City (1950 pop. 386,485; 1525, 8,000-1000) and canton in northern Switzerland, the birthplace of the Anabaptist movement. The canton has since 1351 been listed first in the official list of cantons of the Swiss Confederacy. The city has been, through most of its history, the largest city and most important economic center in Switzerland. The city ruled the territory of the canton until 1803, when a democratic republic was established representing the entire cantonal population. Here the Swiss Reformation began with the work of Ulrich Zwingli who came to the city as the head pastor in 1519 and led the movement until his death at the Battle of Cappel in 1531. He was followed as leader by Heinrich Bullinger (q.v.), who served as head of the Zurich church 1531-d.75. From 1523 to 1798 the church of the canton of Ziirich was a pure state church, with a Reformed theology, the Catholic forms of worship having been reformed in May 1525. Since then it is a modified state church.
The Anabaptist movement arose out of the circle of intimate friends and followers of Zwingli in Zurich, who, after failure to persuade Zwingli to establish a free church of believers only, introduced adult baptism on confession of faith on Jan. 21, 1525, in a meeting of some 15 men in the house of Felix Manz's mother on Neustadt Street. The leaders were two young citizens of Zurich, Conrad Grebel (q.v., d.1526 in Maienfeld) and Felix Manz (q.v,., executed in Zurich in January 1527), togeth- er with Georg Blaurock (q.v., executed in 1529 in Tirol), a former priest of Chur. Grebel and Manz were both sons of prominent Zurich patrician families, both gifted university students, counted by Zwingli among his most devoted and promising followers. The break with Zwingli occurred after the second Zurich religious disputation in October 1523 and came gradually during the ensuing year as the state church policy of Zwingli became clear.
Vigorous suppression of the movement by force, climaxed in 1526 by the institution of the death penalty for teaching or preaching Anabaptism (Fefix Manz the first victim), prevented the development of an organized Anabaptist congregation in Zurich at the beginning or later. The first congregation in the neighborhood was that in the adjacent village of Zollikon (q.v.), which existed from February to May 1525, and then was suppressed.
However, Anabaptism did develop into a substantial movement, though never very large, in several of the outlying districts of the canton, especially Groningen (q.v.) on the east and Horgen (q.v.), Wadenswil, and Knonau on the south, although in the later 16th and early 17th centuries it is clear that all sections of the canton had some Anabaptists, rather thinly spread. It is almost impossible to locate specific and clearly organized congregations at any time, although the records occasionally carry phrases such as "the congregation in Gruningen," or, in "Horgerberg," whereby it is not clear whether the total Anabaptist population of a district is meant, with several meeting groups, or a specific congregation with its own local ministers and one meeting (though rotating in location among the homes or barns, or in the forests).
The first center of the movement was apparently in the territory of Gruningen, the southeastern part of the canton, where Grebel, Manz, and Blaurock found a good response among the villagers in the sununer and fall of 1525. By 1528, however, the promising growth had been broken here. Later the stronger areas were west of Zurich in the Horgerberg, Wadenswil, and Knonau districts.
The threat of the Anabaptist movement led to important measures of discipline in the Zurich state church whose purpose was to aid in detecting individual Anabaptists and making their key activities illegal. Among these was the introduction of the compulsory baptismal register on May 24, 1526, compulsory marriage in the church buildings (the Anabaptists married in their own conventicles), and in 1529 compulsory attendance at the state church service. The Anabaptists' justifiable criticism of the low moral state of the clergy as well as the population in general was met by sharp regulations against the most common vices and an elevation of requirements for the clergy. All these measures were combined and intensified in the sharp and comprehensive mandate of March 26, 1530 (Das grosse Sittenmandat), which included in its paragraph # 9 a direct attack against the Anabaptists. This paragraph strictly forbade any help or housing for Anabaptists on pain of heavy penalties, for "the council will not tolerate them in any regard," and required all clergy and authorities to report at once every known Anabaptist who wouId separate himself from the church. The Anabaptists were con- demned as leading to the "destruction of all authority." This was a decree by the civil state, designed in part to refute the bitter charges of the Catholic cantons that Ziirich was tolerating this "vicious sect," but also designed to meet the threat of a movement which rejected the oath and all military service, although the Anabaptists denied under cross-questioning that they "preached against the state," and there is no direct evidence that they were charged at this time with reducing the military potential of the state in its struggle with the Catholic cantons. In 1531 Bullinger published his first book against them, Von dem unverfchampten fraelet. His second book against them, Der Wider- 16uiqeren ursprung, appeared in 1560.
The strict mandates led to further executions: Konrad Winkler, a preacher, on Jan. 30, 1530, Heini Karpfis of Gruningen and Hans Herzog of Stadel on March 23, 1532. In 1533, however, a less strict policy was adopted, in line with Bern and other cantons. In June 1535 the council received, on requests from the clergy of the city a declaration of counsel an measures to take regarding the Anabap- tists, since the Anabaptists were increasing in number and preaching "in Gruningen, Wadenswil, and all along the lake."
This and other evidence belies the claim of Egli (90 f.) that the movement was dying out after 1530. Continued measures against the Anabaptists throughout the rest of the 16th century indicate that both church and state in Zurich took the movement seriously. Although no more executions took place until 1614, these measures included, besides im- prisonment for longer or shorter periods, confiscation of property and expulsion from Zurich territory. Builinger in particular had great, though misplaced, confidence, in sermons and other instruction to "root out the error," due certainly in part to his extraordinarily high evaluation of preaching as the means whereby God's election operated to reach individuals. Zurich's policy was in fact not so harsh as some of the other cantons, notably Bern, and only four executions took place in the canton, although a number died in prison later on.
One of the consequences of the persecution of the Anabaptists in Zurich as well as in other Swiss cantons was emigration to Moravia, where, except for two brief periods of persecution in 1536 and 1548, toleration by the authorities, as well as a vigorous church life, proved a great attraction. Missioners from the Hutterite colonies there frequently came to Switzerland to solicit immigrants, with considerable success, as the Hutterite Chronik repeatedly reports. In 1585, for instance, the Chronik says, "So many people came from Switzerland that at several places the doors had to be closed to them because not all could be received, though a good part of them were taken in." The years 1584-88 were a period of unusual emigration. On Aug. 18, 1584, at an eastern Zurich border point, a party of 50 headed for Moravia was apprehended. Not all the emigrants joined the Hutterite colonies, for there were congregations of Swiss Brethren in Moravia until well into the 17th century. Several times Hutterite emissaries were caught in Zurich. For instance, in 1574 three were arrested, questioned, and expelled. In 1584 "seven preachers" were sent to Switzerland, according to the Chronik. There is evidence also that at least a few similar emissaries came from the Netherlands, and took some Swiss Brethren back with them. In 1575, for instance, the Zurich archives report an Anabaptist preacher from the Netherlands preaching at various meetings near Billach, "who had been there before." In 1584 there is specific mention of emigration to the Netherlands. In the mid-17th century there was also a strong emigration to Alsace and the Palatinate.
The Zurich authorities wavered in their attitudes toward the Anabaptist emigration. At times they encouraged it and even expelled members of the group. At other times, as in 1576 (decree of Feb. 11), they forbade it. In all cases they forbade re-entry except to those who recanted and returned to the Protestant Church. It is worthy of note that the opposition to the Anabaptists by the state in one of the mandates was based almost exclusively on social and economic (not religious) grounds, such as their rejection of the oath, but especially their emigration with its consequent loss of wealth and manpower to the state and the weakening of the national defense through reduction of soldier material.
An interesting aspect of the relation of Anabaptists to the state church is the recognition by the authorities that the poor behavior of the Zilrich clergy, both in morals and in performance of their preaching and pastoral duties, was one cause of the growth of Anabaptiarn. Repeatedly the failures of the parish clergy in the villages were castigated and measures taken for reform. On Aug. 4, 1585, for instance, the city council sent a message to the Zurich church synod, which was to be read twice yearly at the synod meetings, calling for vigorous reform and improvement of the clergy, since the lack of discipline and poor sense of responsibility of the clergy was the cause for the separation of "many pious, God-fearing people." Their failures, especially moral failures, were to be punished with imprison- ment, suspension, or discharge. The conference of the four cantons on July,4, 1585, which had been called prirparily to agree upon common measures against the Anabaptists, also decided on a long series of measures calling for a reform of the clergy as well as of the morals of the population in general.
Often the measures against the Anabaptists were of an economic nature. In addition to money fines, withdrawal of permission to participate in the economic life of the village or community was ordered, including denial of acceptance into a village upon attempted transfer from one location to another. Money fines were imposed freely. For instance, the first absence from the state church Sunday preaching service drew a fine of 20 batzen, the second 5 pounds, further absences up to 20 pounds. Attendance at Anabaptist services was fined one pound. Hospitality to an Anabaptist cost 10 pounds. An anonymous communication to the city council in 1560 with the title, "By what means Anabaptists may be resisted, and how the Anabaptists, especially their leaders, may be punished," advocated as the chief measure the imposition of money fines.
The continued repressive measures against the Anabaptists did not succeed in rooting them out of Zurich until after the middle of the 17th century. Neither imprisonment confiscation, nor emigration brought about a surrender. Evidently the various measures authorized were not always thoroughly and relentlessly applied, even though the clergy were intense in their opposition to the Anabaptists; otherwise the persistence of the movement can scarcely be explained. It is true that no specific congregations can be identified and very few elders and ministers can be named throughout the entire 140-year history of Zurich Anabaptism, and no evidence has emerged of any general meeting or conferences of the entire body in the canton, nor have any records of the group itself survived except petitions or confessions submitted to the authorities. One of the latter is the "Gruningen Petition" (Gruningen Hingabe) of 1528 submitted by Jakob Falk and Heini Reimann, at that time in prison. Another is the petition of April 23, 1589, submitted by Andreas Gut of Affoltern on behalf of the brotherhood. A third petition, of 1589, possibly also drafted by Andreas Gut, entitled "Supplication an den Burgermeister und Rat der Stadt Zurich von einigen Wiedertaufem," with the further title "Einfaltig bekanntnus," treats five main points: the causes for the great divison, the value of the Old Testament in comparison to the New, the relation of the fellowship of believers of the New Testament to those of the Old, the attitude toward the state and the holding of public offices, and baptism. The Zurich clergy replied to the "Bekanntnus" with a polernic document of its own, containing ten points of poleniic description of the harmful influence of the Anabaptists upon the people, and pointing out their "opposition to the state," including nonswearing of oaths and rejection of military service.
The Anabaptist movement in Zurich experienced a moderate revival in members after 1600. Contributing to this was the serious estrangement between the general peasant population of the villages and the city population and government, which created a great dea; of unrest, together with the continuing poor performance of the clergy. The sympathy of the people for the Anabaptists was so strong in some places, such as Groningen, that it was practically impossible for the police to arrest them or to impose penalties. The magistrate (Vogt) of Wadenswil reported on Oct 8, 1612, "that they have such a tarn following that no one wants to lay hands on them. Other reports indicate thaf the Anabaptists were well enough organized to have a charity fund for the aid of the poor, administered by a "treasurer (deacon?) which received legacies and gifts and even owned a small farm near Sihlbrugg (Hallauergutli).:
In January 1613 a new mandate was issued against the Anabaptists, which was largely a repetition of that of 1585. On the basis of this mandate attempts were first made to win over the Anabaptists peacefully through disputations or conversations. At the first disputation, which took place at Wadenswil (q.v.) on Jan. 26, the Zurich Burgermeister Rahn, aided by J. J. Breitinger, pastor at St. Peter's in Zurich, soon to be the leader of the Zurich church, represented Zurich, while the elders Hans Landis and Rudolph Bachmann and a preacher Galatz represented the Anabaptim. The meeting was fruitless. At the second disputation held at Griiningen on March 3, 1613, sixteen of the forty Anabaptists living in the area appeared, while Stadholder Keller, Vogt Grebel, and J. J. Breifinger represented Zurich. Again the meeting was fruitless. Accordingly the authorities now attempted to carry through the mandate, which was made more difficult by a decree of the council forbidding emigration. At last extreme measures were taken. Six Anabaptist leaders from Wadenswil and Horgen were arrested, among them Hans Landis (q.v.), who finally was executed the following year as the last Anabaptist martyr in Zurich. The Ausbund (from 1655 on) contains a hymn of 47 verses about him. Two of the remaining five emigrated, while three recanted (for the full account see Horgen). The first three had been sentenced to the French galleys but escaped at Solothurn before delivery to the French ambassador.
From 1613 on, J. J. Breitinger, serving as leader of the Zurich church and seeking in every respect to promote her highest welfare, prosperity, and unity, took the lead in measures against the Anabaptists. Ms chief concern in dealing with the Anabaptists was to maintain unity and prevent any signitsnt loss of members or a schism. He was more moderate than some others in the actual measures undertaken, nevertheless carried through strongly. As a wise statesman he saw that the best way to meet the Anabaptist menace was to undermine the movel-nent by removing some of its supposed causes, hence worked vigorously at a reform of the clergy, improvement of the school system, and better care for the poor. His point of view was dominant in the Aarau meeting of the Protestant cantons on Jan. 18, 1616, which decided to push a vigorous reform of the clergy as the best means of counteracting the Anabaptists. Strong measures, including heavy imprisonment up to lifelong terms, were, however, provided for leaders and for stubborn impenitent members. These measures succeeded in repressing the movement somewhat and certainly prevented its further growth, but did not completely eradicate it.
After a period of relative quiet the final struggle with the Anabaptists took place in 1633A5. It was inaugurated with a census of the entire population in 1633, which produced a report (from the pastors) of a total of 182 adult (over 20 years of age) Anabaptists, distributed as follows- Affoltern 5, Barentswil 11, Birmensdorf 11, Bonstetten 2, Cappel 3, Egg 1, Ellikon 8, Griiningen 2, Gryffensee 1, Hinwyl 7, Hirzel 46, Hausen 3, Maschwanden.5, Wanedorf 11, Mettrnenstetten 6, Ottenbach 3, Pfiffikon 3, Richterswil 12, Stallikon 12, Fischent2l 8, Wald 4, Wadenswil 8, Wetzikon 2, Wildberg 2, suspects 5. [Photos of many of these towns]. The true numbers were certainly higher than the 182 listed, according to Bergmann (104), who reports that some figures probably represent households, that three of the parishes reported a total of 117 children under 20, and that the Freie Amt had 50 Anabaptists in addition to many suspects. Bergmann believes that there were scarcely any Anabaptists in the city itself. It is interesting to note that the parishes of Birmensdorf and Barentswil reported their Anabaptists to be very wealthy ("sehr wohlhabend").
On Dec. 28, 1635, four unnamed Anabaptist preachers were arrested and questioned fruitlessly, and after some months released. On Aug. 17, 1635, another disputation was arranged in Knonau, to which all the Anabatists in the districts of Gruningen, Wadenswil, and Knonau were invited. Many appeared, but not all 38 of the 58 in Knonau, 36 of the 71 in Wadenswil, 14 of the 61 in Gruningen. Later two disputations were held in the city, on Aug. 22 and Sept. 8, 1635. All discussions were fruitless; so the authorities concluded to try another tack. The individual Anabaptists were asked to reply in writing whether they were ready to recant or to emigrate. Four writings were received in Ziirich, all negative, one from Knonau written by Rudolf Egli and bearing 20 signatures, one from Widenswil written by Peter Bruppacher and bearing 9 signatures ("and many others"), one from Gruningen written by Hans Spori and bearing 9 signatures, one from Gryffensee and Kyburg with 17 signatures, and one from Wnnedorf with 23 signatures. Cer. t2inly the number of Anabaptists in the canton in 1635 must have reached 300 or more. The next step was to arrest most of the Anabaptists and place them in various prisons since the Zurich city prison did not have room. But soon practically all were either released or had escaped. In 1637 again large numbers were arrested. From these prisoners a petition for leave to emigrate was received, which listed a total of 70 men, 100 women,, and some 300 children as prisoners. This step was taken with heavy heart, after 20 weeks of imprisonment; but permission was refused, After several months of very severe imprisonment the miserable prisoners escaped in March. Thereupon in the following weeks the police were sent on house searches to arrest the Anabaptists again, and to confiscate their cash and valuable household goods. Bergmann illustrates the suffering of the families by an account of what the family of Rudolph Egli had to go through, until the family finally emigrated to the Palatinate.
A moving account of the sufferings of the Zurich brethern is given in a report prepared for the Dutch Mennonites in 1645, possibly by Hans Miiller of Edikon, or Jeremias Mangold. It forms a booklet of 27 pages of small type in small page format, which has been printed in every edition of the Ausbund printed in America, beginning in 1742, under the title Ein wahrhaftiger Bericht von den Brudern im Schweitzerland im dem Zurcher gebiet wegen der Trubsalen, welche uber sie ergangen sind, um des Evangeliums willen, von dem 1635 sten bis in du 1645 ste jahr. Aside from the 4-page sununary of the examinations of the prisoners in 1635-36 and the conclusion, it consists of a detailed account of the experiences of individuals in prison (and in part outside), organized under the heads of Klonau,(Knonau), Wadenswil and Horgen, and Gruningen. The following persons are treated: Hans Meyli, Hans Muller, Rudolph Egli, Hans Ringer, Heinrich Frick, Steffen Zander, Dorothea Grobin, Catharina Miillerin, Heinrich Gut, Otilly Mullerin, Barbara Meylin, Barbara Kolbin, Elisabeth Meylin, Hans Landis, Hans Huber, Conrad Strickler, Hans Rudolph Baumann, Oswald Landis, Feronica Ableny, Jacob Rusterholz, Felix Landis, Rudolph Sommer, Hans Asper, Werne Pleister, Ulrich Schneider, Gally Schneider, Rudolph Bachmann, Hans Jakob Hess, Hans Milller, Jakob Gochnauer, Jakob Egly, Georg Weber, Jakob Baumgartner, Ulrich Muller, Jakob Mussly (Nissly), Catharina Forrerin, Burckhard Ammen, Elisabeth Hutzny, and Heinrich Schnebele. The following are named in the report as ordained ministers (bestellte Diener): Hans Landis of Horgerberg and Ulrich Muller of Kyburg; Rudolph Bachmann as elder (Aeltester), and Werne Pleister as ordained elder (bestellier 4eitester). (It is possible that "besteilter Diener" means elder, and "Aeltester" means deacon.)
The Anabaptist Conunission, which had been set up in 1613 and charged with Anabaptist matters, now prepared a detailed account of their dealings with the Anabaptists, entitled
Handlung und Ersprachurig mit den Widertoeffern ihrer Irrtums wegen, which was published as a '"Manifest" on Oct. 31, 1639, and distributed among the population of the countryside (probably identical with Wahrhaffter Bericht Unsers des Burgermeisters des Kleinen uud Grossen Rahts ... der Statt Zurich ... unsers handlungen gegen den Widertaufferen 1639). The Anabaptists replied with an "Antimanifest" (so named in the archives) entitled "Christenliche und Kurtze verantwortung der briideren, dienern, und eltisten im Zurich gebiedt uber das buchlein oder manifest so ausgegangen in der Stadt und Land-schaft Zurich, probably written in 1640.
.In November and December 1639 the final heavy blow was struck. An order went out from the Anabaptist Commission to arrest all Anabaptists, confiscate all goods, and to declare all marriages an- nulled and all children illegitimate. This was done and the Anabaptists were crowded into the prisons, which had been emptied of criminals, and kept in complete isolation under the harshest conditions. All pleas for mercy were denied. The general population of the countryside, however, was deeply aroused by these measures. Attempts to sell the Anabaptist properties found few buyers, and no one was ready to take over their shops or businesses. In this' time of great need the Zurich Anabaptists turned to their brethren in Holland, apparently through a family of Mennonite weavers in Zurich who had come from Holland, Hans Suner. Secret collections were sent from Holland to the prisoners as early as 1640: The fruitless intervention of the Dutch Mennonites on behalf of their persecuted Zurich brethren in which they finally called on the Dutch government for help, continued for 20 years for Zurich, and for 50 years longer for Bern. Word regarding the Zurich persecution first reached the Amsterdam Mennonites in 1641, who at once made a connection with the prisoners through a Reformed (or Lutheran) merchant in Amsterdam, Izak Hattavier (q.v.). In 1642 a Reformed pastor in Amsterdam, Godefridus Hottonus, wrote to Zurich about the matter and on Aug. 21 received a lengthy letter from Breitinger. A paper war followed in 1643 over the Zurich persecution, between Petrus Bontemps (q.v.) a Reformed preacher of Haarlem, Joost Hendriksz (d. 1644), an Amsterdam Mennonite preacher, and A. D. Volbot (q.v., who used the pseudonym Gerard van Vrijburgh). On Feb. 15, 1645, Jerernias Mangold, no doubt a Zurich Anabaptist, sent to Holland a lengthy manuscript report on the Zurich persecution, which, together with a shorter report of February, written by Martin Meyb, was used by Van Braght for a lengthy report in the Martyrs' Mirror (1660). The Zurich-Lied, with 49 stanzas, gives an account of the sufferings of the Zilrich prisoners, written by one of them, Hans Rycker. It was published in a small songbook called Ein geistliches Liederbachlein, which was published (for the first time?) in 1709 or later. The Darsriittilied follows it, which likewise gives an account of the Bernese Anabaptist persecution. At the request of the Dutch Mennonites, addressed to the States-General and to the Amsterdam City Magistracy, the States-General on Feb. 19, 1660, addressed a letter to the Zurich government requesting that Zurich permit the Anabaptists to emigrate with their goods. This petition was supported by the cities of Amsterdam and Rotterdam, and by the Knights-Proprietors of Alsace (whose support had no doubt been enlisted by the Mennonites there). To all of these Zurich answered negatively on July 20, 1660.
Much material on the persecution of the Zurich Anabaptists about this time is found in several other sources. The Mangold report of 1645 is apparently the one printed in full in the Ausbund (first in the 1742 Germantown edition). An extract of the Zurich Anabaptist archival documents covering Feb. 3, 1639, to Jan. 9, 1643, prepared by Hans Kaspar Suter, probably at the request of the Bernese authorities, qppears in two copies in the Bern Staatsarchiv. A similar comprehensive report secured by the Bern Anabaptist Commission in 1659 from the Zurich Anabaptist Commission also appears in the Bern Staatsarchiv. J. H. Ottius, Annales Anabaptistici, pp. 204-360, also gives many details in often lengthy items, particularly for 1609-70.
On April 23, 1641, the captives escaped from prison, though many were recaptured. Gradually matters quieted down again and once more the Brethren thought that perhaps an implicit toleration might be their lot, but not so. After the close of the Thirty Years' War in 1648, when immigrants were desired to repopulate southern Germany, most of the Zurich Anabaptists emigrated, along with numerous Reformed families. They settled largely in the Palatinate. A few remained behind as relatives of prisoners with life sentences or for other reasons. In 1654 two brethren named Schmid and Frick underwent examinations and in 1656 Frick finally was freed after 27 months of imprisonment, where- upon he emigrated to the Palatinate. The official records show that a total of 119 Anabaptists left for the Palatinate and Alsace in 1656-57, while some 1,076 Reformed followed the same route. Further records show that among the 4,130 who had emigrated in 1657-61 there were 49 Anabaptists with 70 children.
So the might of the Zurich state after 140 years finally succeeded in exterminating the Anabaptist movement in the land of its beginnings. But Zurich Anabaptism lived on in foreign countries, first in the Palatinate, and finally in Pennsylvania, whither a large number of Palatine Mennonites emigrated in 1707-56. It is probable that 75 per cent of the Mennonites of the Lancaster Mennonite settlement established in 1710-17 consisted of original Zurich families, instead of those of Bernese origin as has been hitherto too easily assumed. Among them are such well-known families as Landis, Brubacher, Snyder, Miller, Weber (Weaver), Hess, Gochnauer, Bauman, Bachmann, Good, Nissley, Snavely, Hege, Huber, Strickler, Kendig, and Graff.
The Zurich Anabaptists have been treated in three literary works, two by major writers, all deal- ing with the earliest period. Gottfried Keller, an outstanding Swiss novelist, wrote the Novelle Ursula (q.v., 1878); Usar von Arx, the leading contemporary Swiss dramatist, wrote Bruder in Christo (q.v., 1947); and Erich Diebold, a Swiss journalist, wrote the novel Folge dem Licht (1945; see Literature). Heinrich Bullinger's two major works of 1531 and 1560 against the Anabaptists became standard sources and greatly influenced both official and popular attitudes. Being polemic writings, they contain little purely historical material. They are fully treated under the articles Von dem unverschampten fraefel and Widertaufferen Ursprung.