[HN Gopher] Harvard Law paid $27 for a copy of Magna Carta. It's...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Harvard Law paid $27 for a copy of Magna Carta. It's an original
        
       Author : jgwil2
       Score  : 132 points
       Date   : 2025-05-15 18:26 UTC (4 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.nytimes.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.nytimes.com)
        
       | toomuchtodo wrote:
       | https://archive.today/DOZw1
        
       | perihelions wrote:
       | It may be that Harvard students no longer habeant corpus, but
       | they do habent a corpus of "habeas corpus" corpses.
        
         | spondylosaurus wrote:
         | 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.)
        
           | kevin_thibedeau wrote:
           | Pig Latin would be more fitting for the current climate.
        
             | fsckboy wrote:
             | orcuspae atinuslae
        
           | tootie wrote:
           | Veritas
        
             | skirmish wrote:
             | Did you mean: Veritas socialis?
        
           | skissane wrote:
           | > 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
        
           | fsckboy wrote:
           | 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.
           | ..
        
             | spondylosaurus wrote:
             | First declension! Never would've guessed. Also smart to dig
             | up a deal to look for Latin inscriptions :)
        
       | ChrisArchitect wrote:
       | _Magna Carta, approximately 1300. Manuscript. HLS MS 172, Harvard
       | Law School Library_
       | https://iiif.lib.harvard.edu/manifests/view/drs:49364859$1i
        
       | anthk wrote:
       | 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).
        
       | davikr wrote:
       | $450 when corrected for inflation.
        
         | tim333 wrote:
         | In 1945 they had the gold standard at $35/oz so $27.50 would
         | have been 0.7857 oz of gold currently worth $2540.
        
           | standeven wrote:
           | Is this a reasonable metric though? No one was buying books
           | in 1945 with gold.
        
             | koolba wrote:
             | If I were selling books in Europe in 1945, I'd much prefer
             | gold to Reichsmarks.
        
             | killingtime74 wrote:
             | It's a better metric than the estimate of the dollar
             | inflation. Gold standard was in use until 1971
        
             | jonhohle wrote:
             | Gold is considered to have relatively consistent value over
             | time.
             | 
             | Median home price in 1940 Boston area was $3,600 or 180oz
             | gold. Today the median home price is 215oz of gold in the
             | same area (or $670,000). In terms of gold, house prices are
             | up 20%. In terms of dollars, 18000%.
             | 
             | A new car still costs around 13oz of gold.
             | 
             | Real inflation of fiat is easy to obscure for political
             | reasons. That's much harder to do with the market value of
             | gold.
        
               | Aurornis wrote:
               | > Gold is considered to have relatively consistent value
               | over time.
               | 
               | Not really. It has fluctuated a lot. You can pick
               | starting and ending points a few years apart and come up
               | with very different results relative to actual inflation.
               | 
               | > A new car still costs around 13oz of gold.
               | 
               | Now take this idea and average it across a large number
               | of different items and you arrive at inflation
               | statistics, which are better than using 1 commodity or 1
               | purchasable item as a benchmark.
        
               | thatcat wrote:
               | Using core, required assets actually makes more sense
               | considering recurring purchases tend to change over time.
        
               | boroboro4 wrote:
               | > Now take this idea and average it across a large number
               | of different items and you arrive at inflation statistics
               | 
               | If only it was as simple: you will need to introduce
               | weights between different items, and account to the
               | change of those weights too. Also gold isn't just
               | commodity, it's monetary commodity.
               | 
               | If you use official inflation dollars you get 1$ 1940 ~=
               | 23$ 2025. You can see how magnitude wrong it is for
               | housing or cars in the example above.
               | 
               | Here's food prices from 1940 diner: > A 25-cent platter,
               | 5-cent hotdog, and 10-cent hamburger. Also doesn't really
               | work with official inflation dollars either. And again
               | works much better with gold prices.
        
               | ttoinou wrote:
               | Gold was a standard for a reason
        
               | cyberax wrote:
               | > In terms of gold, house prices are up 20%
               | 
               | Except that the gold price fluctuated by 50% within the
               | last 30 years: https://goldprice.org/gold-price-
               | history.html
        
               | deeg wrote:
               | > A new car still costs around 13oz of gold
               | 
               | But a new car today is vastly different from a 1940s car,
               | so different that it's nonsensical to use it to compare
               | purchasing power of gold.
        
             | AtlasBarfed wrote:
             | desilvering of coins was in the 1965 coin act.
             | 
             | So if they paid in dimes/quarters/ half dollars /dollars,
             | they were paying in silver
        
             | hilsdev wrote:
             | All cash was convertible to gold at a fixed rate, so more
             | or less they were
        
           | jltsiren wrote:
           | 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.
        
             | hilsdev wrote:
             | You're starting to get into the theories of how they hide
             | true inflation
        
               | rileytg wrote:
               | i'm american, what's the price in big macs?
        
               | qingcharles wrote:
               | Four myocardial infarctions.
        
             | andrei_says_ wrote:
             | How is GDP per capita a useful measure in the presence of
             | almost-trillionaires?
             | 
             | Depending on which city they sleep in, Bezos or Musk make
             | all local citizens multimillionaires. Per capita.
             | Statistically.
        
               | actionfromafar wrote:
               | This is very true. One should look at some select
               | percentiles instead, IMHO.
        
       | dralley wrote:
       | 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.
        
         | jvanderbot wrote:
         | "Original copy?"
        
           | dvh wrote:
           | "genuine replica"
        
             | metalman wrote:
             | whatever, umm, "sanctioned forgery" but exactly how is it a
             | "copy", as the Magna Carta was hand written, with 4 signed
             | copys still in existance today. the item under discussion
             | was created 85 years after the magna carta, and presumably,
             | everyone who was involved with the original, was dead so
             | this thing is just old, but has no direct connection, it's
             | even listed as an "amended version" of the actual original
             | document, which means of course that some ancient
             | controversy and disagreement, is lurking for our perusal
             | and picking sides
        
         | hughdbrown wrote:
         | 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.
        
       | huijzer wrote:
       | 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.
        
       | queuebert wrote:
       | Copies of the Magna Carta are becoming unaffordable for working-
       | class families.
        
         | varispeed wrote:
         | Working-class families should work just a little bit harder and
         | maybe cut down on avocados and Netflix.
        
           | vondur wrote:
           | Look, we aren't barbarians here.
        
           | dylan604 wrote:
           | 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
        
       | PaulHoule wrote:
       | 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.
        
         | standeven wrote:
         | Was the university exaggerating the value, or did you pick up
         | some valuable books for cheap?
        
           | dleary wrote:
           | 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.
        
           | asciimov wrote:
           | Likely a different edition, or reproduction.
        
           | PaulHoule wrote:
           | 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.)
        
         | tomjakubowski wrote:
         | 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.
        
           | BizarroLand wrote:
           | 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)
        
         | paxys wrote:
         | 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.
        
       | sirmoveon wrote:
       | 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.
        
         | llm_nerd wrote:
         | >>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 PS42 -- 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.
        
       | alephnerd wrote:
       | 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
        
         | soperj wrote:
         | I tried going in, but couldn't without a student id.
        
           | alephnerd wrote:
           | 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.
        
           | qingcharles wrote:
           | Can a student take you in as a +1?
        
         | burnt-resistor wrote:
         | 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.
        
           | alephnerd wrote:
           | > 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.
        
       | jb1991 wrote:
       | Amazingly, the woman in one photo is not even using gloves to
       | touch this ancient document.
        
         | dmbche wrote:
         | 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
        
           | syncsynchalt wrote:
           | Not to mention that vellum isn't damaged by skin oils - it's
           | already animal skin and contains its own oils.
        
         | pimlottc wrote:
         | 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...
        
           | qingcharles wrote:
           | This. But anything glossy I would always switch to gloves,
           | even though they are annoying, because otherwise oils get
           | everywhere.
        
         | thih9 wrote:
         | 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/...
        
       | heelix wrote:
       | 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.
        
       | burnt-resistor wrote:
       | 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
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2025-05-15 23:00 UTC)