point; they used humanistic pedagogy to inculcate orthodoxy; they reshaped civic
humanism in their image; but they suppressed the humanistic rhetoric of doubt.
The transformation thus effected amounted to a confessionalization of humanism.
This appropriation of humanistic ideas and their translation into the idiom of the
Reformation debate is the subject of this book.

The sources examined in this context are primarily texts originating in the Habs-
burg realm and dating from the first half of the sixteenth century; that is to say, they
represent the region that gave birth to the Reformation movement and the period
that saw a radical change in the perception of the relationship between humanism
and the Reformation. The term confessionalization is usually associated with devel-
opments in the second half of the sixteenth century, ⁶ but evidence cited in my study
will show that the intellectual foundations for the process were laid in the 1520s and
1530s.

Because my study focuses on the fate of humanistic thought, I examine prima-
rily the writings of men of letters who were active members of the humanistic "re-
public of letters." Professional theologians, even those who could lay claim to the ti-
tle "humanist" on account of their skill and range of pursuits, form a supporting
cast. If theologians move to center stage, as, for example, in the cases of Urbanus
Rhegius and Wolfgang Capito, the focus is on their progression from humanist to
theologian and the implications of this reorientation. Classifying writers in the six-
teenth century as "theologians" or "humanists," respectively, can of course be prob-
lematic. In affixing labels, I have generally adopted the stated priorities of individ-
uals and the verdict of their contemporaries. ⁷ Erasmus, for example, was until the
mid-1520s frequently addressed as a "theologian" but in later years critics pointedly
denied him the title, and by 1530 his name had become synonymous with human-
ism. Melanchthon, by contrast, successfully engaged in both disciplines. In later years,
however, and especially after Luther's death, it became clear that his lasting contri-
bution was in the field of theology. For this reason I usually cite Erasmus as a spokes-
man of humanism and refer to Melanchthon in the context of Lutheran theology. ⁸
The availability of biographical sources determined the specific group of individuals
studied in the present context. No thinking person in Reformation Germany could
avoid engagement with confessional issues, but not everyone left a substantial record
documenting this engagement. Episodic evidence, of which there is a great deal,
has only limited paradigmatic value. What is needed for historiographical purposes
is sustained evidence in sufficient quantity to make the writer's mental progress ap-
parent and tangible. My study therefore concentrates on writers that meet both re-
quirements: a commitment to humanism and documented engagement with Refor-
mation issues.

Approaches taken to the subject of the relationship between humanism and the
Reformation vary, considerably, ranging from Erich Meuthen "Charakter und Ten-
denzen des deutschen Humanismus" a carefully qualified account, to Heinz
Liebing's intriguing opinion piece "Die Ausgänge des europäischen Humanismus." ⁹
In Liebing's view, humanists had to choose between freedom and security. Confes-
sionalization and the institutional church offered stability, but it was bought at the
price of liberty: "Undogmatic humanism . . . was rewarded with the freedom to
determine its own content." ¹⁰ Liebing's subjective approach makes for stimulating

-4-