Here it is in a caption from the Dalziel’s illustrated Goldsmith (1865). Definitely a literary affectation in this case, pointing to the C18th origins of the text. The text proper is printed with a short s, so it’s just the caption that uses this archaic form

I’ve seen it persist in handwriting well into the 1860s

I can already hear the tech bros calling me a luddite: here it is with no paywall I think app.theneweuropean.co.uk/story/133185...

Very interesting thread! Showing it to my husband and son (both physicists)

One of the greatest scholars of illustration, and a genuinely lovely person. We will miss him.

Thank you — now I have to save up to buy it 😂

Don’t get me wrong: I’m not arguing in favour of AI generated lit. Just making the case that human lit is highly complex, especially in terms of what comes from where. Of course AI ignores the authorial ‘human experience’: it’s not a human. But that’s not to say that there is no reader experience

Agree with ethical concerns, but it’s not that simple because ALL literature (AI and human) is a product of ‘collective’ intelligence/knowledge, and is (consciously and unconsciously) ‘ripped off’ with or without credit. That’s the nature of literature: it’s a ‘tissue of quotations’ to quote Barthes

I’ve touched on this, and literary tourism in general, in relation to Shakespeare’s birthplace here: www.pennpress.org/978081222337...