All Scholars

John (who also used ‘Jan’) Bake played an important role in effectuating a change of orientation in Dutch Classics in the nineteenth century, namely from being primarily concerned with philosophy (with Daniel Albert Wyttenbach (1746-1820) and Philip Willem van Heusde (1778-1839) as its main exponents) to having textual criticism as its main interest, with Carel Gabriel Cobet (1813-89) as its eventual champion. Bake obtained this role following a series of unexpected events in his early career.

Bake’s appointments were not set in stone: one could have imagined alternative scenarios. A brief look at Leiden Classics during the Dutch ‘French period’ may be helpful. When Louis Bonaparte took the throne of the ‘Batavian Republic’ in 1795, the two Leiden Classics professors were the already aged David Ruhnken (1723-98) and Joan Luzac (1746-1807). After Luzac criticised the violence of the French Revolution in print, his Chair of Contemporary History was taken from him, which prompted him to lay down his Chair of Greek in 1796 as well. Replacements were sought: both Friedrich August Wolf (1759-1824) and Immanuel Gottlieb Huschke (1761-1818) had initially accepted but then refused. To make matters worse, Ruhnken passed away a few years later and there were no full professors left. Wolf, who repented of his earlier refusal, wrote to apply but Wyttenbach (who was previously at the Amsterdam Athenaeum Illustre) was instead appointed as holder of both Chairs. 

At some point, Luzac was reinstated but then another act of misfortune occurred. He was killed in 1807 following the explosion of a ship which was sailing through Leiden carrying gunpowder to be used in the Napoleontic Wars. Many people were sought to replace him. Van Heusde refused the Ruf, Huschke and Creuzer again accepted but then again dropped out. An agreement was reached with Deventer Professor Jan Otto Sluiter (1788-1815), but for one reason or another, King Louis Napoleon did not approve. 

The situation remained unresolved. Again, Wyttenbach, whose health was failing. was the only person remaining. For the next few years, Leiden professors with expertise in other fields were asked to teach Greek, until finally Wyttenbach’s former student Bake was asked to assist with the teaching of Greek as a Professor by Special Appointment. But his 1815 inaugural address was not well received, especially because his lack of talent in public oratory. When Wyttenbach retired in 1817, a whole range of people were offered the position, including again Van Heusde and Creuzer. But when all of them refused, there was no option left except to turn Bake’s professorship by special appointment into a regular one, much to the chagrin of the education minister, who had applied himself to the search as well.

If any of the aforementioned scholars had accepted their offers at any point, the fate of Leiden Classics would have likely been completely different. Wolf would have introduced Altertumswissenschaft to Leiden almost a century before it really gained ground; Creuzer would have shifted the focus towards historiography; Van Heusde would have continued the philosophical tradition of Wyttenbach. But now it was Bake, who had textual criticism as his main focus, who would influence the direction of Leiden Classics for 40 years himself, and for longer via his students.

It remains to explain how Bake acquired this orientation. Again, its origins may lie in an events of which the Napoleontic Wars served as an indirect catalyst. When Peter Paul Dobrée (1782-1825), friend and admirer of Richard Porson (1759-1808), was in Paris in 1815 to study manuscripts, he found himself having to flee after Napoleon’s return from Elba. He made for Leiden, where he met Bake. A year later, Bake also met Thomas Gaisford (1779-1855) who came to Leiden to study manuscripts. Both Dobrée and Gaisford describe the legend that was Porson to their host. In the introduction to his Scholica Hypomnemata II (1839), Bake would later describe both meetings as almost being a life-changing event. He has high praise for Dobrée, but is even more exultant about Gaisford:

Primus ille mihi Porsonianae disciplinae aperuit praestantiam, excellenti plane commendatam et scientia Graeci moris ac sermonis et acerrimo venerum Atticarum sensu ; quorum adspectu bonorum qui non incalescat, alacriusque ingenio moveatur, hunc insuperabili torpore illigari puto. Vere mihi sic videbar vel e somno excitatus, vel e cessatione, vel fortasse nescio qua opinione boni exturbatus, quod videlicet iam essem consecutus. (pp. 5-6)

‘he was the first person to make known to me the pre-eminence of the Porsonian method, distinguished by a thoroughly excellent knowledge of Greek custom and language, and by the sharpest possible insight into the beauty of Attic Greek. If anyone did not glow at the sight of these virtues or if their disposition was not quickly shaken by them, I would think that he was bound by an incurable torpor. Truly it seemed to me that I was either roused from sleep or inactivity, or maybe thrust by some sort of notion of the good which I had clearly already been looking for.’