|
The great intellectual revival, that followed upon the successful
issue of the struggle for freedom waged by Gregory VII and his
successors, reached the zenith of its glory in the thirteenth century.
Scholasticism, as expounded by men like Alexander of Hales, Albert
the Great, Roger Bacon, St. Bonaventure, and St. Thomas,
and illustrated by a wealth of material drawn alike from the
Scriptures, the writings of the Fathers, the wisdom of Pagan
philosophers, and the conclusions of natural science, was alone deemed
worthy of serious attention. Classical studies either were neglected
entirely even in the centres of learning, or were followed merely for
the assistance they might render in the solution of the philosophical
and theological problems, that engaged men's minds in an age when
Christian faith reigned supreme.
The Catholic Church, indeed, had never been hostile to classical
studies, nor unmindful of their value, as a means of developing the
powers of the human mind, and of securing both breadth of view and
beauty of expression. Some few teachers here and there, alarmed by
the danger of corrupting Christian youth by bringing it into contact
with Pagan ideals, raised their voices in protest, but the majority
of the early Fathers disregarded these warnings as harmful and
unnecessary. Origen, St. Clement of Alexandria, St. Gregory
of Nazianzen, St. Basil, and St. Jerome, while not ignoring
the dangers of such studies, recommended them warmly to their
students, and in the spirit of these great leaders the Catholic
Church strove always to combine classical culture and Christian
education.
With the fall of the Empire, consequent upon its invasion by the
barbarian hordes, classical studies were banished to some extent to the
Western Isles, Ireland and Britain, from which they were
transplanted to the Continent principally during the Carlovingian
revival.[1] In the cathedral, collegiate, and monastic schools
the classics were still cultivated, though beyond doubt compilations
were used more frequently than were the original works; and even in the
darkest days of the dark ages some prominent ecclesiastics could be
found well versed at least in the language and literature of Rome. It
looked, too, for a time, as if the intellectual revival of the
twelfth century were to be turned towards the classics; but the example
of men like John of Salisbury was not followed generally, and the
movement developed rapidly in the direction of philosophy. As a
consequence, the study of Latin was neglected or relegated to a
secondary place in the schools, while Greek scholarship disappeared
practically from Western Europe. The Scholastics, more anxious
about the logical sequence of their arguments than about the beauties of
literary expression, invented for themselves a new dialect, which,
however forcible in itself, must have sounded barbarous to any one
acquainted with the productions of the golden age of Roman literature
or even with the writings of the early Fathers of the Latin Church.
Nor was it the language merely that was neglected. The monuments and
memorials of an earlier civilisation were disregarded, and even in
Rome itself, the City of the Popes, the vandalism of the ignorant
wrought dreadful havoc.
So complete a turning away from forces that had played such a part in
the civilisation of the world was certain to provoke a reaction.
Scholasticism could not hold the field for ever to the exclusion of
other branches of study, especially, since in the less competent hands
of its later expounders it had degenerated into an empty formalism.
The successors of St. Thomas and St. Bonaventure had little of
their originality, their almost universal knowledge, and their powers
of exposition, and, as a result, students grew tired of the endless
wranglings of the schools, and turned their attention to other
intellectual pursuits.
Besides, men's ideas of politics, of social order, and of religion
were changing rapidly, and, in a word, the whole outlook of the world
was undergoing a speedy transformation. In the Middle Ages religion
held the dominant position and was the guiding principle in morals, in
education, in literature, and in art; but as the faith of many began
to grow cold, and as the rights of Church and State began to be
distinguished, secularist tendencies soon made themselves felt.
Philosophy and theology were no longer to occupy the entire
intellectual field, and other subjects for investigation must be
found. In these circumstances what was more natural than that some
should advocate a return to the classics and all that the classics
enshrined? Again, the example set by the tyrants who had grasped the
reins of power in the Italian States, by men like Agnello of Pisa,
the Viscontis and Francesco Sforza of Milan, Ferrante of Naples,
and the de' Medici of Florence, was calculated to lower the moral
standard of the period, and to promote an abandonment of Christian
principles of truth, and justice, and purity of life. Everywhere men
became more addicted to the pursuit of sensual pleasure, of vain
glory, and material comfort; and could ill brook the dominant ideas of
the Middle Ages concerning the supernatural end of man,
self-denial, humility, patience, and contempt for the things that
minister only to man's temporal happiness. With views of this kind in
the air it was not difficult to persuade them to turn to the great
literary masterpieces of Pagan Rome, where they were likely to find
principles and ideals more in harmony with their tastes than those set
before them by the Catholic Church.
The thirteenth, fourteenth, and fifteenth centuries, then, mark a
period of transition from the Middle Ages to modern times. They saw
a sharp struggle being waged between two ideals in politics, in
education, in literature, in religion, and in morality. In this
great upheaval that was characterised by a demand for unrestricted
liberty of investigation, a return to the study of nature and of the
natural sciences, the rise and development of national literatures,
and the appearance of a new school of art, the Humanist movement or
the revival of the study of the classics, the "literae humaniores",
played the fundamental part. In more senses than one it may be called
the Age of the Renaissance.
Nor was it a matter of chance that this revival of interest in
classical studies should have made itself felt first in Italy, where
the downfall of the Empire, and the subsequent development of petty
states seem to have exercised a magical influence upon the intellectual
development of the people. The Italians were the direct heirs to the
glory of ancient Rome. Even in the days of their degradation, when
the capital deserted by the Popes was fast going to ruin, and when
foreigners and native tyrants were struggling for the possession of
their fairest territories, the memory of the imperial authority of
their country, and the crumbling monuments that bore witness to it
still standing in their midst, served to turn their patriotic ardour
towards the great literary treasures bequeathed to them by Pagan
Rome. Greek literature, too, was not forgotten, though in the
thirteenth century few western scholars possessed any acquaintance with
the language. Many causes, however, combined to prepare the way for
a revival of Greek. The commercial cities of Italy were in close
touch with the Eastern Empire, especially since the Crusades;
ambassadors, sent by the Emperors to seek the assistance of the Pope
and of the Western rulers in the struggle against the Turks, were
passing from court to court; the negotiations for a reunion of the
Churches, which had been going on since the days of the first Council
of Lyons, rendered a knowledge of Greek and of the writings of the
Greek Fathers necessary for some of the leading ecclesiastics of the
West; while, finally, the fall of Constantinople in 1453 forced
many Greek scholars to seek a refuge in Italy or France, and
provided the agents sent by the Popes and Italian rulers with a
splendid opportunity of securing priceless treasures for the Western
libraries.
Though Dante (1265-1321) is sometimes regarded as the
earliest of the Humanist school[2] on account of his professed
admiration for some of the Pagan masters and of the blending in his
"Divina Comedia" of the beauties of Roman literature with the
teaching of the Fathers and Scholastics, still, the spirit that
inspired him was the spirit of Christianity, and his outlook on life
was frankly the outlook of the Middle Ages. To Petrarch
(1304-74) rather belongs the honour of having been the most
prominent, if not the very first writer, whose works were influenced
largely by Humanist ideals. Born in Arezzo in 1304, he
accompanied his father to Avignon when the latter was exiled from
Florence. His friends wished him to study law; but, his poetic
tendencies proving too strong for him, he abandoned his professional
pursuits to devote his energies to literature. The patronage and help
afforded him willingly by the Avignonese Popes[3] and other
ecclesiastics provided him with the means of pursuing his favourite
studies, and helped him considerably in his searches for manuscripts of
the classics. Though only a cleric in minor orders, he was appointed
Canon of Lombez (1335), papal ambassador to Naples
(1343), prothonotary apostolic (1346), and archdeacon of
Parma (1348). These positions secured to him a competent
income, and, at the same time, brought him into touch with libraries
and influential men.
The ruin of Italy and Rome, caused in great measure by the absence
of the Popes during their residence at Avignon, roused all the
patriotic instincts of Petrarch, and urged him to strive with all his
might for the restoration of the ancient glory of his country. Hence
in his politics he was strongly nationalist, and hence, too, he threw
the whole weight of his influence on the side of Cola di Rienzi, when
in 1347 the latter proclaimed from the Capitol the establishment of
the Roman Republic. Nor did he hesitate to attack the Popes, to
whom he was indebted so deeply, for their neglect of Rome and the
Papal States, as well as for the evils which he thought had fallen
upon Italy owing to the withdrawal of the Popes to Avignon. He
himself strove to awaken in the minds of his countrymen memories of the
past by forming collections of old Roman coins, by restoring or
protecting wherever possible the Pagan monuments, and by searching
after and copying manuscripts of the classical writers. In poetry,
Virgil was his favourite guide. As a rule he wrote in Italian, but
his writings were saturated with the spirit of the early Pagan
authors; while in his pursuit of glory and his love for natural,
sensible beauty, he manifested tendencies opposed directly to the
self-restraint, symbolism, and purity of the Middle Ages. His
longest poem is "Africa", devoted to a rehearsal of the glories of
ancient Rome and breathing a spirit of patriotism and zeal for a long
lost culture, but it is rather for his love songs, the "canzoni",
that he is best remembered.
Petrarch, though a Humanist,[4] was no enemy of the Christian
religion, nor did he imagine for a moment that the study of the Pagan
classics could prove dangerous in the least degree to revealed
religion. It is true that his private life did not always correspond
to Christian principles of morality, and it is equally true that at
times his patriotism led him to speak harshly of the rule of the Popes
in Italy and Rome; but he never wavered in his religious
convictions, and never recognised that Pagan literature and ideals
should be judged by other than current Christian standards.
The example of Petrarch was not followed, however, by several of the
later Humanists. His friend and disciple, Boccaccio
(1313-75), imitated his master in his love for the classics
and in his zeal for classical culture, and excelled him by acquiring,
what Petrarch had failed utterly to acquire, a good knowledge of
Greek. Like Petrarch, he was assisted largely by the Popes, and
took service at the papal court. But his views of life and morality
were coloured by Paganism rather than by Christianity. Many of his
minor poems are steeped in indecency and immorality, and reflect only
too clearly the tendency to treachery and deceit so characteristic of
the Italian rulers of his day; while the "Decameron", his greatest
work, is more like the production of a Pagan writer than of one
acquainted with Christian ethics and ideals. He delighted in
lampooning the clergy, particularly the monks, charging them with
ignorance, immorality, and hypocrisy. Such a line of conduct was not
likely to recommend the apostles of the new learning to the admirers of
Scholasticism, nor to create and foster a friendly alliance between
the two camps. Yet, personally, Boccaccio was not an enemy of
Christianity, and never aimed, as did some of the later Humanists,
at reviving Paganism under the guise of promoting literature. He was
unshaken in his acceptance of the Christian revelation, and, as the
years advanced, he began to realise the evil of his ways and the
dangerous character of his writings. Strange to say, it was to a body
of the monks, whom he delighted in attacking, that he bequeathed the
valuable library which he had brought together with such labour.
Had the Humanists contented themselves with advocating merely a return
to classical studies, and had the Scholastics recognised that
philosophy was not the only path to culture, it might have been
possible to avoid a conflict. But, unfortunately for religion, there
were extremists on both sides. On the one hand, some of the later
Humanists, influenced largely by the low moral tone of the age, aimed
at nothing less than the revival of Paganism, pure and simple;
while, on the other, not a few of the Scholastics insisted strongly
that Pagan literature, however perfect, should have no place in
Christian education. Between these two conflicting parties stood a
large body of educated men, both lay and cleric, who could see no
irreconcilable opposition between Christianity and the study of the
classics, and who aimed at establishing harmony by assigning to the
classics the place in education willingly accorded to them by many of
the Fathers of the Church.
But the influence of this latter body could not effect a
reconciliation. A large section of the Humanists openly vindicated
for themselves freedom from the intellectual and moral restraints
imposed by Christianity. Laurentius Valla[5] (1405-57)
in his work, "De Voluptate", championed free indulgence in all
kinds of sensual pleasures, attacked virginity as a crime against the
human race, and ridiculed the idea of continence and self-denial,
while in his own life he showed himself a faithful disciple of the
Epicurianism that he propounded in his writings. His denunciations,
too, of the Popes as the usurping tyrants of Rome in his work on the
Constantine Donation were likely to do serious injury to the head of
the Church in his spiritual as well as in his temporal capacity. But
bad as were the compositions of Valla, they were harmless when
compared with the books and pamphlets of Beccadelli, the Panormite,
who devoted himself almost exclusively to what was indecent and
repulsive. Poggio Bracciolini in his work, "Facetiae", and
Filelfo, though not equally bad, belong to the same category. In
the hands of these men the Renaissance had become, to a great extent,
a glorification of Pagan immorality. Their books were condemned by
many of the religious orders, but without avail. They were read and
enjoyed by thousands, in whom the wholesale corruption prevalent in
Florence, Siena, and Venice, had deadened all sense of morality.
A large number of the later Renaissance school were Christians only
in name. If the great body of them were judged by the heathen figures
and phraseology with which their works abound, they could hardly be
acquitted of Pagan tendencies; but in case of many of them these
excesses are to be attributed to pedantry rather than to defection from
the faith. In case of others, however, although they were wary in
their expressions lest they might forfeit their positions, Christian
teaching seems to have lost its hold upon their minds and hearts.
Carlo Marsuppini, Chancellor of Florence, Gemistos Plethon, the
well- known exponent of Platonic philosophy, Marsilio Ficino,
Rinaldo degli Albizzi, and the members of the Roman Academy
(1460), under the leadership of Pomponius Laetus, were openly
Pagan in their lives and writings. Had the men in authority in Italy
been less depraved such teaching and example would have been suppressed
with firmness; or had the vast body of the people been less sound in
their attachment to Christianity, Neo-Paganism would have arisen
triumphant from the religious chaos.[6]
But not all of the Humanists belonged to the school of Valla,
Beccadelli, Poggio, and Marsuppini. The Camaldolese monk,
Ambrogio Traversari, his pupil Giannozzo Manetti
(1431-59), a layman thoroughly devoted to the Church, and
the first of the Humanists to turn his attention to the Oriental
languages, Lionardo Bruni, so long Apostolic Secretary at the
papal court and afterwards Chancellor of Florence, Maffeo Vegio
(1407-58), the Roman archaeologist, who in his work on
education endeavoured to combine classical culture with Christian
revelation, Vittorino da Feltre, a model in his life and methods for
Christian teachers, Pico della Mirandola, Sadoleto, and Bida,
were all prominent in the classical revival, but at the same time
thoroughly loyal to the Church. They were the moderate men between
the Pagan Humanists and the extreme Scholastics. Their aim was to
promote learning and education, and to widen the field of knowledge by
the introduction of the ancient literary masterpieces, not at the
expense of an abandonment of Christianity, but under the auspices and
in support of the Catholic Church. Following in the footsteps of
Origen, St. Gregory, St. Basil, and St. Augustine, they
knew how to admire the beauties of Pagan literature without accepting
its spirit or ideals, and hence they have been called the Christian
Humanists.
The revival of Greek in Italy, where Greek literature was
practically unknown, is due in great measure to the arrival of Greek
scholars, who were induced to come by promises of a salary and
position, or who travelled thither on political or ecclesiastical
missions. Of these the principal were Manuel Chruysoloras engaged at
work in Florence from 1396, Cardinal Bessarion
(1403?-72) who came westward for the Council of Florence and
ended his days in Venice to which he bequeathed his library, Gemistos
Plethon (1355-1450) the principal agent in the establishment
of the Platonic academy at Florence, George of Trebizond,
Theodore Gaza, Lascaris, Andronicus Callistus, and others who
fled from Greece to escape the domination of the Turks. With the
help of these men and their pupils a knowledge of Greek and of Greek
literature was diffused through Italy, and in a short time throughout
the Continent. Everywhere collections of Greek manuscripts began to
be formed; agents were sent to the East to buy them wherever they
could be discovered, and copyists and translators were busy at work in
all the leading centres of Italy. The fall of Constantinople in
1453 tended to help the Greek revival in the West by the
dispersion of both scholars and manuscripts through Italy, France,
and Germany.
Humanism owes its rapid development in Italy not indeed to the
universities, for the universities, committed entirely to the
Scholastic principles of education, were generally hostile, but
rather to the exertions of wandering teachers and to the generous
support of powerful patrons. In Rome it was the Popes who provided
funds for the support of Humanist scholars, for the collection and
copying of manuscripts, and for the erection of libraries where the
great literary treasures of Greece and Rome might be available for the
general public; in Florence it was the de' Medici, notably Cosmo
(1429-64) and Lorenzo the Magnificent (1449-92), by
whose exertions Florence became the greatest centre of literary
activity in Europe; in Milan it was the Viscontis and the Sforzas;
in Urbino Duke Federigo and his friends; and in Ferrara and Mantua
the families of d'Este and Gonzaga. Academies took the place of
universities. Of these the academy of Florence, supported by the
de' Medici and patronised by the leading Greek and Italian
scholars, was by far the most influential and most widely known. The
academy of Rome, founded (1460) by Pomponius Laetus, was
frankly Pagan in its tone and as such was suppressed by Paul II.
It was revived, however, and patronised by Sixtus IV, Julius
II, and Leo X. Similar institutions were to be found in most of
the Italian States, notably at Venice and Naples. In nearly all
these cities valuable manuscript libraries were being amassed, and were
placed generously at the disposal of scholars.
Another important aid to the popularisation of the works of the Greek
and Latin writers was the invention of printing and its introduction
into Italy. The first printing press in Italy was established at the
Benedictine monastery of Subiaco, whence it was transferred to
Rome. From this press were issued editions of the Latin classics,
such as the works of Lactantius, Caesar, Livy, Aulus Gellius,
Virgil, Lucan, Cicero, and Ovid. Aldo Manuzio, himself an
enthusiastic student of Greek literature, settled at Venice in
1490, and established a printing press with the intention of
bringing out editions of the principal Greek authors. His house was
the great centre for Greek scholars from all parts of Italy, and from
the Aldine Press were issued cheap and accurate editions of the Greek
classics. Later on when Florence and Milan were disturbed by the
invasion of Charles VIII of France (1483-98), and when
Naples was captured by the Spaniards the Humanist movement found a
generous patron in Leo X, a scion of de' Medici family. From
the press founded by Leo X many classical texts were issued till the
pillaging of the city by the imperial troops in 1527 dealt a death
blow to the revival in Italy.
That there was no opposition between the study of the classics and the
teaching of Christianity is evidenced by the friendly attitude adopted
by the Papacy towards the Humanist movement. The Avignon Popes,
Benedict XII (1334-42) and Clement VI
(1342-52), heaped honours and emoluments upon Petrarch and
provided him with the means of acquiring manuscripts and of meeting
scholars likely to assist him. A similar attitude towards the movement
was adopted by Urban V (1362-70). The leading classical
scholars such as Coluccio, Salutati, Francesco Bruni, Lionardo
d'Aretino, etc., were employed at the Papal court, and the
apostolic college of secretaries became one of the greatest centres for
the propagation of Humanism. The troubles that fell upon the Church
during the Great Western Schism diverted the attention of the rival
Popes from literary pursuits; but as soon as peace had been restored
by the Council of Constance Martin V (1417-31) assembled
around him in Rome many of the ablest classical scholars, and vied
with his cardinals in his protection of the Humanist movement. Eugene
IV (1431-47) was, if anything, more favourable, but yet
his sympathies did not blind him to the dangerous tendencies of the
revival as manifested in the books of men like Beccadelli.[7]
With the election of Nicholas V (1447-55)[8] the
triumph of Humanism at Rome seemed secure. The new Pope was himself
one of the party. As a tutor in Florence he had been brought into
contact with the great literary men of the time and had become an ardent
student of the classics, nor did his enthusiasm lose any of its ardour
when he ascended the Papal throne. His aim was to make Rome the
intellectual as well as the religious capital of the world, and with
this object in view he invited to his court the most distinguished
scholars of the age, and bestowed upon not a few of them, such as
Albergati, Capranica, and Caesarini the rank of cardinal. That he
fully recognised the advantages which religion might derive from the
revival of letters, and that he aimed at employing the services of the
Humanists in defence of Christianity is evident from the works to
which he directed the attention of scholars. The texts of the
Scripture, the translations of the Greek Fathers, and the
preparation of critical studies on the Lives of the Saints were
amongst the works recommended to his literary friends. At the same
time he did not proclaim war upon the less orthodox of the Humanist
school. Men like Valla, Poggio, Filelfo, and Marsuppini were
treated with friendliness and even with favour. Whether such a line of
conduct was dictated by prudence and by the hope of winning over these
scholars to a better understanding, or whether his anxiety for the
success of his own literary schemes blinded him to the serious excesses
of such leaders it is difficult to say; but, at any rate, it serves
to show the great liberty enjoyed by literary men at this period even in
the very city of the Popes.
As a means of ensuring to Rome the most prominent place in the
revival, agents were dispatched to Greece, Turkey, Germany,
France, and even to Sweden and Norway, to hunt for manuscripts.
No expense was spared to secure everything that could be purchased or
to have copies made where purchase was impossible. In order to
preserve these treasures and make them available for scholars the
Vatican Library was undertaken by orders of the Pope. Though long
before this time the library of the Popes was of considerable
importance, yet on account of the immense number of volumes produced by
Nicholas V he is generally regarded as the founder of the Vatican
Library. The number of volumes which it contained at the time of his
death is variously estimated at from one to nine thousand. The works
of the Fathers of the Church, and the Scholastics and Canonists
were well represented.[9]
After the death of Nicholas V the Pagan side of the Humanist
movement became more and more apparent. Pius II
(1458-64), who, as Aeneas Sylvius, was well known as a
clever writer of the Humanist school, seems as Pope to have been
decidedly suspicious of his former friends. His own private library
was filled with Christian authors, and care was taken to show favour
only to those classical scholars whose writings were above reproach.
Yet the cares of his office and the promotion of the crusade on which
he had set his heart prevented him from taking the necessary steps for
the purification of his court, and, as a result, many of the members
of the College of Abbreviators were allowed to remain in office though
they were really Pagan at heart. Paul II could not tolerate such
a state of affairs. He promptly abolished the College of
Abbreviators, suppressed the Roman Academy, and arrested its two
prominent leaders, Pomponius Laetus and Platina.
If Paul II erred on the side of severity some of his successors
went to the other extreme of laxity. The period of the political
Popes, from Sixtus IV to Julius II (1471-1513),
was marked by a serious decline in the religious spirit, nor can it be
said that the policy of the Popes was calculated to check the downward
tendency. Their attention was occupied too much by the politics of the
petty Italian States to permit them to fulfil the duties of their high
office; and, as a consequence, the interests of religion were
neglected. Sixtus IV adopted the friendly attitude of Nicholas
V towards the Renaissance. The College of Abbreviators was
restored, the Roman Academy was recognised, and Platina was
appointed librarian. The manuscripts in the Vatican Library were
increased, more ample accommodation was provided, and every facility
was given to scholars to consult the papal collection. Hence it is
that Sixtus IV is regarded generally as the second founder of the
Vatican Library.
The revolutions and wars, caused by the invasion of Italy by the
French and the Spaniards during the closing years of the fifteenth
century and the early portion of the sixteenth, dealt a serious blow to
Humanism in Florence, Milan, Venice, and other Italian centres.
But the misfortunes of those cities served to strengthen the movement
at Rome. Julius II (1503-13) proved himself a generous
patron of literature and in a special manner of art. Men like
Giuliano da Sangello, Sansovino, Bramante, Michael Angelo, and
Raphael were invited to Rome and induced to devote their genius to the
service of religion and the glory of the Papacy. On the death of
Julius II in 1513 the complete triumph of the Humanist
movement in Rome was assured by the election of Giovanni de' Medici
who took the name of Leo X (1513-21).[10] As the son
of Lorenzo the Magnificent, to whom Florence owes its literary
renown, and as the pupil of the celebrated Humanists, Poliziano and
Marsilio Ficino, he was committed almost of necessity to the
Humanist movement. Scholars and artists flocked to Rome from all
sides to greet the new Pope and to assure themselves of his favour and
protection. Under the new regime literary merit was the principal
qualification sought for in candidates aspiring to the highest
ecclesiastical honours. The Roman University was reorganised; the
search for manuscripts was renewed with vigour; a new college for the
promotion of Greek studies in Rome was founded, and the services of
Lascaris and Musuro were secured; and artists like Raphael and
Bramante received every encouragement. Humanism was at last
triumphant in Rome, but, unfortunately, its triumph was secured at
the expense of religion. Nor was Humanism destined to enjoy the
fruits of the victory for a lengthened period. The outbreak of the
Reformation and the capture of Rome by the soldiers of Charles V
turned the attention of the Popes to more pressing concerns.
The Renaissance movement in Germany is due largely to the influence
of Italian scholars and to the teaching of the Brothers of the Common
Life in their school at Deventer.[11] The close political
relations existing between the German States and the cities of
Northern Italy, the mission of Petrarch to the court of Charles
IV, the intermingling of German and Italian scholars at the
councils of Constance, Florence, and Basle, and the exertions of
Aeneas Sylvius, afterwards Pius II, during his term of office
as Chancellor of Frederick III, helped largely to promote the
study of the classics in Germany, especially when the invention and
development of the art of printing had solved the difficulty of
procuring manuscripts. As in Italy, Humanism owes much of its
success to the generosity of powerful patrons such as the Emperor
Maximilian I, Frederick Elector of Saxony and his kinsman,
Duke George, Joachim I of Brandenburg, and Philip of the
Palatinate, Bishop John von Dalberg of Worms, and Archbishop
Albrecht of Mainz; and as in Italy the academies were the most
powerful means of disseminating classical culture, so also in Germany
learned societies like the "Rhenana", founded by Bishop Dalberg,
and the "Danubiana" in Vienna, were most successful in promoting
the literary propaganda.
But, unlike the Italian, the German revival was assisted largely by
the universities. Basle, Erfurt, Heidelburg, and Leipzig showed
unmistakably their sympathy towards the movement, and in a short time
the programmes of university studies in nearly all the leading centres
were modified in accordance with the new ideas of education.
Scholasticism was obliged to make way for the classics and natural
science. Cologne, alone in Germany, refused to abandon its old
system, and, though not unfriendly to the classics, as is evident by
the presence of Ortwin Gratius on its list of professors, still it
showed itself highly distrustful of the tendencies of some of the
Humanist leaders. Yet German Humanism had little, if anything, in
common with the flagrant irreligion and immorality of the Italian
school. With one or two exceptions German Humanists never assailed
revealed religion as such, but attacked instead the prevailing
educational system, which they held to be responsible for the
widespread ignorance and general decline of the religious spirit. Many
of the leading German scholars were exemplary in their moral character
and in their loyalty to the Church, and few, even of those who were
regarded as hostile, showed any sympathy with Luther once they
understood that he aimed at revolt rather than reform.
Some of the greatest of the German Humanists differed from their
Italian contemporaries also in the fact that they turned the
intellectual revival into scientific channels, and made the study of
the classics subservient to mathematical and astronomical research.
Cardinal Nicholas of Cusa (1400-64), George Peurbach of
Vienna (d. 1461), John Muller of Konigsberg
(1436-76), better known by his Latin name Regiomontanus,
and the great churchman and astronomer Copernicus
(1473-1543) belonged to this section, which prepared the way
for modern scientific developments. With these men religion and
science went hand in hand.
On the purely literary side the most famous of the German Humanists
were Conrad Celtes (1459-1508) the most active of the
promoters of the classical revival beyond the Alps and one of the
earliest of the German poets; Pirkeimer (1470-1528), who
hoped for great things from the Lutheran movement at first, but having
realised its real nature remained loyal to the Church; Mutianus
Rufus (1471-1526), a canon of Gotha and at the same time a
well-known free-thinker; Grotus Rubeanus (1480-1504),
who at first favoured Luther; Jakob Wimpheling (1450-
1528), and Johannes Trithemius (1462-1516), the
learned historian and abbot of Sponheim; Ulrich von Hutten
(1488-1523), and Johann Reuchlin (1455-1522).
Of these the most important from the point of view of ecclesiastical
history are von Hutten[12] and Reuchlin. The former was born in
the year 1488 and was sent for his education to the monastery of
Fulda, from which he fled with very little mental equipment except a
lasting hatred and distrust for all monks and ecclesiastics. As a
wandering student he visited the leading centres of learning in Germany
and Northern Italy, where he was particularly remarkable for his
dissolute life, his ungovernable temper, and his biting sarcasm.
Taking advantage of the rising spirit of unfriendliness between the
Teuton and the Latin countries, he posed as a patriot burning with
love for Germany and the Germans, and despising the French, the
Italians, and in particular the Pope. Against the monks and
theologians he directed his bitterest satires, to the delight of many,
who did not foresee the dangers of such attacks at a time when the
German nation generally was growing less friendly to the Papacy.
A dispute, which broke out about the destruction or suppression of
Jewish books, afforded him a splendid opportunity of venting his
spleen against the Church. A converted Jew of Cologne named
Pfefferkorn advocated the suppression of all Jewish religious books
except the Old Testament, as the best means of converting his former
co-religionists. The Emperor, Maximilian, was not unwilling to
listen to such advice supported as it was by the universities of
Cologne, Mainz, and Erfut. Reuchlin, a professor of Heidelberg
and himself a well-known Hebrew scholar, opposed such a policy as bad
in itself and as injurious to the proper understanding of the Old
Testament. A warm controversy thereupon ensued. The Dominicans of
Cologne espoused the cause of Pfefferkorn, while the Humanists,
scenting in the attack upon Jewish literature an onslaught directed
against the entire literary revival, supported the contentions of
Reuchlin. It was a war between two opposing schools--the
Theologians and the Humanists; and, unfortunately for the
Theologians, they had selected their ground badly, and were but
poorly equipped for a battle in which victory was to be decided by
popular opinion.
Reuchlin was summoned to appear before the Inquisitor to answer for
the views put forward in his "Augenspeigel" (1511), and was
condemned. He appealed to Rome, and the Bishop of Speier was
ordered to investigate the case. The result was the acquittal of
Reuchlin (1514), but his adversaries, having objected to the
mode of trial, the case was transferred once more to the Roman
courts. Meanwhile the controversy was carried on in Germany with
great bitterness. Reuchlin published a volume of sympathetic
letters[13] received by him from the leading scholars of Germany,
and Erasmus issued a new edition (1515) of his "Praise of
Folly (Encomium Moriae)" in which he ridiculed especially the
monks and theologians.
But the book which was most damaging to the opponents of Humanism was
beyond doubt the "Epistolae virorum obscurorum". It was a work
consisting of two volumes, the first brought out by Grotus Rubeanus
in 1514, and the second mostly from the pen of Urich von Hutten
(1517). Like Reuchlin's work it purported to be a collection
of letters addressed by the theologians to Ortwin Gratius, the
champion of Cologne university and, indeed, of the whole Scholastic
party. It was full of bitterness and vulgarity, but, as a humorous
caricature of the theologians, their arguments and modes of
expression, it was calculated to make them ridiculous especially in the
eyes of the university students. Against an attack of this kind
serious arguments were unavailing, and, unfortunately, there was no
apologist of theology capable of producing a reply couched in a strain
similar to that of the "Epistolae". Gratius himself did undertake
the task in his "Lamentationes obscurorum virorum", but without
success, and undoubtedly in the eyes of the general public the victory
rested with the Humanists. The whole controversy was extremely
unfortunate, because it helped to blind many to the real issues at
stake when the Lutheran movement began. By it the Theologians and
Humanists were divided into two hostile camps, with the result that
the latter were inclined to support Luther against their own former
opponents and in vindication of the liberal policy which they had
advocated; while the Theologian, having been discredited as
narrow-minded obscurantists in the eyes of a large body of university
men, were handicapped seriously in a struggle with Luther even though
their struggle was for fundamental religious principles.[14]
The most remarkable of the men, who, though not Germans, were
closely identified with German Humanists, was Desiderius Erasmus
(1466- 1535).[15] He was born at Rotterdam, was sent
to school with the Brothers of the Common Life at Deventer, entered
a monastery of the Canons Regular attracted by its library rather than
by its rule, and left it after two years to become secretary to the
Bishop of Cambrai. He studied classics at the University of
Paris, and after his ordination as priest by the Bishop of Utrecht
he became a tutor to an English nobleman. Later on he paid a visit to
England, where he received a warm welcome from scholars like Fisher,
Bishop of Rochester, Colet, Dean of St. Paul's, and Sir
Thomas More, and where he was honoured by an appointment as
Professor of Greek in Oxford. But the fever of travel was upon
him. He returned to Paris, made a brief stay at Louvain, and
started out to visit the leading literary centres of Italy, notably
Bologna, Venice, and Rome, in the latter of which he was well
received by Julius II.
On the accession of Henry VIII he returned to England and
lectured for some time at Cambridge. Later on he removed to Basle
and settled down to the work of preparing editions of the New
Testament and of the Fathers. The triumph of the Reformation party
in Basle drove him for a time to seek a refuge in Freiburg, but he
returned to die at Basle in 1536.
In his wanderings Erasmus was brought into contact with the leading
scholars of France, England, Germany, and Italy, and was
thoroughly acquainted with the lights and shadows of the Renaissance
movement. In his knowledge of Greek he was surpassed by few of his
contemporaries, and in the purity and ease of his Latin style he stood
without a serious rival. Like many others of the Humanist school he
delighted in attacking the ignorance of the monks and Scholastics, and
in denouncing the abuses of the age, though, as was the case with most
of the literary reformers of the time, his own life as an ecclesiastic
was far from exemplary.
Yet Erasmus himself was never an enemy of Christianity, nor did he
desire the overthrow of ecclesiastical authority. He did, indeed,
advocate reform, and in his advocacy of reform he may have been carried
too far at times, but in his heart Erasmus had little sympathy with
doctrinal changes. Ignorance he believed to be at the root of the
decline of religion, and hence he would have welcomed a complete change
in the educational system of the Church. Instead of Scholasticism he
advocated study of the Scriptures and of the early Fathers, and in
order to prepare the way for such a policy he devoted himself at Basle
to the task of preparing an edition of the New Testament and of the
Greek Fathers. He was on terms of the closest intimacy with the
leading Humanists of Germany, and shared all their contempt for
scholastic theologians and much of their distrust of the Pope and the
Roman Curia. Hence the sympathy and encouragement of Erasmus were
not wanting to Luther during the early days of his revolt and before
the true object of the movement was rightly understood; but once
Erasmus realised that union with Luther meant separation from the
Church he became more reserved in his approval, and finally took the
field against him. In his work, "De Libero Arbitrio", he
opposed the teaching of Luther on free will, and before his death he
received a benefice from Paul III which he accepted, and an offer
of a cardinal's hat which he declined. His life as an ecclesiastic
was certainly not edifying, and his hatred of ignorance, antiquated
educational methods, and abuses may have led him into excesses, but
his theology was still the theology of the Middle Ages rather than
that of the German Reformers.
In France the earliest of the Humanists were Nicholas of Clemanges
and Gerson, both rectors of Paris University, and both well-known
theologians. They were specially active in putting an end to the
Great Western Schism, but in doing so they laid down certain
principles that led almost inevitably to Gallicanism. The influence
of these two men did not, however, change the policy of Paris
University. For years France lagged behind in the classical
movement, and it was only in the early portion of the sixteenth century
that French Humanism made itself felt.
The movement gained ground by the exertions of individuals and of
literary societies, by the results of the activity of the printing
press, and the protection of influential patrons at the Court of
Francis I (1515-47). Paris University became more
friendly to the classics, and eminent scholars like Lascaris and
Aleandro were invited to lecture on Greek. The College of St.
Barbe became a great classical stronghold within the university, and
the movement began to develop so rapidly as to excite the jealousy and
suspicions of the theologians. This unfortunate division was rendered
more acute by the foundation of the College de France in 1529.
It was handed over entirely to the Humanistic party in spite of the
opposition of the more conservative school, and served as a centre for
all kinds of literary, philological, and antiquarian researches.
The most eminent of the French Humanists were Budaeus
(1467-1540), regarded in his own time as but slightly
inferior to Erasmus, Germanus Brixius (Germain de Brie), Canon
of Notre Dame and translator of portion of the works of St. John
Chrysostom, Stephen Poncher, Bishop of Paris and advocate of the
Humanist party at the Court of Francis I, the Dominican,
William Petit, Robert (1503-59) and Henri
(1528-98) Estienne (Stephanus) to whom we are indebted for
the two monumental works, "Thesaurus Linguae Latinae" and
"Linguae Graecae", Scaliger (1540-1609) the well-known
authority on chronology and epigraphy, and the philologist and
classicist Isaac Casaubon (1559-1614).
In France there was a sharp rivalry from the beginning between the
Scholastics and the Humanists. The university was divided into
separate camps. The college of St. Barbe was opposed by the
Montaigue College, the rector of which was the leader of the
Scholastic party. The Humanists regarded the Theologians as
antiquated, while the Theologians looked upon their opponents as
supporters of the Reformation movement. In case of a few of these,
as for example Lefevre d'Etaples,[16] Gerard Roussel, and
others, these suspicions were fully justified; but in case of many
others their faith was sound, and however much they may have wavered in
life they preferred to die at peace with the Church. To this latter
section belongs Marguerite of Valois,[17] sister of Francis I
She was a patroness of the Humanists and Reformers in Paris and was
opposed undoubtedly to many Catholic practices; but it is not so clear
that she wished for a religious revolution, and at any rate it is
certain that she died a Catholic. This rivalry between the
Theologians and Humanists and the misunderstandings to which it gave
rise are largely responsible for the rapid development of Calvinism
amongst certain classes of French society.
The classical movement in England is due largely to Italian
influences, though the visit of the Greek Emperor Manuel in
1400, and the subsequent visits of Greek envoys and scholars must
have contributed not a little to awaken an interest among English
students in Greek studies. Individual Englishmen began to turn
towards the great centres of Italian Humanism, and to return to their
own country imbued with something of the literary zeal of their Italian
masters. Of these the two who, more than others, contributed to give
Greek and Latin a good standing in the schools of the country were
William Selling and William Hadley, both Benedictine monks of
Canterbury. They studied at Bologna, Padua and Rome, and were
brought into contact with Politian and other distinguished Humanists.
Selling was recognised as an accomplished Greek scholar, and on his
return he set himself to remodel the course of studies at Canterbury so
as to ensure for the classics their proper place. The influence of
Canterbury and of Prior Selling helped very much to spread the
classical revival in England.
Selling's most remarkable pupil was Thomas Linacre
(1460-1524), who went to Oxford after having completed his
early education at Canterbury, and was chosen Fellow of All Soul's
College. Later on he accompanied his old master to Italy, where he
had an opportunity of mastering the intricacies of Latin style from
Politian, the tutor of the children of Lorenzo de' Medici, and of
Greek from Demetrius Chalcondylas. He turned his attention to
medicine and received a degree both at Padua and Oxford. His
position at the courts of Henry VII and Henry VIII gave him
an opportunity of enlisting the sympathies of the leading ecclesiastical
and lay scholars of his day in favour of the literary revival. In his
later years he was ordained priest and held some important
ecclesiastical offices. Other distinguished scholars and patrons of
the revival in England were Grocyn, a companion of Linacre at
Oxford and in Italy and afterwards lecturer on Greek at Exeter
College, Oxford; John Colet (1467-1519), Dean of
St. Paul's, the friend of Budaeus, Erasmus, Linacre, and
Grocyn, and founder of St. Paul's School; William Lilly,
appointed by Dean Colet as first master in this school; Fisher
(1459-1535) Bishop of Rochester; and Sir Thomas More
(1480-1535).
The Humanist movement in England, unlike the corresponding movement
in Italy, was in no sense hostile to religion or to the Catholic
Church. Many of its leaders desired reform, but not a single one of
the prominent scholars of the period showed any sympathy with Luther's
revolt. The very founders of the revival in England, Selling,
Hadley, Linacre and Grocyn, were ecclesiastics whose faith was
beyond suspicion; Colet died as he had lived, thoroughly devoted to
the Church; while Fisher and Sir Thomas More sealed their loyalty
to the ancient faith with their blood.[18]
The revival in Spain owes much to the patronage of Queen Isabella
and the exertions of Cardinal Ximenez (1436-1517). The
leading universities, Seville, Alcala, and Salamanca, were not
unfriendly, and the whole educational system was remodelled in favour
of the classics. Cardinal Ximenez devoted himself to the preparation
of the Polyglot edition of the Bible, the New Testament portion of
which was printed so early as 1514, and the whole work was
published in 1522. The leading Humanist scholars were Lebrixa,
or as he is called in Latin Lebrissensis, Nunez, and Ludovico
Vives (1492-1540), the latter of whom was deemed by his
contemporaries not unworthy of being compared with Erasmus and
Budaeus.
The Humanist movement and the general revival of literary,
scientific, philological and historical studies to which it gave birth
were not in themselves anti-religious, nor did they find in the
Catholic Church a determined opponent. Such studies, on the
contrary, might have contributed much to promote a more enlightened
understanding of theology, and more especially of the Scriptures, a
fact which was understood thoroughly by the ablest ecclesiastics of the
time. In Italy, Germany, France, and England, bishops and
abbots vied with secular princes in their patronage of scholars, while
the influence of the Popes, notably Nicholas V, Sixtus IV,
Julius II, and Leo X was entirely in favour of the Humanist
party.
Yet, while all this is true, the Humanist movement did much,
undoubtedly, to prepare men's minds for the great religious revolt of
the sixteenth century. Springing into life as it did at a time when
the faith of the Middle Ages was on the wane, and when many educated
men were growing tired of the cold formalism and antiquated methods of
the Schoolmen, it tended to develop a spirit of restless inquiry that
could ill brook any restriction. The return to the classics recalled
memories of an earlier civilisation and culture opposed in many
particulars to the genius of Christianity, and the return of nature
tended to push into the background the supernatural idea upon which the
Christian religion is based. But the revival did more. The study of
the classics brought into prominence serious problems regarding the
authenticity, age, and value of certain writings and manuscripts, and
by so doing it created a spirit of criticism and of doubt for which the
Theologians of the day were but poorly prepared. In a word, it was a
period of transition and of intellectual unrest, when new ideals in
education were endeavouring to supplant the old ones, and when neither
the friends of the old nor of the new had distinguished clearly between
what was essential in Christianity and what was purely accidental.
In such a time it was to be expected that ardent Humanists, filled
with their new-born zeal for classical studies, should advance too
rapidly, and by confounding religion with the crude methods of some of
its defenders should jump to the conclusion that a reconciliation
between the revival and religion was impossible. Nor should it be a
matter of surprise that the Theologians, confident in the strength of
their own position and naturally suspicious of intellectual novelties,
were not inclined to look with favour on a movement which owed its
inspiration largely to Pagan sources. Moderate men, on the
contrary, whether Humanists or Scholastics, aimed at a complete
reconciliation. They realised that the great literary and scientific
revival could do much for the defence of religion, and that the Pagan
classics must be appraised according to Christian standards.
But this work of reconciliation was rendered very difficult by the
attitude of extremists on both sides. Many of the Italian
Humanists, as has been shown, were Christians only in name. In
their writings and in their lives they showed clearly that they were
thoroughly imbued with the spirit of Paganism. Such men merited
severe condemnation, and it is to be regretted that the Popes,
particularly Sixtus IV and Leo X, did not adopt a firmer
attitude towards this section of the Italian school. But before
judging too harshly the friendly relations maintained by Sixtus IV
and Leo X with the Italian Humanists, it is well to remember that
the age in which they lived was noted for its general laxity and for the
decline of a proper religious spirit, that the Pagan tone and Pagan
forms of expression used by these writers were regarded as exhibitions
of harmless pedantry rather than as clear proofs of opposition to
Christianity, that most of these writers were always ready to explain
away whatever might appear objectionable in their works, and that,
finally, mildness in the circumstances may have been deemed the best
policy. The attitude of the Popes at any rate prevented an open
conflict between the representatives of the two schools in Italy until
the outbreak of the Reformation and the invasion of Rome put an end to
the danger by destroying the Humanist movement.
In Germany and France there were few traces of an anti-Christian
tendency amongst the supporters of the new learning. But in both
countries, more especially in the former, the supporters of the new
learning criticised severely the ignorance of the monks and
Theologians, and took little pains to conceal their contempt for the
Scholastic methods of education. They blamed the Popes for their
neglect of the true interests of the Church, and held them responsible
in a large measure for the general decline of religion. According to
them the study of theology must be reformed so as to give a more
prominent place to the Scriptures and the writings of the early
Fathers; the development of the internal spirit of religion as
distinct from mere external formalism was to be encouraged, and many of
the existing practices might be discarded as superstitious. Such views
tended naturally to excite the opposition of the Theologians and to
unsettle the religious convictions of educated men who watched the
struggle with indifference.
In this way the ground was prepared for a complete religious revolt.
Luther's movement was regarded by many as merely the logical sequence
of Humanism, but that the Humanists themselves were not willing to
accept this view is clear from the fact that once the early
misunderstandings had been removed, and once the real issues were
apparent, most of the Humanists in Germany and France remained true
to the Church. Instead of regarding Luther as a friend they looked
upon him as the worst enemy of their cause, and on the Reformation as
the death-knell of the Renaissance.
|
|