This is the first translation of Hadriaan Beverland’s De peccato originali (DPO), originally printed in Leiden in 1679. The book became infamous among the intellectual elite of Western Europe in the late seventeenth century and it was adapted into French and German editions, and henceforth discovered anew, in the eighteenth century. Yet no one has translated this study on original sin by a libertine humanist from Latin into any other language. With this edition, we aim to make this text, as well as the story and ideas of its author, available and accessible to a wider audience. Many scholars interested in the early modern era, the history of sexuality or scholarship in the Dutch Republic, do not read Latin and even those that do, have struggled with the DPO, due to the complexity of Beverland’s style of writing. This annotated edition presents Beverland’s original Latin text with an English translation, accompanied by a plethora of footnotes to clarify the use of certain words and references to writings, persons, and events. Presenting the text as such, we invite not only those already interested in the topic but also those unfamiliar with Beverland, or with early modern views on sex and sin, to become acquainted with this unique work. We agree with Dutch poet and critic Gerrit Komrij, who noted in 2009 that a modern adaptation of Beverland’s work would be more interesting and more useful than another edition of Woutertje Pieterse, a popular book by renowned nineteenth-century Dutch writer Multatuli (Eduard Douwes Dekker).1
That it has taken more than 340 years for someone to translate the DPO is due to multiple factors: Beverland was banished by the University of Leiden shortly after its publication and he played but a minor role in the history of scholarship. The complex style of writing he adopted is undoubtedly the most important reason, however: contemporaries described Beverland’s syntax as challenging and obscure and it is, indeed, notoriously difficult to interpret at times. In addition, sex was the main topic of the DPO, a subject that shocked secular, religious, and academic authorities in the seventeenth-century Dutch Republic and that has scared off modern scholars for a surprisingly long time. That it has taken us close to seven years to finish this annotated edition has nothing to do with the text or topic, however. Starting this project towards the end of our DPhils, we were blissfully unaware of what life would throw at us in the years to come and we underestimated how much time and effort it would take to produce a solid translation of this complex text.
It is important to point out in this Preface that the DPO is a problematic text from a twenty-first century point of view. Beverland’s perspective is profoundly misogynistic and heteronormative, aligning with the dominant views of the educated, white males that together formed the political, social, cultural, economic elite of seventeenth-century Western Europe. In the DPO problematic views about women, homosexuality, and certain social groups are made explicit, resulting in the use of vulgar terms and demeaning perceptions. This outlook characterized not only Beverland’s DPO but also his other works on sexuality. In alignment with our goal to make the text accessible for a modern audience but to stay true to the text, the reader should be aware that these words, sentences, and ideas are presented and translated in their original form.
The aim of the Introduction at the start of this edition is to provide the reader with a concise overview of Beverland’s life, ideas, and scholarship, the content, context, and reception of the DPO, and the production and publication of the text. It introduces the reader to the author and his work: we by no means address all there is to say, and all one would desire to know, about Beverland, the DPO, his outlook on sex, sin and the classics, and the environment in which the DPO was produced and received. We are well aware that the selected topics could have been discussed in more detail and that other subjects could have been chosen as well: from Beverland’s sexism to his reference to obscure writers and their writings. It is our intention not to present the last word on the topic but to inspire new discussions.
G. Komrij, ‘Adriaan Beverland, vrijdenker, 1650–1716. Niet zomaar een zondaar’, F. Dam (ed.), Onbekende vaderlanders. Over minder bekende helden en schurken In de Nederlandse geschiedenis (Amsterdam, 2009), 50.