o undergraduate seminars. It would have been better to have pro-

vided more opportunity or writing, which, afer my first year, I rarelydid at an advanced level. Yet the reshman English and compositioncourse that was required o all students was outstanding, and it hasnow disappeared rom most undergraduate curricula, to the great losso the undergraduates.

In the all o 1952 Proessor Utt gave me a job as grader or the sur- vey course in European history, in which I had been a student the yearbeore, and during the remainder o my undergraduate semesters I wasa grader or several different courses. Tis was excellent training, or ithelped to develop a more mature ocus on historical study, while pro-

viding experience in the process o examination and evaluation that isso important or teaching. Despite the relative dearth o writingcourses, I was well prepared or graduate school, and here too ProessorUtt helped to open the way, recommending, among other things, that

I apply to a special new program at the Claremont Graduate School(now Claremont University), which proved to be an ideal steppingstone en route to Columbia.


21/342

. xix

A basic responsibility or a history proessor at PUC is to provide aChristian perspective on history, something that once upon a time was

almost universal in American colleges, and then in the twentieth cen-tury began to disappear almost altogether. What was Walter Utt’sapproach? He was a serious proessional scholar and did not teach‘Providentialist History’ or Christian blueprintism, in which everydetail o history somehow revealed the Divine Will. He knew that nohistorian, as a serious scholar, can demonstrate that, and his teachingwas consistently objective and empirical. Some would call that lettingthe chips all where they may, but that would be an inadequate descrip-tion. His approach rather was, through an objective and empirical

treatment o history, to allow underlying meanings and basic interpre-tations to emerge. Tere was no pretence to discover the guiding hando God behind every event; i that were the case, then the conclusionwould have to be that God led in quite dreadul ways, since so mucho history consists o the delusions, ollies, misortunes and sins omankind.

Nonetheless, a truly objective Christian approach, when comparedwith modern ideological interpretations, has the effect o demystiying

history, because it rees the scholar rom ashionable straitjackets andabstract determinisms, making it possible to grasp many—though notnecessarily all—o the actors and influences at work in history.Christian historians in act are more humble than other scholars, notmerely because humility is a undamental Christian virtue, but becauseChristian historians are ree o the ads, oibles and ideologicalapproaches that have dominated much o the work in history or thepast century and more. Christian historians, more than many others,are not araid to let certain acts speak or themselves, and have no

reason to ear the conclusions that may emerge. Tey are also able,more clearly than most others, to discern what are the clearly produc-tive and creative actors at work in history, as well as the requentlydestructive consequences when these are ignored or abandoned. Tisis accomplished through a consistent empiricism on the one hand, andan appropriate attention to the moral and spiritual dimension ohuman affairs, on the other. Tey are not bewildered when historicaloutcomes are ofen much less than happy, though the wiser and moreproessional ones avoid acile moralizing about complex issues which

need to be studied in their entirety. Walter Utt, it has always seemed tome, was this kind o Christian historian.


22/342


23/342

WALER C. U, MY COLLEAGUE

Eric Anderson

Afer earning a doctorate at the University o Caliornia, Walter C. Uttspent the rest o his lie at a small denominational college, an institu-tion unknown to most o his classmates and teachers at Berkeley.Pacific Union College was within easy driving distance o Berkeley, o

course, but it existed on a different intellectual map rom the eminentresearch university. Although Walter Utt became a remarkably influ-ential teacher, scholar, and mentor in his long tenure at Pacific UnionCollege, his achievements were mostly invisible to the wider academicworld. He wrote three books, none an academic treatment o his speci-ality. He taught only a handul o graduate students, and his most sig-nificant research was not published until afer his death.

Proessor Utt devoted most o his proessional lie to one majorresearch project–the story o Claude Brousson and Huguenot resist-

ance to Louis XIV. He took several research trips to France, filled scoreso notebooks with his tiny lef-handed scrawl, purchased many rolls omicrofilmed documents, made hundreds o pages o photocopies, andcompiled lengthy bibliographical lists. When he died in 1985, he lefbehind a 900-page manuscript, which was well beyond a first draf,having been rewritten two or three times. In contrast to his other writ-ings, he called this long-gestating book ‘the real one.’

I he was obscure in the general academic community, he must haveelt superfluous, at times, even on Howell Mountain (not yet a amouswine appellation). o the presidents, deans, and trustees o PUC dur-ing the years between 1951 and 1985, Walter Utt’s research could nothave seemed very important. An elegant ornament to the College, per-haps, he and his study o seventeenth-century France appeared to havelittle direct connection to paying the bills, keeping the College accred-ited, maintaining enrolment, and all the other quotidian anxieties thatdominated their agendas. Although the College did grant him raresabbatical time, what he was doing was secondary, at best, at Pacific

Union College. It was difficult to evaluate or measure in the schemes oquantitative assessment so popular by the end o his lie.


24/342

xxii

For that matter, the things that now cause ormer students to remem-ber Walter Utt, including the many hours he spent in witty conversa-

tion with them, the remarkably rich and gossipy correspondence hecarried on with dozens o graduates, and the lively discussion groupshe sponsored, might well look, to a practical-minded observer, charm-ingly irrelevant. Tey had about as much to do with either historicalresearch or the immediate survival o the College, such an analystmight conclude, as his stamp collection or his interest in French mili-tary music. And yet he is now being honoured by a book o scholarlyessays.

For ten years I was Walter Utt’s colleague in the history department

at Pacific Union College. He was my chairman, mentor, editor, andriend. We worked together on many occasions as team teachers.I believe that the perspective o a teaching colleague may be useul tounderstanding the accomplishments o this important, yet oddly invis-ible man. It is possible, indeed, that some o his intellectual achieve-ments were only ully maniest to his ellow historians.

A teaching associate, especially an inexperienced and youthul one,sees some details more clearly than others, no doubt. My view o

Dr. Utt was quite different rom that o his colleagues in other disci-plines, or rom College administrators, high and low, many o whomsaw him as a ormidable, even rightening figure, capable o cleverobstruction or sarcastic candour. My point o view was simultaneouslymore admiring and more amiliar. I knew the academic actor back-stage, without his makeup, and I thought I knew how he achieved hiseffects.

I craved his approval and recognized that I was seen around campusas his protégé. I had some sense o what this meant, but not until later,

much later, did I realize that he was more my teacher than my patron,that he was quietly showing me the imperections o my scholarship,my shortcomings as an historian. In a sense, although no advanceddegrees or seminars were involved, he was my tutor as well as my ac-ulty peer. I did not recognize at first what he was teaching me.

I Walter Utt had accepted a position in a larger, better-known insti-tution, a place like Berkeley, he would have had the luxury o ocusinghis work on a airly narrow academic speciality. He would not have hadto teach anything except modern French history and closely related

subjects. He would have had both more reedom and less. At a differentkind o school he would no doubt have had ewer administrativeassignments, no threat o theological controversy, and ewer (or at least


25/342

. , xxiii

different) intellectual or political limits to his research. Yet at the sametime, he would have less flexibility to write historical novels, influence

students in other disciplines, or connect his aith to his learning.As chairman o the history department, Proessor Utt accomplished

remarkable things by indirection. In a certain sense, departmentmeetings were quite irregular, convened only when absolutely neces-sary. Looked at another way, however, he presided over one continuousmeeting, with members o the department dropping in and out o eachother’s offices, eavesdropping on conversations in the next cubicle,shouting jokes over the walls, or carrying on long telephone conversa-tions afer hours. Late in his career, when he captured a large, private,

air-conditioned office, he regretted the splendid solitude, I think,and wished or the crowded sociability o the old arrangement. Heprotected the department’s curriculum, encouraged his colleagues,recruited new majors, ound jobs or graduates, and built up a sizeabledepartmental library, stocked mostly with his books. He even providedmore than a ew o the decorations around the offices and classrooms,including vintage French and Soviet propaganda posters.

Looking back, I now recognize what he taught me. Unlike my grad-

uate school teachers, he had little interest in the latest historiographyor popular intellectual trends. He did not teach me much about con-structing a course or designing a test. Instead, he subtly challengedme to synthesize, to show how my specialized interests related to thebig picture, illustrating larger developments in American history orWestern civilization. In the process, I learned a great deal about gaps inmy knowledge. For example, I had detailed inormation aboutReconstruction on the local level, but little understanding o the politi-cal leadership o Lincoln or Grant. I could explain the Founding

Fathers’ attitudes toward slavery, but I had never read the FederalistPapers. I knew more about historians’ avourite lost causes, such asPopulism, than about the successes o the American economy. Withquiet wit, Walter (as I learned to call him) told me colourul historicalanecdotes, assumed that I, like ‘any educated person,’ knew the rele-

vant acts, and constantly surprised me with his encyclopaedic knowl-edge o my own area–not just his field o modern European history.(Didn’t everybody know, say, John Paul Jones’s unusual naval careerafer the Revolutionary War?)

Without ever delivering any direct pronouncements, he instilled inme a love o precision, a quiet intolerance or errors o grammar orspelling, an expectation that inelicities o style were unacceptable,


26/342

xxiv

even a bit gauche. He believed that historians should write and rewriteand he was happy to work on my drafs, rooting out vagueness, sug-

gesting transitions, or demanding urther evidence. Oddly enough,this specialist in seventeenth century France was as important to theediting o my first book as the readers at a amous university press ormy eminent advisors at the University o Chicago.

I was Walter’s teaching colleague in the ullest sense on those occa-sions, ormal and inormal, when we taught together. Tese includednot only regular courses that we team-taught, but also student readinggroups that met in our homes and voluntarily took on writers rangingrom G. K. Chesterton and C. S. Lewis to Malcolm Muggeridge. We

were also part o the rotating group o discussion leaders in the ‘ChoirRoom,’ a weekly religious discussion group aimed more at aculty thanat students, noted or its lively, reewheeling conversations. In all othese situations, I had the opportunity to watch Walter construct ques-tions, direct discussion, and engage critics–all the while indulging inhis penchant or sardonic observation.

Te interdisciplinary course we created on the history o theSeventh-day Adventist denomination was certainly the most stimulat-

ing, even disturbing, experience o such collaboration. Working in atime o intense controversy in the denomination, we ound ourselves(as we ofen said quietly) ‘dancing along a precipice,’ trying to orce onegroup (cocksure believers) to recognize historical context, while resist-ing another group (usually recently lapsed undamentalists) whowanted to reduce history to polemical debunking. Facing an audiencemade up mostly o uture elementary school teachers, Walter appliedto the history o his own group the same calm and sympathetic curios-ity that inormed his other historical work. Relentlessly sceptical o

claims o uniqueness or pure originality, he masterully described whatAdventists owed to general Protestant values and history. Workingrom small scraps o paper covered with cryptic notes, he brilliantlyextemporized, improvising like a jazz musician on an essay by Hughrevor-Roper about the varieties o Protestant religious experience. Bythe time he was finished, an alert student would be able to put Adventisthistory into a broad perspective that extended well beore 1844, andincluded a range o millenarian, messianic, and puritan movements.He counselled the rest o the teaching team, sometimes as many as

three or our colleagues, on raming complex, controversial issues,always insisting on both integrity and prudence. He only becameimpatient when a student reused to listen, stubbornly missing the


27/342

. , xxv

nuances o our presentations. (Indeed, although I was the junior mem-ber o the team, reputedly capable o rushing into any number o sensi-

tive matters, I think I suffered ools more gladly than my mentor did.)In any case, a scholar could hardly have asked or a group o students

more sure that ideas have consequences, that ‘getting the acts right’really matters. Every time we taught the class, we had a wonderullyrelevant illustration o what sort o questions history could answer.Our students also learned to think about the limitations o our disci-pline in weighing certain kinds o claims.

Such questions also came up, albeit without the same immediateand intense implications, in the other classes we worked on together.

Although Walter and I did not teach together the capstone course ormajors called ‘Philosophy o History,’ it elt like we were collaborators.I ollowed immediately afer him and employed the pattern he had cre-ated or a class that was one o his avourites. When he handed thecourse over to me, I used much o the same assigned reading, orexample, with star billing going to E. H. Carr’s What is History? Overthe years my students and I wrestled with Carr’s thoroughly secular,

vaguely Marxist approach to history, thinking careully about how an

historian could ‘have the uture in his bones,’ why Carr denied being adeterminist, and the useulness o the political definition o ‘objectiv-ity’ used by this controversial historian o the Soviet Union. Along theway, we learned to read the ootnotes, and to listen to the other side othe debate, including Carr’s selected punching bags–Isaiah Berlin,Herbert Butterfield, Louis Namier, and Karl Popper, and others. Onecould argue that even afer his death in1985, Walter was a silent part-ner in our classroom debates.

Te course ended with a discussion o what was unique about

the history taught at Pacific Union College. Walter believed in aChristian approach to history, but only i such an approach was definedin terms o Christian assumptions about human nature, progress, andthe events affirmed in the creeds. He rejected any version o ‘Christianhistory’ that played ‘Providence’ as the joker in the pack (as Carr put it)or tried to assign the historian a special role ‘as a sort o confidentialsecretary to Prophecy’(in Walter’s words). In his own teachingand writing, he reused to promulgate ‘intuitions or insights beyondwhat the data will bear,’ believing that exaggeration would only lead

disillusioned students to discard any attempt to understand the pur-poses o God.


28/342

xxvi

We were ormal partners in a course we dubbed ‘Historiography,’but which might better have been labelled ‘Great Historians.’ We asked

upper division students to read and discuss selected classic historians,including, at one time or another, Tucydides, Gregory o ours,Edward Gibbon, Henry Adams, and Francis Parkman. Meeting ofenin Walter’s living room, we asked students to think about historians’assumptions and biases. ‘Could an historian rise above his patriotic orreligious or political commitments?’ we asked, and then passed aroundthe cookies. How did style and artistry shape what the historian had tosay? Tese issues could not have been remote or Walter, who wasabout the same time attempting to write an accurate history o Pacific

Union College, including the recent years in which he had been a sig-nificant participant and had definite opinions about policies and policymakers.

Walter was the right person to write the college history, or he was,despite his reputation or independence and mocking candour, a manappropriately described as ‘institutional thinker.’ Unlike most o hisstudents and not a ew o his colleagues, he saw beyond current leadersand their personalities to the organic lie o the institution. Most peo-

ple on campus remembered his penetrating wit, his irreverent sense ohumour. Yet he practiced a certain kind o college and denominational‘patriotism,’ thinking o the long term and ultimately putting the suc-cess o the institution above his private preerences and his personalcareer. At times, he practiced the ‘patience o a Huguenot.’ He assidu-ously supported the prerogatives o the executive office, even i the cur-rent occupant made ridiculous mistakes and he obeyed the writ o thelarger community. He longed or change–and reserved disobedienceor direct conflicts with God’s demands.

Walter’s approach to lie, including his elegant wit, bore many markso the ‘Age o Reason.’ Charmed by Bayle and Voltaire, he was in manyways an Enlightenment man. He preerred to interpret ‘écrasez l’inâme’as an attack on superstition and corrupt religion, not Christianityper se. He had a constitutional aversion to extremes and excess, cher-ishing the jocular definition o a anatic as ‘a person who does whatGod would do i He had all the acts’! He laughed when a crusading‘liberal’ Adventist, dismissed him as a ‘gradualist.’ Te word was ‘agood description o my historical view and temperament,’ he thought.

On another occasion, he privately observed, ‘I am inclined to wish toweigh, balance, analyze, consider causations, etc., and this probablyprevents me rom the fiery commitment I should have.’ He was uneasy


29/342

. , xxvii

with what the eighteenth century called religious ‘enthusiasm’—that is,a Christianity that was ‘mystical’ or too emotional. He especially

loathed ar-etched conspiracy theories, which turned the untidy con-tingency and regular ollies o history into an intelligently designedplan o a ew plotters. (One can easily image his reaction to Te DaVinci Code or the other overheated novels o Dan Brown!)

In his lectures, letters, and conversations, he relished a tone o irony.Like Gibbon, he enjoyed seeing the realities that dwelt behind artificeand careully crafed rhetoric. Zealots o all sorts exasperated him, buthe was seldom enraged. Yet despite this posture, he was a thoroughbeliever, intelligently deending his tradition, and distressed when stu-

dents moved rom thoughtul criticism to outright scepticism or, evenworse, wholehearted rejection o Christianity.

His embrace o the Enlightenment mentality was not unqualified, inother words. He could well have rewritten to fit his situation SenatorHenry (‘Scoop’) Jackson’s amous credo: ‘I am a liberal, but I’m not adamn ool.’ As teacher and scholar, Walter can be imagined saying:

I am a realist, but I am not a cynic.I am a churchman, but I am not intolerant.

I relish questions, but I am not a relativist.I love wit, but I am not flippant.

Most important o all or a teacher in a school like Pacific UnionCollege, he might well have said, ‘I am a Seventh-day Adventist, butI recognize the impact o history on me and those I love. I believe—butI am not araid o studying the historical context o my own group.’With Gibbon he could aver:

Te theologian may indulge the pleasing task o describing Religion as

she descended rom Heaven, arrayed in her native purity. A more melan-choly duty is imposed on the historian. He must discover the inevitablemixture o error and corruption, which she contracted in a long resi-dence upon earth, among a weak and degenerate race o beings.

We must imagine all these statements delivered in Walter’s curiouscombination o provocation and prudence, as he stood behind a lec-tern, or inched his way around campus with one or two canes. He wasa haemophiliac, suffering rom recurring bleeding into his joints thatseverely limited his mobility—and he laboured on a hilly campus with

ew accommodations to his disability. His jaunty, hard-headed inter-pretation o human events flourished, in short, against a backgroundo continual personal pain.


30/342

xxviii

On the deepest level, Walter Utt’s virtues are what made a school likePacific Union College successul. He was stimulated by good ques-

tions, the lure o discovery, and the power o disciplined curiosity. Hegave several generations o students and colleagues a working model oa Christian scholar. Unmoved by ads or sel-promoters, he lovedlearning or its own sake, knowing that instant relevance and short-term practicality might get in the way o wisdom–might, indeed betruly irrelevant or useless. He was prepared to sacrifice and to workalone. He believed in the time-honoured idea o searching or truth.All these old-ashioned virtues, in turn, made other people, includingme, believe in a small, obscure, isolated college. Te students (and oth-

ers) who were truly educated by Walter Utt had to be ready to opentheir minds, to submit themselves to an intellectual discipline, to deerto a mentor.

In all this, Walter was a proound democrat, the opposite o an ‘elit-ist.’ In the one episode o genuine elitism in PUC’s history (in the1950s), he was mostly a sceptic, opposed to setting admission stand-ards too high. Assuming a ew common sense limits, Walter did notdoubt the basic American commitment to mass education. On the

contrary, he really believed in the power o education to changepeople.A teacher cannot avoid wondering rom time to time: ‘Can educa-

tion actually transorm our students? Are our expectations too high,our hopes o mastery and synthesis and autonomy simply unrealisticor ordinary people? Are we too confident in our judgments o what isimportant?’ Tough he sometimes sounded like a pessimist, on suchquestions he was a proound optimist.

On the small stage o a liberal arts college, my colleague Walter Utt

practiced all the values that inormed his scholarship. He wasted noth-ing, it seemed, in three decades o teaching. Disciplined in the demand-ing world o an overloaded teacher, he mastered the art o synthesisand summary. Triving in a deeply religious environment, he learnedhow to balance the competing demands o commitment and analysis.More than anything else, the years at Pacific Union College showedhim the importance o explaining his specialized work to a wider audi-ence. As a result, he approached the world o Claude Brousson, the‘bellicose dove,’ with an appropriate mixture o irony, aith and realism.

Far rom being a distraction or a detour, his lie on Howell Mountainwas an ideal preparation or ‘the real one.’


31/342

CHAPER ONE

HE HUGUENOS AND HE EXPERIENCE OF EXILESIXEENH O WENIEH CENURIES: HISORY,

MEMORY AND RANSNAIONALISM

D. J. B. rim

Tis book is concerned with the interplay o history and memory intransnational context. Te studies that ollow explore, using differentapproaches and a range o different sources, the role o history andmemory in shaping a particular transnational community: that o theHuguenots.

‘Huguenot’ was the term given in sixteenth-century France to adher-ents o John Calvin, though they characteristically called their cones-sion not ‘Calvinism’ but rather ‘the Reormed religion’ (la religionréormée). Always a minority, the Huguenots were subject to sustained

persecution by the Roman Catholic majority in France: episodically inthe late-sixteenth and mid-seventeenth centuries, then continually inthe late seventeenth century. Oppression was both mental and physi-cal: Huguenots were or example officially required to call their aith‘the so-called reormed religion’ (la religion prétendu reormée); andtheir persons suffered rom both legal sanctions and communal vio-lence, as well as appalling mass killings that blurred the distinctionbetween state and popular action, such as the inamous St Bartholomew’smassacre (1572), in which the dead numbered in the thousands. TeEdict o Nantes (1598), the work o Henri IV, extended liberty o con-science and limited liberty o worship and organisation to the FrenchReormed Churches, but the tolerationist ramework erected in 1598was gradually eroded over the seventeenth century. Te ‘so-calledreormed religion’ was ormally suppressed in France by Louis XIV,whose Edict o Fontainebleau (1685) revoked the Edict o Nantes; to bea Protestant was thereafer illegal in France until the French Revolutionwhen Calvinists re-emerged afer a century o secrecy. Members o the

French Reormed Church o the nineteenth century and afer increas-ingly reserved the term ‘Huguenot’ or their ancestors, rather than


32/342

2 . . .

1 Rather than a neologism, it ‘was coined … in the 1680s’: Bernard Cottret, TeHuguenots in England: Immigration and Settlement c. 1550–1700, trans. Peregrine andAdriana Stevenson (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press/Paris: Editions de laMaison des sciences de l’homme, 1991), 2.

2 As Bertrand Van Ruymbeke argues, although until recently the Huguenot massmigration was ‘not … called a diaspora or included in diaspora studies … the Reugeundeniably belongs to the Jewish diasporic paradigm’: ‘Minority Survival: TeHuguenot Paradigm in France and the Diaspora’, in Van Ruymbeke and RandyJ. Sparks (eds.), Memory and Identity: Te Huguenots in France and the Atlantic

Diaspora (Columbia: University o South Carolina Press, 2003), 18 n.2. C . EckhartBirnstiel with Chrystel Bernat (eds.), La Diaspora des Huguenots: les réugiés protes-tants de France et leur dispersion dans le monde (XVI e– XVII e siècles), Vie des Huguenots,17 (Paris: Champion, 2001).

using it or themselves. In a sense, then Huguenots no longer existed inFrance afer c.1700; however, thanks to a mass departure, Huguenots

survived in several European countries and overseas colonies. Tus,the Revocation o the Edict o Nantes resulted in the destruction oReormed organization in France, but not in the extinction o theHuguenots.

Waves o emigration rom France had taken place in the late six-teenth century and then again in the 1670s and early 1680s, but rom1685 there was a huge expansion and acceleration in flight to sympa-thetic countries, which collectively the Huguenots called ‘the Reuge’(le reuge)—the origins o the modern term ‘reugee’.1 Protestants who

remained in France were driven underground, part o what theydubbed ‘the church o the desert’ (l’église du désert ) due to the necessityo holding its meetings in wilderness areas; as early as the late-seventeenth century le désert was contrasted with le reuge. For those inthe desert, the Revocation was a calamity, since practicing their aithcould mean fines, imprisonment or death; Protestantism in France wasliterally in the wilderness or a hundred years. Yet in the Reuge,Huguenots could survive and thrive. Surely the most significant conse-

quence o the suppression o Protestantism in France was the creationo an extraordinary, truly global diaspora.2 Huguenot settlements wereestablished in our o the seven ‘United Provinces’ o the Netherlands(Friesland, Groningen, Zeeland and Holland) and in the Dutch repub-lic’s recently ounded colony in the Cape o Good Hope; in England,Ireland, and the British colonies in America, especially South Carolinaand New York; in Vaud and Geneva (in Switzerland); in Germany—primarily in Brandenburg–Prussia, but also in Württemberg, Baden


33/342

3

3 For an overview o the approximate distribution o reugees during Louis XIV’sreign see map 1 in Robin Gwynn, Huguenot Heritage: Te History and Contribution othe Huguenots in Britain (2nd edn, Brighton: Sussex Academic Press, 2001), 31.

4

Examples o studies o history and memory rom Huguenot perspectives includethe collection edited by Van Ruymbeke and Sparks, Memory and Identity ; ChristianJouhaud, ‘ “Camisards! We Were Camisards!” Remembrance and the Ruining oRemembrance through the Production o Historical Absences’, History and Memory 21 (Spring/ Summer 2009), 5–24; and the conerence o the Association suisse pourl’histoire du Reuge Huguenot at Ascona in Oct. 2010, ‘Histoire, mémoire et identitésen mutation: Les huguenots en France et en diaspora (XVIe–XXIe siècles)’ [http://www.unige.ch/ihr/huguenots2010.html]. For some potential pitalls in the scholarlystudy o memory see Alon Confino, ‘Collective Memory and Cultural History:Problems o Method’, AHR 102 (Dec. 1997), 1386–1403.

5 Te very helpul term coined by Anthony D. Smith, Te Ethnic Origins o Nations (Oxord: Basil Blackwell, 1986), or an ethnic community, defined as ‘human popula-

tions with shared ancestry myths, histories and cultures, having an association with aspecific territory and a sense o solidarity’ (ibid. 32, emphasis supplied—the Huguenotretained their identification with France long afer having, as noted above, become anessentially émigré community).

and Hesse; while some individuals went as ar as Poland, Sweden andRussia.3

Te Huguenot diaspora was greatly influenced initially by its trans-national nature, but as scholars increasingly recognise it was also sig-nificantly shaped, over the longue durée, by the interplay o history andmemory.4 Tese three actors—transnationalism, history, and mem-ory—are the subject o this book, which illustrates how they and theinterplay between them ashioned the ethnic Huguenot identity overseveral generations. Tey moulded the sel-conceptualisation and sel-understanding o French Calvinist émigrés and their descendants, andadditionally shaped how Huguenots were perceived and received by

their host communities, both during the original waves o emigrationand over subsequent decades and centuries. Te transnational nature othe Huguenot ethnie5 diminished over time, yet while Huguenots grad-ually assimilated into host communities, some sense o Huguenotidentity was generally preserved in most countries where Huguenotreugees settled; even when the French language was no longer usedand distinctive cultural practices had vanished, that identity was(indeed, is) still expressed in art, literature, drama, and genealogical

and historical research.Important reasons why a sense o Huguenot identity persistedare the shared memory o historical events, and the act that, relativelyquickly, to be a Huguenot did not necessarily mean being ‘French’.


34/342

4 . . .

Instead it meant being a member o a community that, despite speakinga different language than the indigenous hosts, shared (or at least

approximated) its conessional allegiance and had suffered as a result,and that moreover transcended borders so that its members, while notnecessarily ‘us’, were also not necessarily ‘other’. Knowledge o thesepoints persisted in the collective memory o the host communities inle reuge, as well as o Huguenot reugees. As a result, the latter couldreadily be absorbed into the ormer. Rather than only being strangersin strange lands, Huguenots had multiple identities they could adopt,acilitating their adaptation and assimilation: skilled crafsmen andwomen, who added to the prosperity o their host community; active

citizens o the republic o letters; suffering saints and martyrs, deserv-ing o sympathy; and comrades-at-arms in a war against Catholic tyr-anny. Chameleon-like, members o Huguenot communities, exploitingempathy (or at least relative lack o suspicion and hostility), could takeon such personae and identities as best suited their ends. Yet this couldengender difficulties among the Huguenot community by raising ques-tions as to who its members really were. Huguenot identity was thusinnately bound up with the Huguenots’ history, the transnational

nature o their diaspora, and the memories they and others preservedo their experiences. Ultimately, however, the traumatic shared experi-ence o persecution, orced emigration, and the contested process ointegration, all helped to ensure that a memory o being Huguenotendured even when most signifiers o ethnic distinctiveness had beeneroded.

Te chapters that ollow are separate but overlapping case studies.Tey ocus chiefly, though not entirely, on the history o Huguenotémigré communities and the Huguenot experience in exile, rather

than on the history o the ‘Reormed religion’ and its adherents withinFrance. In particular they examine the ways in which the Huguenothistory in France, and knowledge thereo, both among FrenchCalvinists and oreigners, affected the way Huguenot emigrants inter-acted with host communities, the way they adjusted and assimilated,and the way, eventually, their history was written and the uses to whichit was put.

In this book history and memory are each explored in two ways or intwo senses. Te workings o memory, in particular, are analysed in

more detail, below, but the twin pair o different usages or history andmemory can be summarised as ollows (and is set out, including the


35/342

5

6 Te title o Gwynn’s seminal Huguenot Heritage.

interrelationships between them in schematic orm in figure 1, whichshows the probable chronological progression). Te essays in this book

explore the actual historical experience o the Huguenots in the six-teenth and seventeenth centuries—what might be termed the Huguenotheritage;6 but they also consider the shaping o the written record, orhistoriography , o that heritage, which scholars began to construct inthe nineteenth century, though drawing on literary works, intendedas histories, that were written soon afer the events they describe. Butthe chapters in this book are also concerned with both the memo-ries and the group-memory o that heritage: the first are actual remem-brances o events (i.e. o history in the first sense) by those who

personally experienced them, whether recalled individually or mutu-ally; the second is the collective concern o a group or its past,expressed in the preservation and transmission through generations,o what started as memories, but becomes common memory o theshared heritage.

Figure 1. Relationship between different types o history and memory

History I

(Historical events)

Memory IICollective memory

History II

Historiography

Memory I

Personal memories

Memory I

Collective memories


36/342

6 . . .

7 See Gwynn, ‘Conormity’, esp. 25–26, 39–41; c. Willem Frijhoff, ‘UncertainBrotherhood: Te Huguenots in the Dutch Republic’, in Van Ruymbeke and Sparks,

Memory and Identity, 128–71, esp. 134–35.

Overview o Contents

Te chapters that ollow are arranged in roughly chronological order;they begin in the late sixteenth century and move to the nineteenthcentury. Some are studies o Huguenot history (in the first sense) andmemory, examining the Huguenots’ role in and experience o key his-torical episodes, as well as the ways in which collective memory othose episodes (including early histories, in the second sense) shapedresponses to Huguenot émigrés (chapters 2–6). Other essays exploreHuguenot history (again, in the first sense) in transnational context(chapters 6–8). Te final three chapters (9–11), while written by histo-

rians rather than sociologists on episodes in the past, are primarily onmemory, but are also on history in the second sense, exploring how a‘Huguenot’ identity was preserved, re-shaped, and times created, bothby the descendants o the original Huguenots and among broader com-munities into which they had gradually assimilated, and how the collec-tive memory o the Huguenot past that had emerged among Europeanand American Protestants played a critical role in the identity-ormationprocess and in the development o historiographical accounts.

Tus, the emphasis o the volume is on the experience o Huguenotsin England (chapters 3–5, 7–8, 10). Tis concentration o chaptersreflects Robin Gwynn’s recent argument that, contrary to the presump-tions o previous scholars, by 1700 ‘England had emerged as [a] moresignificant centre or Huguenots than the Netherlands’ (althoughunquestionably the Dutch Republic attracted great numbers o reu-gees immediately afer the Revocation), and his demonstration thatLondon was the largest single centre o Huguenot population.7 Butthe Huguenot diaspora was wider than England and in this volume

consideration is also given to the Huguenots’ experience as reugeesin three other significant oreign milieus (chapters 7–9): respectivelythe Reormed United Provinces o the Netherlands, Lutheran andReormed principalities in Germany, and the Reormed (and French-speaking) Pays de Vaud in Switzerland. In addition, three other chap-ters (2, 6, 11) look at particular aspects o the Huguenot experiencethat significantly shaped their identity and the way they were regardedand remembered: the St. Bartholomew’s Day massacre; their military


37/342

7

8 For the importance o public opinion and print debate in this period, especially inBritain, see Peter Lake and Steve Pincus, ‘‘Rethinking the Public Sphere in EarlyModern England’, Journal o British Studies 45 (April 2006), 270–292; c . JudithPollmann and Andrew Spicer (eds.), Public Opinion and Changing Identities in theEarly Modern Netherlands: Essays in Honour o Alastair Duke, Studies in Medieval andReormation raditions 121 (Leiden & Boston: Brill, 2007), or its importance in theLow Countries. Te role o Huguenots in the emergent public sphere is beginningto be explored by scholars: e.g., Itamar Raban, ‘Te Newspaper Te Post Man andits Editor, Jean Lespinasse de Fonvive’, in Vigne & Littleton, Strangers to Citizens,397–403; Simon Harvey and Elizabeth Grist, ‘Te Rainbow Coffee House and theExchange o Ideas in Early Eighteenth-century England’, in Dunan-Page, Religious

Culture, 163–72; Andrew Tompson, Te Protestant Interest and the History oHumanitarian Intervention, c.1685–c.1756’, in Brendan Simms and D. J. B. rim (eds.),Humanitarian intervention—a history (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,2011), 67–88.

service beyond France; and their place in the writings o NorthAmerican historians and theological controversialists.

Beyond the three undamental issues (history, memory, transna-tionalism) and their interplay, there are six broad themes which chap-ters explore. Te first is the experience o the Huguenots as an ethnicand conessional minority in England in the seventeenth and eight-eenth centuries (chapters 4, 5, 10); and, second, in particular, their role,and the role o memories o their sufferings, in debates over ecclesiasti-cal policy and religious toleration in Great Britain (chapters 2–5). Tethird is the way political and intellectual debates in late-seventeenth-and early eighteenth-century Great Britain, Hanover, and the Dutch

Republic, were shaped not only by concern about the ate o France’sProtestants, but also by the actions and writings o prominent Hugue-nots: drawing on their transnational networks, they influenced or-eign and military policy-making, and contributed significantly to theincreasingly influential discourse o toleration (chapters 3, 6, 7, 8).Fourth is the role, o both the Huguenots and those debating how theyshould be received, in the emergence o the nascent ‘public sphere’ inBritain and the Netherlands in the seventeenth century and early

eighteenth century (chapters 3, 4, 7, 8).

8 Fifh is the cultural and socialimpact o Huguenot exiles in northern Germany, western Switzerland,and Great Britain, during the late-seventeenth, eighteenth, and early-nineteenth, centuries; these highlight the necessity o including a localdimension to Huguenot studies, since local contexts shaped the widerstory o international experience and encounter (chapters 8–10). Sixthis the broader social, cultural and particularly literary impact o the


38/342

8 . . .

9 C . e.g., Milton M. Gordon, Assimilation in American Lie: Te Role o Race,Religion, and National Origins (New York: Oxord University Press, 1964); AlejandroPortes, Luis E. Guarnizo and Patricia Landolt, ‘Te Study o ransnationalism: Pitallsand Promise o an Emergent Research Field’, Ethnic and Racial Studies 22 (1999), 228.

Huguenots, their persecutions, and emigrations, in Britain, France,and the United States o America, rom the mid-nineteenth century to

the late twentieth century (chapters 1, 10, 11).Collectively, the essays suggest that the economic prosperity and

access to the upper ranks o society achieved by French Protestantémigrés in many countries derived not only rom rapid accultura-tion and entrance into mainstream circles o the host society, but also(at least or some) rom cultivating strong social networks acrossnational borders. Some studies o modern immigration and religionseem to take or granted that, once immigrants have arrived, then, ithey i they are able to, they will settle permanently and thereafer

undergo a process o assimilation and acculturation —slow, perhaps,but steady and almost inescapable.9 o some extent this pattern doesdescribe Calvinist emigrants rom France; however, or several genera-tions, at least until the Reormed Church in France was definitivelydriven into ‘the desert’ and there was no hope o a change o heart bythe Bourbon monarchy, Huguenots retained a keen interest in the ateo their literal and figurative brethren and sisters, both in France andin the diaspora, as well as a willingness to act on behal o conrères

regardless o where they were. Tis meant that, even though probablymany Huguenots concentrated on making new lives or themselves innew lands, certainly many others aced outwards as well as inwards;their ocus was on the Huguenot community, whether in the particularnational context or the general transnational context, as well as onintegration and assimilation.

Tis had consequences or transplanted French Calvinists. And theollowing chapters additionally indicate that one o the most signifi-cant and divisive issues acing those who had emigrated to the lands o

‘Te Reuge’ was their own identity: were reugees primarily subjectso the House o Bourbon? Frenchmen and women (with enduring loy-alties to France but not necessarily its crown)? Persecuted Protestants?Productive members o their host communities? Or, as eventuallybecame the case, were they primarily ‘Huguenots’? Because o theimportance o this issue o identity, it will be considered explicitly in


39/342

9

10 Portes, Guarnizo and Landolt, ‘ransnationalism’, 217.11

Portes, Guarnizo and Landolt, ‘ransnationalism’, 221; see e.g., Herbert Lüthy, LaBanque Protestante en France de la Révocation de l’Édit de Nantes à la Révolution , vol. I, Dispersion et regroupement (1685–1730), École Pratique des Hautes Études—VIe Section, Affaires et gens d’affaires, 9 (Paris: S.E.V.P.E.N., 1959); F. M. Crouzet,‘Walloons, Huguenots and the Bank o England’, HSP 25:2 (1990), J. F. Bosher,‘Huguenot Merchants and the Protestant International in the Seventeenth Century’,WMQ, 3rd series, 52 (1995), 77–100; Ole P. Grell, ‘Merchants and Ministers: TeFoundations o International Calvinism’, in Grell, Calvinist Exiles in udor and StuartEngland (Aldershot: Scolar Press, 1996), 98–119; Robin Gwynn, ‘Te Huguenotsin Britain, the “Protestant International” and the Deeat o Louis XIV’, in Vigne &Littleton, Strangers to Citizens, 414–18; R. C. Nash, ‘Huguenot Merchants and theDevelopment o South Carolina’s Slave-Plantation and Atlantic rading Economy,

1680–1775’, in Van Ruymbeke and Sparks, Memory and Identity , 208–40; and c . chap-ter 4, by Lisa Diller, below.12 C. Portes, Guarnizo and Landolt, ‘ransnationalism’, 221; this is the subject o

chapters 7 and 8, by David Onnekink and Andrew Tompson, below.

the remainder o this introductory chapter. First, however, three otherissues will be explored; transnationalism; the meaning and workings

o ‘memory’; and the way it relates to ‘history’. Each will be consid-ered in more detail, as these were so ormative in the constructiono identity.

ransnationalism

Te Huguenots are an extraordinary and early example o thephenomenon o ‘a transnational community linking immigrant

groups’ across borders, made up o different national or local commu-nities, each composed o people living ‘dual lives’.10 Members o suchcommunities ofen (though not inevitably) speak two or more lan-guages and are consciously members o both their host communityand the local representation o their transnational community.

ransnational activity can be economic, political, socio-culturaland religious. Tere are the ‘economic initiatives o transnationalentrepreneurs who mobilize their contracts across borders in searcho suppliers, capital and markets’, such as the Huguenot merchants

who have been examined by a number o scholars.11 Tere are also thepolitical activities o officials, unctionaries, immigrant communityleaders, and, in the early modern period, polemicists, who seek poweror influence in either their original or their host countries.12 Tereare ‘the maniold socio-cultural enterprises oriented towards the


40/342

10 . . .

13 Portes, Guarnizo and Landolt, ‘ransnationalism’, 221. Huguenot examples arethe activities o artists and crafsmen, many o whom crossed national borders: c . e.g.chapters 12–17 (by Karen Hearn, Julia Marciari Alexander, Christine Riding, EileenGoodway, essa Murdoch and Natalie Rothstein) in Vigne & Littleton, Strangers toCitizens, 117–71. Virtually all issues o HSP in recent years have carried at least onearticle on such protagonists in cultural transnationalism. For a broader view o socio-cultural ‘international interchange’, see chapter 9, by Vivienne Larminie, below (quota-tion at p. 261).

14 Tere is a wealth o scholarship on this area, though rarely rom the perspective

o transnationalism. Tere are studies o a range o 16th- and 17th-cent. theologicaland ecclesiastical leaders who operated across borders: e.g., chapters 2–4 (by CarrieA. Euler, Christoph Strohm, Jeannine E. Olson) in Vigne & Littleton, Strangers toCitizens, 17–47; Utt & Strayer, Bellicose Dove; Paula Wheeler Carlo, ‘Te HuguenotSoul: Te Calvinism o Reverend Louis Rou’, in Dunan-Page, Religious Culture, 109–19;Jonathan Israel, ‘Group Identity and Opinion among the Huguenot Diaspora and theChallenge o Pierre Bayle’s oleration Teory (1685–1706)’, in Pollmann and Spicer,Public Opinion and Changing Identities, 279–93; c . chapter 9, by Larminie, below; c .also Anthony Milton (ed.), Te British Delegation and the Synod o Dort (1618–1619),Church o England Record Society, 13 (Woodbridge: Boydell Press, 2005),‘Introduction’, xvii–lv, and the apparatus criticus, passim, which illuminate the role thatecclesiastical statesmen played in the Synod o Dort, a key episode in 17th-cent.

Calvinism. On the Camisard ‘Prophets’ and their influence in England and NorthAmerica, see Hillel Schwartz, Te French Prophets: the History o a Millenarian Groupin Eighteenth-century England (Berkeley: University o Caliornia Press, 1980);Kenneth G. C. Newport, ‘Te Prophets and Early Methodism: Some New Evidence’,Proceedings o the Wesley Historical Society 50 (1996), 127–40; errie Dopp Aamodt,‘ “Out o thee, O England, shall a bright star arise”: Mother Ann Lee and the EnglishOrigins o the Shakers’ in Richard Bonney and D. J. B. rim (eds), Te Development oPluralism in Modern Britain and France (Oxord, Bern, Frankurt am Main, New York,etc: Peter Lang, 2007), 169–88.

15 Te issue o conormity was a particular challenge to Huguenots in Great Britainand its colonies: this is the subject o chapter 5, by Robin Gwynn, below; c . alsoGwynn, ‘Conormity’; Paula Wheeler Carlo, ‘Anglican Conormity and Nonconormity

among the Huguenots o Colonial New York’ and Jane McKee, ‘Te Integration o theHuguenots into the Irish Church: Te Case o Peter Drelincourt’, in Vigne & Littleton,Strangers to Citizens, 313–21, 442–50; Andrew Spicer, ‘ “A Place o reuge and sanctu-ary o a holy emple”: Exile Communities and the Stranger Churches’, in Nigel Goose

reinorcement o a national identity abroad or the collective enjoymento [common] cultural events and goods.’13

Last, and insufficiently recognized in studies o modern transna-tionalism, but significant in the Huguenot context, are the activities otheologians, episcopal and synodal officials, scholars, and—at leastamong the Huguenots—‘prophets’.14 Such men (and occasionallywomen and children) sought to build or to maintain a common set otheological interpretations and a common set o values and behav-iours, rooted in the homeland and ofen in the ace o divergent (evenwhen similar) ecclesiological, spiritual and liturgical praxis in the hostnation.15


41/342

11

and Lien Luu (eds.), Immigrants in udor and early Stuart England (Brighton: SussexAcademic Press, 2005), 91–109; and Susanne Lachenicht, ‘Differing Perceptions o theReuge? Huguenots in Ireland and Great Britain and Teir Attitudes towards theGovernment’s Religious Policy (1660–1710)’, in Dunan-Page, Religious Culture, 43–53.

16 Paul Ricœur, Memory, History, Forgetting , trans. Kathleen Blamey and DavidPellauer (London & Chicago: University o Chicago Press, 2004), 7, 124.

17 Maurice Halbwachs, On Collective Memory , ed. and trans. Lewis A. Coser(London & Chicago: University o Chicago Press, 1992), 38.

18 Confino, ‘Collective Memory and Cultural History’, 1393.19 Tis is brought out well by, e.g., Judith Pollmann, ‘ “Brabanters Do Fairly ResembleSpaniards Afer All”. Memory, Propaganda and Identity in the welve Years’ ruce’, in

Pollmann and Spicer, Public Opinion and Changing Identities, 218.20 C . Halbwachs, On Collective Memory , 39.

Memory

As already observed, the studies that ollow examine two orms omemory. Te first is what has been called ‘the living experience omemory’; the second is ‘the capacity o collective entities to preserveand recall common memories’, even afer those who actually experi-enced them have died.16

Actual memories can be both individual and collective—one o thepioneers o memory studies, Maurice Halbwachs, stressed that thereare ‘social rameworks or memory; it is to the degree that our indi-

vidual thought places itsel in these rameworks and participates in

this memory that it is capable o the art o recollection.’17 Te pointhere is that memories are socially constructed rather than being auton-omous. But this means they are also dynamic and fluid. Tey go‘through a process o invention and appropriation’.18 As various studieso memory, including in early modern Europe, have emphasised, whenpeople ordered their ‘memories’ o events into narratives they sharedwith others, they were ofen influenced by the stories they had heardothers tell, the books and pamphlets they had read (including chroni-

cles and near-contemporary narrative history), the paintings, broad-sheets and plays they had seen, and the songs and ballads they hadheard sung. Tus, their process o remembrance incorporated not onlytheir own recollections, but also other people’s memories, and/or con-temporary or later propaganda and polemic.19

Tere is a second kind o collective memory, however, separate romactual memories o person experiences—it is rather the recurrence othe past in collective consciousness, and the conservation by subse-quent generations o the memories o those who experienced events.20


42/342

12 . . .

21 Michael S. Roth, ‘Remembering Forgetting: Maladies de la Mémoire inNineteenth-century France’, Representations, no. 26, Special Issue: ‘Memory andCounter-Memory’ (Spring 1989), 49.

22 Pierre Nora, ‘Between Memory and History: Les Lieux de Mémoire’, Represen-

tations, no. 26, Special Issue: ‘Memory and Counter-Memory’ (Spring 1989), 8.23 Te classic work is Eric Hobsbawm and erence Ranger (eds.), Te Invention oradition (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1983).

24 Jouhaud, ‘Camisards’, 6.

In this second sense, ‘memories’ are not first-hand recollections at all,but instead are traditions. Tis kind o memory is, at its heart, how a

culture or community ‘lives with or against its past’, and it can beexpressed in multiple orms—most obviously in simple storytellingabout the past (an actual transmission, even while also a reshaping, ooriginal memories), but also in ‘rituals, ceremonies, monuments’ and,eventually, in the research and writing o history.21 It is thereore alsothe way that the past is represented, both by and to the community,shaping how the community sees and understands itsel. Te tradi-tions that are preserved and perpetuated derived originally rom per-sonal reminiscences (subject, as these were, to varying degrees o

conscious or unconscious post-event shaping), which were irregularlyand inormally gathered, and ofen collectively inchoate, but were thentransmitted down the generations.

All this means that collective memory, like collective memories, isdynamic. While the living reminiscences rom which it derives havepassed away, much o what they encompassed lives on as collective orgroup-memory; and this orm o memory is retained and recalled by‘living societies’. ‘It remains in permanent evolution, open to the dia-

lectic o remembering and orgetting … vulnerable to manipulationand appropriation, susceptible to being long dormant and periodicallyrevived.’22 Tere is a danger that when, as ofen happens, traditions areinvented to serve group purposes, memory will also, in a sense, beinvented.23 A recent study o the Huguenots and memory suggests thatthe discourse o remembrance not only ‘produces powerul effects othe presence o the past but at the same time obscures the very past onwhich it is based’.24 Group memory, then, is dynamic, evolving, andenormously influential—not least in generating a sense o identity, and

to this we shall return later.In sum, memory is both actual remembrance o the events thatare ‘history’ (in its first sense) by people who lived through them,


43/342

13

25 See Jacques Le Goff, History and Memory , trans. Steven Rendall and ElizabethClaman (New York & Oxord: Columbia University Press, 1992), 53, 55.

26 Le Goff, History and Memory , 98.27

See Smith, Ethnic Origins o Nations, 2.28 Smith, Ethnic Origins o Nations, 87.29 Smith, Ethnic Origins o Nations, 29.30 Nora, ‘Between Memory and History’, 8.

including the way their memories were shaped, both consciously andsubconsciously; but it is also the representation o those events and

their construction as a shared cultural knowledge by subsequentgenerations.

Tis second orm o memory, group memory, collectively producedand retained, is an example o what scholars o memory call ‘ethnicmemory’, the sociological unction o which is to reproduce certainbehaviours in societies.25 Nations and ethnies emphasise common his-torical experiences and shared memories, capturing them and preserv-ing them and making them serve the purpose o the group. Tus,‘collective memory is not only a conquest, it is also an instrument and

objective o power.’26 Arguably, indeed, without it, no sense o a distinctethnic identity can exist: as Anthony Smith argues, ‘there can be noidentity without memory (albeit selective), no collective purpose with-out myth, and identity and purpose … are necessary elements o the

very concept … o an ethnic community.’ An ethnie must ‘have anidentity … and hence myths and memories’.27 Indeed, ‘without mem-ory, there can be no ethnicity.’28 Collective memory is even moreimportant in a case (such as that o the Huguenots), ‘when an ethnie and “its” homeland are separated, perhaps by external power’; theassociation between the community and its lost homeland ‘becomesan essential part o the collective memory and identity o thecommunity.’29

Tus, memory in its second sense is a primary source o the con-stituent myths o ethnies and nations—and thus o ethnic and nationalidentity. It is also, however, inevitably a sou

Documents

(Studies in the History of Christian Traditions 156) D.J.B. Trim-The Huguenots_ History and Memory in Transnational Context (2011)