Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

1.5 Million Pages of Ancient Manuscripts Online

Posted by Soulskill on from the play-the-historical-documents dept.

New submitter LordWabbit2 sends this quote from an AP report: "The Vatican Library and Oxford University's Bodleian Library have put the first of 1.5 million pages of ancient manuscripts online. The two libraries in 2012 announced a four-year project to digitize some of the most important works of their collections of Hebrew manuscripts, Greek manuscripts and early printed books. Among the first up on the site Tuesday, are the two-volume Gutenberg bibles from each of the libraries and a beautiful 15th-century German bible, hand-colored and illustrated by woodcuts. ... The Vatican Library was founded in 1451 and is one of the most important research libraries in the world. The Bodleian is the largest university library in Britain."

11 of 79 comments (clear)

  1. Comic Sans by ScottCooperDotNet · · Score: 3, Funny

    And they're all available only in Comic Sans.

  2. Appalling by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    Absolutely no respect for copyright. If I was a descendant of the families who wrote these documents, I would be demanding compensation!

  3. Don't bother trying. by tpstigers · · Score: 2

    No amount of Slashdottery will take the awesome out of this.

    1. Re:Don't bother trying. by Decker-Mage · · Score: 2

      umm... Amen!

      --
      "[I]t is a wise man who admits the limits of his knowledge or skill, and that pretending either causes harm." --Terry Go
  4. Copyright by Smauler · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The images of the ancient texts are marked "Copyright Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana".

    Copyright is seriously out of control. People don't even know what it is any more.

    1. Re:Copyright by GumphMaster · · Score: 4, Informative

      Here is the logic. The image is a work carrying copyright: you cannot reproduce the image without permission or staying within fair use/fair dealing provisions of relevant laws. The words on the pages in the are a public domain work: you can quote from the book with impunity. Logical in some minds, but copyright assertions by gatekeepers has a long history of abuse.

      --
      Patent litigation: A doctrine of Mutually Assured Destruction... in which everyone seems willing to push the button
    2. Re:Copyright by plasticsquirrel · · Score: 2

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bridgeman_Art_Library_v._Corel_Corp.

      If it is a straightforward photo that reproduces a 2D image such as a manuscript page that is in the public domain, then that photo is also in the public domain. I have uploaded others' photos on numerous occasions to Wikimedia Commons, which also recognizes such photos as public domain, and it has always been accepted as valid. Unfortunately many people, even museums, believe that anything and everything is under copyright, and they are uninformed about copyright as it applies to public domain works.

      --
      Systemd: the PulseAudio of init systems
    3. Re:Copyright by swillden · · Score: 2

      It is very badly broken. The goal of proper copyright law is to increase the flow of material into the public domain. The social contract underlying it is basically "We'll all agree to arbitrarily limit what we can do for a short period of time in order to encourage the creation and publication of works". But in what twisted universe does it encourage creation and publication to restrict copying long after the creator has died? Do you seriously believe that authors, for example, might think "Well, if copyright doesn't last at least until my great grandchildren are born, there's just no point in writing." Not to mention the egregious way it's been extended to control not just expressions but ideas (e.g. plot), and the way that Fair Use has been hammered almost out of existence.

      I stand by my statement that copyright is very badly broken. Big content owners have pushed for extensions of the duration and scope to the point that the social contract is gone. If modern copyright law were evaluated under the rules applied in contract law, it would be ruled inequitable and therefore invalid.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
  5. Re:In the name of "Allah" ... by swilly · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The Library of Alexandria caught fire several times.

    The first may have been when the Romans conquered Egypt. The Romans burned their own ships and much of the city caught fire, and the library may have been partially destroyed at this time.

    A branch of the library may have been burned with the destruction of pagan temples when the Roman Empire outlawed paganism, but nobody knows how many (if any) books were lost. The main building was apparently not affected. And by the time paganism was made illegal in the Roman Empire, a concerted effort had been made to have copies of important documents in other libraries, including the worlds largest library at Constantinople. These other libraries were not burned (though it's entirely possible that some books in them were destroyed).

    And it was finally destroyed by the Muslim army. There is a story that the Caliph ordered the burning of books stating that if they contradicted the Quran they are heretical, and if they did not then they are redundant. There are no contemporary sources for this story, so most historians doubt it. Whether or not this burning was deliberate, the destruction was complete and library was lost to history.

  6. Quick translation results by Freshly+Exhumed · · Score: 3, Funny

    Hmmm, if I've got this correct, the item I just read says: "Pound pastrami, can kraut, six bagels—bring home for Emma."

    --
    I deny that I have not avoided attaining the opposite of that which I do not want.
  7. Missing Bible Page Found! by coinreturn · · Score: 2

    It says: "Any similarity to persons dead or alive is purely coincidental."