The magic of compound interest: buying an original Magna Carta for $27 and selling it for $21 million 80 years later is equivalent to achieving 18.5% compound interest. Roughly the same rate and duration as Warren Buffett's investing career, with a smaller starting value.
In 1945, US GDP per capita was almost $1600. Using your conversion factors, that would be almost $150k today. The actual number is something like $85k. I don't think Americans are that much poorer today than they were 80 years ago.
When I visited London a few years ago I went to the British Library and stumbled into their collection (and it was incredibly impressive). I had no idea they had two original Magna Cartas. If you have a chance to see the document at Harvard, you should! It's really something.
The Harvard document is a copy of Edward I's 1297 Great Charter that is still partly in force today.
There were earlier versions of the Magna Carta; originally authored by Stephen Langton, Archbishop of Canterbury in 1215, rejected, revised and eventually reissued and negotiated (largely by force) by William Marshal, 1st Earl of Pembroke in 1217.
Saw some of the examples on holiday last month when we were in Salisbury. It was really neat to be that close to one of the ones sent out. Before that time, I'd never actually read the Magna Carta, which really was an interesting read.
Magna Carta reminds me of the "Seven parts" from Alphonse X of Castille, nearly in the same era.
Also, for its day, it was kinda open-minded and progressive, and Alphonse X was a damn nerd as he ordered to compose a book of games like chess and more tabletop games like Nine Men Morris (Libro de los juegos/The Book of Games).
If you're willing to brave the American customs gulag, Stanford's free Cantor museum has very historically and artistically significant bits. No ID needed there, of all places.
Ah yea, security has gotten much tougher now. There are a couple open-access museums though like the Art Museum, the Near East Museum, the Scientific Instruments one in the Science Building, and a couple others.
All in all, loved the museums and history, but detested Harvard. I would have been a better fit at a more middle class college like Cal, Stanford, or MIT.
> Let's just say "Harvard" is a third declension noun because why not.
Given Harvard maintains the tradition of Latin addresses (the Latin Salutatory), I’m sure they have an official position on what their name is in Latin. Wikipedia cites this article but not sure if it is online: Hammond, Mason (Summer 1987). "Official Terms in Latin and English for Harvard College or University". Harvard Library bulletin. Vol. XXXV, no. 3. Harvard University. pp. 294–310.
I spent a year as a student at the University of Sydney (Australia). I roughly remember how to say in Latin “University of Sydney Library”, because they stamped it on all their old library books (something like “Bibliotheca Universitatis Sidneiensis”)-I expect old books in Harvard’s library may be stamped in Latin too
Reminds me of that time I found a book at my Uni library that was in the rare books collection that I could only read in the reading room and then saw there were many copies on AMZN for 50 cents + shipping.
When a librarian says a book is rare, they don't mean that the information inside is scarce. Rather, they mean that there are few surviving examples of that particular printing or edition of manufacture.
For instance, you can get a first edition copy of Trilby (which was basically the 1890's Twilight Saga) for a few hundred bucks or less as long as you're not picky about the condition.
This was a 1970s paperback by someone who attracted attention for his work on spiritual matters and sold a lot of books but didn't leave an organization behind so you can find his books at used bookstores.
Not rare at all but some people might say it has some prurient interest (talks about his sexual misadjustment) so maybe they think it has to be limited access or maybe people will steal it or something. (The same library kept Steal this book in a restricted area of the stacks but let me check it out.)
It's not an original so much as an official copy. The copies, dated 1300, were created 85 years after the signing of the original Magna Carta in 1215.
Although I suppose the argument is that if you re-affirm the same text several times, that each one is legitimate.
>First issued in 1215, it put into writing a set of concessions won by rebellious barons from a recalcitrant King John of England — or Bad King John, as he became known in folklore.
>He later revoked the charter, but his son, Henry III, issued amended versions, the last one in 1225, and Henry’s son, Edward I, in turn confirmed the 1225 version in 1297 and again in 1300.
But still, it would be weird to say that a copy of the Constitution produced during the Presidency of Abraham Lincoln and re-affirmed by the govt was "an original" even if it otherwise had pedigree.
Came here to understand exactly this point. It made no sense to me that a document created in 1215 would have a copy made in 1300 that was referred to as an original.
The sad thing is, cutting down on the streamers does make an actual dent in outgo. Each platform is at least $9USD, and subscribing to them all at this point is easily $100/month. Obviously, some are higher than $9, but cutting the cord to save money tends to come out higher than the dreaded cable bill.
Yeah Harvard is doing good stuff. I also love listening to Stephen Kotkin. He uses the Socratic method a lot so he just goes a bit from here to there and lets you make up your own mind. Really great historian if you ask me. Very calming to listen to too IMO.
Ezra Klein would sneer at the red tape regulations imposed by a limited monarchy because they "know better" than us plebs how to wield absolute power properly. /s
>>Harvard Law School bought its version from a London legal book dealer, Sweet & Maxwell, which had in turn purchased the manuscript in December 1945 from Sotheby’s, the auctioneers.
>>In the 1945 auction catalog it was listed as a copy and with the wrong date (1327) and was sold for £42 — about a fifth of the average annual income in the United Kingdom at the time — on behalf of Forster Maynard, an Air Vice-Marshal who had served as a fighter pilot in World War I.
>>Air Vice-Marshal Maynard inherited it from the family of Thomas and John Clarkson, who were leading campaigners in Britain against the slave trade from the 1780s onward.
https://archive.today/DOZw1
The magic of compound interest: buying an original Magna Carta for $27 and selling it for $21 million 80 years later is equivalent to achieving 18.5% compound interest. Roughly the same rate and duration as Warren Buffett's investing career, with a smaller starting value.
Unfortunately gains are only real if they're realized — and Harvard will never sell their copy.
They could use it as collateral for debt.
1 reply →
with how trump vs Harvard its going, don't put away your millions yet. you might be able to buy it!
Magna Carta, approximately 1300. Manuscript. HLS MS 172, Harvard Law School Library https://iiif.lib.harvard.edu/manifests/view/drs:49364859$1i
[dead]
$450 when corrected for inflation.
In 1945 they had the gold standard at $35/oz so $27.50 would have been 0.7857 oz of gold currently worth $2540.
In 1945 US citizens were banned from owning gold so the exchange rate was not really tethered to the common value of the dollar.
Is this a reasonable metric though? No one was buying books in 1945 with gold.
23 replies →
In 1945, US GDP per capita was almost $1600. Using your conversion factors, that would be almost $150k today. The actual number is something like $85k. I don't think Americans are that much poorer today than they were 80 years ago.
7 replies →
Gold is volatile. Two years ago it would have been half that.
When I visited London a few years ago I went to the British Library and stumbled into their collection (and it was incredibly impressive). I had no idea they had two original Magna Cartas. If you have a chance to see the document at Harvard, you should! It's really something.
The Harvard document is a copy of Edward I's 1297 Great Charter that is still partly in force today.
There were earlier versions of the Magna Carta; originally authored by Stephen Langton, Archbishop of Canterbury in 1215, rejected, revised and eventually reissued and negotiated (largely by force) by William Marshal, 1st Earl of Pembroke in 1217.
https://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/education/resources/magn...
The fourth (and best preserved of all) Magna Cartas is on display in the Chapter House of the cathedral in Salisbury.
Fun fact, there's an inconsistent comma that changes the meaning of clause XXIX.
This comment is the first result when searching "inconsistent comma clause 29 magna carta" on Google. Can you link to a source?
1 reply →
Saw some of the examples on holiday last month when we were in Salisbury. It was really neat to be that close to one of the ones sent out. Before that time, I'd never actually read the Magna Carta, which really was an interesting read.
Magna Carta reminds me of the "Seven parts" from Alphonse X of Castille, nearly in the same era.
Also, for its day, it was kinda open-minded and progressive, and Alphonse X was a damn nerd as he ordered to compose a book of games like chess and more tabletop games like Nine Men Morris (Libro de los juegos/The Book of Games).
If you ever have the chance, you absolutely should visit the libraries and museums on campus. It's a treat.
I especially loved walking around Widener Library and marveling at the murals and that original Guteberg Bible
If you're willing to brave the American customs gulag, Stanford's free Cantor museum has very historically and artistically significant bits. No ID needed there, of all places.
> Cantor museum has very historically and artistically significant bits
Amen to that. Love Stanford. Cal has a ton of great stuff too.
> the American customs gulag
What does that mean? I've been to Cantor multiple times and nothing seemed out of the ordinary security wise.
9 replies →
I tried going in, but couldn't without a student id.
Can a student take you in as a +1?
Ah yea, security has gotten much tougher now. There are a couple open-access museums though like the Art Museum, the Near East Museum, the Scientific Instruments one in the Science Building, and a couple others.
All in all, loved the museums and history, but detested Harvard. I would have been a better fit at a more middle class college like Cal, Stanford, or MIT.
It may be that Harvard students no longer habeant corpus, but they do habent a corpus of "habeas corpus" corpses.
I haven't Latin'd in forever, but here's an attempt:
Harvardis alumnis corpus non habent sed quidem corpus de "habeas corpus" habent.
(Let's just say "Harvard" is a third declension noun because why not.)
> Let's just say "Harvard" is a third declension noun because why not.
Given Harvard maintains the tradition of Latin addresses (the Latin Salutatory), I’m sure they have an official position on what their name is in Latin. Wikipedia cites this article but not sure if it is online: Hammond, Mason (Summer 1987). "Official Terms in Latin and English for Harvard College or University". Harvard Library bulletin. Vol. XXXV, no. 3. Harvard University. pp. 294–310.
I spent a year as a student at the University of Sydney (Australia). I roughly remember how to say in Latin “University of Sydney Library”, because they stamped it on all their old library books (something like “Bibliotheca Universitatis Sidneiensis”)-I expect old books in Harvard’s library may be stamped in Latin too
when it comes to latin, i must decline to decline for you, but there's this:
sigillum academiae harvardianae in nov ang
https://etc.usf.edu/clipart/55900/55996/55996_harvard_seal.h...
1 reply →
Pig Latin would be more fitting for the current climate.
1 reply →
Veritas
1 reply →
Reminds me of that time I found a book at my Uni library that was in the rare books collection that I could only read in the reading room and then saw there were many copies on AMZN for 50 cents + shipping.
When a librarian says a book is rare, they don't mean that the information inside is scarce. Rather, they mean that there are few surviving examples of that particular printing or edition of manufacture.
For instance, you can get a first edition copy of Trilby (which was basically the 1890's Twilight Saga) for a few hundred bucks or less as long as you're not picky about the condition.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trilby_(novel)
Next you'll wonder why people make such a big deal about the Mona Lisa when you can buy your own version at the Louvre gift shop for $25.
Was the university exaggerating the value, or did you pick up some valuable books for cheap?
If a work is older than 200 years and worth reading, then original editions are going to be valuable.
But it will also be out of copyright so the cost of getting a “new” copy is basically just the cost of printing.
This was a 1970s paperback by someone who attracted attention for his work on spiritual matters and sold a lot of books but didn't leave an organization behind so you can find his books at used bookstores.
https://www.amazon.com/Discovering-Secrets-Happiness-Intimat...
Not rare at all but some people might say it has some prurient interest (talks about his sexual misadjustment) so maybe they think it has to be limited access or maybe people will steal it or something. (The same library kept Steal this book in a restricted area of the stacks but let me check it out.)
Likely a different edition, or reproduction.
Do you think the librarians didn't know what was on Amazon?
It's not an original so much as an official copy. The copies, dated 1300, were created 85 years after the signing of the original Magna Carta in 1215.
Although I suppose the argument is that if you re-affirm the same text several times, that each one is legitimate.
>First issued in 1215, it put into writing a set of concessions won by rebellious barons from a recalcitrant King John of England — or Bad King John, as he became known in folklore.
>He later revoked the charter, but his son, Henry III, issued amended versions, the last one in 1225, and Henry’s son, Edward I, in turn confirmed the 1225 version in 1297 and again in 1300.
But still, it would be weird to say that a copy of the Constitution produced during the Presidency of Abraham Lincoln and re-affirmed by the govt was "an original" even if it otherwise had pedigree.
Came here to understand exactly this point. It made no sense to me that a document created in 1215 would have a copy made in 1300 that was referred to as an original.
"Original copy?"
"genuine replica"
1 reply →
Amazingly, the woman in one photo is not even using gloves to touch this ancient document.
Modern practice recommends using clean, ungloved hands for documents in most circumstances. Gloves reduce dexterity, making tears more likely.
https://ask.loc.gov/preservation/faq/337286
https://blog.nationalarchives.gov.uk/handling-historic-colle...
https://info.gaylord.com/resources/for-the-glove-of-preserva...
This. But anything glossy I would always switch to gloves, even though they are annoying, because otherwise oils get everywhere.
Best practices today are clean hands and no gloves as it lessens chance of tearing paper as you have better dexterity if I recall correctly
Not to mention that vellum isn't damaged by skin oils - it's already animal skin and contains its own oils.
This is the recommended way to handle old books.
> We're often led to believe that wearing gloves is essential when handling precious books. In fact, it poses a serious risk of damaging them.
https://www.nationaltrust.org.uk/our-cause/history-heritage/...
Copies of the Magna Carta are becoming unaffordable for working-class families.
Working-class families should work just a little bit harder and maybe cut down on avocados and Netflix.
The sad thing is, cutting down on the streamers does make an actual dent in outgo. Each platform is at least $9USD, and subscribing to them all at this point is easily $100/month. Obviously, some are higher than $9, but cutting the cord to save money tends to come out higher than the dreaded cable bill.
Avacodos be damned
Look, we aren’t barbarians here.
[dead]
Yeah Harvard is doing good stuff. I also love listening to Stephen Kotkin. He uses the Socratic method a lot so he just goes a bit from here to there and lets you make up your own mind. Really great historian if you ask me. Very calming to listen to too IMO.
[dead]
Ezra Klein would sneer at the red tape regulations imposed by a limited monarchy because they "know better" than us plebs how to wield absolute power properly. /s
Are we as a society have become that gullible? Seems more like someone's trying to find a somewhat credible excuse to launder the stolen goods.
>>Harvard Law School bought its version from a London legal book dealer, Sweet & Maxwell, which had in turn purchased the manuscript in December 1945 from Sotheby’s, the auctioneers.
>>In the 1945 auction catalog it was listed as a copy and with the wrong date (1327) and was sold for £42 — about a fifth of the average annual income in the United Kingdom at the time — on behalf of Forster Maynard, an Air Vice-Marshal who had served as a fighter pilot in World War I.
>>Air Vice-Marshal Maynard inherited it from the family of Thomas and John Clarkson, who were leading campaigners in Britain against the slave trade from the 1780s onward.
Pretty convoluted path to launder stolen goods.