Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Letter from Spinoza to Lodewijk Meijer

26 July 1663

  • Published:
Philosophia Aims and scope Submit manuscript

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Bibliography

  1. Carl Gebhardt wrote in 1924 (passage translated from the German): “The search made by W. Meijer for further Spinoza letters has unfortunately remained unsuccessful; my own efforts to enrich our knowledge of Spinoza's correspondence have likewise all failed.” (Spinoza,Opera. Edited by Carl Gebhardt under the auspices of the Heidelberg Academy of Sciences [1925], Vol. IV, p. 381. — Hereafter cited asOpera.)

  2. Nachbildung der im Jahre 1902 noch erhaltenen eigenhändigen Briefe des Benedictus Despinoza, edited by W. Meijer. The Hague, 1903. (Limited edition of 200 copies). This edition actually reproduces facsimiles of only eleven originals. Two other letters (Ep. XII and LXIX) were still extant in the 19th century, but had disappeared when Meijer prepared his facsimile edition. There is, however, a lithographic reproduction of Ep. LXIX, published by H.W. Tydeman in theUtrechtsche Volks-Almanak for 1844, between pages 160 and 161. Meijer regarded this lithography as a quasi-original and included it in facsimile as the twelfth Spinoza autograph. (Cf. W. Meijer,op. cit.,The Hague, 1903. “Erläuterungen zu den facsimilierten Briefen des Benedictus Despinoza; A: Allgemeine Bemerkungen,” p. 1.) A communication from F. Akkerman, Groningen, indicates that, of the two originals known to have been privately owned in Berlin prior to the two world wars, one (Ep. XXIII) is now preserved in the State Library for Prussian Cultural Heritage, West Berlin; the other (Ep. LXXII), auctioned in 1917, cannot be traced at this time.

  3. The letter is in the Manuscript Department (under call number G×18) of the Library of the University of Amsterdam.

  4. Opera, IV Ep. XIII (pp. 63–69) and Ep. XV (pp. 72–73).

  5. RENATI DES CARTES/PRINCIPIORUM/PHILOSOPHIAE/Pars I, & II,/More Geometrico demonstratae/PER/BENEDICTUM de SPINOZA Amstelodamensem./Accesserunt Ejusdem/COGITATA METAPHYSICA,/in quibus difficiliores, quae tam in parte Metaphysices generali, quàm/speciali occurrunt, quaestiones breviter explicantur./[Fig.]/AMSTELODAMI,/Apud JOHANNEM RIEWERTS, in vico vulgò dicto, de Dirk/van Assensteeg, sub signo Martyrologii. 1663. 40.

  6. C. Louise Thijssen-Schoute,Lodewijk Meyer en diens verhouding tot Descartes en Spinoza. [With summary in French.] Leiden, 1954, pp. 8–9. (Mededelingen vanwege het Spinozahuis [Bulletin of The Spinoza House Society], No. 11.)

  7. Stanislaus von Dunin-Borkowski,Spinoza. Vol. 3:Aus den Tagen Spinozas, Part 2:Das neue Leben. Münster, Westphalia, 1935, p. 98.

  8. See Spinoza's letter to Simon de Vries of late February 1663 (Ep. IX,Opera, IV, p. 142): “Nec est quod Caseario invideas. Nullus nempe mihi magis odiosus, nec a quo magis cavere curavi quam ab ipso quamobrem te omnesque notos monitos vellem ne ipsi meas opiniones communicetis nisi ubi ad maturiorem aetatem pervenerit...” [You have no cause to envy Casearius. Really, he causes me a great deal of unpleasantness, and never have I taken more care to be heedful than in his case, so that I would like you and all acquaintances to be cautioned not to communicate to him my views until such time as he will have reached a more mature age.] Also see the aforementioned letter to Oldenburg (cf. Note 4): “...quem ego cuidam juveni, quem meas opiniones apertè docere nolebam, antehac dictaveram” [... which I had dictated earlier to a young man whom I did not wish to teach my views].

  9. Kuno Fischer,Geschichte der neueren Philosophie, Vol. 2:Spinozas Leben, Werke und Lehre, 4th ed., rev. Heidelberg, 1898. (In this edition, Fischer deals in detail with Freudenthal's reaction; see note on pp. 306–310.)

  10. J. Freudenthal, “Spinoza und die Scholastik”, in:Philosophische Aufsätze, E. Zeller gewidmet. Leipzig, 1887, pp. 98–99.

  11. Spinoza,Oeuvres. Translation, comments and notes by Ch. Appuhn. [New ed., rev.] Vol. I, p. 227, Note 4. Paris, 1964.

  12. My sincere appreciation goes to Dr. F.F. Blok, Institute of Neophilology and Neo-Latin, Amsterdam, who has been most helpful in establishing the text and with the translation from Latin, and to F. Akkerman, Classical Institute, University of Groningen, for his valuable advice.

  13. When preparing the Dutch edition of this paper [Brief van Spinoza aan Lodewijk Meijer, 26 juli 1663. Amsterdam: University Library, 1975], I hesitated about the meaning of “exemplar” and supposed at first that Spinoza might have seen proofs. Having since had the pleasure of receiving a communication with detailed documentation from Mr. F.A. Janssen, Krommenie — who has strongly influenced my opinions in this respect — I am now satisfied that the term “exemplar” can only refer to the manuscript copy submitted to the printer for typesetting, it being most unlikely that proofs were sent to Spinoza. It is difficult to communicate the evidence within the scope of this contribution. For a contemporary reference to the meaning of “exemplar”, cf., e.g., J.A. Comenius,Orbis sensualium pictus. Hoc est omnium fundamentalium in mundo rerum et in vita actionum pictura et nomenclatura./Die sichtbare Welt. Das ist aller vornemsten Welt-Dinge und Lebens-Verrichtungen Vorbildung und Benahmung, Nuremberg, 1658, p. 190 (leaf M7, verso). For the question of proofs, cf. L. Voet,The Golden Compasses. A History and Evaluation of the Printing and Publishing Activities of the Officina Plantiniana at Antwerp. Vol. II. Amsterdam, 1972, pp. 300–301.

  14. Cf. Gebhardt, “Textgestaltung,”Opera, I, p. 610.

  15. Opera, I, p. 233, line 33.

  16. Examples of translations examined:

  17. René Descartes' Prinzipien der Philosophie, erster und zweiter Theil, in geometrischer Weise begründet durch Benedict von Spinoza aus Amsterdam. Mit einem Anhang: Metaphysische Gedanken des Letztern... Translated and annotated by J.J. Kirchmann. Berlin, 1871, p. 100. (Philosophische Bibliothek, Vol. 41.)

  18. B. de Spinoza's sämmtliche Werke, aus dem lateinische, mit einer Lebensgeschichte, by Berthold Auerbach. Vol. I, 2nd ed. Stuttgart, 1871, p. 88.

  19. The Principles of Descartes Philosophy by Benedictus de Spinoza (The Philosopher's Earliest Work). Translated from the Latin with an introduction by Halbert Hains Britan. La Salle, Ill., 1961, p. 116. (Reprint of the 1905 edition.)

  20. Baruch Spinoza,Earlier Philosophical Writings: The Cartesian Principles and Thoughts on Metaphysics. Translated by Frank A. Hayes with an introduction by David Bidney. Indianapolis, Ind., 1963, p. 108. (The Library of Liberal Arts, No. 16)

  21. Spinoza,Oeuvres. Translation, comments and notes by Ch. Appuhn. [New ed., rev.] Vol. I. Paris, 1964, p. 337. (Originally published in 1905.)

  22. Opera, I, p. 234, line 28.

  23. This also applies to the change fromEi to Si, Opera, I, p. 236, line 16.

  24. Amsterdam, University Library (2 copies); The Hague, Royal Library (3 copies); Leeuwarden, Provincial Library; Rijnsburg, Library of The Spinoza House Society; Baarn, private collection of Menno Hertzberger; Nieuwkoop, Messrs. De Graaf, antiquarian booksellers; Paris, Bibloithèque Nationale (3 copies); Bonn, University Library; Munich, Municipal Library (2 copies); Hanover, State Library of Lower Saxony; Göttingen, Municipal and University Library; Jerusalem, University Library; Washington, D.C., Library of Congress (2 copies). Not examined: London, British Library (2 copies); Cincinnati, Hebrew Union College Library; East Berlin, German City Library; Tübingen, University Library.

  25. Benedicti de Spinoza Opera quotquot reperta sunt. Edited by J. van Vloten and J.P.N. Land. 2nd ed., Vol. III. The Hague, 1895, pp. 192–193.

  26. Opera, I. p. 271, lines 29–30. It is of interest to note the remark of Dunin-Borkowski,op. cit. Spinoza. Vol. 3:Aude den Tagen Spinozas, Part 2:Das neue Leben. Münster, Westphalia, 1935, p. 136, on the reaction of Professor A. Heereboort, of Leiden, to the theories of the Spanish philosopher Benedict Pereyra on this question. Here we may possibly have the background to explain Meijer's reluctance to publish this assertion.

  27. Opera, I, p. 185, lines 4–5.

  28. Opera, I, p. 264, lines 10–13.

  29. Only in the copy No. 1815 B 36 of the Amsterdam University Library are the Leaves Q1 and Q4, R1, R2, R3 and R4 pasted on strips. These leaves cover part of the text of Chapters VIII and X. Remarkably, however, the text is printed from the same type as the other copies examined by me, where there is no question of any cancels.

  30. B. Wielenga,Spinoza's “Cogitata Metaphysica” als Anhang zu seiner Darstellung der cartesianischen Prinzipienlehre. Heidelberg, 1899. p. 8. [Doctoral thesis].

  31. Ep. XIII: “... Hac nempe occasione forte aliqui, qui in meâ patriâ partas tenent, reperientur, qui caetera, quae scripsi, atque pro meis agnosco, desiderabunt videre; adeóque curabunt, ut ea extra omne incommodi peridulum communis juris facere possim ...” [For perhaps on this occasion persons will be found who in my native country hold the highest offices, and who will wish to see the other things which I have written and acknowledge as my own work; and who will then see that I can publish them without any risk of inconvenience.]

  32. Brieven van en aan Benedictus de Spinoza benevens des schrijvers Betoog over het zuivere denken. Translated from the Latin by W. Meijer. Amsterdam, 1897, p. 82. (Klassieke Schrijvers, Vol. 44; Spinoza's Works, Vol. III.)

  33. This translation actually offers more than the original; Spinoza corrected, changed and expanded the text in many places. Cf. Gebhardt, “Textgestaltung,”Opera, 1, pp. 611–612. — The two minor changes on pp. 93 and 94 of the Latin edition are indeed incorporated in this translation; the more influential changes which Meijer had proposed in Chapters VIII and X of theCogitata Metaphysica were evidently approved by Spinoza: the Latin text is translated literally in these instances.

  34. See the letter from J. Ludwig Fabritius to Spinoza of 16 February 1673 and Spinoza's reply of 30 March 1673, Ep. XLVII and Ep. XLVIII, respectively,Opera, IV, pp. 234–236.

  35. A. Volemans,Spinoza. De mensch, het leven en het werk. The Hague, 1931, p. 273.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Bibliotheca Rosenthaliana, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands

    A. K. Offenberg

Authors
  1. A. K. Offenberg
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Offenberg, A.K. Letter from Spinoza to Lodewijk Meijer. Philosophia 7, 1–13 (1977). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02379989

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02379989

Search

Navigation