I know that there is a 1965 volume containing the Euler/Goldbach correspondence, but I'm interested in looking at the original manuscripts. I'm not finding anything at University of Basel or Berlin-Brandenburg Academy of Sciences. Any help would be appreciated!
2
-
$\begingroup$ The Euler's correspondence is at eulerarchive.maa.org/correspondence. Unfortunately, it seems that the originals manuscripts are not there. $\endgroup$– Leandro VendraminCommented Feb 10, 2012 at 14:50
-
$\begingroup$ Better scans at Correspondance mathématique et physique de quelques célèbres géomètres du XVIIIème siècle, St.-Pétersbourg, 1843. I:CXXI, 673 p.; II:XXIII, 713 p. ZBL0155.00702. This includes 3 handwritten fac-similes on pp. 131, 138, 233. $\endgroup$– Francois ZieglerCommented Nov 11, 2019 at 5:32
Add a comment
|
2 Answers
$\begingroup$
$\endgroup$
2
Leonhardi Euleri Opera omnia: Descriptio commercii epistolici, Volume 1 gives detailed information where the original letters are, or at least were when the book was written) (I take it from your question you know of some partial printed/edited versions available at the link mentioned in a comment). Most of them are in Russia (more specifically to a large extent in the archive of the academy of science of St. Petersburg and another archive in Moscow, something like 'central state archive for old documents'; the book is not in English and I do not know the official names so this is my translation/description of the name; exact names might also have changed as that book was written when the USSR existed).
I do not know whether some scans are online. However it seems that the publication of the respective volume of the Opera Omnia containing the full correspondance is imminent or already happened (I found a page where it said sheduled for 2011).
$\begingroup$
$\endgroup$
1
The Euler-Goldbach correspondence has been included in the Euler Archive, part of the MAA digital library, at:
http://eulerarchive.maa.org/correspondence/correspondents/Goldbach.html
-
$\begingroup$ and this improves on Leandro's comment because ... ? $\endgroup$ Commented Oct 24, 2012 at 6:14