1. Johann Christoph Sturm, Philosophica eclectica, Altdorf. 1686, pp. 139–42; 161–64.
2. See Jean Baptist du Hamel, Philosophia vetus et nova ad usum scholae accommodata ... Paris, 1682, and De consensu veteris et novae philosophiae libri quatuor seu promotae per experimenta philosophiae, published in a collection of books by du Hamel under the title Operum philosophicorum, Paris, 1681. It is significant that Sturm applauds du Hamel for his conciliatory approach and his awareness of the importance of Descartes’ physics. Sturm cities him as someone who is prepared to accept the Cartesian physics but not its accompanying metaphysics. See Sturm, Philosophia eclectica, p. 18If.
3. Johannes de Raey, Clavis philosophiae naturalis sive Introductio ad naturae contemplationem Aristotelico-Cartesiana. Leiden, 1654. For an account of De Raey and his general importance,
4. see Theo Verbeek, Descartes and the Dutch: Early Reactions to Cartesian Philosophy, 1637–1650, 1992, esp. 11, 70–76, 81f. Verbeek documents the ascendancy of the new philosophy among Dutch philosophers and shows, among other things, that largely due to the influence of De Raey, Cartesianism was “almost normal” as early as 1650 in Leiden (p. 82). It is clear that De Raey inspired much of Clauberg’s Cartesianism and that many of their interpretive positions are similar; it would be interesting to explore the details of that relation.
5. Kenelm Digby, Two Treatises in the one of which the nature of bodies, in the other, the nature of souls is looked into in a way of discovery of the Immortality of Reasonable Souls, London, 1644; Repr. by Garland Publishing Inc., New York and London, 1978.