Matthias’s Reign, Ferdinand’s Succession 123exchange of ideas and influences between radically inclined individu-
als, often Calvinists or members of the Bohemian Brethren. There was
indeed a wide although numerically limited European correspondence
network among such people, with the ubiquitous Christian of Anhalt
never far from its centre, and many of those involved, including some
of the Bohemians, had travelled widely and studied abroad.^15 Hence
they had been exposed to ideas such as monarchomachism, the right of
resistance to an unjust prince, extending if necessary to revolt or even
tyrannicide. Nevertheless such contacts fall far short of providing evi-
dence of wider support for these concepts among the Bohemian upper
class, or of any practical planning or even intent towards actual revolt by
the few participants. Thus when it is reported that Thurn, Schlick and
Wenzel Kinsky told a representative of the elector of Saxony in 1614
that the Bohemians were aiming to depose the Habsburgs, it is more
likely that they were speaking for themselves and a small core group of
Lutheran activists than for the Protestant estates as a whole. Moreover it
is clear that they were then thinking in terms not of organising a violent
revolt but of securing the legitimate election of an alternative candidate
as Matthias’s successor, preferably the elector of Saxony himself.^16
The problems in Bohemia which eventually triggered off the crisis
leading to the defenestration had begun to develop almost as soon as
the ink was dry on Rudolf’s abdication. In contrast to his efforts to
seek conciliation in the Empire, Matthias initially adopted much the
same approach in both Austria and Bohemia as had his predecessor,
seeking to place and keep as many offices as possible in the hands of
Catholics, and to apply the most restrictive possible interpretation to the
religious concessions which he and Rudolf had been obliged to make.
He was more successful in Austria, where the concessions had in any
case been less far-reaching, but in Bohemia too loopholes were found
and exploited. Thus although Protestants had gained the right to build
their own churches the Catholic authorities, with royal support, began
to reassert their right to appoint the ministers at existing churches,
many of which had previously been taken over by the Protestants.
Hence where Protestant incumbents died Catholics were appointed in
their place, and elsewhere some pastors were forced out and replaced by
priests.^17 Parts of the royal lands were also transferred to the Catholic
church, so that many villages lost the rights clearly granted to those
living on crown property by the Letter of Majesty, while in others peas-
ants were forbidden to attend churches on nearby Protestant estates.^18
There were also reports of private Catholic landowners seeking to coerce
their tenants into attending Mass. Such steps, individually small and