‘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.’
‘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 calledSomniumhe 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);Timonto 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’sLife of Erasmus, p. 83.
[319]See Knight’sLife 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’sBriefe, 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 hisAdagia, dated Sept. 1508.) After this he wintered at Padua (seeVita 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 thePraise of Follyis datedex 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 (seeinfra, note at p. 204). The later editions of thePraise of Follyput 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 byGourmont, at Paris, I have not seen, but, according to Brunet, it hasno 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 thePraise 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’sLife of Linacre, pp. 179et seq.
[338]Videinfra, 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. AlsoErasmi 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. 178et seq., and Eras.Op.ix. pp. 466et 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), entitledLucubrationum Erasmi Roterodami Index, and printed by Froben, at Basle, in 1519, it is stated that theMoriæ Encomiumwas ‘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 AugustiM.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 (seeEpistolæclxix., 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’sLife 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 ofDe Octo Orationis Partibus, &c.
[369]The number of the ‘miraculous draught of fishes.’
[370]Statutes of St. Paul’s School. Knight’sLife of Colet, p. 364. See also the letter from Colet to Lilly, prefixed to theRudiments of Grammar, 1510. Knight’sLife of Colet, p. 124, n. r.
[371]Eras.Op.iii. p. 457, c.
[372]Knight’sLife of Colet, p. 109.
[373]Brewer’sCalendar of State Papers, Henry VIII., vol. i. No. 1076, under date June 6, 1510.
[374]Compare licenses mentioned in Brewer’sCalendar of State Papersof Henry VIII. (vol. i. Nos. 1076, 3900, and 4659), with documents given in Knight’sLife of Colet,Miscellanies, No. v. and No. iii.
[375]‘De pueris statim ac liberaliter instituendis.’—Eras.Op.i. p. 505.
[376]Knight’sLife 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’sPrecepts of Living for the Use of his School. Knight’sLife 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 hisLife of Colet(Miscellanies, No. xiii.), and were taken by him from what he callsGrammatices 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’sAccidence.
[380]See also the characteristic letter from Colet to Lilly, prefixed to theSyntax. The editions of 1513, 1517, and 1524 are entitled,Absolutissimus de Octo Orationis Partium Constructione Libellus. TheAccidencewas entitled,Coleti Editio unà cum quibusdam, &c.
[381]Knight’sLife 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 theDe Copiâbeing 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 133l.Brewer, i. Introduction, cviii. note (3).
[386]Prefatory Letter of Beatus Rhenanus, prefixed to the edition of More’sEpigrammata, printed at Basle, 1518 and 1520.
[387]Knight’sLife of Colet, p. 370.Miscellanies, No. vi.
[388]‘Recte instituendæ pubis artifex.’ Preface of Erasmus toDe 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 theDe Copiâbeing 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 studiedEnglishauthors 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 inEnglish.—Knight’sLife 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’sAthenæ Cantab.p. 16. AlsoPhilomorus, Lond. Pickering, 1842, pp. 55-57, andFasti 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’sLife of Erasmus, p. 229.
[407]Brewer, i. 4312.
[408]A ‘tenth,’ of the clergy, produced in 1500 about 12,000l.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 locoTitus iii. 10; also thePraise 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 thePraise of Folly, may also very probably be literally true. Knight, in hisLife of Colet, concludes that as the story is told in thePraise of Folly, the incident must have occurred in aprevious convocation, as this satire was writtenbefore1512.—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 theEncomium 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 theAnnotationes(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, accepiex 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 hisLife of Colet(pp. 289-308), printed by ‘Thomas Berthelet, regius impressor,’ and without date.Pynsonwas 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’sLife 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 prodirescholâqui ipsorum arguunt atque subvertunt inscitiam.’—Stapleton’sTres 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 arevisedcopy 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’sLife 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 inMori 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 alsoPhilomorus, 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’sLife 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. CompareEnchiridion, ‘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 ‘AllWar is unlawful to the Christian.’
[437]Eras.Op.iii. p. 461, A, E.
[438]Knight’sLife of Colet, p. 207, note quoted fromAntiq. 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]ErasmiEpigrammata: 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’sEpigrams, 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.’ ‘AWickliffite, 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 wearingblackvestments (pullisvestibus), 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. IstaJoanni 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 anom de plumefor the other. I am further indebted to Mr. Lupton for the suggestion that when Ammonius, writing to Erasmus (Epist. clxxv.), says ‘tuusLeucophæussalvere 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 ofColet on the Sacraments of the Church, pp. 6, 7. So that the identification of Colet with theGratianus Pullusof the Colloquy is now complete.
[481]The lazar-house of Harbledown. See Dean Stanley’sHistorical Memorials of Canterbury, ed. 1868, p. 243.
[482]The colloquy from which the particulars given in this section have been obtained is entitledPeregrinatio 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’sHistory 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 ofDe Copiâ. Schelestadt, 1514; and Eras. Epist. clxvii. and clxviii. As to his friendship with the Archbishop of Maintz,videEpist. 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 theLife 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’sEcclesiastical 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’sLiterature 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 theAdagia, ‘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 theErasmi 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’sHistory of the Popes, i. ch. ii. sec. 3.
[522]Ubi supra.
[523]See the authorities mentioned by Ranke, and also Hallam’sLiterature of Europe, chap. iv. ed. 1837, p. 435.
[524]Hallam, p. 436.
[525]Moria, ed. 1511, Argent. fol. G. iii.
[526]Hallam’sLiterature 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 inPoetas. Sic enim designabat Coletum,’ &c. Eras.Op.iii. p. 460, F.
[528]Compare the similar views expressed in theEnchiridion(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 especiallyNovum Instrumentum, pp. 295, 290, 377, 382, 270.
[535]Roper, 9.
[536]
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 theSeraphicspirits, allflaming and on fire.... They arelovingbeings of the highest order, &c.’ Colet’s abstract of theCelestial 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’sCalendar of the Letters, &c. of Henry VIII.vol. ii. cclxviiet 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, seeUtopia, 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 toreligion, yet they think that they are led byreasonto 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.