1. The best and most recent interpretations of Hoffman's Danish tenure come from Depperman, K., Melchior Hoffman: Soziale Unruhen und apokalyptische Visionen im Zeitalter dee Reformation (Göttingen, 1979), pp. 84–119,Google Scholar and Pater, Calvin, Karlstadt as the Father of the Baptist Movements: The Emergence of Lay Protestantism (Toronto, 1984), pp. 218–235.Google Scholar The source literature generated in the polemical disputes between Hoffman and the Lutherans, in addition to Karlstadt's and Bugenhagen's reports of the Flensburg Disputation, remain the best available material for piecing together the narrative as it is described in this paper.

2. Dunkley, E. H., The Reformation in Denmark (London, 1948), p. 54.Google Scholar Other helpful information on the Reformation in Denmark may be found in Oakley, S., A Short History of Denmark (New York, 1972), pp. 93–107,Google Scholar and Anderson, N. K. “The Reformation in Scandinavia and the Baltic,” in The New Cambridge Modern History, ed. Elton, G. R., vol. 2 (Cambridge, 1965), pp. 134–142.Google Scholar

3. Dunkley, , Reformation in Denmark, pp. 49–50.Google Scholar

4. Hoffman, and Karlstadt, , Dialogus und gründtliche berichtung gehaltner disputation im land zu Holstein underm König von Denmark vom hochwirdigen Sacrament oder Nachtmal des Herren (Strassburg, 1529), A2b.Google Scholar

5. Depperman, , Melchior Hoffman, p. 84;Google ScholarPater, , Karlstadt, p. 218.Google Scholar

6. The register of the Nikolai-Kirche, now in the Kiel Stadtarchiv, mentions Hoffman preaching there in the spring of 1527 (Depperman, , Melchior Hoffman, p. 89).Google Scholar Pater claims that Hoffman turned to Denmark “most likely in May, 1527” (Karlstadt, p. 218).

7. Frederick spent most of his reign in Gottorp (Oakley, , Short History of Denmark, p. 96).Google Scholar

8. Pater, , Karlstadt, p. 218.Google Scholar

9. This is the date Depperman gives (Melchior Hoffman, p. 99).

10. Hoffman, , Das Niclas Amsdorff der Magdeburger Pastor (Kiel, 1528),Google Scholar Cla: “und da ich zu dir zu Magdeburg quam/ werstu mir so hart/ das ich dich auch sarenlies/ und zu koeniglicher wir den Caplan sprach/ der mit mir war/ da sicht man was fur aussgeblasen geister hie sein.”

11. Anderson, , “Reformation in Scandinavia,” p. 137.Google ScholarDunkley, , Reformation in Denmark, p. 50.Google Scholar The king still kept under his protection everyone “who preached a doctrine which could be defended by the Bible” (ibid., p. 137), a position of tolerance based on the 1526 Diet of Speyer. Since Hoffman had successfully preached before the king a doctrine which could be supported by the Bible, he continued to enjoy the king's protection.

12. Dunkley, , Reformation in Denmark, p. 54.Google Scholar

13. Bugenhagen, Johannes von, ed., Acta der Disputation zu Flensberg (Wittenberg, 1529), A4a–A5a.Google Scholar

14. Luther, Martin, D. Martin Luthers Werke. Kritische Gesamtausgabe. Briefwechsel 4 (Weimar, 1933), pp. 202, 311, 410–411, 453–456, 505–506, 610Google Scholar (hereafter cited as WA Br.4).

15. “Luther an Wilhelm Pravest,” 9 May 1528 (WA Br. 4, p. 412).

16. Amsdorf, Nikolaus v., Eine Vermannung an die von Magdeburg, das sie sich fur falsch propheten zu hütten wissen (1527),Google Scholar in Leenderts, W. I., Melchior Hoffman (Haarlem, 1883), pp. 364–365.Google Scholar

17. “Luther an Amsdorf,” 17 May 1527 (WA Br. 4, p. 202).

18. Amsdorf, , Eine Vermannung, p. 365:Google Scholar “Daruff ist Melchior Hofmann am Mitwochen negst vergangen ynn ein fremb haus zu mir kommen, und mich ungeferlich mit diesen worten angeredet, was mir an yhm feilet, dansz ich brieffe von yhm geschrieben hatte, dadurch yhm grosz leid wider faren were. Als ich solchs hörte, verwundert ich mich und fragte wie er hiesse, da nante er sich, und da ich hörte, dansz er Meichior war, weiste ich yhm kurtz abe und sagte, er solte thun er kunde, denn es flel mir nicht so eilend ynn, was die artikel waren und wie ich geschrieben hatte.”

19. Hoffman, , Das Niclas Amsdorff, C1b.Google Scholar

20. “Luther an Amsdorf,” 17 May 1527 (WA Br. 4, p. 202).

21. Quoted from the surviving preface (Pater, , Karlstadt, p. 174).Google Scholar

22. “Luther an Amsdorf,” 17 May 1527 (WA Br. 4, p. 202).

23. Ibid., p. 202.

24. G. Ficker, Postscript to Hoffman, M., Das Niclas Amsdorff, in Schriften des Vereins für Schleswig-Holsteinische Kirchengeschichte 4 (Preetz, 1926), p. 111.Google Scholar

25. According to Luther's imagery, “The heart suggests that when one believes from the heart, then comes justification; the cross is a sign of life and vitality, not death; the whiteness of the rose gives and is the color of spirits and angels; the blue field is a heavenly sign; the golden ring suggests that heaven lasts forever.” Cole, R. G., “Pamplet Woodcuts in the Communication Process of Reformation Germany,” in Pietas et Societas: New Trends in Reformation Social History, ed. Sessions, K. C. and Bebb, P. N. (Kirksville, Mo., 1985), pp. 107–108.Google Scholar

26. Hoffman, and Karlstadt, , Dialogus, A3a.Google Scholar

27. Hoffman, , Dat Nikolaus Amsdorff der Meydeborger Pastor (Kiel, 1528), A1a.Google Scholar

28. Pravest was the Catholic rector at the Nikolai-Kirche in Kiel. He was particularly offended by the fact that an untrained layman like Hoffman was given permission to preach in his church. Pravest considered this to be a glaring example of the danger of Reformation influences in his country. Hoffman claimed to be “called by God,” yet he did not fall under the jurisdiction of any church. He claimed to teach the law and gospel, said Pravest, yet he knew no Latin. He even claimed the end of the world was only seven years away, a sure sign of his unsettled state of mind! The disconcerted Pravest wrote to Luther with his concerns (“Pravest an Luther,” 21 February 1528 [WA Br. 4, pp. 381–383]). Luther responded by warning Pravest that Hoffman was not fit to teach and people should stay away from him and silence him (“Luther an Pravest,” 14 March 1528 [WA Br. 4, pp. 410–412”). Pravest, in turn, deceitfully used Luther's letter to undermine the cause of the Reformation in Denmark, prompting an incensed Luther to remark that when compared to Pravest, even Hoffman could be called a “minister of the Word” (“Luther an Pravest,” 9 May 1528 [WA Br. 4, pp. 453–454]). Luther added to Paul Harge, burgermeister in Kiel, that the problem with Hoffman was that he was moving too fast (“Luther an Paul Harge,” 9 May 1528 [WA Br. 4, pp. 454–455”). Luther still felt it was necessary to call upon the leaders of the city to control his activity. Luther's attitude toward Hoffman did not change as much as Noll, M. contends in “Luther Defends Meichior Hoffman,” Sixteenth Century Journal 4 (1973):47–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

29. Depperman, , Melchior Hoffman, p. 109.Google Scholar

30. Eberhard, Weidensee, Eyn Underricht uth der hillighen schryffl, dem Dorch lüchtigen Hochgebaren Forsten und Hern, Hern Christiarn, Erffgenohmen tho Norwegen, Herthogen tho Schleswig-Holsteen etc. dorch Eberhardt Wydenssehe gedahn, Melchior Hofmanns Sendebreef, darynne hee schryfft, dat he nicht bekennen kone, dat eyn stuck lyflikes brodes syn Gott sy, belangende (Hamburg, 1529), B3a.Google Scholar

31. Pater has noted this connection between Weidensee's attack on Hoffman's doctrine of Christ and his receptivity to the “heavenly flesh” doctrine of Klemenz Ziegler in Strassburg (Karlstadt, p. 231). See also Depperman, , Melchior Hoffman, p. 108.Google Scholar

32. This is a position that began to emerge in Hoffman's commentary Daniel 12 (Stockholm, 1526)Google Scholar and it continued to develop in his disputes with Schuldorp, Amsdorf, and Weidensee. He officially rejected the doctrine of the real presence at the Flensburg Disputation.

33. Brief references to the Hoffman press appear in Ficker's Postscript, p. 111; Volbehr, F., Kieler Prediger Geschichte seit der Reformation in Mittheilungen der Gesellschaft fü Kieler Staddtgeschichte, vol. 6 (Kiel, 1884), p. 11;Google ScholarBenzing, J., Die Buchdrucker des 16. und 17. Jahrhunderts im deutschen Sprachgebeit (Wiesbaden, 1963), p. 216;Google ScholarDepperman, , Melchior Hoffman, p.99;Google ScholarPater, , Karlstadt, p. 221;Google ScholarDunkley, , The Reformation in Denmark, p. 54,Google Scholar and Hoffman's and Karlstadt's version of the proceedings of the Flensburg Disputation, Dialogus, C3b.

34. Hofman, and Karlstadt, , Dialogus, C3b.Google Scholar

35. Dunkley, , Reformation in Denmark, p. 54.Google Scholar

36. Volbehr, , Kieler Prediger, p. 11.Google Scholar

37. Benzing, , Die Buchdrucker, p. 216.Google Scholar

38. “Wann in der Folgezeit zuerst wider em Buch in Kiel gedrucht worden ist, habe ich nicht ermitteln können.” Ficker, Postscript, p. 111. Depperman agrees that it was the first press in Kiel, (Melchior Hoffman, p. 99).Google Scholar

39. Benzing, , Die Buchdrucker, p. 216.Google Scholar

40. Volbehr, , Kieler Prediger, p. 11 n. 1.Google Scholar

41. Benzing, , Die Buchdrucker, p. 216.Google Scholar

42. Pater, , Karistadi, p. 202.Google Scholar

43. Pieth, W., Lübeck als Pionier der Buchdruckerkunst, in Geschichte der freien und hansestadt Lübeck, ed. Endres, F. (Lübeck, 1926), pp. 231–235.Google Scholar

44. Ibid., pp. 231–232. Benzing writes that the estate passed on to Hans Arndes in 1518 (Die Buchdrucker, pp. 283–284), while E. Voullieme claims it passed on in August 1519 (Die Deutschen Drucker des Fünfzehnten Jahrhunderts [Berlin, 1922], p. 961).Google Scholar

45. Benzing, , Die Buchdrucker, pp. 283–284.Google Scholar

46. Lenhart, J. M., Introduction to Check-Lists of Names of Places where Typography was applied, of Master Printers, Printers, Workmen, Publishers, Promoters, etc. (St. Louis, 1959).Google Scholar

47. Benzing, , Die Buchdrucker, p. 216.Google Scholar

48. Hoffman, , Das Niclas Amsdorff, C3b.Google Scholar

49. Bugenhagen, Acta, Nlb. Bugenhagen also recounts the story about the plundering of Hoffman's house and the confiscation of his books and press.

50. Books and pamphlets were expensive in the fifteenth century; see Buhler, C. F., The Fifteenth Century Book: The Scribes, The Printers, The Decorators (Philadelphia, 1960), p. 531.CrossRefGoogle Scholar However, by the end of the 1400s there was a move away from aristocratic book production (both classical and liturgical folios) toward cheap little pamphlets with serious themes. These were largely the product of the “poor man's press.” They were aimed at all classes and were sold or distributed at fairs and markets; see Dickens, A. G., The German Nation and Martin Luther (New York, 1974), p. 1051.Google Scholar

51. As described by M. Chrisman, the one-man shop was one where “the print-owner worked alone doing both the composing and the printing, with perhaps some help from an apprentice… In this case, one man literally performed the skills of five” (Lay Culture, Learned Culture: Books and Social Change in Strassburg, 1480–1599 [New Haven, 1982], p. 10).Google Scholar

52. Hoffman, , Das Niclas Amsdorff, C3b.Google Scholar

53. The taunt is contained in the very title of Amsdorf's second tract against Hoffman, : Das Mel chior Hoffman nicht em wort auff mein Büchlein geantwort hat (Magdeburg, 1528).Google Scholar

54. Crofts, R. A., “Printing, Reform, and the Catholic Reformation in Germany (1521–1545),” Sixteenth Century Journal 16(1985): 370;CrossRefGoogle ScholarCole, R. G., “The Reformation in Print: German Pamphlets and Propaganda,” Archiv fsir Reformationsgeschichte 66 (1975): 93–102.Google Scholar Seventy-one percent of the titles from Hoffman's press were “controversialist” in nature.

55. There are widely varying figures for literacy rates. Scribner breaks it down for Germany to between 10 percent to 30 percent in towns and 5 percent nationally (Scribner, R., “How Many Could Read? Comments on Bernd Moeller's 'Stadt und Buch,'” in The Urban Classes, the Nobility and the Reformation: Studies on the Social History of the Reformation in England and Germany, ed. Mommsen, W. J. [Stuttgart, 1979”, p. 441).Google Scholar For comparative figures from other sources, see Crofts, R., “Books, Reform and the Reformation,” Archiu für Reformationsgeschichte 71 (1980): 25.Google Scholar

56. Scribner, , “How Many Could Read?” p. 45.Google Scholar See also Mullett, M., Radical Religious Movements in Early Modern Europe (London, 1980), p. 26.Google Scholar

57. Hoffman, and Karlstadt, , Dialogus, C3b.Google Scholar

58. Eyn Underricht was dated at Hadersleben in the year 1529: “Mittwach nach lichtness,” which Tschackert determines was Wednesday, 5 February 1529 (Tschackert, P., Dr. Eberhard Weidensee, Leben und Schriften [Berlin, 1973], p. 441).Google Scholar Hoffman's circular letter can safely be dated just prior to this.