Christmas Every Day

1525

The execution of Thomas Müntzer

When Martin Luther stood before the Holy Roman Emperor in 1521, he asserted that one man’s conscience, formed by reading the Bible, could stand against the might of the Church and a thousand years of tradition. His Catholic opponents argued that individual interpretation of Scripture would lead to chaos and a multitude of opinions, many of them erroneous and heretical. And so it came to be. While Luther was fleeing into hiding after his trial, a host of wild men with wild ideas, sprang up across the German-speaking lands – some of them even entered into Wittenberg where Luther had taught. These were the “Zwickau Prophets” who claimed that Luther had not gone nearly far enough in his rejection of established religion, for what mattered was not Scripture but the direct inspiration of the Holy Spirit. These “Spiritualists” argued that God came in the form of visions and dreams, not in the words of an old book, and they caused the chaos that the Catholics had predicted.

One such Spiritualist was Thomas Müntzer (1489-1525), a priest who was already deemed a radical even before he met, and studied with, Luther. As he wandered from town to town, looking for an audience that would respond to his views, Müntzer became convinced that that End Times were at hand. Christ’s Second Coming was not long off (a widely-held belief even professed by Luther) but that His coming must be preceded by a bloody cleansing of the earth wherein the enemies of Christ: priests, princes, nobles and those who did not follow this Spiritualist line, would be killed. Following the cleansing all would be equal and all property would be held in common.

Peasants in the 16^th century were seeing their traditional rights eroded: from hunting and fishing to representation at local diets. Peasants had long used biblical and religious justification to back their anti-feudal demands. For decades the Bundschuh (peasant legging and shoe) had served as the symbol of peasant resistance and striving in dozens of local rebellions. The Bundschuh was often linked with a religious slogan which implied that God’s laws were not being followed by their feudal overlords and so peasants knew how to exploit a cognate theological argument for spiritual freedom when they heard it in Lutheran sermons. When Luther in 1523 urged communities to pick their own pastors, peasant leaders claimed his approval for local political control as well. There was, therefore, mutual exploitation during these years: the Lutherans by the peasants, and the peasants by the Lutherans. Reformers sought to enlist the support of the peasants and portrayed farmer Hans with his plough as the ideal Christian, the sort of man that God intended: working with his hands, not puffed up with vain theological knowledge. Luther urged lords to treat their peasants as fellow Christians and not to exploit them lest they rise in rebellion but there was no way that mainstream reformers could sanction peasant rebels when fighting broke out in late 1524.

The first outbreak came in Stühlingen where, in the middle of the harvest, the countess demanded that the peasants stop taking off the crop and search for snail shells for her (she was going to wind yarn around them). The fighting spread in Switzerland and across much of Germany. The reasons for the rebellion were overwhelmingly economic and social but there was a religious element too and an involvement by reforming preachers. The “Twelve Articles” which became the peasant manifesto included the demand that local communities have the right to name their own pastors and vowed that they wanted no reform that was not according to Holy Scripture.

Thomas Müntzer had by 1525 become one of the leaders of the rebellion. He began to style himself “Destroyer of the Unbelievers” and to preach of the imminent end of the old era and the dawn of a new age of social justice. His appeal to German princes to lead his crusade having fallen on deaf ears, Müntzer turned to the poor to be the new Elect, a covenanted people of God. When the rebellion broke out he urged his poor followers on to violence and a liberating slaughter that would open the way to the new age of godliness and peace.

Luther began by urging peace and moderation – criticizing both the lords for their refusal to recognize the justice of some of the peasant demands and the peasants for using violence to further their ends. He personally mediated some disputes and pacified areas at the risk of his own life but in 1525 when news of peasant atrocities reached him he turned decisively against them. The title of his work Against the Robbing and Murdering Hordes of Peasants pretty much tells the tale. He urged the authorities to repress the rebels like mad dogs and to show no mercy until the rebellion had been crushed. By the time Luther’s book appeared the fighting was over. The critical battle took place at Frankenhausen where Müntzer was urging violence every bit as harsh as Luther. “On! On! On!”, he told the peasant soldiers, “Spare not. Pity not the godless when they cry. Remember the command of God to Moses to destroy utterly and show no mercy. The whole countryside is in commotion. Strike! Clang! Clang! On! On!” He told the peasants that he would precede them and catch their enemies’ bullets in his sleeves but in fact he ran away and was hiding in bed when he was captured by the forces of the triumphant princes. He was executed on this day in 1525.

1805 Napoleon crowns himself, again

Having already crowned himself Emperor of the French, Napoleon saw no reason to alter the ceremony in his conquered lands. On the 23^rd of May 1805, during the rite to create him King of Italy at Milan, he, with his own hands, placed the ancient iron crown of Lombardy on his head, saying, Dieu me la donne, gare à qui la touche — ‘God has given it to me, let him beware who would touch it’, a phrase used in the ancient coronation ceremony.

This celebrated crown is composed of a broad circle of gold, set with large rubies, emeralds, and sapphires, on a ground of blue and gold enamel. The small size of the regalia may be due to its missing two pieces in the centuries since its creation.

But the most important part of the iron crown, from which, indeed, it derives its name, is a narrow band of iron, about three-eighths of an inch broad, and one-tenth of an inch in thickness, attached to the inner circumference of the circlet. This inner band of sacred iron—perfectly visible in the above engraving —is said to have been made out of one of the nails used at the crucifixion, given by the Empress Helena, discover of the True Cross, to her son Constantine, as a miraculous protection from the dangers of the battlefield. Helena had found the other nails used in the crucifixion: she supposedly cast one nail into the sea to calm a storm, another was incorporated into a  diadem for Constantine’s helmet, another was fitted to the head of a statue of the Emperor, and a fourth was melted down and molded into a bit for Constantine’s horse. Since then, alleged pieces of the holy nails can be found in almost thirty European countries. (I, myself, saw one of these in the Patriarch of Constantinople’s church in Istanbul.)

The ecclesiastics who exhibit the crown point out as a ‘permanent miracle,’ that there is not a single speck of rust upon the iron, though it has now been exposed more than fifteen hundred years. Recent research has shown that the so-called iron band does not attract a magnet and is, in fact, silver; but a medieval manuscript suggests that a band of iron was used on the outside, not the inside of the crown. Scientific examination suggests that at least parts of the crown date back to c. 500.

Bonaparte, after his coronation at Milan, instituted a new order of knighthood for Italy, entitled the Iron Crown, on the same principles as that of the Legion of Honour for France. After his fall, the order was maintained by the Austrian emperors. The crown itself is preserved as a relic in Monza Cathedral.

1520

Massacre at a Mexican Festival

In 1519 the Spanish conquistador Hernan Cortes had succeeded in invading the Aztec empire of central Mexico and controlling the Aztec emperor, Moctezuma, and the capital Tenochtitlan. Relations between the tiny Spanish contingent and the mass of Aztecs was tense and the deeds of this day in 1520 brought things to a boiling point.

Cortes had departed Tenochtitlan to head for the coast where he expected to battle some other Spaniards with orders to arrest him. He had left in charge his unstable deputy Pedro de Alvarado (shown above). During the absence of Cortes, Alvarado was approached by high-ranking Aztecs who wished to hold a festival and sought his permission lest he think they were gathering with hostile intent. Alvarado agreed, provided there would be no human sacrifice involved (a ritual that marked many Aztec festivals). When Alvarado learned that the celebrations would, in fact, include a human sacrifice he acted to halt it and massacred the participants.

That was the Spanish story. Here is the Aztec account:

Here it is told how the Spaniards killed, they murdered the Mexicans who were celebrating the Fiesta of Huitzilopochtli in the place they called The Patio of the Gods

At this time, when everyone was enjoying the celebration, when everyone was already dancing, when everyone was already singing, when song was linked to song and the songs roared like waves, in that precise moment the Spaniards determined to kill people. They came into the patio, armed for battle. They came to close the exits, the steps, the entrances [to the patio]: The Gate of the Eagle in the smallest palace, The Gate of the Canestalk and the Gate of the Snake of Mirrors. And when they had closed them, no one could get out anywhere.

Once they had done this, they entered the Sacred Patio to kill people. They came on foot, carrying swords and wooden and metal shields. Immediately, they surrounded those who danced, then rushed to the place where the drums were played. They attacked the man who was drumming and cut off both his arms. Then they cut off his head [with such a force] that it flew off, falling far away. At that moment, they then attacked all the people, stabbing them, spearing them, wounding them with their swords. They struck some from behind, who fell instantly to the ground with their entrails hanging out [of their bodies]. They cut off the heads of some and smashed the heads of others into little pieces.

They struck others in the shoulders and tore their arms from their bodies. They struck some in the thighs and some in the calves. They slashed others in the abdomen and their entrails fell to the earth. There were some who even ran in vain, but their bowels spilled as they ran; they seemed to get their feet entangled with their own entrails. Eager to flee, they found nowhere to go. Some tried to escape, but the Spaniards murdered them at the gates while they laughed. Others climbed the walls, but they could not save themselves. Others entered the communal house, where they were safe for a while. Others lay down among the victims and pretended to be dead. But if they stood up again they [the Spaniards] would see them and kill them.

The blood of the warriors ran like water as they ran, forming pools, which widened, as the smell of blood and entrails fouled the air. And the Spaniards walked everywhere, searching the communal houses to kill those who were hiding. They ran everywhere, they searched every place.

When [people] outside [the Sacred Patio learned of the massacre], shouting began, “Captains, Mexicas, come here quickly! Come here with all arms, spears, and shields! Our captains have been murdered! Our warriors have been slain! Oh Mexica captains, [our warriors] have been annihilated!”

Then a roar was heard, screams, people wailed, as they beat their palms against their lips. Quickly the captains assembled, as if planned in advance, and carried their spears and shields. Then the battle began. [The Mexicas] attacked them with arrows and even javelins, including small javelins used for hunting birds. They furiously hurled their javelins [at the Spaniards]. It was as if a layer of yellow canes spread over the Spaniards.

This massacre led to a complete breakdown of trust between the Spanish and the Aztec rulers. Rebellion against Cortes broke out and horrible deeds ensued.

1812

The assassination of Prime Minister Perceval

The English-speaking world has a mixed record when it comes to political assassinations. Unlike the more excitable Latin nations who off their leaders with depressing regularity, the Anglosphere is slower on the assassination trigger but even so, there are distinctions to be made. American politicians have a high mortality rate (hello, Presidents Lincoln, Garfield,  Mckinley, and Kennedy; Governors Huey Long, Charles Bent, William Goebel, and Frank Steunenburg; and a host of judges, congressmen, and state officials) and the situation in India and Pakistan is even worse. Only one minor politician has bit the dust in Canada; Australia records only one victim and New Zealand has no assassinated rulers on its watch. Clearly the difference is the presidential system — if you have a constitutional monarchy with an elected prime minister, you are pretty safe. With one exception.

In 1812 John Bellingham (1769-1812), a failed businessman who believed that the British government had not recompensed him for bad treatment at the hands of Russians, shot Prime Minister Spencer Perceval (1762-1812). At his trial he made the following speech in his defence:

“Recollect, Gentlemen, what was my situation. Recollect that my family was ruined and myself destroyed, merely because it was Mr Perceval’s pleasure that justice should not be granted; sheltering himself behind the imagined security of his station, and trampling upon law and right in the belief that no retribution could reach him. I demand only my right, and not a favour; I demand what is the birthright and privilege of every Englishman.

Gentlemen, when a minister sets himself above the laws, as Mr Perceval did, he does it as his own personal risk. If this were not so, the mere will of the minister would become the law, and what would then become of your liberties?

I trust that this serious lesson will operate as a warning to all future ministers, and that they will henceforth do the thing that is right, for if the upper ranks of society are permitted to act wrong with impunity, the inferior ramifications will soon become wholly corrupted.

Gentlemen, my life is in your hands, I rely confidently in your justice.”

Bellingham was found guilty and hanged three days later.

1943

The Warsaw Ghetto Uprising is crushed

As a prelude to mass deportations and extermination, the German government in occupied Poland moved the Jewish population into packed and disease-ridden urban ghettos. From there they were told they would be put on trains to labour camps in the East but in fact, these journeys led only to places whose names live on in infamy: Treblinka, Sobibor, Auschwitz and Majdanek.

By early 1943 the remaining Jews of the ghetto in Warsaw knew what their fates would be — about 200,000 had already been deported — and began to resist sporadically. When German forces entered the ghetto in strength on Passover in April large-scale fighting began to take place. Various Jewish groups, separated by ideology but united in determination to go down fighting, had collected weapons, built strong-points and bunkers, and made alliances with Polish resistance fighters outside the ghetto.

For weeks they prevented the SS and Gestapo units aided by Jewish ghetto police and Polish police  from proceeding with the deportations until finally the Nazis resorted to burning down the ghetto, building by building. Some fighters escaped through tunnels to the outside where they joined the larger anti-German resistance, some committed suicide, and some surrendered. On May 16, the SS commander Jürgen Stroop (later executed for war crimes) announced the end of the uprising, marked by demolition of the synagogue, though minor incidents continued for weeks. German casualties were light but 13,000 Jews perished and a further 57,000 were deported. Stroop, who would late write a lengthy account of the battle praised the Jewish fighters. “The Jews surprised me and my officers with their determination in battle. And believe me, as veterans of World War I and SS members, we knew what determination in battle was all about. The tenacity of your Warsaw Jews took us completely by surprise. That’s the real reason the Großaktion lasted as long as it did.”

The next year, Warsaw would rise again in rebellion and again the Nazis would crush the resistance.

1948 Arab-Israeli War begins

The collapse of the Turkish Ottoman empire after World War I led to much of the Arab world being governed by Britain and France as “mandates”: the British were given Palestine and Iraq to supervise, while France took over ruling Syria and Lebanon. The most problematic of these territories was Palestine where the local Arab population resented Jewish immigration and where a number of radical Jewish groups wished to expel the British and establish an independent Jewish state. Terrorism and atrocities were the order of the day for both sides.

After the Second World War, Britain was desperate to be rid of its Palestinian mandate, having tried to keep the peace but ending up unpopular with both Arabs and Jews. In late 1947, the United Nations proposed a partition of the territory, allotting land for both a Jewish and an Arab state while maintaining Jerusalem and Bethlehem under an international regime. Both Arabs and Jews prepared for conflict, gathering troops, establishing fortifications and buying weapons abroad. Sporadic fighting broke out and terrorist attacks were undertaken. When the partition was to take effect and the republic of Israel was declared, war erupted on May 15. Irregular forces of Muslim volunteers from the Holy War Army and the Arab Liberation Army, the Arab Legion of Jordan, and the armies of Egypt, Syria and Iraq descended upon Jewish-held territories; fighting lasted over 9 months. When the smoke cleared the Israeli state had survived and expanded its territory, Jordan had seized the West Bank, and a massive relocation of refugees begun. Seventy-four years later, the wounds have not healed.

1878

America’s last witchcraft trial

It was, appropriately enough, in Salem, Massachusetts that what came to be known as the last American witchcraft trial took place.

Lucretia Brown was a 50-year old spinster, who had been an invalid since she injured her spine in a childhood accident, when she  became a disciple of  Mary Baker Eddy. She became convinced that Christian Science had healed her but when she suffered a “relapse” in 1875, Mrs. Eddy convinced her that Daniel Spofford of Newburyport, whom Mrs. Eddy had recently excommunicated for “immorality”, was exercising mesmeric powers upon her. Eddy’s term for these powers was “Malicious Animal Magnetism”.

Mrs. Eddy believed that Spofford was an enemy of her church and tried unsuccessfully to publish an attack against him in papers throughout the county. She directed twelve of her students to spend two hours each every day around the clock in concentrated thought against Mr. Spofford to prevent him from doing further harm to her patients. She had her lawyer in Lynn draw up a bill of complaint in Lucretia Brown’s name, setting forth the injuries that Spofford had supposedly inflicted and petitioning the court to restrain him from exercising his powers against her. The text stated that “the defendant practices the art of mesmerism and by his said art and the power of his mind influences and controls the minds and bodies of other persons for the purpose of injuring the persons and property and social relations of others”.

Mrs Eddy’s attorney refused to argue the case in court, so she ordered her student Edward Arens to do so and twenty of her followers to stand as witnesses. On June 3, 1875 they assembled at the railway station in Lynn for the train to Salem. The Boston Globe reported that one of the appointed witnesses approached Mrs. Eddy to complain that he knew nothing whatever about the case and would not know what to say, whereupon she assured him that he would be told what to say. At the courthouse in Salem, nearly two centuries after the witchcraft hysteria, the last charge of witchcraft in this country was brought to trial. Mr. Spofford did not bother to appear. When Mr. Arens rose before Judge Horace Gray and presented the bill of complaint, Mr. Spofford’s attorney Mr. Noyes objected. Judge Gray declared that it was not within the power of the Court to control Mr. Spofford’s mind, even if he were to be jailed. Mrs Eddy was not given any opportunity to argue that disease could be the work of mesmeric powers, and the case was dismissed due to “defects in the writ.”

Lucretia Brown lived out her life still convinced of her Christian Science beliefs, dying in 1883 of pneumonia after refusing medical care.

1878

America’s last witchcraft trial

It was, appropriately enough, in Salem, Massachusetts that what came to be known as the last American witchcraft trial took place.

Lucretia Brown was a 50-year old spinster, who had been an invalid since she injured her spine in a childhood accident, when she  became a disciple of  Mary Baker Eddy. She became convinced that Christian Science had healed her but, when she suffered a “relapse” in 1875, Mrs. Eddy convinced her that Daniel Spofford of Newburyport (pictured above), whom Mrs. Eddy had recently excommunicated for “immorality”, was exercising mesmeric powers upon her. Eddy’s term for these powers was “Malicious Animal Magnetism”.

Mrs. Eddy believed that Spofford was an enemy of her church and tried unsuccessfully to publish an attack against him in papers throughout the county. She directed twelve of her students to spend two hours each every day around the clock in concentrated thought against Mr. Spofford to prevent him from doing further harm to her patients. She had her lawyer in Lynn draw up a bill of complaint in Lucretia Brown’s name, setting forth the injuries that Spofford had supposedly inflicted and petitioning the court to restrain him from exercising his powers against her. The text stated that “the defendant practices the art of mesmerism and by his said art and the power of his mind influences and controls the minds and bodies of other persons for the purpose of injuring the persons and property and social relations of others”.

Mrs Eddy’s attorney refused to argue the case in court, so she ordered her student Edward Arens to do so and twenty of her followers to stand as witnesses. On June 3, 1875 they assembled at the railway station in Lynn for the train to Salem. The Boston Globe reported that one of the appointed witnesses approached Mrs. Eddy to complain that he knew nothing whatever about the case and would not know what to say, whereupon she assured him that he would be told what to say. At the courthouse in Salem, nearly two centuries after the witchcraft hysteria, the last charge of witchcraft in this country was brought to trial. Mr. Spofford did not bother to appear. When Mr. Arens rose before Judge Horace Gray and presented the bill of complaint, Mr. Spofford’s attorney, Mr. Noyes, objected. Judge Gray declared that it was not within the power of the Court to control Mr. Spofford’s mind, even if he were to be jailed. Mrs Eddy was not given any opportunity to argue that disease could be the work of mesmeric powers, and the case was dismissed due to “defects in the writ.”

Lucretia Brown lived out her life still convinced of her Christian Science beliefs, dying in 1883 of pneumonia after refusing medical care.

1619

The execution of a Dutch patriot

Johan van Oldenbarneveldt (1547-1619) was a Dutch lawyer who took part in the resistance to Spanish occupation, the so-called 60 Years’ War. He was a prominent politician who stood up for the rights of the province of Holland and those adhering to the anti-Calvinist branch of Protestantism known as Arminianism. Both of these brought him into conflict with Maurice of Nassau, leader of the Orange faction. In 1618 Oldenbarneveldt was arrested and charged with treason; the trial was infamous for its unfairness, Chamber’s Book of Days was still angry about it 200 years later:

His name is usually associated with ideas of national ingratitude. Another is evoked by it, that there is no party or body of men safe by their professions of liberal principles, or even their professed support of liberal forms of government, from the occasional perpetration of acts of the vilest tyranny and oppression. After William of Orange, the Netherlands owed their emancipation from the Spanish yoke to the advocate, Johan Van Olden Barneveldt. He it mainly was who obtained for his country a footing among the powers of Europe. As its chief civil officer, or advocate-general, he gained for it peace and prosperity, freed it from debt, restored its integrity by gaining back the towns which had been surrendered to England as caution for a loan, and extorted from Spain the recognition of its independence. It owed nearly everything to him. Nor could it be shewn that he ever was otherwise than an upright and disinterested administrator. He had, however, to oppose another and a dangerous benefactor of Holland in Prince Maurice of Orange. A struggle between the civil and the military powers took place.

There was at the same time a struggle between the Calvinists and the Arminians. In British history, the former religious body has been associated with the cause of civil liberty. The history of the Netherlands is enough to shew that this was from no inherent or necessary affinity between liberty and the Genevan church. Barneveldt, who had embraced the tenets of Armin, contended that there should be no predominant sect in Holland; he desired toleration for all, even for the Catholics. The Calvinists, to secure their ascendancy, united themselves with Prince Maurice, who, after all, was not of their belief. By these combined influences, the sage and patriotic Barneveldt was overwhelmed. After a trial, which was a mockery of justice, he was condemned to death; and this punishment was actually inflicted by decapitation, at the Hague, on the 13^th of May 1619, when Barneveldt was seventy-two years of age.

1945  A very busy day

V-E Day

Victory in Europe Day. In the ruins of conquered Berlin, German Field-Marshal Wilhelm Keitl signed the document to “surrender unconditionally to the Supreme Commander, Allied Expeditionary Force and simultaneously to the Supreme High Command of the Red Army all forces on land, at sea, and in the air who are at this date under German control.” This officially ended the European phase of the Second World War, though sporadic fighting continued for a few days.

Prague Uprising

One of those places where fighting continued was in Prague, the capital of Czecho-Slovakia, where citizens had risen up against the occupying German forces. Believing that American and Russian armies were near, the Czech partisans began attacking German positions in the city on March 5. Several days of heavy fighting ensued, including tank battles and air attacks, before an agreement allowed the German forces to slip westward to avoid surrendering to the Soviets.

Sétif Massacre

In the French colony of Algeria, during celebrations of the war’s end, fighting broke out between pro-independence natives and French colons (settlers) resulting in the massacre of over 100 French civilians. The military took revenge against Algerian villages believed to be involved and conducted a series of atrocities that resulted in thousands of deaths, souring relations between the French and their Arab and Berber subjects.

Halifax Riot

When news of the end of the war in Europe reached Halifax on May 7, the city was swollen with the presence of over 25,000 servicemen anxious to celebrate. The commanding admiral, Leonard W. Murray, against the advice of his officers, unwisely allowed 9,000 sailors to go ashore, asking them to “be joyful without being destructive or distasteful.” The men found there were no places they could legally drink and began a riot in which liquor stores were looted, shops were vandalized and robbed, streetcars were overturned and burnt and the police attacked. The next morning, the clueless Murray allowed another 9,500 men shore leave with a similar result. Finally, aware of the disorder, the military declared a curfew and herded men back into their barracks. The damage was three men dead (two from alcohol poisoning, and one a possible murder), 363 arrested, 654 businesses damaged and 207 establishments looted.