1. In Hut's company were at that time Eukarius Kellermann of Coburg, Joachim Mertz, Jörg Nespitzer of Passau, Jakob Widemaun, the “one eyed” (later the beginner of communal life in Moravia), perhaps also Hans Schlaffer and probably Hans Nadler.

2. Die älteste Chronik der Hutterisehen Brüder, ed. A. J. F. Zieglschmid (Philadelphia, 1943), 50Google Scholar. Hereafter Chronik.

3. The N.A. were distributed only in handwritten form, and no printed edition of them existed. At his trial Hut expressly stated that Hubmaier had planned to have his articles printed but the printer allegedly refused to do it. The documentations of this outstanding trial were published in an elaborate essay by Meyer, Chr., “Zur Geschichte der Wiedertäufer in Oberschwaben. Die Anfänge des Wiedertäufferthums in Augsburg,” Zeitschrift des Historisehen Vereins für Sehwaben und Neuburg, 1874, v. I, 207–256Google Scholar. See in particular Document VII, 235, where a printer of Nürnberg and one of Vienna are mentioned. Meyer's study hereafter quoted as Meyer. Handwritten copies of the N.A. are still extant in a number of German city archives, such as Augsburg, Nürnberg and Strassburg.

4. Meyer, Document V.

5. AAmbrosius Spittelmaier was interrogated October 25, 1527, in conformity with a document from Nürnberg (of October 23) which reminds one of the N.A. But Spittelmaier speaks only of “Seven Decisions.” It is an elaborate document from which we present here only the main points. The “Seven Decisions” concern: (1) The divine covenant with God which takes place in the spirit, in baptism and in the drinking of the cup. (2) The Kingdom of God which God will grant to those who are poor in the Spirit. Spittelmaier understands poverty in being poor as Christ was, owning no property whatsoever. Hence the idea of communism of love among Christians. (3) The body of Christ: all who are one with Christ through His word are members of his body which functions as a visible body in perfect mutuality. (4) The end of the world: the time has come when God wifi purge all things. There all pride [Trotz] and all wisdom of the world must be melted down that the Kingdom of the Heavens may be established. (5) The coming of Christ and the Last Judgment. “What we have sown here we will harvest yonder.” (6) The resurrection and the destiny of both the godly and the godless. (7) The eternal verdict [Urteil] of God according to which the ungodly will inherit damnation and will enter eternal fire. Quellen zur Geschichte der Täufer, vol. II: Markgraftum Brandenburg (Bayern, I), ed. K. Schornbaum (1934), 49–50Google Scholar, Hereafter Bayern. Complete English text of this document is found in Mennonite Quarterly Review, 1958, 270–1. B. Hans Nadler had this to say February 13, 1529, at the occasion of his trial and interrogation (after torture): “Two years ago the Lord of Liechtenstein invited learned men to a debate at Nicolsburg. It was a debate between Hubmaier and Hut concerning Seven Decisions which dealt with: (1) [adult] baptism; (2) the sacrament of the Lord's Supper; (3) Gor's [final] Judgment; (4) God's verdict [Urteil]; (5) the end of the world; (6) the new Kingdom according to the Book of Revelation; (7) the [second] coming of Christ.] He, Nadler, had heard at Nicolsburg that [learned men were called in for the debate] but he has “no special knowledge what they decided about these seven points.” (Bayern, I, 153)Google Scholar. It appears most probable that Nadler's deposition comes the nearest to the real debate topics.

6. The German text runs as follows: (1) Das evangelium sol man in den kirchen öffentlich nit predigen sonder allein in die oren und heimlich in den heusern.(2) Cristus sei in den erbsünden entpfangen. (3) Die junkfrau Maria sei nit em mutter Gots, sic sei allein em mutter Christi. (4) Cristus sei nit Got sunder em profet, dem das gesprech oder wort Gottes bevolehen worden. (5) Cristus hab nit gnug gethan for die sünt der gantzen welt. (6) Bey den Cristen mensehen sol kein gwalt noch oberkeit sein. (7) Der jünste dak ist nach zweyen jaren zuekünfftig. (8) Die engel sind mit Cristo entpfangen und haben des vleisch mit Cristo angenumen. TA Bayern, I, 65Google Scholar; similar also Ta Baden-Pfalz, 392. Cf. also Nicoladoni, A., Johannes Bünderlin…, 1893, 108, nr. 3Google Scholar; and Cornelius, C. A., Gesohichte des Münsterschen Aufruhrs (1860), II, 279.Google Scholar

7. That was claimed by E. Meissner, 1921. See article “Nikolsburg Articles” in Mennonite Encyclopedia, III, 1957, 886–8Google Scholar. For details see further below and fn. 15.

8. Jörg, J. E., Deutsohland in der Revoutionsperiode 1523–1526 (1851), 677Google Scholar, fn. 17, but without indication of his source.

9. Cornelius, C. A., Geschichte des Münsterischen Aufruhrs (1860), II, 279 ff.Google Scholar

10. Loserth, Johann, Dr. Baltshasar Huhmaier und die Anfänge der Wiedertaufe in Mähren (1893), 134Google Scholar. Nicoladoni, A., Johannes Bünderlin von Linz und die oberösterreichischen Täufergemeinden in den Jahren 1525–1531 (1893), 108, fn. 3.Google Scholar

11. Wappler, Paul, Die Täuferbewegung in Thüringen von 1526–1584 (1913)Google Scholar; Neuser, Wilhelm, Hans Hut, Leben und Wirken his zum Nikoisburger Religionsgespräch 1913)Google Scholar; Sachsse, Carl, Dr. Balthasar Hubmaier als Theologe (Berlin, 1914), 109, ff., 273.Google Scholar

12. In Hans Hilerbrand's, J.. A Bibliography of Anabaptism, 1520–1630 (Elkhart, Ind., 1962)Google Scholar, we find under No. 2428, a to f, five different editions of Florimond de Rémond's L'Histoire de la naissance, progrez et décadence de l'héresie de ce siècle (Paris, 1605–1617)Google Scholar, in three parts. The Latin version came out in Cologne, 1614, in two volumes. The 1654 volume quoted by Sachsse is not listed by Hillerbrand. We found that its title is incorrect in using “hereseum” where the 1614 edition used the Greek form “hereseon.” Moreover 1614 has “De ortu, progressu et ruina,” while 1654 omits “ruina” and restricts its description exclusively to Germany. There is no doubt that it is the same work as the one listed by Hillerbrand.

13. See article “Martyrs' Synod,” in Mennonite Encyclopedia (1957), III, 529–531.Google Scholar

14. [Rhegius, Urbanus], Wider den neuen Taufforden notwendige Warnung an alle Christgleubigen. Durch die Diener des Euangelij zu Augsburg Augsburg, 1927Google Scholar. It contains a list of “Acht Irrthümer der Wiedertauffer,” somewhat similar to the N.A. Copies of this pamphlet in many libraries. A modern edition is planned for the Täuferakten volume Württenberg II. Cf. also the article “Rhegius, Urbanus” in Mennonite Encyclopedia (1959), IV, 314 with bibliography.Google Scholar

15. Wiswedel, Wilhelm, “Die Nikoisburger Artikel,” in Zeitschrift für Bayrische Kirchengeschichte (1938), pp. 34–46Google Scholar, ef. his detailed article “Nikolsburg Aritcles,” in Menn. Enc., III, p. 886–8.Google Scholar

16. Compare Bergsten, Torsten, Balthasar Hubmaier… (1961), 324, 447, and 456Google Scholar. Cf. note 20 below.

17. Might this particular version of the N.A. not have been the one connected with the Hut trial (doubt)

18. Quellen zur Geschichte der Täufer, VII, Elsass, I, Strassburg, 1522–1532, ed. Manfred Krebs and Jean Rott, 1959, p. 138–144Google Scholar, with elaborate annotations, mainly on 144.

19. Quellen zur Geschichte der Täufer, II, Bayern, I (1934)Google Scholar, and V, Bayern, II (1951)Google Scholar, both ed. by Karl Schornbaum; IV, Baden-Pfalz, ed. by Manfred Krebs (1951)Google Scholar; and VII and VIII, Elsass, I (1959)Google Scholar and II (1960), ed. by Manfred Krebs and Jean Rott. General Title: Täuferakten (abbr. T.A.),

20. Bergsten, Torsten, Balthasar Hubmaier und seine Stellung zu Reformation und Täufertum, Studia Historico-Ecclesiastica Upsalienses, 3 (Acta Universitatis Upsaliensis, Kassel, 1961), 551 pp.Google Scholar with comprehensive bibliography, 524–545.

21. We know ou1y three authentic writings by Hans Hut. Two of them Muller, Lydia published in Glaubenszeugnisse oberdeutscher Taufgesinnter (Leipzig, 1938)Google Scholar, of Queflen zur Gesehichte der Täufer, III. They are: “Vom Geheimnus der Tauf,” 10–28, and “Ein christlicher Unterricht, wie göttliehe Geschrift vergleicht und geurteilt solle werden,” pp. 28–37. Here we find also Hut's letter of August 1527 on page 12. The third writing, a concordance called Ratsbüchlein, can hardly be called an independent writing by Hut, even though at that early date concordances were something new.

22. Bergsten, , Balthasar Hubmaier “Hubmaier hat entweder eine nicht-authentische Fassung des “Unterrichts” benützt oder selbst den Inhalt der Schrift entetellt.”Google Scholar See also Ibid., 464 top.

23. See above fn. 14. The “Eight Errors of the Anabaptists” are part of Rhegius pamphlet Wider den newen Tauforden.…

24. The “Eight Points” of the Nicolsburg debate as Oecolampadius lists them in his letter to Zwingli, July 19, 1527 were (translated from the Latin): (1) The Gospel should not be proclaimed publically in churches but secretly in houses; (2) Mary was not the mother of God but only the mother of Christ: (3) Christ's satisfaction was not sufficient for the sins of the world: (4) there should be no [civic] authority among Christians (5) the Day of Judgment will come in two years; (6) Angels took upon themselves flesh together with Christ; (7) Mary had several sons besides Jesus; (8) Christ was procreated in original sin and is not the true son of God. Cf. Oekolampadius, , Briefe, II, 87f.Google Scholar, quoted by Bergsten, Torsten, Balthasar Hubmaier…, 461Google Scholar; see also Zwinglis, HuldrychBriefe, ed. O. Farner (1920), III, 179.Google Scholar

25. The “Eleven Points” which Hans Hut at his Augsburg trial said he could still remember as being among the fifty-two items put together by Hubmaier who excerpted them from Hut's writings but intentionally distorted them “out of envy” were: (1) Hut and his followers do not believe that Christ was the son of God; (2) they rather believe that Christ was only a prophet; (3) they are said also to believe that Mary, the mother of God, had several husbands; (4) they spoke of angels becoming men together with Christ; (5) they proclaimed the doctrine that if a man takes hold of a good angel that man can do nothing but good; but if a man catches a bad angel he can do nothing but evil; (6) they are said to believe in visions and dreams; (7) they believe in a predetermined time of the Day of Judgment; (8) they believe that with the Scriptures one receives either truth or lie; (9) they supposedly believe that eventually Christians will sit in judgment over the world; (10) they assert that no prince and no civic authority of this world ever accepted or recognized the Truth; (11) they believe that power should be taken away from these authorities and be given to the Christians. Hans Hut deposed that of all these eleven points he accepts but the points 6 and 8 and nothing else. As to point 6 he referred to Job 33, Sapientia 13, and Numbers 12. As to point 8 he referred to the false understanding of the Scriptures by the Catholics. Cf. Meyer (above fn. 3), 232. One will note that a number of these points are decidedly different from the eight N.A. But these eleven points allow a good insight into the excited intellectual climate of the time where the wildest ideas could be claimed and promoted.

26. The question how Fabri might have gotten this information poses another puzzle. Our hypothesis that the Lord of Liechtenstein might have been instrumental in this affair will be discussed further below. Unfortunately there is no archival material available to prove such a thesis. We may take it for granted, however, that Fabri was genuinely convinced that the N.A. were a product of Hubmaier's mind.

27. Hut in his Defense of November 4, 1627 (Meyer, 233). E. Meissner thinks that the minutes of that trial might have been “dressed up” afterwards. He found the handwriting of the document too nice and clean as to represent the real minutes of that day. Most scholars, however, accept them as reliable.

28. As to the “Eleven Points” see above fn. 24.

29. Hubmaier, Balthasar, Schriften, ed. Bergsten, T. (Gütersloh, 1962)Google Scholar, item 25; “Eine Rcchenschaft des Glaubens,” January 3, 1528, article 27 (“Von der Obrigkeit”), p. 489.

30. Thus, for instance, Grete Mecenseffy in her review of Bergsten's “Hubmaier” book in the Jahrbuch für die Geschichte des Protestantsimus in Oesterreich (1963), 168Google Scholar, writes: “The N.A. are possibly excerpts from Hut's writings made by Hubmaier as a preparation for the debate, although it is true that during his trial Hut passionately denounced these theses as representing his own ideas.”

31. Williams, George H., The Radical Reformation (Philadelphia, 1962), 177 ff.Google Scholar

32. Compare the volume Elsass, I, of the Täuferakten (above note 18), item 79. Previously published in Beiträgecur Bayrisehen Kirchengeschichte (1913), 57 ff. According to the article “Nürnberg” in Mennonite Encyclopedia, III, 1957, 927Google Scholar, the city-council of Strassburg had asked Nürnberg for more information regarding their new “Kirchenordnung.” The letter of March 21, 1527, is the answer to it, including also the accusations against the Anabaptists, especially Hans Hut.

33. Of these “Seven Articles” only item Five expresses the thinking of Hans Hut. For afl the rest we have no source to prove it as ideas of Hut.

34. The Elsass, I (see note 18) has as item 86, p. 105, a remarkable passage taken from a writing of the Anabaptist Jacob Kautz which Martin Bucer tried to refute, July 2, 1527. Here we read as article VI: “that Jesus of Nazareth had not rendered satisfaction for our sins in any other way but by showing us the way to follow which previously he had blazed for us, and to obey the commandments of the Father and the Son,—everyone according to his measure.” That is part of the theology of incipient Anabaptism, and was understandably passionately rejected by Bucer. Could it have been that a statement like that laid the foundations for one of the N.A. which states that “Christ did not satisfy enough for our sins”(doubt) I would rather doubt it.

35. Cf. for instance Evans, A. P., An Episode in the Struggle for Religious Freedom: the Sectaries of Nürnberg, 1524–1528 (New York, 1924).Google Scholar

36. Cf. Nester, Hermann, Die Wiedertäuferbewegung in Regensburg (Regensburg, 1926), 45Google Scholar. Also Bayern, II, 8.Google Scholar

37. Margrave Kasimir of Bayreuth-Kuimbach, of the House of Hoheuzollern. ruled 1515–1527. The letter of the city-council of Nürnberg to Kasimir in Bayern, I, 19–20Google Scholar; also in Wappler, Paul, Die Täuferbewegungun…, 245.Google Scholar

38. It is remarkable that the same letter which brought Vogel to the stake re-appeared two centuries later as a pamphlet of “edification” for the budding pietistic movement. In 1717, the well-known Pietist and inspector of the Francke'sche Orphanage at Halle, J. D. Herraschmidt, brought out a booklet under the title, Neue und mit Anmerkungen versehene Ausgabe Wolfgang Vogels merkwürdigen Sendschreibens… Cf. Friedmann, Robert, Mennonite Piety Through The Centuries (Goshen, Ind., 1949), 26ff.Google Scholar

39. Menn. Encycl., III, 1957, pp. 926–931.Google Scholar

40. Concerning Lazarus Spengler see von Schubert, Hans, Lazarus Spengler und die Reformation in Nürnberg (Leipzig, 1934)Google Scholar. ProfGrimm, Harold J. lectured on “Lazarus Spengler and the City-Council of Nüremberg,” 12 28, 1964Google Scholar at the session of the Am. Hist, Ass, at Washington, D.C. but has not yet published his findings. See also Strauss, Gerald, Nürnberg in the Sixteenth Century (New York, 1966), 160–3, 170–3, 193.Google Scholar

41. The last biography by Klassen, Herb, “Life and teachings of Hans Hut,” in Mennonite Quarterly Review, 1959Google Scholar, deals again with this issue, 202–205.

42. Remark by Dr. James M. Stayer in his letter to the writer: “Hubmaier and Hut may well have discussed the “sword” issue also when Hubmaier took exception to the violent implications of Hut's eschatology.”

43. Mentioned in Oecolampadius' letter to Zwingli, July 19, 1527. See above note 24.

44. Concerning the contacts between Kasimir and Liechtenstein we know only the fact that the latter had been attending the great festivities in Prague connected with the coronation of Archduke Ferdinand of Austria as King of Bohemia, April/May 1527, and it is more than likely that there he met Kasimir who, too, attended this affair. Since Kasimir, had just received the Nürnberg letter about the danger of Anabaptism, he might have casually mentioned this to Liechtenstein whose friendliness to Hubmaier since 1526 was generally known.

45. There remains a certain psychological problem with regard to the personality of Leonard Liechtenstein. Loserth's, article “Liechtenstein” in Menn. Enc., III, 338Google Scholar, adds very little to the solution of our problem. Upon my inquiry at the Prince Liechtenstein's Family Archive in Vaduz, Liechtenstein, I received the information that no material has been preserved from this early period, neither correspondence nor notes concerning the Anabaptists in Nicolsburg. Thus our hypothesis regarding the role of the Lord Liechtenstein of Nicolsburg cannot be solved by documentation.

46. Meyer, 233, where we read Hut's deposition that at the occasion of the Nicolsburg debate Martin Göschl, onetime auxiliary bishop and now friend of Hubmaier, had told him that they plan to extradite Hut to King Ferdinand in Vienna. Thereupon Hut fled from the Nicolsburg castle at night.

47. Bergsten, T., Hubmaier…, 324Google Scholar. See above fn. 16.

48. See above fn. 21.

49. That happened, according to Hut's own admission, at Königsberg in Franconia, in the Fall of 1526. Meyer, 241–2.

50. Müller, Lydia, Glaubenszeugnisse oberdeutscher Taufgesinnter (Leipzig, 1938), 12.Google Scholar

51. Williams, George H., The Radical Reformation, 178.Google Scholar

52. Concerning Ambrosius Spittelmaier see Klassen, Herb, “Ambrosius Spittelmaier, his Life and Teachings,” Mennonite Quarterly Review, 1958, 251–271Google Scholar. ProfWilliams, , The Radical Reformation, 178Google Scholar, ascribed to Spittelmaier ideas which this Anabaptist had emphatically denounced. See Bayern, I, 47–56.Google Scholar

53. TA Bayern I, pp. 45–47Google Scholar; the elaborate argument f or the death-sentence, 109–111.

54. Bayern, I, 47–56Google Scholar. This is one of the great documents of early Anabaptism worthy of detailed study.

55. I am here thinking above all of the followers of David Joris.

56. See above fn. 44.

57. Bergsten, , Hubmaier…, 1961, 434 and fn. 46.Google Scholar