[111] K. Müller, in “Zeitschr. für Kirchengesch.,” 24, 1903, p. 46 ff. A. Schulte, in “Quellen und Forschungen aus italienischen Archiven und Bibliotheken,” 6, 1903, p. 32 ff., 174 ff. P. Kalkoff, “Zu Luthers römischem Prozess,” in “Zeitschr. für Kirchengesch.,” 31, 1910, p. 372 ff.; 32, 1911, p. 1 ff.; p. 199 ff., 408 ff., 572 ff.; 33, 1912, p. 1 ff. He deals fully with the part taken by the Dominicans in the Indulgence controversy. Kalkoff’s researches have since been published apart (“Zu Luthers römischem Prozess,” Gotha, 1912). A good general view of the question in Pastor, “Hist. of the Popes,” Engl. Trans., 7, p. 361 ff.
[112] P. Kalkoff, “Forschungen,” etc., p. 133.
[113] Schulte, “Quellen und Forschungen,” see above p. 45, n. 2, p. 35. The statement of K. Müller that from the very outset there had been a difficulty in proving Luther’s writing, rests, as Schulte shows (p. 43), merely on a misapprehended passage in one of the letters of the Venetian Orator at Rome.
[114] Schulte, “Quellen und Forschungen,” p. 45.
[115] In Schulte (ibid., p. 49) this circumstance, on which theology must necessarily lay great stress, is passed over. Not all Luther’s propositions were branded as “heretical.”
[116] Kalkoff, “Forschungen,” p. 543 ff.
[117] “Werke,” Weim. ed., 6, p. 576 ff.; Erl. ed., 24², p. 17 ff.
[118] Ibid., p. 595 ff. [38 f.]. “Opp. Lat. var.,” 5, p. 132 seq.
[119] Ibid., p. 603; “Opp. Lat. var.,” 5, p. 142.
[120] “Werke,” Erl. ed., 24², p. 46.