SHOE Archives

Societies for the History of Economics

SHOE@YORKU.CA

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Mime-Version:
1.0
Sender:
Societies for the History of Economics <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:
From:
Sergio Noto <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Mon, 2 Nov 2009 19:33:17 -0500
Content-Transfer-Encoding:
8bit
Content-Type:
text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; format=flowed
Reply-To:
Societies for the History of Economics <[log in to unmask]>
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (19 lines)
The question raised by June Flanders is something more than a pedant issue
and involves at least two more points.

1. Quoting the first edition seems to be sometimes uncomfortable. E.g. which
is the real first edition of Aristotle's Ethic, or Kautilya's Artashastra? I
argue that a citation of a «classic» edition should be normally preferred
and that the date of publication does not offer further information on
author's life and time.

2. Following the same rule it should be convenient, in order to mention
possibly the original edition, to extend the accuracy and citing the
original language edition (Cicero, Latin; Boisgulbert French, Menger
German), which unfortunately doesn't happen very often, not only in HE
papers.

All the best

Sergio Noto

ATOM RSS1 RSS2