Page:Mind (Old Series) Volume 9.djvu/325

VIIL XEW BOOKS. [These Notes do not exclude Critical Notices later on.] BENEDICTI DE SPINOZA Opera quotquot reperta sunt. Recognoverunt J. VAX VLOTEX et J. P. X. LAND. Voluinen posterius. Hagae Comi- tum apud Mai-tinum Xijhoff, 1883. Pp. x. 634, vrith portrait and facsimiles of handwriting. The Chief Works of BENEDICT DE SPINOZA, translated from the Latin, with an Introduction by R. H. M. EL WES. London : George Bell & Sons, 1883. Pp. xxxiii. 387 ; xxii 420. Our first duty in noticing the completion of the Dutch Committee's edition of Spinoza the first really correct and complete edition, it is well to repeat is to join in Prof. Land's regret for the loss of his colleague Dr. Van Vloten, who was carried off by a rapid illness in the autumn, just before the work was finished. The revived study of Spinoza, both in the Netherlands and elsewhere, owes much to Dr. Van Vloten's constant vigour and enthusiasm. In this volume we have Spinoza's Letters, now for the first time duly collected in order of time, critically edited, and furnished with all attainable information as to names of persons and other matters omitted (for the most part of set purpose) in the Opera Posthuma, Where an original Dutch text is preserved, that text is here given as well as the Latin version, and a good many of the details supplied in the notes will be practically new to students ; we say practically, for the editors' task was not so much that of bringing new matter to light as the far more trouble- some and less grateful one of ordering scatteied materials which had never been thoroughly dealt with as a whole. Examination of the Royal Soci manuscripts has however revealed a couple of unpublished paragraphs in letters from Spinoza to Oldenburg, and a great number of minute variations throughout the text of these letters, which show that Spinoza must have carefully prepared for eventual publication the copies which he kept The Dutch text of the Korte Verhandeling (Spinoza's early treatise on God and Man, first published by Van Vloten in 1862) is not accompanied by a Latin version, the editors having been of opinion that sufficient pro- vision was already made in that behalf by Schaarschinidt, Sigwart, and Janet Under the peculiar circumstances there is no reason to dissent from their conclusion. In a standard edition like the present a Latin version of this work, if undertaken at all, must have aimed at restoring the lost original as nearly as possible in the form that Spinoza gave to it This might probably be done with a fair degree of approximation, but certainly would cost more trouble than it could be worth. An excellent etching reproduces the Wolfenbuttel portrait of Spinoza, which appears to be accepted by experts as the archetype of the better known engraving found in many copies of the Opp. Posth., as well as of the picture now in the town museum at the Hague. The miniature bought some time ago by the late Queen of the Netherlands, which is of a different . is conjecturally identified with the picture of Spinoza said to have been taken by his host Van der Spyck. One would like, however, to have more external evidence about this miniature. Apparently there is nothing to warrant it but its general coincidence with the description of Spinoza's person in Colerus. 21