In two minds. -- Sometimes I curse the workload created by our systems of peer-review. This morning alone I did three referee reports. And I was over the moon when I was finally able to return to reading Simmel. Brilliant man. -- But wait: Wouldn't he be a million times more convincing if he had presented his arguments in a clear and accessible form, and with appropriate references to the relevant contemporaneous literature? Was it really a good practice for him to send his handwritten paper--without any quality-checks--straight to the printer?