² Kutzke, G., Aus Luthers Heimat, 1914.Google Scholar

³ ‘Luther Byways,’ Lutheran Survey, October 23, 1918.Google Scholar

⁴ Scheel, Otto, Martin Luther: Vom, Katholizismus zur Reformation. 2 vols. 1917Google Scholar (vol. i in 2d ed.). On the two Hans Luthers, see Scheel, i, 6; Buchwald, Lutherkalendar, 1910Google Scholar, and Luther's Correspondence, i, 22, note 2.

⁵ ‘Luther,’ in Die Religion in Geschichte und Gegenwart, iii (1912), col. 2412Google Scholar. Against this, Scheel, i, 3.

⁶ Neubauer, T. T., Luthers Frühzeit, 1917, p. 46Google Scholar (Jahrbücher d. k. Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Erfurt, N. F. xliii).

⁷ Bernay, F., Zur Geschichte der Stadt und der Universität Erfurt am Ausgange des Mittelalters, 1919.Google Scholar

⁸ Published in Zentralblatt für Bibliothekswesen, xxxiii, 1916.Google Scholar

⁹ Paquier, Luther et l'Allemagne, 1918, p. 95Google Scholar; Köhler, in Zeitschrift für Kirchengeschichte, xxxiii, 19Google Scholar; Kawerau, in Theologische Literaturzeitung, 1916Google Scholar, col. 331 f.; Freitag in Historische Zeitschrift, cxix, 247 f., and Archiv für Reformationsgeschichte, xiii, 24. Freitag thinks the letter from Han to Trebonius.

¹⁰ Scheel, op. cit., i (2d ed.), 140, and note on p. 293. The most thorough discussion is in Neubauer, op. cit., pp. 153 ff. (1) He says Luther would not have been guilty of writing the hybrid word “Viropolitanus,” and that it means “Manstedt,” not Mansfeld, but I think it means the city as distinguished from the county of Mansfeld. (2) He thinks there is difficulty in identifying the teacher of whom Luther speaks as fellow-countryman, but this is not convincing. (3) He says that Luther's known teacher, J. Greffenstein (John Ansorg of Gräfenstein, on whom see ibid., pp. 225 ff.), was not at Porta Caeli. (4) He says that Luther was at Bursa of St. George, not at Porta Caeli. But he might have changed. Cf. also Biereye, Die Erfurter Lutherstätten nach ihrer geschichtlicher Begläubigung, 1917Google Scholar; Flemming, P. in Luthers Briefwechsel, xvii, 1920, p. 83Google Scholar; Köhler, W., in Zeitschrift für Kirchengeschichte, xxxiii, 19Google Scholar. Böhmer, H., Luther im Lichte der neueren Forschung,⁵ 1918, p. 309Google Scholar doubts the genuineness of all three letters.

¹¹ Enders, Luthera Briefwechsel, xvii, 82; Zentralblatt für Bibliothekswesen, xxxiii (1916), 78.Google Scholar

¹² Diis faventibus, “by favor of the gods,” meant the same as the “favor of the saints” at this period.

¹³ According to Degering's note, loc. cit., this teacher was John Greffenstein.

¹⁴ This was a foundation for the support of poor students: a full account of it in Scheel, O., Luther, i (2d ed., 1917)Google Scholar, and Freitag, A. in Historische Zeitschrift, cxix (1919), 247 ff.Google Scholar

^14a Text conterinam, might be changed to Catarinam, meaning Braun's sister, but much more likely conterminam, ‘neighbor,’ referring to some lady Luther had known at Eisenach, perhaps to Ursula Cotta.

¹⁵ Martinus viropolitanus arbiter tuus onerarius. That viropolitanus means “from the town of Mansfeld” is quite certain, however meaningless the barbarous compound itself may be. The arbiter tuus onerarius was a jocose title given Luther by Braun, with allusion to Cicero, Tusc. v. 120, where Cicero says that in philosophical disputes on virtue and the good, Carneades would act tanquam honorarius arbiter.

¹⁶ That this letter is really to Braun is proved by the fact that the same title divinus miles is given to him in Letter 11.

¹⁷ Smith, Preserved, ‘Luther's Early Development in the Light of Psychoanalysis,’ American Journal of Psychology, July, 1913CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Id., ‘Luther's Development of the Doctrine of Justification by Faith Only,’ Harvard Theological Review, October, 1913.

¹⁸ Scheel, O., Dokumente zu Luthers Entwicklung, 1911.Google Scholar

¹⁹ Müller, A. V., Luthers Werdegang bis zum Turmerlebnis, 1920Google Scholar, and in Theologische Studien und Kritiken, 1917, pp. 496 ff.

²⁰ Müller, A. V., Luthers theologische Quellen, 1912.Google Scholar

²¹ ‘Luther und der Protestantismus,’ Neue Rundschau, xxviii (1917), p. 1312.Google Scholar

²² Scheel, i, 259; Neubauer, p. 99; Freitag in Historische Zeitschrift, cxix, 270 ff.; Biereye, pp. 180 ff.

²³ Zeitschrift für Kirchengeschichte, xxxvii (1917), p. 216Google Scholar; Scheel, ‘Luthers Primiz,’ in Studien G. Kawerau dargebracht, 1917, pp. 1 ff.Google Scholar

²⁴ Werdegang, p. 15.

²⁵ Steinlein, H., Luthers Doktorat, 1912.Google ScholarCf. Enders, xvii, 86 f.; Luther's Correspondence, i, no. 4.

²⁶ Harvard Theological Review, 1913, p. 420, note; Scheel, ii, 318 ff.; Müller, Werdegang, 130; Cf. Tischreden, Weimar, iii, no. 3232; Luthers Werke, Weimar, xxxv, 86. Cf. also O. Ritschl, ‘Luthers seelische Kämpfe in seiner früheren Mönchtum,’ Internationale Wochenschrift, January 21, 1911; F. Loofs, ‘Justitia dei passiva in Luthers Anfängen,’ Theologische Studien und Kritiken, 1911, pp. 461–473; A. Humbert, Les origines de la théologie moderne, 1911; W. Köhler, ‘Luther bis 1521,’ Im Morgenrot der Reformation, ed. Pflugk-Harttung, 1912; E. Billing, 1517–1521: ett bidrag till frâgen om Luthers religiosa och teologiska utvecklingsgâng, 1917; H. von Schubert, Luthers Frühentwicklung bis 1517–19,1916; G. N. Bonwetsch, Wie wurde Luther sum Reformator?, 1917.

²⁷ Müller, A. V., Luther und Tauler, 1918Google Scholar; Die Predigten Taulers, hrsg. von F. Vetter, 1910; Der Frankfurter (deutsche theologia), hrsg. von W. Uhl (Kleine Texte, no. 96); Hunziger, , ‘Luther und die deutsche Mystik,’ Neue Kirchliche Zeitschrift, xix, 972–988Google Scholar; Siedel, G., Die Mystik Taulers, 1911Google Scholar; Windstosser, M., Étude sur la ‘Théologie germanique,’ 1912.Google Scholar

²⁸ Luthers Vorlesung über den Galaterbrief 1516–17, hrsg. von Hans von Schubert, 1918. On this, further, J. Ficker, Luther, 1517, 1918.

²⁹ Humbert, op. cit., chap. 5: St. Jérôme contre St. Augustine.

³⁰ Schlatter, A., Luthers Deutung des Römerbriefes, 1917.Google Scholar

³¹ M. J. Lagrange, Luther on the Eve of his Revolt, translated by W. S. Reilly, 1918 (originally written 1914–16, on Luther's Commentary on Romans).

³² Meissinger, K. A., Luthers Exegese in der Frühzeit, 1911.Google Scholar

³³ H. Böhmer, Luthers Romfahrt, 1914.

³⁴ Rodocanachi, E., Rome au Temps de Jules II et de Léon. X, 1912.Google Scholar Cf. what Luther says of seeing the Barigel at Rome (Werke, Berlin, viii, 134) with Rodocanachi, p. 276.

³⁵ Zeitschrift für Kirchengeschichte, xxxii, 604.

³⁶ Ibid., 607.

³⁷ Theologische Rundschau, xv (1912), 88 f.Google Scholar; Grisar, iii, 958. Eckhof, A., ‘Luther en de Pilatus-Trap t e Rome,’ Nederlandsch Archief vor Kerkgeschiedenis, N. S., xii, 1 ff., 1916.Google Scholar

³⁸ Grisar, H., ‘Lutheranalekten,’ Historisches Jahrbuch, xxxix (1919), 487 ff.Google Scholar

³⁹ Dau, W. H. T., The Leipzig Debate, 1919Google Scholar; Id., The Great Renunciation, 1920.

⁴⁰ E.g. in H. de Jongh, L'ancienne Faculté de Théologie de Louvain, 1911, pp. 92 ff.; Wallace, C. W., Evolution of the English Drama up to Shakespeare, 1912, p. 51Google Scholar, on an English play on indulgences in 1518; Guinness, G., Peru, 1908, p. 372Google Scholar, showing that in South America indulgences for the dead are still profitable; Göller, E., Der Ausbruch der Reformation und die spätmittelalterliche Ablasspraxis, 1917.Google Scholar

⁴¹ Brieger, T., ‘Die Gliederung der 95 Thesen,” Lenz-Festschrift, 1910, pp. 1–37.Google Scholar

⁴² Clemen, O. in Luthers Werke, Bonn, i, 1912, p. 1.Google Scholar They were probably printed at Wittenberg with types borrowed from Melchior Lotther of Leipzig, Zeitschrift für Kirchengeschichte, xxxv, 164 f. A different conclusion is reached by Günther, O., ‘Die Drucker von Luthers Ablassthesen 1517,’ Zeitschrift für Bücherfreunde, N. F. ix, 259 ff., 1918.Google Scholar He thinks they were first printed by Jerome Hölzel of Nuremberg and John Thanner Herbipolensis of Leipzig.

⁴³ Rade, M., Luthers Rechtfertigungsglaube und seine Bedeutung für die 96 Thesen und für uns, 1917.Google Scholar

⁴⁴ Kalkoff, P., ‘Forschungen zu Luthers römischen Prozess,’ Zeitschrift für Kirchengeschichte, xxxii (1911), pp. 1 ff.Google Scholar, 199 ff., 408 ff., 572 ff.; xxxiii (1912), 1 ff. Id., ‘Die von Cajetan verfasste Ablassdekretale und seine Verhandlungen mit dem Kurfürsten von Sachsen in Weimar, 28 und 29 Mai, 1519,’ Archiv für Reformationsgeschichte, ix (1912), 142ff.Google Scholar; Id., Die Miltiziade, 1911. Cf. also, Barge, H., ‘Das Vorgehen der Kurie gegen Luther 1518–21,’ Neue Jahrbücher für das klassische Altertum, xxvii (1911).Google Scholar

⁴⁵ On Hutten, cf. Harnack, O., ‘Ulrich von Hutten,’ in Im Morgenrot der Reformation, hrsg. von Pflugk-Harttung, 1912, pp. 451–554Google Scholar; Kalkoff, P., Ulrich von Hutten und die Reformation, 1920.Google Scholar

⁴⁶ Kalkoff, P., ‘Friedrich der Weise,’ Archiv für Reformationsgeschichte, xiv (1917).Google Scholar

⁴⁷ Smith, Preserved, ‘Note to D. S. Schaff's Spurious Tract of John Huss,’ American Journal of Theology, April, 1915.Google Scholar On Huss's influence on Luther, cf. Werke, Weimar, vol. 1, p. 37.

⁴⁸ Truhlar, J., Catalogus manu scriptorum Latinorum in Bibliotheca Universitatis Pragensis, 1906, no. 2774, “Hussi de Luthero vaticinium.”Google Scholar

⁴⁹ de la Tour, P. Imbart, in Revue de Métaphysique et de Morale, 1918, p. 607.Google Scholar On the influence of Hutten and Capito, Kalkoff, Hutten, 1920, p. 74.

⁵⁰ Greving, J., ‘Zur Verkündigung der Bulle Exsurge Domine,’ in Briefmappe, i, 1912, pp. 196 ff.Google Scholar Bibliography of early printed editions of the bull in Zeitschrift für Bücherfreunde, N. F. ix, 197 ff., and x, 19, 1918–19.

⁵¹ Clerval, A., Régistres des procès-verbaux de la Faculté de Théologie de Paris, i, 1917, pp. 273 f.Google Scholar, 278 ff., 285; Bulletin de l'histoire du Protestantisms français, 1917, pp. 35 ff.

⁵² Christian Thought to the Reformation, 1911, p. 165.

⁵³ Kalkoff, P., Das Wormser Edikt und die Erlasse des Reichsregiment und der einzelnen Reichsfürsten, 1917Google Scholar; Kalkoff, P., Luther und die Entscheidungsjahre der Reformation, 1917Google Scholar; Kalkoff, Die Entstehung des Wormser Edikts, 1913Google Scholar;, von Schubert, H., Die Vorgeschichte der Berufung Luthers auf den Reichstag zu Worms, 1912Google Scholar (Sitzungsberichte der Heidelberger Akademie der Wissenschaften, Phil.-hist. Klasse, vi.); Boller, F., Luthers Berufung nach Worms, Giessen Disertation, 1912.Google Scholar Documents in Kuhn, J., Luther und der Wormser Reichstag, 1913Google Scholar; Kalkoff, ‘Zur Enstehung des Wormser Edikts,’ Archiv für Reformationsgeschichte, xiii (1916), pp. 241–276.Google Scholar

⁵⁴ Böhmer, H., Luther im Lichte der neueren Forsckung, 4th, ed., 1917, p. 147Google Scholar; Köhler, W., Die deutsche Reformation und die Studenten, 1917, p. 21Google Scholar; Neubauer, T. T., ‘Luthers Fruhzeit,’ Erfurter Jahrbücher, N. F. xliii (1917), p. 47.Google Scholar

⁵⁵ Archiv für Reformationsgeschichte, viii (1911), pp. 341 ff.Google Scholar

⁵⁶ Fine historical description of the Wartburg by Schmiedel, O., Address of Welcome to the Wartburg, August 12, 1910Google Scholar, reprinted in Congress of Free Christianity, 1911, p. 675. One of the noted sights there is the inkspot on the wall, or rather the hole where it was said to have been. Interesting to note that Fynes Moryson saw at Wittenberg in 1591, “an aspersion of ink cast by the Divell when he tempted Luther upon the wall of St. Augustine's college.” Moryson's, F.Itinerary, 1907, i, 16.Google Scholar

⁵⁷ Barge, H., Aktenstücke zur Wittenberger Bewegung, 1912Google Scholar; H. Lietzmann, Karlstadts Abtuung der Bilder und die Wittenberger Beutelordnung (Kleine Texte, no. 74).

⁵⁸ Accounts of the doings at Wittenberg 1522 by H. Mühlpfort and J. Pfau, ed. by H. Böhmer, in Neue kirchliche Zeitschrift, xxv, 397 ff.

⁵⁹ Barge, H., ‘Zur Genesis der Frühreformatorischen Vorgänge in Wittenberg,’ Historische Vierteljahrsehrift, xxv (1914)Google Scholar, and article ‘Karlstadt’ in Religion in Geschichte und Gegenwart, iii; M. von Tiling, ‘Der Kampf gegen die Missa privata,’ Neue kirchliche Zeitschrift, xx.

⁶⁰ Böhmer, H., in Schriften des Vereins für niedersächsische Geschichte und Alterthumskunde, xxxvi (1915), pp. 1–38.Google Scholar

⁶¹ Clemen, O., Luthers Werke, Bonn, ii, 1913, p. 311.Google Scholar

⁶² “If Carlstadt believes there is any God in heaven or earth, may Christ never be gracious to me,” Luther, said. Archiv für Reformationsgeschichte. xi (1914), 141.Google Scholar On Luther's battle with James Schenck, see Vetter, P. in Neves Archiv für sächsische Geschichte, xxx (1909), 76 ff.Google Scholar; xxxii (1911), 23 ff.

⁶³ Smith, Preserved, ‘Luther and Henry VIII,’ English Historical Review, 1910Google Scholar; Id., ‘German Opinion of the Divorce of Henry VIII,’ ibid., 1912. A note on the play against Luther given at the English Court by the children of St. Paul's School is found in Wallace, C. W., Evolution of the English Drama, 1912, pp. 66 ff.Google Scholar

⁶⁴ Opus Epistolarum Erasmi, iii, 1913, to June, 1519. Mr. Allen writes me that the fourth volume is now in press and the fifth and sixth ready in manuscript.

⁶⁵ Allen, Epp. 785, 786.

⁶⁶ Allen, Ep. 755, saluta Eleutherium Audacem. Allen does not make the identification with Luther, which, however, seems probable to me. “Eleutherius” was the form in which Luther then wrote his name and by which Erasmus first knew him.

⁶⁷ Kalkoff, P., Erasmus, Luther, und Friedrich der Weise, 1919.Google Scholar

⁶⁸ Luthers theologischen Quellen, 1912, pp. 209 f., and Zeitschrift für Kirchengeschichte, xxv, 135 f. It seems that Luther's comparison of the will to a beast of burden is found in Raymund of Sabunde, and in Augustine, or perhaps Pseudo-Augustine, Lib. iii Hypomnesticum; see Seit, Der authentische Text der Leipziger Disputation, p. 28.

⁶⁹ Letters of Förster, M., in Theologische Studien und Kritiken, 1911, 1 ff.Google Scholar

⁷⁰ Luther and Erasmus: their Attitude towards Toleration, 1920.

⁷¹ Zwinglis Werke, hrsg. von E. Egli, G. Finsler, und W. Köhler, 1905 ff. Volumes 1, 2, 3, 7, 8 and parts of 4 and 9. The treatises now come to 1525, the correspondence to 1528. An English translation of The Latin Works and Correspondence of H. Zwingli, ed. S. M. Jackson, has begun. Vol. i, 1912.

⁷² Köhler, W., ‘Zum Abendmahlsstreite zwischen Luther und Zwingli,’ Lutherstudien zur 4. Jahrhundertfeier der Reformation, 1917, pp. 114 ff.Google Scholar; Faulkner, J. A., ‘Dies ist mein Leib: a Celebrated Debate,’ Baptist Theological Quarterly, 1915, pp. 397 ff.Google Scholar

⁷³ Autobiography, Daniel Greser's, in Zwingliana, ii (1920), 324Google Scholar; and W. Köhler: ibid., pp. 356 ff., on the Marburg Conference.

⁷⁴ Bündnis und Bekenntnis 1529–30, 1910.

⁷⁵ Letter of Venetian Protestants to Luther, November 26, 1542; Enders, xv, 26.

⁷⁶ Bullinger to Vadian, May, 1544; Vadianische Briefsammlung, ed. Arbenz, und Wartmann, , vi (1908), p. 321.Google Scholar

⁷⁷ Gess, F., Akten und Briefe zur Kirchenpolitik Herzog Georgs von Sachsen. Band ii, 1524–27, 1917Google Scholar; Hecker, O. A., Religion und Politik in den letzten Lebensjahren Herzog Georgs des Bärtigen von Sachsen, 1912.Google ScholarBibliographic der sächsischen Geschichte, hrsg. von R. Bemmann, i, 1918.

⁷⁸ Luthers Werke, Weimar, Deutsche Bibel, iii. Vol. v has also been published. Cf. also, Risch, ‘Welche Aufgabe stellt die Lutherbibel der wissenschaftlichen Forschung?’ Neue kirchliche Zeitschrift, 1911.Google Scholar

⁷⁹ Reichert, O., ‘Zwei neue Protokolle zur Revision des Neuen Testaments,’ Lutherstudien zur 4. Jahrhundertfeier der Reformation, 1917, pp. 203 ff.Google Scholar

⁸⁰ Florer, W. W., Luthers Use of the Pre-Lutheran Versions of the Bible, 1913Google Scholar, maintains that he did; but on the other hand, see M. Burgdorf, Johann Lange. Rostock Dissertation, 1911, pp. 79 ff.; Walther, W., Die ersten Konkurrenten des Bibelübersetzers Luther, 1917Google Scholar; Walther, W., Luthers Deutsche Bibel, 1917Google Scholar; Weber, ‘Zu Luthers September und December-Testament,’ Zeitschrift für Kirchengeschichte, xxxiii, 399.

⁸¹ Zerener, H., Studien über das beginnende Eindringen der lutherischen Bibelübersetzung in die deutsche Literatur, 1911.Google Scholar

⁸² Florer, W. W., in Publications of the Modern Language Association, xxvi, 1911Google Scholar, and in a paper read at Modern Language Association, 1915; Giese, E., Untersuchungen über das Verhältnis von Luthers Sprache zur Wittenberger Drucksprache, 1915.Google Scholar

⁸³ Lutherstudien, u. s. w., 1917, p. 221; Archiv für Reformationsgeschichte, xiv (1917), p. 227.Google Scholar On the subsequent life of the book, see Hentz, J. P., History of the Lutheran Version of the Bible, 1910Google Scholar, and Guthe, H., Luther und die Bibelforschung der Gegenwart, 1917.Google Scholar

⁸⁴ In Fifth International Congress of Free Christianity, English, 1911, p. 225.

⁸⁵ Macmillan, K. D., Protestantism in Germany, 1917.Google Scholar

⁸⁶ Drews, P., Studien zur Geschichte des Gottesdienstes und des gottesdienstlichen Lebens, iv und v, 1910Google Scholar; Holl, K., ‘Die Entstehung von Luthers Kirchenbegriff,’ Forschungen und Versuche zur Geschichte. Festschrift Dietrich Schäfer dargebracht, 1915, pp. 410 ff.Google Scholar

⁸⁷ Berbig, ‘Akten der Kursächsichen Visitationen,’ Deutsche Zeitschrift für Kirchenrecht, xxi (1912), pp. 386–429.Google Scholar

⁸⁸ Holl, K., ‘Luther und die landesherrliche Kirchenregiment,’ Zeitschrift für Theologie und Kirche. Ergänzungsheft, 1911Google Scholar; Troeltsch, E., Die Soziallehren der christlichen Kirchen und Gruppen, 1912.Google Scholar

⁸⁹ Faulkner, J. A., ‘Luther and Economic Questions,’ Papers of the American Society of Church History, 2d series, ii, 1910Google Scholar; Schliter, J., ‘Luther's Kampf gegen den Kapitalismus,’ Neue Kirchliche Zeitschrift, 1917, pp. 126 ff.Google Scholar; Hilpert, A., Die Sequestration der geistlichen Güter in Kursachsen, 1531–43. Leipzig Dissertation, 1911.Google Scholar

⁹⁰ Paulus, N., Protestantism.ua und Toleranz, 1911Google Scholar; Völker, K., Toleranz und Intoleranz im Zeitalter der Reformation, 1912Google Scholar; Ruffini, F., Religious Liberty, 1912; R. Lewin, Luthers Stellung zu den Juden, 1911Google Scholar; Wappler, P., Die Stellung Kursachsens und Philipps von Hessen zur Tauferbewegung, 1910Google Scholar; Burr, G. L.: ‘Anent the Middle Ages,’ American Historical Review, 1913, 710–726Google Scholar; Sell, K., ‘Der Zusammeahang von Reformation und politischen Freiheit,’ Abhandlungen und Theologischen Arbeiten aus dem, rheinischen wissenschaftlichen Predigerverein, N. F. xii, 1910Google Scholar; Faulkner, J. A., ‘Luther and Toleration,’ Papers of the American Society of Church History, 2d Series, iv (1914), pp. 129 ff.CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Smith, Preserved, Life and Letters of Luther, 2d ed., Preface, 1914.Google Scholar

⁹¹ Ihmels, L., Das Dogma in der Predigt Luthers, 1912Google Scholar; Singmaster, J. A., ‘Luther the Preacher,’ Lutheran Quarterly, July, 1917.Google Scholar

⁹² Friedensburg, W.; Geschichte der Universität Wittenberg, 1917Google Scholar; Köhler, W., Die Reformation und die Studenten, 1917.Google Scholar

⁹³ Lauchert, J. F., Luther's Hymns, 1917Google Scholar; Albrecht, O., ‘Das Lutherlied, Was fürchst du Feind Herodes?’ Theologische Studien und Kritiken, 1912, pp. 287 ff.Google Scholar; Brenner, O., ‘Und keinen Dank dazu haben,’ Lutherstudien, 1917, pp. 72 ff.Google Scholar; Böhmer (Luther im Lichte der neueren Forschung, 4th ed., p. 145) now asserts that Luther composed the music to Ein' feste Burg. Grisar (iii, 290), dates this hymn in 1528, calling attention to the striking parallels in the Sermons on John (Werke, Weimar, xxviii).

⁹⁴ Adam, J., in Evangelische Freiheit, xii, 5; O. Albrecht, Luthers Katechismen, 1915.Google Scholar

⁹⁵ Luthers Werke, Weimar, xxvi, 237.

⁹⁶ Parvus catechismus pro pueris in Schola nuper auctus. … Ad ludum literarium Autor: Parve puer, parvum tu ne contemne libellum, Continet hic summi Dogmata summa Dei. Follows a woodcut of the crucifix. There is no date, It begins with letters, vowels, diphthongs and consonants in Latin. There is a picture illustrating each Commandment, one showing baptism by immersion and one showing the wafer put into the communicant's mouth. Mr. Plimpton also has a Deutsch Catechismus Mar. Luther. Gedruckt zu Nürmberg durch Friederichen Peypus aus verlegung des Ersamen mans Leonard zu der Aych Büchführer zu Nürmberg. MDXXXX. Mr. Plimpton also possesses, Parvus catechismus pro pueris in schola nuper auctus per Marti. Luth. Witebergae. 1543. Preface by John Sauromannus to Hermann Crotus Rubcanus, dated September 29.

⁹⁷ McGiffert, A. C., Protestant Thought before Kant, 1911Google Scholar; Gottschick, J., Luthers Theologie, 1914Google Scholar; Tschackert, Die Entstehung der lutherischen und der Reformierten Kirchenlehre, 1910Google Scholar; Faulkner, J. A., ‘Luther and the Divinity of Christ,’ Methodist Review, 1913, pp. 373 ff.Google Scholar; Seeberg, R., Luthers Lehre, (Dogmengeschichte, vol. 4), 1917Google Scholar; Ihmels, L., Das Christentum Luther a in seiner Eigenart, 1917Google Scholar; Preuss, H., Luthers Frömmigkeit, 1917Google Scholar; Die, PohlmannGrenze für die Bedeutung des religiösen Erlebnisses bei Luther, 1920Google Scholar; Lagrange, J. M., The Meaning of Christianity according to Luther and his Followers in Germany, 1920Google Scholar; Stange, C., Luther und das sittliche Ideal, 1919.Google Scholar

⁹⁸ Luthers Tischreden, Weimar, 4 vols. 1912 ff.Google Scholar

⁹⁹ Kroker, in Archiv für Reformationsgeschichte, viii (1911), pp. 160 ff.Google Scholar; and in Jahrbuch des Luiher-Vereins zu Wittenberg, i, 1919Google Scholar; Wahl, A., ‘Beiträge zur Kritik der Uberlieferung von Luthers Tischgesprächen der Frühzeit,’ Archiv für Reformationsgeschichte, xvii (1920), pp. 11 ff.Google Scholar; Cohrs, F., in Lutherstudien zur 4. Jahrhundertfeier, 1917, pp. 159 ff.Google Scholar; Christiani, L., ‘Les Propos de Table de Luther,’ Revue des Questions Historiques, 1911, pp. 470 ff.Google Scholar; 1912, pp. 101 ff., 436 ff.

¹⁰⁰ Conversations with Luther, transl. and ed. by Preserved Smith and H. P. Gallinger, 1915.

¹⁰¹ ‘Aus dem Lutherhause zu Wittenberg,’ Zeitschrift für Kirchengeschichte, xxx; Kroker, E., in Archiv für Reformationsgeschichte, xvii (1920), 280 ff.Google Scholar On the looting of this museum by robbers recently, see the New York Times, January 4, 1919.

¹⁰² Smith, Preserved, ‘The Personal Side of Luther,’ Homiletic Review, October, 1917.Google Scholar

¹⁰³ Kroker, E., ‘Luthers Werbung von Katharina von Bora,’ Lutherstudien, 1917, pp. 140 ff.Google Scholar

¹⁰⁴ New York Times, January 24,1916. The ring was for some time on exhibition at the New York Historical Society.

¹⁰⁵ On this, von Schubert, H., Luthers Frühentwicklung, 1916, p. 7.Google Scholar The plot of Angst must resemble that of Mrs. Charles's Schönberg-Cofta Family.

¹⁰⁶ July, 1913, by Preserved Smith.

¹⁰⁷ Preuss, H., Lutherbildnisse historisch-kultisch gesichtet und erläutert, 1914Google Scholar; Ficker, J., Die ältesten Bildnisse Luthers, 1920.Google Scholar

¹⁰⁸ Le Gallerie Nazionali Italiane. I. Roma. 1884, p. 123, “Libro dei conti di Lorenzo Lottos,” entry in Lotto's hand: “1540,17 ott. A Mario d'Armano, suo nipote, doi quadretti del retratto de Martin Luter et sua moier per donarli al Tristan.” On the portrait of Luther seen by Bembo at Mantua in 1537, see Cian, V., in Giornale Storico della Letteratura Italiana, ix (1887), p. 131.Google Scholar

¹⁰⁹ See Zeitschrift für Bücherfreunde, N. F. iv, 221 ff., 1913, and ix, 173 ff., 1918.Google Scholar

¹¹⁰ Böhmer, Luther im Lichte der neueren Forschung, 5th ed., 1918, p. 297.Google Scholar

¹¹¹ Faulkner, J. A., ’ Luther and the Bigamous Marriage of Philip of Hesse,’ American Journal of Theology, 1913, pp. 206 ff.Google Scholar

¹¹² Corpus Schwenckfeldianorum, ed Hartranft, vols. ii to iv, 1911 ff.; Ecke, K., Schwenckfeld, Luther, und der Gedanke einer apostolischen Reformation, 1911.Google Scholar

¹¹³ Nösgen, in Neue Kirchliche Zeitschrift, xxii (1911), 7ff.Google Scholar; E. Doumergue, Jean Calvin, ii, 562 ff.

¹¹⁴ Burr, G. L., ‘A new Fragment on Luther's death,’ American Historical Review, xvi (1911), 1 ff.Google Scholar; Spaeth, A., in Lutheran Church Review, xxix (1910), 313 ff.Google Scholar On this, denying its value, see Strieder, J., in Historische Vierteljahrschrift, xv (1912), 379 ff.Google Scholar; and Theologische Studien und Kritiken, 1913, pp. 314 ff.; J. Strieder, Authentische Berichte über Luthers letzte Lebensstunden (Kleine Texte, no. 99); Heederschee, J., ‘Luther's Laatste Levensdagen,’ Theologisch Tijdschrift, li (1917), 5 ff.Google Scholar; Schubart, C., Berichte über Luthers Tod und Begräbnis, 1917Google Scholar; Smith, Preserved, ‘Some Old Unpublished Letters,’ Harvard Theological Review, 1919, pp. 204 ff.Google Scholar Two letters on the subject were published by Kawerau, G. in Theologische Studien und Kritiken, 1913, pp. 134 ff.Google Scholar

¹¹⁵ Les Regretz et Complainctes de Passe partout et Bruict qui court. … Par Fr. Picart, 1557; quoted by Hauser, H., Études sur la Réforme francaise, 1909, p. 273.Google Scholar

¹¹⁶ Luthers Werke, Kritische Gesammtausgabe, u. s. w., Weimar, 1883 ff. On this, Albrecht, O. in Lutherstudien, 1917, pp. 29 ff.Google Scholar; the same volume contains much else on Luther's manuscripts, and on their first printing.

¹¹⁷ Luthers Werke in Auswahl, hrsg. von O. Clemen, 1912 ff.

¹¹⁸ Works of Martin Luther. Philadelphia, Holman. 2 vols., 1915, 1916 (translations by Jacobs, C. M., Lambert, W. A., Schindel, J. J., Steinhaeuser, A. T. W., and Steimle, A. L.).Google Scholar

¹¹⁹ Kawerau, Luthers Schriften nach der Reihenfolge der Jahren verzeichnet, 1917.Google Scholar

¹²⁰ Dr. Martin Luthers Briefwechsel, bearbeitet von E. L. Enders, fortgesetzt von G. Kawerau, weitergeführt von P. Flemming. Vol. 17. 1920. Professor Flemming has most kindly sent me the proofs of part of volume 18, publication of which is delayed. Professor Kawerau's death was a personal sorrow to me, as I shall never forget the extraordinary kindness he showed to me, an utter stranger, during my student years in Berlin.

¹²¹ Luther's Correspondence and other Contemporary Letters, translated and edited by Preserved Smith. Vol. i, 1913. Vol. ii, in collaboration with C. M. Jacobs, 1918.

¹²² Lockemann, T., Technische Studien zu Luthers Briefen an Friedrich den Weisen, 1913Google Scholar; Flemming, P., ‘Die Lutherbriefe in der Rörersammlung,’ in Studien G. Kawerau dargebracht, 1917, pp. 21 ff.Google Scholar; Kawerau, G., ‘Die Bemühungen im 16, 17, und 18 Jahrhundert, Luthers Briefe zu sammeln und herauszugeben,’ in Lutherstudien, 1917, 1ff.Google Scholar

¹²³ Kidd, B. J., Documents of the Continental Reformation, 1911.Google Scholar

¹²⁴ Mentz, G., Handschriften aus der Reformationszeit, 1912Google Scholar; Clemen, O., Handschriftenproben aus der Reformationszeit, 1911.Google Scholar

¹²⁵ Quellenkunde der deutschen Reformation, 2 vols., 1915, 1916Google Scholar; on Luther, ii, 167 ff. To this should be added A. Herte's dissertation, Die Lutherbiographie des J. Cochlaeus, 1915, and the bibliography in Smith, Preserved, Age of the Reformation, 1920.Google Scholar

¹²⁶ Quellenkunde der deutschen Geschichte, 8th ed., 1912. Cf. also Bibliographic der sächsischen Geschichte, hrsg. von R. Bemmann, i, 1918.

¹²⁷ List of References on the History of the Reformation in Germany, by G. L. Kieffer, W. W. Rockwell, and O. H. Pannkoke, 1917.

¹²⁸ Fourth edition 1917, fifth 1918; English translation from third edition, 1916.

¹²⁹ J. M. Reu, Thirty-five Years of Luther Research, 1917.

¹³⁰ ‘Der gegenwärtige Stand der Lutherforschung,’ Zeitschrift für Kirchengeschichte, xxxvii (1918), pp. 1–60.Google Scholar

¹³¹ Smith, Preserved, ‘Complete List of Works of Luther in English,’ Lutheran Quarterly, October, 1918.Google ScholarCf. also Wiener, F., Naogeorgus in English, 1913.Google Scholar

¹³² Grisar, H., Luther, 3 vols. 1911, 1912Google Scholar; English translation by E. M. Lamond, 6 vols., 1913 ff. Among the many reviews ojf this work or replies to it, the most important Protestant criticism is Kawerau, G., Luther in katholischer Beleuchtung, 1911.Google Scholar

¹³³ Singmaster, E. (Mrs. E. S. Lewis), Life of Martin Luther, 1917.Google Scholar

¹³⁴ Hausrath, A., Luthers Leben. Neue Auflage von H. von Schubert, 1914. Hausrath occasionally makes rash and unsupported statements, some of which were taken over from the first edition by A. C. McGiffert in his life of Luther, 1911.Google Scholar

¹³⁵ Martin Luther. Mit 384 Bildungen, von P. Schreckenbach und F. Neubert, 1916.

¹³⁶ von Harnack, A., M. Luther und die Begründung der Reformation, 1917Google Scholar; Köhler, W., M. Luther und die deutsche Reformation, 1916Google Scholar; Id., M. Luther der deutsche Reformator, 1917; Lenz, M., Luther und der deutsche Geist, 1917.Google ScholarCf. also Etzin, M. Luther, sein Leben und sein Werk, 1917Google Scholar; Severinsen, P., M. Luthers Liv, 1911.Google Scholar

¹³⁷ Christiani, L.: Du Luthéranisme au Protestantisme 1517–28, 1911.Google Scholar

¹³⁸ Berger, A. E., Luther in hulturgeschichtlicher Darstellung. Zweiter Teil, zweite Hälfte, 1919.Google Scholar

¹³⁹ Walther, W., Luihers Charakter, 1917.Google Scholar See also Söderblom, N., Humor och Melankoli och andra Lutherstudier, Stockholm, 1919.Google Scholar

¹⁴⁰ Rivari, La mente ed li carattere di Martino Luthero, 1914.Google Scholar

¹⁴¹ Vedder, H. C., The Reformation in Germany, 1913.Google Scholar Good summary, though too severe, of effects of Reformation, pp. 389–393; Walker, W., History of the Christian Church, 1918Google Scholar; Hulme, E. M., The Renaissance, the Protestant Revolution and the Catholic Reformation, 1914Google Scholar; von Below, G., Die Ursachen der Reformation, 1917Google Scholar; Abbott, W. C., The Expansion of Europe, 2 vols. 1918Google Scholar; Moore, G. F., History of Religions, ii. Judaism, Christianity, Mohammedanism, 1919Google Scholar; Bauslin, D. H., The Lutheran Movement of the Sixteenth Century, 1919Google Scholar; Taylor, H. O., Thought and Expression in the Sixteenth Century, 2 vols. 1920Google Scholar; Smith, Preserved, The Age of the Reformation, 1920.Google Scholar One might add for the sake of completeness the worthless Catholic review by P. Bernard, ‘Pour le quatrième centenaire de la Réformation,’ Études, Tome 153, pp. 137 ff., 308 ff., 468 ff., 733 ff.; Tome 154, pp. 157 ff., 305 ff., 420 ff. (1917–1918). The famous Outlines of History by H. G. Wells has only a few conventional sentences on Luther.

¹⁴² Harvey, A. E., ‘Martin Luther in the Estimate of Modern Historians,’ American Journal of Theology, July, 1918Google Scholar; Wentz, A. R., Martin Luther in ihe Changing Light of Four Centuries, 1916Google Scholar; Eckart, R., Luther und die Reformation im Urteil bedeutender Männer, 2d ed., 1917Google Scholar; Humphrey, L. H., ‘French Estimates of Luther,’ Lutheran Quarterly, April, 1918Google Scholar; Smith, Preserved, ‘English Opinion of Luther,’ Harvard Theological Review, 1917.Google Scholar The last chapter of The Age of the Reformation by the same writer is devoted to a history of the historiography of the Reformation.

¹⁴³ Troeltsch, E., Protestantism and Progress, 1912, pp. 198Google Scholar, 192 f.; Id., ‘Luther und der Protestantismus,’ Neue Rundschau, October, 1917; Id., ‘Protestantismus und Kultur,’ Religion in Geschichte und Gegenwart, 1912. Troeltsch's view that Luther was medieval is exaggerated by Wolff, R., Studien zu Luthers Weltanschauung, 1920.Google Scholar

¹⁴⁴ ‘Luther hat die objective Begriffswelt so völlig durchdrungen, das sie zwar nicht ihre Existenz, wohl aber ihren Wert verlor, und statt dessen der Anker der Lebensbehauptung auf den Boden des Subjects und seiner Erfahrung fiel.’ Luther und die deutsche Reformation, 1916. Santayana would agree with Troeltsch in this statement, but would deplore instead of exulting in it. See his Egotism in German Philosophy, 1917, pp. 1 ff., 23.

¹⁴⁵ ‘Luther,’ in Revue des Deux Mondes, 1912, 6^me période, pp. 309 ff.; the same reprinted in Les Origines de la Réforme, iii, 1914, chap. 1; Id., ‘Pourquoi Luther n'a-t-il pas créé qu'un Christianisme allemand?’ Revue de Métaphysique et de Morale, 1918, pp. 575–612.

¹⁴⁶ France, A., La Révolte des Anges, 1914, pp. 237 ff.Google Scholar

¹⁴⁷ Belloc, H., Europe and the Faith, 1920, pp. 219 f.Google Scholar

¹⁴⁸ Ellis, Havelock, Impressions and Comments, 1915.Google Scholar

¹⁴⁹ Ellis, H., The Philosophy of Conflict, second series, 1919, pp. 89–99.Google Scholar

¹⁵⁰ Moore, George, Confessions of a Young Man, 1886Google Scholar, new ed. 1917, p. 161; on the drama see further, Salve, 1912, pp. 183, 191 ff.; Vale, 1914, p. 104.

¹⁵¹ von Harnack, A., ‘Die Reformation,’ Internationale Monatsschrift, xi, 1918Google Scholar; Lenz, M., ‘Luthers Weltgeschichtliche Stellung,’ Preussische Jahrbücher, clxx (1917), pp. 166 ff.Google Scholar; Heiler, F., Luthers religionsgeschichtliche Bedeutung, 1918; Revue de Métaphysique et de Morale, 1918Google Scholar, articles by C. A. Bernouilli, ‘La Réforme de Luther et les problèmes de la culture presente’; E. Ehrhardt, ‘Le sens de la révolution religieuse et morale accomplie par Luther’; J. Chevalier, ‘Les deux Réformes: le Luthéranisme en Allemagne, le Calvinisme dans les pays de langue anglaise’; C. Andler, ‘L'esprit conservateur et l'esprit révolutionnaire dans le Luthéranisme.’

¹⁵² Chesterton, G. K., The Crimes of England, 1918.Google ScholarCf. also his Irish Impressions, 1920, p. 206.

¹⁵³ Martin Luther: The Man and His Work, 1911, p. 382.

¹⁵⁴ ‘The Unfinished Reformation,’ in Bulletin of Union Theological Seminary, October 31, 1917.

¹⁵⁵ Ibid.

¹⁵⁶ Life and Letters of Martin Luther, 1911, and preface to second edition, 1914; ‘Luther,’ in International Encyclopaedia, 1918; ‘Luther 1517–1917, Outlook, October 31, 1917; ‘The Reformation 1517–1917,’ Bibliotheca Sacra, January, 1918; “The Reformation interpreted in the Light of its Achievements,’ Paper read at American Historical Association, December, 1917, to be printed in Papers of the American Society of Church History; The Age of the Reformation, 1920.

¹⁵⁷ Paquier, J., Luther et l'Allemagne, 1918Google Scholar, with list of books on the subject, pp. viii ff.; Weiss, N., ‘Pour le quatrième centénaire de la Réformation,’ Bulletin de la Société de l'Histoire du Protestantisme Francais, 1917, pp. 178 ff.Google Scholar; Kawerau, K., Luthers Gedanken über den Krieg, 1916Google Scholar; Vermeil, E., ‘Les aspects religieux de la guerre,’ Revue de Métaphysique et de Morale, 1918, pp. 893–921Google Scholar; Faulkner, J. A.: ‘Luther and the Great War,’ Lutheran Quarterly, October, 1920, pp. 448 ff.Google Scholar

¹⁵⁸ Sermons, 1918, p. 274. Cf. Preserved Smith, ‘Luther and the Hohenzollerns,’ Outlook, April 23,1919.

¹⁵⁹ Lauchert, F., Die italienischen literarischen Gegner Luthers, 1912.Google Scholar

¹⁶⁰ Wolff, E., Faust und Luther, 1912.Google Scholar Luther is discussed in Busoni's, F. B. new opera, Doktor Faust, 1920. The libretto is not from Goethe, but is original.Google Scholar

¹⁶¹ Smith, Preserved, ‘The Mooncalf,’ Modern Philology, January, 1914.Google Scholar