Notes
1On the complicated composition of De Corpore, see Noel Malcolm, ‘The Printing and Editing of Hobbes's De Corpore: A Review of Karl Schuhmann's Edition’, in Luc Foisneau and George Wright (eds), New Critical Perspectives on Hobbes's Leviathan (Milano: Franco Angeli, 2004), pp. 329–57.
2Page references to Leviathan are give to the Molesworth edition in the form EW 3: xxx followed by the corresponding page reference to the Head edition in the form H yyy.
3Many other examples of the Editors' ingenuity could be produced, such as this one. The Egerton manuscript (MS) reads ‘For though the Effect of folly (for Example)’ while the Head edition reads ‘(For example,) Though the effect of folly’. The Editors explain the parentheses as likely being introduced by ‘a sign for inverting’ the phrase ‘for Example’ and mistakenly not removed (1: 81).
4Noel Malcolm, ‘The Printing of the “Bear”: New Light on the Second Edition of Hobbes's Leviathan’, in Aspects of Hobbes (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 2002), pp. 341–2.
5Malcolm, ‘The Printing of the “Bear”’, p. 338.
6Malcolm, ‘The Printing of the “Bear”’, pp. 345–6
7Malcolm, ‘The Printing of the “Bear”’, pp. 348.
8Malcolm, ‘The Printing of the “Bear”’, pp. 341–2 and 358.
9Cf. Malcolm, ‘The Printing of the “Bear”’, pp. 358–60.
10The Editors say that small paper copies are about 29.8 cm long. The three copies at the University of Texas are about 27.1, 27.8, and 28.7 cm. The thickness of the paper also varies. Were there, in effect, three or more ‘printings’ of the Head edition?
11The table of the sciences is printed on an oddly shaped piece of broadside paper. It attaches to the binding by a ‘neck’ of paper and the bottom contains the instruction, ‘Place this Table between folio 40. and 41.’ (Cf. 1: 72.)
12Part of the research for this review was supported by a travel grant by the Religious Studies Program, University of Texas at Austin.