16,99 €
Mehr erfahren.
- Herausgeber: John Wiley & Sons
- Kategorie: Geisteswissenschaft
- Serie: Classic Thinkers series
- Sprache: Englisch
- Veröffentlichungsjahr: 2016
Thomas More remains one of the most enigmatic thinkers in history, due in large part to the enduring mysteries surrounding his best-known work, Utopia. He has been variously thought of as a reformer and a conservative, a civic humanist and a devout Christian, a proto-communist and a monarchical absolutist. His work spans contemporary disciplines from history to politics to literature, and his ideas have variously been taken up by seventeenth-century reformers and nineteenth-century communists. Through a comprehensive treatment of More's writing, from his earliest poetry to his reflections on suffering in the Tower of London, Joanne Paul engages with both the rich variety and some of the fundamental consistencies that run throughout More's works. In particular, Paul highlights More's concern with the destruction of what is held 'in common', whether it be in the commonwealth or in the body of the church. In so doing, she re-establishes More's place in the history of political thought, tracing the reception of his ideas to the present day. Paul's book serves as an essential foundation for any student encountering More's writing for the first time, as well as providing an innovative reconsideration of the place of his works in the history of ideas.
Sie lesen das E-Book in den Legimi-Apps auf:
Seitenzahl: 371
Ähnliche
Table of Contents
Series page
Title page
Copyright page
Preface
Abbreviations
Key Dates
The Thought of Thomas More
Scholarship
Humanism and Common Usage
Outline
Notes
1: Early Life, Education and Poetry
Early Life and Education
Pride and Fortune
Conclusion
Notes
2:
Utopia
and ‘Common Things’
Diplomacy
Inspiration
Book 1
Book 2
The Lessons of
U
topia
Conclusion
Notes
3:
R
ichard III
and the Stage Play of Politics
Texts and Contexts
Ars Historica
Sources
Public Opinion and the Stage Play of Politics
Unity and Disunity in the Commonwealth
Riot
Conclusion
Notes
4: The Common Corps of Christendom
Background
Style
Heresy
Authority
Human Nature
The Common Corps of Christendom
Representation and the General Council
Trial
Conclusion
Notes
5: Influence
Reputation
Literature
Early Modern Political Thought
Utopias
The Enlightenment
Socialism and Communism
Notes
Conclusion
Note
References
Recommended Reading
Online Resources
Tudor England
Early Modern Europe
The Church and the Reformation
Humanism
General Studies: Thomas More
Biographies
Early Works
U
topia
History of
R
ichard the Third
Polemics and Religious Works
Legacy
Index
End User License Agreement
List of Illustrations
Figure 2.1 Ptolemaic map of the British Isles. Woodcut. From the Strasbourg 1513
Geographia
of the renowned second-century Greek astronomer and geographer Claudius Ptolemaeus, edited by J. Essler and G. Übelin. As we can see, Scotland has been oriented the wrong way, to the east rather than the west. If this were corrected, a clear crescent shape would be apparent.Source: Facsimile from G. R. Crone (1961),
Early Maps of the British Isles
,
ad 1000–ad 1579
, London: Royal Geographical Society, plate 11.
Figure 2.2 Angliae figura / Map of the British Isles. MS on vellum. Anonymous, drawn between 1534 and 1546.Source: British Museum, Cotton MS. Aug. i.i, f. 9. Facsimile from G. R. Crone (1961),
Early Maps of the British Isles, ad 1000–ad 1579
, London: Royal Geographical Society, plate 12.
Figure 2.3 Utopia's political system.
Figure 2.4 Map of Utopia by Ambrosius Holbein. Woodcut.Source: From Thomas More's
Utopia
, Basel, 1518, p. 12.
Guide
Cover
Table of Contents
Start Reading
Preface
CHAPTER 1
Index
Pages
ii
iv
vi
vii
viii
ix
x
xi
xii
xiii
xiv
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
146
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
147
148
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
149
150
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
151
152
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
153
154
155
156
141
142
143
144
145
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
Series page
Classic Thinkers
Richard T. W. Arthur,
Leibniz
Daniel E. Flage,
Berkeley
J. M. Fritzman,
Hegel
Bernard Gert,
Hobbes
Dale E. Miller,
J. S. Mill
A. J. Pyle,
Locke
Andrew Ward,
Kant
Copyright page
Copyright © Joanne Paul 2017
The right of Joanne Paul to be identified as Author of this Work has been asserted in accordance with the UK Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988.
First published in 2017 by Polity Press
Polity Press
65 Bridge Street
Cambridge CB2 1UR, UK
Polity Press
350 Main Street
Malden, MA 02148, USA
All rights reserved. Except for the quotation of short passages for the purpose of criticism and review, no part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the prior permission of the publisher.
ISBN-13: 978-0-7456-9216-6
ISBN-13: 978-0-7456-9217-3(pb)
A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library.
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
Names: Paul, Joanne, author.
Title: Thomas More / Joanne Paul.
Description: Malden, MA : Polity, 2016. | Series: Classic thinkers | Includes bibliographical references and index.
Identifiers: LCCN 2016016386 (print) | LCCN 2016031201 (ebook) | ISBN 9780745692166 (hardback) | ISBN 9780745692173 (pbk.) | ISBN 9780745692197 (Mobi) | ISBN 9780745692203 (Epub)
Subjects: LCSH: More, Thomas, Saint, 1478-1535. | Philosophy, Renaissance.
Classification: LCC B785.M84 P38 2016 (print) | LCC B785.M84 (ebook) | DDC 192–dc23
LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2016016386
Typeset in 10.5 on 12 pt Palatino
by Toppan Best-set Premedia Limited
Printed and bound in Great Britain by CPI Group (UK) Ltd, Croydon.
The publisher has used its best endeavours to ensure that the URLs for external websites referred to in this book are correct and active at the time of going to press. However, the publisher has no responsibility for the websites and can make no guarantee that a site will remain live or that the content is or will remain appropriate.
Every effort has been made to trace all copyright holders, but if any have been inadvertently overlooked the publisher will be pleased to include any necessary credits in any subsequent reprint or edition.
For further information on Polity, visit our website:
politybooks.com.
Preface
I had not originally intended to write a book about Thomas More. He is too controversial a figure. He evokes too many emotive responses. He has been declared a saint, denounced as a murderer. To write a book about More is to invite fierce backlash, no matter what it says. Even a book about More's ideas, his thought and works, could prove deeply contentious.
And yet not to try is to continue to let such controversy cloud our understanding of More as a thinker. Thus, when given the opportunity to write an introduction to his thought, I took it. The intention of this book is to engage only fleetingly with the more controversial aspects of More's life – such as whether or not he lived for a time as a monk or tortured ‘heretics’, or how the overwrought question of his sexual appetite might be settled. Instead I focus attention on his writing, all of his writing, in an attempt to grasp what More was trying to do in his own context and what legacy he may have bequeathed to future generations.
The year this book is published, 2016, marks 500 years since Utopia appeared in print. Utopia has not been out of print since, and is still read widely today; few books can boast such a popular history. More's neologism is now part of everyday language and has come to denote a genre as well as a way of thinking. All that being said, this is not a book about Utopia either. Although Utopia is More's most significant contribution to the world of ideas, it does little to help us understand him or his times. It is purposely opaque and invites more questions than it answers, which is almost certainly part of why it has remained so popular. In order to appreciate More's ideas and their relationship with the times in which he lived, we have to go beyond Utopia and explore his other writings. This will certainly give us a better insight into this monumental text. But it is my hope that it will also produce reflection on More's wider intentions, his context and some of the lessons that we can take from his work.
I have written this book with the intention of making More's ideas accessible to an audience that has not necessarily encountered his work before. Part of the reason why Utopia has emerged as More's most widely read text is that it has none of the complexity and verbiage of his other works. It is easily digestible in a matter of days (though it has been 500 years and no one can yet claim to fully understand it). This book attempts to treat More's other works, for the most part, in such a way that readers may not have to read them, though it should be noted that they are not as hard-going as many scholars would have you believe. More writes with a wit and a passion that are still apparent 500 years on. But, as he himself would tell you, life is short and university terms even shorter, and this book has been designed to present an introduction to More's context and ideas that can be the foundation to further study – whether of More himself, of his texts, or of various aspects of sixteenth-century literature, politics, religion or thought.
It is for this reason that I have dedicated this book to all students of Thomas More in the past 500 years and for another 500 years to come. I believe our task to be worthwhile, if difficult and, at times, controversial. More lived in an age of great upheaval, characterized by rapid technological changes, religious controversy and violence, political protest and questioning of traditional loyalties. Even at an interval of 500 years, students of More can surely relate to him. We may imagine ourselves to make up a community of scholars over time, just like the Renaissance republic of letters or More's vision of a transtemporal church: a community whose contributions to shared knowledge, I hope, bring us together.
It certainly took a community to produce this book, and so it is essential that I express my deep gratitude before going any further. My thanks must begin with Elliott Karstadt, who first approached me about this project, and to Ellen MacDonald-Kramer and Pascal Porcheron, who have been my contacts at Polity. I am also very grateful to those who read early drafts of the book, either in part or in full, including Antoni Balcerek, Matthew Champion, Signy Gutnick Allen, John-Erik Hansson, James Lancaster, Suzannah Lipscomb, Mathew Lyons, Katie McKeogh, Julia Nicholls, Marius Ostrowski, Estelle Paranque, Quentin Skinner, James Snell, Miranda Stanyon, Miranda Fay Thomas and Sarah Wilford, and my anonymous reviewers. Helpful suggestions and assistance have also come from Adrian Blau, Annabel Brett, Chris Brooke, David Colclough, Hannah Dawson, Robin Douglass, John Dunn, James Harris, Bruno Leipold, Carole Levin, Noel Malcolm, Sarah Mortimer, Johan Olsthoorn, David Owen, Jon Parkin, Richard Rex, Richard Serjeantson, Edwin Shaw, Gareth Stedman Jones, Latré Stijn, Peter Wilson, as well as from the audiences at the Institute for the Historical Research Early Career Seminar in the History of Ideas, the Cambridge History of Political Thought Seminar and the Oxford History of Political Thought Seminar, and from friends, colleagues and acquaintances too numerous to name. I must also thank both students and colleagues at the New College of the Humanities for listening graciously to more about More than they might have liked over the past two years, and to the staff at the Institute for Historical Research and at the Russian State Archive of Socio-Political History. In addition, the patient and knowledgeable contributions of my copy-editor, Manuela Tecusan, have significantly improved this book, and her expertise in classical thought was especially invaluable. Finally, I am very grateful to my close friends, family and partner for their support and indulgence.
London
2016
Abbreviations
Note I have modernized the spelling of More's English-language texts for ease of understanding, but I have kept all the original words and suffixes. I have added modern punctuation where necessary. I have retained Yale translations of Latin texts in most cases, noting the original Latin or my own translation where relevant.
Key Dates
1478
7 February: Born to John and Agnes More in Cheapside, London.
1483
July: Richard III takes the throne from Edward V.
1485
Begins school at St Anthony's.
August: Henry VII defeats Richard III at the Battle of Bosworth Field and becomes the first Tudor king of England.
1489
Leaves St Anthony's for the household of John Morton, formerly bishop of Ely, now Lord Chancellor and archbishop of Canterbury.
1492
Begins study at Canterbury College, Oxford.
1494
Returns to London and begins legal training at New Inn.
1496
Advances his legal training at Lincoln's Inn.
Begins writing English poems.
1499
Meets Erasmus for the first time and is also introduced to Prince Henry, the future Henry VIII.
1501
Lectures on Augustine's
City of God
at St Lawrence Jewry, London.
Called to the bar at Lincoln's Inn.
Begins residing at the Charterhouse.
1502
April: Prince Arthur, Henry VII's heir, dies and Prince Henry becomes heir.
1503
Becomes reader at Furnivall's Inn.
Writes the
Lamentation of Queen Elizabeth
.
1504
Possibly sits in parliament.
1505
January: Leaves the Charterhouse and marries Jane Colt, moving to Bucklersbury, London.
Erasmus visits and they begin their translations of Lucian.
Writes
Fortune Verses
.
1506
More and Erasmus' translations of Lucian are published.
1508
Makes his first visit to the continent, to see universities associated with humanism.
1509
April: Henry VII dies and Henry VIII becomes king.
August: Erasmus stays with the More family and writes his
Moriae encomium
.
Becomes a ‘freeman’ of the Mercers’ Company and negotiates with Antwerp officials on their behalf.
Appointed justice of the peace for Middlesex.
1510
Sits as representative for London in parliament.
Appointed undersheriff for London.
Publishes
Life of Pico della Mirandola
.
1511
Jane Colt dies; marries Alice Middleton.
Reader at Lincoln's Inn.
1513
Begins writing
The History of King Richard the Third
.
1514
Elected to Doctors’ Commons.
1515
May: Travels to Flanders as ambassador.
Resolves Erasmus’ financial troubles.
July: Meets Peter Gillis and discusses Utopia.
Writes the
Letter to Dorp
.
1516
Autumn: Becomes a member of the Court of Star Chamber.
December: Publishes
Utopia
.
1517
30 April: Called to an emergency meeting at the Guildhall and sent out to try to calm London rioters.
1 May: The ‘Evil May Day Riots’ break out throughout the early morning hours.
September: Embarks on a three-month diplomatic mission to Calais.
2 November: Luther publishes
95 Theses
in Wittenberg.
December: Travels to Bruges to meet Richard Pace.
1518
March: Officially begins work as a king's councillor and as ‘Master of Requests’.
Latin Poems
published in second edition of
Utopia
.
1520
Henry VIII publishes
Assertio septem Sacramentorum adversus Martinum Lutherum
.
1521
Knighted and made undertreasurer.
Travels once again to Bruges and Calais as ambassador.
Moves his family to Chelsea.
1522
Writes
The Four Last Things
.
1523
Writes
Responsio ad Lutherum
.
Appointed Speaker of the House of Commons.
1524
Named High Steward at the University of Oxford.
1525
Named High Steward at the University of Cambridge.
Becomes chancellor of the duchy of Lancaster.
1526
Writes the
Letter to Bugenhagen
.
1527
Summer: Diplomatic mission to France.
Autumn: Henry VIII takes him into his confidence about the marriage annulment.
1528
Cuthbert Tunstall asks him to write in defence of the church in English.
1529
June: Publishes
A Dialogue Concerning Heresies
.
Summer: Travels to Cambrai as ambassador.
September: Publishes
Supplication of Souls
.
18 October: Wolsey removed from the position of Lord Chancellor.
29 October: Becomes Lord Chancellor.
1530
February: First evangelical martyr burned in England.
1531
February: Henry VIII made ‘Supreme Head of the Church of England’.
November–December: Richard Bayfield and John Tewkesbury burned at Smithfield.
1532
Publishes first part of
The Confutation of Tyndale's Answer
.
30 April: James Bainham burned at Smithfield.
15 May: Submission of the clergy.
16 May: Resigns from chancellorship.
December: Writes the
Letter against Frith
.
1533
Publishes second part of
The Confutation of Tyndale's Answer
.
1 June: Does not attend Anne Boleyn's coronation.
April: Writes
The Apology of Sir Thomas More
.
October: Writes
Debellation of Salem and Bizance
.
December: Publishes the
Letter against Frith
.
December: Writes
Answer to a Poisoned Book
.
1534
January: More's printer William Rastell interrogated by Thomas Cromwell.
February: More's name appears on the Act of Attainder against Elizabeth Barton.
March: The Act of Succession passed.
April: Leaves
Treatise upon the Passion
unfinished.
12 April: Summoned to take the Oath.
17 April: Imprisoned in the Tower.
Writes
A Treatise to Receive the Blessed Body, A Dialogue of Comfort against Tribulation
.
1535
Writes
De tristitia Christi
.
1 July: Tried and convicted of treason, sentenced to death.
6 July: Executed at Tower Hill.
1547
January: Henry VIII dies and Edward VI takes the throne.
1551
First English translation of
Utopia
published.
1553
July: Edward VI dies and, after a short struggle, Mary I becomes queen.
1557
Roper and Harpsfield complete their biographies of Thomas More, which circulate in manuscript.
More's English works published.
1558
November: Mary I dies and Elizabeth I becomes queen.
1563
Foxe's
Acts and Monuments
published with stories of More's persecution of Protestants.
1565–6
Collection of More's Latin works published in Louvain.
1570
Expanded version of
Acts and Monuments
published.
1588
Stapleton's
Life of More
published.
1599
Life of Sir Thomas More
by ‘Ro. Ba.’ (thought to be Robert Bassett) published.
c. 1592
The Book of Sir Thomas More
written.
1626
Roper's biography of More published.
1630
Cresacre More's biography of More published.
1879
Moritz Kaufmann publishes
Utopias; or, Schemes of Social Improvements: From Thomas More to Karl Marx
.
1888
Karl Kautsky publishes
Thomas More and His Utopia
.
1935
Canonized as Saint Thomas More.
The Thought of Thomas More
Few who qualify for the title of ‘classic thinker’ are as widely known as Thomas More. Thanks especially to his role at the court of the infamous Henry VIII, there are countless biographies and fictional portrayals of him in novels, in plays, on television and in film. More has truly become, as Erasmus called him, ‘a man for all seasons’, employed in a variety of contexts, and given every role from saint to villain.1 There have been, however, few attempts to treat More as a thinker worthy of study five hundred years later. Whereas most thinkers are known for their work and ideas, which must then be placed in the context of their lives, the life of Thomas More is well known, and we must seek to recover his thought.
This book embarks on precisely such an enterprise. Through a comprehensive engagement with More's writing, this study explores the development of More's thought, noting both its rich variety and some of the fundamental consistencies that run throughout. Set in the context of one of the most transformative moments in European history, More's ideas are in many senses dynamic, shifting in audience, tone and purpose with changes in the wider political and intellectual context.
That being said, there are also some static, constant elements to More's thought.2 Throughout, More is concerned with the destruction of what is held in ‘common’. This means, for him, what is shared, what no one holds to the exclusion of others, and therefore also what is ‘public’ or belonging to the corporate community as a whole, such as religious truth, the meaning of words or the structure of the polity.3 In an ideal world (such as Utopia), common custom would reflect a reorientation towards what is commonly held, as reflective of the truths held in common. For More, this arrangement would be more real than his lived reality, in which artificial customs underpin individual ownership. Such investment in what is one's own serves to break apart those things that are held in common. Consequently, authority – whether religious, political or intellectual – becomes fragmented, resulting in disputes which cannot be resolved. This outcome was More's biggest fear, and in his view it could be avoided by refocusing attention on what is held in ‘common’, often through a consideration of our common mortal fate.
In setting out his system of thought, More expands on themes relating to the importance of public opinion, the role of the intellectual and the establishment of political legitimacy. More consciously placed himself in dialogue with thinkers such as Plato, Cicero and Augustine, and his ideas, in turn, were read and discussed by subsequent writers such as Bacon, Bodin and Marx. By developing our understanding of More's thought, we build a better historical picture of his own time as well as of his legacy in the centuries that followed, and we open discussion regarding how his thought might provide new perspectives for us today.
Scholarship
There are a number of reasons why More has been little studied as a thinker. Because of his dramatic role in a transformative moment of English history, biographical accounts have often taken precedence over studies of his thought. There is no question that More is a fascinating figure who led a compelling life, and it is easy to prioritize this over attempting to analyse volumes of text. Second, when scholars do turn to More's writings, he frequently becomes a victim of his own success – or rather the victim of Utopia's success – and his thought is often seen solely through a reading of this single text. It is hard to blame scholars on this account; there are reasons why Utopia has been so widely read. It is a brilliant, pithy, entertaining and enigmatic text, with a great deal to offer to a wide variety of disciplines. More's other writings, especially the polemic texts, are not usually considered such engaging reading and are deemed not to offer as much by way of intellectual content.
In addition to considering the polemics tedious and intellectually unimportant, scholars also often find them difficult to grapple with because of their weighty theological and religious content. The difficulty often is in the nature of this religious content, which presents intense and often vitriolic arguments against figures whom More considers to be ‘heretics’, such as Martin Luther (1483–1546) and William Tyndale (1494–1536). More can emerge from these texts as an irrational and violent zealot, an enemy to freedom of religion – and especially to any form of thought opposed to that of the Catholic Church. The project of attempting to understand the foundational arguments to these views has proved objectionable to many.
For this reason, many scholars have resorted to creating multiple Mores, in order to keep the respectable humanism of Utopia untouched by the religious zealotry of the polemics. This strategy has a long tradition. In 1935, the year More was canonized by the Catholic Church, R. W. Chambers’s biography presented him as a synthesis of religious features deemed to be ‘medieval’ and ideas contained in Utopia, which were claimed as ‘modern’. Chambers brought together saint and scholar to create a vibrant protagonist who transcended his context, in his fight for individual conscience. Unfortunately Chambers got More tragically wrong on this point: individual conscience in fact represented More's greatest fear, as we shall see. Nevertheless, Chambers’s saintly scholar was extremely influential, dominating much of the scholarship on More in the first half of the twentieth century as well as being immortalized on stage and in film, in Robert Bolt's A Man for All Seasons.
In the 1960s three new sets of publications prompted fresh scholarship on More. The first was the publication of More's letters by Elizabeth Frances Rogers in 1961. The second was the establishment of a journal titled Moreana by the association Amici Thomae Mori (Friends of Thomas More) for the study of More and his works. And, finally, the first of the fifteen-volume Yale edition of the Collected Works of Thomas More, still the standard edition of More's texts, was published in 1963. As a result, the 1970s brought a flood of new work on More. In particular, Essential Articles for the Study of Thomas More, published in 1977, brought the work of forty scholars, including James McConica and C. S. Lewis, and even of Robert Bolt himself, into a single volume.
Although much of this work presented More in a largely positive light, the renewal of interest and the re-publication of his polemical works also generated a strongly opposed view, articulated in the work of Richard Marius, Jasper Ridley and G. R. Elton in the 1980s. Marius provided a Freudian account of More as a sex-driven fanatic, whose ‘failure’ to live a monastic life led to his torture and execution of Protestants. In this reading, much of More's anger towards Lutherans stemmed from their allowance of clerical marriage and from Luther's own marriage to a nun. Ridley and Elton likewise saw More as a violent extremist. Ridley presents this fanatic More in contrast to Thomas Wolsey, Elton in contrast to Thomas Cromwell. Whereas the Chambers–Bolt view of More had been inspired by the Catholic biographies of the sixteenth century, these revisionist accounts were furnished with details from Protestant writers such as John Foxe and arguably went on to form the basis of the portrayal of More in Hilary Mantel's widely read Wolf Hall (published in 2009).
Although many of these biographies used More's works to substantiate claims about his life and outlook, they were not intended as analyses of his thought. About the same time, however, shifts in the practice of the history of political thought began to have an effect on the nature of More scholarship. Intellectual historians, led by Quentin Skinner and J. G. A. Pocock, argued for placing emphasis on the context in which thinkers wrote, thereby drawing attention to lesser known contributors to the development of political thinking. This shift prompted a renewal of interest in More's writing, though one largely limited to Utopia. Historians of political thought have often had a blind spot when it comes to religious content; hence it is no surprise that, apart from a limited engagement with other writings from More's ‘humanist’ phase (such as the Life of Pico, History of King Richard the Third and the Letters – to Dorp, Lee, Oxford, etc.), Utopia received the most attention. Historians such as Paul Oskar Kristeller, Elizabeth McCutcheon and Quentin Skinner have re-evaluated More's humanism, placing him in the context of the rise of ‘civic humanism’ and Renaissance rhetoric, but this work does not touch on anything written after 1520. Even Anthony Kenny, whose 1983 Thomas More seeks to treat all of More's writings, and argues that More ‘deserves a place in the intellectual history of Europe’, does so largely on the back of Utopia.4 Debates about these studies continue; Skinner's argument that More belongs in the tradition of neo-Roman thought has recently been opposed by the work of Eric Nelson, who suggests that More was actually arguing against this tradition and in favour of Greek thought; but both historians focus exclusively on Utopia.
There are, of course, exceptions. Alistair Fox's (1982) Thomas More: History and Providence seeks to present a comprehensive view of More and his ideas, focusing on the theme of providence (God's divine plan) in his works. Fox opposes those who try to draw a dividing line between More's humanist and More's polemical writings, suggesting that there is a ‘steady progression in the evolution of his thought’ rather than a disjunction and that all of More's works are linked by the themes of universal history and divine providence.5 Recently two books have furthered the project of breaking down the dichotomy between More's humanism and his polemics and of providing a comprehensive account of More's thought. The first is The One Thomas More, written by Travis Curtright (2012). As implied by the title, Curtright's aim is to present More's thought as unified and constant, against the ‘multiple Mores’ thesis and against those who have a ‘prejudice against him’.6 Curtright's text seeks to uncover More's ‘Christian humanism’ through an engagement that puts his 1510 Life of Pico front and centre. Curtright touches on some important themes, which will also be explored below, especially the importance of the sensus communis (common sense), though perhaps the book goes a bit far in expressing his desire to produce a coherent, consistent account of More's thought.7 The second, Thomas Betteridge's (2013) Writing Faith and Telling Tales, tackles, as Chambers’s biography had, the medieval–modern divide, still extant in More scholarship. Betteridge attempts to demonstrate that More has a place in the same historical ‘tradition’ as medieval writers like Chaucer, but states that he does not wish to show that More had ever read these predecessors’ texts. This makes his book useful for considering More's literary themes but less helpful in providing the intellectual background for his ideas.
It seems that, after five centuries of division and turbulence, scholarship is moving towards acquiring the ability to engage with More as a historical figure and thinker without attempting to hive off pieces or to pave over inconsistencies, in a desire to produce a comfortable, consistent narrative. As More himself would say about the practice of writing history: ‘Let historians begin to show either prejudice or favoritism, and who will there be to lend any credence at all to histories?’ (LP, 221).
Humanism and Common Usage
To understand More as a thinker, one has to appreciate the intellectual movements of which he was a part. More's work attempted to bring together a variety of ways of thinking about the world. His was a context of conflict and division, and his work aimed to provide a unifying remedy. As Richard Pace (1482–1536) said of More in 1517: ‘There's no school of philosophy he doesn't approve of in part. Whatever each one particularly excels in, that's what he particularly admires about it.’8
More was one of the pioneers of humanism in England, which sought to revive the study of a wealth of classical – that is, Greek and Roman – texts.9 The dominant intellectual paradigm in Europe in the medieval period was scholasticism, a mode of study that the humanists found to be elitist, arcane and dogmatic.10 The scholastics were dedicated to the philosophy of Aristotle (fully rediscovered in the west only since the twelfth century) and constructed complex philosophical systems for understanding Aristotelian ideas and for making them consistent with Christian theology. The humanists objected to these systems as the puffed-up imaginings of an isolated class of scholars and sought instead to understand the ways in which language and ideas interacted with the world around them, thus escaping the scholastics’ ivory tower.
From its very inception, humanism was designed as a curriculum for training the young for public life, rather than simply as an exercise in scholarly erudition. Although it was usually noble boys who received such an education, humanists believed in ‘true nobility’ (vera nobilitas) – a combination of virtue, honour and learning that had nothing to do with family or pedigree. Women, too, could be the recipients of such an education, but that had a different aim: domestic rather than public virtue. These educational beliefs and practices were related to the humanist view of politics. Most humanists were dedicated to classical republicanism, that is, to the idea that the people should be the source of power – particularly political power – and that citizens had a duty to serve the republic. Although there were many city republics in Europe at the time – such as the Italian city-states in which humanism began – for humanists in monarchical contexts this dedication to republicanism usually meant a dedication to counselling the ruler and supporting popular institutions like parliament.
To the medieval trivium – literally ‘meeting point of three ways’: a syllabus of three subjects, grammar, logic and rhetoric – the humanists added more ‘practical’ studies, such as moral–political philosophy and history, and redefined the all-important study of grammar.11 In their eyes, the ordinary custom of speech was more important than the scholarly ‘rules’ that guided it.12 When done in the humanist way, grammar, as More puts it, ‘invents no laws of speech in defiance of custom; instead, it simply sees which constructions appear the most often in speech and points these out to those who are unschooled in speech so that their speech will not flout common usage’ (LD, 35). In setting out this view, the humanists, most notably Lorenzo Valla (c. 1407–57), drew on the work of the great Roman rhetorician Quintilian (35–100 ce), who wrote: ‘Usage is…the surest pilot in speaking and we should treat language as currency minted with the public stamp.’13 As this remark exemplifies, the emphasis on usage means that what is commonly held becomes important over and above the rules generated and perpetuated by elites.
In a letter to a theologian, Martin van Dorp (1485–1525), written in 1515, the same year as Utopia, More remarks that words are ‘public property’ (LD, 35). Theologians who go beyond what is common ‘crown themselves victors just because we do not know in what sense, against all common sense, they have secretly agreed to construe our own words’ (LD, 37).14 Such scholars, driven by pride, have gone beyond their right; only the people hold the ownership of the meaning of words. More exclaims: ‘Damn it, since when can some rule slapped together in some corner by men who themselves barely know how to speak impose new laws of speech on the entire world?’ (LD, 35). He maintained this position on the common ownership of meaning throughout his intellectual career. In the longest of his polemics, Confutation of Tyndale's Answer, first published in 1532, More writes, under the marginal note ‘the common usage of speech’, that the ‘signification’ of words is determined ‘by the common custom’ (CTA, 167). This common custom, he goes on to say, ‘is the only thing, by which we know the right and proper signification of a word’ (ibid.). Scholars should not attempt to thwart this common custom in order to show their knowledge, as doing so is to obstruct truth itself.
For More, the entire enterprise of humanism is designed to give access to the knowledge expressed through common custom, as a way to mitigate the pride that comes from overconfidence in one's own abilities. This knowledge, he says, counteracts those who are ‘perversely convinced of their total omniscience’ (LD, 49). This argument is clear in his writings against both scholastic theologians and evangelical reformers such as Martin Luther and William Tyndale.15 For More, both exhibited the same problematic feature, namely a proud over-reliance on their own intellect, usually manifested in the idea that they could interpret scripture without the aid of outside sources. More first sets out this view in his Life of Pico, published in 1510. The subject of the biography, Pico della Mirandola, is presented as a ‘mirror’ for the reader to reflect upon ‘in what points honour standeth’ (LPM, 53). At no point, however, does More assert that Pico himself is wholly honourable. In fact the reader may be inclined to think he is not, because by the end of the text Pico is condemned to the fires of purgatory, not received into heaven. More notes that Pico, having come close to infamy by seeking out fame ‘of his high mind and proud purpose’ (LPM, 58), turned his study only to the Bible, despite the fact that ‘common profit pricked him’ when he thought of how his works were desired and looked after by others (LPM, 66).
More repeats this argument against those who opposed the scholarly programme of the northern humanists. Writing to Oxford University in response to opponents of humanism there, More reiterates a line from Seneca the Younger (4 bce–65 ce) according to which ‘secular learning…prepares the soul for virtue’ as it teaches ‘prudence in human affairs’ (LO, 139), without which a teacher cannot hope to benefit the public. Lacking an understanding of the real world around him, he will be able to preach ‘for his own pleasure’ but will not be suited to do it ‘for the people’ (ibid.). Only a study of ‘poets, orators, and histories’ will inform the scholar about the world around him.16 This knowledge is necessarily ‘common’ and will make the learning relevant to all (ibid.). Humanism is designed, in More's view, to counter the prideful and selfish learning of the scholastics by offering a curriculum that teaches what is common and does so for the benefit of the community.
Like scholastics, heretics demonstrate an ‘arrogance before God’ (RL, 205) and a self-serving nature in thinking that they can interpret scripture without the help of others who had written before. Although, as we shall see, More is usually referring to the writings of the church fathers, he also points to the importance of humanist studies in this context. For instance, in line with Augustine (354–430), he suggests that an understanding of rhetoric is especially important, because Christ used rhetorical figures in his speeches and therefore to ‘neglect the figures of speech’ is to ‘miss the real sense of Scripture’ (DT, 295–7).17 This is especially the case, the humanists maintained, when it comes to decorum – the idea of suiting one's speech to the audience and circumstances at hand. Erasmus, for instance, suggests that Jesus and Paul tailored their speech to their audiences; to miss this central point would be to misunderstand scripture entirely. In short, a reading of scripture requires the central humanist principle of returning ad fontes – going back ‘to the sources’.18 The need for the liberal arts in a study of scripture, however, often goes deeper than this.
In the Dialogue Concerning Heresies, More's interlocutor ignores topics such as logic and philosophy and studies only Holy Scripture. This desire comes, More writes, from a sense of pride; because the proper lessons of Holy Scripture are ‘common’, a proud man cannot distinguish himself by their study. Instead, focusing on scripture alone, he invents ‘paradoxes and strange opinions against the common faith of Christ's whole church’ (DCH, 123). The ‘liberal arts’ are the gift of God and serve as a ‘handmaid’ to the study of scripture, just as reason serves faith (DCH, 126). Philosophy, laws, history, and even poetry teach a man ‘judgement’ and ‘wit’, without which he cannot properly exercise the reason necessary for attaining a proper understanding of the scripture, or indeed of any element of faith.
Although More valued what was common knowledge, this did not mean that he thought that humanist ideas should be spread among the common people, as this could actually interfere with the expression of commonly held truth. Recall that, for the humanists, even Jesus suited his language to the common people. In the Life of Pico More details how Pico's works had to be kept from the public; for ‘there were in them many things strange and not fully declared’, which were ‘more meet for secret communication of learned men than for open hearing of common people’ (LPM, 58). The latter, ‘for lack of cunning’ – meaning intelligence – ‘might take hurt thereby’ (ibid.). When such ideas are disseminated publicly, this is usually done as a result of the scholar's pride and in the hope that they might ‘win the favour of the common people & the commendation of fools’ (LPM, 61).19
Even in Utopia, where people engage in scholarly disputations and elect political officials, ‘to take counsel on matters of common interest outside the senate or the popular assembly is considered a capital offense’ (Ut, 125). In other words, to discuss political ideas outside designated political institutions is punishable by death – a surprisingly severe policy. The Utopians fear the ‘tyrannous oppression of the people’ through the dissemination of political knowledge, though More does not say how these two things – the spread of information and tyranny – might be connected. It is probable that the situation the Utopians hope to prevent is the one that occurs in The History of King Richard the Third: a situation in which the consent of the people is fabricated through the manipulation of public opinion and the riotous participation of upstart youths. If there is no control over what knowledge is spread among the people, it may be possible to sway public opinion – in which case it no longer represents the truths that More contends common sense can hold.
The spread of dangerous ideas can also, More suggests, plant the seed of doubt, threatening political and religious authority. Even if merited, he writes, it ‘were a lewd thing to suffer any prince, estate, or governor, to be brought in slander among the common people’, because this would produce contempt for all ruling classes, whom the people ought to obey (CTA, 561). If a prince or governor is going astray, this ought to be communicated to him via the proper channels, ‘confessors and counsellors’, but not by spreading it abroad, ‘whereof all the town may talk, & to their own harm defame the sovereign’ (CTA, 590). As More writes in his Apology, it is only through ‘secret advice and counsel’ that suggestions regarding the reform of laws should be made, not in ‘books in writing among the people’ (ATM
