Thoughts on Antiquity, Patristics, putting things online, information access, and more
Tom Schmidt writes:
I added 11 new fragments to my page on Papias. I also gave parallel translations from the Syriac and Greek of Eusebius’ Ecclesiastical History and Armenian and Greek of Andrew of Caesarea’s Commentary on Revelation among other things as well.
All very useful to us all!
One of the primary sources of material used by atheists for “Jesus = <insert god here>” is J. Frazer’s The Golden Bough, 1911. In my experience, whenever I look at this kind of material, it is always worth checking what Frazer said. In my case I want to find the origin of some curious statements about the Adonia.
His book is well referenced, if you go directly to it. He’s the only author I have ever come across to know of 6th century Syriac author Thomas of Edessa, or to have read the Latin version — the only version ever made — of his De nativitate. Yet read it he must have done, for he refers (correctly) to the fact that Thomas says the pagans even in his day celebrated a solar festival at Christmas-time.
A single volume abridgement is accessible at Gutenberg. But it came as rather a shock to discover that the original was actually in twelve volumes! I tried to locate this on Google books in vain; a search on Archive.org was better.
To locate all 12 volumes, use this link.
Since I discovered yesterday that a scholion on Aristophanes Peace 412 was an important source for information on the Adonia, I have been trying to find the text. A search today led me to here. This is a Google books preview of Eleanor Dickey’s Ancient Greek Scholarship: a guide to finding, reading, and understanding scholia, commentaries, lexica, and grammatical treatises, from their beginnings to the Byzantine period, Oxford University Press 2007. Don’t bother clicking on the link unless you are American — the preview is for the US only (and what a wretched business it is, this new trick of keeping the previews hidden from non-US readers!) But the book looks like a gem, on a subject which few know anything about.
Pages 28-31 contain the following interesting remarks:
The scholia to Aristophanes are among the most important sets of scholia, in part because they provide historical background without which many of the jokes and allusions in the comedies would be incomprehensible. They are relatively well preserved, and most of them can be found in a sound and reliable modern edition, making them easier to use than many scholia.
Most Aristophanes scholia fall into one of four groups: the old scholia, Tzetzes’ scholia, Thomas Magister’s scholia, and Demetrius Triclinius’ scholia. Scholarly attention tends to focus on the old scholia, which are the most useful in terms of the information they provide on Aristophanes, but the later annotations preserve some old material and are interesting in their own right because of the perspective they offer on Byzantine scholarship.
The old scholia to Aristophanes are derived from a variety of sources going back to the beginning of Alexandrian scholarship. Callimachus, Eratosthenes, and Lycophron (a contemporary of Zenodotus) all worked on Aristophanes to some extent, and the first continuous commentary on his plays was produced by Euphronius, the teacher of Aristophanes of Byzantium. Aristophanes of Byzantium himself produced an edition of the plays, providing an introduction to each (the extant verse hypotheses of the plays are thought to be distant descendants of these introductions) and may also have written a commentary; Callistratus and Aristarchus probably wrote commentaries on the plays, and Timachidas of Rhodes wrote one on the Frogs.
The work of these and other scholars was combined into a single commentary by Didymus in the late first century BC or early first century AD, and sometime in the first two centuries AD Symmachus compiled another commentary, using Didymus as his main source but also consulting other works. At a later date Symmachus’ commentary or one of its descendants, along with some other material, was copied into the generous margins of a book of the plays of Aristophanes and formed the archetype of our extant scholia.
Perhaps the most important of the additional sources of our scholia is the metrical commentary on Aristophanes written by Heliodorus around AD 100. This commentary is often studied apart from the other scholia, for it is crucial for our understanding of ancient metrical theory but of limited use in understanding Aristophanes. Heliodorus’ work has been preserved to varying extents for the different plays; one can reconstruct from the scholia nearly all of it for the Peace, as well as substantial sections of it for the Acharnians and Knights and some fragments for the Clouds and Wasps, but little else.
In addition to the direct tradition of the scholia, which is well attested in several manuscripts, there is an indirect tradition via the Suda, whose writer had access to the same body of material when it was more complete and therefore often preserves scholia that did not survive in the direct tradition. There are also a number of papyri and ancient parchment fragments with commentaries or scholia on Aristophanes; on the whole, those of the fourth century and later seem to reflect a body of material very similar to the ancestor of our scholia (though in some places more complete), while the earlier ones, which are much rarer, apparently belong to different traditions.
There is then a discussion of the Tzetzes scholia, and then the hard data:
The best edition of the scholia is a multivolume work edited first by W. J. W. Koster and later by D. Holwerda (1960– =TLG), which includes both old and Byzantine scholia, usually in separate volumes. The volumes containing the Thesmophoriazusae and Ecclesiazusae have not yet appeared, so for those plays the standard text of the scholia is still that of Dübner (1842 =TLG). While the Koster–Holwerda edition is unquestionably the best in terms of completeness and quality of the text presented, a number of older ones are still useful for specific purposes. Rutherford’s edition (1896) of the scholia in the Ravenna manuscript provides translations and commentary in English. White’s edition of the Heliodorus fragments (1912: 384–421) extracts all the Heliodorus fragments from the scholia, groups them together, and provides an excellent introduction (in English) with explanation of Heliodorus’ Greek. Jorsal et al. (1970) collect the Byzantine metrical scholia to the Frogs. White’s edition of the Birds scholia (1914) has much more detailed indices than the new edition, and Koster (1927) provides an important supplement for Plutus and Clouds.
Papyri with Aristophanes commentaries or scholia are not uncommon, and are conveniently collected with German translation and excellent discussion by Trojahn (2002). In addition, most of those relating to extant plays are included in the Koster–Holwerda edition, and those relating to lost plays can be found in Austin (1973).
Discussions of the Aristophanes scholia are numerous, lengthy, and extremely varied in character and conclusions. The best overview in English is still White’s exceptionally lucid introduction to his edition of the Birds scholia (1914), which covers the entire history of the creation and transmission of the scholia and includes detailed information on Didymus and Symmachus; this work is, however, out of date in places and is concerned almost exclusively with the old scholia. Dunbar’s introduction (1995: 31–49) is briefer but up to date and covers all types of scholarship. Rutherford (1905) offers a detailed and highly informative examination of the nature and contents of the old scholia, but many of his views are no longer accepted, and the author’s evident grumpiness can make the book difficult to read. Additional discussions of textual history can be found in Koster (1985), Hangard (1983, 1985), and the prefaces to the individual volumes of the Koster–Holwerda edition (particularly volumes i.i a, i.iii.i, and ii.i). Montana (1996) discusses the information the old scholia provide on the Αθηναίων πολιτεία.
The papyrus scholia and commentaries are particularly interesting for the question of the dating of the transition from self-standing commentary to marginal scholia, as the marginal commentaries in Aristophanes papyri of the fourth century and later tend to resemble the medieval scholia more than is the case with other authors. Discussions of this and other issues relating to the papyri can be found in Trojahn (2002), Zuntz (1975), H. Maehler (1994: 124–6), Luppe (1978, 1982), and McNamee (1977: 175–96, 356; forthcoming). The best sources for discussion of Heliodorus are White (1912: 384–95) and Holwerda (1964, 1967). For the scholia recentiora one can consult N. Wilson (1962), O. L. Smith (1976b), Koster (1964), Koster and Holwerda (1954), Holzinger (1930), and the prefaces to volumes i.iii.ii, iii.iv b, and iv.i of the Koster–Holwerda edition. For examples of the way scholars use the Aristophanes scholia for historical information on the plays and on Athenian history and culture, see Carawan (1990), Lavelle (1989), Sutton (1980), Bicknell (1975), and Holwerda (1958).
I think the only possible comment on that is “wow”.
I deeply approve of this book. In fact I’ve got to buy a copy of it. I’ve managed to find a bootleg PDF of it, but you can’t read a book like this on-screen!
The author knew what she was doing. In the preface she tells us that scholars are increasingly making use of the ancient Greek scholarly tradition, while finding it very difficult to access. Her book, therefore, is intended to facilitate access. Well done!
It is a pity that Oxford University Press did not see facilitating access in the same way.
A few weeks ago I wrote of my discovery that a bunch of ancient astrological texts existed in an largely unknown English translation by Robert Schmidt of Project Hindsight. These can be obtained by emailing the site and sending money by Paypal (a price list is here, but prices are actually more flexible than the flat $45 per booklet). A table of contents for each volume is on the site (e.g. Antiochus of Athens is here).
These translations have remained unknown. I cannot check l’Année Philologique, but I don’t know that they have ever received an academic review. COPAC, the UK union catalogue for research libraries, did not reveal a single copy in any of them. They were originally sold on a subscription basis to interested people in the astrological community, and so did not circulate more widely.
Now I’m not very interested in ancient astrological texts. The existence of astrology and astrologers in our own times is something of a curiosity. I have found those I have dealt with to be rather civilised folk, somewhat gun-shy and afraid of being taken for cranks and cultists when they write.
It was important to get rid of astrology so that astronomy could be born. But since they are so harmless, we may see these people, and their interest in the astrological tradition, as a genuine survival from ancient times. It’s a part of our own day that would be thoroughly comprehensible to a Roman. It’s as if the worship of Apollo lingered in some mountain fastness; wrong, no doubt, but of great historical interest. This has led me to take an interest in the matter, and perhaps to write more than I might otherwise have done.
I believe that all ancient literature should be accessible to anyone who wants to click on a link. At the very least, it should be easy for people to find out about them! So I invested some of my own money and obtained three volumes from the series; Antiochus of Athens, The Thesaurus; and Hephaistio of Thebes, Apotelesmatics vols.1 and 2. I was warned that these were not of professional quality, that they were reprints, perhaps even photocopies, and that this was why they are not widely advertised.
A package arrived this morning from the US. On opening it, I found three A5 booklets, a card cover, bound as a single-quire with two staples in the spine holding the quire together. My first impression was positive. The text is typeset professionally, the tone is calm and sensible, and the introduction by Robert Schmidt a model of professionalism.
I attach a couple of photographs. You should be able to click through on these to the full-size images. Unfortunately it is rather dim here today, and I am never that handy with a camera taking images of pages anyway.
The volumes, as far as book production is concerned, seem to me to be perfectly acceptable and nothing to be ashamed of. A few of the pages betray the odd mark indicating that a photocopier has been involved — the odd dust speck, the odd hair. But all of us have photocopies of that kind! The text is always perfectly clear and readable with none of the blodges that you get from photocopying old paper.
The prices are rather high, it must be said at once. But you can haggle. The team at Project Hindsight have reprints on the shelf of some of the volumes, which they are willing to let go at a discount.
The introduction to the Antiochus by Robert Schmidt is a model of how this should be done. He indicates his sources, he states what text he is translating, and he gives an appendix indicating how he has translated specific technical terms. The additional editorial work and notes by Robert Hand also look good.
This issue of technical terminology is a real one, which must obstruct all progress in this field until a specialist lexicon is compiled. Mark Riley, while working on Vettius Valens, did start compiling such a lexicon, and he has placed his notes online. It is interesting that Robert Schmidt has found the same need, and I could wish that the Project should place online a digest of how these terms were rendered. In fact Dr Schmidt might be well advised to publish an article in some technical journal on this very subject.
A number of volumes of Vettius Valens are in the Project Hindsight list. It seems that Dr Riley and Dr Schmidt worked independently, neither aware of the other. But the result is probably of benefit to everyone.
Robert Schmidt is now reworking his translations, with the benefit of 17 years experience, into a new series of hardbacks, again to be sold on subscription. We must all wish this enterprise well, and I hope that the translator reaps a handsome financial reward, for his efforts have benefitted mankind to an extraordinary degree.
I wish I knew how to get some of the major libraries here to subscribe, for it is clear to me that these volumes need to be held in research libraries, and will otherwise be very hard of access. Anyone any ideas?
Two posts at the Evangelical Textual Criticism blog here and here — neither makes it quite clear — have made me aware that the Laurentian library in Florence has put online a mass of manuscripts! ETC only refer to Greek New Testament mss, but I discover that in fact it is all the Plutei collection.
This is the core collection of classical manuscripts at the library. The Biblioteca Medicea-Laurenziana, to give it its formal title, is the library of Lorenzo the Magnificent. Florence was the home of the renaissance, the base of the rediscovery of the classics, and the great library of Nicolo Nicoli ended up in this collection. There are treasures to be found there!
Here are the two main Tacitus manuscripts. M1 contains Annals 1-6, M2 contains Annals 11-16 plus the Histories.
Tertullian is also here, although the Conventi Soppressi collection is not included, which contains the most important manuscripts.
But a two volume copy of the Cluny Collection of his works is online:
Eusebius on the Psalms, in Greek? Here. Cicero, Seneca… they’re here. In fact if you look at my digest of manuscripts of the Greek classics here, you will find that this collection contains Aelian and half a hundred others.
The search page is here:
Just search for Tacitus, Tertullianus, Eusebius, and see what you get!
This is wonderful, wonderful news. Suddenly it becomes possible for us all to consult these manuscripts. Better still, you can download individual pages and do digital enhancement on them, if you need to.
Magic! Well done the BML!
I am a king.
I sit in the hall of my ancestors, on a throne of gold and crystal. My castle overlooks the land, where there are many towns. I rule as my fathers have done, justly, that all may live in freedom and enjoy their property without fear of robbers or invaders or my own tax-gatherers. Yet we are not savages, and every modern convenience is at our disposal. But we have no university in our land.
Today some clerks came to see me. They asked me to give them gold every year, to pursue their studies.
I asked them why I should do so. For while my land is not impoverished, my people are not wealthy, and I will not take one man’s goods to give them to another without true need.
One of the clerks talked largely and vaguely of the importance of their studies, and I put him aside as a blatherer. But another spoke more to the purpose.
“O king,” he said, “This land needs learning, that it may prosper, that your people may become more numerous — which is the strength of any land — and your treasury overflow with gold.”
“Say on,” I told him. “How do words in books lead to so pleasing an end?”
“Your land needs Chemistry, so that plastics may be made and other synthetic materials, all of them necessary to a society which depends on such things.”
I replied, “Fair enough. Let some chemists be hired, then, and facilities for their work supplied.”
“O king, unless you are willing for this knowledge to be the property of a rival monarch, to be withheld at their whim, you must train your own folk to be chemists.”
“Let it be so, then,” I replied.
“A university, then, there must be, and means for the young to attend it for the period of study necessary. There must also be jobs for them to occupy, to practice their craft, after they have trained, or the supply will quickly wither away.”
“This seems reasonable,” I said. “I will pay for some of this, and those merchants in my land who profit from their labours will pay for more.”
“There are other forms of learning also, which your land will need, in a similar way.”
“Say on, most persuasive of clerks.”
“You will need physicists also, for their command of the properties of matter, without which no machines may be fabricated. Mathematicians also are needed, to create the control mechanisms for computers and electronics of every kind. Doctors we shall need, until a day comes when none of us get sick.”
“All this I agree to.”
“You will need the botanist, to collect and examine plants. For how else do new drugs and medicines come into being? And the blights that affect the crops may be cured, if we know enough about them. Likewise the zoologist, for his knowledge of animals, unless your majesty considers that a diseased horse is one fit to ride.”
“Your university will not be small, it seems, and the cost will be high.”
“Yet the cost of not doing so is higher. For all these things are necessities, and lands that do not have the means to produce the works of craft that arise from these skills are poor indeed. The engineer, who can build roads and railways and bridges, must also be found. And then there are those whose skills are less obvious, but equally necessary.”
I asked, “Who are these?”
“Your courtiers rely much on persuasion, on words, and on casting ideas in a favourable light. But unless a king is educated, how may be know truth from falsehood?”
“These seem like vague statements,” I said, not entirely patiently.
“When a king has a matter of statecraft to decide, does he not wish to know whether his choice is wise or not? If he could see what the consequences of each choice might be, would he not choose to do so? This knowledge may often be found in the deeds of past rulers, however far in the past. Moreover many things that exist in the world today make little sense of themselves, unless we know how they came to be. A man can only remember a short period of time, from his own youth onwards. A man who loses that memory is at the mercy of others who know more. He cannot even live an independent life. But what if it were possible to extend your memory back before your own life, into the remote past? Would not such a thing be of the highest utility to a ruler?”
“I can imagine that it is so. The decisions of rulers, the laws they passed, the battles they fought, the speeches that were made for and against, and how men politicked with one another… it seems useful for a ruler to know this.”
“Thus your majesty’s university must include the historian, who gathers this knowledge and produces books containing it. It must also contain those who know the languages and literature, both of other lands, and of times gone by; for how otherwise can a historian read the books of past times? Likewise there must be libraries of knowledge and literature for the same purpose, and those whose task is to find and edit these texts. No doubt it is not necessary to have many who are skilled in a dead language of limited modern relevance, but what ruler would not choose to have such a man at his disposal, at need?”
I replied, “Very well, you may have these also, O glib one. But what of the study of the religions of man, past and present? Will you find me a reason why I should hire men to tell me of these also?”
He paused, and then spoke slowly. “The ideas that men share and throw around influence the course of politics; not always, but often. Men who can discuss these ideas should be available to your majesty. There seems no pressing need for your majesty to fund the training of your majesty’s clergy — surely their own collections of money to fund their own activities can cover that. Some study of the past of these movements would naturally form part of history. But there would seem to be a limit to what your majesty should pay for.”
“Particularly when your own pocket will contribute to the tax I levy to pay for all this,” I grumbled.
“Likewise knowledge of the beliefs of the fanatic clergy in your majesty’s neighbouring states should be paid for, as a matter of intelligence gathering on potential foes.”
“Certainly”.
“And thus you see, your Majesty, that you need a university, and you need one with clerks skilled, not merely in metals and machines and the methods of their invention and production, but also with a knowledge of the humanities. This is not for any indefinite purpose, but as source of information whereby you can rule better, achieve more, and whereby your land can prosper. A prosperous land will fill your treasury with gold.”
He ceased speaking, and there seemed little more to say. All that remained was the question of how many jobs I should fund, how many students were desirable or necessary in each area, and the number of establishments required to make the whole system work. And this task I assigned to my steward, reminding him that gold did not grow on trees and that no clerk should doubt that he held his post as a favour, not as of right.
I received an interesting email this morning:
Arabic manuscript of Elmacin’s history
Dear Sir,
My search for Elmacin led me to your most interesting blog, namely to this post.
I am working on a translation of Edward William Lane’s Description of Egypt [into Arabic], and he quotes Elmacin. I’ll of course need to use Elmacin’s Arabic original instead of translating back which as you can see is not a preferable option.
Would please share with me any digitized versions you may have?
It is extremely frustrating to decline such requests. But of course the PDF’s of manuscripts that I have are all supposedly copyright of this library or that, and I can’t give them away to all and sundry, much as I would like to.
What we need, perhaps, is to create an electronic text that can be freely available. Does anyone have any ideas of how we might get one of these manuscripts transcribed?
Prof. Mark Riley has uploaded his translation of the 2nd century astrologer, Vettius Valens, to the web! From his website:
Vettius Valens: Find a link here to a translation of Vettius Valens Anthologiai, the longest astrological text from Greco-Roman antiquity.
What you find here is a preliminary translation completed in the 1990’s and not perfected since. It is based on Wilhelm Kroll’s 1908 edition (page numbers of this edition are marked with bold-faced K in my pdf) and on David Pingree’s 1986 edition (page numbers marked with P), a great improvement on his predecessor’s. The angled brackets (< >) indicate words added in the translation for clarity or (sometimes) to correct errors in the text.
My studies in ancient mathematical literature, and (more important) in the Syriac and Arabic copies of Valens did not proceed far enough to put the finishing touches on this translation. Moreover I have moved on to other work. (See here.) So there are no guarantees of accuracy. You might also find some typos. Use at your own risk. In addition I am not prepared to answer questions about the translation. You are on your own.
When studying Valens, also consult my Survey of Vettius Valens (on this webpage) and Neugebauer and Van Hoesen, Greek Horoscopes (Philadelphia 1987). Most of the horoscopes listed in Valens are translated by Neugebauer and Van Hoesen.
Thank you, Mark, for this — this is excellent news!
At Dyspepsia Generation I happened to see this post:
Speech to the House of Commons 1841.
Can you imagine a modern Congressman making a speech like this?
Can you even think of one that wouldn’t need to have it explained to him in simpler words?
The proposal is to extend the term of copyright from life plus 28 years to life plus 60 years — 10 years less than we now endure. After initial oratory, Macaulay goes on to make some very sound points indeed.
I will take an example. Dr. Johnson died fifty-six years ago. If the law were what my honorable and learned friend wishes to make it, somebody would now have the monopoly of Dr. Johnsons works. Who that somebody would be it is impossible to say; but we may venture to guess. I guess, then, that it would have been some bookseller, who was the assign of another bookseller, who was the grandson of a third bookseller, who had bought the copyright from Black Frank, the Doctors servant and residuary legatee, in 1785 or 1786. Now, would the knowledge that this copyright would exist in 1841 have been a source of gratification to Johnson? Would it have stimulated his exertions? Would it have once drawn him out of his bed before noon? Would it have once cheered him under a fit of the spleen? Would it have induced him to give us one more allegory, one more life of a poet, one more imitation of Juvenal? I firmly believe not. I firmly believe that a hundred years ago, when he was writing our debates for the Gentlemans Magazine, he would very much rather have had twopence to buy a plate of shin of beef at a cooks shop underground. Considered as a reward to him, the difference between a twenty years term and a sixty years term of posthumous copyright would have been nothing or next to nothing. But is the difference nothing to us? I can buy Rasselas for sixpence; I might have had to give five shillings for it. I can buy the Dictionary, the entire genuine Dictionary, for two guineas, perhaps for less; I might have had to give five or six guineas for it. Do I grudge this to a man like Dr. Johnson? Not at all. Show me that the prospect of this boon roused him to any vigorous effort, or sustained his spirits under depressing circumstances, and I am quite willing to pay the price of such an object, heavy as that price is. But what I do complain of is that my circumstances are to be worse, and Johnsons none the better; that I am to give five pounds for what to him was not worth a farthing.
The principle of copyright is this. It is a tax on readers for the purpose of giving a bounty to writers. The tax is an exceedingly bad one; it is a tax on one of the most innocent and most salutary of human pleasures; and never let us forget, that a tax on innocent pleasures is a premium on vicious pleasures. I admit, however, the necessity of giving a bounty to genius and learning. In order to give such a bounty, I willingly submit even to this severe and burdensome tax. Nay, I am ready to increase the tax, if it can be shown that by so doing I should proportionally increase the bounty. My complaint is, that my honorable and learned friend doubles, triples, quadruples, the tax, and makes scarcely any perceptible addition to the bounty. … Now, I again say that I think it but fair that we should pay twenty thousand pounds in consideration of twenty thousand pounds worth of pleasure and encouragement received by Dr. Johnson. But I think it very hard that we should pay twenty thousand pounds for what he would not have valued at five shillings.
My honorable and learned friend dwells on the claims of the posterity of great writers. … But, unhappily, it is scarcely possible that, under any system, such a thing can come to pass. My honorable and learned friend does not propose that copyright shall descend to the eldest son, or shall be bound up by irrevocable entail. It is to be merely personal property. It is therefore highly improbable that it will descend during sixty years or half that term from parent to child. The chance is that more people than one will have an interest in it. They will in all probability sell it and divide the proceeds. The price which a bookseller will give for it will bear no proportion to the sum which he will afterwards draw from the public, if his speculation proves successful. He will give little, if anything, more for a term of sixty years than for a term of thirty or five and twenty. …
If, Sir, I wished to find a strong and perfect illustration of the effects which I anticipate from long copyright, I should select my honorable and learned friend will be surprised I should select the case of Miltons granddaughter. As often as this bill has been under discussion, the fate of Miltons granddaughter has been brought forward by the advocates of monopoly. My honorable and learned friend has repeatedly told the story with great eloquence and effect. He has dilated on the sufferings, on the abject poverty, of this ill-fated woman, the last of an illustrious race. He tells us that, in the extremity of her distress, Garrick gave her a benefit, that Johnson wrote a prologue, and that the public contributed some hundreds of pounds. Was it fit, he asks, that she should receive, in this eleemosynary form, a small portion of what was in truth a debt? Why, he asks, instead of obtaining a pittance from charity, did she not live in comfort and luxury on the proceeds of the sale of her ancestors works? But, Sir, will my honorable and learned friend tell me that this event, which he has so often and so pathetically described, was caused by the shortness of the term of copyright? Why, at that time, the duration of copyright was longer than even he, at present, proposes to make it. The monopoly lasted not sixty years, but for ever. At the time at which Miltons granddaughter asked charity, Miltons works were the exclusive property of a bookseller. Within a few months of the day on which the benefit was given at Garricks theatre, the holder of the copyright of Paradise Lost I think it was Tonson applied to the Court of Chancery for an injunction against a bookseller, who had published a cheap edition of the great epic poem, and obtained the injunction. The representation of Comus was, if I remember rightly, in 1750; the injunction in 1752. Here, then, is a perfect illustration of the effect of long copyright. Miltons works are the property of a single publisher. Everybody who wants them must buy them at Tonsons shop, and at Tonsons price. Whoever attempts to undersell Tonson is harassed with legal proceedings. Thousands who would gladly possess a copy of Paradise Lost, must forego that great enjoyment. And what, in the meantime, is the situation of the only person for whom we can suppose that the author, protected at such a cost to the public, was at all interested? She is reduced to utter destitution. Miltons works are under a monopoly. Miltons granddaughter is starving. The reader is pillaged; but the writers family is not enriched. …
I will only say this, that if the measure before us should pass, and should produce one tenth part of the evil which it is calculated to produce, and which I fully expect it to produce, there will soon be a remedy, though of a very objectionable kind. Just as the absurd acts which prohibited the sale of game were virtually repealed by the poacher, just as many absurd revenue acts have been virtually repealed by the smuggler, so will this law be virtually repealed by piratical booksellers. At present the holder of copyright has the public feeling on his side. Those who invade copyright are regarded as knaves who take the bread out of the mouths of deserving men. Everybody is well pleased to see them restrained by the law, and compelled to refund their ill-gotten gains. …
Pass this law: and that feeling is at an end. Men very different from the present race of piratical booksellers will soon infringe this intolerable monopoly. Great masses of capital will be constantly employed in the violation of the law. Every art will be employed to evade legal pursuit; and the whole nation will be in the plot.
This was prescience indeed.
The record companies used to tell us, in the 1980’s, when there was still a record industry, ‘Home taping is killing music — and it’s illegal.’ Yet who did not possess an album copied onto a cassette tape? Few of us, I suspect, do not possess a bootleg MP3 today.
The copyright durations of the present day are an excrescence. Few if any academic works benefit from the massive terms of copyright under which they remain out of print. The public is harmed, and access denied. We need to return to some saner system, where books that go out of print go out of copyright, and works in which no man has any longer any financial interest move into the public domain.
Mark Riley has sent me PDF’s of his entire unpublished translation of the second century astrological handbook, the Anthology of Vettius Valens. This was translated from the Kroll edition (which is online) and the revised Pingree text (which is not). I’ve combined them into a single file and emailed them back, and he’s going to make it available online.
It’s a marvellous piece of work. The sheer labour that must have been involved is staggering. It is a terrible shame that this never turned into a publication. Mark tells me that the reason for this is that, to perfect it, he needed to consult the Arabic versions of the text, and lacked the necessary language skill and time to acquire it. I have suggested to him that he post the translation on his website. It will be of interest to anyone interested in Vettius Valens. It is very clear and well translated.
Unfortunately the text itself is only of specialist interest. I read through it this morning, hoping for snippets of information on the ancient world. But these are lacking. Vettius Valens is only interested in showing students how to calculate astronomical things in order to cast horoscopes. He derides the bombast and obscurity of other such handbooks. But otherwise it is all calculations.
The book should be useful to those interested in ancient astronomy, and to those who must work out how mathematics was presented in an age without proper numerals. But it is not of interest to most of us.
I’ve also heard back today from Project Hindsight about the Robert Schmidt translations of ancient astrological writers. These are $45 a volume, which is dear — too dear for me. I said so, and was told there might be volumes available at $30, which is a possible. price Why any of these are more than $20 a go I do not see, tho. I have suggested to them that Dr Schmidt might like to consult Dr Riley about Vettius Valens.