Scott,
Well, I have mixed views actually. For the first time in French history Huguenots were given civil liberties and protections to worship God freely...albeit with restrictions like forcing Protestants to continue to pay tithes to the Catholic Church and a honor Catholic requirements for marriage, etc.
It also served as the conceptual basis for the modern doctrine of religious liberty (pluralism). Though it just dealt with Catholic-Protestants (not Muslims or others), it did pave the way for Enlightenment views on pluralism.
Essentially, too, it created a "state within a state." And of course "a house divided cannot stand." Richilieu knew this, which is why he made every effort to undermine the Edict and beseiged places like La Rochelle. Henry IV was certainly one for compromise ("Paris is worth a mass"). But such a compromise could not really work and was eventually undone officially in 1685.
All that said, the Edict provided a respite for Huguenots and allowed them to worship God freely in certain places. They were thankful for that, and as such, it was an improvement over the previous situation.
But the Edict of Nantes is not on par with the Scottish National Covenant for faithfulness to God's Word.
