From: Regina Roth (roth@BBAW.DE)
Date: Wed Aug 23 2006 - 04:51:54 EDT
Ernesto, As Chris has already pointed out, the introduction to the "Kommunistische Zeitschrift" from September 1847 has not been written by Marx and/or Engels. Probably it was Karl Schapper who was chief editor of the journal, as indicated in the collection of sources on the "Bund der Kommunisten" (1970, ed. by Herwig Foerder, Martin Hundt, Jefim Kandel and Sofia Lewiowa for the Instituts for Marxism-Leninism in Berlin and Moscow, vol. 1, pp. 501ff., 1065f.) Also neither the first MEGA, vol. 6, ed. by V. Adoratsky in 1932, nor research done in the sphere of the Karl-Marx-Haus in Trier, who focussed on the 1840s, not only on Marx and Engels but also on other activists, give any hints that Marx or Engels contributed to the "Kommunistische Zeitschrift". So, it will not be taken up into the MEGA2, where the vol. I/6 will present the works, articles and drafts from January 1846 to February 1848. Regina ***************************************************************** Dr. Regina Roth Berlin-Brandenburgische Akademie der Wissenschaften - Marx-Engels-Gesamtausgabe - Jaegerstrasse 22/23 D-10117 Berlin Tel.: 030/20370274 e-mail: roth@bbaw.de ****************************************************************** Date sent: Tue, 22 Aug 2006 20:43:30 +0100 Send reply to: OPE-L <OPE-L@SUS.CSUCHICO.EDU> From: Christopher Arthur <arthurcj@WAITROSE.COM> Subject: Re: [OPE-L] Kommunistische Zeitschrift To: OPE-L@SUS.CSUCHICO.EDU > A final word. I think we can say with certainty that Marx and Engels > did not officially contribute anything to KZ. If you read the two > circulars of the CL sent out from London in 1847 you will see a) Wolff > was designated as editor for the journal proper; the specimen was put > out by a commission in London acting on behalf of the future editorial > board. So this means Schapper and Co. b) They complain they never > received any articles except for one from Wolff 'so we had to do > everything ourselves'. c) It isn't clear (unless DR says) which > article that was; nor of course whether he received any advice from M > & E. d) I can find no reference to this newspaper in M & E. E doesn't > mention it in his history of the League. He surely would have done if > he had written for it. So I am sure this is a false attribution (not > the first time this has happened to Marx). Chris On 22 Aug 2006, at > 18:35, Christopher Arthur wrote: > > > Ernesto. > > > > There are major doubts about it because, like most of the journal, > > the piece is unsigned as your sources should have said. Although I > > do not have Riazanov I recall clearly that he made no suggestion > > that M or E might have authored any part of it. (Has it been > > reprinted I wonder.) In sum, eminent scholars from Russia, Germany > > (MEW), and the USA, have failed to make such an attribution. If your > > sources have proof this is very important and should be made widely > > known. What do they say on this? what text did they translate from? > > Unfortunately the relevant volume of new MEGA is not out I believe. > > As to 'influence', a quick scan of Draper's Chronicle suggests to me > > Wolff, Marx and Engels, were all in Brussels at the relevant time, > > so one can speculate..... > > > > Chris > > > > On 22 Aug 2006, at 16:22, Ernesto Screpanti wrote: > > > >> Chris, > >> > >> thank you very much for the information about Ryazanoff's edition. > >> As to attribution to Marx and Engels, I did not immagine there > >> were > >> doubts on it. Both the Italian and the French edition do this > >> attribution. > >> Who knows who is right? > >> Perhaps the MEGA3 edition clarifies the question. Does anybody > >> know > >> if this Introduction is included in it? > >> > >> Ernesto > >> > >> At 12.18 22/08/2006 +0100, you wrote: > >> > >> Ernesto > >> Why do you think they wrote it? I think it is highly unlikely. 1. > >> MECW would have included it, but they content themselves in the > >> note by saying that M&E's influence in the journal contents can be > >> detected. > >> 2. Draper does not mention it > >> 3. The editor was Wolff so he probably wrote it. > >> 4. A piece attacking Cabet's emigration plan has previously been > >> wrongly attributed to Marx. It was probably by Schapper. > >> 5. There would be no reason for M&E to write together despite the > >> one off commission to do the CM which happened shortly thereafter. > >> 6. M and E, separately, were active publishing during this period > >> but they did so in the Deutsche Brusseler Zeitung, a communist > >> journal edited by Bornstadt, very understandably since Marx was > >> living there and E in Paris. > >> 7. There is an English translation of the whole journal in D > >> Ryazanoff *The communist Manifesto of Karl Marx and Frederick > >> Engels* (London martin Lawrence 1930) Appendix. I don't have it to > >> hand so I cannot report his editorial view. > >> 8. Incidentally the epigraph to the journal was Workers of the > >> world > >> unite - the first public appearance of this slogan. > >> Chris A > >> > >> On 21 Aug 2006, at 14:09, Ernesto Screpanti wrote: > >> > >> > >> Does anybody know if there is an English translation of Marx's and > >> Engels' Introduction to 'Kommunistische Zeitschrift", n.1, London, > >> September 1847? > >> This journal was an organ of the Leage of Communists. But only n. > >> 1 > >> came out. > >> Marx and Engels Introduction is very important from a political > >> point of view, because they criticise certain autoritarian > >> doctrines of communism. > >> I found an Italian and a French translation, but not an English > >> version, not even in the MECW. Who knows if there is one? > >> > >> Ernesto Screpanti > >> > >> </blockquote></x-html> >
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Aug 31 2006 - 00:00:03 EDT