La decouverte par le Dr. E. A. Fellmann de l'exemplaire des Principia Mathematica de Newton ayant appartenu a Leibniz et contenant des notes marginales manuscrites (datant vraisemblablement de 1689), apporte un temoignage direct de la premiere reaction de Leibniz devant l'oeuvre du savant anglais. La presente edition met le document original entre les mains du lecteur, en l'accompagnant des notes et commentaires objectifs indispensables (en allemand et en francais). Le rapport de Leibniz a Newton a souvent ete envisage dans le (...) cadre de la facheuse querelle de priorite dans l'invention du calcul differentiel et integral. Or Leibniz, prenant connaissance des Principia, n'y voit pas un traite purement mathematique: refusant d'enteriner la scission entre la mecanique et les lois de la pensee, il se soucie avant tout d'etablir une fondation metaphysique pour la dynamique. Les Marginalia ont l'originalite de nous presenter, non pas un Leibniz adversaire ou rival, mais un Leibniz lecteur de Newton, dispose a tirer le meilleur parti d'un systeme qui aurait pu, a bien des egards, lui sembler etranger, comme le confirmera la systemisation ulterieure du concept de vis visa. (shrink)

'Marginalia' are notes made in the margins of a book. It could be general comments, glosses or scholia. For centuries marginalia was considered an important scholarly activity, almost as important as the original text. The famous marginalia on the text of Homer's Iliad dates back to the 5th century before Christ. Some of the most important theologians in history kept themselves busy by adding marginalia to texts. Luther's marginalia on the text of Paul's Letter to (...) the Romans is a good example of this type of scholarly endeavour. Writing about the life and work of a fellow theologian could at best be a few marginal notes - sometimes it is a mere scribble, sometimes an interpretation of a text and sometimes commentary is necessary. This contribution reflects on the life and work of I.W.C. van Wyk, a theologian who dedicated his life to the church, mission and reformed theology. (shrink)

In recent years, historians of science have increasingly turned their attention to the “print culture” of early modern science. These studies have revealed that printing, as both a technology and a social and economic system, structured the forms and meanings of natural knowledge. Yet in early modern Europe, naturalists, including John Aubrey, John Evelyn, and John Ray, whose work is discussed in this paper, often shared and read scientific texts in manuscript either before or in lieu of printing. Scribal exchange, (...) exemplified in the circulation of writings like commonplace books, marginalia, manuscript treatises, and correspondence, was the primary means by which communities of naturalists constructed scientific knowledge. Print and manuscript were necessary partners. Manuscript fostered close collaboration, and could be circulated relatively cheaply; but, unlike print, it could not reliably secure priority or survival for posterity. Naturalists approached scribal and print communication strategically, choosing the medium that best suited their goals at any given moment. As a result, print and scribal modes of disseminating information, constructing natural knowledge, and organizing communities developed in tandem. Practices typically associated with print culture manifested themselves in scribal texts and exchanges, and vice versa. “Print culture” cannot be hived off from “scribal culture.” Rather, in their daily jottings and exchanges, naturalists inhabited, and produced, one common culture of communication. (shrink)

Russell’s most important source for his book on Leibniz was C. I. Gerhardt’s seven-volume Die philosophischen Schriften von Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz. Russell heavily annotated his copy of this important edition of Leibniz’s works. The present paper records all Russell’s marginalia, with the exception of passages marked merely by vertical lines in the margin, and provides explanatory commentary.

The rich apparatus of scholia and marginalia transmitted in Lucian’s manuscripts can prove of vital help for the constitutio textus of his writings. On the one hand, their ancient and stratified origin makes it possible that they preserve traces of an earlier stage of Lucian’s text, both directly, through explicit quotations of lost variants, and indirectly, through hints given in the explanations of lemmas. On the other hand, they may allow us to recognise as problematic passages that otherwise would (...) go unnoticed, especially in the case of intruded glosses which convey a coherent and not suspect text. The Lexiphanes, with its deliberately absurd and confused vocabulary, represents a perfect case study for the peculiar situation where it is hard to state whether a text is corrupt or not. In the present article, three textual passages from this Lucianic dialogue (Lex. 1; 3; 6) will be analysed. In all three cases, hitherto unnoticed errors will be detected and new corrections will be proposed thanks to the direct or indirect help given by the scholia and marginalia found in manuscripts. (shrink)

Complementing the publication of Darwin's notebooks and correspondence, this work provides access to the last remaining unpublished source of Darwin manuscript materials. It is a catalog to and a complete transcription of the marks and annotations he made in the margins of his books. The margin comments throw light on Darwin's immediate reactions to his reading matter; further comments on slips of paper stuck inside the covers of the books reveal more considered evaluation. These comments are also fully transcribed. Annotation (...) copyrighted by Book News, Inc., Portland, OR. (shrink)

Danišová, Nikola, 2021. Marginálie k figúre šibala v arcinaratívoch (Tematologicko-kultúrne súvislosti). Nitra: Univerzita Konštantína Filozofa v Nitre. ISBN 978-80-558-1807-8.

Let$\left\langle {{W_n}:n \in \omega } \right\rangle$be a canonical enumeration of recursively enumerable sets, and supposeTis a recursively enumerable extension of PA (Peano Arithmetic) in the same language. Woodin (2011) showed that there exists an index$e \in \omega$(that depends onT) with the property that if${\cal M}$is a countable model ofTand for some${\cal M}$-finite sets,${\cal M}$satisfies${W_e} \subseteq s$, then${\cal M}$has an end extension${\cal N}$that satisfiesT+We=s.Here we generalize Woodin’s theorem to all recursively enumerable extensionsTof the fragment${{\rm{I}\rm{\Sigma }}_1}$of PA, and remove the countability restriction (...) on${\cal M}$whenTextends PA. We also derive model-theoretic consequences of a classic fixed-point construction of Kripke (1962) and compare them with Woodin’s theorem. (shrink)

In his essay "Imagination," George Santayana writes, "There are books in which the footnotes, or the comments scrawled by some reader's hand in the margins, may be more interesting than the text." Santayana himself was an inveterate maker of notes in the margins of his books, writing comments that illuminate, contest, or interestingly expand the author's thought. These volumes offer a selection of Santayana's marginalia, transcribed from books in his personal library. These notes give the reader an unusual perspective (...) on Santayana's life and work. He is by turns critical, approving, literary, slangy, frivolous, and even spiteful. The notes show his humor, his occasional outcry at a writer's folly, his concern for the niceties of English prose and the placing of Greek accent marks. These two volumes list alphabetically by author all the books extant that belonged to Santayana, reproducing a selection of his annotations intended to be of use to the reader or student of Santayana's thought, his art, and his life. Each entry includes a headnote with the author's name, the title of the work, brief publication information, and the library location of the book. Not all marginalia from a given text is included; the notes have been selected for content and style. [cut last sentence; cut entire paragraph if nec.] Santayana, often living in solitude, spent a great deal of his time talking to, and talking back to, a wonderful miscellany of writers, from Spinoza to Kant to J. S. Mill to Bertrand Russell. These notes document those conversations. (shrink)

In his essay "Imagination," George Santayana writes, "There are books in which the footnotes, or the comments scrawled by some reader's hand in the margins, may be more interesting than the text." Santayana himself was an inveterate maker of notes in the margins of his books, writing comments that illuminate, contest, or interestingly expand the author's thought. These volumes offer a selection of Santayana's marginalia, transcribed from books in his personal library. These notes give the reader an unusual perspective (...) on Santayana's life and work. He is by turns critical, approving, literary, slangy, frivolous, and even spiteful. The notes show his humor, his occasional outcry at a writer's folly, his concern for the niceties of English prose and the placing of Greek accent marks. These two volumes list alphabetically by author all the books extant that belonged to Santayana, reproducing a selection of his annotations intended to be of use to the reader or student of Santayana's thought, his art, and his life. Each entry includes a headnote with the author's name, the title of the work, brief publication information, and the library location of the book. Not all marginalia from a given text is included; the notes have been selected for content and style. [cut last sentence; cut entire paragraph if nec.] Santayana, often living in solitude, spent a great deal of his time talking to, and talking back to, a wonderful miscellany of writers, from Spinoza to Kant to J. S. Mill to Bertrand Russell. These notes document those conversations. (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:73. More Hume autograph marginalia in a first edition of the "Treatise". Two sets of marginalia by Hume in copies of the first edition of A Treatise of Human Nature have been published. One is a copy in the British Library. This has 1 2 been described by Connon and Nidditch and was, no doubt, one, at least, of the copies which Hume kept for himself. The (...) marginalia are so extensive as to suggest that, at the time he made them, he may have been hoping for an opportunity to publish a second edition of the Treatise. The other copy with marginalia, a presentation copy to his kinsman, Henry Home, Lord Karnes, has been described by Wallace Nethery, Librarian of the Hóose Library of Phil3 osophy and by Nidditch. There is a third copy of the Treatise with marginalia in Hume's hand which was a pre4 sentation copy to Pope. The Pope copy is inscribed on the flyleaf of Volume I in Hume's handwriting, "To Alexander* Rope Esq at Twickenham". There are 18 corrections in Volume I and 5 in Volume II. They are as follows, the first word or phrase being the error, the second the correction. The first word is usually scratched out in the text and the correction inserted in the margin but sometimes insertions are simply made within the text. 1st EditionSelby-Bigge 1.12.252.8'the' Our' 1.35.2316.1'of 'or' 1.57.428.18'these* 'those' 1.58.829.6'part' 'parts' 1.111.2860.27'defection' 'dissection' 1.126.569.14'it' deleted 1.154.486.1'worn out' "worn it out' 1.240.7136.9'as' 'when' 1.256.21145.28'evidence' 'testimony' 74. ï. 273. 20155.24'instance' 'instances' 1.280.16159.33'gave it's' 'gave it its' Ï.286.25163.22-23'upon observation' 'upon the observation' 1.287.16164.2'cause' 'case' 1.288.5164.15'results* 'result' 1.293.10167.14'exists' 'exist' 1.343.17196.22'opening I' 'opening it I' 1.402.16231.6'presses' 'press' 1.453.1260.34'what the' 'what is the' 11.108.10 336.24 "affections wheel' 'affections to wheel' II. 120. 4 343.19 'cause' 'causes' 11.228.23404.15 'One' Our' 11.229.19 404.32 'and proceed' 'and practice proceed' 11.271.24428. 20 'considerably' 'sensibly' In addition, someone, perhaps Hume, has marked a printer's error where a letter has slipped. (Vol. I, p. 466. 3). It is not possible to find out the date upon which Hume gave this copy to Pope from the published correspondence of either party. Pope died in 1744 and Hume may have sent him a copy of the Treatise because of the former's literary renown and because the publishers had a large number of unsold copies on their hands. From the fact, among others, that the footnote on Volume II, p. 168 (Selby-Bigge, p. 371) is missing from both the Pope1 and the Karnes copies, it is clear that Volumes I and II were, as one might expect of presentations, in each case early issues or states. It is more than likely that Hume made other presents of the Treatise to friends and people he admired such as Francis Hutcheson and Bishop Butler, and these 75. would probably have included marginalia along the same lines as the Karnes and Pope copies. For what Hume substantially did in giving these copies was to perform an act of courtesy; i.e., to incorporate items from the errata tables into the text. The Pope copy is the least important and interesting of those noticed so far, for it contains only one correction which is not included in the errata tables - the second item listed above in Volume I - and not all of them. The percentage of the changes called for in the errata tables which are made by Hume in the text diminishes markedly as between Volumes I and II. Moreover, there are no marginalia in the third volume, 'Of Morals', and this is perhaps to be explained by Hume's becoming bored with this somewhat superfluous task, even if it was a politeness and the fact... (shrink)

Les thèses, proposées par M. Krämer, dans son ouvrage Arete bei Platon und Aristoteles, marqueraient une révolution dans les études platoniciennes, si elles étaient acceptables. Selon lui, Platon a, dès le commencement de sa carrière philosophique, au moins dès l'ouverture de l'Académie, possédé un système élaboré d'ontologie. Ce système a été exposé aux membres de l'Académie, sous forme d'une doctrine ésotêrique. Les dialogues, qui sont entièrement des œuvres protreptiques, ne comportent que des allusions à cette doctrine; tout de même, sans (...) connaître ce fonds doctrinal, on ne peut vraiment comprendre les dialogues. Sans vouloir dresser un compte-rendu complet du livre en question, l'auteur du présent article voulait écrire quelques notes marginales. Ni le récit d'Aristoxène, ni les données plus tardives n'autorisent M. Kr. à déclarer que la fameuse conférence πεϱ τἀγαϑοῦ ait constitué une série de cours. En outre, le récit même n'est pas exempt d'invraisemblance, si l'on compare les fragments des poètes de la comédie moyenne. La dépréciation de l'œuvre écrite que contient la fin du Phèdre n'est pas absolue, comme le croît M. Krämer, mais relative. Dans la vue de M. Kr., il est difficile de comprendre pourquoi Platon a écrit. Surtout la composition des Lois est inexplicable. Dans la théorie d'un système ésotérique, l'héritage de Socrate ne reste plus reconnaissable. Si, comme dans les théories de M. Krämer, l'axiologie se confond avec l'ontologie, l'autonomie de la décision éthique disparaît, et la position priviligiée du Bien ne peut plus être comprise. Le refus de tout développement chez Platon contraint M. Krämer à donner des interprétations très forcées de plusieurs textes platoniciens. (shrink)

In the present chapter, the design of select margins of late medieval Old Norse manuscripts containing the Icelandic ‘Jónsbók’, ‘Kristinréttr Árna biskups’ and Norwegian ‘Landslǫg’ law codes is addressed. In particular, it discusses the size and fillings of margins in these codices and the relation to their modes of use by original clients and later owners. Although it is well-known that Scandinavian law manuscripts contain a large number of notes written by both original and later users, the particular use of (...) marginal spaces by original scribes and illuminators for glosses and other annotations and illuminations has scarcely been investigated to date. In my contribution, two distinctive features will be addressed: (1.) The different use of margins by Norwegian and Icelandic readers of the manuscripts, and (2.) the use of margins by illuminators surrounding the column(s) and incorporated initials. (shrink)

VOL. i, Reitz 88, Indicium Vocalium 5. The so called ñμίÞωνα are given as ίΧνΡΑ Σ Σ and if by Dionysius Hal. Comp. 14.

Whether any apology is possible for the form of this paper is doubtful; but perhaps a few words are allowable. The miscellaneous notes, of which it consists, are fairly well described by the title: at all events, the proposals contained in them—with, I fear, many others—have been pencilled at one time or another in one margin or another. Their age varies widely: two or three must go back to days when my only complete Euripides was Kirchhoff's editio minor and my (...) only Sophocles a copy of Tournier; the most date from middle age or ‘quidquid est illud inter iuvenem et senem medium in utriusque confinio positum’; but, whenever they were made, they were not made by a student of the Greek dramatists commanding the equipment that such a student ought to have. The equipment, in any case, was out of my reach; but, though I have read the plays often, I have read them only because the ancients have a way of enabling one to forget the moderns—as I was informed in my youth by an excellent scholar who has now forgotten both. I hope, therefore, that anyone who may happen to read the paper will overlook some errors and ignorances of the amateur; and, above all, if I may borrow a sentence from Markland's preface to his emendations on Lysias, ‘si quando dictatoria ista, Lege, vel Scribe, occurrent, scito me nihil aliud velle quam Forte legendum vel scribendum’. (shrink)

The paper discusses the relationship between normal natural deductions and cutfree proofs in Gentzen (sequent) calculi in the absence of term labeling. For Gentzen calculi this is the usual version; for natural deduction this is the version under the complete discharge convention, where open assumptions are always discharged as soon as possible. The paper supplements work by Mints, Pinto, Dyckhoff, and Schwichtenberg on the labeled calculi.

The author argues that despite universal and formal character of the foundation of Kant's ethics, its principles appear to be compatible with recognition of the possibility of lying for philanthropic reason. To have an effect in the world, our obligations must necessarily have empirical components that point to specific conditions, under which the maxim will have a moral worth. One of such condition may be the requirement that probable consequences of the action will not clash with other obligations.

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:82 HISTORY OF PHILOSOPHY PEIRGE'S MARGINALIA IN W. T. HARRIS' Hegel's Logic Among the most eminent philosophers of nineteenth-century America were William Torrey Harris (1835-1909) and Charles Sanders Peirce (18391914 ). The former, by his establishment in 1867 of The Journal of Speculative Philosophy, furnished a starting point for American philosophical maturity. The latter, who contributed to that iournal, has been considered America's greatest logician. It may therefore (...) be of interest to examine Peirce's marginalia in the first edition of Harris' chief work, Hegel's Logic: A Book on the Genesis of the Categories of the Mind (Chicago: S. C. Griggs, 1890). Discovered by the present writer on a New York book-stall, in a cheaply priced, coverless, and water-stained copy, and now in his possession, it bears imprinted on the reverse of the title page: "Harvard University: Philos. Dept. Library. Gift of Mrs. Charles S. Peirce. June 28, 1915." Shortly after Peirce, in depressed circumstances, died on April 19, 1914, the Harvard Philosophy Department acquired from his wife the manuscripts that were published in the Collected Papers.1 Harris' Hegel's Logic, which presumably accompanied that transaction, contains several marginal annotations, mostly in faded ink, in a neat, small hand, similar to that reproduced in the frontispiece to Volume IV of Peirce's Collected Papers. Recalling a notable philosophical conjunction, the markings also reveal aspects of Peirce's character and confirm his complex attitude toward Hegel, crucial to the development of his philosophy. Peirce's shifting view and persistent concern regarding Hegel may be traced in some other remarks. For example, in a letter to Harris dated January 1, 1868, he says, "I admit there is music in the logic of Hegel, but that is all I discover there. ''2 In another letter to Harris, dated May 13, 1868, he indicates his ambivalence: "But as I should draw the line... I should come on the same side as Hegel, because I am idealistic. I do not 1eel very much opposed to Hegel, though I think his main point.s tin his own estimate of importance) are wrong. ''s About 1890, Peirce declared, "I reiect his philosophy in toto, ''~ and about 1896, he accused Hegel of reaching "each category from the last preceding by virtually calling 'next!'-5 Yet, in 1903, he acclaimed Hegel "in some respects the greatest philosopher that ever lived. ''6 And, in the very same year, reviewing another treatment of Hegel's logic, and including a reference to Harris' t Eds. Charles Hartshorne, Paul Weiss,and Arthur Burks (Vols.I-VIII; Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1958). 2,.C.S. Peirce to W. T. Harris." ed. WallaceNethery, The Personalist,XLIII (19fi2),37. I am indebted to Dr. Nethery for his kindness in letting me see these letters in advanceof publication. sIbid.,40. 4Collected Papers,I, 193. 5 Ibid., I, 246. eIbid., I, 277. NOTES AND DISCUSSIONS 83 treatise, Peirce flatly remarks: "But all these Hegelians--Harris, XVallace, Hibben, Everett, etc.--who dog the steps of their master in almost textual comments, are profoundly unfaithful to the spirit of his philosophy... the Logik now condemns itself. ''7 A constant feature in Peirce's negative attitude toward Hegel concerns the latter's failure to equip himself scientifically to deal with a subject the American considered basically scientific. For instance, about 1899, Peirce writes: Hegel, while regarding scientific men with disdain, has for his chief topic the importance of continuity, which was the very idea the mathematicians and physicists had been chiefly engaged in following out for three centuries. This made Hegel's work less correct and excellent in itself than it might have been; and at the same time hid its true mode of affinity with the scientific thought into which the life of the race had been chiefly laid up. It was a misfortune for Hegelism~ a misfortune for "philosophy," and a misfortune (in lesser degree) for science: Although Peirce adds, "My philosophy resuscitates Hegel, though in a strange costume, ''9 and his dialectic parallels Hegel's, he attempts to escape the Hegelian subjectivism by an "objective logic" and by avoiding Hegel's supposed mathematical ignorance. "Most of what is true in... (shrink)

Se plantean los problemas y algunas temáticas características de la "independencia literaria" en Hispanoamérica, a la luz de la coyuntura de la emancipación política de España. Este tema desborda los marcos temporales o la periodización de las guerras de independencia; recorre todo el siglo XIX y pa..

This is a review article of Corpus of Mesopotamian Anti-Witchcraft Rituals, vol. 1. By Tzvi Abusch and Daniel Schwemer. Ancient Magic and Divination, vol. 8/1. Leiden: Brill, 2011. Pp. xvi + 482, plates. $255.

In this article, I analyze Heidegger’s marginalia in his personal copy of the 1946 Zurich edition of poems by Georg Trakl, which I discovered several years ago while conducting research in the castle of Heidegger’s hometown of Meßkirch. Although Heidegger’s marginalia in this volume are not extensive, they are significant for three reasons: they provide valuable insight into his reading of the spirit of Trakl’s poetic work and into the place in which Heidegger situates it; they frequently shed (...) light on topics often left in the shadows by Heidegger and his expositors, topics such as biography, sexual difference, and Christianity; and they bear on Heidegger’s lifelong engagement with the status of being and even, at times, seem to call into question his published positions on it. (shrink)

The enigmatic thought of Charles S. Peirce (1839-1914), considered by many to be one of the great philosophers of all time, involves inquiry not only into virtually all branches and sources of modern semiotics, physics, cognitive sciences, and mathematics, but also logic, which he understood to be the only useful approach to the riddle of reality. This book represents an attempt to outline an analytical method based on Charles Peirce's least explored branch of philosophy, which is his evolutionary cosmology, and (...) his notion that the universe as made of an 'effete mind.' The chief argument conceives of human discourse as a giant metaphor in regard to outside reality. The metaphors arise in our imagination as lightning-fast schemes of acting, speaking, or thinking. To prove this, each chapter will present a well-known metaphor and explain how it is unfolded and conceptualized according to the new method for revealing meaning. This original work will interest students and scholars in many fields including semiotics, linguistics and philosophy. (shrink)

La vida y obra del polígrafo granadino Lisān al-Dīn Ibn al-Ḫaṭīb (m. 776/1374) sigue siendo fuente de importantes estudios y traducciones habida cuenta de que su prolija producción literaria está repleta de valiosos testimonios históricos y personales que sitúan a su autor como un personaje destacado en la transmisión del conocimiento en el Mediterráneo islámico. En la difusión de su obra y prestigio jugó un papel fundamental la copia manuscrita de su obra al-Iḥāṭa fī aḫbār Ġarnāṭa que Ibn al-Ḫaṭīb envió (...) en vida (768/1366), a través de su hijo ʿAlī, a la ḫānqāh de Saʿīd al-suʿadāʾ de El Cairo, regida por el tremeceno Ibn Abī Ḥaǧala (m. 776/1375). El conocimiento de esta copia ha llegado hasta nosotros a través de otro tremeceno, al-Maqqarī (m. 1041/1632) y su monumental obra, Nafḥ al-ṭīb, en honor al sabio granadino. Gracias a ella sabemos, entre otras cosas, que esta copia fue profusamente consultada y comentada en sus márgenes. Dos autores destacan por encima de los demás: el hijo del autor Abū l-Ḥasan ʿAlī (m. s. IX/XV), y el magrebí Ibn Marzūq (m. 781/1379). A través del estudio y la traducción de las notas manuscritas de este manuscrito cairota, este estudio pretende poner de relieve el valor de los marginalia como fuente documental, así como arrojar un poco más de luz sobre estas dos figuras, junto con al-Maqqarī, como piezas importantes en la transmisión y pervivencia de la obra de Ibn al-Ḫaṭīb en el Oriente islámico hasta al menos el siglo XI/XVII. (shrink)

This note responds to an interpretation of Mohist Canon and Explanation B 671 published by John Makeham some years ago. Makeham’s interpretation makes significant contributions to our understanding of this passage, especially in calling attention to problems with two influential previous interpretations, those of A. C. Graham and Chad Hansen.3 Yet his reading presents difficulties of its own, which I will attempt to rectify here.