Search results

von Eduard Sthamer ; Text dt., Anhang und Dokumente lat. ; Volltext // Exemplar mit der Signatur: München, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek -- 4 A.civ. 17 go-1/3

A note on the text and translation -- The role of correspondences -- The search for accord -- Leibniz and the Jesuits : China and the universal church -- Jansenism -- The metaphysics of substance -- The union of soul and body -- Composition and the unity of corporeal substance -- The problem of transubstantiation -- Leibniz on transubstantiation and the vinculum substantiale -- Leibniz's final metaphysics : idealism or realism? -- The Leibnizdes- Bosses correspondence -- Des Bosses to Leibniz, 25 January 1706 -- Leibniz to Des Bosses, 2 February 1706 -- Des Dosses to Leibniz, 12 February 1706 -- Leibniz to Des Bosses, 14 February 1706 -- Des Dosses to Leibniz, 2 March 1706 -- Leibniz to Des Bosses, 11 March 1706 -- Des Bosses to Leibniz, 21 May 1706 -- Leibniz to Des Bosses, 11 July 1706 -- Des Bosses to Leibniz, 20 August 1706 -- Leibniz to Des Bosses, 1 September 1706 -- Des Bosses to Leibniz, 17 September 1706 -- Leibniz to Des Bosses, 20 September 1706 -- Des Bosses to Leibniz, 29 September 1706 -- Leibniz to Des Bosses, 4 October 1706 -- Des Bosses to Leibniz, 14 October 1706 -- Leibniz to Des Bosses, 16 October 1706 -- Leibniz to Des Bosses, 5 February 1707 -- Des Bosses to Leibniz, 25 June 1707 -- Leibniz to Des Bosses, 21 July 1707 -- Leibniz to Des Bosses, 3 September 1708 -- Leibniz to Des Bosses, 12 September 1708 -- Des Bosses to Leibniz, 5 October 1708 -- Leibniz to Des Bosses, mid-October 1708 -- Des Bosses to Leibniz, 14 February 1709 -- Leibniz to Des Bosses, 16 March 1709 -- Des Bosses to Leibniz 22 April 1709 -- Leibniz to Des Bosses, 30 April 1709 -- Des Bosses to Leibniz, 30 July 1709 -- Leibniz to Des Bosses, 31 July 1709 -- Des Bosses to Leibniz, 6 September 1709 -- Leibniz to Des Bosses, 8 September 1709 -- Des Dosses to Leibniz, 18 January 1710 -- Des Dosses to Leibniz, 25 March 1710 -- Leibniz to Des Bosses, 2 May 1710 -- Des Bosses to Leibniz, 14 June 1710 -- Leibniz to Des Bosses, 2 July 1710 -- Des Bosses to Leibniz, 18 July 1710 -- Leibniz to Des Bosses, 4 August 1710 -- Des Dosses to Leibniz, 11 October 1710 -- Leibniz to Des Bosses, 7 November 1710 -- Des Bosses to Leibniz, 6 January 1711 -- Leibniz to Des Bosses, 8 February 1711 -- Des Bosses to Leibniz, 25 April 1711 -- Leibniz to Des Bosses, 8 July 1711 -- Des Bosses to Leibniz, 18 August 1711 -- Leibniz to Des Bosses, 7 September 1711 -- Des Bosses to Leibniz, 28 January 1712 -- Leibniz to Des Bosses, 15 February 1712 -- Des Dosses to Leibniz, 20 May 1712 -- Leibniz to Des Bosses, 26 May 1712 -- Des Bosses to Leibniz, 12 June 1712 -- Leibniz to Des Bosses, 16 June 1712 -- Des Bosses to Leibniz, 28 August 1712 -- Leibniz to Des Bosses, 20 September 1712 -- Leibniz to Des Bosses, 10 October 1712 -- Des Bosses to Leibniz, 12 December 1712 -- Leibniz to Des Bosses, 24 January 1713 -- Des Bosses to Leibniz, 8 August 1713 -- Leibniz to Des Bosses, 23 August 1713 -- Leibniz to Des Bosses, 10 January 1714 -- Des Bosses to Leibniz, 22 March 1714 -- Leibniz to Des Bosses, 21 April 1714 -- Des Bosses to Leibniz, 20 September 1714 -- Leibniz to Des Bosses, 15 March 1715 -- Des Bosses to Leibniz, 6 April 1715 -- Leibniz to Des Bosses, 29 April 1715 -- Leibniz to Des Bosses, 30 June 1715 -- Des Bosses to Leibniz, 20 July 1715 -- Leibniz to Des Bosses, 19 August 1715 -- Leibniz to Des Bosses, 13 January 1716 -- Leibniz to Des Bosses, 29 May 1716.

The Tractatus de origine et natura, iure et mutationibus monetarum of Nicholas Oresme, written in Latin in 1355-1356 and later translated in French by the author himself, might be seen as one of the most important works to read in perspective the late-medieval thought on the nature of money and the role of the sovereign and the political body of the community. This work, here offered in a newly revised Italian edition, built on some manuscripts preserved at the Bibliothèque Nationale de France , appears from the onset as having a particularly marked political vocation, as it is addressed to the king of France Charles the Fifth, of whom Oresme was an advisor. The Norman magister has often been portrayed as a fervent supporter of a metallist view of the nature of money, as if its value were nothing more than the market value of the gold or silver it was made of, a perspective that might be characterised as one of private-law. However, a thorough reading of Oresme's monetary writings, that takes good stock of their historical contextualisation in the troubled monetary anarchy of the 1350s and of the interpretative links pointing to Aristotle's Politics and Ethics – known, translated and glossed by Oresme –, reveals a more complex analysis, that cannot be confined to the all-out defence of the intrinsic metallic stability of money. Rather, the proposed interpretation will qualify Oresme as a political advisor that perceives and appreciates the nature of money as a social institution, whose value and role is determined by those, the whole body of the political community, that are sovereign over money and resort to it in negotiations. In this political dimension of the government of the monetary institution emerges the structural role that Oresme attributes to the faith that must rest with those tasked with governing money: thus, the accent posed on the importance of preserving its value assumes a procedural dimension that aims at granting that the institution of money continues to fulfil its social metric role. ; Il Tractatus sulla moneta del filosofo e teologo Nicola Oresme, redatto in latino nel 1355-1356 e poi tradotto in francese dallo stesso autore, costituisce uno dei testi cardine della riflessione medievale sullo statuto della moneta e su chi ne sia sovrano. Quest'opera - di cui si propone una nuova e riveduta edizione italiana, impostata a partire da alcuni manoscritti conservati presso la Bibliothèque Nationale de France - testimonia sin dal suo avvio la sua forte valenza politica, avendo come primo interlocutore Carlo V il Saggio, il re di Francia di cui Oresme fu consigliere. Il magister normanno è stato spesso salutato quale fautore di una visione metallista della moneta, una merce tra le altre che vale tanto quanto l'oro o l'argento di cui è fatta, inserita in un'ottica schiettamente privatistica. Tuttavia, una lettura più attenta degli scritti monetari oresmiani, che metta in prospettiva sia il periodo storico in cui il testo fu redatto, caratterizzato da una diffusa anarchia monetaria, sia le relazioni che il Trattato stesso suggerisce rispetto ai passaggi aristotelici conosciuti e poi commentati dallo stesso Oresme, rivela un pensiero più complesso e più profondo. La cifra sintetica della sua riflessione monetaria non è infatti riducibile a una difesa ad oltranza dell'intrinseco metallico, ma si qualifica per lo spessore politico e teorico espresso dal consigliere regale che vede e apprezza della moneta il suo significato istituzionale. Il suo valore è stabilito da chi di quella moneta può dirsi sovrano e, al tempo stesso, fruitore: la comunità politica tutta. La dimensione eminentemente politica dell'istituzione-moneta emerge proprio da una rilettura complessiva del trattato. In esso il ruolo della fiducia nell'amministratore della divisa assume un'importanza strutturale incidendo sul valore della moneta e sulla necessità che esso venga tutelato e garantito attraverso precise garanzie procedurali sicché la moneta possa mantenere il suo fondamentale ruolo sociale: quello di misura.