We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 16 December 2008
The Councils of many Imperial Free Cities struggled throughout the late fifteenth and early sixteenth centuries to establish their position as “Obrigkeit,” enjoying the same kind of recognized authority as that exercised by the other petty political rulers within the Empire. The struggle resulted in increasingly authoritarian trends in city government, as some Councils sought to extend their control over more and more aspects of citizens' lives in an effort to win the respect of other ruling groups. Although sporadic violence marked the growing polarization between governed and governing which developed from such efforts, city Councils still justified their actions on the basis of benefit to the community—a community which included both Council and citizenry. This unitary concept of the urban community was subjected to further severe strains by the introduction of the ideas of Luther and Zwingli into the cities.
1. Cf. Naujoks, E., Obrigkeitsgedanke, Zunftverfassung und Reformation, Veröffentlichungen der Kommission für geschichtliche Landeskunde in Baden-Württemberg, ser. B: Forschungen, vol. 3 (Stuttgart, 1958)Google Scholar; Maschke, E., “Obrigkeit im spätmittelalterlichen Speyer und in anderen Städten,” Archiv für Reformationsgeschichte 57 (1966), 7–22Google Scholar; Maschke, E., “Verfassung und soziale Kräfte in der deutschen Stadt des späten Mittelalters, vornehmlich in Oberdeutschland,” Viertel-jahrschrift für Sozial- und Wirtschaftsgeschichte 46 (1959): 289–349, 433–76.Google Scholar
2. The only comprehensive survey of urban disorders prior to the Reformation in the early sixteenth century is still Kaser, K., Politische und Soziale Bewegungen im deutschen Bürgertum zu Beginn des 16. Jahrhunderts (Stuttgart, 1899).Google Scholar
3. One of the best discussions of the role played by the sense of communal responsibility in urban religious affairs is that of Moeller, B., Reichsstadt und Reformation, Schriften des Vereins für Reformationsgeschichte, no. 180 (Gütersloh, 1962), 12–18, 29–33, 39–42.Google Scholar
4. See Lau, F., “Der Bauernkrieg und das angebliche Ende der lutherischen Reformation als spontaner Volksbewegung,” Luther-Jahrbuch 26 (1959): 109–34.Google Scholar
5. Cf. Brady, T., Ruling Class, Regime and Reformation at Strasbourg, 1520–1533, Studies in Medieval and Reformation Thought, 22 (Leiden, 1978), 200Google Scholar, and Ozment, S., The Reformation in the Cities (New Haven, 1975), 127–28, 131.Google Scholar
6. Blickle, P., The Revolution of 1525, trans. Brady, Thomas A. Jr., and Midelfort, H. C. Erik (Baltimore, 1981), 113–16.Google Scholar
7. Cf. Scribner, R., “Civic Unity and the Reformation in Erfurt,” Past and Present, 66 (02 1975), 58–59CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Scribner correctly notes that almost nothing has been done on this aspect of the urban Reformation since Baron, H., “Religion and Politics in the German Imperial Cities during the Reformation,” English Historical Review 52 (1937): 405–27, 614–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8. For a fuller analysis of this question, see Sea, T., “Imperial Cities and the Peasants' War in Germany,” Central European History 12 (1979): 3–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9. Estimates of the city's population vary. Duncker, M. (“Heilbronn zur Zeit des Schmalkaldischen Kriegs und des Interims,” Württembergische Vierteljahrshefte für Landesgeschichte, N.F. 23 [1914]: 1Google Scholar) says 4,500 by mid-century, with another 1,500 or so in the surrounding contado. von Rauch, M., Johann Lachmann, der Reformator Heilbronns (Heilbronn, 1923)Google Scholar, 8 estimates 6,000–6,500 at the beginning of the century, without the contado. The city's assessment for the Swabian League in 1525 ranks it roughly the same as Esslingen, Nördlingen, Biberach, and Dinkelsbühl in terms of wealth. See Klüpfel, K., ed., Urkunden zur Geschichte des Schwäbischen Bunds, (1488–1533), vol. 2, Bibliothek des literarischen Vereins in Stuttgart, 31 (Stuttgart: Lit. Verein, 1853) 60–62Google Scholar. (Klüpfel misdates this assessment as 1512, though it can only be late 1525 or early 1526 because of the inclusion of the Archbishop of Salzburg in the list of assessed League members).
10. For a fuller account of the city's government, see Duncker, 1–2; Rauch, , “Heilbronn im Bauernkrieg,” Bericht: Historischer Verein Heilbronn, Heft 14 (Heilbronn, 1922) 3–4.Google Scholar
11. On Church organization, see anon., “Die Reformation der Reichsstadt Heilbronn,” Historische-politische Blätter fur das Katholische Deutschland 61 (1868): 511–13Google Scholar; Hermann, M., “Aus dem mittelalterlichen Kirchenwesen Heilbronns,” Blätter fur württembergische Kirchengeschichte 1906, 143–45Google Scholar; Rauch, Lachmann, 8.
12. The Carmelite house was just outside the city walls.
13. E.g., the 1520 dispute with the Carmelites over accounting practices, Rauch, , ed., Urkundenbuch der Stadt Heilbronn, vol. 3, Württembergische Geschichtsquellen, vol. 19 (Stuttgart, 1916), 562–63, no. 2595Google Scholar. (Hereinafter cited as USH, 3).
14. Other candidates included Christoph Schappeler, the preacher in Memmingen, Jobst Lorch, preacher at St. Gumbert's in Ansbach, and Bernhart Dieter of Erbach (later Rector of Univ. of Heidelberg) USH, 3: 656–57, no. 2741.
15. Jäger, C., Geschichte der Stadt Heilbronn, vol. 2 (Heilbronn, 1828), 22–23Google Scholar, bases his conclusions upon a number of contemporaries. But see also USH, 3: 570, where Kröner's position on the Reformation is disputed because of the language and views expressed in his will. It should also be noted that Kröner was a close friend of Konrad Erer, the most influential Council member to refuse to accept the Reformation.
16. Rauch, Lachmann, 11–12.
17. Ibid.
18. USH, 3: 664–67, no. 2753.
19. Rauch, , ed., Urkundenbuch der Stadt Heilbronn, vol. 4, Württembergische Geschichtsquellen, vol. 20 (Stuttgart, 1922), 5, no. 2770Google Scholar. (Hereinafter cited as USH, 4). The exact identity of “Master Hans” is unknown.
20. Lachmann had resigned the church administratorship upon becoming preacher.
21. Franciscans: USH, 4: 9–10, no. 2771. Carmelites: USH, 3: 669–70, no. 2762; USH, 4: 14–17, no. 2773. Cf. Jäger, 24. Präsenz: Rauch, Lachmann, 14, n. 7.
22. Order against maids: USH, 3: 656–57, no. 2741. Imprisonment of Carmelite Prior Heinrich Seitzenweiler: ibid., 659–61, no. 2774. Inventory and lake dispute: ibid., 432–33, no. 2416, 648–53, nos. 2731, 2735. Franciscans: USH, 4: 20–23, no. 2779. Dietz: ibid., 26, no. 2783. Reply to community: ibid., 5, no. 2770.
23. USH, 3: 667, no. 2755. This was at the request of a neighboring noble.
24. USH, 4: 9, no. 2770b.
25. There is not enough evidence to determine the breakdown within the Council between reform-minded Councillors and those who were undecided or supporters of the traditional beliefs, at least at this point. The Council itself notes only that its “divisions” were partly responsible for the indecisiveness displayed during the Peasants' War.
26. The following account of the Peasants' War in Heilbronn is based generally upon the testimony of witnesses questioned immediately after the revolt by the Heilbronn Council, upon the account of events presented by the Council in its defense before the Swabian League after the revolt, and upon the sworn testimony of over 150 burghers taken by representatives of the Reichskammergericht in 1531 and 1533, plus isolated testimony from later years. Cf. Jäger, C., “Der Bauernkrieg von 1525 um Heilbronn und der nächsten Umgegend,” Sophronizon 9 (1827): 1–31Google Scholar (which is a highly confused account because of inaccurate chronology), and Rauch, “Heilbronn im Bauernkrieg.” Individual documents are cited as they are relevant.
27. “wo aber die bauwern aynes cristenlichen erbarn furnemons weren.”
28. USH, 4: 34–35, no. 2794.
30. On the same day that it replied to the community articles the Council sent urgent messages to Wimpfen and the Imperial Regency Council asking for mediation and help.
31. USH, 4: 46, no. 2807. Cf. the major role assigned to expected help from Helfenstein in the Council's later justification to the Swabian League: ibid., 214, no. 2982a.
32. Ibid., 46–47, no. 2808. This put the Council in the embarrassing position of having to return to the craft associations to ask what should be done next.
33. Ibid., 40–43, no. 2800–2801; 50–60, no. 2815–2816; 63–65, no. 2824. Cf. Bossert, G., “Die Heilbronner Reformator Johann Lachmann als Patriot im Bauernkrieg nach seinen Briefen,” Württembergische Jahrbücher für Statistik und Landeskunde, 1908, pp. 44–66Google Scholar, where the letters are dated differently.
34. “Der Rat sei nichts nutz.”
35. From testimony taken by the Council after the occurrence: USH, 4: 156–72, no. 2962, modified by the depositions taken in the suit of the Teutonic Order against the Heilbronn Council: ibid., 278–99, no. 3019h, i. On the effect of the threat to rip out the vineyards, see the report of Jakob Sturm of Strassburg, who was in Heilbronn as a representative of the Reichsregiment shortly after the city was occupied by the peasants: Virck, H., ed., Politische Correspondenz der Stadt Strassburg im Zeitalter der Reformation, Urkunden und Akten der Stadt Strassburg, pt. 2, vol. 1 (1882): 196–98.Google Scholar
36. These sales, some of which may have occurred before the actual plunder, plus the presence of the citizen committee during the raid and strong evidence that the Council ordered the Teutonic Order's supplies broken into before the peasants entered the city, constituted a principal element in the later charges brought against the city by the Order.
37. The number was disputed after the revolt, with estimates ranging as high as 400. Some of the confusion undoubtedly results from the presence of the Heilbronners with the peasants before they reached the city. I have followed Rauch, “Heilbronn im Bauernkrieg,” 23.
38. USH, 4: 122–23, nos. 2893–2894; 126–27, no. 2898.
39. See the comments of Hans Roth, 38 years later: ibid., 7, no. 2770a.
40. Hauptstaatarchiv Baden-Württemberg, Stuttgart, H53, Bu. 178, fol. 104.
41. For a more complete discussion of this case, see T. Sea, “Imperial Cities …,” 32–36.
42. The Carmelite case has been reconstructed from: USH, 4: 27–29, no. 2785; 75–76, no. 2837; 132–41, no. 2908.
43. Support for refugees against their former Obrigkeit was a favorite tactic in the legal wrangles which arose from the Peasants' War. See Sea, T., “Schwäbischer Bund und Bauernkrieg: Bestrafung und Pazification,” in Der deutsche Bauernkrieg, 1524–1526, ed. Wehler, H.-U., Geschichte und Gesellschaft, Sonderheft 1 (Göttingen, 1975), 144–48.Google Scholar
44. USH, 4: 273–300, no. 3019. Hans Müller, however, was readmitted to Heilbronn after paying a small fine in 1531, a tacit admission of the partial justice of his claims to which the Council consented with an ill grace: ibid., 239–55, no. 3000.
46. For example, the Council refused to join the alliance of protesting estates because it couldn't meet the requirement of abolishing mass in the city. Since it was currently “at law” with the Teutonic Order and the Franciscans, it did not feel justified in acting against them in any way: ibid., 538–39, no. 3260.
47. Ibid., 328–29, no. 3055.
48. Ibid., 334–39, no. 3060. Cf. the discussion in Rauch, Lachmann, 22, which differs from the treatment here.
49. USH, 4: 365–68, no. 3100.
50. Ibid., 377–78, no. 3111.
51. Ibid., 402–4, no. 3132; 408–11, nos. 3142, 3144–3145.
52. Ibid., 418–19. Cf. Rauch, , “Johann Riesser, Heilbronns Reformationsbürgermeister,” Historischer Verein Heilbronn: Bericht 16 (1925–1928): 11–23.Google Scholar
53. USH, 4: 425–27, no. 3164.
55. Ibid., 432–37, no. 3172; 468–69, no. 3203.
56. Ibid., 477–82, no. 3213. Cf. also 669–71, no. 3364.
57. E.g., in 1530 when defending himself against charges from Dietz: “Der prediger auch gepraucht sich des pfarlichs amptt on meyster Peters schaden aus eyns erbern radts geheyss.” USH, 4: 542, no. 3266Google Scholar.
58. Ibid., 726–27, no. 3411.
59. Two good examples are the interruption of the recently-introduced Lutheran communion in 1528 (see above at n. 5 3) and Lachmann's threat to resign in 1526 over a preaching prohibition, which the Council ignored (USH, 4: 316–19, no. 3045).
60. Rauch, Lachmann, 28.
61. USH, 4: 526–29, no. 3254.
62. Ibid., 603–7, nos. 3305–3307, 3309; 622–25, no. 3320.
63. “derwegen auch so balt zusamen insonders glopt und geschworn, in sollicher gotlicher furderung getreulich bestes vermogens zu volfarn und was gemaine stat und ain ersamen radt solliches gotlichen handels halb beschwerlichs anlange nicht wenigers als in anderm uberfallenden sachen getreulich Got zu lob und ere zusamen zu setzen, auch zu yeder zeyt darbey zu pleyben und darwider nit zu sein nach iedes besten vermogen getreulich und on alle gevar.” This oath was to be read into the Ratsprotokoll annually. USH, 4: 640–41, no. 3330a.
64. “du hast den furhalt ains ersamen radts gehort und wiltu, so ain erber radt also furfert, bey ir weyssheit, so verfolgung desshalban kem, besteen, leyb und gut lassen.”
65. USH, 4: 700–703, no. 3399.
66. Since the Commander of the Teutonic Order was not subject to the Council's authority, and also a member of the Swabian League, the Heilbronn Council felt it could not command him to abolish mass.
68. USH, 4: 732–52, no. 3416.
To save this article to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.
To save this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Dropbox account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.
To save this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Google Drive account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.
