The notation of music of the 18 th century is not very different from the one still in use today. But there is a need to transfer today unfamiliar signs and uses into a modern system. Transformations in music edition occur on different levels. They range – while retaining individual elements such as the tact signature or specific features of the formulation of expression designations – from the orthographic transfer of notes and text to supplements and the writing out of the information for the copyists or performers to the necessary transpositions of key. The aim is to create a modern, clear text, which is a reliable basis for a wide variety of uses and also informs the users about historical contexts.
Toward the end of this year the “Marburger Büchner edition digitized” (MBA digital) will be made accessible to the general public. The MBA digital is based on a print version which was published in 18 volumes in the years 2000 to 2013 and it contains the complete corpus of Georg Büchner’s writings comprising all manuscripts, all prints of editorial interest, synoptic versions, text presentations highlighting Büchners use of historical sources, and (inversely) the text of the sources used by Büchner. It contains extensive forms of commentary pertaining to the texts, their textual genetics, their shades of meaning and their importance at the time of writing. The MBA digital is both a historical critical edition and a knowledge store („Wissensspeicher“) as one critic called it. The article provides an introduction into the various features of this knowledge store and outlines the main phases in its historical development first as a print product and finally as a digital product covering a time span of fifty years.
Buber-Korrespondenzen Digital is a project focusing on the 41 000 preserved letters exchanged between Martin Buber and more than 7000 different correspondents. Due to the size of this corpus, the project has developed the concept of ‘modular editing’, which allows for different categories of documentation, ranging from simple bibliographic to content-related metadata and ‘full edition’. In this context, the responsibility of the future editor to help users find the texts relevant to them is highlighted. By discussing the concepts of ‚Regestausgabe‘, ‘semantic annotation’ (Dumont), ‘assertive edition’ and ‘proto-edition’ (Vogeler), the article attempts to situate the project within the landscape of scholarly editing.
Philological work is transformational work, and this is particularly true for textual criticism and critical editing. Nevertheless, philological epistemology has almost always maintained a somewhat hostile relationship to both the logic and practice of transformation or even has claimed a secure position outside the processes that are shaped by such transformations. The contribution sheds light on some aspects of this problematic relationship from a historical and methodological perspective and argues for a more friendly and pragmatic attitude – one that no longer conceptually locates philology in an illusionary ‘beyond’ of transformational processes.
The article discusses challenges that philosophical editions ought to deal with in times of the so called ‘digital transformation’. Not only the technical circumstances, but also business models, funding structures and relevant aspects of the ‘practice’ of text use are changing more drastically than is reflected in the actual reality of editions (i. e. edition projects in Germany). The author attempts to react to this by means of a combination of diagnostic reflections – in essay form. This is combined with a series of theses. The chosen perspective is that of the users of editions, i. e. those who want to continue to conduct historical-hermeneutical research in the future, using all conceivably suitable means.
The paper describes the process of developing a historical-critical digital edition of the Jägerstätter sources and discusses ways in which a digital edition project can be used, the working methods as well as challenges and obstacles of the digital project. The focus is not only on the newness of the edition and the sources but also on the significance of the biographies of the Austrian conscientious objector and his wife for contemporary educational work. It is shown how a digital edition can be used to convey historical knowledge about National Socialism to a broad public and how the reception and impact of the edition is formed.
This study examines Immanuel Kant’s involvement in the publication process of his On a Discovery, whereby Any New Critique of Pure Reason is to be Made Superfluous by an Older One (1790, 1791) based on three letters from Friedrich Nicolovius to Johann Jacob Gebauer. It highlights Kant’s meticulous preparation of the manuscript, his instructions for printing, and his post-publication corrections, including a typographical error in Greek. Despite Kant’s efforts, the first edition contained errors, some of which were addressed in the second edition, primarily through the work of Gebauer’s staff. The study challenges previous assumptions about Kant’s editorial involvement, emphasizing his limited role during the printing process. It also underlines the need for further research into the production history of Kant’s works. The findings contribute to a deeper understanding of Kant’s relationship with publishers and the logistical challenges of 18th-century book production.
The Weimar Edition of Goethe’s literary works, scientific writings, diaries, and letters (1887–1919) remains a scholarly landmark, although its deficits were recognized early on. The paper summarizes the history of efforts to replace and supplement this edition from the post-World War II era to the present, highlighting the development, current state, and future prospects of Goethe editions in the digital age. Integration is one of the key tasks. The PROPYLÄEN project was initiated in 2015 and aims to consolidate separate biographical editions – letters by Goethe, letters to Goethe, diaries, encounters, and conversations – into a unified research platform, thus enhancing accessibility and scholarly utility. Integration will also be essential for a comprehensive digital representation of Goethe’s literary works, given the size and complexity of the transmission and especially the textual overlaps between different works and biographical documents. The paper emphasizes the need to adapt editorial principles to new digital usage scenarios, while maintaining and redefining philological standards, and outlines a data architecture designed to facilitate integration and reuse within a broader research data landscape.
The question is what a commentary is in a general, non-text-genre-specific sense, and how much attention this question should claim for editing. To address this question, a sketch of a history of the practice of commentary and an analysis of the functions of commentary are outlined. Finally, theses concerning the characteristics of commentary in general and the specifics of a commentary on philosophical texts are discussed.
In the age of digital editions, editorial commentary needs to be discussed anew, especially since in practice the classical commentary on a particular passage appears to be a weak point of digital editions. The expected achievements of digital edition commentary (internal and external networking of the knowledge presented in the commentary; linking with standardised data; subsequent use of older, printed commentaries) are measured against the potential of letter commenting, i. e. the fact that letters comment each other; the connection of paradigmatic lemmas, emerging from registers, with syntagmatic lemmas, readable along the sequence of characters, with a favouring of the former option. While previous digital editions of letters were largely based on a print edition that had appeared either in parallel or in advance, future letter commentaries will further open the boundaries between intra- and extramural knowledge. In this context, Georg Vogeler’s concept of the ‘Semantic Digital Edition’ is discussed at the end.
The paper aims to explore the possibilities and opportunities of hybrid edition formats which primarily lie in the possibility of offering a linearly readable reference text in print, while the digital component makes development processes comprehensible and enables comparative cross-reading in larger collections of material. While the book as a medium presents a stable text, as is often preferred in literary studies and teaching, the text remains changeable and correctable in digital formats. Finally, the implementation of the opportunities of hybrid editions are collated with the project Edition der in Regenbogens ‚Brief- und Grundweise‘ und ‚Grauem Ton‘ überlieferten Lieder (University of Duisburg-Essen).
In contrast to their printed counterparts, digital scholarly editions of modern German literature do not attach central importance to the microprocesses of text creation. A corresponding view is the big exception in existing online edition projects in modern German studies. Usually, the texts are presented as diplomatic transcriptions and often do not allow a complete understanding of the microgenetic processes in the manuscripts. The new complete digital edition of Jeremias Gotthelf’s works and letters, however, exploits the philological potential of digital editing, making the genetic apparatus entirely visible directly at the corresponding passages in the edited text.
