Søgningsresultat

Breslau, Wilhelm Koebner, 1884 8vo. Contemporary paper boards. Paper labels over spine. Extremities worn, but tight and fine. A stamp to end-paper and to verso of title-page. Title-page and end-papers with light brownspotting, and some leaves with marginal markings, otherwise very nice and clean. Inscribed to front free end-paper. (10), XI, (1), 119, (1) pp. The rare first edition with a handwritten presentation-inscription from Frege ("Freundschaftlichst/ überreicht vom/ Verfasser.") of this pioneering work of modern logic, which constitutes the starting point of analytic philosophy, of the philosophy of mathematics, and of logicism. This cornerstone of modern logic was pivotal to the development of the two main disciplines: the foundation of mathematics and the foundation of philosophy, and with it, Frege founded the discipline of logicism. The work profoundly influenced Russell and Wittgenstein, who both used Frege's "The Foundations of Arithmetic" as a steppingstone for their own work (e.g. In the preface of the "Principia Mathematica" Russell and Whitehead state that "In all questions of logical analysis our chief debt is to Frege" (p. VIII).).Frege presentation-copies are of the utmost scarcity and hardly ever enter the market. "The Foundations of Arithmetic" arguably constitutes Frege's main work, as it is here that he expounds the central notions of his philosophy while severely and effectively criticizing his predecessors and contemporaries. It is here that he deals with the actual goal of all his thought, namely TO BUILD MATHEMATICS AS AN EXTENSION OF LOGIC. The book represents the first philosophically sound discussion of the concept of number in Western civilization, and it profoundly influenced developments in the philosophy of mathematics and in general ontology.Beginning thus: "When we ask someone what the number one is, or what the symbol "I" means, we get as a rule the answer "Why, a thing". And if we go on to point out that the proposition "the number is a thing" is not a definition, because it has the definite article on one side and the indefinite on the other, or that it only assigns the number one to the class of things, without stating which thing it is, then we shall very likely be invited to select something for ourselves - anything we please - to call one."... ("F.o.A" Introduction), Frege goes on to argue that number is something connected with an assertion concerning a concept - and essential for the notion of number is that of equality of a number. The definition that he settled upon, and which became of fundamental importance to the development of modern logic and the foundations of philosophy and mathematics was "The number which belongs to the concept "F" is the extension of the concept of being equal to the concept "F"."; here, equality of concepts is understood as the existence of a one-to-one correspondence between their extensions. ""Foundations of Arithmetic" (1884) provided an impressive definition of number in logical terms, after having criticized several empiricist, formalist and psychologistic approaches to mathematics. The definition was constructed in terms of properties of concepts rather than through classes. Thus, the number of a class was introduced as the number which applies to a given concept, and this last as the extension of the concept "equinumerous with the given concept", which can be defined in terms of bijective correspondence between sets." (Grattan-Guinness I: p. 621). "The name of Frege has become one of the most honoured in the history of mathematics. The central feature of the book is the development of the definition of number. There can be no doubt about the greatness of this work" (W.H. McCrea - review of the English translation)."Its epochal character in the attempt to put mathematical concepts on a rigorously logical basis has been realized in this country from the beginning of this century, thanks to the writings of Russell and Whitehead." (The Times Literary Supplement - review of the English translation). "The modern philosophy of mathematics is characterized by the fact that various schools have been formed to overcome the difficulties occasioned by the antinomies. The oldest of these schools is LOGICISM and goes back to FREGE, one of the most significant logicians of all times." (Stegmüller, p. 326).

London, Edward Blunt, 1620. 8vo. Contemporary full speckled calf, expertly rebacked to style with four raised bacds and gilt line-decoration. Front free end-paper with notes dated 1637. Note station "Lord Bacon" in early hand to title-page. P. 57 with a 20th century stamp ("Library of Washington University"). A bit closely shaved at top, occasionally cropping border. A very nice copy. (8), 222, (4 - 1 blank leaf and 1 leaf with half-title "A Discourse Upon the Beginning of Tacitus"), pp., pp. 223-324, (1 f. with half-title: A Discourse Of Rome), pp. 325-(418), (1 f. with half-title: A Discourse Against Flatterie), pp. 419-(504), (1 f. with half-title: A Discourse of Lawes), pp. 505-542. The very rare first edition of this extremely important collection of essays, three of which have now been proven to have been written by Thomas Hobbes, thus constituting his earliest published work. The work is now widely regarded a highly important source to the understanding of what is arguably the greatest political thinker of all time, providing us with unprecedented access to the early writings and thought of Thomas Hobbes. "Studies of the early Hobbes can be enriched and deepened by a consideration of the formerly anonymous texts now identified as the philosopher's earliest work, namely the essays "A Discourse on Tacitus", "A Discourse on Rome", "A Discourse on Laws", found in a larger collection entitled "Horae Subseciuae: Observations and Discourses". Originally thought to have been the work of the young William Cavendish, who under Hobbes's supervision likely wrote the majority of the "Horae" essays, these three discourses have since been identified... as the work of Hobbes himself." (Butler). "The entire work consists of twelve essays or "observations" reminiscent in style and language of Bacon's essays and devoted to such topics as arrogance, expenses, reading history, religion, and death, and four much longer discourses, three of which we have been able to attribute to Hobbes." (Reynolds & Saxenhouse p. 4). Efforts to identify the author of the "Horae Subseciuae" began almost immediately after its anonymous publication, and the publication has always been a source of speculation about the author. As it would turn out, all twelve essays were not written by the same author, and three of them were written by one of modernity's greatest philosophers. It was Leo Strauss who first provided something resembling evidence that the writings were by Thomas Hobbes. He had come upon the original manuscript and concluded that it was indeed in Hobbes's hand. But handwriting, of course, does not prove authorship. It does prove a connection, with the work, however, and the exact connection with the three essays would be proven some decades later, by Saxonhouse and Reynolds, who famously published the three essays together, under Hobbes's name for the first time. "For the first time in three centuries, this book brings back into print three discourses now confirmed to have been written by the young Thomas Hobbes. Their contents may well lead to a resolution of the long-standing controversy surrounding Hobbes's early influences and the subsequent development of his thought. The volume begins with the recent history of the discourses, first published as part of the anonymous seventeenth-century work, "Horae Subsecivae". Drawing upon both internal evidence and external confirmation afforded by new statistical "wordprinting" techniques, the editors present a compelling case for Hobbes's authorship. Saxonhouse and Reynolds present the complete texts of the discourse with full annotations and modernized spellings. These are followed by a lengthy essay analyzing the pieces' significance for Hobbes's intellectual development and modern political thought more generally. The discourses provide the strongest evidence to date for the profound influences of Bacon and Machiavelli on the young Hobbes, and they add a new dimension to the much-debated impact of the scientific method on his thought. The book also contains both introductory and in-depth explanations of statistical "wordprinting." Saxonhouse and Reynolds met each other at a conference in 1988 and decided to join forces to determine, whether Thomas Hobbes was the actual author of the "Horae Subseciuae", which had often been speculated. "Fortuitously, Reynolds was closely involved with statisticians at Bringham Young University who have done some of the most important work in developing statistical techniques for identifying authorship for disputed texts, or "wordprinting." ...The results relative to the "Horae Subseciuae" were both exhilarating and disappointing. The three discourses published here could definitely be attributed to Hobbes, but the volume's twelve shorter essays or observations which draw heavily on Baconian themes and language, portraying the passionate young aristocrat with all his foibles, and the fourth discourse, were authored by someone else - perhaps Hobbes's tutee, but clearly not Hobbes himself. While it would have been more satisfying to have the entire work match Hobbes's later writings, we thought that the identification of the three discourses as previously unrecognized and unacknowledged Hobbesian works was of great significance and that they were worthy of republication. These three discourses give us direct access to Hobbes's intellectual concerns and motivating interests at a point almost two decades earlier than was possible through his previous recognized writings." (Reynolds & Saxenhouse, pp. VII-VIII). Apart from a poem in his hand, nothing had remained to help us understand the early intellectual development of Hobbes and the early influences upon his thought, before his translation of Thucydides, which appeared in 1627, when he was almost 40 years old. These important early texts give us access to Hobbes's early thought, thereby letting us understand how he developed his political science. Shortly after taking his degree, Hobbes became engaged as a tutor to the Cavendish family, with whom he maintained a close connection for the rest of his life. Hobbes was first hired to serve as a tutor and companion to William Cavendish, later the Second Earl of Devonshire, and subsequently taught William's son and grandson. In 1610, Hobbes and his first charge embarked on a grand tour of the continent, traveling primarily to France and Italy.Hobbes remained with William for the next twenty years, later serving as his secretary and becoming a close friend and confidant. It has previously been thought that Hobbes published nothing during this time, but as it has recently turned out, he did indeed contribute the three essays "A Discourse on Tacitus", "A Discourse on Rome", "A Discourse on Laws" to the "Horae Subseciuae", that was presumably publiahed by William Cavendish, who arguably wrote if not all, then most of the other essays in the volume. Shortly after William died, Hobbes published the first translation of Thucydides' History of the Peloponnesian War into English (1628). During this period, Hobbes also worked occasionally for the Lord Chancellor and great scientist Francis Bacon, who highly valued him as a secretary, translator, and conversation partner, and to whom the present work has also be ascribed during the centuries. Noel B. Reynolds and Arlene W. Saxenhouse in: "Three Discourses: A Critical Modern edition of Newly Identified Work of the Young Thomas Hobbes", 1995. Todd Butler: Imagination and Politics in Seventeenth-Century England, 2017

[Weimar, Gustaf Uszman] for E.L. Kasprowicz, Lipsk [Leipzig], 1884-[89]. Large 4to. Bound in a very nice recent red half calf with five raised bands and gilt title to spine. Title-page with repair to inner margin and with a few closed tears. Outer margin discreetly reinforced. Verso of title-page with "1942 D. 1513" in pencil. Last leaf also with a couple of closed/repaired tears, with minor loss of text, and reinforced in margin. Apart from the nicely restored flaws to the first and last leaf, this is an excellent, very nice and clean copy. VII, 325, (1) pp. Very rare first edition of the first Polish translation of Marx' revolutionizing main work, "The Capital", which was clandestinely printed in Germany and then smuggled into Poland. The Polish translation, which is much rarer than the first Russian edition, and thus of the utmost scarcity, was illegally printed in Germany, with the mediation of the translator Kasprowicz (who worked for Brockhaus), by G. Uszman in Weimar (far enough from Prussia for the government not to be too concerned with the socialist activities of Polish students) and was then smuggled, mostly via Leipzig and Torún, into Russian Poland. It appeared in three parts, from 1884 to 1889. The translation, which was mainly done from the French, was the work of the hugely influential Polish socialist group, the Krusinsk-ites, which counted Stanislaw Krusinski, Ludwik Krzywicki (who corresponded directly with Marx himself), Mieczyslaw Brzezinski, Kazimierz Plawinski, and Jozef Siemaszko. Ludwik Krzywicki (1859-1941) was the editor-in-chief of this great collaborative work. He is credited with being the leading Marxist of the period and one of the greatest Marxist thinkers of Poland. In 1883 he was expelled from Warsaw University, after which he went to Germany, Switzerland and France, before returning to Poland in 1893, where he continued his political activities and took part in the 1905 revolution. While in Leipzig (from 1883), working on the translation of the Capital into Polish, he began corresponding with Marx, and after Marx died (March 1883), he continued corresponding with Engels, who provided direct suggestions of improvements and corrections.The publication of the first Polish translation of Marx' Capital not only came to influence Polish politics and economics, it also marked an important divide in Polish socialism and constitutes one of the earliest printings within organized Polish Marxism. "In 1882 Ludwig Warýnsk (1856-89) organized in the former Congress Kingdom the first Polish workers' party under the name Social-Revolutionary Party "Proletariat". At the same time in the Russianized Imperial University of Warsaw a circle of young Polish socialists established itself. Its main theoretician was Stanislaw Krusinski (1857-86) after whom the group were called "Krusinski-ites". The most important among them was later to become one of the greatest scholars in the field of the social sciences. In 1884 the Krusinski-ites published in Leipzig the Polish translation of volume one of "Capital".In the ideology of the first Polish Marxists two different tendencies are to be distinguished; a social-revolutionary and a social-democratic one. The first was prevalent in Warzynski's "Proletariat"; after the secession of a social-democratic group named "Solidarity" and led by Kazimierz Puchewicz it was unanimously accepted by this party. The second tendency was dominant in Krusinski's circle. The differences dividing them were profoundly theoretical and not merely tactical. Generally speaking, the social revolutionaries emphasized the important role of the "subjective factor" in history while the social democrats insisted on the necessity of a gradual "ripening" of the economic conditions of the socialist revolution. The social revolutionaries closely collaborated with the Russian populist party, The People's Will, and, under its influence, endorsed political terrorism; the social democrats were resolutely opposed to this. Even more important was the controversy concerning the basic theoretical assumptions of Marxism and their applicability to an economically backward country. The social democrats were convinced that the objective conditions for a socialist revolution would not be ripe until the given country had passed through all phases of capitalist development..." (Walicki, Stanislaw Brzozowski and the Polish Beginnings of "Western Marxism", pp. 41-42).

Basel, [Per Henrichum Petri, 1556 - on colophon]. An absolutely lovely copy of the exceedingly scarce first edition, first printing, of one of the most influential and important works in the history of modern thought. A work that has for a long time been overlooked due to the gross neglect of the history of Renaissance philosophy, but which has nonetheless been seminal to the development of scientific and philosophical thought from the 16th century and onwards. With a purely naturalistic and immanent view of the natural process, Pomponazzi here frees man's thought from the bounds of religion and provides modern thinkers and scientists with pure empiricism and naturalism. "Er will das "Wissen" and die Stelle des "Glaubens" stellen" - "die "dämonische" Kausalität des Glaubens weicht der Kausalität der Wissenschaft" (Cassirer, p. 110 + 111). 8vo. Contemporary full limp vellum, with vellum cords to hinges. Remains of vellum ties to boards. A bit of brownspotting, but all in all a lovely, completely unrestored copy in its first binding. Five large woodcut initials and large woodcut printer's device to verso of last leaf. (16), 349, (3). Adams: P-1827; Wellcome: I:5153; DSB: XI:71-74.A.H. Douglas: "The Philosophy and Psychology of Pietro Pomponazzi", 1910.M.L. Pine: "Pietro Pomponazzi: Radical Philosoper of the Renaissance", 1986.Thorndyke: "A History of Magic and Experimental Science", Vol. V, 1966 (4th printing)P.O. Kristeller: "Eight Philosophers of the Italian Renaissance", 1965.J.H. Randall, in: "The Renaissance Philosophy of Man", 1956 (4th impression).B.P. Copenhaver & C.B. Schmitt: "Renaissance Philosophy", 1992.E. Cassirer: "Individuum und Kosmos in der Philosophie der renaissance", 1969 (3. Aufl. - orig. 1927).See also: Kristeller: "Renaissance Thought and its Sources"; "Medieval Aspects of Renaissance Learning"; "Renaissance Thought II, Papers on Humanism and the Arts". "Pomponazzi's thought and reputation were extremely influential in the centuries after his death. Even before it was printed, his treatise "On incantations" circulated widely in manuscript among philosophers, physicians and early modern naturalists (see Zanier 1975). Due to his mortalist theory of the soul, 17th-century "free thinkers" regarded Pomponazzi as one of their own, portraying him as an atheist (see Kristeller 1968; Paganini 1985). Enlightenment thinkers of the 18th century pushed to extremes his distinction between natural reason and faith, while 19th-century positivists, such as Ernest Renan and Roberto Ardigò, saw in Pomponazzi a forerunner of their own beliefs and a champion of naturalism and empiricism." (SEP). Exceedingly scarce first edition of Pomponazzi's seminal "De Incantationibus", perhaps the most original work of natural philosophy of the Renaissance and arguably the first work of what comes to be the Enlightenment. The work, which is one of Pomponazzi's most important productions (along with his treatise on the immortality of the soul), constitutes a forerunner of Naturalism and Empiricism and could be considered the first true Enlightenment work ever, causing Pomponazzi, our greatest Renaissance philosopher, to be generally considered "The last Scholastic and the first man of the Enlightenment" (Sandy, Randall, Kristeller). The appeal to experience is the main concern of the work, and its strict and completely novel way of treating the subject matter resulted in a hitherto unattained elevated position of philosophy in the Latin West, providing to philosophy a new method that remains dominant to this day and without which we would scarcely be able to imagine modern philosophy. Proclaiming the victory of philosophy over religion, the "de Incantationibus" changed the entire history of philosophy - philosophy being to Pomponazzi the supreme truth and the final judge of all phenomena."Pomponazzi's conclusion [in the "De Incantationibus] results from a dramatic change in method which in turn is based on a profoundly new attitude toward philosophical inquiry. Medieval theologians and philosophers as well as most Renaissance thinkers were content to limit the role of reason in nature because they sincerely believed that the Christian God intervened in the natural order to create miraculous occurrences. As we have seen, this belief prevented their scientific convictions from destroying Christian doctrine by exempting central Biblical miracles from natural process. Even those who held that Christian revelation and Aristotelian science were irreconcilable maintained a sincere fideism which allowed each universe to remain intact, each standing separate from the other. But once Pomponazzi applied the critical method of Aristotelian science to all religious phenomena, Christian miracles were engulfed by the processes of nature. Absorbed by the "usual course of nature", the miracle could no longer be the product of divine fiat. Indeed Christianity itself became merely another historical event, taking its place within the recurring cycles of nature, and destined to have a temporal career within the eternal flow of time." (Pine, p. 273)."De Incantationibus" constitutes one of the single most important works of the Renaissance. Bringing everything in the world under the general laws of nature, the history of religion as well as all other facts in experience, "De Incantationibus" gives us, for the first time in the history of philosophy an outline of a philosophy of nature and of religion, an outline that came to be seminal in the history of philosophy and science throughout the following centuries. With the main aim of the work being to determine the fact that there is no such thing as "supernatural", no magic, no omens, no witchcraft, no divine intervention, no apparitions, etc., etc. - all marvelous events and powers observed in experience or recorded in history have their natural, scientific explanation, they are all within the scope of principles common to all nature -, it is no wonder that it was placed on the index of forbidden books immediately upon its publication, as the only of Pomponazzi's works ever. The analysis of the history of religions and the theory of the nature and use of prayer that Pomponazzi here develops is hugely interesting and so far ahead of its time that one hardly believes it. E.g. the notion that religious doctrines all aim, through fables and myths (which he disproves), to preserve the social order rather than to discover the truth, is not something you will find in any other work of the Middle Ages or the Renaissance. "[H]e brings the whole phenomena of religious history - the changes of religious belief, and the phases of thaumaturgic power - under certain universal laws of nature. Of these facts as of all others, he suggests, there is a natural and a rational explanation; in them the powers that are at work in all nature are still operative; and they are subject to the laws and conditions that govern nature generally - the laws of change, of development, of growth and decay, and transformation in decay." (Douglas, p. 299)."In regard to the religious issue, I have tried to show that he makes a claim for the absolute truth of philosophy and relegates religion to the purely practical function of controlling the masses. Religious doctrines contain a kind of truth because they can persuade men to act so as to preserve the social order. But religious doctrine has social value rather than speculative veracity. [...] rational truth is the only truth. It is really compatible only with complete disbelief. And I think that this is the statement that Pomponazzi makes. The only doctrines that he accepts are those of philosophy. Philosophy rejects the personal Christian God acting within history and eliminates the miracles of religion. Philosophy reduces to the absurd the notion of a life after death. And finally philosophy destroys revelation itself by viewing it as the product of heavenly forces rather than the act of divine will." (Pine, pp. 34-35). The work was originally written in 1520, but was not published in Pomponazzi's life-time. It circulated in manuscript form, however, and was also as such widely noted. In 1552, 27 years after Pomponazzi's death, the manuscript was brought to Basel by Pomponazzi's student Guglielmo Gratarolo, who had had to flee Italy due to his anti-religious views. Here, in Basel, he had the book printed for the first time, with a foreword written by himself, in 1556. This was the very first time that the book was published, as it had also not been included in the standard edition of Pomponazzi's collected works, published at Venice the year after his death, 1525 - presumably due to its dangerous and revolutionary views.In his preface, Gratarolo expresses fear that someone may think him either over curious or less Christian for publishing this book. He furthermore explains that he had purchased the manuscript 20 years earlier and brought it with him North when leaving Italy 6 years previously. "Granting, however, that there may be something in the work which does not entirely square with Christianity, Gratarolo thinks that it should not be suppressed or withheld from the scholarly public, since it contains more solid physics and abstruse philosophy than do many huge commentaries of certain authors taken together." (Thorndyke, V, p. 99-100). Come the Renaissance, the idea of eliminating demons and angels and attempts at a showdown with magical transformations and the like were not completely novel in themselves. Much scientific thinking of the Middle Ages and the Renaissance carried such beliefs that had in some form or other been current for a long time. But up until Pomponazzi's treatise, these ideas had always been surrounded by hesitance and a clear aim at still protecting the miraculous nature of Christianity itself, not leading the theories forward and not letting them bear any relevance. "Let us pause here a moment to estimate the place of this radical treatise [i.e. "De Incantationibus"] in the history of European rationalism. [...] It was Pomponazzi's achievement to go beyond these earlier hesitations and qualifications, particularly in regard to the astrological determination of religious belief. By dramatic shifts of emphasis and the extension of certain ideas to their logical limits, Pomponazzi utterly transformed the context in which these earlier views occurred. In their newly radicalized form, they challenged the supremacy of revelation by elevating philosophy to a position hitherto unattained in the Latin West". (Pine, p. 268)."[...] Even this brief sketch makes clear that Pomponazzi came at the end of a long scientific tradition which had absorbed, and to some degree, subordinated Aristotelian-Arabic science and astrology to the Christian universe. But if we look at each strand of this tradition, we can see how Pomponazzi carried these concepts to their furthest limits." (Pine, pp. 268-72). Pomponazzi clearly sought to explain all miraculous cures, events, etc. through natural powers. All sequences and concoctions which could seem magical or supernatural are within the same framework as other observed sequences and concoctions in nature. We may not be able to explain all of them (although Pomponazzi does attempt in the treatise to provide specific and elaborate natural, physical explanations of a large number of "magical" and "supernatural" events), but that is merely a lack in our intellect or understanding and by no means because these occurrences or events are not governed by nature and the physical laws of nature. "This whole mode of explanation of the marvelous in nature and history is constantly pitted against the orthodox theory which attributed magic and miracles to the agency of angels or demons. The book "De naturalium Effectuum Causis" is a uniform polemic against that theory, as essentially a vulgar superstition. It is the tendency of the vulgar mind, he says, always to ascribe to diabolic or angelic agency events whose causes it does not understand." (Douglas, p. 275). "These fictions are designed to lead us to truth and to instruct the common people who must be led to the good life and turned away from evil just like children, that is to say, by the hope of reward and the fear of punishment; and it is by these vulgar motives that they are led to spiritual knowledge, just as children pass from delicate nourishment to more solid nourishment. Hence it is not far from my concept or from the truth that Plato taught the existence of angels and demons not because he believed in them but because it was his aim to instruct the ignorant." (Pomponazzi, "De Incantationibus", 10, pp. 201-202).In order to understand the monumental accomplishment of Pomponazzi's "De Incantationibus", one must realize which tradition he is inscribed in, namely that of Italian Aristotelianism (as opposed mainly to the Renaissance Platonism). It is within this long tradition that he effects a revolution. "In the Italian schools alone the emerging science of nature did not mean a sharp break with reigning theological interests. To them it came rather as the natural outcome of a sustained and co-operative criticism of Aristotelian ideas. Indeed, that mathematical and mechanical development which by the end of the sixteenth century produced Galileo owes very little to the Platonic revival but received powerful stimulus from the critical Aristotelianism of the Italian universities." (Ren. Phil. of Man, p. 12).Pomponazzi stood at a crossroad in the history of Aristotelianism. He still studied the great logicians and natural philosophers of the 14th century, which his Italian humanistic colleagues had given up (focusing instead on "man" and his place in the universe), but at the same time he had a highly original approach to the teachings of Aristotle and a unique uninhibited approach to the nature of the universe, and he responded philosophically to the achievements of humanism, always seeking the truth and the "naturalist" explanation. Of that critical Aristotelianism which sought to find the true meaning of the works of Aristotle, lay them bare, and develop them further to find the true nature of the universe, to explain how the world functions without any preconceived notions (like the belief in Christ, etc.), Pomponazzi was a forerunner. With his "De Incantationibus", this "last scholastic and the first man of the Enlightenment" paved the way for the Enlightenment of the centuries to come, for rational free thinking. His quest against the theologians and "his scorn for all comfortable and compromising modernism in religion, and his sober vision of the natural destiny of man" (Randall, p. 268) combined with his refusal to leave the bounds of the Aristotelian tradition, his meticulous use of the medieval method of refutation, and his thorough rationalism, enabled him to revolutionize the Aristotelianism of the 16th century - and indeed the entire trajectory of philosophy of the ages to come - and invoke the period of scientific free-thinking that breaks free of Christian doctrines and which later comes to be the Enlightenment. "Against Pico's denial of astrology as incompatible with human freedom, he tried to make an orderly and rational science of the stars, opposed to all superstition - the naturalist's answer to the Humanist". (Randall, p. 277)."During the twelve decades or so between Pomponazzi's arrival (1484) and Galileo's departure in 1610, the learned community that Shakespeare called "fair Padua, nursery of arts", achieved a distinction in scientific and medical studies unmatched elsewhere in Europe. Thus, Pomponazzi's career in northern Italy brought him close to the most exciting advances of his time in science and medicine. In keeping with the nature of his university appointments, he approached Aristotle from a perspective quite distant from Bruni's humanism or Lefèvre's theologizing. [...] Pomponazzi's Aristotelianism developed entirely within the framework of natural philosophy". (Copenhaver & Schmitt, p. 105). "With this final explanation, Pomponazzi has discovered natural causes for all miraculous events and hence has eliminated the miracle as a category for understanding the process of nature. [...] As we have seen, Pomponazzi's theory offers three fundamental natural explanations of events which Christianity ascribes to the miraculous intervention of angels and demons. [...] Here Pomponazzi's method takes its most radical turn. Biblical miracles are now also found to have natural causes. Moses, we learn, performed his task by natural means. The "dead" revived by the prophets were not really dead. And the acts of Christ and the Apostles can be explained "within natural limits"." (Pine, pp. 254-56)."The histories of other religions record miracles similar to those of Christianity, and Pomponazzi justifies his frequent citation of historians in a philosophical work as authorities for past natural events of rare occurrence. Such is the most detailed and carefully worked out, the most plausible and at the same time most sweeping expression of the doctrine of astrological control over the history and development of religions that I have seen in any Latin author." (Thorndyke V, pp. 108-9).FULLER DESCRIPTION AVAILABLE UPON REQUEST-

Kiøbenhavn, Høppfner, (16. Martius, 1792). 4to. The entire volume of "Forordninger...", 1792 bound with the entire volumes of 1790 and 1791 as well in a very nice strictly contemporary brown full calf binding with four raised bands, gilt title-label and lovely gilt ornamentatiions to spine as well as the gilt, crowned monogram of King Chritian the VII to top of spine. Light wear and a closed tear to top capital. Otherwise in splendid condition, in- as well as ex-ternally. Stamp from the Danish Royal Military Library to front free end-paper. Pp. 69-71. [Entire volume: 146, 12 pp., 1 f. blank + 288, (8) pp., two folded tables + 323, (13) pp. woodcut vignettes of the Danish Elephant-order to title-pages]. Extremely rare first printing of the very first law anywhere in the world to abandon slave trade. From the library of King Christian VII, who passed the law, with his crowned gilt monogram to spine. With the completely groundbreaking "Forordning on Neger=Handelen" ("Decree about the Negro-Trade") of 1792, under King Christian VII, Denmark became the first country in the world to forbid slave-trade. Although the first law against slavery as such, not just slave-trade, would follow half a decade later, this first decree forbidding trading in slaves was a major milestone towards equality and freedom for all of mankind, in fact the very first of its kind in the entire world. Britain would be the next country to follow lead, and their first law against slave-trading was passed in 1807, 15 years after the Danish. After the British followed The US, Spain in 1811, Sweden in 1813, Netherlands in 1814, and France in 1817.From the 1660'ies until the end of the 18th century, about 111.000 slaves were sent from the Gold Coast in Danish Guinea to the Danish colony on the West-Indian islands St. Thomas, St. Jan, and St. Croix, this slave trade being part of a larger three-way trade between The Gold Coast, The West-Indian Islands, and Denmark. Weapons and alcohol were shipped from Denmark to Africa to buy slaves, and the slaves were transported to The West-Indies, from where other goods, especially sugar, were shipped back to Denmark. During the last decades of the 18th century, many Europeans were having concerns with the continuation of trading with slaves. One of these was the Danish Minister of Finance, himself a plantation owner, Ernst Schimmelmann (1747-1831), who was instrumental in the Royal Decree against slave-trade being formulated and passed. He was clearly affected by the general tendencies and the new Enlightenment view of mankind, the freedom and rights of man, and the question of the decency of trading in human beings. There was also a financial aspect of the wish to forbid slave trade, as it was beginning to become clear that society was moving towards a more humanistic view of all of mankind that would eventually make slave trading difficult. And apart from that there was also the question whether it was even profitable to transport slaves all the longs way over the Atlantic Ocean. Whatever the bearing arguments might have been, the present decree is a groundbreaking document that catapulted Denmark into a modern, humane world, 15 years before any other country, helping to spark a world-wide legal movement that was absolutely essential in order for the world to evolve into one that is free, humane, and equal for all of mankind.

Berlin u. Libau, Lagarde und Friederich, 1790. 8vo (204 x 135 x 60 mm). Near contemporary marbled paper binding with gilt green title-label to spine. Hinges and capitals neatly restored. Old ownership-stamp to title-page. Mid-nineteenth-century Viennese bookseller's label to pasted-down back end-paper. Occasional light foxing in some margins, otherwise clean and bright. Printed on special, heavy paper, making the volume nearly double the thickness of regular copies. LVIII, 476 pp., (1) f. (errata). Extremely rare copy, printed on special paper, of the first edition of Kant's seminal "Critique of Judgment", the third and last of his critiques, which "Kant himself regarded [..] as the coping-stone of his critical edifice; it even formed the point of departure for his successors, Fichte, Schelling and Hegel, in the construction of their respective systems." (J.H. Bernard in the introduction to his translation of "Critique of Judgment). THIS MAGNIFICENT COPY IS UNLIKE ANY OTHER WE HAVE SEEN - ONE OF ONLY FOUR OR FIVE PRESENTATION-COPIES PRINTED ON SPECIAL PAPER THAT KANT HIMSELF REQUESTED FROM THE PRINTER, TO BE GIVEN TO A HANDFUL OF NAMED RECIPIENTS. From a letter to Lagarde from January 21st 1790 (see "Briefwechsel von Imm. Kant", ed. Fischer, Müller, 1912, pp. 110-11), we know that Kant had requested 20 author's copies, four of them to be printed on special paper. While the book was in the press, Kant sent Lagarde a list of presentees to whom copies on special paper should be sent. He now named five recipients, so we assume that five copies were printed on special paper, instead of the original requested four copies. The recipients were: Count J.N. Windisch-Grätz, F.H Jacobi, K.L. Reinhold, L.H. Jacob and J.F. Blumenbach (see letter to Lagarde, March 25th, 1790, "Briefwechsel von Imm. Kant", ed. Fischer, Müller, 1912, pp. 126-7). As far as we know, none of these five presentation-copies have been traced and we have never seen one of them before. Neither do we know which of the five recipients received the present copy.Together with his two other critiques, the "Critique of Judgment" arguably constitutes the most important contribution to philosophy since Aristotle and Plato. Kant's seminal third critique was extremely influential from the time of its appearance - Goethe said said it was the first philosophical book ever to move him, and Fichte called it "the crown of the critical philosophy"; "...not only did Goethe think highly of it, but it received a large measure of attention in France as well as in Germany on its first appearance. Originally published at Berlin in 1790, a Second Edition was called for in 1793; and a French translation was made by Imhoff in 1796. Other French versions are those by Keratry and Weyland in 1823, and by Barni in 1846." (J.H. Bernard). In the "Critique of Judgment", Kant develops philosophical aesthetics and teleology that comprises nature and art. This aesthetics fulfills an essential systematic function in the Kantian architectonic. It bridges the gap between reason and nature, thus serving as a complement to practical reason of which Kant had proposed a critique two years earlier.The third critique is essential to an understanding of Kant's project of a critical philosophy. It is here that he seeks to join the dimensions of human experience which he had laid bare in the two previous critiques. A number of the conceptual foundations he had laid from 1782 break down, as he tries to demonstrate that aesthetics mediates between the realm of sensibility and that of reason.In order to do so, he sets out to show that aesthetic intuition ranges over both realms. The key to this demonstration is the claim that the two realms are isomorphic. However, as Kant considers the aesthetic judgment of the products of man's artistic invention, he cannot fit them into the format of a teleology of nature. Instead, he develops a conceptual framework for aesthetic judgment which explains why the first section on the faculty of aesthetic judgment swelled to the point of dwarfing the section on the teleology of nature.In the third critique the tension which inhere in the project of a critical philosophy rises to the surface. The third critique thus provides us with an invaluable glimpse into the actual workings of the mental faculties that Kant attempted to chart in his philosophy. For this very reason, the third critique provided the point of departure for much of later idealist philosophy, especially that of Hegel whose speculative philosophy can be seen as an articulation of the topics which Kant had uncovered in the third critique. "...the Critique of Judgement completes the whole undertaking of criticism; its endeavour is to show that there are a priori principles at the basis of Judgement just as there are in the case of Understanding and of Reason; that these principles, like the principles of Reason, are not constitutive but only regulative of experience, i.e. that they do not teach us anything positive about the characteristics of objects, but only indicate the conditions under which we find it necessary to view them; and lastly, that we are thus furnished with an a priori philosophy of pleasure." (J.H. Barnard). Warda: 125.

London, Joannis Haviland, 1623 [later altered in manuscript to 1624]. Small folio. Bound in a lovely early 19th century full vellum binding with gilt borders to boards and gilt ornamentations and gilt title-label to spine.Lower front hinge cracked, but bindning still tight. A bit of edge wear, but overall very nice. Woodcut title-vignettes (burning heart) and woodcut initials in beginning. Text within single woodcut borders. (18), 493, (1 - errata) pp. Complete with both title-pages (no final blank). Old owner's name to title page (along with the dates 1624 and 1648), unlegible scribbles to second title-page, and "collated e perfect" in old hand to last leaf. A very nice and clean copy with good margins. The extremely rare first edition of what is arguably Bacon's main work "De Augmentis Scientiarum", in which he sets out to lay the foundations of science entirely anew and reform the process of knowledge for the advancement of learning. Bacon believes that the advancement of learning will ultimately relieve mankind from its miseries and needs, and as such he not only reformed the foundations of science, he also laid the philosophical foundations for the dawning of the Industrial age. His proposed change of the collective thought of mankind completely reshaped the entire course of science in history. The aim of the present work - to investigate and re-classify philosophy and the sciences - marks a turning point in the rhetorical and theoretical framework for science, which is still essential for our conceptions of proper methodology today.The "De Augmentis Scientarum" constitutes a greatly expanded and completely re-written version of the "Advancement of Learning" (1605). The Latin is by William Rawley, in close collaboration with Bacon himself, who oversaw the entire process. When speaking of "De Augmentis Scientiarum" one never refers the incomparable English forerunner of the work (which was only in 2 books as opposed to the 9 of the "De Augmentis Scientiarum"). The first English translation of the "De Augmentis Scientiarum" appeared in 1640 and is translated by Gilbert Wats as "Of the Advancement and Proficiencie of Learning".The "De Augmentis Scientiarum" was intended as Part 1 of Bacon's proposed, but never completed "Instauratio magna" (PMM 119). "Bacon conceived a massive plan for the reorganization of scientific method and gave purposeful thought to the relation of science to public and social life. His pronouncement "I have taken all knowledge to be my province" is the motto of his work... [His] proposal was "a total reconstruction of sciences, arts and all human knowledge... to extend the power and dominion of the human race... over the universe". The plan for this was to be set out in six parts: (1) a complete survey of human knowledge and learning; this was expounded in the "De Augmentis Scientiarum", 1623 (a greatly extended version of "The Advancement of Learning", 1605)... Of parts (3) to (5) only fragments were ever published; part (6) remained unwritten." (PMM 119 - the header being "The Advancement of Learning"). Francis Bacon's Great Instauration for learning and the sciences was thus to be introduced by his most important work, the "De Augmentis Scientiarum", which he himself considered the most fundamental for the project that caused him to be considered one of the fathers of modern science. "In "De augmentis scientiarum", which is concerned primarily with the classification of philosophy and the sciences, Bacon develops his influential view of the relation between science and theology. He distinguishes in traditional fashion between knowledge by divine revelation and knowledge by the senses, and divides the latter into natural theology, natural philosophy, and the sciences of man... Having placed his project within the complete framework of knowledge in true Aristotelian fashion, Bacon proceeds to demolish all previous pretentions to natural philosophy. His aim is to lay the foundations of science entirely anew, neither leaping to unproved general principles in the manner of the ancient philosophers nor heaping up unrelated facts in the manner of the "empirics" (among whom he counts contemporary alchemists and natural magicians). "Histories," or collections of data, are to be drawn up systematically and used to raise an ordered system of axioms that will eventually embrace all the phenomena of nature."... (D.S.B. I:374-75). For Bacon, this proposed reformation would lead to a great advancement in science and a progeny of new inventions that would relieve mankind of its miseries. His demand for a planned procedure of investigating all things natural marked a turning point in the rhetorical and theoretical framework for science, much of which still surrounds conceptions of proper methodology today.It is due to his "De Augmentis Scientiarum" that Bacon is referred to as the creator of empiricism. With this work and the work intended as the second of the Great Restauration project, the "Novum Organum, Bacon established and popularized inductive methodologies for scientific inquiry, that which we now call the Baconian method, or quite simply "the scientific method". With his belief in the possibility of the advancement of learning of relieving mankind from its miseries and needs, Bacon is furthermore considered the philosophical influence behind the dawning of the Industrial age. He continually proposes that all scientific work should be done for charitable purposes, as matter of alleviating mankind's misery, and that therefore science should be practical and have the purpose of inventing useful things that will improve the conditions of mankind. This proposed change of our collective mind changed the entire course of science in history. The state was no longer merely contemplative; it became a practical and inventive state - one that would have eventually led to the inventions that made possible the Industrial Revolutions of the following centuries.It is furthermore to be noted that it is in the present work that Bacon presents his cipher method for the first time. He had first mentioned the Biliteral Cypher in a brief paragraph of his "Advancement of Learning" in 1605, but it is in the present work that he details with illustrations how to write and use the Biliteral Cypher. As most will know, Bacon's Cypher has had the greatest of impact on modern Bacon-Shakespeare scholarship. Almost all theories of Bacon as the true author of the Shakespearian corpus can be traced back to the cipher that is presented in 1624 in the "De Augmentis Scientiarum"."The system has been recognized, and used, since the day that "De Augmentis" was published, and has had its place in every translation and publication of that work since, but the ages have waited to learn that it was embedded in the original books themselves from the date of his earliest writings (1579 as now known) and infolded his secret personal history." (Elizabeth Wells Gallup, The Bi-Literal Cypher of Sir Francis Bacon Discovered in His Works and Deciphered, p. 48).As is known, since the 19th century, many people have suggested that the plays attributed to William Shakespeare were in fact written by Francis Bacon, and that the published plays contain enciphered messages to that effect. Both Ignatius L. Donnelly and Elizabeth Wells Gallup attempted to find such messages by looking for the use of Bacon's cipher in early printed editions of the plays.For roughly a century from 1850, Bacon's Cypher set the world of literature on fire. A passion for puzzles, codes, and conspiracies fuelled a widespread suspicion that Shakespeare was not the author of his plays. Professional and amateur scholars from all places all over the world have spent extraordinary amounts of time, energy, and money combing Renaissance texts in search of signatures and other messages that would reveal the true identity of their author. Also great authors and thinkers have been convinced that Shakespeare's works contained a secret message. These include Mark Twain, Walt Whitman, Sigmund Freud, Henry James, Henry Miller, etc. Francis Bacon, with his biliteral cipher -Renaissance England's first and clearest statement about how to hide texts within texts - became the leading candidate for the holder of the key to the puzzle.The cipher, which consists in an alphabet, was first printed in the present first edition, in 1623. It is to be found in Book 6, Chapter 1. It was reprinted in all the later editions of the work (2nd ed. Paris, 1624; London, 1638; English translation, Oxford, 1640) and the alphabet in all are substantially the same. Bacon devised this ingenious code in the late 1570s (when he spent three years in the entourage of the English ambassador in France), but he did not describe its workings until 1623. "Bacon gives both mathematics and analogy which he considers a science and calls "grammatical philosophy," a high place in his Great Instauration; which, when used together help to unlock the doors to that which Bacon has deliberately concealed-- including certain mysteries hidden in the Shakespeare plays. For instance, the two great books published in 1623 were the Shakespeare's Folio "Comedies, Histories & Tragedies" and Bacon's "De Augmentis Scientiarum" {the philosophical background and purpose of the Shakespeare plays} two masterpieces published together, since they are as twins, each being a key to unlock hidden treasures in the other-- two relating to the twin faculties of the mind--imagination and reason--and both drawing upon the third faculty, memory." (Peter Dawkins, "Francis Bacon Herald of the New Age"). Bacon's Cypher, however, has not only been used as the key to the Shakespearian puzzle. It was in fact a highly important cryptographical invention, which constitutes on the the very first English works on the subject (predating Both Wilkins' "Mercury" And Falconer's "Cryptomenysis"). This is one of the earliest illustrations of a cipher intended to hide a text within a text.Not only is this the first edition of "de Augmentis Scientiarum", it is also the most correct, and in addition the most beautiful. "First edition, exceedingly scarce, and according to Archbishop Tenison, the "fairest and most correct edition." A copy is in the British Museum." (Lowndes I:95). Gibson 129a. With the date on both title-pages altered in manuscript, adding a "I", as in some copies (as also noted in the description of e.g. the copy in the Huntington). This was presumably done by either the printer or publisher to those copies that remained unsold at the end of 1623. A second edition of the "De Augmentis Scientiarum" appeared in Paris in 1624. The first English translations of "De Augmentis Scientiarum" appeared in 1640.We have not been able to locate a single copy of this first edition in auctions within the last 40 years.

Strassburg, Johann Pruss, 1502. 4to (195 x 137 mm). Bound in a beautiful 19th-century full calf binding with gilt lettering and ornamentation to spine, elaborate gilt borders to boards, inner gilt dentelles, gilt ornamentation to edges of boards. All edges gilt. Ex-libris to both front and back pasted-down end-papers and front and back free end-papers (see below). Title-page reinforced at inner margin and with loss of paper, slightly touching the woodcut illustration. Last leaf with marginal repair and a closed tear. 33 lines to a page. 24 ff. (A4, B6, C-D4, E6). Withbound are 33 blank leaves in the back. A very nice copy. 7 Woodcut illustrations in the text inspired by (but not an adaptation of) Brant's 'Das Narrenschiff'. Provenance:John William Beaumont Pease, 1st Baron Wardington (1869–1950)Christopher Henry Beaumont Pease, 2nd Baron Wardington (1924–2005)Lucy Anne Paese (1966 - ) Rare second edition - considered more attractive than the first, as it contains a short preface (on the verso of the title) by J. Wimpheling of Schlettstadt – of Badius’ ‘Ship of Female Fools’, a supplementary work to Sebastian Brant’s Ship of Fools, which Badius had translated into Latin. In his address to Marnef, the publisher of the original Latin edition of Brant’s work (1500), Badius explains that this book, ‘Ship of Female Fools’, serves to fill a gap left by Brant - specifically, the omission of satirical chapters on the faults and follies of women. The work consists of six chapters written in both Latin verse and prose, accompanied by seven woodcut illustrations (including the one on the title-page) that closely follow the Parisian original. These depict the Ships of Eve and the vessels representing the five senses. The ship of fools is an allegory, first appearing in Book VI of Plato's Republic, about a ship with a dysfunctional crew. The allegory is intended to represent the problems of governance prevailing in a political system not based on expert knowledge. The Basel humanist Sebastian Brant described in his famous ‘Narrenschiff’ (1494) a sea journey of 112 individuals representing the follies of human weakness and vice to 'Naragonia' the paradise of fools: 'The first original work by a German which passed into world literature, and helped to blaze the trail that leads from medieval allegory to modern satire, drama and novel of character' (PMM). “The Flemish humanist and publisher, Jodocus Badius Ascensius (Josse Bade van Asche), composed an additional text in Latin to Sebastian Brant’s Ship of Fools, in verse and prose addressed to an elite audience, entitled Stultifera navis sensus animosque tractans Mortis in exitium (The Ship of Female Fools and the Five Senses... drawn toward death and ruin). In the preface to his additamentum, Badius notes that he decided to complete the Brantian fleet by adding "a small boat, but with enormous capacity" dedicated to perilous female folly, since, "As I have remarked, the first blemish of mortals came more from the folly of woman than of man."” (Pinson, Led by Eve. The Large Ship of Female Fools and the Five Senses). ”In late medieval and early modern written and visual culture, woman, in the guise of Eve/Venus/Lust, incarnates danger and is conceived as a powerful temptress. The biblical story of the temptation casts the first woman as the deceiver of man, determining his fate. For the Fathers of the Church, Eve, the wicked temptress and devil’s accomplice, became the prototype of the powerful and fatal women whose sexual charms were irresistible to men. This nexus of ideas, particularly influential in northern humanistic circles, especially among the cultivated urban milieu, was incisively imagined as a train of perilous ships of female fools incarnating the senses by Jodocus Badius toward the end of the fifteenth century, elaborated by Jehan Drouyn to include female fools embodying the vices. Badius thus made plain his misogyny by regarding the "additional skiff" in the convoy of ships of fools. The small boat of foolish women, now annexed to Brant’s vision, completes the picture of the folly of mankind.” (Pinson Led by Eve. The Large Ship of Female Fools and the Five Senses) Badius’ work not only extends Brant’s satirical allegory but also reflects the deeply entrenched misogynistic perspectives of the late Medieval and early modern periods. By attributing the origins of folly to women and depicting them as the driving force behind moral corruption, Badius underlines the prevailing theological and humanistic views that saw female nature as inherently dangerous and deceptive.'Ship of Female Fools' serves as both a literary expansion of Narrenschiff and a fine testament documenting the anxieties and gendered biases of its time. Adams B-24.Brunet I, 607. BM STC German, 1455-1600, p. 62.

Kiøbenhavn, Andreas Seidelin, 1820. 8vo. In contemporary brown half calf with lighter brown leather title-label with gilt lettering. All edges coloured in blue. In: "Dansk Litteratur = Tidende for Aaret 1820". (The entire volume 1820 present, comprising all 52 issues, numbered 1-52). Light wear to extremities, spine with a few scratches. With occassional brownspotting, primarily affecting first and last leaves, but generally nice and clean. (Entire volume:) X, 822 pp. (Oersteds paper's in issue no. 28:) pp. 447-448. The exceedingly rare very first announcement of H. C. Ørsted’s landmark discovery of electromagnetism, predating his famous “Experimenta”-paper by at least a week. Publishing the present brief note allowed him to quickly claim priority for his discovery, which ensured that his work would be recognized and attributed to him before others potentially stole his discovery. The importance of the discovery of electromagnetism, one of the most pivotal moments in the history of science, can hardly be overestimated. Here, Ørsted laid both the theoretical and practical foundation for future works of Faraday, Maxwell, and Hertz. The offered paper was published in the 28th week of July, 1820 (No. 28 of the periodical), which means that it was published some time between July 11 and July 16, probably the 11th or 12th. The paper which made Oersted famous all over Europe was his Latin pamphlet "Experimenta circa effectum conflictus electrici in acun magneticam. Hafniæ, 1820", dated July 21, 1820. The Latin “Experimenta” was sent on the same day (according to Kirstine Meyer in "Scientific Life and Works of H.C. Ørsted") to learned bodies and scholars in all European countries. The communication offered here (in Danish) was published at least a week before "Experimenta". The essence of Oersted's discovery is detailed in the paper offered here, where he describes how the magnetic effect of an electric current-carrying wire was initially observed using an incandescent platinum wire. He then extended his experiments to non-incandescent wires made from various materials noting that the magnetic effect was influenced by the wire's dimensions. Among Oersted's papers (now in the holding of the Danish Royal Library), we have both a draft written in his own hand on acid-stained paper and a nearly identical version in another handwriting. These experimental notes form the basis of the present paper (which Kirstine Meyer refers to as "Supplement II"). In Supplements III and IV (dated July 15 and 21), Oersted further elaborates on his experiments with the wire in different positions relative to the magnet which became his “Experimenta”-paper. “Electromagnetism itself was discovered in the year 1820, by Professor Hans Christian Oersted, of the University of Copenhagen. Throughout his literary career, he adhered to the opinion, that the magnetical effects are produced by the same powers as the electrical. He was not so much led to this, by the reasons commonly alleged for this opinion, as by the philosophical principle, that all phenomena are produced by the same original power. … His researches upon this subject, were still fruitless, until the year 1820. In the winter of 1819–20, he delivered a course of lectures upon electricity, galvanism, and magnetism, before an audience that had been previously acquainted with the principles of natural philosophy. In composing the lecture, in which he was to treat of the analogy between electricity and magnetism, he conjectured, that if it were possible to produce any magnetical effect by electricity, this could not be in the direction of the current, since this had been so often tried in vain, but that it must be produced by a lateral action. This was strictly connected with his other ideas; for he did not consider the transmission of electricity through a conductor as an uniform stream, but as a succession of interruptions and reestablishments of equilibrium, in such a manner that the electrical powers in the current were not in quiet equilibrium, but in a state of continual conflict.… The plan of the first experiment was to make the current of a little galvanic trough apparatus, commonly used in his lectures, pass through a very thin platina wire, which was placed over a compass covered with glass. The preparations for the experiments were made, but some accident having hindered him from trying it before the lecture, he intended to defer it to another opportunity; yet during the lecture, the probability of its success appeared stronger, so that he made the first experiment in the presence of the audience. The magnetical needle, though included in a box, was disturbed; but as the effect was very feeble, and must, before its law was discovered, seem very irregular, the experiment made no strong impression on the audience [“Thermo-electricity,” in Edinburgh Encyclopaedia (1830), XVIII, 573–589; repr. in Oersted’s Scientific Papers, II, 356]. “We have now reached the spring of 1820. Ørsted understood that the “feeble” disturbance of the compass needle seen in his lecture demonstration was a genuinely important discovery. Other duties prevented a more detailed and quantitative investigation of this effect until the beginning of July 1820. Ørsted had new laboratory facilities and a more powerful galvanic apparatus that facilitated his measurements. Confident that his experiments would have a successful outcome, he gathered a group of six distinguished observers who would serve as witnesses of his experiments. (Their names and credentials were duly noted in the written description of his investigations.) He set about an exhaustive series of measurements aimed at documenting how the distance and orientation of a current-carrying wire affected the deflection of a compass needle. He made copious notes and drawings, many of which can be seen in Det Kongelige Bibliotek in Copenhagen. ” (Karen Jelved & Andrew D. Jackson, H. C. Ørsted and the Discovery of Electromagnetism, 2019). But before the above mentioned Latin paper was published - which within the same year was reprinted in England, France, Germany and Italy - Oersted made sure to secure his discovery and consequently eternal fame by publishing the present paper.OCLC only list three copies (Danish Royal Library, Houghton, Harvard, USA & British Library). Bibliotheca Danica IV: 535 (The periodical was published from 1811-36). Erslew "Almindeligt Forfatterlexicon", Bd. III, p. 688. (Dibner 61, PMM 282, Horblitt 3 b, Sparrow 152, Norman 1606 - all 4 only recording the later "Experimenta").

1870-1872. Folio-oblong (395 x 320 mm). Original brown half calf, recased - the original cloth (with gilt lettering to the front) has been expertly mounted on to the new boards, and most of the original gilt leather spine has been preserved over a perfectly matching new lovely brown half calf. "Tordenskjold / 1870 - 1873" in gilt lettering, partly worn of, to front board. End-papers renewed. 71 albumen print in various sizes and by various photographers (see below) mounted on 59 contemporary white cardboard leaves (measuring 370 x 310 mm), all re-hinged. The album was water-damaged at some point, but has been expertly and neatly restored and appears in overall very good condition with good tones. 1, Oval photo of Tordenskjold (205 x 60mm) 2, Photo of Tordenskjold (190 x 143 mm) 3, Crew aboard Tordenskjold (200 x 14 mm) 4, Crew aboard Tordenskjold (157 x 128 mm) 5, Crew and equipment aboard Tordenskjold (228 x 176 mm) 6, Naval officers about Tordenskjold (167 x 130 mm). 7, 8 small photos of various places on one plate (274 x 190 mm) 8, The harbor of Port Said. By Hippolyte Arnoux (247 x 190mm) 9, Muddigging machines in the channel of Port Said. By Hippolyte Arnoux. (245 x 190mm) 10, Port Said. By Hippolyte Arnoux. 11, Malta (262 x 207 mm) 12, Two photos of Malta (each measuring 134 x 120 mm) 13, Two photos of Gibraltar (Each measuring 148 x 114) 14, Deep Water Bay, Hong Kong (194 x 130 mm). 15, Two photos depicting telegraph-house and ships in Deep Water Bay (each measuring 150 x 112) 16, Boat with people. By Felice Beato, coloured (294 x 235 mm) 17, House next to river. By John Thomson, December 1870 (278 x 225 mm) 17, Seamen’s hospital in Hong Kong. (261 x 190 mm) 18, Hong Kong. (270 x 195 mm) 19, Hong Kong, by Floyd (270 x 192 mm) 20, Hong Kong, by Floyd (240 x 190 mm) 21, Two photos of sites in Hong Kong (each measuring 165 x 127 mm) 22, Five Persians in Hong Kong (215 x 244 mm) 23, Group of women in Hong Kong, (326 x 215 mm) 24, Two photos of Hong Kong harbour, one photo depicting “Cella” (182 x 105; 130 x 98 mm) 25, Villa at Canton. (264 x 190 mm) 26, Pagode in Xuexiu Park, Guangdong. By William Pryor Floyd. (195 x 246 mm) 27, Boats in Canton. William Pryor Floyd,(270 x 223 mm) 28, Pou-Ting-Qua’s Garden, Canton. By John Thomson. (289 x 230 mm) 29, Fields in Canton. (205 x 155 mm) 30, Houses in Canton. (267 x 210 mm) 31, Canton harbor. By John Thomson. (245 x 202 mm) 32, Boat on the Canton river. (274 x 204 mm) 33, Wall around Canton. (260 x 200 mm). 34, Boats in Canton (293 x 225) 35, Telegraphstation in Woosung. (150 x 110 mm) 36, Boats in Foochow. (287 x 232 mm) 37, Temple in Foochow. By John Thomson (190 x 237 mm) 38, Pagode in Foochow. Presumably by John Thomson. (287 x 220 mm). 39, Tomb of Fou Tcheou. By John Thomson. (290 x 225 mm). 40, Temple in Shanghai. (237 x 188 mm). 41, Shanghai. (232 x 176 mm) 42, Chaochow bridge, Kwangtung. By John Thomson. (266 x 204 mm). 43. Panorama of Nagasaki consisting of two photos. (371 x142 mm) 44, Two photos of Nagasaki. Felice Beato. (Each measuring 169 x 119 mm). 45, Two photos from Nagasaki. Presumably by Felice Beato. (Each measuring 165 x 118 mm) 46, Two photos from Nagasaki. Presumably by Felice Beato. (Each measuring 165 x 118 mm) 47, Temple in Nagasaki. Presumably by Felice Beato. (169 x 118 mm). 48, Photo of Japanese woman in kimono. By Felice Beato. (205 x 255 mm). 49, Two photos of officers in house in Yokohama. (162 x 125 mm). 50, The Abbot and Monks of Kushan Monastery. By John Thomson. (287 x 204 mm). 51, Wooden structure, presumably Nagasaki. Presumably by Felice Beato. (270 x 208 mm) 52, Pagode, presumably Nagasaki. Presumably by Felice Beato. (234 x 185 mm) 53, Cityscape with lake, presumably Nagasaki. Presumably by Felice Beato.. (280 x 228 mm). 54, Two photos, cemetery and stairs to temple. By Felice Beato. (Each measuring 168 x 118 mm). 55, People standing outside house, presumably Hong Kong. By John Thomson. (185 x 155 mm) 56, Guangzhou Great Norh Gate, Canton. By John Thomson (245 x 156 mm). 57, Two photos, one of the building of a telegraph station (presumably in Wladivostok) and a view of Wladivostok from the sea (154 x 123; 130 x 99 mm). 58, Seascape of two ships. (130 x 140 mm). 59, Ship laying for anchor. (170 x 123 mm) Exceedingly rare photo-album documenting the Danish vessel Tordenskjold’s mission in laying the very first telegraph cables in East Asia thereby connecting China and Japan to the global telegraph system. The album consists of photos taken aboard the vessel Tordenskjold, of Tordenskjold itself along with its crew, by an unknown photographer, and of photographs of the visited cities and surrounding areas by some of the finest photographers operating in East Asia at the time, such as John Thomson, William Floyd, Felice Beato and, in Egypt, Hippolyte Arnoux - all photographs presumably brought home by William Lund, Captain on board Tordenskjold. Through some of the earliest photos taken in China, Japan, and of the excavation of the Suez Canal, the present album depicts a pivotal moment in international relations and communications. Submarine telegraph cables were first brought to China by Danish magnate Carl Fredrick Tietgen (1829-1901), who in 1870 set up the Great Northern China and Japan Extension Company. The company was created to build and operate a telegraph cable connecting Hong Kong, Shanghai, and Japan, continuing on to Vladivostok on Russia's East coast. From Vladivostok, a cable ran along the Trans-Siberian Railway, linking Hong Kong to telegraph networks in Britain, Europe, and America. Tietgen fought off strong competition - primarily English-, and eventually won the concession to lay and operate new telegraph cables connecting Russia, China and Japan. Tietgen and his partners had embarked upon a grand and risky project. Undersea cables would need to be laid in waters that had not been sounded, cables were to be brought ashore on coasts where the prevailing conditions were not known, and it was uncertain whether the respective governments would grant permission. Everything – cables, stations, wire, and apparatus – was to be brought from Europe and had to function as a coherent system. Two chartered English steamships ‘Cella’ and ‘Great Northern’ were to transport and lay the cables, and the propeller-driven Danish frigate ‘Tordenskjold’ was to sound the waters near Nagasaki and Vladivostok, it had to also carry a relatively small amount of cables, and it was to keep away uninvited guests (of which there were plenty in the South China Sea). “As a small nation with negligible military resources, Denmark could provide a useful – politically neutral – centre for telegraph links to major European powers such as Britain, Russia and the emerging new power of Prussia. The Danes were able to utilize the technical know-how which had been accumulated with great difficulty, and occasionally heavy economic losses, in the preceding decades by British and American entrepreneurs. The competition between the Danish and British groups of telegraph entrepreneurs for first access to the Chinese market was preliminarily resolved when the directors of the two companies negotiated a secret agreement in May 1870. The Danish group had acquired an advantage in terms of timing by winning the Russian concession in 1869, and had to cover shorter distances by sea cables from Vladivostok to Nagasaki and Shanghai. But the British group had the advantage of better access to capital and a more extensive technical experience with submarine cable manufacture and operation. The essence of the agreement was that the line between Hong Kong and Shanghai should be established and operated by the Great Northern; the companies would share the income for telegrams which passed this section of the line and they would run offices in Hong Kong and Shanghai jointly. The agreement provided the Danes with assured landing rights in Hong Kong and with British diplomatic support for attempts to secure landing rights in China. Permission to bring submarine telegraph cables into Chinese treaty ports was obtained in 1870 from the Chinese Government (i.e., the office of foreign affairs, known as the Zongli Yamen) by the British Minister in Peking, Thomas Wade. At the same time, the Danish government had dispatched a diplomatic envoy, Chamberlain Julius Sick, at the Great Northern’s expense to China and Japan to obtain the necessary concessions. The cable between Hong Kong and Shanghai was laid in 1870–1871 with the assistance of the frigate Tordenskjold, which the Danish government had generously allocated to the task. The Great Northern had a great deal of technical problems with the cables they had bought from the British manufacturer since the quality of the insulation was not as good as expected. Therefore, the official opening of the line between Shanghai and Hong Kong was delayed until April 1871. During the remainder of that year the company struggled to finish cable sections from Shanghai to Nagasaki, and from Nagasaki to Vladivostok. Communication between Shanghai and Europe via these cables and the Russian Siberian lines was officially inaugurated on 1 January 1872.” (Erik Baark: Wires, Codes and People The Great Northern Telegraph Company in China 1870–90) The album covers and illustrates one on the most fascinating periods in the process of internationalization in the late modern period: The Suez Canal had just opened and ‘Tordenskjold’ was the first Danish ship to sail through it. The submarine cables linked the major hubs in East Asia to the Western world and helped facilitate an unprecedented growth in the region. Overall, the laying of the submarine cable in 1870-71 was a transformative event for East Asia in general. It played a critical role in the area's economic and social development, helping to make it the global commercial center it is today.

Riga, Hartknoch, 1781. 8vo. Comtemporary - possibly the original! - beige cardboard-binding with contemporary handwritten paper title-label to spine. Spine relaid, preserving the paper-label, with front hinge neatly reastored, perfectly matching the original paper. Smaller, hardly noticeable, restorations to back hinge and upper capital. All edges coloured in red. Front free end-paper with restorations to upper outer corner. Library-stamp (Stadt-Bibliothek Homburg) to recto and verso of title-page as well as blank part of f. a2r, all with deaccession-stamps over. Internally exceptionally nice, clean, and fresh, with hardly any spotting of any kind. Overall an excellent copy. (24), 856 pp. Rare first edition of Kant's monumental main work, arguably the most important work in the history of philosophy since Aristotle.The "Critique of Pure Reason" took Kant about a decade to write, and the work is of the utmost scarcity. It is due to this work that Kant became world famous as one of the three or four greatest philosophers of all times, and the work fundamentally changed the face of philosophy. With this work philosophy is finally provided with a new and comprehensive way of dealing systematically with the problems of philosophy. "In 1770 Kant became professor of logic and metaphysics, and at this point there is a sudden falling off in number of his publications. The cause of this became clear eleven years later when "The Critique of Pure Reason" appeared; and with it Kant became famous. Kant's great achievement was to conclude finally the lines on which philosophical speculation had proceeded in the eighteenth century, and to open up a new and more comprehensive system of dealing with the problems of philosophy... The influence of Kant is paramount to the critical method of modern philosophy. No other thinker has been able to hold with such firmness the balance between speculative and empirical ideas. His penetrating analysis of the elements involved in synthesis, and the subjective process by which these elements are realized in the individual consciousness, demonstrated the operation of "pure reason", and the simplicity and cogency of his arguments achieved immediate fame." (PMM 226). Hook & Norman 1197.PMM 226.Warda 59.

Paris, Gosselin, 1835-40. Lex 8vo. Bound in two excellent contemporary uniform black half calf bindings with blindstamped ornamentation and gilt lettering to spines. Only the slightest signs of wear to extremities. Some browning and brownspotting due to the paper quality, but overall in very nice condition. A few leaves in volume one with marginal markings. (4), XXIV, 365, (3) + (4), 455 pp. + folded, coloured map + (2), V, (3), 333, (1) + (4), 363 pp. An excellent set of the first edition of Tocqueville's monumental "Democracy in America", one of the most important texts in the history of political thought. Being the founding treatise of conservative liberalism and democracy in the 19th century, and generally "one of the most important texts on political literature" (PMM, p. 217), ""De la démocratie en Amérique"" is a classic of social sience, an analysis on the nature and institutions of American society. Beside the "Federalist Papers", it is considered one of the most significant works ever written on American political and civil life" (Books that made Europe p. 206). It is rare to find all four volumes contemporarily bound, and especially in as nice condition as here. Goldsmiths 28902-3.

Königsberg, Friedrich Nicolovius, 1793. 8vo. In the original bluish cardboardbinding, with handwritten title to spine. Binding very neatly restored at spine and extremities. Previous owner's inscriptions to front free end-paper and title-page as well as pasted-down front end-paper. One leaf with a tiny closed tear to blank outer margin and some leaves with a single hole to the blank outer margin. Light pencil-underlinings and -markings to a few leaves. Internally clean and fresh. Printed on very heavy paper (about three times the thickness of the normal paper) and with wide margins. XX, (2), 296, (2, -errata) pp. Housed in a beautiful marbled half calf box in pastiche-style, with splendidly gilt spine and gilt morrocco title-label. Extremely rare presentation-copy inscribed by the recipient, a close friend of Kant, Johann Gottfried Hasse, to whom Kant gave the present copy. The copy is one of no more than perhaps five copies printed on special paper of the first edition of Kant's "Religion Within the Boundaries of Mere Reason", the seminal work in which he develops his religion of reason and most fully accounts for his philosophy of religion.This magnificent copy is completely unique. Not only is one of only four or five presentation-copies printed on special paper - perhaps less - that Kant himself requested from the printer, to be given to a handful of recipients; we also know to whom it was given, namely his close friend and professor of religion Johann Gottfreind Hasse. And Hasse has not only put his ownership signature in the book, he has also noted that it was given to him by Kant in the year of publication ("Donum auctoris 1793").We have not been able to find information anywhere about the presentation-copies of "Religion innerhalb der Grenzen der blossen Vernunft" specifically. There is nothing in the Kant-correspondence about that at all, and no letters to/from the publisher about them have been preserved. But we know that Kant commissioned four or five copies of "Critik der Urtheilskraft" on special paper and four copies of "Critik der reinen Vernunft". The present copy is clearly on special paper as well (about three times the size of copies on normal paper), so even though it is not mentioned anywhere, it is fair to assume that Kant also ordered about a handful copies of "Religion..." to be printed on special paper as well. However, this number might be smaller. As opposed to the other two books that we know he commissioned these copies of, the publication of "Religion..." was caught up in a controversy over censorship, and Kant was given a reprimand in the name of the Prussian emperor, Friedrich Wilhelm II. Kant was forced to pledge not to publish on matters of religion. Furthermore, copies of the "Religion..." on special paper seem not to have appeared anywhere, as opposed to the very few copies of the two other works that have surfaced; so all in all, there is absolutely no reason to think that he should have commissioned more than four or five copies of this book either. The inscription to the front free end-paper is in Hasse's hand and reads "(Donum auctoris 1793.)/ J.G. Hasse". The name of Hasse has been crossed out by the later owner, who has written his name underneath "N. Grosch...(?)/ stud. Theol./ Som[mer]. Semest[er]. [18]05" and on the title-page.The Königsberg professor J.G. Hasse (1759-1806) was a close friend of Kant and a frequent guest at his dinner table. He was a then famous German evangelist theologian and orientalist. After having graduated from the University of Jena in 1784, he became assistant professor at the faculty of philosophy there. Due to his very respected publications within science of religion, he became professor of oriental languages and later professor of theology, which is the position he possessed, when Kant gave him the present copy of his own main work on religion. A few years later, in 1801, he took over Kant's position at the academic Senate, after Kant retired from academic life. And in the last years of Kant's life, Hasse grew even closer to him. He was a frequent guest in his home and a close friend. Hasse was furthermore one of the first to publish a biography of Kant. This biography became particularly famous, because it was written by someone in the inner circle of friends. There is no doubt that Kant had tremendous respect for the renowned professor of religion, to whom he gave one of the only four or five copies printed on special paper of his own definitive work on religion. This is presumably the best presentation- or association-copy of a Kant-book that one can hope to come across. Warda: 141.

Frankfurt a. M., 1845. 8vo. Contemporary black half calf. Professionally rebacked. Title-page somewhat dusty and re-hinged. VIII, 335, (1) pp. Incredibly scarce first edition of one the most significant political publications of the 19th century, the first joint work of Marx and Engels, leading to a life-long association that would change the world. "The Holy Family" is one of the most fundamental works in the history of communism and contains the first formulations of a number of fundamental theses of dialectical and historical materialism. For instance, it is here that the idea of mass/the people as the actual maker of the history of mankind is put forth for the first time and here that Marx shows that communism is the logical conclusion of materialistic philosophy.The work became incredibly influential and caused great uproar. Lenin claimed that it was this work that laid the foundations for scientific revolutionary materialist socialism.At the end of August, 1844, Engels passed through Paris,on his way to Manchester. It was here that he met Marx (then for the second time).Marx suggested that the two of them should write a critique of Young Hegelian trend of thought then very popular in academic circles. They decided to co-author the foreword and divided up the other sections between them. Engels had already finished his chapters before leaving Paris after 10 days. Marx had the larger share of work, which he completed by the end of November 1844.The general title, "The Holy Family", was added at the suggestion of the publisher Lowenthal, being a sarcastic reference to the Bauer brothers and their supporters." "The Holy Family, or Critique of Critical Critique. Against Bruno Bauer and Co." is the first joint work of Karl Marx and Frederick Engels. At the end of August 1844 Marx and Engels met in Paris and their meeting was the beginning of' their joint creative work in all fields of theoretical and practical revolutionary activity. By this time Marx and Engels had completed the transition from idealism to materialism and from revolutionary democratism to communism. The polemic The Holy Family was written in Paris in autumn 1844. It reflects the progress in the formation of Marx and Engels's revolutionary materialistic world outlook.In "The Holy Family" Marx and Engels give a devastating criticism of the subjectivist views of the Young Hegelians from the position of militant materialists. They, also criticize Hegel's own idealistic philosophy: giving credit for the rational element in his dialectics, they criticize the mystic side of it.The Holy Family formulates a number of fundamental theses of dialectical and historical materialism. In it Marx already approaches the basic idea of historical materialism - the decisive role of the mode of production in the development of society. Refuting the idealistic views of history which had dominated up to that time, Marx and Engels prove that of themselves progressive ideas can lead society only beyond the ideas of the old system and that "in order to carry out ideas men are needed who dispose of a certain practical force." (See p. 160 of the present edition.) The proposition put forward in the book that the mass, the people, is the real maker of the history of mankind is of paramount importance. Marx and Engels show that the wider and the more profound a change taking place in society is the more numerous Me mass effecting that change will Re Lenin especially stressed the importance of this thought and described it as one of the most profound and most important theses of historical materialism.The Holy Family contains the almost mature view of the historic role of the proletariat as the class which, by virtue of its position in capitalism, "can and must free itself" and at the same time abolish all the inhuman conditions of life of bourgeois society, for "not in vain does" the proletariat "go through the stern but steeling school of labour. The question is not what this or that proletarian, or even the whole of the proletariat at the moment considers as its aim. The question is what the proletariat is, and what, consequent on that being, it will be compelled to do." (pp. 52-53.)A section of great importance is "Critical Battle against French Materialism" in which Marx, briefly outlining the development of materialism in West-European philosophy, shows that communism is the logical conclusion of materialistic philosophy.The Holy Family was written largely under the influence of the materialistic views of Ludwig Feuerbach, who was, responsible to a great extent for Marx's and Engels's transition from idealism to materialism; the work also contains elements of the criticism of Feuerbach's metaphysical and contemplative materialism given by Marx in spring 1845 in his Theses on Feuerbach. Engels later defined the place of The Holy Family in the history of Marxism when he wrote: "The cult of abstract man, which formed the kernel of Feuerbach's new religion, had to be replaced by the science of real men and of their historical development. This further development of Feuerbach's standpoint beyond Feuerbach was inaugurated by Marx in 1845 in The Holy Family." (F. Engels, Ludwig Feuerbach and the End of Classical German Philosophy.)The Holy Family formulates some of the basic principles of Marxist political economy. In contrast to the Utopian Socialists Marx bases the objective inevitability of the victory of communism on the fact that private property in its economic motion drives itself towards its downfall.The Holy Family dates from a period when the process of the formation of Marxism was not yet completed. This is reflected in the terminology used by Marx and Engels. Marxist scientific terminology was gradually elaborated and defined by Marx and Engels as the formation and development of their teaching progressed." (Introduction to the work by Foreign Languages Publishers)"The book made something of a splash in the newspapers. One paper noted, that it expressed socialist views since it criticised the "inadequacy of any half-measures directed at eliminating the social ailments of our time." The conservative press immediately recognized the radical elements inherent in its many arguments. One paper wrote that, in The Holy Family, "every line preaches revolt... against the state, the church, the family, legality, religion and property." It also noted that "prominence is given to the most radical and the most open communism, and this is all the more dangerous as Mr. Marx cannot be denied either extremely broad knowledge or the ability to make use of the polemical arsenal of Hegel's logic, what is customarily called 'iron logic.'Lenin would later claim this work laid the foundations for what would develop into a scientific revolutionary materialist socialism." (Marx Archive).

(Presumably Yemen), 1772. 4to. Bound in a contemporary full leather binding with flap. Boards and flap with blindtooled ornamentation. Spine worn and worn through at hinges. Back board loose at top 2/3, but still attached. A bit of worming to boards and overall signs of wear to leather. Internally well preserved, with occasional light discolouration. 170 ff. with numerous additional smaller pages of notes inserted throughout, several in different colours (pink and blue). Text throughout is written in Naskh script, in a single column. Mostly written in black ink with occasional colorful highlights. Passages of core texts are overlined, generally in red but occasionally in black or green. The first text varies between approximately 18 and 33 lines per page and is occasionally written diagonally (for example, fol. 31rv); the second is consistent at 9 lines per page with considerable interlinear notes. Portions of the text are copied by the primary scribe on smaller pages, for example ff. 70r-79v, to be distinguished from the small pages of notes that were likely inserted later. The title and author of the first text are presented in attractive green and red calligraphy on f. 1r. The scribe’s name is also written in calligraphy on f. 1r and 126r, in addition to the colophon on f. 168v, but the name has been systematically erased in all three locations, for unknown reasons. According to the colophon on f. 168v, the manuscript was copied on the first Friday of Rabi? al-Thani 1186 AH, equivalent to 3 July 1772 CE. As noted above, the scribe’s name has been erased. The style of the script and decorations suggest that it was most likely copied in or near Yemen. Texts: Fol. 1r-126v: Da'ud al-Ashkashi’s supercommentary ?ashiyah ?alá Shar? al-Mara? on A?mad Dikquz’s (15th c.) commentary on A?mad ibn Mas?ud’s (13th c.) grammatical treatise Mara? al-arwa?, on Arabic morphology. Fol. 129v-168v: ?usam al-Din al-Kati’s (d. 1358/9) commentary Shar? al-Isaghuji on Athir al-Din al-Abhari’s (d. 1265) Isaghuji. Miscellaneous notes and poems appear on front and rear flyleaves, on pages between the two texts, in margins, between lines, and on small inserted pages. Many of these paratexts are in the hand of the primary scribe. The notes discuss numerous topics, but especially grammar and logic, the subjects of the two main texts. Marginal and interlinear notes generally comment on specific passages in the main text. A few notes, especially on fol. 128r, are in Turkish, attesting to Ottoman influence. The front pastedown has a short story or riddle about Muslims and nonbelievers on a ship. Unrecorded Arabic manuscript containing two highly important treatises, the first of which is of the utmost scarcity (only three other manuscript copies of the work are known), and the other of which is of the utmost importance to the development of logic in the Arab world. Da'ud al-Ashkashi’s supercommentary “?ashiyah ?alá Shar? al-Mara?” on A?mad Dikquz’s (15th c.) commentary on A?mad ibn Mas?ud’s (13th c.) grammatical treatise “Mara? al-arwa?”, on Arabic morphology, is extremely rare, and the present manuscript is only the fourth known copy of the work known to exist. Being unrecorded, this manuscript contributes significantly to preserving an old Arabic work of logic and grammar that may otherwise have been lost and may very well shed new light on a text that is now extremely obscure. The core texts are relatively well known, but al-Ashkashi’s work is extremely obscure. The spelling of his name is uncertain and virtually nothing is known about his life. There is one copy of this text in the Municipal Library of Alexandria (Egypt) and two at Princeton University (Incipit:????? ??? ???? ?? ?????? ?????? ??????? ????? ?????? ????????), but so far, no scholars seem to have worked seriously with the work to determine what it may reveal. Husam al-Din al-Kati’s (d. 1358/9) commentary on Athir al-Din al-Abhari’s (d. 1265) “Isaghuji” (Isagoge) is a well-known, popular, and very influential commentary, of which several copies are known in institutions. Although al-Abhari’s Isaghuji is often described as a commentary on Porphyry’s text, it is really more of an imitation, or a text in the same genre. This extremely influential commentary constitutes an introduction to logic in the style of Porphyrios’ famous “Isagoge” of Porphyry. Being extremely popular and influential, numerous manuscripts and supercommentaries of it are known. (Incipit: ????? ??? ?????? ????? ??????? ????? ?????? ????). Not much is known about Husam-al-Din-Katia (who is sometimes referred to as al-Rumi) either, but we know he was a native Anatolian. Furthermore, it was his commentary (and glosses) on al-Abhari's Isagoge that became the most popular and the standard accompanying text throughout the Ottoman period. “This work is a super-commentary or gloss on Athir al-Din al-Abhari (d. 663/1264 or 1265)’s Isaghuji, a brief collection of definitions of logic terms named after its inspiration, the Neoplatonist Porphyry (Furfuriyus, d. 309 AD)’s Isagoge. Abhari’s work which only covers the Categories of Porphyry’s work, served as the standard introductory text for the study of logic in madrasas across the Islamic world until modern times, with an emphasis on elementary semantics through the syllogism. Of the many commentaries and glosses on al-Abhari’s Isaghuji, ?üsamüddin ?asan el-Kati’s was one of the most popular, and continued to be the accompanying text by which al-Abhari’s Isaghuji was studied throughout the Ottoman period. In his autobiographical entry, Tasköprüzade mentions having studied the Isagoge via ?üsamüddin el-Kati (Hüsam-i Kati)’s commentary. Well known super glosses (?ashiya) on ?üsamüddin el-Kati’s commentary were produced by Mevlana ?araca A?mad (d. 854/1450) ???? ???? ??????, Mu?yi al-Din Mu?ammad al-Barda?i (d. 927/1521) ???? ?? ???? ??????? and Mu?yi al-Din al-Taliji (al-Talishi) ??? ????? ??????? ??????? (?ashiya ?ala´ shar? ?usam al-Din al-Kati, ????? ??? ???? ????? ?????? , composed in the year 1085). These works tend to be bound together in manuscript codices.” (Uiversity of St. Andrews: The Islamisation of Anatolia). The two works bound here on logic and grammar have clearly been thoroughly studied, both by the scribe, whose name has sadly been erased, and by later readers. The comments almost constitute a work in its own, and there may be much new material to be found here, for the serious scholar. This kind of supercommentary is extremely interesting and will reveal a lot about the development of logic in the Arab world over the numerous centuries that this supercommentary has come to cover - documenting an entire tradition of one of the most important disciplines from the middle ages. As of now, the present manuscript remains univestigated, as do several of this type whose contents are not just straightforward.

A Londres, Chez Fletcher Gyles, dans Holborn, 1755. 12mo (binding ab. 17x10 cm). Bound in a very nice, contemporary full mottled calf binding with five raised bands to richly gilt spine. All edges of boards with a single gilt line-decoration. Beautiful marbled edges. Very neat and professional restorations to hinges and upper capital. A single tiny worm-hole to middle of spine and a supeficial, barely noticeable, crack down the middle. Old paper-label to lower compartment of spine. One corner a bit worn. Small ex libris to inside of front board, ex libris stamp to half-title. Contemporary owner's name crossed out at title-page. Internally exceptionally nice and clean. Small worm-hole to inner margin of about 60 leaves towards the end, only just touching the edge of a very few letters, otherwise not affecting lettering at all. (4), 430, (6, -Table des Chapitres) pp. The exceedingly rare first edition of one of the most important and influential works of economic literature, as well as being one of the scarcest. The author is considered a pioneer of economic theory who anticipated and influenced the likes of Smith, Malthus, Turgot, Quesnay, Mirabeau, etc., etc. and this, his only published work (!), is considered the first actual work of theoretical economics, an absolutely ground-breaking work which by Jevons was characterized as the "Cradle of Political Economy".Richard Cantillon (1680-1734), though his name is probably of Spanish descent, was an Irishman, and he spent most of his life in France. He was a man of secrecy, and little is known about his life and work. He wrote his only published book, the seminal "Essai sur la Nature du Commerce en Général" between 1730 and 1734 but never saw it published, as he was murdered in 1734 (when he was robbed and his house was set on fire, presumably by his former cook whom he had dismissed ten days earlier), and the book had to await posthumous publication. There is evidence that Cantillon wrote much more than this single work, but the "Essai" seems to be the only one that survived the fire in his house on the night of his death. The work was finally published for the first time in French, anonymously, in 1755, and it is not known whether Cantillon actually wrote the manuscript in French and that the mention of translation on the title-page is false (e.g. to avoid French censorship), or whether he wrote the manuscript in English and translated it into French himself; in all cases, the work circulated in French manuscript form, before it was published, and an English manuscript has never been found. "In any case, the "Essai" is a work of genious, and it was undoubtedly written by Cantillon" (Brewer, p. 19). After having had an immense influence on the Physiocrats and the French School, directly influencing Anne-Robert-Jacques Turgot , François Quesnay, Jean-Baptiste Say, Victor de Riquetti marquis de Mirabeau, Adam Smith, etc., the "Essay…" soon sank into obscurity only to be rediscovered by Jevons in the 1880'ies, and throughout the late 19th and the 20th century it has become increasingly evident that the present work is indeed a pioneering work, which directly and indirectly influenced almost all later economic theory. "Richard Cantillon was a key figure in the early development of economics. He was one of the first to see economy as a single inter-connected system and to try to explain how it worked, and the first to present a coherent theory of prices and income distribution. He made major contributions to monetary theory and to the theory of balance of payments adjustment. The Physiocrats, writing only a few years after the (delayed) publication of Cantillon's one surviving work, the "Essai sur la nature du commerce en general", took many of their ideas very directly from it. Adam Smith probably learnt from Cantillon's "Essai" , as well as from the Physiocrats. There is thus a direct line of intellectual descent from Cantillon's "Essai" to Smith's "Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations", and to modern economics." (Brewer, p. 1). "Cantillon predated the Physiocrats in two ways. First, he used the term "entrepreneur" and emphasized the role of this figure in economic life. Business people, Cantillon said commit themselves to definite payments in expectation of uncertain receipts; this risk taking is remunerated by profit, which competition tends to reduce to the normal value of the entrepreneurs' services. Second, writing a generation before Quesnay constructed his "Tableau Economique", Cantillon stated: "Cash is therefore necessary, not only for the Rent of the landlord... but also for the City merchandise consumed in the country... The circulation of this money takes place when the Landlords spend in detail in the City the rents which the farmers have paid them in lump sums, and when the Entrepreneurs of the Cities, Butchers, Bakers, Brewers, etc. collect little by little the same money to buy from the Farmers in lump sums Cattle, Wheat, Barley, etc."Cantillon developed a theory of value and price. His emphasis on the role of land and labor, on supply and demand, and on the fluctuations of price around intrinsic value makes him a direct forerunner of classical economists... Cantillon anticipated classical economic thought in several other ways. For example, he stated, "Men multiply like mice in a barn if they have unlimited Means of Subsistence." The classical economist Thomas Malthus held a similar view. Also, Cantillon analyzed interest as a reward for the risk taken in lending, based on profits that the entrepreneurs can make by borrowing and investing... In addition, Cantillon focused on the productivity of a nation's resources..." (Brue, pp. 59-60).See: Anthony Brewer, Richard Cantillon: Pioneer of Economic Theory, 1992Stanley L. Brue, The Evolution of Economic Thought. Sixth Edition, 2000Kress: 5423; Einaudi: 846; Goldsmiths’ 8989; Higgs, Bibliography of Economics, 938.

St. Petersburg, 1869. 8vo. Extract in contemporary or slightly later blank blue paper wrappers. Wrappers with neat professional restorations from verso, barely noticeable. A very fine and clean copy. Pp. 60-77. Exceedingly scarce first printing of Mendeleev’s seminal Russian Chemical Society-paper of March 1869, presenting for the first time the periodical table of the elements. “His newly formulated law was announced before the Russian Chemical Society in March 1869 with the statement “elements arranged according to the value of their atomic weights present a clear periodicity of properties.” Mendeleev’s law allowed him to build up a systematic table of all the 70 elements then known.” (Encycl. Britt.) “Early in 1869, Russian chemist Dmitrii Mendeleev was in a predicament many people are familiar with—he was facing a deadline. He had delivered the first volume of his inorganic chemistry textbook to his publisher but was struggling with how to organize the second volume. This struggle would culminate in a remarkable discovery, a system that classified all of the chemical elements. In March 1869, Mendeleev delivered a full paper to the Russian Chemical Society spelling out the most significant aspect of his system, that characteristics of the elements recur at a periodic interval as a function of their atomic weight. This was the first iteration of the periodic law.” (OSU) Mendeleev’s system was not yet perfect when it appeared in 1869, but it would prove to be one of the most fundamental of scientific laws, one that would hold true through new discoveries and against all challenges. Mendeleev not only recognized that what seemed to be a randomness of the elements fitted into a system, he also suggested that the gaps in his system would later be filled with elements yet unknown to the scientific world. The discovery of new elements in the 1870s fulfilled several of Mendeleev’s predictions and brought increased interest to the periodic system, making it an invaluable tool for research. “He had such faith in the validity of the periodic law that he proposed changes to the generally accepted values for the atomic weight of a few elements and predicted the locations within the table of unknown elements together with their properties. At first the periodic system did not raise interest among chemists. However, with the discovery of the predicted elements, notably gallium in 1875, scandium in 1879, and germanium in 1886, it began to win wide acceptance. Gradually the periodic law and table became the framework for a great part of chemical theory. By the time Mendeleev died in 1907, he enjoyed international recognition and had received distinctions and awards from many countries.” (Encycl. Britt.) Horblit 74 Barchas 1412 [Dibner 48 - citing the German translation of 1891]

(Edinburgh, 1839-41). Elephant-folio. In the two original half-calf-folders with green leather-spines and pattern-stamped cloth boards; gilt title and author to front boards. Remains of the original green cloth-ties. Some wear to spines, especially at capitals. 12 magnificent hand-coloured plates with one leaf of text for each, the first, 8th and 11th text-leaves with an engraved illustration measuring 22x13,5 cm. (depicting "Stake Nets of the Solway Firth", "Poke Nets of the Solway Firth", and "Young States of S. Truttafrom Mr. Shaw's Ponds" - the last beautifully hand-coloured); all leaves laid in loose, as originally published, and all plates with the original tissue-guards. Plates and text-leaves measuring ab. 64,5 x 49 cm The exceedingly scarce first printing of this monumental work on British salmon, one of the finest books on fishes ever produced. The work is generally considered the Audubon of salmons; the quality of the plates is considered unsurpassed and the scientific research that lies behind it makes it of the utmost importance to the study of salmons."Jardine was a keen sportsman, expert with rod and gun, and followed his hounds. He was not averse to making deer which strayed from his neighbour's estate onto Jerdine Hall land pay for their trespass. He was also an amateur artist, working in watercolours, and exhibited, as an honorary member, at the Scottish Royal Academy, as well as other art exhibitions in Dumfries. When writing his books, he learned to etch, to draw on wood blocks for wood engraving, to lithograph and to use a variant of lithography called papyrography. One of the finest books of fishes ever printed was Jardine's "The British Salmonidae", for which he did the drawings and etchings himself.Jardine was the foremost ichthyologist in Scotland, perhaps even in the United Kingdom, in the nineteenth century. He was a fine fisherman and fished the Annan, which flowed through his grounds in Dumfriesshire, and the best stretches of the Tweed when he lived for three years at St Boswells, Roxburghshire. One of his aims was to establish his life cycles of the salmon and the sea trout, for which he tagged fish in a specially constructed pool at Jardine Hall, and visited the fisheries at Perth where experiments were carried out. His reputation as a fly fisherman was well known, and he enjoyed many days of sport with other eminent naturalists such as P.J. Selby, John Gould, Richard Parnall, as well as friends and neighbours. His interest in fishing and fisheries led to his appointment as one of the royal commissioners to the Salmon Fisheries Survey of England and Wales in 1860." (Jackson and Davis, "Sir William Jardine. A Life in Natural History", p. X). Jardine was also famous for his huge museum collections, among these a very extensive collection of skins. In the late 1820'ies the collections began to encompass vertebrates other than birds, and it is from this time that his scientific interests in fish began to develop. Although Jardine's interest had always extended beyond the British Isles and he also received many specimens of fish from abroad, his main interest remained British fish, and especially those of the salmon family, which greatly fascinated him. "Some of these were little known, and even in the early nineteenth century were considered rare." (Jackson & Davis, p. 57). From around the beginning of the 1830'ies Jardine was on the lookout for more specimens and further advice, and he began corresponding with the famous Cornish naturalist and ichthyologist, Jonathan Couch. He also began corresponding with other respected scientists and correspondents and with much support from all of these, Jardine devoted more and more of his time and effort to investigating fish, especially the salmon family. In 1834 he began a tour of Sutherland that came to have a significant impact on his studies of the salmon family. He brought Selby with him, and due to their many notes, drawings, and observations, Jardine now had the confidence to present a lecture, in which he revised the scientific status of the Salmonidae discovered on their excursion, to the British Association, which he held in Edinburgh during the late summer of 1834. It is this lecture that established his reputation as an ichthyologist, and it is evident from many sources of the period that he was now much admired within this field. "[w]hen he attended the British Association meeting in Newcastle in August 1838, not only did he chair the Botany and Zoology section, but he also gave a lecture on the Salmonidae of Scotland. By this time he was bringing to fruition a much more ambitious project, with the preparation of the plates for the "Illustrations of British Salmonidae, with Descriptions", which was published in two parts in 1839 and 1841." (Jackson & Davis, p. 60).Jardine had originally planned to work on the project with Selby and had already suggested him this in 1834. Selby supported him throughout the project, but eventually Jardine undertook the work alone. The illustrations of the work were to comprise the salmons of both England and Ireland, and in a letter to T.C. Eyton he indicates many of his thoughts concerning the production as well as his continued interest in fishes around the world; he describes his wish to illustrate the specimens life-size, although that would restrict sales, his and Lizar's frustrations of finding a skilled enough colourist, as well as his view on drawing the fish directly at the edge of the water in order to capture the iridescence and colours of the fish straight away, so that they would not have had time to fade, which they do rapidly after death. Among other things he writes "The sale will of course be limited & one to my list is important. If it will clear its way I shall be satisfied so far as the plates are concerned... but Illustrations of the size which I have chosen are always attended with more expense in the publication than those of a less [?] size. All the drawings have been made at the waters edge, and I am sanguine that the work will be creditable to all both artist and engraver... The 1st number will be out in a very short time it is all prepared except the colouring which we have been annoyed about in the north. We have however now selected Mr. Gould' colourer [Gabriel Bayfield] in London, & from what he has put out in these departments we have considerable reliance." (See Jackson & Davis, p. 61).Thus, the plates were etched by Jardine himself and coloured by Bayfield. The first number of plates were sent to Bayfiled for colouring in July 1838, and the first part of "Illustrations" was advertised as published in August 1839, whereas the second was ready in September 1841. "It is not known how many copies were eventually sold, but Jardine (who had exclusive rights to the publication) hinted in 1844 that "There are only 70 copies coloured" - and indication that few coloured copies were to hand after supplying copies to the subscribers. Lizars had been responsible for producing and distributing the books, but when his establishment in Edinburgh closed, Jardine transferred the stock of uncoloured plates to Jardine Hall. Even in the 1860s there was a demand for copies of the Salmonidae, and also for individual plates, and the faithful Bayfield was asked once more to act as colourist for these. Some indication of the price of the complete work is given by Jardine in a letter to John Gould, asking him to deliver a copy to Pickering in Picadilly and asking him "to take payment for £5 16". Initially prices of £2 12s 6d (coloured) and £1 11s 6d (plain) per part had been suggested, which had risen to £3 3s 0d by August 1839. The first estimates also suggested that an initial run of some 50 copies was sensible until the demand could be gauged, and noted that the cost of colouring each impression was 1s 6d." (Jackson & Davis, p. 62).The work is now considered one of the finest books on fish ever produced, both due to its great artistic value and its "meticulous and painstaiking scientific research" (p. 62); besides its scientific value and scientific importance, it is of the greatest scarcity with no more than 70 copies (at the most) produced, and many fewer that have survived. Nissen 2092; not in Wood;

Kjöbenhavn, 1837-1847. Bound in one nice contemporary half calf binding with blindstamped and gilt ornamentation to spine. Gilding vague, also the gilt title. Minor bumping to corners. Internally a bit of scattered brownspotting, but overall unusually nice, clean, and fresh. A truly excellent copy. See collation below. A magnificent set - unusually nice and clean and bound together in a contemporary binding, which is almost never the case - of the first edition of this exceedingly rare collection of Andersen's earliest fairy tales. This legendary fairy tale-collection that created the fairy tale-genre and brought Andersen international fame, consists in six parts that together make up two volumes. As with most of the other few existing copies, the present set is a mixture of issues (though here, merely two of the parts are in second issue). "With the passing of each year, Andersen's genious brought forth new "wonder stories", and the fame he had so desperately craved and striven for became a reality. Little did he know in the spring of 1835, when he all but had to beg his publisher to accept these remarkable tales, that one day they would make him immortal. And little did the critics, nearly all of whom advised him to give up his "experiment" and devote himself to his other writings, ever dream that they would live to see him gain world acclaim for these tales. For almost a hundred years now, generation after generation has been brought up on Andersen's stories. Take the English-speaking world, for instance. Since the first appearance of Andersen's Fairy Tales in London and New York, in 1846, over seven hundred different editions, including dozens of varied translations, illustrated by more than a hundred different artists, have been published in the United States alone. Indeed, Andersen's stories will live on as classics - as much part of our civilization as the two primary educational factors, reading and writing." (Jean Hersholt, p. 27). Due to the fact that the six little pamphlets together, printed in different years, all have their own title-pages, half-titles, contents, etc. and that there were then also printed all of this for each volume of three (times two) together, the book binders almost always removed several of these "extra" leaves, as they seemed superfluous. It was never the intention of the publisher that the single half-titles, title-pages or tables of contents be preserved. However, due to the many different laves that were deemed "superfluous" or not, all existing sets of these two little volumes have their individual mix-up of half-titles, titles, and tables of contents. Thus, no copies are known to exist with all leaves present. "During Andersen's lifetime 162 of his Fairy Tales were published, but the scarcest and most difficult to obtain are these six little pamphlets. We do not know exactly how many, or how few, copies were printed, but we do know that no copy with all the title pages and tables of contents has ever been offered for sale by any dealer or at any auction. To my knowledge, only five or six complete copies of the first printings (1835-1842) still exist. Even the second printing of the six pamphlets in their entirety (1842-1847) is exceedingly scarce and difficult to obtain." (Jean Hersholt).Here follows a collation including mention of issues and lacunae: Vol. I: VIII pp. (joint title-page (dated 1837) for the three parts, contents-leaf for all three parts, and preface ("Til de ældre Læsere"). The joint half-title merely stating "Eventyr for Børn" has not been bound in.First Part: 61 (including the title-page), (3) (blank verso of p. 61 and the contents-leaf for part one) pp. The half-title has not been bound in. Second issue, 1842.Second Part: 76 (including half-title and title-page), 2 (contents-leaf for part two) pp. + 1 f. (blank). Second issue, 1844.Third Part: 60 (including half-title and title-page) pp., 2 (contents-leaf for part two) pp. + 1 f. (blank). First issue, 1837.Vol. II: 3 ff. (joint title-page, dedication-leaf (for Mrs. Heiberg), contents-leaf for all three parts). First Part: 58 (including title-page), (2) (contents-leaf for part one) pp. The half-title has not been bound in. First issue, 1838.Second Part: 53 (including title-page), (3) (verso of p. 53 and contents-leaf for part two) pp. The half-title has not been bound in. First issue, 1839.Third Part: 49 (including title-page), (3) (verso of p. 49 and contents-leaf for part three) pp. The half-title has not been bound in. First issue, 1842..This is one of the most complete copies we have ever seen, as the only leaves not withbound are some of the half-titles. Usually a lot more leaves have been left out by the binders, and it's even rare to find copies that have all title-pages. The separate contents-leaves are very rarely found preserved in copies that have the joint contents-leaves, and the blank leaves are almost never withbound. BFN: 266; Hersholt: 23; PMM: 299.

Berlin, Franz Duncker, 1859. 8vo. Nice contemporary hafl calf with gilt lettering to spine. A bit of wear to extremities, markings after old label to front board and signs of vague damp staining to front board. A mostly faint damp stain to outer inner corner throrughout, but otherwise very nice. Title-page a bit dusty. Old library number (872) to front free end-paper and top of title-page and marginal pencil-annotations to a number of leaves. VIII, (2), 170 pp. Title-page with the ownership-signature of Alexander Appolonovich Manuilov to top of title-page and binding with his initials "A. M." in gold to the fot of spine. Scarce first edition, in a magnificent association-copy, of the groundbreaking work, in which Marx first presents his revolutionizing theories of capitalism, forming the foundation for his main work "The Capital", which appeared eight year later. It is also in this milestone of political and economic thought that Marx presents his economic interpretation of history for the first time.Alexander Appolonovich Manuilov (1861-1929) was a Russian economist and politician, famous not only as one of the founding members of the Constitutional Democratic party (known as the Kadets), but also as the Russian translator of Marx' "Zur Kritik...", i.e. the present work. "Manuilov graduated from the law department of the University of Novorossiia (Odessa, 1883). He began scholarly and pedagogical work in political economy in 1888. In 1901 he became head of a subdepartment at Moscow University, becoming assistant rector in 1905 and serving as rector from 1908 to 1911. He was dismissed by the tsarist government for attacking the "extremes" of Stolypin’s agrarian legislation. In the 1890’s he was a liberal Narodnik (Populist), later becoming a Constitutional Democrat (Cadet) and a member of the Central Committee of the Cadet Party. Manuilov’s draft on agrarian reform (1905) was the basis for the Cadets’ agrarian program. V. I. Lenin sharply criticized Manuilov, calling him one of "the bourgeois liberal friends of the muzhik who desire the ‘extension of peasant land ownership’ but do not wish to offend the landlords" (Poln. sobr. soch., 5th ed., vol. 11, p. 126, note).At the beginning of his scholarly career Manuilov accepted the labor theory of value. In 1896 he translated K. Marx’ work A Contribution to the Criticism of Political Economy (Zur Kritik der Politischen Oekonomie). During the years of reaction he espoused subjectivist and psychological views in political economy. In 1917 he was minister of education of the Provisional Government. After the October Revolution in 1917 he emigrated but soon returned and cooperated with Soviet power. He participated in the orthographic reform (1918). In 1924 he became a member of the board of Gosbank (State Bank). He taught in higher educational institutions. Changing to Marxist positions and relying on Lenin’s works, he criticized the revisionists and neo-Narodniks on the agrarian question." (Encycl. Britt.).For many years, the exclusive focus on "Das Kapital" meant that the "Kritik" was overlooked. Since the beginning of the 1960's, however, scholars have become increasingly aware of its importance as the blueprint for the social and economic theory Marx shall go on to develop (see for example Raymond Aron, "Le Marxisme de Marx", 1962). It is here that Marx outlines the research programme to which he shall devote the rest of his working life. He himself described "Das Kapital" as a continuation of his "Zur Kritik der politischen Oekonomie" (see e.g. PMM 359), in which his primary concern is an examination of capital and in which he provides the theoretical foundation for his political conclusions later presented in "Das Kapital". "I examine the system of bourgeois economy in the following order: capital, landed property, wage-labour; the State, foreign trade, world market.The economic conditions of existence of the three great classes into which modern bourgeois society is divided are analysed under the first three headings; the interconnection of the other three headings is self-evident. The first part of the first book, dealing with Capital, comprises the following chapters: 1. The commodity, 2. Money or simple circulation; 3. Capital in general. The present part consists of the first two chapters." (Preface to the present work, in the translation (by S.W. Ryazanskaya) of the Progress Publishers-edition, Moscow, 1977).Apart from the obvious importance of the work as the foundational precursor to what is probably the greatest revolutionary work of the nineteenth century, the "Kritik" is of the utmost importance in the history of political and economic thought, as it is here, in the preface, that Marx outlines his classic formulation of historical materialism. This preface contains the first connected account of what constitutes one of Marx's most important and influential theories, namely the economic interpretation of history - the idea that economic factors condition the politics and ideologies that are possible in a society."The first work which I undertook to dispel the doubts assailing me was a critical re-examination of the Hegelian philosophy of law; the introduction to this work being published in the Deutsch-Franzosische Jahrbucher issued in Paris in 1844. My inquiry led me to the conclusion that neither legal relations nor political forms could be comprehended whether by themselves or on the basis of a so-called general development of the human mind, but that on the contrary they originate in the material conditions of life, the totality of which Hegel, following the example of English and French thinkers of the eighteenth century, embraces within the term "civil society"; that the anatomy of this civil society, however, has to be sought in political economy. The study of this, which I began in Paris, I continued in Brussels, where I moved owing to an expulsion order issued by M. Guizot. The general conclusion at which I arrived and which, once reached, became the guiding principle of my studies can be summarised as follows. In the social production of their existence, men inevitably enter into definite relations, which are independent of their will, namely relations of production appropriate to a given stage in the development of their material forces of production. The totality of these relations of production constitutes the economic structure of society, the real foundation, on which arises a legal and political superstructure and to which correspond definite forms of social consciousness. The mode of production of material life conditions the general process of social, political and intellectual life. It is not the consciousness of men that determines their existence, but their social existence that determines their consciousness. At a certain stage of development, the material productive forces of society come into conflict with the existing relations of production or - this merely expresses the same thing in legal terms - with the property relations within the framework of which they have operated hitherto. From forms of development of the productive forces these relations turn into their fetters. Then begins an era of social revolution. The changes in the economic foundation lead sooner or later to the transformation of the whole immense superstructure." (Preface to the present work, in the translation (by S.W. Ryazanskaya) of the Progress Publishers-edition, Moscow, 1977).The work is a summation of Marx' many years of economic studies, mainly undertaken at the Reading Room of the British Museum, and it constitutes the first attempt at a general outline of his theories. Like his "Capital", the "Critique" was originally planned as a work in several volumes, but only this first volume appeared. The work, which was printed in a mere 1000 copies, is scarce and rarely seen on the market.

(Sankt Petersburg, 1748). 8vo. Bound with five other tragedies/dramas in a slightly later (late 18th century) full calf binding with gilt line-borders to boards and richly gilt spine with red and blue title- and tome-labels. Spine with some wear and corners bumped. Upper capital worn. Internally generally nice and clean and on good paper, but "Hamlet" - which has clearly been well red and presumably used for a stage set-up - has some light pencil-annotations and pencil-crossovers, occasional brownspotting, a few paper restorations - no loss of text, a tear to one leaf - no loss, and one leaf slighly loosening at the bottom. Hamlet: 68, (2) pp. - separately paginated. 26pp. + 79, (1) pp. + 62 pp. + 68, (2) pp. + 78 pp. + 1 f. blank + 29 pp. Extremely rare first edition of the first Russian translation/adaptation of Shakespeare's Hamlet. The first edition is incredibly scarce and deemed virtually unobtainable. A second appearance, which is also of the utmost scarcity, came out in 1786, in a collection of plays in Russian. The seminal first rendering of "Hamlet" in Russian constitutes a milestone in Russian literature and cultural history. It deeply penetrated Russian culture, and in many ways Sumarokov's "Hamlet" came to epitomize the Russian spirit. "The first Russian adaptation of Shakespeare's "Hamlet" was made by the founder of the Russian classical theatre Alexander Petrovich Sumarokov (1717-1777). The play was written in 1748 by the 31-year old ambitious statesman and poet.Some researchers suggest that this work was commissioned to legitimise the power of Peter the Great's daughter Elizabeth through cultural discourse. Elizabeth took the Russian throne as a result of a court coup against an infant great grandson of Peter's elder brother. Ivan VI was barely two months old when he became Russian Emperor and "reigned" for eleven months. For the rest of his short life he lived in exile and, from the age of 16, in solitary confinement. Elizabeth's actions might be seen as avenging her father by returning power to his successors.Translated from French, Shakespeare in Sumarokov's version was also turned into a classist play, where people represented functions, such as order and chaos, good and evil, wisdom and stupidity. According to this pattern, the state could not be left without a legitimate ruler. Therefore, Sumarokov wrote a happy end with Claudius and Polonius punished by death and Hamlet, Ophelia and Gertrude victorious and content.Although this version was rarely staged, the image of an outcast prince was often referred to. For example, Catherine the Great's son and heir Paul tried on this role - his father was assassinated and overthrown by his mother's lover to get her the throne....In the 20th century the story of Russian Hamlet continued. As the Russian poet of the Silver Age Maksimilian Voloshin put it, "Hamlet - is a tragedy of conscience, and in this sense it is a prototype of those tragedies that are experienced by the "Slavonic soul" when it lives through disintegration of will, senses and consciousness"." (Katya Rogatchevskaia, for the British Library exhibition "Shakespeare in Ten Acts").Sumarokov created the Russian "Hamlet" in 1748 and might have acquainted himself with the character of Hamlet through French sources; However, it is quite probable that his translation was actually done from English, as it is registered that he borrowed a copy of it from the Academic library in the period from 1746 to 1748.It came to play a seminal role in both Russian literature, culture, and politics in the centuries to come. "Soon after its arrival in a Russia in 1748, "Hamlet" and its chief protagonist became inseparable parts of Russian national identity, prompting such remarks as William Morris's: "Hamlet should have been a Russian, not a Dane". However, at the outbreak of the Second World War, the play seems to have disappeared for more than a decade from the major stages of Moscow and Leningrad. Thus was born the 'myth' of Stalin and Hamlet. Today virtually every mention of Hamlet in the Stalin era refers to the dictator's hatred for this tragedy and his supposed banning of it from all Soviet stages. Notwithstanding the efforts of theatre directors such as Sergei Radlov with his heroic production of Hamlet in 1938, there is no doubt that Hamlet was problematic in the context of the paradigm of Socialist Realism. And it was certainly not the most suitable play for a war-stricken country. Moreover, from Stalin's own pejorative reference to 'an indecisive Hamlet' in connection with Eisenstein's ill-fated depiction of Ivan the Terrible (Part II), it is evident that for the dictator the character of Hamlet had negative connotations. The chequered history of Hamlet in the Soviet Union from the outbreak of the War to the death of Stalin in 1953 and the flood of new productions almost immediately after this date, together with the myth of Stalin's 'ban', deserve more nuanced and broadly contextualised study than they have received to date, based on concrete historical facts, memoirs and official documents. (Michelle Assay :What Did Hamlet (Not) Do to Offend Stalin?)."Reforms initiated by Tsar Peter the Great (1672-1725) had far reaching effects on all spheres of life in eighteenth-century Russia, including the cultural sphere. Profound changes also occurred in Russian literature. As Russian literature was becoming increasingly secular and new literary genres evolved there began an intensive search for aesthetic principles and an ideological platform that would be suitable for the demands of the post-Peter the Great epoch. Alexander Sumarokov (1717-1777) was among those Russian writers who considered adopting ethical principles and aesthetic norms of French classicism the most appropriate path for the development of an emergent secular Russian literature. In his rendering of Shakespeare's Hamlet into the Russian language, Sumarokov subscribed to the rules and traditions of French classicist dramaturgy. He adopted the modus operandi and approaches to translation prevalent during the period of classicism in French literature. By doing so, Sumarokov followed a very clear objective. Tailoring his Hamlet according to the patterns of French classicism and bringing in a strong didactic element into his version of Shakespeare's masterpiece, Sumarokov was able to re-evaluate the original material and focus on the issues that he considered most important for his contemporaries in eighteenth-century Russia… Church authority that had dominated public life for centuries was greatly diminished and undermined in both political and cultural spheres. In the 18th century, Russia was a rapidly changing country. A long period of self isolation ended as Russia was opening up and turning its face towards Europe. Profound changes within society also affected the development of 18th-century Russian literature." (Nikitina, Larisa. (2008). The First Translation of Shakespeare into Russian: A Metamorphosis of Hamlet on Russian Soil. Philologie im Netz. 43. 17-27)."Alexander Sumarokov was the first Russian professional author who chose national subjects for his plays. He introduced Shakespeare to the Russian people with his adaptation of Hamlet, and it was as a spectator at his play Khorev that Elizabeth fell in love with Nikita Beketov who played the leading role." (Encycl. B.).Apart from Sumarokov's seminal version of "Hamlet", the present volume contains the following five works, all by Sumarokov, and all in first editions:Pustynnik [The Hermit]. Drama. 1769Yaropolk i Dimizia. Tragediya, 1768Vysheslav. Tragediya. (1768)Artistona. Tragediya. (1751) Dve Epistoly [Two Letters]Like Hamlet, Sumarokov's other works are very rare in all early printings, especially the first.OCLC lists two copies of this first printing of "Hamlet" in Russian in libraries worldwide: One in Germany, one in the UK.

Paris, Firmin Didot, 1822. 8vo. Uncut in the original printed wrappers. Front wrapper slightly soiled and a bit of light dampstaining throughout. Upper corner worn. Six leaves with contemporary neat annotations, scholarly notes and drawings have been inserted at the front and the back - one double-leaf in front of the title-page (with one page of annotations with references to other works by Champollion), two leaves between plates III and IV (with two and a half pages of Greek-ancient Greek-Latin correspondence alphabet) and three leaves at the end, before the final blank (with five pages of an alphabet of the first Egyptian letters - very neatly drawn - and an alphabet-correspondence at the end). A very charming and interesting copy in the exceedingly rare original wrappers. Housed in a half morocco slipcase with gilt lettering to spine. (4), 52 pp. + 4 folded plates + 1 blank leaf. The scarce first edition, in the even scarcer original printed wrappers, of Champollion's milestone work, which announced for the first time the deciphering of the Rosetta Stone, provided the key to reading Egyptian hieroglyphs, and gave birth to the entire field of modern Egyptology. This seminal work arguably constitutes the single most important philological work ever written. "[...] in the actual state of Egyptian studies, when the monuments stream out from all sides and are collected by the rulers as by amateurs, and when also the scientists of all countries are eager to engage in serious research of their subject matter and are eager to penetrate deeply into the knowledge of these written monuments which must be used to explain all the others, I do not think I should wait till another time to bring to the scientists' attention and under your honourable auspices a short but important series of new developments, which naturally belong to my Memory on HIEROGLYPHIC writing, and which will doubtlessly save you the trouble that I have taken to establish what may be very serious errors about the different periods in the history of Egyptian art and the general administration of Egypt: for this is about the series of hieroglyphs that, making an exception to the general nature of the signs of this writing, have been equipped with the ability to EXPRESS THE SOUNDS of the words, and which are used in the inscriptions of the public monuments of Egypt, the TITLES, the NAMES, and the EPONYMS OF THE GREEK OR ROMAN SOVEREIGNS, who rule Egypt one after the other. Many certainties in the history of this celebrated piece of land must arise from this new result of my research, to which I have been led quite naturally." (pp. 2-3) (*) says Champollion on the opening pages of the present letter to Mr. Dacier. And thus was laid the foundation of modern Egyptology. Jean Francois Champollion (1790-1832), known as the father of Egyptology, was by no means exaggerating when he stated the above - his letter to Mr. Dacier upon his new discoveries and the decipherment of the Egyptian hieroglyphs did change the study of Egypt and Egyptology more profoundly than any work before or after. Ever since the publication of the present work, Champollion has been credited with being the first to correctly and fully decipher the inscription on the famous Rosetta Stone, translating it, and breaking the mystery of the ancient hieroglyphic script; it is in the present work that this milestone event in the history of modern man is announced first time, and it is due to this discovery that he is accepted as the founder of Scientific Egyptology. The Rosetta Stone, which dates back to 196 B.C was found in 1799 by French Troops and was immediately brought to England, where it has been ever since. The stone was (and is) of the utmost importance to the understanding of the Egyptian language, the principles of which were totally unknown up until this point. Because the hieroglyphic inscription on the stone is accompanied by a Greek and a Demotic one with the same contents (the commemoration of Ptolemy V's accession to the Egyptian throne), Champollion was able to crack the code of the hieroglyphs and to read a language that had not been read for far more than a millennium. Other very skilled linguists had worked on the decipherment of the hieroglyphic inscription simultaneously with Champollion, but they had all given up by the time that Champollion finally had his first true breakthrough. It came in 1822, when he successfully deciphered two Egyptian names, Ramses and Thutmos, written in hieroglyphic characters in temple cartouches. Champollion's discovery pointed to the fact that the Egyptian hieroglyphs functioned as an alphabet, a phonetic language and a system of symbols that could stand for words or concepts. "And if the resembling signs of the two names render THE SAME SOUNDS on both cartouches, it is due to their ENTIRELY PHONETIC character." (p. 7). (**) He succeeded in showing that the Egyptian hieroglyphic writing system was a combination of phonetic and ideographic signs, and using his new discovery as a foundation, Champollion next turned his attention to common nouns, and deciphered the phrase "birthday celebrations" from the Rosetta Stone."It is a complex system, writing figurative, symbolic, and phonetic all at once, in the same text, the same phrase, I would almost say in the same word" says Champollion about the hieroglyphs, in the present work, after having established their meaning. He had finally cracked the code and was sure of it. He was so excited by this monumental discovery that he immediately ran to his brother's house, into his office, shouting the famous words "Je tiens l'affaire!", i.e. "I've got it!". It is said that he then fainted and spent the next five days in bed recovering. Shortly after his recovery, he began writing the letter for Mr. Dacier, outlining the discovery that laid the foundation for deciphering hieroglyphs, which was published later the same year, and a condensed version of which he presented as a speech at the Academie des Inscriptions. When he presented the speech, Thomas Young, who had given up breaking the code four years earlier, was also in the audience.In 1824, Champollion published a more comprehensive explanation of the hieroglyphic system, his famous "Précis du Système Hieroglyphiques des Anciens Egyptiens".Champollion was an extraordinary philologist, who, by the age of sixteen, besides Greek and Latin, mastered six ancient Middle Eastern languages, among these Coptic, the knowledge of which, unlike that of Egyptian, was never lost. As the first, Champollion realized the connection between the Coptic and the Egyptian language, and was able to identify many of the Egyptian words on the Rosetta Stone, as he could read them with their Coptic equivalents. He was the first to believe that both Demotic and Hieratic represented symbols, and not sounds as earlier presumed. After that he quickly realized that each single hieroglyph could represent a sign, and he began compiling a hieroglyphic alphabet. When publishing his letter to Mr. Dacier, he presented the fact that the hieroglyphs represented sounds as well as concepts, according to context. Champollion is thus the constructor of our present code of the hieroglyphic alphabet. "Further study enabled him to discover the values of a number of syllabic hieroglyphic signs, and to recognize the use of hieroglyphs as determinatives. In cases where the Greek text supplied him with the meaning of hieroglyphs of which he did not know the phonetic values, his knowledge of Coptic enabled him to suggest values which he found subsequently to be substantially correct. Further reference to determinatives and the importance of parallel passages and texts will be made later on in his work. Between 1822-24 CHAMPOLLION worked incessantly, and was enabled to modify much of his earlier views, and to develop his Alphabet, -and he evolved some rudimentary principles of Egyptian Grammar..." (Wallis Budge, The Rosetta Stone in the British Museum, pp. 224-25). "We have only been able to locate 4 auction records of the work within the last 40 years (ABPC & JAP), none of them in original wrappers.________________________________________________________________________________ORIGINAL FRENCH TEXT OF THE QUOTATIONS ABOVE (WHICH ARE IN OWN TRANSLATION):(*) "[...] dans l'etat actual des études égyptiennes, lors-que de toutes parts les monuments affluent et sont recueilles par les souverains comme par les amateurs, lorsqu'aussi, et a leur sujet, les savants de tous les pays s'empressent de se livrer à de laborieuses recherches, et s'efforcent de pénétrer intimement dans la connaissance de ces monuments écrits qui doivent servir à expliquer tous les autres, je ne crois pas devoir remettre à un autre temps d'offrir à ces savants et sous vos honorables auspices, une courte mais importante série de faits nouveaux, qui appartient naturellement à mon Mémoire sur l'écriture HIÉROGLYPHIQUE, et qui leur épargnera sans doute la peine que j'ai prise pour l'établir, peut-être aussi de graves erreurs sur les époques diverses de l'histoire des arts et de l'administration générale de l'Égypte: car il s'agit de la série ges HIÉROGLYPHES qui, faisant exception à la nature générale des signes de cette écriture, étaient doués de la faculté d'EXPRIMER LES SONS des mots, et ont servi à inscrire sur les monuments publics de l'Égypte, les TITRES, les NOMS, et les SURNOMS DES SOUVERAINES GRECS OU ROMAINS qui la gouvernèrent successivement. Bien des certitudes pour l'histoire de cette contrée célèbre doivent naître de ce nouveau résultat des mes recherches, auquel j'ai été conduit très-naturellement." (pp. 2-3).(**) "et si les signes semblables dans ces deaux noms exprimaient dans l'un et l'autre cartouche LES MÊMES SONS, ils devaient constater leur nature ENTIÈREMENT PHONÉTIQUE." (p.7).

London, 1855. 8vo. Entire volume 16, second series of "The Annals..." present, bound in a very nice red half morocco with richly gilt spine. A nice, clean, fresh, and sturdy copy. A vague stamp to title-page (London Institution) and a blindstamped marking to top of first leaf of contents (Cranbrook Institute of Science). Pp. 184-196. [Entire volume: VII, 472 pp. + 11 plates]. Exceedingly scarce first printing of Wallace's very first publication on the theory of evolution, predating any publication on the subject by Darwin. This milestone paper in the history of the theory of evolution - "A stunning scientific debut" (Nature vol. 496, p. 162) - formulates what is now known as the "Sarawak Law", which is in essence half of the theory of evolution by natural selection, which Wallace would later (1858) so famously publicize together with Darwin. From as early as 1845, Wallace had been convinced of the idea that species arise through natural laws rather than by divine fiat and he invested all in supplying scientific details and uncovering a satisfactory evolutionary mechanism. He kept this more or less to himself, however, and refrained from commenting on it in public until 1855, when he, provoked by an article by Edward Forbes Jr., published this seminal paper, "a concise synthesis of his ideas on the subject. Like many brilliant works, his "On the Law Which Has Regulated the Introduction of New Species" (September 1855) was based on well-known, acceptable scientific observations, although he had transformed the mass of facts into an unusually persuasive argument. The evidence was drawn from geology and geography - the distribution of species in time and space - and following nine acceptable generalizations (axioms), Wallace concluded: "Every species has come into existence coincident both in space and time with a pre-existing closely allied species". He claimed that he had explained "the natural system of arrangement of organic beings, their geographical distribution, their geological sequence", as well as the reason for peculiar anatomical structures of organisms." (D.S.B.). It was this paper by Wallace - not greatly read in the public, but very seriously studied by the greatest biologists of the time - that led directly to Darwin beginning his "origin of Species". - "Despite this excellent presentation (i.e. Wallace's 1855 paper), there were no public replies, although the private comments were quite another matter. Indeed, Edward Blyth, Charles Lyell, and Charles Darwin all read Wallace's article and were greatly impressed by his arguments, but in particular Lyell, who began a complete reexamination of his long-held ideas on species. On 16 April 1856 Lyell discussed Wallace's paper with Darwin, urging him to publish his own views on species as soon as possible. Darwin then began what we now call the long version of the "Origin", and that version was used as a basis for the "Origin" as published in 1859." (D.S.B.).It was in 1848 that Wallace first left England for the tropics. He did so with his friend the entomologist Henry Walter Bates, with the specific intention of solving the problem of the origin of species. "In the autumn of 1847 Mr. A.R. Wallace, who has since acquired wide fame in connection with the Darwinian theory of Natural Selection, proposed to me a joint expedition to the river Amazonas, for the purpose of exploring the Natural History of its banks; the plan being to make for ourselves a collection of objects, dispose of the duplicates in London to pay expenses, and gather facts, as Mr. Wallace expressed it in one of his letters, "towards solving the problem of the origin of species"." (Bates I: p. III). It is during these travels that Wallace begins noticing the remarkable coincidences in the distribution of species in space and time, and in 1855, while sitting in Sarawak, Borneo, he writes the paper that is now a landmark work in the history of evolutionary thought, his so-called "Sarawak-paper", which was published later the same year in the present volume of "The Annals and Magazine of Natural History". "This paper, formulating what came to be known as the "Sarawak Law", is remarkable... (Wallace) advances what is, in effect, half of the theory of evolution, namely what Darwin would call "descent with modification": the idea that the generation of a biological novelty is a genealogical process." (Berry, p. XXVII). The law now known as the Sarawak Law, or "the first half of the theory of eveolution", is stated as follows: "Every species has come into existence coincident both in time and space with a pre-existing closely allied species." This law connected and explained a vast number of independent facts. It was, in fact, Wallace's first statement of a belief in evolution, and for the following three years from the time that he wrote the essay, Wallace recounts that "the question of how changes of species could have been brought about was rarely out of my mind."According to one of the most celebrated anecdotes in the history of science, the second half of the theory of evolution by natural selection finally came to Wallace in February 1858, while delirious during an attack of malarial fever in Ternate in the Mollucas. In his own words, "there suddenly flashed upon me the idea of the survival of the fittest." The theory was thought out during the rest of the fit, drafted the same evening, and written out in full in the two succeeding evenings. Knowing that Darwin was working on the same problem, Wallace sent a manuscript summary to Darwin, who now feared that his discovery would be pre-empted. In order to avoid conflict between the two, Joseph Hooker and Carles Lyell suggested a joint publication. The essay was read, together with an abstract of Darwin's own views, as a joint paper at the Linnean Society on the 1st of July 1858.

Strasbourg, Johannes Grüninger, 28 August 1502. Folio (298 x 204 mm). Bound in an exquisite later (c. 1850) brown full morocco binding by John Clarke with gilt title and five raised bands to spine. Gilt and blindstamped lines to spine. Boards with gilt and blindstamped lines and gilt fleurons to corners. Edges and inside of boards with gilt and blindstamped lines. All edges gilt. Kept in a marbled slipcase. Slight wear to capitals and outer hinges. Armorial exlibris pasted to inside of front board. Woodcut title page remargined. Several underlinings and interlinear and marginal annotations in at least two different contemporary (or near-contemporary) hands. A6 and colophon leaf mounted (no loss). Four insignificant wormholes in lower margin, not affecting the text, from B1 through E2. A few scattered brownspots, otherwise a clean copy. Text of varying length surrounded by 72 lines of commentary. With all 214 woodcut illustrations as well as numerous woodcut initials. 449 leaves: A6 B-S8 (H +1) T-V10 x-z8 AA-HH8 II6 KK-VV8 XX6 YY-ZZ8 a-f8 aa-cc8 dd10. An excellent, complete copy of the marvellous Brant-Grüninger edition of the works of Vergil, being the first illustrated printed edition of Vergil, and altogether one of the most magnificent illustrated books in the history of printing. Arguably the most outstanding illustrated edition of any work of Classical literature, the Brant-Grüninger Vergil had a tremendous impact on sixteenth-century illustration art: "Because of the wealth and erudition of its illustrations, as well as the fact that it was the first in its field, the 1502 Vergil had a considerable influence on almost everyone who wished to illustrate the same subject during the following half century." (T.K. Rabb, Sebastian Brant and the First Illustrated Edition of Vergil, 1960, p. 196) Best known for his satirical work 'Das Narrenschiff' (1494), Sebastian Brant (1457/58 - 1521) was one of the greatest German humanists of the fifteenth (and early sixteenth) century. According to a charming epigram at the end of the book, the purpose of the illustrations was to assist 'unlearned and rustic readers' (lat. 'indoctis rusticolisque viris') in understanding the often complex content of Vergil's poetry. Although Brant indicates in the introductory poem that these were created by himself (lat. 'has nostras quas pinximus ecce tabellas'), the general assumption is that only provisional design sketches can be attributed to him. In any case, the illustrations, though in many respects anachronistic, reveal his thorough knowledge of Vergil and Vergilian scholarship. Along with the text of Vergil, including his spurious writings, the present edition contains five ancient and Renaissance Vergilian commentaries, those of Servius, Donatus, Cristoforo Landino, Antonio Mancinelli and Domizio Calderini. Adams V-457; Brunet V 1277; Dibdin II 542.

(Venice, 1470'ies - 80'ies). 4to. 210x240 mm. In a lovely, strictly contemporary Italian binding. Original wooden boards with beveled edges. Top outer edge of front board chipped and a small split at bottom outer edge. Boards with remnants of the original leather previously partially covering boards, revealing the leather cords, and with an exposed spine revealing four strips of Medieval parchment that hold the quires together (along with a bit of restoration glue, barely noticeable). The top strip with red paint and the other three with fourteenth-century Gothic script. Original brass clasps to front board. An excellent, solid, contemporary binding. 70 ff. (f.70 blank), complete (i-v 12, vi 10), 29 lines to a page, mostly with ruling, occasionally only with frame ruling (150 x 77 mm). Vertical catchwords at the bottom of verso of the last folio of each of quire (i.e. ff. 12, 24, 36, 48, 60), surrounded by wave lines. Written in an easily legible, experienced Italian humanist miniscule. Space (sometimes with cue letters) for initials left blank. No rubrication, but majuscule lettering as headlines at new beginnings or major text divisions. Large, detailed drawing of pointing hand on f. 3, in contemporary hand. Ff. 8v and 24v with scribbled border in light brown ink around the textblocks, in an early modern hand. Another later hand, presumably a later owner, has added “Jacopi – che qui anno 1693 i Viterbo 1693” in runny ink on f. 29v. Crudely written calculations in the same hand to ff. 59v and 61r. Front pasted-down end-paper with paste stains, presumably from a previous bookplate, and with a note in 19th century German script to top. Foliation in modern pencil in top right corner throughout. F1 a bit dusty and with brownspotting. Occasional minor brownspotting. Minor damp staining to margins of last two quires, no loss and not affecting text. Otherwise generally in excellent condition. Two different watermarks in the paper: 1) a scale inside a circle (see ff. 52+57, at inner margin) – this is described in Briquet (Les filigranes…, 1923) as “Balance dens un cerele, à plateau concaves”, nr. 2474 – Venice, 1480. 2) the letter P with loop through shaft also (see ff. 64+70, at inner margin). We have not been able to identify this. The text is divided into the major setions divided mostly by Majuscule "headlines", and begins thus: 1) “[C]ARMINA QVI Condam studio florente peregi...", ending (f. 9v) "hec ubi regnant”; 2) beginning “[P]POST HEC PAVLIS PER opticuit Atentionem...", ending (f. 21v) "Quo celum regitur regat”; 3) beginning “[I]AM CANTUM illa finierat…", ending (f. 41) "Perdit dum videt inferos”; 4) "Explicit iii Incipit iiii L", beginning “[H]EC cum Phylosophia dignitate vultus...", ending (f. 58) "Si dera donat”; 5) beginning “[D]IXERUNT Orationisque cursum ad alia...", ending (f. 69v) "cum ante oculos agitis iudicis cuncta cernentis / GRATIAS DEO Amen”. F70 blank. Complete version of the text, with some minor word and orthographic variations in comparison to the printed standard version, and without the printed edition’s few lines in Greek. No space has been left for these and they were clearly not intended to be added later. A truly magnificent and rare complete Medieval manuscript copy of one of the most significant philosophical texts ever written, Boethius’ magnum opus. The seminal Consolation of Philosophy revolutionized modern thought and influenced medieval and renaissance philosophy to an unprecedented degree. Although one of the most widely read and studied works of the Middle Ages, Medieval manuscript copies of the “Consolation of Philosophy” are very rare on the market. The present manuscript is written in a steady, easily legible, clearly very experienced humanist hand. It does not have the gloss found in most contemporary manuscripts of this sort of text, and is therefore arguably not one of the more usual schoolbooks from the period. It has possibly been copied for the humanist scribe’s own use – in or around Venice during the last quarter of the 15th century – and has thus possibly functioned as a template for other manuscript copies of the text. Boethius (480-ca. 525) is a difficult figure to place in the history of philosophy. Chronologically, he clearly belongs to late Antiquity, but he is a Christian and he writes in Latin. Thus, as a late antique philosopher, a Christian, and one of the thinkers that influenced the middle ages the most, he has come to represent the very centre of a tradition that goes directly back to Plotinus and thereby indirectly back to Plato and Aristotle. As such, he constitutes one of the single most important thinkers in the entire history of philosophy. "Only Aristotle himself, and perhaps Augustine, were more important and wide-ranging in their influence... In short it would be hard to understand the development of philosophy in the medieval Latin West without looking carefully at Boethius' work..." (Marenbon pp. 11-12). Accused of treason against the gothic regime as well as of sorcery, Boethius was imprisoned and later executed, in spite of denying the claims against him. His own theory was that his political activity - as a court official known for defending the weak - was at the core of the accusations against him. He was simply too upright and his enemies were too many. According to historians, the most plausible explanation is that Theoderic doubted the loyalty of the Roman aristocracy and thereby especially the outspoken Boethius. While in prison, Boethius wrote what was to become one of the most widely read, commented upon, and influential works in the history of philosophy. This highly original work, composed as a philosophical conversation between Boethius himself and the goddess of Philosophy, paved the way for a genre completely unknown at the time; both its style, composition, and contents matter has been imitated hundreds of times since its first appearance. Though always true to Christianity, this philosophical magnum opus contains many allusions to pagan neo-platonism. During the Middle Ages, however, all passages of the work were very popularly interpreted, in full accordance with Christianity. Few thinkers have been of such seminal importance to Medieval and Renaissance philosophy and religion as Boethius. Few books were so widely read during the Middle Ages as the "Consolation of Philosophy", and virtually no book has been as major a source of ancient philosophy from the early Middle Ages and throughout the Renaissance as this one. As well of being of great textbook value, this work profoundly inspired and influenced a wide range of influential religious, philosophical and literary writers. "For some writers, such as the Middle English poet, Chauser, the "Consolation" seems to have provided a model for writing about serious issues in a way which presupposes no commitment to Christianity, a philosophical precedent for the use of pagan setting in a literary fiction." (John Marenbon, Medieval Philosophy, 1998, p. 24). With the death of Boethius, "The first scholastic" (Copenhaver & Schmitt, p. 130), came also the end of ancient tradition of philosophy in the Latin West, though through his writings, the influence of this philosophical tradition was preserved during the Middle Ages and through to the Renaissance and early modern times. "The last roman author of significance, Boethius, was not a rhetorician, though he had surely received a rhetorical education, but a trained philosopher thoroughly familiar with Greek philosophy and literature. He was a Christian and wrote a few treatises on theology, but his philosophical works show no Christian influence. The "Consolation of Philosophy" is a highly personal and original work imbued with Stoic and Neoplatonic conceptions that has continued to impress its readers to its present day although it is no longer as widely read as it was in former centuries." (Kristeller, p. 226). "The crowning work of his life, the "Philosophiae Consolatio", was composed in prison not long before his death. It is in the form of a dialogue, and includes 39 short poems in 13 different metres... Throughout the work there is no evidence of distinctively Christian belief, but there are a few phrases of apparently Christian origin... But the absence of all reference to the consolations of religion is much more remarkable than the presence of a few phrases such as these... He does not oppose any Christian doctrine, but his attitude is that of a Theist and not that of a Christian. He supplied the Middle Ages with an eclectic manual of moral teaching severed from dogma and endued with all the charm of exquisite verse blended with lucid prose; and, as the latest luminary of the ancient world, he remained long in view, while the sources of the light he reflected were forgotten. The masterpiece which was his last legacy to posterity was repeatedly translated, expounded and imitated in the Middle Ages, and these translations were among the earliest literary productions of the vernacular languages of Europe, - English, French, German, Italian and Spanish among the translators being names of no less importance than king Alfred, Chaucer and queen Elizabeth. It was also translated into Greek by Maximus Pledanus (d. 1310). The emperor Otho III, who died in 1002, a hundred years after Alfred, placed in his library a bust of Boëthius, which was celebrated by the best Latin poet of his age, the future pope Silvester II. Three centuries later, he is quoted more than 20 times in the "Convito" and elsewhere by Dante, whose best-known lines "Nessun maggior dolore Che ricordarsi del tempo felice Nelle miseris", are a reminiscence of Boëthius... Dante places him in the Fourth Heaven among the twelve "living and victorious splendours" which are the souls of men learned in Theology... Two hundred years after Dante, the book of Consolation composed by Boëthius in the "Tower of Pavia" brought solace to Sir Thomas More in the Tower of London. It has since won the admiration of the elder Scaliger and Casaubon, and has been described as a "golden volume" by Gibbon, who eulogises its author as "the last of the Romans whom Cato or Tully could have acknowledged for their countryman." (Sandy's I: 256-58).