Une correspondance entre deux humanistes. Gian Vincenzo Pinelli , Claude Dupuy , Anna Maria Raugei
dan Avramov on "Letter Writing and the Management of Scientific Controversy: The Correspondence of Henry Oldenburg (1661-77)." These papers also indicate the importance of letters for publication to predispose a reader. Letters could yield an intellectual response as well as emotional reaction. Published letters had a large readership. Also, letters were tools, to solve specific communication dilemmas or to present scientific findings and to handle controversies. Much correspondence would gradually appear as articles in scientific journals. The final part, "Literary Fame and Scientific Reputation," has papers by Karl A.E. Enekel on "Die Grundlegung humanistischer Selbstprasentation im Brief-Corpus: Francesco Petrarcas Familiarium rerum libriXXIV," Lisa Jardine on "Before Clarissa: Erasmus, 'Letters of Obscure Men,' and Epistolary Fictions," Edward V. George on "Conceal or Disclose? The Limits of Self-Representation in the Letters of Juan Luis Vives," Philip J. Ford on "Self-Presentation in the Published Correspondence of George Buchanan," and Adam Mosley on "Tycho Brahe's Epistolae Astronomicae: A Reappraisal." These correspondences indicate how fame and scientific reputation were achieved by the exchange of letters. There was an equation of letters with fame. The goal was the "Republic of Letters" whose members were classical and patristic authors as well as the present and future generations of authors and intellectuals. Further, A. Mosley differs with Edward Rosen on an interpretation of a phrase in one of Tycho's letters (452). A thorough and accurate index of names befits the outstanding quality of scholarship in this volume. Without exception, the papers with abundant footnotes indicate extensive research on the many aspects of early modern letters. Each author has given careful study to his subject in light of this new approach to evaluate these letter collections. It is hoped that this work will alert scholars to examine many other letter collections and thus contribute to the growing interest and research in the history of the ars dictaminis and the ars epistolandi which will yield more editions and studies and perhaps even the founding of the proposed LETS, the Letters and Epistolary Theory Society. For J. IJsewijn and all those departed and present, this work is a major contribution to the study of epistolography in the Neo-Latin culture of the Renaissance. EMIL J. POLAK Queensborough Community College, City University of New York