Spinoza's death - some questions
Steven Nadler in his excellent biography
'Spinoza: A Life'. (Cambridge 1999. pages
349 -350) writes the following regarding
the circumstances of Spinoza's death -
'Spinoza was obviously not well in the winter
of 1676-7. He probably allowed himself to be bled
a couple of times, as this had seemed to provide
some relief in the past. Given the nature of his
illness, he would have been coughing frequently,
and must have been paler, thinner, and weaker than
usual. Still, Van der Spyck and his family told
Colerus that they had "no idea that he was so near
his end, even a little while before he died, and
they had not the least thought of it." Spinoza,
stoic by nature, probably suffered his infirmity
with much reserve and little fuss. Always trying
to be as faithful as possible to his philosophical
principles in his own life, he was not given to
pondering his mortality. This was an activity,
rather, for the superstitious multitude who, moved
by hope and fear, worry about what is to come in
some alleged hereafter. As he proclaims in the
Ethics, "a free man thinks least of all of death,
and his wisdom is a meditation on life, not on death."
In fact, Spinoza himself may have been unprepared
for the quickness of his decline, as Schuller suggested
on the day after his burial: "It seems that death's
unexpected debilitation took him by surprise, since
he passed away from us without a testament indicating
his last will". This is not entirely true, There was
no written will, but Spinoza did at least tell Van der
Spyck that, immediately after his death, his writing
desk, which contained his letters and papers (including
the Ethics), should be sent to Rieuwertsz in Amsterdam.
But if Colerus's report about the final day is to be
trusted - and presumably he heard it all directly from
the landlord and his family, although he was writing
nearly thirty years later - Spinoza, although aware
of the gravity of his illness, had no idea that he
would not last the afternoon.
When the landlord came home [from church] at around
four o'clock [on the day before], Spinoza came downstairs
from his room, smoked a pipe of tobacco and spoke with
him for a long time, particularly about the sermon that
was preached that afternoon. He went to bed soon afterwards
in the forechamber, which was his to use and in which he
slept. On Sunday morning, before church, he came downstairs
again, speaking with his landlord and his wife. He had sent
for a certain doctor LM. from Amsterdam, who ordered them
to buy an old cock and to cook it up that morning, so that
Spinoza might, that afternoon, have some broth, which he did.
And when the landlord returned with his wife, he ate it with
a good appetite. In the afternoon, the landlord's family
went back to church, and Dr. L.M. stayed with him alone.
But when they came hack from church, they heard that
Spinoza died at around three o'clock, in the presence of
the physician, who just that evening returned to Amsterdam by
nightboat, not even seeing to the care of the deceased.
But he made off with some money that Spinoza had left lying
on the table, along with some ducats and a few gold pieces,
and a knife with a silver handle.
Spinoza died quietly on Sunday, February 21. The doctor
who was by his side when he passed away was, to all
appearances, his old friend Lodewijk Meyer, although
it is possible that the "doctor from Amsterdam" was,
in fact, Schuller. Schuller later told Tschirnhaus that
he was present on the day Spinoza died and claimed to
Leibnizthat he had searched through Spinoza's things
"thoroughly, one by one, before and after his death."
Whichever physician it was, the disappearance of the
money and the silverware is more likely explained as
a case of memento collecting rather than theft.'
some questions -
his health?
'Given the nature of his illness, he would have been
coughing frequently, and must have been paler thinner,
and weaker than usual'
OK but as Nadler notes Colerus reports they (the family
he boarded with) 'had no idea that he was near his end,
even a little while before he died, and they had not
the least thought of it'
his last afternoon: Colerus reports that when the landlord
came home from church 'Spinoza came downstairs from his
room, smoked a pipe of tobacco and spoke with him for a
long time'
if Spinoza was suffering - and ill with a respiratory
disease - and also coughing, paler and thinner than usual -
would he be smoking and talking for a long time?
here the report of him smoking and conversing in the
afternoon does not seem to be consistent with the picture
of sick man on death's door
on the day of his death -
the doctor?
still you might say - if he wasn't sick why would he
call for a doctor?
and the doctor prescribes chicken soup - which Spinoza
eats 'with a good appetite'
we are told the landlord and his family go to church
in the afternoon and Spinoza is left alone with the doctor
why didn't Colerus identify this doctor?
why withhold his name - and only refer to him with
initials?
why the mystery?
anyway Colerus reports 'but when they (the landlord
and his family) came back from church, they heard that
Spinoza had died around three o'clock, in the presence
of the physician, who just that evening returned to
Amsterdam by nightboat, not even seeing
to the care of the deceased'
OK - so who told the landlord Spinoza had died -
was it the doctor - or had he gone by the time they came
back from church?
Colerus is not clear here - had the doctor already
gone when they returned from church? - if so the report
of Spinoza's death is from an unknown source
if it was the doctor who reported his death and he
was there at three o'clock - why couldn't he have
'seen to the care of the deceased' before he left
in the evening?
and why - of course would this doctor cut and run?
Spinoza's dagger-
'but he made off with some money that Spinoza had
left lying on the table, along with some ducats
and a few gold pieces, and a knife with a silver handle'
memento collecting?
we are told in the next breath that the doctor was
most likely 'his old friend Lodewijk
Meyer'
the things that were taken were all things that can be sold
the idea of memento collecting doesn't fit
but would the doctor thieve - and especially given
he is an old friend?
and it would be known he was the last to see Spinoza alive?
anything missing would be directly traceable to him
is there any real evidence that there was a doctor with
Spinoza when he died?
or that a doctor visited him on his last day?
only on the report of Colerus based on the say so
of the landlord Van der Spyck
it's all Van der Spyck's story - as far as the Colerus
account goes
(the report of Schuller being the 'Amsterdam doctor'
is a report from Tschirnhaus who is going on Schuller's
say so - again - no corroboration)
the last meal of chicken soup with Van der Spyck -
Colerus doesn't tell us if the landlord partook
of the soup - only that Spinoza ate heartily
the theft - it was the doctor of course
then there's Schuller's claim to Leibnitz that he had
searched through Spinoza's things 'thoroughly, one by one,
before and after his death'
before AND after his death?
why did Schuller report this to Liebnitz and what was
Liebnitz's interest in this?
and what was Schuller looking for?
and whatever it was could it have led to Spinoza's death?
