Nster, Westpha Essay, Research PaperCharisma and History: The Case of M nster, Westphalia, 1534-1535THE VIOLENT effort by the Melchiorite Anabaptists in 1534/35 to set up the & # 8220 ; New Jerusalem & # 8221 ; in the metropolis of M nster represents one of the most eccentric events of the Reformation. The whole crisis is frequently construed as an utmost outworking of some latent inclinations within Reformation thought. Luther & # 8217 ; s widespread influence had greatly diminished the function of the priest as a go-between between the layperson and God, thereby increasing the importance of the Bible and personal scruples in directing the layperson & # 8217 ; s religious journey. The result of this alteration was that many laypersons gave birth to extremist readings of Bible & # 8212 ; readings which frequently carried unsafe societal and political implications.
1 The prophetic claims of the two chief Prophetss at M nster, Jan Matthys and Jan Bockelszoon new wave Leiden, support this position. Both work forces drew an tremendous sum of prophetic authorization from Bible and wielded it with black societal and political consequences.I intend to look into the agencies by which Matthys and Bockelszoon established their prophetic authorization among the citizens of M nster. I will concentrate specific attending on their leading functions during the disruptive period of 1534 and 1535. However, the narrative given here is besides an effort to right some of the defects of old readings of these two Prophetss. There has been a inclination among bookmans to use Max Weber & # 8217 ; s classs of & # 8220 ; personal appeal & # 8221 ; and the & # 8220 ; routinization of personal appeal & # 8221 ; in order to understand the leading manners of Matthys and Bockelszoon.
The initial leading of Matthys so goes the statement & # 8212 ; reflected a dominant magnetic manner, while Bockelszoon merely represented the routinization or bureaucratization of this personal appeal, which culminated in the oppressive legalism of his messianic reign.2 A closer scrutiny of the existent events at M nster, nevertheless, reveals that such Weberian differentiations are mostly indefensible. The authoritative Weberian degeneration from personal appeal to bureaucratism does non clearly appear in the sequence from Matthys to Bockelszoon. Rather, each prophesier manifested utmost bureaucratic, even autocratic, inclinations & # 8212 ; they merely possibly worsened under Bockelszoon.3Page 49 & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; Attempts to over look this and retain a rigorous Weberian terminological model overvalue the conceptual public-service corporation of personal appeal and overcast historical perceptual experience. By showing Matthys and Bockelszoon without Weberian conceptual support, I aim to foreground the defects of personal appeal as a conceptual class, and therefore name attending to the disadvantages which such theoretical devices, when non judiciously employed, frequently conveying to the subject of history.BACKGROUNDAS RECENT scholarship points out, placing the beginnings of Anabaptism is a notoriously complicated affair.
Previous differences have centered around whether Anabaptism began in Zurich with the induction of trusters & # 8217 ; baptism in January of 1525, or in 1521 and 1522 with Luther & # 8217 ; s confrontation of the Wittenburg groups, whom he labeled Schw rmer ( partisans ) . Recently, the disputed nature of Anabaptism & # 8217 ; s origins has led bookmans, alternatively of seeking to set up a individual minute of beginning, merely to accept a plurality of possible beginnings and to prosecute the complexness of Anabaptism.4 For our intents, I merely mention the spread of Anabaptism throughout Southern Germany and into the Netherlands, a procedure mostly traceable to the fiery revelatory discourses of Melchior Hoffman, who independently initiated grownup baptism in Strasbourg in 1530 and subsequently, after much travelling and sermon, won a followers in the Low Countries.5 It was his strand of Anabaptist religion, characterized by eschatological ardor ( one time encountered by Jan Matthys and subsequently transmitted to Jan Bockelszoon van Leiden ) that laid the rational foundations for the events at M nster.IN 1533, Hoffman & # 8217 ; s eschatological prognostications were perceived as a societal menace by the governments at Strasbourg ( the metropolis he originally had prophesied as the hereafter & # 8220 ; New Jerusalem & # 8221 ; ) and he was imprisoned despite his refusal to use force to accomplish his terminals.
After his imprisonment, his thoughts began to presume an aggressive life of their ain in the Netherlands. Soon after hearing of Hoffman & # 8217 ; s destiny, the Haarlem baker Jan Matthys, in the presence of the Low Country Melchiorites, professed to be driven by the Spirit, and he told how God had revealed to him that he was Enoch, the 2nd informant of the apocalypse ( Hoffman had claimed to be the first informant, Elijah ) . This caused considerable confusion among the Melchiorite Anabaptists in the Low Countries who did non cognize how to react to Matthys & # 8217 ; s sudden claim of prophetic authorization. When Matthys learned of this confusion, harmonizing to the Confession of Obbe Philips, he resorted to menaces and panic ; Philips writes, & # 8220 ; he carried on with much emotion and terrorizing dismay, and with great and despairing expletives cast all into snake pit and toPage 50 & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; the Satans to infinity. . . who would non acknowledge and accept him as the true Enoch.
& # 8221 ; 6 Gradually, nevertheless, he won a little followers of adherents, one of whom was Jan Bockelszoon new wave Leiden, the hereafter male monarch of M nster & # 8217 ; s theocracy. Matthys instantly began directing his adherents out in braces as envoies for Christ. Bockelszoon and a adult male named Gerard Boekbinder were sent to M nster.7 They returned and reported to Matthys that they had found Bernard Rothmann, the taking sermonizer in M nster, openly learning Anabaptist philosophies similar to their ain. The conditions in M nster, Matthys reasoned, seemed to co-occur with Hoffman & # 8217 ; s eschatological hopes for Strasbourg. A major alteration in Melchiorite revelatory thought took topographic point.
The New Jerusalem, Matthys reasoned, would now be M nster. The political and societal clime at that place seemed to corroborate this.8 On January 5, 1534, other envoies from Matthys & # 8217 ; s cantonment entered M nster and began to originate grownup re-baptism. As they had expected, the citizens were receptive to their message.9The initial stairss toward M nster & # 8217 ; s tragic destiny had been taken.
CHARISMA AND THE QUESTION OF LEGITIMATIONWITH THIS light historico-intellectual background bearing upon Matthys and Bockelszoon, we must now turn from our narrative in order to analyze the nature of the sociological readings which these two Prophetss have received.As mentioned before, bookmans have liberally applied the Weberian classs of & # 8220 ; personal appeal & # 8221 ; and the & # 8220 ; routinization of personal appeal & # 8221 ; to both work forces in order to light the agencies by which they established their leading places and transmitted their spiritual thoughts to their followers.10 The construct of personal appeal is of cardinal importance in both Weber & # 8217 ; s doctrine of history and his sociology of rule ( Herrschaftssoziologie ) . In his monumental fragment Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft, personal appeal appears in his three-party division of pure types of legitimate authorization: the traditional, the rational- legal, and the magnetic. Weber defined traditional authorization as order resting on & # 8220 ; an established belief in the holiness of immemorial traditions and the legitimacy of the position of those exerting authorization under them. & # 8221 ; Rational or legal authorization, on the other manus, he defined as & # 8220 ; a belief in the & # 8216 ; legality & # 8217 ; of forms of normative regulations and the right of those elevated to authority under such regulations to publish commands. & # 8221 ; 11 Unlike magnetic authorization, traditional and rational signifiers of authorization ( besides described as patriarchal and bureaucratic ) portion a important characteristic: permanency. In this regard they are both establishments of the day-to-day modus operandi, supplying for the recurrent and normal demands of day-to-day life.
As Weber himself put it, & # 8220 ; The patriarch is the & # 8216 ; natural leader & # 8217 ; of the day-to-day modus operandi. And in this regard, the bureaucraticPagestructure is merely the counter-image of patriarchalism transposed into rationality. & # 8221 ; 12Charisma, on the other manus, represents a radically different signifier of authorization that appears in periods of societal hurt. Unlike traditional and rational authorization, where ultimate power resides in impersonal entities ( i.e.
establishments, fundamental laws, familial lines ) , magnetic authorization appears in the leading features of specific persons, or possibly more accurately, in the dialectical interplay between leaders and their followings. Weber writes, Charisma shall be understood to mention to an extraordinary quality of a individual, irrespective of whether this quality is existent, alleged, or presumed. & # 8220 ; Charismatic authorization, & # 8221 ; hence, shall mention to govern over work forces. . . to which the governed submit because of the belief in the extraordinary quality of the specific individual & # 8230 ; . Charismatic regulation is non managed harmonizing to general norms, either traditional or rational, and in this sense it is & # 8220 ; irrational. & # 8221 ; 13This transition touches on several notable facets of personal appeal.
First, the leader-follower relationship is characterized by a complete personal devotedness. Second, the devotedness of the followings frequently leads to the formation of a magnetic community ( Gemeinde ) in which the followings exist in an emotionally charged environment in which each is committed to the leader. Third, and most significantly, there is the intimation in this transition that reliable personal appeal Acts of the Apostless as a radical force, interrupting societal norms. Elsewhere Weber writes, personal appeal, in its most powerful signifier, disrupts rational regulation every bit good as traditional raw and overturns all impressions of holiness. . . [ it ] is so the specifically originative radical force in history & # 8230 ; .
The carrier of personal appeal enjoys trueness and authorization by virtuousness of a mission believed to be embodied in him: his mission has non needfully and non ever been radical, but in its most magnetic signifiers, it has inverted all value hierarchies and overthrown usage, jurisprudence, and tradition.14The kernel of echt personal appeal is therefore its radical nature. Weber documented assorted historical manifestations of echt personal appeal in such figures as Christ, Mohammed, Joseph Smith, Napoleon, and many others whose personal entreaty someway revolutionized their several societal orders.The construct of personal appeal particularly invites application to spiritual figures. In fact, Weber derived the term from the church historian Rudolf Sohm, who in bend borrowed the thought from St. Paul & # 8217 ; s epistles to the Corinthians, where it had originally meant & # 8220 ; gift of grace.
& # 8221 ; In his Kirchenrecht, Sohm used the term toPage 52 & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; explicate how the early church legitimated itself as a lasting establishment in antiquity.15 While Sohm speaks of personal appeal chiefly from a spiritual point of position, Weber expanded the term to use to a multiplicity of societal contexts, both spiritual and secular. He wanted his construct be value-neutral: to be a magnetic leader is non needfully to be an admirable person. Therefore, one could, with good scruples, use the term to a spiritual figure like Francis of Assisi every bit good as to a secular military leader like Napoleon without diverting from the general spirit of the conceptual framework.16 Furthermore, Weber recognized that his three types of legitimate authorization were & # 8220 ; ideal types, & # 8221 ; that is to state, that nowhere in history did he anticipate to happen a political or spiritual order established strictly on one agencies of authorization entirely.
In possibly all instances, legitimate order is a pudding stone of the three types of authorization complexly related to one another.17Despite the frequent employment of personal appeal throughout his work, Weber devotes more infinite to its routinization than to charisma itself. Routinization refers to the agencies by which a magnetic motion becomes infused with mundane societal establishments. It is besides a procedure of the de-personalization and derevolutionization of echt personal appeal.
Since personal appeal depends on a period of societal hurt in order to boom, its life is needfully ephemeral, because its radical thrust becomes mitigated by the more resilient forces of tradition and rationality.18 As Weber himself put it, As domination congeals into a lasting construction, charisma recedes as a originative force & # 8230 ; . However, personal appeal remains a really of import component of the societal construction, even though it is much transformed. . . after its routinization its really quality as an extraordinary, supernatural, and godly force makes it a suited beginning of legitimate authorization for the replacements of the magnetic hero.19Though personal appeal is superseded by stabilising forces, it still remains within the cloth of the go uping constructions of tradition and/or reason.
It serves these constructions by moving as a point of mention from which they derive legitimation.UNTIL NOW, I have been discoursing personal appeal and its routinization in a wide and theoretical mode. Though Weber mostly speaks in similar footings, he besides pinpoints specific historical personalities and societal state of affairss in order to show the value of his theory, including the illustration of a spiritual prophet.20 Weber believed that magnetic prophesier inspires from the resources of his ain personality & # 8212 ; resources which his followings believe are someway & # 8220 ; in touch & # 8221 ; with a religious or extra-mundane kingdom which confers & # 8220 ; a incorporate position ofPage 53 & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; the universe derived from a consciously integrated meaningful attitude toward life & # 8221 ; 21 upon the individual who accepts the leading of the prophesier. Such a prophesier leads merely because of the compelling features of his nature ; he is able to & # 8220 ; win over & # 8221 ; his followings with the evident pragmatism of his universe position, and oblige them to move accordingly.Of class, the personal appeal of the prophesier is capable to routinization. This takes topographic point, harmonizing to Weber, after the decease of the prophesier when he is succeeded by a & # 8220 ; legislator & # 8221 ; & # 8212 ; one who continues the leading function of the prophesier but does so by commiting or bureaucratizing the magnetic thrust of the former leader.
Incapable of bring forthing the & # 8220 ; crowd-response & # 8221 ; like his magnetic forbear, the legislator entreaties to rational and/or traditional agencies of authorization to prolong the impulse among the followings which the prophesier had inspired. The degeneration in early Christian religion from Christ to Paul is an oft-cited illustration of this procedure, though Weber notes many other illustrations. The process can take many signifiers, runing from a simple codification of the recognized moral behaviour set down by the prophesier to the infliction of inhuman treatment and force. Both signifiers may be seen as attempts to keep a sense of control in the absence of the magnetic leader. Weber does non see this alteration in leading manners as a extremist duality, but frequently as a fluid and inevitable passage. The decease of the prophesier leads to the rise of the legislator. The construction which the latter imposes represents a compensation for the loss of personal appeal in the former.
22SINCE WEBER, the construct of personal appeal has witnessed a perplexing assortment of applications, frequently of a contradictory nature. Because of the perceived maltreatment ( or possibly, overexploitation ) of the construct, one must inquire whether the construct remains serviceable for sociological probe. Weber himself is at least partially to fault for this job, for he often left the term vague, in malice of many efforts to clear up himself. His original opacity is compounded by the fact that such sweeping constructs as personal appeal do non suit harmoniously into the multiparadigmatic character of modern sociology. Scholars who attempt to allow Weber & # 8217 ; s vocabulary frequently end up obfuscating his purpose while bring forthing a revised conceptual model of questionable value. In the concluding analysis, the opacity of Weber & # 8217 ; s original preparation coupled with the diverse character of modern-day sociology has produced a conceptual morass in which, as has been repeatedly argued, footings such as personal appeals have become & # 8220 ; sponge words & # 8221 ; easy employed for multiple and frequently contradictory intents. The inquiry no longer is, What does charisma intend? but, What does it intend for whom and when applied to which fortunes? This province of conceptual lawlessness has led some bookmans to reason for the riddance of its usage inPage 54 & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; sociology.
23But this is an utmost place. Weber & # 8217 ; s canonical position in modern sociology has led many bookmans to endeavour to deliver personal appeal from the information which its applications have generated. A chief scheme has been to subdivide the construct into classs and so to decide the residuary ambiguities with voluminous makings. Since the literature which this endeavor has generated is excessively monolithic to take history of here, I will merely touch on a few developments which charisma has undergone as it specifically relates to prophecy.Robert Tucker & # 8217 ; s survey of Lenin & # 8217 ; s leading manner ( 1968 ) argues that & # 8220 ; prophetic personal appeal & # 8221 ; should be understood as the centrepiece of Weber & # 8217 ; s full work on personal appeal. Tucker makes a crisp differentiation between prophetic personal appeal and routinized personal appeal, and argues that the latter should be given another name, since forces of routinization are wholly contradictory to charisma as he defines it. In a 1977 survey, Margrit Eichler calls for a limited apprehension of personal appeal in which she concludes that the thought of personal appeal is non utile for the survey of societal motions, but instead should be confined merely to understanding the legitimacy of leading. Guenther Roth ( 1975 ) , on the other manus, argues for an enlargement of the conceptual boundaries of personal appeal to embrace the generation and development of a broad scope of societal motions.
He by and large speaks of groups instead than persons as charismatic, and he calls the members of these & # 8220 ; inspired & # 8221 ; groups & # 8220 ; ideological ace & # 8221 ; who espouse individual minded strong beliefs about certain absolute values.24Even from this brief glimpse at efforts to clear up or better upon Weber & # 8217 ; s thought of personal appeal, we can see that the construct is a bit excessively fictile to be practical: efforts at elucidation merely consequence in farther bewilderment. I contend that personal appeal from a macrosociological point of view has entered a province of terrible questionability. The promise of conceptual lucidity which the thought seems to offer has been lost in the manifold attempts to consequence this clarity.This is true in both a macrosociological and mircosociological context: the debatable nature of personal appeal seen in a strictly theoretical context besides appears when it is applied to specific historical scenes. The Weberian interventions of leading during the M nsterite land is an disposed illustration. The societal turbulency at M nster coupled with the presence of self-proclaimed Prophetss makes for an appropriate scene to utilize Weberian constructs. However, as mentioned above, the Weberian reading applies merely by overly fiddling with historical detail.
An illustration of such an enterprise is Otthein Rammstedt & # 8217 ; s 1966 Sekte und soziale Bewegung: Soziologische Analyse der Ta fer in M nster ( 1534/1535 ) . Rammstedt depicts Jan Matthys as a extremist magnetic leader ( charismatischenPage 55 & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; Herrscher ) . The grounds for this, harmonizing to Rammstedt, are based on the fact that Matthys claimed to be straight led by God in his actions. He possessed the gift of dispossession and categorised peoples imply as saintly or ungodly. His actions were sanctioned by his pneuma and could non be controlled, criticized, or subjected to put ordinances or traditions ( Ordnungen oder Traditionen ) , but were dependent entirely on his self-generated disclosures. Finally, the nature of his millenarian outlooks made it possible for his followings to place with him.
25The decease of Matthys merely months after the & # 8220 ; New Jerusalem & # 8221 ; had gotten under manner led to the leading of Jan Bockelszoon van Leiden who, harmonizing to the Weberian strategy, fits the function of a & # 8220 ; legislator. & # 8221 ; Rammstedt claims that Bockelszoon lacked magnetic authorization and could merely set up his legitimacy by autocratic control. Unlike Matthys, whose authorization radiated from magnetic entreaty, Bockelszoon was forced to depend on two of M nster & # 8217 ; s taking functionaries, Rothmann and Knipperdolling, to assist him bolster his place of leading. Though he did vaticinate, his prognostications were unsatisfactory to the M nster folds because they lacked the self-generated and irrational elements characteristic of Matthys & # 8217 ; s visions.
Furthermore, the spontaneousness of Matthys & # 8217 ; s leading manner was replaced by organisation, as seen in Bockelszoon & # 8217 ; s determination to stop Matthys & # 8217 ; s former self-generated group meetings and to establish a system of organized meetings.26Rammstedt & # 8217 ; s main statement for the institutionalization hypothesis is based on the inhuman treatment and panic of Bockelszoon & # 8217 ; s reign. Violence increased when he came to power ; in one instance he summarily executed person, without definite cause, merely to animate apprehension in the people. In amount, to cite Rammstedt, Once self-generated, extraordinary events became ordinary phenomena, became ritualized, and all that remained was fright for one & # 8217 ; s ain life. To continue their power places and to forestall the decomposition of the fold, the opinion minority regulated the life of the Anabaptists completely.27Rammstedt & # 8217 ; s statement has been criticized by Margrit Eichler, who argues that the sequence of the M nsterite Prophetss may be apprehended in a Weberian model merely if that model is modified.
She argues that in certain contexts, a magnetic leader may be succeeded by another magnetic leader as in the instance of Matthys and Bockelszoon. She divides magnetic leaders into two types: Prophetss and Jesuss, and argues that Jesuss ( Bockelszoon ) frequently follow Prophetss ( Matthys ) . The archetypical illustration she gives of this procedure is found in the sequence from John the Baptist to Christ, where the personal appeal arising in the former culminates in the latter. In her strategy, the classicalPage 56 & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; Weberian impression of the routinization of personal appeal does non look and Matthys and Bockelszoon are both depicted as charismatic.28 Rammstedt and Eichler & # 8217 ; s attacks present several jobs.
Granted, Rammstedt & # 8217 ; s & # 8220 ; personal appeal legislator & # 8221 ; degeneration in some respects is truly discernible, and a certain conceptual penetration may be gleaned from Eichler & # 8217 ; s modified attack. However, the paradigmatic nature of both statements outputs penetrations at the disbursal of important historical item. To rectify this job, in the narration of Matthys and Bockelszoon presented below, I have consciously abandoned Weberian concepts in order to propose that both Prophetss operated merely by using use and beastly force to carry through their ends.
This procedure originated with Matthys, who captured and maintained the devotedness of his followings non by magnetic personal authorization, but by the fright and apprehension which he inspired. Bockelszoon & # 8217 ; s regulation by bullying and his Old Testament monarchy therefore represents merely the natural outworking of autocratic inclinations already embodied in Matthys. Again, it is my contention that, though the Weberian attack does offer a hermeneutic for understanding this historical state of affairs, it is non without its restrictions. The paradox and monetary value of penetration is frequently an attach toing blindness.
MxNSTER UNDER MATTHYS AND BOCKELSZOONDURING February 1534, the power of the Anabaptists in M nster increased dramatically. On February 8, Jan Bockelszoon new wave Leiden and the guild leader Bernard Knipperdolling, whom Bockelszoon had befriended, ran wildly through the streets, shouting that everyone must atone of their sins.29 This enkindled much emotional turbulency, particularly among the adult females Anabaptists, who, as former nuns, had late left the convents and fallen under the influence of Rothmann & # 8217 ; s sermon. Some began to see revelatory visions in the streets of such strength thatthey would froth at the oral cavity and throw themselves upon the land. In such a charged atmosphere, the Anabaptists made their first armed rise and took the Town Hall and market topographic point. The Lutheran bulk in the town offered small opposition, and shortly the town council recognized the Anabaptists as legal citizens of M nster.
Thereafter, many Lutherans fled the metropolis and the Anabaptists grew in figure and power. Messengers and pronunciamentos were sent out pressing Anabaptists in other towns to come with their households to M nster. The remainder of the Earth, it was announced, was to be destroyed, but M nster would be spared to go the New Jerusalem.
30Into this volatile state of affairs Jan Matthys entered: a tall, gaunt figure with a long black beard.31 His imposing, physical presence allowed him to derive powerPage 57 & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; rapidly, but the effort to recognize the New Jerusalem was non without autocratic steps. Unlike Hoffman, he did non waver to use force to carry through his intents. On February 25, 1534, he preached a discourse at the house of an Anabaptist near a fish market.
Afterwards, he proclaimed to the crowd that God & # 8217 ; s grace had allowed the metropolis to hold a favourable beginning, but in order to construct the democracy of Christ on Earth, it was necessary to sublimate the metropolis of all uncleanness ( Unsauberkeit ) , whether the impure be papists, Lutherans, or others who dissented from the predominating Anabaptist instructions. To accomplish this end, Matthys advocated the executing of all staying Lutherans and Roman Catholics.32 However, Knipperdolling, one of the town leaders, disagreed with Matthys, stating that the bloodshed would do the outside universe to be enraged against M nster. A via media was reached and they decided to throw out all the & # 8220 ; godless & # 8221 ; ( ( Gottlosen ) ) from the metropolis and make those who chose to remain behind receive compulsory baptism.
This undertaking of ejection and irresistible impulse took topographic point several yearss subsequently. On the forenoon of February 27, armed work forces, urged on by Matthys, ran through the streets shouting: & # 8220 ; Get out you godless 1s, and ne’er come back you enemies of the Father. & # 8221 ; In bitter cold, in the thick of snow, rain and air current, droves of the & # 8220 ; godless & # 8221 ; ( including the old and shut-ins, little kids, and pregnant adult females ) were chased from the town by Anabaptists who beat and laughed at them. They were forced to go forth their properties behind, their nutrient was confiscated and they had no pick but to implore in the countryside for nutrient and housing.
As for those who decided to stay in town, they received mandatory re-baptism in the market place. The full procedure lasted three days.33By extinguishing the Lutherans and Catholics from the metropolis, Matthys and his cohorts non merely heightened the sense of millenarian outlook but they besides came to recognize that the outside universe was turning intolerant of the developments within M nster, and that they were shortly to be besieged. The Catholic Bishop of the metropolis, Franz new wave Waldeck, had been at work some clip in enrolling soldier of fortunes to face the Anabaptist menace. The ejection of the Lutherans and Catholics prompted him to speed up his efforts.34 Soon thenceforth, earthworks were erected around the town and the besieging began.
Many Anabaptists were surprised and confused to happen themselves at war, but under the leading of Knipperdolling they shortly recovered assurance and began reacting to the menace. Men, adult females, and kids were assigned assorted responsibilities. Small brushs took topographic point outside the walls.35The war atmosphere led to a regular societal revolution. Matthys seized the chance to consolidate his power over the belongings and money of the townsfolk.
He preached that it was the Father & # 8217 ; s will that all the goods of thePage 58 & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; recent expatriates be confiscated. Furthermore, all the history books and contracts found in their places were burned. Their vesture, beds, furniture, tabular arraies, arms, and nutrient were placed in a cardinal country 36 and, after praying for three yearss, Matthys announced that God had given him a mark to name seven deacons to administer the goods to the people.37This tendency toward common ownership culminated in an institutionalised communism. Under the leading of Matthys, the town sermonizers and council members decided that all goods should be shared in common. Matthys employed Rothmann to proclaim this new vision of society in his discourses.
& # 8220 ; Dear brothers and sisters, & # 8221 ; Rothmann proclaimed, & # 8220 ; afterwards we shall be one people. Brothers and sisters, so it is wholly God & # 8217 ; s will that we bring our money, Ag, and gold together. One individual should hold merely every bit much as another. & # 8221 ; 38 At foremost this order was met with considerable resistance. The people who had late received mandatory baptism were assembled and told that unless they relinquished their money they would die.
They were so locked inside a church in a province of mortal fright for several hours. At length Matthys entered the church with a group of armed work forces. His victims implored him to mediate to God for them, which he did, stating that if they complied, God would let them back in the community.
Ultimately, they complied.39Yet non everyone acceded to Matthys & # 8217 ; s authorization: some defied him unto decease. A blacksmith, for case, unconvinced by Matthys & # 8217 ; s prognostications, accused him of being possessed by the Satan. Matthys had him arrested and thrown in the tower.40 Later he was brought to the market topographic point where many of the citizens were besides summoned. Matthys gave a address in which he declared that God was outraged at this adult male & # 8217 ; s evil actions because he had defiled an otherwise pure town.
He was sentenced to decease, but before executing, was stabbed repeatedly with a halberd and thrown back into the tower. Subsequently he was placed against the town wall and Matthys himself shot him in the tummy, doing his eventual death.41 The gathered crowd was told to gain from the illustration of the blacksmith and they dutifully sang a anthem before dispersing.42A concluding case of the autocratic control exercised by Matthys may be seen in his determination to modulate information. On March 15, 1534, Matthys proclaimed that all books except the Old and New Testaments ( which were deemed entirely sufficient for carry oning a holy life ) were to be brought to the cathedral-square where they were burned to ashes.43 This anti-intellectualist act represents a complete interruption with the yesteryear, and it allowed Matthys to derive a complete monopoly in the reading of Scripture.
44On Easter Sunday of 1534, Matthys received what he believed to be a godly bid to do a sally against the besiegers of the metropolis with merely a few menPage 59 & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; to assist him. The consequence was a suffering failure. He was pierced with a expressway beheaded, and his organic structure hacked to pieces. His caput was subsequently raised on a pole outside the city.45 Thus, the autocratic reign of Jan Matthys came to an terminal Summarizing up the character of this prophesier old ages subsequently, Obbe Philips wrote: He was so ferocious and bloodthirsty that he brought assorted people to their deceases ; yea he was so violent that even his enemies for their portion were terrified of him, and eventually in a uproar they became excessively powerful for him, they were so incensed that they did non merely kill him. . .
but hacked and chopped him into small pieces.46The decease of Matthys allowed for his adherent Jan Bockelszoon new wave Leiden to presume leading. Under Bockelszoon, the previously- constituted autocratic steps of Matthys continued, making a crescendo in his determination to anoint himself king. The land which he set up is legendary in German history, so here I will touch upon merely its most outstanding features.
Bockelszoon began his messianic reign by running naked through the streets of M nster in a wild spiritual craze ; he so fell into a soundless rapture for three yearss. When his power of address returned, he announced that God had told him to reconstitute the town authorities instantly, which he did by naming 12 work forces whom he called the Elders or the Judges of the Tribes of Israel ( -ltesten der St mme Israels ) who were placed in charge of all the public, private, religious, and worldly personal businesss of the citizens of M nster the & # 8220 ; Israelites. & # 8221 ; 47 The 12 published a new codification of moral jurisprudence 48 which provided for rigorous military organisation and a tighter communism of goods.
Some workers, for case, antecedently employed for money, were forced to go on in their trades without wage, merely as retainers of the community.49 The codification besides had a really stiff stance on wickednesss committed after ( re- ) baptism, and all citizens were subjected to demanding Torahs: If we are God & # 8217 ; s boies and have been baptized in Christ so all evil must vanish from among us & # 8230 ; . Every one is under the governments, who have power over all. Because there is no authorization outside of God & # 8230 ; . If you do evil, fear the governments. They wield the blade non in vain ; they are God & # 8217 ; s retainers, the retaliators to penalize the evildoer.50Sins punishable by decease included blasphemy, incendiary linguistic communication, call on the carpeting one & # 8217 ; s parents, criminal conversation, obscene behavior, backbiting, distributing dirt, and even kicking! 51Page 60 & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; Bockleszoon & # 8217 ; s most controversial invention was polygamy. It was introduced at least partially to emulate the Old Testament patriarchs 52 and besides ( possibly ) to counterbalance for the rapid abrasion of male citizens due to their military efforts.
53 Bockelszoon established polygamy on his ain authorization by denoting that all who resisted it would be considered miscreants and hence in danger of executing. Persons of nubile age were ordered to get married ; single adult females had to accept the first adult male to inquire them. This frequently led to perturb in the competition to see who could get the most married womans, and therefore this latter ordinance was finally rescinded.54 Bockelszoon himself, beside remarrying Matthys & # 8217 ; s widow Divara, finally accumulated 15 wives.
55 Bernard Rothmann received 2nd topographic point with nine.56It was non as an ordinary male monarch that Bockelszoon established himself, but as the Messiah of the Last Days. One twenty-four hours a goldworker declared that the Heavenly Father had revealed to him that Bockelszoon was to be male monarch of the whole universe, keeping rule over all male monarchs, princes, and great 1s of the Earth. He was to inherit the sceptre and throne of his sire David and was to maintain them until God should repossess the land from him. Bockelszoon accepted this adult male & # 8217 ; s prognostication and shortly enlisted the town sermonizers to present one discourse after another, explicating that the Messiah foretold by the Prophetss in the Old Testament was so none other than Jan van Leiden Bockleszoon.57 Bockelszoon himself called a town meeting in which he gave a address to proclaim his new individuality, & # 8220 ; Now God has chosen me to be king over the full universe. What I do, I must make, because God has ordained me.
Dear brothers and sisters, allow us now give thanks to God. & # 8221 ; 58 After the discourse, Bockelszoon led the crowd in singing a Psalm, and so everyone returned to their homes.59Bockelszoon did everything possible to stand for tangibly the importance of his new place. While the besieging continued outside the metropolis, the streets and the Gatess within were given new names. Lord’s daies and feast yearss were abolished and the yearss of the hebdomad were renamed on an alphabetical system. Even the names of babies were decided upon by the male monarch harmonizing to a particular system.
Gold and Ag coins were minted with letterings that emphasized Bockelszoon & # 8217 ; s alone function: & # 8220 ; One King Over All. & # 8221 ; 60 A particular emblem was devised to typify Bockelszoon & # 8217 ; s absolute claim to religious and temporal rule: a Earth, stand foring the universe, pierced by two blades and surmounted by a cross inscribed with the words: & # 8220 ; One male monarch of righteousness over all. & # 8221 ; The male monarch himself wore this emblem modeled in gold as a necklace, his attenders wore it as a badge on their arms, and it was accepted in M nster as the official emblem of the state.
61Bockelszoon set up a throne in the market place. Draped with fabric and gold, Page 61 & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; it towered above the surrounding benches which were allotted to other very important persons and sermonizers. Often the male monarch would come at that place to sit in judgement or to supervise the announcement of new ordinances. Heralded by ostentation, he would get on horseback have oning a Crown and transporting a sceptre. In forepart of him marched officers of the tribunal, behind him came Knipperdolling, who was now main curate ; Rothmann, who was now the royal speechmaker ; and a long line of lesser retainers. On either side of his throne stood a page, one keeping a transcript of the Old Testament, the other a sword.62 Both symbolized the absolute control which Bockelszoon exercised over the citizens.Though the male monarch indulged in a life of surplus, he subjected his citizens to asceticism.
Harsh ordinances of frock went into consequence ; for God, Bockelszoon had said, abhorred all overplus in vesture. Every house was searched and anything that was considered excess was confiscated. To warrant the disparity between his life style and that of the people, he explained that luxury was permitted him because he was wholly dead to the universe and the flesh.63Finally, though Bockelszoon maintained his clasp on power through prophetic effusions and entreaties to Scripture, his primary agencies of commanding the public was panic and beastly force. Two cases suffice to show this. The first one came in the aftermath of Bockelszoon & # 8217 ; s edict of polygamy when a group of citizens, led by Henry Mollenhecke, attempted to present a putsch and force out him Their attempts failed, nevertheless, and Mollenhecke, with forty-eight of his followings was viciously anguished and finally beheaded in a macabre procedure that took four yearss. Afterwards, two mass Gravess were dug in the market place where all the dead organic structures were placed a grave reminder of Bockelszoon & # 8217 ; s authority.
64 Another illustration of Bockelszoon & # 8217 ; s tactics of bullying was his determination to put to death several adult females for their wickednesss. One was beheaded merely for denying her hubby his matrimonial rights, another for bigamy ( the pattern of polygamy was entirely a male privilege ) , and a 3rd for dissing one of Bockelszoon & # 8217 ; s preachers.65 Indeed, the male monarch would digest no evildoings. It was therefore announced that all evildoers in the hereafter would be instantly brought before the male monarch and sentenced to decease. They would be extirpated from the Chosen People their very memory would be blotted out, and they would happen no clemency beyond the grave.66WHILE Bockelszoon was busy with his power and prestigiousness within the metropolis outside the metropolis walls, the besieging of M nster, spearheaded by Bishop Franz von Waldeck, continued. By careful diplomatic action, the Bishop had managed to affect both Catholic and Protestant swayers, every bit good as imperial representatives in support of his cause. Even Philip of Hesse, one of the staunchest supportersPage 62 & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; of Protestantism, was a faithful protagonist.
Almost invariably out of financess, the Bishop wrote letters pleading for aid to a host of possible frequenters: King Ferdinand, voter of Mainz, Trier, Saxony, and Brandenburg ; the dukes of Braunschweig, Luneburg, and Saxony ; and the bishop of Liege. Although most declined, the bishop raised adequate support to keep the materialistic force which he had gathered and to go on the besieging and the occasional brushs against the metropolis. Despite political and fiscal support, the existent military endeavor proved mostly unsuccessful throughout 1534 and for the first few months of 1535. Enterprises to obstruct the metropolis, to run out the fosses, and even to take direct military action finally failed.However, by April of 1535, marks of success began to look. The aged, adult females, and kids began dribbling out of the metropolis due to nutrient deficits.
In order to forestall flight, four of the escapees were beheaded on April 26 by the siege forces and their caputs placed at the gate as an illustration of what would go on to others who tried to go forth. Overall, between April 22 and June 15 at least 15 hundred citizens attempted to get away the wretchedness of the metropolis. All but a few were instantly killed by the Bishop & # 8217 ; s forces.On May 25, Heinrich Gresbeck abandoned his station at one of the Gatess of M nster and surrendered. His life was spared because he volunteered information which led to the concluding licking of the Anabaptists.
On June 24, he and Hans Eck, who had escaped with him, led the bishop & # 8217 ; s ground forces into the.city. The concluding confrontation had begun. In conformity with the bishop & # 8217 ; s policies of war, there was to be no clemency for the conquered except for pregnant adult females and priests.
The gaunt, lasting Anabaptist ground forces all of a sudden faced three 1000 soldiers who had been waiting 16 months for this juncture. The violent death lasted for two yearss. Harmonizing to one study of the armed Anabaptists were killed during the combat and an extra 200 afterwards when the basements and lofts were searched. On June 27 Count Wirich von Dhaun, commanding officer in head of the Bishop & # 8217 ; s forces, gave orders to halt the violent death. At that clip, the lasting work forces and adult females were gathered at the cathedral square where they were tried, condemned, and executed. The organic structures of those killed and starved to decease were buried in the cathedral square by provincials recruited from the environing countryside. The malodor was unbearable.67Bishop Franz came personally to the metropolis to measure the state of affairs and to have his portion of the loot.
He claimed half of the entire goods, which included all the belongings of the Anabaptists, while the soldier of fortunes received the movable goods as payment for their services. The bishop besides took charge of the leaders of the Anabaptists ( their lives had been spared for question intents ) . The sermonizer Bernhard Rothmann likely perished someplace in the metropolis, but noPage 63 & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; definite information about his destiny is known. Bockelszoon and Knipperdolling, on the other manus, every bit good as a outstanding figure named Krechting, were kept alive.
These three work forces were capable to intensive question carried out in several different locations in an attempt to understand the beginnings and nature of their theological places. Philip of Hesse was particularly interested in these interviews in the hope of better understanding the international menace of the Anabaptist religion. Ultimately, after much question, Jan Bockelszoon van Leiden recanted, saying that the land of M nster was a vain and dead construction and that he had become king merely because of a prognostication he had heard by a adult male named Dusentschuer. Furthermore, he admitted that every one must obey the authorities for all authoritiess are ordained by God.On the 20th of January 1536, Bockelszoon, Knipperdolling, and Krechting were transferred to M nster and interrogated for the concluding clip.
Once once more, the testers were peculiarly interested in happening out about belowground international Anabaptist connexions, but the replies they received yielded small valuable information. Predictably, each one tried to minimise his duty. The twenty-four hours before the executings, Bockelszoon, in the spirit of his old retraction, was said to hold admitted that he deserved to decease ten times.The following twenty-four hours they were brought to an elevated phase for the executing. Hot glowing coals and tweezers were present for intents of anguish. The decease punishment was verbally proclaimed against all three since they had sinned against & # 8220 ; God and the government. & # 8221 ; Bockelszoon fell to his articulatio genuss and prayed. The victims were strapped against wooden stations and Fe rings were placed around their cervixs.
Bockelszoon was the first to be tortured. When Knipperdolling witnessed how the hot tweezers were used to fire + X ) 0*0*0* . . + Bockelszoon & # 8217 ; s organic structure, he attempted to stop his life by hanging his caput over the Fe pealing around his cervix. The executioner tied his caput against the station with a rope through the oral cavity in order to forestall his efforts.
After the concluding act of anguish, which consisted of drawing their linguas with the tweezers, they were put to decease by piercing their Black Marias with a glowing hot sticker. Their organic structures were so put into big Fe coops and hung on the tower of a nearby church, and the tweezers were attached to a column of the metropolis hall. This was done so that & # 8220 ; all insurgents who refuse to obey proper governments would see in this an illustration and warning. & # 8221 ; 68CONCLUSIONUNDERSTANDABLY, the nature of this paper & # 8212 ; its crisp division into theoretical and historical subdivisions & # 8212 ; nowadayss jobs as one approaches a decision. My purpose could be seen as an attempt to put up the theoretical merely to hold it & # 8220 ; knockedPage 64 & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; down & # 8221 ; by the historical, i.e. to demo the victory of narrative historical cognition over conceptual handicraft.
Yet this is merely partly true, for I grant the heuristic value of constructs in doing history intelligible. My chief purpose, instead, has been to right an instability, by reasoning that conceptual scheme, when non carefully monitored, frequently end up displacing history alternatively of informing it. Weber construed sociology as the servant to history. Unfortunately, the contrary has frequently become the instance. This is particularly true with the construct of charisma.
Scholars in the yesteryear have frequently dealt with the events at M nster as if the full crisis was merely one hermetic research lab for sociological experimentation. If one avoids this mistake, nevertheless, and is willing to believe of the concatenation of thoughts taking up to M nster, i.e.
the idea of Melchior Hoffman, the Weberian cast is possibly lighting. For it is Hoffman, and non Matthys, who is the prophesier that most clearly manifests Weberian magnetic features. The multitudes attracted to Hoffman & # 8217 ; s prognostications in the Low Countries and his refusal to utilize force to consequence his message attest to the fact that he established his authorization merely by personal entreaty and the content of his message.
Matthys, on the other manus, represents a degeneration into autocratic steps. His usage of force, his tactics of information control, and the resistance which he received from the citizens in M nster attest to his inability to keep a sense of authorization in the footing of personal appeal entirely. He merely drew from the personal appeal generated by Hoffman and sanctioned it in himself by force.
Finally, if one indulges my alteration, Bockelszoon represents merely the utmost propulsion of autocratic inclinations already arising with Matthys.Yet my revisionist reading should look self-evidently debatable, for it is the really flexibleness of personal appeal which has made it such a troublesome construct. My revised appropriation of personal appeal, like similar endeavors, represents merely a rewording of historical item to back a rickety conceptual model.
Thus my speedy dismissal of this history is an admittance of the impracticality of personal appeal wholly. Lumping figures like Christ, Napoleon, Hoffman, Matthys, and Bockelszoon under the same terminological umbrella so presents many jobs. As much of this paper demonstrates, the employment of such footings easy sinks into mere semantic haggle. Historical item becomes a pawn in an progressively complex theoretical linguistic communication game that distances itself from historical cognition as it increases the edification of the conceptual tools which are supposed to advance this cognition. In the concluding analysis, alternatively of wheedling history to function theory, we should possibly chasten our theory in order that it may break function history. & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; This article is portion of Essaies in History, volume 35, 1993, published by the Corcoran Department of History at the University of Virginia.
All stuff copyrighted by the Rector and Visitors of the University of Virginia.Return to Try in History, volume 35. & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; & # 8212 ; etext @ virginia.edu