MLR, 104.3, 2009 901 offersonly a short excerpt from a poem by one of them (p. 157). Linton does not directly confront the question of themale gender of nearly all her authors. Do more poems by women exist?Might those authors identified only by initials in the funeral pamphlets have been women, prevented by convention from publicly revealing their names? Are devotional songs to be excluded from the genre of epicedia7. (She mentions only one, p. 81.) Writing and disseminating devotional song textswas considered an acceptable activity forwomen, and they sometimes used such poems designed to be sung to a popular hymn melody in order to express theirwords of grief and consolation on the loss of a child, whether their own or that of another woman. See, for example, the songs on the deaths of children inAemilie Juliane von Schwarzburg-Rudolstadt, Geistliches Weiber-Aqua Vit (1683). The issues surrounding authorial gender deserve more discussion in this context. The book isbeautifully printed and painstakingly copy-edited; I encountered only a few typographical errors, and thesewere confined to the footnotes and appendices. The volume includes an appendix of short biographies of themany lesser-known poets cited, extensive primary and secondary bibliographies, and a useful index of names, places, and subjects. University of Iowa Judith P. Aikin Billigkeit: Literatur und Sozialethik in der deutschen Aufkl?rung. Ein Essay. By Wolfram Mauser. W?rzburg: K?nigshausen & Neumann. 2007. 250 pp. 29.80. ISBN 978-3-8260-3760-3. In his latestwork,Wolfram Mauser wants to raise awareness of a neglected value of theGerman Enlightenment. He argues thatBilligkeit is thekey to a cluster of values which shaped a distinctive middle-class moral outlook between the late seven teenth and the late eighteenth centuries.Within themiddle class, Billigkeit?equity' is the closest English concept?stood formutual respect, reciprocal recognition, readiness to compromise and to see the other person's point of view. In relation to authority, Billigkeit implicitly gained political force, since itsdemands and the habits ofmutual respect ran counter to the theory and practice of the absolutist state. Mauser calls his book an essay' and thus disarms expectations of a systematic account of his chosen topic. There are sections devoted to socio-historical analysis, to studies ofword-fields and the history ofwords, and to the discussion of liter ary works. Longer sections deal with Lessing's concept of criticism and Herder's philosophy of history. A closing chapter diagnoses a crisis of Billigkeit in the latter third of the eighteenth century and its replacement by a new, more individual istic set of values. Throughout Mauser draws out the relevance of his topic for the present. Billigkeit, he believes, has suffered from neglect not only from his torians of ideas; political philosophers, politicians, and citizens themselves would 902 Reviews do well, he maintains, to recover an awareness of Billigkeit as the core value of a liberal 'Sozialethik' which even in our day could do much to restore social cohe sion. Mauser has hit upon an important subject for the study of theAufkl?rung. As his previous work Konzepte aufgekl?rter Lebensf?hrung (W?rzburg: K?nigshausen & Neumann, 2000) also demonstrates, he has seen how much there is to be gained from examining specific concepts of themoral discourse of the period, at the next conceptual level down from the larger abstractions ofTugend' and 'Vernunft'.His examples leave no doubt thatBilligkeit was indeed recognized as a key value at the time and that appeals to Billigkeit were important in regulating social interactions within theworld of lettersand in civic society. There are, none the less, a number of problems with his argument. His historical claim, thatBilligkeit rose to prominence only at the end of the seventeenth century, and was replaced by etwas kategorial Neues' around 1800 (p. 214), gains plausibility only from the selection of examples he makes; these are too few to back up his case. Mauser's insistence that Billigkeit was claimed almost exclusively by themiddle class seems similarly flawed. Throughout, he is at pains to separate the moral ('sozialethisch') concept of Billigkeit from the legal concept of equity, which had a well-established place in Roman law and in early modern legal theory. This rigid...
Read full abstract