Walch has brought together in the sixth volume of his edition all of Luther's interpretations of the prophets that were known at his time. Since then, the material belonging to it has increased so much through the new discoveries in Zwickau and Altenburg that it was not possible to bring all this into one volume, but a division had to be made. This has now been done in such a way that we have included the interpretations on Isaiah to Amos in this volume, but have saved the rest for the fourteenth volume that will appear first. The space necessary for this has been gained by omitting from the fourteenth volume the Latin Bible translation attributed to Luther, which does not belong in our entirely German edition.
The editing of these interpretations was very laborious. Of all the writings about the prophets, only those published by Luther himself, about Jonah, Habakkuk and Zechariah, were written in German; all the rest had to be thoroughly revised from Latin and completely retranslated, more than 3000 colums. This
This work was connected with great difficulties, because the text of the Latin originals is often very corrupted. This applies not only to the writings already present in the old editions (e.g. in the more extensive explanation of the 53rd chapter of Isaiah, in the small section § 207, there are three severe textual corruptions, which were recognized neither by the editors of the Latin nor by the old translator), but also to the writings in the critical editions of the latest time; to a greater extent by the Erlangen edition, to a lesser extent by the Weimar edition. We want to prove the correctness of this statement for these editions with one scripture each.
From the Erlangen we select the interpretation of Hosea edited by Dietrich, exegetica opera, tom. XXIV, p. 165 sqq. Mr. want to say nothing of the hundredfold wrong, many times senseless punctuation, which in the Weimar edition, vol. XIII, p. XXXVI is dismissed with these words: "The Erlanger edition is in this not at all to be taken as a pattern." The most common compendia, as those for que, quam, quod, tur, are not properly resolved,
and we encounter p. 291 and p. 297 the word quoquam instead of quoque; p. 295 postque instead of postquam; p. 282. 299. 348. 397. 440 quod instead of quam; p. 242 and p. 485 quam instead of qui; p. 377 quo instead of quod; p. 322 qua instead of quae; p. 235 premunt instead of premuntur. Proper names are written in lower case: p. 222 and p. 396 aquas instead of Aquas (After); p. 265 instead of lyra ftatt Lyra; p. 523 aquila instead of Aquila; p. 349 salus instead of Salus (the goddess of salvation); p. 374 cupidinem instead of Cupidinem (Cupido); p. 377 priapum instead of Priapum; and vice versa we find p. 209 Paulo instead of paulo. A curiosity is p. 487 the word levinati instead of Levi nati (born of the tribe Levi). We encounter words that do not exist: P. 223 connovatur instead of concionatur; P. 279 impenditium instead of impendentium; P. 375 indignitationem instead of indignationem; P. 499 stulus (not a misprint, for even the Wittenberg reads this way) instead of stultus; P. 330 destincti instead of distincti. P. 167 habet instead of habent; p. 273 ostendit instead of ostendat; p. 274 discant instead of discunt; p. 277 invenire instead of inveniri; p. 278 timere instead of timeri; p. 180 cultis instead of cultus; p. 191 respublica instead of respublicae; p. 209 sic instead of hic; p. 217 convenimus instead of conveniunt; p. 249 beneficia instead of beneficio; p. 250 vinae instead of vineae; p. 279 significationis instead of significationes; p. 289 at instead of et; p. 295 βτη&έον instead of ; p. 303 xxxxxxx; dum instead of tum; p. 306 vidi instead of vide; p. 310 ferre instead of fere; p. 318 defenderunt instead of defenderent; p. 326 impositio instead of imposito; p. 329 filios instead of filius; p. 338 praedicat instead of praecidat; p. 349 tamen misericor
diam instead of tam misericordem; p. 352 ingratia instead of in gratia; p. 377 vocabula instead of vocabulo; p. 400 in instead of ita; p. 410 feri instead of seri; p. 436 in Jacobum instead of in Jacob, cum etc.; p. 445 docet instead of docent; p. 477 queri instead of quaeri; p. 504 rectum instead of tectum; p. 505 ecclesia instead of ecclesiae. The Hebrew is also given incorrectly several times, e.g. p. 395, 456 and 485. This register could be enlarged, but it may be enough.
Now we turn to the Weimar edition and take from it the interpretation of the prophet Hosea according to the Zwickau manuscript, which is found there vol. XIII, p. 2 ff. The text of this is golden compared to that of the Erlangen, and there are only a few reading errors or incorrect readings, so that we gladly put down the Erlangen edition, according to which we had edited the first pages, as soon as we had recognized the better quality of the Weimar edition. However, even in the editing of this edition, we had to struggle with great difficulties several times, of which one can convince oneself if one reads the notes we added to this publication. For although the manuscripts have been diligently consulted in the Weimar edition, we still miss a due consideration of the Holy Scriptures (resp. the Vulgate). As a result, more than twenty errors have arisen in this One Scripture: the annotations are drawn to the wrong biblical passages; here and there, the necessary keywords are missing; elsewhere, words are highlighted as keywords that are not; yes, there are even wrong keywords.
which of course affects the sense not a little. Now we let evidence for this follow. S. 5, line 10 (Cap. 1, 7.) we find "Νοn salvabo" as a keyword, while it should be (from the same verse) Et salvabo. The opening words of the interpretation immediately following, "With wonder-loving words all the prophets point to the kingdom of Christ," indicated that "Νοn salvabo" could not be the correct keyword, and had one then searched the Bible, Et salvabo would have been found. - S. 9, Z. 17 (Cap. 2, 14.) Loqui at cor with its interpretation, which is marked with the verse number "15." belongs To the 14th verse and should have been placed before line 14. On the other hand, the verse number "15th" should have been placed before Vinitores in line 14. In the same line, the Erlanger will read hic instead of hoc. - S. 19, line 1 should have been preceded by "Sic melius" the first part of Cap. 4, 12. (according to the Vulgate) should have been placed as a keyword. But there is no keyword, and the interpretation of v. 12. is appended to v. 11. without a new verse number and other distinction. - P. 20, line 5 (Cap. 4, 13.) Ideo fornicabuntur is marked with the verse number "14th," although it still belongs to v. 13; only in the following line should "14th" have been placed before: Non visitabo. - P. 21, line 3 lacks the keyword and the verse number before the interpretation (Israhel etc.), which does not belong to Cap. 4, 15. where the Weimar edition has drawn it, but to v. 16. - S. 29, Z. 3 Scientiam etc. is drawn to Cap. 6, 7. while it belongs to v. 6. - P. 32, Z. 10 should be the whole line: [Cap. 7,] 5. the regis etc. ge
The number of verses should be "3. - On p. 38, line 11, the verse number (Cap. 8,) "5." should be placed before Projectus, but deleted in line 14. - S. 38, Z. 21 should have been written with "Ipse", which is a new keyword and should be blocked (in our
Bible: "the calf"; Vulg.: ipse), a new paragraph should begin, provided with the verse number (Cap. 8,) "6th". On the other hand, this number is to be erased p. 39, line 7. - On p. 40, line 12, the words: Sed et" are to be deleted, but in the following line after the verse number (Cap. 8,) "10.", because they belong to the keyword. - The words p. 40, line 18: conturbat terras are to be changed after Ps. 29, 9. into conturbat cervas (he arouses the hinds). The Erlanger reads: cerras. - In the interpretation of Cap. 8, 12. we encounter p. 41, line 5 the sentence that seems senseless to us: si do tanquam scriptum omnium eum, nihil tamen efficio etc.. Instead of oomnium eum, nomen meum is probably to be read, which also seems to be indicated by what the Basel edition offers: aliud semper nomen indunt. - S. 43, line 20, the verse number (Cap. 9,) "8." is to be deleted. The same is p. 44 either Z. 10 before speculatorem or Z. 12 before Laqueum. - On p. 49, line 20, the words: Super faciem aquae are highlighted as a keyword, but they are not, but belong to the preceding. On the other hand, immediately after the words just mentioned, the verse number (Cap. 10,) "8." should have been placed with the keyword: Disperdentur. In the following line, the verse number is then to be deleted. - P. 51, line 26 is missing at the beginning of the line the verse number (Cap. 10,) "13." and the stitch word: Vra8ti8 impietatem ete. - P. 56, line 21 the verse number (Cap. 12,) "2. "0 should be erased. The new verse number "2." with the key word: rludiomm er^o Domini etc;., which is missing in the Weimar one, would have been already Z. 18
1) According to the Vulgate, the verse numbers in Cap. 12 are one less than in our Bible.
should stand before the word: 4uäa8. - P. 58, line 27 the keyword Idolum and the new verse number (Cap. 12,) "8." are missing. The interpretation is drawn to the seventh verse in Weimar. - S. 62, Z. 13 is missing before 8ervavi te the keyword In äeserto and the verse number (Cap. 13,) "5.". - P. 62, Z. 14 is missing before the words: "they have the fullness" the keyword 4uxtu PU80NU and the verse number "6.".- P. 64, Z. 12 should be before Dro 1p86 the verse number (Cap. 13,) "15.", not first Z. 13. - P. 65, Z. 18 should be preceded by Derde- tnr the verse number (Cap. 14,) "6.", not first by Z. 22. - In many other places than those mentioned here we have had to overcome difficulties and make improvements, as can be seen in our editing. All words enclosed in square brackets there are inserted by us.
Even in Walch's old edition, we did not find everything smooth, but had to make many Höckerichte even during the revision. We now want to give an account of this as well. The following examples are all taken from one scripture, namely the short interpretation of the prophet Isaiah, Vol. VI, 1 ff. There we read Col. 95, §7 2) "righteousness" instead of unrighteousness (1uju8titiam); 164, 22 "medici" instead of healing (mediemu); 184, 55 "in all places" instead of in all kinds (ommmo(Ü8); 185, 57 and likewise 400, 2 "power" instead of night (noete); 221, 120 "propitiation" instead of propitiation (xraeümtiouem); . 227, 129 "they" instead of themselves; 258, 169 "keep in check" instead of fence (86pire); 266, 184 "a son."
2) In what follows, the first number indicates the columne, the second the paragraph.
instead of in the son (in filio); 269, 189 the word: concern is missing; 293, 228 we read: "although such properties are not real persons (propria personae), as the Grammatici take the nomina propria" instead of: "although they [names derived from offices and activities] are not proper names of the person, as the grammarians call proper names (etiamsi non sunt propria personae, sicut grammatici vocant propria); 297, 232 "all" instead of therefore (sic); 330, 1 "hunger for the word" instead of theure time, as far as the word is concerned (famem verbi); 454, 16 "afterward" instead of never (nunquam); 493, 11 "the words" instead of the word [of God] (in u8u verdi); 532, 13 "heresies" instead of heretics (daeretiei); 539, 26 "every animal" instead of everything that lives (omne aninml M 145, 2]); 559, 65 "has measured" instead of been measured to (inen8uratu8 68t); 592, 7 "Hanes" instead of Tanis (^dan68); 761, 19 "idols" instead of blocks (8tipit68); 766, 28 "shameful" instead of harmful (p6rnieio8a); 813, 15 "others" instead of all (onin68); 819, 30 "giant" instead of man of war (dollator); 821, 34 "a Manichaean" instead of Manichaeus (Manieda6N8); 835, 11 "strange" instead of ineffable (in6narradil6in); 856, 29 "That he call the Lord" instead of What the Lord says ((jnod Oonünn8 dioit); 954, 2 "You who do not despise the word, do not despair, but seek that everything may be rightly done and governed everywhere" instead of You who do not despise the word, but would that everything may be rightly done and governed everywhere, do not despair! (I^olit6 d68p6H6, V08, non 60nt6inniti8 V6I dunst 86(1 V6Ü6118, 1'66^6 ONNN ndiM6 ^6l1 6t ad
inini8trari); 974, 8 "teaching evil" instead of when not rightly taught (nmw do66r6); 1062, 39 "instead of the Jews who will be vexed, not one people but many Gentiles shall be sprinkled in the likeness of the cross of Christ" instead of: instead of the Jews who will be vexed at the likeness of the cross of Christ, not One people but many Gentiles shall be sprinkled (looo dud^orura, Hui o^nd^tur t'orniw 6ruoi8 Odrwti, uou UUU8 xopu1u8, 86(1 rauita6 A6Ut68 Ä8P6i'g6utui'); 1068, 49 "the same" instead of him(6uui ^(1dri8tuili] ); 1105, 120 "I, saith Satan, will make thee blessed" instead of I, saith he [Christ Jes. 49, 25.], will help thee (D^o, incMt, t6 8alvado); 1118, 143 "And not alone has he been taken out of that judgment" instead of And not alone is he condemned by that judgment (Mo judioio 86. 60ud6iuuatu8); 1182, 23 "ugly" instead of hateful (odio8i); 1187, 31 "heretical" instead of seditious (86ditio8a). That in 1277, 24 i-obor6 and xatr6in 6orum is given instead of the correct reading of the Vulgate: rudor6 and xart6ra 8uain, Walch is not solely to blame for this, but also the Latin editions, which have the same wrong reading, but he is certainly responsible in 1277, 23 for 6ord'688iou6 instead of 6oiUu8iou6. 1129, 160 Luther's translation has been taken for that of the Vulgate. 1134, 167 the translator says that in the Latin translation the plural, in mortibu8, stands, while this is the case only in the Hebrew. 803, 44 the translator continues after "the superstition": "This is the queen and empress over all that is high in the world." Sometimes the given translations are not correct.
radezu wrong, but still not satisfactory, e.g. 1107, 126 "to heal the whole earth" instead of making the whole world blessed; 1110, 130 cathedra [the chair or seat from Ps. 1, 1., "where the scoffers sit"] is rendered by: "the cathedra." Politia is almost without exception given by "policey," which here and there makes a rather comical impression, as, 738, 17: "so he [Hezekiah] complains here about having to leave the policey." As an indication, this may be enough; a detailed statement of all errors and irregularities would probably fill a booklet.
The Weimar edition says in its preface to the thirteenth volume: "We have made good progress with the Erlangen edition," and this statement is fully justified. We, too, may be allowed to say that we have been able to improve on what has been offered so far, some shortcomings and errors. We prove this only with the Weimar edition, as the relatively best. We do not take into account real or probable printing errors.
In the interpretation of the prophet Joel according to the Altenburg manuscript, Vol. XIII, p. 92, line 14, the words Confusi sunt agricolae should have been highlighted as a keyword and designated with the verse number (Cap. 1,) "11.", but they are attached to the preceding verse without any distinction. - S. 93, Z. 20 we read (Cap. 1, 18.): Ex hebraeo: etiam greges omnium desolatae sunt. If the Hebrew Bible had been consulted, XXXX would have been found, and thus the correct reading ovium instead of omnium. -
P. 97, line 35 we read (Cap. 2, 6.): "es Wirt in Haussen gehen". To this the note: "Ob häuften --- Haffen, Hafen, Gefäß?" We answer: No, because these German words are translations of congregabuntur, around which the interpretation turns, as the context teaches; it is not olla that matters. We would not have mentioned this if a false explanation had not been built later on this false conjecture, namely (Cap. 2, 20.) p. 106, line 7: "das eyn stuck hie faul Wirt" etc., where "faul" is explained in a note (no longer with a question mark) with reference to p. 97, line 35 by "fall". But here, too, the context teaches that "faul" is to be understood, for it speaks of "verfaulen" (de foetore et putredine p. 105, Z. 27). - On p. 100 we read in the note to line 23: "Wit. [should read: Jen., for in the Wittenberg our Scripture says nothing cites psalm 144 and 85 s[see] but ps. 103." The Jenaer is right in its citation "Psal. 144" [Ps. 145, 8th]. For there patieus is found, which is what our text offers, whereas Ps. 103, 8. [according to the Vulgate's count ps. 102] lonKuuiiniK. The citation of "ksul. 85" [Ps. 86, 15.] is justified by the fact that only there the reading nüserieoi-äiae is found, while in the other two Psalms it says: uuiltum iniserieocs. - P. 120, Z. 25 (Cap. 3, 19.) is to be read in the margin (with the Erlanger) "Dan. 7, 12." instead of: Dan. 12, 9. This is proven by the words given in the text from the Vulgate. - P. 122, Z. 7 (Cap. 3, 23.) reads procul instead of: non procul. A look at the map would have taught that Sittim is not far from the Dead Sea.
Furthermore, the Zwickau manuscript has at the corresponding place, p. 87, line 11 non longe a mari mortuo. - S. 122, Z. 25 (Cap. 3, 24.) the Weimar manuscript as well as the Erlangen manuscript offers: pro caede instead of: procede (thus no printing error). If the Vulgate had been looked up, the correct reading would have resulted from Ps. 45, 5. - Finally, we find p. 122, line 32 and likewise in all editions: satisfactionem, which could also have been improved by insight into the Vulgate (1 Cor. I, 30.) into sanctificationem. - The same applies to the last keyword (p. 122, line 28) in this writing: Et Juda in aeternum habitabitur, which belongs to the 25th verse. On the other hand, the interpretation refers to v. 26 (in the Vulgate v. 21), so here, just as in the Zwickau manuscript, it should have been put: 21. Et mundabo, etc.
In the interpretation of the prophet Joel according to the Zwickau manuscript, Weimar edition, vol. XIII, p. 68 ff, we find the following errors: p. 69, line 2, the verse number "4." should be placed, but line 5 should be deleted. - On p. 70, line 20, the verse number "15." should have been placed before a, a, a; line 22, it should be deleted. - P. 70, Z. 25 (Cap. 1, 16.) should have been replaced by: ,,Vo8tri Q08tri 68t," should be read: ,, V68ti'i8 ^00IlIi8] UO8tri8 68t." After that, from the Vulgate, should be inserted: ^?6i-i6i-unt in ckonio Drü U08tri Ia6titiu 6t 6x6u1tatio). Without this addition, the phrase: quia cultus dei corruit, is meaningless. For all we are offered about v. 16. is: V68tr-i uo8tri 68t, Hula 6u1tu8 ckvi oorruit. - In the second chapter, p. 72, z. 14, the verse number "4." should be before Hula piop6 68t
deleted, but line 16 should be placed before Diss t6N6dramini. - P. 74, line 5 should be preceded by 4 "ort68 the verse number "7." but omitted in the following line. - The sentence p. 74, lines 8 f., Ü6U8 to vu1n6r6ntur, must be inserted, as the Altenburg manuscript has done, (not in the seventh, but) in the eighth verse, namely line 13 after the words: In eall 6 8trato. - P. 77, Z. 25 (Cap. 2, 19.). In the . Satze: O8t6nckit uou Iru8tra ineain 6886 6ouv6iM0N6iu i8tam will have to be read Ii-U8trau6am instead of krustra uwaiu, because the pronoun ru6am is not well possible in this place. The word Iru8tran6U8, which the dictionaries do not offer, is found in the Weim. Ausg. in this volume, p. 151, line 7. - p. 77, line 20, the verse number "19." is to be placed before Hierori^uru8 and line 24 is to be deleted. The Altenburg and Hall manuscripts have this remark only at v. 20. - p. 78, Z. 1 (Cap. 2, 20): ut 8ockoina6 p6ri6runt, should be read udi instead of ub. - P. 78, Z. 8. should be read L266KM6 instead of 86ck6olüa6. - P. 78, Z. 17 (Cap. 2, 22.) instead of "heil" is to be read das ist - P. 78, Z. 21 (Cap. 2, 23.) instead of Do-n is to be read das ist Ebendaselbst should be read in the infernal handwriting: Hodraso MAicküoal 6to. instead of: ,, Ü6l)ra60 Mor6 , for is not the ablative of iuo8. - p. 81, line 24 (Cap. 2, 30. Vulg. [not "31." which line 22 is accidentally set]) is to be read vaxor6m I'unii instead of "vorpoten luml." - The verse number "31." should be placed p. 82 line 5 before lunam, but line 7 should be erased. - Also in the third chapter several times the verse numbers (according to the Vulgate) are not in the right place.
P. 84, line 22 the verse number "7." should be placed before Ecce ego, but line 27 should be deleted. - P. 84, line 29 should be "8." before In, but line 31 should be deleted. - P. 85, line 6 should be "9." before Clamate, but deleted in line 11. - P. 85, line 12, the words: Accedant et ascendant omnes viri bellatores should have been emphasized as a keyword.- P. 86, line 18 ff. the paragraph: Malitia eorum etc. belongs to v. 13, should therefore have already been in line 9. In Z. 20 we do not consider the word Juxta est to be a keyword. - In this third chapter, we also encounter only one significant offense, p. 86, line 32 (Cap. 3, 16. Vulg.): ergo cessabunt vomeres gladiis. This does not fit into the context; therefore, according to the Altenburg manuscript, we have changed it to: ergo cessabunt omnes gladii, which is in accordance with the train of thought. - Other unevennesses are minor, partly probably typographical errors, namely p. 83, line 16 ergo instead of ego; p. 84, line 14 the word amicos is omitted after inimicis; p. 86, line 5 "wol" instead of "vol" (that is, full); p. 86, line 10 "hyn" instead of "hie".
We do not want to leave unmentioned here that the Weimar edition has done a difficult and thankful job by processing the material of the second chapter into a whole. In the form in which it appears to us in the Erlangen edition, exeg. opp. XXV, p. 12-31, it will hardly find readers who would like to work their way through the chaos.
Since Veit Dietrich's editing of the Weimar edition was helpful in interpreting the Prophet Amos according to the Altenburg manuscript, there are no
incorrect keywords, and only in two places, namely p. 193, line 6 (Cap. 7, 3.) and p. 194, line 5, errors in the verse numbers. In the former place, the verse number "6." is erroneous; in the latter place, the number "9." is missing, which is found erroneously only in line 9. However, the verse numbers are missing in very many (more than fifty) places. Moreover, apart from a few typographical errors, as p. 162, line 10 res instead of rex; p. 169, line 3 licerrime instead of liberrime; p. 173, line 14 lur" instead of Lore rc., the text is an excellent one, and we have been able to improve only a few places, namely p. 167, line 7 (Cap. 2, 4.) should read /tatt des zweiten idola: mendaoiu, as the Zwickau and Hallische manuscripts attest. - P. 170, Z. 18 (Cap. 2, 9.) should be read instead of <l68up6r: 8udt "r. - P. 171, line 19 (Cap. 3, 1.) is to be read instead of yuia: yui. - P. 173, Z. 2 (Cap. 3, 6.) is to be read instead of sti8titia: inM8titm. - P. 181, line 12 (Cap. 5, 5.) instead of oileud it should read: oilZ-nI ^do8. 5, 7.]. - P. 182, line 11 (Cap. 5, 8.) instead of ä686enä "r6 it should read: anender". - S. 187, line 9 (Cap. 5, 25.) is to be read instead of "in p8u1ino 11": in p8alino 77 (Ps. 78, 18.). - Furthermore, in the notes which bring the Hall manuscript, two errors have struck us, namely p. 188, line 4 v. u. should read vi8itutioni8 instead of vastationis, and p. 199, line 1 should read festivitates instead of captivitates.
Our judgment of the interpretation of Amos according to the Zwickau manuscript is not quite as favorable. For here we again encounter multiple deficiencies and errors in the verse numbers and key words, which we have not yet discussed.
We do not want to enumerate them further, so as not to tire the reader too much; in our edition, they are indicated in the notes. In addition, we have only noted the following errors: p. 124, line 21 (Cap. 1, 1.) videt instead of vidit. - P. 125, line 6 (Cap. 1, 1.) erigere instead of eligere (1 Cor. 1, 27.). - 127, line 29 (Cap. 1, 6.) suas instead of tuas (Gen. 14, 20.). - P. 128, Z. 22 (Cap. 1, 11.) Sterters viä6i'6 tlie mitti, 8. 8161'011/1116 instead of: 8tert6r6 viäetur-tti6 mitti 8. 8i6r0^n/mu8ft which the Altenburg manuscript offers. - P. 131, Z. 33 (Cap. 2, 13.) "geit" instead of A6init. - P. 136, Z. 19 (Cap. 4, 5.) benekao instead of deneplaoita t'ao (Ps. 119, 108.). - P. 138, Z. 4 (Cap. 4, 13.) ni6U6 instead of 8uae, which the Altenburg manuscript offers. - P. 139, Z. 23 (Cap. 5, 5.) "Oeäeon 7, 3j" instead of 3^08ua ^08. 4, 19. 5, 10.]. - P. 140, Z. 9 (Cap. 5, 7.) v6rt6i-6 instead of V6ibum. - P. 146, line 6 (Cap. 6, 8.) is found in the manuscript: pro t68, which both the Erlangen and Weimar editions have added thus: "xrot68^tatni^". But it should read: pro^6ivita^t68. The whole sentence reads: 8er 8/1166606I1611pro 6ivita^6s. - P. 148, line 24 (Cap. 7, 7.), where the Erlangen edition shows a gap, the Weimar edition has the addition ,,^Mu8
S. 150, Z. 6 (Cap. 7, 10.) is written in the margin Is. 10, 11. instead of Is. 10, 22. - S. 151, Z. 6 (Cap. 8, 1. f.) should be put instead of the second Kait: kes. - S. 156, Z. 3 (Cap. 9, 9.) is mutare instead of nutare. - In the notes (that is, in the Hall manuscript), we noticed the following three errors: p. 132, line 7 v. u. malo instead of mala; p. 132, line 1 v. u.
a non transgrediendo instead of a transgrediendo and p. 133, line 1 jugum instead of jubam.
With the prophet Amos we conclude this volume. From the findings of modern times, the interpretations of the prophets Hosea, Joel and Amos according to the Zwickau manuscripts and those of the last two prophets according to the Altenburg manuscript are newly included in the same instead of the adaptation of Veit Dietrich, which was not approved by Luther, because the latter had repeatedly been guilty of arbitrariness and violence with Luther's interpretation. We have indicated Veit Dietrich's deviations in the notes, as was also done in the Erlangen and Weimar editions. About the sources we have given detailed information in the first note to the prophet Hosea and the prophet Joel, therefore it is sufficient that we refer the reader to what was said there.
Now it only remains that we discuss the relative value of the different relations. It cannot be denied that the Zwickau manuscript has the advantage of the greatest originality for the prophets Joel, Amos and Obadiah, since the college transcriptions are offered to us in it. But on the one hand, the deficiency of the copy, the hearing errors, the many gaps, the disjointedness of the sentences, the incomprehensibility of the abbreviations, the illegibility of the manuscript, on the other hand, the imperfection of the decipherment of the same, the many reading errors and incorrect additions, the lack of or incorrect punctuation, take this manuscript
almost completely lost their value. Luther would not have admitted the publication of writings of such nature. Therefore, we cannot avoid attributing superiority to Dietrich's adaptations. The Altenburg manuscript is also an elaboration of Dietrich. He has, what has been recognized by his contemporaries quite generally, the copies at his disposal with great skill processed into a whole. That in which he has proceeded arbitrarily, or what he has added, nowhere concerns the faith, but mostly only unessential things. On the other hand, such an editor has not yet been found for the raw material in the Zwickau manuscript, and will also be difficult to find later. In the form in which it is now available to us, we are not seldom expected to read the
The most barsten nonsense as Luther's speeches to accept. The Erlangen edition has done an almost unbelievable job here, which (exeg. opp. tom. XXV, p. 9) has read three different remarks by Luther on Joel 1, 7. 8. into each other, which are next to each other in the manuscript. The Weimar edition has not done so badly, but it still leaves much to be desired, as can be seen from the previously mentioned expositions. We also do not expect to have achieved something completely satisfactory, but we have endeavored to make these writings more comprehensible through numerous additions, mostly made after the parallel manuscripts, which have been placed in square brackets.
May God also give His blessing to the course of this volume.