Thanks to D. Ritchie for his comments on his Monday poem. He writes: "My current weakness is encyclopedia Britannica. I just bought my third set, which will allow me perhaps to say a thing or two about the transition from the eleventh to the thirteenth edition. Or maybe I'll just enjoy the essays." L. Helm adds: "By coincidence, I have an Eleventh Edition. And I also have the three volumes that presumably comprise the additions that along with the Eleventh make up the Thirteenth Edition. In fact, those three volumes, entitled "Thirteenth Edition," led me to believe that there was no integrated Thirteenth Edition; that is, that the Thirteenth Edition consisted of an Eleventh Edition plus the three volume addendum. Pray tell, what three volumes do you have? I was once tempted by an earlier edition, perhaps the ninth or the tenth but resisted. I do have a 1990 Fifteenth, but I have never become reconciled to Mortimer Adler's innovations". Very interesting. Jorge Luis Borges was _fascinated_ with the Encyclopaedia Britannica. He was once asked (axed) what book he would take to a desert island and he replied, "The Encyclopaedia Volume -- 11th edition". Indeed, his obsession was such that there is an entry for "Encyclopaedia Britannica" in "A dictionary of Borges, by Hughes and Fishburn (Duckworth -- irritating how things everybody should know become _books_). The entry reads: "ENCYCLOPAEDIA BRITANNICA. Borges, attracted to the claim that encyclopaedias embrace the totality of human knowledge, as the word implies, owned a set of the 11th edition in 29 volumes (1910-1911), the last edition to have been published in Britain [Edinburgh, to be more precise. JLS]. The TENTH edition (1902-3), said in 'Tloen, Uqbar, Orbis Tertius' to be the original of the PIRATICAL *Anglo-American Cyclopaedia, is a reprint of the 24 volumes of the NINTH edition plus 11 supplementary volumes, one containing new maps and one a comprehensive index to the whole work. The 20 volumes mentioned as circulating in the USA in about 1824 are probably the SIXTH edition of 1823. In 1824 these were reprinted with six supplementary volumes. Source: Labyrintsh 27 (3), Ficciones 13." I agree with L. Helm that 'supplementary volumes' can be a bother. I do own one set of the E. B.: the 24-volume boring edition. I write the British Boy and His Hoop, trying to be funny (and failing). The idea of an encyclopaedia, as every British school boy knows, is a FRENCH idea, of the Enlightment -- Hence it's natural that it would caught in Scotland, rather than London, where they would be more sceptical of comprising the whole enlightened science in just a set of things. Now, the etymology suggests that it's a Greek thing, and R. Paul should know more about this. Since it's 'paedia', I assume it's from "pais", which is Greek for 'boy' (or little boy -- They distinguished between 'pais' and 'kuros'. Perhaps 'pais' was neutral for little boy and little girl, but I think it was a masculine noun in any case). Only in a figurative sense can it mean 'educatio' ("education"). The 'cyclo-' thing was possibly a Greek idea derived from the Neo-Platonists, like Plotinus, and the idea -- Greek -- that the kyklos was the epitome of perfection --. Since I cannot see how a kyklos could attract a boy unless it's a jumping hoop, I combined the idea in the title. I added, British, because the whole point of the Edinburgh set was to provide a BRITISH equivalent of what the FRENCH were attempting in the Continent. Am I right? The word 'encyclopaedia' should be restricted to 'general knowledge'. Yet, Paul Edwards thought it would be a good idea to create a "Philosophical Encyclopaedia", and so he did. It's pretty good, with good commissioned articles by Searle, and others (But I don't like the idea of an article being 'commissioned'). There are now too many encyclopaedias, including a few on gardening, and who knows, on Scandinavian fairy-tales. Cheers, JL ************************************** See what's new at http://www.aol.com