From Proselytus to Exul Christi: Networks, Brokers and Religious Identity in the Reconversion of Christian Fischer, 1627

1 Introduction

In 1627 Christian Fischer, secretary and adviser to Wolfgang Wilhelm of Pfalz-Neuburg, made his way to the Duchy of Württemberg in order to formalize his reconversion to Lutheran beliefs, a move which would leave him exiled from his homeland. Born into the Lutheran faith, Fischer converted to Catholicism at some point between 1615 and 1621 during the re-Catholicization of Pfalz-Neuburg that followed Wolfgang Wilhelm’s accession. By migrating to Lutheran Württemberg, Fischer followed a path well-trodden by religious exiles who had been arriving in the duchy in search of succour with increasing frequency since the mid-sixteenth century. The procedures for accepting religious refugees into the territory had been firmly established by the seventeenth century. Furthermore, specific measures for the management of religious exiles and converts of a demonstrably scholarly disposition had been put in place which involved the routine referral of this category of refugee to the University of Tübingen for the assessment of merits and needs. Typically, the consideration of these cases proceeded slowly and with caution. Following his arrival in Stuttgart, Fischer was referred to Tübingen to be processed in this way. In great contrast to the usual pace of the adjudication of qualifying supplications, however, Fischer’s case was reviewed and resolved favourably by the university with remarkable intensity and speed, seemingly in a single day.

This article endeavours to uncover the reasons for the exceptional treatment of Fischer by the university and Württemberg authorities. It identifies the characteristics that set Fischer apart as a supplicant, with particular attention to the forms of capital at his disposal as he migrated to the territory. In doing so, it investigates the interplay of interests that influenced the experiences of refugee converts more generally in Tübingen, Württemberg and further afield. In addition, the article explores how Fischer’s self-fashioning and his characterization of his personal religious history revealed tensions between various individual responses to imposed confessional change and the hierarchies of status that emerged between the types of religious refugee in his confessional environment: that is the convert, exemplifying inconstancy of belief, and the exul Christi, the model of self-sacrificing religious constancy.

2 Confessional Politics and Religious Migration

Fischer’s flight and conversion occurred in a geo-political context characterized by confessional division and rivalry. Fischer’s home territory of Pfalz-Neuburg exemplified the confessional-religious dynamism that flowed from the Peace of Augsburg (1555), particularly from the principle of cuius regio, eius religio.^[1] With his accession in 1614, Wolfgang Wilhelm of Pfalz-Neuburg commenced the re-Catholicization of what had been a Lutheran territory without interruption since the 1550s.^[2] The nature of Wolfgang Wilhelm’s conversion prior to his accession highlighted the tenuous standing of the religious status quo in the territories of the Empire in general and demonstrated the political vulnerability of Lutheranism to Counter-Reformation initiatives in particular.^[3] In Wolfgang Wilhelm’s case, the persuasive interventions of the Jesuits, and the involvement of the Duke of Bavaria – exemplified by Wolfgang Wilhelm’s marriage to Magdalena of Bavaria, and his secret conversion to facilitate this – revealed the hand of the forces working against Lutheran power, utilizing the Augsburg settlement to good effect.^[4] The re-Catholicization of the territory was not a straightforward process and it required time and energy to supplant a well-established Lutheran Church.^[5] The Society of Jesus was to the fore in this effort. The Jesuit theologian Jacob Reihing, who had served as a court preacher to Magdalena of Bavaria and then Wolfgang Wilhelm, played a central role in the re-Catholicization efforts.^[6] Wolfgang Wilhelm’s subjects were ultimately obliged to conform to Catholicism by 1621. Those who refused to do so were forced to migrate, a course of action which led to social upheaval and economic deprivation.^[7] Given the geo-confessional conditions, refugees from Pfalz-Neuburg inevitably flowed to Protestant lands including Württemberg.^[8] Remarkably, Jacob Reihing, the aforementioned Jesuit executant of Pfalz-Neuburg’s re-Catholicization, fled the territory in secret in January 1621, westward to Ulm and onwards to Württemberg in order to convert to Lutheranism.^[9] It is likely that these common experiences of exile combined to build a social knowledge of the migratory possibilities open to the territory’s religious refugees, and raised awareness of friendly networks, sympathetic polities and settlement possibilities. Certainly, anyone leaving the territory in 1627, as Fischer did, would have benefitted from significant foreknowledge of where and how to locate sympathy and succour.

The Duchy of Württemberg occupied an important place within the network of Lutheran territorial states in the Empire from the latter half of the sixteenth century. Among the policies that demonstrated the territory’s credentials as a stronghold of Lutheranism was a supportive approach to Protestant refugees. The duchy accepted waves of Protestant exiles from the Netherlands, France, the Habsburg hereditary lands, Bohemia and Hungary.^[10] Protestant migrants from German territories subject to Counter-Reformation initiatives also found succour in Württemberg. This influx of refugees could be beneficial to the demographic and economic interests of the territory. It also served to exemplify externally the depth of support of the Protestant cause on the part of successive dukes.^[11]

The conventions to manage the influx of religious exiles of a scholarly disposition became established in the latter half of the sixteenth century. An important moment in the territory’s development as a destination for learned religious migrants was the decision in 1553 to settle Pier Paolo Vergerio – one-time papal nuncio and Bishop of Capodistria, and later convert to Lutheranism – in the university city of Tübingen, and to retain him as an adviser to Duke Christoph of Württemberg.^[12] From that point, scholarly religious exiles, including converts, were increasingly diverted to the University of Tübingen.^[13] Gradually, procedures for assessing, housing, employing or re-deploying these scholarly refugees became established by convention, which were in turn formalized by decree in 1607, effectively creating a special system of university asylum.^[14] This dictated that religious exiles and converts with scholarly credentials should be sent to Tübingen where their supplications for support were to be adjudicated by the university authorities. This was to involve an initial test of their academic qualifications and religious bona fides, to be followed by a decision on whether they were to be sent away or kept on for further examination. If the latter was decided, they were to be housed by the university – most often, although not always, in the ducal Stipendium – and observed for an initial period of one month.^[15] Once this time had elapsed, a determination was to be made on whether the supplicant might be offered a further period of accommodation under scrutiny at the university (typically one to two years) or whether they should be dispatched with supports to aid their onward migration, such as letters of recommendation or funds towards travel. The re-education of convert inmates was orientated towards their eventual integration into the Lutheran community in the first instance. Those who performed well under this regime of supervision were sometimes put forward for employment in the service of the territorial church, or in the duchy’s schools or even in the university: the latter being a rare occurrence. Universities across the confessions took in exile converts, some in an ad hoc manner, others with a greater degree of organization.^[16] In this context, the management of scholarly converts at the University of Tübingen was extraordinarily well-defined and systematized, featuring a high degree of involvement on the part of the university authorities. In the turbulent 1620s, the Tübingen asylum system came to be oversubscribed, such was its popularity, to the extent that the university struggled to manage the volume of supplicants.

The experiences of individual supplicants to this system can be compared to delineate patterns in the management of convert scholars in Württemberg and to detect digression from these norms. By far the most prominent and successful passenger through this system was the Jesuit theologian Jacob Reihing.^[17] As noted above, Reihing fled Neuburg for Württemberg in 1621. During an initial period of probation, he was housed in Tübingen in the care of the Stipendium, in accordance with the procedures set out in the ordinance of 1607. Reihing’s first years in Tübingen were difficult since he had to overcome suspicion concerning his motivations for converting and his general moral integrity. Despite this, he retained the support of Duke Johann Friedrich, the university and the Württemberg theologians. In 1622 he was appointed to a specially-created professorship in controversial theology and then promoted to a regular post in theology in 1626. In 1622 he was appointed as a Superintendent of the Stipendium, a remarkable development which gave him direct involvement in the affairs of the refugees housed in the institution.^[18] Reihing thus became an important broker in the management of religious exiles and converts at the university and a beacon to those considering conversion and flight. His interventions were to prove significant in the advancement of Fischer’s cause.

3 Fischer’s Reconversion: An Overview

Fischer’s arrival in Württemberg prompted a flurry of administrative activity in Tübingen and Stuttgart.^[19] Given the wider confessional-political circumstances, interest in Fischer’s case was to be expected. As a once-solid Lutheran, and son of a pastor in Neuburg,^[20] Fischer’s religious experience exemplified the plight of his fellow subjects in their confrontations with the persuasive and coercive force of the Counter-Reformation in Pfalz-Neuburg. Furthermore, Fischer had a political profile, having occupied a senior bureaucratic position in Neuburg. According to his own testimony, he had served as a princely adviser and secretary.^[21] It is notable that in a subsequent testimonial of the faculty of theology, Fischer is described as a former “Fürstlicher, Pfaltzgrävischer Rhat, vnnd Obristen Hoffrhats Secretarius zue Neẅburg an der Thonaẅ” (“Princely, Palatinate Councillor, and Senior Court Secretary in Neuberg on the Donau”).^[22] Interestingly, the phrase “Obristen Hoffrhats” is inserted in the margin as an amendment to the text and does not appear in the other extant documentation: a scaling up that drew attention to his level of experience and competence.

It appears that Fischer first pressed his case in Stuttgart where he sought the opportunity to re-convert via a formal retraction.^[23] From here he was referred to the University of Tübingen. The extant records include Fischer’s initial supplication, his revocation testimony, both undated, and a letter of thanks dated 12 August 1627.^[24] Excluding orphaned notes on scraps of paper, five university documents are extant, all dated 24 July 1627, with one partial exception. These include a report to the duke on Fischer by the university authorities and four documents issued by the faculty of theology comprising a report following their examination of Fischer and a set of testimonials. Two of these were addressed to the Masters and Council of Strasbourg. One testimonial contained a partial correction of the date of issue from 24 July 1627 to 28 October 1627. The original date remained on the address. Although there is similarity in content between the documents issued by the faculty of theology, they are not identical. Excepting the rapidity of the process, the adjudication of Fischer’s case followed normal procedures in its early stages with his merits of character, motivation, standing and religious conviction being assessed and reported on to the duke by the university in accordance with the 1607 decree. At this point, the treatment of the case became unusual. Fischer was not subjected to the usual period of scrutiny but was immediately dispatched with a positive commendation addressed to the Strasbourg authorities. Fischer’s letter of thanks to the university authorities does not illuminate greatly on his fortunes after departing the university. The fact that Fischer sent the letter from Stuttgart suggests that he had not progressed to Strasbourg by the date of signing, 12 August 1627. The grateful tone of the letter does hint at a happy outcome, however, or the near prospect of one.^[25] Fortunately, we glean more on Fischer’s fate from Jacob Reihing’s correspondence with Konrad Brodbeck, a ducal secretary in Stuttgart.^[26] From passing references in five letters commencing 24 July it appears that Fischer’s progress was not immediate or easy. From Reihing’s final mention of Fischer on 27 October 1627 we learn that he had secured salaried employment in secretarial service.^[27]

4 Social Capital and Social Networks

According to the extant sources, Fischer’s case was considered and decided on by the university in a single day. Furthermore, the volume of official correspondence relating to the case issued on that day was considerable. Such documentation was a feature of the processing and management of convert cases between Tübingen and Stuttgart, but in most cases it accumulated incrementally over weeks and months. The handling of Fischer’s case then was characterized by an exceptional degree of urgency. From the content and character of Fischer’s undated supplication it is reasonable to assume that he first presented himself at the ducal court in Stuttgart prior to his arrival in Tübingen. The speed and intensity of the processing of the case in Tübingen, as well as the departure from certain normal procedures, suggests external intervention, unseen in the extant sources, with the ambition to achieve a specific outcome. Certainly, the arrival at a determination to refer Fischer to Strasbourg after one day’s deliberation makes clear the likelihood of immediate interplay between the Stuttgart court and the university. The unusual nature of these likely interactions prompts consideration of the role of intercessors and patrons in the brokerage of Fischer’s interests. His rapid progress also invites an assessment of the basis and extent of his individual agency relative to other refugee converts who sought support from the university and duke.

The first extant assessment of Fischer is in the form of a formal deed of the faculty of theology, the purpose of which was to attest to the sincerity of his conversion.^[28] The document is not addressed to a specified party. It begins by noting the arrival of Fischer, who is described as an honourable “Rechtsgelert” (“jurist”) and a former secretary and councillor in Neuburg.^[29] The account observes how Fischer had been persuaded by the Jesuits to conform to Catholicism. It relates that, in the interim, Fischer had been reflecting on Catholic doctrine, finding it to contain various errors and that now, for the sake of his soul, he had decided to return to the Lutheran faith.^[30] The theologians then assess the integrity of his appeal for absolution determining that it is professed with a repentant heart.^[31] The faculty concludes by issuing a formal confirmation that they have judged Fischer to be sincere in his plea for forgiveness and his desire to commit again to Lutheran doctrine.^[32]

Given an overlap in content, the text is likely to have informed in the preparation of a report submitted to the duke by the university authorities, again dated 24 July.^[33] This furnishes more colour if not detail in the representation of Fischer’s time as a Catholic, his ambitions in converting and on his general character and social standing. It narrates the circumstances of Fischer’s submission to Catholic error, placing it in the framework of the re-Catholicization of Pfalz-Neuburg under Wolfgang Wilhelm and the persuasive efforts of the Jesuits.^[34] Although contextualized in this way, the account refrains from exonerating Fischer for succumbing to the pressures to convert. The report continues to note that, having come to recognize his great mistake, Fischer is no longer willing to persist in Papish error and seeks absolution and forgiveness.^[35] After first observing that they have little knowledge of Fischer’s qualities, the officials note that he is known to Jacob Reihing, who has provided a highly favourable assessment of him.^[36] Reihing is thus recorded as having experience of Fischer’s honesty and learning, his skill, diligence and dexterity as a secretary during his tenure in Pfalz-Neuburg.^[37] The report continues to convey that in the examination of Fischer, presumably that undertaken by the theologians, he has been found sorrowful in his assessment of his apostasy and that he has requested some small assistance from the duke in order to achieve his ambition of re-adhering to the Augsburg Confession.^[38] By the standards of these university reports on converts, the evaluation of Fischer was very favourable and entertained no reservations about his sincerity. It was typical in such reports for the university to recommend a course of action to the duke, whether it be to reject the supplicant, or to admit him to the Stipendium for a period of further scrutiny. Curiously, in Fischer’s case no recommendations of this type are made in the university’s reports.

The remaining university sources comprise testimonials in his favour issued by the faculty of theology. Two of these are directed explicitly to the Masters and Council of Strasbourg.^[39] One further commendation, devoid of an indication of a recipient, is extant.^[40] The fact that these were issued on the same date upon which the initial faculty examination of Fischer occurred and on which the university report was sent to the duke is extraordinary.

If the accuracy of dating is to be trusted, the immediacy of decision-making and speed of communication indicates a high degree of orchestration in the management of this case and suggests that the outcome of the university’s intervention was pre-determined before Fischer’s arrival in Tübingen. Indeed, it is likely then that Fischer was sent to Tübingen with the advanced knowledge that he would gain a formal recommendation from the university via the faculty of theology: a measure that would mitigate the taint of confessional inconstancy and improve his future prospects. What is also notable here is the fact that Fischer was even referred to the university in the first instance. Although the faculty of theology assessment and the university report reference Fischer’s learning through the use of the term “Rechtsgelert,” no further detail is provided. As noted above, the university asylum system was designed for the management of learned religious refugees. Typically, the reports on supplications contained more considered assessment of the academic credentials of refugees which led to the rejection of those deemed to be lacking in learning.

The unusual management of this case points to the involvement of well-placed and influential brokers. From the extant records we know that Conrad Dieterich, Lutheran Superintendent in Ulm, Stephan Wexler, Lutheran Superintendent in Nördlingen and Jacob Reihing were directly involved in promoting Fischer’s cause. The two churchmen endorsed Fischer’s initial written supplication to the Württemberg authorities. Reihing became involved upon Fischer’s arrival in Tübingen and continued to advocate on his behalf via Brodbeck, the ducal secretary, in the months after that. Dieterich, Wexler and Reihing had influence at the Württemberg court, in its church and at the university. Reihing’s involvement is particularly noteworthy. He attested to having known Fischer during his time in Neuburg and Fischer noted Reihing’s participation in his ceremony of Catholic conformity in Neuburg in his supplication. Fischer’s presence in Württemberg certainly drew attention to Reihing’s past as an active agent of the Counter-Reformation. It could be ventured that Reihing’s support of Fischer and his eagerness to see him settled – as evidenced in his letters to Brodbeck – was not without benefit to Reihing’s interests, easing any potential embarrassment caused by Fischer’s presence.

Fischer’s efficient and favourable treatment in Tübingen contrasted with the experiences of less capitalized learned refugees. Those arriving without the support of influential figures such as Dieterich received cooler receptions being subjected to a greater degree of doubt about the integrity of their conversions, and were processed without urgency.^[41] Those accepted into the university asylum system after the initial examination often endured the continued suspicions of their hosts and were subjected to a regime of communal supervision that was particularly attuned to the detection of flaws of belief and/or character. Yet even where the university authorities were well-disposed to a convert refugee, the options for advancing their cause generally remained limited. Nicodemus Reutter, a convert who made himself known to the university authorities in October 1627, is a case in point.^[42] A sympathetic account of his religious history and difficult situation was offered in a university report submitted to the duke.^[43] According to this, Reutter was born to honourable and wealthy Lutheran parents in Regensberg. During the Regensburg Reichstag of 1613, the Imperial Vice-Chancellor, Hans Ludwig von Ulm, resided in Reutter’s mother’s home.^[44] Impressed by the youth’s intelligence, von Ulm allowed Reutter to accompany him to the Reichstag. Here Reutter encountered the Jesuits who coaxed him gradually towards the Catholic faith. Reutter subsequently entered a monastery for further study and was finally persuaded to convert. He joined the Capuchins in Regensberg. However, the ardency of his new convictions receded over time, and he came to the realization that he could no longer adhere to the Catholic doctrine in good conscience and sought a return to the Augsburg Confession. In the interim, Reutter’s mother died, leaving him an inheritance which he decided to put to use by continuing his studies at the University of Tübingen. He discovered, however, that access to this inheritance had been suspended due to the odium of his religious conversion.^[45] Undeterred, he continued to Tübingen in the hope that he could gain service as a famulus or support himself by some other employment so that he could advance his reconciliation with the evangelical faith. Since no such opportunity was available, the university authorities granted him accommodation in the Contubernium, a university bursa, out of Christian charity. The university then requested that Reutter be admitted to the ducal Stipendium to receive bed, board and guidance. On 1 November 1627, Reutter entered the Stipendium.^[46] He departed in April 1628 supported with a viaticum of 15 Gulden to pursue an unspecified opportunity but was then readmitted on 5 May.^[47] He left the Stipendium permanently in late Spring 1628.^[48]

Reutter’s case demonstrates that even where the university authorities were inclined favourably towards a supplicant, available support was limited to the extent that the convert’s situation remained precarious. By contrast, Fischer was in a position to circumvent the typical pathway of support, remaining in Tübingen for the briefest period and avoiding entry to the regime of scrutiny at the Stipendium. Against the backdrop of the norms of convert experience at Tübingen, it becomes clearer that Fischer’s social and political capital – most likely earned by dint of his prior status and connections – was a decisive factor in his relatively successful engagement with the university and princely authorities.

5 Fischer’s Religious Identities

Fischer’s supplication to the Duke of Württemberg, which survives in an undated copy, provides an indication of his expectations following his departure from Neuburg.^[49] In this he conveys a desire to offer a public revocation of his Catholic beliefs. Beyond an appeal to the duke to facilitate this, Fischer does not make further specific requests for aid, which is remarkable since many in his situation sought financial or other support in their supplications to the Württemberg authorities. In their appeals, most converts expressed their desire to adopt and/or develop their knowledge of Lutheran beliefs in a basic and cursory manner, contrasting with Fischer’s detailed discussion of his revocation plans. His near-exclusive focus on the revocation implies a presumption based on foreknowledge and suggests advanced planning and preparation. Given the fact that the supplication bears endorsements from Dieterich and Wexler, both scenarios are likely. Certainly, Fischer’s preoccupation with a formal revocation would have conveyed a maturity of religious understanding to those reviewing the correspondence.

Fischer presents himself as a figure who has suffered as a consequence of his flight from Neuburg, arriving hungry, thirsty and dishevelled but buoyed by the prospect of recanting the devil’s doctrine.^[50] He indicates that because he had made his legal defection before the duke, he hoped that he might also be afforded the opportunity to make his revocation in the territorial ruler’s presence.^[51] This he could recite from memory, or read directly from his prepared manuscript, which he could deposit in Stuttgart.^[52] Fischer applies a degree of pressure, perhaps in an effort to expedite a decision, by alluding to the machinations of Satan who, if given the chance, might thwart his revocation ambitions by destroying his will.^[53] He concludes by stating that he awaits resolution and absolution.^[54] We must assume from this undated supplication that his first action upon entering Württemberg was to present himself to the ducal court in Stuttgart whence he is likely to have been directed to the university in Tübingen.

Fischer’s undated manuscript of revocation is also extant in the university records.^[55] There is no evidence that this received an airing in public, or that it was subsequently disseminated in print, as could occur in the case for high-profile converts.^[56] Fischer’s retraction offers a detailed religious and conversion history in which he carefully contextualizes and explains his departure from Lutheranism with reference to the demands of political loyalty and perceived obligation. He begins by proclaiming that his revocation is freely professed without coercion and then briefly describes his upbringing and education in the Lutheran faith under the stewardship of his pastor-father.^[57] This happy situation was to change when his prince, Wolfgang Wilhelm, under the influence of the stealthy and poisonous Jesuits, allowed for the introduction of Catholicism in Pfalz-Neuburg in accordance with Imperial law.^[58] Fischer then describes his own profession of Catholic beliefs in the court chapel in Neuburg in the presence of Jacob Reihing, whom the intended reader or audience is left to assume to be one of the smooth-talking persuaders of Wolfgang Wilhelm he alluded to previously.^[59] This conversion scenario is thus contrasted with that of the freely professed retraction set out in the first lines of the manuscript. Fischer characterizes this Catholic conversion as a great error borne of perceived obligation and duty with reference to a set of biblical examples, including Manasseh and Nebuchadnezzar, that is of kings condemning their sons with their wicked and ungodly choices.^[60] Wrested from this peril, he acknowledges his mistake, renounces the Catholic religion and commits to the Lutheran faith. He illuminates his motion towards truth with reference again to biblical examples of redemption including Mary Magdalene and Peter.^[61] He notes how his sins burn in his heart and hopes his brothers and sisters can be also dissuaded from falsehood.

Fischer’s letter of thanks to the university of 12 August presents a figure more at ease and with a newly settled religious identity.^[62] In expressing his gratitude for the university’s response to his plea, he notes how in their mercy they have freed his soul from its suffering and endowed him with a valuable intercession. He offers to repay their favour and kindness in eternal life, if not on earth. Most revealing is the manner in which he signs the letter as an “exul.”^[63] This represents a significant recasting of his religious identity. Typically exul or exul Christi referred to Protestant religious exiles forced to migrate due to their constancy of belief in the face of the confessional re-orientation of their homelands: a religious identity that emerged in the wake of the Reformation and the settlements that followed.^[64] The term was often adopted in the self-fashioning of individuals to signal the intensity of their religious commitment and could be effective in the courting of patronage from well-placed individuals. Fischer’s religious history was one of accommodation rather than sacrifice, at least prior to 1627. While it was not a falsehood to describe himself as an exile, the use of the term signalled a continuity of Lutheran belief. One could view this self-characterization as somewhat dubious and even cynical on Fischer’s part: a move designed to submerge the fact of multiple confessional realignments and deflect from the questions of integrity raised by these conversions, while also staking a claim on the social and religious capital that could accrue to voluntary exules Christi on account of the intensity of their self-sacrificing religious commitment.

Alternatively, one might view this self-designation more forgivingly as the conclusion of an active self-appraisal by Fischer of his religious identity which we can first observe in his revocation when he characterized his period of conformity to Catholic belief as one that resulted from political obedience rather than religious conviction. In his revocation, Fischer does not go so far as to suggest that he was disingenuous in adopting Catholicism but paints a picture of coercion and manipulation by the forces of the Counter-Reformation in which he and his compatriots are confronted with conflicting interests and damaging choices. Fischer for his part, chooses obedience to his temporal Lord, as a servant of the state might, trusting in political authority and the laws and procedures of the Empire. Ultimately, he comes to view this choice as the incorrect one, although he does not explicitly indicate the availability of an alternative. He mitigates the error in the revocation by contextualising it. He refers to the legal context of the re-Catholicization of Pfalz-Neuburg; to the grimly coercive environment in the Court Chapel where the one-word statement of conformity – an attribute he accentuates to diminish its integrity – took place in the presence of Reihing, whom he deliberately places at this scene; and the misguided actions of his Jesuit-manipulated prince who like the biblical examples cited led his dependents into danger. Fischer in this way emphasizes the plight of obedient subjects in these circumstances. The implication is that, in political and legal respects, such obedient acts of conformity have legitimacy and that the spiritual error is one imposed on the individual by their ruler. Ultimately, Fischer emerges from this spiritual captivity by choosing exile in order to return to the Lutheran fold.

Fischer’s self-designation as an exul in his letter of gratitude thus displays a degree of continuity with the tenor of his revocation. He conformed to an imposed Catholicism as an obedient subject. His liberation from this imposition was achievable only through flight and suffering.^[65] His status as an exul Christi, while postponed, was now realized and experienced. Circling around in the unstated implications is the idea that conformity is not true conversion, that that is a matter of conviction which is absent when coercion is involved. By portraying his religious history in this way Fischer found a means of combatting the reputational deficiencies associated with serial conversion. Whether his hosts found this convincing is difficult to gauge. While the Tübingen theologians and authorities were sympathetic towards his position in their reports and testimonials, they stopped short of exoneration. One might interpret the special treatment he received as a sign of the impact of Fischer’s self-fashioning. Alternatively, one could simply consider this as an outcome of the interventions of his brokers who may or may not have been ambivalent on these points. What it does reveal, at the very least, is the extent to which these questions of categorization mattered to Fischer in his efforts to justify and make sense of his conversion history.

6 Conclusion

The case of Christian Fischer provokes a series of questions that defy clear resolution. Why was Fischer referred to the convert management system of the University of Tübingen in the first instance when his scholarly standing was not obvious? Why did the university assessors fail to interrogate this when others lacking firm scholarly attributes were rejected due to this deficiency? Why was his case dealt with such intensity and so quickly by the university authorities? In sum, why was he granted special treatment? Although the available evidence limits the potential for certainty in response to these questions, it does offer clues, especially when considered in the context of the broader patterns of refugee convert experience in Württemberg in this period. By the time of Fischer’s migration, highly systematic procedures were in place for the management of religious exiles entering the territory, with the University of Tübingen playing a central role in the handling of refugees of an academic disposition. It is not clear that, when migrating to Württemberg, Fischer aimed at a referral to the university, which for qualified individuals brought the prospect of entry to its asylum regime. It seems the latter was never intended for Fischer since, in his case, the rapid outcome of the university’s adjudication was a testimonial of his good standing and a favourable recommendation to the council of Strasbourg. The bureaucracy of the university system was effectively manipulated towards this outcome by interests that are not fully revealed in the sources. It is likely that Fischer entered the territory confident that he would receive support of some kind. He followed an established pathway of confessional migration from the Catholic territories to the east of Württemberg. The fact that he acquired commendations from Dieterich in Ulm and Wexler in Nördlingen suggests that he had good networks and a foreknowledge of the best ways to approach the Württemberg authorities. Intercession on his behalf by these senior Lutheran churchmen and the Tübingen theologian Jacob Reihing most likely had a direct bearing on the positive response of the Württemberg authorities. It is quite possible that Fischer benefitted from the intercession of other unseen sponsors unmentioned in the documentation. Thus, by contextualizing Fischer’s case with reference to the broader patterns of convert management in Württemberg and Tübingen to read beyond the extant sources, a viable proposition emerges that influential brokerage played a decisive role in his case. Fischer’s assertive correspondence as a supplicant suggests that he was far from impassive in the negotiation of opportunity. Unlike the majority of convert refugees, Fischer was well-supported, well-capitalized and versed in the rules of the game. Having successfully negotiated the endorsement of the university theologians, Fischer continued to look for ways to improve his position. His self-designation as an exul reveals a heightened awareness of the need to mend his reputation as a someone who had converted as an adult to Catholicism and then, after a significant passage of time, had re-converted to Lutheranism. By deploying this term and through an account of grimly obedient and minimal conformance to Catholicism, he sought to downplay his inconstancy almost to the point of denying it. Curiously, the fact that he was a serial convert seemed to matter little in the adjudication of his case by the university authorities. This represented a high degree of affordance by typical standards which is further indication that the cards had been stacked firmly in Fischer’s favour.