Enlightenment and Sentiment
Enlightenment and Sentiment
Introduction and Definitions
Three Examples: Light, Laws, Reason
Joseph Wright of Derby, The Philosopher Giving a Lecture (1766)
Montesquieu, Spirit of the Laws (1748)
Diderot and D’Alembert, eds., The Encyclopédie (1751-1772)
Do Books Make Revolutions?
“Enlightened Absolutism”
Popular Literacy
Sentiment and the Limits of Reason (two examples)
Rousseau’s works (1751-1780)
Joseph Wright of Derby, Experiment… (1768)
Jean-Baptiste Pigalle, Voltaire, Naked (1776)
Enlightenment and Sentiment: Lecture Outline
It is common to say that eighteenth-century Europe was a time of “Enlightenment,”
that it was an “Age of Reason” and that these new ways of thinking contributed to
the outbreak of the cultural-social-political conflict we call “the French Revolution.”
- for instance, you may have learned this in high school
Goal for today is to push this analysis, to ask how (if at all) ideas make revolutions.
And, in order to do this, we need to think a bit more about what we understand by
the word “Enlightenment” (a term not used in English for this period until the late
nineteenth century).
In all the most relevant languages (English, French, German) the dominant metaphor
is one of “light” and so we might want to consider how/why that becomes so
significant.
Enlightenment and Sentiment: Introduction
For instance, while the word “Enlightenment” was not used in eighteenth-century
English, French readers and writers referred to a body of learning and knowledge
as les lumières (lights) and those writers associated with those texts as
philosophes (this does not mean “philosopher” in a narrow sense but, as the
etymology suggests, “lover of knowledge”). Similarly, in German, writers
referred to Aufklärung. Key to this was questioning received wisdom:
All things must be debated, examined, investigated without exception and
without regard for anyone’s feelings… We must ride rough shod over all our
ancient childish fears, we must overturn the barriers that reason never
erected, and give back to the arts and sciences the liberty that is so precious
to them….
Denis Diderot, entry “Encyclopedia,” in Diderot and D’Alembert, eds., Encyclopédie (1751-1772).
Each century will add new enlightenment to that of the century preceding it,
and this progress, which nothing from now on can stop or suspend, will have
no other limits than those of the duration of the universe. . .
Marquis de Condorcet, Perpetual Secretary of the Royal Academy of Sciences (1782).
Enlightenment: Introduction and Definitions
Though we often refer to “the Enlightenment” as if it were a unified movement,
it was not. “It” had no manifesto, no party headquarters, no conventions, no elected
or named officials.
However, as we saw with Barruel’s analysis of Jacobinism, in the context of the French
Revolution (and even before) some authors did argue that “Enlightenment” must have
been an organized plot, a conspiracy by Voltaire, Diderot, and a few others to destroy
everything that was good (Catholic Church, monarchy) about the Old Regime.
Barruel, like the consumers Steve Kaplan studied, found it comforting to think that there
was a plot. If the Enlightenment was a plot, then one ought to be able to find the plotters
and punish them.
But, there was no plot. There was no coherent “movement.” Rousseau, often mentioned
in textbooks as a key Enlightenment thinker was as much an anti-philosophe as anything
else.
So, since there was no conspiracy, no “declaration of enlightenment,” how are we to
understand what was enlightenment? Let’s start by looking at a few examples from
the culture of the 1740s-1780s. Such as the painting on the next slide (and analysis of it
on the following slide).
Enlightenment: Introduction and Definitions
Joseph Wright (of Derby), The Philosopher giving a Lecture on the Orrery (1766)
To understand this painting, need to know that Joseph Wright was from provincial England,
but was trying to establish a reputation in London. You also need to know that an “orrery”
is a model of the solar system—with a candle in the place of the sun.
This painting shows a “philosopher” (today we might say, “scientist”) giving a lecture with
the help of this device. The significance of “light” here is that it does not come from God
(who in the Bible, of course, says “let there be light”) and it does not come from the Sun King.
It comes from a natural phenomenon which the philosopher can explain in rational terms.
Enlightenment, we might say is based on reasoning, not on faith.
Notice that all his listeners (unlike some students in lectures today) are clearly interested by
the model and by what he has to say. The very serious young woman on the far left, the
young man taking notes, the little children—all are interested. That is because the facts of
nature are of universal relevance. Gravity is not optional.
Enlightenment reason, textbooks say, was concerned to identify universals. Things that were
true in all cases.
But is that really the case? Think about the Montesquieu you read two weeks ago. He does
describe some laws as universal (the laws of nature). But man-made, social, “positive” laws
are not universal. They vary with time, place, climate.
As we see that the world, formed by the motion
of matter and devoid of intelligence, still continues
to exist, we learn that its motions must have
invariable laws; and if one could imagine another
world than this, it would have consistent rules
or it would be destroyed…
Godfrey Kneller, Sir Isaac Newton (1689).
… cold air contracts the extremities of the body’s
surface fibers, this increases their spring and
favors the return of blood from the extremities to
the heart… hot air, by contrast, relaxes those
extremities… Therefore, men are more vigorous
in cold climates, where the blood is pushed harder
toward the heart
Charles de Secondat, baron de Montesquieu, The Spirit of the Laws, or on the Relation that the Laws Must
Have with the Constitution of Each Government, with the People’s Customs and Manners, with Climate, with Religion, with Commerce, etc. etc. etc. (first published, 1748).
So, here, notice that it’s an invariable law that cold air makes “men” more vigorous bit it is
not universal that “men” are “vigorous.” They vary with their climate. M says that is why
Italian theater audiences are so loud.
Enlightenment Example: Laws
In order to reach his conclusions about the effect of hot and cold air, Montesquieu looked
at a sheep’s tongue under a microscope. And the tastebuds were smaller when the tongue
was frozen. From which he concluded that people in cold climates could feel less (which
was why you had to really beat servants in Russia to get them to do anything).
Montesquieu was re-working a Renaissance and Classical tradition in which southerners
(around the Mediterranean) were defined as “civilized” and northerners (Russians, Scots,
Poles) were “barbarian” (based on whether or not they had been part of the Roman Empire.)
For Montesquieu, the difference is overwhelmingly due to climate. So if you took a Russian
baby to Rome, s/he could grow up to be civilized.
Difference, in other words, is not inherent in people, but is a product of their environment.
If you change the environment, you can change the people.
This mode of reasoning exempts explanation from history. The Russians are the way they
are because of where they are, not because of everything that has happened before.
We can generalize from Montesquieu and the sheep’s tongue to say that in this mode
of analysis (which we might want to call “rational” or “enlightened” or “scientific”) claims
are made valid by experiment—what happens if I heat the sheep’s tongue? what if I try a
pig’s tongue?—and by replicable experience. In other words, Montesquieu can have the
experience of freezing a sheep’s tongue and looking at it, and so can “anybody” else.
Well, “anybody” with some animal’s tongue and a microscope.
So his knowledge comes not from divine revelation, or through a “great chain of being,”
but by the observing power of individual humans. If lots of humans observe the same
thing and reach the same conclusions, it must be true.
The most famous work of the French Enlightenment is, therefore and unsurprisingly, a
massive collaborative project, the Encyclopédie (1751-1772). There had been encyclopedias
before but none of this scale. Edited by Denis Diderot and Jean le Rond d’Alembert, it was
enormous.
An on-going collaborative project to translate it into English is here:
http://quod.lib.umich.edu/d/did/
Encyclopédie (1751-1772)
71,818 articles; 2,855 plates (pages of illustrations)
28 volumes in-folio (approx. 19” x 12” x 2.5”)
17 volumes of text (1751-1765); 11 of images (1762-1772)
subscriber’s cost for the first edition, 980 livres *
other folio editions: Geneva reprint of original;
contraband versions elsewhere
quarto editions (approx. 12” x 9.5”)
published in Geneva, Neufchatel, 1777-79;
36 volumes of text and 3 of images
(print run: approx. 8400)
ocatavo editions (approx. 9” x 6”)
published in Lausanne, Bern, 1778-1782;
TOTAL: approx 23,500 copies
“Pin Making (iii)” from the Encyclopédie
* when skilled workers earned 2-5 livres/day and approx. ten pounds of bread could be bought for one livre
Enlightenment Examples: The Encyclopédie
Encyclopedism and authorship
at least 140 contributors
no known author: 40%
de Jaucourt: wrote close to 25% of the articles
Diderot, abbé Mallet, Boucher d’Argis:
together responsible for another 20-25%
one-third of identified authors wrote only one article
Louis Michel van Loo, Portrait of Diderot
oil on canvas, 81 cm. x 65 cm. (1767)
Louvre (Paris, France)
Enlightenment Examples: The Encyclopédie
The Encyclopédie is perhaps best known today because it was banned in 1759 for
being “irreligious.” This was not a response to any particular article, but part of a
general crackdown on publishing. In 1758, Helvétius (who was friendly with Diderot
and others who contributed articles) published De l’esprit (On the Spirit) in which he
argued that morality had not advanced as far as sciences and the arts. Why not? He
said that while anyone could do scientific research, only special people (the clergy)
were allowed to make discoveries in morality but they were hypocrites and intolerant
fanatics (remember the Wars of Religion!) who only pretended to be moral. He argued
that we should base morality on the basis of our own feelings and experiences. The
book’s publication increased royal concern about atheism and immorality in
wartime—at this point, the Seven Years’ War, 1756-1763, wasgoing very badly for
France—and resulted in expanded censorship.
The three verbs to ADORE, to honor, and to revere are used for both religious
and secular forms of worship. In religious worship one adores God, one honors
the saints, and one reveres relics and images. In the secular form of worship,
one adores a mistress, one honors decent people, and one reveres illustrious
individuals. … The manner of adoring the true God must never deviate from
the standards of reason, because God is the author of reason and He wanted
people to use it even in judging what is suitable to do or not to do regarding
Him. Perhaps during the first centuries of the Church the saints were not
honored and their images and relics were not revered, as they have been
since that time; people than had an aversion to idolatry and maintained
a cautious attitude toward the rituals of worship
Unknown author, article “Adore,”
Encyclopédie vol. 1, p. 144.
“The Manufacture of Rosary Beads,” Encyclopédie
Enlightenment Examples: The Encyclopédie
1745—publishers acquire the “privilege” (i.e., are
licensed) to produce a multi-volume encyclopedia
to be edited by Denis Diderot and Jean le Rond
d’Alembert
1751—first volume, “A-Azymites” published
1756—Seven Years’ War begins
1757—Damiens attempts to kill Louis XV
1758—Helvétius, De l’Esprit advocates a material
basis for morality
1759 –Encyclopédie banned by Paris Parlement;
added to the Index of books that Catholics were
forbidden to read; Pope Clement XIII told the faithful
to have their copies burnt by a priest or be
excommunicated
“Ut Primum”—papal encyclical banning
the Encyclopédie (September 1759)
1765—volume 8 (“H-Itzehoa”) published
Enlightenment Examples: The Encyclopédie
SO, from all that, you probably get a sense that the Encyclopédie was revolutionary
and that it somehow “led to” the Revolution. Does that really make sense?
DO books make revolutions?
Well, let’s think about that….
Who supported the philosophes?
Voltaire—Frederick II (the Great), King of Prussia
Diderot—Catherine II (the Great), Empress of Russia
Turgot—Louis XVI, King of France
As with attacks on “privilege,” much support
for the Enlightenment (or, rather, the authors
we associate with that word) came from kings
and queens. “Universal laws” after all are
appealing if you are trying to govern a huge
empire.
Diderot’s voyage to (blue) and from (red) St. Petersburg
Do Books Make Revolutions?: Enlightened Absolutism
Who Could Read? How do we know?
usually measured by signatures on wedding contracts but being able to sign
your name and being able to read are two different things!
Literacy in France (average)
men
women
1686-1690 29%
14%
1786-1790 47%
27%
What did they read? How do we know?
We know from permissions granted by the Royal Censors’ Office—so that doesn’t
tell us about the books that could not be published in France but that were
published in the Netherlands or Switzerland and imported.
Religious works as % of permitted publications:
1700: 50%; 1720s: 33%; 1750s: 20%; 1780s: 10%
Fragonard, The Love Letter (c.1770).
Prohibited Books: “philosophical”
pornographic
scandal/rumor reporting
Do Books Make Revolutions?: Popular Literacy
How “enlightened” was Enlightenment Europe?
Even within Montesquieu’s universal laws and the ideal of scientific observation,
there was the possibility that some could not participate in “philosophy” because they
could not read or could not afford a microscope (or a book). Reason claims to be
“universal” but it is in many ways socially specific.
There is also always the possibility of difference based on individual’s nerves (what in
the eighteenth century would have been called “sensibility”).
The most famous critic of the philosophes, Jean-Jacques Rousseau, based much of what
he wrote not on claims about universal reason but on his own “sensitivity” which he
believed—and many readers did, too!—was much more acute than other people’s.
And, in fact, his very, very long novel, Julie, was a best seller, but The Social Contract wasn’t.
Julie, or the New Heloise [note to students: you should go look up “Heloise’ right now] is
about a young woman who falls in love with her tutor but then follows her father’s wishes
and marries a much older man. Which is fine, and they live in a little village in the Alps and
where peasants love them and the sheep are happy and the gardens are beautiful, until
the tutor comes back and lives with them! So she is sorely tempted but just when she might
do something she shouldn’t, she instead jumps into a lake to rescue her child and the child
is saved … but she drowns. (this takes 1200 pages and is all told as letters)
500 eighteenth-century inventories of people’s books
185 copies of La Nouvelle Héloïse
1 copy of The Social Contract
Man is born free, and everywhere he is in chains.
Jean-Jacques Rousseau, The Social Contract (1762).
In me are united two almost irreconcilable characteristics…
I have a passionate temperament and headstrong emotions.
But my thoughts arise slowly and confusedly, such that
they are never ready until it is too late. It is as if my heart
and my brain belong to different people.
Jean-Jacques Rousseau, The Confessions (pub. 1780).
early edition of La Nouvelle Héloïse , published under the original title, Letters of
Two Lovers Living in a little Village at the Foot of the Alps collected by Jean-Jacques Rousseau
Enlightenment and Sentiment: Rousseau’s works
Joseph Wright (of Derby), Experiment on a Bird in an Air Pump (1768)
And if we look at one more Joseph Wright painting, here is the “philosopher” again.
Now he is demonstrating an “air pump”—this was a device for proving that “air” actually
is something. So you put an apple in the air pump and pump out all the air, and the apple
explodes (because there isn’t any air pressure to hold it together). And you put a canary
in an air pump and you pump out all the air… and the bird dies. Isn’t science wonderful?
What Wright suggests in this painting is that maybe science, reason, Enlightenment isn’t
for everybody. Notice the girl in the center (pink dress with blue bows) who can’t bear to
watch. Her sensitive nerves actually prevent her from a scientist. Or notice the couple to
the left, who are taking advantage of the darkened room to make lovey-dovey eyes at
each other.
Maybe enlightenment is “universal”—if the universe consists of adult, white, men.
Image Credits
1. Grand Rue (“Main Street”), Geneva, Switzerland; photo RLSpang
2. Annonces, affiches, et avis divers de la Haute et Basse Normandie (1779); Archives départementales
de la Seine Maritime (Rouen);
http://www.archivesdepartementales76.net/cles/35-journaux-et-periodiques.html
3. anonymous, “Ceremonial Costumes of the Three Orders” (1789), watercolor and engraving;
photo from www.photo.rmn.fr
4. Hyacinthe Rigaud, Portrait of Samuel Bernard (1726), oil on canvas, 2.65 x1.665 meters; Versailles.
François Boucher, The Beautiful Cook (before 1735), oil on wood, .555 x 432 meters; Paris, Musée
Cognacq-Jay; photos, http://www.photo.rmn.fr
5. Affiches de Toulouse available at gallica.bnf.fr
6. Jean-Baptiste Pigalle, Voltaire, nu (1776), marble sculpture, 1.5 x .89 x .77 meters; Paris, Louvre
Museum; adapted from a photo at http://www.photo.rmn.fr
8. photo from www.derby.gov.uk
9. Godfrey Kneller, Sir Isaac Newton (1689); photo, wikimedia.org
10-13. statistics from Robert Darnton, The Business of Enlightenment: A Publishing History of the
Encyclopédie (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1979).
10. http://encyclopedie.uchicago.edu
11. Van Loo, Portrait of Diderot www.photo.rmn.fr
12. http://encyclopedie.uchicago.edu
13. image and full text of encyclical (in Latin) at http://encyclopedie.uchicago.edu/node/117
15. Jean Honoré Fragonard, The Love Letter (1770?), oil on canvas, .83 x .67 meters; New York;
Metropolitan Museum of Art; photo. www. photo.rmn.fr; statistics from Roger Chartier,
The Cultural Origins of the French Revolution, trans. Lydia Cochrane (Durham: Duke University
Press, 1991).
16. Statistics from Daniel Mornet, “L’Influence de Jean-Jacques Rousseau au xviiie siècle,” cited in
Robert Darnton, Mesmerism and the End of the Enlightenment (Cambridge: Harvard Univ Press, 1968).