Search Results
Abstract
Jonathan Israel’s Radical Enlightenment appears in a different light when read in conjunction with George H. Williams’ Radical Reformation and Israel’s own history of The Dutch Republic. The radical dissent of the Reformation and its aftermath extended to Holland, influencing Spinoza’s milieu and creating preconditions for his Tractatus Theologico-Politicus (1670). The radical turn attributed by Israel to Spinoza appears less unprecedented when juxtaposed with its extended Reformation background, including the German speculative or mystical dissenters who anticipated his themes.
Abstract
Jonathan Israel’s Radical Enlightenment appears in a different light when read in conjunction with George H. Williams’ Radical Reformation and Israel’s own history of The Dutch Republic. The radical dissent of the Reformation and its aftermath extended to Holland, influencing Spinoza’s milieu and creating preconditions for his Tractatus Theologico-Politicus (1670). The radical turn attributed by Israel to Spinoza appears less unprecedented when juxtaposed with its extended Reformation background, including the German speculative or mystical dissenters who anticipated his themes.
Paracelsus, Valentin Weigel, and Jacob Böhme are not only linked by a clear chain of influence and borrowing; they are all deeply rooted in the Protestant Reformation. However, the tendency to assign Paracelsus to medicine or the Renaissance and to subsume Weigel and Böhme under the anachronistic heading of “German mysticism” has obfuscated their kinship as well as their significance in German intellectual history. Their relegation distorts the breadth of the reform set in motion after 1517. They share an anticlerical tendency and a determination to expand the Reformation beyond doctrine and devotion to encompass other spheres of life and learning. Their reforming antiauthoritarianism found expression both in the nature philosophy of Paracelsus and in the mystical impulses of Weigel and Böhme.