This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
The Law of Nations article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The 4th English translation from 1797 is at https://oll.libertyfund.org/titles/vattel-the-law-of-nations-lf-ed
Is there a copy of the 1st English translation from 1760 or the 2nd English translation from 1787 or the 3rd English translation from 1793 online somewhere? I'm curious to look at them for differences. WakandaQT ( talk) 05:02, 4 September 2020 (UTC)
I am wondering if someone could explain how we come to the conclusion that all three copies of the book that Franklin received from Dumas were
Is this context found somewhere in the letter itself, or is this rather evidenced in the copies actually being relocated?
If it is not in the letter itself then I think we would need additional sources explaining their language and publication dates.
Franklin refers to "your edition of Vattel" being kept. WakandaQT ( talk) 15:46, 4 September 2020 (UTC)
The 2nd note at bottom of https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Franklin/01-22-02-0172 mentions:
Would anyone know where the "below" for "Pochard to bf" on Oct. 11 refers to? I don't know if there was a hyperlink at some point in the original "Franklin Papers" that Archives.gov got this from?
This is the last use of "pochard" on this page but perhaps the structuring of the Franklin Papers was different and we lost some kind of foot note here? Basically want to read about these "subsequent adventures" perhaps to clarify who Vaillant was as this page uses no forename like it does with establishing Alexandre was who Franklin mention by Messr Pochard.
I'm thinking this https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Franklin/01-22-02-0385
The top title there says "To Benjamin Franklin from Alexandre Pochard, 11 October 1776" although weirdly the date in french is listed "Montreal Le 11 8bre. 1776."
Was "8bre" some kind of unusual French abbreviation for "October" ? In French it's similar "octobre" so I guess substituting "8" for "octo" might have been a common shorthand at the time? Okay so in reviewing this while the letter itself does not mention the name Vaillant there is a 5th note at the bottom which elaborates:
This note is after the sentence "Je ne demande pour la reparation des torts que jai endurés en mon particulier que la Continuation de vos bontés pour mon ami." so presumably Vaillant is the "mon ami".
In looking for the 17 Feb 1781 letter referenced above, I came across this 26 Nov 1780 one instead at https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Franklin/01-34-02-0041
The (4) below:
This posited possibility could be wrong, given that it's elsewhere established that Alexandre (not Joseph) is the one who is friends with M. Vaillant, although I guess plausibly both of them might've been friends with him. Does anyone know if there is a familial connection between Alex and Jo?
Okay finally found the Feb 17 letter at https://franklinpapers.org/framedVolumes.jsp?vol=34&page=379a002 which says:
Rough trans (google):
On 2nd glance I'm not entirely sure that the English letter to Franklin pertainining to Pochard+Vaillant was actually received November 26th. I had only focused on the title and overlooked these notes:
So it seems like this was actually just English translation (or paraphrasing, more like) of the letters that Franklin received during this time, and actually is describing the contents of the same letter. I guess I'm just super-confused why the head of the article says November 1780... I mean I could understand if perhaps it said "15 November 1980" (as that seems to be the estimated starting range of the letters) but instead it says 26 November 1980 which was 11 days later.
Now the only thing seems to be finding the "subsequent Saturday evening" letter Pochard sent to Franklin. 17 Feb 1781 was apparently a Saturday so the subsequent one would be seven days later: 24 Feb 1781. Presumably some time in between, Franklin had also sent a reply to Pochard prompting the thanks.
https://search.amphilsoc.org/collections/view?docId=ead/Mss.B.F85inventory06-ead.xml seems to be the 2nd (though there is no "next Saturday" or "Feb 24" indication):
Based on that summary, Pochard did not initially send the letter. First he sent a request to forward the letter and then presumably after Ben replied agreeing to forward it, he then send the letter itself in a followup with thanks to Ben for the agreement to forward.
It occurs to me that "a subsequent Saturday" could mean ANY subsequent Saturday rather than "THE IMMEDIATELY SUBSEQUENT" Saturday. Maybe that's just when they did the weekly mail-outs? In which case "after" could have been a much longer gap than "seven days". That does seem like a pretty short time for overseas mail at the time, come to think of it. I'm guessing the reason for the lack of specificity is that the letter might not have been dated. Unfortunately perhaps there is no copy of the reply Franklin sent to Pochard preceding this because Pochard's letters were not archived as well as Franklin's? WakandaQT ( talk) 16:37, 4 September 2020 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
The Law of Nations article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The 4th English translation from 1797 is at https://oll.libertyfund.org/titles/vattel-the-law-of-nations-lf-ed
Is there a copy of the 1st English translation from 1760 or the 2nd English translation from 1787 or the 3rd English translation from 1793 online somewhere? I'm curious to look at them for differences. WakandaQT ( talk) 05:02, 4 September 2020 (UTC)
I am wondering if someone could explain how we come to the conclusion that all three copies of the book that Franklin received from Dumas were
Is this context found somewhere in the letter itself, or is this rather evidenced in the copies actually being relocated?
If it is not in the letter itself then I think we would need additional sources explaining their language and publication dates.
Franklin refers to "your edition of Vattel" being kept. WakandaQT ( talk) 15:46, 4 September 2020 (UTC)
The 2nd note at bottom of https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Franklin/01-22-02-0172 mentions:
Would anyone know where the "below" for "Pochard to bf" on Oct. 11 refers to? I don't know if there was a hyperlink at some point in the original "Franklin Papers" that Archives.gov got this from?
This is the last use of "pochard" on this page but perhaps the structuring of the Franklin Papers was different and we lost some kind of foot note here? Basically want to read about these "subsequent adventures" perhaps to clarify who Vaillant was as this page uses no forename like it does with establishing Alexandre was who Franklin mention by Messr Pochard.
I'm thinking this https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Franklin/01-22-02-0385
The top title there says "To Benjamin Franklin from Alexandre Pochard, 11 October 1776" although weirdly the date in french is listed "Montreal Le 11 8bre. 1776."
Was "8bre" some kind of unusual French abbreviation for "October" ? In French it's similar "octobre" so I guess substituting "8" for "octo" might have been a common shorthand at the time? Okay so in reviewing this while the letter itself does not mention the name Vaillant there is a 5th note at the bottom which elaborates:
This note is after the sentence "Je ne demande pour la reparation des torts que jai endurés en mon particulier que la Continuation de vos bontés pour mon ami." so presumably Vaillant is the "mon ami".
In looking for the 17 Feb 1781 letter referenced above, I came across this 26 Nov 1780 one instead at https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Franklin/01-34-02-0041
The (4) below:
This posited possibility could be wrong, given that it's elsewhere established that Alexandre (not Joseph) is the one who is friends with M. Vaillant, although I guess plausibly both of them might've been friends with him. Does anyone know if there is a familial connection between Alex and Jo?
Okay finally found the Feb 17 letter at https://franklinpapers.org/framedVolumes.jsp?vol=34&page=379a002 which says:
Rough trans (google):
On 2nd glance I'm not entirely sure that the English letter to Franklin pertainining to Pochard+Vaillant was actually received November 26th. I had only focused on the title and overlooked these notes:
So it seems like this was actually just English translation (or paraphrasing, more like) of the letters that Franklin received during this time, and actually is describing the contents of the same letter. I guess I'm just super-confused why the head of the article says November 1780... I mean I could understand if perhaps it said "15 November 1980" (as that seems to be the estimated starting range of the letters) but instead it says 26 November 1980 which was 11 days later.
Now the only thing seems to be finding the "subsequent Saturday evening" letter Pochard sent to Franklin. 17 Feb 1781 was apparently a Saturday so the subsequent one would be seven days later: 24 Feb 1781. Presumably some time in between, Franklin had also sent a reply to Pochard prompting the thanks.
https://search.amphilsoc.org/collections/view?docId=ead/Mss.B.F85inventory06-ead.xml seems to be the 2nd (though there is no "next Saturday" or "Feb 24" indication):
Based on that summary, Pochard did not initially send the letter. First he sent a request to forward the letter and then presumably after Ben replied agreeing to forward it, he then send the letter itself in a followup with thanks to Ben for the agreement to forward.
It occurs to me that "a subsequent Saturday" could mean ANY subsequent Saturday rather than "THE IMMEDIATELY SUBSEQUENT" Saturday. Maybe that's just when they did the weekly mail-outs? In which case "after" could have been a much longer gap than "seven days". That does seem like a pretty short time for overseas mail at the time, come to think of it. I'm guessing the reason for the lack of specificity is that the letter might not have been dated. Unfortunately perhaps there is no copy of the reply Franklin sent to Pochard preceding this because Pochard's letters were not archived as well as Franklin's? WakandaQT ( talk) 16:37, 4 September 2020 (UTC)