An Essay on the Nature and Conduct of the Passions and Affections, with Illustrations on the Moral Sense. Francis Hutcheson

Чтение книги онлайн.

СКАЧАТЬ But 1B clearly reads, “London: printed and Dublin re-printed,” and according to Mautner, 1A is advertised in the London Journal as having been printed on January 13, 1728.¹⁸ Thus, unless 1B was printed in the first two weeks of January, which seems unlikely, 1B was an inferior edition that appeared after 1A.

      1A and 1B appeared anonymously as penned by “the Author of the Inquiry into the Original of our Ideas of Beauty and Virtue” (which did carry Hutcheson’s name). The second edition of 1730, which introduced Hutcheson’s name on the title page, is not an independent edition but rather 1A reprinted with Francis Hutcheson’s name on the title page. This was, it seems, the only revision. The authorship read in full, “Francis Hutcheson, Professor of Moral Philosophy in the University of Glasgow; and Author of the Inquiry into the Original of our Ideas of Beauty and Virtue.” The point of this reissue was probably to boost sales of both of Hutcheson’s works by means of his newly acquired academic distinction. He became a professor in Glasgow in 1730, and the third edition of the Inquiry (1729) had been published too early to make note of Hutcheson’s new standing.

      The third edition of 1742 is a distinct and revised edition with many additions and emendations, mainly to the Illustrations. There were a number of posthumous editions of Essay with Illustrations. Jessop mentions a 1751 Dublin edition, a 1756 London fourth edition, and a 1772 Glasgow “3rd edition.”

      [print edition page xxi]

      Editorial Principles

      Of the two extant variorum editions,¹⁹ Peach used a posthumous 1769 reprint of 3 as the copy text for his edition of the Illustrations.²⁰ This is the best approach to the Illustrations when presented independently of the Essays. I have adopted 1A as the copy text for this edition of the entire Essay with Illustrations for a simple reason. It allows the reader to view the actual chronological alteration of the text: that is, how Hutcheson himself initially presented it and then altered it fourteen years later.

      Turco’s excellent Italian edition uses internal citation to make the body of the text neutral to the specific edition.²¹ Unfortunately, that approach becomes far too unwieldy when noting punctuation changes. As Turco’s edition is a translation into Italian with textual apparatus, minute changes of punctuation go for the most part unremarked.

      Why 1A and not 1B? Because 1A has fewer mistakes than 1B, is more common, and is the basis for 2 (more accurately, it is identical to 2, aside from a new title page). I have not noted any variations among 1A, 1B, and the “second edition,” as they have only bibliographic interest (and limited bibliographic interest at that), since Hutcheson appears to have had little or no hand in them. For the same reason, I have not noted variations found in posthumous editions.

      Hutcheson made numerous alterations in the third edition, although the differences between the two editions are not as dramatic

      [print edition page xxii]

      as one might expect, given the fourteen years between them. The significant varia are at the end of this text and are indicated by page and line number of the present volume. Hutcheson’s notes and my editorial notes are attached to the main body of the text, as is the pagination for 1A and 3 (1A appears in italic typeface; 3 appears in regular typeface).

      The lengthiest emendations are found in the preface to the work and in the Illustrations; generally, these are subtractions from the preface and additions to the Illustrations. Many of the specific references to his contemporaries Joseph Butler, Jean Le Clerc, and John Clarke are trimmed from the preface in 3.

      There are numerous other changes to the text, additions and subtractions of words, lines, and paragraphs, as well as countless modifications and alterations to punctuation, capitalization procedures, italics, and typeface. A number of footnotes were added to the later edition as well, including a diatribe against Hutcheson’s critic John Balguy. A sole reference to the New Testament is also added. There are even alterations in the marginal titles.

      I have restricted my variorum to changes that could alter the sense of the text, although what could affect sense is a point of debate. I have noted all changes of wording and all changes of relevant punctuation. These are clearly the two most important types of textual varia. There are many varia, though, that have not been noted.

      I have not noted most changes in capitalization, as there is little or no rhyme or reason to Hutcheson’s use of them. Although capitals are often used for emphasis in twentieth-century prose, they are not used with great consistency in earlier eighteenth-century English-language philosophical texts. Furthermore, capitalization was often a printer’s decision. The same holds for italics. I have noted very few changes in capitals and italics—only those that could possibly be construed as providing a change in emphasis. Readers are strongly cautioned, however, against reading too much into even those changes.

      Among other variorum that have not been noted are the following:

      1. Differences in spelling, broadly conceived, among the editions.

      [print edition page xxiii]

      A. The first edition prefers the idiomatic contraction of -ed: “join’d”/ “joined,” “gratify’d”/“gratified,” “alter’d”/“altered.” There are other variations in contraction, such as “though”/“tho’”/“tho,” “it is”/“’tis.”

      B. There are numerous differences in spelling more narrowly construed. A few representative examples are: “alledge”/“alledg,” “threatned”/“threatened,” “inadvertencies”/“inadvertences,” “suspence”/“suspense,” “shews”/“shows.”

      C. There are also differences in the hyphenation and separation of words. A few representative examples are “nobody”/“no body,” “pre-suppose”/“pre suppose,” “fellow-creatures”/“fellow creatures,” “ourselves”/ “our selves.”

      2. The placement of Hutcheson’s footnote markers—inside or outside punctuation marks. I have noted variations in the marks used, and of course the absence of notes.

      3. Changes in the use of roman and arabic numerals in the footnotes, as well as changes in the footnote markers themselves.

      Finally, I have corrected obvious printer’s errors (e.g., “deipise” for “despise”) and missing punctuation (e.g., a period missing at the end of a sentence), without remark. I have also substituted regular capitalization for the small caps used in the first word of every paragraph.

      Aaron Garrett

      [print edition page xxiv]

      [print edition page xxv]

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

      A number of people and institutions have helped in producing this edition of Hutcheson’s Essay with Illustrations. As to institutions, special thanks are due Boston University, the Humanities Research Centre of the Australian National University, the Houghton Library at Harvard University, Liberty Fund and its unfailingly helpful staff, and the Australian National Cricket Team, which kept me awake through long nights of collation. As to people, James Moore has shown great generosity in helping me with my many queries about Hutcheson. He suggested Gershom Carmichael as the possible identity of the man of “real merit” in Glasgow (cf. p. 10, note x) and has aided in numerous other notes. Stephen Scully and Morgan Meis have suggested and corrected translations. I am also grateful to Bob Brown, Alfredo Ferrarin, Ian Hunter, Thomas Mautner, СКАЧАТЬ