What do you think?
Rate this book
Thomas Müntzer: Mystiker, Apokalyptiker, Revolutionar
Book by Goertz, Hans-Jurgen
Hardcover
First published December 5, 2000
32 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 4 of 4 reviews
July 15, 2018
I know nothing about 16th century Europe, the debates between Christianity at the time (other than the Reformation), or Thomas Muntzer before reading this book.
Goertz does a really good job of establishing the contextual background Muntzer lived in and the material conditions of society that partially influenced him. However, Goertz convincingly argues, his revolutionary views, "omnia communia sunt" (roughly 'all property to be held in common'), and siding with the "common man" over the clergy/nobles originates in his theology - the core being that there should only be a fear of God - not "creaturely fear". Since the peasants and artisans were being held in creaturely fear by the nobles, clergy, monks, etc. Muntzer recognized the latter as the obstacle to erasing creaturely fear in humans and eventually realized the only way to get rid of this obstacle was through an uprising - hence Goertz terms Muntzer's views as a "theology of revolution". I know very little of both but to me Muntzer's theology almost seems like a proto-Liberation theology. Could be wrong here though. Another interesting thing Goertz asserts is that Muntzer thought the Kingdom of God was immanent to history - that it could be brought about through an erasure of creaturely fear, among with communal living and brotherlihood.
Goertz synthesizes the two common interpretations of Muntzer: the Marxist view and the Church-history view (the former, that he was a "figure who reflected the progressive social transformation [from feudalism to capitalism], certainly not completely, but fundamentally all the same." The latter tend to emphasize Muntzer's subjectivity, namely his pretensions of being seized by the divine spirit. As Goertz puts it: "one group orientates its interpretation towards what Muntzer wanted to think and do; and the other towards what he was obliged to think and do."]. He does this by emphasizing an interconnection between Muntzer's theory and practice (or interiority/exteriority, objectivity/subjectivity). I would not say this is a "middle path", but perhaps it is!
Overall, Goertz seems sympathetic to Muntzer and Luther is generally portrayed negatively (though not exclusively so). Goertz also does a really good job of making the book understandable to someone who really has no knowledge of the era. Names of areas and people are thrown up, but their importance are often explained. I would recommend at least a cursory knowledge of feudalism as certain feudalist terms are used but not explained (e.g. seignorial) but this is rather rare and does not make the text inscrutable.
This seems like a pretty niche subject, but I would recommend this book to anyone interested in pre-Marxist revolutionaries.
Goertz does a really good job of establishing the contextual background Muntzer lived in and the material conditions of society that partially influenced him. However, Goertz convincingly argues, his revolutionary views, "omnia communia sunt" (roughly 'all property to be held in common'), and siding with the "common man" over the clergy/nobles originates in his theology - the core being that there should only be a fear of God - not "creaturely fear". Since the peasants and artisans were being held in creaturely fear by the nobles, clergy, monks, etc. Muntzer recognized the latter as the obstacle to erasing creaturely fear in humans and eventually realized the only way to get rid of this obstacle was through an uprising - hence Goertz terms Muntzer's views as a "theology of revolution". I know very little of both but to me Muntzer's theology almost seems like a proto-Liberation theology. Could be wrong here though. Another interesting thing Goertz asserts is that Muntzer thought the Kingdom of God was immanent to history - that it could be brought about through an erasure of creaturely fear, among with communal living and brotherlihood.
Goertz synthesizes the two common interpretations of Muntzer: the Marxist view and the Church-history view (the former, that he was a "figure who reflected the progressive social transformation [from feudalism to capitalism], certainly not completely, but fundamentally all the same." The latter tend to emphasize Muntzer's subjectivity, namely his pretensions of being seized by the divine spirit. As Goertz puts it: "one group orientates its interpretation towards what Muntzer wanted to think and do; and the other towards what he was obliged to think and do."]. He does this by emphasizing an interconnection between Muntzer's theory and practice (or interiority/exteriority, objectivity/subjectivity). I would not say this is a "middle path", but perhaps it is!
Overall, Goertz seems sympathetic to Muntzer and Luther is generally portrayed negatively (though not exclusively so). Goertz also does a really good job of making the book understandable to someone who really has no knowledge of the era. Names of areas and people are thrown up, but their importance are often explained. I would recommend at least a cursory knowledge of feudalism as certain feudalist terms are used but not explained (e.g. seignorial) but this is rather rare and does not make the text inscrutable.
This seems like a pretty niche subject, but I would recommend this book to anyone interested in pre-Marxist revolutionaries.
September 10, 2021
This work is a balanced blend of biography and historiography, and Goertz doesn't tarry much over the times surrounding Müntzer's life (i.e. there isn't much context for Müntzer's world nor the mystical tradition he embodied). In respects to biography, Goertz brings together what various primary and secondary sources have to say about Müntzer, his ideas, his travels, and his whereabouts. In the second, Goertz takes the time to reference most - if not all - contemporary (read: 20th century) works directly concerning Müntzer and paints a portrait of a nuanced, complicated figure. Much of the historiography concerning this "apocalyptic mystic" is in German, so this work is really a peek behind the curtain of contemporary German scholarship in regards to a very specialized subject.
And it is just that scholarship that Goertz is writing in response to, specifically the tendency of historians to interpret Müntzer as either motivated by religion (church historians) or social suffering (the common Marxist interpretation). What Goertz argues is that both of these interpretations are right and that what is needed is a more holistic treatment of Müntzer as a religiously-focused preacher who saw overturning the social and political order as necessary for humanity (specifically the peasantry or, as he phrased it, "the common man"). As Müntzer viewed it, the only way the people could get right with the Lord was if they lived in a world that allowed them to do so. The end of the Middle Ages was not such a world and Müntzer saw his role as a corrector, one who could help bring about a new Eden so that everyone (there would be no peasantry, clerics, nor royalty in this new order) would live and worship together in brotherly love.
Where the rubber failed to meet the road, at least in practice, was that the revolution Müntzer took part in was definitively crushed at the Battle of Frankenhausen in 1525; crushed by German princes egged on by Martin Luther. Despite both being reformers, Luther was far more conservative and in allegiance with the "big-wigs" (as Müntzer himself phrased it), whereas Müntzer saw the nobility as inefficient tools of earthly government who had failed to do their due diligence in ruling and were therefore no longer needed.
Unfortunately for Müntzer and, in some small way, for us the mystic himself never had the time nor inclination to set down how he saw a post-revolutionary world operating beyond a simple communalism (this is, again, where Marxist historians have looked at Müntzer as a prototype to political orders that would come later). Goertz himeself, at the end of this monograph, writes that: "Müntzer's theology was a theology of revolution; it was not a theology for the time thereafter."
A brilliant book with lots to offer. I would recommend a reader have some preexisting knowledge or at least an interest in the Reformation and world of the early 16th century. That said, Goertz's prose is readable and engaging and the English translation is very well done. I suspect there was even some localization done to make certain turns-of-phrase make sense to contemporary readers (Müntzer was writing in the early 1500's). I enjoyed this book a great deal and walked away knowing more than I did before; what more can you ask for?
As an addendum, I would recommend reading the later chapters of Norman Cohn's The Pursuit of the Millenium: Revolutionary Millenarians and Mystical Anarchists of the Middle Ages which does a fabulous job of placing Müntzer in context of a long, long Christian Millenarian tradition as well as providing additional context to the Peasants' War, in which Müntzer ultimately took part.
And it is just that scholarship that Goertz is writing in response to, specifically the tendency of historians to interpret Müntzer as either motivated by religion (church historians) or social suffering (the common Marxist interpretation). What Goertz argues is that both of these interpretations are right and that what is needed is a more holistic treatment of Müntzer as a religiously-focused preacher who saw overturning the social and political order as necessary for humanity (specifically the peasantry or, as he phrased it, "the common man"). As Müntzer viewed it, the only way the people could get right with the Lord was if they lived in a world that allowed them to do so. The end of the Middle Ages was not such a world and Müntzer saw his role as a corrector, one who could help bring about a new Eden so that everyone (there would be no peasantry, clerics, nor royalty in this new order) would live and worship together in brotherly love.
Where the rubber failed to meet the road, at least in practice, was that the revolution Müntzer took part in was definitively crushed at the Battle of Frankenhausen in 1525; crushed by German princes egged on by Martin Luther. Despite both being reformers, Luther was far more conservative and in allegiance with the "big-wigs" (as Müntzer himself phrased it), whereas Müntzer saw the nobility as inefficient tools of earthly government who had failed to do their due diligence in ruling and were therefore no longer needed.
Unfortunately for Müntzer and, in some small way, for us the mystic himself never had the time nor inclination to set down how he saw a post-revolutionary world operating beyond a simple communalism (this is, again, where Marxist historians have looked at Müntzer as a prototype to political orders that would come later). Goertz himeself, at the end of this monograph, writes that: "Müntzer's theology was a theology of revolution; it was not a theology for the time thereafter."
A brilliant book with lots to offer. I would recommend a reader have some preexisting knowledge or at least an interest in the Reformation and world of the early 16th century. That said, Goertz's prose is readable and engaging and the English translation is very well done. I suspect there was even some localization done to make certain turns-of-phrase make sense to contemporary readers (Müntzer was writing in the early 1500's). I enjoyed this book a great deal and walked away knowing more than I did before; what more can you ask for?
As an addendum, I would recommend reading the later chapters of Norman Cohn's The Pursuit of the Millenium: Revolutionary Millenarians and Mystical Anarchists of the Middle Ages which does a fabulous job of placing Müntzer in context of a long, long Christian Millenarian tradition as well as providing additional context to the Peasants' War, in which Müntzer ultimately took part.
December 29, 2020
The author states up front that there is not enough reliable information about Muntzer to get a clear picture of who he was. That makes it possible for scholars to paint an array of different versions of his identity.
The author’s portrait may be as good as any previous, but ultimately it is still a bit of an educated guess. I prefer bios that are more narrative and less interpretive.
The author’s portrait may be as good as any previous, but ultimately it is still a bit of an educated guess. I prefer bios that are more narrative and less interpretive.
April 25, 2024
Basic biography of Muntzer. Little about his early years (though little is known). Could have had more on his capture and execution.
Displaying 1 - 4 of 4 reviews