Papers by Meelis Friedenthal
SUMMARY This article discusses a lithic object originally used as a mould for cross decorations a... more SUMMARY This article discusses a lithic object originally used as a mould for cross decorations and later reworked into the shape of a disc and inscribed with peculiar signs. Besides discussing the disc’s possible provenance and age, the emphasis of this study is put on the signs. It is suggested that even if zodiac symbols were the main inspiration for carving signs onto this disc, the purpose was not to depict only the zodiac circle itself but the meaning of the whole composition derived from Early Modern astral magic. Thus, the main function of the disc was most probably to solicit the help of some spirits and secure benefits for the owner of the disc.
Early Modern Disputations and Dissertations in an Interdisciplinary and European Context
Studia Philosophica Estonica, 2020
The article concerns general histories of philosophy of the Early Modern period, focusing mainly ... more The article concerns general histories of philosophy of the Early Modern period, focusing mainly on the three disputations presented at the Tartu Academy. While at the beginning of the 17th century the so-called scholastic history of philosophy was widespread, at the end of the century the influence of new philosophical trends on the approaches to the history of philosophy can also be seen in Tartu. Firstly, as an application of the Cartesian freedom of philosophizing principle (libertas philosophandi), but also under the influence of Christian Thomasius’ program of eclectic philosophy. In addition, the influence of Rudbeckian Gothicism on the understanding of the history of philosophy can be noticed in the disputation of Gabriel Sjöberg.
![Research paper thumbnail of Varauusaegsete disputatsioonide läbiviimisest, ülesehitusest ja teemadest [Early modern disputation: conduct, structure and topics]](https://attachments.academia-assets.com/74005569/thumbnails/1.jpg)
Keel ja Kirjandus, 2021
Early modern disputation was a phenomenon in its own right, involving both performative and textu... more Early modern disputation was a phenomenon in its own right, involving both performative and textual aspects. The texts of the disputations were different from modern academic dissertations and articles, while at the same time serving as a kind of model for both. For this reason, they must also be approached as a specific genre that no longer exists today.
Disputations are intrinsically linked to the early modern university and its traditions: from the 16th to 18th century, the disputation was the main academic product of universities. It was the basis on which degrees were awarded and jobs were applied for. Changes in universities at the end of the eighteenth century led to the introduction of the requirement of an independently written monograph as a prerequisite for the award of a degree, and this development was accompanied by a gradual disappearance of exercise disputation in the 19th century.
Early modern disputations contain a wealth of information for study: they document the attractiveness and innovation potential of universities, the academic developments of the various faculties, the careers of participants, personal relationships, the reputation of professors and, of course, changes within individual disciplines. Often, the printed theses allow conclusions to be drawn about the educational policies and the theological-philosophical background of the schools concerned. The arguments put forward in the disputations and the choice of authorities cited make it possible to place the participants in the context of certain methodological trends or to associate them with leading figures in the discipline. The content of the disputations conveys the debates that took place at a particular place and time, informs about the basic knowledge that students were taught, and gives an explanation of how the hot topics of the time were understood. From the vast number of disputations, which has hitherto been an obstacle to research, digitization, distant reading and other statistical methods can glean very useful information. For example, it is possible to determine with great precision when certain topics were discussed in certain universities or how ideas moved between universities, while gratulations and other paratexts enable one to map academic circles of communication, identify authorities, spot central issues of controversy in different time periods, etc. More in-depth study of the disputations has only gained momentum in the last couple of decades, and there are many unexplored themes and problems. Disputations are also one of the main sources for the intellectual history of the Estonian early modern period, and our philosophical, medical, legal and theological disputations will provide ample material for further research.
Freethought and Atheism in Central and Eastern Europe, 2020
![Research paper thumbnail of Akadeemilise teoloogia suunad Tartus Academia Gustavianas ja Gustavo-Carolinas [Developments in academic theology at Academia Gustaviana and Gustavo-Carolina in Tartu]](https://attachments.academia-assets.com/61848861/thumbnails/1.jpg)
Reformatsioon - tõlked ja tõlgendused. Eesti Rahvusraamatukogu toimetised; allseeria Raamat ja aeg. Ed. by Piret Lotman, 2019
The purpose of the article is to look at the theological tendencies and attitudes of the early mo... more The purpose of the article is to look at the theological tendencies and attitudes of the early modern University of Tartu, based on disputations in Tartu (Pärnu) and outside Estonia. In terms of the number of disputations, the period of the Academia Gustaviana (1632–1656) in Tartu clearly seems to be more active theologically than the later Academia Gustavo-Carolina period (1690–1710). While there was a total of 211 disputations presented in the Faculty of Theology during the Swedish time, 202 of these were presented in the first period, and only nine in the second period. The article focuses firstly on the relationship between the official Ramist constitutions of Academia Gustaviana and Lutheran Orthodoxy; and secondly, it examines the Lutheran Orthodoxy that was officially established during time of Academia Gustavo-Carolina and its relationship to Pietism.
![Research paper thumbnail of Pneumatoloogiast üldiselt ja Gezeliuse kreekakeelsetest pneumatoloogilistest disputatsioonidest spetsiifiliselt [Of Pneumatology in General and of Gezelius’ Greek Pneumatological Disputations in Particular]](https://attachments.academia-assets.com/55545508/thumbnails/1.jpg)
Kroonikast epitaafini. Eesti- ja Liivimaa varauusaegsest haridus- ja kultuurielust. Ed. by Katre Kaju, 2017
Pneumatology at the Academia Gustaviana (as the first incarnation of the University of Tartu was ... more Pneumatology at the Academia Gustaviana (as the first incarnation of the University of Tartu was called in the 17th century) was taught in the spirit of Ramist and Semi-Ramist schools of thought which were popular in Europe at the time. During that period, the important authority on many subjects, including pneumatology, was Heinrich Alsted’s Encyclopaedia (1630) which found frequent use in all kinds of disputations. As part of teaching Ancient and Koine Greek, Johannes Gezelius the Elder presided over a series of pneumatological disputations in which he successfully undertook the tricky task of discussing the most crucial theological questions, such as the nature of Spirit and the existence of God, in a philosophical framework. In Early Modern period pneumatology as a discipline studied spiritual or immaterial beings and phenomena not according to revelation, which was the task of theology, but in light of reason (lumen naturale). Gezelius who through his position as Professor of Greek and Oriental Languages belonged to the Faculty of Philosophy, had no authority to discuss theology in public disputations, which was a right solely reserved to the members of the Faculty of Theology. However, he could discuss questions pertaining to theology with the students in the framework of pneumatology. The option of metaphysics which was widespread in German universities was also unavailable for him, since metaphysics was explicitly banned in the statutes of all Swedish universities. The statutes of the Academia Gustaviana as well as of the Regia Academia Aboensis (Royal Academy of Turku) were essentially slightly modified versions of the statutes of the Uppsala University, which were authored mainly by Johan Skytte. In this context, the choice of Alsted’s pneumatology was a clever stratagem. In his first pneumatological disputation, Gezelius followed Alsted closely for the most part and avoided any references to metaphysics (prima philosophia) and scholastics. Gezelius slipped in occasional examples from ancient or Christian authors and a number of arguments and notions which were drawn from the Pseudo-Dionysian tradition or simply universally accepted by the Church, but usually he simply translated or rephrased Alsted’s text, with its original flow mostly intact, with a few shorter or longer omissions. Such a close following might seem strange at first glance, but it appears more logical if we consider the universally accepted authority of Alsted on one hand, and the relatively precarious position of pneumatology between philosophy and theology on the other hand. Furthermore, since the disputation in Greek was essentially intended as a language exercise, the students and the professors were not expected to do more than competently introduce the subject, forgoing any complex discussions.
The article also reconsiders some commonly accepted biographical facts of Gezelius’ life, specifically the broadly accepted view that he held the position of Professor Extraordinarius of Theology at the Academia Gustaviana. The authors of the article argue that, instead, his position might have been that of an Adjunct of Theology (adjunctus theologiae). The article is accompanied by the edition of the Greek text of Gezelius’ first pneumatological disputation, its Estonian translation and commentaries in footnotes (listing all known sources of the disputation under the Greek text).
![Research paper thumbnail of Ramism ja metafüüsika Academia Gustavianas [Ramism and metaphysics in the Academia Gustaviana]](https://attachments.academia-assets.com/51409024/thumbnails/1.jpg)
The article discusses the statutes, lectio lists and disputations of the Academia Gustaviana (163... more The article discusses the statutes, lectio lists and disputations of the Academia Gustaviana (1632–1656) in Tartu, Estonia. It is evident that academic life at the beginning of the Academia Gustaviana period was heavily influenced by Ramist thought, which was then clearly visible in the statutes. The Ramist influence persisted during the better part of the period and continued up to the late 1640s, when the rest of the German cultural space had already regarded Ramism as problematic and even harmful. One reason for this was undoubtedly the respect for the main author of the constitutions and the first chancellor of the university Johan Skytte (1577–1645), who was educated in a Ramist environment and was suspicious of scholastic philosophy. Skytte stressed the dangers of “papist” metaphysical speculation in the statutes for the Uppsala university
(which the university in Tartu adopted with some alterations) and in many of his speeches. He exhorted professors to give only practical and clear instructions to the students. In the context of Academia Gustaviana, the fact that a Jesuit seminary and gymnasium had been previously operating in Tartu gave an additional reason to be especially wary of possible Catholic influences. It is thus seen in the constitutions that no professor was appointed for theoretical philosophy, and metaphysics is only mentioned in a disparaging manner. In connection with this, there is no explicit mention of metaphysics in lectio lists and in the titles of disputations; metaphysical topics are also generally avoided, and when discussed, they are not categorised under metaphysics in the bodies of the disputations. In addition, in Academia Gustaviana, it appears that a fairly well-known scheme applied in which smaller and outlying universities tended to prefer Ramist logic and rhetoric because the simplified curriculum permitted one to move quickly to teaching higher disciplines. This trend is also confirmed both by the list of professors in the statutes and the nature of the teaching guidance materials, in which theoretical subjects are avoided and great attention is paid to practical disciplines. Practicality and usefulness for the state are stressed throughout the statutes.
From 1640 onwards (and especially after the death of Johan Skytte), Ramism in the disputations of Tartu starts to play an increasingly smaller role and the first critical remarks about Ramism also appear. At the same time, a rise in interest in Peripatetic philosophy is visible, and the first positive mentions of metaphysics in the disputations appear. However, until the end of the period no disputation using metaphysics as a subject in the heading of the disputation was found. This may also be connected to the fact that in Academia Gustaviana there was no professor of theoretical philosophy (in accordance with 1632 statutes) whose area would have covered this topic.
This chapter explores the tradition of scholastic disputation in the majority of Protestant unive... more This chapter explores the tradition of scholastic disputation in the majority of Protestant universities in Germany during the seventeenth century. Disputations reflect the general intellectual atmosphere and the learned consensus, and shed light into the content of the teaching that educated elites received at the universities, thus giving an accurate idea about contemporary mentalities. They were made up of short texts and were designated variously as exercitium, disputatio, or dissertation. Early modern disputations differed significantly from today’s university dissertations: most of these texts were not written for promotion or for obtaining an academic degree (pro gradu) and a greater part of these disputations were in fact written by professors or masters who acted as presider (praeses). The task of the respondent (respondens) was to defend the proposed theses. Professors also re-used their material—this means the disputations often represent a compilation of previous ideas and texts.
Studia Philosophica Estonica. Special issue: History of Philosophy in Estonia, 2015
The article focuses on the definitions and divisions of philosophical disciplines in the disputat... more The article focuses on the definitions and divisions of philosophical disciplines in the disputations presented at the University of Tartu during the first two periods of its existence: Academia Gustaviana (1632–1656) and Academia Gustavo-Carolina (1690–1710). The classifications of philosophy in Tartu are studied in the context of competing traditions of classifying knowledge and the spread of novel pedagogical methods in early modern Europe. These trends were also reflected in the university statutes that were directly borrowed from the University of Uppsala, the parent institution of the academy in Tartu. The article shows that a strong emphasis on Ramist methods of teaching in the 1632 constitution and a similar prominence given to Aristotelianism in the 1689 constitution affected, to some extent, the priorities given to certain disciplines in the faculties but did not always determine the division of responsibilities between professors nor the conceptual tools and contents of instruction.
Baltic Journal of Art History, 2014
The Use and abUse of Per for maTive arTs for religion and socieTy 1
![Research paper thumbnail of Religiooni ja ateismi ajaloost Eestis [On the history of religion and atheism in Estonia]](https://attachments.academia-assets.com/30522193/thumbnails/1.jpg)
Ajalooline Ajakiri. The Estonian Historical Journal, 2012
This volume is in some way a continuation of the three collections of articles published in the S... more This volume is in some way a continuation of the three collections of articles published in the Soviet period, which were also titled “On the history of religion and atheism in Estonia” These collections dealt with the subject matter in a manner typical for the era (i.e. moulded by the official ideology of the state), but at the same time they gave researchers an opportunity to study the history of the church, which the official ideology normally discouraged. The aim of the current volume, however, is somewhat different as it focuses on the questions related to atheism, not on the history of the church as a whole.
The articles in this volume follow in roughly chronological order, starting with the seventeenth century. At that time accusations of atheism were widespread in Europe, though often unspecified. An accusation did not necessarily mean that the accused was denying the existence of God; it was more often employed to refer to a person’s moral shortcomings or philosophically dubious ideas. The premises for the philosophical denial of God become developed only in the late seventeenth and early eighteenth centuries.
Because atheistic ideas developed in the context of the Enlightenment, the latter is habitually associated with atheism. At the same time, a lot of thinking characteristic to the Enlightenment in the German cultural space takes place in the Pietist circles. For the Pietists, the central principles were religious tolerance, education, and egalitarianism. The activities of the Pietist movement of the Moravian (Herrnhut) Church had a profound influence on the intellectual situation in early eighteenth-century Estonia.
The Pietists were the instigators of the first full translation of the Bible into Estonian, which shaped the later course of the Estonian language. Development of the Estonian national identity in the nineteenth century stems from the same background. It is worth mentioning that the criticism of the Lutheran church and separatist ideas were associated with the Hernnhut movement. At the end of the nineteenth century, the representatives of the national movement in Estonia start to criticize the Lutheran church from the national perspective, as most of the clergy were of Baltic-German origin. At the same time Darwinism and its interpretations (like that of Ernst Hackel) became increasingly popular. Such theories had a strong influence on the European intellectual scene, and they were used for developing different ideologies like racism, eugenics, teetotalism, altruistic politics, etc. Estonian national ideologies also became increasingly more biological, and there were strands that used Darwinism to criticize religion and the church.
In the Estonian national ideology of the second half of the nineteenth century, the romantic idea of the ancient past and prehistoric times played an important role. Prehistoric times were put into stark contrast with the Catholic mission, which was associated with violence. This approach was shared by the Lutherans and the Orthodox Church, who used it to support their own agendas. They all drew a clear line between “ancient religion” and Christianity, and argued that the pre-Christian worldview was somehow unchangingly preserved due to the very superficial acceptance of Christianity by the Estonians. These ideas were most influential during the era of independence in the interwar period.
This was the ideological situation when the incorporation of Estonia into the Soviet Union took place. The official ideology of the Soviet Union was atheist Marxism, and from the beginning it employed previous strands of church-critical thought to further its goals. The aim was to get rid of religion altogether, and both propagandistic (the so-called vulgar atheism) and sociological arguments (scientific atheism) were used to combat religion in all its forms. Scientific atheism was the official policy from 1954 onwards and criticized vulgar atheism as inadequate and ideologically deficient. These attitudes were officially endorsed in Estonia until the collapse of the Soviet Union. Recently “new atheism”, which has similarities both
to the propagandistic and to a lesser extent to the Soviet scientific atheism, has been gaining influence. These views are popularized by the so-called skeptical movement in Estonia.
In summary, in the Estonian history of religion the generally well- observed tendency of the history of ideas can be observed — when statements inherited from a previous period can remain relatively unchanged in terms of phrasing, but acquire with the changes of context slightly or even altogether different content.
This article provides an overview of the Early Estonian Printings (EEP) Database and the Book Dam... more This article provides an overview of the Early Estonian Printings (EEP) Database and the Book Damage Atlas created within the framework of the Watermarks and Paper in Early Modern Estonia project and of questions that arose in the course of the project. The aim of the project was to consider publications as a whole and to try to combine descriptions of different parts of books into a tool for researchers that is readily available and easy to use. The compilers of the EEP database have relied on the standard worked out by the International Association of Paper Historians (IPH) in their descriptions of paper and watermarks and have also added free-form descriptions of watermarks to the database. Entries in the database are tied in with databases of the European-wide Bernstein watermarks portal The Memory of Paper.
In seventeenth-century Academia Gustavo-Carolina, the question of atheism was discussed by Michae... more In seventeenth-century Academia Gustavo-Carolina, the question of atheism was discussed by Michael Dau who was first a professor of history, and later also a professor of theoretical philosophy and professor of rhetoricand poetics. In 1699 he published an apologetic speech in Latin that discussed the teachings of Christian Thomasius and the question of whether
the claims of those who allege “the terrible crime of atheism” to Thomasius are justified. A second and longer treatment of atheism (“The foolish and miserable atheist”), also by Michael Dau, was written in German and discussed and rejected the reasons and justifications for practical and theoretical atheism. He recognized the already vast body of polemical literature written against atheism and admitted that he was not contributing anything new. His aim was rather to educate persons who had no command of English or Latin. Practical atheism was understood to be “revelling in all sorts of sins and profanity and following one’s own desires”, in accordance with the general and unspecific accusation against atheism widespread in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. Such an accusation can also be viewed in the context of other ideas that were deemed radical or deviant (antisocial) at that
time, like republicanism, apocalyptic ideas, witchcraft. However, during this period we can find no self-described atheists. This changed during the latter part of the seventeenth century when materialistic philosophies permitted philosophically-justified atheism to emerge at the beginning of the eighteenth century.
In the seventeenth century, a number of philosophical systems that took mechanics, mathematics, and geometry as their basis were established. In previous centuries, matter was explained in the context of Aristotelism and Platonism and was always understood (in theory at least) as subject to the spirit (forms). In the seventeenth century, it became possible to separate the treatment of spirit and matter (especially by Descartes). The spirit – as understood by Aristotle and Plato – does not seem to be quantifiable or subjectable to mechanical and mathematical prognosis, and there was a need to either completely discard spiritual matter or at least modify it to correspond better to the “new” theory of matter. Spinoza and Hobbes are singled out by Michal Dau here and he accuses them of being “deceivers” who explain everything with material causes. He employs mostly the philosophy of Descartes against the materialistic understanding of nature.
The article discusses a stone disc with symbols discovered as a stray find from Rattama farm in V... more The article discusses a stone disc with symbols discovered as a stray find from Rattama farm in Viljandimaa (Suure-Jaani parish) and brought to the Museum of Viljandi in 1942. It was originally a domerite mould for cross-pendants which has later been reformed into the shape of a disc with 11–14 symbols inscribed on its side. Despite the similarity with zodiac signs the marks can be rather connected with general apotropaic magic in Medieval and Modern Age Europe. It is possible that this is a protective amulet which belonged to a 17th–18th century soldier.
The mechanism of evil eye can be explained according to the ancient and medieval theories of perc... more The mechanism of evil eye can be explained according to the ancient and medieval theories of perception in natural terms. The damaging qualities of evil eye are caused by the bad qualities present in the person and are naturally affected onto his environment. Since all the senses operate essentially with the same principle, this happens not only through vision, but also through sounds (words), touch and smell. Accordingly the evil eye is often described in connection with infectious diseases (miasma theory). Only because the vision is the most noble, and “most of all the senses, makes us know and brings to light many differences between things” (Aristotle, Metaphysica, I.1.) are eye and vision highlighted in the context of fascination. All ancient theories of perception allow such affecting from long distance. This applies not only to the extramission (emission) theories of vision (what are usually mentioned in connection with the phenomenon of evil eye) but also some intromission theories of vision are able to account for the effects of evil eye. In the present article examples from Plutarchos, Aristotle, Roger Bacon, Peter of Limoges and others are employed to illustrate the principles. A central concept that emerges is the Aristotelian principle of eidos (in medieval times usually translated as species) what transmits qualities incorporeally to recipients. Every act of perception is in some way connected with the soul. Thus it is generally necessary for evil eye to operate, that direct contact between eyes is established, but in some cases it is also possible to damage the other even if the affected person does not herself have direct contact with the evil eye. This can happen when the evil qualities inside the fascinators soul are transmitted by other means (sound, smell, etc) or when the virtus visiva inside the eyes of the fascinator is extremely strong (as with the case of Triballi and the Illyrii described by Pliny). Another possibility is the extreme sensitivity (malleable soul) of the victim. As children and women are more sensitive than men usually evil eye is more dangerous to them. How qualities inside human soul are able to affect inanimate matter is illustrated with the example of red mirrors (Aristotle, De somniis 459b24ff).Such general understanding of fascination was in use till Early Modern times, when the phenomenon of evil eye become to be explained not any more by natural but supernatural means (demons).
Uploads
Papers by Meelis Friedenthal
Disputations are intrinsically linked to the early modern university and its traditions: from the 16th to 18th century, the disputation was the main academic product of universities. It was the basis on which degrees were awarded and jobs were applied for. Changes in universities at the end of the eighteenth century led to the introduction of the requirement of an independently written monograph as a prerequisite for the award of a degree, and this development was accompanied by a gradual disappearance of exercise disputation in the 19th century.
Early modern disputations contain a wealth of information for study: they document the attractiveness and innovation potential of universities, the academic developments of the various faculties, the careers of participants, personal relationships, the reputation of professors and, of course, changes within individual disciplines. Often, the printed theses allow conclusions to be drawn about the educational policies and the theological-philosophical background of the schools concerned. The arguments put forward in the disputations and the choice of authorities cited make it possible to place the participants in the context of certain methodological trends or to associate them with leading figures in the discipline. The content of the disputations conveys the debates that took place at a particular place and time, informs about the basic knowledge that students were taught, and gives an explanation of how the hot topics of the time were understood. From the vast number of disputations, which has hitherto been an obstacle to research, digitization, distant reading and other statistical methods can glean very useful information. For example, it is possible to determine with great precision when certain topics were discussed in certain universities or how ideas moved between universities, while gratulations and other paratexts enable one to map academic circles of communication, identify authorities, spot central issues of controversy in different time periods, etc. More in-depth study of the disputations has only gained momentum in the last couple of decades, and there are many unexplored themes and problems. Disputations are also one of the main sources for the intellectual history of the Estonian early modern period, and our philosophical, medical, legal and theological disputations will provide ample material for further research.
The article also reconsiders some commonly accepted biographical facts of Gezelius’ life, specifically the broadly accepted view that he held the position of Professor Extraordinarius of Theology at the Academia Gustaviana. The authors of the article argue that, instead, his position might have been that of an Adjunct of Theology (adjunctus theologiae). The article is accompanied by the edition of the Greek text of Gezelius’ first pneumatological disputation, its Estonian translation and commentaries in footnotes (listing all known sources of the disputation under the Greek text).
(which the university in Tartu adopted with some alterations) and in many of his speeches. He exhorted professors to give only practical and clear instructions to the students. In the context of Academia Gustaviana, the fact that a Jesuit seminary and gymnasium had been previously operating in Tartu gave an additional reason to be especially wary of possible Catholic influences. It is thus seen in the constitutions that no professor was appointed for theoretical philosophy, and metaphysics is only mentioned in a disparaging manner. In connection with this, there is no explicit mention of metaphysics in lectio lists and in the titles of disputations; metaphysical topics are also generally avoided, and when discussed, they are not categorised under metaphysics in the bodies of the disputations. In addition, in Academia Gustaviana, it appears that a fairly well-known scheme applied in which smaller and outlying universities tended to prefer Ramist logic and rhetoric because the simplified curriculum permitted one to move quickly to teaching higher disciplines. This trend is also confirmed both by the list of professors in the statutes and the nature of the teaching guidance materials, in which theoretical subjects are avoided and great attention is paid to practical disciplines. Practicality and usefulness for the state are stressed throughout the statutes.
From 1640 onwards (and especially after the death of Johan Skytte), Ramism in the disputations of Tartu starts to play an increasingly smaller role and the first critical remarks about Ramism also appear. At the same time, a rise in interest in Peripatetic philosophy is visible, and the first positive mentions of metaphysics in the disputations appear. However, until the end of the period no disputation using metaphysics as a subject in the heading of the disputation was found. This may also be connected to the fact that in Academia Gustaviana there was no professor of theoretical philosophy (in accordance with 1632 statutes) whose area would have covered this topic.
The articles in this volume follow in roughly chronological order, starting with the seventeenth century. At that time accusations of atheism were widespread in Europe, though often unspecified. An accusation did not necessarily mean that the accused was denying the existence of God; it was more often employed to refer to a person’s moral shortcomings or philosophically dubious ideas. The premises for the philosophical denial of God become developed only in the late seventeenth and early eighteenth centuries.
Because atheistic ideas developed in the context of the Enlightenment, the latter is habitually associated with atheism. At the same time, a lot of thinking characteristic to the Enlightenment in the German cultural space takes place in the Pietist circles. For the Pietists, the central principles were religious tolerance, education, and egalitarianism. The activities of the Pietist movement of the Moravian (Herrnhut) Church had a profound influence on the intellectual situation in early eighteenth-century Estonia.
The Pietists were the instigators of the first full translation of the Bible into Estonian, which shaped the later course of the Estonian language. Development of the Estonian national identity in the nineteenth century stems from the same background. It is worth mentioning that the criticism of the Lutheran church and separatist ideas were associated with the Hernnhut movement. At the end of the nineteenth century, the representatives of the national movement in Estonia start to criticize the Lutheran church from the national perspective, as most of the clergy were of Baltic-German origin. At the same time Darwinism and its interpretations (like that of Ernst Hackel) became increasingly popular. Such theories had a strong influence on the European intellectual scene, and they were used for developing different ideologies like racism, eugenics, teetotalism, altruistic politics, etc. Estonian national ideologies also became increasingly more biological, and there were strands that used Darwinism to criticize religion and the church.
In the Estonian national ideology of the second half of the nineteenth century, the romantic idea of the ancient past and prehistoric times played an important role. Prehistoric times were put into stark contrast with the Catholic mission, which was associated with violence. This approach was shared by the Lutherans and the Orthodox Church, who used it to support their own agendas. They all drew a clear line between “ancient religion” and Christianity, and argued that the pre-Christian worldview was somehow unchangingly preserved due to the very superficial acceptance of Christianity by the Estonians. These ideas were most influential during the era of independence in the interwar period.
This was the ideological situation when the incorporation of Estonia into the Soviet Union took place. The official ideology of the Soviet Union was atheist Marxism, and from the beginning it employed previous strands of church-critical thought to further its goals. The aim was to get rid of religion altogether, and both propagandistic (the so-called vulgar atheism) and sociological arguments (scientific atheism) were used to combat religion in all its forms. Scientific atheism was the official policy from 1954 onwards and criticized vulgar atheism as inadequate and ideologically deficient. These attitudes were officially endorsed in Estonia until the collapse of the Soviet Union. Recently “new atheism”, which has similarities both
to the propagandistic and to a lesser extent to the Soviet scientific atheism, has been gaining influence. These views are popularized by the so-called skeptical movement in Estonia.
In summary, in the Estonian history of religion the generally well- observed tendency of the history of ideas can be observed — when statements inherited from a previous period can remain relatively unchanged in terms of phrasing, but acquire with the changes of context slightly or even altogether different content.
the claims of those who allege “the terrible crime of atheism” to Thomasius are justified. A second and longer treatment of atheism (“The foolish and miserable atheist”), also by Michael Dau, was written in German and discussed and rejected the reasons and justifications for practical and theoretical atheism. He recognized the already vast body of polemical literature written against atheism and admitted that he was not contributing anything new. His aim was rather to educate persons who had no command of English or Latin. Practical atheism was understood to be “revelling in all sorts of sins and profanity and following one’s own desires”, in accordance with the general and unspecific accusation against atheism widespread in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. Such an accusation can also be viewed in the context of other ideas that were deemed radical or deviant (antisocial) at that
time, like republicanism, apocalyptic ideas, witchcraft. However, during this period we can find no self-described atheists. This changed during the latter part of the seventeenth century when materialistic philosophies permitted philosophically-justified atheism to emerge at the beginning of the eighteenth century.
In the seventeenth century, a number of philosophical systems that took mechanics, mathematics, and geometry as their basis were established. In previous centuries, matter was explained in the context of Aristotelism and Platonism and was always understood (in theory at least) as subject to the spirit (forms). In the seventeenth century, it became possible to separate the treatment of spirit and matter (especially by Descartes). The spirit – as understood by Aristotle and Plato – does not seem to be quantifiable or subjectable to mechanical and mathematical prognosis, and there was a need to either completely discard spiritual matter or at least modify it to correspond better to the “new” theory of matter. Spinoza and Hobbes are singled out by Michal Dau here and he accuses them of being “deceivers” who explain everything with material causes. He employs mostly the philosophy of Descartes against the materialistic understanding of nature.
Disputations are intrinsically linked to the early modern university and its traditions: from the 16th to 18th century, the disputation was the main academic product of universities. It was the basis on which degrees were awarded and jobs were applied for. Changes in universities at the end of the eighteenth century led to the introduction of the requirement of an independently written monograph as a prerequisite for the award of a degree, and this development was accompanied by a gradual disappearance of exercise disputation in the 19th century.
Early modern disputations contain a wealth of information for study: they document the attractiveness and innovation potential of universities, the academic developments of the various faculties, the careers of participants, personal relationships, the reputation of professors and, of course, changes within individual disciplines. Often, the printed theses allow conclusions to be drawn about the educational policies and the theological-philosophical background of the schools concerned. The arguments put forward in the disputations and the choice of authorities cited make it possible to place the participants in the context of certain methodological trends or to associate them with leading figures in the discipline. The content of the disputations conveys the debates that took place at a particular place and time, informs about the basic knowledge that students were taught, and gives an explanation of how the hot topics of the time were understood. From the vast number of disputations, which has hitherto been an obstacle to research, digitization, distant reading and other statistical methods can glean very useful information. For example, it is possible to determine with great precision when certain topics were discussed in certain universities or how ideas moved between universities, while gratulations and other paratexts enable one to map academic circles of communication, identify authorities, spot central issues of controversy in different time periods, etc. More in-depth study of the disputations has only gained momentum in the last couple of decades, and there are many unexplored themes and problems. Disputations are also one of the main sources for the intellectual history of the Estonian early modern period, and our philosophical, medical, legal and theological disputations will provide ample material for further research.
The article also reconsiders some commonly accepted biographical facts of Gezelius’ life, specifically the broadly accepted view that he held the position of Professor Extraordinarius of Theology at the Academia Gustaviana. The authors of the article argue that, instead, his position might have been that of an Adjunct of Theology (adjunctus theologiae). The article is accompanied by the edition of the Greek text of Gezelius’ first pneumatological disputation, its Estonian translation and commentaries in footnotes (listing all known sources of the disputation under the Greek text).
(which the university in Tartu adopted with some alterations) and in many of his speeches. He exhorted professors to give only practical and clear instructions to the students. In the context of Academia Gustaviana, the fact that a Jesuit seminary and gymnasium had been previously operating in Tartu gave an additional reason to be especially wary of possible Catholic influences. It is thus seen in the constitutions that no professor was appointed for theoretical philosophy, and metaphysics is only mentioned in a disparaging manner. In connection with this, there is no explicit mention of metaphysics in lectio lists and in the titles of disputations; metaphysical topics are also generally avoided, and when discussed, they are not categorised under metaphysics in the bodies of the disputations. In addition, in Academia Gustaviana, it appears that a fairly well-known scheme applied in which smaller and outlying universities tended to prefer Ramist logic and rhetoric because the simplified curriculum permitted one to move quickly to teaching higher disciplines. This trend is also confirmed both by the list of professors in the statutes and the nature of the teaching guidance materials, in which theoretical subjects are avoided and great attention is paid to practical disciplines. Practicality and usefulness for the state are stressed throughout the statutes.
From 1640 onwards (and especially after the death of Johan Skytte), Ramism in the disputations of Tartu starts to play an increasingly smaller role and the first critical remarks about Ramism also appear. At the same time, a rise in interest in Peripatetic philosophy is visible, and the first positive mentions of metaphysics in the disputations appear. However, until the end of the period no disputation using metaphysics as a subject in the heading of the disputation was found. This may also be connected to the fact that in Academia Gustaviana there was no professor of theoretical philosophy (in accordance with 1632 statutes) whose area would have covered this topic.
The articles in this volume follow in roughly chronological order, starting with the seventeenth century. At that time accusations of atheism were widespread in Europe, though often unspecified. An accusation did not necessarily mean that the accused was denying the existence of God; it was more often employed to refer to a person’s moral shortcomings or philosophically dubious ideas. The premises for the philosophical denial of God become developed only in the late seventeenth and early eighteenth centuries.
Because atheistic ideas developed in the context of the Enlightenment, the latter is habitually associated with atheism. At the same time, a lot of thinking characteristic to the Enlightenment in the German cultural space takes place in the Pietist circles. For the Pietists, the central principles were religious tolerance, education, and egalitarianism. The activities of the Pietist movement of the Moravian (Herrnhut) Church had a profound influence on the intellectual situation in early eighteenth-century Estonia.
The Pietists were the instigators of the first full translation of the Bible into Estonian, which shaped the later course of the Estonian language. Development of the Estonian national identity in the nineteenth century stems from the same background. It is worth mentioning that the criticism of the Lutheran church and separatist ideas were associated with the Hernnhut movement. At the end of the nineteenth century, the representatives of the national movement in Estonia start to criticize the Lutheran church from the national perspective, as most of the clergy were of Baltic-German origin. At the same time Darwinism and its interpretations (like that of Ernst Hackel) became increasingly popular. Such theories had a strong influence on the European intellectual scene, and they were used for developing different ideologies like racism, eugenics, teetotalism, altruistic politics, etc. Estonian national ideologies also became increasingly more biological, and there were strands that used Darwinism to criticize religion and the church.
In the Estonian national ideology of the second half of the nineteenth century, the romantic idea of the ancient past and prehistoric times played an important role. Prehistoric times were put into stark contrast with the Catholic mission, which was associated with violence. This approach was shared by the Lutherans and the Orthodox Church, who used it to support their own agendas. They all drew a clear line between “ancient religion” and Christianity, and argued that the pre-Christian worldview was somehow unchangingly preserved due to the very superficial acceptance of Christianity by the Estonians. These ideas were most influential during the era of independence in the interwar period.
This was the ideological situation when the incorporation of Estonia into the Soviet Union took place. The official ideology of the Soviet Union was atheist Marxism, and from the beginning it employed previous strands of church-critical thought to further its goals. The aim was to get rid of religion altogether, and both propagandistic (the so-called vulgar atheism) and sociological arguments (scientific atheism) were used to combat religion in all its forms. Scientific atheism was the official policy from 1954 onwards and criticized vulgar atheism as inadequate and ideologically deficient. These attitudes were officially endorsed in Estonia until the collapse of the Soviet Union. Recently “new atheism”, which has similarities both
to the propagandistic and to a lesser extent to the Soviet scientific atheism, has been gaining influence. These views are popularized by the so-called skeptical movement in Estonia.
In summary, in the Estonian history of religion the generally well- observed tendency of the history of ideas can be observed — when statements inherited from a previous period can remain relatively unchanged in terms of phrasing, but acquire with the changes of context slightly or even altogether different content.
the claims of those who allege “the terrible crime of atheism” to Thomasius are justified. A second and longer treatment of atheism (“The foolish and miserable atheist”), also by Michael Dau, was written in German and discussed and rejected the reasons and justifications for practical and theoretical atheism. He recognized the already vast body of polemical literature written against atheism and admitted that he was not contributing anything new. His aim was rather to educate persons who had no command of English or Latin. Practical atheism was understood to be “revelling in all sorts of sins and profanity and following one’s own desires”, in accordance with the general and unspecific accusation against atheism widespread in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. Such an accusation can also be viewed in the context of other ideas that were deemed radical or deviant (antisocial) at that
time, like republicanism, apocalyptic ideas, witchcraft. However, during this period we can find no self-described atheists. This changed during the latter part of the seventeenth century when materialistic philosophies permitted philosophically-justified atheism to emerge at the beginning of the eighteenth century.
In the seventeenth century, a number of philosophical systems that took mechanics, mathematics, and geometry as their basis were established. In previous centuries, matter was explained in the context of Aristotelism and Platonism and was always understood (in theory at least) as subject to the spirit (forms). In the seventeenth century, it became possible to separate the treatment of spirit and matter (especially by Descartes). The spirit – as understood by Aristotle and Plato – does not seem to be quantifiable or subjectable to mechanical and mathematical prognosis, and there was a need to either completely discard spiritual matter or at least modify it to correspond better to the “new” theory of matter. Spinoza and Hobbes are singled out by Michal Dau here and he accuses them of being “deceivers” who explain everything with material causes. He employs mostly the philosophy of Descartes against the materialistic understanding of nature.
Until recently, academic disputations have attracted comparatively little scholarly attention. This volume provides for the first time a comprehensive study of the early modern disputation culture, both through theoretical discussions and overviews, and numerous case studies that analyze particular features of disputations in various European regions.