{"collection":"scripture-revelation","full_text_available":true,"graph_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/api/page/gutenberg_43601/graph","html_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/page/gutenberg_43601","id":"gutenberg_43601","license":"Public Domain (US)","rights_basis":"gutenberg_metadata_copyright_false","source":"gutenberg","source_url":"https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/43601","summary":null,"tags":["Category: Essays, Letters & Speeches","Category: History - Other","Category: Psychiatry/Psychology","Category: Religion/Spirituality","History","Mysticism","Patarines"],"text":"FREAKS OF FANATICISM\n  AND\n  OTHER STRANGE EVENTS\n\n\n\n\n  FREAKS OF FANATICISM\n\n  AND\n\n  OTHER STRANGE EVENTS\n\n  BY\n\n  S. BARING-GOULD, M.A.\n\n  AUTHOR OF \"MEHALAH,\" \"OLD COUNTRY LIFE,\" \"HISTORIC ODDITIES,\"\n  \"SONGS OF THE WEST,\" ETC.\n\n\n  Methuen & Co.\n\n  18, BURY STREET, LONDON, W.C.\n  1891\n\n\n\n\nPREFACE.\n\n\nThis Volume, that originally appeared as a Second Series to\n\"Historic Oddities and Strange Events,\" is now issued under a new\ntitle which describes the peculiar nature of the majority of its\ncontents. Several of the articles are concerned with the history of\nmysticism, a phase of human nature that deserves careful and close\nstudy. Mysticism is the outbreak in man of a spiritual element\nwhich cannot be ignored, cannot be wholly suppressed, and is man's\nnoblest element when rightly directed and balanced. It is capable\nof regulation, but unregulated, it may become even a mischievous\nfaculty.\n\nWhen the Jews are being expelled from Russia, and are regarded with\nbitter hostility in other parts of Eastern Europe, the article on\nthe accusations brought against them may prove not uninstructive\nreading.\n\nThere is political as well as religious and racial fanaticism, and\nthe story of the \"Poisoned Parsnips\" illustrates the readiness\nwith which false accusations against political enemies are made\nand accepted without examination. \"Jean Aymon\" exhibits the same\nunscrupulousness where religious passions are concerned. The curious\nepisode to \"The Northern Raphael\" shows the craving after notoriety\nthat characterises so much of sentimental, hysterical piety.\n\n  S. BARING GOULD.\n\n  LEW TRENCHARD, DEVON,\n  _September 1st, 1891_.\n\n\n\n\nCONTENTS.\n\n\n                                             PAGE\n\n  A SWISS PASSION PLAY                          1\n\n  A NORTHERN RAPHAEL                           39\n\n  THE POISONED PARSNIPS                        67\n\n  THE MURDER OF FATHER THOMAS IN DAMASCUS      86\n\n  SOME ACCUSATIONS AGAINST JEWS               107\n\n  THE COBURG MAUSOLEUM                        120\n\n  JEAN AYMON                                  129\n\n  THE PATARINES OF MILAN                      146\n\n  THE ANABAPTISTS OF M\u00dcNSTER                  195\n\n\n\n\nFREAKS OF FANATICISM.\n\n\n\n\nA Swiss Passion Play.\n\n\nWe are a little surprised, and perhaps a little shocked, at the\nilliberality of the Swiss Government, in even such Protestant\ncantons as Geneva, Z\u00fcrich, and Berne, in forbidding the performances\non their ground of the \"Salvation Army,\" and think that such\nconduct is not in accordance with Protestant liberty of judgment\nand democratic independence. But the experiences gone through in\nSwitzerland as in Germany of the confusion and mischief sometimes\nwrought by fanaticism, we will not say justify, but in a measure\nexplain, the objection the Government has to a recrudescence of\nreligious mysticism in its more flagrant forms. The following story\nexemplifies the extravagance to which such spiritual exaltation runs\noccasionally--fortunately only occasionally.\n\nAbout eight miles from Schaffhausen, a little way on one side of\nthe road to Winterth\u00fcr, in a valley, lies the insignificant hamlet\nof Wildisbuch, its meadows overshadowed by leafy walnut trees. The\nhamlet is in the parish of Tr\u00fcllikon. Here, at the beginning of this\ncentury, in a farmhouse, standing by itself, lived John Peter, a\nwidower, with several of his children. He had but one son, Caspar,\nmarried in 1812, and divorced from his wife; he was, however,\nblessed with five daughters--Barbara, married to a blacksmith in\nTr\u00fcllikon; Susanna, Elizabeth, Magdalena married to John Moser, a\nshoemaker; and Margaretta, born in 1794, his youngest, and favourite\nchild. Not long after the birth of Margaretta, her mother died,\nand thenceforth the child was the object of the tenderest and most\ndevoted solicitude to her sisters and to her father. Margaretta grew\nup to be a remarkable child. At school she distinguished herself by\nher aptitude in learning, and in church by the devotion with which\nshe followed the tedious Zwinglian service. The pastor who prepared\nher for confirmation was struck by her enthusiasm and eagerness to\nknow about religion. She was clearly an imaginative person, and to\none constituted as she was, the barnlike church, destitute of every\nelement of beauty, studiously made as hideous as a perverse fancy\ncould scheme, and the sacred functions reduced to utter dreariness,\nwith every element of devotion bled out of them, were incapable of\nsatisfying the internal spiritual fire that consumed her.\n\nThere is in every human soul a divine aspiration, a tension after\nthe invisible and spiritual, in some more developed than in others,\nin certain souls existing only in that rudimentary condition in\nwhich, it is said, feet are found in the eel, and eyes in the\noyster, but in others it is a predominating faculty, a veritable\npassion. Unless this faculty be given legitimate scope, be\ndisciplined and guided, it breaks forth in abnormal and unhealthy\nmanifestations. We know what is the result when the regular action\nof the pores of the skin is prevented, or the circulation of the\nblood is impeded. Fever and hallucination ensue. So is it with the\nspiritual life in man. If that be not given free passage for healthy\ndischarge of its activity, it will resolve itself into fanaticism,\nthat is to say it will assume a diseased form of manifestation.\n\nMargaretta was far ahead of her father, brother and sisters in\nintellectual culture, and in moral force of character. Susanna,\nthe second daughter of John Peter, was an amiable, industrious,\nyoung woman, without independence of character. The third daughter,\nElizabeth, was a quiet girl, rather dull in brain; Barbara was\nmarried when Margaretta was only nine, and Magdalena not long after;\nneither of them, however, escaped the influence of their youngest\nsister, who dominated over their wills almost as completely as she\ndid over those of her two unmarried sisters, with whom she consorted\ndaily.\n\nHow great her power over her sisters was may be judged from what\nthey declared in after years in prison, and from what they endured\nfor her sake.\n\nBarbara, the eldest, professed to the prison chaplain in Z\u00fcrich, in\n1823, \"I am satisfied that God worked in mighty power, and in grace\nthrough Margaret, up to the hour of her death.\" The father himself\ndeclared after the ruin of his family and the death of two of his\ndaughters, \"I am assured that my youngest daughter was set apart by\nGod for some extraordinary purpose.\"\n\nWhen Margaret was six, she was able to read her Bible, and would\nsummon the family about her to listen to her lectures out of the\nsacred volume. She would also at the same time pray with great\nardour, and exhort her father and sisters to lead God-fearing\nlives. When she read the narrative of the Passion, she was unable\nto refrain from tears; her emotion communicated itself to all\nassembled round her, and the whole family sobbed and prayed aloud.\nShe was a veritable \"ministering child\" to her household in all\nthings spiritual. As she had been born at Christmas, it was thought\nthat this very fact indicated some special privilege and grace\naccorded to her. In 1811, when aged seventeen, she received her\nfirst communion and edified all the church with the unction and\nexaltation of soul with which she presented herself at the table.\nIn after years the pastor of Tr\u00fcllikon said of her, \"Unquestionably\nMargaretta was the cleverest of the family. She often came to thank\nme for the instructions I had given her in spiritual things. Her\npromises to observe all I had taught her were most fervent. I had\nthe best hopes for her, although I observed somewhat of extravagance\nin her. Margaretta speedily obtained an absolute supremacy in her\nfather's house. All must do what she ordered. Her will expressed by\nword of mouth, or by letter when absent, was obeyed as the will of\nGod.\"\n\nIn personal appearance Margaretta was engaging. She was finely\nmoulded, had a well-proportioned body, a long neck on which her head\nwas held very upright; large, grey-blue eyes, fair hair, a lofty,\nwell-arched brow. The nose was well-shaped, but the chin and mouth\nwere somewhat coarse.\n\nIn 1816, her mother's brother, a small farmer at Rudolfingen,\ninvited her to come and manage his house for him. She went, and was\nof the utmost assistance. Everything prospered under her hand. Her\nuncle thought that she had brought the blessing of the Almighty on\nboth his house and his land.\n\nWhilst at Rudolfingen, the holy maiden was brought in contact with\nthe Pietists of Schaffhausen. She attended their prayer-meetings and\nexpositions of Scripture. This deepened her religious convictions,\nand produced a depression in her manner that struck her sisters\nwhen she visited them. In answer to their inquiries why she was\nreserved and melancholy, she replied that God was revealing Himself\nto her more and more every day, so that she became daily more\nconscious of her own sinfulness. If this had really been the case\nit would have saved her from what ensued, but this sense of her own\nsinfulness was a mere phrase, that meant actually an overweening\nself-consciousness. She endured only about a twelve month of the\npietistic exercises at Schaffhausen, and then felt a call to preach,\ntestify and prophesy herself, instead of sitting at the feet of\nothers. Accordingly, she threw up her place with her uncle, and\nreturned to Wildisbuch, in March, 1817, when she began operations as\na revivalist.\n\nThe paternal household was now somewhat enlarged. The old farmer had\ntaken on a hand to help him in field and stable, called Heinrich\nErnst, and a young woman as maid called Margaret J\u00e4ggli. Ernst was a\nfaithful, amiable young fellow whom old Peters thoroughly trusted,\nand he became devoted heart and soul to the family. Margaret\nJ\u00e4ggli was a person of very indifferent character, who, for her\nimmoralities, had been turned out of her native village. She was\nsubject to epileptic fits, which she supposed were possession by the\ndevil, and she came to the farm of the Peter's family in hopes of\nbeing there cured by the prayers of the saintly Margaretta.\n\nAnother inmate of the house was Ursula K\u00fcndig, who entered it at the\nage of nineteen, and lived there as a veritable maid-of-all-work,\nthough paid no wages. This damsel was of the sweetest, gentlest\ndisposition. Her parish pastor gave testimony to her, \"She was\nalways so good that even scandal-mongers were unable to find\noccasion for slander in her conduct.\" Her countenance was full of\nintelligence, purity, and had in it a nobility above her birth and\neducation. Her home had been unhappy; she had been engaged to be\nmarried to a young man, but finding that he did not care for her,\nand sought only her small property, she broke off the engagement,\nto her father's great annoyance. It was owing to a quarrel at home\nrelative to this, that she went to Wildisbuch to entreat Margaretta\nPeter to be \"her spiritual guide through life into eternity.\"\nUrsula had at first only paid occasional visits to Wildisbuch, but\ngradually these visits became long, and finally she took up her\nresidence in the house. The soul of the unhappy girl was as wax in\nthe hands of the saint, whom she venerated with intensest admiration\nas the Elect of the Lord; and she professed her unshaken conviction\n\"that Christ revealed Himself in the flesh through her, and that\nthrough her many thousands of souls were saved.\" The house at\nWildisbuch became thenceforth a great gathering place for all the\nspiritually-minded in the neighbourhood, who desired instruction,\nguidance, enlightenment, and Margaretta, the high priestess of\nmysticism to all such as could find no satisfaction for the deepest\nhunger of their souls in the Zwinglian services of their parish\nchurch.\n\nMan is composed of two parts; he has a spiritual nature which he\nshares with the angels, and an animal nature that he possesses in\ncommon with the beasts. There is in him, consequently, a double\ntendency, one to the indefinite, unconfined, spiritual; the other\nto the limited, sensible and material. The religious history of\nall times shows us this higher nature striving after emancipation\nfrom the law of the body, and never succeeding in accomplishing\nthe escape, always falling back, like D\u00e6dalus, into destruction,\nwhen attempting to defy the laws of nature and soar too near to\nthe ineffable light. The mysticism of the old heathen world, the\nmysticism of the Gnostic sects, the mysticism of medi\u00e6val heretics,\nalmost invariably resolved itself into orgies of licentiousness. God\nhas bound soul and body together, and an attempt to dissociate them\nin religion is fatally doomed to ruin.\n\nThe incarnation of the Son of God was the indissoluble union of\nSpirit with form as the basis of true religion. Thenceforth, Spirit\nwas no more to be dissociated from matter, authority from a visible\nChurch, grace from a sacramental sign, morality from a fixed law.\nAll the great revolts against Catholicism in the middle-ages, were\nmore or less revolts against this principle and were reversions to\npure spiritualism. The Reformation was taken advantage of for the\nmystic aspirations of men to run riot. Individual emotion became\nthe supreme and sole criticism of right and wrong, of truth and\nfalsehood, and sole authority to which submission must be tendered.\n\nIn the autumn of 1817, Margaretta of Wildisbuch met a woman who\nwas also remarkable in her way, and the head of another revivalist\nmovement. This was Julianne von Kr\u00fcdner; about whom a word must now\nbe said.\n\nJulianne was born in 1766, at Riga, the daughter of a noble and\nwealthy family. Her father visited Paris and took the child with\nhim, where she made the acquaintance of the rationalistic and\nspeculative spirits of French society, before the Revolution.\nIn a Voltairean atmosphere, the little Julianne grew up without\nreligious faith or moral principle. At the age of fourteen she was\nmarried to a man much older than herself, the Baron von Kr\u00fcdner,\nRussian Ambassador at Venice. There her notorious immoralities\nresulted in a separation, and Julianne was obliged to return to her\nfather's house at Riga. This did not satisfy her love of pleasure\nand vanity, and she went to St. Petersburg and then to Paris,\nwhere she threw herself into every sort of dissipation. She wrote\na novel, \"Val\u00e9rie,\" in which she frankly admitted that woman, when\nyoung, must give herself up to pleasure, then take up with art, and\nfinally, when nothing else was left her, devote herself to religion.\nAt the age of forty she had already entered on this final phase.\nShe went to Berlin, was admitted to companionship with the Queen,\nLouise, and endeavoured to \"convert\" her. The sweet, holy queen\nrequired no conversion, and the Baroness von Kr\u00fcdner was obliged to\nleave Berlin. She wandered thenceforth from place to place, was now\nin Paris, then in Geneva, and then in Germany. At Karlsruhe she met\nJung-Stilling; and thenceforth threw herself heart and soul into the\npietistic revival. Her mission now was--so she conceived--to preach\nthe Gospel to the poor. In 1814 she obtained access to the Russian\nCourt, where her prophecies and exhortations produced such an effect\non the spirit of the Czar, Alexander I., that he entreated her to\naccompany him to Paris. She did so, and held spiritual conferences\nand prayer meetings in the French capital. Alexander soon tired of\nher, and she departed to Basel, where she won to her the Genevan\nPastor Empeytaz and the Basel Professor Lachenal. Her meetings for\nrevival, which were largely attended, caused general excitement,\nbut led to many domestic quarrels, so that the city council gave\nher notice to leave the town. She then made a pilgrimage along the\nRhine, but her proceedings were everywhere objected to by the police\nand town authorities, and she was sent back under police supervision\nfirst to Leipzig, and thence into Russia.\n\nThence in 1824 she departed for the Crimea, where she had resolved\nto start a colony on the plan of the Moravian settlements, and there\ndied before accomplishing her intention.\n\nIt was in 1817, when she was conducting her apostolic progress along\nthe Rhine, that she and Margaretta of Wildisbuch met. Apparently the\nlatter made a deeper impression on the excitable baroness than had\nthe holy Julianne on Margaretta. The two aruspices did not laugh\nwhen they met, for they were both in deadly earnest, and had not\nthe smallest suspicion that they were deluding themselves first, and\nthen others.\n\nThe meeting with the Kr\u00fcdner had a double effect. In the first\nplace, the holy Julianne, when forced to leave the neighbourhood\nby the unregenerate police, commended her disciples to the blessed\nMargaret; and, in the second place, the latter had the shrewdness\nto perceive, that, if she was to play anything like the part of\nher fellow-apostle, she must acquire a little more education.\nConsequently Margaret took pains to write grammatically, and to\nspell correctly.\n\nThe result of the commendation by Saint Julianne of her disciples\nto Margaret was that thenceforth a regular pilgrimage set in to\nWildisbuch of devout persons in landaus and buggies, on horse and on\nfoot.\n\nSome additional actors in the drama must now be introduced.\n\nMagdalena Peter, the fourth daughter of John Peter, was married to\nthe cobbler, John Moser. The influence of Margaret speedily made\nitself felt in their house. At first Moser's old mother lived with\nthe couple, along with Conrad, John Moser's younger brother. The\nfirst token of the conversion of Moser and his wife was that they\nkicked the old mother out of the house, because she was worldly and\nvoid of \"saving grace.\" Conrad was a plodding, hard-working lad,\nvery useful, and therefore not to be dispensed with. The chosen\nvessels finding he did not sympathise with them, and finding him too\nvaluable to be done without, starved him till he yielded to their\nfancies, saw visions, and professed himself \"saved.\" Barbara, also,\nmarried to the blacksmith Baumann, was next converted, and brought\nall her spiritual artillery to bear on the blacksmith, but in vain.\nHe let her go her own way, but he would have nothing himself to say\nto the great spiritual revival in the house of the Peters. Barbara,\nnot finding a kindred soul in her husband, had taken up with a man\nof like soaring piety, a tailor, named Habl\u00fctzel.\n\nAnother person who comes into this story is Jacob Ganz, a tailor,\nwho had been mixed up with the movement at Basel under Julianne the\nHoly.\n\nMargaret's brother Caspar was a man of infamous character; he was\nseparated from his wife, whom he had treated with brutality; had\nbecome the father of an illegitimate child, and now loafed about the\ncountry preaching the Gospel.\n\nGanz, the tailor, had thrown aside his shears, and constituted\nhimself a roving preacher. In one of his apostolic tours he had made\nthe acquaintance of Saint Margaret, and had been deeply impressed by\nher. He had an elect disciple at Illnau, in the Kempthal, south of\nWinterth\u00fcr. This was a shoemaker named Jacob Morf, a married man,\naged thirty; small, with a head like a pumpkin. To this shoemaker\nGanz spoke with enthusiasm of the spiritual elevation of the holy\nMargaret, and Morf was filled with a lively desire of seeing and\nhearing her.\n\nMargaretta seems after a while to have wearied of the monotony of\nlife in her father's house, or else the spirit within her drove her\nabroad to carry her light into the many dark corners of her native\ncanton. She resolved to be like Ganz, a roving apostle. Sometimes\nshe started on her missionary journeys alone, sometimes along with\nher sister Elizabeth, who submitted to her with blind and stanch\nobedience, or else with Ursula K\u00fcndig. These journeys began in 1820,\nand extended as far Z\u00fcrich and along the shores of that lovely lake.\nIn May of the same year she visited Illnau, where she was received\nwith enthusiasm by the faithful, who assembled in the house of a\ncertain Ruegg, and there for the first time she met with Jacob Morf.\nThe acquaintance then begun soon quickened into friendship. When\na few weeks later he went to Schaffhausen to purchase leather, he\nturned aside to Wildisbuch. After this his visits there became not\nonly frequent, but were protracted.\n\nMargaret was the greatest comfort to him in his troubled state of\nsoul. She described to him the searchings and anxieties she had\nundergone, so that he cried \"for very joy that he had encountered\none who had gone through the same experience as himself.\"\n\nIn November, 1820, Margaret took up her abode for some time in the\nhouse of a disciple, Caspar Notz, near Z\u00fcrich, and made it the\ncentre whence she started on a series of missionary excursions. Here\nalso gathered the elect out of Z\u00fcrich to hear her expound Scripture,\nand pray. And hither also came the cobbler Morf seeking ease for his\ntroubled soul, and on occasions stayed in the house there with her\nfor a week at a time. At last his wife, the worthy Regula Morf, came\nfrom Illnau to find her husband, and persuaded him to return with\nher to his cobbling at home.\n\nAt the end of January in 1821, Margaret visited Illnau again, and\ndrew away after her the bewitched Jacob, who followed her all the\nway home, to Wildisbuch, and remained at her father's house ten days\nfurther.\n\nOn Ascension Day following, he was again with her, and then she\nrevealed to him that it was the will of heaven that they should\nascend together, without tasting death, into the mansions of the\nblessed, and were to occupy one throne together for all eternity.\nThroughout this year, when the cobbler, Jacob, was not at\nWildisbuch, or Saint Margaretta at Illnau, the pair were writing\nincessantly to each other, and their correspondence is still\npreserved in the archives of Z\u00fcrich. Here is a specimen of the style\nof the holy Margaret. \"My dear child! your dear letter filled me\nwith joy. O, my dear child, how gladly would I tell you how it fares\nwith me! When we parted, I was forced to go aside where none might\nsee, to relieve my heart with tears. O, my heart, I cannot describe\nto you the distress into which I fell. I lay as one senseless for\nan hour. For anguish of heart I could not go home, such unspeakable\npains did I suffer! My former separation from you was but a shadow\nof this parting. O, why are you so unutterably dear to me, &c.,\" and\nthen a flow of sickly, pious twaddle that makes the gorge rise.\n\nRegula Morf read this letter and shook her head over it. She had\nshaken her head over another letter received by her husband a month\nearlier, in which the holy damsel had written: \"O, how great is my\nlove! It is stronger than death. O, how dear are you to me. I could\nhug you to my heart a thousand times.\" And had scribbled on the\nmargin, \"These words are for your eye alone.\" However, Regula saw\nthem, shook her head and told her husband that the letter seemed\nto her unenlightened mind to be very much like a love-letter.\n\"Nothing of the sort,\" answered the cobbler, \"it speaks of spiritual\naffection only.\"\n\nWe must now pass over a trait in the life of the holy maid which\nis to the last degree unedifying, but which is merely another\nexemplification of that truth which the history of mysticism\nenforces in every age, that spiritual exaltation runs naturally,\ninevitably, into licentiousness, unless held in the iron bands of\ndiscipline to the moral law. A mystic is a law to himself. He bows\nbefore no exterior authority. However much he may transgress the\ncode laid down by religion, he feels no compunction, no scruples,\nfor his heart condemns him not. It was so with the holy Margaret.\nHer lapse or lapses in no way roused her to a sense of sin, but\nserved only to drive her further forward on the mad career of\nself-righteous exaltation.\n\nShe had disappeared for many months from her father's house, along\nwith her sister Elizabeth. The police had inquired as to their\nwhereabouts of old John Peter, but he had given them no information\nas to where his daughters were. He professed not to know. He was\nthreatened unless they were produced by a certain day that he would\nbe fined. The police were sent in search in every direction but the\nright one.\n\nSuddenly in the night of January 11th, 1823, the sisters\nre-appeared, Margaret, white, weak, and prostrate with sickness.\n\nA fortnight after her return, Jacob Morf was again at Wildisbuch,\nas he said afterwards before court, \"led thither because assured by\nMargaret that they were to ascend together to heaven without dying.\"\n\nFrom this time forward, Margaretta's conduct went into another\nphase. Instead of resuming her pilgrim's staff and travelling round\nthe country preaching the Gospel, she remained all day in one room\nwith her sister Elizabeth, the shutters closed, reading the Bible,\nmeditating, and praying, and writing letters to her \"dear child\"\nJacob. The transgressions she had committed were crosses laid on her\nshoulder by God. \"Oh! why,\" she wrote in one of her epistles, \"did\nmy Heavenly Father choose _that_ from all eternity in His providence\nfor me? There were thousands upon thousands of other crosses He\nmight have laid on me. But He elected that one which would be\nheaviest for me, heavier than all the persecutions to which I am\nsubjected by the devil, and which all but overthrow me. From the\nfoundation of the world He has never so tried any of His saints as\nHe has us. It gives joy to all the host of heaven when we suffer to\nthe end.\" Again, \"the greater the humiliation and shame we undergo,\nand have to endure from our enemies here below\"--consider, brought\non herself by her own scandalous conduct--\"the more unspeakable our\nglorification in heaven.\"\n\nIn the evening, Margaretta would come downstairs and receive\nvisitors, and preach and prophesy to them. The entire house\nwas given over to religious ecstasy that intensified as Easter\napproached. Every now and then the saint assembled the household\nand exhorted them to watch and pray, for a great trial of their\nfaith was at hand. Once she asked them whether they were ready to\nlay down their lives for Christ. One day she said, in the spirit of\nprophecy, \"Behold! I see the host of Satan drawing nearer and nearer\nto encompass me. He strives to overcome me. Let me alone that I may\nfight him.\" Then she flung her arms about and struck in the air with\nher open hands.\n\nThe idea grew in her that the world was in danger, that the devil\nwas gaining supremacy over it, and would carry all souls into\ncaptivity once more, and that she--and almost only she--stood in his\nway and was protecting the world of men against his power.\n\nFor years she had exercised her authority, that grew with every\nyear, over everyone in the house, and not a soul there had thought\nof resisting her, of evading the commands she laid on them, of\nquestioning her word.\n\nThe house was closed against all but the very elect. The pastor of\nthe parish, as \"worldly,\" was not suffered to cross the threshold.\nAt a tap, the door was opened, and those deemed worthy were\nadmitted, and the door hastily barred and bolted behind them.\nEverything was viewed in a spiritual light. One evening Ursula\nK\u00fcndig and Margaretta J\u00e4ggli were sitting spinning near the stove.\nSuddenly there was a pop. A knot in the pine-logs in the stove had\nexploded. But up sprang J\u00e4ggli, threw over her spinning-wheel, and\nshrieked out--\"Hearken! Satan is banging at the window. He wants\nme. He will fetch me!\" She fell convulsed on the floor, foaming\nat the mouth. Margaret, the saint, was summoned. The writhing\ngirl shrieked out, \"Pray for me! Save me! Fight for my soul!\" and\nMargaretta at once began her spiritual exercises to ban the evil\nspirit from the afflicted and possessed servant maid. She beat with\nher hands in the air, cried out, \"Depart, thou murderer of souls,\naccursed one, to hell-fire. Wilt thou try to rob me of my sheep that\nwas lost? My sheep--whom I have pledged myself to save?\"\n\nOne day, the maid had a specially bad epileptic fit. Around her bed\nstood old John Peter, Elizabeth and Susanna, Ursula K\u00fcndig, and John\nMoser, as well as the saint. Margaret was fighting with the Evil One\nwith her fists and her cries, when John Moser fell into ecstasy and\nsaw a vision. His account shall be given in his own words: \"I saw\nChrist and Satan, and the latter held a book open before Christ and\nbade Him see how many claims he had on the soul of J\u00e4ggli. The book\nwas scored diagonally with red lines on all the pages. I saw this\ndistinctly, and therefore concluded that the account was cancelled.\nThen I saw all the saints in heaven snatch the book away, and tear\nit into a thousand pieces that fell down in a rain.\"\n\nBut Satan was not to be defeated and driven away so easily. He\nhad made himself a nest, so Margaret stated, under the roof of\nthe house, and only a desperate effort of faith and contest with\nspiritual arms could expel him. For this Armageddon she bade all\nprepare. It is hardly necessary to add that it could not be fought\nwithout the presence of the dearly beloved Jacob. She wrote to him\nand invited him to come to the great and final struggle with the\ndevil and all his host, and the obedient cobbler girded his loins\nand hastened to Wildisbuch, where he arrived on Saturday the 8th\nMarch, 1823.\n\nOn Monday, in answer, probably, to her summons, came also John Moser\nand his brother Conrad. Then also Margaret's own and only brother,\nCaspar.\n\nBefore proceeding to the climax of this story we may well pause to\nask whether the heroine was in her senses or not; whether she set\nthe avalanche in motion that overwhelmed herself and her house,\nwith deliberation and consciousness as to the end to which she was\naiming. The woman was no vulgar impostor; she deceived herself to\nher own destruction. In her senses, so far, she had set plainly\nbefore her the object to which she was about to hurry her dupes, but\nher reason and intelligence were smothered under her overweening\nself-esteem, that had grown like a great spiritual cancer, till\nit had sapped common-sense, and all natural affection, even the\nvery instinct of self-preservation. Before her diseased eyes, the\nsalvation of the whole world depended on herself. If she failed in\nher struggle with the evil principle, all mankind fell under the\nbondage of Satan; but she could not fail--she was all-powerful,\nexalted above every chance of failure in the battle, just as she was\nexalted above every lapse in virtue, do what she might, which to\nthe ordinary sense of mankind is immoral. Every mystic does not go\nas far as Margaret Peter, happily, but all take some strides along\nthat road that leads to self-deification and _anomia_. In Margaret's\nconduct, in preparation for the final tragedy, there was a good\ndeal of shrewd calculation; she led up to it by a long isolation\nand envelopment of herself and her doings in mystery; and she\ncalled her chosen disciples to witness it. Each stage in the drama\nwas calculated to produce a certain effect, and she measured her\ninfluence over her creatures before she advanced another step. On\nMonday all were assembled and in expectation; Armageddon was to be\nfought, but when the battle would begin, and how it would be carried\nthrough, were unknown. Tuesday arrived; some of the household went\nabout their daily work, the rest were gathered together in the room\nwhere Margaret was, lost in silent prayer. Every now and then the\nhush in the darkened room was broken by a wail of the saint: \"I am\nsore straitened! I am in anguish!--but I refresh my soul at the\nprospect of the coming exaltation!\" or, \"My struggle with Satan is\nsevere. He strives to retain the souls which I will wrest from his\nhold; some have been for two hundred, even three hundred years in\nhis power.\"\n\nOne can imagine the scene--the effect produced on those assembled\nabout the pale, striving ecstatic. All who were present afterwards\ntestified that on the Tuesday and the following days they hardly\nleft the room, hardly allowed themselves time to snatch a hasty\nmeal, so full of expectation were they that some great and awful\nevent was about to take place. The holy enthusiasm was general, and\nif one or two, such as old Peter and his son, Caspar, were less\nmagnetised than the rest, they were far removed from the thought\nof in any way contesting the will of the prophetess, or putting\nthe smallest impediment in the way of her accomplishing what she\ndesired.\n\nWhen evening came, she ascended to an upper room, followed by the\nwhole company, and there she declared, \"Lo! I see Satan and his\nfirst-born floating in the air. They are dispersing their emissaries\nto all corners of the earth to summon their armies together.\"\nElizabeth, somewhat tired of playing a passive part, added, \"Yes--I\nsee them also.\" Then the holy maid relapsed into her mysterious\nsilence. After waiting another hour, all went to bed, seeing that\nnothing further would happen that night. Next day, Wednesday, she\nsummoned the household into her bedroom; seated on her bed, she bade\nthem all kneel down and pray to the Lord to strengthen her hands for\nthe great contest. They continued striving in prayer till noon, and\nthen, feeling hungry, all went downstairs to get some food. When\nthey had stilled their appetites, Margaret was again seized by the\nspirit of prophecy, and declared, \"The Lord has revealed to me what\nwill happen in the latter days. The son of Napoleon\" (that poor,\nfeeble mortal the Duke of Reichstadt) \"will appear before the world\nas anti-Christ, and will strive to bring the world over to his side.\nHe will undergo a great conflict; but what will be the result is\nnot shown me at the present moment; but I am promised a spiritual\ntoken of this revelation.\" And the token followed. The dearly-loved\nJacob, John Moser, and Ursula K\u00fcndig cried out that they saw two\nevil spirits, one in the form of Napoleon, pass into Margaret\nJ\u00e4ggli, and the other, in that of his son, enter into Elizabeth.\nWhereupon Elizabeth, possessed by the spirit of that poor, little,\nsickly Duke of Reichstadt, began to march about the room and assume\na haughty, military air. Thereupon the prophetess wrestled in spirit\nand overcame these devils and expelled them. Thereat Elizabeth gave\nup her military flourishes.\n\nFrom daybreak on the following day the blessed Margaret \"had\nagain a desperate struggle,\" but without the assistance of the\nhousehold, which was summoned to take their share in the battle in\nthe afternoon only. She bade them follow her to the upper chamber,\nand a procession ascended the steep stairs, consisting of Margaret,\nfollowed by Elizabeth and Susanna Peter, Ursula K\u00fcndig and J\u00e4ggli,\nthe old father and his son, Caspar, the serving-man, Heinrich Ernst,\nthen Jacob Morf, John Moser, and the rear was brought up by the\nyoung Conrad. As soon as the prophetess had taken her seat on the\nbed, she declared, \"Last night it was revealed to me that you are\nall of you to unite with me in the battle with the devil, lest he\nshould conquer Christ. I must strive, lest your souls and those\nof so many, many others should be lost. Come, then! strive with\nme; but first of all, kneel down, lay your faces in the dust and\npray.\" Thereupon, all prostrated themselves on the floor and prayed\nin silence. Presently the prophetess exclaimed from her throne on\nthe bed, \"The hour is come in which the conflict must take place,\nso that Christ may gather together His Church, and contend with\nanti-Christ. After Christ has assembled His Church, 1260 days will\nelapse, and then anti-Christ will appear in human form, and with\nsweet and enticing words will strive to seduce the elect; but all\ntrue Christians will hold aloof.\" After a pause, she said solemnly,\n\"In verity, anti-Christ is already among us.\"\n\nThen with a leap she was off the bed, turning her eyes about,\nthrowing up her hands, rushing about the room, striking the chairs\nand clothes-boxes with her fists, crying, \"The scoundrel, the\nmurderer of souls!\" And, finding a hammer, she began to beat the\nwall with it.\n\nThe company looked on in breathless amaze. But the epileptic J\u00e4ggli\nwent into convulsions, writhed on the ground, groaned, shrieked and\nwrung her hands. Then the holy Margaretta cried, \"I see in spirit\nthe old Napoleon gathering a mighty host, and marching against me.\nThe contest will be terrible. You must wrestle unto blood. Go! fly!\nfetch me axes, clubs, whatever you can find. Bar the doors, curtain\nall the windows in the house, and close every shutter.\"\n\nWhilst her commands were being fulfilled in all haste, and the\nrequired weapons were sought out, John Moser, who remained behind,\nsaw the room \"filled with a dazzling glory, such as no tongue could\ndescribe,\" and wept for joy. The excitement had already mounted to\nvisionary ecstasy. It was five o'clock when the weapons were brought\nupstairs. The holy Margaretta was then seated on her bed, wringing\nher hands, and crying to all to pray, \"Help! help! all of you, that\nChrist may not be overcome in me. Strike, smite, cleave--everywhere,\non all sides--the floor, the walls! It is the will of God! smite on\ntill I bid you stay. Smite and lose your lives if need be.\"\n\nIt was a wonder that lives were not lost in the extraordinary scene\nthat ensued; the room was full of men and women; there were ten of\nthem armed with hatchets, crowbars, clubs, pick-axes, raining blows\non walls and floors, on chairs, tables, cupboards and chests. This\nlasted for three hours. Margaret remained on the bed, encouraging\nthe party to continue; when any arm flagged she singled out the\nweary person, and exhorted him, as he loved his soul, to fight more\nvaliantly and utterly defeat and destroy the devil. \"Strike him!\ncut him down! the old adversary! the arch-fiend! whoso loseth his\nlife shall find it. Fear nothing! smite till your blood runs down\nas sweat. There he is in yonder corner; now at him,\" and Elizabeth\nserved as her echo, \"Smite! strike on! He is a murderer, he is the\nyoung Napoleon, the coming anti-Christ, who entered into me and\nalmost destroyed me.\"\n\nThis lasted, as already said, for three hours. The room was full\nof dust. The warriors steamed with their exertions, and the sweat\nrolled off them. Never had men and women fought with greater\nenthusiasm. The battle of Don Quixote against the wind-mills was\nnothing to this. What blows and wounds the devil and the young\nDuke of Reichstadt obtained is unrecorded, but walls and floor and\nfurniture in the room were wrecked; indeed pitchfork and axe had\nbroken down one wall of the house and exposed what went on inside to\nthe eyes of a gaping crowd that had assembled without, amazed at the\nriot that went on in the house that was regarded as a very sanctuary\nof religion.\n\nNo sooner did the saint behold the faces of the crowd outside than\nshe shrieked forth, \"Behold them! the enemies of God! the host of\nSatan, coming on! But fear them not, we shall overcome.\"\n\nAt last the combatants were no longer able to raise their arms or\nmaintain themselves on their feet. Then Margaret exclaimed, \"The\nvictory is won! follow me!\" She led them downstairs into the common\nsitting-room, where close-drawn curtains and fastened shutters\nexcluded the rude gaze of the profane. Here a rushlight was kindled,\nand by its light the battle continued with an alteration in the\ntactics.\n\nIn complete indifference to the mob that surrounded the house and\nclamoured at the door for admission, the saint ordered all to throw\nthemselves on the ground and thank heaven for the victory they had\nwon. Then, after a pause of more than an hour the same scene began\nagain, and that it could recommence is evidence how much a man can\ndo and endure, when possessed by a holy craze.\n\nIt was afterwards supposed that the whole pious community was drunk\nwith schnaps; but with injustice. Their stomachs were empty; it was\ntheir brains that were drunk.\n\nThe holy Margaret, standing in the midst of the prostrate\nworshippers, now ordered them to beat themselves with their fists\non their heads and breasts, and they obeyed. Elizabeth yelled, \"O,\nMargaret! Do thou strike me! Let me die for Christ.\"\n\nThereupon the holy one struck her sister repeatedly with her\nfists, so that Elizabeth cried out with pain, \"Bear it!\" exclaimed\nMargaret; \"It is the wrath of God!\"\n\nThe prima-donna of the whole comedy in the meanwhile looked well\nabout her to see that none of the actors spared themselves. When\nshe saw anyone slack in his self-chastisement, she called to him to\nredouble his blows. As the old man did not exhibit quite sufficient\nenthusiasm in self-torture, she cried, \"Father, you do not beat\nyourself sufficiently!\" and then began to batter him with her own\nfists. The ill-treated old man groaned under her blows, but she\ncheered him with, \"I am only driving out the old Adam, father! It\ndoes not hurt you,\" and redoubled her pommelling of his head and\nback. Then out went the light.\n\nAll this while the crowd listened and passed remarks outside. No\none would interfere, as it was no one's duty to interfere. Tidings\nof what was going on did, however, reach the amtmann of the parish,\nbut he was an underling, and did not care to meddle without higher\nauthority, so sent word to the amtmann of the district. This latter\ncalled to him his secretary, his constable and a policeman, and\nreached the house of the Peter's family at ten o'clock. In his\nreport to the police at Z\u00fcrich he says: \"On the 13th about 10\no'clock at night I reached Wildisbuch, and then heard that the noise\nin the house of the Peter's family had ceased, that all lights were\nout, and that no one was stirring. I thought it advisable not to\ndisturb this tranquillity, so left orders that the house should\nbe watched,\" and then he went into the house of a neighbour. At\nmidnight, the policeman who had been left on guard came to announce\nthat there was a renewal of disturbance in the house of the Peters.\nThe amtmann went to the spot and heard muffled cries of \"Save us!\nhave mercy on us! Strike away! he is a murderer! spare him not!\"\nand a trampling, and a sound of blows, \"as though falling on soft\nbodies.\" The amtmann knocked at the window and ordered those within\nto admit him. As no attention was paid to his commands, he bade\nthe constable break open the house door. This was done, but the\nsitting-room door was now found to be fast barred. The constable\nthen ascended to the upper room and saw in what a condition of\nwreckage it was. He descended and informed the amtmann of what he\nhad seen. Again the window was knocked at, and orders were repeated\nthat the door should be opened. No notice was taken of this;\nwhereupon the worthy magistrate broke in a pane of glass, and thrust\na candle through the window into the room.\n\n\"I now went to the opened window, and observed four or five men\nstanding with their backs against the door. Another lay as dead on\nthe floor. At a little distance was a coil of human beings, men and\nwomen, lying in a heap on the floor, beside them a woman on her\nknees beating the rest, and crying out at every blow, 'Lord, have\nmercy!' Finally, near the stove was another similar group.\"\n\nThe amtmann now ordered the sitting-room door to be broken open.\nConrad Moser, who had offered to open to the magistrate, was rebuked\nby the saint, who cried out to him: \"What, will you give admission\nto the devil?\"\n\n\"The men,\" says the magistrate in his report, \"offered resistance\nexcited thereto by the women, who continued screaming. The holy\nMargaret especially distinguished herself, and was on her knees\nvigorously beating another woman who lay flat on the floor on her\nface. A second group consisted of a coil of two men and two women\nlying on the floor, the head of one woman on the body of a man,\nand the head of a man on that of a girl. The rest staggered to\ntheir feet one after another. I tried remonstrances, but they were\nunavailing in the hubbub. Then I ordered the old Peter to be removed\nfrom the room. Thereupon men and women flung themselves upon him,\nin spite of all our assurances that no harm would be done him. With\ndifficulty we got him out of the room, with all the rest hanging\non him, so that he was thrown on the floor, and the rest clinging\nto him tumbled over him in a heap. I repeated my remonstrance, and\ninsisted on silence, but without avail. When old Peter prepared to\nanswer, the holy Margaret stayed him with, 'Father, make no reply.\nPray!' All then recommenced the uproar. Margaret cried out: 'Let us\nall die! I will die for Christ!' Others called out, 'Lord, save us!'\nand others, 'Have mercy on us!'\"\n\nThe amtmann gave orders that the police were to divide the party\nand keep guard over some in the kitchen, and the rest in the\nsitting-room, through the night, and not to allow them to speak to\neach other. The latter order was, however, more than the police\ncould execute. In spite of all their efforts, Margaretta and the\nothers continued to exhort and comfort one another through the night.\n\nNext morning each was brought before the magistrate and subjected\nto examination. All were sullen, resolute, and convinced that they\nwere doing God's will. As the holy Margaretta was led away from\nexamination, she said to Ursula and the servant Heinrich, \"The world\nopposes, but can not frustrate my work.\"\n\nHer words came true, the world was too slow in its movements. The\namtmann did not send in his report to the authorities of Z\u00fcrich till\nthe 16th, whereupon it was taken into consideration, and orders were\ntransmitted to him that Margaret and Elizabeth were to be sent to an\nasylum. It was then too late.\n\nAfter the investigation, the amtmann required the cobbler, John\nMorf, to march home to Illnau, John and Conrad Moser to return to\ntheir home, and Ursula K\u00fcndig to be sent back to her father. This\ncommand was not properly executed. Ursula remained, and though\nJohn Moser obeyed, he was prepared to return to the holy Margaret\ndirectly he was summoned.\n\nAs soon as the high priestess had come out of the room where she had\nbeen examined by the amtmann, she went to her own bed-chamber, where\nboards had been laid over the gaps between the rafters broken by the\naxes and picks, during the night. Elizabeth, Susanna, Ursula, and\nthe maid sat or stood round her and prayed.\n\nAt eight o'clock, the father and his son, Caspar, rejoined her, also\nher eldest sister, Barbara, arrived from Tr\u00fcllikon. The servant,\nHeinrich, formed one more in the re-assembled community, and the\nensuing night was passed in prayer and spiritual exercises. These\nwere not conducted in quiet. To the exhortations of Margaret,\nboth Elizabeth and the housemaid entreated that the devil might be\nbeaten out of them. But now Ursula interfered, as the poor girl\nElizabeth had been badly bruised in her bosom by the blows she had\nreceived on the preceding night. When the Saturday morning dawned,\nMargaret stood up on her bed and said, \"I see the many souls seeking\nsalvation through me. They must be assisted; would that a sword were\nin my hand that I might fight for them.\" A little later she said,\nwith a sigh of relief, \"The Lamb has conquered. Go to your work.\"\n\nTranquillity lasted for but a few hours. Magdalena, Moser's wife,\nhad arrived, together with her husband and Conrad. The only one\nmissing was the dearly beloved Jacob, who was far on his way\nhomeward to Illnau and his hardly used wife, Regula.\n\nAt ten o'clock, the old father, his five daughters, his son, the two\nbrothers, John and Conrad Moser, Ursula K\u00fcndig, the maid J\u00e4ggli, and\nthe man Heinrich Ernst, twelve in all, were assembled in the upper\nroom.\n\nMargaret and Elizabeth sat side by side on the bed, the latter\nhalf stupified, looking fixedly before her, Margaret, however, in\na condition of violent nervous surrexitation. Many of the weapons\nused in wrecking the furniture lay about; among these were the\nlarge hammer, and an iron wedge used for splitting wood. All there\nassembled felt that something extraordinary was about to happen.\nThey had everyone passed the line that divides healthy common-sense\nfrom mania.\n\nMargaretta now solemnly announced, \"I have given a pledge for many\nsouls that Satan may not have them. Among these is the soul of my\nbrother Caspar. But I cannot conquer in the strife for him without\nthe shedding of blood.\" Thereupon she bade all present recommence\nbeating themselves with their fists, so as to expel the devil, and\nthey executed her orders with wildest fanaticism.\n\nThe holy maid now laid hold of the iron wedge, drew her brother\nCaspar to her, and said, \"Behold, the Evil One is striving to\npossess thy soul!\" and thereupon she began to strike him on head\nand breast with the wedge. Caspar staggered back; she pursued him,\nstriking him and cutting his head open, so that he was covered with\nblood. As he afterwards declared, he had not the smallest thought of\nresistance; the power to oppose her seemed to be taken from him. At\nlength, half stunned, he fell to the ground, and was carried to his\nbed by his father and the maid J\u00e4ggli. The old man no more returned\nupstairs, consequently he was not present at the terrible scene\nthat ensued. But he took no steps to prevent it. Not only so, but\nhe warded off all interruption from without. Whilst he was below,\nsomeone knocked at the door. At that moment Susanna was in the room\nwith him, and he bade her inquire who was without. The man gave his\nname as Elias Vogal, a mason, and asked leave to come in. Old Peter\nrefused, as he said the surgeon was within. Elias endeavoured to\npush his way in but was resisted, and the door barred against him.\nVogel went away, and meeting a policeman told him what had taken\nplace, and added that he had noticed blood-stains on the sleeves of\nboth old Peter and Susanna. The policeman, thinking that Peter's\nlie was truth, and that the surgeon was really in the house, and had\nbeen bleeding the half-crazy people there, took no further notice of\nwhat he had heard, and went his way.\n\nMeanwhile, in the upper room the comedy had been changed into a\nghastly tragedy. As soon as the wounded Caspar had been removed, the\nthree sisters, Barbara, Magdalena, and Susanna left the room, the\ntwo latter, however, only for a short while. Then the holy Margaret\nsaid to those who remained with her, \"To-day is a day of great\nevents. The contest has been long and must now be decided. Blood\nmust flow. I see the spirit of my mother calling to me to offer up\nmy life.\" After a pause she said, \"And you--all--are you ready to\ngive your lives?\" They all responded eagerly that they were. Then\nsaid Margaret, \"No, no; I see you will not readily die. But I--I\nmust die.\"\n\nThereupon Elizabeth exclaimed, \"I will gladly die for the saving of\nthe souls of my brother and father. Strike me dead, strike me dead!\"\nThen she threw herself on the bed and began to batter her head with\na wooden mallet.\n\n\"It has been revealed to me,\" said Margaret, \"that Elizabeth will\nsacrifice herself.\" Then taking up the iron hammer, she struck her\nsister on the head. At once a spiritual fury seized on all the\nelect souls, and seizing weapons they began to beat the poor girl\nto death. Margaret in her mania struck at random about her, and\nwounded both John Moser and Ursula K\u00fcndig. Then she suddenly caught\nthe latter by the wrist and bade her kill Elizabeth with the iron\nwedge. Ursula shrank back, \"I cannot! I love her too dearly!\" \"You\nmust,\" screamed the saint; \"it is ordained.\" \"I am ready to die\"\nmoaned Elizabeth. \"I cannot! I cannot!\" cried Ursula. \"You must,\"\nshouted Margaret. \"I will raise my sister again, and I also will\nrise again after three days. May God strengthen your arm.\"\n\nAs though a demoniacal influence flowed out of the holy maid, and\nmaddened those about her, all were again seized with frenzy. John\nMoser snatched the hammer out of her hand, and smote the prostrate\ngirl with it again, and yet again, on head and bosom and shoulders.\nSusanna brought down a crow-bar across her body, the servant-man\nHeinrich belaboured her with a fragment of the floor planking,\nand Ursula, swept away by the current, beat in her skull with the\nwedge. Throughout the turmoil, the holy maid yelled: \"God strengthen\nyour arms! Ursula, strike home! Die for Christ, Elizabeth!\" The\nlast words heard from the martyred girl were an exclamation of\nresignation to the will of God, as expressed by her sister.\n\nOne would have supposed that when the life was thus battered out\nof the unfortunate victim, the murderers would have come to their\nsenses and been filled with terror and remorse. But it was not so.\nMargaret sat beside the body of her murdered sister, the blaze of\nspiritual ecstasy in her eyes, the blood-stained hammer in her\nright hand, terrible in her inflexible determination, and in the\ndemoniacal energy which was to possess her to the last breath she\ndrew. Her bosom heaved, her body quivered, but her voice was firm\nand her tone authoritative, as she said, \"More blood must flow. I\nhave pledged myself for the saving of many souls. I must die now.\nYou must crucify me.\" John Moser and Ursula, shivering with horror,\nentreated, \"O do not demand that of us.\" She replied, \"It is better\nthat I should die than that thousands of souls should perish.\"\n\nSo saying she struck herself with the hammer on the left temple.\nThen she held out the weapon to John Moser, and ordered him and\nUrsula to batter her with it. Both hesitated for a moment.\n\n\"What!\" cried Margaret turning to her favourite disciple, \"will you\nnot do this? Strike and may God brace your arm!\" Moser and Ursula\nnow struck her with the hammer, but not so as to stun her.\n\n\"And now,\" said she with raised voice, \"crucify me! You, Ursula,\nmust do the deed.\"\n\n\"I cannot! I cannot!\" sobbed the wretched girl.\n\n\"What! will you withdraw your hand from the work of God, now the\nhour approaches? You will be responsible for all the souls that will\nbe lost, unless you fulfil what I have appointed you to do.\"\n\n\"But O! not I--!\" pleaded Ursula.\n\n\"Yes--you. If the police authorities had executed me, it would not\nhave fallen to you to do this, but now it is for you to accomplish\nthe work. Go, Susan, and fetch nails, and the rest of you make ready\nthe cross.\"\n\nIn the meantime, Heinrich, the man-servant, frightened at what had\ntaken place, and not wishing to have anything more to do with the\nhorrible scene in the upper chamber, had gone quietly down into\nthe wood-house, and was making stakes for the vines. There Susanna\nfound him, and asked him for nails, telling him for what they were\ndesigned. He composedly picked her out nails of suitable length, and\nthen resumed his work of making vine stakes. Susanna re-ascended to\nthe upper room, and found Margaret extended on the bed beside the\nbody of Elizabeth, with the arms, breast, and feet resting on blocks\nof wood, arranged, whilst Susanna was absent, by John Moser and\nUrsula, under her in the fashion of a cross.\n\nThen began the horrible act of crucifixion, which is only\nconceivable as an outburst of religious mania, depriving all who\ntook part in it of every feeling of humanity, and degrading them\nto the level of beasts of prey. At the subsequent trial, both\nUrsula and John Moser described their condition as one of spiritual\nintoxication.\n\nThe hands and feet of the victim were nailed to the blocks of wood.\nThen Ursula's head swam, and she drew back. Again Margaret called\nher to continue her horrible work. \"Go on! go on! God strengthen\nyour arm. I will raise Elizabeth from the dead, and rise myself in\nthree days.\" Nails were driven through both elbows and also through\nthe breasts of Margaret; not for one moment did the victim express\npain, nor did her courage fail her. No Indian at the stake endured\nthe cruel ingenuity of his tormentors with more stoicism than did\nthis young woman bear the martyrdom she had invoked for herself.\nShe impressed her murderers with the idea that she was endowed with\nsupernatural strength. It could not be otherwise, for what she\nendured was beyond the measure of human strength. That in the place\nof human endurance she was possessed with the Berserker strength\nof the _furor religiosus_, was what these ignorant peasants could\nnot possibly know. Conrad Moser could barely support himself from\nfainting, sick and horror-struck at the scene. He exclaimed, \"Is\nnot this enough?\" His brother, John, standing at the foot of the\nbed, looked into space with glassy eyes. Ursula, bathed in tears,\nwas bowed over the victim. Magdalena Moser had taken no active part\nin the crucifixion; she remained the whole time, weeping, leaning\nagainst a chest.\n\nThe dying woman smiled. \"I feel no pain. Be yourselves strong,\" she\nwhispered. \"Now, drive a nail or a knife through my heart.\"\n\nUrsula endeavoured to do as bidden, but her hand shook and the knife\nwas bent. \"Beat in my skull!\" this was the last word spoken by\nMargaret. In their madness Conrad Moser and Ursula K\u00fcndig obeyed,\none with the crowbar, the other with the hammer.\n\nIt was noon when the sacrifice was accomplished--dinner-time.\nAccordingly, all descended to the sitting-room, where the meal that\nMargaret J\u00e4ggli had been in the meantime preparing was served and\neaten.\n\nThey had scarce finished before a policeman entered with a paper for\nold Peter to sign, in which he made himself answerable to produce\nhis daughters before the magistrates when and where required.\nHe signed it with composure, \"I declare that I will cause my\ndaughters, if in good health, to appear before the Upper Amtsmann in\nAndelfingen when so required.\" Then the policeman departed without\na suspicion that the two girls were lying dead in the room above.\nOn Sunday the 16th, the servant Heinrich was sent on horseback to\nIllnau to summon Jacob Morf to come to Wildisbuch and witness a\ngreat miracle. Jacob came there with Heinrich, but was not told the\ncircumstances of the crucifixion till he reached the house. When he\nheard what had happened, he was frightened almost out of his few\nwits, and when taken upstairs to see the bodies, he fainted away.\nNothing--no representations would induce him to remain for the\nmiraculous resurrection, and he hastened back to Illnau, where he\ntook to his bed. In his alarm and horror he sent for the pastor, and\ntold him what he had seen.\n\nBut the rest of the holy community remained stead-fast in their\nfaith. On the night of Sunday before Monday morning broke, Ursula\nK\u00fcndig and the servant man Heinrich went upstairs with pincers and\ndrew out the nails that transfixed Margaretta. When asked their\nreason for so doing, at the subsequent trial, they said that they\nsupposed this would facilitate Margaretta's resurrection. _Sanctus\nfuror_ had made way for _sancta simplicitas_.\n\nThe night of Monday to Tuesday was spent in prayer and\nScripture-reading in the upper chamber, and eager expectation of the\npromised miracle, which never took place. The catastrophe could no\nlonger be concealed. Something must be done. On Tuesday, old John\nPeter pulled on his jacket and walked to Tr\u00fcllikon to inform the\npastor that his daughter Elizabeth had died on the Saturday at 10\na.m., and his daughter Margaretta at noon of the same day.\n\nWe need say little more. On Dec. 3rd, 1823, the trial of all\nincriminated in this frightful tragedy took place at Z\u00fcrich and\nsentence was pronounced on the following day. Ursula K\u00fcndig was\nsentenced to sixteen years' imprisonment, Conrad Moser and John\nPeter to eight years, Susanna Peter and John Moser to six years,\nHeinrich Ernst to four years, Jacob Morf to three, Margaret J\u00e4ggli\nto two years, Barbara Baumann and Casper Peter to one year, and\nMagdalena Moser to six months with hard labour. The house at\nWildisbuch was ordered to be levelled with the dust, the plough\ndrawn over the foundation, and that no house should again be erected\non the spot.\n\nBefore the destruction, however, a pilgrimage of Pietists and\nbelievers in Margaret Peter had visited the scene of her death, and\nmany had been the exclamations of admiration at her conduct. \"Oh,\nthat it had been I who had died!\" \"Oh, how many souls must she have\ndelivered!\" and the like. _Magna est stultitia et pr\u00e6valebit._\n\nAt a time like the present, when there is a wave of warm, mystic\nfever sweeping over the country, and carrying away with it\nthousands of ignorant and impetuous souls, it is well that the\nstory--repulsive though it be--should be brought into notice, as\na warning of what this spiritual excitement may lead to--not,\nindeed, again, maybe, into bloodshed. It is far more likely to lead\nto, as it has persistently, in every similar outbreak, into moral\ndisorders, the record of which, in the case of Margaretta Peter, we\nhave passed over almost without a word.\n\n     Authority: Die Gekreuzigte von Wildisbuch, von J. Scherr, 2nd\n     Edit., St. Gall. 1867. Scherr visited the spot, collected\n     information from eye-witnesses, and made copious extracts from\n     the records of the trial in the Z\u00fcrich archives, where they are\n     contained in Vol. 166, folio 1044, under the heading: \"Akten\n     betreffened die Gr\u00e4uel--Scenen in Wildisbuch.\"\n\n\n\n\nA Northern Raphael.\n\n\nHere and there in the galleries of North Germany and Russia may\nbe seen paintings of delicacy and purity, delicacy of colour and\npurity of design, the author of which was Gerhard von K\u00fcgelgen.\nThe majority of his paintings are in private hands; but an Apollo,\nholding the dying Hyacinthus in his arms, is in the possession of\nthe German Emperor; Moses on Horeb is in the gallery of the Academy\nof Fine Arts at Dresden; a St. C\u00e6cilia and an Adonis, painted in\n1794 and 1795, were purchased by the Earl of Bristol; a Holy Family\nis in the Gallery at Cassel; and some of the sacred subjects have\nfound their way into churches.\n\nIn 1772, the wife of Franz K\u00fcgelgen, a merchant of Bacharach on the\nRhine, presented her husband with twin sons, the elder of whom by\nfifteen minutes is the subject of this notice. His brother was named\nKarl. Their resemblance was so great that even their mother found a\ndifficulty in their early childhood in distinguishing one from the\nother.\n\nBacharach was in the Electorate of Cologne, and when the\nArchbishop-Elector, Maximilian Franz, learned that the twins were\nfond of art, in 1791 he very liberally gave them a handsome sum\nof money to enable them to visit Rome and there prosecute their\nstudies.\n\nGerhard was at once fascinated by the statuary in the Vatican, and\nby the pictures of Raphael. The ambition of his life thenceforward\nwas to combine the beauty of modelling of the human form that he\nsaw in the Gr\u00e6co-Roman statues with the beauty of colour that he\nrecognised in Raphael's canvases. Karl, on the other hand, devoted\nhimself to landscapes.\n\nIn 1795 the brothers separated, Gerhard that he might visit Munich.\nThence, in the autumn, he went to Riga with a friend, and there he\nremained rather over two years, and painted and disposed of some\nfifty-four pictures. Then he painted in St. Petersburg and Revel,\nand finally settled into married life and regular work at Dresden\nin 1806. There he became a general favourite, not only on account\nof his artistic genius, but also because of the fascination of\nhis modest and genial manner. He was honoured by the Court, and\nrespected by everyone for his virtues. Orders flowed in on him, and\nhis paintings commanded good prices. The king of Saxony ennobled\nhim, that is to say, raised him out of the b\u00fcrger-stand, by giving\nhim the privilege of writing a _Von_ before his patronymic.\n\nHaving received an order from Riga for a large altar picture, he\nbought a vineyard on the banks of the Elbe, commanding a charming\nprospect of the river and the distant blue Bohemian mountains. Here\nhe resolved to erect a country house for the summer, with a large\nstudio lighted from the north. The construction of this residence\nwas to him a great pleasure and occupation. In November, 1819,\nhe wrote to his brother, \"My house shall be to us a veritable\nfairy palace, in which to dwell till the time comes, when through\na little, narrow and dark door we pass through into that great\nhabitation of the Heavenly Father in which are many mansions, and\nwhere our whole family will be re-united. Should it please God to\ncall me away, then Lily (his wife) will find this an agreeable\ndower-house, in which she can supervise the education of the\nchildren, as the distance from the town is only an hour's walk.\"\n\nThe words were written, perhaps, without much thought, but they\nforeshadowed a terrible catastrophe. K\u00fcgelgen would pass, before his\nfairy palace was ready to receive him, through that little, narrow\ndoor into the heavenly mansions.\n\nThe holy week of 1820 found him in a condition of singularly deep\nreligious emotion. He was a Catholic, but had, nevertheless, allowed\nhis son to be confirmed by a Protestant pastor. The ceremony had\ngreatly affected him, and he said to a friend, who was struck at the\nintensity of his feeling, \"I know I shall never be as happy again\ntill I reach Heaven.\"\n\nOn March 27th, on the very day of the confirmation, he went in\nthe afternoon a walk by himself to his vineyard, to look at his\nbuildings. He invited one of his pupils to accompany him, but the\nyoung man had some engagement and declined.\n\nAt 5 p.m. he was at the new house, where he paid the workmen, gave\nsome instructions, and pointed out where he would do some planting,\nso as to enchance the picturesqueness of the spot. At some time\nbetween six and seven he left, to walk back to Dresden, along the\nroad from Bautzen.\n\nEvery one who has been at the Saxon capital knows that road. The\nright bank of the Elbe above Dresden rises in picturesque heights\ncovered with gardens and vineyards, from the river, and about a\nmile from the bridge is the Linkes Bad, with its pleasant gardens,\ntheatre, music and baths. That road is one of the most charming,\nand, therefore, the most frequented outside the capital. On the\nevening in question the Easter moon was shining.\n\nK\u00fcgelgen did not return home. His wife sent his son, the just\nconfirmed boy, aged 17 years, to the new house, to inquire for her\nhusband. The boy learned there that he had left some hours before.\nHe returned home, and found that still his father had not come\nin. The police were communicated with, and the night was spent in\ninquiries and search, but all in vain. On the following morning,\nat 9 a.m., as the boy was traversing the same road, along with a\ngensdarme, he deemed it well to explore a footpath beside the river,\nwhich was overflown by the Elbe, and there, finally, amongst some\nreeds they discovered the dead body of the artist, stripped of his\nclothes to his shirt and drawers, lying on his face.\n\nGerhard von K\u00fcgelgen had been murdered. His features were cut and\nbruised, his left temple and jaw were broken. Footsteps, as of two\npersons, were traceable through the river mud and across a field\nto the highway. Apparently the artist had been murdered on the\nroad, then carried or dragged to the path, stripped there, and then\ncast among the rushes. About twenty-four paces from where he lay,\nbetween him and the highway, his cap was found.\n\nThe excitement, the alarm, aroused in Dresden was immense. Not only\nwas K\u00fcgelgen universally respected, but everyone was in dismay at\nthe thought that his own safety was jeopardised, if a murder such as\nthis could be perpetrated on the open road, within a few paces of\nthe gates. Indeed, the place where the crime was committed was but a\nhundred strides from the Linkes Bad, one of the most popular resorts\nof the Dresdeners.\n\nIt was now remembered that only a few months before, near the\nsame spot, another murder had been committed, that had remained\nundiscovered. In that case the victim had been a poor carpenter's\napprentice.\n\nOn the same day as the body of K\u00fcgelgen was found, the Government\noffered a sum equal to \u00a3150 for the discovery of the murderer. A\nlittle later, some children found among the rubbish, outside the\nBlack Gate of the Dresdener Vorstadt, a blue cloth cloak, folded\nup and buried under some stones. It was recognised as having\nbelonged to K\u00fcgelgen. Moreover, in the pocket was the little\n\"Thomas-\u00e0-Kempis\" he always carried about with him.\n\nIt was concluded that the murderer had not ventured to bring all\nthe clothing of K\u00fcgelgen into the town, through the gate, and had,\ntherefore, hidden portions in places whence he could remove them one\nby one, unobserved. The murderer was, undoubtedly, an inhabitant of\nthe city.\n\nFrom March 29th to April 4th the police remained without any clue,\nalthough a description of the garments worn by the murdered man, and\nof his watch, was posted up at every corner, and sent round to the\nnearest towns and villages.\n\nThe workmen who had been engaged on K\u00fcgelgen's house were brought\nbefore the police. They had left after his departure, and had\nreceived money from him; but they were discharged, as there was no\nevidence against them.\n\nAs no light seemed to fall on this mysterious case, the police\nlooked up the circumstances of the previous murder. On December\n29th, 1819, a carrier on the highroad had found a body on the way.\nIt was ascertained to be that of a carpenter's apprentice, named\nWinter. His skull had been broken in. Not a trace of the murderer\nwas found; not even footprints had been observed. However, it was\nlearned that the wife of a labourer had been attacked almost at the\nsame spot, on the 28th December, by a man wearing a military cap and\ncloak; and she had only escaped him by the approach of a carriage,\nthe sound of the wheels having alarmed him, and induced him to fly.\nHe had fled in the direction of the Black Gate and the barracks.\n\nThe anxiety of the Dresdeners seemed justified. There was some\nmurderous ruffian inhabiting the Vorstadt, who hovered about the\ngates, waylaying, not wealthy men only, but poor charwomen and\napprentices.\n\nThe military cloak and cap, the direction taken by the assailant in\nhis flight, gave a sort of clue--and the police suspected that the\nmurderer must be sought among the soldiers.\n\nOn April 4th two Jewish pawnbrokers appeared before the police, and\nhanded over a silver watch which had been left with them at 9 a.m.\non the 20th March--that is to say on the morning after the murder\nof K\u00fcgelgen--and which agreed with the advertised description of\nthe artist's lost watch. It was identified at once. The man who had\npawned it, the Jews said, wore the uniform of an artillery soldier.\n\nAt the request of the civil authorities, the military officers held\nan inquisition in the barracks. All the artillery soldiers were made\nto pass before the Jew brokers, but they were unable to identify the\nman who had deposited the watch with them. Somewhat later in the day\none of these Jews, as he was going through the street, saw a man in\ncivil dress, whom he thought he recognised as the fellow who had\ngiven him the watch. He went up to him at once and spoke about the\nwatch. The man at first acknowledged that he had pawned one, then\ndenied, and threatened the Jew when he persevered in clinging to\nhim. A gendarme came up, and hearing what the controversy was about,\narrested the man, who gave his name as Fischer, a gunner.\n\nFischer was at once examined, and he doggedly refused to allow that\nhe had given up a watch to the Jew.\n\nSuspicion against him was deepened by his declaring that he\nhad heard nothing of the murder--a matter of general talk in\nDresden--and that he had not seen the notices with the offer of\nreward for the discovery of the murderer. On the following day,\nApril 5th, however, he admitted having pawned the watch, which he\npretended to have found outside the Black Gate. A few hours later he\nwithdrew this confession, saying that he was so bewildered with the\nquestions put to him, and so alarmed at his arrest, that he did not\nwell know what he said. It was observed that Fischer was a man of\nvery low intellectual power.\n\nThe same day he was invested in his uniform, and presented before\nthe pawnbrokers. Both unanimously declared that he was _not_ the man\nwho had entered their shop and deposited the watch with them. They\nboth declared that though Fischer had the same height and general\nbuild as the man in question, and the same fair hair, yet that the\nface was different.\n\nWith this, the case against Fischer broke down; nevertheless, though\nhe had been handed over by the military authorities to the civil\npower, he remained under arrest. The public was convinced of his\nguilt, and the police hoped by keeping him in prison to draw from\nhim later some information which might prove serviceable.\n\nAnd, in fact, after he had been a fortnight under arrest, he\nvolunteered a statement. He was conducted at once before the\nmagistrate, and confessed that he had murdered Von K\u00fcgelgen. He,\nhowever, stoutly denied having laid hands on the carpenter Winter.\nNevertheless, on the way back to his cell he told his gaoler that\nhe had committed this murder as well. Next day he was again brought\nbefore the magistrate, and confessed to both murders. He was taken\nto the spots where the two corpses had been found, and there he\nrenewed his confession, though without entering into any details.\n\nBut on the next morning, April 21, he begged to be again heard, and\nhe then asserted that his former confessions were false. He had\nconfessed merely because he was weary of his imprisonment and the\npoor food he was given, and decided to die. When spoken to by the\nmagistrates seriously, and remonstrated with for his contradictions,\nhe cried out that he was innocent. Let them torture him as much as\nthey pleased, he wished to die.\n\nBut hardly was he back in his prison than he told the gaoler that it\nwas true that he was the murderer of both K\u00fcgelgen and Winter. Again\nhe confessed before the magistrate, and again, on the 27th, withdrew\nhis confession and protested his innocence.\n\nOn the 21st April a new element in the case came to light, that\nperplexed the question not a little.\n\nA Jewish pawnbroker, L\u00f6bel Graff, announced that on February 3,\n1820, he had received from the gunner Kaltofen, a green coat, and\non the 4th April a dark-blue cloth coat, stained with spots of\noil, also a pair of cloth trousers. As both coats seemed to him\nsuspicious, and to resemble those described in the advertisements,\nhe had questioned Kaltofen about them, but had received equivocal\nanswers, and Kaltofen at last admitted that he had bought them from\nthe gunner Fischer.\n\nJohn Gottfried Kaltofen was a young man of 24 years, servant to\none of the officers, and therefore did not live in the barracks.\nHe was now taken up. His manner and appearance were in his favour.\nHe was frank, and at once admitted that he had disposed of the\ntwo coats to Graff, and that he had bought them of Fischer. On\nconfrontation with the latter he repeated what he had said. Fischer\nfell into confusion, denied all knowledge of Kaltofen, protested his\ninnocence, and denied the sale of the coats, one of which had in the\nmeantime been identified as having belonged to Winter, and the other\nto K\u00fcgelgen.\n\nOn April 27th a search was made in the lodgings of Kaltofen, and\nthree keys were found there, hidden away, and these proved to have\nbelonged to K\u00fcgelgen. At first Kaltofen declared that he knew\nnothing of these keys, but afterwards said that he remembered on\nconsideration that he had found them in the pocket of the blue\ncoat he had purchased from Fischer, and had put them away before\ndisposing of the coat, and had given them no further thought. Not\nmany minutes after Fischer had been sent back to prison, he begged\nto be brought before the magistrate again, and now admitted that it\nwas quite true that he had sold both coats to Kaltofen.\n\nWhilst this confession was being taken down, however, he again\nhesitated, broke down, and denied having sold them to Kaltofen, or\nany one else. \"I can't say anything more,\" he cried out; \"my head is\ndazed.\"\n\nBy this statement he remained, protesting his innocence, and he\ndeclared that he had only confessed his guilt because he was\nafraid of ill-treatment in the prison if he continued to assert\nhis innocence. It must be remembered that the gaolers were as\nconvinced of his guilt as were the public of Dresden; and it is\nnoticeable that under pressure from them Fischer always acknowledged\nhis guilt; whereas, when before the magistrates he was ready to\nproclaim that he was innocent. At this time it was part of the duty\nof a gaoler, or was supposed to be such, to use every possible\neffort to bring a prisoner to confession. And now, on April 27th,\na third gunner appeared on the scene. His name was Kiessling, and\nhe asked the magistrate to take down his statement, which was to\nthe effect that Kaltofen, who had been discharged, had admitted\nto him that he had murdered K\u00fcgelgen with a cudgel, and that he\nhad still got some of his garments hidden in his lodgings. But--so\nsaid Kiessling--Kaltofen had jauntily said he would lay it all on\nFischer. Kiessling, moreover, produced a pair of boots, that he said\nKaltofen had left with him to be re-soled, as he was regimental\nshoemaker. And these boots were at once recognised as having been\nthose worn by K\u00fcgelgen when he was murdered.\n\nKaltofen was at once re-arrested, and brought into confrontation\nwith Kiessling. He retained his composure, and said that it was\nquite true that he had given a pair of boots to Kiessling to\nre-sole, but they were a pair that he had bought in the market. But,\nin the meantime, another investigation of his lodgings had been\nmade, and a number of articles found that had certainly belonged\nto the murdered men, Winter and K\u00fcgelgen. They were ranged on the\ntable, together with the pair of boots confided to Kiessling, and\nKaltofen was shown them. Hitherto, the young man had displayed\nphlegmatic composure, and an openness of manner that had impressed\nall who saw him in his favour. His intelligence, had, moreover,\ncontrasted favourably with that of Fischer. But the sight of all\nthese articles, produced before him, staggered Kaltofen, and, losing\nhis presence of mind, he turned in a fury upon his comrade, the\nshoemaker, and swore at him for having betrayed his confidence. Only\nafter he had poured forth a torrent of abuse, could the magistrate\nbring him to say anything about the charge, and then--still hot\nand panting from his onslaught on Kiessling--he admitted that he,\nnot Fischer, was the murderer in both cases. Fischer, he said, was\nwholly innocent, not only of participation in, but of knowledge of\nthe crimes. The summary of his confession, oft repeated and never\nwithdrawn, was as follows:--Being in need of money, he had gone\noutside the town thrice in one week, at the end of December, 1819,\nwith the intent of murdering and robbing the first person he could\nattack with security. For this purpose, he had provided himself\nwith a cudgel under his cloak. On the 29th December he selected\nWinter as his first victim. He allowed him to pass, then stole\nafter him, and suddenly dealt him a blow on the back of his head,\nbefore the young man turned to see who was following him. Winter\ndropped, whereupon he, Kaltofen, had struck him twice again on the\nhead. Then he divested his victim of collar, coat, hat, kerchief,\nwatch, and a little money--not more than four shillings in English\ncoins, and a few tools. He was engaged on pulling off his boots and\ntrousers, when he was alarmed by hearing the tramp of horses and the\nsound of wheels, and he ran off across the fields with his spoil.\nHe got Kiessling to dispose of the hat for him, the other articles\nhe himself sold to Jews. Whether it was he also who assaulted the\npoor woman we are not informed. In like manner Kaltofen proceeded\nwith K\u00fcgelgen. He was again in want of money. He had been gambling,\nand had lost what little he had. On the Monday in Holy Week, 1820,\nhe took his cudgel again and went out along the Bautzen Road. The\nmoon shone brightly, and he met a gentleman walking slowly towards\nDresden, in a blue cloak. He allowed him to pass, then followed\nhim. As a woman was walking in the same direction, but at a quicker\nrate, he delayed his purpose till she had disappeared behind the\nfirst houses of the suburb. Then he hastened on, walking lightly,\nand springing up behind K\u00fcgelgen, struck him on the right temple\nwith his cudgel from behind. K\u00fcgelgen fell without uttering a\ncry. Kaltofen at once seized him by the collar and dragged him\nacross a field to the edge of the river. There he dealt him\nseveral additional blows, and then proceeded to strip him. Whilst\nthus engaged, he remembered that the dead man had dropped his\nwalking-stick on the high road when first struck. Kaltofen at once\ndesisted from what he was about, to return to the road and recover\nthe walking-stick. On coming back to his victim, he thought there\nwas still life in him; K\u00fcgelgen was moving and endeavouring to rise.\nWhereupon, with his cudgel, Kaltofen repeatedly struck him, till all\nsigns of life disappeared. He now completed his work of spoliation,\npulled off the boots, untied the neckerchief, and ransacked the\npockets. He found in addition to the watch the sum of about\nhalf-a-guinea. He then stole away among the rushes till he reached\nthe Linkes Bad, where he returned to the main road. He concealed\nthe cloak at the Black Gate, but carried the rest of his plunder to\nhis lodgings.\n\nHis confession was confirmed by several circumstances. Kiessling was\nagain required to repeat what he had heard from Kaltofen, and the\nstory as told by him agreed exactly with that now confessed by the\nmurderer. Kiessling added that Kaltofen had told him he was puzzled\nto account for Fischer's self-examination, as he knew that the man\nhad nothing to do with the murder. A third examination of Kaltofen's\nlodgings resulted in the discovery of all the rest of the murdered\nman's effects. Moreover, when Kaltofen was confronted with the two\nJews who had taken the silver watch on the 24th, they immediately\nrecognised him as the man who had disposed of it to them.\n\nFinally, he confessed to having been associated with Kiessling in\ntwo robberies, one of which was a burglarious attack on his own\nmaster.\n\nThe case was made out clearly enough against Kaltofen, and it\nseemed equally clear that Fischer was innocent. Moreover, from the\n24th April onwards, Fischer never swerved from his protestation of\ncomplete innocence. When questioned why he had confessed himself\nguilty, he said that he had been pressed to do so by the gaoler, who\nhad several times fastened him for a whole night into the stocks,\nand had threatened him with severer measures unless he admitted\nhis guilt. The gaoler admitted having so treated Fischer once, but\nFischer insisted that he had been thus tortured on two consecutive\nnights.\n\nIt was ascertained that Fischer had not only known about the murder\nof K\u00fcgelgen, but had attended his funeral, and yet he had pretended\nentire, or almost entire, ignorance when first arrested. When asked\nto explain this, he replied that he was so frightened that he took\nrefuge in lies. That he was a dull-minded, extremely ignorant man,\nwas obvious to the judges and to all who had to do with him; he was\naged thirty, and had spent thirteen years in the army, had conducted\nhimself well, but had never been trusted with any important duties\non account of his stupidity. He had a dull eye, and a heavy\ncountenance. Kaltofen, on the other hand, was a good-looking,\nwell-built young fellow, of twenty-four, with a bright, intelligent\nface; his education was above what was ordinary in his class. It\nwas precisely this that had excited in him vanity, and craving for\npleasures and amusements which he could not afford. His obliging\nmanners, his trimness, and cheerfulness, had made him a favourite\nwith the officers.\n\nAs already intimated, he was fond of play, and it was this that had\ninduced him to commit his murders. He admitted that he had felt\nlittle or no compunction, and he said frankly that it was as well\nfor society that he was taken, otherwise the death of K\u00fcgelgen\nwould have been followed by others. He spoke of the crimes he had\ncommitted with openness and indifference, and maintained this\ncondition of callousness to the end. It seems to have been customary\non several occasions for the Lutheran pastors who attended the last\nhours of criminals to publish their opinions as to the manner in\nwhich they prepared for death, and their ideas as to the motives\nfor the crimes committed, an eminently indecent proceeding to\nour notions. In this case, the chaplain who attended on Kaltofen\nrushed into the priest after the execution. He said, \"Play may have\noccasioned that want of feeling which will commit the most atrocious\ncrime, without compunction, for the gratification of a temporary\nrequirement. Kaltofen, without being rude and rough towards his\nfellows, but on the contrary obliging and courteous, came to regard\nthem with brutal indifference.\" Only twice did he feel any twinge\nof conscience, he said, once before his first murder, and again at\nthe funeral of his second victim, which he attended. The criminal\nwas now known, had confessed, and had confessed that he had no\naccomplice. Moreover, he declared that Fischer was wholly innocent.\nNot a single particle of evidence was forthcoming to incriminate\nFischer, apart from his own retracted confessions. Nevertheless he\nwas not liberated.\n\nThe police could not believe that Kaltofen had been without an\naccomplice. There were stabs in the face and body of K\u00fcgelgen, and\nKaltofen had professed to have used no other weapon than a cudgel.\nThe murderer said that he had dragged the body over the field to\nthe rushes, and it was agreed that there must have been evidence of\nthis dragging. Some witnesses had, indeed, said they had seen such,\nbut others protested that there were footprints as of two men. This,\nhowever, could be explained by Kaltofen's admission that he had gone\nback to the road for the walking-stick.\n\nThen, again, Fischer, when interrogated, had given particulars which\nagreed with the circumstances in a remarkable manner. He was asked\nto explain this. \"Well,\" said he, \"he had heard a good deal of talk\nabout the murders, and he was miserable at the thought of spending\nlong years in prison, and so had confessed.\" When asked how he knew\nthe particulars of the murder of Winter, he said that he had been\nhelped to it by the gaoler. He had said first, \"I went to his left\nside\"--whereupon the gaoler had said, \"Surely you are wrong, it was\non the right,\" thereat Fischer had corrected himself and said, \"Yes,\nof course--on the right.\"\n\nThe case was now ready for final sentence, and for this purpose\nall the depositions were forwarded on September 12th to the\nJudicial Court at Leipzig. But, before judgment was pronounced,\nthe depositions were hastily sent for back to Dresden--for, in the\nmeantime, the case had passed into a new phase. On October 5th,\nthe gaoler--the same man who had brought about the confession of\nFischer--announced that Kaltofen had confided to him that Fischer\nreally had been his accomplice in both the murders. Kaltofen at\nonce was summoned before the magistrate, and he calmly, and with\nemphasis, declared that Fischer had assisted him on both occasions,\nand that he had not allowed this before, because he and Fischer\nhad sworn that neither would betray the other. Fischer had never\nmentioned his name, and he had accordingly done his utmost to\nexculpate Fischer.\n\nAccording to his account, he and Fischer had been walking together\non the morning of March 26th, between 9 and 10, when they planned a\nmurder together for the following day. However, there was rebutting\nevidence to the effect that on the morning in question Fischer had\nbeen on guard, at the hour named, before the powder magazine; he had\nnot been released till noon. Other statements of Kaltofen proved to\nbe equally untrue.\n\nWhat could have induced Kaltofen to deliberately charge a comrade in\narms with participation in the crime, if he were guiltless? There\nwas no apparent motive. He could gain no reprieve by it. It did not\ngreatly diminish his own guilt.\n\nIt was necessary to enter into as close investigation as was\npossible into the whereabouts of Fischer at the time of the two\nmurders. It was not found possible to determine where he was at\nthe time when Winter was killed, but some of his comrades swore\nthat on March 27th he had been present at the roll-call at 6 p.m.,\nand had come into barrack before the second roll-call at half-past\neight. The murder of K\u00fcgelgen had taken place at eight o'clock, and\nthe distance between the barrack and the spot where it had been\ncommitted was 3487 paces, which would take a man about 25 minutes to\ntraverse. If, as his comrades asserted, Fischer had come in shortly\nafter eight, then it was quite impossible that he could have been\npresent when K\u00fcgelgen was murdered; but not great reliance can\nbe placed on the testimony of soldiers as to the hour at which a\ncomrade came into barrack just seven months before on a given day.\n\nThe case was perplexing. The counsel for Fischer--his name was\nEisenst\u00fcck--took a bold line of defence. He charged the gaoler\nwith having manipulated Kaltofen, as he had Fischer. This gaoler's\nself-esteem was wounded by the discovery that Kaltofen and not\nFischer was the murderer, and his credit was damaged by the\nproceedings which showed that he had goaded an unhappy man, confided\nto his care, into charging himself with a crime he had never\ncommitted. Eisenst\u00fcck asserted that this new charge was fabricated\nin the prison by the gaoler in concert with Kaltofen for his own\njustification. But, whatever may be thought of the character and\nconduct of this turnkey, it is difficult to understand how he could\nprevail on a cool-headed man like Kaltofen thus to take on himself\nthe additional guilt of perjury, and such perjury as risked the life\nof an innocent man. Kaltofen never withdrew this assertion that\nFischer was an accomplice. He persisted in it to his last breath.\n\nThe depositions were again sent to the faculty at Leipzig, on Dec.\n18th, to give judgment on the following points.\n\n     1. The examination of the body of K\u00fcgelgen had\n        revealed stabs made with a sharp, two-edged instrument, as well\n        as blows dealt by a blunt weapon. Kaltofen would admit that he\n        had used no other instrument than a cudgel.\n\n     2. It would have been a difficult matter for one man to drag a\n        dead body from the road to the bed of rushes, without leaving\n        unmistakable traces on the field traversed; and such were not,\n        for certain, found. It was therefore more probable that the\n        dead man had been carried by two persons to the place where\n        found.\n\nIt must be observed that crowds poured out of Dresden to see the\nplace where the body lay as soon as it was known that K\u00fcgelgen had\nbeen discovered, and consequently no accurate and early examination\nof tracks across the field had been made.\n\n     3. That it would have been difficult for Kaltofen alone to strip\n        the body. This may be doubted; it would be difficult possibly,\n        but not impossible, whilst the body was flexible.\n\n     4. A witness had said that she had met two men outside the Black\n        Gate on the evening of the 27th March, of whom one was wrapped\n        in a cloak and seemed to be carrying something under it. We\n        should much like to know when the woman gave this evidence.\n        Unfortunately, that is what is not told us.\n\n     5. Kaltofen, in a letter to his parents, had stated that he had\n        an accomplice, but had not named him.\n\nThese were the points that made it appear that Kaltofen had an\naccomplice. An accomplice in some of his crimes he had--Kiessling.\n\nThere were other points that made it appear that Fischer had\nassisted him in the murders.\n\n     6. Fischer's denial that he knew anything about the murder of\n        K\u00fcgelgen when he was arrested, whereas it was established that\n        he had attended the funeral of the murdered man.\n\n     7. His repeated confessions that he had assisted at the\n        murders, and his acquaintance with the particulars and with the\n        localities.\n\n     8. Kaltofen's asseverations that Fischer was his associate in\n        the murders.\n\nIn favour of Fischer it may be said that his conduct in the army had\nfor thirteen years been uniformly good, and there was no evidence\nthat he had been in any way guilty of dishonesty. Nor was he a\nman of extravagant habits like Kaltofen, needing money for his\npleasures. He was a simple, inoffensive, and very stupid man. His\nconfessions lose all their effect when we consider how they were\nextorted from him by undue influence.\n\nAgainst Kaltofen's later accusation must be set his repeated\ndeclaration, during six months, that Fischer was innocent. Not\nonly this, but his assertion in confidence to Kiessling that he\nwas puzzled what could have induced Fischer to avow himself guilty\nof a crime, of which he--Kaltofen--knew him to be innocent. When\nKiessling gave this evidence on April 24th, Kaltofen did not deny\nthat he had said this, but flew into a paroxysm of fury with his\ncomrade for betraying their private conversation.\n\nAgain, not a single article appertaining to either of the murdered\nmen was found with Fischer. All had been traced, without exception,\nto Kaltofen. It was the latter who had concealed K\u00fcgelgen's coat,\nand had given his watch to the Jews. It was he who had got Kiessling\nto dispose of Winter's hat for him, and had given the boots of the\nlast victim to Kiessling to be repaired.\n\nOn January 4th, 1821, the Court at Leipzig issued its judgment;\nthat Kaltofen, on account of two murders committed and confessed,\nwas to be put to death on the wheel; \"but that John George Fischer\nbe discharged on account of lack of evidence of complicity in the\nmurders.\" The gaoler was discharged his office.\n\nKaltofen appealed against the sentence, but in vain. The sentence\nwas confirmed. The ground of his appeal was, that he was not alone\nguilty. The King commuted the penalty of the wheel into execution by\nthe sword.\n\nThe sentence of the court produced the liveliest commotion in\nDresden. The feeling against Fischer was strong and general; the\ngaoler had but represented the universal opinion. Fischer--who\nhad confessed to the murder--Fischer, whom Kaltofen protested was\nas deeply stained in crime as himself, was to go scot free. The\npolice authorities did not carry out the sentence of discharge in\nits integrity; they indeed released him from prison, but placed him\nunder police supervision, and he was discharged from the Artillery\non the plea that he had forsworn himself. The pastor Jaspis was\nentrusted with the preparation of Kaltofen for death; and we\nknow pretty well what passed between him and the condemned man,\nas he had the indecency to publish it to the world. Jaspis had,\nindeed, visited him in prison when he was first arrested, and then\nKaltofen had asserted that he had committed the murders entirely\nunassisted. On Jaspis remarking to him in April, 1820, that there\nwere circumstances that rendered this eminently improbable, Kaltofen\ncut him short with the answer, \"I was by myself.\" Afterwards,\nwhen he had changed his note, Jaspis reminded him of his previous\ndeclaration, but Kaltofen pretended not to remember ever having\nmade it.\n\nTowards the end of his days, Kaltofen was profoundly agitated,\nand was very restless. When Jaspis gave him a book of prayers and\nmeditations for such as were in trouble, he put it from him, and\nsaid the book was unsuitable, and was adapted only to the innocent.\nHe had visitors who combined piety with inquisitiveness, and came\nto discuss with him the state of his soul. Kaltofen's vanity was\ninflamed, and he was delighted to pose before these zealots. When he\nheard that Jaspis had preached about him in the Kreuz Kirche on the\nSunday before his execution, he was greatly gratified, and said, \"He\nwould really like to hear what had been said about him.\"\n\nJaspis thereupon produced his sermon, and read it over to the\nwretched man--but tells us that even the most touching portions of\nthe address failed to awake any genuine compunction in his soul.\nUnless he could play the saint, before company, he was cold and\nindifferent. His great vanity, however, was hurt at the thought that\nhis assertion was disbelieved, that Fischer was his associate in his\ncrimes. He was always eager and inquisitive to know what rumours\ncirculated in the town concerning him, and was gratified to think\nthat he was the topic of the general conversation.\n\nOn the night before his execution he slept soundly for five\nhours, and then lit his pipe and smoked composedly. His condition\nwas, however, not one of bluntness of sense, for he manifested\nconsiderable readiness and consciousness up to the last. He had\ndrawn up a dying address which he handed to pastor Jaspis, and on\nwhich he evidently placed great importance, as when his first copy\nhad caught fire when he was drying it, he set to work to compose a\nsecond. He knew his man--Jaspis--and was sure he would publish it\nafter the execution. The paper was a rigmarole in which he posed to\nthe world.\n\nOn reaching the market-place where the execution was to take place,\nhe repeated his confession, but on this occasion without mention\nof a confederate. His composure gave way, and he began to sob.\nOn reaching the scaffold, however, the sight of the vast crowd\nassembled to see him die restored to him some of his composure,\nas it pleased his vanity; but he again broke down, as he made his\nlast confession to the Lutheran pastor. His voice trembled, and the\nsweat broke out on his brow. Then he sprang up and shouted, so that\nall could hear--\"Gentlemen, Fischer deserved the same punishment as\nmyself.\" In another moment his head fell from his body.\n\nThe words had been audible throughout the market-place by everyone.\nWho could doubt that his last words were true?\n\nFischer happened that very day (July 12th) to be in Dresden. He had\nbeen seen, and had been recognised.\n\nHe had come to Dresden to see his counsel, and ask him to use his\ninfluence to obtain his complete discharge from police supervision,\nand restoration to his rights as an honest man and a soldier, with a\nclaim to a pension.\n\nA vast crowd of people rolled from the place of execution to the\nhouse of Eisenst\u00fcck, shouting, and threatening to tear Fischer to\npieces.\n\nBut Eisenst\u00fcck was not the man to be terrified. He summoned a\ncarriage, entered it along with Fischer, and drove slowly, with the\nutmost composure, through the angry crowd.\n\nOn August 26th, 1822, by command of the king, Fischer's name was\nreplaced in the army list, and he received his complete discharge\nfrom all the consequences of the accusations made against him. He\nwas guaranteed his pension for his \"faithful services through 16\nyears, and in the campaigns of 1813, 1814, and 1815, in which he had\nconducted himself to the approval of all his officers.\"\n\nHow are we to explain the conduct of Kaltofen? The simplest way is\nto admit that he spoke the truth; but against this is to be opposed\nhis denial that Fischer was guilty during the first six months\nthat he was under arrest. And it is impossible to believe that\nFischer was guilty, on the sole testimony of Kaltofen, without any\nconfirmatory evidence.\n\nIt is rather to be supposed that the inordinate vanity of the young\nculprit induced him to persist in denouncing his innocent brother\ngunner, so as to throw off his own shoulders some of the burden\nof that crime, which, he felt, made him hateful in the eyes of\nhis fellow-citizens, and perhaps to induce them to regard him as\nmisled by an older man, more hardened and experienced in crime, thus\narousing their pity and sympathy in place of their disgust.\n\nJaspis, the pastor, did not himself believe in the criminality of\nFischer, and proposes a solution which he gives conjecturally only.\nHe suggests that Kaltofen was misled by the confession of Fischer\ninto the belief that he really had committed a murder or two,\nthough not those of Winter and K\u00fcgelgen, and that when he declared\non the scaffold that \"Fischer deserved to die as much as himself,\"\nhe spoke under this conviction. This explanation is untenable, for\nthe miserable man had repeatedly charged Fischer with assisting\nhim in committing these two particular crimes. The explanation\nmust be found in his self-conceit and eagerness to present himself\nin the best and most affecting light before the public. And he\ngained his point to some extent. The mob believed him, pitied him,\nbecame sentimental over him, wept tears at his death, and cursed\nthe unfortunate Fischer. The apparent piety, the mock heroics, the\ngraceful attitudes, and the good looks of the murderer had won their\nsympathies, and the general opinion of the vulgar was that they had\nassisted at the sublimation of a saint to the seventh heaven, and\nnot at the well-deserved execution of a peculiarly heartless and\nbrutal murderer.\n\nA month had hardly passed since Kaltofen's execution before Dresden\nwas shocked to hear of another murder--on this occasion by a young\nwoman. On August 12th, 1821, this person, who had been in a state\nof excitement ever since the edifying death of Kaltofen, invited to\nher house a young girl, just engaged to be married, and deliberately\nmurdered her; then marched off to the police and confessed her\ncrime--the nature of which she did not disguise. She desired to make\nthe same affecting and edifying end as Kaltofen. Above all, she\nwanted to get herself talked about by all the mouths in Dresden. The\npolice on visiting her house found the murdered girl lying on the\nbed. On the door in large letters the murderer had inscribed the\ndate of Kaltofen's martyrdom, July 12th, and she had committed her\ncrime on the same day one month after, desirous to share his glory.\n\nSuch was one consequence of this execution. A small farce also\nsucceeded it. Influenced by the general excitement provoked by the\nmurder of K\u00fcgelgen, the Jews had assembled and agreed, should any\nof them be able to discover the murderer, that they would decline\nthe \u00a3150 offered by Government for information that might lead to\nthe apprehension of the guilty. But Hirschel Mendel, the Jew who had\nproduced the watch, put in his claim; whereupon L\u00f6bel Graff, who had\nproduced the coat, put in a counter claim. This occasioned a lawsuit\nbetween the two Jews for the money. A compromise was finally patched\nup, by which each received half.\n\nGerhard von K\u00fcgelgen had been buried in the Catholic cemetery at\nDresden on Maundy Thursday evening by moonlight. A great procession\nof art students attended the funeral cort\u00e8ge with lighted torches,\nand an oration was pronounced over his grave by his friend\nCouncillor B\u00f6ttiger.\n\nHis tomb may still be seen in the cemetery; on it is inscribed:--\n\n  FRANZ GERHARD VON K\u00dcGELGEN.\n      Born 6 Feb., 1772.\n     Died 27 March, 1820.\n\nOn the other side is the text, St. John xiv. 27.\n\nK\u00fcgelgen left behind him two sons and a daughter. The eldest son,\nWilhelm, pursued his father's profession as an artist, and the\nEmperor of Russia sent an annual grant of money to assist him in his\nstudies. There is a pleasant book, published anonymously by him, \"An\nOld Man's Youthful Reminiscences,\" the first edition of which was\nissued in 1870, and which had reached its eighth edition in 1876.\n\nK\u00fcgelgen's twin brother, Karl Ferdinand, after spending some years\nin St. Petersburg and in Livonia, settled at Reval, and died in\n1832. He was the author of a \"Picturesque Journey in the Crimea,\"\npublished in 1823.\n\n     Authority:--F. Ch. A. Hasse: Das Leben Gerhards von K\u00fcgelgen.\n     Leipzig, 1824. He gives in the Supplement an excerpt from the\n     records of the trial. As frontispiece is a portrait of the\n     artist by himself, very Raphaelesque.\n\n\n\n\nThe Poisoned Parsnips.\n\n\nAt the time when the banished Bourbons were wandering about\nEurope seeking temporary asylums, during the period of Napoleon's\nsupremacy, a story circulated in 1804 relative to an attempt made\nin Warsaw, which then belonged to Prussia, upon the life of the\nRoyal Family then residing there. It was said that a plot had been\nformed, that was well nigh successful, to kill Louis XVIII., his\nwife, the Duke and Duchess of Angoul\u00eame, and such of the Court as\nsat at the Royal table, with a dish of poisoned parsnips. It was,\nmoreover, whispered that at the bottom of the plot was no other than\nNapoleon himself, who sought to remove out of his way the legitimate\nclaimants to the Gallic throne.\n\nThe article in which the account of the attempt was made public was\nin the _London Courier_ for August 20th, 1804, from which we will\nnow take the leading facts.\n\nThe Royal Family was living in Warsaw. Napoleon Bonaparte employed\nan agent of the name of Galon Boyer at Warsaw to keep an eye on\nthem, and this man, it was reported, had engaged assassins at the\ninstigation of Napoleon to poison Louis XVIII. and the rest of\nthe Royal Family. The _Courier_ of August 21st, 1804, says: \"Some\nof the daily papers, which were not over anxious to discredit the\nconspiracy imputed to Mr. Drake,[1] affect to throw some doubt\nupon the account of the attempt upon the lives of the Royal Family\nat Warsaw. They seem to think that had Bonaparte desired such a\nplan, he could have executed it with more secrecy and effect.\nUndoubtedly his plans of assassination have hitherto been more\nsuccessful, because his hapless victims were within his power--his\nwounded soldiers at Jaffa, Toussaint L'Ouverture, Pichegru, and\nthe Duke D'Enghien. He could send his bloodhounds into Germany to\nseize his prey; but Warsaw was too remote for him; he was under\nthe necessity of having recourse to less open means of sending his\nassassins to act secretly. But it is deemed extraordinary that the\ndiabolical attempt should have failed. Why is it extraordinary that\na beneficent Providence should interpose to save the life of a just\nprince? Have we not had signal instances of that interposition\nin this country? For the accuracy of the account we published\nyesterday, we pledge ourselves[2] that the fullest details,\nauthenticated by all Louis XVIII.'s Ministers--by the venerable\nArchbishop of Rheims--by the Abb\u00e9 Edgeworth, who administered the\nlast consolation of religion to Louis the XVI., have been received\nin this country. All those persons were present when the poisoned\npreparation was analysed by very eminent physicians, _who are the\nsubjects of the King of Prussia_.\n\n  [1] Drake was envoy of the British Government at Munich; he and\n  Spencer Smith, Charg\u00e9 d'Affaires at W\u00fcrtemberg, were accused by\n  Napoleon of being at the bottom of a counter revolution, and an\n  attempt to obtain his assassination. It was true that Drake and\n  Smith were in correspondence with parties in France with the\n  object of securing Hagenau and Strassburgo and throwing discord\n  among the troops of the Republic, but they never for a moment\n  thought of obtaining the assassination of the First Consul, as\n  far as we can judge from their correspondence that fell into the\n  hands of the French police.\n\n  [2] Unfortunately the British Museum file is imperfect, and does\n  not contain the Number for August 20th.\n\n\"The two wretches who attempted to corrupt the poor Frenchman were\nopenly protected by the French Consul or Commercial Agent.\n\n\"The Prussian Governor would not suffer them to be arrested in order\nthat their guilt or innocence might be legally investigated. Is it\nto be believed that had there been no foundation for the charge\nagainst them, the French agent would have afforded them less open\nprotection, and thereby strengthened the charge brought against\nthem? If they were protected and paid by the French agent, is it\nprobable that he paid them out of his own pocket, employed them in\nsuch a plot of his own accord, and without order and instructions\nfrom his own Government, from Bonaparte? Besides, did not the\nPresident Hoym acknowledge his fears that some attempt would be made\nupon the life of Louis the XVIII.?\n\n\"The accounts transmitted to this country were sent from Warsaw one\nhour after the king had set out for Grodno.\"\n\nThe _Courier_ for August 24th, 1804, has the following note:--\"We\nhave another strong fact which is no slight evidence in our minds\nof Bonaparte's guilt. The plot against Louis the XVIII. was to be\nexecuted at the end of July--it would be known about the beginning\nof August. At that very period Bonaparte prohibits the importation\nof all foreign journals without exception--that is, of all the means\nby which the people could be informed of the diabolical deed. Why\ndoes he issue this prohibition at the present moment, or why does\nhe issue it at all? Fouch\u00e9 says in his justification of it that it\nis to prevent our knowing when the expedition sails. Have we ever\nreceived any news about the expedition from the French papers? No,\nno! the prohibition was with a view to the bloody scene to be acted\nat Warsaw.\"\n\nThe _Courier_ of August 22nd contained full particulars. We will now\ntell the whole story, from beginning to end, first of all as dressed\nout by the fancy of Legitimists, and then according to the real\nfacts of the case as far as known.\n\nNapoleon, it will be remembered, had been appointed First Consul for\nlife on August 2nd, 1802, but the Republic came to an end, and the\nFrench Empire was established by the Senate on May 18th, 1804.\n\nIt was supposed--and we can excuse the excitement and intoxication\nof wrath in the minds of all adherents of the Bourbons which could\nsuppose it--that Napoleon, who was thus refounding the Empire of\nCharlemagne, desired to secure the stability of this new throne by\nsweeping out of his way the legitimate claimants to that of France.\nThe whole legend of the attempt to assassinate Louis XVIII. by means\nof a dish of poisoned parsnips is given us in complete form by the\nauthor of a life of that prince twenty years after the event.[3] It\nis to this effect:\n\nWhen the King (Louis XVIII.) was preparing for his journey from\nWarsaw to Grodno an atrocious attempt to assassinate him was brought\nto light, which leaves no manner of doubt that it was the purpose\nof those who were the secret movers in the plot to remove by poison\nboth the King and Queen and also the Duke of Angoul\u00eame and his wife.\nTwo delegates of Napoleon had been in Warsaw seeking for a man who\ncould execute the plan. A certain Coulon appeared most adapted to\ntheir purpose, a man indigent and eager for money. He had previously\nbeen in the service of one of the emigr\u00e9 nobles, and had access to\nthe kitchen of the Royal Family.\n\n  [3] A. de Beauchamp, Vie de Louis XVIII. Paris, 1824.\n\nThe agents of Napoleon gave Coulon drink, and as he became friendly\nand lively under the influence of punch, they communicated to him\ntheir scheme, and promised him money, the payment of his debts, and\nto effect his escape if he would be their faithful servant in the\nintrigue. Coulon pretended to yield to their solicitations, and a\nrendezvous was appointed where the plans were to be matured. But\nno sooner was Coulon at liberty than he went to his former master,\nthe Baron de Milleville, master of horse to the Queen, and told him\nall. The Baron sought the Duc de Pienne, first gentleman of the\nRoyal household, and he on receiving the information communicated\nit to the Count d'Avaray, Minister of Louis XVIII. Coulon received\norders to pretend to be ready to carry on the plot. He did this\nwith reluctance, but he did it. He told the agents of Napoleon that\nhe was in their hands and would blindly execute their orders. They\ntreated him now to champagne, and revealed to him the details of\nthe attempt. He was to get into the kitchen of the Royal household,\nand was to pour the contents of a packet they gave him into one of\nthe pots in which the dinner for the Royal table was being cooked.\nCoulon then demanded an instalment of his pay, and asked to be given\n400 louis d'or. One of the agents then turned to the other and asked\nif he thought Boyer would be disposed to advance so much--this was\nGalon Boyer, the head agent sent purposely to Warsaw as spy on the\nRoyal Family, and the principal mover in the attempt.\n\nThe other agent replied that Boyer was not at the moment in Warsaw,\nbut he would be back in a couple of days. Coulon stuck to his point,\nlike a clever rascal, and refused to do anything till he felt gold\nin his palm, and he was bidden wait till Boyer had been communicated\nwith. He was appointed another meeting on the moors at Novawies\noutside the city.\n\nAs, next evening, Coulon was on his way to the place named, he\nobserved that he was followed by a man. Suddenly out of the corn\ngrowing beside the road started a second. They were the agents.\nThey paid him a few dollars, promised to provide handsomely for\nhim in France, by giving him 400 louis d'or and a situation under\nGovernment; and handed him a bottle of liquor that was to stimulate\nhis courage at the crucial moment, and also a paper packet that\ncontained three parsnips, that had been scooped out and filled with\npoison. These he was to insinuate into one of the pots cooking for\ndinner, and induce the cook to overlook what he had done, and serve\nthem up to the Royal Family.\n\nThe King then lived in a chateau at Lazienki, about a mile out of\nWarsaw. Thither hastened Coulon as fast as his legs could carry\nhim, and he committed the parsnips to the Baron de Milleville. The\nCount d'Avaray and the Archbishop of Rheims put their seals on the\nparcel; after that the parsnips had first been shown to the Prussian\nauthorities, and they had been asked in all form to attest the\nproduction of the poisoned roots, and to order the arrest of the\ntwo agents of Napoleon, and to confront them with Coulon--and had\ndeclined. Louis, when informed of the attempt, showed his wonted\ncomposure. He wrote immediately to the Prussian President, Von Hoym,\nand requested him to visit him at Lazienki, and consult what was to\nbe done.\n\nHerr Von Hoym did not answer; nor did he go to the King, but\ncommunicated with his superiors. Finally there arrived a diplomatic\nreply declining to interfere in the matter, as it was the concern\nof the police to investigate it, and it should be taken up in the\nordinary way.\n\nThereupon the King requested that Coulon and his wife should be\nsecured, and that specialists should be appointed who, along with\nthe Royal physician, might examine the parsnips alleged to be\npoisoned.\n\nBut the Prussian Courts declined again to take any steps. The policy\nof the Prussian Cabinet under Count Haugwitz was favourable to a\nFrench alliance, and the King of Prussia was among the first of the\ngreater Powers which had formally recognised the French Emperor.\nOn condition that the French troops occupying Hanover should not\nbe augmented, and that war, if it broke out with Russia, should\nbe so carried on as not to inconvenience and sweep over Prussian\nterritory, Prussia had undertaken to observe a strict neutrality.\nIn return for these concessions, which were of great moment to\nNapoleon, he openly proclaimed his intention to augment the strength\nof Prussia, and it was hoped at Berlin that the price paid would be\nthe incorporation of Hanover with Prussia.\n\nAt this moment, consequently, the Prussian Government was most\nunwilling to meddle in an investigation which threatened to lead to\nrevelations most compromising to the character of Napoleon, and most\ninconvenient for itself.\n\nAs the Prussian courts would not take up the matter of the parsnips,\na private investigation was made by the Count d'Avaray, with\nthe Royal physician, Dr. Lef\u00e8vre, and the Warsaw physician, Dr.\nGagatkiewicz, together with the Apothecary Guidel and a certain Dr.\nBergozoni. The seals were broken in their presence, and the three\nroots were examined. It was ascertained that they were stuffed\nwith a mixture of white, yellow, and red arsenic. This having been\nascertained, and a statement of the fact duly drawn up, and signed,\nthe president of the police, Herr von Tilly, was communicated with.\nHe, however, declined to interfere, as had the President von Hoym.\n\"Thus,\" says M. Beauchamp, \"one court shuffled the matter off on\nanother, backwards and forwards, so as not to have to decide on the\nmatter, a specimen of the results of the system adopted at this time\nby the Prussian Cabinet.\"\n\nNo other means of investigation remained but for Count d'Avaray\nto have the matter gone into by the court of the exiled King. They\nexamined Coulon, who held firmly to his story as told to the Baron\nde Milleville, and all present were convinced that he spoke the\ntruth.\n\nAs the King could obtain no justice from the hands of Prussia, he\nsuffered the story to be made public in order that the opinion of\nall honourable men in Europe might be expressed on the conduct of\nboth Napoleon and of the Prussian Ministry. \"The impression made,\"\nsays M. Beauchamp, \"especially in England, was deep. Men recalled\nBonaparte's former crimes that had been proved--the poisoning at\nJaffa, the--at the time--very fresh indignation provoked by the\nmurder of the Count de Frott\u00e9, of Pichegru, of Captain Wright, of\nthe Duke d'Enghien, of Toussaint l'Ouverture; they recalled the lack\nof success he had experienced in demanding of Louis XVIII. a formal\nrenunciation of his claims, and weighed well the determination of\nhis character. Even the refusal of the Prussian courts to go into\nthe charge (for if it had been investigated they must needs have\npronounced judgment on it)--encouraged suspicion. Hardly an English\nnewspaper did not condemn Napoleon as the instigator of an attempt\nthat providentially failed.\"\n\nSuch is the legend as formulated by M. de Beauchamp. Fortunately\nthere exists documentary evidence in the archives of the courts at\nBerlin that gives an altogether different complexion to the story,\nand entirely clears the name of Napoleon from stain of complicity in\nthis matter. It throws, moreover, a light, by no means favourable,\non those of the Legitimist party clustered about the fallen monarch.\n\nLouis XVIII., obliged to fly from one land to another before the\nforces of Napoleon, was staying for a while at Warsaw, in the year\n1804, under the incognito of the Count de l'Isle. His misfortunes\nhad not broken his spirit or diminished his pretensions. He was\nsurrounded by a little court in spite of his incognito; and as\nthis little court had no affairs of State to transact, it played a\nniggling game at petty intrigue. This court consisted of the Count\nd'Avaray, the Archbishop of Rheims, the Duke de Pienne, the Marquis\nde Bonney, the Duke d'Avr\u00e9 de Croy, the Count de la Chapelle, the\nCounts Damas Crux and Stephen de Damas, and the Abb\u00e9s Edgeworth and\nFrimont. Louis had assured Napoleon he would rather eat black bread\nthan resign his pretensions. At Warsaw he maintained his pretensions\nto the full, but did not eat black bread; he kept a very respectable\nkitchen. The close alliance between Prussia and France forced him to\nleave Warsaw and migrate into Russia.\n\nAt this time there lived in Warsaw a certain Jean Coulon, son of\na small shopkeeper at Lyons, who had led an adventurous life. At\nthe age of nine he had run away from home and attached himself\nto a wandering dramatic company; then had gone into service to\na wigmaker, and had lived for three years at Barcelona at his\nhandicraft. But wigs were going out of fashion, and he threw up an\nunprofitable trade, and enlisted in a legion of emigr\u00e9s, but in\nconsequence of some quarrel with a Spaniard was handed over to the\nSpanish authorities. He purchased his pardon by enlisting in the\nSpanish army, but deserted and joined the French Republican troops,\nwas in the battle of Novi, ran away, and joined the corps raised at\nNaples by Cardinal Ruffo. When this corps was dispersed, he went\nback to Spain, again enlisted, and was shipped for St. Lucia. The\nvessel in which he was, was captured by an English cruiser, and\nhe was taken into Plymouth and sent up to Dartmoor as prisoner of\nwar. After two years he was exchanged and was shipped to Cuxhaven.\nThence he went to Altona, where he asked the intervention of the\nDuke d'Avr\u00e9 in his favour. The Duke recommended him to the Countess\nde l'Isle, and he was taken into the service of her master of horse,\nthe Baron de Milleville, and came to Warsaw in September, 1803.\nThere he married, left his service and set up a caf\u00e9 and billiard\nroom that was frequented by the retainers and servants of the emigr\u00e9\nnobility that hovered about the King and Queen. He was then aged\n32, could speak Italian and Spanish as well as French, and was a\nthorough soldier of fortune, impecunious, loving pleasure, and\nwholly without principles, political or religious.\n\nThe French Charg\u00e9 d'Affaires at Warsaw was Galon Boyer; he does\nnot appear in the documents relative to the _Affaire Coulon_, not\nbecause the Prussian Government shirked its duty, but because he\nwas in no way mixed up with the matter of the parsnips. It is quite\ntrue that, as M. de Beauchamp asserts, the Court of Louis XVIII. did\nendeavour to involve the Prussian authorities in the investigation,\nbut it was in such a manner that it was not possible for them to\nact. On July 23rd, when the Count de l'Isle was determined to leave\nWarsaw, Count d'Avaray called on the President von Hoym, and told\nhim in mysterious language that he was aware of a conspiracy in\nwhich were involved several Frenchmen and as many as a dozen Poles\nthat sought the life of his august master. Herr von Hoym doubted.\nHe asked for the grounds of this assertion, and was promised\nfull particulars that same evening at eight o'clock. At the hour\nappointed, the Count appeared breathless before him, and declared\nthat now he was prepared with a complete disclosure. However, he\ntold nothing, and postponed the revelation to 10 o'clock. Then\nAvaray informed him that the keeper of the Caf\u00e9 Coulon had been\nhired by some strangers to meet him that same night on the road\nto Novawies, to plan with him the murder, by poison, of the Count\nde l'Isle. The whole story seemed suspicious to von Hoym. It was\nnow too late for him to send police to watch the spot where the\nmeeting was to take place, which he might have done had d'Avaray\ncondescended to tell him in time, two hours earlier. He asked\nd'Avaray where Coulon lived that he might send for him, and the\nCount professed he did not know the address.\n\nNext day Count d'Avaray read to the President von Hoym a document,\nwhich he said had been drawn up by members of the court of the Count\nde l'Isle, showed him a paper that contained twelve small parsnips,\nand requested him to subscribe the document and seal the parcel of\nparsnips. Naturally, the President declined to do this. He had not\nseen Coulon, he did not know from whom Coulon had received the\nparcel, and he mistrusted the whole story. However, he requested\nthat he might be furnished with an exact description of the two\nmysterious strangers, and when he had received it, communicated with\nthe police, and had inquiry made for them in and about Warsaw. No\none had seen or heard of any persons answering to the description.\n\nPresently the Marquis de Bonney arrived to request the President, in\nthe name of the Count de l'Isle, to have the parsnips examined by\nspecialists. He declined to do so.\n\nOn July 26th, the Count d'Avaray appeared before the head of the\nPolice, the President von Tilly, and showed him an attestation\nmade by several doctors that they had examined three parsnips that\nhad been shown them, and they had found in them a paste composed\nof arsenic and orpiment. Von Tilly thought the whole story so\nquestionable that he refused to meddle with it. Moreover, a notary\nof Warsaw, who had been requested to take down Coulon's statement,\nhad declined to testify to the genuineness of the confession,\nprobably because, as Coulon afterwards insinuated, he had been\nhelped to make it consistent by those who questioned him.\n\nLouis XVIII. left Warsaw on July 30, and as the rumour spread\nthat Coulon's wife had bought some arsenic a week before at an\napothecary's shop in the place, the police inspector ordered her\narrest. She was questioned and declared that she had, indeed, bought\nsome rat poison, without the knowledge of her husband. Coulon was\nnow taken up and questioned, and he pretended that he had given\nhis wife orders to buy the rat poison, because he was plagued with\nvermin in the house.\n\nThen the authorities in Warsaw sent all the documents relating to\nthis matter, including the _proc\u00e8s verbal_ drawn up by the courtiers\nof Louis XVIII., to Berlin, and asked for further instructions.\n\nAccording to this _proc\u00e8s verbal_ Coulon had confessed as follows:\nOn the 20th July two strangers had entered his billiard room, and\nhad assured him that, if he were disposed to make his fortune, they\ncould help him to it. They made him promise silence, and threatened\nhim with death if he disclosed what they said. After he had sworn\nfidelity and secrecy, they told him that he was required to throw\nsomething into the pot in which the soup was being prepared for\nthe King's table. For so doing they would pay him 400 louis d'or.\nCoulon considered a moment; then the strangers promised they would\nprovide a situation for his wife in France. After that one of them\nsaid to his fellow in Italian, \"We must be off. We have no time\nto lose.\" Next day, in the evening, a third stranger appeared at\nhis door, called him forth into the street, walked about with him\nthrough the streets of old and new Warsaw, till he was thoroughly\nbewildered, and did not know where he was, and, finally, entered\nwith him a house, where he saw the two strangers who had been with\nhim previously. Champagne was brought on the table, and they all\ndrank, and one of the strangers became tipsy. When Coulon promised\nto do what was required of him, he was told to secure some of the\nmutton-chops that were being prepared for the Royal table, and to\nmanipulate them with the powder that was to be given him. That the\ncook might not notice what he was about, he was to treat him to\nlarge draughts of brandy. Coulon agreed, but asked first to touch\nthe 400 louis d'or. Then the tipsy man shouted out, \"That is all\nright, but will Boyer consent to it?\" The other stranger tried to\ncheck him, and said, \"What are you saying? Boyer is not here, he has\ngone out of town and will not be back for a couple of days.\" After\nCoulon had insisted on prepayment, he had been put off till the next\nevening, when he was to meet the strangers at 11 o'clock on the road\nto Novawies. There he was to receive money, and the powder for the\nKing. He was then given one ducat, and led home at one o'clock in\nthe morning. On the following night, at 11 o'clock, he went on the\nway to Novawies, and then followed what we have already given from\nthe story of the man, as recorded by M. de Beauchamp. He received\nfrom the men a packet containing the parsnips, and some money--only\nsix dollars. They put a kerchief under the earth beneath a tree,\nand bade him, if he had accomplished his task, come to the tree and\nremove the kerchief, as a token to them; if, however, he failed,\nthe kerchief was to be left undisturbed. The tree he had marked\nwell, it was the forty-fifth along the road to Novawies. A small end\nof the kerchief peeped out from under the soil. The strangers had\nthen given him a bottle of liqueur to stimulate his courage for the\nundertaking.\n\nAfter that Coulon was left alone, he said that he staggered\nhomewards, but felt so faint that he would have fallen to the ground\nhad not a Prussian officer, who came by, noticed his condition and\nhelped him home. At the conclusion of the _proc\u00e8s verbal_ came\nan exact description of the conspirators. Such was the document\nproduced originally by the Count d'Avaray, and we can hardly wonder\nthat, on hearing it, the Prussian civil and police authorities had\nhesitated about taking action. The so-called confession of Coulon\nseemed to them to be a rhodomontade got up for the purpose of\nobtaining money out of the ex-King and his Court.\n\nFrom Berlin orders were sent to Warsaw to have the matter thoroughly\nsifted. Coulon and his wife were now again subjected to examination.\nHe adhered at first to his story, but when he endeavoured to explain\nthe purchase of the arsenic, and to fit it into his previous tale,\nhe involved himself in contradictions.\n\nThe President at this point addressed him gravely, and warned\nhim of the consequences. His story compromised the French charg\u00e9\nd'affaires, M. Galon Boyer, and this could not be allowed to\nbe passed over without a very searching examination that must\ninevitably reveal the truth. Coulon was staggered, and hastily\nasked how matters would stand with him if he told the truth. Then,\nafter a little hesitation, he admitted that \"he thought before the\ndeparture of the Count de l'Isle he would obtain for himself a sum\nof money, with which to escape out of his difficulties. He had\nreckoned on making 100 ducats out of this affair.\" He now told quite\na different tale. With the departure of the court of the emigr\u00e9s,\nhe would lose his clientelle, and he was concerned because he owed\nmoney for the caf\u00e9 and billiard table. He had therefore invented\nthe whole story in hopes of imposing on the court and getting from\nthem a little subvention. But he said he had been dragged on further\nthan he intended by the Count d'Avaray, who had swallowed his lie\nwith avidity, and had urged him to go on with the intrigue so as to\nproduce evidence against the conspirators.\n\nThat was why he had made up the figment of the meeting with the\nstrangers on the road and their gift to him of the parsnips, which\nhe admitted that he had himself scooped out and filled with the rat\npoison paste he had bought at the apothecary's.\n\nSo far so good. What he now said was precisely what the cool heads\nof the Prussian authorities had believed from the first. But Coulon\ndid not adhere to this second confession. After a few days in prison\nhe professed his desire to make another. He was brought before the\nmagistrate, and now he said that the whole story was got up by the\nCount d'Avaray, M. de Milleville, and others of the surroundings\nof the exiled King, for the purpose of creating an outbreak of\ndisgust in Europe against Napoleon, and of bringing about a revolt\nin France. He declared that he had been promised a pension of six\nducats monthly, that when he gave his evidence M. de Milleville had\npaid him 35 ducats, and that he had been taken into the service,\nalong with his wife, of the ex-Queen, as reward for what he had done.\n\nThere were several particulars which gave colour to this last\nversion of Coulon's story. It was true that he had been given some\nmoney by Milleville; it was perhaps true that in their eagerness to\nprove a case of attempted assassination, some of those who conducted\nthe inquiry had helped him to correct certain discrepancies in his\nnarrative. Then, again, it was remarkable that, although the Count\nd'Avaray knew about the projected murder, he would not tell the\nPrussian President the facts till 10 o'clock at night, when it was\ntoo late to send the police to observe the pretended meeting on the\nNovawies road; and when Herr von Hoym asked for directions as to\nwhere Coulon lived that the police might be sent to arrest him on\nhis return, and during his absence to search the house, the Count\nhad pretended to be unable to say where Coulon lived. It was also\ntrue that de Milleville had repeatedly visited Coulon's house during\nthe course of the intrigue, and that it was immediately after Coulon\nhad been at Milleville's house that his wife was sent to buy the rat\npoison.\n\nCoulon pretended to have heard M. de Milleville say that \"This\naffair might cause a complete change in the situation in France,\nwhen tidings of what had been done were published.\" Moreover, he\nsaid that he had been despatched to the Archbishop of Rheim's with\nthe message \"Le coup est manqu\u00e9.\"\n\nBut it is impossible to believe that the emigr\u00e9 court can have\nfabricated such a plot by which to cast on the name of Napoleon the\nstain of attempted assassination. The whole story reads like the\nclumsy invention of a vulgar adventurer. Coulon's second confession\nis obviously that of his true motives. He was in debt, he was losing\nhis clientelle by the departure of the Count, and it is precisely\nwhat such a scoundrel would do, to invent a lie whereby to enlist\ntheir sympathies for himself, and obtain from them some pecuniary\nacknowledgment for services he pretended to have rendered. The\nlittle court was to blame in its gullibility. Its blind hatred of\nNapoleon led it to believe such a gross and palpable lie, and, if\ndoubts arose in any of their minds as to the verity of the tale told\nthem, they suppressed them.\n\nCoulon was found guilty by the court and was sentenced to five\nyears' imprisonment. The judgment of the court was that he had acted\nin concert with certain members of the retinue of the Count de\nl'Isle, but it refrained from naming them.\n\n\n\n\nThe Murder of Father Thomas in Damascus.\n\n\nThe remarkable case we are about to relate awoke great interest\nand excitement throughout three quarters of the world, and stirred\nup that hatred of the Jews which had been laid asleep after the\npersecutions of the Middle Ages, just at the time when in all\nEuropean lands the emancipation of the Jew was being recognised as\nan act of justice. At the time the circumstances were imperfectly\nknown, or were laid before the public in such a partial light that\nit was difficult to form a correct judgment upon them. Since then,\na good deal of light has been thrown on the incident, and it is\npossible to arrive at a conclusion concerning the murder with more\nunbiased mind and with fuller information than was possible at the\ntime.\n\nThe Latin convents of Syria stand under the immediate jurisdiction\nof the Pope, and are, for the most part, supplied with recruits\nfrom Italy. They are very serviceable to travellers, whom they\nreceive with genial hospitality, and without distinction of creed.\nThey are nurseries of culture and of industry. Every monk and friar\nis required to exercise a profession or trade, and the old charge\nagainst monks of being drones is in no way applicable to the busy\nmembers of the religious orders in Palestine.\n\nIn the Capuchin Convent at Damascus dwelt, in 1840, a friar named\nFather Thomas, a Sardinian by birth. For thirty-three years he had\nlived there, and had acted as physician and surgeon, attending to\nwhoever called for his services, Mussulman or Christian, Turk, Jew\nor Frank alike. He set limbs, dosed with quinine for fever, and\nvaccinated against smallpox. Being well known and trusted, he was\nin constant practice, and his practice brought him, or, at all\nevents, his order, a handsome annual income. His manners were,\nunfortunately, not amiable. He was curt, even rude, and somewhat\ndictatorial; his manners impressed as authoritative in the sickroom,\nbut were resented in the market-place as insolent.\n\nOn February 5th, 1840, Father Thomas disappeared, together with his\nservant, a lay brother who always attended him. This disappearance\ncaused great commotion in Damascus.\n\nFrance has been considered in the East as the protector of\nChristians of the Latin confession. The French Consul, the Count\nRatti-Menton, considered it his duty to investigate the matter.\n\nFather Thomas had been seen to enter the Jews' quarter. Several\nIsraelites admitted having seen him there. No one saw him leave it:\nconsequently, it was concluded he had disappeared, been made away\nwith, there. As none but Jews occupied the Ghetto, it was argued\nthat Father Thomas had been murdered by Israelites. That was settled\nas a preliminary. But in the meantime the Austrian Consul had been\nmaking investigation as well as the Count Ratti-Menton, and he had\nobtained information that Father Thomas and his servant had been\nnoticed engaged in a violent quarrel and contest of words with some\nMohammedans of the lowest class, in the market-place. No weight was\nattached to this, and the French Consul pursued his investigations\nin the Jews' quarter, and in that quarter alone.\n\nSheriff Pacha was Governor of Syria, and Count Ratti-Menton required\nhim to allow of his using every means at his disposal for the\ndiscovery of the criminal. He also requested the Austrian Consul to\nallow a domiciliary visitation of all the Jews' houses, the Austrian\nGovernment being regarded as the protector of the Hebrews. In both\ncases consent was given, and the search was begun with zeal.\n\nThen a Turk, named Mohammed-el-Telli, who was in prison for\nnon-payment of taxes, sent word to the French Consul that, if he\nwould obtain his release, he would give such information as would\nlead to the discovery of the murderer or murderers. He received\nhis freedom, and denounced, in return, several Jews' houses as\nsuspicious. Count Ratti-Menton at the head of a troop of soldiers\nand workmen, and a rabble assembled in the street, invaded all these\nhouses, and explored them from attic to cellar.\n\nOne of the first names given by Mohammed-el-Telli was that of a\nJewish barber, Negrin. He gave a confused and contradictory account\nof himself, but absolutely denied having any knowledge of the\nmurder. In vain were every means used during three days at the\nFrench Consulate to bring him to a confession; after that he was\nhanded over to the Turkish authorities. They had him bastinadoed,\nthen tortured. During his torture, Mohammed-el-Telli was at his\nside urging him to make a clean breast. Unable to endure his\nsufferings longer, the barbar declared his readiness to tell all.\nWhether what he said was based on reports circulating in the town,\nor was put into his mouth by his tormentors, we cannot tell.\nAccording to his story, on the evening of February the 5th a servant\nof David Arari summoned him into his house. He found the master of\nthe house along with six other Israelitish rabbis and merchants, to\nwit, Aaron and Isaac Arari, Mussa Abul Afia, Moses Salonichi, and\nJoseph Laniado. In a corner of the room lay or leaned against the\nwall Father Thomas, gagged and bound hand and foot. The merchants\nurged Negrin to murder the Capuchin in their presence, but he\nstedfastly refused to do so. Finally finding him inflexible, they\nbought his silence with 600 piastres (hardly \u00a36) and dismissed him.\n\nThereupon, the governor ordered the arrest of David Arari and the\nother Jews named, all of whom were the richest merchants in the\ntown--at all events the richest Jewish merchants. They, with one\nconsent, solemnly protested their innocence. They, also, were\nsubjected to the bastinado; but as most of them were aged men, and\nit was feared that they might succumb under the blows, after a few\nlashes had been administered, they were raised from the ground and\nsubjected to other tortures. For thirty-six hours the unhappy men\nwere forced to stand upright, and were prevented from sleeping. They\nstill persisted in denial, whereupon some of them were again beaten.\nAt the twentieth blow they fainted. The French Consul complained\nthat the beating was inefficient--so the Austrian Consul reported,\nand at his instigation they were again bastinadoed, but again\nwithout bringing them to confession.\n\nIn the meantime, David Arari's servant, Murad-el-Fallat, was\narrested, the man who was said to have been sent for the barber.\nHe was dealt with more sharply than the others. He was beaten most\ncruelly, and to heighten his pain cold water was poured over his\nbruised and mangled flesh. Under the anguish he confessed that he\nhad indeed been sent for the barber.\n\nThat was an insufficient confession. He was threatened with the\nbastinado again, and promised his release if he would reveal all he\nknew. Thereupon he repeated the story of the barber, with additions\nof his own. He and Negrin, said he, had by command of the seven rich\nmerchants put the Father to death, and had then cut up the body and\nhidden the remains in a remote water conduit.\n\nThe barber, threatened with fresh tortures, confessed to the murder.\n\nCount Ratti-Menton explored the conduit where the two men pretended\nthe mutilated body was concealed, in the presence of the servant and\nbarber, both of whom were in such a condition through the barbarous\ntreatment to which they had been subjected, that they could not\nwalk, and had to be carried to the spot. And actually there some\nbones were found, together with a cap. A surgeon pronounced that\nthese were human bones. It was at once concluded that these were the\nremains of Father Thomas, and as such were solemnly buried in the\ncemetery of the Capuchin Convent.\n\nDavid Arari's servant. Murad-el-Fallet, had related that the blood\nof Father Thomas had been collected in a copper vessel and drawn\noff and distributed among the Jews for religious purposes. It was\nan old and favourite belief among the ignorant that the Jews drank\nthe blood of Christians at Easter, or mingled it with the Paschal\nunleavened dough. At the same time the rumour spread that the rich\nHebrew Picciotto, a young man, nephew of the Austrian Consul at\nAleppo, had sent his uncle a bottle of blood.\n\nThe seven merchants were led before the bones that had been\ndiscovered. They persisted in the declaration of their innocence.\nFrom this time forward, all scruple as to their treatment vanished,\nand they were tortured with diabolical barbarity. They received the\nbastinado again, they were burned where their flesh was tenderest\nwith red hot pincers. Red hot wires were passed through their flesh.\nA German traveller, present at the time, declares that the first\nto acknowledge the truth of the charge was brought to do so by\nimmersing him after all these torments for several hours in ice cold\nwater; after which the other six were lashed with a scourge made of\nhippopotamus hide, till half unconscious, and streaming with blood,\nthey were ready to admit whatever their tormentors strove to worry\nout of them.\n\nThe Protestant missionary, Wildon Pieritz, in his account enumerates\nthe sufferings to which these unhappy men were subjected.\n\nThey were, 1st, bastinadoed.\n\n     2nd. Plunged in large vessels of cold water.\n\n     3rd. Placed under pressure till their eyes started out of their\n          sockets.\n\n     4th. Their flesh, where most sensitive, was twisted and nipped\n          till they went almost mad with agony.\n\n     5th. They were forced to stand upright for three whole days,\n          and not suffered even to lean against a wall. Those who fell\n          with exhaustion were goaded to rise again by the bayonets of the\n          guard.\n\n     6th. They were dragged about by their ears, so that they were\n          torn and bled.\n\n     7th. Thorns were driven up the quick of their nails on fingers\n          and toes.\n\n     8th. Their beards were singed off, so that the skin was scorched\n          and blistered.\n\n     9th. Flames were put under their noses so as to burn their\n          nostrils.\n\nThe French Consul--let his name go down to posterity steeped in\nignominy--Count Ratti-Menton, was not yet satisfied. He was bent\non finding the vials filled with the blood. Each of the seven\nquestioned said he had not got one, but had given his vial to\nanother. The last, Mussa Abul Afia, unable to endure his torments\nany longer, gave way, and professed his willingness to turn\nMussulman. Nevertheless, he was again subjected to the scourge,\nand whipped till he named another confederate--the Chief Rabbi\nJacob Antibi, as the man to whom the blood had been committed.\nMussa's confession, committed to writing, was as follows:--\"I am\n_commanded_ to say what I know relative to the murder of Father\nThomas, and why I have submitted to become a Mussulman. It is,\ntherefore, my duty to declare the truth. Jacob Antibi, Chief\nRabbi, about a fortnight before the event, said to me--'You know\nthat according to our religion we must have blood. I have already\narranged with David Arari, to obtain it in the house of one of\nour people, and you must be present and bring me the blood.' I\nreplied that I had not the nerve to see blood flow; whereupon,\nthe Chief Rabbi answered that I could stand in the ante-chamber,\nand I would find Moses Salonichi and Joseph Laniado there. I then\nconsented. On the 10th of the month, Achach, about an hour and a\nhalf before sun-down, as I was on my way to the synagogue, I met\nDavid Arari, who said to me: 'Come along to my house, you are\nwanted there.' I replied that I would come as soon as I had ended\nmy prayers. 'No, no--come immediately!' he said. I obeyed. Then he\ntold me that Father Thomas was in his house, and that he was to be\nsacrificed that evening. We went to his house. There we entered a\nnewly-furnished apartment. Father Thomas lay bound in the midst of\nall there assembled. After sunset we adjourned to an unfurnished\nchamber, where David cut the throat of the monk. Aaron and Isaac\nArari finished him. The blood was caught in a vat and then poured\ninto a bottle, which was to be taken to the Chief Rabbi Jacob. I\ntook the bottle and went to him. I found him in his court waiting\nfor me. When he saw me enter, he retreated to his cabinet, and I\nfollowed him thither, saying, 'Here, I bring you what you desired.'\nHe took the bottle and put it behind a book-case. Then I went home.\nI have forgotten to say that, when I left Arari's house, the body\nwas undisturbed. I heard David and his brother say that they had\nmade a bad choice of a victim, as Father Thomas was a priest, and\na well-known individual, and would therefore be sought for, high\nand low. They answered that there was no fear, no one would betray\nwhat had taken place. The clothing would be now burnt, the body cut\nto pieces, and conveyed by the servants to the conduit, and what\nremained would be concealed under some secret stairs. I knew nothing\nabout the servant of Father Thomas. The Wednesday following, I met\nDavid, Isaac, and Joseph Arari, near the shop of Bahal. Isaac asked\nDavid how all had gone on. David replied that all was done that was\nnecessary, and that there was no cause for fear. As they began to\ntalk together privately, I withdrew, as I was not one who associated\nwith the wealthiest of the Jews, and the Arari were of that class.\nThe blood is required by the Jews for the preparation of the Paschal\nbread. They have been often accused of the same, and been condemned\non that account. They have a book called Serir Hadurut (no such a\nbook really exists) which concerns this matter; now that the light\nof Islam has shone on me, I place myself under the protection of\nthose who hold the power in their hands.\"\n\nSuch was his confession. The French Consul, unable to find the\nblood, was bent on discovering more criminals; and the servant of\nDavid Arari, after further pressure, was ready to give further\nparticulars. He said that, after the Father had been murdered,\nhe was sent to a rich Israelite, Marad Farhi, to invite him to\nslaughter the servant of the Capuchin friar in the same way as his\nmaster had been slaughtered. When he took the message, he found the\nyoung merchant, Isaac Picciotto, present, and delivered his message\nbefore him. Next day this Picciotto and four other Jews, Marad\nFarhi, Meir, and Assan Farhi, and Aaron Stamboli, all men of wealth,\ncame to his master's house, and informed David Arari that they had\ntogether murdered the Capuchin's serving-man in the house of Meir\nFarhi. On another occasion this same witness, Murad-el-Fallat, said\nthat the murder of the servant took place in the house of David\nArari; but no importance was attached in this remarkable case to\ncontradictions in the evidence.\n\nPicciotto, as son of a former Austrian Consul, a nephew of the\nConsul at Aleppo, was able to take refuge under the protection of\nMerlato, the Austrian Consul at Damascus. On the demand of Count\nRatti-Menton, he was placed on his trial, but proved an _alibi_;\non the evening in question, he and his wife had been visiting an\nEnglish gentleman, Mr. George Macson.\n\nArari's servant now extended his revelations. He said that he had\nbeen present at the murder of the attendant on the Capuchin. This\nman had been bound and put to death by seven Jews, namely, by the\nfour already mentioned, young Picciotto, Jacob Abul Afia, and Joseph\nMenachem Farhi.\n\nThe French Consul was dissatisfied that Picciotto should escape. He\ndemanded of the Austrian Consul that he should be delivered over to\nthe Mussulman Court to be tortured like the rest into confession.\nThe Austrian Consul was in a difficult position. He stood alone over\nagainst a fanatical Christian and an embittered Mohammedan mob, and\nin resistance to the Egyptian Government and the representative\nof France. But he did not hesitate, he absolutely refused to\nsurrender Picciotto. The general excitement was now directed\nagainst the Consul; he was subjected to suspicion as a favourer of\nthe murderers, as even incriminated in the murder. His house was\nsurrounded by spies, and every one who entered or left it was an\nobject of mistrust.\n\nAll Damascus was in agitation; everyone sought to bring some\nevidence forward to help on the case against the Jews. According to\none account, thirty-three--according to the report of the Austrian\nConsul, sixty-three Jewish children, of from four to ten years\nold, were seized, thrown into prison and tortured, to extract\ninformation from them as to the whereabouts of their parents and\nrelations--those charged with the murder of the servant, and who\nhad fled and concealed themselves. Those witnesses who had appeared\nbefore the court to testify to the innocence of the accused, were\narrested, and treated with Oriental barbarity. Because Farach\nKatasch and Isaac Javoh had declared that they had seen Father\nThomas on the day of the murder in another quarter of the town than\nthe Ghetto, they were put to the torture. Isaac Javoh said he had\nseen Father Thomas on the road to Salachia, two miles from the Jews'\nquarter, and had there spoken to him. He was racked, and died on the\nrack.\n\nA boy admitted that he had noticed Father Thomas and his servant in\nanother part of the town. For so saying, he was beaten with such\nbarbarity that he died twenty-four hours after. A Jewish account\nfrom Beyrut says: \"A Jew dedicated himself to martyrdom for the\nsanctity of the ever-blessed Name. He went before the Governor,\nand said to him, 'Is this justice you do? It is a slander that we\nemploy blood for our Paschal bread; and that it is so is known\nto all civilized governments. You say that the barber, who is a\nJew, confessed it. I reply that he did so only under the stress of\ntorture. Very likely the Father was murdered by Christians or by\nTurks.' The Governor, and the dragoman of the French Consul, Baudin\nby name, retorted, 'What! you dare to charge the murder on Turks or\nChristians?' and he was ordered to be beaten and tortured to death.\nHe was barbarously scourged and hideously tormented, and urged all\nthe while to confess the truth. But he cried ever, 'Hear, O Israel!\nThe Lord thy God is one Lord!' and so crying he died.\"\n\nAs the second murder, according to one account, was committed in the\nhouse of Meir Farhi, Count Ratti-Menton had the water conduits and\ndrains torn up all round it, and in the drain near them was found a\nheap of bones, a bit of flesh, and a fragment of leather--according\nto one account a portion of a shoe, according to that of the\nAustrian Consul, a portion of a girdle. It had--supposing it to\nhave belonged to the murdered man--been soaking for a month in the\ndrain, nevertheless, the brother of the servant who had disappeared\nidentified it as having belonged to the murdered man! Dr. Massari,\nItalian physician to Sheriff Pacha, and Dr. Rinaldo, a doctor\npractising in Damascus, declared that the bones were human remains,\nbut they were examined by Dr. Yograssi, who proved them to be--sheep\nbones. One may judge from this what reliance can be placed on the\nassumption that the first collection of bones that were given\nChristian burial were those of a man, and of Father Thomas. As for\nthe bit of flesh, it was thought to be a piece of liver, but whether\nof a human being or of a beast was uncertain or unascertained. The\nJews' houses were now subjected to search. Count Ratti-Menton swept\nthrough the streets at the head of twenty sbirri, entering and\nransacking houses at his own caprice, the Jews' houses first of all,\nand then such houses of Christians as were supposed to be open as a\nharbour of shelter to the persecuted Israelites. Thus one night he\nrushed not only into the house of, but even the women's bedrooms of\na merchant, Aiub, who stood under Austrian protection, hunting after\nsecreted Jews, an outrage, in popular opinion, even in the East.\n\nThe Jews charged with the murder of the servant had not been\nsecured. The greater number of the well-to-do Hebrews had fled\nthe town. A hue-and-cry was set up, and the country round was\nsearched. Their families were taken up and tortured into confessing\nwhere they were. A German traveller then in Damascus says that the\nprisons were crowded with unfortunates, and that the pen refuses\nto detail the torments to which they were subjected to wring from\nthem the information required. The wife of Meir Farhi and their\nchild were imprisoned, and the child bastinadoed before its mother's\neyes. At the three hundredth blow the mother's heart gave way, and\nshe betrayed the hiding-place of her husband. He was seized. The\nhippopotamus scourge was flourished over his head, and knowing\nwhat his fellows had suffered, he confessed himself guilty. Assan\nFarhi, who was caught in his hiding-place, was imprisoned for a\nweek in the French Consulate, and then delivered over to Turkish\njustice. Bastinado and the rack convinced him of his guilt, but he\nfound means to despatch from his dungeon a letter to Ibrahim Pacha\nprotesting his innocence.\n\nIt is as impossible as it is unnecessary to follow the story of the\npersecution in all its details. The circumstances have been given\nby various hands, and as names are not always recorded, it is not\nalways possible to distinguish whether single cases are recorded\nby different writers with slight variations, or whether they are\nreporting different incidents in the long story.\n\nThe porter of the Jews' quarters, a man of sixty, died under\nbastinado, to which he was subjected for no other crime than not\nconfessing that he had seen the murdered men enter the Ghetto.\n\nIn the meantime, whilst this chase after those accused of the second\nmurder was going on, the seven merchants who had confessed to the\nmurder of the Father had been lying in prison recovering from their\nwounds and bruises. As they recovered, the sense of their innocence\nbecame stronger in them than fear for the future and consideration\nof the past. They withdrew their confessions. Again were they\nbeaten and tormented. Thenceforth they remained stedfast. Two of\nthe seven, David Arari, aged eighty and Joseph Laniado, not much\nyounger, died of their sufferings. Laniado had protested that he\ncould bring evidence--the unimpeachable evidence of Christian\nmerchants at Khasbin--that he had been with them at the time when it\nwas pretended he had been engaged on the murder. But he died before\nthese witnesses reached Damascus. Then Count Ratti-Menton pressed\nfor the execution of the rest.\n\nSo stood matters when Herr von Hailbronner, whose report on the\nwhole case is both fullest and most reliable, for the sequence of\nevents, arrived in Damascus. He took pains to collect all the most\nauthentic information he could on every particular.\n\nDamascus was in the wildest commotion. All classes of the people\nwere in a condition of fanatic excitement. The suffering caused by\nthe pressure of the Egyptian government of Mohamed Ali, the threat\nof an Oriental war, the plague which had broken out in Syria, the\nquarantine, impeding all trade, were matters that were thrust into\nthe background by the all-engrossing story of the murder and the\npersecution of the Jews.\n\nThe condition of the Hebrews in Damascus became daily more\nprecarious. The old antagonism, jealousy of their riches, hatred\ncaused by extortionate usury, were roused and armed for revenge.\nThe barber, though he had confessed that he was guilty of the\nmurder, was allowed to go scot-free, because he had betrayed his\nconfederates. What an encouragement was offered to the rabble to\nindulge in false witness against rich Jews, whose wealth was coveted!\n\nMohamed Ali's government desired nothing better than the\nconfiscation of their goods. A pack of ruffians sought occasion to\nextract money out of this persecution by bribes, or to purchase\npardon for past offences by denouncing the innocent.\n\nIt is well at this point to look a little closer at the French\nConsul, the Count Ratti-Menton. On him rests the guilt of this\niniquitous proceeding, rather than on the Mussulman judges. He\nhad been twice bankrupt when French Consul in Sicily. Then he\nhad been sent as Consul to Tiflis, where his conduct had been so\ndisreputable, that on the representation of the Russian Government\nhe had been recalled. He had then been appointed Consul at Damascus.\nIn spite of all this, and the discredit with which his conduct with\nregard to the Jews, on account of the murder of Father Thomas, had\ncovered him, his part was warmly taken up by the Ultramontane Press,\nand the French Government did its utmost to shield him. M. Thiers\neven warmly defended him. The credit of France was thought to be at\nstake, and it was deemed advisable to stand by the agent of France,\nand make out a case for him as best might be.\n\nIt is quite possible, it is probable, that he was thoroughly\nconvinced that the Jews were guilty, but that does not justify his\nmode of procedure. It is possible also that bribes may--as was\nsaid--have been offered him by the Jews if he would desist from his\npersecution, but that he refused these bribes shows that he was\neither not an unredeemed rascal, or that he conceived he had gone\ntoo far to withdraw.\n\nThe Turkish and Egyptian authorities acted as always has been and\nwill be their manner, after their nature, and in their own interest.\nWe expect of them nothing else, but that the representative of\none of the most enlightened nations of Europe, a man professing\nhimself to be a Christian, and civilized, a member of a noble house,\nshould hound on the ignorant and superstitious, and give rein to\nall the worst passions of an Oriental rabble, against a helpless\nand harmless race, that has been oppressed, and ill-treated, and\nslandered for centuries, is never to be looked over and forgiven.\nThe name of Ratti-Menton must go down branded to posterity; and\nit is to be regretted that M. Thiers should have allowed his love\nof his country to so carry him away as to induce him to throw\nthe shield over a man of whose guilt he must have been perfectly\naware, having full information in his hands. This shows us to what\nan extent Gallic vanity will blind the Gallic eye to the plain\nprinciples of truth and right.\n\nRatti-Menton had his agents to assist him--Baudin, chief of his\nbureau at the Consulate; Francois Salins, a native of Aleppo, who\nacted as interpreter, spy, and guard to the Consulate; Father Tosti,\na French Lazarist, who, according to the Austrian Consul, \"seemed to\nfind in this case an opportunity for avenging on the race the death\nof his Divine Master; also a Christian Arab, Sehibli Ayub, a man of\nbad character, who was well received by Ratti-Menton, because of his\nkeenness as spy, and readiness as denunciator.\n\nWhat followed now passes all belief. After that countless poor Jews\nhad been accused, beaten, tortured, and killed, it occurred to the\njudges that it would be as well to ascertain the motive for the\ncrime. It had been said by those who had confessed that the Pater\nand his servant had been put to death in order to obtain their blood\nto mingle with the dough for the Paschal wafer. The disappearance\nof the two men took place on February 5th. Easter fell that year on\nApril 18th, so that the blood would have to be preserved two months\nand a half. That was an inconsequence which neither the French\nConsul nor the Egyptian authorities stooped to consider. Orders were\nissued that the Talmud and other sacred books of the Jews should\nbe explored to see whether, or rather where in them, the order was\ngiven that human blood should be mingled with the Paschal dough.\nWhen no such commands could be discovered, it was concluded that the\neditions presented for examination were purposely falsified.\n\nNow, there were distinct indications pointing in quite another\ndirection, which, if followed, might have elucidated the case, and\nrevealed the actual criminals. But these indications were in no\ncase followed. Wildon Pieritz, an Evangelical Missionary, then in\nDamascus, as well as the Austrian Consul, agree in stating that\nthree days before the disappearance of Father Thomas he was seen in\nviolent altercation with a Turkish mule-driver, who was heard to\nswear he would be the death of the priest. The altercation was so\nviolent that the servant of Father Thomas seized the mule-driver by\nthe throat and maltreated him so that blood flowed--probably from\nhis nose. Father Thomas lost his temper and cursed the mussulman\nand his religion. The scene created great commotion, and a number\nof Turks were very angry, amongst them was one, a merchant, Abu\nYekhyeh, who distinguished himself. Wildon Pieritz in a letter\nto the _Journal de Smyrne_ on May 14th, 1840, declares that when\nthe news of the disappearance of Father Thomas began to excite\nattention, this merchant, Abu Yekhyeh, hanged himself.\n\nWe may well inquire how it was that none of these facts came to be\nnoticed. The answer is to hand. Every witness that gave evidence\nwhich might exculpate the accused Jews, and turn attention in\nanother direction, was beaten and tortured, consequently, those who\ncould have revealed the truth were afraid to do so.\n\nEven among the Mohammedans complaints arose that the French Consul\nwas acting in contravention to their law, and a feeling gradually\ngrew that a great injustice was being committed--that the Jews\nwere innocent. Few dared allow this in the first fever of popular\nexcitement, but nevertheless it awoke and spread.\n\nAt first the Austrian Consul had been subjected not to annoyance\nonly, but to danger of life, so violent had been the popular feeling\nagainst him because of the protection he accorded to one of the\naccused. Fortunately Herr Merlato was a man of pluck. He was an\nold soldier who had distinguished himself as a marine officer.\nHe not only resolutely protected young Picciotto, but he did his\nutmost to hinder the proceedings of Ratti-Menton; he invoked the\nassistance of the representatives of the other European Powers, and\nfinally every Consul, except the French, agreed to unite with him in\nrepresentations to their governments of the iniquitous proceedings\nof Ratti-Menton, and to use their influence with the Egyptian\nauthorities to obtain the release of the unhappy accused.\n\nThe bastinadoes and tortures now ceased. Merlato obtained the\nrelease of several of those who were in confinement; and finally\nthe only Jews who remained in prison were the brothers Arari, Mussa\nSalonichi, and the renegade Abul Afia. Of the supposed murderers of\nthe servant only the brothers Farhi were still held in chains.\n\nMatters were in this condition when the news of what had taken place\nat Damascus reached Europe and set all the Jews in commotion. Every\neffort was made by them, in Vienna, Leipzig, Paris and London,\nindeed in all the great cities of Europe, to convince the public\nof the absurdity of the charge, and to urge the governments to\ninterfere in behalf of the sufferers.\n\nFinally all the representatives of the European governments at\nAlexandria, with the exception of the French, remonstrated with\nMohamed Ali. They demanded that the investigation should be begun\n_de novo_; the French Consul-General, M. Cochelet, alone objected.\nBut the action of the Jews of Europe had more influence with\nMohamed Pacha than the representations of the Consuls. The house of\nRothschild had taken the matter up, and Sir Moses Montefiore started\nfrom London, and M. Cremieux from Paris as a diplomatic embassy to\nthe Viceroy at Alexandria to convince him, by such means as is most\nefficacious to an Oriental despot, of the innocence of the accused\nat Damascus.\n\nThe arguments these delegates employed were so extremely\nsatisfactory to the mind of Mohamed Pacha, that he quashed the\ncharges against the Jews of Damascus, in spite of the vehement\nprotest of M. Cochelet, the representative of France. When the\nViceroy issued a firman ordering the incarcerated Jews to be\ndischarged as innocent and suffered to abide in peace, M. Cochelet\nstrove in vain to have the firman qualified or altered into a pardon.\n\nThus ended one of the most scandalous cases of this century.\nUnfortunate, innocent men were tortured and put to death for a crime\nthat had never been proved. That the two Europeans had been murdered\nwas merely matter of conjecture. No bodies had been found. There\nwas no evidence worth a rush against the accused, and no motive\nadduced deserving of grave consideration. \"What inhumanities were\ncommitted during the eight months of this persecution,\" wrote Herr\nVon Hailbronner, \"will never be wholly known. But it must call up a\nblush of shame in the face of an European to remember that Europeans\nprovoked, favoured and stimulated it to the last.\"\n\n     Authorities: \"Morgenland and Abendland,\" by Herr Von\n     Hailbronner,--who, as already mentioned, was present in Damascus\n     through part of the time. \"Damascia,\" by C. H. L\u00f6wenstein,\n     R\u00f6delheim, 1840. Reports and debates in the English Parliament\n     at the time. The recently published Diaries of Sir Moses\n     Montefiore, 2 vols., 1890; his Centenal Biography, 1884, vol.\n     I., p. 213-288; and the article summing up the whole case in\n     \"Der Neue Pitaval,\" by Dr. J. C. Hitzig and Dr. W. H\u00e4ring, 1857,\n     Vol. I.\n\n\n\n\nSome Accusations against Jews.\n\n\nThe story just given of the atrocious treatment of the Jews of\nDamascus on a false accusation naturally leads to a brief sketch of\ntheir treatment in the Middle Ages on similar charges. Not, indeed,\nthat we can deal with all of the outrages committed on the sons of\nAbraham, Isaac, and Jacob--that would require volumes--but only\nnotice some of those which they have had to suffer on the same or\nanalogous false charges.\n\nThese false accusations range under three heads:--\n\n1. They have been charged with poisoning the wells when there has\nbeen an outbreak of plague and malignant fever.\n\n2. They have been charged with stealing the Host and with stabbing\nit.\n\n3. Lastly, with having committed murders in order to possess\nthemselves of Christian blood, to mingle with the dough wherewith to\nmake their Paschal cakes.\n\nWe will leave the first case on one side altogether, and as we have\nalready considered one instance--not by any means the last case of\nsuch an accusation levied against them in Europe--we will take it\nbefore we come to the instances of their being accused of stealing\nthe Host.\n\nBut _why_ should they be supposed to require Christian blood? One\ntheory was that by common participation in it, the Jewish community\nwas closer bound together; another, that it had a salutary medicinal\neffect. That is to say, having made up their minds in the Middle\nAges that Jews did sacrifice human beings and drink their blood,\nthey beat about for the explanation, and caught at any wild theory\nthat was proposed.[4]\n\n  [4] Antonius Bonfinius: Rer. Hungaricarum Dec., v. 1., 3, gives\n  _four_ reasons. Thomas Cantipratensis, Lib. II., c. 29, gives\n  another and preposterous one, not to be quoted even in Latin.\n\nJohn Dubravius in his Bohemian History, under the year 1305,\nrelates: \"On Good Friday the Jews committed an atrocious crime\nagainst a Christian man, for they stretched him naked to a cross\nin a concealed place, and then, standing round, spat on him, beat\nhim, and did all they could to him which is recorded of their\nhaving done to Christ. This atrocious act was avenged by the people\nof Prague upon the Jews, with newly-invented punishments, and of\ntheir property that was confiscated, a monument was erected.\" But\nthere were cases earlier than this. Perhaps the earliest is that\nof S. William of Norwich, in 1144; next, S. Richard of Paris,\n1179; then S. Henry of Weissemburg, in Alsace, in 1220; then S.\nHugh of Lincoln, in 1255, the case of which is recorded by Matthew\nParis. A woman at Lincoln lost her son, a child eight years old.\nHe was found in a well near a Jew's house. The Jew was arrested,\nand promised his life if he would accuse his brethren of the\nmurder. He did so, but was hanged nevertheless. On this accusation\nninety-two of the richest Jews in Lincoln were arrested, their\ngoods seized to replenish the exhausted Royal exchequer; eighteen\nwere hung forthwith, the rest were reserved in the Tower of London\nfor a similar fate, but escaped through the intervention of the\nFranciscans, who, says Matthew Paris, were bribed by the Jews of\nEngland to obtain their release. On May 15th, 1256, thirty-five of\nthe wretched Jews were released. We are not told what became of the\nremaining thirty-nine, whether they had been discharged as innocent,\nor died in prison. The story of little Hugh has been charmingly told\nin Chaucer's Canterbury Tales.\n\nA girl of seven years was found murdered at Pforzheim, in 1271;\nthe Jews were accused, mobbed, maltreated, and executed. In 1286,\na boy, name unknown, disappeared in Munich, with the same results\nto the Jews. In 1292, a boy of nine, at Constance--same results. In\n1303 \"the perfidious Jews, accustomed to the shedding of Christian\nblood,\" says Siffrid, priest of Meisen, in 1307, \"cruelly murdered\na certain scholar, named Conrad, son of a knight of Weissensee, in\nThuringia, after that they had tortured him, cut all his sinews, and\nopened his veins. This took place before Easter. The Almighty, who\nis glorious in His Saints, however did not suffer the murder of the\ninnocent boy to remain concealed, but destroyed the murderers, and\nadorned the martyrdom of their innocent victim with miracles. For\nwhen the said Jews had taken the body of the lad to many places in\nThuringia to bury it secretly, by God's disposition they were always\nfoiled in their attempt to make away with it. Wherefore, returning\nto Weissensee, they hung it to a vine. Then the truth having been\nrevealed, the soldiers rushed out of the castle, and the citizens\nrose together with the common people, headed by Frederick, son of\nAlbert Landgrave of Thuringia, and killed the Jews tumultuously.\"\n\nThe story of St. Werner, the boy murdered by the Jews in 1287, at\nWesel, on the Rhine, and buried at Bacharach, is well known. The\nlovely chapel erected over his body is now a ruin. But Werner was\nnot the only boy martyred by the Jews on the Rhine. Another was St.\nJohanettus of Siegburg.\n\nSt. Andrew of Heiligenwasser, near Innsbr\u00fcck, is another case, in\n1462; St. Ludwig of Ravensburg, in 1429, again another. Six boys\nwere said to have been murdered by Jews at Ratisborn, in 1486; and\nseveral cases come to us out of Spanish history. In Poland, in 1598,\nin the village of Swinarzew, near Lositz, lived a peasant, Matthias\nPetrenioff, with his wife, Anna. They had several children, among\nthem a boy named Adalbert. One day in Holy Week the boy was in\nthe fields ploughing with his father. In the evening he was sent\nhome, but instead of going home directly, he turned aside to visit\nthe village of Woznik, in which lived a Jew, Mark, who owned a\npawnshop, and had some mills. The son of Mark, named Aaron, and the\nson-in-law, Isaac, overtook the boy as they were returning to Wosnik\nin their cart and took him up into it.\n\nAs the child did not return home, his father went in search of him,\nand hearing that he had been seen in the cart between the two Jews,\nhe went to the house of Mark and inquired for him. Mark's wife\nsaid she had not seen him. The peasant now became frightened. He\nremembered the stories that floated about concerning the murder of\nChristian children by Jews, and concluded that his boy had been put\nto death by Mark and his co-religionists. At length the body of the\nchild was discovered in a pond, probably gnawed by rats--but the\nmarks on the body were at once supposed to be due to the weapons of\nthe Jews. Immense excitement reigned in the district, and finally\ntwo servants of the Jews, both Christians, one Athanasia, belonging\nto the Greek Church, and another, Christina, a Latin, confessed\nthat their masters had murdered the boy. He had been concealed in\na cellar till the eve of the Passover, when the chief Jews of the\ndistrict had been assembled, and the boy had been bled to death\nin their presence. The blood was put into small phials and each\nJew provided with one at least. This led to a general arrest of\nthe Jews, when the rack produced the requisite confession. Isaac,\nson-in-law of Mark, in whose house the butchery was said to have\ntaken place, declared under torture that the Jews partook of the\nblood of Christians in bread, and also in wine, but he professed to\nbe unable to account for the custom. Filled, however, with remorse\nfor having thus falsely accused his people and his relatives, he\nhung himself in prison. Mark and Aaron were condemned to be torn\nto pieces alive; and, of course, the usual spoliation ensued. We\nhave the account of this atrocious judicial murder from the pen of\na Jesuit, Szembeck, who extracted the particulars from the acts of\nthe court of Lublin, in which the case was tried, and from those\ndrawn up by order of the bishop of the diocese of Luz, in which the\nmurder occurred, and who obtained or sanctioned a canonization of\nthe boy-martyr.\n\nAnother still more famous case is that of S. Simeon, of Trent, in\n1475, very full details of which are given in the Acta Sanctorum\nof the Bollandists, as the victim was formally canonized by Pope\nBenedict XIV., and the Roman Martyrology asserts the murder by the\nJews in these terms:--\n\n\"At Trent (on March 24th) the martyrdom of S. Simeon, a little\nchild, cruelly slain by the Jews, who was glorified afterwards by\nseveral miracles.\"\n\nThe story as told and approved at the canonization was as follows:\nOn Tuesday, in Holy Week, 1475, the Jews met to prepare for\nthe approaching Passover, in the house of one of their number,\nnamed Samuel; and it was agreed between three of them, Samuel,\nTobias, and Angelus, that a child should be crucified, as an act\nof revenge against the Christians who cruelly maltreated them.\nTheir difficulty, however, was how to get one. Samuel sounded his\nservant Lazarus, and attempted to bribe him into procuring one,\nbut the suggestion so scared the fellow that he ran away. On the\nThursday, Tobias undertook to get the boy, and going out in the\nevening, whilst the people were in church, he prowled about till\nhe found a child sitting on the threshold of his father's door,\naged twenty-nine months, and named Simeon. The Jew began to coax\nthe little fellow to follow him, and the boy, after being lured\naway, was led to the house of Samuel, whence during the night he was\nconveyed to the synagogue, where he was bled to death, and his body\npierced with awls.\n\nAll Friday the parents sought their son, but found him not. The\nJews, alarmed at the proceedings of the magistrates, who had taken\nthe matter up, consulted together what was to be done. It was\nresolved to put the body back into its clothes and throw it into the\nstream that ran under Samuel's window, but which was there crossed\nby a grating. Tobias was to go to the bishop and magistrates and\ninform them that a child's body was entangled in the grate. This was\ndone. Thereupon John de Salis, the bishop, and James de Sporo, the\ngovernor, went to see the spot, had the body removed, and conveyed\nto the cathedral. As, according to popular superstition, blood was\nsupposed to flow from the wound when a murderer drew near, the\nofficers of justice were cautioned to observe the crowds as they\npassed.\n\nIt was declared that blood exuded as Tobias approached. On the\nstrength of this, the house of Samuel and the synagogue were\nexamined, and it is asserted that blood and other traces of the\nbutchery were found. The most eminent physicians were called to\ninvestigate the condition of the corpse, and they pronounced that\nthe child had been strangled, and that the wounds were due to stabs.\nThe popular voice now accusing the Jews, the magistrates seized on\nthem and threw them into prison, and on the accusation of a renegade\nmore than five of the Jews were sentenced to death. They were broken\non the wheel and then burnt. The body of the child is enshrined\nat Trent, and a basin of the blood preserved as a relic in the\ncathedral.\n\nThis must suffice for instances of accusations of murder for\nreligious purposes brought against the Jews, in every case false.\nAnother charge brought against them was Sacrilege. Fleury in his\nEcclesiastical History gives one instance. \"In the little town of\nPulca, in Passau, a layman found a bloody Host before the house of\na Jew, lying in the street upon some straw. The people thought that\nthis Host was consecrated, and washed it and took it to the priest,\nthat it might be taken to the church, where a crowd of devotees\nassembled, concluding that the blood had flowed miraculously from\nwounds dealt it by the Jews. On this supposition, and without any\nother examination, or any other judicial procedure, the Christians\nfell on the Jews, and killed several of them; but wiser heads\njudged that this was rather for the sake of pillage than to avenge\na sacrilege. This conjecture was justified by a similar event, that\ntook place a little while before at Neuburg, in the same diocese,\nwhere a certain clerk placed an unconsecrated Host steeped in blood\nin a church, but confessed afterwards before the bishop that he\nhad dipped this Host in blood for the purpose of raising hostility\nagainst the Jews.\"[5]\n\n  [5] Fleury, Hist. Eccl., vi. p. 110.\n\nIn 1290, a Jew named Jonathan was accused in Paris of having thrown\na Host into the Seine. It floated. Then he stabbed it with his\nknife, and blood flowed. The Jew was burnt alive, and the people\nclamored for a general persecution of the Hebrews.\n\nIn Bavaria, in 1337, at Dechendorf, some Hosts were discovered which\nthe Jews had stabbed. The unhappy Hebrews were burnt alive.\n\nIn 1326, a Jew convert, a favourite of Count William the Good, of\nFlanders, was accused of having struck an image of the Madonna,\nwhich thereupon bled. The Jew was tortured, but denied the\naccusation. Then he was challenged to a duel by a fanatic. He,\nwholly unaccustomed to the use of weapons, succumbed. That sufficed\nto prove his guilt. He was burnt.\n\nIn 1351, a Jew convert was accused, at Brussels, of having\npretended, on three occasions, to communicate, in order that he\nmight send the Hosts to his brethren at Cologne, who stabbed them,\nand blood flowed.\n\nThe traveller who has been in Brussels must certainly have noticed\nthe painted windows all down the nave of S. Gudule, in the side\naisles, to left and right. They represent, in glowing colours, the\nstory of the miraculous Hosts preserved in the chancel to the north\nof the choir, where seven red lamps burn perpetually before them.\n\nThe story is as follows: In 1370, a rich Jew of Enghien bribed a\nconverted Hebrew, named John of Louvain, for 60 pieces of gold, to\nsteal for him some Hosts from the Chapel of S. Catherine. Hardly,\nhowever, had the Jew, Jonathan, received the wafers, before he was\nattacked by robbers and murdered. His wife, alarmed, and thinking\nthat his death was due to the sacrilege, resolved to get rid of\nthe wafers. It may have been remarked in the stories of murders\nby Jews, that they were represented as finding great difficulty\nin getting rid of the dead bodies. In these stories of sacrilege,\nno less difficulty was encountered in causing the disappearance\nof the Hosts. Moreover, the Jews invariably proceeded in the most\nroundabout and clumsy way, inviting discovery. The widow of the\nmurdered Jonathan conveyed the Hosts to the synagogue at Brussels.\nThere, on Good Friday, the Jews took advantage of the Hosts to stab\nthem with their knives, in mockery of Christ and the Christian\nreligion. But blood squirted from the transfixed wafers. In terror,\nthey also resolved to get rid of the miraculous Hosts, and found\nno better means of so doing than bribing a renegade Jewess, named\nCatharine, to carry them to Cologne. They promised her twenty\npieces of gold for her pains. She took the Hosts, but, troubled in\nconscience, revealed what she had undertaken to her confessor. The\necclesiastical authorities were informed, Catherine was arrested,\nimprisoned, and confessed. All the Jews dwelling in Brussels were\ntaken up and tortured; but in spite of all torture refused to\nacknowledge their guilt. However, a chaplain of the prince, a man\nnamed Jean Morelli, pretended to have overheard a converted Jew say,\n\"Why do not these dogs make a clean breast? They know that they\nare guilty.\" This man was that John of Louvain who had procured\nthe theft of the wafers. He was seized. He at once confessed his\nparticipation in the crime. That sufficed. All the accused, he\nhimself included, were condemned to death. They were executed with\nhideous cruelty; after having had their flesh torn off by red-hot\npinchers, they were attached to stakes and burnt alive, on the Vigil\nof the Ascension, 1370. Every year a solemn procession of the Saint\nSacrement de Miracle commemorates this atrocity, or the miracle\nwhich led to it.\n\nUnfortunately, there exists no doubt whatever as to the horrible\nexecution of the Jews on the false charge of having stolen the\nHosts, but there is very good reason for disbelieving altogether the\nstory of the miracle of the bleeding Hosts.\n\nNow, it is somewhat remarkable that not a word is said about this\nmiracle before 1435, that is to say, for 65 years, by any writer of\nthe period and of the country. The very first mention of it is found\nin a Papal bull of that date, addressed to the Dean and Chapter\nof S. Gudule, relative to a petition made by them that, as they\nwanted money for the erection of a chapel to contain these Hosts,\nindulgences might be granted to those who would contribute thereto.\nThe Pope granted their request.\n\nNow, it so happens that the official archives at Brussels contains\ntwo documents of the date, 1370, relative to this trial. The first\nof these is the register of the accounts of the receiver-general\nof the Duke of Brabant. In that are the items of expenditure for\nthe burning of these Jews, a receipt, and the text is as follows:\n\"Item, recepta de bonis dictorum judeorum, postquam combusti fuerant\ncirca ascensionem Domini lxx, qu\u00e6 defamata fuerant de sacramentis\npunic\u00e8 et furtiv\u00e8 acceptis.\" That is to say, that a certain sum\nflowed into the Duke's exchequer from the goods of the Jews, burnt\nfor having \"guiltily and furtively obtained the Hosts.\" \"Punice\" is\nan odd word, but its signification is clear enough. Now, in 1581,\non May 1st, the magistrates of Brussels forbade the exercise of\nthe Catholic religion, in a proclamation in which, when mentioning\ncertain frauds committed by the Roman Church, they speak of \"The\nSacrament of the Miracle, which,\" say they, \"by documentary evidence\ncan be proved never to have bled nor to have been stabbed.\" No\nquestion--they had seen this entry in which no mention is made of\nthe stabbing--no allusion made to the bleeding. Moreover, in the\nsame archives is the contemporary episcopal letter addressed to the\nDean of S. Gudule on the subject of these Hosts. In this document\nthere is no mention made by the bishop of the stabbing or of the\nmiracle. It is stated that the Hosts were obtained by the Jews in\norder that they might insult and outrage them. It is curious that\nthe letter should not specify their having done this, and done it\neffectually, with their knives and daggers. Most assuredly, also,\nhad there been any suspicion of a miracle, the bishop would have\nreferred to it in the letter relative to the custody of these very\nHosts.\n\nAfter the whole fable of the stabbing and bleeding had grown up, no\ndoubt applied to these Hosts from a preceding case of accusation\nagainst Jews, that of 1351, less than thirty years before, it was\nthought advisable, if not necessary, to produce some evidence in\nfavour of the story; but as no such evidence was obtainable, it was\nmanufactured in a very ingenious manner. The entry in the register\nof accounts was published by the P\u00e8re Ydens, after a notary had\nbeen required to collate the text. This notary--his name was Van\nAsbroek--gave his testimony that he had made an exact and literal\ntranscript of the entry. What he and the P\u00e8re Ydens gave as their\nexact, literal transcript was \"recepta de bonis dictorum Judoeorum\n... qu\u00e6 defamata fuerant de sacramen_to puncto_ et furtive\naccep_to_.\" Ingenious, but disingenuous. In the first place they\naltered \"sacramentis\" from plural into singular, and then, the\nadverb _punic\u00e8_, \"guiltily,\" into _puncto_, stabbed.\n\nSubsequently, Father Ydens and his notary have been quoted and\nrequoted as authoritative witnesses. However, the document is\nnow in the Archives at Brussels, and has been lithographed from\na photograph for the examination of such as have not the means\nof obtaining access to the original.[6] The last jubilee of this\napocryphal miracle was celebrated at Brussels in July, 1870.\n\n  [6] Le Jubil\u00e9 d'un faux Miracle (extrait de la Revue de\n  Belgique), Bruxelles 1870.\n\n\n\n\nThe Coburg Mausoleum.\n\n\nAt the east end of the garden of the Ducal residence of Coburg is a\nsmall, tastefully constructed mausoleum, adorned with allegorical\nsubjects, in which are laid the remains of the deceased dukes. Near\nthe mausoleum rise a stately oak, a clump of rhododendron, a cluster\nof acacias, and a group of yews and weeping-willows.\n\nThe mausoleum is hidden from the palace by a plantation of young\npines.\n\nThe Castle of Coburg is one of the most interesting and best\npreserved in Germany. It stands on a height, above the little town,\nand contains much rich wood-carving of the 15th and 16th centuries.\nBelow the height, but a little above the town, is the more modern\nresidence of the Dukes Ehrenburg, erected in 1626 by the Italian\narchitect Bonallisso, and finished in 1693. It has that character\nof perverse revolt against picturesqueness that marked all the\nedifices of the period. It has been restored, not in the best style,\nat the worst possible epoch, 1816. The south front remains least\naltered; it is adorned with a handsome gateway, over which is the\ninscription, \"Fried ern\u00e4hrt, Unfried verzehrt\"--not easily rendered\nin English:--\n\n    \"Peace doth cherish--\n    Strife makes perish.\"\n\nThe princes of Coburg by their worth and kindly behaviour have for\na century drawn to them the hearts of their subjects, and hardly a\nprincely house in Germany is, and has been, more respected and loved.\n\nDuke Franz died shortly after the battle of Jena. During his reign,\nby his thrift, geniality, and love of justice he had won to his\nperson the affections of his people, though they resented the\ndespotic character of his government under his Minister Kretschmann.\nHe was twice married, but left issue only by the second wife,\nAugusta, a princess of Reuss, who inherited the piety and virtues\nwhich seem to be inrooted in that worthy house.\n\nOnly a few weeks after her return from Brussels, where she had seen\nher son, recently crowned King of the Belgians, did the Duchess\nAugusta of Sachsen-Coburg die in her seventy-sixth year, November\n16th, 1831. The admiration and love this admirable princess had\ninspired drew crowds to visit the body, as it lay in state in the\nresidence at Coburg, prior to the funeral, which took place on the\n19th, before day-break, by the light of torches. The funeral was\nattended by men and women of all classes eager to express their\nattachment to the deceased, and respect for the family. A great\ndeal was said, and fabled, concerning this funeral. It was told\nand believed that the Dowager Duchess had been laid in the family\nvault adorned with her diamond rings and richest necklaces. She was\nthe mother of kings, and the vulgar believed that every royal and\nprincely house with which she was allied had contributed some jewel\ntowards the decoration of her body.\n\nHer eldest son, Ernst I., succeeded his father in 1806 as\nDuke of Sachsen-Coburg-Saalfeld, and in 1826 became Duke of\nSachsen-Coburg-Gotha. The second son, Ferdinand, married in 1816\nthe wealthiest heiress of Hungary, the Princess Rohary, and his\nson, Ferdinand, became in 1836 King of Portugal, and his grandson,\nFerdinand, by his second son, is the present reigning Prince of\nBulgaria.\n\nThe third son, Leopold, married Charlotte, only daughter of George\nIV. of England, and in 1831 became King of the Belgians. Of the five\ndaughters, the eldest was married to the Grand-Duke Constantine of\nRussia, the second married the Duke of Kent, in 1818, and was the\nmother of our Queen, Victoria. The third married Duke Alexander of\nW\u00fcrtemberg.\n\nAmong those who were present at the funeral of the Duchess Augusta\nwas a Bavarian, named Andreas Stubenrauch, an artisan then at\nCoburg. He was the son of an armourer, followed his father's\nprofession, and had settled at Coburg as locksmith. He was a\npeculiarly ugly man, with low but broad brow, dark-brown bristly\nhair, heavy eyebrows and small cunning grey eyes. His nose was a\nsnub, very broad with huge nostrils, his complexion was pale; he had\na large mouth, and big drooping underlip. His short stature, his\nlack of proportion in build, and his uncomely features, gave him\nthe appearance of a half-witted man. But though he was not clever\nhe was by no means a fool. His character was in accordance with his\nappearance. He was a sullen, ill-conditioned, intemperate man.\n\nStubenrauch had been one of the crowd that had passed by the bed on\nwhich the Duchess lay in state, and had cast covetous eyes at the\njewellery with which the body was adorned. He had also attended the\nfuneral, and had come to the conclusion that the Duchess was buried\nwith all the precious articles he had noticed about her, as exposed\nto view before the burial, and with a great deal more, which popular\ngossip asserted to have been laid in the coffin with her.\n\nThe thought of all this waste of wealth clung to his mind, and\nStubenrauch resolved to enter the mausoleum and rob the body. The\nposition of the vault suited his plans, far removed and concealed\nfrom the palace, and he made little account of locks and bars, which\nwere likely to prove small hindrances to an accomplished locksmith.\n\nTo carry his plan into execution, he resolved on choosing the night\nof August 18-19, 1832. On this evening he sat drinking in a low\ntavern till 10 o'clock, when he left, returned to his lodgings,\nwhere he collected the tools he believed he would require, a candle\nand flint and steel, and then betook himself to the mausoleum.\n\nIn the first place, he found it necessary to climb over a wall of\nboards that encircled the portion of the grounds where was the\nmausoleum, and then, when he stood before the building, he found\nthat to effect an entrance would take him more time and give him\nmore work than he had anticipated.\n\nThe mausoleum was closed by an iron gate formed of strong bars eight\nfeet high, radiating from a centre in a sort of semicircle and armed\nwith sharp spikes. He found it impossible to open the lock, and he\nwas therefore obliged to climb over the gate, regardless of the\ndanger of tearing himself on the barbs. There was but a small space\nbetween the spikes and the arch of the entrance, but through this\nhe managed to squeeze his way, and so reach the interior of the\nbuilding, without doing himself any injury.\n\nHere he found a double stout oaken door in the floor that gave\naccess to the vault. The two valves were so closely dovetailed\ninto one another and fitted so exactly, that he found the utmost\ndifficulty in getting a tool between them. He tried his false keys\nin vain on the lock, and for a long time his efforts to prise the\nlock open with a lever were equally futile. At length by means of\na wedge he succeeded in breaking a way through the junction of the\ndoors, into which he could insert a bar, and then he heaved at one\nvalve with all his might, throwing his weight on the lever. It took\nhim fully an hour before he could break open the door. Midnight\nstruck as the valve, grating on its hinges, was thrown back. But\nnow a new and unexpected difficulty presented itself. There was no\nflight of steps descending into the vault, as he had anticipated,\nand he did not know the depth of the lower pavement from where he\nstooped, and he was afraid to light a candle and let it down to\nexplore the distance.\n\nBut Stubenrauch was not a man to be dismayed by difficulties. He\nclimbed back over the iron-spiked gates into the open air, and\nsought out a long and stout pole, with which to sound the depth, so\nas to know what measures he was to take to descend. Going into the\nDucal orchard, he pulled up a pole to which a fruit tree was tied,\nand dragged it to the mausoleum, and with considerable difficulty\ngot it through the gateway, which he again surmounted with caution\nand without injury to himself.\n\nThen, leaning over the opening, holding the pole in both hands, he\nendeavoured to feel the depth of the vault. In so doing he lost his\nbalance, and the weight of the pole dragged him down, and he fell\nbetween two coffins some twelve feet below the floor of the upper\nchamber. There he lay for some little while unconscious, stunned by\nhis fall. When he came to himself, he sat up, felt about with his\nhands to ascertain where he was, and considered what next should be\ndone.\n\nWithout a moment's thought as to how he was to escape from his\nposition, about the possibility of which he was not in the smallest\ndoubt, knowing as he did his own agility and readiness with\nexpedients, he set to work to accomplish his undertaking. With\ncomposure Stubenrauch now struck a light and kindled the candle.\nWhen he had done this, he examined the interior of the vault, and\nthe coffins he found there, so as to select the right one. Those of\nthe Duchess Augusta and her husband the late Duke were very much\nalike, so much so that the ruffian had some difficulty in deciding\nwhich was the right one. He chose, however, correctly that which\nseemed freshest, and he tore off it the black cover. Under this\nhe found the coffin very solid, fastened by two locks, which were\nso rusted that his tools would not turn in them. He had not his\niron bar and other implements with him now; they were above on the\nfloor of the upper chamber. With great difficulty he succeeded at\nlength in breaking one of the hinges, and he was then able to snap\nthe lower lock, whereas that at the top resisted all his efforts.\nHowever, the broken hinge and lock enabled him to lift the lid\nsufficiently for him to look inside. Now he hoped to be able to\ninsert his hand, and remove all the jewellery he supposed was laid\nthere with the dead lady. To his grievous disappointment he saw\nnothing save the fading remains of the Duchess, covered with a\nglimmering white mould, that seemed to him to be phosphorescent. The\nbody was in black velvet, the white luminous hands crossed over the\nbreast. Stubenrauch was not the man to feel either respect for the\ndead or fear of aught supernatural. With both hands he sustained the\nheavy lid of the coffin as he peered in, and the necessity for using\nboth to support the weight prevented his profane hand from being\nlaid on the remains of an august and pious princess. Stubenrauch did\nindeed try more than once to sustain the lid with one hand, that\nhe might grope with the other for the treasures he fancied must be\nconcealed there, but the moment he removed one hand the lid crashed\ndown.\n\nDisappointed in his expectations, Stubenrauch now replaced the\ncover, and began to consider how he might escape. But now--and now\nonly--did he discover that it was not possible for him to get out of\nthe vault into which he had fallen. The pole on which he had placed\nhis confidence was too short to reach to the opening above. Every\neffort made by Stubenrauch to scramble out failed. He was caught in\na trap--and what a trap! Nemesis had fallen on the ruffian at once,\non the scene of his crime, and condemned him to betray himself.\n\nAlthough now for the first time deadly fear came over him, as he\nafterward asserted, it was fear because he anticipated punishment\nfrom men, not any dread of the wrath of the spirits of those into\nwhose domain he had entered. When he had convinced himself that\nescape was quite impossible, he submitted to the inevitable, lay\ndown between the two coffins and tried to go to sleep; but, as he\nhimself admitted, he was not able to sleep soundly.\n\nMorning broke--it was Sunday, and a special festival at Coburg, for\nit was the twenty-fifth anniversary of the accession of the Duke, so\nthat the town was in lively commotion, and park and palace were also\nin a stir.\n\nStubenrauch sat up and waited in hopes of hearing someone draw near\nwho could release him. About 9 o'clock in the morning he heard steps\non the gravel, and at once began to shout for assistance.\n\nThe person who had approached ran away in alarm, declaring that\nstrange and unearthly noises issued from the Ducal mausoleum. The\nguard was apprised, but would not at first believe the report. At\nlength one of the sentinels was despatched to the spot, and he\nreturned speedily with the tidings that there certainly was a man\nin the vault. He had peered through the grating at the entrance and\nhad seen the door broken open and a crowbar and other articles lying\nabout.\n\nThe gate was now opened, and Stubenrauch removed in the midst of an\nassembled crowd of angry and dismayed spectators. He was removed to\nprison, tried, and condemned to eighteen months with hard labour.\n\nThat is not the end of the story. After his discharge, Stubenrauch\nnever settled into regular work. In 1836 he was taken up for theft,\nand again on the same charge in 1844. In the year 1854 he was\ndiscovered dead in a little wood near his home; between the fingers\nof his right hand was a pinch of snuff, and in his left hand a\npistol with which he had blown out his own brains. In his pockets\nwere found a purse and a brandy bottle, both empty.\n\n\n\n\nJean Aymon.\n\n\nJean Aymon was born in Dauphin\u00e9, in 1661, of Catholic parents.\nHe studied in the college of Grenoble. His family, loving him,\nneglected nothing which might contribute to the improvement of his\nmind, and the professors of Grenoble laboured to perfect their\nintelligent pupil in mathematics, languages, and history.\n\nFrom Grenoble, Aymon betook himself to Turin, where he studied\ntheology and philosophy. But there was one thing neither parents nor\nprofessors were able to implant in the young man--a conscience. He\nwas thoroughly well versed in all the intricacies of moral theology\nand the subtleties of the school-men; he regarded crime and sin as\nsomething deadly indeed, but deadly only to other persons. Theft\nwas a mortal sin to every one but himself. Truth was a virtue to be\nstrictly inculcated, but not to be practised in his own case.\n\nHis parents, thinking he would grow out of this obliquity of moral\nvision, persisted in their scheme of education for the lad--probably\nthe very worst which, with his peculiar bent of mind, they could\nhave chosen for him. Having finished his studies at Turin, his evil\nstar led him to Rome, where his talents soon drew attention to him,\nand Hercules de Berzet, Bishop of Saint Jean de Maurienne, in Savoy,\nnamed him chaplain, and had him ordained, by brief of Innocent\nXI., before the age fixed by the Council of Trent, \"because of the\nprobity of his life, his virtues and other merits!\"--such were the\nreasons.\n\nShortly after his installation as chaplain to the bishop, his patron\nentrusted him with a delicate case. De Berzet had lately been deep\nin an intrigue to obtain a cardinal's hat. He had been disappointed,\nand he was either bent on revenge, or, perhaps, hoped to frighten\nthe Pope into giving him that which he had solicited in vain. He\nset to work, raking up all the scandal of the Papal household, and\nacting the spy upon all the movements of the familiars of the court.\nAfter a very little while, this worthy prelate had succeeded in\ngathering together enough material to make all the ears in Europe\ntingle, and this was put into the hands of the young priest to work\ninto form for publication.\n\nAs Aymon looked through these scandalous memoirs, he made his\nown reflections. \"The publication of this will raise a storm,\nundoubtedly; but the first who will perish in it will be my patron,\nand all who sail in his boat.\" Aymon noticed that M. de Camus,\nBishop of Grenoble, was most compromised by the papers in his hands,\nand would be most interested in their suppression. Aymon, without\nhesitation, tied up the bundle, put it in his pocket, and presented\nhimself before the bishop, ready to make them over to him for a\nconsideration. He was well received, as may be supposed, and in\nreturn for the papers was given a living in the diocese. But this\ndid not satisfy the restless spirit of Aymon; he had imbibed a\ntaste for intrigue, and there was no place like the Eternal City\nfor indulging this taste. He was, moreover, dissatisfied with his\nbenefice, and expected greater rewards for the service he had done\nto the Church. Innocent XI. received him well, and in 1687 appointed\nhim his protonotary. Further he did not advance. At the Papal Court\nhe made his observations, and whether it was that he was felt to be\nsomewhat of a spy, or through some intrigue, his star began to set,\nwhen Aymon, too well aware that a falling man may sink very low,\nsuddenly fled from Rome, crossed the border into Switzerland, and in\na few days was a convert to the straitest sect of the Calvinists.\nBut the Swiss are poor, and their ministers are in comfortable,\nthough not lucrative positions. Holland was the paradise of\nCalvinism, and to Holland Aymon repaired. Here he obtained a cure of\nimportance, and married a lady of rank.\n\nBut even now, Aymon was not satisfied. Among the Protestants of\nthe Low Countries there are no bishops, and no man can soar higher\nthan the pulpit of a parish church. Aymon was convinced that he had\nclimbed as high as he could in the Church of Calvin, and that he had\na soul for something higher still. His next step was extraordinary\nenough. He wrote in December, 1705, to M. Clement, of the\nBiblioth\u00e8que du Roi, at Paris, stating that he had in his possession\nthe \"Herbal\" of the celebrated Paul Hermann, in forty folio volumes,\nand that he offered it to the King for 3200 livres, a trifle over\nwhat it had cost him. He added that he was a renegade priest, who\nhad sought rest in Protestantism, but had found none--nay! he had\ndiscovered it to be a hot-bed of every kind of vice, and that he\nyearned for the Church of his baptism. He hinted that he had made\nsome discoveries of the utmost political importance, and that he\nwould communicate them to the King if he could be provided with a\npassport.\n\nClement made inquiries of the superintendent of the Jardin-Royal as\nto the expediency of purchasing the \"Herbal,\" and received a reply\nin the negative.\n\nAymon wrote again, saying little more of the \"Herbal,\" and\ndeveloping his schemes. He said that he had State secrets to confide\nto the Ministers of the Crown, besides which, he volunteered to\ncompose a large and important work on the state of Protestantism,\n\"full of proofs so authentic, and so numerous, that, if given to the\nlight of day, as I purpose, it would probably not only restrain all\nthose who meditate seceding from the Roman Church, but also would\npersuade all those, who are not blinded by their passions, to return\nto the Catholic faith.\"\n\nClement, uncertain what to answer, showed these letters to some\nclergy of his acquaintance, and, acting on their advice, he\npresented them to M. de Pontchartrain, who communicated the proposal\nof Aymon to the King.\n\nA passport was immediately granted, and Aymon left Holland,\nassuring his congregation that he was going for a little while to\nConstantinople on important matters of religion.\n\nOn his arrival in Paris, he presented himself before M. Clement,\nto assure him of the fervour of his zeal and the earnestness of\nhis conversion. Clement received him cordially, and took him to\nVersailles to see M. de Pontchartrain. In this interview Aymon made\ngreat promises of being serviceable to the Church and to the State,\nby the revelations he was about to make; but M. de Pontchartrain\ntreated his protestations very lightly, and handed him over to the\nCardinal de Noailles, Archbishop of Paris.\n\nThe conference with the cardinal was long. The archbishop addressed\na homily to the repentant sinner, who listened with hands crossed\non his breast, his eyes bent to earth, and his cheeks suffused\nwith tears. Aymon sighed forth that he had quitted the camp of the\nAmalekites for ever, and that he was determined to turn against them\ntheir own weapons. Clement, who was present, now stepped forward\nand reminded the prelate that Aymon had abandoned a lucrative\nsituation, at the dictates of conscience, and that though he might,\nof course, expect to be rewarded hereafter, still that remuneration\nin this life would not interfere with these future prospects. The\ncardinal quite approved of this sentiment, and promised to see what\nhe could do for the convert. In the meantime, he wished Aymon to\nspend a retreat in some religious house, where he could meditate on\nthe error of his past life, and expiate, as far as in him lay, his\nlate delinquencies by rigorous penances. Aymon thanked the cardinal\nfor thus, unasked, granting him the request which was uppermost in\nhis thoughts, and then begged to be allowed the use of the Royal\nLibrary, in which to pursue his theological researches, and to\nexamine the documents which were necessary for the execution of his\ndesign of writing a triumphant vindication of the Catholic faith,\nand a complete exposure of the abominations of Protestantism. M.\nClement readily accorded this, at the request of the archbishop, and\nJean Aymon was sent to the seminary of the Missions Etrang\u00e8res.\n\nAymon now appeared as a model penitent. He spent a considerable\npart of the night in prayer before the altar, he was punctual in\nhis attendance on all the public exercises of religion, and his\nconversation, morning, noon, and night, was on the errors and\ndisorders of the Calvinist Church. When not engaged in devotions, he\nwas at the library, where he was indefatigable in his research among\nmanuscripts which could throw light on the subject upon which he was\nengaged. Indeed, his enthusiasm and his zeal for discoveries wearied\nthe assistants. Clement himself was occupied upon the catalogues,\nand was unable to dance attendance on Aymon; and the assistants soon\nlearned to regard him as a bookworm who would keep them on the run,\nsupplying him with fresh materials, if they did not leave him to do\npretty much what he liked.\n\nTime passed, and Aymon heard no more of the reward promised by the\ncardinal. He began to murmur, and to pour his complaints into the\nreluctant ear of Clement, who soon became so tired of hearing them,\nthat the appearance of Aymon's discontented face in the library was\na signal for him to plead business and hurry into another apartment.\nAymon declared that he should most positively publish nothing till\nthe king or the cardinal made up to him the losses he had endured\nby resigning his post in Holland.\n\nAll of a sudden, to Clement's great relief, Aymon disappeared from\nthe library. At first he was satisfied to be freed from him, and\nmade no inquiries; but after a while, hearing that he had also left\nthe Missions Etrang\u00e8res, he made search for the missing man. He was\nnowhere to be found.\n\nAbout this time Aymon's congregation at the Hague were gratified by\nthe return of their pastor, not much bronzed by exposure to the sun\nof Constantinople, certainly, but with his trunks well-stocked with\nvaluable MSS.\n\nA little while after, M. Clement received the following note from a\nFrench agent resident at the Hague:--\n\n\"Information is required relative to a certain Aymon, who says\nthat he was chaplain to M. le Cardinal de Camus, and apostolic\nprotonotary. After having lived some while at the Hague, whither\nhe had come from Switzerland, where he had embraced the so-called\nReformed religion, he disappeared, and it was ascertained that he\nwas at Paris, whither he had taken an Arabic Koran in MS., which\nhe had stolen from a bookseller at the Hague. He has only lately\nreturned, laden with spoils--thefts, one would rather say, which\nhe must have made at Paris, where he has been spending five or\nsix months in some publicity.... He has with him the Acts of the\nlast Council of Jerusalem held by the Greeks on the subject of\nTransubstantiation, and some other documents supposed to be stolen\nfrom the Biblioth\u00e8que du Roi. The man has powerful supporters in\nthis country.--March 10, 1707.\"\n\nThe \"Council of Jerusalem\" was one of the most valuable MSS. of\nthe library--and it was in the hands of Aymon! Clement flew to the\ncabinet where this inestimable treasure was preserved under lock and\nkey. The cabinet was safely enough locked--but alas! the MS. was no\nlonger there.\n\nA few days after, Clement heard that Aymon had crossed the frontier\nwith several heavy boxes, which, on inquiry, proved to be full of\nbooks. What volumes were they? The collections in the Royal Library\nconsisted of 12,500 MSS. The whole had to be gone through. It was\nsoon ascertained that another missing book was the original Italian\ndespatches and letters of Carlo Visconti, Apostolic Nuncio at the\nCouncil of Trent.\n\nThere was no time to be lost. Clement wrote to the Hague to\nclaim the stolen volumes, and to institute legal proceedings for\ntheir recovery, before the collection could be dispersed, and he\nappointed, with full powers, William de Voys, bookseller at the\nHague, to seize the two volumes said to be in the possession of\nAymon.\n\nA little while after some more MSS. volumes were missed; they were\n\"The Italian Letters of Prospero S Croce, Nuncio of Pius IV,\" \"The\nEmbassy of the Bishop of Angoul\u00eame to Rome in 1560-4,\" \"Le Registre\ndes taxes de la Chancellerie Romaine,\" \"Dialogo politico sopra i\ntumulti di Francia,\" nine Chinese MSS., a copy of the Gospels of\nhigh antiquity in uncial characters, another copy of the Gospels,\nno less valuable, and the Epistles of S. Paul, also very ancient.\n\nShortly after this, two Swiss, passing through the Hague, were\nshown by Aymon some MSS. which agreed with those mentioned as lost\nfrom the Royal Library; but besides these, they saw numerous loose\nsheets, inscribed with letters of gold, and apparently belonging to\na MS. of the Bible. Clement had now to go through each MS. in the\nlibrary and find what had been subtracted from them. Fourteen sheets\nwere gone from the celebrated Bible of S. Denys. From the Pauline\nEpistles and Apocalypse, a MS. of the seventh century, and one of\nthe most valuable treasures of the library, thirty-five sheets had\nbeen cut. There were other losses of less importance.\n\nWhilst Clement was making these discoveries, De Voys brought an\naction against Aymon for the recovery of the \"Council of Jerusalem\"\nand the \"Letters of Visconti.\"\n\nJean Aymon was not, however, a man to be despoiled of what he had\nonce got. He knew his position perfectly, and he knew the temper\nof those around him. He was well aware that in order to gain his\ncause he had only to excite popular passion. His judges were enemies\nto both France and Catholicism, he had but to make them believe\nthat a plot was formed against him by French Papists for obtaining\npossession of certain MSS. which he had, and which contained a\nharvest of scandals and revelations overwhelming to Catholics, and\nhe knew that his cause was safe.\n\nHe accordingly published a defence, bearing the following\ntitle:--\"Letter of the Sieur Aymon, Minister of the Holy Gospel, to\nM. N., Professor of Theology, to inform people of honour and savants\nof the extraordinary frauds of certain Papistical doctors and of\nthe vast efforts they are now making, along with some perverted\nProtestants, who are striving together to ruin, by their impostures,\nthe Sieur Aymon, and to deprive him of several MSS., &c.\"--La Haye,\ndated 1707. Aymon in his pamphlet took high moral ground. He was\nnot pleading his own cause. Persecuted, hunted down by Papists, by\nenemies of the Republic and of the religion of Christ, he scorned\ntheir calumnies and despised their rage. He would bow under the\nstorm, he would endure the persecution cheerfully--for \"Blessed\nare those that are persecuted for righteousness' sake;\" but higher\ninterests were at stake than his own fair fame. For himself he cared\nlittle; for the Protestant faith he cared everything. If the Papists\nobtained their suit, they would wrest from his grasp documents most\ncompromising to themselves. They would leave no stone unturned to\nsecure them--they _dare not_ leave them in the hands of a Protestant\npastor. Their story of the \"Acts of the Council of Jerusalem\" was\nfalse. They said that it had been obtained by Olier de Nanteuil,\nAmbassador of France at Constantinople, in 1672, and had been\ntransmitted to Paris, where Arnauld had seen and made use of it in\npreparing his great work on the \"Perpetuity of the Faith.\" They\nfurther said that the Biblioth\u00e8que du Roi had obtained it in 1696.\nOn the other hand, Aymon asserted that Arnauld had falsified the\ntext in his treatise on the \"Perpetuity of the Faith,\" and that,\nnot daring to let his fraud appear, he had never given the MS. to\nthe Royal Library, but had committed it to a Benedictine monk of S.\nMaur, who had assisted him in falsifying it and making an incorrect\ntranslation. This monk would never have surrendered the MS. but\nthat conscience had given him no rest till he had transmitted it to\none who would know how to use it aright. He, Aymon, had solemnly\npromised never to divulge the name of this monk, and even though he\nand the Protestant cause were to suffer for it, that promise should\nbe held sacred. He challenged the library of the King to prove its\nclaim to the \"Council of Jerusalem!\" All books in the Biblioth\u00e8que\ndu Roi have the seal of the library on them. This volume had three\nseals--that of the Sultan, that of the Patriarch of Jerusalem, and\nthat of Olier de Nanteuil; but he defied any one to see the library\nmark on its cover, or on any of its sheets. Aymon wound up his\naudacious pamphlet by prophesying that the Papists of France would\nnot be satisfied with this claim, but would advance many others, for\nthey knew that in his hands were documents of the utmost importance\nto them to conceal. Aymon was too clever for Clement: he had mixed\nup truth with fiction in such a way that the points which Clement\nhad to admit tended to make even those who were not bigoted hesitate\nabout condemning Aymon.\n\nClement replied to this letter by stating the whole story of Aymon's\ndeception of the Cardinal de Noailles and others. With regard to\nthe \"Council of Jerusalem,\" it was false that it had ever been\nin a Benedicient monastery. \"It is true,\" he said, \"that in the\nMonastery of S. Germain-des-Pr\u00e9s there are documents relating to\nthe controversies between the Catholics and Greek schismatics, but\nthey are all in French.\" He produced an attestation, signed by\nthe prior, to the effect that the MS. in question had never been\nwithin the walls of his monastery. Clement was obliged to allow\nthat a Benedictine monk had been employed by Arnauld to translate\nthe text of the Council; he even found him out, his name was Michel\nFoucqu\u00e8re; he was still alive, and the librarian made him affirm\nin writing that he had restored the volume, on the completion of\nhis translation, to Dom Luc d'Achery. Clement sent a copy of the\nregister in the library, which related how and when the volume had\ncome into the possession of the King. It was true that it bore no\nlibrary seal, but that was through an oversight.\n\nAymon wrote a second pamphlet, exposing Clement more completely,\npointing out the concessions he was obliged to make, and finally,\nin indignant terms, hurling back on him the base assertion made to\ninjure him in the eyes of an enlightened Protestant public, that he\nhad ever treated with the government or clergy of Paris relative to\na secession to the ranks of Popery. But that he had been to Paris;\nthat he had met the Cardinal Archbishop, he admitted; but on what\nground? He had met him and twenty-four prelates besides, gathered in\nsolemn conclave, and had lifted up his voice in testimony against\nthem; had disputed with them, and, with the Word of God in his\nmouth, had put them all to silence! No idea of his ever leaving\nthe reformed faith had ever entered his head. No! he had been on a\nmission to the Papists of France, to open their eyes and to convert\nthem.\n\nThe news of the robbery had, however, reached the ears of the King,\nLouis XIV., and he instructed M. de Torcy to demand on the part of\nGovernment the restitution of the stolen MSS. M. de Torcy first\nwrote to a M. Hennequin at Rotterdam, who replied that Aymon had\njustified himself before the Council of State from the imputations\ncast upon him. He had been interrogated, not upon the theft\ncommitted in Paris, but on his journey to France. Aymon had proved\nthat this expedition had been undertaken with excellent intentions,\nand had been attended with supreme success, since he had returned\nladen with manuscripts the publication of which would cause the\ngreatest confusion in the Catholic camp. Hennequin added, that after\nhaving been deprived of his stipend, as suspected, on it having been\nascertained that he had visited Paris instead of Constantinople,\nAymon, having cleared his character, had recovered it. Such was the\nfirst result of the intervention of Louis XIV. in this affair.\n\n\"The stamp of the Royal Library is on all the MSS., except the\n'Council of Jerusalem,'\" said Clement. \"Let the judges insist on\nexamining the books in the possession of Aymon, and all doubt as to\nthe theft will be removed.\"\n\nBut this the judges refused to do.\n\nIt was pretended that Aymon was persecuted; it was the duty of the\nNetherland Government to protect a subject from persecution. He had\nmade discovries, and the Catholics dreaded the publication of his\ndiscoveries, therefore a deep plot had been laid to ruin him.\n\nAymon had now formed around him a powerful party, and the Calvinist\npreachers took his side unanimously. It was enough to read the\ntitles of the books stolen to be certain that they contained curious\ndetails on the affairs which agitated Catholics and Protestants from\nthe sixteenth century.\n\nAll that the Dutch authorities cared for now was to find some excuse\nfor retaining these important papers, and the inquiry was mainly\ndirected to the proceedings of Aymon in France. If, as it was said,\nhe had gone thither to abjure Calvinism and betray his brethren, he\ndeserved reprimand, but if, on the other hand, he had penetrated the\ncamp of the enemy to defy it, and to witness a good confession in\nthe heart of the foe, he deserved a crown. Clement, to display Aymon\nin his true colours, acting on the advice of the Minister, sent\ncopies of Aymon's letters. It was not thought that the good faith\nof the French administration would be doubted. Aymon swore that the\nletters were not his own, but that they had been fabricated by the\nGovernment; and he offered to stake his head on the truth of what he\nsaid. At the same time he dared De Torcy to produce the originals.\n\nHe had guessed aright: he knew exactly how far he could go. The\nDutch court actually questioned the good faith of these copies, and\ndemanded the originals. This, as Aymon had expected, was taken by De\nTorcy as an insult, and all further communication on the subject\nwas abruptly stopped. It was a clever move of Aymon. He inverted by\none bold stroke the relative positions of himself and his accuser:\nthe judges at the Hague required M. de Torcy to re-establish his own\nhonour before proceeding with the question of Aymon's culpability.\nIn short, they supposed that one of the Ministers of the Crown, for\nthe sake of ruining a Protestant refugee, had deliberately committed\nforgery.\n\nThe matter was dropped. After a while Aymon published translations\nof some of the MSS. in his possession, and those who had expected\ngreat results were disappointed. In the meantime poor Clement died,\nheart-broken at the losses of the library committed to his care.\n\nAt last the Dutch Government, after the publication of Aymon's book,\nand after renewed negotiation, restored the \"Council of Jerusalem\"\nto the Biblioth\u00e8que du Roi. It still bears traces of the mutilations\nand additions of Aymon.\n\nIn 1710, the imposter published the letters of Prospero S. Croce,\nwhich he said he had copied in the Vatican, but which he had in fact\nstolen from the Royal Library. In 1716 he published other stolen\npapers. Clement was succeeded by the Abb\u00e9 de Targny, who made vain\nattempts to recover the lost treasures. The Abb\u00e9 Bignon succeeded\nDe Targny, and he discovered fresh losses. Aymon had stolen Arabic\nbooks as well as Greek and Italian MSS. There was no chance of\nrecovering the lost works through the courts of law, and Bignon\ncontented himself with writing to Holland, England, and Germany to\ninquire whether any of the MSS. had been bought there.\n\nThe Baron von Stocks wrote to say that he had purchased some leaves\nof the Epistles of S. Paul, some pages of the S. Denis Bible, and an\nArabic volume from Aymon for a hundred florins, and that he would\nreturn them to the library for that sum. They were recovered in\nMarch, 1720.\n\nAbout the same time Mr. Bentley, librarian to the King of England,\nannounced that some more of the pages from the Epistles of S. Paul\nwere in Lord Harley's library; and that the Duke of Sunderland had\npurchased various MSS. at the Hague from Aymon. In giving this\ninformation to the Abb\u00e9 Bignon, Mr. Bentley entreated him not to\nmention the source of his information. M. de Boz\u00e9 thereupon resolved\nto visit England and endeavour to recover the MSS. But he was\ndetained by various causes.\n\nIn 1729, Earl Middleton offered, on the part of Lord Harley, to\nreturn the thirty-four leaves of the Epistles in his possession,\nasking only in return an acknowledgment sealed with the grand seal.\nCardinal Fleury, finding that the Royal signature could hardly be\nemployed for such a purpose, wrote in the King's name a letter to\nthe Earl of Oxford of a flattering nature, and the lost MSS. were\nrestored in September, 1729.\n\nThose in the Sunderland collection have not, I believe, been\nreturned.\n\nAnd what became of Aymon? In 1718 he inhabited the Chateau of\nRiswyck. Thence he sent to the brothers Wetstein, publishers at\nAmsterdam, the proofs of his edition of the letters of Visconti.\nIt appeared in 1719 in two 12mo volumes, under the title \"Lettres,\nAnecdotes, et M\u00e9moires historiques du nonce Visconti, Cardinel\nPr\u00e9conis\u00e9 et Ministre Secret de Pie IV. et de ses cr\u00e9atures.\" The\ndate of his death is not known.\n\n     Authority: Haur\u00e9au, J. Singularit\u00e9s Historiques et Lit\u00e9raires.\n     Paris, 1881.\n\n\n\n\nThe Patarines of Milan.\n\n\nI.\n\nIn the eleventh century, nearly all the clergy in the north of Italy\nwere married.[7] It was the same in Sicily, and it had been the same\nin Rome,[8] but there the authority and presence of the Popes had\nsufficed to convert open marriage into secret concubinage.\n\n  [7] \"Cuncti fere cum publicis uxoribus ... ducebant vitam.\" \"Et\n  ipsi, ut cernitur, sicut laici, palam uxores ducunt.\"--_Andr.\n  Strum. \"Vit. Arialdi.\"_ \"Quis clericorum non esset uxoratus vel\n  concubinarius?\"--_Andr. Strum. \"Vit. S. Joan. Gualberti.\"_\n\n  [8] \"Coeperunt ipsi presbyteri et diacones laicorum more uxores\n  ducere suscepsosque filios h\u00e6redes relinquere. Nonnulli etiam\n  episcoporum verecund \u00e2 omni contempt\u00e2, cum uxoribus domo simul in\n  un\u00e2 habitare.\"--_Victor Papa \"in Dialog.\"_\n\nBut concubinage did not in those times mean exactly what it means\nnow. A _concubina_ was an _uxor_ in an inferior degree; the woman\nwas married in both cases with the ring and religious rite, but the\nchildren of the concubine could not inherit legally the possessions\nof their father. When priests were without wives, concubines were\ntolerated wives without the legal status of wives, lest on the death\nof the priest his children should claim and alienate to their own\nuse property belonging to the Church. In noble and royal families\nit was sometimes the same, lest estates should be dismembered. On\nthe death of a wife, her place was occupied by a concubine, and\nthe sons of the latter could not dispute inheritance with the sons\nof the former. Nor did the Church look sternly on the concubine.\nIn the first Toledian Council a canon was passed with regard to\ncommunicating those who had one wife or one concubine;--such were\nnot to be excluded from the Lord's Table,[9] so long only as each\nman had but one wife or concubine, and the union was perpetual.\n\n  [9] \"Qui unius mulieris, aut uxoris, aut concubin\u00e6 (ut ei\n  placuerit) sit conjunctione contentus.\"--1st Conc. of Toledo,\n  can. 17. \"H\u00e6 quippe, licet nec uxoribus, nec Reginarum decore\n  et privilegiis gaudebant, erant tamen ver\u00e6 uxores,\" say the\n  Bollandist Fathers, and add, that it is a vulgar error \"Concubin\u00e6\n  appellationem solis iis tribuere, qu\u00e6 corporis sui usum uni viro\n  commodant, nullo interim legitimo nexu devinct\u00e6.\"--Acta SS., Jun.\n  T. L. p. 178.\n\nBut, though concubinage was universal among the clergy in Italy, at\nMilan the priests openly, boldly claimed for their wives a position\nas honourable as could be accorded them; and they asserted without\nfear of contradiction that their privilege had received the sanction\nof the great Ambrose himself. Married bishops had been common, and\nsaintly married prelates not unknown. St. Severus of Ravenna had a\nwife and daughter, and though the late biographer asserts that he\nlived with his wife as with a sister after he became a bishop, this\nstatement is probably made to get over an awkward fact.[10] When he\nwas about to die, he went to the tomb where his wife and daughter\nlay, and had the stone removed. Then he addressed them thus--\"My\ndear ones, with whom I lived so long in love, make room for me, for\nthis is my grave, and in death we shall not be divided.\" Thereupon\nhe descended into the grave, laid himself between his wife and\ndaughter, and died. St. Heribert, Archbishop of Milan, had been a\nmarried man with a wife esteemed for her virtues.[11]\n\n  [10] It is the same with St. Gregory, Nyssen, Baronius, Alban,\n  Butler, and other modern Hagiographers make this assertion\n  boldly, but there is not a shadow of evidence, in any ancient\n  authorities for his life, that this was the case.\n\n  [11] \"Hic Archiepiscopus habuit uxorem nobilem mulierem; qu\u00e6\n  donavit dotem suam monasterii S. Dionysii, qu\u00e6 usque hodie Uxoria\n  dicitur.\"--_Calvaneus Fiamma, sub ann. 1040._\n\nBy all accounts, friendly and hostile, the Lombard priests were\nmarried openly, legally, with religious rite, exchange of ring, and\nnotarial deed. There was no shame felt, no supposition entertained\nthat such was an offence.[12]\n\n  [12] \"Nec vos terreat,\" writes St. Peter Damiani to the wives of\n  the clergy \"quod forte, non dicam fidei, sed perfidi\u00e6 vos annulus\n  subarrhavit; quod rata et monimenta dotalia notarius quasi\n  matrimonii jure conscripserit: quod juramentum ad confirmandam\n  quodammodo conjugii copulam utrinque processit. Ignorantes quia\n  pro uniuscujusque fugaci voluptate concubitus mlle annorum\n  negotiantur incendium.\"\n\nHow was this inveterate custom to be broken through? How the open,\nhonest marriage to be perverted into clandestine union? For to\nabolish it wholly was beyond the power of the Popes and Councils. It\nwas in vain to appeal to the bishops, they sympathised with their\nclergy. It was in vain to invoke the secular arm; the emperors,\nthe podestas, supported the parish-priests in their contumacious\nadherence to immemorial privilege.\n\nTo carry through the reform on which they were bent, to utterly\nabolish the marriage of the clergy, the appeal must be made to the\npeople.\n\nIn Milan this was practicable, for the laity, at least the lower\nrabble, were deeply tinged with Patarinism, and bore a grudge\nagainst the clergy, who had been foremost in bringing the luckless\nheretics to the rack and the flames; and one of the most cherished\ndoctrines of the Patarines was the unlawfulness of marriage. What\nif this anti-connubial prejudice could be enlisted by the strict\nreformers of the Church, and turned to expend its fury on the clergy\nwho refused to listen to the expostulations of the Holy Father?\n\nThe Patarines, whom the Popes were about to enlist in their cause\nagainst the Ambrosian clergy, already swarmed in Italy. Of their\norigin and tenets we must say a word.\n\nIt is a curious fact that, instead of Paganism affecting\nChristianity in the earliest ages of the Church, it was Christianity\nwhich affected Paganism, and that not the Greek and Roman idolatry,\nwhich was rotten through and through, but the far subtler and more\nmystical heathenism of Syria, Egypt, Persia, and Mesopotamia.\nThe numerous Gnostic sects, so called from their claim to be the\npossessors of the true _gnosis_, or knowledge of wisdom, were not,\nsave in the rarest cases, of Christian origin. They were Pagan\nphilosophical schools which had adopted and incorporated various\nChristian ideas. They worked up Biblical names and notions into the\nstrange new creeds they devised, and, according as they blended\nmore or less of Christian teaching with their own, they drew to\nthemselves disciples of various tempers. Manes, who flourished in\nthe middle of the third century, a temporary and nominal convert\nto the Gospel, blended some of these elder Gnostic systems with\nthe Persian doctrines of Zoroaster, added to a somewhat larger\nelement of Christianity than his predecessors had chosen to adopt.\nHis doctrines spread and gained an extensive and lasting hold on\nthe minds of men, suppressed repeatedly, but never disappearing\nwholly, adopting fresh names, emerging in new countries, exhibiting\nan irrepressible vitality, which confounded the Popes and Churchmen\nfrom the third to the tenth centuries.\n\nThe tradition of Western Manicheism breaks off about the sixth\ncentury; but in the East, under the name of Paulicians, the\nadherents of Manichean doctrines endured savage persecutions during\ntwo whole centuries, and spread, as they fled from the sword and\nstake in the East, over Europe, entering it in two streams--one by\nBulgaria, Servia, and Croatia, to break out in the wild fanaticism\nof the Taborites under Zisca of the Flail; the other, by way of the\nsea, inundating northern Italy and Provence. In Piedmont it obtained\nthe name of Patarinism; in Provence, of Albigensianism.\n\nWith Oriental Manicheism, the Patarines and Albigenses of the West\nheld that there were two co-equal conflicting principles of good and\nevil; that matter was eternal, and waged everlasting war against\nspirit. Their moral life was strict and severe. They fasted, dressed\nin coarse clothing, and hardly, reluctantly suffered marriage to the\nweaker, inferior disciples. It was absolutely forbidden to those\nwho were, or esteemed themselves to be, perfect.\n\nAlready, in Milan, St Heribert, the married archbishop, had kindled\nfires, and cast these denouncers of wedlock into them. In 1031 the\nheretics held the castle of Montforte, in the diocese of Asti. They\nwere questioned: they declared themselves ready to witness to their\nfaith by their blood. They esteemed virginity, and lived in chastity\nwith their wives, never touched meat, and prayed incessantly. They\nhad their goods in common. Their castle stood a siege. It was at\nlength captured by the Archbishop. In the market-place were raised\na cross on one side, a blazing pyre on the other. The Patarines\nwere brought forth, commanded to cast themselves before the cross,\nconfess themselves to be heretics, or plunge into the flames. A few\nknelt to the cross; the greater number covered their faces, rushed\ninto the fire, and were consumed.[13]\n\n  [13] Landulf Sen. ii. c. 27.\n\nSt. Augustine, in his book on Heresies, had already described these\nheretics. He, who had been involved in the fascinating wiles of\nManicheism, could not be ignorant of them. He calls them Paternians,\nor Venustians, and says that they regarded the flesh as the work of\nthe devil--that is, of the evil principle, because made of matter.\n\nIn the eleventh century, in Lombardy, they are called Patarines,\nPatrins, or Cathari. Muratori says that they derived their name\nfrom the part of the town of Milan in which they swarmed, near the\nContrada di Patari; but it is more probable that the quarter was\ncalled after them.\n\nIn 1074 Gregory VII. in solemn conclave will bless them altogether,\nby name, as the champions of the Holy See, and of the Truth; in\n1179 Alexander III. will anathematise them altogether, as heretics\nmeet to be burned. Frederick II., when seeking reconciliation with\nHonorius III. and Gregory IX., will be never weary of offering\nhecatombs of Patarines, in token of his orthodoxy.\n\nAriald, a native of Cuzago, a village near Milan, of ignoble birth,\nin deacon's orders, was chosen for the dangerous expedient of\nenlisting the Patarine heretics against the orthodox but relaxed\nclergy of that city. Milan, said a proverb, was famous for its\nclergy; Ravenna for its churches. In morals, in learning, in exact\nobservance of their religious duties, the clergy of Milan were\nprominent among the priests of Lombardy. But they were all married.\nThe Popes could expect no support from the Archbishop, Guido\nVavasour; none from the Emperor Henry IV., then a child. Ariald\nwas a woman-hater from infancy, deeply tinged with Patarinism. We\nare told that even as a little boy the sight of his sisters was\nodious to him.[14] He began to preach in Milan in 1057, and the\npopulace was at once set on fire[15] by his sermons. They applauded\nvociferously his declaration that the married clergy were no longer\nto be treated as priests, but as \"the enemies of God, and the\ndeceivers of souls.\"\n\n  [14] For authorities we have Andrew of Vallombrosa, _d._ A.D.\n  1170, a disciple of Ariald. He was a native of Parma. He\n  afterwards went to Florence, where he was mixed up with the riots\n  occasioned by St. John Gualberto in 1063. He joined the Order of\n  Vallombrosa, and became Abbot of Strumi. At least, I judge, and\n  so do the Bollandists, that Andrew of Vallombrosa and Andrew of\n  Strumi are the same.\n\n  [15] \"Plebs fere universa sic est accensa.\"\n\nThen up rose from among the mob a clerk named Landulf, a man of\nloud voice and vehement gesture, and offered to join Ariald in his\ncrusade. The crowd, or, at least, a part of it, enthusiastically\ncheered; another part of the audience, disapproving, deeming it an\nexplosion of long-suppressed Manicheism, which would meet with stern\nrepression, thought it prudent to withdraw.\n\nA layman of fortune, named Nazarius, offered his substance to\nadvance the cause, and his house as a harbour for its apostles.\n\nThe sermon was followed by a tumult. The whole city was in an\nuproar, and the married clergy were threatened or maltreated by\nthe mob. Guido Vavasour de Velati, the Archbishop, was obliged\nto interfere. He summoned Ariald and Landulf before him, and\nremonstrated. \"It is unseemly for a priest to denounce priests. It\nis impolitic for him to stir up tumult against his brethren. Let\nnot brothers condemn brothers, for whose salvation Christ died.\"\nThen turning to Landulf, \"Why do not you return to your own wife and\nchildren whom you have deserted, and live with them as heretofore,\nand set an example of peace and order? Cast the beam out of thine\nown eye, before thou pluckest motes out of the eyes of thy brethren.\nIf they have done wrong, reprove them privately, but do not storm\nagainst them before all the people.\" He concluded by affirming the\nlawfulness of priests marrying, and insisted on the cessation of\nthe contest.[16] Ariald obstinately refused to desist. \"Private\nexpostulation is in vain. As for obstinate disorders you apply fire\nand steel, so for this abuse we must have recourse to desperate\nremedies.\"\n\n  [16] \"H\u00e6c cum Guido placide dixisset; eo finem orationis dixerit,\n  ut sacerdotibus fas esset dicere uxores ducere.\"--_Alicatus,\n  \"Vit. Arialdi.\"_\n\nHe left the Archbishop to renew his appeals to the people. But\ndreading lest Guido should use force to restrain him, Ariald invoked\nthe support of Anselm de Badagio, Bishop of Lucca, and received\npromise of his countenance and advocacy at Rome.\n\nGuido Vavasour had succeeded the married Archbishop Heribert in\n1040. His election had not satisfied the people, who had chosen,\nand proposed for consecration, four priests, one of whom the nobles\nwere expected to select. But the nobles rejected the popular\ncandidates, and set up in their place Guido Vavasour, and his\nnomination was ratified by the Emperor and by the Pope. He was\nafterwards, as we shall see, charged with having bribed Henry III.\nto give him the See, but was acquitted of the charge, which was\ndenounced as unfounded by Leo IX. in 1059. The people, in token\nof their resentment, refused to be present at the first mass he\nsang. \"He is a country bumpkin,\" said they. \"Faugh! he smells of\nthe cow-house.\"[17] Consequently there was simmering discontent\nagainst the Archbishop for Ariald to work upon; he could unite the\nlower people, whose wishes had been disregarded by the nobles, with\nthe Patarines, who had been haled before ecclesiastical courts for\ntheir heresy, in one common insurrection against the clergy and the\npontiff.\n\n  [17] Arnulf., Gesta Archiepisc. Mediol. ap. Pertz, x. p. 17.\n\nAccording to Landulf the elder, a strong partisan of the Archbishop,\nanother element of discontent was united to those above enumerated.\nThe clergy of Milan had oppressed the country people. The Church had\nestates outside of Milan, vine and olive yards and corn-fields. The\nclergy had been harsh in exacting feudal rights and legal dues.\n\nAriald, as a native of a country village, knew the temper of the\npeasants, and their readiness to resent these extortions. Ariald\nworked upon the country-folk; Landulf, rich and noble, and eloquent\nin speech, on the town rabble; and the two mobs united against the\ncommon enemy.\n\nAnselm de Badagio, priest and popular preacher at Milan, had been\nmixed up with Landulf and Ariald in the controversy relative to\nclerical marriage; but to stop his mouth the Archbishop had given\nhim the bishopric of Lucca, in 1057, and had supplied his place\nas preacher at Milan by seven deacons. Landulf the elder relates\nthat these deacons preached with such success that Anselm, in a\nfit of jealousy, returned to Milan to listen to their sermons, and\nscornfully exclaimed, \"They may become preachers, but they must\nfirst put away their wives.\"\n\nAccording to the same authority, Ariald bore a grudge against the\nArchbishop for having had occasion to rebuke him on account of some\nirregularity of which he had been guilty. But Landulf the elder is\nnot to be trusted implicitly; he is as bigoted on one side as is\nAndrew of Strumi on the other.\n\nIn the meantime the priests and their wives were exposed to every\nsort of violence, and \"a great horror fell on the Ambrosian clergy.\"\nThe poor women were torn from their husbands, and driven from the\ncity; the priests who refused to be separated from their companions\nwere interdicted from the altar.[18]\n\n  [18] \"Sic ab eodem populo sunt persecuta et deleta (clericorum\n  connubia) ut nullus existeret quin aut cogeretur tantum nefas\n  dimittere, vel ad altare non accedere.\"--_Andr. Strum._\n\nLandulf was sent to Rome to report progress, and obtain confirmation\nof the proceedings of the party from the Pope. He reached Piacenza,\nbut was unable to proceed farther; he was knocked down, and finding\nthe way barred by the enemies of his party, returned to Milan.\nAriald then started, and eluding his adversaries, arrived safely at\nRome. He presented himself before Pope Stephen X., who was under the\ninfluence of Hildebrand, and, therefore, disposed to receive him\nwith favour. Stephen bade him return to Milan, prosecute the holy\nwar, and, if need be, shed his blood in the sacred cause.\n\nThe appeal to Rome was necessary, as the Archbishop and a large\nparty of the citizens, together with all the clergy, had denounced\nAriald and Landulf as Patarines. The fact was notorious that the\nsecret and suspected Manichees in Milan were now holding up their\nheads and defying those who had hitherto controlled them. The\nManichees suddenly found that from proscribed heretics they had\nbeen exalted into champions of orthodoxy. It was a satisfactory\nchange for those who had been persecuted to become persecutors, and\nturn their former tyrants into victims. But now, to the confusion\nand dismay of the clergy, they found themselves betrayed by the\nPope, and at the mercy of those who had old wrongs to resent.\nFortified with the blessing of the Pope on his work, his orthodoxy\ntriumphantly established by the supreme authority, Ariald rushed\nback to Milan, accompanied by papal legates to protect him,\nand proclaim his mission as divine. He was unmeasured in his\ndenunciations. Dissension fast ripened into civil war. Ariald, at\nthe head of a roaring mob, swept the clergy together into a church,\nand producing a paper which bound all of them by oath to put away\ntheir wives, endeavoured to enforce their subscription.\n\nA priest, maddened to resentment, struck the demagogue in the mouth.\nThis was the signal for a general tumult. The adherents of Ariald\nrushed through the streets, the alarm bells pealed, the populace\ngathered from all quarters, and a general hunting down of the\nmarried clergy ensued.\n\n\"How can the blind lead the blind?\" preached Landulf Cotta. \"Let\nthese Simoniacs, these Nicolaitans be despised. You who wish to have\nsalvation from the Lord, drive them from their functions; esteem\ntheir sacrifices as dogs' dung (_canina stercora_)! Confiscate their\ngoods, and every one of you take what he likes![19] We can imagine\nthe results of such license given to the lowest rabble. The nobles,\nover-awed, dared not interfere.\n\n  [19] Arnulf., _Gesta Ep. Mediol._ ap. Pertz, x. p. 18. It is\n  necessary not to confound Landulf Cotta, the demagogue, with\n  Landulf the elder, the historian, and Landulf the younger, the\n  disciple and biographer of Ariald.\n\nNor were the clergy of the city alone exposed to this popular\npersecution. The preachers roved round the country, creating riots\neverywhere. This led to retaliation, but retaliation of a feeble,\nharmless sort. A chapel built by Ariald on his paternal estate was\npulled down; and the married clergy resentfully talked of barking\nhis chestnut trees and breaking down his vines, but thought better\nof it, and refrained.\n\nA more serious attempt at revenge was the act of a private\nindividual. Landulf Cotta was praying in a church, when a priest\naimed at him with a sword, but without seriously hurting him. A\ncripple at the church door caught the flying would-be assassin; a\ncrowd assembled, and Landulf with difficulty extricated the priest\nalive from their hands.\n\nAriald and Cotta now began to denounce those who had bought their\ncures of souls, or had paid fees on their institution to them. They\nstimulated the people to put down simony, as they had put down\nconcubinage. \"Cursed is he that withholdeth his hand from blood!\"\nwas the fiery peroration of a sermon on this subject by Ariald.\n\n\"Landulf Cotta,\" says Arnulf, \"being master of the lay folk, made\nthem swear to combat both simony and concubinage. Presently he\nforced this oath on the clergy. From this time forward he was\nconstantly followed by a crowd of men and women, who watched around\nhim night and day. He despised the churches, and rejected priests\nas well as their functions, under pretext that they were defiled\nwith simony. They were called Patari, that is to say, beggars,\nbecause the greater part of them belonged to the lowest orders.\"[20]\n\n  [20] Ap. Pertz, l.c., pp. 19, 20.\n\n\"What shall we do?\" asked a large party at Milan. \"This Ariald\ntells us that if we receive the Holy Sacrament from married or\nsimoniacal priests, we eat our own damnation. We cannot live without\nsacraments, and he has driven all the priests out of Milan.\"\n\nThe parties were so divided, that those who held with Ariald would\nnot receive sacraments from the priests, the heavenly gift on their\naltars they esteemed as \"dogs' dung;\" they would not even join with\nthem, or those who adhered to them, in prayer. \"One house was all\nfaithful,\" says Andrew of Strumi; \"the next all unfaithful. In the\nthird, the mother and one son were believing, but the father and the\nother son were unbelieving; so that the whole city was a scene of\nconfusion and contention.\"\n\nIn 1058 Guido assembled a synod at Fontanetum near Novara,\nand summoned Ariald and Landulf Cotta to attend it. The synod\nawaited their arrival for three days, and as they did not come,\nexcommunicated them as contumacious.\n\nLandulf the younger, the biographer of Ariald, says that Pope\nStephen X. reversed the sentence of the synod; but this account\ndoes not agree with what is related by Arnulf. Landulf the elder\nconfounds the dates, and places the synod in the reign of Alexander\nII., and says that the Pope adopted a middle course, and sent\nambassadors to Milan to investigate the matter. Bonizo of Sutri says\nthe same. All agree that Hildebrand was one of these commissioners.\nHildebrand was therefore able to judge on the spot of the results\nof an appeal to the passions of the people. It is the severest\ncondemnation to his conduct in 1073, to know for certain that he had\nseen the working of the power he afterwards called out. He then saw\nhow great was that power; he must have been cruelly, recklessly,\nwickedly indifferent to the crimes which accompanied its invocation.\nLandulf the elder says that the second commissary was Anselm of\nLucca, whilst Bonizo speaks indifferently of the \"bishops _a\nlatere_\" as constituting the deputation. Guido was not in Milan when\nit arrived, he did not dare to venture his person in the midst of\nthe people. The ambassadors were received with the utmost respect;\nthey took on themselves to brand the Archbishop as a simoniac and a\nschismatic, and, according to Landulf, to do many other things which\nthey were not authorised by the Pope to do; so that the dissension,\nso far from being allayed by their visit, only waxed more furious.\n\nAt the end of the year 1058, or the beginning of 1059, the Pope\nsent Peter Damiani, the harsh Bishop of Ostia, and Anselm, Bishop\nof Lucca, on a new embassy to Milan.[21] They were received with\nrespect by the Archbishop and clergy; but the pride of the Milanese\nof all ranks was wounded by seeing the Bishop of Ostia enthroned in\nthe middle, with Anselm of Lucca, the suffragan of Milan, upon his\nright, and their Archbishop degraded to the left of the Legate, and\nseated on a stool at his feet. Milan assembled at the ringing of the\nbells in all the churches, and the summons of an enormous brazen\ntrumpet which shrieked through the streets. The fickle people asked\nif the Church of St. Ambrose was to be trodden under the foot of the\nRoman Pontiff. \"I was threatened with death,\" wrote Peter Damiani to\nHildebrand, \"and many assured me that there were persons panting for\nmy blood. It is not necessary for me to repeat all the remarks the\npeople made on this occasion.\"\n\n  [21] We have a full account of this embassy in a letter of St.\n  Peter Damiani to the Archdeacon Hildebrand (Petri Dam. _Opp._\n  iii; _Opusc._ v. p. 37), besides the accounts by Bonizo, Arnulf,\n  and Landulf the elder.\n\nBut Peter Damiani was not the man to be daunted at a popular\noutbreak. He placidly mounted the ambone, and asserted boldly the\nsupreme jurisdiction of the chair of St. Peter. \"The Roman Church\nis the mother, that of Ambrose is the daughter. St. Ambrose always\nrecognised that mistress. Study the sacred books, and hold us as\nliars, if you do not find that it is as I have said.\"\n\nThen the charges against the clergy were investigated by the\nlegates, and not a single clerk in Milan was found who had not paid\na fee on his ordination; \"for that was the custom, and the charge\nwas fixed,\" says the Bishop of Ostia. Here was a difficulty. He\ncould not deprive every priest and deacon in Milan, and leave the\ngreat city without pastors. He was therefore obliged to content\nhis zeal with exacting from the bishops a promise that ordination\nin future should be made gratuitously; and the Archbishop was\nconstrained to deposit on the altar a paper in which he pronounced\nhis own excommunication, in the event of his relaxing his rigour\nin suppressing the heresy of the Simoniacs and Nicolaitans, by\nwhich latter name those who insisted on the lawfulness of clerical\nmarriage were described.\n\nTo make atonement for the past, the Archbishop was required to\ndo penance for one hundred years, but to pay money into the\npapal treasury in acquittal of each year; which, to our simple\nunderstanding, looks almost as scandalous a traffic as imposing a\nfee on all clergy ordained. But then, in the one case the money went\ninto the pocket of the bishops, and in the other into that of the\nPope.\n\nThe clergy who had paid a certain sum were to be put to penance for\nfive years; those who had paid more, for ten (also to be compensated\nby a payment to Rome!), and to make pilgrimages to Rome or Tours.\nAfter having accomplished this penance they were to receive again\nthe insignia of their offices.\n\nThen Peter Damiani re-imposed on the clergy the oaths forced on them\nby Ariald, and departed.\n\nThe Milanese contemporary historian, Arnulf, exclaims, \"Who has\nbewitched you, ye foolish Milanese? Yesterday you made loud\noutcries for the priority of a see, and now you trouble the whole\norganisation of the Church. You are gnats swallowing camels. You\nsay, perhaps, Rome must be honoured because of the Apostle. Well,\nbut the memory of St. Ambrose should deliver Milan from such an\naffront as has been inflicted on her. In future it will be said\nthat Milan is subject to Rome.\"[22]\n\n  [22] Pertz, x. p. 21.\n\nGuido attended a council held in Rome (April 1059), shortly after\nthis visitation. Ariald also was present, to accuse the Archbishop\nof favouring simony and concubinage. The legates had dealt too\nleniently with the scandal. Guido was defended by his suffragans of\nAsti, Novara, Turin, Vercelli, Alba, Lodi, and Brescia. \"Mad bulls,\nthey,\" says Bonizo; and Ariald was forced to retire, covered with\nconfusion. The Council pronounced a decree that no mercy should be\nshown to the simoniacal and married clergy.[23] An encyclical was\naddressed by Nicholas II. to all Christendom, informing it that the\nCouncil had passed thirteen canons, one of which prevented a layman\nfrom assisting at a mass said by a priest who had a concubine or a\n_subintroducta mulier_. Priests, deacons, and sub-deacons who should\ntake \"publicly\" a concubine, or not send away those with whom they\nlived, were to be inhibited from exercising all ministerial acts and\nreceiving ecclesiastical dues.\n\n  [23] \"Nulla misericordia habenda est.\"\n\nOn the return of the bishops to their sees, one only of them,\nAdelmann of Brescia, ventured to publish these decrees. He was\nnearly torn to pieces by his clergy; an act of violence which\ngreatly furthered the cause of the Patarines.[24]\n\n  [24] Bonizo. It is deserving of remark that Bonizo, an ardent\n  supporter of Hildebrand and the reforming party, calls that Papal\n  party by the name of _Patari_, thus showing that it was really\n  made up of the Manichean heretics.\n\nIn the same year Pope Nicholas sent legates into different countries\nto execute, or attempt to execute, the decrees passed against simony\nand concubinage--as clerical marriage was called. Peter Damiani\ntravelled through several cities of Italy to exhort the clergy to\ncelibacy, and especially to press this matter on the bishops. Peter\nDamiani was not satisfied with the conduct of the Pope in assuming\na stern attitude towards the priests, but overlooking the fact that\nthe bishops were themselves guilty of the same offence. A letter\nfrom him to the Pope exists, in which he exhorts him to be a second\nPhinehas (Numb. xxv. 7), and deal severely with the bishops, without\nwhich no real reform could be affected.[25]\n\n  [25] _Opp._ t. iii.; _Opusc._ xiii. p. 188.\n\nAnselm de Badagio, Bishop of Lucca, the instigator of Landulf and\nAriald, or at least their staunch supporter, was summoned on the\ndeath of Nicholas to occupy the throne of St. Peter, under the title\nof Alexander II. But his election was contested, and Cadalus, an\nanti-Pope, was chosen by a Council of German and Lombard prelates\nassembled at Basle. The contests which ensued between the rival\nPontiffs and their adherents distracted attention from the question\nof clerical marriage, and the clergy recalled their wives.\n\nIn 1063, in Florence, similar troubles occurred. The instigator of\nthese was St. John Gualberto, founder of the Vallombrosian Order.\nThe offence there was rather simony than concubinage.\n\nThe custom of giving fees to those who appointed to benefices\nhad become inveterate, and in many cases had degenerated into the\npurchase of them. A Pope could not assume the tiara without a lavish\nlargess to the Roman populace. A bishop could not grasp his pastoral\nstaff without paying heavy sums to the Emperor and to the Pope. The\nformer payment was denounced as simony, the latter was exacted as\nan obligation. But under some of the Emperors the bishoprics were\nsold to the highest bidder. What was customary on promotion to a\nbishopric became customary on acceptance of lesser benefices, and no\npriest could assume a spiritual charge without paying a bounty to\nthe episcopal treasury. When a bishop had bought his throne, he was\nrarely indisposed to sell the benefices in his gift, and to recoup\na scandalous outlay by an equally scandalous traffic. The Bishop\nof Florence was thought by St. John Gualberto to have bought the\nsee. He was a Pavian, Peter Mediabardi. His father came to Florence\nto visit his son. The Florentines took advantage of the unguarded\nsimplicity of the old man to extract the desired secret from him.[26]\n\n  [26] \"Cui Florentini clam insidiantes tentando dicere coeperunt,\"\n  &c.... \"ille utpote simplicissimus homo coepit jurejurando\n  dicere,\" &c.--_Andrew of Genoa_, c. 62.\n\n\"Master Teulo,\" said they, \"had you a large sum to pay to the King\nfor your son's elevation?\"\n\n\"By the body of St. Syrus,\" answered the father, \"you cannot get a\nmillstone out of the King's house without paying for it.\"\n\n\"Then what did you pay?\" asked the Florentines greedily.[27]\n\n  [27] \"Alacres et avidi rem scisitari.\"\n\n\"By the body of St. Syrus!\" replied the old man, \"not less than\nthree thousand pounds.\"\n\nNo sooner was the unguarded avowal made, than it was spread through\nthe city by the enemies of the bishop.[28]\n\n  [28] For the account of what follows, in addition to the\n  biography by Andrew of Strumi, we have the _Dialogues_ of\n  Desiderius of Monte Cassino, lib. iii.\n\nSt. John Gualberto took up the quarrel. He appeared in Florence,\nwhere he had a monastery dedicated to St. Salvius, and began\nvehemently to denounce the prelate as a simoniac, and therefore a\nheretic. His monks, fired by his zeal, spread through the city, and\nexhorted the people to refuse to accept the sacramental acts of\ntheir bishop and resist his authority.\n\nThe people broke out into tumult. The bishop appealed to the secular\narm to arrest the disorder, and officers were sent to coerce the\nmonks of St. Salvius. They broke into the monastery at night,\nsought Gualberto, but, unable to find him, maltreated the monks.\nOne received a blow on his forehead which laid bare the bone, and\nanother had his nose and lips gashed with a sword. The monks were\nstripped, and the monastery fired. The abbot rolled himself in an\nold cloak extracted from under a bed, where it had been cast as\nragged, and awaited day, when the wounds and tears of the fraternity\nmight be exhibited to a sympathising and excitable people. Nor were\nthey disappointed. At daybreak all the town was gathered around the\ndilapidated monastery, and people were eagerly mopping up the sacred\nblood that had been shed, with their napkins, thinking that they\nsecured valuable relics. Sympathy with the injured was fanned into\nfrenzied abhorrence of the persecutor.\n\nSt. John Gualberto appeared on the scene, blazing with the desire\nof martyrdom,[29] and congratulated the sufferers on having become\nconfessors of Christ. \"Now are ye true monks! But why did ye suffer\nwithout me?\"\n\n  [29] \"Martyrii flagrans amore.\"--_Andr. Strum._\n\nThe secular clergy of Florence were, it is asserted, deeply tainted\nwith the same vice as their bishop. They had all paid fees at their\ninstitution, or had bought their benefices. They lived in private\nhouses, and were for the most part married. Some were even suspected\nto be of immoral life.[30]\n\n  [30] \"Quis clericorum propriis et paternis rebus solummodo non\n  studebat? Qui potius inveniretur, proh dolor! qui non esset\n  uxoratus vel concubinarius? De simoni\u00e2 quid dicam? Omnes pene\n  ecclesiasticos ordines h\u00e6c mortifera bellua devoraverat, ut, qui\n  ejus morsum evaserit, rarus inveniretur.\"--_Andr. Strum._\n\nBut the preaching of the Saint, the wounds of the monks, converted\nsome of the clergy. Those who were convinced by their appeals, and\nthose who were wearied of their wives, threw themselves into the\nparty of Gualberto, and clubbed together in common life.[31]\n\n  [31] \"Exemplo vero ipsius et admonitionibus delicati clerici,\n  spretis connubiis, coeperunt simul in ecclesiis stare, et\n  communem ducere vitam.\"--Atto Pistor., _Vit. S. Joan. Gualb._\n\nThe Vallombrosian monks appealed to Pope Alexander II. against the\nbishop,[32] their thirst for martyrdom whetted not quenched.[33]\nIf the Pope desired it, they would try the ordeal of fire to prove\ntheir charge. Hildebrand, then only sub-deacon, but a power in\nthe councils of the Pope, urged on their case, and demanded the\ndeposition of the bishop. But Alexander, himself among the most\nresolute opponents of simony, felt that there was no case. There\nwas no evidence, save the prattle of an old man over his wine-cups.\nHe refused the petition of the monks, and was supported by the vast\nmajority of the bishops--there were over a hundred present.[34]\n\n  [32] For what follows, in addition to the above-quoted\n  authorities, we have Berthold's _Chronicle_ from 1054 to 1100;\n  Pertz, _Mon. Sacr._ v. pp. 264-326.\n\n  [33] \"Securiores de corona, quam jam gustaverant,\n  martyrii.\"--_Andr. Strum._\n\n  [34] \"Favebat enim maxima pars Episcoporum parti Petri, et omnes\n  pene erant monachis adversi.\"--_Andr. Strum._\n\nEven St. Peter Damiani, generally unmeasured in his invectives\nagainst simony, wrote to moderate the frantic zeal of the\nVallombrosian monks, which he denounced as unreasonable,\nintemperate, unjust.\n\nBut the refusal of the Pope to gratify their resentment did not\nquell the vehemence of the monks and the faction adverse to the\nbishop. The city was in a condition of chronic insubordination\nand occasional rioting. Godfrey Duke of Tuscany was obliged to\ninterfere; and the monks were driven from their monastery of St.\nSalvi, and compelled to retire to that of St. Settimo outside of the\ngates.\n\nShortly after, Pope Alexander visited Florence. The monks piled up\na couple of bonfires, and offered to pass between them in proof of\nthe truth of their allegation. He refused to permit the ordeal, and\nwithdrew, leaving the bishop unconvicted, and therefore unrebuked.\n\nThe clergy of Florence now determined to demand of the bishop that\nhe should either go through the ordeal himself, or suffer the monks\nto do so. As they went to the palace, the people hooted them: \"Go,\nye heretics, to a heretic! You who have driven Christ out of the\ncity! You who adore Simon Magus as your God!\"\n\nThe bishop sullenly refused; he would neither establish his\ninnocence in the fire, nor suffer the monks to convict him by the\nordeal.\n\nThe Podesta of Florence then, with a high hand, drove from the town\nthe clergy who had joined the monastic faction. They went forth\non the first Saturday in Lent, 1067, amidst a sympathising crowd,\ncomposed mostly of women,[35] who tore off their veils, and with\nhair scattered wildly over their faces, threw themselves down in the\nroad before the confessors, crying, \"Alas! alas! O Christ, Thou art\nexpelled this city, and how dost Thou leave us desolate? Thou art\nnot tolerated here, and how can we live without Thee? Thou canst\nnot dwell with Simon Magus. O holy Peter, didst thou once overcome\nSimon? and now dost thou permit him to have the mastery? We deemed\nhim bound and writhing in infernal flames, and lo! he is loose, and\nrisen again to thy dishonour.\"\n\n  [35] \"Maxime feminarum.\"\n\nAnd the men said to one another, \"Let us set fire to this accursed\ncity, which hates Christ.\"[36]\n\n  [36] \"Et nos, viri fratres, civitatem hanc incendamus atque cum\n  parvulis et uxoribus nostris, quocumque Christus ierit, secum\n  camus. Si Christiani sumus, Christum sequamur.\"--_Andr. Strum._\n\nThe secular clergy were in dismay; denounced, deserted, threatened\nby the people, they sang no psalms, offered no masses. Unable to\nendure their position, they again visited the bishop, and entreated\nhim to sanction the ordeal of fire. He refused, and requested the\npriests not to countenance such an unauthorised venture, should it\nbe made. But the whole town was bent on seeing this ordeal tried,\nand on the Wednesday following, the populace poured to the monastery\nof St. Settimo. Two piles of sticks were heaped near the monastery\ngate, measuring ten feet long by five wide, and four and a half feet\nhigh. Between them lay a path the length of an arm in width.\n\nLitanies were chanted whilst the piles were reared, and then the\nmonks proceeded to elect one who was to undergo the fire. The lot\nfell on a priest named Peter, and St. John Gualberto ordered him at\nonce to the altar to say mass. All assisted with great devotion, the\npeople crying with excitement. At the _Agnus Dei_ four monks, one\nwith the crucifix, another with holy water, the third with twelve\nlighted tapers, the fourth with a full censer, proceeded to the\npyres, and set them both on fire.\n\nThis threw the people into an ecstasy of excitement, and the voice\nof the priest was drowned in the clamour of their tongues. The\npriest finished mass, and laid aside his chasuble. Holding the\ncross, in alb and stole and maniple, he came forth, followed by St.\nJohn Gualberto and the monks, chanting. Suddenly a silence fell\non the tossing concourse, and a monk appointed by the abbot stood\nforth, and in a clear voice said to the people, \"Men, brethren, and\nsisters! we do this for the salvation of your souls, that henceforth\nye may learn to avoid the leprosy of simony, which has infected\nnearly the whole world; for the crime of simony is so great, that\nbeside it every other crime is as nothing.\"\n\nThe two piles were burning vigorously. The priest Peter prayed,\n\"Lord Christ, I beseech Thee, if Peter of Pavia, called Bishop of\nFlorence, has obtained the episcopal throne by money, do Thou assist\nme in this terrible ordeal, and deliver me from being burned, as\nof old Thou didst deliver the three children in the midst of the\nburning furnace.\" Then, giving the brethren the kiss of peace, he\nstepped fearlessly between the burning pyres, and came forth on the\nfarther side uninjured.\n\nHis linen alb, his silken stole and maniple, were unburnt. He\nwould have again rushed through the flames in the excess of his\nconfidence, but was prevented by the pious vehemence of the people,\nwho surrounded him, kissed his feet, clung to his vestments, and\nwould have crushed him to death in their eagerness to touch and see\nhim, had he not been rescued by the strong arms of burly monks.\n\nIn after years he told, and talked himself into believing, that as\nhe passed through the fire, his maniple fell off. Discovering his\nloss ere he emerged, he turned back, and deliberately picked it up.\nBut of this nothing was said at the time.[37]\n\n  [37] It is not mentioned in the epistle of the Florentines to the\n  Pope, narrating the ordeal and supposed miracle, which is given\n  by Andrew of Strumi and Atto of Pistoja.\n\nA letter was then drawn up, appealing to the Pope in the most\nvehement terms, to deliver the sheep of the Florentine flock\nfrom the ravening wolf who shepherded them, and urging him, not\nobscurely, to use force if need be, and compel by his troops the\nevacuation of the Florentine episcopal throne. Peter of Pavia, the\nbishop, a man of gentle character, yielded to the storm. He withdrew\nfrom Florence, and was succeeded by another Peter, whom the people\ncalled Peter the Catholic, to distinguish him from the Simoniac. But\nMuratori adduces evidence that the former continued to be recognised\nby the Pope some time after his supposed degradation. Thus ended\nthe schism of Florence in the entire triumph of the Patarines.\nHildebrand was not unobservant; he proved afterwards not to be\nforgetful of the lesson taught by this schism,--the utilization of\nthe rude mob as a powerful engine in the hands of the fanatical or\ndesigning. It bore its fruit in the canons of 1074.\n\n\nII.\n\nAnselmo de Badagio, Bishop of Lucca, had succeeded Nicholas II. to\nthe Papal throne in 1061. Cadalus of Parma had been chosen by the\nGerman and Lombard prelates on October 28th, and he assumed the name\nof Honorius II. But no Roman Cardinal was present to sanction this\nelection. Cadalus was acknowledged by all the simoniacal and married\nclergy, when he entered Italy; but the Princess Beatrice and the\nDuke of Tuscany prevented him from advancing to Rome. From Parma\nCadalus excommunicated Alexander, and from Rome, Alexander banned\nHonorius. The cause of Alexander was that of the Patarines, but the\nquestion of marriage and simony paled before the more glaring one,\nof which of the rival claimants was the actual Pope.\n\nThe voice of Landulf Cotta was silenced. A terrible cancer had\nconsumed the tongue which had kept Milan for six years in a blaze\nof faction. But his room was speedily filled by a more implacable\nadversary of the married clergy--his brother, Herlembald, a stern,\nable soldier. An event in Herlembald's early life had embittered his\nheart against the less rigid clergy. His plighted bride had behaved\nlightly with a priest. He was just returned from a pilgrimage to\nJerusalem, his zeal kindled to enthusiasm. He went to Rome, where he\nwas well received by Alexander II. He came for authority to use his\nsword for the Patarines. The sectaries in Milan had said to him, \"We\ndesire to deliver the Church, besieged and degraded by the married\npriests; do thou deliver by the law of the sword, we will do so by\nthe law of God.\" Alexander II., in a public consistory, created\nHerlembald \"Defender of the Church,\" gave him the sacred banner of\nSt. Peter, and bade him go back to Milan and shed blood--his, if\nnecessary, those of the anti-Patarines certainly--in this miserable\nquarrel.\n\nThe result was that the Patarines were filled with new zeal,\nand lost all compunction at shedding blood and pillaging houses.\nHerlembald established himself in a large mansion, which he\nfortified and filled with mercenaries; over it waved the consecrated\nbanner of St. Peter. From this stronghold he issued forth to\nassail the obnoxious clergy. They were dragged from their altars\nand consigned to shame and insult. The services of the Church, the\ncelebration of the sacraments, were suspended, or administered only\nby the one or two priests who adhered to the Patari. It is said\nthat, in order to keep his rude soldiery in pay, Herlembald made\nevery clerk take a solemn oath that he had ever kept innocence,\nand would wholly abstain from marriage or concubinage. Those who\ncould not, or would not, take this oath were expelled the city, and\ntheir whole property confiscated to support the standing corps of\nhireling ruffians maintained by the Crusader. The lowest rabble,\npoor artisans and ass-drivers, furtively placed female ornaments\nin the chambers of the priests, and then, attacking their houses,\ndragged them out and plundered their property. By 1064, when a synod\nwas held at Mantua by the Pope, Milan was purged of \"Simoniacs and\nNicolaitans,\" and the clergy who remained were gathered together\ninto a house to live in common, under rule.\n\nGuido of Milan and all the Lombard prelates attended that important\nsynod, which saw the triumph of Alexander, his reconciliation with\nthe Emperor, and the general abandonment of the anti-Pope, Cadalus.\n\nIn the following year, Henry IV. was under the tutelage of Adalbert\nof Bremen; he had escaped from Anno, Archbishop of Cologne, who\nhad favoured the strict faction and Alexander II. The situation in\nLombardy changed simultaneously. Herlembald had assumed a power,\nan authority higher than that of the archbishop, whom he refused\nto recognise, and denounced as a heretic. Guido, weary of the\nnine years of strife he had endured, relieved from the fear of\ninterference from Germany, resolved on an attempt to throw off the\nhateful yoke. The churches of Milan were for the most part without\npastors. The married clergy had been expelled, and there were none\nto take their place. The Archbishop had been an obedient penitent\nfor five years, compromising his one hundred years of penitence by\npayments into the Papal treasury; but as the cause of Alexander\ndeclined, his contrition languished, died out; and he resumed his\ndemands for fees at ordinations and institutions, at least so\nclamoured Ariald and Herlembald in the ears of Rome.\n\nA party in Milan had long resented the despotism of the \"Law of\nGod and the law of the sword\" of Ariald and Herlembald, and an\neffort was made to break it, with the sanction, no doubt, of the\nArchbishop. A large body of the citizens rose, \"headed,\" says Andrew\nof Strumi, \"by the sons of the priests,\" and attacked the church and\nhouse of Ariald, but, unable to find him, contented themselves with\nwrecking the buildings. Thereupon Herlembald swept down at the head\nof his mercenaries, surrounded the crowd, and hewed them to pieces\nto the last man, \"like the vilest cattle.\"[38]\n\n  [38] H\u00e6c ut nobilis Herembaldus ceterique Fideles audiere,\n  sumptis armis, in audacem plebem et temerariam irruere;\n  quos protinus exterminavere omnes, quasi essent vilissim\u00e6\n  pecudes,\"--_Andr. Strum._\n\nGuido, the Archbishop, now acted with resolution, and boldly took up\nthe cause of the married clergy. Having heard that two priests of\nMonza, infected with Patarinism, had turned their wives out of their\nhouses, he ordered the arrest of the priests, and punished them with\nimprisonment in the castle of Lecco. On hearing this, the Patarines\nflew to arms, and swarmed out of Milan after Ariald, who bore the\nbanner of St. Peter, as Herlembald was absent at Rome. They met the\nmounted servants of the Archbishop near Monza, surprised them, and\nwrested from them a promise to surrender the priests. Three days\nafter, the curates were delivered up. Ariald, at the head of the\npeople, met them outside the gates, received them with enthusiasm,\ncrying, \"See, these are the brave martyrs of Christ!\" and escorted\nthem to a church, where they intoned a triumphant _Te Deum_.\n\nHerlembald returned from Rome to Milan with a bull of\nexcommunication fulminated by the Pope against the Archbishop. Guido\nsummoned the Milanese to assemble in the cathedral church on the\nvigil of Pentecost.\n\nIn the meantime the Patarines were torn into factions on a subtle\npoint mooted by Ariald. That demagogue had ventured to assail in a\nsermon the venerable custom of the Milanese, which required them to\nfast during the Rogation days. Was he greater than St. Ambrose? Did\nhe despise the authority of the great doctor? On this awful subject\nthe Patarines divided, and with the division lost their strength.\n\nNeither Herlembald nor Ariald seems to have been prepared for the\nbold action of the Archbishop. On the appointed day the cathedral\nwas filled with substantial citizens and nobles. Herlembald missed\nthe wolfish eyes, ragged hair, and hollow cheeks of his sectaries,\nand, fearing danger, leaped over the chancel rails, and took up his\nposition near the altar. The Archbishop mounted the ambone with the\nbull of excommunication in his hand. \"See!\" he exclaimed, \"this\nis the result of the turbulence of these demagogues, Ariald and\nHerlembald. This city, out of reverence to St. Ambrose, has never\nobeyed the Roman Church. Shall we be crushed? Take away out of the\nland of the living these disturbers of the public peace who labour\nday and night to rob us of our ancient liberties.\"\n\nHe was interrupted by a shout of \"Let them be killed.\" Guido paused,\nand then cried out, \"All who honour and cleave to St. Ambrose, leave\nthe church, that we may know who are our adversaries.\" Instantly\nfrom the doors rolled out the dense crowd, seven hundred in number,\naccording to the estimation of Andrew, the biographer of Ariald.\nOnly twelve men were left within who stood firm to the Patarine\ncause. Ariald had, in the meantime, taken refuge in the choir beside\nHerlembald. The clergy selected Ariald, the laity Herlembald, for\ntheir victims. Ariald was dragged from the church, severely wounded.\nHerlembald escaped better; using his truncheon, he beat off his\nassailants till he had climbed to a place of safety, whence he\ncould not be easily dislodged.\n\nAs night fell, the Patarines gathered, stormed, and pillaged the\npalace of the Archbishop, and, bursting into the church, liberated\nHerlembald. Guido hardly escaped on horseback, sorely maltreated in\nthe tumult. His adherents fled like smoke before the tempest. Ariald\nwas found bleeding and faint, and was conveyed by the multitude in\ntriumph to the church of St. Sepolcro. Then Herlembald called to the\nroaring mob to be still. \"Let us ask Master Ariald whose house is to\nbe first given up to sack.\"\n\nBut Ariald earnestly dissuaded from further violence, and entreated\nthe vehement dictator to spare the lives and property of their\nenemies.\n\nThe surprise to the Archbishop's party was, however, temporary only.\nBy morning they had rallied, and the city was again in their hands.\nGuido published an interdict against Milan, which was to remain in\nforce as long as it harboured Ariald. No mass was said, no bells\nrang, the church doors were bolted and barred. Ariald was secretly\nremoved by some of his friends to the village of St. Victor, where\nalso Herlembald had been constrained to take refuge with a party\nof mercenaries. Thence they made their way to Pavia and to Padua,\nwhere they hoped to obtain a boat, and escape to Rome. But the\nwhole country was up against them, and Herlembald was obliged to\ndisband his soldiers, and attempt to escape in disguise. Ariald\nwas left with a priest whose acquaintance Herlembald had made in\nJerusalem. But a priest was the last person likely to secrete the\ntyrant and persecutor of the clergy. He treacherously sent word to\nthe Archbishop, and Ariald was taken by the servants of Olivia, the\nniece of Guido, and conveyed to an island on the Lago Maggiore. He\nwas handed over to the cruel mercies of two married priests, who\ndirected his murder with cold-blooded heartlessness, if we may trust\nthe gossips picked up later. His ears, nose and lips were cut off.\nHe was asked if he would acknowledge Guido for archbishop. \"As long\nas my tongue can speak,\" he replied, \"I will not.\" The servants\nof Olivia tore out his tongue; he was beaten by the two savage\npriests, and when he fainted, was flung into the calm waters of\nthe lovely lake. Andrew of Vallombrosa, or Strumi, followed in his\ntrace, and hung about the neighbourhood till he heard from a peasant\nthe awful story. He sought the mangled body.[39] It was found and\ntransported to Milan on the feast of the Ascension following. For\nten days it was exposed in the church of St. Ambrose, that all\nmight venerate it, and was finally disposed in the convent of St.\nCelsus. In the memory of man, never had such a crowd been seen. The\nArchbishop deemed it prudent to retire, and Herlembald profited\nby his absence to recover his power, and make the people swear to\navenge the martyr, and unite to the death for the \"good cause.\"\nThe events in Milan had their counterpart in the other cities of\nLombardy, especially at Cremona, where the bishopric had been\nobtained by Arnulf, nephew of Guido of Milan. In that city, twelve\nmen, headed by one Christopher, took the Patarine oath to fight the\nmarried clergy; the people joined them, and forced their oath on\nthe bishop-elect before he was ordained. But, as in 1067, he seized\na Patarine priest, a sedition broke out, in which the bishop was\nseriously injured. The inhabitants of Cremona, after Easter, sent\nambassadors to the Pope, and received from him a reply, given by\nBonizo, exhorting them not to allow a priest, deacon or sub-deacon,\nsuspected of concubinage or simony, to hold a benefice or execute\nhis ministry. The consequence of this letter was that all suspected\nclerks were excluded from their offices; and shortly after, the same\ncourse was followed at Piacenza. Asti, Lodi, and Ravenna also threw\nin their lot with the Patarines.\n\n  [39] Ariald was murdered on June 27, 1065. Andrew of Strumi says\n  1066; but he followed the Florentine computation--he had been a\n  priest of Florence--which made the year begin on March 25.\n\nIn 1067, Alexander II. sent legates to Milan to settle the\ndisturbances therein. Adalbert of Bremen had fallen, and again the\nPapal party were in the ascendant. The fortunes of Milan fluctuated\nwith the politics of those who held the regency in the minority of\nHenry IV.\n\nGuido, now advanced in years, and weary of ruling so turbulent\na diocese, determined to vacate a see which he had held for\ntwenty-seven years; the last ten of incessant civil war. He burdened\nit with a pension to himself, and then made it over to Godfrey, the\nsub-deacon, along with the pastoral staff and ring. Godfrey crossed\nthe Alps, took the oath of allegiance to the Emperor, promised to\nuse his utmost endeavours to exterminate the Patarines, and to\ndeliver Herlembald alive into the hands of the Emperor, laden with\nchains. Friend and foe, without scruple, designate the followers\nof the Papal policy as Patarines; it is therefore startling, a\nfew years later, when the Popes had carried their point, to find\nthem insisting on the luckless Patarines being given in wholesale\nhecatombs to the flames, as damnable heretics. It was an ungracious\nreturn for the battle these heretics had fought under the banner of\nSt. Peter.\n\nBut Herlembald refused to acknowledge Godfrey, he devastated the\ncountry with fire and sword wherever Godfrey was acknowledged, and\ncreated such havoc that not a day passed in the holy Lenten fast\nwithout the effusion of much Christian blood. Finally, Herlembald\ndrove the archbishop-elect to take refuge in the strong fortress\nof Castiglione. Guido, not receiving his pension, annulled his\nresignation, and resumed his state. But he unwisely trusted to\nthe good faith of Herlembald; he was seized,[40] and shut up in a\nmonastery till his death, which took place August 23, 1071.\n\n  [40] \"Gloriosus hac vice delusus,\" says Arnulf.\n\nThe year before this, 1070, Adelheid, Margravine of Turin,\nmother-in-law of the young Emperor, attacked the Patarines, and\nburnt the cities of Lodi and Asti. On March 19, 1071, as Herlembald\nwas besieging Castiglione, a terrible conflagration broke out in\nMilan, and consumed a great part of the city and several of the\nstateliest churches. Whilst the army of Herlembald was agitated\nby the report of the fire, Godfrey burst out of Castiglione, and\nalmost routed the besiegers. Before the death of Guido, Herlembald,\nwith the sanction of the Pope, had set up a certain Otto to be\nArchbishop, nominated by himself and the Papal legate, without\nconsulting the electors of Milan or the Emperor, January 6, A.D.\n1072.\n\nOtto was but a youth, just admitted into holy orders, likely to\nprove a pliant tool in the strong hand of the dictator. It was the\nFeast of the Epiphany, and the streets were thronged with people,\nwhen the news leaked out that an archbishop had been chosen,\nand was now holding the customary banquet after election in the\narchiepiscopal palace.\n\nThe people were furious, rose and attacked the house, hunted the\nyouthful prelate out of an attic, where he had taken refuge, dragged\nhim by his legs and arms into the church, and compelled him to swear\nto renounce his dignity. The Roman legate hardly escaped with his\nrobes torn.\n\nHerlembald, who had been surprised, recovered the upper hand in\nMilan on the morrow, but not in the open country, which was swept\nby the imperial troops. The suffragan bishops of Lombardy assembled\nat Novara directly they heard of what had taken place in Milan, and\nconsecrated Godfrey as their archbishop.\n\nOtto appealed to Rome (January, 1072), and a few weeks later the\nPope assembled a synod, and absolved Otto of his oath extorted from\nhim at Milan, acknowledged him as archbishop, and struck Godfrey\nwith interdict. Alexander II. died April 21, 1073, and the tiara\nrested on the brows of the great Hildebrand.\n\nOn June 24, Hildebrand, now Gregory VII., wrote to the Margravine\nBeatrice to abstain from all relations with the excommunicated\nbishops of Lombardy; on June 28, to William, Bishop of Pavia, to\noppose the usurper, the excommunicate Godfrey of Milan; on July\n1, to all the faithful of Lombardy to refrain from that false\nbishop, who lay under the apostolic ban. From Capua, on September\n27, he wrote to Herlembald, exhorting him to fight valiantly, and\nhold out Milan against the usurper Godfrey. Again, on October 9,\nto Herlembald, bidding him be of good courage; he hoped to detach\nthe young Emperor from the party of Godfrey, and bade him receive\namicably those who, with true sentiments of contrition, came over to\nthe Patarine, that is, the Papal side.\n\nOn March 10, 1074, Gregory held one of the most important synods,\nnot of his reign only, but ever held by any Pope. The acts of this\nassembly have been lost or suppressed, but its most important\ndecisions were summed up in a letter from Gregory to the Bishop\nof Constance. This letter has not been printed in the Registrum;\nbut fortunately it has been preserved by two contemporary writers,\nPaul of Bernried, and Bernold of Constance, the latter of whom has\nsupplied a detailed apology for the law of celibacy promulgated in\nthat synod. Gregory absolutely forbade all priests sullied with the\n_crimen fornicationis_, which embraced legitimate marriage, either\nto say a mass or to serve at one; and the people were strictly\nenjoined to shun their churches and their sacraments; and when the\nbishops were remiss, he exhorted them themselves to enforce the\npontifical sentence.[41]\n\n  [41] \"Audivimus quod quidam Episcoporum apud vos commorantium,\n  aut sacerdotes, et diaconi, et subdiaconi, mulieribus\n  commisceantur aut consentiant aut negligant. His pr\u00e6cipimus vos\n  nullo modo obedire, vel illorum pr\u00e6ceptis consentire, sicut\n  ipsi apostolic\u00e6 sedis pr\u00e6ceptis non obediunt neque auctoritati\n  sanctorum patrum consentiunt.\" \"Quapropter ad omnes de quorum\n  fide et devotione confidimus nunc convertimur, rogantes vos et\n  apostolic\u00e2 auctoritate admonentes ut quidquid Episcopi dehinc\n  loquantur aut taceant, vos officium eorum quos aut simoniace\n  promotos et ordinatos aut in crimine fornicationis jacentes\n  cognoveritis, nullatenus recipiatis.\"--Letter to the Franconians\n  (Baluze, _Misc._ vii. p. 125).\n\nThe results shall be described in the words of a contemporary\nhistorian, Sigebert of Gemblours. \"Many,\" says he, \"seeing in this\nprohibition to hear a mass said by a married priest a manifest\ncontradiction to the doctrine of the Fathers, who believed that the\nefficacy of sacrament, such as baptism, chrism, and the Body and\nBlood of Christ, is independent of the dignity of the minister,\nthence resulted a grievous scandal; never, perhaps, even in the time\nof the great heresies, was the Church divided by a greater schism.\nSome did not abandon their simony, others disguised their avarice\nunder a more acceptable name; what they boasted they had given\ngratuitously, they in reality sold; very few preserved continence.\nSome through greed of lucre, or sentiments of pride, simulated\nchastity, but many added false oaths and numerous adulteries to\ntheir debaucheries. The laity seized the opportunity to rise against\nthe clerical order, and to excuse themselves for disobedience to\nthe Church. They profaned the holy mysteries, administering baptism\nthemselves, and using the wax out of their ears as chrism. They\nrefused on their death-beds to receive the _viaticum_ from the\nmarried priests; they would not even be buried by them. Some went\nso far as to trample under foot the Host, and pour out the precious\nBlood consecrated by married priests.\"[42]\n\n  [42] Pertz, viii. p. 362.\n\nThe affairs of the church of Milan continued in the same\nunsatisfactory condition. The contest between the Patarines and\ntheir adversaries had taken greater dimensions. The question which\ndivided them was now less that of the marriage of the clergy than\nwhich of the rival archbishops was to be acknowledged. Godfrey was\nsupported by the Emperor, Otto by the Pope. The parties were about\neven; neither Godfrey nor Otto could maintain himself in Milan;\nthe former fortified himself in the castle of Brebbio, the latter\nresided at Rome. Henry IV., in spite of all the admonitions of the\nPope, persisted in supporting the cause of Godfrey. Milan was thus\nwithout a pastor. The suffragan bishops wished to execute their\nepiscopal functions in the city, and to consecrate the holy oils for\nthe benediction of the fonts at Whitsuntide. Herlembald, when one of\nthe bishops had sent chrism into the city for the purpose, poured it\nout on the ground and stamped on it, because it had been consecrated\nby an excommunicated prelate.\n\nIn March, 1075, another conflagration broke out in the city, and\nraged with even greater violence than the fire of 1071. Herlembald\nhad again poured forth the oils, as he had the year before; and\nhad ordered Leutprand, a priest, as Easter came, to proceed to the\nconsecration of chrism. This innovation roused the alarm of the\nMilanese; the subsequent conflagration convinced them that it was\nabhorrent to heaven. All the adversaries of the Patarines assembled\noutside the city, and swore to preserve intact the privileges of\nSt. Ambrose, and to receive only the bishop nominated or approved\nby the King. Then, entering the city, they fell unexpectedly on the\nPatarines. Leutprand was taken and mutilated, his ears and nose were\ncut off. The standard of St. Peter was draggled in the dust, and\nHerlembald fell with it, cut down by a noble, Arnold de Rauda. Every\ninsult was heaped on the body of the \"Defender of the Church,\" and\nthe sacred banner was trampled under foot.\n\nMessengers were sent to Henry IV. to announce the triumph, and to\nask him to appoint a new Archbishop of Milan. Henry was so rejoiced\nat the victory, that he abandoned Godfrey, and promised the Milanese\na worthy prelate. His choice fell on Tebald, a Milanese sub-deacon\nin his Court.\n\nPope Urban II. canonised Herlembald. Ariald seems never to have\nbeen formally enrolled among the saints, but he received honours\nas a saint at Milan, and has been admitted into several Italian\nMartyrologies, and into the collection of the Bollandists. Baronius\nwisely expunged Herlembald and Ariald from the Roman Martyrology;\nnevertheless, the disgraceful fact remains, that the ruffian\nHerlembald has been canonised by Papal bull.\n\nThe seeds of fresh discord remained. Leutprand, or Liprand, the\npriest, was curate of the Church of St. Paul;[43] having suffered\nmutilation in the riot, he was regarded in the light of a Patarine\nconfessor. But no outbreak took place till the death of Anselm IV.,\nArchbishop of Milan (September 30, 1101), at Constantinople, where\nhe was on his way with the Crusaders to the Holy Land. His vicar,\nthe Greek, Peter Chrysolaus, Bishop of Savonia, whom the Lombards\ncalled Grossulani, perhaps because of the coarse habit he wore (more\nprobably as a corruption for Chrysolaus), had been left in charge\nof the see of Milan. On the news of the death of the Archbishop\nreaching that city, the Primicerius convoked the electors to choose\na successor. The vote fell on Landulf, Ordinary of Milan; but he was\nnot yet returned from Jerusalem, whither he had gone as a crusader.\nGrossulani declared the election informal. Thereupon the Abbot of\nSt. Dionysius, at the head of a large party of the electors, chose\nPeter Grossulani. There is no evidence of his having used bribery in\nany form; but he may have acted unjustly in cancelling the election\nof Landulf. It is, however, fair to observe that Landulf, on his\nreturn, supported Grossulani; consequently, it is probable that the\nlatter acted strictly in accordance with law and precedent.\n\n  [43] The life of Liprand was written by Landulf the younger, his\n  sister's son, in his _Hist. Mediolan._ 1095-1137.\n\nBut the election displeased Liprand and the remains of the\nPatarines. They appealed to Rome, but Grossulani, supported by the\nCountess Matilda and St. Bernard, abbot of Vallombrosa, overcame\ntheir objections. Pope Paschal II. ratified the election, and sent\nthe pall to the Archbishop. Ardericus de Carinate had been sent to\nRome on behalf of Grossulani. The people came out of the gates,\non his approach, to learn the result. Ardericus, hanging the pall\nacross his umbrella (_protensi virga_), waved it over his head,\nshouting, \"Ecco la stola! Ecco la stola!\" (Here is the pall!) and\nled the way into the cathedral, whither Grossulani also hastened,\nand ascending the pulpit in his pontifical habit, placed the coveted\ninsignia about his neck.\n\nLiprand was not satisfied. By means of private agitation, he\ndisturbed the tranquillity of public feeling, and the Archbishop, to\ncalm the minds of the populace, was obliged to convoke a provincial\nsynod at Milan (1103), in which, in the presence of his suffragans,\nthe clergy and the people, he said, \"If anyone has a charge to make\nagainst me, let him speak openly at the present time, or he shall\nnot be heard.\"\n\nLiprand would not appear before the council and formally make\ncharge, but he mounted the pulpit in the Church of St. Paul and\npreached against the Archbishop as a simoniac. He declared his\nreadiness to prove his charge by the ordeal of fire. The bishops\nassembled in council refused to suffer the attempt to be made.\n\nHowever, Liprand was not deterred. \"Look at my amputated nose and\nears!\" he cried, \"I am a confessor for Christ. I will try the ordeal\nby fire to substantiate my charge. Grossulani is a simoniac, by\ngift of hand, gift of tongue, and gift of homage.\" And he gave\nhis wolf-skin cloak and some bottles of wine in exchange for wood,\nwhich the crowd carried off and heaped up in a great pile against\nthe wall of the monastery of St. Ambrogio. The Archbishop sent his\nservants, and they overturned the stack, and scattered the wood.\nThen the crowd of \"boys and girls, men and women,\" poured through\nthe main streets, roaring, \"Away with Grossulani, away with him!\"\nand clamoured around the doors of the archiepiscopal palace, so\nthat Grossulani, fearing for his life, said, \"Be it so, let the\nfellow try the fire, or let him leave Milan.\" His servants with\ndifficulty appeased the people, by promising that the ordeal should\nbe undergone on the following Palm Sunday evening. \"I will not leave\nthe city,\" said Liprand; \"but now I have no money for buying wood,\nand I will not sell my books, as I keep them for my nephew Landulf,\nnow at school.\" So the magistrates of the city prepared a pile of\nbillets of oak wood.\n\nOn the appointed day Liprand, barefooted, in sackcloth, bearing a\ncross, went to the Church of Saints Gervasius and Protasius and sung\nmass. Grossulani also, bearing a cross, entered the same church and\nmounted the pulpit, attended by Ariald de Marignano, and Berard,\nJudge of Asti. Silence being made, and Liprand having taken his\nplace barefooted \"on the marble stone at the entrance to the choir,\ncontaining an image of Hercules,\" Grossulani addressed the people;\n\"Listen, and I will silence this man in three words.\" Then turning\nto Liprand, he asked, \"You have charged me with being a simoniac. To\nwhom have I given anything? Answer me.\"\n\nLiprand, raising his eyes to the pulpit, pointed to those who\noccupied it and said, \"Look at those three great devils, who think\nto confound me by their wit and wealth.[44] I appeal to the judgment\nof God.\"\n\n  [44] \"Proposuisti quod ego sum simoniacus per munus a manu. Modo\n  die: cui dedi; Tunc presbyter super populum oculos aperuit, et\n  digitum ad eos, qui stabunt in pulpito, extendit, dicens, Videte\n  tres grandissimos diabolos, qui per ingenium et pecuniam suam\n  putant me confundere.\"\n\nGrossulani said, \"But I ask what act of simony do you lay to my\ncharge?\"\n\nLiprand answered, \"Do you answer me, What is the lightest form of\nsimony?\"\n\nThe Archbishop, after some consideration, answered, \"To refrain from\ndeposing a simoniac.\"\n\n\"And I say that is simony which consists in deposing an abbot from\nhis abbacy, a bishop from his bishopric, and an archbishop from his\narchbishopric.\"[45]\n\n  [45] It is very evident from this discussion that Grossulani was\n  innocent of true simony; the whole charge against him was due to\n  his having quashed the election of Landulf, and thus of having\n  deposed, after a fashion, \"an archbishop from his archbishopric.\"\n\nThe people became impatient, and began to shout, \"Come out, come\nout to the ordeal!\" Then Liprand \"jumped down from the stone,\ncontaining the image of Hercules,\" and went forth accompanied by the\nmultitude to the field where the pyre was made. There arose then\na difficulty about the form of oath to be administered. Liprand,\nseeing that there was some hesitation, said, \"Let me manage it, and\nsee if I do not satisfy you all!\" Whereupon he took hold of the hood\nof the Archbishop and shook it, and said in a loud voice, \"That\nGrossulani, who is under this hood, he, and no other, has obtained\nthe archbishopric of Milan simoniacally, by gift of hand, gift of\ntongue, and gift of service. And I, who enter on this ordeal, swear\nthat I have used no charm, or incantation, or witchcraft.\"\n\nThe Archbishop, unwilling to remain, remounted his horse and rode\nto the Church of St. John \"ad concham,\" but Ariald of Marignano\nremained to see that the ordeal was rightly carried out. When\nthe pile was lighted, he said to the priest, \"In heaven's name,\nreturn to your duty, and do not rush on certain death.\" But Liprand\nanswered, \"Get thee behind me, Satan,\" and signing himself, and\nblessing the fire with consecrated water, he rushed through the\nflames, barefooted, in sackcloth cassock and silk chasuble. He came\nout on the other side uninjured; a sudden draught had parted the\nflames as he entered, and when he emerged his feet were not burnt,\nnor was his silk chasuble scorched.\n\nThe people shouted at the miracle, and Grossulani was obliged to fly\nfrom the city.\n\nIt was soon rumoured, however, that Liprand was suffering from a\nscorched hand and an injured foot. It was in vain for his friends to\nassure the people that his hand had been burnt when he was throwing\nthe holy water on the flames before he entered them, and that his\nfoot was injured not by the fire, but by the hoof of a horse as\nhe emerged from the flames. One part of the mob began to clamour\nagainst Liprand that he was an impostor, the other to exalt him as\na saint, and the streets became the scene of riot and bloodshed.\nAt this juncture Landulf of Vereglate, who had been just elected\nto the vacant see, arrived from Jerusalem, and finding that the\nArchbishop had fled the city, he appealed to the people to cease\nfrom their riots, and promised to have Grossulani deposed, or at\nleast the charges brought against him properly investigated at\nRome. The tumults were with difficulty allayed, and the Archbishop,\nLandulf, and Liprand went to Rome (A.D. 1103). A Synod was convened\nand Liprand brought his vague accusations of simony against the\nArchbishop. Landulf refused to support him, so that it is hardly\nprobable that he can have felt himself aggrieved by the conduct of\nGrossulani. Liprand, being unable to substantiate his charge of\nsimony, was obliged to change the nature of his accusation, and\ncharged the Archbishop with having forced him to submit to the\nordeal of fire. The Pope and the Synod required the Archbishop\nto clear himself by oath; accordingly Grossulani did so, in the\nfollowing terms: \"I, Grossulani, by the grace of God Archbishop,\ndid not force Liprand to enter the fire.\" Azo, Bishop of Acqui, and\nArderic, Bishop of Lodi, took the oath with him; at the same time\nthe pastoral staff slipped from the hands of the Archbishop and\nfell on the floor, a sign, the biographer of Liprand says, that he\nforswore himself.[46]\n\n  [46] It is evident from the account of Landulf the younger\n  himself, that the Archbishop did not force the priest to enter on\n  the ordeal.\n\nThe Archbishop withdrew his authority confirmed by the Holy See, and\nhe returned to Milan, where he was well received.\n\nThe Archbishop took an unworthy opportunity, in 1110, of ridding\nthe city of the presence of Liprand for that priest having taken\ninto his house and cured a certain Herebert of Bruzano, an enemy\nof the Archbishop, who was ill with fever. Grossulani deprived\nLiprand of his benefice, and the priest retired into the Valteline.\nTroubles broke out in Milan between the two parties, which produced\ncivil war, and the Archbishop was driven out of the city, whereupon\nLiprand returned to it. The friends of Grossulani persuaded him to\nvisit Jerusalem, and he started, after having appointed Arderic,\nBishop of Lodi, his vicar (A.D. 1111). During his absence both\nparties united to reject him, and they elected Jordano of Cliva\nin his room (Jan. 1, A.D. 1112). Mainnard, Archbishop of Turin,\nhastened to Rome, and received the pall from the Pope, on condition\nthat it should not be worn for six months. But the rumours having\nspread that Grossulani was returning from Jerusalem, Mainnard came\nto Milan, and placed the pall on the altar of St. Ambrose, whence\nJordano took it and laid it about his shoulders.\n\nOn the return of Grossulani, civil war broke out again between\nthe two factions, which ended in both Archbishops being summoned\nto Rome in 1116; and the Pope ordered Grossulani to return to his\nbishopric of Savonia, and confirmed Jordano in the archbishopric\nof Milan. But before this Liprand had died 3rd January, 1113. His\nsanctity was almost immediately attested by a miracle, in spite of\nthe disparagement of his virtues by the party of the Archbishop\nGrossulani; for a certain knight of Piacenza, having swallowed a\nfish-bone which stuck in his throat, in sleep saw the priest appear\nto him and touch his throat, whereupon a violent fit of coughing\nensued, in which the bone was ejected; this was considered quite\nsufficient to establish the claim of Liprand to be regarded as a\nsaint.\n\n\n\n\nThe Anabaptists of M\u00fcnster.\n\n\nTo the year 1524 M\u00fcnster, the capital of Westphalia, had remained\nfaithful to the religion which S. Swibert, coadjutor of S.\nWillibrord, first Bishop of Utrecht, had brought to it in the 7th\ncentury. But then Lutheranism was introduced into it.\n\nFrederick von Wied at that time occupied the Episcopal throne. He\nwas brother to Hermann, Archbishop of Cologne, who was afterwards\ndeprived for his secession to Lutheranism.\n\nThe religious revolution in the Westphalian capital at its\ncommencement presents the same symptoms which characterised the\nbeginning of the Reformation elsewhere. The town council were\nprepared to hail it as a means of overthrowing the Episcopal\nauthority, and establishing the municipal power as supreme in the\ncity.\n\nAlready the State of Juliers had embraced the new religion, and\nfaith had been shaken in Osnabr\u00fcck, Minden, and Paderborn, when the\nfirst symptoms appeared in M\u00fcnster.\n\nFour priests, the incumbents of the parishes of St. Lambert, St.\nLudger, St. Martin, and the Lieb-Frau Church, commonly called\nUeberwasser, declared for the Reform. The contemporary historian,\nKerssenbroeck, an eye-witness of all he describes, says of them,\n\"They indulged in the most violent abuse of the clergy, they cursed\ngood works, assured their auditors that such works would not receive\nthe smallest recompense, and permitted every one to give way to all\nthe excesses of so-called Evangelical liberty.\"[47] They stirred up\ntheir hearers against the religious orders, and the people clamoured\ndaily at the gates of the monasteries and nunneries, insisting on\nbeing given food; and the monks and nuns were too much frightened\nto refuse those whom impunity rendered daily more exacting.[48] On\nthe night of the 22nd March, 1525, they attacked the rich convent\nof nuns at Nizink, with intentions of pillaging it. They failed\nin this attempt, and the ringleaders were seized and led before\nthe magistrates, followed by an excited and tumultuous crowd of\nmen and women, \"evangelically disposed,\" as the chronicler says.\nHoping to ally the effervescence, the magistrates asked the cause\nof complaint against the nuns of Nizink, and then came out the\ntrue reason, for which religious prejudice had served as a cloak.\nThey complained that the monks and nuns exercised professions to\nthe prejudice of the artisans; and they demanded of the magistracy\nthat their looms should be broken, the religious forbidden to work\nat trades, and their superabundant goods to be distributed among\nthe poor. The orators of the band declared in conclusion \"that if\nthe magistrates refused to grant these requests, the people would\ndisregard their orders, displace them by force of arms, and put in\ntheir stead men trustworthy and loyal, and devoted to the interests\nof the citizens.\"[49] Alarmed at these threats, the magistrates\nyielded, and promised to take every measure satisfactory to the\ninsurgents.[50] On the 25th May, accordingly, the Friars of St.\nFrancis and the nuns of Nizink were ordered to give up their looms\nand accounts. The friars yielded, but the ladies stoutly refused.\nThe magistrates, however, had all the looms carried away, whilst a\nmob howled at the gates, and agitators, excited by the four renegade\npriests, ran about the town stirring up the people against the\nreligious. \"All the worst characters,\" says the old chronicler,\n\"joined the rioters; the curious came to swell the crowd, and people\nof means shut themselves into their houses.\"[51] For Johann Groeten,\nthe orator of the band, now proclaimed that having emptied the\nstrong boxes of the monks and nuns, they would despoil all those\nwhose fortunes exceeded two thousand ducats.\n\n  [47] Kerssenbroeck, p. 114.\n\n  [48] _Ibid._ p. 115.\n\n  [49] Kerssenbroeck, p. 116.\n\n  [50] _Ibid._ p. 117.\n\n  [51] _Ibid._ p. 120.\n\nThe rioters next marched to the town hall, where the senators\nsat trembling, and they demanded the immediate confirmation of a\npetition in thirty-four articles that had been drawn up for them by\ntheir leaders. At the same time the mob announced that unless their\npetition was granted they would execute its requirements with their\nown hands.\n\nIt asked that the canons of the cathedral should be required to pay\nthe debts of the bishop deceased; that criminal jurisdiction should\nbe withdrawn from the hands of the clergy; that the monks and nuns\nshould be forbidden to exercise any manufacture, to dry grain, make\nlinen, and rear cattle; that the burden of taxation should be shared\nby the clergy; that rectors should not be allowed to appoint or\ndismiss their curates without consent of the parish; that lawsuits\nshould not be allowed to be protracted beyond six weeks; that beer\nlicences should be abolished, and tolls on the bridges done away\nwith; that monks and nuns should be allowed free permission to\nleave their religious societies and return to the world; that the\nproperty of religious houses should be sold and distributed amongst\nthe needy, and that the municipality should allow them enough for\ntheir subsistence; that the Carmelites, the Augustinians, and the\nDominicans should be suppressed; that pious foundations for masses\nfor the repose of souls should be confiscated; and that people\nshould be allowed to marry in Lent and Advent. The magistrates\nyielded at once, and promised to endeavour to get the consent of the\nother estates of the diocese to the legalising of these articles.[52]\n\n  [52] Kerssenbroeck, p. 126.\n\nOn the morrow of the Ascension, 1525, the magistrates closed the\ngates of the town, and betook themselves to the clergy of the\nchapter to request them to accept the thirty-four articles. The\ncanons refused at first, but, in fear of the people, they consented,\nbut wrote to the bishop to tell him what had taken place, and to\nurge him to act with promptitude, and not to forget that the rights\nand privileges of the Church were in jeopardy.\n\nIt was one of the misfortunes in Germany, as it was in France,\nthat the clergy were exempt from taxation. This precipitated the\nRevolution in France, and aroused the people against the clergy;\nand in Germany it served as a strong motive for the adoption of the\nReformation.\n\nThe canons now fled the town, protesting that their signatures\nhad been wrested from them by violence, and that they withdrew\ntheir consent to the articles. The inferior clergy remained at\ntheir post, and exhibited great energy and decision. They deprived\nLubert Causen, minister of St. Martins, one of the most zealous\nfautors of Lutheranism in M\u00fcnster, and the head of the reforming\nparty. When his parishioners objected, a packet of love-letters\nhe had written to several girls in the town, and amongst others\nsome to a young woman of respectable position whom he had seduced,\ncame to light, and were read in the Senate. The reformer had in\nhis letters used scriptural texts to excuse and justify the most\nshameless libertinage.[53] Johann Tante, preacher at St. Lambert,\nand Gottfried Reining, of Ueberwasser, were also deprived. As for\nthe Lutheran preacher at St. Ludger, Johann Fink, \"his mouth was\nstopped by the gift of a fat prebendal stall, and from that moment\nhe entirely lost his zeal for the gospel of Wittenberg, and never\nuttered another word against the Catholic religion.\"[54]\n\n  [53] Kerssenbroeck, p. 128.\n\n  [54] _Ibid._\n\nBy means of the mediation of the Archbishop of Cologne, a\nreconciliation was effected. The articles were abolished and the\nsignatures annulled, and the members of the chapter returned to\nM\u00fcnster, which had felt their absence by the decrease in trade, and\nthe inconstant people \"showed at least as much joy at their return\nas they had shown hatred at their departure.\"[55]\n\n  [55] _Ibid._ p. 138.\n\nThere can be no question but that the Reformation in Germany was\nprovoked to a large extent by abuses and corruptions in the Church.\nTo a much larger extent it was a revolt against the Papacy which had\nweakened and numbed the powers of the Empire throughout the Middle\nAges from the time of the Emperor Henry IV. But chiefly as a social\nand political movement it was the revolt of municipalities against\nthe authority of collegiate bodies of clergy and the temporal\njurisdiction of prince-bishops, or of grand dukes and margraves and\nelectors favouring the change because it allowed them at a sweep\nto confiscate vast properties and melt down tons of chalices and\nreliquaries into coin.\n\nIn M\u00fcnster lived a draper, Bernhard Knipperdolling by name, who\nassembled the malcontents in his house, or in a tavern, and poured\nforth in their ears his sarcasms against the Pope, the bishops,\nthe clergy and the Church. He was well known for his dangerous\ninfluence, and the bishop, Frederic von Wied, arrested him as\nhe passed near his residence at Vecht. The people of M\u00fcnster,\nexasperated at the news of the captivity of their favourite, obliged\nthe magistrates and the chapter to ask the bishop to release him.\nFrederick von Wied yielded with reluctance, using these prophetic\nwords, \"I consent, but I fear that this man will turn everything\nin M\u00fcnster and the whole diocese upside down.\" Knipperdolling left\nprison, after having taken an oath to keep the peace; but on his\nreturn to M\u00fcnster he registered a vow that he would terribly revenge\nhis incarceration and would make the diocese pay as many ducats as\nhis captivity had cost him hellers.[56]\n\n  [56] Kerssenbroeck, p. 143.\n\nThere was another man in M\u00fcnster destined to exercise a fatal\ninfluence on the unfortunate city. This was a priest named Bernard\nRottmann.[57] As a child he had been chorister at St. Maurice's\nChurch at M\u00fcnster, where his exquisite voice had attracted notice.\nHe was educated in the choir school, then went to Mainz, where\nin 1524 he took his Master's degree, and returning to M\u00fcnster,\nwas ordained priest in 1529. He was then given the lectureship of\nthe church in which, as a boy, he had sung so sweetly. He shortly\nexhibited a leaning towards Lutheranism, and the canons of St.\nMaurice, who had placed great hopes on the young preacher, thinking\nthat he acted from inexperience and without bad intent, gave him\na paternal reprimand, and provided him with funds to go to the\nUniversity of Cologne, and study there dogmatic and controversial\ntheology; at the same time undertaking to retain Rottmann in the\nreceipt of his salary as lecturer, and to this they added a handsome\npension to assist him in his studies.\n\n  [57] _Ibid._ 148; Latin edition, p. 1517-9; Dorpius, f. 391 a.\n\nThe young man received this money, and then, instead of going to\nCologne, betook himself to Wittenberg, where he attached himself\nto Melancthon. On his return to M\u00fcnster, the canons, unaware of\nthe fraud that had been played upon them, reinstated Rottmann in\nthe pulpit. He was too crafty to publish his new tenets in his\ndiscourses, and thus to insure the loss of his situation, but he\nemployed his secret influence in society to spread Lutheranism.\nAfter a while, when he considered his party strong enough to support\nhim, he threw off the mask, and preached boldly against the priests\nand the bishops, and certain doctrines of the Catholic Church.\nThe more violent he became in his attacks, the more personal and\ncaustic in his language, the greater grew the throng of people to\nhear him. Then he preached against Confession, which he called \"the\ndisturber of consciences,\" and contrasted it with Justification by\nFaith only, which set consciences at ease; he preached against good\nworks, against the obligation to observe the moral law, and assured\nhis hearers that grace was freely imputed to them, live as they\nliked, and that the Gospel afforded them entire freedom from all\nrestraints. \"The shameless dissolution which now began to spread\nthrough the town,\" says Kerssenbroeck, \"proved that the mob adopted\nthe belief in the impunity of sin; all those who were ruined in\npocket, hoping to get the possessions of others, joined the party of\ninnovators, and Rottmann was extolled by them to the skies.\"[58]\n\n  [58] Kerssenbroeck, p. 152.\n\nThe Senate forbade the citizens to attend Rottmann's sermons, but\ntheir orders were disregarded. The populace declared that Master\nBernard was the only preacher of the true Gospel, and they covered\nwith slander and abuse those who strove to oppose his seductive\ndoctrine. \"Some of the episcopal councillors, however,\" says the\nhistorian, \"favoured the innovator. The private secretary of the\nbishop, Leonhard Mosz, encouraged him secretly, and promised him his\nsupport in the event of danger.\"[59]\n\n  [59] Kerssenbroeck, p. 152.\n\nBut the faithful clergy informed the bishop of the scandal, and\nbefore Mosz and others could interfere, a sentence of deprivation\nwas pronounced against him.\n\nRottmann, startled by this decisive measure, wrote a series of\nletters to Frederick von Wied, which have been preserved by\nKerssenbroeck, in which he pretended that he had been calumniated\nbefore \"the best and most just of bishops,\" and excused himself,\ninstead of boldly and frankly announcing his secession from the\nCatholic Church. In reply, the bishop ordered him to quit M\u00fcnster,\nand charged his councillors to announce to him that his case\nwould be submitted to the next synod. Rottmann then wrote to the\ncouncillors a letter which exhibits his duplicity in a clearer\nlight. Frederick von Wied, hearing of this letter, ordered the\nrecalcitrant preacher to quit the convent adjoining the church\nof St. Maurice, and to leave the town. Rottmann thereupon took\nrefuge in the house of Knipperdolling and his companions. Under the\nprotection of these turbulent men, the young preacher assumed a\nbolder line, and wrote to the bishop demanding a public discussion,\nand announcing that shortly his doctrine would be published in a\npamphlet, and thus be popularised.\n\nOn the 23rd of January, 1532, Rottmann's profession of faith\nappeared, addressed in the form of a letter to the clergy of\nM\u00fcnster.[60] Like all the professions of faith of the period, it\nconsisted chiefly of a string of negations, with a few positive\nstatements retained from the Catholic creed on God, the Incarnation,\n&c. He denied the special authority of the priesthood, reduced the\nSacraments to signs, going thereby beyond Luther; rejected doctrines\nof the Eucharistic Sacrifice, Purgatory, the intercession of saints,\nand the use of images, pilgrimages, vows, benedictions, and the\nlike. It would certainly have been more appropriately designated\na Confession of Disbelief. This pamphlet was widely circulated\namongst the people, and the party of Lutheran malcontents, headed\nby Knipperdolling, and Herman Bispink, a coiner and forger of\ntitle-deeds, grew in power, in numbers, and in audacity.\n\n  [60] Kerssenbroeck, p. 165 _et seq._; Latin edition, Mencken, p.\n  1520-8: Sleidan, French tr., p. 406.\n\nOn the 23rd of February, 1532, Knipperdolling and his associates\nassembled the populace early, and carried Rottmann in triumph to\nthe church of St. Lambert. Finding the doors shut, they mounted the\npreacher on a wooden pulpit before the bone-house. The Reformer then\naddressed the people on the necessity of proclaiming evangelical\nliberty and of destroying idolatry; of overthrowing images and the\nHost preserved in the tabernacles. His doctrine might be summed\nup in two words: liberty for the Evangelicals to do what they\nliked, and compulsion for the Catholics. The sermon produced a\ntremendous effect; before it was concluded the rioters rushed\ntowards the different churches, burst open the doors, tore down the\naltars, reliquaries, statues; and the Sacrament was taken from the\ntabernacles and trampled under foot. The cathedral alone, defended\nby massive gates, escaped their fury.[61]\n\n  [61] Kerssenbroeck, p. 185; Bullinger, \"Adversus Anabaptist.\"\n  lib. ii. c. 8.\n\nProud of this achievement, the insurgents defied all authority,\nsecular and ecclesiastical, and installed Bernhard Rottmann as\npreacher and pastor of the Evangelical religion in St. Lambert's\nChurch. \"Thenceforth,\" says the M\u00fcnster contemporary historian, \"it\nmay well be understood that they did not limit themselves to simple\ntumults, but that murders, pillage, and the overthrow of all public\norder followed. The success of this first enterprise had rendered\nthe leaders masters of the city.\"\n\nBishop Frederick von Wied felt that his power was at an end. He\nwas a man with no very strong religious zeal or moral courage.\nHe resigned his dignity in the sacristy of the church of Werne,\nreserving to himself a yearly income of 2,000 florins. Duke Eric\nof Brunswick, Prince of Grubenhagen, Bishop of Paderborn and\nOsnabr\u00fcck, was elected in his room. The nomination of Eric irritated\nthe Lutheran party. He was a man zealous for his religion, and\nwith powerful relations. Rottmann at once sent him his twenty-nine\narticles, and the artisans of M\u00fcnster, who had embraced the cause\nof Rottmann, handed in a petition to the magistrates (April 16th,\n1532) to request that compulsion might be used to force every one\nto become Lutheran, \"because it seems to us,\" said they, \"that\nthis doctrine is in all points and entirely conformable to the\nGospel, whilst that which is taught by the rest of the clergy is\nabsurd, and ought to be rejected.\"[62] The bishop-elect wrote to the\nmagistrates, insisting on the dismissal of Rottmann, but in their\nanswer they not only declined to obey, but offered an apology for\nhis conduct.\n\n  [62] Kerssenbroeck, pp. 189-90.\n\nThe bishop wrote again, but received no answer. Wishing to use every\nmeans of conciliation, before adopting forcible measures, he sent a\ndeputation to M\u00fcnster to demand the expulsion of the preacher, but\nwithout success.\n\nThe people, becoming more insubordinate, determined to take\npossession of other churches. One of the most important is the\nchurch of Unsere Lieb-frau, or Ueberwasser, a church whose\nbeautiful tower and choir attract the admiration of the traveller\nvisiting M\u00fcnster. This church and parish depended on the convent of\nUeberwasser; the rector was a man of zeal and power, a Dr. Martin,\nwho was peculiarly obnoxious to the Lutheran party. A deputation\nwas sent to the abbess, Ida von Merfelt, to insist on the dismissal\nof the rector and the substitution of an Evangelical preacher.[63]\nThe lady was a woman of courage; she recommended the deputation\nto return to their shops and to attend to their own business, and\nannounced that Dr. Martin should stay at his post; and stay he did,\nfor a time.\n\n  [63] _Ibid._ p. 203.\n\nThe bishop was resolved to try force of arms, when suddenly he died,\nMay 9th, 1532, after having drunk a goblet of wine. Several writers\nof the period state that it was poisoned. A modern historian says he\ndied of excess of drink--on what authority I do not know.[64] He had\nbrought down upon himself the dislike of the Lutherans for having\nvigorously suppressed the reforming movement in Paderborn. The\nhistory of that movement in this other Westphalian diocese is too\nsuggestive to be passed over. In 1527 the Elector John Frederick of\nSaxony passed through Paderborn and ordered his Lutheran preachers\nto address the people in the streets through the windows of the\nhouse in which he lodged, as the clergy refused them the use of the\nchurches. Next year the agitation began by a quarrel between some\nof the young citizens and the servants of the chapter, and ended in\nthe plundering and devastation of the cathedral and the residences\nof the canons. The leader of the Evangelical party in Paderborn was\nJohann Molner of Buren, a man who had been expelled from the city\nin 1531 for murder and adultery; he left, taking with him as his\nmistress the wife of the man he had murdered, and retired to Soest,\n\"where,\" says a contemporary writer, Daniel von Soest, \"he did not\nremain satisfied with this woman only.\" He returned to Paderborn as\na burning and shining gospel light, and led the iconoclastic riot.\nDuke Philip of Grubenhagen supported his brother, and the town was\nforced to pay 2,000 gulden for the damage done, and to promise to\npay damages if any further mischief took place, and this so cooled\nthe zeal of the citizens of Paderborn for the Gospel that it died\nout.[65]\n\n  [64] St\u00fcrc, \"Gerchichte v. Osnabr\u00fcck.\" Osnab. 1826, pt. iii. p.\n  25.\n\n  [65] Vehse, \"Geschichte der Deutschen H\u00f6fe.\" Hamburg, 1859, vol.\n  xlvii. p. 4-6. Bessen, \"Geschichte v. Paderborn\"; Paderb. 1820,\n  vol. ii. p. 33.\n\nThe chapter retired to Ludwigshausen for the purpose of electing\nthe successor to Bishop Eric, who had only occupied the see three\nmonths; their choice fell on Francis von Waldeck, Bishop of Minden,\nand then of Osnabr\u00fcck. The choice was not fortunate; it was dictated\nby the exigencies of the times, which required a man of rank and\npower to occupy the vacant throne, so as to reduce the disorder by\nforce of arms. Francis of Waldeck was all this, but the canons were\nnot at that time aware that he had himself strong leanings towards\nLutheranism; and after he became Bishop of M\u00fcnster he would have\nreadily changed the religion of the place, had it not been that such\na proceeding would, under the circumstances, have involved the loss\nof his income as prince-bishop. Later, when the disturbances were at\nan end, he proposed to the Estates the establishment of Lutheranism\nand the suppression of Catholicism, as we shall see in the sequel.\nHe even joined the Smalkald union of the Protestant princes against\nthe Catholics in 1544.\n\nWith sentiments so favourable to the Reform, the new bishop would\nhave yielded everything to the agitators, had they not assumed a\nthreatening attitude, and menaced his temporal position and revenue,\nwhich were the only things connected with the office for which he\ncared.\n\nThe inferior clergy of M\u00fcnster wrote energetically to him on his\nappointment, complaining of the innovations which succeeded each\nother with rapidity in the town. \"The Lutheran party,\" said they in\nthis letter, \"are growing daily more invasive and insolent,\" and\nthey implored the bishop to protect their rights and liberty of\nconscience against the tyranny of the new party, who, not content\nwith worshipping God in their own way, refused toleration to others,\noutraged their feelings by violating all they held most sacred, and\ndisturbed their services by unseemly interruptions.\n\nFrancis of Waldeck renewed the orders of his predecessor. The senate\nacknowledged the receipt of his letter, and promised to answer it on\na future occasion.\n\nHowever, the warmest partisans of Rottmann were resolved to carry\nmatters to a climax, and at once to overthrow both the episcopal and\nthe civil authority. Knipperdolling persuaded the butcher Modersohn\nand the skinner Redekker that, as provosts of their guilds, they\nwere entitled to convene the members of their trades without the\nintervention of the magistrates. These two men accordingly convoked\nthe people for the 1st July.[66] The assembly was numerously\nattended, and opened tumultuously. When silence was obtained, a\ncertain Johann Windemuller rose and proclaimed the purpose of the\nconvention. \"The affair is one of importance,\" said he; \"we have to\nmaintain the glory of God, our eternal welfare, the happiness of all\nour fellow-citizens, and the development of our franchises; all\nthese things depend on the sacred ecclesiastical liberty announced\nto us by the worthy Rottmann. We must conclude an alliance against\nthe oppressors of the Gospel, that the doctrine of Rottmann, which\nis incontestably the true one, may be protected.\" These words\nproduced such enthusiasm, that the audience shouted with one voice\nthat \"they would defend Rottmann and his doctrine to their last\nfarthing, and the last drop of their blood.\" Some of those present,\nby their silence, expressed their displeasure, but a draper named\nJohann Mennemann had the courage to raise his voice against the\nproposal. A furious band at once attacked him with their fists,\ncrying out that the enemies of the pure Gospel must be destroyed;\n\"already the bold draper was menaced with their daggers, when one\nof his friends succeeded in effecting his escape from the popular\nrage.\" However, he was obliged to appear before the heads of the\nguilds and answer for his opposition. Mennemann replied, that\nin weighty matters concerning the welfare of the commonwealth,\ntumultuous proceedings were not likely to produce good resolutions,\nand that he advised the separation of the corporations, that the\nquestions might be maturely considered and properly weighed.[67]\n\n  [66] Kerssenbroeck, p. 207; Dorpius, f. 391 b. 392.\n\n  [67] _Ibid._ p. 208.\n\nThe corporations of trades now appointed twenty-six individuals, in\naddition to the provosts, to decide on measures adapted to carry\nout the resolution. This committee decided \"that one religion alone\nshould be taught in the town for the future and for ever after;\"\nand that \"if any opposition was offered by the magistrates, the\nwhole body of the citizens should be appealed to.\"[68]\n\n  [68] Kerssenbroeck, p. 209.\n\nThese decisions were presented to the senate on the 11th July, which\nreplied that they were willing not to separate themselves from\nevangelical truth, but that they were not yet satisfied on which\nside it was to be found, and that they would ask the bishop to send\nthem learned theologians who should investigate the matter.\n\nThis reply irritated Rottmann, Knipperdolling, and their followers.\nOn the 12th July fresh messengers were sent to the Rath (senate) to\nknow whether it might be reckoned upon. The answer was equivocal.\nA third deputation insisted on an answer of \"Yes\" or \"No,\" and\nthreatened a general rising of the people unless their demands were\nacceded to.[69] The magistrates, in alarm, promised their adhesion\nto the wishes of the insurgents, who demanded at once that \"sincere\npreachers of the pure Gospel\" should be installed in every church of\nM\u00fcnster. The councillors accordingly issued orders to all the clergy\nof the city to adopt the articles of Bernard Rottmann, or to refute\nthem by scriptural arguments, or they must expect the Council to\nproceed against them with the extremest rigour of the law.\n\n  [69] _Ibid._ pp. 210, 211.\n\nThen, to place the seal on their cowardly conduct, they wrote to\nthe prince-bishop on the 25th, to excuse themselves of complicity\nin the institution of Rottmann, but at the same time they undertook\nthe defence of the Reformer, and assured the bishop that his\ndoctrine was sound and irrefutable. At the same time they opened\na communication with the Landgrave Philip of Hesse, asking that\nbulwark of the Reformation to protect them. Philip wrote back,\npromising his intervention, but warning them not to make the Gospel\nan excuse for revolt and disorder, and not to imagine that Christian\nliberty allowed them to seize on all the property of the Church. At\nthe same time he wrote to the prince-bishop to urge upon him not to\ndeprive the good and simple people of M\u00fcnster of their evangelical\npreachers.[70]\n\n  [70] Kerssenbroeck, pp. 213-23.\n\nIn the meantime the seditious members of the town guilds grew\nimpatient; and on the 6th August they sent a deputation to the town\ncouncil reminding it of its promise, and insisting on the immediate\ndeprivation of all the Catholic clergy. The magistrates sought\nto gain time, but the deputation threatened them with the people\ntaking the law into their own hands, rejecting the authority of the\ncouncil, and electing another set of magistrates.\n\n\"The Rath, on hearing this,\" says Kerssenbroeck, \"were filled with\nalarm, and they considered it expedient to yield, in part at least,\nto the populace, and to deprive the clergy of their rights, rather\nthan to expose themselves rashly to the greatest dangers.\"[71]\n\n  [71] _Ibid._ p. 272.\n\nThey resolved therefore to forbid the Catholic clergy the use of\nthe pulpits of the churches, and to address the people in any form.\nThis was done at once, and all ceremonies \"contrary to the pure word\nof God\" were abolished, and the faithful in the different parishes\nwere required to receive and maintain the new pastors commissioned\nby the burgomaster and corporation to minister to them in things\ndivine.\n\nOn the 10th August, a crowd, headed by Rottmann, the preacher\nBrixius, and Knipperdolling, fell upon the churches and completed\nthe work of devastation which had been begun in February. The\nCathedral and the Church of Ueberwasser alone escaped their\nVandalism, because the fanatics were afraid of arousing too strong\nan opposition. The same day the celebration of mass and communion in\none kind were forbidden under the severest penalties; the priests\nwere driven out of their churches, and Rottmann, Brixius, Glandorp,\nRolle, Wertheim, and Gottfried Ninnhoven, Lutheran preachers, were\nintruded in their room.[72]\n\n  [72] _Ibid._ pp. 228-34.\n\nThe peace among these new apostles of the true Gospel was, however,\nsubject to danger. Pastor Brixius had fallen in love with the sister\nof Pastor Rottmann, and the appearance of the girl proved to every\none that the lovers had not waited for the ceremony of marriage.\nRottmann insisted on this brother pastor marrying the young woman to\nrepair the scandal. But no sooner was the bride introduced into the\nparsonage of St. Martin, of which Brixius was in possession, than\nthe first wife of the evangelical minister arrived in M\u00fcnster with\nher two children. Brixius was obliged to send away the new wife, but\na coldness ensued between him and Rottmann; \"however, fearing to\ncause dissension amongst their adherents by an open quarrel, they\ncame to some arrangement, and Brixius retained his situation.\"[73]\n\n  [73] Kerssenbroeck, pp. 228, 229.\n\nThese acts of violence and scandals had inspired many of the\ncitizens with alarm. Those who were able sent their goods out of\nthe town; the nuns of Ueberwasser despatched their title-deeds\nand sacred vessels to a place of safety. Several of the wealthy\ncitizens and senators, who would not give up their religion,\ndeserted M\u00fcnster, and settled elsewhere. The two burgomasters,\nEbroin Drost and Willebrand Plonies, resigned their offices and\nleft the city never to return.[74] The provosts of the guilds next\ninsisted on the severe repression of all Catholic usages and the\nperformance of sacraments by the priests; they went further, and\ninsisted on belief in the sacrifice of the altar and adoration of\nthe Host being made penal. The clergy wrote to the bishop imploring\nhis aid, and assuring him that their position was daily becoming\nmore intolerable; but Francis of Waldeck recommended patience, and\npromised his aid when it lay in his power to assist them.\n\n  [74] _Ibid._ p. 230.\n\nOn the 17th September, 1532, he convoked the nobles of the\nprincipality at Wollbeck, gave them an account of the condition\nof M\u00fcnster, and conjured them to assist him in suppressing the\nrebellion.[75] The nobles replied, that before adopting violent\nmeasures, it would be advisable to attempt a reconciliation. Eight\ncommissioners were chosen from amongst the barons, who wrote to the\nmagistrates, and requested them to send their deputies to Wollbeck\non Monday, September 23rd, \"so as to come to some decision on what\nis necessary for the welfare of the republic.\" The envoys of the\ncity appeared, and after the opening of the assembly, the grand\nmarshal of the diocese described the condition of the city, and\ndeclared that if it pursued its course of disobedience, the nobility\nwere prepared to assist their prince in re-establishing order. The\ndelegates were given eight days to frame an answer. The agitation\nin M\u00fcnster during these days was great. The evangelical preachers\nlost no time in exciting the people. The deputies returned to the\nconference with a vague answer that the best way to settle the\ndifferences would be to submit them to competent and enlightened\njudges; and so the matter dropped.\n\n  [75] _Ibid._ p. 248 _et seq._\n\nThe bishop's officers now captured a herd of fat cattle belonging to\nsome citizens of M\u00fcnster, which were on their way to Cologne, and\nrefused to surrender them till the preachers of disaffection were\nsent away.[76]\n\n  [76] Kerssenbroeck, pp. 268-9.\n\nThe party of Rottmann and Knipperdolling now required the town\ncouncil to raise 500 soldiers for the defence of the town, should\nit be attacked by the prince-bishop--to strike 2000 ducats in\ncopper for the payment of the mercenaries, such money to circulate\nin M\u00fcnster alone--to order the sentinels to forbid egress to the\nCatholic clergy, should they attempt to fly--and to impose on the\nCatholic clergy a tax of 4000 florins a month for the support of\nthe troops. As the clergy had been deprived of their benefices,\nforbidden to preach and minister the sacraments, this additional\nact of persecution was intolerable in its injustice. The senate\naccepted these requisitions with some abatement--the number of\nsoldiers was reduced to 300.[77]\n\n  [77] _Ibid._ p. 279 _et seq._\n\nThe bishop, finding that the confiscation of the oxen had not\nproduced the required results, adopted another expedient which\nproved equally ineffectual. He closed all the roads by his cavalry,\ndeclared the city in a state of blockade, and forbade the peasantry\ntaking provisions into M\u00fcnster. The artizans then marched out and\ntook the necessary food; they paid for it, but threatened the\npeasants with spoliation without repayment, unless they frequented\nthe market with their goods as usual. This menace produced its\neffect; M\u00fcnster continued to be provisioned as before.[78]\n\n  [78] _Ibid._ p. 283 _et seq._\n\nProud of their success, the innovators attacked Ueberwasser Church,\nand ordered the abbess to dismiss the Catholic clergy who ministered\nthere, and to replace them by Gospel preachers. She declined\nperemptorily, and the mob then drove the priests out of the church\nand presbytery, and instituted Lutherans in their place.[79]\n\n  [79] _Ibid._ pp. 284, 285.\n\nNotwithstanding the decrees of the senate, the priests continued\ntheir exhortations and their ministrations in such churches as the\nEvangelicals were unable to supply with pastors, of whom there was\na lack. Brixius, the bigamist minister of St. Martin's, having\nfound in one of them a monk preaching to a crowd of women, rushed\nup into the pulpit, crying out that the man was telling them\nlies; \"but,\" says Kerssenbroeck, \"the devotees surrounded the\nunfortunate orator, beat him with their fists, slippers, wooden\nshoes and staves, so that he fled the church, his face and body\nblack and blue.\" Probably these women bore him a grudge also for his\ntreatment of Rottmann's sister, which was no secret. \"Furious at\nthis, he went next day to exhibit the traces of the combat to the\nsenate, entreating them to revenge the outrage he had received--he\na minister of the Holy Gospel; but, for the first time, the\nmagistrates showed some sense, and declared that they would not\nmeddle in the matter, because the guilty persons were too numerous,\nand that some indulgence ought to be shown to the fair sex.\"[80]\n\n  [80] Kerssenbroeck, p. 330.\n\nThe town council now sent deputies to the Protestant princes, Dukes\nErnest and Francis of L\u00fcneburg, the Landgrave Philip of Hesse, and\nCount Philip of Waldeck, brother of the prince-bishop, to promise\nthe adhesion of the city to the Smalkald union, and to request\ntheir assistance against their bishop. The situation was singular.\nThe city sought assistance of the Protestant union against their\nprince, desiring to overthrow his power, under the plea that he\nwas a Catholic bishop. And the bishop, at heart a Lutheran, and\nutterly indifferent to his religious position and responsibilities,\nwas determined to coerce his subjects into obedience, that he\nmight retain his rank and revenue as prince, intending, when the\ncity returned to its obedience, to shake off his episcopal office,\nto Lutheranize his subjects, and remain their sovereign prince,\nand possibly transform the ecclesiastical into a hereditary\nprincipality, the appanage of a family of which he would be the\nfounder. He had already provided himself with a concubine, Anna\nP\u00f6lmann, by whom he had children.\n\nWhilst the senate was engaged in treating with the Protestant\nprinces, negotiations continued with the bishop, at the diets\nconvoked successively at Dulmen and Wollbeck, but they were as\nfruitless as before. The deputies separated on the 9th December,\nagreeing to meet again on the 21st of the same month.\n\nAt this time there arrived in M\u00fcnster a formal refutation of\nthe theses of Rottmann, by John of Deventer, provincial of the\nFranciscans at Cologne.[81] The magistrates had repeatedly\ncomplained that \"the refusal of the Catholics to reply to Bernard\nRottmann was the sole cause of all the evil.\" At the same time they\nhad forbidden the Catholic clergy to preach or to make use of the\npress in M\u00fcnster. This answer came like a surprise upon them. It was\ncarried by the foes of the clergy to the magistrates. The news of\nthe appearance of this counterblast created the wildest excitement.\n\"The citizens, assembled in great crowds, ran about the streets to\nhear what was being said. Some announced that the victory would\nremain with Rottmann, others declared that he would never recover\nthe blow.\"\n\n  [81] Kerssenbroeck, p. 332.\n\nThe provosts of the guilds hastily drew up a petition to the senate\nto expel the clergy from the town, and to confiscate their goods;\nbut the magistrates refused to comply with this requisition, which\nwould have at once stirred up civil war.[82]\n\n  [82] _Ibid._ pp. 335-7.\n\nRottmann mounted the pulpit on St. Andrew's day, and declared that\non the following Sunday he would refute the arguments of John of\nDeventer. Accordingly, on the day appointed, he preached to an\nimmense crowd, taking for his text the words of St. Paul (Rom. xiii.\n12), \"The night is far spent, the day is at hand.\" The sermon was\nnot an answer to the arguments of John of Deventer, but a furious\nattack upon the Pope and Catholicism. Knipperdolling also informed\nthe people that he would rather have his children killed and cooked\nand served up for dinner than surrender his evangelical principles\nand return to the errors of the past.[83]\n\n  [83] _Ibid._ p. 338.\n\nOn the 21st December, 1532, Francis of Waldeck assembled the diet\nof the principality, and asked its advice as to the advisability\nof proclaiming war against M\u00fcnster, should the city persist in its\nobstinacy.[84] The clergy and nobles replied that, according to\nimmemorial custom, the prince must engage in war at his own cost,\nand that they were too heavily burdened with taxes for the Turkish\nwar to enable them to undertake fresh charges. Francis of Waldeck\nreminded them that he was obliged to pay a pension of 2000 florins\nto his predecessor, Frederick von Wied, and he affirmed that he also\nwas not in a condition to have recourse to arms.\n\n  [84] _Ibid._ p. 340 _et seq._\n\nWhilst the prince, his barons and canons were deliberating, Rottmann\nhad assumed the ecclesiastical dictatorship in the cathedral city,\nand had ordered, on his sole authority, the suppression of the\nobservance of fast-days.\n\nThe spirit of opposition and protestation that had been evoked\nalready manifested itself in strange excesses. \"Some of the\nEvangelicals refused to have the bread put into their mouths at\nCommunion,\" says Kerssenbroeck, \"but insisted on helping themselves\nfrom the table, or they stained themselves in taking long draughts\nat the large chalices. It is even said that some placed the bread\nin large soup tureens, and poured the wine upon it, and took it out\nwith spoons and forks, so that they might communicate in both kinds\nat one and the same moment.\"[85]\n\n  [85] Kerssenbroeck, p. 347.\n\nThe Reformer of M\u00fcnster began to entertain and to express doubts as\nto the validity of the baptism of infants, which he considered had\nnot the warrant of Holy Scripture. Melancthon wrote urgently to him,\nimploring him not to create dissensions in the Evangelical Church by\ndisturbing the arrangement many wise men had agreed upon. \"We have\nenemies enough,\" added Melancthon; \"they will be rejoiced to see us\ntearing each other and destroying one another.... I speak with good\nintention, and I take the liberty of giving my advice, because I am\ndevoted to you and to the Church.\"[86]\n\n  [86] _Ibid._ p. 348.\n\nLuther wrote as well, not to Rottmann, but to the magistrates\nof M\u00fcnster, praising their love of the Gospel, and urging them\nto beware of being drawn away by the damnable errors of the\nSacramentarians, Zwinglians, _aliorumque schwermerorum_.[87] The\nsenators received this apostolic epistle with the utmost respect\nand reverence imaginable; they communicated it to Rottmann and\nhis colleagues, and ordered them to obey it. But the senate had\nlong lost its authority; and this injunction was disregarded.[88]\n\"Disorder and infidelity made progress; the idle, rogues,\nspendthrifts, thieves, and ruined persons swelled the crowd of\nEvangelists.\"[89]\n\n  [87] _Ibid._ p. 349.\n\n  [88] Kerssenbroeck, p. 351.\n\n  [89] _Ibid._ p. 351.\n\nHowever, it was not enough to have introduced the new religion, to\nsatisfy the Evangelicals the Catholics must be completely deprived\nof the exercise of their religion. In spite of every hindrance,\nmass had been celebrated every Sunday in the cathedral. All the\nparish churches had been deprived of their priests, but the minster\nremained in the hands of the Catholics. As Christmas approached,\nmany men and women prepared by fasting, alms, and confession,\nto make their communion at the cathedral on the festival of the\nNativity.\n\nThe magistrates, hearing of their design, forbade them\ncommunicating, offering, as an excuse, that it would cause scandal\nto the partisans of the Reform. They also published a decree\nforbidding baptisms to be performed elsewhere than in the parish\nchurches; so as to force the faithful to bring their children to the\nministrations of men whom they regarded with aversion as heretics\nand apostates.[90]\n\n  [90] _Ibid._ p. 353.\n\nNo envoys from the capital attended the reunion of the chambers at\nWollbeck on the 20th December. But M\u00fcnster sent a letter expressing\na hope that the difference between the city and the prince might be\nterminated by mediation.\n\nThis letter gave the diet a chance of escaping from its very\ndifficult position of enforcing the rule of the prince without\nmoney to pay the soldiers. The diet undertook to lay the suggestion\nbefore the prince-bishop, and to transmit his reply to the envoys of\nM\u00fcnster.\n\nFrancis of Waldeck then quitted his diocese of Minden, and betook\nhimself to Telgte,[91] a little town about four miles from M\u00fcnster,\nwhere he was to receive the oath of allegiance and homage of his\nsubjects in the principality. The estates assembled at Wollbeck, and\nall the leading nobles and clergy of the diocese hastened to Telgte\nand assembled around their sovereign on the same day. A letter was\nat once addressed to the senate of M\u00fcnster by the assembled estates,\nurging it to send deputies to Telgte, the following morning, at\neight o'clock, to labour together with them at the re-establishment\nof peace.\n\n  [91] _Ibid._ p. 354 _et seq._ Sleidan, French tr. p. 407.\n\nThe deputies did not appear; the senate addressed to the diet,\ninstead, a letter of excuses. The estates at once replied that in\nthe interest of peace, they regretted the obstinacy with which the\nsenate had refused to send deputies to Telgte; but that this had\nnot prevented them from supplicating the bishop to yield to their\nwishes; and that they were glad to announce that he was ready to\nsubmit the mutual differences to the arbitration of two princes of\nthe Empire, one to be named by himself, the other by the city of\nM\u00fcnster. And until the arbitration took place, the prince-bishop\nwould provisionally suspend all measures of severity, on condition\nthat the ancient usages should be restored in the churches, the\npreachers should cease to innovate, and that the imprisoned vassals\nof the bishop should be released.\n\nThis missive was sent into the town on the 25th; the magistrates\nrepresented to the bearer \"that it would be scandalous to occupy\nthemselves with temporal affairs on Christmas-day,\" and on this\npretext they persuaded him to remain till the morrow in M\u00fcnster.\nThen orders were given for the gates of the town to be closed, and\negress to be forbidden to every one.\n\nHaving taken these precautions, the magistrates assembled the\nprovosts of the guilds, and held with them a conference, which\nterminated shortly before nine o'clock the same evening; after which\nthe subaltern officers of the senate were sent round to rap at every\ndoor, and order the citizens to assemble at midnight, before the\ntown-hall. A nocturnal expedition had been resolved upon; but the\nmovement in the town had excited the alarm of the Catholics, who,\nthinking that a general massacre of those who adhered to the old\nreligion was in contemplation, hid themselves in drains and cellars\nand chimneys.\n\nArms were brought out of the arsenal, cannons were mounted, waggons\nwere laden with powder, shot, beams, planks and ladders. At the\nappointed hour, the crowd, armed in various fashions, assembled\nbefore the Rath-haus.[92] The magistrates and provosts then selected\nsix hundred trusty Evangelicals, and united them to a band of three\nhundred mercenaries and a small troop of horse. The rest were\ndispersed upon the ramparts and were recommended to keep watch;\nthen it was announced to the party in marching order that they were\nto hasten stealthily to Telgte and capture the prince-bishop, his\ncouncillors, the barons, and all the members of the estates then\nassembled in that little town.\n\n  [92] Kerssenbroeck, p. 358 _et seq._ Sleidan, French tr. p. 408.\n  Sleidan also gives the number as 900; Dorpius, f. 392 b.\n\nHowever, the diet, surprised at not seeing their messenger return,\nconceived a slight suspicion. Whether he feared that his person was\nin danger so near M\u00fcnster is not known, but fortunately for himself,\nthe prince, that same evening, left Telgte for his castle of Iburg.\nThe members of the diet, after long waiting, sent some men along the\nroad to the capital to ascertain whether their messenger was within\nsight. These men returned, saying that the gates of M\u00fcnster were\nclosed and that no one was to be seen stirring.\n\nThe fact was singular, not to say suspicious, and a troop of horse\nwas ordered to make a reconnaissance in the direction of M\u00fcnster. It\nwas already late at night, so, having given the order, the members\nof the diet retired to their beds. The horse soldiers beat the\ncountry, found all quiet, withdrew some planks from a bridge over\nthe Werse, between Telgte and M\u00fcnster, to intercept the passage, and\nthen returned to their quarters, for the night was bitterly cold. On\nsurmounting a hill, crowned by a gibbet, they, however, turned once\nmore and looked over the plain towards the city. A profound silence\nreigned; but a number of what they believed to be will-o'-the-wisps\nflitted here and there over the dark ground. As, according to\npopular superstition in Westphalia, these little lights are to be\nseen in great abundance at Yuletide, the horsemen paid no attention\nto them, but continued their return. These lights, mistaken for\nmarsh fires, were in fact the burning matches of the arquebuses\ncarried by those engaged in the sortie. On their return to Telgte,\nthe horse soldiers retired to their quarters, and in half-an-hour\nall the inhabitants of the town were fast asleep.\n\nMeanwhile, the men of M\u00fcnster advanced, replaced the bridge over\nthe Werse, traversed the plain, and reached Telgte at two o'clock\nin the morning. They at once occupied all the streets, according to\na plan concerted beforehand, then invaded the houses, and captured\nthe members of the diet, clergy, nobles and commons. Three only of\nthe cathedral chapter escaped in their night shirts with bare feet\nacross the frozen river Ems. The M\u00fcnsterians, having laid their\nhands on all the money, jewels, seals, and gold chains they could\nfind, retreated as rapidly as they had advanced, carrying off with\nthem their captives and the booty, but disappointed in not having\nsecured the person of the prince. They entered the cathedral city\nin triumph on the morning of the 26th December, highly elated at\ntheir success, and nothing doubting that with such hostages in\ntheir hands, they would be able to dictate their own terms to the\nsovereign.\n\nBut the expedition of Telgte had made a great sensation in the\nempire. Francis of Waldeck addressed himself to all the members of\nthe Germanic body, and appealed especially to his metropolitan, the\nElector of Cologne, for assistance, and also to the Dukes of Cleves\nand Gueldres. The elector wrote at once to M\u00fcnster in terms the\nmost pressing, because some of his own councillors were among the\nprisoners. He received an evasive answer. The Protestant princes of\nthe Smalkald league even addressed letters to the senate, blaming\nenergetically their high-handed proceeding. Philip Melancthon also\nwrote a letter of mingled remonstrance and entreaty.[93] The only\nresult of their appeals was the restoration to the prisoners of\ntheir money and the jewels taken from them.\n\n  [93] Kerssenbroeck, p. 368.\n\nJohn von Wyck, syndic of Bremen, was despatched by the senate of\nM\u00fcnster to the Landgrave Philip of Hesse, to ask him to undertake\nthe office of mediator between them and their prince. The Landgrave\nreadily accepted the invitation, and Francis of Waldeck was\nequally ready to admit his mediation, as he was himself, as has\nbeen already stated, a Lutheran at heart. The people of M\u00fcnster,\nfinding that the bishop was eager for a pacific settlement, insisted\non the payment of the value of the oxen he had confiscated, as a\npreliminary, before the subject of differences was entered upon. The\nprince-bishop consented, paid 450 florins, and allowed the Landgrave\nof Hesse to draw up sixteen articles of treaty, which met with the\napproval of both the senate and himself.\n\nThe terms of the agreement were as follows:[94]--\n\nI. The prince-bishop was to offer no violence to the inhabitants of\nM\u00fcnster in anything touching religion. \"The people of M\u00fcnster shall\nkeep the pure Word of God,\" said the article; \"it shall be preached\nto them, without any human additions by their preachers, in the six\nparish churches. These same preachers shall minister the sacraments\nand order their services and ceremonies as they please. The citizens\nshall submit in religious matters to the judgment of the magistrates\nalone, till the questions at issue are decided by a General Council.\"\n\n  [94] _Ibid._ p. 392 _et seq._\n\nII. The Catholics were to exercise their religion freely in the\ncathedral and in the capitular churches not included in the\npreceding article, _until Divine Providence should order otherwise_.\nThe Lutheran ministers were forbidden to attack the Catholics, their\ndogmas and rights, _unless the Word of God imperiously required\nit_;--a clause opening a door to any amount of abuse. As the\nspeciality of Protestantism of every sort consists in negation, it\nwould be impossible for an Evangelical pastor to hold his position\nwithout denouncing what he disbelieved.\n\nArticle III. interdicted mutual recriminations. Article IV., in\nstrange contradiction with Article I., declared that the town of\nM\u00fcnster should obey the prince-bishop as legitimate sovereign in\nmatters spiritual and temporal. The bishop in the Vth Article\npromised to respect the privileges of the subject.\n\nThe VIth Article forbade any one making an arbitrary use of the Word\nof God to justify refusal of obedience to the magistrates. Article\nVII. reserved to the clergy their revenues, with the exception of\nthe six parish churches, of which the revenues were to be employed\nfor the maintenance of the Evangelical pastors. By the VIIIth\nArticle the senate promised not to interfere with the collation to\nbenefices not in their hands by right. The IXth Article allowed the\ncitizens to deprive their pastors in the Lutheran churches, without\nthe intervention of the bishop. The rest of the Articles secured a\ngeneral amnesty, permission to the refugees to return, and to the\nimprisoned members of the diet to obtain their freedom.\n\nThis treaty was fair enough in its general provisions. If, as was\nthe case, a large number of the citizens were disposed to adopt\nLutheranism, no power on earth had any right to constrain them, and\nthey might justly claim the free exercise of their religion. But\nthere were suspicious clauses inserted in the 1st and 2nd Articles\nwhich pointed to the renewal of animosity and the re-opening of the\nwhole question.\n\nThis treaty was signed on the 14th February, 1533, by Philip of\nHesse, as mediator, Francis, Count of Waldeck, Prince and Bishop of\nM\u00fcnster, the members of chapter, the representatives of the nobles\nof the principality, and the burgomasters and senators of M\u00fcnster,\ntogether with those of the towns of Coesfeld and Warendorf, in\ntheir own name and in behalf of the other towns of the diocese.\nThe captive estates were liberated on the 18th February. How the\nmagistrates and town kept the other requirements of the treaty we\nshall soon see.\n\nThe senate having been constituted supreme authority in spiritual\nthings by the Lutheran party, now undertook the organisation of the\nEvangelical Church in the city; and a few days after the treaty had\nbeen signed, it published an \"Evangelical Constitution,\" consisting\nof ten articles, for the government of the new Church.[95]\n\n  [95] Kerssenbroeck, p. 398 _et seq._\n\nThe 8th article had a threatening aspect. \"The ministers of the\nDivine Word shall use their utmost endeavours to gain souls to the\ntrue faith, and to direct them in the ways of perfection. _As for\nthose who shall refuse to accept the pure doctrine_, and those who\nshall blaspheme and be guilty of public crimes, the senate will\nemploy against them all the rigour of the laws, and the sword of\njustice.\"\n\nRottmann was appointed by the magistrates Superintendent of the\nLutheran Church in M\u00fcnster, a function bearing a certain resemblance\nto that of a bishop.[96] Then, thinking that a bishop should be the\nhusband of one wife at least, Rottmann married the widow of Johann\nVigers, late syndic of M\u00fcnster. \"She was a person of bad character,\"\nsays Kerssenbroeck, \"whom Rottmann had inspired during her husband's\nlife with Evangelical principles and an adulterous love.\"[97] It is\nasserted, with what truth it is impossible at this distance of time\nto decide, that Vigers was drowned in his bath at Ems, in a fit,\nand that his wife allowed him to perish without attempting to save\nhim. Anyhow, no sooner was he dead, than she returned full speed to\nM\u00fcnster and married her lover.[98]\n\n  [96] _Ibid._ p. 402.\n\n  [97] _Ibid._ p. 403.\n\n  [98] _Ibid._ p. 404.\n\nThe reformer and his adherents had been given their own way, and\nthe senate hoped they would rest satisfied, and that tranquillity\nwould be re-established in the city. But their hopes were doomed\nto disappointment. Certain people, if given an inch, insist on\ntaking an ell; of these people Rottmann was one. Excited by him,\nthe Evangelicals of the town complained that the magistrates had\ntreated the Papists with too great leniency, that the clergy had\nnot been expelled and their goods confiscated according to the\noriginal programme. It was decided tumultuously that the elections\nmust be anticipated; and on the 3rd March, the people deposed the\nmagistrates and elected in their room the leaders of the extreme\nreforming party.[99] Knipperdolling was of their number; only four\nof the former magistrates were allowed to retain office, and these\nwere men whom they could trust. Hermann Tilbeck and Kaspar Judenfeld\nwere named burgomasters; Heinrich Modersohn and Heinrich Redekker\nwere chosen provosts or tribunes of the people.[100]\n\n  [99] Kerssenbroeck, p. 404.\n\n  [100] _Ibid._ p. 405.\n\nNext to the senate came the turn of the parishes. On the 17th March,\nunder the direction of Rottmann, the people proceeded to appoint\nthe ministers to the churches in the town. Their choice was not\nhappy; it fell on those most unqualified to exercise a salutary\ninfluence, and restrain the excitement of a mob already become\nnearly ungovernable.[101]\n\n  [101] _Ibid._ p. 406.\n\nThe new senate endeavoured to strengthen the Evangelical cause\nby uniting the other towns of the diocese in a common bond of\nresistance. They invited these towns to send their deputies to meet\nthose of the capital at a little inn between M\u00fcnster and Coesfeld,\non the 20th March. The assembly took place; but so far from the\nother cities agreeing to support M\u00fcnster, their deputies read those\nof the capital a severe lecture, and refused to throw off their old\nreligion and their allegiance to the bishop.[102]\n\n  [102] Kerssenbroeck, p. 407 _et seq._\n\nOn the 24th March, 1533, the burgomaster Tilbeck, accompanied by the\ncitizen Kerbink, went to Ueberwasser, summoned the abbess before\nhim, and ordered her to maintain at the expense of the abbey the\npreachers lately appointed to the church in connection with the\nconvent. She was forced to submit.[103]\n\n  [103] _Ibid._ p. 413.\n\nOn the 27th of the same month one of the preachers invaded the\nchurch of St. Ledger, still in the hands of the Catholics, at the\nhead of his congregation, broke open the tabernacle, drew out the\nHost, broke it, and blowing the fragments into the air, screamed to\nthe assembled multitude, \"Look at your good God flying away.\"\n\nThe same day the treaty was violated towards the Franciscans. Some\nof the senators ordered them to quit their convent, their habit,\nand their order, unless they desired still more rigorous treatment,\n\"because the magistrates were resolved to make the Church flourish\nagain in her ancient purity, and because they wanted to convert the\nconvent into a school.\"[104]\n\n  [104] _Ibid._ p. 413.\n\nThe superior replied that he and his brethren followed strictly\nthe rule of their founder, and that this house belonged to them by\nright of succession, and that they were no charge to the town. He\nsaid that if a building was needed for an Evangelical school, he\nwas ready to surrender to the magistrates a portion of the convent\nbuildings; all he asked in return was that he and his brethren\nshould be allowed to live in tranquillity. This proposal saved the\nFranciscans for a time. The Evangelical school was established\nin their convent, \"but at the end of a month it had fallen into\ncomplete disorder, whereas the old Papist school had not lost one of\nits pupils, and was as flourishing as ever.\"[105]\n\n  [105] Kerssenbroeck, p. 415.\n\nWhilst the senators menaced the monasteries, Knipperdolling and his\nfriend Gerhardt Kibbenbroeck pillaged the church of S. Lambert.\nScarcely a day now passed without some fresh act of violence done to\nthe Catholics, or Vandalism perpetrated on the churches.\n\nOn the 5th April the prior and monks of Bispinkhoff were forbidden\nby the magistrates to hear confessions in their own church. The\nsame day the Lutherans broke the altar and images in the church of\nUeberwasser, and scraped the paintings off the walls.\n\nOn Palm Sunday, April 6th,[106] at Ueberwasser, some of the nuns,\nurged by the preachers in their church, cast off their vows, and\njoining the people, chanted the 7th verse of the 124th Psalm\naccording to Luther's translation--\n\n    \"Der Strich ist entzwei,\n    Und wir sind frei.\"\n\n  [106] _Ibid._ p. 416.\n\n\"The snare is broken, and we are delivered;\" and then they received\nCommunion with the pastors.\n\nOn the 7th the mob pillaged the church of the Servites, and defaced\nit. Next day the Franciscans, who had made the wafers for the Holy\nSacrament for the churches in the diocese, were forbidden to make\nthem any more. On the 9th Knipperdolling, heading a party of the\nreformed, broke into the cathedral during the celebration of the\nHoly Eucharist, rushed up to the altar, and drove away the priest,\nexclaiming, \"Greedy fop, haven't you eaten enough good Gods yet?\"\nTwo days later the magistrates ordered the chapter to surrender\ninto their hands their title deeds and sacred vessels. On the 14th,\nBelkot, head of the city tribunal of M\u00fcnster, entered the church of\nS. Ledger, and carried off all its chalices, patens, and ciboriums,\nwhilst others who accompanied him destroyed the altars, paintings,\nand statuary, and profaned the church in the most disgusting manner.\nThe unhappy Catholics, unable to resist, uttered loud lamentations,\nand did not refrain from calling the perpetrators of the outrage\n\"robbers and sacrilegious,\" for which they were summoned before\nthe magistrates, and threatened with imprisonment unless they\napologised.[107]\n\n  [107] Kerssenbroeck 417.\n\nAs the news of the conversion of the city of M\u00fcnster to the Gospel\nspread, strangers came to it from all parts, to hear and to learn,\nas they gave out, pure Evangelical truth.\n\nAmongst these adventurers was a man destined to play a terribly\nprominent part in the great drama that was about to be enacted at\nM\u00fcnster. This was John Bockelson, a tailor, a native of Leyden, in\nHolland. He had quitted his country and his wife secretly to hear\nRottmann. He entered M\u00fcnster on the 25th July, and lodged with a\ncitizen named Hermann Ramers. Having been instructed in the Gospel\naccording to Luther, he went to preach in Osnabr\u00fcck, but from thence\nhe was driven. He then returned to his own home. There he became an\nAnabaptist, under the instruction of John Matthisson, who sent him\nwith Gerrit Buchbinder as apostles of the sect to Westphalia in the\nmonth of November, 1533.\n\nThe time had now arrived when the Lutheran party, which had so\ntyrannically treated the Catholics in the city of M\u00fcnster, was\nitself to be despotically put down and trampled upon by a sect which\nsprang from its own womb.\n\nRottmann had for some while been wavering in his adhesion to\nLutheranism.[108] He doubted first, and then disbelieved in\nthe Real Presence, which Luther insisted upon. He thought that\nthe reformation of the Wittenberg doctor was not sufficiently\nthoroughgoing in the matter of ceremonial; then he doubted the\nscriptural authority for the baptism of infants. Two preachers,\nHeinrich Rott and Herman Strapedius, fell in with his views. The\nformer had been a monk at Haarlem, but had become a Lutheran\npreacher. He regarded the baptism of infants as one of those things\nwhich are indifferent to salvation. Strapedius was more decided;\nhe preached against infant baptism as an abomination in the sight\nof God. He was named by the people preacher at S. Lambert's,\nthe head church of the city, in spite of the opposition of the\nauthorities.[109]\n\n  [108] Kerssenbroeck, p. 429 _et seq._; Sleidan, French tr. p.\n  409; Bullinger, \"Adv. Anabapt.,\" 116, ii. c. 8.\n\n  [109] Kerssenbroeck, pp. 431, 432; Dorp., f. 322-3.\n\nThe Lutheran senate of M\u00fcnster, which a few months previously had\nbeen elected enthusiastically by the people, now felt that before\nthese fiery preachers, drifting into Anabaptism, their power was\nin as precarious a position as was that of those whom they had\nsupplanted. Alarmed at the rapid extension of the new forms of\ndisbelief, they twice forbade Rottmann to preach against the baptism\nof infants and the Real Presence, and ordered him to conform in his\nteaching to authorised Lutheran doctrine. He treated their orders\nwith contempt. Then they summoned him before them: he appeared, but\non leaving the Rath-haus, preached in the square to the people with\nredoubled violence.\n\nThe senate, at their wits' end, ordered a public discussion between\nRottmann and the orthodox Lutherans, represented by Hermann Busch.\nThe discussion took place before the city Rath, and the senate\ndecided that Busch had gained the day, and they therefore forbade\nall innovation in the administration of baptism and the Lord's\nSupper.\n\nRottmann and his colleague disregarded the monition, and continued\ntheir sermons against the rags of Popery which still disfigured\nthe Lutheran Church. Several of the ministers in the town, whether\nfrom conviction or from interest, finding that their congregations\ndrained away to the churches where the stronger-spiced doctrine was\npreached, joined the movement. It was simply a carrying of negation\nbeyond the pillars of Hercules planted by Luther. Luther had denied\nof the sum total of Catholic dogmas, say ten, and had retained\nten. The Anabaptist denied two more, and retained only eight. On\nthe 10th August a tumultuous scene took place in the church of S.\nGiles.[110] A Dutch preacher began declaiming against baptism of\nchildren. Johann Windemoller, ex-senator, a vehement opponent of\nAnabaptist disintegration of Lutheran doctrine, who was in the\ncongregation, rushed up the pulpit stairs, and pulled the preacher\ndown, exclaiming, \"Scoundrel! how dare you take upon you the\noffice of preacher--you who, a few years ago, were thrust into the\niron-collar, and branded on the cheek for your crimes? Do you think\nI do not know your antecedents? You talk of virtue, you gibbet-bird?\nYou who are guilty of so many crimes and impieties? Go along with\nyou, take your doctrine and your brand elsewhere.\"\n\n  [110] Kerssenbroeck, p. 434.\n\nWindemoller was about to turn the pastor out of the church, when a\nnumber of women, who had joined the Anabaptist party, fell, howling,\nupon Windemoller, crying that he wanted to deprive them of the\nsaving Gospel and Word of Truth, and they would have strangled him\nhad he not beat a precipitate retreat. The same afternoon, some\ncitizens who brought their children to this church to be baptized\nwere driven from the doors with shouts of derision.\n\nThe magistrates played a trump card, and ordered Rottmann to\nleave the town, together with the ministers who followed his\nteaching.[111] Bernard Rottmann replied much in the same strain as\nhe had answered the bishop, stating that his doctrine was strictly\nconformable to the pure word of God, and that he demanded a public\ndiscussion, in which his doctrines might be tested by Scripture\nalone, without human additions. Finally he protested that he would\nnot abstain from preaching, nor desert his flock, whether the senate\npersisted in its sentence or not. Five ministers signed this defiant\nletter--Rottmann, Johann Clopris, Heinrich Roll, Gottfried Strahl,\nand Denis Vinnius. These men at once hastened to collect the heads\nof the corporations and provosts together, and urge them to take\ntheir part against the Rath. They were quite prepared to do so, and\nthe magistrates yielded on condition that Bernard and his following\nof preachers should abstain from speaking on the disputed questions\nof infant baptism and the Eucharist. Rottmann consented, in his\nown name and in that of his friends, in a paper dated October 3rd,\n1533.[112] The senate was, however, well aware that its power was\ntottering to its fall, and that the preachers had not the remotest\nintention of fulfilling their engagement. They saw that these men\nwere gradually absorbing into themselves the supreme authority in\nthe city, and that a magistracy which opposed them could at any\nmoment be by them dismissed their office. In alarm they wrote to\nthe prince-bishop, and sent him messengers to lay before him the\nprecarious condition of the affairs in the capital, imploring him\nto consider the imminence of the peril, and to send them learned\ntheologians who could combat the spread of erroneous doctrine, and\nintroduce those conformable to the pure word of God.[113]\n\n  [111] _Ibid._ p. 436.\n\n  [112] Kerssenbroeck, pp. 437-9.\n\n  [113] _Ibid._ p. 441.\n\nIt was a singular state of affairs indeed. The magistrates had\nappealed to the pure word of God, as understood by Luther, against\nCatholicism, and now the Anabaptists appealed to the same oracle,\nwith equal confidence against Lutheranism; the two parties leaned on\nthe same support--who was to decide which party Scripture upheld?\n\nThe answer of Francis of Waldeck was such as might have been\nexpected from a man endowed with some common sense. He reminded the\nmagistrates that it was their own fault if things had come to such\na pass; he feared that now the evil had gained the upper hand, and\nthat gentleness was out of place; a decided face could alone secure\nto the magistrates moral authority. He was ready to support them\nif they would maintain their allegiance for the future. He would\nsend them a learned theologian, Dr. Heinrich Mumpert, prior of the\nFranciscans of Bispinkhoff, to preach against error in the cathedral.\n\nThe senate was in a dilemma. They had no wish to return to\nCatholicism, and they dreaded the progress of schism. They stood on\nan inclined plane. Above was the rock of an infallible authority;\nbelow, faith shelved into an abyss of negation they shrank from\nfathoming. If they looked back, they saw Catholicism; if they\nlooked forward, they beheld the dissolution of all positive belief.\nLike all timorous men they shrank from either alternative, and\nattempted for a little longer to maintain their slippery position.\nThey declined the offer of the Catholic doctor, and turned to the\nLandgrave Philip of Hesse for assistance. The Landgrave at once\nacceded to the request of the magistrates, and sent them Theodore\nFabricius and Johann Melsinger, guaranteeing to their senate their\northodoxy.[114]\n\n  [114] Kerssenbroeck, p. 443; Sleidan, p. 410; Dorpius, f. 393 b.\n\nWhile these preachers were on their way, disorder increased in\nM\u00fcnster. The faction of Rottmann grew apace, and spread into the\nConvent of Ueberwasser, where the nuns were daily compelled to\nhear the harangues of two zealous Evangelical pastors, who exerted\nthemselves strenuously to demolish the faith of the sisters down\nto the point fixed as the limit of negation by Luther. But these\npastors having become infected with Rottmann's views, continued the\nwork of destruction, and lowered the temple of faith two additional\nstages.\n\nThe result of these sermons on the excitable nuns was that the\nmajority broke out into revolt, and refused to observe abstinence\nand practise self-mortification; and proclaimed their intention\nof returning to the world and marrying. The bishop wrote to them,\nimploring them to consider that they were all of them members of\nnoble families, and that they must be careful in no way to dishonour\ntheir families by scandalous behaviour. The mutineers seemed\ndisposed to yield, but we shall presently see that their submission\nwas only temporary.[115]\n\n  [115] Kerssenbroeck, p. 443.\n\nOn the 15th October, the senate wrote to the bishop, and informed\nhim that they would not permit the prior Mumpert to preach in the\ncathedral.[116] They acknowledged that according to the treaty\nof Telgte, the city had consented to allow the Catholics the\nuse of the cathedral, \"until such time as the Lord shall dispose\notherwise,\" but, they said, at the time of the conclusion of the\ntreaty, there was no preacher at the minster; which was true, for\nthe Catholic clergy had been forbidden the use of the pulpit; and\nthey declared that \"in all good conscience, they could not permit\nthe institution of one whose doctrine and manner of life were not\nconformable to the gospel.\"\n\n  [116] _Ibid._ p. 444.\n\nFrancis of Waldeck, without paying attention to this refusal,\nordered Mumpert to preach and celebrate the Eucharist in the\ncathedral church, on Sunday, 26th October, 1533. The prior obeyed.\nThe fury of the Evangelicals was without limits; and in a second\nletter, more insolent than the first, the magistrates told the\nbishop that \"they would not suffer a fanatical friar to come and\nteach error to the people.\" The bishop's sole reply was a command to\nthe prior to continue his course.\n\nAt this moment the learned divines sent by Philip of Hesse arrived\nin the city, and hearing of the sermons in the minster, to which the\npeople flocked, and which were likely to produce a counter current\nin a Catholic direction, they insisted, as a preliminary to their\nmission, that the mouth of the Catholic preacher should be stopped.\n\"We pray you,\" said they to the magistrates, \"to forbid this man\npermission to reside in the town, lest our pure doctrine be choked\nby his abominable sermons. An authority claiming to be Christian\nshould not tolerate such a scandal.\"\n\nThe senate hastened to satisfy the Hessian theologians, by not\nmerely ordering the Catholic preacher to leave the city, but by\noutlawing him, so that he was obliged in haste to fly a place\nwhere his life might be taken by any unscrupulous persons with\nimpunity.[117]\n\n  [117] Kerssenbroeck, p. 444 _et seq._\n\nFrancis of Waldeck, justly irritated, wrote to Philip of Hesse,\nremonstrating at the interference of his commissioners in the\naffairs of another man's principality.[118] The Landgrave replied\nthat, so far from deserving reproach, he merited thanks for\nhaving sent to M\u00fcnster two divines of the first class, who would\npreach there the pure Word of God, and would strangle the monster\nof Anabaptism. With the outlawry of the Catholic preacher, the\nstruggle between Catholicism and Lutheranism closed; the struggle\nfor the future was to be between Lutheranism and Anabaptism; a\nstruggle desperate on the part of the Lutherans, for what basis\nhad they for operation? The Catholics had an intrenched position\nin the authority of a Church, which they claimed to be invested\nwith divine inerrancy, by commission from Christ; but the Lutheran\nand Anabaptist fought over the pages of the Bible, each claiming\nScripture as on his side. It was a war within a camp, to decide\nwhich should pitch the other outside the rampart of the letter.\n\n  [118] _Ibid._ p. 457 _et seq._\n\nFabricius and Melsinger fought for Infant Baptism and the Real\nPresence, Rottmann and Strapedius against both. \"Do you call this\nthe body and blood of Christ?\" exclaimed Master Bernard one day,\nwhilst he was distributing the Sacrament; and flinging it on the\nground, he continued, \"Were it so, it would get up from the ground\nand mount the altar of itself without my help. Know by this that\nneither the body nor blood of Christ are here.\"[119]\n\n  [119] Dorpius, f. 394.\n\nPeter Wyrthemius, a Lutheran preacher, was interrupted, when he\nattempted to preach, by the shouts and jeers of the Anabaptists, and\nwas at last driven from his pulpit.\n\nRottmann kept his promise not to preach Anabaptist doctrine in\nthe pulpit, but he printed and circulated a number of tracts and\npamphlets, and held meetings in private houses for the purpose of\ndisseminating his views.[120] His reputation increased rapidly, and\nextended afar. Disciples came from Holland, Brabant, and Friesland,\nto place themselves under his direction; women even confided to him\nthe custody of their children.\n\n  [120] Kerssenbroeck, p. 448.\n\nThe most lively anxiety inspired the senate to make another attempt\nto regain their supremacy in the direction of affairs.\n\nOn the 3rd or 4th November, the heads of the guilds and the provosts\nand patricians of the city were assembled to deliberate, and it\nwas resolved that Rottmann and his colleagues should be expelled\nthe town and the diocese; and to remove from them the excuse that\nthey feared arrest when they quitted the walls of M\u00fcnster, the\nmagistrates obtained for them a safe-conduct, signed by the bishop\nand the upper chapter.[121]\n\n  [121] _Ibid._ p. 449.\n\nNext day, the magistrates and chief citizens reassembled in the\nmarket square, and voted that \"not only should the Anabaptist\npreachers be exiled, but also those of the magistrates who had\nsupported them; and that this sentence should receive immediate\nexecution.\"[122]\n\n  [122] Kerssenbroeck, p. 450 _et seq._\n\nThis was too sweeping a measure to pass without provoking\nresistance. The burgomaster, Tilbeck, who felt that the blow was\naimed at himself, exclaimed, angrily: \"Is this the reward I receive\nfor having prudently governed the republic? But we will not suffer\nthe innocent to be oppressed, and we shall treat you in such a\nmanner as will calm your insolence.\"\n\nThese words gave the signal for an open rupture.\n\nKnipperdolling and Hermann Krampe, both members of the senate, drew\ntheir swords and ranged themselves beside the burgomaster, calling\nthe people to arms. The mob at once rushed upon the senators. The\nservants of the chapter and the clergy in the cathedral close,\nhastened carrying arms to the assistance of the magistrates. Both\nparties sought a place of defence, each anticipating an attack.\nThe Lutherans occupied the Rath-haus and barricaded the doors. The\nAnabaptists retired behind the strong walls of the cemetery of St.\nLambert. The night was spent by both parties under arms, and a fight\nappeared imminent on the morrow. Then the syndic Johann von Wyck\npersuaded the frightened senate to moderate their sentence, and\nhurrying to the Anabaptists, he urged them to be reconciled to the\nmagistrates. An agreement was finally concluded, whereby Rottmann\nwas forbidden for the future to preach, and every one was to be\nallowed to believe what he liked, and to disbelieve what he chose.\n\nMaster Bernard, however, evaded his obligation by holding meetings\nin private houses at night, to which his followers were summoned by\nthe discharge of a gun.[123] Considering that it was now necessary\nthat his adherents should have their articles of belief, or rather\nof disbelief, as a bond of union and of distinction between\nthemselves and the Lutherans, he drew up a profession of faith in\nnineteen articles. That which he had published nine months before\nwas antiquated, and represented the creed of the Lutheran faction,\nagainst which he was now at variance.\n\n  [123] Kerssenbroeck, p. 453 _et seq._\n\nThis second creed contained the following propositions:--\n\nThe baptism of children is abominable before God.\n\nThe habitual ceremonies used at baptism are the work of the devil\nand of the Pope, who is Antichrist.\n\nThe consecrated Host is the great Baal.\n\nA Christian (that is, a member of Rottmann's sect) does not set foot\nin the religious assemblies of the impious (_i.e._, of the Catholics\nand Lutherans).\n\nHe holds no communication and has no relations with them; he is not\nbound to obey their authorities; he has nothing in common with their\ntribunals; nor does he unite with them in marriage.\n\nThe Sabbath was instituted by the Lord God, and there is no\nscriptural warrant for transferring the obligation to the Sunday.\n\nPapists and Lutherans are to be regarded as equally infamous, and\nthose who give faith to the inventions of priests are veritable\npagans.\n\nDuring fourteen centuries there have been no true Christians. Christ\nwas the last priest; the apostles did not enjoy the priestly office.\n\nJesus Christ did not derive His human nature from Mary.[124]\n\n  [124] This is corroborated by the Acta, Handlungen, &c., fol.\n  385. \"_The Preachers_: Do you believe that Christ received His\n  flesh off the flesh of Mary, by the operation of the Holy Ghost?\n  _John of Leyden_: No; such is not the teaching of Scripture.\" And\n  he explained that if the flesh had been taken from Mary, it must\n  have been sinful, for she was not immaculate.\n\nEvery marriage concluded before re-baptism is invalid.\n\nFaith in Christ must precede baptism.\n\nWives shall call their husbands lords.\n\nUsury is forbidden.\n\nThe faithful shall possess all things in common.\n\nThe publication of this formulary of faith, if such it may be\ncalled, which is a string of negative propositions, increased the\nalarm of the more sober citizens, who, feeling the insecurity of\nproperty and life under a powerless magistracy, prepared to leave\nthe town. Many fled and left their Lutheranism behind them. Lening,\none of the preachers sent by the Landgrave of Hesse, ran away.\n\nFabricius had more courage. He preached energetically against\nRottmann, assisted by Dr. Johann Westermann, a Lutheran theologian\nof Lippe.[125]\n\n  [125] Kerssenbroeck, p. 456; Sleidan, p. 411.\n\nAccording to Kerssenbroeck, however, half the town followed by the\nAnabaptist leader, and brought their goods and money to lay them at\nhis feet. Those who had nothing of their own, in a body joined the\nsociety which proclaimed community of goods.\n\nThe bishop again wrote to the magistrates, urging them to permit\nthe Catholic preacher, Mumpert, the use of the cathedral pulpit,\nbut the senate refused, and continued their vain efforts to build\ntheir theological system on a slide. At their request, Fabricius\nand Westermann drew up (November 28, 1533) a symbol of belief in\nopposition to that formulated by Rottmann, and it was read and\nadopted by the Lutherans in the Church of St. Lambert. A large\nnumber of the people gave in their adhesion to this last and newest\ncreed, and the magistrates, emboldened thereby, made a descent upon\nthe house of the ex-superintendent, and confiscated his private\npress, with which he had printed his tracts.[126]\n\n  [126] _Ibid._ p. 456.\n\nIt was then that the two apostles, Buchbinder and Bockelson, sent\nby Matthisson into Westphalia, appeared in the city. They remained\nthere only four days, during which they re-baptised the preachers\nand several of their adepts, and then retired prophesying their\nspeedy return and the advent of the reign of grace.\n\nRottmann, highly exasperated against Fabricius for having drawn up\nhis counter-creed, went on the 30th November to the churchyard of\nSt. Lambert, and standing in an elevated situation, preached to the\npeople on his own new creed, whilst Fabricius was discoursing within\nto his congregation on his own profession of faith.\n\nWhen service was over Fabricius came out, and was immediately\nattacked by Rottmann with injurious expressions, which, however, so\nexasperated the congregation of the Lutheran, that they fell upon\nthe late superintendent of the Evangelical Church, and threatened\nhim with their sticks and fists.\n\nOn the 1st December, Fabricius complained in the pulpit of the\ninsult he had received, and appealed to the people to judge between\nhis doctrine and that of Master Bernard by the difference there was\nbetween their respective behaviour.[127]\n\n  [127] Kerssenbroeck, p. 461.\n\nA new Anabaptist orator now appeared on the stage; he was a\nblacksmith's apprentice, named Johann Schroeder. On the 8th December\nhe occupied the position in the cemetery of St. Lambert from which\nRottmann had been forced to fly, and defied the Lutherans to\noppose him with the pure Word of God. He denounced them as still\nin darkness, as wrapped in the trappings of Popery, and as enemies\nto the Gospel of Christ and Evangelical liberty. Then he dared\nFabricius to meet him in a public discussion, and prove his doctrine\nby the text of Scripture.[128]\n\n  [128] _Ibid._ p. 461.\n\nThe magistrates resolved on one more attempt to arrest the disorder.\nOn the 11th November they informed Rottmann that, unless he\nimmediately left the city, they would decree his outlawry. Rottmann\nsent a message to them in reply, \"That he would not go; that he was\nnot afraid; and that exile was to him an empty word, for, wherever\nhe was, the heavenly Father would cover him with His wings.\" He took\nno further notice of the order, except only that he instituted a\nbodyguard of armed citizens to accompany him wherever he went. On\nthe Sunday following, December 14th, he betook himself, surrounded\nby his guard, to the church of the Servites, where he intended to\npreach. But finding the doors locked, he placed himself under a\nlime-tree near the building and pronounced his discourse, without\nany one venturing to lay a hand upon him.[129]\n\n  [129] Kerssenbroeck, p. 163; Dorpius, f. 394 a.\n\nThe magistrates were equally unsuccessful in silencing the\nblacksmith Schroeder. This man, having preached again on the 15th\nDecember, was taken by the police and thrown into prison. Next day\nthe members of the Blacksmiths' Guild marched to the Rath-haus,\narmed with their hammers and with bars of iron, to demand the\nrelease of their comrade. A violent dispute arose between the\nsenators and the exasperated artisans. The former declared that\nSchroeder, whose trade was to shoe horses and not to preach, had\ndeserved death for having incited to sedition. The reply of the\nblacksmiths was very similar to that made by the senate to the\nbishop when he ordered the expulsion of Rottmann. \"Schroeder,\" said\nthey, \"has been urged on by love of truth, and he has preached with\nso much zeal that he has made himself hoarse. He has been guilty\nneither of murder nor of any crime worthy of death. How dare you\nmaltreat this one who has given edifying instruction to his fellow\ncitizens? Must nothing be done without your authorisation?\" Upon the\nheels of the arguments came menaces. The senate yielded again, and\npromised to release Schroeder on the morrow.\n\n\"Not to-morrow,\" shouted the blacksmiths; \"restore our comrade to us\nimmediately, or we will burst open the prison doors.\"\n\nThe magistrates bowed to the storm, taking, however, the worse than\nuseless precaution of making Schroeder swear, before they knocked\noff his chains, that he would not attempt to revenge on them his\ncaptivity.[130]\n\n  [130] Kerssenbroeck, p. 464.\n\nOn the 21st December, Rottmann resumed the use of his pulpit in\nthe church of the Servites, treating the orders of the senate with\nsupreme contempt. Westermann, tired of a struggle with the swelling\ntide, deserted M\u00fcnster, leaving Fabricius alone to fight against the\ngrowing power of the Anabaptists.\n\nThe year 1534 opened under gloomy auspices at M\u00fcnster. In the first\nfew days of January, the new sect dealt the Lutherans the same\nmeasure these latter had dealt the Catholics a twelvemonth before.\nThey invaded their churches and disturbed divine worship.\n\nFabricius attacked Rottmann violently in a sermon preached on the\n4th January, and offered to have a public discussion with him on the\nmoot points of doctrine. The senate accepted the proposition with\ntransport, but Rottmann refused. \"Not,\" said he, \"that I am afraid\nof entering the lists against this Lutheran, but that men are so\ncorrupt that they would certainly condemn that side which had for\nits support right and the word of Scripture.\"[131]\n\n  [131] _Ibid._ pp. 466, 467.\n\nOn the same day that Rottmann sent in his refusal, a band of women\ntumultuously entered the town-hall and demanded that \"the miserable\nforeign vagabond Fabricius, who could not even speak the dialect\nof the country, and who, inspired by an evil spirit, preaches all\nkinds of absurdities in a tongue scarcely intelligible, should be\ndriven out of the city. Set in his place the worthy Rottmann,\" said\nthe women; \"he is prudent, eloquent, instructed in every kind of\nknowledge, and he can speak our language. Grant us this favour,\nHerrn Burgmeistern, and we will pray God for you.\" The burgomasters\nrequested the ladies not to meddle with matters that concerned them\nnot, but to return to their families and kitchens. This invitation\ndrove them into a paroxysm of rage, and they shouted at the top\nof their shrill voices: \"Here are fine burgomasters! They are\nneglecting the interests of the town! Here are tender fathers of\ntheir country who attend to nothing! You are worse than murderers,\nfor _they_ kill the body, but _you_ assassinate souls by depriving\nthem of the Evangelical Word which is their nourishment.\" The women\nthen retired, but returned next day reinforced by others, and among\nthem were six nuns who had deserted the convent of Ueberwasser and\nexhibited greater violence than the rest.\n\nThe women entered the hall where the senators were sitting and\ndemanded peremptorily that Rottmann should be instituted to the\nchurch of St. Lambert. They were turned out of the hall without much\nceremony, but they waited the exit of the magistrates when their\nsession was at an end; then they bespattered them with cow and horse\ndung, and cursed them as Papists. \"At first you favoured our holy\nenterprise, but you have returned to Popery like dogs to their\nvomit. Since you have devoured the good Hessian God which Fabricius\noffers you in communion, you oppress the pure Word of God. To the\ngallows, to the gallows with you all!\" The senators fled to their\nhouses, pursued by the women, covered with filth, and deafened by\ntheir yells.[132]\n\n  [132] Kerssenbroeck, p. 468.\n\nRottmann and his colleagues exercised an extraordinary influence\nover the people; they persuaded the rich ladies and citizens' wives\nof substance to sell their goods, give up their jewels, and cast\neverything they had into a common fund. The prompt submission of so\nmany proves that the number of fanatics who were sincere in their\nconvictions was considerable. These proceedings led to estrangement\nin families. Kerssenbroeck relates that the wife of one of the\nsenators, named Wardemann, having been rebaptised by Rottmann, \"was\nso vigorously confirmed in her faith by her husband, who had been\ninformed by a servant maid of the circumstance, that she could\nnot walk for several weeks.\" Other women, who had given up their\njewels and money to Rottmann, were also severely chastised by their\nhusbands.[133]\n\n  [133] _Ibid._ p. 472.\n\nThe magistrates, afraid to touch Rottmann's person, hoped to\nweaken him by dismissing his assistants. They therefore, on the\n15th January, 1534, ordered their officers to take the Anabaptist\npreachers, Clopris, Roll, and Strahl, and to turn them out of\nthe town, with orders never to re-enter it. The mandate was\nexecuted; but the ministers returned by another gate, and were\nconducted in triumph to their parsonages by the whole body of the\nAnabaptists.[134]\n\n  [134] Kerssenbroeck, p. 473.\n\nThe fugitive nuns of Ueberwasser, to the number of eight, were\nre-baptised by Rottmann on the 11th January, and became some\nof his most devoted adherents. Their conduct in the sequel was\ncharacterised by the most shameless lubricity.\n\nThe prince-bishop at this time published a decree against the\nAnabaptists, outlawed Rottmann and five other preachers of that sect\nin M\u00fcnster, and ordered his officers to check the spread of the\nschism through the other towns of his principality.\n\nOn the 23rd January, Rottmann having noticed some Catholics and\nLutherans amongst his audience in the church of the Servites,\nabruptly stopped his sermon, saying that it was not meet to cast the\npearls of the new revelation before swine.[135] Then he descended\nfrom the pulpit, and refused to remount it again. But probably\nthe real cause of this sudden cessation was, that the views of\nthe leader were undergoing a third change, and he was unwilling\nto announce his new doctrine to an audience of which all were not\nprepared to receive it. He continued to assemble the faithful in\nprivate houses, and to hold daily assemblies, in which they were\ninitiated into the further mysteries of his revelation. In every\nparish a house was provided for the purpose, and none were admitted\nwithout a pass-word. In these gatherings the mystic was able to\ngive full development to his views without the restraint of an only\npartially sympathising audience.\n\n  [135] _Ibid._ p. 476.\n\nOn the evening of the 28th January, at seven o'clock, the\nAnabaptists stretched chains across the streets, assembled in\narmed bands, closed the city gates, and placed sentinels in all\ndirections. A terrible anxiety reigned in the city. The Lutherans\nremained up and awake all night, a prey to fear, with their doors\nand windows barricaded, waiting to see what these preparations\nsignified. The night passed, broken only by the tramp of the\nsectarian fanatics, and lighted by the glare of their torches.\n\nDawn broke and nothing further had taken place, when suddenly two\nmen, dressed like prophets, with long ragged beards, ample garments,\nand flowing mantles, staff in hand paced through the town solemnly,\nup one street and down another, raising their eyes to heaven,\nsighing, and then looking down with an expression of compassion on\nthe multitude, which bowed before them and saluted them as Enoch and\nElias. After having traversed the greater part of the town, the two\nmen entered the door of Knipperdolling's house.[136]\n\n  [136] Kerssenbroeck, p. 476.\n\nThe names of these prophets were John Matthisson and John Bockelson.\nThe first was the chief of the Anabaptist sect in Holland. The\npart which the second was destined to play in M\u00fcnster demands\nthat his antecedents should be more fully given. Bockelson was\nthe bastard son of Bockel, bailiff of the Hague, and a certain\nAdelhaid, daughter of a serf of the Lord of Zoelcken, in the diocese\nof M\u00fcnster. This Adelhaid purchased her liberty afterwards and\nmarried her seducer. John was brought up at Leyden, where he was\napprenticed to a tailor. He visited England, Portugal, and Lubeck,\nand returned to Leyden in his twenty-first year. He then married the\nwidow of a boatman, who presented him with two sons. John Bockelson\nwas endowed by nature with a ready wit and with a retentive memory.\nHe amused himself by learning nearly the whole of the Bible by\nheart, and by composing obscene verses and plays. In addition to his\nbusiness of tailoring, he opened a public-house under the sign of\n\"The Three Herrings,\" which became a haunt of women of bad repute.\nThe passion for change came over Bockelson after leading this sort\nof life for a while, and he visited M\u00fcnster in 1533, as we have\nalready seen, and thence passed to Osnabr\u00fcck, from which place\nhe was expelled. After wandering about Westphalia for a while he\nreturned to Leyden. Next year, in company with Matthisson, the head\nof the Anabaptists, he visited M\u00fcnster, which the latter declared\nprophetically was destined to be the new Jerusalem, the capital of a\nregenerate world, where the millennial kingdom was to be set up.[137]\n\n  [137] Kerssenbroeck, part ii. p. 51 _et seq._; Heresbach, p. 31;\n  Hast, p. 324.\n\nThe two adventurers reached their destination on the 13th January,\nand Knipperdolling received them into his house. Some of the\npreachers were informed of their arrival, but were required to keep\nthe matter secret till the time ordained of God should come for\ntheir revealing themselves to the world.\n\nA council was being held in the house of Knipperdolling, when the\nprophets entered it after having finished their peregrination of\nthe town. Rottmann, Roll, Clopris, Strapedius, Vinnius, and Strahl\nwere engaged in a warm discussion. Some of the party were of opinion\nthat the moment had arrived, now that all the Anabaptists were under\narms, for a general purification of the city by the massacre or\nexpulsion of Catholics and Lutherans; the others thought that the\nhour of vengeance had not yet struck, and that the day of the Lord\nmust not be antedated. The quarrel was appeased by the appearance of\nthe two prophets, who were hailed as messengers sent from heaven to\nannounce the will of God. Then Matthisson and his companion knelt\ndown and wept, and having meditated some moments, they uttered\ntheir decision in voices broken by sobs. \"The time for cleansing\nthe threshing-floor of the Lord is not yet come. The slaughter of\nthe ungodly must be delayed, that souls may be gathered in, and\nthat souls may be formed and educated in houses set apart, and not\nin churches which were lately filled with idols. But,\" said they in\nconclusion, \"the day of the Lord is at hand.\"\n\nThese words reconciled the council. On the evening of the 29th, the\nAnabaptists laid aside their arms and returned to their homes.[138]\nThe events of the night had utterly dispelled the last traces of\ncourage in the magistrates; they did not venture to notice the\nthreatening aspect of the armed fanatics, or to remonstrate with\nthem for barricading the streets. To avert all possible danger from\nthemselves was their only object; and to effect this they published\nan act of toleration, permitting every man to worship God and\nperform his public and private devotions as he thought proper.\n\n  [138] Kerssenbroeck, part i. p. 477 _et seq._\n\nThe power of Rottmann had become so great, through the events\njust recorded, that a false prophecy did not serve to upset his\nauthority. On the 6th February, at the head of a troop of his\nadmirers, he invaded the Church of Ueberwasser, \"to prevent the\nEvangelical flame kindled in the hearts of the nuns from dying\nout.\"[139] Having summoned all the sisters into the church, he\nmounted the pulpit and preached to them a sermon on matrimony, in\nwhich he denounced convents and monasteries, in which the most\nimperious laws of nature were left unfulfilled, and \"he urged the\nnuns to labour heartily for the propagation of the human race;\"\nand then he completely turned the heads of the young women, by\nannouncing to them with an inspired air, that their convent would\nfall at midnight, and would bury beneath its ruins every one who was\nfound within its walls. \"This salutary announcement has been made to\nme,\" said he, \"by one of the prophets now present in this town, and\nthe Heavenly Father has also favoured me with a direct and special\nrevelation to the same effect.\"[140]\n\n  [139] Kerssenbroeck, p. 479.\n\n  [140] Hast, p. 329 _et seq._\n\nThis was enough to complete the conversion of the nuns, already\nshaken in their faith by the sermons they had been compelled to\nlisten to for some time past. In vain did the Abbess Ida and two\nother sisters implore them to remain and despise the prophecy.\nThe infatuated women, in paroxysms of fear and excitement, fled\nthe convent and took refuge in the house of Rottmann, where they\nchanged their clothes, and then ran about the town uttering cries of\njoy.\n\nThe prophecy of Rottmann had been repeated by one to another\nthroughout M\u00fcnster. No one slept that night. Crowds poured down the\nstreets in the direction of Ueberwasser, and the square in front of\nthe convent was densely packed with breathless spectators, awaiting\nthe ruin of the house.\n\nMidnight tolled from the cathedral tower. The crowd waited another\nhour. It struck one, and the convent had not fallen. Master\nBernard was not the man to be disconcerted by so small a matter.\n\"Prophecies,\" cried he, \"are always conditional. Jonah foretold that\nNineveh should be destroyed in forty days, but since the inhabitants\nrepented, it remained standing. The same has taken place here.\nNearly all the nuns have repented, have quitted their cloister\nand their habit, have renounced their vows--thus the anger of the\nHeavenly Father has been allayed.\"[141]\n\n  [141] Kerssenbroeck, p. 479.\n\nThe preacher Roll was next seized with prophetic inspiration. He ran\nthrough the town, foaming at the mouth, his eyes rolling, his hair\nand garments in disorder, his face haggard, uttering at one moment\ninarticulate howls, and at another, exhortations to the impenitent\nto turn and be saved, for that the day of the Lord was at hand.[142]\n\n  [142] Dorpius, p. 394.\n\nA young girl of eighteen, the daughter of a tailor named Gregory\nZumberge, was next seized. \"On the 8th February she was possessed\nwith a sort of oratorical fury, and she preached with fire and\nextraordinary volubility before an astonished crowd.\"\n\nThe same day the spirit fell on Knipperdolling and Bockelson; they\nran about the streets with bare heads and uplifted eyes, repeating\nincessantly in shrill tones, \"Repent, repent, repent, ye sinners;\nwoe, woe!\" Having reached the market-place, they fell into one\nanother's arms before a crowd of citizens and artizans who ran\nup from all directions. At the same moment, the tailor, Gregory\nZumberge, father of the preaching damsel, arrived with his hair\nflying, his arms extended, his face contorted, and a wild light\nplaying in his eyes, and cried, \"Lift up your heads, O men, O dear\nbrothers! I see the majesty of God in the clouds, and Jesus waving\nthe standard of victory. Woe to ye impious ones who have resisted\nthe truth! Repent, repent! I see the Heavenly Father surrounded by\nthousands of angels menacing you with destruction! Be converted! the\ngreat and terrible day of the Lord is come.... God will truly purge\nHis floor, and burn the chaff with unquenchable fire.... Renounce\nyour evil ways and adopt the sign of the New Convenant, if you wish\nto escape the wrath of the Lord.\"\n\n\"It is impossible,\" says the oft-quoted writer, who was eye-witness\nin the town of all he describes, \"impossible to imagine the\ngestures and antics which accompanied this discourse. Now the\ntailor leaped about on the stones and seemed as though about to\nfly; then he turned his head with extraordinary rapidity, beating\nhis hands together, and looking up to heaven and then down to\nearth. Then, all at once, an expression of despair came over his\nface, and he fell on the pavement in the form of a cross, and\nrolled in the mud. A good number of us young fellows were there,\"\ncontinues Kerssenbroeck, \"much astonished at their howling, and\nlooking attentively at the sky to see if there really was anything\nextraordinary to be seen there; but not distinguishing anything we\nbegan to make fun of the illuminati, and this decided them to retire\nto the house of Knipperdolling.\"[143]\n\n  [143] Kerssenbroeck, p. 483.\n\nThere a new scene commenced. The ecstatics left doors and windows\nwide open, that all that passed within might be seen and heard by\nthe dense crowd which packed the street without. Those in the street\nsaw Knipperdolling place himself in a corner, his face to the wall,\nand carry on in broken accents a familiar conversation with God\nthe Father. At one moment he was seen to be listening, then to be\nreplying, making the strangest gestures. This went on for some time,\ntill another actor appeared. This was a blind Scottish beggar, very\ntall and gaunt--a zealous Anabaptist. He was fantastically dressed\nin rags, and wore high-heeled boots to add to his stature. Although\nblind, he ran about exclaiming that he saw strange visions in the\nsky. This was enough to attract a crowd, which followed him to the\ncorner of the K\u00f6nig's Strasse, when, just as he was exclaiming,\n\"Alas, alas! Heaven is going this instant to fall!\" he tumbled over\na dung-heap which was in his way. This accident woke him from his\necstasy, and he picked himself up in great confusion, and never\nprophesied again.[144]\n\n  [144] _Ibid._ p. 479.\n\nBut his place was speedily supplied by another man named Jodocus\nCulenburg, who, in order to convey himself with greater rapidity\nwhither the Spirit called him, rode about the town on a horse,\nannouncing in every street that he heard the peal of the Last\nTrumpet. Several women also were taken with the prophetic spirit,\nand one, named Timmermann, declared that \"the King of Heaven was\nabout to appear like a lightning-flash, and would re-establish\nJerusalem.\" Another woman, whose cries and calls to repentance had\ncaused her to lose her voice, ran about with a bell attached to her\ngirdle, urging the bystanders with expressive gestures to join the\nnumber of the elect and be saved.[145]\n\n  [145] Kerssenbroeck, p. 484.\n\nThese fantastic scenes had made a profound impression on many of\nthe citizens of M\u00fcnster. A nervous affection accompanying mystic\nexcitement is always infectious. The agitation of minds and\nconsciences became general; men and women had trances, prayed in\npublic, screamed, had visions, and fell into cataleptic fits. In\nthose days people knew nothing of physical and psychological causes;\nthe general excitement was attributed by them to supernatural\nagency. It was simply a question whether these signs were produced\nby the devil or by the Spirit of God. The Catholics attributed\nthe signs to the agency of Satan; the Lutherans were in nervous\nuncertainty. Were they resisting God or the devil? Fear lest they\nshould be found in the ranks of those fighting against the Holy\nSpirit drew off numbers of the timorous and most conscientious to\nswell the ranks of the mystical sect. M\u00fcnster was exhibiting on a\nlarge scale what is reproduced in our own land in many a Wesleyan\nand Ranter revival meeting.\n\nThe time had now come, thought Rottmann, for the destruction\nof the enemies of God. Secret notice was sent to the different\nAnabaptist congregations to be prepared to strike the blow on the\n9th of February. Accordingly, early in the morning, 500 fanatics\nseized on the gates of the city, the Rath-haus, and the arms it\ncontained; cannons were planted in the chapel of St. Michael, the\ntower of St. Lambert's church, and in the market place; barricades\nof stones, barrels, and benches from the church were thrown up. The\ncommon danger united Catholics and Lutherans; they saw clearly that\nthe intention of their adversaries was either to massacre them,\nor to drive them out of the town. They retreated in haste to the\nUeberwasser quarter, and took up their position in the cemetery,\nplanted cannons, placed bodies of armed men in the tower of the\ncathedral, and retook two of the city gates. They also arrested\nseveral of the senators who had joined the Anabaptist sect, but they\nhad not the courage to lay their hands on the burgomaster, Tilbeck,\nwho was also of that party. Two of the preachers, Strahl and\nVinnius, were caught, and were lodged in the tower of Ueberwasser\nchurch.[146]\n\n  [146] Dorpius, f. 394.\n\nMessages were sent to the villages and towns around announcing the\nstate of affairs, and imploring assistance. The magistrates even\nwrote in the stress of their terror to the prince-bishop, asking him\nto come speedily to their rescue from a position of imminent peril.\nFrancis of Waldeck at once replied by letter, promising to march\nwith the utmost rapidity to M\u00fcnster, and demanding that one of the\ngates might be opened to admit him. This letter was taken to Hermann\nTilbeck; but the burgomaster, intent on securing the triumph of the\nfanatics, with whom he was in league, suppressed the letter, and did\nnot mention either its arrival or its contents to the senate. He,\nhowever, informed the Anabaptists of their danger, and urged them to\ncome to terms with the Lutherans as speedily as possible.\n\nAt the same time the pastor, Fabricius, unable to restrain his\nreligious prejudices, even in the face of danger, sped among the\nLutheran ranks, inciting his followers against the Catholics, and\nurging them to make terms with the fanatics rather than submit to\nthe bishop. \"Beware,\" said he, \"lest, in the event of your gaining a\nvictory, the Papists should recover their power, for it is they who\nare the real cause of all these evils and disorders.\"[147]\n\n  [147] Kerssenbroeck, p. 405 _et seq._ Montfort., \"Tumult.\n  Anabap.,\" p. 15 _et seq._; Bullinger, lib. ii. c. 8.\n\nWhilst the preacher was sowing discord in the ranks of the party\nof order, Rottmann and the two prophets, Matthisson and Bockelson,\nroused the enthusiasm of their disciples to the highest pitch,\nby announcing to them a glorious victory, and that the Father\nwould render His elect invulnerable before the weapons of their\nadversaries.\n\nThe Anabaptist women ran about the streets making the most\nextraordinary contortions and prodigious leaps, crying out that they\nsaw the Lord surrounded by a host of angels coming to exterminate\nthe worshippers of Baal.\n\nThus passed the night. At daybreak Knipperdolling recommenced his\ncourse through the streets, uttering his doleful wail of \"Repent,\nrepent! woe, woe!\" Approaching too near the churchyard wall of\nUeberwasser, he was taken and thrown into the tower with Strahl and\nVinnius.\n\nAt eight o'clock the drossar of Wollbeck arrived at the head of a\ntroop of armed peasants to reinforce the party of order, and several\necclesiastics entered the town to inform the magistrates that the\nprince-bishop was approaching at the head of his cavalry.\n\nBefore the lapse of many hours the city might have been pacified and\norder re-established, had it not been for the efforts of Tilbeck the\nburgomaster, and Fabricius the divine. Mistrust of their allies had\nnow fully gained possession of the Lutherans, and the burgomaster\ntook advantage of the hesitation to dismiss the drossar of Wollbeck\nand his armed band, and to send to the prince, declining his aid. By\nhis advice, also, the Anabaptists agreed to lay down their arms and\nmake a covenant with the senate for the establishment of harmony.\nHostages were given on either side and the prisoners were liberated.\nPeace was finally concluded on these conditions: 1st. That faith\nshould be absolutely free. 2nd. That each party should support the\nother. 3rd. That all should obey the magistrates.\n\nThe treaty having been signed, the two armed bodies separated, the\ncannons were fired into the air, the drossar of Wollbeck and the\necclesiastics withdrew, with grief at their hearts, predicting the\napproaching ruin of M\u00fcnster. The prince-bishop was near the town\nwith his troops when the fatal news was brought him. He shed tears\nof mortification, turned his horse and departed.[148]\n\n  [148] Same authorities; Sleidan, p. 411.\n\nPeace was secured for the moment by this treaty, but order was\nnot re-established. No sooner had the armed Anabaptists quitted\nthe market-place than it swarmed with women who had received\nfrom Rottmann the sign of the New Covenant. \"The madness of\nthe pagan bacchantes,\" says the eye-witness of these scenes,\nKerssenbroeck,[149] \"cannot have surpassed that of these women.\nIt is impossible to imagine a more terrible, crazy, indecent, and\nridiculous exhibition than they made. Their conduct was so frenzied\nthat one might have supposed them to be the furies of the poets.\nSome had their hair disordered, others ran about almost naked,\nwithout the least sense of shame; others again made prodigious\ngambles, others flung themselves on the ground with arms extended\nin the shape of a cross; then rose, clapped their hands, knelt\ndown, and cried with all their might, invoking the Father, rolling\ntheir eyes, grinding their teeth, foaming at the mouth, beating\ntheir breasts, weeping, laughing, howling, and uttering the most\nstrange inarticulate sounds.... Their words were stranger than their\ngestures. Some implored grace and light for us, others besought\nthat we might be struck with blindness and damnation. All pretended\nthat they saw in heaven some strange sights; they saw the Father\ndescending to judge their holy cause, myriads of angels, clouds\nof blood, black and blue fires falling upon the city, and above\nthe clouds a rider mounted on a white horse, brandishing his sword\nagainst the impenitent who refused to turn from their evil ways....\nBut the scene was constantly varying. Kneeling on the ground, and\nturning their eyes in one direction, they all at once exclaimed\ntogether, with joined hands, 'O Father! Father! O most excellent\nKing of Zion, spare the people!' Then they repeated these words for\nsome while, raising the pitch of their voices, till they attained to\nsuch a shriek that a host of pigs could not have produced a louder\nnoise when assembled on market-day.\n\n  [149] Kerssenbroeck, p. 495 _et seq._\n\n\"There was on the gable of one of the houses in the market-place a\nweathercock of a peculiar form, lately gilt, which just then caught\nthe sun's rays and blazed with light. This weathercock caused the\nerror of the women. They mistook it for the most excellent King\nof Zion. One of the citizens discovering the cause, climbed the\nroof of the house and removed this new sort of majesty. A calm at\nonce succeeded to the uproar; ashamed and full of confusion, the\nvisionaries dispersed and returned to their homes. Unfortunately the\nlesson did not restore them to their senses.\"\n\nShortly after the treaty was signed, the burgomaster, Tilbeck,\nopenly joined the Anabaptists, and was rebaptised with all his\nfamily by Rottmann.[150]\n\n  [150] Kerssenbroeck, p. 496.\n\nThe more sensible and prudent citizens, including nearly all the\nCatholics and a good number of Lutherans, being well aware that the\ntreaty was, in fact, a surrender of all authority into the hands of\nthe fanatics, deserted the town in great numbers, carrying with\nthem all their valuables. The emigration began on 12th February.\nThe Anabaptists ordered that neither weapons nor victuals should\nbe carried out of the gates, and appointed a guard to examine the\neffects of all those who left the city. The emigration was so\nextensive, that in a few days several quarters of the town were\nentirely depopulated.[151]\n\n  [151] Kerssenbroeck; Dorpius, ff. 394-5.\n\nThen Rottmann addressed a circular letter to the Anabaptists of all\nthe neighbouring towns to come and fill the deserted mansions from\nwhich the apostates had fallen. \"The Father has sent me several\nprophets,\" said he, \"full of His Spirit and endowed with exalted\nsanctity; they teach the pure word of God, without human additions,\nand with sublime eloquence. Come then, with your wives and children,\nif you hope for eternal salvation; come to the holy Jerusalem,\nto Zion, and to the new temple of Solomon. Come and assist us to\nre-establish the true worship of God, and to banish idolatry. Leave\nyour worldly goods behind, you will find here a sufficiency, and in\nheaven a treasure.\"[152]\n\n  [152] _Ibid._, p. 502; Mencken, p. 1545.\n\nIn response to this appeal, the Anabaptists streamed into the\ncity from all quarters, from Holland, Friesland, Brabant, Hesse,\nOsnabr\u00fcck, and from the neighbouring towns, where the magistrates\nexerted themselves to suppress a sect which they saw imperilled the\nsafety of the commonwealth.\n\nIn a short while the deserted houses were peopled by these\nfanatics. Bernhard Krechting, pastor of Gildehaus, arrived at the\nhead of a large portion of his parishioners. Hermann Regewart,\nthe ex-Lutheran preacher of Warendorf, sought a home in the new\nJerusalem. Rich and well-born persons, bitten with the madness,\narrived, such were Peter Schwering and his wife, the wealthiest\ncitizens of Coesfeld; Werner von Scheiffort, a country gentleman;\nthe Lady von Becke with her three daughters, of whom the two eldest\nwere broken nuns, and the youngest was betrothed to the Lord of\nD\u00f6rl\u00f6; and the Grograff of Schoppingen, Heinrich Krechting, with his\nwife, his children, and a number of the inhabitants of that town,\nwith carts laden with their effects. The Grograff took up his abode\nin Kerssenbroeck's house, along with his family and servants, and,\nas the chronicler bitterly remarks, he took care to occupy the best\npart of the mansion.[153]\n\n  [153] Kerssenbroeck, p. 503.\n\nAmongst those who escaped from the town were the syndic, Von Wyck,\nwho had led the opposition against the bishop, and the burgomaster,\nCaspar Judenfeld. The latter retired to Hamm and was left\nunmolested, but Von Wyck had played too conspicuous a part to escape\nso easily. By the orders of the prince-bishop he was arrested and\nexecuted at Vastenau.[154]\n\n  [154] _Ibid._ p. 505.\n\nM\u00fcnster now became the theatre of the wildest orgies ever\nperpetrated under the name of religion. It is apparently a law that\nmysticism should rapidly pass from the stage of asceticism into that\nof licence. At any rate, such has been the invariable succession of\nstages in every mystic society that is allowed unchecked to follow\nits own course. In the Roman Church those thus psychologically\naffected are locked up in convents. The religious passion verges\nso closely on the sexual passion that a slight additional pressure\ngiven to it bursts the partition, and both are confused in a\nfrenzy of religious debauch. The Anabaptist fanatics were rapidly\napproaching this stage. The prophet Matthisson led the way by\ninstituting a second baptism, administered only to the inner circle\nof the elect, which was called the baptism of fire.\n\nThe adepts were sworn to secrecy, and refused to explain the mode of\nadministration. But public curiosity was aroused, and by learning\nthe password, some were enabled to slip into the assembly and see\nwhat took place. Amongst these was a woman who was an acquaintance\nof Kerssenbroeck, and from whose lips he had an account of the\nrite. \"Matthisson,\" says he, \"secretly assembled the initiated of\nboth sexes during the night, in the vast mansion of Knipperdolling.\nWhen all were assembled, the prophet placed himself under a copper\nchandelier, hung in the centre of the ceiling, lighted with three\ntapers.\" He then made an instruction on the new revelation of\nthe Divine will, which he pretended had been made to him, and\nthe assembly became a scene of frantic orgies too horrible to be\ndescribed.\n\nThe assemblies in which these abominations were perpetrated,\nprepared the way for the utter subversion of all the laws of decency\nand morality, which followed in the course of a few months.\n\nWhen Carnival arrived, a grand anti-Catholic procession was\norganised, to incite afresh the hostility of the people to the\nancient Church, its rites and ceremonies. First, a company of\nmaskers dressed like monks, nuns, and priests in their sacred\nvestments, led the way, capering and singing ribald songs. Then\nfollowed a great chariot, drawn by six men in the habits of the\nreligious orders. On the box sat a fellow dressed as a bishop, with\nmitre and crosier, scourging on the labouring monks and friars. On\nthe car was a man represented as dying, with a priest leaning over\nhim, a huge pair of spectacles on his nose, administering to the\nsick man the last sacraments of the Church, and addressing him in\nthe most absurd manner, loudly, that the bystanders might hear and\nlaugh at his farcical parody of the most sacred things of the old\nreligion. The next car was drawn by a man dressed as a priest in\nsurplice and stole. The other cars contained groups suitable for\nturning into ridicule devotion to saints, belief in purgatory, the\nmass, &c.[155]\n\n  [155] Kerssenbroeck, p. 509.\n\nThe prophets now decided that it was necessary to be prepared in\nthe event of a siege. They, therefore, commissioned the preacher\nRoll to visit Holland and raise the Anabaptists there, urge them to\narm and to march to the defence of the New Jerusalem. Roll started\nfrom M\u00fcnster on the 21st of February, but the Spanish Government in\nthe Netherlands, alarmed at what was taking place in the capital of\nWestphalia, ordered a strict watch to be kept on the movements of\nthe fanatics, and Roll was seized and executed at Utrecht.\n\nThe next step taken by the prophets was to discharge the members\nof the senate from the performance of their office, because they\nhad been elected \"according to the flesh,\" and to choose to fill\ntheir room another body of men \"elected according to the Spirit.\"\nBernard Knipperdolling and Gerhardt Kippenbroeck, both drapers, were\nappointed burgomasters.\n\nOne of the first acts of the new magistrates was to forbid the\nremoval of furniture, articles of food, and money from the town, and\nto permit a general pillage of all the churches and convents in the\ncity. The Anabaptist mob first attacked the religious houses, and\ncarried off all the sacred vessels, the gold, the silver, and the\nvestments. Then they visited the chapel of St. Anthony, outside the\ngate of St. Maurice, and after having sacked it completely, they\ntore it down. They burnt the church of St. Maurice, then fell upon\nthe church of St. Ledger, but had not the patience to complete its\ndemolition. Thence they betook themselves to the cathedral, broke\nit open, and destroyed altars, with their beautiful sculptured and\npainted oak retables, miracles of delicate workmanship and Gothic\nbeauty, the choir stalls, statues, paintings, frescoes, stained\nglass, organ, vestments, and carried off the chalices and ciboriums.\nThe great clock, the pride of M\u00fcnster, as that of Strasburg is\nof the Alsatian capital, was broken to pieces with hammers. A\nvaluable collection of MSS., collected by the poet Rudolf Lange, and\npresented to the minister, together with the rest of the volumes in\nthe library, were burned. Two noble paintings, one of the Blessed\nVirgin, the other of St. John the Baptist, on panel, by Franco,\nwere split up and turned into seats for privies to the guard-house\nnear the Jews' cemetery. The heads and arms were broken off the\nstatues that could not be overthrown--statues of apostles, prophets,\nand sibyls, which decorated the interior of the cathedral and the\nneighbouring square. The tabernacle was broken open, and the Blessed\nSacrament was danced and stamped on. The font was shattered with\ncrowbars, in token of the abhorrence borne by the fanatics to infant\nbaptism; the tombs of the bishops and canons were destroyed, and the\nbodies torn from their graves, and their dust was scattered to the\nwinds.[156]\n\n  [156] Kerssenbroeck, p. 510; Sleidan, p. 411; Dorpius, f. 395.\n\nBut whilst this was taking place in M\u00fcnster, Francis von Waldeck was\npreparing for war. On the 23rd February he held a meeting at Telgte\nto consolidate plans, and now from all sides assistance came. The\nElector of Cologne, the Duke of Cleves, even the Landgrave of Hesse,\nnow exasperated at the ill-success of his endeavours to establish\ntranquillity and to effect a compromise, the Duke of Brunswick, the\nRegent of Brabant, the Counts of Lippe and Berntheim, and many other\nnobles and cities sent soldiers, artillery, and munitions.\n\nThe bishop appointed the generals and principal officers, then he\nmade all the soldiers take an oath of fidelity to himself, and\nconcluded with them an agreement, consisting of the following ten\narticles:\n\n1. The soldiers are to be faithful to the prince, and to obey their\nofficers.\n\n2. The towns, arms, and munitions taken in war shall belong to the\nprince.\n\n3. If, after the capture of the city, the prince-bishop permits\nits pillage by the troops, he shall not be obliged to pay them any\nprize-money.\n\n4. If the pillage be accorded, the town hall is not to be touched.\n\n5. The prince shall have half the plunder.\n\n6. The nobles, canons, and those who have escaped from the city\nshall be allowed the first bid for their articles when offered for\nsale.\n\n7. No fixtures shall be removed by the soldiery.\n\n8. After the capture of the town, the custody of the gates and\nramparts shall be confided to those whom the prince-bishop shall\nappoint.\n\n9. The city taken, and its pillage permitted, the soldiers shall be\nallowed eight days for distribution and sale of the plunder. The\nsoldiers shall receive their pay with punctuality.\n\n10. The heads of the revolt shall, as far as possible, be taken\nalive and delivered up to the bishop for a recompense.[157]\n\n  [157] Kerssenbroeck, p. 513 _et seq._ Sleidan, lib. x. pp. 412-3;\n  Heresbach, p. 36.\n\nThe Anabaptists were not afraid at these preparations; they made\nready vigorously for the defence of the New Zion. As a preliminary,\na body of five hundred burnt the convent of St. Maurice, outside\nthe city gates, and levelled all the houses of the suburbs, which\nobscured the view, and might serve as cover for the besiegers.\n\nOn the 26th February Matthisson preached in the afternoon to a\ncongregation summoned by the discharge of a culverin. At the end of\nthe sermon he assumed an inspired air, and announced that he had an\nimportant revelation to communicate. Having arrested the attention\nof his hearers, he said in a solemn tone, \"The Father requires\nthe purification of the New Jerusalem and of His temple; for our\nrepublic, which has begun so prosperously, cannot grow and endure if\na prey to the confusion produced by the presence of impious sects.\nMy advice is that we kill without further delay the Lutherans, the\nPapists, and all those who have not the right faith, that there may\nremain in Zion but one body, one society, which is truly Christian,\nand which can offer to the Father a pure and well-pleasing worship.\nThere is but one way of preserving the faithful from the contagion\nof the impious, and that is to sweep them off the face of the earth.\nNothing is easier than the execution of this scheme. We form the\nmajority in a strong city, abundantly supplied with all necessaries;\nthere is nothing to fear from within or from without.\"[158]\n\n  [158] Kerssenbroeck, p. 516.\n\nThis suggestion would have been carried into immediate execution by\nthe frenzied sectarians, had it not been for the intervention of\nKnipperdolling, who, fearing that a general massacre of Lutherans\nand Catholics would combine the forces of the Smalkald union and\nof the Imperialists against the city, urgently insisted on milder\nmeasures. \"Let us be content,\" said he, \"with driving, to-morrow,\nout of the city those miserable creatures who refuse the sign of the\nNew Covenant; thus shall we thoroughly purge the floor of the Lord,\nand nothing that is impure will remain in the New Jerusalem.\"[159]\n\n  [159] _Ibid._ p. 517; Sleidan, p. 412.\n\nThis advice was accepted, and it was unanimously decided that the\nmorrow should witness the expulsion of Catholics and Lutherans. The\n27th February was a bitterly cold day. A hard frost had set in, the\nnorth wind blew, cutting to the bone all exposed to the blast, the\ncountry was white with snow, and the streams were crusted over with\nice. At every gate was a double guard; the squares were thronged\nwith armed fanatics, and in and out among them passed the prophets,\nstaff in hand, uttering maledictions on the Lord's enemies, and\nwords of encouragement to those sealed on their brows and hands.\n\nMatthisson sought out those who did not belong to the sect, and\nwith menacing gestures and flaring eyes called them to repentance\nbefore the door was shut. \"Turn ye, turn ye, sinners,\" he cried in\nhis harsh tones. \"Judgment is preparing for you. The elements are in\nleague against you; your iniquities have made nature rise to scourge\nyou. The sword of the Lord's anger is hung above your heads. Turn,\nye sinners, and receive the sign of our alliance, that ye be not\ncast out from the chosen people!\" Then he flung himself down in the\ngreat square, and called on the Father; and lying with arms extended\non the frozen ground, and his face pinched with cold turned towards\nthe sky, he fell into a trance. The Anabaptists knelt around him,\nand lifting their hands to heaven besought the Father to reveal His\nwill by the mouth of the prophet whom He had sent.\n\nThen Matthisson, slowly returning from his ecstasy, like one awaking\nout of a dream, said, \"This is the will and order of the Father:\nthe miscreants, unless they be converted and be baptised, must be\nexpelled this place. This holy city shall be purified of all that is\nunclean, for the conversation of the ungodly corrupts and defiles\nthe people of God. Away with the sons of Esau! this place, this New\nZion, this habitation belongs to the sons of Jacob, to the true\nIsrael.\"\n\nThe enthusiasm of Matthisson communicated itself to the assembly.\nThe Anabaptists separated to sweep the streets, sword and pike in\nhand, and drove the ungodly beyond their walls, shouting, \"The lot\nis ours; the tares must be gathered from among the wheat; the goats\nfrom the sheep; the unholy from the godly; away, away!\" Doors were\nburst open, and the fanatics invaded every house, driving before\nthem men, women, and children, from garret and cellar, wherever\nconcealed, in spite of their cries and entreaties. Men of all\nprofessions, men and women of every age were banished; they were\nnot allowed to take anything with them. The sword of the Lord was\nbrandished against them; the hale and the infirm, the master and the\nservant, none were spared. Those who lagged were beaten; those who\nwere sick and unable to fly were carried to the market-place to be\nrebaptised by Rottmann.\n\nThrough the gates streamed the terrified crowd, shivering, half\nclothed, mothers clasping their babes to their breasts, children\nsustaining between them their aged parents, all blue with cold, as\nthe fierce wind thick strewn with sleet rushed upon them at the\ncorners, and over the bare plain without the city walls, growling\nand cruel, as though it too were wrought up into religious frenzy,\nand came as an auxiliary to the savage work.\n\nThousands traversed the frozen plans, uncertain whither to fly for\nrefuge, uttering piteous cries, lamentations, or low moans; whilst\nfrom the walls of the heavenly city thundered a salvo of joy, and\nthe Anabaptists shouted, because the Lord's day of vengeance had\ncome, and the millennium was set up on earth.\n\n\"Never,\" says Kerssenbroeck, \"never did I see anything more\nafflicting. The women carried their naked nurslings in their\narms, and in vain sought rags wherewith to clothe them; miserable\nchildren, hanging to their fathers' coats, ran barefooted, uttering\npiercing cries; old people, bent by age, tottered along calling down\nGod's vengeance on their persecutors; lastly, some sick women driven\nfrom their beds during the pangs of maternity fell in labour in the\nsnow, deprived of all human succour.\"[160]\n\n  [160] Kerssenbroeck, p. 5222.\n\nAmongst those expelled was Fabricius, the Lutheran divine, who\nescaped in disguise. He was so greatly hated by the sectarians, that\nhad he been recognised, he would not have been suffered to quit the\ncity alive.\n\nThe Frau Werneche, a rich lady, too stout to walk, and unable to\nfind a conveyance, was obliged to remain in M\u00fcnster. Rottmann\ninsisted on her receiving the sign of the New Covenant.\n\n\"I have been baptised already, as were my ancestors,\" said the good\nwoman. Rottmann replied that if she persisted in her impiety she\nmust be slain with the sword, lest the wrath of the Father should\nbe kindled against the Holy City. The poor lady, who had no desire\nfor martyrdom, cried out, impatiently, \"Well, then, be it so!\nbaptise me in the name of all the devils of hell, for I have already\nbeen baptised in the name of God.\" Rottmann, not very particular,\nadministered the rite, and the stout lady remained in M\u00fcnster.\n\nThe apostle now sent letters into all the country, announcing the\nglad tidings of the approaching reign of Christ on earth, and\ninviting the Anabaptists of the neighbourhood to flock into Zion.\nOne of these epistles of Rottmann has been preserved.[161]\n\n  [161] Kerssenbroeck, p. 520; Dorpius, f. 395.\n\n     \"Bernard, servant of Jesus Christ in His\n        Church of M\u00fcnster, salutes affectionately his very dear\n        brother Henry Schlachtschap. Grace and peace from God, and\n        the strength of the Holy Spirit, be with you and with all\n        the faithful.\n\n\"Dear Brother in Christ,--\n\n\"The marvellous works of God are so great and so diverse that it\nwould not be possible for me to describe them all, had I a hundred\ntongues. I am, therefore, unable to do so with my single pen. The\nLord has splendidly assisted us. He has delivered us out of the\nhands of our enemies, and has driven them from the city. Seized by\na panic terror, they fled in multitudes. This is the beginning of\nwhat the Lord announced by His prophets--that all the saints would\nassemble in this New Zion. These prophets have charged me to write\nto you, that you may order all the brethren to hasten to us with all\nthe gold and silver they can collect; as for their other goods, let\nthem be left to the sisters, who will dispose of them, and then join\nus here also. Beware of doing anything after the flesh; do all in\nthe Spirit. The rest by word of mouth. Health in the Lord.\"\n\nThis appeal had all the more success because several executions\nhad taken place at Wollbeck and Bevergern and other places,\ntogether with confiscation of goods, and this had struck alarm into\nthe Anabaptists scattered throughout the principality. Numbers,\ntherefore, answered the appeal, and went up, as the tribes of\nthe Lord, to Jerusalem, out of Leyden, Coesfeld, Warendorf, and\nGr\u00f6ningen. The vacated houses were re-occupied, the M\u00fcnster Baptists\nselecting for themselves the best. Knipperdolling, Kippenbroeck, and\nothers, took possession of the residences of the canons; servants\ninstalled themselves in the dwellings of their masters as if they\nwere their own; and the deserted monasteries were given up as\nhostels to receive the influx from the country, till houses could be\nprovided for them.[162]\n\n  [162] Kerssenbroeck, p. 523.\n\nOn the 28th February, Francis von Waldeck left Telgte at the head\nof his army and invested the capital. Batteries were planted, seven\ncamps were established for the infantry, and six for the cavalry\naround M\u00fcnster. These camps were in connection with one another, for\nmutual support in the event of a sortie, and were rapidly fortified.\n\nThus began the siege which was to last sixteen months minus\nfour days, during which a multitude of untrained, undisciplined\nfanatics, commanded by a Dutch tailor-innkeeper, held out against a\nnumerous and well-armed force. But there was an element of strength\nin the besieged that lacked in the besiegers. Those within the\nwalls were members of a vast confraternity, which ramified over\nGermany, Switzerland, and the Low Countries, its members bound\ntogether by a common enthusiasm, in more or less direct relation\nwith the chiefs who commanded in the Westphalian capital. In spite\nof the siege, news from without was constantly brought into the\ncity, and messengers were sent out to stir up the members of the\nsociety in other countries and provinces to rise and march to the\nrelief of the city which, they all believed, was destined to be\ntheir religious capital. The M\u00fcnster brothers looked for a speedy\ndeliverance wrought by the efficacy of the arms of their brothers\nin Holland, Juliers, Cleves, and Brabant. The Low Countries swarmed\nwith Anabaptists who had organised communities in Amsterdam,\nLeyden, Utrecht, Haarlem, Antwerp, and Ghent; they had arms stored\nin cellars and garrets, and waited only the proper moment to rise\nin a body, massacre their opponents, and deliver the Holy City.\nSeveral attempts to rise were made, but the vigilance of the Spanish\nGovernment in the Netherlands prevented the rising; and the hopes of\nthe besieged were never realised.\n\nOn the other hand, the army of the prince-bishop was composed\nof mercenaries, of soldiers from different provinces and\nprincipalities, speaking different dialects, with different\ninterests, and differing also in faith. The Lutheran troops would\nnot cordially unite with the Catholics, and the latter mistrusted\ntheir Protestant allies, whose sympathies they believed lay with\nthe Anabaptist besieged. And the head of the whole army was a\nCatholic prelate with Lutheran proclivities, who knew nothing of\nwar, had an empty purse, and desired to reduce his own subjects by\nthe aid of foreign mercenaries, with little expense to himself, and\ndamage to his subjects.\n\nThe Anabaptists organised their defence with prudence. They elected\ncaptains and standard-bearers, and divided all the citizens capable\nof bearing arms into regiments and companies. Every one was given\nhis place and his functions, and it was decided that the magistrates\nshould be required to mount guard when it came to their turn. Boys\nwere drilled and taught the use of the arquebus; women prepared\nbrands steeped in pitch and sulphur to fling at the enemy, and\nthey melted lead from the roofs into bullets. Mines were dug and\ncharged with powder, fresh bastions were thrown up, and curtains\nwere erected before the gates, into which were built the tombs and\nsarcophagi of the bishops and canons.[163]\n\n  [163] Kerssenbroeck, p. 531 _et seq._; Hast, p. 344.\n\nThe newly-elected senate, though composed of the most zealous\nAnabaptists, was powerless before Matthisson. A sect governed by the\ninspiration of the moment, professing to be guided by the Spirit\nspeaking through the mouths of prophets, ready to spring into the\nmaddest excesses at the dictates of visionaries, could not long\nsubmit to the government of a magistracy whose power was temporal.\nThe way was rapidly preparing for the establishment of a spiritual\ndespotism.\n\nIt was in vain for the senate to pass an order without the sanction\nof Matthisson, in vain for them to attempt resistance to the\nexecution of his mandates. One day he announced that it was the will\nof the Father that all the goods of the citizens who had fled, or\nhad been expelled, should be collected into one place, that they\nmight be distributed amongst the saints, as every man had need. He\nthereupon despatched men to bring together all that was left behind\nin the city by the refugees, and convey the articles to houses which\nhe designated in every parish. He was promptly obeyed. Garments,\nlinen, beds, furniture, crockery, food, wine--everything was brought\naway in carts. The jewels, the gold, and the silver, were deposited\nin the chancery. Then the prophet ordered three days of prayer to be\ninstituted, \"that God might reveal to him the persons chosen by Him\nto keep guard over the accumulated treasure.\"[164]\n\n  [164] Kerssenbroeck; Dorpius, f. 395.\n\nWhen the three days were at an end, Matthisson announced that the\nFather had indicated to him seven individuals who were to be the\ndeacons to serve tables in the New Jerusalem. He therefore appointed\nthe men to distribute out of the common store to those who needed\nthat which would satisfy their necessities.[165]\n\n  [165] _Ibid._ p. 585.\n\nIt must not, however, be supposed that, with the expulsion of the\nimpious from the holy city, all opposition had disappeared. A\nvery considerable number of citizens, shopkeepers, and merchants,\nrather than desert their houses, abandon their goods to pillage,\nand lose their trade, had consented to be re-baptised. The\nreign of the prophets was becoming to them daily more irksome. A\nblacksmith, named Hubert R\u00fcscher, or Trutling, had the courage to\noppose Matthisson, to charge him with being a false prophet, and an\nimpostor.[166] The prophet, feeling the danger of his position, saw\nthat a measure, decided and terrible, must be adopted to suppress\nthe murmurs, and frighten those who desired to shake off his yoke.\n\"Judgment must begin at the house of God,\" said Matthisson; and\nhe ordered the immediate execution of the smith. Tilbeck, the\nburgomaster, and Redecker, a magistrate, interposed, but were, by\norder of the prophet, cast into prison. Then Bockelson, bursting\nthrough the crowd, announced with frantic gesture that the Father\nhad commissioned him to slay with the sword he bore all those\nwho withstood the will of Heaven as interpreted by the prophets\nwhom He had sent. Then brandishing his weapon, he rushed upon the\nblacksmith, but Matthisson forestalled him, by running his halbert\nthrough the body of the unfortunate man. Finding that he still\nbreathed, he despatched him with a carbine, crying, \"So perish\nall who are guilty of similar crimes.\" Then, at his command, the\nmultitude chanted a hymn of praise, and dispersed, silent and\ntrembling, to their homes.[167]\n\n  [166] Kerssenbroeck, p. 535 _et seq._; Monfortius, p. 19; Sleidan\n  and Dorpius call the man Truteling; Sleidan, p. 412; Dorpius, f.\n  395 b.\n\n  [167] Monfortius, p. 19.\n\nMatthisson took immediate advantage of the power this bold stroke\nhad given him to deal another blow. When the treasure of the\nenemies of Zion had been confided to the care of deacons, the\nfaithful had kept their own goods. But this was to be no longer\ntolerated. The prophet issued a decree, requiring all, old and\nyoung, male and female, under pain of death, to bring all their\npossessions in gold and silver, under whatever form it might be,\ninto the treasury; \"Because,\" said he, \"such things profit not the\ntrue Christian.\"\n\nThe majority of the citizens obeyed, in fear and trembling; but\nmany buried their vessels and ornaments of precious metal, and\ndeclared that they possessed no jewels.[168] However, the amount of\nmoney, chains, rings, brooches, and cups, brought together was very\nconsiderable. It was placed in the chancery, and confided to four of\nMatthisson's most devoted adherents.\n\n  [168] Kerssenbroeck, p. 538.\n\nA few days after, he summoned all the inhabitants into the Cathedral\nsquare, where, in a long discourse, he announced that the wrath\nof God was excited against those who had allowed themselves to be\nrebaptised on the 26th of February, out of human considerations,\nbecause they did not desire to leave their homes and their effects,\nor out of fear; and he advised them all to betake themselves to\nthe church of St. Lambert, to entreat the Father to pardon them\nfor having lied to the Holy Ghost, and soiled by their presence\nthe city of the children of God; \"and if the Father does not remit\nyour offence,\" concluded he in a loud and terrible voice, \"you must\nperish by the sword of the Just One.\"\n\nIn an agony of terror, the unfortunate citizens crowded the church,\nand the doors were fastened behind them. They passed several hours\nwithin, weeping, groaning, and deploring their lot, a prey to\ninexpressible terror.[169]\n\n  [169] Kerssenbroeck, p. 539.\n\nAt length Matthisson entered, accompanied by armed men, and the\nprisoners, supposing they were about to be slaughtered, fell at his\nfeet and embraced his knees, entreating him, with tears, as the\nfavourite of God, to mediate with Him and obtain their pardon. The\nprophet replied that he must consult the Father; he knelt down, and\nfell into an ecstasy. After a few moments he rose, leaped with joy,\nand declared that the Father, though greatly irritated, had granted\nhis prayer, and suffered the penitents to live. Then the poor\ncreatures were purified, hymns of praise were sung, and they were\npronounced admitted into the household of the true Israel. The doors\nwere thrown open, and they were allowed to disperse.\n\nOn the 15th of March, a new decree appeared, forbidding the faithful\nto possess, read, or look at any books except the Bible, and\nrequiring all the books, in print or MS., and all legal documents\nthat were found in the town, to be brought to the Cathedral square,\nand there to be consigned to the flames. Thus perished many a\ntreasure of inappreciable value.\n\nIn the meantime the appeal of Rottmann to the Anabaptists of the\nLow Countries to come and deliver Zion had produced its effect.\nThousands assembled in the neighbourhood of Amsterdam, crossed the\nZuyder Zee, landed at Zwoll, and marched towards M\u00fcnster, pillaging\nand burning churches and convents. But Baron Schenk von Teutenburg,\nimperial lieutenant, met them, utterly routed them, cut to pieces a\nlarge number, and made many prisoners.[170]\n\n  [170] Kerssenbroeck, pp. 541, 542; Bullinger, ii. c. 10.\n\nThe prophets of M\u00fcnster, warned of their advance, but ignorant\nof their dispersion, reckoned on an approaching deliverance,\nand continued their follies. On Good Friday, April 3, 1534,\nthey organised a general festival, with bells pealing, and a\nmock procession carrying candles. The treaty concluded with the\nprince-bishop, through the intervention of Philip of Hesse, was\nattached to the tail of an old horse, and the beast was driven out\nof the gate of St. Maurice in the direction of the enemy's camp.[171]\n\n  [171] _Ibid._ p. 542.\n\nEaster approached, and with it great things were expected. A rumour\ncirculated that a mighty deliverance of Israel would be wrought on\nthe Feast of the Resurrection. Whether Matthisson started the report\nor was carried away by it, it is impossible to decide; but it is\ncertain that, on the eve, he announced in an access of enthusiasm,\nafter a trance, that he had received orders from the Father to\nput to flight the armies of the aliens with a handful of true\nbelievers.[172]\n\n  [172] _Ibid._, 542; Hast, p. 348.\n\nAccordingly, on the morrow, carrying a halbert, he headed a few\nzealots who shared his confidence; the gate of St. Ludgar was thrown\nopen, and he rushed forth with his followers upon the army of the\nprince-bishop; whilst the ramparts were crowded by the inhabitants\nof M\u00fcnster, shouting and praying, and expecting to see a miracle\nwrought in his favour. But he had not advanced very far before a\ntroop of the enemy surrounded his little band, and, in spite of a\ndesperate resistance, he and his companions were cut to pieces.[173]\n\n  [173] Kerssenbroeck, 542; Sleidan, p. 413; Bullinger, lib. ii. c.\n  9; Heresbach, p. 138; Buissierre, p. 310.\n\nJohn Bockelson, seeing that the confidence of the Anabaptists was\nshaken by the failure of this prediction and the fall of the great\nprophet, lost not a moment in establishing his own supremacy. He\ncalled all the people together, and declared to them that Matthisson\nhad died by the just judgment of God, because he had disobeyed the\ncommandment of the Father to go forth with a very small handful, and\nbecause he had relied on his own strength instead of on Divine aid.\n\"But,\" added he, \"he neglected all those precautions he ought to\nhave taken, solemn prayer and fasting, after the example of Judith;\nand he forgot that victory is in the hands of God; he was proud\nand vain, therefore was he forsaken of the Lord. His terrible end\nwas revealed to me eight days ago by the Holy Ghost; for, as I was\nsleeping in the house of Knipperdolling, after having meditated on\nthe Divine Law, Matthisson appeared to me pierced through by the\nlance of an armed man, with all his bowels gushing forth. Then was\nI frightened beyond measure at this terrible spectacle; but the\narmed man said to me, 'Fear not, well-beloved son of the Father,\nbut be faithful to thy calling, for the judgment of God will fall\nupon Matthisson; and when he is dead, marry his widow.' These words\ncast me into profound amazement, for I have already a legitimate\nwife at Leyden. Nevertheless, that I might have a witness worthy of\nconfidence to this extraordinary revelation, I trusted the secret to\nKnipperdolling; he is present, let him be brought forth.\"[174]\n\n  [174] Kerssenbroeck, p. 543; Montfort., p. 24.\n\nThereupon Knipperdolling stepped forward and declared by oath that\nBockelson had spoken the truth, and he mentioned the place, the day,\nand the hour when the revelation was confided to him.\n\nFrom that moment Bockelson passed with the people not only as a\nprophet, but as a favourite of Heaven, one specially chosen of the\nFather, and was held in far higher estimation, accordingly, than\nhad been the fallen prophet. He was seized with inspiration. On\nthe 9th of April, he declared that \"the Father ordered, under pain\nof incurring his dire wrath, that every exalted thing should be\nlaid low, and that the work was to begin at the church steeples.\"\nConsequently three architects of the town were ordered to demolish\nthem. They succeeded in pulling down all the spires in M\u00fcnster. That\nof Ueberwasser church was singularly beautiful. It was reduced to a\nstump; and the modern visitor to the ancient Westphalian capital has\ncause to deplore its loss. The towers were only saved to be used as\npositions for cannon to play upon the besiegers.[175]\n\n  [175] Bullinger, ii. c. 8; Sleidan, p. 271; Dorpius, f. 396.\n\nBockelson had another vision, which served to consolidate his power.\n\"The Father,\" said he, \"had appeared to him, and had commanded\nhim to appoint Knipperdolling to be the executioner of the new\nrepublic.\"\n\nThis was not precisely satisfactory to Knipperdolling; he aimed at\na higher office, but he dissembled his irritation, and accepted the\nsword offered him by John of Leyden with apparent transports of\njoy.[176] Four under-executioners were named to assist him, and to\naccompany him wherever he went.\n\n  [176] Kerssenbroeck, p. 545; Heresbach, p. 139; Sleidan, p. 413;\n  Dorpius, f. 396.\n\nThe nomination of Knipperdolling was the prelude to other important\nchanges. Bockelson aspired to exercise absolute power, without\nopposition or control. To arrive at his ends, a wild prophetic\nscene was enacted. He ran, during the night, through the streets of\nM\u00fcnster stark naked, uttering howls and crying, \"Ye men of Israel\nwho inhabit this holy Zion! fear the Lord, and repent for your past\nlives. Turn ye, turn ye! The glorious King of Zion, surrounded by\nmultitudes of angels, is about to descend and judge the world,\nat the peal of His terrible trumpet. Turn, ye blind ones, and be\nconverted.\" [177]\n\n  [177] Kerssenbroeck, p. 596; Monfort, pp. 25, 26; Heresbach, p.\n  99 _et seq._\n\nExhausted with his run and his shouts, and satisfied with having\nthoroughly alarmed the inhabitants, he returned to the house\nof Knipperdolling, who was also in a paroxysm of inspiration,\nfoaming, leaping, rolling on the ground, and performing many other\nextravagant actions. Bockelson, on entering, cast himself down in a\ncorner and pretended to have lost the power of speech; and as the\ncrowd, assembled round him, asked him the meaning of what had taken\nplace, he signed to them to bring him tablets, on which he wrote,\n\"By the order of the Father, I remain dumb for three days.\"\n\nAt the expiration of this period he convoked the people, and\ndeclared to them that the Father had revealed to him that Israel\nmust have a new constitution, with new laws and new magistrates,\ndivinely appointed. The former magistracy had been elected by men,\nbut the new one was to be designated by the Holy Ghost. Bockelson\nthen dissolved the senate, and, as the mouthpiece of God, he\ndeclared the names of the new officers, to the number of twelve,\nwho were to bear the title of The Elders of the Tribes of Israel,\nin whose hands all power, temporal and spiritual, was to be placed.\nThose appointed were, as might have been expected, the prophet's\nmost devoted adherents.[178] Hermann Tilbeck, the old burgomaster,\nwas brought out of prison, and it was announced to him that he was\nto be of the number of elders; but perhaps a little cooled in this\nenthusiasm by his sojourn in chains, he burst into tears, and in\naccents of humility prayed, \"Oh, Father! I am not worthy so great an\nhonour; give me strength and light to govern with wisdom.\"\n\n  [178] Dorpius, f. 396 b.\n\nRottmann, who, since the arrival of the prophet, had played but\na subordinate part, judged the occasion favourable for thrusting\nhimself into prominence. He therefore preached a long sermon, in\nwhich he declared that God was the author of the new constitution,\nand then, calling the elders before him by name, he committed to\neach a drawn sword, with the words, \"Receive with this weapon the\nright of life or death, which the Father has ordered me to confer\nupon you, and use the sword conformably to the Lord's will.\" Then\nthe proceedings closed with the multitude singing the _Gloria in\nexcelsis_ in German, on their knees.\n\nThe senate resigned its functions without apparent regret or\nopposition, and the twelve elders assumed the plenitude of power.\nThey abolished the laws and formulated new ones, published edicts,\nresolved difficulties, judged causes, subject to no control save the\nwill of the prophet; but that will they regarded as identical with\nthe Divine will, as superior to all law, and every one obeyed its\nsmallest requirements.\n\nImmediately after the installation of the government, an edict in\nten parts was published.[179] The first part, divided into thirteen\narticles, contained the moral law; the second part, in thirty-three\narticles, contained the civil law.\n\n  [179] Kerssenbroeck, pt. ii. pp. 1-9; Monfortius, pp. 26, 27;\n  Hast, p, 352 _et seq._\n\nThe first part forbade thirteen crimes under pain of death:\nblasphemy, disobedience, adultery, impurity, avarice, theft, fraud,\nlying and slander, idle conversation, disputes, anger, envy, and\ndiscontent against the government.\n\nThe second part required every citizen to conform his life and\nbelief to the Word of God; to fulfil exactly his duties to others\nand to the State. It ordered a strict system of vigilance against\nnight surprises by the enemy, and required one of the elders to\nsit in rotation every day as judge to try cases brought before\nhim; also, that whatsoever was decided by the elders as necessary\nfor the welfare of the New Jerusalem should be announced to the\nassembly-general of Israel, by the prophet John of Leyden, servant\nof the Most High; that Bernard Knipperdolling, the executioner,\nshould denounce to the elders the crimes committed within the holy\ncity; and that he might exercise his office with greater security he\nwas never to go forth unaccompanied by his four assistants.\n\nIt ordered that henceforth repasts should be taken publicly and in\ncommon; that every one should accept what was set before him, should\neat it modestly, in silence; that the brothers and the sisters\nshould eat at separate tables; and that, during the meal, portions\nof the Old Testament should be read to them.\n\nThe next articles named the individuals who were to execute the\noffices of butcher, shoemaker, smith, tailor, brewer, and the like,\nto the Lord's people. Two articles forbade the introduction of new\nfashions, and the wearing of garments with holes in them. Article\nXXIX. ordered every stranger belonging to another religion, who\nshould enter the city of M\u00fcnster, to be examined by Knipperdolling.\nNo communication of any sort with strangers was permitted to the\nchildren of Zion.\n\nArticle XXXII. forbade, under pain of death, desertion from the\nmilitary service, or exchange of companies without the sanction of\nthe elders.\n\nArticle XXXIII. required that in the event of a decease, all\nthe goods and chattels of the defunct should be taken to\nKnipperdolling, who would convey them to the elders, and they would\ndistribute them as they judged fitting.\n\nThat some of these provisions were indicative of great prudence\nis not to be doubted. All food having been seized upon and being\nserved out publicly to all the citizens alike, and in moderation,\nthe capabilities of prolonging the defence were greatly increased;\nand the military dictatorship and strict discipline within the city\nmaintained by the prophet, enabled the Anabaptists to preserve an\ninvulnerable front to an enemy torn by faction and with divided\nresponsibilities.\n\nTo increase the disaffection and party strife in the hostile\ncamp, the people of M\u00fcnster sent arrows amongst the besiegers, to\nwhich were attached letters, one of which has been preserved by\nKerssenbroeck.[180] It is an exhortation to the enemy to beware lest\nby attacking the people of the Lord, who held to the pure Word of\nGod, they should be regarded by him as in league with Antichrist,\nand urging them to repentance.\n\n  [180] Kerssenbroeck, pt. ii. p. 9.\n\nBesiegers and besieged heaped on each other reciprocal insults,\nexhibiting themselves to one another in postures more expressive of\ncontempt than decent.[181]\n\n  [181] _Ibid._ pp. 11, 12.\n\nA chimney-sweep, named William Bast, had about this time a vision\nordering him to burn the cities of the ungodly. Bast announced his\nmission to the elders and to the prophet, and was bidden go forth in\nthe Lord's name. He accordingly left M\u00fcnster, eluded the vigilance\nof the enemy's sentinals, and reached Wollbeck, where was the\npowder magazine of the Episcopal army. He fired several houses, and\nthe flames spread, but were fortunately extinguished before they\nreached the powder. Bast had escaped to Dreusteindorf, where also he\nattempted to execute his mission, but was caught, brought back to\nWollbeck, and burnt alive.\n\nIn the meantime various sorties had taken place, in which the\nbesiegers suffered, being caught off their guard. On May 22nd, the\nprince-bishop, finding the siege much more serious than he had\nanticipated, began to bombard the town; but as fast as the walls\ngave way, they were repaired by the women and children at night.\n\nA general assault was resolved on for the 26th May; of this the\nbesieged were forewarned by their spies. Unfortunately for the\ninvesting army, the soldiers of Guelders got drunk on the preceding\nday in anticipation of their victory, and marched reeling and\nshouting against the city as the dusk closed in. The Anabaptists\nmanned the walls, and easily repulsed their tipsy assailants; but\nin the meantime the rest of the army, observing the march of the\nmen of Guelders, and hearing the discharge of firearms, rushed to\ntheir assistance, without order; the M\u00fcnsterians rallied, repulsed\nthem with great carnage, and they fled in confusion to the camp.\nThe Anabaptists had only lost two officers and eight soldiers in\nthe fray; and their success convinced them that they were under the\nspecial providence of God, which had rendered them invincible.[182]\nThey, therefore, repaired their walls with energy, erected several\nadditional bastions, and continued their sorties.\n\n  [182] Kerssenbroeck, pp. 15, 16; Sleidan, p. 413.\n\nOn the 30th May, a party of the fanatics issued from a subterraneous\npassage upon the sentinels opposite the Judenfeld gate, spiked\nnineteen cannon, and laid a train of gunpowder from the store, which\nthey reached, to the mouth of their passage. The troops stationed\nwithin sight marched hastily to repulse the sortie, when the train\nwas fired, the store exploded, and a large number of soldiers were\ndestroyed.[183]\n\n  [183] Kerssenbroeck, pp. 15, 16.\n\nThe prince-bishop next adopted an antiquated expedient, which proved\nsingularly inefficacious. He raised a huge bank against the walls,\nby requisitioning the services of the peasants of the country round.\nThe besieged poured a shower of bullets amongst the unfortunate\nlabourers, who perished in great numbers, and the mole remained\nunfinished.[184]\n\n  [184] _Ibid._ p. 21.\n\nFrancis of Waldeck, discouraged, and at the end of his resources,\nsent his deputies to the Diet of Neuss on the 25th June, to announce\nto the Archbishop of Cologne and the Duke of Juliers his failures,\nand to ask for additional troops. The two princes replied that they\nwould not abandon their ally in his difficulties, and they promised\nto bear a part of the cost of the siege, advanced 40,000 florins\nfor the purchase of gunpowder, promised to despatch forces to his\nassistance, and sent at once prudent advisers.[185] The prince\nwas, in fact, utterly incompetent as a general and incompetent as\na bishop. The pastoral staff has a crook at the head and a spike\nat the bottom. Liturgiologists assure us that this signifies the\nmode in which a bishop should exercise discipline--the gentle he\nshould restrain or direct with mercy, the rebellious he should\ntreat with severity. To the former he should be lenient, with the\nlatter prompt. Francis of Waldeck wielded gracefully and effectively\nneither end of his staff.\n\n  [185] Hast, p. 357; Sleidan, p. 413.\n\nHe shortly incurred a risk, and but for the fidelity of one of his\nsubjects in M\u00fcnster, he would have fallen a victim to assassination.\n\nA young Anabaptist maiden, named Hilla Phnicon, of singular beauty,\nconceived the notion that she had been called by God to be the\nJudith of this new Bethulia, and was to take the head from off the\nshoulders of the great, soft, bungling Holophernes, Francis of\nWaldeck.[186]\n\n  [186] Kerssenbroeck, p. 26 _et seq._\n\nRottmann, Bockelson, and Knipperdolling encouraged the girl in\nher delusion, and urged her not to resist the inspirations of the\nFather. Accordingly, on the 16th June, Hilla dressed herself in\nthe most beautiful robes she could procure, adorned her hair with\npearls, and her arms with bracelets, selecting from the treasury of\nthe city whatever articles she judged most conducive to the end; the\ntreasury being for the purpose placed at her disposal by order of\nthe prophet. Furnished with a linen shirt steeped in deadly poison,\nwhich she had herself made, as an offering to the prince, she left\nM\u00fcnster, and delivered herself up into the hands of the drossar of\nWollbeck, who, after having dispoiled her of her jewels, questioned\nher as to her object in deserting the city. She replied with the\nutmost composure, that she was a native of Holland, and that she had\nlived in M\u00fcnster with her husband, till the change of religion had\nso disgusted her that she could endure it no longer, and that she\nhad fled on the first opportunity, and that her husband would follow\nher on a suitable occasion. \"It is to ask pardon for him that I am\ncome,\" said she; \"and he will be able to indicate to his highness a\nmeans of entering the city without loss.\"\n\nThe perfect self-possession of the lady convinced the drossar of her\nsincerity, and he promised to introduce her to the prince at Iburg\nwithin two days. Everything seemed to favour the adventuress; but\nan unexpected event occurred on the 18th, the day appointed for the\naudience, which spoiled the plot.\n\nThe secret had been badly kept, and it was a matter of conversation,\nhope, and prayer in M\u00fcnster. A citizen named Ramers, who had\nremained in the city, and had been rebaptised rather than lose his\nbusiness and give up his house to pillage, having heard of it,\nescaped from the town on the 18th, and revealed the projects of\nHilla to one of the generals of the besieging army. The unfortunate\nyoung woman was thereupon put to the question, and confessed. She\nwas conducted to Bevergern and decapitated. At the moment when\nshe was being prepared for execution, she assured the bystanders\nthat they would not be able to take her life, for the prophet John\n\"chosen friend of the Father, had assured her that she would return\nsafe and sound to Zion.\"\n\nThe bishop sent for Ramers, provided for his necessities, and\nordered that his house and goods should be spared in the event of\nthe capture of M\u00fcnster.\n\nAs soon as one danger disappeared, another rose up in its place. The\nletters attached to arrows fired by the Anabaptists into the hostile\ncamp, as well as their secret agents, had wrought their effect. The\nLutheran auxiliaries from Meissen complained that they were called\nto fight against the friends of the Gospel, and on the night of the\n30th June they deserted in a body.[187] Other soldiers escaped into\nM\u00fcnster and offered their arms to the Anabaptists. Disaffection was\nwidely spread. Disorder, misunderstandings, and ill-concealed hatred\nreigned in the camp. The besieged reckoned among their assailants\nnumerous and warm friends, and were regularly informed of all the\nprojects of the general. Their emissaries bearing letters to the\nAnabaptists in other territories easily traversed the ranks of the\ninvesting army, and when they had accomplished their mission they\nreturned with equal ease to the gates of M\u00fcnster, which opened to\nreceive them.\n\n  [187] Kerssenbroeck, p. 36.\n\nOne of the soldiers of the Episcopal army, who had taken refuge in\nM\u00fcnster, was lodged in the house of Knipperdolling, in which also\ndwelt John Bockleson. The deserter observed that the Leyden prophet\nwas wont to leave his bedroom at night, and he ventured to watch\nhis conduct and satisfy himself that it was not what it ought to\nbe.[188] He mentioned to others what he had observed. The scandal\nwould soon get wind. One only way remained to cut it short. John\nBockleson consulted with Rottmann and the other preachers, and urged\nthat polygamy should be not only sanctioned but enjoined on the\nelect.\n\n  [188] _Ibid._ p. 38; H. Montfort., p. 28.\n\nSome of those present having objected to this new doctrine, the\nprophet cast his mantle and the New Testament on the ground, and\nsolemnly swore that this which he enjoined was the direct revelation\nof the Almighty. He threatened the recalcitrant ministers, and at\nlast, half-persuaded and wholly frightened, they withdrew their\nobjections; and he appointed the pastors three days in which to\npreach polygamy to the people.[189] The new doctrine having been\nventilated, an assembly of the people was called, and it was\nformerly laid down by the prophet as the will of God, that every man\nwas to have as many wives as he wanted.[190]\n\n  [189] Sleidan, p. 414; Dorp. f 396.\n\n  [190] Kerssenbroeck, p. 38.\n\nThe result of this new step was to bring about a reaction which for\na moment threatened the prophet's domination with downfall.\n\nOn the 30th July, Heinrich Mollenhecke, a blacksmith, supported by\ntwo hundred citizens, burghers and artisans, declared openly that\nhe was resolved to put down the new masters of M\u00fcnster, and to\nrestore everything upon the ancient footing. With the assistance\nof his companions, he captured Bockleson, Knipperdolling, and the\npreachers Rottmann, Schlachtscap, Clopris, and Vinnius, and cast\nthem into prison. Then a council was held, and it was resolved\nthat the gates should be opened to the bishop, the old magistracy\nshould be restored, and the exiled burgesses should be recalled,\nand their property restored to them: and that all this should be\ndone _on the morrow_. Had it been done on the spot we should have\nheard no more of John of Leyden. The delay saved him and ruined the\nreactionary party. It allowed time for his adherents to muster.[191]\nMollenhecke and his party, when they met on the following morning\nto execute their design, were attacked and surrounded by a\nmultitude of fanatics headed by Heinrich Redecker. The blacksmith\nhad succeeded in collecting only a handful. \"No pen can describe\nthe rage with which their adversaries fell upon them, and the\nrefinements of cruelty to which they became victims. After having\noverwhelmed them with blows and curses, they were imprisoned, but\nthey continued inflicting upon them such horrible tortures that\nthe majority of these unfortunates would have a thousand times\npreferred death.\"[192] Ninety-one were ordered to instant execution.\nTwenty-five were shot, the other sixty-six were decapitated by\nKnipperdolling to economize powder, and lest the sound of the\ndischarge of firearms within the city should lead the besiegers to\nbelieve that fighting was going on in the streets. Some had their\nheads cut off, others were tied to a tree and shot, others again\nwere cut asunder at the waist, and others were slowly mutilated.\nKnipperdolling himself executed the men, so many every day, in the\npresence of the prophet, till all were slain.[193]\n\n  [191] Kerssenbroeck, p. 39 _et seq._; Heresbach, pp. 41, 42; H.\n  Montfort., pp. 29, 30; Bullinger, lib. ii. c. 9, p. 56.\n\n  [192] Kerssenbroeck, p. 40.\n\n  [193] _Ibid._ p. 41; Dorpius, f. 536 b.\n\n\"The partisans of the emancipation of the flesh having thus obtained\nthe mastery in M\u00fcnster,\" says the eye-witness, \"it was impossible,\na few days later, to discover in the capital of Westphalia the last\nand feeble traces of modesty, chastity, and self-restraint.\"\n\nThree men, John [OE]chinckfeld, Henry Arnheim, and Hermann Bispinck,\nhaving, however, the hardihood to assert that they still believed\nthat Christian marriage consisted in the union of one man with one\nwoman, were decapitated by order of John of Leyden.[194]\n\n  [194] H. Montfort., p. 29; C. Heresbach, p. 42.\n\nWith the death of these men disappeared every attempt at resistance.\n\nThe horrors which were perpetrated in M\u00fcnster under the name of\nreligious liberty almost exceed belief. The most frantic licence\nand savage debauchery were practised. The prophet took two wives,\nbesides his favourite sultana, the beautiful Divara, widow of\nMatthisson, and his lawful wife at Leyden. These were soon\ndiscovered to be too few, and the harem swelled daily.[195]\n\n  [195] Kerssenbroeck, p. 42. Dorpius confirms the horrible account\n  given by Kerssenbroeck from what he saw himself, f. 498.\n\n\"We must draw a veil,\" says Kerssenbroeck, \"over what took place,\nfor we should scandalise our readers were we to relate in detail\nthe outrageous scenes of immorality which took place in the town,\nand the villanies which these maniacs committed to satisfy their\nabominable lusts. They were no more human beings, they were foul and\nfurious beasts. The hideous word _Spiritus meus concupiscit carnem\ntuam_ was in every mouth; those who resisted these magic words\nwere shut up in the convent of Rosenthal; and if they persisted in\ntheir obstinacy after exhortation, their heads were cut off. In one\nday four were simultaneously executed on this account. On another\noccasion a woman was sentenced to be decapitated, after childbirth,\nfor having complained of her husband having taken to himself a\nsecond wife.\"[196]\n\n  [196] Kerssenbroeck, p. 43 _et seq._\n\nHenry Schlachtscap preached that no man after the Ascension of\nChrist had lived in true matrimony, if he had contracted marriage on\naccount of beauty, wealth, family, and similar causes, for that true\nmarriage consisted solely in that which was instigated by the Spirit.\n\nA new prophet now appeared upon the scene, named Dusentscheuer,\na native of Warendorf. He rushed into the market-place uttering\npiercing cries, and performing such extraordinary antics that a\ncrowd was speedily gathered around him.\n\nThen, addressing himself to the multitude, he exclaimed, \"Christian\nbrothers, the celestial Father has revealed to me, and has commanded\nme to announce to you, that John Bockelson of Leyden, the saint and\nprophet of God, must be king of the whole earth; his authority will\nextend over emperors, kings, princes, and all the powers of the\nworld; he will be the chief authority; and none shall arise above\nhim. He will occupy the throne of his father David, and will carry\nthe sceptre till the Lord reclaims it from him.\"[197]\n\n  [197] _Ibid._ p. 47; Sleidan, p. 419; Bullinger, lib. ii. p.\n  56; Montfort., p. 31; Heresbach, pp. 136-7, \"Historia von d.\n  M\u00fcnsterischen Widerteuffer,\" f. 328 b; Dorpius, f. 397.\n\nBockelson and the twelve elders were present. A profound silence\nreigned in the assembly. Dusentscheuer, advancing to the elders,\ndemanded their swords of office; they surrendered them into his\nhands; he placed eleven at the feet of Bockelson, and put the\ntwelfth into his hand, saying--\"Receive the sword of justice, and\nwith it the power to subjugate all nations. Use it so that thou\nmayst be able to give a good account thereof to Christ, when He\nshall come to judge the quick and the dead.\"[198] Then drawing from\nhis pocket a phial of fragrant oil, he poured it over the tailor's\nhead, pronouncing solemnly the words, \"I consecrate thee in the\npresence of thy people, in the name of God, and by His command,\nand I proclaim thee king of the new Zion.\" When the unction was\nperformed, Bockelson cast himself in the dust and exclaimed, \"O\nFather! I have neither years, nor wisdom, nor experience, necessary\nfor such sovereignty; I appeal to Thy grace, I implore Thy\nassistance and Thy all-powerful protection!... Send down upon me,\ntherefore, Thy divine wisdom. May Thy glorious throne descend on me,\nmay it dwell with me, may it illumine my labours; then shall I be\nable to accomplish Thy will and Thy good pleasure, and thus shall I\nbe able to govern Thy people with equity and justice.\"\n\n  [198] Kerssenbroeck, p. 43 _et seq._\n\nThen, turning himself towards the crowd, Bockelson declared that he\nhad long known by revelation the glory that was to be his, but he\nhad never mentioned it, lest he should be deemed ambitious, but had\nawaited in patience and humility the accomplishment of God's holy\nwill. He concluded by saying that, destined by the Father to reign\nover the whole world, he would use the sword, and slay all those who\nshould venture to oppose him.[199]\n\nNevertheless murmurs of disapprobation were heard. \"What!\" thundered\nthe Leyden tailor, \"you dare to resist the designs of God! Know\nthen, that even were you all to oppose me, I should nevertheless\nbecome king of the whole earth, and that my royalty, which begins\nnow in this spot, will last eternally.\"\n\nThe new prophet Dusentscheuer and the other preachers harangued the\npeople during three consecutive days on the new revelation, read to\nthe people the 23rd chapter of Jeremiah and the 27th of Ezekiel, and\nannounced that in the King John the prophecies of the old seers were\naccomplished, for that he was the new David whom God had promised\nto raise up in the latter days. They also read aloud the 13th\nchapter of St. Paul's Epistle to the Romans, and accompanied the\nlecture with commentaries on the necessity and divine obligation of\nsubmission to authority.[199]\n\n  [199] Kerssenbroeck, p. 47; and the authors before quoted.\n\nAt the expiration of these three days, Dusentscheuer requested John\nof Leyden to complete the spoliation of the inhabitants, so that\neverything they possessed might be placed in a common fund. \"It\nhas been revealed to me,\" said he, \"that the Father is violently\nirritated against the men and women because they have abused\ngrievously their food and drink and clothing. The Father requires\nfor the future, that no one of either sex shall retain more than\ntwo complete suits and four shirts; the rest must be collected and\nplaced in security. It is the will of the Lord that the provisions\nof beef and pork found in every house shall also be seized and be\nconsecrated to the general use.\"[200]\n\n  [200] Kerssenbroeck, p. 49.\n\nThe order was promptly obeyed. Eighty-three large waggons were laden\nwith confiscated clothes, and all the provisions found in the city\nwere brought to the king, who confided the care and apportionment of\nthem to Dusentscheuer.\n\nBockelson now organised his court with splendour. He appointed\nhis officers, chamberlain, stewards, marshals, and equerries, in\nimitation of the Court of the Emperor and Princes of Germany.\nRottmann was named his chaplain; Andrew von Coesfeld, director of\npolice; Hermann Tilbeck, grand-marshal; Henry Krechting, chancellor;\nChristopher Waldeck, the bishop's son, who had fallen into his\npower, was in derision made one of the pages; and a privy council\nof four, composed of Bernard Krechting, Henry Redecker, and two\nothers of inferior note, was instituted under the presidency of\nChristian Kerkering. John had also a grand-master of the kitchen, a\ncup-bearer, taster, carver, gentlemen of the bedchamber, &c.[201]\n\n  [201] _Ibid._ p. 55 Montfort., pp. 31-3; Sleidan, p. 418;\n  Bullinger, p. 57; Heresbach, pp. 137-8.\n\nBut John Bockelson not only desired to be surrounded by a court; he\ndetermined also to display all the personal splendour of royalty.\nAccordingly, at his order, two crowns of pure gold were made,\none royal, the other imperial, encrusted with jewels. Around his\nneck hung a gold chain enriched with precious stones, from which\ndepended a globe of the same metal transfixed by two swords, one\nof gold, the other of silver. The globe was surmounted by a cross\nwhich bore the inscription, \"Ein K\u00f6nig der Gerechtigkeit \u00fcber all\"\n(a King of Righteousness over all). His sceptre, spurs, baldrick and\nscabbard were also of gold, and his fingers blazed with diamonds.\nOn one of the rings, which was exceedingly massive, was cut, \"Der\nK\u00f6nig in dem nyen Tempel furet dit zeichen vur sein Exempel\" (the\nKing of the new Temple bears this symbol as his token). The royal\ngarments were magnificent, of crimson and purple, and costly stuffs\nof velvet, silk, and gold and silver damask, with superb lace cuffs\nand collars, and his mantle lined with costly furs. The elders,\nthe prophets, and the preachers followed suit, and exchanged their\nsad-coloured garments for robes of honour in gay colours. The small\nhouse of Knipperdolling no longer contented the tailor-king; he\ntherefore furnished, and moved into, a handsome mansion belonging\nto the noble family of Von B\u00fcren. The house next door was converted\ninto the palace of his queens, and was adorned with royal splendour.\nA door of communication, broken through the partition wall, allowed\nKing John to visit his wives at all hours.\n\nHe now took to himself thirteen additional wives, and a large train\nof concubines. Among his sixteen legitimate wives was a daughter of\nKnipperdolling. Divara of Haarlem remained the head queen, though\nshe was the oldest. The rest were all under twenty, and were the\nmost beautiful girls of M\u00fcnster. They all bore the title of queens,\nbut Divara alone had a court, officers, and bodyguard, habited in\na livery of chestnut brown and green; the livery of the king being\nscarlet and blue.[202]\n\n  [202] Kerssenbroeck, p. 55 _et seq._; and the authors above\n  cited. Kerssenbroeck gives long details of the dress, ornaments,\n  and manner of life of the king; also \"Historia von d.\n  M\u00fcnsterischen Widerteuffer,\" f. 329.\n\nThe king usually had his meals with his wives, and during the\nrepasts he examined them with great attention, feasting his eyes on\ntheir beauty. The names of the sixteen queens were inscribed on a\ntablet on which the king, after dinner, designated the lady who had\nattracted his favour.[203]\n\n  [203] Kerssenbroeck gives the names of all the wives except one,\n  which he conceals charitably, as the poor child--she was very\n  young--fell ill, but recovered, and was living respectably after\n  the siege with her relatives in the city.\n\nThe King of Zion had abolished the names of the days of the weeks,\nand had replaced them by the seven first letters of the alphabet.\nHe ordered that whenever a child was born in the town, it should be\nannounced to him, and then he gave it a name, whose initial letter\ncorresponded with the letter of the day on which it entered the\nworld. But, as Kerssenbroeck observes, the debauchery which reigned\nin M\u00fcnster had the result of diminishing the births, so that the\nnumber of children born during the latter part of the siege was\nextraordinarily small.\n\nBockelson had only two children by all his wives, and both were\ndaughters. Divara was the first to give birth; the event took place\non a Sunday, designated by the letter A; it was given the name of\nAverall (for Ueberall--Above all); the second child, born on Monday,\nwas called Blydam (the Blythe).[204]\n\n  [204] Kerssenbroeck, p. 59.\n\nThrice in the week Bockelson sat in judgment in the market-place\non a throne decked in purple silk, and richly adorned with gold.\nHe betook himself to this place of audience with great pomp. A\nband of musical instruments headed the pageant, then followed\nthe councillors in purple, and the grand-marshal with the white\nwand in his hand. John, wearing the royal insignia, mounted on a\nwhite horse, splendidly caparisoned, followed between two pages\nfantastically dressed, one bearing a Bible, the other a naked sword,\nsymbols of the spiritual and temporal jurisdiction exercised by his\nmajesty. The bodyguard surrounded his royal person, to keep off the\ncrowd and to protect him from danger. Knipperdolling, Rottmann, the\nsecretary Puthmann, and the chancellor Krechting followed; then\nthe executioner and his four assistants, a train of courtiers, and\nservants closed the procession. The whole ceremony was as regal, as\npunctiliously observed, as at a royal court where the traditions\ndate from many centuries.[205]\n\n  [205] Kerssenbroeck, p. 62; H. Montfort., p. 33; Hast, p. 363\n  _et seq._; Sleidan, p. 415; \"Historia von de M\u00fcnsterischen\n  Widerteuffer,\" f. 328 b.\n\nWhen the king reached the market-place, a squire held the horse, he\nslowly mounted the steps of the throne, and inclining his sceptre,\nannounced the opening of the audience.\n\nThen the plaintiffs approached, prostrated themselves flat upon the\nground twice, and spoke. The majority of the cases were matrimonial\ncomplaints, often exceedingly indecent; \"the greatest abominations\nformulated in the most hideously cynical terms before the most\ncynical of judges.\" Capital sentences, or penalties little less\nsevere, were pronounced against insubordinate wives.[206]\n\n  [206] Kerssenbroeck. Sleidan says, \"Almost every case and\n  complaint brought before him concerned married people and\n  divorces. For nothing was more frequent, so that persons who had\n  lived together for many long years now separated for the first\n  time.\"--p. 415-6.\n\nThe same ceremonial was observed whenever his majesty went to\nhear the preaching in the market-square, with the sole exception,\nthat on this occasion he was accompanied by the sixteen queens,\nmagnificently dressed. Queen Divara rode a palfrey caparisoned in\nfurs, led by a page; the court and the fifteen other queens followed\non foot. On reaching the market-place, the ladies entered a house\nopposite the throne, and assisted at the sermon, sitting at the\nwindows.\n\nThe pulpit and the throne were side by side; a long broad platform\nunited them. When the sermon was concluded, the king, his queens,\ncourt, ministers, and the preacher, assembled on the platform and\ndanced to the strains of the royal band.\n\nIt was from this platform that King John, as sovereign pontiff,\nblessed polygamous marriages, saying to the brides and the\nbridegrooms, \"What God hath joined let no man put asunder; go,\nact according to the divine law, be fruitful and multiply, and\nreplenish the earth.\" This sanction was necessary for the validity\nof these unions.\n\nJohn, wishing to exercise all the prerogatives of royalty, struck\ncoins of various values, bearing on one side the inscription, \"Das\nWort is Fleisch geworden und wohnet unter uns\" (The Word was made\nflesh and dwelt among us); or \"Wer nicht gebohren ist aus Wasser und\nGeist der kann nicht eingehen--\" the rest on the reverse--\"In das\nReich Gottes. Den es ist nur ein rechter K\u00f6nig \u00fcber alle, ein Gott,\nein Glaube, eine Tauffe\" (who is not born of Water and the Spirit,\ncannot enter into the Kingdom of God. For there is only one true\nKing over all, one God, one Faith, one Baptism). And in the middle,\n\"M\u00fcnster, 1534.\"\n\nWhilst the city of M\u00fcnster was thus passing from a republic to a\nmonarchy, the siege continued; but the besiegers made no progress.\nRefugees informed the prince-bishop of what had taken place within\nthe walls.\n\nOn the 25th August he assembled the captains and the princes and\nnobles who had come into the camp to observe the proceedings, to\nrequest them to advise him how to put an end to all these horrors\nand abominations. It was proposed that a deputation should be sent\ninto the town to propose a capitulation on equitable terms; and in\nthe event of a refusal to offer a general assault.[207]\n\n  [207] Kerssenbroeck, p. 65 _et seq._; Montfort., pp. 27, 28.\n\nOn the 28th August an armistice of three hours' duration was\nconcluded, and the deputation obtained a safe-conduct authorising\nthem to enter the city. But instead of being brought before the\ninhabitants of the town, to whom they were commissioned to make the\npropositions, they were introduced to the presence of Bockelson and\nhis court.\n\nThe envoys informed King John of the terms proposed by the bishop.\nThey were extremely liberal. He promised a general amnesty if the\nplace were surrendered, and arms laid down.\n\nKing John replied haughtily, that he did not need the clemency of\nthe prince-bishop, for that he stood strengthened by the almighty\nand irresistible power of God. \"It is your pretended bishop,\" said\nhe, \"who is an impious and obstinate rebel, he who makes war without\nprevious declaration against the faithful servants of the celestial\nFather. Never will I lay down my arms which I have taken up for the\ndefence of the Gospel; never in cowardly fashion will I surrender my\ncapital: on the contrary, I know how to defend it, even to the last\ndrop of my blood, if the honour of God requires it.\"[208]\n\n  [208] Kerssenbroeck, p. 21.\n\nThe bishop, when he learnt that his deputies had been refused\npermission to address the citizens, attached letters, sealed with\nhis Episcopal seal, to arrows, which were shot into the town. In\nthese letters he promised a general pardon to all those who would\nleave the party of the Anabaptists, and escape from the town before\nthe following Thursday.\n\nBut Bockelson forbade, on pain of death, any one touching or opening\none of these letters, and ordered the instant decapitation of man,\nwoman, or child who testified anxiety to leave M\u00fcnster.\n\nThe bishop and the princes resolved on attempting an assault without\nfurther delay. John of Leyden received information of their purpose\nthrough his spies. He at once mounted his white horse, convoked the\npeople, and announced to them that the Father had revealed to him\nthe day and hour of the projected attack; he appointed his post to\nevery man, gave employment to the women and children, and displayed,\nat this critical moment, the zeal, energy, and readiness which would\nhave done credit to a veteran general.[209]\n\n  [209] Kerssenbroeck, p. 68.\n\nThe assault was preluded by a bombardment of three days. The\nbattlements yielded, breaches were effected in the walls, the roofs\nof the houses were shattered, the battered gates gave way, and all\npromised success. But the besieged neglected no precaution. During\nthe night the walls were repaired and the gates strengthened.\nWomen laboured under the orders of the competent directors during\nthe hours of darkness, thus allowing their husbands to take their\nrequisite repose. They carried stones and the munitions of war to\nthe ramparts, and learning to handle the cross-bow, they succeeded\nin committing no inconsiderable amount of execution among the ranks\nof the Episcopal army. Other women prepared lime and boiling pitch\n\"to cook the bishop's soup for him.\"[210] On the 31st August, at\ndaybreak, the roar of the Hessian devil, as a large cannon belonging\nto the Landgrave Philip was called, gave the signal. Instantly the\ncity was assaulted in six places. The ditches were filled, petards\nwere placed under the gates, the palisades were torn down, and\nladders were planted. But however vigorous might be the attack,\nthe defence was no less vigorous. Those on the walls threw down\nthe ladders with all upon them, and they fell bruised and mangled\ninto the fosse, the heads of those who had reached the battlements\nwere crushed with stones and cudgels, and their hands, clasping the\nparapet, were hacked off. Women hurled stones upon the besiegers,\nand enveloped them in boiling pitch, quicklime, and blazing sulphur.\n\n  [210] _Ibid._ p. 70.\n\nRepulsed, they returned to the charge eight or ten times, but always\nin vain. The whole day was consumed in ineffectual assaults, and\nwhen the red sun went down in the west, the clarions pealed the\nretreat, and the army, dispirited and bearing with it a train of\nwounded, withdrew, leaving the ground strewn with dead.\n\nHad the Anabaptists made a night assault, the defeat and dispersion\nof the Episcopal troops would have been completed. But instead, they\nsang a hymn and spent the night in banqueting.\n\nThe prince-bishop, despondent and at his wits' end for money,\ncalled his officers to a consultation on the 3rd September, and it\nwas unanimously resolved to turn the investment into an effective\nblockade. This resolution was submitted to the electors of Cologne\nand Saxony, the Duke of Cleves, and the Landgrave of Hesse, and\nthese princes approved of the design of Francis von Waldeck.\n\nIt was determined to raise seven redoubts, united by ramparts and a\nditch, around the city, so as completely to close it, and prevent\nthe exit of the besieged and the entrance of provisions. It was\ndecided that the defence of this circle of forts should be confided\nto a sufficient number of tried soldiers, and that the rest of the\narmy should be dismissed.\n\nAccordingly, on the 7th September, all the labourers of the country\nround were engaged, under the direction of the engineer Wilkin von\nStedingen, in raising the walls and digging the trenches. The work\nwas carried on with vigour by relays of peasants; nevertheless, the\nundertaking was on so great a scale, that several months must elapse\nbefore it could be completed.[211]\n\n  [211] Kerssenbroeck, p. 75 _et seq._; Heresbach, p. 132.\n\nThe cost of this terrible siege had already risen to 600,000\nflorins, the treasury was empty, and the country could bear no\nfurther taxes. Francis of Waldeck appealed to the Elector Palatine,\nthe Electors of Cologne, Mainz, and Tr\u00e8ves, to give help and\nsubsidies; he had recourse also to the princes and nobles of the\nUpper and Lower Rhine; and it was decided that a diet should\nassemble on the 13th December, 1534, to make arrangements for the\ncomplete subjugation of the insurgent fanatics. All the princes,\nCatholic and Protestant, trembled for their crowns, for the\nAnabaptist sect ramified throughout the country, and if John of\nLeyden were successful in M\u00fcnster, they might expect similar risings\nin their own principalities.[212]\n\n  [212] _Ibid._ p. 75; Bussierre, p. 372; Hast, p. 366.\n\nWhilst the preparations for the blockade were in progress, John\nBockelson, inflated with pride, placed no bounds to his prodigality,\nhis display, and his despotism. He frequently pronounced sentences\nof death. Thus Elizabeth Holschers was decapitated for having\nrefused her husband what he demanded of her; Catherine of Osnabr\u00fcck\nunderwent the same sentence for having told one of the preachers\nthat he was building his doctrines upon the sand; Catherine\nKnockenbecher lost her head for having taken two husbands. Polygamy\nwas permitted, but polyandry was regarded as an unpardonable\noffence.[213]\n\n  [213] Kerssenbroeck, p. 75; Bussierre, p. 372.\n\nHowever, the people chafed at the tyranny they were subjected to,\nand murmurs, low and threatening, continued to make themselves\nheard; whereupon, by King John's order, Dusentscheuer announced from\nthe pulpit, \"that all those who should for the future have doubts in\nthe verities taught them, and who should venture to blame the king\nwhom the Father had given them, would be given over to the anointed\nof the Lord to be extirpated out of Israel, decapitated by the\nheadsman, and condemned to eternal oblivion.\"\n\nAmongst those who viewed with envy the rise and splendour of the\ntailor-king was Knipperdolling. He had opened his home to the\nprophet, had patronised him, introduced him to the people of\nM\u00fcnster, and now the draper was eclipsed by the glory of the tailor.\nThinking that the time was come for him to assume the pre-eminence,\nhe made an attempt to dethrone Bockelson.\n\nOn the 12th of September he was seized with the spirit of prophecy,\nbecame as one possessed, rushed through the town howling, foaming\nat the mouth, making prodigious leaps and extravagant gestures,\nand crying in every street, \"Repent! repent!\" After having carried\non these antics for some time, Knipperdolling dashed into the\nmarket-place, cast himself down on the ground, and fell into an\necstasy.\n\nThe people clustered around him, wondering what new revelation was\nabout to be made, and the king, who was then holding audience,\nlooked on uneasily at the crowd drifting from his throne towards his\nlieutenant-general, whose object he was unable to divine, as this\nperformance had not been concerted between them.\n\nHe was not left long in uncertainty, for Knipperdolling, rising\nfrom the ground with livid face, scrambled up the back of a sturdy\nartisan standing near, and crawled on all fours \"like a dog,\" says\nSleidan, over the heads of the throng, breathing in their faces,\nand exclaiming, \"The celestial Father has sanctified thee; receive\nthe Holy Ghost.\" Then he anointed the eyes of some blind men with\nhis spittle, saying, \"Let sight be given you.\" Undiscomfited by the\nfailure of this attempt to perform a miracle, he prophesied that he\nwould die and rise again in three days; and he indicated a corner\nof the market-place where this was to occur. Then making his way\ntowards the throne, he began to dance in the most grotesque and\nindecent manner before the king, shouting contemptuously, \"Often\nhave I danced thus before my mistresses, now the celestial Father\nhas ordered me to perform these dances before my king.\"[214]\n\n  [214] Kerssenbroeck, p. 81 _et seq._; Sleidan, p. 416.\n\nJohn was highly displeased at this performance; and he ran down the\nsteps of his throne to interrupt him. But Knipperdolling nimbly\nleaped upon the dais, seated himself in the place of majesty, and\ncried out, \"The Spirit of God impels me: John Bockelson is king\naccording to the flesh, I am king according to the Spirit; the\ntwo Testaments must be abolished and extirpated. Man must cease\nfrom obeying terrestrial laws; henceforth he shall obey only the\ninspirations of the Spirit and the instincts of nature.\"\n\nJohn of Leyden sprang at him, dragged him from the throne, beat\nhis head with his golden sceptre, and administering a kick to the\nrear of his lieutenant, sent him flying head over heels from the\nplatform, and then calmly enthroning himself, he gave orders for the\nremoval and imprisonment of the rebel.\n\nHe was obeyed.[215]\n\n  [215] Kerssenbroeck, Hast p. 366.\n\nKnipperdolling, left to cool in the dungeon, felt that his only\nchance of life was to submit. He therefore sent his humble apology\nto the king, and assured him that he had been possessed by an evil\nspirit, which had driven him, against his judgment and conscience,\ninto revolt. \"And,\" said he, \"last night the Father revealed to me\nthat one must venerate the royal majesty, and that John is destined\nto reign over the whole earth.\"\n\nHe was at once released, for Bockelson needed him, and the failure\nof this attempt only secured the king's hold over him. He sent him\na letter of pardon, concluding with the royal signature in this\neccentric fashion:--\n\n    \"In fide persiste salvus\n    Carnis curam agit Deus.\n    Johannes Leydanus.\n    Potentia Dei, robur meum.\"[216]\n\n  [216] Persist secure in Faith. God takes care of the Flesh. John\n  of Leyden. The Power of God is my strength.\n\nAnother event took place at M\u00fcnster, which distracted the thoughts\nof the people from the events of the siege, and the attempt of\nKnipperdolling to dethrone the king.\n\nThe prophet Dusentscheuer, on the same day, the 12th September,\nsought the King of Zion in his palace, and said to him with an\ninspired air, \"This is the commandment of the Lord to me: Go and say\nunto the chief of Israel, that he shall prepare on the Mount Zion\n(that is, the cathedral square) a great supper for all Christian\nbrethren and sisters, and after supper he shall commission the\nteachers of my Word to go forth to the four quarters of the world,\nthat they may teach all men the way of my righteousness, and that\nthey may be brought into my fold.\"\n\nThe king accepted the message with respect, and gave orders for its\nimmediate execution.\n\nOn the 13th September, Dusentscheuer called together the elect,\ntraversing the streets playing upon a flute. At noon 1700 men,\ncapable of bearing arms, 400 old men and children, and 5000 women\nassembled on Mount Zion.\n\nBockelson left his palace, habited in a scarlet tunic over which was\ncast a cloth of silver mantle, on his head was his crown, and his\nsceptre was in his right hand. Thirty-two knights, magnificently\ndressed, served as his bodyguard. Then came Queen Divara and the\nrest of the wives of the court.\n\nWhen the king had taken his place, the Grand Marshal Tilbeck made\nthe people sit down. Tables had been arranged along the sides of the\ngreat square under the trees, with an open space in the centre.\n\nWhen all were seated, the king and his familiars distributed food\nto those invited. They were given first boiled beef and roots,\nthen ham with other vegetables, and finally roast meat. When the\nplates had been removed, thin round cakes of fine wheat flour were\nbrought in large baskets, and John, calling the faithful up before\nhim, communicated them with the bread, saying, \"Take and eat this,\nand show forth the Lord's death.\" Divara followed, holding the\nchalice in her jewelled hands; she made the communicants drink from\nit, repeating the words to each, \"Drink this, and show forth the\nLord's death.\" Then all sang the _Gloria in excelsis_ in German,\nand this fantastic parody of the communion was over. Bockelson now\nordered all his subjects to arrange themselves in a circle, and he\ndemanded if they would faithfully obey the Word of God. All having\nassented, Dusentscheuer mounted the pulpit and said, \"The Father\nhas revealed to me the names of twenty-seven apostles who are to\nbe sent into every part of the world; they will spread everywhere\nthe pure doctrine of the celestial kingdom, and the Lord will cover\nthem with the shadow of His wings, so that not a hair of their head\nshall be injured. And when they shall arrive at a place where the\nauthorities refuse to receive the Gospel, there they shall leave a\nflorin in gold, they shall shake off the dust of their garments, and\nshall go to another place.\" Then the prophet designated the chosen\napostles--he saw himself of the number--and he added, \"Go ye into\nall the cities and preach the Word of God.\" The twenty-seven stepped\nforward, and the king, mounting the pulpit, exhorted the people to\nprepare for a grand sortie.[217]\n\n  [217] Kerssenbroeck, p. 86; Montfort., p. 34; Dorpius, f. 397 b;\n  Heresbach, p. 139, _et seq._; Bullinger, lib. ii. c. 10; Sleidan,\n  p. 417; this author sets the number of communicants at 5,000, the\n  \"Newe Zeitung\" at 4,000, f. 329. This authority adds that the\n  communicants distributed the sacrament they had received amongst\n  themselves saying, \"Brother and sister, take and eat thereof. As\n  Christ gave Himself for me, so will I give myself for thee. And\n  as the corn-wheat is baked into one, and the grape branches are\n  pressed into one, so we being many are one.\" Also, \"Letter of the\n  Bishop to the Electors of Cologne,\" _ibid._ p. 390.\n\nThe banquet was over for the people; but John, his wives and court,\nand those who had been on guard upon the walls, to the number of\n500, now sat down.\n\nThe second banquet was much more costly than the first. In the midst\nof the feast, Bockelson, rising, said that he had received an order\nfrom the Father to go round and inspect the guests. He accordingly\nexamined those present, and recognising amongst them a soldier of\nthe Episcopal army, who had been made prisoner, he confronted him\nsternly, and asked--\n\n\"Friend, what is thy faith?\"\n\n\"My faith,\" replied the soldier, who was half drunk, \"is to drink\nand make love.\"\n\n\"How didst thou dare to come in, not having on the wedding garment?\"\nasked the king, in a voice of thunder.\n\n\"I did not come of my own accord to this debauch,\"[218] answered the\nprisoner; \"I was brought here by main force.\"\n\n  [218] The expression used was somewhat broad--Hurenhochzeit.\n\nAt these words, the king, transported with rage, drew his sword and\nsmote off the head of the unfortunate reveller.\n\nThe night was spent in dancing.[219]\n\n  [219] Kerssenbroeck, p. 88 _et seq._; Heresbach, p. 139; Dorp. f.\n  398.\n\nWhilst the king was eating and drinking, the twenty-seven apostles\nwere taking a tender farewell of their 124 legitimate wives,[220]\nand making their preparations to depart.\n\n  [220] Evidence of Heinrich Graess. Dorpius says that the number\n  of apostles was twenty-eight, and gives their names and the\n  places to which they were sent, f. 398.\n\nWhen all was ready, they returned to Mount Zion; Bockelson\nascended the pulpit, and gave them their mission in the following\nterms:--\"Go, prepare the way; we will follow. Cast your florin of\ngold at the feet of those who despise you, that it may serve as a\ntestimony against them, and they shall be slain, all the sort of\nthem, or shall bow their necks to our rule.\"\n\nThen the gates were thrown open, and the apostles went forth, north\nand south, and east and west. The blockade was not complete, and\nthey succeeded in traversing the lines of the enemy.\n\nHowever, the prince-bishop notified to the governors of the towns in\nhis principality to watch them and arrest them, should they attempt\nto disseminate their peculiar doctrines.[221]\n\n  [221] Kerssenbroeck, p. 89 _et seq._; Heresbach, pp. 89, 101,\n  141; Montfort., p. 35; Bullinger, lib. ii. c. 10; Sleidan, pp.\n  417-8; Hast, p. 368; \"Historia v. d. M\u00fcnst. Widerteuffer.\" p. 329\n  a.\n\nWe shall have to follow these men, and see the results of their\nmission, before we continue the history of the siege of M\u00fcnster.\nIn fact, on their expedition and their success, as John Bockelson\nprobably felt, everything depended. As soon as the city was\ncompletely enclosed no food could enter: already it was becoming\nscarce; therefore an attack on the Episcopal army from the flank\nwas most essential to success; the palisades and ramparts recently\nerected sufficiently defending the enemy against surprises and\nsorties from the town.\n\nSeven of the apostles went to Osnabr\u00fcck, six to Coesfeld, five to\nWarendorf, and eight, amongst whom was Dusentscheuer himself, betook\nthemselves to Soest.[222]\n\n  [222] For the acts of these apostles, Kerssenbroeck, p. 92 _et\n  seq._; Menck. p. 1574; Montfort., p. 36 _et seq._; Sleidan, p.\n  418; Bullinger, lib. ii. c. 10; Heresbach, p. 149.\n\nOn entering Soest, Dusentscheuer and his fellow-apostles opened\ntheir mission by a public frenzied appeal to repentance. Then,\nhearing that the senate had assembled, they entered the hall and\npreached to the city councillors in so noisy a fashion that the\nmagistrates were obliged to suspend their deliberations. The\nburgomaster having asked them who they were, and why they entered\nthe town-hall unsummoned and unannounced, \"We are sent by the king\nof the New Zion, and by order of God to preach the Gospel,\" was the\nreply of Dusentscheuer; \"and to execute this mission we need neither\npassports nor permission. The kingdom of Heaven suffereth violence,\nand the violent take it by storm.\" \"Very well,\" said the burgomaster\ncollectedly. \"Guards, remove the preachers and throw them into\nprison.\" A few days after several of them lost their heads on the\nblock.\n\nJohn Clopris, at the head of four evangelists, entered Warendorf.\nThey took up their abode in the house of an Anabaptist named Erpo,\none of the magistrates of the town, and began to preach and prophesy\nin the streets. The first day they rebaptised fifty persons. Clopris\npreached with such fervour and persuasive eloquence, that the whole\ntown followed him; the senate received the sign of the covenant in a\nbody, and this was followed by a rebaptism of half the population.\n\nAlarmed at what was taking place, and afraid of a diversion in his\nrear, Francis of Waldeck wrote to the magistrates ordering them to\ngive up the apostles of error. They refused, and the prince at once\ninvested the town and bombarded it. The magistrates sent offers\nof capitulation, which the prince rejected; they asked to retain\ntheir arms and their franchises. Francis of Waldeck insisted on\nunconditional surrender, and they were constrained to yield. Some\nof the senators and citizens who had repented of their craze, or\nwho had taken no part in the movement, seized the apostles and\nconducted them to the town-hall. Clopris and his fellows cast down\ntheir florins of gold and declared that they shook off the dust of\ntheir feet against the traitors, and that they would carry the pure\nWord of God and the living Gospel elsewhere; but escape was not\npermitted, and they were delivered over to the prince-bishop.\n\nFrancis of Waldeck at once placed sentinels in the streets, ordered\nevery citizen to deliver up his weapons, took the title-deeds of the\ncity, withdrew its franchises, and executed four of the apostles\nand three of the ringleaders of the senators. Clopris was sent to\nCologne, and was burnt there on the 1st February, 1535, by the\nElector. The bishop then raised a fortress to command the town,\nand placed in it a garrison to keep the Warendorfians in order.\nSeventeen years after, the greater part of the franchises were\nrestored, and all the rest in 1555.\n\nThe apostles of the east, under Julius Frisius, were arrested at\nCoesfeld, and were executed.[223]\n\n  [223] The \"Newe Zeitung v. d. Widerteuffer. zu M\u00fcnster,\" f. 329\n  b, 330 a, gives a summary of the confessions of these men, and\n  their account of the condition of affairs in the city. They said\n  that every man there had five, six, seven, or eight wives, and\n  that every girl over the age of twelve was forced to marry; that\n  if one wife showed resentment against another, or jealousy, or\n  complained, she was sentenced by the king to death.\n\nThose of the north reached Osnabr\u00fcck. Denis Vinnius was at their\nhead. They entered the house of a certain Otto Spiecher, whom they\nbelieved to be of their persuasion, and they laid at his feet their\ngold florins bearing the title and superscription of King John,\nas tokens of their mission. Spiecher picked up the gold pieces,\npocketed them, and then informed his visitors that he did not\nbelong to their sect, and that the only salvation for their necks\nwould be reticence on the subject of their mission.\n\nBut this was advice Vinnius and his fellow-fanatics were by no\nmeans disposed to accept. They ran forth into the streets and\nmarket-place, yelling, dancing, foaming, and calling to repentance.\nThen Vinnius, having collected a crowd, preached to them the setting\nup of the Millennial kingdom at M\u00fcnster. Thereupon the city-guard\narrived with orders from the burgomaster, arrested the missionaries,\nand carried them off to the Goat-tower, where they shut them in, and\nbarred fast the doors.[224]\n\n  [224] Kerssenbroeck, p. 100 _et seq._\n\nThe rabble showed signs of violence, threatened, blustered, armed\nthemselves with axes and hammers, and vowed they would batter open\nthe prison-gates unless the true ministers of God's Word, pure from\nall human additions, were set at liberty. The magistrates replied\nwith great firmness that the first man who attempted to force\nthe doors should be shot, and no one caring to be the first man,\nthough very urgent to his neighbours to lead the assault, the mob\nsang a psalm and dispersed, and the ministers were left to console\nthemselves with the promises of Dusentscheuer that not a hair of\ntheir head should fall.\n\nA messenger was sent by the magistrates post haste to the\nprince-bishop, and before morning the evangelists were in his grasp\nat Iburg.\n\nAs they were led past Francis of Waldeck, one of them, Heinrich\nGraess, exclaimed in Latin, \"Has not the prince power to release\nthe captive?\" and the prince, disposed in his favour, sent for\nhim. Graess then confessed that the whole affair was a mixture of\nfanaticism and imposture, the ingredients being mixed in pretty\nequal proportions, and promised, if his life were spared, to abandon\nAnabaptism, and, what was more to the point, to prove an Ahitophel\nto the Absalom in Zion.\n\nGraess was pardoned, Strahl died in prison, the other four were\nbrought to the block.\n\nGraess was the sole surviving apostle of the seventy-seven, and the\nmiserable failure of their mission had rudely shaken out of him\nall belief in its divine character, and he became as zealous in\nunmasking Anabaptism as he had been enthusiastic in its propagation.\n\nThere is no reason to believe that the man was an unprincipled\ntraitor. On the contrary, he appears to have been thoroughly in\nearnest as long as he believed in his mission, but his confidence\nhad been shaken before he left the city, and the signal collapse of\nthe mission sufficed to convince him of his previous error, and make\nhim resolute to oppose it.\n\nLaden with chains, he was brought to the gates of M\u00fcnster one dark\nnight and there abandoned. In the morning he was recognised by the\nsentinels, and was brought into the city, and led in triumph before\nthe king, by a vast concourse chanting German hymns.[225]\n\n  [225] Kerssenbroeck, p. 103 _et seq._; Montfort., pp. 40-1; Hast\n  p. 368.\n\nAnd thus he accounted for his presence:--\"I was last night at Iburg\nin a dark dungeon, when suddenly a brilliant light filled my\nprison, and I saw before me an angel of God, who took me by the hand\nand led me forth, and delivered me from the death which has befallen\nall my companions, and which the ungodly determined to inflict on\nme upon the morrow. The angel transported me asleep to the gate of\nM\u00fcnster, and that none may doubt my story, lo! the chains, wherewith\nI was laden by the enemies of Israel, still encumber me.\"\n\nSome of the courtiers doubted the miracle, but not so the people,\nand the king gave implicit credence to his word, or perhaps thought\nthe event capable of a very simple explanation, which had been\nmagnified and rendered supernatural by the heated fancy of the\nmystic.\n\nGraess became the idol of the people and the favourite of Bockelson.\nThe king passed a ring upon his finger, and covered him with a\nrobe of distinction, half grey, half green--the first the symbol\nof persistence, the other typical of gratitude to God.[226] Graess\nprofited by his position to closely observe all that transpired of\nthe royal schemes.\n\n  [226] Montfort., p. 40.\n\nJohn Bockelson became more and more tyrannical and sanguinary. He\nhung a starving child, aged ten, for having stolen some turnips. A\nwoman lost her head for having spit in the face of a preacher of the\nGospel. An Episcopal soldier having been taken, the king exhorted\nhim to embrace the pure Word of God, freed from the traditions of\nmen. The prisoner having had the audacity to reply that the pure\nGospel as practised in the city seemed to him to be adultery,\nfornication, and all uncleanness; the king, foaming with rage,\nhacked off his head with his own hand.[227]\n\n  [227] Kerssenbroeck, p. 110.\n\nProvisions became scarce in M\u00fcnster, and the inhabitants were driven\nto consume horse-flesh; and the powder ran short in the magazine.\n\nThe Diet of Coblenz assembled on the 13th December. The envoys of\nthe Elector Palatine, the prince-bishops of Maintz, Cologne, and of\nTrier, the princes and nobles of the Upper and Lower Rhine and of\nWestphalia appeared. Francis of Waldeck, unable to be present in\nperson, sent deputies to represent him.[228]\n\n  [228] _Ibid._ p. 114.\n\nThese deputies having announced that the cost of the siege had\nalready amounted to 700,000 florins, besought the assembled princes\nto combine to terminate this disastrous war. A long deliberation\nfollowed, and the principle was admitted that as the establishment\nof an Anabaptist kingdom in M\u00fcnster would be a disaster affecting\nthe whole empire, it was just that the bishop should not be obliged\nto bear the whole expenses of the reduction of M\u00fcnster. The Elector\nJohn Frederick of Saxony, though not belonging to the three circles\nconvoked, through his deputies sent to the Diet, promised to take\npart in the extirpation of the heretics.[229] It was finally\nagreed that the bishop should be supplied with 300 horse soldiers,\n3000 infantry, and that an experienced General, Count Ulrich von\nUeberstein, should command them and take the general conduct of the\nwar.[230]\n\n  [229] _Ibid._; Sleidan, p. 419; Heresbach, p. 132.\n\n  [230] Sleidan, p. 419.\n\nThe monthly subsidy of 15,000 florins was also promised to be\ncontributed till the fall of M\u00fcnster. It was also agreed that the\nprince-bishop should be guaranteed the integrity of his domains;\nthat each prince, Catholic or Protestant, should use his utmost\nendeavours to extirpate Anabaptism from his estates; that the Bishop\nof M\u00fcnster should request Ferdinand, King of the Romans, and the\nseven Electors, to meet on the 4th April, at Worms, to consult with\nthose then assembled at Worms on measures to crush the rebellion, to\ndivide the cost of the war, and to punish the leaders of the revolt\nat M\u00fcnster.\n\nLastly, the Diet addressed a letter to the guilty city, summoning it\nto surrender at discretion, unless it were prepared to resist the\ncombined effort of all estates of the empire.\n\nBut if the princes were combining against the Anabaptist New\nJerusalem, the sectarians were in agitation, and were arming\nto march to its relief from all sides, from Leyden, Freisland,\nAmsterdam, Deventer, from Brabant and Strassburg.\n\nThe Anabaptists of Deventer were on the point of rising and\nmassacring the \"unbelievers\" in this city, and then marching on\nM\u00fcnster, when the plot was discovered, and the four ringleaders\nwere executed. The vigilance of the Regent of the Netherlands\nprevented the adherents of the mystic sect, who were then very\nnumerous, from rolling in a wave upon Westphalia, and sweeping the\nundisciplined Episcopal army away and consolidating the power of\ntheir pontiff-king.\n\nIt was towards the Low Countries that John of Leyden looked with\nimpatience. When would the expected delivery come out of the west?\nWhy were not the thousands and tens of thousands of the sons of\nIsrael rising from their fens, joined by trained bands from the\ncities, marching by the light of blazing cities, singing the songs\nof Zion?\n\nGraess offered the king to hie to the Low Countries and rouse the\nfaithful seed. \"The Father,\" said he, \"has ordered me to gather\ntogether the brethren dispersed at Wesel, at Deventer, at Amsterdam,\nand in Lower Germany; to form of them a mighty army that shall\ndeliver this city and smite asunder the enemies of Israel. I will\naccomplish this mission with joy in the interest of the faithful. I\nfear no danger, since I go to fulfil the will of God, and I am sure\nthat our brethren, when they know our extremity, and that it is the\nwill of their king, will rise and hasten to the relief.\"[231]\n\n  [231] Montfort., p. 40; Kerssenbroeck, p. 104 _et seq._; Hast, p.\n  368.\n\nJohn Bockelson was satisfied; he furnished Graess with letters of\ncredit, sealed with the royal signet. The letters were couched\nin the following terms:--\"We, John, King of Righteousness in the\nnew Temple, and servant of the Most High, do you to wit by these\npresents, that the bearer of these letters, Heinrich Graess, prophet\nillumined by the celestial Father, is sent by us to assemble, for\nthe increase of our realm, our brethren dispersed abroad throughout\nthe German lands. He will make them to hear the words of life, and\nhe will execute the commandments which he has received from God and\nfrom us. We therefore order and demand of all those who belong to\nour kingdom to confide in him as in ourselves. Given at M\u00fcnster,\ncity of God, and sealed with our signet, in the twenty-sixth year\nof our age and the second of our reign, the second day of the first\nmonth, in the year 1535 after the nativity of Jesus Christ, Son of\nGod.\"\n\nGraess, furnished with this letter and with 300 florins from the\ntreasury, left the city, and betook himself direct to Iburg, which\nhe reached on the vigil of the Epiphany;[232] and appeared before\nthe bishop, told him the whole project, the names of the principal\nmembers of the sect at Wesel, Amsterdam, Leyden, &c., the places\nwhere their arms were deposited, and their plan of a general rising\nand massacring their enemies on a preconcerted day.\n\n  [232] Montfort., p. 40.\n\nThe bishop sent dispatches at once to the Duke of Juliers and\nthe Governors of the Low Countries to warn them to be on their\nguard. They replied, requesting his assistance in suppressing the\ninsurrection; and as the most effectual aid he could render would be\nto send Graess, he commissioned him to visit Wesel, and arrest the\nexecution of the project.\n\nGraess at once betook himself to Wesel, where he denounced the\nringleaders and indicated the places where their arms and ammunition\nwere secreted in enormous quantities. A tumult broke out; but the\nDuke of Juliers entered Wesel on the 5th April (1535), at the head\nof some squadrons of cavalry, seized the ringleaders, who were\nmembers of the principal houses in the place and of the senate, and\non the 13th executed six of them. The rest were compelled to do\npenance in white sheets, were deprived of their arms, and put under\nclose surveillance.\n\nAnother division of the Anabaptists attempted to gain possession of\nLeyden, but were discomfited, fifteen of the principal men of the\nparty were executed, and five of the women most distinguished for\ntheir fanaticism were drowned, amongst whom was the original wife of\nJohn Bockelson.[233]\n\n  [233] Hast, p. 370; Bussierre, p. 403.\n\nIn Gr\u00f6ningen, the partisans of the sect were numerous; orders\nreached them from the king to rise and massacre the magistrates, and\nmarch to the relief of the invested city. As the Anabaptists there\nwere not all disposed to recognise the royalty of John of Leyden,\nan altercation broke out between them, and the attempt failed; but\nrising and marching under Peter Shomacker, their prophet, they\nwere defeated on January 24th, by the Baron of Leutenburg, and the\nprophet was executed.\n\nWe must now return to what took place in the town of M\u00fcnster at the\nopening of the year 1535.\n\nBockelson inaugurated that year by publishing, on January 2nd, an\nedict in twenty-eight Articles. It was addressed \"To all lovers of\nthe Truth and the Divine Righteousness, learned in and ignorant of\nthe mysteries of God, to let them know how those Christians ought to\nlive or act who are fighting under the banner of Justice, as true\nIsraelites of the new Temple predestined for long ages, announced\nby the mouths of all the holy prophets, founded in the power of the\nHoly Ghost, by Christ and his Apostles, and finally established by\nJohn, the righteous King, seated on the throne of David.\"\n\nThe Articles were to this effect:--\n\n     \"1. In this new temple there was to be only one king\n        to rule over the people of God.\n\n     2. This king was to be a minister of righteousness, and to bear\n        the sword of justice.\n\n     3. None of the subjects were to desert their allotted places.\n\n     4. None were to interpret Holy Scripture wrongfully.\n\n     5. Should a prophet arise teaching anything contrary to the\n        plain letter of Holy Scripture, he was to be avoided.\n\n     6. Drunkenness, avarice, fornication, and adultery were\n        forbidden.\n\n     7. Rebellion to be punished with death.\n\n     8. Duels to be suppressed.\n\n     9. Calumny forbidden.\n\n     10. Egress from the camp forbidden without permission.\n\n     11. Any one absenting himself from his wife for three days,\n        without leave from his officer, the wife to take another\n        husband.\n\n     12. Approaching the enemy's sentinels without leave forbidden.\n\n     13. All violence forbidden among the elect.\n\n     14. Spoil taken from the enemy to go into a common fund.\n\n     15. No renegade to be re-admitted.\n\n     16. Caution to be observed in admitting a Christian into one\n         society who leaves another.\n\n     17. Converts not to be repelled.\n\n     18. Any desiring to live at peace with the Christians, in trade,\n         friendship, and by treaty, not to be rejected.\n\n     19. Permission given to dealers and traders to traffic with the\n        elect.\n\n     20. No Christian to oppose and revolt against any Gentile\n         magistrate, except the servants of the bishops and the monks.\n\n     21. A Gentile culprit not to be remitted the penalty of his\n         crime by joining the Christian sect.\n\n     22. Directions about bonds.\n\n     23. Sentence to be pronounced against those who violate these\n         laws and despise the Word of God, but not hastily, without the\n         knowledge of the king.\n\n     24. No constraint to be used to force on marriages.\n\n     25. None afflicted with epilepsy, leprosy, and other diseases,\n         to contract marriage without informing the other contracting\n         party of their condition.\n\n     26. Nulla virginis specie, cum virgo non sit, fratrem\n         defraudabit; alioquin serio punietur.\n\n     27. Every woman who has not a legitimate husband, to choose from\n         among the community a man to be her guardian and protector.\n\n     \"Given by God and King John the Just, minister of the Most High\n        God, and of the new Temple, in the 26th year of his age and\n        the first of his reign, on the second day of the first month\n        after the nativity of Jesus Christ, Son of God, 1535.\"[234]\n\n  [234] Kerssenbroeck, p. 132 _et seq._\n\nThe object Bockelson had in view in issuing this edict was to\nproduce a diversion in his favour among the Lutherans. He already\nfelt the danger he was in, from a coalescence of Catholics\nand Protestants, and he hoped by temperate proclamations and\nprotestations of his adhesion to the Bible, and the Bible only, as\nhis authority, to dispose them, if not to make common cause with\nhim, at least to withdraw their assistance from the common enemy,\nthe Catholic bishop.\n\nFor the same object he sent letters on the 13th January to the\nLandgrave of Hesse, and with them a book called \"The Restitution\"\n(Von der Wiederbringung), intended to place Anabaptism in a\nfavourable light.[235]\n\n  [235] Kerssenbroeck, p. 128; Sleidan, p. 420; Hast, p. 373 _et\n  seq._; \"Acta, Handlungen,\" &c., f. 365 b. The king's letter began\n  \"Leve Lips\" (\"Dear Phil\").\n\nThe Landgrave replied at length, rebuking the fanatics for their\nrebellion, for their profligacy, and for their heresy in teaching\nthat man had a free will.[236]\n\n  [236] Sleidan, p. 421.\n\nThis reply irritated the Anabaptists, and they wrote to him again,\nto prove that they clave to the pure Word of God, freed from all\ndoctrines and traditions of men, and that they followed the direct\ninspiration of God through their prophet. They also retorted on\nPhilip with some effect. The Landgrave, said they, had no right to\ncensure them for attacking their bishop, for he had done precisely\nthe same in his own dominions. He had expelled all the religious\nfrom their convents, and had appropriated their lands; he had\nre-established the Duke of Wurtemburg in opposition to the will\nof the Emperor; he had changed the religion of his subjects, and\nwas unable to allege, as his authority for thus acting, the direct\norders of Heaven, transmitted to him by the prophets of the living\nGod. They might have retorted upon the Landgrave also, the charge\nof immorality, but they forbore; their object was to persuade the\nchampion of the Protestant cause to favour them, not to exasperate\nhim by driving the _tu quoque_ too deep home.\n\nWith this letter was sent a treatise by Rottmann, entitled, \"On the\nSecret Significance of Scripture.\"\n\nPhilip of Hesse wavered. He wrote once more; and after having\nattempted to excuse himself for those things wherewith he had been\nreproached, he said, \"If the thing depended on me only, you would\nnot have to plead in vain your _just_ cause, and you would obtain\nall that you demand; but you ought ere this to have addressed the\nprinces of the empire, instead of taking the law into your own\nhands; flying to arms, erecting a kingdom, electing a king, and\nsending prophets and apostles abroad to stir up the towns and the\npeople. Nevertheless, it is possible that even now your demands may\nbe favourably listened to, if you recall on equitable conditions\nthose whom you have driven out of the town and despoiled of their\ngoods, and restore your ancient constitutions and your former\nauthorities.\"[237]\n\n  [237] Kerssenbroeck, p. 129; Sleidan, p. 421.\n\nLuther now thundered out of Wittemberg. Sleidan epitomises this\ntreatise. Five Hessian ministers also issued an answer to the\ndoctrine of the Anabaptists of M\u00fcnster, which was probably drawn up\nfor them by Luther himself, or was at least submitted to him for his\napproval, for it is published among his German works.[238] It is\nfull of invective and argument in about equal doses. A passage or\ntwo only can be quoted here:--\n\n\"Since you are led astray by the devil into such blasphemous error,\ndrunk and utterly imprisoned you wish, as is Satan's way, to make\nyourselves into angels of light, and to paint in brightness and\ncolour your devilish doings. For the devil will be no devil, but\na holy angel, yea, even God himself, and his works, however bad\nthey may be before God and all the world, he will have unrebuked,\nand himself be honoured and reverenced as the Most Holy. For that\npurpose he and you, his obedient disciples, use Holy Scripture as\nall heretics have ever done.\"[239]\n\n  [238] Luth. \"S\u00e4mmtliche Werke,\" Wittenb. 1545-51, ii. ff.\n  367-375; \"Von der Teuffelischen Secte d. Widerteuffer. zu\n  M\u00fcnster.\"\n\n  [239] _Ibid._ f. 367.\n\n\"What shall I say? You let all the world see that you understand far\nless about the kingdom of Christ than did the Jews, who blame you\nfor your want of understanding, and yet none spoke or believed more\nignorantly of that same kingdom than they. For the Scripture and the\nprophets point to Messiah, through whom all was to be fulfilled, and\nthis the Jews also believed. But you want to make it point to your\nTailor-King, to the great disgrace and mockery of Christ, our only\ntrue King, Saviour, and Redeemer.\"[240]\n\n  [240] _Ibid._ f. 369.\n\nBut this was the grievous rub with the Reformer--that the Anabaptist\nhad gone a step beyond himself. \"You have cast away all that Dr.\nMartin Luther taught you, and yet it is from him that you have\nreceived, next to God, all sound learning out of the Scripture; you\nhave given another definition of faith, after your new fashion, with\nvarious additional articles, so that you have not only darkened, but\nhave utterly annihilated the value of saving faith.\"[241]\n\n  [241] _Ibid._ f. 373.\n\nIn a treatise of Justus Menius, published with Luther's approval,\nand with a preface by him, \"On the Spirit of the Anabaptists,\"\nit is angrily complained, that these sectaries bring against the\nLutheran Church the following charges:--\"First, that our churches\nare idol-temples, since God dwelleth not in temples made with hands.\nSecondly, that we do not preach the truth, and have true Divine\nworship therein. Thirdly, that our preachers are sinners, and are\ntherefore unfit to teach others. Fourthly, that the common people\ndo not mend their morals by our preaching.\" All which charges\nJustus Menius answers as well as he can, sword in one hand against\nthe Papists, trowel in the other patching up the walls of his\nJerusalem.[242]\n\n  [242] _Ibid._ ii. ff. 298-325.\n\nMelancthon also wrote against the Anabaptist book, combating all its\npropositions, and to do so falling back on the maxim, _Abusus non\ntollit substantiam_, a maxim completely ignored by the Reformers\nwhen they attacked the Catholics.[243] Thus the new sect fought\nLutheranism with precisely the same weapons wherewith the Lutherans\nhad fought the Church; and the Lutherans, to maintain their\nground, were obliged to take refuge in the authority of the Church\nand tradition--positions they had assailed formerly, and to use\narguments they had previously rejected.\n\n  [243] _Ibid._ ii. ff. 334-363. Melancthon says that things had\n  come to such a pass in M\u00fcnster, that no child knew who was its\n  father, brother, or sister.\n\nIn the treatise of the five Hessian divines, drawn up by Philip of\nHesse's orders, the errors of the Anabaptists are epitomised and\ncondemned; they are as follows:--\n\n     \"1. They do not believe that men are justified\n        by faith only, but by faith and works conjointly.\n\n     2. They refer the redemption of Christ alone to the fall of\n        Adam, and to its consequences on those born of him.\n\n     3. They hold community of goods.\n\n     4. They blame Martin Luther as having taught nothing about good\n        works.\n\n     5. They proclaim the freedom of man's will.\n\n     6. They reject infant baptism.\n\n     7. They take the Bible alone, uninterpreted by any commentary.\n\n     8. They declare for plurality of wives.\n\n     9. They do not correctly teach the Incarnation of Christ.\"[244]\n\n  [244] \"Acta Handlung.\" &c. f. 366 a.\n\nThis \"Kurtze: und in der eile gestelte Antwort,\" is signed by\nJohn Campis, John Fontius, John Kymeus, John Lessing, and Anthony\nCorvinus.\n\nIt was high time that the siege should come to an end, so every one\nsaid; but every one had said the same for the last twelve months,\nand M\u00fcnster held out notwithstanding.\n\nAn ultimatum was sent into the city by the general in command,\noffering the inhabitants liberal terms if they would surrender, and\nwarning them that, in case of refusal, the city would be taken by\nstorm, and would be delivered over to plunder.[245] No answer was\nmade to the letter; nevertheless, it produced a profound impression\non the citizens, who were already suffering from want of victuals. A\nparty was formed which resolved to seize the person of the king, and\nto open the gates and make terms with the bishop.[246] Bockelson,\nhearing of the plot, assembled the whole of the population in the\ncathedral square, and solemnly announced to them by revelation from\nthe Father that at Easter the siege would be raised, and the city\nexperience a wonderful deliverance. He also divided the town into\ntwelve portions, and placed at the head of each a duke of his own\ncreation, charged with the suppression of treason and the protection\nof the gates. Each duke was provided with twenty-four guards for\nthe defence of his person, and the infliction of punishment on\nthose citizens who proved restive under the rule of the King of\nZion.[247] These dukes were promised the government of the empire,\nwhen the kingdoms of Germany became the kingdom of John of Leyden.\nDenecker, a grocer, was Duke of Saxony; Moer, the tailor, Duke of\nBrunswick; the Kerkerings were appointed to reign over Westphalia;\nRedecker, the cobbler, to bear rule in Juliers and Cleves. John Palk\nwas created Duke of Guelders and Utrecht; Edinck was to be supreme\nin Brabant and Holland; Faust, a coppersmith, in Mainz and Cologne;\nHenry Kock was to be Duke of Trier; Ratterberg to be Duke of Bremen,\nWerden, and Minden; Reininck took his title from Hildesheim and\nMagdeburg; and Nicolas Strip from Frisia and Gr\u00f6ningen. As these\nmen were for the most part butchers, blacksmiths, tailors, and\nshoemakers, their titles, ducal coronets and mantles, and the\nprospect of governing, turned their heads, and made them zealous\ntools in the hands of Bockelson.\n\n  [245] Kerssenbroeck, p. 130.\n\n  [246] _Ibid._ p. 140.\n\n  [247] Sleidan, p. 419; Bullinger, l. ii. c. 9; Heresbach, p. 156;\n  Dorp. f. 498.\n\nThe king made one more attempt to rouse the country. He issued\nletters offering the pillage of the whole world to all those\nwho would join the standard. But the bishop was informed of the\npreparation of these missives by a Danish soldier in M\u00fcnster;\nhe was much alarmed, as his _lantzknechts_ were ready to sell\ntheir services to the highest bidder. He therefore pressed on the\ncircumvallation of the city, kept a vigilant guard, and captured\nevery emissary sent forth to distribute these tempting offers.\nOn the 11th February, 1535, the moat, mound, and palisade around\nthe city were complete; and it was thenceforth impossible for\naccess to or egress from the city to be effected without the\nknowledge of the prince and his generals. The unfortunate people of\nM\u00fcnster discovered attempting to escape were by the king's orders\ndecapitated. Many men and women perished thus; amongst them was a\nmistress of Knipperdolling named Dreyer, who, weary of her life,\nfled, but was caught and delivered over to the executioner. When\nher turn came, the headsman hesitated. Knipperdolling, perceiving\nit, took from him the sword, and without changing colour smote\noff her head. \"The Father,\" said he, \"irresistibly inspired me to\nthis, and I have thus become, without willing it or knowing it, an\ninstrument of vengeance in the hands of the Lord.\"[248]\n\n  [248] Kerssenbroeck, p. 148.\n\nThe legitimate wife of Knipperdolling, for having disparaged\npolygamy, escaped death with difficulty; she was sentenced to do\npublic penance, kneeling in the great square, in the midst of the\npeople, with a naked sword in her hands.[249]\n\n  [249] _Ibid._ p. 149.\n\nEaster came, the time of the promised delivery, and the armies of\nthe faithful from Holland and Friesland and Brabant had not arrived.\nThe position of Bockelson became embarrassing. He extricated\nhimself from the dilemma with characteristic effrontery. During\nsix days he remained in his own house, invisible to every one. At\nthe expiration of the time he issued forth, assembled the people\non Mount Zion, and informed them that the deliverance predicted\nof the Father _had_ taken place, but that it was a deliverance\ndifferent in kind from what they had anticipated. \"The Father,\" said\nhe, \"has laid on my shoulders the iniquities of the Israelites. I\nhave been bowed down under their burden, and was well-nigh crushed\nbeneath their weight. Now, by the grace of the Lord, health has\nbeen restored to me, and you have been all released from your sins.\nThis spiritual deliverance is the most excellent of all, and must\nprecede that which is purely exterior and temporal. Wait, therefore,\npatiently, it is promised and it will arrive, if you do not fall\nback into your sins, but maintain your confidence in God, who never\ndeserts His chosen people, though He may subject them to trials and\ntribulations, to prove their constancy.\"[250] One would fain believe\nthat John Bockelson was in earnest, and the subject of religious\ninfatuation, like his subjects, but after this it is impossible to\nso regard him.\n\n  [250] Kerssenbroeck, pp. 153, 154; Sleidan, p. 422; Bullinger,\n  lib. ii. c. 2; Heresbach, pp. 159, 160.\n\nThe princes, when separating after the assembly of Coblenz, had\nagreed to reassemble on the 4th of April. Ferdinand, King of the\nRomans, convoked all the Estates of the empire to meet on that\nday at Worms. The deputies of several towns protested against the\ndecisions taken at Coblenz without their participation, and the\ndeliberations were at the outset very tumultuous. An understanding\nwas at length arrived at, and a monthly subsidy of 20,000 florins\nfor five months was agreed upon, to maintain the efficacy of the\ninvestment of M\u00fcnster. But before separating, a final effort\nto obtain a pacific termination to the war was resolved upon,\nand the burgomasters of Frankfort and N\u00fcrnberg were sent as a\ndeputation into the city. This attempt proved as sterile as all\nthose previously essayed. \"We have nothing in common with the Roman\nempire,\" answered the chiefs of Zion; \"for that empire is the fourth\nbeast whereof Daniel prophesied. We have set up again the kingdom of\nIsrael, by the Father's command, and we engage you to abstain for\nthe future from assailing this realm, as you fear the wrath of God\nand eternal damnation.\"[251]\n\n  [251] Kerssenbroeck, p. 155; Hast, 394.\n\nThe famine in M\u00fcnster now became terrible. Cats, rats, dogs, and\nhorses were eaten; the starving people attempted various expedients\nto satisfy their craving hunger. They ate leather, wood, even\ncow-dung dried in the sun, the bark of trees, and candles. Corpses\nlately buried were dug up during the night and secretly devoured.\nMothers even ate their children. \"Terrible maladies,\" says\nKerssenbroeck, \"the consequence of famine, aggravated the position\nof the inhabitants of the town; their flesh decomposed, they rotted\nliving, their skin became livid, their lips retreated; their eyes,\nfixed and round, seemed ready to start out of their orbits; they\nwandered about, haggard, hideous, like mummies, and died by hundreds\nin the streets. The king, to prevent infection, had the bodies\ncast into large common ditches, whence the starving withdrew them\nfurtively to devour them. Night and day the houses and streets\nre-echoed with tears, cries, and moans;--men, women, old men, and\nchildren sank into the darkest despair.\"[252]\n\n  [252] Kerssenbroeck, p. 157 _et seq._; Heresbach, pp. 151, 152;\n  Hast, p. 395; Montfort., p. 46.\n\nIn the midst of the general famine, John of Leyden lived in\nabundance. His storehouses, into which the victuals found in every\nhouse had been collected, supplied his own table and that of his\nimmediate followers. His revelry and pomp were unabated, whilst his\ndeluded subjects died of want around him.[253]\n\n  [253] _Ibid._ p. 157.\n\nWhen starvation was at its worst, a letter from Heinrich Graess\ncirculated in the town, informing the people that his miraculous\nescape had been a fable, and that he had rejected the follies of\nAnabaptism, disgusted at the extravagance to which it had led\nits votaries, and assuring them that their king was an impostor,\nexploiting to his advantage the credulity of an infatuated mob.[254]\n\n  [254] Montfort., p. 47.\n\nThis letter produced an effect which made the king tremble. He\nsummoned his disciples before him, reproached them for putting the\nhand to the plough and turning back, and gave leave to all those\nwhose faith wavered to go out from the city. \"As for me,\" said\nhe, \"I shall remain here, even if I remain alone with the angels\nwhich the Father will not fail to send to aid me to defend this\nplace.\"[255]\n\n  [255] Kerssenbroeck, p. 161.\n\nWhen the king had given permission to leave the city, numbers of\nevery age and sex poured through the gates, leaving behind only the\nmost fanatical who were resolved to conquer or die with John of\nLeyden.\n\nOutside the city walls extended a trampled and desolate tract to\nthe fosse and earthworks of the besiegers, strewn with the ruins\nof houses and of farmsteads. The unfortunate creatures escaping\nfrom Zion, wasted and haggard like spectres, spread over this\ndevastated region. The investing army drove them back towards\nthe city, unwilling to allow the rebels to protract the siege by\ndisembarrassing themselves of all the useless mouths in the place.\nThey refused, however, to re-enter the walls, and remained in the\nK\u00f6nigreich, as this desert tract was called, to the number of\n900, living on roots and grass, for four weeks, lying on the bare\nearth. Some were too feeble to walk, and crawled about on all fours;\ntheir hunger was so terrible that they filled their mouths with\nsand, earth, or leaves, and died choked, in terrible convulsions.\nNight and day their moans, howls, and cries ascended. The children\npresented a yet more deplorable spectacle; they implored their\nmothers to give them something to eat, and they, poor creatures,\ncould only answer them with tears and sobs; often they approached\nthe lines of the camp, and sought to excite the compassion of the\nsoldiers.\n\nThe General in command, Graff Ueberstein, sent information, on April\n22nd, to the bishop, who was ill in his castle at Wollbeck, and\nasked what was to be done with these unfortunates who were perishing\nin the K\u00f6nigreich. The bishop shed tears, and protested his sorrow\nat the sufferings of the poor wretches, but did not venture to give\norders for their removal, without consulting the Duke of Cleves and\nthe Elector of Cologne. Thus much precious time was lost, and only\non the 28th May, a month after, were the starving wretches permitted\nto leave the K\u00f6nigreich, upon the following terms: 1st. That they\nshould be transported to the neighbouring town of Diekhausen, where\nthey should be examined, and those who were guilty among them\nexecuted; 2nd. That the rest should be pardoned and dispersed in\ndifferent places, after having undertaken to renounce Anabaptism,\nand to abstain from negotiations, open or secret, with their\ncomrades in the beleagured city.[256] These conditions having been\nmade, the refugees were transported on tumbrils and in carts to\nDiekhausen, at a foot's pace, their excessive exhaustion rendering\nthem incapable of bearing more rapid motion. They numbered 200; 700\nhad perished of famine between the lines of the investing army and\nthe walls of the besieged town. On the 30th May, those found guilty\nof prominent participation in the revolt were executed.\n\n  [256] Kerssenbroeck, pp. 161-8.\n\nThe prince-bishop might have spared his tears and sent loaves.\nHis hesitation and want of genuine sympathy with the starving\nunfortunates serve to mark his character as not only weak, but\nselfish and cowardly.\n\nWhilst this was taking place outside the walls of M\u00fcnster, John van\nGheel, an emissary of Bockelson, was actively engaged in rousing the\nAnabaptists of Amsterdam. Having insinuated himself into the good\ngraces of the Princess Mary, regent of the Netherlands, he persuaded\nher that he was desirous of restraining the sectaries waiting their\ncall to march to the relief of M\u00fcnster. She even furnished him with\nan authorisation to raise troops for this purpose. He profited by\nthis order to arm his friends and lay a plot for obtaining the\nmastery of Amsterdam. His design was to make that city a place\nof rendezvous for all the Anabaptists of the Low Countries, who\nwould flock into it as a city of refuge, when once it was in his\npower, and then he would be able to organise out of them an army\nsufficiently numerous and well appointed to raise the siege of\nM\u00fcnster.\n\nOn the 11th May he placed himself at the head of 600 friends, seized\non the town, massacred half the guards, and one of the burgomasters.\nAmsterdam would inevitably have been in the power of the sectaries\nin another hour, had not one of the guard escaped up the tower\nand rung the alarm-bell. As the tocsin pealed over the city, the\ncitizens armed and rushed to the market-place, fell upon the\nAnabaptists and retook the town-hall, notwithstanding a desperate\nresistance. Crowds of fanatics from the country, who had received\nsecret intimation to assemble before the walls of Amsterdam,\nand wait till the gates were opened to admit them, finding that\nthe plan had been defeated, threw away their arms and fled with\nprecipitation.[257]\n\n  [257] Kerssenbroeck, pp. 73, 74; Hast, p. 37; Montfort., p. 58\n  _et seq._\n\nVan Gheel had fallen in the encounter. The prisoners were executed.\nAmongst these was Camp\u00e9 whom John of Leyden had created Anabaptist\nbishop of Amsterdam. His execution was performed with great\nbarbarity; first his tongue, then his hand, and finally his head was\ncut off.[258]\n\n  [258] Montfort., pp. 68, 69.\n\nWe must look once more into the doomed city.\n\nIn the midst of the general desolation John Bockelson and his court\nlived in splendour and luxury. Every one who murmured against his\nexcesses was executed. Heads were struck off on the smallest charge,\nand scarcely a day passed in May and June without blood flowing on\nMount Zion. One of the most remarkable of these executions was that\nof Elizabeth Wandtscherer, one of the queens.\n\nThis woman had had three husbands; the first was dead, the second\nmarriage had been annulled, and Bockelson had taken her to wife\nbecause she was pretty and well made.\n\nShe was a great favourite with her royal husband, and for six\nmonths she seemed to be delighted with her position; but at\nlength, disgusted with the unbridled licence of the royal harem,\nthe hypocrisy and the mad revelry of the court, contrasted with\nthe famine of the citizens, a prey to remorse, she tore off her\njewels and her queenly robes, and asked John of Leyden permission\nto leave the city. This was on the 12th June. The king, furious at\nan apostacy in his own house, dragged her into the market-place,\nand there in the presence of his wives and the populace, smote off\nher head with his own hands, stamped on her body, and then chanting\nthe \"Gloria in excelsis\" with his queens, danced round the corpse\nweltering in its blood.[259]\n\n  [259] Kerssenbroeck, pp. 176-7; Dorpius, f. 498 b; Sleidan, p.\n  422, says she was executed for having observed to some of her\n  companions that it could not be the will of God that they should\n  live in abundance whilst the subjects perished from want of\n  necessaries. Hast, p. 395; Heresbach, p. 145.\n\nHowever, the royal magazines were now nearly exhausted, and the king\nwas informed that there remained provisions for only a few days. He\nresolved to carry on his joyous life of debauchery without thought\nof the morrow, and when all was expended, to fire the city in every\nquarter, and then to rush forth, arms in hand, and break through the\ninvesting girdle, or perish in the attempt.[260] This project was\nnot executed, for the siege was abruptly ended before the moment\nhad arrived for its accomplishment.\n\n  [260] Kerssenbroeck, p. 177.\n\nLate in the preceding year, a soldier of the Episcopal army, John\nEck, of Langenstraten, or, as he was called from his diminutive\nstature, Hansel Eck, having been punished as he deemed excessively\nor unjustly for some dereliction in his duty, deserted to the\nAnabaptists, and found an asylum in the city, where John Bockelson,\nperceiving his abilities and practical acquaintance with military\noperations, made him one of his captains.\n\nBut Hansel soon repented bitterly this step he had taken. Little men\nare proverbially peppery and ready to stand on their dignity. His\ndesertion had been the result of an outburst of wounded self-pride,\nand when his wrath cooled down, and his judgment obtained the upper\nhand, he was angry with himself for what he had done. Feeling\nconfident that the city must eventually fall, and knowing that\nsmall mercies would be shown to a deserter caught in arms, however\ninsignificant he might be in stature, Hansel took counsel with eight\nother discontented soldiers in his company, and they resolved to\nescape from M\u00fcnster and ask pardon of the bishop.\n\nThey effected the first part of their object on the night of\nthe 17th June, and crossed the K\u00f6nigreich towards the lines of\nthe investing force. The sentinels, observing a party of armed\nmen advancing, with the moon flashing from their morions and\nbreastplates, fired on them and killed seven. His diminutive stature\nstood Hansel in good stead, and he, with one other named Sobb,\nsucceeded in escalading the ramparts unobserved, and in making\ntheir way to the nearest fort of Hamm, where the old officer,\nMeinhardt von Hamm, under whom he had formerly served, was in\ncommand. Hansel and Sobb were conducted into his presence, and\noffered to deliver the city into the hands of the prince-bishop if\nhe would accord them a free pardon; but they added that no time\nmust be lost, as it was but a question of hours rather than of days\nbefore the city was fired, and the final sortie was executed.[261]\n\n  [261] Kerssenbroeck, p. 179 _et seq._; Sleidan, p. 427;\n  Montfort., p. 71; Heresbach, p. 162 _et seq._; Hast, p. 395 _et\n  seq._; Dorpius, f. 499.\n\nMeinhardt listened to his plan, approved of it, and wrote to Francis\nof Waldeck, asking a safe-conduct for Hansel, and urging the utmost\nsecrecy, as on the preservation of the secret depended the success\nof the scheme.\n\nThe safe-conduct was readily granted, and the deserter was brought\nto Willinghegen concealed amidst game in a cart covered with\nboughs of trees. Willinghegen is a small place one mile outside\nthe circumvallation. The chiefs of the besieging army met here to\nconsider the plan of Hansel Eck. The little man protested that with\n300 men he could take the city. He knew the weak points, and he\ncould escalade the walls where they were unguarded. Four hundred\nsoldiers were, however, decided to be sent on the expedition, under\nthe command of Wilkin Steding, \"a terrible enemy but a devoted\nfriend;\" John of Twickel was to be standard-bearer, and Hansel\nwas to act as guide; and the attempt was to be made on the eve\nof St. John the Baptist's day.[262] However, the bishop and Count\nUeberstein, desirous of avoiding unnecessary effusion of blood,\nsummoned the inhabitants to surrender, for the last time, on the\n22nd June.\n\n  [262] Kerssenbroeck, p. 169; and the authors before cited.\n\nRottmann replied to the deputies that \"the city should be\nsurrendered only when they received the order to do so from the\nFather by a revelation.\"\n\nMidsummer eve was a hot, sultry day. Towards evening dark heavy\nclouds rolled up against the wind, and a violent storm of thunder,\nlightning, and hail burst over the doomed city. The sentinels\nof M\u00fcnster, exhausted by hunger, and alarmed at the rage of the\nelements, quitted their posts and retreated under shelter. The\ndarkness, the growl of the wind, and the boom of the thunder\nconcealed the approach of the Episcopal troops. The 400, under\nSteding, guided by the deserter, marched into the K\u00f6nigreich between\nten and eleven o'clock, and met with no obstacles till they reached\nthe Holy-cross Gate. Here they filled the ditch with faggots, trees,\nand bundles of straw; a bridge was improvised, the curtain of\npalisades masking the bastion was surmounted, ladders were planted,\nand without meeting with the least resistance, the 400 reached the\nsummit of the walls. The sentinels, whom they found asleep, were\nkilled, with the exception of one who purchased his life by giving\nup the pass-word, \"Die Erde.\" The soldiers then advanced along the\npaved road which lay between the double walls, captured and killed\nthe sentinels at every watch tower, and then, entering the streets,\ncrossed the cemetery of Ueberwasser, the River Aa by its bridge, and\ndebouched on the cathedral square, where the faint flashes of the\nretreating lightning illumined at intervals the gaunt scaffolding of\nthe throne and gallery and pulpit of the Anabaptist king, looking\nnow not unlike the preparations for an execution.\n\nThe cathedral had been converted into the arsenal. Hansel led the\nEpiscopal soldiers to the western gates, gave the word \"Die Erde,\"\nand the guards were killed before they could give the alarm. The\nartillery was now in the hands of the 400.[263]\n\n  [263] Kerssenbroeck, p. 176 _et seq._; and the authors before\n  cited.\n\nThe Anabaptists had slept through the rumble of the thunder, but\nsuddenly the rattle of the drum on their hill of Zion woke them\nwith a start. They sprang from their beds, armed in haste, and\nrushed to the cathedral square, where their own cannons opened\non them their mouths of fire, and poured an iron shower down the\nmain thoroughfares which led from the Minster green. But they were\nnot discouraged. Through backways, and under the shelter of the\nsurrounding houses, they reached the Chapel of St. Michael, which\ncommanded the position of the Episcopal soldiers, and thence fired\nupon them with deadly precision.\n\nSteding turned the guns against the chapel, but its massive walls\ncould not be broken through, and the balls bounded from them without\neffecting more than a trivial damage. The Anabaptists pursued their\nadvantage. Whilst Steding was occupied with those who held the\nChapel of St. Michael, a large number assembled in the market-place\nand marched in close ranks upon the cathedral square.\n\nThe 400, unable to withstand the numbers opposed to them, were\ndriven from their positions, and retreated into the narrow Margaret\nStreet, where they were unable to use their arms with advantage.\nSteding burst open the door of a house, and sent 200 of his men\nthrough it; they issued through the back door, filled up a narrow\nlane running parallel with the street, and attacked the Anabaptists\nin the rear, who, thinking that the city was in the hands of the\nenemy, and that they were being assailed by a reinforcement, fled\nprecipitately.\n\nBy an unpardonable oversight, Steding had forgotten to leave a guard\nat the postern by which he had entered the city. The Anabaptists\ndiscovered this mistake and profited by it, so that when the\nreinforcements sent to support Steding arrived, the gates were\nclosed, and the walls were defended by the women, who cast stones\nand firebrands, and shot arrows amongst them, taunting them with the\nfailure of the attempt to surprise the city; and they, uncertain\nwhether to believe that the plot of Hansel Eck had failed or not,\nremained without till break of day, vainly attempting to escalade\nthe walls. The Anabaptists, who had fled in the Margaret Street,\nsoon rallied, and the 400 were again exposed to the fury of a\nmultitude three times their number, who assailed them in front and\nin rear, and they were struck down by stones and furniture cast out\nof the windows upon them by the women in the houses.\n\nNevertheless they bravely defended themselves for several hours,\nand their assailants began to lose courage, as news of the onslaught\nupon the walls reached them. It was now midnight. King John proposed\na temporary cessation of hostilities, which Steding gladly accepted,\nand the messengers of Bockelson offered the 400 their life if they\nwould lay down their arms, kneel before him, and ask his pardon.[264]\n\n  [264] Kerssenbroeck, p. 385; Heresbach, pp. 162-6; Montfort., p.\n  72; Hast, p. 396 _et seq._\n\nThe soldiers indignantly rejected this offer, but proposed to quit\nthe town with their arms and ensigns. A long discussion ensued,\nwhich Steding protracted till break of day.\n\nAt the opening of the negotiations, Steding bade John von Twickel,\nthe ensign, hasten to the ramparts with three men, as secretly\nas possible, and urge on the reinforcements. Twickel reached the\nbastions as day began to dawn, and he shouted to his comrades\nwithout to help Steding and his gallant band before all was lost.\nThe Episcopalians, dreading a ruse of the besieged to draw them into\nan ambush, hesitated; but Twickel called the watchword, which was\n_Waldeck_, and announced the partial success of the 400.\n\nHaving accomplished his mission, Twickel returned to his comrades\nwithin, cheering them at the top of his voice with the cry from\nafar, \"Courage, friends, help is at hand!\"\n\nAt these words the remains of the gallant band of 400 recommenced\nthe combat with irresistible energy. They fell on the Anabaptists\nwith such vehemence that they drove them back on all sides; they\ngave no quarter, but breaking into divisions, swept the streets,\nmeeting now with only a feeble resistance, for the soldiers without\nwere battering at the gates. In vain did the sectarians offer to\nleave the town, their offer came too late, and the little band drove\nthem from one rallying point to another.[265]\n\n  [265] Kerssenbroeck, pp. 188, 189.\n\nRottmann, feeling that all was lost, cast himself on their lances\nand fell. John of Leyden, instead of heading his party, attempted to\nfly, but was recognised as he was escaping through the gate of St.\nGiles, and was thrown into chains.\n\nIn the meantime the reinforcement had mounted the walls, beaten\nin the gates, and was pouring up the streets, rolling back the\nwaves of discomfited Anabaptists on the swords and spears of the\ndecimated 400. Two hundred of the most determined among the fanatics\nentrenched themselves in a round tower commanding the market-place,\nand continued firing on the soldiers of the prince. The generals,\nseeing that the town was in their power, and that it would cost an\nexpenditure of time and life to reduce those in the tower, offered\nthem their life, and permission to march out of M\u00fcnster unmolested\nif they would surrender.\n\nOn these terms the Anabaptists in the bastion laid down their arms.\nThe besiegers now spread throughout the city, hunting out and\nkilling the rebels. Hermann Tilbeck, the former burgomaster, who had\nplayed into the hands of the Anabaptists till he declared himself,\nand who had been one of the twelve elders of Israel, was found\nconcealed, half submerged, in a privy, near the gate of St. Giles,\nwas killed, and his body left where he had hidden, \"thus being\nburied,\" says Kerssenbroeck, \"with worse than the burial of an ass.\"\nWhen the butchery was over, the bodies were brought together into\nthe cathedral square and were examined. That of Knipperdolling was\nnot amongst them. He was, in fact, hiding in the house of Catherine\nHobbels, a zealous Anabaptist; she kept him in safety the whole\nof the 26th, but finding that every house was being searched, and\nfearing lest she should suffer for having sheltered him, she ordered\nhim to leave and attempt an escape over the walls.[266]\n\n  [266] Kerssenbroeck, p. 195.\n\nOn the 27th all the women were collected in the market-square, and\nwere ordered to leave the city and never to set foot in it again.\nBut just as they were about to depart, Ueberstein announced that any\none of them who could deliver up Knipperdolling should be allowed to\nremain and retain her possessions. The bait was tempting. Catherine\nHobbels stepped forward, and offered to point out the hiding-place\nof the man they sought. She was given a renewed assurance that\nher house and goods would be respected, and she then delivered up\nKnipperdolling, who had not quitted his place of refuge. The promise\nmade to her was rigorously observed; but her husband, not being\nincluded in the pardon, and being a ringleader of the fanatics, was\nexecuted.[267] The women were accompanied by the soldiers as far as\nthe Lieb-Frau gate; they took with them their children, and were\nordered to leave the diocese and principality forthwith.\n\n  [267] _Ibid._ p. 196; Heresbach, p. 166.\n\nDivara, the head queen of John of Leyden, the wife of\nKnipperdolling, and three other women, were refused permission to\nleave. They were executed on the 7th July.\n\nM\u00fcnster was then delivered over to pillage; but all those who had\nleft the town during the government of the Anabaptists were given\ntheir furniture and houses and such of their goods as could be\nidentified.\n\nAll the property of the Anabaptists was confiscated and sold to\npay the debts contracted by the prince for defraying the expenses\nof the war. The division of the booty occasioned several troubles,\nparties of soldiers mutinied, and attempted a second pillage, but\nthe mutineers were put down rigorously.\n\nSeveral more executions took place during the following days, and\nmen hidden away in cellars, garrets and sewers were discovered and\nkilled or carried off to prison. Among these were Bernard Krechting\nand Kerkering.[268]\n\n  [268] Kerssenbroeck, pp. 198-200. Dorpius says, \"In the capture\n  of the city, women and children were spared; and none were killed\n  after the first fight, except the ringleaders.\"--f. 399.\n\nOn the 28th June, Francis of Waldeck entered the city at the head\nof 800 men. The sword, crown, and spurs of John of Leyden, together\nwith the keys of the city, were presented to him.[269]\n\n  [269] Montfort., p. 73.\n\nThe prince received, as had been stipulated, half the booty, and the\narticles and the treasure deposited in the town-hall and in the\nroyal palace, which amounted to 100,000 gold florins.[270]\n\n  [270] Kerssenbroeck, Heresbach, p. 168; Hast, p. 400.\n\nFrancis remained in M\u00fcnster only three days. Having named the new\nmagistrates, and organised the civil government of the city, he\ndeparted for his castle of Iburg. On the 13th July he ordered a Te\nDeum to be sung in the churches throughout the diocese, in thanks to\nGod for having restored tranquillity; and the Chapter inaugurated a\nyearly thanksgiving procession to take place on the 25th June.[271]\n\n  [271] _Ibid._ p. 200.\n\nOn the 15th July, the Elector of Cologne, the Duke of Juliers, and\nFrancis of Waldeck, met at Neuss to concert measures for preventing\na repetition of these disorders. The leading Protestant divines\nwrote, urging the extermination of the heretics, and reminding the\nprinces that the sword had been given them for this purpose.\n\nOn the same day, the diet of Worms agreed that the Anabaptists\nshould be extirpated as a sect dangerous alike to morals and to the\nsafety of the commonwealth, and that an assembly should be held in\nthe month of November, to decide upon defraying the cost of the war,\nand on the form of government which was to be established in the\ncity.[272]\n\n  [272] _Ibid._ p. 201\n\n  The diet met on the 1st November, and decided,--That everything\n  should be re-established in M\u00fcnster on the old footing, and that\n  the clergy should have their property and privileges restored to\n  them. That all who had fled the city to escape the government of\n  the Anabaptists should be reinstated in the possession of their\n  offices, privileges, and houses. That all the goods of the rebels\n  should remain confiscated to defray the expense of the war.\n  That the princes of neighbouring states should send deputies to\n  M\u00fcnster to provide that the innocent should not suffer with the\n  guilty. That the fortifications should be in part demolished, as\n  an example; but that M\u00fcnster should not be degraded from its rank\n  as a city. That the bishop and chapter and nobles should demolish\n  the bastions within the town as soon as the city walls had been\n  razed. That the bishops, the nobles, and the citizens should\n  solemnly engage, for themselves and for their successors, never\n  to attempt to refortify the city. Finally, that the envoys of\n  the King of the Romans and of the princes should visit the said\n  town on the 5th March, 1536, to see that these articles of the\n  convention had been executed.\n\n  All these articles were not observed. The bishop did not demolish\n  the fortifications, and the point was not insisted upon.\n\n  As for the civil constitution of M\u00fcnster, its privileges and\n  franchises, they were not entirely restored till 1553.\n\n  Francis of Waldeck now set to work repairing and purifying\n  the churches, and restoring everything as it had been before.\n  Catholic worship was everywhere restored without a single voice\n  in the city rising in opposition. The people were sick of\n  Protestantism, whether in its mitigated form as Lutheranism, or\n  in its aggravated development as Anabaptism.\n\n  But Lutherans of other states were by no means satisfied. The\n  reconciliation of the great city with the Catholic Church, from\n  which half its inhabitants had previously separated, was not\n  pleasant news to the Reformers, and they protested loudly. \"On\n  the Friday after St. John's day,\" wrote Dorpius \"in midsummer,\n  God came and destroyed this hell and drove the devil out, but the\n  devil's mother came in again.... The Anabaptists were on that day\n  rooted out, and the Papists planted in again.\"[273]\n\n  [273] \"Hernach auff freitag S. Johanstag mitten in Sommer, kommet\n  Gott und zerst\u00f6ret die Helle, und jaget den Teuffel heraus, und\n  komet sein Mutter wider hinein ... und sind die Widerteuffer\n  an obgemeltem tag ausgerottet worden, die Papisten aber wider\n  eingepflantzet.\"--Dorp. f. 399 (by misprint 499).\n\nIt is time to look at John of Leyden and his fellow-prisoners: they\nwere Knipperdolling and Bernard Krechting. There could be no doubt\nthat their fate would be terrible. It was additional cruelty to\ndelay it. But the bishop and the Lutheran divines were curious to\nsee and argue with the captives, and they were taken from place to\nplace to gratify their curiosity.\n\nWhen King John appeared before Francis of Waldeck, the bishop asked\nhim angrily how he could protract the siege whilst his people were\nstarving around him. \"Francis of Waldeck,\" he answered, \"they should\nall have died of hunger before I surrendered, had things gone as\nI desired.\"[274] He retained his spirits and affected to joke. At\nDulmen the people crowded round him asking, \"Is this the king who\ntook to himself so many wives?\" \"I ask your pardon,\" answered\nBockelson, \"I took maidens and made them wives.\"[275]\n\n  [274] Dorp. ff. 399 a, 400 a, b.\n\n  [275] Dorp. f. 399 b.\n\nIt has been often stated that the three unfortunates were carried\nround the country in iron cages. This is inaccurate. They were taken\nin chains on horseback, with two soldiers on either side; their\nbodies were placed in iron cages and hung to the steeple of the\nchurch of St. Lambert, after they were dead.\n\nAt Bevergern the Lutheran divine, Anthony Corvinus, and other\nministers \"interviewed\" the fallen king, and a long and very curious\naccount of their discussion remains.[276]\n\n  [276] Luther's \"S\u00e4mmtliche Werke.\" Wittenb. 1545-51. Band, ii.\n  ff. 376-386.\n\n\"First, when the king was brought out of prison into the room, we\ngreeted him in a friendly manner and bade him be seated before us\nfour. Also, we asked in a friendly manner how he was getting on in\nthe prison, and whether he was cold or sick? Answer of the king:\nAlthough he was obliged to endure the frost, and the sins weighing\non his heart, yet he must, as such was God's will, bear patiently.\nAnd these and other similar conversations led us so far--for nothing\ncan be got out of him by direct questions--that we were able right\ncraftily to converse with him about his government.\"\n\nThen followed a lengthy controversy on all the heretical doctrines\nof the Anabaptist sect, in which the king exhibited no little\nskill. The preachers having brought the charge of novelty against\nAnabaptism, John of Leyden very promptly showed that those living\nin glass houses should not throw stones, by pointing out that\nLutheranism was not much older than Anabaptism, that he had proved\nhis mission by miracles, whereas Luther had nothing to show to\ndemonstrate his call to establish a new creed.\n\nThe discussion on Justification by Faith only was most affectionate,\nfor both parties were quite agreed on this doctrine--surely a very\nsatisfactory one and very full of comfort to John of Leyden. But on\nthe doctrine of the Eucharist they could not agree, the king holding\nto Zwingli.[277]\n\n  [277] \"Denn wiewol ichs fur dieser zeit mit dem Zwingel\n  gehalten,\" &c., f. 384.\n\n\"That in this Sacrament the faithful, who are baptised, receive the\nBody and Blood of Christ believe I,\" said the king; \"for though I\nhold for this time with Zwingli, nevertheless I find that the words\nof Christ (This is my Body, This is my Blood) must remain in their\nworth. But that unbelievers also receive the Body and Blood of\nChrist, that I cannot believe.\"\n\n_The Preachers_: \"How that? Shall our unbelief avail more than the\nword, command and ordinance of God?\"\n\n_The King_: \"Unbelief is such a dreadful thing, that I cannot\nbelieve that the unbelievers can partake of the Body and Blood of\nChrist.\"\n\n_The Preachers_: \"It is a perverse thing that you should ever try\nto set our faith, or want of faith, above the words and ordinance\nof God. But it is evident that our faith can add nothing to God's\nordinance, nor can my unbelief detract anything therefrom. Faith\nmust be there, that I may benefit by such eating and drinking; but\nyet in this matter must we repose more on God's command and word\nthan on our faith or unbelief.\"\n\n_The King_: \"If this your meaning hold, then all unbelievers must\nhave partaken of the Communion of the Body and Blood of Christ. But\nsuch I cannot believe.\"\n\n_The Preachers_: \"You must understand that our unbelief cannot make\nthe ordinance of God unavailing. Say now, for what end was the sun\ncreated?\"\n\n_The King_: \"Scripture teaches that it was made to rule the day and\nto shine.\"\n\n_The Preachers_: \"Now if we or you were blind, would the sun fail to\nexecute its office for which it was created?\"\n\n_The King_: \"I know well that my blindness or yours would not make\nthe sun fail to shine.\"\n\n_The Preachers_: \"So is it with all the works and ordinances of\nGod, especially with the Sacraments. When I am baptised it is well\nif faith be there; but if it be not, baptism does not for all that\nfail to be a precious, noble, and holy Sacrament, yes, what St. Paul\ncalls it, a regeneration and renewal of the Holy Ghost, because it\nis ordered by God's word and given His promise. So also with respect\nto the Lord's Supper; if those who partake shall have faith to\ngrasp the promise of Christ, as it is written, _Oportet accedentem\ncredere_, but none the less does God's word, ordinance, and command\nremain, even if my faith never more turned thereto. But of this we\nhave said enough.\"[278]\n\n  [278] _Ibid._ f. 384 b.\n\nThe preachers next catechised John of Leyden on his heresy\nconcerning the Incarnation. He did not deny that Jesus Christ was\nborn of Mary, but he denied that He derived from her His flesh and\nblood, as he considered that Mary being sinful, out of sinful flesh\nsinful offspring must issue.\n\nThe catechising on the subject of marriage follows.\n\n_The Preachers_: \"How have you regarded marriage, and what is your\nbelief thereupon?\"\n\n_The King_: \"We have ever held marriage to be God's work and\nordinance, and we hold this now, that no higher or better estate\nexists in the world than the estate of matrimony.\"\n\n_The Preachers_: \"Why have you so wildly treated this same estate,\nagainst God's word and common order, and taken one wife after\nanother? How can you justify such a proceeding?\"\n\n_The King_: \"What was permitted to the patriarchs in the Old\nTestament, why should it be denied to us? What we have held is this:\nhe who wished to have only one wife had not other wives forced upon\nhim; but him who wished to have more wives than one, we left free to\ndo so, according to God's command, Be fruitful and multiply.\"\n\nThis the preachers combat by saying that the patriarchs were\nguiltless, because the law of the land (_die gemeine Policey_) did\nnot then forbid concubinage, but that now that is forbidden by\ncommon law, it is sinful.[279] Then they asked the king what other\ntexts he could quote to establish polygamy.\n\n  [279] Wei zweiveln nicht wenn ein bestendig Policey und Regiment\n  gewesen were, wie itzt est, es w\u00fcrden sich die Vetter freilich\n  aug der selbigen gehalten haben.\n\n_The King_: \"Paul says of the bishop, let him be the husband of\none wife; now if a bishop is to have only one wife, surely, in the\ntime of Paul, laymen must have been allowed two or three apiece, as\npleased them. There you have your text.\"\n\n_The Preachers_: \"As we said before, marriage is an affair of common\npolice regulation, _res Politica_. And as now the law of the land is\ndifferent from what it was in the time of Paul, so that many wives\nare forbidden and not tolerated, you will have to answer for your\ninnovations before God and man.\"\n\n_The King_: \"Well, I have the consolation that what was permitted to\nthe fathers cannot damn us. I had rather be with the fathers than\nwith you.\"\n\n_The Preachers_: \"Well, we prefer obedience to the State.\"[280]\n\n  [280] Predicanten: So w\u00f6llen wir in diesemf\u00e4ll viel lieber der\n  Oberkeit gehorsam sein, f. 386 b.\n\nHere we see Corvinus, Kymens, and the other ministers placing\nmatrimony on exactly the same low footing as did Luther.\n\nHaving \"interviewed\" the king, these crows settled on Knipperdolling\nand Krechting in Horstmar, and with these unfortunates they carried\non a paper controversy.\n\nThe captivity of the king and his two accomplices lasted six months.\nThe Lutheran preachers had swarmed about him and buzzed in his\nears, and the poor wretch believed that by yielding a few points\nhe could save his life. He offered to labour along with Melchior\nHoffmann, to bring the numerous Anabaptists in Friesland, Holland,\nBrabant, and Flanders into submission, if he were given his liberty;\nbut finding that the preachers had been giving him false hopes and\nleading him into recantations, he refused to see them again, and\nawaited his execution in sullen despair.\n\nThe pastors failing to convert the Anabaptists, and finding that the\nsectaries used against them scripture and private judgment with such\nefficacy that they were unable in argument to overcome them, called\nupon the princes to exterminate them by fire and sword.\n\nThe gentle Melancthon wrote a tract or letter to urge the princes\non; it was entitled, \"Das weltliche Oberkeiten den Widerteuffern\nmit leiblicher straffe zu wehren sch\u00fcldig sey. Etlicher bedenken zu\nWittemberg gestellet durch Philip Melancthon, 1536. Ob Christliche\nF\u00fcrsten sch\u00fcldig sind der Widerteuffer unchristlicher Sect mit\nleiblicher straffe und mit dem schwert zu wehren.\" He enumerates the\ndoctrines of the unfortunate sectarians at M\u00fcnster and elsewhere,\nand then he says that it is the duty of all princes and nobles to\nroot out with the sword all heresy from their dominions; but then,\nwith this proviso, they must first be instructed out of God's Word\nby the pure reformed Church what doctrines are heretical, that they\nmay only exterminate those who differ from the Lutheran communion.\n\nHe then quotes to the Protestant princes the example of the Jewish\nkings: \"The kings in the Old Testament, not only the Jewish kings,\nbut also the converted heathen kings, judged and killed the false\nprophets and unbelievers. Such examples show the office of princes.\nAs Paul says, the law is good that blasphemers are to be punished.\nThe government is not to rule men for their bodily welfare, so much\nas for God's honour, for they are God's ministers; let them remember\nthat and value their office.\"\n\nBut it is argued on the other side that it is written, \"Let both\ngrow together till the harvest. Now this is not spoken to the\ntemporal power,\" says Melancthon, \"but to the preachers, that they\nshould not use physical power under the excuse of their office.\nFrom all this it is plain that the worldly government is bound to\ndrive away blasphemy, false doctrine, heresies, and to punish in\ntheir persons those who hold to these things.... Let the judge know\nthat this sect of Anabaptists is from the devil, and as a prudent\npreacher instructs different stations how they are to conduct\nthemselves, as he teaches a wife that to breed children is to please\nGod well, so he teaches the temporal authorities how they are to\nserve God's honour, and openly drive away heresy.\"[281]\n\n  [281] \"Das weltliche Oberkeit,\" &c., in Luth. \"S\u00e4mt. Werke.\"\n  1545-51, ii. ff. 327-8.\n\nSo also did Justus Menius write to urge on an exterminatory\npersecution of the sectaries; he also argues that \"Let both grow\ntogether till the harvest,\" is not to be quoted by the princes as\nan excuse for sparing lives and properties.[282]\n\n  [282] \"Von dem Geist d. Widerteuffer.\" in Luth. \"Samt. Werke.\"\n  1545-51, ii. f. 325 b.\n\nOn the 12th January, 1536, John of Leyden, Knipperdolling, and\nKrechting were brought back to M\u00fcnster to undergo sentence of\ndeath.[283]\n\n  [283] Kerssenbroeck, p. 209; Kurtze Hist. f. 400.\n\nA platform was erected in the square before the townhall on the\n21st, and on this platform was planted a large stake with iron\ncollars attached to it.\n\nWhen John Bockelson was told, on the 21st, that he was to die on the\nmorrow, he asked for the chaplain of the bishop, John von Siburg,\nwho spent the night with him. With the fear of a terrible death\nbefore him, the confidence of the wretched man gave way, and he made\nhis confession with every sign of true contrition.\n\nKnipperdolling and Krechting, who were also offered the assistance\nof a priest, rejected the offer with contempt. They declared that\nthe presence of God sufficed them, that they were conscious of\nhaving committed no sin, and that all their actions had been done\nthe sole glory of to God, that moreover they were freely justified\nby faith in Christ.\n\nOn Monday the 22nd, at eight o'clock in the morning, the ex-king of\nM\u00fcnster and his companions were led to execution. The gates of the\ncity had been closed, and a large detachment of troops surrounded\nthe scaffold. Outside this iron ring was a dense crowd of people,\nand the windows were filled with heads. Francis of Waldeck occupied\na window immediately opposite the scaffold, and remained there\nthroughout the hideous tragedy.[284] As an historian has well\nobserved, \"Francis of Waldeck, in default of other virtues, might\nat least have not forgotten what was due to his high rank and his\nEpiscopal character; he regarded neither--but showed himself as\nferocious as had been John Bockelson, by becoming a spectator of the\nlong and horrible torture of the three criminals.\"[285] John and his\naccomplices having reached the townhall, received their sentence\nfrom Wesseling, the city judge. It was that they should be burned\nwith red-hot pincers, and finally stabbed with daggers heated in the\nfire.[286]\n\n  [284] Kerssenbroeck, p. 210; Kurtze Hist. f. 400.\n\n  [285] Bussierre, p. 462.\n\n  [286] Kerssenbroeck, p. 211; Bullinger, lib. ii. c. 10;\n  Montfort., p. 74; Heresbach, pp. 166-7; Hast, pp. 405-6; Kurtze\n  Historia, f. 400.\n\nThe king was the first to mount the scaffold and be tortured.\n\n\"The king endured three grips with the pincers without speaking or\ncrying, but then he burst forth into cries of, \"Father, have mercy\non me! God of mercy and loving kindness!\" and he besought pardon\nof his sins and help. The bystanders were pierced to the heart\nby his shrieks of agony, the scent of the roast flesh filled the\nmarket-place; his body was one great wound. At length the sign was\ngiven, his tongue was torn out with the red pincers, and a dagger\npierced his heart.\n\nKnipperdolling and Krechting were put to the torture directly after\nthe agonies of the king had begun. Knipperdolling endeavoured\nto beat his brains out against the stake, and when prevented, he\ntried to strangle himself with his own collar. To prevent him\naccomplishing his design, a rope was put through his mouth and\nattached to the stake so as totally to incapacitate him from moving.\nWhen these unfortunates were dead, their bodies were placed in three\niron cages, and were hung up on the tower of the church of St.\nLambert, the king in the middle.[287]\n\n  [287] Kerssenbroeck, p. 211; Kurtze Hist. f. 401.\n\nThus ended this hideous drama, which produced an effect throughout\nGermany. The excess of the scandal inspired all the Catholic\ngovernments with horror, and warned them of the immensity of the\ndanger they ran in allowing the spread of Protestant mysticism.\nCities and principalities which wavered in their allegiance to the\nChurch took a decided position at once.\n\nAt M\u00fcnster, Catholicism was re-established. As has been already\nmentioned, the debauched, cruel bishop was a Lutheran at heart, and\nhis ambition was to convert M\u00fcnster into an hereditary principality\nin his family, after the example of certain other princes.\n\nAccordingly, in 1543, he proposed to the States of the diocese to\naccept the Confession of Augsburg and abandon Catholicism. The\nproposition of the prince was unanimously rejected. Nevertheless\nthe prince joined the Protestant union of Smalkald the following\nyear, but having been complained of to the Pope and the Emperor,\nand fearing the fate of Hermann von Wied, Archbishop of Cologne,\nhe excused himself as best he could through his relative, Jost\nHodefilter, bishop of L\u00fcbeck, and Franz von Dei, suffragan bishop\nof Osnabr\u00fcck.\n\nBefore the Smalkald war the prince-bishop had secretly engaged the\nhelp of the Union against his old enemy, the \"wild\" Duke Henry of\nBrunswick. After the war, the Duke of Oldenburg revenged himself\non the principality severely, with fire and sword, and only spared\nM\u00fcnster itself for 100,000 guilders. The bishop died of grief. He\nleft three natural sons by Anna Polmann. They bore as their arms a\nhalf star, a whole star being the arms of Waldeck.\n\n     Authorities: Hermann von Kerssenbroeck; Geschichte der\n     Wiedertha\u00fcffer zu M\u00fcnster in Westphalen. M\u00fcnster, 1771. There is\n     an abbreviated edition in Latin in Menckenii Scriptores Rerum\n     Germanicaum, Leipsig, 1728-30. T. iii. pp. 1503-1618.\n\n     Wie das Evangelium zu M\u00fcnster erstlich angefangen, und die\n     Widerteuffer verst\u00f6ret widerauffgeh\u00f6ret hat. Darnach was die\n     teufflische Secte der Widerteuffer fur grewliche Gotteslesterung\n     und unsagliche grawsamkeit ... in der Stad ge\u00fcbt und getrieben;\n     beschrieben durch Henrichum Dorpium Monasteriensem; in Luther's\n     Sammtliche Werke. Wittemb. 1545-51. Band ii. ff. 391-401.\n\n     Historia von den M\u00fcnsterischen Widerteuffern.\n\n     _Ibid._ ff. 328-363.\n\n     Acta, Handlungen, Legationen und Schriften, &c., d.\n     Munsterischen sachen geschehen. _Ibid._, ff. 363-391.\n\n     Kurtze Historia wie endlich der K\u00f6nig sampt zweien gerichted,\n     &c. _Ibid._ ff. 400-9.\n\n     D. Lambertus Hortensius Monfortius, Tumultuum Anabaptistarum\n     Liber unus. Amsterdam, 1636.\n\n     Histoire de la R\u00e9formation, ou M\u00e9moires de Jean Sleidan. Trad.\n     de Courrayer. La Haye, 1667. Vol. ii. lib. x. [This is the\n     edition quoted in the article.]\n\nSleidanus: Commentarium rerum in Orbe gestarum, &c. Argent. 1555;\ned. alt. 1559.\n\nI. Hast, Geschichte der Wiedertha\u00fcffer von ihren Entstehen in\nZwickau bis auf ihren Sturz zu M\u00fcnster in Westphalen M\u00fcnster. 1836.\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\n_Cowan & Co., Limited, Printers, Perth._\n\n\n\n\nMETHUEN'S NOVEL SERIES.\n\nTHREE SHILLINGS AND SIXPENCE.\n\n\nMessrs. METHUEN will issue from time to time a Series of copyright\nNovels, by well-known Authors, handsomely bound, at the above\npopular price. The first volumes (ready) are:--\n\n  F. MABEL ROBINSON.\n  1. THE PLAN OF CAMPAIGN.\n\n  S. BARING GOULD, _Author of \"Mehalah\" &c._\n  2. JACQUETTA.\n\n  MRS. LEITH ADAMS (_Mrs. De Courcy Laffan_).\n  3. MY LAND OF BEULAH.\n\n  G. MANVILLE FENN.\n  4. ELI'S CHILDREN.\n\n  S. BARING GOULD.\n  5. ARMINELL: A Social Romance.\n\n  EDNA LYALL.\n  6. DERRICK VAUGHAN, NOVELIST. With Portrait of Author.\n\n  F. MABEL ROBINSON.\n  7. DISENCHANTMENT.\n\n  M. BETHAM EDWARDS.\n  8. DISARMED.\n\n  W. E. NORRIS.\n  9. JACK'S FATHER.\n\n  S. BARING GOULD.\n  10. MARGERY OF QUETHER.\n\nOther Volumes will be announced in due course.\n\n\n\n\nENGLISH LEADERS OF RELIGION.\n\nEdited by A. M. M. STEDMAN, M.A.\n\n\nUnder the above title Messrs. METHUEN have commenced like\npublication of a series of short biographies, free from party bias,\nof the most prominent leaders of religious life and thought in this\nand the last century.\n\nEach volume will contain a succinct account and estimate of the\ncareer, the influence, and the literary position of the subject of\nthe memoir.\n\nThe following are already arranged--\n\n\nCARDINAL NEWMAN. _R. H. Hutton._                          [_Ready._\n\n     \"Few who read this book will fail to be struck by the wonderful\n     insight it displays into the nature of the Cardinal's genius and\n     the spirit of his life.\"--WILFRID WARD, in the _Tablet_.\n\n     \"Full of knowledge, excellent in method, and intelligent in\n     criticism. We regard it as wholly admirable.\"--_Academy._\n\n     \"An estimate, careful, deliberate, full of profound reasoning\n     and of acute insight.\"--_Pall Mall Gazette._\n\n\nJOHN WESLEY. _J. H. Overton, M.A._                      [_Ready._\n\n     \"It is well done; the story is clearly told, proportion is duly\n     observed, and there is no lack either of discrimination or of\n     sympathy.\"--_Manchester Guardian._\n\n     \"Admirable alike in tone and style.\"--_Academy._\n\n  BISHOP WILBERFORCE.      _G. W. Daniell, M.A._\n  JOHN KEBLE.              _W. Lock, M.A._\n  CHARLES SIMEON.          _H. C. G. Moule, M.A._\n  F. D. MAURICE.           _Colonel F. Maurice, R.E._\n  THOMAS CHALMERS.         _Mrs. Oliphant._\n  CARDINAL MANNING.        _A. W. Hutton, M.A._\n\n_Other Volumes will be announced in due course._\n\n\n\n\nSOCIAL QUESTIONS OF TO-DAY.\n\n_Edited by H. de B. GIBBINS, M.A._\n\nCrown 8vo. 2s. 6d.\n\n\nMessrs. METHUEN beg to announce the publication of a series of\nvolumes upon those topics of social, economic and industrial\ninterest that are at the present moment foremost in the public\nmind. Each volume of the series will be written by an author who\nis an acknowledged authority upon the subject with which he deals,\nand who will treat his question in a thoroughly sympathetic but\nimpartial manner, with special reference to the historic aspect of\nthe subject and from the point of view of the Historial School of\neconomics and social science. The Labour Question will be treated of\nin the volumes on Trades Unions and Co-operation: the Land Question\nwill form the subject of another two volumes; others will treat\nof Socialism in England in its various phases, and of the labour\nproblems of the Continent also. The monograph on Commerce will be\nof special interest at present in view of the recent development of\nAmerican commercial policy. Those on Education and on Poverty will\nbe of similar importance in view of current discussion, and the\nvolume on Mutual Thrift will prove a valuable survey of the various\nagencies for that purpose already in existence among the working\nclasses.\n\n_The following form the earlier Volumes of the series:--_\n\n\nTRADES UNIONISM--NEW AND OLD.\n\n  G. HOWELL, M.P., Author of \"The Conflicts of Capital and\n  Labour.\"                                             [_Ready._\n\n     \"Nothing that Mr. Howell has previously written equals this\n     little book in cogency and _verve_, in lucid statistics and\n     clear argument.\"--_Manchester Guardian._\n\n     \"A complete and intelligent history of the rise and modern\n     development of labour organisations. The volume should be read\n     by workers and employers.\"--_Liverpool Post._\n\n\nTHE CO-OPERATIVE MOVEMENT OF TO-DAY.\n\n  G. J. HOLYOAKE, Author of \"The History of Co-operation. [_Ready._\n\n\nMUTUAL THRIFT.\n\n  Rev. J. FROME WILKINSON, M.A., Author of \"The Friendly\n  Society Movement.\"                                 [_Shortly._\n\n\nPOVERTY AND PAUPERISM.\n\n     Rev. L. R. PHELPS, M.A., Fellow of Oriel College, Oxford.\n\n\n\n\nUNIVERSITY EXTENSION SERIES.\n\n\nUnder the above title Messrs. METHUEN have commenced the publication\nof a series of books on historical, literary, and economic subjects,\nsuitable for extension students and home-reading circles. The\nvolumes are intended to assist the lecturer and not to usurp his\nplace. Each volume will be complete in itself, and the subjects will\nbe treated by competent writers in a broad and philosophic spirit.\n\nEdited by J. E. SYMES, M.A.,\n\n_Principal of the University College, Nottingham._\n\nCrown 8vo. 2s. 6d.\n\n_The following volumes are already arranged, and others will be\nannounced shortly._\n\n\nTHE INDUSTRIAL HISTORY OF ENGLAND.\n\n  By H. DE B. GIBBINS, M.A., late Scholar of Wadham Coll.,\n  Oxon., Cobden Prizeman. With Maps and Plans.         [_Ready._\n\n     \"A compact and clear story of our industrial development. A\n     study of his concise but luminous book cannot fail to give\n     the reader a clear insight into the principal phenomena of\n     our industrial history. The editor and publishers are to be\n     congratulated on this first volume of their venture, and we\n     shall look with expectant interest for the succeeding volumes\n     of the series. If they maintain the same standard of excellence\n     the series will make a permanent place for itself among the many\n     series which appear from time to time.\"--_University Extension\n     Journal._\n\n     \"A careful and lucid sketch.\"--_Times._\n\n     \"The writer is well-informed, and from first to last his work is\n     profoundly interesting.\"--_Scots Observer._\n\n\nA HISTORY OF ENGLISH POLITICAL ECONOMY.\n\n  By L. L. PRICE, M.A., Fellow of Oriel Coll., Oxon., Extension\n  Lecturer in Political Economy.                       [_Ready._\n\n     \"Mr. Price writes with great clearness, and has succeeded\n     remarkably in conveying in small compass a really readable and\n     instructive account of English political economy.\"--_Daily\n     Chronicle._\n\n     \"This book fills an important gap in economic\n     literature.\"--_Glasgow Herald._\n\n\nPROBLEMS OF POVERTY: An Inquiry into the Industrial Conditions of\nthe Poor.\n\n  By J. A. HOBSON, M.A., late Scholar of Lincoln Coll., Oxon.,\n  U. E. Lecturer in Economics.                         [_Ready._\n\n\nVICTORIAN POETS.\n\nBy A. SHARP.\n\n\nPSYCHOLOGY.\n\n     By F. S. GRANGER, M.A., London, Lecturer in Philosophy at\n     University Coll., Nottingham.\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\nTranscriber's note:\n\nText enclosed by underscores is in italics (_italics_).\n\nSmall capital text has been replaced with all capitals.\n\nMinor typographical errors have been corrected without note.\nIrregularities and inconsistencies in the text have been retained as\nprinted.\n\nMismatched quotes are not fixed if it's not sufficiently clear where\nthe missing quote should be placed.\n\nThe cover for the eBook version of this book was created by the\ntranscriber and is placed in the public domain.\n\nPage 60: \"On Jaspis remarking to him in April, 1820, that there were\ncircumstances\"--The \"2\" in 1820 was unclear in the book but has been\ninserted by the transcriber.\n\nPage 106: \"ordering the umiiatcirdne Jews to be discharged\"--The\ntranscriber has inserted \"incarcerated\" for \"umiiatcirdne\".\n\nPage 221: \"No envoys from the capital attended the reunion of the\nchambers at Wollbeck on the 20th December.--The word \"of\" is unclear.\n\nPage 262: The transcriber has supplied an anchor for footnote 147.\n\"Kerssenbroeck, p. 405 _et seq._ Montfort., \"Tumult. Anabap.,\" p. 15\n_et seq._; Bullinger, lib. ii. c. 8.\"","title":"Freaks of Fanaticism, and Other Strange Events","tradition":"scripture-revelation","translated_text":null,"word_count":99132}