Printing Spinoza. A Descriptive Bibliography of the Works Published in the Seventeenth Century. (original) (raw)
Related papers
This paper concerns the identification of the hitherto unknown printers of the works of Benedictus de Spinoza (1632-77). For centuries the identity of these printers has remained a mystery. The publisher Jan Rieuwertsz, or the printer Christoffel Cunradus, were often mistakenly mentioned as printer of the works of the seventeenth-century Dutch philosopher. These assumptions are incorrect. Despite several studies published in the last decades, the true identity of the printer was still unknown. In this paper we will describe how we were able to identify Spinoza's anonymous printers by means of analytical bibliography. The identity of printers can be established by their usage of unique printing types, initials and ornaments. By comparing printing materials of known printers to unidentified samples, anonymous works can be ascribed to a certain printer. In seventeenth-century books a decorated initial is often used to start the text. This initial belongs to a certain printer and by comparing different prints of similar initials in detail, small differences may be found. These differences can be caused by damages of the initial concerned, such as small cracks. If these differences are consistent over different prints, one can ascribe certain works to the same printer. By such research the Amsterdam-based printers Daniel Bakkamude and Herman Aeltsz can be identified as the printers of the two earliest published works of Spinoza. His most famous works, Tractatus Theologico-politicus and Opera Posthuma (including the Ethica), were printed by another Amsterdam-based printer: Israël de Paull (1632-80). Preface An anonymously printed book is a particular challenge to the historian. Even though the object is tangibly present, a great part of its context is missing.
Uncovering Spinoza's Printers by Means of Bibliographical Research
This paper concerns the identification of the hitherto unknown printers of the works of Benedic-tus de Spinoza (1632-77). For centuries the identity of these printers has remained a mystery. The publisher Jan Rieuwertsz, or the printer Christoffel Cunradus, were often mistakenly mentioned as printer of the works of the seventeenth-century Dutch philosopher. These assumptions are incorrect. Despite several studies published in the last decades, the true identity of the printer was still unknown. In this paper we will describe how we were able to identify Spinoza's anonymous printers by means of analytical bibliography. The identity of printers can be established by their usage of unique printing types, initials and ornaments. By comparing printing materials of known printers to unidentified samples, anonymous works can be ascribed to a certain printer. In seventeenth-century books a decorated initial is often used to start the text. This initial belongs to a certain printer and by comparing different prints of similar initials in detail, small differences may be found. These differences can be caused by damages of the initial concerned, such as small cracks. If these differences are consistent over different prints, one can ascribe certain works to the same printer. By such research the Amsterdam-based printers Daniel Bakkamude and Herman Aeltsz can be identified as the printers of the two earliest published works of Spinoza. His most famous works, Tractatus Theologico-politicus and Opera Posthuma (including the Ethica), were printed by another Amsterdam-based printer: Israël de Paull (1632-80). Preface An anonymously printed book is a particular challenge to the historian. Even though the object is tangibly present, a great part of its context is missing.
Spinoza as an Expounder, Critic, and ‘Reformer’, of Descartes
In the literature on Spinoza, accounts of why he wrote his first book -the Principles of Cartesian Philosophy (1663), and of its intellectual impact, are usually rather brief and straightforward. Spinoza's Principia philosophiae cartesianae (1663) or the [Beginselen van de cartesiaanse wijsbgeerte] as the expanded Dutch version of 1664 is entitled -the only book to appear openly under his own name during his life-time -was at first, in the mid and later 1660s, invariably taken as being an authentically Cartesian work , and in this way it is usually also interpreted by scholars in recent times. Especially during the interval between 1663 and the appearance of the Tractatus Theologico-Politicus, in 1670, it counted, particularly in the Netherlands, Germany, Switzerland and Scandinavia, as one of the most authoritative and important commentaries on Descartes's philosophy. Likewise, it is again usually considered in recent times a work which simultaneously sets out to expound and defend Descartes' system while at the same time endeavouring to resolve difficulties which Descartes left to one side. 1 It is conceived as 'basically a textbook in the Cartesian philosophy', as Nadler calls it, 2 and a tool for teaching Cartesianism to advanced students.
2022
Spinoza’s Theological-Political Treatise first appeared, anonymously, in 1670. After the publication of the Opera Posthuma (1677), few scholars took the trouble to take the work seriously. In his famous History of Philosophy, Hegel only devoted a few lines to the work, caustically describing it as a mere predecessor of contemporary Biblical criticism. In the early 20th century, Gebhardt deemed it a pamphlet written as an intervention in the political-ecclesiastical controversies of the Republican Era of Johan de Witt, which ended with violent death by the Hague mob. In the 21st century, Verbeek outlined its inconsistencies and named it ‘badly organized and—let us admit it—without a clear and recognizable focus’. Notwithstanding this benign neglect, in the past five decades the TTP has finally emerged from the shadow of the Ethics. In the wake of the growing interest in the political philosophy of Spinoza in France and Italy and the study of the historical significance of Radical Enlightenment by Jonathan Israel, recent studies of the TTP have focused on the context of the Dutch Republic, but also explored the work’s broader philosophical relevance. This commemorative book offers a style guide of the various recent approaches to the TTP, placing the work in its historical context, exploring its Medieval and Early Modern sources, assessing its philosophical (in)coherence, and, finally, its critical relevance in a globalized world, in Brazil, Iran, and in times of enduring authoritarianism and fake news.
Reconstruction of the Spinoza revival in the Netherlands in the second part of the 19 th century
There are several hypotheses about the revival of the ideas of Spinoza in the Netherlands in the nineteenth century, see , and . This paper will focus on this revival. To make clear why this revival could take place I will discuss the reading of the texts of Spinoza by one man, Johannes van Vloten, who was an important publicist and propagator of Spinoza`s ideas in the second part of the nineteenth century. In this paper I will demonstrate that his reading of the texts was not a timeless exercise but was embedded in the time and place where he lived in. This method of historical reading of a certain text was propagated by the sociologist Pierre Bourdieu. I use the ideas of Bourdieu when I look at the reception of the philosophical text of Spinoza by Van Vloten. The historical reading that Bourdieu propagates says that one not should read a philosophical text a-historically, outside time and place. According to Bourdieu, pure philosophy doesn`t exist. In order to be able to interpret a philosophical text from a certain time in history it is necessary to look at the field of perception in that period. This also applies to discussions of the work of earlier philosophes. The questions in this case are: why was van Vloten interested in the ideas of Spinoza, what was his place in the social and political context of his time and and which ideas from the original text did he embrace. All what was read in Spinoza In the nineteenth century by Van Vloten was a historical interpretation of the original texts written in the seventeenth century.
Spinoza's Theological-Political Treatise (1670-2020): Commemorating a Long-Forgotten Masterpiece
Philosophies, 2021
This article is the introduction to a special issue edited by Henri Krop and Pooyan Tamimi Arab on Spinoza's TTP, containing nine articles all available open access. See: https://www.mdpi.com/journal/philosophies/special\_issues/Spinoza\_theological\_political\_treatise Summary introduction: In entitling this Special Issue of Philosophies, commemorating the publication of the Tractatus Theologico-Politicus (hereafter TTP) 350 years ago, ‘a long-forgotten masterpiece’, we acknowledge our debt to Edwin Curley, who in the 1990s wrote two papers called ‘Notes on a Neglected Masterpiece’ [1,2]. The title raises three questions, which this introduction will try to answer. Why, after three decades of intense interest, was the widely diffused TTP forgotten for so long? Why did scholars begin to study the TTP once again after 1850? And finally, why was the TTP acknowledged as a philosophical masterpiece from the 1960s onwards, and one which is still worth studying?