Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-s2hrs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-06T11:01:39.750Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Exclusion of Early Modern Women Philosophers from the Canon: Causes and Counteractive Strategies from the Digital Humanities

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 January 2022

Natalia Zorrilla Open the ORCID record for Natalia Zorrilla [Opens in a new window]
Natalia Zorrilla*
Affiliation:
CONICET, Alejandro Korn Institute of Philosophy, University of Buenos Aires, Puan 480, CP 1406, Ciudad de Buenos Aires, Argentina.
*
Corresponding author. [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Whether it be in universities’ curricula or in traditional accounts of the history of philosophy, early modern women philosophers have frequently been treated as secondary, inconsequential characters. Although many valuable efforts are being made to counter this state of affairs, a generalized tendency to focus on well-known male philosophers and to establish them as representative figures of the early modern period still seems to exist. But does this strategy produce an accurate historical account of early modern philosophy? This essay explores diverse causes of the exclusion of early modern women philosophers from the canon, reflecting on the historical and political aspects of this phenomenon. This piece also intends to highlight the importance of the innovative projects that have been recently created in the field of the digital humanities, which aim to mitigate and to counter said exclusion.

Type
Musing
Information
Hypatia , Volume 37 , Issue 1 , Winter 2022 , pp. 177 - 186
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2022. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of Hypatia, a Nonprofit Corporation

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Amorós, Celia, and De Miguel Álvarez, Ana, eds. 2005. Teoría feminista: de la Ilustración a la globalización. Vol. 1: De la ilustración al segundo sexo. Madrid: Minerva Ediciones.Google Scholar
Benítez Grobet, Laura. 2014. Algunas reflexiones sobre el filosofar de las mujeres en la Modernidad temprana. In Filósofas de la modernidad temprana y la ilustración. Homenaje a Laura Benítez y José Antonio Robles, ed. Benítez, Viridiana Platas and Marín, Leonel Toledo. Veracruz, México: Universidad Veracruzana / Biblioteca Digital de Humanidades.Google Scholar
Berges, Sandrine. 2015. On the outskirts of the canon: The myth of the lone female philosopher, and what to do about it. Metaphilosophy 46 (3): 380–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bolufer Peruga, Mónica. 2000. Galerías de “mujeres ilustres” o el sinuoso camino de la excepción a la norma cotidiana (ss. XV–XVIII). Hispania 60 (204): 181–222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Broad, Jacqueline. 2002. Women philosophers of the seventeenth century. Cambridge, UK, and New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Collins, Patricia Hill, and Bilge, Sirma. 2016. Intersectionality (key concepts). Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Conley, John. 2002. The suspicion of virtue: Women philosophers in neoclassical France. Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crenshaw, Kimberlé. 1991. Mapping the margins: Intersectionality, identity politics, and violence against women of color. Stanford Law Review 43 (6): 1241–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
DeJean, Joan, and Miller, Nancy, eds. 1991. Displacements: Women, tradition, literatures in French. Baltimore: John Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
Deslauriers, Marguerite. 2018. Lucrezia Marinella. The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2018/entries/lucrezia-marinella/.Google Scholar
Ebbersmeyer, Sabrina. 2020. From a “memorable place” to “drops in the ocean”: On the marginalization of women philosophers in German historiography of philosophy. British Journal for the History of Philosophy 28 (3): 442–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Femenías, María Luisa. 2019. Ellas lo pensaron antes. Filósofas excluidas de la memoria. Buenos Aires: Lea.Google Scholar
Fraisse, Geneviève. 1989/1995. Muse de la raison: Démocratie et exclusion des femmes en France. Paris: Gallimard “Folio histoire.”Google Scholar
Godwin, William. 1798. Memoirs of the author of a Vindication of the Rights of Woman. London: J. Johnson.Google Scholar
González de Sande, Mercedes. 2017. La Breve difesa dei diritti delle donne y algunas cuestiones sobre su autoría. In De vera et falsa historia I, estudios sobre falsificación documental y literaria antigua, ed. Guzmán, Antonio and Velázquez, Isabel. Madrid: Ediciones Clásicas.Google Scholar
Goodman, Dena. 1994. The republic of letters: A cultural history of the French Enlightenment. Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Goodman, Dena. 2009. Becoming a woman in the age of letters. Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Hutton, Sarah. 2019. Women, philosophy and the history of philosophy. British Journal for the History of Philosophy 27 (4): 684–701.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Le Ru, Véronique. 2019. Émilie du Châtelet philosophe. Paris: Classiques Garnier.Google Scholar
Lewis, Eric. 2001. The legacy of Margaret Cavendish. Perspectives on Science 9 (3): 341–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lilti, Antoine. 2004. La femme du monde est-elle une intellectuelle? In Intellectuelles: Du genre en histoire des intellectuels, ed. Racine, Nicole and Tresbitsh, Michel. Paris: Complexe.Google Scholar
Lilti, Antoine. 2005. Le monde des salons: Sociabilité et mondanité à Paris au XVIIIe siècle. Paris: Fayard.Google Scholar
Lotterie, Florence. 2013. Le genre des Lumières: Femme et philosophe au XVIIIe siècle. Paris: Garnier “Classiques.”Google Scholar
Meiners, Christoph. 1781. Geschichte des ursprungs, fortgangs und verfalls der wissenschaften in Griechenland und Rom. Lemgo: Im Verlage der Meyerischen Buchhandlung.Google Scholar
O'Neill, Eileen. 2005. Early modern women philosophers and the history of philosophy. Hypatia 20 (3): 185–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
O'Neill, Eileen. 1998. Disappearing Ink: Early Modern Women Philosophers and Their Fate in History. In Philosophy in a feminist voice: Critiques and reconstructions, ed. A, Janet. Kourany. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Park, Peter. 2013. Africa, Asia, and the history of philosophy: Racism in the formation of the philosophical canon, 1780–1830. Albany: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
Rée, Jonathan. 2002. Women philosophers and the canon. British Journal for the History of Philosophy 10 (4): 641–52.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Roe, Glenn. 2017. A sheep in Wolff's clothing: Émilie du Châtelet and the Encyclopédie. Eighteenth-Century Studies 51 (2): 179–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Seguin, María Susana. 2021. Émilie du Châtelet and her Examens de la Bible: A radical clandestine woman philosopher. Intellectual History Review 31 (1): 129–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shapiro, Lisa. 2014. Elisabeth, Princess of Bohemia. The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2014/entries/elisabeth-bohemia/.Google Scholar
Shapiro, Lisa. 2016. Revisiting the early modern philosophical canon. Journal of the American Philosophical Association 2 (3): 365–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tennemann, Wilhelm. 1798. Geschichte der Philosophie. Leipzig: Barth.Google Scholar
Waithe, Mary Ellen, ed. 1987–1994. History of women philosophers, 4 vols. Dordrecht, Boston, and London: Martinus Nijhoff/Kluwer Academic Publishers.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Waithe, Mary Ellen. 2015. From canon fodder to canon-formation: How do we get there from here? The Monist 98 (1): 21–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zinsser, Judith. 2006. La dame d'esprit: A biography of the Marquise Du Châtelet. New York: Penguin.Google Scholar