СНАР. Х. 6 A.D. 1515. steps of those vulgar divines who are accustomed to attribute ecclesiastical authority to whatever in any Erasmus at Basle. 6 way creeps into general use. . . . . I had rather be a common mechanic than the best of their number.' With regard to some other points, it was, he said, more prudent to be silent; but he told Dorpius that he had submitted the rough draft of his Annotations to divines and bishops of the greatest integrity and learning, and these had confessed that they threw much light on Scripture study. He concluded with the expression of a hope that even Dorpius himself, although now protesting against the attempt, would welcome the publication of the book when it came into his hands. This letter 1 written and despatched to the printer, Erasmus proceeded with his journey. The Rhine, swollen by the rains and the rapid melting of Alpine snows, had overflowed its banks; so that the journey, always disagreeable and fatiguing, was this time more than usually so. It was more like swimming, Erasmus said, than riding. But by the end of August2 he was again hard at work in Froben's printing-office putting the finishing strokes to his two great works. By the 1 Erasmus to Dorpius: D. Erasmi, &c. Enarratio in Primum Psalmum, &c. &c. Louvain, Oct. 1515. 2 Erasmus to Wolsey: Eras. Op. iii. p. 1565; App. Epist. lxxiv. wrongly dated 1516 instead of 1515. 3 In a letter prefixed to the Erasmi Epigrammata, Basle, 1518, Froben pays a just tribute to the good humour and high courtesy of Erasmus while at work in his printing office, interrupted as he often was, in the midst of his laborious duties, by frequent requests from all kinds of people for an epigram or a letter from the great scholar.-Pp. 275, 276. 7th of March, 1516, he was able to announce that the CHAP. X. New Testament was out of the printer's hands, and the final colophon put to St. Jerome.1 It is time therefore that we should attempt to realise what these two great works were, and what the peculiar significance of their concurrent publication. 1 Erasmus Urbano Regio: Eras. Op. iii. p. 1554, App. Epist. liii. A.D. 1515 Main object of the Novum Instrumen tum.' CHAP. XI. THE New Testament of Erasmus ought not to be A.D. 1516. regarded by any means as a mere reproduction of the Greek text, or criticised even chiefly as such. The labour which falls to the lot of a pioneer in such a work, the multiplied chances of error in the collation by a single hand, and that of a novice in the art of deciphering difficult manuscripts, the want of experience on the part of the printers in the use of Greek type, the inadequate pecuniary means at the disposal of Erasmus, and the haste with which it was prepared, considering the nature of the work,-all tended to make his version of the Greek text exceedingly imperfect, viewed in the light of modern criticism. He may even have been careless, and here and there uncandid and capricious in his choice of readings, all this, of which I am incapable of forming a conclusive judgment, I am willing to grant by-the-bye. The merit of the New Testament of Erasmus does not mainly rest upon the accuracy of his Greek text,1 although this had cost him a great deal of labour, and was a necessary part of his plan. Not the Greek text. In one place he even supplied was missing by translating the a portion of the Greek text which Latin back into Greek! A.D. 1516. I suppose the object of an author may be most fairly CHAP. XI. gathered from his own express declarations, and that the prefaces of Erasmus to his first edition-the 'Novum • Instrumentum,' as he called it-are the best evidence that can possibly be quoted of the purpose of Erasmus in its publication. To these, therefore, I must beg the reader's attention. 6 object to Now a careful examination of these prefaces cannot Main fail to establish the identity of the purpose of Erasmus be learned in publishing the Novum Instrumentum' with that from its which had induced Colet, nearly twenty years before, to commence his lectures at Oxford. During those twenty years the divergence between the two great rival schools of thought had become wider and wider. prefaces. Italian The intellectual tendencies of the philosophic school The in Italy had become more and more decidedly sceptical. school. The meteor lights of Savonarola, Pico, and Ficino had blazed across the sky and vanished. The star of semipagan philosophy was in the ascendant, and shed its cold light upon the intellect of Italy. 6 Leo X. was indeed a great improvement upon Alexander VI. and Julius II.-of this there could be no doubt. Instead of the gross sensuality of the former and the warlike passions of the latter, what Ranke has well designated a sort of intellectual sensualism,' now reigned in the Papal court. Erasmus had indeed entertained bright hopes of Leo X. He had declared himself in favour of a peaceful policy; he was, too, an enemy to the blind bigotry of the Schoolmen. Nor does he seem to have been openly irreligious. His choice of Sadolet as one of his secretaries was not like the act of a man who himself would scoff at the Y CHAP. XI. Christian faith; though, on the other hand, this enA.D. 1516. lightened Christian was unequally yoked in the office with the philosophical and worldly Bembo. Under former Popes the fear of Erasmus had been 'lest Rome should degenerate into Babylon.' He hoped now that, under Leo X., 'the tempest of war being hushed, 'both letters and religion might be seen flourishing at 'Rome.'1 Its sceptical 6 At the same time he was not blind to the sceptical tendencies. tendencies of the Italian schools. Thus whilst in a letter written not long after this period, expressing his faith in the 'revival of letters,' and his belief that the authority of the Scriptures will not in the long run be 'lessened by their being read and understood correctly ' instead of incorrectly'-whilst thus, in fact, taking a hopeful view of the future-we yet find him confessing to a fear, lest, under the pretext of the revival of ancient literature, Paganism should again endeavour to rear its 'head.' The atmosphere of the Papal Court was indeed far more semi-pagan than Christian. With the revival of classical literature it was natural that there should 2 be a revival of classical taste. And just as the mediæval church of St. Peter was demolished to make room for a classical temple, so it was the fashion in high society at Rome to profess belief in the philosophy of Pliny and Aristotle and to scoff at the Christian faith.3 1 Epist. ad Car. Grymanum, pre- | 1518. See also his reference to the fixed to the Paraphrase on the Epistle to the Romans. Edition Louvain, 1517. same pagan tendencies of Italian philosophy in his treatise entitled 'Ciceronianus,' and the letter prefixed to it. Ranke's History of the Popes, 2 Erasmus Gwolfgango Fabricio |