Proces, Geventileert voor den Ed. Hove van Utrecht tusschen Dina van Spangen, Wed. van Jan van Woudenberg, als Moeder ende Mombersse over haare onmondige Dogter Dina van Woudenberg, Impten. in cas van defloratie. Ca. den Heere ende Mr. Petrus Burmannus, Professor in de Academie alhier ged.

A CLASSICS PROFESSOR ACCUSED OF DEFLORATION. 4to. [25 x 20 cm]. 36 pp. Bound in later orange textured wrappers. Edges deckled and rather soiled; an unsophisticated copy. First or early edition (also published in Leeuwen in the same year) of the official factuum outlining the charges against Pieter Burmann (1668-1741). An esteemed Classical scholar who held the Chairs of Eloquence, History, Politics, and Greek at the University of Utrecht, Burmann was brought before the magistrate on the charge of having deflowered and impregnated his 21-year old cleaning woman, Dina van Woudenberg. Despite Burmann’s defense seemingly resting solely on his social prestige and the testimony of his wife, who agreed to provide an alibi for the periods of his alleged indiscretions, the succeeding three centuries have not been kind to van Woudenberg. Most biographers wholly ignored the accusations (eg. Samuel Johnson, in his obituary of Burmann published shortly after his death in The Gentleman's Magazine); and it is interesting to note that they are not mentioned on Burman’s current Dutch or English Wikipedia pages. As recently as 2000, Harvard historian Blanche T. Ebeling-Koning wrote that "it seems likely that in retaliation for injuries of some kind Burman was set up for a swindle". Although in the end she may be right, the case sheds fascinating light on the dynamics of a current hot trope of modern Renaissance scholarship – reputation – and how little well-publicized sexual misconduct seems to have affected standing in the academic arena. "Briefly, the facts as told by Dina van Woudenberg before the court were as follows. In the summer of 1708, when she was twenty-one and working as a servant with a large family in the Hague… she spent a few days’ leave to visit her mother in Utrecht during the summer carnival. One day she was accosted in the street by Maria Kok, the wife of the cooper, who fell into conversation with her, suggesting that there might be a better position for her with a widower with just two children, where the work would not be so demanding. She was to come the next day, to Maria Kok’s house, to meet the widower and discuss the matter. The upshot, according to Dina, was that she found herself the next afternoon in an upstairs bedroom in Maria Kok’s house, with a man she later identified as Professor Burman, and several bottles of wine. Dina recounts what happened next: carnal knowledge (‘vleeschelijk bekend’ is the Dutch version). In fact, they did so twice, as stated in the proceedings, but Dina gave no indication that she was unwilling. She insisted before the court that she had been a virgin at the time, so that her case was brought as one of defloration. This helped support her claim, but worse was still to come. In November of that year she paid a visit to the Professor’s house, to tell him that she was pregnant, that he was the father of the child, and that she wanted financial assistance. By January 1709, the first date entered in the court record, the professor had made no move to acknowledge her claim; instead, he had decided to fight back. Burman’s wife testified that on the fateful day she had been with him all afternoon. Burman for his part accused Dina and her daughter of being illiterate whores, clearly being coached and funded into daring to take to court a man of his standing and reputation… If found guilty, Burman would have been responsible for paying Dina 3,000 florins for the loss of her virginity, 300 for the birthing costs, and a fixed sum in child support every year thereafter." (Ebeling-Koning). Burman's initial trial ended inconclusively. On 3 July 1713, after a new lawsuit was brought by the husband of the now-married Dina van Woudenberg, the Court of Utrecht finally came to the conclusion that Burman was not to blame for the charges against him. The entire affair does not appear to have tarnished Burmann’s professional reputation; in 1715 he was promoted to Chair of History, Greek, and Rhetoric at th. …