The Peasant War in Germany

the  princes  joined  it,  another  vacillated.  Success  was  almost  certain  at  least  in  a  large
portion of Germany. Under continued peaceful development the other regions could not in
the  long  run  withstand  the  pressure  of  moderate  opposition.  Violent  convulsions,  on  the
other  hand,  were  bound  to  result  in  a  conflict  between  the  moderates  and  the  extreme
plebeian and peasant party, thus to alienate the princes, the nobility, and a number of cities
from the movement and to leave open the alternative of either the middle-class party being
overshadowed  by  the  peasants  and  plebeians,  or  the  entire  movement  being  crushed  by
Catholic  restoration.  How  middle-class  parties,  having  achieved  the  slightest  victory,
attempt to steer their way between the Scylla of revolution and the Charybdis of restoration
by  means  of  lawful  progress,  we  have  had  occasions  enough  to  observe  in  the  events  of
recent times.
It was in the nature of the then prevailing social and political conditions that the results
of  every  change  were  advantageous  to  the  princes,  increasing  their  power.  Thus  it  came
about  that  the  middle-class  reform,  having  parted  ways  with  the  plebeian  and  peasant
elements,  fell  more  and  more  under  the  control  of  the  reform  princes.  Luther’s
subservience to them increased, and the people knew very well what they were doing when
they accused him of having become a slave of the princes as were all the others, and when
they pursued him with stones in Orlamuende.
When the peasant war broke out, becoming more predominant in regions with Catholic
nobility  and  princes,  Luther  strove  to  maintain  a  conciliatory  position.  He  resolutely
attacked  the  governments.  He  said  it  was  due  to  their  oppression  that  the  revolts  had
started, that not the peasants alone were against them, but God as well. On the other hand,
he also said that the revolt was ungodly and against the Gospel. He advised both parties to
yield, to reach a peaceful understanding.
Notwithstanding  these  sincere  attempts  at  conciliation,  however,  the  revolt  spread
rapidly over large areas, including such sections as were dominated by Protestant Lutheran
princes, nobles and cities, and rapidly outgrew the middle-class “circumspect” reform. The
most  determined  faction  of  the  insurgents  under  Muenzer  opened  their  headquarters  in
Luther’s  very  proximity,  in  Thuringia.  A  few  more  successes,  and  Germany  would  have
been one big conflagration, Luther would have been surrounded, perhaps piked as a traitor,
and  middle-class  reform  would  have  been  swept  away  by  the  tides  of  a  peasant-plebeian
revolution.  There  was  no  more  time  for  circumspection.  In  the  face  of  the  revolution,  all
old animosities were forgotten. Compared with the hordes of peasants, the servants of the
Roman Sodom were innocent lambs, sweet-tempered children of God. Burgher and prince,
noble  and  clergyman,  Luther  and  the  pope  united  “against  the  murderous  and  plundering
hordes of the peasants.” “They should be knocked to pieces, strangled and stabbed, secretly
The Peasant War in Germany
– 33 –

---

and  openly,  by  everybody  who  can  do  it,  just  as  one  must  kill  a  mad  dog!”  Luther  cried.
“Therefore,  dear  gentlemen,  hearken  here,  save  there,  stab,  knock,  strangle  them  at  will,
and if thou diest, thou art blessed; no better death canst thou ever attain.” No false mercy
was  to  be  practised  in  relation  to  the  peasants.  “Whoever  hath  pity  on  those  whom  God
pities not, whom He wishes punished and destroyed, shall be classed among the rebellious
himself.” Later, he said, the peasants would learn to thank God when they had to give away
one cow in order that they might enjoy the other in peace. Through the revolution, he said,
the princes would learn the spirit of the mob which could reign by force only. “The wise
man says: ‘Cibus, onus et virgam asino.’ The heads of the peasants are full of chaff. They
do not hearken to the Word, and they are senseless, so they must hearken to the virga and
the  gun,  and  this  is  only  just.  We  must  pray  for  them  that  they  obey.  Where  they  do  not,
there should not be much mercy. Let the guns roar among them, or else they will make it a
thousand times worse.”
It  is  the  same  language  that  was  used  by  our  late  socialist  and  philanthropic
bourgeoisie, when, after the March days the proletariat also demanded its share in the fruits
of victory.
Luther  had  given  the  plebeian  movement  a  powerful  weapon  –  a  translation  of  the
Bible.  Through  the  Bible,  he  contrasted  feudal  Christianity  of  his  time  with  moderate
Christianity  of  the  first  century.  In  opposition  to  decaying  feudal  society,  he  held  up  the
picture  of  another  society  which  knew  nothing  of  the  ramified  and  artificial  feudal
hierarchy.  The  peasants  had  made  extensive  use  of  this  weapon  against  the  forces  of  the
princes,  the  nobility,  and  the  clergy.  Now  Luther  turned  the  same  weapon  against  the
peasants, extracting from the Bible a veritable hymn to the authorities ordained by God – a
feat hardly exceeded by any lackey of absolute monarchy. Princedom by the grace of God,
passive  resistance,  even  serfdom,  were  being  sanctioned  by  the  Bible.  Thus  Luther
repudiated not only the peasant insurrection but even his own revolt against religious and
lay authority. He not only betrayed the popular movement to the princes, but the middle-
class movement as well.
Need we mention other bourgeois who recently gave us examples of repudiating their
own past?
The Peasant War in Germany
– 34 –

---