Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-tf8b9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-29T09:54:06.196Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Impact of the Reformation on Hessian Education

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 July 2009

William J. Wright
William J. Wright
Affiliation:
Mr. Wright is assistant professor of history in the University of Tennesse, Chattanooga.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

“Are we to permit none but louts and boors to rule when we can do better than that.” With these words, Martin Luther challenged the politicians of his day to educate the young, for, he wrote, it is pleasing to God that princes, lords and councilmen and others in authority be educated and qualified to perform the functions of their offices. It was necessary for those in authority to educate the young, because many parents would not do it, others were incompetent to do so, others did not have the time, and that was not to mention orphans.One of those politicians who responded to Luther's challenge was Philip the Magnanimous of Hesse. In the years 1526 to 1537, Philip organized a territorial system of public education consisting of state Latin grammar schools and a university.

Type
Research Article
Information
Church History , Volume 44 , Issue 2 , June 1975 , pp. 182 - 198
Copyright
Copyright © American Society of Church History 1975

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. Luther's Works, ed. Helmut T. Lehmann and Jaroslav Pelikan, 55 vols. (Philadelphia: Muhlenberg/Fortress; St. Louis: Concordia, 1955-; hereafter cited as LW), 45:357.Google Scholar

2. Ibid., pp. 367–368.

3. Ibid., p. 355.

4. Hildebrand, Bruno, ed., Urkundensammlung über die Verfassung und Verwattung der Universstät Marburg unter Philipp dem Grossmütigen (Marburg: N. G. Elwert, 1848), p. 19,Google Scholar and Hermelink, Heinrich and Kaehler, Siegfried A., Die Philipps-Universität zu Marburg 1527 bis 1927 (Marburg: N. G. Elwert, 1927), p. 55.Google Scholar

5. Robbins, Charles L., (New York: Columbia University Press, 1912), pp. 21–22.Google Scholar

6. Schmidt, Max Georg, Untersuchungen über das hessiche Schulwesen, zur Zeit Philipps der Grossmütigen (Berlin: A. Hofmann & Company, 1904), pp. 22–23,Google Scholar and Wolff, Wilhelm, Die Entwicklung des Unterrichtrwesen in Hessen-Kassel vom. 8. bis 19. Jahrhanderts (Kassel: N. G. Elwert, 1911), pp. 109–110, 204–206, 410–411.Google Scholar Wolff also maintains that village schools—seven of them by the end of Philip's reign—were established in connection with catechism classes. Arguing that a little education in German reading and writing was necessary to learn the catechism, he calls these Kūsterschulen.

7. Butts, R. Freeman, A Cultural Hisiory of Western Education (New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc., 1955), pp. 205–207.Google Scholar

8. Hesselbach, Eva, “Die ‘deutsche’ Schule im Mittelalter,” Zeitschrift für Geschiehte der Erziehung und des Unterrichts 10 (1920): 6–7;Google ScholarHelmreieh, Ernst Christian, Religious Education in German Schools: An Historical Approach (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1959), pp. 1–5;CrossRefGoogle ScholarWolff, . Unterrichtswesen in Hessen, pp. 23–27;Google Scholar and Heinemeyer, Walter, “Die Bildungspolitik Landgraf Philipps des Grossmütigen von Hessen,” Hessiches Jahrbuch für Laadesgeschichte 21 (1971): 107–113.Google Scholar Wolff's Unterrichtswesen in Hessen is the best older account of education in Hesse and provides a good deal of information on the existence of schools in the Middle Ages in the territory. Heinemeyer's “Bildungspolitik Philipps” is the only recent work on education in Hesse during the Reformation. It provides a thorough account of the numbers of schools in Hesse.

9. Hesselbach, pp. 6–7.

10. Schmidt, p. 20, and Hesselbach, pp. 8–11.

11. Hesselbach, pp. 8–16.

12. Wolff, , Unterrichtswesen in Hessen, pp. 35, 65–66, 86–87, 100;Google Scholar Helmreich, p. 6; Diehl, Wilhelm, ed., Die Schulordnungen des Groscherzogtums Hessen (Berlin: A. Hofmann & Company, 1903–1905), 2:12–16;Google ScholarDemaudt, Karl E., Geschichte des Landes Hessen (Kassel & Basel: Bärenreiter, 1959), pp. 173–174;Google Scholar and Vormbaum, Reinhold, ed., Evangelische Schulordnungen des sechszehnen Jahrhunderts (Gütersloh: C. Bertelsmann, 1860), 1:v.Google Scholar

13. Lauze, Wigand, Leben und Thaten des Durchleuchtigsten Fursten und Herren Philippi Magnanimi Landgrafen zu Hessen (Kassel: J. J. Bohne, 1841–1847), 1:141.Google Scholar

14. Bruce, Gustav Marius, Luther as an Educator (Minneapolis: Augsburg Publishing House, 1928), pp. 156–159,Google Scholar and Varrentrapp, Carl, “Landgraf Philipp von Hessen und die Universität in Marburg,” Marburg akadesmische Reden. 11 (1905): 6.Google Scholar

15. LW, 46:256.

16. Helmreich, , p. 14;Google ScholarVarrentrapp, , pp. 50–56;Google Scholar and Asheim, Ivar, Glaube und Erziehung bei Luther. Ein Beitrag zur Geschichte des Verhältnisses von Theologie und Pädagogik (Heidelberg: Quelle & Mayer, 1961), pp. 25, 28–29.Google Scholar

17. LW, 46:256.

18. Asheim, , pp. 25, 28–29.Google Scholar

19. See Grimm, Harold J., “Luther and Education,” Luther and Culture (Decorah, Iowa: Luther College Press, 1960), pp. 75–79.Google Scholar

20. Supplementa Melanchthoniana: Werke Melanchihons die in Corpus Reformatorum vermisst werden, ed. Otto Clemen (Leipzig: R. Haupt, 1910), pp. 239–50.Google Scholar

21. Ibid., p. 250.

22. Küch, Friedrich, “Landgraf Phillipp and die Einfürhung der Reformation in Hessen,” Festschrift zum Gedächtnis Philipps des Grossrmütigen Landgrafen von Hessen (Kassel: Georg Dufayel, 1904), pp. 220–221.Google Scholar

23. Barge, Herman, Andreas Bodenstein von Karlstadt (Leipzig: Friedrich Brandstetter, 1905), 1:381–382,Google Scholar and Winkelmann, Otto, “Die Armenordnungen von Nürnberg (1522), Kitzungen (1523), Regensburg (1523), and Ypern (1525),” Archiv für Reformationsgeschichte 10 (1912–1913): 267–268.Google Scholar

24. Diehl, Wilhelm, “Martin Bucer's Bedeutung für das kirchliche Leben in Hessen,” Schriften des Vercins für Reformationsgeschichte 22 (1904): 39–45.Google Scholar

25. See Martin Bucers Deutsche Schriften, ed. Robert Stupperich (Gütersloh: Gerd Mohn, 1962–1964), 7:522–532.Google Scholar

26. Ibid., pp. 536–546.

27. Ibid., 2:399.

28. Ibid., 7:525.

29. Diehl, , “Bucer's Bedeutung,” p. 56,Google Scholar and Zimmermann, Ludwig, Der hessische Territorialstaat im Jahrhundert der Reformation (Marburg: N. G. Elwert, 1933), p. 23.Google Scholar

30. Diehl, , “Bucer's Bedeutung,” p. 56,Google Scholar and Zimmermann, p. 23.

31. Sehling, Emil, ed., Die Evangelischen Kirchenordnungen des XVI. Jahrhunderts. Hessen (Tübingen: J. C. B. Mohr, 1965;Google Scholar hereafter cited as KOO, 8, pt. 1, pp. 113–130.Google Scholar

32. Lauze, 1:386.

33. See Diehl, , Schulordnungon Hessen, 2:6–7.Google Scholar It is interesting to note that Diehl contradicted his views in the above cited article that Bucer was the father of the Hessian Volksschulen in this work.

34. Werke, D. Martin Luthers: Krictische Gesammtuusgabe, Briefwechsel (Weimar: Hermann Böhlaus, 1933;Google Scholar hereafter cited as WA), 4:112–115.

35. Credner, Karl August, Philipp's des Grossmütigen hessische Kirchenreformations-Ordnung aus schriftlichen Quellen herausgeben, übersetzt und mit Rücksicht auf die Gegenwort bevorwortet (Giessen: J. Ricker, 1852;Google Scholar hereafter cited as Reformation since only that document will be cited from this source), pp. 49–110.

36. Wright, William J., “The Homberg Synod and Philip of Hesse's Plan for a New Church-State Settlement,” Sixteenth Century Journal 4 (10 1973): 24–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

37. Reformation, pp. 105–106.

38. Ibid., pp. 104–105.

39. Hahn, Fricdrich, Die evangelisehe Unterweisung in der Schulen des 16. Jahrhunderts (Heidelberg: Quelle & Meyer, 1957), pp 26, 42.Google Scholar

40. Reformation, pp. 106–107.

41. Ibid., p. 106.

42. See Robbins, pp. 53–54, who maintained that this was one of those “vague” statements from the early church orders, showing little concern with intellectual attainment, a subject which will be dealt with again later.

43. Reformation, p. 106.

44. LW, 45:188.

45. See his To the Councilman and the Exposition of Psalm 127, for the Christians at Riga, 1524, ibid., pp. 350–351, 318.

46. Reformation, p. 107.

47. LW, 45:351.

48. Ibid., 46:257.

49. WA, 4:157–158.

50. KOO,8, pt. 1, p. 99; Richter, Aemilius Ludwig, ed., Die Evangelischen Kirchenordnungen des sechszehnten. Jahrhunderts (Nieuwcoop: B. DeGraaf, 1967), 1:285;Google Scholar Vormbaum, 1:33–34; and Franz, Günther, ed., Urkundlichen Quellen zur hessischen Reformationsgeschichte (Marburg: N. G. Elwert, 1954;Google Scholar hereafter cited as UQ), 2:267–268 #343a.

51. See Wright, pp. 22–23, and compare the Reformation to LW, 40:41.

52. UQ, 2:37–38, See also Reformation, pp. 94–95, 104–105, and UQ, 2:25–26, and 48–49, #74.

53. EOO, 8, pt. 1, p. 99; Richter, 1:285; Vormbaum, 1:33–34; and UQ, 2:267–268, #345a.

54. UQ, 3:299, #877.

55. Ibid., p. 197, #785.

56. Ibid., 2:48–49, #74.

57. Vormbaum, 1:33.

58. UQ, 2:78, #115; 101, #158; 244–245, #220, 300, #378. Hesse and Henneberg were the joint sovereigns for the city of Schmalkalden.

59. LW, 45:350–351.

60. Ibid.

61. Ibid., pp. 175, 188.

62. Roth, Friedrich, “Zur Kirchengüterfrage in der Zeit von 1538 bis 1540,” Archiv fü Reformationsgeschichte 1 (1904): 305–306.Google Scholar

63. Wolff, , Unterrichtswesen in Hessen, p. 109.Google Scholar

64. Ibid., p. 161.

65. UQ, 2:64, #78, #115; 244–245, #320; 250, #327; 389–390, 3:197, #785; and Vormbaum, 2:393–394.

66. Wolff, Wilhelm, Dee Säkularisierung und Verwendung der Stifts-und Clostergüten in Hessen-Kassel unter Philipp der Grossmütigen und Wilhelm IV (Gotha: Friedrich Andreas Perthes, 1913), p. 13.Google Scholar

67. See Repertorium über Hessische Landtagsabschiede: Landgrafsehaft Hessen, Landgravisehe Archiv, Landtagsabschiede, verz. 3, pp. 33–34. Hessisches Staatsarchiv, Marburg an der Lahn.

68. UQ, 2:325, #404; 389–390, 3:260–261, #831.

69. Ibid., 2:37–38,#57.

70. KOO, 8, pt. 1, p. 99; Richter, 1:285; Vormbaum, 1:33–34; and UQ, 2:267–268, #345a.

71. UQ, 2:288, #366.

72. Ibid., pp. 126–127, #193; 312–313, #389.

73. Ibid., p. 42, #63; 105–108, #165.

74. Ibid., p. 138, #209; 312–313, #389.

75. Hesselbach, pp. 39–40.

76. Vormbaum, 1:33–34. See also UQ, 2:244–245, #320; and 3:197; #785, on tuition.

77. See Robbins, p. 77.

78. Hesselbach, pp. 39–42.

79. The figures for the year 1581 are from Wolff, , Unterrichtswesen in Hessen, pp. 284–285.Google Scholar The other figures can be found in UQ, 2:389–390, and 3:150–151, #729. Fl. is the symbol used for the gulden, a territorial coin made of silver.

80. UQ, 2:244–245, #320.

81. Ibid., 3:299, #877.

82. Ibid., pp. 181–182, #770.

83. Ibid., p. 299, #877.

84. Hildebrand, p. 42. See also KOO, 8, pt. 1, p. 155, and Wolff, , Unterrichtswesen in Hessen, p. 127.Google Scholar There is also an indication of Melanchthon's importance in the Marburg School Order of 1560 for the city school or Seminar according to Heinemeyer, p. 199.

85. Hermelink and Kaehler, p. 68–69.

86. Vormbaum, 1:33–34.

87. See Richtcr, 1:99–101.

88. The Donat was supposedly first written by Aelius Donatas in the fourth century. Luther referred to it as the best grammar book. The Cato, or more properly the Catonis disticha de moribus, was a collection of 164 proverbs, which students practiced and learned. The Cato supposedly dated from the third or fourth century. The use of proverb books was particularly recommended by the humanists with their emphasis on ethics and moral philosophy.

See Hahn, pp, 37–38, 84–85; Wolff, , Unterrichtswesen in Hessen, pp. 126–133;Google ScholarMerz, George Karl, Das Schulwesen der deutschen Reformation in 16. Jahrhundert (Heidelberg: Carl Winter, 1902), pp. 270, 292;Google Scholar and Heinemeyer, pp. 118–119.

89. UQ, 2:421–426, #514.

90. See Hahn, p. 65.

91. Ibid., pp. 40–42, citing WA, 6: 461–462. See also Hahn, p. 266.

92. Hahn, pp. 20–21.

93. UQ, 3:247–248, #819.

94. LW, 45: 357–358, 368; and see Wolff, , Unterrichtswesen in Hessen, p. 126.Google Scholar

95. Hildebrand, pp. 6–7.

96. Lauze, 1:147–148.

97. KOO, 8, pt. 1, p. 169; and Hildebrand, p. 67.

98. KOO, 8., pt. 1, p. 143.

99. Ibid., p. 169, n. 20; and Wolff, , Unterrichtswesen in Hessen, p. 122.Google Scholar

100. KOO, 8, pt. 1, p. 169, n. 20; and Wolff, , Unterrichtswesen in Hessen, pp. 122–123.Google Scholar

101. Wolff, , Unterrichtswesen in Hessen, pp. 123–137.Google Scholar See also Heinemeyer, p. 119.

102. Wolff, , Unterrichtswesen in Hessen, pp. 280–281,Google Scholar maintains that the reform came in 1539. See the document in UQ, 2:389–390, #459.

103. See UQ, 2:389–390, and Wolff, , Unterrichtswesen in Hessen, pp. 278, 280–281.Google Scholar

104. See UQ, 2:389–390. #459 and Wolff, , Unterrichtswesen in Hessen, pp. 280–281.Google Scholar

105. UQ, 2:389–390, #459 3:150–151, #729; and Wolff, , Unterrichtswesen in Hessen, pp. 278, 280–281.Google Scholar

106. Wolff, , Unterrichtswesen in Hessen, pp. 284–285, 294–295.Google Scholar The first four rules of arithmetic were addition subtraction, doubling and halving.

107. KOO, 8, pt. 1, p. 169, n. 20; and Wolff, , Unterrichtswesen in Hessen, p. 122.Google Scholar