History 321: State and Society in Early Modern Europe:

The Thirty Years War

Course Requirements Reading Value of attendance and participation

Review the questions on p. 4 of the syllabus in preparation for each class.

Bring assigned readings to every class. Tests Written assignments Consult the syllabus regularly and follow all

instructions carefully.

Resources for Course Home page

slides for lectures and tutorials Maps

online Europe’s Tragedy Sourcebook

Genealogy in Europe’s Tragedy Chronology in Sourcebook SFU Library

Interpreting the Thirty Years War

Earliest interpretations: popularity of the Peace of Westphalia (1648): “preserving the liberties of Protestant Germans and strengthening the imperial constitution” (p. 3)

after the French Revolution (1789) and in the context of European Romanticism1. narrative of death and destruction2. “tragic inevitability” (p. 6)3. a choice of Germanies

Interpreting the Thirty Years War

other national narratives a religious war a war that contributed to the

secularization and modernization of Europe absolutism

a wider war (international war school)

Wilson’s Argument

Three distinctive elements:1. The war affected all of Europe.

2. The war was not fundamentally a religious war.

3. The war was not inevitable.

Wilson’s Argument

1. The war affected all of Europe. Russia Poland, Ottoman Empire Dutch Republic; France, Spain Britain Denmark, Sweden

Wilson’s Argument2. The war was not fundamentally a

religious war. religion: “a powerful focus for identity” (p. 9) “The war was religious only to the extent that faith

guided all early modern public policy and private behaviour” (p. 9)

moderate believers: “pragmatic;” unity of Christendom a “distant” goal

militant believers: a minority, observers and victims, fundamentalists; stubborn resolve “poorly suited to achieving military success” (p. 10)

“Militants’ influence was at times disproportionate to their numbers, but this does not mean we should interpret the conflict through their eyes” (p. 10)

Wilson’s Argument

3. The war was not inevitable. 1555-1618: a period of peace

Trouble in the Heart of Christendom

The Empire

Confessionalization

Religion and Imperial Law

What was the Empire?

a “monstrosity” (Samuel Pufendorf, d. 1694)

Communities Matthäus Merian, Topographia Germaniae

(1642-1654) delineation between urban and rural space sacred space political space

Who ruled (in) the Empire? Emperor Reichskirche: Imperial Church Lords: immediate / mediate: fiefs

1. 7 Electors (by Golden Bull of 1356) Archbishops of Mainz, Cologne, Trier Kingdom of Bohemia, Palatinate, Saxony,

Brandenburg2. Princes: bishops, archbishops, dukes, landgraves,

margraves Habsburg dynasty: 2/5 of Empire, +7M subjects

3. lesser lords: counts, etc. Free Imperial Cities (ca. 80)

Augsburg (48,000); most had -4,000

How did the Empire function?

Emperor as overlord and adjudicator: Habsburg dynasty

financing the Empire: from Emperor’s lands and from imperial contributions/taxes: Roman months (multiples of pay for 24,000 soldiers / month)

How did the Empire funciton?

Reichstag (Imperial Diet) a representative and consultative body:

for binding decisions and sounding out opinions

vote by imperial estates recommendation Recess

How did the Empire function?

two supreme courts: Reichskammergericht (Imperial

Cameral Court) Reichshofrat (Imperial Aulic Council)

Imperial Circles (10 by 1570) to enforce verdicts of the courts to raise taxes to raise troops for internal peace and

defence of Empire Each circle had its own assembly.

What characterized the Empire’s political culture?

German freedom: privileges and responsibilities “within the imperial hierarchy” (23)

impersonal and personal dimensions

the cumbersome search for compromise

What were the contours of the religious situation in the Empire?

Confessionalization and social disciplining cultural differences limits: intermarriage, relative absence of violence

in the second half of the sixteenth century

Catholicism and “the primacy of organization” (p. 25)

Lutheranism and “the primacy of doctrine” (p. 26)

Calvinism and the “primacy of practice” (p. 26)

What were the contours of the religious situation in the Empire?

“Religious tension impaired the working of the imperial constitution and contributed to the outbreak of the war in 1618” (p. 25).

“Militancy was certainly growing, particularly as those who had only known a confessionally divided world reached maturity and positions of influence around 1580. But it is impossible to ascribe the outbreak of war in 1618 directly to such sentiment” (p. 40).

What were the contours of the religious situation in the Empire?

Catholicism Catholicism’s basic strengths in the

Empire: Reichskirche, Habsburgs, Bavaria Council of Trent (1545-1563) Catholic piety: processions, pilgrimages,

cult of the saints Society of Jesus (Jesuits): controversialists,

confessors, educators

What were the contours of the religious situation in the Empire?

Lutheranism Augsburg Confession (1530) territorial Church Schmalkaldic Wars (1546-1552) intraconfessional conflict:

Philippists vs. Gnesio-Lutherans Book of Concord (1580)

preponderance in territory and population but not in imperial institutions

What were the contours of the religious situation in the Empire?

Calvinism John Calvin, reformer of Geneva (d. 1564) doctrinal differences a minority with Lutheran converts foothold in Empire: Palatinate (1560),

Hessen (1603), Brandenburg (1613) Heidelberg Catechism (1563) leadership of the Elector Palatine

What was the Peace of Augsburg (1555)?

a religious peace within a context of constitutional reforms

an ambiguous peace: faith and terms (e.g. “reformation) not defined adherents of the Confession of Augsburg right of reformation (ius reformandi): 1552 right to emigrate (ius emigrandi) Article 18: ecclesiastical reservation Declaration of Ferdinand

“the most contested parts of the 1555 Peace” (p. 45)

What was the Peace of Augsburg (1555)?

cuius regio eius religio: The religion of the prince determines the religion of his territory.

Calvinists arbitration for disputes:

Reichskammergericht

How should the Peace of Augsburg be interpreted?

Puzzles1. Could Lutheran princes incorporate

ecclesiastical territories? Lutherans in cathedral chapters; diocesan

administrators

2. What was the status of unincorporated mediate ecclesiastical property in Lutheran territories?

3. What was the status of subjects’ religious freedoms?

princely expulsion vs. voluntary freedoms

How should the Peace of Augsburg be interpreted?

“the fundamental underlying problem: the Peace had given Lutherans legal equality, but left Catholics with a political majority” (p. 45)

imperial efforts to defuse tension: Ferdinand I, Maximilian II

How should the Peace of Augsburg be interpreted?

Catholic views the lesser of two evils (toleration vs. war) moderates:

a stable peace with unequal Lutheran dissenters in a Catholic Empire

a limit to Lutheran expansion with the opportunity of conversion to Catholicism

militants: a temporary suspension of the Edict of Worms (1521) until a theological resolution Council of Trent!

How should the Peace of Augsburg be interpreted?

Protestant views a beginning, not an end resistance or obedience?

just war: recognized authority, just cause, extent of resistance: fight injustice or overthrow a regime?

right of resistance for lesser magistrates

the effect of 1555

How should the Peace of Augsburg be interpreted?

Wilson’s views vs. Geoffrey Parker: “a temporary end to

open confessional warfare in Germany” 63 years of peace a “comparatively satisfactory settlement” (p.

43) foundation for the Peace of Westphalia “little basis…for the standard interpretation…

of steadily polarizing opinion” (p. 46) waxing and waning of moderate and militant

opinions

How should we read primary documents?

Who produced the document? What date can we assign to the document? What is the document’s context? What are the main concepts in the document? What basic message does the document

communicate? How is it historically significant?

Do particular passages reveal significant information?

Is the document logically self-consistent, or do you notice any contradictions?

Sourcebook, docs. 1 and 2

the primacy of peace Who benefits? What are the issues? What is at stake? Article 18 and the Declaration of

Ferdinand