Upload
brandy99
View
1.042
Download
2
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Ce>I'I or~\tt \\~*C),.lt,1 J~ ~\c.t\~ $b (fi..\\ 1C\83), '\6-lOe.
Robert Koib
.:.&. :1(";'1'1 ~9.t). ~J/(f
e '1M3.c~ HrrqNo( fttrldofl
~':;I
Luthfran&, that "Luther is Lthe onlytheologian of whom the Scriptureprophecies (Rev. 14:6). , .. Lutherhaa nO equal after the apostles andprophets,"
Pastors should approac~ Lutherthematically ~ Walther believed~ notchronologicaJ1y, since i,t is! obviousthat the earlier of Luther's writings.still contained much of the darknessof the papacy. The beginning student of Luther should read whatLuther wrote:. not those works whichare based on .student notes~ ~written
down in a huny.. !1 Nor shnuld onebegin with rhose works which appeared in Latin and have been translated into German, for nD transla·tion can ever capture rully theoriginal. (The Saint Louis editionhad, in fact~ begun with Luther'sGenesis lectures, based on studentnotes and in that edition translatedfrom Latin into German.) WaltheraJso discouraged the beginner fromsampling Luther's thought by reading first the exegetical or hcmileticalwritings. In~tead, he suggcested Lu..thers polemics: That These Words ofChrist, 71tis is My Body) ett." StillStlJnd (1527), the gre~t CanJession 011
the L()1d's Supper (1528), On t~ Pap~
at Rome (1520), and Against HansWorst (1541). "The polemical writ ..ings of Luther are, to be 2Iure.. heldin great contempt. but they are thegreatest thing that was evc£r writtendown by human hand.. . . thereyou see Lutber's heroic fai\th and hisspirilualjoy .... You cannot heaJ allillnesses with buttermilk and honey,but you also have to U5e bitter medicine. lI Next Walther ~dvised "the 80
called Reformation.. historical writings . I • where Luther laid thegroundwork for his work Df reforma·tion": On the Bahylonian Captivity of theClwrcn. (1520), To the Christian No-
A (,Iw: LlJ.U~r:r Jvr trlfT1"a,.n ~71U'nc:an..r
theology influenced the way he ledthe Evangelical Synod of Mis,souri t
Ohio, and Other States as its president and leading theologian. 4
Walthees initial reading of Lutherbegan a lifetime of diligent study ofthe Reformer'a writing~1 and thebooks and articles of the Saint Louisprofessor cited Luther frequently. ~In 1875 he wrote in the periodicalwhich he editedJ LeItr~ unJ Wenre~
against those who accused him ofwishing to repristinate the theologyof Lutheran Orthodoxy:
They do not know us who labelour theology that of the ..seventeenth century, As highly as wetreasure the immeo!e accomplish..ment.s of tbe great Lutheran dog·marician& of this periodJ it i.snevertheles,s noC really to themthat ~e return, but rather aboveaJl to our precious Book of Conc.ord and:to Luther, in whom werecogniz-e the man whom Godchose as the Moses of his church ofthe New Covenant, to lead hisCbUfCh, which had fallen inroslavery to the Antichrist, out ofthat sJavery. He is the column ofsmoke and fire of the Word ofGod, dear and pure as gold as itis. 6
Franz Pieper, Walther's succes.soras president of Concordia Seminary.wrote of lW mentor, "In Luther hesaw not just one more theologianalongside others, but the Reformerof the church whom God Himselfhad selectedJ the one who revealedthe Antichrist.'"
Walther himself had stated asmuch in a presentation to a pastoralconference shortly before his d~ath
in 1887, subsequently published inLeh,e unO. Wehre under the title, ftTheFruitful Reading of Luthers Writ..ings." There Walther claimed J inline with the assertion of earlier
•.j~
)~.)
I1
1·-1i-I
J~,I
, tj'j
~;.~
~j(,
Walch's edition became the com..panion of theological students during the next century, and one whofound in its pages solace andstrength during a long bout witbsickness in the midst of his universitycareer was a Saxon named Carl Ferdinand Wilhelm Walther. He spentsix months recovering from a seriou.sillness in 1831- t B32, two year~ afterhe began bis theological studies atLeipzig. It was this reading ofLuther, combined with the influenceof his pietistic friends and PastorMartin Steph.an~ that led Waltherinto an ever deepening commitmentto the theoJogy of Luther, theLutheran Confessions, and theOrChodox fathers of the 17th cen(ury. This commitment to Luthers
others. the Leipzig and the Alten~
burgJ had appeared during thecourse of the 11th century. By the17305 a new edition was needed; the
. old were no longer available. 'andmany pastors found it more convenient to read Luther's Lacin writingsin German translation and Luther's16th.. century German in a moremodem version. puring the next 13year.$ Walch com~eted his 24·volume edition, adding it to his otherliterary accomplishments in ethics
J
history of dogma and polemics, andtheological bibliography. 3
FlJrwrly txu-atJ'1It di,u:tlJr oj fil, end" 1m R':!QT·'RUJtim Rtu.aI'~ S'- £mJu. MOJ Dr. Kotb is 41~I~t t~irmtl.n of UtI Rtlif2'rnr Dt.ptJ,~mrn~ ill
COJl,CfJfdrfJ Cdl~J St PlJal~ MN,
Luther for German AmericansThe Saint Louis Edition of
Luther's Works1880-1910
Among the magnificent gifts ofHis grace which GQd has presented in the precious man, thebtes.sed Dr'. Mart'n Luther, aJ Hischosen inst.rument fOT the blessedreformation of the church, theforemost i.s not only that he Jovedthe divine W-ocd from his heartand in fai:t regarded ic more highJythan ,many thousand pieces of goldand silver, but also that he possessed a deep insight into .t andwas exrreme!y capable in [i nte rpretingl the Scriptures of the Oldand New Testaments. L
With these words Johann' GeorgWalch. 'professor of theology at the.University of JenaJ introduced hisnew edition of Luthe r's works in17~9. Walch, 'a theologian of en..cyclopedic interests and prodigiousJiterary output, recognized the needof German pastors for an updatedv:ersion of Luther's writings so thatthey might learn from the deep insight of the Reformer into the Biblical message. Walch's was the fLfthmajor edition of the Luther corpusproduced by his followers. The firsttwo, the Wittenberg and Jena edi·tions.. bad appean:d in the period between 1539 and 15591
2 and two
.. - - . -. - -~ ~- _.."", .. ~ -.- -.::;..-...... -~ ..... Koib: LJJ.l1ler for Gmnan Amtrica1U
hility fJj the German Nation (1520), andothers. Following certain ('doctrinalwritings," such.as On the Office oj eJuKeY$ (153o), the student s.hould moveon to exegetical writings, such asLuthe(s interpretation of the Sermon on the Mount~ of the LastWords. of David, and of Psalms 2,37, 45 t 82, 110,111) 117, and 118.Among the homi)eti~l writings thepastor should at least read over theappropriate sermons in Luther's postiJs rsermon books] as he prepareseach sermon, and he should also befamiliar with the Slwrt Smnons GirM1Jto a Friend as Models, a ~hort bit of ad ..vice to readers of his sermons foundin the Walch edition& (Walch I: Xli,2132-2735; Walch 2: XII, 18581860). Among Luther's letrers thosewritten immediately before, during..and just after the Diet of Augs.burgof 1530 are the best: "More beautifulletters have .never been written.Such courage of faith, such joy andconfidence of victory, is never ,to befound.l'J
. Walther discouraged pastors fromwriting out (heir own collections ofgems from Lutner's writings: "Ex-.cerpting Luther in detail is not particularly fruitful, for Luther does notoperate in such a manner that heproceeds .straight ahead in a strictorder of thoughts; he rather stormsfull brigade ahead.') Better than excerpting is the compilation of an index of suitable readings for us.e inpreaching on specific themes ortexts, WaJrher suggested. In usingLuther one should also rememberthat Luthers speech is simple, for hewas caHed to reform not the learnerlworld but rather the people of Christendom. Nor should the reader thinkthat h~ has come upon a contradic-
. tion as he reads Luther: ~'che much
criticiz.ed contradictions are onlycontradictory in appearance) or theymay be explained by recognizingthat Luther did not receive the fulltruth all at once as jf through astroke of magic." FinaJ]y, Waltheradvised in conclusion: liIiYou shouldmake it a rule to read something inLuther's writings every day, and findrefuge in them particularly whenyou feel dry, (ired, discouraged, sad,withoul any way out, miserable.Then select. particularly his lettersfor something to pick you up,strengthen you, give you a new leaseon life. Make yourself so familiarwith your edition of Luther (hac youcan find each writing without havingto page around, for that steals precious ti me. ).18
[t is not surprising tha~ a manwith such a high opjnion of Lutherand his writings shollld be concernedthat the many German-born students at his seminary were not ableany longer to' find copies of theWalch edition for their personal libraries, Walther had welcomed theErlangen edition and reprinted anappeal for it! completion in Lehre andWeohre in 1861.9 But Walther was de'ermined to make Luther availablefor German-reading pastors inNorth America, and in 1879 hemoved to implement that desire.Though we do not know the details1
at" the 1879 pastoral conference ofthe Western District of the Mi.ssouriSynod the suggestion was made thatthe Synod sponsor a new edition ofLuther's works based on that ofWalch, according to the preface ofthe fuost volume of the new edition~
because "copies of tbe old edition arebecoming ever harder 10 find and... the Erlangen edition, which
has neither the valuable longer pref..aces nor the translations of the Latin
(
i1.~,11:11j
'1.l.{
.1.,
.~
i~f~.1~
writings, does not replace the Walcheditlon."lO Waltherscolleague in theSaint Louis ministeriurn, PastorJohann Friedrich Buenger) particu-larly promoted this new project .. Theconference recommended Iha tGeorg Stockhardt ~sume the editor..ship and named E. W. Kahler hisassis€ant. Stockhardt, who had received his theological education arErlangen and Leipzig, had arrivedin the United States little more thana year earlier after having sufferedirnprlsonment in Saxony for leavingthe state church and protesting itsposition by joining the Sa~on Lutheran Free Church. StOckhardt hadbriefly ·served a parish and had justcome to Saine Louis as an extra pro..fessor at the seminary when the conference took place. Kahler) a graduate of the Fart Wayne seminary ofthe Missouri Synod t who had servedsome two tfecades in the parish mini..9 try , had come to Saint Louis in1876 to serve as Walthe~-s privatesecretary a.nd worked as literary edi..for for the entire seminary faculty. L•
StOckhardt and Kahler set ~o workand produced one volume in 1880,another in 1881, which containedLuther's lectures on Genesis. St6ckhardt later defended the deci.sion toreproduce the Walch edition. Ger..man scholars had challenged thatchoice, and Stockhardt concededthat the Walch edition was not with ..out its problems. But the decisionhad been reached because the Walchedition bad ~on a kind of claim aspart of the furnishings in the LutheranChurchJ so that in most theo-logical and edificatory writingswhich are read in our circles, thepassages from Luther are cited at..cording to Walch.).Il'2 Walther him ...self greeted the appearance of thefirst volurne of theQew edition with
. 101
an exultant, ~The Lord has done agreat thing for us; because e>f it let usbe joyful/J in a notice pub·li~hed inDer Lu.tnntmer. l¥ln a time such asours , in which the once-mightystructure of the EvangelicaL. LutheranChurcn looks like a devastated city (Is. 1: 8), a new edition of Lutheesworks in such a splendid form as theWalch appeaI"ed to be a really foolish -- because impossible - undertaking. But look! The Lord has givenhis aid, so that already SO many sub..scriptions have been made to beginsuch a coslly project in the Lorcfsname without fear. 1O
Walther took pride jn the mannerin which the edition was b-eing produced: the appearance of the volumes Giis quite splendid and gives ourSynod joy as a new proof that thosewho work in ourConcordiaj Pubiishing House not only knoYli how 10
make their valuable products worthyof the House but also compete witheach other in doing it with love~I' Heexplained that the volume 'was heingsold at a cost of only $3.50 because"the concern of this undertaking isnot money but simpJy the spreadingof saving teaching, so tr..at manymay now be able to take thj~ opportunity 10 obtain for so lO\-N a pricesuch an inestimable treasure."13 Bythe time the edition was completedin 1910, the cost of the final volumehad risen only to .$4.25 for the "Law ..Buckram" edition and 35.00 for thesheep.skin volumes. 14
In 1882-1884 the Stoc.kh.lardt teamissued the Ki1chen ..Poseill,~), with ahelpful, introductory essay on theorigin of the work, and "the HflUS·
/Josliile (Vols. 1t-13). ChristianKorner, an employee of th,e publishing house t rendered valuable assistance to StOckhardr in the prepara~
(S;)
en,f-..,)(S;),f-..,)cs=J(S;)
U1
(S;)
CD
A~
w~
"f::.U1cs=JU1........,
cs=JAen
t\.J:t L,;ONCORD1A t1IS,ORlCAL J.~S'TJTUTB UUARlE1U"Y Kl1lh: Luthet for Gmnan AmtrUQns .103
tion of these volumes~ The next year denl questioned. the paucity of ser'Volume IOJ Luther's catechetica1 mon books on the poor pastorswritings I appeared, in par( the work shelves, and Hoppe stammered thator a recent seminary graduate, H. he had only those sermons containedBayer .1,) The following year a new in' his Erlangen edition of Luther'seditor arrived in Saint Louis J and he works_ Wyneken commended himsaw the edition to its completion for that, and that stimulated Happe:tsdurtng the next 24 years. facile mind to pursue a scholarly
His name was Albert Friedrich study of Luther. L1 By 1862 HoppeHoppet the son of a surgeon in Ro.. had c.omposed an-extensive crittquestock, the grandson of a professor of of a number of volumes of theEnglish at the university in that city, Erlangen edition and sent it towhere he studied under, among Walther for publication in Uhre undothers~ the Old Testamen( scholar Wehre. Walcher replied, encouragingFranz DeJitsch. a personal friend of Hoppe to continue his scholarly pur-,Walther and other leaders of the suits and adding some friendly ~
Missouri Synod: The influence of vice and direction. Hoppe bad pro·Professor F. A. Phi·lippi and Ober- posed formulating an index to aU ofkirchenrat Dr_ Theodor Kliefoth Luther's letters; Walther believedguided him even further into a con- that it could not be published befessional Lutheranism t and the latter cause American financial resourcesrecommended Hoppe to Walther. In were not availabk and Germans1855 Hoppe came co Saint Louis would not be interested since contemand .aught briefly in the Gymnasium porary theologians regarded Luthtr'sattached [0 the seminary there thought as «antiquated, archaeologibefore accepting a caJl to Zion con- ~t or at best as a apecialized area ingregation in New Orlean.s. in 1855_ the history of dogma." Instead, WalThere he endured attacks of yellow ther invited Hoppe to write on Lufever and the deprivations of the cher's hermeneutics even though hetime of the sieg~ and occupation of conceded that the project would notthe city by Federal troops during the be possible at the time since HappeCivil War. Hoppe moved into edu- had only tbe Erlangen edition, incation as a vocationJ organizing a which much of Luther's exegeticalschool of his own. providing private work had not yet appeared, and notin'struction throughout the city, and the Walch. But Walther did believefinally founding a Progym:nasium. Hia that Hoppe was just the man for theintellectual statur.e was recognized in ~ project since he had the necessarythe New Orleans community at . discipline, patience, precision} gift oflarge, and he served as correspond- . analysis, understanding of Luther'sing secretary of the New Orleans language, and command of the ReAcademy of Science of a number of former1s theology. If Hoppe was unyears. 16 willing to attempt a study of Luther~~
Hoppe's incerest in Luther had hermeneutics) Walther proposed hebeen stimulafed, according to his write a homiletics text made up ofown account, by the president of (he quotations from Luther, an extenMissouri Synod at the time] F. C. stye and complete text for preachingD. Wyneken. On an official visit to similar to the pastoral theology writ·the congregation in 1851 the presi- ten by Conrad Porta in the 1580s.
which consisted largely of citationsfrom Luther's writings. 18 We have asimilar letter from Walther to Hoppein 1880, in which Walther again en·couraged Hoppe to submit a manuscript for publication, one on thehermeneutics of Luther. particularlyin regard (0 his interpretation of theOld Testament prophets. 19 This ar·ticle appeared in 1882.
Hoppe's "Contribution (0 the Improvement of che Editions ofLuthers Works, Particularly the Er·langen/' published in 1862, consisted largely of obselVations of duplicated materials in the Erlangenedi(ion, sections of Luther's writingswhich were printed by its editors inmore than one volume, for a varietyof reasons. In some cases thiA determination is significant, for it established that items which earlieredicion! had regarded as independent pieces! were actually excerptsfrom Jarger works. Hoppe'~ apparently photographic memory musthave enabled him to sort out items ofthis kind as he read through the Erlangen edition. He also offered someconjectures .on altemative and improved readings of certain passagesand identified individuals not identified in the notes of the edition. Thearticle reveals no special theologicalanalytical ability but rather an encyclopedic knowledge of Luther's wri rings] his times, and his language .. ~oThe same can be said of his work onLuther's hermeneutics, which appeared in the page! of Lehre undWenre two decade~ Jater. This articleconsists largely of c;:itations from theErlangen edition, arranged to support Hoppe's two theses, uThe entireHoly Scripture teaches only of theLord Jesus Christ, from beginningto end J in a single sense and meaning) "2 L and I¥Mosea' books are the
chief books of the Scripture, out ofwhich all other books flow .J~2 Hoppesupported these theses with extensive quotations from Luther whichrevealed the Reformers Old Testa·ment ChristoJogy.
Hoppe turned his attention nextto the Table Talk. In 1885 Stock·hardt asked him to prepare the sixthvolume (Volume 22) to be issued inlhc hew Walch edition for the SaintLoui~ editorial ream, and Hoppe'swork was so far advanced that hewas able to send the completedmanuscript to Saint Louis in October 1886. Walther anticipated reception of the volume in a letterwhich glowed with pride that one ofhis pastors had .he ·'skiU, fai(hfulne~sJ conscientiousness, and unimaginably remarkable diligence" toproduce suc.h a volume.'23 At almostthe same time the management ofConcorc;iia Publishing House calledHoppe to assume editorial responsibilities for the Luther edition andpressed him to come to Sain t Lou isimmediately. On November 3 hetook his fa mily and some of the studenf:.S in his Progymnasium and headedup the Mississippi River to ScLouis, where his old friend, LouisLange, the publisher, had found hima home~ in which he worked for theremaining quarter century of his lifeon editing Luther. Seminary student~ aMisted him, for instance, inchecking his text against that of theoriginal Walch edition~ In 1896Hoppe earned an annual salary of$840 (compared with .$tt4{}() peryear for the foreman of the publishing house's compo&ition room). 74
During his years as editor Hoppepublished an occasional report on hisown penonal .research in Lehre u-ndWenTe. In 1885 he had reported to itsreaders on ('The Two Oldest Edi·
(S)en aSL"'-f'.J the(S)
"'- ichr-v~ i ~C5JU1 i faC5J unQ) leerA Its.......
:leI
wJp
~ IppA(]l <IsC5J ,c.klU1-...JC5J noA eclen
dlItin,~OJ']
d I)de
~8e
Ie :() ce~ K:Jd8 refl~=LD ~S,
1O ~rn
~lnr rec~ In)
rre,ve:ed.hi
nee
DPIver.n ~
~ err~ nttrr1 OVl
C5J!W
U1 -lal,h'igi:He
,-,UJ'((,,;URVJA nI51·0N-leAL lNSTITUTE. \cLUAR"fE'.RLV & "" ....., ..,) w."'"• ...-•..". •••••., ...nn
tions of Luther's Works," as the article was entitled, and on other earlyattempts to gather materiat from Luther's pen together. Here Hoppe wasagaioconcerned with the itemsprinted more than once in the Wittenberg and Jena edition.s, but healso·~ criticized «he authenticity ofmany items in the Table Talk~ par·ticularly Aurifaber's collection, andhe defended the Jena edition againstit! critics. '2.5 Hoppe ventured a retncerpretation of Luther'.s re.sponse toan imperial .. papa] document on· ageneral council, drafted in 1533 t in abrief arficle published in 1890~ 26 thesame year in which he sketched Lu..ther's later relationship to Carlstadt,focusing on the Reformer's kindnessto his onetime c.olleague, by then hisbitter foe, in 1525~21 Five years la(erLuther's economic situarion attracted Hoppe's atrenfion in a briefarticle in which he surveyed indica..tions from the sources regarding Luther's income.. '28 In each of thesestudies. Hoppe revealed his command of the various collections ofLuther's writings av.ailable, including the Walch and Erlangen editionsand DeWette'g collection of Luther'sfetters. as well as the latest scholarlywork on Luther's theology and career, by Hermann Friedrich Theodor von Kolde andJulius KostHn.~
In 1897 Hoppe acquainted the readers of Lehre "",d .Wtnrewith some I'Lu ..ther discoveries of the most recentperiod," the' lecture3 on the· minorprophec.s which Georg Buchwaldand J. Linke had published inVolumes t 5 and 26 of the Erfangenexegetical series and related materials from the new Weimar edition. 3D
The final product of Hoppe's re..search to appear in the 'pages of L,hreund .Wehre was a posthumously pub·lished beginning of a biography of
LuthcrJ composed largely of citations from Luther's works, .supplemented by the 16th-century biography of Lurher~s student JohannMathesius. 3 L
Such articles were by-products ofHoppe's primary (ask during theperiod from 1886 to 1910, the editing or the Saint Louis edirion. Tilefirst of his volumes was his TableTalk, which Hoppe clairqed was thebest and most compJete edition ofthe Table Talk available. For he hadadded the rttentJy published mareri..a] of Anton Lauterbach and ConradCordatus to the earlier publi.shedcollections of the Table Talk, and hehad taken out items'from those collections which did not belong inthem7 duplicates, excerpts fromothers of Luther's works:, or extraneous materiaL Hoppe provideda fresh translation'of the Table Talk,for he believed that the tradition ofpublishing those texts according (0
the model ofJohann Aurifaber's edi..tion of 1566 was faulty. Walch hadfc;?Uowed) and .so this volume ofIWaJch 2" is a deliberate and significant departure from its modeL 31
Hoppe analyzed the sources of theTable Talk under the names of thecompilers, providing the reader withsome biographical information, bib..Hographical descriptions of theoriginaJ editions t and conjectures ofemendations and corrections of thereceived text.. Included in Hoppe'Banalysis are both the 16th..centurymanuscripts and printed versionsand the 18th- and 19th-century editions, as well as the English transla...don of Captain Henry Bell. Happeconcluded his 62-page introductionwith discussions of some of rhe problems encountered in editing theTabJe Talk: the trustworthiness ofstudent report.s, which Hoppe
measured in part against report.s inLuther~.s letters or olher sourceswhich discussed the same incident)and errors in translarion, dating,and fact- Hoppe's organization of thevolume did not simpJy reproduce thecollections of the 16th",cen'tury student.s but rather synthesized themunder eighty topics.:I$
Upon his arrival in Satnt Louis)Hoppe proceeded to work on thenext set of volumes. As noted above~
Stoc:k.hardt had overseen the production of Luther's Genesis lectures, hiscatechetical writjngs, and the GhUTChand House..Postils. In line wirhWalthers wishes and Walch's patcern, the Saint Louis edition was notchronological, as the Jena editionbad been, but rather followed themodel of the Wittenberg edition andpresented Luthers works by topic.The new edition was not to reproduce Walch's text simply as it hadstood. Hoppe explained that he wascarefully checking translations fromthe Latin; "in the case of some writ..ings which were edited by Luther inGerman as well as Latin. the German and the Latin text:) were compared) ana through this processmany readings could be establishedcorrectly. Also the German writingshave been carefully improved andfreed of many hundreds of mistakesin the old editions.u In line with hisconcern for duplicates in (he edition,Hoppe noted his "'eliminacion ofseveral duplicates," and the correction of many incorrect datings. Fur..thermore t Hoppe used the best ofcontemporary scholarship to im..prove the Walch edition by~ addingnew materials and by using theErlangen and Weimar texts to establish preferable readings of theoriginal Walch material ..!.
Hoppe began with the second half
of the six-volume Reformation Writ·ings> the fLnaI three vofumes ofwhich contain polemical writingsagainst the Roman Catholics and"the Sacramentarians and otherRavers as w.ell. as against the Jewsand the Turks" (Vola. 18-20, of theyears 1888, 1889 J 1890). Hoppe thenturned to Luther's New Testamentwritings (Vols~ 7-9, of the yearsL89!. 1892, 1893), and to the re'"
mainder of the Old Testament works(Vols. 3-6, published in 1894J 1895,t896J 1897). The next volumes com..pleted the Reformation Writings(Vols. 14-17, in the years 1898,1899 t 1900, 1901), and Hoppe concluded the edition with the Correspondence (Vol. 21) .0 two halfvolumes" published in 1903, 1904)~
co which he added an exhaustive topical index c0IlJ.pJeted in 1910 (Vol.23)~
Volume 18 contains Luther's polemical writings against RomanCatholics from 1516 to 1525
1and
Stoc.khardt, in the Foreword to thevolume7 noted that the translationsof these works from Latin had costHoppe much time and effort.Hoppe:'3 own introduction extendsover 69 pages and offers the readeran in~roduction to personalities andsituations which shaped Luthefsanti.. Roman Catholic polemic at thebeginning of his career. The notes tothese comments reveaJ Hoppe's command of Luther's own texts and contemporary scholar.ship. Most ofHoppe's scholarship is .set forth inthe introduction of thi:s volutne andthe introductions of the subsequenttwo volumes of polemical writings,which each numbered 65 pages. TheLuther texts themselves are not extensively annotated apart from thebrief introductory notes which givebibliographical detail$ on the com..
crJO"'l.........f'..JcrJ.........f'..J(S)(S)Ul
crJcoA~
w.....,.A(]IlSIUl-.....JlSIA01
ooz()o:::u'='I-t
Do
U1rr1~
rHttl
'1JDoG')rr1
lSIA
__....... - ... -- - •• - ..... -- ... <II ...., ........ x....."......., 4 ..... 4.IIlo. ... ~AtJUJ: J..,rtJ,~/,er jl.lJ u~/'1"tJ1J J1 m1f14r..UI'U
position and printing of the workand its place in later editions. Thenates do provide significant variantreadings.
The second section of (he editionon which Hoppe worked containedLuther's New Testament writings,and he concinued with five volumesthat completed the edition's coverageof Luther's OJd Testament writings,chiefly on the ps3.;lmsand the prophets (the last of which, Volume 14,contained the Luther prefaces' ofWalch's Volume l4 plus materialsupplementary to Volume 6~ newlydiscovered material on the mmorprophets). Forlhese volumes Hoppedid not provide iptroduction.s~ inbrief forewords he pointed to someprobJems in reading the text, but forthe most part did no more than editit and note the new discoverieswhich he was utilizing out of theErlangen and Weimar editions.
After completing three volumeswhich traced the course of the Refor·macion in Luther's RefonnationWritingS, in 1902, Hoppe turned toLuther's correspondence. In two half·volumes he reproduced every letter ofLuther's which lie couJd find in all thenew editions of Luther's letters, and agood deal of the correspondence addressed to Luther which Walch andat.hers had made available earlier.But Hoppe revised the format ofWalch's volume of the corr'espon·dence. He abandoned Walch's threefoJd' categorization and presentedLuther's correspondence in strictJycbronological order. Each let ter is introduced with a summary sentenceand a bibliographical note. For Luther's correspondenee Hoppe provided 150me annotation, which explained cit:cumstances and identifiedpeople and events (0 aid the reader'su"nders tanding. Of these notes the
editors of the Weimar edition observed that U even if the commentaryon the letters, completely lacking inWalch, is taken basically out of previ..aus publications and therefore doesnot demonstrate any greater personalscholarly aC'complishment of Hoppehimself, nonetheless this edition ofthe correspondence deserves respectand recognition for its trustworthyand faithful translation of the Latinletters into good German)" and '1heserenderings .of Hoppe contribute to abetter understanding of Luther's letters quite often. °3~
Hoppe spent six 'years refashion-. ing the index to the Walch edition,and in early 1910J a little more thana year before his death, he concludedhis work. His final foreword con..eludes with thanksgiving to God "forhis many-faceted and immense rnercy, ' .. And at lHe same time wewant to ask the dear Lord) to give hisblessing to the use" of this accomplishment~ that it will not only bepurchased but also used diligently ~
so that the pure Lutheran teacbingmay be preserved and securedJ andalso spread widely for che salvation~fmany, for the .sake ofJesus Christ,our Savior, Amen."36
It is tilde wonder that the leadersof the Missouri Synod heralded cheappearance of Hoppe's and Stock...hardt's work. In the pages of DeT. LulheTaner Walther greeted the newprinted volumes on occasion~ andthe work wa..~ of sufficient interest towarrant Hoppe's reporting on hisprogress mlhe pages of Lekre UMWenTe on two occasions,:n But theedition won acclaim or at least noticein German circles as well. In 1883 abrief note in the Th60iogisclzes Lt·te1"a.luro/att advertised the appearance ofVolume 11 p the secrion on the Gospel readings of the Churchpostil.- urhe
editors pre.sent a longer preface thistime (73 pages), which in a verythorough way offers a presentationof the history of (he origin of theChurchptJstil and in .ts wen-ex.ecutedoverview makes the Walch presenta·tion of the situation dispensable., .. We take deltght in the energy ofour American brothers in the faith inthis area and wLsh this great undertaking continuing happy results inthis anniversary year of Dr. Luther'sbirth.»JS German scholars did not acclaim this new foreignedilion. withuniversal praise. Guslav Kawerau,professor at the University of Berlin,observed in a report on "'Ywenty.. (iveYears of Luther Research, 18831908" that the Saint Louis edition is"aJmo!t unknown among us.JI' He acknowledged that the editQrs "havetried to kncorporate the newest discoveries and results of German Luther re.sean:h with an admirable andquickly accomplisbed effort," but atthe same time he believed that thescholarlystandard:s of the edition didnot come up to the level of the Weimar edit.on. 3'9 Of course. they couldnot, given Hoppe's distance from thenecessary ".scholarly resources andaids, stuck as he was on the American frontier. On the other hand,Professor Johannes Hauisleiter ofthe Univer.sity of Greifswald~ in anattack on the Roman Catholic Luther biographer, Hartmann Grisar,mentioned the Saint Louis edition inpassing, and he stated that this"American revision of the Walch edition dare not be passed over."40 ThemOlt recen~ survey of current Lutherresearch. an essay by Mark U. Edwards~Jr. of Purdue University. in...eludes this judgment of the Walchedition~ ~The St. Louis editors addednew material) new lransJations, andnew commentary to the material
IV)
compiled by Walch. The other documents are useful; the Germiafl translations of Lutherls Latin can helpwith difficult passages (and are oftenused for this purpose by the editorsof the Weimar Ausgabe); and thebrief glossary in Volume 17 of un ..usual and archaic words (W2, 17.2240-2261) can supplement theother guides to Luthe~s Early HighGerman. Finally, the main subjectindex (W2. 23, 2-2131) to this edition is of use until the subject indiceseo the Weimar Au-sgabe are comp]eted~))+l
Walther, of COUfle, did not dreamof a revision of the Walch edition forthe benefat of German scholars.Stockhardt did not undertake theproject to advance Luther scholarship. Hoppe did not spend hi~ lifehunched over his desk eompanngthe Erlangen and Walcil editionswith his homeland in mind. As amatter of fact, Hoppe was not agreat Luther scholar in the mold ofthe German leaders of the LutherRenaissance or their immediate pre ...decessofs. He did not have the matedals at hand on the American frontier to do that kind of re:search in the:sources, and he did not demonstratethe analytical ability nor the theological sensitivity of many of those whoprepared the setting for the 20thcentury discussion of Luther'sthought. But Hoppe did demonstrate a mastery of Luthe.rs works asimpre&Sive as any of his contemporaries in the homeland. He knew thetext. And he also invested the entireenergy of his last quarter century oflife in a project which took meticulous editing on the basis of a broadknowledge and understanding ofLuther's theology and his times. Hewas indeed a formidable scholar inhi.s own right..
•• _ •• - - - _ •• - _ •• - • - - - • - !l<.,.. ~4~ - 4
Notes
KOlb:' LutherJQ1 fJnman Ameru:ans
(S)CO
A~
w~
A01(Sft11-....J~AO"l
(S)0"'1,I\.J(S),I\.JISJ(SJt11
lUY
J6. LudwLg Fucrbcingc-r l Ptr:rr»U df14 £MflLr (St.Louis: C on(:o'rd~a:. 19.')~ pp. ~O:5 -'2l1. su ppkrntnts biographical and autOlbiographicalmate.riaJ found in DtJ 1.«t1Jf1(J'f2I1!1 61 (1911).J90-L91 J '205-201. See also Henry W. Nicr·mannJ Jr.• I17fhe HUIOIY or Concordia C(')~.
It:~e) Ne...... Orlean!!:," COJj'IJTJio lfiJl()n~(J,t bu~i.
lid' Qftal'"9'1 36 (1963)) 65-12.J7, Der Ltl.t4n/lfU/~ 67 (t 911).. 206.18~ Concordia H19toric:al [oslluHe... Saini Louie,
C. F. W. Wa~tht:T oorrt':Spondcnl;:e. translaredIn'"'C. P. W. WaJ~her [0 A. F. H<Jp~. A Lerfer,~ by RCiGelt Kolb. Colt~r,iiQ HiflatiC41 In$"l~~ QlUirln~. +'2 (1969)) 79-84"
19. Concordia Historical (tJllid~u~c, Saint Lou,s,C. F. W. W:ahher corresponderu:.c. Letter ofOctober J 2) laSt).
'20. uELn Beitrag ~ur Vc:rbcsserung der Ausgabt:nvon Luth<CT1 Werken, insonderh-ej( del Er.langisch.en.)J Lthu fJftti W,Att, 8 {Hlo2}1299 ..312, 334-l39.
21. -crundrl:Jge deC' Jutheri.3<:h:cn Hermencuti'=,zusammengestelh aU3 LlJfners SchriO~n:'
Lsh.r~ ~nd krt~,.,.. 28 (lSal). 51-12. r08-Ll J,1+8-157. esp. p. 58.
'2'2. [bid., p. l08~
23. ConcQcdia HLsforic:a1 In&tttutc, Saint 1..<JuLs,C. F. W. Walther con-espondtnc:e., Ittl.Jef of5eptembe r 27. 1886.
24. Dn- LIJtJv.raJItr~ 61 (391l]1 '2.06. On his .5fudeo£helPCfJ see Franci.!. J. UpJegger. rl'A BriefReview of Nearl)' Ninety Ytan of Life by theGrace of God.'" Con'(HI.h'rt. HiULJ,Ntri lJUJilu(1.
Quarm(y, $8 (I 965}. f41; on his &alary. seeAlbert W. GatenJ "ConcoC'dia PublisbingHo~s One Hundred Yf.a:I'S)1l Co~tdi4 Hir.wr1tfJi IftSlituft Qua'It.r9'~ +'2 (1969}. 164.
25. "'Die !wei ihes(cn Ausgaben der WerkeLuthers,'" Uhrt. and Wmn~ .] l ( J8as.).21l ...220.
26. AEin Beitrag lur RdorrnationsgescnLthte."Lbid' J pp. 24a-253.
21. lILuther. der Lebensrencr Carlst"adr..s," ibid.,pp. 286-'292.
28. I10Uebcr Luthers Vc rmoge nsveThaJ tnis.se. II
Lbid .• "I (1895L 16-79.29. D1. M«J1m Lrtflu-ts Bri4~~ &Mu~ilN.R uu B,..~~ ed. Wilhtlm Martin Leberecht deWelte (Berlin: Reimer, 13'25-t828); JuliusK6stJin, M(J1Ii~ fAllw. &i7C L~bm r.uvi JeW&1Jrijt,t." (E2berfeld: Friderid15.. l 875); Th~o
dor von KoLdc:, Mariirt LrsJker. ea'/I,e 8ifWdphie.(Gotha: P-erth~. 188+. 1889).
30. IoIMitthc:ilungen iiber die Lutherfunde derneUf!3f<!n Ze'lt,t' Ld'7~ uruJ WtJirl!!~ 43 (lS91).44-52 1 81-89.
31. "D. Martin LutheT. Ein Lebensbild nach denc:igencn Au.Mpruchen Lutners und denAngaben seiner Zd(geftOsun~:1 ibi.d., 5'(191 1)~ 443-451; 58 (l9Z2)~ J55-164-, 305-
l. D. Marlin LliJlur.J Gro.t'RIiIidu UJltl £rlttluliduAuslt,gWlg d4s E1SI"J Baths MOJL.s) ed. JahannGeorg Walch (Halle~ Cebauer~ ~ 739), If.a2/r.
2. On the lItrife between the spon.:Jon or tb.eJf"naand Wiucnberg editions I see Ej"e WoJga:st,lICDeT Streit urn dje Werlte Lutht'11i Un 16.jahrJ'o.unduc/, A,&h,1J fit' RtJd'1'M.I3lio1Ug,srhi&htt~
59 (1968), L71-'202.3. RtlJ.lnu:]1ai0p4die fiir fJtoltlfaRtirdu TJwJ(OI~ flNi
KiRkt. 20 (uipzig: Hutrich~ J90B}. 192-191'.4-. 'bid .. 201 8+8. On Walther, particularly OD
his ~niliaJ e:ttc:n3l."er:ncounteC' with Lu:rher'swDrks, see M.a.rlin Cunther, Ds~ C. F. J1I,Waillur, LtiN.RJ"bJ"id {Sr. Louis: ConcordLa,J39O). esp. p. 12; LewIs W. Splu) Sr.• ThI.LiftqfC. F: W. JV,pJ/tAtT (5c Lou~: Concordia.1961'1 p. 23.
5. E.g... hi.s Die S~ifi'2.JTM oUAJ"em' 1<i,,,Ju i~ tin FrfJld~.n Kirt'4t arrd Ami (Erlangen; Bias iog. 1852).Dr~ n'hu G,rJiJll "rrt.r Qo1JJJt Skult wt:t2M4ngignJEtlrmg,(.iJdc·C.utJmill:un. OttIjt"UitJlb. {St. Louts:Wiebusr.:h~ ]a63)~ and Dil mltlt URU7Ir:JuidURg,w,n GI.1~tl t$nti ElItSJI,ft-fitlm {51. LGuis: Concordia, LB91}. The iic.st twa of ~he5e are availa.bl~
in 'Engl isn translat'on en &l¥etM Wliti~ 9/C. F. W, Wa:/uWJ ed. August R. Sudflow(Saint Lo~l~: Concot'dia. 19B1}. W4/lJItlon c.kCkltl?;R, t~ans, John M. Drickan~r; thc thirdin Stl,,,ul W,ilirtlJJ lAw Q1ftJ Gospel) O"ans.HerbertJ. A. Bouman. St'\': also the voLumesErirrmi,slJ fifl11l fiLM,., rIJtJi W".'tn"': Crans.Herbert J. A. Bauman, and C()~ti().n EJSd:)'!)tram. August R. SucJf]ow. for examples ofWahhet'~s use of Luthcl.
6. L,krt ~rJ ~w'J 21 (1875}, 61.1. 'lOr. C. F. W. Wahh.e:r al5 Theologe'." ibid.,
34 (1888), 261.8. Ibid., 33 (l887)~ $05-314. On Walthers ap
preciation of Luther) .1et also E. TbeodoreBachmann~ -.,.yalther, Schaff, and Krauth onLurher,~ /rTtttptdcrr.ojLIlINr, ErsByS io11 HORbfOjWi~bn PlDI.cl:, ed. Jaro:slat Pelika.n (Ph.i~add
phia: Fortress.. 1968).. pp. 181-'230.9. Ltlut UM WWl.,. 7 (186L).. 27-29.
JG. Dr. MtJ,tiJt LldhDr SilmmtJiw StIJ.ri/t4~J IulYJlU'
1"FfJ.tR JM)1I lJT. Jok. Gear, Walch. I: AwJ'lamgdtl tl$tm !Ju(ha Mm (Sc Louis: ConcoroLa.l8BO}. cob. LV-vi.
It. Carl S. Meyer, Log Ca1J~'tt tD Lalkp Towf'!, C~Ii'
aJlr:iitJ Smu'trmJ D.uti~ 0& H"uIfJr,d t111d Tt.Dr1Il.....
JJ'/if. raf$J TOUJll1Q a Mp7t E.xa:U~J1( M;ptut1J~
UJ39-J964 (Sl. Louis~ ConcaJULa.. 19650), onKiihlerJ p. 66 1 on Srikkhardt~ p3..$$im.
J2. Dr. M,(J'f'h.·R LrJfk#1 Simrm,'ic:1tl&hriftmJ XVIn,vi-vii.
13. Dtr l.atilr1(lrur) 3{1 (1880). 116.l1-. Lc1u:t Imd WeJI'~ 56 (1910)~ 365.15. St6ckhardt's reporl Ln D" 1..IltJttJ7J4P, 66
(L9JO). 19'~-199.
Missouri Synod and other'synods ofthe American Lutheran churchesmade th~ purchase and proudlyhanded their sets of Luther on totheir sons who entered the pastoralministry. They not only put Lutheron their shelves. They used thesevolumes as chey prepared 8ermons,as they studied the Biblical text andthe catechism, as they soughtanswers to pastoral problems ofvarious kinds. The libraries of thepas tors of the la te 19th and early20th centuries contained manyauthors: a wide range ·of Germantheologians as wdl as the works ofmen like Walther and Stockhardt)who wrote in America·. But Luthershaped the proclamation and in ..struction of paseor after pastor whoread him week after week from thepages of the Sain~ Louis edition.When the pastors 'Of the MissouriSynod len Lu;ther behind in theirmove into the English language andthen had totu'm to materials byEnglish-writing theologians of dif..ferent theologies and of differentspirits than Luthe r's) there could nothelp "but be an impact on the waythey preached and taught. In reCro..spect, the contribution of those whoproduced tbe Walch 2 edition ofLuther's works I and through ithelped ahape more than a half century of ministry, seema ever larger.
Walther's dream r StOckhardt's ef...forts~ and Hoppe's life and work be..stowed upon the American Lutheranchurches a treasureworth, inWalch's words, more than manythousand pieces of gold and sillJier.
His aim WaB not thal of his Ger..man contemporaries. The Missourian leaders simply wanted to provide the' text of Luthe.r for everypastor's study so that the message of(he Reformer would infonn theproclamation which came from theirpulpits, WaltherJ Stockhardt, andHoppe regarded the availability ofLuther's works as. indispensable forthe proper functioning of the German church on che Amerrcan fron!ier. Walther had made that point asthe first volume appeared in "1B80:11M ay t his new edition of Lu(her'sWorks encourage and stimulate Lutheran Christians to listen to thevoice of Iheir teache~J the prophet ofthe Last Day, with diligence anddesire. Precisely (his interpretationof Genesis contains, as its forewordnotes, a brief, clear summary· ofLuther),s teaching, which is takendirectly from God1s Word.... TheLutheran church in North Americahas through God's grace once ~gain
brought to the fore the pure teachingof Luther which had been forgouenand buried for so long. We prove ourgratitude for this blessing of God bystudying 'andresearching Luther'steac~ing out of Luther himself- forthe securing and strengthening ofour faith .. "42
They succeeded in providing BUch
a tool for their pastors and those ofother denominations on the American frontier. For· an investment ofabout $100 apaB10r could have.Luther at hiB fmgertips. That amountrepresented several months" &alaryfor 80rne pastors, but many from the
Rev. ~ F.Hoppt
L;ONCORDIA "rSiORleAl INSTITUTE QUt\Rt'HRLY
Volume 39 of the Lu/hera1Jtr (1883),Dr~ Walther paints out that previ ..ously the Christian church 'mad onlycelebrated two birthdays; those ofChrist and of St. John the Baptiz.er.(He does admit that the ch1lJrch hadmarked what were caUed tne birth·days of the martyrs, but these birth..days were the dates of their beingborn to eternallife l rather than theirbeing born into the world.)
Walther points out that the Lu"theran Church regularly celebratesthe date of Luther's final homegoing, but that be could find no references to a church festival markingLuther's birth. Luther himself madeit his custom, Walther go~ on, to invite people over on his birth>day. Andhere and there one finds 01:1 -acrvancesof Luther's birthday in a family cir..cle or at a Lutheran school. The onlyregular church observance of thebirthday that Walther co uld com'eup with was when St. Martin ofTours' Day would fallon a Sunday.Then he found that preach.ers wouldoften make mention of the fact thatLuther had been born on 'the 10th ofNovember and baptized on (he 11th,taking the name of St. Martin ofTours. But again, Walther couldfind DO definite mention or regularjubilee festival celebratiorus of Martin Luther's birthday. [Luiheraner,39: 1 (1 Jan. 1883)]
The jubilee celebration.s in 1883were really quite something. Wefind reports on many of them in thepages of Der Lu~htr(Jner ar.id The Lv.·
KLI1t .A . .&dJi.rr..t is 1111QdrJtJte 1)1 C~'fJ1diJJ Srm~'1.1«1)'~ St Ltu,u
Jw~ strOtl U nftmttt QM ,.,...
,mur& as.rut4rti a~ CDrr&Or4ia HutrmcaJ 111lti'rd",T~ J1'est'IIt~ IlAIU 6'1ilintiUy p.,~r«l jfJr a}oitl.t CWI'R1itf.N Muting cd 1M [lLICiJurz ill MtJ)
1963.
Let me try to take you back 100yean to the year 1883, the year ofthe 400tb annivenary of the birth ofDr. Luther. Chester Arthur was fill ...ing out James Garfield's ,term asPresident of the United States.Thomas Edison had finally come upwith the right combination and invented the electric light only fouryears earlier. In 1882, Congress hadmoved to restrict immigration forthe flfst time (starling with the Chi..nese). In 1883 they passed the firstCivil Service Ac.t. And Kitty Hawkwas still 20 years in the future. In theMiuouri S.Ynod, H. C. Schwan wa~
President~ The Norwegian Synodwithdrew from the Synodical Con..Ference in 1883 J effectively endingthe Predestinarian Controversy. TheLutlu:ro.n K'imess was only in its second volum~. J. F. Buenger had diedthe year before, Walther was to diein four years, Sihler in two .. Naetherand Mohn wouldn't be commissioned as our first foreign mission...aries for another 11 yea.r~. And thegrand old Walther League wu still adecade in the future.
And in the midst of all this, weLutherans decided (0 celebrate the400th anniversary of the birth of Dr..Martin Luther. In the Foreword 10
Kurt A. Bodling
conecting the Luther Birthdays
CIiClUtJlir Hirltttkflll IQJft'/u... Q..-ut"-1J
4) J:1 =~~~~ilwtt
(L8B5). 1{)5-]06; and HOPPC'4 report3 in LtJtJetSN1 Wtkr'l 40 (189+), 302-311; and 4-~ (1886}1l44-149. See abo tnt reports of me conclusion Df the edition in W,t una WMitJ 56{ J9) 0)) 365; and lhe Missouri Synod'sEngli.sh, theolDgi:cal periodical" 'nJrt1tvgi&tJlQpt.;:r4tr{y.. 17 (19t3)~ 10}-106.
38. TJklJf~giI"kls L.~l4raJlUh'(Ju.. 1 (February 16,1883}. 55.
39. TAtOidgJ'U'u Sludi~ lJ.M Krilik.t13, 8,1 {1908}..')!i().
40. AIIgt:meirt.t .ED.-tulAtliJr:1It Ki"wltz~ihi"'l. {1912}J1046 fC... u reported Ln the TltilJJfJ.I~lJl ~rlf7'
i}.. 11) JO~.
4]. "Martin Luther,0 Rt:jortlkJ'irm ElSIlJ/Jt: ..f Cu.itkto RtJlJ41tla
Jed. Steven O;z:tnent (Saint Louu:
Cen,~r for Reformation Res~arc:h .. 193'2)) p.61.
4-2, I1tr L1JtJwlJ~J 36 (1 B8<J). 116,
ltV
313. 359-363. 453-~J. %to ...50'. 5.53-551.32. Joha.nn Aurifaber, Cl)JJo,w'(l (Jan Ti'i~hmJ.m
Dt"dl1r MtUtilli lJ.,,1l4l'i (FrankfurtJM, ]566).3.3. Dr. IUIJ1~iA Llllht,S Simmll,.,1tI SdtJiftt1J.. !JtlfJUS
&t&c!M.nw:Q Dr. JoA. GtD'l ~l&~ XXii. nr.Marlin L~tJ",s C«~~ odn 711CR,., Zum ~r-
rJt" Mtf.11 AtfitMgt fi,Jtl/ t'1!1tutft ~,dt Ut~Jetz.fI.J1g
.ur hn'tJm HtJtl.fJtfUf'~ tid TirUtted,,.. aW" .fkA ~.
umucll.tf1 Qnt;rlQk"J ni:mlich tks Tagrhll.&ks ~fJt. C~n..,tPJ C"nJ«Jw iiD.tr Dr, .M. Lul/ur 1517 /Jn4iii Ta,gtbDcJll dts M, Ali''''' laJJl#1h1JG1I fUJj dt1J
JrJ1t, i538{St Louis: Con<::orwa. 1881): J-62.34. Dr. Ml1I1in I..JJlhuj Si#t:mJtidu$cluiftm~ XXII,
Fo,eword:~ VII.... ; VI 'ii'vi i.35. IJ. M41tjll Lu~At1s Wnu (Wehl1.ar: 'B6hlau>
1883- ), BrUfutrc1uf~ 14 (1970}, 569-570.36. D" Mani" LutA.trr Sim"uli~ Sduijt,t\s XX.III.
vii.31. See Wahher's review$ of Volumes. JO and II
in On LNlJtrr4Mf, 38 (t8B2). B'-S2; and 41