Printing, Reform, and the Catholic Reformation in Germany (1521-1545)

Author(s): Richard A. Crofts

Source: The Sixteenth Century Journal, Vol. 16, No. 3 (Autumn, 1985), pp. 369-381
Published by: The Sixteenth Century Journal
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2540224 .
Accessed: 19/10/2011 09:15
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

The Sixteenth Century Journal is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The
Sixteenth Century Journal.

http://www.jstor.org

Sixteenth CenturyJournal
XVI, No. 3 (1986)

Printing,Reform,and the Catholic

Reformationin Germany(1521-1545)
Richard A. Crofts
East Tennessee State University

HISTORIANS OF THE SIXTEENTH CENTURY continueto devoteattentionto theroleand significance

ofprintingin the Reformation.The workof two scholarsdeservesspecial notice.First,in the
oftheeffort
has beenElizaforefront
to developa broadinterpretation
bethEisenstein,whohas discussedwithdetailand precisiontheprinting press as an agent of change.' In her manypublicationsshe has
pointedout the inadequaciesof some commongeneralizationsabout
the relationshipbetweenprintingand both the Reformation
and the
ScientificRevolution.Second,MiriamChrismanhas used theanalysis
ofprintedbooksto provideinsightintothe social,cultural,and intellectualforcesat workin Strasbourgfrom1480 to 1599.2 Her workhas
inthatit showswhat
bothsubstantiveand methodological
importance
can be learnedabout Strasbourgby meansofcomputeranalysisofextensivedata.
and theReformation
also includesgeneralScholarshipon printing
izationswhichneed to be testedwiththe mostprecisedata possible.
Amongthese generalizationsare the contentionsthat those holding
firmlyto Catholicismignoredthe propagandisticpotentialof the
printingpress,"thatlocal ordinancesfavoredLutheranpublications,4
'Elizabeth Eisenstein, The Printing Press as an Agent of Change: Communication
and Cultural Transformationin Early Modern Europe, 2 vols. (New York: Cambridge

UniversityPress,1979).

2Miriam Chrisman, Lay Culture, Learned Culture: Books and Social Change in

Strasbourg,1480-1599(New Haven: Yale UniversityPress, 1982). Chrismanwritesin

herpreface:"Printedbooks,I decided,couldserveas themajorsourceinmyattemptto
reconstruct
thiswholecontext.Books printedin a givenyear,whethertheworkoflivingordead authors,recordtheideas currently
incirculation.
Theyareculturalartifacts
whichreflectthequestions,doubts,assumptions,and certainties
oftheirtime.The totalityofbookspublishedin a giventimecan be used to provideinsightsintothecultural and social forcesoperatingin a period"(p. xix).The companionvolumeis the same
author's Bibliography of Strasbourg Imprints,1480-1599(New Haven: Yale University

Press,1982).
'Richard G. Cole, "The Reformationin Print: German Pamphlets and
Propaganda," Archiv fur Reformationsgeschichte 66 (1975): 93: "It is possible that

Catholictheologiansand statesmenwhowerelongaccustomedto powerand authority

feltlittleneedto experiment
withradicallynewmethodsofmass communication.
Catholicreluctancewas reinforced
by tactilemedievalhabitsoforal,visual,and ceremonial
methodsofcommunication."
4KarlSchottenloher,
"Buchdrucker
und Buchfuhrer
im DienstederReformation,"

in Realencyclopedie furProtestant Theologie und Kirche, ed. Johann Jakob Herzog, 24

vols. (Leipzig:J. C. Hinrichs,1913) 23:272.

370

The Sixteenth CenturyJournal

that periodsof tensionstimulatedstrongresponsesin the book market,5thatthroughout

thecrucial1520s theoutputofProtestantbooks
outnumbered
enormously
theworksofCatholicdefense,6
thatCatholicismdid notproducea singlewriterwhoseliterarygeniusand popular
appeal could remotelymatchthoseofMartinLuther,7thatwe cannot
inferfromthecontentsofa bookits readers'outlook,8
confidently
and
thattherelativelylow rateofliteracylessensthe significance
ofprinting to the people."This articleprovidesdata that partiallyaddresses
some of thesegeneralizations.10
in Print,"p. 98.
'Cole, "The Reformation
(NewYork:Harcourt,Brace,and World,
6A.G. Dickens,The CounterReformation
in Germany,trans.RonaldWalls,2 vols.
1969),p. 35. JosephLortz,The Reformation
(London:Darton,Longman,and Todd, 1968),2: 175,attemptsto moderatethisview:
behindtheold Churchat thattimewas much
"We nowknow. . . thattheliteraryeffort
supposed.In theinterestofhistorical
moreimposingand extensivethanwas formerly
historymustbe ridofthenotionthat Lutherand
accuracy,the imageofReformation
his followersutterlydominatedthe literaryfield."
7Dickens, Counter Reformation, p. 56. Cf. Lortz, The Reformation in Germany, 2:

giganticas it was, allows us to

187: "A surveyof the entireCatholicliteraryeffort,
The Catholicliterbreakintono triumphal
song.Thereis no starofdazzlingbrightness.
outstanding,leadinggenius,whosevoicespokeforall,
aryfrontknewno consummate,
and who prepared the way for their words, as Luther did on the side of the
Lortz also suggeststhat Catholicsweretoo reluctantto enterintodisReformation."
thattheyproputations,thattheirtimingwas poor(theytooktoo longin refutation),
abouttheir
ducednothingon a grandscale,thattheywerenotalwaysas knowledgeable
thepoweroftheenopponentsas theyshouldhave been,and thattheyunderestimated
emy (2: 190-192). See also Rudolf Hirsch, Printing, Selling and Reading, 1450-1550

(Wiesbaden:Harrassowitz,1967),p. 98.

"Natalie Davis, Society and Culture in Early Modem France (Stanford, California:

StanfordUniversityPress, 1975),p. 191.

'Ibid., p. 190. The literacyrate in Germanyat the turnof the sixteenthcentury
musthave been quite low,but no one has yet founda way to documentor measureit
withprecision.RobertScribnerestimatesa rate of 10 to 30 percentin the towns,but
only4 percentnationally.See his "How ManyCouldRead? Commentson BerndMoel-

ler's 'Stadt und Buch,' " in The Urban Classes, the Nobility and the Reformation:
Studies on The Social History of the Reformation in England and Germany, ed. by

WolfgangJ. Mommsen,PublicationsoftheGermanHistoricalInstituteLondon,vol. 5
of the populationcould
(Stuttgart:Klett-Cotta,1979),p. 44. Because onlya minority
society was still predominantly
read, Scribneremphasizes that sixteenth-century
and thatfewpeopleacquiredtheirbasic information
dependenton oralcommunication
about the Reformationthroughprint. In addition to the article cited above see
Wie kam der gemeineMann zu reforScribner's"Flugblatt und Analphabetentum.
matorischen Ideen?," in Flugschriftenals Massenmedium der Reformationszeit,ed. by

Hans-JoachimKohler, Spatmittelalterund Fruhe Neuzeit: TubingerBeitrage zur

vol. 13 (Stuttgart:Klett-Cotta,1981),pp. 65-76.Moellerargues
Geschichtsforschung,
that the Reformation
gave the printedbook the new functionof mass literatureand
to imaginethe Reformation
withoutthe supportofprinting.See his
that it is difficult
Bewegung in
"Stadt und Buch. Bemerkungenzur Strukturder reformatorischen
Deutschland," in The Urban Classes, the Nobility and the Reformation,pp. 30-31, and

in
Flugschriften,"
"Einige Bemerkungenzum Thema: Predigtenin reformatorischen

Flugschriften als Massenmedium der Reformationszeit,pp. 261-268.

"?Anearlierversionofthispaperwas read at the annualmeetingof the Sixteenth

fromdisheldin Octoberof1981.The paperhas benefitted
CenturyStudiesConference
cussionswithmycolleaguesat that meeting.

Printing,Reform,& Catholic Reformation

371

Beforereporting
and commenting
upontheresultsofthisstudy,it
I have tabulatedbookspubis important
to describeits methodology.
lishedin Germanyfrom1521 to 1545,collectingtitlesfromtheBritish
Museum's Short Title Catalogue of Books Printed in the German-

Speaking Countries."The titlesweretabulatedon an annual basis,

brokendownintoLatinand Germanand intosevensubjectcategories:
nonreligiousbooks,booksby reformers,
books by Catholics,editions
of the Bible,books by humanists,Jewishauthors,and a largegroup
that couldnot easilybe classified.Books writtenby Lutherwereincluded in the 'reformers'category,but a separate tally was maintained.Catholicworksweredividedamongthreesub-groups:
reprints
naofearlierworks,worksby controversialists
orofa controversialist
works.'2The booksplacedin thecontroture,and non-controversialist
versialistgroupwereones whichwereobviouslyattemptingto confrontor refutethe positionof the reformers.
The books placed in the
non-controversialist
groupwereofa moretraditional
natureand notso
clearlyattemptsto counterthe Reformation.
My countbeganin 1521
because by that time Luther had been excommunicatedand condemnedby theDiet; thebattlelinesappeareddrawn.My countended
in 1545 withthe Councilof Trent.
The size and breadthofthisstudyrequiredthatit relyon thetabuin the size of editionsand the
lationoftitles,discountingdifferences
lengthof the works.Estimates of the average size of editionsvary
froma minimumof two or threehundredto one thousand,though
mostoftheseestimatesseemhighlyconjecturaland imprecise.
In contrastto thisimprecision,
Chrismanhas suggestedan ingenwhichavoids theproblemofboth
ious meansofmeasuringproduction
as a unitofprosize ofeditionsand lengthsofworks:themasterforme
is thebodyoftypelockedup bythecomposduction.The masterforme
itorintoa framewhichmakesup whatevernumberofpages are to be
printedat oneoperationofthepresson one sideofonesheet.Chrisman
arguesforan averageeditionof1,250copieson thelogicalbasis thata
couldpull 1,250sheetsoff
printing
teamusinga pressmostefficiently
thepressin a day. A smallereditionwouldmeanthattheywouldhave
to changetheformesin themiddleoftheday,a costlyand inefficient
process."

"Short-titleCatalogue of Books Printed in the German-speaking Countries (Lon-

don:TrusteesoftheBritishMuseum,1962).The data in thisstudycan be refinedand

and completeadditionalsimilarstudiescarriedoutwithgreaterassurance,certainty,
ofTubingencompletesits publicanesswhenthegroupof scholarsat the University
pamphletsin Germanand Latin
of sixteenth-century
tionof texts and bibliography
publishedintheHolyRomanEmpirefrom1501to 1530.The projectis beingeditedby
and ChristophWeismann.
Kohler,HildegardHebenstreit-Wilfart,
Hans-Joachim
12 See theexcellent
Theology"in Lortz,The
discussionof"CatholicControversial

Reformationin Germany,2: 175-223.

parallelsthat
LearnedCulture,p. 5. Chrisman'sargument
Lay Culture,
'3Chrisman,

of Leon Voet in his workentitled The Golden Compass: A History and Evaluation of the

372

The Sixteenth CenturyJournal

Two methodologicallimitsmust be admittedat the outset. Of

course,to claimcompletenesswouldbe folly.RelianceupontheShort
numberoftiTitle Cataloguewithoutdoubtmeansthata significant
oftheShort
tles are omitted.As one indicationoftheincompleteness
Title Catalogue,Paul Grendlerhas discoveredthat the Italian Short
Title Catalogueincludesslightlyless thanhalfofthe titlesthathave
been foundin a census of some Italian libraries.14Substantiationof
thisdegreeofincompleteness
can also be seen by inference-ifthetotals reportedhereare approximately
doubled,thenumbersareroughly
consistentwiththoseI publishedin an earlierstudydealingwith1510
to 1520,wheretheavailabilityofadditionalsourcesoftitlespermitted
a closerapproachto completeness.'The lack ofcompletenessleads to
a relatedlimitation-ahigherdegreeofconfidence
can be placedin the
relationshipsbetweenthe numbersthanin the numbersthemselves.
In addition,it must be admittedthat the resultsof this studyare
based upon the assumptionthat this sample of sixteenth-century
books has not beenbiased in ways thatwouldalterthebroadconcluWiththeexceptionofLuther'sworks,it is
sionswhichwillbe offered.
likelythat pamphletscomingdownto us in moderntimes survived
wars and destructionat a roughlyequal rate.'6
The relatedquestionof possiblebias ofprovenancein relyingon
the collectionof Germanbooks by an Englishlibraryrequiresa comherwealth
mentaboutthehistoryoftheBritishMuseum.Considering
and politicaland commercialpower,England developedlibrariessurprisinglylate comparedto otherEuropeannationalpowers.Although
theBritishMuseumwas establishedby an Act ofParliamentin 1753,
it didnotadd to its collectionsin largenumbersuntilthemiddleofthe
nineteenthcentury.It is also true that the collectionshave often
grownin an apparentlyhaphazardand accidentalway due to the unPrinting and Publishing Activities of the OfficinaPlantiniana at Antwerp, 2 vols. (New

York:AbnerSchram,1972),2: 169: "The numberofcopieswas as a rule1,250forordinaryeditions,1,000forblack-and-red

liturgical
works.Thesefigureswerenotarrived
at arbitrarily
but werebased on therateat whichthejourneymen-printers
worked:an
averageof 1,250 sheetsper day forordinaryworks,500 per day forservicebooks."
Voet presentsdata indicatingthatapproximately
halfoftheeditionspublishedbythe
OfficianaPlantinianaweredonein multiplesofthesefigures(2: 172).
"4Paul Grendler, The Roman Inquisition and the Venetian Press, 1540-1605

(Princeton,N.J.: PrincetonUniversityPress, 1977),p. 299. Despite this limitation,

MichaelPegg has concludedthat the ShortTitleCatalogueis a basic bibliographical
tool,somewhatcrude,but worthwhile
nonetheless.See his essay, "ShortTitle Cata-

logues. Notes on Identity of Texts," in Flugschriftenals Massenmedium der Reformationszeit, p. 30.

"RichardCrofts,"Books,Reformand theReformation,"
ArchivfurReformationsgeschichte71 (1980):21-36.
'6Thislast pointis argued by RichardCole in "The Reformation
Pamphletand
Communication Processes," in Flugschriftenals Massenmedium der Reformationszeit,

p. 147.

Printing,Reform,& Catholic Reformation

373

certaintyin knowingwhennew materialwouldbecomeavailable by

gift,sale,ordiscovery.Therefore,
thereis littlereasonto concludethat
thecollectionofthesebookswas biased by thereligiousconvictionsof
sixteenth-century
librariansembroiledin religiouscontroversy.17
Whileit mustbe admittedthattheamountofconfidence
intherelin thisdata is higherthanin theraw numbers,it is
ative proportions
strikingto notethatthe numberofbookspublishedin each five-year
segmentof thisperiodactuallydeclined.Table I presentsthe breakdownofthebookspublishedfrom1521 to 1545in thethreelargestcategories.Chrisman'sdetailedstudyrevealsa similarpatternin Strasbourg.The highestproductivity
forherentireperiodis also reachedin

TABLE I
Non-Religious

Works

Works by

Reformers

1521 - 1525
1526 - 1530

291 = 15.0%

890

352

33.1%

1531 - 1535

425

1536 - 1540

450

1541 - 1545

411 = 49.1%

Total

Works by

Catholics

Total

Works

328 = 16.9%

1936

268 = 25.2%

247

23.2%

1063

46.0%

209

22.6%

167 = 18.1%

924

50.4%

169

18.9%

135 = 15.1%

892

171 = 20.4%

115 = 13.8%

836

1929 = 34.1%

1707

46.0%

30.2%

992

17.6%

5651

the early 1520s, followedby a rapid declineand a secondarypeak

around1530.18Fromthedata in this study,thedeclinewas mostprecipitousbetweenthefirstand secondfive-year
periodswhenit was 45
is to notethat34
percent.Anotherwayofexpressingthatrelationship
percentof the books talliedforthe twenty-five
yearperiodwerepublishedin the firstfiveyears.This maybe a reflection
ofthe eventsof
1521 to 1525 and oftheimportanceauthors,printers,
and thereading
publicplaceduponthem.The factthatthetotalnumberofbookspublisheddeclinedafter1525 and was fairlystable fromthatpointon is
reflected
in thefactthatfrom1526 to 1545 onlytwoyearsvariedfrom
the meanforthe periodby morethanone standarddeviation.
As Table I shows,slightlyoverone-third
ofthebookspublishedin
the entireperiodwereon non-religious
subjects(34 percent).Slightly
"7SeeEdward Miller,That Noble Cabinet:A History of the BritishMuseum
(Athens,Ohio:Ohio UniversityPress,1974),especiallypp. 15, 24-25,95.
"8Chrisman,
Lay Culture,LearnedCulture,p. 287,fig.II.

374

The Sixteenth CenturyJournal

less than one-third

(30 percent)werewrittenby reformers
and about
one-sixth(16 percent)werewrittenby Catholics.For comparativepurposes, the data frommy earlierstudyindicatedthat forthe period
from1510 to 1520 non-religious
booksaccountedforaboutone-half
of
thebookspublishedin theperiod.For theyear1520,however,thisfigure was 31 percent.
Moreis learnedwhenthe totalis brokendownintofive-year
periods than fromthe aggregate.Betweenthe firstand secondintervals
booksmorethandoubled(15 percentto
thepercentageofnon-religious
33 percent)and forthe last fifteenyears of the periodnon-religious
booksaccountedforabouthalfofthetitles(49 percent).
Books by reformers
constitutedalmosthalf(46 percent)ofthetotal forthe firstfiveyears,droppedto about one-fourth
in the second
fiveyears,and retaineda fairlysteadyshareofthemarketfrom1526
to 1545. The numberofbooks by Catholicauthorsdeclinedeach fiveyearperiod,but reachedits highestpercentageofthemarket(23 percent)in theyearsfrom1526to 1530.Thereformers
dominatedGerman
printing
from1521 to 1525,butfromthatpointon non-religious
books
werepublishedmorefrequently
thanclearlyidentifiable
Catholicand
reformers'
books,and the numberof Catholicbooks was only19 percent smallerthan the reformers.
For all threegroups,1525/1526appears to be a significant
dividingline.Fromthatpointon,thenumber
ofnon-religious
bookswas up, and thenumberofbooksby reformers
and Catholicswas down.A one-wayanalysisofvariancerevealsthat
the meansforeach divisionare statisticallydifferent
wellbeyondthe
99 percentconfidence
level,indicatingthatthedifference
betweenthe
two groupsis greaterthanwhatcouldlikelybe ascribedto chance.
It is also of significance
to notethelanguagein whichbookswere
published.Of the total books tallied from1521 to 1545, 57 percent
in German.That comparesto 60 percentofthetitlesfrom
werewritten
the 1510-1520study.Breakingthe categoriesdownbetweenreligious
and non-religious
works,it is discoveredthat 67 percentof the religious booksand 39 percentofthenon-religious
bookswerepublished
in German.This comparesto 61 percentand 58 percentin the earlier
period.Slightlymorereligiousbooks werepublishedin German,but
substantiallyfewernon-religious
books were.Breakingthe religious
booksdownfurther
revealsa strikingdifference,
as can be seenin Table II. The Catholicpublications,
thereligiousworksofthehumanists,
and editionsoftheBible had similarpercentagesofpublicationin German.The percentageforthereformers
roughlydoubledthatoftherest
of the groups.Table III showsthe numberofworkspublishedannuand Catholicsand the percentagewhichwerepubally by reformers
lishedin German.It is easilyseenthatCatholicspublishedin German

Printing,Reform,& Catholic Reformation

TABLE

375

II

Percentageof GermanPublications
Humanists'Works
CatholicWorks
Editionsof Bible
Reformers'Works

38.9%
34.8%
42.5%
79.7%

All Religious Works

67.3%

TABLE
Reformers

III
Catholics

#ofWorks % in German#ofWorks % in German Ratio

1521
1522
1523
1524
1525
1526
1527
1528
1529
1530
1531
1532
1533
1534
1535
1536
1537
1538
1539
1540
1541
1542
1543
1544
1545

125
176
249
195
145
66
60
33
27
82
51
32
44
32
50
25
34
34
40
36
25
27
43
29
47

79.7
85.8
90.4
87.1
82.1
77.3
65.0
81.8
88.9
79.3
86.3
84.4
79.5
71.9
76.0
84.0
58.8
64.7
65.0
63.9
64.0
81.5
76.7
69.0
68.1

74
69
59
59
67
50
48
51
45
53
31
30
24
43
39
38
31
31
17
18
19
19
19
25
33

50.0
40.6
44.1
55.9
26.9
36.0
27.1
41.2
26.7
37.7
6.5
6.7
37.5
32.6
43.6
34.2
35.5
38.7
11.8
5.6
31.6
42.1
36.8
12.0
36.4

1.69
2.55
4.22
3.31
2.16
1.32
1.25
0.65
0.60
1.55
1.65
1.07
1.83
0.74
1.28
0.66
1.10
1.10
2.35
2.00
1.32
1.42
2.26
1.16
2.04

Total

1707

79.7

992

34.8

1.72

376

The Sixteenth CenturyJournal

The thirdcolumnofTable
at a rateless thanhalfthatofthereformers.
and Catholics.
III gives the ratiobetweenbooks by reformers
One ofourmostimportantconcernsis theextentto whichthedethe churchand
fendersof the churchweresuccessfulin representing
in print.For thiswe look to that groupof
confronting
the reformers
as the controversialists.'9
Catholicauthorswhichhas been identified
From1521 to 1545,992 worksby Catholicauthorsweretallied.Of
these,139 (14 percent)werereprintsof the Fathers,medievaltheolothreegians,and otherauthorsofthe MiddleAges. Not surprisingly,
fourthsofthesewerepublishedin Latin.Slightlyoverhalf(52 percent)
nature.Seventy
oftheseCatholicworkswereofa non-controversialist
percentof those were publishedin Latin. One-thirdof the Catholic
workspublishedbetween1521 and 1545 wereof a clearlycontroversialist character-thatis, theywereobviouslyattemptsto confront
thereformers
directlyas opposedto traditionalexpressionsofCathocategorythat
lic pietyand theology.It is onlyin thecontroversialist
the percentageof worksprintedin Latin changedappreciably.Even
so, only45 percentofthesebookswerepublishedin German.But even
in thiscategory,whereonewouldexpectthehighestlevelofactivityin
German,the percentageis only slightlyover one-halfof that forall
books publishedby the reformers.
The data thatis availableindicatesthatno one understoodbetter
in German.TathanMartinLuthertheimportanceofcommunicating
ofLutherbytabulatinghispercentageof
ble IV showsthesignificance
the reformers'
works,his percentageof the total numberof books
published,and the annual percentageof his workspublishedin German. Between1521 and 1525 Lutheraccountedfor60 percentof the
workspublished.In 1522 and 1523 his worksaccountedfor
reformers'
of all the books published.For the entireperiod,89
about one-third
percentofLuther'sworkswerepublishedin German.In thelowestof
thoseyearsthepercentagewas 67 and therewereonlytwoannualpercentagesbelow75. A comparisonofthenumberofworkspublishedby
thegenLutherto thenumbersofthemajorCatholicfiguresconfirms
eralizationthatno one came close to matchinghis productivity.
"9For a bibliography of these authors see Katholische Kontroverstheologen und
Reformer des 16. Jahrhunderts: Ein Werkverzeichnis, ed. by Wilbirgis Klaiber,

Studienund Texte, vol. 116 (Munster:Aschendorffsche

Reformationsgeschichtliche
1978).The volumeis helpfulin generalbutcouldnotcontribute
Verlagsbuchhandlung,
Gilmont,"La bibliographie
muchto thisstudy.For a reviewarticlesee Jean-Francois
de la controversecatholiqueau 16e siecle; quelques suggestionsmethodologiques,"
-Revued'histoireecclesiastique 74 (1979):362-371.Gilmontregardstheworkas a good
He proproject,butis criticalofaspectsofits methodology.
starttowardan important
poses to enlargetheprojectto a "bibliothecacatholicasaeculixvi."

Printing,Reform,& Catholic Reformation

TABLE

1521
1522
1523
1524
1525
1526
1527
1528
1529
1530
1531
1532
1533
1534
1535
1536
1537
1538
1539
1540
1541
1542
1543
1544
1545

377

IV

Luther's % of
Reformers' Works
68.8
71.0
63.9
46.7
49.0
45.5
50.0
36.4
37.0
57.3
45.1
56.3
36.4
40.6
30.0
32.0
35.3
52.9
35.0
22.2
52.0
33.3
30.2
41.4
46.8

Luther's % of
Total Works
28.7
33.6
32.4
21.0
20.9
14.5
14.4
7.1
5.3
16.3
12.6
9.4
10.1
7.0
7.2
4.3
6.9
9.9
8.5
4.3
8.0
6.0
8.0
7.1
11.4

51.3

15.5

% of Luther's
Works in German
84.9
88.8
95.6
90.0
85.9
86.7
73.3
100.0
100.0
93.6
95.7
94.4
93.8
84.6
86.7
87.5
83.3
66.7
78.6
87.5
76.9
100.0
84.6
83.3
77.3
88.6

378

The Sixteenth CenturyJournal

Table V lists the annual numberof Catholicworksclassifiedas

controversialist.
The secondcolumnis the percentageofthoseworks
publishedin German.The thirdcolumnis thepercentagethe controversialistworkswereof the Catholictotal. The data suggestthat it
was notuntil1523 thatCatholicauthorsbeganto riseto theircontroversialisttask. From 1522 to 1523 the percentageof controversialist
worksdoubledand fortheperiodfrom1523 to 1530 the averagepercentageremainedat a similarlevel.After1530, and fortherestofthe
works dropped froman
period,the percentageof controversialist
averageof 40 percentto an averageof 32 percent.That the mostinterestin controversialist
writingcame between1523 and 1530 is seen
in thefactthat 52 percentofthe controversialist
worksfortheentire
periodwerepublishedin this eight-year
span. The annualaverageof
TABLE
# of

Controversialist
Works
1521

1522
1523
1524
1525
1526
1527
1528
1529
1530
1531
1532
1533
1534
1535
1536
1537
1538
1539
1540
1541
1542
1543
1544
1545

15

13
22
25
33
18
22
23
17
14
5
7
9
20
15
11
8
8
6
1
7
3
7
12
15

% Published
in German
53.3 -20.3

20.2
Avg.

8.9
Avg.

46.2
54.5
64.0
36.4
55.6
31.8
73.9
41.2
57.1
40.0
14.3
66.7
40.0
53.3
63.6
37.5
37.5
33.3
0.0
28.6
0.0
28.6
0.0
26.7

-51.4
Avg.

31.3
Avg.

% of
Catholic Total
18.8
37.3
42.4
49.3
36.0
45.8
45.1
37.8
26.4
16.1
23.3
37.5
46.5
38.5
28.9
25.8
25.8
35.3
5.6
36.8
15.8
36.8
48.0
45.5

19.6

Avg.

40.3
Avg.

32.1
Avg.

Printing,Reform,& Catholic Reformation

379

controversialist
worksbetween1521 and 1530 was 20.2. The annual
averagefrom1531 to 1545 was 8.9.
The middlecolumnof Table V gives thepercentageof thesecontroversialist
workspublishedin German.For theentireperiod,45 percent were publishedin German.However,the average percentage
variesgreatlywhen1530 is used as a dividinglineto demarktwopopworkspublished
ulations. Fifty-onepercentof the controversialist
through1530 werepublishedin German.After1530 the percentage
droppedto 31.
Publishingactivityforthereformers
and Catholicsfollowedsimilar patterns.Early in the periodactivityincreaseddramatically,
and
aftera briefperiodof timeactivitydeclinedalmostas dramatically.
For the reformers,
the average numberof books per year was sixtyin
eight.After1525 thatnumberwas exceededonlyonce (eighty-two
1530). Fifty-two
percentof the reformers'
books forthe wholeperiod
werepublishedfrom1521 to 1525.
For theCatholics,theaveragenumberofbooksperyearwas forty.
After1530 thatnumberwas exceededonlyonce (forty-three
in 1534).
Fifty-eight
percentof the Catholicbooks forthe wholeperiodwere
publishedfrom1521 to 1530. The patternsforthe two groupswere
quite similar.The Catholicincreaseand subsequentdeclinefollowed
thatofthereformers
by a fewyears.
Threegraphspicturethispattern.GraphA showsthedramaticincreaseofthereformers'
worksfrom1521 to 1523,a steadydeclineto
A
Graph
Works
byReformers

250200150100
50 1521

1525

1530

1535

Years

1540

1545

The Sixteenth CenturyJournal

380

1529,and a muchsmallersecondpeak of activityin 1530.20 GraphB

showsthe total productionof Catholicworksin generaldeclinefrom
1521 to 1539 withincreasescomingin 1525, 1530, and 1534. After
1539,therewas a modestincrease.GraphC portraystheCatholiccontroversialistworkswherethe similarityto the reformers'
patternis
The peaks and lowpointsforthecontroversialist
moststriking.
works
followthe reformers
at an intervalof about two to fouryears.When
the two graphsare superimposed,
the similarity
is mostapparent.
B
Graph
Works
byCatholics

70 60-

5040'40

30 20-

10
1521

1525

1535

1530

1540

1545

Years

thepatternofintheparallelto Chrisman'sdata is striking.If anything,

20Again,
Lay Culture,
creasesand decreasesin herdata is even moredramatic.See Chrisman,
LearnedCulture,p. 289, fig.V.

Printing,Reform,& Catholic Reformation

35-

381

C
Graph
Controversialists
Works
byCatholic

30
2520 1510
5-

1521

1525

1535

1530

1540

1545

Years

In conclusion,we can see thatthisdata supportssomeofthegeneralizationsnotedat the start:

Despitethefactthatthereligiousissues remainedunsettled,after
1530 about halfof the books publishedin Germanywereon non-religioussubjects.This approximatesthefigurefortheperiodfrom1510
to 1520.
After1525,thenumberofCatholicpublicationswas surprisingly
high,nearlymatchingthe total of the reformers.
Despite the surprisingnumberof Catholicpublications,on the
wholetheCatholicseitherfailedto recognizethevalue ofpublishingin
Germanor wereunwillingto do so.
withtheliterarytalFinally,theCatholicsdid notfinda defender
entsand popularappeal ofLuther.If theyhad,thesefigures,and perIf
haps the course of the Reformation,
would have been different.
Luther'sworksare excludedfromthe reformers'
total,the Catholics
outpublishedtheiropponents.