Marx’s Library

From Old Beardo’s library (as listed in the MEGA), the following books related to India or the East India Company have underlining or marginalia by Marx, in blue or red pen:

Alexander, R[ichard]: The rise and progress of British opium smuggling:

the illegality of the East India Company’s monopoly of the drug; and its injurious effects upon India, China, and the commerce of Great Britain. Five letters addressed to the Right Honourable the Earl of Shaftesbury. 3. ed. rev. and enl. London: Judd and Glass, Soc. for „Suppressing Opium Smuggling” 1856. 80 S. Standort des Orig.: SAPMO/Bibl., Ma 916. Bibl.-Stempel: SPD-Bibl., 41647 (Kat. 1901, S. 46). – Zentralsekretariat der SED/Bibl. – IMLB/Bibl.

Marginalien von Marx (Tinte) S. 37, 38.

Korrektur von fremder Hand.

Bibliothek Marx.



[Crosthwaite, Charles Haukes Todd:] Notes on the north-western 261 provinces of India. By a district officer. London: Allen 1869. 160, 23 S. Standort des Orig.: RGA, f. 1, op. 1, d. 6355. Bibl.-Stempel: SPD-Bibl., 41556 (Kat. 1901, S. 257), Etikett: 705. – IMLB/Bibl. – IMLM/ZPA. Buchhändleretikett: Subscription Library, London.

Marginalien von Marx (Blaustift) S. 2-70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76-91, 92, 93, 94,

95, 96, 97, 98, 99, 100-107, 129-132, 133-135, 136-150, 152, 153-156,

157-159; (Grünstift) S. 129.

Einige Seiten mit Eselsohr.

Bibliothek Marx.



East Indian Tariff. The debate on the motion of Hugh Birley, Esq., 349 M . P . , respecting import duties on cotton manufactures. Delivered in the House of Commons, Tuesday, July 10, 1877. Extracted from „Hansard’s Parliamentary Debates”, vol. 235. London: Buck 1877. 24 S.

Standort des Orig.: RGA, f. 1, op. 1, d. 6454.

Bibl.-Stempel: SPD-Bibl., 41196 (Kat. 1901, S. 47). – Zentralsekretariat der

SED/Bibl. – IMLB/Bibl. – IMLM/ZPA.

Marginalien von Marx (Bleistift) S. 3, 4, 5, 6, 7; (Rotstift) S. 8-24.

Textverlust durch Buchbinderschnitt.

Bibliothek Marx.



Grant, Robert: A sketch of the history of the East-India Company, from its first formation to the passing of the Regulating Act of 1773; with a summary view of the changes which have taken place since that period in the internal administration of British India. London: Black, Parry, Hatchard 1813. 13, L I I I , 397 S. Standort des Orig.: RGA, f. 1, op. 1, d. 6502. Bibl.-Stempel: SPD-Bibl., 41311 (Kat. 1901, S. 255). – IMLB/Bibl. – IMLM/ZPA.

Marginalien von Marx (Blaustift) S. 80, 81; (Rotstift) S. 356, 357, 358, 360-363.

Bibliothek Marx.



Irwin, H[enry] Qrossby]: The garden of India; or chapters on Oudh 610 history and affairs. London: Allen 1880. 350, 36 S. Standort des Orig.: RGA, f. 1, op. 1, d. 6503. Bibl.-Stempel: SPD-Bibl., 41403 (Kat. 1901, S. 256), Etikett: 694. – IMLB/Bibl. – IMLM/ZPA. Widmung: Verfasser an ungenannten Adressaten (Schmutztitel).

Marginalien von Marx (Blau- und Grünstift) S. 16-18, 20-26, 27, 28-39, 40,

41-57, 60, 61, 62-79, 80, 81-84, 86, 87, 88-90, 91-94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99,

100, 101, 102, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 111-113, 114, 115,

116, 117, 118, 119, 120-127, 128, 129, 130, 131, 132, 133, 134, 135, 136,

137-139, 140, 141, 142-144, 145-155, 156, 157-160, 161, 162-167,

168-170, 171, 172, 173, 174-182, 183, 184-187, 188, 189, 191, 192, 193,

194-198, 199, 200, 201-204, 205, 206, 207, 208, 209-212, 213, 214, 215,

216-218, 219, 220, 221, 222-230, 231, 232, 233, 234, 235-238, 239, 240,

241, 242, 243-246, 247, 248, 249-261, 262-265, 266, 267, 268, 269-276,

277, 278-280, 281, 282-284, 285, 286, 287, 288, 289, 290, 291, 292, 293,

294, 295, 296, 297-302, 303, 304, 305, 306-309, 310, 311, 312, 313, 314,

315, 316, 318, 319, 320, 321-339, 340, 341, 342, 344, 345-348, 349, 350;

Annoncenteil: S. [1], [2], 7, 11, 12, 14, 15, 23, 26-29, 36, [40].

Einige Seiten mit Eselsohr.

Bibliothek Marx.



M[a]cCuUoch, J[ohn| R[amsay|: A dictionary, practical, theoretical, 815 and historical, of commerce and commercial navigation. Illustrated with maps and plans. A new ed., corr., enl. and improved. With a suppl. London: Longman, Brown, Green and Longmans 1852. XXIII, 1510, 32 S. Standort des Orig.: SAPMO/Bibl., 54/13140. Bibl.-Stempel: SPD-Bibl, 41345 (Kat. 1901, S. 45). – Zentralsekretariat der SED/Bibl. – IMLB/Bibl. Buchbinderetikett: Westley & Co London.

Wahrscheinlich Bibliothek Marx bzw. Engels.

Titel exzerpiert: Marx, 1852 (IISG, Marx-Engels-Nachlaß, В 52); 1853 (IISG,

Marx-Engels-Nachlaß, В 63).



Titel erwähnt: Marx: Revolution in China and in Europe (MEGAÇ 1/12, S. 149). – T h e East India Company—Its History and Results (MEGAÇ 1/12, S. 186-188, 190, 191). – Grundrisse der Kritik der politischen Ökonomie (MEGAÇ 11/1.2,707, 708). – Zur Kritik der politischen Ökonomie (Manuskript 1861-1863) (MEGAÇ И/ЗА, S. 1353; 3.5, S. 1763). – Ökonomische Manuskripte 1861-1865 (MEGAÇ II/4.2, S. 473). – Das Kapital. Erster Band (MEGAÇ 11/10,

  1. 138). – Le Capital (MEGAÇ II/7, S. 121, 230). – Capital (MEGAÇ Π/9,
  2. 130). – Κ. und



Sewell, Robert: The analytical history of India, from the earliest times to the abolition of the honourable East India Company in London: Allen 1870. XXVIII, 334 S. mit Tab. Standort des Orig.: RGA, f. 1, op. 1, d. 6498. Bibl.-Stempel: SPD-Bibl., 41734 (Kat. 1901, S. 271), Etikett: 693. – IMLB/Bibl. – IMLM/ZPA.

Marginalien von Marx (Rot-, Blaustift und Tinte) S. 3-7, 37, 38, 43, 45-47,

49-52, 53, 54-57, 60, 61, 66, 68, 69, 70, 71, 77-80, 85, 86, 88, 92, 94, 95, 96,

97, 98, 99-105, 106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 111, 112, 113, 114, 115, 116-119,

120, 121-126, 128, 129, 130, 131, 132-138, 139, 140-149, 150, 151, 152,

153-155, 156, 157-162, 163, 164-172, 173, 174-176, 177, 178, 179, 180,

181, 182-203, 204, 205, 206, 207, 208, 209, 210-213, 215, 216, 217-223,

224, 225-227, 228, 229-233, 234-237, 238, 239, 240, 241-248, 249, 250,

251, 252-255, 256, 257-280, 281, [284]-[312], 314-316, 318-322, 325-327,


Einige Seiten mit Eselsohr.

Bibliothek Marx.

Titel exzerpiert: Marx, 1879/1880 (IISG, Marx-Engels-Nachlaß, В 156).



Seymour, Henry: Waste lands of India. Speech in the House of Commons on the 12th May, 1863. With introd. and app. London: Ridgway 1864 XIII, 102 S. Standort des Orig.: RGA, f. 1, op. 1, d. 6297.

Bibl.-Stempel: SPD-Bibl., 41997 (Kat. 1901, S. 257). – IMLB/Bibl. – IMLM/ZPA.

Marginalien von Marx (Bleistift) Titelbl., S. II-XIII, 9-29, 31-33, 49-52, 53, 54,

55-62, 63, 64-70, 75-84, 87-97, 99; (Rotstift) S. 33-49.

Bibliothek Marx.




Destruction of weavers

Their bones will, Marx says, end up bleached on the plains of Bihar. Here Ranajit Guha in 1956 examines how colonial policy and corporation demands destroy livelihoods and skills fore generations to come. Some of the language may seem dated or unfamiliar I guess… but:

‘The Regulation on weavers,

framed by the Board of Trade in 1786, went further than this. But here also the proposed measure of improvement was administered strictly according to the commercial requirements of the Company. The Regulation provided for a number of legal safeguards favourable to the Companys weavers, but these represented no more than what was barely needed to ensure the regular and timely execution of contracts for investment. While the parochial labour of the textile producers of Bengal, thanks to the Company’s transactions, was being converted into an element of world economy, nothing was done to introduce a corresponding measure of improvement either in the technique or in the relations of production. The demands of a higher economic order were thus superimposed on a backward industrial organization without preparing the latter in any sense for such a function. There was nothing either in the nature of the East India Company or in Bengali society at the time which could satisfy the historical requirements of the situation. The result was that the Company, failing as it did to effect the release of the productive forces of native industry from feudal fetters, adopted the more facile solution of quarantine by isolating a part of the productive system from its original habitat and straitjiacketing it by the artificial organization of the English

factories. Thus, even before the indigenous industry of Bcngal had begun to wilt under the blasts that blew from Manchester in the first half of the nineteenth century, it was undermined at its very base due to the utter incompatibility between its mode of production and the nature of the market it was intended to serve’ (Guha 2009: 81-2).

From: The Small Voice of History: Collected Essays. Ranikhet can’t.: Permanent Black.

Kiwi, the imaginary ethnographer

this is, you know, pretty great.

Please visit the show on the theme of Imaginary Ethnography in Experimental Music and Sound on the web space of Jeu de Paume: Fourth Worlds
And don´t miss to check the interactive work Phantom Islands –  A Sonic Atlas by Andrew Pekler commissioned by Jeu de Paume.

Fourth Worlds – Imaginary Ethnography in Experimental Music and Sound

Commissioner: Stefanie Kiwi Menrath

While cultural mixing has been a reality of all societies since time immemorial, there also exists a long history of circumscribing cultures as separate and geographically localized entities. Ethnographic field recording functions as part of this history of positioning and differentiating music cultures in the way that it links sounds to localities and positions them within a cultural cartography. In recent decades, a number of artists have countered static notions of culture and ideas of a territorialisation of music and sound with critical strategies of imagination and the imaginary. Through their work they ask: What are the imaginations inherent in the documentary technique of ethnography? How does the modern technology of field recording perpetuate a Eurocentric perspective of culture? Can sonic speculation destabilize cultural essentialisms or stimulate critical counter-memories?

Composer and trumpeter Jon Hassell set the stage with his eponymous 1980 album Fourth World Vol. 1: Possible Musics (reissued in 2014): « I wanted the mental and geographical landscapes to be more indeterminate – not Indonesia, not Africa, not this or that »… « Something that could have existed if things were in an imaginary culture, growing up in an imaginary place with this imaginary music”. In Hassell’s music the notion of “Fourth World” creates an imaginary place for musical and cultural exchange: beyond the utopia of a conflict-free cultural melange or the dystopian clash of cultural forms, it offers to transcend merely additive notions of contact. Hassell’s “Fourth World” draws on the “otherworldly” quality of music as such: not as an extension of the literal, developmental three-world-model, but as an experimental exploration of the spatial and temporal references of music and sound.

Taking Hassell’s notion of Fourth World as a conceptual formation (not as a musical genre), « Fourth Worlds » (note the plural) turns its focus to a series of artistic approaches that navigate the history and present tense of violently colonial, playfully postmodern or brashly contemporary cultural differentiations. « Fourth Worlds » aims to resonate with transcultural sonic thinking that, as in Paul Gilroy’s Black Atlantic, elucidates the performative and mobilizing dimension of sound and the restless, recombinant qualities of diasporic cultures criss-crossing oceans and resisting monolithic notions of “roots”. In this context, imagination has also been rightly critiqued at length as an instrument of domination and “othering”: imagination plays its part in the spatiotemporal distancing from “other”, “traditional” or “ethnic” cultures – for example in the cartography of former “colonies” and “nation states” and in narratives of the “other”.
Imagination is central not only to this history but also plays a crucial role in contemporary practices of ethnography – be they applied to the field of art or in cultural studies. Strategies of imaginary ethnography think these fields together and methodically reassess imagination. Imaginary ethnography alludes to both the productive capacity of imagination and its reproductive elements: it relates to the “cultural imaginary “ as a negotiation of a vast archive of images and socially shared imaginations about “others”, but it also activates imagination as a creative capacity of making appear a new image of something that neither is nor was.

Taking this as its starting point, « Fourth Worlds » brings together a selection of musical and sound artists and theorists who question the discourse of “otherness” through speculation. Dubious origin myths, mock music archives and phantom atlases, counter-memories and digital diasporic nations as well as islands empathically tied by pacifism, imaginative travel journals, future archaeologies or reconstructions of soon to be lost worlds – the pieces selected for this exhibition project musical and artistic counterstrategies to the ethnographic urge of fixing cultures to places.


The requirement imposed upon untenured ‘early career’ scholars to target only alleged “quality” publications is academic narrowcasting. Zines fall between the cracks of experiment and necessity. Over time necessity produces conformity. A conformity encouraged by pressures of dubious provenance, a consequence of the new privatisation championed by parasite aggregator companies like Elsevier, and Taylor and Francis that prefer not to employ many people (as is the way of platform capitalism) and so engineer elite sector data compliance through simplification and regularity of product – electronic proletarianisation, insofar as this enables algorithmic automation (full luxury uniformity, replicant writing and dalek alliegences)….

scamming journalographica (trinketization at large)

Was helping a colleague find a place for a journal article. I thought a one day turnaround was rapid – its unlikely the article was read, only the abstract (and even then misapprehended). What seems to be going on is a funnelling system designed to entrap younger researchers into open access pay to publish (even after not being paid to write):

For future reference (the tricks and traps in publishing a getting more and more dubious).

Article is sent to journal. A day later the article is praised by the editor but regrettably not suitable for the journal, but perhaps could be placed in x series. Two days later, a personal message from some assistant editor of an previously unheard of series:

Dear L xxxx, I think your paper could be of particular relevance to Cogent Social Sciences (indexed in Web of Science Emerging Sources Citation Index (ESCI), Scopus, International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS), Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ), amongst others), and I would be very pleased should you decide to take us up on this offer. Please email with your existing manuscript ID number (this can be found in the subject line of this email) to automatically transfer your manuscript, or if you have any further queries. Please also let us know which Cogent journal you would like to transfer to in this email. I look forward to hearing from you.

The message is signed, the links check out, Taylor and Francis are not exactly pretending to be completely altruistic – but I find it very dubious that younger researchers are offered this. I’ve never had such a letter, and frankly, if I’d got one I would kick off much more than you can see in this little squib about my colleague (who rightly already had questioned this ‘model’.

A few seconds’ search about Cogenta yields some other squibs, well expressed:

But in looking at the original journal, I noticed this crazy business model they have. The journal, Cogent Social Sciences, is an open-access outlet published by Cogent OA. It charges $1350 to publish an article, unless you don’t have $1350, in which case they’ll take some unspecified minimum.
Okay, so far it sounds like every other scammy “peer-reviewed” open access journal. But wait. Cogent OA, it turns out, is owned by Taylor & Francis, one of the largest academic publishers. Taylor & Francis owns Routledge, for instance, and publishes Economy and Society, Environmental Sociology, and Justice Quarterly, to pick a few I’ve heard of.
Cogent OA has a FAQ that conveniently asks, “What is the relationship between Cogent OA and Taylor & Francis?” Here’s the answer (bold is mine):
Cogent OA is part of the Taylor & Francis Group, benefitting from the resources and experiences of a major publisher, but operates independently from the Taylor & Francis and Routledge imprints.
Taylor & Francis and Routledge publish a number of fully open access journals, under the Taylor & Francis Open and Routledge Open imprints. Cogent OA publishes the Cogent Series of multidisciplinary, digital open access journals.
Together, we also provide authors with the option of transferring any sound manuscript to a journal in the Cogent Series if it is unsuitable for the original Taylor & Francis/Routledge journals, providing benefits to authors, reviewers, editors and readers.
So get this: If your article gets rejected from one of our regular journals, we’ll automatically forward it to one of our crappy interdisciplinary pay-to-play journals, where we’ll gladly take your (or your funder’s or institution’s) money to publish it after a cursory “peer review”. That is a new one to me.


Keep in mind this happens just a month after Sweden made the impressive move to cancel contracts with Elsevier (not renew them, not quite the same) and that follows France, and indeed various controversial aspects of so-called open access (as opposed to property ownership v squatting or v access to all by all for all etc). See The Scientist here and THE here (the latter is paywalled – the original article from THE, how apposite).

Open access or not – both are now worse.

sweden cancells Elsevier

(screen grab from Por la ilusión de un Ministerio de Ciencia)

PS. Contrary to some views I’ve heard out and about, Sci-hub is still operating. Search around and you can find a live link/proxy – though this is never an official recommendation. Pay the labourer.


PPS. in the interests of Fairness (!) here is the Cogenta position on payments. Of course no self-respecting institution is going to fork out a subsidy for you. Discounts for world bank designated low-income apply – but since when did designation mean extorted? – ahh, oops, there goes the rhetoric of fairness. Ah well, I suppose the rhetoric of freedom had been bashed enough in the following:

Freedom Article Publishing Charges
Freedom Article Publishing Charges, pioneered by Cogent OA, allow authors to choose how much to contribute towards the publication of their research in an open access journal.

Authors with funding, institutional support, or from commercial organizations should select the recommended Article Publishing Charge (APC) of $1350.

Authors without direct funding/support should talk to their librarian and faculty about options that may be available:

Your institution may be part of the Taylor & Francis pre-payment membership scheme, which also covers Cogent OA publications. So, your APC may already be covered.
Alternatively, most funding bodies will allow authors to use part of their research grant to cover the cost of article publishing charges.
Cogent OA operates a Freedom APC model; whereby, if you don’t have funds available to you, you can choose to pay what you can. In order to support sustainable open access publishing, a minimum APC applies to ensure we cover the costs of the peer-review process, copyediting, typesetting, publication on our website, marketing, and indexing in major databases. To ensure the integrity of peer review, our team of editors and reviewers receive no information about payments at any stage.