An Inventory of the Extant Correspondence of Elisabeth of Bohemia, Princess Palatine (1618-1680)
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
An Inventory of the Extant Correspondence of Elisabeth of
Bohemia, Princess Palatine (1618–1680)
Sabrina Ebbersmeyer
Journal of the History of Philosophy, Volume 58, Number 2, April 2020, pp.
325-398 (Article)
Published by Johns Hopkins University Press
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1353/hph.2020.0041
For additional information about this article
https://muse.jhu.edu/article/752861
[ This content has been declared free to read by the pubisher during the COVID-19 pandemic. ]An Inventory of the Extant
Correspondence of Elisabeth
of Bohemia, Princess Palatine
(1618–1680)
SABRINA EBBERSMEYER*
abstract This article provides a first inventory of the extant correspondence of
Elisabeth of Bohemia (1618–1680). Elisabeth, best known today for her extensive
exchange of letters with René Descartes, corresponded throughout her lifetime with
family members, scientists, philosophers, politicians, and learned men and women
from various European countries. The main aim of this article is to stimulate philo-
sophical and historical research on Elisabeth of Bohemia by providing an inventory
of her correspondence that enables researchers to investigate Elisabeth’s thought
on philosophical, scientific, political, and religious matters in a broader and more
comprehensive way.
keywords Elisabeth of Bohemia, inventory, correspondence
1. introduction
This article provides a first inventory of the extant correspondence of Elisabeth
of Bohemia (1618–1680), Princess Palatine and later Abbess of Herford.
Elisabeth, one of the most famous women philosophers of the seventeenth
century, is best known today for her comprehensive exchange of letters with the
French philosopher René Descartes (1596–1650). Additionally, her relation
to the Quakers, especially to Robert Barclay and William Penn, has received
some scholarly attention.1 Less known is the fact that, throughout her lifetime,
Elisabeth corresponded with family members, scientists, philosophers, politicians,
See M. Christabel Cadbury, Robert Barclay; and Lore Blanke, “Elisabeth und die Quäker.”
1
* Sabrina Ebbersmeyer is Associate Professor of Philosophy at the University of Copenhagen.
Journal of the History of Philosophy, vol. 58, no. 2 (2020) 325–398
[325]326 journal of the history of philosophy 58:2 april 2020
and learned men and women from various European countries.2 The range and
content of her extant correspondence not only shed light on the private side of
her life and personality, but also illustrate strikingly that Elisabeth took active
part in many of the philosophical, political, religious, and scientific debates of
her time. Given the fact that no other works by her own hand have survived, it
is of the utmost importance to investigate her correspondence in order to assess
the impact Elisabeth had on the learned world during her lifetime and beyond.
As is well known, letters constituted a central medium of scientific exchange
during the early modern period, a time when the usual forms of communication
established at universities were becoming less relevant, while new forms, such as
scientific journals, had yet to be developed. What is more, the investigation of
letter exchanges is of particular importance for research into the contribution of
women to the history of early modern philosophy. Since women were excluded
from all formal university education, they usually did not use academic text forms,
such as commentaries or treatises, but rather preferred informal genres, such as
letters, to express their thought and participate in intellectual life.3
The main aim of this article is to stimulate philosophical and historical research
on Elisabeth of Bohemia by providing an inventory of her correspondence that
enables researchers to investigate her thought on philosophical, scientific, political,
and religious matters more broadly and comprehensively, in part by shedding new
light on her role as a female intellectual in Germany and the Netherlands during
the seventeenth century. Additionally, this inventory can serve as a preparatory
step for the venture of a critical edition of Elisabeth’s correspondence, which is
still missing. Finally, and on a more general level, the reconstruction of Elisabeth’s
correspondence enables us to rethink the role women philosophers played during
the early modern period, and to make visible otherwise hidden aspects of their
participation in the learned world.
To reconstruct Elisabeth’s correspondence is a difficult undertaking, as large
parts of the material have not yet been published, or have been published in
remote venues. There are several reasons for this situation. We know that Elisabeth
responded with reluctance when the question of publishing her letters was raised
during her lifetime. This became apparent already in her first letter to Descartes,
where she begged him to keep the letter exchange between them private (see AT
III.662). She confirmed her position later, after Descartes’s death, when Chanut
asked her for permission to publish their correspondence, and she refused (see AT
V.470–75). However, the main difficulty in reconstructing her letter exchange is
caused by the fact that Elisabeth destroyed all of the letters in her own possession
shortly before her death (see Elisabeth’s letter to her brother Charles Louis, 7
November 1679).4 This means that there is no written Nachlass containing her
correspondence. As a consequence, her exchanges of letters must be reconstructed
Notable exceptions are Anna E. S. Creese, The letters of Elisabeth; and Helge bei der Wieden,
2
Elisabeth von der Pfalz.
On women’s letter-writing during the early modern period, see, e.g. Jane Couchman, Women’s
3
Letters Across Europe ; Julie Campbell and Anne R. Larsen, Early Modern Women; and Leonie Hannan,
Women of Letters.
Elisabeth to Charles Louis, 7 November 1679: “en brulant mes papiers.” Hauck, Die Briefe, 272.
4inventory of the correspondence of elisabeth 327
through the extant letters that were in the possession of her correspondents.
Additionally, because her correspondents were scattered all over Europe, the extant
letters written by and to Elisabeth are also now scattered widely in many libraries
and archives across Europe, especially in Germany, Great Britain, the Netherlands,
and France. As a consequence, many of these letters have remained unpublished,
or have been published in unconnected, often remote venues.
To my knowledge, the first and only book-length study dedicated to the
correspondence of Elisabeth known at the time is the Ph.D. dissertation by Anna E.
S. Creese, The letters of Elisabeth, Princess Palatine: A seventeenth century correspondence
(1993). Creese used Elisabeth’s life as the broad framework for presenting and
engaging with her correspondence. She refers not only to the famous exchanges
of letters with Descartes and with the Quakers, but also mentions the less known
letter exchanges with scholars, such as Constanijn Huygens or Anna Maria von
Schurman, as well as family members, and family friends. However, Creese’s main
interest is to present a nuanced biography of Elisabeth through a careful reading of
her correspondence. She does not present an inventory or any other chronological
list of Elisabeth’s correspondence. The collected volume edited by Helge bei der
Wieden, Elisabeth von der Pfalz, Äbtissin von Herford, 1618–1680 (2008), shares
this biographical approach. Although a great number of hitherto overlooked
letters and correspondents are discussed in this publication, it does not provide
any comprehensive list of Elisabeth’s correspondence. All other publications on
Elisabeth’s letter exchanges refer to specific correspondences, and do not take
into consideration the complete text corpus.
Before providing a survey of the correspondence, I will first mention the basic
events of Elisabeth’s life, which can serve as a broad orientation for the various
letter exchanges. Elisabeth was born in Heidelberg in 1618, the eldest daughter
of Elizabeth Stuart (1596–1662) and Frederik V of the Palatinate (1596–1632).
The dramatic events of the Thirty Year’s War (1618–1648) form the backdrop for
the first half of her life. At an early age, Elisabeth had to leave the Palatinate when
her father, who had accepted the crown of Bohemia, lost the Battle at the White
Mountain (1620) and, as a consequence, also the Palatinate, and was forced to
flee from the imperial troops. While her parents and siblings fled to The Hague,
where they were welcomed by Maurice of Orange (1567–1625), stadtholder of
the seven provinces of the Dutch Republic, and established a court in exile there,
Elisabeth spent her first years, together with her brother Charles Louis and her
grandmother Louise Juliana of Orange-Nassau (1576–1644), at the court of
her aunt Elisabeth Charlotte (1597–1660) in Brandenburg. Some years later,
Elisabeth and her brother joined the rest of the family in The Hague, where they
received an education appropriate for the high nobility, and participated in the
splendid court life. However, after a public scandal involving her brother Philipp
(1627–1650) in 1646, Elisabeth had to leave The Hague, and traveled together
with her sister, Henriette Marie (1626–1651), to Brandenburg, where she stayed for
several years. Following the Peace of Westphalia in 1648, when the Palatinate was
restituted to the family, Elisabeth joined her brother Charles Louis in Heidelberg
in 1651, with the prospect of living there permanently. However, after a family
dispute about the legally controversial separation of Charles Louis from his wife328 journal of the history of philosophy 58:2 april 2020
Charlotte of Hesse-Kassel (1627–1686), Elisabeth left Heidelberg again and lived
as a guest at several befriended courts. In 1661, and with support of her cousin
Frederick William of Brandenburg (1620–1688), Elisabeth secured the position
as coadjutress of Herford abbey, where she eventually became abbess in 1667. As
abbess of Herford, Elisabeth showed tolerance toward persecuted religious groups,
such as the Dutch Labadists, German spiritualists, and English Quakers. Elisabeth
died in Herford on 8 February 1680 after a long and severe illness.5
1.1. Survey of the correspondence
The following survey of the correspondence broadly follows the chronology
of Elisabeth’s life, and is divided according to groups of correspondents. The
survey does not provide a detailed description of the content of the different
correspondences; rather, it gives some indications of the various contexts in which
they developed, and of the topics one might expect to find addressed there. For
various reasons, it is difficult to divide Elisabeth’s correspondence neatly into
different sections, such as private, political, or philosophical. One decisive factor
is that, as a member of the high nobility, many of her private letters also had a
public and political dimension. Additionally, her letters about philosophy also
contain private reflections, while her letters to family members often include
remarks that reflect her philosophical positions. It should be mentioned that not
every correspondent will be referred to here by name; however, a comprehensive
list of all correspondents, including brief biographical information, is given at
the end of this article.
1.1.1. Letter exchanges with family members
During her entire life, Elisabeth corresponded with various members of her family,
including her mother, her brothers and sisters, cousins, and distant relatives from
various noble houses. From her early years onwards, Elisabeth exchanged letters
with her cousin, Elisabeth Louise (1613–1667). In 1649, Elisabeth Louise became
abbess of Herford, and Elisabeth sought to save a position as coadjutrix, first for
her sister Louise Hollandine (1622–1709), and later for herself. Most of Elisabeth’s
extant letters to family members, however, are addressed to her brother Charles
Louis (1617–1680), with whom she maintained a close relationship, despite
some disputes, until her death. Additionally, Elisabeth participated from the very
beginning in correspondence in support of her house’s cause, especially with
English diplomats and noble men, such as Sir Thomas Roe (1581–1644), a close
confidant of her mother. The family letters reveal much important information
concerning Elisabeth’s intellectual networks, as indicated, for example, by her
references to John Amos Comenius (1592–1670), Ludwig Camerarius (1573–
1651), and Franciscus Mercurius van Helmont (1614–1699). They also contain
information about the books that Elisabeth read, received, and forwarded to
others. This is of particular importance because her private library, which she
For more details on Elisabeth’s biography, see Gottschalk Eduard Guhrauer, “Elisabeth, Pfalzgrä-
5
fin bei Rhein”; Creese, The letters of Elisabeth; Wieden, Elisabeth von der Pfalz; and Sabrina Ebbersmeyer,
“Elisabeth of Bohemia.”inventory of the correspondence of elisabeth 329
bequeathed to her brother Charles Louis, is now lost.6 Many (but not all) of the
letters exchanged between Elisabeth and her relatives are found in Karl Hauck’s Die
Briefe der Kinder des Winterkönigs of 1908. Hauck’s edition is of particular relevance,
as the material consulted by Hauck that was located in the Geheimes Hausarchiv in
Munich was destroyed during World War II and is no longer extant.
1.1.2. Letter exchanges with scholars related to Elisabeth’s years in The Netherlands
During her years in The Hague, Elisabeth was acquainted with many intellectuals
who participated in various philosophical and scientific debates.7 The exile court
of her mother attracted many scholars, and Elisabeth was keen to learn about
recent philosophical and scientific developments. Among her correspondents
during this period, we find Anna Maria van Schurman (1607–1678), famous for
her learning and writings about women’s education, who encouraged Elisabeth
to pursue her studies; the French physician and philosopher Samuel Sorbière
(1615–1670), whose letter reveals information about Elisabeth’s engagement
with Epicurean philosophy8; and the diplomat and scholar Constantijn Huygens
(1596–1687), as well as the theologian Andreas Colvius (1594–1671), both of
whom supplied Elisabeth with the latest scientific and philosophical publications.
Elisabeth continued to exchange letters with many of these intellectuals even after
she had to leave The Netherlands in 1646. Many of these letters, but not all, are
published in the context of the works of the respective correspondents.
1.1.3. The letter exchange with Descartes
The letter exchange with Descartes is exceptional for various reasons. It is the
most comprehensive one, as the extant correspondence consists of 59 letters: 33
letters written from Descartes to Elisabeth and 26 from Elisabeth to Descartes. This
correspondence is without any doubt the best studied one. It is also here that we
find Elisabeth’s philosophical thought expressed most clearly and extensively. The
correspondence begins with a discussion of the problem of the interaction of mind
and body under Cartesian premises. Elisabeth presents herself as a sharp critic of
Cartesian thought.9 There follows an exchange about a mathematical problem,
namely, the so-called problem of the three circles. Taking up a suggestion made
by Descartes, Elisabeth was working on an algebraic solution to the problem,
which at that time was unsolved.10 They also discussed various problems of
6
For more details on Elisabeth’s library in Herford, see Helge Bei der Wieden, “Einige Be-
merkungen.”
See Creese, The letters of Elisabeth; Carol Pal, “Princess Elisabeth”; and Vlad Alexandrescu, “What
7
Someone.”
For more on Elisabeth and Epicurean philosophy, see Alexandrescu, “What someone” and
8
Ebbersmeyer, “Épicure at argumentation épicurienne.”
For Descartes’s position concerning the problem of interaction in this letter exchange see, e.g.
9
Daniel Garber, “Understanding Interaction”; and David Yandell, “What Descartes really told Elisabeth.”
For Elisabeth’s position see, e.g. Lisa Shapiro, “The Union of Soul and Body”; and Deborah Tollefsen,
“Mind-Body Interaction.”
10
Elisabeth’s own solution is lost, but has been reconstructed by Verbeek et al., The Correspondence
of René Descartes, 206–11. For the context and the circulation of these letters in manuscript form see
Erik-Jan Bos, “Princess Elizabeth.”330 journal of the history of philosophy 58:2 april 2020
natural philosophy and new publication in this field, such as works by Kenelm
Digby (1603–1665), Henricus Regius (1598–1679), and Cornelis van Hogelande
(1590–1662). On Elisabeth’s inquiry, they discussed the role and nature of the
passions, which motivated Descartes to write his treatise on the Passions of the
Soul (1649). Elisabeth became its first reader and commented critically on the
manuscript. Eventually, they addressed matters of moral and political philosophy.
Sharing their thoughts on Seneca’s On the Happy Life, they discussed moral topics,
such as the best form of life and the sovereign good. They also read Machiavelli’s
The Prince, disagreed on the maxims presented in that work, and discussed more
generally the advantages and disadvantages of a political form of life. The last
letter from Elisabeth to Descartes was written on 4 December 1649, shortly before
Descartes’s death in Sweden on 11 February 1650.
Descartes’s letters to Elisabeth first appeared in Clerselier’s edition of 1657–
1667. There are 31 letters from Descartes to Elisabeth in the first volume of 1657;
the two letters on the mathematical problem are found in the third volume,
which appeared in 1667. Elisabeth’s letters were first published by Alexandre
Foucher de Careil in 1879.11 Several years earlier, Frederik Muller had discovered
a manuscript in the library of Rosendael Castle, then owned by Baron Reinhardt J.
C. van Pallandt, which contains 26 letters from Elisabeth to Descartes and 2 from
Christina of Sweden, one each to Descartes and to Chanut.12 This manuscript is a
copy from the early eighteenth century and the only manuscript copy of Elisabeth’s
letters yet found. This correspondence is published in volumes III, IV, and V of
the edition of Descartes’s work by Charles Adam and Paul Tannery. A new critical
edition of Descartes’s letters is currently being prepared by Roger Ariew, Erik-Jan
Bos, and Theo Verbeek. The correspondence is also available in separate editions
in French, and has been translated into various modern languages.13
1.1.4. Letter exchanges with intellectuals related to Elisabeth’s stay in Heidelberg
During her stay in Heidelberg (c. 1651–1658), Elisabeth developed relationships
with intellectuals related to her brother’s court and to the university that had
reopened in 1652, attracting international scholars and students. One of her
most important acquaintances of this period is the one with the Swiss philologist
and theologian Johann Heinrich Hottinger (1620–1667). With Hottinger, who
dedicated to her the fifth volume of his Historiae Ecclesiasticae Novi Testamenti Seculum
11
Louis Alexandre Foucher de Careil, Descartes, la princesse Élisabeth et la reine Christine d’après des
lettres inédites.
See Frederik Muller, “27 onuitgegeven brieven aan Descartes.” The manuscript is located at
12
Arnhem, Stichting Vrienden der Geldersche Kasteelen, Bibliothek Schloss Rosendael, Recueil de quelques
Lettres écrites à Monsieur Descartes. A detailed description of the manuscript can be found in Verbeek et
al., The Correspondence of René Descartes, xxxiii–vi.
See, in particular, the French editions of Jacques Chevalier, Lettres sur la morale; Jean-Marie and
13
Michelle Beyssade, Correspondance avec Élisabeth; and Jean-Robert Armogathe, Correspondance. An Italian
translation can be found in the complete edition of Descartes’s correspondence published by Giulia
Belgioioso, Tutte le lettere. Separate editions of the correspondence are also available in English (An-
drea Nye, The Princess and the Philosopher ; and Shapiro, The Correspondence), Dutch (Jeanne Holierhoek,
Briefwisseling) and German (Ebbersmeyer, Der Briefwechsel zwischen Elisabeth und Descartes, and Isabelle
Wienand and Olivier Ribordy, Der Briefwechsel mit Elisabeth).inventory of the correspondence of elisabeth 331
(1655–1667), Elisabeth exchanged many letters on personal, philosophical,
and theological matters. During this time, Elisabeth assisted also in circulating
Descartes’s two mathematical letters to her, which appeared in print for the first
time only in 1667. Later she also sent copies of these letters to the German scholar
Theodor Haak (1605–1690).14
1.1.5. Letter exchanges by Elisabeth as Abbess of Herford
Elisabeth’s letter exchange of this period is dominated by political matters
complemented by correspondence on spiritual questions. Between 1670 and 1672,
Elisabeth granted asylum to a group of Labadists accompanied by her friend Anna
Maria van Schurman.15 This caused tensions with, and ultimately open hostility
from, the city of Herford. To defend the Labadists, Elisabeth corresponded with
her cousin Frederick William, sovereign of the city of Herford. Elisabeth and
her abbey also suffered from various political conflicts that surrounded them.
During the Franco-Dutch War (1672–1678), Elisabeth had to accommodate the
military, but tried to protect her territory from foreign influences, as can be seen
in the correspondence with her cousin Frederik William and representatives of
the court of Brandenburg. From 1672 and onward until her death, Elisabeth
corresponded with several Quakers, such as Stephen Crisp (1628–1692), George
Fox (1624–1691), Benjamin Furly (1636–1714), William Penn (1644–1718), and,
in particular, Robert Barclay (1648–1690), with whom she exchanged 17 letters
between 1676 and 1679. They discussed political matters, such as the imprisonment
of several Quakers in Scotland, but also Elisabeth’s own spiritual struggles and
development. The letter exchange became more intensive in the years 1676–77,
when several Quaker delegations visited Elisabeth in Herford. Additionally,
Elisabeth engaged in a correspondence with other preachers and religious
dissidents, such as the German spiritualists Friedrich Breckling (1629–1711)
and Jonann Georg Gichtel (1638–1690). Elisabeth also continued to correspond
with English diplomats and noblemen, such as Henry Coventry (1619–1686) and
William Craven (1608–1697), on political matters and the cause of her family.
Towards the end of her life, Elisabeth also corresponded with the philosophers
Nicolas Malebranche (1638–1715) and Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz (1646–1716)
about religious matters. While the correspondence with Malebranche is now lost
(though reconstructed by André Robinet),16 one letter from Leibniz to Elisabeth
is still extant.
1.2. Description of the inventory
This inventory provides a chronological list of all the letters written by and to
Elisabeth that are known today. Whenever possible, the following information is
provided: Date; Place; Addresser/Addressee; Language; indication of the standard
Printed Edition or (in the absence of such an edition) to the first printed edition;
For more details on Elisabeth’s role in the circulation of Descartes’s letters, see Erik-Jan Bos,
14
“Princess Elizabeth of Bohemia and Descartes’ letters (1650–1665).”
On the Labadist’s movement, see Trevor J. Saxby, The Quest for the New Jerusalem.
15
See Nicolas Malebranche, Oeuvres completes, 130–33.
16332 journal of the history of philosophy 58:2 april 2020
indication of the Manuscript; whether the manuscript is an Autograph, a Copy or
a Concept of a letter; and the Incipit of the respective letter. Information given in
brackets [] is not found in the manuscript, but has been confirmed through other
sources. In cases where the manuscript indicated in the literature is now lost or
was not identified, the manuscript reference is given as in the literature with the
remark “lost” or “n. i.” (not identified) in brackets []. This pertains to several of
the letters provided by Hauck, Die Briefe, and Wendland, “Sechs Briefe.”
There remain several problems, especially with the dating of the letters. First,
and as is well known, Elisabeth’s life fell during a period when two calendars were
still in use. This is because the calendar reform of 1582 (that is, the replacement
of the Julian calendar with today’s Gregorian calendar), which required a ten-day
leap forward, was not implemented everywhere at the same time, and hence both
dates were in use. Sometimes letters were dated with both dates, sometimes just
with one or the other. Usually, the inventory gives the date as indicated in the
manuscript. Additionally, the Quakers used numbers instead of the pagan names
of the months, with the year starting in March. This led to some confusion and
inconsistencies in the literature concerning the dates of certain letters.17 In this
inventory, all names of the months are given in terms of the Julian and Gregorian
calendars. Finally, whenever this inventory departs from dating found in the
literature, an explanation is provided in a footnote. All undated letters are listed
at the end of the inventory.
One remark on the Printed Edition: Some letters to and by Elisabeth were
printed several times in many different editions; this applies especially to the
correspondences with Descartes and with Barclay. Generally, I have confined myself
here to citing only one edition. The guiding criterion has been to give standard
editions that are usually available at libraries. In the absence of such standard
editions, I provide the first printed edition; I provide second editions only in cases
where first editions were not available to me. The “List of Abbreviations” also
includes a list of published works containing letters by or to Elisabeth.
Additional material related to Elisabeth’s position as abbess of Herford,
such as formal documents concerning enfeoffment, and documents related to
her testament, are not included in this inventory.18 The same applies to some
Shapiro, who has included the correspondence with Barclay and Penn in her translation of
17
the correspondence between Elisabeth and Descartes, has misidentified the dates of the following
letters in her recent edition: Barclay to Elisabeth, 24 June (not April) 1676; Elisabeth to Barclay, 6
November (not October) 1676; Barclay to Elisabeth, 24 December (not October) 1676; and Barclay
to Elisabeth, 6 July (not May) 1679.
Hauck’s edition contains some of the additional documents that are not included in the inven-
18
tory of letters: a formal obligation (revers) with annotations from Elisabeth that she had to sign for
Elisabeth Louise when she became coadjutrix of the Abbey of Herford (Hauck, Die Briefe, 186–87),
dated 1 May 1661; along with six documents relating to Elisabeth’s death: Elisabeth’s testament (Hauck,
Die Briefe, 329–31), dated 8/18 September 1671; a fragment of a settlement between Elisabeth and
her Capital (Hauck, Die Briefe, 331–32), dated 18 March 1679; an additional document concerning
her testament, a Legatzettel (Hauck, Die Briefe, 332–38), dated 9 September st. n. 1679; a Memoriale
concerning her testament (Hauck, Die Briefe, 338–41), dated 1 February 1680; an Inventory (Hauck,
Die Briefe, 341–42), dated 4 October 1679; and documents relating to Elisabeth’s debts (Hauck, Die
Briefe, 342–45).inventory of the correspondence of elisabeth 333
official documents related to Elisabeth that are found in archives in Berlin and
in Münster.19
bibliography and abbreviations
Alexandrescu, Vlad. “What Someone May have whispered in Elisabeth’s Ear.” In Oxford Studies in
Early Modern Philosophy 6, edited by Daniel Garber und Donald Rutherford, 1–27. Oxford: Oxford
University Press, 2012. [“What Someone”]
Armogathe, Jean-Robert, ed. Correspondance avec Élisabeth de Bohême et Christine de Suède. Paris: Gallimard,
2018. [Correspondance]
Belgioioso, Giulia, ed. René Descartes: Tutte le lettere 1619–1650. Bologna: Bompiani, 2005. [Tutte le lettere]
Blanke, Lore. “Elisabeth und die Quäker.” In Wieden, Elisabeth von der Pfalz, 97–119.
Bos, Erik-Jan. “Princess Elizabeth of Bohemia and Descartes’ letters (1650–1665).” Historica Mathematica
37 (2010): 485–502. [“Princess Elizabeth”]
Beyssade, Jean-Marie, and Michelle Beyssade, eds. Correspondance avec Élisabeth et autres lettres. Paris:
Flammarion, 1989. [Correspondance avec Élisabeth]
Clerselier, Claude. Lettres de Monsieur Descartes, 3 vols. Paris: Angot, 1657–1667.
Creese, Anna E. S. “The letters of Elisabeth, Princess Palatine: A seventeenth century correspondence.”
PhD diss., Princeton University, 1993. Microfiche ed. Ann Arbor: UMI. [The letters of Elisabeth]
Cadbury, M. Christabel. Robert Barclay: His Life and Work. London: Headley Brothers, 1912. [Robert
Barclay]
Campbell, Julie, and Anne R. Larsen, eds. Early Modern Women and Transnational Communities of Letters.
Farnham: Ashgate, 2009. [Early Modern Women]
Couchman, Jane, ed. Women’s Letters Across Europe, 1400–1700: Form and Persuasion. Aldershot: Ashgate,
2005. [Women’s Letters Across Europe]
Descartes, Réne. Oeuvres de Descartes. Edited by Charles Adam and Paul Tannery, 11 vols. Paris: Vrin,
1996. [AT]
Ebbersmeyer, Sabrina, ed. Der Briefwechsel zwischen Elisabeth von der Pfalz und René Descartes. München:
Fink, 2015. [Der Briefwechsel zwischen Elisabeth und Descartes]
———. “Elisabeth of Bohemia.” In Encyclopedia of Early Modern Philosophy and the Sciences, edited by
Dana Jalobeanu and Charles T. Wolfe. Springer: New York, 2020.
———. “Épicure et argumentations épicuriennes dans la pensée d’Élisabeth.” In Kolesnik-Antoine
and Pellegrin, Élisabeth de Bohême, 171–83.
Elsner, Bernd, and Martin Rothkegel, eds. Der Briefwechsel des Joachim Jungius. Göttingen: Vandenhoek
and Ruprecht, 2005.
Foucher de Careil, Louis Alexandre. Descartes, la princesse Élisabeth et la reine Christine d’après des lettres
inédites. Paris: Germer-Baillière, 1879.
———. Descartes et la Princesse Palatine, ou de l’influence du Cartésianisme sur les Femmes au XVIIe siècle.
Paris: Auguste Durand, 1862.
Garber, Daniel. “Understanding Interaction: What Descartes Should Have Told Elisabeth.” Southern
Journal of Philosophy, Supplement 21 (1983): 15–32. [“Understanding Interaction”]
Guhrauer, Gottschalk Eduard. “Elisabeth, Pfalzgräfin bei Rhein, Aebtissin von Herford (Erste
Abtheilung).” In Historisches Taschenbuch, edited by Friedrich von Raumer, 3. Folge, 1. Jahrgang,
1–150. Leipzig: Brockhaus, 1850. [“Elisabeth, Pfalzgräfin bei Rhein”]
———. “Elisabeth, Pfalzgräfin bei Rhein, Aebtissin von Herford (Zweite Abteilung).” In Historisches
Taschenbuch, ed. Friedrich von Raumer, 3. Folge, 2. Jahrgang, 417–554. Leipzig: Brockhaus, 1850.
Hannan, Leonie. Women of letters. Gender, Writing, and the Life of the Mind in Early Modern England.
Manchester: Manchester University Press, 2016. [Women of Letters]
Hauck, Karl. Die Briefe der Kinder des Winterkönigs. Heidelberg: Köster, 1908. [Die Briefe]
Holierhoeck, Jeanne, ed. René Descartes en Elisabeth van de Palts: Briefwisseling. Amsterdam:
Wereldbibliotheek, 2000. [Briefwisseling]
Heuvel, Gerd van den. “Elisabeth und die Philosophen.” In Wieden, Elisabeth von der Pfalz, 59–75.
Köcher, Adolf, ed. Memoiren der Herzogin Sophie nachmals Kurfürstin von Hannover. Leipzig: Hirzel, 1879.
The information presented here has been gathered to a large extend in the scope of my research
19
project, Invisible Nets, funded by the Fritz Thyssen Foundation (2010–2013) and with the help of many
people. My particular thanks go to Kathrin Schlierkamp, who assisted in collecting and organizing the
fast material and to Erik-Jan Bos, who generously shared his information with us.334 journal of the history of philosophy 58:2 april 2020
Kolesnik-Antoine, Delphine, and Marie-Frédérique Pellegrin, eds. Élisabeth de Bohême face à Descartes:
deux philosophes? Paris: Vrin, 2014. [Élisabeth de Bohême]
Kolesnik-Antoine, Delphine. “Élisabeth philosophe: un cartésianisme empirique?” In Kolesnik-Antoine
and Pellegrin, Élisabeth de Bohême, 119–37.
Leibniz, Gottfried Wilhelm. Sämtliche Schriften und Briefe. Edited by Berlin-Brandenburgische Akademie
der Wissenschaften und der Akademie der Wissenschaften in Göttingen, 2. Reihe, vol. 1. Berlin:
Akademie Verlag, 2006.
Malebranche, Nicolas. Oeuvres completes, vol. 18: Correspondance, actes et documents 1638–1689. Edited
by André Robinet. Paris: Vrin, 1978.
Muller, Frederik. “27 onuitgegeven brieven aan Descartes.” De Nederlandsche Spectator 21 (1876): 336–39.
Nye, Andrea. “Polity and Prudence. The Ethics of Elisabeth, Princess Palatine.” In Hypatia’s Daughters.
Fifteen Hundred Years of Women Philosophers, edited by Linda Lopez McAlister, 68–91, Bloomington:
Indianapolis University Press, 1996.
———. The Princess and the Philosopher. Letters of Elisabeth of the Palatine to René Descartes. Lanham: Rowman
and Littlefield, 1999. [The Princess and the Philosopher]
Pal, Carol. “Princess Elisabeth of Bohemia: An Ephemeral Academy at The Hague in the 1630s.” In
Pal, Republic of Women: Rethinking the Republic of Letters in the Seventeenth Century, 22–51. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press, 2012. [“Princess Elisabeth”]
Powell, Huge. “Gryphius, Princess Elisabeth and Descartes.” Germanica Wratislaviensia 4 (1960): 63–76.
Saxby, Trevor J. The quest for the new Jerusalem, Jean de Labadie and the Labadists, 1610–1744. Dordrecht:
Nijhoff, 1987. [The quest for the new Jerusalem]
Shapiro, Lisa, ed. The Correspondence between Princess Elisabeth of Bohemia and René Descartes. Chicago:
The University of Chicago Press, 2007. [The Correspondence]
———. “Princess Elisabeth and Descartes: The Union of Soul and Body and the Practice of Philosophy.”
British Journal for the History of Philosophy 7 (1999): 503–20. [“The Union of Soul and Body”]
Sorbière, Samuel. Sorberiana seu excerpta ex ore Samuelis Sorbiere. Colomyez: Tolosa, 1694.
Steiger, Johann Anselm, ed. Friedrich Breckling: Autobiographie. Ein frühneuzeitliches Ego-Dokument im
Spannungsfeld von Spiritualismus, radikalem Pietismus und Theosophie. Tübingen: Niemeyer, 2005.
[Friedrich Breckling: Autobiographie]
Tollefsen, Deborah. “Princess Elisabeth and the Problem of Mind-Body Interaction.” Hypatia 14 (1999):
59–77. [“Mind-Body Interaction”]
Yandell, David. “What Descartes really told Elisabeth: Mind-body union as a primitive notion.” British
Journal for the History of Philosophy 5 (1997): 249–73.
Verbeek, Theo, Erik-Jan Bos, and Jeroen van de Ven. The Correspondence of René Descartes 1643. Utrecht:
Zeno Institute for Philosophy, 2003. [The Correspondence of René Descartes]
Wendland, Anna. “Die Heirat der Prinzessin Henriette Marie von der Pfalz mit dem Fürsten Sigmund
Rákószy von Siebenbürgen.” Neue Heidelberger Jahrbücher 14 (1906): 241–78.
Wieden, Helge Bei der. “Einige Bemerkungen zur Bibliothek der Reichsabtei Herford.” In Historisches
Jahrbuch für den Kreis Herford 2004, 8–19. Verlag für Regionalgeschichte: Herford, 2003. [“Einige
Bemerkungen”]
———, ed. Elisabeth von der Pfalz, Äbtissin von Herford, 1618–1680. Hannover: Hahnsche Buchhandlung,
2008. [Elisabeth von der Pfalz]
Wienand, Isabelle, and Olivier Ribordy, eds. René Descartes: Der Briefwechsel mit Elisabeth von der Pfalz.
Hamburg: Meiner, 2015. [Der Briefwechsel mit Elisabeth]
Wolgast, Eike. “Die Reichsabteien im Verfassungssystem des Alten Reiches.” In Wieden, Elisabeth von
der Pfalz, 11–35.Nr Date Place Addresser/addressee Language Print Manuscript Incipit
1
3/13 Oct. Rhenen E. to Elisabeth Fr. Hauck, 2–3 Munich, HA, 181 ½. Je n’ay peu m’empecher de vous dire
[1635] Luise [lost] avec quelle douleur iay apris la perte
que vous avez faite . . .
2 4/14 Mar. E. to Thomas Eng. Kew, Richmond, I see my Brother come bake without
[1638/ Roe TNA, SP 81/46, the good fortune which my false
1639] f. 139. [Autograph] hopes did promise him . . .
3
7 Sept. Utrecht Anna Maria van Fr. Schurman I, Je ne puis exprimer l’excez de joye &
1639 Schurman to E. 281–87 de contentement que j’ay reçeu en
lisant la letre que Votre Altesse . . .
4 28 May Arnhem Roe to E. Eng. London, BL, Add. Hitherto all things have ben prosper-
[1641] 4172, ff. 5v–6r. [Copy] ous, its all things . . .
5
7/17 Jun. E. to Thomas Roe Eng. Hamilton, 4 I shall believe any business desperate
1641 that you undertake without effect,
since you use the best means . . .
6 29 Jul. Roe to E. Eng. London, BL, Add. I know your High. will have . . .
[1641] 4172, f. 39v. [Copy]
7
16/26 The Hague E. to Thomas Roe Eng. Hamilton, 91–92 I have ever thought the Diet but a
Aug. 1641 comedy, where the chief actors, the
Electors and Princes of Germany, . . .
8
24 Aug. Roe to E. Eng. London, BL, Add. I confess I should make no offering,
[1641] 4172, ff. 50r–v. [Copy] but in proportion to the Saint, for . . .
9 30 Oct. Roe to E. Eng. London, BL, Add. 4172, There is not among the Satyres so
[1641] ff. 81v–82r. [Copy] strange a Monster as . . .
335Nr Date Place Addresser/addressee Language Print Manuscript Incipit 336 10 29 Nov./ E. to Thomas Roe Eng. Hamilton, 183–84 Your journey to Vienna has been spo- 9 Dec. 1641 ken against by three sorts of people. Some apprehend the . . . 11 9 Jan. [1642]20 E. to Thomas Roe Eng. Kew, Richmond, TNA, The question betweene the french & . . . SP 81/53, f. 169 whether the yearly monies sent to the republique was a . . . 12 10 Jan. [1642] Roe to E. Eng. London, BL, Add. 4172, A line hath bene enough to have made ff. 116v–117r. [Copy] me the. . . 13 6 May [The Hague] E. to René Descartes Fr. AT III.660–62 Arnhem, SV, pp. 95–98. I’ay appris, avec beaucoup de ioye et [1643] [Copy] de regret, l’intention que vous avez eu de me voir . . . 14 [21] May [Egmond René Descartes Fr. AT III.663–68 Leiden, UB, BPL 293B, La faueur dont vostre Altesse m’a 1643 aan den to E. Verbeek, Bos, ff. 85r–86v. [Copy] honoré en m’a honoré, en me faisant Hoef] Ven, 67–70 Leiden, UB, Per Q 5, ff. receuoir ses commandemens . . . 81r–85v. [Copy] The Hague, KB, KA 47, ff. 74r-76r. [Copy] 15 [25 May]/ E. to Thomas Roe Eng. Kew, Richmond, TNA, The best newes I could expect from yr 4 Jun. [1643] SP 81/53, f. 255. Letters, is to see them in your owne [Autograph] hands . . . 16 9 Jun. [Dordrecht]21 Andreas Colvius Fr. Thijssen- Leiden, UB, BPL 284, Ayant eu ce bonheur d’avoir abbouché 1643 to E. Schoute, 566 f. 102r. [Copy] par deux fois V. A. et ayant apperçeu de pres vos singulieres . . . 17 10 Jun. [The Hague] E. to René Fr. AT III.683–85 Arnhem, SV, pp. Vostre bonté ne paroist pas seulement [1643] Descartes 99–104. [Copy] en me montrant & corrigeant les defauts de mon raisonnement, . . .
18 21 Jun. E. to Andreas Fr. AT VIII B.197 Leiden, UB, PAP 1c Monsieur Colvius, Vous m’enseignez
1643 Colvius [s. p.]. [Autograph] encore mieux par exemple que par
precepte le [sic] maxime de la . . .
19 28 Jun. Egmond aan René Descartes Fr. AT III.690–95 Leiden, UB, BPL 293B, I’ay tres–grande obligation à vostre
1643 den Hoef to E. Verbeek, Bos, ff. 87r–88v. [Copy] Altesse de ce que, apres auoir éprouué
Ven, 96–99 Leiden, UB, BPL 293B que ie me suis mal expliqué . . .
ff. 89r–90v. [Copy]
Leiden, UB, Per Q 5,
ff. 86r–90v. [Copy]
20 1 Jul. [The Hague] E. to René Fr. AT IV.1–3 Arnhem, SV, pp. 89–92. I’aprehende que vous ne receuiez
[1643] Descartes [Copy] autant d’incommodité, par mon estime
de vos instructions . . .
21 [17 Nov. [Egmond René Descartes Fr. AT IV.38–42 London, BL, 4278, ff. Ayant sceu de Monsieur de Pollot que
1643] aan den to E. Verbeek, Bos, 150r–151v. [Copy] Vostre Altesse a pris la peine de cher
Hoef] Ven, 155–56 London, BL, Add. 4278, cher la question . . .
ff. 159r–160v. [Copy]
22 21 Nov. [The Hague] E. to René Fr. AT IV.44–45 Arnhem, SV, pp. 92–94. Si i’auois autant d’habilité a suiure vos
[1643] Descartes [Copy] auis, que d’ennuie, vous trouueriez
desia les effets de . . .
23 29 Nov. Egmond René Descartes Fr. AT IV.45–50; London, BL, Add. 4278, La solution qu’il a plû à Vostre Altesse
1643 aan den to E. Verbeek, Bos, ff. 153r–154v. [Copy] me faire l’honneur de m’enuoyer, est si
Hoef Ven, 163–66 London, BL, Add. 4278, iuste, qu’il . . .
ff. 157r–158v. [Copy]
20
The catalogue of TNA indicates “30 December 1642–09 January 1643.” However, the letter contains just the day, i.e. 9 Jan., but no year, whereas the envelope bears,
by the hand of Sir Thomas Roe “From ye Princes Elzab. 9 Jan. 1642.”
21
The manuscript letter bears no place, but Colvius wrote a letter to Descartes that same day that gives Dordrecht as his location.
337Nr Date Place Addresser/addressee Language Print Manuscript Incipit 338 24 26 Jan. Utrecht Anna Maria van Fr. Schurman I, Ce seroit ignorer la grandeur de Vostre 1644 Schurman to E. 300–303 Altesse, & la petitesse de ma condition, que d’attribuër . . . 25 6/16 E. to Thomas Roe Eng. Kew, Richmond, TNA, I see many reasons in yr last Letter why Jun. 1644 SP 81/54, f. 22. you should be weary of the world & [Autograph] willing to leave it . . . 26 [8 Jul. [Paris] René Descartes Fr. AT V.64–66 Mon voyage ne pouvoit estre accompa- 1644] to E. gné d’aucun malheur, puis que i’ay esté si heureux, . . . 27 20 Jul. Maldegem Constantijn Fr. Worp IV.8 The Hague, KB, KA Entre la honte de vous offrir un 1644 Huygens to E. 49–2, p. 211–12. [Copy] mauvais Livre, et la crainte que qu- elqu’autre ne le . . . 28 17/27 The Hague E. to Constantijn Fr. Worp IV.15 [According to Worp, Si un autre m’eut faict veoir le livre Jul. 1644 Huygens the manuscipt seems to que vous m’avez envoyé, je n’y aurois be lost, cf. Worp IV, 15, admiré que l’excellence . . . note 1] 29 1 Aug. [The Hague] E. to René Fr. AT IV.131–33 Arnhem, SV, pp. Le present que M. Van Bergen m’a fait, [1644] Descartes 139–43. [Copy] de vostre part, m’oblige de vous rendre grace . . . 30 [Aug. [Le Crévis] René Descartes Fr. AT IV.136–38 La faveur que me fait vostre Altesse de 1644] to E. n’avoir pas desagreble que i’aye osé témoigner en public . . . 31 6/16 Jan. E. to Juliane Ger. Hauck, 28 Munich, HA, 215. [lost] . . . ob ich E. L. schon nuhn muss kla- [1645] Magdalene gen, dass S. L. mihr die gantze Zeit sie hier gewessen ihr glück . . .
32 [18 May [Egmond– René Descartes Fr. AT IV.200–04 I’ay esté extremement surpris d’ap
1645] Binnen] to E. prendre, par les lettres de Monsieur
P(ollet), que . . .
33 24 May [The Hague] E. to René Fr. AT IV.207–11 Arnhem, SV, pp. Ie vois que les charmes de la vie soli
[1645] Descartes 104–11. [Copy] taire ne vous ostent point les vertus
requises a la societé. . . .
34 [May/Jun. [Egmond– René Descartes Fr. AT IV.218–22 Ie n’ay pû lire la lettre que vostre
1645] Binnen] to E. Altesse m’a fait l’honneur de m’écrire,
sans auoir des ressentimens . . .
35 12/22 Jun. [The Hague] E. to René Fr. AT IV.233–35 Arnhem, SV, pp. Vos lettres me seruent tousiours d’anti
[1645] Descartes 85–88. [Copy] dote contre la melancolie, quand elles
ne m’emseigneroient pas, . . .
36 23 Jun. Zelzate Constantijn Fr. Worp IV.162 The Hague, KB, KA V. A. n’aura peut estre pas sceu le par-
1645 Huygens to E. 49-2, p. 251–52. [Copy] tage qui luy compete au continent de
la Lune. Voyei toutefois . . .
37 [Jun. [Egmond- René Descartes Fr. AT IV.236–38 Ie supplie tres-humblement vostre
1645] Binnen] to E. Altesse de me pardonner, si ie ne puis
plaindre son . . .
38 21 Jul. Egmond- René Descartes Fr. AT IV.251–53 Hannover, GWLB, XVIII L’air a tousiours esté si inconstant,
1645 Binnen to E. 1010, 1r–1v. [Copy] depuis que ie n’ay eu l’honneur
Marburg, HSA, 340 von de voir vostre Altesse, . . .
Dörnberg Nr. 4232. [Copy]
39 4 Aug. Egmond- René Descartes Fr. AT IV.263–68 Hannover, GWLB, XVIII Lorsque i’ay choisi le liure de Seneque
1645 Binnen to E. 1010, 1v–2v. [Copy] de vita beata, pour le proposer a vostre
Munich, BSB, Clm 10407, Altesse comme . . .
fol. 485r–v. [Fragment]
339Nr Date Place Addresser/addressee Language Print Manuscript Incipit 340
40 6/16 Aug. [The Hague] E. to René Fr. AT IV.268–70 Arnhem, SV, pp. 66–70. I’ay trouvé, en examinant le liure que
[1645] Descartes [Copy] vous m’auez recommandé, quantité de
belles periodes . . .
41 18 Aug. Egmond- René Descartes Fr. AT IV.271–78 Hannover, GWLB, XVIII Encore que ie ne sçache point si mes
1645 Binnen to E. 1010, 3r–4r. [Copy] dernieres ont esté rendües a vostre
Marburg, HSA, 340 von Altesse, . . .
Dörnberg Nr. 4232. [Copy]
Munich, BSB, Clm 10407,
fol. 485v. [Fragment]
42 [Aug. [The Hague] E. to René Fr. AT IV.278–80 Arnhem, SV, pp. 80–84. Ie crois que vous aurez desia veu, dans
1645] Descartes [Copy] ma derniere du 16me, que la vostre du
4me m’a esté rendue. . . .
43 1 Sept. Egmond- René Descartes Fr. AT IV.281–87 Hannover, GWLB, XVIII Estant dernierement incertain si vostre
1645 Binnen to E. 1010, 4v–5v. [Copy] Altesse estoit a la Haye ou a Rhenen,
Marburg, HSA, 340 i’adressay ma . . .
von Dörnberg Nr. 4232.
[Copy]
44 3/13 Sept. [The Hague] E. to René Fr. AT IV.288–90 Arnhem, SV, pp. 28–33. Si ma conscience demeuroit satisfaite
[1645] Descartes [Copy] des pretextes que vous donnez a mon
ignorance, comme . . .
45 15 Sept. Egmond– René Descartes Fr. AT IV.290–96 Hannover, GWLB, XVIII Vostre Altesse a si exactement remar-
1645 Binnen to E. 1010, 6r–7r. [Copy] qué toutes les causes qui ont empesché
Marburg, HSA, 340 von Seneque de nous . . .
Dörnberg Nr. 4232.
[Copy]46 30 Sept. [Rijswijk] E. to René Fr. AT IV, 301–304 Arnhem, SV, pp. 34–40. Quoy que vos obseruations sur les
[1645] Descartes [Copy] sentiments que Seneque auoit du
souuerain bien . . .
47 6 Oct. Egmond- René Descartes Fr. AT IV.304–17 Hannover, GWLB, XVIII Ie me suis quelquefois proposé un
1645 Binnen to E. 1010, 7r–9v. [Copy] doute : sçauoir s’il est mieux d’estre
Marburg, HSA, 340 von gay & content, en . . .
Dörnberg Nr. 4232. [Copy]
Munich, BSB, Clm 10407,
ff. 485r–v. [Fragment]
48 28 Oct. The Hague E. to René Fr. AT IV.321–24 Arnhem, SV, pp. 71–80. Apres auoir donné de si bonnes rai-
[1645] Descartes [Copy] sons, pour montrer qu’il vaut mieux
connoistre des . . .
49 3 Nov. Egmond- René Descartes Fr. AT IV.330–34 Hannover, GWLB, XVIII Il m’arriue si peu souvent de rencon-
1645 Binnen to E. 1010, 9r–10v. [Copy] trer de bons raisonnemens, non seule-
Marburg, HSA, 340 von ment das les discours . . .
Dörnberg Nr. 4232. [Copy]
Munich, BSB, Clm 10407,
f. 486r. [Fragment]
50 [30 Nov. [The Hague] E. to René Fr. AT IV.335–37 Arnhem, SV, pp. Vous aurez suiet de vous estonner,
1645] Descartes 144–49. [Copy] qu’apres m’auoir tesmoigné que mon
raisonnement . . .
51 27 Dec. [The Hague] E. to René Fr. AT IV.339–41 Arnhem, SV, pp. Le fils de feu professeur Schooten m’a
[1645] Descartes 53–56. [Copy] rendu aujourd’hui la lettre que vous
m’escriuiez en . . .
52 [Jan. [Egmond- René Descartes Fr. AT IV.351–57 Ie ne puis nier que ie n’aye esté surpris
1646] Binnen] to E. d’apprendre que vostre Altesse ait eu
de la fascherie, . . .
341Nr Date Place Addresser/addressee Language Print Manuscript Incipit 342
53 15/25 Apr. [The Hague] E. to René Fr. AT IV.404–6 Arnhem, SV, pp. Le traité que mon frere Philippe a
[1646] Descartes 132–38. [Copy] conclu avec la Republique de Venise
m’a fait auoir, tout . . .
54 [May 1646] René Descartes Fr. AT IV.407–12 Ie reconnois, par experience, que i’ay
to E. eu raison de mettre la gloire au
nombre des passions ; car ie . . .
55 [May 1646] [Egmond- René Descartes Fr. AT IV.414–15 L’occasion que i’ay de donner cette
Binnen] to E. lettre à Monsieur de Beclin, qui m’est
tres-intime amy, . . .
56 [Jul. 1646] The Hague E. to René Fr. AT IV.448–49 Arnhem, SV, pp. Puisque vostre voyage est arresté pour
Descartes 149–51. [Copy] le 3me/13 de ce mois, il faut que ie vous
represente . . .
57 8 Aug. 1646 Lokeren Constantijn Fr. Worp IV.341 The Hague, KB, KA Je n’ay osé presumer d’importuner V.
Huygens to E. 49–2, pp. 295–96. A. de mes lettres, jusques à ce que j’aye
[Copy] veu reuscir le peu de . . .
58 [Sept. [Egmond- René Descartes Fr. AT IV.486–94 I’ay lû le liure dont vostre Altesse m’a
1646] Binnen] to E. commandé de luy écrire mon opinion,
& i’y trouue plusieurs . . .
59 30 Sept. Berlin E. to René Fr. AT IV.519–24 Arnhem, SV, pp. Vous avez raison de croire que le diver-
[1646]22 Descartes 112–24. [Copy] tissement que vos lettres m’apportent,
est . . .
60 [Nov. 1646] René Descartes Fr. AT IV.528–33 I’ay receu vne tres-grande faueur de
to E. vostre Altesse, en ce qu’elle a voulu
que i’aprisse par ses . . .61 19/29 Nov. [Berlin] E. to René Fr. AT IV.578–81 Arnhem, SV, pp. 9–17. Ie ne suis pas tant accoutumée aux
[1646] Descartes [Copy] faueurs de la fortune, pour en attendre
d’extraoidinaire ; . . .
62 [Dec. 1646] [Egmond- René Descartes Fr. AT IV.589–91 Ie n’ay iamais trouvé de si bonnes nou-
Binnen] to E. velles en aucune des lettres que i’ay eu
cy-deuant . . .
63 [21 Feb. [Berlin] E. to René Fr. AT IV.618–20 Arnhem, SV, pp. 61–65. I’estime la ioye et la santé autant que
1647] Descartes [Copy] vous le faites, quoy que i’y prefere
vostre amitié aussi bien que . . .
64 [Mar. 1647] [The Hague] René Descartes Fr. AT IV.624–28 La satisfaction que i’aprens que vostre
to E. Altesse reçoit au lieu où elle est, fait
que ie n’ose souhaiter . . .
65 1/11 Apr. Berlin E. to René Fr. AT IV.628–31 Arnhem, SV, pp. 40–47. Ie n’ay point regretté mon absence de
[1647] Descartes [Copy] La Haye, que depuis que vous me man-
dez y avoir esté, . . .
66 [10 May [Egmond- René Descartes Fr. AT V.15–19 Encore que ie pourray trouuer des
1647] Binnen] to E. occasions qui me conuenieront à de-
meurer en France . . .
67 [May [Crossen] E. to René Fr. AT V.46–49 Arnhem, SV, pp. 125–32. Il y a trois semaines qu’on m’a enuoyé
1647] Descartes [Copy] le corollaire impertinent du professeur
Triglandius, . . .
68 [6 Jun. [The Hague] René Descartes Fr. AT V.59–60 Passant par la Haye pour aller en
1647] to E. France, puis que ie ne puis y auoir
l’honneur de receuoir vos . . .
22
The manuscript has 30 September, but Adam and Tannery date this letter 10 October (i.e. stilo novo) as the letter refers to the date “7/17 septembre” as passé (see
343
AT IV.519).Nr Date Place Addresser/addressee Language Print Manuscript Incipit 344
69 [20 Nov. [Egmond- René Descartes Fr. AT V.89–92 Puisque i’ay déia pris la liberté d’auer-
1647] Binnen] to E. tir vostre Altesse de la correspondance
que i’ay commencé . . .
70 25 Nov/ [Berlin] E. to René Fr. AT V.96–97 Arnhem, SV, pp. 5–8. Puisque i’ay receu, il y a quelques
5 Dec. [1647] Descartes [Copy] iours, la traduction françoise de vos
Meditations Metaphysiques, . . .
71 [31 Jan. [Egmond- René Descartes Fr. AT V.111–14 I’ay receu les lettres de vostre Altesse
1648] Binnen] to E. du 23 Decembre presque aussi–tost
que les precedentes, . . .
72 20/30 Jun. Crossen E. to René Fr. AT V.195–96 Arnhem, SV, pp. L’enflure que i’ay eu au bras droit, par
[1648] Descartes 18–22. [Copy] la faute d’vn chirurgien qui m’a coupé
d’vn nerf en me seignant, . . .
73 [Jun./Jul. [Paris] René Descartes Fr. AT V.197–99 Encore que ie sçache bien que le lieu
1648] to E. et la condition où ie suis ne me sçau-
roient donner aucune . . .
74 [Jul. [Crossen] E. to René Fr. AT V.209–11 Arnhem, SV, pp. Vous ne sauriez estre en lieu du monde
1648] Descartes 47–52. [Copy] où la peine que vous prendrez de me
mander de vos . . .
75 13/23 Crossen E. to René Fr. AT V.225–27 Arnhem, SV, pp. 22–27. Ie vous parlois, en ma derniere, d’vne
Aug. [1648] Descartes [Copy] personne qui, sans auoir failly, estoit
en danger de perdre . . .
76 [Oct. [Egmond- René Descartes Fr. AT V.232–34 I’ay eu enfin le bonheur de receuoir
1648] Binnen] to E. les trois lettres que vostre Altesse m’a
fait l’honneur de m’écrire, . . .77 19 Oct. Berlin E. to Charles Fr. Hauck, 34–35 Hannover, NLA, Hann. Vous aurez sceu par le dernier ordi-
1648 Louis Des. 63. [n. i] naire la rayson qui m’a empesche de
vous rendre mes devoirs, . . .
78 [22 Feb. [Egmond- René Descartes Fr. AT V.281–89 Entre plusieurs fascheuses nouuelles
1649] Binnen] to E. que i’ay receues de diuers endroits en
mesme temps, celle qui . . .
79 [31 Mar. [Egmond- René Descartes Fr. AT V.330–31 Il y a enuiron vn mois que i’ay eu
1649] Binnen] to E. l’honneur d’écrire a vostre Altesse, et
de luy mander que . . .
80 [Jun. [Egmond- René Descartes Fr. AT V.359–60 Puisque vostre Altesse desire sçauoir
1649] Binnen] to E. quelle est ma resolution touchant le
voyage de Suede, . . .
81 [9 Oct. [Stockholm] René Descartes Fr. AT V.429–31 Estant arriué depuis quatre ou cinq
1649] to E. iours à Stocholm, l’vne des premieres
choses que i’estime . . .
82 24 Nov./ E. to René Fr. AT V.451–52 Arnhem, SV, 57–60. Vostre lettre du 29 sept./9 oct. s’est
4 Dec. [1649] Descartes [Copy] promenée par Cleue ; mais toute vieille
elle ne laisse pas . . .
83 19 Feb. 1650 Pierre Hector Fr. AT V.471 Paris, BnF, fr. 17966, Le deuoir que je rends presentement a
Chanut to E. pp. 155–58. [Copy] Vostre Altesse Royal est le dernier de
tous ceux par . . .
84 16 Apr. 1650 Pierre Hector Fr. AT V.472–74 Paris, BnF, fr. 17966, J’obeis à l’ordre qu’il a pleu a Vostre
Chanut to E. p. 300–305. [Copy] Altesse Royalle me donner, et je mets
entre les mains . . .
85 3/13 E. to Pierre Fr. AT V.475 [Fragment according “. . . la pratique de sa piété, qui étoit
Jun. 1650 Hector Chanut to Baillet II.502] sincére et solide, mais qui n’avoit rien
d’outré ni de factieux, au sentiment
345
d’une Princesse trés-éclairée, . . .”You can also read
