Last updated 09/07/24: Online ordering is currently unavailable due to technical issues. We apologise for any delays responding to customers while we resolve this. For further updates please visit our website: https://www.cambridge.org/news-and-insights/technical-incident
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 28 July 2009
Four hundred years have passed since the bells rang out in Germany to announce the Peace of Augsburg. Each century since, historians have piously performed their antiquarian rites in its honor. It was, to be sure, the most important Diet between that of Worms in 1521, when Luther stood alone, and the outbreak of the Thirty Years War which involved many nations. The oratorical monuments erected faithfully on these centennials have generally emphasized the great gain of Protestantism in legal recognition, the assurance, by God's grace, of the freedom of the church, and the honest good of peaceful coexistence. But a sober analysis produces an effect rather more astringent than exhilarating and medicinal than intoxicating.
1. Kahnis, C. F. A., Vindiciae Pads Religionis Augustanae (Leipzig, 1855)Google Scholar, thought the Peace to be a thing in ejus memoria pie celebranda, p. 36Google Scholar, stressing the contribution of the princes to the Reformation and the essentially political nature of the Peace, designed in the first instance to preserve order. Böttger, Gustav, Die Jubelfeier des Augsburger Religionsfriedens in den Jahren 1655 und 1755 im Churfürstenthum Sachsen, 'besonders in Dresden, nebst kirchengeschichtlichen Erläuterungen (Dresden, 1855)Google Scholar, describes the festivities of that peace which assured the Lutheran Church “ihre rechtliche Anerkennung und die ungestörte, freie Uebung ihres Gottesdienstes. “Many other Festschriften, while recognizing that the peace was only a truce, join the chorus emphasizing its great importance to Protestantism. The following are examples selected from a large number of such commemorative volumes celebrating the Peace: Der Augsburger Religionsfriede vom 85. September 1555, der Grundpfeiler der Freiheit und Sicherheit der evangelischen Kirche in Deutschland, nach seinen, Ursachen und Folgen zur belehrenden und erbauenden Vorbereitung auf dessen 300 jährige Jubelfeier 1855. (Leipzig, 1855)Google Scholar; Der Augsburger Religionsfrieden vom 25. September 1555 zur Erinnerung an den 35. September 1855 (Berlin, 1855)Google Scholar; Der Augsburger Religionsfriede vom 25. September 1555. Geschichtlicher Ueberblick im Auftrage des Königlicher Consistoriums zu Hannover… (Hannover, 1855)Google Scholar; Der Augsburgische Religionsfrieden vom Jahre 1555, zu dessen dreihundertjährigem Gedächtnisse (Strassburg, 1855)Google Scholar. These references were supplied on microfilm through the courtesy of the British Museum. This paper was read at a meeting of the American Historical Association in Washington, D. C., December 29, 1955, before a joint session of the American Society for Reformation Research and the American Society of Church History. I wish to thank Dr. Felix Gilbert and Dr. Charles Mullett for a number of valuable suggestions.
2. Spieker, Christian W., Geschichte des Augsburger Religionsfriedens vom 26. September 1555 (Schleiz, 1854)Google Scholar, is typical of the former approach. He wrote, p. x: “Man sagte sich gegenseitig viel Böses und kämpfte von beiden Seiten mit Einheit, Consequenz und Energie.” Perhaps even such an incidental factor as the availability of the basic documents in Lehmann, Christoph, De Pace Religionis Acta Publica et Originalia (1631 and 1707)Google Scholar, may have contributed to the emphasis on the imperial role in the Peace, since the sources of the territorial archives were not generally available.
3. Barraclough, Geoffrey, Medieval Germany, 2 vols. (Oxford, 1948)Google Scholar, discusses this historiographical development with selections from German scholars designed to illustrate the change. Barraclough, 's The Origins of Modern Germany (Oxford, 1949)Google Scholar, attempts a new analysis, but is not adequate for the 16th century. The old picture of Giesebrecht, Bryce, et alii, has been superseded by that of H. Mitteis and Percy Schramm. Cf., e.g., von below, G., Der deutsche Staat des Mittclalters, I (Leipzig, 1914)Google ScholarSpangenberg, H., “Landesherrliche Verwaltung, Feudalismus und Ständetum in den deutschen Territorien des 13. bis. 15. Jahrhunderts,” Historische Zeitschrift, CIII (1909)Google Scholar; Vom Lehnstaat zum Ständestaat (1912)Google Scholar; Wapfner, H., “Landeshoheit und landesherrliche Verwaltung in Brandenburg und Oesterreich,” Mitteilungen des Instituts für österreichische Geschichtswissenschaft, XXXII (1911), etc.Google Scholar
4. The classic essay on the proprietary church is Stutz, Ulrich, Die Eigenkirche als Element des mittelalterlichgermanischen Kirchenrechtes (Berlin, 1895)Google Scholar. Cf. Werminghoff, A., Verfassungsgeschichte der deutschen Kirche im Mittelalter (Leipzig, 1913), pp. 87ff.Google Scholar; Kaser, Kurt, “Die landeskirchlichen Bestrebungen der weltlichen Reichsfürsten,” Deutsche Geschichte im Ausgange des Mittelalters, II (Stuttgart, 1912), pp. 259ffGoogle Scholar; Hintze, Otto, “Die Epochen des evangelischen Kirchenregiments in Preuszen,” Geist und Epochen der Preussischen Geschichte; Gesammelte Abhandlungen, III (Leipzig, 1943), pp. 64ffGoogle Scholar: “Die Idee der Landeskirche und des landesherrlichen Kirchenregiments stammt nicht erst aus der Reformation, in. Brandenburg so wenig wie in anderen Territorien des Reiches. Sie tritt schon im 15. Jahrhundert hervor, als eine Folgeerscheinung einerseits des Verfalls der römischen Hierarchie und andererseits des Erstarkens der landesfürstlichen Gewalten, die damals begannen, ihre Territorien zu förmlichen kleinen Staatenbildungen zusammenzuschlieszen.” The decisive act in Brandenburg was taken in 1447.
5. The best monograph by far is still Wolf, Gustav, Der Augsburger Religionsfriede (Stuttgart, 1890)Google Scholar, based on an adequate use of the archival sources, cited pp. ix–xii. Spieker, C. W., op. cit., p. xxiiiGoogle Scholar, names the older historians as Sleidan, Hortleder, Seckendorf, and others who chronicled the Diet. Ritter, Moriz, “Der Augsburger Religionsfriede 1555,” Historisches Taschenbuch, VI, 1 (1882), pp. 217f., 216ffGoogle Scholar., discusses the older sources published by Buchholtz, Lanz, Maurenbrecher, Ranke, in addition to which he examined especially the proceedings of the electoral and prince council. von Druffel, August, Beiträge zur Reichsgeschichte 1553–1555, IV, Briefe und Akten sur Geschichte des Sechszehnten Jahrhunderts (Munich, 1896)Google Scholar, enlarged by Karl Brandi, is the major source publication, but it is unfortunately inadequate in several ways. Many of the documents have been cut too drastically and the sources on the territorial level are inadequately represented. This volume is hereafter referred to as Druffel, IV, with the number of the document and page number following.
6. Deutsche Reichstagsakten, Jungere Reihe, II, pp. 594ffGoogle Scholar., cited in Holborn, Hajo, Ulrich von Hutten and the German Reformation (New Haven, 1937), p. 164.Google Scholar
7. Brandi, Karl, “Der Weltreichsgedanke Karls V,” Europäische Revue, XVI (1940), pp. 271ffGoogle Scholar., emphasizes the ambitions of Charles for world empire rather than merely the Spanish or Holy Roman Empire. Brandi's magnificent work, Kaiser Karl V. Werden und Schicksal einer Persönlichkeit und eines Weltreiches together with the volume of sources (Munich, 1941)Google Scholar, is the definitive interpretation. Rassow, Peter, Die Kaiser-Idee Karls V. dargestellt an der Politik der Jahre 1528–1540 (Berlin, 1932)Google Scholar, undertook to demonstrate how Charles sought to actualize his imperial ideal in the world of real politics.
8. Hartung, Fritz, Karl V. und die deutschen Reichstände von 1546 bis 1555 (Halle a. S., 1910), pp. 5ffGoogle Scholar., an excellent discussion of Charles' attempts at imperial reform, pp. 25ff.; the Treaty of Passau, pp. 85ff.; the Heidelberg League, pp. 115ff. He demonstrates the predominance of political interests also in earlier years. Ernst, Viktor, Briefwechsel des Hersogs Christoph von Wirtemberg, II (Stuttgart, 1900), p. ivGoogle Scholar, warns against the common assumption that 1555 was merely the continuation of the achievements of 1552 without giving due weight to the developments of the two years intervening, such as the birth of the Counter-Reformation in 1554. Druffel, IV, no. 649, p. 695, On July 7 Charles in a letter to Ferdinand renewed his rejection of all cooperation in the religious peace.
9. Ritter, M., op. cit., pp. 220fGoogle Scholar. von Bucholtz, Franz Bernhard, Geschichte der Regierung Ferdinand des Ersten, 9 vols. (Vienna, 1831–1838)Google Scholar, is still a rich mine of information for the period.
10. Steiger, Hugo, Geschichte der Stadt Augsburg (Munich, 1941), p. 145Google Scholar, presents an uncomplimentary sketch of Otto's obdurateness.
11. Wimmer, Friedrich, Die religiösen Zustände in Bayern um die Mitte des sechzehnten Jahrhunderts (Munich, 1845)Google Scholar, applauds the Bavarian dukes for their role in damming the Reformation flood.
12. On the internal development of the Saxon territorial government, cf. Goerlitz, Waldemar, Staat und Stände unter den Herzögen Albrecht und Georg 1485–1539 (Leipzig, 1928)Google Scholar; Voigt, Georg, Moritz von Sachsen 1541–1547 (Leipzig, 1876)Google Scholar; Baumgarten, Hans, Moritz von Sachsen der Gegenspieler Karls V (Berlin, 1941)Google Scholar, popular, adding nothing new; Kötzschke, Rudolf, “Die Landesverwaltungsreform im Kurstaat Sachsen unter Kurfürst Moritz 1547–48,” Zeitschrift des Vereins für Thüringische Geschichte N. F., XXXIV (1940), pp. 191ffGoogle Scholar., discussing the effects of foreign affairs on the domestic government; Wolf, G., “Die Anfänge der Regierung des Kurfürsten August” Neues Archiv für sächsische Geschichte, XVII (1896), p. 312Google Scholar, cited in Hartung, Fritz, op. cit., p. 133.Google Scholar
13. Wolf, G., op. cit., p. 22Google Scholar. The excellent monograph of Schwabe, Ludwig, “Kursachsen und die Verhandlungen über den Augsburger Religionsfrieden,” Neues Archiv für Sächsische Geschichte und Altertumskunde, X (1889)Google Scholar, is based on the Dresden Archives and develops this thread in the story very adequately.
14. Hasenclever, Adolf, Die kurpfälzische Politik in den Zeiten des schmalkaldischen Krieges (Heidelberg, 1905), p. 155ffGoogle Scholar., suggests that Frederick was not deeply Protestant in a religious sense, but was rather following his personal and dynastic interests. The growth of Protestantism in the Palatinate has received much scholarly attention. Müller, Walter, Die Stellung der Kurpfale zur lutherischen Bewegung von 1517 bis 1525 (Heidelberg, 1937), p. 123Google Scholar: “Die Sehaukelstellung in der religiösen Frage stimmt im allgemeinen mit der Linie der pfälzischen Politik überein.” See also Lippert, Friedrich, Die Reformation in Kirche, Sitte und Schule der Oberpfalz 1520–1560 (Freiburg im Breisgau, 1897)Google Scholar; Gümbel, Theodor, Die Geschichte der protestantischen Kirche der Pfalz mit besonderer Berücksichtigung der pfälzischen Profangeschichte (Kaiserslautern, 1885)Google Scholar; Götz, Johann, Die religiöse Bewegung in der Oberpfalz von 1580 bis 1560 (Freiburg im Breisgau, 1914)Google Scholar; and Stamer, Ludwig, Kirchengeschichte der Pfale II. Teil (Speyer, 1949).Google Scholar
15. Ottheinrich is still a cultural hero, cf. von Reitzenstein, Alexander, Ottheinrich von der Pfalz (Bremen, 1939)Google Scholar, a popular biography. Salzer, B., Beiträge zu einer Biographie Ottheinrichs (Heidelberg, 1886)Google Scholar, sketches his early life and exile. Lippert, Friedrich, op. cit., p. 43Google Scholar, cites the following doggerel:
“Ottheinrich Pfalzgraf durch Gottes Gnad,
Von des Papstes Gräuel erledigt hat;
Der Kirchen Ruh, des Reichs Wohlfahrt,
Zu fördern er kein Fleisz nit spart.”
16. Lent, Adolf, Der Augsburger Reichstag von 1555 und das Haus Brandenburg (Berlin, 1884)Google Scholar, a Leipzig dissertation, is brief and inadequate in its archival source references. He concludes, p. 43, that the Peace helped the rise of Brandenburg-Prussia appreciably. Meyer, Hannah, “Die Reformation in der Mark Brandenburg zum vierhundertjährigen Gedächtnis ihrer Einführung,” Zeitwende (12, 1939), pp. 84ffGoogle Scholar., commemorates the four hundredth anniversary of the celebration by Joachim II of communion in both kinds. Wolf, G., op. cit., pp. 23ff.Google Scholar
17. Ernst, Viktor, op. cit., III (Stuttgart, 1902), pp. xxix ffGoogle Scholar., xlvi. This excellent edition is a welcome addition to Druffel's Beiträge. For the exchange between Ferdinand and Christoph, Druffel, IV, no. 595, p. 632; no. 640, pp. 688f. Cf. Rauscher, Julius, Württemberg und das Augsburgische Glaubensbekenntnis (Stuttgart, 1930), pp. 11ffGoogle Scholar., Die Zeit Herzog Christofs. Kugler, Bernhard, Christoph, Herzog zu Wirtemberg, 2 vols. (Stuttgart, 1868 and 1872)Google Scholar, still has merit. Wolf, G., op. cit., pp. 27ff.Google Scholar
18. Wolf, G., op. cit., pp. 33fGoogle Scholar. Zimmermann, Ludwig, “Landgraf Philipp von Hessen und der moderne deutsche Staat,” Zeitschrift des Vereins für hessische Geschichte und Landeskunde, LXII (1940), p. 57Google Scholar, asserts that in helping Germany overcome universalism Philipp helped create the national state. In reality, his policy helped aggravate that particularism which retarded German national unity by centuries. Philipp's balance of power concept and defense plans are described in Heidenhain, Arthur, Die Unionspolitik Landgraf Philipps von Hessen 1557–1562 (Halle a. S., 1890).Google Scholar
19. Hartung, Fritz, Deutsche Verfassungsgeschichte vom 15. Jahrhundert bis zur Gegenwart (Leipzig, 1914), pp. 14ff.Google Scholar
20. Schwabe, L., op. cit., p. 221.Google Scholar
21. Druffel, , IV, no. 526, p. 553Google Scholar. Druffel, , IV, no. 558, pp. 584ffGoogle Scholar. The Ernestine Council, too, favored a national council or synod.
22. The absence excuses of the various princes are amusing, cf. Mainz — angustia rei familiaris, illness, the embarrassment of an adverse vote, pessimism, Druffel, , IV, no. 528, p. 556Google Scholar; Saxony—pressing business and health, Druffel, , IV, no. 534, pp. 561fGoogle Scholar.; Cologne—feared injury to his interests in the city in case of prolonged absence as at Trent, Druffel, , IV, no. 536, pp. 562fGoogle Scholar. and no. 546, p. 572; Ferdinand reports to Charles that all the princes invited have excused themselves, Druffel, , IV, no. 539, p. 564.Google Scholar
23. Wolf, G.. op. cit., pp. 7–15.Google Scholar
24. Druffel, , IV, no. 561, pp. 589fGoogle Scholar.; Druffel, , IV, no. 578, p. 613.Google Scholar
25. Druffel, , IV, no. 540, p. 565Google Scholar; Ernst, V., op. cit., III, no. 21, p. 52Google Scholar. Wolfgang cites four lines reflecting his dour view of German church conditions:
Credere plegicolae tantum vult turba Lutheri,
Pontificis solum curia clamat opus;
Deficit interea pietas utrimque fidesqne
Nil faeit ilia boni, nil fugit ista mali.
26. Wolf, G., op. cit., p. 38.Google Scholar
27. Wolf, G., op. cit., pp. 38f., p. 42.Google Scholar
28. Druffel, , IV, no. 544, pp. 569fGoogle Scholar., a typical rumor of further unrest as Christoph reports to Duke Albrecht that the same steps taken against Margrave Albrecht would be demanded. against Duke Heinrich von Braunschweig.
29. Druffel, , IV, no. 563, pp. 591fGoogle Scholar., Sächsische Berichte vom Reichstage, March 7.
30. Schwabe, L., op. cit., p. 237Google Scholar. Wolf, G., op. cit., p. 43.Google Scholar
31. Druffel, , IV, no. 571, pp. 597fGoogle Scholar., Hans von Germar an Kf. August, March 17. Preparatory negotiations, Druffel, , IV, no. 552, pp. 579fGoogle Scholar.; Druffel, , IV, no. 554, p. 580Google Scholar. The Naumburg resolution moved Ferdinand visibly, Druffel, , IV, no. 584, p. 622Google Scholar. Ferdinand forwarded a copy of the Naumburg communication to Charles, Druffiel, , IV, no, 581. p. 618Google Scholar. For Charles' perfectly predictable reaction, cf. Druffel, , IV, no. 607, pp. 649ffGoogle Scholar., especially p. 650, Kaiser Karl an König Ferdinand, April 11. For the opinion of the papal nuntio Delfino, cf. von Ranke, L., Zur deutschen Geschichte, Werke, Bd. VII (3. Auflage), p. 6, note 2.Google Scholar
32. Schwabe, L., op. cit., p. 228Google Scholar. Druffel, IV, no. 531, pp. 559f.Google Scholar
33. Druffel, , IV, no. 549, p. 574Google Scholar. Cf. Druffel, , IV, no. 570, p. 596Google Scholar, the development of the religious peace, March 16. Druffel, , IV, no. 645, p. 692Google Scholar, Kram announces it is time to stage a drive for the peace, June 24, etc.
34. Druffel, , IV, no. 582, p. 620Google Scholar, March 24; Druffel, , IV, no. 658, p. 704, after August 5.Google Scholar
35. Druffel, , IV, no. 580, p. 617Google Scholar, Franz Kram an Kf. August, March 22. Druffel, , IV, no. 603, p. 645Google Scholar, The Saxon councilors report the Palatinate as appearing indifferent to the question of the peace. Druffel, , IV, no. 550, p. 575Google Scholar, the Palatinate noticed that the Passau Treaty spoke of theologians and asked whether August does not think they should send some.
36. Schwabe, L., op. cit., pp. 252f.Google Scholar
37. Druffel, , IV, no. 566, p. 593.Google Scholar
38. Druffel, , IV, no. 584, p. 622Google Scholar. Wolf, G., op. cit., 19Google Scholar. Andreas Veit charges that the Elector made his concessions out of fear of the Protestants, Kirche und Kvrchenreform in der Erzdiözese Mainz im Zeitalter der Glaubensspaltung und der beginnenden tridentinischen Reformation (1517–1618) (Freiburg i. B., 1920), p. 19.Google Scholar
39. Druffel, , IV, no. 573, p. 598Google Scholar; Druffel, , IV, no. 596, pp. 632fGoogle Scholar.; Druffel, , IV, no. 604, pp. 645f.Google Scholar
40. Schwabe, L., op. cit., p. 227Google Scholar. Druffel, , IV, no. 545, p. 571.Google Scholar
41. For details on the proceedings in the Council of Princes and the subsequent cross-consultations, cf. Wolf, G., op. cit., pp. 88ffGoogle Scholar.; Ernst, V., op. cit., III, pp. xxxviiiffGoogle Scholar.; Druffel, , IV, no. 551, pp. 575ffGoogle Scholar., no. 598, pp. 634ff., no. 663, pp. 708ff., etc.
42. Druffel, , IV, no. 569, p. 595, n. 3.Google Scholar
43. Wolf, G., op. cit., pp. 61ffGoogle Scholar. Similarly, as protector of the church the Emperor could not tolerate the diminishing of church properties, Druffel, , IV, no. 641, pp. 689f.Google Scholar
44. Ernst, V., op. cit., III, p. lxi.Google Scholar
45. Druffel, , IV, no. 588, pp. 626f.Google Scholar
46. Schwabe, L., op. cit., pp. 242f. p. 268.Google Scholar
47. Druffel, , IV, no. 615, p. 661Google Scholar. Schwabe, L., op. cit., p. 246.Google Scholar
48. Druffel, , IV, op. cit., no 579, pp. 615fGoogle Scholar.: verba generalia.
49. Ibid., p. 616. Strife with the spiritual estates in his own territory was a reality for Count Palatine Ottheinrich, cf. Druffel, , IV, no. 689, pp. 758fGoogle Scholar. Württemberg's voice was lost on the committee, cf. Druffel, IV, no. 575, pp. 599ffGoogle Scholar. Ernst, V., op. cit., III, no. 50, pp. 107ffGoogle Scholar. Ritter, M., op. cit., pp. 237ff.Google Scholar
50. Schwabe, L., op. cit., p. 256.Google Scholar
51. Ritter, M., op. cit., p. 229Google Scholar. Druffel, , IV, no. 580, p. 617Google Scholar, points two to four of the Palatine's demands on Saxony; Druffel, , IV, no. 567, p. 594Google Scholar: “der undertanen halben hette sein her sonderlich bedenken, das man diselbigen allenthalben frei solt lassen und uf keinen teil nicht zum glauben wider ire conseienz zwingen … Brandenburg betonte so stark die Freistellung für die Unterthanen, dass der Mainzer Kanzler laut protestierte, es sei unmöglich.
52. Lent, A., op. cit., p. 42.Google Scholar
53. Wolf, G., op. cit., pp. 30fGoogle Scholar. Ernst, V., op. cit., III, no. 25, p. 67Google Scholar, Ottheinrich urges toleration for subjects.
54. Ernst, V., op. cit., III, p. xxxiGoogle Scholar; no. 66, p. 158; no. 165, pp. 327ff.; no. 107, p. 244, on the “Freistellung der Geistliehen”, et passim.
55. Druffel, , IV, no. 647, p. 694.Google Scholar
56. Articles 10 and 11 of the peace, the text of the peace, Druffel, , IV, no. 671, pp. 722ff.Google Scholar
57. Druffel, , IV, no. 541, p. 566.Google Scholar
58. Acton, Lord, Lectures on Modern History (London, 1906), p. 123Google Scholar, very cleverly discerned that the Counter-Reformation employed the weapons of toleration supplied by the Peace of Augsburg. His cutting essay “The Protestant Theory of Persecution” is typically “Actonian,” Essays on Freedom and Power (Boston, 1948), pp. 88ffGoogle Scholar. Paulus, N., “Religionsfreiheit und Augsburger Religionsfriede,” Historisch-politische Blätter, CXLIX (1912), pp. 356ffGoogle Scholar., opposes to the statements for tolerance by Brandenburg, the Palatinate, and Württemberg, the efforts of these princes to achieve a Protestant uniformity in their own territories. Lecler, Père Joseph, Histoire de la tolérance au siècle de la Reforme, 2 vols. (Paris: 1955)Google Scholar, is illuminating in representing a well-informed Catholic interpretation.
59. For a brief evaluation of the Peace, see The Cambridge Modern History, III (New York, 1905), pp. 140–144Google Scholar. For a review of some views, cf. Hoyer, Theodore, “The Religious Peace of Augsburg,” Concordia Theological Monthly, XXVI, no. 11 (1955), pp. 820ff.Google Scholar
60. Bornkamm, Heinrich, “Kurfürst Moritz von Sachsen. Zwischen Reformation und Staatsr¨son,” Zeitschrift für deutsche Geisteswissenschaft, I, pp. 398ff.Google Scholar
61. Ernst, V., op. cit., III, no. 175, pp. 340ffGoogle Scholar. For later Protestant meetings, cf. Wolf, G., Zur Geschichte der deutschen Protestanten 1555–1559 (Berlin, 1888).Google Scholar
62. Köhler, K., “Der Augsburger Religionsfriede und die Gegenreformation,” Jahrb¨cher f¨r deutsche Theologie, XXIII (1878), pp. 376ff., pp. 563ffGoogle Scholar. Page 376: “Freilich es war eine Täuschung, wenn man durch den Friedensschlusz einen sicheren Rechtsboden im Sinne principieller Gleichstellung mit der katholischen Kirche errungen zu haben meinte.”
63. Pastor, Ludwig, “Augsburger Religionsfriede,” Kirchenlexikon, Wetzer and Weite, eds., I (1882), cols. 1649–1651.Google Scholar
