Whether the translation be by Richard Taverner, the translat

Produced by Bryan Ness and the Online Distributed

Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net (This book was

produced from scanned images of public domain material

from the Google Print project.)

THE HUMANISTS' LIBRARY

Edited by Lewis Einstein

II

ERASMUS

AGAINST WAR

ERASMUS

AGAINST WAR

[Illustration]

WITH AN INTRODUCTION BY

J.W.MACKAIL

THE MERRYMOUNT PRESS

BOSTON, MDCCCCVII

Copyright, 1907, by D. B. Updike

CONTENTS

Introduction ix

Against War 3

INTRODUCTION

The Treatise on War, of which the earliest English translation is here

reprinted, was among the most famous writings of the most illustrious

writer of his age. Few people now read Erasmus; he has become for the

world in general a somewhat vague name. Only by some effort of the

historical imagination is it possible for those who are not professed

scholars and students to realize the enormous force which he was at a

critical period in the history of civilization. The free institutions and

the material progress of the modern world have alike their roots in

humanism. Humanism as a movement of the human mind culminated in the age,

and even in a sense in the person, of Erasmus. Its brilliant flower was of

an earlier period; its fruits developed and matured later; but it was in

his time, and in him, that the fruit set! The earlier sixteenth century is

not so romantic as its predecessors, nor so rich in solid achievement as

others that have followed it. As in some orchard when spring is over, the

blossom lies withered on the grass, and the fruit has long to wait before

it can ripen on the boughs. Yet here, in the dull, hot midsummer days, is

the central and critical period of the year's growth.

The life of Erasmus is accessible in many popular forms as well as in more

learned and formal works. To recapitulate it here would fall beyond the

scope of a preface. But in order to appreciate this treatise fully it is

necessary to realize the time and circumstances in which it appeared, and

to recall some of the main features of its author's life and work up to

the date of its composition.

That date can be fixed with certainty, from a combination of external and

internal evidence, between the years 1513 and 1515; in all probability it

was the winter of 1514-15. It was printed in the latter year, in the

"editio princeps" of the enlarged and rewritten Adagia then issued from

Froben's great printing-works at Basel. The stormy decennate of Pope

Julius II had ended in February, 1513. To his successor, Giovanni de'

Medici, who succeeded to the papal throne under the name of Leo X, the

treatise is particularly addressed. The years which ensued were a time

singularly momentous in the history of religion, of letters, and of the

whole life of the civilized world. The eulogy of Leo with which Erasmus

ends indicates the hopes then entertained of a new Augustan age of peace

and reconciliation. The Reformation was still capable of being regarded as

an internal and constructive force, within the framework of the society

built up by the Middle Ages. The final divorce between humanism and the

Church had not yet been made. The long and disastrous epoch of the wars of

religion was still only a dark cloud on the horizon. The Renaissance was

really dead, but few yet realized the fact. The new head of the Church was

a lover of peace, a friend of scholars, a munificent patron of the arts.

This treatise shows that Erasmus, to a certain extent, shared or strove to

share in an illusion widely spread among the educated classes of Europe.

With a far keener instinct for that which the souls of men required, an

Augustinian monk from Wittenberg, who had visited Rome two years earlier,

had turned away from the temple where a corpse lay swathed in gold and

half hid in the steam of incense. With a far keener insight into the real

state of things, Machiavelli was, at just this time, composing The Prince.

In one form or another, the subject of his impassioned pleading for peace

among beings human, civilized, and Christian, had been long in Erasmus's

mind. In his most celebrated single work, the Praise of Folly, he had

bitterly attacked the attitude towards war habitual, and evilly

consecrated by usage, among kings and popes. The same argument had formed

the substance of a document addressed by him, under the title of

Anti-Polemus, to Pope Julius in 1507. Much of the substance, much even of

the phraseology of that earlier work is doubtless repeated here. Beyond

the specific reference to Pope Leo, the other notes of time in the

treatise now before us are few and faint. Allusions to Louis XII of France

(1498-1515), to Ferdinand the Catholic (1479-1516), to Philip, king of

Aragon (1504-1516), and Sigismund, king of Poland (1506-1548), are all

consistent with the composition of the treatise some years earlier. At the

end of it he promises to treat of the matter more largely when he

publishes the Anti-Polemus. But this intention was never carried into

effect. Perhaps Erasmus had become convinced of its futility; for the

events of the years which followed soon showed that the new Augustan age

was but a false dawn over which night settled more stormily and profoundly

than before.

For ten or a dozen years Erasmus had stood at the head of European

scholarship. His name was as famous in France and England as in the Low

Countries and Germany. The age was indeed one of those in which the

much-abused term of the republic of letters had a real and vital meaning.

The nationalities of modern Europe had already formed themselves; the

notion of the Empire had become obsolete, and if the imperial title was

still coveted by princes, it was under no illusion as to the amount of

effective supremacy which it carried with it, or as to any life yet

remaining in the mediaeval doctrine of the unity of Christendom whether as

a church or as a state. The discovery of the new world near the end of

the previous century precipitated a revolution in European politics

towards which events had long been moving, and finally broke up the

political framework of the Middle Ages. But the other great event of the

same period, the invention and diffusion of the art of printing, had

created a new European commonwealth of the mind. The history of the

century which followed it is a history in which the landmarks are found

less in battles and treaties than in books.

The earlier life of the man who occupies the central place in the literary

and spiritual movement of his time in no important way differs from the

youth of many contemporary scholars and writers. Even the illegitimacy of

his birth was an accident shared with so many others that it does not mark

him out in any way from his fellows. His early education at Utrecht, at

Deventer, at Herzogenbosch; his enforced and unhappy novitiate in a house

of Augustinian canons near Gouda; his secretaryship to the bishop of

Cambray, the grudging patron who allowed rather than assisted him to

complete his training at the University of Paris--all this was at the time

mere matter of common form. It is with his arrival in England in 1497, at

the age of thirty-one, that his effective life really begins.

For the next twenty years that life was one of restless movement and

incessant production. In England, France, the Low Countries, on the upper

Rhine, and in Italy, he flitted about gathering up the whole intellectual

movement of the age, and pouring forth the results in that admirable Latin

which was not only the common language of scholars in every country, but

the single language in which he himself thought instinctively and wrote

freely. Between the Adagia of 1500 and the Colloquia of 1516 comes a mass

of writings equivalent to the total product of many fertile and

industrious pens. He worked in the cause of humanism with a sacred fury,

striving with all his might to connect it with all that was living in the

old and all that was developing in the newer world. In his travels no less

than in his studies the aspect of war must have perpetually met him as at

once the cause and the effect of barbarism; it was the symbol of

everything to which humanism in its broader as well as in its narrower

aspect was utterly opposed and repugnant. He was a student at Paris in the

ominous year of the first French invasion of Italy, in which the death of

Pico della Mirandola and Politian came like a symbol of the death of the

Italian Renaissance itself. Charles VIII, as has often been said, brought

back the Renaissance to France from that expedition; but he brought her

back a captive chained to the wheels of his cannon. The epoch of the

Italian wars began. A little later (1500) Sandro Botticelli painted that

amazing Nativity which is one of the chief treasures of the London

National Gallery. Over it in mystical Greek may still be read the

painter's own words: "This picture was painted by me Alexander amid the

confusions of Italy at the time prophesied in the Second Woe of the

Apocalypse, when Satan shall be loosed upon the earth." In November, 1506,

Erasmus was at Bologna, and saw the triumphal entry of Pope Julius into

the city at the head of a great mercenary army. Two years later the league

of Cambray, a combination of folly, treachery and shame which filled even

hardened politicians with horror, plunged half Europe into a war in which

no one was a gainer and which finally ruined Italy: "bellum quo nullum,"

says the historian, "vel atrocius vel diuturnius in Italia post exactos

Gothos majores nostri meminerunt." In England Erasmus found, on his first

visit, a country exhausted by the long and desperate struggle of the Wars

of the Roses, out of which she had emerged with half her ruling class

killed in battle or on the scaffold, and the whole fabric of society to

reconstruct. The Empire was in a state of confusion and turmoil no less

deplorable and much more extensive. The Diet of 1495 had indeed, by an

expiring effort towards the suppression of absolute anarchy, decreed the

abolition of private war. But in a society where every owner of a castle,

every lord of a few square miles of territory, could conduct public war on

his own account, the prohibition was of little more than formal value.

Humanism had been introduced by the end of the fifteenth century in some

of the German universities, but too late to have much effect on the rising

fury of religious controversy. The very year in which this treatise

against war was published gave to the world another work of even wider

circulation and more profound consequences. The famous Epistolae

Obscurorum Virorum, first published in 1515, and circulated rapidly among

all the educated readers of Europe, made an open breach between the

humanists and the Church. That breach was never closed; nor on the other

hand could the efforts of well-intentioned reformers like Melancthon bring

humanism into any organic relation with the reformed movement. When mutual

exhaustion concluded the European struggle, civilization had to start

afresh; it took a century more to recover the lost ground. The very idea

of humanism had long before then disappeared.

War, pestilence, the theologians: these were the three great enemies with

which Erasmus says he had throughout life to contend. It was during the

years he spent in England that he was perhaps least harassed by them. His

three periods of residence there--a fourth, in 1517, appears to have been

of short duration and not marked by any very notable incident--were of the

utmost importance in his life. During the first, in his residence between

the years 1497 and 1499 at London and Oxford, the English Renaissance, if

the name be fully applicable to so partial and inconclusive a movement,

was in the promise and ardour of its brief spring. It was then that

Erasmus made the acquaintance of those great Englishmen whose names cannot

be mentioned with too much reverence: Colet, Grocyn, Latimer, Linacre.

These men were the makers of modern England to a degree hardly realized.

They carried the future in their hands. Peace had descended upon a weary

country; and the younger generation was full of new hopes. The Enchiridion

Militis Christiani, written soon after Erasmus returned to France,

breathes the spirit of one who had not lost hope in the reconciliation of

the Church and the world, of the old and new. When Erasmus made his second

visit to England, in 1506, that fair promise had grown and spread. Colet

had become dean of Saint Paul's; and through him, as it would appear,

Erasmus now made the acquaintance of another great man with whom he soon

formed as close an intimacy, Thomas More.

His Italian journey followed: he was in Italy nearly three years, at

Turin, Bologna, Venice, Padua, Siena, Rome. It was in the first of these

years that Albert Duerer was also in Italy, where he met Bellini and was

recognized by the Italian masters as the head of a new transalpine art in

no way inferior to their own. The year after Erasmus left Italy,

Botticelli, the last survivor of the ancient world, died at Florence.

Meanwhile, Henry VIII, a prince, young, handsome, generous, pious, had

succeeded to the throne of England. A golden age was thought to have

dawned. Lord Mountjoy, who had been the pupil of Erasmus at Paris, and

with whom he had first come to England, lost no time in urging Henry to

send for the most brilliant and famous of European scholars, and attach

him to his court. The king, who had already met and admired him, needed no

pressing. In the letter which Henry himself wrote to Erasmus entreating

him to take up his residence in England, the language employed was that of

sincere admiration; nor was there any conscious insincerity in the main

motive which he urged. "It is my earnest wish," wrote the king, "to

restore Christ's religion to its primitive purity." The history of the

English Reformation supplies a strange commentary on these words.

But the first few years of the new reign (1509-1513), which coincide with

the third and longest sojourn of Erasmus in England, were a time in which

high hopes might not seem unreasonable. While Italy was ravaged by war and

the rest of Europe was in uneasy ferment, England remained peaceful and

prosperous. The lust of the eyes and the pride of life were indeed the

motive forces of the court; but alongside of these was a real desire for

reform, and a real if very imperfect attempt to cultivate the nobler arts

of peace, to establish learning, and to purify religion. Colet's great

foundation of Saint Paul's School in 1510 is one of the landmarks of

English history. Erasmus joined the founder and the first high master,

Colet and Lily, in composing the schoolbooks to be used in it. He had

already written, in More's house at Chelsea, where pure religion reigned

alongside of high culture, the Encomium Moriae, in which all his immense

gifts of eloquence and wit were lavished on the cause of humanism and the

larger cause of humanity. That war was at once a sin, a scandal, and a

folly was one of the central doctrines of the group of eminent Englishmen

with whom he was now associated. It was a doctrine held by them with some

ambiguity and in varying degrees. In the Utopia (1516) More condemns wars

of aggression, while taking the common view as to wars of so-called

self-defence. In 1513, when Henry, swept into the seductive scheme for a

partition of France by a European confederacy, was preparing for the first

of his many useless and inglorious continental campaigns, Colet spoke out

more freely. He preached before the court against war itself as barbarous

and unchristian, and did not spare either kings or popes who dealt

otherwise. Henry was disturbed; he sent for Colet, and pressed him hard on

the point whether he meant that all wars were unjustifiable. Colet was in

advance of his age, but not so far in advance of it as this. He gave some

kind of answer which satisfied the king. The preparations for war went

forward; the Battle of Spurs plunged the court and all the nation into the

intoxication of victory; while at Flodden-edge, in the same autumn, the

ancestral allies of France sustained the most crushing defeat recorded in

Scottish history. When both sides in a war have invoked God's favour, the

successful side is ready enough to believe that its prayers have been

answered and its action accepted by God.

Erasmus was now reader in Greek and professor of divinity at Cambridge;

but Cambridge was far away from the centre of European thought and of

literary activities. He left England before the end of the year for Basel,

where the greater part of his life thenceforth was passed. Froben had made

Basel the chief literary centre of production for the whole of Europe.

Through Froben's printing-presses Erasmus could reach a wider audience

than was allowed him at any court, however favourable to pure religion and

the new learning. It was at this juncture that he made an eloquent and

far-reaching appeal, on a matter which lay very near his heart, to the

conscience of Christendom.

The Adagia, that vast work which was, at least to his own generation,

Erasmus's foremost title to fame, has long ago passed into the rank of

those monuments of literature "dont la reputation s'affermira toujours

parcequ'on ne les lit guere." So far as Erasmus is more than a name for

most modern readers, it is on slighter and more popular works that any

direct knowledge of him is grounded on the Colloquies, which only ceased

to be a schoolbook within living memory, on the Praise of Folly, and on

selections from the enormous masses of his letters. An Oxford scholar of

the last generation, whose profound knowledge of humanistic literature was

accompanied by a gift of terse and pointed expression, describes the

Adagia in a single sentence, as "a manual of the wit and wisdom of the

ancient world for the use of the modern, enlivened by commentary in

Erasmus's finest vein." In its first form, the Adagiorum Collectanea, it

was published by him at Paris in 1500, just after his return from England.

In the author's epistle dedicatory to Mountjoy he ascribes to him and to

Richard Charnock, the prior of Saint Mary's College in Oxford, the

inspiration of the work. It consists of a series of between eight and nine

hundred comments in brief essays, each suggested by some terse or

proverbial phrase from an ancient Latin author. The work gave full scope

for the display, not only of the immense treasures of his learning, but of

those other qualities, the combination of which raised their author far

above all other contemporary writers, his keen wit, his copiousness and

facility, his complete control of Latin as a living language. It met with

an enthusiastic reception, and placed him at once at the head of European

men of letters. Edition after edition poured from the press. It was ten

times reissued at Paris within a generation. Eleven editions were

published at Strasburg between 1509 and 1521. Within the same years it was

reprinted at Erfurt, The Hague, Cologne, Mayence, Leyden, and elsewhere.

The Rhine valley was the great nursery of letters north of the Alps, and

along the Rhine from source to sea the book spread and was multiplied.

This success induced Erasmus to enlarge and complete his labours. The

Adagiorum Chiliades, the title of the work in its new form, was part of

the work of his residence in Italy in the years 1506-9, and was published

at Venice by Aldus in September, 1508. The enlarged collection, to all

intents and purposes a new work, consists of no less than three thousand

two hundred and sixty heads. In a preface, Erasmus speaks slightingly of

the Adagiorum Collectanea, with that affectation from which few authors

are free, as a little collection carelessly made. "Some people got hold of

it," he adds, (and here the affectation becomes absolute untruth,) "and

had it printed very incorrectly." In the new work, however, much of the

old disappears, much more is partially or wholly recast; and such of the

old matter as is retained is dispersed at random among the new. In the

Collectanea the commentaries had all been brief: here many are expanded

into substantial treatises covering four or five pages of closely printed

folio.

The Aldine edition had been reprinted at Basel by Froben in 1513. Shortly

afterwards Erasmus himself took up his permanent residence there. Under

his immediate supervision there presently appeared what was to all intents

and purposes the definitive edition of 1515. It is a book of nearly seven

hundred folio pages, and contains, besides the introductory matter, three

thousand four hundred and eleven headings. In his preface Erasmus gives

some details with regard to its composition. Of the original Paris work he

now says, no doubt with truth, that it was undertaken by him hastily and

without enough method. When preparing the Venice edition he had better

realized the magnitude of the enterprise, and was better fitted for it by

reading and learning, more especially by the mass of Greek manuscripts,

and of newly printed Greek first editions, to which he had access at

Venice and in other parts of Italy. In England also, owing very largely to

the kindness of Archbishop Warham, more leisure and an ampler library had

been available.

Among several important additions made in the edition of 1515, this essay,

the text of which is the proverbial phrase "Dulce bellum inexpertis," is

at once the longest and the most remarkable. The adage itself, with a few

lines of commentary, had indeed been in the original collection; but the

treatise, in itself a substantial work, now appeared for the first time.

It occupied a conspicuous place as the first heading in the fourth Chiliad

of the complete work; and it was at once singled out from the rest as of

special note and profound import. Froben was soon called upon for a

separate edition. This appeared in April, 1517, in a quarto of twenty

pages. This little book, the Bellum Erasmi as it was called for the sake

of brevity, ran like wildfire from reader to reader. Half the scholarly

presses of Europe were soon employed in reprinting it. Within ten years it

had been reissued at Louvain, twice at Strasburg, twice at Mayence, at

Leipsic, twice at Paris, twice at Cologne, at Antwerp, and at Venice.

German translations of it were published at Basel and at Strasburg in 1519

and 1520. It soon made its way to England, and the translation here

utilized was issued by Berthelet, the king's printer, in the winter of

1533-4.

Whether the translation be by Richard Taverner, the translator and editor,

a few years later, of an epitome or selection of the Chiliades, or by some

other hand, there are no direct means of ascertaining; nor except for

purposes of curiosity is the question an important one. The version wholly

lacks distinction. It is a work of adequate scholarship but of no

independent literary merit. English prose was then hardly formed. The

revival of letters had reached the country, but for political and social

reasons which are readily to be found in any handbook of English history,

it had found a soil, fertile indeed, but not yet broken up. Since Chaucer,

English poetry had practically stood still, and except where poetry has

cleared the way, prose does not in ordinary circumstances advance. A few

adventurers in setting forth had appeared. More's Utopia, one of the

earliest of English prose classics, is a classic in virtue of its style as

well as of its matter. Berners's translation of Froissart, published in

1523, was the first and one of the finest of that magnificent series of

translations which from this time onwards for about a century were

produced in an almost continuous stream, and through which the secret of

prose was slowly wrung from older and more accomplished languages.

Latimer, about the same time, showed his countrymen how a vernacular

prose, flexible, well knit, and nervous, might be written without its

lines being traced on any ancient or foreign model. Coverdale, the

greatest master of English prose whom the century produced, whose name has

just missed the immortality that is secure for his work, must have

substantially completed that magnificent version of the Bible which

appeared in 1535, and to which the authorized version of the seventeenth

century owes all that one work of genius can owe to another. It is not

with these great men that the translator of this treatise can be compared.

But he wrought, after his measure, on the same structure as they.

It is then to the original Latin, not to this rude and stammering version,

that scholars must turn now, as still more certainly they turned then, for

the mind of Erasmus; for with him, even more eminently than with other

authors, the style is the man, and his Latin is the substance, not merely

the dress, of his thought. When he wrote it he was about forty-eight years

of age. He was still in the fullness of his power. If he was often

crippled by delicate health, that was no more than he had habitually been

from boyhood. In this treatise we come very near the real man, with his

strange mixture of liberalism and orthodoxy, of clear-sighted courage and

a delicacy which nearly always might be mistaken for timidity.

His text is that (in the translator's words) "nothing is either more

wicked or more wretched, nothing doth worse become a man (I will not say a

Christian man) than war." War was shocking to Erasmus alike on every side

of his remarkably complex and sensitive nature. It was impious; it was

inhuman; it was ugly; it was in every sense of the word barbarous, to one

who before all things and in the full sense of the word was civilized and

a lover of civilization. All these varied aspects of the case, seen by

others singly and partially, were to him facets of one truth, rays of one

light. His argument circles and flickers among them, hardly pausing to

enforce one before passing insensibly to another. In the splendid

vindication of the nature of man with which the treatise opens, the tone

is rather that of Cicero than of the New Testament. The majesty of man

resides above all in his capacity to "behold the very pure strength and

nature of things;" in essence he is no fallen and corrupt creature, but a

piece of workmanship such as Shakespeare describes him through the mouth

of Hamlet. He was shaped to this heroic mould "by Nature, or rather god,"

so the Tudor translation reads, and the use of capital letters, though

only a freak of the printer, brings out with a singular suggestiveness the

latent pantheism which underlies the thought of all the humanists. To this

wonderful creature strife and warfare are naturally repugnant. Not only is

his frame "weak and tender," but he is "born to love and amity." His chief

end, the object to which all his highest and most distinctively human

powers are directed, is cooperant labour in the pursuit of knowledge. War

comes out of ignorance, and into ignorance it leads; of war comes contempt

of virtue and of godly living. In the age of Machiavelli the word "virtue"

had a double and sinister meaning; but here it is taken in its nobler

sense. Yet, the argument continues, for "virtue," even in the Florentine

statesman's sense, war gives but little room. It is waged mainly for "vain

titles or childish wrath;" it does not foster, in those responsible for

it, any one of the nobler excellences. The argument throughout this part

of the treatise is, both in its substance and in its ornament, wholly

apart from the dogmas of religion. The furies of war are described as

rising out of a very pagan hell. The apostrophe of Nature to mankind

immediately suggests the spirit as well as the language of Lucretius.

Erasmus had clearly been reading the De Rerum Natura, and borrows some of

his finest touches from that miraculous description of the growth of

civilization in the fifth book, which is one of the noblest contributions

of antiquity towards a real conception of the nature of the world and of

man. The progressive degeneration of morality, because, as its scope

becomes higher, practice falls further and further short of it, is

insisted upon by both these great thinkers in much the same spirit and

with much the same illustrations. The rise of empires, "of which there was

never none yet in any nation, but it was gotten with the great shedding of

man's blood," is seen by both in the same light. But Erasmus passes on to

the more expressly religious aspect of the whole matter in the great

double climax with which he crowns his argument, the wickedness of a

Christian fighting against another man, the horror of a Christian fighting

against another Christian. "Yea, and with a thing so devilish," he breaks

out in a mingling of intense scorn and profound pity, "we mingle Christ."

From this passionate appeal he passes to the praises of peace. Why should

men add the horrors of war to all the other miseries and dangers of life?

Why should one man's gain be sought only through another's loss? All

victories in war are Cadmean; not only from their cost in blood and

treasure, but because we are in very truth "the members of one body,"

"redeemed with Christ's blood." Such was the clear, unmistakable teaching

of our Lord himself, such of his apostles. But the doctrine of Christ has

been "plied to worldly opinion." Worldly men, philosophers following "the

sophistries of Aristotle," worst of all, divines and theologians

themselves, have corrupted the Gospel to the heathenish doctrine that

"every man must first provide for himself." The very words of Scripture

are wrested to this abuse. Self-defence is held to excuse any violence.

"Peter fought," they say, "in the garden,"--yes, and that same night he

denied his Master! "But punishment of wrong is a divine ordinance." In war

the punishment falls on the innocent. "But the law of nature bids us repel

violence by violence." What is the law of Christ? "But may not a prince go

to war justly for his right?" Did any war ever lack a title? "But what of

wars against the Turk?" Such wars are of Turk against Turk; let us

overcome evil with good, let us spread the Gospel by doing what the Gospel

commands: did Christ say, Hate them that hate you?

Then, with the tact of an accomplished orator, he lets the tension relax,

and drops to a lower tone. Even apart from all that has been urged, even

if war were ever justifiable, think of the price that has to be paid for

it. On this ground alone an unjust peace is far preferable to a just war.

(These had been the very words of Colet to the king of England.) Men go to

war under fine pretexts, but really to get riches, to satisfy hatred, or

to win the poor glory of destroying. The hatred is but exasperated; the

glory is won by and for the dregs of mankind; the riches are in the most

prosperous event swallowed up ten times over. Yet if it be impossible but

war should be, if there may be sometimes a "colour of equity" in it, and

if the tyrant's plea, necessity, be ever well-founded, at least, so

Erasmus ends, let it be conducted mercifully. Let us live in fervent

desire of the peace that we may not fully attain. Let princes restrain

their peoples; let churchmen above all be peacemakers. So the treatise

passes to its conclusion with that eulogy of the Medicean pope already

mentioned, which perhaps was not wholly undeserved. To the modern world

the name of Leo X has come down marked with a note of censure or even of

ignominy. It is fair to remember that it did not bear quite the same

aspect to its contemporaries, nor to the ages which immediately followed.

Under Rodrigo Borgia it might well seem to others than to the Florentine

mystic that antichrist was enthroned, and Satan let loose upon earth. The

eight years of Leo's pontificate (1513-21) were at least a period of

outward splendour and of a refinement hitherto unknown. The corruption,

half veiled by that refinement and splendour, was deep and mortal, but the

collapse did not come till later. By comparison with the disastrous reign

of Clement VII, his bastard cousin, that of Giovanni de' Medici seemed a

last gleam of light before blackness descended on the world. Even the

licence of a dissolute age was contrasted to its favour with the gloom,

"tristitia," that settled down over Europe with the great Catholic

reaction. The age of Leo X has descended to history as the age of Bembo,

Sannazaro, Lascaris, of the Stanze of the Vatican, of Raphael's Sistine

Madonna and Titian's Assumption; of the conquest of Mexico and the

circumnavigation of Magellan; of Magdalen Tower and King's College Chapel.

It was an interval of comparative peace before a long epoch of wars more

cruel and more devastating than any within the memory of men. The general

European conflagration did not break out until ten years after Erasmus's

death; though it had then long been foreseen as inevitable. But he lived

to see the conquest of Rhodes by Soliman, the sack of Rome, the breach

between England and the papacy, the ill-omened marriage of Catherine de'

Medici to the heir of the French throne. Humanism had done all that it

could, and failed. In the sanguinary era of one hundred years between the

outbreak of the civil war in the Empire and the Peace of Westphalia, the

Renaissance followed the Middle Ages to the grave, and the modern world

was born.

The mere fact of this treatise having been translated into English and

published by the king's printer shows, in an age when the literary product

of England was as yet scanty, that it had some vogue and exercised some

influence. But only a few copies of the work are known to exist; and it

was never reprinted. It was not until nearly three centuries later, amid

the throes of an European revolution equally vast, that the work was again

presented in an English dress. Vicesimus Knox, a whig essayist, compiler,

and publicist of some reputation at the time, was the author of a book

which was published anonymously in 1794 and found some readers in a year

filled with great events in both the history and the literature of

England. It was entitled "Anti-Polemus: or the Plea of Reason, Religion,

and Humanity against War: a Fragment translated from Erasmus and addressed

to Aggressors." That was the year when the final breach took place in the

whig party, and when Pitt initiated his brief and ill-fated policy of

conciliation in Ireland. It was also the year of two works of enormous

influence over thought, Paley's Evidences and Paine's Age of Reason. Among

these great movements Knox's work had but little chance of appealing to a

wide audience. "Sed quid ad nos?" the bitter motto on the title-page,

probably expressed the feelings with which it was generally regarded. A

version of the treatise against war, made from the Latin text of the

Adagia with some omissions, is the main substance of the volume; and Knox

added a few extracts from other writings of Erasmus on the same subject.

It does not appear to have been reprinted in England, except in a

collected edition of Knox's works which may be found on the dustiest

shelves of old-fashioned libraries, until, after the close of the

Napoleonic wars, it was again published as a tract by the Society for the

Promotion of Permanent and Universal Peace. Some half dozen impressions of

this tract appeared at intervals up to the middle of the century; its

publication passed into the hands of the Society of Friends, and the last

issue of which any record can be found was made just before the outbreak

of the Crimean war. But in 1813 an abridged edition was printed at New

York, and was one of the books which influenced the great movement towards

humanity then stirring in the young Republic.

At the present day, the reactionary wave which has overspread the world

has led, both in England and America, to a new glorification of war. Peace

is on the lips of governments and of individuals, but beneath the smooth

surface the same passions, draped as they always have been under fine

names, are a menace to progress and to the higher life of mankind. The

increase of armaments, the glorification of the military life, the

fanaticism which regards organized robbery and murder as a sacred imperial

mission, are the fruits of a spirit which has fallen as far below the

standard of humanism as it has left behind it the precepts of a still

outwardly acknowledged religion. At such a time the noble pleading of

Erasmus has more than a merely literary or antiquarian interest. For the

appeal of humanism still is, as it was then, to the dignity of human

nature itself.

J. W. Mackail

AGAINST WAR

DULCE BELLUM INEXPERTIS

It is both an elegant proverb, and among all others, by the writings of

many excellent authors, full often and solemnly used, Dulce bellum

inexpertis, that is to say, War is sweet to them that know it not. There

be some things among mortal men's businesses, in the which how great

danger and hurt there is, a man cannot perceive till he make a proof. The

love and friendship of a great man is sweet to them that be not expert: he

that hath had thereof experience, is afraid. It seemeth to be a gay and a

glorious thing, to strut up and down among the nobles of the court, and to

be occupied in the king's business; but old men, to whom that thing by

long experience is well known, do gladly abstain themselves from such

felicity. It seemeth a pleasant thing to be in love with a young damsel;

but that is unto them that have not yet perceived how much grief and

bitterness is in such love. So after this manner of fashion, this proverb

may be applied to every business that is adjoined with great peril and

with many evils: the which no man will take on hand, but he that is young

and wanteth experience of things.

Aristotle, in his book of Rhetoric, showeth the cause why youth is more

bold, and contrariwise old age more fearful: for unto young men lack of

experience is cause of great boldness, and to the other, experience of

many griefs engendereth fear and doubting. Then if there be anything in

the world that should be taken in hand with fear and doubting, yea, that

ought by all manner of means to be fled, to be withstood with prayer, and

to be clean avoided, verily it is war; than which nothing is either more

wicked, or more wretched, or that more farther destroyeth, or that never

hand cleaveth sorer to, or doth more hurt, or is more horrible, and

briefly to speak, nothing doth worse become a man (I will not say a

Christian man) than war. And yet it is a wonder to speak of, how nowadays

in every place, how lightly, and how for every trifling matter, it is

taken in hand, how outrageously and barbarously it is gested and done, not

only of heathen people, but also of Christian men; not only of secular

men, but also of priests and bishops; not only of young men and of them

that have no experience, but also of old men and of those that so often

have had experience; not only of the common and movable vulgar people, but

most specially of the princes, whose duty had been, by wisdom and reason,

to set in a good order and to pacify the light and hasty movings of the

foolish multitude. Nor there lack neither lawyers, nor yet divines, the

which are ready with their firebrands to kindle these things so

abominable, and they encourage them that else were cold, and they privily

provoke those to it that were weary thereof. And by these means it is come

to that pass that war is a thing now so well accepted, that men wonder at

him that is not pleased therewith. It is so much approved, that it is

counted a wicked thing (and I had almost said heresy) to reprove this one

thing, the which as it is above all other things most mischievous, so it

is most wretched. But how more justly should this be wondered at, what

evil spirit, what pestilence, what mischief, and what madness put first in

man's mind a thing so beyond measure beastly, that this most pleasant and

reasonable creature Man, the which Nature hath brought forth to peace and

benevolence, which one alone she hath brought forth to the help and

succour of all other, should with so wild wilfulness, with so mad rages,

run headlong one to destroy another? At the which thing he shall also much

more marvel, whosoever would withdraw his mind from the opinions of the

common people, and will turn it to behold the very pure strength and

nature of things; and will apart behold with philosophical eyes the image

of man on the one side, and the picture of war on the other side.

Then first of all if one would consider well but the behaviour and shape

of man's body shall he not forthwith perceive that Nature, or rather God,

hath shaped this creature, not to war, but to friendship, not to

destruction, but to health, not to wrong, but to kindness and benevolence?

For whereas Nature hath armed all other beasts with their own armour, as

the violence of the bulls she hath armed with horns, the ramping lion with

claws; to the boar she hath given the gnashing tusks; she hath armed the

elephant with a long trump snout, besides his great huge body and hardness

of the skin; she hath fenced the crocodile with a skin as hard as a plate;

to the dolphin fish she hath given fins instead of a dart; the porcupine

she defendeth with thorns; the ray and thornback with sharp prickles; to

the cock she hath given strong spurs; some she fenceth with a shell, some

with a hard hide, as it were thick leather, or bark of a tree; some she

provideth to save by swiftness of flight, as doves; and to some she hath

given venom instead of a weapon; to some she hath given a much horrible

and ugly look, she hath given terrible eyes and grunting voice; and she

hath also set among some of them continual dissension and debate--man

alone she hath brought forth all naked, weak, tender, and without any

armour, with most soft flesh and smooth skin. There is nothing at all in

all his members that may seem to be ordained to war, or to any violence. I

will not say at this time, that where all other beasts, anon as they are

brought forth, they are able of themselves to get their food. Man alone

cometh so forth, that a long season after he is born, he dependeth

altogether on the help of others. He can neither speak nor go, nor yet

take meat; he desireth help only by his infant crying: so that a man may,

at the least way, by this conject, that this creature alone was born all

to love and amity, which specially increaseth and is fast knit together by

good turns done eftsoons of one to another. And for this cause Nature

would, that a man should not so much thank her, for the gift of life,

which she hath given unto him, as he should thank kindness and

benevolence, whereby he might evidently understand himself, that he was

altogether dedicate and bounden to the gods of graces, that is to say, to

kindness, benevolence, and amity. And besides this Nature hath given unto

man a countenance not terrible and loathly, as unto other brute beasts;

but meek and demure, representing the very tokens of love and benevolence.

She hath given him amiable eyes, and in them assured marks of the inward

mind. She hath ordained him arms to clip and embrace. She hath given him

the wit and understanding to kiss: whereby the very minds and hearts of

men should be coupled together, even as though they touched each other.

Unto man alone she hath given laughing, a token of good cheer and

gladness. To man alone she hath given weeping tears, as it were a pledge

or token of meekness and mercy. Yea, and she hath given him a voice not

threatening and horrible, as unto other brute beasts, but amiable and

pleasant. Nature not yet content with all this, she hath given unto man

alone the commodity of speech and reasoning: the which things verily may

specially both get and nourish benevolence, so that nothing at all should

be done among men by violence.

She hath endued man with hatred of solitariness, and with love of company.

She hath utterly sown in man the very seeds of benevolence. She hath so

done, that the selfsame thing, that is most wholesome, should be most

sweet and delectable. For what is more delectable than a friend? And

again, what thing is more necessary? Moreover, if a man might lead all his

life most profitably without any meddling with other men, yet nothing

would seem pleasant without a fellow: except a man would cast off all

humanity, and forsaking his own kind would become a beast.

Besides all this, Nature hath endued man with knowledge of liberal

sciences and a fervent desire of knowledge: which thing as it doth most

specially withdraw man's wit from all beastly wildness, so hath it a

special grace to get and knit together love and friendship. For I dare

boldly say, that neither affinity nor yet kindred doth bind the minds of

men together with straiter and surer bands of amity, than doth the

fellowship of them that be learned in good letters and honest studies.

And above all this, Nature hath divided among men by a marvellous variety

the gifts, as well of the soul as of the body, to the intent truly that

every man might find in every singular person one thing or other, which

they should either love or praise for the excellency thereof; or else

greatly desire and make much of it, for the need and profit that cometh

thereof. Finally she hath endowed man with a spark of a godly mind: so

that though he see no reward, yet of his own courage he delighteth to do

every man good: for unto God it is most proper and natural, by his

benefit, to do everybody good. Else what meaneth it, that we rejoice and

conceive in our minds no little pleasure when we perceive that any

creature is by our means preserved.

Moreover God hath ordained man in this world, as it were the very image of

himself, to the intent, that he, as it were a god on earth, should provide

for the wealth of all creatures. And this thing the very brute beasts do

also perceive, for we may see, that not only the tame beasts, but also the

leopards, lions, and other more fierce and wild, when they be in any great

jeopardy, they flee to man for succour. So man is, when all things fail,

the last refuge to all manner of creatures. He is unto them all the very

assured altar and sanctuary.

I have here painted out to you the image of man as well as I can. On the

other side (if it like you) against the figure of Man, let us portray the

fashion and shape of War.

Now, then, imagine in thy mind, that thou dost behold two hosts of

barbarous people, of whom the look is fierce and cruel, and the voice

horrible; the terrible and fearful rustling and glistering of their

harness and weapons; the unlovely murmur of so huge a multitude; the eyes

sternly menacing; the bloody blasts and terrible sounds of trumpets and

clarions; the thundering of the guns, no less fearful than thunder indeed,

but much more hurtful; the frenzied cry and clamour, the furious and mad

running together, the outrageous slaughter, the cruel chances of them that

flee and of those that are stricken down and slain, the heaps of

slaughters, the fields overflowed with blood, the rivers dyed red with

man's blood. And it chanceth oftentimes, that the brother fighteth with

the brother, one kinsman with another, friend against friend; and in that

common furious desire ofttimes one thrusteth his weapon quite through the

body of another that never gave him so much as a foul word. Verily, this

tragedy containeth so many mischiefs, that it would abhor any man's heart

to speak thereof. I will let pass to speak of the hurts which are in

comparison of the other but light and common, as the treading down and

destroying of the corn all about, the burning of towns, the villages

fired, the driving away of cattle, the ravishing of maidens, the old men

led forth in captivity, the robbing of churches, and all things

confounded and full of thefts, pillages, and violence. Neither I will not

speak now of those things which are wont to follow the most happy and most

just war of all.

Erasmus Against War · 第 1 / 5 段