ChansonRolandV1, Main, Corpus, bibRecord, 000047

Plagiat an Leibniz' historiographischem Werk? Rekonstruktion frühmittelalterlicher Adelsgeschichte bei G. W. Leibniz und J. G. Eckhart, 1. Teil

Identifieur interne : 000047 ( Main/Corpus ); précédent : 000046; suivant : 000048

Plagiat an Leibniz' historiographischem Werk? Rekonstruktion frühmittelalterlicher Adelsgeschichte bei G. W. Leibniz und J. G. Eckhart, 1. Teil

Auteurs : Sven Erdner

Source :

Studia leibnitiana [ 0039-3185 ] ; 2003.

RBID : Francis:519-07-13512

Descripteurs français

Pascal (Inist)
- Histoire de la philosophie, Siècle 17-18, Leibniz (G. W.).

English descriptors

KwdEn :
- Century 17-18, Leibniz (G. W.), Philosophy history.

Abstract

While it is a commonplace even for mathematicians and philosophers that Leibniz was working since 1685 on a Historia Domus for the dukes and electors of Hanover, that what he then actually worked out is much less a topic in the Leibniz research. Therefore, the old claim of Louis Davillé, that Leibniz's amanuensis Johann Georg Eckhart has plagiarized this Historia Domus in his own books, which stands unrefuted since 1911, is a good starting point to examine Leibniz's historical work and method in detail. In this first part I describe the environment in which dynastic history at this time took place and the new aspects which Leibniz introduced into the historical research, especially into medieval prosopography. Further in a first example, I examine Davillé's claim in a comparison between Leibniz and Eckhart on the basis of the deductions of possible descendants of Widukind, the famous rival of Charlemagne, in Leibniz's Annales imperil and Eckhart's Historia genealogica. In a second part I will continue the comparison with two further examples of reconstruction of early medieval nobility.

Notice en format standard (ISO 2709)

Pour connaître la documentation sur le format Inist Standard.

A01	`01`	`1`		`@0 0039-3185`
A03		`1`		`@0 Stud. leibnitiana`
A05				`@2 35`
A06				`@2 2`
A08	`01`	`1`	`GER`	`@1 Plagiat an Leibniz' historiographischem Werk? Rekonstruktion frühmittelalterlicher Adelsgeschichte bei G. W. Leibniz und J. G. Eckhart, 1. Teil`
A11	`01`	`1`		`@1 ERDNER (Sven)`
A14	`01`			`@1 Sven Erdner, M. A., Gottfried-Wilhelm-Leibniz-Gesellschaft, Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz Bibliothek, Niedersächsische Landesbibliothek, Waterloostr. 8 @2 30169 Hannover @3 DEU @Z 1 aut.`
A20				`@1 194-224`
A21				`@1 2003`
A23	`01`			`@0 GER`
A24	`01`			`@0 eng`
A43	`01`			`@1 INIST @2 24893 @5 354000124720990030`
A44				`@0 0000 @1 © 2007 INIST-CNRS. All rights reserved.`
A47	`01`	`1`		`@0 519-07-13512`
A60				`@1 P`
A61				`@0 A`
A64	`01`	`1`		`@0 Studia leibnitiana`
A66	`01`			`@0 DEU`
A99				`@0 ref. et notes dissem.`
C01	`01`		`ENG`	@0 While it is a commonplace even for mathematicians and philosophers that Leibniz was working since 1685 on a Historia Domus for the dukes and electors of Hanover, that what he then actually worked out is much less a topic in the Leibniz research. Therefore, the old claim of Louis Davillé, that Leibniz's amanuensis Johann Georg Eckhart has plagiarized this Historia Domus in his own books, which stands unrefuted since 1911, is a good starting point to examine Leibniz's historical work and method in detail. In this first part I describe the environment in which dynastic history at this time took place and the new aspects which Leibniz introduced into the historical research, especially into medieval prosopography. Further in a first example, I examine Davillé's claim in a comparison between Leibniz and Eckhart on the basis of the deductions of possible descendants of Widukind, the famous rival of Charlemagne, in Leibniz's Annales imperil and Eckhart's Historia genealogica. In a second part I will continue the comparison with two further examples of reconstruction of early medieval nobility.
C02	`01`	`P`		`@0 5191I @1 I`
C02	`02`	`P`		`@0 519`
C03	`01`	`P`	`FRE`	`@0 Histoire de la philosophie @5 01`
C03	`01`	`P`	`ENG`	`@0 Philosophy history @5 01`
C03	`02`	`P`	`FRE`	`@0 Siècle 17-18 @2 ND @5 02`
C03	`02`	`P`	`ENG`	`@0 Century 17-18 @2 ND @5 02`
C03	`03`	`P`	`FRE`	`@0 Leibniz (G. W.) @2 NF @2 FA @5 03`
C03	`03`	`P`	`ENG`	`@0 Leibniz (G. W.) @2 NF @2 FA @5 03`
N21				`@1 232`

Format Inist (serveur)

NO :	FRANCIS 519-07-13512 INIST
GT :	Plagiat an Leibniz' historiographischem Werk? Rekonstruktion frühmittelalterlicher Adelsgeschichte bei G. W. Leibniz und J. G. Eckhart, 1. Teil
AU :	ERDNER (Sven)
AF :	Sven Erdner, M. A., Gottfried-Wilhelm-Leibniz-Gesellschaft, Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz Bibliothek, Niedersächsische Landesbibliothek, Waterloostr. 8/30169 Hannover/Allemagne (1 aut.)
DT :	Publication en série; Niveau analytique
SO :	Studia leibnitiana; ISSN 0039-3185; Allemagne; Da. 2003; Vol. 35; No. 2; Pp. 194-224; Abs. anglais
LA :	Allemand
EA :	While it is a commonplace even for mathematicians and philosophers that Leibniz was working since 1685 on a Historia Domus for the dukes and electors of Hanover, that what he then actually worked out is much less a topic in the Leibniz research. Therefore, the old claim of Louis Davillé, that Leibniz's amanuensis Johann Georg Eckhart has plagiarized this Historia Domus in his own books, which stands unrefuted since 1911, is a good starting point to examine Leibniz's historical work and method in detail. In this first part I describe the environment in which dynastic history at this time took place and the new aspects which Leibniz introduced into the historical research, especially into medieval prosopography. Further in a first example, I examine Davillé's claim in a comparison between Leibniz and Eckhart on the basis of the deductions of possible descendants of Widukind, the famous rival of Charlemagne, in Leibniz's Annales imperil and Eckhart's Historia genealogica. In a second part I will continue the comparison with two further examples of reconstruction of early medieval nobility.
CC :	5191I; 519
FD :	Histoire de la philosophie; Siècle 17-18; Leibniz (G. W.)
ED :	Philosophy history; Century 17-18; Leibniz (G. W.)
LO :	INIST-24893.354000124720990030
ID :	519

Links to Exploration step

Francis:519-07-13512

Le document en format XML

<record><TEI><teiHeader><fileDesc><titleStmt><title xml:lang="GER" level="a">Plagiat an Leibniz' historiographischem Werk? Rekonstruktion frühmittelalterlicher Adelsgeschichte bei G. W. Leibniz und J. G. Eckhart, 1. Teil</title>
<author><name sortKey="Erdner, Sven" sort="Erdner, Sven" uniqKey="Erdner S" first="Sven" last="Erdner">Sven Erdner</name>
<affiliation><inist:fA14 i1="01"><s1>Sven Erdner, M. A., Gottfried-Wilhelm-Leibniz-Gesellschaft, Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz Bibliothek, Niedersächsische Landesbibliothek, Waterloostr. 8</s1>
<s2>30169 Hannover</s2>
<s3>DEU</s3>
<sZ>1 aut.</sZ>
</inist:fA14>
</affiliation>
</author>
</titleStmt>
<publicationStmt><idno type="wicri:source">INIST</idno>
<idno type="inist">519-07-13512</idno>
<date when="2003">2003</date>
<idno type="stanalyst">FRANCIS 519-07-13512 INIST</idno>
<idno type="RBID">Francis:519-07-13512</idno>
<idno type="wicri:Area/Main/Corpus">000047</idno>
</publicationStmt>
<sourceDesc><biblStruct><analytic><title xml:lang="GER" level="a">Plagiat an Leibniz' historiographischem Werk? Rekonstruktion frühmittelalterlicher Adelsgeschichte bei G. W. Leibniz und J. G. Eckhart, 1. Teil</title>
<author><name sortKey="Erdner, Sven" sort="Erdner, Sven" uniqKey="Erdner S" first="Sven" last="Erdner">Sven Erdner</name>
<affiliation><inist:fA14 i1="01"><s1>Sven Erdner, M. A., Gottfried-Wilhelm-Leibniz-Gesellschaft, Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz Bibliothek, Niedersächsische Landesbibliothek, Waterloostr. 8</s1>
<s2>30169 Hannover</s2>
<s3>DEU</s3>
<sZ>1 aut.</sZ>
</inist:fA14>
</affiliation>
</author>
</analytic>
<series><title level="j" type="main">Studia leibnitiana</title>
<title level="j" type="abbreviated">Stud. leibnitiana</title>
<idno type="ISSN">0039-3185</idno>
<imprint><date when="2003">2003</date>
</imprint>
</series>
</biblStruct>
</sourceDesc>
<seriesStmt><title level="j" type="main">Studia leibnitiana</title>
<title level="j" type="abbreviated">Stud. leibnitiana</title>
<idno type="ISSN">0039-3185</idno>
</seriesStmt>
</fileDesc>
<profileDesc><textClass><keywords scheme="KwdEn" xml:lang="en"><term>Century 17-18</term>
<term>Leibniz (G. W.)</term>
<term>Philosophy history</term>
</keywords>
<keywords scheme="Pascal" xml:lang="fr"><term>Histoire de la philosophie</term>
<term>Siècle 17-18</term>
<term>Leibniz (G. W.)</term>
</keywords>
</textClass>
</profileDesc>
</teiHeader>
<front><div type="abstract" xml:lang="en">While it is a commonplace even for mathematicians and philosophers that Leibniz was working since 1685 on a Historia Domus for the dukes and electors of Hanover, that what he then actually worked out is much less a topic in the Leibniz research. Therefore, the old claim of Louis Davillé, that Leibniz's amanuensis Johann Georg Eckhart has plagiarized this Historia Domus in his own books, which stands unrefuted since 1911, is a good starting point to examine Leibniz's historical work and method in detail. In this first part I describe the environment in which dynastic history at this time took place and the new aspects which Leibniz introduced into the historical research, especially into medieval prosopography. Further in a first example, I examine Davillé's claim in a comparison between Leibniz and Eckhart on the basis of the deductions of possible descendants of Widukind, the famous rival of Charlemagne, in Leibniz's Annales imperil and Eckhart's Historia genealogica. In a second part I will continue the comparison with two further examples of reconstruction of early medieval nobility.</div>
</front>
</TEI>
<inist><standard h6="B"><pA><fA01 i1="01" i2="1"><s0>0039-3185</s0>
</fA01>
<fA03 i2="1"><s0>Stud. leibnitiana</s0>
</fA03>
<fA05><s2>35</s2>
</fA05>
<fA06><s2>2</s2>
</fA06>
<fA08 i1="01" i2="1" l="GER"><s1>Plagiat an Leibniz' historiographischem Werk? Rekonstruktion frühmittelalterlicher Adelsgeschichte bei G. W. Leibniz und J. G. Eckhart, 1. Teil</s1>
</fA08>
<fA11 i1="01" i2="1"><s1>ERDNER (Sven)</s1>
</fA11>
<fA14 i1="01"><s1>Sven Erdner, M. A., Gottfried-Wilhelm-Leibniz-Gesellschaft, Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz Bibliothek, Niedersächsische Landesbibliothek, Waterloostr. 8</s1>
<s2>30169 Hannover</s2>
<s3>DEU</s3>
<sZ>1 aut.</sZ>
</fA14>
<fA20><s1>194-224</s1>
</fA20>
<fA21><s1>2003</s1>
</fA21>
<fA23 i1="01"><s0>GER</s0>
</fA23>
<fA24 i1="01"><s0>eng</s0>
</fA24>
<fA43 i1="01"><s1>INIST</s1>
<s2>24893</s2>
<s5>354000124720990030</s5>
</fA43>
<fA44><s0>0000</s0>
<s1>© 2007 INIST-CNRS. All rights reserved.</s1>
</fA44>
<fA47 i1="01" i2="1"><s0>519-07-13512</s0>
</fA47>
<fA60><s1>P</s1>
</fA60>
<fA61><s0>A</s0>
</fA61>
<fA64 i1="01" i2="1"><s0>Studia leibnitiana</s0>
</fA64>
<fA66 i1="01"><s0>DEU</s0>
</fA66>
<fA99><s0>ref. et notes dissem.</s0>
</fA99>
<fC01 i1="01" l="ENG"><s0>While it is a commonplace even for mathematicians and philosophers that Leibniz was working since 1685 on a Historia Domus for the dukes and electors of Hanover, that what he then actually worked out is much less a topic in the Leibniz research. Therefore, the old claim of Louis Davillé, that Leibniz's amanuensis Johann Georg Eckhart has plagiarized this Historia Domus in his own books, which stands unrefuted since 1911, is a good starting point to examine Leibniz's historical work and method in detail. In this first part I describe the environment in which dynastic history at this time took place and the new aspects which Leibniz introduced into the historical research, especially into medieval prosopography. Further in a first example, I examine Davillé's claim in a comparison between Leibniz and Eckhart on the basis of the deductions of possible descendants of Widukind, the famous rival of Charlemagne, in Leibniz's Annales imperil and Eckhart's Historia genealogica. In a second part I will continue the comparison with two further examples of reconstruction of early medieval nobility.</s0>
</fC01>
<fC02 i1="01" i2="P"><s0>5191I</s0>
<s1>I</s1>
</fC02>
<fC02 i1="02" i2="P"><s0>519</s0>
</fC02>
<fC03 i1="01" i2="P" l="FRE"><s0>Histoire de la philosophie</s0>
<s5>01</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="01" i2="P" l="ENG"><s0>Philosophy history</s0>
<s5>01</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="02" i2="P" l="FRE"><s0>Siècle 17-18</s0>
<s2>ND</s2>
<s5>02</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="02" i2="P" l="ENG"><s0>Century 17-18</s0>
<s2>ND</s2>
<s5>02</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="03" i2="P" l="FRE"><s0>Leibniz (G. W.)</s0>
<s2>NF</s2>
<s2>FA</s2>
<s5>03</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="03" i2="P" l="ENG"><s0>Leibniz (G. W.)</s0>
<s2>NF</s2>
<s2>FA</s2>
<s5>03</s5>
</fC03>
<fN21><s1>232</s1>
</fN21>
</pA>
</standard>
<server><NO>FRANCIS 519-07-13512 INIST</NO>
<GT>Plagiat an Leibniz' historiographischem Werk? Rekonstruktion frühmittelalterlicher Adelsgeschichte bei G. W. Leibniz und J. G. Eckhart, 1. Teil</GT>
<AU>ERDNER (Sven)</AU>
<AF>Sven Erdner, M. A., Gottfried-Wilhelm-Leibniz-Gesellschaft, Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz Bibliothek, Niedersächsische Landesbibliothek, Waterloostr. 8/30169 Hannover/Allemagne (1 aut.)</AF>
<DT>Publication en série; Niveau analytique</DT>
<SO>Studia leibnitiana; ISSN 0039-3185; Allemagne; Da. 2003; Vol. 35; No. 2; Pp. 194-224; Abs. anglais</SO>
<LA>Allemand</LA>
<EA>While it is a commonplace even for mathematicians and philosophers that Leibniz was working since 1685 on a Historia Domus for the dukes and electors of Hanover, that what he then actually worked out is much less a topic in the Leibniz research. Therefore, the old claim of Louis Davillé, that Leibniz's amanuensis Johann Georg Eckhart has plagiarized this Historia Domus in his own books, which stands unrefuted since 1911, is a good starting point to examine Leibniz's historical work and method in detail. In this first part I describe the environment in which dynastic history at this time took place and the new aspects which Leibniz introduced into the historical research, especially into medieval prosopography. Further in a first example, I examine Davillé's claim in a comparison between Leibniz and Eckhart on the basis of the deductions of possible descendants of Widukind, the famous rival of Charlemagne, in Leibniz's Annales imperil and Eckhart's Historia genealogica. In a second part I will continue the comparison with two further examples of reconstruction of early medieval nobility.</EA>
<CC>5191I; 519</CC>
<FD>Histoire de la philosophie; Siècle 17-18; Leibniz (G. W.)</FD>
<ED>Philosophy history; Century 17-18; Leibniz (G. W.)</ED>
<LO>INIST-24893.354000124720990030</LO>
<ID>519</ID>
</server>
</inist>
</record>

Pour manipuler ce document sous Unix (Dilib)

EXPLOR_STEP=ChansonRolandV1/Data/Main/Corpus

HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_STEP/biblio.hfd -nk 000047 | SxmlIndent | more

HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/Main/Corpus/biblio.hfd -nk 000047 | SxmlIndent | more

Pour mettre un lien sur cette page dans le réseau Wicri

{{Explor lien
   |wiki=   *** parameter Area/wikiCode missing *** 
   |area=    ChansonRolandV1
   |flux=    Main
   |étape=   Corpus
   |type=    RBID
   |clé=     Francis:519-07-13512
   |texte=   Plagiat an Leibniz' historiographischem Werk? Rekonstruktion frühmittelalterlicher Adelsgeschichte bei G. W. Leibniz und J. G. Eckhart, 1. Teil
}}

This area was generated with Dilib version V0.6.38.
Data generation: Thu Jun 17 11:08:39 2021. Site generation: Thu Jun 17 11:33:18 2021

	La Chanson de Roland dans Francis
	Attention, ce site est en cours de développement ! Attention, site généré par des moyens informatiques à partir de corpus bruts. Les informations ne sont donc pas validées.

La Chanson de Roland dans Francis

Plagiat an Leibniz' historiographischem Werk? Rekonstruktion frühmittelalterlicher Adelsgeschichte bei G. W. Leibniz und J. G. Eckhart, 1. Teil

Plagiat an Leibniz' historiographischem Werk? Rekonstruktion frühmittelalterlicher Adelsgeschichte bei G. W. Leibniz und J. G. Eckhart, 1. Teil

Source :

Descripteurs français

English descriptors

Abstract

Notice en format standard (ISO 2709)

Format Inist (serveur)

Links to Exploration step

Le document en format XML

Pour manipuler ce document sous Unix (Dilib)

Pour mettre un lien sur cette page dans le réseau Wicri