Letters and Poems to and from Her Mentor and Other Members of Her Circle (Volume 81) (The Other Voice in Early Modern Europe: The Toronto Series) [Illustrated] 1649590121, 9781649590121

Table of contents :
Cover
Series Page
Title Page
Dedication
Contents
Acknowledgments
Illustrations
Abbreviations
Introduction
Letters and Poems
Appendices
Bibliography
Index
Series Titles

Citation preview

Anna Maria van Schurman

Letters and Poems to and from Her Mentor and Other Members of Her Circle EDIT ED AND T R ANS LAT ED B Y

Anne R. Larsen and Steve Maiullo

The Other Voice in Early Modern Europe: The Toronto Series, 81

LETTERS AND POEMS TO AND FROM HER MENTOR AND OTHER MEMBERS OF HER CIRCLE

The Other Voice in Early Modern Europe: The Toronto Series, 81

FOUNDING EDITORS Margaret L. King and Albert Rabil, Jr. SERIES EDITOR Margaret L. King SERIES EDITOR, ENGLISH TEXTS Elizabeth H. Hageman

In memory of Albert Rabil, Jr. (1934–2021)

ANNA MARIA VAN SCHURMAN

Letters and Poems to and from Her Mentor and Other Members of Her Circle •

Edited and translated by ANNE R. LARSEN and STEVE MAIULLO

2021

© Iter Inc. 2021 New York and Toronto IterPress.org All rights reserved Printed in the United States of America

ISBN 978-1-64959-012-1 (paper) ISBN 978-1-64959-013-8 (pdf) ISBN 978-1-64959-033-6 (epub)

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Names: Schurman, Anna Maria van, 1607–1678, author. | Rivet, André, 1572–1651 correspondent. | Larsen, Anne R., editor, translator. | Maiullo, Steve, editor, translator. Title: Letters and poems to and from her mentor and other members of her circle / Anna Maria van Schurman; edited and translated by Anne R. Larsen and Steve Maiullo. Description: New York : Iter Press, 2021. | Series: The other voice in early modern Europe: the Toronto series ; 81 | Includes bibliographical references and index. | Summary: “This volume presents in translation a remarkable run of the correspondence of Anna Maria van Schurman (1607–1678), covering almost four decades of her life, from 1631 to 1669. Largely unpublished, these manuscript letters and poems to and from her mentor, André Rivet (1572–1651), and other members of her circle show how deeply engaged and respected she was in the traditionally male Latin world of the Republic of Letters”-- Provided by publisher. Identifiers: LCCN 2020047902 (print) | LCCN 2020047903 (ebook) | ISBN 9781649590121 (paperback) | ISBN 9781649590138 (pdf) | ISBN 9781649590336 (epub) Subjects: LCSH: Schurman, Anna Maria van, 1607–1678--Correspondence. | Rivet, André, 1572–1651--Correspondence. | Intellectuals--Netherlands--Correspondence. | LCGFT: Personal correspondence. Classification: LCC PT5679.S48 Z48 2021 (print) | LCC PT5679.S48 (ebook) | DDC 839.3/18309 [B]--dc23 LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2020047902 LC ebook record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2020047903

Cover Illustration Anna Maria van Schurman, Self-Portrait (ca. 1640), 8,3 x 6,7 cm. Courtesy the Rijksmuseum, Amsterdam.

Cover Design Maureen Morin, Library Communications, University of Toronto Libraries.

In memory of my mother, Wiepske Rozelaar Larsen (1918–2017) For Grace and Isaiah

Contents Acknowledgments Illustrations



Abbreviations

ix xiii xxiii

Introduction 1 The Other Voice 1 Historical and Religious Context of the Early Dutch Golden Age, 1580–1650 2 Life and Published Works 11 Anna Maria van Schurman and Her Mentor, André Rivet, 1631–1652 31 Affairs of Church and State 40 Anna Maria van Schurman as Religious Polemicist 52 Anna Maria van Schurman and Female Members of Her Circle 65 Anna Maria van Schurman and Constantijn Huygens, 1633–1669 73 Anna Maria van Schurman, Latin, and Letter Writing 87 The Reception and Afterlife of Anna Maria van Schurman 99 The KB Collection 112 A Curious Addition to the Manuscript (no. 58, 1:71) 114 Note on the Text, Translation, and Cover Portrait 115 The Plan of the Book 119 PART 1: Letters and Poems to and from Her Mentor, André Rivet, and Other Members of Her Circle, 1631–1652

123

PART 2: Anna Maria van Schurman and Constantijn Huygens, Letters and Poems, 1633–1669

229

Appendix A: Chronologies and Chronological Graphs Appendix B: Additional Poems by Constantijn Huygens and Caspar Barlaeus to and about Anna Maria van Schurman, 1635–1650 Appendix C: Additional Letters to, from, and about Anna Maria van Schurman, 1636–1782 Appendix D: A Biography of Anna Maria van Schurman by Contemporary Labadist Pierre Yvon Appendix E: Examples of Anna Maria van Schurman’s Latin and French Letters

287 303 319 337 361

Bibliography

363

Index

389

Acknowledgments This edition has evolved over several years and is the fruit of a collaboration that began soon after Steve Maiullo, a classicist and Latin and Greek specialist, began teaching at Hope College. At that time Anne Larsen was working on her monograph on Anna Maria van Schurman and would turn regularly to Steve for help with the translations of Van Schurman’s Latin and Greek writings. Steve suggested doing an edition and they have been working on it ever since. Many have contributed their generous expertise and encouragement. Anne and Steve thank colleagues who read portions of the introduction and offered perceptive comments, queries, and corrections. They include Martine van Elk, Alfred Gootjes, Philip Holtrop, Bo Karen Lee, Amanda Pipkin, and John Thompson. Julie Campbell, Jane Couchman, Phillip van Eyl, Charles Huttar, Diana Robin, Alice Ward, and Stephanie Wykstra read earlier drafts of the entire introduction, offering clear and much appreciated advice. We are also very grateful to colleagues who answered our questions, and generously lent their expertise in helping to translate—and in some cases transcribe—expressions and poems in Italian, Hebrew, Persian, and seventeenth-century Dutch. They include Barry Bandstra, Bram ten Berge, Tom Boogaart, Jamie Goodrich, Marsely Kehoe, Cornelia Kennedy, Alireza Korangy, Meredith Ray, Toon van Hall, Jennifer Welsh, and Merry Wiesner-Hanks. We extend our sincere thanks to Pieta van Beek for alerting Anne to the portrait of Anna Maria van Schurman on the cover of this book; formerly in a private collection, it was recently acquired by the Rijksmuseum in Amsterdam. Our warmest thanks go to Rebecca Stanton for the chronologies and graphs of the letters, the bibliography, and the index. We thank our colleagues Marsely Kehoe and Brigitte Hamon-Porter for freeing up funds to support Rebecca’s collaborative work with us. The Other Voice series team has been a great pleasure to work with. We are deeply grateful to our anonymous reviewer, who provided ways to improve the book; to Cheryl Lemmens, who meticulously edited the final text and gave us numerous suggestions and learned references; to Margaret English-Haskin for her fine editorial help; and to our editor, Margaret L. King, for her generous support and expert guidance. We also wish to thank the late Al Rabil, Jr., who was editor of the Other Voice series when we began the project, for his guidance and help. • I am immensely grateful to Michelle Yost at the Interlibrary Loan Office of the Margaret and Gordon van Wylen Library at Hope College for finding time and again, in short order, out-of-the-way articles and books in multiple languages. ix

x Acknowledgments I could not have pursued the research on this book without her timely assistance. My thanks go as well to Daphne Fairbanks, the TechLab Coordinator at the Hope Library for her help with the illustrations. I thank warmly Hope College for awarding me at the right time the Endowed Lavern ’39 and Betty DePree ’41 Van Kley Chair, which funded trips over four summers to Paris and the Netherlands to work in the archives. My thanks go to the staff of the following libraries for their professional courtesy and generous help: Koninklijke Bibliotheek Special Collections at The Hague, Leiden University Library Special Collections, Utrecht University Library Special Collections, Bibliothèque nationale de France, Bibliothèque Mazarine, Bibliothèque de l’Arsenal, Bibliothèque Sainte-Geneviève, Bibliothèque Municipale de Grenoble, the Houghton Library at Harvard University, the Newberry Library, and the Beinecke Library at Yale University. I am also very grateful to many friends who have unfailingly supported my work, to Phil van Eyl and Alice Ward for delightful weekly sessions translating and discussing secondary literature in Dutch on Anna Maria van Schurman, to Julie Campbell and Diana Robin for great book club discussions on early modern women, to my spouse Stephen Wykstra for being such a devoted “PA” throughout the preparation of this book, to my daughter Stephanie for her wonderful encouragement and interest in early modern women, and to my beloved mother for her life-long support and for gifting me with her love of languages and travel. I dedicate this book to her memory. ANNE R. LARSEN • It is impossible to include the names of everyone who has helped me in preparing this translation, largely because my journey with Latin began in Anne Marie Cussen’s “sixie” Latin class at Boston Latin School in 1993. My first debt of gratitude goes to the faculty at Boston Latin, especially Brad Smith, Hillary Pollock, Mary Shea, and Marianne Pagos, all of whom had the patience to instill in a teenage version of me a love of exploring Latin and Greek. I owe special thanks to those who taught me about good translation. David George wrote “watch your diction” on top of just about every translation; Linda Rulman sat with me for hours to show me how to decipher the source material behind  I, Claudius  and to seek the right turn of phrase; Will Batstone had the patience in his advanced prose composition course to help me begin to see how Latin works from the inside; and Erik Gunderson never ceased to tell me, in no uncertain terms, when my efforts were more “decodings” than translations.  From watching my diction to avoiding decoding, I have drawn upon all these lessons in preparing these translations. The best in these pages belongs to them, the worst to me.

Acknowledgments xi My willingness to undertake a project such as this one comes almost solely from the example of my dissertation adviser, Anthony Kaldellis, who spent his career reading texts that few, if any, had clapped eyes on in the modern era. Anthony has illuminated so many aspects of life in the Byzantine period by reading and translating long neglected authors. as he once told me, “It’s surprising how much scholarly attention an author will receive once their writings appear in English.” With this translation, I am hoping to honor his example and bring Anna Maria van Schurman into the light she sought to avoid. My colleagues and students at Hope have provided me with rich opportunities to conduct this research. Special thanks go to my Provosts Rich Ray and Cady Short-Thompson and my Dean Sandra Visser, who have supported this work with a Nyenhuis Grant, a sabbatical leave, and supplemental funding. I also am grateful to Janis Gibbs and Curtis Gruenler, who met with me weekly during my sabbatical in Spring 2018 and graciously listened as I struggled with that one footnote or perplexing phrase I couldn’t quite get right. I also must thank all those who read sections of the manuscript, provided me with opportunities to present research, and offered suggestions, especially Bram ten Berge, Maggie Burr, Quinn Griffin, and Mark Wright. Of all my colleagues, I must thank Jim Allis, primus inter pares, who always manages to ask the question I need him to ask and to stay with me when I can’t answer it. And, finally, I thank my spouse and son, Grace and Isaiah, without whose patience and understanding I would never have been able to complete this work. I dedicate this work to them. STEVE MAIULLO

Illustrations Cover.

Anna Maria van Schurman, Self-Portrait (ca. 1640), 8,3 x 6,7 cm. Courtesy the Rijksmuseum, Amsterdam.

Figure 1.

Anna Maria van Schurman, Self-Portrait (1640). KB National Library Ms. 133 B 8. Courtesy the Koninklijke Bibliotheek, The Hague.

Figure 2.

André Rivet, Portrait. KB National Library Ms. 133 B 8. Courtesy the Koninklijke Bibliotheek, The Hague.

Figure 3.

Anna Maria van Schurman to André Rivet, Letter no. 1. KB National Library Ms. 133 B 8. Courtesy the Koninklijke Bibliotheek, The Hague.

Figure 4.

Johannes Elichmann, Tetrastichon no. 75 (1638). KB National Library Ms. 133 B 8. Courtesy the Koninklijke Bibliotheek, The Hague.

Figure 5.

Anna Maria van Schurman, Self-Portrait (1633). Courtesy the Rijksmuseum, Amsterdam.

Figure 6. Anna Maria van Schurman to Constantijn Huygens, Poem no. 73, with address and wax seal. KB National Library Ms. 133 B 8. Courtesy the Koninklijke Bibliotheek, The Hague. Figure 7. Cornelis van Dalen the Younger, Anna Maria van Schurman (ca. 1661). Print engraving after a painting by Cornelis Jonson (or Janssens) van Ceulen (1657). Courtesy Collection Martena Museum, Franeker. Figure 8.

Anna Maria van Schurman to Constantijn Huygens, Letter no. 72. KB National Library Ms. 133 B 8. Courtesy the Koninklijke Bibliotheek, The Hague.

xiii

xiv Illustrations

Figure 1. Anna Maria van Schurman, Self-Portrait (1640). KB National Library Ms. 133 B 8. Courtesy the Koninklijke Bibliotheek, The Hague.

Illustrations

Figure 2. André Rivet, Portrait. KB National Library Ms. 133 B 8. Courtesy the Koninklijke Bibliotheek, The Hague.

xv

xvi Illustrations

Figure 3. First page, Anna Maria van Schurman to André Rivet, Letter no. 1. KB National Library Ms. 133 B 8. Courtesy the Koninklijke Bibliotheek, The Hague.

Illustrations xvii

Figure 3. Second page, Anna Maria van Schurman to André Rivet, Letter no. 1. KB National Library Ms. 133 B 8. Courtesy the Koninklijke Bibliotheek, The Hague.

xviii Illustrations

Figure 4. Johannes Elichmann, Tetrastichon no. 75 (1638). KB National Library Ms. 133 B 8. Courtesy the Koninklijke Bibliotheek, The Hague.

Illustrations xix

Figure 5. Anna Maria van Schurman, Self-Portrait (1633). Courtesy the Rijksmuseum, Amsterdam.

xx Illustrations

Figure 6. Anna Maria van Schurman to Constantijn Huygens. Poem no. 73, with address and wax seal. KB National Library Ms. 133 B 8. Courtesy the Koninklijke Bibliotheek, The Hague.

Illustrations xxi

Figure 7. Cornelis van Dalen the Younger, Anna Maria van Schurman (ca. 1661). Print engraving after a painting by Cornelis Jonson (or Janssens) van Ceulen (1657). Courtesy Collection Martena Museum, Franeker.

xxii Illustrations

Figure 8. Anna Maria van Schurman to Constantijn Huygens, Letter no. 72. KB National Library Ms. 133 B 8. Courtesy the Koninklijke Bibliotheek, The Hague.

Abbreviations BL

British Library

BnF

Bibliothèque nationale de France

EMLO

Early Modern Letters Online, Cultures of Knowledge, .

Israel

Jonathan I. Israel, The Dutch Republic: Its Rise, Greatness, and Fall, 1477–1806. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1995.

KB

Koninklijke Bibliotheek, The Hague

NAVK

Nederlands Archief voor Kerkgeschiedenis [Dutch Review of Church History]

ODNB

H.C.G. Matthew and Brian Harrison, eds., The Oxford Dictionary of National Biography. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004. Online edition, 2004–.

RQ

Renaissance Quarterly

Schotel

G.D.J. Schotel, Anna Maria van Schurman. ’s-Hertogenbosch: G. Muller, 1853.

SCJ

Sixteenth Century Journal

Stighelen and Landtsheer

Katlijne van der Stighelen and Jeanine de Landtsheer, “Een suer-soete Maeghd voor Constantijn Huygens: Anna Maria van Schurman (1607–1678).” In Vrouwen rondom Huygens, special issue, De Zeventiende Eeuw 25, no. 2 (2009), edited by Els Kloek, Frans Blom, and Ad Leerintveld, 149–202. Hilversum: Verloren, 2010.

Yvon

[Pierre Yvon], “Abregé sincere de la vie & de la conduite & des vrais sentimens de feu Mr. De Labadie.” In Unpartheyische Kirchen- und Ketzerhistorie, edited by Gottfried Arnold, 2:1234–70. Frankfurt: Fritsch, 1699–1700; reprint Hildesheim: Olms, 1967. Dutch translation, Amsterdam, 1754.

ZE

De zeventiende eeuw [The Seventeenth Century]

xxiii

Introduction The Other Voice Anna Maria van Schurman (1607–1678) was regarded throughout the seventeenth century, and well into the eighteenth century, as the most erudite woman in Europe—“the Star of Utrecht,” “the Dutch Minerva,” “the Tenth Muse,” and “a miracle of her sex,” to cite just some of the sobriquets bestowed on her. A brilliant linguist, she was proficient in more than a dozen languages, both modern and ancient. She was also a talented craftswoman who mastered several of the amateur arts popular among the Dutch elite, from miniature painting and embroidery to glass and copper engraving, wax modeling, and intricate paper-cutting. Van Schurman was the first Dutch woman to actively seek publication of her correspondence, and her letters to the learned men and women of her time—written in Latin, Greek, Hebrew, French, and even Arabic—reveal the breadth of her interests in theology, philosophy, medicine, literature, numismatics, painting, sculpture, embroidery, and instrumental and vocal music. A collection of her letters, entitled Minor Works in Hebrew, Greek, Latin, and French, in Prose and Verse, by the Most Noble Maiden Anna Maria van Schurman (the Opuscula), appeared in 1648 at the height of her fame. Her correspondents included the most renowned intellectuals and writers of Europe: Caspar Barlaeus, Jacob Cats, Princess Elisabeth of Bohemia, Daniel Heinsius, Constantijn Huygens, André Rivet, and Claudius Salmasius in the Netherlands; Sir Simonds D’Ewes, Bathsua Makin, Lady Dorothy Moore, and John Owen in England; Valentin Conrart, Pierre Gassendi, Marie de Gournay, Marin Mersenne, and Princess Anne de Rohan in France; and Johann Schütz and Johanna Eleonora Petersen in Germany, to name but a few of the vast number who wrote to her. Van Schurman’s relation to authorship and publishing was made possible through her advanced education, derived partly from being the first woman to sit in on lectures at a university in the Netherlands—albeit hidden in a cubicle— and partly from being an autodidact. Pursuant to her academic experience, she advocated boldly that women be admitted into universities. She stood in the late humanist tradition of innovative female polemicists such as Moderata Fonte, Lucrezia Marinella, and Marie de Gournay, and she paved the way for later seventeenth-century protofeminists Bathsua Makin, Mary More, Gabrielle Suchon, and Mary Astell, who championed a serious education for women. Although Van Schurman, along with these early feminists, emphasized women’s rationality, she did not openly contend that women should take on the same public functions as men. She spoke from an accommodationist social and religious perspective. In keeping with the Dutch Republic’s emphasis on devotio domestica, she 1

2 Introduction advocated that women have a broadly-based humanist education for private use, and to strengthen their religious faith. By defending equal access to a university education, however, she implicitly critiqued unequal sociopolitical structures. To move beyond the customary practice of female exclusion from institutions of power and learning—the colleges and universities, the seminaries, and the scientific academies—women’s ability to reason had first to be recognized. Therein lies the political efficacy of Van Schurman’s appeal and legacy. She did not alter social structures, a transformative change that would occur much later in history. Rather, she participated in the early development of a rights discourse by creating a precedent for women, the right to attain serious knowledge and to appropriate a rhetoric constituting a form of political influence. In her later years, Anna Maria van Schurman became a courageous spokesperson for a renegade religious movement. She relinquished her iconic status as a celebrated member of the international Republic of Letters to join a small persecuted Pietist household founded by Jean de Labadie (1610–1674). A French defrocked Jesuit priest, Labadie converted to Calvinism, was banned from serving the Calvinist church, and formed his own religious community. Within this environment, paradoxically, Van Schurman found a new authoritative voice and visibility, abandoned the tropes of humility so prevalent in her earlier writings, and achieved equality of respect among the Labadist leadership as theologian, correspondent, and translator. We translate and edit here a remarkable run of Van Schurman’s correspondence covering almost four decades of her life, from 1631 to 1669, ending just a month before she joined the Labadists. Largely unpublished, these manuscript letters and poems to and from her mentor and other members of her circle show how deeply engaged and respected she was in the traditionally male Latin world of the Republic of Letters.

Historical and Religious Context of the Early Dutch Golden Age, 1580–1650 The poems and letters that Anna Maria van Schurman addressed to her mentor André Rivet and other members of her circle were mostly written in Utrecht, where she resided during the early Golden Age of the prosperous United Provinces of the Netherlands, known as the Dutch Republic. As will be discussed in detail later, four essential features characterized Dutch culture at the time: a large middle class founded on mercantile wealth; the relative absence of political and religious centralization; universities and a publishing industry with a global reach; and religious toleration. The Republic’s large middle class—the nobility comprised less than 1 per cent of the population—meant that the relative lack of strict hierarchies and

Introduction 3 governmental authoritarian structures created a zone of intellectual freedom quite liberating for scholars from other countries: from France, for instance, came the great humanist scholars Joseph Justus Scaliger, Claude Saumaise (Salmasius), and René Descartes. The network of rivers, inland waterways, and access to the sea facilitated the growth of mercantile wealth for an urban patriciate, rather than dependence on the rural, landed, and rentier aristocracy dominant in other countries. General prosperity was high, and the urban and rural poor were better fed and taken care of by the different religious communities than in other parts of Europe. High female labor participation and high literacy and numeracy among both men and women characterized the urban centers, making the Dutch Republic the most literate country in Europe.1 Women fared better than elsewhere, since domestic violence was considered a crime and women had some legal and economic rights they did not enjoy in other countries.2 The entrepreneurial agency of Dutch women of the lower, middle, and even upper middle classes in the economy of their country was well known; foreign visitors commented on their engagement in activities largely reserved to men in other countries due to, as an English visitor to Amsterdam noted in 1622, their “Bargaining, Cyphering, & Writing.”3 Judith Drake, an English medical practitioner and writer, noted in 1696 that Dutch women not only managed the household but did “all the Business . . . with as much Dexterity and Exactness as their, or our Men do.”4 The Dutch Republic eschewed a “prescriptive centralization” in the political and devotional spheres by enabling municipal councils and regents—councillors, burgomasters (mayors), and aldermen—to govern their towns and territories, even in matters of religion. The regents formed a “small oligarchy” numbering some two thousand in a population of two million.5 Each individual province, furthermore, had its own provincial church synod, and appointed its own ministers or pastors according to its own guidelines; this policy hindered the formation 1.Danielle van den Heuvel, Women and Entrepreneurship: Female Traders in the Northern Netherlands, c. 1580–1815 (Amsterdam: Aksant, 2007), 17, 19. 2. Based on the limited number of extant trial records, however, it appears that women had difficulty in proving sexual violence and rape. See Amanda Pipkin, Rape in the Republic, 1609–1725: Formulating Dutch Identity (Leiden and Boston: Brill, 2013), 25. 3. Alena Buis, Christi Spain-Savage, and Myra E. Wright, “Attending to Fishwives: Views from Seventeenth-Century London and Amsterdam,” in Mapping Gendered Routes and Spaces in the Early Modern World, ed. Merry E. Wiesner-Hanks (Farnham, UK, and Burlington, VT: Ashgate, 2015), 186. 4.  [Judith Drake], An Essay in Defense of the Female Sex (London: Printed for A. Roper and E. Wilkinson, 1696), 16. Drake added that if English women learned accounting and mathematics, “it would be a mighty profit to the Nation” (17). 5. Willem Frijhoff, “Religious Toleration in the United Provinces: From ‘Case’ to ‘Model’,” in Calvinism and Religious Toleration in the Dutch Golden Age, ed. Ronnie Po-Chia Hsia and Henk van Nierop (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002), 50.

4 Introduction of a national state Reformed Church with an administrative apparatus applying to all the provinces.6 Nonetheless, as public churches, the Reformed congregations contributed in an important way to the formation of the national identity as a people saved from the Catholic persecution that newly-arrived refugees had endured in other countries. The Dutch Republic had seven constituent provinces; each had its own stadtholder, over whom the Stadtholder of the dominant province of Holland, of the House of Orange-Nassau, held a position of power.7 The stadtholder, translated loosely as “governor,” functioned as a political advisor and military commander. His position was circumscribed and more akin to that of the royal provincial governors who ruled Holland under the Spaniards in earlier times. The States General held sovereign power and controlled the country’s finances, foreign policy, and religion.8 Loyalty to the House of Orange enabled all the religious communities to express a common national patriotism.9 Further support for the national character was expressed in the myth of the Batavians and of the Maid of Holland, or Hollandia, which became culturally prominent especially from the 1580s. Known from the writings of Tacitus, the Batavians, an ancient Germanic tribe, were considered the ancestors of the Netherlanders because it was thought that their fierce opposition to Rome prefigured the Dutch Revolt against Spain.10 Thus the renowned jurist Hugo Grotius, in On the Antiquity of the Batavian Republic (1610), recalled the story of the Batavians to explain the nature of the Netherlanders’ devotion to their privileges and rights.11 The Maid of Holland, a Minerva figure, became a symbol of Dutch independence during the Revolt.12 Anna Maria van Schurman was frequently praised as a “Batavian

6. Frijhoff, “Religious Toleration,” 39. 7. Jonathan I. Israel, The Dutch Republic: Its Rise, Greatness, and Fall, 1477–1806 (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1995), 300–6. 8. David Onnekink, “The Body Politic,” in The Cambridge Companion to the Dutch Golden Age, ed. Helmer J. Helmers and Geert H. Janssen (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2018), 107–23. 9. Ronnie Po-Chia Hsia, Introduction, in Calvinism and Religious Toleration, 4. See also Herbert H. Rowen, The Princes of Orange: The Stadholders in the Dutch Republic (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1988). 10. Benjamin J. Kaplan, “ ‘Dutch’ Religious Tolerance: Celebration and Revision,” in Calvinism and Religious Toleration, 12. 11. Pipkin, Rape in the Republic, 55n58. 12. As Martha Moffitt Peacock explains, this “gender-crossing archetype” was an enabling figure for women in Dutch society. See “The Maid of Holland and Her Heroic Heiresses,” in Women and Gender in the Early Modern Low Countries, 1500–1750, ed. Sarah Joan Moran and Amanda Pipkin (Leiden and Boston: Brill, 2019), 68–127. With thanks to Amanda Pipkin for sending this article ahead of publication.

Introduction 5 miracle”13 and heroine by eulogists such as Constantijn Huygens and Caspar Barlaeus, and enlisted as the “Dutch Minerva” in service to the Dutch Republic.14 The new universities of Leiden (1575), Franeker (1585), Groningen (1614), Utrecht (1636), Harderwijk (1648), and Nijmegen (1655) became centers for classical studies and late humanism in Europe; they enrolled thousands of students and attracted renowned scholars. During the quarter-century from 1625 to 1650, Leiden, the most prestigious of these universities, had nine thousand students in attendance, around forty-four per cent foreign-born.15 About half of these were German Protestants; the rest came from France, England, Scotland, and Scandinavia. All told, some twenty countries sent students to Leiden, including countries in North Africa, the Turkish Empire, and Persia.16 Leiden University paid well for the services of such late humanist scholars as Joseph Justus Scaliger, Justus Lipsius, and Claudius Salmasius. Further institutions, including six Illustrious Schools, or Athenaea, civic colleges for boys, and ninety-two Latin schools, attracted equally renowned teachers and rectors who at some point in their careers taught at the university.17 The Republic’s printing presses also had a European reach; 68 publishers were in business in 1600, and by 1654, that number had increased to 247.18 The leading publisher at the time, the prestigious Elzevier family dynastic firm, marketed its books directly at sales counters all over Europe, especially Germany and France. Thanks to its oriental press with Syriac, Chaldaic, Ethiopic, Arabic, Hebrew, and Greek fonts, acquired in 1624, the firm published nearly half of all the scholarly books issued in Leiden during its tenure.19 Elzevier became Van Schurman’s main publisher, starting with her Dissertatio in 1641,20 13. Hubertus Beets, Oratio in laudem mulieris  [Oration in Praise of Women] (Haarlem: Vincent Casteleyn, 1650), 4; cited in Peacock, 100. 14. Huygens calls Van Schurman a “Batavian goddess” (2:3) and an “illustrious jewel of our fatherland” (2:18); Barlaeus eulogizes her as born “for the Batavians” (Appendix B1). Van Schurman uses the term as well, in January 1644, when she welcomes Claudius Salmasius as a “Batavian Traveler” on his return after a three-year sojourn in France (1:50). References are to the present edition. 15. Israel, 572. 16. Laura Cruz, The Paradox of Prosperity: The Leiden Booksellers’ Guild and the Distribution of Books in Early Modern Europe (New Castle, DE: Oak Knoll Press, 2009), 218. 17. Daniela Prögler, English Students at Leiden University, 1575–1650 (Farnham, UK, and Burlington, VT: Ashgate, 2013), 86. 18. Maarten Prak, The Dutch Republic in the Seventeenth Century: The Golden Age, trans. Diane Webb (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005), 226. 19. David W. Davies, The World of the Elseviers, 1580–1712 (The Hague: Nijhoff, 1954). 20. Nobiliss. Virginis Annœ Mariœ à Schurman. Dissertatio, de Ingenii Muliebris ad Doctrinam, & meliores Litteras aptitudine. Accedunt Quædam Epistolæ, ejusdem Argumenti  [A Dissertation on the Aptitude of Women for Knowledge and Humane Letters. To which are added certain letters on the same argument] (Leiden: Elzevier, 1641). Hereafter cited as “Dissertatio.”

6 Introduction and published her Opuscula (1648, 1650)21 in a beautifully printed octavo volume. Because her collected oeuvre was so well published and highly valued by the international Republic of Letters, she was widely read. A third edition was published in Utrecht in 1652 by Johannes Waesberghe.22 Three editions of the Opuscula thus appeared in the space of a mere four years. Her printed letters disseminated her fame across borders, preserving her writings and story for posterity. Complementing this vigorous intellectual environment was religious toleration, which allowed marginal groups such as Catholics, Portuguese Sephardic and Ashkenazic Jews, Lutherans, Anabaptists, spiritualists, and other religious minorities to exist, if only in a secondary role, and within the religio domestica or private sphere.23 Article 13 of the Union of Utrecht (1579), which marked the emergence of the United Provinces from war with Spain, guaranteed freedom of conscience, allowing all inhabitants the right to simply attend, formally join, or even choose not to attend or join a church. It also prohibited persecution for religious reasons. The Reformed Church, which became the official public church in the period 1573–1581, opposed an official public status for Catholicism on grounds that Catholics were a potential source of revolt against the new Dutch Republic; it would also oppose Jews who wished to practice Judaism openly. However, even the Reformed orthodoxy recognized the legitimacy of differences of opinion due to the fundamental principle of freedom of conscience understood as freedom of thought.24 As Ronnie Po-Chia Hsia notes, “the central paradox of the Dutch Republic” was the coexistence of discrimination against Catholics and other religious minorities with a “pragmatic religious toleration.”25 Different Christian confessions grouped in more or less distinct metaphorical social spaces—the later so-called zuilen (“pillars”)—were protected by the regents, for whom ensuring the social peace was primordial.26 These civil authorities censored 21. Nobiliss. Virginis Annæ Mariæ à Schurman, Opuscula Hebræa, Græca, Latina, Gallica. Prosaica & Metrica [Minor Works in Hebrew, Greek, Latin, and French, In Prose and Verse by the Most Noble Maiden Anna Maria van Schurman] (Leiden: Elzevier, 1648/1650). Hereafter cited as “Opuscula.” Unless otherwise noted, all translations from Latin, Greek, French, and Dutch, including book titles, are our own. 22. All citations from the Opuscula come from the 1652 edition. 23. On the degrees of toleration in the Dutch Republic, see Willem Frijhoff, “Religious Toleration,” 27–52. 24. Frijhoff, “Religious Toleration,” 30. 25. Ronnie Po-Chia Hsia, Introduction, in Calvinism and Religious Toleration, 2. 26. Judith Pollmann underscores the constant intermingling in daily life of Netherlanders with different religious beliefs. See “Public Enemies, Private Friends: Arnoldus Buchelius’s Experience of Religious Diversity in the Early Dutch Republic,” in The Public and Private in Dutch Culture of the Golden Age, ed. Arthur K. Wheelock, Jr., and Adele Seeff (Newark: University of Delaware Press, 2000), 182.

Introduction 7 religious and polemical defamation to protect social order and discipline.27 The solution of distinct social spaces was culled from Roman civil law, which accorded limited rights to religions other than the official state church; this allowed their existence as “voluntary societies” for the purpose of communal worship with no possibility of communal possessions other than a place of worship to prevent political aspirations.28 Some historians have maintained that the regents’ policy of tolerating dissenting religious minorities was a form of “concealed intolerance” or “containment,” and that “the real test of tolerance” concerned radicals such as Spinozists, Socinians, and Deists, who were largely suppressed.29 Indeed, for all their acceptance of pluralism, the regents and the Reformed Church balked at Spinozists’ refusal of the divinity of Christ and the anti-Trinitarianism of the Socinians. A better description of Dutch toleration, according to Willem Frijhoff, is “connivance and concord . . . the two pillars of the civil policy of religious peace in the Republic.”30 What made the Dutch experiment unique was “a tacit toleration of religious diversity . . . as long as the necessary concord between believers did not endanger the unity of the body politic and the civic community.” Concord—written into the motto of the state, Concordia res parvae crescent (“Through unity small things flourish,” or “In unity there is strength”),—was the leading policy, based on “solutions of consensus rather than of constraint.”31 This civil pragmatism found its match in intellectual libertinism (of those who supported a broadly inclusive, non-dogmatic church) and irenicism (of those who promoted church unity and peace), the latter embodied by the statesman jurist Hugo Grotius; when developed into a political philosophy, civil pragmatism transcended the Dutch situation to create a new secular ideal that flourished during the Enlightenment. The Reformed Church, to which Anna Maria van Schurman and her family belonged, was a public church, meaning that unlike other Protestant countries such as Scotland, Switzerland, and the German territories where Protestantism had been imposed, the Dutch Reformed model was one of voluntary membership. As a public church, it offered baptism and marriage to everyone regardless of church membership or lack thereof but reserved the Eucharist or Lord’s 27. See Willem Frijhoff, “Dimensions de la coexistence confessionelle,” in The Emergence of Tolerance in the Dutch Republic, ed. Christiane Berkvens-Stevelinck, Jonathan I. Israel, and G. H. M. Posthumus Meyjes (Leiden: Brill, 1997), 213–37. 28. Joke Spaans, “Religious Policies in the Seventeenth-Century Dutch Republic,” in Calvinism and Religious Toleration, 79. 29. Kaplan, “ ‘Dutch’ Religious Tolerance,” 23; Israel, 372. Spinozists were followers of the Dutch philosopher Baruch Spinoza; Socinians were disciples of Fausto Sozzini, who rejected the doctrine of the Trinity; Deists rejected the supernatural aspects of religion. 30. Frijhoff, “Religious Toleration,” 31. 31. Frijhoff, “Religious Toleration,” 32.

8 Introduction Supper to confessing members only. Its “self-created exclusiveness” led its conservative wing, consisting of orthodox Calvinists,32 to view its increasing membership over the course of the seventeenth century—about half the population belonged to it by the 1650s—more as “a threat,” leading to attempts to distinguish true believers from worshipers who attended purely out of social respectability.33 Orthodox Calvinists were aided in this by Calvinist refugees, such as Anna Maria van Schurman’s father and paternal grandparents, who had emigrated from the southern Netherlands to escape persecution during the Spanish Habsburg conquest; such refugees comprised about one third of the membership of the Dutch Reformed churches in Utrecht and Leiden especially.34 They were accused of wanting to impose on the church a Geneva-like inquisition mirroring the Spanish intolerance that was thought untrue to the national character. Contrary to the orthodox Calvinists, the Arminians, or so-called Remonstrants, not only claimed that the national character was inherently tolerant, but also located the origins of Dutch Protestantism in the views of Desiderius Erasmus (1466–1536), “a native Hollander  . . . and champion of a ‘purified’ Christianity,” in Benjamin Kaplan’s words, and “the perfect father-figure for a religious movement intent on portraying itself as autochthonous, popular, and distinctly Dutch.”35 Other religious leaders, including “Libertines” such as Dirck Coornhert, Hubert Duifhuis, and Caspar Coolhaes, were strongly influenced by spiritualist and Protestant teachings from their own religious exile in cities of the German Rhineland such as Cologne, Essen, and Wesel.36 Starting in the 1570s, they returned imbued with views based on the church welcoming all believers and encouraging the imitation of Christ rather than doctrinal purity and subjection to ecclesiastic discipline. Sanctification (the improvement of the Christian’s life) rather than confessionalism (the advocacy of a religious confession) was the Libertines’ main concern.37 Thus, in the German Rhineland, they had joined churches that mixed confessional services together in the same church space; 32. “Orthodox Calvinists” included the Gomarists, or so-called Counter-Remonstrants, who defended clerical independence and the doctrine of double predestination, meaning the divinely decreed salvation of some and damnation for others. 33. Johannes Müller, Exile Memories and the Dutch Revolt: The Narrated Diaspora, 1550–1750 (Leiden and Boston: Brill, 2016), 174. 34. Kaplan, “ ‘Dutch’ Religious Tolerance,” 13. 35. Kaplan, “ ‘Dutch’ Religious Tolerance,” 15. 36. The following sketch on the Rhineland Reformed ‘Libertines’ is indebted to Mirjam G. K. van Veen and Jesse Spohnholz, “Calvinists vs. Libertines: A New Look at Religious Exile and the Origins of ‘Dutch’ Tolerance,” in Calvinism and the Making of the European Mind, ed. Gijsbert van den Brink and Harro M. Höpfl (Leiden and Boston: Brill, 2014), 76–99, and Benjamin J. Kaplan, Reformation and the Practice of Toleration: Dutch Religious History in the Early Modern Era (Leiden and Boston: Brill, 2019). 37. Veen and Spohnholz, “Calvinists vs. Libertines,” 83.

Introduction 9 they did not remain, as did the Van Schurman family when it lived in Cologne, in churches exclusively for conservative Reformed worship: “Through much of the Rhineland, there was good reason for refugees to reduce, not increase, commitment to Calvinism.”38 The Van Schurmans, unlike the Libertines, went thus against the grain, helping us understand the particular religious outlook of Anna Maria’s early and later years (to be discussed more shortly). Throughout much of the Rhineland, local churches attended by Libertines accepted the magistrates’ local authority. Once back in the Netherlands, they encouraged greater inclusivity in church membership and opposed church discipline, which did not endear them to strict Calvinists.39 Their clash with the Calvinists was particularly felt over their dispute concerning the Heidelberg Catechism, which, with the Belgic Confession, constituted the doctrinal standard for orthodoxy. Strict Calvinists mandated the catechism, while Libertine preachers refused it on the grounds that it was too pessimistic regarding human potential to do good. The Libertines also rejected the doctrine of predestination, insisting that, aided by grace, believers could obey the divine commands and refrain from evil. This dispute, which had been smoldering for more than a decade from around 1604, came to a dramatic head at the Synod of Dordrecht (or “Dordt,” as the city is called by its residents). Starting on 13 November 1618, the Synod pitted the Remonstrants (moderate to liberal Calvinists who endorsed the views of the theologian Jacobus Arminius) against the Counter-Remonstrants (orthodox Calvinists who backed the Leiden theologian Franciscus Gomarus).40 Free will, divine providence, predestination, election, and freedom of religion were hotly debated. The synod ended in 1619 when the Stadtholder Maurice of Nassau, in a classic coup d’état, ousted the Grand Pensionary Johan van Oldenbarnevelt, a respected statesman and diplomat who had sided with the Remonstrants and had earlier negotiated a truce with Spain despite Maurice’s opposition. Van Oldenbarnevelt was imprisoned, then executed for treason—a fate that his fellow prisoner, Hugo Grotius, was able to avoid through a daring escape. After the death of Van Oldenbarnevelt and the purging of the Remonstrants, the United Provinces were presided over by the Stadtholder and the Counter-Remonstrants, who favored strict Calvinism. 38. Veen and Spohnholz, “Calvinists vs. Libertines,” 84. 39. Benjamin J. Kaplan, “ ‘Remnants of the Papal Yoke’: Apathy and Opposition to the Dutch Reformation,” in Kaplan, Reformation and the Practice of Toleration, 38. 40. Studies on the Synod of Dordt abound. See, for instance, Aza Goudriaan and Fred van Lieburg, eds., Revisiting the Synod of Dordt (1618–1619) (Leiden and Boston: Brill, 2010); Theodoor Marius van Leeuwen, Keith D. Stanglin, and Marijke Tolsma, eds., Arminius, Arminianism, and Europe: Jacobus Arminius (1559/60–1609) (Leiden and Boston: Brill, 2009); Dirk van Miert, The Emancipation of Biblical Theology in the Dutch Republic, 1590–1670 (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2018), chap. 2; and the survey by Martin van Gelderen, “Hot Protestants: Predestination, the Freedom of the Will and the Making of the Modern European Mind,” in Calvinism and the Making of the European Mind, 131–54.

10 Introduction As Van Gelderen notes, however, the orthodox Calvinists’ victory was a “pyrrhic one”: because of the Stadtholder’s intervention, it had to accept “the superiority of secular authority,” and it could not impose its doctrine on the Dutch faithful, making living under Calvinist discipline a voluntary choice.41 The Synod of Dordt was of major significance to the development of European Calvinism. Orthodox Calvinists recognized that social peace and unity among the different Christian confessions, including the Libertines, had to be maintained, and they did not attack the founding principle of freedom of conscience. Instead, they sought to progressively usher in a more sincere practice of piety by forming a movement of further reformation (the so-called Nadere Reformatie) based on the notion of a church for the elect—the perfecting of the few—rather than a large popular church of those who became members out of habit rather than conviction.42 A majority of Netherlanders favored a pious and at the same time non-confessional Christian culture to maintain social cohesion.43 Since joining the church was voluntary, many had family members and friends who were not church members. The incidence of mixed marriages was also high; about two thirds of Reformed church members were women,44 suggesting that, aside from unmarried and widowed women, a high number were married to men who were not Reformed Church members. Such an imbalance suggests religious diversity within families and the perception that religious uniformity was not essential.45 As late as the 1680s, English travelers such as the physician Ellis Veryard observed the diversity of religious creeds within families with the husband of one faith, the wife of another, the children of a third, and the servant of yet another: “and yet they live without the least jangling of dissension.”46 As Judith Pollmann notes, many Dutch church members were active in two cultures, the vitriolic “discourse of confessionalism,” and an “a-confessional religious culture” founded on conservative and communalist values; the latter was favored 41. Gelderen, “Hot Protestants,” 148. 42. Since there is no standard English translation of nadere, another possible translation is “Dutch Second Reformation.” See Joel R. Beeke, “The Dutch Second Reformation (“Nadere Reformatie”),” Calvin Theological Journal 28 (1993): 300–7, and Fred A. van Lieburg, “From Pure Church to Pious Culture: The Further Reformation in the Seventeenth-Century Dutch Republic,” in Later Calvinism: International Perspectives, ed. W. Fred Graham, Sixteenth Century Essays & Studies 22 (Kirksville, MO: Sixteenth Century Journal Publishers), 409–29. 43. Benjamin J. Kaplan, Calvinists and Libertines: Confession and Community in Utrecht, 1578–1620 (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1995), 291–94, cited in Judith Pollmann, “The Bond of Christian Piety: The Individual Practice of Tolerance and Intolerance in the Dutch Republic,” in Calvinism and Religious Toleration, 55. 44. See Judith Pollmann, “Women and Religion in the Dutch Golden Age,” Dutch Crossing 24 (2000), 162–82, for the reasons single and widowed women joined the church as members. 45. Pollmann, “Bond of Christian Piety,” 56. 46. Pollmann, “Bond of Christian Piety,” 56.

Introduction 11 especially by the Libertines, the Mennonites, and the religiously unaffiliated.47 For them, Christianity was moralistic rather than doctrinal. On the other hand, theologians such as Gijsbert Voet (Gisbertus Voetius, 1589–1676)48 stressed that good Christian behavior was not enough and had to be grounded in an internalized faith based on sound doctrine. Judith Pollmann’s study of the religious trajectory of the Utrecht antiquarian Aernout van Buchel (Arnoldus Buchelius, 1565–1641), a close friend and sponsor of Anna Maria van Schurman, demonstrates how Netherlanders lived in two cultures, a necessary means of safeguarding religious diversity. Buchelius migrated from Catholicism to church un-affiliation, then to membership in Utrecht’s Libertine Reformed Church, and finally to full adherence to the orthodox Counter-Remonstrants. His transitioning occurred during the years of the fragile truce with Spain that still threatened the security of the young Republic, leading up to the Peace of Westphalia in 1648. Catholics and Arminians, Buchelius thought, posed a risk both to internal security and to the moral fiber of society. But even though Buchelius became a strict Calvinist, in practice his relations with Arminians were anything but intolerant, as is evident in his close friendship with Caspar van Baerle (Barlaeus, 1584–1648), an Arminian theologian, poet, and rector of the Athenaeum Illustre in Amsterdam. Buchelius also had friendly relations with non-Reformed thinkers and artists, such as the Catholic nobleman Johannes de Witt,49 the Mennonite engraver Crispijn van de Passe the Elder, the Catholic painter Abraham Bloemaert, and others. As Pollmann states, “For Buchelius, the elect, clearly, were not just to be found within the Church.”50

Life and Published Works  Born on 5 November 1607 in Cologne, Anna Maria van Schurman was the third child and only daughter of Frederik van Schurman (1564–1623) and Eva von Harff (ca. 1580–1636/7), who married in Cologne in 1602.51 She had two 47. Kaplan, Calvinists and Libertines, 47–51, 292–304, cited in Pollmann, “Bond of Christian Piety,” 58. 48. Voetius, a minister, theologian, and reputed scholar in Semitic languages, studied at the University of Leiden, became pastor of Vlijmen in 1611, and was influential as a Counter-Remonstrant at the Synod of Dordt (1618–19). In 1634, he became professor of theology and ancient oriental languages at Utrecht, where he also led the Reformed congregation. When the school became a university in 1636, he also became its rector. In his numerous writings, he censored any concession to Roman Catholic doctrine. 49. Not to be confused with Johan de Witt (1625–1672), the Grand Pensionary of Holland who opposed the House of Orange-Nassau and was brutally lynched, along with his brother, in The Hague. 50. Judith Pollmann, Religious Choice in the Dutch Republic: The Reformation of Arnoldus Buchelius, 1565–1641 (Manchester and New York: Manchester University Press, 1999), 66. 51. This sketch is indebted to G. D. J. Schotel, Anna Maria van Schurman (’s-Hertogenbosch: G. Muller, 1853); Joyce Irwin, “Learned Woman of Utrecht: Anna Maria van Schurman,” in Women Writers of the

12 Introduction older brothers, Hendrik Frederik (ca. 1603–ca. 1632) and Johan Godschalk (ca. 1605–1664), and a younger brother, Willem (ca. 1610–1615). Her paternal and maternal grandparents had fled persecution because of their Calvinist faith. Pierre Yvon (1646–1707), her contemporary biographer and Labadist colleague, relates how her paternal grandfather Frederik van Schurman [the Elder] and his wife, Clara van Lemens, fled Antwerp on 4 October 1564, on the night that the Protestant martyr Christoffel Fabricius was burned at the stake by the army of the Duke of Alva.52 On losing their possessions—they belonged to the magistracy of the city53—they moved to Frankfurt, then Hamburg, finally settling in Cologne in 1593, where the elder Frederik died in 1599. Her mother’s parents, from the minor German nobility, fled persecution when they narrowly escaped from the city of Neuss, pillaged by the Duke of Parma’s troops, and settled in Cologne. Anna Maria van Schurman was baptized in a clandestine Calvinist church in Cologne. Cologne was the seat of a bishopric that kept a close watch over the Protestant minority. Due to the imperial ban on Reformed Church services in 1610, the Van Schurmans fled to Schleiden, southwest of Cologne, to the small family castle of Dreiborn, home of her mother’s ancestors. From there they moved to The Hague, and in 1615 to Utrecht; Anna Maria was then seven or eight years old. Before leaving Cologne for the Netherlands, and to ensure the nobility of his children, her father and his two brothers, Johan and Samuel, obtained letters of nobility for themselves from the Holy Roman Emperor Matthias.54 Van Schurman’s maternal aunts, Sybille and Agnes von Harff, also escaped from Seventeenth Century, ed. Katharina M. Wilson and Frank J. Warnke (Athens, GA: University of Georgia Press, 1989), 164–85; Pieta van Beek’s monographs “Verbastert Christendom”: Nederlandse gedichten van Anna Maria van Schurman (1607–1678) (Houten: Hertog, 1992) and The First Female University Student: Anna Maria van Schurman (1636) (Utrecht: Igitur, 2010); Carol Pal, Republic of Women: Rethinking the Republic of Letters in the Seventeenth Century (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2012); Van Schurman’s contemporary biographers Pierre Yvon, “Abregé sincere de la vie & de la conduite & des vrais sentimens de feu Mr. De Labadie,” in Gottfried Arnold, ed., Unpartheyische Kirchenund Ketzerhistorie (Frankfurt: Fritsch, 1700; reprint, Hildesheim: Georg Olms, 1967), 2:1234–70, and Isaac Bullart, Academie des Sciences et des Arts, contenant les Vies, et les Eloges Historiques des Hommes Illustres parmi diverses Nations de l’Europe (Amsterdam: Elzevier, 1682), 2:228–32; Anne R. Larsen, Anna Maria van Schurman, The “Star of Utrecht”: The Educational Vision and Reception of a Savante (London: Routledge, 2016), chap. 1; and “Anna Maria van Schurman,” in Project Vox (2020), Duke University, Department of Philosophy, accessible at . For an overview of Van Schurman scholarship to date, see Bo Karen Lee and Anne Larsen, “Anna Maria van Schurman,” in Oxford Bibliographies: Renaissance and Reformation, ed. Margaret L. King (2018), . 52. Yvon, 1264, col. 2. See Appendix D for the translation of Yvon’s biography. On Fabricius, a former monk, born Jan de Smet, see, e.g., the entry in the Nieuw Nederlandsch biografisch woordenboek, ed. P.J. Blok and P.C. Molhuysen (Leiden, 1930), 8:523–24, accessible at www.dbnl.org. 53. Bullart, 2:229. 54. Beek, “Verbastert Christendom,” 11.

Introduction 13 Cologne to settle in Utrecht. The obstacles Anna Maria’s family encountered to live out their faith freely greatly influenced her educational and religious views, as the letters we translate will indicate. Her education began early. In her spiritual autobiography Eukleria, or The Choice of the Better Part (1673), we learn that at age three she could already “read German accurately and recite part of the [Heidelberg] catechism from memory,” thanks to “an outstanding tutor, who lived at home with us.”55 She describes how, when she recited the first question of the Heidelberg Catechism to her maid one day, “at the words ‘that I am not my own but belong to my most faithful Savior Jesus Christ,’ my heart was flooded with such an intense and sweet joy that I became intimately conscious of Christ’s love. All the subsequent years could not erase the living memory of that moment” (13–14). Connecting the love of Christ with the heart, seat of intuitive knowledge and inner experience, became foundational to her religious understanding. As was customary among elite families, she was sent at age seven to a French school, but after only two months she returned home to study writing, arithmetic, and instrumental and vocal music with a private tutor.56 The Dutch-born bio-bibliographer Isaac Bullart (1599–1672) indicates that “she began to speak Latin, taught by a preceptor, who taught this language to her older brothers,” and she became so good at it that at ten or eleven she was correcting her brothers.57 Discovering her at this one day, her father permitted her to take part fully in their lessons. He handed Seneca’s sayings to her, and to encourage her further in her Latin studies, he quoted an adage from Erasmus: Aquila non capit muscas (“The eagle does not catch flies”).58 Her progress in the amateur arts also continued. At age six, she cut out with scissors, “without any example,” intricate designs from bits of paper to everyone’s astonishment; at age ten, she learned embroidery “in three hours . . . Everybody was amazed” (Eukleria, 18). At age eleven Van Schurman began reading the lives of the martyrs, including most likely John Foxe’s Commentarii Rerum in Ecclesia Gestarum (Strasbourg, 1554; later translated into English in 1563 as History of the Martyrs 55. Anna Maria van Schurman, Eukleria, seu melioris partis electio. Tractatus brevem vitae ejus Delineationem exhibens (Altona: Cornelis van der Meulen, 1673), 15. Unless otherwise indicated, all translations from the Eukleria are our own. The first two chapters of the Eukleria are translated in Anna Maria van Schurman, Whether a Christian Woman Should Be Educated, and Other Writings from her Intellectual Circle, ed. and trans. Joyce L. Irwin (Chicago: University of Chicago Press 1998). 56. French schools were mostly attended by boys; only after the 1630s were schools founded for girls. The Reformed Church had no control over these schools. See Dick van Miert, “Education,” in Cambridge Companion, 339, 342. 57. Bullart, 229. On Bullart, see Anne Delvingt, “L’Académie des sciences et des arts (1682) d’Isaac Bullart et les ‘Peintres illustres du Pays-Bas & autres en deçà des Monts,’ “ in L’Histoire de l’histoire de l’art septentrional au XVIIe siècle, ed. Michèle-Caroline Hick (Turnhout: Brepols, 2009), 67–78. 58. Erasmus, Adages, III.ii.65.

14 Introduction or Actes and Monuments). Portions of Foxe’s work—a popular history of early Christian and Protestant martyrs across Europe, as were most of the influential martyrs’ books—were first translated into Dutch in 1612. There she would have read about the writings and the heroic death of the early Reformist Lady Jane Grey (1536/7–1554), who fascinated her and whom she mentions several times in her letters. Jane Grey, queen of England for only nine days, was beheaded at age sixteen or seventeen and immediately became “a symbol of Protestant heroism and martyrdom.”59 Foxe’s work, important to Dutch Calvinists, especially to those families who like the Van Schurmans emigrated to escape persecution, evoked in the young Anna Maria a burning desire to die for her faith. She states in Eukleria: “Upon seeing examples of so many of Christ’s faithful servants and witnesses to his truth, a burning desire for martyrdom seized my mind and I passionately longed to exchange the life that I so much prized for a death as glorious as theirs” (14). The significance of these martyrs in her early life was not lost on Pierre Yvon, who connected it with her later decision to join the Labadists: what she experienced at age eleven, she newly experienced, he wrote, “and felt in her heart the renewal of that joy she had then when she judged that she would be infinitely happy if some day she could suffer hardship for His [Jesus’s] Name.”60 Van Schurman’s adolescent years were marked by her formal entrance into the networks of the Republic of Letters. That she managed this as a woman, and at so young an age, suggests an overarching strategy. Her engagement in these networks closely resembles what Carol Pal calls a “three-stage development,” which, for a male scholar, usually included, first, being noted locally for his accomplishments; second, getting the attention of national and international savants; and last, creating his own network(s) of exchange within the larger community of letters.61 Van Schurman began attracting attention locally for her artistic work and learning.62 In around 1620, at age twelve or thirteen, she was eulogized by Anna Roemers Visscher (1584–1651), a poet and emblem writer from Amsterdam, for cultivating art and music, and for her Latin and Greek. Prophetically, Visscher thought that Van Schurman would one day “banish male pride / With reason and 59. Carole Levin, “Lady Jane Grey: Protestant Queen and Martyr,” in Silent but for the Word: Tudor Women as Patrons, Translators, and Writers of Religious Works, ed. Margaret Patterson Hannay (Kent, OH: Kent State University Press, 1985), 92–106, at 97. On Lady Jane Grey in Van Schurman’s letters on the education of women, see Larsen, Star of Utrecht, chap. 6. 60. Yvon, 1212, col. 2. 61. Pal, Republic of Women, 26. 62. Van Schurman’s artistic education included embroidery, calligraphy, intricate paper-cutting, glass and copper engraving, wax modeling, and miniature carvings intended as gifts. Later she became the first Hollander to paint a pastel portrait. See Beek, First Female, 20; Katlijne van der Stighelen, Anna Maria van Schurman (1607–1678) of “Hoe hooge dat een maeght kan in de konsten stijgen” (Leuven: Leuven University Press, 1987).

Introduction 15 with argument.”63 Visscher became for Van Schurman a model on how to introduce oneself to scholars. The former had secured local recognition by replying to a praise poem from the classical philologist, orientalist, and poet Daniel Heinsius (1580–1655), which he included in his collection Nederduytsche Poemata (Dutch Poems, 1616). Visscher went on to compose a poem honoring Jacob Cats (1577– 1660), the Grand Pensionary of Holland and a poet of national stature. Her poem was included in a poetic anthology from Zeeland entitled Zeeusche nachtegael (Zeeland Nightingale, 1623).64 With Visscher as her model, the fifteen-year-old Van Schurman addressed a letter to Heinsius in 1623; she had also sent a missive to Cats a year earlier, thanking him for his recent visit and for inquiring “zealously after my studies (or rather, my trifles).”65 Unlike Anna Visscher, however, she wrote in Latin, the international language of the Republic of Letters. Moreover, she alluded to the fame Cats had promised to give her and her studies. Cats then praised her in his bestseller, Houwelick (Marriage, 1625); he singled her out, along with Visscher, as an exception to her sex. In his major work Proefsteen van de Trou-ringh (Touchstone of the Wedding Ring, 1637), dedicated to Van Schurman, Cats included an engraved portrait of her with a description of her qualities, languages, and learning, stating that she and he resembled one another in that both bore “paper children.”66 Now fully embarked on drawing attention locally, she continued doing so in the next phase of her life in Franeker, the capital of Friesland, to which her family moved in 1623 so that Johan Godschalk, her brother and lifelong supporter, could study medicine and geometry at the university. Her father also wanted to study, along with his sons, under the English Puritan William Ames (Amesius, 1576–1633), professor of practical theology at Franeker from 1622 to 1633. Amesius and the English Puritans emphasized personal religious conversion, piety, and strict morality, and they greatly influenced Dutch Pietism. But Frederik van Schurman died suddenly on 15 November 1623, soon after the move and Anna Maria’s sixteenth birthday. On his deathbed, he urgently admonished her “against the inextricable and corrupting chains of worldly marriage.” She obeyed his fatherly advice “when thereafter,” she writes in Eukleria, “the World attempted and sought in various ways to bind me to it by marriage” (25). Her decision to remain single dovetailed with her growing sense of a scholarly vocation. 63. Anna Roemers Visscher, Gedichten van Anna Roemersdochter Visscher: Een bloemlezing, ed. Riet Schenkeveld-van der Dussen and Annelies de Jeu (Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press, 1999), 96. 64. Visscher, in Lia van Gemert et al., eds., Women’s Writing from the Low Countries, 1200–1875: A Bilingual Anthology (Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press, 2010), 237, 239. 65. Van Schurman to Jacob Cats, 1622, in Opuscula, 166–67. 66. Cats’s description is included in Van Schurman’s Opuscula, 334. Cats’s books sold in the tens of thousands.

16 Introduction Van Schurman resembled well-known women intellectuals of the period who also did not marry, all for different reasons. This group included, for instance, Marie de Gournay, Marie du Moulin, the Protestant princesses Elisabeth of Bohemia and Anne de Rohan, Madeleine de Scudéry, and Queen Christina of Sweden. As well, several Dutch women writers such as Margaretha van Godewijck, Katharina Lescailje, and Cornelia van der Veer, all contemporaries of Van Schurman with long careers, remained unmarried.67 But Van Schurman, unlike these women intellectuals, prized her virginity especially because it provided a single-minded devotion to Christ. Her life’s motto, Amor Meus Crucifixus Est (“My love has been crucified”), borrowed from the letters of the martyr Saint Ignatius of Antioch (ca. 35–ca. 107 CE), appeared in her many contributions to the alba amicorum (friendship albums) of acquaintances. She was enthusiastically commended for her virginal life by Meletios Pantogalus, bishop of the Greek Orthodox Church at Ephesus.68 Her dedication to the single life became well known: Thomas des Hayons, a French Hellenist writer from the Huguenot French city of Sedan, published in Utrecht in 1649 a collection of epigrams entitled Epigrams Consecrated to the Virtue of Mademoiselle Anne de Schurman, in which he described her devotion to Christ as akin to a holy marriage.69 Her desire to consecrate her life to her faith, and her father’s deathbed warnings, reflected her spiritual yearnings. However, her father may also have wished to protect her from a confessionally mixed union. Utrecht remained in the first half of the seventeenth century a center of Catholicism in the Netherlands; about a third of its population was Catholic, its elite was mostly Catholic, and about a quarter of the Republic’s priests lived in the city. It had a high incidence of religiously mixed marriages among the Dutch nobility until the 1640s. Calvinist authorities opposed such unions, warning of the dangers of possible conversion to Catholicism.70

67. On Lescailje and Van der Veer, see Martine van Elk, Early Modern Women’s Writing: Domesticity, Privacy, and the Public Sphere in England and the Dutch Republic (London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2017). 68. Beek, First Female, 123–25. 69. Thomas des Hayons, Epigrammes, consacrez à la vertu de Madamoiselle Anne Marie de Schurman (Utrecht: Johannes Waesberghe, 1649); transcribed in Schotel, 2:84–91. 70. There is a growing body of work on mixed marriages in the Dutch Republic. See Bertrand Forclaz, “The Emergence of Confessional Identities: Family Relationships and Religious Coexistence in Seventeenth-Century Utrecht,” in Living with Religious Diversity in Early-Modern Europe, ed. C. Scott Dixon et al. (Farnham, UK, and Burlington, VT: Ashgate, 2009), 249–66, and Benjamin J. Kaplan, “ ‘For They Will Turn Away Thy Sons’: The Practice and Perils of Mixed Marriage in the Dutch Golden Age,” in Kaplan, Reformation and the Practice of Toleration, 298–315. Van Schurman’s brother Johan Godschalk published a book, Weegh-schale des Heyligdoms (Weigh scale of the Sanctuary, Utrecht, 1658) against mixed marriages (with thanks to Amanda Pipkin for this last title). On Johan Godschalk’s book, see Pieta van Beek, with Joris Bürmann, “Ex Libris”: De Bibliotheek van Anna Maria

Introduction 17 The family stayed on in Franeker until about 1625/6 so that Johan Godschalk could complete his studies. Anna Maria profited from her proximity to the University of Franeker by becoming acquainted, through her brother, with several professors, two of whom she would meet again later at the University of Utrecht: Meinardus Schotanus, professor of the Old Testament and her “regular discussion partner,”71 and his brother Bernardus, professor of law and mathematics, who became Utrecht’s first rector magnificus. While at Franeker, she composed around 1625 a florilegium or anthology, no longer extant, of thirteen brief sayings on God that she transcribed from a wide range of classical authors and church fathers.72 Returning to Utrecht in November 1629, Eva von Harff bought a house situated on Achter de Dom (“Behind the Cathedral”). The house’s location (indicated by a large plaque stating that Van Schurman had lived on that spot) could not have been more fortunate for her budding career. Just a few hundred meters away on the same street would be established the university she would soon attend. Around the corner stood the house of the rector of the university and her soon-to-be professor and mentor, Gisbertus Voetius. Voetius, a Reformed minister, became professor of theology, Hebrew, and ancient oriental languages at the Illustre Latin School of Utrecht in 1634. The high school became a full-fledged university two years later, and from the start was considered second in status after Leiden for the prestige of its humanist studies—classical philology, biblical studies, and philosophy.73 On the occasion of its founding, Voetius invited Van Schurman to write the customary Latin ode, to which she added poems in Dutch and French.74 She was an exceptional Latinist, not merely verbally fluent but with a rare command of classical (Ciceronian) Latin which very few women could display.75 Voetius, who had started mentoring Van Schurman in 1634, wanted to show off the talents of his precocious protégée by featuring her as a type of civic titular Minerva, thereby adding to the prestige of the city. But while he envisioned her merely in a ceremonial and ornamental role, she seized the occasion to challenge received ideas and issue an activist call van Schurman en de Catalogi van de Labadiestenbibliotheek, Schurmaniana-reeks no. 5 (Ridderkerk: Provily Pers, 2016), 32. 71. Stated on the caption to an oil portrait of Schotanus at the Martena Museum in Franeker. 72. See Pieta van Beek, “On God.” An Unknown Florilegium of Anna Maria van Schurman (ca. 1625), Schurmanniana-reeks no. 1 (Ridderkerk: Provily Pers, 2014). Van Beek, who reconstituted the florilegium from the inventory compiled in 1851 by a Franeker notary, comments that the anthology is “truly exceptional” for its wide range of sources and its “non-Calvinist dogmatic point of view” (23). 73. Israel, 573–75. 74. The Latin ode was included in Opuscula (1648/1650), 262–63, while the French poem was added to the 1652 edition of Opuscula, 302–3. 75. Jane Stevenson, “Women’s Education,” in Brill’s Encyclopaedia of the Neo-Latin World, vol. 1: Macropaedia, ed. Philip Ford, Jan Bloemendal, and Charles Fantazzi (Leiden and Boston: Brill, 2014), 87–99, at 94.

18 Introduction for gender integration: “these holy precincts are inaccessible to Minerva’s virgin chorus!” she exclaims in her thirty-line ode, and she boldly petitions officials of the new university for a space for female students. Anna Maria van Schurman’s Attendance at Disputations and Her Study of Languages Voetius invited Van Schurman (and her brother Johan Godschalk76) to attend his disputations on theology and to study languages. André Rivet, her mentor at the time (to be discussed more shortly), encouraged her to accept the invitation. In a letter to him in October 1634, she confessed her anxiety in taking such a step: “But I fear that there is a need not so much for a net as for a goad on that very threshold to which I’m clinging” (no. 8, 1:11).77 She accepted, however, since a month later she told Rivet that Voetius was tutoring her in advanced Greek (which she had begun to study with her father) as well as biblical and rabbinic Hebrew (no. 9, 1:12). She also took up Arabic. The following year, in May 1635, her good friend Arnoldus Buchelius expressed some anxiety over her surcharge of studies: “Anna Maria van Schurman is pursuing Arabic and I fear that it may in some way overwhelm her too much.”78 Then, in 1636, Voetius expanded his lessons to include theology and oriental languages (Syriac and Aramaic). He invited her to these lectures, making her the first woman to attend a university. She did so, hidden in a closet-like space or cubicle with a lattice grid. She also attended his private lectures (the so-called privatissima for a few privileged students) at his home. Such private teaching, as an early modern contemporary stated, was for the “sublime geniuses.”79 Van Schurman’s presence at Voetius’s disputations was typical of all university students at the time, but unheard-of for a woman. The disputatio’s main purpose was to resolve a disputed quæstio (question); the faculty of theology presented these as part of a series in the collegium covering a range of theological topics, the shortest of which, consisting of forty to fifty disputations, was usually

76. Fred A. van Lieburg, “Johan Godschalk Van Schurman (1605–1664),” in Figuren en thema’s van de Nadere Reformatie, ed. J. B. H. Alblas et al. (Rotterdam: Lindenberg, 1993), 58. 77. Unless otherwise indicated, all citations from Van Schurman’s letters to Rivet come from A Collection of Seventy-four letters & four Latin Poems &c. in the handwriting of the very talented & very celebrated Anna Maria van Schurman (KB, MS 133 B 8), hereafter “KB collection,” on which our translations are based. The first parenthesized number indicates the number in the KB collection; the second indicates the number of the letter (or poem) in our translations. 78. Aernout van Buchel (Arnoldus Buchelius), Notae Quotidianae, ed. J. W. C. van Campen (Utrecht: Kemink, 1940), 40. 79. Françoise Waquet, Les enfants de Socrate: Filiation intellectuelle et transmission du savoir, XVIIe– XXIe siècle (Paris: Albin Michel, 2008), 220.

Introduction 19 completed in fifteen months.80 Van Schurman would thus have spent long periods of time attending these. Her presence at these disputations became so widely noted that Descartes wrote in jest to his disciple Henricus Regius (Hendrik de Roy, 1598–1679), professor of theoretical medicine and botany at Utrecht, that he would not hesitate to come to the latter’s rescue should he need moral support in his defense of Cartesian theories, “provided that no one knows anything about this and that I am able to remain hidden in the listening area or the tribune where Mlle de Schurman is accustomed to following the classes.”81 Van Schurman’s study of languages, on the other hand, was not so unusual for girls from the Dutch elite. French was taught in the schools, and Italian was considered a desirable female accomplishment. Instruction in Latin and Greek depended on paternal encouragement. Hebrew was valued as the original language of the Scriptures, offering, as the linguarum mater (mother of languages), a direct access to biblical knowledge; some ambitious parents had their sons and daughters instructed in Hebrew. Van Schurman’s extensive knowledge of Semitic and Near Eastern languages, however, was unparalleled for a woman. As a university student, she learned these languages because biblical philology and oriental studies were pre-eminent at Utrecht, as at Leiden. The study of Arabic was included on grounds that it advanced the study of science, medicine, mathematics, and the Bible. Van Schurman annotated a handwritten Arabic version of the Qur’an, now lost, which was edited in 1694 by the Hamburg Reformed pastor Abraham Hinckelmann.82 Her rapid mastery of Syriac and Arabic surprised even Buchelius, who noted in his journal that “she has imbibed the basics of Syriac with great ease and is beginning to read Arabic with great dexterity; she is also studying philosophy, especially logic.”83 To Arabic, Chaldaic (or Aramaic), and Syriac, Van Schurman added Persian, Samaritan, and Ethiopian, which she studied on her own. She wrote an Ethiopian Latin grammar, never published and no longer extant. She was proficient in French, German, Italian, and Flemish or Dutch. None of her writing in English survives, except for one line on a penciled portrait of her deceased father or grandfather.84 According to Jean Le Laboureur—who met 80. On university lectures and disputations, see Keith D. Stanglin, ed., The Missing Public Disputations of Jacobus Arminius (Leiden and Boston: Brill, 2010). 81. Descartes to Henricus Regius, 24 May 1640, in Descartes, Œuvres complètes, ed. Charles Adam and Paul Tannéry, 12 vols (Paris: Vrin, 1964–71), 3:70. 82. Schotel, 34–35; Beek, First Female, 79; Beek, “Anna Maria van Schurman,” in Christian-Muslim Relations: A Bibliographical History, vol. 8: Northern and Eastern Europe (1600–1700), ed. David Thomas and John A. Chesworth (Leiden and Boston: Brill, 2016), 600. 83. Buchel, Notae Quotidianae, April 1636, 65. 84. Katlijne van der Stighelen, “Portretjes in ‘Spaens loot’ van de hand van Anna Maria van Schurman (1607–1678),” ZE 2 (1986): 27–44; Beek, First Female, 42.

20 Introduction Van Schurman in Utrecht in 1645 while accompanying the new Queen of Poland, Louise-Marie de Gonzague—she also knew Spanish, as attested to by three other non-Dutch contemporaries: Claude Joly, Canon of Notre-Dame de Paris, who visited Van Schurman while accompanying the duchesse de Longueville in September 1646; the Carmelite priest and bibliographer Louis Jacob de Saint-Charles; and the poet Rotger zum Bergen, a university professor in his birthplace of Riga.85 So far, however, there is no extant evidence of Spanish in Van Schurman’s writings. Transnational Fame and Works Van Schurman’s fame quickly crossed borders. The founding of the University of Utrecht in March 1636 led to her first publications. Her Latin ode, Anna Maria van Schurman Congratulates the Famous and Ancient City of Utrecht with its Recently Founded University, and her French poem, Remarque d’Anne Marie de Schurman, were published in a commemorative volume of the professors’ inaugural speeches.86 Her Dutch poem on the inauguration was appended to Voetius’s Sermon on the Usefulness of Academies and Schools, and of the Sciences and the Arts that are taught therein.87 A second work, De Vitae Termino (On the Temporal Limits of Life), a philosophical and theological treatise, soon followed. She figured prominently in the title of Johan van Beverwijck’s collective volume, Epistolary question on the temporal limits of Life, destined or changeable? With Scholarly Responses [. . .] to which is added the same topic by the most Noble and Learned Maiden Anna Maria van

85. Le Laboureur kept a travel journal, and recounts how the entire royal entourage was astounded by Van Schurman’s linguistic brilliance as she conversed effortlessly in Italian and Latin with the Bishop of Orange, and in Greek with the queen’s physician. See Jean Le Laboureur, Histoire et relation du voyage de la Royne de Pologne et du retour de Madame la mareschalle de Guébrian, ambassadrice extraordinaire, & sur-intendante de sa conduitte (Paris: Toussaint Quinet, 1648), 66, excerpted in Opuscula, 337–39; Claude Joly, Voyage ou description de toutes les villes de Münster en Westphalie, Hollande, Osnabrüch, Cologne, et autres lieux des Païs-Bas (Paris: François Clouizier, Jean de La Tourette, and Pierre Aubouyn, 1672), 150; Louis Jacob, Bibliothèque des femmes illustres par leurs écrits (1646) (BnF, A.F. Fr. 22.865), and Opuscula, 346. On Bergen, see Pieta van Beek, “Herrezen uit de as”: Verbrande lofgeschriften van Rotger zum Bergen voor Anna Maria van Schurman (1649–1655), Schurmannianareeks no. 4 (Ridderkerk: Provily Pers, 2015), 57. 86. Academiae Ultrajectinae inauguratio, unà cum orationibus inauguralibus (Utrecht: Aegidius and Petrus Roman, 1636). 87. Sermoen van de nutticheydt der academien ende scholen, mitsgaders der wetenschappen ende consten die in de selve gheleert weren (Utrecht: Aegidius and Petrus Roman, 1636). For the translation of the Latin ode, see Pieta van Beek, “Alpha Virginum: Anna Maria van Schurman (1607–1678),” in Women Writing Latin from Roman Antiquity to Early Modern Europe, vol. 3: Early Modern Women Writing Latin, ed. Laurie J. Churchill, Phyllis R. Brown, and Jane E. Jeffrey (New York and London: Routledge, 2002), 271–93. On the Dutch poem, see Beek, “Verbastert Christendom,” 54–63.

Introduction 21 Schurman (Leiden, 1639).88 She asked whether human beings should use science to prolong life, and replied that although the end of life was decreed by God, this end or temporal limit was produced freely and contingently in how death occurred. Physicians were essential in “moderating the virulence of illnesses, soothing pains, and reawakening natural strength.”89 She supported her arguments with ample references from Stoic, Sceptic, Ciceronian, Platonic, Judaic, Muslim, and early Christian works. Of the twenty-four invited contributors who participated in the three parts of Van Beverwijck’s published symposium, she was the only woman. Van Schurman’s next publication was an unauthorized edition titled A Friendly Argument between the Most Noble Maiden Anna Maria van Schurman and Andreas Rivetus, on the Aptitude of the Female Mind for Knowledge and Humane Letters (Paris, 1638).90 Published by Charles du Chesne, a court physician of King Louis XIII, the Amica Dissertatio is extremely rare. The most extensive copy, located at the Bibliothèque Sainte-Geneviève in Paris, consists of the excerpt from the royal privilège and eight pièces, or items. These include two different addresses by Du Chesne to the reader, Van Schurman’s Latin ode on the inauguration of the University of Utrecht, five brief verse eulogies, Domenico Gilberto da Cesena’s Italian panegyric (later published separately in 1642), Van Schurman’s poem responding to rumors that she had translated L’Astrée, Rivet’s dedicatory letter to her from his L’Instruction préparatoire à la Sainte Cène (The Preparatory Instruction to Holy Communion, 1634), and the correspondence between Van Schurman and Rivet on the education of women.91 Eight letters in the collection of the Koninklijke Bibliotheek (KB) in The Hague concern Van Schurman’s dealings with Du Chesne. Three of these, written 88. Further editions followed. It appeared some fifteen times, either alone or as part of another work. See Van Beek, First Female, 118. See H.J.M. Nellen, “De Vitae termino: An Epistolary Survey by Johan van Beverwijck (1632–1639),” in Acta Conventus Neo-Latini Hafniensis: Proceedings of the Eighth International Congress of Neo-Latin Studies (Copenhagen, 1991), edited by Ann Moss et al. (Tempe, AR: Medieval and Renaissance Texts and Studies, 1997), 731–40. 89. Van Schurman to Van Beverwijck, 8 February 1639, in De Vitae Termino, translated into French in Van Schurman, Lettres de la très fameuse demoiselle Anne-Marie Schurmans, academicienne de la fameuse Université d’Utrect. Traduites du Holandois par Madame de Zoutelandt, à present femme du Sieur Boisson, Ingenieur du Roy (Paris: Rebuffé, 1730), 23. 90. Amica Dissertatio inter Nobilissimam Virginem Annam Mariam à Schurman, et Andræam Rivetum, de Ingenii Muliebris ad scientias, & meliores literas capacitate (Paris: n.p., 1638), hereafter “Amica Dissertatio.” On this unauthorized edition, see Larsen, Star of Utrecht, 158–68. 91. Pieta van Beek has identified a copy at the Kongelige Bibliotek in Copenhagen, but it consists of just four of the eight pièces found in the copy at Saint-Geneviève. Two other incomplete copies are located at the Bibliothèque Sainte-Geneviève, and another incomplete and incorrectly ordered copy is at the Bibliothèque Mazarine in Paris. Finally, a copy at the Bibliothèque Municipale in Grenoble includes five of the eight listed items. All copies include the correspondence on the education of women. Anne Larsen thanks Krystyna Mossan from the Bibliothèque Municipale in Grenoble for her assistance.

22 Introduction in 1640, include her thanks to him for publishing her writings (no. 77, 1:28; she had not yet seen the edition); her informing Rivet that the collective reaction in Utrecht toward the book was that a new, corrected version had to be arranged “since the earlier version is so full of errors that they could not bear to see these letters republished again in such a flawed manner” (no. 21, 1:30); and, lastly, a letter requesting Rivet to release her letters to the famed Elzevier publishing firm in Leiden, which had decided to replace the Amica Dissertatio with a new, expanded version (no. 22, 1:31). Elzevier’s anticipated edition of Van Schurman’s Dissertatio appeared in Leiden in 1641.92 It includes her treatise and letters to Rivet on female higher studies, several pages of elogia, and a two-way exchange with three noted scholars in the Dutch Republic: Adolphus Vorstius (1597–1663), a Leiden professor and a nephew of Buchelius, and Andreas Colvius (1594–1671) and Jacobus Lydius (1610–1679), both ministers of the Reformed Church at Dordrecht. The Dordrecht physician Johan van Beverwijck (1594–1647) edited the book. Its publication was a major achievement. It cancelled out the 1638 edition of the Amica Dissertatio; it brought once again to the attention of the Republic of Letters Van Schurman’s learning; at its core lay her philosophical scholastic treatise and letters on educating women, which had first heralded her fame; and its prefatory addresses to the readers perfectly illustrated how to ease a woman’s publication into the book market. But Van Schurman’s dealings with Charles du Chesne were far from over. Four more letters in the collection, all in 1643, detail Du Chesne’s continued interest. He requested that she translate some of her letters into French. Her reply to him—no longer extant—was sent to Rivet with a covering letter in which she expressed deep misgivings over the French editor’s invitation. In her letter to Du Chesne, she stated “some objections” to this project in the hope that she could “remove  [herself] very far, and as much as possible, from the task of translating these little works into French” (no. 32, 1:42). She did not know if the request had originated with the French queen, Anne of Austria, or with Du Chesne. Two weeks later, in a follow-up letter, her alarm increased. Du Chesne, it seemed, wanted a translation of the Dissertatio, to which she was adamantly opposed. She saw no reason for yet another version of the work that Elzevier had published. Finding herself in a bind—she had vowed allegiance to the queen and did not want to seem arrogant (no. 31, 1:43)—she proposed that Rivet “ferret out easily through his friends” in Paris whether it was the queen’s or Du Chesne’s wish that she translate the work. If it was Du Chesne, then “he could certainly take care of 92. Daniel Heinsius (Heyns, 1580–1655), a renowned scholar at Leiden, a proofreader for Elzevier, and a correspondent of Van Schurman from 1623, may have helped her negotiate the contract. Cited in David Norbrook, “Women, the Republic of Letters, and the Public Sphere in the Mid-Seventeenth Century,” Criticism 46 (2004): 234.

Introduction 23 this task himself without much difficulty.” By August 1643, Van Schurman could rest easy. Rivet had asked Princess Anne de Rohan to intervene with the queen to put a stop to Du Chesne’s request. Van Schurman wrote to Rivet that he had “brought to naught by [his] prudence the imprudence—or dare I say the vanity— that that man showered on me” (no. 33, 1:44). If Rivet thought it appropriate, she would thank Anne de Rohan, incomparabilis illius Heroinae (“that incomparable Heroine”), but preferred not to write to the queen, since “you know how much I have detested excessive fame throughout my whole life.” Finally, in the fall of 1643, she was reassured that “our Doctor has acquiesced to your advice” (no. 35, 1:46). The persistent Du Chesne might have sent her one more extant letter in which he requested, to her surprise, “the exact date and time of [her] birth.” Since Rivet had commended this “chief physician” as “a man of unusual piety,” she was “not afraid that he [would] harm [her] by looking into [her] horoscope” (no. 34, 1:45). Van Schurman’s publishing experience with the Amica Dissertatio afforded her an invaluable lesson. She mustered public opinion in Utrecht to press for a new edition that would rectify the unacceptably flawed Paris version. The resulting book, the Dissertatio (1641), met her expectations fully. She stood up to the pressure to translate the Dissertatio, using Rivet to maneuver a more fitting outcome through the mediation of the Princess of Rohan with the French queen. This event had two crucial outcomes: it opened the way for Guillaume Colletet (1598–1659), the seasoned Parisian translator, historian, poet, and salon habitué, to translate into French her letters on the education of women, and it led to a brief correspondence with Anne de Rohan, which was included in her major work, Opuscula.93 Colletet’s free adaptation of Van Schurman’s and Rivet’s letters on women’s higher studies, A Famous Controversy: Whether it is necessary or not that Girls be learned,94 was published in Paris in 1646 and attracted much attention. The Question célèbre featured an epistolary debate opposing two famous interlocutors on a topic closely linked to the Querelle des femmes and its controversies over women’s education, which had evident economic advantages for the publisher. Added to its cachet was its dedication to Anne-Marie-Louise d’Orléans (1627–1693), duchesse de Montpensier—the wealthiest heiress in France, if not Europe. Factors that influenced Colletet to undertake the translation included his search for new patronage; the interest of close colleagues and members of the salon of Catherine de Vivonne, Marquise de Rambouillet, for whom the translation was intended; the controversial nature of the letters; and the market appeal of 93. Opuscula, 260–66. On Van Schurman and Rohan, see Pal, Republic of Women, chap. 6. 94. Question celebre. S’il est necessaire, ou non, que les filles soient sçavantes. Agitée de part et d’autre, par Mademoiselle Anne Marie de Schurman Holandoise, & le Sr André Rivet Poitevin. Le tout mis en François par le Sr Colletet (Paris: Rolet le Duc, 1646). Hereafter cited as Question celebre.

24 Introduction the book. Colletet was aware that the return for his translation was commercial, as well as aesthetic and intellectual.95 A selection of Van Schurman’s correspondence during the 1630s and 1640s, in Latin, Greek, Hebrew, and French, with references in Arabic and Syriac, was published in 1648 in Leiden. Once again, Elzevier published her work, but with a major difference: Van Schurman exercised some control over the print text. More than any of her previous publications, the Opuscula affirmed her authoritative standing in the Republic of Letters. It is a typical humanist letterbook in an elegant typographic print with a striking frontispiece—Van Schurman’s engraved 1640 self-portrait in an oval frame (Figure 1)—and comprises two treatises (De Vitae Termino and Dissertatio logica); Latin, Greek, and Hebrew letters; Latin poems (Poemata); and French letters. It closes with tributes (Elogia) by numerous colleagues in the Republic of Letters and three French letters written in 1647 and 1648 to Salmasius and his wife, Anne Mercier, hastily added at the last minute. Van Schurman’s letterbook was so widely read that a second edition by Elzevier soon followed in 1650, and a third in 1652. Van Schurman personally took control of the last edition and added new material. She selected Johannes van Waesberghe, an Utrecht publisher, for this third edition. Further impressions, no longer extant, followed in 1672 in Leiden and Herford (Germany), 1700 in Wesel, 1723 in Dresden, and 1794 in Leipzig.96 A final fourth edition was published in 1749 in Leipzig, edited by the poet laureate Dorothea Loeberia, who included reference notes and reorganized the collection. Clement Barksdale’s English translation of Van Schurman’s Dissertatio logica and of a short excerpt from her letter to Rivet on women’s education appeared in London in 1659. A slim book of fifty-five pages, The Learned Maid, or, Whether a Maid may be a Scholar? also includes a sampling of Van Schurman’s letters to select continental and English writers of interest to an English audience (including Gassendi, Van Beverwijck, Dorothy Moore, Sir Simonds D’Ewes, and Frederik Spanheim), with a dedication to “A.H.” (Lady Anne Halkett, Lady Anne Huntington, or Lady Anne Hudson).97 Barksdale (1609–1687), a vicar, teacher, and prolific translator from Latin, was principal of a free school at Hereford and, later, master of a private school at Hawling in the Cotswolds. He was interested in 95. On the economic dimension of women’s published writings, see Leah L. Chang, Into Print: The Production of Female Authorship in Early Modern France (Newark: University of Delaware Press, 2009). 96. Beek (First Female, 248) indicates that the poet Henrietta Catharina, Baroness von Gersdorff (1648–1726), also edited the Opuscula in 1730 (now presumed lost), adding to it her own poems and letters. Von Gersdorff, a religious poet, was an early supporter of the Moravian Church and of the Pietist Philipp Jakob Spener. She encouraged the education of girls. 97. The Learned Maid, or, Whether a Maid may be a Scholar? A Logick Exercise Written in Latine by that incomparable Virgin Anna Maria à Schurman of Utrecht; With some Epistles to the famous Gassendus and others, trans. Clement Barksdale (London: John Redmayne, 1659).

Introduction 25 women’s education and later published a Letter touching a Colledge of Maids, or, a Virgin-Society (London, 1675). Anna Maria van Schurman was also a theologian. Her unpublished commentaries on the New Testament and on Saint Paul’s Epistle to the Romans are no longer extant.98 Her metaphysical treatise, De motibus primo primis (On the first movements from the beginning), on God as the Prime Mover or First Cause, is also lost.99 Several of her epistolary essays, however, on topics such as the baptism of the dead in 1 Corinthians 15: 29, millennialism and the overthrow of Satan in the Book of Revelations, the cross and the hyssop, and the doctrine of transubstantiation were published in her Opuscula. Her spiritual autobiography, Eukleria, or the Choice of the Better Part (1673), a book on theology and philosophy, as well as an apologia of the Labadists, influenced the movement of Lutheran pietism in Frankfurt. She also translated from the French a collection of hymns by Jean de Labadie.100 Changing Course Anna Maria van Schurman became deeply conflicted over her astonishing fame. She spent a great deal of her time answering letters and receiving visitors at her home in Utrecht. Pierre Yvon went so far as to state that: . . . there was not a person of quality nor any nobleman passing through Holland who did not look for an occasion to converse with her even for a mere quarter of an hour. To have been in Utrecht without having seen Mlle de Schurman was like having been in Paris without having seen the King.101 The conflict between, on the one hand, pride of place as a distinguished citizen in the networks of the Republic of Letters and, on the other, her deeply held Christian faith surfaced again and again in her correspondence with leading male savants. From her first contact with Daniel Heinsius in 1623 at age fifteen to her spiritual autobiography published in 1673 when she was sixty-five years old, she touched repeatedly on her burdensome fame. In the introduction to Eukleria 98. Beek, First Female, 38. 99. Beek, First Female, 121. 100. Heilige lof-sangen ter eeren Gods, tot heerlijkheid van Jesus Christus, en tot vertroostinge en vreugde van sijn Kerk. Uit het Frans Vertaalt door Anna Maria van Schurman (Praises to honor God, to the glory of Jesus Christ and to the comfort and joy of his Church. Translated by Anna Maria van Schurman, Amsterdam: Jacob van Velzen, 1675). Labadie published in 1670 two collections of hymns, Receüil de diverses Chansons Spiritüeles (Amsterdam: Laurans Autein, 1670) and Le Chant Royal du Grand Roy Jesus, ou les Hymnes & Cantiques de l’Aigneau (Amsterdam: Laurans Autein, 1670). 101. Yvon, 1264, col. 2.

26 Introduction she opposed falsehood—the fame heaped on her—to the “authentic presentation of the truth” that she wanted to offer (4). She confessed that although very often her conscience was troubled, she was led “under the guise of a certain virtue or duty and the supposed common good of erudition” to acquiesce and so allowed herself “to be led step by step into that theater of a fame that was too illustrious, from which it has been difficult to return” (10). Growing intolerance of fame and praise led her, in the mid-1640s, to refuse to reply to correspondents whom she did not personally know. She frequently asked Rivet whether a reply was necessary. On the day she received Sir Simonds D’Ewes’s self-introductory letter, enclosed with a letter from Rivet, she expressed her hesitation, even displeasure, in a postscript to Rivet: “Before I could sign this letter, yours and a letter from that English Baronet arrived. I cannot see how to reply appropriately to him, since it seems neither advisable nor safe to communicate with those I do not know” (no. 45, 1:53).102 She also began to question the direction and influence of her studies on her spiritual life. In January 1644, she addressed a lengthy poem to Frederik Spanheim (1600–1649), a theologian at the University of Leiden and pastor of the Walloon Church, in which she shared her misgivings.103 He had summoned her back “to the streams of Helicon” (line 1). But she replied that “once upon a time, I admired these old Greeks /  . . . I used to trust their voices as pure divine oracles” (lines 9, 13). She described how “buffeted” she felt “through anxious and vain studies, / As I, in the middle of the sea, sought safe shores” (lines 21–22). Then, in an eighty-line dialogue with her alter ego, represented by “Heavenly Persuasion,” she meditated on the vanity of pagan scholarship as opposed to the spiritual refreshment of Christian theology. This inner conflict led her to seek Spanheim as her new “Phoebus” and sponsor: “Under your guidance,” she concluded, “I will sing of greater things” (line 108).104 The last quarter-century of Anna Maria van Schurman’s life took her away from her beloved Utrecht both physically and intellectually. Her marked disenchantment with her life and the direction of the Reformed Church and its ministers, joined with time-consuming responsibilities at home, led her to rethink 102. D’Ewes (1602–1650), an English antiquary and member of Parliament, had requested several copies of her 1640 engraved self-portrait for his portrait gallery and his wife and daughters. She finally agreed to reply only because, she tells him, “your most favourable opinion concerning my sex has encouraged me to do so,” and because he thought so highly of Bathsua Makin, one of the members of her network (Van Schurman to D’Ewes, 31 October 1645, Opuscula, 211–13). See J. Sears McGee, An Industrious Mind: The Worlds of Sir Simonds D’Ewes (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 2015), 429. 103. Opuscula, 309–12. The original manuscript poem is at the Martena Museum, Franeker. 104. In 1649 (no. 50, 1:63), Van Schurman expressed her sorrow over the state of the Dutch Reformed Church, and in 1657, she wrote to Andreas Colvius (Leiden University Library, Special Collections, ms. Pap. 2) that her deepest desire from then on was to render “the last act of [her] life better than the first.”

Introduction 27 her goals. During the 1650s she took increasing care of her elderly aunts, Sybille and Agnes von Harff. From May 1653 to July 1654, she returned with them and her brother to Cologne to try to reclaim land confiscated during the Thirty Years’ War. Since Reformed services in Cologne were unavailable, she and her close kin had to cross the Rhine to attend Protestant services in Mülheim. She came to value the tightly knit bonds of her minority community as well as her anonymity. Ill-willed ministers in Utrecht,105 meanwhile, circulated the rumor that she had converted to Roman Catholicism. She returned to Utrecht in 1654, where she resided for several more years amid the continuing slander against her from these ministers.106 In 1660, to escape from a quarrel over ecclesiastical goods and Sabbath observance, she left Utrecht for Lexmond, a municipality in the Dutch countryside, where she owned land. There she spent two years with her brother, aunts, and servants, living in a close-knit community she compared to an independent “Christian church.”107 Her aunts, who were almost entirely blind, now required her constant presence and help until they died, aged 89 and 91 respectively, in 1661. These years away from Utrecht, according to Yvon, brought her a reprieve from the continual visits, letters, and conversations which her fame had caused and of which she had grown so “tired. . . . She enjoyed there a great calm, distanced from the crowd and the troubles of the world.”108 Throughout the late 1650s and the 1660s, Van Schurman grew completely disillusioned with the lack of spiritual devotion she found in the Reformed Church. She associated closely with Jodocus van Lodenstein (1620–1677), the chief pastor at Utrecht’s Cathedral from 1653 to 1677, and other ministers of the Nadere Reformatie (Further Reformation) such as Voetius, Justus van den Boogaart, Theodorus and Wilhelmus à Brakel, and Wilhelmus’s wife, Sara Nevius. Lodenstein addressed shallow religiosity by preaching monthly repentance sermons and supporting conventicles of laity, students, and pastors for devotional sharing and hymn singing. He directed two of these, one at his house and the other at Van Schurman’s.109 For her own personal devotions, Van Schurman wrote poems in the Dutch vernacular not intended for publication. Two of these, however, written around 1660, were published posthumously together in the same volume in 1732. They are the 944-line poem, Elaboration of the First Three Chapters of Genesis, and the Hymn on Christ’s Spiritual Marriage with the

105. Yvon describes at length the calumny directed at her (Appendix D). 106. See Yvon’s description in Appendix D. 107. Beek, First Female, 206. 108. Yvon, 1267, col. 2. 109. On Lodenstein, see Carl J. Schroeder, In Quest of Pentecost: Jodocus van Lodenstein and the Dutch Second Reformation (Lanham, MD: University Press of America, 2001).

28 Introduction Believing Soul, comprising 278 rhymed couplets.110 Both the first exegetical work and the second, employing devotional nuptial imagery, contain such important themes of the Nadere Reformatie as the decline of Christendom, union with God, denial of the self, and the primacy of an experiential knowledge of God. Her disquiet over these years reverberates through her last extant letter to Constantijn Huygens, dated 13 September 1669 (no. 72, 2:62). Huygens had requested her comments on his poem “Aen sommighe predikers” (“To some preachers”), which mocked the posturing of church ministers; he also wanted her opinion on several portraits by family members and others (8 September 1669, 2:60). But she responded by citing an aphorism of Hippocrates—ars longa, vita brevis (“Art is long, life is short”)—and stating that her goal was now to live entirely for Christ. She kept his poem because, “as with a mirror,” it “exhibits to the preachers an unfortunate vice that occupies the pulpit,” but she returned the rest to him, stating that she cared only for the “heavenly image” of Jesus, who was now her teacher. “May the Almighty and Greatest God above,” she concludes, “the only Teacher of this art, teach the practice of it to you, to me, and to all His own who love Him for His glory, and for the reformation of the true Church” (no. 72, 2:62) (see Figure 8). These statements represent a new way of speaking in her letters and are likely drawn from a dramatic event that changed the course of her life. Her brother, Johan Godschalk, began telling her about a charismatic spiritual leader he had met. In late 1661 Johan had travelled to Basel, where he studied theology with the German Hebrew scholar Johannes Buxtorf and published a treatise on piety. Buxtorf and his colleague Lukas Gernler spoke at length with him on matters of moral reformation and told him about Jean de Labadie, a French defrocked Jesuit priest converted to Calvinism and residing in Geneva, where he preached the reformation of the church.111 Remaining at Labadie’s house in Geneva during 110. Anna Maria van Schurman, Uitbreiding over de drie eerste capittels van Genesis. Beneffens een vertoog van het geestelyk huwelyk van Christus met de gelovigen, beide in zinrijke digtmaat t’zamen gesteld (Groningen: Jacobus Sipkes, 1732). On these poems, see Beek, “Verbastert Christendom,” 93–121; Beek, “ ‘O Utrecht, Lieve Stad . . .’: Poems in Dutch by Anna Maria van Schurman,” in Mirjam de Baar et al., eds., Choosing the Better Part: Anna Maria van Schurman (1607–1678), trans. Lynne Richards (Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1996), 69–85; John L. Thompson, “Piety, Theology, Exegesis, and Tradition: Anna Maria van Schurman’s ‘Elaboration’ of Genesis 1–3 and its Relationship to the Commentary Tradition,” in Church and School in Early Modern Protestantism. Studies in Honor of Richard A. Muller on the Maturation of a Theological Tradition, ed. Jordan J. Ballor, David Sytsma, and Jason Zuidema (Leiden and Boston: Brill, 2013), 613–28, and “Anna Maria van Schurman: Poetry as Exegesis,” in Embodiment, Identity, and Gender in the Early Modern Age, edited by Amy E. Leonard and David M. Whitford (London and New York: Routledge, 2021), 122–34. 111. The charismatic Jean de Labadie (1610–74) sensed early in his life a vocation for the renewal of the church. In the late 1640s he began having visions that led him to develop his chiliastic, or millenarian, notions of the Kingdom of God. After various wanderings, he settled in Geneva for seven years (1659–66). Recent sources on Labadie include T.J. Saxby, The Quest for the New Jerusalem: Jean

Introduction 29 Lent 1662, Johan wrote enthusiastically to his sister about the lengthy sermons Labadie preached before a packed audience, some lasting up to four hours. He made his way back to the Netherlands by way of Germany, taking two years, and meeting, in Strasbourg in January 1663, Philipp Jakob Spener (1635–1705), the future founder of German Pietism.112 Not long after his return to Utrecht, Johan died in September 1664.113 His accounts of his experiences left a deep impression on his sister, who started corresponding with Labadie in 1663. Meanwhile, Labadie grew increasingly discontented with Calvinist Geneva’s nominal Christians, and convinced his small band of followers that the elect had to separate from nominal and non-believers to comprise a church solely of the regenerate. When in 1665 he was invited to the pastorate in Middelburg, Zeeland, home to the oldest Walloon congregation in the Netherlands, he left Geneva. He arrived a year later, stopping first at Utrecht where he and his co-workers Pierre Yvon, Pierre Dulignon (or Du Lignon), and Jean Menuret lodged for ten days at Van Schurman’s house. As pastor at Middelburg, his fiery sermons on the need for moral regeneration and for believers to live apart from unbelievers, as well as his chiliasm, or millenarianism,114 drew the ire of other ministers, including Voetius. Van Schurman traveled frequently to Middelburg to hear his sermons and became a strong advocate of his teaching, even in the face of sometimes fierce opposition from her friends. He invited her publicly to join him in a collaborative partnership, issuing his invitation in a lengthy dedicatory letter addressed to her in his Le Triomphe de l’Eucharistie, penned in July 1667.115 Labadie was removed in 1669, due in large part to a severe conflict with Henri du Moulin (brother of Van Schurman’s soeur d’alliance, Marie du Moulin), with whom he shared the pastorate at Middelburg. He settled in Amsterdam in August 1669 to establish a separatist church household.

de Labadie and the Labadists, 1610–1744 (Dordrecht: Nijhoff, 1987); Beek, First Female, Part 3; and Pierre Antoine Fabre et al., eds., Lire Jean de Labadie (1610–1674): Fondation et affranchissement (Paris: Classiques Garnier, 2016). 112. Spener, a young student at the time, was more interested in learning than in piety; Johan made such a deep impression upon him that, according to Lieburg (“Johan Godschalk Van Schurman,” 60), he then directed his life toward church regeneration. 113. Van Schurman wrote a moving deathbed memoir of her brother’s final days, included in Part 2 of Eukleria, and in Yvon, 1268–69 (see Appendix D). 114. Saxby, 149: “Millenarianism consists in a belief in the second advent of Christ to establish a kingdom of righteousness on earth with the resurrection of the saints who will dwell in him.” Historically, millenarianism was popular during periods of social crisis and unrest. 115. Jean de Labadie, Le Triomphe de l’Eucharistie, ou la vraye Doctrine du St Sacrement, avec les moyens d’y bien participer (Amsterdam: Abraham Wolfgang, 1667). On Labadie’s invitation to a partnership, see Anne R. Larsen, “Religious Alterity: Anna Maria van Schurman and Jean de Labadie,” French Forum 43 (2018): 301–17.

30 Introduction That same year, Van Schurman published two tracts, Thoughts of A. M. Schurman on the Reformation Needed at Present in the Church of Christ, and A Serious Warning and Urgent Exhortation to All the Reformed Faithful.116 In the first, she denounced the apostasy of Reformed Church leaders who trampled on “divine wisdom” using reason as their guide. The second pamphlet confronted the Cartesian rationalism of Ludwig Wolzogen (1633–1690), a Reformed professor at Utrecht, who defended a moderate biblical rationalism. Just as Van Schurman had denounced in Thoughts the imposition of reason on religious belief, so in A Serious Warning she attacked the presumption that faith must submit to reason and accept only tenets that coincide with rational truth claims. Van Schurman’s critique of Wolzogen paralleled Labadie’s denunciation of him before the Synod of Naarden in September 1668. Writing in tandem with Labadie, she continued her unrelenting support for his belief that only a church of the elect, wholly separated from the world while awaiting the imminent return of Christ, could remain a true church. The next inevitable step was separation. In November 1669, Van Schurman sold her house in Utrecht with the furniture and a portion of her library to join Labadie’s sectarian community. Remaining immovable in the face of immense opposition and a smear campaign, she asserted that she preferred the spiritual edification found in the Labadist community, of which she now became a co-leader with Labadie. Due to several incidents, the Labadists were forced to leave Amsterdam and seek a new refuge. Van Schurman turned to her old friend, Princess Elisabeth of Bohemia (abbess of the Lutheran Damestift convent in Herford, Germany, since 1667), who issued an invitation. The Labadists, numbering about fifty, lived on the grounds of the convent for two years, from 1670 to 1672. Growing opposition from the surrounding inhabitants, and the threat of Louis XIV’s troops closing in, led them to move yet again. On 23 June 1672, they headed to Altona, in Denmark. Elisabeth remained steadfast in her support, even writing letters in their favor to the King of Denmark.117 In Altona, Van Schurman published Eukleria, or the Choice of the Better Part, toward the end of 1673, taking its title from Luke 10:42, in which Mary “chooses the better part” by sitting at the feet of Christ. Eukleria was well received by the German philosopher and polymath Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz and his circle, and by leading Pietists such as Johann Jakob Schütz, Philipp Jakob Spener, and Eleonore von Merlau, with whom Van Schurman corresponded. Eukleria was translated into Dutch and followed by a second part in Latin published posthumously in Amsterdam in 1685. 116. Pensées d’A.M. de Schurman sur la reformation nécessaire à present à l’Eglise de Christ (Amsterdam: Jacob van Velsen, 1669); Jean Samuel [pseudonym], Sérieux avertissement et vive exhortation à toute sorte de Fidèles Réformés (Amsterdam: Stephanus Molard, 1669). Published under a pseudonym, this extremely rare eight-page pamphlet is located at the Bibliothèque Sainte-Geneviève (Paris). See Larsen, “Religious Alterity,” 308n10. 117. Saxby, 218–19.

Introduction 31 Labadie’s death in February 1674 and the war threatening Altona led Pierre Yvon, the new leader of the community, to find another home. Van Schurman sought a more hospitable environment in England, and wrote to the Congregationalist divine John Owen.118 The community eventually found a new site in 1675 in the Frisian village of Wieuwerd, where it flourished for about a decade, attracting new members. Some of these new converts included people of renown such as the artist-naturalist Maria Sibylla Merian (1647–1717), who joined the community with her mother and two daughters for a ten-year sojourn. At its optimum period it numbered about four hundred men, women, and children of all backgrounds, professions, and languages, practicing absolute detachment from worldly values. In the last year of her life, Van Schurman was housebound with gout and severe rheumatism. She continued her correspondence and completed the second part of Eukleria. Fearing adulation after her death, she had burned most of her remaining unpublished correspondence a few years earlier.119 She died on 4 May 1678 at age seventy-one.

Anna Maria van Schurman and Her Mentor, André Rivet, 1631–1652 I would now feel overjoyed that a gentleman such as yourself has placed me on a peak of fame and glory, but I am trying—in vain—to hide under the cover of obscurity, especially now that my intellectual pursuits have come to light. Anna Maria van Schurman to André Rivet, 1631120 [Rivet] had that speciall gift of God to possess in a strong and healthfull body, a cheerfull, peaceable, and calm soule. [Marie du Moulin], 1652121 118. Saxby, 231, 375. See Appendix C7 for the letter to Owen. 119. Yvon, 1265, col. 1. 120. Van Schurman to Rivet, 20 July 1631 (no. 1, 1:1). Van Schurman’s extant letters to Rivet are in Latin; only four in the KB collection are in French, all written toward the end of Rivet’s life. For a recent inventory of Van Schurman’s 239 extant letters, see “The Correspondence of Anna Maria van Schurman,” edited by Samantha Sint Nicolaas with the SKILLNET Project, under the supervision of Dirk van Miert, Early Modern Letters Online, (accessed July 2018). 121. [Marie du Moulin], The Last Hours of the Right Reverend Father in God Andrew Rivet, trans. G. L. [George Lauder] (The Hague: Samuel Brown, 1652), 6; “Il avoit cette grace speciale de posseder dans un corps sain & vigoureux, une ame joyeuse, paisible, & tranquille,” in [Marie du Moulin], Les Dernieres heures de Monsieur Rivet, vivant docteur & professeur honoraire en l’Université de Leyden,

32 Introduction As with other women intellectuals before her—such as Cassandra Fedele, Olympia Morata, Camille de Morel, and Margaret More Roper—Van Schurman framed her literary exchanges with learned men as kinship relations, using the language of filial deference and accentuating the context of the famille d’alliance (covenant family).122 Like her female predecessors, she made the best use of her family network, beginning with her father and mother, household tutors, her brother Johan Godschalk, and extended family members, and, in her teens and early twenties, with eminent mentors, sponsors, professors, editors, publishers, and scholars in the Republic of Letters. One of these mentors was the famous French Calvinist minister, theologian, and governor to the young Prince of Orange at the court of The Hague, André Rivet (Figure 2). The autograph letters and poems of Van Schurman to Rivet are gathered in a large leather-bound volume in the Special Collections of the Koninklijke Bibliotheek (KB) in The Hague. It contains fifty-two of her letters to Rivet—seven of which also appear in her Opuscula—to which we have added a fifty-third unpublished letter.123 It also contains four of her poems to Rivet, to which we have added another three, all published in her Opuscula and alluded to in her letters to Rivet.124 Letters in the collection to and from other members of her circle include three to Marie du Moulin, her “soeur d’alliance” (covenant sister), one to her editor Charles du Chesne, one from Marie de Gournay, one from Frédéric Rivet to his father André Rivet, as well as her letters and poems to Constantijn Huygens. André Rivet was a pivotal spokesperson for French Protestantism and an intermediary between Dutch and French Calvinism.125 Born in 1572, some two & curateur de l’echole illustre, & college d’Orange à Breda (Sedan: François Chayer; Breda: Johannes Waesberghe, 1651), Preface, 3. 122. Pal, Republic of Women, 20. 123. See Paul Dibon, Eugénie Estourgie, and Hans Bots, eds., Inventaire de la correspondance d’André Rivet (1595–1650) (The Hague: Nijhoff, 1971), which lists a total of fifty-three extant letters from Van Schurman to Rivet, and two extant letters from Rivet to Van Schurman. We translate them all. 124. These three poems include a Hebrew cento, a poem on the Virgin Mary, and a funeral ode on the death of Meinardus Schotanus. 125. This biographical sketch of Rivet is indebted to Gustave Cohen, Ecrivains français en Hollande dans la première moitié du XVIIe siècle (Paris: Edouard Champion, 1921), 293–310; H.J. Honders, Andreas Rivetus als invloedrijk gereformeerd theoloog in Holland’s bloeitijd (’s-Gravenhage: Nijhoff, 1930); J. A. Bots, “André Rivet en zijn positie in de Republiek der Letteren,” Tijdschrift voor geschiedenis 84 (1971): 24–35; François Laplanche, L’Écriture, le sacré et l’histoire: Erudits et politiques protestants devant la Bible en France au XVIIe siècle (Amsterdam and Maarsen: APA–Holland University Press, 1986); JeanLuc Tulot, “Familles de l’Eglise réformée de Thouars au XVIIe siècle,” Cahiers du Centre de généalogie protestante 90 (2005): 61–79; Willem J. van Asselt, “Andreas Rivetus (1572–1651): International Theologian and Diplomat,” in Martin I. Klauber, ed., The Theology of the French Reformed Churches: From Henri IV to the Revocation of the Edict of Nantes (Grand Rapids, MI: Reformation Heritage Books, 2014), 251–75; and Larsen, Star of Utrecht, chap. 3.

Introduction 33 months before the St. Bartholomew’s Day massacres of the French Huguenots, his first pastoral duties took him in 1595 to the Château de Thouars in the Poitou region, where he served for twenty-five years as chaplain to the Calvinist nobleman Claude de la Trémoille, duc de Thouars, and his wife Charlotte-Brabantine of Nassau, daughter of William the Silent and his third wife Charlotte de Bourbon. At Thouars, Rivet cultivated close relations with other noble Huguenots such as the powerful Rohan-Soubise clan. After lengthy negotiations, he was hired in 1620 as professor of theology at Leiden University. A highly sought-out preacher, he also became the pastor of the French congregation in Leiden. When his wife died in 1621, he married Marie du Moulin, a widow, and the sister of the theologian Pierre du Moulin. After twelve years at Leiden (1620–1632), he became governor of the young prince of Orange, Willem Hendrik, the future Stadtholder William II. His final move was to Breda, where he was appointed in 1646 as one of three governors of the newly founded Illustrious School. He died in 1651 at age seventy-eight, a few months after the death of his royal pupil. Rivet was influential in the Leiden circle of the Walloon expatriates (French-speaking refugees from the southern Netherlands), which included the renowned scholars Claude Saumaise (Claudius Salmasius), Hendrik Reneri, Samuel Desmarets, Johannes Polyander van Kerckhoven,126 Andreas Colvius, and Frederik Spanheim. Diplomat, courtier, and member par excellence of the international Republic of Letters, he corresponded assiduously with leading scholars in the Low Countries, France, and England. During his years at the court, he became a close friend of the poet and diplomat Constantijn Huygens, with whom he contributed toward making The Hague a cross-cultural center of epistolary exchange. His diplomacy and ability to negotiate led the French philosopher Marin Mersenne to choose him, along with Descartes, as his principal correspondent in Holland. Valentin Conrart, the secretary of the French Academy (1635), also corresponded with him and made him his intermediary with the Elzevier publishers in Leiden. Rivet was also a prolific published author of sermons, commentaries on the Old Testament, polemical and ethical works, and church history. As a practitioner of “cutting-edge Protestant scholarship,”127 he defended scholarly standards set by his Protestant predecessors against Hugo Grotius and the French Protestant theologian Moïse Amyraut, among others. His career was largely defined by polemics with Catholics, Socinians, and Arminians.128 126. Johannes Polyander van Kerckhoven the Elder (1568–1646) is the father of Johannes Polyander van Kerckhoven (1594–1660), a Dutch diplomat, lord of Heenvliet, and is referred to later in the Introduction in relation to the civil wars in England. 127. Nicholas Hardy, Criticism and Confession: The Bible in the Seventeenth Century Republic of Letters (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2017), 206. 128. Anthony Ossa-Richardson, “The Naked Truth of Scripture: André Rivet between Bellarmine and Grotius,” in Scriptural Authority and Biblical Criticism in the Dutch Golden Age: God’s Word

34 Introduction Van Schurman’s first extant letter to Rivet dates from 20 July 1631 (see Figure 3). She was then in her early twenties, and he was almost sixty. She expresses joy that “a gentleman such as yourself has placed me on a peak of fame and glory,” but is apprehensive at her new-found publicity and visibility (no. 1, 1:1). Although she had already been discovered by the elite in her own country, corresponding with Rivet took her to a much broader stage, since he was at the heart of cross-border communication networks. Thus began in Van Schurman’s trajectory what Martine van Elk aptly calls “a move into a deliberately cultivated singularity” that would lead her into a dynamic of controlled public display and retreat; display ensured that her scholarship was useful to others, while retreat “could guarantee virtue, modesty, and the freedom to study.”129 Put another way, as with Margaret More Roper, Sir Thomas More’s famous learned daughter, she developed an intensified rhetoric of modesty that “justified and excused  [her] publicity.”130 The suspense of waiting for Rivet’s answer led her to write a second letter some six months later, reminding him that his “humanitas” (“good will”) had “tied” her to him, and that her aim in corresponding with him was not to gather fame or enhance her name. Rather, she earnestly desired his help in her “studies, or, should I say, my trifles” (no. 3, 1:2), and revealed her project of a French book to convince young women on how to make the best use of their leisure. The ideas in this work—no longer extant—were likely developed in her Latin treatise and letters to Rivet on women’s higher education. Rivet finally answered on 1 March 1632 (1:3), eight months after her initial letter. He mentions two reasons to praise her “publicly in front of many people”131 and correspond with her. First, such public praise “will be useful to others”; second, it is a service to the glory of God “because He furnished your sex with such a splendor of letters and fine arts.” But he adds a caveat: she is clearly an extraordinary exception, for even though women are capable of higher studies they either will not apply themselves or are too busy with their domestic duties. In any case, it is not “expedient” for women to choose this type of life: “let it suffice if some, who are called to it by a special inspiration, sometimes stand out,” especially to remind young men to take their Questioned, ed. Dirk van Miert et al. (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2017), 109–30, at 112. 129. Elk, Early Modern Women’s Writing, 192. 130. Jaime Goodrich, “Thomas More and Margaret More Roper: A Case for Rethinking Women’s Participation in the Early Modern Public Sphere,” SCJ 39 (2008): 1026. 131. Rivet to Van Schurman, Latin letter, 1 March 1632, in Dissertatio, 40–42; Opuscula, 55–58. Rivet would have spoken about her in multiple contexts, to his learned colleagues at Leiden, to members of the Dutch court where he was appointed governor in 1632, and in letters to scholars in The Netherlands and abroad. Only two of his letters to Van Schurman are extant, this one and the reply dated 18 March 1638. At various points in our commentary, we have tried to reconstruct—at least in part—what Van Schurman must be replying to.

Introduction 35 studies more seriously.132 He concludes that even though they have not yet met, she, “a young girl of such talent and such piety has initiated a friendship with me and has challenged me so kindly to this exchange.”133 He bestows on her his “paternal affection.” It would take another two years before he formally adopted her as his fille d’alliance (covenant daughter): in 1634 Van Schurman addresses him for the first time as her “Father in Christ” (30 May 1634, no. 6, 1:9), and two months later she signs off as his “daughter” (4 August 1634, no. 7, 1:10). As a mentor and a “gatekeeper,”134 Rivet was instrumental in introducing her to members of his ever-expanding network, both male (such as Claudius Salmasius, Marin Mersenne, Pierre du Moulin, and Valentin Conrart) and female (such as Elisabeth of Bohemia and Marie du Moulin). She eagerly welcomed these introductions, as is evident in her letters to him, and her correspondents likewise eagerly engaged in epistolary exchanges with her. Father Marin Mersenne (1588–1648) is a case in point.135 Van Schurman’s fame had reached new heights in France after Rivet began circulating her Dissertatio logica—her scholarly treatise on women’s aptitude for higher learning—and the letters on women’s education, leading up to the publication of the Amica Dissertatio in 1638 in Paris. In a letter to Rivet in May 1638, Mersenne wrote that Rivet’s youngest son, Frédéric, had spoken to him with enthusiasm about her and the “letters where she proves that girls are capable of the arts and the sciences.”136 Would Rivet kindly send 132. Rivet draws on the Erasmian trope of the learned woman shaming men for not devoting themselves seriously enough to the studia humanitatis. On this trope, see Sarah Gwyneth Ross, The Birth of Feminism: Woman as Intellect in Renaissance Italy and England (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2009), 56–59, 217. 133. Rivet was eventually to meet Van Schurman when she came to The Hague for a visit. In her letter dated 4 August 1634 (no. 7, 1:10), she describes her excitement at conferring with him in his home, and the way in which they were constantly interrupted by the boisterous conversations of surrounding family members. 134. Michael P. Farrell, Collaboration Circles: Friendship Dynamics and Creative Work (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2001), 276. 135. Mersenne, who managed his vast correspondence network from the convent of the Minims at the Place Royale in Paris, directed from his cell an informal academy. Frances A. Yates, in The French Academies of the Sixteenth Century (London: Warburg Institute, 1947; reprint, Nendeln, Liechtenstein: Kraus Reprint, 1968), 284–85, notes that “every savant who came to Paris visited Mersenne as a matter of course, and in addition to his very large circle of personal relationships—his most intimate friend, René Descartes, is also the most famous—he conducted an enormous correspondence with people whom he never met.” Seventy-seven letters from Mersenne to Rivet, and six of Rivet’s letters to Mersenne, are extant. See Hans Bots, “Marin Mersenne, ‘secrétaire général’ de la République des Lettres, 1620–1648,” in Les grands intermédiaires culturels de la République des Lettres: Etudes de réseaux de correspondances du xvie au xviiie siècles, ed. Christiane Berkvens-Stevelinck, Hans Bots, and Jens Häseler (Paris: Honoré Champion, 2005), 165–81. 136. Mersenne to Rivet, French letter, 23 May 1638, in Marin Mersenne, Correspondance du P. Marin Mersenne, religieux minime, publiée par Mme P. Tannery, ed. Cornélis de Waard et al., 17 vols. (Paris:

36 Introduction him a copy? Also, “I’d be very pleased to know her name, her age and where she’s from, for she deserves to be among the illustrious women.” Then, in June 1639, Van Beverwijck sent Mersenne a copy of the third part of his newly edited collection De Vitæ Termino (On the Temporal Limits of Life), to which Van Schurman had contributed an essay. In his cover letter, Van Beverwijck singled out “that [one] nearest to a miracle, the most illustrious maiden Anna Maria van Schurman . . . You can get to know her especially in this one epistle, as a lion by its claw.”137 Mersenne immediately penned a letter to Van Schurman, which he asked Constantijn Huygens to send her; Huygens, unlike Mersenne, had been corresponding with Van Schurman for quite a while. In his cover letter accompanying Mersenne’s missive, Huygens warned Van Schurman lest she engage in an exchange with Mersenne: “were it not for this letter, I’m not the sort of person who would be itching to be counted either as the originator of or as a patron in joining the two of you in friendship” (2:20).138 Mersenne, he stated, had a vast but “chaotic” store of learning, and should she begin a correspondence, she would, “daily, become exhausted and burdened by letters, questions, and problems with no solution.” However, should she write to Mersenne, she should have Huygens deliver the letter. Van Schurman did reply to Mersenne, asking Rivet to send her letter to Huygens for him to deliver to Mersenne (no. 18, 1:24). At this stage of her life in the late 1630s and early 1640s, she was still relishing getting to be known by important members of the international community of savants. The Controversy over Women’s Higher Studies and Rivet’s Friendship An enormous admiration for the sciences, or even the equity of common law, moves me not to consider as rare in our sex what all human beings find worthy to know. Anna Maria van Schurman to André Rivet, 1637 (no. 14, 1:17) In November 1637, Van Schurman’s correspondence with Rivet took a sharp turn as it focused entirely, in a densely packed four-page letter, on the question of a “Christian” woman’s education.139 Using the letter genre as a tool for intellectual CNRS, 1933–88), 7:213–14. 137. Van Beverwijck to Mersenne, Latin letter, 27 June 1639, in Mersenne, Correspondance, 8:459. 138. Huygens to Van Schurman, 26 August 1639, in Mersenne, Correspondance, 8:484, and Huygens, De Briefwisseling van Constantijn Huygens (1608–1687), ed. Jacob A. Worp, 6 vols. (’s-Gravenhage: Nijhoff, 1911–17), 2:489, no. 2218. 139. Studies on Van Schurman’s views of the education of women are numerous. See, for instance, David Norbrook, “Autonomy and the Republic of Letters: Michèle Le Doeuff, Anna Maria van Schurman, and the History of Women Intellectuals,” Australian Journal of French Studies, 40 (2003): 275–87; Beek, First Female, chap. 1; Jane Duran, “Christianity and Women’s Education: Anna Maria van Schurman and Mary Astell,” Philosophy and Theology 26 (2014): 3–18; Larsen, Star of Utrecht,

Introduction 37 debate, she worked out her ideas on women’s higher studies; her two letters to Rivet on university education for women were followed by her Dissertatio logica in 1638 to convince him further of the appropriateness of the cause. In her view, women with leisure time and financial standing were not to be limited to “sewing with the needle and spinning the distaff,” usually considered “an ample enough school for women”: By what law, I ask, have these things become our lot? Is it by divine law or human law? Never will they demonstrate that these restrictions, by which they force us into line, have been prescribed by fate or determined by God (no. 14, 1:17). Such women should gain access to higher learning to advance on the road to salvation through a better grasp of the Scriptures. And, further, was it not their moral duty to study and make the best of their leisure to avoid idleness and vice? She recommended that they study all the secular disciplines that would help them gain a better understanding of theology, “the Queen of the sciences.” Since learning in her estimation was gender neutral, she confronted the common objection that, given their vocation to live a private life, women needed “to know little,” arguing that this would logically entail that men in private life would have to be denied “the encyclopedia” since their studies would be irrelevant to any public career. Rather, “the universal knowledge that pertains especially to all humans, by which we are either Christians or at the very least human beings . . . should by no means thereby be excluded.”140 Women’s access to higher learning, including the natural sciences of cosmology, medicine, and natural philosophy, as well as law and military strategy, was legitimate on grounds of the universality of knowledge.141 In sum, she recommended the study of the entire “encyclopedia,” which her professor, Gisbertus Voetius, was teaching his students.142 Rivet, however, bitingly replied that she had offered a rhetorical defense of the equality, even the superiority, of women’s minds over men’s (18 March 1638, 1:18). He understood her stated question, “Whether for a young woman in these times especially it is fitting to study letters and the fine arts,” as defending chap. 3; and Sara L. Uckelman, “Bathsua Makin and Anna Maria van Schurman: Education and the Metaphysics of Being a Woman,” in Early Modern Women on Metaphysics, ed. Emily Thomas (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2018), 95–110. 140. Dissertatio logica, in Schurman, Whether a Christian Woman Should Be Educated, 36. Italics added. 141. On Aristotelian universality, see Aristotle, Metaphysics, 1.980a22. 142. Voetius defended a philological approach to the Bible, arguing for the normativity of Scripture for all secular learning. On his reading list (which Van Schurman deftly borrows for women’s higher studies), see Aza Goudriaan, “Biblical Criticism, Knowledge, and the First Commandment in Gisbertus Voetius (1589–1676),” in Scriptural Authority, 316.

38 Introduction especially the fitness of young women for the study of the liberal arts. But Van Schurman had strategically positioned the adverb potissimum (“especially”) after hisce temporibus (“these times”) and before conveniat (“fitting”), indicating that both the issue of women’s increasing leisure time and women’s reasoning capacity for higher learning were legitimate concerns.143 Rivet then expounded that the different spheres in which men and women lived were divinely instituted. Moreover, the studies she recommended were “neither appropriate nor necessary,” as she had overestimated the level of interest of most women who were neither “suited for the study of letters” nor could study because they were entangled in domesticity. If she accepted his view, then he would certainly not begrudge her the exceptional women from the ancient and Christian past and present who could be permitted such learning. In her reply, she highlighted his misunderstanding: “you interpret the word especially as if I have unlawfully used it . . . in comparison to . . . your own sex, and even that I would contend that women are more suited to study than men” (no. 16, 1:19).144 Neither did she take back what she had asserted, nor did she agree with Rivet. In fact, she subtly undermined several of his categorical statements. Her goal was to discuss what he thought of the “tyrannical laws of custom” regarding women’s lack of education, and to offer her “opinion” (no. 16, 1:19). She concluded her letter by reaffirming her continued respect and love for him. It has been noted that the friendship between Rivet and Van Schurman was at its strongest between 1632 and 1638.145 This is a misconception. The letters reveal a growing, steady, and deep affection and commitment to one another from the moment that Rivet “adopted” Van Schurman as his fille d’alliance to the final dirge she composed on his death in 1651, whose last two lines encapsulate the depth of her filial attachment and immense sorrow at losing him: “I have been a daughter twice. I was fortunate. Before my final hour, / The fates require that I, a daughter twice, must die twice” (no. 54, 1:69). Their covenant relationship offers a superb example of what historian Barbara H. Rosenwein has termed an “emotional community.” According to Rosenwein, these emotional communities, which are largely social communities such as families, academic institutions, 143. Van Schurman’s original question Num virgini hisce temporibus potissimum conveniat literarum bonarumque artium stadium? has no intentional commas. However, in the printed versions of the Dissertatio (46) and the Opuscula (61), two commas were added: Num virgini, hisce temporibus potissimum, conveniat literarum bonarumque artium stadium? In Rivet’s version of Van Schurman’s question in the Dissertatio (63) and the Opuscula (77), only the first comma remains, while the second comma was eliminated: Num virgini, hisce temporibus potissimum conveniat literarum bonarumque artium stadium? In her reply (no. 16, 1:19) to Rivet, she restated her original question, without commas. 144. As note 143 indicates, when the letter was published in the Dissertatio and the Opuscula, a comma was added after “especially” (hisce temporibus potissimum, conveniat . . .) to show that Van Schurman was using the adverb to qualify “these times,” thereby toning down the polemical force of her question. The added comma is missing in the Amica Dissertatio (1638). 145. Honders, Andreas Rivetus, 168.

Introduction 39 monasteries, princely courts, and the like, are defined by “systems of feeling” based on the emotions that the individuals in these communities “value, devalue, or ignore; the nature of the affective bonds between people that they recognize; and the modes of emotional expression that they expect, encourage, tolerate, and deplore.”146 Van Schurman’s terms of endearment revolve around the humanist concept of amicitia (friendship), which she describes in her first letter to Rivet in 1632 as founded upon “sacred Theology.” Theology “unites and guards us in our Friendship”; it is a sacred bond exemplifying the one between early church fathers and their protégées. Two years later, she addresses him as “incomparable Friend” and “first patron and director of my studies, or better yet, my life,” and signs herself as: “She who loves and honors you like a Father” (no. 11, 1:7). She cherishes the gifts of his books because “you are so effusive in the love you show me; even in public you do not hesitate to reveal its scintillating brightness” (no. 6, 1:9); she sends him in return copies of her self-portraits and even a portrait she had done of him and his wife. Letter after letter reflects her unwavering admiration and gratitude for his “paternal love” and help with her “studies.” In November 1634—she had just turned twenty-seven—she writes: “You offer all your help . . . just like a Father would. . . . I am very grateful to you, just as a daughter ought to be to a Father, even though that daughter was not born to him” (no. 9, 1:12). The imminent loss of her mother in late 1636 / early 1637 endears him to her even more, and she fears that losing him as well “would result in my suffering not only the loss of my mother, but also the best wet nurse and director of my studies, and partner of all my cares” (no. 13, 1:16). She is concerned about his health; she longs to see him; she speaks of “the sympathy of [his] hallucinatory love . . . (as I might say with the physicians)” (no. 39, 1:52).147 When he announces that he will be moving to Breda in 1646, she states forthrightly: “I can hardly stop thinking about your former position, which . . . allowed me to see you” (no. 46, 1:57). Rivet died in January 1651. On his deathbed he set aside for her a small Hebrew Bible. A year later, she thanked his niece, Marie du Moulin, for sending her Les Dernieres heures de Monsieur Rivet (The Last Hours of Mr. Rivet, 1651), which Marie wrote at Rivet’s request (no. 62, 1:68). Van Schurman’s respectful and loving attachment to Rivet endured throughout her life. In Eukleria (1673), she identifies him as the exception in her diatribe against theologians and preachers “who are instructed too little or not at all by the Spirit of God.”148 Rivet, to the contrary, expressed in his dying words “the light and power of a knowledge imprinted through experiencing God” (Eukleria 2:18, 33). She draws attention to Les Dernieres heures by quoting Rivet’s very own words when he addressed 146. Cited in Andrew Lynch, “Emotional Community,” in Early Modern Emotions: An Introduction, ed. Susan Broomhall (London and New York: Routledge, 2017), 3. 147. Hallucinantis amoris. A reference to Paracelsian medicine. See reference note in 1:52. 148. Eukleria, 2:17, 32; Schurman, Whether a Christian Woman Should Be Educated, 92.

40 Introduction God’s Spirit as “the teacher of spirits . . . I have learned more theology in these ten days . . . than in the space of fifty years.”149 Rivet’s death signaled for Van Schurman the end of an era. In the 1650s, she began incrementally detaching herself from the life she had lived until then. From her existing letters, it appears that she did not approximate with any other correspondent—except perhaps Marie du Moulin—the same level of trust and intimacy that she had had with him. What makes the epistolary exchange between Rivet and Van Schurman so interesting is that she participates (indirectly) in the theological and philosophical controversies of her day. By increasingly confiding in her, Rivet places her on a par with the male intellectuals with whom he regularly corresponded. In so doing, he corroborates the exceptionality that allowed her to strategically affirm her agency. This does not mean that she played a specific public role in their exchange. The emerging ideology of domesticity in the Dutch Republic, with its emphasis on the nuclear family and the wife within the home, did not grant women’s agency a public dimension unless they were part of the ruling order. Nor did it grant them visibility in doctrinal controversy, which explains in part why neither Rivet, nor her publishers, nor even Van Schurman allowed their correspondence on thorny and heated theological quarrels against other Reformed intellectuals and preachers to be included in her Opuscula. Except for Rivet’s two letters to her in the Dissertatio and the Opuscula, the entirety of his side of the exchange is—surprisingly—no longer extant. While his vast correspondence with others is held in the Rivetiana volumes at the Leiden University Library Special Collections (and other libraries on the continent), no other copies of his letters to her remain. Did she burn his letters, along with those of others, five or six years before her death, as Pierre Yvon indicates in his biography?150 Or did Rivet ask Marie du Moulin to burn his letters to Van Schurman shortly before his death? We will never know for sure.

Affairs of Church and State  As Anna Maria van Schurman’s mentor, André Rivet acted as her intermediary with theologians, writers, and members of his own family. Their long-time correspondence—over nineteen years—focuses on affairs of state and theological quarrels. The following discussion profiles these events and their agents.

149. Dernieres heures, 59. Rivet states that he had finally left le monde (“the world”) for “God’s School . . . where I am now learning in a very different way than that of all those Doctors whom I spent so much time reading. What obscurity! What conjecture and vanity come from the human mind!” 150. Yvon, 1265, col. 1, states that she had burned her letters without identifying from or to whom they were addressed. Yvon may have kept some of Rivet’s letters, since he cites from one of them, penned on 22 June 1650, in his biography of Van Schurman (see Appendix D).

Introduction 41 Michel Le Faucheur Rivet continually shared with his covenant daughter his negotiations over various church and state matters. In November 1634 (no. 9, 1:12), for instance, she mentions that “[a]ll good people are most eagerly awaiting Mr. Le Faucheur,” and she hopes that “with God’s help he will overcome the inconveniences of a tiresome journey.” Her aside references the trip to Utrecht that the well-known French pastor and theologian Michel Le Faucheur (ca. 1585–1657) was about to undertake to assume his new post as minister at the city’s Walloon Church.151 Le Faucheur, born in Geneva to a refugee family from La Rochelle, was a minister at Montpellier until the Parliament of Toulouse decreed that foreign-born pastors could no longer minister or live in the Languedoc region. Le Faucheur then turned to Rivet to help him secure a position in the Netherlands. Rivet got in touch with Hendrik Reneri to negotiate with the Utrecht Town Council an invitation to serve as a pastor.152 This call reached Le Faucheur in August 1634, whereupon he made ready to leave with Johan de Knut (1587–1654), ambassador to France, stating on 24 November in a letter to Rivet that he dreaded “the crossing of the sea in this season.” By the end of November, however, he had fallen ill and could no longer leave Paris. He eventually changed his mind about coming, informing Rivet on 23 March 1635 that his infirmities had detained him and that, in any event, he had been “offered elsewhere situations very advantageous to me”—most notably at Sedan, in England, and at Geneva.153 He settled finally on a post at the Protestant Temple at Charenton, outside Paris, where he ministered from 1636 to his death. Le Faucheur became a leader in the dawning ecumenical movement that embraced Lutherans and was critical of the Dutch Counter-Remonstrants for their intolerance of their Remonstrant opponents. His irenicism, however, did not lead him to argue, as did Hugo Grotius, that peace with Roman Catholicism was acceptable.154 He went on to publish sermons, tracts, and the most influential treatise on oratory among eighteenth-century English elocutionists.155 151. This sketch on Le Faucheur is indebted to Emily Farnum, “Michel Le Faucheur and his Influence,” 5 vols. (PhD diss., University of Wisconsin, 1964), 2:chap. 11; 5:100–17; and Nicholas Must, Preaching a Dual Identity: Huguenot Sermons and the Shaping of Confessional Identity, 1629–1685 (Leiden and Boston: Brill, 2017), 75–77, 85–99. 152. The minutes of the Town Council’s meetings on Le Faucheur appear in Notulen van de Vroedschap for 1634–35, Municipal Archives, Drift 27: 192, 192v, 194, 195, and in the next volume, 5, 6, and 33v (translated in Farnum, 2:309–10). 153. Le Faucheur to Rivet, 23 March 1635, in Rivetiana BPL 301, fol. 51 (cited and translated in Farnum, 5:111–12). Le Faucheur also dreaded the Dutch climate and did not want to be far from his native France. 154. Farnum, 2:292. 155. Cinthia Meli, “Le prédicateur et ses doubles: Action oratoire et jeux scéniques dans Le Traité de l’action de l’orateur de Michel Le Faucheur,” in Le temps des beaux sermons, ed. Jean-Pierre Landry

42 Introduction Baronius, Salmasius, and the De Primatu Papae (1645)156  Van Schurman developed a keen interest in corresponding with Claude Saumaise (Claudius Salmasius, 1588–1653), a prolific textual critic, formidable polemicist, and the most famous classical scholar of the period, who had been invited in 1631 to the position formerly occupied by Joseph Justus Scaliger at Leiden. Rivet introduced him to her. She first mentions Salmasius in early 1639 (no. 17, 1:22), stating that she had received a letter from him which she “embraced  . . . deep within [her] soul as if [she] were a hostage to the friendship of that great man.” Salmasius soon became a quasi-mentor to her, since in her reply she thanks him for his “friendship” (amicitia) and the pactus (“covenant” or “alliance”) he wished to forge over her “studies” (28 May 1639, Appendix C2). Rivet kept her au courant with Salmasius’s long-expected De Primatu Papae (On the Primacy of the Pope, 1645), a major production some forty years in the making. Two years later, she informed Rivet that she was “truly overjoyed that the Most Noble Salmasius is declaring war on the enemies of divine truth with this work of his. The great hope is that it will soon attack that giant of the Pope’s army, I mean Baronius, and lay him beaten in the dust” (no. 25, 1:34). When Salmasius, who had left for a three-year sojourn to his native France, finally returned to the Dutch Republic, she composed in January 1644 (1:50) a triumphant poem lauding him for rejecting “the enticements of Kings”—a pensioned position of 6,000 pounds per annum at the French royal court—and for his “planning a summum opus on Religion,” the forthcoming De Primatu Papae. Cesare Baronio (Caesar Baronius, 1538–1607), the Counter-Reformation historian, cardinal, and Vatican librarian, published between 1588 and 1607 a definitive history of the first twelve centuries of the Christian Church in his Annales Ecclesiastici a Christo nato ad annum 1198 (Ecclesiastical Annals from the Birth of Christ to 1198). He undertook this massive project in reply to the Magdeburg Lutheran theologians whose Historia Ecclesiae Christi (History of the Church of Christ, Basel, 1559–74) defended the view that the Pope was the Antichrist and that the Catholic Church had deviated from the purity of the early church. Through his access to Vatican Library archives, Baronius defended papal primacy and ecclesiastical practices, which to his mind demonstrated that the (Geneva: Droz, 2006), 117–38. 156. Sources for this sketch include Cyriac K. Pullapilly, Caesar Baronius: Counter-Reformation Historian (South Bend, IN: University of Notre Dame Press, 1975); Guiseppe Antonio Guazzelli, “Cesare Baronio and the Roman Catholic Vision of the Early Church,” in Sacred History: Uses of the Christian Past in the Renaissance World, ed. Katherine van Liere, Simon Ditchfield, and Howard Louthan (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2012), 52–71; Jason Harris, “Catholicism,” in The Oxford Handbook of Neo-Latin, ed. Sarah Knight and Stefan Tilg (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2015), 322–25; and James C. Brown, “Revealed Law in Salmasius,” in Milton, Rights and Liberties, ed. Christophe Tournu and Neil Forsyth (Bern: Peter Lang, 2007), 183–93.

Introduction 43 Roman Catholic Church was the only legitimate successor to the early church of the Apostles. So definitive was his work that Catholic theologians continued to use, supplement, and correct it down to the nineteenth century as a source of interpretation on topics relating to Catholicism. Baronius argued that based on Peter’s alleged founding of the bishopric of Antioch in 39 CE, and transfer of the Holy See to Rome in 45 CE, Peter played a pre-eminent role among the Apostles and therefore could claim primacy among them.157 Protestants, on the other hand, argued that since each Apostle evangelized a different part of the Roman world, the oldest episcopal sees were equal in status to all the others; the Roman see, headed by Peter, was not superior in dignity. For Baronius, however, the early Apostolic churches were all part of one single Church headed by Peter, “the first among the Apostles.” Furthermore, he equated the term “Catholicus” with “Christianus” and “Romanus,” arguing that only Christians in communion with Rome were legitimate, and all others were heretics. For Protestant polemicists, however, the term “Romanus” had become a synonym of “Catholicus” over the course of the Middle Ages, and not in the first century; Baronius was thus “forcing the evidence” to claim that the doctrinal and ecclesiastic practices of the Roman Catholic Church coincided with those of the early church. Salmasius had been hired in 1631 by the University of Leiden in part to counterattack Baronius’s Annals with his De Primatu Papae, a biting critique of the legality of papal supremacy and infallibility, which ascribed the pope’s power to a jus positivum et non divinum (“man-made, not divine law”).158 Salmasius wrote to Rivet that his work indicated all the ways in which the Pope arrogated to himself the powers once equally shared among the bishops. On the passage in which Christ told Peter, “You are Peter [Petrus] and on this rock [Petra] I will build my church” (Matthew 16:18), which Catholics interpreted as Christ declaring that Peter was the rock and foundation of the church and thus Christ’s vicar on earth, he noted that “it is impossible to give this interpretation that Petra is Petrus,” for Petra indicated Christ and not Peter.159 157. The following is indebted to Guazzelli, “Cesare Baronio.” 158. Brown, “Revealed Law,” 189. 159. Saumaise to Rivet, 29 December 1634 (no. 28), in Claude Saumaise and André Rivet, Correspondance échangée entre 1632 et 1648, ed. Pierre Leroy and Hans Bots (Amsterdam and Maarssen: Holland University Press, 1987), 64. See also Saumaise’s next letter to Rivet in early 1635 (no. 29) in Correspondance, 66–69. In a further conversation reported on by the French doctor Guy Patin (1601–1672) in June 1641, Salmasius stated his contempt for Baronius, who, he said, “falsified almost all the manuscripts he used.” Salmasius went on to say that “the Vatican” still employed two men to “erase  . . . everything that impugns transubstantiation, Purgatory, the Councils, or the so-called supremacy of the Pope and other such drugs of the Roman Court.” See Pierre-Eugène Leroy, Le dernier voyage à Paris et en Bourgogne, 1640–1643, du réformé Claude Saumaise: Libre érudition et contrainte politique sous Richelieu (Amsterdam: APA–Holland University Press, 1983), 245–47.

44 Introduction Van Schurman thus hoped that Salmasius would deal a major blow to the authority of the Catholic Papal Court. When his book finally appeared in October 1645, it was banned in France, and the Assembly of the Clergy of France planned to burn all copies. A New Convert to Protestantism: François Cupif  Rivet often shared with Van Schurman letters to and from people he knew in France who then became members of her own intellectual circle. In a postscript in late 1643 (no. 42, 1:47), she states that he had mentioned two letters he wrote to “Mr. Cupif,” but that one of these had never reached her. François Cupif, Sieur de La Béraudière (d. ca. 1683), a former priest of Contigné in Anjou, had converted to Protestantism in 1637 and found refuge at Sedan with Frédéric-Maurice de La Tour d’Auvergne, duc de Bouillon. He then came to The Hague, where he later married, and pastored the French troops in the Dutch Republic.160 He was severely attacked by François Véron (ca. 1575–1649), one of France’s leading Jesuit convertisseurs of Protestants. To defend himself, Cupif published two plaquettes (pamphlets). In Letter from M. Cupif to Messieurs the Ministers and Elders in the Consistory at Charenton on the Deception of Father Véron (1639), he denounced Véron for spreading lies by stating that Cupif was married even though he was still at the time a bachelor, and that he had moved back to Anjou, where he had defected to Catholicism. Cupif wanted the ministers at Charenton to warn everyone of what had really happened, and that Véron was doing what all that Jesuits did by asserting that “the same man, at the same time, could freeze from the cold in Rome, and die from the heat in Paris,” meaning that there could somehow be a “Cupif in Holland, living the Reformed faith, and at the same time attending mass in Anjou.”161 In his second, more extensive pamphlet, A Declaration of Mr. Cupif where he lists the reasons that prompted him to separate from the Roman Church to embrace the Reformed Religion (1637),162 he condemned the mass, transubstantiation, prayers to saints, bowing to images, purgatory, works leading to salvation, the pope, relics, and monastic vows. He confessed how hard it was for him to 160. On Cupif, see Eugène and Emile Haag, La France protestante: ou, vies des protestants français qui se sont fait un nom dans l’histoire [. . .], 10 vols. (Geneva: Joel Cherbuliez, 1846–59), 4:978–80; Saumaise and Rivet, Correspondance, 149n7; Didier Boisson, “Les synodes provinciaux : Un révélateur d’un difficile apprentissage des normes dans les communautés réformées françaises (vers 1590–vers 1670), ” in Trouver sa place: Individus et communautés dans l’Europe moderne, ed. Antoine Rouillet, Olivier Spina, and Nathalie Szczech (Madrid: Casa de Velázquez, 2011), 181. 161. François Cupif, Lettre de M. Cupif à MM. les pasteurs et anciens, assemblez en Consistoire à Charenton, sur l’importance du P. Véron (Charenton: Louis Vendosme, 1639), fol. B-r. This slim pamphlet of nine folios was written on 1 May 1639. 162. Déclaration de maistre François Cupif, . . . où il déduit les raisons qui l’ont meut à se séparer de l’Eglise romaine pour embrasser la reformée (Charenton: Mondière, 1637).

Introduction 45 wound his parents and renounce the “privileges and goods” given to him by the Church. Cupif met Van Schurman in Utrecht when he delivered to her a letter from Salmasius,163 and he visited her on another occasion to pick up her reply to Rivet.164 Negotiations on the Peace of Westphalia Like most Protestant intellectuals of the period, Van Schurman frequently admitted anxiety about the survival of the Reformed Church in France and about the Religious Wars—both the Eighty Years’ War between Spain and the Dutch Republic (1568–1648) and the Thirty Years’ War (1618–1648) in the Holy Roman Empire. She often turned to Rivet to discuss the latest news. In early 1647, for instance, she broached the developing negotiations of the Peace of Westphalia, consisting of a series of peace treaties.165 Begun in 1644, the final peace was negotiated in the Westphalian neighboring cities of Münster and Osnabrück, where the Spanish-Dutch treaty was signed on 30 January 1648, and the treaty to end the Thirty Years’ War, involving the Palatinate, was finalized on 24 October 1648. The Thirty Years’ conflict was on a European scale, opposing the Habsburgs and their Catholic allies against Protestant Holy Roman principalities and Protestant states (Sweden, Denmark, and the Dutch Republic) allied with anti-Habsburg Catholic France.  Van Schurman reports in a letter in early 1647 that one of the commanding politicians in the French delegation to Münster had unexpectedly arrived at her house “bearing greetings from the Duchesse de Longueville,” and “saying that he was sent by his Duke with the express purpose of making a proposal to the Prince and our Magistrates” (no. 48, 1:60). The duchess was the famous Anne-Geneviève de Bourbon-Condé (1619–1679), a habitué of Madame de Rambouillet’s salon, who had visited Van Schurman in Utrecht in September 1646. She was then accompanying her husband, Henri II d’Orléans (1595–1663), duc de Longueville, a scion of the French royal family, who was sent in 1646 as chief envoy by Cardinal Jules Mazarin, Anne of Austria’s prime minister, to Münster to conduct negotiations on the Peace of Westphalia. Longueville worked with Claude de Mesmes, comte d’Avaux, and Abel Servien, two of France’s leading diplomats. Van Schurman then comments that the proposal from Mazarin, addressed to the Stadtholder Frederik Hendrik and the Dutch magistrates of the States of Holland and Zeeland, contained a plea that they not “desert the lofty business of the 163. Rivet to Salmasius, French letter, 5 November 1639 (no. 53), in André Rivet and Claude Saumaise, Correspondance, 149. 164. Rivet to Salmasius, French letter dated 19 December 1639 (no. 59), in Correspondance, 161. 165. Peter H. Wilson, The Thirty Years War: Europe’s Tragedy (Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 2011); Derek Croxton and Anuschka Tischer, The Peace of Westphalia: A Historical Dictionary (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 2002).

46 Introduction Protestants in Germany, and especially in the Palatinate,” thereby “displac[ing] their concern” onto the young Louis XIV (no. 48, 1:60). Indeed, by the 1640s, the Dutch States General had lost interest in the German conflict, giving little assistance to coreligionists abroad, unlike Dutch orthodox Calvinists who raised great sums of money for them.166 Wishing a separate peace with Spain—which the Reformed preachers were also against in their desire to free the south Netherlands from Spain—the magistrates were allied to France, which was concerned to stop Spain’s hegemony. Abel Servien, the top-ranking French diplomat, was in The Hague at the time of Van Schurman’s letter (where he would remain from the end of December 1646 to August 1647) to negotiate a mutual Franco-Dutch guarantee for a peace treaty with Spain. France wanted Dutch help in expelling Spain from the Spanish Netherlands and, in exchange, would share the conquered territory. But the States General refused to allow a major country controlling their borders, whether Spain or France.167 According to Van Schurman, the envoy who spoke to her about the French proposal then threatened that the “Reformation in France” would fall into “danger” if the United Provinces did not agree to the guarantee. Even though they were the last foreign power to arrive at the negotiations of the Peace of Westphalia in January 1647, the Dutch were the first to agree to a separate peace with Spain against French wishes. They could do so because Spain had been considerably weakened through constant French military pressure and was eager to settle with them. Charles I and the English Civil Wars  Time and again Van Schurman indicates her concern about the developing civil wars in England and the Dutch position regarding Charles I. Officially, the Dutch States General and the States of Holland—represented by the Dutch ambassador to London, Johannes Polyander van Kerckhoven, Lord of Heenvliet—upheld moderation and concession in the conflict between Charles I and the English Parliament, preferring to stay out of the English Civil Wars that erupted in 1642. The States General refused to intervene in the English conflict because they feared the power of the English navy and its adverse effects on trade in the event of war. The Reformed ministers backed the States General in not lending help to Charles I because of their spiritual kinship with the English parliamentary party, then led by the Presbyterians; Rivet, for one, made no secret of his support for

166. Judith Pollmann, “The Cult and Memory of War and Violence,” in Cambridge Companion, 90. 167. The States General’s anti Catholic policy for regaining the Spanish Netherlands also stood in the way. French Ambassador D’Avaux pleaded for religious tolerance, to no avail. See Pieter Geyl, The Netherlands in the Seventeenth Century: Part One, 1609–1648 (London: Ernest Benn; New York: Barnes and Noble, 1961), 142.

Introduction 47 Parliament.168 Van Schurman also clearly aligned with Dutch Reformed sympathies for Parliament in a letter to Sir Simonds D’Ewes (1602–1650), an English antiquary and member of Parliament.169 Given the States General’s refusal to intervene, therefore, Stadtholder Frederik Hendrik could not act legally in the conflict to offer the help and arms that Charles I needed, although he did so anyway. In this he was helping Queen Henrietta Maria, Charles’s consort, who actively sought money, troops, and ammunition to aid her beleaguered husband. Walter Strickland, the representative of Parliament, won the confidence of the States General over Henrietta Maria and Sir William Boswell, Charles I’s representative in Holland since 1627. The States General intervened to counter her efforts and tried to prevent the sailing of ships to England carrying ammunition and soldiers. Van Schurman first broached “the Anglican cause” in June 1641, expressing anxiety at the unfolding events (no. 25, 1:34). Then, in March 1643, she informed Rivet that she “scarcely retain[ed] any hope, let alone hope that nothing detrimental will happen to the Church of Christ” in England.170 Even among her own countrymen, she observed, there were those “(how disgraceful!)  . . . who were once such strong proponents of a similar cause but are now openly attacking it” (no. 37, 1:39). She refers here to the refusal of the States General to intervene in the English civil war even to support Parliament.171 The English political quagmire accounts as well for Van Schurman reporting to Rivet in February 1647, three weeks before the death of Frederik Hendrik, that “there is much talk here [in Utrecht] about the affairs of England. But your France seems up to this point to have been considering these wars carefully and is not inactively resisting the attempts of my native Provinces, especially since 168. Pieter Geyl, Orange and Stuart, 1641–1672, trans. Arnold Pomerans (London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson; New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1969), 12. 169. Van Schurman to D’Ewes, 31 October 1645, Opuscula, 212–13: “Wherefore, you will have done me a great favor if you would not refuse to share with us (being partners in the same cause) whatever can be achieved by your greatest and most honorable assembly either in peace or in war.” However, she was likely supportive of monarchy in France because French Protestant ministers and scholars such as Pierre du Moulin, Rivet, and Salmasius himself firmly defended French absolutism. On the political survival of the French Huguenots who depended on only one possible strategy, that of showing their collective loyalty to the king, see Elisabeth Labrousse, “La doctrine politique des huguenots, 1630–1695,” in Conscience et conviction: Etudes sur le XVIIe siècle (Paris: Universitas; Oxford: Voltaire Foundation, 1996), 81–88. 170. In 1646, Van Schurman also asked Bathsua Makin for a report on the events affecting the Church in England. See her letter to Makin in Whether a Christian Woman Should Be Educated, 68. 171. Charles I provoked the ire of Puritans, who had the support of Parliament, through changes to the Church of England’s religious services and the selection of the conservative William Laud as Archbishop of Canterbury. Laud, influenced by Arminianism, was thought to be an opponent of Calvinism, covertly favoring Catholic doctrine and rituals. He was arrested by Parliament in 1640, tried for treason in 1644, and beheaded in 1645. In 1643, at the time of Van Schurman’s letter, the Parliamentary army was on the losing side of the war.

48 Introduction Holland is so plainly opposed to War” (no. 48, 1:60). Indeed, Mazarin refused to get France embroiled in the English wars because of the Franco-Spanish War (1635–1659), for which France wanted Dutch support for a separate peace treaty, leading English royalists to ply instead the Stadtholder and the Dutch public for support. The House of Orange, especially after William II succeeded his father Frederik Hendrik as Stadtholder in mid-March 1647, became fervent about aiding the English king.172 After the final defeat of Charles I in 1646, followed by his impeachment, trial, and execution in 1649, a flood of Royalists left England for the exile court at The Hague. In March 1647, Frederik Hendrik died and was replaced by William II, who was then twenty-one years old. William II was wholly committed to the Stuart cause. He had married in 1641 Mary Stuart, daughter of Charles I, who had given her as a bride to the House of Orange to secure Dutch support in case the civil war with Parliament turned detrimental. While the States General, along with the orthodox Reformed, were set against aiding Charles I, William II was keen on restoring his brother-in-law, Charles II, to the throne of England. A wave of royalist propaganda swept through the Netherlands and the Continent to enlist support against the regicide and ensure Charles II’s rightful inheritance to the English throne.173 Salmasius published his Defensio Regia, pro Carolo I (Defense of Kingship, for Charles I, Leiden, 1649); its Dutch translation in 1650 included a host of poems composed by elite and lesser-known Catholic and heterodox poets from the more tolerant and independent cities of Amsterdam and Rotterdam.174 The States of Holland banned Salmasius’s Defensio and its Dutch translation.175 William II laid siege to Amsterdam in 1650 to gain control of the States of Holland, a move that—if successful—could have led to war against the English Commonwealth. But his unexpected death of smallpox on 6 November 1650 at age twenty-four, and the birth of his son William III (later to become king of England) eight days later, put an end to the Royalist Orangist campaign in the Netherlands. These events weakened the Orangists and the exiled English Royalists. With the succeeding Prince of Orange, a newborn infant, a regency was imposed. 172. Geyl, Orange and Stuart, 24–30; Israel, 544, 602–9. 173. Even the staunchly Reformed Constantijn Huygens, secretary to four Stadtholders and normally a prolix writer on political events, did not produce a single poem in the vernacular on the execution of Charles I. His only Latin quatrain on the event was never published. Cited in Paul R. Sellin and Margriet Lacy-Bruijn, “Royalist Propaganda and Dutch Poets on the Execution of Charles I: Notes Towards an Inquiry,” Dutch Crossing 24 (2016): 258. 174. Sellin and Lacy-Bruijn, 257. 175. On Salmasius’s Defense, see Helmer J. Helmers, “ ‘The Cry of the Royal Blood’: Revenge Tragedy and the Stuart Cause in the Dutch Republic, 1649–1660,” in Literary Cultures and Public Opinion in the Low Countries, 1450–1650, ed. Jan Bloemendal, Arjan van Dixhoorn, and Elsa Strietman (Leiden: Brill, 2011), 219–49.

Introduction 49 Constantijn Huygens, in a letter to Van Schurman dated 23 March 1651 (2:39), noted that those involved in discussions about the regency were “engaged in a laudable negotiation with good people, perhaps by getting their worst opponents on their side.” He himself played a major role in resolving the quarrels over the tutelage of the infant prince.176 Amalia von Solms-Braunfels, Frederik Hendrik’s German-born wife, and the grandmother of the infant, fought with her daughter-in-law Mary Stuart over the charge. Orange family members, as well as the Elector of Brandenburg and Count Maurice of Nassau (half-brother of Frederik Hendrik), also contested the tutelage. The High Court of Holland and Zeeland finally granted shared guardianship and chairmanship of the regency council of Orange to both women.177 The Protestant Independent Principality of Sedan Returned to France (1643)  Van Schurman’s worries about the survival of French Protestantism are expressed in several letters to Rivet. In October 1642, for instance, she pleads for further news “about the sudden change in the Republic of Sedan which seems to threaten to destroy both its flourishing Church and its Academy” (no. 27, 1:36). Sedan, a strategic independent border principality in the Ardennes mountains in eastern France, had become one of the leading refuge cities for French Protestants after it was declared independent from France in 1560. Its collège, founded in 1579, became an academy, founded officially in 1602. It was considered the most important Protestant academic institution after that of Saumur, and its faculty of theology numbered several well-known professors, including Pierre du Moulin, who taught there from 1621 to 1658, and Samuel Desmarets (Maresius) from 1624 to 1636.178 The principality was inherited in 1623 by Frédéric Maurice de La Tour d’Auvergne, duc de Bouillon (1605–1652), who had a deep antipathy to royal power. Frédéric’s mother, Elisabeth of Orange-Nassau (1577–1642)—the second 176. Huygens expressed his views in an essay, Considérations pacifiques sur le subject de la tutèle du jeusne Prince d’Orange. See [Constantijn Huygens], A Selection of the Poems of Sir Constantijn Huygens (1596–1687): Revised Edition, ed. and trans. Peter Davidson and Adriaan van der Weel (Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press, 2015), 39. 177. On Amalia von Solms, see Nadine Akkerman, Courtly Rivals in The Hague: Elizabeth Stuart, 1596–1662, and Amalia van Solms, 1602–1675 (Venlo: Van Spijk, 2014), and Marika Keblusek and Jori Zijlmans, eds., Princely Display: The Court of Frederik Hendrik of Orange and Amalia van Solms (Zwolle: Waanders, 1997). Amalia von Solms is also spelled Amalia van Solms. 178. The academy was dissolved in 1681. See Pierre Daniel Bourchemin, Etude sur les académies protestantes en France au XVIe et au XVIIe siècle (1882; reprint, Geneva: Slatkine Reprints, 1969), and Karen Maag, “The Huguenot Academies: Preparing for an Uncertain Future,” in Society and Culture in the Huguenot World, 1559–1685, ed. Raymond Mentzer and Andrew Spicer (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002), 139–56.

50 Introduction daughter of William the Silent and his third wife Charlotte de Bourbon—corresponded frequently with Rivet about her efforts to keep her two sons in the Protestant faith and loyal to the French crown (her second son was the famous vicomte de Turenne, Marshal General of France, who defeated the Habsburgs, leading to the Peace of Westphalia). But Frédéric disappointed his mother’s hopes by marrying for love in 1634 the Brussels-born countess Eleonora van den Bergh and under her influence converting to Catholicism. He conspired time and again against Louis XIII and Cardinal Richelieu through alliances with the king’s brother, Gaston, duc d’Orléans, and other discontented courtiers. He was arrested for yet another conspiracy in June 1642. His mother and wife wrote to Rivet on 10 July, begging him as well as Stadtholder Frederik Hendrik and his wife to intervene.179 Frédéric finally agreed with Louis XIII that, in exchange for his life, he would relinquish the sovereignty of Sedan to France. Elisabeth of Nassau, exhausted and ill, died on 3 September 1642. By the end of the month, Sedan was occupied by the king’s army and annexed to the French crown. Rivet’s nephew, André Pineau, stated in a letter to his uncle: “This is a great loss for such a small State, for the Church & for the Academy whose sustenance, as you know, depends, after God, on the life of this excellent princess.”180 The news of Sedan’s rendition and Elisabeth’s demise signaled to Protestants across France and Europe the passing of an epoch. Marguerite de Rohan and the Defection of French Protestant Nobles Van Schurman first heard from Buchelius in 1633 about the Huguenot Princess Anne de Rohan (1584–1646), Marguerite de Rohan’s aunt.181 Ten years later, she and Anne were corresponding. The sister of Henri II, duc de Rohan (1579–1638), the last leader of the militant Huguenot party during the reign of Louis XIII, Anne de Rohan is a striking example of both a Calvinist femme forte and a savante who not only performed heroically in defense of the Huguenots, but also developed a textual voice through her numerous published writings.182 Van Schurman admired her deeply and logically surmised that her niece Marguerite (1617–1684) resembled her. Thus, in August 1644, she informed Rivet that she had heard of 179. Correspondance d’Elisabeth de Nassau, duchesse de Bouillon, Années 1630–1642, ed. Jean-Luc Tulot, , 91. There are thirty-four letters from Elisabeth de Nassau to Rivet in the archives of the Royal House of Orange-Nassau at the KB in The Hague. Cited by Tulot in the introduction to the Correspondance d’Elisabeth de Nassau, , 1n5. On Elisabeth’s letters to Rivet, see Dibon et al., Inventaire de la correspondance d’André Rivet. 180. André Pineau to Rivet, 12 September 1642, Leiden University Library, BPL 286/49. Cited by Tulot in the introduction to the Correspondance d’Elisabeth de Nassau, 13n100. 181. Beek, First Female, 34. 182. Larsen, Star of Utrecht, 206–14.

Introduction 51 the “heroic constancy in Religion” of Marguerite for refusing to marry a Catholic: “such an illustrious example will in fact rouse the strength and courage even in the leading men, among whom quite a few, born under the same sky, have defected from the truth” by converting to Catholicism (no. 39, 1:52). But little did Van Schurman know that a marriage between Marguerite and the Catholic Henri de Chabot was, in fact, in the making. A year later, in August 1645, she felt “exceedingly dismayed” upon hearing “the rumor concerning the inconstancy of the Duchesse de Rohan, since not so long ago she cast a far better hope about herself ” (no. 43, 1:54). The marriage had officially been declared three months earlier. To gain a sense of the immensity of what Van Schurman perceived as Marguerite’s betrayal, one needs to know the latter’s standing in one of the most prominent Reformed families in France.183 Henri de Rohan had only one surviving daughter, Marguerite, who became heir in the 1620s to the vast Rohan fortune. Since Henri’s younger brother Benjamin, baron de Soubise, and two of his sisters, Henriette and Anne, never married, Marguerite inherited four sizable fortunes, and a portion of the wealth of her grandfather Maximilien de Béthune, duc de Sully, the popular prime minister of King Henri IV. The family believed its lineage could be traced back to the reign of Constantine, in the late Roman Empire, and it claimed connections to several ruling European dynasties. Its motto was: “I cannot be king; I do not deign to be a duke; I am Rohan.” Marguerite was sought out in marriage by France’s most prestigious families and by foreign princes. Waiting until her majority, she chose at age twenty-eight the Catholic Henri de Chabot, a relatively poor prospect who was nonetheless well connected at court. She was thought to have married for love. Appealing to Queen Anne of Austria, Louis XIV issued a certificate allowing Marguerite to maintain her status as a princess, provided that her children were raised Catholic. Her inheritance from her father went to her husband. Marguerite’s husband became Henri de Chabot, and their descendants the Rohan-Chabot.184 Two generations after the death of Henri de Rohan and his brother Soubise (the latter in exile), the family had “fully integrated into Louis XIV’s political and religious order.”185 By the third generation, all talk about a familial Huguenot faith had disappeared as the Rohan dynasty had become solidly Catholic. 183. On the Rohan dynasty, see Jonathan Dewald, Status, Power, and Identity in Early Modern France: The Rohan Family, 1550–1715 (University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press, 2015); Gédéon Tallemant des Réaux, “Mesdames de Rohan,” in his Historiettes, ed. Antoine Adam, 2 vols. (Paris: Gallimard, 1960), 1:620–48. 184. Although married to a Catholic, Marguerite nonetheless protected and provided financial support to the Protestants at Blain in Brittany belonging to the Rohan family. She affirmed her desire to die in the Protestant faith and be buried near her aunt Anne de Rohan at the Reformed cemetery of Charenton. Since the Crown had seized all Protestant cemeteries at the time of her death in 1684, she was buried instead at the Rohan estate at Blain, in western France. 185. Dewald, Status, Power, and Identity, 26.

52 Introduction The fourth-generation offspring of yet another famous Protestant dynasty that had defected to Catholicism—the Coligny-Châtillon clan—is perhaps referred to in Van Schurman’s letter of August 1644 (no. 39, 1:52). Rivet had sent her a “mournful poem,” possibly on the death of Maurice de Coligny on 23 May 1644, following a duel with Henri II, duc de Guise. Maurice was the son of Gaspard III de Coligny, Maréchal de Châtillon (himself a grandson of Admiral Gaspard II de Coligny, whose murder had signaled the start of the St. Bartholomew’s Day Massacre in 1572) and Anne de Polignac (1598–1651), a frequent correspondent of Rivet.186 Maurice’s brother, Gaspard IV de Coligny, defected to Catholicism in the spring of 1643, while his sister Henriette de Coligny, comtesse de La Suze, was converted in a spectacular court ceremony in 1653 and became a celebrated poet.187

Anna Maria van Schurman as Religious Polemicist For nearly a century, from the onset of the French Wars of Religion (1562–1598) and Thirty Years’ War (1618–1648) to the English Civil Wars (1642–1651), Europe was engulfed in inter-confessional quarrels. In this turbulent era, as Jonathan Israel states, “confessional theology long remained the principal and overriding criterion in assessing all intellectual debate and innovation.”188 Mass migrations due to repeated religiously motivated expulsions became commonplace, and, as Nicholas Terpstra observes in his study on religious refugees in the early modern period, “as wide ranging and brutal as the ‘ethnic cleansings’ of the twentieth century.” Church and state “politicized and nationalized religion as never before.”189 It is in this context that we must understand the theological controversies mentioned in Van Schurman’s correspondence with her mentor. They are rooted in what Terpstra calls “the language of purity, contagion, and purgation” so endemic in official discourses of the period.190 They also take their cue from the disputatious culture of academia, and the ways in which scholars’ interactions with each other were marked by “a range of affects from deep friendship to violent hate.”191 And as bad as religious tensions between Catholics and Protestants were, it was “primarily those within the Dutch Reformed Church” that “caused most outrage.”192 However, what distinguishes Van Schurman’s references 186. Dibon et al., Inventaire de la correspondance d’André Rivet. 187. Henriette de Coligny, comtesse de La Suze, Elégies, chansons et autres poésies, ed. Mariette Cuénin-Lieber (Paris: Classiques Garnier, 2017). 188. Israel, 24. 189. Nicholas Terpstra, Religious Refugees in the Early Modern World: An Alternative History of the Reformation (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2015), 120. 190. Terpstra, 13. 191. Françoise Waquet, Une histoire emotionnelle du savoir, XVIIe–XXIe siècle (Paris: CNRS Editions, 2019), 248. 192. Helmers, “Popular Participation and Public Debate,” in Cambridge Companion, 140–41.

Introduction 53 to and discussion of these controversies is that she, a woman, followed intently and was engaged in the theological polemics of her time. It can be argued that her epistolary involvement with Rivet in these religious controversies opened the way for her later polemical engagement alongside Jean de Labadie. The Illustrious Brotherhood of Our Blessed Lady (1641)  In early 1639, Van Schurman mentions that she “eagerly awaits” Rivet’s Apologetic on Behalf of the Most Sacred Virgin Mary, Mother of our Lord (Leiden, 1639): “O how I wish that the publishers themselves could be gripped by the same longing and that their excitement in producing this work would not diminish” (no. 20, 1:21).193 Rivet’s apologetic on the Virgin was part of his ongoing polemical fight against perceived heretical forms of belief. Like Calvin, he respected the Virgin as a model of faith, but judged her invocation an act of idolatry detracting from the honor due to Christ and God.194 Two months later, on Rivet’s bidding, Van Schurman sent him her poem on this work, which she entitled “On RESCUING Mary, the Mother of Our Lord,” and which appeared in printed form at the start of Rivet’s apologetic.195 Its main disputed claim is that papal doctrine attributed “only one face to both the mother and her child.” Rivet, she states, “saw this and is now / Lifting the spell and painting the Virgin’s face with her own / True colors.” In June 1641, she was still waiting for a copy of his book: “The very title whets my appetite because it pertains rather closely to my sex and status” (no. 25, 1:34). Later that year, a controversy that involved her other mentor, Voetius, erupted over the Illustere Lieve-Vrouwe-Broederschap (Illustrious Brotherhood 193. Sources for this section and the next include Gustave Cohen, Ecrivains français en Hollande, chaps. 18 and 22; Theo Verbeek, “The Utrecht Crisis,” in Descartes and the Dutch: Early Reactions to Cartesian Philosophy, 1637–1650 (Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press, 1992), 13–33, “The Utrecht Crisis” and “The ‘Illustrious Brotherhood of Our Blessed Lady’ in ’s-Hertogenbosch,” in The Correspondence of René Descartes: 1643, ed. Theo Verbeek, Erik-Jan Bos, and Jeroen van de Ven (Utrecht: Zeno Institute for Philosophy, 2003), 183–201; René Descartes and Martin Schoock, La Querelle d’Utrecht, ed. and trans. Theo Verbeek, preface by Jean-Luc Marion (Paris: Les Impressions nouvelles, 1988), 52–54; Paul Dibon, “Deux théologiens wallons face à Descartes et à sa philosophie: André Rivet (1572–1651) et Samuel Desmarets (1599–1673),” in Dibon, ed., Regards sur la Hollande du Siècle d’Or (Naples: Vivarium, 1990), 343–58; Stephen Gaukroger, Descartes: An Intellectual Biography (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1995); and Desmond Clarke, Descartes: A Biography (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006), chap. 8. 194. Bridget Heal, The Cult of the Virgin Mary in Early Modern Germany: Protestant and Catholic Piety, 1500–1648 (Cambridge, 2007), 144. See also Donna Ellington, From Sacred Body to Angelic Soul: Understanding Mary in Late Medieval and Early Modern Europe (Washington, DC: Catholic University of America Press, 2001), and Gary Waller, The Virgin Mary in Late Medieval and Early Modern English Literature and Popular Culture (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2011). Rivet’s apologetic is listed as no. 42 under the quarto titles in the Labadist catalog of books sold in Altona in 1675. See Beek and Bürmann, “Ex Libris,” 59. 195. See the translated poem (no. 56, 1:23) and accompanying letter dated 27 April 1639 (no. 17, 1:22).

54 Introduction of our Blessed Lady) at ’s-Hertogenbosch (Bois-le-Duc in French, a Dutch city in the modern province of North Brabant). This Marian confraternity, founded in 1318 to promote devotion to the Virgin Mary, included prominent Catholic members appointed from the nobility, the magistracy, and the city clerics. The town’s Calvinist military governor, Johan Wolfert van Brederode, decided to join the Brotherhood along with thirteen Calvinist town officials and five elders of the Dutch and Walloon Reformed Church. An agreement was reached in early 1642 that half the Brotherhood would consist of Catholics and the other half of Protestants to promote unity and friendship. But the decision was not to the liking of the town’s orthodox Calvinists, who appealed to Voetius to help counter it. Their opponents turned for their defense to Samuel Desmarets (Maresius, 1599– 1673), a professor of theology at the Illustrious School of ’s-Hertogenbosch and a Reformed minister of its Walloon Church. Voetius critiqued the town’s Calvinists for joining a popish sodality. Maresius, however, argued that the Brotherhood’s primary raison d’être was civic rather than religious and, moreover, that joining it was a good way to convert Catholics. The “Querelle d’Utrecht” Meanwhile, the controversy over the Brotherhood overlapped with a second, nastier one, dubbed the Querelle d’Utrecht, involving Descartes and the conservative faction of professors at the University of Utrecht headed by Voetius. Van Schurman had personally taken the initiative to visit Descartes when he arrived in Utrecht in March 1635 to see his friend and disciple Hendrik Reneri. Van Schurman describes her meeting to Rivet in March 1635 and shares her initial reservations: Moreover, I cannot hide from you the news that I have recently visited Monsieur Descartes. He is a man of tremendous, or rather (as they say), unheard-of erudition; but he seems not to hold a very high opinion of the commonly accepted progress in the study of the liberal arts. He says that none of these add anything to true Knowledge, and that he is forging another path by which knowledge could be reached much more quickly and certainly (1:13). While mindful of Descartes’s great learning, she was taken aback by his declaration that none of his academic learning led to certain knowledge and that he was working on a way to reach that certainty. She had learned from Calvin,196 196. As Calvin wrote in the Institutes of the Christian Religion: “And let us not be ashamed to be ignorant of something in this matter wherein there is a certain learned ignorance.” Cited in Paul Schuurman, “ ‘Thou Knowest not the Works of God’: Gisbertus Voetius (1589–1676) and John Locke on Learned Ignorance,” Westminster Theological Journal 72 (2010): 63.

Introduction 55 and Voetius, that secular learning was ancillary to biblical knowledge and truth and that trying to find a method to avoid error was hubristic. It was better to adopt a “learned ignorance,” since “many things in theology and in academic disciplines have not been revealed by God.”197 Voetius opposed “the autonomy of reason” and “philosophy as the norm of Biblical interpretation,” arguing instead that all knowledge vindicated Scripture and was linked to theology.198 By March 1642—some seven years after Van Schurman’s first encounter with Descartes—a sea change had occurred in her views on him. At that time, the University of Utrecht formally condemned the “New Philosophy” of Cartesianism, and in the spring of 1642 Descartes published his Letter to Father Dinet against Voetius and the Utrecht judgment. Voetius then undertook his own defense by involving his former colleague, the polemicist Martinus Schoock (1614–1669), in writing a virulent attack on Descartes. The ensuing work, The Admirable Method of the New Philosophy of René Descartes, published in late March or April 1643, argued that Descartes’s philosophy led to “skepticism, atheism, and enthusiasm.”199 Descartes riposted with a Letter to Voetius (late May 1643) in which he took Maresius’s side in the controversy over the Brotherhood to show how unreasonable and quarrelsome Voetius was to intervene in the civic affairs of another town, and to appeal as well to the sympathy of other Protestant ministers and theologians. He may have also wanted to gain the support of the town’s governor and his friends, several of whom were allies of members of the States of Utrecht. He impugned Voetius as the “real author” of The Admirable Method and sent his letter to the regents of Utrecht. Instead, they indicted Descartes for libel against Voetius and formally closed the case in September 1643, declaring a truce between the quarreling parties and forbidding books for or against Descartes from appearing in Utrecht. Van Schurman echoes in two striking letters major aspects of the Querelle d’Utrecht. In December 1645, she reveals to Rivet that Maresius had corresponded 197. Aza Goudriaan, “Biblical Criticism, Knowledge, and the First Commandment in Gisbertus Voetius (1589–1676),” in Scriptural Authority, 321. 198. Goudriaan, “Biblical Criticism,” 323. In Disputations on Atheism (1639), Voetius critiqued the methodological approach to knowledge that Descartes had offered Van Schurman: “Certain people . . . try to build anew . . . all knowledge of God and creatures, because they hold in suspicion all books and histories, as if they were lies and fairy tales . . . Aristotle is not afraid to prefer the wise who has no experience to someone who has experience but no wisdom . . . The same is implied in that well-known Hippocratic dictum: Art is long, life short, the occasion rare, and experience unreliable (or dangerous). Read what is said by commentators of both authors and use it as an answer to our contemporary empirics who know everything without books, without study, without education, relying only on their lazy and erratic thinking.” Cited in Theo Verbeek, “From ‘Learned Ignorance’ to Scepticism: Descartes and Calvinist Orthodoxy,” in Scepticism and Irreligion in the Seventeenth and Eighteenth Centuries, ed. Richard H. Popkin and Arjo Vanderjagt (Leiden: Brill, 1993), 35. 199. Clarke, Descartes: A Biography, 235. For an analysis of the arguments against Cartesianism in this polemical work, see Verbeek, Descartes and the Dutch, 52–61.

56 Introduction with her, seemingly to win her over to his side. Maresius had moved to Groningen to become president of the senate of that city’s university, to which Descartes had turned for help, and in April 1645 he presided over the trial for defamation brought by Descartes against Schoock, Voetius, and Dematius.200 Although Maresius was a minister of the Reformed Church, Van Schurman noted that he had “become alienated from our [Reformed] family, as if the family had not shown him enough favor” (no. 44, 1:56). Moreover, he had been pleading “secretly and bitterly (but I don’t know this for sure) the case of Descartes and Schoock against our common friend, Mr. Voetius.” As far as she was concerned, “I can solemnly affirm that nothing could convince me to join [his] side.” Two weeks later, on 25 December 1645, she criticized “the Curators of the Academy of Groningen, who seem to have made the case of Maresius their own,” thereby “neglect[ing] their own reputation,” since they demanded from the Utrecht magistrates that “silence be imposed on Mr. Voetius and his son” (no. 46, 1:57). The Groningen curators also presumptively impugned the Utrecht magistrates for “approv[ing] the minutes in which Mr. Voetius and Mr. Dematius had urged a lawsuit for perjury against them for claiming they were the original authors” of the injurious work, The Admirable Method. She then reported that Voetius replied to the curators that he could not be accused of writing “something he had not yet set his mind to writing,” and that it was all “the doing of one person, especially when the cause pertains to an ignoramus [Descartes].”201 Moreover, he had not known in advance that his own son (Paul Voet, to be discussed more shortly) had mounted a defense of him; Voetius had publicly stated that he had not interfered in another city’s affairs and that he would be willing to be examined about “all the things that he had written, perhaps in a too hostile language.” If Maresius were willing to be examined in a similar way, “then that lawsuit could be completely dismissed.” In letters 44 and 46, Van Schurman reports on Voetius’s side of the quarrel against Descartes, Schoock, and Maresius. She had likely heard it directly from Voetius, who hoped that using her as his intermediary might sway Rivet into joining him, since Rivet at this point had not joined either side. In her report to Rivet, she refers to Paul Voet (1619–1667), Voetius’s son, a professor of metaphysics from 1641 at Utrecht University, who took up his father’s defense in three tracts.202 Voet exposed the flaws of the Groningen proceedings. Maresius, he alleged, had a 200. Carolus de Maets (Dematius, 1597–1651), a professor of theology at Utrecht, joined Voetius in his defense against Descartes. Van Schurman knew him well, since she had first met him when she lived in Franeker. 201. Descartes wrote disparagingly about scholastic teaching of the ancients and erudition. 202. These tracts are entitled Tribunal iniquum Maresii in causa Schookio Voetiana (Utrecht, 1646); Pietas in parentem contra impotentiam Maresii (Utrecht, 1646); and Martinus Schookius A πςοσδιόνυσος (Utrecht, 1651). On these tracts, see Verbeek, Descartes and the Dutch.

Introduction 57 conflict of interest in presiding over the trial, given his enmity with Voetius in the quarrel over the Brotherhood of the Virgin, while Schoock, in a letter to Voetius, had openly stated that he was the author of The Admirable Method, thus proving that Voetius could not have written it as his critics contended. Finally, it was clear that Maresius had never answered the accusations against him.203 Van Schurman, it appears, was taking Voetius’s side of the quarrel. Did she know how appalled Rivet was at the infighting between Maresius and Voetius? In a letter to his Parisian friend, the parlementaire Claude Sarrau, Rivet bluntly stated his utter distaste for their wrangling: “These two men are outrageously tearing each other apart and are mutually slandering each other in various writings in which they are prostituting their honor with a great scandal.” He had intervened to no avail, he said, and concluded that “it [would] be necessary for the Magistrate to take it in hand, but it will be too late.”204 The Quarrel with Grotius  Van Schurman’s letters to Rivet indicate a sustained polemical engagement in Rivet’s defense of orthodox Calvinist theology and Protestant scholarship against Hugo van Groot (Grotius, 1583–1645). Indeed, Rivet frequently informed Van Schurman about his campaign of relentless publication against Grotius’s views. She acknowledged how delighted she was that he had “chosen” her “along with [his] other friends, not only as a spectator but also as a judge of this most noble combat” (no. 36, 1:38). Over the course of a single year (April 1642 to April 1643), she commented on Rivet’s quarrel with Grotius in five letters. She concluded her case against him in a sixth letter, dated 8 December 1645 (no. 44, 1:56), and in an undated poem (no. 59, 1:55), likely composed after the publication of 203. Critics are divided over who wrote The Admirable Method. For Verbeek, in Descartes and the Dutch, 33, although The Admirable Method was written by Schoock, “Voetius was deeply involved with its history.” Gaukroger, in Descartes: An Intellectual Biography, 360–61, asserts that Voetius himself wrote The Admirable Method, while enlisting Schoock, and Voetius also “instructed his son to draft a reply to Descartes.” Clarke, in Descartes: A Biography, 234–36, attributes The Admirable Method to Schoock. 204. Rivet to Sarrau, 25 June 1646, Correspondance intégrale d’André Rivet et de Claude Sarrau, ed. Hans Bots and Pierre Leroy, 3 vols. (Amsterdam: APA–Holland University Press, 1978–82), 3:436. The University of Groningen arbitrated against the Utrecht theologians and cleared Descartes of the accusation of atheism (Cohen, Ecrivains français en Hollande, 595–96). Schoock, having disavowed the most injurious portions of The Admirable Method, stated that another hand had altered the text, and ended by distancing himself from Voetius (Clarke, Descartes: A Biography, 243–44). Voetius and Dematius then undertook a lawsuit for perjury against Schoock and Maresius in the summer of 1645, which dragged on for several years. Descartes, to get full redress from Utrecht, drafted an Apologetic Letter to the Magistrates of Utrecht in spring 1647, sending it to the magistrates in February 1648, and repeating that Voetius was the real author of The Admirable Method. The Utrecht city council simply repeated its earlier call for a truce, giving satisfaction to neither side.

58 Introduction Grotius’s final work against Rivet in September 1645.205 In all of these writings, Van Schurman stood by Rivet in his critique of Grotius, who, in the last five years of his career, had wanted to reunite Christendom by reconciling the Protestant and Roman Catholic confessions. To understand the complexities of this theological controversy, we need to briefly parse its meandering contours. The controversy began in 1641 when Grotius, a jurist, historian, apologist, and biblical commentator—whose pathbreaking On the Law of War and Peace (1625) contributed to modern international law—published his Annotations on the Inquiry of G. Cassander (1641), in which he commented on and re-edited the work of Georg Cassander (1513–1566). Cassander, a Flemish Catholic theologian, had earlier drawn up for the Holy Roman Emperors Ferdinand I and his successor Maximillian II a proposal to reunite Catholics and Protestants.206 Grotius, a Christian humanist and a Remonstrant in the irenic tradition of Erasmus, was deeply troubled by the divisions within the church brought on by confessional differences and what he considered an excessive preoccupation with dogma.207 Moreover, in his view, papal abuses did not justify a schism.208 In his apologetic On the Truth of the Christian Religion (1640) and biblical commentaries on the Old and New Testaments (Annotationes, 1641–50), he favored rational argumentation and historical testimony over doctrinal insistence on, for instance, the Trinity and the divinity of Christ. In his admiration for the Church of the first five centuries of Christendom, which he viewed as having promoted an unparalleled peace and consensus unifying Christians, he emphasized ethics over doctrine.209 205. These six letters and the poem are in the KB collection. The letters are dated 23 April 1642 (no. 26), 14 October 1642 (no. 27), 19 November 1642 (no. 28), 20 January 1643 (no. 36), 1 April 1643 (no. 29), and 8 December 1645 (no. 44). 206. For an overview of Grotius’s career, see Hugh Trevor-Roper, “Hugo Grotius and England,” in The Exchange of Ideas: Religion, Scholarship and Art in Anglo-Dutch Relations in the Seventeenth Century, ed. Simon Groenveld and Michael Wintle (Zutphen: Walburg Instituut, 1994), 42–67. 207. G. H. M. Posthumus Meyjes, “Hugo Grotius as an Irenicist,” in The World of Hugo Grotius (1583– 1645). Proceedings of the International Colloquium organized by the Grotius Committee of the Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences, Rotterdam 6–9 April 1983 (Amsterdam: APA–Holland University Press, 1984), 43–63. 208. On the controversy between Rivet and Grotius, see Henk J. M. Nellen, Hugo Grotius: A Lifelong Struggle for Peace in Church and State, 1583–1645, translated by J. C. Grayson (Leiden and Boston: Brill, 2015), 699–710, and Hardy, Criticism and Confession, 205–19. According to Hardy, 206, critics interpret Rivet’s opposition to Grotius in either sociopolitical terms—as a protector of international and especially French Reformed Protestantism—or as a dogmatic opponent of Grotius’s humanist and historical challenge. For Hardy, Grotius was seriously leaning toward and favoring Catholicism rather than merely adopting a “non-dogmatic, humanistic, and philological” approach (218). 209. Grotius favored the early church before the arrival of Augustine and his doctrine of predestination. See Jan-Paul Heering, Hugo Grotius as Apologist for the Christian Religion. A Study of his Work De veritate religionis Christianae (1640), trans. J. C. Grayson (Leiden and Boston: Brill, 2004), 202.

Introduction 59 He thus severed the link between apologetics and dogmatics,210 at the expense, according to Rivet, of careful historical documentation and Protestant scholarship. Grotius’s criticism of two fundamental Protestant doctrines in his anonymously published Commentary on the Antichrist (1640)—the doctrine of justification by faith and the notion that the Pope was the Antichrist—was opposed by orthodox exegetes. He was accused of sympathizing with Socinianism, a theological current that denied the Trinity and Christ’s redemption and divinity, and that emphasized free will and responsibility.211 He was also roundly condemned for being a cryptoCatholic and a Papist in his defense of transubstantiation, purgatory, monasticism, and prayers for the dead. It was thought that his broadly irenic project of defending an ethical Christianity was a cover-up for legitimating the Papacy and Catholic doctrine.212 Rivet, whose twin aims were to defend doctrinal purity and assure civil peace to protect the church, especially in France, undertook at the age of sixty-nine a campaign of redress against Grotius.213 It ended up becoming an “exhausting polemic”214 in which Grotius complained that Rivet had stirred up more hatred against him than all of the Dutch ministers combined, while Rivet declared Grotius the “worst enemy” of French Protestantism.215 Van Schurman’s extraordinarily combative six letters and poem on Grotius began with her first missive on 23 April 1642 (no. 26, 1:35), thanking Rivet for sending her a copy of his Observations on the Annotations of H. Grotius on the Inquiry of Cassander (March 1642), which she read “with great delight.” She was hesitant, however, to accept his invitation to “freely profess” or publish her own views on Grotius, since whatever she would say would be much more “courteous” than what was called for. Conscious that an attempt on her part to voice publicly and openly her opinions could backfire and damage her reputation, given the gendered constraints on women “meddling” with theology, let alone doctrinal 210. Jan-Paul Heering, “Hugo Grotius’ De veritate religionis Christianae,” in Hugo Grotius, Theologian: Essays in Honour of G. H. M. Posthumus Meyjes, ed. Henk J. M. Nellen and Edwin Rabbie (Leiden: Brill, 1994), 49. 211. Although Grotius was not a Socinian, but rather a Reformed Protestant whose position lay outside orthodox Calvinism, he borrowed from Socinus’s books and refused to condemn colleagues thought to be Socinians. See Henk J. M. Nellen, “In Strict Confidence: Grotius’ Correspondence with his Socinian Friends,” in Self-Presentation and Social Identification: The Rhetoric and Pragmatics of Letter Writing in Early Modern Times, ed. Toon van Houdt et al. (Leuven: Leuven University Press, 2002), 227–45. 212. Hardy, Criticism and Confession, 210. 213. Rivet was born on 22 June 1572, two months before the St. Bartholomew’s Day massacres, which haunted him all his life and motivated him in his zeal to guard against those who would “lead our churches into the misery which took away our liberty.” Cited in Hans Bots, “Hugo Grotius et André Rivet: Deux lumières opposées, deux vocations contradictoires,” in Hugo Grotius, Theologian, 146. 214. Nellen, Hugo Grotius: A Lifelong Struggle, 699. 215. Rivet to Sarrau, 2 October 1645, Correspondance intégrale, 3:233.

60 Introduction controversy, she preferred to applaud Rivet’s efforts on the sidelines. Women did not normally voice their political and religious opinions in polemical disputes at the time.216 Grotius’s ensuing Observations on the Observations of A. Rivet (1642) then occasioned a counterattack by Rivet in his Examination of the Observations of Hugo Grotius (July 1642), with Grotius replying in September 1642 in his Wish for Ecclesiastical Peace. Commenting on the quarrel in her next letter in October 1642 (no. 27, 1:36), Van Schurman stated that she gave to Voetius Rivet’s counterattack, Examination of the Observations of Hugo Grotius, which Voetius approved “enthusiastically.” Then, a month later, in November 1642 (no. 28, 1:37), she predicted that Rivet’s forthcoming third attack on Grotius, the Apologetic for the true and sincere peace of the church (December 1642), would guarantee Rivet’s “victory,” although she had not yet seen “the spear with which your enemy is attacking you”; Grotius, who had been “nurtured from his youth in other cares and studies,” would be mocked for daring to “fight in hand-to-hand combat with a man like you, a veteran soldier.” In mid-January 1643 (no. 36, 1:38), she triumphantly declared that she had read “from cover to cover” Rivet’s 320-page Apologetic and “admired it greatly.” Reprising the military lexicon of her previous letter, she rejoiced that he had selected her “as a judge of this most noble combat.” She confessed that, she, a woman, knew it was “not [her] place to give an opinion about those matters that rest upon authority.” Since Rivet had authorized her judgment, however, she would not be “stepping too much out of line” in declaring him the victor. She condemned Grotius’s laboring at matters “unfamiliar to his reason and his studies,” and his “bitter jokes” against “the entire Reformation and its most distinguished champions.” As she put it, “no one misses the Grotius in Grotius.” His audacity at proclaiming, “as if in the tripod,” that the Calvinists should agree with the Papists was “inauspicious,” since he “does not agree with others or even with himself.” Three months later (1 April 1643, no. 29, 1:40), she heard that Rivet’s Apologetic, although “perfect in every detail of knowledge,” had incurred calumny from Grotius, who, tired out by the polemic, sought in vain to entrust his selfdefense to others. Not finding one after months of searching, he “reluctantly” wrote his Examination of Rivet’s Apologetic for the Schism, leaving the manuscript with friends before a trip to Sweden to have it published in Amsterdam.217 On the way back from his journey, however, he died following a shipwreck in late August 1645; his book was sold in early September, the day after news of his death reached Holland. Although Rivet expressed some hesitation in working on his final reply against Grotius, calling him “a dead man whom only maggots fight,” he stated

216. Helmer J. Helmers, “Popular Participation,” in Cambridge Companion, 126. 217. Nellen, Hugo Grotius: A Lifelong Struggle, 704.

Introduction 61 nonetheless that “his writing has not died and I will fight him without blame.”218 Rivet found Grotius’s Examination particularly harmful to Calvinist doctrine and to relations between the Dutch state and the church. His final work of 630 pages against his nemesis, A Refutation of Grotius’ Examination, appeared late in 1646. Three months after Grotius’s death, Van Schurman commented on his “virulence” and “inconstancy in religion,” stating that Rivet, in his final refutation, would “kill off completely, and with ease, this final hydra’s head, just as it begins to grow anew from the corpse” (no. 44, 1:56). She then composed a poem celebrating Grotius’s death, boldly stating: “Look! A dead man (who would believe it?) bites his living enemy, / Nor does his seething anger expire at the top of his funeral pyre.” She critiqued him for his post-mortem polemical work, which had led him to think that “he has mocked his enemy’s victory.” But posterity and the world itself, she concluded, would be a “knowing witness” to his double demise (no. 59, 1:55). The Quarrel with Amyraut  Although Rivet also confided in Van Schurman on the heated polemic with Moïse Amyraut (1596–1664), a theology professor at the Academy of Saumur (the most illustrious of the French Reformed universities), she was not as engaged as in the quarrel with Grotius, perhaps because Rivet, after publishing a first pamphlet against Amyraut in 1636, had then let the theologians Pierre du Moulin and Frederik Spanheim take the lead roles.219 She mentions Amyraut in six letters over a period of seven years, from 1643 to 1650. Yet, although somewhat removed from the controversy, she expressed consistently her worry about the consequences of a schism in the French Reformed churches that would lead, she thought, to irreparable damage; she also commented admiringly on the polemical works of Du Moulin and Spanheim. How did Amyraut differ from orthodox Calvinists? On the role of reason in religious belief, he argued that church doctrines should be reasonable, while Rivet and the orthodox Reformed countered that reason is subservient to religious faith. Amyraut published in 1641 The Elevation of Faith and the Lowering of Reason when Believing the Mysteries of Religion, which stated that in the face of certain incomprehensible Christian truths, such as the doctrine of the Trinity, the complementarity of faith and reason must be maintained.220 He drew inspiration from 218. Rivet to Sarrau, 19 September 1645, Correspondance intégrale, 218. 219. According to F.P. van Stam, Rivet’ s involvement in the conflict was “incredibly deep.” F.P. van Stam, The Controversy over the Theology of Saumur, 1635–1650: Disrupting Debates among the Huguenots in Complicated Circumstances (Amsterdam and Maarssen: APA-Holland University Press, 1988), 439. On the actors in the quarrel, see Stam, Controversy over the Theology of Saumur, 439–52. 220. Richard A. Muller, “Beyond Hypothetical Universalism: Moïse Amyraut (1596–1664) on Faith, Reason, and Ethics,” in The Theology of the French Reformed Churches, 210.

62 Introduction the Scotsman John Cameron (ca. 1579–1625), his former teacher at Saumur.221 But the most controversial of his ideas, which Rivet and his colleagues Du Moulin and Spanheim fought aggressively, was his defense of conditional universalism, arguing that salvation for all humans was conditional upon faith. His position led him to a moderate Calvinism more in line with Lutheranism, which likewise taught universal atonement. The controversy began in 1634 when Amyraut published in French rather than Latin, to gain a wider readership, his Brief Treatise on Predestination, in which he stated his opposition to the notion of a God whose creation included those predetermined to be damned. To the contrary, God, in a first decree, sent Christ to save all humankind (universalism), but only appropriation by faith, granted in a second decree by God to some, enabled salvation to become efficacious (conditional universalism).222 Amyraut’s doctrine provoked sharp dissension in the Reformed Churches in France, Switzerland, and Holland, with key ministers in France finding it consistent with the decrees of the Synod of Dordt, while Du Moulin, Spanheim, and Rivet rejected it as a compromise with Arminianism. Du Moulin headed the opposition. Once a professor of philosophy at Leiden, he was a redoubtable controversialist who, after several decades as pastor at the Temple of Charenton outside Paris, was exiled to Sedan. By late 1635/6, Du Moulin had circulated a refutation in which he attacked the order of decrees on predestination in Amyraut’s position.223 Despite Du Moulin’s efforts to attribute heterodoxy to Amyraut, the National Synod of Alençon in 1637 did not condemn him for heresy. Most Parisian pastors supported him to avoid a church schism and potential harm to the Academy of Saumur. In the years following the Alençon Synod, the controversy simmered in the background. In mid-1643, however, three students from Saumur were rejected for ministry by the provincial Synod of Poitou for advocating Amyraut’s ideas. This caused a great commotion. It is at this point that Van Schurman began writing about Amyraut. In December 1643, she alluded to the necessity for the French churches to “remember that God imparts His singular grace strictly to his own,” meaning the elect, and that Satan “cannot endure the light of this doctrine 221. According to Albert Gootjes, in Claude Pajon (1626–1685) and the Academy of Saumur. The First Controversy over Grace (Leiden and Boston: Brill, 2014), Cameron injected “ ‘rationalism into Reformed theology.” 222. Brian G. Armstrong, Calvinism and the Amyraut Heresy: Protestant Scholasticism and Humanism in Seventeenth-Century France (Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1969), 82; Willem J. van Asselt, “Andreas Rivetus: International Theologian,” in The Theology of the French Reformed Churches, 269. For an extensive treatment of the controversy, see F.P. van Stam, Controversy over the Theology of Saumur. 223. An Examination of the Doctrine of Messieurs Amyraut and Testard concerning Predestination was published in Amsterdam in 1638.

Introduction 63 of salvation,” or the doctrine of predestination (no. 42, 1:47). Two years later, in December 1645, she referred to Amyraut’s allies as “hypotheticals,” a derisive term applied to defenders of the theology of Saumur,224 and she praised the efforts of the Leiden theologian Frederik Spanheim “in rooting out the heterodoxy of Amyraut” (no. 44, 1:56). Spanheim had published a Disputation on Universal Grace, to which Amyraut responded with Four Theological Disputations (1645), dedicated to Rivet in a vain attempt to get him on his side.225 Then, in February 1647, she inquired about “the state of the Church” in France, and “whether the Amyraut controversy still rages on even now” (no. 48, 1:60). She was “overjoyed” to hear in March 1648 (no. 49, 1:62) that Du Moulin had republished in French a revised version of his earlier Examination (1638),226 A Clarification of the Controversies of Saumur, in which he outlined the entire controversy from the Synod of Alençon in 1637 to its present-day form. Rivet, in the meantime, deeply disturbed by the lack of resolution at the Synod of Alençon, mentioned in a letter on 23 December 1644 to Paul Ferry, a minister at Metz, his apprehension of a schism in European Protestantism: “If this assembly does not provide a vigorous remedy to this situation, there is danger of a schism in our churches.”227 Disappointed as well with the National Synod of Charenton (16 December 1644–26 January 1645), which also withheld condemnation of Amyraut, he supported Spanheim’s efforts to publish an even more prolix response, the three-volume Exercitationes de gratia universali (Practices of Universal Grace, Leiden, 1646), amounting to some 2,600 pages, to which Amyraut replied early in 1648 with his own An Example of an Inquiry into the

224. Stam, The Controversy over the Theology of Saumur, 277. 225. In an email communication of 18 September 2018, Albert Gootjes explained that Rivet held a series of disputations in 1630 on discovering, in or around 1628, Cameron’s universalism in posthumously published works. Despite deep concerns, Rivet responded mildly, hoping that “this incipient universalism would die a quiet death.” But he was greatly dismayed when Amyraut “infused new life into his late mentor’s hypothetical universalism” in his Brief Treatise on Predestination (1634). Amyraut, in 1645, remembered Rivet’s mild response, thinking he could be swayed. On Rivet and Cameron, see Albert Gootjes, “The Theologian’s Private Cabinet: The Development and Early Reception of John Cameron’s Universalism,” in The Doctrine of Election in Reformed Perspective: Historical and Theological Investigations of the Synod of Dort, 1618–1619, ed. Frank van der Pol (Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2018), 155. 226. Examen de la doctrine de messieurs Amyrault et Testard, touchant la Predestination (Amsterdam, n.p., 1638) (Examination of the doctrine of Messrs. Amyrault and Testard, touching on predestination). Rivet had applauded the appearance in French of Du Moulin’s book “to mobilize the people.” See Stam, The Controversy over the Theology of Saumur, 345. 227. Letter reproduced in part in François Laplanche, L’Oeuvre d’Amyraut et la querelle de la grâce universelle (Paris: Presses Universitaires de France, 1965), 186. Cited in Armstrong, Calvinism and the Amyraut Heresy, 103.

64 Introduction Practices of Universal Grace.228 Not to be outdone, Rivet and his brother Guillaume each published a refutation of Amyraut in 1648 and 1649 in which they went so far as to equate Amyraut’s position on the doctrine of justification to that of a Roman Catholic.229 In July 1649, Van Schurman referred to yet another combatant in the fight against Amyraut: George Reveau (1582/3–1663), a Huguenot conseiller d’état (attorney representing the king) living in La Rochelle, who had likely sent her a copy of his refutation, On the Example of the Inquiry of Amyraut against Spanheim’s Exercises on Universal Grace (Leiden, 1649). She asked Rivet to send Reveau her letter of thanks for “his book and the honor he gave me in placing me among those who are able to judge it” (no. 51, 1:65). Given that she referred in the previous paragraph of her letter to God’s raising up “such excellent champions to battle for the defense of his cause,” and that among these was Rivet’s “incomparable brother-in-law,” Pierre du Moulin, whose “latest work of which it has pleased you to give me some hope” she “passionately desire[d] to see” (either his Clarification of the Controversies of Saumur, published in 1648, or one of two other works on Amyraut published in 1649), it is likely that the work Reveau sent her was a refutation of Amyraut. Knowing of her reputation as a theologian siding with Reformed Calvinists would have occasioned this request. The main consequence resulting from this crisis in Reformed Protestantism was, again, a tremendous fear of a schism in the French Church, a fear also seen in Van Schurman’s letters to Rivet. Peace between the warring parties was finally reached when Henri-Charles de La Trémoille (1620–1672), duc de Thouars, arranged for a meeting at Thouars between Amyraut and his principal opponents in France. The Act of Thouars on 16 October 1649 put an end to the official controversy. In February 1650—the last time Van Schurman mentioned Amyraut— she expressed joy and relief that “this storm of dissension, which threatens our Churches in France with a great shipwreck, seems to want to end in a gentle calm” (no. 53, 1:66). But, in fact, there was no final resolution to the doctrinal difference with Amyraut.230 Rivet joined the agreement, and all except Pierre du Moulin desisted from further writing on the topic. Rivet may have finally won the peace before his death in 1651 by coercing Du Moulin to refrain from further attacks. A reconciliation of sorts between Amyraut and Du Moulin came about in 1655, four years after Rivet’s death.

228. Amyraut, Specimen animadversionum in Exercitationes de gratia universali (Saumur: Johannes Lesner, 1648). 229. Armstrong, Calvinism and the Amyraut Heresy, 112. 230. Armstrong, Calvinism and the Amyraut Heresy, 115.

Introduction 65

Anna Maria Van Schurman and Female Members of Her Circle  Early modern women’s circles and networks have attracted recent scholarly and digital attention. Van Schurman’s networking and connections with transnational female scholars have also drawn strong critical interest and been featured in Carol Pal’s Republic of Women: Rethinking the Republic of Letters in the Seventeenth Century (2012). In addition to Anne de Rohan, discussed earlier, three other notable women scholars (Marie du Moulin, Marie de Gournay, and Lady Dorothy Moore), as well as two women artists (Utricia Ogle and Madame Coutel), appear in her epistolary exchange with Rivet. Anna Maria van Schurman and the Du Moulin Family Network or “Famille d’Alliance” Three extant French letters from Van Schurman to Marie du Moulin (ca. 1613– 1699) are included in the KB collection (1:58, 1:64, 1:68); a fourth French letter appears in Opuscula (1:59). It also appears that she wrote “long letters in Dutch” to Marie (1:59), now lost. Van Schurman first met Marie231 when the latter came to live at The Hague in 1633 with her uncle André Rivet and her aunt, also named Marie du Moulin. In March 1635, Van Schurman wrote to Pierre du Moulin, her father, to attest to the covenant relationship she had established with the younger Marie, whom she addressed from then on as her soeur d’alliance and her “chère soeur.”232 She was grateful to Marie for the honor of her father’s correspondence with her, but concluded that she loved Marie both “for her own sake” and “the sake of such a father.” Marie remained with her uncle and aunt at The Hague for about twenty years, except for several extended stays at Sedan to care for her ill father (in 1642, 1646, and 1649). Van Schurman’s letters to her mentor record her distress both over these absences and Pierre du Moulin’s long-standing illness. The latter was repeatedly attacked by Catholic polemicists, who argued that his illness was brought on as divine retribution for teaching false doctrines—so much so that he addressed a Letter  . . . to Mr. Rivet his brother-in-law  . . . against the false rumors spread in various places, harming his constancy in the true Religion, in which he affirmed that “he had not taught any doctrines that he was not ready to 231. On Marie du Moulin, see Elisabeth Labrousse, “Marie du Moulin, éducatrice,” Bulletin de la Société de l’Histoire du Protestantisme français 139 (1993): 255–68; Pieta van Beek, “ ‘Ma très chère sœur’:  Marie du Moulin (1625–1699) and Marie Jeanne des Pres (1675–1763). Two Forgotten Huguenot Women Writers,” Bulletin of the Huguenot Society of South Africa 39 (2002): 111–19; “Marie du Moulin,” in vol. 12 of the Dictionnaire de Biographie Française (Paris: Letouzey & Ané, 1970), 253; Pal, Republic of Women, 97–109; Beek, First Female, 144–48; Els Kloek, “Moulin, Marie du,” in Digitaal Vrouwenlexicon van Nederland, (accessed November 2018). 232. Van Schurman to Pierre du Moulin, French letter, 20 March 1635, Opuscula, 246–49.

66 Introduction agree to with his own blood.”233 Du Moulin eventually regained his health. Marie moved to Breda in 1646 with her uncle and aunt, much to Van Schurman’s “great unhappiness” at the news (no. 60, 1:58). Van Schurman became Marie’s mentor when she invited her to study Hebrew. Marie began her Hebrew studies only after she returned to Sedan in 1646 to take care of her ill father. In a letter in Hebrew to Van Schurman on her progress, ably composed in the form of a cento (a poetical work composed wholly of passages and verses from other authors), she described how she had at first resisted Van Schurman’s invitation because of the largely domestic training she had received “as all the young girls of [my] country.”234 It was only at the urging of her ill father, who wanted to hear the Bible read to him in the Hebrew tongue, that she began to learn it. Van Schurman then commended her “happy progress” in Hebrew (no. 61, 1:64). Marie published anonymously at least three works on religious and educational topics: a treatise on the education of princes, an account of the last hours of André Rivet, and an account of the last hours of her father.235 However, her educational treatise was later attributed to her cousin, Frédéric Rivet, whose name was inscribed in the copy of the work at the Bibliothèque nationale in Paris.236 Then, when it appeared in English translation in 1673, it was attributed to its translator, Pierre du Moulin, Marie’s brother. In the preface, we learn that “a great princess,” who was expecting her first child, requested the work. This was Princess Mary (Mary Stuart), wife of William II of Orange and mother of future king of England William III, who was born in 1650. Marie du Moulin’s moving record of the last twelve days of Rivet’s life, from 27 December 1650 to his death on 7 January 1651 (which she sent to Van 233. Lettre . . . à Monsieur Rivet son beau-frere . . . contre les faux bruits semez en quelques lieux, au prejudice de sa constance en la vraye Religion (The Hague: Ludolph Breeckevelt, 1643), n.p., dated from Sedan, 16 March 1643. 234. For a translation of the letter, see Beek, First Female, 146. The letter is kept at Amsterdam University Library, Collection Diederichs, 16 Ag. Marie learned Latin and Greek as well. 235. Les Dernieres heures de Monsieur Rivet; Récit des dernières heures de Monsieur du Moulin (Sedan: François Chayer, 1658), and De la Premiere education d’un Prince. Depuis sa naissance jusqu’à l’aage de sept ans. Traitté tres-utile non seulement aux grands, mais encor à tous ceux qui desirent de bien élever leurs enfans (Rotterdam: Arnout Leers, 1654), reprinted as De l’education des enfans. Et particulierement de celle des princes. Où il est montré de quelle importance sont les sept premieres années de la vie (Amsterdam: Elzevier, 1679). The only extant copy of the 1654 edition is at the Bodleian Library, Oxford University. The first two works are included, without any attribution to her, in Jean-Jacob Salchli, ed., Les dernières heures de De Mornay du Plessis, Gigord, Rivet, Du Moulin, Drelincourt et Fabri: Nouvelle édition, augmentée des derniers moments de J.-C. Rieu . . . (Valence and Paris: J. Marc Aurel, 1847). 236. Elisabeth Labrousse, in “Marie du Moulin, éducatrice,” and Carol Pal, in Republic of Women, 235, demonstrate that the book is by Marie du Moulin.

Introduction 67 Schurman), was republished at least five times: in Breda, Sedan, and Delft in 1651; Utrecht in 1652; and Geneva in 1666. It was also translated into English in 1651, and into Latin and Dutch. Marie described Rivet’s gradual relinquishing of his life in intimate terms. The untimely death of his former pupil, Stadtholder William II, in November 1650, was a shock that precipitated in him a detachment from worldly things.237 Following his last sermon on the Sunday before Christmas, he took to his bed with an intestinal colic, which no physician could remedy. He frequently stated in Latin Van Schurman’s motto: “Amor meus crucifixus est; Mon amour est le crucifié” (“My love is the crucified”).238 Then, the day before his death, he remembered Van Schurman with the following words, addressed to his son Frédéric and recorded by Marie: She is a person whom I have always loved with a sincere affection, and she has honored me with her sacred friendship, and with the title of Father. And as a small token of my fatherly affection, I am giving her a little [Hebrew] unvocalized239 Bible from the Plantin press, which you will find in its place in my library. If I had enough strength left, I would write with my dying hand a testimonial regarding the respect and esteem that I have for her on account of the admirable gifts of God in her; but, my son, he added, you will supply this fault of mine and will tell her of my happy end, and of the prayers I have addressed to God, that it please Him to fortify her in her celestial vocation, prolong her days with His benediction, and give her the grace to end happily her life.”240 Van Schurman, in March 1652, related to Marie her transport of joy when she received Rivet’s Bible “as proof of his spiritual love” and “paternal affection, which he kept for me right up until his last breath.” She proposed that if she were to die ahead of Marie, the latter would inherit the Bible to “remember our covenant and 237. Les Dernieres heures de Monsieur Rivet, 5. 238. Les Dernieres heures de Monsieur Rivet, 42. 239. This is described as “sans pointes” in the original. We thank Tom Boogaart, Professor of Hebrew and the Old Testament at Western Theological Seminary, for his explanation in an email communication of 25 July 2018: “For centuries the Hebrew Bible consisted of just consonants . . . The reader added the vowels . . . Around 800 AD/CE Jewish scholars gathered to establish the original pronunciation of words, and they added vowels to the consonants to standardize the pronunciation. These vowels consisted of various points and dashes under the consonants and in a few cases above them. These vowels are often called ‘pointings.’ Generally, people today referred to the text being ‘pointed’ or ‘unpointed.’ You could also say ‘vocalized’ or ‘unvocalized’.” 240. Les Dernieres heures de Monsieur Rivet, 53. The Plantin Press, the renowned publishing house in Antwerp, was founded in 1555 by Christophe Plantin of Touraine.

68 Introduction solid friendship” (no. 62, 1:68). It is not known what happened to Rivet’s Bible after Van Schurman’s death in 1678.241 Although courted by André Rivet’s second son, Claude Rivet, Marie du Moulin refused to marry him out of devotion to her Protestant faith. Claude Rivet had converted to Catholicism, along with his patron at the time, Henri-Charles de La Trémoille, duc de Thouars. Claude returned to Protestantism ten years later, but could not convince Marie of the sincerity of his conversion.242 Pierre Bayle confirmed her refusal to marry in an autograph letter, dated 28 November 1678, in which he included the genealogy of the family of Pierre du Moulin given to him a few years earlier by a pastor at Senlis; he stated that Marie du Moulin “never wished to marry, even though her beauty, wealth, and merit drew numerous suitors.”243 Marie du Moulin later directed a refuge in Haarlem for impoverished Huguenot French women, the Société des Dames françaises de Haarlem, which flourished from 1683 to 1770.244 Returning to France after 1686, Marie du Moulin was arrested and held in a prison in Colommiers and later in a convent.245 Returning to The Hague, she died in 1699 at age eighty-six. Covenant Alliances: Anna Maria van Schurman, Marie de Gournay, and Dorothy Moore  Marie Le Jars de Gournay (1565–1645) and Dorothy Moore (née King, ca. 1612– 1664), scholars who joined Van Schurman’s friendship network, figure as well in the KB collection. Gournay is mentioned in two ways in Van Schurman’s œuvre: in a brief Latin epideictic poem published in Opuscula, and in four letters to Rivet in the collection, all drafted in 1639–40. Moore appears in one letter drafted in 1642. Van Schurman cast Gournay as a mighty defender of the cause of women’s learning. She had likely read Gournay’s treatise The Equality of Men and Women (1622) and the shorter The Ladies’ Complaint (1626). These treatises appeared in Gournay’s collected works: first, in L’Ombre de la demoiselle de Gournay (The Shadow of Mademoiselle de Gournay, 1626), then in two editions of Les Advis, ou, Les Presens de la Demoiselle de Gournay (The Opinions, or the Gifts of Mademoiselle de Gournay, 1634, 1641). Van Schurman could well have read Gournay’s treatises on women upon their publication in the 1620s, a period when as a rising star she was beginning to draw the attention of Dutch savants—she was fifteen when The 241. Van Schurman had at least fifteen titles of books by Rivet in her library. There is no mention of his Bible in the Labadist catalogue. See Beek and Bürmann, “Ex Libris,” 46. 242. See Tulot, “Familles de l’Église réformée de Thouars, ” 70. 243. Labrousse, “Marie du Moulin, éducatrice,” 259. 244. Pal, Republic of Women, 235. 245. Haag and Haag, La France protestante, 5: 830.

Introduction 69 Equality of Men and Women appeared, and nineteen when The Ladies’ Complaint was published. The second edition of Gournay’s collected works (1634) was printed when Van Schurman was writing on female leisure time and education. In a missive on 12 December 1639 (no. 19, 1:26), Van Schurman mentioned that Gournay had written to her, but that she had not yet responded for lack of time. In a second letter on 4 October 1640 (no. 23, 1:32), she referred to Gournay as Rivet’s Nobilissima vestra Gornacensis (“your most noble Lady De Gournay”). In her ode, Van Schurman likens Gournay to an Amazon warrior defending women’s education.246 She declares twice in chiasmic form Gournay’s allegiance to Pallas Athena, virgin goddess of warfare, the crafts, and wisdom or learning.247 She ends with a resounding call to follow Gournay “beneath her banner.” In her letter to Rivet on female education, she criticizes those who state that “sewing with the needle and spinning the distaff constitute an ample enough school for women” (no. 14, 1:17), thus echoing Gournay’s indictment in her Equality of Men and Women of those who limit women’s sphere to the “distaff, yea, to the distaff alone.”248 Although she does not explicitly state the equality of men and women, she refuses, like Gournay, a rigid rhetorical positioning of admitting only female superiority or inferiority. Then, in replying to Rivet’s criticism of her arguments, she praises Gournay’s citation of authorities proving that women are as capable of higher learning as men (no. 16, 1:19). Gournay’s views, founded on the humanist ideal of the dignitas homini, inspired Van Schurman’s defense of learning as gender neutral. As Jean-Claude Arnould notes, Gournay endorsed a “single anthropological understanding” of human beings, leading the way to a feminism of equality whereby women writers were indistinguishable, because intellectually equal.249 246. Opuscula, 303. On this ode, see Pal, Republic of Women, 90; Larsen, Star of Utrecht, 195. 247. Pallas Athena’s virginity would have appealed to Van Schurman. She may have known of Andrea Alciato’s emblem book (Emblemata), published by the Plantin Press in 1591, in which Pallas is depicted as the guardian of virgins, with the motto “Custodiendas virgines” (“Virgins must be guarded”). See Alciato, Emblemata (Leiden: ex Officina Plantiniana, 1591), Emblem 22, 39. Van Schurman’s contemporary, the Venetian nun Arcangela Tarabotti (1604–1652), also refers to Pallas Athena as the protector of virgins in her defence of virginity in her Convent Paradise (1643); see Convent Paradise, ed. Meredith K. Ray and Lynn Lara Westwater (Toronto: Iter Academic Press; Tempe, Arizona: Arizona Center for Medieval and Renaissance Studies, 2020), 170. With thanks to Cheryl Lemmens for these references. 248. Marie le Jars de Gournay, The Equality of Men and Women, in Apology for the Woman Writing and Other Works, ed. and trans. Richard Hillman and Colette Quesnel (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2002), 75. Van Schurman does not criticize needlework, since she was skilled at a wide variety of handcrafts, including embroidery. She objects here to limiting women to needlework. 249. Jean-Claude Arnould, “Y a-t-il une place pour les femmes dans la création littéraire? Marie de Gournay et la figure de l’autrice, ” in Les femmes dans la critique et l’histoire littéraire, ed. Martine Reid (Paris: Honoré Champion, 2011), 28.

70 Introduction Gournay and Van Schurman corresponded with one another, but Gournay both praised and critiqued Van Schurman. She thanked Van Schurman for her poem, but then came to the main point of her missive: Dare I, in passing, give you, Philosophically, a word from my limited perspective? Languages take an inordinate and far too long a time for a mind like yours, which is capable of other and the best things. Nor is it useful for you to say, as you do, that you want to read everything in the original because their translated versions are not as good. (no. 76, 1:25) Gournay pressed her on the best way to spend her leisure, and whether a translation was in fact inferior to the source text, as Van Schurman supposed. She ended with the promise that should she live longer, she would send Van Schurman a new printing of her collected works, the Advis, “where your name will be included.” In her reply, Van Schurman stated how pleased she was at Gournay’s promise to mention her but protested that an exception had to be made for Hebrew, whose use “will survive into the next life” (1:29).250 Gournay wrote at least one more known letter to Van Schurman, now lost, offering her a formal mother-daughter foedus, meaning a “pact,” “alliance,” or “contract.”251 Van Schurman eagerly asked Rivet what answer she should give: Your most noble Lady de Gournay recently wrote to me, offering me the possibility of strengthening a closer alliance between us, namely that of a mother and daughter. For this reason, I beg you urgently, in accordance with your fatherly prudence and judgment, that you advise me as rapidly as possible what I should do about this request. (no. 23, 1:32) Now in her declining years, Gournay wished to be a covenant “mother” to Van Schurman, thereby endorsing the rise on the European stage of a female star resembling her. Her desire for Van Schurman to succeed her in the Republic of Letters was well known, since Gabriel Naudé reported on it in a letter to Johan van Beverwijck. Gournay, wrote Naudé, wished to “groom” Van Schurman, “her equal in mental acumen, and not below her in glory and reputation, one who can hold her own among male rivals.”252 Marie de Gournay clearly influenced 250. Opuscula, 284. 251. On this term, which conveys a “deliberative arrangement” more than an “affective tie,” see Constant J. Mews and Neville Chiavaroli, “The Latin West,” in Friendship: A History, ed. Barbara Caine (London: Equinox, 2009), 96. 252. Naudé to Van Beverwijck, 21 June 1642 (Appendix C5).

Introduction 71 Van Schurman’s writings on the education of women. Her emphasis on women’s capacity to reason, her critique of customs limiting women’s access to serious learning, her defense of her own literary voice, and her use of evidence from the ancients provided a model for her to admire and imitate. Dorothy Moore, for her part, appeared in a letter by Van Schurman to Rivet drafted in November 1642.253 Moore, a widowed Anglo-Irish reformer embedded in the circle of the polymath Samuel Hartlib (ca. 1600–1662) and attached to the court of the exiled Queen of Bohemia at The Hague, had just visited Van Schurman in Utrecht, where she also likely saw her two sons, who were lodging at Voetius’s house school. In 1639 Moore had written a self-introductory Hebrew letter to Van Schurman, now lost, to which the latter replied in Hebrew on 8 August 1640, stating how delighted she was at her acquaintance and inviting her into a friendship covenant.254 A second letter of Van Schurman in Latin, on 1 April 1641, expanded on this offer, even suggesting the hope of some day enjoying a closer “companionship” or “intimacy” through living together in the same house.255 By 1642, when Van Schurman mentioned Moore to Rivet, she was confident enough in her friendship with Moore to ask a special favor of him. Van Schurman hoped that Rivet would introduce Moore to members of his own circle of contacts and court connections (no. 28, 1:37). Perhaps Moore could even stay a while at his home so that he might become a possible père d’alliance to her. Van Schurman facilitated a brief mentoring connection when, in September 1643, an epistolary exchange occurred between Moore and Rivet. Moore inquired from him whether women had a spiritual and moral duty to perform a public ecclesiastic role, if not as members of the clergy, then at least in some meaningful official capacity. Moore and Rivet ended up writing five letters exploring—in utramque partem—both sides of the issue.256

253. There has been of late a resurgence of interest in Moore’s networking. See Cathy Barry, “Dorothy Moore: Building Networks in the Republic of Letters,” Irish Philosophy blog, 21 January 2016, (accessed August 2016); Felicity Lyn Maxwell, “Calling for Collaboration: Women and Public Service in Dorothy Moore’s Transnational Protestant Correspondence,” Literature Compass 14, no. 4 (2017), doi:10.1111/ lic3.12386; Evan Bourke, “Female Involvement, Membership, and Centrality: A Social Network Analysis of the Hartlib Circle,” Literature Compass, 14.4 (2017), doi:10.1111/lic3.12388; and Carol Pal, “Accidental Archive: Samuel Hartlib and the Afterlife of Female Scholars,” in Archival Afterlives: Life, Death, and Knowledge-Making in Early Modern British Scientific and Medical Archives, ed. Vera Keller, Anna Marie Roos, and Elizabeth Yale (Leiden and Boston: Brill, 2018), 120–49. 254. Opuscula, 154; Whether a Christian Woman Should Be Educated, 60. 255. Opuscula, 191–94; Whether a Christian Woman Should Be Educated, 61. 256. The manuscript copies of the exchange are included in Samuel Hartlib’s Papers at the University of Sheffield. See Pal, Republic of Women, 124–41; Larsen, Star of Utrecht, chap. 7.

72 Introduction Friendship in the Arts: Anna Maria van Schurman, Utricia Ogle, and Madame Coutel Utricia Ogle (1611–1674) appeared in letters from Van Schurman to Rivet (1:62 and 1:63) and to Huygens (2:23), and in two poems Huygens addressed to Van Schurman (Appendix B18 and 2:43). An accomplished musician and singer, she was a close friend of Van Schurman and a protégée of Huygens, who dedicated to her his Pathodia sacra et profana (Songs of Passion Sacred and Profane, 1647). She was the daughter of Sir John Ogle (1569–1640), an army officer who joined in the Netherlands the company of Sir Francis Vere, sergeant-major-general of the English forces aiding the Dutch Republic.257 After many feats of heroism, he was chosen as governor of Utrecht during the first Arminian troubles in 1610. Ogle married the Dutchwoman Elizabeth de Vries; two of his daughters, Utricia and Trajectina, born in Utrecht, were named after the city. She left for England with her family in 1620, returning to Holland in the early 1640s, possibly in the retinue of Mary Stuart, Princess Royal, who arrived in the Netherlands to join her husband Prince William—although no archival evidence for this has been found. In 1645 Utricia married Sir William Swann (ca. 1619–1678), an English professional officer in the army of the Dutch States General and an accomplished musician. Her husband then later moved with her to Hamburg, where she died in 1674. Van Schurman informed Rivet on 25 March 1648 of Utricia’s forthcoming visit to Utrecht, sending him “the little verses that I played with not so long ago when the Noble Lady Swann arrives for a visit” (no. 49, 1:62).258 She referred once more to her, apologizing for the delay in her reply since Utricia, on whom she counted as messenger, was still at court “where she has been in mourning with the Princess Royal” the death of Charles I (no. 50, 1:63). As for Huygens, Utricia Ogle was the best promoter and advertiser of his musical compositions. He hoped Van Schurman would appreciate his Songs of Passion Sacred and Profane, “thanks to her singing that we so admire” (ca. December 1647, 2:22), to which Van Schurman replied that she had indeed heard him perform “a certain marvelous selection of it” with Utricia (no. 65, 2:23). Huygens was immensely taken with Ogle’s singing and beauty, frequently writing to her—nineteen letters of his to her are extant—and accompanying her on the theorbo. 257. On Ogle, see Rudolf Rasch, “ ‘Aensienlicxte der Vrouwen, Aenhoorlixte daer toe’: Utricia Ogle in de ogen (en oren) van Constantijn Huygens,” in Vrouwen rondom Huygens, special issue, ZE 25, no. 2 (2009), ed. Els Kloek, Frans Blom, and Ad Leerintveld (Hilversum: Verloren, 2010), 131–48; Lisa Jardine, Going Dutch: How England Plundered Holland’s Glory (New York: HarperCollins, 2008), 163–66; and Christopher Joby, The Multilingualism of Constantijn Huygens (1596–1687) (Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press, 2014), 110. 258. Likely the French poem entitled “On the Welcome and the Residence of the very Noble and Virtuous Lady, MADAME UTRICIA OGLE, Known as SWAEN. At UTRECHT, in the Month of November 1647,” Opuscula, 313.

Introduction 73 Finally, Van Schurman’s relationship with Madame Coutel, a French noblewoman, although short-lived, appears to have been genuine. Coutel was a friend of Salmasius, who was called upon to adjudicate between her and Van Schurman’s portraiture. Van Schurman informed Rivet in October 1639 that Coutel had sent her an art gift for which she needed to reciprocate (no. 18, 1:24). In December 1639, she assured Salmasius that she would send him her “attempt at painting” for this adjudication, not so much “to appear glorious” as to comply with his wishes for “being dragged into this arena” (Appendix C3). Rivet was consulted, and before long she wrote that she was sending “the excellent Matron Lady Coutel” a “sample of the style of my former artwork” (no. 19, 1:26). By Christmas 1639, she did what she had promised, penning a French letter to Madame Coutel, and sending her a self-portrait.

Anna Maria van Schurman and Constantijn Huygens, 1633–1669 Where, O Nymph, do you continually hide yourself [. . .] Step forth from the sea, modest Venus, and be born, Batavian goddess [. . .]. Huygens, For the Pearl, Anna Maria van Schurman. So that she remains less hidden.259 On 8 March 1651, Van Schurman made her way to Delft to attend the funeral of Stadtholder William II. The elaborate ceremony—complete with a heraldic funeral cortège, a sermon at the Nieuwe Kerk at Delft, and the burial in the church vault where lay the Stadtholders William the Silent (1584), Maurice (1625), Frederik Hendrik (1647), and now William II (1651)—was replete with symbols of the hereditary dignities of the Princes of Orange.260 The funeral cortège consisted of two distinct parts. Ahead of the coffin, laid on a canopied coach driven by eight horses, came a vast train of noblemen, each bearing the insignia and coat of arms of his station as a private individual; following the coffin, some eight hundred functionaries, courtiers, and public representatives formed part of the procession—among them one of the most renowned members of the Republic of Letters, Constantijn Huygens (1596–1687). After the funeral, Huygens planned to host Van Schurman at his nearby house in The Hague so that she could spend some time at his renowned cabinet of curiosities, or “museum,” as he called it (2:47). He had made an exception for 259. Opuscula, 297, 2 October 1634 (2:3); Momenta desultoria: Poëmatum libri XI, ed. Caspar Barlaeus (Leiden: Elzevier, 1644), 92. For Huygens’s works online, as well as biographical and scholarly material, see “Constantijn Huygens,” Digitale Bibliotheek voor de Nederlandse Letteren (DBNL), (accessed March 2019). 260. On these rites, see Geert H. Janssen, “Political Ambiguity and Confessional Diversity in the Funeral Processions of Stadholders in the Dutch Republic,” SCJ 40 (2009): 283–301.

74 Introduction her, since women were generally excluded from such sites. The early modern museum—“a privileged site of knowledge,” as Paula Findlen notes—was viewed as an extension of the collector’s “self,”261 thus highlighting Huygens’s exceptional invitation and keen desire for Van Schurman’s visit. But she neither met him at the funeral nor visited his museum. Van Schurman chose instead to view the end of the funeral and then return home to Utrecht. She likely made her way into the Nieuwe Kerk, where she would have heard the predominantly Calvinist, “short and sober” funeral sermon.262 The weather that day was particularly stormy and dark. Seemingly rankled at neither seeing her at the funeral nor being able to welcome her to his home, Huygens sent her a first terse poem three days later: “One minute you’re here, Van Schurman, and the next you’re not? Are you / Lying about your friendship with Huygens? And Casembroot?263 / . . . This fraud, this wicked fraud, is a fraud, / . . . I offer you lunch and dinner and my home; what else do you want? / I offer whatever small connection to the Muses Huygens has” (11 March 1651, 2:37).264 A week later, he sent another abrupt poem, challenging her to explain her absence: “What do you say, Van Schurman, / Who will untangle this knot you have caused? What kind of Plato or Aristotle / Will it take? . . . / . . . you, Parca, have acted badly [in Greek]” (19 March 1651, 2:38). He included with his poem prints of the funeral of Frederik Hendrik four years earlier, designed by the famous printmaker artist Pieter Janszoon Post, to show her what she missed. Then came a letter asserting that she wanted to “play the part of a female Cato,” or censor, in deliberately trying to avoid him so as not to have to “graze too much upon food” he planned to offer her. “But you preferred to flee,” he intoned, “and the Muses were indignant, 261. Paula Findlen, Possessing Nature: Museums, Collecting, and Scientific Culture in Early Modern Italy (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1994), 101. The early modern museum reflected “the ideal of humanist sodality more than courtly sociability”; women were perceived “to be the true ‘foreigners’ in the museum” (143). 262. Janssen, “Political Ambiguity,” 298. 263. To complicate matters further, Huygens had sent a letter of recommendation to Van Schurman (dated 14 August 1648, 2:24) on Maria Casembroot, a young, unmarried harpsichord player whom he was courting. Huygens hoped to impress his new protégée by getting Van Schurman to befriend her. On Casembroot, see Ton van Strien, “Virtuoos en vertueus: Maria Casembroot (1621–?),” in Vrouwen rondom Huygens, ed. Kloek et al., 115–30. Two years earlier, Huygens had used the same strategy with Maria Tesselschade Roemers Visscher, Anna Roemers’s sister, who had distanced herself from him; he sent to her as his intermediary the fledgling young poet Alida Bruno, who hoped in turn that Huygens would help her publish her poems. See Annelies de Jeu, ‘’t Spoor der dichteressen’: Netwerken en publicatiemogelijkheden van schrijvende vrouwen in de Republiek (1600–1750) (Hilversum: Verloren, 2000), 11–12. 264. Pieter Geyl comments that “crisp forcefulness” characterizes Huygens’s poetic and epistolary style, whose “matter-of-factness often turns to harshness”; see The Netherlands in the Seventeenth Century, 232. In this instance, his Latin expression is especially forceful in his repetitive hammering at Van Schurman’s fraus (“fraud”).

Introduction 75 and have not yet stopped grieving over not seeing Van Schurman.” Surely his curiosity cabinet alone was worth the trip and her time, since it contained “quite a few coins, and not of the least quality.” Finally, he offered her an olive branch, expecting that she would “atone for [her] crime” by commenting on a poem he had penned on the funeral, and scheduling a visit, soon. “Let it be so, let it be so, my Maiden, if it’s within your power to be indebted to the man who continues to live and be the most devoted cultivator of your virtue” (23 March 1651, 2:39). Six weeks later, Van Schurman answered Huygens with a poem in which she adroitly deflected both his accusation of disloyalty and his expectation of a visit. Likening him to the versatile Apollo / Phoebus, god of music and poetry, sun and light, she exquisitely intimated that since the foul weather on the day of the funeral prevented Apollo’s sun from shining, she was indistinguishable in the massive crowds and thus could not be seen; besides, he had “fulfilled the illustrious duties of Phoebus” by immortalizing the funeral cortège in his glorious poem (11 May 1651, 2:40). This incident captures the on-again, off-again relationship between the poet-diplomat and the “Star of Utrecht.” Van Schurman’s extant correspondence with Constantijn Huygens occurred over three and a half decades, from October 1634, when she addressed her first poem to him, to September 1669, when she announced that she was dedicating her remaining years to “the reformation of the true Church.” Two months after her last letter, she moved into the sectarian household of Jean de Labadie. The imbalance in the extant epistolary traces of the relationship is striking: from his first poem to her in October 1634 and first letter in June 1636, to her last letter to him in 1669 and his last poem to her in June 1670 after she had joined the Labadists, he wrote more than forty extant poems and seventeen letters and, she, eleven extant poems and eight letters.265 Clearly, given the extant exchange, she does not appear as engaged with Hugyens as she had been with Rivet. Who was Constantijn Huygens? Diplomat and civil servant, poet and patron of the arts, lifelong instrumentalist and composer, Huygens was, according to Lisa Jardine, “an iconic cultural figure for the seventeenth century—a distinguished man of letters and polymath who left an indelible mark upon emerging Dutch

265. We translate thirty-two of Huygens’s poems and all his letters to Van Schurman, as well as all of Van Schurman’s communications with Huygens. The KB collection contains seven of her eight extant letters and three of her ten extant poems to Huygens. Katlijne van der Stighelen and Jeanine de Landtsheer provide Dutch translations of Huygens’s and Van Schurman’s letters, and eight of her poems, in “Een suer-soete Maeghd voor Constantijn Huygens: Anna Maria van Schurman (1607–1678),” in Vrouwen rondom Huygens, ed. Kloek et al., 149–202. We are greatly indebted to their identifying the call numbers and folio pages of Huygens’s autograph letters at The Hague’s KB Special Collections, on which we base our translations.

76 Introduction culture.”266 Versed from his youth in eight languages (Dutch, French, Latin, Greek, Italian, English, German, and Spanish),267 he was educated in law, mathematics, and logic at Leiden. He owned and played several instruments of substantial quality, many purchased overseas: the viola da gamba, lute, harpsichord, theorbo, guitar, and organ.268 During apprenticeship trips abroad, he accompanied ambassadors to England and Venice, and on a second trip to England in 1622 he was knighted by King James I and thus became known as “Sir Constantine.” He met the poet John Donne, then Dean at St. Paul’s Cathedral, at the London house of Sir Robert Killigrew (1579–1633), and later translated nineteen of Donne’s poems into Dutch. He was well acquainted with Holland’s best-known poets and writers, became an enthusiastic supporter of Descartes, and corresponded with scholars, writers, and musicians in the Netherlands and abroad, including many culturally prominent women.269 He amassed an art collection for his cabinet of curiosities, specializing particularly in coins and medals, as well as portraits, especially those of royals he had met such as Christina of Sweden and Louis XIV, and persons from the art and musical world.270 He married the well-connected Susanna van Baerle (1599–1637), and fathered five children, among them the scientist Christiaan Huygens. As Stadtholder Frederik Hendrik’s private secretary, he spent a portion of every summer at an army camp with him, from whence he wrote poems and letters to relations and friends, among them Van Schurman.271 A courtier within

266. Lisa Jardine, “The Reputation of Sir Constantijn Huygens: Networker or Virtuoso?” in Temptation in the Archives: Essays in Golden Age Dutch Culture (London: UCL Press, 2015), 45. Huygens served three consecutive Stadtholders from the Orange-Nassau dynasty: Frederik Hendrik, William II, and William III. 267. Joby, Multilingualism, chap. 2. Huygens learned Spanish relatively late while in England, and by necessity in 1624, at age twenty-seven, the year before he became secretary to the Stadtholder. Given the Dutch Republic’s Eighty Years’ War with Spain, the Dutch were ambivalent toward the language; as Joby notes (76), the Calvinist theologian Willem Baudaert denounced Spanish due to Spain’s “great idolatry and Papist superstitions.” 268. On Huygens’s musical education, see  [Constantijn Huygens], A Selection of the Poems of Sir Constantijn Huygens, 28; and Jan W. J. Burgers, “A Lutenist of Standing: Constantijn Huygens,” chap. 5 of The Lute in the Dutch Golden Age: Musical Culture in the Netherlands, 1580–1670 (Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press, 2013), 73–88. 269. Early Modern Letters Online (EMLO) has more than 7,000 letters from Huygens in its current collection. 270. Inge Broekman, “Constantijn Huygens’ Art Collection: The Importance of Portraiture,” in Return to Sender: Constantijn Huygens as a Man of Letters, ed. Lise Gosseye, Frans Blom, and Ad Leerintveld (Ghent: Academia Press, 2013), 23–45. 271. Hans Bots, ed., Constantijn Huygens: Zijn plaats in geleerd Europa (Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press, 1973).

Introduction 77 a republic, he was on a modest scale a self-made nobleman, Lord of Zuilichem, a “democratic aristocrat.”272 Huygens likely first noticed Van Schurman in the 1620s when Anna Roemers Visscher and Jacob Cats praised her in their writings.273 Huygens then heard of her from his frequent correspondent Caspar van Baerle (Barlaeus, 1584– 1648), the regent of Amsterdam’s Athenaeum Illustre (Latin School) and a major Neo-Latin poet. Barlaeus had already been alerted to her in 1627 by Buchelius.274 But it was Van Schurman’s brother, Johan Godschalk, who drew Barlaeus’s immediate attention by introducing both himself and his then twenty-two-year-old sister in a letter in 1629: “I have but one unsurpassed sister, who does not shrink from such studies, and who is quite well-known; I don’t know if you have heard of her. Your writings have won her full attention.”275 A month later Barlaeus excitedly announced her existence to Huygens: “There is in Utrecht a rare exemplary young girl, Anna Maria van Schurman, who is Roman not only because she possesses a first name, name, and surname, but because she speaks Latin. She paints, writes, versifies, reads Greek, and understands it. . . . She . . . is truly a learned woman for the Batavians.”276 Van Schurman then boldly initiated the contact by sending Huygens in 1633/4 an engraved self-portrait in which she depicted herself without hands; the cartouche bore her Latin quatrain etched with the modesty trope (2:2). What did Huygens and Van Schurman write about? In addition to topics related to music, the arts, and Huygens’s work as a diplomat—to be discussed more shortly—he kept her apprised of at least four of his poetic compositions. She invited him early in their epistolary exchange to critique her Dutch poem on the inauguration of the University of Utrecht.277 Thrilled at this prospect, he gushed that she would provide him with yet an additional happiness “should [she] consider [him] worthy to love, or should [she] consider it a good thing to be loved by [him]” (30 June 1636, 2:15). She replied that she was much obliged to him for his “many suggestions,” for he had become “such a kind critic” (23 July 1636, no. 272. A Selection of the Poems of Sir Constantijn Huygens, 20. 273. See in this Introduction, “Life and Published Works.” 274. Katlijne van der Stighelen, “Constantijn Huygens en Anna Maria van Schurman: Veel werk, weinig weerwerk,” ZE 3 (1987): 138n4. 275. Johan Godschalk van Schurman to Barlaeus, Latin letter, 5 December 1629, University of Leiden Special Collections, ms. Pap 2, and Schotel, 2:112. On this letter, see Beek, First Female, 30–31; Pal, Republic of Women, 63, and Larsen, Star of Utrecht, Appendix 1.2, for its translation. Barlaeus replied on 31 December 1629 that he would very much like to greet her: see Epistolarum liber: Pars prior, ed. Geeraert Brandt (Amsterdam: Johan Blaeu, 1667), 306–8, letter 129. 276. Barlaeus to Constantijn Huygens, 7 January 1630, Latin letter, in Huygens, Briefwisseling, 1:273, no. 484. 277. The exchange in the KB collection between Van Schurman and Huygens begins with her Dutch poem “Raetsel” (“Riddle,” no. 63, 2:1), which points to the theorbo, an instrument close to the lute and a favorite of Huygens. It was composed in 1633 and sent to him in 1634.

78 Introduction 64, 2:17). She “disagree[d]” completely with “the comparison” in which he had placed her “at [his] side.” And she accepted his invitation to a further correspondence, provided he “talk of heavenly love.” By alluding to the two Venuses, celestial and terrestrial, in Plato’s Symposium, she rebuffed any advances on his part by stating the non-sexual nature of the attention she desired from him. Three years later, in April 1639 (2:18), Huygens asked her to critique his poetic collection Dagh-werck (Day’s Work, or Daily Business), begun in 1627, the year after his wedding to Susanna van Baerle, and completed the year after her untimely death in 1637, shortly after she gave birth to their daughter.278 A memorial to his happy marriage, he hoped the collection would elicit her comments: “Read it if you find the time, and comment on it. Be a harsh critic, my censorious Virgin, and continue to be my flogging rod, 279 and whatever  [you] the judge decrees, I’ll weigh more heavily than the decrees of anyone else.” Then, on 29 January 1645, he sent her a copy of his Heilighe daghen (Holy Days) with an accompanying Dutch epigram.280 Holy Days, written around New Year 1645, includes nine religious sonnets on the Christian holidays, with a commentary on God’s judgment, patience, and mercy. There is no extant reply from Van Schurman. Then, two decades later, in October 1667, he sent her his poem The Sea Road from The Hague to Scheveningen.281 Huygens’s plan to build a toll road between The Hague and neighboring Scheveningen, submitted in 1653, was executed in 1662. Finally, in November 1667 (2:58), he sent her a copy of Cornflowers (Koren-bloemen, 1658), in which he likened himself to a farmer planting and hoeing the earth, thereby contributing to the public good. However, in the late 1660s, when Van Schurman received this poetic collection, she was no longer interested in purely earthlyminded endeavors. She was deeply involved in Labadie’s ministry and at the time was caring for her “deathly ill” friend Catharina Martini,282 whom she called “the 278. On Susanna van Baerle, see Frans R.E. Blom and Ad Leerintveld, “ ‘Vrouwen-schoon met Mannelicke reden geluckigh verselt’: De perfect match met Susanna van Baerle,” in Vrouwen rondom Huygens, ed. Kloek et al., 97–114; Lea van der Vinde, Vrouwen rondom Huygens (Voorburg: Huygensmuseum Hofwijck, 2010), 32–47. Dagh-werck was published for the first time in the first edition of Huygens’s major Dutch poetic collection, Koren-bloemen (1658). 279. Pun on virgo (virgin) and virga (flogging rod). 280. Huygens, Gedichten, ed. Jacob A. Worp, 8 vols. (Groningen, 1892–98), 4:29–30, “To Lady Anna Maria van Schurman, with my Holy Days.” The first line reads: “Don’t look sour, sweet Maiden, if you find me to be a liar” (Appendix B10). On the collection, see E. K. Grootes and M. A. Schenkeveld-Van der Dussen, “The Dutch Revolt and the Golden Age, 1560–1700,” in A Literary History of the Low Countries, ed. Theo Hermans (Rochester, NY: Camden House, 2009), 277. 281. Huygens, De Zeestraat van ’s-Gravenhage op Scheveningen, ed. Ad Leerintveld (The Hague: Valerius, 2004). 282. Van Schurman’s unidentified friend was likely Catharina Martini, with whom Van Schurman traveled to Amsterdam two years later, in 1669, to join Jean de Labadie’s separatist community. After moving with the community to Elisabeth of Bohemia’s convent at Herford, Martini became pregnant

Introduction 79 other half of [her] soul” and who had just recovered (4 November 1667, 2:58). With a newly found authoritative voice, she urged him “to contribute Constantly,283 to the church, the fatherland, and all of yours, not your least but your best verses.” Besides, she no longer wanted him to “expect anything from [her] pen any more.” Constantijn Huygens as Musician, Composer, and Accompanist in His Letters to Anna Maria van Schurman Van Schurman and Huygens exchanged letters and poems over his compositions and other aspects of music. Van Schurman’s own musical talents included a fine voice and the ability to play the lute, spinet, and viola da gamba. She attended musical soirées in Utrecht along with her brother Johan Godschalk, Utricia Ogle and her husband, Huygens at times, and Voetius. She was called upon once, in August 1640, to adjudicate in a famous musical querelle initiated by Marin Mersenne and mediated by Huygens between Bannius (Jon Albert Ban, 1597–1641), a French musicologist from Haarlem, and Descartes.284 As for Huygens, from his earliest years, attending concerts, writing musical compositions, and playing his widely acclaimed instruments were favorite pastimes. He reported in his memoirs on a musical reception at the house of Sir Robert Killigrew during his third journey to England in 1623 at which “the ravishing hostess, mother of . . . a dozen children” accompanied “her heavenly songs on the lute.”285 The hostess was Lady Mary Killigrew (1584–1656), a trusted confidante and art advisor whom he deeply admired, and who after the death of her husband married Sir Thomas Stafford, gentleman-usher to Queen Henrietta Maria. Huygens also met and corresponded with musicians and performers in other countries, as, for instance, the family members in Antwerp of Gaspar Duarte, a Sephardic businessman, musician, and art connoisseur, and in Paris the French royal organist and composer Joseph Chabanceau de La Barre and his sister Anne, a celebrated soprano. He met the latter two at The Hague in 1653 while they were traveling to the court of Cristina of Sweden. During his visit in 1661 to through Pierre Yvon, Labadie’s right-hand man, at a time when marriage was frowned upon by the Labadists. Elisabeth urged the couple to marry, which they soon did; thereupon the Labadists changed their mind, now finding that marriage would increase the community, and mirrored Christ’s union with the church. In her will, Van Schurman made Martini the heir to her estate. Martini died in 1684. See Stighelen and Landtsheer, 198n187; Saxby, 176, 212, 259. 283. Underlined by Van Schurman, who puns on Huygens’ first name and motto. 284. Rudolf Rasch, “Descartes en de Ban-Boesset-controverse, ” in Née Cartésienne/Cartesiaansch Geboren: Descartes en de Utrechtse Academie, 1636–2005, ed. Willem Koops, Leen Dorsman, and Theo Verbeek (Assen: Van Gorcum, 2005), 178–95; Larsen, Star of Utrecht, 90. 285. Huygens, Mijn leven verteld aan mijn kinderen: in twee boeken, ed. and trans. F. R. E. Blom, 2 vols. (Amsterdam: Prometheus, 2003), 1:124–26. In his last letter to Van Schurman, 8 September 1669 (2:60), Huygens mentions owning a portrait of Mary Killigrew.

80 Introduction Paris as a diplomat for the Orange-Nassau court, he met Jacques Champion de Chambonnières and the singers Anna Bergerotti and Hilaire Dupuy.286 Huygens often corresponded with foreign musicians to ask their opinion of his musical compositions, and he did so with Van Schurman as well. By the end of his life, he had composed more than eight hundred brief instrumental pieces for voice, lute, and theorbo, of which only a few survive.287 In late 1647 (2:22), Huygens wrote to Van Schurman that his Pathodia sacra et profana occupati (Songs of Passion Sacred and Profane by a Busy Man, 1647) was being printed in Paris by Robert Ballard (ca. 1574–after 1650), the royal music printer who specialized in airs de cour (court music).288 The word Pathodia is a compound noun invented by Huygens consisting of two Greek words, pathos (“feeling”) and odè (“song”); this combination indicates that the songs are meant to arouse emotion.289 The Pathodia is a collection of twenty Latin psalm motets, a dozen Italian arias of texts from the poet Giambattista Marino and from Huygens himself, and seven French airs for one voice and basso continuo. Huygens had written a lute tablature as the accompanying part for a twelve-course theorbo lute, but the publisher turned it down because he wanted an accompaniment for a theorbo and a harpsichord; the tablature was then turned into a figured bass in Paris by the court chapel master, Thomas Gobert.290 Huygens dedicated the Pathodia to his favorite singer, Utricia Ogle, who sang several of its psalms and airs for Van Schurman; he hoped, he wrote to Van Schurman in December 1647 (2:22), that she would approve “thanks to her [Utricia Ogle’s] singing.” Van Schurman replied that she had received a copy of the Pathodia, by which she was “incredibly moved.” She congratulated Huygens on conferring “its glory upon our nation,” especially since, “among all other nations, ours isn’t generally known for refinement” (no. 65, 2:23). Indeed, Huygens sought out assiduously musicians and composers not from his own country but from those at the courts of England, 286. Rudolf Rasch, ed., Driehonderd brieven over muziek van, aan en rond Constantijn Huygens, 2 vols. (Hilversum: Verloren, 2007), 130. Huygens also mentions Anna Bergerotti in his last letter to Van Schurman, 8 September 1669 (2:60). 287. Rasch, ed., Driehonderd brieven, 123. 288. See Huygens, Pathodia sacra et profana: Unius vocis cum basso continuo, ed. Frits Noske (Amsterdam: Groen, 1975). On the Pathodia, see also Joby, Multilingualism, 121, 131, 138–42; Rudolf Rasch, “Waarom schreef Constantijn Huygens zijn Pathodia sacra et profana?” in Constantijn Huygens, 1596–1996: Lezingen van het tweede Groningse Huygens-symposium, ed. N. F. Streekstra (Groningen: Passage, 1997), 95–124; Astrid de Jager, “Constantijn Huygens’ Passion: Some Thoughts About the Pathodia sacra et profana,” Tijdschrift van de Koninklijke Vereniging voor Nederlandse Muziekgeschiedenis, 57 (2007): 29–42. 289. See Christopher Joby, “The Use of Greek in the Poetry of Constantijn Huygens,” Humanistica Lovaniensia 60 (2011): 219–41. 290. Joby, Multilingualism, 81–82.

Introduction 81 Germany, and especially France.291 He sent advance copies of his work to other elite noblewomen, as well as to Princess consort of Orange Amalia van Solms and to queens Henrietta Maria of England, Louise-Marie de Gonzague of Poland, and Christina of Sweden. Utricia Ogle frequently sang for Huygens. However, following her marriage to William Swann in 1645, he had difficulty meeting with her.292 He repeatedly invited her for visits to his house at The Hague, but she had either her brother John Ogle or her husband write back with excuses concerning the weather or her health. Huygens thus resorted to having others invite her. In October 1650, he asked Van Schurman to invite to her home Utricia and her husband, Voetius, and her brother Johan Godschalk, to play music based on tunes likely from the Pathodia.293 Since he was traveling back from the Veluwe in the province of Gelderland and would stop off in Utrecht, he thought such a musical gathering could be organized. But the event never took place, either because Van Schurman did not follow through, or because Huygens had to return to The Hague due to the illness and ensuing death of William II. Huygens, a devoted member of the Dutch Reformed Church, also informed Van Schurman about a long-standing controversy over whether congregational singing in the Reformed Churches in the Netherlands should be accompanied by the organ, considered a Catholic instrument.294 Organ use was left to individual Reformed parishes to decide on; in several cities such as Leiden, Dordrecht, and Groningen, for instance, the organ was allowed, and in The Hague the Walloon Church regularly used it. Since parishioners, including Huygens, were becoming irritated at the discordant congregational singing of the Genevan Psalter, many requested the reintroduction of organ accompaniment. Huygens had previously published in 1641 the treatise Gebruyck of ongebruyck van ‘t orgel in de kercken der Vereenighde Nederlanden (Use or Non-Use of the Organ in the Churches of the United Netherlands, Leiden, 1641) in which he argued for its reinstatement.295 He sent advance manuscript copies to the poet Pieter Corneliszoon Hooft, Descartes, and several local pastors. After the publication, scholars Gerardus Vossius,

291. Burgers, Lute in the Dutch Golden Age, 80. 292. Rasch, “ ‘Aensienlicxte der Vrouwen’,” 141. 293. Huygens to Van Schurman, 10 October 1650 (Appendix B18). 294. See Ad Leerintveld, “Cursing in Private, Publically Polite: Huygens’ Reaction to the Antidotum of Calckman (1641),” in Return to Sender, ed. Gosseye, 141–57. 295. See Huygens, Use and Non-Use of the Organ in the Churches of the United Netherlands, ed. and trans. Ericka Smit-Vanrotte (New York: Institute of Mediaeval Music, 1964). Gebruyck of ongebruyck is listed as no. 82 under theological octavo titles in the Labadist auction catalog. See Beek and Bürmann, “Ex Libris,” 62.

82 Introduction Adolphus Vorstius, Johan van Beverwijck, and Van Schurman received copies.296 Most of their reactions were positive, except for Voetius, who was not in favor of the organ in Reformed Church services.297 Finally, in 1660, Huygens sent Van Schurman his new translation into Dutch of the Geneva Psalter, Kerck-gebruyck der psalmen (Church Use of the Psalms), stating that “[u]ntil now the usual present-day practice of pleading Heaven has been neglected through indifference,” and requesting her opinion (2:47). Van Schurman promptly replied that she approved his “beautiful intention . . . with two thumbs up (as it were),” and that she “shared it with as many people as possible,” including Voetius. She then helpfully suggested that since many parishioners balked at change, he should ask a choir of five or six singers to perform his version of the psalms in church to “prepare a path for introducing it sensibly” (no. 68, 2:48). Constantijn Huygens as Diplomat in His Letters to Anna Maria van Schurman In June 1666, Huygens told Van Schurman that he had just returned from an ambassadorship to France: “I should have informed you in my own hand about the work in which I’ve been so absorbed during the four years I’ve stayed away from my Fatherland, my children, my books, and my friends since I’ve been a busy exile” (2:50). Leading up to this extended overseas trip was the crisis regarding Dutch sovereignty over the principality of Orange in southern France.298 The Stadtholder William the Silent had inherited the independent principality of Orange from a childless cousin in 1544; this inheritance was confirmed at the Treaty of CateauCambrésis in 1559. An appointed official governed it on behalf of the House of Orange-Nassau. But a century later, in 1657, four different contenders claimed sovereignty: the House of Orange-Nassau, the Elector of Brandenburg, Duke Henri de Longueville, and Louis XIV. In November 1657, Mary Stuart, widow of William II and mother of Willem Hendrik, the future William III, thought to ask for help from Louis XIV in laying claim to the principality of Orange in accordance with her deceased husband’s will. Louis XIV saw his chance to lay siege to 296. See Voetius’s letter to Huygens, 8 March 1641 (Appendix C4), on receiving a copy from Van Schurman. 297. Rasch, ed., Driehonderd brieven, 132. See Frits Noske, “Rondom het orgeltractaat van Constantijn Huygens,” Tijdschrift van de Vereniging voor Nederlandse Muziekgeschiedenis 17 (1955): 278–309; Israel, 694–95. Van Schurman’s response to receiving a copy of Huygens’s treatise on the organ is not known. 298. Sources include Huygens, Mijn leven verteld aan mijn kinderen, 2: lines 748–905; Hendrik Arie Hofman, Constantijn Huygens, 1596–1687: Een christelijk-humanistisch bourgeois-gentilhomme in dienst van het Oranjehuis (Utrecht: HES Uitgevers, 1983), 266–95; Eugène Arnaud, Histoire des protestants de Provence, du comtat Venaissin et de la principauté d’Orange, 2 vols. (Paris: Grassart, 1884), 2:299–301; Saxby, chap. 5; Stighelen and Landtsheer, 193n165.

Introduction 83 the Princedom of Orange.299 In March 1660, Orange surrendered to Louis XIV’s army on the pretense that the young Willem Hendrik still held power over the city. On 7 October 1661, Huygens was sent to France to negotiate with the French king. He had to travel twice to the French court for talks. Then, in 1664, Louis XIV retreated and left Orange to the Dutch when Amalia van Solms, the Princess Dowager, who was Mary Stuart’s mother-in-law and grandmother of Willem Hendrik, appointed as governor of the principality Etienne de Milet, Seigneur de Mesmay, a Catholic. On 12 April 1665, Huygens arrived in Orange and was welcomed with a triumphal entry imitating those of the city’s Roman past. On 7 May, he concluded the process of pacification with a general amnesty from Amalia van Solms. To mark the shared peace between Catholic and Protestant confessions, a tree was planted in the Roman amphitheater.300 Huygens left Orange on 18 July, accompanied by more than three hundred riders. Jacques Pineton de Chambrun (1655–1689), a Reformed pastor at Orange, published a commemorative book.301 Huygens promptly sent a copy to Van Schurman, hoping that she would resume a correspondence with him and inform him about “whatever you are doing today and into whatever world your Ethiopian Muses have carried you since I last saw you” (13 June 1666, 2:50). This was a reference to the poems he had penned back in 1649 when, on a visit to see her in Utrecht, he had found her studying Ethiopian. “You preferred to flee . . .”: The Epistolary Relationship of Anna Maria van Schurman and Constantijn Huygens Huygens was keenly interested in Van Schurman’s extraordinary ability to write the scripts of oriental languages such as Arabic, Chaldean, Syriac, Persian, Samaritan, and Ethiopian. Everyone had cause to marvel. In the seventeenth century few lay men and even fewer women had the training to compose a formal letter crafted in a fine hand. Most formal letters were dictated to a notary or a scribe.302 Calligraphy was the specialty of schoolmasters from the southern 299. Another reason motivating Louis XIV was the refugee presence in Orange at that time of Jean de Labadie, the defrocked French Jesuit priest turned Calvinist, whom the king considered a threat to Catholicism. According to Saxby, 102, “Louis’s action had much to do with his self-styled championship of Catholicism.” 300. For the ceremonies of pacification at Orange, see Amanda Eurich, “Sacralizing Space: Reclaiming Civic Culture in Early Modern France,” in Sacred Space in Early Modern Europe, ed. Will Coster and Andrew Spicer (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005), 278–79. 301. Relation de ce qui s’est passé au restablissement d’Orange (Orange: Eduard Raban, 1666). 302. Ann Jensen Adams, “Disciplining the Hand, Disciplining the Heart: Letter-Writing Paintings and Practices in Seventeenth-Century Holland,” in Love Letters: Dutch Genre Paintings in the Age of Vermeer, ed. Peter C. Sutton, Lisa Vergara, and Ann Jensen Adams (London: Frances Lincoln Limited, 2003), 63–76.

84 Introduction Netherlands who had immigrated to the Dutch Republic. Only a few women were noted for their fine hand, such as Jacquemyne Hondius, Anna Roemers Visscher, Cornelia Kalf,303 Van Schurman, and Maria Strick—the latter of whom published her copybooks with her husband, a shoemaker who was later trained as a script engraver.304 Individual sheets in different scripts of Van Schurman’s calligraphy were framed and displayed. Canon Claude Joly, who visited Van Schurman in Utrecht in 1646, noticed on the wall a framed sample of her calligraphy and remarked: “I have never seen anything which came close to the beauty of her writing in Rabbinic, Syriac, and Arabic.”305 Jacob Cats praised her for surpassing even the best calligraphers of her day,306 and Buchelius stated in his journal in September 1635 that he had seen at her house one of her letters to Voetius, compiled in the form of a cento from verses of the Hebrew Scriptures: “The writing was extremely elegant, which no typesetter can equal.”307 Huygens, for his part, began asking her repeatedly—no less than four times over a period of thirteen years—to create a special sample of polyglossia for his curiosity cabinet. Starting in January 1653, he sent her a brief poem on a shipwreck off the Dutch coast, entitled “Fortunata clades, quae in litore Sceverino contigit postrid” (“The fortunate wreck that happened off the coast of Scheveningen, the day before the kalends of January, 1653”).308 He translated it into six modern languages, but had to admit to her that he “did not call upon [those] from the East, conscious as I am of my stammering and ignorance” (17 / 27 January 1653, 2:41). Would she kindly translate the poem into all the oriental languages she knew? To which Van Schurman quipped: “If I were to have a hundred tongues in a poem, / Your one tongue is more than my one hundred” (no. 66, 2:42). Seven years later, in December 1660, Huygens invited her comments on his new translation of the Psalms to repay a “favor” to “an old friend” by creating “as many specimens of your fine hand as you can” for his “cabinet of curiosities” (2:47). She replied that although “scarcely . . . anything that could come from my hand” was worthy of him, she would try to find “some free time” (no. 68, 2:48). Six years 303. Kalf was praised by Huygens for her “manly hand,” suggesting, according to Martine van Elk, “an association of ornate handwriting with masculinity.” See Elk, “Capable of Bruising a Letter: Early Modern Women’s Calligraphy,” on her blog Early Modern Women: Lives, Texts, Objects, 16 February 2018, , accessed December 2018. 304. On Strick, see Ton Croiset van Uchelen, “Maria Strick, Schoolmistress and Calligrapher in Early Seventeenth-Century Holland,” Quaerendo 39 (2009): 83–132. 305. Joly, Voyage ou description de toutes les villes, 151. 306. Cats, Trou-ringh (1637; rpt. Amsterdam, 1657), n.p., cited in Katlijne van der Stighelen, “Anna Maria van Schurman (1607–1678) als kalligrafe,” De Gulden passer 64 (1986): 63. 307. Buchel, Notae Quotidianae, 48. 308. Huygens, Gedichten, 5:31. Most of the sailors were saved. On the shipwreck, see Stighelen and Landtsheer, 191n158. The kalends of January indicate the first day of the month.

Introduction 85 passed. Huygens, back from his diplomatic mission to Orange, reported to her on the trip, signing off with a stern warning that she not “free” herself from her promise of a polyglot sample since it had “tied” her to him (2:50). Van Schurman, finally finding the necessary time, spent “a day’s worth of effort” to comply with his request (22 June 1666, no. 70, 2:51), but soon sent off a rushed note, stating that she was too embarrassed with her page “because of the rough grain and blemish of the paper. . . I would not dare subject it to your most discerning eye” (ca. June 1666, no. 69, 2:52). In its place she sent a polyglot poem, Tetrastichon,309 composed for her thirty years earlier by Johannes Elichmann (no. 75, 2:53) (see Figure 4).310 A piqued Huygens replied that Van Schurman had rashly “tried to slip away” from him. The condition of the paper was no excuse, and substituting a four-line poem by Elichmann, “as charming and ingenious as it may be,” would simply not do. Worn out, Van Schurman finally granted his request, sending him her polyglot page with a brief note: “I will consider that enough is said if this page, however modest, speaks for itself in such a way that it finds a place in your most ornate cabinet” (1 November 1666, no. 71, 2:55). Exceedingly pleased, Huygens dashed off an epigram, apologizing for making her life “miserable, as I kept pushing you, unashamedly, and became a nuisance, indeed, beyond all good manners and custom” (30 November 1666, 2:56). As discussed earlier, Huygens’s interest in Van Schurman extended not only to her manifold talents but, more ambiguously, to her marriageable state. She, however, had at age sixteen promised her father on his deathbed to avoid the 309. Meaning “Four lines” in Greek. To show the close kinship between Dutch and Persian, Elichmann penned this poem with similar words in meaning and sound in both languages. 310. Johannes Elichmann (1601/1602–1639), a Silesian expert of oriental languages at Leiden, focused on the similarities between Persian and the Germanic languages. He gave the initial impetus to the development of the so-called Scythian hypothesis, namely that Scythian was the matrix language of other languages such as Greek, Latin, Persian, German, and Dutch. See Toon van Hal’s essays, “On ‘the Scythian Theory’: Reconstructing the Outline of Johannes Elichmann’s (1601/1602–1639) Planned Archaeologia Harmonica,” Language & History 53 (2010): 70–80, and “The Alleged PersianGermanic Connection: A Remarkable Chapter in the Study of Persian from the Sixteenth through the Nineteenth Centuries,”  in Trends in Persian and Iranian Linguistics, ed. Alireza Korangy and Corey Miller (Berlin and Boston: Walter de Gruyter, 2018), 1–20. Elichmann’s edition of the Tabula Cebetis in Greek, Latin, and Arabic was published after his death by Salmasius. The latter was a close colleague and friend; on Elichmann’s sudden death in September 1639, Salmasius wrote to Jacques Dupuy in Paris, on 26 September 1639 (Paris BN, ms. Dupuy 898, f. 75r, cited in Leroy, Le dernier voyage, 59n16): “I cannot name him without being overwhelmed with sorrow. I can say that he was my only friend in this city. He shared my interests in everything and against everyone and opened the eyes of several who were with Heinsius’ party and brought them over to mine. I used his library as if it were mine; it was one of the best in the country.” Van Schurman expressed her grief at the news of Elichmann’s death in a letter to Salmasius on 14 December 1639 (see Appendix C3): his death was a blow to the Republic of Letters and to her own studies, “for who was able to open up for us the sacred space of oriental wisdom more than him?”

86 Introduction entrapment of a “worldly marriage” for the sake of her piety and her learning, and so she had resolutely committed herself to celibacy.311 But as a noble, marriageable woman, Van Schurman was a problematic figure, vulnerable to unwanted advances and salacious jokes. Her public visibility as an artist and learned woman led to her being sexualized. Huygens made no secret of his ardent admiration, as evidenced by his backhanded compliments on her engraved self-portrait of 1633, when she was twenty-seven years old (see Figure 5). He penned ten short poems in Dutch, Latin, French, and Italian, focusing on her depiction of herself as “handeloos” (“without hands”). As Martine van Elk notes, Huygens found her portrait erotic because of her “teasing modesty and her self-conscious combination of self-display and concealment.”312 In one of these poems, he flirts with her image. Her “masle beauté” (virile beauty) fills him with “envy” of all other (male) viewers (2:13). He also joked about Van Schurman’s comment in her selfportrait’s cartouche that her inexperienced chisel had prevented a better outcome. Her portrait, he stated, was her “first cut” (“d’eerste sné”), which, as Agnes Sneller notes, Huygens meant as a metaphor for sexual intercourse (2:6).313 Van Elk adds that “if, by this logic, Van Schurman gives herself the first cut, she is male and female, strangely sexual and asexual at once.”314 Huygens’s flirtatious admiration for Van Schurman became known. Two years after his series of poems on her 1633 self-portrait, he himself became the subject of a joking letter from his colleague Caspar Barlaeus. In a letter dated 30 April 1636, Barlaeus asserted that things would be a lot easier for everyone, not least Huygens, if Van Schurman were a man (Appendix C1). He listed several reasons, stating for instance that were she a man, “there would be no danger that a good man would become inflamed with love for her,” thereby intimating that Huygens had done so; access to her would be much more simple since “she is afraid of kisses, and she allows herself to be greeted and beheld as if she were the Empress of the Ottomans.” Unfazed, Huygens continued sending her letters and poems, frequently (as we have seen) expressing discontent when she did not reply sooner or, worse, did not reply at all. To Rivet, in 1639, he complained that he had sent her a missive from the French philosopher Marin Mersenne, who wanted to begin a correspondence with her.315 But he was still waiting for a reply and wondered if his unmarried state was the problem: “I find this Minerva as if fearful to write to me. Could it well be my widowerhood that frightens her?” He 311. Larsen, Star of Utrecht, 42–44. 312. Elk, Early Modern Women’s Writing, 177. 313. A. Agnes Sneller, “ ‘If she had been a man . . .’: Anna Maria van Schurman in the Social and Literary Life of Her Age,” in Baar et al., Choosing the Better Part, 139. 314. Elk, Early Modern Women’s Writing, 176. 315. In his letter to Van Schurman accompanying Mersenne’s missive, 26 August 1639 (2:20), Hugyens does his utmost to discourage her from corresponding with the “Parisian monk.” She did, nonetheless.

Introduction 87 begged Rivet to convince her that she should not be suspicious of him, and then slipped in a tease on her motto, stating, “It is written: Do not say or do anything against the will [of Minerva]. Therefore, my love has been as crucified as hers, and I am only interested in the beauty of her intellect.”316 Rivet assured Huygens that she was far from thinking about or even suspecting his intentions. Besides, it was best that Huygens remain celibate, since he had already had “all the fruits of marriage to enjoy,” and “provided God had granted him what he had given to Saint Paul,” he should devote himself to “his useful public service” and care for his children.317 Huygens accepted Rivet’s advice, and remained a widower for the rest of his life.

Anna Maria van Schurman, Latin, and Letter Writing Van Schurman and Latin  Van Schurman tells us in her autobiography how she came to learn Latin. That she feels the need to explain this suggests just how unusual it was for her to have studied, let alone written in, Latin. Generally-speaking, French was the language of the cultured woman, with Latin reserved for men aspiring to politics or the clergy. According to her story, when she was eleven and her brothers were thirteen and fifteen, she overheard a lesson her father was giving her brothers in Latin. Her father had asked a question that, as luck would have it, her brothers could not answer. Despite her younger age and her fairer sex, Van Schurman blurted out the correct answer, and her father then saw that his daughter had a special aptitude for this difficult language. He began teaching her more advanced Latin, and the two of them would walk through their garden reading and discussing Seneca. To enter Van Schurman’s world as fully as possible requires some knowledge of Latin. For this reason, we offer a brief introduction to some of the features of her Latin, so our readers may glimpse the richness that we have tried to capture in our translation. For the most part, Van Schurman writes Latin that employs classical grammar, constructions, and rhetorical features, with few, if any, contemporary words or syntax finding their way into her prose, at least until she joins the Labadists late in her life. Her Latin is economical, elegant, and precise: all the words are carefully chosen and pack the greatest rhetorical punch. She rewards slow reading, especially when she must balance her ambitions for intellectual pursuits with the modesty required of her sex. Consider, for example, her first words to Rivet in the collection on 20 July 1631 (no. 1, 1:1) (see Figure 3). We offer a rhetorical analysis here so that the reader may understand the nature of the text: 316. “Il est escrit: nihil invitâ dices faciesve. Denique tam amor meus crucifixus est que le sien, et n’en voudray jamais qu’à la beauté de son esprit,” Huygens to Rivet, 20 September 1639, in Huygens, Briefwisseling, 2:499, no. 2239. 317. Rivet to Huygens, 26 September 1639, in Huygens, Briefwisseling, 2:503, no. 2247.

88 Introduction Nihil aliud e dignitate sua a me exspectare debuisset larga haec tua humanitas, Vir Reverende, quam mentis confusionem, aut certe silentium perpetuum: nisi per illecebras et Genii dulcedinem magis proprium eius esset ad responsionem invitare. Nothing more from its dignity should have been expected by this genteel humanitas of yours, Reverend Sir, than a confusion of mind or certainly unending silence except that, through your enticements and the sweetness of your Genius, it was more fitting that it invite me to a response. The literal translation of her Latin does not immediately reveal its meaning: she uses many pronouns (like “it”) and, on first reading, it is hard to follow what their antecedents are. Understanding her requires knowing about the rhetorical power of word order and placement in Latin sentences. At the risk of oversimplification, the beginnings and endings of a Latin sentence or clause tend to carry rhetorical emphasis. The standard configuration of a Latin sentence is subject—object— verb. Van Schurman’s first sentence, however, presents a different structure: the object comes first and the subject last, with the verb in the middle. Her reordering shifts the rhetorical weight to the object nihil aliud (“Nothing more”) and to the subject humanitas (“Rivet’s genteel learning and kindness”). Within this structure, she creates suspense by introducing two main linguistic delays to emphasize Rivet’s humanitas and her reaction to it. When she begins her letter with the phrase nihil aliud (“nothing more”), the Latin reader expects the phrase to be completed, as it naturally would in Classical Latin, with a comparison clause introduced by quam (“than”). To put this another way, we want to know “nothing more than what. . .” But she leaves us in suspense to introduce the more important topic, Rivet’s humanitas (“kindness and learning”) and the dignitas (“dignified reputation and status”) that flows from it. Her rhetoric gets a little more complicated in that she creates a second delay within the delay that begins her letter. Before giving us the noun, humanitas, she strings three adjectives together—larga haec tua (“this genteel thing of yours . . . your humanitas”)—which she draws out further by appending a direct address after Vir Reverende. The delay and suspense rhetorically emphasize her response to the subject of the sentence, Rivet’s humanitas and dignitas, that have stunned her to silence. To approximate the experience of reading her in Latin, accounting for all her linguistic delays and rhetorical suspense, we could translate the first line as follows: “You should have expected nothing more from me. It’s so well-known, dignified, and generous, Reverend Sir. This humanitas of yours. You should have expected nothing more from me than stunned silence, had you not been kind enough to invite me to reply.” That is, in her Latin, art imitates life, its delays, stutters, and stammers, and

Introduction 89 she finds her voice only when Rivet invites her to do so. Our translation in this volume often renders the structure of emphasis, rather than individual words and phrases, while keeping to good English idiom: “Your incredible humanitas—on its own merits—would have set my mind racing, Reverend Sir, and stunned me to silence, had your sweet genius not enticed me to reply.” Why would Van Schurman begin her first letter to Rivet this way? Context, perhaps, gives us a clue. Her first letter reveals that Rivet has initiated contact with her. From her perspective, she cannot not reply, because he is a famous theologian with the connections and political influence that she needs to advance her work. No doubt she wanted this, but the trick is that she cannot state that she wanted this. She must reply so as not to appear as a social climber seeking merely fame and reputation. As a woman, she must maintain her feminine and virginal modesty. She thus begins her letter from a position of modesty. In a past contrary-tofact condition, she writes that Rivet’s dignitas and humanitas would have inspired so much reverence that she was stunned to silence, as would be expected of a woman, and she is speaking only because Rivet had asked her to reply. That is, it is his humanitas—a word that references both his kindness and his love of learning and position in the Republic of Letters—that gives her permission to write back. She, as she frames it, is complying with his request. Van Schurman regularly quotes from and alludes to the major classical authors of antiquity, chiefly Cicero, Virgil, Horace, and Seneca, as well as Biblical passages (although these usually appear in Greek). We have pointed out many such examples in our footnotes, but we will discuss two here to illustrate that her allusions to classical literature communicate intertextually. In the case of the initial stages of her correspondence with Rivet, her ability to quote classical authors may well have been one of the key factors that garnered Rivet’s attention. Rivet did not immediately reply to her first letter, and it is not clear that he ever would have, if Van Schurman had not penned a second letter six months later, on 2 January 1632 (1:2). This time, she appeals not just to her feminine modesty, but also subtly adduces the Roman poet Catullus: Fas amplius non puto te quicquam studiorum meorum vel nugarum potius celare. Annus nunc aut circa est quo libellum conscribere Gallice (quod nempe virginibus quam maxime probari linguae illus lepos ac elegantia solet) conatus aliquis fuit. I do not think it is right for me to conceal any longer from you any of my studies, or, should I say, my trifles. It has now been a year or thereabout since I made some attempt to compose a little book in French (given the fact that the charm and elegance of that language is naturally very much esteemed by young women).

90 Introduction This request, like her first letter, straddles the line between feminine modesty and her scholarly ambitions. These lines have a double meaning. On the surface, Van Schurman wants help composing a French book to convince young women on how to make the best use of their leisure. This maintains her feminine modesty because she plans to write in French—the language women were to use. Her request is basic: Rivet is a native speaker of French, and she is not. She would like him to read it over for her. However, there is a second layer coming from an intertextual allusion. Schurman borrows key phrases from Catullus’s dedication of his book of poetry: Cui dono lepidum novum libellum arida modo pumice expolitum? Corneli, tibi: namque tu solebas meas esse aliquid putare nugas. Iam tum, cum ausus es unus Italorum omne aevum tribus explicare cartis Doctis, Iuppiter, et laboriosis. Quare habe tibi quidquid hoc libelli— qualecumque, quod, o patrona virgo, plus uno maneat perenne saeclo! To whom do I dedicate this charming new little book Recently polished with dry pumice? Cornelius, it’s for you: because you used to Think that my trifles were actually something, At the time when you dared, alone of the Italians, To explain the history of everything in three volumes. They were learned, by Jupiter, and well-worked. So please, have this little book for yourself, whatever it is, And, O virgin patron, may it last more than one lifetime!318 In this poem, Catullus dedicates his “little book” (libellum) of poems to Cornelius Nepos, a historian who aimed to explain the history of everything in three volumes. In comparison, Catullus describes his work as trifling (nugae), charming (lepidum), a little bit of something (aliquid). But Cornelius saw its value and so gets a dedication. In her second letter to Rivet, Van Schurman adopts the language of the Catullan dedication by referring to her work as a “little book” (libellum) that contains little more than “trifles” (nugae) that employ the “charm and elegance” (lepos ac elegantia) of French, written for women (and therefore less serious). If Van Schurman and Catullus are both triflers, she is casting Rivet as Cornelius, the 318. Catullus, Poems 1.

Introduction 91 man with the eminent reputation for weighty works in his day who happened to think that her work was “worth something.” The Catullan mode of self-deprecation and modesty is the perfect frame for her to borrow not only his words but his context—and, handily enough, impress Rivet with her deft handling of the Classical tradition. So she concludes with the hope that Rivet will become not her book’s dedicatee, but its “guide and protector,” and, when completed, that it will “overcome all obstacles.” Rivet replies on 1 March 1632 and agrees to shepherd her work. He praises her effusively, and so effusively, in fact, that Van Schurman, in her reply—a third letter now on 25 March 1632 (no. 2, 1:4)—must once again reiterate her feminine modesty, but this time through a different allusion to classical literature. She says that she appreciates his public praise of her, but she thinks he has gone too far: “you are in the grip of such a powerful desire to see me and for so much elevation that you are on the verge of exclaiming before everyone: Oh, a Goddess for sure, / Apollo’s sister or some creature who shares the blood of Nymphs!” The italicized passage comes from the first book of Virgil’s Aeneid, in which Venus disguises herself as a huntress to give her son Aeneas advice about how to proceed in Carthage. Aeneas does not believe that the huntress is human; he is convinced that she is a goddess and exclaims these lines. Van Schurman casts Rivet in the role of Aeneas addressing Venus. However alluring and beautiful Venus appears to Aeneas, in this passage, Venus acts in her role as a mother rather than the goddess of erotic love. And not only that, she adopts the garb of Diana—a virgin goddess. Van Schurman deliberately selects that rare passage in which Venus has laid aside her erotic nature, taken on the shape of a virgin, and acted as a missing mother to her son Aeneas. Van Schurman is joking here, claiming that Rivet has wrongly seen her as a goddess. She is a mere virgin mortal, and it will be he who is the parent, she the child. Over time, as Van Schurman becomes an intimate confidante of Rivet, she drops the need to play up her modesty. Instead, she becomes his greatest defender. Consider a letter from 8 December 1645 (no. 44, 1:56), which Van Schurman sends to Rivet when, at age 73, he finds himself embroiled in major religious controversies. She begins by expressing annoyance that his previous letter had arrived too late because of the letter carrier’s negligence. She tells him that she would have learned about his situation sooner and “would not have remained silent about anything . . . which I think would have displeased you.” In the next paragraph, she promises “to confide . . . more fully” in him, “just as a daughter would to her own Father.” She launches into a stinging and frank critique of Samuel Desmarets, who did not know the extent of her friendship with Voetius but was trying to enlist her help in wooing Rivet to his side against Voetius’s book on the confraternity of Mary. She then turns to the quarrel with Grotius, where she comes to his defense and to console him:

92 Introduction Quare licet omnes Grotii fautores atque admiratores habitura sim haut dissimulanter iratos: tamen non possum non summopere illius viri (caetera egregii) virulentiam atque in Religione inconstantiam, cuius monumentum aeternum in postumo suo scripto extare voluit, detestari. Nulla autem dubito, quin tu facillime, aspirante divino Numine, postremum hoc, veluti ex cadavere pullulans, hydrae caput Veritatis telo enecare possis. (no. 44, 1:56) And so, for this reason, although I intend to take into some account all of Grotius’s supporters and admirers who are openly angry [at his treatment], I still cannot refrain from condemning the virulence of that man (who is otherwise outstanding in other respects) and his inconstancy in religion, and who wished an eternal monument to be prominent on his tombstone. I have no doubt whatsoever that you, on the other hand, guided by divine inspiration, will be able to kill off completely, and with ease, this hydra’s head that opposes the truth, just as if you were springing forth from its dead body. When she comes to Rivet’s defense as a covenant daughter, she does not spare the invective in favor of maintaining a feminine modesty. In fact, at the end of this paragraph, she assures Rivet that her response is expressed “moderately” (pro modulo). If her letters to Rivet show her facility with Latin prose and classical allusions as well as a tendency toward frankness and openness as the relationship develops, her exchange with Constantijn Huygens proves Van Schurman to be playful and well-humored, but also always on her guard against Huygens’s flirtatious overtures. In general, Van Schurman matches Huygens’s rhetorical and poetic license, but she never drops feminine modesty. Huygens’s Latin poems are dense, highly stylized, filled with puns and classical allusions, humorous and light, and therefore all but impossible to translate—but fun to read. He writes in the elegiac couplet, which consists of a longer line of dactylic hexameter followed by a shorter pentameter. This meter was favored by the Latin love elegists (Catullus, Propertius, Tibullus, and Ovid) as well as the epigrammatist Martial. Huygens’s poems frequently straddle the line between love poems and epigrams, which puts Van Schurman in a difficult position. She clearly loves the intellectual playfulness of trying to match poetic wits with the precious Huygens, but she also deflects his romantic advances, causing the relationship to become strained by the 1650s. Just as her early correspondence with Rivet requires her to affirm her feminine modesty, she must do so in an exchange of poems with Huygens. Huygens’s early poems beg Van Schurman to drop her feminine modesty and come into the light of day so that she can receive the attention and praise she deserves:

Introduction 93 Sol in virgine plus satis est; in Sole rogamus Virgo sit, accendas orta, fugesque diem. The Sun in this maiden is more than enough; so, we ask that in the Sun The Maiden be, rise, and shine, and put daylight to flight. (2:3, lines 7–8) In these lines, Huygens manages to combine interlocking and chiastic phrasing in the first line: sol in virgine . . . est is answered by its reversal in the second half of the line: in sole . . . Virgo sit. “The sun in the Virgin” becomes “In the sun the Virgin.” The conclusion of the line suggests that her brightness would make even the daytime pale in comparison if she would allow herself to rise and shine. She responds with a poem of her own: Magnum Musa virum sonat; utque ego sim quoque vates Ingenium Constans da mihi Phœbe tuum. Ast quo jure meum poscit clarescere nomen, Cum pro me caussam, qui latet, Autor agat. (no. 67, 2:4) Anna Maria à Schurman The Muse sings of a great man; and so that I may also become an inspired poet Lend me your talent, Constant Phoebus. But with what right does he think he can make my name famous When, to plead my case, he, the Author, hides himself? Anna Maria van Schurman Van Schurman opens her poem by referring to two great epics, the Odyssey and the Aeneid, both of which refer to a “man” in the first half-line. In the Odyssey especially the “man” is the first word of the poem and is modified by the epithet polytropos, “the man of many twists and turns.” Van Schurman’s man, however, is Constans, a play on Huygens’s first name and motto: Constanter—ever stable and, more importantly, self-controlled. Clever—and funny—as she is, she firmly reasserts her feminine modesty. She calls him Phoebus Apollo, the god of poetry and the sun, to remind him that it will be he, not she, who will stand in the light of day because of his poetic prowess. But she concludes with yet another joke of her own: Huygens does not sign his name to his last poem, so he may be guilty of the very crime he brings against her. Readers will notice that she signs her name at the end of her poem. The exchange between them returns to this theme. As their correspondence evolves, the reader gets the sense that all Huygens’s playfulness amounts to flirtation that he hopes may perhaps lead to marriage. Each time Huygens ups the ante,

94 Introduction as it were, Van Schurman pulls back, again by appealing to her virginal modesty. Consider how Huygens concludes one of two poems, dated 1 January 1649, praising Van Schurman’s study of the Ethiopian language: Vidit et obstipuit gemini frons altera Iani, Et Deus, “Ecquis,” ait, “denique finis erit? Si, quoties in me nova frons, in virgine lingua est, Si, quoties novus est Annus, et Anna nova est.” One face of Janus saw her, while the other one marveled. And this god exclaims: “Will there ever be an end? Whenever I take on a new face, this Maiden takes on a new language, And as often as there is a new Year, there is also a new Anna.” (2:26, lines 5–8) Huygens lets the god Janus—the two-faced Roman god of boundaries, limits, beginnings and endings, and the namesake of January—speak his praise of Van Schurman for him. One face of Janus sees her, while the other expresses bafflement: “What place can there be for a god of limits and ends, when there seems to be no limit or end to Van Schurman’s gifts for languages?” Given that the letter is dated January 1, New Year’s Day, Huygens can’t help himself in the concluding couplet, punning on the Latin word for year (annus) and Van Schurman’s first name, Anna. He wonders: what will this next year bring for Anna? Van Schurman’s reply thanks him for the poems, but also pulls back on his enthusiasm by appealing again to feminine modesty. She declines to write a poem to match his, but instead offers something else, a reiteration of her earlier theme of signing her name: Sed tua jure meas poscunt sibi munera grates, Quas tibi cum nequeam reddere, nomen habe. M. à SCHURMAN (no. 74, 2:29, lines 3–4) But the gift of your poems rightly requires my thanks, Which I cannot fully return, so have my name. A. M. à SCHURMAN If she has to thank him for writing such a clever poem, then she must also renounce her name, since she wants nothing to do with the fame that will now come to her because of Huygens’s poems. Huygens in his reply wonders what good the gift of her name would be to him, since she rejects fame (2:32). Van Schurman replies with a series of poems, the last of which picks up on his Annus-Anna pun with a pun of her own:

Introduction 95 Quare tuum, CONSTANS, nostro vis cedere nomen? Sic mihi, mutato nomine, nomen eris? Why do you want to exchange your name for mine, CONSTANS? Will your name be mine once you’ve changed yours? (2:33) If Huygens wants to escalate the playful intimacy of their poetic exchange, Van Schurman ultimately pulls back and deflects his advances. She does so by reminding him of his name: CONSTANS and all the ideas it encompasses, standing firm, steady, unchangeable, persistent, and, she hopes, self-controlled. Anna Maria van Schurman and Letter Writing Letters in the early modern era were a chief means of communication and intellectual exchange. Correspondence lay at the heart of the Republic of Letters, and, not surprisingly, a majority of the thousands of letters which circulated in Europe during this period were to correspondents in just five cities, two of them in the Netherlands: Paris, London, Rome, The Hague, and Amsterdam.319 Women’s letters promoted new discussions on gender roles. Furthermore, they challenged the stereotype of “public” versus “private” participation. One cannot reliably state that Van Schurman’s unpublished letters to her mentor and other members of her circle were more “private” than her published ones. Some were copied, and disseminated, making it clear that they were part of an identifiable public sphere. Scribal publication, particularly by women, often gives information not generally available in published collections, such as news items related to family networks, friendships, patronage, literacy, and services rendered.320 As we have seen, Van Schurman’s manuscript letters to Rivet offer much insight into the developing nature of her feelings for him. They also often indicate the rendering of services. She asks him on one occasion to correct her letters should “there [be] some errors in them because of my haste” (no. 40, 1:48). Rivet, likewise, requests that she correct an unidentified text he has sent her (no. 57, 1:71). Her letters include petitions on behalf of individuals. She urges Rivet to help place at the Orange-Nassau court the son of a female friend, stating that his acquaintances can recommend him to the Stadtholder and that he could consult Frederik Spanheim, the young man’s professor at Leiden, to get a full report on his life. She is not used 319. Sixty per cent of the letters outside Germany of the philosopher Gottfried Leibniz, for instance, were to correspondents in these five cities. See Francisco Bethencourt and Florike Egmond, eds., Cultural Exchange in Early Modern Europe, vol. 3: Correspondence and Cultural Exchange in Europe (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007), 12. 320. Johanna Harris and Elizabeth Scott-Baumann, “Introduction,” in The Intellectual Culture of Puritan Women, 1558–1680, ed. Johanna Harris and Elizabeth Scott-Baumann (Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan, 2011), 8.

96 Introduction to this sort of commission, she adds, but if Rivet were to fulfill her request, “you would bind me to you in an even greater way” (no. 41, 1:49). Van Schurman’s letters also attest to her extensive knowledge of the political and religious tensions across Northern Europe, France, and England. Scholars both near and far frequently requested her thoughts on theological matters, as did Rivet. She reveals as well her eagerness for a new publication of her letters that had been poorly edited in Paris by Charles du Chesne in the Amica Dissertatio (1638), and her deep pleasure that Elzevier had taken charge of this editorial project; under his guidance, her Dissertatio appeared in 1641. Her letters to her mentor provide insight into the material conditions in which letters were written and sent at that time. She often describes the letter as an incomplete surrogate for the face-to-face contact she would much rather have, and thus mentions that the courier delivering her letter will fill in the gaps, giving a fuller account. Sending off a letter entailed a prompt reply; not doing so called for a profuse apology, as is repeatedly evident in Van Schurman’s letters. However, when the matter at hand was urgent news, she found time to reply speedily, as was evident in the year 1643 when she sent no fewer than twelve replies to Rivet’s letters.321 Van Schurman made multiple references to the messenger(s) in charge of delivering her letters. These included especially her brother Johan Godschalk, who seemed to be traveling frequently, as well as Utricia Ogle, trusted friends of Rivet and Salmasius such as François Cupif and Abraham de Mory, and messengers of Rivet’s and Huygens’s letters to France. Other messengers she could count on included a seaman, a cavalry captain, an ambassador to France, and a lady-in-waiting at the Frisian court, Juliana de Roussel.322 When not relying on an acquaintance to deliver her letters, she could depend on the postal service, which made daily runs to the major Dutch cities of Leiden, Haarlem, Amsterdam, and The Hague. A weekly postal service for more distant cities such as London or Paris often left on the weekends, and it usually took about a week for letters to 321. See the chronological graphs in Appendix A. 322. Juliana de Roussel (ca. 1600–1669), a lady-in-waiting to Sophia Hedwig van BrunswickLüneburg, the wife of the Frisian Stadtholder Ernst Casimir van Nassau. On a visit to Utrecht, Roussel invited Van Schurman to sign her album amicorum (friendship album), begun in 1616, which she inscribed with the French aphorism, La vertu couronne la noblesse (“Virtue crowns nobility”) (59). Van Schurman left out her trademark Greek motto, My love has been crucified, and aphorisms in Greek, Latin, or oriental languages, since the album belonged to a noblewoman containing several dozen inscriptions and painted coats of arms of and by Dutch noblewomen. Utrica Ogle also inscribed in the album in 1645 an aphorism, Dans ma prison ma liberté (“In my prison my freedom”) (54). The album, numbered KW79J50, is held at the National Library in The Hague. See Sophie Reinders, “ ‘Social Networking is in our DNA’: Women’s Alba Amicorum as Places to Build and Affirm Group Identities,” in Identity, Intertextuality, and Performance in Early Modern Song Culture, ed. Dieuwke van der Poel, Louis P. Grijp, and Wim van Anrooij (Leiden and Boston: Brill, 2016), 150–77.

Introduction 97 reach their addressees.323 Until 1660, all long-distance mail from the Netherlands relied on foreign carriers through Antwerp and on to other cities; after that date, direct routes from Holland were developed, bypassing Antwerp.324 Numerous studies related to the materiality and physicality of early modern letters have enriched our understanding of manuscripts and early printed books.325 We are fortunate to have such an extensive collection of Van Schurman’s autograph Latin and French letters to study both the epistolary process—from her method of composition to the dispatch of her letters and their reception—and the letters’ physical features, consisting of her handwriting, the paper she used, the ink, seals, folding, layout, signature, and addresses.326 The first thing to note is that these are autograph letters not dictated to a scribe or a secretary. This is unusual because a majority of formal and informal letters of the period were dictated, depending on the circumstances and the writer’s level of literacy.327 Furthermore, her letters display a handwritten calligraphic skill that made her famous among her contemporaries. They are uniformly written in an elegant italic script, demonstrating a mastery of calligraphy replete with flourishing loops and firmly rounded characters. She learned schoonschrift (beautiful writing) at a young age, reaching such a level of perfection that she was frequently invited to provide a specimen in friendship albums. From this it is clear she had the power both to fashion her editorial authorship and to display it materially. At times, however, her handwriting appears rushed, and she adds “In haste” before the subscription (the final salutation). Van Schurman’s autograph letters evidence the marks of their folding, their addresses, the wax seal ring, and delicate silk seal threads in different colors—pink, blue, and red—that fastened them. A high number measure 23 x 17

323. Rasch, ed., Driehonderd brieven, 68–69. 324. Paul Arblaster, “Posts, Newsletters, Newspapers: England in a European System of Communications,” in News Networks in Seventeenth Century Britain and Europe, ed. Joad Raymond (London and New York: Routledge, 2006), 22. 325. See, for instance, Sara Jayne Steen, “Reading Beyond the Words: Material Letters and the Process of Interpretation,” Quidditas, 22 (2001): 55–69; Patricia Pender and Rosalind Smith, eds., Material Cultures of Early Modern Women’s Writing (Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan, 2014); James Daybell, The Material Letter in Early Modern England: Manuscript Letters and the Culture and Practices of Letter-Writing, 1512–1635 (Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan, 2012); and James Daybell, “The Materiality of Early Modern Letters,” in A Handbook of Editing Early Modern Texts, ed. Claire Loffman and Harriet Phillips (London: Routledge, 2018), 117–24. 326. See James Daybell, “The Materiality of Early Modern Women’s Letters,” in Women and Epistolary Agency in Early Modern Culture, 1450–1690, ed. James Daybell and Andrew Gordon (London and New York: Routledge, 2016), 55–77. 327. In “The Materiality of Early Modern Women’s Letters,” 59, Daybell writes that while family correspondence by women could be autograph, drafting and copying were left to scribes and secretaries.

98 Introduction centimeters (or 9 x 7 inches).328 But some are much larger and wider depending on their content; no. 14 (1:17), her letter on the education of women, comprises four sheets of 36 x 23.5 centimeters (or 14 x 9.5 inches) covered from top to bottom with a small-sized script. Many are one-page letters composed on a full sheet of paper; others contain only half a page of writing on a full sheet, with a large space between the final salutation and signature and the rest of the letter, thereby indicating deference to the recipient (the rhetoric of deference to be discussed more later). Finally, a number of letters take up the entire sheet of paper, even including a postscript crammed into the left side of the sheet, while yet other letters continue onto the back of the sheet, and sometimes on a second sheet for a total of three written pages. Most of the postscripts are positioned beneath the subscription and the signature at the bottom of the page. However, when she became more confident and reached a level of ease and intimacy with Rivet, she added the postscript beneath the date of the letter at the bottom left-hand corner, and even vertically in the left-hand margin, and she did without the formalities of the final salutation and the signature. She added postscripts whenever there was time elapsing between the completion of the letter and its sendoff. Since her letters did not depend on the postal service but on messengers, she had to wait until one became available. The layout of the manuscript letters of Van Schurman shows her thorough knowledge of the rhetoric of deference. The required spaces between the opening salutation (or mode of address) and the first line of the letter, as well as the placement of the subscription and the signature, were a standard way of showing politeness, deference, and authority. Juan Luis Vives, in De conscribendis Epistolis (On Writing Letters, 1534), described the requisite gap as “the honorary margin.”329 Van Schurman’s deference to her addressees, be they Rivet, Huygens, Marie de Gournay, or Marie du Moulin, is made visible in the significant space she leaves between the opening salutation and the first line of the letter. In letter no. 1 to her mentor, for instance, she leaves a gap of one and a half centimeters between her salutation (“Anna Maria van Schurman sends greetings to the Most Illustrious gentleman, ANDREAS RIVETUS”) and the beginning of the letter (see Figure 3). Furthermore, the first letter of the first word at the start of the main body contains a calligraphic flourish taking up almost the full width of the left margin and a length of three lines. This she does in a good number of her letters. 328. According to Rasch, ed., Driehonderd brieven, 54, up until the first half of the century, the folded folio sheet in sizes of 20x30 centimeters was most common, while in the second half of the century the quarto letter in sizes of 15x20 cm predominated. The folio format allowed four sides to a letter, while the folded half-sheet quarto made for smaller size sheets, since a sheet of paper was cut in half to form four sides. 329. Vives, De conscribendis Epistolis, vol. 3 of Selected Works of Juan Luis Vives, ed. and trans. Charles Fantazzi (Leiden: Brill, 1989), 91. Cited in Daybell, “The Materiality of Early Modern Women’s Letters,” 70n76.

Introduction 99 At the end of the letter, she leaves a gap of two and a half centimeters above the subscription and another gap of one centimeter before the signature. Both the subscription and the signature always appear on the right-hand side at the end of the letter in keeping with rhetorical deference. The folding of the letters is done widthwise into strips or accordion-like folds.330 After the last folding, the address is added to the outside fold. The silk threads in various colors to sew the letters shut appear to the left of the address and at times on both sides of the address (see Figure 6). Silk threads on letters indicated noble rank; the red wax seal from the signet ring Van Schurman used also signaled her aristocratic status. It bore on its insignia the oak tree, which was part of the coat of arms of the Van Schurmans and the Von Harffs.331 Van Schurman routinely used one folio sheet per letter. She would fold it in half and then frequently write on just the first side or page of the bifolium (consisting of two leaves and four sides or pages for writing). She used more paper than necessary because she could afford it—double-sheet or bifolium letters were more expensive and socially more prestigious—and because it provided greater firmness and protection for the enclosed letter.332 As well, she used a cream-colored paper which was then considered of the best quality; inferior grades were usually brown or grey.333 Our translations of Van Schurman’s and Huygens’ manuscript letters and poems and those of her circle reflect the layout or mise-en-page of each letter, its signature, date, and postscript (except when the latter is vertically on the page).

The Reception and Afterlife of Anna Maria van Schurman Anna Maria van Schurman’s reception from the seventeenth century on, note De Baar and Rang, is marked by diverse views “which evoke an image that is anything but unambiguous.”334 The countless male celebrants who heaped praise on her wrote largely about her exceptionality rather than her writings. She acquired a mythical cast and was turned into an “illustrious woman,” joining the classi330. Anne Larsen thanks Ad Leerintveld, former Conservator of Manuscripts at the KB at The Hague, for showing her how a seventeenth-century letter was folded, and referring her to the following website on letterlocking by Jana Dambrogio, Conservator for the MIT Libraries: , accessed July 2018. Dambrogio’s site contains links to the website Letterlocking.org (), as well as to YouTube videos on the art of letterlocking (). 331. With thanks to Alice Ward for this observation. See also Katlijne van der Stighelen, “Portetjes in ‘Spaens loot’ van de hand van Anna Maria van Schurman (1607–1678),” ZE 2 (1986): 31. 332. Rasch, ed., Driehonderd brieven, 55. 333. Dard Hunter, Papermaking: The History and Technique of an Ancient Craft (New York: Knopf, 1947), 224, cited in Daybell, “The Materiality of Early Modern Women’s Letters,” 63. 334. Mirjam de Baar and Brita Rang, “Anna Maria van Schurman: A Historical Survey of Her Reception since the Seventeenth Century,” in Baar et al., Choosing the Better Part, 4.

100 Introduction cal, biblical, and contemporary heroines in the period’s ubiquitous catalogues of women worthies. These catalogs, by focusing on women’s lives and personalities, made their works and accomplishments “invisible,” as Margaret Ezell observes.335 Even Van Schurman’s mentor, André Rivet, praised her at the start of their relationship not so much for her writings but as an example to goad male students into emulation, so as not to be overtaken by a woman, for “certainly, it is good for them to stand corrected and be filled with shame by someone like you” (1:3). The trope of the learned woman shaming men betrays the way in which eulogists sought to contain erudite females. In the Netherlands, Van Schurman’s virtuous qualities—her modesty, chastity, and piety—were valorized at the expense of her scholarship and writings, especially in the first half of the nineteenth century. By mid-century, however, she was given the attention she deserved in G.D.J. Schotel’s historical study, published in 1853, the first serious monograph on her and her writings—and one which nonetheless praised the aura of her virtues, as was then prized in women.336 In the Germanic territories, she was considered a model of female erudition, an exemplary “sensitive woman,” and the precursor to German Pietism. In France in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, her polyglossia was praised, while her Labadism was either vilified or ignored, depending on the literary genre assessing her. For French bio-bibliographers Louis Moréri, Jean-Pierre Nicéron, George de Chauffepié, and Jean-Noël Paquot, her Labadism blemished her reputation. But the philosopher Pierre Bayle, in his News from the Republic of Letters, retorted that the “schismatic” Van Schurman had merely become a pretext that misogynists used to denounce any form of advanced learning for women on grounds that these women would become both heretical and insane; in reality, he continued, these critics preferred to see women attached to la bagatelle (“trifles”) so as to “mortify those who distinguish themselves in their studies.”337 On the other hand, defenders of women’s education and enlightened educators in France admired her, but without mentioning her Labadism. Van Schurman’s fame spread throughout Europe, beginning with her home country, and moving across borders to include Germany, France, England, Scandinavia, Poland, Switzerland, Italy, Spain, and finally America. She was also known in Russia and Hungary and several other countries not covered in the 335. Margaret J. M. Ezell, “Invisibility Optics: Aphra Behn, Esther Inglis and the Fortunes of Women’s Works,” in A History of Early Modern Women’s Writing, ed. Patricia Phillippy (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2018), 27–45. 336. See Mirjam de Baar, “Anna Maria van Schurman: Gereformeerde heilige en icoon van feminisme?,” in Heiligen of helden: Opstellen voor Willem Frijhoff, ed. Joris van Eijnatten, F. A. van Lieburg, and Hans de Waardt (Amsterdam: Bert Bakker, 2007), 215–28. 337. Pierre Bayle, ed., Nouvelles de la République des Lettres (Amsterdam: Henry Desbordes, 1684), vol. 1 (June): 388–89, cited in Linda Timmermans, L’Accès des femmes à la culture (1598–1715): Un débat d’idées de Saint François de Sales à la Marquise de Lambert (Paris: Honoré Champion, 1993), 779.

Introduction 101 following, necessarily brief, survey of the ways in which Van Schurman’s cultural capital was appropriated in each of the listed regions. The Dutch Republic In the Netherlands, the earliest printed eulogies of Van Schurman, according to De Baar and Rang, were written by Jacob Cats in ’s Werelts begin . . . in den trou-ringh (The Touchstone of the Wedding Ring, 1637), Johan van Beverwijck in Van de wtnementheyt des vrouwelicken Geslachts (Of the Excellence of the Female Sex, 1643), Walter Driessens (Valerius Andreas Desselius, 1588–1655) in Bibliotheca Belgica (Library of the Lowlands, 1643), and Jan de Brune the Younger (1616–1649) in Wetsteen der vernuften (The Whetstone of the Intellect, 1644).338 Dutch women writers admired her. Charlotte de Huybert (ca. 1622–ca. 1646) stated that “through your name all women are praised”;339 Johanna Hoobius (ca. 1614–ca. 1642) crowned her with laurel leaves, calling on all women to follow her lead. Many other learned figures and artists in the 1640s and 1650s in the Dutch Republic corresponded with her and praised her effusively.340 The engraver Crispijn van de Passe the Younger, who did a portrait with pen and ink of her as a cultivated woman in 1632/3,341 asked in his The True Portraits of Several of the Greatest Ladies of Christendom Disguised as Shepherdesses, “What fame, what praise and honor shall I not give you?”342 Constantijn Huygens, as we have seen, wrote numerous praise poems on Van Schurman. Johannes Mollerus (Johannes Möller, 1661–1725), the Danish pietist and well-known bio-bibliographer, transcribes one of these in his Cimbria literata (Learned Jutland, 1744); it epitomizes the views of her Dutch contemporaries. In his “Address to Van Schurman,”343 Huygens states: 338. Baar and Rang, “A Historical Survey,” 5n16. On these contemporaries’ reactions to Van Schurman, see A. Agnes Sneller, Met Man en Macht: Analyse en interpretatie van teksten van en over vrouwen in de vroegmoderne tijd (Kampen: Kok Agora, 1996), chap. 2; and Sneller’s ‘ “If she had been a man . . .’, in Baar et al., Choosing the Better Part, 133–49. On Valerius Andreas, see Anne Marie de Schurman, femme savante (1607–1678): Correspondance, ed. Constant Venesoen (Paris: Honoré Champion, 2004), 21n40. 339. Beverwijck, Excellence of the Female Sex, 3. See also Johanna Hoobius, Het Lof der Vrouwen (In Praise of Women, 1643), quoted in Gemert et al., Women’s Writing from the Low Countries, 44. 340. See especially Beek, First Female, chap. 3. 341. Larsen, Star of Utrecht, 3. 342. Les vrais pourtraits de quelques unes des plus grandes dames de la chrestienté, desguisées en bergeres (Amsterdam: J. Broeesz, 1640), cited in Ilja M.Veldman, Crispijn de Passe and His Progeny (1564– 1670): A Century of Print Production, trans. Michael Hoyle (Rotterdam: Sound and Vision, 2001), 309, 331. Van de Passe depicted Van Schurman as an attractive and fashionable shepherdess. 343. Johannes Mollerus, Cimbria literata; sive, Scriptorum ducatis utriusque Slesvicensis et Holsatici, 3 vols. (Copenhagen, 1744), 2:814. “Cimbria” is the Latin name for the peninsula comprising parts of Denmark and Germany. On Mollerus, see Schotel, 2:71.

102 Introduction Anna, pearl of her country, gift from God, The phenomenal Anna, from the rising to the setting of the sun, A Maiden among holy women, but unique among them all, There is no other equal either in talent or in piety. Anna (who does not know this?) sounded the languages of the whole earth, And from her one pen, every form of script is born. One born Hebrew would be amazed at her Hebrew, So, too, the person in Rome, the Greek, Ethiopian, and Syrian, And every other tongue she can command. Anna, whose long labor has revealed long-hidden divine truths, Even from her tender maiden years, Anna has experimented with the human arts, Which only the greatest of men have tasted. The German Territories In Germany, which produced many bio-bibliographies of learned women, one finds a gradual acceptance, mostly in the eighteenth century, of Van Schurman’s defense of the intellectual parity of the sexes and equal access to higher studies. Johannes Sauerbrei (or Sauerbrey, 1644–1721), a pastor and school principal in Coburg and Erfurt, defended at the University of Leipzig two disputations on the learned education of women (1671 and 1676); in the first, he approved of the cultivated woman who trained her mind through education, while in the second he argued that serious professional learning should best be left to men, since only a few exceptional women could cultivate scientific and literary studies to promote their virtue and glory. He praised Van Schurman especially for her command of oriental languages.344 Soon after, Johann Andreas Planer, a professor of mathematics at Wittenberg, in a dissertation on learned women, agreed with Sauerbrei that only exceptional women like Van Schurman were capable of higher education.345 Similarly, in 1692, Christian Juncker and Abraham Gottleber noted Van Schurman’s praise by Claudius Salmasius, Gilles Ménage, and especially Jean-Louis Guez de Balzac, whose compliments regarding the elegance of her French letters they cited.346 Juncker and Gottleber admired her learning, but considered it utterly exceptional. On the other hand, Christian Franz Paullini (1643–1712), a doctor who compiled four catalogues of learned women, argued 344. Johannes Sauerbrei, Diatriben academicam de foeminarum eruditio, 2 vols. (Leipzig: Hahn, 1676), 2:16–19. 345. Johann Andreas Planer, Gynaeceum Doctum, sive Dissertatio historico-literaria vom Gelehrten Frauenzimmer (Wittenberg, 1686; 1701). On Planer, see Elisabeth Gössmann, ed., Eva: Gottes Meisterwerk (Munich: Iudicium, 2000), chap. 4. With thanks to Jennifer Welsh for this last reference. 346. Christian Juncker and Abraham Gottleber, Centuria foeminarum eruditione et scriptis illustrium (Leipzig: Christoph Fleischer, 1692), 119–20.

Introduction 103 in two of these (1700 and 1712) the intellectual equality of the sexes by citing extensively from the “noble Schurman.”347 Likewise, Johann Caspar Eberti, in 1706, argued that women produced fewer works than men because they were denied access to higher education; his entry of seven pages on Van Schurman was one of his most substantial.348 German writers and professionals visited Van Schurman in Utrecht, among them Paul Fleming, a physician and poet who was awarded a doctorate in Leiden in 1640, the year when she might have done a finely etched portrait of him.349 Finally, Van Schurman had a major, long-term influence on German educational institutions through her Eukleria and her correspondence with reform-minded German Pietists such as Johann Jakob Schütz (1640–1690) and Johanna Eleonora Petersen, née von Merlau (1644–1724).350 Her Dissertatio, however, became hard to locate. The physician Christian Leporin, whose daughter Dorothea Erxleben (1715–1762) became the first female medical doctor in Germany, wrote in the preface to her work on the right of women to an education that he looked for Van Schurman’s Dissertatio for his daughter, but that “despite all my effort, it was not to be had.”351 France  In France, Van Schurman arguably became a celebrity whose famed artistic precocity and linguistic genius endured well into the nineteenth century among literati and select salonnières. In the seventeenth century, several female writers and salonnières praised her for inspiring women to overcome their limited education and for modeling correct French usage, in keeping with the salon’s mission civilisatrice and ethos of promoting the French language. In a letter in 1660 to the duchesse de Montpensier (1627–1693), known as “La Grande Mademoiselle,” Françoise Bertaut de Motteville (1621–1689) judged men harshly for preventing 347. Christian Franz Paullini, Philosophischer Feyerabend (Frankfurt, 1705; Erfurt, 1712); Das Hochund Wohl-gelahrte Teutsche Frauenzimmer (Frankfurt and Leipzig: Stössel, 1705; Erfurt: Stössel, 1712), cited in Jean M. Woods and Maria Fürstenwald, Women of the German-Speaking Lands in Learning, Literature and the Arts during the 17th and Early 18th Centuries: A Lexicon (Stuttgart: J. B. Metzler, 1984), xvi. On Paullini, see Gössmann, ed., Eva: Gottes Meisterwerk, chap. 7. 348. Johann Caspar Eberti, Eröffnetes Cabinet deß Gelehrten Frauen-Zimmers (Frankfurt and Leipzig: Rohrlach, 1706), 317–24; cited in Woods and Fürstenwald, Women of the German-Speaking Lands, xvii. 349. Stighelen, “Hoe hooge,” 126. On these German visitors, see Beek, First Female, 176. 350. On Van Schurman’s letters to Schütz, see Bo Karen Lee, Sacrifice and Delight in the Mystical Theology of Anna Maria van Schurman (Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press, 2014); on Petersen, see The Life of Lady Johanna Eleonora Petersen, Written by Herself, ed. and trans. Barbara Becker-Cantarino (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2005). 351. Londa Schiebinger, The Mind has no Sex? Women in the Origins of Modern Science (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1989), 270.

104 Introduction women from studying the liberal arts, even though “we have seen that the liberal arts, practiced in every age by many women, in spite of the opposition of men, have, in our own day, enriched the minds of Elisabeth of Bohemia, Mademoiselle Van Schurman of Holland, Madame de Brassac, and Mademoiselle de Scudéry in France.”352 These exemplars demonstrated that their “savoir [learning] did not take away their modesty and the douceur [sweetness] that befits our sex.”353 Motteville commended Van Schurman for being an agent of civilization, and for conforming to the salon ethos of “naturalness, grace, douceur, delicacy, playfulness, [and] modesty.”354 Other female eulogists such as Jacquette Guillaume and Marguerite Buffet lauded Van Schurman for her mastery of French.355 Several male critics and writers, on the other hand, such as Guez de Balzac, Antoine Baudeau de Somaize, Jean de La Forge, Isaac Bullart, and Samuel Sorbière, praised her as a brilliant linguist.356 Additionally, she was mentioned by name at the end of the fourth conversation on “Le bel esprit” (“Wit”) in The Conversations between Ariste and Eugène (1671) by Dominique Bouhours (1628–1702), a Jesuit priest and literary critic. While the misogynist Eugène voiced his distrust of women’s intellect due to the “humidity” of their brains, Ariste avowed that there were exceptions to the rule, citing a host of women worthies including “Mademoiselle de Scurmans.”357 The learned churchman Pierre-Daniel Huet (1630–1721), who owned a copy of Van Schurman’s 1650 edition of Opuscula,358 declared that she, Christina of Sweden, and Madeleine de Scudéry were the three most learned women of Europe.359 Paul Colomiès (1638–1692), a French Huguenot librarian, published a biographical dictionary of French Christian Hebraists, entitled French Orientalists (1665), in which he praised two Hebraist female members of Van Schurman’s circle, Anne de Rohan and Marie du Moulin. In both entries, he mentioned Van 352. Anne-Marie-Louise d’Orléans, duchesse de Montpensier, Against Marriage: The Correspondence of La Grande Mademoiselle, ed. and trans. Joan DeJean (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2002), 129, 53. 353. Montpensier, Against Marriage, 53. 354. Myriam Dufour Maître, “Les belles et les Belles Lettres: Femmes, instances du féminin et nouvelles configurations du savoir,” in Le Savoir au XVIIe siècle, ed. John D. Lyons and Cara Welch (Tübingen: Papers on French Seventeenth-Century Literature, 2003), 52. 355. See Larsen, Star of Utrecht, 150–51. 356. Larsen, Star of Utrecht, 51–52, 148–49. Balzac, an epistolary author, praised her for her verses, which are “not the least of her wonders.” Balzac, Lettres choisies, première partie, edited by Valentin Conrart (Paris: Augustin Courbé, 1647), 635. Van Schurman mentions in a letter of 25 March 1648 (no. 49, 1:62) that she was expecting a letter from Balzac. 357. Dominique Bouhours, Les Entretiens d’Ariste et d’Eugène, ed. Bernard Beugnot and Gilles Declerq (Paris: Honoré Champion, 2003), 266. 358. Huet’s copy is housed at the BnF (Z. 19198). 359. Pierre-Daniel Huet, Mémoires (1718), ed. Philippe-Joseph Salazar (Paris: Klincksieck, 1993), 86–87.

Introduction 105 Schurman’s epistolary exchanges in Hebrew with them.360 The scholar Gilles Ménage (Menagius, 1613–1692), known to tutor salonnières such as Madame de La Fayette, ranked Van Schurman among the doctissima women of all times in his Historia mulierum philosopharum (History of Women Philosophers, 1690).361 He advocated “working alongside, and benefitting from, female intellectuals.”362 Fascinated with her learning, a host of French savants tried to visit her. While some succeeded, others failed to catch even a glimpse of her. The astronomer Ismaël Boulliau (1605–1694), for example, managed to see her in Utrecht in mid-September 1651—“with some difficulty,” as he reported to the Parisian scholar Jacques Dupuy. His success was rewarded: “She is a demoiselle as wise and modest,” he noted, “as she is learned.”363 On his visit, he could well have spoken to her of the erudite Italian nun Arcangela Tarabotti (1604–1652), whose work Paternal Tyranny (1654) he had just delivered to Elzevier for publication, and of the Silesian astronomer Maria Cunitz (1610–1664), whose major work Urania propitia (1650) he much admired.364 Not as fortunate was Balthasar de Monconys (1611–1665), a well-known magistrate, physicist, and diplomat. During his travels through the Low Countries between June and September 1663 while accompanying the son of the duc de Luynes, he stopped off in Utrecht expressly to visit Van Schurman. On August 30, not finding her at home, he was told by her servant that she was at an Assemblée de Ministres (“Assembly of Pastors”), and, furthermore, that she “did not allow anyone to see her unless he was a Saumaise, or a person of that reputation.”365

360. Paul Colomiès, Gallia Orientalis, sive Gallorum qui linguam hebræam vel alias orientalies excoluerunt vitæ (The Hague: Adriaan Vlacq, 1665), 165, 272. 361. Gilles Ménage, The History of Women Philosophers, trans. Beatrice H. Zedler (Lanham, MD: University Press of America, 1984), 29. 362. Rosie Wyles, “Ménage’s Learned Ladies: Anne Dacier (1647–1720) and Anna Maria van Schurman (1607–1678),” in Women Classical Scholars: Unsealing the Fountain from the Renaissance to Jacqueline de Romilly, ed. Rosie Wyles and Edith Hall (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2016), 71. 363. Boulliau to Jacques Dupuy, 19 September 1651 (BnF, f.fr. 13043, fols. 29r–30r). Cited in H. J. M. Nellen, Ismaël Boulliau (1605–1694): Astronome, épistolier, nouvelliste et intermédiaire scientifique (Amsterdam: APA–Holland University Press, 1994), 199; and Lynn Lara Westwater, “A Rediscovered Friendship in the Republic of Letters: The Unpublished Correspondence of Arcangela Tarabotti and Ismaël Boulliau,” RQ 65 (2012): 97n125. 364. In Urania propitia, Cunitz offered new tables and a new approach to Kepler’s planetary positioning in his Rudolphine Tables. Bathsua Makin mentions her work in The Ancient Education of Gentlewomen (1673), although she had forgotten her name. See Bathsua Makin and Mary More, Educating English Daughters: Late Seventeenth-Century Debates, ed. Frances Teague and Margaret J. M. Ezell (Toronto: Iter Academic Press; Tempe: Arizona Center for Medieval and Renaissance Studies, 2016), 66. 365. Balthasar de Monconys, Les voyages de Monsieur de Monconys en Angleterre, et aux Pays Bas (1666; reprint, Paris: Pierre Delaulne, 1695), 357.

106 Introduction In the eighteenth century, Van Schurman had many French admirers, including the anonymous Monsieur N. C., the Dutch-born writer and translator Johanna Dorothea Lindenaer (Madame de Zoutelandt), who moved to France, Mme de Château-Thierry Galien, Philibert Riballier, and Charlotte Cosson de la Cressonnière.366 Additionally, she was singled out by Madeleine de Puisieux (1720–1798) in La femme n’est pas inférieure à l’homme (Woman Is Not Inferior to Man, 1750), an adaptation of François Poullain de La Barre’s On the Equality of the Sexes (1673), and a free translation of a treatise by the anonymous English writer Sophia (to be discussed in detail shortly).367 For Puisieux, one did not need to resort to catalogues of femmes illustres from antiquity, since “our own century and our nation can brag to have had more than one Sappho, many Cornelias, and several Schurmann and Daciers.”368 Diderot’s Encyclopédie included Van Schurman in the article Femme (“Woman”), which approvingly displayed her argument that women’s higher studies granted them “a wisdom that cannot be acquired through the dangerous aid of experience.”369 For a string of eighteenth-century bio-bibliographers, mention of Van Schurman was de rigueur. Most emphasized her lack of vanity: for instance, both Jean-Baptiste Ladvocat and Jean-François de La Croix stated that she was even more famous “for her rare modesty.”370 In the nineteenth century, Van Schurman appeared in the international Abridged Dictionary of Illustrious Women (1800), sandwiched between Christina of Sweden and Madeleine de Scudéry; her artistry, learning, modesty, and treatise on female education were highlighted.371 The bibliographer Fortunée Briquet (1782–1815) mentioned her in 1804 in connection with Anne de Rohan.372 366. Larsen, Star of Utrecht, 272–74. 367. On Sophia, see A History of Women Philosophers, vol. 3: Modern Women Philosophers, 1600– 1900, ed. Mary Ellen Waithe (Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1991), 225. Waithe notes that Puisieux likely translated Sophia’s work. 368. [Madeleine de Puisieux], La femme n’est pas inférieure à l’homme, traduit de l’anglois (London [i.e. Paris], 1750), 107. Puisieux leaves—either deliberately, or in error—the name of Van Schurman in the singular. Puisieux’s book was credited to her husband. 369. “Femme,” in vol. 6 of l’Encyclopédie, ou, Dictionnaire raisonné des sciences, des arts et des métiers, ed. Denis Diderot and Jean le Rond d’Alembert (Paris: 1756), 469. 370. Jean-Baptiste Ladvocat, Dictionnaire historique  [. . .] contenant l’histoire  [. . .] des Femmes Savantes, 3 vols. (Paris: Veuve Didot, 1760), 3:394; Jean-François de La Croix, Dictionnaire historique portatif des femmes celebres, 3 vols. ([Paris]: L. Cellot, 1769), 3:362. 371. Dictionnaire abrégé des femmes illustres, ou recommandables par leur esprit, leurs talens, leurs vertus, & par des actions de courage, ou d’héroïsme (Paris: Chez les marchands de nouveautés, 1800). 440–41. 372. Fortunée Briquet, Dictionnaire historique, littéraire et bibliographique des françaises, et des étrangères naturalisées en France (Paris: Treuttel and Würtz, 1804). (accessed July 2018).

Introduction 107 England English commentators focused on her piety, artistic talents, and learning, while English women tried to follow her lead. At mid-century, notes David Norbrook, Van Schurman was invoked as a “champion” of Civil War female prophets such as Mary Cary, supporter of the Fifth Monarchists. The Puritan Hugh Peters, in his preface to Cary’s The Little Horns Doom & Downfall (London, 1651, A2v), praised her as “the glory of the sexe in Holland” and a close fit for Cary.373 Sir Edward Leigh, a Parliamentary colleague of Sir Simonds D’Ewes, dedicated his treatise, The Saints’ Encouragement in Evil Times (1651), to one of D’Ewes’s daughters, noting that she was as “wel-grounded in Latine” as Van Schurman, “that Mirrour of Learning for the Female sex.”374 John Evelyn, in his Sculptura: or the History, and Art of Chalcography and Engraving with Copper (1662), noted that Van Schurman was “a Prodigy of her sex” in the art of engraving.375 William Walsh’s A Dialogue concerning Women, Being a Defense of the Sex Written to Eugenia (1691) mentioned Van Schurman’s debate with Rivet on women’s learning “printed in her Works in Latin.” Making reference to her languages, skill with poetry, painting, “and all the Philosophies,” he stated that “she was indeed a Library herself;  . . . the greatest Divines of her time were proud of her judgment in their own profession.”376 In 1739, an anonymous female writer calling herself “Sophia, a Woman of Quality” published Woman Not Inferior to Man, in which she examined her opponents’ arguments against women’s education. In chapter 6, on whether women were able to teach the sciences in universities, she extolled the “Schurman and Daciers” of her century, including the Italian physicist Laura Bassi, who, in 1732, was the second woman, after Elena Cornaro Piscopia in 1678, to be awarded a doctor of philosophy degree.377 She concluded that “if our sex, as it hitherto appears, has all the talents requisite to learn and teach those sciences, they are equally capable of applying their knowledge to practice [public roles], in exercising that power and dignity.”378 Indeed, the next generation of female scholars in 373. Norbrook, “Women, the Republic of Letters, and the Public Sphere,” 233. 374. McGee, An Industrious Mind, 430. 375. John Evelyn, Sculptura: or the History and Art of Chalcography and Engraving with Copper (London: Printed for G. Beedle, 1662), 83; cited in Margaret J.M. Ezell, “Seventeenth-Century Female Author Portraits, Or, The Company She Keeps,” Zeitschrift für Anglistik und Amerikanistik 60 (2012): 33. 376. William Walsh, A Dialogue concerning Women, Being a Defense of the Sex: Written to Eugenia (London: Printed for R. Bentley and J. Tonson, 1691), 87, 93. 377. Paula Findlen, “Science as a Career in Enlightenment Italy: The Strategies of Laura Bassi,” Isis 84 (1993): 441–69. Bassi received her doctorate from the University of Bologna; Piscopia, from the University of Padua. 378. Anonymous  [Sophia]. Woman Not Inferior to Man; or, A Short and Modest Vindication of the Natural Right of the FAIR-SEX to a Perfect Equality of Power, Dignity, and Esteem, with the Men

108 Introduction eighteenth-century England, such as Lady Mary Wortley Montagu and Elizabeth Elstob, were inspired by the legacy of Van Schurman’s respublica mulierum to create their own Republic of Women.379 By the mid-eighteenth century, however, the memory of Van Schurman and her female network began to fade. The antiquarian George Ballard stated in his Memoirs of Several Ladies of Great Britain (1752) that he could find little to say about her, and about women such as the teacher Bathsua Makin and the scholar and scientist Katherine Boyle Jones (Lady Ranelagh), “who corresponded in the learned languages with Mrs. Anna Maria à Schurman.”380 His observation served to confirm Van Schurman’s own apprehension, expressed in her letter on female education, that “the memorials to women’s names are no more evident than the traces left by a passing ship in the sea” (no. 14, 1:17). Scandinavia  In Denmark, Norway, and Sweden, Van Schurman was greeted as an exception to her sex; however, enlightened male eulogists encouraged women in their national networks to imitate her and “in some cases actively put women in touch with one another.”381 Mollerus recorded in Learned Jutland (1744) that the Danish physician Thomas Bartholinus, in his book of Songs (2:98), celebrated her in an epigram as one who overwhelmingly impressed men: “A man’s intellect grows numb alongside such a mind, and a man’s hand is hard pressed by this weighty woman.” Just as “Van Schurman conquers her sex / With her beautiful appearance, so she conquers men with her intellect.”382 Pieta van Beek mentions that Bartholinus visited Van Schurman in Utrecht in 1646 and prescribed her Dissertatio (1641) as a must-read to his colleagues and the learned women he knew.383 Ole Borch (Olaus Borrichius, 1626–1690), a Danish scientist, physician, and poet at Copenhagen, known mainly for his works on chemistry, stated in his On Latin Poets (1683) that Van Schurman had surpassed in poetic skill all the (London: Printed for John Hawkins, 1739; 2nd ed., 1740), 46–47, 48. By the 1750s, there were three women professors at Bologna, confirming Sophia’s judgment. 379. On this generation, see Pal, Republic of Women, Conclusions. 380. George Ballard, Memoirs of Several Ladies of Great Britain, who have been celebrated for their writings or their skill in the learned languages, arts, and sciences (1752); reprint, ed. Ruth Perry (Detroit: Wayne State University Press, 1985), 54. 381. Jane Stevenson, Women Latin Poets: Language, Gender, and Authority from Antiquity to the Eighteenth Century (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010), 422. 382. Mollerus, Cimbria literata, 2:813. 383. Pieta van Beek, “ ‘Habent sua fata libelli’: The Adventures and Influence of Anna Maria van Schurman’s Work in Scandinavia,” in Acta Conventus Neo-Latini Upsaliensis: Proceedings of the Fourteenth International Congress of Neo-Latin Studies (Uppsala, 2009), ed. Astrid Steiner-Weber, 2 vols. (Leiden: Brill, 2012), 1:199–200.

Introduction 109 other women of her time. To which he added: “Let it be other people’s judgment as to whether her splendor faded because of Labadie when she reached the end of her life.” He, for one, would not pass judgment.384 The Swede Otto Sperling the Younger (1634–1715), whose manuscript On Learned Women contained close to fourteen hundred biographies, noted in biography no. 152 that Van Schurman left no discipline untouched; she owned all the languages, both oriental and modern, and she was amazing at the fine arts: “Hence the omniscient maiden was honored by all.”385 Sperling was instrumental in the publishing trajectory of Birgitte Thott (1610–1662), who translated Seneca’s Philosophus into Danish in 1658, and Sophia Elisabeth Brenner (1659–1730), Sweden’s first famous female poet. Thott’s translation was introduced with a liminary Latin poem by Van Schurman, who called her the Tenth Muse of the North. Sperling patterned his Latin correspondence with Brenner on that of Van Schurman with Rivet.386 Johannes Esbergius (1665–1734), a professor and rector of the university at Uppsala, remarked in a disputation by his student, Concerning Women Philosophers (1699), that “more honor than the human lot deserves and that can be bestowed on a person was granted to Van Schurman.”387 Poland  In Königsberg, Rotger zum Bergen (1603–1661) published Latin letters, epigrams, and a memorial addressed to her.388 In 1636, he became secretary to King Władysław IV of Poland and later served Marie-Louise de Gonzague when she became queen consort in 1646. He also knew Anna Margaretha Van Schurman, Van Schurman’s younger cousin, who lived in Königsberg and had informed him 384. Mollerus, Cimbria literata, 2:813. On Borch, see William Poole, “Peter Goldman: A Dundee Poet and Physician in the Republic of Letters,” in Neo-Latin Literature and Literary Culture in Early Modern Scotland, ed. Steven J. Reid and David McOmish (Leiden and Boston: Brill, 2016), 101. 385. Mollerus, Cimbria literata, 2:813. 386. On Thott and Brenner, see Marianne Alenius, “Learned Scandinavian Women in the 17th and 18th Centuries,” in Acta Conventus Neo-Latini Torontonensis: Proceedings of the Seventh International Congress of Neo-Latin Studies (Toronto, 1988), ed. Alexander Dalzell, Charles Fantazzi, and Richard Schoeck (Binghamton, NY: Medieval and Renaissance Texts and Studies, 1991), 177–87; Elisabet Göransson, “Defining a Subgenre: Aspects of Imitation and Intertextuality in the Correspondence of Learned Women in Early Modern Times,” in Acta Conventus Neo-Latini Upsaliensis: Proceedings of the Fourteenth International Congress of Neo-Latin Studies (Uppsala, 2009), ed. Astrid Steiner-Weber, 2 vols. (Leiden and Boston: Brill, 2012), 1:415–27; Stevenson, Women Latin Poets, 354–65; Beek, First Female, 190–91. 387. Mollerus, Cimbria literata, 2:813. 388. These are edited and translated in Pieta van Beek, “Herrezen uit de as”: verbrande lofgeschriften van Rotger zum Bergen voor Anna Maria van Schurman (1649–1655), Schurmanniana-reeks no. 4 (Ridderkerk: Provily Pers, 2015). The memorial, Vita bonum fragile est (Life is fragile, 1655), is based on rumors of Van Schurman’s supposed death in Cologne in 1653 due to an illness.

110 Introduction about her famous relative. In his first letter he describes the portrait Van Schurman drew of Gonzague during the latter’s visit to her in Utrecht in December 1645 while on her way to Poland as queen, as well as Van Schurman’s multilingual answers to questions from members of the queen’s retinue.389 Bergen’s eulogy of Van Schurman typified the hyperbolic praises to which she was subjected. His gendered allusions to her male intellect were summarized in his epigram: “For the very noble Anna Maria van Schurman, a unique example that is admirable in a learned man, and a marvelous monster of her sex, but without any of its vices.” He also issued a veiled marriage proposal—his wife Margaretha had died in 1649—hoping that she would become “Juno” to his “Apollo.”390 Switzerland The philologist and theologian Johann Heinrich Hottinger (1620–1667), in his Historia ecclesiastica (1651–67), declared her a “prodigy of a new world” and a “cornucopia of all good letters.” His colleague Johann Heinrich Heidegger (1633–1698), a professor of Hebrew and later of philosophy, wrote in Life of J. H. Hottinger (1667) that Hottinger, during his travels to the Netherlands, visited Van Schurman in 1664 and stated that “he could never praise enough” her erudition and intellect “that stretched to all the liberal arts.”391 Italy  In Italy, Van Schurman was the subject of Domenico Gilberto da Cesena’s The Triumphant Fame: A Panegyric to the Most Beautiful, Most Chaste, and Most Learned Lady Anna Maria van Schurman. This collection of thirteen eleven-line stanzas, a sonnet, and a twenty-five-line poem was preceded by an Italian letter from Gilberto to Gabriel Naudé, mio diletissimo amico (“my dearest friend,” 1 January 1642), and concluded with a Latin missive from Naudé to Johan van Beverwijck (21 July 1642).392 Little is known about Gilberto apart from his friendship with Naudé (1600–1653), the librarian of state and the founder of the discipline of library science, who lived in Italy for a decade from 1631 to 1641, working as secretary to the bibliophile cardinal and papal nuncio Gian Francesco de’ Conti Guidi di Bagno. When his patron died in 1641, he became librarian to Cardinal 389. Le Laboureur, in Histoire et relation du voyage de la Royne de Pologne, 64–67, does not mention the portrait. 390. "Nobillissimae Annae Mariae à Schurmann / Unico omnium mirandorum in homine docto exemplari, ac sui sexûs prorsus-monstro absque omni tamen vitio," in Beek, “Herrezen uit de as,” 53; the proposal is found in Zum Bergen’s first letter in “Herrezen uit de as,” 52. 391. Mollerus, Cimbria literata, 2:812. 392. Domenico Gilberto da Cesena, La Fama trionfante: Panegirico alla bellissima, castissima, e dottissima Signora Anna Maria Schurman (Rome: n.p., 1642). Transcribed in Schotel, 2: 96–102.

Introduction 111 Richelieu. Upon the latter’s death in 1642, he was selected as chief librarian of the cardinal, diplomat, and statesman Jules Mazarin, traveling to the Low Countries, Italy, England, and Germany to collect books for Mazarin’s library. Naudé was acquainted with Van Schurman’s On the Temporal Limits of Life (1639), since he also contributed an essay to the same volume, edited by Johan van Beverwijck, which included her essay. He also wrote about her to Van Beverwijck. In his l642 letter published by Gilberto da Cesena, Naudé reported on a conversation he had held with Guillaume Colletet: “For just as this man’s skills surpass Anna Maria in every discipline which can be practiced blamelessly by noble men—and everyone knows this—even so, he, too, sings her praises.” Colletet then informed Naudé about Marie de Gournay’s invitation to Van Schurman to become her mère d’alliance in order to “groom” Van Schurman as her replacement.393 Spain Van Schurman’s name and fame reached Spain in the early eighteenth century. Benito Jerónimo Feijóo y Montenegro (1676–1764), in his Defense of Women (1726), ignited a debate in Spain over women’s nature when he defended their intellectual and moral equality to men.394 Included in his Teatro critico universal, aimed at enlightening his fellow citizens through introducing them to major European writers, his inquiry was based on women’s reasoning ability. After debunking their supposed inferior nature, he praised their abilities in politics, economics, and learning, ending his defense with a catalogue of learned women from Spain, France, Italy, and Germany. He then devoted his second-longest entry395 to Van Schurman, “glory of the one and the other Germany, superior and inferior” since she was born in Cologne and her parents came from the Low Countries (69): “Until now no capacity more universal in the one and the other sex has been known. All the Sciences and all the Arts recognized with equal obedience the command of her mind, such that none made the slightest resistance when this heroine undertook their conquest.”396 Feijoo listed her undertakings in each of the arts, from paper-cutting to embroidery.

393. Naudé to Van Beverwijck, Latin letter, 21 June 1642, in Gilberto, La Fama trionfante; Schotel, 2:104. See Appendix C5. 394. On Feijóo’s Defense of Women, see Theresa Ann Smith, The Emerging Female Citizen: Gender and Enlightenment in Spain (Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 2006), 28–39. 395. Feijóo’s longest entry is devoted to Sitti Maani, the Persian wife of the musicologist Pietro della Valle, who was thought to know twelve languages. See Benito J. Feijóo, Defensa de la mujer: Discurso XVI del Teatro crítico, ed. Victoria Sau (Barcelona: Icaria, 1997), §20:136, 71–72. 396. Feijóo, Defensa de la mujer, 69.

112 Introduction America Clement Barksdale’s English translation, The Learned Maid (1659), likely brought Van Schurman’s fame to the American colonies. The Puritan minister Cotton Mather (1663–1728), in his Magnalia Christi Americana, Or, the Ecclesiastical History of New England (1702), referred to her writings having reached America.397 He would have read her Dissertatio and Opuscula in their original Latin, while for non-Latinate readers Barksdale’s translation was at hand. In Ornaments for the Daughters of Zion, Or the Character and Happiness of a Virtuous Woman (1692), Mather defended women’s capacity for literary pursuits, citing Van Schurman as his most eminent example alongside Anne Bradstreet.398 Van Schurman was also mentioned in relation to the Labadists who founded a sister community in Cecil County, Maryland, from 1683 to the death of their leader, Peter Sluyter, in 1722. Jasper Danckaerts, who traveled to America with Sluyter and kept a journal of their experiences, translated all one hundred and fifty Psalms into Dutch, with an accompanying musical score; he submitted the manuscript to Van Schurman “for further revision . . . and after two years [he] received it back with corrections.”399

The KB Collection  The collection at The Hague’s Koninklijke Bibliotheek containing the manuscript letters and poems to and from Van Schurman and members of her circle has an interesting history largely of English ownership.400 One of its owners, Dawson Turner (1775–1858), an English banker, botanist, and antiquarian collector, as well as a fellow of the Royal Society, affixed on the first page of the manuscript a handwritten explanation about its prior owners and on how he came into its possession. On 18 December 1836, he wrote: The contents of this volume were imported into England in 1823 by Dodd, who bought them in the October of that year at Leyden, on the sale of the library of Professor Te Water—see this Catalogue, Part II, no. 64, where there is a full description of them.401 They were sold to 397. Cotton Mather, Magnalia Christi Americana, or, The Ecclesiastical History of New England (Hartford, CT: Andrus and Sons, 1855), 135. 398. Cotton Mather, Ornaments for the Daughters of Zion, introd. Pattie Cowell (Delmar, NY: Scholars’ Facsimiles and Reprints, 1978). 399. Journal of Jasper Danckaerts: 1679–1680, ed. Bartlett Burleigh James and J. Franklin Jameson (New York: Barnes and Noble, 1941), xxiv. 400. The KB collection’s catalog entry lists the owners’ names. With thanks to Charles Huttar for help in reconstructing the collection’s line of ownership. 401. See Bibliothecae te Wateranae. Pars Alterae, sive, Catalogus (Leiden: Luchtmans, 1823), 26, cited in Schotel, 2:26.

Introduction 113 Anderson for £10.10 s[hillings],402 on the dispersion of his autograph library by Evans, Feb. 1830 (see catalogue #422), and purchased by R. Heber for £26. 10 s.; Heber’s death happened shortly afterwards; they came a third time to auction them by Starleg, May 20, 1834, and went divided into 2 lots (see catalogue nos. 742 and 743) . Sold to the Rev. E.H. Barker for £31.10. With that gentleman they remained a very short time before his pecuniary embarrassment caused him to put his whole library into the hands of new [owners?]. And now they are mine, and how long will they continue so? At the age of 61, I shall naturally not keep them long, and were I far younger, I am not weak enough to suppose I who I am a person possessing in them . Tamquam sit proprium quicquam, puncto quod mobilis horae nunc prece, nunc pretio, nunc vi, nunc morte suprema permutet dominos et cedat in altera iura.403 Dawson Turner, Dec. 18, 1836. Jona Willem te Water (1740–1822), the first in Dawson’s listing to own the collection, was a pastor, historian, and theologian who had studied theology at Utrecht under orthodox Reformed professors. He supported Reformed orthodoxy, while maintaining that religious freedom was crucial to Dutch identity. He became a professor of Dutch history and philosophy at Middelburg’s Athenaeum Illustre in 1779 before his final appointment as professor of theology and church history at Leiden University. He ended his career as Rector Magnificus of the university, retiring in 1815.404 Another owner mentioned in the KB catalog entry, and two others whom Turner mentions, were distinguished bibliophiles and collectors. Henry George Bohn (1796–1884), the son of a German bookbinder who settled in London, began his career in 1831 as an auctioneer. Bohn sold the Van Schurman collection between 1831 and 1833 to A.G. Anderson (otherwise unknown); the collection then went to Richard Heber (1774–1833), a lawyer and a member of Parliament for Oxford University, who died soon after its purchase.405 After receiving a large 402. The KB descriptive notice affixed to the collection indicates that the collection was “purchased then by Mr. H. G. Bohn and sold to A. G. Anderson” (the latter otherwise unknown). 403. Horace, Satires, Epistles, and Ars Poetica, trans. H. R. Fairclough (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1966), Epistles, 2.2, ll.172–74: “Just as though anything were one’s own, which in a moment of fleeting time, now by prayer, now by purchase, now by force, now—at the last—by death, changes owners and passes under the power of another.” 404. On Te Water, see Jacobus Daniel (Jack) de Mooij, Jona Willem te Water (1740–1822): Historicus en theoloog tussen traditie en Verlichting [Jona Willem te Water, 1740–1822: Historian and Theologian between Tradition and Enlightenment] (Leiden: Eigen Beheer, 2008). 405. Arthur Sherbo, “Heber, Richard,” in the ODNB.

114 Introduction inheritance from his father and estates in Yorkshire and Shropshire, Heber traveled extensively on the Continent, including the Netherlands, to purchase books and manuscripts. His library, estimated at between 145,000 and 150,000 volumes, was sold at his death in 1833. His books and manuscripts in depot in France and Holland numbered some 33,000 volumes, and more than 100,000 volumes were sold at auction. On Heber’s death, the collection was bought by the Rev. Edmund Henry Barker (1788–1839), a classical scholar and lexicographer who began his career as a vicar at Hatton, in Warwickshire, before later focusing on the classics. Barker co-edited a Greek-English lexicon and edited many Greek authors. He eventually fell into debt, was imprisoned in London in 1837, and died soon thereafter; thus he, too, did not own Van Schurman’s collection for very long.The collection ended up in the library of Dawson Turner (1775–1858), a passionate collector of autograph letters. In 1820, he purchased the manuscript collection of Cox Macro, consisting of the letters of kings and queens from the fifteenth century on. His autograph collection eventually numbered over 40,000 items. His 1848 Guide to the Historian indicates that “an autograph appears at the present time a no less indispensable accompaniment to biography than a portrait; and both for the same cause, as clues to the deciphering of character.”406 Van Schurman’s manuscript collection, along with Turner’s entire library of nearly 8,000 volumes, including one hundred and fifty volumes of manuscripts and letters, was auctioned by Sotheby in London in 1853. G.D.J. Schotel, who published his biography of Van Schurman in 1853, the same year as the sale of Turner’s library, indicates that the letters were owned by Turner and “shortly after were auctioned off or will be.”407 The collection returned to the Netherlands and was presumably owned by J.N. Scheltema, on whom the following notation was added to the first page of the KB Collection: Ex collectione J.N. Scheltema anno 1896 Amsterdam de vendita a bibliopola R.W.P. de Vries (“From the Collection of J.N. Scheltema, when it was offered for sale in 1896 in Amsterdam by the bookseller R.W.P. de Vries”). De Vries (1841–1919), a Dutch publisher, antiquarian, auctioneer, and librarian, owned his own firm in Amsterdam and likely purchased the collection for the Koninklijke Bibliotheek.

A Curious Addition to the Manuscript (no. 58, 1:71) The elegies you have given me to read have as their author Vincent Fabricius; one can read them in an earlier edition of his poems, Amsterdam, 1638 p. 44 and p. 25. But in the first edition (if one can use this word), which was produced in Leiden in 1633, they are missing. 406. Nigel Goodman, “Introduction,” in Dawson Turner: A Norfolk Antiquary and his Remarkable Family, ed. Nigel Goodman (Chichester, UK: Phillimore, 2007), 12. 407. Schotel, 2:26.

Introduction 115 The elegies mentioned, To Johannes Fredericus Gronovius. Why Virgins are preferred to Widows, and To Jan Meier. On seeing the Danish Wedding. Why Lovers resemble kings, were published in the second edition of Vincent Fabricius’s Poemata. Editio Secunda (Amsterdam: Johannes Janssonius, 1638). Fabricius (1612–1667), a poet from Hamburg, studied law and letters at Leiden in the early 1630s, where he was a student of Daniel Heinsius. Together with his Danish friend, Zacharias Lund (1608–1667), he published poems alternating with Lund’s in the second edition of his Poemata. These poems reference the tradition of the paradoxical encomium (or mock praise) that evince rhetorical virtuosity, erudition, and wit. Additionally, they form part of a section of Ovidian-inspired bawdy writings, each dedicated to a different individual, such as the German philologist Gronovius, Cornelis de Groot (son of Hugo Grotius), or Daniel Heinsius. But even more surprising is that handwritten copies of Fabricius’s two elegies were included in Van Schurman’s collection and thought to have been copied by her.408 The two poems were then taken from the collection and transferred to Amsterdam University Library some time after 1853, when the collection was auctioned off by Dawson Turner’s estate and sold to a Dutch collector. According to Pieta van Beek, neither the handwriting nor the content and style of the copied poems comes even close to those of Van Schurman.409 It appears that whoever included the two poems in her collection was possibly playing a joke.

Note on the Text, Translation, and Cover Portrait This translation of the autograph letters and poems to and from Anna Maria van Schurman and members of her circle is based on the manuscript A Collection of Seventy-four letters & four Latin Poems &c. in the handwriting of the very talented & very celebrated Anna Maria de Schurman. The letters almost altogether addressed to Andrew Rivet D.D. Tutor of the Young Prince of Orange and Author of Critici Sacri &c. &c., 1632–1669 (The Hague, National Library, KB ms. 133 B 8). The translation of Constantijn Huygens’s letters to Van Schurman is based on Huygens’s manuscript letters at the Koninklijke Bibliotheek in The Hague (Ms. KA), together with Huygens, De Briefwisseling van Constantijn Huygens (1608–1687), edited by Jacob A. Worp, in 6 volumes (’s-Gravenhage: Nijhoff, 1911–17). The translation of Huygens’s poems to Van Schurman is based on De Gedichten van Constantijn Huygens, naar zijn handschrift uitgegeven, edited by Jacob A. Worp, in 9 volumes (Groningen: Wolters, 1892–99). We have also translated additional letters and poems to and from Van Schurman and members of her circle whenever these are mentioned in the epistolary exchanges between Van 408. Schotel, 2:26, states that she had copied them. 409. Pieta van Beek, “ ‘Liever een maagd dan een weduwe’: Twee Latijnse erotische gedichten op naam van Anna Maria van Schurman (1607–1678),” Tydskrif vir Geesteswetenskappe 49 (2009): 333–49.

116 Introduction Schurman and Rivet, and Van Schurman and Huygens. These additional texts enable us to better grasp and appreciate the immediate epistolary context in which her letters and poems were written. Translating Van Schurman’s letters and poems has been a remarkable experience. Scholars and students of classical texts rarely read anything written in an author’s own hand. When scholars prepare and publish critical editions of classical authors such as Cicero, Plato, or Virgil, they rely on a manuscript tradition that stretches back through the centuries across borders into archives and shelves of monasteries and libraries. In some cases, most notably Homer, whose Iliad and Odyssey represent fixed versions of poems that were handed down through oral tradition, we see only snapshots of works that were constantly in motion. Although we can, with a fair degree of certainty, determine what the original text said, the handwritten manuscripts of the authors themselves have long been lost, and questions about the authenticity of particular words, phrases, and, in some cases, large chunks of text, still remain. We have prepared our translations directly from letters and poems written in the author’s own hand or in the hand of a scribe; for Huygens, we have letters written in his own hand and in the (neater) hand of his scribe. Additionally, a fair number of the letters and poems were collected in Van Schurman’s lifetime and published in her Opuscula. In cases where we have both original and published versions, we have been able to compare what she wrote originally with edited versions of the same work, giving us a window into the editing process. We note differences wherever they occur and provide some suggestions about why they might have been edited. Although we have been fortunate to study the very pen strokes of Van Schurman and Huygens, many of these letters and poems have never been translated into English. This has been a daunting task. Very few modern scholars work with Latin as authentically and naturally today as Van Schurman and her correspondents did in the seventeenth century. Moreover, given the nature of personal correspondence, context and meaning often must be inferred. This is especially true with the letters of Rivet, whose entire correspondence with Van Schurman, save two letters, is lost. In most cases, we are hearing only Van Schurman’s side of the conversation. But the difficulty with translation is even more elemental. As Mary Beard, one of the anglophone world’s most prominent classical scholars, put it in a blog post: People often imagine that if you “know Latin” you can read more or less any bit of the language that is put in front of you (much like what you can do if you “know French”). It isn’t really like that at all . . . when you are reading anything complicated for the first time . . . The

Introduction 117 truth is that for most of the canonical greats, there are always translations if you get stuck.410 Even the best readers of Latin and Greek come across lines and phrases where the only response is “I wonder what that means.” Most of the time, they can consult what others have thought that same passage means because many other translations and commentaries for the work exist. For a few letters, we have stood on the shoulders of Joyce Irwin, Pieta van Beek, and Desmond Clarke—exceptional readers and scholars of Van Schurman—but, for the most part, our translations and notes are the first in English. We are confident that our translations are accurate, although there are stray lines where the meaning is not fully clear. We have indicated these passages in the footnotes, and we invite our readers to comment and correct as they see fit. We hope this translation invites a new generation of scholars to study this remarkable woman. In aiming for accuracy, clarity, and readability, we have at times turned ad verbum into ad sensum translations. The point is to attain Paul Ricoeur’s idea of “linguistic hospitality,” whereby “the pleasure of dwelling in the other’s language is balanced by the pleasure of receiving the foreign word in one’s own welcoming home.”411 Umberto Eco expressed the same notion when he stated that “a translation is always a shift, not between two languages, but between two cultures—or two encyclopedias.”412 The question that guides a translator, according to Eco, is whether a translation should lean toward a semantically oriented, almost wordfor-word replication, or whether it should aim at being a communicative piece with the reader’s and translator’s interests at the forefront. We have tried to strike a balance between the two poles, preserving as much as possible the original meaning, and often the very words, while conveying them into contemporary English. We have retained the capital letters for proper nouns and nouns capitalized in the original; these were considered an expression of respect and emphasis. For greater readability, we have slightly altered the punctuation by adding commas, quotation marks, and paragraph indentations wherever appropriate. We have also frequently turned the passive into the active voice. We have kept the French Monsieur, Madame, and Mademoiselle as forms of address for the French letters. Certain expressions need further clarification, such as Latin and French turns of phrase indicative of the legacy of Renaissance humanism. For example, 410. Mary Beard, “What Does the Latin Actually Say?” on her blog, A Don’s Life, 16 August 2016: , accessed November 2019. 411. Paul Ricoeur, “Translation as Challenge and Source of Happiness,” in On Translation, trans. Eileen Brennan (London and New York: Routledge, 2006), 10. 412. Umberto Eco, Experiences in Translation, trans. Alastair McEwen (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2001), 22.

118 Introduction “scientia,” “lettres,” “sciences,” and “bonnes lettres” are interchangeably used. These terms designate knowledge of all kinds, whether pertaining to literature or fields of scientific knowledge. In the Latin texts of the poems, we have standardized the spelling: the consonantal u and i are shown as v and j. Hugyens’s poems are especially challenging to the translator. They are densely conceptual and obscure at times, privileging word play, puns, and ambiguity. E.K. Grootes and M.A. Schenkeveld-Van der Dussen indicate that “the contrived and demanding nature of Huygens’s poetry appealed to readers from his own social circles, who appreciated his word games and were willing to take time to decipher them.”413 Another striking feature of the Van Schurman–Huygens exchange is their common use of code-switching, or switching from one language to another, mostly Latin to Greek. Christopher Joby notes that Huygens used this feature to imitate classical authors, Cicero especially. He does this notably “in titles and at the end of poems; for euphemism; in proverbs and fixed expressions; in quotations; for the purpose of evocation; for critical and medical terms; for neologisms and names; and for the mot juste.”414 Van Schurman also code-switched, thereby indicating her high degree of linguistic proficiency and dexterity. By inserting Greek into their Latin, both Van Schurman and Huygens indicated that they were members of an elite circle of writers and readers. We indicate in italics each time either uses code-switching. We have selected for our cover a self-portrait of Anna Maria van Schurman that until recently belonged to the private collection of the family of Johan Philip van der Kellen (1831–1906), a nineteenth-century Dutch engraver, art historian, and from 1876 to 1896 director of the Rijksprentenkabinet (the Print Room at the Rijksmuseum in Amsterdam).415 Van Schurman’s miniature self-portrait, whose dimensions are 8,3 x 6,7 cm, was included in 1910 in an exhibit at Rotterdam.416 Katlijne van der Stighelen notes that the background of the portrait shows recognizable brush strokes indicating the use of oil paint.417 Inscribed (not in Van Schurman’s hand) are the words: Anna Maria van Schurman hanc suam effigiem ipsa pinxit ætatis suæ anno 44 1652 (“Anna Maria van Schurman painted this self-portrait at age 44  [in] 1652”). This dating is problematic according to Van der Stighelen, since Van Schurman appears to be younger than the ascribed date; moreover, the portrait closely resembles in accoutrements, hairstyle, and facial 413. Grootes and Schenkeveld-Van der Dussen, “The Dutch Revolt,” 277. 414. Joby, Multilingualism, 222. 415. Pieta van Beek, “Zelfportret van Anna Maria van Schurman nu in Rijksmuseum,” Handreiking, Citypastoraat Domkerk Utrecht 48, no. 5 (2018), 8. Anne Larsen thanks Pieta van Beek for a copy of the issue. 416. C. van Ommeren, ed., Catalogus der tentoonstelling van portretminiaturen, 27 maart–16 mei 1910 (’s-Gravenhage: Nijhoff, 1910), 49, no. 232. 417. Stighelen, “Hoe hooge,” 71.

Introduction 119 features her pastel self-portrait of around 1640, now at the Museum Martena, Franeker. Van der Stighelen therefore dates the self-portrait to ca. 1640. With her finely arched brows and ruby red lips, light brown eyes, curls and coif with ribbon and pearls matched with a pearl necklace, her white conical collar and delicate blue butterfly bow, Van Schurman gazes out sympathetically at the viewer. It is no wonder that Van der Stighelen admiringly states: “one can speak [here] of a small masterpiece.”418

The Plan of the Book  This book is divided into two parts. Part 1 features Anna Maria van Schurman’s letters and poems to and from André Rivet and other members of her circle, while Part 2 features her letters and poems to and from Constantijn Huygens. Appendix A contains chronologies and graphs of the epistolary exchanges between Van Schurman, Rivet, and other members of her circle over a period of twenty-one years (1631–1652), and between Van Schurman and Huygens over thirty-six years (1633–1669). The chronologies include the dates and the summary content of each letter and poem. The graphs indicate the frequency of the exchanges in any given year. The next three appendices consist of first-time English translations of Latin and French documents. Appendix B features additional poems by Huygens and Caspar Barlaeus to and about Van Schurman from 1634 to 1650; Appendix C, additional letters from, to, and about Van Schurman by various members of her circle from 1636 to 1782; and Appendix D, a first-time translation of the biography of Van Schurman by her Labadist colleague Pierre Yvon (1646–1707). Joyce Irwin translated a brief excerpt of the biography in her Womanhood in Radical Protestantism, 1525–1675 (New York and Toronto: The Edwin Mellen Press, 1979), 145–56. The last appendix, Appendix E, contains two examples of Van Schurman’s letters in Latin (no. 1, 1:1; see Figure 3) and in French (no. 62, 1:68). Our final remarks concern the dates of letters and the names of scholars. Throughout the period of this book, the Dutch Republic used two calendars: whereas the provinces of Holland and Zeeland adopted on 1 January 1583 the Gregorian calendar, the provinces of Utrecht, Gelderland, Overijssel, Friesland, and Groningen continued to use the “Old Style” or Julian calendar until 1700– 1701. Dates in Holland, Zeeland, and England therefore differ from the rest of Europe by ten days, so that 1 January in the Julian calendar would be 11 January in the Gregorian calendar. Also, the “new year” in the Julian calendar was not recognized until 21 March, the date of the spring equinox. In general, we give the dates pertinent to the location.

418. Stighelen, “Hoe hooge,” 72.

120 Introduction Scholars of this era usually Latinized their names. When introducing them we state both their actual name and the Latinized version. In Dutch names, the prefixes van, van der, and de are not capitalized. However, when citing the last name only, the prefix is capitalized, and we have maintained the capitalization. In the index, the prefix does not count in the alphabetical order (e.g., Van Schurman is listed under Schurman).

A Collection of Seventy-Four Letters & Four Latin Poems &c. In the Handwriting of The very Talented & very Celebrated

Anna Maria de Schurman, the letters almost altogether addressed to

Andrew Rivet D.D. Tutor of the Young Prince of Orange and Author of “Critici Sacri” &c. &c. 1632–1669

Title page, Ms. 133 B 8, A Collection of Seventy-four Letters, the source of many of the letters included in this volume.

PART 1 Letters and Poems to and from Her Mentor, André Rivet, and Other Members of Her Circle, 1631–1652 1. Anna Maria van Schurman to André Rivet, 20 July 1631 (no. 1)1 This is Anna Maria van Schurman’s first extant letter to André Rivet. Based on this letter, it appears that Rivet initiated the correspondence.

[To the Reverend, Noble, of exceptional Piety and Erudition, the illustrious gentleman, Andreas Rivetus, Very Eminent Professor in Sacred Theology at the Batavian Academy. At Leiden.]2 Anna Maria van Schurman sends greetings to the Most Illustrious Gentleman, André Rivet.3 Your incredible humanitas4—on its own merits—would have set my mind racing,5 Reverend Sir, and stunned me to silence, had your sweet genius not enticed me to reply. For your very humanitas supports my efforts and protects me so kindly that even my failings could not undo the gifts your mind bequeaths to me.6 I would now feel overjoyed that a gentleman such as yourself has placed me on a peak of fame and glory, but I am trying—in vain—to hide beneath the cover of obscurity, especially now that my intellectual pursuits have come to light.7 Still, 1. Unless otherwise indicated, the letters and poems in Part 1 to and from Van Schurman’s mentor and members of her circle are in Latin. The number in parentheses indicates the number of the letter and / or poem in A Collection of Seventy-Four Letters & Four Latin Poems &c. at the National Library (Koninklijke Bibliotheek), The Hague, ms. 133 B 8. For letter no. 1, see Figure 3. 2. Address on the back of the letter. 3. Since Van Schurman’s salutation is repeated verbatim in each of her letters to Rivet, we leave it out of subsequent letters unless there is a change in address. 4. Humanitas is used here in the Ciceronian sense of the love of bonae litterae. According to Paul Dibon, the term connotes “respect, mutual understanding, and modesty,” and can be translated as “good will.” It is a key term used in epistolary exchanges between savants. See “Communication in the Respublica litteraria of the 17th Century,” Respublica literaria: Studies in the Classical Tradition 1 (1978): 48. 5. Van Schurman refers to mentis confusionem, “a mixing up of my mind.” With this phrase, she indicates that she feels overwhelmed by Rivet’s kindness toward her. 6. Van Schurman’s Latin is tortured in the opening sentences of this letter, as elsewhere in the letters when she plays the role of the modest woman. Her dance is a delicate one: she must maintain the modesty required by her sex, especially in the presence of such an eminent thinker as Rivet, while at the same time graciously accepting his praise and his offer to mentor her work. 7. From the very start, Van Schurman is concerned about the fame that Rivet is bringing her through his extraordinary standing in the Dutch Republic and the international Republic of Letters. There are

123

124 ANNA MARIA VAN SCHURMAN AND MEMBERS OF HER CIRCLE I accept the honors you so richly bestow on me; for I do not want them to lie fallow on some sterile foundation, just like so many of the incentives of which we are destitute, and this for a long time, in this age of ours. I have seen what the future holds,8 and I am undaunted by the signs of the times; indeed, I am advancing even more courageously by following your virtues and wisdom. Your perpetual kindnesses toward me have thoroughly convinced me to move forward. Who would not revel in words like yours, as officious as they are friendly? Why should I remember your words? In fact, shouldn’t I remember even more how warmly your affection for me radiates in your letter? For several years now,9 sacred Theology has been stirring up my love and reverence for you, because your rare virtues have achieved a worthy distinction, and they shine more brightly and with greater splendor than the stars and the Sun in the sky as they shine along their course. I shall therefore venerate the One [Theology] that unites and guards us in our Friendship, to whose sanctity I dedicate and consecrate whatever I may have that is worthy of your trust.10 Farewell, most outstanding of men, and if it is not too much trouble, I hope very much that my deepest regards will be conveyed to your dear Wife.11 Utrecht, 20 July 1631. My admiration of your virtues grows daily, Anna Maria van Schurman 2. Van Schurman to Rivet, 2 January 1632 (no. 3)12 Not having received a reply from Rivet in six months, Van Schurman sends a second letter. She reiterates her gratitude for his first letter, as well as her feminine modesty. echoes here, as well, of Mark 4:1–25 and Luke 8:4–18. These Gospel texts combine the Parable of the Sower (which tells of the seed that falls on rocky ground, then withers and dies) and the Lesson of the Lamp (“No one lights a lamp and covers it with a jar or puts it under a bed. Instead, he sets it on a lampstand, so that those who enter can see the light”). 8. Van Schurman expresses her complete trust in Rivet as the guide to her future. 9. According to Pierre Yvon, 1263, col. 1 (see Appendix D), Van Schurman first heard Rivet preach in 1621 when she was fourteen years old; she was so moved, he writes, that “she began henceforth to feel that respectful love that she held for him her entire life.” 10. Van Schurman frames her friendship with Rivet as a “sacred” bond, thereby following the example of early church fathers and their female protégées. 11. After the death of his first wife, Rivet married Marie du Moulin, the half-sister of the famous French Calvinist theologian, Pierre du Moulin (Molinaeus, 1568–1658); she was forty-seven years old and he, forty-nine, at the time of their wedding on 5 August 1621. 12. This letter became widely known, as it was included in Van Schurman’s Dissertatio, 37–39, and Opuscula (1652), 26–28. A copy is located at Utrecht University Library, Special Collections, Hs. 983 (7 E7), fols. 79r–80v. All references to the Opuscula come from the 1652 edition.

Part 1: Letters and Poems 125 She assures Rivet that she does not seek fame. She describes her work and asks for his assistance. She mentions as well a work on women’s leisure that she has begun writing in French.

[To Monsr. André Rivet. By a friend. At Leiden] Anna Maria van Schurman sends hearty greetings to the most honorable gentleman, ANDREAS RIVETUS.13 Whenever I reflect, Reverend Sir, on how much your humanitas has tied me to you, and the great honor you conferred upon me [when you spoke of me] openly in front of others, I admit nothing more gratifying or more profitable has ever happened to me. I have reaped such an abundant harvest from so slight a cultivation. And yet is there anyone who, in recognizing and cherishing your virtues, would stop wondering what in the world possessed you to confer those goods upon me? For since the stars in these turbulent times wander for the most part and are prone to fall,14 I shall turn to this one and only sure support:15 our friendship. I am not ignorant, however, about this age. I am fully aware that there could be some mean-spirited person ready to claim that by engaging in these studies, I am seduced by some vain hope of displaying my talent.16 But, as God is my witness, I have strived to live the sort of life that is very far removed from ambition of this sort. Even though I pay little attention to those who make claims like this, because I know for myself that my intentions are otherwise, I am still overjoyed that you have paid no attention to such opinions. Of course, you have been candid about your feelings for me and you have been so understanding in all respects that you will never actually disappoint the great hope that I have placed in you alone. Therefore, for this reason, as my confidence no doubt increases, I do not think it is right for me to conceal any longer from you any of my studies, or, should I say, my trifles. It has now been a year or thereabout since I made some attempt to compose a little book in French (given that the charm and elegance of that language is naturally very much esteemed by young women). In it I will try to persuade these same young women of the best way to enjoy our leisure (although I’ll persuade them by appealing to their emotions more than by the power of my

13. In Dissertatio and Opuscula, “Doctor of Sacred Theology” is added. 14. A reference to the Messianic age in Matthew 24:29 and Mark 13:25: “The stars will fall from the sky.” In the Vulgate, Matthew 24:29 states: et stellae cadent de caelo. 15. Firmamentum. In Biblical cosmology, the firmament is the vault or dome above the atmosphere of the earth. 16. In this and the previous letter, Van Schurman is deeply worried that Rivet will think she desires fame, and that she seeks a relationship with him to enhance her name.

126 ANNA MARIA VAN SCHURMAN AND MEMBERS OF HER CIRCLE arguments).17 But, aside from the outline, I have not developed any of its parts, and, in certain places, the ideas and thoughts should be considered nothing more than shadowy darkness. I thought that it was not yet worthy of your consideration because it is not yet capable of receiving the great light you would shine on it. Even now I am not sure what guardian spirit could hasten it to you in secret—you who will become its guide and protector. And if God favors my work, at some point, it is going to overcome all these obstacles. In the meantime, I will beseech God with intimate prayers that He keep you and yours safe for many years to come as an example for all and as an ornament of his Church. Farewell, most outstanding of Men, and consider me by no means the least among those who love and cherish you. Utrecht, 12 days before the Ides of January 1632. I am eager to please you, just as I would all good people, Anna Maria van Schurman

3. André Rivet to Van Schurman, 1 March 163218 Rivet finally replies to Van Schurman, eight months after Van Schurman’s first letter. He explains the reasons he has praised her publicly and recognizes that she has no ambition to enhance her fame. He expresses his desire to meet her and conveys that he has shared her French verses with Princess Elisabeth of Bohemia. He concludes by informing her that he has been appointed governor of the young Prince William of Orange.

To the most Excellent and most Erudite Maiden, Anna Maria van Schurman. Most Noble Maiden, if I have preached your praises publicly in front of many people, I have done as I ought. For the mark of a frank and transparent heart is not to keep to itself and admire alone the honorable qualities of the person whose gifts are being praised, should others begin to learn about them. And, possibly, my public praises will be useful to others, so that they can be inspired to imitate honorably that person’s example; and, also, perhaps they would in gratitude praise God because He furnished your sex with such a splendor of letters and fine arts. That example serves as further proof for the living, and even for posterity, that it is not due to a lack of intellect or of judgment that most women do not care for such studies; it is because they are unwilling to apply their mind, since they are not allowed to do so because they have to tend to humbler occupations. Moreover, it is not expedient for many women to choose this kind of life; let it suffice if some, 17. This “little book” in French likely contained ideas Van Schurman later developed in her Latin treatise and letters to Rivet on women’s higher education. On this letter, and Van Schurman’s use of language from Catullus’s dedicatory poem, see the Introduction. 18. Dissertatio, 40–42; Opuscula, 55–58.

Part 1: Letters and Poems 127 who are called to it by a special inspiration, sometimes stand out. This is especially important in our own time because so many young men profess studies more often than they seriously cultivate them, and they are content to remain on the surface rather than get to the heart of the matter;19 certainly, it is good for them to stand corrected and be filled with shame by someone like you.20 These reasons have motivated me to reveal to the public what your modesty nearly keeps hidden and, to the best of my ability, as occasion is allowed, I intend to continue doing this. Moreover—on this matter I am thinking about myself—I boast not undeservedly that a young girl of such talent and such piety has initiated a friendship with me and has challenged21 me so kindly to this exchange. I feel so moved by this kindness that I pursue with my paternal affection a young girl whose face I have not yet seen.22 O, how I wish I could see her some day! There will be an occasion, if God wills, for me to open my heart to her in person, and to contemplate the face that such a mind adorns so elegantly. And let me add that your talent is so outstanding and so modest in its self-estimation that I have not yet heard of anyone who would want to rob you of this virtue. As for me, I think that you have sinned by underestimating rather than overestimating yourself, and I even think that that lack makes for perfection. I have delivered your French verses to the Princess Elisabeth,23 who read and praised them right in front of me and promised that she would thank you for them 19. Solo nomine contenti, rem ipsam contemnunt (they are content with the name alone, scorning the thing itself). Rivet critiques young male students’ superficial approach to learning. 20. An Erasmian trope of the learned woman shaming men for not devoting themselves seriously enough to the studia humanitatis. Humanists’ lower expectations for female education were founded on the notion that learned women would not alter the power relations between the sexes; a daughter’s learning could not surpass or challenge that of her brothers. Aysha Pollnitz, in Princely Education in Early Modern Britain (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2015), 205, notes that even Christine de Pizan privileged her son’s education over that of her daughter, who remained at home while her brother continued his studies in noble households. Pietro Bembo (1470–1547), likewise, upheld his son’s advanced learning, scolding him for letting himself be outshone by his daughter Helena. The Puritan minister Thomas Cawton (1605–1659) urged his son, whom he had committed to the care of Voetius, to study hard: “I hope the excellency of Anna Maria Schurman will provoke you young Schollar[s] with a gallant indignation, not only to do as well as she hath done, but also to go beyond her.” See Geoffrey F. Nuttall, “English Dissenters in the Netherlands, 1640–1689,” NAVK 59 (1978): 42. On this trope, see Ross, Birth of Feminism, 56–59, 217. 21. Provocarit (provoked or challenged). Rivet initiated the correspondence, but Van Schurman wrote two letters seeking his friendship. 22. It would take another two years before Van Schurman addressed Rivet as her “Father in Christ” (30 May 1634, no. 6, 1:9), and concluded her letter as one who loved him “like a daughter” (4 August 1634, no. 7, 1:10). 23. Elisabeth of Bohemia (1618–1680), daughter of Elizabeth Stuart and Frederick V of Bohemia, who resided at the court of The Hague.

128 ANNA MARIA VAN SCHURMAN AND MEMBERS OF HER CIRCLE in a letter.24 However, the little work25 that you are considering in that same language, please don’t keep me waiting for it a second longer; I am very eager to read it. And if there is anything in my mother tongue, which you learned as a foreign language, for which you need my help, remember my honesty and my frankness.26 But I do not think there will be any need for my suggestions, since I have seen examples of your style,27 and I have been completely delighted with them. I have no doubt that you have learned that I am moving in two months to The Hague where my new occupation calls me, and that I must become a young boy once again, but with a big boy.28 If I can return him to the Fatherland and to the Church as a man, I will judge that my effort has not been badly placed. Whether I live there or elsewhere, you will always have, so long as I live, my admiration for your virtues, and especially your piety and modesty. Leiden. The kalends of March 1632. ANDRÉ RIVET

4. Van Schurman to Rivet, 25 March 1632 (no. 2) Less than a month has passed since Van Schurman has received Rivet’s letter. She compliments him on becoming governor of the future William II and mentions again her book on female leisure.

[To the Reverend, Noble, of exceptional Piety and Erudition, the Illustrious Gentleman Andreas Rivetus, Very worthy Governor to His Highness the Young Prince]

24. These may be the verses Van Schurman wrote on the death of her father. See her poem in Anna Margaretha H. Douma, “Anna Maria van Schurman en de Studie der Vrouw” (PhD diss., University of Amsterdam, 1924), 80–81. 25. Opusculum. Rivet declares that Van Schurman’s writing is not a mere “trifle,” as she states in her letter on 2 January 1632 (no. 3, 1:2). 26. Rivet uses the Greek term parrhēsia. Throughout this collection, writers will switch into Greek when Latin doesn’t quite have the right word. The term parrhēsia refers to the ability to speak freely. In friendships, particularly those in which a literary work is to be exchanged, both participants must feel that they do not have to repress their opinions, even when those opinions might be critical. Here Rivet offers to help Van Schurman with French, his native language, if she needs it. He reminds her that he enjoys parrhēsia with her. For a fuller discussion of the history and meaning of parrhēsia in Greek, see David Konstan, “The Two Faces of Parrhêsia: Free Speech and Self-Expression in Ancient Greece,” Antichthon 46 (2012): 1–13. 27. This indicates that Van Schurman wrote letters in French that circulated. 28. After twelve years of teaching theology at Leiden, Rivet’s next assignment took him in 1632 to the court at The Hague, where he became governor to the young William of Orange, then five years old.

Part 1: Letters and Poems 129 I am overjoyed, Reverend Sir, that you were appointed Governor to the young Prince. I offer my heartfelt congratulations not just to you, but even more so to our country, which will reap the fruits of your refinement most of all. I heard a rumor from my Brother29 that this would happen, but now I am even happier since you have announced it yourself. For, indeed, to me your letter is sweeter than honey and more precious than Eastern spice30 because not only does it fill me with delight and wonder, it even—and this is the most rewarding part—stirs and lifts me up. Let me clarify: I think I tend to revisit whatever praise you have publicly given me in the spirit of our friendship, not because I like to be praised so freely, but rather because I like the fact that your kindness toward me has been noticed as important. I also like being borne along by the light breeze of your flattering love; for I am so often listless.31 But you are in the grip of such a powerful desire to see me and my refinement that you are on the verge of exclaiming before everyone: Oh, a goddess for sure, Apollo’s sister or some creature who shares the blood of Nymphs.32 I am afraid I could never fulfill all the promise you see in me.33 Since my capabilities are so slight, I cannot help but think humbly about myself and my talents. And, in fact, among my prayers, I have made this one request, and it is by no means my final one: to delight in your encouragement and that of your most beloved wife. And I am not holding back in asking for this.34 Although I am, in fact, far less talented than what you project me to be in your mind —discerning as it

29. Johan Godschalk Van Schurman. For this letter, see the Introduction. 30. Van Schurman writes condimento (“condiment” or “relish”). She refers to the Dutch trade in spices from the Near-Islands of the East Indies (modern-day Indonesia). 31. Van Schurman is feeling directionless, and so is overjoyed that Rivet has recognized her talent, promising thereby to open the way to membership in the international Republic of Letters—which he has already begun to do by introducing her work to the scholarly princess Elisabeth of Bohemia. Her Latin is tricky to translate here since, again, she is trying to be careful not to revel too much in the praise Rivet has given her, even as she hopes to reassure him that she feels renewed and inspired by it. 32. Virgil, Aeneid, 1.328–39. 33. Vereor ne ad nihil minus respondeam quam ad id quod tibi de me spondes, which translates literally to “I am afraid that I will respond to nothing less than to what you promise to yourself about me.” She expresses a fear that she will not fulfill (re-spondeam) the promises (spondes) that he made to himself about her. 34. Van Schurman is asking to be included into Rivet’s family network, bringing her closer to becoming his fille d’alliance (covenant daughter). On the significance of the famille d’alliance for early modern women intellectuals, see Carol Pal, “Forming familles d’alliance: Intellectual Kinship in the Republic of Letters,” in Julie D. Campbell and Anne R. Larsen, eds., Early Modern Women and Transnational Communities of Letters (Farnham, UK, and Burlington, VT: Ashgate, 2009), 251–80.

130 ANNA MARIA VAN SCHURMAN AND MEMBERS OF HER CIRCLE is—I recognize that there is nothing so unattractive that a new lover35 will not overlook. As for my little book,36 it has recently taken some shape, and it won’t be so unsightly that it couldn’t benefit from the help you offered so generously. Farewell, best of men, and consider the burden of loving and helping me as imposed on you by God. I am a lover37 and tireless worshipper of your virtue, Anna Maria van Schurman Utrecht, Ides of April 1632.

5. Van Schurman to Rivet, 10 February 1633 (no. 5) Van Schurman thanks Rivet for his gift of one of his newly published books.

[To the Reverend and Very Noble and remarkable gentleman, distinguished in outstanding Erudition and of rare Piety, Andreas Rivetus, very worthy Governor. At The Hague] It felt as though your letter came down from heaven, Reverend Sir, and I was so grateful to taste again your unspoiled affection after such a long time. I have never had any reason to doubt its constancy.38 Thus, as I see it, given that your constancy is so tried and true, you didn’t have to offer so many excuses, or even just a single excuse.39 And, what is more, how superficial would my friendship seem if it were to rely on so shaky a foundation? I hope that those other women you mention are well, since for the most part either they languish when favorable circumstances turn against them, or they wither when some false suspicion grips them.40 35. Serio amanti. The idea here is that lovers, especially when they are first falling in love, tend to overlook each other’s faults. Van Schurman suggests that their relationship is still new and still may be in the “honeymoon” phase. This sentiment occurs throughout the Roman elegiac tradition, although it is likely drawn from the philosophical tradition. See Ruth Rothaus Caston, The Elegiac Passion: Jealousy in Roman Love Elegy (Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press, 2012), 22–47. Van Schurman uses an erotic term for Rivet that she has “defanged” by alluding a few lines earlier to a familial rather than an eroticized Venus. 36. A reference to the “little book” in French that Van Schurman was attempting to write, which she mentions in her previous letter of 2 January 1632 (no. 3, 1:2). 37. Amans. 38. Van Schurman waited for some time for Rivet’s reply to her previous letter of 25 March 1632 (no. 2); she intimates that she resisted doubting his “constancy.” 39. Rivet apologized for his long delay in replying due to a “serious matter” that happened to him. 40. A cryptic sentence, since we do not have Rivet’s reply.

Part 1: Letters and Poems 131 I would have been delighted to write to you had something worthy of your attention occurred to me sooner. Now that matter was very serious, it truly was, for what could have taken a little more time to mature has finally come into broad daylight, and I do not take this lightly at all. And you should have had a partner in this terrible grief of yours and now, indeed, you have one. I had it in mind to play the role of the consoler with all my might, but I was afraid—and this was my excuse [for not writing]—that any consolation I could offer, after so many others had done so, would have been ineffectual and ill-timed. Besides, I thought that your manly strength and especially your Faith were all you needed. I have thoroughly and very eagerly embraced the gift you attached to your letter, a gift, I might add, that is wonderful not only in its size but in its subject matter and worthiness. There’s nothing that could have been offered in return for this gift, and nothing more auspicious because your book reminded me of your genius, which I once admired in public gatherings.41 Therefore you will know that the favor and memory of it will never fade, since it provides me with such a remarkable way to remember you. God will allow me to see you in this work, as if it were a window into your soul.42 Still, should God will it, the occasion to see and address you openly, that I have longed for so much, will occur.43 Farewell, most outstanding Sir, and know that I am always eager in my reverence and my love for you and your virtues, She who though absent treasures you as if you were present in spirit, Utrecht on Rhine, Anna Maria van Schurman 4 days before the Ides of February 1633

41. Van Schurman had heard Rivet preach in 1621, and she may have heard him again in 1623 when her brother enrolled at Leiden University. Rivet sent her one of the four works he published in 1632; these were as follows: Commentarius in Jonam (A Commentary on John); Praelectiones in cap. XX Exodi (Lectures on Chapter 20 of Exodus); Oratio habito in auditorio solemni (An Oration Delivered at a Solemn Convocation); and Exhortations de repentance et recognoissance, faites au sujet du siege de Maestricht (Exhortations on Repentance and Gratitude, Given on the Siege of Maastricht). The last book is listed as no. 133 in the catalog of books owned by Van Schurman, Labadie, and Yvon, and auctioned in Altona in 1675. See Beek and Bürmann, “Ex Libris,” 68. 42. Literally, “It will be divinely allowable for me to gaze upon you in it, just as if I were looking at you in a mirror.” Van Schurman suggests that Rivet put so much of himself into his work that it serves as a mirror. She sees into his soul and sees her own soul in him. 43. Rivet invited Van Schurman for a visit, which she recounts in her letter of 4 August 1634 (no. 7, 1:10).

132 ANNA MARIA VAN SCHURMAN AND MEMBERS OF HER CIRCLE 6. Van Schurman to Rivet, 23 October 1633 (no. 4) Van Schurman sends portraits that she has done of Rivet and his wife, and possibly of Princess Anne de Rohan.

[To the Reverend, Noble, and notable for his Erudition, to a gentleman respected for his exceptional piety, Andreas Rivetus, the very worthy Governor to the young Prince. At The Hague.] Your letter, which I have so greatly cherished as a gift from your bounty, sounds sadder to me than usual because it announces your unexpected departure. I felt sad over how this departure affects your dearest Wife too, and I’m sure that you would find the basis of my protest to be just and fair if I were to look upon it as my own personal loss; but you would not do so if I considered my loss a burning necessity. And, so, if God wills it, I hope to recoup this loss. Here are the Portraits of the two of you,44 which I trust I will touch up later when you get even a little bit of an opportunity to pose for them in person.45 And, here, you also have, to use a homonym, our Princess.46 I believe that I have never experienced anything more inspirational than her great genius. Nor do I think this portrait so perfect that it does not need some flourish—that is, your recommendation, which would lend it more weight. But too long a delay is tiresome, not so much from my own perspective, or out of a desire for a reply from her Highness; I would dare to affirm that every single moment of working on these portraits has been dear to me, so much so that now, indeed, the final hour for rushing off a letter to you has arrived. Farewell, best of Men, and most Reverend in my eyes, and please convey my deep regards from the bottom of my heart to your sweet wife. In haste.47 Utrecht, 23 October 1633. 7. Van Schurman to Rivet, 3 January 1634 (no. 11)48 Van Schurman thanks Rivet for his prayers for her recovery from an illness and for being the “first patron and director of her studies.” 44. We translate “the two of you” because van Schurman uses the plural, vestras effigies. 45. Van Schurman uses the pretext of Rivet sitting for his portrait to get him to visit her, or vice-versa. 46. The term used is homonymo (homonym or namesake), a possible reference to the Huguenot princess, poet, and savante Anne de Rohan (1584–1646) because they share the same first name. More likely, however, Van Schurman is referring to Elisabeth, with whom she felt kinship as a female intellectual. 47. Van Schurman’s handwriting in this letter appears rushed, indicating that she was in a hurry to send it off. 48. Letter no. 10 is an English translation of letter no. 11 by one of the English owners of the collection. This is the only English translation included in the collection.

Part 1: Letters and Poems 133 [To the Reverend, Very Noble Gentleman, Andreas Rivetus, comparable to very few in all erudition, and of a rare Piety, and very distinguished Governor to his Royal Highness, the Prince of Orange. At The Hague] Hearty greetings to you and all yours, Reverend Sir and incomparable Friend! I was recently sick and recovered again, for which, I confess, I am undoubtedly indebted to your prayers. And although this unexpected opportunity does not allow me to say more, you may nevertheless be assured that I am unable to express in words how much I am obliged to you, as you are the first patron and director of my studies, or better yet, my life. Farewell to all your family and I pray to God that you may enjoy a happy new year. Utrecht, 3 January 1634. She who loves and honors you like a Father,49 Anna Maria van Schurman

8. Van Schurman to Rivet, 4 March 1634 (no. 12) Van Schurman thanks Rivet for dedicating a book50 to her but expresses trepidation at being cast into the public limelight.

[To the Reverend, Noble, illustrious gentleman, Andreas Rivetus, of a rare Piety, commended in all erudition, Doctor of Theology and very worthy Governor to His Highness, the Young Prince. At The Hague] Your letter, Reverend Sir, has very much cheered me up, and there is no need to keep on saying how much influence it rightly has over me. But you explained the reason for your silence so judiciously and much more humanely than is fitting for someone as exalted as you, given that you are always so busy. You made me blush51 right away because of your remarkable kindness. And although you have so many friends, you were still willing to dedicate your book to me and establish, publicly,52 such a great monument to the Friendship between us. However, I fear

49. First reference to Rivet as a “Father,” referencing his now formal adoption of her as his covenant daughter. 50. Rivet’s L’Instruction préparatoire à la saincte Cène; avec cinq prédications convenables en la matiere (Preparatory Instruction to Holy Communion; with Five Appropriate Sermons on the Topic, 1634), whose dedicatory epistle to Van Schurman is included in her Amica Dissertatio (1638). 51. The trope of the maidenly blush is found in eulogies of learned women. See, for instance, Angelo Poliziano’s praise of the Venetian scholar Cassandra Fedele (1465–1558) in Fedele, Letters and Orations, ed. and trans. Diana Robin (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2000), 91. 52. Exstare (to make visible).

134 ANNA MARIA VAN SCHURMAN AND MEMBERS OF HER CIRCLE that you have likened me to unskilled Phaethon in his chariot when you lift me up on the wings of celebrity and fame.53 This indeed is a beautiful thing: What I ask for is not mortal.54 But, nonetheless, even if you came to my rescue, there would still be no less danger in dying. In the meantime, however, I can scarcely restrain myself from my desire to see your gift.55 I cannot delay anymore from following you, my leader, wherever you may fly.56 Concerning the Princess’s kindness toward me, it was gratifying to learn from you that Her Highness does not disdain to recall the name of even her lowliest subject.57 And finally I will apply that temperance which you write about to my studies, and, God willing, I hope to be allowed to welcome your teaching for living the good life directly from you. Farewell, most Reverend and kind Father in the Lord. I pray from the bottom of my heart for good health for you and all those dearest to you in your family, and that you will keep this same good health at present. My Mother and Brother58 long to see you very much. Utrecht, 4 March 1634. She who tries to live up to your example, Anna Maria van Schurman

53. In Greek myth, Phaethon, son of Clymene and the solar deity Helios, asked to be allowed to drive his father’s sun chariot—drawn by four fiery horses—for one day. Phaethon could not control the horses, however, and they veered wildly fro their course, threatening to burn the earth. Zeus hurled his thunderbolt at the chariot to stop it, and Phaethon fell to his death into a river. 54. Non est mortale quod opto: Ovid, Metamorphoses, 2.56. Helios warns Phaethon that “your lot is mortal, what you ask for is not.” Van Schurman changes “you” to “I.” 55. Rivet’s book dedicated to her. 56. A reference to Ovid, Metamorphoses, 2.208. Van Schurman shifts from the story of Phaethon, who cannot control his father’s flying chariot, to that of Icarus, who flies too high and ignores his father’s warning to “keep to a middle course.” The legendary craftsman Daedalus makes wings out of feathers fastened together with wax for himself and his son Icarus so that they can escape their imprisonment on Crete by flying away. Daedalus warns Icarus to take the right path by following him: “me duce carpe viam” (“under my leadership, seize the way”), but Icarus flies too close to the sun; the wax of his wings melts, and he falls to his death into the sea. Van Schurman addresses Rivet with the terms te ducem (“following you, my leader”). The sun that burns Icarus represents, for her, the danger posed by fame; to avoid that danger, she wishes to follow Rivet’s good guidance to steer a safe middle course. 57. Rivet mentioned Van Schurman to Princess Elisabeth of Bohemia for the first time in March 1632 (no. 4, 1: 6). Pal, Republic of Women, 72, interprets “studies” in the following paragraph as Elisabeth’s studies. However, in studiis eam does not mean “in her studies,” referring to Elisabeth. Rather, the eam points forward to the quam scribis and agrees with temeriem. The more natural translation of these lines is, “And finally I will apply that moderation which you write about to my studies.” 58. First mention in the letters of Van Schurman’s mother and brother.

Part 1: Letters and Poems 135 9. Van Schurman to Rivet, 30 May 1634 (no. 6) Van Schurman thanks Rivet for sending her the book that he dedicated to her (see the previous letter). She mentions for the first time Marie du Moulin, and the “declining health” of her mother.

[To the Reverend, Noble Gentleman esteemed in Piety and erudition, Mr. Andreas Rivetus, Professor of Sacred Theology, as well as the very worthy Governor to the young Prince. At The Hague] I have seen your gift and cherished very much your kindness toward me, most Illustrious Sir and Reverend Father in Christ,59 not only because you have dedicated this little book to me, but because with this dedication you have divulged and trumpeted my accomplishments to the world (and this is something that is very far from my ambition).60 But I cherish it especially because you are so effusive in the love you show me; even in public you do not hesitate to reveal its scintillating brightness, and you do not hesitate to apply that great and most keen judgment of yours to all other matters as well. Nor do I have any preconceived notion that my name would be of any small use to you, especially since the authority of the Author and the argument itself stand on their own merit.61 Indeed, that authority will have a major influence on me because it will excite and lead me toward that very necessary sense of duty, and toward Piety itself. Therefore, I thank you, and thank you very much again, since you considered me worthy of an honor derived from both your affection for me and your humanitas. I am also aware, however, that posterity is going to praise me as assiduously and (as it were) as profusely as you have, because, as if drawn to my studies, you have not proven yourself unapproachable to someone [like me] who seeks you so earnestly. Yet you yourself know how precious and sacred your Friendship is to me, and that I am not actually seeking it so much for my own benefit as for the friendship itself. Concerning my coming visit—I cannot venture to set a firm date, since there are no small obstacles holding me back at this point, and the visit has been made doubtful of course by the uncertain and declining health of my mother.62 But yet your invitation, so friendly and honorable, greatly entices me, and for it, I confess, I’m indebted to you. My mother and brother hope that their warmest 59. This is the first time that Van Schurman formally addresses Rivet as her “Father in Christ.” His adopting her as his fille d’alliance was deeply important to her, as her own father had died on 15 November 1623 when she had just turned sixteen. 60. Van Schurman invokes once again the modesty trope. 61. Van Schurman is keenly aware of the honor Rivet has bestowed on her in dedicating his book to her, and of how little she can offer him in return. 62. A first reference to the declining health of Van Schurman’s mother, Eva von Harff. She alerts Huygens as well, on 23 July 1636 (no. 64, 2:17), about the “failing health” of her mother. Then, in a letter to Rivet on 26 September 1636 (no. 13, 1:16), she refers to her mother’s imminent death.

136 ANNA MARIA VAN SCHURMAN AND MEMBERS OF HER CIRCLE greetings will be unanimously expressed to you and to your Lady Wife, who is especially dear to me, as well as to your niece Du Moulin.63 Farewell. Utrecht on Rhine, 30 May 1634. She whose name enjoys its own splendor thanks to you, Anna Maria van Schurman. 10. Van Schurman to Rivet, 4 August 1634 (no. 7) Van Schurman thanks Rivet for his family’s warm welcome at The Hague, which marked her inclusion into her new famille d’alliance. However, despite her protestation to the contrary, she was disappointed by the brevity and ill-timed occasion of her visit.

[To Monsieur, Monsieur André Rivet. Under cover.64 At Arnhem65] I lingered a few days after your departure, most Reverend Sir, at the gathering at The Hague where I was kindly and openly welcomed by your family.66 For, indeed, you have enriched me with an even greater favor because you welcomed me with such a generous and kind hospitality. It was not my merit that motivated you, but that genuine affection that you always bestow on me. Besides, I was not offended by your untimely departure. But the flow of our conversation was interrupted many times, and our train of thought was often disrupted. For this reason, there was an untimely exchange of goodbyes, a moment unfriendly to the Muses. Nonetheless, I was certainly eager to discuss a lot more with you, both about other things and about my higher studies. I am confident that you came to me at just the right time. You yourself promised me—or your niece Marie du Moulin promised—your well-established critical eye.67 Farewell. She who loves and cherishes 68 In haste. Utrecht, 4 August 1634. you like a daughter,69 Anna Maria van Schurman 63. A first reference to Rivet’s niece, Marie du Moulin (ca. 1613–1699), who arrived at The Hague in 1632/3 to help her uncle and aunt with the household. She was the daughter from the first marriage of the Calvinist theologian Pierre du Moulin. Her aunt (also named Marie du Moulin) was the half-sister of her father. 64. Enclosed with another letter. 65. Arnhem is in the east of the Netherlands, close to the German border. 66. Non minus liberaliter quam amice a tuis excepta, which literally means “I was welcomed by your family no less generously than like a friend.” 67. Van Schurman likely met Marie du Moulin for the first time at this family gathering. 68. Van Schurman’s handwriting in this letter betrays the haste with which she replied. 69. This is the first mention of Van Schurman calling herself “a daughter.”

Part 1: Letters and Poems 137 11. Van Schurman to Rivet, 2 October 1634 (no. 8) This letter includes the first mention of Gisbertus Voetius, who invited Van Schurman to study Greek and Hebrew with him.

[To Monsieur, Monsieur Rivet, Governor of the young Prince of Orange. At The Hague] I received your two letters, Reverend Sir and most beloved Father in Christ. I read them by candlelight and recognized with great delight your feelings for me. And I never cease to wonder how you can complete your truly peace-filled work in such turbulent places; this provides living proof of a mind that rises above all human limitations.70 Furthermore, I found especially pleasing that exhortation you pressed upon me so sincerely and so earnestly. But I fear that there is a need not so much for a net as for a goad on that very threshold to which I’m clinging.71 Yet I confess that that great majesty of the virtues and of heavenly Wisdom touches and rouses me often; but too often trivial matters weigh me down and prevent me from reaching the heights of a great happiness. Undoubtedly, I would have delayed you with more had this sudden unexpected interruption not gotten my attention. Farewell. In haste. Utrecht, 2 October 1634. She who is always in pursuit of you in cherishing and unending love, A. M. Van Schurman72 12. Van Schurman to Rivet, 21 November 1634 (no. 9)73 Van Schurman gives a glowing report of Voetius’s teaching, which fills her days, leaving little time to write to Rivet.

[No address] 70. The ability to find peace amid turmoil is a Stoic virtue. Van Schurman likely had Seneca in mind, given that she and her father, and many of her contemporaries, read this author with great delight. In his Epistulae morales (Moral Epistles, also known as Letters from a Stoic), Seneca describes his experience living above a noisy bathhouse in Rome. No matter how noisy and turbulent one’s external circumstances may be, however, an inner calm and peace can overcome them. See Seneca, Epistle 56, in vol. 1 of The Epistles, trans. Richard M. Gummere (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1917), 373–75. 71. The “exhortation” was likely Rivet’s insistent encouragement that she should accept Voetius’s invitation, in November 1634, to study Greek and Hebrew with him. Van Schurman needed some encouragement, given that this would involve studying as the first (and only, to this point) woman at a university. She would quite literally be crossing an important threshold into Voetius’s lecture hall. 72. Van Schurman’s rushed handwriting, reflecting her haste, reverts in her signature to her usual fine hand to mark her deference for her addressee. 73. This letter is damaged, with the superscription and the endings of several lines missing. We have done our best to reconstruct, where possible, the missing content.

138 ANNA MARIA VAN SCHURMAN AND MEMBERS OF HER CIRCLE It has been so long, Reverend Sir and most cherished Father in Christ, since I have written to you with my full attention. Hereafter, of course, [. . .] from your letter emanates a truly fatherly affection and every day [. . .] it finds its way into my thoughts; it is as if you yourself were here with me [. . .] but that is the sort of thing that I could not do soon enough with the pen. Yet whatever excuse can sway you, [. . .] indulge me. For although there is yet in this [. . .] I will offer as an excuse my busyness rather than negligence: which, indeed, would itself have been untimely, [. . .] the same indulgence and of you [. . .]. And I say that in this matter, in completely surrendering to your wish [. . .], of all the possible ornaments that you have trumpeted before everyone so publicly, you have not yet mentioned my knowledge of Greek (which, still, I should confess the truth, I had greeted only from the threshold, as it were).74 Our most illustrious Professor Voetius75 came to me at a very good time: he is trying to supply me with all the teachings of the best tutor by homing in on what is left missing in my knowledge [of Greek]. And, in fact, he has also given me to some extent a taste of the Hebrew language and has inspired no trivial love in me for that sacred idiom. I have explained the reason for my silence, and I now return to your letter, from which I am very pleased to learn that you will promise to mention me to Mr. Du Moulin;76 I ask now that, if it isn’t too much trouble, you tell him of my great affection for him and my supreme admiration for his talents. All good people are most eagerly awaiting Mr. Le Faucheur.77 O, how I hope that with God’s help he will overcome the inconveniences of a tiresome journey. Mr. de Mory,78 a very educated man just as you described him, has just handed me your most recent letter. And because he seemed very friendly to me, introducing him to my studies and my little occupations was not difficult. You offer all your help and your talents so kindly, just like a Father would. I have nothing further to say except that I am very grateful to you, just as a daughter ought to be to a Father, even though that daughter was not born to him. Farewell, best of Men, and give my greetings to your most beloved Lady Wife. May she keep you safe for a long time. My mother greets all of you very affectionately and so do I. Utrecht, 21 November 1634. Out of Reverence and [. . .] for you, Anna [Maria Van Schurman] 74. She recalls her previous letter, in which she claimed to be “clinging to the threshold.” In this letter, she has crossed the physical threshold into Voetius’s classroom, but also the metaphorical threshold into studying Greek and Hebrew. 75. Voetius (Gijsbert Voet, 1589–1676). 76. The first reference to the famous French theologian Pierre du Moulin, Marie du Moulin’s father. 77. On Le Faucheur, see the Introduction. 78. Abraham de Mory (d. 1645), a chaplain with the French regiment in the Netherlands. See Rivet to Saumaise, January 1640, in Saumaise and Rivet, Correspondance, 165, and Correspondence of Descartes: 1643, 282.

Part 1: Letters and Poems 139 13. Van Schurman to Rivet, 18 March 163579 Van Schurman has been studying Hebrew with Voetius for six months. She reports on her meeting with Descartes.80

At long last I can return to myself, O Reverend and most beloved Father in Christ. Until now, I have been distracted by a wide variety of studies. Now that I have been restored to myself (so to speak), I thought that I owed you this letter as first fruits. In fact, I had decided to address you in Hebrew so that the progress I was making might not keep your paternal affection and concern in suspense any longer; but I was afraid that I could not come up with an excuse for the longer delay.81 Moreover, I cannot hide from you the news that I have recently visited Monsieur Descartes.82 He is a man of tremendous, or rather (as they say), unheard-of erudition;83 but he seems not to hold a very high opinion of the commonly accepted progress84 in the study of the liberal arts. He says that none of these add anything to true Knowledge,85 and that he is forging another path by which knowledge could be reached much more quickly and certainly. I consider Professor Reneri the patron of all the liberal arts and, as it were, their guarantor; however, I thought—since (as our same Reneri86 asserts) you know this man— that you especially had to be consulted. Farewell. My mother greets you and your beloved Lady Wife very lovingly. I do the same. At Utrecht, 18 March 1635. She to whom nothing is more lasting than to remain in your circle of friends, Anna Maria van Schurman 79. This letter is not part of the collection. It is held at Utrecht University Library, Hs. 8*F.19 ff. 1–3v; a facsimile and transcription are included in Koert van der Horst et al., eds., Handschriften en oude drukken van de Utrechtse Universiteitsbibliotheek (Utrecht: Universiteitsbibliotheek, 1984), 282–83. 80. René Descartes (1596–1650), a French philosopher, scientist, and mathematician, had come to Utrecht to visit his friend and disciple, Hendrik Reneri (1593–1639), who had been appointed professor of philosophy at the Illustrious School in 1634. 81. To avoid any further delay in replying to Rivet, Van Schurman opted not to compose her reply in Hebrew. However, she may have sent along with her letter a Hebrew cento, or a patchwork of verses she collected from the Hebrew Scriptures. See the cento following this letter (1:14). 82. Descartes lived in the Dutch Republic for more than two decades, from 1628 to 1649, and wrote his major works there. At the time of his visit to Utrecht, he was at work on his most famous treatise, Discourse on the Method of rightly conducting one’s reason and seeking the truth in the sciences, published in June 1637. On Descartes and Van Schurman, see the Introduction. 83. Inauditae, meaning “unprecedented, unusual, unheard of.” 84. Litterarum progressu, literally the progression of letters. 85. Veram Scientiam. For Descartes, “true Knowledge” must be based on reproducible and verifiable data, not on mastering the scholastic learning taught at the universities. 86. Van Schurman had questioned Reneri about Descartes or had heard him speak about Descartes in a lecture at the University of Utrecht.

140 ANNA MARIA VAN SCHURMAN AND MEMBERS OF HER CIRCLE 14. Van Schurman to Rivet, March 1635 Van Schurman sends Rivet a Hebrew cento, or “psalm collage,” to demonstrate her study of Hebrew.87

His reputation extends until the ends of the earth. [To] the man of God, a mighty one among shepherds, his head crowned, my Lord Andreas Rivetus, at The Hague. Who will give me a pen that would spell out true value, a pen to fulfill my desire, to express my writing before you, my dear father? O, that grace would pour forth from my lips! O, that there would be a stream bubbling forth, a fountain of understanding in order that my mouth would express your splendor! I will speak to my lord, my father, in the holy language. May the first fruits of my learning belong to him. Truly, I am lacking in strength to pluck from the tree of knowledge, and I have been slow to acquire wisdom and understanding. Therefore, I delayed seeing your face again, and I hid. And I hid like an ostrich who is afraid of the light, until I considered that the words of children who speak with stammering lips find more favor in the eyes of their fathers than the words of strangers who speak smoothly. And this is my comfort in my distress that, indeed, I am a daughter to you. And, therefore, the work of my fingers will not be a small thing in your eyes. And may you be full of life and may you be prosperous, you and your house. Your daughter and your humble handmaid, Anna Maria van Schurman

15. Frédéric Rivet to André Rivet, 13 November 1635 (no. 78) This letter is addressed to Rivet from his youngest son, aged eighteen at the time.88 87. See 1:13. This cento was later included in Opuscula, 154, but not kept in the manuscript collection. We are indebted for the translation to Tom Boogaart, Professor of Hebrew and the Old Testament at Western Theological Seminary. On this piece, see Pieta van Beek, “ ‘ Tu mihi Parnassus, tu mihi Apollo eris’: Anna Maria van Schurman (1607–1678) en haar leermeesters,” Nieuwsbrief Neolatinistenverband 21 (2008): 5–16. On the cento form, or the “psalm collage,” a patchwork of quotations and paraphrase from the Scriptures, see Susan Felch, “ ‘Halff a Scrypture Woman’: Heteroglossia and Female Authorial Agency in Prayers by Lady Elizabeth Tyrwhit, Anne Lock, and Anne Wheathill,” in English Women, Religion, and Textual Production, 1500–1625, ed. Micheline White (Farnham, UK, and Burlington, VT: Ashgate, 2011), 147–66. On another Hebrew cento poem or letter Van Schurman composed, this time for Voetius, see Beek, First Female, 75–76. 88. Frédéric Rivet (1617–1666) was the only one of Rivet’s sons to live a long life. After studying in Scotland, he returned to finish his studies at Leiden. He worked in London from 1639 to 1647 as secretary to Albert Joachimi, the Dutch ambassador to England, who was a close friend of the English

Part 1: Letters and Poems 141 [To Monsieur, Monsieur Rivet. At Arnhem] Your letter was given to me, Honorable Father, as a testimony to your concern and love for me, and I have tasted again with great joy your usual exhortations to virtue for which I greatly thank you. I vow to God as my helper, with as much enthusiasm as I can muster, that I will cling to and watch jealously over these commands, which my Reverend paternal Uncle has added to his own.89 And, so, I shall satisfy my friends, who trust that I will follow this most praiseworthy path. You see, there will be nothing that would please me more than to study your teachings; those things that concern the care of the body, my true Mother,90 whose love is very strong for me, will supply with a pleasing and diligent spirit, and I will reply in compliance to my duty in whatever service I am able. Farewell, Honorable Father, and look after yourself and your virtue with care and love. Your Son, who is eager to fulfill The Hague, 13 November 1635 your wishes, Frédéric Rivet

16. Van Schurman to Rivet, 26 September 1636 (no. 13) It has been a year and a half since Van Schurman’s last extant letter to Rivet.91 She thanks him for his encouragement and love in the face of the imminent death of her mother.

[To the Reverend, Noble, eminent both in Piety and erudition, the remarkable man, Andreas Rivetus, Doctor of Theology and Professor, Governor to the Young Prince. At The Hague] antiquarian Simonds D’Ewes. From 1647 he became valet to William II of Orange at The Hague. In 1650 he was appointed personal secretary to Amalia von Solms-Braunfels, the mother of William II, and was one of young William III’s preceptors. An enthusiastic admirer of Van Schurman, he alerted scholars, most notably Marin Mersenne, of Van Schurman’s learning. Mersenne, in a French letter dated 23 May 1638 (Mersenne, Correspondance, 7:213–14), informs André Rivet of his son’s praise of Van Schurman’s letters on the education of women. On Joachimi’s ambassadorship, see Pieter Geyl, Orange and Stuart, 6, 14, 18–23, 45. On Frédéric Rivet, see Jean-Luc Tulot, “Familles de l’Église réformée de Thouars au XVIIe siècle,” Cahiers du Centre de généalogie protestante 90 (2005): 61–79. We try to capture in our translation his plodding command of Latin. 89. André Rivet’s younger brother, Guillaume Rivet (1580–1651), a Reformed minister and theologian. His correspondence with André Rivet is housed at the Bibliothèque du protestantisme français in Paris. It is also accessible online, as edited by Jean-Luc Tulot (2004); the introduction (http://jeanluc. tulot.pagesperso-orange.fr/Grivetarivet03.pdf) is followed by two separate PDF files of correspondence covering the years 1621–1641 and 1642–1650. 90. Marie du Moulin, Rivet’s second wife. 91. See 1:13.

142 ANNA MARIA VAN SCHURMAN AND MEMBERS OF HER CIRCLE At this time, I am feeling deeply the power of that kindred connection of spirit, Reverend and dearest Father in Christ, that has joined you and me in a tighter bond of love willed by God. Indeed, I immediately read your letter and it was as if you were there in person in that instant; and my spirit began grieving just like, as it were, when those bloodied [martyrs] who have died a violent death meet kindred family spirits from a far-off place.92 And just as, for instance, our great friend Mornay lamented the fate of his most beloved only son along with that of his wife,93 I would shed tears into your lap, and, truly, I would do so with a very heavy pen and a swan’s song. I am glad that I remember this man [Mornay],94 so that I wouldn’t lose your protection if I were at any point to experience, with a lesser resolve, no less serious a misfortune. For what would be sadder in my life than to lose such a parent as you, whose love our age has witnessed, since there is nothing more ardent than your love, nothing more shining than your character, and nothing more faithful than your guidance. For that would result in my suffering not only the loss of my mother, but also the best wet nurse and director of my studies, and partner95 of all my cares. And for this reason, I must admit now that I should no longer be considered an orphan since I have fixed my eyes on you and other friends of an even greater character. How piously, how faithfully you have played your part here as your truly encouraging96 letter shows. It easily holds first place, not so much on account of its author’s affection as on the weight of the arguments your have drawn from your storeroom: “Blessed are those who die in the Lord.” Theosophy97 alone proposes not only that faith be embraced but that it

92. An allusion to Christian martyrs, whose stories Van Schurman had read as a young child. 93. The Huguenot apologist and diplomat Philippe Duplessis-Mornay (1549–1623), a close supporter and friend of Henri IV, lost his only son, Philippe, Seigneur de Bauves (1579–1605), on 23 October 1605, at the siege of Guelders in the Low Countries, where he had joined the army of Maurice of Nassau, Stadtholder of Holland. He was buried in Saumur, where his father was governor. DuplessisMornay’s wife, Charlotte Arbaleste de la Borde (1550–1606), died of grief a few months later. 94. Tanti autem viri hic meminisse iuvat, a formula made famous by Virgil: forsan et haec olim meminisse iuvabit (Aeneid, 1.203). In this passage, Aeneas and his men have just survived a storm on the final leg of their journey to Italy. Aeneas privately wishes he had died on the plain of Troy, but puts on a brave face for his men, reminding them that they have been through hard times before and “perhaps will someday look back on these misfortunes too and laugh.” Van Schurman is going through a storm of her own with the imminent loss of her mother; she thinks about Rivet’s own mortality, given that she considers him as her sole surviving parent. She also thinks of Mornay’s fate since he lost both his son and wife at the same time. Van Schurman puts on a brave face, consoled by the fact that she still has the support and love of Rivet. 95. Consortis, meaning “sharing in,” “partaking of.” 96. Paraklêtikê, in Greek. 97. Theosophy, from Greek Theosophia, “God’s Wisdom.” Christian theosophy is not to be confused with the nineteenth-century occult movement of the same name founded by Helena Blavatsky.

Part 1: Letters and Poems 143 reveals itself through experience.98 When that final hour leaves no one untouched, what else can so clearly demonstrate that my mother is crossing99 over from death to life? Not even the torturous nature of an awful disease could prevent her from acknowledging God as her Father. Thus, if Theosophy can offer comfort to those who are about to die, how could it fail the living? However, in such calamities, our condition should be considered as rather unfortunate because they [the calamities] usually blanket our mind with a dark cloud that makes us incapable of seeing the clear light of day that usually enlightens us.100 But I pray to God that He might seek to change that harsh feeling of grief into a pious and pleasing memory of my dearest mother, and I urge you to do the same. Farewell, dearest Father. I beg from the bottom of my heart the supreme Ruler and Guardian of humankind to keep you safe, for me, for a long time. Utrecht, 26 September 1636. Your devoted daughter in Christ,101 Anna Maria van Schurman

17. Van Schurman to Rivet, 6 November 1637 (no. 14)102 Over a year has passed since Van Schurman’s last letter. She is at a turning point in her relationship with Rivet; she now fully trusts him with this major letter on women’s education. 98. The imminent death of her mother leads Van Schurman to consider for the first time in her letters to Rivet what faith is not: it is apprehended not merely by external knowledge (scientia) but by experience, the inward knowledge of God (intima notitia Dei) that she will refer to many decades later in her spiritual autobiography, Eukleria (1673). On this distinction, see Bo Karen Lee, Sacrifice and Delight, 22. Van Schurman’s focus on the inner life comes from her deep reading of Thomas à Kempis and Augustine, although the seeds may have already been planted when she and her father read Seneca. 99. Literally, “my mother has crossed over.” Van Schurman uses the epistolary past tense. She expects her mother will die before Rivet receives her letter. This indicates that her mother died either in late 1636 or early 1637. 100. An allusion to depression, although she uses the language of stormy weather, recalling her reference to Aeneas earlier in this letter. 101. This is the first time that Van Schurman signs off as Rivet’s devota filia (“devoted daughter”); she is no longer filiae instar (“like a daughter’), as in letter no. 7 (1:10). The loss of her mother leads her to express even stronger filial sentiments for him. 102. This letter on women’s education appears in Dissertatio, 43–59; Opuscula, 58–73; and British Museum Library, Harley 6824, F. 90. Fine translations of this letter, as well as Rivet’s reply (1:18) and Van Schurman’s reply to Rivet (1:19), appear in Joyce L. Irwin, ed. and trans., Whether a Christian Woman Should Be Educated, and Desmond M. Clarke, ed. and trans., The Equality of the Sexes: Three Feminist Texts of the Seventeenth Century (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013). We stand on the shoulders of Irwin and Clarke in our translation of these three letters.

144 ANNA MARIA VAN SCHURMAN AND MEMBERS OF HER CIRCLE [To the Reverend, Noblest of the Orthodox Religion, educated in all learning, the Incomparable Rivet, Doctor and Professor of Holy Theology, and most dignified Governor of the Young Prince]103 Nothing could please me more, Reverend Sir and Venerable Father in Christ, than to learn that you welcomed with such kindness the small gift that, however mediocre, I was permitted to give to your granddaughter.104 For if you were to consider only the item itself on its own merits, it was actually insufficient; but if, on the other hand, you were to reflect on the depth of our affection for one another, then I think that there is nothing that is not owed you on the strength of our long friendship. I received with a cheerful disposition, as was appropriate, the books you sent to enrich my library. I was delighted on two counts when I directed my gaze both to the person who gave the books and to the arguments in them, which have led you to your triumph. How can I repay you? I have nothing ready at hand to offer you as a reward, no matter how much I want to, unless, perhaps, you consider my gratitude as payment enough.105 On top of all this, I think you are very kind to promise me your help with all my studies, and even in resolving some serious doubts that are weighing on me. I value your judgment very much, as I should, because where I lack sufficient perspective, I cling to my own uncertainty and am forced to press on hobbled, as it were. But I have for a long time now eagerly desired your judgment on a very important topic (that pertains especially to the responsibilities and status of young unmarried women); and I think that nothing could be more important or make me prouder than to have you, as in a rescript,106 confirm my own opinion. But if you think otherwise, I would not be ashamed if you told me to sound the retreat. I am compelled, though, to doubt what you have decided on this matter, as if it were a general universal principle. In an earlier letter, after praising me and my studies so lovingly and honorably as you usually do, you write this: “Perhaps it would not be expedient for many women to choose this kind of life; it may suffice if some, who are called to it by a special inspiration, from time to time stand 103. The salutation in Dissertatio, 43, and Opuscula, 58, is missing in the manuscript letter: “To the most Distinguished Gentleman and a Father to be venerated in Christ, Sir André Rivet. S. P.” 104. Neptem vestram, meaning “granddaughter.” Guillaume Colletet, in Question célèbre, 2, translates the term as “vostre Niepce” (“your Niece”), referring to Marie du Moulin. 105. The mutual rendering of favors and services was an indispensable aspect of the system of exchange at the heart of the Republic of Letters. Correspondents exchanged news, manuscripts, books, portraits, and gifts. Rivet thus sends Van Schurman his latest publications as a gesture of thanks for her gift to his granddaughter. On the exchange system in the Republic of Letters, see Hans Bots and Françoise Waquet, La République des Lettres (Paris: Belin, 1997), chap. 5. 106. An official written response to a personal request or a petition to civil authorities in the Roman Empire and in Roman Catholicism.

Part 1: Letters and Poems 145 out.”107 But if we understand here married women involved in household affairs, or any other women who, by some necessity, care for family matters, I completely agree. On the other hand, if we mean young girls endowed with natural ability, who ought to be educated more liberally—the sort that our age produces in large numbers—I have a difficult time agreeing. An enormous admiration for the sciences,108 or even the equity of common law, moves me not to consider as rare in our sex what all human beings find worthy to know. For since Wisdom is such an adornment of the human race that it ought rightly to be extended to every single person (as far as one’s lot in life allows it), I, indeed,109 don’t know why this most beautiful adornment of all is not fitting for a young woman to whom we give permission to diligently look after and beautify herself. Nor is there any reason why the Republic110 should be afraid of a change of this kind, since the glory of the educated class does not at all obstruct the light of those who govern. No, on the contrary, every single person agrees that that state would flourish the most which is going to have more citizens who obey not so much the laws as Wisdom itself. Besides, it is impossible to show respect and honor to virtue and even to the chorus of the educated unless their more capable members know how to honor the glory and splendor of letters, and this not so much with a blind admiration as with a true appreciation. But so that I do not delay any further, I now enter the gateway111 of the controversy itself. For if I explain it properly, then the whole truth of the matter will become clear. The principal question, therefore, is this: Whether for a young woman in these times especially it is fitting to study letters and the fine arts?112 I myself am persuaded by no trivial arguments that the affirmative answer is more convincing. For, indeed, so that I can begin to weave my web113 of argument with civil law, I remember reading at some point that, according to Ulpian, women 107. Rivet to Van Schurman, 1 March 1632, in Dissertatio, 40. See 1:3. 108. Scientia. 109. “I, indeed” is missing in the Dissertatio and the Opuscula. 110. Republica refers to both the state, the Dutch Republic, and the Republic of Letters governed by men. 111. Propyleo stands for the gateway to the Athenian Acropolis, the temple of Athena, goddess of learning. 112. This key question, in the manuscript version, has no commas. On its punctuation, see the Introduction. 113. Van Schurman uses the language of weaving, which is typically associated with the work of a dutiful woman. The archetypal weaving woman is Odysseus’s wife, Penelope. In book 2 of Homer’s Odyssey, she literally weaves a trick. Her husband has been away from Ithaca for twenty years, and more than a hundred suitors are pressing her to marry one of them. She promises to choose a suitor once she has completed a shroud for her elderly father-in-law—a shroud that she weaves by day and unweaves by night in order to put off her would-be husbands. Like Penelope, Van Schurman “weaves” not a shroud, but an argument for the education of women.

146 ANNA MARIA VAN SCHURMAN AND MEMBERS OF HER CIRCLE were excluded from all civil and public charges or offices.114 I will not now laboriously inquire into the fairness of such a law, except to say that at the very least I think that it clearly implies that the leisure in which we, women, spend our time is praiseworthy and legitimate.115 From this we evidently enjoy a lot of free time and a tranquility that is friendly to the Muses. Most of all, though, we enjoy as a certain special prerogative a greater freedom from necessary work and a greater immunity from domestic cares and duties. But this generous and unoccupied time in our lives, when it is frittered away in excess and negligence, and when it isn’t put to any good use, becomes an opportunity for all kinds of vices. Even the eminent Basil says: “Idleness is the beginning of vice.”116 And whatever we do to avoid this Charybdis,117 doesn’t the idle mind surely become progressively emasculated118 and dissolve into the likeness of the idle leisure and indolence in which it lies? What then? Look at the path between the rocks that Seneca, the cultivator of a more sublime intellect, opens for us when he said that of all men, only those at leisure (that is, only those who truly make the most of their leisure time) are free to pursue wisdom. They alone truly live, and they alone take good care not only of the age in which they live, but they also add the wisdom of every other previous generation to their 114. A citation from Ulpian’s law, codified under the Justinian Digesta, 50.17.2. Domitius Ulpianus, a famous Roman jurist (d. 228 CE), wrote most of his books under the reign of the emperor Caracalla (211–17 CE). His summing-up of earlier legal writings was so thorough that codifiers in the reign of the sixth-century Byzantine emperor Justinian consulted his work more than that of any other jurist; nearly a third of the Justinian Digesta comes from Ulpian. 115. Women’s use of their leisure was a major concern of moralists and women writers of the time. Madeleine de Scudéry, in “Sappho to Erinna” (from Les Femmes Illustres, 1642), argues that since men in public life have little leisure, women who do should be allowed to study: “they [men] should allow us at least the freedom to know everything that our minds can encompass.” See Madeleine de Scudéry, Selected Letters, Orations, and Rhetorical Dialogues, ed. and trans. Jane Donawerth and Julie Strongson (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2004), 91. 116. Saint Basil the Great, “Homily 7 (On the Hexaemeron),” in Exegetic Homilies, trans. Agnes Clare Way (Washington, DC: Catholic University of America Press, 1963), 113. Interestingly, given Van Schurman’s juxtaposition of idleness with the story of Scylla and Charybdis, Basil speaks a little further on in this homily about the creatures of the sea; as he observes, some were made “for the service of men; others for their contemplation of the marvel of creation; and some terrible things, taking to task our idleness. ‘God created the great sea monsters.’ ” (Exegetic Homilies, 115.) 117. In Greek mythology, Charybdis was a sea monster in the Strait of Messina. As a type of whirlpool, it sucked and belched out water that resulted in the destruction of passing ships. Opposite it, inside a rock, lived another monster, Scylla. Since the passage between the two was narrow, sailors would inevitably fall within the reach of one or the other—getting caught “between Scylla and Charybdis.” Van Schurman warns that the idle female mind is sucked into a whirlpool of vice if a woman is forbidden to study. 118. Effoeminatur. With this striking term, Van Schurman argues that all idle minds (including men’s) are sucked up in indolence and vice.

Part 1: Letters and Poems 147 own.119 For one should not seek virtue independently from leisure, but seek virtue in leisure.120 Thus a deep tranquility in seclusion and retreat will not bring us any trouble or weariness. Indeed (as Cicero says), the two conditions that weary others, leisure and solitude sharpen instead the wise.121 But some often object that sewing with the needle and spinning the distaff constitute an ample enough school for women.122 I must confess that many indeed have been persuaded of this, and in our own time quite a few malicious123 people are inclined to agree with them. But those among us who seek the voice of reason, and not of received custom, reject this Rule of Lesbos.124 By what law, I ask, have these things become our lot? Is it by divine law or human law? Never will they demonstrate that these restrictions, by which they force us into line, have been prescribed by fate or determined by God.125 For if we search for witnesses from antiquity, both the countless examples from every age and, also, the authority of even the greatest men will prove the contrary. This is shown with no less wit and learning by the most noble glory of the Gournay family,126 in the little book she 119. “Of all men, they alone are at leisure who take the time for philosophy, they alone really live.” Seneca, On the Shortness of Life, 8.14, in vol. 2 of Moral Essays, ed. John W. Basore (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1932), 333. 120. Well-lived leisure provides abundant wisdom. 121. Cicero, De Officiis (On Duties), 3.1. In this passage, Cicero tells his son that the great Roman general Scipio Africanus was never idle when he had nothing to do and never lonely when he was alone. The reason, Cicero suggests, is that Scipio always attended to his public duty and lived a rich life of the mind. Thus, duae res, quae languorem adferunt ceteris, illum acuebant, otium et solitude: “the two conditions, leisure and solitude, that cause other men to be idle would just spur him on.” Van Schurman points to this passage because women generally do not work outside the home, but that should not prevent them from developing a life of the mind through education. It is a bold move to suggest that women can be like the great Scipio Africanus. 122. Van Schurman remembers Marie de Gournay’s critique: “It is not enough for certain persons to prefer the masculine to the feminine sex; they must also confine women, by an absolute and obligatory rule, to the distaff—yea, to the distaff alone.” See Gournay, The Equality of Men and Women, in Apology for the Woman Writing, 75. For the opposite view, see Arcangela Tarabotti’s defense of the distaff in Convent Paradise (1643), part of a lengthy discussion of the merits of manual work in Tarabotti’s convent of Sant’Anna, connected to the Venetian lace industry. See Meredith K. Ray, “Letters and Lace: Arcangela Tarabotti and Convent Culture in Seicento Venice,” in Campbell and Larsen, eds., Early Modern Women and Transnational Communities of Letters, 45–73. 123. In Greek. 124. A reference to young girls who learned household management in schools on the island of Lesbos, the largest of the Greek islands; Sappho was associated with such a school in the seventh century BCE. See Barbara Bulckaert, “Une lettre de l’humaniste Anna Maria van Schurman (1607–1678) sur l’accès des femmes au savoir,” Clio: Femmes, Genre, Histoire 13 (2001): 177n35. 125. In Greek. 126. Marie de Gournay (1565–1645), the fille d’alliance (covenant daughter) of the French philosopher and essayist Michel de Montaigne (1533–1592), as well as his editor.

148 ANNA MARIA VAN SCHURMAN AND MEMBERS OF HER CIRCLE entitled The Equality of Men and Women. But so that I do not (as the saying goes) do what has already been done, I will refrain from revisiting these testimonies here.127 It is enough for me to add to Gournay’s circumspect reasons that the higher disciplines are not only good for us but should even be expected in the kind of life we live. For the noblest among the leisured do not permit their talents to be confined within such strict limits, nor do they allow the keenness of their intellect to be reduced below their own ability.128 Indeed, as I see it, if these Draconian129 laws should be kept, I would not at all be surprised if some women were sometimes seduced by the charms of this world because of the contempt shown for this type of menial work.130 To this must be added that no honor, no dignity, and finally no reward for virtue, by which noble souls are usually impelled toward praiseworthy actions especially, leave us, women, any hope. We boast in vain about our own nobility which we have inherited from our ancestors, since a useless obscurity envelops it all too soon. Then there is the fact that when one starts reading the history of a very long expanse of time, very often the memorials to women’s names are no more evident than the traces left by a passing ship in the sea.131 “But” they will ask, “where does your glory come from? And your immortality, where does that come from? It can’t come from leisure, can it?” Why not? It comes from a leisure illuminated by the light of the liberal arts.132 For, in fact, it is fitting for us women to become illustrious with the protection not so much of Athena dressed up in her armor, but of Athena wearing the citizen’s toga.133 127. Van Schurman will not revisit Gournay’s lengthy catalog of illustrious women, and her proofs for female rationality, as set out in The Equality of Men and Women. 128. Van Schurman refers explicitly to the altioris ingenii (the higher intellect) of women, who are forced to limit their reach because of social constraints. 129. From Draco, an Athenian legislator, who codified the laws of the city-state in 621 BCE. These laws were notoriously harsh (hence the term “Draconian”), with nearly all the offenses (including idleness) punishable by death. 130. An ironic counterpoint to Rivet, 1 March 1632 (1:3): “let it suffice if some [non nullae], who are called to it [learning] by a special inspiration, sometimes [aliquando] stand out” (emphasis added). Van Schurman employs the same Latin terms to indicate that menial household activities, far from saving women, drive some toward vice and a disordered life. 131. In The Literal Exposition on Job, in Opera Omnia, chapter 41. 223, Thomas Aquinas states that the power of Leviathan, the great whale, is so great that “just as when a ship moves through the sea a track of the passing ship is left behind for a long distance because of the disturbance and the foam generated in the water, so it happens also from the motion of that fish because of its magnitude.” Unlike the Leviathan, which leaves a track in the sea, women, Van Schurman notes, leave no traces behind them. 132. Scientiarum lumine, “the light of the sciences,” or the liberal arts. 133. Togatae Palladis. A reference to the idea that philosophy can be a Roman enterprise (hence the toga) and not just a Greek one. See Miriam Griffin and Jonathan Barnes, eds., Philosophia Togata: Essays on Philosophy and Roman Society (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1989). In Van Schurman’s

Part 1: Letters and Poems 149 And, also, when true Philosophy occupies the throne of our mind, it allows no access ever to the vain and wandering agitations of a wavering mind. Erasmus, that distinguished patron of every kind of humanist writing, eloquently observed in a letter when he discussed the education of the daughters of Thomas More: “Nothing so occupies the whole heart and soul of a young woman as much as study.”134 Isn’t it the case that we will totally scorn the voices of this world, the illusory authority of past customary examples, and the vanity of our impotent age, than when we look down on this world from the highest summits of wisdom? Besides, since at stake is no less the duty than the happiness of all to strive for the [pre-fall] perfection of our origins (and not one of us has not fallen short), we must seek at all costs to have the image of the One who is Truth and Light shine more and more brightly in the highest region of our mind. I do not deny that Theology (the perfector especially of the intellect) gives us everything we need to fulfill all the requirements here. But, then again, I don’t know why those who want Theology to walk alone and unescorted have not understood more adequately the majesty of such a great Queen.135 For, in fact, when we examine deeply the book of nature,136 who doesn’t see by what a beautiful harmony the parts of each of the liberal arts fit together? How much one helps the other, and how much light one provides the other? Nor should it stop us at all that some people restrict this study within such narrow limits that they think it is of little interest to us [young women] whether this machine of the world has come together from atoms, or whether it emerged from unformed chaos; whether some bodies happen to take on a celestial form, while others are terrestrial; whether the uppermost masses of the earth revolve in an orbit, or whether those that spin around the lowest rather than the formulation, Athena is privileged as an educated citizen rather than as a military leader. Athena, an unmarried virgin, is a surrogate for Van Schurman. 134. “There is nothing that more occupies the attention of a young girl than study.” This statement by Thomas More is part of a description of More and his family in a letter of Erasmus to Guillaume Budé. See this passage from the letter (no. 1233) in J. K. Sowards, “Erasmus and the Education of Women,” SCJ 13, no. 4 (1982): 83; vol. 4 of Opus Epistolarum des Erasmi Roterdami, ed. P.S. Allen and H.M. Allen (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1922), 578; and vol. 8 of The Correspondence of Erasmus, ed. and trans. R.A.B. Mynors (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1988), 297. In the Institution of Marriage (1526), Erasmus develops his ideas on the education of girls, noting that “reading good books not only forestalls idleness but also fills girls’ minds with the best of principles and inculcates virtue.” See Erasmus on Women, ed. Erika Rummel (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1996), 85. 135. Meaning that all disciplines are ancillary to theology. 136. The original metaphor naturalium volumen (book of nature) derives from the Latin Middle Ages. For Nicholas of Cusa, the world is a book through which God as teacher reveals his truth. Descartes adapted the metaphor as the “grand livre du monde” (great book of the world) which he spent his youth studying, while Galileo states that one cannot read the book of the universe if one has not learned the script in which it is written. See Ernst R. Curtius, European Literature and the Latin Middle Ages, trans. Willard R. Trask, introd. Colin Burrow (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2013), 319–24.

150 ANNA MARIA VAN SCHURMAN AND MEMBERS OF HER CIRCLE highest masses revolve in a whirling motion;137 whether the sun as it sets is immersed in the ocean, or whether it owes its light to the ends of the earth;138 whether the earth has a square or a round shape; or, finally, whether the universe is bounded by the earth’s horizon, or rather our gaze limits it.139 If it were not now necessary for us women to be asking the very questions which are asked everywhere, much to our disgrace for not doing so, then we would be allowing that God, the creator of everything—who brought us into this Theatre to know, understand, and celebrate His beautiful works—would be frustrated in His purposes. Nature is not some kind of stepmother who forbids us from inspecting her. Why else would God have given us what the Philosopher affirms is innate in all human beings, namely, the desire to know?140 To what purpose would He have given us an erect posture unless He was directing our eyes and minds toward contemplating Him?141 Certainly, we would be tree-trunks and not human beings; we would be guests rather than inhabitants of this world, if we did not bring a mind excited and, as it were, kindled by divine love to such beautiful and awesome things in 137. Van Schurman explores recent cosmological discoveries, asking pointed questions about the views of Aristotle and Galileo on motion. For Aristotle, the fixed stars move around the earth in a continuous eternal and uniform circular movement. For Galileo, the earth appears to move because it turns daily on its axis. 138. The antipodes are referred to in Plato, Timaeus, 63a, as well as two works by Cicero: The Dream of Scipio (in The Republic, 6.9.21–23), and Academica, 2.123. 139. In The Book of the Heavens and the Earth (1377), the scholastic philosopher Nicole Oresme argues for a rotating earth based on a thought experiment that all motion is relative to the position of the observer: “One cannot demonstrate by any [experiment] that the heavens move with diurnal motion. Whatever the fact may be, assuming the heavens move, and the earth does not, or that the earth moves, and the heavens do not, to an eye in the heavens which could see the earth clearly, it would appear to move; if the eye were on the earth, the heavens would appear to move.” Cited in Richard E. Rubenstein, Aristotle’s Children: How Christians, Muslims, and Jews Rediscovered Ancient Wisdom and Illuminated the Middle Ages (New York: Harcourt, 2003), 276. Van Schurman is posing a similar question relative to a flat or circular earth, depending on the position of the viewer. 140. Aristotle, Metaphysics, ed. and trans. Hugh Tredennick, 2 vols. (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1933), I:1.1.980a22, “All men [humans] naturally desire knowledge.” 141. Here, Van Schurman draws on Aristotle and Aquinas. In the Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle states that the best activities are those “chosen for their own sake from which nothing is sought beyond the activity itself ” (1176b7). In his view, contemplation is the best activity because it is what the gods do: “It follows that the activity of God, which is transcendent in blessedness, is the activity of contemplation; and therefore among human activities that which is most akin to the divine activity of contemplation will be the greatest source of happiness” (1178b20). Aquinas builds further on Aristotle’s definition of happiness as contemplation by arguing that perfect happiness consists in contemplation of God Himself: “final and perfect happiness can consist in nothing other than contemplation of the Divine Essence” (Summa Theologica, I–II.3.8). Van Schurman also draws on dignity-of-man texts on the Genesis account of humans created in God’s image, particularly the reference to man’s upright posture to gaze into the heavens. See Lyndan Warner, The Ideas of Man and Woman in Renaissance France: Print, Rhetoric, and Law (Farnham, UK, and Burlington, VT: Ashgate, 2011), chap. 1.

Part 1: Letters and Poems 151 which the Majesty of His eternal divinity shines forth.142 Nor should we think that we are performing our divine office well [to contemplate Him] if we merely look at these things from time to time, as if peering through a lattice window,143 because in that case we would be looking at things not to really know them but rather to indicate that we don’t want to know them any further. There is nothing more wonderful for us to behold than a human being, and nothing is more beautiful than the home [body] of the human soul. But how very small is something that is judged only by its skin or its external appearance? How miserably should we blush at the outstanding hymns of pagans who investigated Nature so deeply and approached more closely the first cause of all things and are thereby more accustomed to singing the praises of the supreme craftsman? Moreover, however many times we turn our minds to the constellation of the Sacred Scriptures,144 who will deny that we are obliged to pay the same homage to so many examples of holy people who have taken these same Scriptures to celebrate their God? Furthermore, to say nothing generally about the study of history that today holds authority in women’s meeting places145 and the halls of the powerful, let us examine only in passing whether the knowledge of public affairs is appropriate for any private person. Although I easily concede that the study of history is directly relevant to the practical needs of a Republic, still, because of the theoretical knowledge and special benefits that redound from the study of history to every single person, we think that no one should neglect it. The Sacred Scriptures show us the way; but they do not merely show us the way, they lead us by the hand. There the succession of the ages is connected through the reigns of monarchs; there both the rise and the fall of the greatest peoples are either described or predicted. Nor is it surprising, since the awesome judgments of God, which it is right for us to continually observe, appear more splendidly when seen in the natural world. And since events that pertain to this universe cannot be expressed in the lifetime of a single person, if God wished this study to be dear to everyone, isn’t it the case that the contemplation of God’s admirable governance will not stir our lyres as well? On this the royal Psalmist was completely awed, and he never ceased to exclaim: “How very great are your works, O Lord, how deep your thoughts.”146 142. Like Aristotle, Van Schurman reconciles science and religion. The divine order of creation has a natural and observable aspect to it. See John Herman Randall, Jr., Aristotle (New York: Columbia University Press, 1960), 148–53. 143. Van Schurman may be thinking of the lattice of the cubicle in which, well hidden, she listened to her professors’ lectures at the university. 144. Personified as sanctarum literarum (Holy Letters). 145. A critique of the reduction of history to la petite histoire of contemporary men and women; “gynaeceis” (women’s meeting places, or chambers) refers to the salons, court circles, and female academies of the time. 146. Psalm 92:5. Quoted in Hebrew.

152 ANNA MARIA VAN SCHURMAN AND MEMBERS OF HER CIRCLE Perhaps someone will object here: all the above offers nothing more than a recommendation for the monastic life, and a limitation of our duties to contemplation alone.147 But, in fact, reason seems to demand that we look out first after ourselves, to ascertain what is sufficient for our own happiness, and only then that we consider the happiness of our neighbor. For in vain does someone who has never rightly had free time for the self take on the job of being free to look out for others. It is vain to help others either with advice or good deeds if one has failed to help oneself. And, finally, in vain will someone who is a stranger in one’s own home aspire to civil conversation with others or the bonds of the higher Republic148 of Christians. For, I beg you, wouldn’t it be rash to wish to build the whole economy149 of moral virtues on ignorance and commonly held opinions? No, on the contrary, leaving chance aside, the examples from every age teach us that no one successfully appeases great gods unless they are instructed in thorough and sound knowledge before approaching them. Indeed, that knowledge very much prepares, disposes, and makes us ready to act well, and it lifts our mind to undertake even more excellent deeds. Besides, nothing is more useful for a young woman, and nothing more necessary than to distinguish the contemptible from the honorable, the harmful from the harmless, and the appropriate from the inappropriate. But doesn’t this require from us much more expert knowledge of things and much skill in making judgments? And since it is neither useful nor safe for us women to acquire prudence of this kind by experience alone, we must flee headlong to history, “just as in a mirror, to beautify our life and assimilate the virtues of others.”150 I say that for us young women, we are never allowed to return to favor with a good reputation once dishonor begins to cling to us from some base suspicion. And, so, it is highly incumbent on girls not so much to avoid bad things when they happen as to prevent them from happening at all. Finally, I cannot pass over in silence the arts and (as they are called) the instrumental sciences (which, of course, follow the principal sciences as ladiesin-waiting necessarily follow their queen) without commenting on the delight we should experience in becoming a polyglot,151 especially if languages are used for practical purposes and not just for show! For languages are trustworthy guardians or, rather, true interpreters of those matters that a wise antiquity has bequeathed to us. For when antiquity speaks to us in its own idiom, it offers our mind a genuine image of itself, and touches our senses with a certain kind of wonderful grace 147. A reference to the vita contemplativa and the vita activa. Van Schurman addresses in this paragraph the best way for women to be mindful of their own needs and those of their families and communities. 148. In Greek. 149. Oikonomia (household management). 150. In Greek. Plutarch, Lives: Timoleon, 1.1. 151. In Greek.

Part 1: Letters and Poems 153 and charm that with good reason we cannot find in all translations, no matter how good they are. If at some point I were to offer you a discourse to explain and prove how pleasing and fruitful it would be to draw heavenly teachings from those very sources, that would amount to nothing more than what is expressed in the proverb: “to lend light to the Sun.”152 However, to bring this letter to a close, I will offer you one example that is constantly on my mind. The one example, I say, is of the incomparable princess Jane Grey,153 to whom no other nation, and no other age (and everyone agrees with this), will ever provide an equal. The Florentine Michelangelo,154 who has written the history of her life and violent death fully and with pathos following a conversation he had with Feckenham,155 who reported the news of her death to her relatives, noted the following among other things: she considered of lesser value—in addition to those notable gifts she had received from God—her noble blood, her physical beauty, and the youthfulness of her flowering age by which she could have otherwise attained for herself glory and favor in this world. Instead, she declared magnanimously that nothing in her whole life pleased her more than knowing the three languages reserved for the learned;156 and, lastly, that if finding pleasure in this life from such knowledge were to be called true happiness, she confessed that she had obtained such pleasure from her study of the liberal arts 152. In Greek. An Urdu saying, “to lend light to the sun and stars to the heaven.” See also Erasmus, Adages, I.vii.58 (Lumen soli mutuas). 153. Lady Jane Grey (1537–1554), the Protestant queen and martyr to her faith, who, during the last six months of her imprisonment in the Tower of London, composed prayers, letters, and a dying speech, all carefully preserved in John Foxe’s account of her life in his Actes and Monuments (1563; rpt. New York: AMS Press, 1965), 6:415–17. In her teens, Jane Grey became proficient in Latin, Greek, French, and Italian, and corresponded with the Protestant theologian Heinrich Bullinger (1504–1575) in Hebrew. Her mentor Roger Ascham fondly stated that she was “happier reading about the martyrdom of Socrates than rejoicing in her descent from kings and queens, for from this arose her own martyrdom,” as noted by Roland H. Bainton in Women of the Reformation in France and England (Minneapolis: Augsburg Publishing, 1973), 185. Van Schurman’s lifelong admiration for Lady Jane Grey was inspired by her own deep reverence for martyrs of the faith. 154. The Protestant refugee Michelangelo Florio (1515–1572), chaplain to Lady Jane Grey, reported the conversation in his History of the Life and Death of the Illustrious Lady Jane Grey (Historia de la vita e la morte de l’Illustriss. Signora Giovanna Graia, Venice: Richardo Pittore, 1607), written in 1561/2. Florio was acquainted with Jane’s father, Henry Grey, the Duke of Suffolk. See Pollnitz, Princely Education, 219–28. 155. John Feckenham (1515–1584/5), a Roman Catholic priest and confessor of Queen Mary I, arranged for a public debate, or disputation, with Lady Jane Grey on topics of theology such as salvation through faith or through works, and the role of the sacraments, especially the Eucharist. The debate was conducted in the presence of Tower officials. Refusing to recant her Protestant faith, she was beheaded in February 1554. On her writings, see Elaine V. Beilin, “Transmitting Faith: Elizabeth Tudor, Anne Askew, and Jane Grey,” in A History of Early Modern Women’s Writing (ed. Phillippy), 137–52. 156. Latin, Greek, and Hebrew.

154 ANNA MARIA VAN SCHURMAN AND MEMBERS OF HER CIRCLE and especially the holy Scriptures. And although quite a few might loudly protest a woman studying like this, she still maintained that, because it brought spiritual solace to her mind—which she had finally obtained and continued to feel deeply within herself—their opinion was contrary to reason. Behold a swan’s song coming not from beneath the shadow of scholastic disputations, but from the final act of a glorious martyrdom.157 Who, I beg you, would not venerate her as an oracle? And, so, I have not hesitated to babble before you on these not so silly matters. Certainly, I am relying on the indulgence of your fatherly love for me. But I conclude here, lest I seem to want to leave unsaid, or to have been totally unmindful of just how busy you are. Farewell, Father dear to me in so many ways, and do not fail to extend my greetings to your most beloved wife. Utrecht, 8 days before the Ides of November. She who remains completely at your command,158 Anna Maria van Schurman

18. Rivet to Van Schurman, 18 March 1638159 Rivet’s second extant letter to Van Schurman replies to her letter on women’s education (no. 14).

To the most noble Maiden who excels in every form of virtue, ANNA MARIA VAN SCHURMAN. S. P. Your most elegant dissertation on behalf of your sex and the aptitude of the female intellect for pursing all the liberal arts and sciences, equaling and, perhaps, even surpassing the minds of men, has left me hesitant for quite some time. On the one hand, I was ashamed to jump bail and leave our cause undefended.160 On the other hand, it would be ungrateful to oppose the person whom I intended to help and by whom it would have been pleasant and most gratifying to be beaten, especially since you argue your case with such modesty, nor do you omit anything that contributes to your cause. You were exceptionally eloquent and precise in your arguments.

157. A reference to Jane Grey’s beheading, with an allusion to the final song of a dying swan in Greek proverb and myth; see, e.g., Aristotle, The History of Animals, 9.13.2. 158. Literally, “She who depends completely on your nod.” In Homer’s Iliad, 1.528, Zeus famously “nods in assent” when he grants Thetis’s prayer on behalf of her son Achilles, making all of Mount Olympus shake. Van Schurman will wait for Rivet to “nod in assent” to her work and offer his blessing. 159. Dissertatio, 60–69; Opuscula, 74–83. 160. A reference to the cause and faction of men. Rivet situates his reply in the rhetorical tradition of the Querelle des femmes.

Part 1: Letters and Poems 155 The occasion arose for you to reply to my words in a certain Letter161 in which, while I praised your purpose and admired your progress,162 I did not allow to become common practice what I thought was appropriate only for you and a few others. You therefore were unwilling to let me recount other admirable things I see in you. You wanted this education to be for many women, so that you might hide in the crowd and have nothing singular attributed to you. You can be very persuasive, but here you are persuasive in vain; you are not going to draw anyone who knows you over to your position. But even this is a characteristic of your modesty because you want the eyes of everyone to turn away from your virtues so that they can turn toward many others. Forgive me if I were to say that the truth will not follow your words, and that even if you should get from me what you want, you would not be able to draw womankind over to your opinion. You will thus fight on either alone, or with very few others, abandoned by everyone else whose character or mind do not incline toward such things. You will object that it is a matter of the will and not of ability, which can happen even in men. In certain men I would not deny that; but still, if character and studies follow the constitution of the body, it is certain that the author of nature has formed the sexes differently, such that he has indicated that men are destined for some things and women for others. You are not ignorant how that wise Ithacan was able to distinguish Achilles from the foreign king’s daughters even though he was dressed in women’s clothing.163 I will not say with the ancient Poet that nature gave “reason to men, but not to women.”164 For I am not so hostile to your sex, nor in this way unjust to God; but what seems certain to me is that practical civic prudence ought to be as different as possible from that of women;165 and the description of the strong and valiant woman which the Holy Spirit praises through Solomon166 has been instituted so that those things attributed to her that should be praised the most are greatly distant from the study of the arts and sciences. My hypothesis, which you cite, was the following: “Nor is it expedient for many women to choose this kind of life; let it suffice if some, who are called to it 161. Rivet’s letter, 1 March 1632 (1:3), is published in Dissertatio, 40–42; Opuscula, 55–58. 162. Irwin and Clarke translate the word profectum as “success.” However, the term “progress” is preferable since Rivet, while admiring Van Schurman’s aim, profoundly disagrees with its objective. 163. In Greek legend, Thetis, the mother of Achilles, sent him to live among the daughters of Lycomedes, king of Skyros, to prevent him, according to prophecy, from dying in the Trojan War. Ulysses, king of Ithaca, needing Achilles to win the war, cunningly dressed himself as a merchant offering the daughters jewelry, clothes, and finery, as well as a sword and a shield. Achilles instinctively chose the weapons, thereby revealing his true male identity. 164. In Greek. From Anacreon, Ode 24, in which nature gives men reason and women beauty. 165. Van Schurman had defended the notion, in her 6 November 1637 letter to Rivet (no.14, 1:17), that young women should learn civic prudence from the study of history, and not simply from life experiences which are “neither useful nor safe.” 166. Proverbs 31:10–31.

156 ANNA MARIA VAN SCHURMAN AND MEMBERS OF HER CIRCLE by a special inspiration, sometimes stand out.”167 In what? Of course, I am referring to philology, philosophy, and similar studies where expertise in many languages and many different disciplines far and wide is involved, disciplines which are collectively called encyclopedia.168 I therefore persist in my opinion that such study is neither appropriate nor necessary. There is already so much with which you readily agree, as you yourself admit, if by women you mean married women who are responsible for household affairs, or any other [unmarried] women who take care of the needs of a family. This certainly applies to most of your sex; only a very small number of women are exempt. I also do not think that you mean to suggest that all women who are exempt from necessary household cares are suited for the study of letters. And, so, if you were only to examine what I have written, there will be no disagreement between us, or it will be very slight. This remains true even if the question that you subsequently identify as the principal one were to be asked again, namely, “Whether for a young woman, in these times especially it is fitting to study letters and the fine arts”169—unless you understand the term “young woman” as having an indefinite and universal application, or, to put it differently, you accept that it applies to all women. If not the latter case, I have already easily conceded that this kind of education is only for some women “called to it by a special inspiration.” What if I were to add that I might be willing to concede this—or that I even desire this—for as many young women as possible? But I would want this kind of study to be limited beforehand in terms of how far it should go, which arts and sciences should be included, and what curriculum should be instituted and developed, so that even here the ancient maxim “nothing in excess” is observed.170 Moreover, I would want a limited end171 to be established for women’s studies, so that once in place those studies deemed suitable or necessary for that end would be selected. For since no one would dispute that the female sex is unfit to enter Politics or the Church, and is especially unsuited to teach in public, why would young women work so hard to acquire the kind of learning directed toward those ends from which they are excluded? Unless, perhaps, you are making an exception for the few women who, in very few nations, might succeed to the throne when there is no male heir? “I do not permit” (said the Apostle) “a woman to teach, or to have authority over man, but to remain silent.”172 If this were to be enjoined 167. See Rivet’s letter to Van Schurman (1:3). 168. In Greek. 169. On Rivet’s punctuation of Van Schurman’s original question, see the Introduction. 170. The Temple of Apollo at Delphi bore the inscription “Nothing in excess.” 171. Finem, indicating both a “finishing point” and an “objective.” 172. 1 Timothy 2:12.

Part 1: Letters and Poems 157 upon women, you are not going to corrupt173 young women into believing that this is particularly appropriate for them. Consequently, there is no need for them to acquire the kind of learning that is required to speak well, if you really think of how that learning is applied; unless, perhaps, you object—which you definitely are doing now—that they could benefit from practicing the art of speaking well so that they might be able to judge the purpose of those who exercise that art. But be able to judge whom?174 For such a judgment will have to rest upon an honorable modesty.175 And I would say the same about the art of debate; indeed, I am sure you will easily grant me that it is not generally in keeping with the morals of a young woman to learn how to argue and lead a flock of disputants.176 Let it suffice for women if they can attain the skill of speaking well by their own natural ability and the experience found in ordinary conversation and the public instruction of the church, where they are not disallowed from “hearing the Word [of God].”177 However, you infer from this that women are most suited to these disciplines, or at the very least are abundantly offered opportunities to study that are not available to men, since they are engaged in honorable leisure and exempted from public duties. But it does not seem to me that this proves what you intended. First, if we were to consider what age is best suited to learned studies, the male sex is on a par with women until they reach adulthood,178 when men are saddled with the cares of public duties. Secondly, young women should not be brought up with so much leisure that they are always free to cultivate their inborn talents; I say this because they must attend to household duties at home so long as they are under parental control. The result is that they are not able to enjoy that leisure which Seneca describes: “Leisure without letters is death and the grave of a living human being.”179 But I would not want to condemn all 173. Rivet departs here from classical Latin idiom. He writes: virgines maxime decere non ibis inficias. As in French, he uses the verb “to go” as a helping verb to indicate the future tense, followed by the present subjunctive: “you are not going to corrupt.” Classical Latin does not have this construction. We take this as an indication of his indignation. 174. Sed apud quos? The implication is that women trained in the art of public speaking would critique men. 175. Rivet’s use of pudor includes, according to Tamara Harvey, the idea of “a veiling of shameful knowledge [which] is overtly conditioned by social expectations rather than innate abilities”; see Figuring Modesty in Feminist Discourse across the Americas, 1633–1700 (Aldershot, UK, and Burlington, VT: Ashgate, 2008), 2. 176. In using the term greges (flock), Rivet alludes both to a public disputation and to preaching. 177. In Greek. Matthew 13:23. 178. In Greek. 179. From Seneca’s Moral Epistles: “Leisure without study is death; it is a tomb for the living man . . . Therefore, gird yourself about with philosophy, an impregnable wall . . . The soul stands on unassailable ground, if it has abandoned external things; it is independent in its own fortress.” See

158 ANNA MARIA VAN SCHURMAN AND MEMBERS OF HER CIRCLE young women to the distaff and the spindle, so that they could never consider more serious activities, even though princesses—whether among the Greeks or the Romans, the pagans or the Christians—did not scorn such work.180 I trust that you have read that elegant book by Juan Luis Vives on the Christian woman. Please consider the whole of chapter 3 in book 1 on the early instruction of girls. There you will find that it was always thought praiseworthy, even in the judgment of the Holy Spirit, that not only married women but particularly young women, even from royalty, should occupy themselves in duties requiring manual work.181 But we do not for that reason go to the other extreme, which Vives also did not do when he added a fourth chapter on the education of girls, in which he treats both elegantly and sensibly this question: “What kind of learning is fitting for the inferior sex?” Indeed, you will not get angry with me,182 however much Gournay is reluctant to agree, if I believe along with the Apostle that “the woman is the weaker vessel.”183 If you were to vote in favor of Vives,184 we will easily agree and I will not begrudge you the Sempronias, Cornelias, Laelias, Mutias, Cleobulinas, Cassandras, and Hortensias.185 Nor the Christian women, the Enonias, Paulas, Seneca, Epistle 82.4–5, in vol. 2 of The Epistles, trans. Richard M. Gummere (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1920), 243. 180. Meaning that well-born women preferred using their distaffs and spindles to nobler activities. 181. Juan Luis Vives, The Education of a Christian Woman: A Sixteenth-Century Manual, ed. and trans. Charles Fantazzi (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2000), 59: “But I should not wish any woman to be ignorant of the skills of working with the hands, not even a princess or a queen.” 182. Rivet takes every opportunity to use preterition, a rhetorical device in polemical writing that consists in passing over or eliding the source of contention to better put one’s opponent on one’s side—stating, for example, “You know as well as I do that . . .” Rivet casts himself as the more authoritative spokesman very much in command of the debate, while Van Schurman’s speaker abides strictly by the norms of feminine decorum. Her voice is even more muted in Colletet’s French translation. See Larsen, Star of Utrecht, chap. 4. 183. In Greek; 1 Peter 3:7. 184. In a rhetorical sleight of hand that pits Vives and the Scriptures against the contemporary protofeminist Marie de Gournay, Rivet compels Van Schurman to choose between one and the other, putting her in an awkward position. 185. Rivet draws on Vives’s catalog of women worthies in chap. 4 of The Education of a Christian Woman to emphasize the rarity of such women. Van Schurman stays clear of this Querelle des femmes argument by example. Sempronia (flourished ca. 60 BCE), the mother of Brutus, one of Caesar’s assassins, was the first woman recorded as having written poetry in Latin. She was attacked by Sallust, who connected her literary talent with dissoluteness. See Henricus Cornelius Agrippa, Declamation on the Nobility and Preeminence of the Female Sex, trans. and ed. Albert Rabil, Jr. (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1996), 83n177; Christine de Pizan, The Book of the City of Ladies, trans. Earl Jeffrey Richards (New York: Persea Books, 1982), 86; and Stevenson, Women Latin Poets, 33. Cornelia (second century BCE), daughter of Scipio Africanus, was held up to posterity as a model matron and educator of her sons, the Gracchi.

Part 1: Letters and Poems 159 Albinas, Pollas, Zenobias, Valerias, Probas, and Eudocias. Nor the [Jane] Greys, or the Olympia Moratas,186 or whomever you want to add to the ancients from those who have adorned your sex, whether in our own time or in that of our ancestors. Provided that we all agree that they are rare birds on this earth—not because Laelia and her daughter Mutia were known for their eloquent speech. Cleobulina (or Eumetis) was the daughter of Cleobulus, one of the Seven Wise Men of ancient Greece, who defended the education of girls. See Vives, Education, 66. Cassandra, the daughter of Priam, king of Troy, and his wife, Hecuba, is best known in mythology as a prophetess doomed to be ignored by her listeners. Hortensia, the daughter of the Roman orator Hortensius, was renowned for her public speaking. In 42 BCE, she pleaded successfully against the imposition of taxes on Roman women whose male relatives were in political difficulty. See Giovanni Boccaccio, Famous Women, ed. and trans. Virginia Brown (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2001), chap. 84. 186. Enonia, identified as Eunomia in Johan van Beverwijck’s Van de wtnementheyt des vrouwelicken Geslachts, 111, was a rhetorician living during Constantine’s reign. See Stevenson, Women Latin Poets, 62n17. Paula (347–404), mother of Eustochium, was among the learned female friends of Saint Jerome. “Albina” was incorrectly identified as the mother of the philosopher Seneca in Latin editions of Vives’s Education and its sequel, De Officio Mariti [The Institution of Marriage, 1528]. Seneca’s mother was Helvia, to whom he addressed a consolatory work after he was accused of adultery with the sister of the emperor Caligula and exiled to Corsica. Polla Argentaria, misidentified by Rivet as “Pella,” was the wife of the poet Lucan, who engaged her to help him in writing and correcting his Pharsalia; see Vives, Education, 68, and Stevenson, Women Latin Poets, 48. Zenobia, queen of Palmyra (ca. 268–272), was regent for her son. A disciple of the philosopher Longinus, she composed works on history, which were translated into Greek; see Agrippa, Declamation, 81n174. Valeria Maximina, the daughter of Candidia Quintina, wrote Latin verse along with her mother; see Stevenson, Women Latin Poets, 444; Agrippa, Declamation, 82. The Roman noblewoman Faltonia Betitia Proba (ca. 322–ca. 370), a convert to Christianity, composed her Cento Vergilianus de laudibus Christi by rearranging lines from Virgil into a composition or a commentary with a new meaning. Augusta Eudocia (ca. 400–460, wife of emperor Theodosius II) wrote a Greek cento weaving in Homeric lines. See Stevenson, Women Latin Poets, 63n21. Lady Jane Grey (1537–1554) was versed in Latin, Greek, Hebrew, Chaldean, and Arabic. Van Schurman praised her before concluding her letter to Rivet (no. 14), and made reference to her in a Hebrew letter to Dorothy Moore, 8 August 1640 (Opuscula, 154; see Irwin’s translation in Whether a Christian Woman Should Be Educated, 60). Olympia Fulvia Morata (1526/7–1555) was born in Ferrara, where she joined the court of the duchess Renée de France at a young age and became a study companion of Anna d’Este, Renée’s daughter. After converting to Protestantism during the Reformation, she married a German Lutheran doctor. She died of the plague in Heidelberg. Her complete Latin and Greek works were published posthumously in Basel in 1558, 1562, and 1570. Morata was well-known in Reformation circles; see Olympia Morata, The Complete Writings of an Italian Heretic, ed. and trans. Holt N. Parker (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2003).

160 ANNA MARIA VAN SCHURMAN AND MEMBERS OF HER CIRCLE there could not potentially be more, but because it would not be in the public interest, or particularly useful.187 And if we were to consider the interests of the Republic and the Church, what ought to be common among men, is less frequent among women, and more like a freak occurrence, as when in earlier times one saw women outfitted in armor as they opposed and fought men in battle. Among the people of God, the Deborahs and Jaels were rare;188 nor did that palestra,189 which the English used for burning people alive, yield kindly enough to the Joans of Arc.190 However much she is worshipped as a second Pallas by our inhabitants of Orléans,191 nevertheless her chastity remains in doubt even among her admirers. But you have not undertaken to advocate this kind of life—I am well aware of that. You have something else in mind that is more appropriate, I will admit to that. But before you can persuade me, I would like you to set up for me colleges of learned women, so that in these Academies those young women whom you dedicate to such studies may be thoroughly educated.192 For you yourself will not easily admit that all young women can be self-taught,193 or even that all would have parents who could arrange for them this type of education at home that happily befell you. Nor would it be appropriate for them to attend schools for males and be mixed in with boys. You yourself will concede this point to me: however much the study of letters and languages—especially those languages in which God recorded his own Word for us—would be a source of the greatest help for those who ought to dig out the true meaning of the Spirit, it is not given to anyone to drink directly from those sources themselves. Nor does just anyone have the judgment 187. Rivet cites from Aristotle’s Politics 1.5.12, which briefly discusses why the education of women and children is necessary to the state. 188. Deborah, a prophetess who appears in the list of judges of Israel (ca. 1125 BCE), was consulted by Israelites who wished to have their disputes settled. Jael, the wife of Heber the Kenite, slew Sisera, the Canaanite general, which proved a turning-point in the Israelites’ deliverance from oppression (Judges 4:17–21). Jael’s action was immortalized in the Song of Deborah (Judges 5:24–27). 189. A palestra, or palaestra, was a training facility for wrestling, part of a gymnasium in ancient Greece. It also functioned in part as a place of learning and debate; Socrates held his dialogues there with the youth of Athens. Rivet is perhaps thinking of the passage in Plato’s Republic, 452b, where Socrates mentions the ridicule attached to female athletes “exercising stripped in the palestras alongside the men.” Rivet’s conflation of the palestra with the martyrs’ stake is a pun based on the closeness of the Latin words palaestra (wrestling school) and palus (wooden stake). 190. In other words, there were very few military women like Joan of Arc (1412–1431). 191. The city of Orléans, which Joan of Arc liberated from the English in 1428–29. Joan was dubbed the “Maid of Orléans.” 192. Rivet challenges Van Schurman to come up with an example of colleges for women equal to those for men. Such a college became a reality a few decades later when, in 1673, Bathsua Makin (ca. 1600–ca. 1675) founded a school for gentlewomen at Tottenham High Cross, England. Makin was inspired by Van Schurman’s call for a demanding academic education for women. 193. In Greek.

Part 1: Letters and Poems 161 that would make it possible to clarify ambiguous words and phrases and select their most appropriate meanings. For many it is healthier if they are content with the streams. It often happens that by attentively reading translations in their own vernacular prepared by others, with humility and due reverence, and while calling upon the name of God, they may investigate and elicit those meanings that elude even the most expert in those languages. However, I am not saying this to diminish the praise of those women who, like you, have so much progressed in the ability to understand the sacred texts in their own languages. But rather it is so that the arguments you are using do not cause scruples in the minds of those women who have absolutely no hope of equaling you. The magnificent works of God, about which the Psalmist speaks,194 can be celebrated by everyone, even though there are only a few who have expertise about the rotation of the heavens, the positions of the planets, the motion of the stars, and other such similar phenomena. In fact, it often happens that you see those who are most engaged with such matters turning away from God to attribute all things to nature. In contrast, those who simply accept the appearances of things are awestruck, and they appreciate the wonderful handiwork of God and completely acquiesce to His authorship of these works, whereas all the most learned men exhaust in vain their brains on these things and, after lengthy inquiries, they feast upon the wind.195 And concerning their wisdom, that interpreter of the wisest king said, “For in much wisdom [is] much frustration, and whoever increases knowledge increases sorrow.”196 But you seek and embrace that true wisdom, which consists in fearing God and observing his commands.197 And may it be far from me to deter or discourage you or any other women who are so inclined toward this kind of study. I want nothing more than that the Prophet’s prediction that was partially fulfilled when the gospel began to be preached, become common among us, “your sons and your daughters will prophesy.”198 I am so happy that you are among them, and that such a daughter has come to me in accordance with my wish and her agreement with that wish—a daughter Whom I truly embrace with a father’s affection and I love with that attention which her virtues deserve. The Hague, 18 March 1638 ANDRÉ RIVET 194. David, to whom the Psalms are traditionally attributed. 195. From Hosea 12:1: “Ephraim feedeth on the wind, and followeth the burning heat . . .” (Vulgate). 196. In Hebrew. Ecclesiastes 1:18. Saint Augustine, Confessions, 5.4–5. Rivet refers as well to Thomas à Kempis, who, in Of the Imitation of Christ, trans. Richard Whytford, rev. Wilfrid Raynal (London: Chatto and Windus, 1953), 34, declares: “a humble rustic that serves God is better than a proud philosopher who, neglecting the good life, contemplates the course of the stars.” 197. Proverbs 9:10; Deuteronomy 13:4. 198. In Greek. Joel 2:28; Acts 2:17.

162 ANNA MARIA VAN SCHURMAN AND MEMBERS OF HER CIRCLE 19. Van Schurman to Rivet, 14 / 24 March 1638 (no. 16)199 Van Schurman replies to Rivet on women’s education.

[To the Reverend, Very Noble Man, of exceptional Piety and erudition, Andreas Rivetus, Doctor and Professor of Very Sacred Theology, as well as very worthy Governor to His Highness the young Prince. At The Hague]200 Even though you were so preoccupied with much more important obligations, I am indebted especially to your humanitas, Reverend Sir and dearest Father in Christ, for thinking it worthwhile to reply so comprehensively to my trifles. Indeed, a first reading of your opinion troubled me very much, since it seemed to oppose my argument in a non-trivial way. But after I examined it more thoroughly and deeply, I understood that, at least regarding its overall sentiment, your opinion agrees very much with what I wish to propose. Nevertheless, in the meantime, I experienced some grief, either because my defective writing obscured my meaning, or, perhaps, because I lacked skill in making some distinctions. Apparently, I have conveyed beliefs to you that are very far from my thinking. Evidently, it seems that I had so thoughtlessly favored that hateful and vain assertion that our sex is superior to yours that I dared to brandish it casually before you (you whose most precious time it’s a sacred obligation not to waste, even a very small bit of it). For I now perceive that this is how you have understood, above everything else, the whole matter of the question that I have raised, contrary to today’s customs, as to “whether for a young woman in these times especially it is fitting to study letters and the fine arts.”201 Here, you interpret the word especially202 as if I have unlawfully used it not in comparison to occupations or duties acceptable by today’s customs, but rather as compared to your own sex, and even that I would contend that women are more suited to study than men. If this hypothesis were to be accepted, then the arguments that I put forward in defense of my thesis would not only seem witless and absurd, but I would also rightly be accused of a novel and arrogant vanity. It is so far from me to consider this in keeping with my virginal modesty or, at least, my innate sense of propriety,203 that it troubles me to read through 199. Dissertatio, 70–73; Opuscula, 83–87. The date in Latin is pridie Idus Martii 1638, or 14 March. Since this letter is a reply to Rivet’s letter of 18 March 1638, it must have been written with the Julian calendar in mind, or else Rivet followed the Gregorian calendar. 200. The same salutation as in letter no. 14 (1:17) appears in Dissertatio and Opuscula, but not in the manuscript letter. See letter no. 14, 1:17. 201. Van Schurman restates her original question (no. 14, 1:17) which has no commas. See the Introduction. 202. Van Schurman realizes that a missing comma after potissimum (especially) may have led Rivet to misunderstand her. Potissimum is underlined in the manuscript and italicized in Dissertatio and Opuscula. 203. Pudor refers to a woman’s chastity, sense of propriety, decorum, reserve, and modesty.

Part 1: Letters and Poems 163 that otherwise outstanding treatise of Lucrezia Marinella, which she entitled The Nobility and Excellence of Women, along with the Defects and Deficiencies of Men.204 Just as, on the basis of its elegance and charm,205 I would certainly not dare to condemn the little dissertation by the Most Noble Gournay, On the Equality of Men and Women; neither would I dare to approve it in all things, and I would not even want to. For brevity’s sake, I would now appeal to the testimonies of the wise authorities that she presents to us in her treatise. If, admittedly, there are virtues pertaining to my gender that should be rightly praised, I very much desire that that role be handed over to you men, who are the most outstanding beacons of the virtues. For it is appropriate for us women that the more solitary theater of conscience suffice. My goal here was none other than to understand your judgment clearly and accurately concerning how best to use our leisure time. And to achieve that end more easily, I seized the occasion from the words you proposed problematically, “it is perhaps not expedient that there be many [women] like this.” I took the opportunity not to attack these words, but to inquire into what you genuinely think. Besides, I offered my opinion, which I thought was completely fair, or rather sentiments consistent with my own. Finally, I proposed these various arguments to illustrate our common position,206 and for no other reason than for you to discern through your sharp mind whether they seemed to you to be contrary to the usual voices of ignorance and the tyrannical laws of custom. I thought that these few points should be examined a little more fully, so that you might gain a clearer understanding of my thinking, which I know is enough for you. I read with great pleasure the two chapters of Juan Luis Vives that you indicated I should reread, as well as the chapters that came before. The guidelines prescribed there for instructing Christian women are so excellent and clear. I think they should be applied as much as possible to the studies of young women

204. Lucrezia Marinella (1571–1653), a poet and a moral and natural philosopher, was celebrated in Italy as a leading woman intellectual. Her polemic The Nobility and Excellence of Women and the Defects and Vices of Men (1600), a reply to the misogynist diatribe On the Defects of Women by Giuseppe Passi, was reprinted in 1601 and in 1621. Letizia Panizza states that her work is “the only formal debating treatise of its kind written by a woman; it presents a stunning range of authorities, examples, and arguments, which in sheer quantity no other woman had hitherto amassed; and it mounts a blistering attack on men for exactly the same vices Passi had dared to accuse women of.” See Panizza’s introduction to The Nobility and Excellence of Women, and the Defects and Vices of Men, ed. and trans. Anne Dunhill (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1999), 2. 205. Elegantia ac lepore. Van Schurman describes Gournay’s work with the same phrases she uses to describe her own work in French in her second letter (no. 3, 1:2) to Rivet. 206. Van Schurman uses the terms mentem nostrum (our mind, or our common position) to indicate that she firmly believed Rivet agreed with her position when she proposed it. In contrast, in the previous sentence, she uses the term meam, i.e. “I offered my opinion.”

164 ANNA MARIA VAN SCHURMAN AND MEMBERS OF HER CIRCLE today.207 For this reason I am very gratified that you suggested him to interpret your opinion, whose authority in this case I accept most willingly as I do in most other respects as well. Farewell, dearest Father. I pray to the highest God that you may continue to enjoy your good health, recently regained, for a long time. Utrecht, 14 [24] March 1638. She who loves and cherishes you from the bottom of her heart, Anne Maria Van Schurman I hear from my friends that certain bits of my trifles are being gathered into an edition.208 On this matter, I earnestly beg you not to pay any attention to them. For, indeed, you know that (even if one were to eliminate the least important of these) nothing of what I have written to you so far has been commended by a distinguishing mark of your approval, so that none of these [trifles] can hope to become either publicly useful or bring fame and reputation to me. All of us here greet you warmly from the bottom of our hearts.

20. Van Schurman to Rivet, 5 May 1638 (no. 15)209 Six weeks after their amicably resolved dispute on female education, Van Schurman expresses her deepest devotion to Rivet and thanks him for one of his recent books.

[To the Reverend, Very Noble Man, of exceptional Piety and distinguished in excellent erudition, Mr. Andreas Rivetus, Doctor and Professor of Very Sacred Theology, as well as very worthy Governor to His Highness the young Prince. At The Hague] There isn’t any reason to doubt, Reverend Sir and most beloved Father in Christ—and, indeed, I don’t think you doubt it either—that I agree with you completely, whether in good fortune or in bad, especially in what pertains to the preservation of your life. For your affection for me is not merely cemented by our common bond of Christian love (which best enables this sympathy between us210 to remain strong), but also by what customarily contributes the most to a special relationship and the closest of friendships. I would thus have written sooner to express my grief except that I heard too late about your illness and the harm had 207. Van Schurman endorses Vives’s two chapters in The Education of a Christian Woman (Book 1, chaps. 3 and 4). These chapters, although limiting the educational curriculum for women, also contain much with which Van Schurman would agree. Vives encourages young women to read to live a godly and chaste life, and he offers a catalog of women famous for their learning. 208. A reference to Van Schurman’s Amica Dissertatio (Paris, 1638). This postscript, while missing in the Dissertatio and Opuscula, is included in the Amica Dissertatio. 209. Opuscula, 175–76. A portion of this letter is included in Sup. Ep. 28, f. 215 at Hamburg University Library, cited in Dibon, Inventaire de la correspondance d’André Rivet, 145. 210. In Greek.

Part 1: Letters and Poems 165 already been undone. And now there is nothing else for me to say except that I grieve in not having been able to grieve together with you and your family. I have kissed your dear book211 many times, as though it were some jewel you deigned to send me as a perpetual symbol of our like-minded spirits, and I have been carrying it with me all the time as if it were the world’s most precious necklace. Why wouldn’t I carry it around, since one could never find a more brilliant demonstration of divine love, and thus of your love for me? But since you speak about my writings so honorably, I recognize for this very reason212 your truly paternal intention and my happiness on this account, if indeed along with the Poet I say: It is not the final praise to have been pleasing to the leading men.213 Farewell, most exceptional Sir, and receive the friendliest greeting from all of us. Utrecht, 5 May 1638. Devoted to you as your daughter in Christ,214 Anna Maria van Schurman

21. Van Schurman to Rivet, 28 February 1639 (no. 20)215 Ten months have elapsed since Van Schurman’s last letter. She has not yet seen a copy of the Amica Dissertatio published three months earlier in Paris; the royal privilège to publish is dated 12 November 1638. She mentions Rivet’s tract on the Virgin Mary.

[To the Reverend, Very Noble Gentleman recognized for his remarkable erudition, and of rare Piety, Andreas Rivetus, Doctor and Professor of Very Sacred Theology, and very worthy Governor to His Highness the Young Prince. At The Hague] I acknowledge your usual humanitas toward me, Reverend Sir and dearest Father in Christ, because you tried to atone for my rather long silence not only with your loving letter but also with an exceptional gift. I confess indeed that not everyone would see this as I do, since many people instead are used to seeking pleasures of a more theatrical kind on which you216 have declared war. But your 211. Either The sighs of the penitent sufferer, the solace of a trusting soul, or Meditations on Psalm 7, or An Antidote against the plague and other diseases, a meditation on psalm 91, the two books Rivet published in 1638. 212. In Greek. 213. Horace, Epistles, 1.17.35: “Yet to have won favor with the foremost men is not the lowest glory.” See Satires, Epistles, and Ars poetica, trans. H. Rushton Fairclough (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1926), 363. 214. This is the first time that Van Schurman signs off as Rivet’s “daughter in Christ.” 215. Opuscula, 173–75, where the letter is misdated 1637. 216. “This little book” replaces “you” in Opuscula, 173. A reference to Rivet’s A Christian Instruction concerning the Public Entertainments of Comedies and Tragedies (1639).

166 ANNA MARIA VAN SCHURMAN AND MEMBERS OF HER CIRCLE book was sorely needed so that you could shake loose that apathy from many Christians with an argument resembling goads and clubs.217 Moral corruption (if I may say) excuses this last sentence of mine, for people up until now do not blush when they cover up your useful arguments with disparaging nonsense.218 Those who understand and approve nobler things sin more tolerably by far; but they allow themselves to be seduced too easily by the examples of others who lead the rope through the wilderness.219 If only they were instructed properly at some point, they would embrace a safer retreat from the vanity of our age! Even if (as you say) I am unable220 to conceal myself entirely because of my fame, still I am drawn to the solitary life especially, and this has always been the case. I will insist on this with others that I have never lacked the desire to conceal myself. But you think that I owe to certain powerful men221 my permission to allow certain tokens of my little creative mind to be published. Because I agree with you, as in everything else, I would also agree with you here if I were to rightly fear nothing other than your judgment. But I cannot say whether my writings would be able to sustain222 the sharp attacks of malevolent critics (attacks to which, doubtless, my writings would be exposed). At any rate, these critics keep saying that I am chasing after the popular aura of a certain whiff of glory if I were to publish my little scribbles which, such as they are, seem nearly empty of learning. Thus, I beseech you, again and again, to permit these writings of mine to remain hidden between your private walls until an opportunity worthier of praise at some point smiles on us.223

217. A forceful simile from Ecclesiastes 12:11: “The words of the wise are as goads, and as nails deeply fastened in, which by the counsel of masters are given from one shepherd.” (Vulgate) 218. In Greek, phlauriais means “trivialities,” but also implies useless, shabby, or evil things. Van Schurman switches into Greek to condemn those who disagree with Rivet. 219. Possibly drawing on Isaiah 15:18: “Woe to you that draw iniquity with cords of vanity, and sin as the rope of a cart.” (Vulgate) 220. “It is not right” in Opuscula, 174. 221. Such as the statesman Cardinal Richelieu (1585–1642), who took an interest in the Amica Dissertatio. See Van Schurman’s letter to Charles du Chesne, the editor of the work, dated 18 February 1640 (no. 77, 1:28), which refers to the cardinal. 222. “I do not see who could sustain,” Opuscula, 175. The syntax of the letter is difficult because Van Schurman is treading carefully. She wants to maintain her feminine modesty and shy away from fame, even though Rivet has suggested that she should publish her work. She is worried, too, about exposing herself to “malevolent critics,” who will claim that she seeks fame. She thus disagrees with Rivet here but must be careful about how to express that disagreement. 223. Van Schurman resists Rivet’s plea to authorize the publication of her writings on the education of women.

Part 1: Letters and Poems 167 I eagerly await your Tract on the Blessed Virgin.224 O how I wish that the publishers themselves could be gripped by the same longing and that their excitement in producing this work would not diminish. Farewell, incomparable Sir, along with your Wife and Niece, both of whom are very dear to me, and may you all receive our friendliest greetings from all of us here. She who follows you with every sort of affection and love, Anna Maria van Schurman I have attached to this letter my reply to the most distinguished Gentleman, Mr. du Moulin.225

22. Van Schurman to Rivet, 27 April 1639 (no. 17) Van Schurman thanks Rivet for his family’s warm welcome when she came to visit them at The Hague. She mentions Salmasius’s first letter to her. She adds to her letter her poem on Rivet’s book on the Virgin Mary.

[To the Reverend, Very Noble Gentleman, exceptional in every sort of erudition, and of rare piety, Mr. Andreas Rivetus, Doctor and Professor of Very Sacred Theology, as well as very worthy Governor to His Highness the young Prince. At The Hague] I would have had to endure “too long a silence,”226 Reverend Sir and beloved Father in Christ, had you been willing to impose on me that rigid law, as they say. But your paternal affection for me has absolved me easily of my sin of negligence; indeed, you well know that rarely does strong health respect us all. I have added to this letter the little verses that you thought I was worthy to compose.227 If only there were other verses of this kind that could match in some way the dignity of your own work. I received a letter from the great Salmasius, and I have embraced it deep within my soul as if I were a hostage to the friendship of that great man.228 My Brother, however, who is on his way to see you, will talk more openly with you

224. Apologia pro sanctissima Virgine Maria matre Domini (An Apologetic on Behalf of the Most Sacred Virgin Mary, Mother of our Lord, Leiden, 1639). 225. Written vertically in the left-hand margin of the letter. 226. Van Schurman uses the first two words in the opening of Cicero’s Pro M. Marcello Oratio (The Speech on behalf of Marcus Marcellus), in Cicero, The Speeches, trans. N.H. Watts (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1958), 422: Diuturni silentii (“Today . . . the long silence”). Van Schurman begins her letter: Jamdudum nimis diuturni silentii. 227. See, following this letter, Van Schurman’s poem on the Virgin. 228. First mention of Claude Saumaise (Claudius Salmasius, 1588–1653), the most famous classical scholar of the period.

168 ANNA MARIA VAN SCHURMAN AND MEMBERS OF HER CIRCLE about this. Farewell. And give my regards to your Wife and your Niece, both of whom are very dear to me. Utrecht, 5 days before the Kalends of May 1639. She who cherishes and loves you deeply within her soul, Anna Maria van Schurman

23. Van Schurman to Rivet [ca. 27 April 1639] (no. 56)229 Van Schurman sends Rivet her poem on the Virgin Mary, which he requested for his upcoming publication An Apologetic . . . on the Virgin Mary (1639). It appears as a liminary poem in his Apologia. Van Schurman uses the extended metaphor of the Virgin Mary’s human rather than divine face, which Rivet restored in opposition to Catholic doctrine.

In Reverendi Nobilis Doctissimique Viri, D. ANDREÆ RIVETI, S.S. Theologiae Doctoris VINDICIAS MARIÆ Matris DOMINI 5 10

Omnia sacrilegus tandem pervaserat error, Et iam Roma potens terram miscebat Olympo: Nec quaenam facies venerandae Virginis esset Dignosci poterat: vultusque erat unus utrisque Et Matri et Soboli, similisque per omnia cultus. Viderat haec ardens animis Rivetus, et una Detrahit has larvas, propriisque coloribus ornat Virgineam frontem primo de fonte petitis. Quin male conficti subvertit numinis aras, Et meritos (quales genuina modestia suadet) Restituit mundo magnae genetricis honores. Hunc, si forte placet nitidis depicta tabellis Simplicitas, auctor toto celebrabitur orbe.230 To the Noble, Reverend, and Very Learned Gentleman, Mr. ANDREAS RIVETUS, Doctor of Holy Theology

229. Undated and no address. Opuscula, 307. Van Schurman sent this poem with her letter dated 27 April 1639 (no. 17, 1:22). 230. This poem is written in dactylic hexameter, the meter of epic and didactic poetry.

Part 1: Letters and Poems 169 On RESCUING MARY, the Mother of our LORD That wicked error has finally infected all things, As powerful Rome was long mixing earth with Olympus,231 And the real face of the venerated Virgin became unrecognizable. There was only one face for both the Mother and her child, 5 And both were equally venerated in all respects.232 Rivet, his mind on fire, saw this and is now Lifting the spell, and painting the Virgin’s face with her own True colors drawn from the first source. Indeed, he is overturning the altars of that ill-formed divinity, And is restoring to the world the true honors 10 That great mother deserves (and the sort that genuine modesty requires). If perchance this frank depiction of Mary shines forth in these pages, The author will be celebrated the world over. [A. M. Van Schurman]233

24. Van Schurman to Rivet, 5 October 1639 (no. 18)234 Van Schurman mentions her gift for Madame Coutel and her reply to Marin Mersenne.

[To the Reverend, Very Noble Gentleman, of exceptional Piety and incomparable in doctrine, Mr. Andreas Rivetus, not only Doctor and Professor of Very Sacred Theology, but very worthy Governor to His Highness the young Prince. At The Hague] I would never have been able to write this letter, Reverend Sir and dearest Father in Christ—for I remained silent far too long after reading your honeysweet letter—had there not been an urgent need for me to disturb your incredibly precious time with my unimportant words. I was thinking of hastening a reply to those friends whose side you wanted to join. However, although I have barely returned into favor with the painter’s art,235 I see that a gift in return236 ought to be prepared for that noble Matron,237 and this requires a little bit more leisure time. 231. Meaning “heaven.” 232. A reference to the deification of Mary in Catholic doctrine. 233. Added in Opuscula, 307. 234. An excerpt of this letter is included in Mersenne, Correspondance, 8:530. 235. That is, she has not painted any recent portraits for some time. 236. Antidoron, in Greek. 237. Matrone nobili, a reference to Madame Coutel, mentioned again in Van Schurman’s letter, 12 December 1639 (no. 19, 1:26).

170 ANNA MARIA VAN SCHURMAN AND MEMBERS OF HER CIRCLE But still I will not allow you to think, justifiably so, that I have deservedly caused my good name to be harmed. I ask this one thing of you, my Father, and I swear on the sacred bond of our friendship that you not think that I’ve rejected in any way at all my deep and loyal affection for you. Here you also have my reply to Mr. Mersenne. Please ensure that through your messenger it reaches the Very Noble Gentleman Lord of Zuilichem238 who, without my asking for his services, has offered in a very gracious letter239 to deliver it to M. Mersenne as he travels through the province. The gift from the great Hero Salmasius was truly gratifying, and I decreed that thanks should be given him daily.240 Farewell and give my regards to both your Lady wife and your Niece, who both are uniquely dear to me. Utrecht, 3 days before the Nones of October 1639.241

25. Marie de Gournay to Van Schurman, 20 October 1639 (no. 76)242 Gournay thanks Van Schurman for her Latin praise poem and critiques her view on the study of languages.

[no address] Mademoiselle, I would be doing an injustice to the legitimate purpose of my letter if I were to add other matters to my very humble thanks, which your generous favors have so worthily deserved; for what opportunities wouldn’t I have to praise you? I 238. Constantijn Huygens had bought the feudal estate and manor of Zuilichem in 1630. The estate, situated in the province of Gelderland, included a medieval castle, as well as the right to levy local taxes, administer justice, and bear the title of Lord of Zuilichem. Mersenne had written to Van Schurman, possibly to discuss her contribution to Johan van Beverwijck’s De Vitae Termino (1639). His letter and her reply are no longer extant. 239. Huygens to Van Schurman, 26 August 1639, 2:20. 240. See Van Schurman’s letter of thanks to Salmasius, dated 14 December 1639 (Appendix C3). The phrase gratias agere decrevi (I decreed that thanks be given) is overblown. The verb decrevi is used in the classical world to indicate official decrees, often from the senate, as in Decrevit quondam senatus, ut L. Opimius consul videret, ne quid res publica detrimenti caperet (“the senate once decreed that the consul Lucius Opimius should take care that the republic not be harmed in any way”: Cicero, In Catilinam, 1.4). Van Schurman recognizes how important the “great Salmasius” is and playfully issues a decree that “he should be thanked.” This is one of the first times we find Van Schurman adopting a playful tone with Rivet. 241. Van Schurman skips for the first time the final salutation and her signature. Having met Rivet and his family, she is more at ease and dispenses with such formalities. 242. Gournay’s letter circulated. Arnoldus Buchelius, Notae Quotidianae, 101, states in February 1640 that Van Schurman’s brother spoke of it to him. Gournay was seventy-four years old at the time of this letter, and Van Schurman, thirty-two.

Part 1: Letters and Poems 171 indeed freely admit that the ability to represent them243 as they deserve is limited by the narrow bounds of my own ability, as well as the rewards of so few services that I have rendered to the Muses. Welcome, therefore, this act of gratitude which I think is worthy to be received by you in these lines only because I have made a solemn vow that I will in my heart continually celebrate it. Dare I, in passing, give you, Philosophically, a word from my limited perspective? Languages take an inordinate and far too long a time for a mind like yours, which is capable of other and the best things. Nor is it useful for you to say, as you do, that you want to read everything in the original because their translated versions are not as good.244 For everything that books contain that is truly worthy of a soul like yours I can find written in Latin, or at the most also in Greek, to which you might with little trouble add Italian, Spanish, and above all French, which the Essays,245 among others, have made necessary to the whole world. If I still live a few more years, I will send you a new edition of my Advis, where your name will be included,246 remaining in the meantime, however, with all my heart, Mademoiselle, Your very humble and very faithful servant. Gournay. The 20th of October 1639.

26. Van Schurman to Rivet, 12 December 1639 (no. 19) Van Schurman informs Rivet of her contacts with Madame Coutel; of two selfportraits he requested; of the praise verses by a Mr. Thoar; and of Gournay’s letter.

[To the Reverend, Very Noble Gentleman, of exceptional Piety and incomparable in doctrine, Mr. Andreas Rivetus, not only Doctor and Professor of Very Sacred Theology, but very worthy Governor to His Highness the young Prince. At The Hague] I would have informed you sooner that I had received your letter and the accompanying parcel, Reverend Father in Christ, except that I had at the same time already decided to reply to the great Salmasius after I had finally given up all 243. All the fields in which Van Schurman excelled. 244. See letter no. 14, 1:17, in which Van Schurman argues that translations, “no matter how good,” are inadequate. Gournay’s statement indicates that she had read Van Schurman’s letter to Rivet in the Amica Dissertatio. 245. Gournay edited Montaigne’s Essays. French became the lingua franca of politics and sociability among the European elites. 246. The final edition of Gournay’s collected works, published in 1641, entitled Les Advis; ou, Les Presens de la Demoiselle de Gournay (The Opinions, or the Gifts, of Mademoiselle de Gournay), includes a tribute to Van Schurman. Apology for the Woman Writing, 78n15, states that Gournay’s tribute to Van Schurman first appeared in the 1634 edition of the Advis; this is incorrect.

172 ANNA MARIA VAN SCHURMAN AND MEMBERS OF HER CIRCLE hope that he would come.247 I forwarded your letter to the excellent Matron Lady Coutel, for whom I am keeping a sample of the style of my artwork.248 Although I failed to find an example of the finest work249 I completed during this time, I sent what was close at hand. Nor indeed did it seem, when I first laid eyes on it, to be an outlier, since it is very similar to the work—with which you are already well acquainted—that I produced then. But I am still not sure if it really resembles the person I tried to paint.250 Also, I very much appreciate the praise poem from the very kindly gentleman Mr. Thoar.251 But his talent, as I see it, far exceeds what ought to be written, given the limitations of so slight a subject matter. Here you have two examples of my self-portrait,252 and I cannot tell you just how much—and this more and more—they displease me given that they show a greater dignity than I have in person. “For I prefer being great to seeming great.”253 But in the end I thought that your request ought to be obeyed. I have not yet replied to Gournay, that Most Outstanding of all Maidens. As soon as I find the time to do this, I will take care to repay this debt. Farewell, and stay well. Send my greetings to those most dear to you. Utrecht, the day before the Ides of December 1639. 27. Van Schurman to Madame Coutel, 25 December 1639254 Van Schurman sends Madame Coutel one of her miniature self-portraits to which she refers in her letter to Rivet on 12 December 1639 (no. 19, 1:26). 247. See Van Schurman to Salmasius, 14 December 1639 (Appendix C3). 248. As noted in the Introduction, Madame Coutel was an artist friend of Salmasius, who was called upon to adjudicate between her and Van Schurman’s portraiture. See Van Schurman to Rivet, 5 October 1639 (no. 18, 1:24). 249. Floris exemplum, “an example of a flower,” although the term also means “the choicest” or “the finest” part. 250. Et nescio utrum alterius magis referat imaginem: “I do not know whether it [i.e., the portrait] recalls more the image of another.” Van Schurman is being playful. 251. Otherwise unknown. 252. Van Schurman completed ten self-portraits in the 1630s. See Katlijne van der Stighelen, “Portretjes in ‘Spaens loot’ van de hand van Anna Maria van Schurman.” 253. Van Schurman distinguishes “being” from “seeming,” as found prominently in Aeschylus’s Seven Against Thebes, 592, concerning a certain priest who οὐ γὰρ δοκεῖν ἄριστος, ἀλλ᾽ εἶναι θέλει: “doesn’t want to seem to be noble, but actually wants to be noble.” Plato also makes much of the distinction between seeming and being (see, for example, Republic, 361b). Van Schurman may also have Cicero’s famous formulation in mind: Virtute enim ipsa non tam multi praediti esse quam videri volunt, “When it comes to true virtue, not so many want to actually be endowed with it than to seem to be endowed with it” (Cicero, Laelius de Amicitia [Laelius on Friendship], 98). 254. Opuscula, 255–56.

Part 1: Letters and Poems 173 Madame, You will see in this miniature which I am sending you, along with my gratitude for your very precious gift, that my friendship (which you were pleased to pursue with a pure and unselfish goodness) is entirely yours. For I could not find, I think, a more appropriate way to convince you of this than by offering you my very self. It’s true that it’s only in the form of a painting; but I know full well that you will not seek to simply gaze on the portrait alone, but rather you will reflect on the person who gave it to you. Certainly, I confess that there is nothing else that motivates me to return to the good graces of these arts and pleasant curiosities than the desire to imitate you. Far be it that I should want to claim for myself the hyperbolic praises you have been pleased to honor me with through a much too excessive courtesy. So, if you are mistaken in your opinion on this point, you will not be so regarding the great affection I have in informing you that I am, Madame, Your very humble and very loyal servant, A.M. Van Schurman Utrecht, this 25 December 1639. 28. Van Schurman to Charles du Chesne, 18 February 1640 (no. 77) Van Schurman thanks Charles du Chesne for publishing her Amica Dissertatio.

[no address] Monsieur, In as much as there is nothing that tempts me less than the grandeur and glory of this world, and that I have always tried to hinder the course of my fame, so the care and zeal that lead you to make it shine forth even more oblige me to thank you very humbly and tell you that I am as incapable of deserving such an honor as I am prompt in acknowledging it. I attribute to that same source of your favors the fact that you have judged worthy of publication a letter255 whose only grace was that it should have been hidden beneath the cloak of friendship. If My Lord the Cardinal256 thinks otherwise, that is a pure consequence of his noble goodness in inciting my little Muse to higher thoughts, and not that of his incomparable mind, which cannot be susceptible to an opinion that is hardly tenable. The Paradoxes on the Elements that you propose are plausible enough in this century of ours. As for me, I have neither the ability nor the authority to offer 255. An allusion to Van Schurman’s letter to Rivet on the education of women, dated 6 November 1637 (no. 14, 1:17), and included in Amica Dissertatio. Van Schurman had not yet seen the publication. See in Part 1, her letter to Rivet, 13 April 1640 (no. 21, 1:30), in which she disapproves of it. 256. Cardinal Richelieu.

174 ANNA MARIA VAN SCHURMAN AND MEMBERS OF HER CIRCLE on them a definitive judgment.257 But this will not prevent me from assuring you that I remain Monsieur, Your very humble servant, Anna Maria van Schurman This 18 February 1640.

29. Van Schurman to Gournay, 28 February 1640258 In her reply to Marie de Gournay,Van Schurman defends her study of Hebrew.

Mademoiselle, If I have acknowledged my sense of the advantages that your heroic virtues have given to our sex,259 it has only been to discharge myself of a duty that it is just and necessary for me to render. But the letter which you have done me the honor of writing shows well enough that your civility is not proportionate to its addressees, and that its largesse derives from itself alone. From this it seemed to you a small thing to thank me for what is legitimately due to you, if you had not given me the hope that my name would, one day, be consecrated to immortality by the favor of your Muse. Certainly, I only wish to be as worthy of this happiness as you are prompt and liberal in promising it to me, and that you might find some consonance260 between the elevated character of your style and the lowliness of its subject. But no matter what happens, I imagine in a sweet dream that the tokens of your affection, that will doubtless be read there, will not be any less glorious to me than the honor of whatever praise I hope to have deserved.261 In regard to your opinion that I amuse myself too much with the study of languages, I can assure you that I give it only my leisure hours, and sometimes only after long intervals, if only you will allow me to make an exception for the 257. In his dedicatory epistle to the reader in Amica Dissertatio, Du Chesne thanks Van Schurman for liking his “treatise entitled The Christian Philosopher.” Here, Du Chesne has asked Van Schurman to read yet another one of his works. Neither is extant. 258. Written on the back of the letter to Du Chesne are the lines: “Copy of a letter to Mlle de Gournay. To Mlle de Schurman, and her reply, with another letter from her to Mr. du Chesne.” It appears that Van Schurman’s reply to Gournay (misdated 26 January 1647 in Opuscula, 282–84) was originally part of the manuscript collection. When it was taken out is not known. Van Schurman’s manuscript reply to Gournay is at The Hague, KB, ms. 135 D 79, where it is dated 28 February 1640. It was purchased by the library at an auction in Utrecht in 1935 (cited in the KB catalog). 259. A reference to Van Schurman’s Latin praise poem of Gournay in Opuscula, 303. 260. Added to Opuscula, 283: “and symmetry.” 261. In the final edition of her Advis (1641), Gournay honored Van Schurman by adding her to her catalog of illustrious women.

Part 1: Letters and Poems 175 sacred Tongue.262 For besides the fact that its subject matter is the word of God, which ought to be the foremost object of our thoughts, and that no translation can possibly express so well the authenticity and force of these Sacred Mysteries, Hebrew has properties and beauties that all the elegancies of either Greek or Latin cannot match. What Saint Jerome says, “Let us learn on earth those things whose knowledge will endure with us in Heaven,”263 can very well apply to Hebrew, whose use (according to the opinions of the most learned) will survive into the next life. It is to me an infallible proof of your good will that you think my intellect is born for good264 things. As for me, if I cannot satisfy the grand designs you have of my abilities, at least I shall always try to conform to your good advice, as one who is Mademoiselle, Your very humble and very obedient servant,265 Anna Maria van Schurman

30. Van Schurman to Rivet, 13 April 1640 (no. 21) The first in a series of letters on the publication of the Amica Dissertatio (1638) by Charles du Chesne.

[To the Reverend, Very Noble Gentleman, highly regarded for every Piety and erudition, Mr. Andreas Rivetus, Doctor and Professor of Very Sacred Theology, and very worthy Governor to His Highness the Young Prince. At The Hague] There was a good reason why I held back from writing to you for so long (no doubt it’s because of the very poor health of the young woman Von Falkenstein,266 and I could not fail to assist her in accordance with what Christian love requires). But now that that pretext has been removed (I say this because she has left due to the changing weather here), I was not able to thank you effusively enough in 262. Hebrew. 263. From Saint Jerome’s letter to Paulinus (Letter 53). 264. Opuscula, 284: “better things.” 265. Opuscula, 284: “and very faithful.” 266. Possibly Elisabeth of Waldeck, who in 1634 married Count William von Daun-Falkenstein (1613–1682), Lord of Broich, near Mühlheim, Germany. The count’s mother, Anna Maria of Nassau-Siegen, was related to the House of Orange-Nassau. Their daughter Charlotte Auguste von Falkenstein (1637–1713) became a close friend of the German Pietist Johanna Eleonora von Merlau (1644–1724), with whom Van Schurman corresponded. Cited in Johanna Eleonora Petersen, The Life of Lady Johanna Eleonora Petersen, Written by Herself, 10, 38. Elisabeth of Waldeck’s father was Count Christian of Waldeck-Wildungen, a notorious witch-hunter. Anne Larsen thanks Merry WiesnerHanks for this information.

176 ANNA MARIA VAN SCHURMAN AND MEMBERS OF HER CIRCLE words for the way you took care to bring me our letters from France.267 Here, in this city, there are certain eminent gentlemen who very much want a new edition of them, especially since the earlier version is so full of errors that they could not bear to see these letters republished again in such a flawed268 manner. If there is to be any gratification at all in this, perhaps we will add one or two more letters written in plain French. Please send along an example of these to that most eminent gentleman Charles du Chesne, if you have one to show.269 Farewell and stay well, Reverend Sir and dearest Father in Christ, along with your most loving Lady Wife and Niece, whose arrival we eagerly anticipate. Utrecht, exactly on the Ides of April 1640.

31. Van Schurman to Rivet, 18 July 1640 (no. 22) Van Schurman informs Rivet that Elzevier intends to publish a collection of their letters and asks him to make his portion of them available.

[Same address as 1:30] I resolved270 to reply more pointedly to your very kind letter, Reverend Sir and most beloved Father in Christ, and at the same time to lighten a little the burden I began to feel during my long wait for our most well-read Du Moulin,271 unless there is some way I could satisfy in the future my desire to do so with you face to face. However, just now I learned from the letter of a certain friend of ours that Elzevier is intending to publish momentarily our letters which had previously appeared in France, as well as some other letters sent to you. Any day now, I will allow them to be entrusted to him. I cannot refrain from asking you to make these available to him.272 I will add one or two more at the suggestion of friends because of their similarity to our argument. If further progress is to be made, I now authorize the publication of all the rest of the letters.273 As further evidence, 267. Amica Dissertatio. 268. Other meanings for vitiosa include corrupt, vicious, full of faults, defective, morally depraved. 269. Van Schurman suggests that Rivet request from Du Chesne a corrected version that would include some of her French letters. She was at this point thinking that the new edition would come from Du Chesne. 270. Decreveram, the same verb as in no. 18, 1:24; this signals that Van Schurman has officially decided to allow her letters to be published by Elzevier. 271. Lectissime nostræ Molineæ: Marie du Moulin, who was travelling back to The Hague. 272. Van Schurman uses a double negative construction which literally reads: “I am unable not to ask you earnestly not to use your power over them.” 273. Van Schurman expresses the hope that many more of her letters will be published. Her wish was fulfilled when her Opuscula appeared in 1648.

Part 1: Letters and Poems 177 I heard that the famous Van Bevervijck is engaged in this very activity, since he is relying on the authority of your example.274 Farewell to all most dear and closest to you. In extreme haste. Utrecht, 15 days before the Kalends of August 1640.

32. Van Schurman to Rivet, 4 October 1640 (no. 23) Van Schurman states that she will thank Salmasius for the gift of one of his books and mentions Gournay’s offer of a mother-daughter covenant. She sends Rivet two self-portraits.

[To the Reverend, Very Noble Gentleman, notable for his exceptional erudition and of rare Piety, Andreas Rivetus, Doctor and Professor of Very Sacred Theology, as well as very worthy Governor to His Highness the Young Prince. At The Hague] I received your letter, Reverend Sir and most beloved Father in Christ, together with the excellent Commentary by that illustrious gentleman, the honorable Mr. Salmasius.275 Truly, every single day, I am drawn increasingly into admiring his supreme talent, his very keen judgment, and his obviously inexhaustible learning. If only I could have sent him material worthy of his impressive skills. I confess that I owe much to his generosity, and I will soon repay him with a letter which (just as your humanitas urges me) I will take care reaches you.276 As for your many other kindnesses toward me, I will add the fact that you have not refused to oversee the publication of my letters.277 Your most noble Lady De Gournay recently wrote to me, offering me the possibility of strengthening a closer alliance278 between us, namely that of a mother and daughter. For this reason, I beg you urgently, in accordance with your fatherly prudence and judgment, that you advise me as rapidly as possible what I should do about this request. I am sending you only two images [self-portraits]279—so that I do not seem to be harping after even a little bit of the glory associated with your generosity. They are, in fact, of little value. But I do this on one condition: that you keep them in your home for a few weeks, perhaps to be reshaped in the forge.280 And, in fact, 274. Van Beverwijck edited the Elzevier Dissertatio. 275. Salmasius published several commentaries in 1640. 276. As her père d’alliance, Rivet requested that Van Schurman forward to him copies of her letters to eminent scholars. 277. Dissertatio (1641). 278. Foedus, a “pact,” “alliance,” or “contract.” 279. Effigies, meaning “images” or “likenesses”; an allusion to Van Schurman’s 1640 self-portrait, of which there are four slightly different versions. See Stighelen, “Hoe hooge,” 119–22; Larsen, Star of Utrecht, 181–84. 280. Van Schurman is speaking metaphorically.

178 ANNA MARIA VAN SCHURMAN AND MEMBERS OF HER CIRCLE “it is now a sure, fixed, and immovable idea in my mind”281 to fashion new ones more accurately, provided that the result corresponds to my attempt. The last part of the Theses of Voetius282 was missing; so, they are coming to you rather late.283 I am unable to write anything for certain about our trip, except that I’m quite ready in my intention to see you. In the meantime, I will beseech the best and the greatest God that He keep you and all yours safe for as long as possible. Utrecht, 4 days before the Nones of October 1640.

33. Van Schurman to Rivet, 31 March 1641 (no. 24) Van Schurman expects a visit from Rivet’s wife and her soeur d’alliance, Marie du Moulin. She recalls that Rivet is planning to travel to England with the Prince of Orange and her brother.

[To the Reverend, Noble Gentleman, of remarkable erudition and exceptional Piety, Andreas Rivetus, Doctor and Professor of Very Sacred Theology, as well as very worthy Governor to His Highness the Young Prince. At The Hague] Now, then, I can finally stop doubting the promised arrival of your Lady Wife and Niece, since you have deemed it worthy to send me your letter, as if you were holding it hostage for this very occasion. You write that very soon you will set out for England with the young Prince.284 My brother made up his mind to offer himself as a companion to both of you for this event. It would then seem for this reason that I can rightly set aside any concern regarding my Christian duty, since I am now offering prayers to God to keep my dear friends safe and bring 281. Fixum immotumque sedet animo, recalling Dido’s speech to her sister in which she admits her attraction to Aeneas, while reaffirming her commitment to avoid marriage: si mihi non animo fixum immotumque sederet / ne cui me vinclo vellem sociare iugali . . .: “if it were not remaining firmly fixed in my mind not to want to unite with anyone in the bonds of marriage. . .” (Virgil, Aeneid, 4.15–16). Dido was not as firmly committed not to marry as she claims here, given that she slept with Aeneas in a cave and commited suicide when he left her for Italy. Van Schurman quotes the expression playfully to indicate her intention to redo her self-portraits, although she may be signaling that her “fixed intention” may falter. 282. An allusion to Voetius’s disputations, either the ones on atheism, defended between 22 June and 13 July 1639, the fourth of which, containing references to Descartes, is no longer extant (see Descartes et Schoock, La Querelle d’Utrecht, 30n41); or, possibly, an early draft of his theses On the Natures and Substantial Forms of Things, which, defended on 23 and 24 December 1641, constituted a reply to the Utrecht professor Henricus Regis, who defended the circulation of the blood (see Descartes et Schoock, La Querelle d’Utrecht, 96). 283. Voetius had commissioned Van Schurman to pass on to Rivet a copy of his theses. 284. Rivet accompanied the young Prince William of Orange-Nassau to London to negotiate and sign the nuptial agreement to marry Mary Stuart, eldest daughter of Charles I and Henrietta Maria, on 2 May 1641, at Whitehall Palace in London. Mary, Princess Royal, was nine at the time; the wedding took place in November 1643. Rivet’s youngest son, Frédéric Rivet, and Van Schurman’s brother accompanied him.

Part 1: Letters and Poems 179 them back to our land. I could add a little more, but you would know all this more readily from my brother’s official report. Farewell, and stay well, together with those dearest to you and me. Utrecht, the day before the Kalends of April 1641.

34. Van Schurman to Rivet, 17 June 1641 (no. 25) This letter mentions for the first time Salmasius’s De Primatu Papae [On the Primacy of the Pope], directed against Baronius, as well as the English Civil Wars.

[Same address as in 1:33] I shared your recommendation with my brother and Mr. Voetius, Reverend Sir and dearest Father in Christ, about that gentleman’s outstanding learning and virtue. They promised they would take care of that business in all seriousness the best they could. Our Magistrate here was recently thinking of consulting a certain lawyer from Deventer285 who was a great public asset to that Sparta286 many years ago; but unless I am mistaken, time will soon tell what plans they are going to adopt. I am truly overjoyed that the Most Noble Salmasius is declaring war on the enemies of divine truth with this work of his. The great hope is that it will soon attack that giant of the Pope’s army, I mean Baronius, and lay him beaten in the dust.287 I’m very anxiously and eagerly waiting for that final act in the Anglican cause;288 but (and I state this reverently) what lies beyond us is none of our concern.289 The Fates will take care of it.290 I have not yet seen the book on the honorable Virgin.291 The very title whets my appetite because it pertains rather closely to my sex and status. I will add no more. I pray the Most Supreme God that He watch over you and keep you safe, together with your dearest Lady Wife and your Niece Du Moulin, to whom I wish returning health from the bottom of my heart. May He keep you safe for a long time. Utrecht, 15 days before the Kalends of July 1641.

285. A city in the Dutch province of Overijssel. Leading an Anglo-Dutch army, Stadtholder Maurice of Nassau recaptured the city from Spanish forces following a siege that lasted from 1 to 10 June 1591. 286. In Greek history, Sparta’s reputation rested in its superiority in war, particularly land war. 287. Caesar Baronius (Cesare Baronio, 1538–1607). See Van Schurman’s praise poem of Salmasius’s return from France, and critique of Baronius (1:50). 288. Van Schurman followed closely the events in the developing English Civil Wars, which began in 1642. 289. Erasmus, Adages, I.vi.69: Quae supra nos, nihil ad nos. 290. Virgil, Aeneid, 10.113: Fata viam invenient. 291. Rivet’s Apologetic on behalf of the most sacred Virgin Mary (1639).

180 ANNA MARIA VAN SCHURMAN AND MEMBERS OF HER CIRCLE 35. Van Schurman to Rivet, 23 April 1642 (no. 26) Ten months have passed since Van Schurman’s last letter. Van Schurman mentions Hugo Grotius for the first time and congratulates Rivet on his critique of Grotius.292

[Same address as in no. 34] Reverend Sir and Most beloved Father in Christ, I received and read thoroughly and with great delight your Observations on Mr. Grotius’s Annotations on Cassander.293 But in asking me to freely profess my opinion294 about this quite convoluted piece of writing, you are acting more generously than either your duty or my meager talent reasonably demands. I will say only this: there is no more pleasing spectacle that could have possibly appeared before my eyes than when you restored Truth to its native liberty after it had been shackled by the wicked chains of error and entangled in fraudulent snares. I have enclosed a letter to our Marie du Moulin, in which, above all else, I conceive a better hope for the improved health of her noble father.295 Farewell and be well, together with your most beloved Lady Wife. Utrecht, 9 days before the Kalends of May 1642. Your most devoted, Anna Maria van Schurman I urgently beg you, if it is not too much trouble for you, to send this little packet of letters from Mr. Voetius to France.296

36. Van Schurman to Rivet, 14 October 1642 (no. 27) Van Schurman signals a new closeness to Rivet, who confides in her over the quarrel with Grotius. She is concerned about the grave illness of Pierre du Moulin and the troubling events in Sedan, a Protestant border principality. She mentions Frederik Spanheim’s first letter to her.

[Same address as in 1:35] 292. Hugo Grotius (Hugo de Groot, 1583–1645). On the controversy, see the Introduction. Dibon (Inventaire de la correspondance d’André Rivet, 202) dates this letter to 21 April. 293. A reference to Grotius’s Annotations on the Inquiry of G. Cassander (1641). See the Introduction. 294. Sententiam libere pronunciem (to declare freely, make publicly known one’s opinion). The context is the public profession of a verdict, or an official opinion. See Cicero, De Finibus Bonorum et Malorum (On the Ends of Good and Evil), 2.36. 295. Pierre du Moulin, then in his mid-seventies, was struck down by a disease of the nervous system and suffered from deafness. Van Schurman refers to his illness another four times in her letters to Rivet. 296. The first time that Van Schurman avails herself, on Voetius’s behalf, of Rivet’s private messengers to France.

Part 1: Letters and Poems 181 It is incredible, Reverend Sir and Dearest Father in Christ, how closely you have united me to you in your previous letter. You thought it worthy to write to me so carefully and so diligently about all those things I so very much wanted to know. Indeed, those matters are much sadder to me than what I had hoped and imagined earlier. But since it seemed the most holy will of our God that they doubtlessly had to be exposed, I now have, with all due respect, no reason to continue to ignore this calamity. Certainly, even now, I am very worried about the worsening health of Mr. du Moulin and his daughter also, and about the sudden change in the Republic of Sedan which seems to threaten to destroy both its flourishing Church and its Academy.297 And, so, I could not help but interrupt again your most serious occupations. What is happening now in that place? I would like you to tell me. I’m pleading with you, earnestly, that you make me a companion to your prayers, if it doesn’t inconvenience you. Since, moreover, you wished to adorn my library and my private female quarters298 with more than one gift, I am repaying you most willingly with an artwork299 that depicts your kindnesses toward me. You have defended rightly and successfully both divine truth and your own good judgment. I affirm this, boldly, not only according to my own judgment but also based on that of others. I gave to our common friend, Mr. Voetius, a copy of your EXAMINATION as you asked me, and he took it with a thoroughly cheerful disposition, approving it enthusiastically.300 He congratulated himself very much that he had in you a voting partner301 in his view on this idolatry; and this is mainly because he also sees that this same opinion is being attacked by people who are least fit to attack him, and this through underground tunnels,302 as it were. Recently, that most outstanding person, Mr. Du Chesne, wrote to me that certain leading churchmen had come under the suspicion of apostasy, and for this reason he composed a very weighty poem;303 these things are rather obscure to me because of the Platonic number304 but no doubt they are well known to you, if I am not mistaken. 297. A reference to the disastrous consequences of the conspiracy of Sedan’s governor, FrédéricMaurice de La Tour d’Auvergne, duc de Bouillon. See the Introduction. 298. Gynaecium, literally, “women’s quarters.” 299. Tabula, a painting, picture, or engraving. 300. A reference to Rivet’s Examination of the Observations of Hugo Grotius (1642), in which he attacks Grotius for his ill-advised project of the union of the Protestant and Catholic confessions. 301. In Greek. 302. That is, surreptitiously. 303. An allusion to yet another work by Du Chesne other than The Christian Philosopher, the book he mentions in his dedication to the Amica Dissertatio, and Paradoxes on the Elements, to which Van Schurman refers in her letter to him on 18 February 1640 (no. 77, 1:28). 304. Possibly a reference to “Plato’s number” in Republic, 8.546b–d, an ambiguous text with no agreement about the value or meaning of the number.

182 ANNA MARIA VAN SCHURMAN AND MEMBERS OF HER CIRCLE However, so that I do not delay you any longer, I am forwarding this one item [the engraving] to you. I have also enclosed a letter to our sweetest Marie du Moulin, for whose misfortune I grieve deeply in my heart. Farewell, my eternally cherished Father, and please relate my regards to your most beloved Lady Wife and the fact that I long for nothing more than her continued good health, if it is not too much trouble. Utrecht. 19 days before the Kalends of November 1642. The Reverend Mr. Spanheim sent me a letter, and I was overjoyed that he arrived safely and unharmed both for our sake and for your Academy.305 My Brother and Aunts send you their warmest and most dutiful greetings.306

37. Van Schurman to Rivet, 19 November 1642 (no. 28) Van Schurman aggressively defends Rivet against Grotius. She mentions Lady Dorothy Moore, whom she urges Rivet to befriend and possibly mentor.

[To the Reverend, Very Noble, Very Illustrious and Very Learned Gentleman, Andreas Rivetus, Doctor and Professor of Very Sacred Theology, as well as very worthy Governor to His Highness the Young Prince. At The Hague] [same address as in 1:38] It is only now, Reverend Sir and Dearest Father in Christ, that I sincerely regret postponing for far too long my duty to reply to you, especially after I understood that this very delay led you to have to write to me twice. Even now I could offer you a few slim excuses, but when you (your kindness, that is) stated that you were fully satisfied, it is better for our current communication to do without further excuses. I have only this one request that, by all the rights of our friendship, you may be convinced that my affection for you remains too firm to be tested—let alone undermined—by all the machinations of ill will. As far as I am concerned, I will take special care, as much as I can, not to ask forgiveness for the same mistake again. My Sister, Lady Du Moulin, writes about the illness of her most noble Father, and I don’t know for certain whether I should be more surprised or more saddened; but I have this one great consolation: both have perseverance. So whatever troubles befall them, they will not hesitate to place themselves in the hands of divine providence. As for the rumor circulating that a troubling change is happening in the Republic of Sedan, the Academy and the Church seem not to have feared that 305. First mention of Frederik Spanheim the Elder (1600–1649), a well-established theologian and rector who taught at the University of Leiden from 1642 to his death and edited Van Schurman’s Opuscula. 306. First mention of Van Schurman’s aunts Sybille and Agnes von Harff, aged sixty and fifty-eight respectively at the time.

Part 1: Letters and Poems 183 change so much as embraced it, and it seems that, if this is true, we have only ourselves to blame.307 I eagerly await your Apologetic.308 Although I have not yet seen the spear with which your enemy is attacking you, I can still predict accurately that your victory awaits you, due to those letters you just recently produced by burning the midnight oil. For it is not possible in this arena309 for late learning310 to become sufficiently advantageous. The man nurtured from his youth in other cares and studies ought to be mocked by everyone, since he dares to fight in hand-to-hand combat with a man like you, a veteran soldier (to say nothing about his motivation for doing this). But that man, because of his reputation for discord, has perfectly brought about ill will on your account, while he, on the other hand, attributes to himself a love of peace. It is really he who is the disturber of the natural order of things, since he cannot prevent himself from mixing truth with falsehood, light with darkness, and, in the end, heaven with earth. The Most Noble Matron, Lady Moore, would have given you this letter of mine, had it not been necessary for her to leave [Utrecht], too quickly in my view. Indeed, if she could stay with you and yours at some time in the future, I very much want you to welcome her into the sacred intimacy of your Friendship: first because I know full well how much she would come to love and cherish you and your virtues; and second, due to her uncommon piety,311 the gentleness of her disposition, and the other extraordinary gifts of her intellect, my friendship with her is not at all an ordinary one.312 Your dearest, most beloved Lady Wife will not hesitate (if I am not mistaken) to help you in every respect, and I pray earnestly 307. See Van Schurman’s letter to Rivet on 14 October 1642 (no. 27, 1:36), in which she asks for more information on the political and religious events in Sedan. 308. The Apologetic of A. Rivetus for the true and sincere peace of the church (1643), Rivet’s counterattack against Grotius, completed at the end of 1642. This work is listed as no. 26 under the octavo titles in the auction catalog of Labadist books. See Beek and Bürmann, “Ex Libris,” 61. 309. Palestra, an Ancient Greek term for a school of rhetoric. Plato, in Republic, 452b, uses it to indicate a site for Olympic competitions; see also in Part 1 note 189. Throughout this passage, Van Schurman employs language associated with the military and athletics to describe Rivet’s disagreements with Grotius. 310. In Greek, opsimatheia. Van Schurman may have Theophrastus’s Characters 27 in mind. Theophrastus defines the term as follows: ἡ δὲ ὀψιμαθία φιλοπονία δόξειεν ἂν εἶναι ὑπὲρ τὴν ἡλικίαν, “Late-learning would seem to mean the desire to work after the appropriate age.” In other words, one can be too old to begin to learn certain things. Later in the passage, Theophrastus writes of a man who is a “late learner” that he might “go into the palaestra and wrestle,” presumably with younger and more capable men (καὶ προσανατρίβεσθαι εἰσιὼν εἰς τὰς παλαίστρας). Van Schurman means that Grotius has come to these matters too late and too recently to fully understand the parameters of the debate he is entering and will be no match for a man of Rivet’s thoughtfulness and learning. 311. Piety in the sense of devotion to God, country, and family. 312. On Moore and Van Schurman, see the Introduction.

184 ANNA MARIA VAN SCHURMAN AND MEMBERS OF HER CIRCLE for her good health. Farewell, and remain in good health as much as you can, my Father, and that comes from all of us here. I am rooted in my perennial love and appreciation for you. Continue to show that love to me in return.313 Utrecht, 13 days before the Kalends of December 1642. 38. Van Schurman to Rivet, 20 January 1643 (no. 36)314 Van Schurman continues her critique of Grotius and mentions Pierre du Moulin’s illness.

[Same address as in 1:37. Letters from 1:40 to 1:53 bear the same address] I have read from cover to cover your Apologetic315 [against Grotius], Reverend Sir and most beloved Father in Christ, and I admired it greatly. It has surpassed my expectations and has overcome the weariness of a rather long delay [in reaching me]. As soon as it arrived, it compensated for everything with its own charm. But in this I acknowledge your humanitas toward me because you chose me, along with your other friends, not only as a spectator but also as a judge of this most noble combat.316 Indeed, I know that it is not my place to give an opinion about those matters that rest upon authority; still, for my part, I wouldn’t be stepping too much out of line if I were to proclaim in advance that you are triumphant over a well-known enemy in a decisive struggle.317 For who does not see that you have fought so well on behalf of divine truth, and no one else would have been able to plead this case with more zeal, or knowledge, or foresight, or success than you? Indeed, your estimation of the talent, in the first place, and then of the knowledge of Mr. Grotius was profound before this; but now, after he has begun to labor at things unfamiliar to his reason and his studies (as it was thought even before he began), and to attack with some very bitter jokes the entire Reformation and its most distinguished champions, “no one misses the Grotius in Grotius.”318 Moreover, how ridiculous it is, how inauspicious that a man who does not agree with others or even with himself (which you have excellently shown) should take 313. Van Schurman resumes here a final salutation that she had foregone in previous letters, starting with her letter dated 5 October 1639 (no. 18, 1:24). Since she was running out of space, she attached it to the body of the letter. 314. Included in Opuscula, 197–99. 315. The Apologetic . . . for the sincere peace of the church (1643), referred to in the previous letter of 19 November 1642 (no. 28, 1:37). 316. Van Schurman continues the athletic metaphors of the previous letter; she is the spectator and judge and is pronouncing victory for Rivet. 317. See letter no. 26 (1:35), in which Van Schurman states that she will not publicly profess her opinion of Grotius. 318. A play on “Looking for Rome in Rome,” a famous epigram by the sixteenth-century Italian humanist Janus Vitalis on the ruins of Rome.

Part 1: Letters and Poems 185 it upon himself, unasked, to proclaim as if on the tripod (as they say),319 that we can and should agree with the Papists. What you mentioned in your letter on the illness of Mr. du Moulin is such that I am not even shaken by the thought of it. For I am enjoying most of all this consolation that divine inspiration has fully supplied to him those remedies (I am talking about the most ardent prayers) that should be considered more important even than good health. For all that, I hope that our great and powerful God will soon abundantly grant happier events and, also, restore your Lady Wife to her former good health. Farewell, most beloved Father, along with all of yours. Utrecht, 12 days before the Kalends of January1643. At the next opportunity, I will send a letter to my Sister, whose reply I await in the meanwhile. My aunts send their greetings from the bottom of their heart to you and your Lady Wife; and I do the same.

39. Van Schurman to Rivet, 1 March 1643 (no. 37) Van Schurman mentions Pierre du Moulin’s illness and the developing English Civil Wars.

I am waiting for my sister’s letter—for which you gave me some hope long ago— so that I might reply more appropriately to both of you at once. However, I am especially afraid of one thing—namely your feelings about me—that I may seem inconsiderate because I have delayed so long in replying to you, precisely to avoid seeming rude. I will delay no longer because the things you mention in your letter are clearly uncertain or for someone else to judge, so that we might not be seen deservedly, perchance, to have neglected our duty.320 Thus I now come to your earlier letter for which I owe you the greatest debt, the one where you inform me

319. In Greek. A reference to the oracle at Delphi. Van Schurman imagines Grotius positioning himself as God’s spokesman. Sarah Iles Johnston describes the common image of the oracle at Delphi: “A virgin, robed in white, enters a darkened room at the back of the temple. She sits on a tripod, which is positioned over a chasm in the earth. From the chasm pour forth intoxicating vapors, and as they fill her body, she becomes possessed by Apollo. She speaks for the god in an incoherent voice, and her gibbering message is translated by priests into poetic verse that enquirers will be able to understand.” See Johnston, Ancient Greek Divination (Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell, 2008), 33. To be fair, Johnston goes on to assess the accuracy of this description in the rest of her chapter, but undoubtedly this common image is what Van Schurman has in mind. 320. Since Van Schurman’s last letter of 20 January 1643 (no. 36, 1:38), in which she thanks Rivet for treating her as his confidante, she deliberately includes him in her assessment of the theological landscape using the “we” narrative pronoun. Throughout the letters, she uses the “we” pronoun as a polite version of “I,” but given the new closeness they share in these letters, Van Schurman wants to show her agreement with him.

186 ANNA MARIA VAN SCHURMAN AND MEMBERS OF HER CIRCLE about the situation at Sedan.321 You promised that you would do this on a regular basis (should anything of great importance happen). We are also very affected (as is fitting) by what has happened to Mr. du Moulin and his family. Yet however many times I have thought of the peaceful and admirable constancy of that gentleman, I believe that nothing remains for him except a glorious victory over so numerous and terrible difficulties. I beg you earnestly that when the book on ethics that he recently dictated to his daughter is published, you make it available for me to read.322 I would also very much like to know more about this business on religion, which that distinguished delegation obtained from the King and about which you wrote to me.323 But since nothing now in the whole wide world and particularly in this kingdom is exempt from the danger of change, I scarcely retain any hope, let alone hope that nothing detrimental will happen to the Church of Christ. Before this you and I used to follow with certain favorable omens the affairs of England. But now, those favorable omens are being cast aside not only by those who first opposed the spreading tyranny (you know what I am referring to), but also (how disgraceful!) even by our very own countrymen, among whom are those who were once such strong proponents of a similar cause but are now openly attacking it, and this not in secret.324 I am afraid that, surrounded by so many enemies, they will not be able to hold out for much longer. I heard that you were rather saddened, as you usually are, about the impending troubles of the church. I share your anxiety if that is the case—I really do not doubt it. I pray that the great God above bring much needed counsel to those who are in charge. Farewell, kindest Father, and greetings from all of us. Greetings, also, to your dearest Lady Wife. Utrecht, the Kalends of March 1643.

40. Van Schurman to Rivet, 1 April 1643 (no. 29)325 In this encouraging letter to a discouraged Rivet, Van Schurman mentions Du Moulin’s protracted illness; the ongoing quarrel with Grotius; and Voetius’s quarrel with Samuel Desmarets over the Confraternity of the Virgin.

321. See her letters no. 27, 1:36, and no. 28, 1:37, in which she mentions the troubles at Sedan. 322. Ethics, or Moral Science (Ethique, ou Science Morale, Paris: Thomas Blaise & Olivier de Varennes, 1644). This is the third part of Philosophy translated into French & divided into three Parts, namely, Elements of Logic, Physics or Natural Science, Ethics or Moral Science (1644). Marie du Moulin assisted her father in transcribing his works. 323. Van Schurman follows closely the developing English Civil Wars. 324. On the refusal of the States General to take sides in the conflict, see the Introduction. 325. Opuscula, 199–201.

Part 1: Letters and Poems 187 O! How unstable is the condition of the Church of God! Or is it just a rumor that there is now a new crowd of persecutors threatening the people of the Reformation in France326 where, for a long time, just like the Prophet Daniel among the lions,327 she was safe and almost secure in the middle of her enemies? I became aware of this in no uncertain terms from your last letter to Mr. Voetius.328 Although this letter affects me greatly, certainly nothing remains for us than with our prayers to entrust unanimously to God the protection of His cause. He is easily able to steer all evils away from His own people, or, if He has decided otherwise, He is still able to turn these evils into good.329 But those things that require—beyond what is expected of all pious people—our prudence, piety, faith, and perseverance do not seem to cast greater cares upon us other than injury. In truth, the faithful servants of the Word experience especially this, and as soon as they take up the defense of the purer doctrine they are attacked by virulent and poisonous weapons,330 and if they try either to deflect or to avoid those weapons, they are then immediately judged to have repented for their ideas rather than for truth and piety. Here, lately, your defense of the truth against Grotius,331 although it is perfect in every detail of knowledge, has still not been able to prevent the calumny of your adversary. Our common friend Mr. Voetius332 runs that same risk now since he openly refutes too much333 the Apologetic on Mary334 with his misguided approach.335 But, I ask, what was the reason for this? Why does he [Voetius] collude with Grotius in this way? Is it because of the honor of his position? But what should be refuted most of all is that he did more harm by his example than by the sin itself. As you well know, Calvin admirably demolished336 this position in his own book De

326. France is replaced by asterisks in Opuscula. 327. Daniel 6. 328. As Van Schurman’s close neighbor, Voetius shared Rivet’s letters with her. 329. Romans 8:28. Cf. also Saint Augustine, The Enchiridion, chap. 100: “nor would a Good Being permit evil to be done only that in His omnipotence He can turn evil into Good.” See The Enchiridion, trans. J.F. Shaw, in St. Augustine: On the Holy Trinity; Doctrinal Treatises; Moral Treatises, vol. 3 of Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, ed. Philip Schaff (Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans, 1956), 269. 330. The words of the malevolent are added in Opuscula. 331. Allusion to Rivet’s Apologetic . . . for the sincere peace of the church, published in early 1643. 332. Voetius is left out in Opuscula. 333. As they think is added in Opuscula. The editor softens Van Schurman’s critique of Voetius. 334. Rivet’s Apologetic on behalf of the Virgin (1639). 335. His misguided approach is left out of Opuscula. Van Schurman dares to critique her former professor; no modesty trope attenuates her freedom to criticize him for undermining Rivet. She is appalled at the rift and its possible repercussion. 336. Explodit (exploded), a strong verb.

188 ANNA MARIA VAN SCHURMAN AND MEMBERS OF HER CIRCLE Scandalis.337 And the Holy Spirit does not want us to be without the example of the Apostle [Paul], who opposed Saint Peter to his face and in public and openly before all, stating that he was headed down the wrong path.338 Indeed, what we are amazed at all the more is that he [Paul] has inscribed with black ink, in divine and eternally enduring monuments, the failure of so great a light of the Church. I have thus poured out more freely these things into your lap because I am unable to hide anything from you that touches us so closely. I have decided at the first opportunity to write to my sister at greater length concerning the matters of Sedan.339 Be well and farewell, together with your dearest Lady Wife. In haste. Utrecht, 5 days before the Nones of April 1643. My Aunts and my Brother send you their greetings very lovingly.

41. Van Schurman to Rivet, 31 May 1643 (no. 30) Van Schurman informs Rivet that her brother, who is “rushing” to see him, will relay her urgent situation. She is waiting for Marie du Moulin.

I will not keep you long, Reverend Sir and beloved Father in Christ. My brother, who is rushing to see you, will openly relay to you my situation.340 I will offer a small start now, by trying to curry your favor with this little gift of words: this I can do easily if you are willing to look upon them not so much for their intrinsic value as for the spirit in which they are offered. I wait as anxiously as is possible for my sister Lady du Moulin. Farewell and stay well. Send my greetings to your dearest Lady Wife. Utrecht, the day before the Kalends of June 1643.

42. Van Schurman to Rivet, 1 July 1643 (no. 32) Van Schurman expresses her alarm over a French translation of her Dissertatio (1641) and does not know if the request came from Queen Anne of Austria or from Charles du Chesne, the editor of her Amica Dissertatio. 337. Calvin, in his polemical De Scandalis (On Scandals, 1550), attacked skeptics who criticized the Reformation. He critiqued three kinds of offences: taking offence at the gospel; sects, confusion, and impiety; and slander against reformed practices. 338. Galatians 2:11–21, in which Saint Paul confronts the apostle Peter over his erroneous understanding of circumcision. In a letter to Rivet dated 10 October 1645 (no. 224), in Saumaise and Rivet, Correspondance, 451, Salmasius cites the same passage as he opposes Grotius’s indictment of divisions within the Christian church; the apostles themselves did not agree with each other, yet this did not prevent the “truth of religion” to shine forth. 339. See her letters no. 27, 1:36, and no. 28, 1:37. 340. See the next letter on the situation confronting an anxious Van Schurman.

Part 1: Letters and Poems 189 Reverend Sir, and Beloved Father in Christ, Here you have my letter to forward to the royal Physician.341 In it I state some objections so that I can remove myself very far, and as much as possible, from the task of translating these little works342 into French. But, of course, if the Queen343 persists in her opinion—for you know that in an earlier letter I have agreed to yield my little work to her wishes in this regard—I don’t see by what other colorful pretext I can manage her request; you will easily know this from conversing with Du Chesne, who, for this reason I thought, ought to be communicating with you. I recently found out from your letter to a certain friend that the office of ambassador to the French queen was offered to your son by our most exalted Prince; I heartily congratulate you and your family on this nomination.344 I see that Mr. du Moulin has undertaken a long and arduous journey. How I wish that I could soon hear about the fortunate outcome of this consultation. Farewell and stay well, Father most dear to me, and send my eternal regards to your most beloved Lady Wife. Utrecht, the Kalends of July 1643. Yours with the greatest respect, Anna Maria van Schurman 345 I am sending you some samples because I learned you were eagerly expecting some from my Brother, who greets you very dutifully together with my Aunts.

43. Van Schurman to Rivet, 15 July 1643 (no. 31) Van Schurman is alarmed at Du Chesne’s prospective French translation of her Dissertatio (Leiden, 1641). Rivet has suggested that she write a new book in French on the same arguments.

341. Charles du Chesne, who had published the Amica Dissertatio in 1638, was one of Louis XIII’s personal physicians. 342. The Dissertatio (1641). 343. Anne of Austria (1601–1666), wife of Louis XIII, and regent of France during the minority of her son, Louis XIV, from 1643 to 1651. 344. Claude Rivet (1603–1647), Rivet’s second son, came into the employ of the Prince of Orange, Frederik Hendrik, in 1639 as gentleman of his court. In June 1643, he was sent to Paris to present the prince’s condolences to Anne of Austria following the death of Louis XIII, and to congratulate her on the Regency. He was also commissioned to urge the queen to return to the duc de Bouillon the principality of Sedan, which had been confiscated in 1642. While in Paris, he paid visits to several famous savants. On Claude Rivet, see Tulot, “Familles de l’Eglise reformée de Thouars,” 69–71. On Rivet’s delight with his son’s return to Holland, see his letter to Salmasius, 30 November 1639, in Saumaise and Rivet, Correspondance, 156. 345. Exemplaria, possibly art samples.

190 ANNA MARIA VAN SCHURMAN AND MEMBERS OF HER CIRCLE I received your letter, Reverend Sir and beloved Father in Christ, together with the letter of Mr. du Chesne. I see clearly here that there are many intrusions that are foreign to my original intention. Let me explain. He apparently wants to undertake a new version [in French] of what someone else has already brought to completion [in Latin], and it seems to me that this is not only a bad idea, but also a complete waste of time. I would easily think that any reader, however gifted and eloquent in this kind of writing (which is itself difficult to follow) could delight in a variety of diction; and I wouldn’t dare hope to gain even some small bit of glory from this endeavor. But still, when my thoughts get stirred up about the powerful will of the Queen, to whom I have pledged my faith, and about her power over me, I am careful that while I am attempting to avoid the charge of arrogance, I might be condemned—and rightly so—of inconstancy and frivolity. Your advice to submit a new work with the same arguments would please me, but it would take too long—unless this gentleman [Du Chesne], compelled by a renewed order from the Queen, insists that I undertake the work as soon as possible. However, if this were now being carried out not so much by the Queen’s authority, but rather, as you suspect, by Mr. du Chesne’s own personal initiative (which you can ferret out easily through your friends, if I’m not mistaken), then he could certainly take care of this task [of translating it] himself without much difficulty. She wrote not a single word to me about a translation; and I think that it would scarcely be the case that our printers here would undertake such a work if they thought that an edition of the same kind was to come soon to this area. Furthermore—provided only that it’s not too much trouble for you—find out according to your better judgment what possible rationale will perhaps move the author [Du Chesne] to desist from this undertaking, if that is the right thing. I had decided to reply more carefully to every single point in your letter. But Mrs. Roussel,346 to whom I have given this to be brought [to you], is in such a great hurry that I must put down my pen now. Farewell and stay well, my most upright Protector.347 To you and your Lady Wife we send all our greetings. Utrecht, the Ides of July 1643.

44. Van Schurman to Rivet, 2 August 1643 (no. 33) Van Schurman rejoices that Du Chesne dropped the translation after Rivet asked Princess Anne de Rohan to inquire from the queen whether the idea of the translation came from her or from Du Chesne, as Rivet had suspected. She mentions Spanheim’s arrival in Leiden. 346. On Juliana de Roussel (ca. 1600–1669), see the Introduction. 347. In contrast to Du Chesne, who is looking out for his own interests rather than hers. See the following letter.

Part 1: Letters and Poems 191 I was unable, Reverend Sir and dearest Father in Christ, to thank you at the first opportunity. So here are my thanks not so much for the concern and trouble you went through, but rather because you brought to naught by your prudence the imprudence—or dare I say the vanity—that that man [Du Chesne] showered on me. Also, at the same time (and I think I have you to thank for this), you have zealously arranged for me an extraordinary favor from that incomparable Heroine.348 And although, in my estimation, I think the resolution would be better if I continued to venerate in silence her admirable virtues, still I will not be afraid to address her as soon as I can with my little letter [of thanks], should you think it appropriate. But I do not anticipate, nor do I desire, an opportunity fitting enough for me to address the Queen. For you know how much I have detested excessive fame throughout my entire life. I rejoice that Mr. du Moulin, together with his dear companion, has happily completed his journey. But, really, you have added this sad news on top of the misfortune of his young son.349 The only thing left for us to do is that we must pray to the great and supreme God that He put an end to so many terrible troubles. The arrival of Mr. Spanheim has filled me with incredible joy.350 He is a gentleman of every kind of learning and distinguished piety, and he surpasses my expectations with his supreme charm. “O! Three and four times blessed”351 that person’s lot to whom such a great and like-minded352 friend has befallen! If only I had come to know his merits earlier and could have manifested the pleasure with which I embrace such a man. I congratulate your son for having so happily and so honorably been granted the ambassadorship.353 I cannot write any more now because I have friends who are staying with me. Farewell and remain healthy, Great Glory of the Church. I ask you fervently to send my greetings to all those dearest to you, especially your Lady Wife. Utrecht, 4 days before the Nones of August 1643.

348. Anne de Rohan, whom Van Schurman elsewhere calls a “Heroine,” found out from the queen that Du Chesne was acting on his own initiative and not on the queen’s command. 349. Something has happened to one of the children that Pierre du Moulin had with his second wife, Sara de Gelhay. The nature of this event is unknown. 350. Frederik Spanheim (1600–1649), a theologian and the editor of Opuscula. 351. See, for example, Homer, Odyssey, 5.305–6, and Virgil, Aeneid, 1.94. 352. In Greek, isopsychos. 353. See Van Schurman’s letter, dated 1 July 1643 (no. 32, 1:42), in which she refers to Claude Rivet’s new post.

192 ANNA MARIA VAN SCHURMAN AND MEMBERS OF HER CIRCLE 45. Van Schurman to Rivet, 3 September 1643 (no. 34) Van Schurman comments on Du Chesne’s request to know her birthplace and date. She replies that she was born on 5 November 1606 (sic).

In your previous letter I learned about the state of Mr. du Moulin, and I am terribly sad that his health did not improve from taking the waters at Spa.354 What you say about that chief physician355 is very surprising; but I am very gratified by your request, as you see in this little page356 which I am sending you. I do not understand why he wants to know the exact date and time of my birth: but because you commend him as a man of unusual piety, I’m not afraid that he will harm me by looking into my horoscope, or the little details therein. I shed my first tears in this world in Cologne on 5 November 1606.357 I cannot be certain about the hour and exact moment because the book in which all that information is noted is lost to us. What you ask me for my Sister’s sake, I do every day and intend to keep on doing. I will do it with her even more in my letters when I find a little bit of time.358 Farewell, take care of yourself, dear Father, along with your very dear Lady Wife. My aunts, brother, and Mr. Voetius359 greet you very lovingly in return. Utrecht, three days before the Nones of September 1643.

46. Van Schurman to Rivet, 15 November 1643 (no. 35) Van Schurman mentions a letter from Anne de Rohan. She is satisfied that Du Chesne has abandoned the idea of a translation. She refers to a rumor of an invitation to France, which she treats lightly.

It is not a problem that you spoke about me [to Anne de Rohan], Reverend Sir and dearest Father in Christ, but let me take this opportunity to compensate for the brevity of that letter [to her] with some chattiness in this letter to you. I 354. The waters at Spa, a municipality in the province of Liège, present-day Belgium, reputed for its healing cold springs. Salmasius was cured of a disease in 1633 by the Silesian physician and orientalist Johannes Elichmann (1601/2–1639), who gave him pills containing the waters of Spa. Cohen, Ecrivains français en Hollande, 319. 355. Archiater is the Greek word for the chief physician of a monarch. Van Schurman adopts a bantering tone from here on regarding Du Chesne. 356. Schedula, a small page. 357. Van Schurman writes 1606 rather than 1607. Pierre Yvon confirms her birthdate as 5 November 1607 (Appendix D). 358. A possible reference to Van Schurman’s mentoring Marie du Moulin in Hebrew. 359. Voetius is included to indicate that although he had been at odds with Rivet over his Apologetic [. . .] on the Virgin (see the letter dated 1 April 1643, no. 29, 1:40), he was still on good speaking terms with Rivet.

Part 1: Letters and Poems 193 read with great delight the letter of the incomparable Princesse de Rohan, and I think that you will not take it amiss if I share it with you because I rightly ought to entrust you with such an illustrious testimony of her kindnesses toward me. So, I have added here my reply to her which, if it seems appropriate to you, I ask you to forward to France. Clearly, these [kindnesses] are heroic, and furthermore what you say of her niece, the duchesse de Rohan, is worthy of the conduct of a Christian Princess.360 May the greatest and most trustworthy God and the originator and perfector361 of our faith see to it that through such an outstanding example of his steadfastness her Royal House remains illustrious. The health of your wife would not have discouraged us, had you not also announced at the same time that she made a full recovery. I hope that God, who is kind, will keep her safe for us for a long time, and that she remains healthy. Similarly, I think some new positive developments are being announced about the health of the illustrious Mr. du Moulin. Nothing forbids us from remaining hopeful about a quick end to his disease because it is possible that divine help will overcome its power and tenaciousness. I now see that our Doctor [Du Chesne] has acquiesced to your advice, although even now he remains steadfast in his view that he ventured nothing in this matter without the Queen’s consent. In the same letter from Salmasius, there is no mention of the latter’s return; but he writes that he has heard something about my summons to France that was arranged, or so he says, in Attalic magnificence.362 As things now stand, I am enjoying this one pleasant thought: the Seine river will, at some point in the future, welcome me; but if, in fact, it does not, just the thought of it will also do so, if I can only complete the journey in my imagination. Let me know when the most noble Mr. Salmasius arrives because I’m afraid that if he stays too long there [in France], an angry sea will arise again at this time of the year.363 However, I have kept you too long; I will add just one more thing. A report has reached me that Ambassadors from two African Kings, together with 360. On Marguerite de Rohan, see the Introduction. 361. In Greek: archegos kai telesotes. 362. Attalus III, king of Pergamon, was known for his extravagance. Upon his death in 133 BCE, he willed his territory to the Romans and, as a result, his name became synonymous with generosity and splendor. 363. Salmasius was forced to return to France on family business—his father had died in January 1640. His trip lasted three full years, from October 1640 to the end of October 1643. The French Crown did everything in its power to retain him; his wife, Anne Mercier, who loved Paris, had no desire to return. But he did return because of the “freedom [. . .] to say, write, and do” what he wished for “the repose and tranquility of one’s conscience” (cited in Leroy, Le dernier voyage, 114). He was also working on his De Primatu Papae—he had left the beginning of the manuscript with Elzevier and wanted to return to the Netherlands to complete the book. Rivet urged him to publish it to counter not only Baronius but also Théophile Brachet de La Milletière (1588–1665), who sought the reunification of the Catholic and Protestant confessions in On the Necessity of the Pope to the Church, as a remedy against schism

194 ANNA MARIA VAN SCHURMAN AND MEMBERS OF HER CIRCLE their retinues, who are embracing the Reformed Faith, are expected any day now at The Hague; they are going to ask for our help to propagate the Christian faith. When this happens, I will easily learn these things (if they are true) from you.364 Farewell, most Beloved Father in Christ. My Aunts and Brother greet you and your Lady Wife as dutifully and lovingly as possible. And I do the same. Utrecht, 17 days before the Kalends of December 1643. Here you have a History of the Academy which our common friend Mr. Voetius sends to you with an appendix on other matters by Thysius,365 and he sends his greetings, too.

47. Van Schurman to Rivet, 18 December 1643 (no. 42)366 Van Schurman mentions the developing controversy over Moïse Amyraut’s defense of universal salvation, Pierre du Moulin’s book on moral philosophy, and François Cupif.

I willingly prosecute myself on the charge of neglecting my duty, Reverend Sir and dearest Father in Christ, when I recall not only that you do not scorn my little letters, even though they are void of importance, but also that you complain to me frequently about their infrequency, which is how you show your indulgence toward me. Otherwise I am somewhat fearful that in sending you more letters I would be daring to interrupt your more serious work, especially since there is nothing that I think worthier of your learning. For I have not examined enough (Paris, 1640). Salmasius left France on 17 November 1643, heading to the Netherlands by boat (Leroy, Le dernier voyage, 103). See Van Schurman’s poem on Salmasius’s arrival in the Netherlands (1:50). 364. A partially true rumor. In June 1643, Dom Miguel de Castro, the official representative of an African Gold Coast king, arrived in Amsterdam with a retinue of two servants to meet with the Dutch West India Company (WIC), which, under the leadership of Johan Maurits, Prince of Nassau-Siegen, was attempting to secure the slave trade through an alliance. The WIC directors hoped to dispatch a Reformed minister and Protestant schoolmasters to undermine the presence of the Portuguese and the Catholic Church in the Gold Coast, but to no avail: “Protestant preachers were simply not welcome in the Catholic kingdom” of Congo. See Mark Meuwese, Brothers in Arms, Partners in Trade: Dutch Indigenous Alliances in the Atlantic World, 1595–1674 (Leiden and Boston: Brill, 2012), 212. On the WIC in Africa, see Elizabeth A. Sutton, Early Modern Dutch Prints of Africa (Farnham, UK, and Burlington, VT: Ashgate, 2012), and Johannes Postma, The Dutch in the Atlantic Slave Trade, 1600– 1815 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990). Our thanks to Marsely Kehoe for these titles. 365. Antonius Thysius the Younger (ca. 1613–1665), son of Antonius Thysius (1565–1640), professor of theology at Leiden, taught literature at Leiden and became a state historiographer. Thysius the Elder contributed to a volume of fifty-two disputations on theology, together with Johannes Polyander van Kerckoven the Elder and Rivet, which became a standard manual for students of theology. See F.G.M. Broeyer, “Theological Education at the Dutch Universities in the Seventeenth Century: Four Professors on their Ideal of the Curriculum,” NAVK 85 (2005): 120. 366. Opuscula, 209–10.

Part 1: Letters and Poems 195 how I have been able to acquire such a close friendship with you, an epistolary friendship between us that I greatly revere, and that I rightly owe entirely to you. For this reason, I know that you will kindly receive whatever I send you here. Your news about the situation at Sedan367 suggests that no amount of human counsel can make it better; so, we ought therefore to accelerate our hopes and prayers for divine Mercy. If only on this occasion the remaining French368 Churches could earnestly remember that God imparts His singular grace strictly to his own, they would not allow it to be obscured by any machination of Satan, who cannot endure the light of this doctrine of salvation.369 We are anxiously awaiting the work370 of the famed Mr. du Moulin, whose virtue, after so many calamities, shines as brightly as the sun breaking through the clouds. The fact that these works will come to me, along with the name of my sister371 (as you mention), is a mark of honor that I nevertheless have not deserved. For it isn’t the case that everything he produces with his pen and his intellect isn’t most pleasing to me.372 May the best and the greatest God keep you for a long time for the honor and protection of his Church, along with your most beloved Lady Wife. My aunts and my brother send you greetings. So do I. Utrecht, 15 days before the Kalends of January 1644. About the two letters that you mention in your letter to Mr. Cupif,373 I suspect that the last of the two got lost because I have been anxiously and vainly waiting for it. I beg you earnestly to take care of the letter herewith enclosed as soon as you reach France.

367. The condition of ***, in Opuscula, 209. 368. French is left out in Opuscula, 210. 369. The saving light of this doctrine, in Opuscula, 210. An allusion to the developing controversy over Amyraut’s belief in universal salvation, which was opposed to Calvinist orthodoxy. See the Introduction. 370. Operum Philosophicorum is added in Opuscula, 210. This work is Philosophy translated into French & divided into three Parts, namely, Elements of Logic [. . .] (1644), previously mentioned in Van Schurman’s letter of 1 March 1643 (no. 37, 1:39). Several editions appeared that year. In a letter dated 1 August 1644, in Rivet and Sarrau, Correspondance intégrale, 2:344, Rivet mentions that he is awaiting the arrival of “La Philosophie de Mons. du Moulin.” The Latin version appeared in Amsterdam in 1645. 371. The three parts of Du Moulin’s La Philosophie were dedicated to Marie du Moulin. 372. Van Schurman often phrases her thoughts in the double negative, a rhetorical feature of the modesty trope. 373. François Cupif, Sieur de La Beraudière (d. ca. 1683). See the Introduction.

196 ANNA MARIA VAN SCHURMAN AND MEMBERS OF HER CIRCLE 48. Van Schurman to Rivet, 21 December 1643 (no. 40) Van Schurman has resolved not to write to people whom she does not know, a decision that may have been influenced by Rivet. She sends him, nonetheless, two letters to strangers to edit.

I am surprised at the mishap that occurred since you sent me your last letter. My letters have apparently not yet reached you; these are letters I had arranged to be forwarded to you the week before last. I assumed that because they were handed over to the seaman himself from my hand to his, they would have reached you by now. So, I must at least do this one thing, that I show by deeds rather than merely words how I prepared myself to do everything I could for your sake. For indeed because of reasons which you well know, it remains “fixed and immobile in my mind”374 that I will no longer engage in letter exchanges with people I do not know. I would make an exception for the two letters I am attaching here. I’m telling you this because I think this news would please you and because, if I didn’t tell you, I would risk breaking your trust. Farewell, Reverend Sir and Dearest Father in Christ. All of us greet you and your Lady Wife affectionately. In haste, 12 days before the Kalends of January 1644. I am leaving you these two letters of mine which you should edit, so that if by chance there are some errors in them because of my haste, you could either correct them yourself, or send them back for me to correct.

49. Van Schurman to Rivet, 28 December 1643 (no. 41) Van Schurman states that she is not entirely to be blamed for wanting to write to Rivet so soon after her last letter the week before (see 1:48), since she needs to continue writing to people whom she cannot refuse. She recommends the son of a friend, who seeks a position at court.

It is so difficult to keep to the mean,375 Reverend Sir and Dearest Father in Christ, for when I recently sinned through my long-lasting silence, now I do not want to overwhelm you with a barrage of letters. But I would not want to blame myself entirely, since I have been fulfilling the wishes of others whom I cannot completely refuse. Thus, Madame du Tour376 (unless I am mistaken, she is not 374. Virgil, Aeneid, 4.15. Van Schurman quotes Dido’s assertion to her sister Anna that she will remain faithful to her pledge not to remarry after the death of her first husband, Sychaeus—a pledge Dido breaks for the hero Aeneas; cf. in Part 1, note 279. Van Schurman breaks her own pledge not to engage in exchanges with strangers in the very next line. She jokes with Rivet here, hoping to ingratiate him to her request to edit them. 375. In Greek, to meson. Cf. Aristotle, Nichomachean Ethics, 2.6.16–17, in which he states that “virtue is the observance of the mean.” 376. Unidentified.

Part 1: Letters and Poems 197 well known to you) asked me to introduce you to her son, who is eagerly seeking you out. As I understand it, he aspires to a position at your court, and he wishes very much that you would help him with your advice and influence.377 Moreover, he has friends among the courtiers at The Hague who will recommend him to our most Exalted Prince,378 and they would not regard their effort in doing so as a burden should they be able to join you in the same effort. And for this reason, I, too, would be willing to seek this position for him. Also, you can easily learn more about his studies and virtues from Mr. Spanheim.379 As for me, I’m not accustomed to undertaking willingly this type of request, nor am I used to speaking about such a thing to you who are so busy. But because I could not turn away this very pious Matron because of old ties of friendship, especially when she confided that I could do a lot for her with you and His Highness, you would bind the two of us together more closely if you would allow this hope, which she has placed in you, not to go unfulfilled. Farewell, and convey my heartfelt greetings to your Lady Wife. My brother and aunts say the same to you. Utrecht, 5 days before the Kalends of January 1644.

50. Van Schurman to Salmasius, 3 January 1644380 Van Schurman celebrates Salmasius’s long-awaited return from France after a threeyear sojourn, and the anticipated publication of his De Primatu Papae, written to counter Baronius’s influential Counter-Reformation history of the Roman Catholic Church.

Nobilissimo Doctissimoque Heroum D. CLAUDIO SALMASIO felicem è Galliis reditum gratulatur ANNA MARIA A SCHURMAN Hospes ave Batavis jam tandem reddite terris:   Quin orbis resonet: Battavus Hospes ave. Quem Regum illecebræ, quem tot promissa Potentum   Reddere vel patrio non potuêre solo. 5 Hinc tibi, Salmasi, quos non referemus honores?   Qui nos prætuleris gratis honore tuis. 377. The court at The Hague where Rivet was tutor to the Prince of Orange. 378. Stadtholder Frederik Hendrik. 379. Spanheim had taught the young man at Leiden. 380. Opuscula, 308. See Van Schurman’s letter to Rivet, 15 November 1643 (no. 35, 1:46), in which she asks to be informed of Salmasius’s arrival.

198 ANNA MARIA VAN SCHURMAN AND MEMBERS OF HER CIRCLE Nunc quoque te fama est, pro nostris fortiter aris,   Moliri summum Relligionis opus. Pessimus interpres veteris Baronius ævi 10   Protinus ultrices sensit adesse minas. Et licet ingentes imitetur mole gigantes,   Crede mihi, calamo mox cadet ille tuo. Quid ni? cum septem geminæ præcordia Lernæ   Vix animam, ante tuo fulmine tacta, trahant. 15 Hoc tibi certamen merito decernit Olympus,   Ut paret Alcidi digna trophæa suo. Quod si vota mei non dedignabere sexus.   Is quoque grata tibi præmia sponte feret. Blanda puellarum comitabitur aura triumphos; 20   Virgineusque canet carmina læta chorus. Hæc agitanda viris potius si cura videtur,      Est tamen à nostro non aliena foro. Proque Lupa Cæsar, cum tu pro virgine certes,   Cur non virgo tibi laurea serta daret?   Ultrajecti III. Non. Jan CIↃIↃ XLIV

5 10

ANNA MARIA VAN SCHURMAN Congratulates the most Honorable and most Learned of Heroes, Mr. CLAUDIUS SALMASIUS, On His Happy Return from France Welcome Traveler, you have now finally returned to the Batavian land! May the whole earth proclaim: Welcome Batavian Traveler, Kings enticed you, and the Powerful made promises But they could not keep you in your fatherland.381 What honors, Salmasius, will we not now heap on you? You would rather honor us than accept our thanks. Now there is also the rumor that, on behalf of our land, You are bravely planning a summum opus on Religion, On Baronius, the worst ever interpreter of the old era, Who realizes that the avenging and threatening furies are upon him. And although he imitates the great giants, Believe me, he will soon fall at the tip of your pen. Why would he not fall, when the seven heads of the Lernaean Hydra382 Barely remain alive once struck by your lightning?

381. Salmasius had rejected a pension from Cardinal Richelieu. 382. A serpentine water monster in Greek and Roman mythology killed by Hercules in the second of his Twelve Labors.

Part 1: Letters and Poems 199 15 20

Olympus decrees, and rightly so, that you have won the contest, And he will grant you a trophy worthy of its Hercules.383 However, if you do not think these wishes are worthy of my sex, Olympus will bring these rewards to you all on his own. A pleasing procession of young women will accompany your triumph, And a chorus of Virgins will sing you songs of praise. And should this topic seem more appropriate for a man, Still it is not foreign to my forum.384 As Caesar fought for Rome, when you fight on behalf of a virgin, Why should she not offer you the crown of laurels?385      Utrecht, 3 days before the Nones of January 1644

51. Van Schurman to Rivet, 6 May 1644 (no. 38) Van Schurman has lost hope of seeing Marie du Moulin again soon. She mourns the death of Meinardus Schotanus in a funeral ode that she sends to Rivet.

I was unable to send my brother rushing off to you, and I should not have sent him without my short letter. I am very sorry that I have lost nearly all hope of seeing our Marie du Moulin again, even if there is no good reason, nor would it be proper for her to refuse her father’s request.386 In the meantime I would be very happy to learn about how her family is doing. Mr. Schotanus has recently died; he left behind a saintly memory with everyone because of the integrity of his life, his unparalleled devotion to God, and his uncommon learning. I, too, cannot help but offer a poem to commemorate such an eminent theologian.387 But the man who will give this letter to you will speak freely about this. Farewell, Reverend Sir and Dearest Father in Christ. Utrecht, the day before the Nones of May 1644. EPICEDIUM IN OBITUM 383. In a French letter to Rivet on 18 September 1645 (no. 221), Salmasius mentions a letter critical of him in which he is compared to “Hercule le furieux” (Saumaise and Rivet, Correspondance, 447). 384. Processions for victorious military generals would arrive in Rome’s central forum before ascending the Capitoline Hill to the temple of Jupiter. 385. A laurel wreath symbolizes victory and honor. 386. Marie du Moulin rejoined her ill father in France. 387. Meinardus Schotanus (1593–1644), professor of Old Testament and Reformed minister at Utrecht, died on 6 April 1644. He worked closely with Voetius and Carolus de Maets in the Dutch Second Reformation (see the Introduction).

200 ANNA MARIA VAN SCHURMAN AND MEMBERS OF HER CIRCLE Doctrina et pietate Clarissimi Viri D. MEINARDI SCHOTANI Quis Schotane sibi te non suspiret ademptum,   Nec tua cygnaea funera voce fleat? Qui tot divinis radiabas undique donis,   Queis potius nobis, quam tibi natus eras. 5 Quique novam ut posses mortalibus addere vitam,   Non piguit mortem te properare tuam. Non sitis argenti, aut aliena negotia mundi,   Nec mora magnificae desidiosa dapis: Sed tua cœlestis qui viscera torruit ardor, 10   Is vetuit longos te numerare dies. Ast licet æthereus penitus te carpserit ignis:   Hoc tamen, ut Phoenix, nasceris ipse rogo. Dum vivet pietas, facilique modestia vultu,   Et nivea gaudens simplicitate fides; 15 Dum fera flexanimis demulcens pectora virtus,   Nomine nascetur gloria digna tuo. Non tua sors lachrymas, sed nostra requirit, amaras:   Nam tua mors nobis, non tibi pœna fuit, Quis tanti referat capitis dispendia? Velo 20   Ipsa tegi satius, more Timantis, erit. At memorare tuos generosa in morte triumphos   Me juvat & celsi munera læta poli. Illic dulce tibi veterum meminisse laborum:   Si tamen hæc nullus sit meminisse labor. 25 Felix qui nostrum potuisti spernere mundum:   Quicquid felices reddit Olympus habet. Omnia quæ votis poscebas gaudia quondam,   Iam datur in solo cernere mente Deo. En tua quo præunt vestigia sponte sequemur. 30   Haec tibi nos tantum solvere justa cupis. A.M. à SCHURMAN



A FUNERAL ODE on the Death of Mr. MEINARDUS SCHOTANUS, A Very Illustrious Gentleman in Learning and Piety388 Who, Schotanus, would not sigh that you have been taken away,

388. Opuscula, 315–16. On this poem, see Pieta van Beek, “ ‘Pallas Ultrajectina, bis quinta dearum’: Anna Maria van Schurman en haar Neolatijnse dichtkunst,” in De Utrechtse Parnas: Utrechtse Neolatijnse dichters uit de zestiende en de zeventiende eeuw, ed. Jan Bloemendal (Amersfoort: Florivallis, 2003), 51, 60–61.

Part 1: Letters and Poems 201   And who would not cry a swan’s song over your death? You, who kept shining everywhere with so many divine gifts,   Were born for us rather than for yourself. 5 And so that you could add new life to mortals,   You did not regret hastening your own demise. It was not a thirst for money, nor alien worldly pursuits,   Nor the pointless idleness of gluttony, That burned in your heart. It was your passion for heaven, 10   That set you on fire and forbade you from counting long days as your   own. But although a heavenly fire consumed you deeply,   Still I do ask this: that you, Phoenix, may rise again.389 15 So long as piety lives, and modesty endures in your gentle brow,   And faith rejoices in your candid simplicity, So long as virtue strokes gently your passionate heart,   A glory worthy of your name will be born again. It is not your fate but ours that calls forth bitter tears,   For your death punishes us, not you, For who could compensate for such an irretrievable loss? 20   A veil to hide death would be enough, as it was for Timanthes.390 But to mention your triumph over a noble death brings me   Pleasure, as do the joyful gifts you received from lofty Heaven. There you remember with pleasure your former labors.   And if there is no pain in recalling these, 25 You, who have been able to spurn our world, will be happy.   For whatever Olympus owns, it happily returns. All the joys you once asked for in prayers   Have already found their fulfillment in God alone. We shall willingly follow in your footsteps that go before us. 30   You desire only one thing: that we give you what we rightly owe you.

52. Van Schurman to Rivet, 6 August 1644 (no. 39)391 Van Schurman comments on a “mournful poem” that Rivet has sent her; she mentions Marguerite de Rohan, Du Moulin’s health, and Sedan. 389. In Greek mythology, the phoenix is a bird that is cyclically regenerated and reborn. 390. Timanthes of Cythnus, Greek painter of the fourth century BCE. His famous painting of the sacrifice of Iphigenia shows her father Agamemnon with his face veiled because the artist was unable to depict his grief. 391. Undated in Opuscula, 221–23.

202 ANNA MARIA VAN SCHURMAN AND MEMBERS OF HER CIRCLE The mournful poem that you mentioned in your last letter has reached me later than expected, as I see it. But since you desire my judgment on something that has by now been decided on for some time, as if “the curtain had been raised” so to speak,392 I would want almost nothing to do with this obligation, except that the sympathy393 of your hallucinatory love394 for me (as I might say with the physicians) wins over my heart and mind. The following seems clear enough to me, that the poem has a weighty subject matter, evidence of abundant talent, a meter appropriate to piety, and the charms of its French idiom are naturally suitable to extolling womanly honor. I have also examined well enough the fact that those famed Poets, whom today your France admires so much, use arguments that mirror their subject’s glory. And, so, I declare all this without any obsequiousness, even though I freely confess that I am seeking, not moderately, the grace and favor of that Princess.395 Everyone should acknowledge along with me the worthiness of her Niece’s396 heroic constancy in Religion can never be praised enough; and this, even more, because teachers of character have contended that this virtue rarely shines out in our sex. I have no doubt that she will provide an illustrious example of strength and courage even to leading men. Quite a few of them, even though they were born under the same sky as she was, have defected from the truth.397 And I rejoice that the most excellent Marie du Moulin agrees with me; it’s wonderful just how the two of us breathe together in harmony with each other in this common wish.

392. Levato velo, an expression from Roman law indicating that the case be heard without delay. 393. In Greek, hê sympatheia. 394. Hallucinantis amoris. A possible reference to magnetism in Paracelsian medicine. Paracelsus (1493/4–1541), the Swiss physician and alchemist, emphasized magnetic attraction and sympathetic actions. Van Schurman may also be thinking of Marie de Gournay, who, in her essay “Que par necessité les grands esprits et les gens de bien cherchent leurs semblables” (“That Great Minds and Good People necessarily look for their Equals”) in Oeuvres complètes, 1:895, writes of the attraction that great minds or souls exercise on one another: “And the one who could benefit from such a precious encounter, would desire with an ardent passion the attractiveness of such a great mind, engendered primarily from communication with another elevated mind, similar and friendly, and necessarily superior to all other human attractions.” As an alchemist in the Paracelsian tradition, Gournay stressed “the thoughtengendering power of a mentor” affirming her as a woman writer. See Dorothea Heitsch, “Cats on a Windowsill: An Alchemical Study of Marie de Gournay,” in Gender and Scientific Discourse in Early Modern Culture, ed. Kathleen P. Long (Farnham, UK, and Burlington, VT: Ashgate, 2010), 226. 395. Anne de Rohan, with whom Van Schurman had corresponded in 1643. 396. ***’s heroic constancy, Opuscula, 222. An allusion to Marguerite de Rohan. 397. Rivet likely wrote to Van Schurman of the defection of Gaspard IV de Coligny, son of Anne de Polignac, Maréchale de Châtillon, one of his frequent correspondents. Van Schurman hopes that Marguerite de Rohan’s exemplary fidelity to her Protestant faith will prevent further defections.

Part 1: Letters and Poems 203 I am especially eager to find out whether that doctor is truly capable of ensuring that her father—the illustrious Mr. du Moulin—makes a full recovery.398 What you mention on the restoration of the Academy of Sedan and the kindness of the Cardinal399 toward your brother-in-law400 exceeds almost every hope. These events, provided they were carried out without political artifice, seem to promise us a golden age in the middle of this Age of Iron.401 Be well, most beloved Father in Christ. May that Higher Judge protect you and your dearest Wife for a long time in long and vigorous old age.402 My aunts and my brother along with me send you our courteous regards. Eight days before the Ides of August 1644.

53. Van Schurman to Rivet, 5 March 1645 (no. 45) About eight months have elapsed since Van Schurman’s last letter (no. 39, 1:52). She comments on Du Moulin’s book on moral philosophy, and the news about the National Synod at Charenton.

As I was waiting for the right occasion, Reverend Sir and Dearest Father in Christ, you have showered upon me so many kindnesses that I cannot see a way to begin thanking you, if indeed I ever needed solemn words with you. However (and this proves your deep generosity toward me), while you usually embrace my tendency to reciprocate in kind, there is no reason I should stick to customary formula. So then, as soon as I hear that you have favorably received my earlier recommendation, I will have no fear even now in prayerfully asking you that, as

398. Rivet wrote to Sarrau on 18 July 1644 (Correspondance intégrale, 2:329) that Pierre Michon de Bourdelot (1610–1684), the doctor of the duc d’Anguien (Louis II de Bourbon, later Prince de Condé), was at Pierre du Moulin’s side predicting that “he would be able to heal him within ten days.” Du Moulin’s recovery occurred two years later. On 30 April 1646 (Correspondance intégrale, 3:398), Rivet announced to Sarrau that Marie du Moulin reported her father’s healing “as a miracle.” Bourdelot later cured Queen Christina of Sweden of psychosomatic symptoms. See Stefano Fogelberg Rota, “Naudé, Bourdelot and Queen Christina’s French Court in Stockholm,” in Lieux de culture dans la France du XVIIe siècle, ed. William Brooks et al. (Oxford: Peter Lang, 2012), 33. 399. The Cardinal is replaced with asterisks in Opuscula, 222. 400. Pierre du Moulin. 401. The Greek poet Hesiod describes earlier races or generations of men as living in happier times, or a Golden Age. In speaking of an “Age of Iron,” Van Schurman may well be referring to the almost continuous warfare and violent struggle in Europe, all carried out with weaponry that required a veritable industry to manufacture and maintain. From swords and lances to artillery and firearms, weapons in the early modern era evolved at a rapid and ominous pace. 402. The words late to Olympus are added to the sentence in Opuscula. In Greek myth, the gods were thought to dwell in the heavens above Olympus, the highest mountain in Greece.

204 ANNA MARIA VAN SCHURMAN AND MEMBERS OF HER CIRCLE soon as the opportunity arises, you will continue to bind me always to that excellent Matron403 (who has recently professed quite openly that she is bound to you). I was very pleased with the philosophical work404 of Mr. du Moulin and not only with him, but also with the person who recommended it to me and sent it my way, to whose praises—which for many years now have been publicly proclaimed—I would be foolish to want to add anything of my own. What is more, it can scarcely be said how greatly disturbed I was by the news that reached me of that incomparable man’s long lasting and nearly life-ending illness, and that his pious daughter, on whom Mr. du Moulin depends, also fell ill.405 For I fear that nothing—except the recovery of her Father and the well-being of others—will lead her to take care of herself. Who other than God himself can bring a remedy to this misfortune? I recently heard what happened at the National Synod.406 The events were certainly such that I could have both hoped for something better and begun to conclude that things are actually getting worse. But there is the danger that from these sparks of dissent long suppressed by a common fear, a conflagration will ultimately ignite unless God on High, to whom I commend you and your Lady Wife, can avert it. All of us here, however many we are, bid you take care of yourselves. Utrecht, 3 days before the Nones of March 1645. Before I could sign this letter, your letter and one from that English Baronet407 arrived. I cannot see how to reply appropriately to him, since it seems neither advisable nor safe to communicate with those I do not know; and, in fact, it is not at all in accordance with my habit to communicate with foreigners of this kind, unless you believe that there are good reasons for me to do otherwise. I also received the two letters from France which you enclosed with your penultimate letter (and which had almost been lost). Farewell excellent Sir. Send my greetings dutifully to that excellent gentleman, Cl. Voetius.408 403. Unidentified. 404. Pierre du Moulin, Ethics, or Moral Science (1644), mentioned in no. 37, 1:39, and no. 42, 1:47. 405. Marie du Moulin. 406. The National Synod of Charenton (December 1644–January 1645), which refrained from condemning Moïse Amyraut of heresy. See the Introduction. 407. Sir Simonds D’Ewes (1602–1650). Van Schurman received a self-introductory letter from D’Ewes, in which he stated that Frédéric Rivet and Bathsua Makin had spoken in glowing terms about her. She replied in a Latin letter dated 31 October 1645; see Opuscula, 211–13, and The Learned Maid (1659), 48–49. D’Ewes continued to write extensively to Van Schurman on the genealogy of his wife’s ancestry, the events in the English Civil War, and his admiration of her and other women scholars. Her replies grew increasingly brief until she stopped altogether. 408. Van Schurman’s abbreviation of the name as “Cl. Voetius” may be a reference to Voetius’s third (and youngest) son, Nicolaas (1635–1679), who would thus have been about 10 years old at the time that this letter was written. “Cl.” (i.e., “Claas”) was a common short form of “Nicolaas.” (Cf. Sinterklaas, the short form of “Saint Nicholas,” which became “Santa Claus.”) Nicolaas Voet became a minister in

Part 1: Letters and Poems 205 54. Van Schurman to Rivet, 14 August 1645 (no. 43) Van Schurman mentions that her brother will bring to Rivet a new version of her 1640 self-portrait. She refers to Pierre du Moulin’s improving health and the rumor concerning Marguerite de Rohan.

[From the hand of a friend] I heard that Mr. Voetius’s daughter has diligently explained to you (just as she promised) the reason for my silence. However, I did not wish to make you wonder, rightly and deservedly so, if I had forgotten my sense of duty, especially since my brother is planning to visit you. He will show you my portrait in its new version. I worked on it profitably, if not thoroughly, to make it as lifelike as possible. Please see to it that a copy is sent to my sister at your first opportunity.409 That way, she will not complain yet again about the way I live, which she thinks is far too contemplative, if I once again neglect my obligation to complete the practical task of sending her a copy.410 I am so pleased that the health of her father, Mr. du Moulin, that most wonder-worthy of all men,411 is now better, as I learned from your letter to Mr. Voetius. For, as the Psalmist says, “they will still bear fruit in old age.”412 I look upon him with admiration. I am exceedingly dismayed about the rumor concerning the inconstancy of the duchesse de Rohan, since not so long ago she cast a far better hope about herself. What you report on this could be true, but I want to be further informed.413 Farewell. Utrecht, 19 days before the Kalends of September 1645.

Utrecht and in Heusden (a town just northwest of ’s-Hertogenbosch); see John McClintock and James Strong, Cyclopaedia of Biblical, Theological, and Ecclesiastical Literature, vol. 10 (New York: Harper & Brothers, 1894), 809. With thanks to Cheryl Lemmens for this identification. Two of Voetius’s other sons, Daniel (1630–1660) and Paul (1619–1667), became professors at Utrecht. 409. One of the four versions of Van Schurman’s 1640 self-portrait. See her letter to Marie du Moulin, dated 8 December 1646 (1:59), in which she mentions her self-portrait. 410. Marie du Moulin was concerned about Van Schurman’s health due to her overextended studies. Others, such as Van Beverwijck and Vossius, in letters addressed to her in her Dissertatio (1641), were equally concerned. 411. In Greek. 412. Psalm 92:14. Van Schurman combines here the Rashi script with Masoretic Hebrew. Our thanks to Barry Bandstra for identifying the scripts. 413. Marguerite de Rohan, Anne de Rohan’s niece, married the Catholic Henri de Chabot on 6 June 1645.

206 ANNA MARIA VAN SCHURMAN AND MEMBERS OF HER CIRCLE 55. Undated [between about late August and mid-September 1645], no. 59 Van Schurman wrote this poem sometime after Grotius’s death on 28 August 1645 and the publication of his last work against Rivet in mid-September 1645.

En mordet vivum (quis credat?) mortuus hostem,   Nec gravis a summo sistitur ira rogo. At cur, Riveti victus dum viveret armis,   Grotius ad pugnam post sua fata redit? 5 An quod Achilleam pulchrum est prævertere dextram,   Nec rursus meritas sustinuisse vices. Scilicet impune voluit nocuisse, nec umbræ   Credidit ultricem posse nocere manum. Sic licet hostili putet illusisse triumpho: 10   At tamen huic testis conscius orbis erit. M. à Schurman Look how this man irritates his enemy from beyond the grave!   His anger still seethes and didn’t expire atop the pyre. While he was alive, he was beaten under Rivet’s arms,   So why is Grotius returning to the fight after his death?414 5 How wonderful, indeed, to take a shot at Achilles’ right hand   Without sustaining his return fire.415 No doubt he wanted to inflict damage with impunity. He didn’t believe   That anyone could retaliate against a ghost. Well, he might think he has eluded his enemy’s triumph 10   But, in reality, the whole world will witness it.

56. Van Schurman to Rivet, 8 December 1645 (no. 44) Van Schurman returns to the ongoing quarrels with Desmarets, Descartes, Grotius, and Amyraut.

That well-known friend to whom you sent your earlier letter, Reverend Sir and Dearest Father in Christ, assured me that it would reach me through a family messenger. But if he himself had in fact taken on this reponsibility, as he had 414. Grotius’s final work against Rivet was published after his sudden tragic death. See the Introduction. 415. Achilles was the Greek hero of the Trojan War and the greatest warrior in Homer’s Iliad. The climax of the Iliad comes in book 22, when Achilles chases down the Trojan prince Hector after Hector has killed Achilles’s closest friend, Patroclus. Van Schurman is making a joke here. Arguing with Rivet is akin to fighting Achilles, and Rivet would have had his revenge, too, had Grotius not died first.

Part 1: Letters and Poems 207 promised you, I would have learned directly from him much more about your current situation; and I would not have remained silent about anything related to your affairs, which I think would have displeased you. However, so that I confide in you more fully, just as a daughter would to her own Father, I think that he [Samuel Desmarets]416 has undertaken a matter of this kind only to gratify you. What I mean is that I don’t know how he, having devoted himself long ago, as I remember, to the universal order of the Reformed (as they say) clergy, has then become alienated from our [Reformed] family, as if the family had not shown him enough favor. He has been pleading secretly and bitterly (but I don’t know this for sure) the case of Descartes and Schoock against our common friend, Mr. Voetius. And he knows that I have not publicly divulged the extent of my friendship [with Voetius]. However, whatever other people may think of me, I can solemnly affirm that nothing could convince me to join their side and embrace their thinking with a fair and impartial mind, even if truth and justice could be shown to differ from my own beliefs, since I have resolved to win the favor of no one if it were to entail even the smallest loss to my conscience. And so, for this reason, although I intend to take into some account all of Grotius’s supporters and admirers who are openly angry [at his treatment], I still cannot refrain from condemning the virulence of that man (who is otherwise outstanding in other respects417) and his inconstancy in religion, and who wished an eternal monument to be prominent on his tombstone.418 I have no doubt whatsoever that you, on the other hand, guided by divine inspiration, will be able to kill off completely, and with ease, this hydra’s head419 that opposes the truth, just as if you were springing forth from its dead body. 416. Samuel Desmarets (Maresius, 1599–1673), a Walloon theologian at the University of Groningen, critiqued Voetius in 1642, when he defended the sodality in honor of the Virgin Mary that Voetius had condemned, and a second time in 1645 when, as rector of the University of Groningen, he presided over Descartes’s lawsuit against Martinus Schoock (1614–1669) and Voetius. Voetius’s book condemning the confraternity of Mary is listed as no. 37 under the duodecimo titles in the auction catalog of the Labadists. This may have been Van Schurman’s own copy. See Beek and Bürmann, “Ex Libris,” 66. 417. In a letter to Sarrau on 30 April 1646 (Correspondance intégrale, 3:397), Rivet stated that he had to reply to Grotius’s last posthumous work because “I found so much venom, virulence, and malice” in his writing that “I, at times, had to call things by their name. I am not attacking the erudition and celebrity of the man in other things.” 418. Grotius was buried at the Nieuwe Kerk in Delft, where only members of the Orange-Nassau dynasty were traditionally buried. The epitaph on his funerary monument at the time read: “Here lies Hugo Grotius, / Captive of the Batavians and a refugee, / Ambassador to great Sweden” (“Grotius hic Hugo est, / Batavum captivus et exul, / Legatus regni, Suecia magna”); cited in a French letter from Salmasius to Rivet, 24 September 1645 (no. 222), in Saumaise and Rivet, Correspondance, 448n4. More than a century later, Grotius’s descendants ordered a tomb erected by the architect Jan Giudici that was completed in 1781, bearing a lengthy Latin epitaph praising him for being “the defender of true religion.” 419. The many-headed serpentine monster killed by Hercules.

208 ANNA MARIA VAN SCHURMAN AND MEMBERS OF HER CIRCLE Still, in these brief words, I have tried to express moderately what I think. But (as you state) your age deservedly requires some tranquility. Who would not wish this for you from the depths of their heart? I have no doubt whatsoever that you, through divine inspiration, will be able to pick up your spear of truth and kill off completely, and with ease, this final hydra’s head, just as it begins to grow anew from the corpse. I rejoice greatly that Spanheim, that most famous gentleman, in rooting out the heterodoxy of Amyraut,420 is putting forth all the necessary effort, and so, like you, his effort is most praiseworthy. Although we should fear (if the rumors are true) that this schism in the French Church, which first arose from small and doubtful beginnings, will erupt, still it isn’t possible that Amyraut is going to bring a salvific light-filled remedy to the eyes of the faithful, who are enveloped in a cloud of errors. May God himself intervene so that those who have learned from what happened long ago to our Provinces421 would strive to join forces to crush that calamitous disease which has attacked so deeply our inner being. But I am keeping you, and to prepare you somewhat for a tedious reading of this letter, it contains, it seems, two dissimilar bits of information, one that I ask you to pass along, and the other to return with your comments, if it’s not too much trouble. Finally, to you, glorious and incomparable Theologian, together with your Lady Wife, I send my fondest regards, and all of us here, however many we are, send our warmest greetings. Utrecht, 6 days before the Ides of December 1645.

57. Van Schurman to Rivet, 25 December 1645 (no. 46) Van Schurman comments on Rivet’s move to Breda,422 and reports on Voetius’s account of the trial for defamation instigated by Descartes against him, Dematius, and Schoock. She ends with the controversy over Amyraut.

[To the Reverend, Noble, and Very Learned Gentleman, André Rivet, the Honorable Professor of Theology at the Batavian Academy at Leiden, and, also, the no less Illustrious and Most Worthy Curator of the Academy at Breda] I was not willing to be included, Reverend Sir and dearest Father in Christ, among those who have disturbed your tranquility with inopportune interruptions like this; you have been interrupted more than enough already, if I’m not mistaken. For indeed, I know that you have an inborn ability to nurture friendships, 420. Moïse Amyraut (1596–1664), after whom Amyraldism is named. See the Introduction. 421. A reference to the divisions in the Dutch Reformed Church occasioned by the controversy between the Remonstrants and the Counter-Remonstrants, leading to the Synod of Dordt (1618–19). 422. Breda is a city in the southern Netherlands, now in the province of North Brabant. Twice captured by Spain, it was restored to the House of Orange-Nassau in 1637 and became part of the Dutch Republic in 1648.

Part 1: Letters and Poems 209 and I also know that you have adopted that sense of Stoic equanimity that does not waver in the face of difficulty, and have undertaken your recent move (not to mention the transportation of all the items in your study) without any disturbance of spirit. And you have been able not only to say farewell to all your intimate friends (among whom so few have virtues that undoubtedly resemble yours in areas where you have displayed them for so long on the public stage, as it were) but also to send them off even as they were saying their farewells to you. And, so, I congratulate you heartily for having been granted by His Highness the position of Curator in the Republic of Letters. But because I know that the hope of seeing you more often has not lessened in me, I can hardly stop thinking about your former position [at The Hague], which, thanks to its nature, allowed me to see you. There is only one thing that reassures me and that stands out both in every change of circumstances and in this agitation of my mind, namely that the prudent and most holy Supreme God will ensure that He will lead us through an obscure and often unrecognizable path into the harbor of pure tranquility.423 I strongly approve the arguments of your Apologetic, which represent well your incredibly keen judgment and deep learning.424 I’m recording here as well for you, in all its details, Mr. Voetius’s wise and official view, which sheds much light on these matters (or so he says), so that I don’t detract from praising your own work through my lack of talent [to report].425 Indeed, I see now just how important and urgent is this business of peace among the Theologians. Certainly, those who are not on our side are among the reasons why the peace thus far has not proceeded very well. I don’t doubt that they will bring this case to you to judge, should you wish to acquaint yourself with it more deeply.426 Certainly, I am persuaded that you would spare our adversaries only if their integrity agreed with their innocence. Although they know full well what they have been doing, they will persist in declaring that they are innocent from even the appearance of the charges for which they stand accused. They will also say not that they have been mollified and pacified [for being in the wrong] 423. A Stoic image. Seneca’s De Tranquillitate animi (On Peace of Mind) begins with the image of a boat viewed as a consolation when his political career as adviser to the emperor Nero was unravelling. Stoicism emphasized that, as Epictetus put it, “Some things are up to us, and some are not” (Enchiridion 1). The object of life, then, is not to wish that things might be different, but rather to accept them as they are to thereby achieve inner peace and harmony. 424. A reference to Rivet’s Refutation of Grotius’s Examination for the True and Sincere Peace of the Church (Rotterdam, 1646), which Rivet sent to Van Schurman before publication. 425. In the rest of the letter, Van Schurman reports back to Rivet on Voetius’s account to her of the trial for defamation against him, Dematius, and Schoock. The report consists of first-person statements by Voetius and Van Schurman’s summary of his report. 426. Rivet, to this point, had not taken sides in Voetius’s quarrel with Descartes. Voetius hoped that by using Van Schurman as his intermediary, Rivet would join him in his defense.

210 ANNA MARIA VAN SCHURMAN AND MEMBERS OF HER CIRCLE but rather, in line with Augustine’s thought,427 they will become more obdurate. If the Curators of the Academy of Groningen, who seem to have made the case of Maresius their own, should neglect their own reputation, they would be doing so in all deliberate seriousness. They recently demanded from our Utrecht Magistrates that silence be imposed on Mr. Voetius and his son428 (the Magistrates had approved the minutes in which Mr. Voetius and Mr. Dematius429 had urged a lawsuit for perjury against them for claiming they were the original authors). In the meantime, concerning the reconciliation with Mr. Maresius, which these same men [at Groningen] promised would take place in earnest, I heard that Mr. Voetius made the following reply: first, that it was not possible for him to stop writing something he had not yet set his mind to writing in the first place; and that he earnestly lamented the tyranny of this age, when whatever others write or undertake to write on behalf of a cause is all usually the doing of one person, especially when the cause pertains to an ignoramus.430 This was the reason that the writings of his son, which he did not know about, were of interest: there were parts that he would not have seen unless they were already in print, and parts that he would have known when they were published rather than still in their beginning stage. It also mattered that he was the author of a public admission that he needed to mind his own affairs; and, in his view, it was not the job of parents to try to be responsible for the words and deeds of their sons. Finally, he said that he had not violated the peace, nor had he ever disavowed it once it was broken. But when he was publicly accused not only by a Theologian but by a Professor of Reformation Studies (under whose authority the accusation was agreed upon),431 even if just a small number of these accusations were true, he [Voetius] would be considered not only not a very reputable Master of Theology, but also not even a good citizen. Thus, he could not say that he would be always free to remain silent. In addition (although he had recently forgiven the injury done to him), he said that it was of no small interest to the church in which he played a prominent role that unless the perpetrator [Maresius] either retracted or proved his objections, 427. Van Schurman’s reference is vague. In Confessions 2.5, Augustine suggests that our human bonds can lead us to neglect our duty to obey God’s truth and God’s law. We commit crimes or seek revenge to satisfy our worldly desires. Van Schurman suggests that “our adversaries” have become caught up in worldly debates and have turned away from the truth and law of God. 428. Paul Voet (1619–1667), a professor at the University of Utrecht, took up the defense of his father in three virulent tracts. Voetius’s critics contended that he had incited his son to write these on his behalf. 429. Carolus De Maets (Dematius, 1597–1651), a reformed theologian and professor at Utrecht. Voetius and Dematius undertook in the summer of 1645 a lawsuit for perjury against Schoock and Maresius, who accused them of writing the libelous pamphlet The Admirable Method of the New Philosophy of René Descartes (1643). 430. A reference to Descartes, who wrote disparagingly about learning and Scholastic teaching. 431. An allusion to Maresius, under whose authority and direction the trial against Voetius took place.

Part 1: Letters and Poems 211 he himself would remove himself entirely from a public protestation. However, when his son was also summoned by the [Groningen] Senate, his son apologized and admitted that perhaps his previous response had been too harsh.432 And since retorsion law yields to common law,433 especially in defending his most innocent father and his pastor, Mr. Dematius, there was no good reason for him to be condemned. Finally, he [Voetius] would be most willing to be questioned for all the things that he had written, perhaps with language that was too hostile. If Mr. Maresius allowed the same legal procedure to be applied to him, then that lawsuit could be completely dismissed. You write that the French churches are, even now, fighting amongst themselves as if in a gladiators’ ring, and that those who are proceeding as hypotheticals434 are all trying to divert ill will onto you; from this we can easily gather that the Devil can do nothing other than unite us. Therefore, the Orthodox should now unanimously strive even more to join forces together and stretch all the strings of the bow of their intelligence to protect both truth and charity. However, there are those who are making a different prediction concerning the agreement between your countrymen’s thinking and mine, based on the recent publication of your countrymen’s Theses.435 Yet I am confident that this soil of discord will be crushed in that very garden under your leadership. Farewell, most Glorious and Honorable Guardian of the Church of Christ; give my greetings as dutifully as possible from all of us here to your Lady Wife and most delightful Niece. I decided on this occasion to give a copy of this letter to my sister.436 However, as I sympathize with your weakening health brought on by the intemperance of this age, I am forced to lay down my pen in haste because the courier who will bring you this letter is here. Utrecht, 8 days before the Kalends of January [Christmas Day] 1646.

58. Van Schurman to Marie du Moulin, 27 September 1646 (no. 60) This letter is the first of four extant French letters to Marie du Moulin.

432. Paul Voet defended his father in three virulent tracts. 433. Retorsion law applies to an act committed in retaliation for a similar act perpetrated by another. Common law is based on precedents or judicial decisions already made in similar cases and maintained over time in the records of the courts. 434. An allusion to the Amyraut controversy over hypothetical universal grace, an internal controversy that shook the Reformed Church to its core. The adherents of Amyraut were derisively called “les hypothétiques.” See Stam, The Controversy over the Theology of Saumur, 277. 435. The National Synod of Charenton (16 December 1644–26 January 1645) withheld condemnation of Amyraut. 436. Marie du Moulin.

212 ANNA MARIA VAN SCHURMAN AND MEMBERS OF HER CIRCLE [To Mademoiselle. Mademoiselle du Moulin, Under cover,437 at The Hague] My dearest Sister, I cannot express the great unhappiness that this news brought to me, which threatens us with your even greater distance.438 It is true that there is some sort of necessity to obey the will of His Highness;439 but I could never acquiesce to such a thought, if I were not looking upward to the providence of our God who, undoubtedly, wants to use Monsieur your Uncle for the good of this illustrious School, which, still being as it were in its infancy, will need the authority and prudence that are his to direct it. Whatever happens, this hindrance will not at all prevent me from keeping intact the affection that I devoted to you once upon a time, and to remain all my life, My dearest sister, Your very humble and very affectionate sister and servant, A. M. de Schurman I will write as soon as possible to Monsieur your Uncle to thank him for his very pleasing gift. Please very humbly greet him for me, as well as Mademoiselle your Aunt. This 27th of September 1646.

59. Van Schurman to Marie du Moulin, 8 December 1646440 Van Schurman welcomes the news of the convalescence of Pierre du Moulin and hopes to see Marie soon.

To Mademoiselle du Moulin. My dearest Sister, Since we share the same interests in joy and in sadness, I was very pleased to see in your letter the true marks of a serene face, a face not only smiling, but whose smile makes sorrow itself laugh. And, thus, the cheerfulness that awakens in your heart and bursts forth with laughter after such a great eclipse can only produce in me pleasant and recreational thoughts. So much so that if you find me now with a more cheerful disposition, and much more extravagantly so than usual, know that you are the one who put me in such a good mood. You will therefore forgive me if I happen to distract you a little from the serious lessons of Monsieur your Father, and from the company of Philosophy for which (as I just learned) you have substituted me. And although, to prevent me from being jealous of this rival, 437. Sous couvert, meaning enclosed with another letter. 438. Marie du Moulin was about to move to Breda, where her uncle had become rector of the Illustrious School, officially opened on 17 September 1646. 439. Frederik Hendrik. 440. Opuscula, 274–76.

Part 1: Letters and Poems 213 you try to persuade me that you hold nothing from her good graces except her look and appearances, I am unconvinced that she [Philosophy] hasn’t granted you some of her caresses. And if you are determined not to reveal to me any of her secrets and mysteries, I believe that she was willing to communicate them to you only under a vow of silence and a secret confession. Yet I can’t deny that you hold in common with the wisest the tendency to mingle a little folly with your wisdom, and that especially on this point you enjoy beguiling people and appearing less than what you really are. Furthermore, when I consider the advantageous view you hold of me, I am right to believe that the self-portrait I recently sent you flatters me too much, and that the Idea of the original is almost entirely erased from your mind.441 And so it is not surprising that your Dutch (as you say) is escaping you. As for me, I can see that my French is already about to embark for somewhere in search of better nourishment442 than I can give it here. And if you do not want me to write you long letters in Dutch from now on, or for us to require interpreters to understand each other, you will have to think about coming back soon. But to end on a more serious note, I long to hear from you about the continued good news of the convalescence of Monsieur your Father,443 and about the present state in France of our Religion, which (as they say) is troubled by novelties that in their consequences can only be highly dangerous in a Kingdom where there are so many enemies. I am and will remain all my life, My dear Sister, Your very affectionate Sister & very humble Servant, This 8th of December 1646 A. M. de Schurman

60. Van Schurman to Rivet, 24 February 1647 (no. 48) Fourteen months have elapsed since Van Schurman’s last letter to Rivet on Christmas Day 1645 (no. 46, 1:57). In the meantime, Rivet has reluctantly moved to Breda, at age seventy-four, to take up his new post as Curator of the newly founded Illustrious School.Van Schurman mentions the visit of an envoy from the duchesse de Longueville, whose husband is negotiating the Peace of Westphalia, and she hopes for news of the Amyraut controversy.444

441. See Van Schurman’s letter dated 14 August 1645 (no. 43, 1:54), in which she asks Rivet to forward a copy of her self-portrait to Marie du Moulin. 442. Entretien. 443. On 30 April 1646 (Correspondance intégrale, 3:398), Rivet announced to Claude Sarrau that his niece had returned from Sedan bringing good news of her father’s convalescence. 444. Same address as no. 46, 1:57.

214 ANNA MARIA VAN SCHURMAN AND MEMBERS OF HER CIRCLE I rejoice that you are taking advantage of the easy convenience of this position which you are now enjoying, and that in accordance with your mind’s purpose you are engaged in leisure, but not leisure without Letters or dignity. And I hope that the healthy air which your region enjoys is going to keep you well and flourishing in your old age for a very long time. I will not refuse the invitations with which you have attempted to fulfill my eager desire to see you, if only a fitting occasion could offer itself some time soon. But, no doubt, your Palladian home,445 which is well removed from the swarm of people wishing to see you [as in The Hague], would be friendlier to more pressing concerns. There is much talk here concerning the peace, and the terms now are almost set for it; how I wish we could all desire it, as much for the common good as for yours.446 Also, there is much talk here about the affairs of England. But your France seems up to this point to have been considering these wars carefully and is not inactively resisting the attempts of my native Provinces, especially since Holland is so plainly opposed to War.447 A certain statesman from France recently came, bearing greetings from the duchesse de Longueville.448 And he kept on saying that he was sent by his Duke449 with the express purpose of making a proposal to the Prince [Frederik Hendrik] and our Magistrates; and that he would leave it to them to consider whether they thought it safe enough and worthy of his [the Prince’s] faith to desert the lofty business of the Protestants in Germany, and especially in the Palatinate, and of the [Protestant] faith which they openly professed; and that everyone was considering by what right they [the Dutch] displaced their concern for this matter onto his King,450 who is so foreign to the sacred interests of our people. For if the Dutch should pay less attention to this treaty [of Westphalia] than they are now, then everyone would notice how much danger would now be hanging over the Reformation in France. But the state of the Church [in France] may have now reached that very same place. You would do me a great favor to inform me in a letter, should you have the opportunity and if it does not bother you, whether the Amyraut controversy still rages on even now. Farewell, incomparable Patron of Letters and divine Truth, 445. Palladium is a play on words referring to Pallas and to Palladian villas by the famous Venetian architect, Andrea Palladio (1508–1580). 446. The forthcoming Peace of Westphalia (October 1648), and the Dutch-Spanish treaty (January 1648). 447. On the Dutch position in the conflict between Charles I and Parliament, see the Introduction. 448. Anne-Geneviève de Bourbon-Condé (1619–1679), duchesse de Longueville, visited Van Schurman in September 1646. 449. Henri II d’Orléans (1595–1663), duc de Longueville, was sent in 1646 as chief envoy by Cardinal Mazarin to Münster to begin negotiations on the Peace of Westphalia. See the Introduction. 450. Louis XIV.

Part 1: Letters and Poems 215 and bless me as you usually do with a father’s love. We all send our greetings to your Lady Wife as dutifully as we can. Utrecht, 6 days before the Kalends of March 1647. Our common friend, Mr. Spanheim, urgently asked me to send along for his editing some of our letters.451 But although I resisted him at first, I could not make him change his mind, since he was so eager for my studies. However, I did not want to send him my little sheets of paper,452 if you do not agree with me on this matter.

61. Van Schurman to Rivet, 13 September 1647 (no. 47) Van Schurman thanks Rivet for appraising a new version of her 1640 self-portrait. She engraved at least four versions, two of which are mentioned in this letter. The one that Rivet selected as her best became the frontispiece of her Opuscula.

[Same address as in 1:60] I sent you, Reverend Sir and Dearest Father in Christ, the portraits you requested from me. I would in fact have done this sooner, in line with my sense of duty, if the copper plate, which has recently shown signs of wear and tear, had not required some fixing, and if copies of a previous impression had not so recently been sent out.453 But I was very pleased and thoroughly gratified that you would take a look a second time at a new copy; this shows even now that you consider this version of it the best yet. And for this reason, I consider this a gift of your kindness equal to the rest of your kindnesses toward me. Farewell, and give my regards to your excellent Lady Wife and Niece, to whom I am finally released, God willing, of the debt I owe to reply. In haste. Utrecht, the Ides of September 1647. My Maternal Aunts and Brother greet you most dutifully. I have not yet had the occasion to see a copy of my Dissertatio on the studies of women that has been translated into French.454

451. Spanheim became the editor of Van Schurman’s Opuscula (1648). 452. Chartulas meas, “little papers” or “small pieces of writing.” 453. Van Schurman had sent copies to several individuals of an earlier version of her self-portrait. According to Katlijne van der Stighelen, she “had enough technical equipment in her house” to engrave her self- portraits, and the letter corroborates this. See Stighelen, “ ‘Et ses artistes mains . . .’: The Art of Anna Maria van Schurman,” in Choosing the Better Part, 63. 454. Van Schurman finally received a copy of the Question célèbre (1646), translated by Guillaume Colletet, two years after its publication. Rivet indicated to Valentin Conrart in March 1648 that it reached her through a circuitous path. See Larsen, Star of Utrecht, 175.

216 ANNA MARIA VAN SCHURMAN AND MEMBERS OF HER CIRCLE 62. Van Schurman to Rivet, 25 March 1648 (no. 49) Van Schurman mentions the Amyraut controversy, the impending arrival in Utrecht of Utricia Ogle, and a letter from Guez de Balzac.

[No address] Although there is barely any reason, Reverend Sir and Dearest Father in Christ, that I should rightly interrupt your serious business, I could not avoid sending you a letter on this occasion. I see that your Lady Wife and your Niece are experiencing an unfortunate bout of ill health (because of the stormy weather, I believe). But I hope that the coming spring will be merciful and provide them soon some relief from their troubles. I am overjoyed that the Opusculum455 of Mr. du Moulin on Amyraut’s position was republished. Its further additions have much improved it. I rejoice both because that great gentleman always produces something remarkable, and, also, because this work, written in the French idiom, needed to be shortened to fit the needs of native French speakers. As for the other quarrels, the seeds which you mention are sprouting everywhere—profane people favor them. The only remedy we can expect comes from none other than God’s kindness alone, to whom I commend you and all your dear family. Utrecht, 8 days before the Kalends of April 1648. Here you will find the little verses that I played with not so long ago when the Noble Lady Swann arrives for a visit (although, clearly, I was unskilled at it);456 and because of her absence, I was not yet able to convey your greetings to her. I am sending now my greetings to your dearest Lady Wife and to my sister whose “Husband”457 found it pleasing to offer a gift in return458 in the form of little verses

455. Pierre du Moulin’s Esclaircissement des controverses Salmuriennes. Ou défense de la doctrine des églises reformées sur l’immutabilité des décrets de Dieu, l’efficace de la mort de Christ, la grâce universelle, l’impuissance à se convertir, et sur d’autres matières [A Clarification of the Controversies of Saumur. Or a Defense of the Doctrines of the Reformed Churches on the Immutability of God’s Decrees, the Efficacy of Christ’s Death, Universal Grace, the Powerlessness to Convert Oneself, and other matters] (Leiden: Jean Maire, 1648), with a preface by Spanheim and letters from du Moulin to Spanheim, dated 18 October 1647, Rivet to Spanheim, dated 1 March 1648, and du Moulin to the pastors and elders of the National and Provincial Synods of France. This book is listed as no. 104 in the 1675 auction catalog of the books of the Labadists. See Beek and Bürmann, “Ex Libris,” 63. 456. Likely the French verses “On the Welcome and the Residence of the very Noble and Virtuous Lady, MADAME UTRICIA OGLE, Known as SWAEN. At UTRECHT, in the Month of November 1647,” Opuscula, 313. On Utricia Ogle, the wife of Sir William Swann, see the Introduction. 457. Cujus Mariti. In her French letter to Marie du Moulin, dated 3 April 1649 (no. 61, 1:64), Van Schurman refers to her tres-joli mari (“very nice husband”). The term mari is probably a nickname for a young ward, or perhaps Rivet’s grandson, under Marie du Moulin’s care. 458. In Greek, antidoron.

Part 1: Letters and Poems 217 that are very clever for his age. My Maternal Aunts and Brother also greet you as dutifully as they can. I have not yet received a letter from Balzac.459

63. To Rivet, 3 April 1649 (no. 50) The first of four letters in French to Rivet. Up until this point, Van Schurman had addressed him solely in Latin. Van Schurman mentions Utricia Ogle Swann’s stay at court to mourn the execution of Charles I, and the ongoing quarrel between Desmarets and Voetius.

[To Monsieur Rivet, Honorary Professor of the Academy of Holland, and Curator of the Illustrious School of his Highness. At Breda] Monsieur, my very dear and very honored Father, The promise I had made to Madame Swann to join my letters to hers has caused me to delay my reply to you, as she has stayed longer at The Hague, where she has been in mourning with the Princess Royal.460 The tragedy of this Kingdom is a case unheard-of in our century; and where could one find a soul so barbaric as to not have an aversion for such an event, considering its secondary causes? But we know that the First Cause always reigns there,461 and that it makes us consider such major events to incite in us terror of its judgments, which spare neither Kings any more than their subjects. Also, one must not seek the remedy for these mortal wounds anywhere else than from the hand of God, who can bring light even out of darkness. The affairs of France seem to us to be going better; and I hope that our good God will have pity on his Church, which is so afflicted. And, certainly, the Church here in our country has its thorns, and the future threatens it still more. 459. According to Salmasius in his preface to Miscellæ defensiones pro Cl. Salmasio, de variis observationibus & emendationibus ad ius atticum et romanum pertinentibus [Miscellaneous defenses of various observations and improvements pertaining to Greek and Roman law] (Leiden: Jean Maire, 1645) (Opuscula, 323–24), Van Schurman’s “French letters are so beautiful that Monsieur de Balzac can hardly write any better than hers.” Jean-Louis Guez de Balzac (1597–1654), a celebrated epistolary writer and a critic, was a founding member of the Académie française (1635). His letters (Lettres, 1624)—short essays on political, moral, and literary topics—were continuously expanded and re-edited. See Balzac’s letter of 15 May 1646 to Guillaume Girard (d. 1663), secretary to the Duc d’Epernon, in which he praises Van Schurman as another Sulpicia, a Latin writer born around 40 BCE; Balzac, Lettres choisies, 635–40; also, Opuscula, 344–45. 460. Utricia Ogle (Swann) joined Mary Stuart (1631–1660), Princess Royal and wife of William II, Prince of Orange, to mourn the death of her father, King Charles I, on 30 January 1649. After his defeat during the Second English Civil War (1648–49), Charles I was arrested, tried, condemned, and executed. The monarchy was replaced by a republic called the Commonwealth of England, referred to also as the Cromwellian Interregnum. 461. That is, God as creator, under whose sovereignty and providence the universe came into being.

218 ANNA MARIA VAN SCHURMAN AND MEMBERS OF HER CIRCLE The instruments are already forged to torment it and need only the occasion to arise.462 All good people agree, and I am of your opinion, that those above us should try to reconcile these two parties which you mentioned to me. But, Monsieur, you well know that no opportunity was given to our Professors, who had even offered to travel to Groningen to give all sorts of satisfaction both to the Magistrates and to Monsieur Desmarets.463 And, indeed, it is very notable that the latter did not want to accept the conditions, and instead of pursuing peace, “he does not cease to injure his associates and, what is truly astonishing, he even mockingly attacks my name. For my part, I ask you what harm I could have caused him so that he wants to involve me in the same quarrel.”464 I strongly desire to see the books you promised me, and will not fail to thank that worthy person whose rare and good qualities you have depicted in such a lively way, after I’ve received the gift it pleased him to send me. However, I will pray our good God to seek to keep you for a long time in good health and prosperity for the good of the Church and the contentment of your friends, among whom I qualify myself as particularly, Monsieur, Your very humble and very obedient daughter and servant, A.M. de Schurman From Utrecht, this 3rd of April 1649 I recommend myself very humbly to the good graces of Mademoiselle your dear companion. My Brother very humbly kisses your hands.

64. Van Schurman to Marie du Moulin, 3 April 1649 (no. 61) This letter in French, penned the same day as the French letter to Rivet (no. 50, 1:63), commends Marie for her progress in Hebrew.

[To Mademoiselle, Mademoiselle du Moulin. At Breda] My dearest Sister, I believe that my letters need no apology, since they come to you so well accompanied; I’m talking, of course, about the letters of Madame Swann, who will no doubt explain the details of her trip to The Hague and the present state of the 462. These lines reflect Van Schurman’s personal critique of the Dutch Reformed Church. 463. Samuel Desmarets (Maresius) had in 1645 defended Descartes against Voetius. Three years later, in 1649, the quarrel over Descartes was still ongoing. Van Schurman quotes here from a letter of Voetius, who complains that Desmarets will not cease to attack him. 464. In Greek, from Voetius’s letter.

Part 1: Letters and Poems 219 Court.465 May God have pity on His poor Church amid the horrible and bloody confusion in England. I was very pleased to hear about your continued good health and happy progress in sound knowledge of the holy language.466 For don’t think that I would rather trust the voice of your humility, which refuses all arguments that praise you, than that of the judgment of Monsieur my Father,467 who takes good care to flatter his own Niece. That Captain of the Cavalry, who brought me your last letter, has entertained me for some time with the pleasant conversations you both had at Breda and with how he explained to you his intention in getting the verses that you mention published. Thank you for informing me of the quality of their author. For I can see that this Gentleman is very fond of [the author] and that he doesn’t care for his present charge, since he has left, as he told me, quite an honorable one for the love of the Reformed religion. I am My dearest sister, Your very humble and very affectionate sister and servant, A. M. de Schurman With your permission, I will recommend myself to the good graces of Monsieur your very handsome “husband,”468 and I thank him with all my heart for his lovely letter, and for the very pretty gift that he made for me with his scissors, which shows rather well (forgive me if I contradict you) that he has abandoned neither the love nor the habit of that art, and that he has a mind quite capable of working at several beautiful things at the same time. May our good God satisfy him more and more with all His graces and blessings. Utrecht, this 3rd of April 1649

65. Van Schurman to Rivet, 25 July 1649 (no. 51) Van Schurman comments in this second letter in French on the death of Spanheim in May 1649, and on the recently published refutations of Amyraut by Pierre du Moulin and George Reveau.

465. Utricia Ogle (Swann) acts here as the messenger carrying Van Schurman’s letters to Marie du Moulin and Rivet. In her letter to Rivet penned the same day (no. 50, 1:63), Van Schurman explains that Utricia extended her stay at the court of The Hague to mourn the death of Charles I. 466. Van Schurman had encouraged Marie to learn Hebrew. 467. Rivet. 468. Marie’s tres-joli mari. See no. 49, 1:62.

220 ANNA MARIA VAN SCHURMAN AND MEMBERS OF HER CIRCLE [To Monsieur. Monsieur Rivet, Doctor and Honorary Professor in Holy Theology at the University of Leiden, and Curator of the Illustrious School of His Highness. At Breda] My very dear and very honored Father, It is no wonder that we share the same interest in the loss of such an excellent person—who was no less necessary to private friendships as he was profitable to the public and to the Church of God—since we have shared the same interest in his life.469 In fact, Heaven threatens us with yet a thicker darkness, since we do not walk in the light even while it shines in our hemisphere. And, understandably, I dread that some star of bad influence will follow, if it does not forecast happier events.470 However, we have the possibility of consoling ourselves in these turbulent times, in that our God summons such excellent champions to battle for the defense of his cause. Above all I admire the courage and the force of mind of Monsieur your incomparable brother-in-law; and I passionately desire to see his latest work of which it has pleased you to give me some hope.471 I beseech you very humbly to give the enclosed letter to Monsieur Reveau, in which I thank him for his book and the honor he gave me in placing me among those who are able to judge it.472 I am, with all my affection, Monsieur my very dear Father, Your very humble and very obedient daughter and servant, A.M. de Schurman th From Utrecht, this 25 of July 1649 I cannot imagine why the Elzeviers have not delivered my letter with my small gift to Monsieur Conrart,473 given that our late friend, Monsieur Spanheim, asked them to do so a long time ago.474 My Aunts and my Brother commend themselves 469. Spanheim died on 14 May 1649. 470. The United Provinces were experiencing troubled times. The Stadtholder Frederik Hendrik had died two years earlier, and his son, William II, tried to stop negotiations for the Peace of Westphalia by renewing war efforts against Spain. When the States General refused to let him proceed, he laid siege to Amsterdam in 1650. 471. Pierre du Moulin had just published A Clarification of the Controversies of Saumur (Leiden, 1648), which refuted Amyraut’s universal grace; see in Part 1, note 455. 472. Georges Reveau (1582/3–1663), a Protestant from Nantes who settled in La Rochelle, published two books in 1649, an account of the fall of La Rochelle (1627–28), and a refutation of Amyraut’s universal grace. Given Van Schurman’s allusion in the preceding paragraph to Du Moulin’s critique of Amyraut, it is quite possible that Reveau had sent her a copy of his refutation, inviting her to judge it. 473. Valentin Conrart (1603–1675), the secretary of the French Academy in Paris, and an admirer of Van Schurman. 474. Van Schurman complains that the Elzeviers have not sent Conrart a copy of her Opuscula, as she and Spanheim had requested. A copy finally reached Conrart on 12 June 1650 (see no. 52, 1:67).

Part 1: Letters and Poems 221 very humbly to your good graces, and me, to those of Mademoiselle, your dear companion.

66. Van Schurman to Rivet, 4 February 1650 (no. 53) Van Schurman mentions, in this third French letter, the deaths of a female family acquaintance, of Gerardus Vossius, and of Spanheim; and the anticipated reconciliation between Pierre du Moulin and Amyraut.

[To Monsieur. Monsieur André Rivet, Doctor and Professor of Holy Theology, and Curator of the Illustrious School of His Highness. Under cover. At Breda] Monsieur, my very dear and very honored Father, Your last letter was a great consolation to me, as much for the solemnity of its contents, as for the sympathy and interest that you have in our affliction. I must confess that our loss does not matter much to the public, unlike that of those two excellent lights of the Church of whom you write;475 yet such a loss leaves one deeply affected, especially our good elderly aunts, who have less strength to resist it.476 But what relieves my spirit is that her piety was so clearly in evidence at the end of her life, that there is no doubt that she has passed from this life to one that is infinitely happier. I have not yet seen the letters of Monsieur Amyraut, whose news, which you have sent us, has given us a great source of joy and relief, since this storm of dissension, which threatens our Churches in France with a great shipwreck, seems to want to end in a gentle calm, and this man, who was the leader of the party, recognized his error and sought your friendship. And yet, I do not doubt that the reconciliation of these two people,477 whom you mention, would have happened so easily if the offending party had not wished to do the same.478 It has been reported to me that the whole affair depends now on our Synods, which have taken up the matter; and one must now await the outcome. Please, look into this 475. Gerardus Johannes Vossius died on 17 March 1649, and Spanheim, on 14 May 1649. In 1600, Vossius, a polymath, became rector of the Latin School of Dordrecht, where he cultivated philology and historical theology. From 1614 to 1619, he directed the theological college at Leiden University. Purged during the Arminian controversy at the Synod of Dordt, he nevertheless continued as professor of rhetoric and Greek. From 1632 to his death, he taught history at the Athenaeum Illustre in Amsterdam. Spanheim left Geneva in 1642 to become professor of theology at Leiden, where he defended the doctrine of predestination against Amyraldism. 476. Van Schurman’s loss could have been that of a family member, or someone close to her family. 477. The Accord of Thouars on 15 and 16 October 1649 brought a reconciliation between the opposing parties. Amyraut did not in fact admit to being in the wrong. Rather he committed himself to remaining “silent on the issues in question.” See Stam, The Controversy over the Theology of Saumur, 397. 478. According to Stam, The Controversy over the Theology of Saumur, 440, Rivet had “a capacity for self-deception” that extended to untruths. Amyraut, it seems, did not admit to being in the wrong.

222 ANNA MARIA VAN SCHURMAN AND MEMBERS OF HER CIRCLE especially. The Flemish ministers of your town [of Breda] will communicate to you the Acts of the Synod of South-Holland, held in Leiden in the month of July of the Year 1649, and those which have followed since.479 I pray that the God of peace will preside there, and inspire them with beneficial advice, so that all turns out well for the glory of his Name and the edification of his Church. May it please Him to keep you in good health for a long time, for the same end. Abiding for ever after Monsieur, Your very humble and obedient daughter and servant, A. M. de Schurman From Utrecht, the 4th of Feb. 1650 My Brother commends himself to your good graces.

67. Van Schurman to Rivet, 12 June 1650 (no. 52) The last extant letter from Van Schurman to Rivet, who died six months later, on 7 January 1651. She mentions in this French letter that Elzevier will expedite her Opuscula to Valentin Conrart, and that Reveau is sending her his book on the siege of La Rochelle.480

Monsieur, very dear and very honored Father, I do not dare to keep you much longer, lacking as I do a matter worthy of your leisure, since my preceding letter and the one that you have done me the honor of writing have met en route and the one seems to have met the other with a reply. I will only say that my Brother, who arrived a few days ago from Leiden, told me that the Elzeviers assured him that they will still send a copy of my letters to Mr. Conrart; and that they will give me a letter written by him, which will grant me a new occasion to thank him with good grace, for the second time, for the gifts that he sent me last year. I recently received from Mr. Reveau a very learned and courteous letter, in which he mentioned his book on La Rochelle besieged.481 I will reply to him after it reaches me. I pray that our good God will keep you in his holy protection and continue the strength of your body and your soul, abiding as always, Monsieur and very honored Father, 479. A reference to the provincial synods of Dordt (Dordrecht), located in South Holland. 480. Same address as in no. 51, 1:65. 481. Reveau’s De Rupella ter obsessa, dedita demum, capta, subacta, libri tres [La Rochelle besieged three times, surrendered, and conquered: three books for posterity] (Amsterdam: Jan Jansson, 1649). There were at least two sieges of La Rochelle, in 1572–73 and 1627–28, as well as a naval battle during the Hundred Years’ War.

Part 1: Letters and Poems 223 Your very humble and affectionate daughter and servant of the Lord, Anne Marie de Schurman

From Utrecht, the 12th of June 1650 My Aunts and my Brother commend themselves very humbly to your good graces, and so do I.

68. Van Schurman to Marie du Moulin, 13 March 1652 (no. 62) Van Schurman thanks Marie du Moulin in this French letter for sending her The Last Hours of Monsieur Rivet.482

To Mademoiselle, Mademoiselle du Moulin. My dearest Sister, My trip to Delft, which I made principally to see our dearest Sister de Maisonneuve,483 delayed me a few days in thanking you for this very excellent work to which you have given the light of day. It is a gift for which all of Christendom is indebted to you, and one I consider not only as a beautiful portrait of a soul filled with celestial gifts and graces, but also as a testament of my Father. It includes utterly sacred principles and rules by which to live and die happily; and particularly for me, it indicates how much this saintly Person remembered me in his greatest suffering and weakness, and how he gave me his saintly blessings, with so many utterances of earnest words, by adding to them, as proof of his spiritual love, a legacy of the Testament of our God, in its best form. These are truly for me infallible tokens of his paternal affection, which he kept for me right up until his last breath; these are more precious to me than all the treasures of the Indies. The proposal that you make to me concerning this little Bible, and the Bible that you also inherited, I find so reasonable and so advantageous for me, that I would like you to consider this letter as my will and testament, so that this Bible will be returned to you by my heir after my death.484 For I consider it a gain and a great honor that my memory is eternalized alongside that of such an illustrious 482. Les Dernieres heures de Monsieur Rivet (Breda: Johannes Waesberghe, 1651). 483. Madeleine, the niece and wife of Isaac de Perponcher, Sieur de Maisonneuve, who married her in January 1637 after the death of his first wife. Madeleine lived for a time with the Rivets and was close to Marie du Moulin. By the mid-1640s, the couple lived in Delft. Isaac was colonel from 1629 to 1645 in the French Huguenot second regiment in the Netherlands. He was replaced in 1645 by Charles de Rechignevoisin, Sieur des Loges, son of the salonnière Marie Bruneau des Loges (ca. 1584–1641). See D.J.B. Trim, “Huguenot Soldiering c. 1560–1685: The Origins of a Tradition,” in War, Religion and Service: Huguenot Soldiering, 1685–1713, ed. Matthew Glozier and David Onnekink (Aldershot, UK, and Burlington, VT: Ashgate, 2007), 9–30. 484. Marie du Moulin had proposed that both she and Van Schurman inherit the Bible that Rivet had given to them by including it for each other in their wills.

224 ANNA MARIA VAN SCHURMAN AND MEMBERS OF HER CIRCLE and sacred Person, whom God wished to make an object of all his most special graces. And it is for me a special pleasure now to imagine that some day, when I am no longer here on earth, you will remember our covenant and solid friendship, as well as the person who will remain all her life, Dearest Sister, Your very humble and very affectionate Sister and Servant, A. M. de Schurman From Utrecht, the 23th of March 1652 My Aunts and my Brother very humbly greet you, and I greet Mademoiselle your Aunt.

69. Undated Poem on Rivet’s Death, ca. 1651 (no. 54)485 This poem commemorates Rivet’s death in Breda, on 7 January 1651, at age seventyeight. The manuscript draft, reworked by Van Schurman, contains words and lines crossed out and written over. The corrections are included in Opuscula.

In Obitum Summi Viri Domini Andreæ Riveti a morte Patris sui in locum eiusdem ἐνσπόνδως assumpti Epicedium Dicite, Pierides, cur tanto pectora luctu   Plangitis, et mæstos funditis ore modos? Curque sedet pulla lugens sub veste Lyceum,   Nostraque cur vultus Templa dolentis habent? 5 Gallia quem lætis surgentem vidit ab undis   Et patrio placidum spargere in orbe jubar; Hunc votis magnum venerata Batavia Solem,   Huc contra solitum currere fecit iter. Hic modo Palladio, modo cessa fulsit in Aula. 10   Et tam diversis par tamen unus erat. Vivida cælestis Doctrinæ femina fovit,   Fœcundaque novos486 messe beavit agros. Et Romæ cæcas errorum487 dispulit umbras.   Restituens summo debita jura Deo. 15 Conspicuus semper488 victor pugnavit in hostes, 485. Opuscula, 316–17. 486. Written over the crossed-out atque novos ampla. 487. Over the crossed-out tenebrarum (“of darkness”). 488. Semper replaces varios, which would agree with hostes (“may different enemies”).

Part 1: Letters and Poems 225   Lucifugas telis perdidit ille suis. Ipse sui similis, similisque per omnia Phœbo.   Omnibus auxilio, præfidioque fuit. Sic tamen in recto firmavit tramite cursum, 20   Ut non planetam dicere jure queas.489 Talis erat, nostri miserà quem flemus voce, Rivetus,   Qui sua funestis lumina mersit aquis. Fallimur, improvidæ, non atris occidit undis,   Sed superum exoriens clarus in Orbe micat.490 25 Nec minus hic sanctæ radiant vestigia vitæ,   Et radiat scriptis autor ubique suis Vel scriptaque sublimis lumina mentis habent.491   Obstipui ad tristes, Musa referente, Cypressos; Vix potis hæc querulis verba sonare modis: 30   Siccine perpetuos patitur sors nostra regressus Et nihil in terris stabile pondus habent.   Laetitiæ finis dolor est; nihil usque beatum. Munera, quæ cælum contulit, umbra rapit.   Filia bis fueram felix: Horam ante supremam, 35 Denasci natam bis mea fata ferunt. Anna Maria à Schurman On the death of the Most Eminent Gentleman, André Rivet, who was claimed by death and raised from ashes into life to the realm of his Father. A Dirge [ca. 1651] Tell me, daughters of Pieros,492 why you are beating your breast with such     grief   And why you are bathing your cheeks with sad songs? Why does the Lyceum sit in mourning beneath a funeral tapestry?   And why do our temples have a look of lamentation? 489. In Opuscula, these lines were revised to: Nec tamen instabilem fas est dixisse Planetam Semper enim recto gestiit ire gradu It’s not right to have said that his Planet was unstable Because he always traveled on a sure foot. 490. The first draft of the line reads: exoriens supremum clarius in orbe micat. In the published version, Van Schurman added sed (“but”) by taking advantage of the elision occurring between superum exoriens, such that, when read aloud, the line would flow like this: sed super’exoriens. This is metrically equivalent to exoriens supremum, but the elision gives her the one syllable she needs to add sed. 491. Van Schurman offers two possible pentameters to end this couplet; she chooses the first for the Opuscula. 492. Greek muses of music, song, and dance, and the source of inspiration for poets.

226 ANNA MARIA VAN SCHURMAN AND MEMBERS OF HER CIRCLE 5 And that great sun, which France saw rising from abundant waves,493   And which spreads its placid rays over its ancestral land, Batavia also venerated greatly with prayers,   As it made its usual journey, running across the sky. Sometimes it shines over Pallas Athena, other times in the Palladium.494 10   And, indeed, only one man was fit for so many diverse places. The lively-minded woman of Celestial Knowledge495 favored him   And blessed new fields with a fertile496 harvest. And he cast out the dark shadow of errors in Rome,497   And restored rightful laws to God on High. 15 In any battle against an enemy, he was always the clear victor,   He destroyed with his arrows anyone who fled the light. He was truly himself and, in everything, in all respects, like Phoebus,   A helper to all and a protector. For in this way he maintained a straight course on the right path,498 20   So that you could say, and rightly so, that his planet was never unstable.499 Such was the man we now weep over with cries of lament,   Rivet’s light is extinguished in mournful waters. But we, who cannot see into the future, are deceived. He has not drowned    in black waters,   But rather he has risen and his light shines over the Earth. 25 Traces of his holy life shine even now   Since he shines everywhere, an author in his writings And these have the sublimity of an outstanding mind.500   I stood silently by the gloomy Cypresses501 upon the return of the Muse; And I was barely able to cry out these words in a plaintive tone: 30   “So, in this way, our lot in life endures a perpetual cycle, And nothing on this earth has any stable weight.   Grief is the end of happiness; nothing is blessed forever. The gifts which Heaven confers upon us, the shadow of death snatches away.   I have been a daughter twice. I was fortunate. Before my final hour, 493. Rivet, born in France. 494. Pallas Athena symbolizes the university world, and the Palladium, the church. 495. Pallas Athena. 496. Fertile replaces the crossed-out generous. 497. Errors replaces darkness. 498. In the Opuscula, this and the following lines differ from the original. 499. An allusion to Fortune’s unstable ball or wheel, representing life’s capriciousness. 500. This line is missing in the Opuscula. 501. Cypress trees were traditional symbols of mourning.

Part 1: Letters and Poems 227 35 The fates require that I, a daughter twice, must die twice.” Anna Maria van Schurman   70. Undated Poem from Van Schurman to Rivet (no. 55)502 Undated, but composed before 1646 when Rivet moved to Breda to become the curator of the Illustrious School and while he was still governor of the future William II at The Hague.

[To the Reverend, Very Noble Gentleman, of exceptional Piety and erudition, Andreas Rivetus, Most admirable Professor of Very Sacred Theology at the Academy of Holland. At Leiden] V.C. Dño Andreae Riveto S.D. Tanta tuæ, Rivete, viget vox inclyta Famæ, Ut solam invidiam velle silere putem. Si memorare tuas laudes vel convenit hosti, Conciliet tantum te mihi purus amor. 5 Ecce igitur properam quam parvula charta salutem. Dicit, Amicitiæ candida signa meæ. Cui nihil Virtutibus tuis amabilius, Anna Maria A Schurman To the Illustrious Gentleman Mr. André Rivet Greetings The renowned voice of your Fame is so great, Rivet, That I would think envy alone wants it silenced. If it befits even your enemies to sing your praises, Then it’s only pure love that will unite the two of us. 5 Behold, therefore, the greetings that this little page sends you, It says that it is a shining token of my Friendship. To whom nothing is more lovable than your Virtues, Anna Maria van Schurman  

502. Opuscula, 296, in which the poem is titled “For the Most Famous Gentleman, ANDREAS RIVETUS.”

228 ANNA MARIA VAN SCHURMAN AND MEMBERS OF HER CIRCLE 71. Van Schurman to Rivet, undated, ca. 1648/49 (no. 57) Likely written on the publication of the Opuscula, which Van Schurman wished to send with an accompanying letter to Valentin Conrart (see no. 51, 1:65, and no. 52, 1:67).

[No address] I received your letter, and my sister’s503 as well, to which lack of time at present does not allow me to reply point by point. I will mention only this: that it pleased me very much because you write that you have changed only one or two words in my letter to Mr. Conrart. But, if I remember correctly, its introduction also needs the same curative hand that I lent you at that time.504 For this reason, I beg you to send it back to me if you cannot easily fix it; or, better yet, throw it in the fire. 72. Undated (no. 58) A pasted page written in a hand different than Van Schurman’s.505 

[No address] The elegies you have given me to read have as their author Vincent Fabricius; one can read them in an earlier edition of his poems, Amsterdam, 1638 p. 44 and p. 25. But in the first edition (if one can use this word), which was produced in Leiden in 1633, they are missing.

503. Marie du Moulin. 504. An indication that Rivet welcomed Van Schurman’s comments on his writings. 505. On this page and the poems alluded to, see the Introduction.

PART 2 Anna Maria van Schurman and Constantijn Huygens, Letters and Poems, 1633–1669 1. Van Schurman, Riddle, 1633 (no. 63)506 One of Van Schurman’s earliest extant poems.This poem is on the theorbo, a musical instrument like the lute and favored by Huygens.

5

Raetsel T’ Komt uyt den bosch, ’t is teer van aert, En ’t dient voor onval nau bewaert, De kunst die leert het wonder strecken, En soet met veele tongen spreecken, T’ is lang van hals en ruym van schoot, En ’t draeght syn eygen dermen bloot. En efter is het sonder leven, Indien dieselv’ het hem niet geven.

5

Riddle It comes from the forest; it is fragile by nature, And it should be shielded from harm, The art of extending the miracle Makes it speak sweetly with many tongues. It has a long neck and an ample body, It openly carries its own bowels, And is usually without life, Unless such is given to it.

2. Van Schurman, Engraved Self-Portrait, 1633507 The self-portrait of Van Schurman, sent in 1633/34 to Huygens, bears this Latin quatrain on the cartouche (see Figure 5).



Non animi fastus, nec formæ gratia suasit Vultus æterno sculpere in ære meos:

506. Translation by Beek, First Female, 93. For a modernized Dutch version, see Riet Schenkeveldvan der Dussen et al., Met en zonder lauwerkrans: Schrijvende vrouwen uit de vroegmoderne tijd, 1550–1850, van Anna Bins tot Elise van Calcar (Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press, 1997), 209. On this poem, see Stighelen and Landtsheer, 150. 507. Stighelen, “Hoe hooge,” 119; Schotel, 2:71.

229

230 ANNA MARIA VAN SCHURMAN AND CONSTANTIJN HUYGENS Sed, si forte rudis stilus hic meliora negaret, Tentarem prima ne potiora vice. A.M. a Schurmā sculp. et delin. Anno 1633 No arrogance of mind nor the grace of my features persuaded me To sculpt my face in everlasting copper: But if perhaps my inexperienced chisel prevented a better outcome, I would be looking for a better one at the first opportunity. A. M. Van Schurman, sculpted & traced in the year 1633

3. Huygens to Van Schurman, 2 October 1634508 Composed at a camp in Drunen, just west of ’s-Hertogenbosch, where Huygens had accompanied the Stadtholder Frederik Hendrik.

ANNÆ MARIÆ A SCHURMANS UNIONI. Ut minus lateat Quo te, Nympha, cui tam custodita, quousque   Subtrahis, & muta509 laude sepulta lates? Celatæ virtutis onus fit inertia, fit nox,   Fit gravis æternae mortis imago quies.510 5 Prodi parca Venus, partuque Batava marino   De tot virtutum nascere, diva, mari. Sol in virgine plus satis est; in Sole rogamus   Virgo sit, accendas orta, fugesque diem. FOR THE PEARL ANNA MARIA VAN SCHURMAN So that she remains less hidden Where do you keep hiding yourself, O Nymph? Who is keeping you in   their custody?   Are you lying low, buried, so praise cannot reach you? The cost of concealing virtue is inactivity, and it is night,   And it is deep sleep—which is like death eternal. 5 So come forward, modest Venus, and Batavian goddess, 508. Opuscula, 297. 509. Multa in Huygens, Momenta desultoria: Poëmatum libri XI (Leiden: Elzevier, 1644), 92. 510. Sopor in Huygens.

Part 2: Letters and Poems 231   Be born from the sea of your many virtues.511 There is more than enough Sunlight in this Maiden;512 so, I ask that this   Maiden   Come into the Sunlight! Rise and shine and chase off daybreak.

4. Van Schurman to Huygens, ca. October 1634 (no. 67)513 Since Huygens did not sign his poem “For the Pearl,” Van Schurman jokes that she cannot count on him to plead her case.

Ad Occultum Apollinis cuiusdam ad lucem me provocantis Oraculum Responsio Magnum Musa virum sonat; utque ego sim quoque vates   Ingenium Constans da mihi Phœbe tuum. Ast quo jure meum poscit clarescere nomen,   Cum pro me caussam,514 qui latet, Autor agat.515 Anna Maria à Schurman To THE SECRET ORACLE OF A CERTAIN APOLLO Who Beckons Me to the Light A Reply to an Oracle My muse sings of a great man;516 and so that I may also become an     inspired poet Lend me your talent, my Constant Phoebus. But what gives him the right to think he can make my name famous When he pleads his case for me without acknowledging that he was the     author? Anna Maria van Schurman 511. The birth of Venus from the sea is found in Hesiod’s Theogony, 1.188–200. Sandro Botticelli’s famous painting, The Birth of Venus (ca. 1484–1486), predates this poem by almost exactly 150 years. 512. Huygens consistently uses virgo  /  Virgo to refer to Van Schurman. We translate it as maiden / Maiden, except when Huygens puns on the word or otherwise draws attention to Van Schurman’s virgin state. 513. Opuscula, 297. A reply to Huygens’s poem of 2 October 1634 (2:3). 514. Causam in Opuscula, 297. 515. Question mark added in Huygens, Momenta desultoria, 92. 516. Van Schurman plays with the epic tradition in her opening lines. On this poem, see the Introduction.

232 ANNA MARIA VAN SCHURMAN AND CONSTANTIJN HUYGENS 5. Huygens to Van Schurman, 2 December 1634517 The ten poems that follow feature Huygens’s reactions to Van Schurman’s 1633 self-portrait.518

In Effigiem SCHURMANNIÆ, αὐτόχειρον, ἄχειρον & ipsius versibus inscriptam De facie gratum est: sed enim bis, quinta Dearum,   Cur magis illustri parte stupenda lates? Pingere se incertam nequiit, quæ, mobilis usque   Et nova, non cessat se superare manus. 5 Nec lateo quâ parte tamen, si cœperis esse   Lector, ubi inspector desinis esse mei: Mente, manu vultum retuli; plus litera pinxit;   Scripta refert mentem litera, picta manum

On the Portrait of VAN SCHURMAN, without hands, done by her own hand, and inscribed with her verses Your portrait is quite lovely: but why do you, Tenth Muse,   Amazing Lady, hide that part of yourself that is even more famous? Your hand could not depict its own hesitation, and because of its constant   Motion and originality, it does not cease to outdo itself. 5 If you begin to read my work, you will find that I do not hide myself   Where your eyes cannot find me. I have seen evidence of your mind and hand in your portrait:   Your writing proves you have a mind, but your painting proves you    have a hand.

6. Huygens to Van Schurman, 2 December 1634519

5

Op de print van Juffrou Anne Marie Schurmans, sonder handen uytgebeelt, ende door haer selver gesneden Waerom berght de Maeghd die handen Die noijt wedergaed’ en vanden? T’ koper om end om gesett Heeft haer’ vingeren gesmett, En sij schroomtse soo te thoonen.

517. Huygens, Momenta desultoria, 94; Huygens, Gedichten, 2:299; Opuscula, 324. 518. Composed between 2 and 6 December 1634. The first five were written on just one day, 2 December. 519. Huygens, Gedichten, 2:299–300; Schotel, 2:75. We thank Cornelia Kennedy, Bram ten Berge, and Martine van Elk for their help with the translations from the Dutch.

Part 2: Letters and Poems 233

Leser, helpt de schuld verschoonen. ’Tis de schuld van d’eerste sné, Die sij van haer’ dagen dé.

5

On the portrait of the Maiden Anna Maria van Schurman, portrayed without hands, and engraved by herself Why does the Maiden conceal those hands That never found their equal? The copper turned this way and that Had stained her fingers, And she fears to show them thus. Reader help her to exonerate herself from blame. ’Tis the fault of the first cut, That she ever made in all her days.520

7. Huygens to Van Schurman, 2 December 1634521 5 10 15 20

De Selve Handeloos en sonder spraeck, Uijt een’ onbewogen kaeck, Onbewogen als een baeck, Dat de baeren overblaeck, Als een ancker voor een’ kraeck, Doof en ongevoelick stae’ck: Maer wie is soo sonder smaeck, Die mijn’ waerde niet en raeck’, Die van wilde weelde kraeck; Die mijn’ stomme stilte laeck Die ick niet genoegh en waeck, Die mij van te grooten vaeck Tot een’ slappe slaepster maeck’? Wie soo menscheloosen draeck Die mij nijdelick genaeck’ Met een’ onverdiende wraeck, Die mijn’ eer ten halven staeck’, Die kon lijden dat ick braeck, Of in vier en kolen staeck? Is ’t een’ dagelixe saeck

520. On the sexual innuendo in this poem, see the Introduction. 521. Huygens, Gedichten, 2:300; Schotel, 2:76.

234 ANNA MARIA VAN SCHURMAN AND CONSTANTIJN HUYGENS

Dat ick oor en oogh vermaeck Handeloos en sonder spraeck?

On the Same Lacking hands and lacking speech, With a face unmoved Like a beacon, unaffected, Glowing above the waves, Like an anchor on a ship Deaf and unmoved I stand. But who is so devoid of taste? Who does not fathom my worthiness? Who breaks beneath wild opulence? 10 Who blames my muted silence Which I do not guard enough, Which too often fashions me Into a weary sleeper? Who is such an inhuman beast 15 Who would accost me bitterly With an undeserved rancor? Who diminishes my honor in half And would gloat if I should break, Heaping fiery coals upon my head?522 20 Should it be my daily task To entertain the ear and eye, Lacking hands and lacking speech? 5

8. Huygens to Van Schurman, 2 December 1634523 5

De selve Jammer, jammer, seij de Reden, Daer dit Meisjen quam getreden, Dat soo soeten schepsel lam Handeloos ter wereld quam: Maer de waerheid sprack ’er tegen, Weest’er weinigh in verlegen; Als het Haeghje wandelloos, Als den Amstel handelloos,

522. Vurige kolen op iemands hoofd stapelen means literally: Stack fiery coal on someone’s head, meaning to load feelings of guilt on someone. 523. Huygens, Gedichten, 2:300–1; Schotel, 2:75.

Part 2: Letters and Poems 235 10 15

Als de duijnen strandeloos, Als den oever sandeloos, Als de tiger tandeloos, Als de sonne brandeloos, Als de minnaer bandeloos, Als de heide landeloos, Als de kercken pandeloos, Als de merckten mandeloos, Als de doosen randeloos, Als de boose schandeloos, Soo is ’t Meysjen handeloos.

5 10 15

To the Same Unfortunately, unfortunately, said Reason, When this Maiden arrived And when so sweet a creature came Weak and without hands into the world. But truth contradicted such prattle And was not shy about it. Like The Hague without its paths, Like the Amstel without trade, Like the dunes without a beach, Like the riverbank without sand, Like the tiger without teeth, Like the sun without fire, Like the lover without bonds, Like the heath without land, Like the churches without a building, Like the markets without baskets, Like the boxes without rims, Like the wicked without shame, So the Maid is without hands.

9. Huygens to Van Schurman, 2 December 1634524 Huygens demands that the cartouche be taken down so that he can see Van Schurman’s hands.



Op de selve Stoot af het nijdigh berd, en gunt mijn oogh de handen

524. Huygens, Gedichten, 2:300–1. Schotel, 2:77.

236 ANNA MARIA VAN SCHURMAN AND CONSTANTIJN HUYGENS 5

Die ’t lang van verre siet, en langhe dreight te vanden. Stoot niet; all staet de planck ’er voor, Ick sies’er in, en op, en door. Bewaertse veil en vast, en van verongelucken. Geraeckt’er een’ in stucken, Wanneer verhaelde men de schad’, en waer, en hoe? Daer is geen’ weergae toe.

On the Same Knock down that hostile board525 and offer your hands to my gaze, Which long has seen them from afar, and long has threatened to find   them. No, do not discard it; even though it conceals them, I can see in, and up, and through it. 5 It keeps them safe and steady and free from accidents. Were one to break it into pieces, When, and where, and how could one recover the damages? There is none that is equal. 10. Huygens to Van Schurman, 5 December 1634526 IN EANDEM Anna, fatebor enim, poteras plus picta placere,   Formaque non sculpti gratior æris erat: Sed magè sculpta places. Aiunt vænire puellam,   Picta cui multo mala colore nitet. 5 Quæ, tantum virtutis amans, ignorat Amantem,   Cui specie, si fas, non placuisse, placet, Quæ paucis non dura viris si nupserit, unis   Ingeniis uno nupserit ingenio, Quæ, mens tota, velit sola se mente videri, 10   Membra supervacui ponderis instar habet. Psilothro niteat, cretam ferat oblita? Scalpi   Debuit, & scalpi debuit ungue suo. TO THE SAME Anna, I must confess, your portrait was quite gratifying   And your copper engraving was even more gratifying: 527

525. Berd (board) refers to the cartouche. 526. Opuscula, 325; Huygens, Gedichten, 2:301; Schotel, 2:74. 527. Virgil, Aeneid, 4.20, when Dido begins confessing her love for Aeneas to her sister Anna.

Part 2: Letters and Poems 237 But your sculpture was even more gratifying than that. They say that a    girl is coming   For whom a brightly painted apple gleams.528 5 But she loves virtue too much to ever know a Lover.   She is quite gratified, if I may say so, that no one has found her beauty   gratifying. Were she not so stubborn, she would and could marry many a man, and    in so doing   She would marry her singular talent to many singular talents. But she wants to exist merely as a mind and be viewed only by the mind; 10   Her limbs are weightless. Should she shine forth embodied in her true form, or cover herself in    white dust,   Forgotten? She should be engraved and engraved with her own   hands.

11. Huygens to Van Schurman, 5 December 1634529 In Eandem Hactenus una fuit; furto datur altera Phœnix.   Publica privatum gratia crimen habet. Quàm bene non prodit, quæ se, fugiendo, fatetur     Dextera Phœnicem surripuisse sibi! To the Same Until now, she was just one; but then another Phoenix530 has appeared in   secret. Her public charm hides a private crime. 528. The apple in the Garden of Eden, Genesis 3:6. This could also be a reference to the famous “golden apple” tossed into the wedding of Peleus and Thetis, on which was inscribed “for the fairest,” making this an indirect comment on Van Schurman’s beauty. 529. Opuscula, 325; Huygens, Momenta desultoria, 94, and Gedichten, 2:301; Schotel, 2:74. 530. The joke in this epigram is subtle. As the Lewis and Short Latin Dictionary (1879) notes, the Phoenix “was said to live 500 years, and from its ashes a young phoenix arose.” In The Persian Wars, 2.73, Herodotus states what the phoenix does with his father’s ashes: “The story goes that the bird manages to do the following (though I’m not sure I believe it). The bird starts from Arabia and rushes off to the temple of the sun, then carries its father plastered up in myrrh to protect the body before burying him at the temple of the sun.” Huygens’s joke is that Van Schurman’s right hand gave birth to the portrait, which is the new Phoenix. But by refusing to depict her right hand—the father of the portrait—she lost her father’s ashes. The connection with Phoebus and the Sun plays upon the first set of couplets they exchanged.

238 ANNA MARIA VAN SCHURMAN AND CONSTANTIJN HUYGENS How lucky that her right hand remains hidden, that hand which, in its   flight, Pretends it has lost its own Phoenix!

12. Huygens to Van Schurman, 6 December 1634531 5

Op de selve Is het aengesicht vol kerven, Die en kost de kunst niet derven: Leser, siet mij door de borst, Des’ en is maer koele korst. Maghs’ haer uijterst niet bederven Die ten uijterst Maeghd will sterven?

5

On the same Even a face so full of slashes532 Cannot spoil its artistry. Reader, look upon me, and into my heart, This [face] is but a cool crust. May she not mar her external look She who at all costs wants to die a Maiden.

13. Huygens to Van Schurman, 6 December 1634533 5

Visage faict comme ce qui l’anime: Masle beauté, dont la jalouse estime Porte l’envie au poinct de t’adorer; Endures tu que toute main te touche, Te souffres tu tous les jours reverer De front à front, d’oeil à oeil, bouche à bouche, Et peux tu bien, merveille des humains, Me refuser de te baiser les mains?



Face reflecting an animated spirit, Virile beauty for which a jealous esteem Brings envy to the point of adoration, How can you stand anyone’s hand touching you?

531. Huygens, Gedichten, 2:302; Schotel, 2:77. 532. The incisions of the engraving. 533. Huygens, Gedichten, 2:302.

Part 2: Letters and Poems 239 5

How can you suffer being daily worshipped Forehead to forehead, eye to eye, mouth to mouth? And can you, indeed, marvel of humanity, Refuse to let me kiss your hands?

14. Huygens to Van Schurman, 6 December 1634534 5

Ben tu savia paresti Quando più d’ogni man mano eccellente, Quando ti nascondesti, Quando le luci spente In te sola figesti, e non intente. Come ti pingeresti? Invitta, inimitabil’ man’ dipinta Saria come vinta.

5

You would surely seem wise When, more than any other excellent hand, You hide yourself, And when the lights go out, One can focus on you alone, not intending so.535 How do you depict yourself? Invite [that] inimitable hand, depict Yourself as vanquished.

15. Huygens to Van Schurman, 30 June 1636536 Huygens’s first extant letter was written three months after Van Schurman composed her Latin, French, and Dutch odes on the founding of the University of Utrecht.

I send you these pages, Most Outstanding Maiden—where you will observe the power of the ancient words, “painters and poets have always shared the right to do anything”537—just to keep a promise I made recently to your brother when he very kindly paid me a visit, and not to teach you anything, I promise! However 534. Huygens, Gedichten, 2:302. We thank Meredith Ray for her help with the translation. 535. Another possible reading of lines 4 and 5, according to Meredith Ray, is: “When you turn on the lights, dimmed and unseeing, / Upon yourself alone.” 536. Huygens, The Hague, KB, ms. KA 44, no. 241; ms. KA 45, f. 82v–83; Huygens, Briefwisseling, 2:171–72, no. 1398. 537. Horace, Ars Poetica (The Art of Poetry), 9–10. It appears that Huygens sent Van Schurman two unidentified drawings, engravings, or artworks.

240 ANNA MARIA VAN SCHURMAN AND CONSTANTIJN HUYGENS much these are the product of an experienced hand—and this is the reason I have saved them—it is perfectly clear that they have nothing to teach you, and you do not need to decide beforehand if you should copy them. Anyway, all this goes against the genius of art. It would certainly be a waste of time to look for the sort of artistry in those works that comes not through schooling but through nothing other than what nature offers as one’s guide.538 Concerning your poem in Dutch, added to the erudite sermon by the most illustrious G. Voetius,539 you did a great service to someone who does not have much experience in this sort of art. Because, even if I myself had thought that I had some ability to repay you in kind, I would not have been able to give you the timely sort of un-versified540 thanks that you are getting in this letter. Now you have deprived me of any hope, which I might perhaps have had, that you have not seen my rhymes or beheld my words, given the many instances of my ineptitude. And, so, I might now be on the verge of experiencing my very first happiness. And I say first happiness, if you leave out the happiness that I would feel should you consider me worthy to love, or should you consider it a good thing to be loved by me, as I ask of you now. Farewell noble and illustrious glory541 of our country and of this age and convey my greetings to that well-known gentleman542 whom I named, if it is not too much trouble. The Hague, the day before the Kalends of July 1636. Most devoted to you, C. H.

538. Huygens compliments Van Schurman on her artistry, which he judges superior to the art samples he sends her. He shows awareness of her modesty by using double negatives. A more direct paraphrase would be: “Forget what the experts say about art; trust your natural eye for it, which you clearly have.” 539. On 23 March 1636, Voetius preached a sermon at the Cathedral of Utrecht on Luke 2:46, entitled Sermon on the Usefulness of Academies and Schools, and of the Sciences and the Arts that are taught therein. It was published soon after, and Van Schurman’s Dutch poem was added to the volume. 540. In Greek, arrythmes. 541. Decus in the original. Huygens uses decus to describe Van Schurman as the “glory” of his times, a term found in Virgil’s Aeneid, 11.508–9. The same term was used by the Florentine humanist Angelo Poliziano (1454–1494) at the opening of his famous encomium of the Venetian scholar Cassandra Fedele (1465–1558), the “Glory of Italy,” whom he extols for her superior Latin and virginal modesty. Fedele’s works had just been reissued in 1636 by the bishop and man of letters Jacopo Filippo Tomasini (1595–1655) in Clarissimae feminae Cassandrae Fidelis, venetae. Epistolae et orationes (Padua: Francesco Bolzetta, 1636). Huygens, who was fascinated with learned and talented women, would have known of this work. On Poliziano’s letter, see Cassandra Fedele, Letters and Orations, ed. and trans. Diana Robin (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2000), 90–91, and Margaret L. King and Albert Rabil Jr., eds., Her Immaculate Hand: Selected Works by and about the Women Humanists of Quattrocento Italy (Binghamton, NY: Center for Medieval and Early Renaissance Studies, 1983), 126–27. 542. Voetius.

Part 2: Letters and Poems 241 16. Huygens to Van Schurman, 3 July 1636543 Somewhat embarrassed, Huygens apologizes for his gushy request that she find a way to love him.

Most Noble Lady, Here follows another letter that sends “owls to Athens.”544 Whatever its worth, I must show my appreciation to each of these [artworks] because they attest to the greatest artistry. I do want to say that in both cases the lines of the typeface should stand out more fully. I did not realize this before. And I now beg your pardon for what I said at the end of my letter—such a useless thing545—that you should want to be loved by someone who feels 3 July 1636. Most pledged to you,546 C.H. 17. Van Schurman to Huygens, 23 July 1636 (no. 64)547 In this first extant letter to Huygens,Van Schurman thanks him for his critique of her Dutch poem on the inauguration of the University of Utrecht, and refers to the failing health of her mother, Eva von Harff.

[To Monsieur de Zuilichem, residing at The Hague]548 Anna Maria van Schurman sends her greetings to Constantijn Huygens. Although you should rightly expect a social call from everybody because of your eminent virtues, or rather the dignity of your public office,549 Most Eminent 543. Huygens, ms. KA 44, no. 242; ms. KA 45, f. 83r; Briefwisseling, 2:172, no. 1400. 544. An Athenian cliché that indicates something superfluous. The owl, symbol of the goddess Athena, was depicted on the currency of Athens, and therefore sending owls to Athens was sending something Athens already had in abundance. Huygens uses the expression to suggest that more discussion of the art he has sent isn’t necessary, given his first letter a mere four days earlier. See Erasmus, Adages, I.ii.11 (Ululas Athenas); Cicero, Epistles, 6.3.3, and Cicero, Letters to Quintus, 2.16.9. Cited in Stighelen and Landtsheer,181n107. 545. Huygens refers to his closing remarks in his previous letter which, at best, are too forward. He softens his request, while still reiterating his interest. 546. Tui addictissimo, often used in correspondence of the period. See, for example, Huygens to Van Beverwijck, April 1637, The Hague, KB, ms. KA 45, f. 143r; Briefwisseling, 4:411, no. 4617, signed Addictissimus vobis. 547. This letter appears twice in Opuscula (1648), at 172–75 and 246–49 (the only difference is that the postscript is included the first time, but not the second). The error was corrected in the 1652 edition, 170–72. This letter is included in Huygens, Briefwisseling, 2:178–79, no. 1410. Van Schurman replies here to the two letters by Huygens dated 30 June 1636 (2:15) and 3 July 1636 (2:16). 548. Address in French. 549. Huygens was secretary to Frederik Hendrik, Prince of Orange, and as member of the Council and Exchequer, he managed the Orange-Nassau estate.

242 ANNA MARIA VAN SCHURMAN AND CONSTANTIJN HUYGENS Sir, still you prefer to be considered great for the good you do to others rather than merely accepting what is owed to you. I, on the other hand, do not by any means easily concede to being the author of a debt I owe you, especially since I am in no place to absolve it.550 I asked my Brother to convey my greetings to you and your family as sincerely as possible as he was about to leave for The Hague;551 however, it was not my intention to distract you with some ludicrous game that the leisured enjoy, since you are extremely busy with extraordinarily serious tasks. My Brother was not mistaken in stating that all the fine arts, and painting especially, have made their home with you, and that one must assuredly seek your advice.552 And however much I forgot about your expertise, whatever is missing in me you have supplied with your usual urbanity. Furthermore, the praise you give me, I must admit, is a form of exaggeration553 that is neither sincere nor fittingly modest; but I must admit that it has been quite a pleasure to be praised by a man who is not only incredibly praiseworthy himself, but by one who is praised publicly and is entirely deserving of that praise. I always greatly value your opinion; whatever comes from you sounds neither trite nor common. I will not try to repay you here; of course, I consider it much more proper for a young woman to admire you in silence554 than to stir up admiration about you in others by mentioning you. In the end, I recognize how obliged I am to you for my poem, written in the popular tongue,555 which is indebted to your many suggestions—you have become such a kind critic and I have not thanked you enough. And although I am unable to offer a few words of atonement for my crime,556 since in vain would I make atonement to the unwilling Graces, as they say, still I am pleased that I have not displeased you; my own theater [of performance] is quite enough for me. For I know that what you have

550. The debt of owing Huygens a reply. 551. See Huygens’s first extant letter to Van Schurman (2:15), stating he had just been visited by her brother. 552. Huygens was a fine arts connoisseur, and throughout his life as a civil servant to the House of Orange-Nassau, he collected works of art on the international art market. He, along with his children, sketched and painted with great skill. Van Schurman therefore acknowledges the artwork he sent her and signals her willingness to trust his opinions on it. 553. In Greek, hyperboladio. 554. Even though Van Schurman and Huygens have exchanged playful poems for two years before the date of this letter, Van Schurman reverts to a modesty that characterizes her first letter to Rivet (1:1). In that letter, she suggests that the dignitas of Rivet’s position should have stunned her into silence, were it not for his invitation to begin an exchange. Similarly, at the beginning of this letter, she notes Huygens’s dignitas, and that she should admire him in silence. 555. Van Schurman’s Dutch poem on the inauguration of the University of Utrecht. 556. Her delay in replying.

Part 2: Letters and Poems 243 displayed in this area shows that you stand a head above the crowd of poets as “the peak of Olympus, which leaves behind the winds and the clouds.”557 That is why I disagree with you in no small way with the comparison where you place me at your side. Farewell, most cultured of men, and to the extent that you talk of heavenly love,558 I very much desire that you pay attention to one who is very admiring of your virtue. Utrecht, 23 July 1636. I would have replied earlier to your two letters, had the failing health of my mother not prevented me.559

18. Huygens to Van Schurman, 10 April 1639560 Almost three years have elapsed since Huygens’s last extant letter (2:16). He asks Van Schurman to critique his poetic collection, Dagh-werck (Day’s Work, 1638), completed soon after the death of his wife. His letter can be read as a subtle wooing of Van Schurman.

Very Noble Maiden, If, of course, you have some free time—and I easily concede that this is something you rarely allow yourself—still, if you are free, here is where you might invest just a few minutes, [almost] as if you were sleeping. This one thing—which you don’t do for just anyone—I request that you do for my sake and that of the Holy Shades of the person who is not dead but is now sleeping,561 since she lived in perpetual admiration of your virtue and was known for the time-honored cultivation of friendship, if I am not mistaken. Here you have my poetic collection.562 The completion of the work, which I began writing with enthusiasm and with the 557. Claudian, On the Consulship of Manlius Theodorus, 206–7. In this passage, Claudian depicts his subject taking the reins of Justice’s chariot, which extends to the corners of the Roman empire. Van Schurman invokes a comparison: just as Manlius was known across the Roman world as a just person, so too does Huygens’s fame as poet stretch across Europe. 558. An allusion to the two Venuses, one celestial and one terrestrial, in Plato’s Symposium, 180c–182c. Van Schurman refers to Huygens’s invitation to “love” him in his first letter to her (2:15), and rebuffs any advances by reiterating the non-sexual nature of the love she desires. 559. This postscript has missing words; it appears in full in Opuscula, 172. Van Schurman includes here her excuse for not replying sooner. 560. Huygens, ms. KA 44, no. 274; ms. KA 45, f. 96r–v; Briefwisseling, 2:445–46, no. 2078. For the Dutch translation of this letter, see Dagh-werck van Constantijn Huygens, ed. F.L. Zwaan (Assen: Van Gorcum, 1973), 7–8. 561. In Greek. An allusion to the daughter of Jairus in Matthew 9:24: “she sleeps but is not dead.” Cited in Joby, Multilingualism, 229. Huygens married Susanna van Baerle on 6 April 1627. Their happy marriage lasted ten years until her untimely death in childbirth on 10 May 1637. 562. Huygens’s Dagh-werck [Day’s Work], a poem of 2,063 lines begun in 1627 and completed the year after his wife’s death.

244 ANNA MARIA VAN SCHURMAN AND CONSTANTIJN HUYGENS permission and assistance of my blessed wife,563 was postponed by my frequent jumping from one project to another and by my life’s fate. And it was suddenly cut short by the bitter death of the woman whose main purpose in life was to be devoted to me. Consequently, I do not know whether it should have been shortened and eliminated altogether from readers’ eyes; but that was not possible, given that the majority of them were so looking forward to it that it could not escape the hands of the publishers. And, so, as we still disagreed on this, I have surrendered it to the judgment of a few select readers,564 as you can see, since I would really like to write for them only. Your reply would be as good as anyone else’s, illustrious jewel of our fatherland, to matters I am now thrusting upon your modesty, which, I say with some difficulty, is law to me.565 Read it if you find the time, and comment on it. Be a harsh critic, my censorious Virgin, and continue to be my flogging rod,566 and whatever [you] the judge decrees, I’ll weigh more heavily than the decrees of anyone else. Farewell, you who are superior to our age and the glory567 of our century, manners, and mores, shed your light upon me568 and kindly forgive whatever foolishness there is in this.569 The Hague, 4 days before the Ides of April 1639. A most devoted cultivator of your great name, C. Huygens I have not yet met Mr. Voetius face to face, but I have heard of his learning and of his amazing piety.570 So, I ask that you convey my greetings to this most noble gentleman with your own words, as if they were mine.

19. Van Schurman to Huygens, (ca. April 1639)571 Van Schurman replies with a Latin quatrain highlighting Huygens’s marriage to Susanna van Baerle and complimenting him on his name and fame. 563. In Greek, “blessed one” or “one who has just died.” 564. Huygens sent copies with a request for comments to Barlaeus, the poet Pieter Corneliszoon Hooft, and the playwright Joost van den Vondel. Cited in Stighelen and Landtsheer, 183n115. 565. Modesty here refers both to sexual modesty as well as Van Schurman’s desire to protect herself from the demands of fame. 566. Pun on virgo (virgin) and virga (flogging rod). 567. Decus. See letter 2:15. 568. In Greek. 569. “This” indicates both his request to her and the work he sent her. 570. In Greek. 571. Opuscula, 298; Huygens, Gedichten, 6:328. Van Schurman’s quatrain appears at the opening of the elogia in Huygens’s Cornflowers (Koren-bloemen, 1658), which includes his Dagh-werck.

Part 2: Letters and Poems 245 EPIGRAMMA IN Nobilissimi præstantissimique Viri, D. CONSTANTINI HUGENII, Opus-Diurnum. Quod in gratiam lectissima sua quondam conjugie Dnæ SUSANNÆ à BAERLE conscripsit Quæris an hæc claram mereantur carmina lucem.   Quis neget? Hanc poscit Nobilis UMBRA sibi. Nec, si forte velis, potes occultare diurnum,   Cum natura tibi Phœbe, repugnet, Opus. EPIGRAM FOR the Very Noble and Very Distinguished Gentleman, MR. CONSTANTIJN HUYGENS, on his Day’s Work, which he wrote in gratitude for his very special wife, LADY SUSANNA VAN BAERLE You ask whether these poems deserve the light of day.   Who would say no? Even her noble SHADE demands this for herself. Even if you wished it, you could not cover your Day’s Work in darkness,  Phoebus.572 That goes against your nature.

20. Huygens to Van Schurman, 26 August 1639573 Huygens forwarded to Van Schurman a letter by Father Marin Mersenne, who wished to correspond with her. He warns her about the risk of an epistolary exchange with “the Parisian monk.”

Very Noble Maiden, As you can see, I am obligated for this little letter to Father Marin Mersenne, the Parisian monk, who is not the least among the Minims whom the blind leaders of the blind574 call the least. And, so, I must render service to a friend who has written a number of letters to me, and this is a custom known to everyone publicly

572. Phoebus or Apollo, Greek god of light, poetry, and music. 573. Huygens, ms. KA 44, no. 278; ms. KA 45, f. 98r; Briefwisseling, 2:489, no. 2218. 574. In Greek. See Matthew 15:14; Erasmus, Adages, I.viii.40 (Caecus caeco dux). Huygens puns on the religious order of the Minims to which Mersenne belonged. The order’s name was derived from the Italian minimo (“least”), and its founder, Francis of Paola, referred to himself as “il minimo dei minimi” (“the least of the least”).

246 ANNA MARIA VAN SCHURMAN AND CONSTANTIJN HUYGENS and privately.575 Otherwise, were it not for this letter, I’m not the sort of person who would be itching to be counted either as the originator of or as a patron in joining the two of you in friendship. So that I can discharge this sacred obligation and the source of the discord that hangs between us concerning the highest truth, this monk has a vast learning that extends far and wide, but it is chaotic: one could say that it’s like the face of the universe before there was sea and land, as the poet said.576 Finally, concerning his character, if you should ever enter into an epistolary exchange with him, I predict—and I am not ignorant of this danger—that you will, daily, become exhausted and burdened by letters, questions, and problems with no solution. You will surely see for yourself if he might benefit your studies and you yourself. For you always make the most of every opportunity,577 and that is what makes you so precious. You will find it hard not to bend your humanitas to avoid replying to him if I am not mistaken. If you do reply, and if you think it pleasing, use my services to deliver the letter.578 Farewell, glory579 of our Lowlands. Rheinberg,580 7 days before the Kalends Most pledged to you, of September 1639. C.H.

21. Huygens to Van Schurman, 8 July 1647581 About eight years have elapsed since Huygens’s last extant letter. She has promised to visit him in The Hague, where he will give her a book by the poet Janus Secundus which she would like to read. He announces the publication of his Pathodia sacra et profana occupati.

Very Noble Maiden, Take a look here at both the mind and talent of my excellent countryman, whose artful work up to now you’ve not yet seen and, emerging from these, his most outstanding accomplishments comparable in my judgment to those of 575. Huygens refers to the obligation of members of the Republic of Letters to reply to correspondence. 576. Ovid, Metamorphoses 1.5–9. Huygens refers to the cosmic origins of the universe, which Ovid describes as a rude and ill-formed mass that needs order to be brought to it. 577. In Greek. Colossians 4:5. 578. Van Schurman complied, asking Rivet to deliver to Huygens her reply for Mersenne. See Van Schurman to Rivet, 5 October 1639 (no. 18, 1:24). On the enormous range of Mersenne’s correspondence, see the Introduction. 579. Decus. 580. City in the region of Westphalia, about 75 km southeast of the Dutch city of Nijmegen. 581. Huygens, ms. KA 44, no. 401, f. 491v; ms. KA 45, no. 401, f. 143r–v; Briefwisseling, 4:411, no. 4617; Rasch, Driehonderd brieven, 2:815–17, no. 4617. See Van Schurman’s reply on 18/28 December 1647 (no. 65, 2:23). Two years before this letter, in early 1645, Huygens sent Van Schurman two poems, one in Dutch with a copy of his Holy Days (see Appendix B10) and one about his visit to her cabinet of curiosities (Appendix B11).

Part 2: Letters and Poems 247 antiquity.582 Look, I am saying to you, and grieve with all good people that the course of so bright a star in the Batavian firmament has been shorter than even the winter sun in the North Pole.583 If I recall, you complained that a little book of this kind could not be found in your city.584 I will be very happy if even now a copy585 hasn’t yet reached you. I want you to receive a great poet from The Hague from a friend of The Hague, rather than from someone else’s hand. I must confess that this major poet from The Hague is truly our pride and joy, and a great ornament of my birthplace. My Psalms,586 several of which, thanks to your humanitas, you have listened to with most patient ears, are all, each of them, now going into print. Italian and French songs follow them, and I admit that at the time I did not know whether I should have included them or left them out. But I finished them for my friends who were urging me on,587 and I guess I have now completely fulfilled my obligation. You will see this small work, as soon as it has been wrested from the slowpokes, or rather, from the distracted hands of the Royal typographer,588 whose elegant printing you will not find objectionable, even if you find the content minimal. I have mentioned that the wonderful etching of your [i.e., from Utrecht] Hendrik Goudt, the “mad”589 painter,590 even now would have been sent to you, 582. Janus Secundus (Jan Everaerts, 1511–1536), born in The Hague, was a prolific Neo-Latin poet who published elegies, epigrams, odes, and verse epistles; his most famous collection is Liber Basiorum (Book of Kisses, 1541). Van Schurman admired especially his wax portraits and medallions of his beloved Julia, and of Charles V, at whose Spanish court he worked as secretary. Huygens replied to her poem “On the portrait of Julia” with one of his own in January 1649. See the translation of these poems in 2:25 and 2:26. 583. Secundus died at the age of twenty-four. See David H. Price, Janus Secundus (Tempe, AZ: Medieval and Renaissance Texts and Studies, 1996). 584. Huygens heard from Utricia Ogle that Van Schurman was looking for a copy of the poet’s work. 585. Huygens may have sent Van Schurman a copy of Secundus’s works edited by the Leiden philologist Petrus Scriverius (Leiden, 1619), or by Franciscus Hegerus (1631). Cited in Stighelen and Landtsheer, 185n122. 586. The Pathodia sacra et profana occupati (1647). 587. A classic modesty trope of blaming friends for the publication. 588. Robert Ballard (ca. 1574–after 1650), the royal music printer in Paris. 589. In Greek. 590. Hendrik Goudt (ca.1583–1648), a painter, printmaker, and draftsman of landscapes and religious scenes, was born in The Hague. He worked in Rome until 1610, then moved to Utrecht, where he became a member of the newly formed Guild of Saint Luke. His will of 1625 stated that he had become insane and that a board of trustees was overseeing his affairs. According to Rasch, Driehonderd briefen, 817n10, the work referred to here may have been Goudt’s etching of “Jupiter and Mercury in the House of Philemon and Baucis” (1612) (cited in Steghelen and Landtsmeer, 185n126). On Goudt, see Joaneath A. Spicer, “The Role of Printmaking in Utrecht during the First Half of the Seventeenth Century,” Journal of the Walters Art Gallery 57 (1999): 105–32.

248 ANNA MARIA VAN SCHURMAN AND CONSTANTIJN HUYGENS had it not occurred to me that you seemed to have promised me that you yourself would come for a visit to The Hague this summer.591 If it is still your intention to come—and I very much want you to come—I invite you with several other friends to see this treasure more safely here, along with some other works for which, unless I’m mistaken, you would scarcely be sorry that you had devoted a brief moment of your time. Send me word if you would like me to do anything else for you.592 Actually, no, tell me with authority, since you are being imposed upon with this command. From a cultivator and admirer of your great virtue and erudition, C. H. Send my warmest regards to Mr. Voetius, and to your brother, an exceptional and most humane person.

22. Huygens to Van Schurman, ca. December 1647593 Huygens announces the imminent publication of his Pathodia sacra et profana.

Very Noble Lady, Whatever someone does through another, he does not seem to be doing himself, contrary to what the law experts keep saying. I am asking you to allow me to show you something that is happening now not by my own will, but rather through the slowness of the Parisian printers who are lazier than dripping resin.594 They are guilty, and not I, that you still do not have a copy of the little work whose date of birth you thought it worthy to anticipate, a wish that exceeds its actual value. At long last, if it pleases the gods and as we head toward the end of the year, I dare offer you this little work whose weight is light, and that I’ll send to you before the first swallow of the year.595 For I have the greatest trust that your 591. An indication that Huygens and Van Schurman continued to communicate with one another, although there are no extant letters to this effect. 592. Or, want things differently. 593. Undated, no place indicated. Huygens, ms. KA 44, no. 403; ms. KA 45, no. 403, f. 143v–144r; Briefwisseling, 4:441, no. 4715; Rasch, Driehonderd brieven, 2:845–46, no. 4719. Stighelen and Landtsheer, 186n127, date this letter to ca. 9 December 1647 in connection to Van Schurman’s reply on 18/28 December 1647 (no. 65, 2:23). Rasch dates the letter to ca. 20–25 December 1647, a few days before Van Schurman’s reply dated 18 December in the Julian calendar, or 28 December in the Gregorian calendar. 594. Martial, Epigrams, 3.67.2: Vatreno Rasinaque. The lines read: “You are wasting your time, boys / You are lazier than Vatrenus and Rasina”; the second line refers to tributaries of the Po River of northern Italy. 595. Before the first swallow of the year is sighted, a sign of the arrival of spring. In Nichomachean Ethics, 1.7.16, Aristotle refers to the first appearance of the swallow, but sounds a cautionary note: “one

Part 2: Letters and Poems 249 neighbor lady596 will rush in to help my insufficiency. My desire is that this little piece, which can displease because of its insufficiency, will meet the approval of your finely tuned ears, thanks to her singing that we so admire, her amiability, and her exceptional kindness toward its author. If you do me the pleasure of completely fulfilling my prayer of singing God’s praise using my words, then even when I am absent from you, I’ll consider that I am with you because I think that I am blessed by such good fortune as often as I can be by your side. Farewell, most noble Maiden, and believe in me as the perpetual cultivator of your most illustrious name. C. Huygens

23. Van Schurman to Huygens, 18 / 28 December 1647 (no. 65)597 Van Schurman thanks Huygens for a copy of his newly published Pathodia sacra et profana.

[To the Most Noble Gentleman, Mr. Constantijn Huygens, Knight, Lord of Zuilichem,598 Counselor and First Secretary to His Very Eminent Highness and Ruling Prince. At The Hague.] You should not think, Most Illustrious Sir, that you have sent this extraordinary gift too late, since I cannot imagine a more pleasing gift ever coming my way. For as far as I am concerned, the longer delay has made me desire it even more: the harmony of its measures more than make up for the wait. But I congratulate us especially because you have beautifully conferred its glory upon our nation. And among all other nations, ours is not generally known for cultural refinement.599 I swallow does not make spring, nor does one fine day.” 596. Utricia Ogle, to whom Huygens dedicated his Pathodia. 597. Opuscula, 233–34; Huygens, Briefwisseling, 4:442, no. 4718; Rasch, Driehonderd brieven: 848–50, no. 4724. Rasch, 66, dates this letter to 28 December 1647 in the Gregorian calendar. It is a reply to Huygens’s undated letter, which Rasch dates to ca. 20–25 December. See the Introduction. 598. Huygens bought the feudal estate of Zuilichem, a village in the province of Gelderland, which gave him the right to levy taxes and administer justice. It included a medieval castle, allowing him to be addressed as “Lord of Zuilichem.” He was not, however, elevated to the nobility. 599. In Greek. ἄμουσος (Amousos), “without the Muses.” This interesting statement reflects perhaps external views of the Dutch as either merchant-class burgers in the cities or uncultivated boers in the rural areas. In “Urban and Rural Articulations of an Early Modern Bourgeois Civilizing Process and its Discontents,” published online in Journal of Urban Research 3 (2010), Ulrich Ufer discusses urban and rural life and culture in the early modern Netherlands. As he notes, residents of rural Friesland were described by the Cosimo di Medici, visiting in the 1660s, as “rozza, incivile e salvatica” (“rude, uncivilized, and wild”), while Grotius “went so far, as to state that Flemish was the language of ignorant people while French was spoken by men of intelligence.” Ufer’s article can be read at https://journals.

250 ANNA MARIA VAN SCHURMAN AND CONSTANTIJN HUYGENS would go so far as to promise to myself that nothing in it is unprofitable because you have ensured that this treasure600 reaches me thanks to my most noble neighbor [Utricia Ogle], whose help and guidance will open an easy passage to these sacred songs.601 I am not so much of a Stoic602 that I would not willingly admit how incredibly moved I was by your Pathodia, especially since it wasn’t so long ago that you offered a certain marvelous selection of it together with our Siren [Utricia Ogle].603 And I hope that at some point in the future I could, with that conciliator Polymnia,604 return into favor with unwilling Minerva,605 as it were. Whatever the case, although my Muse is not yet constant enough to harmonize well with the measures of Mrs. Swann, indisputably as the goose cackles with the swans,606 still in voice and mind we are conspiring to give you the greatest thanks we can, she, because you wanted to inscribe this outstanding work with her name on it, and I, because you wished to send your book to me. Farewell. 15 days before the Kalends of January 1647. 24. Huygens to Van Schurman, 14 August 1648607 Huygens sends Van Schurman a letter of recommendation on his new protégée, Maria Casembroot.608

Very Noble Lady, In a word, include among your flock609 [of friends] this most outstanding young woman. If I were to recommend her for her intellect, which is most receptive openedition.org/articulo/1583; the attribution to Grotius is from J.L. Price, Culture and Society in the Dutch Republic During the 17th Century (London: Batsford, 1974), 224. Huygens was the leading connoisseur of the fine arts and culture generally in the Dutch Republic. See Israel, 486. 600. In Greek. 601. Van Schurman is primarily interested in the Pathodia’s psalms. 602. The Stoics were averse to strong, unregulated emotions. 603. Huygens called Utricia “our Siren” in his dedication to her of the Pathodia sacra et profana. 604. One of the nine Muses, goddesses of music, song, and dance. As the muse of religious hymns, Polymnia was depicted in a pensive and meditative pose. 605. That is, Van Schurman would give music a shot too, but she is not particularly good at it. The phrase “unwilling Minerva” is a Latin saying that indicates a lack of talent or skill in a particular art. See, for example, Cicero, Letters to Friends, 3.1.1 and 12.25.1; Horace, Ars Poetica, 385. 606. Virgil, Eclogues 9.36; obviously a pun on Utricia Ogle’s married surname. 607. Huygens, ms. KA 44, no. 412; ms. KA 45, no. 403, f. 146v–147r; Briefwisseling, 4:490–91, no. 4855. 608. Maria Casembroot (b. 1621) was a young harpsichordist whom Huygens was courting. On Casembroot, see Ton van Strien, “Virtuoos en vertueus: Maria Casembroot (1621–?),” in Vrouwen rondom Huygens, ed. Els Kloek, 115–30. 609. Horace, Epistles, 1.9.13.

Part 2: Letters and Poems 251 to all the fine arts, or her modesty and exemplary humanitas, or her piety, which is outstanding among all her other virtues, then I would fail because there’s no way that I could find the words. Trust her reputation. If I have diminished her in some way in this letter, let me remain forever, along with her, a recruit for your friendship. There is nothing I pray for more earnestly for her and me. How kindly you receive her will be a reflection on me. Please, don’t take it amiss if I add a few words from my favorite Philosopher and if I say somewhat boldly the following: “Whatever benefits me will also through me benefit you, not because it benefits me but because it has made me an instrument of its usefulness.”610 This is something you will understand as soon as you will have seen Maria Casembroot. So that you do this one thing for me, I will rush off my letter, perfectly secure about the result. Farewell, illustrious star of our age. I write in haste, and I was about to explain something more to you, had not a greater force of a golden servitude not driven me far from you.611 In Nijmegen, the real city of the Batavians.612 The day before the Ides of September 1648. The perpetual admirer of your most illustrious virtue. C. H.

25. Huygens to Van Schurman, ca. January 1649613 Huygens hosted Van Schurman at his house in The Hague, where she would have seen his collection of artworks by Janus Secundus. He puns on the name Secundus, meaning “second” in Latin, as he challenges her to imitate the latter.

5

Ad Schurmannam, num J. Secundi sculpturam imitari voluerit Ecquid, ut Hagani tangebas pauca Poetae Marmora, vel raros, gypsea signa, typos, Ecquid, ut oblata est avidis in talia ocellis Vatis amatoris Julia sculpta manu, Exempli stimulavit honos, et posse docebas,

610. Seneca, On Benefits, 6.20.2. Cited in Stighelen and Landtsheer, 188n141. 611. Huygens refers to urgent duties beckoning him at the court of The Hague. 612. A reference to Oppidum Batavorum, seu Noviomagum [On the City of the Batavians, or Nijmegen] (Amsterdam: Johan Blaeu, 1644, 1645), by Johannes Smetius (1590–1651), a minister and archaeologist in Nijmegen. Smetius argued that Nijmegen—a city in Gelderland near the German border—was the city described by Tacitus in his History, 5.19, as belonging to the Batavians. (Indeed, Nijmegen— established as Noviomagum, an outpost of the Roman Empire, in the first century BCE—can lay claim to being the oldest city in the Netherlands.) Van Schurman corresponded with Smetius on his excavations of Roman antiquities and coins found near Nijmegen. 613. Huygens, Gedichten, 4:146.

252 ANNA MARIA VAN SCHURMAN AND CONSTANTIJN HUYGENS 10

Quae posset quivis, omnipotente manu? Non liquet: et vero, nisi valde fallor, honeste, Ocyus hoc factum nolle, negare fuit. Indignata sequi, Virgo mea, credo Secundum es, Ne sic forte cui prima, secunda fores.

5 10

To Van Schurman, on whether she wanted to imitate a sculpture by J. Secundus Tell me, is it possible that you held, from the Poet of The Hague, a few Of his Marbles, or rare figures and plaster busts? And is it possible that Julia, sculpted by her poet-lover, Was offered to your eyes, eager for such things? Did the charm of that piece inspire you, and will you be able To show that your almighty hand can do what anyone else can do? This is not certain and, indeed, unless I am very much mistaken, Your unwillingness to do this so far means that you refused to do it. I guess, my Maiden, you did not think yourself worthy to follow Secundus For fear of coming in second to one to whom you are, really, first.

26. Huygens to Van Schurman, 1 January 1649614 Huygens, in the next two poems, praises Van Schurman’s study of Ethiopian.

In Stupendam Virginem Annam Mariam Schurmannam, cum illam Trajecti in studio linguæ Aethiopicæ reperissem Omnia cum sciret, voluit nil scire videri   Anna, nisi extremos sciret et Aethiopes. Has illam fuscas iter, nova numina, Musas   Vidimus, atque oculi vix habuere fidem. 5 Vidit et obstipuit gemini frons altera Iani,   Et Deus, “Ecquis,” ait, “denique finis erit? Si, quoties in me nova frons, in virgine lingua est,   Si, quoties novus est Annus, et Anna nova est.” Cal. Jan. 1649 St. Vet. To the Amazing Anna Maria van Schurman, when I discovered her in Utrecht studying the Ethiopian language Although she knows all things, Anna seems as though she does not   know anything 614. Huygens, Gedichten, 4:147. Van Schurman may have given Huygens during his visit to Utrecht a copy of her engraved self-portrait of 1640, which became the frontispiece of her Opuscula (1648). He then wrote a quatrain on her portrait (see Appendix B14). On this poem, see the Introduction.

Part 2: Letters and Poems 253   Unless she can know far-reaching Ethiopia, too. We see her among these dark-skinned Muses, newly discovered goddesses,   And we can hardly believe our eyes. 5 One face of Janus615 saw her, while the other one marveled.   And this god exclaims: “Will there ever be an end? Whenever I take on a new face, this Maiden takes on a new language,   And as often as there is a new Year, there is also a new Anna.” On the Kalends of January 1649

27. Huygens to Van Schurman, 11 January 1649616 Ad Ipsam Hanc ego currendo fudi, Schurmanna, poesin,   Dum non jam rota sub vate, sed esset equus; Esset equus, qui me de vestra quattuor horis   Pallados Hollandae sisteret ante fores. 5 Forsitan, hos si tu numeros cum tempore confers,   Pegaseum quid, ais, quadrupes iste fuit. Nescio quid dicas. Ego me nova dona ferentes   Aethiopes comites credo habuisse tuas. Iamque adeo vetus est non falsa parœmia: semper 10   Africa quae Monstri quid parit, hic peperit. Ultrajecto Leidam equo 4. horis pervectus 3/13 Ian. To This Very Lady This poem just poured out of me, Lady Schurman, while I was travelling   Not on wheels, but on a horse, Which was to stop in four hours’ time   Before the door of the Pallas617 of Holland. 5 Perhaps, if you compare these verses with the time they took,   Then, you will say, that that horse was some sort of Pegasus.618 I do not know how that can be, but I believe that I took with me   As travel-companions your Ethiopians bearing new gifts.619 And yet that old saying is not wrong: “Africa, which always 615. A two-faced deity in Roman mythology who looked to the past and to the future, Janus was the god of beginnings, boundaries, and endings. January is named after Janus. 616. Huygens, Gedichten, 4:147. 617. Greek goddess of wisdom, the arts, and warfare. 618. A mythical winged stallion associated with the Muses. 619. A reference to Laocoön’s famous line about Greeks, timeo Danaos et dona ferentes (“I fear Greeks even when they are bearing gifts”): Virgil, Aeneid 2.49.

254 ANNA MARIA VAN SCHURMAN AND CONSTANTIJN HUYGENS   Produces some marvel,”620 has now brought forth another. Carried on horseback from Utrecht to Leiden in four hours.  Three days before the Ides of January.

28. Huygens to Van Schurman, 14 January 1649621 Huygens visited Van Schurman in Utrecht where at the time she was studying Ethiopian. He sends her French medals to copy.

Very Noble Lady, See how no journey in either body or mind can prevent me from perpetually admiring your virtue. The time passed quickly because I carried with me in my carriage your [Ethiopian] Muses. With my attendants surrounding me, my horse carried me back to Leiden in less than four hours, and all the while I was conversing with you and about you. And you wouldn’t believe how the verses I was composing came to me right away from Mercury on wings, even as that famous winged father [Daedalus] complained, in verse rather than prose, “in what region might I find you?”622 And, so, the Ethiopian Muses, with which you have so faithfully accompanied me on my journey, were unknown to both of them [Mercury and Daedalus], since they would not even have heard about them.623 To change the subject, I am sending you these French medals which I mentioned to you; they are very precious. The one is by Jean Warin, the other by Du Pré624; both are outstanding craftsmen and very famous in that kingdom (I am not sure whether they are still alive). They are both equally superior; judge for yourself, and, if I’m not mistaken, you’ll find it very difficult, as I said in my verse, to imitate or surpass, even with all your brilliance, men of this kind.625 I will be eager to learn at some point your opinion on this. Farewell, most noble Lady. The Hague, 14 January 1649.

620. Monstrum: Pliny the Elder, History of Animals, 8.28; Erasmus, Adages, III.vii.10 (ex Africa semper aliquid novi). Huygens plays on the double meaning of monstrum (monster and marvel). 621. Huygens, ms. KA 44, no. 415; ms. KA 45, no. 415, f. 147v; Briefwisseling, 4:509, no. 4907. 622. Ovid, Metamorphoses 8.232. Daedalus speaks the lines after he loses Icarus. 623. Van Schurman’s Ethiopian Muses, rather than winged Mercury and Daedalus, made him go even faster. 624. Jean Warin (1606–1672), a French sculptor who invented new ways of minting coins, was appointed by Richelieu in 1647 as the head of the French mint. Guillaume Dupré (ca. 1579–1640), a French sculptor and medalist, produced famous medals for Henri IV and Louis XIII. 625. Van Schurman did a wax copy of the double portrait of Henri IV and Marie de’ Medici by Guillaume Dupré (ca. 1602–3), which she describes in a later poem to Huygens (2:34). He replied with two poems (see 2:35 and 2:36).

Part 2: Letters and Poems 255 29. Van Schurman to Huygens, 18 January 1649 (no. 74)626 Van Schurman replies with two epigrams, this one and the next (2:30), to Huygens’s two epigrams (2:26, 2:27) on his amazement of her study of Ethiopian.

AD Illustrem Virum, ZULICHEMII Dominum Cur me mortalem poscunt tua carmina testem,   Quæ testes Clarias promeruere Deas? Sed tua jure meas poscunt sibi munera grates,   Quas tibi cum nequeam reddere, nomen habe. M. à SCHURMAN TO the Illustrious Gentleman, Lord of ZUILICHEM [For My Lord, My Lord Constantijn Huygens, Knight, and Lord of Zuilichem, Counselor of Her Highness the Dowager Princess of Orange [Amalia von SolmsBraunfels], behind the Court at The Hague]627 Why do your poems require that I become a mortal witness,   When the Clarion Goddesses should be all the witness you need. But the gift of your poems rightly requires my thanks,   Which I cannot fully return, so have my name.628 A. M. VAN SCHURMAN629

30. Van Schurman to Huygens, 18 February 1649630 Ad Nobilissimum Virum Sulichemii Dominum pro Musis Aethiopicis Responsio Non leviter Clarias tetigisti carmine Divas,   Hugeni, fuscas dum canis esse Deas. An Erybi ingratam sobolem noctisque sorores,   Quis Phœbo gratum crederet esse chorum? 626. Opuscula, 298. 627. Address in Dutch. 628. Van Schurman plays on her name. In saying “have my name,” she offers her signature as thanks for the fame that comes along with it. 629. Van Schurman uses capital letters to highlight her name. It is uncapitalized in Opuscula. 630. Huygens, Gedichten, 4:148, undated. Dated in Van Schurman’s hand, Leiden University Library, Special Collections, ms. Hug. 37.

256 ANNA MARIA VAN SCHURMAN AND CONSTANTIJN HUYGENS 5 At fallor: socias, quas proximus ardet Apollo,   Scilicet has albas non sinit esse Deas. To the Most Noble Lord of Zuilichem, on Behalf of The Ethiopian Muses A Reply Your poem was not so kind to my Clarian Muses,631   Huygens, when you sing that the Muses are dark-skinned. The offspring of Darkness and the sisters of night are so unappreciated.   So, who then could believe that Phoebus appreciated their chorus? 5 But what a silly question: the friends to whom Apollo burns closest,   These goddesses,632 could never be white.633 31. Van Schurman to Huygens, 18 February 1649634 A reply to Huygens (2:25) on Secundus’s art, which she has attempted to imitate.

5

In Imaginem Juliae à Joh. Secundo quam artificiosissime exsculptam Julia, cui formâ vix ulla secunda, Secundi Sculpta poetarum principis arte fuit. Ut vidi, denuo tam pulchram posse figuram De nostra nasci vota fuêre manu. Mi satis est primas vati cessisse Secundo, Cui nemo est alius, signa secunda forem.

On the Portrait of Julia, sculpted in the most beautiful way by Janus Secundus Julia, whose beauty was second to none,   Was sculpted by the art of Secundus, the best of poets. When I saw it, I again prayed that such a beautiful Figure   Might emerge from my hand. 5 It is enough for me to have yielded my first fruits to Secundus,   Since there is no one else to whom I would rather be than second.635 Anna Maria van Schurman 631. Muses associated with the Greek island of Claros, where a temple and an oracle honored “Apollo Clarius.” 632. A reference to the sun-burned Ethiopian Muses who sit closest to Apollo, god of the sun. 633. For Van Schurman, blackness is beautiful, since she finds beauty in the Ethiopian language. 634. Dated in Van Schurman’s hand, Leiden University Library, Special Collections, ms. Hug. 37; Schotel, 2:13, undated. 635. Van Schurman follows Huygens in puning on the name “secundus” (“second”).

Part 2: Letters and Poems 257 32. Huygens to Van Schurman, ca. January 1649636 Huygens plays on Van Schurman’s name and fame.

AD EPIGRAMMA Viri ‫םֵּׁשַה‬ D. CONSTANTINI HUGENII ZULICHEMI TOPARCHÆ quod sic habet “Nomen habe,” Schurmanna canit. Lepidissima Virgo!     “Nomen habes” nequiit dicere, dixit “habe.” O si ridenti potis esset dicere verum,   Si, quod habet, dando “nomen habere” daret! An Epigram on The Name637 by the Gentleman CONSTANTIJN HUYGENS, TOPARCH OF ZUILICHEM638 On what he has “Have my name,” Van Schurman sings, Most Charming Maiden!   She could not say “you have my name,” she said, “have it.” O, if only it were possible for someone who is joking to also speak the truth!   If so, she would now give what she has when she gives “have my name”!639

33. Van Schurman to Huygens, ca. January 1649640 RESPONSIO ANNÆ MARIÆ à SCHURMAN 636. Huygens’s undated epigram and the three distichs by Van Schurman that follow are included in Opuscula, 299. They were likely composed in January 1649, since they play on the words nomen habe (“have my name” in Van Schurman’s epigram of 18 January 1649, 2:29). On Van Schurman’s play on her and Huygens’s name, see the Introduction. On her awareness of the possibilities for play with her signature on her glass engravings, see Martine van Elk, “Female Glass Engravers in the Early Modern Dutch Republic,” RQ 73 (2020): 165–211. 637. In Hebrew, meaning “The Name.” We thank Tom Boogaart, who states in an e-mail communication that “in most cases this refers to God, and it is the word that is called out when the reader of the sacred text comes to the name of God (the tetragrammaton, or four letters making up the name of God which are never pronounced).” 638. Toparch: a ruler or dignitary in the Byzantine empire. 639. In other words, if only Van Schurman would give him her fame along with her name, Huygens would have both; but in resisting her fame, she does not have a name / fame to have or give. 640. Opuscula, 299. In these couplets, Van Schurman plays with the modesty trope in relation to her name and fame. On the dynamic between retirement and self-display in Van Schurman, see Martine van Elk, Early Modern Women’s Writing, chap. 5.

258 ANNA MARIA VAN SCHURMAN AND CONSTANTIJN HUYGENS Hugenio cum non sit, nomine, clarior alter,   Quis melius, “dando nomen habere, daret?” ALIUD Anne bonum credat, nequeam cum solvere, nomen?   Quis dare, quæso, bonum, quo caret ipse, potest? ALIUD Quare tuum, CONSTANS, nostro vis cedere nomen?   Sic mihi, mutato nomine, nomen eris? REPLIES BY ANNA MARIA VAN SCHURMAN Since there could be no one whose name is more famous than Huygens’s,   What better gift is there to give than “Have a name”? ANOTHER Could I determine or resolve whether anyone thinks my name is good?   Who could give, I ask you, a good name when that very person lacks one? ANOTHER Why do you want to exchange your name for mine, CONSTANS?641 Will your name be mine once you have changed yours?

34. Van Schurman to Huygens, 16 July 1650 (no. 73)642 Van Schurman comments on her wax reproduction of the double portrait of Henri IV and Marie de’ Medici by Guillaume Dupré.

[Pour Mons Hugens (sic), Seigr de Sulecum] Ad Nobilissimum Virum Constantinum Hugenium Sulichemii Dominum, etc. Anne magni rogitas placeant in imagine vultus,   An gratum artificis sit præeuntis opus? Hic cum de sceptro certent cum Pallade Reges,   Qui detur exemplum gratius arte sequi? 5 Postulat usuras pulchri numismatis usus:   Has non argentum, sed tibi charta dabit. A. M. à Schurman To the Noblest Sir Constantijn Huygens, Lord of Zuilichem, etc. 641. A play on Huygens’s name, Constantijn, and motto. 642. See Huygens’s letter, dated 14 January 1649 (2:28), accompanying a gift of medals and challenging Van Schurman to copy Dupré. Her wax medal is no longer extant.

Part 2: Letters and Poems 259 [For Mr. Huygens, Lord of Zuilichem] You keep asking whether the great faces in an image are pleasing,   Or whether the faces are pleasing because of the greatness of the artist. Here, when Kings compete with Pallas643 for dominion,   How could a more pleasing example be given than to follow art? 5 The interest that a beautiful medal generates accrues [financial] interest,   You will get that not from silver, but from my poem.

35. Huygens to Van Schurman, 28 July 1650644 Huygens comments on various medals he owns in gold, silver, and bronze which, he says, are not as worthy as Van Schurman’s wax medal of the king and queen of France.

5 10

In Effigies regis et reginae Galliae ab Anna Maria Schurman cera expressas Esto quod est pretio regale numisma Philippus, Esto quod aut Caroli aut, Elisabetha, tuum est. Sunto quod aetatis longâ putredine fiunt Romulidum viridi cara metalla situ; Aurea sint aliis, aliis argentea magni aut Aerea, Schurmannae cerea pluris emam. Certe pluris emas si possint, Gallia, fari, Mollia quo fandi tempora regis emas. Cerea nimirum, quia melli proxima, ut hic sunt Mollia Reginae, mellea Regis erunt.

On the Portraits of the King and Queen of France, done in wax by Anna Maria van Schurman If this precious royal coin is a Philip, Let that one, a Charles or an Elizabeth, be yours. Those coins and precious metals of the descendants of Romulus, Found in green pastures, are now decayed by time. 5 Some would have been gold, others silver, or even bronze. But I shall buy the wax medals of Van Schurman. France, if her medals were sweet [to the taste], you would spend much     more 643. Pallas Athena, Greek goddess of the arts. 644. Huygens, Gedichten, 4:238. On this poem, see Stighelen, “Hoe hooge,” 148; Stighelen and Landtsheer, 163–64. On Dupré’s medal of Henri IV and Marie de Médicis and the work of Jean Warin, see Stephen Scher, ed., The Currency of Fame: Portrait Medals of the Renaissance (New York: The Frick Collection, 1994), 319–43, and Arne R. Flaten, “Renaissance Medals,” RQ 71 (2018): 645–56.

260 ANNA MARIA VAN SCHURMAN AND CONSTANTIJN HUYGENS 10

On them than on even an occasion to address the king. Of course, made of wax, they are like honey. And if the Queen prefers soft medals, the King prefers honeyed ones.645

36. Huygens to Van Schurman, 29 July 1650646 Huygens compliments Van Schurman on her wax medal, and on her fruitful artistry which bypasses the “marital bed.”

In easdem Omnia tentarat calamo, scalproque styloque,   Omnia adimplerat omnibus æqua manus. Deerat adhuc magnos orbi producere Reges,   Deerat Reginas posse, et utrumque facit: 5 Et faciendi ultro finem facture coronis   Ipsa coronatum virgo coronat opus. Este procul qui Schurmannam pro cœlibe vita   Conjugii vultis velle subire jugum. Conjugium sterile est prae nulli non hymenaeo 10   Virginea extanti fertilitate thoro, Ut pariunt multae, pareret, puto, et Anna marita,   Ut paucae pariunt Anna Maria parit. On the Same She had already tried everything with the pen, the scalpel, and the chisel.   Her steady hand had fulfilled all obligations to all peoples. Up until now she has not begotten great kings,   Nor great queens for the world to see, and now here she is doing both:647 5 To complete her creation, the Maiden herself is crowning   Her own crowning achievement with the crowns of kings and queens. Away with you who wish Van Schurman to submit   To the marriage yoke in place of her celibate life. For marriage is sterile when compared with the marriage 10   Found in a marital bed marked by this Virgin’s fertility. Just as many women are fruitful, I suppose there is also somewhere   A fruitful Anna Married-ah, but few as fruitful as Anna Maria.648 645. Clever play on mollia (“soft”) and mellea (“honey”). 646. Huygens, Gedichten, 4:239. See Stighelen, “Hoe hooge,” 148; Stighelen and Landtsheer, 163–64. 647. An allusion to Van Schurman’s medal of the French king and queen. 648. Huygens puns on Anna marita (“married Anna”) and Anna Maria. We have tried to approximate Huygens’s pun.

Part 2: Letters and Poems 261 37. Huygens to Van Schurman, 11 March 1651649 Huygens composed this poem, and its Dutch version, when Van Schurman neither welcomed Maria Casembroot (see his letter on 14 August 1648, 2:24) nor accepted hospitality at his home at The Hague immediately following the funeral at Delft of the Stadtholder William II, who died on 6 November 1650 and was buried on 8 March 1651. She chose to attend the end of the burial rites at the Nieuwe Kerk in Delft and then return home to Utrecht. Huygens puns on Delphi (the seat of the famous oracle) and Delft.

Ad Schurmannam Delphis commorantem Hic es et hic non es, Schurmanna, et fallis amica   Hugenium, et fallis virgo Casembrotiam? Pæniteat facti; fraus haec, fraus improba, fraus est   Cuius te doleat Voetius esse ream. 5 Offero prandolium, cænamque, domumque; quid ultra?   Offero Musarum quidquid in Hugenio est. Sin perstas in fraude, cave: quem decipis Hagae,   Te quoque Trajecti fallere, falsa, doces. 11 Mart. Calendis Martys Trajectinis To Van Schurman when she stopped off at Delphi [Delft] One minute you’re here, Van Schurman, and the next you’re not? Are you   Lying about your friendship with Huygens? and Casembroot? Do you regret your deed? This fraud, this wicked fraud, is a fraud,   And Voetius grieves because you are its perpetrator. 5 I offer you lunch and dinner and my home; what else do you want?   I offer whatever small connection to the Muses Huygens has. But if you persist in your fraud, beware: my false friend, you are now learning that   The person you disappointed at Utrecht is the one you disappointed at   The Hague. 1/11 March, Utrecht 38. Huygens to Van Schurman, 19 March 1651650 Still rankled, Huygens sends Van Schurman this epigram on a print, or a series of prints, of the funeral of Frederik Hendrik in 1647 by Pieter Janszoon Post to indicate what she has missed. 649. Huygens, Gedichten, 4:254–55. 650. Huygens, Gedichten, 4:256. Pieter Janszoon Post (1608–1669), an architect, artist, and printmaker, published his series of prints of the funeral of Frederik Hendrik in 1651. He designed Huygens’s house at The Hague. See the Introduction.

262 ANNA MARIA VAN SCHURMAN AND CONSTANTIJN HUYGENS AD ANNAM MARIAM SCHURMANS INSCRIPTUM POMPÆ FUNERIS AURIACI PER P. POSTIUM ÆRE EXPRESSÆ ὡς ἴδον, ὡς ἐμάνην. Quid ais, Schurmanna, quis istum,   Quis Plato, quis nodum solvet Aristoteles? Prævalet umbra rei; finite funere, durant   Quas hic exequitur Postius exequias. 5 Unica sculptoris vivet post funera virtus,   Cum modo qui pinxit funera, funus erit: Parca σολοικίζεις: cum re solet umbra perire;   Hic ubi devixit, non vitat umbra mori. 19. Mart. brevissimo impetu WRITTEN FOR ANNA MARIA VAN SCHURMAN, ON THE FUNERAL OF THE PRINCE OF ORANGE, ENGRAVED BY P. POST As soon as I saw you, I lost my mind.651 What do you say, Van Schurman,   Who will untangle this knot652 you have caused? What kind of Plato or   Aristotle Will it take? The cast shadow survives its object. At the funeral’s end, The procession, which Post depicted, remains. 5 The unique talent of the artist will endure long past the funeral, Especially since he who depicted it will someday have his own funeral. But you, Parca, have acted badly:653 a shadow usually perishes with its object. But when the object lives on, the shadow cannot die.654 19 March, the briefest attack655

39. Huygens to Van Schurman, 23 March 1651656 Huygens is unhappy that Van Schurman has refused his invitation to his house at The Hague. 651. In Greek. Theocritus, Idylls, 2.82 and 3.42. Cited in Stighelen and Landtsheer, 165n54. 652. Allusion to the “Gordian knot,” meaning an unsolvable problem. According to legend, whoever loosened the knot would rule Asia—a prophecy fulfilled when Alexander the Great cut the knot and established an empire stretching from Greece to India. 653. In Greek. The Parca was the female personification of fate in Roman mythology. 654. Huygens means that what Van Schurman has done has cast a long shadow over him. 655. Beneath these lines appears the following: “A. Mariae Schurmannae cum funebri munusculo adscribeb. 1651” (“He wrote this for Anna Maria van Schurman and attaches a small token from the funeral”).  656. Huygens, ms. KA 44, no. 421; ms. KA 45, f. 150r–v; Briefwisseling, 5:81, no. 5126.

Part 2: Letters and Poems 263 [To Anna Maria van Schurman. Sent in haste] Very Noble Friend, You wanted to play the part of a female Cato, entering the Theater only to leave it again soon after, where your ears alone would have grazed too much upon food that I could have offered you.657 While I was looking for you during the funeral procession, I realized How much more slowly things reach one’s mind if entered through one’s ear Than if they were seen with one’s own eyes.658 Now I have abandoned my unrefined musings, which, doubtless, once upon a time, benefitted from your attention. And, so, I call you back once again to the sort of spectacle that you saw at dusk after a delay because of the long procession. I don’t know if you got more tired from watching it than waiting for it to happen. A stubborn rumor claims that I wrote a short commentary in praise of an artist who is a dear friend to me. But you happened to leave [the funeral] too quickly, so you just managed to escape both my loquacity and my little scribblings. And, thus, I attach here an epigram on the recent funeral, trusting that your humanitas will not censure my unrefined style. I have not disseminated it yet, not even to my friends. The wickedness of these times terrifies me, when hardly anyone goes unpunished for stealing one of the antique coins of the GREATEST PRINCE of the House of Orange. When you visit a vendor [of these medals and coins], be careful to consult him [as to their origin] with your usual prudence; and don’t be rash when there is an abundance of little verses which you might see [on the coins], however innocent they may appear. Concerning the Regency there is no reason that you should take pains to keep that hidden. They are engaged in a laudable negotiation with good people, perhaps by getting their worst opponents on their side.659 There are still quite a few coins, and not of the least quality, that I’m sure would certainly have kept you at my Museum at Zuilichem.660 But you preferred to flee, and the Muses were indignant, and have not yet stopped grieving over not seeing Van Schurman. There will come an opportunity for you to atone for your 657. An anecdote from Valerius Maximus, Memorable Deeds and Sayings, 2.10.8. Cato the Younger, a strict moralist, left a theater to avoid actresses performing in a lewd show of the Floralia. Huygens used the same anecdote in an earlier poem to Van Schurman, dated 28 December 1648, entitled “To Van Schurman, when I was sent to East-Frisia and traversed Utrecht, without seeing her.” Cited in Steghelen and Landtsheer, 189n149. See Appendix B12, line 23. 658. Horace, Ars Poetica, 180–81. 659. William II died of smallpox on 6 November 1650; his son, William III (the future king of England), was born on 4 November 1650. On the regency, see the Introduction. 660. Van Schurman’s interest in numismatics and medals led Huygens to invite her to view his curiosity cabinet.

264 ANNA MARIA VAN SCHURMAN AND CONSTANTIJN HUYGENS crime,661 for which Voetius does not want you to be the perpetrator.662 Let it be so, let it be so, my Maiden, if it’s within your power to be indebted to the man who continues to live and be the most devoted cultivator of your virtue. 23 March 1651 C. H.

40. Van Schurman to Huygens, 11 May 1651663 Van Schurman replies to Huygens’s letter and two poems on the funeral at The Hague.

Ad illustrem virum D. Constantinum Hugenium Publica nos pietas olim ad spectacula duxit   Delphica, quies mos est solvere justa Deûm. Sed sua difficilis subduxit lumina Apollo;   Ne patrii Solis cerneret ipse rogum. 5 Splendida sic tristi pompa obvelata sub umbra   Visa est; atque umbræ corpora visa mihi. Excipit Hugenius suppletque illustra Phœbi   Munia; ne tantum nocte lateret opus. Hic rediviva suo jam funera reddidit Orbi. 10   Atque umbras clara luce redire facit. Nec mirum est umbræ si post sua corpora durent:   Scilicet extincti funeris umbra manet. In solidum accipio tam magni Nominis umbram:   Lumine quæ splendet lux erit umbra tuo. Anna Maria à Schurman To the Illustrious Gentleman Lord Constantijn Huygens My public duty and piety brought me recently to the Delphic664 procession,   Where one usually offers peaceful rites of homage to the gods.665 But Apollo was difficult and averted his gaze so that he would not have to   see 661. That is, make good on her debt to visit him. 662. A reprise of line 4 in Huygens’s poem, 2:37. 663. Dated in Van Schurman’s hand, Leiden University Library, ms. Hug. 37; Huygens, Gedichten, 4:261–62; Schotel, 2:27. Huygens indicates that he received the poem on 11 May 1651. 664. The funeral procession at Delft, which Huygens called Delphi (2:37). 665. An allusion to the funeral rites honoring the Princes of Orange.

Part 2: Letters and Poems 265   The Funeral Pyre of the Sun of our Fatherland.666 5 The procession was splendid, but it was shrouded under   A gloomy shadow667 and the sheer number of people enshrouded me.668 Now Huygens has taken up and fulfilled the illustrious duties of Phoebus,   And such an important work will not be hidden in darkness.669 He has revived the funeral rites and returned them to the World, 10   And cast away the shadows with his bright light. It is no surprise that if shadows survive their bodies,   Then the shadow cast by this funeral, of course, remains long after it is   over. I accept as real the shadow of so great a Name:670   The shadow, illumined by your light, will be light. Anna Maria van Schurman 41. Huygens to Van Schurman, 17 / 27 January 1653671 Huygens requests again a sample of Van Schurman’s polyglot calligraphy. He sends her a Latin poem to translate into several oriental languages.

Very Noble and most outstanding Lady, Look, I am showing again my old and usual craziness. And here is the proof: I have recently invited nearly all the inhabitants of Christendom into a conversation with one another. I must confess that quite a few of those whom I did not call upon are from the East, conscious as I am of my stammering and ignorance. But I will stop here so that there is an occasion for you to begin. Am I right in saying 666. The reference to Apollo has a double meaning. “Apollo” is Van Schurman’s nickname for Huygens. She is saying two things at the same time: Apollo-Huygens did not see her (although she was there), and Apollo, god of the sun, was absent the day of the funeral because of the foul weather. 667. Bad weather prevailed the entire day of the funeral. 668. Van Schurman’s line 6, atque umbræ corpora visa mihi, is tricky. We take it as a double dative construction: “The bodies (of the people present) seemed to cover me in shadows.” In our reading, the terrible weather and the crowds prevented Huygens from seeing her. 669. A reference to Huygens’s poem, In exortam tempestatem et diluvia sub exequias Gulielmi Principis Auriaci (“On the rising of the storm and flood at the funeral procession of William Prince of Orange”), on 8 March 1651, the day of the national funeral of William II. Huygens, Gedichten, 253n2. 670. Because Huygens depicted the funeral so well in the poem that he sent her. 671. Huygens, ms. 44, no. 431; ms. KA 45, f. 153v; Briefwisseling, 5:165, no. 5269. Huygens had long wanted a sample of Van Schurman’s calligraphy in several oriental languages for his curiosity cabinet. He sent her in January 1653 a Latin poem on a shipwreck, Fortunata clades, quae in litore Sceverino contigit postrid (“The fortunate wreck that happened off the coast of Scheveningen the day before the Kalends of January 1653,” 1 January 1653, Gedichten, 5: 31), which he translated into six modern languages, asking her to translate it into six oriental languages. She declined, sending instead a four-line poem (31 January 1653, no. 66, 2:42).

266 ANNA MARIA VAN SCHURMAN AND CONSTANTIJN HUYGENS that your heart leaps within you, and that you will be able to give voice to the Muses of Utrecht, after the Muses of The Hague have been so talkative?672 I am attaching here one or two poems that have just recently flowed from my pen,673 like many other things born from a headlong madness. I am asking that these be sent back to me when it’s convenient. The originals are gone because their author was careless and there wasn’t anyone else nearby to transcribe them again by hand.674 Farewell, Very Noble Maiden, and please give to Voetius and [Utricia] Swann a copy [of the poems] with your comments, if you think it worthwhile. The Hague, 17 / 27 January 1653. I am the perpetual cultivator of your great name and virtue. 42. Van Schurman to Huygens, 31 January 1653 (no. 66)675 Van Schurman replies to Huygens’s invitation to translate his poem into Eastern languages.

Ad Nobilissimum præstantissimumque Virum Dominum Constantinum Hugenium Solicitas nostras, Hugeni, carmine Musas,   Atque ubi tu cessas, poscis ut incipiam. Quid? mihi si centum fuerint in carmine linguæ,   Plus tua quam centum lingua vel una potest. A.M. à Schurman. Prid. Kal. Jan. MDCLIII To the Most Noble and Outstanding Gentleman Mr. Constantijn Huygens [To the Lord of Zuilichem] You stir up my Muses with your poem, Huygens,   And when you cease, you demand that I begin. Why? For if I were to have a hundred tongues in a poem,   Your one tongue is more than my one hundred. The day before the Kalends of January 1653 672. That is, he will now stop talking. 673. In Greek. 674. Huygens wants to ensure that Van Schurman will reply because he has sent her the originals on the pretext that no secretary was present to copy them for him. 675. Stighelen and Landtsheer, 167n61, think that Van Schurman may have been in error in writing January instead of February. But it is conceivable that she could have sent this poem immediately upon receiving Huygens’s letter of 17 / 27 January 1653.

Part 2: Letters and Poems 267 43. Huygens to Van Schurman, 5 September 1654676 Van Schurman, her brother, and two aunts returned to Cologne from May 1653 to July 1654 to reclaim land confiscated during the Thirty Years’ War. Huygens wrote to Utricia Ogle Swann asking about her whereabouts and composed this triumphant poem on his discovery of her “hiding place.” He hoped to visit her. But she was already back in Utrecht.

Ad Annam Mariam Schurmannam civem, Ut tum credebatur, Coloniensem Nondum tota lates veteres peregrina Batavos,   Nec vel Agrippinæ condita, virgo, sinu: Vicimus, inventa es; nec quae penetrare latebras   Una tuas posset Swannia diva fuit. 5 Sive viam prior ostendit Dux fœmina facti,   Sive rati cursum Fata dedere meæ, Vicimus, et Batavos quamvis invita videbis,   Quemque libet, vel quem non libet, Hugenium. Miraris, Miranda? vide quæ gessimus istis 10   Audaces modo non inferiora viri. Scilicet hic fugias quem non effugeris olim   Nec Persas inter tuta nec Aethiopas? Scrib(ebam) Augustæ Treviror. To Anna Maria van Schurman, a Citizen of Cologne, as it was Believed at the Time No longer are you completely hidden as an immigrant among the long   standing Batavians,   Nor are you concealed, my Maiden, in the heart of Cologne. We won! You have been found! It was no goddess who could penetrate   Your secret hiding place from me, but Lady Swann.677 676. Gedichten, 5:132. 677. Huygens wrote to Utricia on 5 / 15 September 1653, Briefwisseling, 5:187, no. 5310, inquiring what happened to “your famous Sibylla removing, and which way she may bee gone. Certainly, the towne of Utrecht is a mightie looser by it and should have hindred it by all possible violent civilities, so that the ashes of that Phenix had been preserved, where she hath so gloriously spent the best part of her life.” Having found out Van Schurman’s whereabouts, he wrote to Utricia again on 17 / 27 March 1654, Briefwisseling, 5:201, no. 5338, inquiring “about our precious Sibylla and the altering of her religion,” which was a “calumnie” no doubt spread by the Jesuits who had disputed with her in Cologne and who were “bragging of an apparent victorie and conviction of her noble soule, which God forbid we should ever live to see.” Van Schurman mentions Utricia’s visit to her in Cologne in her unpublished poem, “Aenmerkinghe Over ’t onderschijt tussen UITRECHT en CEULEN” (“Remarks on the difference between Utrecht and Cologne”), in Van Beek, Verbastert Christendom, 66–78.

268 ANNA MARIA VAN SCHURMAN AND CONSTANTIJN HUYGENS 5 Whether “a woman did the deed”678 and showed me the way first,   Or the Fates drove me on my course,679 We won! You will see again the Batavians, even if you do not want to,   And you will see Huygens, whether you like it or not. Are you, O Amazing One, amazed yourself? See what we have done for   your people, 10   Bold men doing no less bold deeds! Of course, you might want to flee and escape the man you once could   not escape,   And remain safely among your Persians and your Ethiopians. Written in Trier, September 5680 44. Van Schurman to Huygens, 3 March 1656681 Huygens sent Van Schurman a book, letting her know that she had been silent for too long. She excuses herself because of household obligations.

[To the Illustrious Gentleman, Mr. Constantijn Huygens, Knight, Lord of Zuilichem, etc. The Hague] Illustri Viro Domino Constantino Hugenio Anna Maria à Schurman Ordinis et pulchri spiras sub imagine veri, Hanc tamen, Hugeni, quis putet esse tuam, Dum nos astra locas inter præclara, culina Me vero potius vindicat una sibi? 5 Attamen errori jam mente assentior illi; Meque pudet contra dicere vera tibi. Ista mihi indixit tam longa silentia cura, Vel quia nulla libro gratia digna tuo est.



To the Illustrious Gentleman Constantijn Huygens Inspiration comes easily enough to you when you gaze on your lovely status.

678. Virgil, Aeneid 1.364, dux femina facti: “a woman became leader of the deed,” referring to Dido’s foundation of Carthage by herself. 679. Huygens borrows the sentiment of the line from Virgil, Aeneid, 3.337, sed tibi qui cursum venti, quae fata dedere? (“What winds sent you on this course? What did the fates give you?”), which Andromache asks Aeneas when they are reunited after the fall of Troy. Huygens may have this line in mind as he wonders why he has not heard from Van Schurman for so long. 680. A southwestern German city in the Palatinate. 681. Dated in Van Schurman’s own hand, Leiden University Library, ms. Hug. 37; undated in Schotel, 2:28–29.

Part 2: Letters and Poems 269   But, Huygens, who would think that this image is yours? While you place me among the brightest stars, aren’t kitchen duties   Claiming me as their own? 5 Still I have long acknowledged that mistake in my mind,   And I am ashamed to have to contradict you with the truth. Your concern has exposed my long-time silence,   Since no expression of thanks is worthy of your book. 45. Van Schurman to Huygens, 1 February 1658682 Another two years elapse and Van Schurman now thanks Huygens for an unspecified gift.

[To the Illustrious Gentleman, Mr. Constantijn Huygens, Lord of Zuilichem, etc. The Hague. Under cover] Illustri Viro Domino Constantino Hugenio S.P.D. A.M. à Schurman CONSTANTER pergis varium decus addere Mundo, Et Patriæ indigenas demeruisse tibi. Quo magis insistis nova Carmina fundere; pergit Hoc magis et Nectar Belga sitire tuum. 5 Quid tua torpentem meditatur Musa quietem? Naturam sequitur mobilis illa Poli. Filia si terræ possit tibi nostra videri: Attamen æthereis partubus illa favet: Ne dignum expectes tanto pro munere munus, 10 Nam debere tibi plus mea Musa cupit.

5

To the Illustrious Gentleman Constantijn Huygens Anna Maria van Schurman sends her greetings You CONSTANTLY683 continue to add versatile glory to the world, And have constantly won the favor of the inhabitants of your Fatherland. The more you insist on pouring out new poems, The more the Lowlands thirst for your nectar. So why is your Muse intending listless quiet for you? She is fickle and moves with the heavens. If you think the daughter of Earth684 could be ours,

682. Dated in Van Schurman’s hand, Leiden University Library ms. Hug. 37; undated in Schotel, 2:29. 683. A play on Huygens’s first name. 684. The goddess Gaia in Hesiod’s Theogony, mother of all life, was capable of engendering without the assistance of a male.

270 ANNA MARIA VAN SCHURMAN AND CONSTANTIJN HUYGENS 10

She still favors a heavenly birth. But do not expect a gift from me worthy of your great gift, Since my Muse desires to be in your greater debt.

46. Huygens to Van Schurman, July 1660685 Huygens warns Van Schurman of his impending visit to Utrecht to renew contact with her.

5

Ad Schurmannam Ille ego perfricta toties tibi fronte molestus, Trajecto quoties infero cumque pedem, Ecce pedi illato liceat tua tecta subire, Quod juvenis quondam, posco, Puella, senex: Addo, Senex: ne me metuas, quod saepe diuque Hactenus et feci et factito, posse diu.

To Van Schurman You have put on a bold face so many times, and here I have come to   disturb it     Yet again, as I make my way to Utrecht. Might I also make my way to your house?   I have asked this once before as a young man, Maiden, now I ask it as    an old man: 5 And I mean “old man.” Fear not: what I have asked and continue to ask   For so long now will not be possible much longer.686

47. Huygens to Van Schurman, 5 December 1660687 Huygens speaks of his new translation of the psalms for use in Reformed Church services. He requests, again, a polyglot sample. 685. Gedichten, 6:284. 686. Born on 4 September 1596, Huygens would have then been sixty-four years old. He reminds Van Schurman that since he is getting older, there will not be many more chances to see one another. He lived until the age of ninety-one. 687. Huygens, KA 44, no. 470, f. 579v; KA 45, no. 470, f. 165v–166r; Briefwisseling, 5:344, no. 5667 (summary in Dutch); and Rasch, Driehonderd brieven, 1034–35, no. 5667. Six years have elapsed since Huygens’s last poem to Van Schurman. In 1657, Huygens’s youngest son died, leaving his father bereft and ill. Huygens’s recovery was slow. Publication of Huygens’s collected poems, Koren-bloemen (Cornflowers, The Hague, 1658), was supervised by his second son, the renowned physicist, mathematician, and astronomer Christiaan Huygens (1629–1695).

Part 2: Letters and Poems 271 Very Noble Maiden, Here you have what I said I would discuss as a favor to a friend over the use of the psalms in church.688 At first glance, my proposal goes against doctrine.689 I must admit it isn’t easy to make it work690 if I consider the common folk’s capacity to understand it. But if offered the chance to exchange ideas with experienced Musicians, I can sincerely hope that the success of my plan will not turn out badly. I cannot find a better way to maintain the sublimity of the text, while simultaneously preserving without damage the godly character of the praise. Until now the usual present-day practice of pleading Heaven691 has been neglected through indifference, or thoroughly compromised. You must decide, if I may say, Very Noble Lady. Farewell. The Hague, the Nones of December 1660. Your very own, C. Huygens Z[uilichem] If ever you wish to spend some of your leisure time in favor of an old friend, I ask that you create as many specimens of your fine hand as you can so that I can preserve the pages in my cabinet692 of curiosities, my Museum. It would please me if you would convey my warmest greetings to Mr. Voetius. And, also, give him my explanation; I am very eager to know his opinion on my little dissertation on the psalms, whether it is any good and if it is worth looking into further. 48. Van Schurman to Huygens, 23 January 1661 (no. 68)693 Van Schurman advises Huygens on how best to introduce his new version of the psalms in church services.When she has free time, she will send him a polyglot sample.

[My Lord, My Lord of Zuilichem, Knight and Counselor to His Highness at The Hague. Residing at the Court]694 Anna Maria van Schurman sends her very hearty greetings to M. Constantijn Huygens. 688. According to Rasch, Driehonderd brieven, 2:1034, and Stighelen and Landtsheer, 191n160, Huygens refers to his translation of the psalms, which he had mentioned in a Dutch letter to a friend (The Hague, KB, ms. KA 48, f. 705–17). His “Kerck-gebruyck der Psalmen” (1658), however, was never published. A copy can be found in Willem Moll, “ ‘Kerck-gebruyck der Psalmen’: Een onuitgegeven geschrift van Constantijn Huygens,” Studiën en Bijdragen op’t Gebied der Historische Theologie 3 (1876): 111–23. 689. In Greek. 690. In Greek. 691. In Greek. 692. Κειμήλια, literally, “treasures” or “heirlooms.” 693. Huygens, Briefwisseling, 5:350, no. 5678; Rasch, Driehonderd brieven: 1035–37, no. 5679. Rasch, 132n104, dates this letter to 2 February 1661. 694. Address in Dutch.

272 ANNA MARIA VAN SCHURMAN AND CONSTANTIJN HUYGENS I cannot refrain from acknowledging your beautiful intention, Illustrious Sir, with two thumbs up695 (as it were). Not only do I think so, but among those with whom I shared it (I shared it with as many people as possible), I discovered that every one of them thinks as I do in every respect, especially that common friend of ours into whose community of grace you have the honor of being admitted by name.696 However, the more ardently they [the members of this community] desire to promote this reform, the more they also seem to despair because of the carelessness of the times about which they can do nothing.697 You know all too well the common saying, it is difficult to heal a chronic illness.698 And on this point they do not disagree with you, you who are no dissimulator of truth in your own writing. However, there is a certain person of special dignity and esteemed prudence who thinks that it would not be a bad thing if this project were to be brought out into the light so that men of the same affability and inviting demeanor would receive it into their hearts sooner and would thus prepare a path for introducing it sensibly into the church itself. The thinking is that it would proceed more successfully if five or six more eminent people, who could sing this type of music, were to welcome it and work with it in our church.699 You desired from me a sample of my polyglot compositions,700 and I acknowledge your usual kindness because I scarcely think that anything that could come from my hand would be worthy of the light of your Muse. But when I have found some free time, I will not unwillingly refuse to take on that risk. Farewell. Utrecht, ten days before the Kalends of February 1661.

695. Utroque: Horace, Epistles, 1.18. 66, and Erasmus, Adages, I.viii.46 (Premere pollicem. Convertere pollicem / Thumbs down. Thumbs up). 696. For Stighelen and Landtsheer, 192n161, the allusion is to Voetius, to whom Huygens had sent several years before copies of his treatise Use or Non-Use of the Organ in the Churches of the United Netherlands (1641). 697. In Greek. 698. In Greek. In other words, “old habits die hard.” From Saint John Climacus, The Ladder of Divine Ascent, in Migne, ed., Patrologiae Graecae 88, col. 937, l. 13. Cited in Stighelen and Landtsheer, 192n164. 699. This unidentified person suggests that a proposal be submitted to modify the use of the Psalter in church by having several people sing it. 700. In Greek. Literally, “a sample of polyglossia.”

Part 2: Letters and Poems 273 49. Huygens to Van Schurman, 12 April 1661701 Huygens eulogizes Van Schurman in the epigram he composed for her engraved print portrait (ca. 1661) by Cornelis van Dalen the Younger.

In effigiem Annæ Mariae Schurmannæ Tanta fides cælo, tanta est fiducia, divæ   Hoccine Schurmannæ vultus in ære micet? Disce gravis, Sculptor, quæ sit vesania cæpti :   Haec, ais, haec ævi sideris umbra tui est? 5 Tun’similem præstis ætas cui nulla secundam   Edidit, et non est ulla datura parem? CONSTANTER On the Portrait of Anna Maria van Schurman Such trust in heaven,702 such confidence,   Is this the face of the divine Schurman that shines in the lower sphere?703 Learn, Sculptor, what serious madness there is in such an undertaking:   This, you say, this is the shadow of the celestial Star of your times? 5 Are you offering a likeness of her, the woman to whom no age      has ever produced a second, And whose likeness none other can ever equal? CONSTANTER 50. Huygens to Van Schurman, 13 June 1666704 Five years have elapsed since Huygens’s last extant letter because of his diplomatic mission to Orange from 1661 to 1665. He reminds Van Schurman that she owes him a polyglot sample. 701. Huygens, Gedichten, 6:128. Van Schurman’s engraved print portrait by Cornelis van Dalen the Younger was done after a painted grisaille by Cornelis Jonson van Ceulen (1657), possibly for her fiftieth birthday. The engraving was printed in three states between ca. 1657 and 1661; Huygens’s Latin sestet was added to the cartouche of the third state. She is depicted in three-quarter length, with the tower of the Cathedral of Utrecht in the distance. The frame’s four corners feature the emblems of the Seven Liberal Arts and the sciences she had mastered. On the portrait, see Arthur K. Wheelock, Jr., “Nothing Gray about Her: Cornelis Jonson van Ceulen’s Grisaille of Anna Maria van Schurman,” in Face Book: Studies on Dutch and Flemish Portraiture of the 16th–18th Centuries, ed. Edwin Buijsen, Charles Dumas, and Volker Manuth (Leiden: Primavera Pers, 2012), 325–30. See Figure 7. 702. Or, in the engraver’s burin. 703. Or, from this copper plate. 704. Huygens, Briefwisseling, 6:192, no. 6565 (summary in Dutch); KA 44, no. 498; KA 45, f. 175v– 176r. Both Worp (editor of Huygens’s Briefwisseling), and Stighelen and Landtsheer misinterpret Huygens’s poorly written “Ides” (“II” in the autograph letter) as 11 June.

274 ANNA MARIA VAN SCHURMAN AND CONSTANTIJN HUYGENS I have delayed telling you, Most Noble Maiden, about my return. I should have informed you in my own hand about the work in which I’ve been so absorbed during the four years I’ve stayed away from my Fatherland, my children, my books,705 and my friends since I’ve been a busy exile. And while our gods were sustaining me, I was tossed about four times on the sea, as though I were a ball, and pushed this way and that from king to king, until I landed on the Mediterranean Coast, separated by only a short distance from Africa.706 In such a climate, I burned hotter than my Dutch blood could take, but since my God looks favorably upon me, this did not trouble me.707 As for the end term of my work, a nice finishing touch was found. A learned man708 wanted to tell it to our Princes in every detail709 in his book, and I would now be adding to the truth if, as you will see, he had not dared to offer just a little bit more about me. And everyone who knows me knows that it could not be further from the truth, as Orange is from our countrymen. You, in a spirit of leniency, will forgive those who exult in such unrestrained joy, claiming that this is what must be said about the least of mortals [Huygens]. Because of my additional labor, after a period of heavy servitude, they have been restored to their former freedom under the merciful Prince [Louis XIV]. Farewell, Illustrious Lady, and I ask that you not be troubled to inform me about whatever you are doing today and into whatever world your Ethiopian Muses710 have carried you since I last saw you. Do not free yourself from the promise you made concerning the specimen of your polyglossia, a promise by which your humanitas has tied you to me. The Hague, the Ides of June 1666. Totally yours.

705. A pun on liberos / libros (children / books). 706. On Huygens’s diplomatic mission to Orange from 1661 to 1665, see the Introduction. 707. A Stoic trope that Van Schurman would appreciate. 708. An allusion to Jacques Pineton de Chambrun (1635–1689), a Reformed pastor at Orange, who published Relation de ce qui s’est passé au restablissement d’Orange: ensemble des discours et harangues qui ont esté faictes pour le mesme subject (An Account of what happened at the restoration of Orange: with discourses and speeches presented on the same topic, 1666). Chambrun met Huygens in 1660 at The Hague when the former arrived with a delegation from Orange to plead for a withdrawal of the French troops. Huygens sent a copy of the book to Marie du Moulin on 27 October 1666 with an accompanying French poem which states: “To Mademoiselle Du Moulin, with the report on Orange. See from end to end / The true Story / By this honnête author. / But do not believe all / That he wishes one to believe / About your Servant [Huygens]” (Huygens, Gedichten, 7:101). This book is listed as no. 16 under “Historical titles” in the auction catalog of the Labadists. See Beek and Bürmann, “Ex Libris,” 69. 709. In Greek. 710. An allusion to Van Schurman’s study of Ethiopian. Huygens wrote two poems in 1649 on Van Schurman’s “Ethiopian Muses.” See these poems in 2:26 and 2:29.

Part 2: Letters and Poems 275 51. Van Schurman to Huygens, 22 June 1666 (no. 70)711 Van Schurman welcomes Huygens back from his mission to France and thanks him for the book by Pineton de Chambrun. To fulfill her obligation, she sends him a calligraphic sample in Persian and Dutch from Johannes Elichmann.

[For the Most Noble Gentleman, Lord Constantijn Huygens, Knight, and Lord of Zuilichem, etc. At The Hague] Anna Maria van Schurman sends her very hearty greetings to M. Constantijn Huygens. As soon as I read with eager eyes your last letter, Illustrious Sir, after the long interval of your journey to France,712 together with that most pleasing book with which you do not hesitate to renew your usual generosity toward me, I immediately picked up my pen and called forth with renewed speed a certain grace for my reply and for this little gift; as the well-known axiom states, He who gives quickly gives twice.713 I now have had my hands full in joining this page714—which represents a day’s worth of effort—to this already overloaded letter. A number of delays presented themselves continually to my own work, such that these unexpected interruptions have stolen all pleasure and grace from both.715 But, also, thanks to your great humanitas interceding on my behalf, you are able to arouse me from my neglected duty and ungratefulness. I owe the utmost gratitude to you, and I thank you especially for your words and above all your genuine feelings, and I pray for your happy and illustrious return as if it were the return of a health-bearing star in our World. I pray that the greatest and the best God keep you safe for a long time as a source of the greatest good for the Church, the Country, and the Republic of Letters, and your friends and family as well, and that your light will set here and rise again in the Heaven of heavens. Farewell, most Humane of Men. Ten days before the Kalends of July 1666.

711. Huygens, Briefwisseling, 6:193, no. 6566. Van Schurman’s handwriting, rushed and sloppy, betrays the constraints on her time. 712. During the early 1660s, Huygens was in France on a diplomatic mission to defend the interests of the young William III in the French city of Orange. See the Introduction. 713. Publilius Syrus, Sententiae, 225: inopi beneficium bis dat, qui dat celeriter. See also Erasmus, Adages, I.viii.91 (Bis dat qui cito dat); Seneca, On Benefits, 2.1.2, cited in Stighelen and Landtsheer, 194n170. 714. Her polyglot sample, which in the end she did not send. See the accompanying cover letter (2:52) and the poem Tetrastichon (2:53), which she sent instead of her own sample. 715. Van Schurman had just hosted Jean de Labadie and his two acolytes, who in mid-June 1666 arrived in Utrecht where they lodged with her for ten days.

276 ANNA MARIA VAN SCHURMAN AND CONSTANTIJN HUYGENS 52. Van Schurman to Huygens, ca. June 1666 (no. 69)716 This rushed letter, bearing no superscription, date, place, or signature, accompanies the Tetrastichon.

[My Lord, Lord Constantijn Huygens, Lord of Zuilichem, etc. residing at the Court of the Prince of Orange. At The Hague] See here, Very Noble Sir, “coals instead of a treasure.”717 For while my page has been enriched and finished with various oriental characters, I examine it again and again, but it displeases me because of the rough grain and blemish of the paper, which its dye had previously covered over in my opinion. I would not dare subject it to your most discerning eye.718 And thus, so that I do not just send you nothing in exchange, this Epigram, or rather Tetrastichon,719 which has just come to my mind, will bring forth light and favor from its author. At least I admit that the silence which, I think, was occasioned by my three- or four-week trip and which has taken me beyond the limits of polite exchange, must come to an end.720 Again, be well and forgive my haste. 53. TETRASTICHON (no. 75)721 Alludens ad Nomen ac Ingenium masculum etc.   ANNÆ MARIÆ SCHURMANNÆ Persicè  &   Teutonicè ὁμοιοσύντακτον, ὁμοιόλογον, ὁμοιόσημον Affinitatis inter has linguas testandæ gratia Uut Dochtereñen Heyr niet komet Naem noch Faem. ‫زا‬ ‫نارتخد‬ ‫هورگ‬ ‫هن‬ ‫دمآ‬ ‫مان‬ ‫ن‬ ‫ه‬ ‫مایپ‬ So Maeghdje Swager grypt, ter Faeme komt ok Naem. ‫وچ‬ ‫هدام‬ ‫رهوش‬ ‫تفرگ‬ ‫رد‬ ‫پ‬ ‫ای‬ ‫دمآ‬ ‫و‬ ‫مان‬ 716. Huygens, Briefwisseling, 6:354, no. 5691. 717. See Erasmus, Adages, I.ix.30 (Thesaurus carbones erant). See also Erasmus’s colloquy The Girl with no Interest in Marriage (1523), in Erasmus on Women, ed. Erika Rummel (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1996), 28, whose female protagonist Catharine expresses a long-held desire “to join a community of holy virgins,” to which her male interlocutor replies, “Huh! Coals instead of treasure!” 718. Van Schurman offers as an excuse the poor paper grade of her polyglot sample. She sends instead a poem addressed to her by the oriental scholar, Johannes Elichmann. See the poem, 2:53. 719. In Greek, meaning “Four Lines.” 720. After lodging with Van Schurman in Utrecht in mid-June 1666, Labadie headed to Middelburg to become the pastor of the Walloon Church. Van Schurman travelled frequently to Middelburg to hear him preach and became a strong advocate. 721. The quatrain in Dutch and the accompanying Persian was copied by Van Schurman from a poem by Johannes Elichmann dated 16 August 1638. On this poem, see the Introduction, as well as Figure 4.

Part 2: Letters and Poems 277 Dochterje bediede (k). Geen byster. Naem haer is. ‫رتخد‬ ‫ار‬ ‫مدیدب‬ ‫نآ‬ ‫رتشیپ‬ ‫مان‬ ‫رو‬ ‫تسا‬ Swager niet grypt: ok beter SCHURMAND is.722 ‫رهوش‬ ‫هن‬ ‫تفرگ‬ ‫و‬ ‫رتهب‬ ‫دنمرهوش‬ ‫تسا‬ Was onderteykent JOANNES ELICHMANNUS Lugd Batav: 16. Aug. 1638 TETRASTICHON Playing with the name and the manly intellect etc. of ANNA MARIA VAN SCHURMAN In Persian    &    in Dutch Of Similar composition, words, and meaning For the sake of testifying to the affinities between these languages Daughters do not come with a Name or Fame. So young Maids take on marriage for Fame and a Name. A Daughter serves. No fault [here]. Her Name is. She needs no marriage: better to be a SCHURMAN. 54. Huygens to Van Schurman, 1 September 1666723 Huygens refuses to release Van Schurman from her obligation to send her own polyglot sample.

Constantijn Huygens greets warmly the Most Illustrious Lady Anna Maria van Schurman.

722. Our thanks to Toon van Hal for the Dutch transcription. In an e-mail correspondence of 25 September 2014, he explains: “As the Latin / Greek title clearly states, it was Elichmann’s aim to show the similarity, in this case the very identity of Persian and Dutch. This is the reason why Elichmann wrote a text in Dutch which is accompanied by a Persian translation following the Dutch original, word by word. But as Elichmann was forced to use only such corresponding words, he was limited in his possibilities and hence the result sounds hermetic.” We thank Alireza Korangy for the transcription and translation of the Persian: Az Dukhtarān-i Gurūh na āmad nām na payām Chu Mādda Shuhar girift dar payā āmad u nām dukhtar rā bidīdam ān pīshtar nāmvar-ast Shuhar na-girifit m bihtar shuharmand-ast. Of the girls of the group none was mentioned Since Wealth and being known comes with marriage I have seen girls who, though famous, in their own right Still trail those who are simply just married. 723. Huygens, ms. KA 44, no. 499; ms. KA 45, f. 176r; Briefwisseling, 6:195–96, no. 6576.

278 ANNA MARIA VAN SCHURMAN AND CONSTANTIJN HUYGENS You tried to slip away from me, my Virgin,724 as if through the back door, and you tried to deceive a client,725 but I am a bloodsucker: “I will not let go of your skin, until I have had enough of your learned blood.”726 I am holding on to you, and you are obliged to fulfill that promise, you who have been tied by chains by which humans are bound together, just like the horns of bulls are tied with ropes or cables. And, also, that rough condition of your paper, which you use as an excuse, will not at all free you from your agreement. To the contrary, if indeed you are to meet again such an obstacle, I will insist, even more ardently, on seeing how your work triumphs over the material, and how your artistry will disguise or correct its insufficiencies if nature does let you down. Likewise, as you can see, I openly confess that I will take great satisfaction in the sample that you will have taken the trouble to write just for me. There are no more excuses for you to escape this obligation, not even with this four-line verse from Elichmann, as charming and ingenious as it may be. For it is worth far more to me if it is crafted by a Van Schurman, than because of the diligence and erudition of that author. Farewell, most amazing Maiden, and make good your promise! The Hague, on the very Kalends of September 1666. I hope that this letter will find you home from your journey.

55. Van Schurman to Huygens, 1 November 1666 (no. 71)727 Van Schurman finally complied with Huygens’s request for her polyglot sample.

[No address] Anna Maria van Schurman sends her very hearty greetings to Lord Constantijn Huygens. I will not keep you long, Illustrious Sir, for fear that I lose favor twice, both for the briefness of my letter and for my handwriting.728 I will consider that enough is said if this page, however modest, speaks for itself in such a way that it finds a 724. Huygens understood the allusion to Erasmus’s colloquy in Van Schurman’s letter (no. 69, 2:52). We have therefore retained “Virgin” for the Latin “Virgo” instead of “Maiden.” 725. Huygens pointedly reminds Van Schurman that since he requested a polyglot sample from her, he is her client, and she thus has an obligation to him. 726. Horace, Ars Poetica, 476. 727. Huygens, Briefwisseling, 6:200, no. 6587. Van Schurman finally acceded to Huygens’s request for the long- awaited sample of her own calligraphic inspiration. The sample, now lost, likely resembled others housed at the KB (KW 121 D 2–49 ll) and Utrecht’s Gemeentelijk Archief (cat. nr. 2965) (for the latter, see Stighelen and Landtsheer, 172). She states that she can now take her name off her list of obligations; she has paid her debt to Huygens and wants no more. Huygens was so pleased with the poem that he replied with a Latin quatrain composed on 18 November 1666 and sent to her from Breda with a covering letter (see 2:56). 728. In Greek.

Part 2: Letters and Poems 279 place in your most ornate cabinet:729 and that I delete my name from its writing. Farewell to you, always, Most Humane of Men, and to all of yours. Utrecht, on the Kalends of November 1666.

56. Huygens to Van Schurman, 30 November 1666730 Huygens thanks Van Schurman profusely for her calligraphic sample.

Constantijn Huygens sends warm greetings to the Most Noble Maiden, Anna Maria van Schurman. Look, here, I am back from Breda, most Illustrious Maiden. At the very moment when I was ready to undertake this trip, an amazing work of art was handed to me, a page which you wanted to give me to erase an old debt.731 As I was on the way from boat to coach, I was playing with the following verses, as is my custom: “To fulfill my prayers, you, Van Schurman, exhausted by my supplications,   Gave me a sample that future generations will admire. You call that erasing your name? In vain, you are, my Maiden,   You make your name indelible by erasing the debt so well.”732 But you know very well that you have done me a favor as amply as you have done one to yourself. I congratulate each of us and, to you alone, I give thanks for your small, elegant gift and your gratitude, which I prefer to return to you as much as possible. I shall try either to find an occasion or to make it happen in such a way that I am able to discharge my obligation to you. And I beg you, especially, not to remember how I made your life miserable, as I kept pushing you, unashamedly, and became a nuisance, indeed, beyond all good manners and custom. Farewell, Most Noble Maiden, and continue to count me in your circle of friends so long as we both breathe the same air. The Hague, the day before the Kalends of December 1666. 729. In Greek, ταμιεῖον, or “secret room.” 730. Huygens, ms. KA 44, no. 500; ms. KA 45, f. 176r–v; Briefwisseling, 6:201, no. 6591 (summary in Dutch). Huygens replies to Van Schurman’s letter of November 1, 1666 (no. 71, 2:55). 731. Literally “to erase an old name.” Huygens puns on “erase” and “name” in his quatrain. He plays as well with the marriage trope in the Tetrastichon. 732. Huygens, Gedichten, 7:106. Huygens entitled his poem Ad Schurmannam, cum mihi polygraphiæ suæ specimen mittens, quod promiserat, delere se scriberet nomen suum (“To Anna Maria van Schurman, who promised a sample of her calligraphy and wrote that her name should be erased”) Quam, precibus lassata meis, Schurmanna, dedisti, Ultima posteritas admiratura Tabellam est. Hoc delere vocas? frustra es, mea virgo; tuumque Tam bene delendo facis indelebile nomen. Bredae 18 Nov. 1666. Neither her cover letter nor her sample were retained in Huygens’s correspondence.

280 ANNA MARIA VAN SCHURMAN AND CONSTANTIJN HUYGENS 57. Huygens to Van Schurman, 7 October 1667733 A year has elapsed since Huygens’s last letter. He sends Van Schurman a copy of his Dutch poem The Sea Road from The Hague to Scheveningen.

I am breaking my word, my Maiden, since I am the one who promised both you and the whole country that I would not trouble you with any more trifles of this kind. But then look, “following that true proverb, I shall return to my own vomit.”734 However, it is not through my initiative that this poem is seeing the light of day.735 It pleased my friends, and their word was law, even though no one thought enough about the fact that as strength declines with age, it necessarily follows that “the end is worse than the first.”736 So whatever the case may be, I consider it unpardonable if what I have written to you should reach you through people other than [me] the author. Open this up and apply to it all the humanitas that is so characteristic of you. Forgive me for disturbing your more important studies.737 Farewell, glory738 of our age and our country. From C. Huygens, 7 October 1667. who is forever yours.

58. Van Schurman to Huygens, 4 November 1667739 Van Schurman mentions caring for a sick friend, most likely Catharina Martini, with whom she would later join the Labadist community. She comments briefly on Huygens’s collection of poems, Koren-bloemen (Cornflowers), and indicates that she will no longer write to him.

To the Illustrious Gentleman, Mr. Constantijn Huygens,

733. Huygens, ms. KA 45, f. 177r; Briefwisseling, 6:214, no. 6620. 734. In Greek. 2 Peter 2:22. 735. De Zeestraat van’s-Gravenhage op Scheveningen (1667) celebrates the new toll road from The Hague to the sea that Huygens oversaw. Scheveningen is now a popular seaside resort area. 736. In Greek. Stighelen and Landtsheer, 197n185, note that the citation is from Huygens himself. The citation, however, comes from Matthew 12:43–45 and Luke 11:24–26, where Jesus describes the return of an unclean spirit to the house of the man from whom he has been removed. Finding the home swept clean, he leaves, then returns with “seven other spirits more wicked than himself: and entering in they dwell there. And the last state of that man becomes worse than the first.” (Vulgate: Luke 11:26) 737. An ironic reference to Van Schurman’s growing attention to the activities of Jean de Labadie. 738. Decus. 739. Not included in ms. 133 B 8. The letter is at The Hague, KB, ms. 135 C 91; a photocopy of the original Latin letter is included in Stighelen and Landtsheer, 199.

Part 2: Letters and Poems 281 This entire month, most humane of men, I was confined to the bedside of a deathly ill (as it was thought) person; she is my friend, the other half of my soul,740 such that I wasn’t free to be anywhere else in body or in mind. And so, to the contrary, my eyes were scarcely allowed to look upon that Royal Road,741 which never had seemed good to me before, but which you indicated was not out of my way. My mind and [lack of] free time did not permit me to pluck those very beautiful flowers, which you yourself sprinkled not on distant Parnassus, but on a rich and bountiful soil, a fitting garland for an author.742 And although I have begun to find freedom from those constraints, I do not want you to expect anything from my pen any more. You have so managed to harmonize the form and flourishes of your work that I think nothing could be disturbed and nothing added, and this wonder743 which is more encrusted with jewels than with flowers crowns your temples honorably enough. Then, you, I ask, you should continue to contribute Constantly744 to the church, the fatherland, and all of yours, not your least but your best verses. And although I do this rather belatedly, believe that I thank you and will continue to thank you very much for your outstanding gift. Keep for yourself that kind spirit with which you offered what you gave to me. Goodbye forever.745 Utrecht, the day before the Nones of November 1667. 59. Huygens to Van Schurman, 13 June 1669746 Almost two years have passed. Huygens petitions Van Schurman to welcome the wife of Jean Henri de Berckoffer, who was returning to Orange.

Most Noble Lady,

740. Horace, Odes, 1.3.8. In a send-off poem, Horace bids farewell to Virgil, who is about to start on a faraway journey from which he will never return. Also, Augustine, Confessions 4.6. 741. In Numbers 21:22, the via regia is described as “diverging neither to the right nor to the left.” Van Schurman means this in a metaphorical sense. Huygens had just sent her his poem on a new toll road (see the previous letter, 2:57). But she is now on a road which, unbeknownst to her, will take her far from Utrecht into a separatist community that will travel far and wide and from which she will never diverge. 742. Huygens’s Cornflowers (Koren-bloemen, The Hague: Adriaen Vlack, 1658). 743. In Greek. 744. Underlined by Van Schurman, who puns on Huygens’s first name and motto. 745. Van Schurman is intimating that she no longer wants to correspond with Huygens, given her growing separation from the world in turning to Jean de Labadie. Two months before she made her final decision to join the community, Huygens wrote to her on 8 September 1669, appealing once again to her love of art as a way of holding onto her. Her final reply on 13 September 1669 (no. 72, 2:62), however, makes clear her decision to disengage herself from her former life. 746. Summary in Dutch in Huygens, The Hague, KB, ms. KA 44, no. 508; ms. KA 45, f. 178r; Briefwisseling, 6:251, no. 6716 (Dutch summary).

282 ANNA MARIA VAN SCHURMAN AND CONSTANTIJN HUYGENS If you trust me at all, do me this favor. Add this lady to your flock [of friends].747 She is a pious matron, noble in birth, and the wife of that erudite gentleman Berckoffer, the commander of the château fort of Orange.748 She does not want to leave the Netherlands without conveying her greetings to you, since you are the ornament of our Lowlands. For this reason, she is coming to see you, so long as the pastor of the French church at Delft is getting ready for the journey. If I’m not mistaken, he will escort her to Geneva and from there will travel back to Orange. I will not mention anything about the beauty, virtue, eloquence, or modesty of this most elegant lady. You will find that out for yourself. There is no more time, I’m extremely busy right now. Farewell, glory749 of our age, and love 13 June 1669 yours forever. 60. Huygens to Van Schurman, 8 September 1669750 Huygens disregards Van Schurman’s decision to no longer write to him. He requests her comments on a poem and six art samples.

Most Noble Lady, I told you that I was amused at the voice and gesturing of our preachers and at that one thing that I hate “worse than a dog and a snake,”751 namely their most absurd and affected posturing on holy matters; here you have an occasion for a not unpleasant reading.752 I am including with this a portrait by our Netscher,753 747. Scribe tui gregis hanc: the same words as in Huygens’s petition to welcome Maria Casembroot (2:24). 748. Jean Henri de Berckoffer married Françoise de Veilheux (or Vilbrieux, according to Worp, in Huygens, Briefwisseling, 6:251n3), dame de Buffières, Maison-Blanche et Grand-Champ en Viennois. Berckoffer replaced Etienne de Milet, Seigneur de Mesmay (d. 16 June 1669), as commander of Orange. Huygens corresponded with him between December 1668 and October 1673. See Eugène Arnaud, Histoire des protestants, 2:301. 749. Huygens uses again the term decus. 750. Huygens, ms. 44, no. 509; ms. KA 45, f. 178r–v; Briefwisseling, 6:253, no. 6722; Tien gedichten van Constantijn Huygens, ed. F. L. Zwaan (Assen: Van Gorcum, 1976), 152–53. 751. Horace, Epistles, 1.17.30. 752. An allusion to Huygens’s poem “Aen sommighe predikers” (“To Some Preachers”), Gedichten, 7:102–5, 27 and 28 October 1666, which he forgot to send her and forwarded to her two days later. See his next letter. 753. Huygens sends six art samples: (1) a portrait of himself by Caspar Netscher and (2) by his oldest son Constantijn Junior; (3) a portrait by his oldest son of his sister Susanna, possibly after an oil portrait of Susanna by Netscher; (4) a portrait of an English woman, Lady Mary Killigrew, after the original by Anthony van Dyck; (5) and two prints by Huygens’s son Christiaan of the famous Anna Bergerotti and of Margaretha de Hertoghe van Osmael, daughter of the Lord of Valkenburg. The Dutch artist Caspar Netscher (1639–1684) painted a famous oil portrait of Christiaan Huygens, as well

Part 2: Letters and Poems 283 whose artistic skill you will find ever more delightful; also a portrait of the same person by my oldest son754 and, by the same hand, a portrait of his sister, the only one of the same sex as you;755 likewise, a portrait of a certain English lady in the manner of Van Dyck;756 and, finally, a portrait by our Christian Archimedes757 of Anna Bergerotti, an outstanding musician from Rome whom I admired a number of times in Paris;758 and another one here of Osmalia,759 who now lives in Amersfoort. Hoskins,760 whom I knew forty years ago in London, painted the Queen of Great Britain, who is now an old lady, almost decrepit and far from her former beauty; he also painted that other noble English woman, a mother as a superb portrait of Susanna Doublet-Huygens in 1669. See Wayne E. Franits, Dutch SeventeenthCentury Genre Painting: Its Stylistic and Thematic Evolution (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2004), 107, and Marjorie E. Wieseman, Caspar Netscher and Late Seventeenth-Century Dutch Painting (Doornspijk: Davaco, 2002), 230–31. 754. Constantijn Junior. 755. Susanna. 756. Sir Anthony van Dyck (1599–1641), Flemish baroque artist and leading court painter of Charles I of England and his court. The English woman, according to Stighelen and Landstheer, 173, was Lady Mary Killigrew, née Woodhouse (1584–1656), the wife of Sir Robert Killigrew (1579–1633), with whose family Huygens stayed during his second trip to England in 1622. They were close neighbors to his diplomatic lodgings in London. Huygens remembered fondly the musical soirées at their house and the hostess, Mary Killigrew, for whom he developed intense feelings. She became his most trusted art advisor on artistic and musical commissions. See Jardine, Going Dutch, 185–87, and “The Reputation of Sir Constantijn Huygens,” 45–64. 757. Christiaan Huygens, one of the greatest scientists of his era, is here referred to as Archimedes (ca. 287 BCE–ca. 212 BCE), the Greek polymath and role model for early modern natural philosophers interested in the mechanical arts. See Findlen, Possessing Nature, 327–28. 758. Anna Bergerotti (b. ca. 1630), an Italian singer, was invited by Cardinal Mazarin in about 1655 to form part of a musical team for the “Cabinet du roi.” Giovanni Francesco Tagliavacco, Guiseppe Melone, and Atto Melani joined her. All four singers performed, for the marriage of Louis XIV on 22 November 1660, in Francesco Cavalli’s opera Xerse. Huygens corresponded with Bergerotti in 1663: Briefwisseling, 5:567, no. 6111. Anna Bergerotti was soon joined by Anne Chabanceau de La Barre (1628–1688), a celebrated Parisian singer; the two performed the music of the composer Jean-Baptiste Lully (1632–1687) at court. Bergerotti returned to Rome in 1669 to marry a marquis. Huygens invited Anne de La Barre to The Hague in 1653 while she travelled to the Swedish court; he met Bergerotti during the early 1660s at the French court, where he was on a diplomatic mission to defend the interests of William III, Prince of Orange. See Lisandro Abadie, “Anne de La Barre (1628–88): Biographie d’une chanteuse de cour,” Revue de Musicologie 94 (2008): 5–44, and Anthony Lewis and Nigel Fortune, Opera and Church Music, 1630–1750 (London: Oxford University Press, 1975). 759. Huygens corresponded with and wrote French epigrams to Margaretha van Osmael, who lived about 25 km northeast of Utrecht in Amersfoort. See Huygens, Briefwisseling, 4:113, no. 3866; 4:437, no. 4703; 4:464, no. 4768; Gedichten, 4:30–31; and 4:18–20, 30. 760. John Hoskins (ca. 1595–1664) painted in 1632 a famous miniature portrait of Queen Henrietta Maria (1609–1669), who died on 10 September 1669, two days after this letter. Huygens met him during his early years in London.

284 ANNA MARIA VAN SCHURMAN AND CONSTANTIJN HUYGENS of twelve children.761 Look here, I have taken [all] these out of my little chest so that you can enjoy them for a moment while you rise exhausted from your more serious study,762 and surely from the commerce of so many letters with which the whole world wearies you. Of every one of these, I would like to know which one pleases you the most. Farewell, glory763 of ours. The Hague, 6 days before the Ides of September 1669. Most pledged to you.764

61. Huygens to Van Schurman, 10 September 1669765 Huygens sends Van Schurman his poem “Aen sommighe predikers” (“To some preachers”), which he forgot to include with his previous letter.

To the Most Noble Lady, Anna Maria van Schurman, C.H. I am shocked, most noble Maiden, and embarrassed that I forgot to include in my recent letter this Poem which you especially were eager to read.766 Forgive me, I beg you, for this not insignificant error. A group of friends standing around me were talking endlessly when it was being sent. Farewell. Four days before the Ides of September 1669.

62. Van Schurman to Huygens, 13 September 1669 (no. 72)767 This is Van Schurman’s last extant farewell letter to Huygens. A month later, she moved in with the Labadists in Amsterdam.

[No address] 761. Mary Killigrew. After the death of her husband in 1633, Mary Killigrew married Sir Thomas Stafford. See Inge Broekman, “Constantijn Huygens’ Art Collection,” 23–45. 762. Huygens replaced studies with study, meaning perhaps that he knew of Van Schurman’s sole “study” of Labadie. 763. Decus. 764. Addictissimus tibi ends several of Huygens’s letters, including this last one to her. 765. Huygens, ms. KA 44, no. 510; ms. KA 45, f. 178v. 766. Huygens sent Van Schurman his poem “Aen sommighe predikers” (“To Some Preachers”), written on 27 and 28 October 1666. See Huygens, Gedichten, 7:102–5. 767. Huygens, Briefwisseling, 6:253, no. 6723. This is Van Schurman’s last extant letter to Huygens, written a month before moving to Amsterdam, in November 1669, to join the Labadist community; her handwriting is extremely rushed (see Figure 8). She included in Eukleria the final paragraph of this letter (Eukleria, 1673, 23; Dutch translation, 1684, 32–33). In an attempt to dissuade her, Huygens sent her a 124-line Dutch poem on 11 June 1670 (Gedichten, 7:304–7), entitled “To the Noble Maiden Anna Maria van Schurman, on knowing herself,” in which he attacked Labadie and accused her of betraying herself, her former professors, her religious confession, and the city of Utrecht.

Part 2: Letters and Poems 285 Anna Maria van Schurman sends her very hearty greetings to Lord Constantijn Huygens. You have thought me worthy, most cultivated of Men, to delight my eyes and mind with the contemplation of not just one picture. Among all these, one especially in my judgment is very precious, and I am keeping it for myself. This picture, as with a mirror, exhibits to the preachers an unfortunate vice that occupies the pulpit;768 I am sending the rest back to you with my sincerest thanks. There is no reason that I should attempt to praise every one of them, after I have already said farewell long ago to delights of this kind. I would not easily return to the graces of Apelles,769 whose skill I need. I am considering another kind of art in my soul so that I might imitate the heavenly image, or the ideal exemplar, as it were, of the Divine Virtues of our highest and most beautiful King and Savior JESUS; even if I cannot do this by putting pen to paper (something I have tried to do so often in vain), then I can do this certainly in some way in my soul. More and more I perceive every day that this Art is long, life is short, and the opportunity is difficult to find.770 And this does not happen to just anyone; only when some small ray from this divine chalice771 shines upon someone does the heavenly hall lie open. If anyone learns how to card well the finest threads on this tapestry, as it were, he would easily surpass any Protagoras and any Apelles.772 However, I, in my desire to end my life in this pursuit, end it with this prayer: May the Almighty and Greatest God above, the only Teacher of this art, teach the practice773 of it to you, to me, and to all His own774 who love Him for His glory, and for the reformation of the true Church. Utrecht, the Ides of September 1669.

768. Jean de Labadie’s acerbic critique of the Reformed pastorate is reflected in this comment. 769. The fourth-century BCE painter Apelles of Kos, who was praised by Pliny the Elder in his Natural History. 770. Van Schurman adapts the aphorism of Hippocrates—ars longa, vita brevis, occasio praeceps (“art is long, life is short, opportunity is fleeting”)—in Seneca, On the Shortness of Life, 10.1. 771. In Greek. The original word karateros is non-existent. Worp, in Huygens, Briefwisseling, 6:253, no. 6723, suggests krateros (“[wine] bowl”). Zwann, in Tien gedichten,153n1, suggests crateres (“cup of oil”), as in fuso crateres olivo from Virgil, Aeneid, 6.225. Van Schurman, who is about to join the Labadist household, affirms that only through a Eucharistic communion with Christ can “this art,” the sort that she longs for, find fulfillment. 772. Protagoras: Greek Sophist (fifth century BCE) who converses with Socrates in one of Plato’s dialogues; Apelles: Greek painter (fourth century BCE). 773. In Greek. 774. God’s elect.

Appendix A Chronology Anna Maria van Schurman: Letters and Poems to and from Her Mentor and Other Members of Her Circle, 1631–1652 1630s Date

Author

Addressee

Summary Content

1 Latin Letter

20 July Van Schurman Rivet 1631 (no. 1)

First letter to Rivet, who began the correspondence.

2 Latin Letter

2 January Van Schurman Rivet 1632 (no. 3)

Mentions her work in French on how women should use their leisure.

3 Latin Letter

1 March 1632

4 Latin Letter

25 March Van Schurman Rivet 1632 (no. 2)

Compliments Rivet on becoming governor and mentions again her book on female leisure.

5 Latin Letter

10 February Van Schurman Rivet 1633 (no. 5)

Thanks Rivet for his gift of one of his newly published books.

6 Latin Letter

23 October Van Schurman Rivet 1633 (no. 4)

Sends her portraits of Rivet and his wife, and possibly of Princess Anne de Rohan.

7 Latin Letter

3 January 1634 (no. 11)

Van Schurman Rivet

Thanks Rivet for his prayers for her recovery from an illness, and for being the “first patron and director of her studies.”

8 Latin Letter

4 March 1634 (no. 12)

Van Schurman Rivet

Thanks Rivet for dedicating a book to her, but expresses trepidation at being cast into the public limelight.

Rivet

Van Schurman First of two extant letters. Rivet has been appointed governor to the prince of Orange, the future William II.

287

288 Appendix A Date

Author

Addressee

Summary Content

9 Latin Letter

30 May Van Schurman Rivet 1634 (no. 6)

Has just received a book that Rivet dedicated to her. First mention of Marie du Moulin, and of the “declining health” of her mother.

10 Latin Letter

4 August Van Schurman Rivet 1634 (no. 7)

Thanks Rivet for his family’s welcome when she visited them.

11 Latin Letter

2 October Van Schurman Rivet 1634 (no. 8)

First mention of Voetius, who has invited her to study Greek and Hebrew with him.

12 Latin Letter

21 November 1634 (no. 9)

Van Schurman Rivet

Gives a glowing report of Voetius’s teaching.

13 Latin Letter

18 March 1635

Van Schurman Rivet

Has been studying with Voetius for six months. Reports on her meeting with Descartes.

14 Hebrew Poem

March 1635 Van Schurman Rivet

15 Latin Letter

13 November 1635 (no. 78)

Frédéric Rivet

16 Latin Letter

26 September 1636 (no. 13)

Van Schurman Rivet

A year and a half elapsed since her last letter. She thanks Rivet for his support on the imminent death of her mother.

17 Latin Letter

6 November 1637 (no. 14)

Van Schurman Rivet

Sends Rivet her letter on women’s education.

18 Latin Letter

18 March 1638

Rivet

19 Latin Letter

Van Schurman Rivet 14 / 24 March 1638 (no. 16)

Rivet

Sends Rivet a Hebrew cento to demonstrate her study of Hebrew. From Rivet’s youngest son, aged eighteen at the time.

Van Schurman Second extant letter from Rivet in reply to her letter on women’s education. Her reply to Rivet on women’s education.

Chronologies and Chronological Graphs 289 Date

Author

Addressee

Summary Content

20 Latin Letter

5 May 1638 (no. 15)

Van Schurman Rivet

21 Latin Letter

28 February Van Schurman Rivet 1639 (no. 20)

22 Latin Letter

27 April 1639 (no. 17)

Van Schurman Rivet

Includes her poem on the Virgin Mary and mentions Salmasius’s first letter to her.

23 Latin Poem

ca. 27 April 1639 (no. 56)

Van Schurman Rivet

Van Schurman’s poem on the Virgin Mary, which Rivet had requested.

24 Latin Letter

5 October 1639 (no. 18)

Van Schurman Rivet

Mentions a “return gift” for Madame Coutel and includes her reply to Marin Mersenne.

25 French Letter

20 October 1639 (no. 76)

Marie de Gournay

26 Latin Letter

12 December 1639 (no. 19)

Van Schurman Rivet

Informs Rivet of Madame Coutel, Gournay, Mr. Thoar, and the portraits Rivet requested.

27 French Letter

25 December 1639

Van Schurman Madame Coutel

Sends her a miniature selfportrait.

Date

Author

Summary Content

Expresses her deepest devotion to Rivet, and thanks him for one of his recent books. States that she has not yet seen a copy of the Amica Dissertatio. Mentions Rivet’s book on the Virgin Mary.

Van Schurman Gournay thanks Van Schurman for her praise poem and critiques the time she spends on learning languages.

1640s Addressee

28 French Letter

18 February Van Schurman Charles du Chesne 1640 (no. 77)

Thanks Du Chesne for publishing her Amica Dissertatio.

29 French Letter

28 February Van Schurman Marie de 1640 Gournay

Replies to Gournay and defends her study of Hebrew.

290 Appendix A Date

Author

Addressee

Summary Content

30 Latin Letter

13 April 1640 (no. 21)

Van Schurman Rivet

The first in a series of letters on the publication of the Amica Dissertatio.

31 Latin Letter

18 July 1640 (no. 22)

Van Schurman Rivet

Informs Rivet that Elzevier will publish a collection of their letters and asks him to make his available.

32 Latin Letter

4 October 1640 (no. 23)

Van Schurman Rivet

States that she will thank Salmasius for his book. Mentions Gournay’s offer of a mother-daughter alliance and includes two self-portraits.

33 Latin Letter

31 March 1641 (no. 24)

Van Schurman Rivet

Recalls that Rivet plans to travel to England with the Prince of Orange and her brother.

34 Latin Letter

17 June 1641 (no. 25)

Van Schurman Rivet

First mention of Salmasius’s On the Primacy of the Pope, and of the English Civil Wars.

35 Latin Letter

23 April 1642 (no. 26)

Van Schurman Rivet

First mention of Hugo Grotius.

36 Latin Letter

14 October 1642 (no. 27)

Van Schurman Rivet

Signals a new closeness with Rivet, who confides in her about his quarrel with Grotius. First mentions Pierre du Moulin’s illness, the troubles at Sedan, and Frederik Spanheim.

37 Latin Letter

19 November 1642 (no. 28)

Van Schurman Rivet

Defends Rivet against Grotius. Mentions Lady Dorothy Moore, whom she urges Rivet to befriend.

38 Latin Letter

20 January 1643 (no. 36)

Van Schurman Rivet

Continues her critique of Grotius and mentions Du Moulin’s illness.

39 Latin Letter

1 March 1643 (no. 37)

Van Schurman Rivet

Mentions Du Moulin and asks about the developing English Civil Wars.

Chronologies and Chronological Graphs 291 Date

Author

Addressee

Summary Content

40 Latin Letter

1 April 1643 (no. 29)

Van Schurman Rivet

Refers to Du Moulin’s protracted illness, the ongoing quarrel with Grotius, and Voetius’s quarrel with Samuel Desmarets over the Confraternity of the Virgin.

41 Latin Letter

31 May 1643 (no. 30)

Van Schurman Rivet

Tells Rivet that her brother will relay her urgent situation. She is waiting for Marie du Moulin.

42 Latin Letter

1 July 1643 (no. 32)

Van Schurman Rivet

Expresses her alarm over a French translation of her Dissertatio (1641); she does not know if the request came from Queen Anne of Austria or from Du Chesne.

43 Latin Letter

15 July 1643 (no. 31)

Van Schurman Rivet

Is alarmed at Du Chesne’s prospective translation. Rivet suggests that she write a new book in French with similar arguments.

44 Latin Letter

2 August 1643 (no. 33)

Van Schurman Rivet

Du Chesne drops the translation after Rivet asks Anne de Rohan to intervene with the queen.

45 Latin Letter

3 September 1643 (no. 34)

Van Schurman Rivet

Comments on Du Chesne’s request to know her birthplace and date. Says she was born on 5 November 1606 (sic).

46 Latin Letter

15 November 1643 (no. 35)

Van Schurman Rivet

Mentions a letter from Anne de Rohan. She is satisfied that Du Chesne has abandoned the idea of a translation.

47 Latin Letter

18 December 1643 (no. 42)

Van Schurman Rivet

Mentions the developing controversy over Amyraut’s defense of universal salvation, Du Moulin’s book on moral philosophy, and François Cupif.

292 Appendix A Date

Author

Addressee

Summary Content

48 Latin Letter

21 December 1643 (no. 40)

Van Schurman Rivet

Has resolved not to write to people she does not know.

49 Latin Letter

28 December 1643 (no. 41)

Van Schurman Rivet

Recommends the son of a friend, taught by Frederik Spanheim, who seeks a position at court.

50 Latin Poem

3 January 1644

Van Schurman Salmasius

Celebrates Salmasius’s return from France and forthcoming book On the Primacy of the Pope.

51 Latin Letter and Poem

6 May 1644 Van Schurman Rivet (no. 38) and ca. May 1644

Has lost hope of seeing Marie du Moulin again soon. Mourns the death of Meinardus Schotanus and includes her funeral ode on his death.

52 Latin Letter

6 August 1644 (no. 39)

Van Schurman Rivet

Comments on a “mournful poem” that Rivet has sent. Mentions Marguerite de Rohan, Du Moulin’s health, and Sedan.

53 Latin Letter

5 March 1645 (no. 45)

Van Schurman Rivet

Comments on Du Moulin’s book on moral philosophy, and on the National Synod at Charenton.

54 Latin Letter

14 August 1645 (no. 43)

Van Schurman Rivet

Mentions that her brother will bring Rivet a new version of her 1640 selfportrait, as well as Du Moulin’s improving health, and the rumor about Marguerite de Rohan.

55 Latin Poem

Undated, ca. Aug. / Sept. 1645 (no. 59)

Van Schurman On Grotius

Written after Grotius’s death on 28 August 1645, and the publication of his last work against Rivet.

56 Latin Letter

8 December 1645 (no. 44)

Van Schurman Rivet

Returns to the ongoing quarrels with Descartes, Grotius, and Amyraut.

Chronologies and Chronological Graphs 293 Date

Author

Addressee

Summary Content

57 Latin Letter

25 December 1645 (no. 46)

Van Schurman Rivet

Comments on Rivet’s move to Breda as Curator of its Academy, on Voetius’s account of the trial for defamation instigated by Descartes against him, and on Amyraut.

58 French Letter

27 September 1646 (no. 60)

Van Schurman Marie du Moulin

The first of four extant letters to Marie du Moulin.

59 French Letter

8 December 1646

Van Schurman Marie du Moulin

Welcomes the news of the convalescence of Pierre du Moulin, Marie’s father.

60 Latin Letter

24 February Van Schurman Rivet 1647 (no. 48)

61 Latin Letter

13 September 1647 (no. 47)

Van Schurman Rivet

Thanks Rivet for appraising a new version of her 1640 self-portrait.

62 Latin Letter

25 March 1648 (no. 49)

Van Schurman Rivet

Mentions the Amyraut controversy, the impending arrival in Utrecht of Utricia Ogle, and a letter from Guez de Balzac.

63 French Letter

3 April 1649 (no. 50)

Van Schurman Rivet

Mentions that Utricia is still at court mourning the execution of Charles I, as well as the ongoing quarrel between Desmarets and Voetius.

64 French Letter

3 April 1649 (no. 61)

Van Schurman Marie du Moulin

Letter penned the same day as the letter to Rivet (no. 63). Mentions Marie du Moulin’s progress in Hebrew.

Is pleased with Rivet’s uneventful move to Breda. Mentions the visit of an envoy from the duchesse de Longueville, whose husband is negotiating the Peace of Westphalia.

294 Appendix A Date

Author

25 July 1649 (no. 51)

Van Schurman Rivet

Mentions the death of Spanheim, and the refutations of Amyraut by Du Moulin and George Reveau.

Date

Author

Summary Content

66 French Letter

4 February 1650 (no. 53)

Van Schurman Rivet

Mentions the deaths of a family acquaintance, of Gerardus Vossius, and of Spanheim, as well as the forthcoming reconciliation between Du Moulin and Amyraut.

67 French Letter

12 June 1650 (no. 52)

Van Schurman Rivet

Last extant letter to Rivet, who dies six months later. Mentions that Elzevier will expedite her Opuscula to Valentin Conrart, and that Reveau is sending her his book on the siege of La Rochelle.

68 French Letter

13 March 1652 (no. 62)

Van Schurman Marie du Moulin

Thanks Marie for sending The Last Hours of Monsieur Rivet.

69 Latin Poem

Undated, ca. 1651 (no. 54)

Van Schurman On Rivet’s death

Rivet dies in Breda on 7 January 1651.

70 Latin Poem

Undated, before 1646 (no. 55)

Van Schurman Rivet

Written before Rivet moved to Breda, and while he was still governor of the Prince of Orange at The Hague.

71 Latin Letter

Undated, ca. 1648 /  1649 (no. 57)

Van Schurman Rivet

Written on the publication of the Opuscula, which she wished to send to Conrart.

72 Latin Entry

Undated (no. 58)

unknown

Pasted page written in a hand different than Van Schurman’s.

65 French Letter

Addressee

Summary Content

1650s Addressee

unknown

Chronologies and Chronological Graphs 295

Chronological Graphs of Van Schurman’s Letters and Poems Letters and Poems to and from Van Schurman and Rivet, 1631–1650 14

Number of Letters and Poems

12 10 8 6 4 2 0

Year

14

Van Schurman’s Letters and Poems to and from Rivet and Other Members of Her Circle, 1631–1652

Number of Letters and Poems

12 10 8 6 4 2 0

*The following two letters from van Schurman to Salmasius from Appendix C have been added to this graph: nos. 2 and 3.

Year

With Rivet

With Others

296 Appendix A

Chronology Anna Maria van Schurman’s Letters and Poems to and from Constantijn Huygens, 1633–1669 1630s Date

Author

1 Dutch Poem

1633 (no. 63)

Van Schurman [Huygens]

Addressee

Summary Content The poem points to the theorbo, an instrument close to the lute and especially favored by Huygens.

2 Latin Poem

1633

Van Schurman

Included on the cartouche of her 1633 self-portrait.

3 Latin Poem

2 October 1634

Huygens

4 Latin Poem

ca. October Van Schurman Huygens 1634 (no. 67)

5–14 Latin Poems

2–6 December 1634

Huygens

Van Schurman These ten poems in Latin, Dutch, French, and Italian feature Huygens’s reaction to Van Schurman’s 1633 self portrait (no. 2).

15 Latin Letter

30 June 1636

Huygens

Van Schurman First extant letter written after Van Schurman composed her poems on the founding of the University of Utrecht.

16 Latin Letter

3 July 1636

Huygens

Van Schurman Somewhat embarrassed, Huygens apologizes for the forward request in his previous letter (no. 15) that she find a way to love him.

17 Latin Letter

23 July 1636 (no. 64)

Van Schurman Huygens

Van Schurman First extant poem from Huygens to Van Schurman “so that she remains less hidden.” Since Huygens did not sign his poem (no. 3), Van Schurman playfully accuses him of hiding behind it.

Thanks Huygens for his critique of her Dutch poem on the inauguration of the University of Utrecht; refers to the failing health of her mother.

Chronologies and Chronological Graphs 297 Date

Author

Addressee

Summary Content

18 Latin Letter

10 April 1639

Huygens

Van Schurman Asks Van Schurman to critique his poetic collection, Dagh-werck (Day’s Work, 1638).

19 Latin Poem

ca. April 1639

Van Schurman Huygens

20 Latin Letter

26 August 1639

Huygens

Van Schurman Forwards to Van Schurman a letter by Marin Mersenne, who wants to correspond with her.

Date

Author

Addressee

21 Latin Letter

8 July 1647

Huygens

Van Schurman Promises to visit him in The Hague, where he will give her a copy of a work by the poet Janus Secundus.

22 Latin Letter

ca. December 1647

Huygens

Van Schurman Announces the imminent publication of his Pathodia sacra et profana.

23 Latin Letter

18 / 28 December 1647 (no. 65)

Van Schurman Huygens

24 Latin Letter

14 August 1648

Huygens

Van Schurman Urges her to welcome Maria Casembroot as a friend.

25 Latin Letter

ca. January 1649

Huygens

Van Schurman Challenges her to imitate a medal of Janus Secundus.

26–27 Latin Poems

1 and 11 January 1649

Huygens

Van Schurman Praises her on her study of Ethiopian.

28 Latin Letter

14 January 1649

Huygens

Van Schurman Visited her in Utrecht while she was studying Ethiopian. He sends her French medals to copy.

Replies with a quatrain highlighting Huygens’s marriage to Susanna van Baerle and complimenting him on his name and fame.

1640s Summary Content

Thanks Huygens for a copy of his newly published Pathodia.

298 Appendix A Date

Author

Addressee

Summary Content

29–30 Latin Poems

18 January Van Schurman Huygens (no. 74) and 18 February 1649

Replies with two poems on his amazement at her study of Ethiopian.

31 Latin Poem

18 February 1649

Van Schurman Huygens

32 Latin Poem

ca. January 1649

Huygens

33 Latin Poem

ca. January 1649

Van Schurman Huygens

Replies with three witty couplets on Huygens’s name and fame. Summary Content

Comments on her imitation of one of Secundus’s medals.

Van Schurman Plays on her fame and name.

1650s Date

Author

34 Latin Poem

16 July 1650 (no. 73)

Van Schurman Huygens

Addressee

35 Latin Poem

28 July 1650

Huygens

Van Schurman Comments on his various medals, which, he says, are not as worthy as her wax medal.

36 Latin Poem

29 July 1650

Huygens

Van Schurman Compliments her on her wax medal and fruitful artistry which bypasses the “marital bed.”

37 Latin Poem

11 March 1651

Huygens

Van Schurman Complains that she neither welcomed Maria Casembroot (letter 24) nor accepted his hospitality following the funeral of the Stadtholder William II.

38 Latin Poem

19 March 1651

Huygens

Van Schurman Sends her a print of the funeral of the Stadtholder Frederik Hendrik to indicate what she has missed.

39 Latin Letter

23 March 1651

Huygens

Van Schurman Is unhappy that she refused his invitation to his house at The Hague to see his museum.

Comments on her imitation of the double portrait of Henry IV and Marie de’ Medici by Dupré.

Chronologies and Chronological Graphs 299 Date

Author

Addressee

Summary Content

40 Latin Poem

11 May 1651

Van Schurman Huygens

41 Latin Letter

17 / 27 January 1653

Huygens

42 Latin Poem

31 January 1653 (no. 66)

Van Schurman Huygens

43 Latin Poem

5 September 1654

Huygens

44 Latin Poem

3 March 1656

Van Schurman Huygens

Thanks him for a book he has sent.

45 Latin Poem

1 February 1658

Van Schurman Huygens

Thanks him for another unspecified gift.

Date

Author

Addressee

Summary Content

46 Latin Poem

July 1660

Huygens

Van Schurman Warns Van Schurman of his impending visit to Utrecht to renew contact with her.

47 Latin Letter

5 December 1660

Huygens

Van Schurman Mentions his new translation of the psalms for use during Reformed Church services. He requests a polyglot sample.

48 Latin Letter

23 January 1661 (no. 68)

Van Schurman Huygens

49 Latin Poem

12 April 1661

Huygens

Replies to his letter and two poems on the funeral.

Van Schurman Sends her a Latin poem to translate into oriental languages. Quips in her reply that “Your one tongue is more than my one hundred.”

Van Schurman Van Schurman returns to Cologne to reclaim confiscated land. Hearing of her whereabouts from Utricia Ogle, he composes this triumphant poem on his discovery of her “hiding place.”

1660s

Advises Huygens on how best to introduce his new version of the psalms in church services.

Van Schurman Huygens’s epigram on the cartouche of Van Schurman’s engraved portrait by Cornelis van Dalen the Younger.

300 Appendix A Date

Author

Addressee

Summary Content

50 Latin Letter

13 June 1666

Huygens

Van Schurman Five years have elapsed since his last extant letter because of his mission to Orange (1661–65). He reminds her that she owes him a polyglot sample.

51 Latin Letter

22 June 1666 (no. 70)

Van Schurman Huygens

Welcomes him back from his mission and sends him a Tetrastichon she copied from the one by Johannes Elichmann.

52 Latin Letter

ca. June 1666 (no. 69)

Van Schurman Huygens

Her rushed note explains why she is sending him the Tetrastichon.

53 Latin Poem

Undated (no. 75)

Johannes Elichmann

Van Schurman Tetrastichon, composed for her by Elichmann in 1638.

54 Latin Letter

1 September 1666

Huygens

Van Schurman Refuses to release her from her obligation to provide her own polyglot sample.

55 Latin Letter

1 November 1666 (no. 71)

Van Schurman Huygens

56 Latin Letter

30 November 1666

Huygens

Van Schurman Thanks her profusely for her sample.

57 Latin Letter

7 October 1667

Huygens

Van Schurman Sends her a copy of his Dutch poem The Sea Road from The Hague to Scheveningen.

58 Latin Letter

4 November 1667

Van Schurman Huygens

Finally complies with Huygens’s repeated request for a sample.

Mentions caring for her sick friend, likely Catharina Martini, with whom she later joined the Labadist community. She comments on Huygens’ Koren-bloemen (Cornflowers) and indicates that she will no longer write to him.

Chronologies and Chronological Graphs 301 Date

Author

Addressee

Summary Content

59 Latin Letter

13 June 1669

Huygens

Van Schurman Asks her to welcome the wife of Jean Henri de Berckoffer.

60 Latin Letter

8 September 1669

Huygens

Van Schurman Requests comments on a poem and six art samples he sent her.

61 Latin Letter

10 September 1669

Huygens

Van Schurman Sends her his poem “To Some Preachers,” which he forgot to include with his previous letter.

62 Latin Letter

13 September 1669 (no. 72)

Van Schurman Huygens

Van Schurman’s last extant farewell letter to Huygens. A month later, she moves in with the Labadists in Amsterdam.

302 Appendix A

Chronological Graphs of Van Schurman’s Correspondence Letters and Poems from Anna Maria van Schurman to Constanjin Huygens, 1633–1669

Number of Letters and Poems

4

3

2

1

0

Year

Letters and Poems to and from Anna Maria van Schurman and Constantjin Huygens, 1633–1669 14

Number of Letters and Poems

12

10

8

6

4

2

0

Year

*The following ten poems from Huygens to van Schurman from Appendix B have been added to this graph: nos. 2, and 10 through 18. Poems 1 and 53 from Part 2 are excluded from this graph.

Appendix B Additional Poems by Constantijn Huygens and Caspar Barlaeus to and about Anna Maria van Schurman, 1635–1650 1. Caspar Barlaeus to Anna Maria van Schurman, ca. December 1634–early January 16351 Undated, this poetic joust on Van Schurman’s status as an unmarried learned woman was composed some time between December 1634 and early January 1635, when Barlaeus joked with Huygens in a series of poems about the latter’s attraction to her.

5 10

What Goddess was your parent? Was it Learned Carmenta,2 who bore you for the Batavians?3 And must nature bestow on a maiden The merits of men and the glory of learning? A young virgin, you ascend the heights of Apollo,4 We, men, are now stripped of our former praise, we are of no account, While you, a woman, surpass in genius our honors. Should I marvel or rather bewail this portent? Am I to say that Jove5 has erred? Or that in a wondrous way The image of man has changed its form? Another Sempronia6 is born to us, A better Sappho7 beneath the northern sky. Jupiter has raised from the earth a new Pallas,8 And a woman is the judge of ancient Athens.

1. First published in Poemata: Editio IV, altera plus parte auctior: Pars I: Heroicorum [Poems: Fourth edition, increased with a second part; Part I: Of heroes] (Amsterdam: Johan Blaeu, 1645); Van Schurman, Opuscula, 319–21. Since the Latin poems of Huygens and Barlaeus to each other and to Van Schurman are accessible online, we do not include them here. 2. A mythical poet-prophetess: Aeneid, 8:339–41. Barlaeus includes Van Schurman in a catalogue of ten women, which patterns itself on the canonical ten Attic Orators, a list of rhetoricians compiled between the third century BCE and the second century CE. 3. A name for the Dutch, derived from an ancient Germanic tribe. 4. God of light, divination, poetry, and music. 5. Jupiter, the Roman sky-god. 6. Sempronia, a Roman noblewoman and the first female writer of Latin poetry, who flourished around 60 BCE. 7. Greek lyric poetess, born in the seventh century BCE on the island of Lesbos. 8. An epithet of Athena, goddess of reason and wisdom in her role as goddess of war; she was said to have emerged fully armed from the head of her father, Zeus.

303

304 Appendix B But neither Latium nor Rome suffice for her, nor is it enough for her to  speak 15 In one tongue; such eloquence is too simple for this maiden’s desires. Greek writings (o gods!) does Anna read, connecting her Belgium with  Cecrops.9 Wonderful it was that ancient Corinna10 possessed the gift of writing, Yet, Anna, too, can write. Though rich in knowledge, Manto11 handed down her songs to past ages, 20 And the great Sibyls12 sang of great matters, So, too, is the power of Maria’s mind. With her [poet] husband, Polla13 was associated and helped him in his poetic inventions. And Maria would similarly help the studies of men If she were to get married. Why do you boast of the activities of  Netherlanders 25 And their war ships, and the wealth of their growing empire Under a great prince?14 Why boast of their renowned battles, The ships loaded with foreign goods, And their many cities with newly built walls sprawling hither and yonder? Here is a greater marvel: Batavia bestows on you 30 A rare name. This eloquent woman warrior15 stands Above all these titles and surpasses all empty pomp with her virtues. No longer is sex of any account.16 You, learned men, Share with this maiden a common intellect, our vilest part 9. A mythical first king of Attica, the state encompassing the city of Athens. Attica was sometimes called Cecropia after him. 10. Greek lyric poetess, described by Pausanias as a contemporary of her famous countryman, the poet Pindar (fifth century BCE); recent scholarship indicates that she flourished in the third century BCE. 11. A prophetess, daughter of the prophet Tiresias. In Roman mythology, her son founded the city of Mantua, named after her; she appears in Dante’s Divine Comedy (Inferno 20:52–56). 12. The ten canonical Sibyls, established by Varro in the first century BCE and transmitted to the Middle Ages by Lactantius and Isidore of Seville, were virginal prophetesses. 13. Polla Argentaria married the poet Lucan, a friend of Martial; see Vives, Education, 68, and Stevenson, Women Latin Poets, 48. Huygens referred to his wife as “the Polla of my pen”; see Davidson and Van der Weel, A Selection, 108. 14. A reference to the rise of the Dutch Republic and its provinces to economic dominance in Europe. The “great prince” is Stadtholder Frederik Hendrik, Prince of Orange. 15. Virago. An allusion to the Dutch Maiden, an androgenized national personification of the Netherlands originating in the Dutch Revolt against Spain. See Peacock, “The Maid of Holland.” 16. A phrase reminiscent of the concept that “the mind has no sex,” championed by the Cartesian philosopher François Poullain de la Barre (1647–1723) in De l’Egalité des deux sexes [On the Equality of the Two Sexes] (Paris: Jean du Puis, 1673); see Clarke, trans. and ed., The Equality of the Sexes, 119–200, at 157.

Additional Poems 305 Alone remains our own. We differ from her, alas, 35 Only in body; she shares with men her genius and her art And, doing what we know, she deserves to be called a man.17 What can I say that is worthy of you, o maiden? Your honorable learning Matches your chastity, and your chaste life Approves of your character. Submissive modesty bends your learned mind, 40 And reverence adorns your ingenious face.18 Who, fair one, will ascend your [bridal] couch as lover? On whom will you smile as his betrothed, and on what husband as his  bride? If Phoebus were to fall in love with Batavian women, He would abandon Daphne19 to take you, such a Goddess, as his wife. 45 Your dowry would then have so many arts, so much prudence and virtue. Your dowry would include your many languages, your grace, candor, Simplicity, and whatever the Muses would love to know. Anna, (for I will confess it),20 it is not your name alone That moves me and makes me a poet; but rather that 50 Virginity of yours that can bend great Jove himself, That is what I admire, and your honor,21 dear to the Muses, pleases me. I write this and confess that, should I be forced to speak in your presence, The poet’s words would surely hang in mid-air,22 Nor would my songs flow according to the customary rules.23 55 But if these please you less—and although your sex Prefers poems on kisses—you will think that I ought to keep them at  home. You will find another [man] if this Alexis24 displeases you.

17. Humanist catalogues promoted exemplary women perceived to have transcended their sex by acting intellectually like men. These women, called viragos and prodigies of nature, were ambiguously complimented for having a man’s mind in a woman’s body. 18. A variation on the trope of the “blushing face,” used in eulogies of learned women. 19. Daphne, a nymph, rejected the love of the god Apollo and fled from him, praying to the river-god Peneus, her father, for deliverance; she was thereupon changed into a laurel tree. 20. Fatebor, the same verb Huygens uses in one of his ten poems on Van Schurman’s 1633 self-portrait. See 2:10, which begins, “Anna, fatebor enim.” 21. Honestas. 22. He would be rendered speechless. 23. It is uncommon to write an erotic poem in praise of virginity. 24. A standard name in Latin pastoral poetry. See Virgil, Eclogues, 2.

306 Appendix B 2. Barlaeus to Huygens, 25 December 163425 Barlaeus penned this poem in reply to Huygens’s ten epigrams (2–15 December 1634, Part 2:5–14) on Van Schurman’s 1633 self-portrait depicted without hands.

On the Virgin of Utrecht, depicted without hands. To Constantijn Huygens Why has Anna depicted herself without hands? You want to know? Here is the reason, and an omen. Who was that girl who picked the forbidden fruit from that lovely tree? Eve, and she was accused of a grave sin on account of her hand.26 5 And who was that daring girl who exposed the failure of Sarah’s sterility? Hagar, and she was cast out by a vindictive hand. And Rebecca, to deceive father [Isaac], Had him feel Jacob’s hairy hands. When Rachel abandoned her fatherland and ancestral home, 10 She placed the household gods under a blanket, with her hand. And what about that wild, greatly spirited, and active man? Jael27 crushed his Martian head with her shattering hand. Lucretia fell on her own sword when, with her hand, She did on the marital bed what was not considered a crime..28 15 Often in a rape or a fight a hand commits sins. But it sins Especially when a hearer magnifies it into something indecent. That happens also when a stork goes the wrong way.29 Several Laodamias30 found death by their own hand. But your gentle little Anna,31 foreign to these daring deeds, 20 Would hate sin-committing hands. Yet perhaps such a virginal reincarnation of famous Seneca 25. Huygens, Gedichten, 2:304–5. 26. In lines 5–10, Barlaeus refers to episodes concerning women in Genesis 3, 16, 27, and 31. 27. Jael, the wife of Heber the Kenite, killed Sisera, the Canaanite general, by driving a tent peg into his temple, thereby crushing his head (Judges 4:17–21). 28. Lucretia, raped by Sextus Tarquinius, committed suicide. 29. Meaning, looks for signs. Although the stork was sacred to Juno and long a symbol of good fortune, fidelity, and especially fertility and childbirth, ‘a rich folklore’ also existed about its negative traits. Deformed or stillborn infants, for example, were said to be brought to families by storks as acts of vengeance. A Polish folktale relates that ‘God gave the stork white wings, while the Devil gave it black ones . . . because within it both good and evil impulses reside.’ ” See Marvin Margolis and Philip Parker, ‘The Stork Fable—Some Psychodynamic Considerations,’ Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association 20 (1972):494–511, especially 495–98. 30. In Greek mythology, Laodamia, daughter of Bellerophon, was shot by Artemis; another Laodamia killed herself after the death of her husband in the Trojan War. 31. Annula: a pun on Anna and anula (ring, signet).

Additional Poems 307 25 30

Sees that pure marble hands do not exist.32 And when the constellation Auriga33 is in mid-course, One sees it has no hands. So no need for hands in a portrait when the depiction is clear. The face indicates a good mind, so why have hands? Perhaps she wanted this and refused to follow Arachne,34 The weaver, and so had no need for hands. Perhaps there is a hand in her inborn talent, a right hand, Her mind owns fingers, too. We are being foolish: Anna does not want hands. The reason why? A virgin, she wants to touch no man.

3. Huygens to Van Schurman, 9 January 163535 A month following his ten epigrams on Van Schurman’s 1633 self-portrait (2:5–14), Huygens thinks that she ought to disengage herself from her studiously guarded conduct of virtuous retreat.36

The Sun is in the Maiden, I have not hidden it, Nor have I vainly hoped to hide her name in some obscure poem.   But I have pined away like a little speck, led on by her rays. The radiance that blots out the stars does not see the rising sun. 5 So, rise, and see how great a day37 is about to break.   Ask whether an eclipse38 is possible since the day has not yet risen. Rise, for this is something I have desired and continue to pray for, Rise and dispel the night and inspire the day with your day.

32. Seneca—one of Van Schurman’s favorite authors—was ordered by Nero to commit suicide even though he was not a participant in a plot to kill that Roman emperor. 33. “Auriga” means “charioteer,” and the constellation has been associated with a number of mythological figures. When one looks up at the constellation, however, one sees only the stars, not the chariot-driver associated with them (or of course his hands). 34. In Greek mythology, Arachne, a talented mortal, challenged Athena—goddess not only of wisdom but of handicraft—to a weaving contest. Enraged that Arachne’s work was more beautiful than her own, Athena transformed her into a spider. 35. Huygens, Momenta desultoria, 93; Gedichten, 2:306–7. 36. Worp, in Gedichten, 2:306n3, signals a second version that Huygens discarded; it is, indeed, ungrammatical and unfinished. 37. Sies (unknown) should be dies. 38. To hide her.

308 Appendix B 4. Barlaeus to Huygens, 11 January 163539 Barlaeus replies to Huygens’s previous poem (B3), joking that Van Schurman is not drawn to the “light” in Huygens and that Huygens must be freed from her attraction.

5

To Constantijn Huygens, Who Vainly Tried to Draw Anna Maria van Schurman Into the Light of the Sun When all of Titan40 hides in the Virgin, why do you want The Virgin’s glory to shine if there is no Sun?41 Rescue the immortal radiance in the learned maiden, Rescue the torches of fire she has from her inborn talent, Rescue Phoebus from Phoebus’s own heart,42 So that clear day may return Maria to the night. When sun and day hide, enclosed within the Virgin, Why is it surprising that she hides from your gaze? C. B. Amsterdam, 11 January

5. Huygens to Barlaeus, 10 January 163543 Following the previous octet poem (B4), Huygens indulges in a salacious exchange with Barlaeus over who was the first to “discover” Van Schurman and who consequentially “owned” her.

On the Preceding Epigram A new pleasure grabs me now, Barlaeus, though I am no bigamist: Forgive me? I have a thing going with this Virgin, Something that you are going to love and not censure. Our intercourse44 Occurs long-distance, and each of us is a parent bearing fruitful offspring.

6. Barlaeus to Huygens, ca. January 163545 Barlaeus replies that he has beaten Huygens, since he introduced Van Schurman to him and was the first to send her “a flattering poem” (see B1). 39. Huygens, Gedichten, 2:308. 40. Or the sun. 41. A gloss on the “eclipse” in Huygens’s poem to Van Schurman of 9 January 1635, line 6 (B3). 42. A reference to Huygens. 43. Huygens, Momenta desultoria, 93; Gedichten, 2:307. 44. “Intercourse” stands for both conversation and copulation. 45. Huygens, Momenta desultoria, 93; Gedichten, 2:307. Undated.

Additional Poems 309

5 10 15

On Having a Long-Distance Thing Going with a Virgin I do not begrudge you, my Constantijn, that You have something going with that illustrious Virgin of yours. I, myself, though no violator of love, Once upon a time had something going also with this very same Virgin. Behold, your Barlaeus beats you to the love punch, And Anna was already mine so many harvests ago. Too late, you got to Anna far too late. My libido was pricked ahead of yours. I touched her, yea, I touched her, but not as Mopsus touched Phyllis, Or Jupiter touched Asteria, or Cynthius touched Antiope.46 But, yet, I touched her, and pricked her, but with a flattering poem.47 No succubus or incubus here..48 Intact Is her virginity, the flame was innocent, and yet we consorted. Thus, we two are adulterers, Huygens, yet without sinning. But, upon my honor, I had intercourse with her first. Yours, speaking metaphorically C.B.

7. Huygens to Barlaeus, 15 January 163549 Huygens challenges the truth of Barlaeus’s first-come tale, saying that both men will not be able to conquer the “untamed Virgin.”



To the early-come adulterer. If you cannot stop mentioning all those kisses In your quatrain, you would scarcely keep my doubting trust. I have experienced the tell-tale signs of her chaste modesty, And how difficult it is to embrace an untamed Virgin.

46. Mopsus, a poet, sings of Phyllis in Virgil’s Eclogue 5; Asteria, a Titan goddess, was pursued by Jupiter across the heavens; Cynthius is an epithet of Apollo; Antiope, daughter of the Boeotian king Nycteus, is linked not to Cynthius (Apollo) but to Jupiter, who seduces her in the form of a satyr. 47. See Barlaeus’s poem to Van Schurman in B1. 48. The succubus is a female demon who appears in dreams to seduce men, usually through sexual activity; the incubus is her male counterpart. 49. Huygens, Momenta desultoria, 94; Gedichten 2:308. Worp, in Gedichten, 2:308n3, notes that another manuscript copy of this poem bears the title: “To Barlaeus, who wrote that he had consorted with A. Schurman before me and in another epigram that he had taken the Sun, hiding in the Virgin, away from her, when a four-line poem from her was sent to him.” This four-line poem from Van Schurman may have been the one included in Opuscula, 296: “To MR. BARLAEUS. What thanks shall I give you for such a wonderful gift? / Shall I reply to your poem with a poem of my own? / My reputation demands, if my impertinence can be forgiven, / That I write nothing to Barlaeus, so I will write nothing. / Neither silent nor replying. A.M.S.”

310 Appendix B 5

In the end, as lovers we are powerless, unless your further aid is given. Why give these warnings so late, Barlaeus? You are asking me to produce the Sun from an undomesticated body, What even a chemist cannot produce from a peevish poet?50

8. Barlaeus to Huygens, 17 January 163551 Barlaeus replies with two radically different poems written on the same day. The first poem continues the same salacious joking on how to draw Van Schurman into Huygens’s amorous orbit by turning her into his personal Muse (B8), while the second addresses Huygens with a moralizing intent on how to be content with what he already has, namely an important court position at The Hague, a happy marriage, and four sons (B9). Barlaeus thus playfully writes in the paradoxical tradition of utramque partem, the argument on both sides.

5

A Plea to, or Advice from, Athena on How to Draw Anna Maria van Schurman into the Light If you desire that manly huntress [Athena] to appear in the sunlight, And Anna to shine in broad daylight, Then you would see all the Muses together on the public stage And the Clarian Muses52 coming to your aid. So, consider this, the Muses of Helicon never hide in the darkness, And the great goddesses shine over the earth even more. Think about Pallas Athena, or fruitful Corinna’s verses,53 Think about the lyric mode perfected by your Sappho.

50. Quod Chijmicus nequit, a vate caco-chijmico? This last word comes from “cacochymia” as meaning “A depraved condition of the humors.” See Joseph Thomas, A Complete Pronouncing Medical Dictionary (Philadelphia: J.B. Lippincott Co., 1891). The modern word for “cacochymia” is “cacochymy,” which Webster’s Dictionary notes is an obsolete term meaning “an unhealthy condition of the humors of the body, especially of the blood.” Today we would use the term “dyspeptic,” which refers to both indigestion and ill humor. With thanks to Cheryl Lemmens for this reference. 51. Huygens, Gedichten, 2:308–9. This important poem is key to understanding Van Schurman’s apprehension of her fame, and how learned men objectified her. Barlaeus encourages Huygens to view Van Schurman as his own personal muse, who will make his work even better, in much the same way as authors from antiquity praised individual women as their muses. All the women cited in the poem stand behind famous male writers and poets. 52. Cf. Ausonius, Epigram 26, “On Augustus”: “whatever rest he has from hours of war, in camp he lavishes it all upon the Clarian Muses.” See Ausonius, Epigrams on Various Matters, trans. Hugh G. Evelyn White, in Ausonius, vol. 2 (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1921), 171. 53. Barlaeus’s catalog appears, with many of the same women, in his praise poem of Van Schurman (see B1). References here are to Pallas Athena; Corinna, whose victory over Pindar in a lyric contest is described by Pausanias; Sappho, a Greek poet from Lesbos; Aspasia, the mistress of Pericles, who wrote a famous oration on him; Cassandra, a prophetess; Queen Zenobia, a student of the philosopher

Additional Poems 311 You could object about how Aspasia consorted with the great Pericles, 10 Or object about Cassandra, or again, Zenobia, Or object about Deiphobus, and the words of the lively Sibyl. And consider this: how eloquent Polla was with Lucan, Or the poet Statius, who had Claudia whom he celebrated, And consider the companion of Crates who was his learned wife.54 15 When you select these women and hold them up as exemplars, She [Van Schurman] will want to be even more famous than they. Perhaps a new form of glory will set her mind aflame with desire. And she will want to be read even more often on the lips of learned men. Then, Huygens, you will draw forth from the Virgin the Sun enclosed   within her, 20 And you will become the father of the Sun, and she, its mother.

9. Barlaeus to Huygens, ca. 17 January 163555 Barlaeus warns Huygens that he should rest content with what he already has: a good job, a happy marriage, and four sons.

To Constantijn Huygens, a Poet of Good Taste and Good Humor, not Ill-disposed56 When your noble-minded restraint emerges from your splendid writing  desk, And the efficacy of your Muse whets the appetite of educated men, When your words bring discretion to the Batavian warrior57 And your hand prepares to write for the Prince of Orange, 5 When your soft kisses bring savory desire to your bride58 And Anna directs elsewhere her burning flame of love,59

Longinus; Athena, who took on the likeness of Deiphobus to urge Hector to fight in the Trojan War; and the Sibyls, virginal prophetesses. 54. References are to the learned wives of two famous Roman poets and the Greek comic poet, Crates. On Polla Argentaria, the wife of Lucan, see the note to B1. 55. Huygens, Gedichten, 2:309. Undated. Worp (2:309n1) indicates that this poem and the preceding one by Barlaeus to Huygens on 17 January 1635 (B8) are both side by side on the same page. 56. The last word of the title is caco-chijmicum. Barlaeus refers to Huygens’s line on the impossibility of even “a chemist” bringing change in a “peevish poet,” let alone a Van Schurman. See B7, line 8. 57. The Stadtholder Frederik Hendrik, for whom Huygens worked as secretary. 58. Susanna van Baerle. 59. A reference to Van Schurman’s passion for her studies and learning.

312 Appendix B 10

While you are fathering beautiful sons to a Barlaean wife60 With whom you could not sire any more [than you now have], You are sweet, a profoundly pleasing morsel of flavor, And a little box filled with a hundred wishes and desires. At that moment, your epigrams drip with a Latin nectar, And it seems to me you want to plead indisposition, Or, As I think, you want to be the spring and font of a better nectar.

10. Huygens to Van Schurman, 29 January 164561 Huygens sends Van Schurman a copy of his Holy Days (Heilighe daghen, 1645) with this accompanying epigram.

5

Aen Joffrouw Anna Maria Schurman, met mijn Heilighe daghen Siet niet suer, soete Maeghd, all vindt ghij mij op loghen, En mijn’ belofte valsch, en soo uw’ hoop bedroghen, All swoer ick lest, het was de leste moeylickheid Die ghij te lyden hadt; ’twas twijffeligh geseidt; ’Twas mier waer-achtigh waer. Penn en Geest, wild’ ick seggen, En souden u niet meer onlusts te voren leggen. Ick doe het woord gestand, dit ’s ’twerck van een van tween; De Penn en heeft geen’ schuld, hier spreeckt de Geest alleen.

5

To the Young Noble Woman Anna Maria van Schurman, With my Holy Days Do not look sour, sweet Maiden, if you find me to be a liar, And my promise false, and so your hope has been deceived, Though I swore recently it would be the last difficulty You would have to endure, it was said in doubt, I really meant it. Pen and Spirit, I wished to say, Would be bothersome to you no more. I stand behind my word, this is the work of one of the two, The Pen does not bear the blame, the Spirit alone speaks here.

60. Suzanna van Baerle, Huygens’s wife, whom he married on 6 April 1627, and who was mother to four sons in eight years. 61. Huygens, Gedichten, 4:29–30. There is no extant reply from Van Schurman. With thanks to Martine van Elk for refining the translation.

Additional Poems 313 11. Huygens to Van Schurman, 11 February 164562 On a visit to Utrecht, Huygens admired Van Schurman’s cabinet of curiosities.

On Anna Maria van Schurman’s Cabinet of Curiosities Containing Many Amazing Specimens Although claiming to be doing nothing, she has produced miracles just by playing, Although a Virgin ignorant of the marriage bed, she bears this offspring. Thus, visitor, what do you seriously think of the serious works of this Nymph When even her smallest side projects are so amazing?63

12. Huygens to Van Schurman, 28 December 164864 Huygens, on an official trip to East Frisia, penned over the course of a little over a week, from 28 December 1648 to 9 January 1649, four poems in his coach as he approached and left Utrecht. This first poem describes his refusal to “bother” Van Schurman when he passed through Utrecht at night.

To Van Schurman When I was sent to East Frisia and traversed Utrecht, without seeing her The Lord of Zuilichem commands Van Schurman to greet him. A nightly traveler entered the road by night, And a nightly traveler left it by night. Rejoice, be happy, because I was forced not to be a nuisance 5 As I wished to be. My coach sped along quickly, On speedy wheels I headed due North, So that you would know I came and fled at the same moment. The Northern zenith of heaven calls me, and the constellations Ursa   Major and Minor, too, Along with Boötes65 over land and sea, by which the night Watchman   rules the wild beasts. 10 Naso (may I not be compared with him,

62. Huygens, Gedichten 4:40. “In pinacothecam Schurmannae ipsius stupendis operibus instructam. Cum faceret nihil, haæ ludens miracula fecit, / Hanc sobolem thalami nescia virgo tulit. / Ergo tuam, peregrine, fidem, quid seria Nymphæ / ἔργα putas, cujus tanta πάρεργα vide.” 63. Huygens puns on ἔργα (deeds) and πάρεργα (side deeds). 64. Huygens, Gedichten, 4:141–42. The County of East Frisia was in the northwest of the present-day German State of Lower Saxony. Huygens left on a mission on 26 December and returned to The Hague on 12 January 1649. On the first night of his trip, he resided in Utrecht. 65. Boötes, a Northern constellation meaning “plowman” (literally, “ox-driver,” from βοῦς, “cow”).

314 Appendix B 15 20 25 30

Unless, of course, I am compared on grounds of his terrible destiny),66 You know of Naso’s frigid fate, As you imagine me among the natives of Tomis and harsh Getae67 Approaching the shore of the Black Sea Except, perchance, for the fact that approaching you is met instead With a sweet sound, known only by its name, Dawn. But should I turn around and leave behind those constellations, And Getae, Tomis, and Thrace,68 really the entire North, and fly toward what I am fleeing from now? Make no mistake, that would be no trouble, Indeed, it would be the contrary. I would see Van Schurman, But only to hear that you would confess for sure That you were no Cato leaving the theater so soon.69 Why, then, if this is to be the tone of our exchange, Does the Lord of Zuilichem ask Van Schurman to greet him? But I am lying to you, my Maiden, There is one small thing I want to add. Goodbye. If, perchance, I was the sort of man you could fear, You can relinquish that fear entirely. You understand what everyone else, and no one else understands, Why someone from Zuilichem much prefers to Say Goodbye than to say Hello. In my coach between Swollam and Drunen,70 28 December

13. Huygens to Van Schurman, 7 January 164971 On approaching Utrecht upon his return journey, Huygens penned the next three poems while riding in his coach. 66. A reference to the poet Publius Ovidius Naso (or Ovid), who was banished by Emperor Augustus to Tomis, on the Black Sea. 67. Tomis is the historical name of Constanţa in present-day Romania. While in exile there, Ovid wrote letters in which he described the inhabitants, particularly the Indo-European tribe known as the Getae: “Harsh voices, grim faces, surest indication of their minds . . . Among such men, alas! your bard is living.” See Tristia, trans. Arthur Leslie Wheeler, rev. G. P. Goold (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1988), 5.15–16, 18–19. 68. The region that now encompasses parts of Bulgaria, Greece, and Turkey, south of Ovid’s place of exile in Tomis. 69. Huygens later accused Van Schurman of playing the role of a female Cato when she left the funeral of William II, thereby refusing his hospitality at his house in The Hague (23 March 1651, 2:39). 70. Zwolle is the capital of Overijssel, a province in the northeastern Netherlands; Drunen is a town in the province of North Brabant, in the southern Netherlands.  71. Huygens, Gedichten, 4:143.

Additional Poems 315 To Van Schurman, again Behold, “Greetings Van Schurman,” and “Farewell Van Schurman,” this  traveler Will say, at last he is here by day.72 Do not fear, the Batavian Constanter remains true to his promises, He has a winged foot, that is how he travels. 5 And why not? If, perchance, this greeting is too long for a woman on the   verge of fear, My address will not seem so threatening.73 Of course, when I say “goodbye” on my journey, I am really saying Be well, always, everywhere, completely, and in Hebrew, goodbye. On my coach between Assen and Beilen,74 7 January

14. Huygens to Van Schurman, 8 January 164975 Huygens likely had in mind Van Schurman’s 1640 portrait, which became the frontispiece of her Opuscula.



On Van Schurman’s Self-Portrait So, you are admired soberly as a miracle of your sex, Whether a man or a woman is looking at you. Does this one maiden76 merely surpass other maidens in a single virtue? No, in fact, this one maiden also surpasses all men in all the virtues. Between Beilen and Zwolle, 8 January

15. Huygens to Van Schurman, 9 January 164977

On Van Schurman’s Cabinet of Curiosities Since my fate is rushing toward me (and may yours be far off yet), As soon as Anna ends her life, she should Bequeath those art works she owns to those of us with great names. Remember, vain glory does not raise up the living in a tomb.

72. The last time Huygens was in Utrecht, it was at night, as he was passing through. See the previous poem (B12). 73. Huygens’s visit to Van Schurman would be too brief to bother her. 74. Beilen is a village in the province of Drenthe, south of Assen. 75. Huygens, Gedichten, 4:144. 76. Puella, meaning girl. 77. Huygens, Gedichten, 4:145.

316 Appendix B 5

Quite the contrary, those living are razed78 by the tomb. Although she may not be alive, she will live on.79 Zwolle, 9 January

16. Huygens to Van Schurman, 6 September 165080 To Van Schurman Behold, Maiden, some yearly bad news Which troubles the Muses, and Huygens, too. What cannot be avoided must be endured with patience, What is not gentle for an inexperienced person is burdensome. 5 So here it is. Say about me what a certain great man Proclaimed about death with such clear words: the pain of death, He said (and you know who said this), is that If I can endure it, it’s light, and if I can’t, it’s brief.81 Riding between Putten and Amersfoort82

17. Huygens to Van Schurman, 9 October 165083 A month later, Huygens passes through Utrecht again on his way back from a trip to the court at The Hague. He vows that he will not disturb Van Schurman’s tranquility with a visit.

Tremble, Nymph, and as if struck by a thunderbolt,   Shrink at the evident signs of a new scourge.84 The Noble Hague orders Huygens to its august court, a lightweight   To his Fatherland. Having ended his journey, he reaches Utrecht’s   Athena 5 And the households nearest to her Athenaeum.   But do you think that upon entering and drawing closer now, I will trouble you, o my neighbor, with my presence?   Fear not, rest easy. Fortune guarantees you the gods’ favor, 78. A pun on pasca (raise) and pascantur (razed). 79. A reference to the immortality provided by the poet in exegi monumentum (“I have raised a monument more permanent than bronze”); see Horace, Odes, 3:30. 80. Huygens, Gedichten, 4:239. 81. Huygens at times quoted from his own writings. 82. Putten is a town in the central province of Gelderland; Amersfoort is a town in the province of Utrecht. 83. Huygens, Gedichten, 4:239–40. 84. A reference to the illness of William II.

Additional Poems 317 And you may fully enjoy your leisure time with the Muses. 10   Whether modesty or reverence for a great empire guides him, You will know that Huygens (he will leave it at that),   As soon as he came, left again.   Between Utrecht and Doorn,85 9 October

18. Huygens to Van Schurman, 10 October 165086 Huygens could not resist the occasion to see Van Schurman. He invited her to organize a musical soirée with, as guests, Utricia Ogle and her husband Sir William Swann, her brother Johan Godschalk, and Voetius. But the event did not take place. Either Van Schurman did not organize it, or the continuing illness of William II and his ensuing death prevented Huygens from coming.

To the Same I recently fled, whether because of shame or a greater power, I do not know. If I think about it, though, it is both. But now both the shame and the power are far away, As well as the golden shackles of responsibilities at court. 5 My feet are free to go where they like. I follow Wherever the Fates lead me, and the wind and breeze carry me. And, O, how I would follow the Fates and the favorable winds, If I were to follow, however often, and wherever I would like to go. O, my Muse, forgive the trouble I am causing to your Muses! 10 Your pain will either be light, or brief, as I have suggested. If the gods are favorable to your prayers, Then to us two, my Swann would join us as the third, The fourth will be Mr. Swann, perhaps Voetius would like to join As the fifth, and your brother as the sixth. 15 Do not command a seventh tongue or a seventh ear To come;87 the orchestra we six will form is more than enough. And if my Songs have any power at all, I will make you say, “Good Heavens, how light is my pain, how brief my grief!” Between Rhenen et Arnhem,88 10 October

85. Doorn, a town in the province of Utrecht, originally called “Thorhem” by Viking travelers because Thor, the god of thunder, was worshipped there. 86. Huygens, Gedichten, 4:240. 87. Huygens does not want a seventh guest since he has paired up with Van Schurman. 88. Rhenen, a city in the central Netherlands; Arnhem, the capital of the province of Gelderland, in the eastern part of the Netherlands.

Appendix C Additional Letters to, from, and about Anna Maria van Schurman, 1636–1782 1. Caspar Barlaeus to Constantijn Huygens, 30 April 163689 Barlaeus jokes with Huygens about Van Schurman as an androgynous being.

[To my Lord. My Lord Constantijn Huygens, Lord of Zuilichem and Secretary of his Princely Excellency. Living on the Houtstraat,90 The Hague] Most noble and illustrious man, To your charming and extraordinarily witty epigram,91 I have scarcely anything to add. I fear, of course, that I am going to hear from you again about your piece “Early-come Adulterer [. . .],”92 or something in that vein. Namely that Anna is Anna, and that she is also Annaeus,93 both male and female, truer than a prodigy, and like a hermaphrodite, and a well-known virgin. If you want nothing to be removed, and something to be sewn on, wouldn’t you be turning a virgin into an androgyne? If the god of love were to see such a specimen, he would be ashamed and annoyed at such a spectacle. Let such an Aphrodite marry herself, and such a Hermes marry himself.94 As for me, certainly, may she serve as a remedy and a 89. Leiden University Library, Hug. 37 (Barlaeus), 107; Briefwisseling, 2:164, no. 1382; Duizend brieven over muziek van, aan en rond Constantijn Huygens, , in the section “Muziekbrieven 1636.” 90. Huygens’s house was on the Hoogstraat. He included several poems on this street in his Haga vocalis (Momenta desultoria, 1655). See Huygens, Stemmen van Den Haag, 43, 47. 91. Huygens, Dialogus cum Barlaeo, in verba carminis quod Schurmannae inscripserat (“Dialogue with Barlaeus, on the words of the poem that he wrote to Schurman”), composed on 25 April 1636, in Huygens, Gedichten, 3:1–2. Huygens’s piece reads: “HUG. Would Jupiter deprive this maiden of the lighter sex? Are you asking for this? BARL. It is your prayer that seriously suggests that Anna become Annaeus. HUG. Indeed. Annaeus and Anna, a He-She. BARL. I ask that nothing be eliminated, but rather sewn on a Ms. to Annaeus and a Mr. to Anna; may the mother of love as the matron of honor marry her off to Hermaphrodites. HUG. Such a prudent prayer, Barlaeus, on behalf of this virgin who will not attain learning unless she begets herself.” Huygens’s piece is a reply to Barlaeus’s In masculos versus Annae Mariae Schurman, quibus Trajectinae urbi novum Academiae decus gratulatur (“On the masculine verses of Anna Maria van Schurman, with which the city of Utrecht is congratulated on the new Academy”), in Barlaeus, Poemata, 4th ed. (Amsterdam: Johan Blaeu, 1645), 2:173–74. A portion of Barlaeus’s poem was included in Van Schurman’s Amica Dissertatio (1638). 92. See Appendix B7. 93. A pun also sounding like Aeneas, mythical hero of Troy and Rome. 94. Aphrodite, Greek goddess of love, beauty, pleasure, and procreation; Hermes, Greek god of oratory and wit, literature and poetry, trade and travelers.

319

320 Appendix C coolant for your love, for she is what she always was [unmarried], and may she become what she was not earlier [may she marry]. If it were up to me, let her beget herself and know herself! And if it pleases Philosophers, may whatever happens happen, but happen by someone else. That is my wish and opinion, that Jupiter should remove something and sew on something else, so that Anna becomes what once happened to that girl Iphis in Ovid: With no whiteness left in her complexion, With additional strength, and sharper features, And shorter, less elegant hair; showing more vigor than women have. She who was formerly a girl, is now believed to be a man.95 Why would I want her to become a man? The reasons are many. First, her verses are those only men can write. Second, there will be no danger that a good man would become inflamed with love for her, nor would he fall in love with another man, Nor, indeed, would a bull fall for a bull, Or horses fall in love with other male horses, Rather, rams burn with love for sheep, and the doe pursues the buck, This is how birds mate, and the same is true for all animals, Such that no male is seized by love for another male.96 Third, access to her would be much freer and easier, since she is afraid of kisses, and she allows herself to be greeted and beheld as if she were the Empress of the Ottomans. Fourth, if she were a man, she would be able to listen to her professors’ lectures more securely and sit among other students of her own sex. Now, however, bashful, she listens to her professors teach through a little window or a little opening in such a way that she cannot be seen by some daring young man who is trying to catch sight of her.97 Fifth, if she were a man, she would be able to openly profess her poetic work, in which she excels, and the writings in Hebrew which she can read without the aid of vowels, under the guidance of Foot Doctor [Voetius].98 Sixth, if she were a man, she could guide the rudder of a republic and 95. Ovid, Metamorphoses, 9.786–91. According to the myth, Iphis’s parents, who were expecting a child, were too poor to afford a dowry. Iphis’s father then decided that if his wife gave birth to a daughter, he would abandon the child. Iphis’s distraught mother was visited by the Egyptian goddess Isis, who promised her help. Iphis was born a girl, but her mother raised her as a son. Iphis fell in love with a young woman, Ianthe. On the day before they were to marry, Iphis’s mother brought her to the temple of Isis, where the goddess transformed Iphis into a man, enabling him to marry Ianthe. 96. Ovid, Metamorphoses, 9.731–34. Underlined in the original. Barlaeus changes the gender in Ovid from female to male. 97. Van Schurman began attending lectures at the University of Utrecht, seated in a small closet-like space. 98. Doctore Pedio. Voetius, or Voet, means foot in Dutch. Barlaeus shows an irreverent humor toward Voetius.

Additional Letters 321 she could teach by example, namely that the republic is sometimes better ruled by one who was once formerly a woman than always by men. But, my dear Huygens, let these things be kept as jokes between just the two of us. Indeed, it would not honor this extremely serious and extremely honorable virgin for more people to know these jokes; so, let us fully enjoy honoring her name. One should not speak irreverently about the gods and even less about the Vestal Virgins. If I were Mars, what happened to Rhea could hopefully be happening to him: namely that she bore Romulus and Remus, the founders of a great city and people.99 And now that I have only just recently become free to [re]marry,100 And have fought gloriously for my seven children, These arms and, although it is worn out in battle, My lyre, will hang on this wall.101 But then this line from Pindar says it all: Have the ways of men ever been changed?102 Farewell, most renowned, most learned, and most humane of friends, “however many there are, however many there were, and however many there will be.”103 30 April 1636.

2. Van Schurman to Salmasius (Claude Saumaise), 28 May 1639104 Van Schurman thanks Salmasius for the pactus (“alliance”) he offered her. See her letter on 27 April 1639 (no. 17, 1:22), in which she informed Rivet for the first time of Salmasius’s correspondence with her. She mentions Madame Coutel for the first time.

Anna Maria van Schurman greets the Most Noble Gentleman, CLAUDIO SALMASIUS. 99. Rhea, a Vestal Virgin, was impregnated by Mars and bore twins. Barlaeus implies in his crude sexual joke that Van Schurman should follow Rhea’s example. 100. Barlaeus’s wife died on 19 June 1635, leaving seven young children to his care. 101. A play on Horace, Odes, trans. James Michie (New York: Washington Square Press, 1963), 3:26, lines 1–4: “In love’s wars I have long maintained / Good fighting trim and even gained / Some glory; but now lyre / And veteran sword retire.” 102. Pindar, Olympian Odes 8:61. At age fifty-one, Barlaeus courted Maria Tesselchade Roemers Visscher (1594–1649), a poet and engraver, and the widowed daughter of the poet Roemer Visscher. She showed no interest. On Barlaeus, see F.F. Blok, Caspar Barlaeus: From the Correspondence of a Melancholic (Assen: Van Gorcum, 1976), 53. 103. Catullus, Poem 49, lines 2–3. Barlaeus ends with joking lines from Catullus at the expense of Cicero. 104. Van Schurman, Opuscula, 177–78.

322 Appendix C You have expressed a great opinion of my current studies, Noblest of Gentlemen, and have almost forgotten the weight of your own name and splendor, when you were so eager to show me kindness; you deserve a further inquiry into my studies. In fact, as I dared to gaze upon your friendship, nothing greater stood in the way than the deep sense I have of my own limitations. But because of your obvious humanitas, it is clear to you that I have openly admitted to professing such a great treasure [as your friendship]; of course, you have invited others as well to share your friendship, since your heroic virtue is more than enough to draw others into a life of culture and a love for you. In addition to all this, I venerate in silence your many talents, and have heard that you are not holding back from dispensing your precious gifts. This is one instance of your outstanding gifts which you are not slow to impart to your friends. Thus, I cannot help but pursue with a grateful spirit this outstanding favor of your character. I embrace this splendid state most greedily, but confess that should all these things be revoked upon their reckoning,105 and, indeed, should you want a guarantee from me concerning, as it were, this alliance,106 no account of a broken pledge would be necessary between us. For your happiness demands nothing else, because it can be gained through communication with others and not just by taking from them. Cicero makes on this point a good comparison: “A man is fortified by virtue and wisdom in such a way that he needs nothing else, he judges his own affairs to be within himself alone: in the same way, he stands out for cultivating and seeking out friendships.”107 The gift from that noblewoman was very pleasing to me.108 If only there were a return gift109 that I could give you which could pass as a repayment to express my gratitude. I am sending you a sample of this, but it is lacking my usual finishing touches. I ask you earnestly that you pass on this gift to her together with the expression of my gratitude. I understand from my Brother that you were dangerously ill. But we are relieved because good health110 has returned to you. I beg and pray that divine power continue to keep you safe for a long time. We ourselves enjoy a tenuous health all the time. Farewell and stay well, most outstanding of Men, together 105. In Greek. 106. Pactus, “pact” or “alliance.” 107. Cicero, De Amicitia, trans. William Armistead Falconer (Cambridge, MA.: Harvard University Press; London: William Heinemann, 1946), chap. 9, section 30: “For to the extent that a man relies upon himself and is so fortified by virtue and wisdom that he is dependent on no one and considers all his possessions to be within himself, in that degree is he most conspicuous for seeking out and cherishing friendships.” 108. Reference to Madame Coutel, a friend of Salmasius and an artist. 109. In Greek. 110. In Greek.

Additional Letters 323 with your most noble Wife,111 to whom I send my greetings with an eager spirit. Utrecht, 5 days before the Kalends of June 1639.

3. Van Schurman to Salmasius (Claude Saumaise), 14 December 1639112 Van Schurman thanks Salmasius for his gift of one of his books and refers again to the adjudication between her and Madame Coutel’s portraiture. She mourns the death of Johannes Elichmann.

Anna Maria van Schurman greets the Most Noble Gentleman, CLAUDIUS SALMASIUS. For some time now, Illustrious Gentleman, an utterly trustworthy friend had given me the sure hope of your arrival in our city, and this offered me the occasion to reflect on my duty. But then I learned that a critically important reason has deprived us of such a great happiness. And now that I have the opportunity, I have decided to take care of this personally and most diligently through a letter, so that a longer delay does not by chance make me guilty of an undutiful silence. Your gift seemed to require a very prompt expression of my good will and because of its excellence you are worthy to adorn my library. For you judge the nature of my gratitude not just by the solemnity of my words, but also by the promptness of my intention. I am confident that I have thanked you quickly enough with the gratitude which I have always had and will continue to have. Additionally, when Madame Coutel’s work is soon referred to your judgment, I will also send you my attempt at painting for whatever it is worth. And I urge you to send these along to that same person at your earliest convenience. I do not want you to think that I have stooped to this kind of contest of the art of Apelles113 and that I ambitiously strive to appear glorious; but since by your auspices I am being dragged into this arena, I want to align myself more with 111. Anne Mercier, Madame Saumaise (1602–?), who married Salmasius in 1623. Although maligned for her supposedly difficult character, she was highly respected by Van Schurman, perhaps because she came from an illustrious scholarly family; she had grown up in a household academy and was likely learned. Anne was the daughter of the French Huguenot philologist Josias Mercier, Seigneur des Bordes, and the granddaughter of the Christian Hebraist Jean Mercier, who taught at the Collège de France. The Mercier family was closely related to the humanist educator Jean de Morel, whose three daughters Camille, Diane, and Lucrèce were famous savantes. Anne’s grandmother was Marie Dallier, daughter of Antoinette de Loynes, Jean de Morel’s erudite wife. On Mercier, see Roger Zuber, “Le livre de famille de Josias Mercier, ” in Jean (ca. 1525–1570) et Josias (ca. 1560–1626) Mercier: l’Amour de la philologie à la Renaissance et au début de l’âge classique, ed. François Roudaut (Paris: Honoré Champion, 2006), 178–89. 112. Opuscula, 186–88. 113. A reference to the renowned Greek painter Apelles of Kos, who flourished in the fourth century BCE.

324 Appendix C compliance than with fame. I am going to pass over these honors which you strain to give me altogether too foolishly but also certainly too kindly, contending that the palm is owed to me from the other sex. No one would deny that you are the Leader114 of the Republic of Letters; still I think that there are quite a few who would swear that you would be the best judge in this area than allow themselves to be condemned to so inglorious a lot. As for the death that befell that most erudite gentleman Elichmann,115 it can scarcely be stated how much grief I felt on that occasion, together with the loss that this brought for the larger public in the cultivation of polished letters (for who has been able to reveal to us the sacred space of Oriental wisdom more than he has) as well as for the favorable conditions that I promised myself for my own personal studies—and I do not say this rashly—from his splendid brilliance. But nothing in life is as certain as that uncertain hour that brings the end of mortal life! Farewell, worthy Sir, and send greetings in my name to your most noble wife.116 Utrecht, the day before the Ides of December [14 December] 1639.

4. Voetius to Huygens, 8 March 1641117 Voetius thanks Huygens for sending his Use or Non-Use of the Organ in the Churches of the United Netherlands (1641). In return he sends him a copy of Van Schurman’s 1640 self-portrait (See Figure 2).

I have received two copies of your work on the Use or Non-Use of the Organ, one of which I passed on to the most noble Van Schurman. She herself thanks you for the gift of your book, and I thank you too, as much as I can. I would have wanted to express my judgment of it thoroughly, but unfortunately other tasks intervened in addition to those that are weighing on me right now, and I will have to keep the whole matter, as it is, for a more thorough discussion for some other time. I am sending you here a portrait of our Van Schurman, if by chance you have not seen it, which she herself painted and engraved, together with some short verses118 with which she tried to delay Schotanus119 when he recently visited, 114. Dictatorem. A magistrate of the Roman Republic appointed to oversee an emergency or to undertake a specific task. 115. Johannes Elichmann had sent a tetrastichon (no. 75, 2:53) to Van Schurman in 1638. 116. Anne Mercier, Madame Saumaise. 117. Huygens, Briefwisseling, 3:157, no. 2670. Latin letter. 118. The distich to Van Schurman’s 1640 self-portrait is by Van Schurman: Cernitis sic picta, nostros in imagine vultus: / Si negat ars formam, gratia vestra dabit (“See my features portrayed in this image. / If art denies beauty, then your favor will grant it”). (See Figure 1). 119. Bernardus Schotanus (1598–1652), younger brother of Meinardus Schotanus and professor of law and mathematics who became Utrecht University’s first rector magnificus. He moved to Leiden

Additional Letters 325 but in vain. I beg that God may guide you with his spirit so that you may go on advancing and adorning your work by showing a rare and admirable example of true wisdom and eternal piety in places and centuries to come. Utrecht, 8 March 1641.

5. Gabriel Naudé to Johan van Beverwijck, 21 June 1642120 Gabriel Naudé, Cardinal Mazarin’s chief librarian, applauds Van Beverwijck’s praise of Van Schurman and mentions Marie de Gournay’s keen interest in her.

Gabriel Naudé sends greetings to the most distinguished gentleman, JOHANNES BEVEROVICIUS. I have undertaken during the harshest time of the year a very difficult journey into France from Italy, where I have been treated most kindly over the last ten years. That most bitter misfortune, which comes from the most blessed remembrance of Maecenas,121 my Cardinal from Bagno,122 never comes to my mind without causing me great grief. So, the causes are legitimate, in my judgment at least, as to why I have not been able to answer the letters which you wrote to me often during this period.  But I was not ashamed that so many travels and so many delays to my work, which were longer than they should have been and have kept me in your debt, have delayed me quite unwillingly.123 Therefore, as soon as it was allowed for me to return to the service of the Muses, a certain bookseller friend of mine thought that the eulogy of that most well-read Maiden, Anna Maria van Schurman, recommended to me by the most cultured poet Domenico Gilberto,124 should be published in his own type. I did not think I should be the one—once the chance presented itself (advantageously, I thought)—to reveal to everyone just how deeply I was indebted to your incredible kindness, the fruits of which I still feel growing more abundant every day. I should also confess just how great it is—and others take this as a debt already paid—that University in 1641. Van Schurman wrote a Latin poem on his departure. See Van Beek, “ ‘Pallas Ultrajectina’,” 58. 120. Letter in Domenico Gilberto da Cesena, La Fama trionfante: Panegyrico alla bellissima, castissima, e dottissima Signora Anna Maria Schurman (Rome: n.p., 1642). Transcribed in Schotel, 2:103–5. Naudé (1600–1653) was Mazarin’s librarian of state and founder of the discipline of library science. 121. Gaius Maecenas (ca. 70–8 BCE), a Roman patron whose name has become the eponym for a “patron of the arts.” 122. Cardinal Nicolò Guidi de Bagno (1583–1663), see Gaetano Moroni, Dizionario di erudizione storico-ecclesiastico, vol. 33 (Venice: Tipographia Emiliana, 1845), 201, and René Pintard, Le libertinage érudit dans la première moitié du XVIIe siècle (Geneva: Slatkine, 1983), 206–8. 123. On Naudé’s travels throughout Italy, see Gabriel Naudé, Lettres à Jacques Dupuy (1632–1652), ed. Philip Wolfe (Edmonton: Lealta / Alta Press, 1982). 124. Gilberto da Cesena, an Italian poet, dates unknown.

326 Appendix C you, a physician, look after the most precious thing in the world: health. Or that you, a lover of letters, uncover treasures of the most elegant word-usages; or, finally, that you, a historian, study carefully all the ruins of the ancient world, and do not cease to be a man of great productivity. But I will say no more on this topic for fear that I appear to be doing you an injustice, were I to explain, in a public announcement of this sort, the immensity of the reasons to praise you, as if they were not already thoroughly evident to all good people, and as if I were bringing your many talents from obscurity (as it were) into the light of day. Therefore, I am working hard to reveal my true feelings so that you do not assume that my great affection for you and complete devotion to you are just a product of my rhetoric rather than my sincerity. This is not hard to do now, since you know full well that I must repay your kind deeds toward me. By Hercules! let me call the most trustworthy witnesses to this fact. Take, for example, Famianus Strada,125 Marin Mersenne,126 Fortunio Liceto,127 René Moreau,128 Guy Patin,129 and John Francis Slingeland,130 who contributed some great and lasting chapters [to your book], with which I frequently converse.131 They have brought me great joy not only because of how pleasant it is to recall your outstanding learning and your willingness to discuss everything, but also because of how pleasing it is to recall the virtues that are absolutely remarkable in the most noble Maiden, Anna Maria van Schurman. All these conversations have become by far the most pleasing aspects of life and a daily experience. But you, Van Beverwijck, have had another distinguished follower, whether as a witness to my regard for you or as a herald of your virtues and those of Anna Maria, in the person of Guillaume Colletet, a poet who, for some time now, is the most refined writer in France, and he is by far the best.132 For just as this man’s skills surpass Anna Maria in every discipline which can be practiced blamelessly 125. The Jesuit Famianus Strada (1572–1649) published De Bello belgico (Rome: Francesco Corbelletti, 1632), covering the years 1555–78. This text was often re-edited until 1640, and translated into French in 1644 by Pierre du Ryer. 126. Marin Mersenne (1588–1648), French polymath. On his vast network of correspondents, see the Introduction. 127. Fortunio Liceti (1577–1656), professor of medicine and philosophy at Padua, whom Naudé often visited. 128. René Moreau, professor of anatomy at Paris, taught Naudé in the 1620s. 129. Guy Patin (1601–1672), physician and close friend of Naudé. 130. The Flemish John Francis Slingeland, whom Naudé met in Italy. See Pintard, Libertinage, 248. 131. A reference to Johan van Beverwijck’s Epistolica quæstio de Vitae termino, fatali an mobili? (Leiden: Le Maire, 1639), a collective three-part volume on the end of life in which Van Schurman participated. 132. Guillaume Colletet (1598–1659), a member of the French Academy, literary historian, and polygraph. On his translation of Van Schurman’s and Rivet’s letters on the education of women, see Larsen, Star of Utrecht, chap. 4.

Additional Letters 327 by noble men—and everyone knows this—even so, he, too, sings her praises. I remember that when I had bumped into him recently in his charming suburban house,133 he had been engaged in a conversation about Nature’s remarkable providence. The nearly retired Marie de Gournay, advancing into old age, a woman of such great eloquence, talent, and a reputation for learning, so gifted that she could stop even the most educated men, wanted to groom (as it were) Anna Maria as she was maturing; the latter is her equal in intellect, and not beneath her in glory and reputation, as it happened, since she is one who can hold her own among male rivals.134 As a matter of fact, Gournay was saying that it’s consistent with reason that a change be done to a will in which Lipsius, a Belgian and a keen judge of talent, began to fortify a path toward immortal glory135 for our Maria; and a certain Frenchman restored that same glory136 to Anna Maria van Schurman, the most eloquent woman of the Lowlands.137 But it was you who figured out the significance of the eulogy by burning the midnight oil. For this reason, Gournay loved you more, and then did not stop asking me to write and convey to you her well-being in her own words. Of course, that is the superiority of virtue to connect those who are far from one another. And, of course, we who cannot greet you in person instead embrace your character, joined to you through the glory of learning. We recognize that there is no one truly in greater repute among men. Farewell, and promise my allegiance to Gronovius, a gentleman of evident virtue and learning.138 The sort of allegiance I experienced in Rome, that is the sort you are promising me very convincingly for the future. Paris, 21 June 1642.

133. From 1632 to 1652, Colletet hosted a literary circle in Paris which met at his house, formerly owned by the Pléiade poet Ronsard. 134. On Gournay’s invitation to Van Schurman to become her fille d’alliance (covenant daughter), see Van Schurman’s letter to Rivet no. 23, 1:32. 135. Decus. The Neo-Stoic Justus Lipsius (1547–1606), admired by Van Schurman, failed to become the hoped-for frère d’alliance he had said he would be to Gournay. See Pal, Republic of Women, chap. 2. 136. Decus. 137. The “Frenchman” who first eulogized Van Schurman was the Carmelite scholar Louis Jacob de Saint-Charles (1608–1670). Jacob wrote, but never published, an extensive Latin compendium on the writings of learned women from antiquity to contemporary times, entitled Bibliotheca illustrium mulierum, or Bibliothèque des femmes illustres par leurs écrits (Library of women illustrious through their writings). His extended eulogy of Van Schurman was translated by the Lyonnais lawyer Paul Jacob, and later included in Colletet’s Question célèbre (1646). 138. In 1642, Claude Sarrau asked Rivet to invite Johannes Fredericus Gronovius to join the faculty of the University of Leiden. See Correspondance intégrale d’André Rivet et de Claude Sarrau, 1:32. On Gronovius, see Paul Dibon and Françoise Waquet, Johannes Fredericus Gronovius, pélerin de la République des Lettres: Recherches sur le voyage savant au XVIIe siècle (Geneva: Droz, 1984).

328 Appendix C 6. Van Schurman to Daniel Meyer, 26 September 1673139 Van Schurman was living in Altona, where she published her autobiography Eukleria on the Labadist printing press. She sent a copy to Daniel Meyer, an old friend whom she met in the early 1660s at Dreischor, Zeeland, where as a minister and former Utrecht student he lived with his wife and children. We include two extant letters to Meyer and one to the English theologian John Owen to indicate the difference in Van Schurman’s Latin style and perspective after she joined the Labadists in 1669.

Anna Maria van Schurman sends greetings to the Very Reverend Gentleman, Daniel Meyer. I have learned from experience—and how sad this is—that I have had to pass judgment on the rumors spread by the common folk (and I can’t even exclude most of the theologians from this group) about the truly faithful, few of whom can now be found on this earth. And, thus, I do not want you to learn or to suspect something sinister about my present situation, and that of our [Labadist] Church, solely on reports from others. For is there anyone here today, among those wearing regular academic garb or ecclesiastical vestments, who does not keep divine truth itself away from his threshold if he were not now conforming to our times? Since a better turn of events ought to be hoped for—but only after the demise of this widespread anti-Christian spirit, and only when the Holy Scriptures have been reinstated— they are some sort of prelude to the kindness of God, who wants to flourish in our community built especially on the foundation of the first Jerusalem.140 Since my dissertatio,141 which I am forwarding to you, will sufficiently explain all of this, I will not keep you now any further. And this I wish for you, that our Lord and Savior fill you with his light and kindle your heart with his love so that you may see all things with a simple and luminous eye and keep and embrace all good things. And may God cause you to see, love, and embrace true Christianity, for there is nothing more sacred, nothing more lovable, and, I should add, nothing more remote from the multitude. Farewell. Altona, 26 September 1673.

139. Latin letter in Schotel, 2:133–34. Meyer wrote a Latin elegy after Van Schurman’s death entitled ΜΝΗΜΟΣΥΝΟΝ Beatæ Virginis ANNÆ MARIÆ A SCHURMAN (In Memory of the Blessed Virgin Anna Maria van Schurman). Cited in Van Beek, “Klein werk: de Opuscula Hebraea Graeca Latina et Gallica, prosaica et metrica van Anna Maria van Schurman (1607–1678),” PhD diss., Stellenbosch University, 1997, 40. The poem was appended to the second part of Eukleria. On 13 September 1673, Denmark’s king issued a mandate for the Labadists to leave Altona, where they resided, an order that reached them on 22 September. Van Schurman, however, never mentions this to Meyer. See Saxby, 226–27. 140. A reference to the Early Church in Acts 2:42–47. 141. Van Schurman’s Eukleria, or Choosing the Better Part (1673), which she calls a dissertatio, or a reasoned apologetic.

Additional Letters 329 7. Van Schurman to John Owen, 8 March 1674142 Jean de Labadie had corresponded with John Owen since 1669. When Labadie died on his sixty-fourth birthday, on 13 February 1674, Van Schurman wrote to Owen, asking him to mediate with the royal court in London for a place of residence for the Labadist community.

Anna Maria van Schurman sends greetings to the very famous Gentleman, Mr. John Owen Although in this recent turn of events, Reverend Sir, silence seems especially fitting for me,143 still, because of my well-meaning intention, I am unable to refuse not to accompany with a little note of my own this enclosed letter which this dearest Pastor of our Church, Mr. Yvon, plans to send you. Let me furthermore proclaim God’s extraordinary and paternal kindness toward this family of His, and also the grace which He offers us eternally and which on every occasion is worthy of love, admiration, and veneration. But this grace shines forth in such a way that the world pursues it, I must say, in a hostile manner as if it were blind, or as if with an evil intent. Lovers of heavenly truth and justice, on the other hand, should pursue this grace with every good intent and an honest care. In the ranking of these two types, I count you deservedly among the latter, and I recognize in you the divine beam of light that shines forth from your good intentions.144 And, so, I greet you with an open spirit, particularly after you declared yourself in your warm letter to be a true friend of that great servant of God and remarkable Pastor of Christ’s Church, Mr. de Labadie, as well as of our community named after him and gathered together in Christ’s Spirit. Moreover, I should not hide from you my own state, for I have experienced throughout my whole life, deep within my heart, a certain spark of that grace which the kingly Prophet professed was given to him in his divine Psalms (Psalm XVI: 3),145 and certainly I have always had a total and unique love for the renowned holy men on this earth. As I matured, this feeling grew continuously and constantly in my spirit, and it reached out to these holy men in so far as they became known to me, if not in 142. Schotel, 2:131–33. Latin letter. John Owen (1616–1683), a Puritan minister, Nonconformist theologian and administrator at the University of Oxford, and a prolific author of theological works. He helped in the issuing of a Declaration of Indulgence in 1672 granting greater freedom to dissenters. See Saxby, 231n44. 143. This is Van Schurman’s first letter to John Owen. She resorts to the same trope of silence and humility she had used in her first letter to Rivet, no. 1, 1:1, and her first letter to Huygens, no. 64, 2:17. 144. Van Schurman uses the captatio benevolentiae (winning of good will), a standard rhetorical device at the start of an appeal. 145. “But to the Saints that are in the earth, and to the excellent: all my delight is in them” (Geneva Bible). In Eukleria, 13, Van Schurman states, “I, for one, will never deny that I felt from my tender years, deep in my heart, some little sparks of genuine piety. Then it was not difficult to see that over the course of my life these sparks ignited at various points and even burst into flames.”

330 Appendix C effect, then certainly in affect. Yet this sense, or affect, has come to me through divine inspiration, and divine goodness has granted me that good which has won for me an inward knowledge146 and, at the same time, a holy and salutary friendship with that outstanding instrument of divine grace by which Labadie brought back the living image of the way of life of the first Christians, which degenerate Christendom right now should be imitating in this world of ours.147 He led me through his divine Ministry on an admirable path, guiding me into the tabernacle of God which Jesus, the greatest architect of all, had taught him—as his very own Moses or Bezalel148—to return to its original form not on Mount Sinai but on Mount Zion, after the first mission of the Spirit in the Jerusalem Church. I spoke about this at length in my published work Eukleria. I should especially commemorate and celebrate one of the chief benefits of this divine kindness, first for its own sake, and then for the sake of Labadie’s ministry. Our God has adorned and increased this man as one of his very own, a servant faithful to His house,149 not only through the remarkable and abundant graces and gifts he received from boyhood, but also because God made him like his servant Moses and gave him a very passionate love to glorify His name forever, a name in which he lived and died blessedly and peacefully. He completed at that time so faithfully and fruitfully the work which God had given him, that he testified to his few and beloved co-workers, Pastors Yvon and Dulignon, a few days before his death, that he peacefully and happily came from and was returning to his Lord and Savior when he saw this Church of Christ walking in faith and love. On this I could testify more than would be worthy to recall. It is enough for me to add a word about the state of this Church of God which, thanks to God’s goodness, continues to walk on the path of virtue where its remarkable founder left it. Leaving the rest to our Pastor Yvon, I shall add only this, namely that we acknowledge the care of divine Providence and your benevolence toward Christ’s servants in those things you have judged worthy for our peace and security to be prepared in holy liberty in your kingdom [of England]. And, although for a few months now, Daniel’s den150 began to consider us in a kinder manner, and 146. Intima notitia Dei, a key concept in Eukleria. 147. See Van Schurman’s poem Over het droevig verval der Christenen (“On the sad decline of Christians,” September 1665), in Van Beek, “Verbastert Christendom,” 126–31. The poem’s first line encapsulates her critical tone: “Verbastert Christendom! waer is u eerster luijster?” (“Degenerate Christendom! What became of your former splendor?”). In Eukleria (7), Van Schurman expressed her despair over the state of Christendom: “I have looked back with sadness for so many years upon the decline of Christendom from its origins and its near total failure.” 148. Moses supervised the building of the tabernacle (Exodus 36–40), while Bezalel, a Judahite craftsman, was responsible for building it. Van Schurman refers to Bezalel in her Pensées d’A.M. de Schurman sur la reformation necessaire à present à l’Eglise de Christ (1669), 8, and in Eukleria, 18. 149. The Labadist community. 150. The den of lions into which the Old Testament prophet Daniel was thrown.

Additional Letters 331 neighboring lands around us are offering us some immunity that we should not spurn, nothing for certain has been decided.151 However, we will be keeping an open mind as we await your reply, we who are constantly in pursuit of God’s will in all things. Unto Him I commend you and all of yours. Altona, 8 March 1674

8. Van Schurman to Daniel Meyer, 14 July 1675152 This is one of Van Schurman’s earliest letters written after she reached Wieuwerd, Friesland, with a majority of the Labadists. A smaller number remained in Altona under Pastor Dulignon until they too left ahead of the invading Swedish army, reaching Wieuwerd by mid-July 1675.

Anna Maria van Schurman sends greetings to the Very Reverend Gentleman, Daniel Meyer If a certain series of obstacles, beloved Brother in Christ, had not delayed me in writing, I would not have hidden from you my arrival in Friesland, especially since your last letter mentioned your sorrow at our changing locations, thereby separating us and making it difficult to exchange letters with each other. Rumors of war, which began to disturb everything in these lands, have moved Lord Sommelsdijck to invite his dearest sisters here, and he offered his home both to them and at the same time to our blameless congregation, along with abundant fields, and all of this about three hours from Leeuwarden.153 In this we readily acknowledge God’s hand and his Fatherly providence. And Mr. Yvon, the faithful pastor of our Church, along with other members arrived here, and now his likeminded colleague, Mr. Dulignon, has followed with the rest.154 Although two brothers remain in Altona—they are guarding even now our house—we have followed God’s calling and charge, since this change of location would never have occurred to us if He had not led us. 151. Six different offers of shelter were sent to the Labadists. See Saxby, 227. 152. Latin letter transcribed in Schotel, 2:134–37. See Saxby, 237. 153. As rumors of war spread to Altona, Cornelis van Aerssen van Sommelsdijck (1637–1688)—the elder brother of the three Van Sommelsdijck Labadist sisters, Anna, Maria, and Lucia, who belonged to one of the wealthiest families in the Dutch Republic—offered his ancestral family castle Walta-slot (or Walta-estate) in Wieuwerd to the Labadists. Cornelis van Sommelsdijck later became the first governor of Suriname after its establishment in 1683. On the estate of Walta-slot, its lands, and life in the community, see Saxby, chap. 11. Wieuwerd (today Wiuwert) is about 20 km southwest of Leeuwarden, the capital of Friesland. 154. Van Schurman informs Meyer of the safe arrival, under Dulignon, of the remaining Labadists who had stayed behind in Altona.

332 Appendix C Let me return to your letter, from which I took no small consolation that although God had allowed so many churches in various places to be filled with darkness, He, nonetheless, opened your eyes to see that they were deceived and are deceiving those who hardly proffer any sound other than “this is the temple, this is the temple, this is the temple of the Lord!”155 In the meantime, they are on a much shakier ground when they allow themselves to say these things about that strange hodge-podge156 of churches rather than talk about the Ancient Temple which formed Christ and his evangelical church; they then decree firmly among themselves that they have the one and true church that should be saved because it alone holds the truth. But if they only knew what really constitutes the living truth of Christianity, which can turn their children into true children, and that true believers worship God who is spirit and do all those things that please Him, they would soon stifle these voices of theirs that boast in vain. They do not adhere, I must confess, to orthodox tenets and words, neither do they profess them in their public or private writings, and they certainly do not voice them in their accusations of others and in their public confessions. And they boast again and again that they have true faith! But this is just rhetorical play in the name of true faith; for true faith can only be rightly distinguished in true belief. And what we believe accompanies that articulation only through faith. And this thus distinguishes someone from those ordinary enemies of Christ who show they are enemies by their very actions. For in fact (as you well note), there are many heretical practices being propagated right now, such as those that Mr. Bogardus,157 a notable disturber, taught all year to the inhabitants of Utrecht, to whom he plied his doctrine. Yet, still, I protest that I am offering this criticism and saying these things not because I hate anybody, though I admit that I am angry.158 Rather I am speaking to all those superstitious people out there who refuse to think in a salutary and serious way about the Reformation, just so long as the Reformation [for them] is about establishing the essence of the Church in oral confessions of Reformed doctrine.159 In 155. A reference to Israel’s idolatrous devotion to the temple building in Van Schurman’s Pensées d’A.M. de Schurman sur la reformation necessaire à present à l’Eglise de Christ (1669), 2: “An ancient people can serve us as example, / Crying O Temple, O Temple, O Temple of the true God !”  156. Faragine (fodder for cattle, a mash, hodge-podge). 157. Unidentified. Not to be confused with Justus van den Boogaart (ca. 1623–1663), Reformed minister in Utrecht from 1654 to 1663 who was a member of the Nadere Reformatie (Further Reformation). Van Schurman wrote a Dutch poem lamenting his death. See Van Beek, “Verbastert Christendom,” 122–25. 158. An instance of Van Schurman’s forthright and direct expression, without any apology, of her feelings. 159. For Van Schurman, true Reformation is not conformity to doctrine, but a moral and spiritual renewal. In Eukleria, chap. 4.1, 92, Van Schuman states that during her life “I tried to cultivate not just

Additional Letters 333 fact, teachers here and there ignore the corruption of the churches; yet they still state that the worldly should be ejected from among the faithful, or rather that the faithful should separate from the worldly, or better yet secede from the worldly. But let me come back to you and to your letter, which brought me great joy. It openly shows that God did you a great favor in that not only do you see the necessity of reforming the church in every respect, but you also see the outstanding nature of both our pastors160 and the flock, and most importantly, you see yourself. But so that you respond faithfully and constantly, I ask you to respond earnestly to God’s call through love for Christ and his glory. They [the members of his flock] do the same, and they encourage and summon everything you can possibly think concerning the infinite dignity and glory of our God, and the glorious blessings that He has bestowed, as well as everything pertaining to His law and his absolute and supreme dominion. Not to mention that you and the position you hold compel and impel you from all sides to renounce, right away, all the things of this world, and to say farewell to the world and to you yourself through a living faith, which summons the faithful out of themselves and transfers them into God through Christ; and that you hand yourself entirely over to Him and consecrate yourself to Him completely through pure love. For even your own age—which to my surprise has reached fifty—does not allow you to delay even for a single moment from making yourself obedient to the inner call of the Spirit of God, and that you live in God alone just as I ought to do every moment of my life, since eternity lies in the balance. I will not add anything more because I expect from the greatest giver of every good thing that He will teach you more fully in the light of His grace, and He will strengthen you; it is in this way that you would die to the world and to yourself, and you will live in Christ and for Christ. I have only one small thing to say—in my reply to the recent letter of Mr. Koelman161—in which he rebuked us a few days ago for neglecting disputes over matters that are considered less important. I would like you to encourage me to expand, as I did before, on the definition of a Christian and whether you and I would be considered Christians. For, indeed, we should not listen to the advice a theory of systematic and practical Theology, but I also devoted myself to practicing that practical Theology within the deepest recesses of my soul, as an expression of the little bit of grace residing in me . . . I learned daily that there is a difference between the truths that are grasped by the intellect, as if conjured by the mind, and the truths that are received by the heart through love.” 160. Pierre Yvon and Pierre Dulignon. 161. Jacobus Koelman (1632–1695), a Reformed minister at Sluis, Zeeland, adhered to the Dutch Further Reformation, and was influenced by his Utrecht professors Voetius and Johannes Hoornbeeck. Formerly accepting of Labadie, he withdrew his support in 1669. Not long before her death, Van Schurman pleaded with him to visit the community. Koelman published a stinging rebuke in his Der Labadisten Dwalingen [On the Labadists’ Errors] (Amsterdam: Johannes Boekholt, 1684). See Saxby, 166 and 258; and Van Lieburg, “From Pious Church,” 422–23.

334 Appendix C and words of the ‘wise’ people of this age and those educated by them, but rather we should listen to our inner selves, for God speaks to us through the Spirit and his Word. For if He reveals pure truth to us and His will concerning us, we should faithfully follow His voice and His call, mindful of Christ’s words: “It will be given to the man who has,162 and he who is faithful in small ways163 will stand out among the many.” I was thinking that I had said enough, but I now recall some sad memories, instances of some things that were good, but are no more. Those who at first had approvingly embraced this divine light, which revealed the same things that are now clear to you, kept saying that they would continue to pursue, with an ardent love, such pure and heavenly truths. But they began to resist these truths, whether because of the benefits, the friendship, or the approval of others, and then they listened to the voices of these other people. In the end, the love of reason furnished them with so many clever exceptions and limiting arguments, that it caused that initial divine light to become obscured. And now they see these former things shortsightedly.164 Thus many of these people have defected, after it seemed that they were going to move their hand to the plow.165 Therefore, dear brother, you seem to want to build an evangelical tower to dwell in, and to calculate the cost as to whether you should remove yourself [from the world] through Christ’s grace and come into Christ’s place so that He himself would become your foundation and angular stone,166 your tower, rock, teacher, priest, king, your All and All. And, in a word, together with Christ crucified, you will no longer live as you, but as Him in you;167 and you will not vacillate, you will persevere in this way of life happily and constantly. It is not just I, but especially our faithful pastors, Mr. Yvon and Mr. Dulignon, who desire this. They wish you to be well and to stay well in the Lord. Wieuwerd 14 July 1675

162. “For whosoever hath, to him shall be given, and he shall have abundance”: Matthew 13:12 and 25: 29 (Geneva Bible; the first text is quoted here). 163. “He that is faithful in the least, he is also faithful in much”: Luke 16:10 (Geneva Bible). 164. In Greek. 165. “And Jesus said unto him, No man that putteth his hand to the plough, and looketh back, is apt for the kingdom of God”: Luke 9:62 (Geneva Bible). 166. I.e., the cornerstone, as in Matthew 21:42, Mark 12:10, and Luke 20:17. 167. “I am crucified with Christ, but I live, yet not I anymore, but Christ liveth in me”: Galatians 2:20 (Geneva Bible).

Additional Letters 335 9. Abraham Frederik van Schurman to the Senate of the Academy of Franeker, May 1782168 In this legal document in Latin to the Academy of Franeker, the last descendant of Anna Maria van Schurman’s family describes the collection of her memorabilia that he was donating to the city of Franeker.

To the Rector Magnificus, and all the most eminent professors of Theology and the Liberal Arts Experience has taught me that the many artworks, paintings, books, and writings, and other monuments to illustrious men and women are bequeathed after their death, first to those related to them by birth, and then to those related to them by marriage and by friendship. Gradually, however, they get lost beyond the family, either through inheritance, or through sales, and from time to time they pass from one owner to another like the river flowing past its banks, and they migrate from one place to another where they finally settle or remain as guests. And then you can barely track them down when you are looking for them. I thought I needed to ensure that a terrible fate of this kind does not happen to the memorable works, pictures, sculptures, and pages169 of the most noble and world famous maiden Maria van Schurman,170 my great-grandfather’s niece; and, for this reason, after much thought, I have decided to keep the works that have come down to me and that mirror her intellect and her hand in the safety of a certain public repository of letters. Old Utrecht on the Rhine, where for the past forty years I have lived and made my first forays into the fine arts, and where I have married and looked after Lady Maria’s house—even now I am still in charge

168. Koninklijke Bibliotheek, The Hague, KB MS 74D14, ff. 150–51. Abraham Frederik van Schurman (26 April 1730–4 April 1783) was the son of Johan Abraham van Schurman (1655–1731) and Jacoba Gercama (1690–1762), and a descendant of a brother of Anna Maria van Schurman’s father (see the Van Schurman Family Tree on the website of the Martena Museum in Franeker). Abraham Frederik was an amateur draughtsman and a glass engraver who lived in Utrecht for some forty years. He wrote this letter to offer his collection of the memorabilia of Anna Maria to the Academy of Franeker (Schotel, 2:52). The Martena Museum, which houses the Van Schurman special collection, has a portrait of Abraham Frederik (1772) with the family coat of arms bearing an oak tree, symbolic of moral strength, and a portrait of Abraham Frederik’s mother, Jacoba Gercama. When the University of Franeker closed, notes Pieta van Beek (“On God,” 11), the collection came to the city of Franeker in 1811, where it was first housed in a showcase and later exhibited in a “Oudheidkamer” (“Room of Antiquities”) in the town hall until 1942. It was then housed in the Coopmanshûs-museum until 2006, then at the Martena Museum. A Latin Bible of 1545 at the Martena Museum contains the Van Schurman family tree down to Abraham Frederik, the last surviving member of Anna Maria’s family branch. For a description of the collection, see Schotel, 2:67–70; Beek and Bürmann, “Ex Libris,” 51–52. 169. Schedis, meaning sheets of paper, or pages. The writer does not otherwise draw attention to them. 170. Anna Maria’s name, and the localities, are underlined in the original letter.

336 Appendix C of it as a sort of Canonicus,171 as they say—Utrecht, then, does not seem suitable for safeguarding this collection. But, as I see it, I thought that Friesland was preferable: for not only is it my birthplace, but, indeed, the city of Franeker is better because the ashes and bones of my father rest there, and a plaque over his burial tomb stands even now in the Saint Martin Church.172 I have chosen, then, the city of Franeker to house the collection and Maria van Schurman’s portraits, as well as those of her mother and brother that she herself carved in boxwood, as well as the very celebrated one that Honthorst valued at one thousand florins (see Eukleria, Chapter 2, paragraph 7, page 19).173 Likewise there is a copper engraving on which she inscribed with a stylus her self-portrait,174 as well as other treasures. I think there can be no more fitting, more long-lasting, and more honorable place to keep this material for posterity than the illustrious library at your Academy. Therefore, as the sole remaining heir of the Van Schurman family, being of sound mind, I do bequeath of my own free will and with pleasure my entire collection, and I swear: “I give, I say it, I adjudge.” I would like you, most eminent Gentlemen, to accept this offer with serenity and equanimity. I ask this one thing of you, that you assign an outstanding place to keep all these works in the public part of your Museum. And if you think it is a good idea, may a short epigraph be added, dedicated to the Maiden Van Schurman herself, the person who created these fine works, to cherish her memory. May the greatest and almighty God keep you and the Republic well and prosperous. My very best wishes to you! May you please take my request to heart, I beg you, dedicated as I am to observing your most eminent positions and duty, Abraham Frederik van Schurman Official Address at Heerenveenans,175 1782

171. An honorary canon of a cathedral or collegiate church.  According to Schotel, 2:51, Abraham Frederik van Schurman became a canon of the Chapel of St Mary. The Van Schurman house, no longer in existence, was situated at no. 8 Achter de Dom (“Behind the Cathedral”) in Utrecht; the current building has a commemorative plaque, “Hier woonde Anna Maria van Schurman” (“Anna Maria van Schurman lived here”). 172. The Sint-Martinikerk (Saint Martin’s Church) in Franeker, a pseudo-basilica built in the fourteenth century. Anna Maria’s father, Frederik van Schurman, was buried in the choir of this church in November 1623. See Schotel, 85, and Stighelen, “Hoe hooge,” 16. 173. Eukleria, 19; see Whether a Christian Woman Should Be Educated, 83. Gerard Honthorst (1592– 1656) was a leading portrait painter born in Utrecht. 174. On this copper engraving at the Martena Museum, see Beek and Bürmann, “Ex Libris,” 12. 175. Heerenveen, also in Friesland, is located about 45 km southeast of Franeker.

Appendix D A Biography of Anna Maria van Schurman by Contemporary Labadist Pierre Yvon Editor’s Introduction This biography of Anna Maria van Schurman appeared in “Abregé sincere de la vie & de la Conduite & des vrais sentimens de feu Mr. de Labadie” (“A Truthful Summary of the Life and Conduct and True Feelings of the Deceased Mr. de Labadie”). Gottfried Arnold (1666–1714), a German Pietist theologian and Lutheran church historian, included it as a supplement to his Unpartheyische Kirchen- und Ketzer-Historie (Impartial History of Churches and Heretics, 1688) (Frankfurt: Fritsch, 1699–1700). A Dutch translation was published in 1754.176 Arnold’s History of Heretics was an instant bestseller. A product of “radical Pietism,” it emphasized the notion of an interconfessional Christianity based on the faith of individuals and rooted in the individual soul. Arnold contended that the teachings of the institutional church, its published confessions, and its clergy had led to a history of decline, beginning soon after the apostolic age.177 Communal life had given way to formalized religion, piety to ritual and ceremony, and spiritual understanding to confessions. Arnold argued, along with other Pietists such as Jean de Labadie, that true Christianity survived only in the faithful witness of “a few enlightened souls . . . the alienated, the persecuted, the heretics.”178 Only members of the invisible church were saved through authentic piety rather than mere orthodoxy. Arnold was the first to include in the genre of heresiology a series of studies on female mystics, whom he treated sympathetically. He cites at length from the works of leading female mystics such as Jane Leade (1624–1704), Anna Vetter (1630–1703), and Antoinette Bourignon (1616–1680), to which he added Yvon’s biography of Anna Maria van Schurman.179 176. Gottfried Arnold, Unpartheyische Kirchen- und Ketzer- Historie, 2 vols. (Frankfurt: Thomas Fritsch, 1699–1700; reprint, Hildesheim: Georg Olms, 1967), 2:1234–70; [Pierre Yvon], Oprecht verhaal van het leven, gedrag en gevoelen van wylen den heer Joh. de Labadie (Amsterdam, 1754). On Arnold, see Peter C. Erb, Pietists, Protestants, and Mysticism: The Use of Late Medieval Spiritual Texts in the Work of Gottfried Arnold (1666–1714) (Metuchen, NJ: Scarecrow Press, 1989). 177. C. Scott Dixon, “Faith and History on the Eve of Enlightenment: Ernst Salomon Cyprian, Gottfried Arnold, and the History of Heretics,” Journal of Ecclesiastical History, 57 (2006): 33–54. 178. Dixon, 43. See also Peter C. Erb, “Gottfried Arnold (1666–1714),” in Carter Lindberg, ed., The Pietist Theologians: An Introduction to Theology in the Seventeenth and Eighteenth Centuries (Oxford: Blackwell, 2005), 175–89. 179. Xenia von Tippelskirch, “ ‘Elle avoit même gagné des personnes de considération . . .’: Les femmes et les hérésiologues,” in L’Atelier du centre de recherches historiques: Revue électronique du CRH, 4

337

338 Appendix D Mirjam de Baar and Brita Rang attribute this biography to Pierre Yvon, Jean de Labadie’s right-hand man, who assumed leadership of the Labadist community after the death of Labadie in 1674. Jacques Voisine, on the other hand, states that Yvon was unlikely to have written it.180 It was written anonymously, he notes; Yvon himself, moreover, declared in the preface to his book on the last words of five Labadists who died in 1680 and 1681 that if he had written “in some measure” the final words of Jean de Labadie and of Anna Maria van Schurman when they passed away, “we have not hastened to produce those words which we judged edifying and which one will find in their lives that will appear some day, if it pleases God, to the glory of his Name.”181 According to Voisine, therefore, Yvon never published his biographical account of Labadie and Van Schurman. On closer examination, however, the “Abregé sincere” reveals an extraordinary amount of detail which in several instances indicates that the account must have been based on Yvon’s eyewitness reportage. This is clearly the case when he—or his amanuensis—recounts in third-person narrative his close relationship with Labadie while living as one of his lodgers in Geneva; he also reports on how Labadie increasingly confided in him and Dulignon, his other lodger, about the sufferings he endured from the opposition against him in Geneva and his growing conviction to establish a church purely for the elect. So much so, states Yvon, that “the more he [Labadie] meditated on this subject, & the more he talked about it with Mr. Yvon & Mr. Du Lignon, the more all three became convinced of its truth and importance, and the more they felt the need to commit themselves wholly to this.”182 The description of their flight from Geneva, disguised as poor peasants while joining a caravan of eighty travelers (three of whom had fallen sick, thus letting Lababie and his two acolytes take their place), and of the incidents during their journey through Switzerland and Germany, is based on first-hand observation that could only have been his. Once Labadie, Yvon, and Dulignon reached Utrecht, Labadie’s biography is put on hold to make room for Van Schurman’s life story. The fascinating, detailed account of her life ends with the death of her brother Johan Godschalk in 1664, and then leads to a statement that Labadie’s biography will be resumed. However,

(2009), accessed 6 August 2018, . 180. De Baar and Rang, “Anna Maria van Schurman: A Historical Survey,” 8; Jacques Voisine, “Un astre éclipsé: Anna Maria van Schurman (1607–1678),” Études germaniques 27 (1972): 509. 181. Pierre Yvon, A Faithful Relation of the State and Last Words and Dispositions of Certain Persons whom God Hath Taken to Himself, out of the Reformed Church and Separated from the World, which Formerly was Assembled at Herford and Altona, and Now at Present at Wieuwert in Friesland [Fidelle Narré des Etats & des Dernieres paroles & Dispositions de diverses personnes (. . .)] (Amsterdam: Jacob van de Velde, 1685), Preface, A2r. 182. “Abregé sincere,” 1259, col. 2.

A Biography of Anna Maria van Schurman 339 the “Abregé sincere” ends with this statement. Yvon apparently never finished his biography of Labadie. After Labadie’s death at Altona in 1674, the Labadist community—with Pierre Yvon at the helm—moved to Wieuwerd in Friesland, where they occupied the estate of the Sommelsdijck family. Van Schurman died in 1678, and Yvon lived another thirty years until 1707. The last of the Sommelsdijck sisters died in 1725, and the property became the possession of Count Maurice of Nassau (not a Labadist), son of the oldest Sommelsdijck sister. The property then fell into decay after 1733.

The Life of Anna Maria van Schurman [by Pierre Yvon] Since the first person that Mr. de Labadie met in Utrecht was Mlle de Schurman, who through her letters had convinced him to come to Zeeland, and since she is singularly integral to the sequel of this story, it would be good for us, especially since we were urged to do so, to say something here about this illustrious person, who was even more illustrious because of her humility and unfeigned piety than because of her birth and extraordinary erudition. Her grandfather Frederik van Schurman, a nobleman of great wealth whose wife belonged to the family of the Counts of Lemens, fled Antwerp on the same night that the Martyr Christoffel Fabricius was burned at the stake during the tyrannical rule of the Duke of Alva.183 He renounced for the love of Jesus Christ and of the truth all the interests and advantages of this world, and then ended with a very Christian death a life consecrated to God’s Kingdom and Glory. Her maternal grandfather, who came from a noble family of considerable means in the region of Cologne and whose family name was Von Harff, was entirely won over to the truth by his wife Lucy Slaun,184 who herself had been converted, after great sufferings and inner turmoil, by Bucer, God’s Servant.185 God used him to enlighten her more fully and free her heart when, in 1541 and 1542, he came to assist Archbishop Hermann in the Reformation of the Bishopric of Cologne.186 Mr. von Harff, having embraced with his heart the Reformed Faith, 183. Fernando Alvarez de Toledo, 3rd Duke of Alva (1507–1582), governor-general of the Spanish Netherlands (1567–73). Under his regime, some 8,950 persons, from all levels of society, were sentenced for treason or heresy, or both, and more than one thousand were executed. On Fabricius, see the Introduction. 184. All italicized words in this account are so in the original. 185. Martin Bucer (1491–1551), a German Reformer, but originally a Dominican priest, left the Roman Catholic Church after meeting Martin Luther in 1518. 186. Hermann of Wied (1477–1552), assisted by Bucer and his fellow Reformer, the theologian Philip Melanchthon (1497–1560), set out to create a parallel reform movement within the Catholic Church, starting in his own archdiocese of Cologne. His policy, however, met with hostility from most of his

340 Appendix D was forced to flee his home city of Neuss187 because of the violence of the persecution. Neuss was taken soon after and sacked and burned by the Duke of Parma,188 and although he lost most of his wealth, he received contentedly in his heart the news in the city of Cologne, where he had sought refuge and where he served God in the clandestine Church which had gathered there. These are, he said then, merely perishable things that I am losing; the best remains; never shall the flame consume it, nor the sword burn the word of God within the heart; it lasts forever. In 1602, Mr. von Harff gave in marriage his daughter Eva to the father of our famous Maiden, also named Frederik van Schurman, who lived in the region of Neuburg,189 and who had been raised as a good and strong Christian. Their children were, first, Hendrik-Frederik, who died at the age of twenty-nine and showed in life and in death how filled he was with the fear of the Lord. In 1605, they had a second son whose name was Johan Godschalk; and their daughter Anna Maria was born on 5 November, in the year 1607; it is about her that we shall speak. The youngest of her brothers, named Willem, died at five years and a few months, after having left marks of such an extraordinary ability and piety that one can only be deeply touched at what his sister wrote of him in one of her memoirs.190 Because she was born in Cologne, her father and mother felt particularly inclined to consecrate her to God, promising Him to raise her by His grace in the knowledge, fear, and love of Him. Both earnestly sought to do this throughout their entire lives, by offering themselves to her as examples of that which they tried constantly to engrave upon her soul, which early on God made susceptible to good and holy impressions. She herself states in her Eucleria191 how moved she felt at the age of four by the words of the Catechism that state at the very beginning that a Christian does not belong to himself, but to Jesus Christ his faithful Savior, and that the feeling that she experienced then never left her heart, and remained still quite vivid in the last year of her life, as one could tell on some of the occasions that gave her the opportunity to testify to it.192 parishioners, as well as from the Holy Roman Emperor Charles V and Pope Paul III, who deposed him in 1546. 187. Neuss, a city in North Rhine-Westphalia, located on the opposite bank of the Rhine from Düsseldorf. 188. Alexander Farnese, Duke of Parma (1545–1592), governor-general (1578–92) of the Spanish Netherlands. Only eight buildings remained standing in Neuss after it was sacked and burned. 189. A town in Bavaria, Germany. 190. Van Schurman’s memoir remains unidentified; it is not her Eukleria, which Yvon mentions later in his account. 191. Son Euclerie. Eukleria in the Latin original became Eucleria in the Dutch translation, Eucleria, of uitkiezing van het beste deel (Amsterdam: Jacob van de Velde, 1684). Yvon had likely read the Latin original text. 192. Eukleria, chap. 2.1, 13–14; see, also, Whether a Christian Woman Should Be Educated, 79–80.

A Biography of Anna Maria van Schurman 341 She was so well instructed in the truth that at the age of only seven or eight years old, when her father and mother were living in Utrecht during the period of the Remonstrants’ seizure of the public Churches,193 she could scarcely remain until the end of a sermon to which she was listening, so intense was her repugnance for what she heard preached against the truths of Predestination and grace. There was no way to make her go again, although her parents, who were not attending, thought that she would not have been capable to ascertain what was evil or erroneous in what was being preached. At the age of eleven, while reading the History of Martyrs,194 she felt such an ardent desire to suffer for Jesus Christ that when she subsequently dedicated herself to this notion and finally had to sacrifice everything to Him to remain faithful to what she felt was His holy will for her, she did so joyously;195 and she felt in her heart the renewal of that joy she had then when she judged that she would be infinitely happy if some day she could suffer hardship for His Name. Having thus since her most tender childhood felt in her heart living sparks of love for God and Our Savior Jesus Christ, she found herself imperceptibly involved by Monsieur her father in Studies, after he had noticed the facility with which she understood what she heard. When she found herself present at the instruction of her brothers, she would take away, as in passing, without any difficulty, all that they were taught. Since she loved and respected tenderly her father, who even wanted to educate her in languages and Sciences, she became obedient to his desire, and gave herself then by inclination to cultivate what had cost her little to acquire and in which she made prodigious progress.196 As she had received from God a hand as skillful and as fortunate as her mind, she succeeded admirably in drawing, painting, sculpture, engraving, and writing in all sorts of languages, surpassing in these the best masters and the most delicate workers. She succeeded at the age of ten, after only three hours’ time, at the art of embroidery, and at the age of eight she was able after a few weeks to sketch flowers in a surprising manner.197 193. A reference to the theological controversy between the liberal Reformed Jacobus Arminius (1560–1609) and his strict Calvinist opponent Franciscus Gomarus (1563–1641). Arminius defined grace in such a way that the individual retained choice in the matter of faith, while Gomarus defended predestination, whereby the individual was consigned in advance to salvation or damnation. The Remonstrants, who sided with Arminius, turned Utrecht into the “Arminian capital of the United Provinces.” Cited in Judith Pollmann, Religious Choice in the Dutch Republic, 133. 194. This may be a reference to the History of the Martyrs or Genuine Witnesses of Jesus Christ (1615), an Anabaptist martyrology by the Antwerp-born Mennonite Hans de Ries (1553–1638). John Foxe’s Actes and Monuments (1563) is also a possibility, although the History is more of a local account. She relates this episode in Eukleria, chap. 2.1, 14. 195. A reference to Van Schurman joining the Labadist community in 1669. 196. Eukleria, chap. 2.2, 15. 197. Eukleria, chap. 2.6, 18.

342 Appendix D From her youth she learned, in addition to Arithmetic, Geography, Astronomy, and instrumental and vocal Music, the Latin, Greek, and Hebrew languages.198 And she knew them so perfectly that when she wanted to apply herself carefully she would express herself either in speech or in writing in all of them in such a way as to surprise and delight the most learned and best trained in writing or speaking these languages. She also acquired a good deal of knowledge of all the Oriental Languages that serve or have some bearing on Hebrew, such as Syriac, Chaldean, Arabic, and Ethiopian. As for the living Languages, in addition to Flemish, she understood German, English, French, and Italian, and could use all of them without trouble or difficulty. As for the human Sciences, she understood more and more that there was little substance in them, sensing how little they suffice to satisfy a mind and heart made for God Himself, the supreme Being, the infinite Good, and the essential and eternal Truth; there were none that she had not envisaged up close and of which she did not have a great deal of knowledge and discernment. Theology, Scripture, and the truths of the Faith and Piety were constantly her greatest and liveliest inclination; and since she had from childhood turned her heart toward God and Our Savior Jesus Christ, she also searched until she had fully and perfectly found Him, just as now she rejoices in Him by His Grace in blissful Eternity. All of her knowledge, which surpassed the ordinary reach of persons of her sex, left her as humble and as small in her own eyes as any could be who only occupy themselves with ordinary matters that one considers lowly; even with regard to these ordinary occupations, she was so well and profoundly instructed that one was often surprised when on occasion she would speak in her humble, modest way of what she knew. However, she would do so only when occasions engaged her or demanded her doing so. For beyond these occasions you would have said that she hadn’t the slightest knowledge, and this was also the case regarding all the other things that she had mastered and of which she had such rare and specific knowledge. In the twentieth year of the last century199 she began at the age of thirteen or fourteen to become widely known through the verses of the Pensionary of Holland, Mr. Cats, who subsequently would have very much wished her to become engaged to him in marriage,200 from which she has often blessed God for

198. Van Schurman began to study Hebrew with Voetius (no. 9, 1:12). 199. The “last century” indicates that Yvon had written, or dictated, his biography at the start of the eighteenth century, shortly before his death in 1707. 200. Jacob Cats (1577–1660), a famous poet and politician, dedicated his Touchstone of the Wedding Ring (1637), which sold in the tens of thousands of copies, to Van Schurman. The rumor that Cats wished to marry Van Schurman appears to have begun to circulate already in the seventeenth century.

A Biography of Anna Maria van Schurman 343 having preserved her, so that she could follow Him with less trouble and greater holy freedom. In the twenty-first year of the century, having heard Mr. Rivet preach and being deeply moved by one of his sermons, she began henceforth to feel that respectful love that she held for him her entire life.201 Her father died two years later at Franeker (where Ames’s fame202 had led him to entrust his two sons), but that was not until he had given them very holy and wise lessons, and to his dear daughter also strong exhortations to flee the world and secular dealings and to guard herself above all from easily entering into the estate of marriage, which, undertaken as it ordinarily is, binds one more to the world and terrestrial life than to God and Our Savior Jesus Christ.203 Upon the death of her father, when she was eighteen years old,204 she pursued her Studies and remained on the general course that he had had her take. Her mother retired with her family to Utrecht, where one of her [Anna Maria’s] paternal Uncles, who came with his wife to stay with her mother, served in place of her father. Ultimately, God took to Himself her dear mother, who had sought Him from her youth and who went to Him with feelings of glorious and ineffable joy.205 Since her daughter was so far from wanting to show herself off or make known or valued what she knew, the public would have known very little of her had not three persons, whom she respected highly for their piety and their learning, not drawn her with a certain force from her private life. One of them was Mr. Rivet, whom she considered as her father; the second was Mr. Voetius, and the third, Mr. Spanheim the elder. The latter became subsequently, despite all her objections, the Promoter of the publication of her Opuscula, where one finds eulogies accorded to her lavishly from all sides, as to a marvel or a prodigy of her century. In the United Provinces three other persons besides Mr. Cats also contributed to making her known. One was Mr. Saumaise, who considered himself quite honored by her correspondence; the second, Mr. Beverwijck; and the third, Mr. Huygens. All three corresponded with her for many years. Princess Elisabeth of Palatine, daughter of the King of Bohemia, had a fondness for her from her youth;

201. Van Schurman would have been fourteen years old at the time. 202. The English Puritan William Ames (1576–1633), professor of theology at Franeker from 1622 to 1632. 203. Eukleria chap. 2.10, 25. 204. Van Schurman was sixteen when her father died in 1623. 205. Eva von Harff died in 1636/7. See Van Schurman’s letter to Rivet in September 1636 (no. 13, 1:16) and her letter to Huygens in July 1636 (no. 64, 2:17).

344 Appendix D she loved and revered her to the end of her life, having wished to imitate her from the beginning of her Studies.206 Among the French, one knows the high regard that Mr. Balzac,207 among those in polite society, had for her. But Mr. Conrart above all, who had written her many letters, developed a very special esteem for her.208 As far as the Learned are concerned, the philosopher Gassendi, and Father Mersenne, and above all Mr. Bochart209 were delighted to correspond with her, as they did quite often. And among the Great men, Cardinal Richelieu was extremely pleased to see some products of her pen and her hands, and even placed in the hands of M. Noyers,210 who did not like him, a sign of his esteem for her to keep. While Mr. Descartes was in Holland, before going to Sweden,211 he came to see her in Utrecht. As something unusual occurred in their conversation there, of which Mlle de Schurman wished to leave some record, I think that I should report it here accurately. There happened to be at that moment on her table a Hebrew Bible from which she usually read, and Mr. Descartes asked her what it was. When he heard that it was the Holy Scriptures in Hebrew, and that she applied herself to the study of that language, he expressed amazement that a person with a mind such as that of Mlle de Schurman should spend her time, which was, he said, so precious, at a thing of so little importance. She explained to him that it seemed to her that this language was well worth the trouble, and that after all there was always a notable difference between being able to read an Author in his own Language 206. In 1639, the then twenty-one-year-old Elisabeth of Bohemia inquired from Van Schurman which books she should read. See Van Schurman’s reply of 7 September 1639, Opuscula, 249–55; Whether a Christian Woman Should Be Educated, 57–60. 207. Jean-Louis Guez de Balzac (1597–1654), a celebrated epistolary author and one of the founding members of the French Academy. 208. Valentin Conrart (1603–1675), the secrétaire perpétuel of the French Academy, had in reality a difficult time getting Van Schurman to reply to his letters. From 1645 to 1650, he kept reminding Rivet that he was waiting for her to reply. 209. Pierre Gassendi (1592–1655), a philosopher, priest, and mathematician, corresponded with Van Schurman; Marin Mersenne (1588–1648), an ordained priest, had many contacts in the Republic of Letters, including Constantijn Huygens; Samuel Bochart (1599–1667), a Reformed minister and a specialist in ancient and oriental languages, was highly admired by Van Schurman. 210. François Sublet de Noyers (1589–1645), secretary of state to Louis XIII and patron of the arts. 211. Queen Christina of Sweden (1626–1689) had corresponded with Descartes on philosophical topics since 1646. Upon her invitation, he arrived at the Stockholm court in October 1649. However, a severe epidemic swept the capital early in 1650; Descartes, who would regularly meet the Queen for lessons at dawn, caught a cold, and was soon among the victims of the epidemic. He died there four months after his arrival, on 11 February 1650. On Christina and Descartes, see Susanna Åkerman, Queen Christina of Sweden and Her Circle: The Transformation of a Seventeenth-Century Philosophical Libertine (Leiden: Brill, 1991), chap. 3.

A Biography of Anna Maria van Schurman 345 and being able to read only a translation, for it was quite rare, even regarding secular Authors, for a translator, no matter how capable, to be able to find all the meanings of what he was translating and not lose anything in the transfer of Language; and this was even rarer with respect to the sacred Writers, of whom one could have true understanding only by being enlightened by the Spirit that had led them to write, which was not the spirit of man, but the Spirit of God Himself. He replied that at one time he had had the same thoughts, and that to this end he had learned the Language called sacred; he had begun to read the first chapter of Genesis that speaks of the creation of the world; but however hard he thought about it, he could conceive nothing clear and distinct. Therefore, since he did not understand what Moses was trying to say, and that instead of enlightening him, everything he said served only to confuse him even more, he stopped trying. This answer surprised Mlle de Schurman very much and, deeply offending her heart, it gave her at first such a repulsion for this Philosopher that she took care never again to have anything to do with him.212 In a memoir where she mentions him, she wrote these words under the title of “Blessings of the Lord”: God has turned my heart away from profane men, and he has used it as a goad to excite me to piety and to devote myself more fully to it. Indeed, the Lord gave her such a heart. As soon as she noticed this impious spirit in any one of those with whom she could have had some conversation or correspondence, she immediately broke off all ties with him, and refused him all access to her. She showed this same sentiment on another important occasion, which I have no difficulty in adding to the above even though it occurred many years later. As everyone was saying such wonderful things about Queen Christina and how incomparable she was in learning and in virtue, Mlle de Schurman’s friends urged her—although somewhat against her will—to compose a eulogy in Latin verse and allow a small present of her own crafting, which was very rare, to be presented to the Queen. Indeed, Mr. Bochart, who was on his way to Stockholm to see the Queen, had taken it with him and had told the queen while presenting it to her that it had been taken as if by force from Mlle de Schurman’s hands, since the latter’s modesty did not allow her to appear at the Courts of Princes and Kings. Mlle de Schurman had consented finally to this because a few individuals of similar piety had spoken to her very highly of this Queen. However, when she learned that Bourdelot,213 who was then at the Court and was insinuating himself in the minds of several under pretext of learnedness and even modesty, had uttered impious words in the Queen’s presence and that of Mr. Descartes214 and Mr. Bochart, who himself reported these words, she not only expressed horror for this impious man 212. On this episode, see Larsen, Star of Utrecht, 99–100. 213. Pierre Michon Bourdelot (1610–1685), a doctor to Louis XIII and a member of the Condé household, had been summoned by Queen Christina in 1652 to cure her. 214. This event occurred in 1652, two years after Descartes’s death in 1650.

346 Appendix D but refrained from taking any further step toward Queen Christina, even though the latter had been sought out by many and might have had incomparably more wit than she [Van Schurman] herself.215 When one lacked the fear of God and the love of Jesus Christ in one’s heart, it was useless to approach Mlle de Schurman. If on first getting acquainted with her one could surprise her in appearance, it was impossible to obtain her friendship once one had disclosed one’s [true] heart. She could thus say with the Prophet King: Lord, see how much I hate those who hate you, and how filled with zeal against those who rise against you? I have nothing but hatred for them; I count them my enemies.216 For a long time, she had great difficulty in consenting to have her works published separately, because she believed with good reason that in doing so she would cause people to think ill of her and suspect her of being desirous of Vainglory. Therefore, some of her works were published together with those of other writers. Thus, in 1639, Mr. Beverwijck published her Latin Letter, On the Temporal Limits of Life [De Vitae Termino], in a collection that included the writings of many famous men on the same topic.217 He included two others among those that he brought to light some time later under the name of Epistolicæ quæstiones.218 Others did the same in the Collections of Letters that they published. In 1641, a further step was taken when her Dissertatio was published in a single volume along with some Letters written on the same topic between Mr. Rivet and herself.219 Finally, in 1646, Mr. Rivet and Mr. Spanheim the elder so entreated her that she gave in and agreed to allow the publication of the Collection of her separate works.220 But if the products of her mind won her publicity, they also kept her very occupied. Her visits and correspondences multiplied despite the difficulty she had with them. Still, she approached these with great discernment. For to speak with all those who wished to see her, she could scarcely have done anything else; and, also, to answer all those who wrote letters to her, she would have had to spend all

215. Queen Christina’s rhetorical and linguistic ability, memory, and judgment were noted by the numerous scholars whom she assembled at her court. Pierre Daniel Huet, who arrived at her court in 1652, remarked that she was the most intellectual of women, even compared with Van Schurman and Madeleine de Scudéry, “two of the most accomplished women writers of the time” (Huet to Gassendi, 1652), cited in Åkerman, Queen Christina of Sweden and Her Circle, 18. 216. Psalm 139:21–22. 217. Other established contributors to Van Beverwijck’s volume included, for instance, Andreas Colvius, André Rivet, Caspar Barlaeus, Gisbertus Voetius, Jacobus Crucius, Johannes Polyander van Kerckhoven, Marin Mersenne, and Jacques Dupuy. 218. Epistolicæ quæstiones (Rotterdam: Arnold Leers, 1644). 219. The Dissertatio (1641). 220. The Opuscula (1648).

A Biography of Anna Maria van Schurman 347 her time writing. This obliged her to accept neither easily and do so only because of some special engagement.221 However, at the beginning she was more liberal. As she was exceedingly gentle and kind, she would have liked to favor everyone, if that had been possible. But seeing, on the one hand, that it would take her too much time and, on the other hand, that she would put herself in danger, especially regarding the correspondences, in having to honor those who did not deserve it and who would even misuse her name, or would show off her letters, she became little by little more circumspect; she wrote only to those whose integrity and merit she knew, either from their own writings, if they had published any, or through the recommendation of those whom she knew were credible in the testimony they offered. And so that no one would become unhappy with her, she resolved to write only rarely to those of her own country, and very rarely to foreigners. Once known, this resolution preserved her from the embarrassment she would have known without it, but it did not prevent, however, the most famous men from one Religion or another, not only from the United Provinces, but also from France, England, Germany, Denmark, and other countries in Europe, from taking pride in themselves for writing to her, preferring not to receive her replies than to fail to show their respect for her through their letters. She acted in about the same way regarding visits. She received some, but rarely. She believed that her condition, and her modesty, excused her sufficiently in this and protected her from the blame with which one could tarnish her, claiming she was making herself unavailable through an inordinate self-esteem. Those who had a greater influence on her, such as Mr. Rivet, Mr. Spanheim, and Mr. Voetius and a few others, were the reason she could not refuse to see various people, because they were sent by them with introductory letters that beseeched her to forgive them, since they could not help granting such a favor to persons of merit. Some Counts even addressed them to gain the honor of seeing her, fearing her refusal if they addressed her directly. Yet there was not a person of quality, nor any nobleman passing through Holland, who did not look for an occasion to converse with her even for a mere quarter of an hour. To have been in Utrecht without having seen Mlle de Schurman was like having been in Paris without having seen the King. Several Princes paid her a visit and admired the greatness of her mind and her extraordinary qualities.

221. Van Schurman’s fame was so far reaching that Utrecht became a de rigueur stop for most learned visitors to the Netherlands. Van Schurman’s publication in 1641 of her Dissertatio and selected letters contains a French quatrain that celebrates the city in these terms: “QUATRAIN. To those who travel to Holland to see its singular qualities and for one’s own pleasure. / Holland is the sum of the marvels of the world: / Friends, how great is the fruit of our labors! / But here is the rarest of them all: an erudite Maiden / Alone possesses the glory of the nine sisters,” Dissertatio, 102.

348 Appendix D The Queen of Poland, Louise-Marie de Gonzague,222 during the trip that she made in 1645 to join her husband, King Władysław IV, passed through that city and, she, too, wanted to see her. She went to her residence followed by the Bishop of Orange, her chief physician, and three or four other persons, among whom figured Mr. Le Laboureur, who wrote the history of her trip.223 This Queen looked with admiration upon the marvelous works of her hands, but was even more amazed when she heard her speak so many Languages and reply to questions on so many of the sciences. After this, when the account of the Queen’s trip had been published, Mlle de Schurman tried to shield herself from the glory that surrounded and pursued her and she made herself much less available than before, as is greatly evidenced in the small number of papers she kept after she had burned the greater part five or six years before her death. A Frenchman, a man of wit who did not wish to reveal his name, when he did not satisfy his desire to see her, wrote down on a page that he managed to send her the following words: To the very wise and very virtuous Mademoiselle de Schurman On how it was impossible for me to have the pleasure to see her. Beautiful place,224 which owns the rarest of treasures, With good reason you keep her to yourself: Like you, my reason forbids all hope. To ask that Schurman make herself visible, Is to desire an impossible thing from her, For since she is all spirit, one cannot go and see her. Another, who affixed only the first letters of his name, which are P. D., composed stanzas on a similar occasion, of which I will include only the first two, since there are more than twenty. Your great humility, incomparable Schurman, Prevents me from seeing you: And my unworthiness means that I am guilty Of the hope of seeing you. At least, do not forbid me to offer you A tableau of my verses, In which I honor the God who, through His grace, has made you The honor of the Universe. It was, in fact, her humility that caused her to act this way, and that was equally evident both in the access she granted to some and her refusal of other 222. Louise-Marie de Gonzague (1611–1667), a habituée of the salon of Mme de Rambouillet, traveled through the Low Countries on her way to Poland to wed King Władysław IV. 223. Le Laboureur’s account of the queen’s visit to Van Schurman is found in Histoire et relation du voyage de la Royne de Pologne [. . .] [Story and account of the travels of the Queen of Poland] (1648), 64–67. 224. A reference to Utrecht.

A Biography of Anna Maria van Schurman 349 people’s visits. She would have liked to welcome the least little child, so affable was she; and she would have wanted never to be honored by the visits of the greatest and most distinguished persons, so humble was she. A wise modesty governed all her virtues, which she displayed according to the decorum225 and appropriateness of the occasion. All of this contributed to make her daily even more illustrious. And what distinguished her especially was that the very modesty we have just mentioned, and the sincere and true humility that shone in all of her actions, made her more incomparable than all of her artworks and all her learning. Her modesty was the ornament and the guardian of all her good qualities. It is a rare to find this virtue, even in imbeciles; it is still rarer to meet it in the savants, especially if they excel above others; but to find it with such sincerity and constancy in a person of her sex, her learning, her self-sufficiency, and her reputation, in the midst of the universal praise from all the Learned, is a very extraordinary thing; and it can indeed be said that if she has not been alone in this, she has had few companions. This was indeed what most impressed all those who knew how to judge rightly such matters and form a solid judgment. They admire the capacity of her mind and the skill of her hands; but there is nothing that delights them more than her extreme modesty. It was so natural to her that she expressed nothing that did not bear that trait. It flowed even into her verses, where ordinarily it is least likely to be found. Mr. de Balzac, when he saw some of her Epigrams, speaks in one of his letters in the following way: “One must admit that Mademoiselle de Schurman is a marvelous young Woman, and that her verses are not the least of her wonders. I do not think that Sulpicia,226 whom Martial praised so highly, composed any more beautiful, nor more Latin: but what chastity and honesty227 are found among the graces and beauties of her verses! How agreeably the virtue of her soul blends with the products of her mind!”228 Mr. Gassendi says even more in the letter he wrote to her in 1644, after having read her Dissertatio.229 First, he testifies that he had indeed heard of this Maiden from Utrecht who excelled at all the noblest arts, who knew almost all the languages, and who had studied the most sublime sciences: “But astonishment,” he says, “seizes me now, for in these few pages [of the Dissertatio] I find 225. Bien-seance. 226. Sulpicia, an otherwise unidentified poet praised by Martial, even above Sappho: see Epigrams, 10.35. 227. Pudeur & honnêteté. 228. Opuscula, 344–45. 229. Pierre Gassendi (1592–1655), a mathematician and philosopher, revived Epicureanism as a substitute for Aristotelianism, and attempted a reconciliation of mechanistic Atomism with the Christian belief in immortality, free will, creation, and an infinite God. Gassendi wrote to Van Schurman on 15 July 1644, to which she replied on 21 December 1644: Opuscula, 206–8 (translated in Larsen, Star of Utrecht, 283). Yvon cites directly from Gassendi’s Latin letter, translating it into French.

350 Appendix D a maturity of judgment and a modesty of mind as great as one can find among men. Doubtless there are persons of your sex who invite admiration through the elegance of their words and the subtleties they weave in; but, whether they speak or write, one can always detect some strain that shows a lack of naturalness and that is filled with affectation, with some sort of little vain presumption, some innate superficiality. But in your short treatise and in your reply to N.N. [Rivet], which is joined to it, it seems to me that you have expressed such sincerity and frank simplicity that a reader cannot help but recognize that you possess to the highest degree, at one and the same time, the most reflective knowledge and the best acquired manners. As for me, I think that there is no other true wisdom that can make men truly happy. But I am not one to write you in such a manner, if I did not know that you take no delight in the eulogies given to you, and that you listen to your praises only against your will and never without a face that always bears the marks of chastity and modesty, and that you even seize the occasion to attribute everything to He from whom all perfection is derived, taking good care not to do anything unworthy of people’s opinion of you.” Mr. Rivet wrote to her from Breda on 22 June 1650 (the very same day of his birth in 1572, which indicated he was seventy-nine years old at the time), in a very serious frame of mind after telling her in a few words about the almost desperate state of everything, and about the hope he had that God would work out His power in his weakness, to which he added: “For this, I ask the help of your saintly prayers that are agreeable to Him, since they come from such a good soul and are so filled with His grace. I will pray to Him with all my heart, as long as I live, that He perfect his work in you, who are an uncommon being and in whom He is glorified, even more so since He has placed such humility in such a great abundance of grace.”230 He writes in the same letter, that he admits more and more, that to deny ourselves is the principle and the whole of the Christian life. It was at that time that a quite noticeable change occurred in her life. She had been almost wholly contemplative until then. Her studies had been the sole focus of her occupations, while the little exercises in the arts that she slipped in were for entertainment rather than work. The care of household chores, which her mother had assumed all her life, took her out of her study only after the latter’s death. Still, these chores were not much for a few years, she just needed to pay a bit of attention to them, and she put things in order without giving too much care herself. But the Lord then brought it about that she had to devote herself so much to the care of her family that she had no time left for her studies. Both her good aunts who were staying with her and her brother, in addition to the usual weaknesses that old age brings, became almost totally blind in the last years of

230. Yvon quotes from a letter by Rivet that is now lost.

A Biography of Anna Maria van Schurman 351 their lives.231 During this whole time Mlle de Schurman was not only obliged to pay close attention to the household, but had to continually render charitable services to her dear aunts, who could barely spend a day without her presence and help. This made her life as active as it had earlier been contemplative, without causing her to give up with much difficulty one for the other, since the Lord gave her the wish to do so by his divine Providence. Her aunts by then had entered their seventieth year. They were ordinarily bedridden due to their infirmities, and they thus became very needy. Since they had lost their eyesight, one had to entertain them often, either by conversing with them or by reading something to them. Their state finally demanded a care ever more constant and laborious as one given to toddlers when they are still being breastfed; the latter rewards one somewhat for the trouble they cause by the innocent entertainment one gets from them. It is true, however, that the people we are talking about gave a much more real consolation to their niece with their patience, faith, as well as humble and entire conformity to the divine will, but it was a consolation of the spirit and of grace that one normally does not experience. In 1653, Mlle de Schurman felt a particular engagement to go with her disabled aunts to Cologne, city of her birth.232 Then it was that people envious of her renown and the glory surrounding her spread rumors in Utrecht that she had become a papist; and since this ill-natured rumor was at first somewhat generally believed, she learned, as she later said, that in Utrecht, for which she had great esteem because of the renown of its Piety, the people were far worse than she had thought.233 After living in Cologne for close to two years,234 she and her entire family went back to Utrecht, where she was greeted with much love and joy by all people of worth. However, the worldly Ministers did not view her return as a reason for rejoicing. They did not even stop their slandering of Mlle de Schurman with other ministers and gave false and disadvantageous impressions of her. The falseness of their previous calumny had become evident to all at first, but since the world kept its ears quite open they did not despair of reaching their goal. Indeed, they reached it with several individuals, and bad as they were, they gave her the pleasure of freeing her from many unwelcome visits. She was grateful to them and took 231. Almost entirely blind, Van Schurman’s two maternal aunts, Sybille and Agnes von Harff, required her constant presence and help until their death, aged eighty-nine and ninety-one respectively, in 1661. 232. Van Schurman was in Cologne from early summer 1653 to July 1654, working to reclaim von Harff family land that had been confiscated during the Thirty Years’ War. 233. While in Cologne, Van Schurman composed a Dutch poem “Aenmerkinghe Over ’t onderschijt tussen UITRECHT en CEULEN” [“Remarks on the difference between UTRECHT and COLOGNE”] (unpublished), in which she compared her then beloved Utrecht to Jerusalem on account of its theologians and Reformed Church and Cologne to Babylon. See Van Beek, Verbastert Christendom, 66–78. 234. Van Schurman lived about one year in Cologne.

352 Appendix D good care not to resent them for this, since, far from doing her harm, they did her good. However, she carried on with her life, and did neither more nor less about all the arrows aimed at her by these sorts of persons. Far from stepping back, she was going further day by day in the knowledge and hatred of the world, which is God’s enemy, and in the sincere practice of the holy maxims of Our Savior Jesus Christ. The active life, where we saw her engaged for some time, helped her greatly in this. Since, on the one hand, she had many opportunities to exercise all sorts of works of charity, she also had, on the other, opportunities to discover more fully the strange corruption of the world. She had been beforehand as if locked up in her study,235 and had only seen the world in passing; but when she saw it now more closely and contemplated the life of men in general, and especially all of those who bore the name of Reformed, she was extremely surprised to find in them so little fear of God and so little practice of true Christianity. She was even more surprised when she saw, over time, that many who had the external appearance of piety showed by their works to have neither truth nor virtue; so much so that by comparing the life of the majority of those who call themselves Christians with either the maxims of the Gospel that had been their rule of conduct, or with the life of the first Christians who had been living examples, not only did she find that it did not conform to the gospel, but saw that it was even directly contrary to it. In this manner, she clearly saw the deplorable decay among the Christians of today in all types of Communions. For those who wander away from the fundamentals of Christianity, she did not find this strange; since they were not in the truth, it was impossible for them to have true piety, one being inseparable from the other. But for those who professed so highly the Reformed Religion and the truth of the Gospel, she was with good reason very surprised. She loved its doctrine with all her heart, but she could only despise those whose lives were entirely opposed to it. This is what, on the one hand, made her groan and sigh for a reformation in conduct and morals and, on the other hand, brought her to speak faithfully on every occasion, either in word or in writing, of the feelings that God gave her, to motivate all those whom she knew had some zeal to carry on such an important and necessary work. Several worldly Ministers and Theologians hated her even more for this; but, nonetheless, she was not repulsed by this, for she did not seek to please men, but God, and was willing to be hated and slandered by the world for her love, as her Master and all His true disciples had been before her. At that time, there was trouble in Utrecht because of the dispute over the use of Ecclesiastic goods, and that led to the banishment of several of the most zealous Ministers of the city.236 Mr. de Schurman and his dear sister, when they found 235. Cabinet. 236. Two ministers whom Van Schurman supported and who were members of the Further Reformation—Abraham van de Velde (1614–1677) and Johannes Teellinck (1614–1674)—were

A Biography of Anna Maria van Schurman 353 out that good people were oppressed in different ways, did not like to see what was happening then. That is why, when the Lord’s Providence granted them the means, after the death of their aunts, which was a great consolation, they moved their family for two whole years to Lexmond237 near Vianen, to get some fresh country air; in such a way they left behind the troubles and commotion of the city. This was particularly the wish of Mlle de Schurman, to whom the world was starting to become more than ever a burden. She had indeed been attracted to retreat238 ever since her childhood; however, she had gradually allowed herself to become involved in the world through visits and conversations, as we have seen. And even though at the beginning this involvement was against her will and as if forced upon her, with time she did not find it so troublesome. On the one hand, she was getting used to it a bit, and on the other she thought that it was her duty to maintain the reputation she had in the world. She had not at all sought glory from it; in fact, she had sincerely run away from it; but seeing that the more she was running away from it, the more she was pursued by it, she finally thought that she had to welcome her fame. She followed it, indeed, but with a lot of modesty and reserve. Nevertheless, it was impossible for her not to get enmeshed in several things that were contrary to the kind of heart that God had started to give her, and that were very remote from the purity of spirit that He gave her more fully later. Then, since the Lord made her see more clearly day after day the great and saintly obligations of the Christian, and the latter’s total opposition to the world, she became so tired of all these visits, conversations, acquaintances, and troublesome friendships, that she often looked for a way to get rid of them without finding such a means. The bad Ministers had partly relieved her [of such visits], but as their power did not extend very far, many more remained. That is why she was delighted to have the opportunity of getting away for some time by retiring to the countryside, while waiting for the Lord to free her entirely from them, as He has since done because of His goodness. She enjoyed there a great calm, away from the crowd and the troubles of the world. Thus, she firmly resolved, on going there, to walk with God’s grace more carefully and more intentionally on the paths of His commandments that she had not yet taken, and to adhere faithfully to the ways that could help her do so, especially since the tranquility of the new environment supported her good purpose so perfectly well. She underscores in her Eucleria239 that her life there was the sweetest and the most Christian that she had ever lived until then. After that, she went back to Utrecht and returned to her former house. The trip that her brother was about to take according to long thought-out plans was banished from Utrecht on orders of the regents. 237. A town about 25 kilometers south of Utrecht, where Van Schurman spent two years (1660–62). 238. À la retraitte. 239. Son Euclerie. Eukleria, chap. 6.3, 134.

354 Appendix D the special cause of this change of domicile, since it meant that she had to stay alone with two female servants and found for various reasons that it was better to do so in the city than in the countryside. Her brother left Utrecht at the end of the month of July in the year 1661;240 he traveled through Germany and Switzerland and arrived some time later at Basel, where he remained the entire following winter. There he was loved and admired by all the best Professors and Ministers, even though he did not actually make himself known to them: he thought that to do more good, avoid attention,241 and not risk falling short of his good intentions, it was more expedient not to make himself known under his [family] name: that is why he contented himself with the name of Johan Godschalk, under which his friends in Switzerland and in Geneva honored him. While there, he heard that there was in Geneva a man of God, full of very singular talents and zeal for the reformation. This was Mr. de Labadie. Mr. de Schurman, having heard a lot about him, was seized with a great desire to meet a person of whom he was hearing so much good. It was not that there were none, on the other hand, who spoke badly of him; but he felt that he should not give credence to their words, which he clearly saw proceeded for many from their distance from piety, or from the jealousy they had for the extraordinary gifts that shone in this Servant of God. He thus resolved to go see him as soon as the winter was over, to ascertain for himself the truth of the matter. When spring came, he went to Zurich, and then on to Geneva, and found housing with Mr. de Labadie himself, to whom Mr. Buxtorf had written about him with praise. And he stayed at his house for two whole months and had the means to judge quite well his conduct, in public and in private, which he always found equal to itself and uniform in all sorts of meetings. He found him unwearied in the functions of his Ministry, inflexible on what was the interest and the will of his Master, fearless at the sight of a thousand dangers he endured in being faithful to Him, standing above all the offences, promises, and threats of the world, insurmountable in courage, and a wall of bronze242 against everything that opposed Our Savior Jesus Christ and His holy Gospel. He saw him, on the one hand, very serious, full of zeal, and a saint in generosity and magnanimity concerning everything regarding God and His glory, and, on the 240. Johan Godschalk traveled to Basel in late 1661 to study theology with the Hebrew scholar Johannes Buxtorf the Younger (1599–1664) and his colleague, Lukas Gernler (1625–1675). Both soon spoke at length with him on moral reformation and told him about Jean de Labadie, who was then residing in Geneva. 241. L’éclat, meaning a great light. The word is used metaphorically. 242. From Jeremiah 15:20:  “And I will make thee unto this people a strong brazen wall, and they shall fight against thee, but they shall not prevail against thee: for I am with thee to save thee, and to deliver thee, saith the Lord” (Geneva Bible). Other versions of this verse refer to “a fortified wall of bronze.”

A Biography of Anna Maria van Schurman 355 other hand, admirably good, and sweet, and friendly in his ordinary conversation. He was not surprised as well to see him as feared and dreaded by the wicked as he was loved and revered by the good. It seemed to him, he said, that he could see in him an Ambrose243 in courage and Apostolic authority, a Chrysostom244 in holy eloquence, an Augustine245 in illumination and words of charity and grace, a Bernard246 in persuasion and caring expressions, in short a man who was needed in a century as corrupt, as lethargic, as covered over in darkness, as full of its own reasoning, as empty in spirit, as sterile and as arid as is ours. Since he was filled with these feelings, he had to communicate them to his dearest Sister. So he wrote to her that he had arrived in this capital of the reformation,247 and that as much as he had looked for Geneva in Geneva itself,248 he took good care not to regret the trouble he undertook to come there, since he had met there a Man who, with the qualities of a Minister and Servant of Jesus Christ, stood by his Master with dignity. He added that if the corruption of this city did not yet seem desperate, it would surely amend itself due to the preaching of such a faithful, strong, and effective herald of penitence; that most of his Colleagues, far from helping him, tried to nullify all his good intentions, some openly, others in secret; that despite all the obstacles that either they or others were trying to place before him, he did not give up any of his vigor and zeal; that he was indifferent to either the hatred or the love of men so long as he was faithful to God in the exercise of his Ministry; that he had banished from his heart all respect and consideration for human status when the glory and interest of his Master were at stake, or the faithful administration of the duty given to him; that on a certain day for fasting, having chosen as the topic of his sermon those words of our Lord in Luke, chapter 13, I tell you that unless you convert and repent, you will all perish,249 he had preached for four and a half hours in the great 243. Saint Ambrose (ca. 339–397), Bishop of Milan. His considerable influence helped bring about the conversion of Saint Augustine, whom he baptized in 387. 244. Saint John Chrysostom (ca. 347–407) first directed his preaching to the instruction and moral reformation of the nominally Christian city of Antioch, and then began to reform Constantinople, where he became bishop in 398. 245. Saint Augustine of Hippo (354–430), an expositor and theologian who shaped the Western Church. 246. Saint Bernard (1090–1153), Abbot of Clairvaux, was known for his eloquence and his devotion to Mary, something Dante was acknowledging when he made Bernard the last of his guides in the Divine Comedy. 247. Geneva became one of the cities central to the Reformation during John Calvin’s long residence there (1536–38, 1541–64). 248. A play on “Looking for Rome in Rome,” a famous epigram by the sixteenth-century Italian humanist Janus Vitalis on the ruins of Rome. 249. Luke 13:3.

356 Appendix D Temple250 full of people in a way that made the strongest minds and the most insensitive hearts tremble; finally, that he was a very admirable man who was powerful in both convincing the Christian world of its universal squandering of true Christianity, and in building the foundation of a full and lasting reformation. He wrote about some other particularities to his sister, promising to entertain her more amply upon his return. It was in this way that she obtained her first knowledge of this Servant of God, and that she began after that a correspondence with him from which she gained much fruit and consolation. Once back in Utrecht, Mr. de Schurman did not forget to tell her more; and after he had traveled along with her to various places in these Provinces to ascertain the splendor251 of the Churches and the most worthy sites, he fell sick some time later with the illness from which he died.252 Here is what his sister left in a memoir on the happy death with which the Lord was willing to crown the life of his faithful Servant:253 “My brother, Johan Godschalk van Schurman, having died in Utrecht after the death of my aunts who greatly comforted me both in their life and in their death, left us mighty testimonials of his zeal and of the love he had for the glory of God, principally during the years preceding his death. “Two nights prior to his happy departure from this mortal life, one of the Doctors came to tell me that he thought that my brother’s life would end that night. Having heard this conjecture of the Doctor, I judged that it was my duty to warn my dearest brother. I thus told him that I was not afraid of informing him of the judgment of the Doctor, knowing well that it would not be disagreeable to him. He replied sweetly and was not at all surprised: How, my sister, could you not tell me? I thank you for it, my sister, I thank you. I have lived long enough, and I am ready; when my God wishes, I am ready to follow Him. “And after we had called Mr. Voetius and then some of our other Ministers, he spoke with such strength and Christian courage that they were all astonished by it. One of them,254 who could not be dissuaded from spending the final two nights constantly by his side, declared that he had never seen a person so close to death who had such vigor of mind and spiritual strength, and that in all his time as a Minister he had not experienced an encounter from which he received such edification, saying that it was not dying, but delighting in God and preparing oneself for the marriage of the Lamb. 250. St. Peter’s Cathedral in Geneva. 251. L’éclat, the brilliance or worth of the churches. 252. Johan Godschalk died in September 1664 at age fifty-nine. 253. On Van Schurman’s account of the death of her brother, see Schotel, 149–53; Lieburg, “Johan Godschalk,” 63. 254. Jodocus van Lodenstein, according to Lieburg: “Johan Godschalk van Schurman,” 63. On Lodenstein, see in Appendix D note 261.

A Biography of Anna Maria van Schurman 357 “What is more, there were some pious persons who, having been familiar with my brother while he was in good health, set aside their homes and their most pressing affairs to keep constant vigil in his bedroom day and night, saying that they preferred this nourishment to all the banquets of the world. “He urged us all to give glory to God. As we were present in great number to see his happy departure, since the doctor had told us that he did not believe that my brother would survive the morrow, he said to me after midnight: Should we not sing praise to God? And having asked him which Psalm he wished to sing, he answered, Psalm 103.255 I asked him if he would not find it better that we read it because of his weakness. No, he said, let us sing it. A Christian must praise his God in his dying. We sang it, with him leading us, his voice expressing the strong and lively movements of his soul; he was filled with praises of his God, and I confess that I had never heard a sweeter voice, nor one more alive or tender. He ended the singing with us until the last two couplets, and what was even more surprising, he asked the same thing four hours before his death from a minister who had come to see him, and from us who were all present; and although we warned him that his weakness did not seem to permit this of him, he told us again the same thing, Know that a Christian must die while glorifying God. He thus sang with us Psalm 23256 right up until the end. For two more hours he asked us to sing with him the Canticle of Simeon,257 and so we did. “He testified also in his illness that it was good to live here when one lived in the service and in the glory of God and Our Savior Jesus Christ and that he would have very much liked to have further served them both in a public function, but that God’s will was always better than our own; that God did not need our services and that if He tells us, I do not take any pleasure in you, one should reply with the same heart as David’s: Here I am. Let God do with me that which he feels is best.258 “But who could relate the beautiful words by which he exhibited his renouncement of himself, his patience, and his ardent love for his Savior? One of these words which I found very beautiful, and which came from the bottom of his heart was that, The end of all things, that is to know the Glory of God, had been once placed very clearly before his eyes, and that since that time he had aspired to it and worked to attain it in the integrity and fidelity of his heart, albeit with great imperfection. Indeed, the impression that he received from it had been so alive and so penetrating that he never spoke of it without a deep, special feeling. “O! The goodness of God! he often said: O! His indescribable mercy! That a God would wish to be glorified by men! He possesses an infinite and eternal glory, He has no need of us or of any other creature, He suffices to Himself; nevertheless, He 255. “Bless the Lord, O my soul” (Vulgate); “My soul, praise thou the Lord” (Geneva Bible). 256. Perhaps the most famous of all the Psalms: “The Lord is my shepherd, I shall not want.” 257. Luke 2:25–32. 258. 2 Samuel 15:26.

358 Appendix D wants to be glorified by us, we who are nothing but creatures at once criminal and sinful. He could have damned us all and thus glorified Himself in the deployment of His divine justice; but no, He wanted to save a remnant, not only to glorify His goodness toward His Chosen Ones, but to ensure that they themselves glorify Him by celebrating His greatness, proclaiming His praises, and committing themselves lovingly to His divine glory, such that they find their happiness in the honor they give to Him, and their felicity in the love that they bring forth to Him. “He pronounced a second set of words, related to the ones that preceded them, to a minister who came to see him a couple of hours before his death, and who wished for him an even greater foretaste of the celestial bliss: It is sufficient for me to be able to serve the Lord. He is worthy of this for Himself. To glorify Him with all of one’s being, that is true happiness. “His third set of words was this: That he had loved Our Savior Jesus Christ from the heart. He said this with an inimitable air, as if his heart were leaving his chest upon pronouncing the words from the heart. “The fourth set of words is that when another Minister asked him on the morning that he died if he wished them to pray together to God once more, he replied: Yes, with all my heart, for a Christian must die while praying and adoring God. When his arms began to turn cold, he joined them together saying, I embrace my Lord Jesus Christ with the arms of faith. “I will say nothing of the good and wholesome instructions and exhortations which he addressed to the ministers as well as to us all, suitably to the state of each in turn. But I consider that he rejoiced once again at the hour of his death in the saintly doctrine of divine Predestination, speaking intelligibly the words of the Apostle: Nevertheless, God’s solid foundation stands firm, sealed with his inscription: The Lord knows those who are his.259 His hand and his chest seemed already dead, since they were without movement, and only his tongue seemed to have conserved some strength to pronounce again his last words: Come, Jesus, come.260 Amen. And with these words he expired, very softly, dying the death of the just, according to us all, at the age of fifty-nine in the year 1664.” Although he was the only brother of Mlle de Schurman and had taken the place of a father for her, and was incomparably dearer to her for his grace than for the relationship he had with her according to nature, she behaved in a very Christian manner in the loss that she felt on his account: God disposed, she said somewhere, my heart and my spirit to consider the happy departure of my brother; He reminded me that this life is a path and that we are travelers, and He urged me to direct my steps with a saintly haste toward the same homeland, where he had already gone. These impressions were so lively and at the same time so effective, that she could not fully appreciate the incredible goodness of Jesus Christ in this 259. 2 Timothy 2:19, which also echoes John 10:14: “I am that good shepherd, and know mine, and am known of mine” (Geneva Bible). 260. “Come, Lord Jesus”: the last words in the Book of Revelation (22:20) before John signs off (22:21).

A Biography of Anna Maria van Schurman 359 grace of hers. This is how she expressed herself about it at this time. In her Eukleria she adds, on page 137, that The grace of God had so fortified her in the practice of the faith and true charity, by that living and domestic example of a love so invincible through which she had seen her brother triumph over all his enemies, even in the eyes of death and of hell, that nothing terrestrial would ever again be able to seize her heart, nor occupy it even a little. Only one thing afflicted her: it was that she noted more than ever that both she and all those who were happy to bear the saintly name of Christians did not live worthily enough according to the saintly profession of faith that they had made. This is what made her groan for a greater communion in spirit and grace; and God who had put these sighs in her heart did not omit to answer them at the time and in the way that we will see later, when resuming the narration of the life of Mr. de Labadie. Their first communication with one another, as we have seen, was made possible through her brother, whose real name Mr. de Labadie came to know only when they parted. It was then that Mr. de Schurman told him about it, from Lausanne, where he wrote to thank him for the sincere Christian friendship shown to him during the time he stayed at his house. Mr. de Schurman assured Mr. de Labadie at the same time that he was leaving full of edification, not only of what he had seen of his zealous, saintly, and generous liberty in opposing public vice, but also and most of all for what he had noticed of his conduct in his own home, which he considered a Temple where God was continuously served and honored! Back in Utrecht, he could not help but talk about him not only to his sister, as we have said, but to Messieurs Voetius, Lodenstein261 and their friends, according to the fullness of the feelings he had. This aroused their hearts with the desire to be able to have him closer, which later led, as has been seen, Mlle de Schurman to write to him in her name and in that of the good Ministers, beseeching him not to refuse the call to preach in Middelburg262 that had been addressed to him, and urging him to come and work for the Reign of God in the [Dutch] Provinces. There he would have a great mission field and would find many hearts which, like theirs, would contribute to the advancement and success of his good and holy purposes. Having thus arrived in Utrecht, Mr. de Labadie went to see Mlle de Schurman with Messieurs Yvon, Dulignon, and Ménuret,263 and she has testified since that 261. Jodocus van Lodenstein (or Lodensteyn, 1620–1677), a pastor at Utrecht and colleague of Voetius in the Further Reformation, stressed personal communion with God, using the vocabulary of the mystics. Like Voetius, he was at first sympathetic to Labadie. However, when the latter set up his separatist household in Amsterdam, which Van Schurman joined in 1669, Lodenstein distanced himself. 262. Middelburg, Zeeland, was home to the oldest Walloon church in the United Provinces. Its pastor, Jean Le Long, died in 1665. This, coupled with the good reports on Labadie, led the consistory to invite Labadie to become its next pastor. Labadie accepted in December 1665. 263. Pierre Dulignon (or Du Lignon) and Jean Menuret were two of Labadie’s lodgers in Geneva from 1659 to 1666. They became his most fervent disciples. Saxby (360n103) refers to Menuret’s identity as

360 Appendix D she had been so touched by this first visit and by the following ones, that her heart was as if tied to his words; she felt in herself that he was a Servant of God such as she had so desired; in fact he was one who, to wage a tough war against the world and worldliness, had received a special grace to lead souls into the ways of God and who, as she hoped, would also lead her to experience a great desire to purify herself before God’s face and live more fully for Him. She first talked about his arrival and her joy to Mr. Voetius and other Minister friends, who promptly went to her house to welcome him and show their contentment at his arrival.264

problematic. 264. This is the end of Yvon’s biographical sketch of Van Schurman.

Appendix E Examples of Anna Maria van Schurman’s Latin and French Letters 1. Van Schurman to Rivet, 20 July 1631 (no. 1) This is Van Schurman’s first extant letter to Rivet (see Figure 3).

V(iro) C(larissimo) D(omi)no Andreæ Riveto S(alutem) D(icit) Nihil aliud e dignitate sua a me exspectare debuisset larga haec tua humanitas, Vir Reverende, quam mentis confusionem, aut certe silentium perpetuum: nisi per illecebras et Genii dulcedinem magis proprium eius esset ad responsionem invitare. Illa enim est, quæ partis meas suscipiens, ea tuetur gratia, ut summæ reliquæ ingenii tui dotes ab ea vinci no(n) recusent. Gauderem sane eo famae honorisque culmine collocari a tali viro, nisi post detectam animi actionumque mearum humilitatem, frustra coner obscuritatis presidio delitescere. Atqui laudes has, quas in me confers uberrime, ne sterile prorsus sortiantur subjectum; veluti incitamenta, quibus aliquando hac nostra ætate destituimur, libens accipio: ut talibus animosa auspiciis, eoq(ue) virtutum scientiarumque stadio pergens alacrius, perpetuæ tuæ erga me benevolentiæ amplissimum habeant argumentum. Enimvero quis non exsultet ad voces illas tam officiosas, tam amicas? quid memorem voces? imo affectum hunc tam calide in literris tuis spirantem? quanto magis autem ego? cui ab annis jam aliquot amorem ac reverentiam tui sancta incussit Theologia, in qua rarissimæ virtutes tuæ dignam nactæ materiem haud secus splendore eminebant, quam notiores in cælo stellæ, Sole illo lumen suum circumfundente.Hanc igitur venerabor tanquam unicam conciliatricem tutricemq(ue) nostr(a)e Amicitiæ in cuius sanctionem etiamnum offero consecroq(ue) quidquid habeo Fide dignum. Vale virorum pr(a)estantissime, et intimam meo nomine salutem dilectæ tuæ Conjugi impertiri ne graveris, in primis exopto. Trajecti ad Rhenum. An(n)o 1631. Jul. 20 Cui subinde crescit virtutum tuarum admiratio Anna Maria A Schurman

361

362 Appendix E 2. Van Schurman to Marie du Moulin, 13 March 1652 (no. 62) This is Van Schurman’s last extant letter to Marie du Moulin, whom she thanks for sending her The Last Hours of Monsieur Rivet.265

À Mademoiselle, Mademoiselle du Moulin. Ma tres-chere Soeur, Mon voyage de Delft, que j’ay fait principalement pour voir nostre treschere Soeur de Maisonneuve,266 m’a retardé quelques jours à vous remercier de ceste tres-excellente piece, à laquelle vous avez donné le jour. C’est un present dont toute la Chrestienté vous est redevable; et lequel je regarde non seulement comme un beau pourtrait d’une ame comblée de dons et graces celestes: mais aussi comme un testament de mon Pere, qui comprend des motifs et des regles toutes divines pour vivre et mourir heureusement; et qui a cela de particulier pour moy, qu’il me declare comment ce sainct Personnage s’est souvenu de moy en ses plus grandes douleurs et foiblesses; qu’il m’a donné ses saintes benedictions, avec tant d’expressions de paroles emphatiques; y adjoustant, pour gage de son amour spirituel, un legat du Testament de nostre Dieu, en la meilleure forme. Ce me sont veritablement des marques infaillibles de son affection paternelle, qu’il m’a conservé jusqu’au dernier souspir de sa vie; lesquelles me sont plus precieuses que les thresors des Indes. La condition que vous me proposez, touchant ceste petite Bible, et celle que vous avez herité pareillement, je la trouve si raisonnable et si avantageuse pour moy, que je veux que la presente vous soit, en ce regard, au lieu de testament, afin qu’elle vous soit rendüe de mon heritier apres ma mort. Car je le prens à gain, et grand honneur, que ma memoire se puisse eterniser avec celle d’une si illustre et saincte Personne, laquelle Dieu a voulu faire l’objet de toutes ses graces plus speciales. Et ce m’est une espece de plaisir, des le present, de m’imaginer un temps, quand je ne seray plus au monde, que vous vous souviendrez de nos alliances, et fermes amitiez, et de la personne qui demeurera toute sa vie, Tres chere Soeur, Votre tres-humble et tresA Utrecht affectionnée Soeur et Servante, me Ce 13 de Mars 1652 A. M. de Schurman Mes Tantes et mon Frere vous saluent Tres-humblement et moy Madamoislle vostre Tante.

265. Les Dernieres heures de Monsieur Rivet (Breda: Johannes Waesberghe, 1651). Rivet died on 7 January 1651. See letter no. 62, 1:68. 266. Madeleine, the wife and niece of Isaac de Perponcher, Sieur de Maisonneuve. See note to no. 62, 1:68.

Bibliography Primary Sources Manuscript Sources Koninklijke Bibliotheek, The Hague Ms. 133 B 8. A Collection of Seventy-four letters & four Latin Poems &c. in the handwriting of the very talented & very celebrated Anna Maria de Schurman. The letters almost altogether addressed to Andrew Rivet D.D. Tutor of the Young Prince of Orange and Author of Critici Sacri &c. &c., 1632–1669. Ms. KA 45. Letters from Constantijn Huygens to Anna Maria van Schurman. Ms. 135 D 79. Van Schurman to Marie Le Jars de Gournay, 28 February 1640. Ms. 135 C 91. Van Schurman to Huygens, 4 November 1667. Ms. 74D14, ff. 150–1. Abraham Frederik van Schurman to the Senate of the Academy of Franeker, May 1782. KW79J50. Album amicorum of Juliana de Roussel. Utrecht University Library, Special Collections Hs. 983 (7E7), ff. 79r–80v. Van Schurman to André Rivet, 2 January 1632 (no. 3). Hs. 8*F.19 ff. 1–3v. Van Schurman to Rivet, 18 March 1635. Leiden University Library, Special Collections Ms. PAP 2. Johan Godschalk van Schurman to Caspar Barlaeus, 5 December 1629. BPL 286/49. André Pineau to Rivet, 12 September 1642. Ms. PAP 2. Letter to Andreas Colvius, 26 May 1657. Ms. Hug. 37. Poems by Van Schurman to Huygens, 1649–1658. British Museum Library Harley 6824, F. 90. Van Schurman to Rivet, 6 November 1637 (no. 14). Bibliothèque nationale de France A.F. Fr. 22.865. Louis Jacob, Bibliothèque des femmes illustres par leurs écrits, 1646.

Other Primary Sources Academiae Ultrajectinae inauguratio, unà cum orationibus inauguralibus. Utrecht: Aegidus and Petrus Roman, 1636. Agrippa, Henricus Cornelius. Declamation on the Nobility and Preeminence of the Female Sex. Translated and edited by Albert Rabil, Jr. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1996. 363

364 Bibliography Andreas, Valerius [Walter Driessens]. Bibliotheca Belgica: de Belgis vita scriptisque claris. Louvain: Jacob Zegers, 1643. Anonymous [Sophia]. Woman Not Inferior to Man; or, A Short and Modest Vindication of the Natural Right of the FAIR-SEX to a Perfect Equality of Power, Dignity, and Esteem, with the Men. London: Printed for John Hawkins, 1739; 2nd edition 1740. Ballard, George. Memoirs of Several Ladies of Great Britain; who have been celebrated for their writings or their skill in the learned languages, arts, and sciences. 1752. Reprint, edited by Ruth Perry. Detroit: Wayne State University Press, 1985. Balzac, Guez de. Lettres choisies, première partie. Edited by Valentin Conrart. Paris: Augustin Courbé, 1647. Barlaeus, Caspar. Epistolarum liber. Edited by Geeraert Brandt. Amsterdam: Johan Blaeu, 1667. ———. Poemata. 4th ed. 2 vols. Amsterdam: Johan Blaeu, 1645. Beets, Hubertus. Oratio in laudem mulieris: quod eâ nihil forte detur. Haarlem: Vincent Casteleyn, 1650. Bouhours, Dominique. Les Entretiens d’Ariste et d’Eugène. Edited by Bernard Beugnot and Gilles Declerq. Paris: Honoré Champion, 2003. Briquet, Fortunée. Dictionnaire historique, littéraire et bibliographique des françaises, et des étrangères naturalisées en France. Paris: Treuttel and Würtz, 1804. . Buchel, Aernout van [Arnoldus Buchelius]. Notae Quotidianae. Edited by J. W. C. van Campen. Utrecht: Kemink, 1940. Bullart, Isaac. Academie des Sciences et des Arts, contenant les Vies, et les Eloges Historiques des Hommes Illustres parmi diverses Nations de l’Europe. 2 vols. Amsterdam: Elzevier, 1682. Clarke, Desmond M., trans. and ed. The Equality of the Sexes: Three Feminist Texts of the Seventeenth Century. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013. Colomiès, Paul. Gallia orientalis, sive Gallorum qui linguam hebræam vel alias orientales excoluerunt vitæ. The Hague: Adriaan Vlacq, 1665. Cupif, François. Déclaration de maistre François Cupif, . . . où il déduit les raisons qui l’ont meut à se séparer de l’Eglise romaine pour embrasser la reformée. Charenton: Mondière, 1637. ———. Lettre de M. Cupif à MM. les pasteurs et anciens, assemblez en Consistoire à Charenton, sur l’importance de P. Véron. Charenton: Louis Vendôme, 1639. Danckaerts, Jasper. Journal of Jasper Danckaerts: 1679–1680. Edited by Bartlett Burleigh James and J. Franklin Jameson. New York: Barnes and Noble, 1941. Descartes, René. Œuvres complètes. Edited by Charles Adam and Paul Tannéry. 12 vols. Paris: Vrin, 1964–71.

Bibliography 365 Descartes, René, and Martin Schoock. La Querelle d’Utrecht. Edited and translated by Theo Verbeek. Preface by Jean-Luc Marion. Paris: Les Impressions nouvelles, 1988. Des Hayons, Thomas. Epigrammes, consacrez à la vertu de Madamoiselle Anne Marie de Schurman. Utrecht: Johannes Waesberghe, 1649. Dictionnaire abrégé des femmes illustres, ou recommandables par leur esprit, leurs talens, leurs vertus, & par des actions de courage, ou d’héroïsme. Paris: Chez les marchands de nouveautés, 1800. [Drake, Judith.] An Essay in Defense of the Female Sex. London: Printed for A. Roper and E. Wilkinson, 1696. [Du Moulin, Marie.] De la Premiere education d’un Prince. Depuis sa naissance jusqu’à l’aage de sept ans. Traitté tres-utile non seulement aux grands, mais encor à tous ceux qui desirent de bien élever leurs enfans. Rotterdam: Arnout Leers, 1654. Reprinted as De l’education des enfans. Et particulierement de celle des princes. Où il est montré de quelle importance sont les sept premieres années de la vie. Amsterdam: Elzevier, 1679. ———. Les Dernieres heures de Monsieur Rivet, vivant docteur & professeur honoraire en l’Université de Leyden, & curateur de l’echole illustre, & college d’Orange à Breda. Sedan: François Chayer; Breda: Johannes Waesberghe, 1651. ———. The Last Hours of the Right Reverend Father in God Andrew Rivet. Translated by G. L. [George Lauder]. The Hague: Samuel Brown, 1652. ———. Récit des dernières heures de Monsieur du Moulin. Sedan: François Chayer, 1658. Du Moulin, Pierre. Lettre . . . à Monsieur Rivet son beau-frere . . . contre les faux bruits semez en quelques lieux, au prejudice de sa constance en la vraye Religion. The Hague: Ludolph Breeckevelt, 1643. ———. La Philosophie mise en françois et divisée en 3 parties, sçavoir éléments de la logique, la physique ou science naturelle, l’ethique, ou science morale. Paris: Thomas Blaise and Olivier de Varennes, 1644. Eberti, Johann Caspar. Eröffnetes Cabinet deß Gelehrten Frauen-Zimmers. Frankfurt and Leipzig: Rohrlach, 1706. Erasmus, Desiderius. The Correspondence of Erasmus. Edited and translated by R. A. B. Mynors and D. F. S. Thompson. 18 vols. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1974–. ———. Erasmus on Women. Edited by Erika Rummel. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1996. Evelyn, John. Sculptura, or, the History and Art of Chalcography, and Engraving with Copper. London: Printed for G. Beedle, 1662. Fedele, Cassandra. Letters and Orations. Edited and translated by Diana Robin. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2000.

366 Bibliography Feijóo, Benito J. Defensa de la mujer: Discurso XVI del Teatro crítico. Edited by Victoria Sau. Barcelona: Icaria, 1997. “Femme.” In vol. 6 of l’Encyclopédie, ou, Dictionnaire raisonné des sciences, des arts et des métiers, edited by Denis Diderot and Jean le Rond d’Alembert, 468–76. Paris: André le Breton et al., 1756. Foxe, John. The Acts and Monuments of John Foxe; with a Life of the Martyrologist, and Vindication of the Work, by George Townsend. Originally published as Actes and Monuments of these latter and perillous dayes, touching matters of the Church. London: John Day, 1563. Rpt. New York: AMS Press, 1965. Gemert, Lia van, et al., eds. Women’s Writing from the Low Countries, 1200–1875: A Bilingual Anthology. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press, 2010. Gilberto da Cesena, Domenico. La Fama trionfante: Panegirico alla bellissima, castissima, e dottissima Signora Anna Maria Schurman. Rome: n.p., 1642. Gössmann, Elisabeth, ed. Eva: Gottes Meisterwerk. Munich: Iudicium, 2000. Gournay, Marie Le Jars de. Apology for the Woman Writing and Other Works. Edited and translated by Richard Hillman and Colette Quesnel. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2002. ———. Œuvres complètes. Edited by Jean-Claude Arnould et al. 2 vols. Paris: Honoré Champion, 2002. Huet, Pierre-Daniel. Mémoires (1718). Edited by Philippe-Joseph Salazar. Paris: Klincksieck, 1993. Huygens, Constantijn. De Briefwisseling. Edited by Jacob A. Worp. 6 vols. ’sGravenhage: Nijhoff, 1911–17. ———. Dagh-werck van Constantijn Huygens. Edited by F. L. Zwaan. Assen: Van Gorcum, 1973. ———. Driehonderd brieven over muziek van, aan en rond Constantijn Huygens. Edited by Rudolf Rasch. 2 vols. Hilversum: Verloren, 2007. ———. Gedichten. Edited by Jacob A. Worp. 8 vols. Groningen: Wolters, 1892–98. ———. Mijn leven verteld aan mijn kinderen: in twee boeken. Edited and translated by F. R. E. Blom. 2 vols. Amsterdam: Prometheus, 2003. ———. Momenta desultoria: Poëmatum libri XI. Edited by Caspar Barlaeus. Leiden: Elzevier, 1644. ———. Pathodia sacra et profana: Unius vocis cum basso continuo. Edited by Frits Noske. Amsterdam: Groen, 1975. ———. A Selection of the Poems of Sir Constantijn Huygens (1596–1687): Revised Edition. Edited and translated by Peter Davidson and Adriaan van der Weel. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press, 2015. ———. Stemmen van Den Haag. Edited by F. R. E. Blom and I. L. Pfeijffer. Amsterdam: Prometheus, 2013. ———. Tien gedichten van Constantijn Huygens. Edited by F. L. Zwaan. Assen: Van Gorcum, 1976.

Bibliography 367 ———. Use and Non-Use of the Organ in the Churches of the United Netherlands. Edited and translated by Ericka Smit-Vanrotte. New York: Institute of Mediaeval Music, 1964. ———. De Zeestraat van ’s-Gravenhage op Scheveningen. Edited by Ad Leerintveld. The Hague: Valerius, 2004. Joly, Claude. Voyage ou description de toutes les villes de Munster en Westphalie, Hollande, Osnabruch, Cologne, et autres lieux des Païs-Bas. Paris: François Clouzier, Jean de La Tourette, and Pierre Aubouyn, 1672. Juncker, Christian, and Abraham Gottleber. Centuria foeminarum eruditione et scriptis illustrum. Leipzig: Christoph Fleischer, 1692. King, Margaret L., and Albert Rabil, Jr., trans. and eds. Her Immaculate Hand: Selected Works by and about the Women Humanists of Quattrocento Italy. Binghamton, NY: Center for Medieval and Early Renaissance Studies, 1983. Labadie, Jean de. Le Chant Royal du Grand Roy Jesus, ou les Hymnes & Cantiques de l’Aigneau. Amsterdam: Laurent Autein, 1670. ———. Le Triomphe de l’Eucharistie, ou la vraye Doctrine du St Sacrement, avec les moyens d’y bien participer. Amsterdam: Abraham Wolfgang, 1667. ———. Receüil de diverses Chansons Spiritüeles. Amsterdam: Laurent Autein, 1670. La Croix, Jean-François de. Dictionnaire historique portatif des femmes celebres. 3 vols. [Paris]: L. Cellot, 1769. Ladvocat, Jean-Baptiste. Dictionnaire historique-portatif, contenant l’histoire [. . .] des femmes savantes. 3 vols. Paris: Veuve Didot, 1760. La Suze, Henriette de Coligny, comtesse de. Elégies, chansons et autres poésies. Edited by Mariette Cuénin-Lieber. Paris: Classiques Garnier, 2017. Le Laboureur, Jean. Histoire et relation du voyage de la Royne de Pologne, et du retour de Madame la mareschalle de Guébrian, ambassadrice extraordinaire, & sur-intendante de sa conduitte. Paris: Toussainct Quinet, 1648. Makin, Bathsua, and Mary More. Educating English Daughters: Late SeventeenthCentury Debates. Edited by Frances Teague and Margaret J. M. Ezell. Toronto: Iter Academic Press; Tempe: Arizona Center for Medieval and Renaissance Studies, 2016. Marinella, Lucrezia. The Nobility and Excellence of Women, and the Defects and Vices of Men. Edited and translated by Anne Dunhill. Introduction by Letizia Panizza. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1999. Mather, Cotton. Magnalia Christi Americana, or, The Ecclesiastical History of New England. Hartford, CT: Andrus and Sons, 1855. ———. Ornaments for the Daughters of Zion. Introduction by Pattie Cowell. Delmar, NY: Scholars’ Facsimiles and Reprints, 1978. Ménage, Gilles. The History of Women Philosophers. Translated by Beatrice H. Zedler. Lanham, MD: University Press of America, 1984.

368 Bibliography Mersenne, Marin. Correspondance du P. Marin Mersenne, religieux minime, publiée par Mme P. Tannery. Edited by Cornélis de Waard et al. 17 vols. Paris: CNRS, 1933–88. Mollerus, Johannes [Johannes Möller]. Cimbria literata; sive, Scriptorum ducatis utriusque Slesvicensis et Holsatici. 3 vols. Copenhagen: n.p., 1744. Monconys, Balthasar de. Les voyages de Monsieur de Monconys en Angleterre, et aux Pays Bas. 1666. Reprint, Paris: Pierre Delaulne, 1695. Montpensier, Anne-Marie-Louise, duchesse de. Against Marriage: The Correspondence of La Grande Mademoiselle. Edited and translated by Joan DeJean. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2002. Morata, Olympia. The Complete Writings of an Italian Heretic. Edited and translated by Holt N. Parker. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2003. Paullini, Christian Franz. Das Hoch- und Wohl-gelahrte Teutsche Frauenzimmer. Frankfurt and Leipzig: Stössel, 1705; Erfurt: Stössel, 1712. ———. Philosophischer Feyerabend. Frankfurt, 1705; Erfurt, 1712. Petersen, Johanna Eleonora. The Life of Lady Johanna Eleonora Petersen, Written by Herself. Edited and translated by Barbara Becker-Cantarino. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2005. Planer, Johann Andreas. Gynaeceum Doctum, sive Dissertatio historico-literaria vom Gelehrten Frauenzimmer. Wittenberg: Matthäus Henckel, 1686; reprint, Wittenberg, 1701. [Puisieux, Madeleine de.] La femme n’est pas inférieure à l’homme, traduit de l’anglois. London [i.e., Paris]: n.p., 1750. Rivet, André. L’Instruction préparatoire à la Sainte Cène; avec cinq prédications convenables à la matière. Leiden: n. p., 1634. Rivet, André, and Claude Sarrau. Correspondance intégrale d’André Rivet et de Claude Sarrau. Edited by Hans Bots and Pierre Leroy. 3 vols. Amsterdam: APA–Holland University Press, 1978–82. Salchli, Jean-Jacob, ed. Les dernières heures de De Mornay du Plessis, Gigord, Rivet, Du Moulin, Drelincourt et Fabri: Nouvelle edition, augmentée des derniers moments de J.-C. Rieu . . . . Valence and Paris: J. Marc Aurel, 1847. Sauerbrei, Johannes. Diatriben academicam de foeminarum eruditione. 2 vols. Leipzig: Hahn, 1676. Saumaise, Claude, and André Rivet. Correspondance échangée entre 1632 et 1648. Edited by Pierre Leroy and Hans Bots. Amsterdam and Maarssen: Holland University Press, 1987. Schurman, Anna Maria van. Amica Dissertatio inter Nobilissimam Virginem Annam Mariam à Schurman, et Andræam Rivetum, de Ingenii Muliebris ad scientias, & meliores literas capacitate. Paris: n.p., 1638. ———. “Anna Maria van Schurman.” In Project Vox (2020), Department of Philosophy, Duke University. .

Bibliography 369 ———. Anne Marie de Schurman, femme savante (1607–1678): Correspondance. Edited by Constant Venesoen. Paris: Honoré Champion, 2004. ———. “The Correspondence of Anna Maria van Schurman.” Catalogue edited by Samantha Sint Nicolaas, with the SKILLNET Project, under the supervision of Dirk van Miert. In Early Modern Letters Online. . ———. Eukleria, seu melioris partis electio. Tractatus brevem vitae ejus Delineationem exhibens. Part 1: Altona: Cornelis van der Meulen, 1673. Part 2: Amsterdam: Jacob van de Velde, 1685. Dutch translation: Eucleria of Uitkiezing van het Beste Deel. Amsterdam: Jacob van de Velde, 1684. ———. “Excerpts from the Correspondence.” In Clarke, The Equality of the Sexes, 94–111. ———. The Learned Maid, or, Whether a Maid may be a Scholar? A Logick Exercise Written in Latine by that incomparable Virgin Anna Maria à Schurman of Utrecht; With some Epistles to the famous Gassendus and others. Translated by Clement Barksdale. London: John Redmayne, 1659. ———. Heilige lof-sangen ter eeren Gods, tot heerlijkheid van Jesus Christus, en tot vertroostinge en vreugde van sijn Kerk. Uit het Frans Vertaalt door Anna Maria van Schurman. Amsterdam: Jacob van Velzen, 1675. ———. Lettres de la très fameuse demoiselle Anne-Marie Schurmans, academicienne de la fameuse Université d’Utrect. Traduites du Holandois par Madame de Zoutelandt, à present femme du Sieur Boisson, Ingenieur du Roy. Paris: Rebuffé, 1730. ———. Nobiliss. Virginis Annœ Mariœ à Schurman. Dissertatio, de Ingenii Muliebris ad Doctrinam, & meliores Litteras aptitudine. Accedunt Quædam Epistolæ, ejusdem Argumenti. Leiden: Elzevier, 1641. ———. Nobiliss. Virginis Annæ Mariæ à Schurman, Opuscula Hebræa, Græca, Latina, Gallica. Prosaica & Metrica. Leiden: Elzevier, 1648/1650. ———. Nobiliss. Virginis Annæ Mariæ à Schurman, Opuscula Hebraea, Graeca, Latina, Gallica. Prosaica adque metrica. 3rd ed., amended and enlarged. Utrecht: Johannes Waesberghe, 1652. . ———. Pensées d’A.M. de Schurman sur la reformation necessaire à present à l’Eglise de Christ. Amsterdam: Jacob van Velsen, 1669. ———. Question célèbre. S’il est necessaire, ou non, que les filles soient sçavantes. Agitée de part et d’autre, par Mademoiselle Anne Marie de Schurman Holandoise, & le Sr André Rivet Poitevin. Le tout mis en François par le Sr Colletet. Paris: Rolet le Duc, 1646. ———. [As Jean Samuel.] Sérieux avertissement et vive exhortation à toute sorte de Fidèles Réformés. Amsterdam: Stephanus Molard, 1669.

370 Bibliography ———. Uitbreiding over de drie eerste capittels van Genesis. Beneffens een vertoog van het geestelyk huwelyk van Christus met de gelovigen, beide in zinrijke digtmaat t’zamen gesteld. Groningen: Jacobus Sipkes, 1732. ———. De Vitae Termino. In Johan van Beverwijck, Epistolica quæstio de Vitæ Termino, fatali an mobili? [. . .]. Leiden: Le Maire, 1639. ———. Whether a Christian Woman Should Be Educated, and Other Writings from her Intellectual Circle. Edited and translated by Joyce L. Irwin. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1998. Scudéry, Madeleine de. Selected Letters, Orations, and Rhetorical Dialogues. Edited and translated by Jane Donawerth and Julie Strongson. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2004. Tallemant des Réaux, Gédéon. “Mesdames de Rohan.” In vol. 1 of Historiettes, edited by Antoine Adam, 620–48. Paris: Gallimard, 1960. Tarabotti, Arcangela. Convent Paradise. Edited by Meredith K. Ray and Lynn Lara Westwater. Toronto: Iter Academic Press; Tempe, Arizona: Arizona Center for Medieval and Renaissance Studies, 2020. Visscher, Anna Roemers. Gedichten van Anna Roemersdochter Visscher: Een bloemlezing. Edited by Riet Schenkeveld-van der Dussen and Annelies de Jeu. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press, 1999. Vives, Juan Luis. De conscribendis Epistolis. Edited and translated by Charles Fantazzi. Vol. 3 of Selected Works of Juan Luis Vives, edited by Charles Fantazzi. Leiden: Brill, 1989. ———. The Education of a Christian Woman: A Sixteenth-Century Manual. Edited and translated by Charles Fantazzi. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2000. Voetius, Gisbertus. Sermoen van de nutticheydt der academien ende scholen, mitsgaders der wetenschappen ende consten die in de selve gheleert weren. Utrecht: Aegidius and Petrus Roman, 1636. Walsh, William. A Dialogue concerning Women, Being a Defense of the Sex: Written to Eugenia. London: Printed for R. Bentley and J. Tonson, 1691. Yvon, Pierre. “Abregé sincere de la vie & de la conduite & des vrais sentimens de feu Mr. de Labadie.” In Unpartheyische Kirchen- und Ketzerhistorie, edited by Gottfried Arnold, 2:1234–70. Frankfurt: Thomas Fritsch, 1700; reprint, Hildesheim: Georg Olms, 1967. Dutch translation: Amsterdam, 1754.

Secondary Sources Abadie, Lisandro. “Anne de La Barre (1628–88): Biographie d’une chanteuse de cour.” Revue de Musicologie 94 (2008): 5–44. Adams, Ann Jensen. “Disciplining the Hand, Disciplining the Heart: Letter-Writing Paintings and Practices in Seventeenth-Century Holland.” In Love Letters: Dutch Genre Paintings in the Age of Vermeer, edited by Peter C. Sutton,

Bibliography 371 Lisa Vergara, and Ann Jensen Adams, 63–76. London: Frances Lincoln Limited, 2003. Akkerman, Nadine. Courtly Rivals in The Hague: Elizabeth Stuart, 1596–1662, and Amalia von Solms, 1602–1675. Venlo: Van Spijk, 2014. Alenius, Marianne. “Learned Scandinavian Women in the 17th and 18th Centuries.” In Acta Conventus Neo-Latini Torontonensis: Proceedings of the Seventh International Congress of Neo-Latin Studies (Toronto, 1988), edited by Alexander Dalzell, Charles Fantazzi, and Richard Schoeck, 177–87. Binghamton, NY: Medieval and Renaissance Texts and Studies, 1991. Arblaster, Paul. “Posts, Newsletters, Newspapers: England in a European System of Communications.” In News Networks in Seventeenth Century Britain and Europe, edited by Joad Raymond, 19–34. London and New York: Routledge, 2016. Armstrong, Brian G. Calvinism and the Amyraut Heresy: Protestant Scholasticism and Humanism in Seventeenth-Century France. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1969. Arnaud, Eugène. Histoire des protestants de Provence, du comtat Venaissin et de la principauté d’Orange. 2 vols. Paris: Grassart, 1884. Arnould, Jean-Claude. “Y a-t-il une place pour les femmes dans la création littéraire? Marie de Gournay et la figure de l’autrice.” In Les femmes dans la critique et l’histoire littéraire, edited by Martine Reid, 13–29. Paris: Honoré Champion, 2011. Asselt, Willem J. van. “Andreas Rivetus (1572–1651): International Theologian and Diplomat.” In Klauber, The Theology of the French Reformed Churches, 251–75. Baar, Mirjam de. “Anna Maria van Schurman: Gereformeerde heilige en icon van feminism?” In Heiligen of helden: Opstellen voor Willem Frijhoff, edited by Joris van Eijnatten, F. A. van Lieburg, and Hans de Waardt, 215–28. Amsterdam: Bert Bakker, 2007. Baar, Mirjam de, and Brita Rang. “Anna Maria van Schurman: A Historical Survey of Her Reception since the Seventeenth Century.” In Baar et al., Choosing the Better Part, 1–22. Baar, Mirjam de, et al., eds. Choosing the Better Part: Anna Maria van Schurman (1607–1678). Translated by Lynne Richards. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1996. Bainton, Roland H. Women of the Reformation in France and England. Minneapolis: Augsburg Publishing, 1973. Barry, Cathy. “Dorothy Moore: Building Networks in the Republic of Letters.” Irish Philosophy (blog), 21 January 2016. . Beard, Mary. “What Does the Latin Actually Say?” A Don’s Life (blog), 16 August 2016. .

372 Bibliography Beek, Pieta van. “Alpha Virginum: Anna Maria van Schurman (1607–1678).” In Women Writing Latin from Roman Antiquity to Early Modern Europe, vol. 3: Early Modern Women Writing Latin, edited by Laurie J. Churchill, Phyllis R. Brown, and Jane E. Jeffrey, 271–93. New York and London: Routledge, 2002. ———. “Anna Maria van Schurman.” In Christian-Muslim Relations: A Bibliographical History, vol. 8: Northern and Eastern Europe (1600–1700), edited by David Thomas and John A. Chesworth, 596–602. Leiden and Boston: Brill, 2016. ———. “ ‘Ardens martyrii desiderium’: On the Martyrdom of Anna Maria van Schurman (1607–1678).” In The Low Countries as a Crossroads of Religious Beliefs: Intersections, edited by Arie-Jan Gelderblom, Jan de Jong, and Marc van Vaeck, 247–66. Leiden and Boston: Brill, 2004. ———. The First Female University Student: Anna Maria van Schurman (1636). Utrecht: Igitur, 2010. ———. “ ‘Habent sua fata libelli’: The Adventures and Influence of Anna Maria van Schurman’s Work in Scandinavia.” In Acta Conventus Neo-Latini Upsaliensis: Proceedings of the Fourteenth International Congress of Neo-Latin Studies (Uppsala, 2009), edited by Astrid Steiner-Weber, 1:199–209. Leiden and Boston: Brill, 2012. ———. “Herrezen uit de as”: Verbrande lofgeschriften van Rotger zum Bergen voor Anna Maria van Schurman (1649–1655). Schurmanniana-reeks no. 4. Ridderkerk: Provily Pers, 2015. ———. Het wereldwonder van Utrechts Academie: Naam en faam van Anna Maria van Schurman (1636–2016). Ridderkerk: Provily Pers, forthcoming. ———. “Klein werk: de Opuscula Hebraea Graeca Latina et Gallica, prosaica et metrica van Anna Maria van Schurman (1607–1678).” PhD diss., Stellenbosch University, 1997. . ———. “ ‘Liever een maagd dan een weduwe’: Twee Latijnse erotische gedichten op naam van Anna Maria van Schurman (1607–1678).” Tydskrif vir Geesteswetenskappe 49 (2009): 333–49. ———. “ ‘Ma très chère sœur’: Marie du Moulin (1625–1699) and Marie Jeanne des Pres (1675–1763). Two Forgotten Huguenot Women Writers.” Bulletin of the Huguenot Society of South Africa 39 (2002): 111–19. ———. “On God.” An Unknown Florilegium of Anna Maria van Schurman (ca. 1625). Schurmanniana-reeks no. 1. Ridderkerk: Provily Pers, 2014. ———. “ ‘O Utrecht, Lieve Stad . . .’: Poems in Dutch by Anna Maria van Schurman.” In Baar et al., Choosing the Better Part, 69–85. ———. “ ‘Pallas Ultrajectina, bis quinta dearum’: Anna Maria van Schurman en haar Neolatijnse dichtkunst.” In De Utrechtse Parnas: Utrechtse Neolatijnse dichters uit de zestiende en de zeventiende eeuw, edited by Jan Bloemendal, 45–67. Amersfoort: Florivallis, 2003.

Bibliography 373 ———. “ ‘Sol iustitiae illustra nos’: De femme savante Anna Maria van Schurman (1607–1678) en de universiteit van Utrecht.” Akroterion 40 (1995): 145–62. ———. “ ‘Tu mihi Parnassus, tu mihi Apollo eris’: Anna Maria van Schurman (1607–1678) en haar leermeesters.” Nieuwsbrief Neolatinistenverband 21 (2008): 5–16. ———. “Verbastert Christendom”: Nederlandse gedichten van Anna Maria van Schurman (1607–1678). Houten: Hertog, 1992. ———. “Zelfportret van Anna Maria van Schurman nu in Rijksmuseum.” Handreiking, Citypastoraat Domkerk Utrecht 48, no. 5 (2018). Beek, Pieta van, with Joris Bürmann. “Ex Libris”: De Bibliotheek van Anna Maria van Schurman en de Catalogi van de Labadiestenbibliotheek. Schurmanniana-reeks no. 5. Ridderkerk: Provily Pers, 2016. Beeke, Joel R. “The Dutch Second Reformation (Nadere Reformatie).” Calvin Theological Journal 28 (1993): 298–327. Beilin, Elaine V. “Transmitting Faith: Elizabeth Tudor, Anne Askew, and Jane Grey.” In A History of Early Modern Women’s Writing, edited by Patricia Phillippy, 137–52. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2018. Benedict, Philip. Christ’s Churches Purely Reformed: A Social History of Calvinism. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2002. Bethencourt, Francisco, and Florike Egmond, eds., Correspondence and Cultural Exchange in Europe. Vol. 3 of Cultural Exchange in Early Modern Europe, edited by Robert Muchembled. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007. Blom, F. R. E., and Ad Leerintveld. “ ‘Vrouwen-schoon met Mannelicke reden geluckigh verselt’: De perfect match met Susanna van Baerle.” In Kloek et al., Vrouwen rondom Huygens, 97–114. Boisson, Didier. “Les synodes provinciaux: Un révélateur d’un difficile apprentissage des normes dans les communautés réformées françaises (vers 1590– vers 1670).” In Trouver sa place: Individus et communautés dans l’Europe moderne, edited by Antoine Rouillet, Olivier Spina, and Nathalie Szczech, 171–85. Madrid: Casa Velázquez, 2011. Bots, Hans, ed. Constantijn Huygens: Zijn plaats in geleerd Europa. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press, 1973. ———, ed. Correspondance de Jacques Dupuy et de Nicolas Heinsius (1646–1656). The Hague: Nijhoff, 1971. ———. “Hugo Grotius et André Rivet: Deux lumières opposées, deux vocations contradictoires.” In Nellen and Rabbie, Hugo Grotius, Theologian, 145–55. ———. “Marin Mersenne, ‘secrétaire général’ de la République des Lettres, 1620–1648.” In Les grands intermédiaires culturels de la République des Lettres: Etudes des réseaux de correspondances du xvie au xviiie siècle, edited by Christiane Berkens-Stevelinck, Hans Bots, and Jens Häseler, 165–81. Paris: Honoré Champion, 2005.

374 Bibliography Bots, Hans, and Pierre Leroy. “La mort de Richelieu vue par des protestants: André Rivet et ses correspondants.” Lias 4 (1977): 85–98. Bots, Hans, and Françoise Waquet. La République des Lettres. Paris: Belin, 1997. Bots, J. A. “André Rivet en zijn positie in de Republick der Letteren.” Tijdschrift voor geschiedenis 84 (1971): 24–35. Bourchemin, Pierre Daniel. Etude sur les académies protestantes en France au XVIe et au XVIIe siècle.1882. Reprint, Geneva: Slatkine Reprints, 1969. Bourke, Evan. “Female Involvement, Membership, and Centrality: A Social Network Analysis of the Hartlib Circle.” Literature Compass 14, vol. 4 (2017). doi:10.1111/lic3.12388. Brink, Gijsbert van den, and Harro M. Höpfl, eds. Calvinism and the Making of the European Mind. Leiden and Boston: Brill, 2014. Broekman, Inge. “Constantijn Huygens’ Art Collection: The Importance of Portraiture.” In Gosseye et al., Return to Sender, 23–45. Broeyer, F. G. M. “Theological Education at the Dutch Universities in the Seventeenth Century: Four Professors on their Ideal of the Curriculum.” NAVK 85 (2005): 115–32. Brown, James C. “Revealed Law in Salmasius.” In Milton, Rights and Liberties, edited by Christophe Tournu and Neil Forsyth, 183–93. Bern: Peter Lang, 2007. Buis, Alena, Christi Spain-Savage, and Myra E. Wright. “Attending to Fishwives: Views from Seventeenth-Century London and Amsterdam.” In Mapping Gendered Routes and Spaces in the Early Modern World, edited by Merry E. Wiesner-Hanks, 177–99. Farnham, UK, and Burlington, VT: Ashgate, 2015. Bulckaert, Barbara. “Une lettre de l’humaniste Anna Maria van Schurman (1607– 1678) sur l’accès des femmes au savoir.” Clio: Femmes, Genre, Histoire 13 (2001): 167–83. Burgers, Jan W. J. The Lute in the Dutch Golden Age: Musical Culture in the Netherlands, 1580–1670. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press, 2013. Caston, Ruth Rothaus. The Elegiac Passion: Jealousy in Roman Love Elegy. Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press, 2012. Chang, Leah L. Into Print: The Production of Female Authorship in Early Modern France. Newark: University of Delaware Press, 2009. Clarke, Desmond. Descartes: A Biography. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006. Cohen, Gustave. Ecrivains français en Hollande dans la première moitié du XVIIe siècle. Paris: Edouard Champion, 1921. “Constantijn Huygens.” Digitale Bibliotheek voor de Nederlandse Letteren (DBNL), . Croxton, Derek, and Anuschka Tischer. The Peace of Westphalia: A Historical Dictionary. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 2002.

Bibliography 375 Cruz, Laura. The Paradox of Prosperity: The Leiden Booksellers’ Guild and the Distribution of Books in Early Modern Europe. New Castle, DE: Oak Knoll Press, 2009. Curtius, Ernst R. European Literature and the Latin Middle Ages. Translated by Willard R. Trask, with a new introduction by Colin Burrow. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2013. Dambrogio, Jana. Personal website. . Includes links to Letterlocking.org () and to videos on the art of letterlocking (). 2014–19. Davies, David W. The World of the Elseviers, 1580–1712. The Hague: Nijhoff, 1954. Daybell, James. “The Materiality of Early Modern Letters.” In A Handbook of Editing Early Modern Texts, edited by Claire Loffman and Harriet Phillips, 117–24. London: Routledge, 2018. ———. “The Materiality of Early Modern Women’s Letters.” In Women and Epistolary Agency in Early Modern Culture, 1450–1690, edited by James Daybell and Andrew Gordon, 55–77. London and New York: Routledge, 2016. ———. The Material Letter in Early Modern England: Manuscript Letters and the Culture and Practices of Letter-Writing, 1512–1635. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan, 2012. Dewald, Jonathan. Status, Power, and Identity in Early Modern France: The Rohan Family, 1550–1715. University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press, 2015. Dibon, Paul. “Communication in the Respublica litteraria of the 17th Century.” Res Publica litterarum: Studies in the Classical Tradition 1 (1978): 43–55. Rpt. in Regards sur la Hollande du Siècle d’Or, 153–70. Naples: Vivarium, 1990. ———. “Deux théologiens wallons face à Descartes et à sa philosophie: André Rivet (1572–1651) et Samuel Desmarets (1599–1673).” In Regards sur la Hollande du Siècle d’Or, 343–58. Naples: Vivarium, 1990. Dibon, Paul, and Françoise Waquet. Johannes Fredericus Gronovius, pélerin de la république des lettres: Recherches sur le voyage savant au XVIIe siècle. Geneva: Droz, 1984. Dibon, Paul, Eugénie Estourgie, and Hans Bots, eds. Inventaire de la correspondance d’André Rivet (1595–1650). The Hague: Nijhoff, 1971. Douma, Anna Margaretha Hendrika. “Anna Maria van Schurman en de Studie der Vrouw.” PhD diss., University of Amsterdam, 1924. Duran, Jane. “Christianity and Women’s Education: Anna Maria van Schurman and Mary Astell.” Philosophy and Theology 26 (2014): 3–18. Eck, Caroline van. “The First Dutch Feminist Tract? Anna Maria van Schurman’s Discussion of Women’s Aptitude for the Study of Arts and Sciences.” In Baar et al., Choosing the Better Part, 43–54.

376 Bibliography Eco, Umberto. Experiences in Translation. Translated by Alastair McEwen. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2001. Elk, Martine van. “Capable of Bruising a Letter: Early Modern Women’s Calligraphy.” In Early Modern Women: Lives, Texts, Objects (blog), 16 February 2018, . ———. Early Modern Women’s Writing: Domesticity, Privacy, and the Public Sphere in England and the Dutch Republic. London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2017. ———. “Female Glass Engravers in the Early Modern Dutch Republic,” RQ 73 (2020): 165–211. Ellington, Donna. From Sacred Body to Angelic Soul: Understanding Mary in Late Medieval and Early Modern Europe. Washington, DC: Catholic University of America Press, 2001. Eurich, Amanda. “Sacralizing Space: Reclaiming Civic Culture in Early Modern France.” In Sacred Space in Early Modern Europe, edited by Will Coster and Andrew Spicer, 259–81. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005. Ezell, Margaret J. M. “Invisibility Optics: Aphra Behn, Esther Inglis and the Fortunes of Women’s Works.” In A History of Early Modern Women’s Writing, edited by Patricia Phillippy, 27–45. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2018. ———. “Seventeenth-Century Female Author Portraits, Or, The Company She Keeps.” Zeitschrift für Anglistik und Amerikanistik 60 (2012): 31–45. Fabre, Pierre Antoine, et al., eds. Lire Jean de Labadie (1610–1674): Fondation et affranchissement. Paris: Classiques Garnier, 2016. Farnum, Emily. “Michel Le Faucheur and his Influence.” PhD diss., 5 vols., University of Wisconsin, 1964. Farrell, Michael P. Collaboration Circles: Friendship Dynamics and Creative Work. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2001. Felch, Susan. “ ‘Halff a Scrypture Woman’: Heteroglossia and Female Authorial Agency in Prayers by Lady Elizabeth Tyrwhit, Anne Lock, and Anne Wheathill.” In English Women, Religion, and Textual Production, 1500– 1625, edited by Micheline White, 147–66. Farnham, UK, and Burlington, VT: Ashgate, 2011. Findlen, Paula. Possessing Nature: Museums, Collecting, and Scientific Culture in Early Modern Italy. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1994. ———. “Science as a Career in Enlightenment Italy: The Strategies of Laura Bassi.” Isis 84 (1993): 441–69. Flaten, Arne R. “Renaissance Medals.” RQ 71 (2018): 645–56. Fogelberg Rota, Stefano. “Naudé, Bourdelot and Queen Christina’s French Court in Stockholm.” In Lieux de culture dans la France du XVIIe siècle, edited by C. Scott Dixon et al., 249–66. Farnham, UK, and Burlington, VT: Ashgate, 2009.

Bibliography 377 Forclaz, Bertrand. “The Emergence of Confessional Identities: Family Relationships and Religious Coexistence in Seventeenth-Century Utrecht.” In Living with Religious Diversity in Early-Modern Europe, edited by C. Scott Dixon et al., 249–66. Farnham, UK, and Burlington, VT: Ashgate, 2009. Franits, Wayne E. Dutch Seventeenth-Century Genre Painting: Its Stylistic and Thematic Evolution. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2004. Frijhoff, Willem. “Dimensions de la coexistence confessionelle.” In The Emergence of Tolerance in the Dutch Republic, edited by Christiane Berkvens-Stevelinck, Jonathan I. Israel, and G. H. M. Posthumus Meyjes, 213–37. Leiden: Brill, 1997. ———. “Religious Toleration in the United Provinces: From ‘Case’ to ‘Model’.” In Hsia and Nierop, Calvinism and Religious Toleration, 27–52. Gaukroger, Stephen. Descartes: An Intellectual Biography. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1995. Gelderen, Martin van. “Hot Protestants: Predestination, the Freedom of the Will and the Making of the Modern European Mind.” In Brink and Höpfl, Calvinism and the Making of the European Mind, 131–54. Geyl, Pieter. The Netherlands in the Seventeenth Century: Part One, 1609–1648. London: Ernest Benn; New York: Barnes and Noble, 1961. ———. Orange and Stuart, 1641–1672. Translated by Arnold Pomerans. London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson; New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1969. Goodman, Nigel, ed. Dawson Turner: A Norfolk Antiquary and his Remarkable Family. Chichester, UK: Phillimore, 2007. Goodrich, Jaime. “Thomas More and Margaret More Roper: A Case for Rethinking Women’s Participation in the Early Modern Public Sphere.” SCJ 39 (2008):1021–40. Gootjes, Albert. Claude Pajon (1626–1685) and the Academy of Saumur: The First Controversy over Grace. Leiden and Boston: Brill, 2014. ———. “The Theologian’s Private Cabinet: The Development and Early Reception of John Cameron’s Universalism.” In The Doctrine of Election in Reformed Perspective: Historical and Theological Investigations of the Synod of Dort, 1618–1619, edited by Frank van der Pol, 137–64. Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2018. Göransson, Elisabet. “Defining a Subgenre: Aspects of Imitation and Intertextuality in the Correspondence of Learned Women in Early Modern Times.” In Acta Conventus Neo-Latini Upsaliensis: Proceedings of the Fourteenth International Congress of Neo-Latin Studies (Uppsala, 2009), edited by Astrid Steiner-Weber, 1:415–27. Leiden and Boston: Brill, 2012. Gosseye, Lise, Frans Blom, and Ad Leerintveld, eds. Return to Sender: Constantijn Huygens as a Man of Letters. Ghent: Academia Press, 2013.

378 Bibliography Goudriaan, Aza. “Biblical Criticism, Knowledge, and the First Commandment in Gisbertus Voetius (1589–1676).” In Miert et al., Scriptural Authority, 309–24. Goudriaan, Aza, and Fred van Lieburg, eds. Revisiting the Synod of Dordt (1618– 1619). Leiden and Boston: Brill, 2011. Grootes, E. K., and M. A. Schenkeveld-Van der Dussen. “The Dutch Revolt and the Golden Age, 1560–1700.” In A Literary History of the Low Countries, edited by Theo Hermans, 153–292. Rochester, NY: Camden House, 2009. Guazzelli, Giuseppe Antonio. “Cesare Baronio and the Roman Catholic Vision of the Early Church.” In Sacred History: Uses of the Christian Past in the Renaissance World, edited by Katherine van Liere, Simon Ditchfield, and Howard Louthan, 52–71. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2012. Haag, Eugène and Emile. La France protestante: ou, vies des protestants français qui se sont fait un nom dans l’histoire [. . .]. 10 vols. Geneva: Joel Cherbuliez, 1846–59. Hal, Toon van. “The Alleged Persian-Germanic Connection: A Remarkable Chapter in the Study of Persian from the Sixteenth through the Nineteenth Centuries.” In Trends in Persian and Iranian Linguistics, edited by Alireza Korangy and Corey Miller, 1–20. Berlin and Boston: Walter de Gruyter, 2018. ———. “On ‘the Scythian Theory’: Reconstructing the Outline of Johannes Elichmann’s (1601/1602–1639) Planned Archaeologia Harmonica.” Language & History 53 (2010): 70–80. Hardy, Nicholas. Criticism and Confession: The Bible in the Seventeenth Century Republic of Letters. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2017. Harris, Jason. “Catholicism.” In The Oxford Handbook of Neo-Latin, edited by Sarah Knight and Stefan Tilg, 313–28. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2015. Harris, Johanna, and Elizabeth Scott-Baumann, eds. The Intellectual Culture of Puritan Women, 1558–1680. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan, 2011. Harvey, Tamara. Figuring Modesty in Feminist Discourse across the Americas, 1633–1700. Aldershot, UK, and Burlington, VT: Ashgate, 2008. Heal, Bridget. The Cult of the Virgin Mary in Early Modern Germany: Protestant and Catholic Piety, 1500–1648. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007. Heering, Jan Paul. Hugo Grotius as Apologist for the Christian Religion: A Study of his Work De veritate religionis Christianae (1640). Translated by J. C. Grayson. Leiden and Boston: Brill, 2004. ———. “Hugo Grotius’ De veritate religionis christianae.” In Hugo Grotius, Theologian: Essays in Honour of G. M. H. Posthumus Meyjes, edited by Henk J. M. Nellen and Edwin Rabbie, 41–52. Heitsch, Dorothea. “Cats on a Windowsill: An Alchemical Study of Marie de Gournay.” In Gender and Scientific Discourse in Early Modern Culture,

Bibliography 379 edited by Kathleen P. Long, 217–38. Farnham, UK, and Burlington, VT: Ashgate, 2010. Helmers, Helmer J. “ ‘The Cry of the Royal Blood’: Revenge Tragedy and the Stuart Cause in the Dutch Republic, 1649–1660.” In Literary Cultures and Public Opinion in the Low Countries, 1450–1650, edited by Jan Bloemendal, Arjan van Dixhoorn, and Elsa Strietman, 219–49. Leiden: Brill, 2011. ———. “Popular Participation and Public Debate.” In Helmer and Janssen, Cambridge Companion, 124–46. Helmers, Helmer J., and Geert H. Janssen, eds. The Cambridge Companion to the Dutch Golden Age. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2018. Herbert, Amanda E. Female Alliances: Gender, Identity, and Friendship in Early Modern Britain. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2014. Heuvel, Danielle van den. Women and Entrepreneurship: Female Traders in the Northern Netherlands, c. 1580–1815. Amsterdam: Aksant, 2007. Hofman, Hendrik Arie. Constantijn Huygens, 1596–1687: Een christelijk-humanistisch bourgeois-gentilhomme in dienst van het Oranjehuis. Utrecht: HES Uitgevers, 1983. Honders, H. J. Andreas Rivetus als invloedrijk gereformeerd theoloog in Holland’s bloeitijd. ’s-Gravenhage: Nijhoff, 1930. Horst, Koert van der, et al., eds. Handschriften en oude drukken van de Utrechtse Universiteitsbibliotheek. Utrecht: Universiteitsbibliotheek, 1984. Hsia, Ronnie Po-Chia, and Henk van Nierop, eds. Calvinism and Religious Toleration in the Dutch Golden Age. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002. Hunter, Dard. Papermaking: The History and Technique of an Ancient Craft. New York: Knopf, 1947. Irwin, Joyce. “Learned Woman of Utrecht: Anna Maria van Schurman.” In Women Writers of the Seventeenth Century, edited by Katharina M. Wilson and Frank J. Warnke, 164–85. Athens, GA: University of Georgia Press, 1989. ———. Womanhood in Radical Protestantism, 1525–1675. New York and Toronto: The Edwin Mellen Press, 1979. Israel, Jonathan I. The Dutch Republic: Its Rise, Greatness, and Fall, 1477–1806. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1995. Jager, Astrid de. “Constantijn Huygens’ Passion: Some Thoughts About the Pathodia sacra et profana.” Tijdschrift van de Koninklijke Vereniging voor Nederlandse Muziekgeschiedenis 57 (2007): 29–42. Janssen, Geert H. “Political Ambiguity and Confessional Diversity in the Funeral Processions of Stadholders in the Dutch Republic.” SCJ 40 (2009): 283–301. Jardine, Lisa. Going Dutch: How England Plundered Holland’s Glory. New York: HarperCollins, 2008. ———. Temptation in the Archives: Essays in Golden Age Dutch Culture. London: UCL Press, 2015.

380 Bibliography Jeu, Annelies de. ’t Spoor der dichteressen’: Netwerken en publicatiemogelijkheden van schrijvende vrouwen in de Republiek (1600–1750). Hilversum: Verloren, 2000. Joby, Christopher. The Multilingualism of Constantijn Huygens (1596–1687). Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press, 2014. ———. “The Use of Greek in the Poetry of Constantijn Huygens.” Humanistica Lovaniensia 60 (2011): 219–41. Kaplan, Benjamin J. Calvinists and Libertines: Confession and Community in Utrecht, 1578–1620. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1995. ———. “ ‘Dutch’ Religious Tolerance: Celebration and Revision.” In Hsia and Nierop, Calvinism and Religious Toleration, 8–26. ———. Reformation and the Practice of Toleration: Dutch Religious History in the Early Modern Era. Leiden and Boston: Brill, 2019. Keblusek, Marika, and Jori Zijlmans, eds. Princely Display: The Court of Frederik Hendrik of Orange and Amalia van Solms. Zwolle: Waanders, 1997. Klauber, Martin I., ed. The Theology of the French Reformed Churches: From Henri IV to the Revocation of the Edict of Nantes. Grand Rapids, MI: Reformation Heritage Books, 2014. Kloek, Els. “Moulin, Marie du.” In Digitaal Vrouwenlexicon van Nederland, . Kloek, Els, Frans Blom, and Ad Leerintveld, eds. Vrouwen rondom Huygens. Special issue, ZE 25, no. 2 (2009). Hilversum: Verloren, 2010. Konstan, David. “The Two Faces of Parrhêsia: Free Speech and Self-Expression in Ancient Greece.” Antichthon 46 (2012): 1–13. Labrousse, Elisabeth. “La doctrine politique des huguenots, 1630–1695.” In Conscience et conviction: Etudes sur le XVIIe siècle, 81–88. Paris: Universitas; Oxford: Voltaire Foundation, 1996. ———. “Marie du Moulin, éducatrice.” Bulletin de la Société de l’Histoire du Protestantisme français 139 (1993): 255–68. Laplanche, François. L’Ecriture, le sacré et l’histoire: Erudits et politiques protestants devant la Bible en France au XVIIe siècle. Amsterdam and Maarssen: APA– Holland University Press, 1986. ———. Orthodoxie et prédication: L’œuvre d’Amyraut et la querelle de la grâce universelle. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France, 1965. Larsen, Anne R.  Anna Maria van Schurman, The “Star of Utrecht”: The Educational Vision and Reception of a Savante. London: Routledge, 2016. ———. “ ‘No one misses the Grotius in Grotius’: Anna Maria van Schurman, André Rivet, and Religious Controversy in the Dutch Republic.” In Portraits of Women Who Exemplified Themselves Through Their Faith (XVIth–XVIIth Centuries). Special issue of Cahiers des Recherches Médiévales et Humanistes (Journal of Medieval and Humanistic Studies). Edited by Anne Larsen, François Rouget, and Colette Winn, forthcoming.

Bibliography 381 ———. “Religious Alterity: Anna Maria van Schurman and Jean de Labadie.” French Forum 43 (2018): 301–17. Lee, Bo Karen. Sacrifice and Delight in the Mystical Theology of Anna Maria van Schurman. Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press, 2014. Lee, Bo Karen, and Anne Larsen. “Anna Maria van Schurman.” In Oxford Bibliographies: Renaissance and Reformation. Edited by Margaret L. King. 2018. . Leerintveld, Ad. “Cursing in Private, Publically Polite: Huygens’ Reaction to the Antidotum of Calckman (1641).” In Return to Sender, ed. Gosseye, 141–57. Leeuwen, Theodoor Marius van, Keith D. Stanglin, and Marijke Tolsma, eds. Arminius, Arminianism, and Europe: Jacobus Arminius (1559/60–1609). Leiden and Boston: Brill, 2009. Leroy, Pierre E. Le dernier voyage à Paris et en Bourgogne, 1640–1643, du réformé Claude Saumaise: Libre érudition et contrainte politique sous Richelieu. Amsterdam: APA–Holland University Press, 1983. Levin, Carole. “Lady Jane Grey: Protestant Queen and Martyr.” In Silent but for the Word: Tudor Women as Patrons, Translators, and Writers of Religious Works, edited by Margaret Patterson Hannay, 92–106. Kent, OH: Kent State University Press, 1985. Lewis, Anthony, and Nigel Fortune. Opera and Church Music, 1630–1750. London: Oxford University Press, 1975. Lieburg, Fred A. van. “From Pure Church to Pious Culture: The Further Reformation in the Seventeenth-Century Dutch Republic.” In Later Calvinism: International Perspectives, edited by W. Fred Graham, Sixteenth Century Essays & Studies 22, 409–29. Kirksville, MO: Sixteenth Century Journal Publishers, 1994. ———. “Johan Godschalk van Schurman (1605–1664).” In Figuren en thema’s van de Nadere Reformatie, vol. 3, edited by J. B. H. Alblas et al., 55–68. Rotterdam: Lindenberg, 1993. Lynch, Andrew. “Emotional Community.” In Early Modern Emotions: An Introduction, edited by Susan Broomhall, 3–6. London and New York: Routledge, 2017. Maag, Karen. “The Huguenot Academies: Preparing for an Uncertain Future.” In Mentzer and Spicer, Society and Culture in the Huguenot World, 139–56. Maître, Myriam Dufour. “Les belles et les Belles Lettres: Femmes, instances du féminin et nouvelles configurations du savoir.” In Le Savoir au XVIIe siècle, edited by John D. Lyons and Cara Welch, 17–147. Tübingen: Papers on French Seventeenth-Century Literature, 2003. “Marie du Moulin.” In vol. 12 of Dictionnaire de Biographie Française, 253. Paris: Letouzey & Ané, 1970.

382 Bibliography Maxwell, Felicity Lyn. “Calling for Collaboration: Women and Public Service in Dorothy Moore’s Transnational Protestant Correspondence.” Literature Compass 14, no. 4 (2017). doi:10.1111/lic3.12386. McGee, J. Sears. An Industrious Mind: The Worlds of Sir Simonds D’Ewes. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 2015. Meli, Cinthia. “Le prédicateur et ses doubles: Action oratoire et jeux scéniques dans Le Traité de l’action de l’orateur de Michel Le Faucheur.” In Le temps des beaux sermons, edited by Jean-Pierre Landry, 117–38. Geneva: Droz, 2006. Mentzer, Raymond, and Andrew Spicer, eds. Society and Culture in the Huguenot World, 1559–1685. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002. Meuwese, Mark. Brothers in Arms, Partners in Trade: Dutch Indigenous Alliances in the Atlantic World, 1595–1674. Leiden and Boston: Brill, 2012. Mews, Constant J., and Neville Chiavaroli. “The Latin West.” In Friendship: A History, edited by Barbara Caine, 73–110. London: Equinox, 2009. Miert, Dirk van. “Education.” In Helmers and Janssen, Cambridge Companion, 333–49. ———. The Emancipation of Biblical Theology in the Dutch Republic, 1590–1670. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2018. Miert, Dirk van, et al., eds. Scriptural Authority and Biblical Criticism in the Dutch Golden Age: God’s Word Questioned. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2017. Moll, Willem. “ ‘Kerck-gebruyck der Psalmen’: Een onuitgegeven geschrift van Constantijn Huygens.” Studiën en Bijdragen op’t Gebied der Historische Theologie 3 (1876): 111–23. Mooij, Jacobus Daniel (Jack) de. Jona Willem te Water (1740–1822): Historicus en theoloog tussen traditie en Verlichting. Leiden: Eigen Beheer, 2008. Müller, Johannes. Exile Memories and the Dutch Revolt: The Narrated Diaspora, 1550–1750. Leiden and Boston: Brill, 2016. Muller, Richard A. “Beyond Hypothetical Universalism: Moïse Amyraut (1596– 1664) on Faith, Reason, and Ethics.” In Klauber, The Theology of the French Reformed Churches, 197–216. Must, Nicholas. Preaching a Dual Identity: Huguenot Sermons and the Shaping of Confessional Identity, 1629–1685. Leiden and Boston: Brill, 2017. Nellen, Henk J. M. “Disputando inclarescet veritas: Grotius as a Publicist in France (1621–1645).” In Nellen and Rabbie, Hugo Grotius, Theologian, 121–44. ———. Hugo Grotius: A Lifelong Struggle for Peace in Church and State, 1583– 1645. Translated by J. C. Grayson. Leiden and Boston: Brill, 2015. ———. “In Strict Confidence: Grotius’ Correspondence with his Socinian Friends.” In Self-Presentation and Social Identification: The Rhetoric and Pragmatics of Letter Writing in Early Modern Times, edited by Toon van Houdt et al., 227–45. Leuven: Leuven University Press, 2002.

Bibliography 383 ———. Ismaël Boulliau (1605–1694): Astronome, épistolier, nouvelliste et intermédiaire scientifique. Amsterdam: APA–Holland University Press, 1994. ———. “De Vitae termino: An Epistolary Survey by Johan van Beverwijck (1632– 1639).” In Acta Conventus Neo-Latini Hafniensis: Proceedings of the Eighth International Congress of Neo-Latin Studies (Copenhagen, 1991), edited by Ann Moss et al., 731–40. Tempe, AR: Medieval and Renaissance Texts and Studies, 1997. Nellen, Henk J. M., and Edwin Rabbie, eds. Hugo Grotius, Theologian: Essays in Honour of G. H. M. Posthumus Meyjes. Leiden: Brill, 1994. Nobbs, Douglas. Theocracy and Toleration: A Study of the Disputes in Dutch Calvinism from 1600 to 1650. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1938. Norbrook, David. “Autonomy and the Republic of Letters: Michèle Le Dœuff, Anna Maria van Schurman, and the History of Women Intellectuals.” Australian Journal of French Studies 40 (2003): 275–87. ———. “Women, the Republic of Letters, and the Public Sphere in the Mid-Seventeenth Century.” Criticism 46 (2004): 223–40. Noske, Frits. “Rondom het orgeltractaat van Constantijn Huygens.” Tijdschrift van de Vereniging voor Nederlandse Muziekgeschiedenis 17 (1955): 278–309. Nuttall, Geoffrey F. “English Dissenters in the Netherlands, 1640–1689.” NAVK 59 (1978): 37–54. Onnekink, David. “The Body Politic.” In Helmers and Janssen, Cambridge Companion, 107–23. Ossa-Richardson, Anthony. “The Naked Truth of Scripture: André Rivet between Bellarmine and Grotius.” In Miert et al., Scriptural Authority, 109–30. Pal, Carol. “Accidental Archive: Samuel Hartlib and the Afterlife of Female Scholars.” In Archival Afterlives: Life, Death, and Knowledge-Making in Early Modern British Scientific and Medical Archives, edited by Vera Keller, Anna Marie Roos, and Elizabeth Yale, 120–49. Leiden and Boston: Brill, 2018. ———. “Forming familles d’alliance: Intellectual Kinship in the Republic of Letters.” In Early Modern Women and Transnational Communities of Letters, edited by Julie D. Campbell and Anne R. Larsen, 251–80. Farnham, UK, and Burlington, VT: Ashgate, 2009. ———. Republic of Women: Rethinking the Republic of Letters in the Seventeenth Century. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2012. Peacock, Martha Moffitt. “The Maid of Holland and Her Heroic Heiresses.” In Women and Gender in the Early Modern Low Countries, 1500–1750, edited by Sarah Joan Moran and Amanda Pipkin, 68–127. Leiden and Boston: Brill, 2019. Pender, Patricia, and Rosalind Smith, eds. Material Cultures of Early Modern Women’s Writing. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan, 2014. Pipkin, Amanda. Rape in the Republic, 1609–1725: Formulating Dutch Identity. Leiden and Boston: Brill, 2013.

384 Bibliography Pollmann, Judith. “The Bond of Christian Piety: The Individual Practice of Tolerance and Intolerance in the Dutch Republic.” In Hsia and Nierop, Calvinism and Religious Toleration, 53–71. ———. “The Cult and Memory of War and Violence.” In Helmers and Janssen, Cambridge Companion, 87–104. ———. “Public Enemies, Private Friends: Arnoldus Buchelius’s Experience of Religious Diversity in the Early Dutch Republic.” In The Public and Private in Dutch Culture of the Golden Age, edited by Arthur K. Wheelock, Jr., and Adele Seeff, 181–90. Newark: University of Delaware Press, 2000. ———. Religious Choice in the Dutch Republic: The Reformation of Arnoldus Buchelius, 1565–1641. Manchester and New York: Manchester University Press, 1999. ———. “Women and Religion in the Dutch Golden Age.” Dutch Crossing 24 (2000): 162–82. Pollnitz, Aysha. Princely Education in Early Modern Britain. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2015. Posthumus Meyjes, G. H. M. “Hugo Grotius as an Irenicist.” In The World of Hugo Grotius (1583–1645): Proceedings of the International Colloquium organized by the Grotius Committee of the Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences, Rotterdam 6–9 April 1983, 43–63. Amsterdam: APA–Holland University Press, 1984. Prak, Maarten. The Dutch Republic in the Seventeenth Century: The Golden Age. Translated by Diane Webb. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005. Price, David H. Janus Secundus. Tempe, AZ: Medieval and Renaissance Texts and Studies, 1996. Prögler, Daniela. English Students at Leiden University, 1575–1650. Farnham, UK, and Burlington, VT: Ashgate, 2013. Pullapilly, Cyriac K. Caesar Baronius: Counter-Reformation Historian. South Bend, IN: University of Notre Dame Press, 1975. Rang, Brita. “An Exceptional Mind: The Learned Anna Maria van Schurman.” In Baar et al., Choosing the Better Part, 23–41. Rasch, Rudolf. “ ‘Aensienlicxte der Vrouwen, Aenhoorlixte daer toe’: Utricia Ogle in de ogen (en oren) van Constantijn Huygens.” In Kloek et al., Vrouwen rondom Huygens, 131–48. ———. “Descartes en de Ban-Boësset-controverse.” In Née Cartésienne/Cartesiaansch Geboren: Descartes en de Utrechtse Academie, 1636–2005, edited by Willem Koops, Leen Dorsman, and Theo Verbeek, 178–95. Assen: Van Gorcum, 2005. ———. “Waarom schreef Constantijn Huygens zijn Pathodia sacra et profana?” In Constantijn Huygens, 1596–1996. Lezingen van het tweede Groningse Huygens-symposium. Ed. N. F. Streekstra, 95–124. Groningen: Passage, 1997.

Bibliography 385 Ray, Meredith K. “Letters and Lace: Arcangela Tarabotti and Convent Culture in Seicento Venice.” In Campbell and Larsen, Early Modern Women and Transnational Communities of Letters, 45–73. Reinders, Sophie. “ ‘Social Networking is in our DNA’: Women’s Alba Amicorum as Places to Build and Affirm Group Identities.” In Identity, Intertextuality, and Performance in Early Modern Song Culture, edited by Dieuwke van der Poel, Louis P. Grijp, and Wim van Anrooij, 150–77. Leiden and Boston: Brill, 2016. Ricoeur, Paul. “Translation as Challenge and Source of Happiness.” In On Translation, translated by Eileen Brennan, 3–10. London and New York: Routledge, 2006. Ross, Sarah Gwyneth. The Birth of Feminism: Woman as Intellect in Renaissance Italy and England. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2009. Rowen, Herbert H. The Princes of Orange: The Stadholders in the Dutch Republic. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1988. Saxby, T. J. The Quest for the New Jerusalem: Jean de Labadie and the Labadists, 1610–1744. Dordrecht: Nijhoff, 1987. Schenkeveld-van der Dussen, Riet, et al., eds. Met en zonder lauwerkrans: Schrijvende vrouwen uit de vroegmoderne tijd, 1550–1850, van Anna Bijns tot Elise van Calcar. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press, 1997. Scher, Stephen, ed. The Currency of Fame: Portrait Medals of the Renaissance. New York: The Frick Collection, 1994. Schotel, G. D. J. Anna Maria van Schurman. ’s-Hertogenbosch: G. Muller, 1853. Schroeder, Carl J. In Quest of Pentecost: Jodocus van Lodenstein and the Dutch Second Reformation. Lanham, MD: University Press of America, 2001. Schuurman, Paul. “ ‘Thou Knowest not the Works of God’: Gisbertus Voetius (1589–1676) and John Locke on Learned Ignorance.” Westminster Theological Journal 72 (2010): 59–69. Sellin, Paul R., and Margriet Lacy-Bruijn. “Royalist Propaganda and Dutch Poets on the Execution of Charles I: Notes Towards an Inquiry.” Dutch Crossing 24 (2016): 241–64. Smith, Theresa Ann. The Emerging Female Citizen: Gender and Enlightenment in Spain. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 2006. Sneller, A. Agnes. “ ‘If she had been a man . . .’: Anna Maria van Schurman in the Social and Literary Life of Her Age.” In Baar et al., Choosing the Better Part, 133–49. ———. Met Man en Macht: Analyse en interpretatie van teksten van en over vrouwen in de vroegmoderne tijd. Kampen: Kok Agora, 1996. Spaans, Joke. “Religious Policies in the Seventeenth-Century Dutch Republic.” In Hsia and Nierop, Calvinism and Religious Toleration, 72–86. Spicer, Joaneath A. “The Role of Printmaking in Utrecht during the First Half of the Seventeenth Century.” Journal of the Walters Art Gallery 57 (1999): 105–32.

386 Bibliography Stanglin, Keith D., ed. The Missing Public Disputations of Jacobus Arminius. Leiden and Boston: Brill, 2010. Steen, Sara Jayne. “Reading Beyond the Words: Material Letters and the Process of Interpretation,” Quidditas 22 (2001): 55–69. Stevens, Harm. Shades of Orange: A History of the Royal House of The Netherlands. Translated by Lynne Richards. Amsterdam: Rijksmuseum, 2001. Stevenson, Jane. Women Latin Poets: Language, Gender, and Authority from Antiquity to the Eighteenth Century. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010. ———. “Women’s Education.” In Brill’s Encyclopaedia of the Neo-Latin World, vol. 1: Macropaedia, ed. Philip Ford, Jan Bloemendal, and Charles Fantazzi, 87–99. Leiden and Boston: Brill, 2014. Stighelen, Katlijne van der. “Anna Maria van Schurman (1607–1678) als kalligrafe,” De Gulden passer 64 (1986): 61–82. ———. Anna Maria van Schurman (1607–1678) of “Hoe hooge dat een maeght kan in de konsten stijgen.” Leuven: Leuven University Press, 1987. ———. “Constantijn Huygens en Anna Maria van Schurman: Veel werk, weinig weerwerk.” ZE 3 (1987): 138–48. ———. “ ‘Et ses artistes mains . . .’: The Art of Anna Maria van Schurman.” In Baar et al., Choosing the Better Part, 55–68. ———. “Portretjes in ‘Spaens loot’ van de hand van Anna Maria van Schurman (1607–1678).” ZE 2 (1986): 27–44. Stighelen, Katlijne van der, and Jeanine de Landtsheer. “Een suer-soete Maeghd voor Constantijn Huygens: Anna Maria van Schurman (1607–1678).” In Kloek et al., Vrouwen rondom Huygens, 149–202. Strien, Ton van. “Virtuoos en vertueus: Maria Casembroot (1621–?).” In Kloek et al., Vrouwen rondom Huygens, 115–30. Sutton, Elizabeth A. Early Modern Dutch Prints of Africa. Farnham, UK, and Burlington, VT: Ashgate, 2012. Terpstra, Nicholas. Religious Refugees in the Early Modern World: An Alternative History of the Reformation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2015. Thompson, John L. “Anna Maria van Schurman: Poetry as Exegesis.” In Embodiment, Identity, and Gender in the Early Modern Age, edited by Amy E. Leonard and David M. Whitford, 122–34. London and New York: Routledge, 2021. ———. “Piety, Theology, Exegesis, and Tradition: Anna Maria van Schurman’s ‘Elaboration’ of Genesis 1–3 and its Relationship to the Commentary Tradition.” In Church and School in Early Modern Protestantism: Studies in Honor of Richard A. Muller on the Maturation of a Theological Tradition, edited by Jordan J. Ballor, David Sytsma, and Jason Zuidema, 613–28. Leiden and Boston: Brill, 2013.

Bibliography 387 Timmermans, Linda. L’Accès des femmes à la culture (1598–1715): Un débat d’idées de Saint François de Sales à la Marquise de Lambert. Paris: Honoré Champion, 1993. Trevor-Roper, Hugh. “Hugo Grotius and England.” In The Exchange of Ideas: Religion, Scholarship and Art in Anglo-Dutch Relations in the Seventeenth Century, edited by Simon Groenveld and Michael Wintle, 42–67. Zutphen: Walburg Instituut, 1994. Trim, D.J.B. “Huguenot Soldiering c. 1560–1685: The Origins of a Tradition.” In War, Religion and Service: Huguenot Soldiering, 1685–1713, edited by Matthew Glozier and David Onnekink, 9–30. Aldershot, UK, and Burlington, VT: Ashgate, 2007. Tulot, Jean-Luc, ed. Correspondance d’Elisabeth de Nassau, duchesse de Bouillon, Années 1630–1642. . ______, ed. Correspondance de Guillaume Rivet à son frère André. Introduction. . ———. “Familles de l’Eglise réformée de Thouars au XVIIe siècle,” Cahiers du Centre de généalogie protestante 90 (2005): 61–79. Uchelen, Ton Croiset van. “Maria Strick, Schoolmistress and Calligrapher in Early Seventeenth-Century Holland,” Quaerendo 39 (2009): 83–132. Uckelman, Sara L. “Bathsua Makin and Anna Maria van Schurman: Education and the Metaphysics of Being a Woman.” In Early Modern Women on Metaphysics, edited by Emily Thomas, 95–110. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2018. Veen, Mirjam G. K. van, and Jesse Spohnholz. “Calvinists vs. Libertines: A New Look at Religious Exile and the Origins of ‘Dutch’ Tolerance.” In Brink and Höpfl, Calvinism and the Making of the European Mind, 76–99. Veldman, Ilja M. Crispijn de Passe and His Progeny (1564–1670): A Century of Print Production. Translated by Michael Hoyle. Rotterdam: Sound and Vision, 2001. Verbeek, Theo. “From ‘Learned Ignorance’ to Scepticism: Descartes and Calvinist Orthodoxy.” In Scepticism and Irreligion in the Seventeenth and Eighteenth Centuries, edited by Richard H. Popkin and Arjo Vanderjagt, 31–45. Leiden: Brill, 1993. ———. “The Utrecht Crisis.” In Descartes and the Dutch: Early Reactions to Cartesian Philosophy, 1637–1650, 13–33. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press, 1992. ———. “The Utrecht Crisis” and “The ‘Illustrious Brotherhood of Our Blessed Lady’ in ’s-Hertogenbosch.” In The Correspondence of René Descartes: 1643, edited by Theo Verbeek, Erik-Jan Bos, and Jeroen van de Ven, 183–201. Utrecht: Zeno Institute for Philosophy, 2003.

388 Bibliography Vinde, Lea van der. Vrouwen rondom Huygens. Voorburg: Huygensmuseum Hofwijck, 2010. Waithe, Mary Ellen, ed. Modern Women Philosophers, 1600–1900. Vol. 3 of A History of Women Philosophers. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1991. Waller, Gary. The Virgin Mary in Late Medieval and Early Modern English Literature and Popular Culture. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2011. Waquet, Françoise. Les enfants de Socrate: Filiation intellectuelle et transmission du savoir, XVIIe–XXIe siècle. Paris: Albin Michel, 2008. ———. Une histoire emotionnelle du savoir, XVIIe–XXIe siècle. Paris: CNRS Editions, 2019. Warner, Lyndan. The Ideas of Man and Woman in Renaissance France: Print, Rhetoric, and Law. Farnham, UK, and Burlington, VT: Ashgate. 2011. Westwater, Lynn Lara. “A Rediscovered Friendship in the Republic of Letters: The Unpublished Correspondence of Arcangela Tarabotti and Ismaël Boulliau,” RQ 65 (2012): 67–134. Wheelock, Arthur K., Jr. “Nothing Gray about Her: Cornelis Jonson van Ceulen’s Grisaille of Anna Maria van Schurman.” In Face Book: Studies on Dutch and Flemish Portraiture of the 16th–18th Centuries, edited by Edwin Buijsen, Charles Dumas, and Volker Manuth, 325–30. Leiden: Primavera Pers, 2012. Wieseman, Marjorie E. Caspar Netscher and Late Seventeenth-Century Dutch Painting. Doornspijk: Davaco, 2002. Wilson, Peter H. The Thirty Years War: Europe’s Tragedy. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 2011. Woods, Jean M., and Maria Fürstenwald. Women of the German-Speaking Lands in Learning, Literature and the Arts during the 17th and Early 18th Centuries: A Lexicon. Stuttgart: J. B. Metzler, 1984. Wyles, Rosie. “Ménage’s Learned Ladies: Anne Dacier (1647–1720) and Anna Maria van Schurman (1607–1678).” In Women Classical Scholars: Unsealing the Fountain from the Renaissance to Jacqueline de Romilly, edited by Rosie Wyles and Edith Hall, 61–77. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2016. Yates, Frances A. The French Academies of the Sixteenth Century. London: Warburg Institute, 1947; reprint, Nendeln, Liechtenstein: Kraus Reprint, 1968.

Index Académie française. See French Academy Aeschylus, 172n253 African Gold Coast, 194n364 Alba amicorum, 16, 96n322, 97, 385 alliance, as amitié (friendship), 42, 68–71, 72–73, 74, 173, 191, 197, 224, 245–46, 250–51, 261, 279, 280–81, 321–22, 330, 376, 379, 382–84, 388 (see also Schurman, Anna Maria van: friendship with Rivet) famille d’alliance, 129n34, 383 (see also Schurman, Anna Maria van: famille d’alliance) fille d’alliance, 147n126 (see also Schurman, Anna Maria van: fille d’alliance (covenant daughter)) frère d’alliance, 327n135 mère d’alliance (covenant mother), 70, 111, 177, 290 père d’alliance (see also Schurman, Anna Maria van: friendship with Rivet) soeur d’alliance, 29, 32, 65, 178, 182, 185, 188, 192, 195, 205, 211–13, 216, 218–19, 223–24, 228, 362, 372 Ames, William (Amesius), 15, 343 Amyraut, Moïse, 33, 61–64, 194–95, 204n406, 206–11, 213–14, 216, 219–21, 291–94, 371, 380, 382 Anacreon, 155n164 Anne of Austria (queen of France), 22, 45, 51, 188–89, 291 Apelles, 285, 323

Apollo, 26, 75, 91, 93, 110, 129, 140n87, 156n170, 185n319, 226, 231, 237n530, 245, 256, 264–65, 303, 305, 308, 309n46, 373 Aquinas. See Saint Thomas Aquinas Arbaleste, Charlotte. See DuplessisMornay, Charlotte Arbaleste de la Borde Aristotle, 37n141, 55n198, 74, 150n137, 150nn139–41, 151n142, 154n157, 160n187, 196n375, 248n595, 262 Arminius, Jacobus, 9, 19n80, 341n193, 381, 386 Arminians. See Remonstrants Arnold, Gottfried, xxiii, 11n51, 337, 370 Astell, Mary, 1, 36n139, 375 Augustine. See Saint Augustine Ausonius, 310n52 Baerle, Caspar van (Barlaeus), 1, 5, 11, 73n259, 77, 86, 119, 244n564, 303–12, 319–21, 346n217, 363, 364, 366 Baerle, Susanna van, 76, 78, 243n561, 244–45, 297, 311n58, 312n60, 373 Ballard, George, 108, 364 Ballard, Robert, 80, 247n588 Balzac, Jean-Louis Guez de, 102, 104, 216–17, 293, 344, 349, 364 Ban, Jon Albert (Bannius), 79 Barker, Edmund Henry, 113–14 Barksdale, Clement, 24, 112, 369 Baronio, Cesare (Baronius), 42–43, 179, 193, 197–99, 378, 384 Bartholinus, Thomas, 108 389

390 Index Basil the Great. See Saint Basil the Great Batavian(s), 4–5, 73, 77, 123, 198, 207n418, 208, 226, 230, 247, 251, 267–68, 303–5, 311, 315 Bayle, Pierre, 68, 100 Bembo, Pietro, 127n20 Berckoffer, Jean Henri de, 281–82, 301 Bergen, Rotger zum, 20, 109–10, 372 Bergerotti, Anna, 80, 282–83 Bernard of Clairvaux. See Saint Bernard Béthune, Maximilien de (duc de Sully), 51 Beverwijck, Johan van, 20–24, 36, 70, 82, 101, 110–11, 159n186, 170n238, 177, 205n410, 241n546, 325–27, 343, 346, 370, 383 works: De Vitae Termino [On the Temporal Limits of Life], 20–21, 24, 36, 111, 170n238, 326n131, 346, 370, 383; Van de wtnementheyt des vrouwelicken Geslachts [Of the Excellence of the Female Sex], 101, 159n186 Bezalel, 330 Bible, 9n40, 17–19, 30, 32n125, 33–34nn127–28, 37n142, 39, 55, 58, 66–68, 89, 100, 125n15, 204n408, 223, 329n145, 334nn162–63, 334n165, 334n167, 335n168, 344, 354n242, 357n255, 358n259, 362, 378, 380, 382 Bochart, Samuel, 344–45 Bohn, Henry George, 113 Boogaart, Justus van den, 27, 332n157 Borch, Ole (Olaus Borrichius), 108, 109n384

Bouhours, Dominique, 104, 364 Boulliau, Ismaël, 105, 383, 388 Bourbon-Condé, Anne-Geneviève de (duchesse de Longueville), 20, 45, 214n448, 213–14, 293 Bourdelot, Pierre Michon de, 203n398, 345, 376 Bourignon, Antoinette, 337 Brakel, Theodorus à, 27 Brakel, Wilhelmus à, 27 Brenner, Sophia Elisabeth, 109 Briquet, Fortunée, 106, 364 Brune, Jan de Jonge (the Younger), 101 Bucer, Martin, 339 Buchel, Aernout van (Arnoldus Buchelius), 6n26, 11, 18–19, 22, 50, 77, 84, 170n242, 364, 384 Buffet, Marguerite, 104 Bullart, Isaac, 11–12n51, 12n53, 13, 104, 364 Bullinger, Heinrich, 153n153 Buxtorf, Johannes, 28, 354 Calvin, John, Calvinism, Calvinist, 2, 3n5, 4nn9–10, 6n25, 7n28, 8–12, 14, 16–17, 28–29, 32–33, 46, 47n171, 50, 53–54, 55n198, 57, 57–64, 74, 76n267, 83, 124n11, 136n63, 187–88, 195n369, 341n193, 355n247, 371, 373–74, 377, 379–81, 384–85, 387 Cameron, John, 62–63, 377 Cardinal Mazarin. See Mazarin, Jules, Cardinal Cardinal Richelieu. See Richelieu, Armand Jean du Plessis (Cardinal de) Cary, Mary, 107 Casembroot, Maria, 74, 250–51, 261, 282n747, 297–98, 386 Cassander, Georg, 58–59, 180

Index 391 Catholic Church, Catholicism, Catholic, 4, 6, 11, 16, 27, 33, 41–48, 50–54, 58–59, 64–65, 68, 81, 83, 144n106, 146n116, 153n155, 168–69, 181n300, 193–94nn363–64, 197, 205n413, 339–40nn185–86, 376, 378 Cats, Jacob, 1, 15, 77, 84, 101, 342–43 Cato, 74, 263, 314 Catullus, 89–90, 92, 126n17, 321n103 Champion de Chambonnières, Jacques, 80 Charles I (king of England), 46–48, 72, 178n284, 214n447, 217, 219n465, 283n756, 293, 385 Château-Thierry Galien, Mme de (pseudonym), 106 Chesne, Charles du, 21–23, 32, 96, 166n221, 173–76, 181, 188–93, 289, 291 Christina (queen of Sweden), 16, 76, 81, 104, 106, 203n398, 344n211, 345–46, 376 Cicero, 17, 21, 89, 116, 118, 123n4, 147, 150n138, 167n226, 170n240, 172n253, 180n294, 241n544, 250n605, 321n103, 322n107 Clarian Muses, 256, 310 Claudian, 243n557 Cleobulina (or Eumetis), 158–59 Climacus. See Saint John Climacus Cologne, 8–9, 11–13, 20n85, 27, 109n388, 111, 192, 267, 299, 339–40, 351, 367 Coligny, Gaspard de (Admiral), 52 Coligny, Henriette (comtesse de La Suze), 52, 367 Coligny, Maurice de, 52 Colomiès, Paul, 104–5, 364

Colletet, Guillaume, 23–24, 111, 144n104, 158n182, 215n454, 326–27, 369 Colvius, Andreas, 22, 26n104, 33, 346n217, 363 Conrart, Valentin, 1, 33, 35, 104n356, 215n454, 220, 222, 228, 294, 344, 364 Coolhaes, Caspar, 8 Coornhert, Dirck, 8 correspondence, as letters manuscript, 2, 26n103, 43n159, 71n256, 95, 97–99, 112, 114–16, 140n87, 144nn103–5, 145n112, 162n200, 162n202, 174n258, 224, 309n49, 363, 375 network, 35n135, 71n253, 76n266, 129, 326n126, 371 (see also Schurman, Anna Maria van: networking) Counter-Remonstrants, 8–11, 41, 208n421 Coutel, Madame, 65, 72–73, 169, 171–73, 289, 321–23 Cosson de la Cressonnière, Charlotte. See La Cressonnière, Charlotte Cosson de Cunitz, Maria, 105 Cupif, François (sieur de La Béraudière), 44–45, 96, 194–95, 291, 364 Dalen, Cornelis van the Younger, xiii, xxi, 273, 299 Danckaerts, Jasper, 112, 364 Descartes, René, 3, 19, 33, 35n135, 53n193, 54–56, 57nn203–4, 76, 79, 81, 138n78, 139, 149n136, 178n282, 206–10, 218n463, 288, 292–93, 344–45, 364–65, 374–75, 377, 384, 387 Des Hayons, Thomas, 16, 365

392 Index Desmarets, Samuel (Maresius), 33, 49, 53n193, 54, 55–57, 91, 186–88, 206–7, 210–11, 217–18, 291, 293 D’Ewes, Sir Simonds, 1, 24, 26, 47, 107, 140–41n88, 204n407, 382 Donne, John, 76 Drake, Judith, 3, 365 Driessens, Walter (Valerius Andreas Desselius), 101, 364 Duarte, Gaspar, 79 Duifhuis, Hubert, 8 Dulignon, Pierre (or Du Lignon), 29, 330–34, 338, 359 Du Moulin, Marie (Molinaea) (daughter of Pierre du Moulin), 16, 29, 31–33, 35, 39–40, 65–68, 98, 104, 124n11, 135–36, 138, 141n90, 144n104, 176, 178–80, 182, 186n322, 188, 192n358, 195n371, 199, 202–5, 211–13, 216n457, 218–19, 223–24, 228n503, 274n708, 288, 291–94, 362, 365, 372, 380–81 Du Moulin, Pierre (Molinaeus), 33, 35, 47n169, 49, 61–66, 124n11, 136n63, 138, 167, 180–81, 184–86, 189, 191–95, 201–5, 212, 216, 219–22, 290–94, 365, 368 works: Esclaircissement des controverses Salmuriennes [A Clarification of the Controversies of Saumur], 63–64, 216, 220; Ethique, ou Science Morale [Ethics, or Moral Science], 186, 204n404, 365 Duplessis-Mornay, Charlotte Arbaleste de la Borde, 142n93 Duplessis-Mornay, Philippe, 142n93 Dupré, Guillaume, 254nn624–25, 258–59, 298

Dupuy, Jacques, 85, 105, 325n123, 346, 373 Dupuy, Hilaire, 80 Dutch Republic, xxiii, 1–6, 7nn27–28, 9n40, 10nn42–43, 11n50, 16n67, 16n70, 22, 40, 42, 45, 48n175, 73n260, 76n267, 84, 101–2, 119, 123n7, 139n82, 145n110, 208n422, 249–50n599, 257n636, 304n14, 331n153, 341n193, 376–77, 379, 381–82, 384–85 Dutch Revolt, 4, 8n33, 78n280, 118n413, 304n15, 378, 382 Dyck, Anthony van, 282n753, 283 Eberti, Johann Caspar, 103, 365 Eighty Years’ War, 45, 76n267 Elichmann, Johannes, xiii, xviii, 85, 192n354, 275, 276–77, 278, 300, 323–24 Elisabeth of Bohemia (daughter of Elizabeth Stuart and Frederick V of Bohemia), 1, 16, 30, 35, 78–79n282, 104, 126–28, 129n31, 132, 134n57, 343–44 Elisabeth of Orange-Nassau (daughter of William the Silent), 49–50, 387 Elizabeth Stuart (queen of Bohemia), 49, 71, 127, 371 Elstob, Elizabeth, 108 Elzevier (or Elsevier), 5, 6n21, 11–12n51, 22, 24, 33, 66n235, 73n259, 96, 105, 176, 177n274, 193n363, 220, 222, 230n509, 290, 294, 364–66, 369, 375 encyclopedia, 37, 117, 156 English Civil Wars, 33n126, 46–49, 52, 107, 179, 185–86, 204n407, 217n460, 290 engraving. See Schurman, Anna Maria van: engraving

Index 393 Erasmus, Desiderius, 8, 13, 58, 149, 153n152, 179n289, 241n544, 245n574, 254n620, 272n695, 275n713, 276n717, 278n724, 365 Esbergius, Johannes, 109 Evelyn, John, 107, 365 Fabricius, Christoffel, 12, 339 Fabricius, Vincent, 114–15, 228 Falkenstein, Elisabeth von Daun, 175 famille d’alliance. See alliance Feckenham, John, 153 Fedele, Cassandra, 32, 133n51, 240n541, 365 Feijóo, Benito Jerónimo, 111, 366 Ferry, Paul, 63 Fleming, Paul, 103 Florio, Michelangelo, 153n154 Fonte, Moderata, 1 Foxe, John, 13–14, 153n153, 341n194, 366 Frederick V of Bohemia (Elector Palatine), 127n23, 343 Frederik Hendrik, Prince of Orange (Stadtholder), 45, 47–50, 73–74, 76, 189n344, 197n378, 212n439, 214, 220n470, 230, 241n549, 261–62, 298, 304n14, 311n57, 380 French Academy, 33, 217n459, 220n473, 326n132, 344nn207–8 Further Reformation. See Nadere Reformatie Galileo Galilei, 149n136, 150n137 Gassendi, Pierre, 1, 24, 344, 346n215, 349 Gaston (duc d’Orléans), 50 Gilberto, Domenico da Cesena, 21, 110–11, 325, 366 Gobert, Thomas, 80

Gomarus, Franciscus, 9, 341n193 Gonzague, Marie-Louise de (queen of Poland), 20, 81, 109–10, 348 Gottleber, Abraham, 102, 367 Gournay, Marie Le Jars de, 1, 16, 32, 65, 68–71, 98, 111, 147–48, 158, 163, 170–72, 174–75, 177, 202n394, 289–90, 325–27, 363, 366, 371, 378 Goudt, Hendrik, 247 Grey, Jane (queen of England), 14, 153–54, 159, 373, 381 Gronovius, Johannes Fredericus, 115, 327, 375 Groot, Hugo van (Grotius), 4, 7, 9, 33, 41, 57–61, 91–92, 115, 180–88, 206–7, 209n424, 249–50n599, 290–92, 373, 378, 380, 382–84, 387 Guillaume, Jacquette, 104 Harff, Agnes von, 12–13, 27, 182n306, 351n231 Harff, Eva von, 11–12, 17, 135n62, 241–43, 340, 343n205 Harff, Sybille von, 12–13, 27, 182n306, 351n231 Hartlib, Samuel, 71, 374, 383 Heber, Richard, 113–14 Heidelberg Catechism, 9, 13, 340 Hesiod, 203n401, 231n511, 269n684 Heyns, Daniel (Heinsius), 1, 15, 22n92, 25, 85n310, 115 Henri II d’Orléans (duc de Longueville), 45, 50, 82, 213–14 Henri IV (king of France), 32n125, 51, 142n93, 254nn624–25, 258–59, 380 Henrietta Maria (queen of England), 47, 79, 81, 178n284, 283n760 Hippocrates, 28, 285n770

394 Index Homer, 116, 145n113, 154n158, 159n186, 191n351, 206n415 Hondius, Jacquemyne, 84 Honthorst, Gerard, 336 Hooft, Pieter Corneliszoon, 81, 244 Hoornbeeck, Johannes, 333 Horace, 89, 113n403, 165n213, 239n537, 250n605, 250n609, 263n658, 272n695, 278n726, 281n740, 282n751, 316n79, 321n101 Hoskins, John, 283 Hottinger, Johann Heinrich, 110 Huet, Pierre-Daniel, 104, 346n215, 366 Huygens, Christiaan, 76, 270n687, 282n753, 283n757 Huygens, Constantijn, and art, 28, 48, 72, 73–77, 79, 84, 239– 40, 241n544, 242, 249–50n599, 251, 265n671, 271–74, 281n745, 282–84, 285, 301, 313, 315, 374 diplomacy, 33, 48–49, 75–77, 80, 82–83, 85, 273–75, 283n756, 283n758, 300 funeral procession of William II at Delft, 73–75, 261–65, 298–99, 314n69 medal(s), 76, 254, 258n642, 259–60, 263, 297–98 musicianship, 28, 72, 75–76, 77, 79–82, 229, 245n572, 250n605, 271–72, 283n756, 296, 317 poems on Van Schurman’s 1633 self-portrait, 86, 232–39, 296, 305n20, 306–7 relationship with Van Schurman, xiii, xx, xxii, 1, 5, 28, 36, 73–87, 92–95, 96, 101–2, 118, 135n62, 170nn238–39, 240–44, 249, 251, 258, 261–65, 267–70, 278–79, 281–82, 284–85, 302, 303, 307–12, 343, 386

works: Dagh-werck [Day’s Work], 78, 243–45, 297, 366; De Zeestraat van’s-Gravenhage op Scheveningen [The Sea Road from The Hague to Scheveningen], 78, 280, 300, 367; Fortunata clades, quae in litore Sceverino contigit postrid [The Fortunate wreck that happened off the coast of Scheveningen], 84, 265n671; Gebruyck of ongebruyck van ‘t orgel [Use or Non-Use of the Organ], 81, 272n696, 324, 367; Heilighe daghen [Holy Days], 78, 246n581, 312; Kerck-gebruyck der Psalmen [Church Use of the Psalms], 82, 271n688, 382; Koren-bloemen [Cornflowers], 78, 244n571, 270n687, 280, 281n742, 300; Momenta desultoria [Desultory Moments], 73n259, 230n509, 231n515, 232n517, 237n529, 307n35, 308n43, 308n45, 309n49, 319n90, 366; Pathodia sacra et profana occupati [Songs of Passion Sacred and Profane by a Busy Man], 72, 80, 246–50, 297, 366, 379, 384 Illustrious Brotherhood of our Blessed Lady, 53–54, 387 James I (king of England), 76 Jerome. See Saint Jerome Joachimi, Albert, 140n88 Joan of Arc, 160 Joly, Claude, 20, 84, 367 Jones, Katherine Boyle (Viscountess Ranelagh), 108 Juncker, Christian, 102, 367

Index 395 Kalf, Cornelia, 84 Koelman, Jacobus, 333 Kellen, Johan Philip van der, 118 Kempis, Thomas à, 143n22, 161n196 Killigrew, Mary, 79, 282–84 Killigrew, Robert, 76, 79, 283n756, 284n761 Knut, Johan de, 41 La Barre, Anne Chabanceau de, 79, 283n758, 370 La Tour d’Auvergne, FrédéricMaurice de (duc de Bouillon), 44, 49, 181n297, 189n344 Labadie, Jean de, xxiii, 2, 11–12n51, 16–17n70, 25, 28–31, 53, 75, 78–79, 83n299, 109, 131n41, 275n715, 276n720, 280n737, 281n745, 284n762, 284n767, 285n768, 329–30, 333n161, 337–39, 354, 359–60, 367, 370, 373, 376, 381, 385 Labadist(s), 2, 12, 14, 25, 28–29n111, 30, 53n194, 68n241, 75, 78– 79n282, 81n295, 87, 112, 119, 183n308, 207n416, 216n455, 274n708, 280, 284, 285n771, 300–1, 328–34, 337–39, 341n195, 385 La Croix, Jean-François de, 106, 367 La Cressonnière, Charlotte Cosson de, 106 Ladvocat, Jean-Baptiste, 106, 367 La Forge, Jean de, 104 La Suze, Henriette de Coligny. See Coligny, Henriette (comtesse de La Suze) La Trémoille, Henri-Charles de (duc de Thouars), 33, 64, 68 Le Faucheur, Michel, 41, 138, 376, 382

Leiden University, x, 5, 26n104, 33, 40, 50n180, 113, 131n41, 221n475, 255n630, 256n634, 264n663, 268n681, 269n682, 319n89, 363, 384 Le Laboureur, Jean, 19–20, 110n389, 348, 367 Lindenaer, Johanna Dorothea (Madame de Zoutelandt), 21n89, 106, 369 Lipsius, Justus, 5, 327 Lodenstein, Jodocus van (or Lodensteyn) , 27, 356n254, 359n261, 385 Louis XIII (king of France), 21, 50, 189n341, 189nn343–44, 254n624, 344n210, 345n213 Louis XIV (king of France), 30, 46, 51, 76, 82–83, 189n343, 214n450, 274, 283n758 Lund, Zacharias, 115 Lydius, Jacobus, 22 Maets, Carolus de (Dematius), 56, 57n204, 199n387, 208–11 Maid of Holland, 4, 304n15, 383 Makin, Bathsua, 1, 26n102, 36– 37n139, 47n170, 105n364, 108, 160n192, 204n407, 367, 387 Marinella, Lucrezia, 1, 163, 367 Marino, Giambattista, 80 Martial, 92, 248n594, 304n13, 349 Martini, Catharina, 78–79, 280, 300 Mary Stuart, Princess Royal (wife of William II), 48–49, 66, 72, 82–83, 178n284, 217n460 Mather, Cotton, 112, 367 Maurice of Nassau, Prince of Orange (Stadtholder), 9, 49, 73, 142n93, 179n285, 339 Mazarin, Jules, Cardinal, 45, 48, 111, 214n449, 283n758, 325

396 Index Medici, Marie de’, 254n625, 258, 298 Ménage, Gilles (Menagius), 102, 105, 367 Menuret, Jean, 29 Mercier, Anne (Mme Saumaise). See Saumaise, Mme (Anne Mercier, wife of Saumaise) Merian, Maria Sibylla, 31 Merlau, Johanna Eleonora von. See Petersen, Johanna Eleonora von Merlau Mersenne, Marin, 1, 33, 35–36, 79, 86–87, 140–41n88, 169–70, 245–46, 289, 297, 326, 344, 346n217, 368, 373 Mesmes, Claude de (comte d’Avaux), 45, 46n167 Meyer, Daniel, 328, 331–34 Millenarianism, 29 Minerva. See Pallas Athena Möller, Johannes (Mollerus), 101, 108, 109nn384–85, 109n387, 110n391, 368 Monconys, Balthasar de, 105, 368 Montaigne, Michel de, 147n126 Montpensier, Anne-Marie-Louise (duchesse de), 23, 103–4, 368 Moore, Dorothy, 1, 24, 65, 68–71, 159n186, 182–84, 290, 371, 382 Morata, Olympia Fulvia, 32, 159n186, 368 More, Mary, 1, 105n364, 367 More, Thomas, 34, 149, 377 Morel, Camille de, 32 Morel, Jean de, 323n111 Moréri, Louis, 100 Moses, 330, 345 Motteville, Françoise Bertaut de, 103–4 Nadere Reformatie (Further Reformation), 10, 18n76, 27–28,

332n157, 333n161, 352n236, 359n261, 373, 381 Nassau, Charlotte-Brabantine of (duchesse de la Trémoille), 33 Naudé, Gabriel, 70, 110–11, 203n398, 325–27, 376 Netscher, Caspar, 282–83, 388 Nevius, Sara, 27 Ogle, John, 72, 81 Ogle, Utricia. See Swann, Utricia Ogle Oldenbarnevelt, Johan van, 9 Ovid, 92, 115, 134n54, 134n56, 246n576, 254n622, 314nn66–68, 320nn95–96 Owen, John, 1, 31, 328, 329–31 Palladio, Andrea, 214n445 Pallas Athena, 1, 4–5, 17–18, 69, 86–87, 145n111, 148–49, 226, 241n544, 250, 259n643, 303n8, 307n34, 310–11, 316 Paullini, Christian Franz, 102–3, 368 Paracelsus, Theophrastus Bombastus von Hohenheim, 202n394 Passe, Crispijn van de (the Elder), 11 Passe, Crispijn van de (the Younger), 101, 387 Patin, Guy, 43, 326 Paula, follower of Saint Jerome, 158–59 Pegasus, 253 Pericles, 310n53, 311 Perponcher, Isaac de (Sieur de Maisonneuve), 223n483, 362n266 Peter the Apostle, 43, 158n183, 188, 280n734, 356n250 Petersen, Johanna Eleonora von Merlau, 1, 30, 103, 175n266, 368 Phoebus. See Apollo Pineau, André, 50, 363

Index 397 Pineton de Chambrun, Jacques, 83, 274n708, 275 Piscopia, Elena Cornaro, 107 Pizan, Christine de, 127n20, 158n185 Planer, Johann Andreas, 102, 368 Plato, 21, 74, 78, 116, 150n138, 160n189, 172n253, 181, 183n309, 243n558, 262, 285n772 Pliny the Elder, 254n620, 285n769 Plutarch, 152n150 Polignac, Anne de (maréchale de Châtillon), 52, 202n397 Poliziano, Angelo, 133n51, 240n541 Polyander van Kerckhoven, Johannes (the Elder), 33, 194n365, 346n217 Polyander van Kerckhoven, Johannes (Lord of Heenvliet), 33n126, 46 Post, Pieter Janszoon, 74, 261–62 Poullain de La Barre, François, 106, 304n16 Proba, Faltonia Betitia, 159 Propertius, 92 Puisieux, Madeleine de, 106, 368 Querelle des Femmes, 23–24, 154n160, 158n185 Querelle d’Utrecht, 53n193, 54–57, 178n282, 365 Rambouillet, Catherine de Vivonne (marquise de), 23, 45, 348n22 Reformed Church, 3–4, 6–11, 12, 13n56, 17, 22, 26–27, 30, 32n125, 40, 44–45, 47, 52, 54, 56, 58n208, 59n211, 61–64, 81–82, 113, 188n337, 194, 208n421, 210n429, 211n434, 216n455, 218n462, 219, 270–71, 285n768, 299, 332–33, 338n181, 339–40, 341n193, 351n233, 371, 373, 380, 382

Remonstrants, 8–10, 33, 41, 47n171, 58, 62, 72, 208n421, 221n475, 341, 381 Republic of Letters, 2, 6, 11–12n51, 14–15, 22, 24–25, 32–33, 36n139, 65, 70, 71n253, 73, 85n310, 89, 95, 100, 105n363, 107n373, 109n384, 123n7, 129n31, 129n34, 144n105, 145n110, 209, 246n575, 275, 324, 344n209, 371, 378, 383, 388 Reneri, Hendrik (Henri Régnier or Henricus Renerius), 33, 41, 54, 139 Reveau, George, 64, 219–20, 222, 294 Riballier, Philibert, 106 Richelieu, Armand Jean du Plessis (Cardinal de), 43, 50, 110–11, 166n221, 173n256, 198n381, 254n624, 344, 374, 381 Rivet, André (Rivetus), and Breda, 31–32n121, 33, 39, 65–67, 208, 212n438, 213, 217, 220, 221–22, 223n482, 224, 227, 278n727, 279, 293–94, 350, 362n265, 365 père d’alliance (see Schurman, Anna Maria van: friendship with Rivet) works: Apologetic of A. Rivetus for the true and sincere peace of the church, 60, 183, 184, 187n331; Apologetic on Behalf of the Most Sacred Virgin Mary, 53, 167n224, 168–69, 179n291, 187, 192n359; Examination of the Observations of Hugo Grotius, 60, 181n300; Preparatory Instruction to Holy Communion, 21, 133n50, 368; Refutation of Grotius’s Examination for the

398 Index True and Sincere Peace of the Church, 61, 209n424 Rivet, Claude, 68, 189n344, 191n353 Rivet, Frédéric, 32, 35, 66–67, 140–41, 178n284, 204n407, 288 Rivet, Guillaume, 64, 141n89, 387 Rohan, Anne de, 1, 16, 23, 50, 51n184, 65, 104, 106, 132, 190–93, 202n395, 205n413, 287, 291, 370, 375 Rohan, Henri (duc de), 50–51, 375 Rohan, Henri de Chabot (duc de), 51, 205n413, 375 Rohan, Marguerite de, 50–52, 193n360, 201–2, 205, 292, 370, 375 Roper, Margaret More, 32, 34, 377 Roussel, Juliana de, 96, 190, 363 Roy, Hendrik de (Regius), 19 Saint Augustine, 58n209, 143n98, 161n196, 187n329, 210, 281n740, 355 Saint Bernard, 355 Saint Bartholomew’s Day Massacre, 33, 52, 59n213 Saint Basil the Great, 146 Saint-Charles, Louis Jacob de, 20, 327n137 Saint Jerome, 159n186, 175 Saint John Climacus, 272 Saint Thomas Aquinas, 148n131, 150n141 Sappho, 106, 146n115, 147n124, 303, 310, 349n226 Sarrau, Claude, 57, 59n215, 61n218, 195n370, 203n398, 207n417, 213n443, 327n138, 368 Sauerbrei, Johannes, 102, 368 Saumaise, Claude (Salmasius), 1, 3, 5, 24, 33, 35, 42–45, 47n169, 48, 73, 85n310, 96, 102, 105,

138n78, 167, 170–71, 172nn247– 48, 177, 179, 188n338, 189n344, 192n354, 193, 193–94n363, 197–99, 207n418, 217n459, 289–90, 292, 295, 321–24, 343, 368, 374, 381 works: De Primatu Papae [On the Primacy of the Pope], 42–44, 179, 193n363, 197, 290, 292; Miscellæ defensiones [Miscellaneous defenses], 217n459 Saumaise, Mme (Anne Mercier, wife of Saumaise), 24, 193n363, 323n111, 324n116 Saumur, 49, 61–64, 142n93, 211n434, 216n455, 220n471, 221nn477– 78, 377 Scaliger, Joseph Justus, 3, 5, 42 Scheltema, Jacobus, 114 Schoock, Martinus, 53n193, 55–57, 178n282, 207–10, 365 Schotanus, Bernardus, 324 Schotanus, Meinardus, 17, 32n124, 199–201, 292, 324n119 Schurman, Abraham Frederik van, 335–36, 363 Schurman, Anna Maria van, and calligraphy, 14, 83–84, 97–98, 265–66, 278n727, 279 celibacy, 16, 85–87, 260 controversy over women’s higher studies, 2, 22–23, 34–35, 36–40, 68–69, 71, 100, 102–4, 106–7, 111, 126–27, 140–41n88, 144–64, 326n132 engraving, xiii, xxi, 1, 14n62, 15, 24, 26n102, 77, 84, 86, 107, 118, 181n299, 182, 215, 229–30, 232– 33, 236–37, 238n532, 239n537, 252n614, 257n636, 262, 273, 299, 324, 335n168, 336, 341 “Ethiopian Muses,” 83, 254, 256, 274

Index 399 famille d’alliance, 32, 65–68, 136 fille d’alliance (covenant daughter), 35, 38–39, 41, 91–92, 127n22, 129n34, 133n49, 135n59, 136, 138, 140, 143, 161, 165, 207, 218, 220, 222–23, 226–27, 327n134 friendship with Rivet, 35, 36–40, 57, 67–68, 71, 124–25, 127, 128n25, 129–30, 133, 135, 136n66, 144, 164, 170, 177n276, 182–84, 195, 208–9, 227, 290 humility, modesty, 2, 34, 73, 77, 85–87, 89–94, 100, 104–6, 123n6, 124, 127–28, 135n60, 140, 154–55, 160, 162, 166n222, 173–75, 187n335, 195n372, 212–13, 218–20, 222–24, 230, 240n538, 242n554, 244, 257n640, 278, 305, 309, 329n143, 339, 342, 345, 347–51, 353, 362 inward knowledge of God [intima notitia Dei], 143n98, 330n146 letter writing, 87, 95–99 maternal aunts, 12, 27, 182, 185, 188, 189, 192, 194, 195, 197, 203, 215, 217, 220, 221, 223, 224, 267, 350–51, 353, 356 networking, 14, 25, 26n102, 34–35, 65, 68, 95, 96n322, 108, 129n34 portraits, ix, xiii, xiv, xix, 14n62, 15, 17n71, 19, 24, 26n102, 28, 39, 73, 77, 86, 103, 110, 115, 118–19, 132, 169n235, 171–73, 177–78, 205, 213, 215, 229, 232–33, 236, 237n530, 247n582, 252n614, 254n625, 256, 258–60, 273, 282–84, 287, 289–90, 292– 93, 296, 298–99, 305n20, 306–7, 315, 323–25, 335n168, 336

reception, 11–12n51, 97, 99–112, 371, 380 religious polemics, 52–64 retreat, 34, 144, 147, 166, 307, 353 riddle, 77n277, 229 theology, 1, 17–19, 25, 26, 28–31, 37, 39–40, 52–53, 57, 59–60, 63, 103n350, 124, 149, 210, 332– 33n159, 342, 375, 381, 386 theosophy, 142–43 visitors, 15, 25, 27, 45, 71, 72, 83, 84, 96n322, 103, 105, 108, 110, 132n45, 178, 213–14, 216, 246n581, 252n614, 254, 270, 293, 297, 299, 313, 315n73, 324, 346–49, 353, 359–60 works: Amica Dissertatio, 21–23, 35, 38n144, 96, 133n50, 164n208, 165, 166n221, 171n244, 173, 174n257, 175–76, 181n303, 188–89, 289–90, 319n91, 368; De Vitae Termino, 20–21, 24, 36, 111, 170n238, 326n131, 346, 370, 383; Dissertatio, 5, 22–23, 34n131, 38nn143–44, 40, 96, 103, 108, 112, 124n12, 125n13, 126n18, 143n102, 144n103, 145n107, 145n109, 154n159, 155n161, 162nn199–200, 162n202, 164n208, 177n274, 177n277, 188–90, 205n410, 291, 346, 347n221, 349, 369; Eukleria, seu melioris partis electio, 13–15, 25–26, 29n113, 30–31, 39, 103, 143n98, 284n767, 328n141, 329n145, 330, 332n159, 336, 340nn190–92, 341n194, 341nn196–97, 343n203, 353n239, 359, 369; The Learned Maid, 24, 112, 204n407, 369; Opuscula, 1, 6, 15nn65–66,

400 Index Schurman, Anna Maria van (continued) works (continued)   Opuscula (continued), 17n74, 20n85, 23–25, 26n102, 32, 34n131, 38nn143–44, 40, 47n169, 65, 68, 69n246, 70n250, 71nn254–55, 72n258, 73n259, 112, 116, 124n12, 125n13, 126n18, 140n87, 143n102, 144n103, 145n109, 154n159, 155n161, 156n186, 162nn199–200, 162n202, 164nn208–9, 165nn215–16, 166n220, 166n222, 168n229, 169n233, 172n254, 174nn258– 60, 175nn264–65, 176n273, 182n305, 184n314, 186n325, 187n326, 187n330, 187nn332– 33, 187n335, 191n350, 194n366, 195nn367–70, 197n380, 200n388, 201n391, 202n396, 203n399, 203n402, 204n407, 212n440, 215, 216n456, 217n459, 220n474, 222, 224–28, 230n508, 231nn513–14, 232n517, 236n526, 237n529, 241n547, 243n559, 244n571, 249n597, 252n614, 255n626, 255n629, 257n636, 257n640, 294, 303n1, 309n49, 315, 321n104, 323n112, 328n139, 343, 344n206, 346n220, 349nn228–29, 369, 372; Pensées d’A.M. de Schurman sur la reformation necessaire, 30n116, 330n148, 332n155, 369; Question célèbre, 23, 144n104, 215n454, 327n137, 369; Sérieux avertissement et vive exhortation, 30n116, 369; Uitbreiding over de drie eerste capittels van Genesis,

28n110, 370 Schurman, Frederik van, 11, 15, 336n172, 340 Schurman, Johan Godschalk van, 12, 15–18, 28–29, 32, 77, 79, 81, 96, 129n29, 317, 338, 340, 354–59, 363, 381 Schütz, Johann Jakob, 1, 30, 103 Scriverius, Petrus, 247n585 Scudéry, Madeleine de, 16, 104, 106, 146n115, 346n215, 370 Secundus, Janus (Jan Everaerts), 246–48, 251–52, 256, 297–98, 384 Sedan, 16, 31–32n121, 41, 44, 49–50, 62, 65–67, 180–83, 186, 188, 189n344, 195, 201–3, 213n443, 290, 292, 365 Sempronia, 158, 303 Seneca, 13, 87, 89, 109, 137n70, 143n98, 146–47, 157–58, 159n186, 209n423, 251n610, 275n713, 285n770, 306–7 Servien, Abel (marquis de Sablé), 45–46 Slingeland, John Francis, 326 Smetius, Johannes, 251n612 Socinian(s), 7, 33, 59, 382 Solms-Braunfels, Amalia von (or van) (wife of Stadtholder Frederik Hendrik), 49, 81, 83, 140–41n88, 255, 371, 380 Somaize, Antoine Baudeau de, 104 Sommelsdijck, Cornelis van Aerssen van, 331, 339 Sorbière, Samuel, 104 Spanheim, Frederik, 24, 26, 33, 61–64, 95, 180–82, 190–91, 197, 208, 215, 216n455, 219–21, 290, 292, 294, 343, 346–47 Spener, Philipp Jakob, 24n96, 29–30 Sperling, Otto the Younger, 109

Index 401 Strick, Maria, 84, 387 Strickland, Walter, 47 Suchon, Gabrielle, 1 Sulpicia, 217n459, 349 Swann, Utricia Ogle, 65, 72, 79–81, 96, 216–19, 247n584, 249n596, 250, 267, 293, 299, 317, 384 Swann, William, 72, 81, 216n456, 317 Synod of Charenton, 63, 203–4, 211n435, 292 Synod of Dordrecht (or “Dordt”), 9–10, 11n48, 62, 208n421, 221n475, 222n479, 378 Tacitus, 4, 251n612 Tallemant des Réaux, Gédéon, 51n183, 370 Tarabotti, Arcangela, 69n247, 105, 147n122, 370, 385, 388 Theocritus, 262n651 Theophrastus, 183n310 Thirty Years’ War, 27, 45, 52, 267, 351n232, 388 Thott, Birgitte, 109 Thysius, Antonius (the Younger), 194 Turner, Dawson, 112–15, 377 Ulpian, 145–46 Ulysses, 155n163 Valerius Maximus, 263n657 Veilheux, Françoise de (or Françoise de Vilbrieux), 282n748 Venus, 73, 78, 91, 130n35, 230–31, 243n558 Veryard, Ellis, 10 Virgil, 89, 91, 116, 129n32, 142n94, 159n186, 178n281, 179n290, 191n351, 196n374, 236n527, 240n541, 250n606, 253n619, 268nn678–79, 281n740, 285n771, 305n24, 309n46

Visscher, Anna Roemers, 14–15, 74n263, 77, 84, 321n102, 370 Vitalis, Janus, 184n318, 355n248 Vives, Juan Luis, 98, 158–59, 163–64, 304n13, 370 Voet, Gijsbert (Gisbertus Voetius), 11, 17–18, 20, 27, 29, 37, 53–57, 60, 71, 79, 81–82, 84, 91, 127n20, 137–39, 140n87, 178–81, 186–87, 192, 194, 199, 204n408, 205, 207–11, 217–18, 240, 244, 248, 261, 264, 266, 271–72, 288, 291, 293, 317, 320, 324–25, 333n161, 342n198, 343, 346n217, 347, 356, 359–60, 370, 378, 385 Voet, Nicolaas, 204n408 Voet, Paulus, 56, 204–5n408, 210n428, 211n432 Vorstius, Adolphus, 22, 82 Vossius, Gerardus Johannes, 81–82, 205n410, 221, 294 Vries, Elizabeth de, 72 Walsh, William, 107, 370 Warin, Jean, 254, 259n644 Water, Jona Willem te, 113, 382 Westphalia, Peace of, 11, 45–46, 50, 213–14, 220n470, 293, 374 Wieuwerd, 31, 331, 334, 339 William II, Prince of Orange (Stadtholder), 33, 48, 66–67, 73, 76n266, 81–82, 128, 140–41n88, 217n460, 220n470, 227, 261, 263n659, 265n669, 287, 298, 314n69, 316n84, 317 William III (king of England), 48, 66, 76n266, 82, 140–41n88, 263n659, 275n712, 283n758 William Henry, Prince of Orange (William the Silent), 33, 50, 73, 82

402 Index Władysław IV (king of Poland), 109, 348 Wolzogen, Ludwig, 30 Yvon, Pierre, xxiii, 12, 14, 25, 27, 29, 31, 40, 78–79n282, 119, 124n9, 131n41, 192n357, 329–34, 337–39, 340nn190–91, 342n199, 349n229, 350n230, 359–60, 370

The Other Voice in Early Modern Europe: The Toronto Series

FOUNDING EDITORS

Margaret L. King and Albert Rabil, Jr.

SERIES EDITOR

Margaret L. King

SERIES EDITOR, ENGLISH TEXTS Elizabeth

H. Hageman

Series Titles Madre María Rosa Journey of Five Capuchin Nuns Edited and translated by Sarah E. Owens Volume 1, 2009 Giovan Battista Andreini Love in the Mirror: A Bilingual Edition Edited and translated by Jon R. Snyder Volume 2, 2009 Raymond de Sabanac and Simone Zanacchi Two Women of the Great Schism: The Revelations of Constance de Rabastens by Raymond de Sabanac and Life of the Blessed Ursulina of Parma by Simone Zanacchi Edited and translated by Renate Blumenfeld-Kosinski and Bruce L. Venarde Volume 3, 2010 Oliva Sabuco de Nantes Barrera The True Medicine Edited and translated by Gianna Pomata Volume 4, 2010 Louise-Geneviève Gillot de Sainctonge Dramatizing Dido, Circe, and Griselda Edited and translated by Janet Levarie Smarr Volume 5, 2010

Pernette du Guillet Complete Poems: A Bilingual Edition Edited with introduction and notes by Karen Simroth James Poems translated by Marta Rijn Finch Volume 6, 2010 Antonia Pulci Saints’ Lives and Bible Stories for the Stage: A Bilingual Edition Edited by Elissa B. Weaver Translated by James Wyatt Cook Volume 7, 2010 Valeria Miani Celinda, A Tragedy: A Bilingual Edition Edited with an introduction by Valeria Finucci Translated by Julia Kisacky Annotated by Valeria Finucci and Julia Kisacky Volume 8, 2010 Enchanted Eloquence: Fairy Tales by Seventeenth-Century French Women Writers Edited and translated by Lewis C. Seifert and Domna C. Stanton Volume 9, 2010

Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz, Sophie, Electress of Hanover and Queen Sophie Charlotte of Prussia Leibniz and the Two Sophies: The Philosophical Correspondence Edited and translated by Lloyd Strickland Volume 10, 2011 In Dialogue with the Other Voice in Sixteenth-Century Italy: Literary and Social Contexts for Women’s Writing Edited by Julie D. Campbell and Maria Galli Stampino Volume 11, 2011 Sister Giustina Niccolini The Chronicle of Le Murate Edited and translated by Saundra Weddle Volume 12, 2011 Liubov Krichevskaya No Good without Reward: Selected Writings: A Bilingual Edition Edited and translated by Brian James Baer Volume 13, 2011 Elizabeth Cooke Hoby Russell The Writings of an English Sappho Edited by Patricia Phillippy With translations from Greek and Latin by Jaime Goodrich Volume 14, 2011 Lucrezia Marinella Exhortations to Women and to Others If They Please Edited and translated by Laura Benedetti Volume 15, 2012 Margherita Datini Letters to Francesco Datini Translated by Carolyn James and Antonio Pagliaro Volume 16, 2012

Delarivier Manley and Mary Pix English Women Staging Islam, 1696–1707 Edited and introduced by Bernadette Andrea Volume 17, 2012 Cecilia del Nacimiento Journeys of a Mystic Soul in Poetry and Prose Introduction and prose translations by Kevin Donnelly Poetry translations by Sandra Sider Volume 18, 2012 Lady Margaret Douglas and Others The Devonshire Manuscript: A Women’s Book of Courtly Poetry Edited and introduced by Elizabeth Heale Volume 19, 2012 Arcangela Tarabotti Letters Familiar and Formal Edited and translated by Meredith K. Ray and Lynn Lara Westwater Volume 20, 2012 Pere Torrellas and Juan de Flores Three Spanish Querelle Texts: Grisel and Mirabella, The Slander against Women, and The Defense of Ladies against Slanderers: A Bilingual Edition and Study Edited and translated by Emily C. Francomano Volume 21, 2013 Barbara Torelli Benedetti Partenia, a Pastoral Play: A Bilingual Edition Edited and translated by Lisa Sampson and Barbara Burgess-Van Aken Volume 22, 2013

François Rousset, Jean Liebault, Jacques Guillemeau, Jacques Duval and Louis de Serres Pregnancy and Birth in Early Modern France: Treatises by Caring Physicians and Surgeons (1581–1625) Edited and translated by Valerie WorthStylianou Volume 23, 2013 Mary Astell The Christian Religion, as Professed by a Daughter of the Church of England Edited by Jacqueline Broad Volume 24, 2013 Sophia of Hanover Memoirs (1630–1680) Edited and translated by Sean Ward Volume 25, 2013 Katherine Austen Book M: A London Widow’s Life Writings Edited by Pamela S. Hammons Volume 26, 2013 Anne Killigrew “My Rare Wit Killing Sin”: Poems of a Restoration Courtier Edited by Margaret J. M. Ezell Volume 27, 2013 Tullia d’Aragona and Others The Poems and Letters of Tullia d’Aragona and Others: A Bilingual Edition Edited and translated by Julia L. Hairston Volume 28, 2014 Luisa de Carvajal y Mendoza The Life and Writings of Luisa de Carvajal y Mendoza Edited and translated by Anne J. Cruz Volume 29, 2014

Russian Women Poets of the Eighteenth and Early Nineteenth Centuries: A Bilingual Edition Edited and translated by Amanda Ewington Volume 30, 2014 Jacques Du Bosc L’Honnête Femme: The Respectable Woman in Society and the New Collection of Letters and Responses by Contemporary Women Edited and translated by Sharon Diane Nell and Aurora Wolfgang Volume 31, 2014 Lady Hester Pulter Poems, Emblems, and The Unfortunate Florinda Edited by Alice Eardley Volume 32, 2014 Jeanne Flore Tales and Trials of Love, Concerning Venus’s Punishment of Those Who Scorn True Love and Denounce Cupid’s Sovereignity: A Bilingual Edition and Study Edited and translated by Kelly Digby Peebles Poems translated by Marta Rijn Finch Volume 33, 2014 Veronica Gambara Complete Poems: A Bilingual Edition Critical introduction by Molly M. Martin Edited and translated by Molly M. Martin and Paola Ugolini Volume 34, 2014 Catherine de Médicis and Others Portraits of the Queen Mother: Polemics, Panegyrics, Letters Translation and study by Leah L. Chang and Katherine Kong Volume 35, 2014

Françoise Pascal, MarieCatherine Desjardins, Antoinette Deshoulières, and Catherine Durand Challenges to Traditional Authority: Plays by French Women Authors, 1650–1700 Edited and translated by Perry Gethner Volume 36, 2015 Franciszka Urszula Radziwiłłowa Selected Drama and Verse Edited by Patrick John Corness and Barbara Judkowiak Translated by Patrick John Corness Translation Editor Aldona Zwierzyńska-Coldicott Introduction by Barbara Judkowiak Volume 37, 2015 Diodata Malvasia Writings on the Sisters of San Luca and Their Miraculous Madonna Edited and translated by Danielle Callegari and Shannon McHugh Volume 38, 2015 Margaret Van Noort Spiritual Writings of Sister Margaret of the Mother of God (1635–1643) Edited by Cordula van Wyhe Translated by Susan M. Smith Volume 39, 2015 Giovan Francesco Straparola The Pleasant Nights Edited and translated by Suzanne Magnanini Volume 40, 2015 Angélique de Saint-Jean Arnauld d’Andilly Writings of Resistance Edited and translated by John J. Conley, S.J. Volume 41, 2015

Francesco Barbaro The Wealth of Wives: A Fifteenth-Century Marriage Manual Edited and translated by Margaret L. King Volume 42, 2015 Jeanne d’Albret Letters from the Queen of Navarre with an Ample Declaration Edited and translated by Kathleen M. Llewellyn, Emily E. Thompson, and Colette H. Winn Volume 43, 2016 Bathsua Makin and Mary More with a reply to More by Robert Whitehall Educating English Daughters: Late Seventeenth-Century Debates Edited by Frances Teague and Margaret J. M. Ezell Associate Editor Jessica Walker Volume 44, 2016 Anna StanisŁawska Orphan Girl: A Transaction, or an Account of the Entire Life of an Orphan Girl by way of Plaintful Threnodies in the Year 1685: The Aesop Episode Verse translation, introduction, and commentary by Barry Keane Volume 45, 2016 Alessandra Macinghi Strozzi Letters to Her Sons, 1447–1470 Edited and translated by Judith Bryce Volume 46, 2016 Mother Juana de la Cruz Mother Juana de la Cruz, 1481–1534: Visionary Sermons Edited by Jessica A. Boon and Ronald E. Surtz Introductory material and notes by Jessica A. Boon Translated by Ronald E. Surtz and Nora Weinerth Volume 47, 2016

Claudine-Alexandrine Guérin de Tencin Memoirs of the Count of Comminge and The Misfortunes of Love Edited and translated by Jonathan Walsh Foreword by Michel Delon Volume 48, 2016 Feliciana Enríquez de Guzmán, Ana Caro Mallén, and Sor Marcela de San Félix Women Playwrights of Early Modern Spain Edited by Nieves Romero-Díaz and Lisa Vollendorf Translated and annotated by Harley Erdman Volume 49, 2016 Anna Trapnel Anna Trapnel’s Report and Plea; or, A Narrative of Her Journey from London into Cornwall Edited by Hilary Hinds Volume 50, 2016 María Vela y Cueto Autobiography and Letters of a Spanish Nun Edited by Susan Diane Laningham Translated by Jane Tar Volume 51, 2016 Christine de Pizan The Book of the Mutability of Fortune Edited and translated by Geri L. Smith Volume 52, 2017 Marguerite d’Auge, Renée Burlamacchi, and Jeanne du Laurens Sin and Salvation in Early Modern France: Three Women’s Stories Edited, and with an introduction by Colette H. Winn Translated by Nicholas Van Handel and Colette H. Winn Volume 53, 2017

Isabella d’Este Selected Letters Edited and translated by Deanna Shemek Volume 54, 2017 Ippolita Maria Sforza Duchess and Hostage in Renaissance Naples: Letters and Orations Edited and translated by Diana Robin and Lynn Lara Westwater Volume 55, 2017 Louise Bourgeois Midwife to the Queen of France: Diverse Observations Translated by Stephanie O’Hara Edited by Alison Klairmont Lingo Volume 56, 2017 Christine de Pizan Othea’s Letter to Hector Edited and translated by Renate Blumenfeld-Kosinski and Earl Jeffrey Richards Volume 57, 2017 Marie-Geneviève-Charlotte Thiroux d’Arconville Selected Philosophical, Scientific, and Autobiographical Writings Edited and translated by Julie Candler Hayes Volume 58, 2018 Lady Mary Wroth Pamphilia to Amphilanthus in Manuscript and Print Edited by Ilona Bell Texts by Steven W. May and Ilona Bell Volume 59, 2017 Witness, Warning, and Prophecy: Quaker Women’s Writing, 1655–1700 Edited by Teresa Feroli and Margaret Olofson Thickstun Volume 60, 2018

Symphorien Champier The Ship of Virtuous Ladies Edited and translated by Todd W. Reeser Volume 61, 2018 Isabella Andreini Mirtilla, A Pastoral: A Bilingual Edition Edited by Valeria Finucci Translated by Julia Kisacky Volume 62, 2018 Margherita Costa The Buffoons, A Ridiculous Comedy: A Bilingual Edition Edited and translated by Sara E. Díaz and Jessica Goethals Volume 63, 2018 Margaret Cavendish, Duchess of Newcastle Poems and Fancies with The Animal Parliament Edited by Brandie R. Siegfried Volume 64, 2018 Margaret Fell Women’s Speaking Justified and Other Pamphlets Edited by Jane Donawerth and Rebecca M. Lush Volume 65, 2018 Mary Wroth, Jane Cavendish, and Elizabeth Brackley Women’s Household Drama: Loves Victorie, A Pastorall, and The concealed Fansyes Edited by Marta Straznicky and Sara Mueller Volume 66, 2018 Eleonora Fonseca Pimentel From Arcadia to Revolution: The Neapolitan Monitor and Other Writings Edited and translated by Verina R. Jones Volume 67, 2019

Charlotte Arbaleste DuplessisMornay, Anne de Chaufepié, and Anne Marguerite Petit Du Noyer The Huguenot Experience of Persecution and Exile: Three Women’s Stories Edited by Colette H. Winn Translated by Lauren King and Colette H. Winn Volume 68, 2019 Anne Bradstreet Poems and Meditations Edited by Margaret Olofson Thickstun Volume 69, 2019 Arcangela Tarabotti Antisatire: In Defense of Women, against Francesco Buoninsegni Edited and translated by Elissa B. Weaver Volume 70, 2020 Mary Franklin and Hannah Burton She Being Dead Yet Speaketh: The Franklin Family Papers Edited by Vera J. Camden Volume 71, 2020 Lucrezia Marinella Love Enamored and Driven Mad Edited and translated by Janet E. Gomez and Maria Galli Stampino Volume 72, 2020 Arcangela Tarabotti Convent Paradise Edited and translated by Meredith K. Ray and Lynn Lara Westwater Volume 73, 2020 Gabrielle-Suzanne Barbot de Villeneuve Beauty and the Beast: The Original Story Edited and translated by Aurora Wolfgang Volume 74, 2020

Flaminio Scala The Fake Husband, A Comedy Edited and translated by Rosalind Kerr Volume 75, 2020 Anne Vaughan Lock Selected Poetry, Prose, and Translations, with Contextual Materials Edited by Susan M. Felch Volume 76, 2021 Camilla Erculiani Letters on Natural Philosophy: The Scientific Correspondence of a SixteenthCentury Pharmacist, with Related Texts Edited by Eleonora Carinci Translated by Hannah Marcus Foreword by Paula Findlen Volume 77, 2021 Regina Salomea Pilsztynowa My Life’s Travels and Adventures: An Eighteenth-Century Oculist in the Ottoman Empire and the European Hinterland Edited and translated by Władysław Roczniak Volume 78, 2021 Christine de Pizan The God of Love’s Letter and The Tale of the Rose: A Bilingual Edition Edited and translated by Thelma S. Fenster and Christine Reno With Jean Gerson, “A Poem on Man and Woman.” Translated from the Latin by Thomas O’Donnell Foreword by Jocelyn Wogan-Browne Volume 79, 2021

Marie Gigault de Bellefonds, Marquise de Villars Letters from Spain: A Seventeenth-Century French Noblewoman at the Spanish Royal Court Edited and translated by Nathalie Hester Volume 80, 2021