422 books for « kierkegaard »Edit

‎Om Begrebet Ironi med stadigt hensyn til Socrates. Af S. A. Kierkegaard. - [ARGUABLY THE BEST POSSIBLE COPY ONE CAN EVER HOPE TO ACQUIRE OF KIERKEGAARD’S DISSERTATION – ONE OF TWO COPIES ON THICK VELLUM PAPER]‎

‎Kjøbenhavn, P.G. Philipsens Forlag, 1841. 8vo. (8), 350 pp. Gift binding of elaborately blindpatterned full cloth with single gilt lines to spine. All edges gilt and printed on thick vellum paper. A splendid copy in completely unrestored state with minimal edge wear. Slight sunning to upper 1 cm of front board and slight bumping to corners and capitals. Leaves completely fresh and clean. Pencil-annotation from the Kierkegaard archive of the Royal Library (nr. 83) and discreet stamp from the Royal Library of Copenhagen to inside of front board (with a deaccession-inscription) and to verso of title-page. With ownership signatures of P.S. Lund and Troels Lund to title-page. Inside of back board with previous owner’s pencil-annotations listing the entire provenance of the copy and explaining that this is one of two copies printed on thick vellum paper. Laid in is the original agreement for the exchange of real property between the previous owner and the Royal Library of Denmark, from which is evident that in 2003, The Royal Library and the previous owner legally agreed to exchange their respective copies of Om Begrebet Ironie – the present one for Ørsted, being one of two copies on thick vellum paper, and the copy on normal paper for Heiberg, which is now in the holdings of the Royal Library of Denmark.‎

4 Images

‎Arguably the best possible copy one can ever hope to acquire of Kierkegaard’s dissertation – one of two copies on thick vellum paper, being a presentation-copy from Kierkegaard to the discoverer of electromagnetism H.C. Ørsted. Inscribed to verso of front fly-leaf: “Til / Hans Magnificens / Universitetets Rector / Hr. Conferentsraad Ørsted. / C og D.M.” (For / His Magnificence / Principle of the University / Mr. [a high Danish title, now obsolete] Ørsted. / C (ommandør) (i.e. Commander) and DM (short for Dannebrogsmand, another honourable title) ). The copy is with the Thesis, and both the day and the time has been filled in by hand. As mentioned in the introduction to the Irony, Kierkegaard had two copies made on thick vellum paper –one for himself (which is in the Royal Library of Denmark), and one for H. C. Ørsted, a towering figure of the Danish Golden Age, one of the most important scientists that Denmark has produced, then principle of the University of Copenhagen. This copy is unique among the 11 registered presentation-copies of Kierkegaard’s dissertation and is without doubt the most desirable. It is approximately twice as thick as the other copies and stand out completely. THIS IS KIERKEGAARD’S dissertation, which constitutes the culmination of three years’ intensive studies of Socrates and “the true point of departure for Kierkegaard’s authorship” (Brandes). The work is of the utmost importance in Kierkegaard’s production, not only as his first academic treatise, but also because he here introduces several themes that will be addressed in his later works. Among these we find the question of defining the subject of cognition and self-knowledge of the subject. The maxim of “know thyself” will be a constant throughout his oeuvre, as is the theory of knowledge acquisition that he deals with here. The dissertation is also noteworthy in referencing many of Hegel’s theses in a not negative context, something that Kierkegaard himself would later note with disappointment and characterize as an early, uncritical use of Hegel. Another noteworthy feature is the fact that the thesis is written in Danish, which was unheard of at the time. Kierkegaard felt that Danish was a more suitable language for the thesis and hadto petition the King to be granted permission to submit it in Danish rather than Latin. This in itself poses as certain irony, as the young Kierkegaard was known to express himself poorly and very long-winded in written Danish. One of Kierkegaard’s only true friends, his school friend H.P. Holst recounts (in 1869) how the two had a special school friendship and working relationship, in which Kierkegaard wrote Latin compositions for Holst, while Holst wrote Danish compositions for Kierkegaard, who “expressed himself in a hopelessly Latin Danish crawling with participial phrases and extraordinarily complicatedsentences” (Garff, p. 139). When Kierkegaard, in 1838, was ready to publish his famous piece on Hans Christian Andersen (see nr. 1 & 2 above), which was to appear in Heiberg’s journal Perseus, Heiberg had agreed to publish the piece, although he had some severe critical comments about the way and the form in which it was written – if it were to appear in Perseus, Heiberg demanded, at the very least, the young Kierkegaard would have to submit it in a reasonably readable Danish. “Kierkegaard therefore turned to his old schoolmate H. P. Holst and asked him to do something with the language…” (Garff, p. 139). From their school days, Holst was well aware of the problem with Kierkegaard’s Danish, and he recounts that over the summer, he actually “translated” Kierkegaard’s article on Andersen into proper Danish. The oral defense was conducted in Latin, however. The judges all agreed that the work submitted was both intelligent and noteworthy. But they were concerned about its style, which was found to be both tasteless, long-winded, and idiosyncratic. We already here witness Kierkegaard’s idiosyncratic approach to content and style that is so characteristic for all of his greatest works. Both stylistically and thematically, Kierkegaard’s and especially a clear precursor for his magnum opus Either-Or that is to be his next publication. The year 1841 is a momentous one in Kierkegaard’s life. It is the year that he completes his dissertation and commences his sojourn in Berlin, but it is also the defining year in his personal life, namely the year that he breaks off his engagement with Regine Olsen. And finally, it is the year that he begins writing Either-Or. In many ways, Either-Or is born directly out of The Concept of Irony and is the work that brings the theory of Irony to life. Part One of the dissertation concentrates on Socrates as interpreted by Xenophon, Plato, and Aristophanes, with a word on Hegel and Hegelian categories. Part Two is a more synoptic discussion of the concept of irony in Kierkegaard’s categories, with examples from other philosophers. The work constitutes Kierkegaard’s attempt at understanding the role of irony in disrupting society, and with Socrates understood through Kierkegaard, we witness a whole new way of interpreting the world before us. Wisdom is not necessarily fixed, and we ought to use Socratic ignorance to approach the world without the inherited bias of our cultures. With irony, we will be able to embrace the not knowing. We need to question the world knowing we may not find an answer. The moment we stop questioning and just accept the easy answers, we succumb to ignorance. We must use irony to laugh at ourselves in order to improve ourselves and to laugh at society in order to improve the world. The work was submitted to the Philosophical Faculty at the University of Copenhagen on June 3rd 1841. Kierkegaard had asked for his dissertation to be ready from the printer’s in ample time for him to defend it before the new semester commenced. This presumably because he had already planned his sojourn to Berlin to hear the master philosopher Schelling. On September 16th, the book was issued, and on September 29th, the defense would take place. The entire defense, including a two hour long lunch break, took seven hours, during which ”an unusually full auditorium” would listen to the official opponents F.C. Sibbern and P.O. Brøndsted as well as the seven “ex auditorio” opponents F.C. Petersen, J.L. Heiberg, P.C. Kierkegaard, Fr. Beck, F.P.J. Dahl, H .J.Thue og C.F. Christens, not to mention Kierkegaard himself. Two weeks later, on October 12th, Kierkegaard broke off his engagement with Regine Olsen (for the implications of this event, see the section about Regine in vol. II). The work appeared in two states – one with the four pages of “Theses”, for academics of the university, whereas the copies without the theses were intended for ordinary sale. These sales copies also do not have “Udgivet for Magistergraden” and “theologisk Candidat” on the title-page. The first page of the theses always contains the day “XXIX” of September written in hand, and sometimes the time “hora X” is also written in hand, but not always. In all, 11 presentation-copies of the dissertation are known, and of these only one is signed (that for Holst), all the others merely state the title and name of the recipient. As is evident from the auction catalogue of his collection, Kierkegaard had a number of copies of his dissertation in his possession when he died. Five of them were bound, and two of them were “nit. M. Guldsnit” (i.e. daintily bound and with gilt edges). These two copies were obviously meant as presentation-copies that he then never gave away. The gift copies of the dissertation were given two types of bindings, both brownish cloth, one type patterned, the other one plain, and some of them have gilt edges, but most of the plain ones do not. There exist two copies on thick vellum paper – one being Kierkegaard’s own copy, the other being the copy for H.C. Ørsted, discoverer of electromagnetism and then principle of the University of Copenhagen. “As already implied, two works of the authorship stand out in the sense that Kierkegaard sent his presentation-copies to a special circle of people: The dissertation from 1841...” (Posselt, Textspejle, p. 91, translated from Danish). Most of the copies were given to former teachers and especially to people who, due to leading positions, personified the university. “For this circle of initiated we can now, due to registered copies, confirm that Kierkegaard gave copies with handwritten dedications to the headmaster of the University H.C. Ørsted (printed on thick paper), Kolderup-Rosenvinge and to J.L. Heiberg. It is granted that Sibbern, Madvig and F.C. Petersen were also given the dissertation as a gift,... but these copies are not known (yet).” (Posselt, Textspejle, pp. 93-94, translated fromDanish). (N.b. We have since handled the copy given to Petersen and can thus confirm that it exists). The presentation-inscriptions in the 11 registered copies of the Irony all follow a certain, strict pattern. “The wording could not be briefer. In the donation of his academic treatise, the otherwise prolific Kierkegaard sticks to name, titles, and the modes of address that goes with the titles.” (Tekstspejle p. 96, translated from Danish). When presenting his later books, he always signs himself “from the author”, sometimes abbreviated (i.e. “Forf.” In stead of “Forfatteren”), unless he is mentioned by name on the title-page as the publisher, not the author, as is the case with some of the pseudonymous works. In that case he signs his inscriptions “From the publisher”, always accompanied by “in deep reverence”, “with reverence”, “with friendship” or the like, adapted to the rank of the recipient and his place on Kierkegaard’s personal scale. An academic treatise, however, published before the oral defense took place – in the mind of Kierkegaard – required certain demands in relation to the donation of it. Thus, the brevity and rigidity in the following inscriptions. With the exception of Kierkegaard Hans Christian Ørsted (1777-1851) is arguably the most famous and influential Dane ever to have lived, universally known for his discovery of Electro-magnetism in 1820, which led to new theories and discoveries that constituted the foundation of all later electro-technology. After this milestone of scientific discovery, Ørsted went on to write a number of important philosophical works on natural philosophy and empiricism, of which The Spirit in Nature is the most famous and the work he himself considered his main work. Both H.C. Andersen and Søren Kierkegaard admit to having been influenced by the writings of Ørsted. “He was an enthusiastic follower of the “Naturphilosophie” school in Germany, whose main object was the unification of physical forces, thus producing a monistic theory of the universe. It was to further this purpose that Oersted sought in actual phenomena the electro-magnetic identity of which he had already convinced himself on metaphysical grounds” (Percy H. Muir in Printing and The Mind of Man). “The natural scientist Hans Christian Ørsted was one of the most significant and influential personalities of his age and together with the sculptor Bertel Thorvaldsen, the poet Hans Christian Andersen, and the thinker Søren Kierkegaard, constituted the small handful of figures from “The Danish Golden Age” who achieved international and even world fame.” (Troelsen in Kierkegaard and his Danish Contemporaries I: p. (215) ). In intellectual circles in Denmark at the time of Kierkegaard, Ørsted was inevitable. He influenced not only natural sciences profoundly, but also philosophy, literature, and Danish languages (coining more than 2.000 neologisms). He was furthermore rector of the university of Copenhagen, when Kierkegaard in 1841 submitted his master’s thesis On the Concept of Irony. Being the rector, Ørsted was the one who needed to pass the treatise, but having read it, he was simply not sure whether to do so or not and needed to consult other experts, before making his decision. He ended up allowing it to pass, but not without having first famously said about it (in a letter to Sibbern) that it “makes a generally unpleasant impression on me, particularly because of two things both of which I detest: verbosity and affectation.” (Kirmmmse (edt.): Encounters with Kierkegaard, p. 32). Kierkegaard makes several references to Ørsted’s Spirit in Nature and mentions him several times in his journals and notebooks. Although being of different generations and not particularly close on a personal level, the two intellectual giants would naturally be unavoidably connected in one way or the other. Ørsted was simply so centrally placed and so influential that there was no way around him for someone like Kierkegaard. Himmelstrup 8‎

‎Enten – Eller. Et Livs=Fragment udgivet af Victor Eremita. Anden Udgave. Første Deel, indeholdende A.’s Papirer + Anden Deel, indeholdende B.’s Papirer, Breve til A. - [KIERKEGAARD’S OWN PERSONAL COPY OF EITHER-OR, WITH HIS OWN CORRECTIONS]‎

‎Kjøbenhavn, Reitzel, 1849. 8vo. XIV, (2), 320" (4), 250 pp. Bound in one original green full cloth binding with blindstamped decorative borders to boards and blindstamped lines and gilt title to spine. Rebacked preserving most of the original spine. White moiré end-papers and all edges gilt. Corners bumped. First title-page browned and brownspotting throughout. Previous owner’s neat pencil annotations about the history of the copy to back free end-paper and annotations/corrections in Kierkegaard’s hand to pp. 208 and 275 of vol. 1.‎

‎Kierkegaard’s own personal copy of the second issue of Either-Or, with his own corrections – one of them correcting a “not” to an “either”! This copy is with all likelihood nr. 2116 of the auction catalogue of Kierkgaard’s book collection – there merely described as “dainty binding with gilt edges”. The title-gilding on the spine, including the types, the fond, and the size, is identical to that of the five presentation-bindings of the second edition of Either-Or that have been preserved and identified (the ones for Hertz, Andersen, and Winther being the only ones with the presentation-inscription preserved). The spine- and the border-decoration, however, differs, as there is no decorative border on the other copies, which all have gilt volume-identification on them. This is clearly one of the dainty copies Kierkegaard had made, but differing somewhat from the copies he gave away. The style of the handwritten corrections is identical to those in Kierkegaard’s copy of Stadier paa Livets Vei (Stages on Life’s Way) (ex the collection of Muüllertz). The two corrections are:Vol. 1 p. 208: correcting “ret” to “vel”, i.e. meaning to change the sentence “One rightfully feels” to “One presumably feels”Vol. 1 p. 275: correcting “ikke” to “enten”, i.e. meaning to change the sentence “I could not use the conversation…” to “I could either use the conversation…” The two errors were first publicly identified with the publication of Kierkegaard’s collected works half a century later. It is absolutely magnificent to have here what is with all likelihood Kierkegaard’s own personal copy of his magnum opus, with his own handwritten corrections in it. In the light of the history of the work, it makes perfect sense for Kierkegaard to have used and read the second edition of the work. Kierkegaard’s magnum opus Either-Or is considered the foundational work of existentialism and doubtlessly the most famous work by the greatest Scandinavian philosopher of all times, who ""is now generally considered to be, however eccentric, one of the most important Christian philosophers"" (PMM 314). Kierkegaard's monumental magnum opus seminally influenced later as well as contemporary philosophy and ranks as one of the most important works of philosophy of modern times. Either-Or is the earliest of Kierkegaard’s major works and the work with which he begins his pseudonymous authorship. Kierkegaard’s pseudonymity is an entire subject unto its own. The various cover names he uses play a significant role in his way of communicating and are essential to the understanding of his philosophical and religious messages. And it all properly begins here, with his groundbreaking magnum opus. Conjuring up two distinctive figures with diverging beliefs and modes of life – the aesthetic “A” of Part One, and the ethical B (note that this is the first “pseudonym” that Kierkegaard uses, in his earliest articles – no. I above)/Judge Vilhelm of Part Two, Kierkegaard presents us with the most basic reflections on the search for a meaningful existence, seen from two completely different philosophical views. This masterpiece of duality explores the foundational conflict between the ethical and the aesthetical, providing us along the way with the now so famous contemplations on music (Mozart), drama, boredom, pleasures, virtues, and, probably most famously, seduction (and rejection – The Seducer’s Diary). It is primarily Judge Vilhelm from Part Two of Either-Or that has bestowed upon Kierkegaard the reputation as the Father of Existentialism. His emphasis on taking ownership of oneself and the importance of making choices has made him the (first) personification of Existentialism and the idea that one does not passively develop into the self that he or she should be or ought to become. Kierkegaard went to great lengths to ensure that the public would not know the identity of the author was of Either-Or. He even had the draft of the work done by several hands, so that employees at the printer’s would also be deceived. Despite his efforts, however, it did not take long for the public to guess that Kierkegaard had written this astounding work. But Kierkegaard himself kept up the façade and did not accept authorship until several years later. Nothing Kierkegaard did was left to chance, which his carefully chosen pseudonyms also reflect. This also spills over in his presentation-inscriptions, which follow as strict a pattern as the pseudonyms themselves – he never signed himself the author, if his Christian name was not listed as the author on the title-page. And seeing that he had not accepted authorship of Either-Or and is not mentioned by name anywhere on the title-page (also not as the editor nor publisher as with the other pseudonymous works), he was not able to give away copies of his magnum opus, which is why no presentation-copy of the first edition exists. The appearance of the second edition of this monumental work was, naturally, carefully planned. Either-Or first appeared in 1843, and due to the great demand for the work, which had originally only been printed in ca 525 copies, it had quickly been sold out" but Kierkegaard refused to have it reprinted. In 1849, finally, he decided to let it appear again, in a textually unchanged version. When the second edition appeared (recte second issue), Kierkegaard had meanwhile owned up to the authorship of Either-Or. He had done so in 1846, in his Concluding Unscientific Postscript to The Philosophical Fragments (own translation): “For the sake of manners and etiquette I hereby acknowledge, what can hardly in reality be of interest to anybody to know, that I am, as one says, the author of Either-Or (Victor Eremita), Copenhagen in February 1843...”. Now, finally, Kierkegaard could give away his magnum opus! In his Papers from 1849, Kierkegaard states (own translation): “The poets here at home each received a copy of Either-Or. I thought it my duty and now I was able to do it because now one cannot reasonably claim that a conspiracy is made concerning the book. -because the book is now old and its crisis over. Of course they were given the copy from Victor Eremita...” (Pap., X1A 402). Naturally, because “as little as I in Either-Or is the Seductor or the Assessor, as little am I the publisher Victor Eremita, exactly as little" he is a poetically-real subjective thinker, as he is also found in “in vino veritas.” “ (the postscript to the Postscript, 1846) But he only sent few copies to very choice people, fewer than he did most of his other works, and only three copies have been identified (to Henrik Hertz, Christian Winther, and Hans Christian Andersen). Three further copies in gift-bindings corresponding to these have been identified, but in these copies, the leaf with the presentation-inscription has also been torn out. He must have given away yet another copy – one presumably not being on vellum-paper, as, according to his own notes, he had asked the printers for six copies on vellum paper (see Pap., Vol. X, part five, p. (203).) -, making the total known (albeit not all identified) number of copies seven. “Two copies in a binding corresponding to Hertz’s copy have been traced, but in both, the front free end-paper has been torn out. It leads one to think that the completely unusual presentation inscription (signed by Victor Eremita!), for the immediate posterity has been of such a curious nature that it has tempted autograph hunters on several occasions.” (Tekstspejle, p. 97, translated from Danish). “The other book, of which the recipients stand out is the second edition of Either-Or, which appeared in May 1849. The first edition from 1843 had been sold out for several years, but Kierkegaard had refused to have it reprinted. In our context we must remember that in 1843, he was unable to send gift copies of the first edition… When, in 1843, he lets Either-Or be reprinted in textually unaltered form, he has meanwhile (1846) admitted to authorship of the work. But the wording on the title-pages of the two leaves does not allow him to sign the dedication “from the Author” or “from the publisher” or the like.” (Tekstspejle p. 96, translated from Danish). Either-Or is now not only the title of Kierkegaard’s most famous and widely read work, it is also a phrase that summarizes much of the thinking for which he is best known and a cornerstone of what we now characterize as Existentialism. The first edition caused a sensation. The second issue (termed “edition”, although it is textually unaltered) is not only the first edition of the work to appear after Kierkegaard had acknowledged authorship of it and thus also confirmed being one and the same with his most famous pseudonym, it is also the first of Kierkegaard’s works to appear in a second edition or issue. The second edition of the work is thus also of the utmost importance and is one of the only important second editions of any of Kierkegaard’s works. Only a few months after Kierkegaard died (11th of November 1855), at the beginning of April 1856, his books were put up for sale. The sale was an event which created stir among scholars all over Denmark, and the event drew large crowds. Everyone wanted a piece of the recently deceased legend, and bidding was lively. The average price for the single items was nearly a rix-dollar a very high price for that time. As the old Herman Lynge wrote in a letter on the 22nd of May (The Royal Library, Recent Letters, D.), to the famous collector F.S. Bang, “At the sale of Dr. Søren Kierkegaard’s books everything went at very high prices, especially his own works, which brought 2 or 3 times the published prices”.” (Rohde Auction Catalogue, p. LVIJ). Many authors, philosophers, and scholars were present in the auction room, which was completely full, as was the Royal Library, who bought ca 80 lots. “Many of the books, not only his own, were paid for with much higher prices than in the book shops” (In Morgenposten no. 99, 30. April 1856, written by “P.”, translated from Danish). ""Some books were bought by libraries where they still are today, others were bought by private people, who sometimes wrote their names in the front of the books and thus, indirectly, stated that they came from Kierkegaard’s book collection… The edition (of the auction catalogue, 1967) registers all books from Kierkegaard’s book collection that it has hitherto been possible to identify – either in public or in private ownership… All in all, nearly a couple of hundred volumes – i.e. ca. 10 % – of the Kierkegaardian book collection is said to be rediscovered…"" (Rohde). Thus, today, books from Kierkegaard’s library are of the utmost scarcity. Only very few are still possible to acquire, and they hardly ever appear on the market. PMM: 314 Himmelstrup 21‎

‎Gjentagelsen. Et Forsøg i den experimenterende Psychologi af Constantin Constantius. - [KIERKEGAARD’S OWN COPY - ONE OF THE TWO COPIES HE HAD MADE FOR REGINE AND FOR HIMSELF]‎

‎Kjøbenhavn, Reitzel, 1843. Small 8vo. 157 pp. Splendidly bound in beautiful patterned pink moiré-paper covered with red and green floriated gilt branches. Rebacked in nearly matching paper. Blue silk end-papers. All edges gilt. Printed on thick vellum-paper. A splendid copy with light edgewear and absolutely minimal brownspotting. Contemporary inscription to front fly-leaf stating that this is Kierkegaard’s own copy and that it was bought at the auction after him, April 1856 (presumably in the hand of Herman H.J. Lynge). Housed in a beautiful marbled paper box with red Morocco spine. Spine with gilt lines and gilt gothic lettering stating title, the pseudonymous author name and that this is Kierkegaard’s own copy printed on heavy vellum-paper.‎

‎Kierkegaard’s own copy of Repetition, one of the two copies he had printed on special paper and specially bound, one for Regine, one for himself, with a correction in Kierkegaard’s hand. This is as close as one comes to the love story of Regine and Kierkegaard – this is Kierkegaard’s own copy that he kept himself, from the love-set of the two copies of Repetition he had made, where the other was for Regine. One of the two copies of the book that he had made on special paper and bound in this particularly beautiful and romantic binding with gilding and flowers. Kierkegaard had his eight pseudonymous works made like this, one for Regine, one for himself. So far, only four of these have surfaced, Regine’s copies of Repetition, Prefaces, and Either-Or (all three sold at auction in 2002), and Kierkegaard’s own copy of Either-Or (which is in the Danish Royal Library). The other copies are unregistered, and the whereabouts unknown. The present copy is presumably that described merely as “dainty w. gilt edges”, nr. 2125 from the auction catalogue, which Herman H.L. Lynge bought at the auction. The correction is to be found on p. 80, where “legede” (played) has been changed to “levede” (lived). See Pap. IV B99. REPETITION – not only the title of one of his most significant books, but also a key concept in the philosophy of Kierkegaard – was written during the same brief spell of feverish activity that also produced Fear and Trembling the two books were even published on the same day. ”Say what you will, this question will play a very important role in modern philosophy, for repetition is a crucial expression for what “recollection” was to the Greeks. Just as they taught that all knowing is a recollecting, modern philosophy will teach that all life is a repetition.” (Repetition, p. 3 – translation by Hong), Kierkegaard states in the beginning of his treatise, anticipating the importance that his concept of Repetition is to have for modern philosophy. Written in the narrative form of an experimental novel centered on two stories that are internally linked, Kierkegaard lets us understand what Repetition could be and what it is in his philosophy. The first story portrays Repetition as something empty and trivial, whereas the second portrays it as an ethical category that is inextricably linked to religion. Repetition is that which makes it possible for man to become and to remain present in the present. Kierkegaard’s explanation of his key concept of Repetition is exhausted in the present work, but it also plays a significant rôle throughout his later works and is considered one of the key concepts in his philosophy. The work is centered around the story of a young man, who has fallen in love with an innocent young girl to whom he has become engaged. But, finding himself unable to consummate the love because of poetic stirrings inside himself, he tries to understand what is going on inside him and whether or not he should break off the engagement. The elderly Constantin Constantius, one of Kierkegaard’s numerous pseudonyms, interferes with the emotions of our young man and begins to conduct speculative experiments with him that are meant to investigate whether a repetition (of the relationship with the girl, of the young man’s feelings, etc.) might be possible. At the end of the first part, the young man flees Copenhagen and leaves the girl, presumably at her wits’ end. Later, she marries someone else, and the young man transforms into the true poet that he could only be when unattached to the girl he loved. It does not take much of an imagination to link this story to the Kierkegaard’s own wildly famous love story and failed engagement to Regine Olsen. It all begins in 1837, when Kierkegaard meets the lovely young girl Regine Olsen at a visit to the widowed Cathrine Rørdam. Three years later, in September 1840, after having corresponded frequently with her and visited her on numerous occasions, Kierkegaard decides to ask for her hand in marriage. She and her family accept, but the following day, Kierkegaard regrets his decision and ends up finally breaking off the engagement in October 1841. Disregarding the scandal, the heartbreak (his own included), and the numerous pleas from family members and friends alike, Kierkegaard’s tortured soul, still searching for God and for the meaning of faith, cannot continue living with the promise of marriage. Later the same month, he flees Copenhagen and the scandal surrounding the broken engagement. He leaves for Berlin, the first of his four stays there, clearly tortured by his decision, but also intent on not being able to go through with the engagement. As is evident from his posthumously published Papers, Kierkegaard’s only way out of the relationship was to play a charming, but cold, villain, a charlatan, not betraying his inner thoughts and feelings. Despite the brevity of the engagement, it has gone down in history as one of the most significant in the entire history of modern thought. It is a real-life Werther-story with the father of Existentialism as the main character, thus with the dumbfounding existentialist outcome that no-one could have foreseen. This exceedingly famous and difficult engagement became the introduction to one of the most influential authorships in the last two centuries. “She was the reason for my authorship”, Kierkegaard writes in his Papers, and there is no doubt that several of his most significant works are born out of the relationship with Regine – and its ending. It is during his stay in Berlin, his first of four altogether, right after the rupture of the engagement, that he begins writing Either-Or, parts of which, like Repetition, can be read as an almost autobiographical rendering of his failed engagement. Repetition, more than any other work, lets us see how Kierkegaard came to be as an author through his tumultuous inner life during his engagement and the ending of it. After a couple of years, Regine got engaged to someone else, whom she married in 1847. But as is well known, Kierkegaard never married, and the impact of his engagement to Regine and what it made him understand – about himself, about religion, faith, the inner workings of the philosopher and the poet –, never lost its significance. It is evident from the many drafts of a letter that he sent to Regine, through her husband, in 1849 (which was returned to him, unopened) that he had never lain the matter to rest and that the relationship with Regine was still very much alive. He also states in his Notebook 15 from 1849 “By the way, it is certainly the case that my relationship with her has been a very close, present study for me of what faith is. For I know better in this relationship how it is apparently the exact opposite of the foundational. That I have lasted in this relationship has been useful for me in relating to God as a believer.” In his Notebook 15, also known as My Relationship with Her, from 1849, Kierkegaard describes how, when he finally broke off the engagement and she tried to get him to stay, she had told him “that she would thank me her entire life for being allowed to stay with me, even if she were to live in a little cupboard” (SKS No. 16: 6). Thus, Kierkegaard had a little cupboard made, with no shelves in it. Here, he kept “everything that reminds me of her and will remind me of her. There is also a copy of the pseudonyms (i.e. the works that he wrote under a pseudonym) of these, there were always only two copies on vellum-paper, one for her and one for me.” (SKS: Not. 15:6.). Here we have it – the closest we get to this pivotal love affair from which grew one of the most important philosophical-religious authorships in the Western world. In all, Kierkegaard wrote eight pseudonymous books, Repetition being one of them, all of which were evidently printed in two copies each on vellum-paper and bound in special bindings, one for Regine, one for Kierkegaard himself. 24 years ago, three of these books surfaced, at an auction in 2002, namely Either-Or, Repetiton, and Prefaces, all being the copies Kierkegaard had bound for Regine. Before that, only one single copy of one of these eight titles for Kierkegaard himself or for Regine were known (namely Kierkegaard’s own copy of Either-Or, which is in the Danish Royal Library). Seven of the books, Kierkegaard’s own copies, were listed in the auction catalogue after his death, but apart from the mentioned copy of Either-Or in the Royal Library, the others had not been found. The four known copies are all bound in very particular, beautiful, patterned bindings with flowers and gold, in either pink or white. Like Fear and Trembling, there are no presentation-copies known to exist of Repetition. Himmelstrup 53‎

‎Om Begrebet Ironi med stadigt hensyn til Socrates. Af S. A. Kierkegaard. - [PRESENTATION-COPY TO HIS PREVIOUS GREEK TEACHER BOJESEN]‎

‎Kjøbenhavn, P.G. Philipsens Forlag, 1841. 8vo. (8), 350 pp. Gift binding of plain brown full cloth with single gilt lines to spine. Printed on fine paper. Handwritten title to spine: “Kierkegaard / Om / Ironie”. Very neat, barely noticeable small restorations to capitals and to corners. A bit of browning and brownspotting, mostly to the first leaves. With the ex libris of Georg Nygaard to inside of front board and pencil annotation stating that the copy was bought at the auction of his collection in 1943, by bookseller Hagerup. ‎

‎Magnificent presentation-copy of Kierkegaard's dissertation, inscribed toverso of front fly-leaf to his previous Greek teacher, Bojesen: “Til / Hr. Professor Boiesen” (i.e. For / Mr. Professor Boiesen). The copy is with the Thesis, but neither the date nor the time has been filled in by hand as usual in the presentation-copies. This is presumably because he did not expect his previous teacher to show up to the defense. Kierkegaard's dissertation constitutes the culmination of three years’ intensive studies of Socrates and “the true point of departure for Kierkegaard’s authorship” (Brandes). The work is of the utmost importance in Kierkegaard’s production, not only as his first academic treatise, but also because he here introduces several themes that will be addressed in his later works. Among these we find the question of defining the subject of cognition and self-knowledge of the subject. The maxim of “know thyself” will be a constant throughout his oeuvre, as is the theory of knowledge acquisition that he deals with here. The dissertation is also noteworthy in referencing many of Hegel’s theses in a not negative context, something that Kierkegaard himself would later note with disappointment and characterize as an early, uncritical use of Hegel. Another noteworthy feature is the fact that the thesis is written in Danish, which was unheard of at the time. Kierkegaard felt that Danish was a more suitable language for the thesis and hadto petition the King to be granted permission to submit it in Danish rather than Latin. This in itself poses as certain irony, as the young Kierkegaard was known to express himself poorly and very long-winded in written Danish. One of Kierkegaard’s only true friends, his school friend H.P. Holst recounts (in 1869) how the two had a special school friendship and working relationship, in which Kierkegaard wrote Latin compositions for Holst, while Holst wrote Danish compositions for Kierkegaard, who “expressed himself in a hopelessly Latin Danish crawling with participial phrases and extraordinarily complicatedsentences” (Garff, p. 139). When Kierkegaard, in 1838, was ready to publish his famous piece on Hans Christian Andersen (see nr. 1 & 2 above), which was to appear in Heiberg’s journal Perseus, Heiberg had agreed to publish the piece, although he had some severe critical comments about the way and the form in which it was written – if it were to appear in Perseus, Heiberg demanded, at the very least, the young Kierkegaard would have to submit it in a reasonably readable Danish. “Kierkegaard therefore turned to his old schoolmate H. P. Holst and asked him to do something with the language…” (Garff, p. 139). From their school days, Holst was well aware of the problem with Kierkegaard’s Danish, and he recounts that over the summer, he actually “translated” Kierkegaard’s article on Andersen into proper Danish. The oral defense was conducted in Latin, however. The judges all agreed that the work submitted was both intelligent and noteworthy. But they were concerned about its style, which was found to be both tasteless, long-winded, and idiosyncratic. We already here witness Kierkegaard’s idiosyncratic approach to content and style that is so characteristic for all of his greatest works. Both stylistically and thematically, Kierkegaard’s and especially a clear precursor for his magnum opus Either-Or that is to be his next publication. In many ways, Either-Or is born directly out of The Concept of Irony and is the work that brings the theory of Irony to life. Part One of the dissertation concentrates on Socrates as interpreted by Xenophon, Plato, and Aristophanes, with a word on Hegel and Hegelian categories. Part Two is a more synoptic discussion of the concept of irony in Kierkegaard’s categories, with examples from other philosophers. The work constitutes Kierkegaard’s attempt at understanding the role of irony in disrupting society, and with Socrates understood through Kierkegaard, we witness a whole new way of interpreting the world before us. Wisdom is not necessarily fixed, and we ought to use Socratic ignorance to approach the world without the inherited bias of our cultures. With irony, we will be able to embrace the not knowing. We need to question the world knowing we may not find an answer. The moment we stop questioning and just accept the easy answers, we succumb to ignorance. We must use irony to laugh at ourselves in order to improve ourselves and to laugh at society in order to improve the world. The work was submitted to the Philosophical Faculty at the University of Copenhagen on June 3rd 1841. Kierkegaard had asked for his dissertation to be ready from the printer’s in ample time for him to defend it before the new semester commenced. This presumably because he had already planned his sojourn to Berlin to hear the master philosopher Schelling. On September 16th, the book was issued, and on September 29th, the defense would take place. The entire defense, including a two hour long lunch break, took seven hours, during which ”an unusually full auditorium” would listen to the official opponents F.C. Sibbern and P.O. Brøndsted as well as the seven “ex auditorio” opponents F.C. Petersen, J.L. Heiberg, P.C. Kierkegaard, Fr. Beck, F.P.J. Dahl, H .J.Thue og C.F. Christens, not to mention Kierkegaard himself. The work appeared in two states – one with the four pages of “Theses”, for academics of the university, whereas the copies without the theses were intended for ordinary sale. These sales copies also do not have “Udgivet for Magistergraden” and “theologisk Candidat” on the title-page. The first page of the theses always contains the day “XXIX” of September written in hand, and sometimes the time “hora X” is also written in hand, but not always. In all, 11 presentation-copies of the dissertation are known, and of these only one is signed (that for Holst), all the others merely state the title and name of the recipient. As is evident from the auction catalogue of his collection, Kierkegaard had a number of copies of his dissertation in his possession when he died. Five of them were bound, and two of them were “nit. M. Guldsnit” (i.e. daintily bound and with gilt edges). These two copies were obviously meant as presentation-copies that he then never gave away. The gift copies of the dissertation were given two types of bindings, both brownish cloth, one type patterned, the other one plain, and some of them have gilt edges, but most of the plain ones do not. There exist two copies on thick vellum paper – one being Kierkegaard’s own copy, the other being the copy for H.C. Ørsted, discoverer of electromagnetism and then principle of the University of Copenhagen. “As already implied, two works of the authorship stand out in the sense that Kierkegaard sent his presentation-copies to a special circle of people: The dissertation from 1841...” (Posselt, Textspejle, p. 91, translated from Danish). Most of the copies were given to former teachers and especially to people who, due to leading positions, personified the university. “For this circle of initiated we can now, due to registered copies, confirm that Kierkegaard gave copies with handwritten dedications to the headmaster of the University H.C. Ørsted (printed on thick paper), Kolderup-Rosenvinge and to J.L. Heiberg. It is granted that Sibbern, Madvig and F.C. Petersen were also given the dissertation as a gift,... but these copies are not known (yet).” (Posselt, Textspejle, pp. 93-94, translated fromDanish). (N.b. We have since handled the copy given to Petersen and can thus confirm that it exists). The presentation-inscriptions in the 11 registered copies of the Irony all follow a certain, strict pattern. “The wording could not be briefer. In the donation of his academic treatise, the otherwise prolific Kierkegaard sticks to name, titles, and the modes of address that goes with the titles.” (Tekstspejle p. 96, translated from Danish). When presenting his later books, he always signs himself “from the author”, sometimes abbreviated (i.e. “Forf.” In stead of “Forfatteren”), unless he is mentioned by name on the title-page as the publisher, not the author, as is the case with some of the pseudonymous works. In that case he signs his inscriptions “From the publisher”, always accompanied by “in deep reverence”, “with reverence”, “with friendship” or the like, adapted to the rank of the recipient and his place on Kierkegaard’s personal scale. An academic treatise, however, published before the oral defense took place – in the mind of Kierkegaard – required certain demands in relation to the donation of it. Thus, the brevity and rigidity in the inscriptions. Ernst Frederik Christian Bojesen (1803-64) was a philologist and school man. In 1820, Bojesen graduated as student from Borgerdydskolen, where he already the following year began teaching classical languages and soon became the principal’s right hand man. Here, he taught classical languages and was Kierkegaard’s teacher of classical Greek. He later became dr. Phil and professor at Sorø Akademi, where “in September 1841, he received, by post, a presentation-copy of the dissertation “On the Concept of Irony” by his previous disciple. (Tudvad, Kierkegaards København, p. 171). Himmelstrup 8‎

‎1) A.F. Hvo er Forfatteren af Enten-Eller. 2) Taksigelse til Hr. Professor Heiberg 3) En lille Forklaring 4) En Erklæring og Lidt til [Printed in: Fædrelandet, edt. Giødwad and Ploug]. - [ANTICIPATING MODERN LITERARY THEORY MY MORE THAN A CENTURY]‎

‎(København), 1843-1845. 1) 4de Aarg. Nr. 1162. Mandagen den 27. februar 18432) 4de Aarg. Nr. 1168. Søndagen den 5. Marts 18433) 4de Aarg. Nr. 1236. Tirsdagen den 16. Mai 18434) 6te Aarg. Nr. 1883. Fredagen den 9. Mai 1845 All 4 articles in large 4to (33 x 24,5 cm – 4) measuring 33 x 25). 2 columns to a page. 1) 2 pp. Columns 9325-9332. Kierkegaard’s article: Columns 9330-93322) 2 pp. Columns 9373-9380. Kierkegaard’s article: Columns 9373-93763) 2 pp. Columns 9917-9924. Kierkegaard’s article: Columns 9921-99224) 2 pp. Columns 15089-15096. Kierkegaard’s article: Columns 15093-15096. Marginal dampstaining‎

‎A magnificent set of all Kierkegaard’s four articles on his own authorship and pseudonymity, all in the exceedingly scarce original printings of The Fatherland. During its entire existence, The Fatherland would be published in ca 2.000 copies, making it of the utmost scarcity today. Almost all copies of it have been destroyed, thrown out, worn, etc., and it is extremely rare on the market. The issues we have at the moment are the only ones from this period that we have ever seen for sale. Kierkegaard’s play with the pseudonyms is a fundamental part of his authorship. Either-Or is a prime example of how these pseudonyms interact and how they represent different parts of Kierkegaard and his thought. Merely a week after the publication of Either-Or, Kierkgaard publishes an article entitled Who is the Author of Either-Or. The background for the publication is, not surprisingly, the many immediate reactions that followed the publication of his magnum opus. The article was published in The Fatherland on February 27th, 1843 and is the second paper pertaining to Kierkegaard’s pseudonymity and the first paper pertaining to the reception of Either-Or. As we know, Either-Or initiated Kierkegaard’s pseudonymous authorship, and the work caused quite a sensation, not only due to its massive length, which was very unusual at the time, but also due to the interest in the authorship of the work. The article Who is the Author of Either-Or makes use of this interest and is itself also published pseudonymously. At no point does it mention the name Kierkegaard. He states that there is no consensus as to the authorship of the work and even posits various theories on the authorship based on external and internal evidence, finally concluding that the identity of the true author is immaterial. As Kierkegaard owned up to the authorship of Either-Or in Unscientific Concluding Postscript, so he did to that of the present article, admitting there that he is indeed also the A.F. that has authored Who is the Author of Either/Or. When Nielsen collected and published Kierkegaard’s newspaper articles posthumously, in 1857, he apparently was not aware that Kierkegaard was also the author of Who is the Author of Either- Or and did not include it in his publication. Following Who is the Author of Either-Or is another paper on the same subject, printed merely a week after the first, namely on March 5, 1843, also in The Fatherland. It is entitled A Word of Thanks to Professor Heiberg and is also written under a pseudonym. This time the pseudonym is Victor Eremita, who was the pseudonymous name for the editor of Either-Or. This article is written as a reaction to Heiberg’s review of Either-Or and constitutes the second of the four papers that Kierkegaard writes on the immediate reactions to and reception of his magnum opus. Heiberg had written his review of Either-Or, without knowing the identity of the author, in Litterær vintersæd, which was published in Intelligensblade (of which Heiberg himself was the publisher). Some of Heiberg’s criticism consisted in Either-Or being ridiculously long. But the review also clearly shows that Heiberg had not understood the work. Which is exactly what Kierkegaard points out in A Word of Thanks to Professor Heiberg. Hidden under a veil of irony, he nods to the importance of Heiberg’s review, but at the same time pointing out that Heiberg has misunderstood the work and is not susceptible to finer dialectic. A couple of months after the article on Heiberg’s review, namely on May 16, 1843, Kierkegaard publishes his third article on his own authorship, also in The Fatherland. The article is called A Little Explanation and is published under Kierkegaard’s own name. The article is a reaction to the reception of Either-Or, but more specifically a dismissal of the persistent rumors that connected Kierkegaard’s name with it. Although the paper was published on May 16, 1843, Kierkegaard must have finished it no later than May 8, as he left for Berlin that day, only to return on May 30th. In Either-Or, towards the end, there is a sermon, which, according to contemporary rumors in Copenhagen, was so similar to a trial sermon that Kierkegaard had held in the winter semester 1840-41 after having entered the Royal Pastoral Seminary, that people concluded that Kierkegaard must be the author of Either-Or. In the present paper, A Little Explanation, Kierkegaard, in his own name, attempts to explain that the sermon he held in the Winter 1841-42 (possibly misdated in order to confuse the readers further) bears no resemblance to the sermon in Either-Or, adding sarcastically how wonderous it is that someone in the audience has paid so well attention that he was able to recall the sermon more than a year later and adds ridiculous silly logic to the conclusion of the rumor mongers. Thus, by portraying the absurdity in comparing the two sermons, Kierkegaard “proves” how preposterous the notion that he should be the author of Either-Or is. Two years later, on May 9, 1845, also in The Fatherland, Kierkegaard publishes his fourth and final article on his own authorship and pseudonymity. Also published in his own name, this article, entitled An Explanation and a Little More, is a response to a review of his work Three Discourses on Imagined Occasions from 1844, in which the author attributed several of the pseudonymous works to Kierkegaard. Kierkegaard distances himself sharply from the article, which was printed in Berlingske Tidende. In the beginning of this short article, he states the obvious point that “If I am not the author of these books, then the rumor is a falsehood. However, if I am the author, then I am the only one authorized to say that I am so” (column 15094), using sophistic logic to prove that the rumor can only be untrue. Kierkegaard’s pseudonyms not only play a pivotal part in his authorship and his thought in general, they are also part of an endeavour to focus the readers’ minds on the works themselves rather than on the author, freeing them from the person who wrote them. Also, his pseudonyms all have their own distinct personalities and all represent their own distinct views, be they authors of articles, parts of books, books themselves, or editors. They are not merely there for play or for hiding the identity of the author, they are also there to let us, the readers, understand the works in certain way. Also in this regard Kierkegaard is a trailblazer. His authorial philosophy anticipated modern literary theory by a century. Himmelstrup 43a, 44, 47, 83 ‎

‎Om Begrebet Ironi med stadigt hensyn til Socrates. Af S. A. Kierkegaard. - [KIERKEGAARD’S DISSERTATION IN THE ORIGINAL BINDING, WHICH IS OF THE UTMOST SCARCITY.]‎

‎Kjøbenhavn, P.G. Philipsens Forlag, 1841. 8vo. (4), 350 pp., 1 f. (blank), 2 pp. (advertisements). Completely uncut and partly unopened in the original brown cardboard binding. Rebacked with paper perfectly matching that of the boards. Corners restored. Title-page evenly browned and a few leaves with a bit of brownspotting, but overall in unusually nice condition, clean, fresh, and bright. Completely unmarked.‎

‎A fabulous copy of the first edition of Kierkegaard’s dissertation, here in the original binding, which is of the utmost scarcity. We have only seen it in this state once before. And of all the copies we have handled of the Irony over the last decades, we have only once before come across a copy with the advertisement-leaf in the back. This is virtually never present. This completely uncut copy is approximately 1 cm taller and wider than regular copies. The spines of the original Kierkegaard cardboard bindings are always just thin paper directly glued on the block, making them extremely fragile, especially on the thicker volumes. If one finds these original bindings, the spines are almost always more or less disintegrated. Kierkegaard's dissertation constitutes the culmination of three years’ intensive studies of Socrates and “the true point of departure for Kierkegaard’s authorship” (Brandes). The work is of the utmost importance in Kierkegaard’s production, not only as his first academic treatise, but also because he here introduces several themes that will be addressed in his later works. Among these we find the question of defining the subject of cognition and self-knowledge of the subject. The maxim of “know thyself” will be a constant throughout his oeuvre, as is the theory of knowledge acquisition that he deals with here. The dissertation is also noteworthy in referencing many of Hegel’s theses in a not negative context, something that Kierkegaard himself would later note with disappointment and characterize as an early, uncritical use of Hegel. Another noteworthy feature is the fact that the thesis is written in Danish, which was unheard of at the time. Kierkegaard felt that Danish was a more suitable language for the thesis and hadto petition the King to be granted permission to submit it in Danish rather than Latin. This in itself poses as certain irony, as the young Kierkegaard was known to express himself poorly and very long-winded in written Danish. One of Kierkegaard’s only true friends, his school friend H.P. Holst recounts (in 1869) how the two had a special school friendship and working relationship, in which Kierkegaard wrote Latin compositions for Holst, while Holst wrote Danish compositions for Kierkegaard, who “expressed himself in a hopelessly Latin Danish crawling with participial phrases and extraordinarily complicatedsentences” (Garff, p. 139). When Kierkegaard, in 1838, was ready to publish his famous piece on Hans Christian Andersen (see nr. 1 & 2 above), which was to appear in Heiberg’s journal Perseus, Heiberg had agreed to publish the piece, although he had some severe critical comments about the way and the form in which it was written – if it were to appear in Perseus, Heiberg demanded, at the very least, the young Kierkegaard would have to submit it in a reasonably readable Danish. “Kierkegaard therefore turned to his old schoolmate H. P. Holst and asked him to do something with the language…” (Garff, p. 139). From their school days, Holst was well aware of the problem with Kierkegaard’s Danish, and he recounts that over the summer, he actually “translated” Kierkegaard’s article on Andersen into proper Danish. The oral defense was conducted in Latin, however. The judges all agreed that the work submitted was both intelligent and noteworthy. But they were concerned about its style, which was found to be both tasteless, long-winded, and idiosyncratic. We already here witness Kierkegaard’s idiosyncratic approach to content and style that is so characteristic for all of his greatest works. Both stylistically and thematically, Kierkegaard’s and especially a clear precursor for his magnum opus Either-Or that is to be his next publication. The year 1841 is a momentous one in Kierkegaard’s life. It is the year that he completes his dissertation and commences his sojourn in Berlin, but it is also the defining year in his personal life, namely the year that he breaks off his engagement with Regine Olsen. And finally, it is the year that he begins writing Either-Or. In many ways, Either-Or is born directly out of The Concept of Irony and is the work that brings the theory of Irony to life. Part One of the dissertation concentrates on Socrates as interpreted by Xenophon, Plato, and Aristophanes, with a word on Hegel and Hegelian categories. Part Two is a more synoptic discussion of the concept of irony in Kierkegaard’s categories, with examples from other philosophers. The work constitutes Kierkegaard’s attempt at understanding the role of irony in disrupting society, and with Socrates understood through Kierkegaard, we witness a whole new way of interpreting the world before us. Wisdom is not necessarily fixed, and we ought to use Socratic ignorance to approach the world without the inherited bias of our cultures. With irony, we will be able to embrace the not knowing. We need to question the world knowing we may not find an answer. The moment we stop questioning and just accept the easy answers, we succumb to ignorance. We must use irony to laugh at ourselves in order to improve ourselves and to laugh at society in order to improve the world. The work was submitted to the Philosophical Faculty at the University of Copenhagen on June 3rd 1841. Kierkegaard had asked for his dissertation to be ready from the printer’s in ample time for him to defend it before the new semester commenced. This presumably because he had already planned his sojourn to Berlin to hear the master philosopher Schelling. On September 16th, the book was issued, and on September 29th, the defense would take place. The entire defense, including a two hour long lunch break, took seven hours, during which ”an unusually full auditorium” would listen to the official opponents F.C. Sibbern and P.O. Brøndsted as well as the seven “ex auditorio” opponents F.C. Petersen, J.L. Heiberg, P.C. Kierkegaard, Fr. Beck, F.P.J. Dahl, H .J.Thue og C.F. Christens, not to mention Kierkegaard himself. Two weeks later, on October 12th, Kierkegaard broke off his engagement with Regine Olsen (for the implications of this event, see the section about Regine in vol. II). The work appeared in two states – one with the four pages of “Theses”, for academics of the university, whereas the copies without the theses were intended for ordinary sale. These sales copies also do not have “Udgivet for Magistergraden” and “theologisk Candidat” on the title-page. The present copy is one of the sales-copies without theses. Himmelstrup 8‎

‎Af en endnu Levendes Papirer. Udgivet mod hans Villie af S. Kjerkegaard. - [H.P. KIERKEGAARD'S COPY OF SØREN'S FIRST BOOK]‎

‎Kjøbenhavn, C. A. Reitzel, 1838. 8vo. X, (2), 79 pp. Lovely contemporary brown half calf with marbled paper over boards. Double gilt lines and gilt lettering to spine. Foot of spine with the gilt initials of H.P. Kierkegaard. A few brown spots to the margin of the first eight leaves, otherwise remarkably clean. An excellent, beautifully preserved copy. With the ownership signature of H.P. Kierkegaard to front fly-leaf.‎

‎An exquisite copy of the first edition of Kierkegaard's first work, which has belonged to Kierkegaard’s disabled cousin, who was a great source of inspiration to Kierkegaard. The relationship between the two cousins was very touching, and they both benefitted greatly from the other. Søren drew inspiration from his cousin, who was lame and unable to walk, and he cared a great deal for him. Hans Peter was one of the very few who had a standing invitation to visit Søren. He felt that his cousin might lead a truer and more meaningful life than most other people, who do not face the same hardships. Hans Peter, on the other hand, was greatly comforted by his famous cousin and his edifying writings. Søren helped him feel that, in spite of his hardships, his life was not wasted – he helped him believe in God. All copies of Kierkegaard’s works belonging to his cousin denote a special significance, but it is especially lovely to find H.P. Kierkegaard’s copy of his cousin’s very first book. Kierkegaard's famous first work sews the seeds of his future career and initiates his philosophical production. It is in this famous review of Hans Christian Andersen as an author of novels, with a particular focus on his Only a Fiddler that Kierkegaard – the then 25 year-old theology student known only in a small academic circle, for his wit and sharp intelligence – puts forth his devastating criticism of Hans Christian Andersen – then 33 years old and already widely famous, Denmark’s other national hero and world-famous fairy tale-author. Even though the book is written as a polemic review, we already here witness Kierkegaard’s introduction of his emphasis on authentic individual existence will continue throughout his entire production as thus, From the Papers of one Still Living serves as a highly important introduction to Kierkegaard’s philosophical-ethical production. Kierkegaard points out that Hans Christian Andersen has not yet found himself and therefore cannot be a good author. This emphasis on authenticity and on the necessary first stage of the epic becomes an introduction to Kierkegaard’s famous theory of stages that he develops in his later works. He rejects the notion that environment is decisive in determining the fate of genius – the genius is a shaping subject, not a passive one formed by circumstances. Not one that needs to be nurtured and sheltered in order not to perish. The work was originally meant to be published as an article in the literary periodical Perseus, of which Johan Ludvig Heiberg was the editor. But the article grew too extensive, and the intended columns in the periodical were given to H.L. Martensen instead. Martensen’s article took up 70 pages and was about the idea of Faust, which vexed Kierkegaard, who had wanted to write about that subject himself. Kierkegaard, Hans Peter (1815-62) is always referred to as Kierkegaard’s cousin, also by Kierkegaard himself, but if one is to be precise, he was Søren’s half-cousin. H.P. was the son of M.P. Kierkegaard’s (Søren’s father) cousin, M.A. Kierkegaard. H.P. was one of the few people Kierkegaard was personally very close to. As Søren writes in a letter to H.P. (SKS letter no. 27) “you are one of the exceptions”. He cared a great deal for his cousin, who was disabled. He was lame, completely paralyzed on one side of the body, and unable to walk. Intellectually, however, he was gifted, and the two cousins grew very close. Søren saw in him a purity that he did not see in other people, an ability to lead a truer and more meaningful life than others, who did not have to suffer in the same way. Søren was also a great comfort to H.P, who read the works of his famous cousin with enthusiasm. He probably owned every single work Kierkegaard wrote, and he drew great comfort from several of them. As Brøchner recalls in his recollections about Kierkegaard (Erindringer om Søren Kierkegaard – no. 43), H.P. “read his cousin’s writings with the greatest of interest, occasionally visited him in his home, and drew much spiritual awakening from these visits.” Brøchner continues to recall how he once told Kierkegaard what a great impression one of his works, Opbyggelige Taler i forskjellig Aand, had made upon H.P. In the confessional discourse, Søren portrays a person, who due to his bodily disposition is unable to practice anything physically or outwardly, and goes on to beautifully describe how this person too is subject to the same ethical demands as everyone else and what particular form this life-assignment takes on for him. To this, Søren replied “yes! To him, that work is a blessing”. And so it was. Reading his cousin’s upbuilding works provided the disabled Hans Peter with the power to overpower gloomy thoughts about his life having no meaning. Søren gave him, not only through his writings, but also through his meetings and conversations with him, the feeling of being as important as everyone else, as those who were physically blessed. There is no doubt that Kierkegaard drew inspiration from his admirable cousin, who had to overcome so much. And there is no doubt that H.P. was close to Søren’s heart. Apart from Boeson, H.P. was the only person who had a standing invitation. He writes how he admires H.P., who, reconciled with his fate, with patience and devotion solves a task that is just as great as the one everyone else has to solve, whether they do big business, build houses, write great books, etc. – “when all is heard, everything, after all, mainly comes down to fervor – and when all is forgotten, it also comes down to fervor” … “Do not forget the duty to love thyself… That you are somehow set outside of life… that in the eyes of a stupid world, you are superfluous, let that not rob you of the idea of yourself.” (Letter 27). Like his famous cousin, H.P. Kierkegaard was also a bibliophile and had a beautiful book collection. The books that surface from his library are usually in excellent condition and are often bound in beautiful bindings, much like those Søren had made for his books. Himmelstrup 6‎

‎Enten – Eller. Et Livs=Fragment udgivet af Victor Eremita. Anden Udgave. Første Deel, indeholdende A.’s Papirer + Anden Deel, indeholdende B.’s Papirer, Breve til A. - [IN PRESENTATION-BINDING, ONE OF SIX COPIES ON THIN VELLUM-PAPER]‎

‎Kjøbenhavn, Reitzel, 1849. 8vo. XIV, (2), 320" (4), 250 pp. Bound in one original full patterned cloth binding with gilt lines to spine as well as title in Gothic gilt lettering and gilt volume-numbering (“1.2.”). Printed on thin vellum-paper. Capitals and corners with a bit of wear. Spine and edges of boards a bit faded. But overall very nice. Blue pasted-down end-papers. Internally very nice and clean. Old owner’s signature to inside of front board (J.P. Melbye) and previous owner’s neat pencil annotations explaining that the front free end-paper has been removed, that it may well have carried an inscription from Kierkegaard, and that the binding corresponds to the bindings of the copies that we know he gave away.‎

‎The important second edition (recte issue) in Kierkegaard’s own characteristic presentation-binding, one of the six copies on thin vellum-paper (although we can find mention of seven presentation-copies having been given away, Kierkegaard notes himself that he had six copies printed on special paper). There is no doubt that the present copy is in Kierkegaard’s gift- (or presentation-) binding, which he had made in the same style for the copies that he gave away. He always wrote the presentation-inscription on the front free end-paper, which is unfortunately lacking here, so that we cannot determine, to whom he gave the present copy. The binding corresponds to the one that gave to e.g. Henrik Hertz (which still has the presentation-inscription). Kierkegaard’s magnum opus Either-Or is considered the foundational work of existentialism and doubtlessly the most famous work by the greatest Scandinavian philosopher of all times, who ""is now generally considered to be, however eccentric, one of the most important Christian philosophers"" (PMM 314). Kierkegaard's monumental magnum opus seminally influenced later as well as contemporary philosophy and ranks as one of the most important works of philosophy of modern times. Either-Or is the earliest of Kierkegaard’s major works and the work with which he begins his pseudonymous authorship. Kierkegaard’s pseudonymity is an entire subject unto its own. The various cover names he uses play a significant role in his way of communicating and are essential to the understanding of his philosophical and religious messages. And it all properly begins here, with his groundbreaking magnum opus. Conjuring up two distinctive figures with diverging beliefs and modes of life – the aesthetic “A” of Part One, and the ethical B (note that this is the first “pseudonym” that Kierkegaard uses, in his earliest articles – no. I above)/Judge Vilhelm of Part Two, Kierkegaard presents us with the most basic reflections on the search for a meaningful existence, seen from two completely different philosophical views. This masterpiece of duality explores the foundational conflict between the ethical and the aesthetical, providing us along the way with the now so famous contemplations on music (Mozart), drama, boredom, pleasures, virtues, and, probably most famously, seduction (and rejection – The Seducer’s Diary). It is primarily Judge Vilhelm from Part Two of Either-Or that has bestowed upon Kierkegaard the reputation as the Father of Existentialism. His emphasis on taking ownership of oneself and the importance of making choices has made him the (first) personification of Existentialism and the idea that one does not passively develop into the self that he or she should be or ought to become. Kierkegaard went to great lengths to ensure that the public would not know the identity of the author was of Either-Or. He even had the draft of the work done by several hands, so that employees at the printer’s would also be deceived. Despite his efforts, however, it did not take long for the public to guess that Kierkegaard had written this astounding work. But Kierkegaard himself kept up the façade and did not accept authorship until several years later. Nothing Kierkegaard did was left to chance, which his carefully chosen pseudonyms also reflect. This also spills over in his presentation-inscriptions, which follow as strict a pattern as the pseudonyms themselves – he never signed himself the author, if his Christian name was not listed as the author on the title-page. And seeing that he had not accepted authorship of Either-Or and is not mentioned by name anywhere on the title-page (also not as the editor nor publisher as with the other pseudonymous works), he was not able to give away copies of his magnum opus, which is why no presentation-copy of the first edition exists. The appearance of the second edition of this monumental work was, naturally, carefully planned. Either-Or first appeared in 1843, and due to the great demand for the work, which had originally only been printed in ca 525 copies, it had quickly been sold out" but Kierkegaard refused to have it reprinted. In 1849, finally, he decided to let it appear again, in a textually unchanged version. When the second edition appeared (recte second issue), Kierkegaard had meanwhile owned up to the authorship of Either-Or. He had done so in 1846, in his Concluding Unscientific Postscript to The Philosophical Fragments (own translation): “For the sake of manners and etiquette I hereby acknowledge, what can hardly in reality be of interest to anybody to know, that I am, as one says, the author of Either-Or (Victor Eremita), Copenhagen in February 1843...”. Now, finally, Kierkegaard could give away his magnum opus! In his Papers from 1849, Kierkegaard states (own translation): “The poets here at home each received a copy of Either-Or. I thought it my duty and now I was able to do it because now one cannot reasonably claim that a conspiracy is made concerning the book. -because the book is now old and its crisis over. Of course they were given the copy from Victor Eremita...” (Pap., X1A 402). Naturally, because “as little as I in Either-Or is the Seductor or the Assessor, as little am I the publisher Victor Eremita, exactly as little he is a poetically-real subjective thinker, as he is also found in “in vino veritas.” “ (the postscript to the Postscript, 1846) But he only sent few copies to very choice people, fewer than he did most of his other works, and only three copies have been identified (to Henrik Hertz, Christian Winther, and Hans Christian Andersen). Three further copies in gift-bindings corresponding to these have been identified, but in these copies, the leaf with the presentation-inscription has also been torn out. He must have given away yet another copy – one presumably not being on vellum-paper, as, according to his own notes, he had asked the printers for six copies on vellum paper (see Pap., Vol. X, part five, p. (203).) -, making the total known (albeit not all identified) number of copies seven. “Two copies in a binding corresponding to Hertz’s copy have been traced, but in both, the front free end-paper has been torn out. It leads one to think that the completely unusual presentation inscription (signed by Victor Eremita!), for the immediate posterity has been of such a curious nature that it has tempted autograph hunters on several occasions.” (Tekstspejle, p. 97, translated from Danish). “The other book, of which the recipients stand out is the second edition of Either-Or, which appeared in May 1849. The first edition from 1843 had been sold out for several years, but Kierkegaard had refused to have it reprinted. In our context we must remember that in 1843, he was unable to send gift copies of the first edition… When, in 1843, he lets Either-Or be reprinted in textually unaltered form, he has meanwhile (1846) admitted to authorship of the work. But the wording on the title-pages of the two leaves does not allow him to sign the dedication “from the Author” or “from the publisher” or the like.” (Tekstspejle p. 96, translated from Danish). Either-Or is now not only the title of Kierkegaard’s most famous and widely read work, it is also a phrase that summarizes much of the thinking for which he is best known and a cornerstone of what we now characterize as Existentialism. The first edition caused a sensation. The second issue (termed “edition”, although it is textually unaltered) is not only the first edition of the work to appear after Kierkegaard had acknowledged authorship of it and thus also confirmed being one and the same with his most famous pseudonym, it is also the first of Kierkegaard’s works to appear in a second edition or issue. The second edition of the work is thus also of the utmost importance and is one of the only important second editions of any of Kierkegaard’s works. PMM: 314 Himmelstrup 21 ‎

‎I. A: Ogsaa et Forsvar for Qvindens höie Anlæg. II. B: Kjøbenhavnspostens Morgenbetragtninger i Nr. 43 + III. B: Om Fædrelandets Polemik + IV. S. KIERKEGAARD: Til Hr. Orla Lehman. [printed in: Kjøbenhavns flyvende Post, Interimsblad Nr. 34, 76, 82/83 ... - [VERY RARE FIRST PRINTINGS OF KIERKEGAARD'S FIRST FOUR PUBLICATIONS]‎

‎Kjøbenhavn, 1834-1836. Large 4to. Interimsblade [i.e. Interim Papers] 1-100, with the joint title-page and the contents leaf, bound in a very nice contemporary brown half calf with gilt spine and marbled paper over boards. Spine with wear and hinges and corners bumped. Edges of boards with wear. Occasional brownspotting throughout, but all in all a fine and well preserved copy. Each “Interimsblad” takes up 4 pp. Kierkegaard’s contributions: I: ab. 1 p. II: 2 3/4 pp. III: 4 pp. IV: 4 pp.‎

5 Images

‎Very rare first printings of Kierkegaard’s first four publications, including the very first publication in Kierkegaard’s own name, which constitutes a true milestone in the history of Kierkegaard’s opus, as does, of course, his very first publication. KIERKEGAARD’S VERY EARLIEST publications are the papers that he publishes in Kjøbenhavns Flyvende Post, before he publishes his famous first book, which is a polemic attack on Hans Christian Andersen. The first and fourth of these earliest periodical publications are arguably the most important, being the very first thing Kierkegaard publishes and the very first publication in Kierkegaard’s own name respectively but all these four earliest papers (Himmelstrup 1,2,3, and 4) are significant, 2,3, and 4 dealing with contemporary press issues, primarily freedom of press. Danish politics in the 1830’es was dominated by the slow implementation of rules for election for and assembly of the Estates of the Realm. But as they were only advisory, the papers and periodicals were not allowed to publish their opinions. In response to this, a liberal opposition arose around the two polemic papers Kjøbenhavnsposten (The Copenhagen Post) and Fædrelandet (The Fatherland). The first point on the agenda for the Liberals was the fight for freedom of the press and the abolishment of censorship. This fight for freedom of the press was something that found resonance with Copenhagen academics, and it stirred up a lively activity in Copenhagen. In 1835, active Liberals had encouraged King Frederik VI to support freedom of press but had received an answer stating that he alone was able to evaluate what was truly the best for the people and the state. After this answer from the king, the “Society for the Correct Use of the Freedom of press” was founded by moderate liberals and young liberals, and at the end of the year almost 2.300 members had joined. It was in the midst of all this that the 21-year old Søren Kierkegaard, then a student of theology, had his debut, with political-literary articles in Kjøbenhavns flyvende Post, in Interimsbladende, which were published separately. But as opposed to the predominantly liberal views of almost all other contributors, Kierkegaard’s articles expressed distinctly conservative views. His first publication, Også et Forsvar for Qvindens høie Anlæg (Also a Defense of the High Abilities of the Woman) constitutes an unpolished ironic apology for the liberation of women. This article is published in December 1834 and is signed “A.”. As opposed to the following next three articles, this does not deal with freedom of press. Kierkegaard’s three following publications, however, all concern the question of freedom of press and constitute satirical polemics against the two liberal papers Kjøbenhavnsposten and Fædrelandet, against Orla Lehmann, the upcoming star of the liberal youth, and against all liberals in general. These three articles were published in February and April 1836. The two first are signed “B.”, and the third, signed “S. Kierkegaard”, constitutes the very first publication in his own name. As is well known, the names under which Kierkegaard later publishes come to play a significant role in his authorship and represent an extremely thorough and well-thought-out construction. The foundation of this play with the reader is thus laid in the present publications, in which he begins to develop the style for which he later gained worldwide renown. The “names” A and B, under which he here publishes, will most famously be used again in Either- Or, Part one of which consists in “A.’s Papers” and Part Two in “B.’s Papers, Letters to A.” Common for all four of his first publications is the attempt at polemic and satirical power, at literary elegance and at a masterful and ceremonious critique of the prose of the opponent – all dominant traits in his later writings. Kjøbenhavns flyvende Post (The Flying Post of Copenhagen) was one of the most important and most widely read cultural and literary periodicals of the period. It was edited and run by Johan Ludvig Heiberg (1791-1860), arguably the most famous cultural person during the Danish Golden Age. He played a more significant role than any other author or thinker during this period and was the leading character of literature and philosophy in the 19th century. He introduced many German thinkers to Denmark, most importantly Hegel – who Kierkegaard would later oppose –, and he was part of almost all intellectual discussions of the Danish Golden Age. He was also a patron for many leading figures of the era. Interestingly, several people thought that the first of the articles on the freedom of the press was written by Heiberg. This was of dubious merit to Kierkegaard himself, as he was opposed to the circles around Heiberg and the Hegelian environment, but it was still this article – and this miscomprehension – that gave him a claim to fame. Another paper claimed that this “priceless” article had been written by Heiberg himself, who “had written many witty things, but never anything as witty as this.” Also Kierkegaard’s professor of philosophy, Poul Martin Møller, to whom Kierkegaard was very devoted and to whom he dedicated Begrebet Angest (the only person outside of his family that Kierkegaard ever wrote a printed dedication for), loved the article and assumed that Heiberg had written it. “He (Kierkegaard) had a lifelong antipathy toward the press, though he himself published reviews in various papers. His mistrust of the press as a legitimate organ of communication was based on several observations, one of which was that the press was the voice of the masses, rather than that of the individual. He viewed that voice with great skepticism and sarcasm in later years, averring that the crowd... even if technically correct... is wrong by the very fact of being the crowd. The truth can only be stated and practiced as individuals, especially as individuals before God. Admittedly, Kierkegaard’s view of the masses was not well developed at this juncture.” (D. Antony Storm). Himmelstrup: 1, 2, 3 & 4.‎

‎Aabenbart Skriftemaal. [Printed in: Fædrelandet 3die Aarg. Nr. 904. Søndagen den 12. Juni 1842, edt. Giødwad]. - [EXCEEDINGLY SCARCE FIRST PRINTING OF KIERKEGAARD'S FRIST PAPER IN ""THE FATHERLAND""]‎

‎(København), 1842. Large 4to (32 x 24, 8 cm). 2 columns to a page. Columns (7545)-7252, all containing Kierkegaard’s article. 2 ff. ‎

‎The exceedingly scarce original printing of the leaves of The Fatherland that contain Kierkgaard’s first publication in the paper, in which he would print all of his other newspaper-articles. AABENBART SKRIFTEMAAL is Kierkegaard’s first article in the paper Fædrelandet (The Fatherland), a paper that will later become of seminal importance to him and to Danish polemics in general. It also constitutes his fifth newspaper article, the first to appear after his earliest publications in Kjøbenhavns Flyvende Post, which were published before any of his books, and the first article pertaining to his pseudonymity. Kierkegaard kept returning to Aabenbart Skriftemaal, eg. in an unpublished article that he wrote in 1843, Opfordring, and also several years later, in his Journal (NB6:16), where he denotes Aabenbart Skriftemaal as a “signal shot” – a signal shot for the forthcoming period of his authorship, the pseudonymous period, that begins with Either-Or. Though the present paper is among Kierkegaard’s earliest writings, we already witness the distinct attitude to his authorship that would become so defining for his career. His earliest articles, although pseudonymously published, had been attributed to Kierkegaard, and he uses the present paper to refuse taking ownership of papers he had not published in his own name. “Thus “Public Confession” is noteworthy because it indicates just how early Kierkegaard shaped his authorial purpose.” (D. Anthony). “...I beg the good people who show an interest in me never to regard me as the author of anything that does not bear my name” (from Aabenbart Skriftemaal). Fædrelandet – litterally translated as ”The Fatherland” – was a Danish newspaper that was founded in 1834 and existed until 1882. In the beginning it appeared weekly, but in 1839, it began appearing daily. With its cultural and political contents, it soon became the leading paper of the national liberal opposition. The paper was the most important paper in Kierkegaard’s time and the one that more than any other influenced public opinion. During the first years of its existence, the paper had numerous different publishers and editors. It also ended up in numerous controversies with the censorship authorities, resulting in many trials and fines. From May 1841, the editors of the paper were Carl Ploug and J.F. Giødwad. The latter would come to play an enormous role in Kierkegaard’s authorship, as would The Fatherland itself. Giødwad was one of the very few people that Kierkegaard has ever characterized as a “personal friend” (SKS 21 214,10). It is very likely that this friendship was initiated in 1842, when Kierkegaard published his first paper in The Fatherland, Aabenbart Skriftemaal. We know that from the Christmas of 1842, Giødwad helps with the proof reading of Either-Or and is thus clearly one of the most trusted people in his life. As we shall see later, it was also Giødwad, who represented Kierkegaard in dealings with publishers and printers, when it had to do with the pseudonymous writings, thus protecting Kierkegaard’s pseudonymity and shielding him from the public. Giødwad himself said that Kierkegaard initially got a favourable impression of him when at some point he had dismissed a reader, who wished to know who was behind an anonymous paper published in The Fatherland (see A.D. Jørgensen’s statement from 1885 in Kirmmsee, Søren Kierkegaard truffet, p. 88). Kierkegaard trusted Giødwad completely, and thereby also The Fatherland. Apart from his four earliest papers in Kjøbenhavnsposten (see nr. 1 above), The Fatherland was the only paper Kierkegaard would publish in. During its entire existence, The Fatherland would be published in ca 2.000 copies, making it of the utmost scarcity today. Almost all copies of it have been destroyed, thrown out, worn, etc., and it is extremely rare on the market. The few issues we have at the moment are the only ones from this period that we have ever seen for sale. Himmelstrup: 15‎

‎Begrebet Angest. En simpel psychologisk=paapegende Overveielse i Retning af det dogmatiske Problem om Arvesynden. Af Vigilius Hafniensis. - [THE ONLY KNOWN COPY ON SPECIAL PAPER OF THE WORK THAT INTRODUCED ""ANGST"" IN PHILOSOPHY]‎

‎Kjøbenhavn, Reitzel, 1844. 8vo. (8), 184 pp. Bound in a black glitted full paper binding mimicking Kierkegaard’s gift-bindings. With Gothic gilt lettering and printing year to spine. Top edge gilt, otherwise uncut. Bound by Anker Kyster’s Eftf. 1958, more specifically Bent Andree, with his name in pencil under the book-binder stamp on front free end-paper. A bit of wear to extremities. One leaf loose. The copy is a most curious one. It was been washed and restored and then bound by one of Denmarks’ best bookbinders of all time, clearly under specific instructions to both keep it original, but to also reflect the typical bindings Kierkegaard had made. The copy is on fine, bright white vellum-paper (!), uncut, and bound with the original back-strip with the original printed title-label, preserving all of the printed text and with blank blue wrappers of the exact same paper as the back-strip. To our knowledge, The Concept of Anxiety did not appear in blue blank wrappers. It did, however, appear in the characteristic blue paper binding. The wrappers here bound in, however, do not match this paper exactly.‎

‎A unique copy of the scarce first edition of this classic of Existentialism, being the only known copy printed on fine paper. The Concept of Anxiety is one of Kierkgaard's greatest works, his primary psychological work, and the work with which ""Angst"" is introduced in philosophy. It is futhermore (together with Sixteen Unbuilding Discourses - the amputated Eighteen Upbuilding Discourses), the rarest of Kierkegaard's works, at is was printed in half as many copies as his other works. Not a single presentation-copy of the work is known to exist, no copy on special paper has been registered (before this), and merely a single copy of the work is listed in the auction catalogue of Kierkegaard’s books sold after he died (the whereabouts of this copy unknown). This could possibly be the hitherto unlocated copy from Kierkegaard’s own collection. Or it could be a copy he gave away, the only one to have ever surfaced. It is undoubtedly one or the other, seeing that it is on special vellumpaper, on which Kierkegard only had copies made for himself, for presentation, or for Regine.There could be several explanations for the mystery of the bound in wrappers: 1) they are new wrappers made to match the original spine with the original printed title-label" 2) they are the original blue paper taken off the original cardboard-boards in order to bind them in a binding that mimics a Kierkegaardpresentation-binding 3) they are unknown original wrappers, not previously registered for The Concept of Anxiety. It is this classic of Existentialism that introduced the notion of “Angst” (anxiety) in philosophy. If Kierkegaard had written nothing else, The Concept of Anxiety alone would have cemented him as one of the most important thinkers since antiquity. Nowhere else can one find an account of the concept of anxiety that comes close in importance to the one Kierkegaard gives in the present work. Using the Fall in the Garden of Eden as the foundation of the analysis, he succeeds in describing what no-one has been able to before or since. “Long before modern psychology had entered puberty, Kierkegaard unfurled advanced psychological concepts that in many senses were Freudian before Freud was around. In his primary psychological work, The Concept of Anxiety, he presents his detailed analyses of the relationship of anxiety to phenomena such as freedom, sexuality, original sin, and history.” (The Søren Kierkegaard Research Centre). Being one of his most important and influential philosophical works, The Concept of Anxiety is essential to all later existentialist writers. It was arguably this work that more than any other influenced Existentialism. The work bears a printed dedication to his beloved Poul Martin Møller, one of the most beautiful and moving dedications in a philosophical work. Poul Martin Møller was his philosophy professor, but more than that he was a moral mentor and one of a few people that Kierkegaard truly admired and cared for. Poul Martin Møller died in 1838, leaving almost no published works behind he is the only person outside of Kierkegaard’s immediate family (here including Regine), who had been honoured with a printed dedication in any of his books. Apart from the title Sixteen Upbuilding Discourses (the amputated Eighteen Upbuilding Discourses – without the two that were quickly sold out), The Concept of Anxiety is by far the scarcest of Kierkegaard’s works – “The Concept of Anxiety was only printed in 250 copies!” (Textspejle, p. 58, translated from Danish), which is ca half of most of the other works. It is, interestingly, the only one of the pseudonymous writings from the period that was reprinted, despite the poor sales numbers of the first issue. In the summer of 1847, when Reitzel buys the remainders of the first issue, a mere 165 copies of what is arguably now considered Kierkegaard’s most important work had been sold. The Concept of Anxiety is not only notorious for its pivotal importance in the history of philosophy and for essentially being the theoretical foundation of Existentialism among Kierkegaard collectors and bibliophiles in general, it is also notorious for its scarcity, having been printed in a mere ca 250 copies. Furthermore, like Fear and Trembling, not a single presentation-copy of the work is known to exist, nor had any copy printed on special paper ever been discovered (until now). A single copy of the work is listed in the auction catalogue of Kierkegaard’s books sold after he died. But the whereabouts of this copy is unknown (possibly until now). Himmelstrup 62.‎

‎Af en endnu Levendes Papirer. Udgivet mod hans Villie af S. Kjerkegaard. - [KIERKEGAARD'S OWN COPY, SPLENDIDLY BOUND FOR HIMSELF]‎

‎Kjøbenhavn, C. A. Reitzel, 1838. 8vo. X, (2), 79 pp. Magnificently bound for Kierkegaard himself in a patterned silver cloth binding with green leaves. All edges gilt. Printed on vellum-paper. The copy is noticeably larger than other copies of the book. Old owner’s inscription to inside of front board and small ex libris (Theodor Find) to the green front free end-paper. ‎

‎First edition, Kierkegaard’s own copy (from his own book collection, sold after his death), splendidly bound for himself, of his first work, which sews the seeds of his future career and initiates his philosophical production. It is in this famous review of Hans Christian Andersen as an author of novels, with a particular focus on his Only a Fiddler that Kierkegaard – the then 25 year-old theology student known only in a small academic circle, for his wit and sharp intelligence – puts forth his devastating criticism of Hans Christian Andersen – then 33 years old and already widely famous, Denmark’s other national hero and world-famous fairy tale-author. Even though the book is written as a polemic review, we already here witness Kierkegaard’s introduction of his emphasis on authentic individual existence which will continue throughout his entire production" as thus, From the Papers of one Still Living serves as a highly important introduction to Kierkegaard’s philosophical-ethical production. Kierkegaard points out that Hans Christian Andersen has not yet found himself and therefore cannot be a good author. This emphasis on authenticity and on the necessary first stage of the epic becomes an introduction to Kierkegaard’s famous theory of stages that he develops in his later works. He rejects the notion that environment is decisive in determining the fate of genius – the genius is a shaping subject, not a passive one formed by circumstances. Not one that needs to be nurtured and sheltered in order not to perish. The work was originally meant to be published as an article in the literary periodical Perseus, of which Johan Ludvig Heiberg was the editor. But the article grew too extensive, and the intended columns in the periodical were given to H.L. Martensen instead. Martensen’s article took up 70 pages and was about the idea of Faust, which vexed Kierkegaard, who had wanted to write about that subject himself. A contemporary note to the front free end-paper of the present copy states that it belonged to Kierkegaard himself and that it was bought at the auction of his books. The auction-protocol lists two copies of the work, both elaborately bound and with gilt edges (2957-2057a). Only a few months after Kierkegaard died (11th of November 1855), at the beginning of April 1856, his books were put up for sale. The sale was an event which created stir among scholars all over Denmark, and the event drew large crowds. Everyone wanted a piece of the recently deceased legend, and bidding was lively. The average price for the single items was nearly a rix-dollar a very high price for that time. As the old Herman Lynge wrote in a letter on the 22nd of May (The Royal Library, Recent Letters, D.), to the famous collector F.S. Bang, “At the sale of Dr. Søren Kierkegaard’s books everything went at very high prices, especially his own works, which brought 2 or 3 times the published prices”.” (Rohde Auction Catalogue, p. LVIJ). Many authors, philosophers, and scholars were present in the auction room, which was completely full, as was the Royal Library, who bought ca 80 lots. “Many of the books, not only his own, were paid for with much higher prices than in the book shops” (In Morgenposten no. 99, 30. April 1856, written by “P.”, translated from Danish). ""Some books were bought by libraries where they still are today, others were bought by private people, who sometimes wrote their names in the front of the books and thus, indirectly, stated that they came from Kierkegaard’s book collection… The edition (of the auction catalogue, 1967) registers all books from Kierkegaard’s book collection that it has hitherto been possible to identify – either in public or in private ownership… All in all, nearly a couple of hundred volumes – i.e. ca. 10 % – of the Kierkegaardian book collection is said to be rediscovered…"" (Rohde). Thus, today, books from Kierkegaard’s library are of the utmost scarcity. Only very few are still possible to acquire, and they hardly ever appear on the market. Himmelstrup 6‎

‎Om Begrebet Ironi med stadigt Hensyn til Sokrates. - [KIERKEGAARD'S DISSERTATION]‎

‎Kjøbenhavn, P.G. Philipsen, 1841. 8vo. Elegant later (ca. 1920) brown half calf with four raised bands and gilt morocco title-label to gilt spine. With Paul Rubow's ownership signature to front free end-paper. Clean and fresh both in- and externally, with no signs of wear to the exterior and only faint brown spots to a few pages. (4), 350 pp.‎

‎First edition of Kierkegaard's dissertation, as it appeared in the normal trade, without the preliminary Theses, which were intended for academics attending the defence. Kierkegaard’s dissertation constitutes the culmination of three years’ intensive studies of Socrates and “the true point of departure for Kierkegaard’s authorship” (Brandes). The work is of the utmost importance in Kierkegaard’s production, not only as his first academic treatise, but also because he here introduces several themes that will be addressed in his later works. Among these we find the question of defining the subject of cognition and self-knowledge of the subject. The maxim of “know thyself” will be a constant throughout his oeuvre, as is the theory of knowledge acquisition that he deals with here. The dissertation is also noteworthy in referencing many of Hegel’s theses in a not negative context, something that Kierkegaard himself would later note with disappointment and characterize as an early, uncritical use of Hegel. Another noteworthy feature is the fact that the thesis is written in Danish, which was unheard of at the time. Kierkegaard felt that Danish was a more suitable language for the thesis and had to petition the King in order to gain permission to submit it in Danish rather than Latin. This in itself contains as certain irony, as the young Kierkegaard was known to express himself poorly and very long-winded in written Danish. Both stylistically and thematically, Kierkegaard’s dissertation is a seedbed of his subsequent work and especially a clear precursor for his magnum opus Either-Or that is to be his next publication. The year 1841 is a momentous one in Kierkegaard’s life. It is the year that he completes his dissertation and commences his sojourn in Berlin, but it is also the defining year in his personal life, namely the year that he breaks off his engagement with Regine Olsen. And finally, it is the year that he begins writing Either-Or In many ways, Either-Or is born directly out of “The Concept of Irony” and is the work that brings the theory of Irony to life. Part One of the dissertation concentrates on Socrates as interpreted by Xenophon, Plato, and Aristophanes, with a word on Hegel and Hegelian categories. Part Two is a more synoptic discussion of the concept of irony in Kierkegaard’s categories, with examples from other philosophers. The work constitutes Kierkegaard’s attempt at understanding the role of irony in disrupting society, and with Socrates understood through Kierkegaard, we witness a whole new way of interpreting the world open before us. Wisdom is not necessarily fixed, and we ought to use Socratic ignorance to approach the world without the inherited bias of our cultures. Kierkegaard's dissertation appeared in two states – one with the four pages of “Theses”, for academics of the university, whereas the copies without the theses were intended for ordinary sale. These sales copies also do not have “Udgivet for Magistergraden” and “theologisk Candidat” on the title-page. Himmelstrup 8.‎

‎Frygt og Bæven. Dialektisk Lyrik af Johannes de Silentio. - [A SPLENDID COPY IN THE ORIGINAL BINDING]‎

‎Kjøbenhavn, Reitzel, 1843. 8vo. VIII, 135 pp. Completely uncut in the original blue cardboard binding. Spine and front hinge neatly restored, preserving part of the original printed title-label. Brownspotting as usual. Overall a very nice copy indeed. Old owners’ names to inside of front board (N. Pedersen 18/8 1879 and C. Wegener).‎

‎A splendid copy of one of Kierkegaard's most splendid and most sought-after works in the original binding, which is extremely rare. The spines of the original Kierkegaard cardboard bindings are always just thin paper directly glued on the block, making them extremely fragile, and the original paper-labels are hardly every preserved. Although Fear and Trembling is evidently printed in the same number of copies as almost all the other works by Kierkegaard (i.e. ca 525), this is one of the most difficult of his works to find in the first edition. Perhaps later research will show whether unsold copies were destroyed, which seems unlikely, however. We know that in July or August 1847, 321 copies of Fear and Trembling had been sold. What we also know is that it is highly sought-after by collectors and much less frequently on the market than most of Kierkegaard’s other works. It is very odd that not a single copy on special paper or in a gift-binding, presentation-copy or anything like that has been located or registered. For this title, a Kierkegaard-collector will have to make do with a “normal” copy. The present copy, in the original binding, and completely uncut, is the best copy we have come across over the last many decades. FEAR AND TREMBLING is one of Kierkegaard’s most important works. And it is also one of his most difficult. It deals – in forceful brevity – with the relationship between reason and faith and provides us with Kierkegaard’s most thorough exposition of the religious stage, which he considered the most meaningful form of existence. Setting the scene in his Preface with the punchy opening lines: “Not merely in the realm of commerce but in the world of ideas as well our age is organizing a regular clearance sale. Everything is to be had at such a bargain that it is questionable whether in the end there is anybody who will want to bid.”(Preface, Walter Lowrie’s translation, 1941), Kierkegaard begins the work with a rendering of the biblical tale of Abraham and Isak from the Old Testament, using it to illustrate how religious reasons can triumph over ethical. It is here that Kierkegaard introduces the “tragic hero” and contrasts it to the “Knight of Faith”, who both ignore their own wishes for a higher good. These two essential figures epitomize the ethical and the religious and pave the way for the understanding of these stages in Kierkegaard’s philosophy. It is arguably also here that the idea of the essential leap of faith is introduced for the first time. The Knight of Faith sacrifices his son at the command of God and thus sets aside an ethical demand in in order to attain a higher goal that exists beyond the ethical. This teleological suspension of the ethical requires a leap of faith that is only possible through faith in virtue of the absurd. In many ways, Fear and Trembling is the most forceful of Kierkegaard’s works, as is also indicated by the title. Kierkegaard himself also considered it one of his most significant productions and wrote in his posthumously published Notebooks: “Oh, once I am dead, Fear and Trembling alone will be enough for an imperishable name as an author. Then it will be read, translated into foreign languages as well. The reader will almost shrink from the frightful pathos in the book.” (NB 12:147, 1849). This splendidly dense work which so magnificently weaves together existential concerns with biblical interpretation is responsible for the introduction of many of the concepts that are most fundamental to Kierkegaard’s philosophy and is essential to the understanding of his thought. Not a single presentation-copy of the work is known to exist and none has ever been registered nor identified. We know from the auction catalogue that Kierkegaard had two copies in his collection, one in “dainty binding”, but neither copy has been located. Himmelstrup 48‎

‎Crainte et tremblement‎

‎Paris, Aubier - Montaigne, s.d. (vers 1935). Coll. "Philosophie de l'esprit". In-12 broché, xxvi-219 p. Introduction de Jean Wahl. Traduit du danois par P.H. Tisseau. Lyrique-Dialectique par Johannès de Silentio. Très bon état. ‎

‎Traité du désespoir‎

‎Nrf.1949.In-12 br.Pages non coupées.Couv.insolée.‎

‎Riens philosophiques‎

‎Nrf.1948.In-12 br.Pages non coupées.Couv.insolée.‎

‎Les Miettes Philosophiques.‎

‎Le Caillou Blanc, éditions du livre français. 1947. In-12. Br. 237 p. BE. Couverture défraichie. ‎

‎Etapes sur le chemin de la vie‎

‎Paris, Gallimard, coll. TEL, 1979 - in-12 broché, couv. illustrée, 424 pages - TBE‎

‎Etapes sur le chemin de la vie ‎

‎Paris, Gallimard, 1948. In-huit, broché, 426 pages. Table : In vino véritas - propos sur le mariage -- « coupable? »-« non coupable ? » -- lettre au lecteur.T.b.e.‎

‎In Vino Veritas -‎

‎Paris, Cavalier, 1933. In-12, broché, 185p. Exemplaire numéroté et tiré sur Alfa - Bon état, qqs rousseurs sur tranches et in texte sur 1ères et dernières pages‎

‎Ou bien.. Ou bien...‎

‎Paris, Gallimard, 1943. In-8 broché, xviii-629 p. Traduit du danois par F. et O. Prior et M. H. Guignot. Introduction de F. Brandt. Bon état.2e édition.‎

‎Journal (extraits), tome I, 1834-1846‎

‎Paris, NRF / Gallimard, coll. Les Essais XI, 1950 - in-12 broché, 270 pages - Bon état malgré papier jauni, qqs annotations au crayon (facilement effaçables)‎

‎Ou Bien.. Ou Bien... ‎

‎Gallimard, NRF. 1943. 7ème édition. In-8. Br. 627 p. non coupées. Bon état intérieur. Couv. déchirée et tachée.‎

‎Philosophiske Smuler eller en Smule Philosophi. Af Johannes Climacus. Udgivet af S. Kierkegaard. - [A REMARKABLY FINE COPY IN THE ORIGINAL WRAPPERS]‎

‎Kjøbenhavn, Reitzel, 1844. Small 8vo. 164 pp. Completely uncut in the original printed light green wrappers with the text of the title-page repeated inside a frame to front board, printed author and title to spine, and the printing year within the same repeated frame to the back board. An almost untouched copy with just a tiny crease to the front wrapper and a tiny little nick to lower capital at back hinge. A bit of brownspotting due to the quality of the paper. Housed in an elegant green half morocco box with gilt lines and Gothic gilt lettering to spine. Green marbled paper boards and gilt super ex libris to front board (Anker Kysters Eftf. And gilt by Hagel Olsen).‎

‎A truly remarkable copy of the first edition, in completely original condition, in the fragile original wrappers, virtually untouched. We have seen copies in the original wrappers before, but never in this state. This is a truly amazing survival. In uncut state, the work is a lot larger than regular copies – more than a cm taller and also significantly wider. By many, Philosophical Fragments is considered Kierkegaard’s actual religious-philosophical main work. It is the first book written under the important pseudonym Johannes Climacus, and it is here that Kierkegaard unfolds the tension between philosophy and religion in an attempt to find a historical onset for eternal consciousness, opposing the ideological thought inherited by Plato, Aristotle and Hegel. Through Climacus, Kierkegaard contrasts the paradoxes of Christianity with Greek and modern philosophical thinking. He begins with Greek Platonic philosophy, exploring the implications of venturing beyond the Socratic understanding of truth acquired through recollection to the Christian experience of acquiring truth through grace. It is in Philosophical Fragments that Kierkegaard’s polemic against the philosophy of Hegel becomes most obvious, portraying clearly for the first time how the salvation of man can only be found through the paradoxical inversion of the rational values of speculative philosophy and through the “leap of faith” in the crucified Christ. It is here that we have the very root of Existentialism. In his preface, Kierkegaard hints at a possible “sequel [to Philosophical Fragments] in 17 pieces” this sequel was published in 1846, namely as the 600 pages long Concluding Unscientific Postscript to the Philosophical Fragments (which is 83 pages long…). Only one single presentation-copy of Philosophical Fragments is known to exist. Himmelstrup: 62.‎