![Sample our Humanities journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5939/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Humanities.jpg"})
ABSTRACT
This article examines the term “Radical Enlightenment” as a historiographical category through the lens of the philosophical work of Dorothea Christiane Erxleben (1715–1762), a keen advocate for women’s education and the first female medical doctor in Germany. The aim of the article is to develop a methodological framework that makes it possible to critically assess the radicalism of Erxleben’s philosophical position as it is presented in her highly systematic work Rigorous Investigation (1742). In the first part of the article, the term “Radical Enlightenment” is briefly discussed in the German context. The second part is dedicated to articulating two methodological problems concerning the use of the term “radical” with regards to early feminist writings of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. The aim of this section is to develop a new approach to the classification of radical thinkers of this period. In the remaining three parts, this methodological approach is applied to the analysis of Erxleben’s views on equality and education, focusing on her call for women’s active participation in society. Finally, it is concluded that there is sufficient evidence to categorize vital parts of Erxleben’s philosophy as radical.
Notes on contributor
Anne-Sophie Sørup Nielsen is a PhD Fellow in the Section for Philosophy at the University of Copenhagen. Her main research areas are early modern philosophy and feminist history of philosophy. She is currently working on a project on the gendering of philosophy as an academic discipline in seventeenth- and eighteenth-century Germany.
Notes
1 Other works by Enlightenment authors that also deal with the question of education include: Humboldt, “Theorie der Bildung,” 5–25; Smith, “Education of Youth,” 758–88; Montesquieu, “Laws of Education,” 37–51; and Kant’s lectures on education, which were converted into the book Über Pädagogik (1803) and published by F. T. Rink.
2 See Diderot, “Plan d’une Université,” 429–52; Condorcet, Écrits sur l'Instruction Publique; d’Holbach, Systeme of Nature, 88, 109, 145–56.
3 The most famous of these dissertations was perhaps the Dissertatio de Ingenii Muliebris ad Doctrinam, & meliores Litteras Aptitudine (Whether the Study of Letters is Fitting for a Christian Woman, Paris 1638 and Leiden 1641) by the highly celebrated Dutch scholar Anna Maria van Schurman (1607–1678), whose work and personal example inspired learned women all over Europe. Other similarly influential works, dealing with the subject of women’s education, include: Makin, Education of Gentlewomen; Astell, “Serious Proposal”; Masham, Occasional Thoughts; Gournay, Égalité; Amar y Borbón, Discurso Sobre; Wollstonecraft, Vindications.
4 Poeter, “Gender, Religion, and Medicine,” 101.
5 Very little research has been done on Dorothea Christiane Erxleben and her philosophical and political influence. Notable exceptions are: Dyck, “On Prejudice”; Petschauer, “German Opinions”; Markau, “Dorothea Christiana Erxleben”; Poeter, “Gender, Religion, and Medicine”; Böhm, Die Ärztin.
6 For a comprehensive general view of the history of the term “Radical Enlightenment” and the research pertaining to it, see Stjernfelt, “History of a Term.”
7 Jacob, Radical Enlightenment; Jacob, “How Radical”; Israel, Radical Enlightenment; Israel and Mulsow, Radikalaufklärung.
8 Many other values or significant issues have been identified as pertaining to the radical sphere in Frederik Stjernfelt’s “‘Radical Enlightenment’: Aspects of the History of a Term,” 80–103. Among them are: science, reason, education, liberalism, anti-dualism, revolution, autonomy, skepticism, tolerance, as well as strong criticisms of the monarchy, the academies, epistemic and political prejudice, and organized religion.
9 In 2018, the book was republished in a new edition under the title Radikale Frühaufklärung in Deutschland 1680–1720. Mulsow has written a number of other influential texts on different aspects of the German Radical Enlightenment and early modern period in Germany. See also Mulsow, Die Unanständige Gelehrtenrepublik; Mulsow, Prekäres Wissen; Mulsow, “The Radical Enlightenment”; Mulsow, Knowledge and Profanation.
10 Mulsow, Enlightenment Underground, 1.
11 For more on the role of underground networks and clandestine writers in early modern Europe, see Paganini et al., Clandestine Philosophy.
12 Mulsow, Enlightenment Underground, 5.
13 Ibid., 5.
14 A notable exception is Katherine Goodman’s paper “Luise Gottsched, Freethinker,” which argues for a radical reading of parts of Gottsched’s authorship. Although Goodman’s project is similar to that of the present article, her approach is somewhat different, as she does not critically interrogate the historiographical category of “Radical Enlightenment” but rather accepts the understanding of radicalism found, for example, in Israel and Mulsow’s writings. My aim, on the other hand, is to reassess the classification of radical thinkers, which will then allow me to articulate the radicalism in Erxleben’s thought.
15 Davis, “Women’s Equality,” 293–4 (my emphasis). For a discussion of the usefulness of distinguishing between moderate and radical enlightenment, see Chisick, “Radical and Moderate Enlightenment.”
16 Mulsow, “Radical Enlightenment,” 81–2.
17 Davis, “Women’s Equality,” 293.
18 For an example of a Christian feminist position, see, e.g. Masham, Occasional Thoughts; for a feminist critique of republicanism and defense of monarchy, see Astell, An Impartial Enquiry, 168–9.
19 Davis, “Women’s Equality,” 293.
20 Ibid., 294.
21 Mousset, Women’s Rights, 99–103; Scott, “Only Paradoxes to Offer”, 201; Hunt, The Family Romance, 1–17.
22 See Spinoza, “Political Treatise,” 603. On Spinoza’s exclusion of women from citizenship, see Gatens and Lloyd, “Freedom, authority and difference,” 114–36; Sharp, “Eve’s Perfection,” 559–80; Lord, “Spinoza on natural Inequality,” 127–42.
23 Foucault, Archeology of Knowledge, 24.
24 Ibid., 25.
25 Kleingeld, Bloomsbury Dictionary, 190.
26 Poeter, “Gender, Religion, and Medicine,” 106–7; Poeter refers to Haase, Können, Mut und Phantasie, 65.
27 For more on Erxleben’s life and, specifically, on her dissertation in the original Latin, see Markau, “Dorothea Christiana Erxleben.”
28 Erxleben, Gründliche Untersuchung, 11. In the following analysis, I will make use of two editions of Erxleben’s text, namely the original German dissertation from 1742 and a recent English translation from 2019 by Corey W. Dyck, which unfortunately only covers paragraphs §18–51 and §91–110. The translation is published as a part of the anthology Early Modern German Philosophy (1690–1750), 41–57.
29 On the question of equality in the Radical Enlightenment, see, e.g. Israel, Radical Enlightenment, 175–84; Chisick, Radical and Moderate Enlightenment, 66–7; Lord, Spinoza on Natural Inequality, 127–42.
30 Ansart, “Condorcet, Social Mathematics,” 347.
31 See Condorcet, “Emancipation of Women” and “On Slavery.”
32 By this distinction, I mean to separate the claims about equality into two distinctive groups, in which metaphysical claims concern the philosophical foundation assumed by the author (Cordorcet argues from a notion of natural equality, whereas Erxleben takes biblical equality as her point of departure). Political equality, on the other hand, concerns the concrete actions suggested to advance equality as a political cause (in this case, education). A similar distinction between metaphysical or “spiritual” equality and political equality is made by Broad and Green, Women’s Political Thought, 178.
33 Erxleben, “Rigorous Investigation,” 45.
34 Ibid., 45.
35 Ibid., 46.
36 Erxleben, Gründliche Untersuchung, 106.
37 Condorcet, “Emancipation of Women,” 156.
38 Ibid., 156–7.
39 Williams, “New constructions of equality,” 161.
40 Erxleben, “Rigorous Investigation,” 46.
41 Erxleben, Gründliche Untersuchung, 106–7.
42 Ibid., 3.
43 Erxleben, “Rigorous Investigation,” 47.
44 Erxleben, Gründliche Untersuchung, 95.
45 Williams, “New constructions of equality,” 165.
46 Condorcet, “Emancipation of Women,” 159.
47 Quoted from the English translation by Williams in “New constructions of equality,” 167. The original French quote can be found in Condorcet, Écrits sur l'Instruction Publique, 46–7.
48 See, e.g. Schurman, Whether a Christian Woman; Makin, Education of Gentlewomen; Agnesi et al., Contest for Knowledge.
49 For a conservative reading of Erxleben’s dissertation, see Poeter, “Gender, Religion, and Medicine.”
50 Erxleben, Gründliche Untersuchung, 5.
51 Melton, Rise of the Public, 85.
52 Ibid. The percentage of people who could sign their own name varied highly across the country, with some regions such as East Prussia ranking as low as 10 percent for adult men in 1750 and even lower for women (Ibid., 82). For more on women’s access to education in early modern Europe, see Houston, “Literacy and Society”; Wiesner, “Learning and Letters.”
53 Mazón, Modern Research University, 10.
54 Petschauer, “German Opinions,” 289.
55 Ibid., 264.
56 Ibid., 289.
57 Ibid., 291.
58 Erxleben, Gründliche Untersuchung, 140.
59 This divide between feminine and masculine sciences is also present in catalogues and lexica of learned women (Frauenzimmerlexica), a genre that was immensely popular in the seventeenth and first half of the eighteenth century. Cf. Frawenlob, Die Lobwürdige Gesellschafft; Pasch, Gynaeceum Doctum; Omeis, Dissertatio; Eberti, Eröffnetes Cabinet; Eberti, Wohlgelehrtes Frauenzimmer; Paullini, Teutsche Frauen-Zim̄er. In an impressive study, Karen Schmidt-Kohberg shows that far fewer learned women were applauded for contributing to the sciences/natural philosophy and medicine than to the humanities, arts, and theology. Philosophy is regarded as both male and female depending on which branch of philosophy one looks at; ethics and philosophy of religion was normally seen as compatible with femininity, whereas metaphysics, logic, and natural philosophy were highly masculine fields: see Schmidt-Kohberg, Manche Weibspersonen, 224.
60 Poeter, “Gender, Religion, and Medicine,” 100.
61 Erxleben, Gründliche Untersuchung, 79. Once again Erxleben’s views coincide with those of another radical thinker, namely Nicolas de Condorcet, who also argues for mixed-sex education in his Écrits sur l'Instruction Publique, 48.
62 Erxleben, Gründliche Untersuchung, 80.
63 Ibid., 81.
64 Ibid.
65 Ibid., 82.
66 Ibid.
67 Ebbersmeyer, Female Curiosity, 149–50. Ebbersmeyer mentions Christine de Pizan (1364–c. 1430), Moderata Fonte (1555–1592), and Arcangela Tarabotti (1604–1652) as women who have all dealt with this argument in their texts. Their rebuttals all follow a similar line of argument to the one presented by Erxleben. See De Pizan, City of Ladies, 139–40; Fonte, Worth of Women, 236; Tarabotti, Paternal Tyranny, 109.
68 Erxleben, “Rigorous Investigation,” 44 (my emphasis). As the translator, Corey Dyck points out that this definition is inspired by Christian Thomasius’ notion of learning from Einleitung zu der Vernunfft-Lehre (1691).
69 By “will” (Wille), Erxleben refers to the moral faculty, which can be guided either by a good will, inclined to make virtuous decisions, or a bad or weak will, which is motived by selfish desires.
70 Erxleben, Gründliche Untersuchung, 41.
71 Ibid., 47–8.
72 Ibid., 68.
73 Ibid., 95–6.
74 Fifty years later, Mary Wollstonecraft uses a similar approach in A Vindication of the Rights of Woman (1792), arguing that education is the key to achieving equality between the sexes.
75 Erxleben, Gründliche Untersuchung, 149.
76 Holbach, System of Nature, 178.
77 Ibid., 88.
78 Ibid., 65.
79 Erxleben, Gründliche Untersuchung, 130–60. Neither Anne Maria van Schurman, Marie de Gournay, Bathsue Makin, nor Josefa Amar y Borbón argued that employment should be the aim of women’s education. However, Erxleben was not entirely alone in taking this stance. The Italian feminist Arcangela Tarabotti expressed similar ideas in her main work Paternal Tyranny (1654), as did Gabrielle Suchon, a radical French advocate for women’s rights.
80 Petschauer, “German Opinions,” 272.
81 Ibid., 113.
82 Ibid., 130.
83 Ibid., 126.
84 This is the position championed by Schurman, Whether a Christian Woman, 36–7.
85 Erxleben, Gründliche Untersuchung, 132.
86 Ibid., 118.
87 Davis, “Women’s Equality,” 292.
88 Cf. De Pizan, City of Ladies; Schurman, Whether a Christian Woman; Gournay, Égalité; Astell, “Serious Proposal”; Nogarola, “Dialogue on Adam and Eve.” For more on Christian arguments for equality, see Gössmann, Kennt der Geist; Gössmann, Eva - Gottes Meisterwerk.
89 Dorothea Christiane Erxleben was married to Johann Christian Erxleben who was a deacon, which means that she had close personal ties to the church. For more on the role of religion in her argument for women’s education, see Dyck, “On Prejudice”; Poeter, “Gender, Religion, and Medicine,” 107, 113.
90 Spinoza, “Political Treatise,” 603.
91 Mulsow, Enlightenment Underground, 2.
92 Chisick, “Radical and Moderate Enlightenment,” 66–7.