SOURCE: "The Making of the Historia von D. Johann Fausten: The Emergence of the Faustian Pact," in his Faustus on Trial: The Origins of Johann Spies's "Historia" in an Age of Witch Hunting, Max Niemeyer Verlag, 1992, pp. 110-46, 157-68.

Augustin Lercheimer speaks of a pact that Faustus had made, but he supplies few details. As far as we know, Lercheimer was the first to claim that Faustus made a pact for twenty-four years and that when he later tried to repent, the devil forced him to sign a second pact and thus brought about his damnation.¹

Aber sein geist warnet jn daß er davon [from Wittenberg, where he was about to be arrested] kamm, von dem er nicht lange darnach grewlich getodtet ward, als er jm vier vnd zwantzig jar gedient hatte.²

Der. vielgemeldte Faust hat jm ein mal fürgenommen sich zu bekeren, da hat jm der teuffel so hart gedrawet, so bang gemacht, so erschreckt, daß er sich jm auch auffs new hat verschrieben.³

The reference to Faustus's intention to repent indicates the relevance of other passages in Lercheimer's book. Lercheimer relates, for example, that Faustus visited Melanchthon, who attempted to convert the magician and warn him that there would be serious consequences if he did not (" … kamm etwann zum Herrn Philippo, der laß jm dann einen guten text, schalt vnd vermanet jn daß er von dem ding beyzeit abstuinde, es würde sonst ein bose end nemmen, wie es auch geschahe.") At the same time, Lercheimer tells of an unsuccessful attempt by a pious old man to convert Faustus ("Ein Gottesforchtiger mann vermanete jn auch, er solte sich bekeren.")⁴ These brief assertions occur in a context that points to Faustus only as one of many magicians illustrating the dangers of learned magic. They serve a relatively minor function in the book as a whole. In the hands of the anonymous author, however, they become the nucleus of the Faustian plot and thus the basis of the entire Historia.

But it would be wrong to think that the author simply revised these passages. He was aware of a long tradition of stories, which he drew from, combined, and placed in a new context. To understand his contribution it is necessary to see it in relationship to its background.

Although Lercheimer asserts that Faustus is taken by the devil in the end, it is not a foregone conclusion that he would have approved of an exemplum of warning that focuses simply on Faustus's losing his soul. After all, he concludes his brief narrative of Faustus and the Wittenberg student who had also made a pact with the devil by stating that one should treat such people mercifully ("Diesem exempel nach solt man fleiß anwenden vnd sich bearbeiten mehr solche leute zu bekeren vnd zu beßern, dann dann vmmzubringen vnd zu verderben.")⁵

The literary tradition favored a merciful ending for Faustus. In this respect the Historia deviated from tradition and even from its guiding authority, Luther.

Although Luther repeatedly stressed the danger of the devil pacts, he and his close friend Philipp Melanchthon were inclined to favor a merciful treatment of sinners accused of diabolical magic. We need to take a closer look, therefore, at the stories they told. Although it would be impossible to examine every reference to the popular idea of the devil pact, the number of stories in which the reformers treated this phenomenon in detail is modest. We find these stories in Luther's table conversations and in the record of Melanchthon's Sunday lectures. Each has its own history, many stages of which can be reconstructed. The texts provide evidence about the origins, development, and association of the devil pact stories, with information about Faustus.⁶

A. Erfurt

The origin and transformation of the Erfurt devil pact story is well documented. We know how Luther reacted to the story when he first heard it, what his information was based on, and how, many years later, Philipp Melanchthon reported the story in an entirely changed form. On July 27, 1537, Luther responded to the news from Friedrich Myconius in Erfurt about a devil pact, and he thought that this news warranted the publication of a book. He asked Myconius to investigate the matter; he felt that it could serve the glory of Christ and that it promised comfort to many. It also implied, in his view, most terrifying portents for the pope. A letter of the same day by Justus Jonas shows that Luther and Jonas had discussed the devil pact story with intense interest. Jonas wrote that "by this horrifying example God appeared clearly to reject the profanity of the times in which many people—even if they did not make explicit pacts with the devil—impiously dedicated themselves to the riches and pleasures of this world while neglecting God, Christ, and religion." Both Luther and Jonas attached considerable significance to the Erfurt report as an exemplum; the story addressed itself to some serious immediate concerns.

Antonius Lauterbach's report of a table conversation shows the sequence of events that interested Luther and Jonas so much: "On July 28, news came from Erfurt about a certain impious magician, who was executed there in that week by burning.… Describing how he had made a pact with Satan and deserted Christ, he confessed his crime. Because the devil had made his pact invalid and because the magician realized the deceptions, he requested the help of pastors. By the example of his genuine repentance he encouraged many to give up complacency and to fear God. He accepted his punishment joyfully. In this way the devil was defeated, being beaten at his own game, and he revealed what his advice was really worth."⁷ Luther's version of the story makes no mention of the fact that the confession of the Erfurt sinner was obtained with the aid of torture. This fact emerges from the letter of Aegidius Mechler, who "converted" the sinner and reported about that to Luther.

Even at the earliest stage of the devil pact story, it is appropriate to refer to the medieval legends of the holy sinner. The Theophilus legend is generally considered the model for the Faust story. 'But in this particular instance a story told about Bishop St. Basil offers a much more striking parallel. Whereas Theophilus, who makes a pact with the devil, is eventually returned to the fold through the intercession of Mary, St. Basil himself, not unlike the pastor Aegidius Mechler, is called upon to save the soul of a sinner, who has been trapped by the devil and cannot escape without help. St. Basil visits the sinner over a period of time. At first the sinner feels that his pact has made his case hopeless. He suffers from nightmares; devils threaten him. But with persistent encouragement, the sinner gradually regains hope, and finally a fervent public prayer led by St. Basil miraculously forces the devil to give up the pact. The fateful signed document is given up by the devil and flies through the air into the hands of the bishop.

When we turn to Melanchthon's version of the Erfurt devil pact, we find that after more than fifteen years, further mutations have taken place. In his brief presentation Melanchthon has given the exemplum a new focus. He speaks about the initial reluctance of the captured sinner to repent, and he stresses the sinner's belief that redemption is no longer possible for him. The pastors had to make a special effort to make him understand that there was hope. For Luther this was not the problem; in his presentation the sinner realizes on his own the deception of the devil. For Melanchthon a problem Luther ignored becomes the essential one: the conversion finally becomes a reality when "pastors said that although he had committed a great evil, it was nevertheless God's will to have him return to his senses, and although he had made the pact with the devil, the pact was invalid for no one can give to another that which is not his own." Melanchthon agrees with Luther's assertion that the pact is invalid but ignores information about the devil's deceptions and stresses, instead, the inability of the devil to get possession of man's immortal soul. Melanchthon shifts the focus, which is now on the pastor's role in overcoming despair and on God's infinite mercy rather than simply on the deviousness of the devil.⁸

The new interpretation brings about a revision of the details. Melanchthon's exemplum is further removed from specific, time-bound concerns; his concluding statement makes a stronger claim for general acceptance and relevance. His revision of the exemplum has a close parallel in the devil pact story in the legendary biography of St. Basil. We noted that the exchange between the sinner and the representative of the court had an antecedent in Basil's life. Luther ignores this aspect of the incident. Melanchthon, who was probably unaware of Mechler's letter, now shifts the focus of the story to a conversion attempt resembling one described in great detail in the life of the saint. Basil succeeds in persuading a despairing young man to realize that he can still reject his pact with the devil and that salvation is still possible. Through prayers Basil is able to force the devil to return the pact, and the sinner is spared of punishment.⁹ In contrast to Luther, Melanchthon does not mention that the Erfurt sinner was punished at all; this significant omission brings his exemplum very close to the devil pact story of the saint's legend. Evidently its influence was at work.

In 1585, Augustin Lercheimer also tells a version of this story, but since he does not supply the location and since he changes the story radically, it is at first not clear how much has survived from the original event in Erfurt. The devil pact of the magician is no longer the focus of the story. The magician is merely mentioned as the person who falsely accuses a poor man of theft. Lercheimer implies that torture produces false information and can have tragic consequences.¹⁰ The story now has an entirely different function. Although the thrust of the exemplum has shifted, Lercheimer, like his predecessors, shows a great deal of sympathy for the plight of those accused and stresses the importance of mercy and forgiveness.

B. Valerius Glockner

The gradual fusion of contemporary incidents with narrative passages from saints' legends is illustrated by another devil pact story originating just a matter of months after the Erfurt incident. This incident revolves about Valerius Glockner, a student of the University of Wittenberg, the son of the mayor of the city of Naumburg and a pupil of Luther's friend Georg Major, in whose house the student lived. From the table talk we learn that Luther absolved Valerius from his pact on February 13, 1538. According to this report, the student had been "most disobedient, displaying no uprightness at all. When he was interrogated in this desperate condition by his teacher, who wanted to know why he lived without fear of God and man, he confessed that five years earlier he had committed himself to the devil with these words: "God, I am giving up my faith in you, and I will have another master." Luther interrogated him concerning these words and scolded him harshly, asking whether he had said anything else, whether he was sorry, and whether he wished to be converted." Then Luther prayed for Valerius, stressing that God favored the spirit of gentleness in teaching those who have transgressed and that Christ's primary concern was for sinners. After Valerius publicly declared in church that he regretted having given himself to the devil and resolved from then on to be the devil's enemy, Luther admonished Valerius to lead an obedient and pious life. If the devil should tempt him again, he should quickly flee to his teacher or chaplain.

There can be little doubt that Antonius Lauterbach, who was present at the ceremony that absolved Valerius, reported honestly what he saw. The report does not reveal, however, how the extraordinary confession came about. What prompted Valerius to admit to a pact with the devil, an admission that had earned an Erfurt sinner capital punishment? We cannot exclude the possibility that Valerius confessed because he was afraid of being tortured or severely punished, and perhaps, as was common practice, he was promised merciful treatment if he confessed. At any rate, the repetition of the verb examinare suggests that Valerius found himself in a situation similar to that of a trial for diabolic magic (" … a praeceptore examinatus … Lutherus eum examinavit eumque graviter urgebat…"). He was in great danger, from which he thought perhaps to extricate himself with a confession. Whether he really believed that he had made a pact is not important. What is important is that Luther was convinced of it, and his pronouncements on this subject certainly left no doubt in Antonius Lauterbach, a witness and the author of the report.¹¹

More than fifteen years later, Philipp Melanchthon gave an entirely different version of the same events. In the new account the name Valerius Glockner is no longer remembered; the youth is not the son of a mayor, but rather a young nobleman, whose father does not supply him with the money he needs to lead the proper student's life. While despairing in his need for money, the young man meets the devil, who is in the disguise of a ragged old man in a forest near the city. In return for a regular income, the young man is asked to sign a pact in blood. Each day for almost half a year under his bed he can find the sum agreed, which enables him to lead a life of pleasure. Then the situation begins to appear suspicious. Georg Mayor's bidding to his pupils to prepare for Holy Communion causes great consternation in the young man, and his anxiety exposes him. We learn then of Luther's intervention, which was similar in Lauterbach's report. At the conclusion, however, we again have a radical departure from the original account: after Luther's fervent prayer for mercy, the same old man (in reality the devil) appears and returns the pact (chirographon), directing a resentful "O Du! 0 Du!" at Luther as he disappears.¹²

Melanchthon's contributions to the transformation of this story are not entirely arbitrary. The original story does not explain why the young man has made a pact. From Melanchthon we learn that he needs money. This is, of course, a common explanation for the pact throughout the Middle Ages, and we see evidence of it in the Erfurt story. It is conceivable that the similarity between the Erfurt and Valerius Glockner stories caused Melanchthon to assume that the same motivation was valid where the necessary information was not provided. Moreover, many details have close parallels in the devil pact stories of the saints' legends: meeting the devil outside the city, the exchanges with him, the signing of the pact in blood, and, finally, the marvelous return of the pact represent a pattern of correspondences.¹³ Can so many correspondences occur by chance? Melanchthon's concluding passage clearly eliminates this possibility. Both the sinner whom Basil converts and Theophilus feel at first that they are bound to the devil as long as the devil has the pact. Most readers in the sixteenth century would have wondered whether Valerius Glockner could be assured of salvation without the return of the pact. Melanchthon's miraculous ending with its idea firmly based in medieval tradition provides that security. In Melanchthon's story we observe a logical and natural fusion of a historical incident with essential aspects of older well-known narratives generally thought to provide plausible explanations of situations involving the devil.

Melanchthon's story stresses the miraculous power of Luther's prayer. Martin Luther was no longer alive, and Melanchthon transfigured him as one who absolved Valerius Glockner into a saintly figure capable of miracles like those of St. Basil. This is not the story of a sinner brought back to the fold; there is now a mythical struggle in which the forces of evil are overcome by superhuman means. Melanchthon's faith in Luther's mission in renewing Christianity has given the original story a new dimension. At any rate, we realize that such narratives have to be seen in the situations in which they originated: first, Luther's reacting to what he perceives as the need to save a youth from the snares of the devil; second, Melanchthon relating this incident later in such a way that the reasons for the devil pact are understood and Luther appears as a divinely inspired leader.

The life of St. Basil with its story of the devil pact was well known and valued in Wittenberg. A convincing documentation of its influence is that Georg Major himself published it in Wittenberg in 1544, and Luther wrote an introduction to this edition. The story of the Wittenberg student also circulated widely. We find, for example, two different versions in Hungary. A French author was responsible for an entirely different rendition.¹⁴

In 1585, just two years before the publication of the Historia, Augustin Lercheimer told the same story in a way that shows its direct relevance to the Faustian devil pact. Information about the devil pact and about Faustus appear here together for the first time in a single exemplum. One part primarily treats Faustus. Lercheimer essentially retells what Johannes Manlius reports that Melanchthon said about Faustus escaping.¹⁵ But unlike Manlius, he has information about the twenty-four-year pact and Luther's and Melanchthon's efforts to convert Faustus. Then he proceeds immediately to the story of the Wittenberg student. This part of the exemplum, in which the student meets the devil during his walk outside the gates of Wittenberg, supplies information that we know comes from the devil pact stories of the saints' legends: the idea that the pact must be signed in blood ("nicht mit dinte, sondern mit seim eigen blute"), just as the devil of the Historia demands. The way Lercheimer tells it, the lives of Faustus and the Wittenberg student have the same significance. For him such stories helped to support his argument that one should not be too quick to burn people at the stake. The words "zu bekeren und zu beßern" appear in two places in the exemplum. They stress the importance of making an effort to rehabilitate people such as Faustus and the Wittenberg student.

C. Regensburg

It is not certain how Luther contributed to the story of the Regensburg magician, but a relatively late source attributes the story to him.¹⁶ This story has come to light in a manuscript containing primarily excerpts and exempla characteristic of Melanchthon's Sunday lectures. The manuscript in question refers to the lectures Melanchthon delivered in November 1555.

Concerning a magician and his penance. A few years ago in Regensburg there was a certain nobleman who led an extremely wicked life. He practiced magic. But when certain cities of Southern Germany, including Regensburg, were recipients of the purer reformed doctrine, this nobleman, despite his wicked way of life, went to church frequently to hear sermons. But after listening once to a sermon very attentively, he felt moved by a force from above, and he was suddenly gripped with terror. Having left the church, he began to think about his former, foolish way of life and to deplore and curse it. He changed his life and behavior so that his piety was apparent to all, and by his example many were moved to embrace the cause of this doctrine. But in old age, when he was close to death, he called certain friends, among whom there was a doctor, to his bedside, and as his death was imminent, he said to his friends: "I see that I am being called by God from this life. Although I stand firm in my faith so that I am assured of salvation through Christ's sacrifice and the devil has no power over me, because I had made a pact with the devil previously and now my soul was stolen from him, after my death he will rage against my body and deform it. You need not be disturbed by this." When the nobleman expired, there was rumbling and such disturbance that the house appeared to collapse. The doctor, who had been present up until then, was gripped by great terror and fled. In the meantime, the devil twisted the dead man's face against his back and left him in that condition. The friends entered again after the house calmed down and saw the corpse deformed in this way, and they ordered him to be buried in a very honorable manner.¹⁷

The Regensburg story deserves attention because it shows a situation very close to that in the conclusion of the Historia. At the same time, many elements draw it close to earlier devil pact stories. The familiar motifs suggest that this story has evolved to a considerable extent beyond the historical situation that first inspired it. For example, there is the crucial role of the Lutheran pastor who converts a great sinner. Melanchthon adds the idea that the devil did not have a right to the sinner's soul. The violent death of the sinner, despite a confession and repentance, is present in the original Erfurt story, which narrated the execution of the sinner.¹⁸

The myth of violence that the witch craze created plays an even more prominent role in the narration of Faustus's death. Lercheimer states that Faustus was taken in a violent way. But he does not give details; he tells the story of the Regensburg magician and thus shows what could be expected in Faustus's case. Lercheimer does not mention that the conversion resulted from the sermon of a Lutheran pastor; instead, he focuses on the discussion with friends before his death.

Vor jaren ist zu R. auff dem Reichstage ein zauberer oder schwartzkünstler gewesen, der sich vor seinem letzten, da er wußte daß jn der teuffel, jrem vertrage nach, holen würde, wider zu Gott bekert, vnd deßen eine gute christliche Bekantnuß und anzeigung gethan hat: aber nicht desto weniger in bestimmter nacht vom Geiste erwurget worden, daß er morgens fir seim Bette gelegen auff dem Rucken umb jm das Angesicht abwertz auff dem boden gestanden. Aber doch haben die hochgelerte berahmte Theologi vnd Doctoren der heiligen Schrifft, damals daselbs zu eim gesprech versammlet, von denen er zuvor rhat, underricht, und trost begert vnd eingenommen, vnd denen er seine bekantnuß gethan, an seiner seelen Heil nicht verzweiffelt. Denn wie Gott wil daß die Ubeltheter von der Oberkeit gestraffet und schendlich hinngerichtet werden, andern zum exempel, derhalben aber die seel nicht verwirfft noch verdammt: gleichs fats wil er villeicht auch, ob sich diese schon bekeren, und er die seel zu gnaden auffnimmt, dal sie nicht desto weniger vom teuffel am Leibe geschendet werden, andern zum Spiegel und zu[m] Abschrecken. Also wann ers dahinn bracht hat, daß die armen hexen brennen, dann lachet jm, dem schadenfro, das hertze: ob jm wol die seel nicht werden mag.¹⁹

The Wittenberg version of the Regensburg story focuses on the idea of conversion, the return to the fold through a Protestant sermon. There is no mention of a pact in that earlier story, but a long period of dealing with the devil is evident. Lercheimer refers specifically to the existence of a pact and focuses on its tragic consequences. The body must go to the devil. Lercheimer grants that the authorities have to execute those who were guilty of such an evil deed. But he sees the need to prevent the process from going to that dangerous point. If execution takes place, the devil has won. Lercheimer sees a special significance for the fate of witches; he implies that burning the witches is, in effect, a potential victory for the devil. It is such burnings that his book desires to prevent.

D. Francisco de Spiera

The story of Francisco de Spiera (or Spera, t 1548) is not about a devil pact, but it describes a situation closely related to the crisis of the Regensburg sin-ner. The influential Philipp Melanchthon was the author of a version published in Wittenberg in 1549. Spiera, a doctor of law, had been forced to recant his Protestant beliefs. This action against his own conscience drove him into a deep depression. Basing his report on an account by Pier Paulo Vergerio, who tried to console Spiera, Melanchthon describes in great detail Spiera's condition of despair. He describes a man who has lost all faith and identifies himself with Judas and Cain: his sin is thought to be too great to be forgiven.

Hatt gar zu Gott kein hoffnung, Wunschet an des Juda Cain [oder] eines anderen verdampten menschen stad zu sein, alda Gottes zom, straff vnd emstlich gericht zu erwarten. Bekennet, das Gottes gnad viel grosser sey den alle sunde, komme jhm aber nicht zu gut, dieweil er ewig von Gott verworffen vnd aus der zal der auserweleten aus geschlossen, Christus hab nicht für jhn, sondern allein für die ausserweleten gelitten vnd gebeten, Drumb werde ehr den andern zum exempel ietzund schrecklich gestraffet vnd verworfen.²⁰

Melanchthon argues against the misconceptions that underly Spiera's thinking. He sees salvation easily within the reach of such a sinner, if only he would understand God's message of mercy in the Bible. From the account in Melanchthon's hands it appears that Spiera, despite all the pleading and arguments of his friends, persists in his despair and is intent on committing suicide. In his concluding remarks Melanchthon does not dwell at all on the question of how Spiera died.²¹ Melanchthon's primary concern is about the ways in which one can avoid the path of Cain, Saul, Judas, and other lost sinners. At any rate, this particular story goes an important step beyond the Regensburg story and approaches that state of mind that considered the despair, death, and merciless condemnation of Faustus appear as a just and appropriate end. Johannes Spies printed a Latin version of the fate of Spiera a year before the Historia.²²

The devil pact story with a positive, merciful ending, represents a strong tradition, which makes itself felt in the Historia by contributions to the plot and motifs. The saints' legends are constantly in the background of these contemporary stories, so the narrators are not entirely aware of the difference between legend, tradition, and historical event.

The basic premise of a merciful ending is given in the Historia. Of course, by discarding the Bible and then signing a devil pact, Faustus has destroyed the obvious basis for recovery and has essentially narrowed his options to one: saving his soul. He could still save his soul, just as the sinners of these stories had done. The anonymous author spells this option out in unmistakable terms.

Er [Faustus] wolte aber keinen Glauben noch Hoffnung schöpfen, daß er durch Buß möchte zur Gnade Gottes gebracht werden. Denn wenn er gedacht hette: Nun streicht mir der Teuffel jetzt eine solche Farbe an, daß ich darauff muß in Himmel sehen, Nun so wil ich umbkehren, vnd Gott vmb Gnade vnd Verzeihung anruffen, Denn nimmer thun, ist ein grosse Buß, hette sich darauff in der Christlichen Gemein in die Kirchen verfugt, vnnd der heyligen Lehre gefolget, dardurch also dem Teuffel einen widerstand gethan, ob er jm schon den Leib hie hette lassen massen, so were dennoch die Seele noch erhalten worden, Aber er wardt in alien seinen opinionibus vnnd Mey-nungen zweiffelhafftig, vnglaubig vnd keiner Hoffnung.²³

In the end, Faustus appears to be desperate enough to accept these terms and act accordingly.

Dann ich sterbe als ein böser vnnd guter Christ, ein guter Christ, darumb daß ich eine hertzliche Reuwe habe, vnd im Hertzen jmmer vmb Gnade bitte, damit meine Seele errettet möchte werden, Ein böser Christ, daß ich weiß, daß der Teuffel den Leib wil haben, vnnd ich wil jhme den gerne lassen, er laß mir aber nur die Seele zu frieden.²⁴

The conditions for salvation appear to be present. Why must Faustus be damned? The printer appears to caution that this line of questioning is not justified. What Faustus said was not sincere; it was the repentance of Judas (the gloss is: "Judas Rew"). The author himself makes his view clear in the subsequent exchange. The students plead with Faustus and urge him to let learned theologians save him from the devil. He should appeal to Christ and say that he is willing to give up his body as long as the soul is not lost. Faustus's response seals his fate: he feels like Cain, whose sins are too great to be forgiven. Despite what theologians might think, the author believes that it is possible to go too far.²⁵ Faustus is the victim of ultimate despair; he has no hope of salvation. His belief is prepared and reinforced at various points: in the resolution not to allow a return to the Christian fold to take place (chapters 4 and 52), in the belief that it is too late to turn back (chapters 17 and 65), and by thinking that his sin was too great to be forgiven (chapters 16 and 68). These persistent expressions of despair are found thus at the beginning and the end, obviously representing the forces that prevail in the end. The author rejects the traditional solution for Faustus.

Marguerite De Huszar Allen analyzes the life of Faustus as the antithesis of the typical saint's legend. Her study shows that the Historia, while adhering to the essential patterns of the saints' lives, may be seen as a reversal in which the exemplary biography is transformed into a cautionary tale: For polemical purposes, an unholy one has usurped the role of the saint.²⁶ Thus, Allen argues persuasively for the concept of "inverted hagiography" as an explanation of the obvious links and parallels between the Historia and the Legenda aurea. When the author of the Historia takes over some of the features from the biography of Valerius Glockner (that is, the life of St. Basil), he is unconsciously bringing about the "reversal" that Allen describes.

The name Mephostophiles has inspired many interpretations, but perhaps the most convincing is that proposed by Füssel and Kreutzer, that the name is derived from Greek and that its three components indicate 1) negation; 2) light, and 3) loving.²⁷ In this sense the devil represents the reversal of the divine light. This manner of creating a fictional name would not have been foreign to Spies, who engaged in a similar word play when he presented his edition of the Disticha Catonis to the public. In the preface he addresses the reader as Philophiles, one who loves love (that is, friendship).²⁸ Spies printed this book for the book fair of fall 1587, at the time when the Historia appeared.

The "reversal" is illustrated in the transformation of verses by Luther. In their reversed form they become appropriate as a little sermon of the devil.

Luther

Schweig, leyd, meyd vnd vetrag,
dein not niemand klag,
An Gott nicht verzag
dein hülff kombt alle tag.²⁹

Historia

Darumb schweig, leyd, meyd vnd vertrag,
Dein Vnglück keinem Menschen klag.
Es ist zu spat, an Gott verzag.
Dein Unglück läufft herein alle tag.

By having the devil preach in opposition to Luther, the author remains faithful to basic premises of the reformer. But he is now focusing on the most negative outcome conceivable. The anonymous author inserts the key concept of despair "zu spat" and reverses "nicht verzag" into "verzag." His decision to challenge traditional wisdom and insisting on a harsh, merciless resolution he could point to stories and a tradition that lent him support [sic]. The forces that prepared the "reversal" are also detectable in the exempla tradition. But in this respect the social phenomenon of witchcraft plays a more visible role. In fact, all devil pact stories of this period relate to it. The biography of Faustus represents a warning of unprecedented urgency to desist from diabolical magic and as such it became embroiled early in the debates about witchcraft.

Notes

¹ There is, to be sure, a vague reference to Faustus's pact in one of Rosshirt's anecdotes (ca. 1575-1586): "Alls nun doctor Georgius Faustus im Lande hin und wider mancherley abentewer vnd Schalckheit geubt vnd getriben hette, dardurch er doch wenich Ehr noch danck erworben, kam die bestimpte Zeyt darinnen er sich gegen dem Teuffel seinem Lehrmeister, verschrieben hatte." Fulssel and Kreutzer 273.

² Lercheimer fol. 44v-45r.

³ Lercheimer fol. 55r.

⁴ Lercheimer fol. 36v-37r. Cf. Baron, "The Faust Book's Indebtedness" 531-532.

⁵ Lercheimer fol. 45r.

⁶ In an attempt to establish a representative survey of the Wittenberg devil pact stories Brückner's comprehensive reference work has been useful: Wolfgang Brückner, Volkserzählung und Reformation. Ein Handbuch zur Tradierung und Funktion von Erzizhlstoffen und Erzählliteratur (Berlin: Schmidt, 1974). I have discussed some devil pact stories in Doctor Faustus from History to Legend (Munich: Fink, 1978) 80-81 and Faustus. Geschichte, Sage, Dichtung (Munich: Winkler, 1982) 65-74. About Luther's influence on the Faustus legend see Erich Schmidt, "Faust und Luther," Abhandlung der Akademie der Wissenschaften in Berlin 25 (1896): 567-591. Secondary literature about the devil pact generally ignores the sixteenth-century background of this topic. Cf. Wolfgang S. Seifferth, "The Concept of the Devil and the Myth of the Pact in Literature Prior to Goethe," Monatshefte 45 (1953): 271-289 and Hans Joachim Gernentz, Der Pakt mit dem Teufel (Hanau: Müller and Kiepenheuer, 1988).

⁷ Luther wrote to Friedrich Myconius in Gotha on July 27, 1537: "De historia Erffordensi velim vos, exploratis omnibus, edere libellum, quia ad gloriam Christi & multorum solatium ea res pertinet, ut taceam, quam territura sit Papae portenta. 1537 feria 6. post Iacobi. M. L." On the same day, Justus Jonas also wrote also to Myconius: "Historiam de cive Erphordiensi, quam perscripsisti, mi Friderice, d. doctor Martinus et nos omnes non sine magna admiratione legimus et audivimus. Deus hoc exemplo horrendo videtur palam obiurgare horum temporum et huius saeculi profanitatem, ubi multi non quidem tam crasse paciscuntur cum Satana, sed tamen satis impie opibus et voluptatibus mundi posthabent Deum, Christum, totam religionem. Scribam Egidio Mechlero, ut explicatius totam rem nobis mittat, et curabimus typis excudi." D. Martin Luthers Werke. Briefwechsel (Weimar: Böhlau, 1938) 8: 104-105. The pastor, Aegidius Mechler, who wrote a detailed account in response to Luther's request, quotes the precise wording of the pact that the "miserable" man had made four and a half years earlier. In this pact (which, incidentally, is in German, in contrast to the Latin of the letter) the devil, in return for the rejection of baptism and faith, promises to provide money and wealth. After the sinner's capture, a crystallike stone is found in his home next to the pact. During his imprisonment the sinner is vexed constantly by the devil, and he asks for the aid of a pastor. Mechler describes how in five separate visits he was able to make the sinner realize genuine remorse and remain constant in his renewed faith until the time of his punishment. Mechler's letter brings to light the incidents that inspired Luther's devil pact story. But Mechler's report is not entirely firsthand. He relies on others for information about the events before his meeting with the imprisoned sinner. The pastor accepts the reality of the pact without question and reports how it came about and how a copy of it was found, together with the crystallike stone, in the sinner's house. The confession is clearly extracted with the help of torture ("Haec fassus est in tortura."). Otto Clemen, "Eine Erfurter Teufelsgeschichte von 1537," Archiv für Kulturgeschichte 10 (1912): 455-458. Having received the report from Myconius, Luther told the story of the Erfurt devil pact at his table. See text in: D. Martin Luthers Werke. Tischreden (referred to hereafter as Tischreden) (Weimar: Böhlau, 1912-1921) no. 3618A.

⁸ The original text in: "Historiae quaedam recitatae inter publicas lectiones," K. G. Bretschneider, Corpus Refornnatorum (Braunschweig: Schwetschke and Sohne, 1854) 20: cols. 540-541. Cf. note 10 below.

⁹ The legend narrates the dramatic resolution of the crisis very much the way Melanchthon does: "Et orante Basilio et tenente in coelum manus, ecce charta p[er] aerem delata et ab omnibus visa venit et imposita est in manibus Basilii, quam ille suscipiens dixit puero: agnoscis has litteras frater? Et ille: etiam manu mea scriptae sunt. Et frangens Basilius scriptum perduxit eum ad ecclesiam et dignum eum fecit ministerio et bene instruens et regulas sibi dans reddidit mulieri." In: "De sancto Basilio," Jacobus de Voragine, Legenda aurea, ed. by Th. Graesse (Dresden, 1846) 125. Jacobus de Voragine uses the name Heradius, a corrupted form of Helladius, who is referred to in earlier texts as a witness; the father is generally known as Proterius. Cf. Ludwig Rademacher, "Die griechischen Quellen zur Faustsage," in: Sitzungsberichte der Akademie der Wissenschaften in Wien, philos.-hist. Kl. 206 (1927): 53. Rademacher shows that the legendary biography of St. Basil was an extremely popular work in the Middle Ages (p. 120). Cf. Erhard Dorn, Der sundige Heilige in der Legende des Mittelalters (Munich: Fink, 1967). Ernest Cushing Richardson, "The Influence of the Golden Legend on Pre-Reformation Culture History," Papers of the American Society of Church History 1 (1889): 239-248.

¹⁰ A manuscript of the Munich State Library shows Melanchthon's Erfurt story with essentially the same concluding admonition as that of Lercheimer. The admonition deals with the problem of motivation for the devil pact: money and the prospect of recovering lost articles with the devil's help. The manuscript belonged to Johannes Spon of Nurnberg, a student who began his studies in Wittenberg in 1553. "Ich will euch wol ein gewissere Kunst lernen. Wenn du etwas verloren hast, so lege saltz drauff, so findestu es wider. Id est: Supra rem amissam pone salem." Clm 941, fol. 558v. Lercheimer writes: "Derhalben gehe man solches teuffels fragens mussig. Hastu etwas verloren, das suche vnd bekomme es wider auff rechte, zimliche, vngefehrliche weise: als, lege ein wenig saltz daraff, so hastu es alsbald …" Lercheimer 9r-9v. The close correspondence in the moral lesson leaves little doubt that Lercheimer, a former student in Wittenberg, also took his material directly from Melanchthon.

¹¹ Luther, Tischreden no. 3739. Cf. Milchsack, Gesammelte Aufsatze cols. 227-228.

¹² Most of the anecdotes in the Leipzig manuscript described by Ernst Kroker date from 1554 and 1555. There is no piece dated later than 1557. The title of the section in which these stories are found is "Historiae collectae Wittebergae ex lectionibus D. Praeceptoris Philippi Melanthonis" in a manuscript preserved at the University of Leipzig (Rep. IV. 115aa 2). Quoted here from Ernst Kroker, "Anekdoten Melanchthons und Leipzig," Schriften des Vereins für Geschichte Leipzigs 10 (1911): 124-125. Also published by Milchsack Gesammelte Aufsaitze cols. 228-229. Cf. Andreas Hondorff, Promptuarium Exemplorum fol. 70r.

¹³ The Theophilus legend provides a striking parallel. In response to prayer, Mary returns the pact, placing it on the dying Theophilus's breast. Legenda aurea 593-594. As Hrotsvitha tells the story, Theophilus meets the devil in a forest. Hrotsvithae opera, ed. by H. Homeyer (Munich: Schoningh, 1970) 154-170 (lines 83-106).

¹⁴ Georg Major, Vitae Patrum in usum ministrorum verbi (Wittenberg: Seitz, 1544) fol. 211r-216v. Péter Bornemisza, Ordögi kisértetek, ed. Alexander Eckhardt (Budapest, 1955) 138. Cf Frank Baron, "A Faustmonda es valtozatai (Bornemisza Peter es Szenci Molnar Albert)," Irodalomtortenti Kozlemenyek 90 (1986): 22-31. In 1567 the Frenchman Gilbert Cousin published still another variation of the Valerius Glockner story in: Gilbert Cousin (Cognatus), Narrationum sylva (Basel, 1567) 543-547. Written down more than a century later, a similar devil pact story concerns the life of the Hungarian author Szenci Molnar Albert. The basic outline of the story is very close again to that of Melanchthon. Judit Vásárhelyi, "Molnár Albert és a Sátán Szövetsége," Irodalomtörténeti Közleménnyek 81 (1977): 395-403. Cf. György E. Szönyi, "Molnár Albert és a 'Tikos tudományok,'" Addattár XVII századi szellemi mozgalznaink történetéhez 4 (1978): 47-57. The narrators tended to revise their sources according to their particular interests. For Bomemisza the vice of drunkenness is of great concern. The author of the story about Szenci Molnár, as Melanchthon, focused on the popular motif of greed. For Bornemisza and Cognatus there was the new problem of pomography.

¹⁵ "Hic Faustus in hoc oppido Wittemberga evasit, cum optimus princeps dux loannes dedisset mandata de illo capiendo …" Johannes Manlius, Locorum communium collectanea (Basel: Oporinus, 1565) 39.

¹⁶ "Et nota est historia recitata a D. Luthero de nobili quodam pontificio & mago …" Nicolaus Selneccer, Operum Latinorum pars quarta (Leipzig: J. Steinemann, 1584) 206. A version of the story is also found in Wolfgang Bütner's revised ex empla collection Epitome historiarum of 1596, published in Leipzig by Frantz Schnellboltz, fol. 20r.

¹⁷ Gustav Milchsack, Gesammelte Aufsatze cols. 269-270. This story is found in the Wolfenbüttel manuscript 1169 Helmst., fol. 114v. The title: "Exempla insignia factorum dictorumque memorabilium, et principum et privatorum, collecta ex lectionibus D. praeceptoris Philippi Melanthonis et aliorum." The collection was probably written down about 1555. Cf. Milchsack, cols. 252-256. Luther tells the story of a pope (Sylvester II, 999-1003) who paid for his pact with the devil by the dismemberment of his body, but who in the end was able to save his soul by penance. Luther, Tischreden no. 6448. Cf. no. 5451.

¹⁸ The motif of violent death at the hands of the devil is common at this time, especially with the twisted head. The life of a Cologne physician in the Zimmerische Chronik ends in this manner. Frank Baron, "Which Faustus Died in Staufen? History and Legend in the Zimmerische Chronik," German Studies Review 4 (1983): 185-194. In 1562, Manlius shows this grotesque death of Faustus; Johannes Gast does the same as early as 1548; in the preface (Vorred an den Christlichen Leser) the Historia of 1587 follows their lead.

Luther's table conversation about Johannes Eck and Joachim I of Brandenburg, his famous religious and political opponents, illustrates this important factor in the development of devil pact stories. According to Luther, both Eck and the elector had made pacts with the devil in order to lengthen their lives. Luther, Tischreden nos. 5451 and 6809. Cf. Martin Rade, Zum Teufelsglauben Luthers, in: Marburger theologische Studien 21 (1931). Rade gives other examples of Luther's use of Teufelspolemik. This kind of attack made use of a considerable freedom in associating and shifting information from one subject to another. Motifs, images, or an entire devil pact story could be borrowed from other sources and brought to bear on a particular subject, motivated strongly by religious and polemical zeal.

¹⁹ Lercheimer fol. 5r-5v.

²⁰ K.G. Bretschneider, Corpus reformatorum 20: col. 617. Cf. Milchsack, Gesammelte Aufsätze cols. 148-149.

²¹ Spiera is reported to have died of natural causes. "Francesco Spiera," in: Realencyklopädie für protestantische Theologie und Kirche (Leipzig: Hinrich, 1906) 18: 648-649.

²² Andreas Hondorff, Theatrum historicum (Frankfurt: Spies, 1586) 100-103. About the mythical dimension of the identification with Cain and other sinners cf. Friedrich Ohly, Der Verfluchte und der Erwählte. Vom Leben mit der Schuld (Opladen: Westdeutscher Verlag, 1976) 98-104. Ohly shows that the closely related concepts of excessive self-reliance, boldness, and subsequent despair are familiar warning signs in the religious thought of the Middle Ages. Friedrich Ohly, "Desperatio und Praesumptio. Zur theologischen Verzweiflung und Vermessenheit," in: Helmut Birkhan (Hrsg.), Festgabe für Otto Höfler (Wien: Baumüller, 1976) 499-556.

²³ Füssel and Kreutzer 33.

²⁴ Füssel and Kreutzer 121.

²⁵ For a discussion of this problem in relationship to Lutheran thought cf. Hartmut Rudolph, "Das Faustbuch im kirchengeschichtlichen Zusammenhang," Das Faustbuch von 1587. Entstehung und Wirkung. In: Bad Kreuznacher Symposien II ed. by Richard Auernheimer and Frank Baron (Munich: Profil, 1991).

²⁶ Marguerite De Huszar Allen, The Faust Legend: Popular Formula and Modern Novel, in: Germanic Studies in America (New York: Lang, 1985) 53: 17. Cf. André Jolles, Einfache Formen (Halle: Niemeyer, 1930).

²⁷ Füssel and Kreutzer 188. Their interpretation is supported by Jeffrey Burton Russel: "The chief elements are the Greek me, "not"; phos, photos, "light"; and philos, "lover"—yielding "he who is not a lover of light," an ironic parody of Lucifer, "lightbearer." Mephistopheles. The Devil in the Modern World (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1986) 61. Cf. Müller, Romane 1376. Many attempts to solve the puzzle begin with the false assumption that the devil's name is Mephistopheles, as it appears in Goethe's work. The original name is Mephostophiles.

²⁸ Cf. Figure 5 and note 48 in Chapter 2 of Part I above.

²⁹ Johann Matthesius, D. Martin Luthers (Berlin, 1855) 295.