The Peasant War in Germany - Marxists Internet ArchiveThe Peasant War in Germany was the first...

ThePeasantWarinGermany

FrederickEngels

Written:Summer1850,London;Published:NeueRheinischeZeitung.Revue;Translated:byMoissayeJ.Olginin1926forInternationalPublishers;Transcribed:[email protected],July1995,onlineJan41996;ProofedandCorrected:MarkHarris(2010),DaveAllinson(2016).

MarxistsInternetArchiveAvailableonlineat:https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1850/peasant-war-germany/index.htm

The1848uprisingsinGermanyputEngelsinmindofthelastgreatpeasantrebellionsofthe1500s.Ashewouldlaterwrite:

“The parallel between theGermanRevolution of 1525 and that of 1848–49was tooobvioustobealtogetherignoredatthattime.”

Engels demonstrates the failure of both these revolutionswas largely attributable to thebourgeois/burgerdom(andthusunderscoringthemodernneedforanalliancebetweentheworkingproletariatandtheworkingpeasantry).

ThePeasantWarinGermanywasthefirsthistorybooktoassert thattherealmotivatingforce behind the Reformation and 16th-century peasant war was socio-economic (classconflict)ratherthan“merely”religious.


–2–

Contents

Author’sPrefacetotheSecondEdition(1870).....4

Author’sAddendumtothePreface(1874).....11

Chapter1:TheEconomicSituationandClassesinGermany.....16

Chapter 2: The Main Opposition Groups and their Programmes; Luther and

Muenzer.....26

Chapter3:Precursors:PeasantUprisings,1476–1517.....42

Chapter4:UprisingoftheNobility.....53

Chapter5:ThePeasantWarinSuabiaandFranconia.....57

Chapter6:ThePeasantWarinThuringia,AlsaceandAustria.....78

Chapter7:SignificanceofthePeasantWar.....86

TheTwelveArticlesofthePeasants.....91

CommentsbyD.Riazanov.....95

Facsimileofopeningpagesfromthe1870edition.....99

Notes.....100


–3–

PrefacetotheSecondEdition(1870)

ThisworkwaswritteninLondoninthesummerof1850,underthevividimpressionofthecounter-revolutionthathadjustbeencompleted.Itappearedin1850inthefifthandsixthissuesoftheNeueRheinischeZeitung,apoliticaleconomicrevieweditedbyKarlMarxinHamburg.MypoliticalfriendsinGermanydesiretoseeitinbookform,andIherebyfulfilthatdesire,since,unfortunately,itstillhastheinterestoftimeliness.

The work does not pretend to present independently collected material. Quite thecontrary,all thematerialrelatingtothepeasantrevoltsandtoThomasMuenzerhasbeentakenfromZimmermann[1]whosebook,althoughshowinggapshereandthere,isstillthebestpresentationofthefacts.Moreover,oldZimmermannenjoyedhissubject.Thesamerevolutionaryinstinctwhichmakeshimheretheadvocateoftheoppressedclasses,madehimlateroneofthebestintheextremeleftwingofFrankfurt.

If,nevertheless,theZimmermannrepresentationlacksinternalcoherence;ifitdoesnotsucceedinshowingthereligiousandpoliticalcontroversiesofthatepochasareflectionoftheclass struggles thatwere takingplace simultaneously; if it sees in theclass strugglesonlyoppressorsandoppressed,goodandevil, and the finalvictoryof evil; if its insightintosocialconditionswhichdeterminedboththeoutbreakandtheoutcomeofthestruggleis extremely poor, it was the fault of the time in which that book came into existence.Nevertheless,foritstime,andamongtheGermanidealisticworksonhistory,itstandsoutaswritteninaveryrealisticvein.

This book, while giving the historic course of the struggle only in its outlines,undertakes to explain the origin of the peasant wars, the attitude of the various partieswhich appear in thewar, the political and religious theories throughwhich those partiesstrovetomakecleartothemselvestheirposition;andfinally,theresultofthestruggleasdeterminedbythehistorical-socialconditionsoflife,toshowthepoliticalconstitutionofGermany of that time, the revolt against it; and to prove that the political and religioustheorieswerenotthecauses,buttheresultofthatstageinthedevelopmentofagriculture,industry,landandwaterways,commerceandfinance,whichthenexistedinGermany.This,theonlymaterialisticconceptionofhistory,originates,notfrommyselfbutfromMarx,andcan be found in his works on the French Revolution of 1848–9, published in the samereview,andinhisEighteenthBrumaireofLouisBonaparte.

TheparallelbetweentheGermanRevolutionsof1525andof1848–9wastooobvioustobe leftentirelywithoutattention.However, togetherwithan identityofevents inbothcases,asforinstance,thesuppressionofonelocalrevoltaftertheotherbythearmyoftheprinces, togetherwitha sometimescomicsimilitude in thebehaviourof thecitymiddle-


–4–

class,thedifferenceisquiteclear.

“WhoprofitedbytheRevolutionof1525?Theprinces.WhoprofitedbytheRevolutionof1848?Thebigprinces,AustriaandPrussia.Behindtheprinces of 1525 there stood the lower middle-class of the cities, heldchained by means of taxation. Behind the big princes of 1850, therestoodthemodernbigbourgeoisie,quicklysubjugatingthembymeansoftheStatedebt.Behindthebigbourgeoisiestandtheproletarians.”

I amsorry to state that in thisparagraph toomuchhonourwasgiven to theGermanbourgeoisie.True,ithadtheopportunityof“quicklysubjugating”themonarchybymeansoftheStatedebt.Neverdiditavailitselfofthisopportunity.

Austria fell as a boon into the lap of the bourgeoisie after thewar of 1866, but thebourgeoisie does not understand how to govern. It is powerless and inefficient ineverything.Onlyonethingisitcapableofdoing:tostormagainsttheworkersassoonastheybegintostir.ItremainsatthehelmonlybecausetheHungariansneedit.

AndinPrussia?True,theStatedebthasincreasedbyleapsandbounds.Thedeficithasbecomeapermanent feature.TheStateexpenditureskeepgrowing,year inandyearout.ThebourgeoisiehaveamajorityintheChamber.Notaxescanbeincreasedandnodebtsincurredwithouttheirconsent.ButwhereistheirpowerintheState?Itwasonlyacoupleofmonthsago,whenadeficitwaslooming,thatagaintheyfoundthemselvesinthemostfavourable position. They could have gained considerable concessions by persevering.Whatwastheirreaction?TheyconsidereditasufficientconcessionwhentheGovernmentallowed them to lay at its feet ninemillions, not for oneyear alone, but to be collectedindefinitelyeveryyear.

Idonotwanttoblamethe“nationalliberals”oftheChambermorethanistheirdue.Iknow they have been forsaken by those who stand behind them, by the mass of thebourgeoisie.Thismassdoesnotwishtogovern.1848isstillinitsbones.

Why the German bourgeoisie has developed this remarkable trait, will be discussedlater.

In general, however, the above quotation has proved perfectly true. Beginning from1850, the small States were in constant retreat, serving only as levers for Prussian andAustrian intrigues. Austria and Prussia were engaged in ever-stronger struggles forsupremacy.Finally,thefearfulclashof1866tookplace.Austria,retainingallitsprovinces,subjugated,directlyandindirectly,theentirenorthofPrussia,whileleavingthefateofthethreesouthernStatesintheair.

In all these grand activities of the States, only the following are of particular


–5–

importancefortheGermanworkingclass:

First,thatuniversalsuffragehasgiventheworkersthepowertobedirectlyrepresentedinthelegislativeassemblies.

Second,thatPrussiahassetagoodexamplebyswallowingthreecrownsbythegraceofGod.ThatafterthisoperationherowncrownismaintainedbythegraceofGodaspureassheclaimsittobe,noteventhenationalliberalsbelieveanymore.

Third,thatthereisonlyoneseriousenemyoftheRevolutioninGermanyatthepresenttime–thePrussiangovernment.

Fourth, that theAustro-Germanswillnowbecompelled toask themselveswhat theywish to be, Germans or Austrians; whom they wish to adhere to, to Germany or herextraordinarytransleithanianappendages.Ithasbeenobviousforalongtimethattheywillhavetogiveuponeortheother.Still,thishasbeencontinuallyglossedoverbythepetty-bourgeoisdemocracy.

Astootherimportantcontroversiesconcerning1866whichwerethreshedoutbetweenthe“national-liberals”andthepeople’spartyadnauseam,comingyearswillshowthatthetwostandpointsfoughtsobitterlysimplybecausetheyweretheoppositepolesofthesamestupidity.

InthesocialconditionsofGermany,theyear1866haschangedalmostnothing.Afewbourgeois reforms: uniform measures and weights, freedom of movement, freedom oftrade,etc.–allwithinlimitsbefittingbureaucracy,donotevencomeuptothatofwhichotherwesternEuropeancountrieshavebeeninpossessionforalongwhile,andleavethemain evil, the system of bureaucratic concessions, unshaken. As to the proletariat, thefreedom of movement, and of citizenship, the abolition of passports and other suchlegislationismadeillusorybythecurrentpolicepractice.

What ismuchmore important than thegrandmanoeuvresof theState in1866 is thegrowth of German industry and commerce, of the railways, the telegraph, and oceansteamshipnavigationsince1848.ThisprogressmaybelaggingbehindthatofEnglandorevenFrance, but it is unheard of forGermany, andhas donemore in twenty years thanwouldhavebeenpreviouslypossibleinacentury.Germanyhasbeendrawn,earnestlyandirrevocably,intoworldcommerce.Capitalinvestedinindustryhasmultipliedrapidly.Theposition of the bourgeoisie has improved accordingly. The surest sign of industrialprosperity – speculation – has blossomed richly, princes and dukes being chained to itstriumphal chariot. German capital is now constructing Russian and Rumanian railways,whereas, only fifteen years ago, the German railways went a-begging to English


–6–

entrepreneurs. How, then, is it possible that the bourgeoisie has not conquered politicalpower,thatitbehavesinsocowardlyamannertowardthegovernment?

It is the misfortune of the German bourgeoisie to have come too late – quite inaccordancewiththebelovedGermantradition.TheperiodofitsascendancycoincideswiththetimewhenthebourgeoisieoftheotherwesternEuropeancountriesispoliticallyonthedownwardpath.InEngland,thebourgeoisiecouldplaceitsrealrepresentative,Bright,intothegovernmentonlybyextendingthefranchisewhichinthelongrunisboundtoputanendtoitsverydomination.InFrance,thebourgeoisie,whichfortwoyearsonly,1849–50,had held power as a class under the republican régime, was able to continue its socialexistenceonlyby transferring itspower toLouisBonaparteand thearmy.Underpresentconditions of enormously increased interdependence of the three most progressiveEuropeancountries,itisnomorepossiblefortheGermanbourgeoisieextensivelytoutilizeitspoliticalpowerwhile thesameclasshasoutlived itself inEnglandandFrance. It isapeculiarityofthebourgeoisie,distinguishingitfromallotherclasses,thatapointisbeingreached in its development after which every increase in its power, that is, everyenlargement of its capital, only tends to make it more and more incapable of retainingpoliticaldominance.“Behindthebigbourgeoisiestandtheproletarians.”Inthedegreeasthe bourgeoisie develops its industry, its commerce, and itsmeans of communication, italso produces the proletariat. At a certain point, which must not necessarily appearsimultaneouslyandon the samestageofdevelopment everywhere, it begins tonote thatthis, its second self, has outgrown it. From then on, it loses the power for exclusivepoliticaldominance.Itlooksforallieswithwhomtoshareitsauthority,ortowhomtocedeallpower,ascircumstancesmaydemand.

In Germany, this turning point came for the bourgeoisie as early as 1848. Thebourgeoisiebecamefrightened,notsomuchbytheGerman,asbytheFrenchproletariat.Thebattle of June, 1848, inParis, showed the bourgeoisiewhat could be expected.TheGerman proletariat was restless enough to prove to the bourgeoisie that the seed ofrevolution had been sown also in German soil. From that day, the edge of bourgeoispoliticalactionwasbroken.Thebourgeoisielookedaroundforallies.Itsolditselftothemregardlessofprice,andthereitremains.

Thesealliesareallofareactionaryturn.Itistheking’spower,withhisarmyandhisbureaucracy;itisthebigfeudalnobility;itisthesmallerjunker;itiseventheclergy.Thebourgeoisiehasmadesomanycompactsandunionswithallofthemtosaveitsdearskin,thatnowithasnothingmoretobarter.Andthemoretheproletariatdeveloped,themoreitbegan to feelasaclassand toactasone, the feeblerbecame thebourgeoisie.When theastonishinglybadstrategyofthePrussianstriumphedovertheastonishinglyworsestrategy


–7–

of theAustrians at Sadowa, itwas difficult to saywhogave a deeper sighof relief, thePrussianbourgeois,whowasapartnertothedefeatatSadowa,orhisAustriancolleague.

Ouruppermiddle-classof1870actedinthesamefashionasdidthemoderatemiddle-classof1525.Astothesmallbourgeoisie,themasterartisansandmerchants,theyremainunchanged.Theyhopetoclimbuptothebigbourgeoisie,andtheyarefearfullesttheybepusheddownintotheranksoftheproletariat.Betweenfearandhope,theywillintimesofstruggleseektosavetheirpreciousskinandtojointhevictorswhenthestruggleisover.Suchistheirnature.

The social and political activities of the proletariat have kept pace with the rapidgrowthofindustrysince1848.TheroleoftheGermanworkers,asexpressedintheirtradeunions,theirassociations,politicalorganisationsandpublicmeetings,atelections,andintheso-calledReichstag, isaloneasufficient indicationof the transformationwhichcameoverGermanyinthelasttwentyyears.ItistothecreditoftheGermanworkersthattheyalonehavemanagedtosendworkersandworkers’representativesintotheParliament–afeatwhichneithertheFrenchnortheEnglishhadhithertoaccomplished.

Still,eventheproletariatshowssomeresemblanceto1525.Theclassofthepopulationwhich entirely and permanently depends on wages is now, as then, a minority of theGermanpeople.Thisclass isalsocompelled toseekallies.The lattercanbe foundonlyamongthepettybourgeoisie,thelowgradeproletariatofthecities,thesmallpeasants,andthewage-workersoftheland.

The petty bourgeoisie has been mentioned above. This class is entirely unreliableexceptwhenavictoryhasbeenwon.Then itsnoise in thebeer saloons iswithout limit.Nevertheless, there are good elements among it, who, of their own accord, follow theworkers.

The lumpenproletariat, this scum of the decaying elements of all classes, whichestablishes headquarters in all the big cities, is the worst of all possible allies. It is anabsolutely venal, an absolutely brazen crew. If the Frenchworkers, in the course of theRevolution, inscribedon thehouses:Mortauxvoleurs! (Death to the thieves!) and evenshotdownmany, theydidit,notoutofenthusiasmforproperty,butbecausetheyrightlyconsidereditnecessarytoholdthatbandatarm’slength.Everyleaderoftheworkerswhoutilisesthesegutter-proletariansasguardsorsupports,proveshimselfbythisactionaloneatraitortothemovement.

Thesmallpeasants(biggerpeasantsbelongtothebourgeoisie)arenothomogeneous.They are either in serfdom bound to their lords and masters, and inasmuch as thebourgeoisiehas failed todo itsduty in freeing thosepeople fromserfdom, itwillnotbe


–8–

difficulttoconvincethemthatsalvation,forthem,canbeexpectedonlyfromtheworkingclass;ortheyaretenants,whosesituationisalmostequaltothatoftheIrish.Rentsaresohighthatevenintimesofnormalcropsthepeasantandhisfamilycanhardlyekeoutabareexistence;whenthecropsarebad,hevirtuallystarves.Whenheisunabletopayhisrent,he is entirely at themercy of the landlord. The bourgeoisie thinks of relief only undercompulsion.Where,then,shouldthetenantslookforreliefoutsideoftheworkers?

Thereisanothergroupofpeasants,thosewhoownasmallpieceofland.Inmostcasestheyaresoburdenedwithmortgagesthattheirdependenceupontheusurerisequaltothedependenceofthetenantuponthelandlord.Whattheyearnispracticallyameagerwage,which,sincegoodandbadcropsalternate, ishighlyuncertain.Thesepeoplecannothavetheleasthopeofgettinganythingoutofthebourgeoisie,becauseitisthebourgeoisie,thecapitalistusurers,thatsqueezethelife-bloodoutofthem.Still,thepeasantsclingtotheirproperty, though in reality it does not belong to them, but to the usurers. It will benecessarytomakeitcleartothesepeoplethatonlywhenagovernmentofthepeoplewillhavetransformedallmortgagesintoadebttotheState,andtherebyloweredtherent,willtheybeabletofreethemselvesfromtheusurer.This,however,canbeaccomplishedonlybytheworkingclass.

Wherevermiddleandlargelandownershipprevails,thewage-workersofthelandformthemostnumerousclass.ThisisthecasethroughouttheentirenorthandeastofGermany,andit isherethat theindustrialworkersof thecityfindtheirmostnumerousandnaturalallies. In the same way as the capitalist is opposed to the industrial worker, the largelandownerorlargetenantisopposedtothewage-workersoftheland.Themeasuresthathelptheonemustalsohelptheother.Theindustrialworkerscanfreethemselvesonlybyturning the capital of thebourgeoisie, that is, the rawmaterials,machines and tools, thefoodstuffsnecessaryforproduction,intosocialproperty,theirownproperty,tobeusedbythemincommon.Similarly,thewage-workersofthelandcanbefreedfromtheirhideousmiseryonlywhenthemainobjectoftheirwork,thelanditself,willbewithdrawnfromtheprivatepropertyofthelargepeasantsandstilllargerfeudalmasters,andtransformedintosocialpropertytobecultivatedbyanassociationoflandworkersoncommonbasis.AndherewecometothefamousdecisionoftheInternationalSocialistCongressinBasle:Thatitisintheinterestofsocietytotransformpropertyonlandintocommonnationalproperty.Thisdecisionwasmadeprimarilyforthosecountrieswherethereislargelandownership,with large agricultural enterprises, with one master and many wage-workers in everyestate.ItistheseconditionsthatstillprevailinGermany,andnexttoEngland,thedecisionwasmosttimelyforGermany.Theagriculturalproletariat,thewage-workersoftheland,istheclassfromwhichthebulkofthearmiesoftheprincesisbeingrecruited.Itistheclass


–9–

which,thankstouniversalsuffrage,sendsintoParliamentthegreatmassoffeudalmastersand Junkers.However, it is also theclassnearest to the industrialworkersof thecity. Itshares their conditions of living, and it is still deeper steeped in misery than the cityworkers. This class, powerless because split and scattered, but possessing hidden powerwhich is so well known to the government and nobility that they purposely allow theschoolstodeteriorateinorderthattheruralpopulationshouldremainunenlightened,mustbecalledtolifeanddrawnintothemovement.ThisisthemosturgenttaskoftheGermanlabourmovement.Fromthedaywhenthemassoftheworkersofthelandhavelearnedtounderstandtheirowninterests,areactionary,feudal,bureaucraticorbourgeoisgovernmentinGermanybecomesanimpossibility.


–10–

AddendumtothePreface

THEpreceding lineswerewrittenoverfouryearsago,but theyarevalidalsoatpresent.Whatwas true after Sadowa and the partition ofGermany is being confirmed also afterSedanand theerectionof theHolyGermanEmpireofPrussiannationality.Little indeedare the“world-shaking”activitiesof theStates in the realmofso-calledbigpolitics inapositiontochangethetrendofhistoricdevelopment.

WhatthesegrandactivitiesoftheStatesareinapositiontoaccomplishistohastenthetempo of historic movement. In this respect, the originators of the above-mentioned“world-shaking” events have made involuntary successes which to themselves appearhighly undesirable, but which, however, they must take into the bargain, for better orworse.

Already thewarof1866hadshaken theoldPrussia to its foundations.After1848 itwasdifficulttobringtherebelliousindustrialelementofthewesternprovinces,bourgeoisaswellasproletarian,undertheolddiscipline.Still,somehow,thiswasaccomplished,andtheinterestsoftheJunkersoftheeasternprovinces,togetherwiththoseofthearmy,againbecame dominant in the State. In 1866 almost all the northwest of Germany becamePrussian.BesidestheincurablemoralinjurytothePrussiancrown,bythefactthatithadswallowed up three other crowns by the grace of God, the centre of gravity of themonarchy had moved considerably westward. The four million Rhinelanders andWestphalianswere reinforced, first, by fourmillionGermansannexed through theNorthGermanAlliancedirectly, and thenby sixmillion annexed indirectly. In 1870, however,eightmillionsouthwestGermanswereadded,sothat,inthe“newmonarchy,”thefourteenand a half million old Prussians (all the six East Elbian provinces, among them, twomillion Poles) were opposed by twenty-five million who had long outgrown the oldPrussian junker feudalism. So it happened that the very victories of the Prussian armydisplacedtheentirefoundationofthePrussianStateedifice;thejunkerdominancebecameever more intolerable, even for the government itself. At the same time, however, thestrugglebetweenthebourgeoisieandtheworkersmadeinevitablebytheimpetuousgrowthofindustry,relegatedtothebackgroundthestrugglebetweenJunkersandbourgeoisie,sothattheinnersocialfoundationsoftheoldStatesufferedacompletetransformation.Eversince 1840, the conditionmaking possible the existence of the slowly rottingmonarchywas the struggle between nobility and bourgeoisie, wherein the monarchy retainedequilibrium.Fromthemoment,however,whenitwasnomoreaquestionofprotectingthenobility against the onslaught of the bourgeoisie, but of protecting all propertied classesagainsttheonslaughtoftheworking-class,theabsolutemonarchyhadtoturntothatform


–11–

ofstatewhichwasexpresslydevisedforthisspecificpurpose–theBonapartistmonarchy.This change of Prussia towards Bonapartism I have discussed in another place(Woknungsfrage). What I did not stress there, and what is very important in thisconnection,isthatthischangewasthegreatestprogressmadebyPrussiaafter1848,whichonlyshowshowbackwardPrussiawasinpointofmoderndevelopment.ItisafactthatthePrussian State still was a semi-feudal State, whereas Bonapartism is, at all events, amodern form of state which presupposes the abolition of feudalism. Thus Prussia mustdecidetodoawaywithitsnumerousremnantsoffeudalism,tosacrificeitsjunkerdomassuch.This,naturally,isbeingdoneinthemildestpossibleform,andunderthetuneofthefavourite melody, “Always slowly forward.” An example of such “reform” work is thenotoriousorganisationofdistricts,which,removingthefeudalprivilegesoftheindividualjunkerinrelationtohisestate,restoresthemasspecialprivilegesofthebiglandownersinrelation to the entire district. The substance remains, it being only translated from thefeudalintothebourgeoisdialect.TheoldPrussianjunkerisforciblybeingtransformedintosomething akin to the English squire. He need not have offered so much resistance,becausetheoneisjustasfoolishastheother.

Thus it was the peculiar feat of Prussia not only to culminate, by the end of thiscentury, her bourgeois revolution begun in 1808–13 and continued in 1848, but toculminate it in the present formofBonapartism. If everything goeswell, and theworldremainsniceandquiet,andweallbecomeoldenough,wecanstillperhapslivetosee–about1900–thegovernmentofPrussiaactuallyrelinquishingall feudal institutions,andPrussiafinallyreachingapointwhereFrancestoodin1792.

Speaking positively, the abolition of feudalism means the introduction of bourgeoisconditions.Inthemeasureastheprivilegesofthenobilityfall, legislationbecomesmoreandmorebourgeois.Here,again,wemeetwiththechiefpointatissue,theattitudeoftheGerman bourgeoisie towards the government. We have seen that the government iscompelledtointroducetheseslowandpettyreforms,butinitsrelationtothebourgeoisie,thegovernmentportraysthesesmallconcessionsassacrificesinfavourofthebourgeoisie,asconcessionsyieldedbythecrownwithdifficultyandpain,andforwhichthebourgeoisiemust, in return, yield something to he government. The bourgeoisie, on the other hand,thoughquiteawareofthisstateofaffairs,allowsitselftobefooled.Thisisthesourceofthe tacitagreementwhich is thebasisofallReichstagandChamberdebates.Ontheonehand, the government reforms the laws at a snail pace tempo in the interests of thebourgeoisie; it removes the impediments to industry emanating from themultiplicity ofsmallstates;itcreatesunityofcoinage,ofmeasuresandweights;itgivesfreedomoftrade,etc.; it grants the freedom of movement; it puts the working power of Germany at the


–12–

unlimiteddisposalofcapital;itcreatesfavourableconditionsfortradeandspeculation.Ontheotherhand, thebourgeoisie leaves in thehandsof thegovernmentallactualpoliticalpower;itvotestaxes,loansandrecruits;ithelpstoframeallnewreformlawsinawaythatthe old police power over undesirable individuals shall remain in full force. Thebourgeoisiebuysitsgradualsocialemancipationforthepriceofimmediaterenunciationofitsownpoliticalpower.Naturally, themotivewhichmakessuchagreementacceptabletothebourgeoisieisnotthefearofthegovernmentbutthefearoftheproletariat.

Miserableasthebourgeoisieappearsinthepoliticalrealm,itcannotbedeniedthatasfaras industryandcommerceareconcerned, thebourgeoisie fulfils itshistoricduty.Thegrowth of industry and commerce mentioned already in the introduction to the secondeditionhasbeengoingonwithevengreatervigour.WhathastakenplaceintheRhenish-Westphalian industrial region since 1869, is unprecedented forGermany, and it remindsone of the rapid growth in the English manufacturing districts at the beginning of thiscentury.ThesamethingwillhappeninSaxonyandUpperSilesia,inBerlin,Hanover,andthesouthernStates.Atlastwehaveworldtrade,areallybigindustry,andareallymodernbourgeoisie.Butwehavealsohadarealcrisis,andwehaveatrulymightyproletariat.ForthefuturehistorianofGermany,thebattleroarof1859–64onthefieldofSpicheren,MarslaTour,Sedan,andtherest,willbeofmuchlessimportancethantheunpretentious,quiet,andconstantlyforward-movingdevelopmentoftheGermanproletariat.Immediatelyafter1870,theGermanworkersstoodbeforeagravetrial–theBonapartistwarprovocationanditsnaturalsequence,thegeneralnationalenthusiasminGermany.TheGermanworkersdidnot allow themselves to be illusioned for amoment.Not a trace of national chauvinismmadeitselfmanifestamongthem.Inthemidstofamaniaforvictory,theyremainedcool,demanding“equitablepeacewiththeFrenchRepublicandnoannexations,”andnoteventhestateofsiegewasinapositiontosilencethem.Nogloryofbattle,nophraseologyofGerman“imperialmagnificence”attractedthem.TheirsoleaimremainedtheliberationoftheentireEuropeanproletariat.Wemaysaywithfullassurancethatinnocountryhavetheworkersstoodsuchadifficulttestwithsuchsplendidresults.

The state of siege of wartime was followed by trials for treason, lèse majesté, andcontemptofofficersandbyever increasingpoliceatrocitiespractised inpeace time.TheVolksstaathadthreeorfoureditorsinprisonsimultaneously;theotherpapers,inthesameratio.Everyknownpartyspeakerhad to facecourtat leastonceayear,andwasusuallyconvicted. Deportations, confiscations, suppressions of meetings rapidly followed oneanother,butalltonoavail.Theplaceofeveryprisonerordeporteewasimmediatelyfilledby another. For one suppressed gathering, two others were substituted, wearing outarbitrarypolicepowerinonelocalityaftertheotherbyenduranceandstrictconformityto


–13–

the law. Persecution defeated its own purpose. Far from breaking theworkers’ party orevenbendingit, itattractedevernewrecruits,andstrengthenedtheorganisation.In theirstruggle against the authorities and the individual bourgeois, theworkersmanifested anintellectual and moral superiority. Particularly in their conflicts with the employers oflabour did they show that they, the workers, were now the educated class, while thecapitalistsweredupes.Intheirfights,asenseofhumourprevailed,showinghowsuretheywereoftheircause,andhowsuperiortheyfelt.Astrugglethusconductedonhistoricallyprepared soilmustyieldgreat results.The successof the January (1874) elections stoodout,uniqueinthehistoryof themodernlabourmovement,andtheastonishmentarousedbythemthroughoutEuropewasperfectlydeserved.

TheGermanworkershavetwoimportantadvantagescomparedwiththerestofEurope.First,theybelongtothemosttheoreticalpeopleofEurope;second,theyhaveretainedthatsense of theory which the so-called “educated” people of Germany have totally lost.WithoutGermanphilosophy,particularly thatofHegel,GermanscientificSocialism (theonly scientificSocialismextant)wouldneverhavecome intoexistence.Withouta sensefortheory,scientificSocialismwouldhaveneverbecomebloodandtissueoftheworkers.Whatanenormousadvantagethisis,maybeseenontheonehandfromtheindifferenceoftheEnglishlabourmovementtowardsalltheory,whichisoneofthereasonswhyitmovessoslowlyinspiteofthesplendidorganisationoftheindividualunions;ontheotherhand,from themischiefandconfusioncreatedbyProudhonism in itsoriginal formamong theFrenchmenandBelgians,andinitscaricatureform,aspresentedbyBakunin,amongtheSpaniardsandItalians.

Thesecondadvantageis that,chronologicallyspeaking, theGermanswerethe last toappearinthelabourmovement.InthesamemannerasGermantheoreticalSocialismwillneverforgetthatitrestsontheshouldersofSaintSimon,FourierandOwen,thethreewho,inspiteoftheirfantasticnotionsandUtopianism,belongedtothemostsignificantheadsofall timeandwhosegeniusanticipatednumerousthingsthecorrectnessofwhichcannowbeprovedinascientificway,sothepracticalGermanlabourmovementmustneverforgetthat ithasdevelopedon the shouldersof theEnglishandFrenchmovements, that ithadutilised their experience, acquired at a heavy price, and that for this reason it was in apositiontoavoidtheirmistakeswhichintheirtimewereunavoidable.WithouttheEnglishtrade unions and the French political workers’ struggles preceding the German labourmovement, without themighty impulse given by the Paris Commune, where would wenowbe?

It must be said to the credit of the German workers that they have utilised theadvantagesoftheirsituationwithrareunderstanding.Forthefirsttimeinthehistoryofthe


–14–

labourmovementthestruggleisbeingsoconductedthatitsthreesides,thetheoretical,thepoliticalandthepracticaleconomical(oppositiontothecapitalists),formoneharmoniousand well-planned entity. In this concentric attack, as it were, lies the strength andinvincibilityoftheGermanmovement.

It isduetothisadvantageoussituationontheonehand,totheinsularpeculiaritiesoftheBritish,andtothecruelsuppressionoftheFrenchmovementsontheother,thatforthepresentmoment theGermanworkersformthevanguardof theproletarianstruggle.Howlongeventswillallowthemtooccupythispostofhonourcannotbeforeseen.Butaslongas they are placed in it, let us hope that they will discharge their duties in the propermanner. It is thespecificdutyof the leaders togainaneverclearerunderstandingof thetheoreticalproblems, to free themselvesmoreandmore from the influenceof traditionalphrasesinheritedfromtheoldconceptionoftheworld,andconstantlytokeepinmindthatSocialism,havingbecomeascience,demandsthesametreatmentaseveryotherscience–itmustbestudied.Thetaskoftheleaderswillbetobringunderstanding,thusacquiredandclarified,totheworkingmasses,tospreaditwithincreasedenthusiasm,toclosetheranksofthepartyorganisationsandofthelabourunionswithevergreaterenergy.Thevotescastinfavourof theSocialists lastJanuarymayrepresentconsiderablestrength,but theystillarefarfrombeingthemajorityoftheGermanworkingclass;andencouragingasmaybethesuccessesof thepropagandaamongtheruralpopulation,moreremains tobedone inthisfield.Thesloganisnottoflinchinthestruggle.Thetaskistowrestfromtheenemy’shands one seat after the other, one electoral district after the other. In the first place,however,itisnecessarytoretainarealinternationalspiritwhichpermitsofnochauvinism,which joyfully greets each new step of the proletarian movement, no matter in whichnationitismade.IftheGermanworkersproceedinthisway,theymaynotmarchexactlyattheheadofthemovement–itisnotintheinterestofthemovementthattheworkersofonecountryshouldmarchattheheadofall–buttheywilloccupyanhonourableplaceonthebattleline,andtheywillstandarmedforbattlewhenotherunexpectedgravetrialsormomentouseventswilldemandheightenedcourage,heighteneddetermination,andthewilltoact.

FREDERICKENGELSLondon,July1,1874.


–15–

Chapter1TheEconomicSituationandSocialClassesinGermany

TheGermanpeoplearebynomeanslackinginrevolutionarytradition.ThereweretimeswhenGermanyproduced characters that couldmatch the bestmen in the revolutions ofothercountries;whentheGermanpeoplemanifestedanenduranceandenergywhich,inacentralised nation, would have brought the most magnificent results; when the Germanpeasants and plebeians were pregnant with ideas and plans which often made theirdescendantsshudder.

Incontrast topresent-dayenfeeblementwhichappearseverywhereafter twoyearsofstruggle (since 1848) it is timely to present once more to the German people thoseawkwardbutpowerfulandtenaciousfiguresofthegreatpeasantwar.Threecenturieshaveflown by since then, andmany a thing has changed; still the peasant war is not as farremovedfromourpresent-daystrugglesas itwouldseem,andtheopponentswehavetoencounter remain essentially the same. Those classes and fractions of classes whicheverywherebetrayed1848and1849,canbefoundintheroleoftraitorsasearlyas1525,thoughonalowerlevelofdevelopment.Andiftherobustvandalismofthepeasantwarsappearedinthemovementofthelastyearsonlysporadically,intheOdenwald,intheBlackForest,inSilesia,itbynomeansshowsasuperiorityofthemoderninsurrection.

*

Letus first reviewbriefly thesituation inGermanyat thebeginningof theSixteenthCentury.

GermanindustryhadgonethroughaconsiderableprocessofgrowthintheFourteenthandFifteenthCenturies.Thelocalindustryofthefeudalcountrysidewassupersededbytheguildorganisationofproduction in thecities,whichproducedforwidercirclesandevenfor remote markets. Weaving of crude woollen stuffs and linens had become a well-established,ramifiedbranchofindustry,andevenfinerwoollenandlinenfabrics,aswellassilks,werealreadybeingproducedinAugsburg.Outsideoftheartofweaving,therehadarisenthosebranchesofindustry,which,approachingthefinerarts,werenurturedbythedemands for luxuries on the part of the ecclesiastic and lay lords of the latemediaevalepoch: gold- and silver-smithing, sculpture and wood-carving, etching and wood-engraving,armour-making,medal-engraving,wood-turning,etc.,etc.Aseriesofmoreorless important discoveries culminating in the invention of gunpowder and printing hadconsiderablyaidedthedevelopmentofthecrafts.Commercekeptpacewithindustry.TheHanseaticLeague,throughitscentury-longmonopolyofseanavigation,hadbroughtabout


–16–

theemergenceoftheentirenorthofGermanyoutofmedievalbarbarism;andevenwhen,aftertheendoftheSixteenthCentury,theHanseaticLeaguehadbeguntosuccumbtothecompetitionoftheEnglishandtheDutch,thegreathighwayofcommercefromIndiatothenorthstilllaythroughGermany,VascodaGama’sdiscoveriesnotwithstanding.Augsburgstill remained the great point of concentration for Italian silks, Indian spices, and allLevantineproducts.ThecitiesofupperGermany,namely,AugsburgandNuernberg,werethe centres of opulence and luxury remarkable for that time. The production of rawmaterialshadequallyprogressed.TheGermanminersof theFifteenthCenturyhadbeenthemostskilfulintheworld,andagriculturewasalsoshakenoutofitsmediaevalcruditythrough theblossoming forthof thecities.Notonlyhad large stretchesof landbeenputundercultivation,butdyeplantsandotherimportedcultureshadbeenintroduced,whichinturnhadafavourableinfluenceonagricultureasawhole.

Still, the progress of national production in Germany had not kept pace with theprogress of other countries.Agriculture lagged far behind that of England andHolland.IndustrylaggedfarbehindtheItalian,FlemishandEnglish,andas toseanavigation, theEnglish,andespeciallytheDutch,werealreadydrivingtheGermansoutofthefield.Thepopulationwasstillverysparse.CivilisationinGermanyexistedonlyinspots,aroundthecentres of industry and commerce; but even the interests of these individual centresdivergedwidely,withhardlyanypointofcontact.Thetraderelationsandmarketsof theSouthdifferedfromthoseof theNorth; theEastandtheWesthadalmostnointercourse.Nocityhadgrowntobecometheindustrialandcommercialpointofgravityforthewholecountry,suchasLondonwasforEngland.Internalcommunicationwasalmostexclusivelyconfinedtocoastwiseandrivernavigationandtoafewlargecommercialhighways, likethose from Augsburg and Nuernberg through Cologne to the Netherlands, and throughErfurttotheNorth.Awayfromtheriversandhighwaysofcommercetherewasanumberof smaller cities which, excluded from the great trade centres, continued a sluggishexistenceunderconditionsof latemedieval times,consumingfewnon-localarticles,andyielding few products for export. Of the rural population, only the nobility came intocontactwithwidecirclesandnewwants; themassof thepeasantsneveroversteppedtheboundariesoflocalrelationsandlocaloutlook.

WhileinEngland,aswellasinFrance,theriseofcommerceandindustryhadbroughtaboutalinkingofinterestsovertheentirecountry,thepoliticalcentralisationofGermanyhadsucceededonlyinthegroupingofinterestsaccordingtoprovincesandaroundpurelylocalcentres.ThismeantpoliticaldecentralisationwhichlatergainedmomentumthroughtheexclusionofGermanyfromworldcommerce.Inthedegreeasthepurelyfeudalempirewas falling apart, bonds of unity were becoming weakened, great feudal vassals were


–17–

turning into almost independent princes, and cities of the empire on the one hand, theknights of the empire on the other, were forming alliances either against each other, oragainst the princes or the emperor. The imperial power, now uncertain as to its ownposition,vacillatedbetweenthevariouselementsopposingtheempire,andwasconstantlylosingauthority;theattemptatcentralisation,inthemannerofLouisXI[2]broughtaboutnothing but the holding together of the Austrian hereditary lands, this in spite of allintrigues and violent actions. The final winners, who could not help winning in thisconfusion, in this helter-skelter of numerous conflicts, were the representatives ofcentralisationamidstdisunion,therepresentativesoflocalandprovincialcentralisation,theprinces,besidewhomtheemperorgraduallybecamenomorethanaprinceamongprinces.

Undertheseconditionsthesituationoftheclassesemergingfrommediaevaltimeshadconsiderablychanged.Newclasseshadbeenformedbesidestheoldones.

Outoftheoldnobilitycametheprinces.Alreadytheywerealmostindependentoftheemperor, andpossessed themajorpart of sovereign rights.Theydeclaredwar andmadepeace of their own accord, they maintained standing armies, called local councils, andlevied taxes.Theyhad alreadydrawn a large part of the lower nobility and cities undertheirlordlypower;theydideverythingintheirpowertoincorporateintheirlandsalltherestofthecitiesandbaronieswhichstillremainedundertheempire.Towardssuchcitiesandbaronies theyappeared in theroleofcentralisers,whileas faras the imperialpowerwas concerned, they were the decentralising factor. Internally, their reign was alreadyautocratic,theycalledtheestatesonlywhentheycouldnotdowithoutthem.Theyimposedtaxes,andcollectedmoneywhenevertheysawfit.Therightof theestatestoratifytaxeswasseldomrecognised,andstillmoreseldompractised.Andevenwhentheywerecalled,theprincesordinarilyhadamajority,thankstotheknightsandtheprelateswhichwerethetwoestatesfreedfromtaxes,participating,nevertheless,intheirconsumption.Theneedoftheprincesformoneygrewwiththetasteforluxuries,withtheincreaseofthecourtsandthestandingarmies,withthemountingcostsofadministration.Thetaxeswerebecomingmore and more oppressive. The cities being in most cases protected against them byprivileges, the entire weight of the tax burden fell upon the peasants, those under theprincesthemselves,aswellastheserfsandbondsmenoftheknightsboundbyvassalagetotheprinces;whereverdirect taxationwas insufficient, indirect taxeswere introduced; themostskilfulmachinationsoftheartoffinancewereutilisedtofillthegapingholesofthefiscal system.When nothing else availed,when therewas nothing to pawn and no freeimperialcitywaswillingtograntcreditanylonger,oneresortedtocoinmanipulationsofthe basest kind, one coined depreciated money, one set a higher or lower rate of legaltendermostconvenientfortheprince.Tradingincityandotherprivileges,subsequentlyto


–18–

be takenawayby force, inorder that theymight againbe sold, seizingeveryattempt atopposition as an excuse for incendiarism and robbery of every kind, etc., etc., werelucrative and quite ordinary sources of income for the princes of those times. Theadministrationof justicewas also a constant andnotunimportant articleof trade for theprinces.Inbrief,thesubjectswho,besidestheprinces,hadtosatisfytheprivateappetitesof their magistrates and bailiffs as well, were enjoying the full taste of the “fatherly”system. Of the medieval feudal hierarchy, the knighthood of moderate possessions hadalmost entirely disappeared; it had either climbed up to the position of independence ofsmallprinces,or ithadsunk into the ranksof the lowernobility.The lowernobility, theknighthood,wasfastmovingtowardsextinction.Alargeportionofithadalreadybecomepauperised,andlivedonitsservicestotheprinces,either inmilitaryor incivilcapacity;another portion was bound by vassalage to the sovereignty of the prince; a very smallportion was directly under the empire. The development of military science, the risingimportance of infantry, the spread of firearms, had dwarfed theirmilitary importance asheavycavalry,atthesametimedestroyingtheinvincibilityoftheircastles.Theknightshadbecome superfluous through the progress of industry, just as the artisans had becomeobviated by the same progress. The dire need of the knighthood for money addedconsiderablytotheirruin.Theluxuriouslifeinthecastles,thecompetitioninmagnificenceat tournaments and feasts, the price of armaments and of horses all increased with theprogressofcivilisation,whereasthesourcesofincomeoftheknightsandbarons,increasedbutlittle,ifatall.Feudswithaccompanyingplundersandincendiarism,lyinginambush,and similar noble occupations, became in the course of time too dangerous. The cashpaymentsof theknights’ subjectsbrought inhardlymore thanbefore. Inorder to satisfymountingrequirements,thenoblemastersresortedtothesamemeansaswerepractisedbythe princes; the peasantrywas being robbed by themasterswith greater dexterity everyyear. The serfs were being wrung dry. The bondsmen were burdened with ever newpaymentsofvariousdescriptionsuponeverypossibleoccasion.Serflabour,dues,groundrents,landsaletaxes,deathtaxes,protectionmoneysandsoon,wereincreasedatwillinspite of old agreements. Justicewas denied or sold formoney, andwherever the knightcouldnotobtainthepeasant’smoneyotherwise,hethrewhimintothetowerwithoutmuchado,andcompelledhimtopayransom.

With the other classes, the lower nobility courted no friendly relations either.Vassalknights strove to become vassals of the empire; vassals of the empire strove to becomeindependent.Thisledtoincessantconflictswiththeprinces.Theknighthoodlookeduponthe clergy with their resplendent grandeur as upon a powerful but superfluous class. Itenvied them their large estates and their riches held secure by celibacy and the church


–19–

constitution.Withthecities,theknighthoodwascontinuallyonthewarpath;itowedthemmoney,itfedonplunderingtheirterritory,onrobbingtheirmerchants,ontheransompaidforprisonerscapturedinconflicts.Thestruggleoftheknighthoodagainstalltheseestatesbecamemorevehementastheestatesthemselvesbegantorealisethatthemoneyquestionwasalifeproblemforthem.

Theclergy,representativesoftheideologyofmediaevalfeudalism,felttheinfluenceofthe historic transformation no less acutely. The invention of the art of printing, and therequirementsofextendedcommerce,robbedtheclergynotonlyofitsmonopolyofreadingandwriting,butalsoofthatofhighereducation.Divisionoflabourwasbeingintroducedalsointotherealmofintellectualwork.Thenewlyarisingclassofjuristsdrovetheclergyout of a series of very influential positions. The clergy was also beginning to becomelargely superfluous, and it acknowledged this fact by growing lazier andmore ignorant.Themore superfluous it became, themore it grew in numbers, thanks to the enormousricheswhichitstillkeptonaugmentingbyfairmeansorfoul.

The clergywas divided into two distinct groups. The feudal hierarchy of the clergyformedthearistocraticgroup–bishopsandarchbishops,abbots,priorsandotherprelates.Thesehighchurchdignitarieswereeitherimperialprincesthemselves,ortheyreignedasvassalsofotherprincesoverlargeareaswithnumerousserfsandbondsmen.Theynotonlyexploitedtheirsubjectsasrecklesslyastheknighthoodandtheprinces,buttheypractisedthisinanevenmoreshamefulmanner.Theyusednotonlybrutalforce,butalltheintriguesof religion as well; not only the horrors of the rack, but also the horror ofexcommunication,orrefusalofabsolution;theyusedalltheintricaciesoftheconfessionalinordertoextractfromtheirsubjectsthelastpenny,ortoincreasetheestatesofthechurch.Forgingofdocumentswasawidespreadandbelovedmeansofextortion in thehandsofthoseworthymen,who, receiving from their subjects feudal payments, taxes and tithes,werestillinconstantneedofmoney.Themanufactureofmiracle-producingsaints’effigiesand relics, the organisation of praying-centres endowedwith the power of salvation, thetradeinindulgenceswasresortedtoinordertosqueezemorepaymentsoutofthepeople.Allthiswaspractisedlongandwithnotlittlesuccess.

Theprelatesandtheirnumerousgendarmerieofmonkswhichgrewwiththespreadofpoliticalandreligiousbaiting,weretheobjectsofhatrednotonlyofthepeoplebutalsoofthenobility.Beingdirectlyundertheempire,theprelateswereinthewayoftheprinces.Thefast livingofthecorpulentbishopsandabbotswiththeirarmyofmonks,rousedtheenvyof thenobility and the indignationof thepeoplewhobore theburden.Hatredwasintensifiedbythefactthatthebehaviouroftheclergywasaslapinthefaceoftheirownpreaching.


–20–

The plebeian faction of the clergy consisted of preachers, rural and urban. Thepreacherswereoutside the feudalhierarchyof thechurchandparticipated innoneof itsriches.Theiractivitieswerelessrigorouslycontrolledand,importantastheywereforthechurch, theywere for themoment far less indispensable than the police services of thebarracked monks. Consequently, they were paid much less than the monks, and theirprebendswere far from lucrative.Being of amiddle-class or plebeian origin, theywerenearer to the life of the masses, thus being able to retain middle-class and plebeiansympathies, in spiteof their statusasclergy.While theparticipationof themonks in themovementsoftheirtimewastheexception,thatoftheplebeianclergywastherule.Theygavethemovementitstheoristsandideologists,andmanyofthem,representativesoftheplebeians and peasants, died on the scaffold. The hatred of the masses for the clergyseldomtouchedthisgroup.

Whattheemperorwastotheprincesandnobility,thepopewastothehigherandlowerclergy.Astheemperorreceivedthe“commonpenny,”theimperialtaxes,sothepopewaspaid the general church taxes, out of which he defrayed the expenses of the luxuriousRoman court. In no country were his taxes collected with such conscientiousness andrigouras inGermany,due to thepowerand thenumberof theclergy.Theannateswerecollectedwithparticularseveritywhenabishopricwastobecomevacant.Withthegrowthofthecourt’sdemands,newmeansforraisingrevenueswereinvented,suchasthetrafficinrelicsandindulgences, jubileecollections,etc.Largesumsofmoneywere thusyearlytransportedfromGermanytoRome,andtheincreasedpressurefannednotonlythehatredtowardstheclergy,butitalsoarousednationalfeelings,particularlyamongthenobility,thethenmostnationalclass.

Inthecities,thegrowthofcommerceandhandicraftproducedthreedistinctgroupsoutoftheoriginalcitizenryofmedievaltimes.

Thecitypopulationwasheadedbythepatricianfamilies,theso-called“honourables.”Thoseweretherichestfamilies.Theyalonesatinthecouncil,andheldallthecityoffices.They not only administered all the revenues of the city, but they also consumed them.Strong in their riches and their ancient aristocratic status, recognised by emperor andempire, theyexploited ineverypossibleway thecitycommunityaswellas thepeasantsbelonging to the city. They practised usury in grain and money; they secured forthemselvesmonopoliesofvariouskinds;theygraduallydeprivedthecommunityofeveryright to use the city forests andmeadows, and used them directly for their own privatebenefit.Theyimposedroad,bridgeandgatepaymentsandotherduties;theysoldtradeandguildprivileges,masterandcitizenrights;andtheytradedwithjustice.Thepeasantsofthecity areawere treated by themwith nomore consideration than by the nobility and the


–21–

clergy.Onthecontrary,thecitymagistratesandbailiffs,mostlypatricians,broughtintothevillages,togetherwitharistocraticrigidityandavarice,acertainbureaucraticpunctualityincollecting duties. The city revenues thus collectedwere administered in amost optionalfashion; city bookkeepingwas as neglectful and confused as possible; defraudation andtreasury deficits were the order of the day. How easy it was for a comparatively smallcaste, surrounded by privileges, and held together by family ties and community ofinterests,toenrichitselfenormouslyoutofthecityrevenues,willbeunderstoodwhenoneconsiders the numerous frauds and swindles which 1848 witnessed in many cityadministrations.

Thepatricianstookcaretomakedormanttherightsofthecitycommunityeverywhere,particularlyasregardsfinance.Later,whentheextortionsofthesegentlemenbecametoosevere,thecommunitiesstartedamovementtobringatleastthecityadministrationundertheircontrol.Inmostcitiestheyactuallyregainedtheirrights,butdue,ontheonehand,totheeternalsquabblesbetweentheguildsand,ontheother,tothetenacityofthepatriciansand theirprotectionby theempireand thegovernmentsof thealliedcities, thepatriciancouncilmemberssoonrestoredbyshrewdnessorforcetheirdominanceinthecouncils.AtthebeginningoftheSixteenthCentury,thecommunitiesofallthecitieswereagainintheopposition.

Thecityoppositionagainstthepatricianswasdividedintotwofactionswhichstoodoutveryclearlyinthecourseofthepeasantwar.

The middle-class opposition, the predecessor of our modern liberals, embraced therichermiddle-class, themiddle-class ofmoderatemeans, and amoreor less appreciablesectionof the poorer elements, according to local conditions.This oppositiondemandedcontroloverthecityadministrationandparticipationinthelegislativepowereitherthrougha general assemblage of the community or through representatives (big council, citycommittee).Further, itdemandedmodificationof thepatricianpolicyof favouringa fewfamilieswhichweregaininganexceptionalpositioninsidethepatriciangroup.Asidefromthis, themiddle-classoppositiondemandedthefillingofsomecouncilofficesbycitizensof their own group. This party, joined here and there by dissatisfied elements ofimpoverishedpatricians,hadalargemajorityinalltheordinarygeneralassembliesofthecommunityandintheguilds.Theadherentsofthecouncilandthemoreradicaloppositionformedtogetheronlyaminorityamongtherealcitizens.

Weshallseehow,inthecourseoftheSixteenthCentury,thismoderate,“law-abiding,”well-offandintelligentoppositionplayedexactlythesameroleandexactlywiththesamesuccess as its heir, the constitutional party in the movements of 1848 and 1849. The


–22–

middle-classoppositionhadstillanotherobjectofheatedprotest:theclergy,whoselooseway of living and luxurious habits aroused its bitter scorn. Themiddle-class oppositiondemanded measures against the scandalous behaviour of those illustrious people. Itdemanded that the inner jurisdiction of the clergy and its right to levy taxes should beabolished,andthatthenumberofthemonksshouldbelimited.

Theplebeianoppositionconsistedofruinedmembersofthemiddle-classandthatmassof the city population which possessed no citizenship rights: the journeymen, the daylabourers,andthenumerousbeginningsofthelumpenproletariatwhichcanbefoundevenin the lowest stages of development of city life. This low-grade proletariat is, generallyspeaking,aphenomenonwhich,inamoreorlessdevelopedform,canbefoundinallthephasesof societyhithertoobserved.Thenumberofpeoplewithoutadefiniteoccupationand a stable domicile was at that time gradually being augmented by the decay offeudalism in a society in which every occupation, every realm of life, was entrenchedbehind a number of privileges. In nomodern countrywas the number of vagabonds sogreatasinGermany,inthefirsthalfoftheSixteenthCentury.Oneportionofthesetrampsjoinedthearmyinwar-time,anotherbeggeditswaythroughthecountry,athirdsoughttoekeoutameagrelivingasday-labourersinthosebranchesofworkwhichwerenotunderguildjurisdiction.Allthreegroupsplayedaroleinthepeasantwar;thefirstinthearmyofthe princes to whom the peasant succumbed, the second in the conspiracies and in thetroopsofthepeasantswhereitsdemoralisinginfluencewasmanifestedeverymoment;thethird,inthestrugglesofthepartiesinthecities.Itmustbeborneinmind,however,thatalargeportionofthisclass,namely,theonelivinginthecities,stillretainedaconsiderablefoundation of peasant nature, and had not developed that degree of venality anddegradationwhichcharacterisethemoderncivilisedlow-gradeproletariat.

It is evident that the plebeian opposition of the cities was of a mixed nature. Itcombined the ruined elements of the old feudal and guild societies with the buddingproletarianelementsofacomingmodernbourgeoissociety;ontheonehand,impoverishedguildcitizens,who,duetotheirprivileges,stillclungtotheexistingmiddle-classorder,onthe other hand, driven out peasants and ex-officers who were yet unable to becomeproletarians.Between these twogroupswere the journeymen, for the timebeingoutsideofficial society and so close to the standard of living of the proletariat as was possibleunder the industryof the times and theguildprivileges, but, due to the sameprivileges,almost allprospectivemiddle-classmaster artisans.Thepartyaffiliationsof thismixturewere,naturally,highlyuncertain,andvaryingfromlocalitytolocality.Beforethepeasantwar, the plebeian opposition appeared in the political struggles, not as a party, but as ashouting,rapacioustail-endtothemiddle-classopposition,amobthatcouldbeboughtand


–23–

soldforafewbarrelsofwine.Itwastherevoltofthepeasantsthattransformedthemintoaparty, and even then theywere almost everywheredependent upon thepeasants, both indemandsandinaction–astrikingproofofthefactthatthecitiesofthattimeweregreatlydependent upon the country. In so far as the plebeian opposition acted independently, itdemandedextensionofcitytradeprivilegesovertheruraldistricts,anditdidnotliketoseethecityrevenuescurtailedbyabolitionoffeudalburdensintheruralareabelongingtothecity,etc.Inbrief,insofarasitappearedindependently,itwasreactionary.Itsubmittedtoits own middle-class elements, and thus formed a characteristic prologue to the tragiccomedystagedby themodernpetty-bourgeoisie in the last threeyearsunder theheadofdemocracy.

Only in Thuringia and in a few other localities was the plebeian faction of the citycarriedawaybythegeneralstormtosuchanextentthatitsembryoproletarianelementsforabrief timegained theupperhandoverall theotherfactorsof themovement.This tookplace under the direct influence ofMuenzer in Thuringia, and of his disciples in otherplaces.Thisepisode,formingtheclimaxoftheentirepeasantwar,andgroupedaroundthemagnificentfigureofThomasMuenzer,wasofverybriefduration.Itiseasilyunderstoodwhy theseelements collapsemorequickly thananyother,why theirmovementbears anoutspoken,fantasticstamp,andwhytheexpressionoftheirdemandsmustnecessarilybeextremely indefinite. Itwas this group that found least firm ground in the then existingconditions.

Atthebottomofalltheclasses,savethelastone,wasthehugeexploitedmassofthenation, thepeasants. Itwas thepeasantwho carried theburdenof all theother strata ofsociety: princes, officialdom, nobility, clergy, patricians and middle-class. Whether thepeasantwasthesubjectofaprince,animperialbaron,abishop,amonasteryoracity,hewaseverywheretreatedasabeastofburden,andworse.Ifhewasaserf,hewasentirelyatthemercyofhismaster.Ifhewasabondsman,thelegaldeliveriesstipulatedbyagreementweresufficient tocrushhim;even theywerebeingdaily increased.Mostofhis time,hehadtoworkonhismaster’sestate.Outofthatwhichheearnedinhisfewfreehours,hehad to pay tithes, dues, ground rents, war taxes, land taxes, imperial taxes, and otherpayments. He could neither marry nor die without paying the master. Aside from hisregular work for the master, he had to gather litter, pick strawberries, pick bilberries,collect snail-shells, drive the game for the hunting, chopwood, and so on. Fishing andhunting belonged to themaster. The peasant sawhis crop destroyed bywild game.Thecommunity meadows and woods of the peasants had almost everywhere been forciblytaken away by the masters. And in the same manner as the master reigned over thepeasant’sproperty,heextendedhiswillfulnessoverhisperson,hiswifeanddaughters.He


–24–

possessedtherightof thefirstnight.Wheneverhepleased,hethrewthepeasant intothetower,wheretherackwaitedforhimjustassurelyastheinvestigatingattorneywaitsforthecriminal inour times.Wheneverhepleased,hekilledhimororderedhimbeheaded.None of the instructive chapters of the Carolina[3] which speaks of “cutting of ears,”“cutting of noses,” “blinding,” “chopping of fingers,” “beheading,” “breaking on thewheel,”“burning,”“pinchingwithburningtongs,”“quartering,”etc.,wasleftunpractisedbythegraciouslordandmasterathispleasure.Whocoulddefendthepeasant?Thecourtsweremanned by barons, clergymen, patricians, or jurists,who knewverywell forwhatthey were being paid. Not in vain did all the official estates of the empire live on theexploitationofthepeasants.

Incensed as were the peasants under terrific pressure, it was still difficult to arousethemtorevolt.Beingspreadover largeareas, itwashighlydifficult for themtocometocommon understanding; the old habit of submission inherited from generation togeneration,thelackofpractiseintheuseofarmsinmanyregions,theunequaldegreeofexploitationdependingonthepersonalityofthemaster,allcombinedtokeepthepeasantquiet.Itisforthesereasonsthat,althoughlocalinsurrectionsofpeasantscanbefoundinmediaeval times in largenumbers,notonegeneralnationalpeasant revolt, leastofall inGermany, can be observed before the peasant war. Moreover, the peasants alone couldnevermake a revolution as long as theywere confrontedby the organisedpower of theprinces,nobilityand thecities.Onlybyallying themselveswithotherclassescould theyhave a chance of victory, but how could they have allied themselveswith other classeswhentheywereequallyexploitedbyall?

At thebeginningof theSixteenthCentury thevariousgroupsof theempire,princes,nobility, clergy, patricians, middle-class, plebeians and peasants formed a highlycomplicated mass with the most varied requirements crossing each other in differentdirections.Everygroupwas in thewayof theother,andstoodcontinually inanovertorcovert struggle with every other group. A splitting of the entire nation into two majorcamps, as witnessed in France at the outbreak of the first revolution, and as at presentmanifest on a higher stageof development in themost progressive countries,wasundersuchconditionsarankimpossibility.Somethingapproachingsuchdivisiontookplaceonlywhentheloweststratumofthepopulation,theoneexploitedbyalltherest,arose,namely,theplebeiansandthepeasants.Thetangleofinterests,viewsandendeavoursofthattimewillbeeasilyunderstoodwhenonerememberswhataconfusionwasmanifestedinthelasttwo years in a society far less complicated and consisting only of feudal nobility,bourgeoisie,petty-bourgeoisie,peasantsandproletariat.


–25–

Chapter2The Main Opposition Groups and their Programmes;LutherandMuenzer

The grouping of the numerous and variegated groups into bigger unitswas at that timemade impossiblebydecentralisation,by localandprovincial independence,by industrialand commercial isolation of the provinces from each other, and by poor means ofcommunication. This grouping develops only with the general spread of revolutionary,religiousandpolitical ideas, in thecourseof theReformation.Thevariousgroupsof thepopulationwhicheitheracceptoropposethoseideas,concentratethenation,veryslowlyand only approximately indeed, into three large camps, the reactionary or Catholic, thereformistmiddle-class or Lutheran, and the revolutionary elements. Ifwe discover littlelogiceveninthisgreatdivisionofthenation,ifthefirsttwocampsincludepartlythesameelements, it is due to the fact thatmost of the official groupings brought over from theMiddleAgeshadbeguntodissolveandtobecomedecentralised,whichcircumstancegaveto the same groups in different localities amomentary opposing orientation. In the lastyearswehavesooftenmetwithsimilarfactsinGermanythatwewillnotbesurprisedatthisapparentmixtureofgroupsandclassesunderthemuchmorecomplicatedconditionsoftheSixteenthCentury.

TheGerman ideology of to-day sees in the struggles towhich theMiddleAges hadsuccumbed nothing but violent theological bickerings, this notwithstanding our modernexperiences. Had the people of that time only been able to reach an understandingconcerningthecelestialthings,sayourpatriotichistoriansandwisestatesmen,therewouldhave been no ground whatever for struggle over earthly affairs. These ideologists weregullible enough to accept on their face value all the illusionswhich an epochmaintainsaboutitself,orwhichtheideologistsofacertainperiodmaintainedaboutthatperiod.Thisclassofpeople,whichsawintherevolutionof1789nothingbutaheateddebateovertheadvantages of a constitutionalmonarchy as comparedwith absolutism,would see in theJulyRevolutionapracticalcontroversyovertheuntenabilityoftheempirebythegraceofGod,and in theFebruaryRevolution,anattemptat solving theproblemofa republicormonarchy,etc.Of theclass struggleswhichwerebeing foughtout in these convulsions,andwhosemereexpressionisbeingeverytimewrittenasapoliticalsloganonthebannerof these class struggles, our ideologists have no conception even at the present time,althoughmanifestations of them are audible enough not only abroad, but also from thegrumblingandtheresentmentofmanythousandsofhomeproletarians.

In the so-called religiouswarsof theSixteenthCentury,verypositivematerial class-


–26–

interestswereatplay,and thosewarswereclasswars justaswere the latercollisions inEnglandandFrance.Iftheclassstrugglesofthattimeappeartobearreligiousearmarks,ifthe interests, requirements and demands of the various classes hid themselves behind areligiousscreen,itlittlechangestheactualsituation,andistobeexplainedbyconditionsofthetime.

TheMiddleAgeshaddevelopedoutofrawprimitiveness.Ithaddoneawaywitholdcivilisation, old philosophy, politics and jurisprudence, in order to begin anew in everyrespect.TheonlythingwhichithadretainedfromtheoldshatteredworldwasChristianityand a number of half-ruined cities deprived of their civilisation. As a consequence, theclergyretainedamonopolyofintellectualeducation,aphenomenontobefoundineveryprimitive stage of development, and education itself had acquired a predominantlytheologicalnature.

In the hands of the clergy, politics and jurisprudence, as well as other sciences,remainedbranchesoftheology,andweretreatedaccordingtotheprinciplesprevailinginthe latter. The dogmas of the churchwere at the same time political axioms, andBiblequotationshadthevalidityoflawineverycourt.Evenaftertheformationofaspecialclassofjurists, jurisprudencelongremainedunderthetutelageoftheology.Thissupremacyoftheologyintherealmofintellectualactivitieswasatthesametimealogicalconsequenceof the situation of the church as the most general force coordinating and sanctioningexistingfeudaldomination.

Itisobviousthatundersuchconditions,allgeneralandovertattacksonfeudalism,inthe first place attacks on the church, all revolutionary, social and political doctrines,necessarilybecametheologicalheresies.Inordertobeattacked,existingsocialconditionshadtobestrippedoftheiraureoleofsanctity.

The revolutionaryopposition to feudalismwasalive throughoutall theMiddleAges.Accordingtoconditionsofthetime,itappearedeitherintheformofmysticism,asopenheresy,orofarmedinsurrection.Asmysticism,itiswellknownhowindispensableitwasforthereformersoftheSixteenthCentury.Muenzerhimselfwaslargelyindebtedtoit.Theheresies were partly an expression of the reaction of the patriarchal Alpine shepherdsagainsttheencroachmentsoffeudalismintheirrealm(Waldenses[4]),partlyanoppositiontofeudalismofthecitiesthathadout-grownit(TheAlbigenses,ArnoldofBrescia,etc.),andpartlydirectinsurrectionsofpeasants(JohnBall,themasterfromHungaryinPicardy,etc.).Wecanomit,inthisconnection,thepatriarchalheresyoftheWaldenses,aswellasthe insurrection of the Swiss,which by form and contents,was a reactionary attempt atstemmingthetideofhistoricdevelopment,andofapurelylocalimportance.Intheother


–27–

twoformsofmediaevalheresy,wefindasearlyastheTwelfthCenturytheprecursorsofthe great division between the middle-class and the peasant-plebeian opposition whichcaused the collapse of the peasant war. This division is manifest throughout the laterMiddleAges.

Theheresyofthecities,whichistheactualofficialheresyoftheMiddleAges,directeditselfprimarilyagainsttheclergy,whoserichesandpoliticalimportanceitattacked.Intheverysamemannerasthebourgeoisieatpresentdemandsa“gouvernementàbonmarché”(cheap government), so the middle-class of mediaeval times demanded first of all an“égliseàbonmarché”(cheapchurch).Reactionaryinform,asiseveryheresywhichseesin the further development of church and dogma, only a degeneration, themiddle-classheresydemandedtherestorationoftheancientsimplechurchconstitutionandtheabolitionofanexclusiveclassofpriests.This cheaparrangementwouldeliminate themonks, theprelates,theRomancourt,inbrief,everythingwhichwasexpensiveforthechurch.Intheirattack against papacy, the cities, themselves republics although under the protection ofmonarchs,expressedfor thefirst timeinageneralformtheideathat thenormalformofgovernment for the bourgeoisiewas the republic.Their hostility towardsmany a dogmaandchurch law ispartlyexplainedby the foregoingandpartlyby their conditions.Whytheyweresobitteragainstcelibacy,noonehasgivenabetterexplanationthanBoccaccio.Arnold of Brescia[5] in Italy and Germany, the Albigenses[6] in south France, JohnWycliffe[7] in England, Huss[8] and the Calixtines[9] in Bohemia, were the chiefrepresentativesofthisopposition.Thattheoppositionagainstfeudalismshouldappearhereonly as an opposition against religious feudalism, is easily understood when oneremembersthat,atthattime,thecitieswerealreadyarecognisedestatesufficientlycapableof fighting lay feudalism with its privileges either by force of arms or in the cityassemblies.

Here,asinsouthFrance,inEnglandandBohemia,wefindthelowernobilityjoininghands with the cities in their struggle against the clergy and in their heresies, aphenomenon due to the dependence of the lower nobility upon the cities and to thecommunityof interestsofbothgroups as against theprinces and theprelates.The samephenomenonisfoundinthepeasantwar.

Atotallydifferentcharacterwasassumedbythatheresywhichwasadirectexpressionof the peasant and plebeian demands, andwhichwas almost always connectedwith aninsurrection. This heresy, sharing all the demands ofmiddle-class heresy relative to theclergy,thepapacy,andtherestorationoftheancientChristianchurchorganisation,wentfarbeyondthem.ItdemandedtherestorationofancientChristianequalityamongthemembersofthecommunity,thistoberecognisedasaruleforthemiddle-classworldaswell.From


–28–

theequalityofthechildrenofGoditmadetheimplicationastocivilequality,andpartlyalsoastoequalityofproperty.Tomakethenobilityequaltothepeasant,thepatriciansandtheprivilegedmiddle-classequaltotheplebeians,toabolishserfdom,groundrents,taxes,privileges,andatleastthemostflagrantdifferencesofproperty–theseweredemandsputforthwithmoreorlessdefinitenessandregardedasnaturallyemanatingfromtheancientChristiandoctrine.Thispeasant-plebeianheresy,inthefullnessoffeudalism,e.g.,amongtheAlbigenses,hardlydistinguishablefromthemiddle-classopposition,grewinthecourseoftheFourteenthandFifteenthCenturiestobeastronglydefinedpartyopinionappearingindependently alongside the heresy of themiddle-class.This is the casewith JohnBall,preacheroftheWatTylerinsurrectioninEnglandalongsidetheWycliffemovement.Thisis also the case with the Taborites alongside the Calixtines in Bohemia. The Taboritesshowedevenarepublicantendencyundertheocraticcolouring,aviewlaterdevelopedbytherepresentativesoftheplebeiansinGermanyintheFifteenthandatthebeginningoftheSixteenthCentury.

Thisformofheresywasjoinedinbythedreamvisionsofthemysticsects,suchastheScourging Friars,[10] the Lollards,[11] etc., which in times of suppression continued therevolutionarytradition.

Theplebeiansofthattimeweretheonlyclassoutsideoftheexistingofficialsociety.Itwas outside the feudal, as well as outside the middle-class organisation. It had neitherprivilegesnorproperty;itwasdeprivedevenofthepossessionsownedbypeasantorpettybourgeois, burdenedwith crushing duties asmuch as theymight be; itwas deprived ofpropertyandrightsineveryrespect;itlivedinsuchamannerthatitdidnotevencomeintodirect contactwith the existing institutions,which ignored it completely. Itwas a livingsymptomofthedissolutionofthefeudalandguildmiddle-classsocieties,anditwasatthesametimethefirstprecursorofmodernbourgeoissociety.

This position of the plebeians is sufficient explanation as to why the plebeianopposition of that time could not be satisfiedwith fighting feudalism and the privilegedmiddle-classalone;why, infantasy,at least, it reachedbeyondmodernbourgeoissocietythen only in its inception; why, being an absolutely propertyless faction, it questionedinstitutions,viewsandconceptionscommontoeverysocietybasedondivisionofclasses.The chiliastic dream-visions[12] of ancient Christianity offered in this respect a veryserviceablestarting-point.Ontheotherhand,thisreachingoutbeyondnotonlythepresentbut also the future, could not help being violently fantastic. At the first practicalapplication,itnaturallyfellbackintonarrowlimitssetbyprevailingconditions.Theattackon private property, the demand for community of possession had to solve itself into acrude organisation of charity; vagueChristian equality could result in nothing but civic


–29–

equality before the law; abolition of all officialdom transformed itself finally in theorganisationofrepublicangovernmentselectedbythepeople.Anticipationofcommunismbyhumanfantasywasinrealityanticipationofmodernbourgeoisconditions.

This anticipation of coming stages of historic development, forced in itself, but anatural outcome of the life conditions of the plebeian group, is first to be noted inGermany,intheteachingsofThomasMuenzerandhisparty.AlreadytheTaboritesshowedakindofchiliasticcommunityofproperty,butthiswasapurelymilitarymeasure.OnlyintheteachingsofMuenzerdidthesecommunistnotionsfindexpressionasthedesiresofavitalsectionofsociety.Throughhimtheywereformulatedwithacertaindefiniteness,andwereafterwardsfoundineverygreatconvulsionofthepeople,untilgraduallytheymergedwiththemodernproletarianmovement.SomethingsimilarweobserveintheMiddleAges,wherethestrugglesofthefreepeasantsagainstincreasingfeudaldominationmergedwiththestrugglesoftheserfsandbondsmenforthecompleteabolitionofthefeudalsystem.

While the firstof the three largecamps, theconservativeCatholics,embracedall theelements interested in maintaining the existing imperial power, the ecclesiastical and asection of the lay princes, the richer nobility, the prelates and the city patricians – themiddle-class moderate Lutheran reform gathered under its banner all the propertiedelements of the opposition, themass of the lower nobility, themiddle-class and even aportionofthelayprinceswhohopedtoenrichthemselvesthroughtheconfiscationofthechurchestatesandtoseizetheopportunityforestablishinggreaterindependencefromtheempire. As to the peasants and plebeians, they grouped themselves around therevolutionary party whose demands and doctrines found their boldest expression inMuenzer.


–30–

Luther[13] and Muenzer, in their doctrines, in their characters, in their actions,accuratelyembodiedthetenetsoftheirseparateparties.

Between 1517 and 1525, Luther had gone through the same transformations as theGerman constitutionalists between 1846 and 1849. This has been the case with everymiddle-classpartywhich,havingmarched for awhile at theheadof themovement, hasbeenoverwhelmedbytheplebeian-proletarianpartypressingfromtherear.

When in 1517 opposition against the dogmas and the organisation of the Catholicchurch was first raised by Luther, it still had no definite character. Not exceeding thedemandsoftheearliermiddle-classheresy,itdidnotexcludeanytrendofopinionwhichwentfurther.Itcouldnotdosobecausethefirstmomentofthestruggledemandedthatallopposingelementsbeunited,themostaggressiverevolutionaryenergybeutilisedandthetotalityoftheexistingheresiesfightingtheCatholicorthodoxyberepresented.Inasimilarfashion, our liberal bourgeoisie of 1847were still revolutionary.They called themselvessocialistsandcommunists,andtheydiscussedemancipationoftheworkingclass.Luther’ssturdy peasant nature asserted itself in the stormiest fashion in the first period of hisactivities.“Iftheragingmadness[oftheRomanchurchmen]weretocontinue,itseemstome no better counsel and remedy could be found against it than that kings and princesapplyforce,armthemselves,attackthoseevilpeoplewhohavepoisonedtheentireworld,andonceandforallmakeanendtothisgame,witharms,notwithwords. If thievesarebeingpunishedwithswords,murdererswithropes,andhereticswithfire,whydowenot


–31–

seize, with arms in hand, all those evil teachers of perdition, those popes, bishops,cardinals,andtheentirecrewofRomanSodom?Whydowenotwashourhandsintheirblood?”

This revolutionary ardour did not last long. The lightning thrust by Luther caused aconflagration.AmovementstartedamongtheentireGermanpeople.Inhisappealsagainstthe clergy, in his preaching of Christian freedom, peasants and plebeians perceived thesignal for insurrection. Likewise, the moderate middle-class and a large section of thelowernobilityjoinedhim,andevenprincesweredrawnintothetorrent.Whiletheformerbelieved the day had come in which to wreak vengeance upon all their oppressors, thelatter only wished to break the power of the clergy, the dependence upon Rome, theCatholichierarchy,andtoenrich themselves throughtheconfiscationofchurchproperty.The parties became separated from each other, and each found a different spokesman.Lutherhad tochoosebetween the two.Luther, theprotégéof theElectorofSaxony, therespected professor ofWittenbergwho had become powerful and famous overnight, thegreat man who was surrounded by a coterie of servile creatures and flatterers, did nothesitateamoment.Hedroppedthepopularelementsofthemovement,andjoinedthetrainofthemiddle-class, thenobilityandtheprinces.AppealstowarofexterminationagainstRome were heard no more. Luther was now preaching peaceful progress and passiveresistance.(Cf.TothenobilityoftheGermannation,1520,etc.)InvitedbyHuttentovisithimandSickingeninthecastleofEbern,thecentreofthenobleconspiracyagainstclergyand princes, Luther replied:“I should not like to see theGospel defended by force andbloodshed.TheworldwasconqueredbytheWord,theChurchhasmaintaineditselfbytheWord,theChurchwillcomeintoitsownagainthroughtheWord,andasAntichristgainedascendancywithoutviolence,sowithoutviolencehewillfall.”

Out of this turn of mind, or, to be more exact, out of this definite delineation ofLuther’spolicy,sprangthatpolicyofbarteringandhagglingoverinstitutionsanddogmasto be retained or reformed, that ugly diplomatising, conceding, intriguing andcompromising, the result of which was the Augsburg Confession, the final draft of theconstitutionof thereformedmiddle-classchurch.Itwasthesamepettytradingwhich, inthe political field, repeated itselfadnauseam in the recentGerman national assemblies,unity gatherings, chambers of revision, and in the parliaments of Erfurt. The Philistinemiddle-class character of the official reformation appeared in these negotiations mostclearly.

Therewere valid reasonswhy Luther, now the recognised representative ofmiddle-classreform,chosetopreachlawfulprogress.Themassofthecitieshadjoinedthecauseofmoderatereform;thelowernobilitybecamemoreandmoredevotedtoit;onesectionof


–32–

the princes joined it, another vacillated. Success was almost certain at least in a largeportionofGermany.Undercontinuedpeacefuldevelopmenttheotherregionscouldnotinthe long runwithstand the pressure ofmoderate opposition.Violent convulsions, on theother hand, were bound to result in a conflict between the moderates and the extremeplebeianandpeasantparty,thustoalienatetheprinces,thenobility,andanumberofcitiesfromthemovementandtoleaveopenthealternativeofeitherthemiddle-classpartybeingovershadowed by the peasants and plebeians, or the entiremovement being crushed byCatholic restoration. How middle-class parties, having achieved the slightest victory,attempttosteertheirwaybetweentheScyllaofrevolutionandtheCharybdisofrestorationbymeansof lawfulprogress,wehavehadoccasionsenough toobserve in theeventsofrecenttimes.

Itwasinthenatureofthethenprevailingsocialandpoliticalconditionsthattheresultsof every changewere advantageous to the princes, increasing their power.Thus it cameabout that the middle-class reform, having parted ways with the plebeian and peasantelements, fell more and more under the control of the reform princes. Luther’ssubserviencetothemincreased,andthepeopleknewverywellwhattheyweredoingwhentheyaccusedhimofhavingbecomeaslaveoftheprincesaswerealltheothers,andwhentheypursuedhimwithstonesinOrlamuende.

Whenthepeasantwarbrokeout,becomingmorepredominantinregionswithCatholicnobility and princes, Luther strove to maintain a conciliatory position. He resolutelyattacked the governments. He said it was due to their oppression that the revolts hadstarted,thatnotthepeasantsalonewereagainstthem,butGodaswell.Ontheotherhand,healsosaidthattherevoltwasungodlyandagainsttheGospel.Headvisedbothpartiestoyield,toreachapeacefulunderstanding.

Notwithstanding these sincere attempts at conciliation, however, the revolt spreadrapidlyoverlargeareas,includingsuchsectionsasweredominatedbyProtestantLutheranprinces,noblesandcities,andrapidlyoutgrewthemiddle-class“circumspect”reform.Themost determined faction of the insurgents under Muenzer opened their headquarters inLuther’s very proximity, inThuringia.A fewmore successes, andGermanywould havebeenonebigconflagration,Lutherwouldhavebeensurrounded,perhapspikedasatraitor,andmiddle-class reformwouldhavebeensweptawayby the tidesofapeasant-plebeianrevolution.Therewasnomore timeforcircumspection. In thefaceof therevolution,alloldanimositieswereforgotten.Comparedwiththehordesofpeasants,theservantsoftheRomanSodomwereinnocentlambs,sweet-temperedchildrenofGod.Burgherandprince,nobleandclergyman,Lutherand thepopeunited“against themurderousandplunderinghordesofthepeasants.”“Theyshouldbeknockedtopieces,strangledandstabbed,secretly


–33–

andopenly,byeverybodywhocandoit, justasonemustkillamaddog!”Luthercried.“Therefore, dear gentlemen, hearkenhere, save there, stab, knock, strangle thematwill,andifthoudiest,thouartblessed;nobetterdeathcanstthoueverattain.”Nofalsemercywas tobepractised in relation to thepeasants. “Whoeverhathpityon thosewhomGodpitiesnot,whomHewishespunishedanddestroyed,shallbeclassedamongtherebellioushimself.”Later,hesaid,thepeasantswouldlearntothankGodwhentheyhadtogiveawayonecowinorderthattheymightenjoytheotherinpeace.Throughtherevolution,hesaid,theprinceswouldlearnthespiritofthemobwhichcouldreignbyforceonly.“Thewisemansays:‘Cibus,onusetvirgamasino.’Theheadsofthepeasantsarefullofchaff.TheydonothearkentotheWord,andtheyaresenseless,sotheymusthearkentothevirgaandthegun,andthis isonly just.Wemustprayfor themthat theyobey.Where theydonot,thereshouldnotbemuchmercy.Letthegunsroaramongthem,orelsetheywillmakeitathousandtimesworse.”

It is the same language that was used by our late socialist and philanthropicbourgeoisie,when,aftertheMarchdaystheproletariatalsodemandeditsshareinthefruitsofvictory.

Luther had given the plebeian movement a powerful weapon – a translation of theBible. Through the Bible, he contrasted feudal Christianity of his time with moderateChristianityof the first century. Inopposition todecaying feudal society, heheldup thepicture of another society which knew nothing of the ramified and artificial feudalhierarchy.Thepeasantshadmadeextensiveuseof thisweaponagainst the forcesof theprinces, the nobility, and the clergy. Now Luther turned the same weapon against thepeasants,extractingfromtheBibleaveritablehymntotheauthoritiesordainedbyGod–afeathardlyexceededbyanylackeyofabsolutemonarchy.PrincedombythegraceofGod,passive resistance, even serfdom, were being sanctioned by the Bible. Thus Lutherrepudiatednotonlythepeasantinsurrectionbutevenhisownrevoltagainstreligiousandlayauthority.Henotonlybetrayedthepopularmovementtotheprinces,butthemiddle-classmovementaswell.

Needwementionotherbourgeoiswhorecentlygaveusexamplesofrepudiatingtheirownpast?


–34–

Let us now compare the plebeian revolutionary, Muenzer, with the middle-classreformist,Luther.

ThomasMuenzerwasborninStolberg, in theHarz, in1498.It issaid thathisfatherdiedon the scaffold, avictimof thewilfulnessof theCountofStolberg. Inhis fifteenthyear, Muenzer organised at the Halle school a secret union against the Archbishop ofMagdeburgandtheRomanChurchingeneral.Hisscholarlyattainmentsinthetheologyofhis time brought him early the doctor’s degree and the position of chaplain in a Hallenunnery. Here he began to treat the dogmas and rites of the church with the greatestcontempt.Atmassheomittedthewordsofthetransubstantiation,andate,asLuthersaid,the almighty gods unconsecrated. Mediaeval mystics, especially the chiliastic works ofJoachimofCalabria,[14]werethemainsubjectofhisstudies.ItseemedtoMuenzerthatthemillenniumandtheDayofJudgmentoverthedegeneratedchurchandthecorruptedworld,asannouncedandpicturedbythatmystic,hadcomeintheformoftheReformationandthegeneralrestlessnessofhistime.Hepreachedinhisneighbourhoodwithgreatsuccess.In1520 hewent to Zwickau as the first evangelist preacher. There he found one of thosedreamychiliasticsectswhichcontinuedtheirexistenceinmanylocalities,hidingbehindanappearanceofhumilityanddetachment,theranklygrowingoppositionofthelowerstrataofsocietyagainstexistingconditions,andwiththegrowthofagitation,beginningtopresstotheforegroundmoreboldlyandwithmoreendurance.ItwasthesectoftheAnabaptistsheaded by Nicolas Storch.[15] The Anabaptists preached the approach of the Day of


–35–

Judgment and of the millennium; they had “visions, convulsions, and the spirit ofprophecy.”TheysooncameintoconflictwiththecouncilofZwickau.Muenzerdefendedthem,thoughhehadneverjoinedthemunconditionally,andhadratherbroughtthemunderhisowninfluence.Thecouncil tookdecisivestepsagainst them, theywerecompelled toleavethecity,andMuenzerdepartedwiththem.Thiswasattheendof1521.

HethenwenttoPragueand,inordertogainground,attemptedtojointheremnantsofthe Hussite movement. His proclamations, however, made it necessary for him to fleeBohemiaalso.In1522,hebecamepreacheratAllstedtinThuringia.Herehestartedwithreformingthecult.BeforeevenLutherdaredtogosofar,heentirelyabolishedtheLatinlanguage, and ordered the entire Bible, not only the prescribed Sunday Gospels andepistles,tobereadtothepeople.Atthesametime,heorganisedpropagandainhislocality.People flocked to him from all directions, and soon Allstedt became the centre of thepopularanti-priestmovementofentireThuringia.

Muenzeratthattimewasstilltheologianbeforeeverythingelse.Hedirectedhisattacksalmost exclusively against the priests. He did not, however, preach quiet debate andpeacefulprogress,asLutherhadbeguntodoatthattime,buthecontinuedtheearlyviolentpreachmentsofLuther,appealingtotheprincesofSaxonyandthepeopletoriseinarmsagainsttheRomanpriests.“IsitnotChristwhosaid:‘Ihavecometobring,notpeace,butthesword’?Whatcanyou[theprincesofSaxony]dowith thatsword?Youcandoonlyonething:IfyouwishtobetheservantsofGod,youmustdriveoutanddestroytheeviloneswhostandinthewayoftheGospel.Christorderedveryearnestly(Luke,19,27):‘Butthesemineenemies, thatwouldnot that I should reignover them,bringhither, and slaythem before me.’ Do not resort to empty assertions that the power of God could do itwithoutaidofoursword,sincethenitwouldhavetorust in itssheath.Wemustdestroythosewhostand in thewayofGod’s revelation,wemustdo itmercilessly,asHezekiah,Cyrus,Josiah,DanielandEliasdestroyedthepriestsofBaal,elsetheChristianChurchwillnevercomeback to itsorigins.Wemustuproot theweeds inGod’svineyardat the timewhen the crops are ripe.God said in theFifthBookofMoses, 7, ‘Thou shalt not showmercyuntotheidolators,butyeshallbreakdowntheiraltars,dashinpiecestheirgravenimagesandburnthemwithfirethatIshallnotbewrothatyou.’”Buttheseappealstotheprinceswereofnoavail,whereastherevolutionaryagitationamongthepeoplegrewdaybyday.Muenzer,whoseideasbecamemoredefinitelyshapedandmorecourageous,nowdefinitely relinquished themiddle-class reformation, and at the same time appeared as adirectpoliticalagitator.

Histheologic-philosophicdoctrineattackedallthemainpointsnotonlyofCatholicismbut of Christianity as such. Under the cloak of Christian forms, he preached a kind of


–36–

pantheism,whichcuriouslyresemblesthemodernspeculativemodeofcontemplation,andattimeseventaughtopenatheism.HerepudiatedtheassertionthattheBiblewastheonlyinfallible revelation. The only living revelation, he said,was reason, a revelationwhichexistedamongallpeoplesat all times.Tocontrast theBiblewith reason,hemaintained,wastokill thespiritbythelatter,fortheHolySpiritofwhichtheBiblespokewasnotathingoutsideofus; theHolySpiritwasour reason.Faith, he said,wasnothing elsebutreasonbecomealiveinman,therefore,hesaid,paganscouldalsohavefaith.Throughthisfaith,throughreasoncometolife,manbecamegodlikeandblessed,hesaid.Heavenwasto be sought in this life, not beyond, and it was, according toMuenzer, the task of thebelieverstoestablishHeaven,thekingdomofGod,hereonearth.AsthereisnoHeaveninthebeyond,sothereisnoHellinthebeyond,andnodamnation,andtherearenodevilsbuttheevildesiresandcravingsofman.Christ,hesaid,wasaman,asweare,aprophetandateacher,andhis“Lord’sSupper” isnothingbutaplainmealofcommemorationwhereinbreadandwinearebeingconsumedwithmysticadditions.

Muenzer preached these doctrines mostly in a covert fashion, under the cloak ofChristianphraseologywhichthenewphilosophywascompelledtoutiliseforsometime.The fundamental heretic idea, however, is easily discernible in all hiswritings, and it isobviousthatthebiblicalcloakwasforhimofmuchlessimportancethanitwasformanyadiscipleofHegelinmoderntimes.Still,thereisadistanceofthreehundredyearsbetweenMuenzerandmodernphilosophy.

Muenzer’s political doctrine followed his revolutionary religious conceptions veryclosely,andashistheologyreachedfarbeyondthecurrentconceptionsofhistime,sohispolitical doctrine went beyond existing social and political conditions. As Muenzer’sphilosophy of religion touched upon atheism, so his political programme touched uponcommunism,andthereismorethanonecommunistsectofmoderntimeswhich,ontheeveof the February Revolution, did not possess a theoretical equipment as rich as that ofMuenzerof theSixteenthCentury.Hisprogramme, lessacompilationof thedemandsofthe then existing plebeians than a genius’s anticipation of the conditions for theemancipation of the proletarian element that had just begun to develop among theplebeians, demanded the immediate establishment of the kingdom of God, of theprophesiedmillenniumonearth.Thiswastobeaccomplishedbythereturnofthechurchtoitsoriginsandtheabolitionofall institutionsthatwereinconflictwithwhatMuenzerconceivedasoriginalChristianity,which,infact,wastheideaofaverymodernchurch.BythekingdomofGod,Muenzerunderstoodnothingelsethanastateofsocietywithoutclassdifferences,withoutprivateproperty, andwithout superimposed statepowersopposed tothemembersofsociety.Allexistingauthorities,asfarastheydidnotsubmitandjointhe


–37–

revolution, he taught,must be overthrown, all work and all propertymust be shared incommon, and complete equality must be introduced. In his conception, a union of thepeoplewas tobeorganised torealise thisprogramme,notonly throughoutGermany,butthroughoutentireChristendom.Princesandnoblesweretobeinvitedtojoin,andshouldthey refuse, the union was to overthrow or kill them, with arms in hand, at the firstopportunity.

Muenzerimmediatelysettoworktoorganisetheunion.Hispreachingsassumedastillmore militant character. He attacked, not only the clergy, but with equal passion theprinces, the nobility and the patricians. He pictured in burning colours the existingoppression,andcontrasteditwiththevisionofthemillenniumofsocialrepublicanequalitywhich he created out of his imagination.He published one revolutionary pamphlet afteranother, sending emissaries in all directions,while he personally organised the union inAllstedtanditsvicinity.

ThefirstfruitofthispropagandawasthedestructionSt.Mary’sChapelinMellerbachnearAllstedt,according to thecommandof theBible(Deut.7,5):“Yeshallbreakdowntheiraltars,anddash inpieces theirpillars,andhewdown theirAsherim,andburn theirgraven images with fire.” The princes of Saxony came in person to Allstedt quell theupheaval,andtheycalledMuenzertothecastle.Therehedeliveredasermon,whichtheyhadneverheardfromLuther,“thateasylivingfleshofWittenberg,”Muenzercalledhim.He insisted that the ungodly rulers, especially the priests and monks who treated theGospelasheresy,mustbekilled;forconfirmationhereferredtotheNewTestament.Theungodlyhavenorighttolive,hesaid,savebythemercyofthechosenones.Iftheprinceswould not exterminate the ungodly, he asserted,Godwould take their sword from thembecausetherighttowieldtheswordbelongstothecommunity.Thesourceoftheevilofusury, thieveryandrobbery,hesaid,were theprincesand themasterswhohad takenallcreatures into their private possession – the fishes in thewater, the birds in the air, theplantsinthesoil.Andtheusurpers,hesaid,stillpreachedtothepoorthecommandment,“Thoushaltnotsteal,”whiletheygrabbedeverything,androbbedandcrushedthepeasantandtheartisan.“When,however,oneofthelattercommitstheslightesttransgression,”hesaid,“hehastohang,andDr.Liarsaystoallthis:Amen.”Themastersthemselvescreatedasituation,heargued,inwhichthepoormanwasforcedtobecometheirenemy.Iftheydidnot remove the causes of the upheaval, howcould things improve in times to come?heasked. “Oh,my dear gentlemen, how theLordwill smitewith an iron rod all these oldpots!When I say so, I amconsidered rebellious.Sobe it!” (Cf.Zimmermann’sPeasantWar,II,p.75.)

Muenzerhadthesermonprinted.HisAllstedtprinterwaspunishedbyDukeJohannof


–38–

Saxony with banishment. His own writings were to be henceforth subjected to thecensorship of the ducal government inWeimar. But he paid no heed to this order. HeimmediatelypublishedaveryincitingpaperintheimperialcityofMuehlhausen,whereinheadmonishedthepeople“towidentheholesothatalltheworldmayseeandcomprehendwhoourfoolsarewhohaveblasphemouslyturnedourLordintoapaintedmannikin.”Heconcludedwiththefollowingwords:“Alltheworldmustsufferabigjolt.Thegamewillbesuchthattheungodlywillbethrownofftheirseatsandthedowntroddenwillrise.”Asamotto, ThomasMuenzer, “the man with the hammer,” wrote the following on the titlepage:“Beware, Ihaveputmywords into thymouth; Ihave lifted theeabove thepeopleand above the empires that thoumayest uproot, destroy, scatter and overthrow, and thatthoumayestbuildandplant.Awallofironagainstthekings,princes,priests,andforthepeople hath been erected. Let them fight, for victory is wondrous, and the strong andgodlesstyrantswillperish.”

ThebreachbetweenMuenzer andLutherwithhis partyhad takenplace longbeforethat.LutherhimselfwascompelledtoacceptsomechurchreformswhichwereintroducedbyMuenzerwithoutconsultinghim.LutherwatchedMuenzer’sactivitieswiththenettleddistrust of a moderate reformer towards an energetic far-aiming radical. Already in thespringof1524,inalettertoMelanchthon,thatmodelofahecticstay-at-homePhilistine,Muenzer wrote that he and Luther did not understand the movement at all. They wereseeking,hesaid,tochokeitbyadherencetotheletteroftheBible,andtheirdoctrinewasworm-eaten.“Dearbrethren,”hewrote,“stopyourdelayingandhesitating.Thetimehascome,thesummerisknockingatourdoors.DonotkeepfriendshipwiththeungodlywhopreventtheWordfromexercisingitsfullforce.Donotflatteryourprincesinorderthatyoumaynotperishwith them.Ye tender,bookishscholars,donotbewroth, for Icannotdootherwise.”

Luther hadmore than once invitedMuenzer to an open debate. The latter, however,beingalwaysreadytoacceptbattleinthepresenceofthepeople,didnothavetheslightestdesire toplunge into a theological squabblebefore thepartisanpublicof theWittenbergUniversity.Hehadnodesire“tobringthetestimonyofthespiritbeforethehighschooloflearningexclusively.”IfLutherwassincere,hewrote,lethimusehisinfluencetostopthechicaneries against his,Muenzer’s, printers, and to lift the censorship in order that theircontroversymightbefreelyfoughtoutinthepress.

Whentheabove-mentionedrevolutionarybrochureappeared,LutheropenlydenouncedMuenzer. In his “Letter to the Princes of Saxony Against the Rebellious Spirit,” hedeclaredMuenzertobeaninstrumentofSatan,anddemandedoftheprincestointervene,and drive the instigators of the upheaval out of the country, since, he said, they did not


–39–

confine themselves topreaching theirevildoctrine,but incited to insurrection, toviolentlawlessactionagainsttheauthorities.

OnAugust1st,Muenzerwascompelled toappearbefore theprinces in thecastleofWeimar,todefendhimselfagainsttheaccusationofincendiarymachinations.Therewerehighlycompromisingfactsquotedagainsthim;hissecretunionhadbeentraced;hishandwasdiscoveredintheorganisationofthepitmenandthepeasants.Hewasbeingthreatenedwithbanishment.UponreturningtoAllstedt,helearnedDukeGeorgofSaxonydemandedhis extradition.Union letters in his handwriting had been intercepted,wherein he calledGeorg’ssubjectstoarmedresistanceagainsttheenemiesoftheGospel.Thecouncilwouldhaveextraditedhimhadhenotleftthecity.

In the meantime, the rising agitation among the peasants and the plebeians hadenormously lightenedMuenzer’s taskofpropaganda. In thepersonof theAnabaptistshefoundinvaluableagents.Thissect,havingnodefinitedogmas,held togetherbycommonoppositionagainstallrulingclassesandbythecommonsymbolofsecondbaptism,asceticin theirmode of living, untiring, fanatic and intrepid in propaganda, had grouped itselfmore closely around Muenzer. Made homeless by constant persecutions, its memberswanderedoverthelengthandbreadthofGermany,announcingeverywherethenewgospelwherein Muenzer had made clear to them their own demands and wishes. NumberlessAnabaptists were put on the rack, burned or otherwise executed. But the courage andenduranceoftheseemissarieswereunshaken,andthesuccessoftheiractivitiesamidsttherapidlyrisingagitationofthepeoplewasenormous.Thatwasoneofthereasonswhy,onhisflightfromThuringia,Muenzerfoundthegroundpreparedwhereverheturned.

In Nuernberg, a peasant revolt had been nipped in the bud a month previous. HereMuenzer conducted his propaganda under cover. Soon there appeared persons whodefendedhismostaudacioustheologicaldoctrinesofthenon-obligatorypoweroftheBibleandthemeaninglessnessofsacraments,declaringChristtohavebeenamereman,andthepoweroflayauthoritiestobeungodly.“WeseethereSatanstalking,thespiritofAllstedt!”Lutherexclaimed.InNuernberg,MuenzerprintedhisreplytoLuther.Heaccusedhimofflatteringtheprincesandsupportingthereactionarypartybyhismoderateposition.“Thepeoplewill free themselves in spite of everything,” hewrote, “and then the fate of Dr.Lutherwillbethatofacaptivefox.”Thecitycouncilorderedthepaperconfiscated,andMuenzerwascompelled to leave thecity.Fromtherehewent throughSuabia toAlsace,thentoSwitzerland,andthenbackto theUpperBlackForestwhere the insurrectionhadstarted severalmonthsbefore,precipitated largelyby theAnabaptist emissaries.There isno doubt that this propaganda trip ofMuenzer’s addedmuch to the organisation of thepeople’sparty,toaclearformulationofitsdemandsandtothefinalgeneraloutbreakofthe


–40–

insurrection in April, 1525. It was through this trip that the dual nature of Muenzer’sactivitiesbecamemoreandmorepronounced–ontheonehand,hispropagandaamongthepeoplewhomheapproachedintheonlylanguagethencomprehensibletothemasses,thatofreligiousprophecy;ontheotherhand,hiscontactwiththeinitiated,towhomhecoulddisclosehisultimateaims.EvenprevioustothisjourneyhehadgroupedaroundhimselfinThuringiaa circleof themostdeterminedpersons,notonly fromamong thepeople,butalso from among the lower clergy, a circle whom he had put at the head of the secretorganisation.NowhebecamethecentreoftheentirerevolutionarymovementofsouthwestGermany, organising connections betweenSaxony andThuringia throughFranconia andSuabiauptoAlsaceandtheSwissfrontierandcountingamonghisdisciplesandtheheadsof theorganisation suchmenasHubmaierofWaldshut,ConradGrebelofZurich,FranzRabmann of Griessen, Schappelar of Memmingen, Jakob Wehe of Leipheim, and Dr.MantelinStuttgart,themostrevolutionaryofpriests.HekepthimselfmostlyinGriessenontheSchaffhausenfrontier,undertakingjourneysthroughtheHegau,Klettgau,etc.Thebloody persecutions undertaken by the alarmed princes andmasters everywhere againstthisnewplebeianheresy,aidednotalittleinfanningtherebelliousspiritandclosingtheranks of the organisation. In this way,Muenzer passed five months in upper Germany.Whentheoutbreakofthegeneralmovementwasathand,hereturnedtoThuringia,wherehewishedtoleadthemovementpersonally.Therewewillfindhimlater.

Weshallseehowtrulythecharacterandthebehaviourofthetwopartyheadsreflectedthe position of their respective parties. Luther’s indecision, his fear of the movement,assumed serious proportions; his cowardly servility towards the princes correspondedcloselytothehesitating,vacillatingpolicyofthemiddle-classes.TherevolutionaryenergyanddecisivenessofMuenzer,ontheotherhand,wasseeninthemostadvancedfactionoftheplebeians andpeasants.Thedifferencewas thatwhileLuther confinedhimself to anexpressionoftheideasandwishesofamajorityofhisclassandtherebyacquiredamongitavery cheappopularity,Muenzer, on the contrary,went farbeyond the immediate ideasand demands of the plebeians and peasants, organising out of the then existingrevolutionaryelementsaparty,which,asfarasitstoodonthelevelofhisideasandsharedhisenergy,stillrepresentedonlyasmallminorityoftheinsurgentmasses.


–41–

Chapter3Precursors:PeasantUprisings,1475–1517

Aboutfiftyyearsafter thesuppressionof theHussitemovement, thefirstsymptomsofabuddingrevolutionaryspiritbecamemanifestamongtheGermanpeasants.

Thefirstpeasantconspiracycameintobeingin1476,inthebishopricofWuerzburg,acountry already impoverished “by bad government, manifold taxes, payments, feuds,enmity,war, fires,murders, prison, and the like,” and continually plundered by bishops,clergyandnobilityinashamelessmanner.Ayoungshepherdandmusician,HansBoeheimofNiklashausen,alsocalledthe“Drum-Beater”and“HansthePiper,”suddenlyappearedinTaubergrundintheroleofaprophet.HerelatedthattheVirginhadappearedtohiminavision, that she told him to burn his drum, to cease serving the dance and the sinfulgratification of the senses, and to exhort the people to do penance. Therefore, he said,everybody should purge himself of sin and the vain lusts of the world, forsake alladornmentsandembellishments,andmakeapilgrimagetotheMadonnaofNiklashausentoattainforgiveness.

Alreadyamongtheseprecursorsofthemovementwenoticeanasceticismwhichistobe found in all mediaeval uprisings that were tinged with religion, and also in moderntimes at the beginning of every proletarianmovement. This austerity of behaviour, thisinsistence on relinquishing all enjoyment of life, contrasts the ruling classes with theprinciple of Spartan equality. Nevertheless, it is a necessary transitional stage, withoutwhich the lowest strata of society could never start a movement. In order to developrevolutionaryenergy, inorder tobecomeconsciousof theirownhostileposition towardsallotherelementsofsociety,inordertoconcentrateasaclass,thelowerstrataofsocietymust begin with stripping themselves of everything that could reconcile them to theexisting system of society. They must renounce all pleasures which would make theirsubduedposition in the least tolerableandofwhicheven theseverestpressurecouldnotdeprivethem.

Thisplebeianandproletarianasceticismdifferswidely,bothby itswild fanatic formand by its contents, from the middle-class asceticism as preached by the middle-classLutheranmoralityandby theEnglishPuritans (tobedistinguishedfromthe independentandfarther-reachingsects)whosewholesecretismiddle-classthrift.Itisquiteobviousthatthisplebeian-proletarianasceticismlosesitsrevolutionarycharacterwhenthedevelopmentofmodernproductiveforcesincreasesthenumberofcommodities,thusrenderingSpartanequalitysuperfluous,andontheotherhand,theverypositionoftheproletariatinsociety,and thereby the proletariat itself becomes more and more revolutionary. Gradually, this


–42–

asceticismdisappearsfromamongthemasses.Amongthesectswithwhichitsurvives,itdegenerateseitherintobourgeoisparsimonyorintohigh-soundingvirtuousnesswhich,inthe end, is nothing more than Philistine or guild-artisan niggardliness. Besides,renunciationofpleasuresneednotbepreachedtotheproletariatforthesimplereasonthatithasalmostnothingtorenounce.

HansthePiper’scalltopenitencefoundagreatresponse.Alltheprophetsofrebellionstarted with appeals against sin, because, in fact, only a violent exertion, a suddenrenunciationofallhabitualformsofexistencecouldbringintounifiedmotionadisunited,widely scattered generation of peasants grown up in blind submission. A pilgrimage toNiklashausenbeganandrapidlyincreased,andthegreaterthemassesofpeoplethatjoinedtheprocession, themoreopenlydid theyoung rebel divulgehis plans.TheMadonnaofNiklashausen,hesaid,hadannouncedtohimthathenceforththereshouldbeneitherkingnor princes, neither pope nor other ecclesiastic or lay authority. Every one should be abrothertoeachother,andwinhisbreadbythetoilofhishands,possessingnomorethanhisneighbour.Alltaxes,groundrents,serfduties,tollsandotherpaymentsanddeliveriesshouldbeabolishedforever.Forests,watersandmeadowsshouldbefreeeverywhere.

Thepeoplereceivedthisnewgospelwithjoy.Thefameoftheprophet,“themessageofourMother,” spreadeverywhere,even indistantquarters.HordesofpilgrimscamefromtheOdenwald,fromMain,fromKocherandJaxt,evenfromBavariaandSuabia,andfromthe Rhine.Miracles supposed to have been performed by the Piper were being related;peoplefellontheirkneesbeforetheprophet,prayingtohimastoasaint;peoplefoughtforsmall strips from his cap as for relics or amulets. In vain did the priests fight him,denouncinghisvisionsasthedevil’sdelusionsandhismiraclesashellishswindles.Butthemass of believers increased enormously. The revolutionary sect began to organise. TheSunday sermons of the rebellious shepherd attracted gatherings of 40,000 and more toNiklashausen.

For several months Hans the Piper preached before the masses. He did not intend,however,toconfinehimselftopreaching.HewasinsecretcommunicationwiththepriestofNiklashausenandwith twoknights,KunzofThunfeld andhis son,whoaccepted thenewgospelandweresingledoutasthemilitaryleadersoftheplannedinsurrection.Finally,ontheSundayprecedingthedayofSt.Kilian,whentheshepherdbelievedhispowertobestrongenough,hegavethesignal.Heclosedhissermonwiththefollowingwords:“Andnowgohome,andweighinyourmindwhatourHoliestMadonnahasannouncedtoyou,andonthecomingSaturdayleaveyourwivesandchildrenandoldmenathome,butyou,you men, come back here to Niklashausen on the day of St. Margaret, which is nextSaturday,andbringwithyouyourbrothersandfriends,asmanyas theymaybe.Donot


–43–

come with pilgrims’ staves, but covered with weapons and ammunition, in one hand acandle,intheotheraswordandapikeorhalberd,andtheHolyVirginwillthenannouncetoyouwhatshewishesyoutodo.”Butbeforethepeasantscameinmasses,thehorsemenof the bishop seized the prophet of rebellion at night, and brought him to theCastle ofWuerzburg.On the appointed day, 34,000 armed peasants appeared, but the news had adiscouragingeffectonthemass;themajoritywenthome,themoreinitiatedretainedabout16,000withwhomtheymovedtothecastleundertheleadershipofKunzofThunfeldandhis sonMichael.Thebishop,bymeansofpromises,persuaded them togohome,butassoonas theybegan todisperse, theywere attackedby thebishop’shorsemen, andmanywereimprisoned.Twoweredecapitated,andHansthePiperwasburned.KunzofThunfeldfled,andwasallowedtoreturnonlyatthepriceofcedingallhisestatestothemonastery.PilgrimagestoNiklashausencontinuedforsometime,butwerefinallysuppressed.

After this firstattempt,Germanyremainedquiet forsome time;butat theendof thecenturyrebellionsandconspiraciesofthepeasantsstartedanew.

WeshallpassovertheDutchpeasantrevoltof1491and1492whichwassuppressedbyDukeAlbrechtofSaxonyinthebattlenearHeemskerk;alsotherevoltofthepeasantsoftheAbbey ofKempten inUpper Suabiawhich occurred simultaneously, and the FrisianrevoltunderShaardAhlva,about1497,whichwasalsosuppressedbyAlbrechtofSaxony.These revoltsweremostly too far fromthesceneof theactualPeasantWar. Inpart theywerestrugglesofhithertofreepeasantsagainsttheattempttoforcefeudalismuponthem.We now pass to the two great conspiracieswhich prepared the PeasantWar: theUnionShoeandthePoorKonrad.

TheriseinthepriceofcommoditieswhichhadcalledforththerevoltofthepeasantsintheNetherlands,broughtabout,in1493,inAlsace,asecretunionofpeasantsandplebeianswith a sprinkling of the purely middle-class opposition party; and a certain amount ofsympathy even among the lower nobility. The seat of the union was the region ofSchlettstadt,Sulz,Dambach,Rossheim,Scherweiler, etc.Theconspiratorsdemanded theplunderingandexterminationoftheJews,whoseusurythen,asnow,suckedthebloodofthepeasantsofAlsace,theintroductionofajubileeyeartocancelalldebts,theabolitionoftaxes, tolls and other burdens, the abolition of the ecclesiastical andRottweil (imperial)court, the right to ratify taxation, the reduction of the priests’ incomes to a prebend ofbetween fifty and sixty guilders, the abolition of the auricular confession, and theestablishment in the communities of courts elected by the communities themselves. Theconspiratorsplanned,assoonastheybecamestrongenough,tooverpowerthestrongholdofSchlettstadt,toconfiscatethetreasuriesofthemonasteriesandthecity,andfromtheretoarouse thewholeofAlsace.Thebannerof theunion tobeunfurledat themomentof


–44–

insurrection,containedapeasant’sshoewithlongleatherstrings,theso-calledUnionShoe,whichgaveasymbolandanametothepeasantconspiraciesofthefollowingtwentyyears.

The conspirators held their meetings at night on the lonesome Hungerberg.MembershipintheUnionwasconnectedwiththemostmysteriousceremoniesandthreatsofseverestpunishmentagainsttraitors.Nevertheless,themovementbecameknownaboutEasterWeek of 1493, the time appointed for the attack on Schlettstadt. The authoritiesimmediatelyintervened.Manyoftheconspiratorswerearrestedandputontherack,tobequartered or decapitated.Manywere crippled by chopping their hands and fingers, anddrivenoutofthecountry.AlargenumberfledtoSwitzerland.TheUnionShoe,however,was far from being annihilated and continued its existence in secret. Numerous exiles,spreadoverSwitzerlandandSouthGermany,became itsemissaries.Findingeverywherethesameoppressionandthesameinclinationtowardsrevolt,theyspreadtheUnionShoeover the territory of present-dayBaden. The greatest admiration is due the tenacity andendurancewithwhichthepeasantsofupperGermanyconspiredforthirtyyearsafter1493,withwhichtheyovercametheobstaclestoamorecentralisedorganisationinspiteofthefact that they were scattered over the countryside, and with which, after numberlessdispersions,defeats,executionsof leaders, theyrenewedtheirconspiraciesoverandoveragain,untilanopportunitycameforamassupheaval.

In 1502, the bishopric of Speyer, which at that time embraced also the locality ofBruchsal, showed signsof a secretmovement among thepeasants.TheUnionShoehadhere reorganised itself with considerable success. About 7,000 men belonged to theorganisation whose centre was Untergrombach, between Bruchsal and Weingarten, andwhose ramifications reached down theRhine to theMain, and up to theMargraviate ofBaden.Itsarticlesprovided:Nogroundrent,tithe,taxortolltobepaidtotheprinces,thenobilityortheclergy;serfdomtobeabolished;monasteriesandotherchurchestatestobeconfiscatedanddividedamong thepeople,andnootherauthority tobe recognisedasidefromtheemperor.

We find here for the first time expressed among the peasants the two demands ofsecularising the church estates in favour of the people and of a unified and undividedGerman monarchy – demands which henceforth will be found regularly in the moreadvancedfactionofthepeasantsandplebeians.

InThomasMuenzer’sprogramme,thedivisionofthechurchestateswastransformedintoconfiscationinfavourofcommonproperty,andtheunifiedGermanempire, intotheunifiedandundividedrepublic.

TherenewedUnionShoehad,aswellastheold,itsownsecretmeetingplaces,itsoath


–45–

of silence, its initiation ceremonies, and its union bannerwith the legend, “Nothing butGod’s justice.” The plan of action was similar to that of the Alsatian Union. Bruchsal,where themajority of the population belonged to theUnion,was to be overpowered.AUnion army was to be organised and dispatched into the surrounding principalities asmovingpointsofconcentration.

Theplanwasbetrayedbyaclergymantowhomoneoftheconspiratorsrevealeditinthe confessional. The governments immediately resorted to counter action. Howwidespread theUnion had become, is apparent from the terrorwhich seized the variousimperialestatesinAlsaceandintheUnionofSuabia.Troopswereconcentrated,andmassarrests were made. Emperor Maximilian, “the last of the knights,” issued the mostbloodthirsty, punitive decree against the undertakingof the peasants.Hordes of peasantsassembledhereandthere,andarmedresistancewasoffered,buttheisolatedpeasanttroopscouldnotholdgroundforalongtime.Someoftheconspiratorswereexecutedandmanyfled,but the secrecywas sowellpreserved that themajority, andalso the leaders, couldremainunmolestedintheirownlocalitiesorinthecountriesoftheneighbouringmasters.

Afterthisnewdefeat,therefollowedaprolongedperiodofapparentquietintheclassstruggles.Thework,however,wascontinuedinanundergroundway.Already,inthefirstyears of the Sixteenth Century, Poor Konrad was formed in Suabia, apparently inconnectionwiththescatteredmembersoftheUnionShoe.IntheBlackForest,theUnionShoe continued in isolated circles until, ten years later, an energetic peasant leadersucceededinunitingthevariousthreadsandcombiningthemintoagreatconspiracy.Bothconspiraciesbecamepublic,oneshortlyaftertheother,intherestlessyearsfrom1513to1515,inwhichtheSwiss,HungarianandSlovenianpeasantsmadeaseriesofsignificantinsurrections.

The man who restored the Upper Rhenish Union Shoe was Joss Fritz ofUntergrombach,afugitivefromtheconspiracyof1502,aformersoldier,inallrespectsanoutstanding figure.Afterhis flight,hehadkepthimself invarious localitiesbetween theLake Constance and the Black Forest, and finally settled as a vassal near Freiburg inBreisgau,whereheevenbecameaforester.InterestingdetailsastothemannerinwhichhereorganisedtheUnionfromthispointofvantageandastotheskillwithwhichhemanagedtoattractpeopleofdifferentcharacter,arecontainedintheinvestigations.Itwasduetothediplomatictalentandtheuntiringenduranceofthismodelconspiratorthataconsiderablenumber of people of themost divergent classes became involved in theUnion: knights,priests,burghers,plebeiansandpeasants,anditisalmostcertainthatheorganisedseveralgradesoftheconspiracy,onemoreorlesssharplydividedfromtheother.Allserviceableelementswereutilisedwiththegreatestcircumspectionandskill.Outsideof the initiated


–46–

emissarieswhowanderedoverthecountryinvariousdisguises,thevagrantsandbeggarswereused for subordinatemissions. Joss stood indirect communicationwith thebeggarkings,andthroughthemheheldinhishandthenumerousvagabondpopulation.Infact,thebeggarkingsplayedaconsiderableroleinhisconspiracy.Veryoriginalfigurestheywere,thesebeggarkings.Oneroamedthecountrywithagirlusingherseeminglywoundedfeetas a pretext for begging; he wore more than eight insignia on his hat – the fourteendeliverers,St.Ottilie,OurMotherinHeaven,etc.;besides,heworealongredbeard,andcarried a big knotty stickwith a dagger and pike. Another, begging in the name of St.Velten, offered spices andworm-seeds; hewore a long iron-coloured coat, a red barret,withtheBabyofTrientattachedthereto,aswordathisside,andmanyknivesandadaggeronhisgirdle.Othershadartificialopenwounds,besidessimilarpicturesqueattire.Therewereatleasttenofthem,andforthepriceoftwothousandguilderstheyweresupposedtosetfiresimultaneouslyinAlsace,intheMargraviateofBaden,andinBreisgau,andtoputthemselves,withatleast2,000menoftheirown,underthecommandofGeorgSchneider,theformerCaptainoftheLansquenets,onthedayoftheZabernParishFairinRozen,inordertoconquerthecity.Acourierservicefromstationtostationwasestablishedbetweenreal members of the union. Joss Fritz and his chief emissary, Stoffel of Freiburg,continuallyridingfromplacetoplace,reviewedthearmiesoftheneophytesatnight.ThereisamplematerialinthedocumentsofthecourtinvestigationsrelativetothespreadoftheUnionintheUpperRhineandBlackForestregions.Thedocumentscontainmanynamesofmembersfromthevariouslocalitiesinthatregion,togetherwithdescriptionsofpersons.Mostofthosementionedwerejourneymen,peasantsandinnkeepers,afewnobles,priests(like that of Lehen himself), and unemployedLansquenets. This composition shows themoredevelopedcharacterthattheUnionShoehadassumedunderJossFritz.Theplebeianelement of the cities began to assert itself more and more. The ramifications of theconspiracywentoverintoAlsace,present-dayBaden,uptoWuerttembergandtheMain.Largermeetingswere held from time to timeon remotemountains such as theKniebis,etc., and the affairs of the Union were discussed. The meetings of the chiefs, oftenparticipatedinbylocalmembersaswellasbydelegatesofthemoreremotelocalities,tookplaceontheHartmattenearLehen,anditwasherethatthefourteenarticlesoftheUnionwereadopted:Nomasterbesidestheemperor,and(accordingtosome)thepope;abolitionoftheRottweilimperialcourt;limitationofthechurchcourttoreligiousaffairs;abolitionofallinterestwhichhadbeenpaidsolongthatitequalledthecapital;aninterestof5percent as the highest permissible rate; freedom of hunting, fishing, grazing, and woodcutting;limitationoftheprieststooneprebendforeach;confiscationofallchurchestatesandmonastery gems in favour of theUnion; abolition of all inequitable taxes and tolls;eternal peace within entire Christendom, energetic action against all opponents of the


–47–

Union;Uniontaxes;seizureofastrongcity,suchasFreiburg,toserveasthecentreoftheUnion; opening of negotiations with the emperor as soon as the Union hordes weregathered,andwithSwitzerlandincasetheemperordeclined–thesewerethepointsagreedupon.Wesee that thedemandsof thepeasantsandplebeiansassumedamoreandmoredefiniteanddecisiveform,althoughconcessionshad tobemade in thesamemeasure tothemoremoderateandtimidelementsaswell.

The blow was to be struck about Autumn, 1513. Nothing was lacking but a Unionbanner,andJossFritzwenttoHeilbruntohaveitpainted.Itcontained,besidesallsortsofemblemsandpictures,theUnionShoeandthelegend“Godhelpthydivinejustice.”Whilehewasaway,aprematureattemptwasmadetooverwhelmFreiburg,buttheattemptwasdiscovered. Some indiscretions in the conduct of the propaganda put the council ofFreiburgand theMargraveofBadenon the right track.Thebetrayalof twoconspiratorscompleted theseriesofdisclosures.Presently theMargrave, thecouncilofFreiburg,andtheimperialgovernmentofEnsisheimsentouttheirspiesandsoldiers.AnumberofUnionmemberswerearrested, torturedandexecuted.But themajorityescapedoncemore,JossFritzamongthem.TheSwissgovernmentnowpersecutedthefugitiveswithgreatassiduityand even executed many of them. However, it could not prevent the majority of thefugitivesfromkeepingthemselvescontinuallyinthevicinityoftheirhomesandgraduallyreturning there.TheAlsacegovernment inEnsisheimwasmore cruel than theothers. Itorderedverymanytobedecapitated,brokenonthewheel,andquartered.JossFritzkepthimselfmainlyontheSwissbankoftheRhine,buthealsowentoftentotheBlackForestwithouteverbeingapprehended.

Why theSwissmadecommoncausewith theneighbouringgovernments this time isapparent from the peasant revolt that broke out the following year, 1514, in Berne,SollothurneandLucerne,andresultedinapurgingofthearistocraticgovernmentsandtheinstitutionofpatricians.Thepeasantsalsoforcedthroughsomeprivilegesforthemselves.IftheseSwisslocalrevoltssucceeded,itwassimplyduetothefactthattherewasstilllesscentralisationinSwitzerlandthaninGermany.ThelocalGermanmasterswereallsubduedbythepeasantsof1525,andiftheysuccumbed,itwasduetotheorganisedmassarmiesoftheprinces.Theselatter,however,didnotexistinSwitzerland.

Simultaneously with the Union Shoe in Baden, and apparently in direct connectionwithit,asecondconspiracywasformedinWuerttemberg.Accordingtodocuments,ithadexisted since 1503, but since the name Union Shoe became too dangerous after thedispersaloftheUntergrombachconspirators,itadoptedthenameofPoorKonrad.ItsseatwasthevalleyofRemsunderneaththemountainofHohenstaufen.Itsexistencehadbeennomystery for a long time, at least among thepeople.The shameless pressure ofDuke


–48–

Ulrich’sgovernment,andtheseriesoffamineyearswhichsogreatlyaidedtheoutbreaksof1513 and 1514, had increased the number of conspirators. The newly imposed taxes onwine,meatandbread,aswellasacapitaltaxofonepennyyearlyforeveryguilder,causedthenewoutbreak.ThecityofSchorndorf,wheretheheadsofthecomplotusedtomeetinthehouseofacutlernamedKasparPregizer,wastobeseizedfirst.Inthespringof1514,the rebellionbrokeout.Three thousand,and,according toothers, five thousandpeasantsappeared before the city, and were persuaded by the friendly promises of the Duke’sofficers to move on. Duke Ulrich, having promised the abolition of the new tax, cameridingfastwitheightyhorsemen,tofindthateverythingwasquiet inconsequenceofthepromise. He promised to convene a diet where all complaintswould be examined. Thechiefs of the organisation, however, knewverywell thatUlrich sought only to keep thepeoplequietuntilhehadrecruitedandconcentratedenoughtroopstobeabletobreakhiswordandcollectthetaxesbyforce.TheyissuedfromKasparPregizer’shouse,“theofficeof PoorKonrad,” a call to aUnion congress, this call having the support of emissarieseverywhere. The success of the first uprising in the valley of Rems had everywherestrengthened the movement among the people. The papers and the emissaries found afavourableresponse,andsothecongressheldinUntertuerkheimonMay28,wasattendedbynumerousrepresentativesfromallpartsofWuerttemberg.ItwasdecidedimmediatelytoproceedwiththepropagandaandtostrikeadecisiveblowinthevalleyofRemsatthefirstopportunity in order to spread the uprising from that point in every direction. WhileBantelshans of Dettingen, a former soldier, and Singerhans ofWuertingen, a prominentpeasant,were bringing theSuabianAlp into theUnion, the uprising broke out on everyside. Though Singerhans was suddenly attacked and seized, the cities of Backnang,Winnenden, andMarkgroenningen fell into thehandsof thepeasants combinedwith theplebeians,andtheentireterritoryfromWeinsbergtoBlaubeurenandfromthereuptothefrontiersofBaden,wasinopenrevolt.Ulrichwascompelledtoyield.However,whilehewascallingtheDietforJune25,hesentoutacircularlettertothesurroundingprincesandfree cities, asking for aid against the uprising, which, he said, threatened all princes,authoritiesandnoblesintheempire,andwhich“strangelyresembledtheUnionShoe.”

Inthemeantime,theDiet,representingthecities,andmanydelegatesofthepeasantswhoalsodemandedseatsintheDiet,convenedonJune18inStuttgart.

Theprelateswerenotthereasyet.Theknightshadnotbeeninvited.TheoppositionofthecityofStuttgart,aswellastwothreateninghordesofpeasantsatLeonbergnearbyinthe valley of Rems, strengthened the demands of the peasants. Their delegates wereadmitted, and itwas decided to depose and punish three of the hated councillors of theDuke–Lamparter,ThumbandLorcher,toaddtotheDukeacounciloffourknights,four


–49–

burghersandfourpeasants,togranthimacivillist,andtoconfiscatethemonasteriesandtheendowmentsinfavouroftheStatetreasury.

DukeUlrichmettheserevolutionarydecisionswithacoupd’état.OnJune21,herodewithhisknightsandcouncillorstoTuebingen,wherehewasfollowedbytheprelates.Heorderedthemiddle-class tocomethereaswell.Thiswasobeyed,andtherehecontinuedthe session of the Diet without the peasants. The burghers, confronted with militaryterrorism,betrayedtheirallies,thepeasants.OnJuly8,theTuebingenagreementcameintobeing,whichimposedonthecountryalmostamillionoftheDuke’sdebt,imposedontheDukesomelimitationsofpowerwhichheneverfulfilled,anddisposedofthepeasantswithafewmeagregeneralphrasesandaverydefinitepenallawagainstinsurrection.Ofcourse,nothingwasmentioned about peasant representation in theDiet. The plain people cried“Treason!”but theDuke,havingacquirednewcreditsafterhisdebtswere takenoverbythe estates, soon gathered troopswhile his neighbours, particularly the Elector Palatine,were sendingmilitary aid.Thus, by the end of July, theTuebingen agreement had beenacceptedalloverthecountry,andanewoathtaken.OnlyinthevalleyofRemsdidPoorKonradofferresistance.TheDuke,whorodethereinperson,wasalmostkilled.Apeasantcamp was formed on the mountain of Koppel. But the affair dragged on, most of theinsurgents runningaway for lackof food; later the remainingonesalsowenthomeafterconcludinganambiguousagreementwithsomerepresentativesoftheDiet.Ulrich,whosearmy had in themeantime been strengthened by voluntarily offered troops of the citieswhich,havingattainedtheirdemands,nowfanaticallyturnedagainstthepeasants,attackedthe valley ofRems contrary to the terms of the agreement, and plundered its cities andvillages.Sixteenhundredpeasantswerecaptured,sixteenofthemdecapitated,andtherestreceivingheavy fines in favourofUlrich’s treasury.Many remained inprison fora longtime.Anumberofpenallawswereissuedagainstarenewaloftheorganisation,againstallgatherings of peasants, and the nobility of Suabia formed a special union for thesuppressionofallattemptsatinsurrection.Meantime,thechiefleadersofPoorKonradhadsucceededinescapingintoSwitzerland,whencemostofthemreturnedhomesingly,afterthelapseofafewyears.

Simultaneously with the Wuerttemberg movement, symptoms of new Union Shoeactivities became manifest in Breisgau and in the Margraviate of Baden. In June, aninsurrectionwasattemptedatBuehl,butitwasimmediatelydispersedbyMargravePhilipp–theleader,Gugel-BastianofFreiburg,havingbeenseizedandexecutedontheblock.

In thespringof thesameyear,1514,ageneralpeasantwarbrokeout inHungary.AcrusadeagainsttheTurkswasbeingpreached,and,asusual,freedomwaspromisedtotheserfsandbondsmenwhowould join it.About60,000congregated,andwere tobeunder


–50–

the command of György Dózsa,[16] a Szekler, who had distinguished himself in theprecedingTurkishwarsandevenattainednobility.TheHungarianknightsandmagnates,however,lookedwithdisfavouruponthecrusadewhichthreatenedtodeprivethemoftheirpropertyandslaves.Theyhastilyfollowedtheindividualhordesofpeasants,andtookbacktheirserfsbyforceandmistreatedthem.Whenthearmyofcrusaderslearnedaboutit,allthefuryoftheoppressedpeasantswasunleashed.Twoofthemen,enthusiasticadvocatesofthecrusade,LawrenceMészárosandBarnabas,fannedthefire,incitingthehatredofthearmyagainstthenobilitybytheirrevolutionaryspeeches.Dózsahimselfsharedtheangerofhistroopsagainstthetreacherousnobility.Thearmyofcrusadersbecameanarmyoftherevolution,andDózsaassumedleadershipofthemovement.

HecampedwithhispeasantsintheRakosfieldnearPest.HostilitieswereopenedwithencountersbetweenthepeasantsandthepeopleofthenobilityinthesurroundingvillagesandinthesuburbsofPest.Soontherewereskirmishes,andthenfollowedSicilianVespersforallthenobilitywhofellintothehandsofthepeasants,andburningofallthecastlesinthevicinity.Thecourtthreatenedinvain.Whenthefirstactsofthepeople’sjusticetowardsthenobilityhadbeenaccomplishedunderthewallsofthecity,Dózsaproceededtofurtheroperations. He divided his army into five columns. Twowere sent to themountains ofUpperHungaryinordertoeffectaninsurrectionandtoexterminatethenobility.Thethird,underAmbrosSzaleves,acitizenofPest,remainedontheRakostoguardthecapital.ThefourthandfifthwereledbyDózsaandhisbrotherGregoragainstSzegedin.

Inthemeantime,thenobilitygatheredinPest,andcalledtoitsaidJohannZapolya,thevoivodeofTransylvania.Thenobility,joinedbythemiddle-classofBudapest,attackedandannihilated the armyon theRakos, after Szaleveswith themiddle-class elements of thepeasantarmyhadgoneovertotheenemy.Ahostofprisonerswereexecutedinthemostcruelfashion.Therestweresenthomeminustheirnosesandears.

DózsasuffereddefeatbeforeSzegedinandmovedtoCzanadwhichhecaptured,havingdefeated an army of the nobility under Batory Istvan and Bishop Esakye, and havingperpetrated bloody repressions on the prisoners, among them the Bishop and the royalChancellorTeleky,fortheatrocitiescommittedontheRakos.InCzanadheproclaimedarepublic,abolitionofthenobility,generalequalityandsovereigntyofthepeople,andthenmovedtowardTemesvar,towhichplaceBatoryhadrushedwithhisarmy.ButduringthesiegeofthisfortresswhichlastedfortwomonthsandwhilehewasbeingreinforcedbyanewarmyunderAntonHosza,histwoarmycolumnsinUpperHungarysuffereddefeatinseveral battles at the hand of the nobility, and Johann Zapolya, with his Transylvanianarmy,moved against him.The peasantswere attacked byZapolya and dispersed.Dózsawascaptured, roastedona redhot throne,andhis flesheatenbyhisownpeople,whose


–51–

livesweregrantedtothemonlyunderthiscondition.Thedispersedpeasants,reassembledby Lawrence and Hosza, were defeated again, and whoever fell into the hands of theenemieswereeitherimpaledorhanged.Thepeasants’corpseshunginthousandsalongtheroads or at the entrances of burned-down villages. According to reports, about 60,000eitherfellinbattle,orweremassacred.ThenobilitytookcarethatatthenextsessionoftheDiet,theenslavementofthepeasantsshouldagainberecognisedasthelawoftheland.

ThepeasantrevoltinCarinthia,CarniolaandStyria,the“windymarshes,”whichbrokeoutatthesametime,originatedinaconspiracyakintotheUnionShoe,organisedasearlyas 1503 in that region,wrungdry by imperial officers, devastated byTurkish invasions,andtorturedbyfamines.Itwasthisconspiracythatmadetheinsurrectionpossible.Alreadyin1513,theSlovenianaswellastheGermanpeasantsofthisregionhadoncemoreraisedthe war banner of the Stara Prawa (The Old Rights). They allowed themselves to beplacatedthattime,andwhenin1514theygatheredanewinlargemasses,theywereagainpersuaded togohomebyadirectpromiseof theEmperorMaximilian to restore theoldrights.Still,thewarofvengeancebythedeceivedpeoplebrokeoutintheSpringof1515with much more vigour. Here, as in Hungary, castles and monasteries were destroyed,captured nobles being tried and executed by peasant juries. In Styria andCarinthia, theemperor’scaptainDietrichsteinsoonsucceededincrushingtherevolt.InCarniola,itcouldbesuppressedonlythroughanattackfromRain(Autumn,1516)andthroughsubsequentAustrian atrocitieswhich formed aworthy counterpart to the infamies of theHungariannobility.

Itisclearwhy,afteraseriesofsuchdecisivedefeats,andafterthesemassatrocitiesofthe nobility, the German peasants remained quiescent for a long time. Still, neitherconspiraciesnorlocaluprisingsweretotallyabsent.Alreadyin1516mostofthefugitivesoftheUnionShoeandPoorKonradhadreturnedtoSuabiaandtotheupperRhine.In1517theUnionShoewasagain infullswing in theBlackForest.JossFritzhimself,whostillcarried in his bosom the oldUnion Shoe banner of 1513, traversed theBlack Forest invariousdirections,anddevelopedgreatactivity.Theconspiracywasbeingorganisedanew.Meetings were again held on the Kniebis as they had been four years before. Secrecy,however, was not maintained. The governments learned the facts and interfered. Manywerecapturedandexecuted.Themostactiveandintelligentmemberswerecompelledtoflee,amongthemJossFritz,who,althoughstillnotcaptured,seems,however,tohavediedinSwitzerlandashorttimeafterwards.Atanyrate,hisnameisnotmentionedagain.


–52–

Chapter4UprisingoftheNobility

While the fourth Union Shoe organisation was being suppressed in the Black Forest,Luther, inWittenberg,gavethesignaltoamovementwhichwasdestinedtodrawall theestatesintoitstorrent,andtoshakethewholeempire.ThethesesofthisAugustinianfromThuringia had the effect of lightning in a powder magazine. The manifold andcontradictorystrivingsoftheknightsandthemiddle-class,thepeasantsandtheplebeians,theprincescravingforsovereignty,thelowerclergysecretlyplayingatmysticism,andthelearnedwriter’soppositionofasatiricalandburlesquenature, found inLuther’s thesesacommonexpressionaroundwhichtheygroupedthemselveswithastoundingrapidity.Thisalliance of all the opposing elements, though formed overnight and of brief duration,suddenlyrevealedtheenormouspowerofthemovement,andgaveitfurtherimpetus.

Butthisveryrapidgrowthofthemovementwasalsodestinedtodeveloptheseedsofdiscordwhichwerehiddeninit.Itwasdestinedtotearasunderatleastthoseportionsofthearousedmasswhich,bytheirverysituationinlife,weredirectlyopposedtoeachother,andtoput themintheirnormalstateofmutualhostility.Alreadyin thefirstyearsof theReformation, the assembling of the heterogeneous mass of the opposition around twocentral points became a fact. Nobility and middle-class grouped themselvesunconditionallyaroundLuther.Peasantsandplebeians,yetfailingtoseeinLutheradirectenemy, formed a separate revolutionary party of the opposition. This was nothing new,since now the movement had become much more general, much broader in scope anddeeper than it was in the pre-Luther times, which necessarily brought about a sharpantagonism and an open struggle between the two parties. This direct opposition soonbecameapparent.LutherandMuenzer,fightinginthepressandinthepulpit,wereasmuchopposedtoeachotheraswerethearmiesofprinces,knightsandcities(consisting,astheydid,mainlyofLutheransorofforcesatleastinclinedtowardsLutherism),andthehordesofpeasantsandplebeiansroutedbythosearmies.

ThedivergenceofinterestsofthevariouselementsacceptingtheReformationbecameapparentevenbeforethePeasantWarintheattemptofthenobilitytorealiseitsdemandsasagainsttheprincesandtheclergy.

ThesituationoftheGermannobilityatthebeginningoftheSixteenthCenturyhasbeendepictedabove.Thenobilitywaslosingits independencetotheever-increasingpowerofthelayandclericalprinces.Itrealisedthatinthesamedegreeasitwasgoingdownasagroupinsociety,thepoweroftheempirewasgoingdownaswell,dissolvingitselfintoanumber of sovereign principalities. The collapse of the nobility coincided, in its own


–53–

opinion,withthecollapseoftheGermannation.Addedtoitwasthefactthatthenobility,especiallythatsectionofitwhichwasundertheempire,byvirtueofitsmilitaryoccupationanditsattitudetowardstheprinces,directlyrepresentedtheempireandtheimperialpower.Thenobilitywas themostnationalof theestates,and itknew that thestrongerwere theimperialpowerandtheunityofGermany,andtheweakerandlessnumeroustheprinces,themorepowerfulwould thenobilitybecome.Itwasfor thatreasonthat theknighthoodwas generally dissatisfied with the pitiful political situation of Germany, with thepowerlessnessoftheempireinforeignaffairs,whichincreasedinthesamedegreeas,byinheritance, the court was adding to the empire one province after the other, with theintriguesof foreignpowers insideofGermanyandwith theplottingsofGermanprinceswithforeigncountriesagainstthepoweroftheempire.Itwasforthatreason,also,thatthedemands of the nobility instantly assumed the form of a demand for the reform of theempire,thevictimsofwhichweretobetheprincesandthehigherclergy.UlrichofHutten,thetheoreticianoftheGermannobility,undertooktoformulatethisdemandincombinationwithFranzvonSickingen,itsmilitaryanddiplomaticrepresentative.

Thereformof theempireasdemandedby thenobilitywasconceivedbyHutten inavery radical spirit and expressed very clearly. Hutten demanded nothing else than theeliminationofallprinces,thesecularisationofallchurchprincipalitiesandestates,andtherestorationofademocracyofthenobilityheadedbyamonarchy–aformofgovernmentreminiscentof theheydayof the latePolishrepublic.HuttenandSickingenbelievedthattheempirewouldagainbecomeunited,freeandpowerful,shouldtheruleofthenobility,apredominantlymilitaryclass,bereestablished,theprinces,theelementsofdisintegration,removed, the power of the priests annihilated, and Germany torn away from under thedominanceoftheRomanChurch.

Foundedonserfdom thisdemocracyof thenobility, theprototypeofwhichcouldbefoundinPolandand,intheempiresconqueredbytheGermanictribes,atleastintheirfirstcenturies, is one of the most primitive forms of society, and its normal course ofdevelopment is to become an extensive feudal hierarchy, which was a considerableadvance.Suchapowerfuldemocracyofthenobilityhadalreadybecomeanimpossibilityin Germany of the Sixteenth Century, first of all because there existed at that timeimportant andpowerfulGermancities and therewasnoprospectof an alliancebetweennobilityand thecities suchasbroughtabout inEngland the transformationof the feudalorder into a bourgeois constitutional monarchy. In Germany, the old nobility survived,while in England it was exterminated by the Wars of the Roses,[17] only twenty-eightfamiliesremaining,andwassupersededbyanewnobilityofmiddle-classderivationandmiddle-classtendencies.InGermany,serfdomwasstillthecommonpractice,thenobility


–54–

drawing its income from feudal sources, while in England serfdom had been virtuallyeliminated, and the nobility had become plainmiddle-class land owners,with amiddle-classsourceofincome–thegroundrent.Finally,thatcentralisationofabsolutemonarchialpowerwhich inFrancehadexistedandkeptgrowingsinceLouisXIdue to theclashofinterestsbetweennobilityandmiddle-class,wasimpossibleinGermanywhereconditionsfornationalcentralisationexistedinaveryrudimentaryform,ifatall.

Undertheseconditions,thegreaterwasHutten’sdeterminationtocarryouthisidealsinpractice, themoreconcessionswashecompelled tomake,and themorecloudeddidhisplan of reforming the empire become. Nobility, alone, lacked power to put the reformthrough.Thiswasmanifestfromitsweaknessincomparisonwiththeprinces.Alliesweretobelookedfor,andthesecouldonlybefoundeitherinthecities,oramongthepeasantryand the influentialadvocatesof reform.But thecitiesknewthenobility toowell to trustthem,andtheyrejectedallformsofalliance.Thepeasantsjustlysawinthenobility,whichexploitedandmistreatedthem,theirbitterestenemy,andastothetheoreticiansofreform,they made common cause with the middle-class, the princes, or the peasants. Whatadvantages, indeed, could the nobility promise the middle-class or the peasants from areform of the empirewhosemain task itwas to lift the nobility into a higher position?UnderthesecircumstancesHuttencouldonlybesilentinhispropagandawritingsaboutthefuture interrelationsbetween thenobility, thecitiesand thepeasants,or tomention themonlybriefly,puttingallevilsatthefeetoftheprinces,thepriests,andthedependenceuponRome,andshowingthemiddle-classthatitwasintheirintereststoremainatleastneutralinthecomingstrugglebetweenthenobilityandtheprinces.NomentionwasevermadebyHuttenofabolishingserfdomorotherburdensimposeduponthepeasantsbythenobility.

TheattitudeoftheGermannobilitytowardsthepeasantsofthattimewasexactlythesameasthatofthePolishnobilitytowardsitspeasantsintheinsurrectionssince1830.Asin themodernPolish upheavals, themovement could have been brought to a successfulconclusion only by an alliance of all the opposition parties,mainly the nobility and thepeasants.Butofallalliances,thisonewasentirelyimpossibleoneitherside.Thenobilitywas not ready to give up its political privileges and its feudal rights over the peasants,while the revolutionarypeasantscouldnotbedrawnbyvagueprospects intoanalliancewiththenobility, theclasswhichwasmostactivein theiroppression.Thenobilitycouldnot win over the German peasant in 1522, as it failed in Poland in 1830. Only totalabolition of serfdom, bondage and all privileges of nobility could have united the ruralpopulationwithit.Thenobility,likeeveryprivilegedclass,hadnot,however,theslightestdesiretogiveupitsprivileges,itsfavourablesituation,andthemajorpartsofitssourcesofincome.


–55–

Thusitcameaboutthatwhenthestrugglebrokeout,thenobleswerealoneinthefieldagainsttheprinces.Itwasobviousthattheprinces,who,fortwocenturieshadbeentakingthegroundfromunderthenobility’sfeet,wouldthistimealsogainavictorywithoutmucheffort.

The course of the struggle itself is well known. Hutten and Sickingen, alreadyrecognisedasthepoliticalandmilitarychiefsofthemiddleGermannobility,organisedinLandau,in1522,aunionoftheRhenish,SuabianandFranconiannobilityforthedurationof six years, ostensibly for self-defense. Sickingen assembled an army, partly out of hisownmeans and partly in combination with the neighbouring knights. He organised therecruiting of armies and reinforcements in Franconia, along the Lower Rhine, in theNetherlandsandinWestphalia,andinSeptember,1522,heopenedhostilitiesbydeclaringa feud against the Elector-Archbishop of Trier. While he was stationed near Trier, hisreinforcementswerecutoffbyaquickinterventionoftheprinces.TheLandgraveofHesseand the Elector Palatinewent to the aid of theArchbishop of Trier, and Sickingenwashastilycompelledtoretreattohiscastle,Landstuhl.InspiteofalltheeffortsofHuttenandtheremainderofhisfriends,theunitednobility,intimidatedbytheconcentratedandquickactionoftheprinces,lefthiminthelurch.Sickingenwasmortallywounded,surrenderedLandstuhl, and soon afterwards he died. Hutten was compelled to flee to Switzerland,wherehediedafewmonthslaterontheIsleofUfnau,ontheLakeofZurich.

Withthisdefeat,andwiththedeathofbothleaders,thepowerofthenobilityasabody,independent of the princes,was broken. From then on the nobility appeared only in theserviceandunder the leadershipof theprinces.ThePeasantWar,whichsoonbrokeout,drovethenoblesstillmoredeeplyunderthedirectorindirectprotectionoftheprinces.Itproved that the German nobility preferred to continue the exploitation of the peasantsunderprincelysovereignty,ratherthanoverthrowtheprincesandprieststhroughanopenalliancewiththeemancipatedpeasants.


–56–

Chapter5ThePeasantWarinSuabiaandFranconia

FromthemomentwhenLuther’sdeclarationofwaragainsttheCatholichierarchysetintomotion all the opposition elements of Germany, not a year passedwithout the peasantscoming forth with their demands. Between 1518 and 1523, one local revolt followedanother in theBlackForestand inupperSuabia.Beginning in theSpringof1524, theserevoltsassumedasystematiccharacter.InAprilofthatyear,thepeasantsoftheAbbeyofMarchthal refused serf labour and duties; inMay of the same year, the peasants of St.Blasien refused serf payments; in June, the peasants of Steinheim near Memmingendeclaredtheywouldpayneitherthetithenorotherduties;inJulyandAugust,thepeasantsof Thurgau rebelled and were quieted partly through the mediation of Zurich, partlythroughthebrutalityoftheconfederacywhichexecutedmanyofthem.Finally,adecisiveuprising tookplace in theMargraviateofStuehlingen,whichmaybe lookeduponas therealbeginningofthePeasantWar.

The peasants of Stuehlingen suddenly refused deliveries to the Landgrave andassembledinstrongnumbers.OnOctober24,1524,theymovedtowardsWaldshutunderHansMuellerofBulgenbach.Heretheyorganisedanevangelicalfraternity,jointlywiththecitymiddle-class.Thelatterjoinedtheorganisationthemorewillinglysincetheywereinconflict with the government of Upper Austria over the religious persecutions of theirpreacher,BalthaserHubmaier,afriendanddiscipleofThomasMuenzer’s.AUniontaxofthreekreutzerweeklywasimposed.Itwasanenormoussumforthevalueofmoneyofthattime.EmissariesweresentouttoAlsace,totheMoselle,totheentireUpperRhineandtoFranconia, to bring peasants everywhere into the Union. The aims of the Union wereproclaimed as follows: abolition of feudal power; destruction of all castles andmonasteries;eliminationofallmastersoutsideoftheemperor.TheGermantricolourwasthebanneroftheUnion.

The uprising spread rapidly over the entire territory of present-day Baden. A panicseizedthenobilityofUpperSuabia,whosemilitaryforceswereallengagedinItaly, inawar against Francis I of France.Nothing remained for it but to gain time by protractednegotiations,meanwhilecollectingmoneyandrecruitingtroops,pendingthemomentwhenit would feel strong enough to punish the peasants for their audacity by “burning andscorching, plundering and murdering.” From that moment there began that systematicbetrayal,thatconsistentrecoursetoperfidiousnessandsecretmalice,whichdistinguishedthe nobility and the princes throughout the entire Peasant War, and which was theirstrongest weapon against decentralised peasants. The Suabian Union, comprising the


–57–

princes, the nobility, and the imperial cities of southwest Germany, tried conciliatorymeasures without guaranteeing the peasants real concessions. The latter continued theirmovement. HansMueller of Bulgenbachmarched, from September 30 to themiddle ofOctober, through theBlack Forest up toUrach and Furtwangen, increased his troops to3,500and tookapositionnearEratingen,not far fromStuehlingen.Thenobilityhadnomorethan1,700menattheirdisposal,andeventhoseweredivided.Ithadtoagreetoanarmistice,whichwasconcluded in thecampatEratingen.Thepeasantswerepromisedapeaceful agreement, either directly between the interested parties, or by means of anarbitrator,andaninvestigationofcomplaintsbythecourtatStockach.Thetroopsofboththenobilityandthepeasantsweredispersed.

Thepeasantsformulatedsixteenarticles,theacceptanceofwhichwastobedemandedofthecourtatStockach.Thearticleswereverymoderate.Theyincludedabolitionofthehuntingright,ofserflabour,ofexcessivetaxesandmasterprivilegesingeneral,protectionagainstwillfularrestsandagainstpartisancourts.Thepeasants’demandswentnofarther.

Nevertheless, immediately after the peasants went home, the nobility demandedcontinuation of all contested services pending the court decision. The peasants refused,advising the masters to go to the court. Thus the conflict was renewed, the peasantsreassembled,andtheprincesandmastersonceagainconcentratedtheir troops.This timethemovementspreadfarovertheBreisgauanddeepintoWuerttemberg.ThetroopsunderGeorg Truchsess of Waldburg, the Alba of the Peasant War, observed the peasants’movements,attackedindividualreinforcements,butdidnotdaretoattackthemainforce.Georg Truchsess negotiated with the peasant chiefs, and here and there he effectedagreements.

BytheendofDecember,proceedingsbeganbeforethecourtatStockach.Thepeasantsprotestedagainstthecourt,composedentirelyofnobles.Inreply,animperialedicttothiseffectwas read.Theproceedings lagged,while thenobility, theprinces and theSuabianUnionauthoritieswerearming themselves.ArchdukeFerdinandwhodominated,besideshereditary lands thenstillbelonging toAustria,alsoWuerttemberg, theBlackForestandSouthernAlsace,orderedthegreatestseverityagainsttherebelliouspeasants.Theyweretobe captured, mercilessly tortured and killed; they were to be exterminated in the mostexpeditiousmanner; their possessions to be burned and devastated, and theirwives andchildren driven from the land. It was in that way that the princes andmasters kept thearmistice,andthisiswhatpassedforamicablearbitrationandinvestigationofgrievances.ArchdukeFerdinand,towhomthehouseofWelserofAugsburgadvancedmoney,armedhimselfverycarefully.TheSuabianUnionorderedaspecialtax,andacontingentoftroopstobecalledinthreeinstallments.


–58–

Theforegoingrebellionscoincidedwiththefivemonths’presenceofThomasMuenzerintheHighland.Thoughtherearenodirectproofsofhisinfluenceovertheoutbreakandthecourseofthemovement,itis,nevertheless,indirectlyascertained.Themostoutspokenrevolutionaries among the peasants were mostly his disciples, defending his ideas. TheTwelveArticles,aswellastheLetterofArticlesoftheHighlandpeasants,wereascribedtohimbyallthecontemporaries,althoughthefirstwascertainlynotcomposedbyMuenzer.Already,onhiswaybacktoThuringia,heissuedadecisiverevolutionarymanifestototheinsurgentpeasants.

Duke Ulrich, who, since 1519, had been an exile from Wuerttemberg, was nowintriguingtoregainhislandwiththeaidofthepeasants.Sincethebeginningofhisexilebehad been trying to utilise the revolutionary party, and had supported it continuously. Inmostofthelocaldisturbancestakingplacebetween1520and1524intheBlackForestandin Wuerttemberg, his name appeared. Now he armed himself directly for an attack onWuerttembergtobelaunchedoutofhiscastle,Hohentweil.However,hewasonlyutilisedbythepeasantswithoutinfluencingthem,andwithoutenjoyingtheirconfidence.

Thewinter passedwithout anything decisive happening on either side. The princelymasterswereinhiding.Thepeasantrevoltwasgainingscope.InJanuary,1525,theentirecountrybetween theDanube, theRhine and theLech,was in a stateof fermentation. InFebruary, thestormbroke.While theBlackForestHegau troops,underHansMuellerofBulgenbach,wereconspiringwithUlrichofWuerttemberg,partlysharinghisfutilemarchonStuttgart(FebruaryandMarch,1525),thepeasantsaroseonFebruary9inRiedaboveUlm,assembledinacampnearBaltringenwhichwasprotectedbymarshes,hoistedtheredflag,andformed,undertheleadershipofUlrichSchmid,theBaltringenTroop.Theywere10,000to12,000strong.

On February 25, the Upper Allgaeu troops, 7,000 strong, assembled at Schussen,movedbytherumourthattroopsweremarchingagainstthedissatisfiedelementswhohadappearedinthislocalityaseverywhereelse.ThepeopleofKempten,whohadconductedafightagainsttheirarchbishopthroughoutthewinter,assembledonthe26thandjoinedthepeasants. The cities of Memmingen and Kaufbeuren joined the movement on certainconditions. The ambiguity of the position of the cities in this movement was alreadyapparent.OnMarch7,thetwelveMemmingenarticleswereproclaimedinMemmingenforallthepeasantsofUpperAllgaeu.

AmessagefromtheAllgaeupeasantsbroughtabouttheformationonLakeConstanceof theLakeTroopunderEitelHans.This troop also grew fast. Its headquarterswere inBermatingen.


–59–

The peasants also arose in Lower Allgaeu in the region of Ochsenbausen andSchellenberg, in the localitiesofZeilandWaldburg,andin theestatesofTruchsess.ThemovementstartedintheearlydaysofMarch.ThisLowerAllgaeuTroop,whichconsistedof7,000men,campednearWurzach.

All these troopsadopted theMemmingenarticles,which, itmustbenoted,werestillmore moderate than the Hegau articles, manifesting, as they did, a remarkable lack ofdeterminationinpointsrelatingtotheattitudeofthearmedtroopstowardsthenobilityandthe governments. Such determination, wherever manifested, appeared only in the laterstagesofthewar,whenthepeasantslearnedtoknowfromexperiencethemodeofactionoftheirenemies.

A sixth troopwas formed on theDanube, simultaneouslywith the others. From theentire region, Ulm to Donauwoerth, from the valleys of the Iller, Roth and Biber, thepeasants came toLeipheim, and opened camp there. From fifteen localities, every able-bodiedmanhadcome,whilereinforcementsweredrawnfrom117places.TheleaderoftheLeipheimTroopwasUlrichSchoen.ItspreacherwasJakobWehe,thepriestofLeipheim.

Thus, at the beginning of March, there were between 30,000 and 40,000 insurgentpeasants of Upper Suabia in six camps under arms. The peasant troops were aheterogeneous lot.Muenzer’s revolutionary partywas everywhere in theminority but itformedthebackboneofthepeasantcamps.Themassofthepeasantswerealwaysreadytoventurecompactswiththemasterswherevertheywerepromisedthoseconcessionswhichthey hoped to force upon their enemies by their menacing attitude. Moreover, as theuprisingdraggedonandtheprinces’armiesbegantoapproach,thepeasantsbecameweary.Mostofthosewhostillhadsomethingtolose,wenthome.Addedtoallthedifficultieswasthefactthatthevagabondmassesofthelowgradeproletariathadjoinedthetroops.Thismade disciplinemore difficult, and demoralised the peasants, as the vagabondswere anunreliable element, coming and going all the time. This, alone, is sufficient explanationwhy,atthebeginning,thepeasantsremainedeverywhereonthedefensive,whytheywerebecomingdemoralisedin theircamps,andwhy,asidefromtacticalshortcomingsandtherarityofgoodleaders,theycouldnotmatchthearmiesoftheprinces.

While the troops were assembling, Duke Ulrich invaded Wuerttemberg fromHohentweilwithrecruitedtroopsandanumberofHegaupeasants.Werethepeasantsnowto proceed from the other side, from Waldburg against Truchsess’ troops, the SuabianUnionwouldhavebeen lost.Butbecauseof thedefensiveattitudeof thepeasant troops,Truchsess soon succeeded in concluding an armisticewith those ofBaltringen,Allgaeu,andtheLake,startingnegotiationsandfixingadateforterminatingthewholeundertaking,


–60–

namely, JudicaSunday (April2). In themeantime,hewasable toproceedagainstDukeUlrich,tobesiegeStuttgart,compellinghimtoleaveWuerttembergasearlyasMarch17.Then he turned against the peasants, but theLansquenets revolted in his own army andrefused toproceedagainst thepeasants.Truchsesssucceeded inplacating thedisgruntledsoldiersandmovedtowardsUlm,wherenewreinforcementswerebeinggathered.HeleftanobservationpostatKerchiefunderthesupervisionofTeck.

At last theSuabianUnion,with freehands and in commandof the first contingents,threwoffitsmask,declaringitself“tobeready,witharmsinhandandwiththeaidofGod,tochangethatwhichthepeasantswilfullyventured.”

Thepeasantsadheredstrictlytothearmistice.OnJudicaSundaytheysubmittedtheirdemands,thefamousTwelveArticles,forconsideration.Theydemandedtheelectionandremoval of clergymen by the communities; the abolition of the small tithe and theutilisationof the large tithe,after subtractionof thepriests’ salaries, forpublicpurposes;theabolitionofserfdom,offishingandhuntingrights,andofdeathtolls;thelimitationofexcessive bonded labour, taxes and ground rents; the restitution of the forests,meadowsand privileges forcibly withdrawn from the communities and individuals, and theelimination of willfulness in the courts and the administration. It is obvious that themoderate conciliatory section still had the upper hand among the peasant troops. Therevolutionarypartyhadformulateditsprogrammeearlier, intheLetterofArticles.Itwasanopen letter toall thepeasantry, admonishing them to join“theChristianAllianceandBrotherhood” for the purpose of removing all burdens either by goodness, “which willhardly happen,” or by force, and threatening all those who refuse to join with the “layanathema,” that is, with expulsion from the society and from any intercourse with theUnionmembers.Allcastles,monasteriesandpriests’endowmentswerealso,accordingtotheLetter,tobeplacedunderlayanathemaunlessthenobility,thepriestsandthemonksrelinquishedthemoftheirownaccord,movedintoordinaryhouseslikeotherpeople,andjoinedtheChristianAlliance.Weseethatthisradicalmanifestowhichobviouslyhadbeencomposed before the Spring insurrection of 1525, deals in the first place with therevolution,withcompletevictoryovertherulingclasses,andthatthe“layanathema”onlydesignatesthoseoppressorsandtraitors thatweretobekilled, thecastlesthatweretobeburned,andthemonasteriesandendowmentsthatweretobeconfiscated,theirjewelstobeturnedintocash.

BeforethepeasantssucceededinpresentingtheirTwelveArticlestothepropercourtsofarbitration,theylearnedthattheagreementhadbeenbrokenbytheSuabianUnionandthatitstroopswereapproaching.Stepsweretakenimmediatelybythepeasants.Ageneralmeeting of allAllgaeu,Baltringen andLake peasantswas held atGeisbeuren. The four


–61–

divisions were combined and reorganised into four columns. A decision was made toconfiscatethechurchestates,toselltheirjewelsinfavourofthewarchest,andtoburnthecastles.Thus,asidefromtheofficialTwelveArticles,theLetteroftheArticlesbecametherule ofwarfare, and JudicaSunday, designated for the conclusion of peace negotiations,becamethedateofgeneraluprising.

Thegrowingagitation everywhere, the continued local conflicts of thepeasantswiththenobility,thenewsofagrowingrevoltintheBlackForestfortheprecedingsixmonthsand of its spread up to the Danube and the Lech, are sufficient to explain the rapidsuccessionofpeasantrevoltsintwo-thirdsofGermany.Thefact,however,thatthepartialrevoltstookplacesimultaneously,provesthatthereweremenattheheadofthemovementwhohadorganiseditthroughAnabaptistsandotheremissaries.AlreadyinthesecondhalfofMarch,disordersbrokeoutinWuerttemberg,inthelowerregionsoftheNeckarandtheOdenwald, and in Upper and Middle Franconia. April 2, Judica Sunday, however, hadalready been named everywhere as the day of the general uprising, and everywhere thedecisiveblow,therevoltofthemasses,fellinthefirstweekofApril.TheAllgaeu,Hegauand Lake peasants sounded the alarm bells on April 1, calling into the camp a massmeeting of all able-bodied men, and together with the Baltringen peasants, theyimmediatelyopenedhostilitiesagainstthecastlesandmonasteries.

In Franconia,where themovementwas grouped around six centres, the insurrectionbrokeouteverywhere in the firstdaysofApril. InNoerdlingen twopeasantcampswereformedaboutthattime,andtherevolutionarypartyofthecityunderAntonForner,aidedby the peasants, gained the upper hand, appointing Forner theMayor, and completing aunionbetween thecityand thepeasants. In the regionofAnspach, thepeasants revoltedeverywherebetweenApril1and7,andfromheretherevoltsspreadasfarasBavaria.IntheregionofRottenburg,thepeasantswerealreadyunderarmsonMarch22.InthecityofRottenburg the rule of the honourables was overthrown by the lower middle-class andplebeiansunderStephanofMenzingen,butsincethepeasantdueswerethechiefsourceofrevenueforthecity,thenewgovernmentwasabletomaintainavacillatingandequivocalattitude towards the peasants. In the Grand Chapter of Wurzburg there was a generaluprising,earlyinApril,ofthepeasantsandthesmallcities.InthebishopricofBamberg,ageneral insurrectioncompelled thebishop toyieldwithin fivedays. In theNorth,on theborderofThuringia,thestrongBildhausenPeasantCampwasorganised.

IntheOdenwald,whereWendelHipler,anobleandformerchancelloroftheCountofHohenlohe, andGeorgMetzler, an innkeeper atBallenberg nearKrautheim,were at theheadof therevolutionaryparty, thestormbrokeoutonMarch26.Thepeasantsmarchedfrom all directions towards the Tauber. Two thousand men from the Rottenburg camp


–62–

joined.GeorgMetzlertookcommand,andhavingreceivedallreinforcements,marchedonApril4tothemonasteryofSchoenthalontheJaxt,wherehewasjoinedbythepeasantsoftheNeckarvalley.Thelatter,ledbyJaeckleinRohrbach,aninnkeeperatBoeckingennearHeilbronn, had proclaimed, on Judica Sunday, the insurrection in Flein, Southeim, etc.,while, simultaneously,WendelHipler,withanumberofconspirators, tookOehringenbysurprise and drew the surrounding peasants into the movement. In Schoenthal, the twopeasant columns, combined into the Gay Troop, accepted the Twelve Articles, andorganisedexpeditionsagainstthecastlesandmonasteries.TheGayTroopwasabout8,000strong,andpossessedcannon,aswellas3,000guns.FlorianGeyer,aFranconianknight,alsojoinedthetroopandformedtheBlackHost,aselectdivisionwhichhadbeenrecruitedmainlyfromtheRottenburgandOehringeninfantry.

TheWuerttembergmagistrateinNeckarsulm,CountLudwigvonHelfenstein,openedhostilities. Without much ado, he ordered all peasants that fell into his hands to beexecuted. The Gay Troop marched against him. The peasants were embittered by themassacres as well as by news of the defeat of the Leipheim Troop, of Jakob Wehe’sexecution,andtheTruchsessatrocities.VonHelfenstein,whohadprecipitouslymovedintoWeinsberg,wasthereattacked.ThecastlewasstormedbyFlorianGeyer.Thecitywaswonafteraprolongedstruggle,andCountLudwigwastakenprisoner,aswereseveralknights.On the following day, April 17, Jaecklein Rohrbach, together with the most resolutemembersof the troop,held courtover theprisoners, andordered fourteenof them,withvonHelfensteinat thehead, torunthegauntlet, thisbeingthemosthumiliatingdeathhecould invent for them.ThecaptureofWeinsbergand the terroristic revengeof Jaeckleinagainst von Helfenstein, did not fail to influence the nobility. Count von Loebensteinjoined the Peasant Alliance. The Counts von Hohenlohe, who had joined previouslywithoutofferinganyaid,immediatelysentthedesiredcannonandpowder.

The chiefs debated among themselves whether they should not make Goetz vonBerlichingen their commander “sincebe couldbring to them thenobility.”Theproposalfoundsympathy,butFlorianGeyer,whosawinthismoodofthepeasantsandtheirchiefsthe beginning of reaction, seceded from the troop, and together with his Black Host,marched first through the Neckar Region, then the Wuerzburg territory, everywheredestroyingcastlesandpriests’nests.

TheremainderofthetroopmarchedfirsttowardsHeilbronn.Inthispowerfulandfreeimperialcity, thepatriciatewasconfronted,asalmosteverywhere,byamiddle-classandrevolutionary opposition. The latter, in secret agreement with the peasants, opened thegatesbeforeG.Metzler and JaeckleinRohrbach,onApril17, in thecourseof ageneraldisturbance.Thepeasantchiefswiththeirpeopletookpossessionofthecity.Theyaccepted


–63–

membership in thebrotherhood, anddelivered12,000guilders inmoney and a squadofvolunteers.OnlythepossessionsoftheclergyandtheTeutonicOrderwerepillaged.Onthe22nd,thepeasantsmovedaway,leavingasmallgarrison.Heilbronnwasdesignatedasthecentre of the various troops, the latter actually sending delegates and conferring overcommonactionsandcommondemandsof thepeasantry.But themiddle-classoppositionand thehonourableswhohad joined themafter thepeasant invasion, regained theupperhandinthecity,preventingitfromtakingdecisivestepsandonlywaitingfortheapproachoftheprinces’troopsinordertobetraythepeasantsdefinitely.

ThepeasantsmarchedtowardtheOdenwald.GoetzvonBerlichingenwho,afewdaysprevious, had offered himself to theGrand Elector Palatine, then to the peasantry, thenagain to theGrandElector,was compelledonApril 24 to join theEvangelistFraternity,andtotakeoverthesupremecommandoftheGayBrightTroop(incontrasttotheBlackTroopofFlorianGeyer).Atthesametime,however,hewastheprisonerof thepeasantswho mistrusted him and bound him to a council of chiefs without whom he couldundertake nothing. Goetz and Metzler moved with a mass of peasants over Buchen toArmorbach,wheretheyremainedfromApril30,untilMay5,arousingtheentireregionoftheMain.Thenobilitywaseverywherecompelledtojoin,andthusitscastleswerespared.Only the monasteries were burned and pillaged. The troops had obviously becomedemoralised. The most energetic men were away, either under Florian Geyer or underJaeckleinRohrbach,who,after thecaptureofHeilbronn,alsoseparatedhimself fromthetroops, apparently because he, judge of Count vonHelfenstein, could no longer remainwithabodywhichwasinfavourofreconciliationwiththenobility.Thisinsistenceonanunderstandingwiththenobilitywasinitselfasignofdemoralisation.Later,WendelHiplerproposed a very fitting reorganisation of the troops.He suggested that the Lansquenets,whoofferedthemselvesdaily,shouldbedrawnintotheservice,andthatthetroopsshouldno longerbe renewedmonthlybyassemblingfreshcontingentsanddismissingoldones,butthatthoseofthemwhohadreceivedmoreorlessmilitarytrainingshouldberetained.The community assembly rejected both proposals. The peasants had become arrogant,viewingtheentirewarasnothingbutapillage.Theywantedtobefreetogohomeassoonastheirpocketswerefull,butthecompetitionoftheLansquenetspromisedthemlittle.InAmorbach,itwentsofarthatHansBerlin,amemberofthecouncilofHeilbronn,inducedthechiefsandthecouncilsofthetroopstoaccepttheDeclarationoftheTwelveArticles,adocumentwhereintheremainingsharpedgesoftheTwelveArticleswereremoved,andinwhich, a languageofhumble supplicationwasput into themouthsof thepeasants.Thiswas too much for the peasants, who rejected the Declaration under great tumult, andinsistedontheretentionoftheoriginalArticles.


–64–

In themeantime,adecisivechangehad takenplace in the regionofWuerzburg.Thebishop who, after the first uprising early in April, had withdrawn to the fortifiedFrauenbergnearWuerzburg,fromtheretosendunsuccessfullettersinalldirectionsaskingfor aid, was finally compelled to make temporary concessions. OnMay 2, a Diet wasopenedwiththepeasantsrepresented,butbeforeanyresultscouldbeachieved,letterswereintercepted which proved the bishop’s traitorous machinations. The Diet immediatelydispersed, and hostilities broke out anew between the insurgent city inhabitants and thepeasantsononehand,andthebishop’sforcesontheother.ThebishopfledtoHeidelbergonMay 5, and on the following day FlorianGeyer, with the Black Troop, appeared inWuerzburgandwithhimtheFranconianTauberTroopwhichconsistedofthepeasantsofMergentheim,RottenburgandAnspach.OnMay7,GoetzvonBerlichingenwithhisGayBrightTroopcame,andthesiegeofFrauenbergbegan.

InthevicinityofLimpurgandintheregionofEllwangenandHall,anothercontingentwas formed by the end of March and the beginning of April, that of Gaildorf or theCommonGay Troop. Its actionswere very violent. It aroused the entire region, burnedmany monasteries and castles, including the castle of Hohenstaufen, compelled all thepeasantstojoinit,andcompelledallnobles,eventhecup-bearersofLimpurg,toentertheChristianAlliance.EarlyinMayitinvadedWuerttemberg,butwaspersuadedtowithdraw.TheseparatismoftheGermansystemofsmallstatesstoodthen,asin1848,inthewayofacommonactionof therevolutionariesof thevariousstate territories.TheGaildorfTroop,limitedtoasmallarea,wasnaturallyboundtodispersewhenallresistancewithinthatareawasbroken.ThemembersofthistroopconcludedanagreementwiththecityofGmuend,andleavingonly500underarms,theywenthome.

InthePalatinate,peasanttroopswereformedoneitherbankoftheRhinebytheendofApril.Theydestroyedmanycastlesandmonasteries,andonMay1theytookNeustadtontheHardt.TheBruchrainpeasants,whoappearedin thisregion,hadonthepreviousdayforcedSpeyertoconcludeanagreement.TheMarshalofZabern,withthefewtroopsoftheElector, was powerless against them, and on May 10 the Elector was compelled toconcludeanagreementwiththepeasants,guaranteeingthemaredressoftheirgrievances,tobeeffectedbyaDiet.

In Wuerttemberg the revolt had occurred early in separate localities. As early asFebruary,thepeasantsoftheUrachAlpformedaunionagainstthepriestsandmasters,andby the end of March the peasants of Blaubeuer, Urach, Muensingen, Balingen andRosenfeld revolted. The Wuerttemberg region was invaded by the Gaildorf Troop atGoeppingen, by Jaecklein Rohrbach at Brackenheim, and by the remnants of thevanquished Leipheim Troop at Pfuelingen. All these newcomers aroused the rural


–65–

population.Therewerealsoseriousdisturbancesinotherlocalities.OnApril6,Pfuelingencapitulatedbefore thepeasants.Thegovernmentof theAustrianArchdukewas inaverydifficultsituation.Ithadnomoneyandbutfewtroops.Thecitiesandcastleswereinabadcondition, lacking garrisons or munitions, and even Asperg was practically defenseless.The attemptof thegovernment to call out city reserves against thepeasants, decided itstemporarydefeat.OnApril16thereservesofthecityofBottwarrefusedtoobeyorders,marching, instead of to Stuttgart, toWunnenstein near Bottwar, where they formed thenucleusofacampofmiddle-classpeopleandpeasants,andaddedothernumbersrapidly.On the sameday the rebellionbrokeout inZabergau.ThemonasteryofMaulbronnwaspillaged,andanumberofmonasteriesandcastleswereruined.TheGaeupeasantsreceivedreinforcementsfromtheneighbouringBruchrain.

The command of the Wunnenstein Troop was taken by Matern Feuerbacher, acouncillor of the city of Bottwar, one of the leaders of the middle-class oppositioncompromisedenoughtobecompelledtojointhepeasants.Inspiteofhisnewaffiliations,however,heremainedverymoderate,prohibitingtheapplicationoftheLetterofArticlestothe castles, and seekingeverywhere to reconcile thepeasantswith themoderatemiddle-class.Hepreventedtheamalgamationof theWuerttembergpeasantswith theGayBrightTroop, and afterwards he also persuaded the Gaildorf Troop to withdraw fromWuerttemberg.OnApril19hewasdeposedinconsequenceofhismiddle-classtendencies,but the next day hewas againmade commander.Hewas indispensable, and evenwhenJaeckleinRohrbachcame,onApril22,with200ofhisassociatestojointheWuerttembergpeasants,hecoulddonothingbutleaveFeuerbacherinhisplaceofcommander,confininghimselftorigidsupervisionofhisactions.

On April 18, the government attempted to negotiate with the peasants stationed atWunnenstein.Thepeasants insisteduponacceptanceof theTwelveArticles, but this thegovernment’srepresentativesrefusedtodo.Thetroopnowproceededtoact.OnApril20,it reached Laufen, where, for the last time, it rejected the offers of the governmentdelegates.OnApril22, the troops,numbering6,000,appeared inBietighein, threateningStuttgart.Most of the city council had fled, and a citizens’ committeewasplaced at thehead of the administration. The citizenry here was divided, as elsewhere, between thepartiesofthehonourables,themiddle-classopposition,andtherevolutionaryplebeians.OnApril 25, the latter opened the gates for the peasants, and Stuttgart was immediatelygarrisoned by them. Here the organisation of the Gay Christian Troop (as theWuerttemberginsurgentscalledthemselves)wasperfected,andrulesandregulationswereestablished for remuneration, division of booty and alimentation. A detachment ofStuttgarters,underTheusGerber,joinedthetroops.


–66–

OnApril29,FeuerbacherwithallhismenmarchedagainsttheGaildorftroops,whichhad entered theWuerttemberg region at Schorndorf. He drew the entire region into hisallianceandthuspersuadedtheGaildorftroopstowithdraw.Inthisway,hepreventedtherevolutionary elements of his men under Rohrbach from combining with the recklesstroopsofGaildorfandthusreceivingadangerousreinforcement.HavingbeeninformedofTruchsess’ approach, he left Schorndorf to meet him, and on May 1 encamped nearKerchiefunderTeck.

WehavethustracedtheoriginandthedevelopmentoftheinsurrectioninthatportionofGermanywhichmustbe considered the territoryof the first groupofpeasant armies.Beforeweproceedtotheothergroups(ThuringiaandHesse,Alsace,AustriaandtheAlps)wemustgiveanaccountofthemilitaryoperationsofTruchsess,inwhichhe,aloneatthebeginning, later supported by various princes and cities, annihilated the first group ofinsurgents.WeleftTruchsessnearUlm,wherehecamebytheendofMarch,havingleftanobservation corps under Teck, under the command of Dietrich Spaet. Truchsess’ corpswhichtogetherwiththeUnionreinforcementsconcentratedinUlmcountedhardly10,000,amongthem7,200infantrymen,wastheonlyarmyathisdisposalcapableofanoffensiveagainst the peasants. Reinforcements came to Ulm very slowly, due in part to thedifficultiesofrecruitingininsurgentlocalities,inparttothelackofmoneyinthehandsofthe government, and also to the fact that the few available troops were everywhereindispensableforgarrisoningthefortressesandthecastles.Wehavealreadyobservedwhatasmallnumberoftroopswereatthedisposaloftheprincesandcitiesthatdidnotbelongto the SuabianUnion. Everything depended upon the successeswhichGeorg Truchsesswithhisunionarmywouldscore.

TruchsessturnedfirstagainsttheBaltringentroopswhich,inthemeantime,hadbegunto destroy castles and monasteries in the vicinity of Ried. The peasants who, with theapproachof theUnion troopswithdrew intoRied,weredrivenoutof themarshesbyanenveloping movement, crossed the Danube and ran into the ravines and forests of theSuabianAlps.Inthisregion,wherecannonandcavalry,themainsourceofstrengthoftheUnionarmy,wereoflittleavail,Truchsessdidnotpursuethemfurther.Hemarchedinsteadagainst theLeipheim troopswhichnumbered5,000men stationedatLeipheim,4,000 inthe valley of Mindel, and 6,000 at Illertissen, and was arousing the entire region,destroying monasteries and castles, and preparing to march against Ulm with its threecolumns. It seems that a certain demoralisation had set in among the peasants of thisdivision,which had undermined theirmilitarymorale, for JakobWehe tried at the verybeginning to negotiate with Truchsess. The latter, however, now backed by sufficientmilitarypower,declinednegotiations,andonApril4attackedthemaintroopsatLeipheim


–67–

and entirely disrupted them. Jakob Wehe and Ulrich Schoen, together with two otherpeasant leaders, were captured and beheaded. Leipheim capitulated, and after a fewmarchesthroughthesurroundingcountry,theentireregionwassubdued.

Anew rebellion of theLansquenets, caused by a demand for plunder and additionalremuneration, again stopped Truchsess’ activities until April 10, when he marchedsouthwest against the Baltringen Troopwhich in themeantime had invaded his estates,Waldburg,Zeil andWolfegg, andbesiegedhis castles.Here, also, he found thepeasantsdisunited,anddefeatedthem,onApril11and12,oneaftertheother,invariousencounterswhich completely disrupted the Baltringen troops. Its remnants withdrew under thecommandofthepriestFlorian,andjoinedtheLaketroops.Truchsessnowturnedagainstthelatter.TheLaketroopswhichinthemeantimehadmadenotonlymilitarymarchesbuthadalsodrawnthecitiesBuchhorn(Friedrichshafen)andWollmatingenintothefraternity,held,onApril13,abigmilitarycouncilinthemonasteryofSalem,anddecidedtomoveagainst Truchsess. Alarm bells were sounded and 10,000 men, joined by the defeatedremnants of theBaltringen troops, assembled in the camp ofBermatingen.OnApril 15theystoodtheirowninacombatwithTruchsess,whodidnotwishtoriskhisarmyinadecisivebattle,preferringtonegotiate,themoresosincehereceivednewsoftheapproachoftheAllgaeuandHegautroops.OnApril17,inWeingarten,heconcludedanagreementwiththeLakeandBaltringenpeasantswhichseemedquitefavourabletothem,andwhichthey acceptedwithout suspicion.He also induced thedelegatesof theUpper andLowerAllgaeupeasantstoaccepttheagreement,andthenmovedtowardsWuerttemberg.

Truchsess’cunningsavedhimherefromcertainruin.Hadhenotsucceededinfoolingtheweak,limited,forthemostpartdemoralisedpeasantsandtheirusuallyincapable,timidandvenalleaders,hewouldhavebeenclosedinwithhissmallarmybetweenfourcolumnsnumbering at least from 25,000 to 30,000 men, and would have perished. It was thenarrow-mindednessofhisenemies,alwaysinevitableamongthepeasantmasses,thatmadeitpossibleforhimtodisposeofthemattheverymomentwhen,withoneblow,theycouldhave ended the entirewar, at least as far as Suabia andFranconiawere concerned.TheLakepeasantsadhered to theagreement,whichfinally turnedout tobe theirundoing,sorigidlythattheylatertookuparmsagainsttheirallies,theHegaupeasants.Andalthoughthe Allgaeu peasants, involved in the betrayal by their leaders, soon renounced theagreement,Truchsesswasthenoutdanger.

TheHegau peasants, though not included in theWeingarten agreement, gave a newexampleoftheappallingnarrow-mindednessandthestubbornprovincialismwhichruinedtheentirePeasantWar.When,afterunsuccessfulnegotiationswiththem,Truchsess,movedtowardsWuerttemberg, they followed him, continually pressing his flank, but it did not


–68–

occurtothemtounitewiththeWuerttembergGayChristianTroop,becausepreviouslythepeasantsofWuerttembergandtheNeckarvalleyrefusedtocometotheirassistance.WhenTruchsess hadmoved far enough from their home country, they returned peacefully andmarchedtoFreiburg.

We left the Wuerttemberg peasants under the command of Matern Feuerbacher atKerchiefbelowTeck,fromwheretheobservationcorpsleftbyTruchsesshadwithdrawntowardsUrachunderthecommandofDietrichSpaet.AfteranunsuccessfulattempttotakeUrach, Feuerbacher turned towards Nuertingen, sending letters to all neighbouringinsurgent troops, calling reinforcements for the decisive battle. ConsiderablereinforcementsactuallycamefromtheWuerttemberglowlandsaswellasfromGaeu.TheGaeupeasantshadgroupedthemselvesaroundtheremnantsoftheLeipheimTroopwhichhadwithdrawntoWestWuerttemberg,andtheyarousedtheentirevalleysofNeckarandNagoldt up to Boetlingen and Leonberg. ThoseGaeu peasants, onMay 5, came in twostrong columns to join Feuerbacher at Nuertingen. Truchsess met the united troops atBoetlingen. Their number, their cannon and their position perplexed him. As usual, hestartednegotiationsandconcludedanarmisticewith thepeasants.Butassoonashehadthussecuredhisposition,heattackedthemonMay12duringthearmistice,andforcedadecisivebattleupon them.Thepeasantsoffereda longandbrave resistanceuntil finallyBoetlingenwassurrenderedtoTruchsessowingtothebetrayalofthemiddle-class.Theleftwingof thepeasants,deprivedof itsbaseofsupport,wasforcedbackandencompassed.Thisdecided thebattle.Theundisciplinedpeasantswere thrown intodisorder and, later,into awild flight, those thatwere not killed or captured by the horsemen of theUnionthrew away their weapons andwent home. The Bright Christian Troop, andwith it theentireWuerttemberg insurrectionwasgone.TheusGerber fled toEsslingen,Feuerbacherfled to Switzerland, Jaecklein Rohrbach was captured and dragged in chains toNeckargartach,whereTruchsess ordered him chained to a post, surrounded by firewoodand roasted to death on a slow fire,while he, feastingwith horsemen, gloated over thisnoblespectacle.

FromNeckargartach,Truchsess gave aid to theoperationsof theElectorPalatinebyinvading Kraichgau. Having received word of Truchsess’ successes, the Elector, whomeanwhile had gathered troops, immediately broke his agreement with the peasants,attacked Bruchrain on May 23, captured and burned Malsch after vigorous resistance,pillaged a number of villages, and garrisoned Bruchsal. At the same time TruchsessattackedEppingenandcaptured thechiefof the localmovement,AntonEisenhut,whomthe Elector immediately executed with a dozen other peasant leaders. Bruchrain andKraichgau were thus subjugated and compelled to pay an indemnity of about 40,000


–69–

guilders.Botharmies,thatofTruchsessnowreducedto6,000meninconsequenceofthepreceding battles, and that of the Elector (6,500 men), united and moved towards theOdenwald.

WordoftheBoetlingendefeatspreadterroreverywhereamongtheinsurgents.Thefreeimperialcitieswhichhadcomeundertheheavyhandofthepeasants,sighedinrelief.ThecityofHeilbronnwasthefirsttotakestepstowardsreconciliationwiththeSuabianUnion.Heilbronnwastheseatofthepeasants’mainofficeandthatofthedelegatesofthevarioustroopswhodeliberatedovertheproposalstobemadetotheemperorandtheempireinthenameofall theinsurgentpeasants.In thesenegotiationswhichwereto laydowngeneralrules for all of Germany, it again became apparent that none of the existing estates,including thepeasants,wasdevelopedsufficiently tobeable to reconstruct thewholeofGermanyaccording to itsownviewpoint. Itbecameobvious that toaccomplish this, thesupport of the peasantry and particularly of the middle-class must be gained. Inconsequence,WendelHiplertookovertheconductofthenegotiations.Ofalltheleadersofthemovement,WendelHipler had the best understanding of the existing conditions.Hewasnota far-seeing revolutionaryofMuenzer’s type;hewasnota representativeof thepeasants as were Metzler or Rohrbach; his many-sided experiences, his practicalknowledgeof thepositionof thevarious estates towards eachotherpreventedhim fromrepresentingoneoftheestatesengagedinthemovementinoppositiontotheother.JustasMuenzer,arepresentativeof thebeginningsof theproletariat thenoutsideof theexistingofficial organisation of society, was driven to the anticipation of communism, WendelHipler, the representative, as it were, of the average of all progressive elements of thenation,anticipatedmodernbourgeoissociety.Theprinciplesthathedefended,thedemandsthatheformulated,thoughnotimmediatelypossible,werethesomewhatidealised,logicalresultofthedissolutionoffeudalsociety.Insofarasthepeasantsagreedtoproposelawsfor the whole empire, they were compelled to accept Hipler’s principles and demands.Centralisation demanded by the peasants thus assumed, in Heilbronn, a definite form,which,however,wasworldsawayfromtheideasofthepeasantsthemselvesonthesubject.Centralisation,forinstance,wasmoreclearlydefinedinthedemandsfortheestablishmentof uniform coins, measures and weights, for the abolition of internal customs, etc., indemands,thatistosay,whichweremuchmoreintheinterestsofthecitymiddle-classthanintheinterestsofthepeasants.Concessionsmadetothenobilitywereacertainapproachtothemodernsystemof redemptionandaimed, finally, to transformfeudal landownershipintobourgeoisownership.Inaword,sofarasthedemandsofthepeasantswerecombinedinto a system of “imperial reform,” they did not express the temporary demands of thepeasantsbutbecamesubordinatetothegeneralinterestsofthemiddle-classasawhole.


–70–

WhilethisreformoftheempirewasstillbeingdebatedinHeilbronn,theauthoroftheDeclarationoftheTwelveArticles,HansBerlin,wasalreadyonhiswaytomeetTruchsess,to negotiate in the name of the honourables, the middle-class and the citizenry on thesurrenderof thecity.Reactionarymovementswithinthecitysupportedthisbetrayal,andWendelHiplerwasobligedtoflee,aswerethepeasants.HewenttoWeinsbergwherebeattempted to assemble the remnants of theWuerttemberg peasants and those few of theGaildorf troopswhich could bemobilised. The approach of the Elector Palatine and ofTruchsess,however,drovehimoutofthereandhewascompelledtogotoWuerzburgtocausetheGayBrightTrooptoresumeoperations.Inthemeantime,thearmiesoftheUnionand the Elector subdued theNeckar region, compelled the peasants to take a new oath,burnedmanyvillages,andstabbedorhangedallfleeingpeasantsthatfellintotheirhands.ToavengetheexecutionofHelfenstein,Weinsbergwasburned.

The troops thatwereassembled in frontofWuerzburghad in themeantimebesiegedFrauenberg. On May 15, before a gap was made by their fusillade, they bravely butunsuccessfully attempted to storm the fortress. Four hundredof the bestmen,mostly ofFlorianGeyser’shost,remainedintheditches,deadorwounded.Twodayslater,May17,Wendel Hipler appeared and ordered a military council. He proposed to leave atFrauenbergonly4,000menandtoplacethemainforce,about20,000men, inacampatKrautheimontheJaxt,beforetheveryeyesofTruchsess,sothatallreinforcementsmightbeassembledthere.Theplanwasexcellent.Onlybykeepingthemassestogether,andbyanumerical superiority, could one hope to defeat the army of the princes which nownumbered about 13,000 men. The demoralisation and discouragement of the peasants,however,hadgonetoofartomakeanyenergeticactionpossible.GoetzvonBerlichingen,whosoonafterwardsopenlyappearedasatraitor,mayhavehelpedtoholdthetroopback.ThusHipler’splanwasneverputintoaction;thetroopsweredividedasever,andonlyonMay23didtheGayBrightTroopstartactionaftertheFranconianshadpromisedtofollowquickly.OnMay26,thedetachmentsoftheMargraveofAnspach,locatedinWuerzburg,werecalled,duetothewordthattheMargravehadopenedhostilitiesagainstthepeasants.The rest of the besieging army, with Florian Geyser’s Black Troop, took position atHeidingsfeldnotfarfromWuerzburg.

TheGayBrightTrooparrivedonMay24inKrautheiminaconditionfarfromgood.ManypeasantslearnedthatintheirabsencetheirvillageshadtakentheoathatTruchsess’behest, and this they used as a pretext to go home. The troops moved further toNeckarsulm, and on May 28 started negotiations with Truchsess. At the same timemessengersweresenttothepeasantsofFranconia,AlsaceandBlackForest–Hegau,withthedemandtohurryreinforcements.FromNeckarsulmGoetzmarchedtowardsOehringen.


–71–

The troopsmelted fromday today.GoetzvonBerlichingenalsodisappearedduring themarch. He rode home, having previously negotiated with Truchsess through his oldbrother-in-arms,DietrichSpaet,concerninghisgoingovertotheotherside.InOehringen,afalserumouroftheenemyapproachingthrewthehelplessanddiscouragedmassintoapanic. The troopwas rapidly disintegrating, and it was with difficulty thatMetzler andWendel Hipler succeeded in keeping together about 2,000 men, whom they again ledtowardsKrautheim.Inthemeantime,theFranconianarmy,5,000strong,hadcome,butinconsequence of a side march over Loewenstein towards Oehringen, ordered by Goetzapparently with treacherous intentions, it missed the Gay Troop and moved towardsNeckarsulm. This small town, defended by a detachment of theGayBright Troop,wasbesieged byTruchsess.TheFranconians arrived at night and saw the fires of theUnionarmy,buttheirleadershadnotthecouragetobraveanattack.TheyretreatedtoKrautheim,where they at last found the remainder of the Gay Bright Troop. Receiving no aid,Neckarsulmsurrenderedon the29th to theUnion troops.Truchsess immediatelyordered13 peasants executed, andwent tomeet the troop, burning, pillaging andmurdering allalongthewaythroughthevalleysofNeckar,KocherandJaxt.Heapsofruinsandbodiesofpeasantshangingontreesmarkedhismarch.

AtKrautheimtheUnionarmymet thepeasantswho, forcedbya flankmovementofTruchsess, had withdrawn towards Koenigshofen on the Tauber. Here they took theirposition,8,000innumber,with32cannon.Truchsessapproachedthem,hiddenbehindhillsandforests.Hesentoutcolumns toenvelop them,andonJune2,heattacked themwithsuchasuperiorityof forcesandenergy that inspiteof thestubborn resistanceofseveralcolumns lasting into the night, they were defeated and dispersed. As everywhere, thehorsemenoftheUnion,“thepeasants’death,”weremainlyinstrumentalinannihilatingtheinsurgentarmy,throwingthemselvesonthepeasants,whowereshakenbyartillerygunfireand lance attacks, disrupting their ranks completely, and killing individual fighters. ThekindofwarfareconductedbyTruchsessandhishorsemenismanifestedinthefateof300Koenigshof middle-class men united with the peasant army. During the battle, all butfifteenwerekilled,andoftheseremainingfifteen,fourweresubsequentlydecapitated.

Having thuscompletedhisvictoryover thepeasantsofOdenwald, theNeckarvalleyand lower Franconia, Truchsess subdued the entire region by means of punitiveexpeditions, burning entire villages and causing numberless executions. From there hemovedtowardsWuerzburg.OnhiswayhelearnedthatthesecondFranconiantroopsunderthecommandofFlorianGeyerandGregorvonBurg-BernsheimwasstationedatSulzdorf.Heimmediatelymovedagainstthem.

FlorianGeyer,who,aftertheunsuccessfulattemptatstormingFrauenberg,haddevoted


–72–

himselfmainlytonegotiationswiththeprincesandthecities,especiallywithRottenburgandMargraveCasimirofAnspach,urgingthemtojointhepeasantfraternity,wassuddenlyrecalled in consequence ofword of theKoenigshofen defeat.His troopswere joined bythose ofAnspach under the command ofGregor vonBurg-Bernsheim.The latter troopshad been only recently formed. Margrave Casimir had managed, in true Hohenzollernstyle,tokeepincheckthepeasantrevoltinhisregion,partlybypromisesandpartlybythethreatofamassingtroops.HemaintainedcompleteneutralitytowardsalloutsidetroopsaslongastheydidnotincludeAnspachsubjects.Hetriedtodirectthehatredofthepeasantsmainly towards the church endowments, through the ultimate confiscation of which hehopedtoenrichhimself.AssoonashereceivedwordoftheBoetlingenbattle,heopenedhostilitiesagainsthisrebelliouspeasants,pillagingandburningtheirvillages,andhangingorotherwisekillingmanyofthem.Thepeasants,however,quicklyassembled,andunderthecommandofGregorvonBurg-BernsheimdefeatedhimatWindsheim,May29.Whiletheywerestillpursuinghim,thecallofthehard-pressedOdenwaldpeasantsreachedthem,and they turned towardsHeidingsfeld and from therewithFlorianGeyer, again towardsWuerzburg(June2).StillwithoutwordfromtheOdenwald,theyleft5,000peasantsthere,andwiththeremaining4,000–manyhadrunaway–theyfollowedtheothers.Reassuredby false rumours of the outcome of the Koenigshofen battle, they were attacked byTruchsess atSulzdorf andcompletelydefeated.Thehorsemenand servantsofTruchsessperpetrated, asusual, a terriblemassacre.FlorianGeyerkept the remainderofhisBlackTroop,600innumber,andbattledhiswaythroughthevillageofIngolstadt.Heplaced200meninthechurchandcemeteryand400inthecastle.HehadbeenpursuedbytheElectorPalatine’sforces,ofwhomacolumnof1,200mencapturedthevillageandsetfiretothechurch.Thosewhodidnotperishintheflameswereslaughtered.TheElector’stroopsthenfiredonthecastle,madeagapintheancientwall,andattemptedtostormit.Twicebeatenbackbythepeasantswhostoodhiddenbehindaninternalwall,theyshotthewalltopieces,and attempted a third storming, which was successful. Half of Geyser’s men weremassacred;with the other 200 hemanaged to escape. Their hiding place, however,wasdiscovered the followingday (Whit-Monday).TheElectorPalatine’s soldiers surroundedthewoodsinwhichtheylayhidden,andslaughteredallthemen.Onlyseventeenprisonersweretakenduringthosetwodays.FlorianGeyeragainfoughthiswaythroughwithafewof his most intrepid fighters and turned towards the Gaildorf peasants, who had againassembled in a body of about 7,000 men. Upon his arrival, he found them mostlydispersed, in consequence of crushing news from every side.Hemade a last attempt toassemble thedispersedpeasants in thewoodsonJune9,butwasattackedby the troops,andfellfighting.


–73–

Truchsess, who, immediately after the Koenigshofen victory, had sent word to thebesieged Frauenberg, now marched towards Wuerzburg. The council came to a secretunderstandingwithhimsothat,onthenightofJune7,theUnionarmywasinapositiontosurroundthecitywhere5,000peasantswerestationed,andthefollowingmorningtomarchthroughthegatesopenedbythecouncil,withoutevenliftingasword.BythisbetrayaloftheWuerzburg“honourables”thelasttroopsoftheFranconianpeasantsweredisarmedandall the leaders arrested. Truchsess immediately ordered 81 of them decapitated.Here inWuerzburgthevariousFranconianprincesappeared,oneafter theother,amongthemtheBishopofWuerzburghimself,theBishopofBambergandtheMargraveofBrandenburg-Anspach.Thegracious lordsdistributed the roles among themselves.Truchsessmarchedwith the Bishop of Bamberg, who presently broke the agreement concluded with hispeasants andofferedhis territory to the raginghordes of theUnion army,whopillaged,massacredandburned.MargraveCasimirdevastatedhisownland.Teiningenwasburned,numerousvillageswerepillagedormadefuel for the flames. Ineverycity theMargraveheldabloodycourt.InNeustadt,ontheAisch,heorderedeighteenrebelsbeheaded,intheBuergelMarch,forty-threesufferedasimilarfate.FromtherehewenttoRottenburgwherethehonourables,inthemeantime,hadmadeacounterrevolutionandarrestedStephanvonMenzingen.TheRottenburglowermiddle-classandplebeianswerenowcompelledtopayheavily for the fact that they behaved towards the peasants in such an equivocal way,refusing tohelp them to thevery lastmoment and in their localnarrow-mindedegotisminsistingonthesuppressionofthecountrysidecraftsinfavourofthecityguilds,andonlyunwillinglyrenouncingthecityrevenuesflowingfromthefeudalservicesofthepeasants.TheMargrave ordered sixteen of them executed, Menzingen among them. In a similarmanner theBishopofWuerzburgmarched throughhis region,pillaging,devastatingandburningeverywhere.Onhistriumphalmarchheordered256rebelstobedecapitated,andupon his return toWuerzburg he crowned his work by decapitating thirteenmore fromamongtheWuerzburgrebels.

In the region ofMainz the viceroy, BishopWilhelm von Strassburg, restored orderwithoutresistance.Heorderedonlyfourmenexecuted.Rheingau,wherethepeasantshadalso been restless, butwhere, nevertheless, everybody had long before gone home,wassubsequentlyinvadedbyFrowenvonHutten,acousinofUlrich,andfinally“pacified”bythe execution of twelve ringleaders. Frankfurt, which also had witnessed revolutionarymovementsofaconsiderablesize,washeldincheckfirstbytheconciliatoryattitudeofthecouncil, then by recruited troops in theRhenishPalatinate.Eight thousand peasants hadassembled anew after the breach of agreement by the Elector, and had again burnedmonasteries and castles, but theArchbishop of Trier came to the aid of theMarshal of


–74–

Zabern, and defeated them as early asMay 23 at Pfedersheim.A series of atrocities (inPfedersheim alone eighty-twowere executed) and the capture ofWeissenburg on July 7terminatedtheinsurrectionhere.

Of all the divisions of troops there remained only two to be vanquished, those ofHegau–BlackForestandofAllgaeu.ArchdukeFerdinandhadtriedintrigueswithboth.Inthe sameway asMargraveCasimir and other princes tried to utilise the insurrection toannex the church territories and principalities, so Ferdinand wished to utilise it tostrengthen the power of the House of Austria. He had negotiated with the Allgaeucommander,WalterBach,andwiththeHegaucommander,HansMueller,withtheaimofinducing thepeasants todeclare their adherence toAustria,but,bothchiefsbeingvenal,their influence with the troops went only so far that the Allgaeu troop concluded anarmisticewiththeArchbishopandobservedneutralitytowardsAustria.

RetreatingfromtheWuerttembergregion,thepeasantsofHegaudestroyedanumberofcastles,andreceivedreinforcementsfromtheprovincesoftheMargraviateofBaden.OnMay13theymarchedtowardsFreiburg;onMay18theybombardedit,andonMay23,thecityhavingcapitulated,theyentereditwithflyingcolours.FromtheretheymovedtowardsStockachandRadolfzell,andwagedaprolongedpettywaragainst thegarrisonsof thosecities.The latter, togetherwith thenobility andother surrounding cities, appealed to theLakepeasantsforhelpinaccordancewiththeWeingartenagreement.TheformerrebelsoftheLakeTrooprose,5,000strong,against their formerallies.Sopotentwas thenarrow-mindednessofthepeasantswhowereconfinedtotheirlocalhorizon,thatonly600refusedtofightandexpressedadesiretojointheHegaupeasants,forwhichtheywereslaughtered.TheHegaupeasants,themselves,persuadedbyHansMuellerofBulgenbach,whohadsoldhimselftotheenemy,liftedtheirsiege,andHansMuellerhavingrunaway,mostofthemdispersed forthwith. The remaining ones entrenched themselves on theHilzingen Steep,where,onJuly16,theywerebeatenandannihilatedbythetroopsthathadinthemeantimebecome free of other engagements. The Swiss cities negotiated an agreement with theHegau peasants, which, however, did not prevent the other side from capturing andmurderingHansMueller,hisLaufenburgbetrayalnotwithstanding.InBreisgau,thecityofFreiburgalsodesertedthepeasantUnion(July17)andsenttroopsagainstit,butbecauseoftheweakness of the fighting forces of the princes, here as elsewhere, an agreementwasreached (September 18), which also included Sundgau. The eight groups of the BlackForest and the Klettgau peasants, who were not yet disarmed, were again driven to anuprisingby the tyrannyofCountvonSulz,andwererepulsed inOctober.OnNovember13,theBlackForestpeasantswereforcedintoanagreement,andonDecember6,Walzhut,thelastbulwarkoftheinsurrectionintheUpperRhine,fell.


–75–

TheAllgaeu peasants had, after the departure of Truchsess, renewed their campaignagainst themonasteries andcastles andwereusing repressivemeasures in retaliation forthe devastations caused by theUnion army.Theywere confronted by few troopswhichbravedonlyinsignificantskirmishes,notbeingabletofollowthemintothewoods.InJune,amovementagainst thehonourablesstartedinMemmingenwhichhadhithertoremainedmoreorlessneutral,andonlytheaccidentalnearnessofsomeUniontroopswhichcameintime to the rescueof thenobility,made its suppressionpossible.Schapelar, thepreacherandleaderoftheplebeianmovement,fledtoSt.Gallen.Thepeasantsappearedbeforethecity andwere about to start firing tobreak agap,when they learnedof the approachofTruchsess on his way from Wuerzburg. On June 27 they started against him, in twocolumns,overBabenhausenandOberguenzburg.ArchdukeFerdinandagainattempted towin over the peasants to theHouse ofAustria. Citing the armistice concludedwith thepeasants,hedemandedofTruchsesstomarchnofurtheragainstthem.TheSuabianUnion,however, ordered Truchsess to attack them, but to refrain from pillaging and burning.Truchsess,however,wastooclevertorelinquishhisprimaryandmosteffectivemeansofbattle, even were he in a position to keep in order the Lansquenets whom he had ledbetweenLakeConstance and theMain fromone excess to another.Thepeasants took astand behind the Iller and theLuibas, about 23,000 in number.Truchsess opposed themwith11,000.Thepositionsofbotharmieswereformidable.Thecavalrycouldnotoperateon the territory that lay ahead, and if the Truchsess Lansquenets were superior to thepeasantsinorganisation,militaryresourcesanddiscipline,theAllgaeupeasantscountedintheirranksahostofformersoldiersandexperiencedcommandersandpossessednumerouswell-manned cannon.On July19, the armiesof theSuabianUnionopened a cannonadewhichwascontinuedoneverysideonthe20th,butwithoutresult.OnJuly21,GeorgvonFrundsberg joined Truchsess with 300 Lansquenets. He knew many of the peasantcommanderswhohadservedunderhimintheItalianmilitaryexpeditionsandheenteredintonegotiationswiththem.Wheremilitaryresourceswereinsufficient,treasonsucceeded.WalterBachandseveralothercommandersandartillerymensoldthemselves.Theysetfireto the powder store of the peasants and persuaded the troops to make an envelopingmovement,butassoonasthepeasantslefttheirstrongpositiontheyfellintotheambushplacedbyTruchsessincollusionwithBachandtheothertraitors.TheywerelesscapableofdefendingthemselvessincetheirtraitorouscommandershadleftthemunderthepretextofreconnoiteringandwerealreadyontheirwaytoSwitzerland.Thustwoof thepeasantcampswereentirelydisrupted.Thethird,underKnopfofLuibas,wasstillinapositiontowithdraw in order. It again took its position on the mountain of Kollen near Kampten,whereitwassurroundedbyTruchsess.Thelatterdidnotdaretoattackthesepeasants,buthe cut them off from all supplies, and tried to demoralise them by burning about 200


–76–

villages in thevicinity.Hunger,and thesightof theirburninghomes, finallybrought thepeasants to surrender (July25).More than twentywere immediatelyexecuted.KnopfofLuibas,theonlyleaderofthistroopwhodidnotbetrayhisbanner,fledtoBiegenz.Therehewascaptured,however,andhanged,afteralongimprisonment.

Withthis,thePeasantWarinSuabiaandFranconiacametoanend.


–77–

Chapter6ThePeasantWarinThuringia,AlsaceandAustria

Immediately after theoutbreakof the firstmovement inSuabia,ThomasMuenzer againhurried to Thuringia, and since the end of February and the beginning of March, heestablished his quarters in the free imperial city of Muehlhausen, where his party wasstrongerthanelsewhere.Heheldthethreadsoftheentiremovementinhishand.HeknewwhatstormwasabouttobreakinSouthernGermany,andheundertooktomakeThuringiathecentreofthemovementforNorthGermany.Hefoundveryfertilesoil.Thuringia,themainarenaof theReformationmovement,wasin thegripofgreatunrest.Theeconomicmisery of the downtrodden peasants, as well as the current revolutionary, religious andpolitical doctrine, had alsoprepared the neighbouringprovinces,Hesse,Saxony, and theregionof theHarz, for thegeneraluprising. InMuehlhausen itself,wholemassesof thelowermiddle-classhadbeenwonovertotheextremeMuenzerdoctrine,andcouldhardlywait for the moment when they would assert themselves by a superiority of numbersagainstthehaughtyhonourables.Inordernottostartbeforethepropermoment,Muenzerwascompelledtoappearintheroleofmoderator,buthisdisciple,Pfeifer,whoconductedthemovementthere,hadcommittedhimselftosuchanextentthathecouldnotholdbackthe outbreak, and as early as March 17, 1525, before the general uprising in SouthernGermany,Muehlhausenhaditsrevolution.Theoldpatriciancouncilwasoverthrown,andthegovernmentwashandedovertothenewly-elected“eternalcouncil,”withMuenzeraspresident.

Theworstthingthatcanbefallaleaderofanextremepartyistobecompelledtotakeoveragovernment inanepochwhenthemovementisnotyetripefor thedominationoftheclasswhichherepresentsandfortherealisationofthemeasureswhichthatdominationwouldimply.Whathecandodependsnotuponhiswillbutuponthesharpnessoftheclashof interests between the various classes, and upon the degree of development of thematerialmeansofexistence,therelationsofproductionandmeansofcommunicationuponwhichtheclashofinterestsoftheclassesisbasedeverytime.Whatheoughttodo,whathispartydemandsofhim,againdependsnotuponhim,oruponthedegreeofdevelopmentof the class struggle and its conditions. He is bound to his doctrines and the demandshithertopropoundedwhichdonotemanatefromtheinterrelationsofthesocialclassesatagivenmoment, or from themore or less accidental level of relations of production andmeans of communication, but from hismore or less penetrating insight into the generalresultofthesocialandpoliticalmovement.Thushenecessarilyfindshimselfinadilemma.Whathecandoisincontrasttoallhisactionsashithertopractised,toallhisprinciplesand


–78–

tothepresentinterestsofhisparty;whatheoughttodocannotbeachieved.Inaword,heiscompelledtorepresentnothispartyorhisclass,buttheclassforwhomconditionsareripefordomination.Intheinterestsofthemovementitself,heiscompelledtodefendtheinterestsofanalienclass,and tofeedhisownclasswithphrasesandpromises,with theassertionthattheinterestsofthatalienclassaretheirowninterests.Whoeverputshimselfinthisawkwardpositionisirrevocablylost.Wehaveseenexamplesofthisinrecenttimes.WeneedonlyberemindedofthepositiontakeninthelastFrenchprovisionalgovernmentbytherepresentativesoftheproletariat,thoughtheyrepresentedonlyaverylowlevelofproletariandevelopment.Whoevercanstilllookforwardtoofficialpositionsafterhavingbecome familiarwith the experiencesof theFebruarygovernment–not to speakof ourown noble German provisional governments and imperial regencies – is either foolishbeyondmeasure,oratbestpaysonlylipservicetotheextremerevolutionaryparty.

Muenzer’s position at the head of the “eternal council” ofMuehlhausenwas indeedmuch more precarious than that of any modern revolutionary regent. Not only themovementofhistime,butthewholecentury,wasnotripefortherealisationoftheideasforwhichhehimselfhadonlybeguntogrope.Theclasswhichherepresentednotonlywasnotdevelopedenoughand incapableof subduingand transforming thewholeof society,butitwasjustbeginningtocomeintoexistence.Thesocialtransformationthathepicturedinhisfantasywassolittlegroundedinthethenexistingeconomicconditionsthatthelatterwereapreparationforasocialsystemdiametricallyopposedto thatofwhichhedreamt.Nevertheless, he was bound to his preachings of Christian equality and evangelicalcommunity of possessions. He was at least compelled to make an attempt at theirrealisation. Community of all possessions, universal and equal labour duty, and theabolitionofallauthoritywereproclaimed.Inreality,Muehlhausenremainedarepublicanimperialcitywithasomewhatdemocraticconstitution,withasenateelectedbyuniversalsuffrageandunderthecontrolofaforum,andwiththehastilyimprovisedfeedingofthepoor.Thesocialchange,whichsohorrifiedtheProtestantmiddle-classcontemporaries,inrealityneverwentbeyonda feebleandunconsciousattemptprematurely toestablish thebourgeoissocietyofalaterperiod.

Muenzer, himself, seems to have realised the wide abyss between his theories andsurroundingrealities.Thisabyssmusthavebeenfelt themorekeenly, themoredistortedtheviewsof this genius of necessity appeared, reflected in theheadsof themassof hisfollowers.Hethrewhimself intowideningandorganisingthemovementwithazealrareeven for him. Hewrote letters and sent out emissaries in all directions. His letters andsermonsbreathed a revolutionary fanaticismwhichwas amazing in comparisonwithhisformer writings. Gone completely was the naive youthful humour of Muenzer’s


–79–

revolutionarypamphlets.Thequietinstructivelanguageofthethinkerwhichhadbeensocharacteristic of him, appeared no more. Muenzer was now entirely a prophet of therevolution.Incessantlyhefannedtheflameofhatredagainsttherulingclasses.Hespurredthewildest passions, using forceful terms of expression the like of which religious andnationalistdeliriumhadputintothemouthsoftheOldTestamentprophets.Thestyleuptowhich heworked himself reveals the level of education of that publicwhich hewas toaffect.TheexampleofMuehlhausenandthepropagandaofMuenzerhadaquickandfar-reaching effect. In Thuringia, Eichsfeld, Harz, in the duchies of Saxony, in Hesse andFulda, inUpperFranconiaand inVogtland, thepeasantsarose,assembled inarmies,andburnedcastlesandmonasteries.Muenzerwasmoreorlessrecognisedastheleaderoftheentiremovement, andMuehlhausen remained the central point,while in Erfurt a purelymiddle-class movement became victorious, and the ruling party there constantlymaintainedanundecidedattitudetowardsthepeasants.

In Thuringia, the princes were at the beginning just as helpless and powerless inrelationtothepeasantsastheyhadbeeninFranconiaandSuabia.OnlyinthelastdaysofApril, did the Landgrave of Hesse succeed in assembling a corps. It was that sameLandgravePhilipp,whosepietyisbeingpraisedsomuchbytheProtestantandbourgeoishistoriesoftheReformation,andofwhoseinfamiestowardsthepeasantswewillpresentlyhave aword to say.By a series of quickmovements and by decisive action,LandgravePhilipp subdued themajor part of his land.He called new contingents, and then turnedtowardstheregionoftheAbbotofFulda,whohithertowashislord.OnMay3,hedefeatedtheFuldapeasanttroopatFrauenberg,subduedtheentireland,andseizedtheopportunitynotonlytofreehimselffromthesovereigntyoftheAbbot,buttomaketheAbbeyofFuldaa vassalage of Hesse, naturally pending its subsequent secularisation. He then tookEisenach and Langensalza, and jointly with the Saxon troops, moved towards theheadquarters of the rebellious Muehlhausen. Muenzer assembled his forces atFrankenhausen, 8,000 men and several cannons. The Thuringian troops were far frompossessingthatfightingpowerwhichtheSuabianandFranconiantroopsdevelopedintheirstrugglewithTruchsess.Themenwerepoorlyarmedandbadlydisciplined.Theycountedfew ex-soldiers among them, and sorely lacked leadership. It appears that Muenzerpossessednomilitaryknowledgewhatsoever.Nevertheless,theprincesfounditpropertousehere the same tactics that sooftenhelpedTruchsess tovictory–breachof faith.OnMay16,theyenterednegotiations,concludedanarmistice,butattackedthepeasantsbeforethetimeofthearmisticehadelapsed.

Muenzer stood with his people on the mountain which is still called Mount Battle(Schlachtberg),entrenchedbehindabarricadeofwagons.Thediscouragementamongthe


–80–

troopswasrapidlyincreasing.TheprinceshadpromisedthemamnestyshouldtheydeliverMuenzeralive.Muenzerassembledhispeopleinacircle,todebatetheprinces’proposals.Aknight andapriest expressed themselves in favourof capitulation.Muenzerhad thembothbroughtinsidethecircle,anddecapitated.Thisactofterroristenergy,jubilantlymetbytheoutspokenrevolutionaries,causedacertainhaltamongthetroops,butmostofthemenwould have gone awaywithout resistance had it not been noticed that the princes’Lansquenets,whohadencircledtheentiremountain,wereapproachinginclosecolumns,inspiteofthearmistice.Afrontwashurriedlyformedbehindthewagons,butalreadythecannonballsandgunswerepoundingthehalf-defenselesspeasants,unusedtobattle,andtheLansquenetsreachedthebarricade.Afterabriefresistance,thelineofthewagonswasbroken, the peasants’ cannon captured, and the peasants dispersed. They fled in wilddisorder, and fell into the hands of the enveloping columns and the cavalry, whoperpetrated an appallingmassacre among them.Out of 8,000 peasants, over 5,000wereslaughtered. The survivors arrived at Frankenhaus, and simultaneously with them, theprinces’cavalry.Thecitywastaken.Muenzer,woundedinthehead,wasdiscoveredinahouseandcaptured.OnMay25,Muehlhausenalsosurrendered.Pfeifer,whohadremainedthere,ranaway,butwascapturedintheregionofEisenach.

Muenzerwasputontherackinthepresenceoftheprinces,andthendecapitated.Hewenttohisdeathwiththesamecouragewithwhichhehadlived.Hewasbarelytwenty-eightwhenhewasexecuted.Pfeifer,withmanyothers,wasalsoexecuted.InFulda, thatholy man, Philipp of Hesse, had opened his bloody court. He and the Prince of Hesseorderedmanyotherstobekilledbythesword–inEisenach,twenty-four;inLangensalza,forty-one; after the battle of Frankenhaus, 300; in Muehlhausen, over 100; at German,twenty-six;atTungeda, fifty;atSangenhausen, twelve; inLeipzig,eight,not tospeakofmutilationsandthemoremoderatemeasuresofpillagingandburningvillagesandcities.

Muehlhausen was compelled to give up its liberty under the empire, and wasincorporated into the Saxon lands, just as the Abbey of Fulda was incorporated in theLandgraviateofHesse.

TheprincenowmovedthroughtheforestofThuringia,whereFranconianpeasantsoftheBildhauscamphadunitedwiththeThuringians,andburnedmanycastles.AbattletookplacebeforeMeiningen.Thepeasantswerebeatenandwithdrewtowards thecity,whichclosed its gates to them, and threatened to attack them from the rear. The troops, thusplaced in a quandary by the betrayal of their allies, capitulated before the prince, anddispersed, while negotiations were still under way. The camp of Bildhaus had longdispersed,andwith this, the remnantsof the insurgentsofSaxony,Hesse,ThuringiaandUpperFranconia,wereannihilated.


–81–

InAlsacetherebellionbrokeoutafterthemovementhadstartedontherightsideoftheRhine.Thepeasantsof thebishopricofStrassbourgaroseas lateas themiddleofApril.Soonafter,therewasanupheavalofthepeasantsofUpperAlsaceandSundgau.OnApril18,acontingentofLowerAlsacepeasantspillagedthemonasteryofAltdorf.Othertroopswere formed near Ebersheim andBarr, aswell as in theUrbis valley. Thesewere soonconcentrated into the largeLowerAlsacedivisionandproceeded inanorganisedway totakecitiesandtownsandtodestroymonasteries.Oneoutofeverythreemenwascalledtothecolours.TheTwelveArticlesofthisgroupwereconsiderablymoreradicalthanthoseoftheSuabianandFranconiangroups.

Whileonecolumnof theLowerAlsacepeasantsfirstconcentratednearSt.Hippoliteearly in May, attempting to take the city but without success, and then, through anunderstanding with the citizens, came into possession of Barken on May 10, ofRappoldtsweiler on May 13, and Reichenweier on May 14, a second column underErasmusGerbermarchedtoattackStrassbourgbysurprise.Theattemptwasunsuccessful,and the column now turned towards the Vosges, destroyed the monastery ofMauersmuenster,andbesiegedZabern,takingitonMay13.FromhereitmovedtowardsthefrontierofLorraineandarousedthesectionoftheduchyadjoiningthefrontier,atthesame time fortifying themountainpasses.Twocolumnswere formedatHerbolzheimonthe Saar, and at Neuburg, at Saargemund, 4,000 German-Lorraine peasants entrenchedthemselves.Finally,twoadvancedtroops,theKolbenintheVosgesatStuerzelbrunn,andtheKleeburgatWeissenburg,coveredthefrontandtherightflank,whiletheleftflankwasadjoiningthoseofUpperAlsace.

The latter, in motion since April 20, had forced the city of Sulz into the peasantfraternity onMay 10,Gebweiler, onMay 12, and Sennheim and vicinity,May 15. TheAustriangovernmentandthesurroundingimperialcitiesimmediatelyunitedagainstthem,but theywere tooweak to offer serious resistance, not to speak of attack. Thus, in themiddleofMay,thewholeofAlsace,withtheexceptionofonlyafewcities,cameintothehandsoftheinsurgents.

ButalreadythearmywasapproachingwhichwasdestinedtobreaktheungodlyattackoftheAlsacepeasants.ItwastheFrenchwhoeffectedheretherestorationofthenobility.Already,onMay16,DukeAntonofLorrainemarchedoutwithanarmyof30,000,amongthemthefloweroftheFrenchnobility,aswellasSpanish,Piedmontese,Lombardic,GreekandAlbanianauxiliarytroops.OnMay16hemet4,000peasantsatLuetzelsteinwhomhedefeated without effort, and on the 17th he forced Zabern, which was besieged by thepeasants, to surrender. But even while the Lorrainers were entering the city and thepeasants were being disarmed, the conditions of the surrender were broken. The


–82–

defenselesspeasantswereattackedbytheLansquenetsandmostofthemwereslaughtered.TheremainingLowerAlsacecolumnsdisbanded,andDukeAntonwenttomeettheUpperAlsatians.The latter,who had refused to join theLowerAlsatians at Zabern,were nowattacked at Scherweiler by the entire force of the Lorrainers. They resisted with greatbravery, but the enormous numerical superiority – 30,000 as against 7,000 – and thebetrayalofanumberofknights,especiallythatofthemagistrateofReichenweier,madealldaring futile. They were totally beaten and dispersed. The Duke subdued the whole ofAlsacewiththeusualatrocities.OnlySundgauwasspared.Bythreateningtocallhimintothe land, the Austrian government forced the peasants to conclude the Ensisheimagreement early in June. The government soon broke the agreement, however, orderingnumbersofpreachersandleadersofthemovementtobehanged.Thepeasantsmadeanewinsurrectionwhich endedwith the inclusion of theSundgau peasants into theOffenburgagreement(September18).

TherenowremainsonlythereportofthePeasantWarintheAlpineregionsofAustria.These regions, as well as the adjoining Archbishopric of Salzburg were in continuousopposition to the government and the nobility ever since the Stara Prawa, and theReformationdoctrinesfoundthereafertilesoil.Religiouspersecutionsandwillfultaxationbroughttherebelliontoacrisis.

The city of Salzburg, supported by the peasants and the pitmen, had been incontroversy with the Archbishop since 1522 over city privileges and the freedom ofreligious practice. By the end of 1523, the Archbishop attacked the city with recruitedLansquenets, terrorised it by a cannonade from the castle, and persecuted the hereticalpreachers. At the same time he imposed new crushing taxes, and thereby irritated thepopulation to the utmost. In the spring of 1525, simultaneously with the Suabian-Franconian and Thuringian uprisings, the peasants and pitmen of the entire countrysuddenly arose, organised themselves under the commanders Brossler and Weitmoser,freed the city andbesieged the castle ofSalzburg.Like theWestGermanpeasants, theyorganisedaChristianallianceandformulatedtheirdemandsintofourteenarticles.

InStyria, inUpperAustria, inCarinthia andCarniola,wherenewextortionate taxes,dutiesandedictshadseverelyinjuredtheinterestsclosesttothepeople,thepeasantsaroseintheSpringof1525.TheytookanumberofcastlesandatGrys,defeatedtheconquerorof the Stara Prawa, the old field commander Dietrichstein. Although the governmentsucceeded in placating some of the insurgents with false promises, the bulk of themremained together and united with the Salzburg peasants, so that the entire region ofSalzburgandthemajorpartofUpperAustria,Styria,CarinthiaandCarniolawere in thehandsofthepeasantsandpitmen.


–83–

IntheTyrol,theReformationdoctrineshadalsofoundadherence.HereevenmorethanintheotherAlpineregionsofAustria,Muenzer’semissarieshadbeensuccessfullyactive.ArchbishopFerdinandpersecutedthepreachersofthenewdoctrineshereaselsewhere,andimpingedtherightsofthepopulationbyarbitraryfinancialregulations.Inconsequence,anuprising took place in the Spring of 1525. The insurgents, whose commander was aMuenzer man named Geismaier, the only noted military talent among all the peasantchiefs, took a great number of castles, and proceeded energetically against the priests,particularly in thesouthand the regionofEtsch.TheVorarlbergpeasantsalsoaroseandjoinedtheAllgaeupeasants.

The Archbishop, pressed from every side, now began to make concession afterconcessiontotherebelswhomashorttimebeforehehadwishedtoannihilatebymeansofburning, scourging, pillaging and murdering. He summoned the Diets of the hereditarylands, and pending their assembling, concluded an armistice with the peasants. In themeantimehewasstrenuouslyarming,inorder,assoonaspossible,tobeabletospeaktotheungodlyonesinadifferentlanguage.

Naturally, the armistice was not kept long. Dietrichstein, having run short of cash,began to levy contributions in the duchies; his Slavic and Magyar troops allowedthemselves,besides,themostshamefulatrocitiesagainstthepopulation.ThisbroughttheStyrians to new rebellion. The peasants attackedDietrichstein at Schladming during thenight of July 3rd and slaughtered everybody who did not speak German. Dietrichsteinhimselfwascaptured.

OnthemorningofJuly4, thepeasantsorganiseda jury to try thecaptives,andfortyCzech and Croatian noble prisoners were sentenced to death. This was effective. TheArchbishop immediately consented to all the demands of the estates of the five duchies(UpperandLowerAustria,Styria,CarinthiaandCarniola).

InTyrol,thedemandsoftheDietwerealsogranted,andtherebytheNorthwasquieted.TheSouth,however,insistingonitsoriginaldemandsasagainstthemuchmoremoderatedecisionsof theDiet, remainedunder arms.Only inDecemberwas theArchbishop in apositiontorestoreorderbyforce.Hedidnotfailtoexecuteagreatnumberofinstigatorsandleadersoftheupheavalwhofellintohishands.

Now 10,000 Bavarians moved against Salzburg, under Georg of Frundsberg. Thisimposingmilitarypower,aswellasthequarrelsthathadbrokenoutamongthepeasants,inducedtheSalzburgpeasantstoconcludeanagreementwiththeArchbishop,whichcameintobeingSeptember1,andwasalsoacceptedbytheArchduke.Inspiteofthis,thetwoprinces, who had meanwhile considerably strengthened their troops, soon broke the


–84–

agreementandtherebydrovetheSalzburgpeasantstoanewuprising.Theinsurgentsheldtheirownthroughoutthewinter.IntheSpring,Geismaiercametothemtoopenasplendidcampaign against the troops which were approaching from every side. In a series ofbrilliant battles inMay and June, 1526, he defeated theBavarian,Austrian andSuabianUniontroopsandtheLansquenetsoftheArchbishopofSalzburg,oneafteranother,andfora long time he prevented the various corps fromuniting.He also found time to besiegeRadstadt.Finally,surroundedbyoverwhelmingforces,hewascompelledtowithdraw.HebattledhiswaythroughandledtheremnantsofhiscorpsthroughtheAustrianAlpsintoVenetianterritory.TherepublicofVeniceandSwitzerlandofferedtheindefatigablepeasantchief starting points for new conspiracies. For a whole year he was still attempting toinvolve them in awar againstAustria,whichwouldhaveofferedhimanoccasion for anewpeasant uprising.Thehandof themurderer, however, reachedhim in the course ofthesenegotiations.ArchbishopFerdinandandtheArchbishopofSalzburgcouldnotrestaslong as Geismaier was alive. They therefore paid a bandit who, in 1527, succeeded inremovingthedangerousrebelfromamongtheliving.


–85–

Chapter7SignificanceofthePeasantWar

AfterGeismaier’swithdrawalintoVenetianterritory,theepilogueofthePeasantWarwasended.Thepeasantswereeverywherebroughtagainundertheswayoftheirecclesiastical,nobleorpatricianmasters.Theagreementsthatwereconcludedwiththemhereandtherewerebroken,andheavyburdenswereaugmentedbytheenormousindemnitiesimposedbythe victors on the vanquished. Themagnificent attempt of theGerman people ended inignominious defeat and, for a time, in greater oppression. In the long run, however, thesituationofthepeasantsdidnotbecomeworse.Whateverthenobility,princesandpriestscouldwring out of the peasants had beenwrung out even before thewar. TheGermanpeasantofthattimehadthisincommonwiththemodernproletarian,thathisshareintheproductsoftheworkwaslimitedtoasubsistenceminimumnecessaryforhismaintenanceand for the propagation of the race. It is true that peasants of some little wealth wereruined.Hostsofbondsmenwereforcedintoserfdom;wholestretchesofcommunitylandswereconfiscated;agreatnumberofpeasantsweredriven intovagabondageor forced tobecome city plebeians by the destruction of their domiciles and the devastation of theirfieldsinadditiontothegeneraldisorder.Warsanddevastations,however,wereevery-dayphenomenaatthattime,andingeneral,thepeasantclasswasontoolowaleveltohaveitssituationmadeworse for a long time through increased taxes. The subsequent religiouswarsandfinallytheThirtyYears’WarwithitsconstantlyrepeatedmassdevastationsanddepopulationspoundedthepeasantsmuchmorepainfullythandidthePeasantWar.ItwasnotablytheThirtyYears’Warwhichannihilatedthemostimportantpartsoftheproductiveforces in agriculture, throughwhich, aswell as through the simultaneous destruction ofmanycities, it loweredthelivingstandardsof thepeasants,plebeiansandtheruinedcityinhabitantstothelevelofIrishmiseryinitsworstform.

TheclassthatsufferedmostfromthePeasantWarwastheclergy.Itsmonasteriesandendowments were burned down; its valuables plundered, sold into foreign countries, ormelted; its stores of goods consumed. They had been, least of all capable of offeringresistance, andat the same time theweightof thepeople’soldhatred fell heaviestuponthem.Theotherestates,princes,nobilityand themiddle-class,evenexperiencedasecretjoy at the sufferings of the hated prelates. The Peasant War had made popular thesecularisation of the church estates in favour of the peasants. The lay princes, and to acertain degree the cities, determined to bring about secularisation in their own interests,andsoonthepossessionsoftheprelatesinProtestantcountrieswereinthehandsofeithertheprincesorthehonourables.Thepowerandauthorityoftheecclesiasticalprinceswere


–86–

alsoinfringedupon,andthelayprincesunderstoodhowtoexploitthepeople’shatredalsointhisdirection.ThuswehaveseenhowtheAbbotofFuldawasrelegatedfromafeudallordofPhilippofHessetothepositionofhisvassal.ThusthecityofKemptenforcedtheecclesiasticalprincetoselltoitforatrifleaseriesofpreciousprivilegeswhichheenjoyedinthecity.

Thenobilityhadalsosufferedconsiderably.Mostof itscastlesweredestroyed,andanumber of itsmost respected familieswere ruined and could findmeans of subsistenceonlyintheserviceoftheprinces.Itspowerlessnessinrelationtothepeasantswasproven.Ithadbeenbeateneverywhereandforcedtosurrender.Onlythearmiesoftheprinceshadsaved it.Thenobilitywasboundmore andmore to lose its significance as a free estateundertheempireandtofallunderthedominionoftheprinces.

NordidthecitiesgenerallygainanyadvantagesfromthePeasantWar.Theruleofthehonourableswas almost everywhere reestablishedwith new force, and the opposition ofthemiddle-classremainedbrokenfora longtime.Oldpatricianroutine thusdraggedon,hamperingcommerceandindustryineveryway,uptotheFrenchRevolution.Moreover,the citiesweremade responsible by the princes for themomentary successeswhich themiddle-class or plebeian parties had achieved within their confines during the struggle.Citieswhichhadpreviouslybelongedtotheprinceswereforcedtopayheavyindemnities,robbed of their privileges, andmade subject to the avariciouswillfulness of the princes(Frankenhausen, Arnstadt, Schmalkalden, Wurzburg, etc.), cities of the empire wereincorporated into territories of the princes (Muehlhausen), or they were at least placedunder moral dependence on the princes of the adjoining territory, as was the case withmanyimperialcitiesinFranconia.

The sole gainers under these conditions were the princes. We have seen at thebeginningofourexposition that lowdevelopmentof industry,commerceandagriculturemadethecentralisationoftheGermansintoanationimpossible,thatitallowedonlylocaland provincial centralisation, and that the princes, representing centralisation withindisruption, were the only class to profit from every change in the existing social andpoliticalconditions.ThestateofdevelopmentofGermanyinthosedayswassolowandatthe same time so different in various provinces, that along with lay principalities therecould still exist ecclesiastical sovereignties, city republics, and sovereign counts andbarons. Simultaneously, however, this development was continually, though slowly andfeebly,pressingtowardsprovincialcentralisation,towardssubjugatingallimperialestatesunder theprinces. It is due to this that only theprinces couldgainby the endingof thePeasant War. This happened in reality. They gained not only relatively, through theweakening of their opponents, the clergy, the nobility and the cities, but also absolutely


–87–

throughtheprizesofwarwhichtheycollected.Thechurchestatesweresecularisedintheirfavour;partofthenobility,fullyorpartlyruined,wasobligedgraduallytoplaceitselfintheirvassalage;theindemnitiesofthecitiesandpeasantryswelledtheirtreasuries,which,with the abolition of somany city privileges, had now obtained amuchmore extendedfieldforfinancialoperations.

The decentralisation of Germany, the widening and strengthening of which was thechiefresultofthewar,wasatthesametimethecauseofitsfailure.

WehaveseenthatGermanywassplitnotonlyintonumberlessindependentprovincesalmosttotallyforeigntoeachother,butthatineveryoneoftheseprovincesthenationwasdivided intovarious strataof estates andpartsof estates.Besidesprincesandpriestswefindnobilityandpeasantsinthecountryside;patricians,middle-classandplebeiansinthecities. At best, these classes were indifferent to each other’s interests if not in actualconflict.Aboveall thesecomplicated interests therestillwere the interestsof theempireandthepope.Wehaveseenthat,withgreatdifficulty,imperfectly,anddifferinginvariouslocalities, thesevarious interests finally formed threegreatgroups.Wehave seen that inspite of this grouping, achieved with so much labour, every estate opposed the lineindicated by circumstances for the national development, every estate conducting themovementofitsownaccord,comingintoconflictnotonlywiththeconservativesbutalsowiththerestoftheoppositionestates.Failurewas,therefore,inevitable.ThiswasthefateofthenobilityinSickingen’suprising,thefateofthepeasantsinthePeasantWar,ofthemiddle-class in their tame Reformation. This was the fate even of the peasants andplebeianswhoinmostlocalitiesofGermanycouldnotuniteforcommonactionandstoodineachother’sway.Wehavealsoseenthecausesofthissplitintheclassstruggleandtheresultantdefeatofthemiddle-classmovement.

How local and provincial decentralisation and the resultant local and provincialnarrow-mindedness ruined thewholemovement, howneithermiddle-class nor peasantrynorplebeianscoulduniteforconcertednationalaction;howthepeasantsofeveryprovinceacted only for themselves, as a rule refusing aid to the insurgent peasants of theneighbouringregion,andthereforebeingannihilatedinindividualbattlesoneafteranotherby armies which in most cases counted hardly one-tenth of the total number of theinsurgentmasses – all thismust be quite clear to the reader from this presentation.Thearmistices and the agreements concluded by individual groups with their enemies alsoconstitutedactsofbetrayalof thecommoncause,andthegroupingof thevarious troopsnotaccordingtothegreaterorsmallercommunityoftheirownactions,theonlypossiblegrouping, but according to the community of the special adversary to whom theysuccumbed, is striking proof of the degree of the mutual alienation of the peasants in


–88–

variousprovinces.

Theanalogywith themovementof1848–50 ishere also apparent. In1848as in thePeasantWar,theinterestsoftheoppositionclassesclashedwitheachotherandeachactedof its ownaccord.Thebourgeoisie, developed sufficientlynot to tolerate any longer thefeudalandbureaucraticabsolutism,wasnotpowerfulenoughtosubordinatetheclaimsofotherclassestoitsowninterests.Theproletariat,tooweaktobeabletocountonskippingthe bourgeois period and immediately conquering power for itself, had, still underabsolutism,tastedtoowellthesweetnessofbourgeoisgovernment,andwasgenerallyfartoodevelopedtoidentifyforonemomentitsownemancipationwiththeemancipationofthebourgeoisie.Themassofthenation,smallbourgeoisartisansandpeasants,wereleftinthe lurch by their nearest and natural allies, the bourgeoisie, because they were toorevolutionary, and partly by the proletariat because theywere not sufficiently advanced.Divided in itself, thismass of the nation achieved nothing,while opposing their fellowopponentson the right and the left.As toprovincialnarrow-mindedness, it couldhardlyhavebeengreaterin1525amongthepeasantsthanitwasamongtheclassesparticipatingin the movement of 1848. The hundred local revolutions as well as the hundred localreactionsfollowing themandcompletedwithouthindrance, theretentionof thesplit intonumeroussmallstates–allthisspeaksloudenoughindeed.Hewho,afterthetwoGermanrevolutions, of 1525 and 1848, and their results, still dreams of a federated republic,belongsinahousefortheinsane.

Still, the two revolutions, that of the SixteenthCentury and that of 1848–50, are, inspite of all analogies, materially different from each other. The revolution of 1848bespeaks,ifnottheprogressofGermany,theprogressofEurope.

Whoprofitedbytherevolutionof1525?Theprinces.Whoprofitedbytherevolutionof1848?Thebigprinces,AustriaandPrussia.Behindtheprincesof1525therestoodthelower middle-class of the cities, held chained by means of taxation. Behind the bigprovincesof1850, there stood themodernbigbourgeoisie,quickly subjugating thembymeansoftheStatedebt.Behindthebigbourgeoisiestandtheproletarians.

Therevolutionof1525wasalocalGermanaffair.TheEnglish,French,BohemiansandHungarianshadalreadygonethroughtheirpeasantwarswhentheGermansbegantheirs.IfGermanywas decentralised, Europewas so to amuch greater extent. The revolution of1848wasnotalocalGermanaffair,itwasonephaseofagreatEuropeanmovement.Themovingforcesthroughouttheperiodofitsdurationwerenotconfinedtothenarrowlimitsofone individual country,not even to the limitsofone-quarterof theglobe. In fact, thecountrieswhichwere the arenaof the revolutionwere least active inproducing it.They


–89–

weremoreorlessunconsciousrawmaterialswithoutwilloftheirown.Theyweremoldedinthecourseofmovementinwhichtheentireworldparticipated,amovementwhichunderexisting social conditionsmay appear to us as an alien power, butwhich, in the end, isnothingbutourown.Thisiswhytherevolutionof1848–50couldnotendinthewaythattherevolutionof1525ended.

THEEND


–90–

TheTwelveArticlesofthePeasants

The fundamental and correct chief articles of all the peasants and of those subject toecclesiasticallords,relatingtothesemattersinwhichtheyfeelthemselvesaggrieved.

Mcccc,quadratum,IxetduplicatumVcumtransit,christianasectaperibit.PeacetotheChristianReaderandtheGraceofGodthroughChrist.

There are many evil writings put forth of late which take occasion, on account of theassemblingof thepeasants, tocast scornupon thegospel, saying: Is this the fruitof thenew teaching, thatnoone shouldobeybut all shouldeverywhere rise in revolt and rushtogethertoreformorperhapsdestroyaltogethertheauthorities,bothecclesiasticandlay?Thearticlesbelowshallanswer thesegodlessandcriminalfault-finders,andserve in thefirstplacetoremovethereproachfromthewordofGod,andinthesecondplacetogiveaChristianexcuseforthedisobedienceoreventherevoltoftheentirePeasantry.InthefirstplacetheGospelisnotthecauseofrevoltanddisorder,sinceitisthemessageofChrist,thepromisedMessiah,theWordofLife,teachingonlylove,peace,patienceandconcord.Thus, all who believe in Christ should learn to be loving, peaceful, long-suffering andharmonious.Thisisthefoundationofallthearticlesofthepeasants(aswillbeseen)whoaccepttheGospelandliveaccordingtoit.HowthencantheevilreportsdeclaretheGospelto be a cause of revolt and disobedience? That the authors of the evil reports and theenemiesoftheGospelopposethemselvestothesedemandsisdue,nottotheGospel,buttotheDevil,theworstenemyoftheGospel,whocausesthisoppositionbyraisingdoubtsinthe minds of his followers, and thus the word of God, which teaches love, peace andconcord, is overcome. In the second place, it is clear that the peasants demand that thisGospel be taught them as a guide in life and they ought not to be called disobedient ordisorderly.Whether God grant the peasants (earnestly wishing to live according to Hisword)theirrequestsorno,whoshallfindfaultwiththewilloftheMostHigh?Whoshallmeddle inHis judgments or oppose hismajesty?Did be not hear the children of IsraelwhentheycalleduponHimandsavedthemoutofthehandsofPharaoh?CanHenotsaveHisownto-day?Yes,Hewillsavethemandthatspeedily.Therefore,Christianreader,readthefollowingarticleswithcareandthenjudge.Herefollowthearticles:

The First Article. – First, it is our humble petition and desire, as also our will andresolution,thatinthefutureweshouldhavepowerandauthoritysothateachcommunityshouldchooseandappointapastor,andthatweshouldhavetherighttodeposehimshouldheconducthimselfimproperly.ThepastorthuschosenshouldteachustheGospelpureandsimple,withoutanyaddition,doctrineorordinanceofman.FortoteachuscontinuallythetruefaithwillleadustoprayGodthatthroughHisgracethisfaithmayincreasewithinus


–91–

andbecomepart of us.For ifHis graceworknotwithinuswe remain flesh andblood,whichavailethnothing;sincetheScriptureclearlyteachesthatonlythroughtruefaithcanwecometoGod.OnlythroughHismercycanwebecomeholy.HencesuchaguideandpastorisnecessaryandinthisfashiongroundedupontheScriptures.

TheSecondArticle.–AccordingasthejusttitheisestablishedbytheOldTestamentandfulfilled in theNew,wearereadyandwilling topay thefair titheofgrain.ThewordofGodplainlyprovidedthatingivingaccordingtorighttoGodanddistributingtoHispeoplethe services of a pastor are required. We will that, for the future, our church provost,whomsoeverthecommunitymayappoint,shallgatherandreceivethistithe.Fromthisheshall give to the pastor, elected by the whole community, a decent and sufficientmaintenance for him and his, as shall seem right to thewhole community (or,with theknowledgeofthecommunity).Whatremainsovershallbegiventothepooroftheplace,asthecircumstancesandthegeneralopiniondemand.Shouldanythingfartherremain,letitbekept,lestanyoneshouldhavetoleavethecountryfrompoverty.Provisionshouldalsobemadefromthissurplus toavoid layingany landtaxon thepoor. Incaseoneormorevillages themselveshavesold their tithesonaccountofwant,andeachvillagehas takenactionasawhole,thebuyershouldnotsufferloss,butwewillthatsomeproperagreementbe reachedwith him for the repayment of the sumby the villagewith due interest.Butthose who have tithes which they have not purchased from a village, but which wereappropriatedbytheirancestors,shouldnot,andoughtnot, tobepaidanythingfartherbythe village which shall apply its tithes to the support of the pastors elected as aboveindicated, or to solace the poor as is taught by theScriptures.The small tithes,whetherecclesiasticalorlay,wewillnotpayatall,fortheLordGodcreatedcattleforthefreeuseofman.Wewillnot,therefore,payfartheranunseemlytithewhichisofman’sinvention.

The Third Article. – It has been the custom hitherto for men to hold us as their ownproperty,whichispitiableenough,consideringthatChristhasdeliveredandredeemedusall, without exception, by the shedding of His precious blood, the lowly as well as thegreat.Accordingly,itisconsistentwithScripturethatweshouldbefreeandwishtobeso.Notthatwewouldwishtobeabsolutelyfreeandundernoauthority.Goddoesnotteachusthatweshouldleadadisorderly life in thelustsof theflesh,but thatweshouldlovetheLordourGodandourneighbour.WewouldgladlyobserveallthisasGodhascommandedus in the celebration of the communion. He has not commanded us not to obey theauthorities,butrather thatweshouldbehumble,notonly towards those inauthority,buttowards everyone.We are thus ready to yield obedience according toGod’s law to ourelectedandregularauthoritiesinallproperthingsbecomingtoaChristian.We,therefore,takeitforgrantedthatyouwillreleaseusfromserfdomastrueChristians,unlessitshould


–92–

beshownusfromtheGospelthatweareserfs.

TheFourthArticle.– In the fourthplace ithasbeen thecustomheretofore, thatnopoormanshouldbeallowedtocatchvenisonorwildfowlorfishinflowingwater,whichseemstousquiteunseemlyandunbrotherlyaswellasselfishandnotagreeable to thewordofGod. In some places the authorities preserve the game to our great annoyance and loss,recklessly permitting the unreasoning animals to destroy to no purpose our cropswhichGodsufferstogrowfortheuseofman,andyetwemustremainquiet.Thisisneithergodlyor neighbourly. ForwhenGod createdmanhe gave himdominion over all the animals,overthebirdsoftheairandoverthefishinthewater.Accordinglyitisourdesireifamanholdspossessionofwatersthatheshouldprovefromsatisfactorydocumentsthathisrighthasbeenunwittinglyacquiredbypurchase.Wedonotwishtotakeitfromhimbyforce,but his rights should be exercised in a Christian and brotherly fashion. But whosoevercannotproducesuchevidenceshouldsurrenderhisclaimwithgoodgrace.

TheFifthArticle.–Inthefifthplaceweareaggrievedinthematterofwood-cutting,forthenoblefolkhaveappropriatedallthewoodstothemselvesalone.Ifapoormanrequireswoodhemust paydouble for it (or, perhaps, twopiecesofmoney). It is our opinion inregardtowoodwhichhasfallenintothehandsofalordwhetherspiritualortemporal,thatunlessitwasdulypurchaseditshouldrevertagaintothecommunity.Itshould,moreover,befreetoeverymemberofthecommunitytohelphimselftosuchfire-woodasheneedsinhishome.Also,ifamanrequireswoodforcarpenter’spurposesheshouldhaveitfree,butwith the knowledge of a person appointed by the community for that purpose. Should,however,nosuchforestbeatthedisposalofthecommunityletthatwhichhasbeendulyboughtbeadministeredinabrotherlyandChristianmanner.Iftheforest,althoughunfairlyappropriatedinthefirstinstance,waslaterdulysoldletthematterbeadjustedinafriendlyspiritandaccordingtotheScriptures.

TheSixthArticle.–Oursixthcomplaintisinregardtheexcessiveservicesdemandedofuswhichareincreasedfromdaytoday.Weaskthatthismatterbeproperlylookedintosothatweshallnotcontinuetobeoppressedinthisway,butthatsomegraciousconsiderationbegivenus,sinceourforefatherswererequiredonlytoserveaccordingtothewordofGod.

The Seventh Article. – Seventh, we will not hereafter allow ourselves to be fartheroppressedbyourlords,butwillletthemdemandonlywhatisjustandproperaccordingtothewordoftheagreementbetweenthelordandthepeasant.Thelordshouldnolongertryto forcemore services or other dues from the peasant without payment, but permit thepeasanttoenjoyhisholdinginpeaceandquiet.Thepeasantshould,however,helpthelordwhenitisnecessary,andatpropertimeswhenitwillnotbedisadvantageoustothepeasant


–93–

andforasuitablepayment.

The Eighth Article. – In the eighth place, we are greatly burdened by holdings whichcannot support the rent exacted from them.Thepeasants suffer loss in thisway and areruined,andweaskthatthelordsmayappointpersonsofhonourtoinspecttheseholdings,andfixarent inaccordancewith justice,so that thepeasantsshallnotworkfornothing,sincethelabourerisworthyofhishire.

TheNinthArticle.–In theninthplace,weareburdenedwithagreatevil in theconstantmakingofnewlaws.Wearenotjudgedaccordingtotheoffense,butsometimeswithgreatillwill,andsometimesmuchtooleniently.Inouropinionweshouldbejudgedaccordingtotheoldwrittenlawsothatthecaseshallbedecidedaccordingtoitsmerits,andnotwithpartiality.

The Tenth Article. – In the tenth place, we are aggrieved by the appropriation byindividualsofmeadowsandfieldswhichatonetimebelongedtoacommunity.Thesewewill takeagain intoourownhands. Itmay,however,happen that the landwasrightfullypurchased.When,however, the landhasunfortunatelybeenpurchased in thisway, somebrotherlyarrangementshouldbemadeaccordingtocircumstances.

TheEleventhArticle.–IntheeleventhplacewewillentirelyabolishtheduecalledTodfall(that is, heriot) andwill no longer endure it, nor allowwidows and orphans to be thusshamefully robbed againstGod’swill, and in violation of justice and right, as has beendone in many places, and by those who should shield and protect them. These havedisgracedanddespoiledus,andalthoughtheyhadlittleauthoritytheyassumedit.Godwillsufferthisnomore,butitshallbewhollydoneawaywith,andforthefuturenomanshallbeboundtogivelittleormuch.

Conclusion.–Inthetwelfthplaceitisourconclusionandfinalresolution,thatifanyoneormoreofthearticlesheresetforthshouldnotbeinagreementwiththewordofGod,aswethinktheyare,sucharticlewewillwillinglyrecedefromwhenitisprovedreallytobeagainstthewordofGodbyaclearexplanationoftheScripture.Orifarticlesshouldnowbeconcededtousthatarehereafterdiscoveredtobeunjust,fromthathourtheyshallbedeadandnullandwithoutforce.Likewise,ifmorecomplaintsshouldbediscoveredwhichare based upon truth and the Scriptures and relate to offenses against God and ourneighbour,wehavedetermined to reserve the right topresent thesealso,and toexerciseourselves inallChristian teaching.For thisweshallprayGod,sinceHecangrant these,andHealone.ThepeaceofChristabidewithusall.


–94–

CommentsbyD.Riazanov

Fourhundredyearshavepassedsince thegreatPeasantWar inGermany. Itdiffers fromsimilarpeasantuprisingsof theFourteenthCentury in Italy,France andEngland, in thattheseuprisingswereofamoreorlesslocalcharacterandweredirectedagainstthemoneyeconomy then in the process of development, while the Peasant War, unfolding in theepochofearlycapitalismwhichwascreatingaworldmarket,wasintimatelyrelatedtotheevents of the Reformation. Thismore complex historic background, comparedwith thebackgroundof theFourteenthCentury, renderedmorecomplex theclassgroupingwhosestruggledeterminedthewholecourseofthePeasantWar.Theroleofproletarianelementsalsobecomesmorepronouncedcomparedwithearlieruprisings.

Itwasnaturalthat,withthegrowthofademocraticmovementinGermany,especiallyafter theJulyRevolutioninFrance,attentionshouldbedirectedtowardsthestudyof thegreatPeasantWar.Aseriesofpopularbrochuresandworksexaminingindividualphasesofthemovementmade their appearance, and in 1841 therewas published themonumentalwork of [Wilhelm] Zimmermann,which, to the present time, remains themost detailednarrativeoftheeventsofthePeasantWarinGermany.

It was also natural that the German communists, confronted with the necessity ofdetermininghowfar thepeasantrycouldbe relieduponasa revolutionary factor, shouldhave carefully studied the history of the Peasant War. Their attention was particularlydrawn to the leaders of the Peasant War, one of whom was Thomas Muenzer. It ischaracteristic that as early as 1845, Engels, in one of his first articles for the Chartist“NorthernStar,”calledtheattentionof theEnglishworkers to this“famousleaderof thePeasantWarof1525,”who,accordingtoEngels,wasarealdemocrat,andfoughtforrealdemands,notillusions.

MarxandEngels,whoverysoberlyregardedtheroleofthepeasantryintherealizationofasocialrevolutionneverunderestimateditsroleasarevolutionaryfactorinthestruggleagainst the large landowners and the feudalmasters.Theyunderstoodverywell that themore thepeasantry fallsunder the leadershipof revolutionaryclasseswhichunite it, themore capable it is of general political actions. Led by the revolutionary proletariat,supportingitsstruggleagainstcapitalisminthecityandthevillage,thepeasantryappearedtobeaveryimportantally.ThisiswhyMarxandEngels,duringtherevolutionof1848–49,mercilesslyexposedthecowardlyconductoftheGermanbourgeoisie,which,curryingfavourwiththeJunkersandafraidoftheproletariat,hadrefusedtodefendtheinterestsofthepeasantry.

It was with the aim of instructing the German bourgeois democracy that in 1850,


–95–

Engels,supportedbythefactualmaterialcollectedbythedemocrat,Zimmermann,wrotethissplendidaccountoftheGermanPeasantWar.First,hegivesapictureoftheeconomicsituationandoftheclasscompositionofGermanyofthattime.Thenheshowshowoutofthissoilspringthevariousoppositiongroupswiththeirprogrammes,andgivesacolourfulcharacterisationofLuther andMuenzer.The thirdchapter containsabriefhistoryof thepeasantuprisingsintheGermanEmpirefrom1476to1517,thatis,tothebeginningoftheReformation.InthefourthchapterwehavethehistoryoftheuprisingofthenobilityundertheleadershipofFranzvonSickingenandUlrichvonHutten.ThefifthandsixthchapterscontainanarrativeoftheeventsofthePeasantWarassuch,withadetailedexplanationofthemaincausesofthepeasants’defeat.IntheseventhandlastchaptersthesignificanceofthePeasantWaranditsconsequencesinGermanhistoryareexplained.

Permeating the whole of Engels’ work is the idea of the necessity of a mercilessstruggleagainstthefeudalmasters,thelandlords.Onlyaradicalabolitionofall tracesoffeudaldomination,hesaid,couldcreatethemostfavourableconditionsforthesuccessofaproletarianrevolution.InthisrespectEngelswasinfullharmonywithMarx,whowrotetohimlater(August16,1856),“EverythinginGermanywilldependuponwhetheritwillbepossible to support the proletarian revolution by something like a second edition of thePeasantWar.Onlythenwilleverythingproceedwell.”

QuitedifferentwastheconceptionofLassalle,whooverestimatedthesignificanceofthe uprising of the nobility, idealized Franz von Sickingen and Ulrich von Hutten, andtreatedtherevolutionarymovementofthelowerplebeianstratatoocontemptuously.Inhisopinion, the PeasantWar, notwithstanding its revolutionary appearance,was in reality areactionarymovement. “Youallknow,”he said to theBerlinworkers, “that thepeasantskilledthenoblesandburnedtheircastles,or,accordingtotheprevailinghabit,madethemrun thegauntlet.However,notwithstanding this revolutionaryappearance, themovementwas,insubstanceandprinciple,reactionary.”

The Russian revolutionary populists, especially the adherents of Bakunin, oftenidentifiedLassalle’sviewofthepeasantswiththeviewsofMarxandEngels.InthistheyfollowedBakunin’slead,whowrotethefollowing:

“Everybody knows that Lassalle repeatedly expressed the idea that the defeat of thepeasantuprisingintheFourteenthCenturyandthestrengtheningandrapidgrowthofthebureaucraticstateinGermanythatfolloweditwereaveritabletriumphfortherevolution.”According to Bakunin, the German communists viewed all peasants as elements ofreaction.“Thefactis,”headded,“thattheMarxistscannotthinkotherwise;worshippersofstatepower at anyprice, they arebound to curse everypeople’s revolution, especially a


–96–

peasant revolution,which is anarchic by its very nature, andwhich proceeds directly toannihilatethestate.”

WhenBakuninwrotetheselines,therewasalreadyinexistencethesecondeditionofEngels’workonthePeasantWar,withanewpreface(1870),inwhichtheinconsistencyofLiebknechtandothercontemporaryGermansocial-democratsontheagrarianquestionwascriticised. In1875, the thirdeditionappeared,withanaddendumwhichemphasised stillmore the sharp difference between the views ofMarx andEngels on the one hand, andLassalleontheother.

Itmustbenoted that in the lastyearsofhis life,Engelsdevotedmuch labour to thestudyofthePeasantWar,andwasabouttorecasthisoldwork.

In1882bewroteaspecialadditiontohisSocialism,UtopianandScientific,devotedtothe history of theGerman peasantry.OnDecember 31, 1884, hewrote to Sorge: “I amsubjectingmyPeasantWartoradicalreconstruction.ItisgoingtobecomeacornerstoneofGermanhistory.Itisagreatpieceofwork.Allthepreliminaryworkisalmostready.”

The work of preparing the second and third volumes of Capital for publication,preventedhimfromcarryingouthisplan.InJuly,1893,hewrotetoMehring,“IfIsucceedinreconstructinganewthehistoricintroductiontomyPeasantWar,whichIhopewillbepossibleduring thiswinter, Iwillgive thereanexpositionofmyviews” [concerning theconditions of the breaking up of Germany and the causes of the defeat of the GermanbourgeoisrevolutionoftheSixteenthCentury].

When Kautsky was writing his book on the forerunners of modern socialism – itappearedinparts–EngelswrotetohimonMay21,1895:“Ofyourbook,Icantellyouthatthefurtheritproceeds, thebetter itbecomes.Comparedwiththeoriginalplan,PlatoandearlyChristianityarenotsufficientlyworkedout.Themediaevalsectsaremuchbetter,andthelaterones,moreso.BestofallaretheTaborites,Muenzer,andtheAnabaptists.Ihave learned much from your book. For my recasting of the Peasant War, it is anindispensablepreliminarywork.

“Inmyjudgment,thereareonlytwoconsiderablefaults:

“(1) A very insufficient insight into the development and the role ofthose elements entirely outside of the feudal hierarchy, which aredéclassé,occupyingalmosttheplaceofpariahs;elementsthatformthelowest stratumof thepopulationofeverymedievalcity,without rightsandoutsidetheruralcommunity,thefeudaldependence,theguildbonds.This isdifficult,but it is thechieffoundation, sincegradually,with thedecomposition of feudal relations, out of this stratum develops thepredecessoroftheproletariatwhich,in1789,inthefaubourgsofParis,madetherevolution.Youspeakoftheproletarians,butthisexpressionis


–97–

not entirely exact; when you count among your ‘proletarians’ theweavers,whosesignificanceyoupictureverycorrectly,youmayrightlydo so, only beginning from that epoch when the déclassé non-guildjourneyman weavers made their appearance and only in so far as thelatterwereinexistence.Muchworkisstillrequiredinthisconnection.

“(2) You have not sufficiently taken into account the situation of theworldmarket,insofarasonecouldspeakofsuchamarketatthattime,and the international economic situation ofGermany at the end of theFifteenth Century. However, only this situation explains why thebourgeois-plebeianmovement under a religious cloak, having suffereddefeat in England, the Netherlands and Bohemia, could achieve ameasureofsuccessinGermanyintheSixteenthCentury.Thiswasduetoitsreligiouscloak,whereasthesuccessofitsbourgeoiscontentswasreserved for the following century and for the countries which hadutilized thedevelopmentof theworldmarket thathad in themeantimetaken another direction, namely, Holland and England. It is a greatsubject,whichIhopetobeabletotreatbrieflyinthePeasantWar, ifIonlysucceedintakingitup!”

Death – Engels died several days after thewriting of this letter (August 5, 1895) –preventedhimfromcompletingthiswork.

D.RIAZANOV.Moscow,July1925


–98–

Facsimileofopeningpagesfromthe1870edition


–99–

NotesFirstappendedtotheRussianeditionof1926

1.Wilhelm Zimmermann – German historian and poet. Born January 2, 1807, inStuttgart, in the family of an artisan. Graduated gymnasium in Stuttgart, studied in theUniversity ofTuebingen togetherwith F. Strauss.Was first pastor, then professor in thePolytechnic School of Stuttgart, occupying the chair of history, German language andliterature. On April 23, 1848, be was elected representative of the National Assembly(Frankfurt).InSt.Paul’sCathedralhejoinedtheextremeleftgroupofrepresentatives.In1850, he was deprived of the University chair for actively participating in the Marchrevolution.In1854,herenewedhisactivitiesaspastorinZabergau.HediedSeptember22,1888.

Asahistorian,WilhelmZimmermannisknownbyhisbook,TheHistoryoftheGreatPeasantWar(1841,2nded.,1856,3rded.,1891).Zimmermannleftaseriesofworksonhistory,historyofliterature,andpoetry:TheHistoryoftheHohenstaufens(2nded.,1865),IllustratedHistoryoftheGermanPeople,HistoryofPoetryofAllNations(1947),etc.

TheHistoryoftheGreatPeasantWar,Zimmermann’schiefhistoricwork,waswrittenwith astonishing mastery and objectivity. The author utilised documents and materialsmainly of the Stuttgart archive. Generally speaking, Zimmermann’s work remains thefullest presentation of the facts relating to the Peasant War. The objectivity of hispresentationand“therevolutionaryinstinctwhichmakeshimanadvocateoftheoppressedclasses” gives the book a special interest. But even in this book the radical bourgeoismakes himself felt. Zimmermann’s negative attitude toward socialism and communismdoes not allow him correctly to appreciate the conflict of classes in the history of thepeasantwars.

Kautsky’s book,Forerunners of Socialism, supplements that of Engels and correctssome inaccuracies in his presentation. The excerpts from Muenzer’s speech which arequoted by Engels as parts of the sermon given before the princes of Saxony after thedestructionbythepeopleofSt.Mary’sChapelinMoellerbach,werewrittenbyMuenzeronanentirelydifferentoccasioninapolemicworkagainstLuther.EngelsheredependsonZimmermann.

Kautsky corrected Zimmermann in another more important question. ZimmermanndepictsMuenzer as aman towering above his epoch. In his book, Kautsky proved thisstandpointtobeunfounded:

“Muenzer was superior to his communist followers, not by philosophical gifts and


–100–

organisationaltalents,butbyhisrevolutionaryenergy,and,firstofall,byhisstatesmanlikemind.”

Even some of the facts in the history ofMuenzer’s dictatorship inMuehlhausen, asgiven by Engels, need correction in some details. Muenzer was not at the head of theMuehlhausencouncil.Pfeiferwasnothisdisciple,buta representativeofamiddle-classfaction.

2.LouisXI – King of France, son of Charles VII. Born 1423, reigned 1461–1483. Hefounded the absolute monarchy on the ruins of feudalism in France, and extended theboundariesofhiscountrytotheJura,theAlps,andthePyrenees.Inhisyouth,asdauphin,LouisparticipatedintheuprisingofthenobilityagainstCharlesVII.Havingascendedthethrone after the death of his father, he started a fight against the feudal lords but wasopposedby theCommonWelfareLeaguewhichunited thebigandsmall feudal lordsofFrance.InhiswarsagainsttheLeague,Louis,insteadofusingthecrudemethodsoffeudalpolicies,practisednotonlyforcebutcunning,adiplomaticsystemof lies,deceptionandcaution.LouisXIwasdefeatedandcompelledtosignapeacepactwiththefeudallordsonOctober 29, 1461. But peace with the feudal lords was not achieved. Aided by thecommercial class, he started a newwar inNovember, 1470.All ofwestern France roseagainst him, but this time he was victorious. In order to be able more successfully tooppose the feudal lords,LouisXIdecided to reform the armyby freeing the cities frommilitaryduties,andtocreateanarmyof50,000.HisinfantryconsistedofSwisshirelings.In1481,headdedProvenceandLiége tohisdomainsand subdued thewholeofFranceoutside of Navarre and the duchy of Breton. The absolute power of Louis XI couldestablishitselfinFranceonlythroughthesupportofthecommercialelements.LouisXIinhisturnprotectedcommerce,industryandagriculture.UnderhisreigntheoldinstitutionoftheRomanempire,themail,wasrestored.

3.Carolina–AcriminalcodeoftheSixteenthCentury,publishedin1532underEmperorCharlesV.IntheSixteenthCentury,Germanycountedover300states,eachhavingitsowncriminal lawswith its ownmethods of cruelty. Justice at that time aimed at extorting aconfessionfromtheprisonerbymeansoftorture.TheprevailingRomanlaw,inthehandsof theprinces,wasacruel tool for theexploitationof thepeople.Thedevelopmentofamoney economy, however, and the growth of absolutism, demanded a uniform criminallegislation and a reform of the existing laws. Attempts at reform had been made inGermanyasearlyastheendoftheFifteenthandthebeginningoftheSixteenthCentury.TheReichstag,meetinginAugsburgandRegensburgin1532,finallyadoptedadraftofacriminal code known asCarolina (‘EmperorCharlesV’s and theHolyRomanEmpire’sorderofPenalLaw’).ThiscodedidnotabolishtheRomanlaw,butwasanattemptonlyto


–101–

combine the prevailing Roman with the local law. Neither did the Carolina abolish thecodesoftheseparatestates,thenewcodeservingonlyasasortofguidefortheprincesandelectors.Thenewcodebrought insignificantchanges in thecourtprocedure. Itmitigatedthe inquisitional order of investigation anddefined the right of defense.But torture as ameans of examination of the defendant was retained in the new code. The chaptersconcerningthe‘cuttingofears,’‘cuttingofnoses,’‘burning,’‘quartering,’adornedthenewcode as well. The code retained its great importance, however, up to the EighteenthCentury.

4.Waldenses –A religious sectwhich sprangup in the citiesof southernFrance in themiddleoftheTwelfthCentury.ThecitiesofnorthernItalyandsouthernFranceofthattimerepresented very favourable ground for the development of a religious reformistmovement. Commerce and industry had developed here earlier than in the west; thebourgeoisiehadcomeintoexistence,thecraftsflourished.ButwhilethecitiesofnorthernItaly,whichwerepartlyinterestedintheexploitationofRome,sincetheyderivedfromitnosmallprofits,begantoshowspiritualindependenceonlyinrelationtothedoctrinesofthe Catholic Church, the cities of southern France, which were no less developedeconomically but at the same time less dependent upon Rome, started the first seriousupheavalagainstthepope’sdomination.

Accordingtothelegend,thesectoftheWaldenseswasfoundedbyarichmerchantofLyonscalledPetrusWaldus.Itispossible,however,thatitexistedpriortothattime.PetrusWaldusdecidedtofollowthelawoftheGospel.Hedistributedhispossessionsamongthepoor, gathered around himself a considerable number of followers, and began preaching(1176).SoontheWaldensescombinedinLombardywiththesectoftheHumiliates,whoalso called themselves the paupers of Lyons. The Waldenses did not confine theirpreachings to southern France. We find them also in Italy, Germany and Bohemia. Insouthern France, as elsewhere, they recruited their followers from among the artisans,particularlytheweavers.

Originally,theWaldensesdidnotplantosecedefromthechurch.Buttheirfreereadingof the Gospel and their lay preachings, their disagreement with Catholicism inunderstanding the mysteries of transubstantiation, as well as their militant character,compelled the official authorities, the clergy, to start a campaign of cruel persecutionagainst them. Pope Sixtus IV even declared a crusade against them in 1477. ThosepersecutionscontinueddowntotheEighteenthCentury.In1685,FrenchandItalianarmieskilled3,000Waldensesandcaptured1,000.Only in1848did theyattaincivil rightsandreligiousfreedominPiedmontandSavoy.ItalianWaldensesaretobefoundevenatpresentin the Alpine valleys, Val-Martino, Val-Angrona. The Twentieth Century finds 46


–102–

communitiesofWaldenseswith6,276parishioners.

TheEvangelistcommunismof theWaldenses in theMiddleAgeswasofamonklikecharacter. For the ‘perfect’ members of their community they made communism andcelibacy obligatory. The ‘disciples,’ however, were allowed to marry and to possessproperty. The Waldenses rejected military service and the oath. They devoted theirattentiontotheeducationofthemasses.InthosecommunitiesoftheWaldenseswherethepeasants and the middle-class prevailed, they turned into a bourgeois–democratic sect.Wheretheproletarianelementsprevailed,theWaldensesbecamecommunist‘dreamers.’

5.ArnoldofBrescia –Made the first serious attempt to reform theCatholicChurchasearlyasthemiddleoftheTwelfthCentury.ArnoldofBresciawasbornbetween1100and1110inBrescia,Italy.Adiscipleofthetheologianandphilosopher,Abélard,headoptedhiscriticalattitudetowardsthereligiousdogmasandtheteachingsofthefathers.In1136,heparticipated,withhisnativecity,Brescia,initsstruggleagainstitslord,thebishop.Arnoldof Brescia strove to bring the clergy back to the real Christianity of the Gospel. Hedemanded that the clergy should relinquish lay authority and should hand over itspossessionstothelayrulers.Theclergymenwhopreachedmustcontentthemselveswiththetitheandvoluntarycontributions,hesaid.AtthesecondLateranchurchcouncil(1139),theBishopofBresciaaccusedhimofheresy.ArnoldofBresciawascompelledtofleetoParis.In1146,hereturnedtoRome,wherebeparticipatedinthestrugglebetweenthecitydemocracyandthepope.

RomeinthemiddleoftheTwelfthCenturywasaspiritualandpoliticalcentrewhithermaterial wealth was flowing from all sections of the Christian world. The popes ablyexploited the favourable situationof theChristiancapital.ArnoldofBresciaappealed tothepeopletodeposethepopeandtorestoretheancientRomanrepublic.PopeHadrianIV,however, succeeded in expelling him from the city. Hewas taken prisoner by EmperorFrederickBarbarossaandextraditedtotheauthoritiesofRome.Hewashangedasarabidheretic,andhisbodywasburned(1155).

6.TheAlbigenses–AreligioussectofsouthernFrance,werewidespreadintheEleventhandTwelfthCenturies.TheirnamewasderivedfromthecityofAlbiinLanguedoc,oneofthe most important centres of the movement. The Albigenses preached apostolicChristianityandsimplelifeaccordingtotheGospel.Theywerecalledthe‘goodmen.’ThepopeandthecouncilsofthechurchclaimedthattheydeniedtheTrinitydoctrine,theHolyCommunionandmarriage, aswell as thedoctrineof thedeathand resurrectionof JesusChrist.AtthecouncilofToulouse(1119),PopeCalixtusII,andsubsequentlyin1139PopeInnocentII,excommunicatedthem.Finally,in1209,PopeInnocentIIIorganisedacrusade


–103–

againstthem.Thewarcoveredtwentyyears.

ThestubbornnessofthebloodyfightagainsttheAlbigensesisexplainedpartlybythefactthattheAlbigenseswereaidedintheirwaragainstthepopebythelocalfeudallordsofsouthernFrance.Whenapapal legateand inquisitorwaskilledon the territoryofCountRaymondVIofToulouse,PopeInnocentIIIdecidedtousethisoccurrenceastheoccasionfor taking away the lands from Count Raymond, who maintained a tolerant attitudetowardstheheretics.AstruggleensuedbetweenthelordsofsouthernFranceandthepope,whowas supported by the lords of the north. Northern Francewas in conflict with thesouth, which being economically more developed, was, therefore, a menace to it. Thenorthern armieswere headed byCount Simon deMontfort and papal legates.When thearmiesofthenorthtookthecityofBéziers,theykilled20,000Albigenses.Inthecourseoftheensuingstrugglehundredsofthousandsfell.TheprovincesofProvenceandLanguedocweredevastated.Peacewas concludedonly as late as 1229. In consequenceof thewarsagainst theAlbigenses thewealthy southwasdestroyedand the territoriesof theFrenchcrownwereexpanded.

7.JohnWycliffe (BornOctober 1320, died 1384) –AnEnglish reformer.One of thoseideologistswho,evenprior to theReformation(FifteenthandSixteenthCenturies),drewan outline of the coming reforms. JohnWycliffe was a professor of OxfordUniversity.Prior to his appearance on the social and political arena, he devoted himself entirely toresearchworkinthefieldsofphysics,logicandphilosophy.TheFourteenthCenturywasanepochofstubbornfightingbetweentheroyalpowerofEnglandandthepope.ThepopeexploitedEnglandcruelly.IntheThirteenthCentury,theEnglishkingdompaidtothepopea yearly tribute of 1,000 pounds of silver. Under Edward III (Fourteenth Century),Parliamentcomplainedthatthecountrywaspayingthepopeasumfivetimestheamountof the taxes paid to the king.The development of industry and commerce increased theresistingpowerofEngland.ThestrugglebetweenRomeandEnglandwasdeepenedbytheHundred Years’ War between England and France (1339–1456). This war affected theinterests of all classes of the English people. The governing classes of England soughtpossessionofthetreasuriesofNetherland,andtheyalsolookedwithacovetouseyeontherichesoftheFrenchnobility.Themiddle-classsawinthiswarameansofenrichment.Theburdenofthewarfellprimarilyuponthepeasantry.Itisnotsurprising,therefore,thatthepope, having become an ally of France, aroused universal hatred in England. In 1336,Parliamentabolishedthetributetothepope.HeresiespersecutedinItalyandFrancenowspreadtoEngland.Wycliffe’spreachingswerepopularamongallthestrataofthepeople.He taught that in case of necessity the State had a right to deprive the Church of itspossessions,thatpowerwasbaseduponservice,andthatconsequentlyonlyservicecould


–104–

justify the levying of taxes and duties by the clergy. In 1374, in disputes with therepresentatives of the Roman court, Wycliffe disclosed also the abuses of the RomanChurch in appointing candidates to ecclesiastical posts in England. He was severelypersecutedbytheclergy,andonlytheinterferenceofthecourt,andtheinterventionoftheuniversityandthecities,savedhim.

In his doctrines,Wycliffe never overstepped the boundaries laid down by the rulingclasses.HepreachedpovertyandequalityinChrist,butonlyfortheclergy.Heproposedthat their lands should be expropriated; but this was entirely in the interests of thelandowners and the king. The relations betweenman andGod,Wycliffe pictured in theimageofthefeudalrelationsofhistime.Manholdsallhispossessions,hesaid,fromGod.God’smercy is theconditionof thisvassalage.Mortalsindeprivesman,hepreached,ofhis right toholdpossessionsby themercyofGod.Therefore,he said, theclergy shouldhavecommonproperty,andshouldsubmittociviljurisdiction.Thesupremejudgeofthehumanconscience,hesaid,wasnotthepope,butGod.

Afterthepeasantinsurrectionof1381,ageneralsympathyforWycliffeinhisstruggleagainst the pope changed into a hatred on the part of the propertied classes. OxfordUniversity condemned his Twelve Articles, which rejected the doctrine oftransubstantiation.Wycliffediedinpeace,buthisdoctrineswerecruellypersecuted.

In1415,thechurchcouncilatConstancedecidedtoburnhisremains.

8.WiththenameofJohnHuss isconnected thestruggleagainst theCatholicChurch inBohemia,theso-calledHussitemovementoftheFifteenthCentury.DuringtheFourteenthand Fifteenth Centuries, the Roman Catholic Church had lost its authority among themassesof thepeople.TheRomanpopewas, in theeyesofallpeoples,anexploiterwhodeprivedthemofearthlygoodsinthenameofGodandheavenlylife.InEngland,FranceandSpain,theChurchwasassuminganationalcharacter,severingitsrelationswithRome.The exceptionwasGermany,which became the object of the avaricious appetite of thepope.Iftheothercountrieswereinamorefavourablecondition,iftheywereearlierinaposition to free themselves fromunder thepapal yoke, it is to be explainedonlyby thedevelopmentofcapitalism,thegrowthofwealth,andthepowerofthemiddle-classandtheprinces.Of allGermany, onlyBohemiawas, in this respect, in an exceptional situation.Bohemia developed economically in the Fourteenth Century with incredible rapiditybecause of its silver mines. The Church and the king with his court, as well as themerchants and the artisans, received enormous profits. The pope and the emperor werekeenly watching Bohemia lest it free itself from their dependence. Dissatisfaction hadbeguntogatherinthecountry.Thelowernobility,thepeasantryandthemiddle-classwere


–105–

dissatisfied.A price revolution, due to the abundance of silver, caused a general dearth.Besides, themasses of the people in Bohemiawere Czechs, while the exploiting upperlayer, the lay and ecclesiastical authorities, were Germans. Therefore the class strugglehereassumedthecharacterofa religiousandnationalstruggleof theBohemiansagainstthe Germans and the pope. In this revolutionary medium, the ideas of the Englishreformist, Wycliffe, penetrated into Bohemia. Jan Huss was the literary defender andpropounderofWycliffe’sideas.

Husswasborn in1369, inawell-to-dopeasant family.Hewasprofessor,andatonetime rector, in the then famous Prague University, and also preacher in the Chapel ofBethlehem,whereserviceswereheldintheCzechlanguage.WhenthePragueUniversitytookastandagainsttheforty-fivethesesofWycliffe,Husscametotheirdefence(1409).In1412, Pope John XXIII, being in need of money, organised the sale of indulgences inPrague.Husscameforthwithaheatedsermonagainst thecorruptionof theChurch,anddemandedthe terminationof the traffic.Healsoopposed‘miracles.’ Inaspecial treatise,HussprovedthattrueChristiansneedednomiracles,andthattruefaithwascontainedonlyintheHolyScriptures.HussassertedthattheChurchwasonlyanassemblyofthefaithfuldestinedforHeaven,wherebyheprovokedthehatredoftherulingclique,whosawintheChurchthedominanceofthehigherclergy.

On June 6, 1410, the books of Huss were burned, and he was excommunicated. In1414, theChurchcouncilatConstanceaccusedhimofheresy,andthoughHussdeclaredthat hewished to receive guidance and instruction from the princes of theChurch as towhereinhisopinionsdifferedfromtheWordofGod,hewasturnedovertotheauthoritiesandburnedatthestake(June6,1415).HisasheswerethrownintotheRhine.

9.Hussites(TaboritesandCalixtines).TheexecutionofJanHusssetarevolutionafootinBohemia.AlltheclassesoftheBohemianpeoplearrayedthemselvesagainstthepowerofthepope–forachurchreform,andagainst theGermans–fornational independence.Inthisnationalistreligiousstrugglethemassesofthepeoplerevealedtheirsocialhatredforthepropertiedclasses.Atthebeginning,however,allclassesofBohemiaactedinunison.Thesloganofthestrugglewasthedemandforcommunionundertwoforms.TheritesoftheCatholicChurchgavetothelaymanincommunionbreadalone,andtothepriestsbreadandwine. Themasses rising against the privileges of the Church demanded equality incommunion. ‘A chalice for the layman!’ – that was the slogan of the movement. Thenobilitywhich joined themovementused thisstruggle toannex the landsof theChurch;and the clergy held no less than one-quarter of the kingdom’s territory. The richbourgeoisiesawintheHussitewaralsoameansofgainingmorerichesfromtheclergyandthe possessions of theGermanCatholic cities (Kuttenberg,with its famous silvermines


–106–

wasthemostdesirableofall).ThenobilityandtherichBohemianbourgeoisiethatjoinedtheHussitemovement formed themoderate party of theCalixtines orUtraquists. TheircentrewasthecityofPrague.Sidebysidewiththismoderatemovement,however,thereexistedalsoademocraticone.Itsbulkwasformedbythepeasantswhowishedtobefreeownersoftheland,especiallyafterthenobilityhadappropriatedthelandoftheclergy.Thelowermiddle-class of the cities and the proletarianswerewith the peasants. TheywereconcentratedinthesmallercitiesofBohemia.ThedemocraticelementslaterbegantocallthemselvesTaborites after thenameof theirmilitaryandpolitical centre, thecommunistcityofTabor.TheHussitemovementwasnowheadedbyagroupofcommunists.

In1414,thepeopledroveKingWenceslausoutofPrague,afterwhichhereticsbegantoflowintoBohemiafromallpartsofEurope.

TheBeghards and theWaldenses found in Bohemia a refuge from persecution. Thecommunists fortified themselves in Tabor where they started their propaganda. TheydeclaredthattheMillenniumofChristhadcome,thattherewouldbenomoreservantsandmasters, and that the people would return to the state of pristine innocence. In variouscities,particularlyinTabor,theinsurgentsbegantoorganisecommunistcentres.Taborwaslocatedinthevicinityofgoldmines.Commerceandindustryflourishedthere.WhenthecommunistsbecamestronginTabortheyattractedlargemassesofthepeople.Itissaidthatonegatheringnumbered42,000(July22,1419).TheinhabitantsofTaborcalledeachotherbrotherandsister,andrecognisednodifferencebetween‘thine’and‘mine.’TheTaboritestaughtthat‘thereshouldbenokings,nomasters,nosubjectsonearth,andthattaxesandduties should be abolished.’ According to their doctrine there was to be no coercion,everything was to belong to all, and therefore, they said, he who possesses propertycommits a mortal sin. This communism, however, was of a Christian nature. It was acommunismofconsumption,notproduction.Everyfamilyworkedforitself,contributingits surplus to the general treasury. There were among the Taborites the most extremecommunists, who allowed no concessions, and denied the family. Those ‘brothers andsisters of the free spirit’ called themselvesAdamites. Themajority of the inhabitants ofTabor and the knights, under the leadership of Zizka, launched a struggle against theAdamites.

The communist community of Tabor was surprisingly well organised. As amilitarycommunityitalarmedtheGermanprincesforalongwhile.TheTaboritesrepresentedthefirstregulararmy,andtheywerethefirsttouseartilleryinbattle.ThattheTaboritescouldholdtheirownforalmostagenerationisexplainedbytheirattentiontoeducation,bytheorder and discipline in their community. Tabor fell, due, mainly, to a split among theHussites.ThemoderateCalixtines,havingappropriatedthelandoftheclergy,didnotwish


–107–

torecognisethesupremacyofTabor.ThewaroftheTaboritesagainsttheking,thepope,andallofEurope,wasnotintheinterestsofthenobility.AfterthevictoryoftheTaboritesatTauss(1431),itseemedthattherewasnoenemycapableofcopingwiththem.ButtheCalixtinesstartednegotiationswith theenemy.Theydecided tocall toaDietallbarons,knights,andrepresentativesof thecities, todiscussaplanforastateorganization.Taboritself was divided. The lower middle-class and the peasantry were indifferent to thecommunistprogramme.Theywantedpeace.Tabor’scommunismwasnotstable.Ithadnotthe foundation of communist production, therefore equality of themeans of subsistencesoondisappeared.TherewerebothrichandpoorinTabor.

ThearmyofTaborwasbeingovercrowdedby‘crooksandriff-raffofallnations.’Assoon as the nobility began to recruit soldiers for a war against Tabor, offering betterconditions than the communist community, treason crept into the ranks of the Taboritearmy,andwholesaledesertionbegan.ThisexplainsthefallofTabor.OnMay30,1434,theTaborites suffered a crushing defeat near Czeski Brod. Out of 18,000 Taborite soldiers,13,000were killed. In 1437, theywere compelled to conclude a treatywith Sigismund,who guaranteed them the independence of Tabor. But in spite of this the communistcommunityofTaborsoondisappeared.

10.ScourgingFriars(Flagellants)–Asectofpeoplewhowhipthemselves.ItappearedinEurope as early as the Eleventh Century, and became widespread in the Thirteenth,Fourteenth and Fifteenth Centuries. From Italy, the movement spread through southernFrance,Netherlands,Alsace andLorraine.TheFlagellants taught that itwas possible toobtain absolution from sin by inflicting sufferings on one’s body. One of the firstecclesiasticaltheoristsofthissect,GeorgeVII,taughtthatinthiswaythefaithfulemulatedChrist, laboured to obtain a martyr’s crown, deadened and castigated their flesh, andexpiatedtheirsins.ThisdoctrinewasinlinewiththeprevailingasceticismoftheMiddleAges,whichdemandedof the faithful tohardenand torture theirbodiesby fasting,poorclothing, etc., in the name of Christ. The Flagellant movement, however, assumed thecharacterofanepidemic,ofamasspsychosis.Thus, in theThirteenthCentury,bandsofpeoplemarchedthroughthecitiesofItaly,whippingthemselveswithstrapsandlashes,andprayingforabsolution.Afterthedevastatingepidemicofthe‘BlackDeath,’themovementassumed a dangerous character. In many localities of Germany, France and Flanders,Flagellants inmortal terror, imagining thatChristwasabout todestroy theworld for thesinsofmankind,inflictedcruelpunishmentuponthemselves.InGermancities,Flagellantcommunitiesbegantocomeintoexistence.‘Thosedesirousofpartakingofself-castigationhadtopayasmallfee,andthiswasalldemandedofproselytes.’IntheFifteenthCentury,themovementweakened,butitdidnotdisappear.TheFlagellantsoftheFifteenthCentury


–108–

spoke evil of themonks anddemanded a series of church reforms.TheRomanChurch,whichatthebeginninghadnotopposedthemovementsince,inItaly,itwasanti-imperialandthereforeameansofstrengtheningtheChurch,begantopersecutetheFlagellants.IntheSixteenthandSeventeenthCenturies,themovementbecamefashionableatcourt.Sexelementsbegantodominateinit.TracesofthissectcanbefoundevenintheNineteenthCentury.

11.TheLollards–AreligioussectwidespreadamongtheworkingpopulationsofEnglandin the Fourteenth and FifteenthCenturies. The heresies of those times found favourablegroundnotonlyamongthemasterclasses.Asamatteroffact,everyclassformulateditsdemandsthroughthereformmovement.Thus,amongthepoorestweaversofEnglandthesect of Beghards, or, as they were commonly called in England, Lollards, came intoexistence. (The Lollards were funeral chanters.) The Beghards first appeared in theNetherlands (Flanders and Brabant), in a country where commerce and industry hadprogressed earlier than in the rest ofEurope andwhere sheep-breeding and thewoollenindustrywere highly developed.The sect ofBeghardswas inmost cases a fraternity ofweavers.Unmarried artisans belonging to the sect lived in common houses,where theykept a communist household. The movement started in England when the weavers ofFlandersmigrated into that country.Norfolk, the centre of thewoollen industry, becamealso the centre of the movement of the English Beghards, the Lollards. The Lollardpropagandists, called ‘poor brothers,’ spread the new doctrine over the country. Errant‘poorministers’ preached to the people that lay and ecclesiastical possessions should becommonproperty.Theyurgedthepeopletopayneitherduesnortithestotheclergy,andappealedtotheservantstorefusetoworkforthemasters.In1395,theLollardspetitionedParliament, demanding a reform of the Anglican Church, abolition of its worldlypossessionsandcelibacy.Thepetitionwasrejected.

ThemostoutstandingrepresentativeoftheLollardswasJohnBall,themadministerofKent.ComingfromtheranksoftheFranciscanmonkswhosympathisedwiththeLollardmovement, he became one of the leaders of the peasant uprising of 1381 in England.Beginningwith1356,JohnBallpreachedmainly inEssexand inNorfolk,deliveringhissermonsincitysquaresandcemeteries.Theybecameverypopular.Hepreachedcommonproperty,andurgedthepeopletoexterminatethenobility.Onlythen,hesaid,wouldpeoplebeequal,andthemasterswouldbenohigherthantherest.AllmenoriginatedfromAdamand Eve, he said. ‘When Adam dolf and Eve span, who was then the gentleman?’ bequeried.Hewaskilledduringthesuppressionoftherevoltin1381.

The Lollard movement gained in importance when it became connected with thepeasantuprisingandwiththeoppositionmovementofthemiddle-classinthecities,After


–109–

1381, the Lollards found themselves in a precarious situation. Every Lollard wasconsideredacriminalandtreatedaccordingly.Terroristactsagainstthesectcontinuedforalongwhile,butitdidnotdisappearfromthelowerstrataoftheworkingpopulation,asisprovenbypamphletsappearingevenattheendoftheFourteenthandthebeginningoftheFifteenthCentury:‘ThePIoughman’sPrayer’and‘TheLanthorneofLight.’TheLollardsspreadamongthepeopleaknowledgeoftheBibleintheEnglishlanguage.

12.Chiliasticdreams,Chiliasm–Thedoctrineof the secondcomingofChrist and theMillennium on earth. This Millennium was pictured as one thousand years of joy andhappiness. All sufferings and privations, the adherents of this doctrine said, woulddisappear, and perfect harmony between mankind and rejuvenated nature would be re-established.ThedreamsofaMillenniumbecamewidespreadintheMiddleAges,inyearsofelementalsufferingsandsocio-politicalcataclysms;inmorequietepochs,Chiliasmwasthedoctrineofsmallinsignificantsects.LargemassesofpeoplewerefiredwithChiliasticdreamsduringthepersecutionsoftheChristiansintheTenthCentury,becausetheendoftheworldwas expected to come in theyearofChrist 1000.Morewidespread,however,were theChiliasticdreams in theFourteenthandFifteenthCenturies, in theReformationperiod. A back-to-the-Gospel movement, religious unrest, coupled with an increasingexploitation of the working population, were fertile soil for Chiliastic visions. ThomasMuenzer, theAnabaptists,andtheTaborites,allpaidtributetothemysticdoctrineoftheMillennium.

SocialconditionsprevailingintheMiddleAgescreatedanatmospherefavourableformysticism.Theignoranceofthemassesnurturedit.Besides,Chiliasm,beliefinmiracles,andmysticvisionswereanoutletatatimewhenthemassessawnowayofimprovingtheircondition by their own efforts. Only a miracle could, in their opinion, overthrow alloppressorsandexploiters.ThemassesweredriventobelieveinthemiracleofthesecondcomingofChrist,inorderthattheyshouldnotsinkintodespair.

13.WiththenameofMartinLuther isconnectedthehistoryof thereligiousandsocio-political transformation of theGermany of the SixteenthCentury, the history of the so-called Reformation. Luther was not the initiator of that movement. His activities anddoctrines by nomeans cover the social history of theReformation. In the revolutionarymovement of the Sixteenth Century, he was the representative of the coalition of themiddle-classandthenobility.

FromtheFourteenthtotheSixteenthCentury,tradecapitaltransformedtheoldnaturaleconomy of the European peoples, and rendered superfluous the political system offeudalism.Thevictoryof absolutismbecame an economicnecessity.On theother hand,


–110–

developmentofcommercialcapitalinducedthemasterstoincreasetheexploitationofthepeasants.Freeing thepeasants fromthefeudalyoke, themasters increased theirburdens,substituting cash payments formanual labour and payments in kind. The peasantswerebeingdrivenofftheland,andthusthenucleusofthefutureproletarianclasswasformed.Thisincipientproletariatwasutilisedbythearmycommandersandthemerchants,bytheformer as material for the armies, by the latter as workers in their manufactories. In aperiodofeconomicrevolution,feudalnobilitybecameahindrancetohistoricdevelopment.The lowernobility, theknights, tookan intermediarypositionbetween thepeasantryandthehighnobility.Theknighthoodattemptedtohaltitsownimminentruin.InGermany,thestruggle of these two class groupings was complicated by the peculiarities of Germaneconomicdevelopment.AtthebeginningoftheSixteenthCentury,Germany,becauseofitsminesandcommerce,wasstillapowerfulcountryeconomically.Buttheeconomiccentreof Europe soon moved from theMediterranean basin to the coast of the Atlantic. Thedevelopment of Germany, as of all Eastern Europe, became stagnant. Under thesecircumstanceswell-establishedsocialandpoliticalconditionswereeitherbreakingdownorchangingradically.ForacenturyEuropewasshakenbyterrificwarsandrevolutions.Theexploitation on the part of the Roman Church was most keenly felt in Germany. Themonasteries and the princes of the Church exploited the peasantry and the cities to thepointofruin.Themiddle-classesprotestedagainsttheaidthatthemonasteriesgavetothepoor,becauseitlimitedthemintheirexploitationofthemasses.

TheRomanChurchfoundalucrativesourceofincomeinthesaleofchurchofficesandespeciallyinthesaleoftheso-calledindulgences–absolutionforcash.TheprincesoftheChurch exploited the people in their own realm, as did the feudal land owners and thecapitalistmerchantsintheirs.AstruggleagainsttheRomanChurchbecameinevitable.ButwhileEnglandandFrance,economicallymoreadvancedthanGermany,soonsucceededinfreeingthemselvesfrompapalrule,Germanyrequiredalongandstubbornstruggle.

InGermany,allclassesofthepopulationsufferedgravelyunderpapalexploitation,buteachformulateditsownprogramme.Luther’spropagandawasthecentrewhichoriginallyunited,first,theknighthoodstrugglingagainsttheprinces,second,thelowerclergyandthepeasantrystrugglingagainsttheprincesoftheChurchandthefeudalbarons,and,third,thecitymiddle-classchafingundertheruleofthecityaristocracy,thepatricians.

Lutherwas bornNovember 10, 1483, in a peasant family. His fatherworked in themines.In1501,heenteredErfurtUniversity,whereheledaverygaylifeinthecirclesoftheHumanists, thoseadvocatesofradical ideas.In1505,heenteredamonastery,and,aseverygoodCatholic,wenttoseethepope.In1509,LuthergaveacourseoflecturesintheWittenbergUniversity.In1517,whenTetzel, therepresentativeofPopeLeoX,openeda


–111–

saleofindulgencesinSaxony,LutherhungoutonthedoorsoftheWittenbergchapel,hisninety-fivethesesagainstindulgences.HisfirstprotestagainsttheRomanChurchwasverytimid.Lutherprotestedagainstcorruption.Thesis21read:‘Advocatesofindulgencesaremistakenwhen theysay that throughpapalabsolutionaman is freedofallpunishment.’Thesis27:‘It isnonsensetopreachthatassoonasthepennyjinglesinthebox,thesoulleaves purgatory.’Lutherwas surprised at the effect of his theses.Hegave impetus to amovementwhich had started before him, and it engulfed all classes ofGermany. Threegroups became engaged in the struggle: the Catholic conservatives, the middle-classreformists, and the plebeian revolutionists. As a leader of the middle-class reformistmovement, Luther at first appealed to violence, to the use of fire and iron for theexterminationofthecancerthat,hesaid,wasdestroyingtheworld.Hecalledforadecisivestruggleagainstthelayandclericalprinces.Between1517and1522,Lutherwasreadytoenter an alliance with the democratic factions. Between 1522 and 1525, however, hebetrayed his allies, the peasantry and the lower clergy. His change was due to theAnabaptistsinZwickauandthepeasantmovement.Hewasalsoinfluencedbytheuprisingoftheknighthood(Autumn,1522).

AttheheadoftheuprisingoftheknighthoodwereFranzvonSickingenandUlrichvonHutten. The formerwas the commander, and the latter the ideologist of themovement.Their hatred for the pope and the princes and their striving for the reconstruction of aunited Germanymade them, by the middle of the Sixteenth Century, the heroes of theGerman bourgeoisie. In substance, however, the movement of united knighthood in asociety where capitalism had begun to develop, was reactionary. Sickingen and Huttendreamedofarenewedmediaevalstatewherepowerwasinthehandsofthenoblesandtheemperorwastheirsubject.Theyneveraimedatfreeingthecitiesorthepeasantry,thoughthey were compelled to appeal to them for aid. In the summer of 1522, Franz vonSickingen led troops against the ‘priestly nest’ of Trier. But the armies of the unitedRhenishandSuabianprincesdealthimadecisiveblow.Manycastlesweredestroyedandmanyknightsperished.Lutherdidnotsupportthatmovement,butcondemneditaswellasthatofthepeasants.

Inhisfirstworks,wherehecalledtheprinces‘thegreatestfoolsonearthandthemostheinousscoundrels,’and inhis firstappeals relative to thePeasantWar,Lutherdefendedtheinsurgents.Hewrote,forinstance,‘Itisnotthepeasantswhoaroseagainstyoumasters,butGodhimself,whowishestopunishyouforyourevildoings.’Lutherhopedtofindinthe peasantmovement a support for his struggle against Rome.Butwhen, inApril andMay, the peasantry revolted all over the country, burning and destroying castles, themovement assuming a communist character, Luther defended the princes against the


–112–

insurgent peasants.He attributed themovement to the peasants’ easy life.He urged theprincesto‘stranglethemasyouwouldmaddogs.’Whentheinsurrectionwasquelled,hebraggedthathe‘hadkilledthepeasantsbecausehehadgiventheorderstokill.’‘Alltheirbloodisuponme,’hesaid.

AnalliancewasestablishedbetweenLutherand theprinces,whowerewell satisfiedwiththeacquisitionofthechurchestates.TheReformationwasprofitablebothtothemandtotheinsurgentsofthebigcities.In1526,ataDietsessioninSpeyer,itwasforthefirsttimedecreed that thesubjectmust follow the faithofhismaster.Thissaved theprinces,whoopenlyjoinedLuther.Itistruethatin1529CatholicserviceswerereinstatedandtheconfiscationofthelandsoftheclergywashaltedintheprovincesoftheLutheranprinces,buttheLutheranminorityprotestedagainstthisdecision–hencethenameProtestants. In1530,ataDietsessioninAugsburg,theProtestantprincessubmittedtoEmperorCharlesVthe so-calledAugsburg Confession of the Lutherans. It consisted of two parts, the firstgiving an exposition of the new faith, and the second condemning the corruption of theRomanChurchandoutliningthenecessaryreforms.

‘We reject those,’ says theAugsburgConfession, ‘whopreach thatabsolutioncanbereached,notbyfaith,butbygooddeeds.’MancanfindfavourintheeyesofGod,saysthedocument,onlybythewordofGodandbytheguidanceoftheHolySpirit.Wemustnot,itsays,confusetheauthorityoftheStatewiththeauthorityofthepope;theChurchhasthepowertopreachtheGospelandtoperformrites,butitshouldnotparticipateintheaffairsoftheState.

The publication of the Augsburg Confession was not the end of the struggle. InSeptember,1555,attheAugsburgDiet,theso-calledAugsburgReligiousPeaceconfirmedthedecisionof1526 relative to theobligationof the subjects to follow the faithof theirmasters.Thisdecisionmadeitobvious thatGermanywastoremaindismembered,undertheruleoftheprinces.

Lutherism became the religion of the economically backward countries. It spread innorthernandwesternGermany,DenmarkandSweden,wheretheprinces,thebishopsandthe landlordsbecametheprotectorsof theLutheranChurch.Buteven thispartial reformcouldsucceedonlyasa resultof the revolutionarymovementof thepeasantry, thecitiesandtheknighthood.

14. Joachim of Floris (of Calabria) – An Italian mystic of the Twelfth Century. HisdoctrineoftheeternalgospelisknownunderthenameofJoachimism.Inhisconception,theApocalypseteachesusthattheworldpassesthroughthreeages,theageoftheLaw,orof theFather, theageof theGospel,orof theSon,and theageof theSpirit,whichwill


–113–

bringtheagestoanend.Thefirstage,hesaid,correspondstotheOldTestament,theruleoflayauthority,ofexternallawandthepreponderanceoftheflesh.Thesecondagemarksthe predominance of the clergy, and the combination of spiritual andmaterial interests.This,hesaid,wastheagehelivedin.Thethirdage,heprophesied,wouldsooncomeandwould bemarked by a dominance of the spirit over the flesh, themonks becoming theruling power, and the eternal gospel being the law of the world. Joachim denied thathumanitywassavedbyChrist.

Joachimwas of an urban family. Stricken by the horrors of the plague epidemic, hebecameamonkandfoundedthemonasteryofSanGiovanniinFiore.Hewrotetwobooks:The Concordance Between the New and the Old Testaments and Commentary on theApocalypse. Several decades later (1260), the Joachimiteswere cursed by the pope andseverelypersecuted.

15.NicolasStorch –A cloth-maker in Zwickau,were he became famous by preachingreligiouscommunism.ThomasMuenzerwasunderhisinfluenceandassertedthatheknewthe Bible better than all priests combined. In a short time, a whole community, whichcountedtwelveapostlesinitsmidst,gatheredaroundStorch.Hisdisciplesbelievedthatthetruthwasgiventohiminholyrevelations.OnMay16,1521,thecommunityofZwickauinvited a newpreacher,NicolasHausmann of Schneeberg, a devoted friend ofLuther’s,andthusStorch’sactivitiesmetwithastubbornopposition.Hewasexpelledfromthecity,andwenttothecityofWittenberg,wherethe‘Zwickauprophets’hopedtofindsupportinCarlstadt, a former co-worker of Luther. But they were compelled to flee to southernGermany where Storch dreamed of establishing the kingdom of God on earth. A holyrevelation,hesaid,madecleartohimthetruepathsofsocialreformation.In1522,StorchsettledinThuringia,wherehebecameoneoftheinitiatorsandleadersofthePeasantWar.IncollaborationwithMuenzer,Pfeiferandothers,hecomposedaprogrammeofdemands,whichdeclaredpropertytobelongtoallalike,sinceGodhadcreatedallmenequallybareandhadgiventothemeverythingontheland,inthewaterandunderthesky.Allofficers,lay and ecclesiastical alike, theprogramme said,must be removed from their offices, orkilled.EverymancouldfreelypreachthelawofGod,aseveryonehadafreewillandwasabletoacceptthegoodandrejecttheevil.StorchdiedinMunichin1525.

16.György Dózsa – Leader of the peasant insurrection of the Sixteenth Century inHungary.Atthattime,thestrugglebetweentheabsolutepowerofthekingandthefeudallordsofHungarystillcontinued.AfterthedeathofKingMatthias,who,supportedbythepeople,hadconductedasuccessfulstruggleagainstthefeudallords,thelatterregainedtheupperhandunderUladislaus,andabolishedallthereformsofKingMatthiasincludingthestandingarmy.Thecountrywassufferingunderthestrugglesofthefeudallords.In1514,


–114–

the pope declared a new crusade against the Mohammedans. György Dózsa, who hadbecome famous as a warrior in the fight against the Turks, was offered the post ofcommander.Within twenty days he gathered a people’s militia numbering 60,000 men.Dózsa was the head of military operations. He was accompanied by two priests, whoarousedthesoldiers,peasantsandcityfolkbytheirsermons.Thefeudallordswereloathtolet their servants join thecrusade,and,asharvest timewasapproaching, theydemandedtheirreturn.Inreply,Dózsaandthepriestsappealedto thepeople torebel.Thepeasantsarose all overHungary, and thewarwith the feudal barons began. The situation of thepeasantryinHungaryofthattimewaslessintolerablethanitwasintheothercountries,buthaving a little more freedom in Hungary, the peasants felt more keenly the yoke ofserfdom.IncessantwarswiththeTurkswereruiningthecountry,thepopulationwasbeingenormously depleted, and the peasants found themselves in a position to force upon thefeudal lords anumberof concessions.Thepeasants, however, being skilled in the art ofwar,hoped for full liberation.The lowerclergyof thevillages,hating theprincesof theChurch,joinedthepeasants.Butthey,alongwiththecitymiddle-class,whichalsojoinedthepeasantmovement,soonbetrayedit.

The leaders of the peasant uprising (1514) preached that the nobleswere a criminalclass which had enslaved the body and the soul of the peasant. They encouraged thedestructionof thehousesandthecastlesof thelords.GyörgyDózsa,whohadtaught thepeasantstheuseofarms,calledthemtorisealloverthecountry.AnarmyoffeudalbaronsunderJohnZápolyamovedagainsthim.Thisarmy,aidedbythecitymiddle-classandthenobility,theformeralliesofthepeasants,suppressedthemovementcruelly.GyörgyDózsaofferedlongandstubbornresistance.Heproclaimedarepublicdeclaringthepoweroftheking and the privileged classes abolished. Notwithstanding the sympathy of the peasantmasses throughout the country,GyörgyDózsawas defeated at Temesvár. His executionwasarefinedtorture.Hewasplacedonaredhotironthrone,hisheadwasadornedwithared hot iron crown, and a red hot iron sceptre was forced into his hand. Dózsa’s onlyexclamation was: ‘These hounds!’ No less than 60,000 peasants were killed in thisuprising.ThelordsinDietassembled,decidedtoincreasetheburdenofthepeasantryanddeclaredserfdomaperpetualinstitution.

17.TheWaroftheRoses(1455–1485)–AftertheterminationoftheHundredYears’WarbetweenEnglandandFrance(1339–1450)andaftertheEnglisharmieswerecompelledtoevacuate France, a bloody war started between the two dynasties, Lancaster and York,which lasted over thirty years. The Lancaster dynasty, with a red rose as its emblem,representedtheinterestsofthelargefeudalmastersinWalesandinthenorthwheretheirlargeestateswerelocated.TheYorkdynasty,withawhiteroseasitsemblem,dependedon


–115–

the commercial southeast, the citypopulation, thepeasants and theHouseofCommons.The stubborn feud between the two dynasties was to decide whether England wouldbecome an absolutemonarchy in case of the victory of theYork dynasty, orwhether itwouldbedividedamongthefeudalmasterswiththevictoryoftheLancasterdynasty.

AsearlyastheFourteenthCentury,largelandpossessionsconcentratedinthehandsofafewnoblefamilies.IntheFifteenthCentury,theHouseofLordscountedonlyone-thirdof its oldmembers.The survivingdynasties annexed the landof those families that haddisappeared.When theHundredYears’Warwas over, the armywas disbanded and theformer soldiers taken into the service of the feudal masters. In the second half of theFifteenthCentury,thewarbetweenthetwodynastiesbegan.InthebattleofNorthampton(1460),YorkcapturedthekingandcompelledtheHouseofLordstorecognisehimastheprotectorofthestateandtheheirtothethrone.Hewasdefeatedbythearmyofthehostiledynasty,buthissonEdwardreturnedtoLondonvictorious(1451).Edward’sarmiesdealtmercilesslywiththenobility.IntheTauntonbattle,forty-twoknightsandtwolordswereexecuted,whileWarwick,oneofEdward’scommanders,sawtoitthatlittleharmwasdonetotheCommoners.

The ascension to the throne of Edward IV, that is, the victory of the White Rose,markedthebeginningoftheperiodofabsolutism.EdwardIVdidnotraisethequestionofhis election by the English Parliament. He expelled all feudalmasters, even his closestfriends who opposed his will (his fight againstWarwick, ‘the maker of kings’). In hisstruggle against the feudalmasters he used hired armies, thusmaking the feudalmilitiasuperfluous.He cruelly annihilated the adherents of theLancaster dynasty. Tomake hisvictory secure, he refused tomake new compulsory loans, and to secure the aid of thepeasantryhedemandedofParliamentlawsprohibitingthedispossessionofpeasants.ThustheWaroftheRosesstrengthenedabsolutisminEngland.


–116–

The Peasant War in Germany - Marxists Internet ArchiveThe Peasant War in Germany was the first...

Documents

Transcript of The Peasant War in Germany - Marxists Internet ArchiveThe Peasant War in Germany was the first...