
Luther's World: Understanding the man who was the powerhouse of the Reformation - pepys
http://www.weeklystandard.com/luthers-world/article/2007915
======
Nokinside
Seeing history trough individuals can be misleading. There would have been
reformation even without Luther.

There were several reformations before Luther. Bible was translated into
German and other languages before Luther. Mentel Bible was on it's second
printing when Luther started his reformation. Several other successful reform
movements started at the same time or little later.

Question is why reformations started at that particular time and why Luther
was so successful and several reformations before him failed.

The answer is technology. Printing press revolution had exploded. There was
over 1000 printing presses throughout Western Europe when Luther started his
reformation. Germany and Italy were the main centers. Pamphlets from
reformists spread around like wildfire and the movement was able to grow much
faster among common people.

[https://blogs.qub.ac.uk/medievalforum/2015/08/19/literacy-
an...](https://blogs.qub.ac.uk/medievalforum/2015/08/19/literacy-and-print-in-
early-modern-germany-and-england/)

>Between 1516 and 1546, 3.1 million copies of Martin Luther’s works were sold
in Germany (excluding whole and partial Bible translations). Considering that
each reprint had around 1,000 copies, that equates to 3,100 editions of his
work alone. Over this period, 1,057 editions were published in Wittenberg, 490
in Augsburg, and in comparison, Basel produced 131 editions. On a shorter
time-scale, the number of pamphlet editions produced from 1518 to 1529 is as
follows: 181 in Wittenberg, 140 in Augsburg and 61 in Basel. What is more
remarkable is that Luther also authored 20% of the 7,500 cheap broadsheets
printed between 1520 and 1526. Besides preaching, the Protestant reformers
clearly published a large amount of material to disseminate their ideologies
to a wider audience.

~~~
Lordarminius
> _Seeing history trough individuals can be misleading. There would have been
> reformation even without Luther._

Definitely not provable.

Men of character and placement are required to drive history though they will
never channel historical forces in directions it is unprepared for. The debate
over whether great men make history or history raises up great men is an old
and unsettled one.

~~~
Nokinside
In the 1500's religious people were abandoning the the Church in numbers.
There were 15-20 independent reformers at the Luther's time and maybe 5 of
them are still known names.

You remove Luther from the picture and reform changes pace and takes different
route but but it still happens.

~~~
Lordarminius
> _You remove Luther from the picture and reform changes pace and takes
> different route but but it still happens_

Does it ?

If the pace and course of events were changed, perhaps the reformation would
happen, albeit under a different name. Perhaps not.

A different leader might not have been so resolute or bold (as to pin the
grievances on the cathedral door), might not have had the political support of
the Elector of Saxony. Certainly the conditions may have been present, but
would individuals of sufficient character have been available to kindle change
? It was fortuitous that Germany had both Luther and Fredrick III (aka
'Fredrick the Wise') alive at the same time. Given a slightly less capable
Elector the Church could have prevailed; with slightly more flexible Church
hierarchy Martin Luthers fiery challenge could have been contained.

Look at it this way:

Would the outcome WWII be the same if Churchill and Roosevelt were replaced by
different men? Remove Mao from the picture and is it obvious that course of
modern Chinese history would be the same ?

Progress and change are not inevitable. The ingredients of _agent and agency_
must be present and work together[1]

[1]Arthur M. Schlesinger, Jr wrote an essay in 1958 dealing with this issue
and entitled _The Decline Of Greatness_. I am unable to find an adequate link
to it. It is a fascinating read.

Also see Sidney Hook _The Hero in History_
[https://www.google.com/search?q=The+Hero+in+History&stick=H4...](https://www.google.com/search?q=The+Hero+in+History&stick=H4sIAAAAAAAAAONgFuLUz9U3MIk3syhS4tFP1zc0Sso1Nc5IstQScCwtycgvCsl3ys_P9s_LqQQAsEs-
Ty0AAAA&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwi45MnQ1eDTAhUGAxoKHVcYADoQxA0IsQEwGQ&biw=1366&bih=657)

------
Hermel
Also relevant in this context is Jean Calvin, who had an enormous influence on
what today is considered "protestant work ethics" and on the well-known
related theories by Max Weber.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Calvin](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Calvin)

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Max_Weber](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Max_Weber)

------
forvelin
"With the sole exception of Jesus Christ, more books have been written about
Luther than about any other person who has ever lived."

Is there any basis for this claim or did writer forget that there are other
religions and their characters ?

~~~
danesparza
Even a cursory examination of other sources will show this to be false. Here
is a great list from the Guardian publication in 2014:
[https://www.theguardian.com/books/2014/jan/30/whos-most-
sign...](https://www.theguardian.com/books/2014/jan/30/whos-most-significant-
historical-figure)

Spoiler: Martin Luther is number 17 on their list

~~~
hexis
That list is a synthesis of many different sources, most prominently the
english Wikipedia. It is not directly relevant to the question asked by the
parent comment.

------
pionar
I really liked Dan Carlin's podcast on Luther and the aftermath of his posting
of the theses: [http://www.dancarlin.com/product/hardcore-
history-48-prophet...](http://www.dancarlin.com/product/hardcore-
history-48-prophets-of-doom/)

------
muninn_
Obligatory Dan Carlin mention here:
[http://www.dancarlin.com/product/hardcore-
history-48-prophet...](http://www.dancarlin.com/product/hardcore-
history-48-prophets-of-doom/)

It's very entertaining and interesting (I'm not making a case for historical
accuracy here).

------
TallGuyShort
Is this worth reading past page 1? After all that it's barely talked about
Luther himself, and just about a bunch of authors and how great their books
are and and minor opinions they have about Luther.

