Thomas Müntzer and the World to Come
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
This article analyzes the conflict between Martin Luther and Thomas Müntzer, two of the main leaders of the Protestant Reformation, but above all the person and thought of Thomas Müntzer, in the light of Marxist historiography. Indeed, if for a part of the Marxist historians and ideologues, such as Engels and Kautsky, the Reformation had been a thinly veiled class struggle and the theological component had little importance, the situation changed radically throughout the 20th century. Thus, for Carls Hinrichs, in a 1952 work on the disputes between Luther and Müntzer, he did take into account the theological ideas of both. But the most interesting author is Ernst Bloch, whose work on Müntzer in 1960 was not well understood either by Marxists or by the West. For the authors of the article, Bloch is interested in Müntzer because through his life and fate, Bloch could demonstrate that the German reformer's idea of history was connected to a kind of "submerged history of utopia", a theme that interested Bloch above all between 1918 and 1923. In other words, with his interpretation of Müntzer's personality, Bloch turns what until then was understood as a pre-Marxist revolutionary, at least among supporters of Marxist historiography, into a defender of his own utopian hermeneutics. Bloch identified his utopia with the Russian Revolution.
We have hardly found errors in the article, only, in l. 215, where it is said: "to individualism. this seems", it should say: "to individualism, this seems".
Wouldn't it be convenient to include all the cited bibliography in a final list?
Author Response
Thank you. I have corrected line 215 and added a bibliography. Best wishes, Christina
Reviewer 2 Report
l. 29: I believe "his" is missing after "seizing of" -- seizing of his enormous wealth/ or "the seizing of the enormous wealth of the pope...
l. 45 : "utopian" rather than "utopianist."
When first mention of the GDR, you should spell it out German Democratic Republic. Perhaps you should also note that Bloch resided in the GDR before he fled to West Germany
Please note that in the footnotes you tend to spell genitive pronouns in upper case, whereas the should be in lower case.
fn 2 Und= und
fn 3 Des=des
fn 3 Konzept Der = Konzept der
fn 6 and 9 Geschichte Der = der
fn 13 article Und=und
fn 29 Der=der
fn 30 Der=der
Author Response
Thank you for this. I have added (GDR) after the first mention of German Democratic Republic. I do mention Bloch's residence in GDR in lines 162-167, but have made it a bit clearer. Thank you for noting the capitals in the footnotes, I have corrected this. BEst wishes, Christina
Reviewer 3 Report
Thomas Munzer and the world to come.
I think this paper merits publication. It brings clarity to the question of how Munzer’s theological vision underwrote the Peasants’ rebellion whereas Luther’s vision opposed it. Whereas Luther’s emphasis on individual enthusiasm based exclusively in scripture can deploy in the services of princes, Munzer’s emphasis on not self but “we-revelation” has a communal and extra-scriptural basis in “material traces” of past injustices, as “utopian surplus” (Bloch’s language). This convincingly establishes the link the author promises to Marxist historiography. In short, the author offers a sufficiently interesting and valuable contribution to justify publication. The uses of primary sources and quality of writing is impressive.
Author Response
Thank you. Best wishes, Christina
