Full Download Test Bank Get the Latest Study Materials at testbankfan.

com

Java How to Program Early Objects 11th Edition

Deitel Test Bank

https://testbankfan.com/product/java-how-to-program-early-
objects-11th-edition-deitel-test-bank/

OR CLICK HERE

DOWLOAD NOW

Download More Test Banks for All Subjects at https://testbankfan.com

 Recommended digital products (PDF, EPUB, MOBI) that
you can download immediately if you are interested.

Java How to Program Early Objects 11th Edition Deitel

Solutions Manual

https://testbankfan.com/product/java-how-to-program-early-
objects-11th-edition-deitel-solutions-manual/

testbankfan.com

Java How to Program Early Objects 10th Edition Deitel Test

Bank

https://testbankfan.com/product/java-how-to-program-early-
objects-10th-edition-deitel-test-bank/

testbankfan.com

Java How to Program Early Objects 10th Edition Deitel

Solutions Manual

https://testbankfan.com/product/java-how-to-program-early-
objects-10th-edition-deitel-solutions-manual/

testbankfan.com

Biology Life on Earth 10th Edition Audesirk Test Bank

https://testbankfan.com/product/biology-life-on-earth-10th-edition-
audesirk-test-bank/

testbankfan.com
Financial Accounting 15th Edition Williams Test Bank

https://testbankfan.com/product/financial-accounting-15th-edition-
williams-test-bank/

testbankfan.com

Calculus 7th Edition Stewart Test Bank

https://testbankfan.com/product/calculus-7th-edition-stewart-test-
bank/

testbankfan.com

Quantitative Methods for Business 12th Edition Anderson

Test Bank

https://testbankfan.com/product/quantitative-methods-for-
business-12th-edition-anderson-test-bank/

testbankfan.com

Questioning Gender A Sociological Exploration 3rd Edition

Ryle Test Bank

https://testbankfan.com/product/questioning-gender-a-sociological-
exploration-3rd-edition-ryle-test-bank/

testbankfan.com

Business Law Text and Exercises 7th Edition Miller

Solutions Manual

https://testbankfan.com/product/business-law-text-and-exercises-7th-
edition-miller-solutions-manual/

testbankfan.com
Animal Physiology From Genes to Organisms 2nd Edition
Sherwood Test Bank

https://testbankfan.com/product/animal-physiology-from-genes-to-
organisms-2nd-edition-sherwood-test-bank/

testbankfan.com
Java How to Program, 11/e Multiple Choice Test Bank 1 of 4

Chapter 9 Object Oriented Programming: Inheritance

Section 9.1 Introduction
9.1 Q1: Which of the following statements is false?
a. A subclass is often larger than its superclass.
b. A superclass object is a subclass object.
c. The class following the extends keyword in a class declaration is the direct superclass of the class
being declared.
d. Java uses interfaces to provide the benefits of multiple inheritance.
ANS: b. A superclass object is a subclass object.

9.1 Q2: Inheritance is also known as the

a. knows-a relationship.
b. has-a relationship.
c. uses-a relationship.
d. is-a relationship.
ANS: d. is-a relationship

Section 9.2 Superclasses and Subclasses

9.2 Q1: Which of the following is not a superclass/subclass relationship?
a. Employee/Hourly Employee.
b. Vehicle/Car.
c. Sailboat/Tugboat.
d. None of the above.
ANS: c. Sailboat/Tugboat. A Sailboat is not a superclass for Tugboats. Both sailboat and tugboats
would be subclasses of Boat.

9.2 Q2: An advantage of inheritance is that:

a. All methods can be inherited.
b. All instance variables can be uniformly accessed by subclasses and superclasses.
c. Objects of a subclass can be treated like objects of their superclass.
d. None of the above.
ANS: c. Objects of a subclass can be treated like objects of their superclass.

Section 9.3 protected Members

9.3 Q1: Which of the following keywords allows a subclass to access a superclass method even when the
subclass has overridden the superclass method?
a. base.
b. this.
c. public.
d. super.
ANS: d. super.

9.3 Q2: Using the protected keyword also gives a member:

a. public access.
b. package access.
c. private access.
d. block scope.

© Copyright 1992-2018 by Deitel & Associates, Inc. and Pearson Education, Inc.
Java How to Program, 11/e Multiple Choice Test Bank 2 of 4

ANS: b. package access.

9.3 Q3: Superclass methods with this level of access cannot be called from subclasses.
a. private.
b. public.
c. protected.
d. package.
ANS: a. private.

Section 9.4 Relationship between Superclasses and

Subclasses
9.4 Q1: Which of the following statements is false?
a. A class can directly inherit from class Object.
b. It's often much more efficient to create a class by inheriting from a similar class than to create the class
by writing every line of code the new class requires.
c. If the class you're inheriting from declares instance variables as private, the inherited class can access
those instance variables directly.
d. A class's instance variables are normally declared private to enforce good software engineering.
ANS: c. If the class you're inheriting from declares instance variables as private, the inherited class
can access those instance variables directly. (Actually, if the class you're inheriting from declares
instance variables as protected, the inherited class can access those instance variables directly.)

Section 9.4.1 Creating and Using a CommissionEmployee

Class
9.4.1 Q1: Every class in Java, except ________, extends an existing class.
a. Integer.
b. Object.
c. String.
d. Class.
ANS: b. Object.

9.4.1 Q2: Overriding a method differs from overloading a method because:

a. Overloaded methods have the same signature.
b. Overridden methods have the same signature.
c. Both of the above.
d. Neither of the above.
ANS: b. Overridden methods have the same signature.

Section 9.4.2 Creating and Using a

BasePlusCommissionEmployee Class
9.4.2 Q1: To avoid duplicating code, use ________, rather than ________.
a. inheritance, the “copy-and-past” approach.
b. the “copy-and-paste” approach, inheritance.
c. a class that explicitly extends Object, a class that does not extend Object.
d. a class that does not extend Object, a class that explicitly extends Object.
ANS: a. inheritance, the “copy-and-past” approach.

© Copyright 1992-2018 by Deitel & Associates, Inc. and Pearson Education, Inc.
Java How to Program, 11/e Multiple Choice Test Bank 3 of 4

Section 9.4.3 Creating a CommissionEmployee-

BasePlusCommissionEmployee Inheritance Hierarchy
9.4.3 Q1: Consider the classes below, declared in the same file:
class A {
int a;
public A() {
a = 7;
}
}

class B extends A {
int b;
public B() {
b = 8;
}
}

Which of the statements below is false?

a. Both variables a and b are instance variables.
b. After the constructor for class B executes, the variable a will have the value 7.
c. After the constructor for class B executes, the variable b will have the value 8.
d. A reference of type A can be treated as a reference of type B.
ANS: d. A reference of type A can be treated as a reference of type B.

9.4.3 Q2: Which of the following is the superclass constructor call syntax?
a. keyword super, followed by a dot (.) .
b. keyword super, followed by a set of parentheses containing the superclass constructor arguments.
c. keyword super, followed by a dot and the superclass constructor name.
d. None of the above.
ANS: b. keyword super, followed by a set of parentheses containing the superclass constructor
arguments.

Section 9.4.4 CommissionEmployee-

BasePlusCommissionEmployee Inheritance Hierarchy
Using protected Instance Variables
9.4.4 Q1: Which superclass members are inherited by all subclasses of that superclass?
a. private instance variables and methods.
b. protected instance variables and methods.
c. private constructors.
d. protected constructors.
ANS: b. protected instance variables and methods.

9.4.4 Q2: Which statement is true when a superclass has protected instance variables?
a. A subclass object can assign an invalid value to the superclass’s instance variables, thus leaving an
object in an inconsistent state.
b. Subclass methods are more likely to be written so that they depend on the superclass’s data
implementation.
c. We may need to modify all the subclasses of the superclass if the superclass implementation changes.
d. All of the above.
ANS: d. All of the above.

© Copyright 1992-2018 by Deitel & Associates, Inc. and Pearson Education, Inc.
Java How to Program, 11/e Multiple Choice Test Bank 4 of 4

Section 9.4.5 CommissionEmployee-

BasePlusCommissionEmployee Inheritance Hierarchy
Using private Instance Variables
9.4.5 Q1: private fields of a superclass can be accessed in a subclass
a. by calling private methods declared in the superclass.
b. by calling public or protected methods declared in the superclass.
c. directly.
d. All of the above.
ANS: b. by calling public or protected methods declared in the superclass.

9.4.5 Q2: When overriding a superclass method and calling the superclass version from the subclass
method, failure to prefix the superclass method name with the keyword super and a dot (.) in the superclass
method call causes ________.
a. a compile-time error.
b. a syntax error.
c. infinite recursion.
d. a runtime error.
ANS: c. infinite recursion.

Section 9.5 Constructors in Subclasses

9.5 Q1: When a subclass constructor calls its superclass constructor, what happens if the superclass’s
constructor does not assign a value to an instance variable?
a. A syntax error occurs.
b. A compile-time error occurs.
c. A run-time error occurs.
d. The program compiles and runs because the instance variables are initialized to their default values.
ANS: d. The program compiles and runs because the instance variables are initialized to their default
values.

Section 9.6 Class Object

9.6 Q1: The default implementation of method clone of Object performs a ________.
a. empty copy.
b. deep copy.
c. full copy.
d. shallow copy.
ANS: d. shallow copy.

9.6 Q2: The default equals implementation of class Object determines:

a. whether two references refer to the same object in memory.
b. whether two references have the same type.
c. whether two objects have the same instance variables.
d. whether two objects have the same instance variable values.
ANS: a. whether two references refer to the same object in memory.

© Copyright 1992-2018 by Deitel & Associates, Inc. and Pearson Education, Inc.
Other documents randomly have
different content
While the war was going on in the west and centre of France, the
League was strengthening its organisation and perfecting its plans.
It had become more and more hostile to Henry III., and had become
a secret revolutionary society. It drafted a complete programme for
the immediate future. The cities and districts of France which felt
themselves specially threatened by the Huguenots were to beseech
the King to raise levies for their protection. If he refused or
procrastinated, they were to raise the troops themselves, to be
commanded by officers in whom the League had confidence. They
could then compel the King to place himself at the head of this army
of the Leaguers, or show himself to be their open enemy by
refusing. If the King died childless, the partisans of the League were
to gather at Orléans and Paris, and were there to elect the Cardinal
de Bourbon as the King of France. The Pope and the King of Spain
were to be at once informed, when it had been arranged that His
Holiness would send his benediction, and that His Majesty would
assist them with troops and supplies. A new form of oath was
imposed on all the associates of the League. They were to swear
allegiance to the King so long as he should show himself to be a
good Catholic and refrained from favouring heretics. These
instructions were sent down from the mother-society in Paris to the
provinces, and the affiliated societies were recommended to keep in
constant communication with Paris. Madame de Montpensier, sister
to the Guises, at the same time directed the work of a band of
preachers whose business it was to inflame the minds of the people
in the capital and the provinces against the King and the Huguenots.
She boasted that she did more work for the cause than her brothers
were doing by the sword.
The Guises, with this force behind them, tried to force the King to
make new concessions—to publish the decisions of the Council of
Trent in France (a thing that had not been done); to establish the
Inquisition in France; to order the execution of all Huguenot
prisoners who would not promise to abjure their religion; and to
remove from the armies all officers of whom the League did not
approve. The mother-society in Paris prepared for his refusal by
organising a secret revolutionary government for the city. It was
called “The Sixteen,” being one for each of the sixteen sections of
Paris. This government was under the orders of Guise, who
communicated with them through an agent of his called Mayneville.
Plot after plot was made to get possession of the King’s person; and
but for the activity and information of Nicholas Poulain, an officer of
police who managed to secure private information, they would have
been successful.

§ 18. The Day of Barricades.[225]

The King redoubled his guards, and ordered four thousand Swiss
troops which he had stationed at Lagny into the suburbs of Paris.
The Parisian Leaguers in alarm sent for the Duke of Guise; and
Guise, in spite of a prohibitive order from the King, entered the city.
When he was recognised he was received with acclamations by the
Parisian crowd. The Queen-Mother induced the King to receive him,
which he did rather ungraciously. Officers and men devoted to the
League crowded into Paris. The King, having tried in vain to prevent
the entry of all suspected persons, at last ordered the Swiss into
Paris (May 12th, 1588). The citizens flew to arms, and converted
Paris into a stronghold. It was “the day of Barricades.” Chains were
stretched across the streets, and behind them were piled beams,
benches, carts, great barrels filled with stones or gravel. Houses
were loop-holed and windows protected. Behind these defences men
were stationed with arquebuses; and the women and children were
provided with heaps of stones. Guise had remained in his house, but
his officers were to be seen moving through the crowds and
directing the defence. The Swiss troops found themselves caught in
a trap, and helpless. Henry III. was compelled to ask Guise to
interfere in order to save his soldiers. The King had to undergo
further humiliation. The citizens proposed to attack the Louvre and
seize the King’s person. Guise had to be appealed to again. He had
an interview with the King on the 13th, at which Henry III. was
forced to agree to all the demands of the League, and to leave the
conduct of the war against the Huguenots in the hands of the leader
of the League. After the interview the King was able to escape
secretly from Paris.
The day of the “Barricades” had proved to Henry III. that the
League was master in his capital. The meeting of the States General
at Blois (Oct. 1588) was to show him that the country had also
turned against him.
The elections had been looked after by the Guises, and had taken
place while the impression produced by the revolt of Paris was at its
height. The League commanded an immense majority in all the
three Estates. The business before them was grave. The finances of
the kingdom were in disorder; favouritism had not been got rid of;
and no one could trust the King’s word. Above all, the religious
question was embittering every mind. The Estates met under the
influence of a religious exaltation fanned by the priests. On the 9th
of Oct. representatives of the three Estates went to Mass together.
During the communion the assistant clergy chanted the well-known
hymns,—Pange lingua gloriosi, O salutaris Hostia, Ave verum Corpus
natum,—and the excitement was immense. The members of the
Estates had never been so united.
Yet the King had a moment of unwonted courage. He had resolved
to denounce the League as the source of the disorders in the
kingdom. He declared that he would not allow a League to exist
within the realm. He only succeeded in making the leaders furious.
His bravado soon ceased. The Cardinal de Bourbon compelled him to
omit from the published version of his speech the objectionable
expressions. The Estates forced him to swear that he would not
permit any religion within the kingdom but the Roman. This done, he
was received with cries of Vive le Roi, and was accompanied to his
house with acclamations. But he was compelled to see the Duke of
Guise receive the office of Lieutenant-General, which placed the
army under his command; and he felt that he would never be
“master in his own house” until that man had been removed from
his path.
The news of the completeness of the destruction of the Armada had
been filtering through France; the fear of Spain was to some extent
removed, and England might help the King if he persisted in a policy
of tolerating his Protestant subjects. It is probable that he confided
his project of getting rid of Guise to some of his more intimate
councillors, and that they assured him that it would be impossible to
remove such a powerful subject by legal means. The Duke and his
brother the Cardinal of Guise were summoned to a meeting of the
Council. They had scarcely taken their seats when they were asked
to see the King in his private apartments. There Guise was
assassinated, and the Cardinal arrested, and slain the next day.[226]
The Cardinal de Bourbon and the young Prince de Joinville (now
Duke of Guise by his father’s death) were arrested and imprisoned.
Orders were given to arrest the Duchess of Nemours (Guise’s
mother), the Duke and Duchess of Elbœuf, the Count de Brissac,
and other prominent Leaguers. The King’s guards invaded the
sittings of the States General to carry out these orders. The bodies
of the two Guises were burnt, and the ashes thrown into the Loire.
The news of the assassination raised the wildest rage in Paris. The
League proclaimed itself a revolutionary society. The city organised
itself in its sections. A council was appointed for each section to
strengthen the hands of the “Sixteen.” Preachers caused their
audiences to swear that they would spend the last farthing in their
purses and the last drop of blood in their bodies to avenge the
slaughtered princes. The Sorbonne in solemn conclave declared that
the actions of Henry III. had absolved his subjects from their
allegiance. The “Sixteen” drove from Parlement all suspected
persons; and, thus purged, the Parlement of Paris ranged itself on
the side of the revolution. The Duke of Mayenne, the sole surviving
brother of Henry of Guise, was summoned to Paris. An assembly of
the citizens of the capital elected a Council General of the Union of
Catholics to manage the affairs of the State and to confer with all
the Catholic towns and provinces of France. Deputies sent by these
towns and provinces were to be members of the Council. The Duke
of Mayenne was appointed by the Council the Lieutenant-General of
the State and Crown of France. The new Government had its seal—
the Seal of the Kingdom of France. The larger number of the great
towns of France adhered to this provisional and revolutionary
Government.
In the midst of these tumults Catherine de’ Medici died (Jan. 5th,
1589).

§ 19. The King takes refuge with the

Huguenots.
The miserable King had no resource left but to throw himself upon
the protection of the Protestants. He hesitated at first, fearing
threatened papal excommunication. Henry of Navarre’s bearing
during these months of anxiety had been admirable. After the
meeting of the States General at Blois, he had issued a stirring
appeal to the nation, pleading for peace—the one thing needed for
the distracted and fevered country. He now assured the King of his
loyalty, and promised that he would never deny to Roman Catholics
that liberty of conscience and worship which he claimed. A treaty
was arranged, and the King of Navarre went to meet Henry III. at
Tours. He arrived just in time. Mayenne at the head of an avenging
army of Leaguers had started as soon as the provisional government
had been established in Paris. He had taken by assault a suburb of
the town, and was about to attack the city of Tours itself, when he
found the Protestant vanguard guarding the bridge over the Loire,
and had to retreat. He was slowly forced back towards Paris. The
battle of Senlis, in which a much smaller force of Huguenots routed
the Duke d’Aumale, who had been reinforced by the Parisian militia,
opened the way to Paris. The King of Navarre pressed on. Town after
town was taken, and the forces of the two kings, increased by
fourteen thousand Swiss and Germans, were soon able to seize the
bridge of St. Cloud and invest the capital on the south and west
(July 29th, 1589). An assault was fixed for Aug. 2nd.
Since the murder of the Guises, Paris had been a caldron of seething
excitement. The whole population, “avec douleur et gemissements
bien grands,” had assisted at the funeral service for “the Martyrs,”
and the baptism of the posthumous son of the slaughtered Duke had
been a civic ceremony. The Bull “monitory” of Pope Sixtus V., posted
up in Rome on May 24th, which directed Henry III. on pain of
excommunication to release the imprisoned prelates within ten days,
and to appear either personally or by proxy within sixty days before
the Curia to answer for the murder of a Prince of the Church, had
fanned the excitement. Almost every day the Parisians saw
processions of students, of women, of children, defiling through their
streets. They marched from shrine to shrine, with naked feet, clad
only in their shirts, defying the cold of winter. Parishioners dragged
their priests out of bed to head nocturnal processions. The hatred of
Henry III. became almost a madness. The Cordeliers decapitated his
portraits. Parish priests made images of the King in wax, placed
them on their altars, and practised on them magical incantations, in
the hope of doing deadly harm to the living man. Bands of children
carried lighted candles, which they extinguished to cries of, “God
extinguish thus the race of the Valois.”
Among the most excited members of this fevered throng was a
young Jacobin monk, Jacques Clément, by birth a peasant, of scanty
intelligence, and rough, violent manners. His excitement grew with
the perils of the city. He consulted a theologian in whom he had
confidence, and got from him a guarded answer that it might be
lawful to slay a tyrant. He prayed, fasted, went through a course of
maceration of the body. He saw visions. He believed that he heard
voices, and that he received definite orders to give his life in order to
slay the King. He confided his purpose to friends, who approved of it
and helped his preparations. He was able to leave the city, to pass
through the beleaguering lines, and to get private audience of the
King. He presented a letter, and while Henry was reading it stabbed
him in the lower part of the body. The deed done, the monk raised
himself to his full height, extended his arms to form himself into a
crucifix, and received without flinching his deathblow from La Guesle
and other attendants (Aug. 1st, 1589).[227]
The King lingered until the following morning, and then expired,
commending Henry of Navarre to his companions as his legitimate
successor.
The news of the assassination was received in Paris with wild
delight. The Duchess de Nemours, the mother of the Guises, and the
Duchess de Montpensier, their sister, went everywhere in the streets
describing “the heroic act of Jacques Clément.” The former mounted
the steps of the High Altar in the church of the Cordeliers to
proclaim the news to the people. The citizens, high and low, brought
out their tables into the streets, and they drank, sang, shouted and
danced in honour of the news. They swore that they would never
accept a Protestant king[228] and the Cardinal de Bourbon, still a
prisoner, was proclaimed as Charles x.
At Tours, on the other hand, the fact that the heir to the throne was
a Protestant, threw the Roman Catholic nobles into a state of
perplexity. They had no sympathy with the League, but many felt
that they could not serve a Protestant king. They pressed round the
new King, beseeching him to abjure his faith at once. Henry refused
to do what would humiliate himself, and could not be accepted as an
act of sincerity. On the other hand, the nobles of Champagne,
Picardy, and the Isle of France sent assurances of allegiance; the
Duke of Montpensier, the husband of the Leaguer Duchess, promised
his support; and the Swiss mercenaries declared that they would
serve for two months without pay.

§ 20. The Declaration of Henry IV.[229]

Thus encouraged, Henry published his famous declaration (Aug. 4th,
1589). He promised that the Roman Catholic would remain the
religion of the realm, and that he would attempt no innovations. He
declared that he was willing to be instructed in its tenets, and that
within six months, if it were possible, he would summon a National
Council. The Roman Catholics would be retained in their
governments and charges; the Protestants would keep the
strongholds which were at present in their hands; but all fortified
places when reduced would be entrusted to Roman Catholics and
none other. This declaration was signed by two Princes of the Blood,
the Prince of Conti and the Duke of Montpensier; by three Dukes
and Peers, Longueville, Luxembourg-Piney, and Rohan-Montbazon;
by two Marshals of France, Biron and d’Aumont; and by several
great officers. Notwithstanding, the defections were serious; all the
Parlements save that of Bordeaux thundered against the heretic
King; all the great towns save Tours, Bordeaux, Châlons, Langres,
Compiègne, and Clermont declared for the League. The greater part
of the kingdom was in revolt. The royalist troops dwindled away. It
was hopeless to think of attacking Paris, and Henry IV. marched for
Normandy with scarcely seven thousand men. He wished to be on
the sea coast in hope of succour from England.
The Duke of Mayenne followed him with an army of thirty thousand
men. He had promised to the Parisians to throw the “Bearnese” into
the sea, or to bring him in chains to Paris, But it was not so easy to
catch the “Bearnese.” In the series of marches, countermarches, and
skirmishes which is known as the battle of Arques, the advantage
was on the side of the King; and when Mayenne attempted to take
Dieppe by assault, he was badly defeated (Sept. 24th, 1589). Then
followed marches and countermarches; the King now threatening
Paris and then retreating, until at last the royalist troops and the
Leaguers met at Ivry. The King had two thousand cavalry and eight
thousand infantry to meet eight thousand cavalry and twelve
thousand infantry (including seventeen hundred Spanish troops sent
by the Duke of Parma) under the command of Mayenne. The battle
resulted in a surprising and decisive victory for the King. Mayenne
and his cousin d’Aumale escaped only by the swiftness of their
horses (March 14th, 1590).
It is needless to say much about the war or about the schemes of
parties. Henry invested Paris, and had almost starved it into
surrender, when it was revictualled by an army led from the Low
Countries by the Duke of Parma. Henry took town after town, and
gradually isolated the capital. In 1590 (May 10th) the old Cardinal
Bourbon (Charles X.) died, and the Leaguers lost even the
semblance of a legitimate king. The more fanatical members of the
party, represented by the “Sixteen” of Paris, would have been
content to place France under the dominion of Spain rather than see
a heretic king. The Duke of Mayenne had long cherished dreams
that the crown might come to him. But the great mass of the
influential people of France who had not yet professed allegiance to
Henry IV. (and many who had) had an almost equal dread of
Spanish domination and of a heretic ruler.

§ 21. Henry IV. becomes a Roman Catholic.

Henry at last resolved to conform to the Roman Catholic religion as
the only means of giving peace to his distracted kingdom. He
informed the loyalist Archbishop of Bourges of his intention to be
instructed in the Roman Catholic religion with a view to conversion.
The Archbishop was able to announce this at the conference of
Suresnes, and the news spread instantly over France. With his usual
tact, Henry wrote with his own hand to several of the parish priests
of Paris announcing his intention, and invited them to meet him at
Mantes to give him instruction. At least one of them had been a
furious Leaguer, and was won to be an enthusiastic loyalist.
The ceremony of the reception of Henry IV. into the Roman Catholic
Church took place at Saint Denis, about four and a half miles to the
north of Paris. The scene had all the appearance of some popular
festival. The ancient church in which the Kings of France had for
generations been buried, in which Jeanne d’Arc had hung up her
arms, was decked with splendid tapestries, and the streets leading
to it festooned with flowers. Multitudes of citizens had come from
rebel Paris to swell the throng and to shout Vive le Roi! as Henry,
escorted by a brilliant procession of nobles and guards, passed
slowly to the church. The clergy, headed by the Archbishop of
Bourges, met him at the door. The King dismounted, knelt, swore to
live and die in the catholic apostolic and Roman religion, and
renounced all the heresies which it condemned. The Archbishop
gave him absolution, took him by the hand and led him into the
church. There, kneeling before the High Altar, the King repeated his
oath, confessed, and communicated. France had now a Roman
Catholic as well as a legitimate King. Even if it be admitted that
Henry IV. was not a man of any depth of religious feeling, the act of
abjuration must have been a humiliation for the son of Jeanne
d’Albret. He never was a man who wore his heart on his sleeve, and
his well-known saying, that “Paris was well worth a Mass,” had as
much bitterness in it as gaiety. He had paled with suppressed
passion at Tours (1589) when the Roman Catholic nobles had urged
him to become a Romanist. Had the success which followed his arms
up to the battle of Ivry continued unbroken, it is probable that the
ceremony at Saint Denis would never have taken place. But Parma’s
invasion of France, which compelled the King to raise the siege of
Paris, was the beginning of difficulties which seemed
insurmountable. The dissensions of parties within the realm, and the
presence of foreigners on the soil of France (Walloon, Spanish,
Neapolitan, and Savoyard), were bringing France to the verge of
dissolution. Henry believed that there was only one way to end the
strife, and he sacrificed his convictions to his patriotism.
With Henry’s change of religion the condition of things changed as if
by magic. The League seemed to dissolve. Tenders of allegiance
poured in from all sides, from nobles, provinces, and towns. Rheims
was still in possession of the Guises, and the anointing and crowning
took place at Chartres (Feb. 27th, 1594). The manifestations of
loyalty increased.
On the evening of the day on which Henry had been received into
the Roman Catholic Church at Saint Denis, he had recklessly ridden
up to the crest of the height of Montmartre and looked down on
Paris, which was still in the hands of the League. The feelings of the
Parisians were also changing. The League was seamed with
dissensions; Mayenne had quarrelled with the “Sixteen,” and the
partisans of these fanatics of the League had street brawls with the
citizens of more moderate opinions. Parlement took courage and
denounced the presence of Spanish soldiers within the capital. The
loyalists opened the way for the royal troops, Henry entered Paris
(March 22nd), and marched to Notre Dame, where the clergy
chanted the Te Deum. From the cathedral he rode to the Louvre
through streets thronged with people, who pressed up to his very
stirrups to see their King, and made the tall houses re-echo with
their loyalist shoutings. Such a royal entry had not been seen for
generations, and took everyone by surprise. Next day the foreign
troops left the city. The King watched their departure from an open
window in the Louvre, and as their chiefs passed he called out gaily,
“My compliments to your Master. You need not come back.”
With the return of Paris to fealty, almost all signs of disaffection
departed; and the King’s proclamation of amnesty for all past
rebellions completed the conquest of his people. France was again
united after thirty years of civil war.

§ 22. The Edict of Nantes.

The union of all Frenchmen to accept Henry IV. as their King had not
changed the legal position of the Protestants. The laws against them
were still in force; they had nothing but the King’s word promising
protection to trust to. The war with Spain delayed matters, but when
peace was made the time came for Henry to fulfil his pledges to his
former companions. They had been chafing under the delay. At a
General Assembly held at Mantes (October 1593-January 1594), the
members had renewed their oath to live and to die true to their
confession of faith, and year by year a General Assembly met to
discuss their political disabilities as well as to conduct their
ecclesiastical business. They had divided France into nine divisions
under provincial synods, and had the appearance to men of that
century of a kingdom within a kingdom. They demanded equal civic
rights with their Roman Catholic fellow-subjects, and guarantees for
their protection. At length, in 1597, four delegates were appointed
with full powers to confer with the King. Out of these negotiations
came the Edict of Nantes, the Charter of French Protestantism.
This celebrated edict was drawn up in ninety-five more general
articles, which were signed on April 13th, and in fifty-six more
particular articles which were signed on May 2nd (1598). Two
Brevets, dated 13th and 30th of April, were added, dealing with the
treatment of Protestant ministers, and with the strongholds given to
the Protestants. The Articles were verified and registered by
Parlements; the Brevets were guaranteed simply by the King’s word.
The Edict of Nantes codified and enlarged the rights given to the
Protestants of France by the Edict of Poitiers (1577), the Convention
of Nérac (1578), the treaty of Fleix (1580), the Declaration of Saint-
Cloud (1589), the Edict of Mantes (1591), the Articles of Mantes
(1593), and the Edict of Saint-Germain (1594).
It secured complete liberty of conscience everywhere within the
realm, to the extent that no one was to be persecuted or molested
in any way because of his religion, nor be compelled to do anything
contrary to its tenets; and this carried with it the right of private or
secret worship. The full and free right of public worship was granted
in all places in which it existed during the years 1596 and 1597, or
where it had been granted by the Edict of Poitiers interpreted by the
Convention of Nérac and the treaty of Fleix (some two hundred
towns); and, in addition, in two places within every bailliage and
sénéchaussée in the realm. It was also permitted in the principal
castles of Protestant seigneurs hauts justiciers (some three
thousand), whether the proprietor was in residence or not, and in
their other castles, the proprietor being in residence; to nobles who
were not hauts justiciers, provided the audience did not consist of
more than thirty persons over and above relations of the family.
Even at the Court the high officers of the Crown, the great nobles,
all governors and lieutenants-general, and captains of the guards,
had the liberty of worship in their apartments provided the doors
were kept shut and there was no loud singing of psalms, noise, or
open scandal.
Protestants were granted full civil rights and protection, entry into all
universities, schools, and hospitals, and admission to all public
offices. The Parlement of Paris admitted six Protestant councillors.
And Protestant ministers were granted the exemptions from military
service and such charges as the Romanist clergy enjoyed. Special
Chambers (Chambres d’Édit) were established in the Parlements to
try cases in which Protestants were interested. In the Parlement of
Paris this Chamber consisted of six specially chosen Roman Catholics
and one Protestant; in other Parlements, the Chambers were
composed of equal numbers of Romanists and Protestants (mi-
parties). The Protestants were permitted to hold their ecclesiastical
assemblies—consistories, colloquies, and synods, national and
provincial; they were even allowed to meet to discuss political
questions, provided they first secured the permission of the King.
They remained in complete control of two hundred towns, including
La Rochelle, Montauban, and Montpellier, strongholds of exceptional
strength. They were to retain these places until 1607, but the right
was prolonged for five years more. The State paid the expenses of
the troops which garrisoned these Protestant fortified places; it paid
the governors, who were always Protestants. When it is remembered
that the royal army in time of peace did not exceed ten thousand
men, and that the Huguenots could raise twenty-five thousand
troops, it will be seen that Henry IV. did his utmost to provide
guarantees against a return to a reign of intolerance.
Protected in this way, the Huguenot Church of France speedily took
a foremost place among the Protestant Churches of Europe.
Theological colleges were established at Sedan, Montauban, and
Saumur. Learning and piety flourished, and French theology was
always a counterpoise to the narrow Reformed Scholastic of
Switzerland and of Holland.
 CHAPTER V.
THE REFORMATION IN THE NETHERLANDS.
[230]

§ 1. The Political Situation.

It was not until 1581 that the United Provinces took rank as a
Protestant nation, notwithstanding the fact that the Netherlands
furnished the first martyrs of the Reformation in the persons of
Henry Voes and John Esch, Augustinian monks, who were burnt at
Antwerp (July 31st, 1523).

“As they were led to the stake they cried with a loud voice that
they were Christians; and when they were fastened to it, and
the fire was kindled, they rehearsed the twelve articles of the
Creed, and after that the hymn Te Deum laudamus, which each
of them sang verse by verse alternately until the flames
deprived them both of voice and life.”[231]

The struggle for religious liberty, combined latterly with one for
national independence from Spain, lasted therefore for almost sixty
years.
When the lifelong duel between Charles the Bold of Burgundy and
Louis XI. of France ended with the death of the former on the
battlefield under the walls of Nancy (January 4th, 1477), Louis was
able to annex to France a large portion of the heterogeneous
possessions of the Dukes of Burgundy, and Mary of Burgundy carried
the remainder as her marriage portion (May 1477) to Maximilian of
Austria, the future Emperor. Speaking roughly, and not quite
accurately, those portions of the Burgundian lands which had been
fiefs of France went to Louis, while Mary and Maximilian retained
those which were fiefs of the Empire. The son of Maximilian and
Mary, Philip the Handsome, married Juana (August 1496), the
second daughter and ultimate heiress of Isabella and Ferdinand of
Spain, and their son was Charles V., Emperor of Germany (b.
February 24th, 1500), who inherited the Netherlands from his father
and Spain from his mother, and thus linked the Netherlands to Spain.
Philip died in 1506, leaving Charles, a boy of six years of age, the
ruler of the Netherlands. His paternal aunt, Margaret, the daughter
of the Emperor Maximilian, governed in the Netherlands during his
minority, and, owing to Juana’s illness (an illness ending in
madness), mothered her brother’s children. Margaret’s regency
ended in 1515, and the earlier history of the Reformation in the
Netherlands belongs either to the period of the personal rule of
Charles or to that of the Regents whom he appointed to act for him.
The land, a delta of great rivers liable to overflow their banks, or a
coast-line on which the sea made continual encroachment, produced
a people hardy, strenuous, and independent. Their struggles with
nature had braced their faculties. Municipal life had struck its roots
deeply into the soil of the Netherlands, and its cities could vie with
those of Italy in industry and intelligence. The southern provinces
were the home of the Trouvères.[232] Jan van-Ruysbroec, the most
heart-searching of speculative Mystics, had been a curate of St.
Gudule’s in Brussels. His pupil, Gerard Groot, had founded the lay-
community of the Brethren of the Common Lot for the purpose of
spreading Christian education among the laity; and the schools and
convents of the Brethren had spread through the Netherlands and
central Germany. Thomas à Kempis, the author of the Imitatio
Christi, had lived most of his long life of ninety years in a small
convent at Zwolle, within the territories of Utrecht. Men who have
been called “Reformers before the Reformation,” John Pupper of
Goch and John Wessel, both belonged to the Netherlands. Art
flourished there in the fifteenth century in the persons of Hubert and
Jan van Eyck and of Hans Memling. The Chambers of Oratory
(Rederijkers) to begin with probably unions for the performance of
miracle plays or moralities, became confraternities not unlike the
societies of meistersänger in Germany, and gradually acquired the
character of literary associations, which diffused not merely culture,
but also habits of independent thinking among the people.
Intellectual life had become less exuberant in the end of the
fifteenth century; but the Netherlands, nevertheless, produced
Alexander Hegius, the greatest educational reformer of his time, and
Erasmus the prince of the Humanists. Nor can the influence of the
Chambers of Oratory have died out, for they had a great effect on
the Reformation movement.[233]
When Charles assumed the government of the Netherlands, he
found himself at the head of a group of duchies, lordships, counties,
and municipalities which had little appearance of a compact
principality, and he applied himself, like other princes of his time in
the same situation, to give them a unity both political and territorial.
He was so successful that he was able to hand over to his son, Philip
II. of Spain, an almost thoroughly organised State. The divisions
which Charles largely overcame reappeared to some extent in the
revolt against Philip and Romanism, and therefore in a measure
concern the history of the Reformation. How Charles made his
scattered Netherland inheritance territorially compact need not be
told in detail. Friesland was secured (1515); the acquisition of
temporal sovereignty over the ecclesiastical province of Utrecht
(1527) united Holland with Friesland; Gronningen and the lands
ruled by that turbulent city placed themselves under the government
of Charles (1536); and the death of Charles of Egmont (1538),
Count of Gueldres, completed the unification of the northern and
central districts. The vague hold which France kept in some of the
southern portions of the country was gradually loosened. Charles
failed in the south-east. The independent principality of Lorraine lay
between Luxemburg and Franche-Comté, and the Netherland
Government could not seize it by purchase, treaty, or conquest. One
and the same system of law regulated the rights and the duties of
the whole population; and all the provinces were united into one
principality by the reorganisation of a States General, which met
almost annually, and which had a real if vaguely defined power to
regulate the taxation of the country.
But although political and geographical difficulties might be more or
less overcome, others remained which were not so easily disposed
of. One set arose from the fact that the seventeen provinces were
divided by race and by language. The Dutchmen in the north were
different in interests and in sentiment from the Flemings in the
centre; and both had little in common with the French-speaking
provinces in the south. The other was due to the differing
boundaries of the ecclesiastical and civil jurisdictions. When Charles
began to rule in 1515, the only territorial see was Arras. Tournai,
Utrecht, and Cambrai became territorial before the abdication of
Charles. But the confusion between civil and ecclesiastical
jurisdiction may be seen at a glance when it is remembered that a
great part of the Frisian lands were subject to the German Sees of
Münster, Minden, Paderborn, and Osnabrück; and that no less than
six bishops, none of them belonging to the Netherlands, divided the
ecclesiastical rule over Luxemburg. Charles’ proposals to establish six
new bishoprics, plans invariably thwarted by the Roman Curia, were
meant to give the Low Countries a national episcopate.

§ 2. The Beginnings of the Reformation.

The people of the Netherlands had been singularly prepared for the
great religious revival of the sixteenth century by the work of the
Brethren of the Common Lot and their schools. It was the aim of
Gerard Groot, their founder, and also of Florentius Radevynszoon, his
great educational assistant, to see “that the root of study and the
mirror of life must, in the first place, be the Gospel of Christ.” Their
pupils were taught to read the Bible in Latin, and the Brethren
contended publicly for translations of the Scriptures in the vulgar
tongues. There is evidence to show that the Vulgate was well known
in the Netherlands in the end of the fifteenth century, and a
translation of the Bible into Dutch was published at Delft in
1477[234]. Small tracts against Indulgences, founded probably on
the reasonings of Pupper and Wessel, had been in circulation before
Luther had nailed his Theses to the door of All Saints’ church in
Wittenberg. Hendrik of Zutphen, Prior of the Augustinian Eremite
convent at Antwerp, had been a pupil of Staupitz, a fellow student
with Luther, and had spread Evangelical teaching not only among his
order, but throughout the town.[235] It need be no matter for
surprise, then, that Luther’s writings were widely circulated in the
Netherlands, and that between 1513 and 1531 no fewer than
twenty-five translations of the Bible or of the New Testament had
appeared in Dutch, Flemish, and French.
When Aleander was in the Netherlands, before attending the Diet of
Worms he secured the burning of eighty Lutheran and other books
at Louvain;[236] and when he came back ten months later, he had
regular literary auto-da-fés. On Charles’ return from the Diet of
Worms, he issued a proclamation to all his subjects in the
Netherlands against Luther, his books and his followers, and
Aleander made full use of the powers it gave. Four hundred
Lutheran books were burnt at Antwerp, three hundred of them
seized by the police in the stalls of the booksellers, and one hundred
handed over by the owners; three hundred were burnt at Ghent,
“part of them printed here and part in Germany,” says the Legate;
and he adds that “many of them were very well bound, and one
gorgeously in velvet.” About a month later he is forced to confess
that these burnings had not made as much impression as he had
hoped, and that he wishes the Emperor would “burn alive half a
dozen Lutherans and confiscate their property.” Such a proceeding
would make all see him to be the really Christian prince that he is.
[237]

Next year (1522) Charles established the Inquisition within the

seventeen provinces. It was a distinctively civil institution, and this
was perhaps due to the fact that there was little correspondence
between the civil and ecclesiastical jurisdictions in the Netherlands;
but it must not be forgotten that the Kings of Spain had used the
Holy Office for the purpose of stamping out political and local
opposition, and also that the civil courts were usually more energetic
and more severe than the ecclesiastical. The man appointed was
unworthy of any place of important trust. Francis van de Hulst,
although he had been the Prince’s counsellor in Brabant, was a man
accused both of bigamy and murder, and was hopelessly devoid of
tact. He quarrelled violently with the High Court of Holland; and the
Regent, Margaret of Austria, who had resumed her functions, found
herself constantly compromised by his continual defiance of local
privileges. He was a “wonderful enemy to learning,” says Erasmus.
His colleague, Nicolas van Egmont, a Carmelite monk, is described
by the same scholar as “a madman with a sword put into his hand
who hates me worse than he does Luther.” The two men discredited
the Inquisition from its beginning. Erasmus affected to believe that
the Emperor could not know what they were doing.
The first victim was Cornelius Graphæus, town clerk of Antwerp, a
poet and Humanist, a friend of Erasmus; and his offence was that he
had published an edition of John Pupper of Goch’s book, entitled the
Liberty of the Christian Religion, with a preface of his own. The
unfortunate man was set on a scaffold in Brussels, compelled to
retract certain propositions which were said to be contained in the
preface, and obliged to throw the preface itself into a fire kindled on
the scaffold for the purpose. He was dismissed from his office,
declared incapable of receiving any other employment, compelled to
repeat his recantation at Antwerp, imprisoned for two years, and
finally banished.[238]
The earliest deaths were those of Henry Voes and John Esch, who
have already been mentioned. Their Prior, Hendrik of Zutphen,
escaped from the dungeon in which he had been confined. Luther
commemorated them in a long hymn, entitled A New Song of the
two Martyrs of Christ burnt at Brussels by the Sophists of Louvain:

“Der erst recht wol Johannes heyst,

So reych an Gottes hulden
Seyn Bruder Henrch nach dem geyst,
 Eyn rechter Christ on schulden:
Vonn dysser welt gescheyden synd,
Sye hand die kron erworben,
Recht wie die frumen gottes kind
Fur seyn wort synd gestorben,
Sein Marter synd sye worden.”[239]
Charles issued proclamation after proclamation, each of increasing
severity. It was forbidden to print any books unless they had been
first examined and approved by the censors (April 1st, 1524). “All
open and secret meetings in order to read and preach the Gospel,
the Epistles of St. Paul, and other spiritual writings,” were forbidden
(Sept. 25th, 1525), as also to discuss the Holy Faith, the
Sacraments, the Power of the Pope and Councils, “in private houses
and at meals.” This was repeated on March 14th, 1526, and on July
17th there was issued a long edict, said to have been carefully
drafted by the Emperor himself, forbidding all meetings to read or
preach about the Gospel or other holy writings in Latin, Flemish, or
Walloon. In the preamble it is said that ignorant persons have begun
to expound Scripture, that even regular and secular clergy have
presumed to teach the “errors and sinister doctrines of Luther and
his adherents,” and that heresies are increasing in the land. Then
followed edicts against unlicensed books, and against monks who
had left their cloisters (Jan. 28th, 1528); against the possession of
Lutheran books, commanding them upon pain of death to be
delivered up (Oct. 14th, 1529); against printing unlicensed books—
the penalties being a public whipping on the scaffold, branding with
a red-iron, or the loss of an eye or a hand, at the discretion of the
judge (Dec. 7th, 1530); against heretics “who are more numerous
than ever,” against certain books of which a long list is given, and
against certain hymns which increase the zeal of the heretics (Sept.
22nd, 1540); against printing and distributing unlicensed books in
the Italian, Spanish, or English languages (Dec. 18th, 1544);
warning all schoolmasters about the use of unlicensed books in their
schools, and giving a list of those only which are permitted (July
31st, 1546). The edict of 1546 was followed by a long list of
prohibited books, among which are eleven editions of the Vulgate
printed by Protestant firms, six editions of the Bible and three of the
New Testament in Dutch, two editions of the Bible in French, and
many others. Lastly, an edict of April 29th, 1550, confirmed all the
previous edicts against heresy and its spread, and intimated that the
Inquisitors would proceed against heretics “notwithstanding any
privileges to the contrary, which are abrogated and annulled by this
edict.” This was a clear threat that the terrible Spanish Inquisition
was to be established in the Netherlands, and provoked such
remonstrances that the edict was modified twice (Sept. 25th, Nov.
5th) before it was finally accepted as legal within the seventeen
provinces.
All these edicts were directed against the Lutheran or kindred
teaching. They had nothing to do with the Anabaptist movement,
which called forth a special and different set of edicts. It seems
against all evidence to say that the persecution of the Lutherans had
almost ceased during the last years of Charles’ rule in the
Netherlands, and Philip II. could declare with almost perfect truth
that his edicts were only his father’s re-issued.
The continuous repetition and increasing severity of the edicts
revealed not merely that persecution did not hinder the spread of
the Reformed faith, but that the edicts themselves were found
difficult to enforce. What Charles would have done had he been able
to govern the country himself it is impossible to say. He became
harder and more intolerant of differences in matters of doctrine as
years went on, and in his latest days is said to have regretted that
he had allowed Luther to leave Worms alive; and he might have
dealt with the Protestants of the seventeen provinces as his son
afterwards did. His aunt, Margaret of Austria, who was Regent till
1530, had no desire to drive matters to an extremity; and his sister
Mary, who ruled from 1530 till the abdication of Charles in 1555, was
suspected in early life of being a Lutheran herself. She never openly
joined the Lutheran Church as did her sister the Queen of Denmark,
but she confessed her sympathies to Charles, and gave them as a
reason for reluctance to undertake the regency of the Netherlands.
It may therefore be presumed that the severe edicts were not
enforced with undue stringency by either Margaret of Austria or by
the widowed Queen of Hungary. There is also evidence to show that
these proclamations denouncing and menacing the unfortunate
Protestants of the Netherlands were not looked on with much favour
by large sections of the population. Officials were dilatory,
magistrates were known to have warned suspected persons to
escape before the police came to arrest them; even to have given
them facilities for escape after sentence had been delivered. Passive
resistance on the part of the inferior authorities frequently
interposed itself between the Emperor and the execution of his
bloodthirsty proclamations. Yet the number of Protestant martyrs
was large, and women as well as men suffered torture and death
rather than deny their faith.
The edicts against conventicles deterred neither preachers nor
audience. The earliest missioners were priests and monks who had
become convinced of the errors of Romanism. Later, preachers were
trained in the south German cities and in Geneva, that nursery of
daring agents of the Reformed propaganda. But if trained teachers
were lacking, members of the congregation took their place at the
peril of their lives. Brandt relates how numbers of people were
accustomed to meet for service in a shipwright’s yard at Antwerp to
hear a monk who had been “proclaimed”:
“The teacher, by some chance or other, could not appear, and one of
the company named Nicolas, a person well versed in Scripture,
thought it a shame that such a congregation, hungering after the
food of the Word, should depart without a little spiritual
nourishment; wherefore, climbing the mast of a ship, he taught the
people according to his capacity; and on that account, and for the
sake of the reward that was set upon the preacher, he was seized by
two butchers and delivered to the magistrates, who caused him to
be put into a sack and thrown into the river, where he was
drowned.”[240]
 § 3. The Anabaptists.
The severest persecutions, however, before the rule of Philip II.,
were reserved for those people who are called the Anabaptists.[241]
We find several edicts directed against them solely. In February 1532
it was forbidden to harbour Anabaptists, and a price of 12 guilders
was offered to informants. Later in the same year an edict was
published which declared “that all who had been rebaptized, were
sorry for their fault, and, in token of their repentance, had gone to
confession, would be admitted to mercy for that time only, provided
they brought a certificate from their confessor within twenty-four
days of the date of the edict; those who continued obdurate were to
be treated with the utmost rigour of the laws” (Feb. 1533).
Anabaptists who had abjured were ordered to remain near their
dwelling-places for the space of a year, “unless those who were
engaged in the herring fishery” (June 1534). In 1535 the severest
edict against the sect was published. All who had “seduced or
perverted any to this sect, or had rebaptized them,” were to suffer
death by fire; all who had suffered themselves to be rebaptized, or
who had harboured Anabaptists, and who recanted, were to be
favoured by being put to death by the sword; women were “only to
be buried alive.”[242]
To understand sympathetically that multiform movement which was
called in the sixteenth century Anabaptism, it is necessary to
remember that it was not created by the Reformation, although it
certainly received an impetus from the inspiration of the age. Its
roots can be traced back for some centuries, and its pedigree has at
least two stems which are essentially distinct, and were only
occasionally combined. The one stem is the successions of the
Brethren, a mediæval, anti-clerical body of Christians whose history
is written only in the records of Inquisitors of the mediæval Church,
where they appear under a variety of names, but are universally said
to prize the Scriptures and to accept the Apostles’ Creed.[243] The
other existed in the continuous uprisings of the poor—peasants in