List of Folio Society Books: The Middle Ages

INTRODUCTION

This list is designed to cover those Folio Society books (including editions that are out of print, those that are presently offered, as well as forthcoming works) that deal with the Middle Ages, a period of history spanning the 5th century to the 15th century CE. It is broken into several sections for ease of reference. Titles are listed by author, or in some cases the editor. When the author is unknown, the work is listed by its title. Following the title, I'll also add the translator when relevant, as well as the year of publication as I discover this information. If there is a title missing, please add it in the comments below and I will update the list when time permits, so long as it meets the aforementioned criteria (NOTE: More on the specifics of this criteria can be found below under ** DEFINING THE MIDDLE AGES **). Also, please feel free to share your thoughts on these editions! And, by all means, correct me if you find any errors. Which books have you read? Which do you recommend? Which are in your personal library? Do you have any editions you are willing to sell or trade? Let's make this thread a great resource for Folio Society devotees who have a love of the Middle Ages! Oh, and one more thing: I added ** BONUS MUSIC ** to the end of this list. Check it out if you like and happy browsing!

DEFINING THE MIDDLE AGES

In order to keep this list as concise as possible (so that it does not grow too large and unruly and therefore less useful), I would like to establish boundaries for the term "Middle Ages" as it will be used here. While historians differ on the exact dates, the Medieval period is generally thought to span from the 5th century to the 15th century CE. Additionally, I would prefer to limit the geographical area of the Medieval period as it is presented here to Europe, North Africa, and the Near East with maybe a few exceptions for the Far East. In short, this list will focus more on the various people and cultures associated with Christendom, Judaism, paganism, and the Islamic World during the Middle Ages, with maybe a few books here and there on Genghis Khan and the Mongol Empire, for example. Far Eastern history and cultures, such as the various Chinese dynasties and Feudal Japan, are absolutely fascinating, but I think they deserve their own separate thread (with respect for the vast differences between the Western and Eastern world), if only to limit the size of this one. Furthermore, it is important to note that some topics, such as the fall of the Roman Empire or the Renaissance, belong to more than one historical period. Since I intend to create other lists that will cover different historical periods, my tendency is to avoid relisting works that fall within more than one historical period and to choose a place that I feel is best for them. However, I created this list for everyone's benefit and I recognize that this is probably not possible. Therefore, there will likely be some repetition between lists as I create them. Suggestions are more than welcome and please feel free to offer any constructive criticism you may have. I will do my best to make this list one we can all utilize and enjoy.

LITERATURE OF THE MIDDLE AGES: THOSE WORKS COMPOSED BETWEEN THE 5TH CENTURY AND THE 15TH CENTURY CE

Abelard, Peter and Heloise d'Argenteuil. Abelard and Heloise. 1977.
Arabian Nights, The. (6-volume set in two 3-volume slipcases). 2003.
* Volume I
* Volume II
* Volume III
* Volume IV
* Volume V
* Volume VI
Arabian Nights, The: Tales from the Thousand and One Nights. 1999.
Augustine of Hippo. City of God. (2-volume set)
* The Refutation
* The Cities
Augustine of Hippo. Confessions. 1993.
Battuta, Ibn. The Travels of Ibn Battutah.
Bede. History of the English Church and People. 2010.
Beowulf. Trans. Kevin Crossley-Holland. 1973.
Beowulf. Trans. Seamus Heaney. 2010.
Bestiary. Trans. Richard Barber. 1992.
Boccaccio, Giovanni. The Decameron. (2-volume set). 1969.
* The First Five Days
* The Last Five Days
Boethius. The Consolation of Philosophy. 1998.
Burchard, Johann. At the Court of the Borgia. 1968. (Some overlap with the 16th century)
Chaucer, Geoffrey. The Canterbury Tales. Trans. Nevill Coghill. (2-volume set). 1956.
Chaucer, Geoffrey. The Canterbury Tales. (2-volume set). 1966.
Chaucer, Geoffrey. The Canterbury Tales. 1974.
Chaucer, Geoffrey. The Canterbury Tales. Trans. David Wright. (3-volume set). 1986.
Chaucer, Geoffrey. The Canterbury Tales. Trans. David Wright. 1998.
Chaucer, Geoffrey. Troilus and Criseyde. 1990.
da Vinci, Leonardo. The Notebooks of Leonardo da Vinci. (3-volume set). 2009. (Some overlap with the 16th century)
* Volume I
* Volume II
* Volume III
Dante Alighieri. The Divine Comedy. 1979.
Dante Alighieri. The Divine Comedy. (3-volume set, available individually)
* Inferno. 2004 (Reprint of 1998 edition with a new binding)
* Purgatorio. 2007.
* Paradiso. 2009.
Dante Alighieri. Inferno. 1998.
de Commynes, Philippe. The Universal Spider: The Life of Louis XI of France. 1973.
Einhard and Notker the Stammerer. The Life of Charlemagne. 1970.
Exeter Riddle Book, The. Ed. Kevin Crossley-Holland. 1978.
Icelandic Sagas I, The.
Icelandic Sagas II, The.
Kempe, Margery. The Book of Margery Kempe. 2004.
Kramer, Heinrich. Malleus Maleficarum. Trans. Montague Summers. 1968.
Langland, William. The Vision of Piers the Plowman. 2014.
Laxdæla saga. Trans. Magnus Magnusson. 1975.
Malory, Thomas. The Chronicles of King Arthur. (3-volume set). 1982.
* The Tale of King Arthur
* Sir Tristram de Lyonesse
* The Morte D'Arthur
Malory, Thomas. Lancelot and Guinevere. 1953.
Monmouth, Geoffrey of. The History of the Kings of Britain.
Pearl Poet. Sir Gawain and the Green Knight. Trans. Keith Harrison. 1983.
Pearl Poet. Sir Gawain and the Green Knight. Trans. Simon Armitage. 2008.
Poitiers, William of. The Bayeux Tapestry and the Norman Invasion. 1973.
Polo, Marco. The Travels of Marco Polo. 1968.
Procopius. The Secret History. 2009.
Qu’Rân, The.
Song of Roland, The. Trans. C. K. Scott Moncrieff. 2010.
Thousand Nights and One Night, The Book of the. (4-volume set). 1980.
* Volume I
* Volume II
* Volume III
* Volume IV

ANTHOLOGIES OF MEDIEVAL LITERATURE, MODERN RETELLINGS, AND OTHER MYTHOLOGY AND FOLKLORE BOOKS RELATED TO THE MIDDLE AGES

Barber, Richard. British Myths and Legends. 1998.
- Beowulf
- The Four Branches of the Mabinogi
- Sir Gawain and the Green Knight
- And many, many more!
Barber, Richard. British Myths and Legends. (3-volume set, reprint of 1998 edition).
* Heroes and Saints
* Marvels and Magic
* History and Romance
Barber, Richard. Legends of the Grail. 2007.
- Joseph of Arimathea
- Perceval
- Perlesvaus
- Parzival
- Galahad
Barber, Richard. Legends of King Arthur. 2000.
- Arthur
- Tristan
- The Holy Grail
Barber, Richard. Legends of King Arthur. (3-volume set, reprint of 2000 edition).
* Arthur
* Tristan
* The Holy Grail
Barber, Richard. Epics of the Middle Ages. 2005.
- The Song of Roland
- The Song of William
- Raoul of Cambrai
- The Cid
- The Deeds of the Norman People
- The Bruce
- Godfrey of Boulogne
Briggs, Katharine M. Folk Tales of Britain: Legends. 2011.
Briggs, Katharine M. Folk Tales of Britain: Narratives. 2011.
Crossley-Holland, Kevin. Folk-Tales of the British Isles. 1985 (Reprinted with a new binding 2006).
Crossley-Holland, Kevin. The Norse Myths.
Lancelyn Green, Roger. The Adventures of Robin Hood. 2001.
Magee, Elizabeth. Legends of the Ring. 2004.
- The Saga of the Volsungs
- The Heroic Poems of the Elder Edda
- The Prose Edda, by Snorri Sturluson
- The Mythological Poems of the Elder Edda
- The Nibelungenlied
- From the Saga of Dietrich of Bern
- The Lay of Horn-Skinned Siegfried
- The Tragedy of Horn-Skinned Siegfried, by Hans Sachs
Matthews, Caitlin and John Matthews. Celtic Myths and Legends.

NON-FICTION/EARLY MODERN SCHOLARSHIP OF THE MIDDLE AGES

Holinshed, Raphael. Holinshed: Chronicles. 2012.
More, Thomas and Horace Walpole. Richard III: The Great Debate. Ed. Paul Kendall. 1965.

NON-FICTION/MODERN SCHOLARSHIP OF THE MIDDLE AGES

Age of Illumination, The. (3-volume set). 2004.
* Early Medieval Art and Civilisation (by George Henderson)
* Gothic Art and Civilisation (by George Henderson)
* Byzantine Art and Civilisation (by Steven Runciman)
Barber, Richard. Chronicles of the Dark Ages. (3-volume set).
* The Coming of the Anglo-Saxons
* Anglo-Saxon Lore and Learning
* The Fall of the Anglo-Saxon Kingdoms
Barber, Richard. The Life and Campaigns of the Black Prince. 1979.
Barber, Richard. The Pastons: A Family in the War of the Roses. 1981. (Reprinted with a new binding 2001).
Barbero, Alessandro. Charlemagne: Father of a Continent. 2006.
Barraclough, Geoffrey. The Crucible of the Middle Ages.
Bloch, Marc. Feudal Society.
Brewer, Derek. Medieval Comic Tales. 2012.
Brooke, Christopher. The Rise and Fall of the Medieval Monastery. 2006.
Burne, Alfred H. The Hundred Years War.
Chadwick, Nora. The Celts.
de Hartog, Leo. Genghis Khan: Conqueror of the World. 2005.
Douglas, David C. The Normans.
Douglas, David C. William the Conqueror.
Frugoni, Chiara. Inventions of the Middle Ages.
Henderson, George. Early Medieval Art and Civilisation. 2004.
Hodgkin, Thomas. The Barbarian Invasions of the Roman Empire. (8-volume set, available individually)
* Volume I: The Visigothic Invasion
* Volume II: The Huns and the Vandals
* Volume III: The Ostrogoths
* Volume IV: The Imperial Restoration
* Volume V: The Lombard Invasion
* Volume VI: The Lombard Kingdom
* Volume VII: The Frankish Invasion
* Volume VIII: The Frankish Empire
Holt, J. C. Robin Hood.
Huizinga, John. The Waning of the Middle Ages.
Ishaq, Ibn. The Life of Muhammad, Apostle of Allah. 1964.
Kamen, Henry. The Spanish Inquisition. (Included here for its beginnings in the Middle Ages)
Keen, Maurice. Chivalry.
Jones, Gwyn. The Vikings.
Lawrence, T. E. Crusader Castles.
Le Goff, Jacques. Medieval Civilisation. 2011.
Le Roy Ladurie, Emmanuel. Montaillou. 2005.
Lewis, Bernard. The Assassins: A Radical Sect in Islam.
Maalouf, Amin. The Crusades Through Arab Eyes.
Matthews, Caitlin and John Matthews. King Arthur: History and Legend. 2008.
Morris, Jan. The Venetian Empire: A Sea Voyage.
Mortimer, Ian. The Time Traveller’s Guide to Medieval England.
Moss, Henry St. L. B. The Birth of the Middle Ages.
Mundy, John H. The High Middle Ages.
Norwich, John Julius. Byzantium. (3-volume set)
* The Early Centuries
* The Apogee
* The Decline and Fall
Onon, Urgunge. Chinggis Khan: The Golden History of the Mongols. 1993.
Pevsner, Nikolaus. The Cathedrals of England. (3-volume set, available individually)
* The South East
* The West & Midlands
* The North & East Anglia
Pirenne, Henri. Mohammed and Charlemagne.
Power, Eileen. Medieval People.
Power, Eileen. Medieval Women.
Power, Eileen. Scenes of Medieval Life. (3-volume set)
* Life in a Medieval Castle
* Life in a Medieval City
* Life in a Medieval Village
Runciman, Steven. The Fall of Constantinople 1453.
Runciman, Steven. A History of the Crusades. (3-volume set)
* The First Crusade
* The Kingdom of Jerusalem
* The Kingdom of Acre
Sackville-West, Vita. Saint Joan of Arc.
Sellar, W. C. and R. J. Yeatman. 1066 and All That. (Tongue-in-cheek)
Seward, Desmond. The Monks of War: The Military Orders.
Seward, Desmond. The Wars of the Roses. 2011.
Southern, R. W. The Making of the Middle Ages.
Story of the Middle Ages, The. (5-volume set, also available in individual volumes)
* The Birth of the Middle Ages (by Henry St. L. B. Moss)
* The Crucible of the Middle Ages (by Geoffrey Barraclough)
* The Making of the Middle Ages (by R. W. Southern)
* The High Middle Ages (by John H. Mundy)
* The Waning of the Middle Ages (by John Huizinga)
Tuchman, Barbara W. The Mirror of the Past. (2-volume set)
* A Distant Mirror: The Calamitous 14th Century
* The Proud Tower: A Portrait of the World Before the War, 1890-1914 (Not about the Middle Ages, but part of the set)
Tyerman, Christopher. An Eyewitness History of the Crusades. (4-volume set)
* The First Crusade
* The Second Crusade
* The Third Crusade
* The Fourth Crusade
Waddell, Helen. Songs of the Wandering Scholars.
Ward, Colin. Chartres: The Making of a Miracle. 1986.
Weir, Alison. The Princes in the Tower.
Ziegler, Philip. The Black Death. 1997.

MODERN FICTION SET DURING THE MIDDLE AGES

Crossley-Holland, Kevin. The Arthur Trilogy. (3-volume set, available individually)
* The Seeing Stone. 2009.
* At the Crossing-Places. 2010.
* King of the Middle March
Eco, Umberto. The Name of the Rose. Trans. William Weaver. 2001.
Graves, Robert. Count Belisarius. 2010.
Scott, Walter. Ivanhoe.
Twain, Mark. A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur’s Court.
White, T. H. The Once and Future King. 2003.

LIMITED EDITIONS

Æthelwold of Winchester. The Benediction of Saint Æthelwold. 2001.
Boccaccio, Giovanni. Decameron. 2007.
Chaucer, Geoffrey. The Canterbury Tales.
Chaucer, Geoffrey. Troilus and Criseyde. 2012.
Fitzwilliam Book of Hours, The.
Getty Apocalypse, The.
Hereford World Map, The: Mappa Mundi.
Holkham Bible, The.
Liber Bestiarum.
Luttrell Psalter, The.
Magna Carta. (Forthcoming)
Malory, Thomas. Le Morte d’Arthur.
Winchester Psalter, The. (Forthcoming)

OTHER PUBLICATIONS OFFERED BY THE FOLIO SOCIETY

Great Cathedrals of the Middle Ages.
Les Grandes Heures de Jean, duc de Berry.
Piva, Paolo. Medieval Art and Architecture. (2-volume set)
* Medieval Art
* Medieval Architecture

BONUS! BROWSING MUSIC!

Benedictine Monks of Santo Domingo de Silos in Spain Chanting
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HwcG3mYo5Kk

Celtic Music by Adrian von Ziegler
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jiwuQ6UHMQg

Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim - Original Soundtrack
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5OWdMHIRld8&list=PL8CB7943AB56938F8

Game of Thrones - Original Soundtrack
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E-sb2j0UxCY&list=PLUyiyCkoNwG-ekb-w3pWHA5vunY...

Gregorian Chants from Assisi - Medieval Lauds
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eC6OKIYXBxQ

Kingdom of Heaven - Original Soundtrack
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aOOpRTQxZWM&list=PLjapP-fVi-kLvaFxVDjnB_GQao9...

Medieval Music Ultimate Grand Collection
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7RCM2IeiB00

If you date the beginning of the Middle Ages to the collapse of the Roman Empire in the West then I think you should include the 8 Volumes of

The Barbarian Invasions of the Roman Empire by Thomas Hodgkin

Volume 1 - The Visigothic Invasion
Volume 2 - The Huns And The Vandals
Volume 3 - The Ostrogoths
Volume 4 - The Imperial Restoration
Volume 5 - The Lombard Invasion
Volume 6 - The Lombard Kingdom
Volume 7 - The Frankish Invasion
Volume 8 - The Frankish Empirel

The Life of Charlemagne By Einhard (I can't remember if that volume also included Notker the Stammerer or not

>1 erbisoeul:
A most impressive catalogue!
You may want to note that the extremely expensive Les Grandes Heures de Jean, duc de Berry was marketed by the FS, but is not a FS publication.
Great Cathedrals of the Middle Ages was published by Adams and not the FS.
The FS often markets high quality publications by other publishers.

Thanks! Hoping to see it grow! I believe Paolo Piva's Medieval Art and Architecture is also not an official publication, but as far as I know, it's only available through the Folio Society or, at least that is what I had read. The rest of the books on this list are, as far as I know, official Folio publications.

>5 erbisoeul:

Correct, but with a slight distinction. The slipcase was commissioned for FS, but the publication itself is not by FS.

>1 erbisoeul:

You should also add:

- Secret History, The (Procopius)
- Life and Campaigns of the Black Prince, The (?)
- Richard III: The Great Debate (Walpole and More)
- I'm not near my library at present, but I suspect boldface or Conte can clarify the title of this - along with Vita Sackville-West, there's a volume containing a translation of selected passages from Joan of Arc's trial
- Shakespeare's history plays, most notably King John, Richard II, Henry IV (I and II), Henry V, Richard III, Henry VI (I, II, and III), and if we stretch the period a wee bit, Henry VIII
- Utopia (More) (yes, I know this is in the reign of Henry VIII, but if we're honest, More was enormously influenced by the medieval way of thinking)
- Life and Death of Cardinal Wolsey, The (by one of his gentlemen valets - this is technically into the Renaissance, though)
- At the Court of the Borgia (Burchardt?) (covers the very end of the 15th century during the pontificate of Alexander VI)
- Face of Battle, The (Keegan - this contains a chapter on the battle of Agincourt)
- Benedictional of St Aethewold, The (first LE the FS produced, I believe)
- Winchester Psalter, The (forthcoming LE)
- Magna Carta (also a forthcoming LE)

And many more that I can't think of offhand, I'm sure!

EDIT: >3 Geedge: Yes, that edition includes Notker.

Thought of a couple further books:

- Exeter Riddle Book, The (Crossley-Holland)
- Age of Illumination, The (3-vol set...apologies as I can't recall the titles of the individual volumes offhand)
- Chronicles (Holinshed - technically Renaissance, but the guy covered EVERYTHING to do with English history up to then, let's be honest. Plus Shakey ripped him off liberally for his history plays.)

I keep wanting to say that we've forgotten Saxo Grammaticus' history of Amleth, Prince of Denmark, but no...that's a LEC title!!!

And I think we should just turn this list into a medieval and Renaissance list - it is just too difficult to distinguish between the two periods, particularly since Europe went through the 'Renaissance'* at different times - England didn't go through its version until about 150 years after Italy did. On that basis, I would actually include McCulloch's magisterial Reformation as well. Ditto for Decline of Religion and Magic - even though these two works ostensibly look at English religio-social life post-Reformation, they focus a lot of attention, rightly, on the pre-Reformation period as well.

*As far as I'm concerned, the Renaissance that everyone knows is the fake one. The real renaissance happened in the twelfth century. (There's even a wiki article on it, I believe - it's traditionally called the 'renaissance of the twelfth century' or something similar. Not to be confused with the so-called Carolingian Renaissance, a limited and localised renaissance that centred around Charlemagne's palace during his reign.)

Montaillou- Emmanuel La Roy Ladurie

Chartres the Making of a Miracle - Colin Ward

Sadly I don't think The Folio Society published an Edition of Mont St Michel & Chartres though the Limited Editions Club & Heritage Society both published fine editions of this "meditative journey across time and space into the medieval imagination"

The Cathedrals of England: The South East Nikolaus Pevsner
The Cathedrals of England: The West & Midlands Nikolaus Pevsner
The Cathedrals of England: The North & East Anglia Nikolaus Pevsner

A Distant Mirror: The Calamitous 14th Century Barbara W. Tuchman

1066 and all that
Lives of the Artists - Vasari

How about: The Bayeux Tapestry and the Norman Invasion (1973) by William of Poitiers

Thanks for all the suggestions, everyone. I appreciate your enthusiasm! However, I've added my thoughts above on what I feel this list should and should not include. Thanks again and I will start adding your suggestions when I get the chance.

>12 erbisoeul: I have some sympathy, but I feel trying to narrow the focus of this list will be like trying to catch a tiger by the tail.

If you define The Middle Ages as European history between the 5th and 15th centuries, then you are going to get a long list, and it will naturally and legitimitely include anything to do with the fall of the Roman Empire (for example). Take Hodgkin for example. The very first paragraph of his multi-volume history states that the objective of that work is to explain how the Roman Empire became "the Italy of the Middle Ages". It is difficult to see therefore how or why you would exclude it.

I agree that if you explicitly limit the definition to 5th-15th century European history/literature it would help exclude some of the suggestions so far which stretch deep into 16th century.

>13 Conte_Mosca: You are not wrong and I share some of these concerns. Great endings tend to open up the story, rather than wrap it up, as the saying goes. With this in mind, it makes perfect sense to include the fall of the Roman Empire among a list of the Middle Ages, as this event serves as an excellent prologue to the story of the Middle Ages.

Nonetheless, my reason for excluding the fall of the Roman Empire from this list has already been given and it's really not too difficult to see how or why I chose to do so. Ultimately, given the choice between placing books on the fall of the Roman Empire on either A) a bookcase full of Antiquity/Classical Studies or B) a bookcase of the Middle Ages, I would choose to place them on the former, because I believe books on this subject are in better company with the Classical period. However, I also recognize they would not be out of place on the Middle Ages bookcase for the above reasons.

So, while I personally prefer to separate the Romans and the Middle Ages when it comes to cataloging them, I did create this list for everyone's benefit and I'd like for the majority of us to be pleased with it. Thus, I'll be sure and add titles on the fall of the Roman Empire shortly!

Regarding the conclusion of the Middle Ages, some historians place the end at the fall of Constantinople in 1453, while others extend the period through the end of the 15th century. However, given the major technological advances and societal changes in the 15th century, the period was definitely over by the onset of the 16th century.

A new list encompassing the Early Modern period (16th century to 18th century) is more appropriate at this point and it will no doubt be just as fascinating. Holinshed's Chronicles and the works of William Shakespeare have been mentioned above and, while they certainly cover the Middle Ages, I feel they are better suited to the era in which they were written, as I can't imagine a list of that period without them. Again, this is my mind selecting one or the other, rather than both. I guess I'm just trying to avoid repeating works across the various lists I intend to create. Perhaps this is an attempt to catch the tiger by the tail, as you say, but I can try.

>14 erbisoeul: I wish you the very best of luck. It is certainly an interesting list, so thanks for your work on it.

Just to clarify, when I referred to the fall of the Roman Empire, I was referring not to works about the pre-Medieval period as background to the Middle Ages, but works that absolutely relate to the period. Hodgkin was to whom I was referring, not Gibbon. Of course Gibbon's Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire itself is entirely focused in The Middle Ages in Volumes 5 and 6, which cover the period from 7th-15th Century, but Hodgkin's work (to which I was referring, as per post >2 Geedge: ) is much more deeply rooted in the Middle Ages, with the majority (volumes 3-8) exclusively covering 5th-15th Century. So on that basis, I would agree that I would put Gibbon's on the Classical/Antiquities shelf, I would absolutely have to place Hodgkin's on the Middle Ages shelf.

It is a really intesting debate, and I for one am glad I don't have to make such choices and can sit both sets on the same shelf next to each other! Next to Carlyle's The French Revolution on one side and Ann Radcliffe's Novels boxset on the other, so you can tell I do not have a tidy mind!

>15 Conte_Mosca: No arguments there! And I'll probably avoid putting Gibbons on this list for the very reason you have given. I've not read Hodgkins, but you and others have made a clear argument for his inclusion here. Thanks!

On a side note, I do have a nice 3-volume Heritage Press edition of The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire from the 1940s. Gian Battista Piranesi's sepia illustrations in it are absolutely gorgeous.

Definitely an interesting debate and I'm happy to have it here. It's a shame more of my Medieval classes don't discuss the fall of the Roman Empire in more detail, as my professors often only briefly touch upon it or omit it altogether (probably due to time constraints).

My old roommate has a less-than-tidy mind as well. It was always a pleasure watching him look for a book in his library while mumbling, "Now where did I put that?"

>2 Geedge: Thanks, they're on the list!

Is anyone familiar with how many different editions the Folio Society has produced of Dante's Divine Comedy? I'd like to list all of these editions, including what years they were produced, whether they were issued in a single volume, multiple volumes, etc. And, whether or not they were limited editions.

>6 scholasticus: Thanks for all your suggestions! I've uploaded most of them to the list above. Regarding the Limited Editions Club, I have an excellent edition of The Nibelungenlied produced by them!

>18 erbisoeul:
Folio 60 does not mention any editions of Dante other than you have already listed. And it also mentions that the first volume --Inferno-- of the "3 volume edition" of 2007-2009, is actually a 2004 reprint of the 1998 edition, with a new binding.

>20 garyjbp: Thanks! I've been meaning to get a copy of Folio 60.

I would put the Decline and Fall on the list as it covers the geographic region you stipulate and the years (as mentioned).

I went through the FS catalogue from 1947-2010 yesterday (Canada Day here) and have created an Excel file with about 250 titles (including reprints) covering subjects from c. AD 500 to AD 1603*.

Would anyone know how I can upload the file to the FS home page rather than just to my personal account?

I'm hoping to have time in the next few days to go through the 2011-2014 lists as well, so I'll post the full list once it's completed.

*Yes, this list includes Renaissance titles, for the very simple reason that various parts of Europe moved into the Renaissance period much later than Italy did. England is generally considered to have attained the Renaissance under Henry VIII and Elizabeth I, hence the 1603 end date. By comparison, Italy is considered to have entered the Renaissance c. 1350 (think Petrarch); at this time, France and England were still very solidly in the medieval era, and even the idea of the 'Italian Renaissance' is problematic, since it didn't reach its zenith until the sixteenth century. So to make things easier, I've simply made this list cover the medieval and Renaissance.

And yes, my list does include Gibbon's Decline and Fall (this has only been published twice as of 2010: once as seven individual volumes in the 1980s and 1990s, and later as the six-volume set) and Hodgkin's Barbarian Invasions series (published just once thus far).

The list does include Shakespeare as well, before anyone asks. All LEs and Letterpress Shakespeares are included (although I admit that for the sake of brevity, I reduced the Letterpress to a single entry with publication dates of 2007-2014).

The list is searchable in Excel, as I've listed entries by title, author, and year of publication, so if anyone wants to omit Shakespeare and/or others, they can download my list and make any changes to their personal copy.

The list does not make any distinctions between primary and secondary sources, or novels, etc. that have the medieval or Renaissance periods as their subjects - that was just too much work after I realised how many titles I had pulled! FS have really ramped up their medieval-Renaissance catalogue since the 1990s - before then, it's easily Shakespeare by a mile, and then some.

>23 scholasticus: Sounds like your list will be worth a look, even if it will be less focused on the Medieval period. However, I disagree with your claim that a "Medieval and Renaissance" list will "make things easier." The former is a historical period, or categorization of time. The latter is best described as a cultural movement that spans both the Middle Ages and the Early modern period (in its popular usage) and, as you have already pointed out, can be applied to more than one topic of discussion. Grouping these topics together as a whole would require those with an interest in the Middle Ages to sift through material that is not Medieval.

To elaborate further, the reason this is not a "Medieval and Renaissance" list is because I wanted to make it a more convenient source for those Folio Society devotees with an interest in the Medieval period. As I have already pointed out, the addition of overlapping topics, such as the Fall of the Roman Empire and the Renaissance, would cause this list to grow too large and unruly, and therefore less easily navigated. Case in point, you admit your list: "...does not make any distinctions between primary and secondary sources, or novels, etc. that have the medieval or Renaissance periods as their subjects - that was just too much work after I realised how many titles I had pulled!" So, you've put your finger on the exact reason why I chose to limit this list.

In short, this is not a completionist list comprised of every Folio Society title with even the vaguest connection with the Middle Ages, but rather one that includes those works primarily associated with the period. That doesn't mean there are not other works offered by the Folio Society that discuss the Middle Ages in part, but the focus of a work, so far as its inclusion on this list, must primarily be on the Middle Ages. This is why you won't find Edward Gibbons' The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire on the list, as only the final volumes of that work focus on the Medieval period. However, the opposite is true of Hodgkin, which is why he is included here. Anyway, good luck with your list.

>23 scholasticus:
It may be better to upload your file to any site on the web, then post a link to it from this thread and/or the FSD wiki page. You can then modify your list as you wish and keep it up to date.

EDIT: There is no FS edition of Petrarch, apparently. I was thinking of the LEC edition, it seems!

(A precis: a rationale for my position stated in 23 and arguments against points raised in 24 and noting that my medieval and Renaissance lists will be up in the next few days, followed by a thank-you note to Warwick as per 25.)

>24 erbisoeul:

I'm not quite sure why you feel my list will be "less focused" on the medieval period, to be honest. I said it'd include the medieval and Renaissance periods - how does including the Renaissance reduce the medieval era? How does including works relevant to the fall of the Roman Empire and the Renaissance detract from the medieval era? If anything, including relevant works from these two 'border' eras fleshes out the medieval era and prevents us from looking at it in a clinical vacuum.

More to the point, it doesn't appear that you've looked at FS' back catalogue; it became apparent to me very quickly when I went over it yesterday that we've been making a mountain out of a molehill. (I should've made that clearer in post 23 above - I apologise!) There are only two works in FS' catalogue at present that could be problematic in terms of the classical-medieval divide:
- Gibbon's Decline and Fall, and
- Hogdkin's Barbarian Invasions.

All other works dealing with the classical era are easily catalogued into the classical era, and this includes the Church Fathers (Augustine, mostly) - I have no problems putting such works into the classical era. Anyone who creates a list for classical antiquity will only have Gibbon and Hodgkin for overlap.

We both agree that Hodgkin should be added, so that only leaves Gibbon. My position is that Gibbon needs to be included because he looks at the history of Rome (and thus its empire) from the age of the Antonines down to the late fifteenth century with the fall of Constantinople. I'm not sure if you've ever read Gibbon, given your comments(?), but Gibbon reaches the fall of the Western Roman Empire in 476 in chapter 36, which is generally the halfway point of the Decline and Fall (I use the six-volume Everyman edition, which has Chapter 36 closing the third volume). So in reality, while you're technically correct in saying that Gibbon only deals with the medieval era in his "final volumes", that's only true if you concede that the medieval era constitutes the second half of his Decline and Fall. And even then, one cannot look at the medieval era without understanding the context behind the fall of the Western Empire and the slow separation of the two halves of the empire in the late classical era, at least in my opinion.

And I think you misunderstand the purpose of Gibbon's work: it's not solely focusing on the Western Empire. (I admit I fell into this trap when I started reading medieval history for my BA!) Its focus is on the Roman Empire, in both its Western and Eastern forms, so, yes, Gibbon does deliberately set out to cover the medieval era as well because the Eastern (Byzantine) Empire lasted into that era. His ultimate point is that the Empire endured an incredibly long decline measured by centuries, replete with many transformations between the halcyon days of the second and third centuries AD down to the slow decline of her imperial fortunes in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries. (And to be fair, Hodgkin has the same dilemma: his first four volumes focus more on the period up to 476, while the 'back half' focuses on the medieval era 'proper'.)

I happily agree the point implicit in your criticism of Gibbon, that it's simply more convenient to use the (Western) Roman Empire as the litmus test, ergo there's no need to worry about the early days of the Empire. I do agree that the fall of the (Western) Roman Empire was a seismic event with pan-European implications. So, yes, it's wonderfully convenient to peg the medieval era's beginnings to 500.

(Also, it's Gibbon, not Gibbons. :) )

As for the Renaissance era, I've consulted my list more carefully and we have the same mountain for a molehill issue again. We could easily cut off the medieval era in 1485 if we go with an English 'theme' in honour of the FS being British (Battle of Bosworth Field, in which Richard III was done in by Henry (VII) Tudor). The only three works that would be problematic, at least as of today, would be Petrarch's sonnets, Dante's Comedy, and Christopher Hibbert's wonderful history of the Medici family.

Even then, that could easily be resolved by:
1. Listing all three works only in the medieval list,
2. Listing them all only in the Renaissance list, or
3. Listing them all in both the medieval and Renaissance lists.

As a professional medievalist, my preference is for option #2 for reasons stated in earlier posts (essentially the fact that the Italians started their renaissance in the early to mid-fourteenth century, peaking in the sixteenth, while the rest of Europe took until the sixteenth century to join the party), but I accept that not everyone's a professional historian, so I'll include these three works in the final versions of both the medieval and Renaissance lists that I'll try to complete by the weekend.

And in the interest of fairness, even if I maintained my original position of dating the Renaissance from 1509 (Henry VIII's accession), only one work would have to switch sides: Bacon's history of the life and reign of Henry VII. FS has been very nice in not muddling up the period divisions too much!!!

I'll split up the works for both the medieval and Renaissance eras into two categories: primary - including literature - and secondary (books written about these periods) and append brief one- or two-sentence annotations. Looking more at my list of ~270 titles, this won't be a difficult project. (I admit that a fair number of these entries are Shakespeare!) I can probably have this done in a couple of days, and will post it as per Warwick's helpful suggestion in 25.

I'm not sure where you got the impression that I was including "every Folio Society title with even the vaguest connection with the Middle Ages". Yes, I did include several works that I explicitly stated extended into the Renaissance, but that in and of itself does not constitute evidence of an intent to create a list with every work that has any "vague" connection to the medieval era, so your conclusion is overreaching there. In fact, my list includes only primary sources, as well as secondary (either literary or academic: examples would be Chaucer's Canterbury Tales and Frank Barlow's biography of Thomas Becket; after going through the list it was clear that Keegan's The Face of Battle, with its chapter on Agincourt, was an outlier, so I did not include it; perhaps this is why you said that I was including every title with a "vague" connection?).

Please understand that I'm not upset or annoyed, even though my written tone may make it seem that I am. I'm thrilled that so many people are interested in history, and according to your profile, you're taking up a degree with a certificate/minor? in medieval studies. That is absolutely fantastic. My bone of contention was with how your list was initially created on an ad hoc basis without defining precisely what constituted the medieval era until pressed by subsequent posts, as well as your wholesale rejection of the fall of the Roman Empire and the birth of the Renaissance because the medieval era has to exist in a neat millennial vacuum totally separate from the Roman Empire and the Renaissance. Several other people in this thread have sagely pointed out that one cannot ignore relevant events on either side of your dates. The fifth to the fifteenth century benchmark should be seen as a guideline more than an absolute demarcation; even Folio breaks this "rule", as one of the books I found in the back catalogue states that the medieval period started in AD 385 in its title. FS also categorises books on its site as belonging to the "Medieval and Renaissance", probably for the reasons I've passionately pushed in my previous comments and here. It's just too darn difficult to separate out the two! This is also why I will never attempt to write an academic monograph that has to force a break between the medieval and Renaissance periods! :) I'll leave that to colleagues far braver than I.

Congratulations - and apologies! - to all who reached the end of this "thesis"! I'm certainly happy to discuss my points further with anyone, either here or via PM, if so interested. Probably best to do so via PM, as it'd be unfair for erbisouel and mine's discussion to hijack this thread.

>25 wcarter:

Many thanks! I'll do just that.

well, Scholasticus rendered any point I was going to make redundant except to acknowledge that lines don't exist in nature and demarcating historical periods will always be a somewhat arbitrary exercise. I find clear distinctions in historical epochs to be a little undergrad for my tastes and those distinctions can often do more to narrow the focus of a conversation than to broaden it. However, I will second my own opinion - how is that for ego - that to not include Gibbon is to fail in understanding the scope of his work and the last 4 volumes (3 in Everyman).

While I think this conversation is interesting I am no doubt guilty of taking it off the topic of the OP except to advocate for poor ol'Gibbon, greatly misunderstood, greatly under read.

This post makes me want to get my hands on one of those handy Folio 60s, not sure I can wait until 2017 for the next one.

Cheers. Ooo, since we are talking medieval period here, I sign off with: sine ire et studio…..

Ire or ira? ira, right? And yes I know it is Tacitus, who was definitely pre-medieval :)

>27 BINDINGSTHATLAST:, 28

Ira. :)

Sine ira et studio ("without hate and zealousness"). And kudos on knowing it's Tacitus! :)

And before anyone gets upset, Bindings is not saying that he's angry with anyone here; the original context, in Tacitus' introduction to his Annales, has this phrase, and it's clearly meant to convey the sense that Tacitus will be a neutral historian.

The histories of Tiberius, Gaius, Claudius, and Nero, while they were in power, were falsified through terror, and after their death were written under the irritation of a recent hatred. Hence my purpose is to relate a few facts about Augustus - more particularly his last acts, then the reign of Tiberius, and all which follows, without either bitterness or partiality, from any motives to which I am far removed.

>26 scholasticus: Although it's certainly a rousing discussion, I feel I've made my position clear more than once, you are just refusing to acknowledge it. I don't want this list to grow too large, hence the omission of certain works, even though they do relate to the Middle Ages. If you choose to take this as "wholesale rejection," then that is your problem and your mistaken assumption. Furthermore, by including Renaissance works that date entirely from the Early modern period, you are making your list "less focused" on the Medieval period, as it will inevitably contain non-Medieval material and force those with an interest in the Middle Ages to sift through non-Medieval material, as I have already told you. As a "professional medievalist," is this really that hard to comprehend? Nonetheless, if you wish to "flesh out" your list and include more of the Renaissance, then go for it. Just don't act so wounded when a list that has always been titled "List of Folio Society Books: The Middle Ages" does not include more material from the latter part of the Renaissance.

As far as Edward Gibbon is concerned, I am most definitely in the wrong in my statements above and thank you for correcting me on several important points. I have only read early chapters from the Decline and Fall, hence my ignorance on the later portions of the work. Quite stupidly, I was basing what I said on what another person had remarked concerning that work in this very thread (one of your sages?). Anyway, I took a look at my copy this evening and there is plenty of material present in that work to warrant its inclusion here. My mistake and my easily-avoidable error for not double-checking first. As far as his name, we all make spelling errors, yourself included, which I corrected when I added some of your earlier suggestions to this list.

Finally, in the interest of avoiding what will certainly be an endless debate with a clearly passionate and argumentative individual, I'll just say that when I created this list, I did not anticipate sparking such a debate. From the onset, I tried using the generally established timeline for the period in order to set limitations so as to avoid the creation of a far lengthier list. Inevitably, some people raised concerns, namely yourself, and I have done my best to address these concerns by establishing further guidelines in order to limit its size. Apologies if this has gotten under your skin, but I created this list for fun, not the opposite. Again, best of luck with your list. If it had existed earlier, I might have avoided the desire to create this one in the first place. Nonetheless, I am glad this "clinical vacuum" was able to inspire you.

>30 erbisoeul: "Quite stupidly, I was basing what I said on what another person had remarked concerning that work in this very thread".

Not me I hope!

For what it is worth I am largely with you on this one. It was your list, and you did clearly title it "The Middle Ages",' not "The Middle Ages and the English Rennaissance", and you were clear about your reasons. I also completely get where Scholasticus is coming from as any dividing line is arbitrary in historical terms, but for the reasons you gave, it was clear you wanted to draw the line somewhere which is fair enough. And if you are drawing the line at what is generally considered to be The Middle Ages (5th-15th centuries CE) then that should be respected. I for one can never get my head around Shakespeare being included in any such list, a man whose work epitomises the height of the middle to late English Rennaissance (and certainly not any fuzzy transition from the medieval to the early English Rennaissance at the start of the Tudor period in 1485).

As for Gibbon, my earlier point was that his Decline and Fall very clearly does cover ground in the Middle Ages although if you define it by time period, then it only explicitly does so in the later volumes (see >15 Conte_Mosca: where I state that the final two volumes entirely cover the period from 7th-15th centuries), unlike Hodgkin whose work dives into the Medieval period early and for most of the work. As I said, I don't draw a dividing line, hence they are shelved together on my bookshelves, but in looking to meet your criteria (it was your thread after all), then if I had to choose only one category under which I could place Decline and Fall and Barbarian Invasions, it would be Classical and Middle Ages respectively (but reluctantly, as both works cover significant ground across both periods).

>30 erbisoeul:

I know this list was created for fun - and it should be! - so no apologies needed on that score. What I took exception to was your repeated attempts to limit discussion only to your definition of the medieval period without considering the Renaissance on the main assertion that such a list would be lengthy and cumbersome; such a position, to me, appeared a poorly-formulated argument of convenience intended to inhibit discussion and debate about the medieval period (including any relevant discussions regarding the classical and Renaissance periods, which greatly enrich any understanding of the medieval period) in order to ensure that such a list would remain a "convenient" length for you to update and maintain. Your addition of a list of musical titles also weakened your position because if such a thread were meant to be restricted only to the medieval period as per your original suggestion, why include what has the potential to develop into a brilliantly varied list if one considers the countless permutations of medieval music, both lay and ecclesiastical? This is a statement of my position, not an ad hominem attack, as you imply in your post. Pertinent extensions and tangents of a thread's purpose should be happily encouraged to the further enjoyment and edification of all on this forum, and in that sense, I'm glad that you included the music list as well (however at cross-purposes with my earlier statement that may seem!).

Using 500-1485 and your limitations (which I agree with broadly, but I'll admit that these limitations were pretty moot, as FS has firmly restricted itself to Western European history in terms of the medieval and Renaissance periods after going through the catalogue) for the medieval era netted me 182 titles (this value includes distinct editions of the same work); the Renaissance period (1485-1603) returned 109 titles* under the same rules, but if we omit Shakespeare, it's a very surprising 54. Keep in mind that it's perfectly possible that I missed a few works in the catalogue, so these values are by no means absolute. This does include some duplication of titles in the medieval and Renaissance lists.

My end position has been that the medieval and Renaissance periods form a natural and sensible unity, which should be appreciated not only by professional historians, but by laypeople as well, since the precise demarcation(s) between these two periods cannot easily be agreed upon without sacrificing the whole; the ethos of the period evolved continuously from the fall of the Western Empire through to the socio-cultural upheavals and re-definitions brought about by the Reformation. Certainly there needs to be a split somewhere, and this most apparent in academia, but I have yet to meet a historian who refuses to go beyond the neat demarcations noted in the course or book title. :)

That being said, I do accept that I initiated the discussion about including the Renaissance in the first place, so that point is conceded, but I did so for a very valid reason. Lists that hermetically seal off one period from another often imply - unintentionally - that items that "fit" into one period or the other can only be thought of as belonging to "their" period. That's why I created my list slightly differently from yours: I did create a split between the two periods, but they're part of a single Excel file so that one can flip between them if so interested. I think this is a fair compromise: if one is interested in one period over the other, that list can be viewed, but my hope is that viewers will be intrigued by the possibility of this "conversation" between the two lists.

The best way I've ever found to explain my position is to use a comic by the Canadian artist Kate Beaton (of "Hark, a vagrant!" webcomic fame). If I find the comic on her notoriously unsearchable site, I'll post it for some laughs. Basically you have a bunch of medieval folks sitting around and whinging about the terrible Middle Ages, with one character crying out, "Man, I can't wait for the Renaissance to start!" Admittedly much funnier in pictures than words, but the point and humour concerning the question of how to define the medieval and Renaissance periods still stands. :)

And I'm genuinely happy that you have read some Gibbon thus far!! Far too many people - including colleagues - have completely skipped Gibbon, which saddens me immensely. I hope you'll endeavour to read him in his entirety some day: you won't be disappointed!

I think in the end >31 Conte_Mosca: has ultimately said it best by suggesting that we both have valid points. And, Conte, a friend of mine has an unorthodox way of shelving her copies of Gibbon and Hodgkin: she shelves the first half of each set on her 'classical' shelf and the second half of each set on her 'medieval' shelf. Drives me crazy every time I see these sets split across her shelves, but I appreciate her point. Not something I could ever bring myself to do, but fortunately I have just enough titles along with Gibbon and Hodgkin to constitute an "interim" shelf between my classical and medieval shelves!

*This includes a single entry for the Letterpress Shakespeare: if anyone wants to expand this later on so there are 38 distinct entries for the plays and the sonnets, the total would be 146.

A fascinating discussion on historical periods which reminds me of a particular conundrum that puzzles me: Did the Dawn of Civilisation come before or after the British Empire on which the sun never set?

>33 boldface: Oh, I know that one! The answer is yes!

I also want to know whether or not we are living in the Age of Aquarius....

>33 boldface:, >34 Conte_Mosca:, >35 Firumbras:

I'm glad you've all enjoyed the discussion, and I hope erbisouel feels the same.

As to >33 boldface: and >34 Conte_Mosca:, I love that conundrum! In fact, my retort on the rare times I hear that conundrum-joke is always this: Which British Empire - the one under Constantine the Great or Victoria? Granted, most people don't know that CtG started his career in York, so the joke falls flat more often than not, sadly. Either way, my answer is 'yes' as well!

I think the list should be ready for posting some time over the weekend.

>35 Firumbras:

I'm an Aquarius myself, and I'd love the answer to that question as well!

EDIT: Typos

I like the list you sent me and look forward to both the finished copy and a similar of classics. Here's a question: should one end the classical list in 476 or overlap to the end of Byzantium?

My proposed list can be viewed via the link here: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1mu6BVDApqCm6TQ4qm-5B1vHT_zYiqHdy0g39z1a1...

(Warwick, if you want to include the link on the main FSD page, please feel free!)

It's a Google Excel document. At the moment, I've restricted it so only I can make changes - I'm trying to figure out the best way to allow FSDs to make changes without making it so that anyone who stumbles across the list online can make changes. Any ideas on this would be appreciated.

There are two lists, as per my earlier comments: medieval (500-1485) and Renaissance (1485-1603). I have split both lists into primary and secondary source lists; each entry has been categorised into either 'Historical account' (i.e. a contemporary account, or collections of contemporary accounts), 'Literature' (very broad, I know!), and 'Analysis' (a generic term to cover post-period studies).

All primary source materials have the (assumed) period of creation included, so one can see the general relationships if one is interested in whether a certain work came before or after another one; there's also a Notes field at the end of each line with further notes on the work.

As always, this list is by no means complete. I have likely missed some works in the back catalogue, and/or inadvertently placed some items in the wrong place (esp. the primary/secondary division, as it's not always immediately apparent from the title if the work includes primary materials). Please do let me know of any inconsistencies and/or omissions and I'll make corrections.

This is in no way meant to supersede the list in >1 erbisoeul:; if anything, it's meant to show just how difficult it is to categorise historical periods, even when working with a closed set in terms of the FS back catalogue.

If there is interest, I would be willing to add another tab to the file for the classical period some time this summer when I have time.

>37 BINDINGSTHATLAST:

Oh, that's another thorny question! :)

Classicists and late antiquarians (i.e. "early medieval" historians) are still debating this distinction.

The main argument is that the classical period ended when the western Empire (i.e. Rome) was no longer the dominant force in the Mediterranean, so one could argue that this would have been in the fifth century AD (most notably with the sack of Rome in 410). On the flip side, historians of Byzantium point out - rightly - that right up to 1453 the emperors still considered themselves emperors of Rome, even though the empire was effectively a Greek one for centuries. Another argument is that it doesn't really end until after Justinian's victories in restoring the nucleus of the full Empire fall away in the late sixth and early seventh centuries. Yet another argument is that the classical period ends in the fourth century when Constantine moves the capital out of Rome.

I think for the sake of a classical list, it'd be easiest to hold that it ends c. 500, as that's most convenient.

It's just struck me that historical periods mirror Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle in quantum physics. Just as when you observe a sub-atomic particle you can predict roughly where it must be, but can never pin down exactly where it is at any given moment, so it is with the boundaries of historical time periods. We can make a prediction about where the classical period might end and the medieval period might begin but the closer we look at it the more hazy and uncertain it becomes.

Now, the opposite is true when I contemplate my monthly book budget . At the start of the month I have a vague idea that my bank balance will cover my grandiose book-buying plans, but the closer I look at my statement at the end of the month the more the hideous truth comes into focus with pin-sharp clarity.

> 40
A related gripe of mine is our use of CE (AD) dates which keeps us in the early years of a third millennium. It would be nice if the chronology could better reflect the age of human civilisation - counting backwards in BC for so much of it is a real pain. Here's a nice idea devised by one Cesare Emiliani: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_Era
- simply add 10,000 years (broadly indicative of the beginnings of human agriculture / civilization) to everything in AD, and subtract the 'negative' BC years from 10,000 - that would make this year 12014; the legendary founding of Rome (-753; 753 BC) the year 9247; the reign of Augustus 9973 to 10019; the coronation of Charlemagne 10800; the Prague Spring 11968.
In fact I'm going to resist paying taxes and hide out in a forest with a collection of rifles somewhere until this is made law.

amen brother… and as if all these FS sales were not enough to kill the budget, Mr. Scholasticus there has some sort of freakish 6th sense for new out of print FS editions as well, as in "oh, I do know where there is a new Thucydides still in the original shrink wrap…." which doesn't bloody well help the budget either.

here is a question: Why is Eusebius considered a medieval writer by FS when he clearly lived in the late Classical period?

as for hiding out in the forest with a rifle, it is fun until you accidentally poop in poison ivy. All of a sudden paying taxes will make sense :)

>41 Firumbras:

Oh, I deal with that question ALL. THE. TIME. My philosophy is very simple: pick one system and stick with it. I do understand the arguments on both sides, but I still prefer to use the BC/AD distinction myself because if we're honest, the BCE/CE distinction is just window dressing. It still uses the BC/AD reckoning (i.e. Jesus' birth) but is more inclusive of other religions and perspectives.

(This is to say nothing of the controversy about whether Dionysius Exiguus screwed up his reckoning of when precisely Christ was born when working out his Easter tables, or even the controversy over a 'year zero'.)

And you may want to pick up some forest green fabric while you're at it! ;)

>42 BINDINGSTHATLAST:

Sorry! :) Like I said, it just happened to be in my local crack shop - er, Folio purveyor - so I knew about it.

>43 BINDINGSTHATLAST:

And we're back to >40 boldface:'s mention of the Heinseberg Uncertainty Principle: he was the equivalent of a bestseller during most of the medieval era. Also possible that he's medieval if you go by the principle that the Christianisation of the Empire marks the end of the classical, pagan past. (Bonus: So does this mean that Constantine's classical, since it wasn't until Theodosus I at the end of the fourth century that Christianity effectively became the de jure religion of the Empire, given how long it had already been de facto? And to confuse the classical/medieval divide even further, it's Theodosius' reign that marks the very last time a single emperor ruled over both the western and eastern halves: his sons, Arcadius and Honorius, initiated the final division of the Empire between them.)

I still consider him a classical author, though. It's also possible that FS made a mistake and put him in the med/Ren list? However if >1 erbisoeul: or anyone else presents a good argument for considering Eusebius a medieval author for the purposes of this thread, I have no objections, as the same can certainly be said of other authors in this period such as Augustine.

The Folio Society Devotees Group Website wiki at:-
http://www.librarything.com/wiki/index.php/Groups:Folio_Society_Devotees
has been modified to include a link to the list of Medieval and Renaissance books by the FS as first envisaged by >1 erbisoeul: and completed by >38 scholasticus:
It can be found under Online Resources at the bottom of the page.
The Folio Society Limited and Special Editions section has also been modified to include more divisions and information.

Apologies for cross-posting, as this post also exists in the thread regarding the Fitzwilliam LE.

In case anyone's interested in a cheap(er) version of a medieval work rather than forking out for the Fitzwilliam Hours, you may be interested in the Fitzwilliam's facsimile of the Macclesfield Psalter: they have a hardcopy version for about 60 quid, as well as a CD with scans of the pages themselves that's going for about 20ish quid.

Sorry to come in at such a late point. I would suggest that the Folio set

The Middle Sea by John Julius Norwich

would add a useful and completist geographical touch to the list prepared.