Page:American Historical Review, Volume 12.djvu/882

 872 Reviews of Books Indexes, issued in different parts of Europe, Avith chapters on the Council of Trent and the Index of Pius IV. ; the condemnation of Galileo; Erasmus and Luther in the Index; and the Jansenist Contro- versy and the Bull Unigenitus. A distrust in the reliability of the book begins with the preface, where Air. Putnam makes several mistakes in referring to his chief au- thority. He states that Reusch's Der Index dcr verhotcncn Biichcr is in three volumes " which comprise 2400 closely printed octavo pages " (p. vii), when in fact it is in two volumes and contains only 1800 pages. To be sure Reusch did publish a collection of Indexes as a separate work in 1886, and it is included in the bibliography, and although quite ac- cessible was probably one of those from which Mr. Putnam '" did not have occasion or opportunity to make citations" (p. ix). In basing his work upon Reusch's book, Mr. Putnam has made use of his references without verifying them, and sometimes with strange results. To cite a few typical examples of his method of book-making. On p. 61 he cites on the Decretum Gelasianum the incomprehensible "Cone. Geseh., ii, 217"; in Reusch (I. 13) there is a reference to " Hefele, Cone. Gcseli., II. 217". In Putnam's bibliography the only edition of Hefele mentioned is the English translation in three volumes, yet on p. 65 we find " Hefele, iv, 712 ", and on p. 66 " Hefele, v, 833 ". Again, p. 196, there is a reference to Archiv fiir Deutsch. [sic'] Buchh., V, 147, which is cited by Reusch (I. 346) as authority for another state- ment, although on this same page Air. Putnam has successfully conveyed three other references from one page of Reusch. In the account of the censorship regulations in Bavaria, Putnam (p. 220) cites a document in the " Staats Archiv Mitnehens"; Reusch (I. 472) cites the same document correctly as " In Miinchener Staatsarchiv ". In the same way a careless and unintelligent use is made of Mend- ham's authorities. In his Literary Policy of the Church of Rome, Mendham (p. 19) gives a list of condemned books, taken from the first edition of Fox's Acts and Monuments, which he notes is not to be found in subsequent editions, or in Wilkins's Concilia, where it should be found ; Putnam (p. 89) copies the list and comment from Mendham, and cites as his authority " Wilkins, Concil., Fox, iii, 403 ". One must doubt whether Mr. Putnam ever saw Alendham's " reprint of the Index of Gregory XXI." (p. 159), any more than he saw the work to which Reusch does refer, which is not a reprint but a study of the Index of Gregory XVI. But then, by abbreviating the title of one book, Mr. Putnam creates a second (pp. 148, 151) ; and a copy of the Roman Index of 1682, in the Royal Library at Munich (Reusch, II. 34 n.) becomes an edition printed at Munich in 1683 (p. 324). On p. 176 Mr. Putnam gives a translation from a letter of Latinus Latinius, citing Mendham as his authority. Now only half of the Latin original of Putnam's text is to be found in Mendham (p. 52); Reusch cites Mendham; but Putnam's citation is only a translation from Reusch's rendering (I. 295) of a more extended extract of the letter. i