CHAPTER V.
THE ANABAPTISTS OF MUNSTER. CHASTISEMENT.
(1535-1536.)
CHASTISEMENT.
The landgrave Philip of Hesse having, meanwhile, entered Westphalia with the troops which had just made the conquest of Würtemberg, Munster was soon so completely invested that nothing, and especially no food supplies, could any longer enter the town. The dearth became more and more severe, and the miserable people were driven to have recourse for sustenance to the most unaccustomed food. They ate the flesh of horses, dogs and cats, dormice, grass, and leather; they tore up books and devoured the parchment. Half the population of the town, it was said, died of starvation. These fanatics had trusted in the word of their king and prophet, and had awaited with confidence the succor which he promised them; but, as this succor did not arrive, murmurs began to be heard from some of them, and others appeared to go mad. Bockhold had told them that, if it were necessary for saving his people, 'the stones would be turned into bread.' Consequently, some of these votaries might be seen stopping in the streets, biting the stones and attempting to tear them to pieces, in expectation of their being converted into nourishment.[524] At length despair, madness, and inhumanity proceeded to the bitterest extremities. The wife of the senator Menken, one of the working men raised to this dignity by Bockhold, killed her three children, salted their bodies, and placed the parts thus cured in jars, in this way making abominable provision for her own subsistence, and on this she fed day by day.[525] The wretched inhabitants of this ill-fated town wandered with tottering steps about the streets, the skin wrinkled over their fleshless bones, their necks long and lank, hardly able to sustain the head, their eyes haggard and opening and shutting with sudden jerk, their cheeks hollow and emaciated, with lips which death seemed to be about to close, corpses in appearance rather than living beings. In the midst of this appalling spectacle which recalls the greatest distresses recorded in history, even the destruction of Jerusalem, there was, it is said, in the king's palace abundance, feasting, and debauchery.[526]
The enthusiasts, during this time, were causing much trouble in Holland; but they did not succeed in bringing help to their brethren. At the beginning of 1535 a certain number of them proposed to burn Leyden; fifteen were arrested and beheaded. In February others ran naked about the streets of Amsterdam by night, crying out, 'Woe! woe! woe!' They also were executed. Near Franeker, in Friesland, three hundred of them assembled and took possession of a convent; but they were all put to death. Bockhold, impatient to get the succor of which he was in sore need, delegated Jan van Geelen, a clever, crafty man, to stir up a revolt in Holland, and to return to his aid with an army which should raise the siege of Munster, and help him to conquer the world. Jan van Geelen, by a feigned renunciation of his errors, obtained a pardon from Queen Mary. Having entered Holland, he was able secretly to attract a large number of followers; and in a short time he conceived the project of surprising Amsterdam by night. He did, in fact, get possession of the town-hall; but the townsmen, aroused by the tocsin, drove away the fanatics with cannon-shot, not without suffering great losses themselves, particularly in the death of a burgomaster. The rebels were cruelly treated. Many of them were stretched upon butchers' blocks, had their hearts torn out, and were then quartered. On all these occasions a certain number of women were, as usual, drowned.[527]
CAPTURE OF MUNSTER.
EXECUTIONS.
These successive defeats made an impression on Bockhold and his partisans. They lost all hope of aid from Holland. The landgrave, Philip of Hesse, one of the most powerful chiefs of Protestantism, had brought up his forces to put an end to the scandals of Munster. The bishop of this city, impelled by the desire to reconquer it, had assembled for the purpose some Roman Catholic soldiers. One of Bockhold's men escaped from the town and pointed out the way to capture it.[528] In the night of June 24, 1535, two hundred lansquenets cleared the foss and scaled the wall at a point where it was very low. They were no sooner within the town, than they uttered cries and beat the drum. The men of the king of Zion leaped out of their beds and ran to arms. The conflict began and was for a moment doubtful; but one of the city gates having been opened from within, the army of the besiegers entered and the fight became terrible. A hundred and fifty horse or foot soldiers lost their lives. On the side of the besieged many also fell, and amongst others Rottmann who, resolved not to suffer the disgrace of captivity, threw himself with intrepidity into the midst of the fire and perished. The king and two of his principal counsellors, Knipperdolling and the pastor Crechting, made their escape and hid themselves in a strong tower, where they hoped to escape the notice of the conquerors.[529] But the soldiers penetrated into their place of concealment, dragged them out and made them prisoners. Bockhold at first braved it out, and assuming the air of a king spoke arrogantly to the bishop. Two theologians of Hesse endeavored to bring him to repentance; but he obstinately held to his opinion, admitting no superior to himself on earth. Reflection, however, wrought a change. Bockhold was not a fanatic, but an impostor; and he felt that the only way to save his life was to abjure his errors. He asked for a second conference with the two Hessians and feigned conversion. 'I confess,' he said to them, 'that the resistance I have offered to authority was unlawful; that the institution of polygamy was rash, and that the baptism of children is obligatory. If pardon should be granted me, I pledge myself to obtain from all my adherents obedience and submission.' He likewise acknowledged that he had deserved to die ten times over. This was the behavior of a knave, willing to abandon even his imposture, if, by so doing, he might save his life. Knipperdolling and Crechting, on the contrary, persisted in their views, and asserted that they had followed the guidance of God. Cruelty of various kinds was inflicted on these wretched men. They were led about publicly, during the month of their detention, like strange animals, as a spectacle to the several princes and their courts, to whom they and their pretended king were made a subject of ridicule.[530] Bockhold did not derive from his confessions the advantage which he expected. The three leaders were all sentenced to the same punishment, the penalty of high treason to a supreme head. This took place in February, 1536. In the barbarous period of the Middle Ages imagination had been racked for the invention of the most cruel punishments. These three wretches were conducted to the great square of Munster, where Bockhold, as king, had borne the sceptre and the triple crown, and his executive minister Knipperdolling the sword. They were then laid out naked; and their bodies were plucked to pieces with hot pincers, until at length, amidst hideous tortures, pincers, fire, sword and excruciating sufferings had put an end to their life.[531] This process lasted an hour. Cochlæus himself exclaims,—'Cruel, horrible punishment! a terrible example to all rebels!' Knipperdolling and Crechting bore with courage the frightful infliction, and Bockhold, apparently recovering good sense, was determined not to die the death of a coward. Not a groan escaped him. After he had breathed his last they pierced his heart with a dagger.
It was Philip of Hesse and his soldiers of the reformed party who chiefly contributed to put an end to the disorders and cruelties of which Munster had been the scene. The only result of this episode for Protestantism was to demonstrate that it had no connection with the fanaticism of these would-be inspired ones. Protestant opinion was on this occasion distinguished by various characteristic features. Its intention was that punishment should be inflicted not for the religious doctrine of the enthusiasts, but only for their rebellion and other ordinary crimes. There have been, indeed, and there are especially at the present time a large number of pious and zealous Christians who advocate adult baptism; and we are bound to respect them although we do not share their views. Moreover the baptism practised by the enthusiasts of Munster, was not that of the sect of Baptists; it was a proceeding which denoted adhesion to the fanatical system the triumph of which they pretended to insure, a ceremony such as is adopted in many secret societies. The essential characteristics of their system were their alleged visions, their unquestionable licentiousness, the confusion which they brought upon the institutions of social life, their tyranny and their cruelty.
Various opinions were entertained as to the punishment which ought to be inflicted on them. Luther by a letter expressed clearly and briefly what he thought on the subject. He was not greatly troubled. 'It does not disturb me much,' he said; 'Satan is in a rage, but the Scripture stands fast.'[532] The landgrave Philip was always an advocate of the most lenient measures; he had no desire that the punishment of death should be inflicted upon them, as had been done in other countries. He consented only to their being imprisoned; and he insisted that they should be instructed. The evangelical towns of Upper Germany acted upon the same principle and refused to stain their hands with the blood of these unhappy men. But it was decreed by a majority of the Germanic Diet, that all enthusiasts who persisted in their false doctrines should be put to death. Thus were confounded, as it has been said, two things as remote from each other as heaven and earth, evangelical doctrine and the confusion introduced into churches and states by these fanatics. The unfortunate men were put to death, whether they were visionaries or not; and not only were culpable disorders put down with a strong hand, but evangelical doctrine was also banished from Munster.[533]
CAUSES OF THE DISORDERS.
Three causes especially contributed to bring about these hideous disorders of the fanatics. First, the bloody persecutions carried on by Charles V. in the Netherlands against all those who desired to worship God according to their conscience; next, the doctrines of the enthusiasts, mingled sometimes with immorality, which Tanchelme of Antwerp, Simon of Tournay, Amalric of Bena, the Turlupines, the Pseudo-Cathari, and the Brethren of the Free Spirit, had for centuries professed in different countries, and especially in the Netherlands and on the banks of the Rhine, and which had lately been revived there by emissaries from Germany; and finally, the need for a change in the social order felt at this period by the least industrious and most fanciful men of the lower orders, and especially of the class of artisans.
After the terrible catastrophe which put an end to the kingdom of Zion, there still remained, undoubtedly, some enthusiasts and libertines, particularly David Joris. But many of them settled down and returned to more wholesome doctrines. One of these, Ubbo of Leuwarden, had been consecrated bishop of the new sect and had in turn consecrated others, Menno Simonis in particular. Ubbo made public confession of his error; 'I have been miserably mistaken,' he said, 'and I shall lament it as long as I live.'[534]
We have narrated the horrible episode of Munster, and we have exhibited it like one of those placards which we have sometimes met with in the Alps, nailed to a post near an abyss, on which were to be read such words as these,—'Traveller, beware! any one approaching falls and rolls over, and hurled from rock to rock, is dashed to pieces and killed, the sad victim of his rashness.'