T158. The opposed theory/practice and moral/literary pairs remain. The initial Against fragment is not merged into the next sentence.
T479. The parenthetic manuscript description is a distinct second paragraph. The first nominal Contre and moral/literary contrast remain without an invented bibliographical title.
T159. The parenthetic description remains a separate source paragraph. It is not converted into a title or identified as a particular surviving manuscript.
T160. The hypothetical comparison and repeated action remain, including the source’s final period rather than an added question mark. A nature is not replaced by a newly specified soul or human character.
T161. The quoted Latin Solatia rerum remains unattributed; Consolations of things keeps its genitive without deciding whether things furnish consolation or are what one is consoled for. The following thoughts console us for things and books console us for people take de as introducing what calls for consolation; us expresses the implicit recipient without identifying a sufferer. In the latter sentence considered alone, des hommes could also mean some people as a direct object. The parallel with things and the next entry’s pleasures-from-books/sorrows-from-people contrast favor the retained reading, but do not eliminate that grammatical alternative. The infinitive instruction and dash remain.
T481. Only Solatia rerum. is italic within roman quotation marks. The infinitive, dash, repeated books and consolation constructions remain; des is not expanded into a uniquely assigned grammatical relation. No source attribution is supplied.
S1. Source editor’s annotation This thought is not in the notebook, but on a torn, undated scrap of paper. I am not sure that it should be placed precisely here. I nevertheless assign it the date May 24, 1812, because of its analogy with the preceding thought, which is itself dated in the notebook. After “it escapes me and,” the sheet is torn.
T162. The superlatives, opposed books/people, acknowledgment of harshness and final unfinished conjunction remain. The source ends with an ellipsis after et , then its raised note call, then a separate full stop. English retains the same arrangement, leaving four consecutive dots when the call is omitted from plain text; it is and, not etc. Beaunier’s separate apparatus explains a torn undated sheet and his provisional placement; its assigned May 24 is not an original entry date.
T164. The first-person uncertainty and assigned date belong to Beaunier’s apparatus, not Joubert’s text. The torn endpoint is not completed.
T482. The parallel superlatives and opposed books/people remain. The source ends et... with raised call 1 followed by a separate baseline period; removing the call from the body leaves the four consecutive dots, with the call anchored before the final one. It does not print etc. The source apparatus describes an undated torn slip and a tentative placement/date inferred by the editor. No May 24 date is assigned as an authorial main-text date.
T483. One roman apparatus paragraph. The editor’s uncertainty, undated torn slip, analogical May 24, 1812 assignment and exact quoted torn ending remain; this is not an authorial date.
S2. Source editor’s annotation Because of the analogy between the thoughts, I am tempted to attach to this May 24, 1812 a separate sheet, whose text follows: “Taste, naturally the enemy of what is obscure. — An overly sustained exercise of thought ultimately impairs reason, if the pleasures of the imagination do not divert and in some way refresh it.” And Joubert adds: “Powder and pomade at Mr. Tillier’s, perfumer, rue de la Limace , at the corner of the rue des Bourdonnois , the wigmaker’s house.”
T163. The infinitive inquiry, repeated every and metaphorical flight remain. Immoderate follows the French adjective after essor ; its broader possible relation to the paired activities is not expanded. Wears follows the source’s singular use and reads distributively after every...every. No new explanation of mental exhaustion is supplied.
T165. Beaunier’s provisional association, two distinct quoted portions and practical address remain within this separate apparatus paragraph. The taste fragment is not completed. The pleasures of imagination divert and refresh reason, the referent of both French la pronouns. Tillier , Limace and Bourdonnois retain the source’s forms without an independently identified shop or modern address. The qualified source spelling raffraichissent , with double f and no certified circumflex, remains in French.
T484. The infinitive fragment, two tout formulations and singular use remain. Raised call 2 precedes the final period; the separate-paper material quoted in its note is not appended as new main paragraphs.
T485. One roman apparatus paragraph containing two distinct quotations. The date is the source editor’s tentative analogical assignment, not an added authorial heading. The source has raffraichissent with double f ; the mark over i is dot-like, not a certified circumflex. The qualified literal spelling is retained. Distrayent and the initial plain A remain. Tillier , Limace and Bourdonnois are retained without modern address normalization or expansion.
S1. Source editor’s annotation Everything that follows, under the date May 1, 1812, comes from several undated sheets that form a series: on this basis, in dating one, I date the others. The one I date contains this thought of Plato’s: “Light is the shadow of God,” a thought also found in the notebook under May 1. In the notebook it is not attributed to Plato. But under that same date, May 1, at the end of the notebook, there is this announcement: “May 1, 1812. Plato.” some quotations from Plato follow.
T166. The leading ellipsis, coercive prescription, Politics fragment and printed reference remain. Grandees expresses social rank without moral praise. [Marry] and [people] interpret the residues as épouser and peuple . [Ours] reads Les […]tres contextually as Les nôtres , taking the next Our grandees as support; autres , others, is also compatible with the surviving ending. The broader English bracket includes the intact French article, which has no separate counterpart in ours. Perses remains an unlocated abbreviated reference; no title or edition is supplied. Beaunier’s May 1 assignment belongs to his separate apparatus, not a recovered authorial date.
T175. Beaunier assigns the first six entries on source page 721 to May 1, 1812 by association and sequence, although the separate sheets are undated and the main heading’s day is damaged. His first-person inference remains separate from Joubert’s text. The notebook occurrence lacks Plato’s name, while the separate-paper occurrence supplies it; the later Plato announcement is another explicitly distinguished fact. English keeps the lower-case some after the quotation as the source does with suivent .
T486. Full page and original-resolution left strips inspected. The day before mai is lost; the source editor’s May 1 assignment in apparatus 1 is not a recovered authorial date. Its scope is this and the following five entries. Embélir retains the printed acute and one l . The damaged wrapped ending n’épou[…]r and the residues […]tres / […]uple do not certify the missing letters; épouser , nôtres and peuple are contextual possibilities only. The opening ellipsis and unexpanded Perses reference remain.
T487. The editor assigns May 1, 1812 by analogy and sequence to six entries on otherwise undated separate leaves. This is an editorial assignment, not recovery of the damaged main date or a date printed on each leaf. The first three er components are raised in 1ᵉʳ ; the final quoted 1er has baseline letters. The lower-case suivent after the quotation remains. The left initials in feuillets /date /lumière /la are abraded; the surviving strokes support the selected readings but their complete contours cannot be certified.
S2. Source editor’s annotation Here, this notation: “Sp. 2. ”
T167. The unperformed actions and their two values for the will remain. [Discovery] renders contextual découverte from […]couverte . Step forward renders progrès without adding a theory of moral progress.
T176. The opaque Sp. 2. remains unexpanded, with its numeral and punctuation. No particular work or notebook is identified.
S3. Source editor’s annotation Likewise: “Spᵗ γ , 224.”
T168. The attribution is Joubert’s reported claim; the exact maxim has not been securely located in Plato. Beaunier separately distinguishes this attribution from an unattributed occurrence in the dated notebook. [Beautiful] renders contextual beau from […]eau . The source’s exclamation, note call and separate full stop are retained in that order; the plain-text form therefore ends !. rather than silently deleting either mark.
T177. The small raised t and provisional γ -shaped symbol remain as transcribed. The latter’s identity and language are undetermined; it is not certified as a Greek letter or numeral. No work, book or section is inferred from the notation.
T491. Spᵗ has a small raised t . The following damaged symbol is represented provisionally by γ for its forked upper strokes and detached descending stem; its identity and language are undetermined, and no numeral or reference expansion is asserted.