The first, failed attempt of the FBI to take the compound led to a fifty-one-day standoff with the FBI; a recent study suggests that “Koresh and his subleaders may well have wished to find a peaceful solution to the confrontation. However, the shoot-out with the FBI had no doubt enhanced the salience and immediacy of Koresh’s … apocalyptic vision. He may well have been inhibited” from surrendering “in part because his prophetic vision would be compromised if the dramatic confrontation ended ‘not with a bang but with a whimper.’ By definition an apocalypse does not peter out!” (Emphasis in original.)
The final attack by the government, with armored vehicles, tear gas, and heavy weapons, resulted in the deaths of Koresh and seventy-five other men, women, and children; the causes of death include, primarily, the terrible fire that followed the attack, but how the fires began was never determined. A continuing and major point of controversy turns around how many people died as a result of government action, and how many might have killed themselves or been murdered by Koresh and other followers.
The dissimilarities between Münster and Waco are obvious. A ranch with a few hundred people is not a city with nine thousand; the Texas group was more or less complete in itself, without large numbers of like-minded sympathizers spread around the continent; there was never any threat that Koresh and his group would cause a national disturbance; their relative power vis-à-vis the government’s was so tiny that they could have been obliterated at any moment that the government chose; religious intolerance on the part of the government was not seen by anybody but Koresh’s group as a reasonable charge against it. But most important is the simple fact that Koresh and his followers did not face certain death if they surrendered, as Jan most surely did.
That said, the similarities are still striking. In addition to the public drama of a prolonged standoff, we have both parties refusing to negotiate for anything other than total surrender, extensive dithering on the part of the government paralleled with increased isolation of the besieged, a final resolution that was marked by unnecessary brutality, and the deaths of many innocent people who had taken the wrong path, following the wrong man. The chief rebels, Jan van Leyden and Vernon Howell, were both self-created young men who changed their identities; both saw themselves in the form of the biblical David; both usurped the authority of the previous prophet; both lacked formal education but had a thorough knowledge of the Bible and complete recall of it; both were talented performers with a marked artistic bent; both took more wives than the law, religious or secular, allowed; both were cunning, unscrupulous, and, in Jan’s case at least, murderous; and both were capable of inspiring great affection despite all that was known to be reprehensible about them.
One question remains. Why are we interested in such characters and events? After all, the Anabaptist Kingdom in Münster is far less important than the Peasants’ Revolt or the Siege of Vienna, just as dozens of more important events than Waco were happening in 1993. Is the appeal simply that it is perversely entertaining to imagine Thornton Wilder’s idyllic Our Town turning into a hellhole, as in Shirley Jackson’s “The Lottery”? Is it merely modish paranoia combined with popular entertainment, as in The X Files? Is it a deep sense of social malaise, of a world without purpose, design, or moral foundation? Or is the appeal, despite repeated warnings that we don’t learn anything from history, to learn to recognize dangerous characters and ideas so that we can avoid repeating our mistakes?
All of these, perhaps. Or maybe, less ambitiously, these are all fascinating stories with characters and ideas that move us to a response. The story of the Anabaptists in Münster, the original apocalyptic horror story, is inherently dramatic—indeed, melodramatic in the tradition of Grand Guignol, Kurosawa’s Ran, and three or four of Shakespeare’s tragedies. But what, finally, to return to the question posed above, does it mean? Here are a few concluding speculations.
What it means, in the larger sense, is that Virginia Woolf was wrong when she said human nature changed in the early twentieth century. The people in Münster were recognizably like those of today—not only like those in Rancho Bernardo or Waco but like all of us, no matter how strongly we resist that idea. Who can deny, after considering human behavior past and present, the pervasive appeal of the irrational, of the desire, if only in fantasy, to wield total power over others, of furious resentment at mistreatment and resulting revenge fantasies? Who among us can read about the courage of those who defied Jan and died, or about the shifting allegiances and accommodations of those who did not, without wondering how we would have behaved? And who doubts that many people today around the world still have to make similar choices?
It means, then, that this story is not just a historical anecdote about a group of peculiar north Germans and Hollanders in the late Middle Ages but about people who may be seen as universal archetypes of heroism, villainy, aspiration, and defeat. Their own archetypes were drawn from the Bible—Hille Feyken as Judith, Jan as King David, Jan Matthias as Enoch. The modern reader, often more familiar with literary than with biblical models, may see King Lear in Knipperdolling, Iago combined with Macbeth in Jan of Leyden, and Don Quixote in Jan Matthias.
It means, finally, that there are recognizable patterns of human and social experience, many of them dismaying. Like the Nazis, the Anabaptists destroyed competing icons of worship in the churches and burned books in the public square. Like the Serbs in Sarajevo before the war in Bosnia, they dismantled a shaky though functional ecumenical community in Münster and drove the unbelievers from the city. Like the disciples of David Koresh and Jim Jones, they followed a charismatic leader to their doom.
And like all of these disparate forces of anarchy and destruction, Jan van Leyden and his Company of Christ shook the foundations of their world. What makes them worth remembering is that they were the precursors and to some degree the progenitors of the political and religious violence that have become so much a part of our world today.
NOTES FOR THE ILLUSTRATIONS
Illustrations begin in Chapter 7
ANABAPTISTS BATHING. Copper engraving by Virgil Solis (1514–1562) after Heinrich Aldegrever. Mid-sixteenth century. Courtesy Westfälisches Landesmuseum für Kunst und Kulturgeschichte, Münster.
FRANZ VON WALDECK. Unsigned and undated oil painting, probably mid-seventeenth century. Münster Catalog #4. Courtesy Land Niedersachsen, Polizeiausbildungstätte, Bad Iburg.
KING JAN. Copper etched portrait by Heinrich Aldegrever, 1536. Courtesy Stadtmuseum Münster. Authorities differ as to whether Aldegrever’s celebrated portrait of Jan van Leyden was begun as a crayon sketch during the last months of the young king’s reign or initiated after his capture, at the command of the Prince-Bishop. We know that the artist’s father was arrested and tortured in a nearby city in 1522 for protesting the execution of some religious dissidents, and that the artist was sympathetic to the Anabaptists’ cause. Certainly the richly detailed symbolism of Jan’s kingly regalia and his look of dignified determination convey a more favorable image than his deeds would justify.
THE SIEGE OF MÜNSTER, 1534. Woodcut by Erhard Schoen, 1535. Catalog #149. Courtesy Stadtmuseum Münster; on loan from a private source.
BERNARD KNIPPERDOLLING. Portrait by Heinrich Aldegrever. Catalog #122. Courtesy Stadtmuseum Münster. In Das Graphische Werk Heinrich Aldegrevers: Ein Beitrag zu seinem Stil im Rahmen der Deutschen Stilentwicklung (The Graphic Work of Heinrich Aldegrever: A Contribution to His Style in the Context of German Stylistic Development; Heitz: Strassburg, 1933), the German art critic Herbert Zschelletzschky offers instructive comments on the painting: “The coat of arms, in the upper right corner of the engraving, describes a knotty, muscular fist holding the sword of judgment, surrounded by a laurel wreath. Note also the brilliantly opposed black and white stripes of the coat and the elaborately worked collar, contrasted with the bland background into which the head emerges, comparatively small, but one that deeply impresses the observer with its suggestion of energy and movement. There is a pier
cing sensation, a sense of looking into the distance, and a certain suggestion of uneasy tension. More than in the coolly detailed and reserved, unapproachable majesty of Jan’s picture is it possible with Knipperdolling’s, behind the stiff mien with the arched eyebrows, to read the character of this remarkable man, of … his head full of strange thoughts and impulses, a man noble in appearance, respected by the common man for his conduct, and his wise counsel in practical affairs, dignified and commanding, inclined to reject authority over him with courage, in quieter times certainly a man who could lead other men in powerful ways … .”
KNIPPERDOLLING CAPERING BEFORE KING JAN. An illustration by the Dutch artist Lambertus Hortensius, Amsterdam, 1694. Catalog #193A. Courtesy Stadtmuseum Münster.
THE MOLLENHECK REBELLION. Unsigned and undated illustration, early eighteenth century. Catalog #105. Libri picturait A 96, Bl. 45. Courtesy Staatsbibliothek Preußicher Kulturbesitz, Berlin.
KING JAN EXECUTES ELIZABETH WANDSCHEER and THE KING AND HIS OTHER WIVES CELEBRATE THE DEATH. Both illustrations by Lambertus Hortensius. Catalog #192, B and C. Courtesy Stadtmuseum Münster.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
I am pleasantly indebted to Rosemary Zahn and Susanne Fröhnel for their advice on the use of German names and grammar; to Alasdair Heron for his wise counsel concerning the Reformation; and to Barbara Kelly for her sensitive editorial suggestions on style. I am also grateful to Karl-Heinz Kirchhoff for personally sharing some of his vast knowledge of the Anabaptists with me during my visit to Münster. Finally, thanks again to my wife, Carolyn, for her patience and her good humor.
Also by Anthony Arthur
Deliverance at Los Banos
Bushmasters
CAST OF CHARACTERS
This partial list of names is limited to those who appear more than once in The Tailor-King. The more important names are in bold type.
Melchior von Buren. Owner of the residence in Münster that King Jan makes his palace; one of the Bishop’s military staff.
Charles V. Holy Roman Emperor, concerned with unrest caused by the Anabaptists in Germany, orders their ruthless suppression.
Antonius Corvinus. Catholic priest who interrogates Jan, describes his character and his death.
Ulrich von Dhaun. Commander in chief of the Bishop’s forces.
Divara. Formerly a Carmelite nun, then wife of Jan Matthias, finally wife and queen of King Jan.
Johann Dusentschur. Lame goldsmith from nearby Warendorf, who crowns Jan van Leyden as king of Münster.
Hille Feyken. Fifteen-year-old Dutch girl who tries to re-enact the biblical story of Judith and Holofernes.
Dietrich Fabricius. Lutheran clergyman, formerly an associate of the Anabaptists.
Henry Graes. Anabaptist schoolmaster who is captured by the Bishop but is reportedly saved from death by an angel.
Henry Gresbeck. Young carpenter who returns to Münster to protect his mother, instrumental in King Jan’s defeat; later writes a useful account of his adventures.
Jaspar Jodefeld. Lutheran co-mayor, with Herman Tilbeck, who opposes the Anabaptists take-over.
Herman Kerssenbrück. Young Latin scholar who witnesses the initial troubles in Münster and later writes the fullest contemporary account of the Anabaptist Kingdom.
Bernard Knipperdolling. Prominent local businessman who becomes Jan van Leyden’s father-in-law and his chief executioner.
Bernard Krechting. King Jan’s chief of staff who is with him until the end.
Henry Krechting. Brother of Bernard, King Jan’s chancellor, formerly a soldier, who survives into a serene old age.
Jan van Leyden. (Jan Bockelson). Handsome young tailor’s apprentice, playwright, and adventurer who becomes king of Münster.
Martin Luther. Father of the Reformation, stern opponent of the Anabaptists.
Jan Matthias. Aging Dutch baker turned Anabaptist apostle who initiates the terror in Münster.
Philip Melanchthon. German Lutheran, humanist scholar, and associate of Luther who wrote in opposition to the Anabaptists.
Dirk von Merveldt. Bailiff of the Cathedral in Münster.
Ida von Merveldt. Abbess of the Cathedral in Münster (not related to Dirk).
Henry Mollenheck. Important guild leader who organizes the only serious opposition to Jan van Leyden.
Gert von Münster. An officer in the Bishop’s army who defects to the Anabaptists.
Johann Nagel. A professional soldier for the Bishop, nicknamed Hansel Eck, or little Hans in the corner, who joins the rebel Anabaptists and is instrumental in their defeat.
Philip, Landgraf (Count) of Hesse. Influential neighbor and friend of Franz von Waldeck, a moderate Lutheran who works for peace.
Bernard Rothmann. Brilliant Anabaptist preacher and rhetorician, the party intellectual and propagandist.
Herbert Rusher. A blacksmith whose early opposition to the Anabaptists causes him to become their first victim.
Wilhelm Steding. A Prussian nobleman who leads the successful final assault on the Anabaptists.
Herman Tilbeck. Co-mayor with Jaspar Jodefeld before the take-over and a secret Anabaptist who betrays his city.
Franz von Waldeck. Prince-Bishop of Münster, forced into an expensive sixteen-month-long siege by the stubborn Anabaptists.
Elizabeth Wandscheer. King Jan’s favorite wife, after Divara, who challenges his inhumanity at great cost.
Gerlach von Wullen. A nobleman and soldier who joins King Jan’s cause.
Friedrich von Wyck. A Lutheran Bremen attorney. Hired by the moderates in Münster to negotiate between the Bishop and the radicals, he angers both.
CHRONOLOGY
805 Bishopric of Münster founded.
1517 Martin Luther initiates Protestant Reformation in Wittenberg.
1523 Anabaptism defined and formulated by Swiss reformer Conrad Grebel.
1524–1525 Peasants’ Revolt against Church and state throughout Germany leads to mass destruction and death.
1525 Münster wins independence from Church and degree of self-rule, government by council and mayor.
1527 Rome sacked and destroyed by armies of Charles V.
1529 Emperor Charles V orders wholesale extermination of “every anabaptist and rebaptized man and woman of the age of reason.”
1531 Former Münster priest Bernard Rothmann becomes radical Lutheran, destroys “idols” in his former church, Saint Mauritz.
1532 February Prominent citizens meet to organize resistance to the Bishop; mob attacks Catholic churches.
March New Prince-Bishop, Franz von Waldeck, assumes post. City limits Catholic freedom of worship and assembly.
May Bishop imprisons local businessmen traveling to Lübeck.
December Anabaptists raid Bishop’s residence, capture hostages.
1533 February Truce results in exchange of prisoners, guar antees of city independence, declarations of loyalty to Bishop.
March Anabaptists force election of new, more radical council that nullifies treaty.
June Melchior Hoffmann, peaceful Anabaptist leader, imprisoned in Strasbourg; Jan Matthias, Dutch convert, as sumes leadership of radical sect advocating violent rebel lion.
June–September Influx of foreigners destabilizes Mün ster.
October Mass conversions and re-baptisms begin.
November 4 Remaining council moderates try to evict Bernard Rothmann, now declared Anabaptist; armed standoff between Lutherans and Anabaptists follows. Mod erate Lutheran Philip of Hesse brokers truce.
1534 January 4 Philip’s emissary Fabricius taunted and humiliated when he opposes Rothmann publicly; Bishop later demands Rothmann’s expulsion.
Mid–January Jan Bockelson arrives from Leyden, Hol land, to coordinate Anabaptist activities in Münster.
February 8-10 Anabaptists fear sell-out by Lutherans to Bishop, attack City Hall; moderates retreat to stone-walled church. First armed conflict between groups.
ca February 12 Arrival of Anabaptist Prophet Jan Mat thias; ne
w council entirely consisting of Anabaptists formed.
February 27 Catholics and moderate Lutherans driven from the city.
February 28 Bishop initiates blockade.
Mid-March City prepares for Bishop’s attack; Matthias confiscates private property and wealth; Münster blacksmith murdered by Jan van Leyden for resisting.
March 27 Dutch supporters coming to Münster intercepted in Holland.
April 5, Easter Sunday Jan Matthias singly challenges Bishop’s army, is killed; Jan van Leyden assumes leadership.
April 9 Church towers and steeples destroyed, remains used to shore up city walls.
ca April 10–12 Jan disbands council; twelve Elders now to rule, as in ancient Zion, with him at the head. Opponents are imprisoned or executed.
May 25 Bishop’s attack fails; Jan’s dominance strengthened.
Mid–June Dutch girl, Hille Feyken, leaves city on mission to assassinate Bishop Franz.
Mid–July Jan van Leyden forces Elders to decree polygamy both legal and desirable, takes Matthias’s widow and ultimately fifteen other women for himself.
July 30 Rebellion prompted by resistance to polygamy crushed; scores are executed.
August 28 Bishop’s second attack repulsed; he begins construction of impenetrable cordon, intends to starve city into submission.
ca. September 1 Jan becomes King, establishes court; remaining opposition punished by death, including two women beheaded for opposing polygamy.
October 23 Teams of apostles sent to neighboring cities to gather support; most are captured and executed.
November 2 Bishop’s emissary allowed to visit city, reports Jan and followers determined to resist; Bishop continues to tighten siege.
The Tailor-King Page 24
