Ramus contra Martinum defensus: The Helmstedt Controversy 1592-1598

Sometimes during the seventeenth century, somebody had the principal interventions of the Helmstedt Ramus-controversy of 1594-1598 bound together in a volume. Now conserved in Berlin’s Staatsbibliothek Preußischer Kulturbesitz, its spine carries the inscription, ‘Ramus contra Martinum defensus’. The phrasing of the spine reveals what the controversy was about, namely the attempt of the Ramists Friedrich Beurhaus (1536-1609), Heizo Buscher (1564-1598), Konrad Hoddäus (fl. 1596) and Anton Nothold (1569-1650) to defend Petrus Ramus (1515-1572) against Cornelius Martini (1568-1621). While Ramus was defended by the Ramists, Martini attacked and was able to construct a future for his approach. After a last reply in 1597, he simply went on with his tasks--which included another formidable controversy from 1598 to 1601 against Daniel Hoffmann’s (1538-1611) interpretation of the theory of the double truth (which, to a certain extent, was also influenced by Ramus). If one keeps in mind that Martini’s position was strongly influenced by Jacopo Zabarella (1533-1589) and that all contenders considered Philipp Melanchthon (1497-1560) their highest authority, the controversy can be also read as a posthumous dialogue between Melanchthon, Ramus and Zabarella. A dialogue by proxy, it is true, but nonetheless an important one, because the three philosophers never spoke among themselves and hardly mentioned each other.