Erik-Jan Bos | Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique / French National Centre for Scientific Research (original) (raw)

Books by Erik-Jan Bos

Critical edition of Descartes' correspondence from the year 1643, with three additional essays on... more Critical edition of Descartes' correspondence from the year 1643, with three additional essays on the Utrecht Crisis, the 'Illustrious Brotherhood of Our Blessed Lady' in 's-Hertogenbosch, and Descartes, Elizabeth and Appolonius' Problem (last essay by Henk Bos). Includes a Calendar of 1643 and a Biographical Lexicon.

Edition of the manuscript "Verantwoordingh van Renatus Descartes," the Dutch translation of Desca... more Edition of the manuscript "Verantwoordingh van Renatus Descartes," the Dutch translation of Descartes's "Lettre aplogétique aux Magistrats d'Utrecht." Corrected and signed by Descartes. Sent to the Utrecht Municipality in February 1648. Transcription, introduction and annotation by Erik-Jan Bos

Papers by Erik-Jan Bos

Bulletin cartésien LIV, 2025

Short article relating to the Utrecht Quarrel. The first part is about the rediscovery of a lost ... more Short article relating to the Utrecht Quarrel. The first part is about the rediscovery of a lost book by Maarten Schoock, namely the open letter to Descartes: Epistola ad Renatum Des-Cartes. The second part is about the manuscripts in the Groninger Archieven related to Descartes' case against Schoock. These manuscripts were largely known to Adam and Tannery, who describe them as copies; in fact, however, they are autographs or autograph notes by Descartes himself.

Abstract In 1640 a curious book appeared at The Hague which vehemently attacked Descartes’ Discou... more Abstract
In 1640 a curious book appeared at The Hague which vehemently attacked Descartes’ Discours de la Méthode. The identity of the author, evidently an adherent of Paracelsian and Hermetic philosophy, remained unknown, until a clear indication was found in the Hartlib Papers. This article discloses the name of the person hiding behind the pseudonym Mercurius Cosmopolita, and sketches his life and works, including the book against Descartes: Pentalogos.

Erudition and the Republic of Letters, 2023

In the 1650s, two professors of philosophy at the University of Utrecht defended atomism. Interes... more In the 1650s, two professors of philosophy at the University of Utrecht defended atomism. Interestingly, one of them, Johannes de Bruyn, is considered to be a staunch Cartesian, while the other, Daniel Voet, was a neo-Aristotelian and strongly opposed to Descartes’s philosophy. This article examines this curious situation and analyses the theories of both professors. While converging with Gassendi on several crucial points, their theories relied mainly on other sources. Since De Bruyn’s atomistic view has never been studied before, the main part of the article is devoted to him and his sources. Surprisingly, it turns out that David Gorlaeus was a source of inspiration for De Bruyn’s development of a new type of Cartesianism.

Descartes in the Classroom: Teaching Cartesian Philosophy in the Early Modern Age, edited by Davide Cellamare and Mattia Mantovani, 2023

Erik-Jan Bos 1 Van der Horst, "De twee vroegste Series lectionum." 2 See below. Utrecht Universit... more Erik-Jan Bos 1 Van der Horst, "De twee vroegste Series lectionum." 2 See below. Utrecht University Library owns over 2,000 lecture notes; see Van der Horst, Catalogus. See also Van der Horst, "Collegedictaten." I thank Bart Jaski, curator of manuscripts, Utrecht University Library, for the information that there are no seventeenth-century lecture notes among the acquisitions since 1994. 3 As part of the ku Leuven Magister Dixit Project, Davide Cellamare (Nijmegen) and Mattia © The Authors | 2023 cartesian and anti-cartesian disputations and corollaries 147 This chapter investigates the reception and teaching of Cartesianism at Utrecht University between 1650 and 1670, based upon the disputations for and against Descartes, with special attention to the corollaries. Corollaries, usually a list of short propositions below the text of the disputation, may relate to the topic discussed in the disputation but do not necessarily relate to the said topic. Sometimes they address contemporary issues in philosophy and science, such as the Copernican system, Harvey's discovery of blood circulation, or Cartesian philosophy. Corollaries can supply information on current debates within the academy, even when the texts of the disputations themselves are silent on these topics. According to Descartes's classical biographer, Utrecht University was "born Cartesian".4 After the founding of the university in 1636, its first professor of philosophy was Henry Reneri (1593-1639), a close friend and follower of Descartes. Apparently, he discussed the Discourse and the Essays with his students, but his disputations show no trace of Cartesianism.5 In stark contrast, his colleague Henricus Regius (1598-1679), professor of medicine since 1638, openly taught Descartes's philosophy, and had it defended during ten public disputations in 1640 and 1641.6 It elicited a hostile response not just from the theologians, as should be underscored, but also from professors of philosophy and medicine. The subsequent ban on Cartesian philosophy in 1642 and the censure directed at Regius seemed to smother the introduction of Descartes's ideas at Utrecht University, but these were only temporary setbacks, for the New Philosophy made a resurgence in Utrecht disputations in the 1650s which culminated in the next decade. The main characters to whom we will turn our attention are the Cartesian Johannes De Bruyn (1620-1675) and the neo-Aristotelian Daniel Voet. In the same Faculty of Philosophy, they both struggled, on the one hand, with the philosophical tradition and the regulations of the academic senate and the Vroedschap, and, on the other, with the startling discoveries in science and medicine, as well as the rise of Cartesianism. On top of that, being mutually antagonistic, they struggled against each other, with De Bruyn in an underdog position at first, because he faced an anti-Cartesian majority at the university, led by Gisbertus Voet (Voetius) and Voet's sons Paul and Daniel. Mantovani (Leuven) are collecting and analysing the lecture notes by Cartesian professors in the seventeenth-century Dutch Republic and Leuven University. At present, the only articles published on Dutch Cartesian lecture notes are Verbeek, "Principia," and Cellamare, "A

Bulletin cartésien 51 (Archives de philosophie 85), 2022

Most details regarding the journey Descartes would have made through Italy are known only from Ba... more Most details regarding the journey Descartes would have made through Italy are known only from Baillet’s biography La vie de Monsieur Des-Cartes (1691, vol. I, pp. 117-128). According to Baillet, Descartes left Paris in September 1623, he travelled around in Italy for one and a half year, returning, via Lyon, in May 1625. Baillet has much to say about where he went and whom he met, but his narrative was never confirmed by independent evidence. For this reason some historians of philosophy decided not to put too much weight on Baillet’s story, and pretty much ignored it when discussing Descartes’ life or intellectual development, while others, taking Baillet more seriously, believe the long journey must have had an impact on the philosopher’s life and career. That Descartes did indeed go to Italy is beyond doubt, as clear indications to that effect can be gathered from his letters, but what is conspicuously absent in his letters is any information about which places he visited or whom he met. All we learn from the correspondence is that he did not like the climate there, nor the food.
Recently I have found evidence that casts light on Descartes’ journey to Italy. It compels us to reduce Descartes’ voyage to just six weeks, from late March 1625, when he left Paris, till early May 1625, when he arrived in Lyon. The historical documents that have turned up are an inventaire après décès, and an act drawn up before a notary in Lyon, both dating from 1625. Relevant passages from the first document is discussed below, and the complete text of the second document is given in an appendix. It is clear that Descartes never went to Venice, Loreto, and Rome.

The scientific revolution of the 17th century was driven by countless discoveries in Europe and o... more The scientific revolution of the 17th century was driven by countless discoveries in Europe and overseas in the observatory, in the library, in the workshop and in society at large. There was a dramatic increase in the amount of information, giving rise to new knowledge, theories and world images. But how were new elements of knowledge picked up, processed, disseminated and – ultimately – accepted in broad circles of the educated community? A consortium of universities, research institutes and cultural heritage institutions has started a project called CKCC1 to meet this research question, building a multidisciplinary collaboratory to analyze a machine-readable and growing corpus of letters of scholars who lived in the 17th-century Dutch Republic. Until the publication of the first scientific journals in the 1660s, letters were by far the most direct and important means of communication between intellectuals. Therefore the 17th-century Republic of Letters offers an ideal case for ex...

The Cambridge Descartes Lexicon, 2000

The Cambridge Descartes Lexicon (Lawrence Nolan ed.), 2000

British Journal for the History of Philosophy, 2004

The municipal archives of The Hague hold a small collection with personal papers of the Leiden ph... more The municipal archives of The Hague hold a small collection with personal papers of the Leiden physician Cornelis van Hogelande (1590-1662). Among Van Hogelande's papers we found the copies of two letters by his close friend Rene´Descartes. The first letter is without question the most important discovery: the letter was completely unknown and contains Descartes's unpublished judgement on a work by the Czech reformer Jan Amos Comenius. 1 Both copies lack an address, but there can be no doubt that the original letters were sent to Van Hogelande, because the second of the two letters was-for the greater part-already known and can be found in the standard edition of the correspondence by Adam and Tannery (AT III, 721-4). Addressed to Van Hogelande on 8 February 1640, it contains Descartes's judgement on a broadsheet by the English mathematician John Pell. 2 However, compared to the text published in AT, the copy in The Hague has an additional paragraph. Moreover, in it Descartes refers to the *We wish to thank the Gemeentearchief in The Hague for the kind permission to publish the letters of Descartes. We are much obliged to John Cottingham who readily agreed to translate the Latin letters into English. We also thank Theo Verbeek for his helpful comments on earlier drafts of this article. The edition of Descartes's works by Charles Adam and Paul Tannery (Paris: Vrin, 1964-74) is abbreviated AT. The Correspondance du P. Marin Mersenne

Les Passions de l'âme et leur réception philosophique (eds. G. Belgioioso and V. Carraud, 149-167), 2020

[PDF of the Pre-Print (complete article)]. Before the publication of the correspondence between ... more [PDF of the Pre-Print (complete article)].
Before the publication of the correspondence between Descartes and Princess Elisabeth of Bohemia by Clerselier in 1657, the philosophically and mathematically interesting letters exchanged between them circulated widely in manuscript. These are the first two letters by Descartes, elaborating on the Princess’ question on “la force qu’a l’âme de mouvoir le corps”, the two mathematical letters to the Princess, and finally Descartes’ letters on morals and the passions. Elisabeth’s part of the correspondence was not published by Clerselier, nor did it circulate in manuscript, but it has nevertheless been preserved in a handwritten copy. I will discus its provenance refuting a recently proposed hypothesis. The second part of my article is devoted to the mystery of the Latin Epistolae edition (1668). The circulation of the two mathematical letters supplies new information on the publishing history of the Latin translation of the first two volumes of Descartes’ correspondence published by Clerselier, a vexed question in Cartesian scholarship.

Descartes and Cartesianism. Essays in Honour of Desmond Clarke, S. Gaukroger and C. Wilson (eds.), 2017

Qu'est-ce qu'être cartésien ? (Éd. Delphine Kolesnik-Antoine), 2013

Starting with Descartes, Henricus Regius has been accused of being a dubious philosopher, at odds... more Starting with Descartes, Henricus Regius has been accused of being a dubious philosopher, at odds trying to conceal an atheistic materialism, a view that still resonates in modern literature. In this paper I investigate to which extent that accusation is justified. In my view, Regius’ appeal to Revelation to settle the dispute on the true nature of the human soul, is not the obvious move of a libertine facing theological inquisitors, nor does it imply philosophical incompetence. On the contrary, it is consistent with Regius’ theory of mind and in accordance with his own philosophical principles. This result supports the view, advanced in several recent studies, that Regius rightly concluded that Cartesian physics and medicine does not collapse without certain metaphysical truths.
English version of the article on Academia.eur.

Nederlands Archief voor Kerkgeschiedenis / Dutch Review of Church History, 1998

Erik-Jan Bos and F.G.M. Broeyer 1. Letters to Maarten Schoock from Gisbertus Voetius and Paulus ... more Erik-Jan Bos and F.G.M. Broeyer
1. Letters to Maarten Schoock from Gisbertus Voetius and Paulus Voet.
In April 1645, Maarten Schoock, professor of philosophy at the university of Groningen, declared that the Utrecht theologian Voetius and his accomplices had been responsible for the libel in Schoock's anti-Cartesian work Admiranda methodus (Utrecht 1643). In a futile attempt to safeguard himself against Voetius's prosecution, Schoock wrote a short defense, entitled Corte Memorie, in which he referred to several letters Voetius had written to him. This defense and four letters to Schoock have been rediscovered in the Utrecht Municipal Archives. They are published in this journal in two parts. In this issue we present Voetius's letter of 9 November 1641 o.s., and a letter by his eldest son Paulus Voet of 27 April 1645 o.s. Much as these two letters were not related to the Admiranda methodus, Schoock put them forward during his lawsuit with Voetius to show that Voetius's interference with the manuscript of the Admiranda methodus had not been an isolated incident. Letters written in Latin are accompanied by our Dutch translation.
2. Letters to Elisabeth and Paulus Reuffert from Deliana van Diest and Gisbertus Voetius.
We present here a letter written by Deliana van Diest, Gisbertus Voetius' wife, and a letter by Voetius. Deliana's letter is addressed to Elisabeth Reuffert and announces the death of her husband Paulus Voet. Voetius's letter is a letter of condolence to Paulus Reuffert (Elisabeth's father) on the death of his wife.
3. Inventory of the correspondence of Gisbertus Voetius.
This provisional inventory of Voetius's correspondence, mostly based on published sources, comprises 164 letters. Not included are open letters to Voetius, Voetius's letters of dedication and the letters published in J. Cramer (1932).

Nederlands Archief voor Kerkgeschiedenis / Dutch Review of Church History, Jan 1, 1999

We present here two letters of Voetius to Maarten Schoock, professor of philosophy at the univers... more We present here two letters of Voetius to Maarten Schoock, professor of philosophy at the university of Groningen. They almost exclusively treat both men's dispute with Descartes, and especially the proceedings the French philosopher instituted against Schoock because of his anti-Cartesian work Admiranda methodus (Utrecht 1643). The first letter (April 1644, published here for the first time), is of particular interest, for Voetius described in detail the reasons for publishing Admiranda methodus in it. The second one (21 January 1645 o.s., only partly known) is a letter of advice, or, as Descartes saw it, a shameless attempt to entice Schoock to give false evidence before his judges (AT VIIIB 248-249). The letters are in Latin, accompanied by our Dutch translation. The last document published here is Schoock's Corte memorie. The margins of this manuscript show Voetius's own comments.
Follows an addition to the inventory of Voetius’s correspondence.

Bulletin cartésien LIV, 2025

Erudition and the Republic of Letters, 2023

Descartes in the Classroom: Teaching Cartesian Philosophy in the Early Modern Age, edited by Davide Cellamare and Mattia Mantovani, 2023

Bulletin cartésien 51 (Archives de philosophie 85), 2022

The Cambridge Descartes Lexicon, 2000

The Cambridge Descartes Lexicon (Lawrence Nolan ed.), 2000

British Journal for the History of Philosophy, 2004

Les Passions de l'âme et leur réception philosophique (eds. G. Belgioioso and V. Carraud, 149-167), 2020

Descartes and Cartesianism. Essays in Honour of Desmond Clarke, S. Gaukroger and C. Wilson (eds.), 2017

Qu'est-ce qu'être cartésien ? (Éd. Delphine Kolesnik-Antoine), 2013

Nederlands Archief voor Kerkgeschiedenis / Dutch Review of Church History, 1998

Nederlands Archief voor Kerkgeschiedenis / Dutch Review of Church History, Jan 1, 1999

This document offers the Latin text and its English translation of Regius' letter to Scherertzius... more This document offers the Latin text and its English translation of Regius' letter to Scherertzius. The English translation is published in Erik-Jan Bos, 'Descartes and Regius on the Pineal Gland and Animal Spirits, and A Letter of Regius on the True Seat of the Soul', in Descartes and Cartesianism. Essays in Honour of Desmond Clarke, edited by S. Gaukroger and C. Wilson, Oxford University Press, 2017, 95–111 (109–111).

Descartes’ correspondence only really took off after his move to the United Provinces in 1629. Le... more Descartes’ correspondence only really took off after his move to the United Provinces in 1629. Letters written prior to that date are scarce, and among those texts some do not pertain to the correspondence at all or are probably not written by him. In this article I will point out these instances, and take a closer look at Descartes’ proper first (extant) letters, the correspondence with Beeckman. The second part of the article is entirely devoted to Étienne de Villebressieu, an elusive figure in Descartes’ life.
The research for this article was made possible by a grant from the National Endowment for the Humanities.

The published French translation of the article (ENS Lyon 2013) can be found at
https://books.openedition.org/enseditions/8832

Uit de briefwisseling die Huygens voerde met Descartes, en over Descartes, blijkt een grote en vo... more Uit de briefwisseling die Huygens voerde met Descartes, en over Descartes, blijkt een grote en voortdurende belangstelling van de eerste secretaris van de Stadhouder voor de Franse wijsgeer en wetenschapper. Deze lezing belicht op welke manieren Huygens Descartes s muleerde en beschermde, en hoe de filosoof hem wederdiensten bewees. Video-opname van de lezing: h ps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UuVH7T8JwxI

Program of a meeting discussing Descartes' correspondence, Toulouse, 17-19 October 2018. Universi... more Program of a meeting discussing Descartes' correspondence, Toulouse, 17-19 October 2018. Université Toulouse III (Paul Sabatier).

Séminaire Descartes, Sorbonne. Sur les éditions de la correspondance de Descartes. Paris, 10 octo... more Séminaire Descartes, Sorbonne. Sur les éditions de la correspondance de Descartes.
Paris, 10 octobre 2014.

“Les Passions de l'âme. Genesi, struttura e storia” (Lecce, 10-12 novembre 2014).

On the occasion of the colloque "Descartes in Cambridge" I will discuss the sources of Descartes... more On the occasion of the colloque "Descartes in Cambridge" I will discuss the sources of Descartes' correspondence, from an editor's point of view.
Cambridge, Sidney Sussex College, 26 September 2014.

Review of The Philosopher, the Priest, and the Painter: A Portrait of Descartes By Steven Nadler... more Review of
The Philosopher, the Priest, and the Painter: A Portrait of Descartes
By Steven Nadler
Princeton University Press, 2013

Isis, 2019

Review of Harold J. Cook. The Young Descartes: Nobility, Rumor, and War. Chicago/London: Universi... more Review of Harold J. Cook. The Young Descartes: Nobility, Rumor, and War. Chicago/London: University of Chicago Press, 2018.

The case studies in this volume juxtapose instances of knowledge exchange across a variety of fie... more The case studies in this volume juxtapose instances of knowledge exchange across a variety of fields usually studied in isolation: anthropology, medicine, botany, epigraphy, astronomy, geography, philosophy and chronology. In their letters, scientists and scholars tried to come to grips with the often unclear epistemological status of an ‘observation’, a term which covered a wide semantic field, ranging from acts of perceiving to generalized remarks on knowledge. Observations were associated with descriptions, transcriptions, copies, drawings, casts and coordinates, and they frequently took into account the natural, material, linguistic, historical, religious and social contexts. Early modern scholars were well aware of the transformations which knowledge could undergo in the process of being communicated and therefore stressed the need for autopsy, implying faithfulness (fides) and diligence (diligentia), to enhance the authority of observations. It was the specific character of Renaissance epistolography, more than the individual subjects discussed, which shaped the way information circulated. In the course of a correspondence, the narrative in which observations were communicated could be modified by adding implicit or explicit considerations and by relegating lists, drawings or tables containing ‘raw material’ to appendices, which recipients more often than not detached and filed separately. While letters were the prime medium for exchanging information, they have to be studied in relation to notebooks, drafts, attachments and printed works in order to appreciate fully how observations were communicated within the learned networks of Europe during the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries.

Conference announcement: New Readings of Descartes. A Decoding Descartes Conference. Rotterdam, ... more Conference announcement: New Readings of Descartes. A Decoding Descartes Conference.
Rotterdam, 7 and 8 June 2022.
Organised by Erasmus School of Philosophy, Erasmus University Rotterdam, The Netherlands.