MARXIST INTERNET ARCHIVE |  Marx Engels

Marx-Engels Collected Works

Editors’ Footnotes from Volume 1

1 Reflections of a Young Man on the Choice of a Profession — an essay written by Marx at the school leaving examinations at the Royal Frederick William III gymnasium in Trier in August 1835. Only seven of Marx’s examination papers have been preserved: the above-mentioned essay on a subject at the writer’s choice, a Latin essay on the reign of Augustus and a religious essay (both are published in the appendices to this volume), a Latin unseen, a translation from the Greek, a translation into French, and a paper in mathematics (all of which are published in: Marx/Engels, Historisch-Kritische Gesamtausgabe, Erste Abteilung, Band 1, Zweiter Halbband, Berlin, 1929, S. 164-82).

In the original there are numerous underscorings presumably made by the history and philosophy teacher, the then headmaster of the gymnasium, Johann Hugo Wyttenbach (they are not reproduced in the present edition). He also made the following comment: “Rather good. The essay is marked by a wealth of thought and a good systematised narration. But generally the author here too made a mistake ‘ peculiar to him-he constantly seeks for elaborate picturesque expressions. Therefore many passages which are underlined lack the necessary clarity and definiteness and often precision in separate expressions as well as in whole paragraphs.”

In English this essay was published in 1961 in the United States, in the journal The New Scholasticism, Vol. XXXV, No. 2, Baltimore-Washington, pp. 197-20 1, and in Writings of the Young Marx on Philosophy and Society, New York, 1967, pp. 35-39.

2 Letter from Marx to His Father — this is the only letter written by Marx in his student years which has been preserved. Of all Marx’s letters that are extant, this is the earliest. It was published in English in the collections: The Young Marx, London, 1967, pp. 135-47, Writings of the Young Marx on Philosophy and Society, New York, 1967, pp. 40-50 and Karl Marx. Early Texts, translated and edited by David McLellan, University of Kent at Canterbury, Oxford, 1971, pp. 1-10.

3 The Pandect-compendium of Roman civil law (Corpus iurus civilis) made by order of the Emperor of the Eastern Roman Empire Justinian 1 in 528-534. The Pandect or the Digest contained excerpts from works in civil and criminal law by prominent Roman jurists.

4 The work mentioned is not extant.

5 Marx quotes these passages from memory.

6 This refers to the classification of contracts in Immanuel Kant’s Die Metaphysik der Sitten. Theil I. Metaphysische Anfangsgründe der Rechtslehre, Königsberg, 1797-98.

7 The philosophical dialogue mentioned here has not been preserved.

8 The Doctors’ Club was founded by representatives of the radical wing of the Hegelian school in Berlin in 1837. Among its members were lecturer on theology of Berlin University Bruno Bauer, gymnasium history teacher Karl Friedrich Köppen and geography teacher Adolf Rutenberg. The usual meeting place was the small Hippel café. The Club, of which Marx was also an active member, played an important part in the Young Hegelian movement.

9 The work has not been preserved.

10 Marx refers to the Deutscher Musenalmanach, a liberal annual published in Leipzig from 1829.

11 As is seen from Heinrich Marx’s letter of September 16, 1837, to his son (see this volume, p. 680), Karl Marx intended at that time to publish a journal of theatrical criticism.

12 The letter has not survived.

13 These two poems, written in 1837, were included in a book of verse dedicated to Karl Marx’s father (see this volume, pp. 531-632). The general title Wild Songs was introduced when the poems were published in the journal Athendum in 1841. The text of both poems was reproduced with slight alterations. In 71e Fiddler two lines

“Fort aus dem Haus, fort aus dem Blick, Willst Kindlein spielen urn dein Genick?” (“Away from the house, away from the look, 0 child, do you seek to risk your neck?")

coming in the original in the fifth stanza after the lines

“How so! I plunge, plunge without fail
My blood-black sabre into your soul”

were omitted.

A comment on the Wild Songs was published in the Frankfurter Konversationsblatt No. 62 of March 3, 1841. Though unfavourably commenting on the form, the paper admitted the author’s “original talent”.

In English the poems were published in the book: R. Payne, Marx, New York, 1968, pp. 62-64.

14. Marx’s work Difference Between the Democritean and Epicurean Philosophy of Nature is part of a general research on the history of ancient philosophy which he planned as far back as 1839.

During his research on ancient philosophy Marx compiled the preparatory Notebooks on Epicurean Philosophy (see this volume, pp. 401-509). In early April 1841 Marx submitted his work to the Faculty of Philosophy of the University of Jena as a dissertation for a doctor’s degree (see this volume, p. 379) and received the degree on April 15. He intended to have his work printed and for this purpose wrote the dedication and the foreword dated March 1841. However, he did not succeed in getting it published, although he thought of doing so again at the end of 1841 and beginning of 1842.

Marx’s own manuscript of the thesis has been lost. What remains is an incomplete copy written by an unknown person. This copy has corrections and insertions in Marx’s handwriting. Texts of the fourth and fifth chapters of Part One and the Appendix, except for one fragment, are missing. Each chapter of Part One and Part Two has its own numeration of the author’s notes. These notes, in the form of citations from the sources and additional commentaries, are also incomplete. They are given, according to the copy of the manuscript which has survived, after the main text of the dissertation and marked in the text, in distinction to the editorial notes, by numbers and brackets. Obvious slips of the pen have been corrected. Changes made by Marx which affect the meaning are specified.

In the first publication of the thesis in Aus dem Literischen Nachlass" von Kar1 Marx, Friedrich Engels und Ferdinand Lassalle, Bd. I, Stuttgart, 1902, the fragments from the Appendix "Critique of Plutarch’s Polemic Against the Theology of Epicurus", have been omitted as well as all the author’s notes except for some excerpts. The first publication in full (according to the part of the manuscript that has been preserved) was carried out by the Institute of Marxism-Leninism, CC CPSU, in 1927 in Volume One of MEGA (Marx/Engels, Historisch-Kritische Gesamtausgabe, Erste Abteilung, Band 1, Erster Halbband, S. 3-81).

The first translation into English was done by the Austrian-born Kurt Karl Merz in 1946 in Melbourne (a typewritten copy of it is kept in the Institute of Marxism-Leninism, CC CPSU, in Moscow). The foreword to the thesis was published in the collection: K. Marx and F. Engels, On Religion Moscow, 1957, pp. 13-15. In 1967 a translation by Norman D. Livergood was published in the book: Activity in Marx’s Philosophy, Hague, 1967, pp. 55-109. Two excerpts from the dissertation (see this volume, pp. 84-87 and 103-05) were published in Writings of the Young Marx on Philosophy and Society, New York, 1967, pp. 60-66, and Kari Marx. Early Texts, Oxford, 1971, pp. 11-22.

15 Marx here refers to the book Petri Gassendi, Animadversiones in decimum librum Diogenis Laertii, qui est De Vita, Moribus, Placitisque Epicuri, Ludguni, 1649.

16 Marx never realised his plan to write a larger work on the Epicurean, Stoic and Sceptic philosophies.

17 This refers to the following passage from the book by Karl Friedrich Köppen, Friedrich der Grosse und seine Widersacher, Leipzig, 1840: "Epikureismus, Stoikismus und Skepsis und die Nervenmuskel und Eingeweidesysteme des antiken Organismus, deren unmittelbare, natürliche Einheit die Schönheit und Sittlichkeit des Altertums bedingte, und die beim Absterben desselben auseinanderfielen" (S. 39) ("Epicureanism, Stoicism and Scepticism are the nerve muscles and intestinal system of the antique organism whose immediate, natural unity conditioned the beauty and morality of antiquity, and which disintegrated with the decay of the latter"). Köppen dedicated his book to Karl Marx.

18. Marx quotes David Hume’s A Treatise of Human Nature from the German translation: David Hume über die menschliche Natur aus Englischen nebst kritischen Versuchen zur Beurtheilung dieses Werks von Ludwig Heinrich Jakob, 1. Bd., Über den menschlichen Verstand, Halle, 1790, S. 485.

19 Marx quotes from a letter by Epicurus to Menoeceus; see Diogenes Laertii de clarorum philosophorum vitis, dogmatibus et apophthegmatibus libri decem (X, 123).

20 Gymnosophists - Greek name for Indian sages.

21 Ataraxy- in ancient Greek ethics- tranquillity. In Epicurean ethics - the ideal of life; state of the sage who has attained inner freedom through knowledge of nature and deliverance from fear of death.

22 The manuscripts of "General Difference in principle Between the Democritean and Epicurean Philosophy of Nature" and "Result" have not been found.

23 Characterising here the gods of Epicurus, Marx, obviously, had in mind the remark by Johann Joachim Winckelmann in his book Geschichte der Kunst des Altelluim, 2 Teile, Dresden, 1767: "The beauty of the deities in their virile age consists in the combination of the strength of mature years and the joyfulness of youth, and this consists here in the lack of nerves and sinews, which are less apparent in the flowering of the years. But in this lies also an expression of divine self-containment which is not in need of the parts of our body which serve for its nourishment; and this illuminates Epicurus’ opinion concerning the shape of the gods to which he gives a body, which looks like a body, and blood, but which looks like blood, something which Cicero considers obscure and inconceivable".

24 Hyrcanian Sea-ancient name of the Caspian Sea.

25 The reference is probably to the commentaries by johann Baptist Carl Niirnberger and johann Gottlob Schncider on the following editions: Diogems Laertius. De vitis, dogmatibus et aethegmatibus liber decimus graece et latine separation editus... a Carolo Nürnbergerg Norimbergae, 1791 (the second edition appeared in 1808) and Epicuri physica et meteorologica duabus epistolis eiusdem compmhenia. Graeca ad fidem librorum sciiptorum et editorum emandavit atque interpretatus est. jo. Gottl. Schneider, Lipsiae, 1813.

26 This is not Metrodorus of Lampsacus, the disciple of Epicurus, but Metrodorus of Chios, the disciple of Democritus, named incorrectly by Stobaeus (in the author’s note) as the teacher of Epicurus. The same lines may be found in the fifth notebook on Epicurean philosophy (see this volume, pp. 96 and 486).

27 Two fragments from the Appendix have been preserved: the beginning of the first paragraph of Section Two and the author’s notes to Section One. The general title of the Appendix, which is missing in the first fragment, is reproduced here according to the contents (see this volume, p. 33). The text of this fragment corresponds almost word for word to the text of the third notebook on Epicurean philosophy (see this volume, pp. 452-54) and was written in an unknown hand on paper of the same kind as the text of the notebook. On this ground some scholars assume that this fragment does not belong to the Doctoral dissertation, but is part of a non-extant work on ancient philosophy. The content of the fragment, however, and the quotations from Plutarch in it are closely connected with the author’s notes to the Appendix (see this volume, pp. 102-05). As the available data do not yet permit a final decision as to where this fragment belongs, in this edition it is included in the Doctoral dissertation.

28 The reference is to Plutarch’s mystic conception of three eternally existing categories of men.

29 In the manuscript of the author’s notes all quotations are given in the original-Greek or Latin. While Marx, in the Notebooks on Epicurean Philosophy, quotes Diogenes Laertius according to Pierre Gassendi’s edition (Lyons, 1649), in his notes to the dissertation he quotes from the Tauchnitz edition of Diogenes Laertius, De vitis philosorum libri.... X, T. 1-2, Lipsiae, 1833. Editorial explanatory insertions are given in square brackets when necessary.

30 Massilians were the citizens of the city of Massilia, now Marseilles, founded circa 600 B. C. as a Greek colony by Ionic Phocaeans. The battle of Marius with the German Cimbri tribes who invaded Caul and Northern Italy took place in 101 B. C. near Vercelli.

31 Marx refers here to the struggle between different trends in the German philosophy of the late thirties and early forties of the nineteenth century. By the "liberal party" Marx means here the Young Hegelians. The most advanced of the Young Hegelians (Ludwig Feuerbach, Bruno Bauer, Arnold Ruge) took the stand of atheism and political radicalism. In answer to this evolution of the Left wing of the Hegelian school, the conservative German philosophers united under the banner of the so-called positive philosophy- a religious-mystical trend (Christian Hermann Weisse, Immanuel Hermann Fichte junior, Franz Xaver von Baader, Anton Gunther and others), which criticised Hegel’s philosophy from the right. The "positive philosophers" tried to make philosophy subservient to religion by proclaiming divine revelation the only source of "positive" knowledge. They called negative every philosophy which recognised rational cognition as its source.

32 Marx cites (in the manuscript in French) from the book System de La nature, ou des du monde physique et du monde moral. Par. M. Mirabaud, Secrétaire Perpétuel et 1’un des Quarante de l’Académie Francaise, Londres, 1770. The real author of the book was the French philosopher Paul Holbach, who for the sake of secrecy put the name of J. Mirabaud, the secretary of the French Academy, on his book (J. Mirabaud died in 1760).

33 Both Friedrich Schelling’s works quoted by Marx (Philosophische Briefe uber Dogmatismus und Kriticismus and Vom Ich als Princip der Philosophie, oder uber das Unbedingte im menschlichen Wissen) appeared in 1795. Later Schelling renounced his progressive views and turned to religious mysticism. In 1841 Schelling was invited by the Prussian authorities to the University of Berlin to oppose the influence of the representatives of the Hegelian school, the Young Hegelians in particular.

34 Marx probably refers to the 13th lecture on the history of religion delivered by Hegel at the University of Berlin during the summer term of 1829.

35 The reference is to Kant’s critique of different ways of proving God’s existence in his Kritik der reinen Vernunft (Critique of Pure Reason).

36 Marx refers to the following remark made by Kant in his Critique of Pure Reason in connection with the speculation on the logical meaning of the elements of reasoning (subject, predicate and the copula "is"): "... A hundred real talers do not contain the least coin more than a hundred possible talers. For as the latter signify the concept, and the former the object and the positing of the object, should the former contain more than the latter, my concept would not, in that case, express the whole object, and would not therefore be an adequate concept of it. My financial position is, however, affected very differently by a hundred real talers than it is by the mere concept of them (that is, of their possibility). For the object, as it actually exists, is not analytically contained in my concept, but is added to my concept (which is a determination of my state) synthetically; and yet the conceived hundred talers are not themselves in the least increased through thus acquiring existence outside my concept."

37 Wends — old name of West Slavic tribes.

38 At the end of 1841 and beginning of 1842 Marx made a new attempt to publish his dissertation. He drafted the beginning of a new preface in which many passages were altered or crossed out. It was probably at the same period that he wrote the note against Schelling which was inserted in Marx’s handwriting in the copy of the manuscript.

39 Comments on the Latest Prussian Censorship Instruction was the first work written by Marx as a revolutionary journalist. It was occasioned by the censorship instruction of the Prussian Government of December 24, 1841. Though formulated in moderate liberal terms, the instruction actually not only retained but intensified the censorship of the press. Written between January 15 and February 10, 1842, just after the publication of the instruction in the press (it was published in the Allgemeine Preussische Staats-Zeitung No. 14, January 14, 1842; Marx cites from this publication), the article was originally intended for the Deutsche Jahrbücher under the editorship of Arnold Ruge (see this volume, p. 381) but because of the censorship restrictions it was published only in 1843 in Switzerland in Anekdota which contained works by appositional authors, mostly Young Hegelians.

Excerpts from the article were reprinted in the Mannheimer Abendzeitung Nos. 71 and 72, March 26 and 28, 1843.

In 1851 Hermann Becker, a member of the Communist League, made an attempt to publish Marx’s collected works in Cologne. On the author’s initiative the first issue began with this article (see Gesammette Aufsätze von Karl Marx, herausgegeben von Hermann Becker, 1. Heft, Köln, 1851). However, the publication was ceased because of the government repressions.

The first English translation of the article appeared in Writings of the Young Marx on Philosophy and Society, New York, 1967, pp. 67-92, and an excerpt from it in Karl Marx. Early Texts, Oxford, 1971, pp. 26-30. P. 109

40 The reference is to the Bundesakte adopted by the Congress of Vienna on June 8, 1815. The Act proclaimed the formation of a German Confederation consisting initially of 34 independent states and four free cities. The Act virtually sanctioned the political dismemberment of Germany and the maintaining of the monarchical estate system in the German states.

Article 18 of the Act vaguely mentioned a forthcoming drafting of uniform instructions providing for “freedom of the press” in the states of the German Confederation. However, this article remained on paper. The Provisional Federal Act on the Press of September 20, 1819 (it remained provisional for ever), introduced preliminary censorship for all publications of not more than 20 signatures (actually all periodicals) throughout Germany as well as a series of other restrictions.

41 Lettre de cacheta secret royal order for the imprisonment or exile of any person without judge or jury. This method of reprisals against appositional elements and undesirable persons was widely used in France in the period of absolutism, especially under Louis XIV and Louis XV.

42 An allusion to the negotiations of Prussian diplomats with the Pope concerning the disagreements between the Prussian Government and the Catholic Church known as the “Cologne” or “church conflict”. The conflict concerning the religious denomination of children of mixed marriages between Catholics and Protestants arose in 1837 with the arrest of C. A. Droste-Vischering, Archbishop of Cologne, who was accused of high treason for refusing to obey the orders of Frederick William Ill, the King of Prussia. It ended in 1841 under Frederick William IV with the Prussian Government yielding to the Catholic Church (see Marx’s letter to Ruge of July 9, 1842, pp. 389-90 of this volume).

43 The article Proceedings of the Sixth Rhine Province Assembly. First Article. Debates on Freedom of the Press and Publication of the Proceedings of the Assembly of the Estates was Marx’s first contribution to the Rheinische Zeitung für Politik, Handel und Gewerbe. Marx began his work as a contributor and in October 1842 became one of the editors of the newspaper. By its content and approach to vital political problems, the article helped the newspaper, founded by the appositional Rhenish bourgeoisie as a liberal organ, to begin a transition to the revolutionary-democratic positions.

The appearance of Marx’s article in the press raised a favourable response in progressive circles. Georg Jung, manager of the Rheinische Zeitung, wrote to Marx: “Your articles on freedom of the press are extremely good.... Meyen wrote that the Rheinische Zeitung had eclipsed the Deutsche Jahrbücher ... that in Berlin everybody was overjoyed with it” (MEGA, Abt. 1, Bd. 1, Hb. 2, S. 275). In his comments on the article published in the Rheinische Zeitung Arnold Ruge wrote: “Nothing more profound and more substantial has been said or could have been said on freedom of the press and in defence of it” (Deutsche Jahbücher, 1842, S. 535-36).

In the early 1850s Marx included this article in his collected works then being prepared for publication by Hermann Becker (see Note 39). However only the beginning of the article was included in the first issue. The major part of the text which had been published in the Rheinische Zeitung No. 139 was left unprinted. The end of the article was intended for the following issue, which was never published.

A copy of the Rheinische Zeitung which Marx sent from London to Becker in Cologne in February 1851 with the author’s notes on the text of the articles (mostly in the form of abbreviations) intended for the edition Becker was preparing has recently been found in the archives of Cologne University library. This copy of the newspaper proves that Marx thought of publishing-partly in an abridged form- many of his articles written for the Rheinische Zeitung. However, his plan was not realised. Marginal notes show that the articles “Communal Reform and the Kölnische Zeitung” and “A Correspondent of the Kölnische Zeitung vs. the Rheinische Zeitung belong to Marx. These articles have never been published in any collection of Marx’s works.

In English an excerpt from the Proceedings was published in Karl Marx. Early Texts, Oxford, 1971, pp. 35-36.

44 Marx devoted three articles to the debates of the Sixth Rhine Province Assembly, only two of which, the first and the third, were published. In the first article Marx proceeded with his criticism of the Prussian censorship which he had begun in his as yet unpublished article “Comments on the Latest Prussian Censorship Instruction”. The second article, devoted to the conflict between the Prussian Government and the Catholic Church, was banned by the censors. The manuscript of this article has not survived, but the general outline of it is given by Marx in his letter to Ruge of July 9, 1842 (see this volume, pp. 389-90). The third article is devoted to the debates of the Rhine Province Assembly on the law on wood thefts.

45 Assemblies of the estates were introduced in Prussia in 1823. They embraced the heads of princely families, representatives of the knightly estate, i.e., the nobility, of towns and rural communities. The election system based on the principle of landownership provided for a majority of the nobility in the assemblies. The competency of the assemblies was restricted to questions of local economy and administration. They also had the right to express their desires on government bills submitted for discussion.

The Sixth Rhine Province Assembly was in session from May 23 to July 25, 1841, in Düsseldorf. Ale debates dealt with in the article took place during the discussion on publication of the proceedings of the assemblies (this right had been granted by the Royal edict of April 30, 1841) and in connection with petitions of a number of towns on freedom of the press.

Citations in the text are given according to the Sitzungs-Protokolle des sechsten Rheinischen Provinziat-Landtags, Koblenz, 1841.

46 The reference is to the article “Die inlandische Presse u. die inlandische Statistik”, published in the Allgemeine Preussische Staats-Zeitung No. 86, March 26,1842. Marx cited mainly from this article, and also from two other articles, “Die Wirkung der Zensur-Verfiigung vom 24. Dezember 1841and “Die Besprechung inlandscher Angelegenheiten,” published in the same newspaper in Nos. 75 and 78, March 16 and 19, 1842, respectively.

47 Vossische Zeitung — the name given after its owner to the daily Königlich privilegirte Berlinische Zeitung von Staats und gelehnen Sachen.

48 Spenerche Zeitung -the name given after its publisher to the Berlinische Nachrichten von Staats- und gelehrten Sachen which was a semiofficial government organ at the beginning of the 1840s.

49 Marx ironically compares Prussian officialdom’s enthusiasm for statistics with the ardent philosophical systems which assigned a special importance to signs and numbers. He hints in particular at the ardent Chinese “I Ching” writings, of which Confucius was considered in the nineteenth century to be one of the first commentators. According to the philosophical conception laid down in them, hu signs, which were formed from variou-s combinations of three continuous or broken lines, symbolised things and natural phenomena.

When calling Pythagoras the “universal statistician” Marx had in mind the ancient Greek philosophers’ conceptions of number as the essence of all things.

50 The reference is to positive philosophy. See Note 31.

51 By this Marx meant Heraclitus’ maxim: The dry soul is the wisest and the best.

52 The reference is to the Provisional Federal Act on the Press for the German states adopted on September 20, 1819 (see Note 40).

53 The reference is to the historical school of law — a trend in history and jurisprudence which originated in Germany at the end of the eighteenth century. Its representatives (Gustav Hugo and Friedrich Carl von Savigny) tried to justify the privileges enjoyed by the nobility and the existence of feudal institutions by eternal historical traditions. An assessment of this school is given by Marx in the article “The Philosophical Manifesto of the Historical School of Law” (ace this volume, pp. 203-10).

54 By the decision of the Vienna Congress of 1815, Belgium and Holland were incorporated in the single kingdom of the Netherlands, Belgium being actually subordinated to Holland. Belgium became an independent constitutional monarchy after the bourgeois revolution of 1830.

55 Ku — see Note 49.

56 Marx cites these and the following lines of Hariri’s poem from Friedrich Rückert’s Die Verwandiungen des Abu Stid von Semg, oder die Mahamm des Hariri Stuttgart, 1826.

57 This work is the beginning of a critical article which Marx planned to write against the abstract, nihilist treatment of the problem of state central station in the article by Moses Hess, “Deutschland und Frankreich in bezug auf die Zentralstionsfrage,” which was published in the Supplement to the Rheinische Zeitung No. 137 of May 17, 1842.

Marx’s article was evidently not finished. The part which was written has survived in manuscript form.

It was first published in English in Writings of the Young Ma7x on Philosophy and Society, New York, 1967, pp. 106-08.

58 This article was occasioned by attacks on the trend of the Rheinische Zeitung on the part of the influential Kölnische Zeitung, which defended the Catholic Church in the 1840s. In 1842 the Kölnische Zeitung, under the editorship of Karl Hermes, a secret agent of the Prussian Government, took an active part in the campaign against the progressive press and progressive philosophical trends, the Young Hegel’s in particular.

The article was published in English in the collections: K. Marx and F. Engels, On Religion, Moscow, 1957, pp. 16-40, and Writings of the Young Marx on Philosophy and Society, New York, 1967, pp. 109-30.

59 Marx cites Lucian from Griechische Prosaiker in neuen Übersetzungen. Fünftes Bindchen, Stuttgart, 1827, S. 176.

60 Vedas — ancient Hindu religious and literary works in verse and prose written over several centuries, not later than the sixth century B.C.

61 This wording is given in Article 3 of La Chart octroye — the fundamental law of the Bourbon monarchy proclaimed in 1814, and in La Charm bâclée proclaimed on August 14, 1830, after the July bourgeois revolution in France. While introducing some changes into the constitution of the French monarchy (certain restrictions of royal power, lowering of age and property qualifications, the practice of open debates in the Chambers, etc.), the second charter retained essentially the main principles laid down in the charter of 1814 granted by the Bourbons after the restoration.

62 Here and further Marx cites from Allgemeines Landrecht für die Preussische Staaten, second edition, Berlin, 1794.

63 Code Napoléon — a civil code published in 1804; it was introduced also in West and South-West Germany conquered by Napoleon and continued in force in the Rhine Province after its union with Prussia in 1815. It was a classical code of bourgeois society.

64 An allusion to the participation of the editor of the Kölnische Zeitung Hermes in the appositional movement of the German students in his youth.

65 Corybantes — priestesses of the goddess Cybele; Cabiri were priests of the ancient Greek divinities. The Corybantes and Cabiri were identified in Asia Minor with the Curetes, priests of Rhea, the mother of Zeus. According to mythology the Curetes clashed their weapons to drown the cries of the infant Zeus and thus saved him from his father, Cronus, who devoured his own children.

66 By this Marx means the attacks of the German press against the philosophical critique of religion which began with Strauss’ book Das Leben Jesus the first volume of which appeared in 1835.

67 Deutsche Jahrbücher — abbreviated title of the Left Hegelian literary-philosophical journal Deutsche Jahrbücher für Wissenschaft und Kunst. The journal was published in Leipzig from July 1841 and edited by Arnold Ruge. Earlier (1838-41) it came out under the title Hallische Jahrbücher für deutsche Wissenschaft und Kunst. Its name was changed and publication transferred from the Prussian town of Halle to Saxony because of the threat of suppression in the Prussian state. However, it did not last long under its new name. In January 1843 it was closed by the Government of Saxony and its further publication was prohibited throughout Germany by the Federal Diet (Bundestag).

68 When this article was published in the Rheinische Zeitung, one of the sections, “The Chapter on Marriage”, was banned by the censors. It appeared in full only in 1927. In the present edition the article is reproduced, as in all previous complete publications, according to the manuscript, which is extant.

The article was published in English in Writings of the Young Marx on Philosophy and Society, New York, 1967, pp. 96-105.

69 Papageno — a character in Mozart’s opera Die Zauberflöte, a bird-catcher who clad himself in feathers.

70 The reference is to a pamphlet written by the German jurist Friedrich Carl von Savigny in 1838 on the occasion of Gustav Hugo’s jubilee -the fiftieth anniversary of his being awarded a doctor’s degree: Der Zehente Mai 1788. Beytrag zur Geschichte der Rechtswissenschaft (Berlin, 1838).

71 Marx cites the first volume of Benjamin Constant’s De la religion (Book 2, Ch. 2, pp. 172-73, Paris edition, 1826). A detailed synopsis of this work written by Marx in Bonn in 1842 has survived.

72 Marx refers here to the preaching of “free love” in the works of some of the Young Germany writers.

Young Germany — a group of writers which emerged in the 1830s in Germany and was influenced by Heinrich Heine and Ludwig Bisme. The Young Germany writers (Karl Gutzkow, Ludolf Wienbarg, Theodor Mundt and others) came out in defence of freedom of conscience and the press, their writings, fiction and journalists, reflecting opposition sentiments of the petty-bourgeoisie and intellectuals. The views of the Young Germans were politically vague. Soon the majority of them turned into mere liberals.

73 An allusion to Savigny’s book Vom Beruf umrer Zeit für Gesetzgebung und Rechtswissenschaft, Heidelberg, 1814, and to Savigny’s appointment as Minister of Justice for the revision of the law in 1842.

74 This article was written in connection with the attacks made by the German philosopher Otto Friedrich Gruppe on Bruno Bauer’s book Kritik der evangelischen Geschichte der Synoptiker. Attacking the leader of the Young Hegelians in his pamphlet Bruno Bauer und die akademische Lehrfreiheit, Gruppe tried under the guise of non-partisanship and neutrality in philosophy to discredit Bauer as a critic of the gospel sources. In his article Marx cites and slightly paraphrases Gruppe’s statement: “The writer of these lines has never served any party and has not been influenced by anybody.” The Young Hegelian journal Deutsche Jahrbücher replied with a series of articles in defence of Bruno Bauer.

75 Marx expounds the statement made by the Protestant theologian Joachim Neander in his book Das Leben Jesu Christi in seinem geschichtlichen Zusammenhange und seiner geschichtlichen Entwickelung dargestellt, Hamburg, 1837, S. 265, and quoted by Bruno Bauer in his Kritik der evangelischen Geschichte der Synoptiker (Bd. 2, S. 296).

76 Citation from Bruno Bauer’s Kritik der evangelischen Geschichte der Synoptiker. Citations from the New Testament are given according to this work (Bd. 2, S. 297, 299 and 296).

77 This article is the first written by Marx for the Rheinische Zeitung after he became its editor. The article in No. 284 of the Augsburg Allgemeine Zeitung against which Marx polemises was published on October 11, 1842, under the title “Die Kommunistenlehren”.

In English the article was published in Writings of the Young Marx on Philosophy and Society, New York, 1967, pp. 136-42, and in Vol. 1 of On Revolution New York, 1971, pp. 3-6.

78 The reference is to a report from Berlin on August 21, 1842, reprinted in the Rheinische Zeitung No. 273, September 30, 1842, from Weitling’s Journal Die Junge Generation under the title “Die Berliner Familienhäuser”.

79 Marx means the critical article “Die Augsburger Allgewine Zeitung in ihrer tiefsten Emiedrigung” published in the journal Mefistofeles. Revue der deutschen Gegenwart in Shizun und Umrissen, issues 1 and 2, 1842.

80 The reference is to the tenth congress of scientists of France which took-place in Strasbourg from September 28 to October 9, 1842. It was attended by scientists from Germany, Switzerland, Great Britain, Belgium, Russia and other countries. One of its sections discussed proposals made by the followers of Fourier for improving the social position of the non-propertied classes. The report cites Edouard de Pompery’s speech in which he compared the proletariat’s struggle against private property with the struggle of the bourgeoisie against feudalism.

This report, an excerpt from which Marx quotes below, was published in the Rheinische Zeitung No. 280, October 7, 1842, with a note: “Strassburg, 30. Sept.”

81 This refers to the following proposition from Emmanuel Sieyès’ Qu'est-ce que le tiers état? published in 1789 on the eve of the French revolution: “What is the third estate? Everything. — What was it until now in the political respect? Nothing. — What is it striving for? To be something.”

82 An allusion to the revolutionary. actions of the proletariat in England and France. In August 1842 Manchester was one of the centres of Chartist agitation and a massive strike movement; in May 1839 a revolt organised by the secret revolutionary Society of the Seasons took place in Paris; the Lyons weavers rose in 1831 and 1834.

83 The reference is to an article datelined: “Karlsruhe, 8. Oktober”, published in the Augsburg Allgmeine Zeitung No. 284. Excerpts from this article are printed below.

84 This refers to an article datelined: “London, 5. Oktober 1842”, published in the Augsburg Allgmeine Zeitung No. 284.

85 Automnists — the name given to the members of former landowning families of princes and counts who, on the basis of the Federal Act of 1815, retained the right to dispose of their hereditary estates at their discretion irrespective of the general legislation on inheritance, trusteeship, etc.

86 This apparently refers to the book by Wilhelm Kosegarten, Betrachtungen über die Veräusserlichheit und Theilbarkeit des Landbesitzes mit besonderer Rücksicht auf einige Provinzen der Preussischen Monarchie, in which the author criticised the parcelling out of the landed estates and upheld the restoration of feudal landownership.

87 This refers to the article “Die Kommunistenlehren” published in the Allgemeine Zeitung of October 11, 1842, and criticised by Marx in his article “Communism and the Augsburg Allgmeine Zeitung “.

88 Proceedings of the Sixth Rhine Province Assembly. Third Article. Debates on the Law on Thefts of Wood is one of the series of articles by Marx on the proceedings of the Rhine Province Assembly from May 23 to July 25, 1841. Marx touched on the theme of the material interests of the popular masses for the first time, coming out in their defence. Work on this and subsequent articles inspired Marx to study political economy. He wrote about this in the preface to his A Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy (1859): “In the year 1842-43, as editor of the Rheinische Zeitung, I first found myself in the embarrassing position of having to discuss what is known as material interests. Debates of the Rhine Province Assembly on the theft of wood and the division of landed property; the official polemic started by Herr von Schaper, then Oberpräsident of the Rhine Province, against the Rheinische Zeitung about the condition of the Mosel peasantry, and finally the debates on free trade and protective tariffs caused me in the first instance to rum my attention to economic questions.”

Excerpts from the speeches by the deputies to the Assembly are cited from Sitzungs-Protokolle des secham Rheinischen Provinzial-Landtags, Koblenz, 1841.

89 The second article written by Marx on the proceedings of the Rhine Province Assembly, banned by the censors, was devoted to the conflict between the Prussian Government and the Catholic Church or the so-called church conflict (see Note 42).

90 Marx refers to the Criminal Code of Karl V (Die peinliche Halsgerichtsordnung Kaiser Karts V. Constitutio criminalis Carolina), approved by the Reichstag in Regensburg in 1532; it was distinguished by its extremely cruel penalties.

91 The reference is to the so-called barbaric laws (leges barbarorum) compiled in the fifth-ninth centuries which were records of the common law of various Germanic tribes (Franks, Frisians, Burgundians, Langobards [Lombards], Anglo-Saxons and others).

92 Dodona — a town in Epirus, scat of a temple of Zeus. An ancient oak grew near the main entrance to the temple with a spring at its foot; oracles interpreted the will of the gods from the rustling of its leaves.

93 The fact mentioned took place during the siege of Antwerp in 1584-85 by the troops of King Philip II of Spain, who were suppressing the Netherland’s revolt against absolutist Spain.

94 The reference is to the Barebone’s, nominated, or Little Parliament summoned by Cromwell in July and dissolved in December 1653. It was composed mainly of representatives of the Congregational Churches who couched their criticism in religious mystic terms.

95 Tidong — a region in Kalimantan (Borneo).

96 An allusion to the debate of the Sixth Rhine Province Assembly on a bill against violations of game regulations, which deprived the peasants of the right to hunt even hares.

97 This note was a footnote to an article marked “Vom Rhein” printed in the same issue. The article in its turn was a reply to a previous article printed in the Supplement to the Rheinische Zeitung Nos. 265, 268, 275 and 277, September 22 and 25 and October 2 and 4, 1842, under the title “Fehlgriffe der liberalen Opposition in Hannover”.

98 The reference is to la Charte bâclée, proclaimed on August 14, 1830 (see Note 61).

99 In 1837 King Ernst Augustus and his supporters made a coup d'état in Hanover. They abolished the 1833 Constitution which was moderately liberal (according to it ministers were appointed by the king but were responsible to the provincial assembly) and revived the fundamental state law of 1819 which retained representation on the estate principle and drastically restricted the lights of the provincial assembly. Liberal circles in Hanover attempted to restore the 1833 law. Their demand was formulated in a protest by seven professors of the University of Göttingen (Dahlmann, Gervinus, the brothers Wilhelm and Jacob Grimm, Ewald, Albrecht and Weber) who were subsequently deprived of their chairs and some of them banished. The controversy on the constitutional questions in Hanover was transferred to the Bundestag, which by a decision of 1839 sanctioned restoration of the law of 1819. The new constitutional Act of the King of Hanover in 1840 re-asserted the principal clauses of the law.

100 This article and the article “A Correspondent of the Kölnische Zeitung vs. the Rheinische Zeitung” which is closely linked with it (see this volume, pp. 277-79) were written on the occasion of a sharp polemic launched in the press on the proposed reform of local administration in towns and villages of the Prussian provinces. For the Rhine Province this reform meant the abolition of progressive elements in local government which had survived from the time of the French revolution and Napoleon 1. The struggle for their preservation and development assumed the form of defending these principles against Prussian absolutism and monarchically orientated nobility.

The Rheinische Zeitung played a leading part in this struggle. Already in August 1842 its editorial board publicly stated its views on this matter. From November 3 to December 1 the paper published in its Supplement a series of articles entitled “The Reform of the Rhenish Administration”, written by Claessen, a member of the paper’s Board of Directors. These articles contained demands for unification and equality of urban and rural local administration, publicity of local administration sessions, extension of their rights and reduction of bureaucratic control over them. Reflecting the Prussophilism and anti-democratic sentiments of a certain section of the Rhenish bourgeoisie the Kölnische Zeitung attacked the Rheinische Zeitung in its “Summing Up” published on November 1, 1842. On November 1 1 and 16 the Kölnische Zeitung continued the polemic by publishing short items containing attacks on Claessen’s articles and insinuations against the Rheinische Zeitung. The two articles mentioned here were in answer to these attacks (see Note 43).

101 In this note Marx laid down the principal lines for the criticism of the Divorce Bin which he later developed in the Rheinische Zeitung in a special article (see this volume, pp. 307-10). Preparation and discussion in government quarters of the Divorce Bill making the dissolution of marriage much more difficult was kept in great secrecy. However, on October 20, 1842, the Rheinische Zeitung published the Bill and thus initiated broad discussion on this subject in the progressive press. Prior to this article by Marx, the Rheinische Zeitung had published a brief article on the new Bill under the title “Bilmerkungen über den Entwurf einer Verordnung über Ehescheidung, vorgelegt von dem Ministerium für Revision der Gesetze im Juli 1842” (Rheinische Zeitung No. 310, November 6, 1842, Supplement). Marx mentions the article in this item which was written in the form of an editorial note to another article devoted to the same subject, “Der Entwurf zu dem neuen Ehegesetz”.

Owing to the general dissatisfaction with the government Bill, Frederick William IV was compelled to abandon his intention of carrying it through.

The publication of the Bill and the resolute refusal of the Rheinische Zeitung editorial board to name the person who had sent the text of it to the paper was one of the reasons for the banning of the Rheinische Zeitung.

In English this note was published in Writings of the Young Marx on Philosophy and Society, New York, 1967, pp. 136-38.

102 This refers to the law of the Kingdom of Prussia codified in 1794; it reflected backwardness of feudal Prussia in the sphere of law and justice.

103 This note reflects Marx’s desire as the editor of the Rheinische Zeitung to use the liberal wording of the Cabinet Order on the press, to which Frederick William IV frequently resorted with demagogic aims, so as to provide juridical barriers against the persecution of the paper being prepared by the censorship and to repulse the harassing action on the part of governmental officials and the reactionary press. Marx resorted to similar tactics also on other occasions when forced to do so by the situation.

104 The trend pursued by the Rheinische Zeitung after Marx became its editor was a source of apprehension for the Prussian authorities. Oberpräsident of the Rhine Province von Schaper wrote to Berlin stressing that the tone of the paper was “becoming more and more impudent and harsh”. By his order Regierungspräsident of Cologne von Gerlach demanded on November 12, 1842, the dismissal from the editorial board of Rutenberg (whom the authorities considered to be the initiator of the radical trend) and conveyed the instructions of the censorship ministries on changes in the paper’s trend. The editorial board replied with a letter by the publisher Engelbert Renard who was the official manager of the paper. As can be seen from the rough copy, the actual author of the letter was Marx.

The arguments put forward by Marx deprived the government representatives of grounds for banning the paper, although it is obvious from von Schaper’s report to the censorship ministers on December 17, 1842, that they did not abandon the intention of bringing a suit against the editors of the Rheinische Zeitung, in particular the author of the article “Debates on the Law on Thefts of Wood”, for “impudent and disrespectful criticism of the existing government institutions”. However, having no formal grounds for prosecution, the authorities had temporarily to confine themselves to intensifying censorship measures (change of censors, etc.).

105 This refers to articles published in the Supplement to the Rheinische Zeitung: “Auch eine Stimme über eine Hegemonie in Deutschland"’ (author, Fidedrich Wilhelm Carovoé; signed ‘Vom Main'), No. 135, May 15, 1842; “Hegemonie in Deutschland”, No. 146, May 26, 1842; and “Weitere Verhandlungen über die Hegemonie Preussens”, No. 172, June 21, 1842, when Marx was not yet editor of the newspaper.

106 This note was published in the Rheinische Zeitung as a footnote to the article “Die hannoverschen Industriellen und der Schutzzol”. It has not yet been proved who the author of this item was. Some scholars doubt whether it was written by Marx.

107The Free” (Die Freien) — a Berlin group of Young Hegelians, which was formed early in 1842. Among its prominent members were Edgar Bauer, Eduard Meyen, Ludwig Buhl and Max Stirner (pseudonym of Kaspar Schmidt). Their criticism of the prevailing conditions was abstract and devoid of real revolutionary content and ultra-radical in form; it frequently discredited the democratic movement. Subsequently many representatives of “The Free” renounced radicalism.

When Marx had become editor of the Rheinische Zeitung, he took steps to prevent “The Free” from using the newspaper as a mouthpiece for their pseudo-revolutionary statements. On his conflict with “The Free” see his letter to Arnold Ruge, November 30, 1842 (this volume, pp. 393-95). The article quotes almost word for word from Herwegh’s letter of November 22, 1842 to the Rheinische Zeitung.

108 This is an editor’s note quoted from the Rheinische Zeitung No. 322, November 18, 1842. The report referred to was published in issue No. 317 of the paper on November 13, 1842.

109 Here and elsewhere is quoted the article mentioned below, “Leipzig (Julius Mosen u. die Rhein. Zeitung),” which was published in the Allgemeine Zeitung No. 329, November 25, 1842.

110 Marx wrote this work in reply to an article in the Allgemeine Zeitung which tried to justify the Prussian Government’s attempts to substitute the establishment of the all-German Assembly of the Estates for the introduction of the constitution. The article criticised by Marx, “Berlin, im November. Über die Zusammensetzung der ständischen Ausschüsse in Preussen”, was published in the Supplement to the Allgemeine Zeitung Nos. 335 and 336, December 1 and 2, 1842 (below are quoted passages from this article). For reasons of tactics Marx made the reservation that the polemics were directed against the opinion of the conservative press on the Prussian state institutions and not against these institutions themselves. This enabled him to criticise them severely and expose their spurious constitutionalism.

Commissions of the estates of the provincial assemblies were set up in Prussia in June 1842. They were elected by the provincial assemblies out of their membership (on the estate principle) and formed a single advisory body-the United Commissions. With the help of this body which was but a sham representative assembly, Frederick William IV planned to introduce new taxes and obtain a loan.

An excerpt from this article was published in English in Karl Marx. Early Texts, Oxford, 1971, pp. 55-57. p. 292

111 This is an excerpt from the law of March 27, 1824, introducing an assembly of the estates in the Rhine Province and adopted on the basis of the law on the provincial assemblies of the estates promulgated in Prussia on June 5, 1823.

112 Mediatised lands were former imperial fiefs which were previously held directly from the Emperor but afterwards became dependent on princes, on the King of Prussia in the given case; their holders retained some of their privileges, including personal membership of the Assembly of the Estates.

113 Virilstimme was an individual vote enjoyed in the assemblies of the estates by persons of knightly (noble) descent and individual German cities by virtue of privileges granted them in the Middle Ages.

114 On the Divorce Bill and the stand of the Rheinische Zeitung on this question see Note 101. The article was published in English in Writings of the Young Marx on Philosophy and Society, New York, 1967, pp. 138-42.

115 Late in 1842 the German governments intensified persecutions of the opposition press. The Cabinet Order of December 28, 1842, prohibited distribution of the Leipziger Allgemeine Zeitung in Prussia for the publication, in its issue of December 24, of a letter by Georg Herwegh, a democratic poet, to King Frederick William IV, accusing him of breaking the promise to introduce freedom of the press. The Rheinische Zeitung editor’s defence of the persecuted press required particular courage because the paper was increasingly threatened with government repressions.

Each section of the article was published in the Rheinische Zeitung under its own title, the general title was given by the Institute of Marxism-Leninism of the CC CPSU.

116 This refers to the report marked “Köln, 4. Jan.”, published in the Kölnische Zeitung No. 5, January 5, 1843.

117 This refers to the report marked “Vom Rhein, den 4. Jan.”, published in the Rhein- und Mosel-Zeitung No. 6, January 6, 1843.

118 The reference is to the events connected with the abolition of the Constitution by the King of Hanover in 1837 and the protest against this arbitrary act by seven liberal professors of Göttingen University who were subjected to repressions (see Note 99). The Hanover events evoked a wide response all over Germany. The Leipziger Allgemeine Zeitung came out in defence of the Göttingen professors.

119 The allusion is to the Augsburg Allgemeine Zeitung. At the end of 1842 and beginning of 1843 the newspaper again made a number of attacks against the Rheinische Zeitung (in particular, in No. 4, January 4, 1843), stating its intention to polemicise on principles with the latter but failing to supply any weighty arguments. In reply, the Rheinische Zeitung of January 12, 1843, carried a polemical article by Marx against the Allgemeine Zeitung, which is published in this volume together with the reply to the paper’s attacks which he made on January 3, 1843 (see this volume, pp. 359-60).

120 See Note 115.

121 This refers to the report marked “vom Niederrhein”, which was published in the Kölnische Zeitung No. 9, January 9, 1843.

122 This refers to the article “Die preussische presse” published in the Rheinische Zeitung No. 6, January 6, 1843.

123 See Note 110.

124 Here and below Marx quotes the report marked “Köln, 10. Jan.”, published in the Kölinische Zeitung No. 11, January 11, 1843.

125 This refers to two reports published in the Rhein- und Mosel-Zeitung No. 11, January 11, 1843, the first of which is marked “Koblenz, den 10. Jan.” and the second “Vom Rhein, den 9. Jan.”

126 This refers to the report marked “Koblenz, den 13. Jan.”, published in the Supplement to the Rhein- und Mosel-Zeitung No. 15, January 15, 1843.

127 The Rheinische Zeitung No. 348, December 14, 1842, carried, on Marx’s initiative, an unsigned article marked “Von der Mosel”, written by the democratic lawyer P. I. Coblenz. The situation in the Mosel was also dealt with in another article marked “Bemkastel, 10. Dez.”, published in issue No. 346. They were printed for the purpose of drawing public attention to the distress of the Mosel peasants and censuring the prejudiced and inattentive attitude of the government circles towards their complaints. The publication of these articles led to two resclipts from von Schaper, Oberpräsident of the Rhine Province, to the newspaper, accusing the Mosel correspondent of distorting the facts and slandering the government. Von Schaper demanded answers to a number of questions, in the hope of securing in effect a disavowal of the accusations levelled at the government. On December 18, issue No. 352 of the Rheinische Zeitung published the rescripts and asked the author to write a reply to them. However, as Coblenz was unable to produce sufficient grounds for his theses and disprove the accusations made against him, Marx took the task upon himself in order to use the polemics against von Schaper to expose the Prussian sociopolitical system. At the time the present announcement of the forthcoming reply to the Oberpräsident was published Marx was gathering material for his article “Justification of the Correspondent from the Mosel”.

128 This article was written by Marx instead of P. I. Coblenz, the author of the report “Von der Mosel”, in reply to the charges levelled against the latter in the rescripts of von Schaper, Oberpräsident of the Rhine Province (see Note 127). Marx was unable to carry out his programme for a reply ‘m full -out of five questions he managed to answer only two. Further publication was banned by the censor. The manuscript is not extant. Subsequently a report datelined “Von der Mosel in Januar 1843” entitled “Die Krebswhiiden der Moselgegend”, which coincided with the formulation of the third point of a reply Marx had planned to give, appeared in the book by K.Heinzen, a contributor to the Rheinische Zeitung, Die Preussische Bureaukratie (Darmstadt, 1845, S. 220-25). However, the content was strictly factual, and the style of this item differed from those parts of Marx’s article which had been published. At present it is still difficult to tell for certain who the author of this report was, but it may be assumed that what Heinzen published under this heading was one of the previously unpubbshed articles by Coblenz, whom Marx defended, rather than the continuation of Marx’s article.

The publication of the article in defence of the Mosel correspondent provided the immediate pretext for the government, at the insistence of the king, to pass a decision on January 19, 1843, banning the Rheinische Zeitung as from April 1, 1843, and imposing a rigorous censorship for the remaining period. The decree was promulgated on January 21.

The article was published in part in English in Writings of the Young Marx on Philosophy and Society, New York, 1967, pp. 143-48.

129 This refers to the Prussian Government’s new censorship instruction (see Note 39).

130 See Note 39.

131 The two items published here under a title supplied by the Institute of Marxism-Leninism were printed in the Rheinische Zeitung in reply to the attacks of the Augsburg Allgemeine Zeitung (see Note 119).

132 These notes are the draft reply written by Marx to disprove the accusations contained in the ministerial rescript of January 21, 1843, which ordered suppression of the Rheinische Zeitung as from April 1, 1843, and imposed a rigorous censorship for the remaining period. The manner in which Marx replied was determined by his purpose of shielding the Rheinische Zeitung against government repressions and securing a repeal of the ban, but not at the cost of a change in its political line. Hence the Aesopean language which he uses in elucidating the paper’s stand on questions of principle in the the life of Germany.

133 Marx apparently refers to Das Neue eleganteste Conversatione — Lexicon für Gebildete aus allen Ständen published in Leipzig in 1835. On p. 255 of this book it was stated that Hegel came to Berlin in 1818 so that “his doctrine might be turned into a state philosophy”.

134 This refers to the article “Eingesandt aus Preussen” published in the Allgemeine Königsberger Zeitung No. 30, February 4, 1843.

135 This charge was provoked by the article “Die russische Note über die preussische Presse” published in the Rheinische Zeitung No. 4, January 4, 1843. The article criticised Russian Tsarism and the interference of its representatives in German affairs for the purpose of suppressing the opposition press. The publication of this article caned forth a Note of protest from the tsarist government.

136 Marx reproduces almost word for word the Prussian censorship instruction of October 18, 1819.

137 Ultramotanes — supporters of ultramontanism, a trend in the Roman Catholic Church advocating greater papal authority. In the Rhine Province Catholics were in opposition to the Prussian Government, which supported the Regrets.

138 This refers to the separatist ideas advocated by Johannes Joseph von G6rres in 1838 in the Historisch-politische Blätter für das Kathoiische Deutschland published in Munich.

139 This refers to Karl Marx’s article “The Supplement to Nos. 335 and 336 of the Augsburg Allgemeine Zeitung on the Commissions of the Estates in Prussia” (see this volume, pp. 292-306).

140 This refers to the negotiations between Prussia and Russia which were held in the summer of 1842 on the questions of concluding a trade agreement and cancelling, under the pressure of German public opinion, the 1830 Convention with Russia concerning extradition of deserters, prisoners of war and criminals.

141 The Cabinet Order of October 14, 1842, obliging the editorial boards of newspapers to publish government officials’ refutations of incorrect data given in these newspapers, was published in the Rheinische Zeitung No. 320, November 16, 1842.

The editorial note on this Order ironically remarks that whatever the author’s intentions it constituted “a perfect guarantee of the independence’ of the press and recognition of its social significance.

142 The quotations which follow are from the article marked “, Vom Rhein, den 6. März”, published in the Rhein- und Mosel-Zeitung No. 67, March 8, 1843.

143 The Rhein- und Mosel-Zeitung was published in Koblenz. Further on in the text Marx refers to it as the “Koblenz newspaper”. p. 367

144 Marx further quotes from the article “Friedrich v. Sallet ist totl” published in the Trier’sche Zeitung No. 63, March 6, 1843. This obituary to the German anti-clerical poet was attacked by the pro-Catholic editors of the Rhein- und Mosel-Zeitung, which carried in issue No. 70, March 11, 1843, an article entitled “Friedrich v. Sallets Laien-Evangelium”. Marx severely criticises both this article (excerpts from which are also quoted) and attempts of the Trier’sche Zeitung article to describe Sallet as an author with religious beliefs.

145 Sanbenito- a yellow robe worn by heretics sentenced by the Inquisition when they were led to the place of execution.

146 This refers to the article marked “Vom Rhein, den 11. März”, published in the Rhein- und Mosel-Zeitung No. 72, March 13, 1843. Marx quotes from this article below.

147 After the publication of the rescript of January 21, 1843, which suppressed the Rheinische Zeitung as from April 1, 1843, Marx directed his efforts to secure its repeal. Neither the refutation of the charges against the newspaper (see this volume, pp. 361-65), nor the petitions of the inhabitants of Colgne and other dries of the Rhine Province in defence of the paper succeeded in shaking the government’s decision. At the end of January 1843 Marx was already thinking of resigning the editorship (see letter to Ruge of January 25, 1843, p. 397 of this volume), but he did not consider it possible to carry out his intention at the height of the campaign for the repeal of the ban. In March, however, he believed that changes in the editorial board could provide a chance of saying the newspaper, and made up his mind to resign officially from his post. He handed over his duties to Dagobert Oppenheim. Marx was probably prompted to do so also by his unwillingness to take upon himself the responsibility for a possible change of line of the newspaper by which the liberal shareholders wished to prolong its existence.

Notwithstanding Marx’s resignation, the royal rescript was not repealed. The last issue of the newspaper appeared on March 31, 1843.

148 Marx’s thesis, together with his applications in German and Latin, was recorded under No. 26 on April 13, 184 1, in-the Jena University Register. On the same day Bachmann, the Dean of the Faculty of Philosophy, and a group of professors signed a highly commentator ,y review on it (see this volume, pp. 705-06). On April 15 Marx was awarded the degree of Doctor of Philosophy and received his diploma (see illustration).

149 In mid-April 1841, after he had been awarded the degree of Doctor of Philosophy, Marx moved to Trier and in July of the same year to Bonn, because he had intended to enlist as Privat-Docent at Bonn University. In view of the government persecutions of progressive scientists (in the autumn of 1841 Bruno Bauer, a Young Hegelian, was banned from lecturing at Bonn University), Marx had to give up his plans for an academic career and become a publicist.

From January till March 1842 Marx stayed in Trier in the family of his fiancée, Jenny von Westphalen.

Marx’s correspondence with Arnold Ruge was occasioned by his intention to contribute to the opposition periodicals of the time including the Deutsche Jahrbücher, edited by Ruge.

150 ‘This refers to Ludwig Feuerbach’s review of Karl Bayer’s book Betrachtungen laber den Begriff des sittlichen Geistes und über das Wesen der Tugend published in the Hallische Jahrbücher for 1840.

151 The full title is Anekdota zur neusten deutschen Philosophie und Publicistik which Ruge planned to publish in Switzerland. The first issue of the almanac (1843) carried Marx’s article “Comments on the Latest Prussian Censorship Instruction” and also articles by Ludwig Feuerbach, Karl. Friedrich K6ppen, Amold Ruge and others.

152 The reference is to Bruno Bauer’s book Die Posaune des jungsten Gerichts über Hegel den Atheisten und Antichristen. Ein Ultimatum which was published anonymously in early November 1841. Bauer wrote it in August and September 1841 with some assistance from Marx. Bauer and Marx intended to publish the second part of the book as their joint work. However. their co-operation soon came to an end. chiefly be-cause Marx, who wanted to link advanced philosophy more closely with politics, was dissatisfied with Bauer’s tendency to confine himself to radical criticism of theology. After Marx had left Bonn for Trier in January 1842 to see the father of his fiancée, Ludwig von Westphalen, who was dying, Bauer published the second part of Die Posaune as a separate book entitled Hegels Lehre von der Religion und der Kunst von dem Standpunkte des Glaubem aus beuteilt (Leipzig, 1842) without the section which was to be written by Marx — a treatise on Christian art.

153 The article did not appear in the publication for which it was written. The manuscript is not extant. later on set forth his criticism of the constitutional monarchy in his Critique of Hegel’s Philosophy of Law written in the summer of 1843 (see present edition, Vol. 3).

154 In the autumn of 1841 Bruno Bauer was banned from lecturing by Eichhorn, Minister of Religious Worship, Education and Medicine, and in March 1842 he was suspended from the post of Privat-Docent of Theology at Bonn University for his atheistic views and opposition statements. Bruno Bauer’s letter mentioned by Marx has not been found.

Lit de justice — sitting of the old French Parliament which was held in the presence of the king, whose directions in that case acquired the force of law.

155 This refers to the Cabinet Order of February 18, 1842, concerning revision of the earlier decrees of the Prussia Government (the Cabinet orders of March 6, 1821, and of August 2, 1834) according to which, in respect of certain judicial proceedings, the French Penal Code and trial by jury, which had been applied so far in the Rhine Province, were replaced by Prussian law and secret hearing. Under pressure from the discontented Rhenish bourgeoisie the Prussian Government revised these decrees. However the Cabinet Order of February 18, 1842, contained a number of reservations which in fact retained the Prussian law for cases of high treason, malfeasance. etc.

156 This is how Marx ironically calls the official newspapers published in Germany at the time.

157 Marx was unable to realise his intention to move to Cologne at the time (see this volume, p. 389). About April 10, 1842, he was to go to back to Bonn where he stayed with interruptions due to visits to Trier for family reasons till early October of the same year.

158 Spandau — a fortress in Brandenburg, later included in Great Berlin. It was used for a long time as a prison for state criminals.

159 Of the list of articles given by Marx only one was published, namely, “The Philosophical Manifesto of the Historical School of Law”, in the Rheinische Zeitung (see this volume, pp. 203-10).

160 Friedrich Rudolf Hasse’s Ansein von Canterbury, Part I, was published in 1843, Part II appeared in 1852.

161 Marx had to leave for Trier at the end of May 1842 because his younger brother Hermann had died. During his stay in Trier (till mid-July 1842, when he returned to Bonn) his conflict with his mother, which had begun earlier, grew more acute. Henriette Marx was displeased with her son’s refusal to embrace an advantageous government or academic career. She stopped paying him allowance and prevented him from receiving his share of his father’s estate. On account of this Marx had to postpone his marriage with Jenny von Westphalen and, moreover, found himself in very straitened circumstances.

162 See Note 89.

163 On “The Free” see Note 107.

Marx refers to the article in the Königsberger Zeitung No. 138, June 17, 1842, which announced the aims and tasks of “The Free”. The article was reprinted in the Rheinische Zeitung No. 176, June 25, 1842, and marked “Aus Berlin”.

164 Ruge’s article was published in the Supplement to the Rheinische Zeitung No. 268. September 25, 1842, under the title “Sächsische Zustände”.

165 This refers to an unsigned article published in the Supplement to the Rheinische Zeitung No. 226, August 14, 1842, under the title “Ein Wort als Einleitung zur Frage: entsplicht die Rheinische Kommunal-Verfassung den Anforderungen der Gegenwart?”.

The above-mentioned articles by Karl Heinrich Hermes against Jewry were published in the Kölnische Zeitung (Nos. 187 and 211, and in the Supplement to No. 235, July 6 and 30, and August 23, 1842).

166 Apparently, Marx had in mind the unsigned article “Aus dem Hannoverschen” published in the Rheinische Zeitung No. 241, August 29, 1842.

167 The unsigned article “Das Juste-Milieu” was published in the Supplement to the Rheinische Zeitung Nos. 156,228, 230, 233 and 235 of June 5 and August 16,18, 21 and 23, 1842. The author of this article was the Young Hegelian Edgar Bauer, a leader of “The Free”. It was directed against the half-hearted attitude of the liberals. It criticised them from the positions characteristic of “The Free”, that is, from the positions of complete rejection of any progressive role of the liberal opposition to the absolutist feudal system. The clamorous tone of the article served as a pretext for persecutors of the progressive press.

168 Marx moved to Cologne in the first half of October 1842, and on October 15 he became editor of the Rheinische Zeitung.

The first English translation of this letter appeared in Karl Marx. Early Texts, Oxford, 1971, pp. 52-54.

169 Concerning the conflict between the Prussian authorities and the editorial board of the Rheinische Zeitung, which began in November 1842, see Note 104.

170 This refers to the rescript of January 21, 1842. For a criticism of this resclipt see Marx’s article “Marginal Notes to the Accusations of the Ministerial Rescript” (pp. 361-65 of this volume).

171 Marx refers to the 1842 Divorce Bill. See Note 101.

172 See Note 39.

173 Marx published the announcement of his resignation from editorship of the Rheinische Zeitung on March 17, 1843. See Note 147.

174 This refers to the radical monthly Der Deutsche Bote aus der Schweiz which Herwegh was planning to publish in Zurich in 1842 and to which Marx was invited to contribute. The plan of the publication did not materialise. Articles by various authors written for it were published in the summer of 1843 in a collection entitled Ein-und-wanzig Bogen aus der Schweiz.

175 Marx intended to enlist progressive German and French intellectuals to contribute to the prospective journal Deutsch-Französische Jahrbücher.

The publication of the journal was started by Marx and Ruge only at the beginning of 1844, after Marx had moved to Paris in the autumn of 1843. Only one double issue appeared. Its publication was discontinued mainly due to disagreements between its editors.

The first English translation of Marx’s letter appeared in Karl Marx. Early Texts, Oxford, 1971, pp. 58-60.

176 Robert Eduard Prutz’s article entitled “Die Jahrbücher der Gegenwart und die deutschen Jahrbücher” was published in the Supplement to the Rheinische Zeitung No. 43, February 12, 1843. The author’s intention was to prove that the journal Jahrbücher der Gegenwart (editor Albert Schwegler, published in Stuttgart and Tübingen), the publication of which had been announced in the press, could not be regarded, judging by its ideological tendency, as a continuation of the Deutsche Jahrbücher, which had been suppressed by the Government of Saxony.

177 Marx refers to the pamphlet by Arnold Ruge and Otto Wigand entitled An die Hohe Zweite Kammer der Sächsischen Ständversammlung. Beschwerde über die durch ein Hohes Ministerium des Innem angeordnete und 3. Januar 1843 ausgeführte Unterdrückung der Zeitschrift “Deutsche Jahrbücher für Wissenschaft und Kunst”, published in early 1843 in Brunswick.

The review of this pamphlet by Pffitzner was published in the Supplement to the Rheinische Zeitung Nos. 71 and 73, March 12 and 14, 1843.

178 Ruge’s correspondence with the German censors was published in the first volume of Anekdota zur neuesten deutschen Philosophie und Publicistik under the title “Aktenmässige Darlegung der Cenzurverhiltnisse der Hanischen und Deutschen Jahrbücher in den Jahren 1839, 1841, 1842”.

179 The Notebooks written by Marx in 1839 served as preparatory material for his future work on ancient philosophy and were widely used in his doctor’s thesis (see this volume, pp. 25-106). The Notebooks sum up the results of Marx’s research into ardent philosophy and, besides his own views, contain lengthy excerpts in Latin and Greek from the works of ardent authors, chiefly of the Epicurean school of philosophy. The extant manuscript consists of seven notebooks of which five (notebooks 1-4 and 7) carry the heading “Epicurean Philosophy” on the cover. The covers of notebooks 2-4 bear the inscription “Winter Term, 1839”. The covers of notebooks 5 and 6 are not extant. The fifth notebook has several pages missing. The last five pages of the sixth notebook contain excerpts from Hegel’s Encyclopedia, under the heading “Plan of Hegel’s Philosophy of Nature”; as these are not connected with the main content of the Notebooks they are published separately (see this volume, pp. 510-14).

The Notebooks were first published in 1927 in Marx/Engels, Gesamtatisgabe, Bd. I. That edition included mainly the text written by Marx himself without the excerpts or his commentaries on them. The full text was first published in Russian in the collection: Marx and Engels, From Early Writings, Moscow, 1956. In the language of the original (with parallel translations into German of the Latin and Greek quotations) the work was first published in Marx/Engels, Werke, Ergänzungsband, Erster Teil, Berlin, 1968.

An excerpt from the sixth notebook was published in English in Writings of the Young Marx on Philosophy and Society, New York, 1967, pp. 51-60.

The present edition gives the quotations from Greek and Latin authors in English. Greek and Latin terms and expressions have been left untranslated only when they were used in the German text in the author’s digressions and commentaries. Vertical lines made by Marx in the manuscript for emphasis are reproduced here in the margins. In quotations from the works of Diogenes laertius (Book X), Sextus Empiricus and Plutarch, the editors give, in square brackets, Roman figures to denote chapters and Arabic figures to denote paragraphs in accordance with the division of the text accepted in publications of the works of these authors. In some cases there are editorial interpolations within quotations (also in square brackets) made on the basis of the sources used by Mar-x to reconstruct the meaning. The general title corresponds to the author’s headings of individual notebooks and to his definition of the subject of the investigation (see foreword to the dissertation, this volume, p. 29),

180 This treatise of Aristotle is not extant. The passage referred to is to be found in Aristotle, De partibus animalium (I, 5).

181 in his translation Marx quotes Epicurus according to Petri Gassendi, Animadversiones in decimum librum Diogenes Laertii, qui est De Vita, Moribus, Placitisque Epicuri, Ludguni, 1649.

182 The followers of Epicurus received this name because the school of Epicurus in Athens founded in 307-06 B. C. was situated in a garden. The Garden became the main centre of materialism and atheism of Ancient Greece.

183 Marx apparently quotes Jakob Böhme from Ludwig Feuerbach’s book Geschichte der neuern Philosophie von Bacon von Verulam bis Benedict Spinoza, Ansbach, 1833, S. 161.

184 The fifth notebook is not extant in full. The beginning, including the cover, has been lost and the extant part has some pages missing. Still extant are also some separate sheets containing the continuation of the excerpts from the works of Seneca and Stobaeus, the beginning of which is in the extant part of the notebook, and the relevant excerpts from the works of Clement of Alexandria. In the collection From Early Writings (Russ. ed., 1956), these sheets were included in the sixth notebook, which is extant also without its cover or the usual author’s list of works quoted. There are good grounds, however, for including them in the fifth notebook as was done in Marx/Engels, Werke, Ergänzungsband, Erster Teil, Berlin, 1968. The arrangement of the material of notebooks 5 and 6 in this edition corresponds to that in the Werke.

185 There are no excerpts from Book VI of Lucretius’ poem On the Nature of Things in the extant manuscript of the Notebooks.

186 See Note 1 80.

187 Apparently Marx refers to Chapter IX of Book One of the Metaphysics in which Aristotle criticises Plato’s teaching.

188 The reference is to the Enneads, a work by Plotinus.

189 There are no excerpts from Cicero’s Tusculanae quaestiones in the extant manuscript though it is mentioned by Marx on the cover of the seventh notebook. But the seventh notebook contains excerpts from Cicero’s work De finibus bonorum et malorum, which is not listed on the cover.

190 The Plan of Hegel’s Philosophy of Nature consists of brief notes on the content of those paragraphs of Hegel’s work Encyclopedie der philophischen Wissewchaftem in Grundrisse, 3 Aufl., Heidelberg, 1830, which deal with the philosophy of nature. These notes were made by Marx in 1839 in three versions on five pages of the sixth notebook. The first version covers 5§ 252-334 of Hegel’s book and most closely reproduces the order in which Hegel sets forth his material. Marx departs from Hegel’s terminology here only in separate cases. The second version covers fewer paragraphs dealing with the philosophy of nature but it is marked by greater independence in systematising the material and in terminology. Most original in this respect is the third version, which, though brief, expounds the contents of Hegel’s philosophy of nature more fully than the previous ones.

191 This section contains several poems from Marx’s three albums of poems written in the late autumn of 1836 and in the winter of 1836-37. According to his daughter Laura Lafargue and his biographer Franz Mehring, who had access to his manuscripts after his death, two of these albums bore the title Book of Love, Part I and Part II, and the third, Book of Songs. Each had the following dedication: “To my dear, ever beloved Jenny von Westphalen.” lie covers of the albums with the titles and dedications are not extant. Some poems from these albums were later included by Marx in his book of verse dedicated to his father (published below in full). Recently a copybook and a notebook belonging to Karl Marx’s eldest sister Sophic were discovered among the documents of Heinrich Marx’s heirs in Trier. Alongside verses by different people they contain some by the young Marx. Most of them were taken from other copybooks, but some were new.

Marx was very critical of the literary qualities of his early poems but he believed that they conveyed his warm and sincere feelings (see this volume, p. 11). Later on, his view of them grew even more critical. Laura Lafargue, for example, wrote, “My father treated his verses very disrespectfully; whenever my parents mentioned them, they would laugh to their hearts’ content.” (Aus dem literarischen Nachlass von Karl Marx, Friedrich Engels und Ferdinand Lassalle, Stuttgart, 1902, S. 25-26.) In 1954 the Institute of Marxism-Leninism of the CC CPSU came into possession of the two albums of Marx’s early verse from the inheritance of his grandson Edgar Longuet, and in 1960 Marcel Charles Longuet, Marx’s great-grandson, presented the Institute with the third album. A number of poems from these albums drew the attention of Marx’s biographers and translators and were published at various times, chiefly abridged, in different publications, in particular, in the books: Aus dem literarischen Nachlass von Karl Marx, Friedrich Engels und Ferdinand Lasalle, Stuttgart, 1902; J. Spargo, Karl Marx, New York,) 1910; M. Oflivier, Marx et Engels poeks, Paris, 1933; Marx/Engels, Werke, Ergänzungsband, Erster Teil, Berlin, 1968; and the magazines Yunost (Youth) No. 11, Moscow, 1958, and Inostrannaya Literatura (Foreign Literature) No. 1, Moscow, 1968.

192 This album contains 12 poems of which the ballads Lucinda, Distraught and The Pale Maiden and the poem Human Pride were later included by Marx in the book of verse dedicated to his father (see this volume, pp. 565-71, 581-83, 612-15, 584-86).

193 This album is the bulkiest of the three dedicated to Jenny von Westphalen. It contains 53 poems of which Yearning, Siren Song, Two Singers Accompanying Themselves on the Harp and Harmony were included by Marx in the book of verse dedicated to his father (see this volume, pp. 538-39, 542-45, 574-75, 580-81).

194 This album contains 22 poems of which Song to the Stars and The Song of a Sailor at Sea were included by Marx in the book of verse dedicated to his father (see this volume, pp. 608-09, 610-11). Passages from the poems My World, Feelings and Transformation published in this volume appeared in English in the translation by Meta L. Stern in the book: J. Spargo, Karl Marx, New York, 19 10, pp. 42, 43 and

44. p. 523

195 In this book the young Marx collected samples of his early poetical writings, including ballads, sonnets, romances, songs, translations of Ovid’s elegies, scenes from Oulanen a tragedy in verse, epigrams and jokes. It had as a supplement chapters from his satirical novel Scorpion and Felix. Marx mentioned this book in his letter of November 10-11, 1837 (see this volume, p. 17). Two poems, The Fiddler and Nocturnal Love (published in the first section of this volume), were published by Marx in 1841 in the journal Athenäum. The order of the poems in the book differs slightly from the order in the contents drawn up by Marx.

The book was first published in full in German in 1929. Subsequently separate poems were reprinted in biographies and other publications.

The poem To the Medical Student and excerpts from Epigrams were published in English in R. Payne’s book Marx, New York, 1968, Oulanm in The Unknown Karl Marx by the same author, New York, 1971, pp. 55-94.

196 The reference is to Christoph Gluck’s opera Amide.

197 The age of Marx’s father is stated in this document inaccurately. According to latest investigations, Heinrich Marx was born in 1777, not in 1782 (see H. Monz, Karl Marx und Trier, Verhältnisse-Beziehungen-Einflusse, Trier, 1964, S. 130).

198 Concerning Marx’s gymnasium examination papers see Note 1.

On August 17, 1835, his teacher Küpper wrote the following comment on the present composition: “It is profound in thought, brilliantly and forcefully written, deserving of praise, although the topic — the essence of union — is not elucidated, its cause is dealt with only one-sidedly, its necessity is not proved adequately.”

This essay was first published in English in R. Payne’s book, The Unknown Karl Marx, New York, 1971, pp. 39-43.

199 The manuscript of Marx’s essay in Latin was underscored in many places by the examiner Johann Hugo Wyttenbach, headmaster of the gymnasium. In the margins there are a number of remarks in Latin, some of which deal with the content of the work. Thus, there is the following remark at the end of the first paragraph, “See what a broad, almost limitless task you set yourself when you intend to examine the question in this way.” The words at the beginning of the seventh paragraph, “That the Augustan age was unlike this no one can deny”, were commented as follows: “You should have avoided altogether any comparison of this kind and description of the period preceding the Carthaginian Wars as well as the epoch of Nero.” There is a correction to the following words in one of the last paragraphs, “Tacitus also speaks of Augustus and his age with the utmost respect": “Not at all! See Annali, I, 1-10. But you could have refrained from such disquisitions”.

The general remarks at the end of the manuscript signed by Wyttenbach and Loers, teacher of Latin and Greek, say, “With the exception of some passages, which called forth the above remark, and a few mistakes, particularly at the end, the composition reveals a profound knowledge of history and of Latin. But what atrocious handwriting!”

This essay was first published in English in R. Payne’s book, The Unknown Karl Marx, New York, 1971, pp. 44-48.

200 In addition to the certificate of maturity issued to Karl Marx by the Trier. gymnasium there are extant rough copies of the certificate, an excerpt from the record of the graduation examinations at the Trier gymnasium, an extract from the report, and a list of the pupils who took the examinations.

The first rough copy of the certificate, which is kept in the archives of the Trier gymnasium, gives a more detailed account of the graduate’s knowledge of Greek: “His knowledge and ability in regard to understanding the classics are almost as good as in Latin, but his skill in translating the classics read at the gymnasium is less owing to lack of solid knowledge of grammar and because he is less sure than in Latin, although he often succeeds in explaining correctly even the more difficult passages; on the whole, he translates quite satisfactorily.”

201 Some letters of Heinrich Marx to his son have reached us in a very bad condition. Undecipherable words or phrases are marked by dots in square brackets. Square brackets are also used to indicate tentative interpretation of illegible words or phrases.

Not a single one of Karl Marx’s replies to his father’s letters during his stay at Bonn University (October 1835-July 1836) has been preserved. Of his correspondence with his father during his subsequent stay in Berlin (he moved there late in October 1836 from Trier where he had spent his summer vacation and become engaged to Jenny von Westphalen) only one letter dated November 10-11, 1837, remains (see this volume, pp. 10-21).

202 Apparently Heinrich Marx refers to §§ 7 and 60 of Immanuel Kant’s Anthologie in pragmatischer Hinsicht, Königsberg, 1798.

203 The letter bears mainly illegible markings and separate words apparently added later by Karl Marx.

204 The certificate of release is extant in the form of a copy written by an unknown person and submitted to Jena University together with the other documents sent there by Marx when he applied for a doctor’s degree for his treatise on the history of ardent philosophy (see Note 148).

205 The letter has not been found.

206 The letter was addressed to his wife and son. Apparently, it was first sent to Henriette Marx in Trier, and from there to Karl in Berlin.

207 These lines are Heinrich Marx’s last letter to his son. Heinrich died on May 10, 1838.

208 Passages from this letter were published for the first time in Russian in the book: P. Vinogradskaya, Jenny Marx, Moscow, 1964, pp. 20, 55-57.

The end of the letter is missing.

209 The original has a note written by Marx in the right-hand corner: “Permission to issue the leaving certificate to Herr Marx, student of [the Faculty of] Law, 18.3.4l.”

Before the text filled in by the student the form has the following notification: “In accordance with the Ministry directives of September 26, 1829, every student must occupy at lectures during the whole term only that seat the number of which is stated by the respective tutor in the record sheet. If any student is prevented from attending lectures for several days or longer due to any circumstances, no one is allowed to take his seat under any pretext.”

210 The certificate bears the remark “To No. 26” made in April 1841 at Jena University on registration of the application and other documents submitted by Marx for the award of a doctor’s degree (see Note 148).

211 See Note 148.

212 Jenny von Westphalen uses ironically the expression “Hegeling gentlemen”, a derogatory name given to the followers of Hegel by their rabid opponent Heinrich Leo, historian and publicist. Leo wrote against the Young Hegehans the pamphlet Die Hegelingen.Actenstücke und Belege zu der s. g. Denunciation der ewigen Wahrheit Halle, 1838.

213 The announcement of the publication of Bruno Bauer’s book Kritik der evangelischen Geschichte den Synoptiker and his three small articles were carried in the Supplement to the Allgemeine Zeitung of August 1, 1841.

214 This petition was compiled on January 30, 1843, and illegally circulated among the inhabitants of Cologne. By February 18 it had been signed by 911 citizens. The petition was rejected on March 31, 1843.

Similar petitions requesting the lifting of the ban on the Rheinische Zeitung were addressed to the King of Prussia from Aachen, Barmen, Wesel, Düsseldorf and a number of other towns. However, all steps taken in defence of the newspaper were fruitless.

215 The joint meeting of the shareholders of the Rheinische Zeitung and the editorial board was held in the Cologne casino and lasted for six hours -from 10 a. m. till 1 p.m. and from 5 p.m. till 8 p.m. The debates were so long because of a sharp struggle between the moderate-liberal majority of the meeting who were prepared to denounce the radical-democratic views expounded by the newspaper and to have the petition couched in a tone of loyalty, and those who stood for firm defence of the right of the opposition press to exist. The latter were headed by Marx and upheld his policy as editor. The record of Marx’s statements was very brief. Marx and his followers, however, succeeded in persuading the meeting to refrain from officially denouncing the trend of the newspaper (the petition denounced only the sharp tone of its statements), and this gave the radicals grounds for signing it despite its extremely moderate form.

Brief reports of the meeting were carried in the Aachener Zeitung No. 46, February 15, and in the Frankfurt Journal No. 52, February 21, 1843.

The minutes of the general meeting of the shareholders were later published with insignificant changes in the book Rheinische Briefe und Akten zur eschichte der politischen Bewegung 1830-1850, Essen, 1919, Bd. 1, S. 436-47. The present volume reproduces the minutes according to the book of minutes.

216 For details concerning the conflict, see Note 104. This was followed by von Schapees reply to Renard on November 19, 1842 (see Rheinische Briefe und Akten zur Geschichte dei. politischen Bewegung 1830-1850, Essen, 1919, Bd. 1, S. 380-82).

217 The newspaper was suppressed within the borders of Prussia by the Cabinet Order of December 28, 1842 (see this volume, pp. 311-30 and Note 115).

218 Part of this petition was published as a footnote in the book Rheinische Briefe und Akten zur Geschichte der politischen Bewegung 1830-1850, Essen, 1919, Bd. 1, S. 448.

219 See Note 175.

220 This apparently refers to the book: Marie Lafargue (Laffarge), Memoires de Marie Cappelle, veuve Lafarge, écrits par elle-même. In 1841 another book on the same subject was published in Leipzig: Marie Lafarge, verurtheilt als Giftmischerin und angeklagt ass Diamantendiebin. Criminalgeschichte den neuesten Zeit.