On the Difficulty of Correct Description of Books

Front Cover
Blue Sky Press, 1902 - Bibliography - 30 pages
0 Reviews
 

What people are saying - Write a review

We haven't found any reviews in the usual places.

Other editions - View all

Common terms and phrases

Popular passages

Page 32 - From the Invention of Printing to the present time ; being Brief Notices of a large Number of Works drawn up from actual inspection.
Page 22 - ... the writings of Newton. In proof of this, we have, since the preceding sentences were written, fallen in with a recent work in which Kahle is placed under suspicion of having, under the name of Kayle, answered Voltaire by plagiarizing an answer written by Kahle seventeen years before Voltaire wrote. If we ourselves should have fallen into any mistakes, they will serve our purpose, as helping to prove the truth of our title. They will do us a service of the same kind which a lapse of memory of...
Page 23 - Of the persons who read the first canto, not one in ten reaches the end of the first book, and not one in a hundred perseveres to the end of the poem. Very few and very weary are those who are in at the death of the
Page 10 - Lalande copies him, together with the reference " p. 337," and thus again seems to misstate the matter of his own reference. According to the preface, the date of composition of this OpuseGeogr. is 1533 ; from which Lalande says it was printed in 1533 ; but we can find no notice of any impression previous to that in the collected works of 1551. Weidler says this collection contains some things which had not been previously published : but this can only mean that he had not found them. The third of...
Page 19 - ... if he do ; but nothing except an examination of the lists of the Royal Society will enable him to be certain. Out of such trifles as these spring many mistakes, such as can hardly be avoided, except by knowledge beyond what the books themselves can give. And as to the books themselves, nothing short of a studied examination will show the difference between a perfect and imperfect volume. A folio collection of astrologers (1533) which has at the end of the contents " Postremo Othonis Brunfelsii...
Page 25 - S. 10," had they known how to read, would have been " S. Jo.," and the whole would have shown that the book once belonged to the Library of the Convent of St. John of the Canals at Piacenza. They impute to M. Libri that he stamped these letters, first, to hide the marks of another stamp which they assert to have been erased, next, to pass off the work as printed at Piacenza. The terms in which they crow over their unanswerable proof, as they take it to be, that the book had been stolen, will perhaps...
Page 6 - ... mistake. But the unpractised reader must not come to such a conclusion too rapidly. If Lalande had not named his authority, as often happens with him, we should have had three alternatives to consider. 1. A mere mistake. 2. The circumstance of his having happened to fall in with a book in which some one had bound together some astronomical tracts of Werner with a copy of Regiomontanus's epistle. 3. The possibility that Werner made two distinct publications at Nuremberg in 1522, one containing...
Page 9 - Riccioli (in 1661) makes the same assertion. It matters little or nothing that the work of 1543 is not called a second edition, for it not unfrequently happens that a reprint shows no sign of that character. And though neither the Abbe Scina, in the life of Maurolycus, nor the compiler of the list of works presently mentioned, notes any edition earlier than 1543, yet neither seems to have made much search, and both, to judge by their modes of description, would rest content with the earliest edition...
Page 10 - Cusa,2 who is not worth alluding to on this point) who really thought anew on the subject, so as to produce fresh arguments either for or against. Nevertheless, it appears, though we cannot find it mentioned by any historian, that Regiomontanus had seriously considered the •subject. One of the greatest preservers of his writings was John Schoner, of Carlstadt (1477-1547).
Page 27 - Opuscula, knew that the Optics were published in 1704, and had a copy of 1706. He took for granted (pref. p. vii.) that there could not be two editions so near in time, and therefore announced that by the printer's negligence the edition of 1704 had; 1706 on the title-page. The fact is that there was an English edition in 1704, and a Latin one in 1706, in his History and in his Bibliography.

Bibliographic information