1 The best recent bibliographical study was prepared by Pauck, Wilhelm for the American Council of Learned Societies, “The Historiography of the German Reformation during the Past Twenty Years,” Church History, IX (1940), 305–340CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Standard German historiographies are Wolf, Gustav, Quellenkunde der deutschen Reformationgeschichte (Gotha, 1916–1923), 2 vols.Google Scholar; Schnabel, Franz, Deutschlands geschichtliche Quellen und Darstellungen in der Neuzeit, I. Das Zeitalter der Reformation, 1500–1550 (Leipzig, 1931)Google Scholar; and for the most definitive historiography including recent studies on the various topics, see, Schottenloher, Karl, Bibliographie zur deutschen Geschichte im Zeitalter der Glaubensspaltung (1933–1939), 5 vols.Google Scholar

2 The word “Reformation” has a Protestant orientation implying that basically the Church founded in the days of the Apostles lived through the Middle Ages and was merely reformed and restored. The expression “Protestant Revolution” has a secular emphasis implying that certain political, social, economic, and religious forces became so powerful that a revolt against accepted standards occurred in the early sixteenth century. The use of the label “Protestant Revolt” is Catholic in orientation implying that there is but a single Church in Christendom from which the Protestants revolted in the Lutheran and Reformed churches.

3 Taylor, H. O., The Mediaeval Mind (New York, 1919), I, 61–204Google Scholar; Harnack, Adolph, History of Dogma (Boston, 1903), V, 14–60.Google Scholar

4 Stutz, Ulrich, Die Eigenkirche als Element des mittelalterlich-germanischen Kirchenrechts (1895), recently translated by Barraclough, G., Studies in Mediaeval History, Mediaeval Germany 911–1250 (Oxford, 1938), II, 35–70Google Scholar. Cf. Seeberg, Reinhold, Lehrbuch der Dogmengeschichte (Leipzig, 1930), III, 4 ff.Google Scholar

5 Gierke, O., Das deutsche Genossenschaftsrecht, II, 29 ff.Google Scholar; cf. Seeberg, , Lehrbuch, III, 15–16.Google Scholar

6 Seeberg, , Lehrbuch, III, 306.Google Scholar

7 Gierke, , Genossenschaftsrecht, II, 29 ff.Google Scholar; Seeberg, , Lehrbuch, III, 15–16.Google Scholar

8 Harnack, , History of Dogma, VI, 45–83Google Scholar; 118–149; 200–275; Loafs, Friedrich, Leitfaden zum Studium der Dogmengeschichte (Hale a. S., 1906), 496 ffGoogle Scholar. passim; Seeberg, , Lehrbuch, III, 206–218Google Scholar; 282–558, passim.

9 When Luther attacked the indulgence traffic the Dominican order supported itsmember, John Tetzel. The Master of the Sacred Palace was the Dominican Silvester Prierias. Tetzel's case in the curia was represented by his fellow Dominican, Hermann Rab, Provincial of Saxony. See D. Martin Luthers Werke kritische Gesammtausgabe (Weimar, 1883 ff.), II, 30Google Scholar, later cited as W. A.; Müller, Karl, “Luthers Römischen Prozess,” Zeitschrift für Kirchengeschichte, XXIV, 51Google Scholar; Boehmer, H., Der junge Luther (Gotha, 1925), 203–204.Google Scholar

10 Seeberg, , Lehrbuch, III, 703 ff.Google Scholar; Loofs, , Leitfaden, 608–621Google Scholar; Boehmer, , Der junge Luther, 39–43.Google Scholar

11 Ibid.

12 Creighton, M., A History of the Papacy (New York, 1901), V, 150 ffGoogle Scholar. King Louis XII had recently summoned a Council and some of the cardinals at Pisa had supported the coneiliar theory. The University of Paris had also appealed to a General Council in 1518. See Luther's, appeal, W. A., II, 36 ffGoogle Scholar. Cf. Kaweran, E. Enders et al. , Dr. Martin Luthers Briefwechsel, I, 314Google Scholar, hereafter cited as Enders. Bull Execrabilis of Pope Pius II in 1460 made an appeal to a Council unlawful. Creighton, , Papacy, III, 239–240Google Scholar; Müller, K., “Luthers Rönischen Prozess,” 73Google Scholar; Feret, L'Abbé P., La Faculté de Théologie de Paris Ép. Moderns, I, 98Google Scholar; Crevier, M., Histoire de L'Unieersité de Paris, V, 35 ff.Google Scholar

13 Friedensburg, Walter, Urkundenbuch der Universität Wittenberg (Magdeburg, 1926), I, 15Google Scholar. Trutvetter is listed in the Rotulus of 1507 prepared by Christoph Scheurl. Also see Friedensburg, , Geschichte der Universität Wittenberg (Halle a. S., 1917), 50–53Google Scholar, hereafter, G. U. W.; Plitt, G., Jodokus Trutfetter von Eisenach, der Lehrer Luthers (Erlangen, 1876)Google Scholar. Scheurl, , Briefbuch, I, 124Google Scholar, reads: “Viam modernam instituens sine intermissione legebat, studebat, docebat, praedicabat, orabat.” Hauszleiter, Johannes, Die Universität Wittenberg vor dem Eintritt Luthers (Leipzig, 1903), 16Google Scholar, quotes from the Dialogus of 1507 by Meinhardt, “humilis, iustus, a mundo segregatus et deo dicatus.”

14 Seeberg, , Lehrbuch, III, 420 ffGoogle Scholar. passim; Harnack, History of Dogma, VI, 200 ffGoogle Scholar.; Loofs, , Leitfaden, 539 ff.Google Scholar

15 Scheel, Otto, Martin Luther, Vom Katholizismus zur Reformation (Tübingen, 1917), II, 125 ffGoogle Scholar.; Strohl, H., L'Évolution Religieuse de Luther jusqu'en 1515 (Strasbourg, 1922)Google Scholar; Seeberg, Reinhold, Die religiösen Grundgedanken des jungen Luther und ihr Verhältnis zu dem Ockamismus und der deutschen Mystik (Berlin, 1931)Google Scholar; Wolf, E., Staupitz und Luther (Leipzig, 1927)Google Scholar; Wolf, , “Johann von Staupitz und die theologisehen Anfänge Luthers,” LutherJahrbuch, XI (1929), 43–86Google Scholar. A good example of the search for light is found in the letter written by Luther in the name of the Wittenberg faculty, November 22, 1518, W. A., “Die Deutsche Bibel,” IV, 583 ff.

16 W. A., II, 34 ffGoogle Scholar.; Enders, I, 314. Luther made this appeal on November 28, 1518, before a notary and witnesses. Later this was renewed and Luther did not abandon the idea of a General Council until after the Diet of Augsburg in 1530 even though he had little hope that one might be called during the twenties.

17 Seeberg, , Lehrbuch, III, 73–82Google Scholar; 206–219; cf. Geiselmann, J., Die Eucharistielehre der Vorscholastik (1926), 290 ff.Google Scholar

18 Joaehimsen, Paul, “Der Humanismus and die Entwieklung des deutachen Geistes,” Deutsche Vierteljahrschrift für Literaturwissenchaft und Geistesgeschichte, VIII, 419–480Google Scholar; Huizinga, J., “Das Problem der Renaissance,” Wegs der Kaslturgeschichte (München, 1930), 124 ff.Google Scholar; von Schubert, Hans, “Reformation and Humanismus,” Luther-Jahrbuch, VIII (1926).Google Scholar

19 Luther first stressed Augustine but later questioned the authority of all the Fathers. After weighing one against another (W. A., L, 541–542Google Scholar) he concluded that Cyprian was closer to the Apostles than Augustine. Erasmus preferred Jerome and was followed by Zwingli in this respect. Wernle, Paul, Die Renaissonsce des Christentums im 16. Jahrhunderis (Tübingen, 1904), 1–17Google Scholar, points out that Erasmus mistrusted Augustine. He wanted to begin with the Sermon on the Mount and build a militant Christian. On pp. 27–28 he shows that Zwingli was very close to Erasmus, also beginning with the Sermon on the Mount and using Origen and Jerome as guides rather than Augustine. Luther, however, (30–31) began with the story od the Cross and proceeded to the Sermon on the Mount.

20 The original document on parchment with the official seal is in Haile, WUA. Tit. III, No. 1. First reprinted in Suevus, G., Academia Witebergensis ad anno fundationis 1502 … usque ad annum 1655 (Wittebergae, [1655])Google Scholar Bl. A₁—A₃, now quite rare. More accessible in Friedensburg, , Urkundenbuch, I, 1–3Google Scholar. Also Israël, F., Des Wittenberger Universitätsarchiv; seine Geschichte and seine Bestände, Forsehungen zur Thiüringiseh-Sächsischen Geschichte (Halle a.d.S., 1913), IV, 96–99.Google Scholar

21 The official sanction of Pope Alexander VI, issued through the Cardinal Legate Raimund, Bishop of Gurk, written on parchment, is in Halle, WUA, Tit. III, No. 5. It is poorly preserved and the seal is missing. For text see Israel, , Des Wittenherger Universitätsarchiv, 100–102Google Scholar; cf. also Friedensburg, , Urkundenbuch, I, 5Google Scholar. Numbers 2 and 3 in this same collection are additional letters granting special privileges to the Theological and Law Faculties. See Urkundenbuch, I, 4–5.Google Scholar

22 Friedensburg, , G. U. W., 1Google Scholar. The Elector of Saxony was Rechsvikar which made him ruler over all of eastern Germany during an interregnum. Boedler, K. E. F., Die Gewalt der askanischen Herzöge in Westfalen and Engern bis zum Ausgang des 14.Jahrhunderts (Halle a.S., 1912), 68 ff.Google Scholar

23 Wittenberg had 2146 inhabitants in 1500 and 2453 in 1550. For comparative figures see Esehenhagen, E., “Wittenberger Studien,” Luther-Jahrbuch, IX (Munich, 1927), 28–42.Google Scholar

24 In the Dialogus of 1507, Meinhardt tells the student whom he is showing the town, “So rapid is the renovation of the town and the Castle that buildings seem to grow like trees.” This old source is very rare; only three copies were in existence before the recent war. The above quotation is from the Berlin text in which Chapter 16 describes the town.

25 The best detailed discussion of the nature and history of the Augustinian monastery is found in Stein, Hermann, Geschichte des Lutherhauses (Wittenberg, 1883)Google Scholar. Charitius, M. D. Andreas, Chronik der Wittenberger Archidiakonrus (e. 1740, unpublished), 97–107, has much material.Google Scholar

26 Below, n. 74.

27 Das alte Collegium is #19 and the Collegium Friederici is #20 in Schwiebert, E. G., “The Electoral Town of Wittenberg,” Medievalia et Humanistica, III (1945), 104.Google Scholar

28 The Augustinian monastery is #24, Ibid. For the location of classes, Merian, Matthceum, Topographia Superioris Saxoniae, Thurtngiae, Misniae, Lusatiae etc. (Franekfurt, 1650), 196.Google Scholar

29 Meinhardt, Dialogus of 1507, sec. 16.

30 Gurlitt, Cornelius, Die Lutherstadt Wittenberg, Die Kunst, ed. by Muther, Richard (Berlin, s. d.), 48 ff.Google Scholar

31 Schwiebert, E. G., “Remnants of a Reformation Library,” The Library Quarterly, X (1940), 494–531.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

32 Krüger, Gottfried, “Wie sah die Stadt Wittenberg zu Luthers Lebzeiten aus? ”Luther, Vierteljahrsschrift der Luthergesellschaft, XV (1933), 23.Google Scholar

33 Meinhardt, Dialogus, sec. 16. In 1507 the professor tells the prospective student that a Law College might be built later across the street from the Franciscan monastery. It must have been built for the street was renamed Juristen Gasse and the Consistory was housed in the building on that location. Cf. Medievalia et Humanistica, III, 104, #10.Google Scholar

34 Israel, , Das Wittenberger Unversitätsarchiv, 98.Google Scholar

35 Friedensburg, , Urkundenbuch, I, 20Google Scholar

36 Ibid., 29–30. “De carcere et inobedientibus” provided for a special student jail in which they were to be kept for a short time. Ineorrigibles were to be turned over to the magistrates. According to the section “De foro competenti,” the Rector and his Deans were to make the preliminary investigations. If the problem was financial, the student was given fifteen days to make amends.

37 Friedensburg, , G. U. W., 42Google Scholar, based on the Album of the first four semesters of the school. Förstemaan, C. E., Album Academiae Vitebergensis (1841–1905), 3 vols.Google Scholar, hereafter cited as Album. See, Ibid., III, 803.

38 A good Introduction to the Dialogus is given in Hauszleiter, Joh., Die Universität Wittenberg, 5 ff.Google Scholar

39 Album, III, fan and spring semesters, 1519–1520, total 552, 804; cf. I, 86–99.

40 Friedensburg, , Urkundenbuch, I, 109.Google Scholar

41 Philip Melanehthon's Statutes of 1533 are in Ibid., 154–158. For changes in 1535–1536 see Ibid., 162–186. See also Israel, , Das Wittenberger Univeritätsarchiv, 104 ffGoogle Scholar. The date 1560 is an arbitrary one as the death of Philip Melanchthon did not necessarily end the Reformation. Its force, however, had been spent even before that date and the Age of Dogmatism was gaining ascendancy.

42 A study of the Album shows a rather striking correlation between the spread of the German Reformation in different regions as reflected in the enrolments in the university.

43 Friedensburg, , Urkundenbuch, I, 20Google Scholar; documents 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, and 27, 18–60, give the fundamental regulations governing the organization of the school. The statutes of 1523 and of 1533–36 merely modified these original statutes.

44 Ibid., 21. Elections were held May 1 and October 18 by the Senate of the University. The name of the rector appears in the Album at the beginning of each semester. On their duties see Friedensburg, , Urkundenbuch, I, 21–22.Google Scholar

45 Ibid., 20. For qualifications, duties, etc., see statutes 23, 24, 25 and 26 of n. 43 above.

46 Ibid., 19. Statute 22 describes their duties and qualifications. They were the final authority on the campus. In the original Statutes of 1508 they were the Rector T. Bloehig, Prior John Mogenhofer, John Staupitz, and Polich von Mellerstadt. For further information on the reformatores see Ibid., 22 and 23.

47 Ibid., 30.

48 See Rotulus of 1507, Ibid., 14–17 and the staff of the reorganized university of 1533–1536, Ibid., 154–179.

49 Schwiebert, E. G., Reformation Lectures (Vaiparaiso, 1937), 207–224Google Scholar. For a good collection of sources on this subject see Israel, , Das Wittenberger Universtätsarchiv, 1 ffGoogle Scholar. passim. See also Grohmann, J. C. A., Annalen der Uasversität zu Wittenberg (Meissen, 1801), I, 46 ffGoogle Scholar. passim, and Friedensburg, , Urkzendenbuch, IGoogle Scholar, passim.

50 For an evaluation of Luther's income during these years see Sehwiebert, E. G., Reformation Lectures, 222–224Google Scholar. For comparative standards of value see Ibid., 207 ff.

51 See Friedensburg, , Urkundenbuch, I, 202–203 as an illustration.Google Scholar

52 For the growth and content of this library see Schwiebert, E. G., “Renmants of a Reformation Library,” The Library Quarterly, X (1940), 504 ff. and 526 ff.Google Scholar

53 Friedensbnrg, , G. U. W., 66–68.Google Scholar

54 Seheurl, , Briefbuch, I, 124Google Scholar; Friedensburg, , G. U. W., 51 ff.Google Scholar

55 Ibid., 52–53.

56 Ibid., 69. He had studied under the best German humanists, including Agricola and Langen, and crossed the Alps to finish his studies in Italy. He left Wittenberg because of the bitter struggle between Mellerstadt and Wimpina.

57 He was the “Bannerträger des Hellenismus,” reputed to be one of the foremost Greek scholars in northern Germany. Although his colleagues were quite impressed by his knowledge of the classics as evidenced in the commencement address which he delivered in 1503, he nevertheless left Wittenberg because of the scholastic atmosphere. Scheel, Otto, Martin Luther (Tübingen, 1916), I, 221Google Scholar; G. Bauch, Die Anfädnge des Studiums der griechischen Sprache und Literatur in Norddeutschland; Friedensburg, , G. U. W., 75–76.Google Scholar

58 Th. Muther, , Aus dem Universitäts und Gelehrtenleben im Zeitalter der Reformation, 95 ffGoogle Scholar. His real name was Petrus Tomais. A native of Italy, he had taught for some time at the University of Padua and a number of other schools. Duke Bogislav X of Pomerania met him while on a journey to the Holy Land and persuaded him to move his family north and to teach at the University of Griefswald. Upon the death of his daughter, he was so grieved that he decided to return to Italy. On the way, Frederick the Wise succeeded in keeping him at Wittenberg from 1503 to 1506, when an outbreak of the pest caused his immediate departure. Cf. Friedensburg, , G. U. W., 54–57.Google Scholar

59 Ibid., 73 ff.

60 As General Vicar of the Augustinian Hermits in Germany, Staupitz was so busy traveling that he was forced to neglect his theological lectures at the university. When ho was reëlected in May, 1512, at the Cologne Chapter, he decided to give up teaching and to make Martin Luther his successor.

61 With the death of Mellerstadt in December, 1513, it seemed as though the University had lost its “Haupt.” Cf. Stier, G., Inscriptiones Vitebergae latinae (Wittenberg, 1856), 30.Google Scholar

62 The circumstances surrounding the return are not too clear. It seems logical to believe that John Staupitz was chiefly responsible. Boehmer, (Der junge Luther, 85–86)Google Scholar feels that Erfurt may even have asked Luther to leave, since after his return from Rome Luther and Lang had joined the General Vicar in favoring the union of the non-reformed convents with those already reformed, a movement to which Erfurt strenuously objected and the purpose behind Luther's mission in Rome. Cf. W. A., “Briefe,” I, 24–27.Google Scholar

63 Boehmer, , Der junge Luther, 90Google Scholar, makes the point that the Elector was willing to pay the promotion fee of 50 gulden for Luther's doctorate only on the condition that he fill the chair of Lectura in Biblia for the remainder of his life. A few of the many stories surrounding Luther's promotion may be found in W. A., “Tischreden,” III, 187–188Google Scholar, (hereafter T. B.); Enders, I, 7–8Google Scholar; T. R., II, 379Google Scholar; T. R., IV, 13, 129–130Google Scholar; Reu, , Luther's German Bible (Columbus, 1934), 331.Google Scholar

64 Boehmer, H., Luthers erste Vorlesung (Leipzig, 1924), 3Google Scholar. He concludes on the basis of W. A., L, 519Google Scholar, that Luther lectured on Genesis before he began his lectures on the Psalms which he was delivering in February, 1513. He did not again lecture on Genesis until 1535.

65 All but two leaves of Luther's lecture notes on the Psalms has been preserved in the Wolfenbüttler Psalter, reproduced by Kawerau, in the W. A., III. About two-thirds of his ünge von Luthers Christologis naoh d. ersten Psalmernvorlesung (Berlin, 1929).Google Scholar

66 Johannes Ficker of Halle rediscovered Luther's original lecture notes on Romans in Berlin's Staatsbibliothek and published them in 1908 under the title, Anfänge reformatorischer Bibelauslegung, I; Luthers Vorissung über den Rörnerbrief (Leipsig, 1908), 2 partsGoogle Scholar. Cf. Hell, Karl, Luther, Gesuommelte Aufsäte zur Kirchengeschichte (Tubingen, 1927), I, 91Google Scholar. Also Ellwein, Eduard, Martin Luther, Vorlesung über den Römerbrief (München, 1927).Google Scholar

67 Luther's own lecture notes have not yet been discovered, but student notes reveal that the Glossae and Soholia had now been discarded and replaced by the exegetical method. See text in von Schubert, Hans, Luthers Vorlesung über den Galaterbrief, 1516–1517 (Heidelberg, 1918)Google Scholar. For a study of Luther's exegetical growth see Meissinger, K. A., Luthers Exegese in der Frühseft (Leipzig, 1910), 22 ff.Google Scholar, especially 51–53. Also Rommel, H., Über Luthers Randbemerkungen von 1509–1510 (Kiel, 1930), 27 ffGoogle Scholar.

68 For a rather complete review of Luther's theological development between 1512 and 1519 see Stracke, Ernest, “Luthers groszes Selbstzeugnis, 1545” Schriften des Vereins für Reformationsgeschichte, CXL (Leipzig, 1926).Google Scholar

69 An excellent introduction to the historiography of Luther's struggle for faith may be found in Pauck, “The Historiography,” 321–325. For further materials see Roland Bainton's review of Road to Reformation by Boehmer, H., Church History, XVI (1947), 169–171Google Scholar. Wendorf, H., “Der Durchbruch der neuen Erkenntnis Luthers im Lichte der Handschriftlichen Überlieferung,” Historische Vierteljahrschrift, XXVII (1932), 124–144, 285–327Google Scholar presents a strong case for placing the Turmerlebnis in July, 1513. Cf. Vogelsang, E., Luthers Christologie, 59Google Scholar. He does not believe the change is evident until Psalm 71 and places the date in 1514. See also Harnack, D. Theodosius, Luthers Theologie (Müchen, 1927), II, 326–329.Google Scholar

70 Modern scholars are prone to begin with the assumption that the teachings of the Roman Church were stable and that Luther's problem was only imaginary. Reu, Luther's German Bible, presents a detailed treatment of Luther's progress, 101 ff., even though the footnoting is unsatisfactory; cf. “Source Materials,” 94 ff. Holl, Luther, 15 ff.

71 Schubert, , “Reformation und Humaniamus,” Luther Jahrbuch, VIII, 9.Google Scholar

72 Friedensburg, , G. U. W., 97–98Google Scholar; cf. Romniel, , Über Luthers Randbemerkungen, 27 ff.Google Scholar

73 It was not until his debate with John Eck that Luther began to realize that he had changed, but he was not even then fully conscious that he was no longer an orthodox Catholic. Cf. Stracke, Luthers grosses Selbstzeugnis, passim.

74 Stein, Hermann, Lutherhaus, 12Google Scholar. Shortly after his promotion to the doctorate, Luther was appointed regens studii in which capacity he lectured to his fellow Augustinians.

75 The promotion was for the degree of Sententiarius and the disputation was held September 25, 1516, on the theme, “Quaestio de viribus et voluntate hominis sine gratia disputata 1516,” W. A., I, 142–144Google Scholar. Cf. Enders, I, 54 f., n. 22. On September 4, 1517, another student, Francis Günther, defended the thesis: “It is false to say that without Aristotle one cannot become a theologian. The opposite is true. No one becomes a theologian unless it be without Aristotle, for the whole of Aristotle is related to theology as darkness is to light, and his Ethics is the worst enemy of Grace.” W. A., I, 226Google Scholar. The above is a free rendition of Theses 41 to 45 inclusive.

76 Barge, H., Andreas Bodenstein von Karlstadt, I, 74Google Scholar; Friedensbnrg G. U. W., 99–100.

77 Ibid., 100.

78 Bauch, G., “Die Einführung des Hebräischen in Wittenberg,” Monatsschrift für Geschiehte und Wissenschaft des Judentums (N. F. 12), XLVIII (1904), 147.Google Scholar

79 Endere, I, 86; cf. W. A., “Briefe,” I, 88–89.

80 Friedensburg, , Urkundenbuch, I, 74–90.Google Scholar

81 Ficker, Johannes, Liber Decanorum, Des Dekanatsbuch der theologisehen Fakultät zu Wittenberg, 1923Google Scholar. A photographic reproduction of the original. Förstemann, E. C., Liber decanorum fac. theol. acad. Vitebergensis, 19 if. 82Google Scholar

82 Enders, I, 100–101; W. A., “Briefe,” I, 98–99.

83 Enders, I, 170–171.

84 Friedensburg, , Urkundenbuch, I, 86.Google Scholar

85 The Elector wanted John Reuchlin himself for the new teacher in Greek and Hebrew, but the famous scholar declined the invitation, W. A., “Briefe,” I, 175, n. 17. On August 29, 1518, Melanchthon, the nephew of Reuchlin, delivered his inaugural address in the Castle Church to a capacity audience and made a distinct impression on Luther and other faculty members. Enders, I, 220 and 237. The Liberal Arts curriculum is given in the Elector's directive of May 31, 1520; Friedensburg, , Urkundenbuoh, I, 100.Google Scholar

86 Friedensburg, , G. U. W., 126, 131 ff.Google Scholar

87 Ibid.

88 Friedensburg, , Urkundenbuch, I, 128–130.Google Scholar

89 Ibid., 154–158.

90 Ibid., 156. De Promotionibus states that a Biblicus must be familiar with Romans. Luther believed that Romans contained all the doctrines of the Bible, with the exception of the Trinity found in John. For the Sententiarius, the candidate was required to know the essential points of the writings of St. Paul, some of the Psalms, and a part of the Prophets, instead of Lombard's Sentences. For the Formatus, the next step, the candidate was to participate in a publie disputation in an assigned field of theology. The Doctorate was conferred only upon a complete mastery of the Bible.

91 In earlier years Luther referred to his Biblical humanism as a New Theology, but after being accused of many innovations, he preferred to emphasize that he had merely returned to early Christian practice and doctrine. Cf. Wolfgang Capito, Preface to the Froben edition of Luther's works, October, 1518, reprinted in Herminjard, , Correspondance des Réformateurs des pays de la langue francaise (1866), I, 61Google Scholar, and Luther's, tract of 1539, “On Councils and the Churches,” Works of Martin Luther (Philadelphia, 1931)Google Scholar, V. An original of the 1518 Froben edition of Luther's works is in the Cornell University Library.

92 W. A., “Die Deutsche Bibel,” IV, 583 ff.

93 Deutsche Reichstagsakten unter Karl V (Gotha, 1896), II, 637–641Google Scholar; Mirbt, Carl, Quellen zur Geschichte des Papsttums und des Römischen Katholizismus (Tübingen, 1924), 260–261Google Scholar. Cf. Kalkoif, P., Enstehung des Wormser Edikts (Leipzig, 1913), 195Google Scholar; Kalkoff, Paul, Die Depeschen des Nuntius Aleandefs (Halle, 1886)Google Scholar. Aleander was commissioned to draft the Edict in the absence of the Archbishop of Salzburg.

94 After Luther had defied the Pope's a Bull, Exsurge Domine, by burning it with the Canon Law on December 10, 1520, the subsequent Bull, Decet Romanum pontificem, of January 2, 1521, placed him officially under papal excommunication. For literature see Mirbt, , Quellen, 257.Google Scholar

95 Martini, D.Lutheri Opera latina varii argumenti (Erlangen), VI, 34 ffGoogle Scholar.; W. A., VIII, likewise contains the Latin text. Walch, J. G., D. Martin Luthers Sämtliche Schriften, XVIIIGoogle Scholar, contains the German translation but must be used with care. Schwiebert, E. G., The University of Wittenberg and some other Universities in their Relation to the German Reformation (Cornell, 1929), 260–287Google Scholar, doctoral dissertation written under the direction of Preserved Smith.

96 Album, I, 99–124Google Scholar; cf. Ibid., III, 804, which gives 285 for 1522; 198 for 1523; 170 for 1524; and 201 for 1525.

97 Ibid. The location of each student reveals that most of them were from the lands of those evangelical princes who had already made their position known.

98 An interesting example is the tiny village of Kemberg whose mayor proudly showed the author an old town record which revealed that Luther had experimented with the use of the Lutheran liturgy in that small congregation before attempting to introduce its use in the Wittenberg congregation. The already familiar Bartholomäus Bernhardi was serving as pastor at the time.

99 These and subsequent tables were prepared for the doctoral dissertation cited in note 95, hereafter referred to as Thesis. Figures were compiled from the Album, I, 99–108Google Scholar; cf. supra, n. 37. The original is in the Halle-Witteaberg University Library, Germany.

100 It is difficult to estimate the number of students actually in school during an academic year, as the matriculations indicate only new students. There is no means of determining how long a student remained at the university.

101 Album, I, 86–99.Google Scholar

102 Sehwiebert, , Thesis, 71, based on Album, I, 137–140.Google Scholar

103 The use of the terms “northern” and “southern” lands is an arbitrary one meaning north or south of a horizontal line drawn through Wittenberg. See Sehwiebert, Thesis, 72. One of the reasons for the greater number of matriculations from the South in 1520 was that the new Gospel teaching did not spread to the North until the late twenties and early thirties.

104 The Statutes of 1523 are in Friedensburg, , Urkundenbuch, I, 128–130Google Scholar. The Weckruf may be found in W. A., XV, 28ff. Cf. W. A., XXX, 508–588.Google Scholar

105 For the historical growth of this principle see Schwiebert, E. G., “The Medieval Pattern in Luther's Views of the State,” Church History, XII (1943), 98–117CrossRefGoogle Scholar; for an account of the Saxon Visitations see Burkhardt, C. A. H., History of Church and School Visitations in Saxon Lands from 1524 to 1545 (1879)Google Scholar. The definitive source collection, Sehling, E., Die evangelischen Kirchenordnungen des XVI Jahrhunderts (Leipzig, 1902 ff.), 5 vols.Google Scholar

106 Burkhardt, , Visitations, 9–10Google Scholar; for the 1528 instructions see Sehling, , Kirchenordnungen, I, 31 ff.Google Scholar

107 Burkhardt, , Visitations, 3 ffGoogle Scholar. gives this account in great detail giving accurate statistical findings in each region for the original and subsequent visitations. Sehling, , Kirchenordnungen, I, 34 ffGoogle Scholar. contains the necessary documents of the Saxon reforms.

108 For a good description of the Catholic and Lutheran clergy during the sixteenth century see Drews, Paul, “Der evangeliache Geistliche in der deutschen Vergangenheit,” Monographien zur deutsohen Kulturgeschichte (Jena, 1905), 6 ff. and 17–19Google Scholar. For the deplorable conditions see Burkhardt, , Visitations, passim, on schools, 40 ff.Google Scholar

109 Some interesting statistics are given for the number of ministers considered competent by the visitors. In Electoral Saxony during the first visitations, 94 out of 154 were judged satisfactory, Burkhardt, , Visitations, 36–39Google Scholar; in the Meissen-Vogtland region the findings were given in percentages as 37% fair, 11% poor, 21% worthless, and 25% satisfactory, Ibid., 52–53. Cf. Luther, W. A., XXXVIII, 404Google Scholar, on the great shortage of preachers. See Sehling, , Kirchenordnungen, 24 ff.Google Scholar; Drews, P., Der evangelisehe Geistliche, passim., especially 14 ff.Google Scholar

110 W. A., XXX, 1, 265–267Google Scholar

111 Within the last two decades academic interest has shifted from the circumstances surrounding the establishment of the Lutheran Landeskirohe to Luther's conception of the word “Church.” See Kattenbusch, F., Die Doppeischiohtigkeit in Luthers Kirchenbegriff (Gotha, 1928)Google Scholar; Althaus, Paul, Communio sanctoruum (Gütersloh, 1929)Google Scholar; Rietschl, Ernst, “Das Problem der unsichtbarensichtbaren Kirehe bei Luther,” Schriften des Vereins für Reformationsgeschichte, CLIV (1932), 1–109Google Scholar; Jacob, G., “Luthers Kirchenbegriff,” Zeitsohrift für Kirchengeschichte, XLV (1934), 16–32Google Scholar; Kohlmeyer, E., “Die Bedeutung der Kirche für Luthar,” Z. K. G., XLVII, 466–511.Google Scholar

112 W. A., XII 35ff. and 197 ff.; Ibid., XIX, 44 ff. Cf.Sehling, , Kirchenordnungen, I, passim.Google Scholar

113 W. A., XXXV, 5–55, 70–87Google Scholar, and passim. On Ein Feste Burg, see 185–229.

114 Album, I, 137–140Google Scholar

115 The “Strenge Ordnung” of Duke George has been reproduced in Schreckenbach, P. and Neubert, F., Martin Luther (Leipzig, 1921), 86–87Google Scholar. Album, I, 137–140.Google Scholar

116 Ibid.; cf. Schwiebert, Thesis, 81.

117 Album, I, 137–140.Google Scholar

118 Spengler was one of the prominent laymen of the Reformation movement. As town secretary, he influenced the city council to establish the famous Nütnberg school, the model for many other Lutheran schools. With Brenz and Osainder, Spengler drafted the Nürnberg-Brandenburg Kirchenordnung of 1533 which was also a model for other regions. Th. Pressel, , Lazarus Spengler, Leben und ausgewählte Schriften der Väter und Begründer der lutherischen Kirche, 1–100Google Scholar; Schwiebert, , Thesis, 94.Google Scholar

119 Johannes Brenz was converted to the Reformation movement by Luther's Galatians and first met Luther at Heidelberg in 1518. As minishter of Schwabisch-Hall, he became the leader of the movement in Southwestern Germany and was the great stabilizing influence in that region during the Abendmahlsstreit. Hartmann, Julius, Brenz, Johannes. Leben und ausgewaählte Schriftern der Väter und Begründer der lutherischen Kirche, 61 ffGoogle Scholar. For his co-workers see Schwiebert, , Thesis, 92–93.Google Scholar

120 Archbishop Ernst of Magdeburg was the brother of Frederick the Wise, which explained the close relationship between Magdeburg and Wittenberg even before teh Reformation. Th. Pressel Nicolaus, von Amsdorf, Leben und ausgewählte Schriften der Väter und Begründer der lutherischen Kirche, VIII, 16Google Scholar. Between 1517 and 1520, Dr. Andrew Proles, Dr. Johann Scheyring and Anderw Kaurdorf had paved the way for the new Gospel. Hoffmann, F. W., Geschichte der Stadt Magdeburg (1847), II, 23Google Scholar. These were followed by two evangelical preachers, Dr. Johann Agricola and Dr. Melchior Myritz. In the early twenties, the authorities realized the necessity of instituting reforms or facing civil strife. On Sundays the people left the city in droves for the Vorstadt where the new Gospel was being preached. Ibid., 23–30. Schwiebert, , Thesis, 78–79.Google Scholar

121 Hoffmann, , Magdeburg, II, 27.Google Scholar

122 Pressel, , Nicolaus von Amsdorf, 20–25Google Scholar; paulsen, F., Geschichte des gelehrten Unterrichts (Leipzig, 1919), 276.Google Scholar

123 Rost, J. R., Pädagogische Bedeutung Bugenhagens (1890), 11 ffGoogle Scholar. Cf. Pressel, , Nicolaus von Amsdorf, 20–42Google Scholar, showing how Goslar, Eimsbeck, and other neighboring mission fields were organized.

124 Realencyklopadie für protestantische Theologie und Kirche, ed. by D. A. Hauck (1896–1913), III, 792Google Scholar; hereafter, R. E. Dr. Hesz received his M. A. degree from Wittenberg and completed his doctorate in Italy. The success of his reforms in Silesia is reflected in the student enro1ment from that region.

125 Album, I, 177 ff.Google Scholar; Schwiebert, Thesis, maps, 99 and 109, graph, 72.

126 Album, I, 137–140.Google Scholar

127 Reu, H., Augsburg Confession (Chicago, 1930)Google Scholar, contains much valuable source material otherwise not easily accessible, but unfortunately marred by poor proofreading. von Schubert, Hans, “Der Reiehstag von Augsburg im Zusammenbang der Reformationsgeschichte,” Schriften des Vereins für Reformations geschichte, XLV, III (1930), 3 ffGoogle Scholar. Another significant publication, in the form of Lichtsdrucktafeln, is “Die Augsburgische Konfession in ihrer ersten Gestalt als gemeinsames Bekenntnis deutseher Reichsstknde,” Schriften der Gesellschaft der Freunde der Universität Halle-Wittenberg (Halle, 1930)Google Scholar; also Walter, Johannes v., “Der Reichstag von Augsburg 1530,” Luther-Jahrbuch, XII (1930), 1 ffGoogle Scholar. W. A., XXX, III, 81 ffGoogle Scholar. and L, 162 if.

128 Althaus, Paul, “Luthers Abendmahlslehre,” Luther-Jahrbuch, XI (1929), 2–42Google Scholar; Seeberg, R., Die Lehre Luthers, Lehrbuch der Dogmengeschichte, 4th edition (Leipzig, 1933), IV, I, 458 ff.Google Scholar; Köhler, Walther, “Das Marburger Religionsgespräch 1529, Versuch einer Reconstruction,” Schriften des Vereins für Reformationsgeschichte, XLVIII (Leipzig, 1929), 1 ff.Google Scholar; W. A., XXIII, 38 ifGoogle Scholar. and XXVI, 241 ff.

129 Luther's frequent expressions on the Augsburg Confession leave no doubt as to his position. Enders, VIII, 190, 191, 220, 221, 222, 233, 258, 259. W. A., L, 162 ff.Google Scholar

130 Friedensburg, , Urkundenbuch, I, 154Google Scholar. The Church Ordinances do not stress the Angsburg Confession, but rather an acquaintance with Luther's Small Catechism. Sehling, , Kirchenordnungen, I, 1 ff.Google Scholar

131 Spalatin, Georg, Friedrichs des Weisen Leben und Zeitgeschichte (Jena, 1851), 4Google Scholar, states that he became John Frederick's tutor in 1509 when the boy was six. Vita Georgii Spalatini ex ipsius autographo descripta, M. D. XXXIV cui super impositus erat his Versicuius, ed. Georg Berbig, Queues. uru) Darsteflungen aus der Geschichte des Reformationsjahrhunslerts (Leipzig, 1908), VGoogle Scholar, MDIX, “tutor of John Frederick.”

132 Above, n. 41. Friedensburg, , Urkundenbuoh, I, 154–186.Google Scholar

133 W. A., XV, 28 ff.Google Scholar; Ibid., XXX, 508–588.

134 Some consideration was given to the plan of teaching Latin, Greek, and Hebrew in the preparatory schools; but Hebrew, particularly, was found impractical at the lower level.

135 Friedensburg, , Urkundentbuch, I, 154–158.Google Scholar

136 Ibid.

137 Rost, J. B., Pädagogische Bedeutung Bugenhagens, 24 ff.Google Scholar; cf. R. E., III, 528–529Google Scholar and Vogt, K. A. T., Johannes Bugenhagen Pomeranus, Leben und ausgewählte Schriften der Väter und Begründer der lutherisohen Kirche, IV, 303 ff. passim.Google Scholar

138 Paulsen, F., Geschichte des Gelehrten Unterrichts, 276–281.Google Scholar

139 Ibid.; Scheel, Otto, “Luther und die Schule seiner Zeit,” Luther-Jahrbuch, VII (1925), 141 ff.Google Scholar

140 Rost, , Pädagogische Bedeutung Bugenhagens, 59 ffGoogle Scholar. Unfortunately these publie lectures for adults met with much opposition. In Lübeck they were opposed by the strong guilds, in Hamburg the Cathedral Chapter was hostile, but in Stettin the lectures flourished, Ibid., 68–69.

141 A good example is the Wittenberg Latin school of 1533 established by Philip Melanohthon. Cf. n. 139.

142 Rost, , Pädagogische Bedeutung Bugenhagens, 66Google Scholar. Ziegler, Heinrich, “Die Gegenreformation in Schlesien,” Schriften des Vereins für Reformationsgeschichte, VI (1888–1889), 3 ff.Google Scholar

143 Album, I, 177–184; 250–261.Google Scholar

144 Burkhardt, , Visitations, 225 ff.Google Scholar

145 Album, I, 177–184Google Scholar. Sehwiebert, Thesis, 292, tabulation of “The North German States.”

146 Album, I, 250 ff.Google Scholar, II, 3–9. Between six and seven hundred students from the Breslau region alone attended Wittenberg during thia period.

147 Album, I, 250 ff.Google Scholar, II, 3–9.

148 Ibid.

149 Ibid.

150 Album, III, 804–806Google Scholar. These figures were computed on the basis of an average enrolment.

151 Ibid.

152 Ibid.

153 Ibid.

154 Another avenue for intriguing research would be to use the names of students in the Album as leads to further investigations in their home communities to ascertain the degree of correlation between Wittenberg and the growth of the Reformation in individual communities. Such a study could be made only an Ort und Stelle and would require infinite patience and time. For a few recorded reactions of students that studied at Wittenberg, see Friedensburg, , G. U. W., 152 ffGoogle Scholar. Cf. Ballenstadius, J. A., Andreae Althameri Vita, 73Google Scholar; Schiesz, , Briefwechsel der Brüder Ambrosius und Thomas Blaurer (1908), I, 29 ff.Google Scholar, no. 28; cf., also, 30, 31, 32, and 34.