52 DE ACHTTIENDE EEUW 39 (2007) 1 BERICHTEN UIT DE GELEERDE WERELD Contesting Enlightenment Contested Some questions and remarks for Jonathan Israel Hanco Jürgens ses teenagers’ ignorance of Bayle’s concept of tolerance, or Spinoza’s radical philo- sophy, with its explicitly democratic public agenda. Secondary-school pupils have no idea why the ideas of these renowned phi- losophers on toleration, personal freedom, equality and freedom of expression would be of interest to them anyway. This message is typical of Israel’s work. In Enlightenment Contested, Philosophy, Mo- dernity and the Emancipation of Man, 1670- 1752, the author particularly discusses the Radical Enlightenment of the first half of the eighteenth century. The book is a se- quel to Radical Enlightenment, published in 2001, which covers mainly the second half of the seventeenth century. And he is already working on his next book, which will cover the later Enlightenment, the pe- riod of 1752-1792. His work on the Enligh- tenment at large is seminal, comparable In his 2004 Pierre Bayle Lecture, Jonathan to Paul Hazard’s La Crise de la Conscience Israel set Bayle’s concept of tolerance as an Européenne or Eric Hobsbawm’s The Age of example for our times.1 Following Bayle, Extremes. As written on the blurb of En- Israel asserts that it does not make sense lightenment Contested, Israel’s work will be to complain about biases or intolerance on ‘the definitive reference point for anyone the part of a particular religious denomi- engaged with this fascinating period of hu- nation. For governments, it is completely man development.’2 irrelevant to worry about what one religi- ous group thinks about another, as long as Contesting the canon these groups do not translate their biases With his books, Israel has brought about and prejudices into active harassment, a number of revolutions (in the early mo- discrimination, or violence. Israel’s lecture dern meaning) in the historiography of the could be read as an indictment of contem- Enlightenment. First, his point of depar- porary Dutch education policy, which cau- ture is not France, not Scotland, not Prussia, 1 Israel, Bayle, the Enlightenment, and Modern Western Society, zie: http://www.pierrebayle.nl/. I would like to thank Frank van Meurs and Dick Smakman for correcting my English. 2 Israel, Enlightenment Contested. WWW.18E-EEUW.NL 53 but the Dutch Republic, a country which most to us today, both historically and phi- had a reputation as transit port of ideas, losophically, is Radical, not Moderate, nor but was not very well known as ‘a centre Counter. It seems likely that particularly of gravity’ of radical enlightened ideas. On his outspoken views on the conservative the contrary, the Dutch Enlightenment Moderate Enlightenment, which he de- was often described as a diluted extract of velops further in Enlightenment Contested, the French model. Although Israel was not will be contested by historians, who, for the first to emphasize the importance of example, emphasize the progressivism of Dutch radical philosophers,3 as he was not the Scottish Enlightenment, whereas Israel the first to emphasize the idea of a Radical emphasizes the conservatism of its repre- Enlightenment,4 for the larger public he sentatives, particularly of David Hume. put these ideas on the map. Among many Thirdly, Israel sees the Radical Enligh- others, the Dutch liberal criticasters of po- tenment as a cross-border phenomenon, as litical correctness Paul Cliteur and Herman an integral and vital part of a wider pic- Philipse embraced the book.5 After praising ture, which should not be squeezed into Israel’s Radical Enlightenment in his column the constricting strait-jacket of ‘national in the weekly TV discussion programme history’, but considered as internationally Buitenhof, Paul Cliteur concluded that cohesive. Indeed, as it appears from their the key to Europe’s unity is to be found in correspondences, the eighteenth-century one philosopher. The European calendar intellectuals were often very internatio- should not have been fixed on 2004 after nal in scope. Not only were they used to Christ but, so he calculated, on 372 after reading books from all over Europe in La- Spinoza. And in his letter to Ayaan Hirsi tin, they were also often able to read the Ali, Herman Philipse concluded that Ayaan most important books written in foreign is a contemporary representative of the Ra- languages soon after they were published, dical Enlightenment. In their philosophi- since it was common to translate these cal struggle with religions, the convinced rather quickly. Israel’s point of view is qui- atheists Cliteur and Philipse appropriated te a challenge to his peer historians, who Israel’s work. really have to learn their languages, to be Secondly, Israel develops a whole new able to test this claim themselves. canon of radical enlightened thinkers, to Fourthly, Israel considers the Radical which neither John Locke, David Hume, Enlightenment the essential step in the Voltaire, Montesquieu, Turgot, the later Making of Modernity, meaning the emer- Jean-Jacques Rousseau, nor Immanuel gence of a complex of abstract philosop- Kant belonged, but first and foremost Ba- hical concepts of which the primacy of ruch de Spinoza, and after him Adriaen reason, the denial of all miracles and of Koerbagh, Lodewijk Meyer, Adriaen Bever- revelation, democracy, racial equality, land, John Toland, Theodor Ludwig Lau, feminism, religious toleration, sexual Pierre Bayle, Bernard le Bovier de Fontenel- emancipation and freedom of expression le, Denis Diderot and many, many others. are the most important. Historically, Israel For Israel, the Enlightenment that matters sees a continuous triangular conflict from 3 Van Bunge and Klever (eds.), Disguised and Overt Spinozism around 1700, Klever, Mannen rond Spinoza and Wielema, Ketters en verlichters, later published as The March of the Libertines. 4 Jacob, The Radical Enlightenment. 5 For Paul Cliteur, see: http://www.vpro.nl/programma/buitenhof/afleveringen/14121491/items/14602- 199/, Philipse, Verlichtingsfundamentalisme?, 9-10, 30-31, 35. 54 DE ACHTTIENDE EEUW 39 (2007) 1 the end of the seventeenth century down Other historians say that Israel is less to today, between the three main intellec- interested in the social history of ideas, a tual blocs on the threshold of Modernity: field which has become so important in the Radical Enlightenment, the Moderate the last decades. The question as to who mainstream, and the Counter Enlighten- read the radical enlightened literature, or ment. In this, Israel follows and adapts how subversive ideas were spread, seems to Darrin McMahon’s position, that to this be not his main focus of attention. With very day there has been a continuous and his three-part division, Israel not only re- fundamental ‘dialectic of Enlightenment considers the traditional concept of En- and Counter-Enlightenment’, which was lightenment as a whole, he also points out not confined to France alone.6 a new meaning of Modernity, which did Israel’s Radical Enlightenment is widely not originate in Jürgen Habermas’ bour- discussed among historians.7 Many histo- geois public sphere of salons, clubs, cof- rians tend to think that the author makes fee houses and literary societies,9 but was Spinoza and the Spinozists more important crystallized in the subversive ideas of Spi- than they were. In Israel’s seventeenth and noza and the Spinozists. eighteenth century, Spinoza’s ghost image seemed to lurk behind every corner, but Controversialist approach one may ask if his texts were read by many One of the most positive traits of Jonathan and if his arguments were discussed so Israel is his willingness to defend and ex- widely as Israel suggests. In the eighteenth plain his position in the field, to take part century, German missionaries even found in the intellectual debate, and to face cri- Spinozism among the Hindus in Southern ticism. His books almost force the readers India. For them, Spinozism was nothing to take a position themselves. It is likely new, since, they wrote, it was already that Enlightenment Contested will provoke described in the Book of Wisdom 1:2 and more debate among historians than Radi- in Ecclesiastes 3:19. Also, it resembled Cice- cal Enlightenment did, because of its overall ro’s teaching in De natura deorum, and the view of the Radical, Moderate and Coun- worldview of Plato’s academics.8 The Early ter Enlightenments in the course of the Modern reception of Spinozism is compa- long eighteenth century, and because of rable to that of communism in the United its challenging statements. Israel not only States in the 1950s: It seemed to be every- challenges his critics by emphasizing again where, but it was not clear how many were and again the importance of Spinozism, really inspired by the communist threat. but also by disavowing freemasonry as a Today the word terrorism seems to have a rather peripheral phenomenon, seen from comparable effect on politicians. a strictly ‘enlightened’ viewpoint, since it 6 McMahon, Enemies of the Enlightenment; see: Israel, ‘Enlightenment! Which Enlightenment?’, 542-543. 7 Among others: Stuurman, ‘Pathways to the Enlightenment’, Jacob, ‘Radical Enlightenment’, 387-388, Anthony la Vopa, 389-393. 8 Der Königlich Dänischen Missionarien aus Ost-Indien eingesandter ausführlichen Berichte, 7, Ct. 76, 550, and Neuere Geschichte der evangelischen Missions-Anstalten zu Bekehrung der Heiden in OstIndien, 3, 31 St. (Halle 1786) 726. 9 On the influence and effect of Habermas’ Strukturwandel der Öffentlichkeit on the historiography of the Enlightenment, see: Pincus, ‘‘Coffee Politicians Does Create’’, Mah, ‘Phantasies of the Public Sphere’. BERICHTEN UIT DE GELEERDE WERELD 55 hardly ever tried to erase distinctions be- think the controversialist approach makes tween aristocracy, high bourgeoisie and the sense, particularly for the Early Modern common man: ‘If our aim is to get to the period, with its pamphlet wars, and its seve- heart of the Enlightenment as a decisively re theological and philosophical polemics.