Well, there's the places that were Eastern Orthodox but that's a whole other can of worms.From my reading of the period, I honestly think the only regions that couldn't have fallen to protestantism were in Italy and Iberia. The Spanish already went through what amounted to a reformation of their church structures during the 1400s, with massive anti-corruption campaigns and the much closer linkage of the church and state - coupled with a very militant and missionary version of Catholicism. Portugal had a far more corrupt church system, but was so cut off from the rest of Europe and influenced so heavily by Spain that they would be more likely to follow Spanish example than that set elsewhere. In Italy they were under heavy pressure from the closeness of the church - their form of Catholicism might take on a more liberal bent but it would remain Catholic. I would strongly recommend Diarmaid MacCullough's book The Reformation: Europe's House Divided if you want to learn more about all of this.
France could have fallen to the Huguenots at some point during the Wars of Religion, there are multiple possible PoDs to accomplish that. Germany and Austria nearly fell in their entirety to Protestantism in early 1600 while Poland, Transylvania and Royal Hungary all had very strong protestant powers. I think that about covers the areas that didn't go protestant IOTL.
If the Huguenots had been able to hold onto their supporters in Normandy, particularly in the first couple of wars, then they should be set to eventually dominate France. Though that opens up the question and threat of Habsburg or Papal interference in France earlier on.
Citation pleaseYou forgot Poland. Even IOTL, at some time five sixths of the population already had converted. But then the counter-reformation stroke...
You forgot Poland. Even IOTL, at some time five sixths of the population already had converted. But then the counter-reformation stroke...
Citation please
Maybe he meant one sixt? At the peak of Reformation in Poland (second half of 16th century) up to 20% of nobles (and over 1/3 magnates) converted, mostly to Calvinism, but there was no 'cuius regio, eius religio' rule in Poland, nobles were not interested in converting their peasants, and when counter-reformation started, number of Protestant nobles fell quickly, out of circa 800 Calvinist congregations (?, how is Calvinist analogue of parish called?) only one survived untill 20th century and majority of modern Polish Calvinists are descendants of Czech and German immigrants.Citation please
Not really, in no small part because Protestants were the relatively less powerful side of the Wars.Is there any way the Hugoenots could win the Wars of Religion?
Francis I remained a firm catholic, in spite of his beef with Rome. His relative tolerance of Protestantism was, outside a personal interest on intellectual Protestantism that was close to humanism, essentially geopolitical. The Concordate of Bologna could be, however, a good starting point : admitting that Henri II does hold his ground ITTL rather than witnessing Habsburg's dominance (meaning longer Italian Wars) you could see edicts towards a more independent French church turning more and more as a Gallican church while Protestant nobility remains close to power.The Concordat of Bologne seems to be a very good POD. Francis I was somewhat supportive of the reformation, because it was turning German princes against his main rival, Charles V, at least until the Placard Affair. So he seems like a good candidate to pull a Henry VIII.
Citation please
I can't find anything mentioning a large protestant polish population. Maybe that data was found to be dubious or they were referring to the part of Poland that was later annexed by Prussia.An old German encyclopedia from the late 19th century we had at home. Was fun to read.
Is there any way the Hugoenots could win the Wars of Religion?
A century later, the Edict of Nantes was repealed and the Huguenots were forced out and France's Christian population today is virtually all Catholic.The question implies that they lost, which was hardly the case. By the Edict of Nantes they got pretty much everything they realistically expected. Creation of the Protestant France was not their goal so conversation of victory as "Protestant France" is irrelevant.
They got:
1. Freedom of religion with a guaranteed protection for those travelling abroad. While formally, a complete equality was guaranteed, at least one position, Connetable of France, was reserved to the Catholics. Lesdiguières had to convert and Turenne ended up with being just Marshal General of France (). Of course, their freedom of worship had been limited to specified geographic areas (those officially established in 1597) but these areas had been covering (AFAIK) most of the Protestant regions and the nobles holding the right of high justice could "exercise the said religion in their houses"
2. Their own strongholds (places de sûreté) maintained, at least partially, at state expense and a further 150 emergency forts (places de refuge), to be maintained at the Huguenots' own expense.
How exactly this amounts to not winning?
As for the relative military strengths, while the Huguenots had been a minority, popularity of Calvinism among the nobility (cadres of the heavy cavalry, still the main offensive weapon in the battles of that time) partially compensated for this. Then, it is necessary to keep in mind that practically from the very beginning the Huguenots felt themselves quite free to invite the German Protestants as the mercenaries and/or allies (popularity of Henry de Guise grew considerably after he got a credit for repulsing one such invasion during the reign of Henry III). Of course, the royal side kept hiring the Swiss but they cost money while the Protestant German allies would be satisfied with looting.
At the Battle of Dreux the German reiters had been forming a part of the 1st line in Protestant's battle order and Landsknechts - part of the 2nd line. At Moncontour, again - the royal troops had been fighting the Huguenots and their German (and Dutch?) Protestant allies led by Count Vollrad of Mansfeld and Count Louis of Nassau. As a result, in the major battles the Protestant forces had been more than once more numerous than their opponents. Of course, having the greater numbers never prevented Coligny from losing a battle but this is neither here nor there.
Hapsburg direct interference was quite limited (at least where it mattered): in 1590 Parma marched to France to break blockade of Paris by Henry of Navarre and in 1592 he did the same at Rouen but, after escaping from being trapped by the greatly superior French Royal forces at Caudebec, left for the Flanders.
The point of the Edict was that Protestants were able to practice their religion where they already could, but were forbidden to do so elsewhere. Oh, and Catholics could practice and convert even in places de sureté (which were repealed by the Edict of Alès, so well before Fontaineblau).A century later, the Edict of Nantes was repealed and the Huguenots were forced out and France's Christian population today is virtually all Catholic.
I mean, ultimately, not counting the medieval proto-reformations, there have been four reformations: Magisterial, Radical, Unitarian, and Pentecostal. The Unitarian Reformation, rejecting the Trinity and any strong kind of church organization, began to take roots in Hungary and Severtus was actually leaning in that direction, but John Calvin's burning of Severtus crippled the movement, and the counter reformation meant that it never gained traction. Bungle the Counter-Reformation and have Severtus make it back to Spain and win the support of some claimants to the throne and etc, and you could get a Unitarian Spain, which leads to Mothra-sized butterflies.Tell me about the Unitarian Reformation
A century later, the Edict of Nantes was repealed and the Huguenots were forced out and France's Christian population today is virtually all Catholic.
Henri IV knew what he owed to the Protestant side, but couldn't do much more than Henri III that already assessed the situation (and, in fact, would have Henri III lived, I suspect the situation for Protestant would be similar). ...
So I entirely agree with you it can't be seriously considered as a Protestant victory.