400 THE GERMAN REFORMATION. A.D. 1517 To 15380.
Comp. ADALB. HoRAWwITzZ: Erasmus v. Rotterdam und Martinus Lipsius, Wien, 1882; Hrasmiana, several numbers, Wien, 1882-85 (reprinted from the Sitzungsberichte of the Imperial Academy of Vienna; contains extracts from the correspondence of Er., discovered in a Codex at Louvain, and in the Codex Rehdigeranus, 254 of the city library at
ANNAN ANNAN GDN
IMAGO-ERASMIROTERODA ἢ MI: AB-ALBERTO » DVRERO-AD VIVA M: EFFIGIEM-DELINIATA:[
‘THN KPEITTO-TA-ZYITPAM MATA: ATEEL
*‘MDAXVI-
Me
wnittditdtt tidied?
ltd td
hitb
From the Portrait by A. Diirer.
ERASMUS.
Breslau, founded by Rehdiger). HorAwirz and HARTFELDER: Brieywechsel des Beatus Rhenanus, Leipzig, 1886.
If. Biographies of Erasmus by himself and by Beatus Rhenanus, in vol. 1. of the ed. of Clericus; by PIERRE BAYLE, in his “‘ Dictionnaire” (1696) ; KNIGHT, Cambr. 1726; JontTiIN, Lond. 1748, 2 vols.; 1808, 3 vols. (chiefly a summary of the letters of Erasmus with critical comments); BurRiIeGNy, Paris, 1757, 2 vols.; HENKE, Halle, 1782, 2 vols.; Hess, Zurich, 1789, 2 vols.; BUTLER, London, 1825; Ap. MULLER, Hamburg, 1828 (Leben
§ 71. ERASMUS. 401
des E. v. Rotterdam . . . Eine gekrinte Preisschrift ; comp. the excellent review of ULLMANN in the “‘ Studien und Kritiken,’’ 1829, No. I.); GLAsius (prize essay in Dutch), The Hague, 1850; Sricuanrt (Er. Ὁ. Rotterd., seine Stellung zur Kirche und zu den kirchl. Bewegungen seiner Zeit), Leipz. 1870; DURAND DE LAUR (Erasme, précurseur et initiateur de Vesprit moderne), Par. 1873, 2 vols.; R. B. DRUMMOND (Erasmus, his Life and Character), Lond. 1878, 2 vols.; G. FEUGERE (Er., étude sur sa vie et ses ouvrages), Par. 1874; PENNINGTON, Lond. 1875; MILMAN (in Savonarola, Erasmus, and other Essays), Lond. 1870; Nisarp, Rénaissance et réforme, Paris, 1877.— Also WokEeR: De Erasmi Rotterodami studiis irenicis. Paderborn, 1872. W. ViIscHER: Erasmiana. Programm zur Rectoratsfeier der Univers. Basel. Basel, 1876. ἐς Brasmus” in Ersch and Gruber, vol. XXXVI. (by EruHarp) ; in the ‘‘ Allg. Deutsche Biogr.” VI. 160-180 (by KAmmet); in Herzog,! IV. 114-121 (by Hacennacn), and in Herzog,? IV. 278-290 (by R. StAHE- Lin); in the “ Encycl. Brit.,” 9th ed., VIII. 512-518. ScHLoTrTMaNn: Erasmus redivivus, Hal. 1883. Comp. Lit. in § 72.
The quarrel between King Henry and Luther was the occasion of a far more serious controversy and open breach between Erasmus and the Reformation. This involved a separation of humanism from Protestantism.
The Position of Erasmus.
Desiderius Erasmus of Rotterdam! (1466-1536) was the king among scholars in the early part of the sixteenth century. He combined native genius, classical and biblical learning, lively imagination, keen wit, and refined taste. He was the most cultivated man of his age, and the admired leader of scholastic Europe from Germany to Italy and Spain, from
1 His double name is a Latin and Greek translation of his father’s Christian name Gerard (Roger), or Gerhard = Gernhaber or Liebhaber, i.e., Beloved, in medieval Latin Desiderius, in Greek Erasmus, or rather Erasmius from ᾿Εράσμιος, Lovely. He found out the mistake when he became familiar with Greek, and accordingly gave his godson, the son of his publisher Froben, the name John Erasmius (Erasmiolus). In dedicating to him an improved edition of his Colloquies (1524), he calls this book ‘‘ ἐράσμιον, the delight of the Muses who foster sacred things.’? He was equally unfortunate in the additional epithet Roterodamus, instead of Roterodamensis. But he was innocent of both mistakes.
402 THE GERMAN REFORMATION. A.D. 1517 To 15380.
England to Hungary. The visible unity of the Catholic Church, and the easy interchange of ideas through the medium of one learned language, explain in part his unique position. No man before or since acquired such undisputed sovereignty in the republic of letters. No such sovereignty is possible nowadays when distinguished scholars are far more numerous, and when the Church is divided into hostile camps.!
Erasmus shines in the front rank of the humanists and forerunners of the Reformation, on the dividing line between the middle ages and modern times. His great mission was to revive the spirit of classical and Christian antiquity, and to make it a reforming power within the church. He cleared
the way for a work of construction which required stronger.
hands than his. He had no creative and no organizing power. The first period of his life till 1524 was progressive ana reformatory; the second, till his death, 1536, was conservative and reactionary.
He did more than any of his contemporaries to prepare the church for the Reformation by the impulse he gave to classical, biblical, and patristic studies, and by his satirical exposures of ecclesiastical abuses and monastic ignorance and bigotry. But he stopped half way, and after a period of hesitation he openly declared war against Luther, thereby injuring both his own reputation and the progress of the movement among scholars. He was a reformer against reform, and in league with Rome. Thus he lost the respect and confidence of both parties. It would have been better for his fame if he had died in 1516, just after issuing the Greek Testament, a year before the Reformation. To do justice to him, we must look backward. Men of transition, like Staupitz, Reuchlin, and Erasmus, are no less necessary than bold leaders of a new
1 Drummond (II. 337) calls Erasmus ‘‘the greatest luminary of his age, the greatest scholar of any age.” But his learning embraced only the literature in the Greek and Latin languages.
ee ]᾿ΡΕΙΟῈ