It was thus that Moses taught the truth and justice of God, as it was
brought down to the level of sensible things, and diluted for the ancient
Hebrews. It was thus that Christ taught to the disciples what they were
able to bear. It was thus, lastly, that Paul, both gently and sparingly
gave to the Corinthians, as it were, milk instead of meat.... He spoke
wisdom to the perfect, to the imperfect he accommodated as it were
foolish, more humble and more homely things. With this design, also, he
tolerated indulgently less perfect and less absolute morals for a time,
dealing gently with them as far as was lawful, not thinking how much was
lawful to himself, but what was expedient to others; not how much he
himself could bear, but what was adapted to the Corinthians.’...--Leaf c,
7. See also leaf e, 6.
[165] 1 See Eras. _Op._ iii. p. 1263, and Ibid. p. 184, E. ‘1499 was the
date of the 1st edition, which is comprised in eight pages, and forms the
last treatise in a volume of ancient writers on astronomy, edited by
Aldus. It is intituled, “Procli Diadochi Sphæra, Astronomiam discere
Incipientibus Vtilissima, Thomâ Linacro Britanno Interprete.”’--Johnson’s
_Life of Linacre_, p. 152.
[166] In a letter from Politian to Franciscus Casa, there is a description
of an ‘orrery’ made at Florence. The letter was written 1484.--_Illustrium
Virorum Epistolæ ab Angelo Politiano_, n. 1523, fol. lxxxiii.
[167] Luther’s _Table Talk_, ‘Of Astronomy and Astrology.’
[168] So also in Pico’s _Heptaplus_ the same kind of speculation is much
indulged in.
[169] Emmanuel Col. MS. 3, 3, 12, leaves d, 3 to d, 5, and Appendix (B,
e). See also leaf n, 2.
[170] Eras. _Op._ iii. p. 459, A.
[171] Leaf g, 4.
[172] Emmanuel Col. MS. Leaf i, 1 to leaf i, 3.
[173] Leaf k, 7 and 8.
[174] Leaves g, 5 to g, 7.
[175] Emmanuel MS. Leaf f, 6, and Appendix (B, f).
[176] ‘Plurimum tribuebat Epistolis Apostolicis, sed ita suspiciebat
admirabilem illam Christi majestatem ut ad hanc quodammodo sordescerent
Apostolorum scripta.’--Eras. _Op._ iii. p. 459, F. See also this view
supported by Erasmus in his _Ratio Veræ Theologiæ_. ‘Nec fortassis
absurdum fuerit, in sacris quoque voluminibus ordinem auctoritatis aliquem
constituere,’ &c.--Eras. _Op._ v. p. 92, C; and _Ibid._ p. 132, C.
[177] Eras. _Op._ vi. p. 503, F; _Annotationes in loco_, Acts xvii. v. 34.
The edition of 1516 does not mention the anecdote at all. Those of 1519
and 1522 mention it as having occurred ‘ante complures annos.’ Also see
‘Declamatio adversus Censuram Facultatis Theol. Parisien.’ Eras. _Op._ ix.
p. 917 and Epist. mccv. The former was written in 1530 or 1531, and in it
he says:--‘Is ante annos triginta, Londini in æde Divi Pauli,’ &c.: which
gives the date of Grocyn’s lectures as some time before 1500 or 1501. The
publication of the Paris edition of Dionysius, in 1498, may have called
forth these lectures.
[178] Jewell, however, mentions John Colet as believing that the
Areopagite was not the author of these ancient writings.--_Of Private
Masse_, ed. 1611, p. 8.
[179] Vide supra, p. 82.
[180] ‘Apostoli sermo ... (qui in hoc loco _artificiosissimus_
est)....’--MS. on _1 Corinthians_, Emmanuel Coll. leaf a, 6.
[181] The date of Erasmus’s coming to England may be approximately fixed
as follows. Epist. xxix. dated 12th April, and evidently written in 1500,
after his visit to England, mentions a fever which nearly killed Erasmus
_two years before_. Comparing this with what is said in the ‘Life’
prefixed to vol i. of Eras. _Op._, Epist. vi. vii. and viii., dated 3
Feb., 4 Feb., and 12 Feb., seem to belong to Feb. 1498. Epist. vi. ix. and
v. seem to place his studies with Mountjoy, at Paris, in the spring of
that year. Epist. xxii. seems to mention the projected visit to England.
Epist. xiv. ‘Londini tumultuarie,’ 5 Dec., is evidently written after he
had been to Oxford and seen Colet, Grocyn, and Linacre, and yet,
comparatively soon after his arrival in England. It alludes to his coming
to England, but gives no hint that he is going to leave England. In the
winter of 1499-1500 he was at Oxford, intending to leave, but delayed by
political reasons. He really did leave England 27 Jan. 1500. Whilst,
therefore, it is just possible that Epist. xiv. may have been written in
Dec. 1499, it is more probable that it was written in Dec. 1498, and that
the first experience of Erasmus at Oxford had been during the previous
summer and autumn. This seems to comport best both with Epist. vi. ix. v.
and xxii., and also with the circumstances connected with his stay in
England, mentioned in this chapter. See also the next note. The years
attached to the early letters of Erasmus are not in the least to be relied
on.
[182] Coletus Erasmo: Eras. Epist. xi.
[183] ‘Hic (at Oxford) hominem nosse cœpi, nam eodem tum me Deus nescio
quis adegerat; natus tum erat annos ferme triginta, me minor duobus aut
tribus mensibus.’--Eras. _Op._ iii. p. 456, B. Erasmus, according to his
monument at Rotterdam (Eras. _Op._ i. (7)) was born 28 Oct. 1467. Colet
would be born, say, Jan. 1467-8, if three months younger, and would be
‘annos ferme triginta, in the spring of 1498.’ According to Colet’s
monument he would be 31 at that date, as he died 16 Sept. 1519, and the
inscription states ‘vixit annos 53.’--Knight’s _Colet_, p. 261.
[184] Epist. xii. Sixtinus Erasmo.
[185] Else how could Erasmus describe Colet’s style of speaking so clearly
in his first letter to him?--Epist. xli.
[186] ‘Virum optimum et bonitate præditum singulari.’--Eras. Epist. xi.
[187] Coletus Erasmo: Epist. xi.
[188] Eras. Epist. xli. _Op._ iii. p. 40, D.
[189] ‘Dicebat Coletus, Caym ea primum culpa Deum offendisse, quod tanquam
conditoris benignitate diffisus, suæque nimium confisus industriæ, terram
primus prosciderit, quum Abel, sponte nascentibus contentus, oves
paverit.’--Eras. Epist. xliv. _Op._ iii. p. 42, F. Compare MS. G. g. 4,
26, fols. 4-6 and 29, 30, and Erasmus’s Paraphrases, _in loco_, Hebrews
xi. 4.
[190] ‘At ille unus vincebat omnes; visus est sacro quodam furore
debacchari, ac nescio quid homine sublimius augustiusque præferre. Aliud
sonabat vox, aliud tuebantur oculi, alius vultus, alius adspectus,
majorque videri, afflatus est numine quando.’--Eras. _Op._ iii. 42, F.
[191] Eras. Epist. xliv.
[192] Erasmus Sixtino, Epist. xliv. _Op._ iii. p. 42, C.
[193] See his colloquy, _Ichthyophagia_, in which he describes his college
experience at Paris, especially his physical hardships. The latter are
probably caricatured, and perhaps too much magnified for the description
to be taken literally.
[194] Erasmus to Lord Mountjoy: Epist. xlii. Oxoniæ, 1498.
[195] ‘Beatus Rhenanus Cæsari Carolo.’--Eras. _Op._ i. leaf * * * 1.
[196] Eras. _Op._ iii. p. 458, D and E.
[197] Eras. _Op._ iii. pt. 1, p. 459, F.
[198] ‘Siquidem magnum erat, Coletum, in ea fortuna, constanter sequutum
esse, non quo vocabat natura, sed quo Christus,’ &c.--_Ibid._ p. 461, E.
[199] See the following extract from the colloquy of Erasmus, ‘_Pietas
puerilis_,’ edition Argent. 1522, leaf e, 4, and Basileæ, 1526, p. 92, and
Eras. _Op._ i. p. 653.
‘_Erasmus._ Many abstain from divinity because they are afraid lest they
should waver in the catholic faith, when they see there is nothing which
is not called in question.
‘_Gaspar._ I believe firmly what I read in the Holy Scriptures, and the
creed called the Apostles’, and I don’t trouble my head any further. I
leave the rest to be disputed and defined by the clergy, if they please.
‘_Erasmus._ What _Thales_ taught you that philosophy?
‘_Gaspar._ I was for some time in domestic service’ [as More was in the
house of Cardinal Morton before he was sent to Oxford], ‘with that
honestest of men, _John Colet_. _He imbued me with these precepts._’ See
Argent. 1522, leaf c, 4.
[200] ‘Illic in collegio Montis Acuti ex putribus ovis et cubiculo infecto
concepit morbum, h.e. malam corporis, antea purissimi,
affectionem.’--_Vita_, prefixed to Eras. _Op._ i. written by himself. See
the letter to Conrad Goclenius.
[201] ‘A studio theologiæ abhorrebat, quod sentiret animum non propensum,
ut omnia illorum fundamenta subverteret; deinde futurum, ut hæretici nomen
inureretur.’--_Vita_, prefixed to Eras. _Op._ i.
[202] See for this anecdote, Eras. _Op._ iii. p. 458, E and F.
[203] ‘Tanquam afflatus spiritu quodam, “Quid tu, inquit, mihi prædicas
istum, qui nisi habuisset multum arrogantiæ, non tanta temeritate tantoque
supercilio definisset omnia; et nisi habuisset aliquid spiritus mundani,
non ita totam Christi doctrinam sua profana philosophia
contaminasset.”’--Eras. _Op._ iii. p. 458, F.
[204] _Summa_, i. quest. 52, 53.
[205] ‘Omnino decessit aliquid meæ de illo existimationi.’--Eras. _Op._
iii. pt. 1, 458, F.
[206] See _The Praise of Folly_, Eras. _Op._ iv. p. 462, where the
dogmatic science of the age is as severely satirised by Erasmus as the
dogmatic theology of the Schoolmen. Thus Folly is made to say:--‘With what
ease, truly, do they indulge in day-dreams (_delirant_), when they invent
innumerable worlds, and measure the sun, moon, and stars, and the earth,
as though by thumb and thread; and render a reason for thunder, winds,
eclipses, and other inexplicable things, without the least hesitation, as
though they had been the secret architects of all the works of nature, or
as though they had come down to us from the council of the gods. _At whom
and whose conjectures nature is mightily amused!_’
[207] Cresacre More’s _Life of Sir Thomas More_, p. 93.
[208] Erasmi aliquot Epistolæ: Paris, 1524, p. 33. Eras. _Op._ iii. Epist.
lxiii. 1521 ed. p. 291. Whether written in 1498 or 1499 is doubtful.
[209] Erasmus Roberto Piscatori: Epist. xiv.
[210] The incidents related in this section are taken from
_Disputatiuncula de Tædio, Pavore, Tristitiâ Jesu, instante Supplicio
Crucis, deque Verbis, quibus visus est Mortem deprecari, ‘Pater, si fieri
potest, transeat a me calix iste.’_--Eras. _Op._ v, pp. 1265-1294.
[211] Eras. _Op._ v. pp. 1291 and 1292.
[212] ‘From this order, any one may perceive the reason of the _four
senses_ in the old law which are customary in the church. The _literal_
is, when the actions of the men of old time are related. When you think of
the image, even of the Christian church which the law foreshadows, then
you catch the _allegorical_ sense. When you are raised aloft, so as from
the shadow to conceive of the reality which both represent, then there
dawns upon you the _anagogic_ sense. And when from signs you observe the
instruction of individual man, then all has a _moral_ tone for you.... In
the writings of the New Testament, saving when it pleased the Lord Jesus
and his Apostles to speak in parables, as Christ often does in the
Gospels, and St. John throughout in the Revelation, all the rest of the
discourse, in which either the Saviour teaches his disciples more plainly,
or the disciples instruct the churches, has the sense that appears on the
surface. Nor is one thing said and another meant, but the very thing is
meant which is said, and the sense is wholly literal. Still, inasmuch as
the church of God is figurative, conceive always an _anagoge_ in what you
hear in the doctrines of the church, the meaning of which will not cease
till the figure has become the truth. From this moreover conclude, that
where the literal sense is, then the allegorical sense is _not_ always
along with it; but, on the other hand, that where there is the allegorical
sense, the literal sense is always underlying it.’--Colet’s abstract of
the _Eccl. Hier._, Mr. Lupton’s translation, pp. 105-107; and see Mr.
Lupton’s note on this passage.
[213] Summa, pt. i. quest. 1, article x. Conclusio.
[214] Eras. _Op._ v. pp. 1291 to 1294. This reply of Colet to the long
letter of Erasmus does not seem to have been published in the early
editions of the latter. Thus I do not find it in the editions of
Schurerius, Argent. 1516, and again 1517. The earliest print of it that I
have seen is that appended to the _Enchiridion_, &c. Basle, 1518.
[215] Eras. _Op._ iii. Epist. lxv. Erasmus Fausto Andrelino, 1521 ed. p.
260.
[216] ‘Torquatis istis aulicis.’--Eras. _Op._ v. p. 126, E.
[217] Colet’s letter to Erasmus has been lost, but the above may be
gathered from the reply of Erasmus.
[218] Eras. _Op._ v. p. 1263.
[219] It is possible that Colet himself had, at one time, thought of
expounding the book of Genesis, but the manuscript letters to Radulphus
appended to the copy of the MS. on the ‘Romans,’ in the library of Corpus
Christi College, Cambridge, contain no allusion to any such intention.
[220] Probably De la Pole. See Mr. Gairdner’s _Letters and Papers, &c. of
Richard III. and Henry VII._ vol. i. p. 129, and vol. ii. preface, p. xl;
and appendix, p. 377; where Mr. Gairdner mentions under date, 20th Aug. 14
Henry VII. (1499) a ‘Proclamation, against leaving the kingdom without
license,’ and adds ‘N.B. clearly in consequence of the flight of Edmund De
la Pole.’ If this prohibition extended through December, it fixes the date
of this letter as written in the winter of 1499-1500.
[221] Eras. _Op._ v. p. 1263. This letter is generally found prefixed to
the various editions of the _Disputatiuncula de Tædio Christi_. And this
is often appended to editions of the _Enchiridion_.
[222] Epist. lxiv. Erasmus to Mountjoy, and also see Epist. xlii.
[223] Eras. _Op._ iii. p. 26, E. Epist. xxix.
[224] The fact that Erasmus saw Prince _Edmund_ fixes the date of his
departure from England to 1500, instead of 1499. He left England 27th
Jan., and it could not be in 1499, for Prince Edmund was not born till
Feb. 21, 1499.
[225] See the mention of this incident in Erasmus’s letter to Botzhem,
printed as _Catalogus Omnium Erasmi Roterdami Lucubrationum, ipso Autore_,
1523, Basil, fol. a. 6, and reprinted by Jortin, app. 418, 419.
[226] For the verses see Eras. _Op._ i. p. 1215.
[227] See Ep. xcii. and lxxxi.
[228] ‘He [Tyndale] was born (about 1484) about the borders of Wales, and
brought up from a child in the University of Oxford, where he, by long
continuance, grew and increased as well in the knowledge of tongues and
other liberal arts, as specially in the knowledge of the Scriptures,
whereunto his mind was singularly addicted; insomuch that he, lying there
in Magdalen Hall, read privily to certain students and fellows of Magdalen
College, some parcel of divinity, instructing them in the knowledge and
truth of the Scriptures.’--Quoted from Foxe in the biographical notice of
William Tyndale, prefixed to his Doctrinal Treatises, p. xiv, Parker
Society, 1848. Magdalen College is supposed to have been the college in
which Colet resided at Oxford; as, according to Wood, some of the name of
Colet are mentioned in the records, though not John Colet himself.
[229] ‘How many years did he (Colet) following the example of St. Paul,
teach the people _without reward_!’--Eras. Epist. cccclxxxi. Eras. _Op._
iii. p. 532, E.
[230] In Colet’s epitaph it is stated ‘administravit 16;’ as he died in
1519, this will bring the commencement of his administration to 1504, at
latest. See also the note in the Appendix on Colet’s preferments.
[231] Fasti Ecclesiæ Anglicanæ, p. 184.
[232] Eras. _Op._ iii. p. 456, C.
[233] Eras. _Op._ iii. p. 456, D.
[234] Ibid. E. and F.
[235] Walter Stone, LL.D., was admitted to the vicarage of Stepney, void
by the resignation of D. Colet, Sept. 21, 1505.--Kennett’s MSS. vol. xliv.
f. 234 b (Lansdowne, 978). He seems to have retained his rectory of
Denyngton.
[236] Eras. _Op._ iii. p. 465, E.
[237] Ibid. E. and F.
[238] Grocyn and Linacre had also removed to London. More was already
there.
[239] ‘Impense delectabatur amicorum colloquiis quæ sæpe differebat in
multam noctem. Sed omnisillius sermo, aut de literis erat, aut de
Christo.’--Eras. _Op._ iii. p. 457. A.
[240] Eras. _Op._ iii. p. 459, F.
[241] Ibid. p. 457, A.
[242] Ibid. p. 459, F.
[243] Ibid. p. 456, E.
[244] ‘Porro in suo templo non sumebat sibi carptim argumentum ex
Evangelio aut ex epistolis Apostolicis sed unum aliquod argumentum
proponebat, quod diversis concionibus ad finem usque prosequebatur: puta
Evangelium Matthæi, Symbolum Fidei, Precationem Dominicam.’--Eras. _Op._
iii. p. 456, D, E.
[245] Grocyn was apparently rector of this parish up to 1517, when he
vacated it.--Wood’s _Ath. Oxon._ p. 32.
[246] Stapleton, p. 160.
[247] Roper, Singer’s ed. 1822, p. 5.
[248] Rot. Parl. vi. 521, B.
[249] 12 Henry VII. c. 12, also Rot. Parl. vi. p. 514.
[250] 12 Henry VII. c. 13.
[251] See 3 Edward I. c. 36, and 25 Edward III. s. 5, c. 11.
[252] Roper, p. 7.
[253] Possibly, ‘_our trusty and right well-beloved knight and
counseller_,’ _Sir William Tyler_, who had so often partaken of the royal
bounty, being made ‘Controller of Works,’ ‘Messenger of Exchequer,’
‘Receiver of certain Lordships,’ &c. &c. (see Rot. Parl. vi. 341, 378 b,
404 b, 497 b), and who was remembered for good in chap. 35 of this very
Parliament.
[254] A fifteenth of the three estates was estimated by the Venetian
ambassador, in 1500, to produce 37,930_l._--See _Italian Relation of
England_, Camden Soc. p. 52. The amount of a ‘fifteenth’ was fixed in
1334, by 8 Ed. III. Blackstone (vol. i. p. 310) states that the amount was
fixed at about 29,000_l._ This was probably the amount, exclusive of the
quota derived from the estates of the clergy, which latter was estimated
at 12,000_l._ by the Venetian ambassador in 1500. This being added would
raise Blackstone’s estimate to 41,000_l._ in all. From this, however,
about 4,000_l._ was always excused to ‘poor towns, cities, &c.,’ so that
the nett actual amount would be about 37,000_l._ according to Blackstone,
which agrees well with the Venetian estimate.
[255] 19 Henry VII. c. 32, Jan. 25, 1503, Rot. Parl. vi. 532-542. In lieu
of two reasonable aids, one for making a knight of Prince Arthur deceased,
and the other of marriage of Princess Margaret to the King of Scots, and
also great expenses in wars, the Commons grant 40,000_l._ less 10,000_l._
remitted, ‘_of his more ample grace and pity, for that the poraill of his
comens should not in anywise be contributory or chargeable to any part of
the said sum of 40,000l._’ The 30,000_l._ to be paid by the shires in the
sums stated, and to the payment every person to be liable having lands,
&c. to the yearly value of 20_s._ of free charter lands, or of 26_s._
8_d._ of lands held at will, or any person having goods or cattalls to the
value of x marks or above, not accounting their cattle for their plough
nor stuff or implement of household.
[256] John More was one of the commissioners for Herts.
[257] This story is told in substantially the same form in the manuscript
life of More by Harpsfield, written in the time of Queen Mary, and
dedicated to William Roper.--_Harleian MSS._ No. 6253, fol. 4.
[258] ‘Meditabatur adolescens sacerdotium cum suo Lilio.’--Stapleton,
_Tres Thomæ_, ed. 1588, p. 18, ed. 1612, p. 161. See also Roper, pp. 5, 6.
[259] Stapleton and Roper, _ubi supra_.
[260] Richard Whitford himself, retiring soon after from public life,
entered the monastery called ‘Sion,’ near Brentford in Middlesex, and
wrote books, in which he styled himself ‘_the_ wretch of Sion.’ See Roper,
p. 8, and Knight’s _Life of Erasmus_, p. 64.
[261] Stapleton, ed. 1588, p. 20, ed. 1612, p. 163.
[262] That this letter was written in 1504 is evident. First, it cannot
well have been written before Colet had commenced his labours at St.
Paul’s; secondly, it cannot have been written in Oct. 1505, because it
speaks of Colet as still holding the living of Stepney, which he resigned
Sept. 21, 1505. Also the whole drift of it leads to the conclusion that
More was unmarried when he wrote it. And he married in 1505, according to
the register on the Burford picture, which, the correct date of More’s
birth having been found and from it the true date of Holbein’s sketch,
seems to be amply confirmed by the age there given of More’s eldest
daughter, Margaret Roper. She is stated to be twenty-two on the sketch
made in 1528, and so was probably born in 1506.
[263] _Mori Epigrammata_: Basle, 1518, p. 6. See the prefatory letter by
Beatus Rhenanus.
[264] Ibid.
[265] See Epigram entitled ‘_Gratulatur quod eam repererit Incolumem quam
olim ferme Puer amaverat_.’--_Epigrammata_: Basle, 1520, p. 108, and
_Philomorus_, pp. 37-39.
[266] ‘From whence [the Tower], the day before he suffered, he sent his
shirt of hair, not willing to have it seen, to my wife, his dearly beloved
daughter.’--Roper, p. 91.
[267] Walter’s _Life of More_, London, 1840, pp. 7, 8. Cresacre More’s
_Life of More_, pp. 24-26.
[268] ‘Maluit igitur maritus esse castus quam sacerdos impurus.’--_Erasmus
to Hutten_: Eras. _Op._ iii. p. 75, c. Stapelton, 1612 ed. pp. 161, 162.
Cresacre More’s _Life of More_, pp. 25, 26. Even Walter allows that his
‘finding that at that time religious orders in England had somewhat
degenerated from their ancient strictness and fervour of spirit,’ was the
cause of his ‘altering his mind.’--Walter’s _Life of More_, p. 8.
[269] Sir Thomas More’s _Works_, pp. 1-34; and see the note on Pico’s
religious history, and his connection with Savonarola, above, p. 19.
[270] Compare this with the line of argument pursued by Marsilio Ficino in
his _De Religione Christianâ_. Vide supra, p. 11.
[271] This remarkable letter was written, ‘Ferrariæ, 15 May, 1492’ (Pici
_Op._ p. 233), scarcely six weeks after Pico’s visit to the deathbed of
Lorenzo de Medici.
[272] This letter is dated in More’s translation M.cccclxxxxii. from
_Paris_, in mistake for M.cccclxxxvi. from _Perugia_. See Pici _Op._ p.
257.
[273] See More’s _Works_, p. 19, _in loco_, v. 6.
[274] Stapleton, ed. 1612, p. 162. Cresacre More’s _Life of Sir T. More_,
p. 27.
[275] Sir T. More’s _Works_, p. 9.
[276] There is a copy of this translation of More’s in the British Museum
Library. ‘276, c. 27, _Pico, &c._, 4{o}, _London_, 1510.’ This is probably
the original edition. More may have waited till Henry VIII.’s accession
before daring to publish it.
[277] This date of More’s marriage is the date given in the register
contained on the Burford family picture; and as it is in no way dependent
on the other dates, probably it rested upon some family tradition or
record. It is confirmed by the age of Margaret Roper on the Basle
sketch--22 in 1528. Vide supra, p. 149, n. 1.
[278] Cresacre More’s _Life of Sir T. More_, p. 39.
[279] Erasmus Botzhemo: _Catalogus Omnium Erasmi Lucubrationum_: Basle,
1523.
[280] Epist. lxxxi. He arrived at Paris ‘postridie Calend, Februarias’ (p.
73, E.), i.e. Feb. 2, 1500.
[281] Epist. iii. This letter is dated in the Leyden edition, 1490, and in
the edition of 1521, p. 264, M.LXXXIX. (_sic_), but it evidently was
written shortly after the illness of Erasmus at Paris in the spring of
1500. See also the mention of ‘Arnold’ in Epist. xxix. (Paris, 12 April)
and a repetition in it of much that is said in this letter respecting
Erasmus’s illness and intention of visiting Italy. See also Epist. dii.
App.
[282] ‘In Britannico littore pecuniola mea, studiorum meorum alimonia,
naufragium fecit.’--Epist. xcii. p. 84 C.
[283] ‘_Tenuiter._’--Eras. _Op._ iii. p. 73, F. Epist. lxxxi. and see also
lxxx.
[284] Erasmus to Battus: Epist. xxix. Paris, 12 April, probably in 1500.
See also Epist. lxxx. ‘Græscæ literæ animum meum propemodum enecant: verum
neque precium datur, neque suppetit, quo libros, aut præceptoris operam
redimam. Et dum hæc omnia tumultuor, vix est unde vitam sustineam.’
[285] Epist. xciv.
[286] Epistolæ xxxvi. lxxvi. lxxi. (20 Nov.), lxxii. (9 Dec.), xciv. xcix.
(11 Dec.), lxxiii. (11 Dec.), and lxxiv. seem to belong to this period of
flight to Orleans. Epist. xv. and lxxvii. (14 Dec.), lxxviii. (18 Dec.),
and xci. (14 Jan.), seem to mark the date of his return to Paris.
[287] Epist. xcii. Paris, 27 Jan. 1500 (should be 1501).
[288] Epist. xxxix.
[289] Epist. ccccvii. App.
[290] ‘Nec est in ullo mortalium aliquid solidæ spei, nisi in uno
Batto.’--Eras. _Op._ iii. p. 48, C. Epist. liii.
[291] Epist. xxx. 2 July [1501] seems to be the first letter written from
St. Omer, where Erasmus was then staying with the Abbot. See also Epist.
xxxix., where he speaks of having been terrified at Paris with the numbers
of funerals. On 12 July and 18 July he writes Epist. liv.-lviii.
(‘Tornaco’ evidently meaning the castle of Tornahens). Epist. lix. also
was written about the same time. Epist. xcviii. 30 July, if written by
Erasmus, shows he was still at St. Omer. All these letters seem to belong
to the year 1501.
[292] Eras. _Op._ iii. p. 52, E. Epist. lix.
[293] Epist. lxii.
[294] Erasmus to Botzhem: _Catalogus Omnium Erasmi Lucubrationum_: Basle,
1523, leaf b, 4.
[295] Erasmus to Justus Jonas: Epist. ccccxxxv.
[296] ‘Ea quum placerent etiam eruditis, præsertim Ioanni Viterio
Franciscano cujus erat in illis regionibus autoritas summa.’--_Letter to
Botzhem_, leaf b, 4. There can be no doubt that the John Viterius
mentioned in this letter is the same person as the Vitrarius of the letter
to Justus Jonas. See also Mr. Lupton’s introduction to his translation of
Colet on Dionysius.
[297] Eras. Epist. clxxiii.
[298] Ibid. xciv.
[299] _Lucubratiunculæ aliquot Erasmi_: Antwerp, 1503. _Biogr. de Thierry
Martins_: par A. F. Van Iseghem: Alost, 1852, 8vo. See also Letter to
Botzhem (_Catalogus, &c._), fol. b, 4.
[300] It is very difficult to fix the true dates of these letters, and to
ascertain to what year they belong. Epist. ccccxlvi. App., from Louvain,
mentions the death of Battus, and that the Marchioness of Vere had married
below her. He speaks of himself as buried in Greek studies.
[301] Eras. _Op._ iii. p. 94. Epist. cii. Dated 1504, but should be
probably 1505.
[302] See Erasmus Edmundo: Epist xcvi. ‘ex arce Courtemburnensi.’
[303] The Panegyric upon Philip, King of Spain, on his return to the
Netherlands. See Epist. ccccxlv. App. Erasmus Gulielmo Goudano.
[304] More literally ‘The _Pocket Dagger_ of the Christian Soldier.’ But
Erasmus himself regarded it as a ‘Handybook.’ See _Enchiridion_, ch. viii.
English ed. 1522. ‘We must haste to that which remaineth lest it should
not be an “Enchiridion,” that is to say “a lytell treatyse hansome to be
caryed in a man’s hande,” but rather a great volume.’
[305] See especially chap. ii. _Allegoria de Manna_, Eras. _Op._ v. fol.
6-10, &c.
[306] It is evident that Erasmus had not yet appreciated as fully as he
did afterwards the _historical_ method which Colet had applied to St.
Paul’s Epistles to get at their real meaning and ‘spirit.’
[307] Alfonso Fernandez, Archdeacon of Alcor, to Erasmus: Palencia, Nov.
27, 1527. _Life and Writings of Juan de Valdès_, by Benjamin Wiffen:
London, Quaritch, 1865, p. 41.
[308] The above is an abridged translation from the _Enchiridion_, ed.
Argent. June, 1516, pp. 7, 8, which, being published before the Lutheran
controversy commenced, is probably a reprint of the earlier editions. The
editions of 1515 are the earliest that I have seen.
[309] This letter was republished in the edition of some letters of
Erasmus printed at Basle, 1521, p. 221, and see also Eras. _Op._ iii.
Epist. ciii.
[310] Letter to Fox, Bishop of Winchester. London, Cal. Jan. 1506. Eras.
_Op._ i. p. 214.
[311] Erasmus’s letter to Botzhem, _Catalogus, &c._ Basle, 1523, leaf b,
3.
[312] Eras. _Op._ iii. p. 475, D.
[313] The epigrams have no dates, and it is impossible, therefore, to say
positively which of them were written during this period. The following
translation of one of them from Cayley’s _Life of Sir Thomas More_, vol.
i. p. 270 (with this reservation as to its date), may be taken as a
sample:--
A squall arose; the vessel’s tossed;
The sailors fear their lives are lost.
‘Our sins, our sins,’ dismayed they cry,
‘Have wrought this fatal destiny!’
A monk it chanced was of the crew,
And round him to confess they drew.
Yet still the restless ship is tossed,
And still they fear their lives are lost.
One sailor, keener than the rest,
Cries, ‘With our sins she’s still oppress’d;
Heave out that monk, who bears them all,
And then full well she’ll ride the squall.’
So said, so done; with one accord
They threw the caitiff overboard.
And now the bark before the gale
Scuds with light hull and easy sail.
Learn hence the weight of sin to know,
With which a ship could scarcely go.
[For the Latin, see _Epigrammata Thomæ Mori_, Basilæ, 1520, pp. 72, 73.]
[314] E. g.:--
‘T. Mori in Avarum.’
‘Dives Avarus Pauper est.’
‘Sola Mors Tyrannicida est.’
‘Quid inter Tyrannum et Principem.’
‘Sollicitam esse Tyranni Vitam.’
‘Bonum Principem esse Patrem non Dominum.’
‘De bono Rege et Populo.’
‘De Principe bono et malo.’
‘Regem non satellitium sed virtus reddit tutum.’
‘Populus consentiens regnum dat et aufert.’
‘Quis optimus reipub. status.’
[315] Alluding to this time, Erasmus spoke of More as ‘Tum studiorum
sodali.’--Letter to Botzhem, 1523, leaf b, 3.
[316] See letter of Erasmus to Richard Whitford, Eras. _Op._ i. p. 265,
dated May, ex rure (1506).
[317] Lucian’s dialogue called _Somnium_ he sent to Dr. Christopher
Urswick, a well-known statesman (Eras. _Op._ i. p. 243); _Toxaris, sive de
Amicitiâ_, to Fox, Bishop of Winchester (_Ibid._ p. 214); _Timon_ to Dr.
Ruthall, afterwards Bishop of Durham (_Ibid._ p. 255); _De Tyrannicidâ_,
to Dr. Whitford, chaplain to Fox (_Ibid._ p. 267).
[318] See an amusing account of this visit to Lambeth Palace in the letter
to Botzhem (_Catalogus_, leaf a, 5); also Knight’s _Life of Erasmus_, p.
83.
[319] See Knight’s _Life of Erasmus_, pp. 96-101. _Adagia._ _Op._ ii. 554.
Epist. dccclxxiv. and dccccliii.
[320] Eras. _Op._ iii. Epist. civ.
[321] Epist. cv.
[322] See his Colloquy, _Diversoria_.
[323] Eras. _Op._ iv. p. 755. Erasmus to Botzhem, leaf a, 4.
[324] Luther visited Rome in 1510, or a year or two later. Luther’s
_Briefe_, De Wette, 1. xxi.
[325] ‘Nullum enim annum vixi insuavius!’--Erasmus to Botzhem, leaf a, 4.
[326] Eras. Ep. cccclxxxvi. App.
[327] Epist. cccclxxxvii. App.
[328] Eras. to Botzhem, leaf b, 8.
[329] Mountjoy to Erasmus, Epist. x., dated May 27, 1497, but should be
1509.
[330] It is difficult to fix the date of the arrival of Erasmus in
England. He was at Venice in the autumn of 1508. (See the Aldine edition
of his _Adagia_, dated Sept. 1508.) After this he wintered at Padua (see
_Vita Erasmi_, prefixed to Eras. _Op._ i.); and after this went to Rome
(ibid.). This brings the chronology to the spring of 1509. In April, 1509,
Henry VIII. ascended the English throne. On May 27, 1509, Lord Mountjoy
wrote to Erasmus, who seems to have been then at Rome, pressing him to
come back to England (Eras. Epist. x., the date of which is fixed by its
contents).
The letter prefixed to the _Praise of Folly_ is dated _ex rure, ‘quinto
Idas Junias,’_ and states that the book is the result of his meditations
during his long journeys on horseback on his way from Italy to England.
This letter must have been dated June 9, 1510, at earliest, or 1511, at
latest. 1510 is the probable date (see _infra_, note at p. 204). The later
editions of the _Praise of Folly_ put the year 1508 to this letter; but
the edition of August, 1511 (Argent.) gives no year, nor does the Basle
edition of 1519, to which the notes of Lystrius were appended. So that the
printed date is of no authority, and it is entirely inconsistent with the
history of the book as given by Erasmus. The first edition, printed by
_Gourmont_, at Paris, I have not seen, but, according to Brunet, it has
_no date_. In the absence of direct proof, it is probable on the whole
that Erasmus returned to England between the autumn of 1509 and June,
1510.
[331] See the letter to More prefixed to the _Praise of Folly_.
[332] Roper, p. 9.
[333] See More’s letter to Dorpius, in which he mentions this visit.
[334] Roper, p. 6.
[335] Hall, ed. 1548, fol. lix.
[336] _Epigrammata Mori_: Basil, 1520, p. 17.
[337] Johnson’s _Life of Linacre_, pp. 179 _et seq._
[338] Vide _infra_, p. 380.
[339] Stapleton, 1588 ed. pp. 26, 27.
[340] Roper, p. 9.
[341] More’s son John--nineteen in 1528, according to Holbein’s
sketch--was probably born in 1509. More’s three daughters, Margaret,
Elizabeth, and Cicely, were all older.
[342] See the letter of Erasmus to Botzhem, ed. Basle, 1523, leaf b, 3,
and Jortin, App. 428. Also _Erasmi ad Dorpium Apologia_, Louvain, 1515,
leaf F, iv.
[343] Argent. 1511, leaf D, iii., where occurs the marginal reading,
‘Indulgentias taxat.’
[344] Argent. 1511, E, 8, and Eras. _Op._ iv. p. 457.
[345] Argent. 1511, leaf E, viii., and Eras. _Op._ iv. p. 462.
[346] Argent, 1511, leaf F, and Eras. _Op._ iv. p. 465.
[347] Argent. 1511, leaf F, and Eras. _Op._ iv. p. 465.
[348] Basle, 1519, p. 178 _et seq._, and Eras. _Op._ ix. pp. 466 _et seq._
[349] Basle, 1519, p. 181.
[350] Basle, 1519, p. 183, and Eras. _Op._ iv. p. 468.
[351] Basle, 1519, p. 183, and Argent. 1511, leaf F; which contains,
however, only part of this paragraph.
[352] Basle, 1519, p. 185. Argent. 1511, leaf F, ii., and Eras. _Op._ iv.
p. 469.
[353] Basle, 1519, pp. 185 and 186.
[354] Ibid. p. 180.
[355] This paragraph is not inserted in the edition Argent. 1511, but
appears in the Basle edition, 1519, p. 192, and Eras. _Op._ iv. pp. 473,
474.
[356] Argent. 1511, leaf F, viii. and Eras. _Op._ iv. p. 479.
[357] Ranke, _Hist. of the Popes_, chap. ii. s. 1.
[358] Erasmus Buslidiano: Bononiæ, 15 Cal. Dec. 1506, Eras. _Op._ i. p.
311.
[359] Argent. 1511, leaf G, iii. Eras. _Op._ iv. p. 484.
[360] Ranke, _Hist. of the Popes_, chap. ii. s. 1 (abridged quotation).
[361] _Moriæ Encomium_: Argent. M.DXI. leaf G, iii. This edition contains
all the above passages on Popes, and was published during the lifetime of
Julius II., as he did not die till the spring of 1513.
[362] Erasmus writes: ‘It was sent over into France by the arrangement of
those at whose instigation it was written, and there printed from a copy
not only full of mistakes, but even incomplete. Upon this within a few
months it was reprinted more than seven times in different
places.’--_Erasmi ad Dorpium Apologia_, Louvain, 1515.
See also Erasmus to Botzhem, where Erasmus says ‘Aderam Lutetiæ quum per
Ricardum Crocum pessimis formulis depravatissime excuderetur.’ (First
edition of this letter: Basle, 1523; leaf b, 4.) In the copy fixed to
Eras. _Op._ i. ‘_nescio quos_’ is substituted for ‘_Ricardum Crocum_,’
_who was not the printer, but the friend of More who got it published_.
(See Erasmus to Colet, Epist. cxlix. Sept. 13, 1511 (wrongly dated 1513),
where Erasmus says of Crocus, ‘qui nunc Parisiis dat operam bonis
literis.’ Erasmus was at Paris in April 1511. (See Epistolæ clxix., cx.,
and clxxv. taken in connection with each other.)) In a catalogue of the
works of Erasmus (a copy of which is in the British Museum Library),
entitled _Lucubrationum Erasmi Roterodami Index_, and printed by Froben,
at Basle, in 1519, it is stated that the _Moriæ Encomium_ was ‘sæpius
excusum, _primum Lutetiæ per Gormontium, deinde Argentorati per
Schurerium_,’ &c. The latter edition is the earliest which I have been
able to procure, and it is dated ‘mense Augusti M.DXI.’ But the date of
the first edition printed at Paris by Gourmont I have not been able to fix
certainly. According to Brunet, it had no date attached.
After staying at More’s house, and there writing the book itself, he may
have added the prefatory letter ‘Quinto Idus Junias,’ 1510, ‘ex rure,’
whilst spending a few months with Lord Mountjoy, as we learn he did from a
letter to Servatius from ‘London from the Bishop’s house’ (Brewer, No.
1418, Epist. cccclxxxv., under date 1510), it is most probable that in
1511 Erasmus paid a visit to Paris, being at Dover 10 April, 1511; at
Paris 27 April (see _Epistolæ_ clxix., cx., and clxxv.); and thus was
there when the first edition was printed. His letters from Cambridge do
not seem to begin till Aug. 1511. See Brewer, Nos. 1842, Epist. cxvi.; and
1849, Epist. cxviii. No. 1652 belongs, I think, to 1513. Possibly No.
1842, Epist. cxvi., belongs to a later date; and, if so, No. 1849, Epist.
cxviii., may be the first of his Cambridge letters, and with this its
contents would well agree.
[363] Brewer, No. 1418. Eras. Epist. App. cccclxxxv., and see cccclxxxiv.,
dated 1 April, London.
[364] Brewer, No. 1478. Eras. Epist. cix. 6, Id. Feb., and it seems, in
March 1511, Warham gave him a pension out of the rectory of Aldington.
Knight, p. 155.
[365] Brewer, No. 4427.
[366] ‘A right fruitfull Admonition concerning the Order of a good
Christian Man’s Life, very profitable for all manner of Estates, &c., made
by the famous Doctour Colete sometime Deane of Paules. Imprinted at London
for Gabriell Cawood, 1577.’--Brit. Museum Library.
[367] In Sept. 1505. Knight’s _Life of Colet_, p. 265, and n. a.
[368] ‘Insumpto patrimonio universo vivus etiam ac superstes solidam
hæreditatem cessi,’ &c. Letter of Colet to Lilly, dated 1513, prefixed to
the several editions of _De Octo Orationis Partibus, &c._
[369] The number of the ‘miraculous draught of fishes.’
[370] Statutes of St. Paul’s School. Knight’s _Life of Colet_, p. 364. See
also the letter from Colet to Lilly, prefixed to the _Rudiments of
Grammar_, 1510. Knight’s _Life of Colet_, p. 124, n. r.
[371] Eras. _Op._ iii. p. 457, c.
[372] Knight’s _Life of Colet_, p. 109.
[373] Brewer’s _Calendar of State Papers_, Henry VIII., vol. i. No. 1076,
under date June 6, 1510.
[374] Compare licenses mentioned in Brewer’s _Calendar of State Papers_ of
Henry VIII. (vol. i. Nos. 1076, 3900, and 4659), with documents given in
Knight’s _Life of Colet_, _Miscellanies_, No. v. and No. iii.
[375] ‘De pueris statim ac liberaliter instituendis.’--Eras. _Op._ i. p.
505.
[376] Knight’s _Life of Colet_, p. 175, and copied from him by Jortin,
vol. i. pp. 169, 170.
[377] Take the following examples: ‘Revere thy elders. Obey thy superiors.
Be a fellow to thine equals. Be benign and loving to thy inferiors. Be
always well occupied. Lose no time. Wash clean. Be no sluggard. Learn
diligently. Teach what thou hast learned lovingly.’--Colet’s _Precepts of
Living for the Use of his School_. Knight’s _Life of Colet_.
_Miscellanies_, No. xi.
[378] Eras. _Op._ iii. p. 458, D.
[379] This epigram and the above-mentioned prefaces are inserted by Knight
in his _Life of Colet_ (_Miscellanies_, No. xiii.), and were taken by him
from what he calls _Grammatices Rudimenta_, London, M.DXXXIIII. in ‘_Bibl.
publ. Cantabr. inter MS. Reg._’ But see note 1 on the next page. They were
in the preface to Colet’s _Accidence_.
[380] See also the characteristic letter from Colet to Lilly, prefixed to
the _Syntax_. The editions of 1513, 1517, and 1524 are entitled,
_Absolutissimus de Octo Orationis Partium Constructione Libellus_. The
_Accidence_ was entitled, _Coleti Editio unà cum quibusdam_, &c.
[381] Knight’s _Life of Colet_, p. 126.
[382] Eras. Epist. cxlix. Erasmus to Colet, Sept. 13, 1513 (Brewer, i.
4447), but should be 1511. See 4528 (Eras. Epist. cl.), which mentions the
_De Copiâ_ being in hand, which was printed in May 1512. (?)
[383] _De Ratione Studii Commentariolus_: Argent. 1512, mense Julio, and
printed again with additions, Argent. 1514, mense Augusto. The above
translation is greatly abridged.
[384] Eras. Epist. App. iv.
[385] In 4 Henry VIII. (1513) Lord Chancellor Warham received 100 marks
salary, and 100 marks for commons of himself and clerk--200 marks, or
133_l._ Brewer, i. Introduction, cviii. note (3).
[386] Prefatory Letter of Beatus Rhenanus, prefixed to the edition of
More’s _Epigrammata_, printed at Basle, 1518 and 1520.
[387] Knight’s _Life of Colet_, p. 370. _Miscellanies_, No. vi.
[388] ‘Recte instituendæ pubis artifex.’ Preface of Erasmus to _De Octo
Orationis Partium Constructione_, etc. Basle, 1517.
[389] Colet to Erasmus, Sept. 1511, not 1513 (Brewer, No. 4448), for the
same reason as Nos. 4447 and 4528.
[390] Eras. Epist. cl. Brewer, p. 458. Dated October 29, 1513, but, as it
mentions the _De Copiâ_ being in hand, it must have been written in 1511.
[391] John Ritwyse, or Rightwyse.
[392] ‘Moreover, that Thomas Geffrey caused this John Butler divers
Sundays to go to London to hear Dr. Colet.’--Foxe, ed. 1597, p. 756.
[393] Ibid. p. 1162.
[394] William Sweeting and John Brewster, on October 18, 1511.--Foxe, ed.
1597, p. 756.
[395] Eras. Epist. cxxvii. Brewer, i. No. 1948.
[396] Brewer, i. p. 2004.
[397] Ibid. i. Introduction.
[398] Brewer, i. p. 4312. Warham to Henry VIII.--a document referring to
this convocation as held at St. Paul’s from Feb. 6, 1511 (i.e. 1512) to
Dec. 17 following. This document is in many places wholly illegible, but
these words are visible: ‘concessimus ... [pro defensione ecclesiæ]
Anglicanæ et hujus inclyti regni vestri Angliæ; necnon ad sedandum et
extirpandum hereses et schismata in universali ecclesia quæ his diebus
plus solito pullulant.’
[399] That Colet preached in English, see the remark of Erasmus that he
had studied _English_ authors in order to polish his style and to prepare
himself for preaching the gospel.--Eras. _Op._ iii. p. 456, B. It may also
be inferred from the Lollards going to hear his sermons. In his rules for
his school he directed that the chaplain should instruct the children in
the Catechism and the Articles of the faith and the Ten Commandments in
_English_.--Knight’s _Life of Colet_. _Miscellanies_, Num. v. p. 361.
[400] Tyndale, p. 168 (Parker Society).
[401] Eras. _Op._ iii. p. 460, D.
[402] Erasmus to Werner: Eras. Ep. Lond. ed. lib. xxxi. Ep. 23. The person
alluded to in this letter was clearly not James Stanley, as has sometimes
been assumed.
[403] Cooper’s _Athenæ Cantab._ p. 16. Also _Philomorus_, Lond. Pickering,
1842, pp. 55-57, and _Fasti Ecclesiæ Anglicanæ_, p. 70.
[404] Epigram ‘In Posthumum Episcopum.’
[405] Epigram ‘In Episcopum illiteratum, de quo ante Epigramma est sub
nomine Posthumi.’ There is no reason, I think, to conclude that More’s
satire was directed in these epigrams against the Bishop of Ely. There may
have been plenty of Scotists whom the cap might fit as well, or better. In
the same year that Stanley was made Bishop of Ely, Fitzjames was made
Bishop of London. The late Dean Milman (_Annals of St. Paul’s_, p. 120)
shows, however, that Fitzjames was not unlearned, as he had been Warden of
Merton and Vice-chancellor of Oxford.
[406] _Fasti Ecclesiæ Anglicanæ_, p. 298; and Knight’s _Life of Erasmus_,
p. 229.
[407] Brewer, i. 4312.
[408] A ‘tenth,’ of the clergy, produced in 1500 about 12,000_l._ See
Italian Relation of England, C. S. p. 52. Four-tenths would be equal to
about half a million sterling in present money.
‘If the King should go to war, he ... immediately compels the clergy to
pay him one, two, or three fifteenths or tenths ... and more if the
urgency of the war should require it.’--_Ibid._ p. 52.
[409] ‘Senex quidam theologus et imprimis severus.’--_Erasmi
Annotationes_, edit. 1519, p. 489; and edit. 1522, p. 558. ‘Senex quidam
severus et vel supercilio teste theologus, magno stomacho,
respondit.’--_Erasmi Moriæ Encomium_, Basle, 1519, p. 225.
[410] See note of Erasmus in his ‘_Annotationes_,’ _in loco_ Titus iii.
10; also the _Praise of Folly_, where the story is told in connection with
further particulars. The exact coincidence between the two accounts of the
old divine’s construction of Titus iii. 10 leads to the conclusion that
the rest of the story, as given in the _Praise of Folly_, may also very
probably be literally true. Knight, in his _Life of Colet_, concludes that
as the story is told in the _Praise of Folly_, the incident must have
occurred in a _previous convocation_, as this satire was written _before_
1512.--Knight, pp. 199, 200. But the story is not inserted in the editions
of 1511 and of 1515, whilst it is inserted in the Basle edition of the
_Encomium Moriæ_, November 12, 1519, published just after Colet’s death
(p. 226). Nor is the first part of the story relating to Titus iii. 10 to
be found in the first edition of the _Annotationes_ (1516). The story is
first told by Erasmus in the second edition (1519), published just before
Colet’s death, and then without any mention of Colet’s name; the latter
being possibly omitted lest, as Bishop Fitzjames was still living, its
mention should be dangerous to Colet. It was not till the third edition
was published (in 1522), when both Colet and Colet’s persecutor were dead,
that Erasmus added the words, ‘Id, ne quis suspicetur meum esse commentum,
accepi _ex Johanne Coleto_, viro spectatæ integritatis, quo præsidente res
acta est.’--_Annotationes_, 3rd ed. 1522, p. 558.
[411] _Praise of Folly_, 1519, p. 226.
[412] There is an old English translation given by Knight in his _Life of
Colet_ (pp. 289-308), printed by ‘Thomas Berthelet, regius impressor,’ and
without date. _Pynson_ was the King’s printer in 1512 (Brewer, i. p.
1030), and accordingly he printed the Latin edition of 1511, _i.e._
1512.--Knight, p. 271. Knight speaks of the old English version as
‘written probably by the Dean himself,’ but he gives no evidence in
support of his conjecture.--See Knight’s _Life of Colet_, p. 199.
[413] ‘Neque valde miror si clarissimæ scholæ tuæ rumpantur invidia.
Vident enim uti ex equo Trojano prodierunt Græci, qui barbaram diruere
Trojam, sic è tuâ prodire _scholâ_ qui ipsorum arguunt atque subvertunt
inscitiam.’--Stapleton’s _Tres Thomæ_, p. 166, ed. 1612; p. 23, ed. 1588.
[414] Brewer, vol. ii. No. 3190. The true date, 1512, is clearly fixed by
the allusion to the ‘De Copia,’ &c.--Eras. Epist. App. ccccvi.
[415] Dated ‘M.DXII. iii. Kal. Maias: Londini.’
[416] The first edition was printed at Paris by Badius. Another was
printed by Schurerius (Argentorat.), January 1513. And, in Oct. 1514,
Erasmus sent to Schurerius a _revised_ copy for publication.
[417] Eras. _Op._ iii. p. 460, D and E.
[418] Ibid. p. 460, E.
[419] 3 Tyndale, p. 168 (Parker Society).
[420] ‘The Seven Peticyons of the Paternoster, by Joan Colet, Deane of
Paules,’ inserted in the collection of Prayer entitled ‘_Horæ beate Marie
Virginis secundum usum Sarum totaliter ad longum_.’--Knight’s _Life of
Colet_, App. _Miscellanies_, No. xii. p. 450.
[421] Eras. Epist. cvii. Brewer, No. 3495, under date 1st Nov. 1512.
[422] Eras. Epist. cxxviii. and cxvi.
[423] ‘Written by Master Thomas More, then one of the undersheriffs of
London, about the year 1513.’--_More’s English Works_, p. 35.
[424] ‘Morus noster melitissimus, cum sua facillima conjuge ... et liberis
ac universa familia pulcherrime valet.’--Ammonius to Erasmus: Epist.
clxxv. This letter, dated May 19, 1515, evidently belongs to an earlier
date. It is apparently in reply to Epist. cx. dated April 27, from Paris,
and written by Erasmus during his stay there in 1511.
[425] The date of the death of More’s first wife it is not easy exactly to
fix. Cresacre More says, ‘His wife Jane, as long as she lived, which was
but some six years, brought unto him almost every year a child.’--_Life of
Sir T. More_, p. 40. This would bring her death to 1511, or 1512.
[426] _Philomorus_, p. 71.
[427] See Brewer, i. preface p. xl et seq., and authorities there cited.
[428] ‘_In Brixium Germanum falsa scribentem de Chordigera._’ ‘_In eundem:
Versus excerpti e Chordigera Brixii_;’ ‘_Postea de eadem Chordigera_;’
‘_Epigramma Mori alludens ad versus superiores: Aliud de eodem_,’
&c.--_Mori Epigrammata._
[429] See the several epigrams relating to Brixius in _Mori Epigrammata_.
For the wearisome correspondence which resulted from the publication of
these epigrams and the ‘_Antimorus_’ of Brixius in reply, see Eras. _Op._
iii., index under the head ‘Brixius (Germanus).’ See also _Philomorus_, p.
71.
[430] Eras. _Op._ iii. pp. 460, 461. See also ‘_Richardi Pacei ... de
Fructu qui ex doctrina percipitur, liber_.’ Basle, 1517, Oct. And Cresacre
More’s _Life of More_, App.
[431] Brewer, i. 3723.
[432] Ibid. 3752, 3821.
[433] Ibid. 3809.
[434] Brewer, i. xlvii, and No. 3820. Edward Lord Howard to Henry VIII.
[435] Eras. _Op._ iii. p. 461. Compare _Enchiridion_, ‘Canon VI.’
[436] Colet, and Erasmus, and More, notwithstanding their very severe
condemnation of the wars of the period, and wars in general, never went so
far as to lay down the doctrine, that ‘_All_ War is unlawful to the
Christian.’
[437] Eras. _Op._ iii. p. 461, A, E.
[438] Knight’s _Life of Colet_, p. 207, note quoted from _Antiq.
Britann._, Sub. Wil. Warham, ed. Han. p. 306.
[439] Brewer, Nic. West to Henry VIII. 3838.
[440] Brewer, i. 3780.
[441] Ibid. 3857. Sir E. Howard to Wolsey.
[442] Henry VIII. to Cardinal Bainbridge. Brewer, i. 3876.
[443] Brewer, i. 3876.
[444] Ibid. 3903, Sir E. Howard to Henry VIII.
[445] Ibid. 4005, Echyngham to Wolsey.
[446] Brewer, i. 4019, Thomas Lord Howard to Wolsey; 4020, Thomas Lord
Howard to Henry VIII.
[447] Ibid. 4055, Henry VIII. to his ambassadors in Arragon.
[448] Ibid. 4075, Fox to Wolsey.
[449] Ibid. 3977, 5761.
[450] Eras. Epist. cxix. Brewer, i. 4427, Erasmus to Ammonius.
[451] Erasmi _Epigrammata_: Basle, 1518, p. 353; and Eras. _Op._ i. p.
1224, F.
[452] _De Deditione Nerviæ, Mori Epigrammata_: Basle, 1518, p. 263, and
ed. 1522, p. 98.
[453] For the particulars mentioned in this section, it will be seen how
much I am indebted to Mr. Brewer. See vol. i. of his Calendar, preface pp.
l-lv, in addition to the particular authorities cited.
[454] Eras. Epist. cxiv. Brewer, i. 1652.
[455] See mention of Aldridge in Eras. Epist. dcclxxxii.
[456] _Compendium Vitæ Erasmi_: Eras. _Op._ i. preface.
[457] Eras. Epist. cxvii. Brewer, i. 1847.
[458] Eras. Epist. cxv. Brewer, i. 4336. The allusion to the ‘De Copia’
(printed in May 1512) fixes the date.
[459] Eras. Epist. cxxix. Brewer, i. 4576. See also Brewer, i. 2013, which
belongs to the same autumn. Epist. cxli.
[460] From the letters referred to by Brewer, i. p. 963, Nos. 5731 (Eras.
Epist. clxv.), 5732, 5733, and 5734, it would seem that he had undertaken
the education of a boy to whom he had been ‘_more than a father_.’ This
does not prove that he was in the habit at Cambridge of taking private
pupils, as possibly this boy was placed under his care somewhat in the
same way as More had been placed with Cardinal Morton.
[461] See Eras. Epist. cl. Brewer, i. 4528.
[462] Eras. Epist. cxix. Brewer, i. 4427.
[463] Brewer, i. 4428.
[464] Eras. Epist. cxxxi. Brewer, i. 2001, under the date 1511. The
allusion to the King of Scots, as well as the passage quoted, fix the date
1513. See also Eras. Epist. cxxix. Brewer, i. 4576.
[465] Eras. Epist. cxxxi. Brewer, i. 2001.
[466] 5 Henry VIII. c. i.
[467] Brewer, i. 4819. Notes of a speech in this parliament.
[468] Eras. Epist. cxliv.
[469] Compare More’s _Epigrams_, headed: ‘Populus consentiens Regnum dat
et aufert,’ and ‘Bonum Principem esse patrem non dominum.’
[470] Eras. Epist. cxliv. and published among ‘Auctarium Selectarum
aliquot Epistolarum Erasmi,’ &c. Basil, 1518, p. 62. The above extracts
are abridged in the translation.
[471] Eras. Epist. cxliii.
[472] Eras. Germano Brixio: Eras. Epist. mccxxxix.
[473] Brewer, i. 4845, 5173, and 4727.
[474] Eras. Epist. cxv. Eras. _Op._ iii. p. 107, D. Brewer, i. 4336.
[475] Eras. Epist. cxv. Eras. _Op._ iii. p. 106, E and F.
[476] Eras. Epist. cxv.
[477] Eras. _Op._ iii. p. 785, A.
[478] Eras. _Op._ iii. p. 785, A, C.
[479] _Ibid._ p. 457, A. See also Eras. Epist. viii. App.
[480] The companion of Erasmus was, according to the ‘Colloquy,’
‘_Gratianus Pullus_, an Englishman, learned and pious, but with less
liking for this part of religion than I could wish.’ ‘A _Wickliffite_, I
fancy!’ suggested the other spokesman in the ‘Colloquy.’ ‘I do not think
so’ (was the reply), ‘_although he had read his books_, somewhere or
other.’--_Colloquia_: Basle, 1526, p. 597. In his letter to Justus Jonas,
Erasmus mentions that Colet was in the habit of reading heretical
books.--Eras. _Op._ iii. p. 460, A. It has been suggested also
(_Pilgrimages to Walsingham_, &c. by J. G. Nichols, F.S.A. Westminster,
1849, p. 127), that as in the same letter he describes Colet as wearing
_black_ vestments (_pullis_ vestibus), instead of the usual purple (Eras.
_Op._ iii. p. 457, B.), hence the name ‘_Pullus_’ may in itself point to
Colet. There is also an allusion by Erasmus in his treatise, ‘_Modus
Orandi_,’ to his visit to the shrine of St. Thomas-à-Becket, in which he
says, ‘Vidi ipse quum ostentarent linteola lacera quibus ille dicitur
abstersisse muccum narium, abbatem ac cæteros, qui adstabant, aperto
scriniolo venerabundos procidere ad genua, ac manibus etiam sublatis
adorationem gestu repræsentare. Ista _Joanni Coleto, nam is mecum aderat_,
videbantur indigna, mihi ferenda videbantur donec se daret opportunitas ea
citra tumultum corrigendi.’--Eras. _Op._ v. p. 1119, F, and p. 1120, A.
This allusion to Colet so accurately comports with what is said in the
Colloquy of ‘Gratianus Pullus,’ that the one seems most probably suggested
only as a _nom de plume_ for the other. I am further indebted to Mr.
Lupton for the suggestion that when Ammonius, writing to Erasmus (Epist.
clxxv.), says ‘tuus _Leucophæus_ salvere te jubet,’ he alludes to Colet:
‘Leucophæus’ being a Greek form of the same nickname as ‘Pullus’ might be
in a Latin form. Mr. Lupton has also shown that ‘_Gratian_’ is a rendering
of ‘_John_.’ See his introduction to his edition of _Colet on the
Sacraments of the Church_, pp. 6, 7. So that the identification of Colet
with the _Gratianus Pullus_ of the Colloquy is now complete.
[481] The lazar-house of Harbledown. See Dean Stanley’s _Historical
Memorials of Canterbury_, ed. 1868, p. 243.
[482] The colloquy from which the particulars given in this section have
been obtained is entitled _Peregrinatio Religionis ergo_. It was not
contained in the edition of 1522 (Argent.), but it was inserted probably
in that of 1524 (which, however, I have not seen). It was contained in the
Basle edition of 1526, which is probably a reprint of that of 1524, the
prefatory letter at the beginning being dated Calen. Aug. 1524.
[483] Eras. Ammonio: Eras. Epist. clix.
[484] Eras. Epist. App. viii. There is a reference in the letter to Wolsey
as ‘Episcopus Lincolniensis,’ and this confirms the correctness of the
date, as Wolsey was translated to the Archbishopric of York Aug.
1514.--_Fasti Eccl. Anglicanæ_, p. 310.
[485] Eras. _Op._ iii. p. 160, A.
[486] Eras. Epist. clxxxii. Partly written at Antwerp, but finished at
Basle, Aug. 29, 1514.
[487] The letter is dated ‘Lovanii, A.D. mdxiiii. Kal. Aug.’
[488] ‘Quo viro non alium habet mea quidem sententia Anglorum Imperium vel
magis pium, vel qui Christum verius sapiat.’
[489] _Cato Erasmi. Opuscula aliquot Erasmo Roterodamo Castigatore et
Interprete, &c._ ‘Colonie in edibus Quentell. A.D. mcccccxv;’ and Ibid.
‘Colonie in edibus Martini Werdenensis xii. Kal. Dec. (1514?)’
[490] Coletus Erasmo: Epist. lxxxv. App.
[491] Ranke’s _History of the Reformation_, bk. ii. c. 1. See Erasmus’s
mention of Reuchlin in the letter written this autumn to Wimphelingus,
appended to the 2nd edition of _De Copiâ_. Schelestadt, 1514; and Eras.
Epist. clxvii. and clxviii. As to his friendship with the Archbishop of
Maintz, _vide_ Epist. cccxxxiv.
[492] See letter to Wimphelingus, Basle, xi. Kal. Oct. 1514, _ubi supra_,
for these and the following particulars.
[493] Eras. _Op._ iii. p. 1249; and see Epist. clxxiv. Erasmus to Leo X.
p. 154, C and D.
[494] Epist. dccccxxii. Eras. _Op._ iii. pp. 1054, 1055.
[495] See the _Life of Beatus Rhenanus_, by John Sturmius, ‘Vita
clarissimorum Historicorum.’ Buderi, 1740, pp. 53-62; and Eras. _Op._ iii.
pp. 154, C, &c. (see Index under his name); and especially the prefatory
letter from Erasmus to Beatus Rhenanus, prefixed to ‘Enarratio in Primum
Psalmum, Beatus vir,’ &c. Louvain, 1515. There is also a mention of him
worth consulting in Du Pin’s _Ecclesiastical Writers_, iii. p. 399.
[496] Eras. _Op._ iii. p. 222, E; and the letter to Wimphelingus.
[497] Erasmus to Mountjoy, Epist. clxxxii., and the letter above mentioned
to Wimphelingus.
[498] Epist. clxxxii.
[499] Epist. Erasmi clix. and Epist. lxxxv. App.
[500] Epist. lxxxv. App.
[501] Epist. ad Wimphelingum.
[502] Epist. clxvii. clxviii. and clxxiv.
[503] Eras. _Op._ iii. p. 141, C and D.
[504] Brewer, i. lxix, and ii. i, _et seq._
[505] Ibid. ii. xxxviii.
[506] Brewer, ii. liv.
[507] See Eras. Epist. App. xxvii. xxi. and xxiii. These letters are dated
1515; and, from the mention of the New Testament as not yet placed in
Froben’s hand, this date would seem to be correct.
[508] Eras. _Op._ ii. pp. 870-2; and in part translated in Hallam’s
_Literature of the Middle Ages_, part I, c. iv. These passages are quoted
from the explanation given in the Adagia of the proverb, ‘_Scarabeus
Aquilam quærit_.’ They occur in the edition separately printed by Froben
in large type and in an octavo form, entitled ‘Scarabeus:’ Basle, mense
Maio, 1517, ff. 21-23.
[509] Eras. _Op._ ii. p. 775. From the _Adagia_, ‘Sileni Alcibiadis.’
[510] Eras. Epist. App. xxi. That this edition was printed in 1515, see
mention of it in Erasmus’s letter to Dorpius, dated Antwerp, 1515, and
published at Louvain, Oct. 1515.
[511] Martinus Dorpius Erasmo: _D. Erasmi, &c. Enarratio in Primum
Psalmum, &c. &c._ Louvain, Oct. 1515.
[512] See the commencement of the reply of Erasmus.
[513] ‘Martinus Dorpius instigantibus quibusdam primus omnium cœpit in me
velitari.... Scirem illum non odio mei huc venisse, sed juvenem tum, ac
natura facilem, aliorum impulsu protrudi.’--_Erasmus Botzemo, Catalogus_,
&c. Basle, 1523; leaf b, 5.
[514] Erasmus to Dorpius: _D. Erasmi, &c. Enarratio in Primum Psalmum, &c.
&c._ Louvain, Oct. 1515.
[515] Erasmus to Wolsey: Eras. _Op._ iii. p. 1565; App. Epist. lxxiv.
wrongly dated 1516 instead of 1515.
[516] In a letter prefixed to the _Erasmi Epigrammata_, Basle, 1518,
Froben pays a just tribute to the good humour and high courtesy of Erasmus
while at work in his printing-office, interrupted as he often was, in the
midst of his laborious duties, by frequent requests from all kinds of
people for an epigram or a letter from the great scholar.--Pp. 275, 276.
[517] Erasmus Urbano Regio: Eras. _Op._ iii. p. 1554, App. Epist. liii.
[518] In one place he even supplied a portion of the Greek text which was
missing by translating the Latin back into Greek!
[519] _Epist. ad Car. Grymanum_, prefixed to the Paraphrase on the Epistle
to the Romans. Edition Louvain, 1517.
[520] Erasmus Gwolfgango Fabricio Capitoni: Epist. ccvii. _Op._ iii. p.
189, 89, A, C, Feb. 22, 1516, from Antwerp, but probably the year should
be 1518. See also his reference to the same pagan tendencies of Italian
philosophy in his treatise entitled ‘_Ciceronianus_,’ and the letter
prefixed to it.
[521] Ranke’s _History of the Popes_, i. ch. ii. sec. 3.
[522] _Ubi supra._
[523] See the authorities mentioned by Ranke, and also Hallam’s
_Literature of Europe_, chap. iv. ed. 1837, p. 435.
[524] Hallam, p. 436.
[525] Moria, ed. 1511, Argent. fol. G. iii.
[526] Hallam’s _Literature of the Middle Ages_, ed. 1837, p. 555, _et
seq._
[527] Compare the satire on Monks in ‘_Scarabeus_,’ and the colloquy
called ‘_Charon_,’ with the following passage, in which Erasmus alludes to
the continental wars of Henry VIII.: ‘Id enim temporis adornabatur bellum
in Gallos, et hujus fabulæ non minimam partem Minoritæ duo agebant, quorum
alter, fax belli, mitram meruit, alter bonis lateribus vociferabatur in
concionibus in _Poetas_. Sic enim designabat Coletum,’ &c. Eras. _Op._
iii. p. 460, F.
[528] Compare the similar views expressed in the _Enchiridion_ (Canon V.)
fifteen years before.
[529] Both the above passages are slightly abridged in the
translation.--_Novum Instrumentum_, leaf aaa, 3 to bbb.
[530] _Id._ leaf bbb to bbb 5. The quotations in this case also are
abridged.
[531] _Novum Instrumentum_: Annotationes in loco Acts vii. p. 382:--‘Et
hunc locum annotavit Hieronymus in Libro ad Pammachium de Optimo Genere
Interpretandi, qui secus habeatur in Genesi, ubi legitur quod Abraham
emerit ab Ephron Etheo filio Saor juxta Hebron quadringentis drachmis
speluncam duplicem, et agrum circa eam, sepelieritque in ea Saram uxorem
suam; atque in eodem legimus libro postea revertentem de Mesopotamia Jacob
cum uxoribus et filiis suis posuisse tabernaculum ante Salem, urbem
Sichymorum, quæ est in terra Chanaan, et habitasse ibi et emisse partem
agri, in quo habebat tentoria, ab Emor patre Sychem, centum agnis, et
statuisse ibi altare et invocasse deum Israhel. Proinde Abraham non emit
specum ab Emor patre Sychem, sed ab Ephron filio Saor, nec sepultus est in
Sychem sed in Hebron, quæ corrupte dicitur Arboch. Porro duodecim
patriarchæ non sunt sepulti in Arboch sed in Sychem, qui ager non est
emptus ab Abraham sed a Jacob. Hunc nodum illic nectit Hieronymus nec eum
dissolvit.’
[532] In loco Mark ii. p. 299, where Erasmus writes:--‘Divus Hieronymus in
libello de Optimo Genere Interpretandi indicat nomen Abiathar pro
Achimelech esse positum, propterea quod libro Regum primo, capite 22, ubi
refertur hujusce rei historia, nulla mentio hat Abiathar sed duntaxat
Achimelech. Sive id acciderit lapsu memoriæ, sive vitio scriptorum, sive
quod ejusdem hominis vocabulum sit Abiathar et Abimelech; nam Lyra putat,
Abiathar fuisse filium Achimelech qui sub patre functus sit officio
paterno, et eo cæso jussu Saulis comes fuerit fugæ Davidicæ.’
[533] In loco Matt. xxvii. p. 290:--‘Annotavit hunc quoque locum divus
Hieronymus in libro cui titulus de Optimo Genere Interpretandi, negans
quod his citat ex Hieremia Matthæus, prorsus exstare apud Hieremiam, verum
apud Zachariam prophetam, sed ita ut quæ retulit evangelista, parum
respondeant ad Hebraicam veritatem, ac multo minus ad vulgatam editionem
Septuaginta. Etenim ut idem sit sensus tamen inversa esse verba, imo pene
diversa. Cæterum locus est apud Zachariam, cap. ii., si quis velit
excutere. Nam res perplexior est quam ut his paucis explicari possit, et
prope πάρεργον est. Refert Hieronymus Hieremaiam apocryphum sibi exhibitum
a quodam Judæo factionis Nazarenæ in quo hæc ad verbum ut ab evangelista
citantur haberentur. Verum non probat ut apostolus ex apocryphis adduxerit
testimonium, præsertim cum his mos sit evangelistis et apostolis ut,
neglectis verbis, sensum utcumque reddant in citandis testimoniis.’
[534] See especially _Novum Instrumentum_, pp. 295, 290, 377, 382, 270.
[535] Roper, 9.
[536]
1512 £286,269
1513 699,714
1514 155,757
---------
£1,141,740
1515 £74,007
1516 130,779
1517 78,887
-------
£283,673
See Brewer, ii. preface, cxciv.
[537] 6 Henry VIII. c. 24.
[538] Ibid. c. 26.
[539] 6 Henry VIII. c. 1. The draft of this Act in the final form in which
it was adopted when Parliament met again in the autumn, is in Wolsey’s
handwriting.--Brewer.
[540] Grafton, p. 104. Holinshed, ii. 835, under date 6 Henry VIII.
[541] 4 Henry VIII. c. 5, and 6 Henry VIII. c. 3.
[542] 6 Henry VIII. c. 5.
[543] Lord Herbert’s History, under date 1521, ed. 1649, p. 108; and
Grafton, pp. 1016-1018.
[544] Brewer, i. Nos. 4019 and 4020.
[545] 4 Henry VIII. c. 2, and 6 Henry VIII. c. 6.
[546] 6 Henry VIII. c. 12.
[547] Brewer, ii. 422 (7 May), 480, and 534; also Roper, 10.
[548] Brewer, ii. 672, 679, 733, 782, 807.
[549] Ibid. 672 and 733.
[550] Ibid. 904 and 922.
[551] Ibid. 1067.
[552] ‘First after the Trinity come the _Seraphic_ spirits, all _flaming
and on fire_.... They are _loving_ beings of the highest order, &c.’
Colet’s abstract of the _Celestial Hierarchy of Dionysius_. Mr. Lupton’s
translation, p. 20.
[553] Fiddes’ _Life of Wolsey_. Collections, p. 252, quoted from MS. in
Herald’s office. Cerem. vol. iii. p. 219, &c. Brewer, ii. 1153.
[554] Brewer, ii. 1335.
[555] Eras. Epist. ccli. and App. lxxxvii.
[556] Erasmus to Hutten, Epist. ccccxlvii. Eras. _Op._ iii. p. 476, F.
[557] Utopia, 1st ed. T. Martins. Louvain [1516], chap. ‘De Fœderibus.’
Leaf k, ii.
[558] Utopia, 1st ed. ‘De Re Militari.’ Leaf k, iii.
[559] _Utopia_, 1st ed. Leaves m, iv. v.
[560] More’s English Works: _The Apology_, p. 850.
[561] _Utopia_, 1st ed. Leaf h, i.
[562] _Utopia_, 1st ed. Leaf f, iii.
[563] _Ibid._ chap. ‘De Urbibus,’ Leaf f, i.
[564] I may be allowed to refer the reader to the valuable mention of
‘Utopia’ in the preface to Mr. Brewer’s _Calendar of the Letters, &c. of
Henry VIII._ vol. ii. cclxvii _et seq._, where its connection with the
political and social condition of Europe at the time is well pointed out.
[565] In support of the abstract here given of the moral philosophy of the
Utopians, see _Utopia_, 1st ed. Leaf h, ii. _et seq._
For the following careful translation of the most material part of it, I
am indebted to the Rev. W. G. Rouse, M.A.
‘The same points of moral philosophy are discussed by the Utopians as by
us. They inquire what is “_good_” in respect as well of the mind as of the
body, as also of external things; also, whether the title “_good_” be
applicable to all these, or to the mental qualities alone. They discuss
“_virtue_” and “_pleasure_.” But their first and principal topic of debate
is concerning human “_happiness_”--on what thing or things they consider
it to depend.
‘But here they seem more inclined than they should be to that party which
advocates “_pleasure_,” as being that which they define as either the
whole, or the most important part of human happiness. And, what is more
surprising, they even draw arguments in support of so nice an opinion from
the principles of religion, which is usually sombre and severe, and of a
stern and melancholy character. For they never dispute about happiness
without joining some principles drawn from religion to those derived from
rational philosophy; without which, reason is, in their opinion, defective
and feeble in the search for true happiness. Their religious principles
are as follow. The soul is immortal, and, by the goodness of God, born to
happiness. He has appointed rewards after this life for man’s virtues and
good deeds--punishment for his sins. Now, though these principles
appertain to _religion_, yet they think that they are led by _reason_ to
believe and assent to them. Apart from these principles, they
unhesitatingly declare that no man can be so foolish as not to see that
pleasure is to be pursued for its own sake through thick and thin; so long
as he takes care only not to let a less pleasure stand in the way of a
greater, and not to pursue any pleasure which is followed in its turn by
pain.
‘For they consider “_virtue_” austere and hard to strive after; and they
deem it the greatest madness for a man not only to exclude all
“_pleasure_” from life, but even voluntarily to suffer pain without
prospect of future profit (for what profit can there be, if you gain
nothing after death, after having spent the whole of your life without
pleasure, that is, in misery?).
‘But now they do not place happiness in the enjoyment of every kind of
pleasure, but in that only which is honest and good. For they think that
our nature is attracted to happiness, as to its supreme good, by that very
“_virtue_” to which alone the opposite party ascribes happiness. For they
define “_virtue_,” the living in accordance with nature; inasmuch as, to
this end, we are created by God. They believe that he follows the guidance
of nature who obeys the dictates of reason in the pursuit or avoidance of
anything; and they say that reason first of all inflames men with a love
and reverence for the Divine Majesty, to whom we owe it both that we
exist, and that we are capable of happiness; and secondly, that reason
impresses upon us and urges us to pass our lives with the least amount of
care and the greatest amount of pleasure ourselves; and, as we are bound
to do by the natural ties of society, to give our assistance to the rest
of mankind towards attaining the same ends. For never was there a man so
stern a follower of “virtue,” or hater of pleasure, who, whilst thus
enjoining upon you labours, watchings, and discomfort, would not tell you
likewise to relieve the want and misfortunes of others to the utmost of
your ability, and would not think it commendable for men to be of mutual
help and comfort to one another in the name of humanity. If, then, it be
in human nature (and no virtue is more peculiar to man) to relieve the
misery of others, and, by removing their troubles, to restore them to the
enjoyment of life, that is, to pleasure--does not nature, which prompts
men to do this for others, urge them also to do it for themselves? For a
joyful life--that is, a life of pleasure--is either an evil--in which
case, not only should you not help others to lead such a life, but, as far
as you can, prevent them from leading it, as being hurtful and deadly; or,
if it be a good thing, and if it be not only lawful, but a matter of duty
to enable others to lead such a life--why should it not be good for
yourself first of all, who ought not to be less careful of yourself than
of others? For when nature teaches you to be kind to others, she does not
bid you to be hard and severe to yourself in return. Nature herself then,
in their belief, enjoins a happy life--that is, “_pleasure_”--as the end
of all our efforts; and to live by this rule, they call “_virtue_.”
‘But, since nature urges men to strive together to make life more cheerful
(which, indeed, she rightly does; for no man is so much raised above the
condition of his fellows as to be the only favourite of nature, which
cherishes alike all whom she binds together by the tie of a common shape),
she surely bids you urgently to beware of attending so much to your own
interest as to prejudice the interest of others. They think, therefore,
that not only all contracts between private citizens should be kept, but
also public laws, which either a good prince has legally enacted, or a
people neither oppressed by tyranny, nor circumvented by fraud, has
sanctioned by common consent for the apportionment of the conveniences of
life; that is, the material of pleasure. Within the limits of these laws,
it is common prudence to look after your own interests; it is a matter of
duty to have regard for the public weal also. But to attempt to deprive
another of pleasure in favouring your own, is to do a real injury. On the
other hand, to deprive yourself of something in order that you may give it
to another, that is indeed an act of humanity and kindness which in itself
never costs so much as it brings back. For it is not only repaid by the
interchange of kindnesses; but also the very consciousness of a good
action done and the recollection of the love and gratitude of those whom
you have benefited, afford more pleasure to the mind, than the thing from
which you have abstained would have afforded to the body. And, lastly, God
repays the loss of these small and fleeting pleasures with vast and
endless joy; a doctrine of the truth of which religion easily convinces a
believing mind.
‘Thus, on these grounds, they determine that, all things being carefully
weighed and considered, all our actions, and our very virtues among them,
regard pleasure and happiness after all as their object.’--_Utopia_, 1st
ed. Leaf h, ii. _et seq._
[566] J. S. Mill’s _Essay on Utilitarianism_, p. 24.
[567] _Utopia_ 1st ed. Leaf i, i.
[568] Leaf i, ii.
[569] Leaf i, iii.
[570] Leaf h, ii.
[571] Leaves h, i. and ii.
[572] Leaf l, iv.
[573] Ibid.
[574] Leaf m, ii.
[575] Leaf m, i.
[576] Leaf l, iii.
[577] Leaf m, iii.
[578] It is impossible not to see in this a ritualism rather of the
_Dionysian_ than of the modern sacerdotal type.
[579] _Utopia_, 1st ed. ‘De Religionibus Vtopiensium.’
[580] Epist. clxvii. Eras. _Op._ iii. p. 144, A.
[581] Erasmus to Savage: Epist. clxxvi. June 1, 1516. Brewer, 1976.
[582] ‘There is certainly a steadiness of moral principle and Christian
endurance, which tells us that it is better not to exist at all than to
exist at the price of virtue; but few indeed of the countrymen and
contemporaries of Machiavel had any claim to the practice, whatever they
might have to the profession, of such integrity. _His crime in the eyes of
the world, and it was truly a crime, was to have cast away the veil of
hypocrisy, the profession of a religious adherence to maxims which at the
same moment were violated._’--Hallam’s _Literature of the Middle Ages_,
chap. vii. s. 31.
[583] ‘Whatever may be thought of the long-disputed question as to
Machiavelli’s motives in writing, his work certainly presents to us a
gloomy picture of the state of public law and European society in the
beginning of the sixteenth century: one mass of dissimulation, crime, and
corruption, which called loudly for a great teacher and reformer to arise,
who should speak the unambiguous language of truth and justice to princes
and people, and stay the ravages of this moral pestilence.
‘Such a teacher and reformer was _Hugo Grotius_, who was born in the
latter part of the same century and flourished in the beginning of the
seventeenth.... He was one of those powerful minds which have paid the
tribute of their assent to the truth of Christianity.’--Wheaton’s
_Elements of International Law_: London, 1836, pp. 18, 19.
[584] 1st ed. leaf c, i.
[585] 1st ed. leaf d, ii. Eras. _Op._ iv. p. 567.
[586] 1st ed. leaf d, iii. Eras. _Op._ iv. p. 567.
[587] Leaf d, iii.
[588] 1st ed. leaf f, ii. Eras. _Op._ iv. p. 574.
[589] ‘Monarchia temperata,’ in the marginal reading.
[590] Abridged quotation, 1st ed. leaf f, iv. Eras. _Op._ iv. p. 576.
[591] _Ibid._
[592] 1st ed. leaf g, iii. Eras. _Op._ iv. p. 579.
[593] Leaf l, i.
[594] 1st. ed. leaf l, i. Eras. _Op._ iv. pp. 593, 594.
[595] _Ibid._ Charles the Bold was the prince alluded to.
[596] Eras. _Op._ iv. p. 595, _et seq._
[597] 1st ed. leaf l, iv.
[598] Leaf m, i.
[599] Eras. _Op._ iv. 603.
[600] 1st ed. leaf o, i. Eras. _Op._ iv. pp. 607 _et seq._
[601] 1st ed. leaf o, iii.
[602] On August 5 he seems to have been in London, and to have written a
letter from thence to Leo X. Eras. Epist. clxxxi. Brewer, ii. 2257.
On August 17 he writes from Rochester to Ammonius, that he is spending ten
days there. Eras. Epist. cxlvi. Brewer, ii. 2283. And again on August 22.
Eras. Epist. cxlvii. Brewer, ii. 2290. On the 31st he writes to Boville
from the same place. Eras. Epist. cxlviii. Brewer, ii. 2321.
[603] Erasmus to Ammonius: Epist. cxxxiii. Brewer, ii. 2323, without date.
[604] Eras. Epist. lxxxvii. App. and ccxviii. Brewer, ii. 2409.
[605] Erasmus Ægidio: Epist. cccxlv. November 18, 1518. The mention of St.
Jerome as not yet finished (see Epist. ccxviii.; Brewer, 2409), fixes the
date 1516. Brewer, ii. 2558.
[606] Letter from More to Peter Giles, prefixed to ‘Utopia.’
[607] Roper, pp. 9, 10. Eras. _Op._ iii. pp. 474, 476.
[608] More to Erasmus: Eras. Epist. ccxxvii.
[609] Roper, 10.
[610] Erasmus to Hutten: Epist. ccccxlvii. Eras. _Op._ iii. p. 476, B.
[611] Leaf b, 4.
[612] Leaves b, iv to c, ii. These extracts are somewhat abridged and
condensed.
[613] Leaves d, ii. _et seq._ These extracts are somewhat abridged and
condensed.
[614] Eras. Epist. App. xliv. (Brewer, ii. 2748), in which Lord Mountjoy
acknowledges the receipt of a copy sent by Erasmus, dated Jan. 4, 1516;
i.e. 1517 in modern reckoning.
[615] The extracts from the Utopia, translations of which are given in
this chapter, have in all cases been taken from the first edition
(Louvain, 1516), but very few alterations were made in subsequent
editions. The first edition was published in Dec. 1516. I am indebted to
Mr. Lupton for the suggestion that the publication of some letters of
Vespucci at Florence, in 1516, may have suggested More’s use of that
voyager’s name in his introductory book.
Erasmus, writing from Antwerp to More, March 1 [1517], says: ‘Utopiam tuam
recognitam, huc quam primum mittito, et nos exemplar, aut Basilium
mittemus aut Lutetiam.’--Epist. ccviii.
Erasmus sent it to Froben of Basle, by whom a corrected edition was
published in March, 1518, and another in November of the same year. See
Appendix F.
[616] Eras. Epist. cclvi. Brewer, ii. 2000; from St. Omer; and see ccxxv.
Brewer, ii. 1976.
[617] Epist. clviii. Erasmus to Ammonius: June 5, 1514; in error for 1516.
[618] More to Erasmus: Eras. Epist. lii. App. London, Feb. 25, 1516.
[619] Eras. Epist. lxxxiv. App. Brewer, ii. 2941, dated ‘in die sancti
Edwardi, in festo _suæ_ [? secundæ] translationis, sive 13 Octobris,
1516.’ Probably ‘_second_ translation of St. Edward,’ on June 20, 1516.
The words ‘sive 13 Oct.’ are not found in the copy of this letter in
_Aliquot Epistolæ, &c._ (Basle, 1518, pp. 249, 252), nor in the ed. of
1640. The earlier date seems to harmonise more with the contents of the
letter than the later date.
[620] Eras. Epist. lxxxvii. App. Brewer, ii. 2492.
[621] Eras. Epist. Waramus Erasmo, cclxi. _Aliquot Epistolæ, &c._ Basle,
1518, p. 231.
[622] Eras. Epist. ccxxi. App.
[623] Thomæ Mori ad Monachum Epistola: _Epistolæ aliquot Eruditorum
Virorum_. Basle, 1520, p. 122.
[624] Erasmus to Boville, from the Bishop’s palace at Rochester, pridie
calendas Septembris. _Aliquot Epistolæ, &c._ Basle, 1518, pp. 234-246.
Eras. Epist. cxlviii. Brewer, ii. 2321. The above is only an abstract of
this letter, and some of the quotations are abridged.
[625] More to Erasmus: Epist. lxxxvii. App. dated Oct. 31, 1516.
[626] Erasmus to Ammonius, from Brussels, December 29, 1516. Brewer, ii.
2709.
[627] Epist. cclvi. June 1517; should be 1516. Brewer, ii. 2000.
[628] Bearing date, Tubingen, Aug. 21, 1516. Eras. _Op._ iii. p. 1595. It
was first printed probably at the back of the titlepage of ‘_Epigrammata
Des. Erasmi Roterodami_.’ Basle, March 1518.
[629] Œcolampadius Erasmo: Eras. Epist. ccxxxviii.; also cxix. App. and
ccccxi.
[630] Spalatinus Erasmo: Eras. Epist. xciv. App.
[631] Luther’s _Briefe_. De Wette, i. 40, No. xxii.
[632] Philippi Melanchthonis _Vita Martini Lutheri_, chap. v. ‘Vita ejus
monastica.’
[633] Philippi Melanchthonis _Vita Martini Lutheri_, chap. vi. vii.
[634] Ranke refers to the period before 1516. See _Hist. of Reformation_,
vol. i. bk. ii. ch. i.
[635] _Novum Instrumentum_, folio, 433.
[636] Luther to Spalatin: Luther’s _Briefe_. De Wette, No. xxii.
[637] Luther an Joh. Lange: De Wette, No. xxix. p. 52.
[638] More to Erasmus: Epist. lxxxvii. App. Eras. _Op._ iii. p. 1575, A
and B.
[639] Vol. i. Epist. 2.
[640] Vol. i. App. 1.
[641] Vol. ii. Ep. 9.
[642] Vol. ii. Ep. 49.
[643] Ibid. Ep. 68.
[644] One of the best and most valuable essays on the _Epistolæ Obscurorum
Virorum_ will be found in No. cv. of the _Edinburgh Review_, March 1831.
[645] Ranke’s _History of the Reformation_, bk. ii. chap. 1.
[646] Epist. cxxxiii. App.
[647] Ibid. ccccxxviii. App.
[648] Ibid. ccxlvi. App.
[649] ‘Sed, meo judicio, nulla via assequemur, quam ardenti amore et
imitatione Jesu. Quare relictis ambagibus, ad brevitatem brevi compendio
eamus: ego pro viribus volo.’ These sentences remind one of the
conversation between Tauler and Nicholas of Basle, in the beautiful story
of the _Master and the Man_, where the master says, ‘Verum est, charissime
fili, quod ais. Adhuc enim durior mihi videtur esse hic sermo tuus.’ And
the layman replies, ‘Et tamen ipse me rogasti, Domine Magister, ut
compendiosissimum ad supremam hujus vitæ perfectionem iter tibi
demonstrarem. Et certe securiorem ego, quàm sit ista, viam ad imitandum
exemplar sacratissimæ humanitatis Christi nullam novi.’ _Thauleri Opera_,
p. 16. Paris. 1623.
[650] Foxe, ed. 1597, p. 887.
[651] Thomæ Mori ad Monachum Epistola. _Epistolæ aliquot Eruditorum
Virorum_: Basle, 1520, pp. 128, 129. The letter does not state exactly the
date of this singular occurrence.
[652] _On the Romans_: Louvain, 1517, at the press of Martins.
[653] Erasmus to Cope, ccv. Brewer, ii. p. 2962. See also cciii. and cciv.
and Erasmus to Henry VIII. cclxviii.
[654] Erasmus to Cardinal Grymanus, prefixed to the _Paraphrases on the
Romans_. Dated, Id. Nov. 1517.
[655] Mountjoy to Wolsey: Brewer, ii. p. 1259; and Bishop of Worcester to
Wolsey: ibid. No. 4179. Ranke’s _Hist. of the Reformation_, bk. ii. chap.
1.
[656] One early edition, without date, has in the margin, ‘Fictæ
pontificum condonationes vel indulgentiæ;’ and Lystrius, in his note on
this passage, says, ‘Has vulgo vocant indulgentias.’ The marginal note in
the Argent. edition of 1511 reads, ‘indulgentias taxat.’
[657] Basle, ed. 1519, p. 141.
[658] Eras. Epist. cclxiv. Aug. 29, 1517.
[659] Bishop of Worcester to Wolsey: Brewer, ii. p. 4179.
[660] Papers relating to the Convocation: Brewer, ii. p. 1312.
[661] Ranke’s _History of the Reformation_, London, 1845, i. p. 333.
Brewer, ii. p. 3160 and 3688.
[662] Brewer, ii. p. 3818, and preface, ccv.
[663] Ranke, p. 332.
[664] Ibid. p. 333.
[665] Ibid. p. 350.
[666] Ibid. p. 356.
[667] Erasmus to Beatus Rhenanus: Epist. clxiv. App. Brewer, ii. p. 3614.
Ranke, p. 378.
[668] Ranke, pp. 239 and 379.
[669] Ibid. p. 359.
[670] Ranke, p. 239.
[671] Ibid. p. 241.
[672] Erasmus to Fisher: cccvi. App. Brewer, ii. p. 3989.
[673] Eras. Epist. App. cccv. Brewer, ii. p. 3992.
[674] Eras. Epist. App. cclxix.
[675] Epist. App. cclxv. Brewer, ii. p. 3991.
[676] Ægidius to Erasmus: Epist. ccccxxxvi. Brewer, ii. p. 4238.
[677] See Brewer’s preface to vol. ii. pp. cxlvii-clvii.
[678] See Brewer, ii. cxlii-clxi (preface).
[679] Roper, p. 11.
[680] Roper, p. 48.
[681] Epist. cclxviii.
[682] Epist. App. cccxi. and cclxxxii. Brewer, ii. p. 4111.
[683] Erasmus to Henry VIII.: Brewer, iii. No. 226.
[684] March 13, 1518. Eras. Epist. App. cclxxiv. Brewer, ii. p. 4005.
[685] Epist. ccxlvii. Brewer, ii. p. 4138. Eras. Epist. Basle, 1521, p.
217.
[686] Eras. Epist. App. cclxxxiv.-v.
[687] Ibid. App. cccv.
[688] Eras. _Op._ iii. 401 E.
[689] Eras. Epist. ccciii. first printed in _Auctarium selectarum
Epistolarum Erasmi, &c._ Basle, 1518, p. 39.
[690] Luther’s _Briefe_. De Wette. Epist. No. xxxvii.
[691] Eras. Epist. ccciii.
[692] Epist. ccclxxvi. dated May 15, 1518, and first printed at p. 45 of
the _Auctarium selectarum Epistolarum, &c._ Basle, 1518.
[693] Erasmus to More, App. cclxxxv. Brewer, ii. p. 4204; and in App.
cclxxxiv. Ibid. ii. p. 4203.
[694] Brewer, ii. p. 3991. Eras. Epist. App. cclxv.
[695] _Lucubrationum Erasmi Index_: Frobenius, Basle, 1519.
[696] Epist. cclxv. App. Brewer, ii. p. 3991. Dated March 5, 1518.
[697] Eras. Epist. App. cccxi. Brewer, ii. p. 4110.
[698] _Adagia_: Basle, 1520-21, p. 494. I have not seen the edition of
1517, but it is mentioned in _Lucubrationum Erasmi Index_; Basle, 1519.
[699] _Auctarium selectarum aliquot Epistolarum Erasmi_, &c.: Basle, with
preface by Beatus Rhenanus, dated xi. Calendas Septembris, 1518, and
‘_Aliquot Epistolæ sane quam elegantes Erasmi Roterodami, et ad hunc
aliorum eruditissimorum hominum_.’ Basle, Jan. 1518. The latter includes
Colet’s letter to Erasmus on the _Novum Instrumentum_. An edition,
containing some of the letters of Erasmus and others, had also been
printed by Martins at Louvain in April, 1517.
[700] English translation. London: Jno. Byddell, 1522.
[701] ‘Cur sic arctamus Christi professionem quam ille latissime voluit
patere?’
[702] These passages are condensed in the translation.
[703] Erasmus to Laurinus: Epist. ccclvi. See Jortin, i. 140.
[704] The Epistle at the beginning from Leo X. to Erasmus, bears date
Sept. 1518. March 1519 is the date printed at the end.
[705] _Novum Testamentum_, 2nd ed. p. 266.
[706] _Novum Testamentum_, pp. 209, 93, 82, 83.
[707] _Novum Testamentum_, 2nd ed. pp. 19, 20.
[708] _Novum Testamentum_, 2nd ed. pp. 28, 29.
[709] _Novum Testamentum_, 2nd ed. pp. 34, 35.
[710] _Ibid._ p. 32.
[711] _Novum Testamentum_, 2nd ed. p. 32. These passages are abridged in
the translation.
[712] _Novum Testamentum_, 2nd ed. pp. 35, 36.
[713] _Novum Testamentum_, 2nd ed. p. 42.
[714] _Ibid._ p. 61.
[715] When, after the 3rd edition had been published and a 4th was in
preparation, in 1526, a Doctor of the Sorbonne attacked the New Testament
of Erasmus, he was able triumphantly to ask him, ‘what he wanted?’ His New
Testament had already been ‘scattered abroad by the printers in thousands
of copies over and over again.’ His critic ‘_should have written in
time_!’--Erasmus to the Faculty of Paris. Jortin, ii. App. No. xlix. p.
492.
[716] Eras. _Op._ iii. pp. 374, 375.
[717] Eras. _Op._ iii. p. 432, D and E.
[718] Eras. Epist. ccclvii.
[719] Eras. _Op._ iii. 1490, D. Brewer, ii. Nos. 3670, 3671, dated Sept.
1517.
[720] Brewer, preface, ccxi.
[721] Jortin’s _Life of Erasmus_, App. p. 662-667.
[722] Eras. _Op._ iii. p. 408, b.
[723] Eras. _Op._ iii. p. 408.
[724] _Four Years at the Court of Henry VIII._ ii. p. 127.
[725] Eras. _Op._ iii. p. 457, E. See also Mr. Lupton’s _Introduction_ to
his edition of _Dean Colet on the Sacraments of the Church_, pp. 19 and
26.
[726] Eras. _Op._ iii. p. 457, E.
[727] _Ibid._ p. 459, A and B.
[728] William Lilly was married and had several children. The sur-master,
John Rightwyse, married his daughter. Mr. Lupton informs me, that in vol.
iv. of Stow’s _Historical Collections_ (Harleian, No. 450), fol. 58 _b_,
is a Latin epitaph, in ten lines, by Lilly on his wife. Her name is spelt
‘Hagnes,’ and (if the reading be correct) they appear to have had fifteen
children.
[729] Knight’s _Life of Colet_. _Miscellanies_, No. v.
[730] The original of this book with Colet’s signature is still preserved
at the Mercers’ Hall.
[731] Knight, p. 227. He drew up a body of statutes, which, however, were
never accepted by the chapter.--Milman’s _Annals of St. Paul’s_, p. 124.
[732] Eras. _Op._ iii. p. 460, A.
[733] _Ibid._ p. 445, B.
[734] _Ibid._ p. 751, E.
[735] Strausz. Leipzig, 1858, vol. i. p. 123.
[736] _Epistolæ aliquot Eruditorum, &c._ Appended to _Apologia Erasmi,
&c._ Basil 1520, pp. 139, 140.
[737] This letter possibly may not have reached England before Colet’s
death; but it is most likely that the date is wrong, as so often is the
case with these letters--the year not being often added by the writer
himself at the time, but by some copyist subsequently.
[738] ‘Epistola clarissimi viri Thomæ Mori, qua refellit rabiosam
maledicentiam monachi cujusdam juxta indocti atque arrogantis.’--_Epistolæ
aliquot Eruditorum Virorum, &c._ Basileæ, M.DXX. pp. 92-138. Also Jortin’s
_Life of Erasmus_, Appendix.
[739] ‘Nisi quod Lutherus fertur Augustini doctrinam mordicus tenens
antiquatam sententiam rursus instaurare.’--p. 99.
[740] For the above particulars see Ranke’s _History of the Reformation_,
bk. ii. c. iii.
[741] _Melanchthonis Epistolæ_: Bretschneider, i. p. 63, and p. 66.
[742] March 1519, Bretschneider, i. p. 75.
[743] Erasmus to Œcolampadius, 1518, Epist. cccliv.
[744] Dated January 5, from Wittemberg. Bretschneider, i. p. 59.
[745] Epist. ccccxi.
[746] Luther’s _Briefe_. De Wette, vol. i. Epist. cxxx. p. 249.
[747] Louvain, May 30, 1519. Eras. Epist. ccccxxvii.
[748] Eras. _Op._ iii. p. 444, E and F.
[749] Epist. cccxvii. May 8, 1519.
[750] Epist. ccccxiii. Ap. 23, 1519.
[751] Eras. Epist. Laurentio: Louvain, Feb. 1519, prefixed to the Basle
edition of the Five Epistles, 1520.
[752] _Apologia pro Declamatione de Laude Matrimonii_: Basil. 1519.
[753] Colet seems even to have retired from the office of preacher before
the King on Good Friday, which he had filled in 1510, 1511, 1512, 1513,
1515, 1516, and 1517. Brewer, ii. pp. 1445-1474. In 1518 the sermon was
preached by the Dean of Sarum, p. 1477.
[754] Epist. cccclxxiv. Erasmus to Fisher: Louvain, Oct. 17, 1519.
[755] Ranke, bk. ii. c. iii. De Wette, i. No. ccviii. p. 425. That Luther
had found a point of unison between himself and the Hussites, not only in
their common opposition to Papal authority, but also in their common
adoption of the severest views of St. Augustine, see ‘_Assertio omnium
articulorum M. Lutheri per Bullam Leonis X. novissimam damnatorum_.’ Mense
Martio M.DXXI. Leaves Kk, ii. and iii. ‘Habes, miserande Papa, quid hic
oggannias. Unde et hunc articulum necesse est revocare, male enim dixi
quod liberum arbitrium ante gratiam sit res de solo titulo, sed
simpliciter debui dicere, lib. arb. est figmentum in rebus, seu titulus
sine re. Quia nulli est in manu sua quippiam cogitare mali aut boni, sed
omnia (ut Viglephi articulus _Constantiæ_ damnatus recte docet) de
necessitate absoluta eveniunt.’ These articles were condemned as a part of
the heresy of John Huss, of whom Luther in the same treatise had
said:--‘Et in faciem tuam sanctissime Vicarie Dei, tibi libere dico, omnia
damnata Joannis Huss esse evangelica et Christiana,’ &c. (_Ibid._ leaf Hh,
iii.)
[756] See Epist. ccccxii. Louvain, April 23, 1519.
[757] _History of the Protestant Church of the United Brethren._ By the
Rev. John Holmes. London, 1825, vol. i. chaps. i. and ii.
[758] This middle party were called ‘Calixtines.’ See introduction to
Holmes’s _History_, vol. i. p. 21, where the facts mentioned in this
letter are detailed, very much in accordance with Schlechta’s account.
[759] John Zisca was a Hussite. He died in 1424, nine years after the
death of Huss, and on his monument was inscribed, ‘_Here lies John Zisca,
who having defended his country against the encroachments of Papal
tyranny, rests in this hallowed place in spite of the Pope_.’--Ibid. p.
20.
[760] Epist. cccclxiii. Dated Oct. 10, 1519.
[761] Epist. cccclxxviii. Dated Nov. 1, 1519. The letter is a long one,
and these quotations are somewhat abridged in translation.
[762] Luther replied:--‘Absint a nobis Christianis Sceptici.... Nihil apud
Christianos notius et celebratius, quam assertio. Tolle assertiones et
Christianissimum tulisti.... Spiritus Sanctus non est scepticus, nec dubia
aut opiniones in cordibus nostris scripsit, sed assertiones, ipsa vita, et
omni experientia, certiores et firmiores.’--_De Servo Arbitrio_ Mar.
Lutheri. Wittembergæ, 1526, pp. 7-12.
[763] ‘Ideo alteram est judicium externum, quo non modo pro nobis ipsis,
sed et pro aliis et propter aliorum salutem, certissime judicamus spiritus
et dogmata omnium. Hoc judicium est publici ministerii in verbo et officii
externi, et maxime pertinet ad duces et præcones verbi &c.’--_De Servo
Arbitrio_ Mar. Lutheri. Wittembergæ, 1526, p. 82.
[764] See Mozley’s _Augustinian Doctrine of Predestination_. Chap. x.
_Scholastic Doctrine of Predestination._ And see the particular instance
there given on the subject of infants dying in original sin, p. 307.
‘Being by nature reprobate, and not being included within the remedial
decree of predestination, they were ... [according to the pure Augustinian
doctrine] ... subject to the sentence of eternal punishment.... The
Augustinian schoolman [Aquinas] could not expressly contradict this
position, but what he could not contradict he could explain. Augustine had
laid down that the punishment of such children was the mildest of all
punishment in hell.’... Aquinas ‘laid down the further hypothesis, that
this punishment was not pain of body or mind, but _want of the Divine
vision_.’
[765] Epist. ccccxlvii.
[766] See note on the date, More’s birth, Appendix C.
[767] Eras. _Op._ iii. p. 475, E.
[768] _Ibid._ C and D. One is tempted to think that More intended to
describe his first wife in the epigram, ‘Ad Candidum qualis uxor
deligenda,’ very freely translated into English verse by Archdeacon
Wrangham as follows:--
Far from her lips’ soft door
Be noise or silence stern,
And hers be learning’s store,
Or hers the power to learn.
With books she’ll time beguile,
And make true bliss her own,
Unbuoyed by Fortune’s smile,
Unbroken by her frown.
So still thy heart’s delight,
And partner of thy way,
She’ll guide thy children right,
When myriads go astray.
So left all meaner things,
Thou’lt on her breast recline,
While to her lyre she sings
Strains, Philomel, like thine;
While still thy raptured gaze
Is on her accents hung,
As words of honied grace
Steal from her honied tongue.
Quoted from _Philomorus_, p. 42.
[769] More’s English _Works_, p. 1420.
[770] Eras. _Op._ iii. p. 475, D and E.
[771] Eras. _Op._ iii. p. 476, D, &c.
[772] _Ibid._ p. 474, B.
[773] _Ibid._ p. 474, E.
[774] _Ibid._ p. 477, B.
[775] _Ibid._ p. 474, E and F.
[776] Colloquy entitled _Amicitia_.
[777] Stapleton’s _Tres Thomæ_, p. 257.
[778] Eras. _Op._ i. p. 511, E.
[779] _Mori Epigrammata_: Basle, 1520, p. 110. The first edition was
printed at Basle along with the _Utopia_ in 1518, and does not contain
these verses.
[780] Mackintosh’s _Life of Sir Thomas More_, p. 73, quoting ‘City
Records.’
[781] Roper, p. 12.
[782] Ellis, _Original Letters_, 3rd series, letter lxxx.
[783] Epist. cccclxvii.
[784] Ibid. cccclxx.
[785] Epist. cccclxxi.
[786] Ibid. cccclxxiv.
[787] Eras. _Op._ iii. Epist. cccclxxxi., and _Epistolæ aliquot Eruditorum
Virorum_: Basil. 1520, p. 46.
[788] Ibid. p. 122. ‘Coletum nomino, quo uno viro neque doctior neque
sanctior apud nos aliquot retro seculis quisque fuit.’
[789] Ashmolean MSS. Oxford 77-141 a. I have to thank Mr. Coxe for the
following copy of the inscription: ‘Joannes Coletus, Henrici Coleti iterum
prætoris Londini filius, et hujus templi decanus, magno totius populi
mœrore, cui, ob vitæ integritatem et divinum concionandi munus, omnium sui
temporis fuit chariss., decessit anno a Christo nato 1519 et inclyti regis
Henrici Octavi 11, mensis Septembris 16. Is in cœmeterio Scholam condidit
ac magistris perpetua stipendia contulit.’
[790] Luther in his famous speech at the Diet, after alluding to his
doctrinal and devotional works, and offering to retract whatever in them
was contrary to Scripture, emphatically refused to retract what he had
written against the Papacy, on the ground that were he to do so, it would
be ‘like throwing both doors and windows right open’ to Rome to the injury
of the German nation. And in his German speech he added an exclamation,
most characteristic, at the very idea of the absurdity of its being
thought possible, that he could retract anything on this point:--‘Good
God, what a great cloak of wickedness and tyranny should I be!’ See
Förstermann’s _Urkundenbuch zur Geschichte der evangelischen
Kirchen-Reformation_, vol. i. p. 70: Hamburg, 1842.
[791] I am mainly indebted to Mr. Lupton for this list.
Transcriber’s Notes:
Passages in italics are indicated by _italics_.
Superscripted characters are indicated by {superscript}.
End of Project Gutenberg's The Oxford Reformers, by Frederic Seebohm