1. My reference is, of course, to Ozment's, Steven splendid monograph The Bürgermeister's Daughter: Scandal in a Sixteenth-century German Town (New York: St. Martin's, 1996), which exemplifies, in my judgment, social history on the micro level at its finest.Google Scholar

2. See here Kelly Gadol, Joan, “Was there a Renaissance of Women?” in Women, History & Theory: The Essays of Joan Kelly Gadol (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1984).Google Scholar

3. Luther's self-appraisal of his writings is in WA 50, 657–61. Philip Melanchthon's funeral oration is found in Coryus Reformatorum 11, 726–34.Google Scholar

4. Flacius Illyricus, Matthias, Ecclesiastica historia, integrarn ecclesiae Christi ideam … perspicuo ordine complectens: singulari diligentia & fide ex vetussimis & optimis historicis studiosos & pios viros in urbe Magdeburgica, 13 vols (Basil: Ioannem Oporinum, 1559–1574).Google Scholar

5. Grafton, Anthony, The Footnote: A Curious History (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1997).Google Scholar

6. Baronio, , Cesare, , Annales ecclesiastici … (Mainz: loannis Gymnici, 1601–1608)Google Scholar; Bossuet, Jacques B., Historia doctrinæ protestantium, in religionis materia: continuis mutationibus, contradictionibus, innovationibus, variatae, & fluctuantis (Vienna: Typis Gregorii Kurtzböck, 1734–1735).Google Scholar

7. George Williams's contribution is found in three places, his bibliographical survey in Church History, the introduction to his collection of primary sources in Spiritual and Anabaptist Writers (Philadelphia, Penn.: Westminster, 1957)Google Scholar, and his Radical Reformation, 3rd ed.(Kirksville, Mo.: Sixteenth-century Journal, 1992).Google Scholar

8. The best introduction to Gottfried Arnold is Blaufuss, Dietrich and Niewöhner, Friedrich, eds., Gottfried Arnold (1666–1714): mit einer Bibliographic der Arnold-Literatur ab 1714 (Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 1995).Google Scholar

9. I am thinking of such Lutheran theologians as Werner Elert, Paul Althaus, and Wolfhart Pannenberg in Germany and Gustav Aulen in Sweden.

10. On Luther's notion of the deus absconditus, one does well to recur to Kattenbusch, Ferdinand, Deus absconditus bei Luther (Tübingen: J. C. B. Mohr, 1920)Google Scholar; Stauffer, Richard, Dieu, la création et la providence dans la prédication de Calvin (Berne: P. Lang, 1978).Google Scholar

11. Kolb, Robert, Martin Luther as Prophet, Teacher, Hero: Images of the Reformer, 1520–1620 (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Books, 1999).Google Scholar

12. Moeller, Bernd, “Probleme der reformationsgeschichtlichen Forschung,” originally printed in the Zeitschrift für Kirchengeschichte 196 (1966)Google Scholar, is found in English translation in Moeller's, Imperial Cities and the Reformation (Philadelphia, Penn.: Fortress, 1972).Google Scholar

13. The essay was first published under the tile “Reichsstadt und Reformation” at Gütersloh, 1962. The English translation appeared in Philadelphia, Penn.: Fortress, 1972.

14. Dickens, A. G., The German Nation and Martin Luther (New York: Harper and Row, 1974).Google Scholar

15. Still, theological topics continue to find attention, most of them focusing on Luther. During the last decade a number of studies have appeared on Luther's theology of the cross, have compared Luther's notes on his Romans lectures with the lecture notes of his students, have examined Luther's understanding of the priesthood of all believers and Luther's ecciesiology. This attention is particularly true of Finnish Reformation scholarship. I note a few outstanding monographs: Stolle, Volker, Luther und Paulus: die exegetischen und hermeneutischen Grundlagen der lutherischen Rechtfertigungslehre im Paulinismus Luthers (Leipzig: Evangelische Verlagsanstalt, 2002)Google Scholar; Ghiselli, Anja, Kopperi, Kari und Vinke, Rainer, eds., Luther und Ontologie: Das Sein Christi im Glauben als strukturierendes Prinzip der Theologie Luthers: Referate der Fachtagung des Instituts für Systematische Theologie der Universität Helsinki in Zusatntnenarbeit mit der Luther-Akademie Ratzeburg in Helsinki 1.-5.4.1992 (Erlangen: Martin Luther, 1993)Google Scholar; Wohle, Andreas H., Luthers Freude an Gottes Gesetz: eine historische Quellenstudie zur Oszillation des Gesetz esbegriffes Martin Luthers im Licht seiner alttestamentlichen Predigten (Frankfurt am Main: Haag and Herchen, 1998).Google Scholar

16. Lortz, Joseph, Die Reformation in Deutschland. Freiburg, 1940Google Scholar; the English translation, The Reformation in Germany (New York: Herder and Herder, 1968)Google Scholar. Other Catholic scholars to be mentioned are Hans Kung (at least in his early work), notably his Justification; the doctrine of Karl Barth and a Catholic Reflection. With a Letter by Karl Barth (New York: Nelson, 1964)Google Scholar. Other names are Otto Pesch, Erwin Iserloh, Vincent Pfnurr, Harry McSorley as Catholic scholars who worked on Protestant theological topics. See also Heinz, Johann, “Martin Luther and his Theology in German Catholic Interpretation before and after Vatican II,” Andrews University Studies 26 (1988): 253ff.Google Scholar; Lukens, Michael, “Lortz' View of the Reformation and the Crisis of the True Church,” Arch iv für Reformationsgeschichte 81 (1990): 20ff.Google Scholar

17. The two important books are Grisar, Hartmann, Luther, Engl. Trans. (St. Louis, Mo.: Herder, 1913–1917)Google Scholar, and Denifle, Heinrich, Luther und Luthertum in der ersten Entwicklung (Mainz: F. Kirchheim, 1904–1909)Google Scholar. Grisar's, biography was republished in Westminster, Md.: Newman, 1950!Google Scholar

18. There are many splendid tributes to the contribution of Heiko Oberman to the field, notably the Festschrift, Continuity and Change: the Harvest of Late Medieval and Reformation History: Essays Presented to Heiko A. Oberman on his 70th Birthday (Leiden: Brill, 2000).Google Scholar

19. George H. Williams introduced the terminology “Radical Reformation,” after Roland Bainton had coined the term “left wing of the Reformation.” Williams meant to refer to reformers who sought to return, without governmental support and assistance, to the “roots” (radix) of Christianity. The problem with such a definition was, of course, that all reformers claimed to be doing precisely that, so that conceding that some so succeeded represents a value judgment. By the same token, to understand “radical” in our customary usage as “extreme,”“consequent,” and so on, similarly represents a value judgment. I, therefore, find the term too complicated to be of much use and insert quotation marks to express my misgivings.

20. Two of these exceptions were Cornelius, C. A., Geschichte des Münsterischen Aufruhrs (Leipzig: T. O. Weigel, 1855–1860)Google Scholar, and—most importantly—Ernst Troeltsch, in his famous The Social Teachings of the Christian Churches, Engl. Trans. (New York: Macmillan, 1931).Google Scholar

21. Of course, there were exceptions, notably in the Netherlands.

22. Williams, George H., The Radical Reformation.Google Scholar

23. Robert Kingdon has been a major voice in calling attention to the Calvinist-French aspects of the Reformation, while Carlos Eire directed our attention to the peninsula, Iberian, theretofore a prerogative of Spanish scholars, for example his From Madrid to Purgatory: The Art and Craft of Dying in Sixteenth-Century Spain (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995).Google Scholar

24. Lubieniecki, Stanislas, History of the Polish Reformation: and nine related documents. Translated and interpreted by Williams, George Huntston (Minneapolis, Minn.: Fortress, 1995).Google Scholar

25. Warsaw, , 1983.Google Scholar

26. Hughes, Philip, The Reformation in England, 2 vols. (London: Hollis and Carter, 1950–1954)Google Scholar. The two volumes are an immensely learned work. This perspective can also be found in Aidan Gasquet, Francis, Henry VIII and the English Monasteries: an Attempt to Illustrate the History of Their Suppression (London: J. Hodges, 1895), which painted the picture of a flowering English monasticism extinguished by Henry VIII.Google Scholar

27. Dickens, A. G., The English Reformation. (New York, 1964Google Scholar; Dickens, A. G., The English Reformation. 2nd ed.University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press, 1991).Google Scholar

28. See here Haigh, Christopher, ed., The English Reformation Revised (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1987)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Haigh, Christopher, English Reformations: Religion, Politics, and Society under the Tudors (Oxford: Clarendon, 1993)Google Scholar; Duffy, Eamon, The Stripping of the Altars: Traditional Religion in England, c. 1400–c. 1580 (New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press, 1992)Google Scholar; and Scarisbrick, J. J., The Reformation and the English People (Oxford: Blackwell, 1984)Google Scholar. An early assessment of the disagreement was by O'Day, Rosemary, The Debate on the English Reformation (London: Methuen, 1986).Google Scholar

29. A good illustration for such criticism is found in Christopher Haigh's English Reformations, cited above. Similarly revisionist is Skeeters, Martha C., Community and Clergy: Bristol and the Reformation c. 1530–c. 1570 (Oxford: Clarendon, 1993).Google Scholar

30. Dickens sought to refute this revisionist interpretation, which, naturally, focused on his own interpretation of the English course of events: “The Early Expansion of Protestantism in England, 1520–1558,” Archive for Reformation History 78 (1987): 187–222.Google Scholar

31. Whiting, Robert, Local Responses to the English Reformation (New York: St. Martin's, 1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Litzenberger, C. J., The English Reformation and the Laity: Gloucestershire, 1540–1580 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Duffy, Eamon, The Voices of Morebath: Reformation and Rebellion in an English Village (New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press, 2001).Google Scholar

32. Shagan, Ethan H., Popular Politics and the English Reformation (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003).Google Scholar

33. An interesting illustration for this East German scholarship is the Luther biography by Brendler, Gerhard, Martin Luther: Theology and Revolution (New York: Oxford University Press, 1991).Google Scholar

34. Blickle, Peter, The Revolution of 1525. The German Peasants' War from a New Perspective (Baltimore, Md.: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1985).Google Scholar

35. This is found in such books as Roper, Lyndal, The Holy Household. Women and Morals in Reformation Augsburg (Oxford: Clarendon, 1989)Google Scholar; Karant-Nunn, Susan, The Reformation of Ritual. An Interpretation of Early Modern Germany (New York: Routledge, 1997)Google Scholar, and the recent fascinating book of Ozment, Steve E., Flesh and Spirit: Private Life in Early Modern German. (New York: Viking, 1999), the latter examining the various rites of the church– baptism, marriage, burial–both before and after the Reformation.Google Scholar

36. A comprehensive bibliographical survey is that of Schmidt, Heinrich Richard, Konfessionalisierung im 16. Jahrhundert (Munich: Oldenbourg, 1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Equally incisive (and not uncritical) is Kaufmann, Thomas, “Die Konfessionalisierung von Kirche und Gesellschaft,” Theologische Literaturzeitung 121 (1996): 1008ffGoogle Scholar. A critical assessment of the concept of confessionalization is by Merz, Johannes, “Calvinismus im Territorialstaat? Zur Begrifffs- und Traditionsbildung in der deutschen Historiographie,” Zeifschrift f. bayerische Landesgeschichte 57 (1994): 45ffGoogle Scholar. Another critic of the thesis is Philip Gorsky, who harks back to Max Weber with his argument that the several “confessions” had quite different ways of translating their beliefs into the public square: Gorsky, Philip, The Disciplinary Revolution: Calvinism and the Rise of the State in Early Modern Europe (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2003).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

37. A different way of using the term “confessional,” namely as a term denoting the theological-creedal characteristic of the period from 1525 to 1648, is that of Klueting, Harm, Das konfessionelle Zeitalter, 1525–1648 (Stuttgart: E. Ulmer, 1989).Google Scholar

38. A thoughtful bibliographical survey and trenchant criticism of both term and concept is offered by Klueting, Harm, “Gab es eine ‘zweite Reformation’? Ein beitrag zur Terminologie des Konfessionellen Zeitalters,” Geschichte in Wissenschaft und Unterrzcht 38 (1987), 261–79Google Scholar. Heinz Schilling appears to have had ambivalent thoughts: “Die ‘zweite Reformation’ als Kategorie der Geschichtswissenschaft”, in Die reformierte Konfessionalisierung in Deutschland–Das Problem der zweiten Reformation, ed. Schilling, (Gütersloh: G. Mohn, 1986), 387ff.Google Scholar

39. Nischan, Bodo, Prince, People, and Confession. The Second Reformation in Brandenburg (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1994).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

40. Schilling, Heinz, Konfessionskonflikt und Staatsbildung. Eine Fallstudie über das Verhältnis von religiösem und sozialem Wandel in der Frühneuzeit am Beispiel der Grafschaft Lippe. Gütersloh, 1981, 7Google Scholar. Schilling, Heinz, Die reformierte Konfessionalisierung in Deutschland–Das Problem der zweiten Reformation, 7.Google Scholar

41. Schilling, Heinz, “Die Konfessionalisierung im Reich–Religiöser und gesellschaftlicher Wandel in Deutschland zwischen 1555 und 1620,” Historische Zeitschrft 246 (1988): 6.Google Scholar

42. Elias's ideas are found in the second volume of his The Civilizing Process: Sociogenetic and Psychogenetic Investigations (Oxford: Blackwell, 2000).Google Scholar

43. Hand in hand with “confessionalization” went the process of what has been called “social discipline” of society. This process began well before the sixteenth century and accelerated steadily as time went on. It was a collaborative effort of church and state–the churches were eager to impose their moral standards upon society, while the state, in exercising its authority through regulations concerning such matters as festivals, vagrancy, begging, poor relief, saw these regulations as means to consolidate its power. If what the church ventured to do was largely voluntaristic, the action of the state was demonstrably repressive. The notion is that of Oestreich, Gerhard, “Struktur-probleme des europäischen Absolutismus,”in Geist und Gestalt des frühmodernen Staates (Berlin: Duncker and Humblot, 1969), 179–97Google Scholar. An essay that connects social control and the Reformation is by Scribner, Bob, “Social Control and the Possibility of an Urban Reformation,” in Popular Culture and Popular Movements in Reformation Germany (London: Hambledon, 1987).Google Scholar

44. Marx, Anthony W., Faith in Nation: Exclusionary Origins of Nationalism (New York: Oxford University Press, 2003)Google Scholar; Colley, Linda, Britons: Forging the Nation, 1707–1837 (New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press, 2003).Google Scholar

45. For example, Zeeden, Ernst Walter, Die Entstehung der Konfessionen. (Munich: Oldenbourg, 1965). Zeeden clearly anticipated, without offering a broader conceptual perspective, the essential notion of the confessionalization thesis. See Note 36.Google Scholar

46. Zeeden, Ernst Walter, “Zur Periodisierung und Terminologie des Zeitalters der Reformation und Gegenreformation,” Geschichte in Wissenschaft und Unterricht 7 (1956): 67.Google Scholar

47. Schilling, Konfessionskonflikt, 2. See also Reinhard, Wolfgang, ed., Katholische Konfessionalisierung. Wissenschaftliches Symposion der Gesellschaft zur Herausgabe des Corpus Cat holicorum und des Vereins für Reformationsgeschichte 1993 (Gutersloh: Gutersloher Verlagshaus, 1995), 420.Google Scholar

48. Erich Hassinger's book offers perhaps the best illustration: clearly, his conceptualization suggests that what he calls “Frühe Neuzeit” was incisively marked by the Protestant Reformation.

49. To cite a few books in point: Völker-Rasor, Anette, Frühe Neuzeit (Munich: Oldenbourg, 2000)Google Scholar; Reisenleitner, Markus, Fruhe Neuzeit, Reformation und Gegenreformation: Darstellung, Forschungsuberblick, Quellen und Literatur (Innsbruck: Studien-Verlag, 2000)Google Scholar; Warnke, Martin, Spat mittelalter und fruhe Neuzeit: 1400–1750 (Munich: Beck, 1999)Google Scholar; Göttmann, Frank, Die Fruhe Neuzeit: gesellschaftliche Stabilität und politischer Wandel (Paderborn: Schöningh, 1999)Google Scholar; Haug, Walter, Mittelalter und frühe Neuzeit: Übergänge, Umbrüche und Neuansätze (Tubingen: M. Niemeyer, 1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Wunder, Heide, Der andere Blick auf die Frühe Neuzeit: Forschungen 1974–95 (Königstein: U. Helmer, 1999).Google Scholar

A thoughtful assessment of the larger conceptual issues is found in the volume edited by Vierhaus, Rudolf, Frühe Neuzeit-frühe Moderne? Forschungen zur Vielschichtigkeit von Ubergangsprozessen (Gottingen: Vandenheock and Ruprecht, 1992).Google Scholar

50. In German scholarship, aided by that fascinating ability of the German language to coin new words, the term “Friihneuzeit” has appeared as a noun. As noted in the text, there is a subtle difference between “Neuzeit” and “modern.”

51. Venard, Marx, ed., Histoire du Christianisme des Origines à Nos Jours, Vol. 7. Temps des confessions (1530–1620/30) (Paris: Delclée, 1990).Google Scholar

52. O'Malley, John, “Was Ignatius of Loyola a Church Reformer? How to look at Early Modern Catholicism,” Catholic Historical Review 77 (1991): 177–93.Google Scholar

53. In a way, the same conceptual problem surrounds the use of the term “Renaissance” as a historical epoch. And that quite aside from the propriety of its applicability to the history of Christianity during that time.

54. Troeltsch, Ernst, Protestantism and Progress. A Historical Study of the Relation of Protestantism to the Modern World (New York: G. P. Putnam's Sons, 1912).Google Scholar

55. The remark is in WA TR 2, 154b; see also WA 49,21, a sermon on 1 Timothy 1:2, in which Luther writes “Teuffels, wie du gehest und stehest. Item, wenn du falsch bier machst.”

56. Fried, Johannes, ed., Stand und Perspektiven der Mittelalterforschung am Ende des 20. Jahrhunderts (Göttingen: Walistein, Ca. 1996)Google Scholar; Fuhrmann, Horst, Deutsche Geschichte im hohen Mittelalter: Von der Mitte des 11. bis zum Ende des 12. Jahrhunderts (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck and Ruprecht, 1978)Google Scholar, English translation Germany in the High Middle Ages, c. 1050–1200 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1986)Google Scholar, and especially his Überall ist Mittelalter: von der Gegenwart einer vergangenen Zeit (Munich: C. H. Beck, 1996).Google Scholar

57. Lindberg, Carter, The European Reformations (Oxford: Blackwell, 1996).Google Scholar

58. Wittenmyer, Annie T., The Women of the Reformation. (New York: Phillips and Hunt, 1885).Google Scholar

59. Bainton, Roland, Women of the Reformation in France and England (Minneapolis, Mimi: Augsburg, 1973); Women of the Reformation from Spain to Scandinavia (Minneapolis, Minn.: Augsburg, 1977)Google Scholar; Women of the Reformation in Germany and Italy (Minneapolis, Minn.: Augsburg, 1971),Google Scholar

60. I note the following from the voluminous literature: Joldersma, Hermina and Grijp, Louis, eds., “Elisabeth's ‘manly courage’“: Testimonials and Songs of Martyred Anabaptist Women in the Low Countries (Milwaukee, Wisc.: Marquette University Press, 2001)Google Scholar; Zahl, Paul F. M., Five Women of the English Reformatio (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans, 2001)Google Scholar; Conrad, Anne, ed., “In Christo ist weder man noch weyb”: Frauen in der Zeit der Reformation und der katholischen Reform (Münster: Aschendorff, 1999)Google Scholar; Wiesner-Hanks, Merry, ed., Convents Confront the Reformation: Catholic and Protestant Nuns in Germany (Milwaukee, Wisc.Google Scholar: Marquette University Press, 1998)Google Scholar; Karant-Nunn, Susan C. and Wiesner, Merry E., eds., Luther on Women: a Sourcebook (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002)Google Scholar; Matheson, Peter, ed., Argula von Grumbach: a woman's voice in the Reformation (Edinburgh: T and T Clark, 1995)Google Scholar; Wilson, Katharina M., Women Writers of the Renaissance and Reformation (Athens: University of Georgia Press, 1987)Google Scholar; Marshall, Sherrin, ed., Women in Reformation and Counter-Reformation Europe: Public and Private Worlds (Bloomington: Idiana University Press, 1989)Google Scholar. An attempt to bring the categories of gender studies and feminist theory to bear on the sixteenth century is by Wiesner, Merry E., “Beyond Women and the Family: towards a gender analysis of the Reformation,” Sixteenth-century Journal 18 (1987): 311–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

61. Schilling picked up the thrust of Pierre Chaunu's thesis in his essay, “Reformation– Umbruch oder Gipfelpunkt eines Temps des Réformes?” in Die frühe Reformation in Deutschland als Umbruch, eds. Buckwalter, Stephen E. and Moeller, Bernd (Gütersloh: Gutersloher Verlagshaus, 1998), 24.Google Scholar

62. Munich, , 1987, 13.Google Scholar

63. Schilling-Reinhard, , 35Google Scholar; Buckwalter-Moeller, , 49.Google Scholar

64. Gelder, Enno van, The Two Reformations of the Sixteenth-century; a Study of the Religious Aspects and Consequences of Renaissance and Humanism (The Hague: M. Nijhoff, 1961).Google Scholar

65. Accordingly, Chaunu gave his book the title Le Temps des Réformes. Histoire religieuse et système de civilsation. La crise de la Chrétienté, l'éclatement, 1250–1550 (Paris: Fayard, 1975).Google Scholar

66. Schilling-Reinhard, , 49.Google Scholar

67. As an example, see the older monograph by Joest, Wilfried, Ontologie der Person bei Luther (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck and Ruprecht, 1967).Google Scholar

68. Hamm, Berndt, “Wie innovativ war die Reformation?” Zeitschrft für historische Forschung 27 (2000): 493ff. The summary appears on page 497: “Faktoren des landgristigen Wandels sind integriert in eine reformatorische Gesamt-konstellation des Umbruchs, der wiederum in andersartige Vorgange eines langfristigen Wandels integriert ist.” At issue is the interrelationship between change and continuity. Hamm has a comrade in arms in Thomas Kaufmann, who identifies nine areas in which the Reformation brought about incisive change. See Kaufmann, 1119.Google Scholar