Portal de Periódicos da CAPES

Ulrich Von Hutten as a Literary Problem

1948; Routledge; Volume: 23; Issue: 1 Linguagem: Inglês

10.1080/19306962.1948.11786338

1930-6962

Robert Herndon Fife,

Click to increase image sizeClick to decrease image size NotesDeutsche Geschichte im Zeitalter der Reformation, I7 (Leipzig, 1894), “Vorrede,” p. 4.Cf. his paean in the Teutsche Merkur, 1776, 1777; Suphan ed., IX, 476 ff., XVI, 273 ff.P. Kalkoff, Huttens Vagantenzeit und Untergang, traverses the history of the Huttensaga, not without prejudice! Cf. following footnote. For useful bibliographical data concerning works on Hutten preceding the two Swabians, cf. Heinrich Grimm’s study, note 5, belowHutten und die Reformation, Leipzig, 1920; Huttens Vagantenzeit und Untergang,Weimar, 1925.Cf. O. Clemen’s plea for a suspended judgment in this matter in Archiv für Reformationsgeschichte, XXIII (1926), 150 f. The manuscripts were sold from Hutten’s Nachlaß several years after his death. Cf. Böcking, Opera, II, 446.Also in English, Ulrich von HuUen and the German Reformation (Yale University Press, 1937), translated by R. H. Banton, with a revised introduction and some additions. The two other studies referred to above are worth-while contributions, but lack the interpretive quality of Walser’s and Holborn’s. Otto Flake, Ulrich von Hutten (Berlin, 1929) is a systematic biography intended for the general reader. The author, known chiefly for his novels and other popular writing, is not particularly at home in the sixteenth century; nevertheless, his biography is well-balanced and methodologically sound. Paul Held, Ulrich von Hutten. Seine religiös-geistige Auseinandersetzung mit Katholicismus, Humanismus und Reformation, Leipzig, 1928 (“Schriften des Vereins für Reformationsgeschichte”), is a diligent study, but not without historical errors.“con tanto veneno che sarebbe per intoxicar el mundo.” To Giulio dei Medici, April, 5, 1521. Aleander und Luther, ed. Brieger (Gotha, 1884), p. 123.lbid., p. 129.Published in celebration of the 450th anniversary of Hutten’s birth. lts rich bibliography has many items overlooked by other students.Luther’s response to Hutten’s offers of aid through Melanchthon in January and February of that year has been lost; cf. Weimar Ausgabe, Briefe, II, 91. Other items in the interchange are definitely missing.Cf. Ficker, Luthers Vorlesungen über den Römerbrief, 1515–16, Straßburg, 1908 (”Anfänge reformatorischer Bibelauslegung,“I), p. xx.This biting satire on the war-eager Pope Julius II, Libellus de obitu Julii Pontificis, etc., first published in the year of his death, finds its place under the “Dialogi Pseudohutteniciin Böcking (Opera, Bd . IV) and is definitely rejected from the Hutten canon by the wary editor. lt was long ascribed to Erasmus, but latterly Böcking’s conjecture of Faustus Andrelinus, an Italian humanist in the service of Louis XII, has found support. Cf. Carl Stange’s conclusion, Erasmus und Julius. Eine Legende (Berlin, 1937), p. 334.Also in the group of ”Pseudohuttenici” and certainly not Hutten’s work. P. Merker (Der Verfasser des Eccius dedolatus und andere Reformationsdialoge, Halle, 1923) argues at length for Nicholas Gerbel, the Straßburg humanist, but his evidence for this seems unconvincing against the opinion of Luther and his contemporaries, who ascribed it at once to the clever pen of Willibald Pirkheimer.Ulrichs von Hutten Deutsche Schriften (Straßburg, 1891), ”Quellen und Forschungen z. Sprache u. Kulturgesch. d. germ. Völker,” No. 67, p. ix.In laudem Marchiae carmen, 1507. Grimm, op. cit., p. 110 f., reprints the poem, with a spirited translation of his own.In laudem Reverendissimi Alberti Archiepiscopi Moguntiae, Tübingen, 1515. Böcking, Opera, III. Grimm, p. 167, gives two passages in a translation by Ludwig Schubart (Ulrich von Hutten, 1791) which reproduces verse and mood quitc admirably, especially the “Gesang an Deutschland.” Cf. Böcking, p. 373, beginning with Verse 626.De virtute elegiae exhortatio (Böcking, III, 8), attached to Aesticampianus’ Tabula Cebetis, Frankfurt (Oder), 1507. Grimm, who translates a part of the poem, calls it “die erste Dichtung Huttens, die als eine selbständige schöpferische Leistung angesehen werden muß.” Op. cit., p. 124.Vir bonus (Böcking, III, II f.). Grimm argues for 1509 as year of origin, correcting Böcking. lt was first printed in Erfurt, 1513.Printed at Erfurt without date, but fixed by Clemen in spring of 1510. Grimm argues for a Frankfort origin in I 507 or I 508.Op. cit., appendix.Cf. Bömer’s conclusion, op. cit., II, IOI f.Strauss, Ulrich von Hutten, p. 207.The most important studies are A. Bauer, “Der Einfluß Lukians von Samosata auf Ulrich von Hutten,” Philologu s, XVIII, 457 ff . ; XX, 192 ff.; and Olga Gewerstock, Lukian und Hutten. Zur Geschichte des Dialogs im 16. Jahrhundert, Berlin, 1924, “Germanische Studien,” No. 31.Grimm (op. cit., p. 89 f.) reports a print, Dyalogus Luciani per Ari spam, which he interprets as evidence of a course of lectures on the dialogues at Frankfort 1507–09. Later Hutten used Erasmus’ translation.Op. cit., p. 161 ff. The author contrasts the effect of these characteristics of Hutten’s dialogues on the Gespräch with that of the subtle, novelistic technique of Erasmus’ Colloquia.Gottfried Niemann, Die Dialogliteratur der Reformationszeit (Leipzig diss., 1905), p. 57.Cf. Georg Blochwitz, “Die anti-röinischen deutschen Flugschriften der frühen Reformationszeit,” Archiv des Vereins für Reformationsgeschichte, No’s 107-108 (1930), p. 145 ff.Whether Luther had Hutten’s Vadiscus before him when writing his An den Adel is a much-discussed topic. Hutten wrote to Melanchthon February 28, 1520, that his Dialogi, containing this dialogue, had been published; but its distribution seems to have been delayed. For a careful analysis of parallels between Luther’s pamphlet and Hutten’s Roman Triads cf. E. Kohlmeyer, Die Entstehung der Schrift Luthers “An den Adel deutscher Nation” (Gütersloh, 1922), p. 47 ff.Op. cit., p. 1-52.Problems of Gcrnw.n Literary History of the Fifteenth and Sixteenth Centuries (NewYork: Modern Language Association, 1939), p. 115.Ulrich von Hutten, p. 30.”Vorübungen der lateinischen und deutschen Dichtkunst” (Leipzig, 1756), p. 225 f. Cf. Grimm, op. cit., p. 164.