Introduction

The schoolbook shares certain aspects with books in general as regards the ordering of knowledge, support and information, creation, authorship, circulation, appropriation, but it also has particularities. Among other aspects, some important features include the purpose and the regulated production and use of this category of books, the protected circulation of the market dynamics, the forms, proof and cognizing of the reading of it. In historical terms, in the West, the schoolbook authorship regimes do not vary much from country to country, with progressive constraints associated with the scientific-pedagogical filtration towards school standardisation and innovation. Each printed copy always states the name of the publisher and the author. This information was provided alongside data that affirmed independence, namely by mentioning the scientific, professional, institutional (inspector, teacher) group of belonging, or qualifications that asserted recognition through commissioned prefaces, awards, distinctions. Some authors used the regulatory authorities to preserve copyright. It was not rare for authors and publishers to transcribe honourable statements and statistical data proving the demand for the book.

In the school context, in terms of the authorised and legitimised supply, in association with the authorship, translations and adaptations also appeared. The authorship of schoolbooks involved, albeit in a non-uniform and varying manner, the ownership of the knowledge that was being imparted; the institution of a pragmatism often translated into a method; the curricular progression; the organisation of the pedagogical-didactic action and learning orientation. The affirmation of the authorship was subject to stringent training, until the work was approved by the competent authorities. Simpler, but not necessarily less rigorous processes, were the translation and adaptation, which were frequently used in the Portuguese language versions.

Throughout the 18^th century, in the context of Illustration, and more towards the end of the century in the backdrop of the Western Revolution, recommendations and guidelines emerged about what a schoolbook should be. For Portugal, the inventories mention teaching books from the 16^th century, namely the Cartilhas. But it was with Nova Escola, written by Manuel de Andrade ^{Figueiredo, published in 1722}, that the school textbook began to have a layout and reading and learning orientation, specifically geared towards curricular progression and the pedagogical-didactic, school or domestic panorama. Nova Escola was a school teaching and learning book organised into lessons. It was for masters and contained contents and written exercises (which could be replicated for new exercises) aimed at the learners.

Throughout the 18^th century the publication of books solely geared towards teaching intensified. In 1791, in response to a request from the Convention, Condorcet published Cinq mémoires sur l’instruction publique, providing guidance and instructions about the early reading book geared towards pupils, and about the book aimed at the teachers. The schoolbook gained its configuration, authorship and editorial ownership in the mid-19^th century, fulfilling the double function of curricular support and a means of reading and information throughout life. Aimed at masters and pupils, the teaching guidelines are either integrated into the same volume, or come in a separate publication. The expansion of the publishing market, in the second half of the 19^th century, made the schoolbook the means of acculturation for the masses, as proven by Jean-Yves Mollier’s studies about the French publishing market.

To sum up, you may observe that the Western historical and school context in which the schoolbook emerged was associated to new reading practices - learning through books. In the first half of the 18^th century, publications of small books for meditation, recreation and scientific and technical learning had increased. The schoolbook emerged with common aspects and with specificity, namely in the configuration and in the modes of discourse, the regulation of authorship, approval and circulation, in the translation and adaptation. Tesouro de Meninos was one of the most widespread titles in different languages, adapted from country to country. These and other transformations inherent to authorship, translation and adaptation of the schoolbook gained substance and meaning when the book is approached as a text submitted to a hermeneutic of representation, authorship, circulation and appropriation, enlightened by the cultural history and seeking a historical-pedagogical perspective of school culture, namely with regard to the “common places”.

The emergence of the schoolbook

One of the first guidelines of books aimed at children and young readers was to provide instruction, information and education through reading, listening to the book being read out and learning by the book. As suggested by João Amós Coménio, it is possible to teach everything to everybody, provided that there was a method and adaptation. As such, printed materials were produced combining figures and names, ordered into a method, as exemplified by the Orbis Pictus.

François de Solignac Fenélon, in Aventuras de Telémaco, recreated educational situations and boxes which were sensitive to and intelligible by young readers, and to do so he frequently sought their opinion. This gave rise to a children’s reading book, written with the participation of the young readers and which would be translated and adapted into different languages. The Portuguese translation was carried out by Joaquim Joseph Caetano Pereira de Sousa, who added “some mythological and allegorical notes for the intelligence of the Poem” (SOUSA, 1788). The translator dedicated the translation to the “Sereníssimo Príncipe do Brasil”, who would become D. Pedro IV of Portugal and D. Pedro I of Brazil. In 1777, Aventuras de Diófanes, had been published in Lisbon, written by Dorothea Engrasia Tavareda Dalmira (pseudonym of Alexandre de Gusmão), imitating and commenting on Aventuras de Telémaco.

This method of writing, geared towards the young reader, was replicated and would result in collections of stories and traditional narratives, collected and adapted into French, English and German versions by consecrated authors, especially Charles Perrault. Through these adaptations, the old became new, modernising and adapting to the new readers. Recreating a modern context of adventure, exploration of nature and consecration of the human being, the holder of will and invention. Daniel Defoe published Robinson Crusoe in 1717, a story that Rousseau would recommend as a first book for children to read.

Taking a different approach, schoolbooks like Nova Escola para Aprender a ler, Escrever e Contar (1722), by Andrade de Figueiredo, were written for the master-adult aimed at the learner-child, who should replicate the master through imitation and practice. These books contained text and tables for exercises, which could be recast. Most of the catechisms, charters and other schoolbooks in the second half of the 18^th century contained text, explanation and exercises. The exercise tables were often reproduced by the masters, serving a collective of students. Small typographies were also produced that replicated the application materials.

The most frequent type of book integrated the different subjects, and was called escola (^{MAGALHÃES, 2011}, p. 141 e ss.). One of these books, which included writing and calculation tables, was Eschola Popular das primeiras letras, dividida em quatro partes, by Jerónimo Soares ^{Barbosa and published in 1796}. One can therefore infer that one of the lines behind the appearance of the schoolbook was the replication of the master’s book, in a simplified and practical way, often using the question-answer catechistic formula and containing memorisation and practice exercises for the pupil. The Catechisms and Cividade Textbooks derived partly from this model, adjusting the cause to the children’s world, but maintaining the ethical rigour and sentence formalisation of the test sheets.

A second orientation in the emergence of the schoolbook can be found in Condorcet, who as mentioned earlier, in response to the request from the Convention, in 1791 published Cinq mémoires sur l’instruction (CONDORCET, 2008). In the second memory exercise, on the common instruction for children, Condorcet included guidance and recommendations about the characteristics that an early reading book for pupils should contain. Following up and associated to this, but with its own edition, was the book for the teachers.

With regard to the pupil’s book, Condorcet (2008) warned against the trend of using foreign books, sometimes untranslated and which contained material that was unintelligible for the youngest readers. He therefore recommended “l’usage des livres dans lesquels on renfermerait une instruction appropriée aux premiers moments de l’éducation” (p. 112). He pointed out that it was not yet possible to read the simplest sentences without recognising the words in isolation and without knowing the syllables and letters. Hence, he suggested that the first part of the early reading book should contain a sequence of words that were intelligible for children, but which did not make sense. Next, small sentences would be shown made out of those words. These sentences should contain a meaning and provide the formulation of judgements. The words would be explained through reading and writing games. The second part of the early reading book would contain “courtes histoires morales, propres à fixer leur attention sur les premiers sentiments que, suivant l’ordre de la nature, ils doivent éprouver” (p. 113). The first sentiment transmitted should be that of the piety of animals and mankind. Attending to the need for conciliation between knowledge and moderation, Condorcet stated that “l’homme compatissant n’a pas besoin d’être éclairé pour être bon, et la plus simple raison lui suffit pour être vertueux” (p. 114). In the final part, the pupil’s book should also contain the decimal numbering system and other material.

Alongside that book was the corresponding book for masters and teachers, which consisted of “1. des remarques sur la méthode d’enseigner; 2. les éclaircissements nécessaires pour que les maîtres soient en état de répondre aux difficultés que les enfants peuvent proposer, aux questions qu’ils peuvent faire; 3. des définitions” (CONDORCET, 2008, p. 115). It was up to the masters to make sure that pupils learned precise definitions, gleaned from different readings. One of the chapters of the master’s book was the explanation of the set of unconnected words from the early reading book for the pupils. Condorcet believed that the combination of the two books ensured the uniformity of the teaching from school to school.

Having two books, one for the pupils and another one for the masters and teachers, in fulfilment of a principle of standardisation, because common practice in the academic world. Throughout the 19^th century, the creators of methods and authors of schoolbooks also began to write teachers’ books, of the type of master-books, scripts, vade mecum. In addition to the guides and didactic auxiliary material, the books for the masters and teachers fulfilled a pedagogical and standardisation function. Among other examples, one can point to the Systema Britanico de Educação: sendo hum completo Tratado de melhoramentos e invenções praticadas por José^{Lancaster (1823}). This Treatise contains figures, representing the inside of a classroom and the pupils organised by prefects. It also contains references to school organisation, furniture, materials, teaching materials, teaching methods, prizes, etc. A similar two-book approach was cultivated by António Feliciano de Castilho, creator and driver of the Método Português, also called Leitura Repentina, published in 1850, and for which Castilho associated a collection of Quadros para as Escolas de leitura pelo Método Português de Castilho (s.d.) and the Catálogo de Palavras e Contos. Método Repentino de Leitura (1865).

In contrast, the first editions of the Cartilha Maternal ou Arte de Leitura, written by João de ^{Deus, contained the explanation of each lesson in the body of the Booklet itself. In 1876}, the first two editions were published for the public, one of which was organised by C. J. A. de Madureira, Abade de Arcozelo, who applied the Method outlined in the Booklet (DEUS, 1876) in schools. One year later, the Quadros Parietais were published. But the two-book didactic approach, as regards the didactics and content, was resumed in 1906 with the publication by João de Deus Ramos of the Guia Prático e Theorico da Cartilha Maternal ou Arte de Leitura.

In all these publications there is a pedagogical and didactic orientation that binds the teachers and pupils into a system of knowledge and values, even if, from the editorial point of view, one can notice a differentiation between the book for the children and the book for the masters and teachers. They are articulated in a same regime of educability intrinsic to standardisation. Georges Patrick Sppeckaert, upon presenting Livres Scolaires d’Autrefois, states that “Les livres scolaires d’hier, quelle que soit l’appartenance philosophique des auteurs, voulaient enseigner la morale, le civisme, la bonté, l’entraide, l’idéal, l’acceptation de son destin” (SPPECKAERT, 1996, p. 11). In truth, all the schoolbooks aimed to simultaneously impart knowledge and practical advice for work and everyday tasks.

Reducing the editorial costs, but without neutralising the duality of the guidance provided to the masters and to the pupils (or to the pupils by the masters), the authors of the schoolbooks also used the prefaces to address the masters and the teachers. They were often informed about how the book was written, including the guiding principles and goals, and instructions were provided about how it should be used. In effect, overlapping i) author information, ii) justification for having a single book, integrating the curricular material which was previously taught separately, and iii) guidance to the masters, A. Lepigoché and CH. Seltensperger, authors of the Livre unique de sciences et d’agriculture, d’hygiène et d’économie domestique à l’École rurale (s.d.), addressed the preface to “Maitres et aux Maitresses”. After framing and justifying the rural teaching and advantages of having a single book, they claimed: “Les maîtres et les maîtresses qui mettront ce livre entre les mains de leurs élèves peuvent être sûrs que, à la fin de l’année scolaire, les enfants auront étudié toutes les grandes questions du programme de sciences” (^{SPEECKAERT, 1996}, p. 20). They also stated that the book tackled the main applications, from hygiene to domestic economics and all the questions of the agricultural programme.

The Livre unique de sciences et d’agriculture, d’hygiène et d’économie domestique à l’École rurale, by A. Lepigoché and CH. Seltensperger consists of 72 lessons and each lesson includes an explanation, summary, questionnaire, writing topic and test paper on a related problem for the exam. The authors do not hide the respective statutes, or the ownership of the knowledge. In a blend of legitimation and propaganda, Lepigoché presents himself as a primary education inspector, public instruction officer and gentleman of agricultural merit, and Seltensperger as an agronomy engineer, special agriculture teacher, officer of agricultural merit, and academia officer. These author distinctions reinforce the idea that the single book would end up becoming the most consolidated model of the school formalism and authority.

The ‘master-book’ proved an essential tool for educational centrism, disciplining the thinking and formalising the didactic action. The pedagogical-didactic manuals centred on teachers became a means of standardisation and institutionalisation. By accepting responsibility for teacher training as the Director of the Escuela Normal de Maestros de Sucre (Bolivia), between 1917 and 1919, António Faria de Vasconcelos, who had funded and managed a New School in Bierges between 1912 and 1914, systematised and published a teaching manual entitled Syllabus del curso de Dirección y Organización de las Escuelas in 1919. This manual, organised into lessons, included methodological ideas, applied straight away through the study of the syllabus itself and includes recapitulation, correction or application exercises, explanation of the new lesson, as applied through the guidance of the teacher. The topics of the lessons are, among others, management and organisation of schools, buildings, medical-pedagogical collaboration, spaces, furniture, timetables, programmes, subjects, textbooks, libraries, study visits, self-government, co-education. This Syllabus manual, ‘master-book’, had a big influence on the pedagogical and professional training of teachers and educators, especially in the formalisation of the curriculum in Primary Education Schools. When, at the start of the 1930s, Faria de Vasconcelos organised an Education Library, he followed those orientations closely.

Authorship and circulation of the schoolbook

From the 18^th century, in contrast to the uniformity of the compendium, a multitude of small books began to appear, and the reading guidance underpinning the schoolbook, combined with the new mode of reading - learning by the book - was associated to new practices of study, frequently used in the libraries (^{MAGALHÃES, 2018a} e 2018b). The schoolbook ordered knowledge and disciplined thinking, containing the essential and suggesting other reading sources. In response to this enlargement of knowledge and benefitting from technical improvements in printing and publishing, provided by the rotation of continuous paper and the insertion of typography in the final decades of the 19^th century, the publications of small books multiplied, organised into topical libraries and collections.

By the end of the 19^th century, the book and the periodical had become the foremost means of mediatic culture and acculturation of the masses. Between 1872 and 1889, the French publisher Armand Colin printed and sold 50 million books. In the middle of the 20^th century, with the audio-visual medium asserting itself and competing with print, the cultural massification was intensified and accelerated. Taking as a reference point the proliferation of the periodical and the book, Jean-Yves Mollier admits that the exponential growth of the industry and commerce of small books, from the second half of the 19^th century, necessarily led to the unification of the mental. Referring to the situation of the new reader, Mollier states that “Pour resistir à l’anomie, (…) l’homme doit trouver des repères, à la fois spatiaux et temporels, qui lui permettent de communiquer avec ses contemporains et même de communier avec leurs grandes émotions, patriotiques, nationalistes ou chauvines selon le cas” (MOLLIER, 2001, p. 7).

Also the massification of the schoolbook and the small book aimed at recreational, informational and regeneration readers, who had been growing exponentially since the final decades of the 19^th century, was associated with the new author and reader strategies; the massification of collections aimed at new readers; the creation of school libraries, mobile libraries and popular libraries; the improvements in the field of publishing, bookselling and the book market. One of the most radical innovations, in the book economy, was the introduction of the Universal Decimal Classification (UDC) system, disseminated from the United States of America.

As mentioned above, the main transformations of the schoolbook occurred in the processes of reading guidance, authorship, translation, adaptation and the publishing market. These transformations can be analysed in the light of cultural history and outline a historical-pedagogical perspective linked to school culture. At the base were the ‘common places’, which included good customs, notions of civility, good manners and urbanity, and to which were added notions of hygiene and practical knowledge.

Pragmatism, encyclopaedism and massification forced publishers to adapt to the new fields of knowledge and knowhow. One of the scientific domains where the typography innovations were most noticeable was in geography through the inclusion of formulas, maps and atlases - a mixture of cartographic and print systems. Biology and zoology required adaptation in the symbolisation and representation, incorporating figures, formulas, diagrams, text. Likewise, the fields of music, algebra and statistics needed specific symbol systems.

Linked to the ‘common places’ of an ethical, customary, moral, cultural and civilisational nature, represented in the form of sentences, biographies and small, virtuous, gestural, informative narratives, from the second half of the 18^th century books began to emerge with titles such as Tesouro, Tesouros de Meninos, Tesouro de Crianças e Adolescentes. Published first in French, Thesouro de Meninos, by Pedro Blanchard, was one of these encyclopaedic and moralising textbooks, which would be translated into and adapted for other languages, and into Portuguese in 1807 by Mateus José Costa. Some books were aimed specifically at boys or girls (e.g. Tesouro de meninas ou diálogos entre uma sábia ais e suas discípulas, in 1765, translated by Joaquim Inácio Frias) and others were geared towards both sexes (e.g. the L’Abbé Reyre volume, Le Trésor des Enfans et des Adolescens, ou Maximes, Traits d’Histoire et Fables Nouvelles en vers, propres a former l’Esprit et le Coeur de la Jeunesse, in 1844). The translation of these books, usually comprising of common knowledge and transversal ideas, but also including examples and matters of a national or regional nature, made it inevitable that they had to be adapted and to include content that made them into family books that would be accessible and intelligible to children and adolescents from different national and ethnocultural backgrounds.

The commitment to respect the original and introduce adaptations even led to the books varying from language to language: Tesouro de Infância, Tesouro de Meninos, Tesouro da Mocidade. In 1846, J. I. Roquete published the 3^rd edition of Tesouro da Mocidade, under the Casa label by J. P. Aillaud de Paris, the “Introduction” of which included the following statement:

much corrected and considerably improved from Thesouro da Mocidade Portugueza of the moral in Action. Selection of memorable facts and interesting anecdotes, chosen to inspire love for virtue, and to mould the heart and the spirit. Work extracted from the best national and foreign authors (…) offered to the Portuguese and Brazilian youth.

In the Preamble of that book, J. I. Roquete pointed out what had changed in relation to the 1^st edition (1836) and the 2^nd edition (which he published in 1838), always aimed at guiding children and young towards perfection and virtue; he also pointed out the reasons that moved him to decide to translate this Treatise.

In relation to Thesouro da Mocidade Portugueza e Brasileira (1846), in the 8^th corrected and improved edition, ^{Roquete (1875}) stated that, in comparison to other treatises, he considered this one “more adept to produce that important service, like selecting from the facts of History those in which virtue played the leading role, and from among the Anecdotes and Fables those that inculcated kindness and moral sensibility” (p. IX). Noteworthy as regards the authors and the question of adaptation is the information by Roquete that the Thesouro da Mocidade Portugueza e Brasileira assumes “a new form”, which he labelled “truly Portuguese”:

When, however, we undertake this task [translating this book into Portuguese], noticing that a proportion of the anecdotes were of little or no importance for the Portuguese, and also seeing that our history provides us with a huge collection of virtuous actions of all kinds, we do not hesitate, at any time, to embed those that in themselves inculcate a new and authentically Portuguese form of this book, which we entitle Thesouro da Mocidade Portugueza e Brasileira. (p. IX)

As such, in drawing up “a new form”, J. I. Roquete called unto himself the actual authorship of the book he published. The author explained the inclusion in the title of the reference to the Brazilian youth through the fact that the book “contained Doctrines, Examples and Anecdotes, which could be appropriated from all the classes, ages and conditions of society,” adding that the advantage “of containing herein what is most interesting in our history” (p. IX).

Another example of adaptation/creation was Ramalhetinho da Puerícia (1868), by Luiz Filipe Leite, the 8^th edition of which was published in 1874. This book was approved by the General Council of Public Instruction and was published by Livraria de Campos Júnior, in Lisbon. In the “Introduction”, Luiz Filipe Leite (1868) wrote:

my little friends. I picked these flowers for you from an English garden. This garden is a book made specifically for boys of your age. Its author is as much your friend as I am. Do you want to know his name? This good man is called Lindley Murray. His book has nearly sixty editions (…). I chose from this excellent work what I considered most convenient and pleasing to compose the Ramalhetinho that I offer you.

Subsequently, he justified and explained how he tailored and adapted each of the stories to Portugal, recreating Portuguese scenarios, namely in the “O Giraldinho” story, the action of which took place in the relocated region of Serra da Estrela. In the Prologue, Luiz Filipe Leite said that he had translated and adapted to Portuguese O Novo Amigo dos Meninos, by Leduc, in 1854.

In contrast to what happened with these Books/Treatises, holders of values, knowledge and transversal examples, the universality of which authorised the adaptation, the national language Grammar books, although sharing the general principles, comprised a singular, formalised and hierarchical framework in themselves. This was expressed by Jerónimo Soares ^{Barbosa (1822}), author of Gramática Filosófica da Língua Portuguesa:

The entirety of Particular and Rudimentary Grammar is to be truthful and precise in its definitions, simple in its rules, correct in its analogies, brief in its anomalies, and therefore easily understood by beginners; it should be grounded on general and reasoned Grammar. Because, elaborating on these general reasons and principles of the language, one can better transmit notions of the signals of ideas, discover all the analogies of a particular Language, and reduce them to many anomalies, which the ignorant consider as such, although they really are not. (p. IX-X)

These warnings from Jerónimo Soares Barbosa, who wrote the grammar books, albeit rudimentary and destined for teaching, have specific characteristics. On the one hand, they imply knowledge of the general principles and compliance with the grammatical principles of each language, meaning that, in view of the uniformity and formalism, the author’s capacity is conditioned and reproductive. On the other hand, the practical need to create application exercises, namely memorisation and practice tasks for the learners, requires knowledge and thoroughness not always attributed to the different authors.

The authorship of grammar books therefore raised problems as regards the linguistic nationalisation, without which it would not be representative, nor accepted as a school norm, and problems regarding its recreation, preventing plagiarism and guaranteeing the copyright in the creation of exercises. In this background, the author status attributed to Júlio Caldas Aulete is significant, who in 1845 began to publish a progressive collection of Portuguese Language school textbooks, ranging from Método Legográfico ou Cartilha Maternal to Selecta divided into three volumes. Caldas Aulete was also the author of a National Grammar Book, which had to be studied progressively, serving primary and secondary school education. Therefore, this is a fully accepted authorship mode, not only in the nationalisation of the language, but also in the formalisation and exercises. School grammar books were also created for the Brazilian language. The authorship of Brazilian schoolbooks was entrusted to the teachers of the Colégio Pedro II, in Rio de Janeiro.

Not entirely differing from the Grammar Books, the Civility textbooks were compositions that contained necessarily general and transversal aspects, and necessarily differentiating and national aspects. João Rosado de Villa-Lobos and Vasconcelos, translator into Portuguese of essential works of the Enlightenment, was the author of the Treatise entitled Perfeito Pedagogo na Arte de Educar a Mocidade. Em que se dão as regras da Policia, e Urbanidade Christã, conforme os usos, e costumes de Portugal, republished in 1816. If a slow and progressive education was impossible, it proposed an elementary civic education programme for comprehension and compliance with the Four Cardinal Virtues: prudence, justice, strength, moderation.

In 1906 Trindade Coelho published the Manual Político do Cidadão Português, which up to page 196 was an adapted translation of Instruction Civique by Numa Droz, the main disseminator of the democratic ideals in the city of Geneva (COELHO, 1906). In this same year, Trindade Coelho published Primeiras Noções de Educação Cívica, 1º e 2º grau.

Finally, another mode of authorship, composition and circulation of the schoolbook was introduced, through the O Livro das Creanças Portuguezas e Brazileiras (1909), coordinated by authors from Brazil and Portugal (D. João da Câmara; José António de Freitas; Azevedo, Maximiliano de Azevedo and Raúl Brandão). This book intended to safeguard the idea of patria, under the principle that “Portuguese and Brazilians are brothers, although born in different countries: brothers through our blood, language and aspirations” (p. 5). Brazil and Portugal will always walk alongside one another, and for the Portuguese, the idea of prosperity is linked to the idea of the grandeur of Brazil. This common message is based on a shared history, and as such the book is a representation of this fraternity, putting face to face heroes, writers, great men of the two countries, as well as “the great Brazilian patriot fertilisation grounds and elegant landscapes of the Portuguese terrain, which merge into the same admiration and same love” (p. 6). Nothing more representative and significant of how authorship, composition, circulation ensured a shared, individualised and autonomic appropriation and projection. These dimensions that cut through the complexity of the schoolbook find a significant representation in the cultural, educative and historical in this hybrid and mixed proposal.

Concluding

The schoolbook presents a specificity. It was basically a composition and adaptation, meaning that the questions of configuration, authorship, publication, circulation, and appropriation did not break away from books in general, but also were not a replication of books in general. There were specific aspects in the production, circulation and forms of access, as well as in how they were used and appropriated.

Therefore, there is a specificity that derives from the regulation and control of production and access, as well as the reading guidance. Upstream from the schoolbook is a scientific and cultural universe of which the book is a summary and mediation. The structure of the book brings order to reading. The schoolbook congregated and ordered school culture, conciliating knowledge, action and values. The schoolbooks published reflect the great scientific, pedagogical and curricular cycles.

With Enlighttenment and the Western Revolution, the small book emerged, associated to the reading strategy of ‘learning by books’. The schoolbook, regulated and standardised an authentic ‘master-book’ for the masters and learners, developed through the 19^th century. The proliferation of the schoolbook, the small book and the periodical are at the origin of the acculturation of the masses. Authorship, translation and adaptation of the schoolbook were processes that often overlapped one another, in a hybrid exercise of invention and composition. As such, invention and composition became operations that characterised the world of publication of schoolbooks.