Moreana, no.

3 1-32 (Nov 197 1): 29-46

VTVOLO

Upon a tyme, when tidyngw came too the citie of Cainthe that
~gRliflippefathertoAlexanderaumamedtheGr8at,~~g
thethemde with an armie mydl to lay h g e to the citie : The
Cainthianabeing forthwith stryken with w t e foam, beganno b d ,
and e a m d y to looke aboute them, and to falle to wake of all
handas. Some to akowre and tryxnm@up harnsis, sum, to m
stoma, mmr, to amendo and buylde hyghsr the w a l k , mms t o
rampiereand fortyfie the bulwarkes, and fortresms, some one thynge,
and some anothw for the defendinqe, and stmgthenynge af the citie.
Ths whiche M e labour, and to& of t h k when Diogsnes the
phylosopher sawe having no profitable busin- hersupon to aette
himself on worke (neither any mtln required his labour, and helpe as
expedient for the cornmen wealth in that needtie) immediatly
girded about him his phylawphicall cloke, and began to rolle, and
tumble up and downe hether and thethsr upon the hih syda, that
lieth adjoyninge to the citie, his mt barrel or tunne, wherein he
dwelled : for other d d y n g e place wold he have none. Thia seing
one of hia frendes, and not a litell muaynge therat, cams to hym :
And I praye the Diogones (quod he) prhie dosst thou thus, ar what
meanest thou hereby ? F m t h e I am tumblyng my t u b k to
(quod he) bycauae it whom no rsaaon that I only should be y d d ,
when, so many be working.
 32 ROBERT COOGAN
Harpsfield merely asserts that Hythlodaeus enables More to compliment
Morton.' Stapleton, like Roper, makes no mention of Raphael ; but, in
his remarks on the Utopia it seems that he identifies Hythlodaeus' views
with those of ore.^ In the seventeenth century, Cresacre More relates
Hvthlodaeus t o More's ~ersonalitv: in literature and in life More often
"fayned matters cunningly t o have heard them of others, which he himself
had invented, as in his preface t o his Utopia he artificially discourseth as
though Raphael Hythlodius had told that whole storie unto him."3
Hoddesdon does not even touch on the Utopia. Nor does Regi in his biogra-
phy, but his appendix samples I d y ' s response to the Utopia in the
Renaissance. Paulus Jovius (d.1552), Bishop of Nocera, holds that it
reveals delightfully a flourishing republic and a holy way of life ; St. R,obert
B e h m i n e (d.162 I ) , a leader of the Counter-Reformation, states that
because of the Utopia More deserves the title of p h i l o ~ o p h e rThere
.~ seems
to be no significant treatment of Hythlodaeus in the eighteenth century.
From the nineteenth century t o the present, however, the Utopia
has attracted much notice ;for socialists and communists it is a far-sighted
vision of reform, for religious polemicists its author is to be damned or
canonized. In the renew;d interest in Raphael, various interpretations
.#
arise which still obtain. Although the lines are not always clear-cut, there
are three major views - one identifies Hythlodaeus completely with More,
a second sees him as a protective screen, the thud focuses on the
differences between More and Raphael.
In the nineteenth century, John Macdiarmid, who is quite puzzled
by the discourse, describes Raphael simply as an adventurous navigator and
an intelligent eye-witness. From his appendix on the Utopia, one can infer
that he twins More and Hythlodaeus. He sees Raphael as part of a
propaedeutic strategy rather than as a philosopher who stimulates thought
by attacks on the establishment. In the dialogue, More uses Hythlodaeus
to expose vices, to ridicule prejudices, and, thus, t o prepare the reader for
a better reception of the radical program in the discourse. Hythlodaeus
should have the audience impatient to hear of the "wonderful islanders."5
Lupton and Bridgett both lean to the view that Raphael is More's
mouthpiece - especially in Book I. Lupton feels that persona-More posits
arguments of straw against communism. These are not t o be taken serious-
ly - the diseased condition of Europe forces More to prescribe desperate
remedies6 Bridgett divorces More from ~ y t h l o d a e u son war and com-
munism, but sees Raphael as a protective screen which enables More t o
----
1. Harpfield-Hitchock. Nicholas Hnrpsfield, me Life and Lkatlr of Sir Thorn
More, ed. E. V. Hitchock (London, 1932), p. 105.
2. Thomas Stapleton, 7he Life and nlu~m'ou~ &rtyrdom of Sir l%onrasMore,
translated by P. E. Hallett, edited by E. E. Reynolds (London, 1966), pp. 28-31.
3. Cresacre More, 7he Life of Sir 7homas More (London. 1726). P. 28.
4. Domenico Regi, Delh Vita di T o m o Mom, 2 vols. (Milan, 1675). 11 pp. 246-48.
5. John Macdiannid. Lives of British Statesmen (London, 180% Appendix I,
p. 5.
6. J. H. Lupton, 77re "Utopin" of Sir 771omrrs More, ed. J. H. Lupton (Oxford,
18')s).p. xxxvii.
NVNC Vlvo w VOLO 33
tell rude truths and discuss burning questions.' Bridgett's position was
taken in order t o rebut Seebohm who held that More was a radical
visionary m youth who became intolerant and conservative during the
Reformation. Seebohm looks on Hythlodaeus as the mouthpiece through
'
which More counsels Henry VIZI.2 Mackintosh distinguishes Raphael from
More in regard t o communism. Because the debate a t Morton's court
amounts to a severe satire on Tudor England.which could provoke a
reprisal, Mackintosh considers Hythlodaeus chiefly as a protective masque.3
i Perplexed by the ironies of the Utopia, he is evidently eager t o get back
:; quickly to the safer ground of biography. Hutton reflects a similar
uneasiness. In regard t o the debate on service, the treatment of thieves.
j and even the communism, he feels that the views expressed by Hythlodaeus
are substantially More's own. Although he states that the vicious condition
! of Europe forces More to propose a voluntary, temporary, and primitive
, Christian communism, he knows that nowhere else does More offer
such a solution. Acknowledging defeat, he concludes : "It is a question
: impossible t o d e ~ i d e . " ~Later he says that More could not endorse
communism, divorce, euthanasia, etc.5
lWJ2NTlETHCENTURYINTERPRETATIONS
i
Our century has witnessed one significant modification : some critics
demand an outright repudiation of the independent philosopher and his
: counsels. Those who still take Raphael as More's prolocutor do so for
I diverse reasons. Sidney Lee does not distinguish between Hythlodaeus and
More ; like Seebohm, he thinks that More turned his back on his youthful
j idealiim.6 Dudok emphasizes the very close relationship between More and
a Hythlodaeus in the dialogue." In passing he mentions that an interest-
ing comparison can be made between Raphael and h m u e l Gulliver -- he
f
then quickly dismissesthe matter by commentingon the difference between
the benign More and the misanthropic Swift. This comparison comes t o
the fore again and partially accounts for this century's deflation of
r
z Hythlodaeus. Dudok, however, will not allow the stature of the inimitable
Hythlodaeus to be diminished. In Raphael, he sees More's deep veneration
1
1
of Plato. Quoting from Churton Collins' edition of the Utopia, he relates
Morton to Cephalus, the lawyer t o Thrasyrmchut, and Hythlodaeus t o
Socrates.8
I
1. TE. Bridptt, Life and Wrings of Blessed Thomas More (London, 1904),
pp. 10244. First edition was 1891.
2. Frederic Seebohm, 7he Oxford Reformers (London, 1913). p. 389. First edition
war 1867.
3. James Mackintosh, me Life of Sir momas More (London, 1831), p. 54.
4. W i a m Holden Hutton, Sir W m s More (London, 1895), pp. 11624.
5. Ibid., pp. 138-39.
6. Sidney Lee,CreatEnglhhmen of the Sixteenth Century (New York, 1904). p. 34.
7. Gerard Dudok, Sir Thomas More and His Utopia (Amsterdam, 1923), p. 11 1.
8. Ibid., pp. 93-94.
 34 ROBERT COOCAN
For various reasons, Routh, Kautsky, Ames and Hexter identify
Hythlodaeus with More. For Miss Routh, who stresses the moral aspects
of the work, he voices More's indictment of pride.1 Praising More as a
prophet of modern communism, Kautsky makes Raphael his mouthpiece.
What persona-More says is not important - what Hythloday says is More's
political confession of faith.2 Raphael protects More and enables him to
express his anticlericaism and h& criti- of England's economy which
exploits the poor.Ames, while taking into account the distinctions made by
Campbelland Chambers between More and Hythlodaeus, CaMOt see how a
satirist could disagree with a view, namely communism, that he develops
as a major issue.3The most forceful case for the identification is made by
Hurter in More's "Utopia" : The Biography of an Idea. In the discourse,
he says, ~ y t h l o d a e u sexpresses More's opinions, and in the dialogue he
represents More's person.' Basing his position on the fact that More se-
riously considered entry into Henry VIIl's service in 1516, Hexter holds
that More's problem coincides exactly with Hythlodaeus'. Further on, this
assumption will be questioned ;and it will be suggested that More decided
t o serve before he completed the dialope. In the Yale Utopia, Hexter
retains his view which amounts t o a modem and tolerant exposition of
Seebohm's position : when More wrote Utopia he was a visionary pos-
sessed by a moment of acute perception.
- - Thus, in 1515-1 516, Hythlodaeus'
counseh were More's - even if these were not ore's ultimate
convictions (xiri).
When one passes from the above position t o that of those who
differentiate between More and ~ ~ t h l o d a e &one, encounters this century's
fear of utopia and the deflation of Hythlodaeus. For Campbell, if More
and Raphael are one in their protest against injustice, they differ consider-
ably in the means they advocate to reform it. Far from being More's
alter ego, that is, the social revolutionary More longed t o be, Hythlodaeus
has too many characteristics foreign t o More's makeup : he is "impatient,
presumptuous, inexperienced and unbalanced in judgment ; and that in
spite of (or was it rather because of ? ) his adventurous journey t o
Nowhere."S Traugott and Hejserman also feel that the journey t o Utopia
was an affliction rather than a blessing. They liken Raphael t o Gulliver
returned &om the land of the ~ o u ~ h n h n m s . ~
1. E.M.C. Routh, Sir %m More and His Friends ;1477-1535 (London 1934).
v. 71.
2. Karl Kautsky, i'7tom.v More and his Utopia (New York, 1959), pp. ,131-39.
3. Russel Ames, Citizen i'7tomos More and His Utopia (Rinceton, 1949), pp. 33-96.
4. J.H. Hexter, More's "Utopia" : i'7te Biogmphy of an I d a (Rinceton, 1952),
p. 114.
5. W.E. Campbell,MoreS "Utopia"rmd His Socicrl Teaching (London, 1930), p. 48.
For a more recent interpretation of HytNodaeus as More's alter ego, r e P. Sawada,
"The Raise of Realpolitik ? H. Oncken and More's Utopia," Moremm, 15-16 (1967),
145-64.
6. See John Traugott, "A Voyage to Nowhere. with Thomas More and Jonathan
Swift : Utopia and m e Voyage to the Hacyhnhnm,"Sewee Review, 69 (1961),
543-565. A. R. Heiserman, "Satire in the Utopia," P M L A, 78 (1963), 163-174.
NVNC wvo VT VOLO
LATEST VIEWS
Since the publication of the Yale Utopia, Sylvester, Berger, and
Johnson have carefully formulated an interpretation akin to this one.
Although space prohibits the lengthy analysis their position merits, a few
major issues will be treated here. The three Yale men associate Greek with
Raphael's alienation. By changing the title from Nusquam to Utopia, and
by giving Raphael a decided reference for Greek learning and culture, More
emphasized the esoteric quality of the mariner's social program. Berger
makes this parenthetical remark about Hythlodaeus' detachment :
"More, like Alberti and other humanists, indicates this tendency by
remarking Hythlodaeus' preference for Greek over Latin".l Johnson
endorses this view, which was not documented in regard t o Alberti and
which cannot be substantiated in regard to More. He even makes the dabious
judgment weightier by calling it-a convention : "As Berger remarks, a
~ r e o c c u ~ a t i o with
n Greek at the expense of Latin is a convention
frequently used by Renaissance humanists t o express a contrast between
philosophic isolation and a more pragmatic and immediate civil in-
volvement."2 Alberti's judgment must be taken in the context of the
advanced civilization of Quincento Italy - not More's backward England.
Speakingof More, Erasmus wonders what his wonderful, rich nature would
not have accom~lishedif his talent had been trained in l t d v (3). .
. , One
of More's greatest achievements was his successful defense and cultivation
of Greek learning which, for England, fust became a practical reality in
his circle. In 1501, while Hythlodaeus was accompanying Vespucci on his
secondvoyasMore put aside his Latin books for Greek ones, and Erasmus
began an intensive study of Greek that lasted for three years. In 1504, the
year of the fust printed editions of the Iliad and Odyssey, Hythlodaeus
wrested permission from Vespucci t o remain behind in Brazil. In the
year More completed the Utopia, Erasmus dedicated t o Leo X his Greek
edition of the New Testament, the appearance of which made Fisher
and Colet eager t o learn Greek. More's letters t o Dorp (October 1515)
and t o Oxford (March 1518) are two of the English Renaissance's most
significant defenses of Greek learning. The letter t o Oxford echoes the
Utopia (5011-2) : "Nam in philosophia, exceptis duntaxat his, quae Cicero
reliquit et Seneca, nihil habent Latinorum scholae, nisi vel Graecum, vel
quod e Graeca lingua traductum est."3 More, as well as ~ u d Cand Beatus
Rhenanus, who employ Greek in their commendatory letters t o the
Utopia, would find-~;thlo&eus' attachment to reek praiseworthy -
the philosopher must go ad fontes.
1. Harry Berger, 'The Renaissance Imagination : Second World and Green World,"
The Centennial Review, 9 (1965), p. 63.
2. Robbin S. Johnson,More's "Utopia" : Ideal and nlusion (New Haven, 1969),p.5.
3. Thomas More, m e Correspondence of Sir Thomas More.ed. E . F . Rogen
(Princeton, 1947), p. 117, translated in St. i%oms More :Selected Letters, ed. E . F .
Rogers (Yale, 1961), p. 100. See also Surtz's comments on 5012.
 36 ROBERT COOGAN
In their deflation of Raphael, Berger and Johnson make much of the
Morton episode. They think that Morton "humors Hythlodaeus as he
humors the lawyer, friv and parasite - a Chaucerian gallery eminently
quaUed to bring on an attack. He amuses himself with them, is amused
by them, allows them to vent their vanities and theories at his table, and
dismisses them when it is time 'to heare his suetorsl."l Hythlodaeus may
be too idealistic, tbe contrast between him and Morton is wident ;yet
if any of his counsels could be implemented, certainly those he gives t o
Morton are most practical. Some had worked for the Romans. In regard
to the vexing problem of enclosure, Wolsey was to enact a law along
~ saying - "not even you" - Morton
the lines of Hythlodaeus' p r o p o ~ a l .By
acknowledges that Hythlodaeus is unconventional ; by saying - "my dear
Raphael" - he renders him an affection not granted to others in the scene
(71-73). Morton admires Hythlodaeus' personality, but reserves the right
to evaluate critically his advice. The text shows the statesman eager to
hear more from Raphael whereas, the gloss points out, he checked the
lawyer for talkativeness (.71). Since Morton intends to hear Raphael again
the next day, it seems clear that he is not amused by him (71).
In regard to the Morton episode, Sylvester, who does not express the
above position, convicts Hythlodaeus of a kind of blindness - Hythlodaeus
argues that Europeans would not accept his counsel; yet Morton approves
his plan for the treatment of criminals and is ready t o implement it with
due modification (81). This, by the way, seems to be the proper response
to Hythlodaeus. One hesitates to take issue with a person of Sylvester's
stature so steeped in More. One can only say that More, in h i desire to
praise Morton, puts himself in a difficult position. Not only does he
contrast the practical Morton to the idealistic Hythlodaeus, but he also
places this opponent to Richard 111 as a foil to the tyrannical French and
imaginary kings. If Morton closed his mind to Hythlodaeus' sound and
humane counsel, he would hardly be the type of leader admired by More.
Furthermore, ~ ~ t h l o d a e knows
us that the evils for which he had offered
a cure to the Chancellor of Henry VII s d remain ;in Henry VIII's reign
they are, if anything, more critical.3
Another major objection can be raised against Berger and Johnson,
who seem influenced less by More's milieu than by the modem psychology
of a Norman Brown and by commentators on utopian literature like
Northrop Frye and Lewis Mumford. Berger and Johnson treat Raphael as
a fantasy-maker captivated by the pleasure-principle, one who proposes
illusion not ideals. Utopia is a "Platonic Garden of Adonis a place without
pain where everyone learns everything the short smooth way."4 Raphael
offers "an emasculated, soft, an unreal paradise of unearned pleasures...
Utopia (Nowhere) is negative, unreal, because her citizens are a fiction and
1. Berger, p. 6 4 :Johnson, p. 57.
2. See 6 Henry VIll (I 514) in WOT Royd PtoclmMtiom, ed. by P. Hugha and
J. krkin, 3 vols.(New Haven, 1964), 1, 122-23. Note also Surtz's comments on 6617.
3. See Surtz's comments on 60/10.
4. Berger, p. 68.
NVNC VlVO VT VOLO 37
h a prophet-philosopher is fictional... "Eutopia" ("the happy place") re-
v& itself as a garden of illusory, empty pleasures, pleasures gained without
struggle or sacrifice."l Is Hythlodaeus really proposing a soft prim-
itivism ? The primitivi9m of Utopia is hard. In addition to the farm labor
imposed on all, each of the five Utopian trades requires persistent and
tedious application in order to transfrom the goods of nature into
human amenities, i.e., into the matter of pleasure. In this society dominated
by the mature and old, even the dehghts of the common dining hall - if
they are to be taken seriously - are tempered considerably for the youths
who must either serve the diners or stand by in silence and who must eat
what is handed them from the table (143). Utopian scholars labor nearly
three years to master Greek (181). Re-dawn lectures, games that inculcate
virtue, compulsory military training which includes swimming under arms,
resmctions on travel etc., all these regulations and the regimentation
make Utopia so different from a Platonic Garden of Adonis that only one
student m my experience has ever responded in the affirmative to the
question : "Would you, if possible, want to live in Utopia ? " Her
reason ? The streets are safe. The objection to Hythlodaeus on the gcound
that he and his island are a fiction has already been answered. More's choice
of the imaginary and dramatic dialogue frees him from the dull abstractions
of the philosopher and the factual restrictions of the historian. Findy, to
discredit Hythlodaeus, the detached philosopher, simply because More
himself chose the active life of service appears to be a non sequitur. In the
concluding pages of this article, Hythlodaeus' isolation and detachment will
be viewed in a positive Lght.
A final point must be made in regard to Sylvester's a r t i ~ l e .He ~
observes that in the debate Hythlodaeus draws farther and farther from the
real world - fust, there is the historical reality of Morton's court ; next,
the hypothetical court of the French king ; third, the totally imaginary
court. It is possible that the second and third episodes are more remote
than the fust because Wolsey and Henry VIII passed laws similar to those
Hythlodaeus recommended to Morton. But Henry could also be accused
of having the warlike spirit of the French king, and Cardinal Morton did
endorse financial policies like those of the imaginary king's councillors?
In these instances, distance not only lends protection, it also keeps
Morton's image untarnished.
The ultimate isolation, of course, is the island itself which enshrines
Hythhheus' "ideals and virtues, but i t also- and he himself is completely
unaware of this - hints at the defects in his thinking and at the m r a l
flaws in his character. Utopia is made like all famous creations, in the image
and Iilieness of its creator. If we accept the country, we accept its f ~ u n d e r . " ~
I. Johnson,pp.10-11.
2. R.S. Sylvester, "SI HYTHLODAEO CREDIMUS : Vision and Revision in
Thomu More's Utopi~."Sounding, 51 (1969). 272-89.
,
3. See Surtz's comments on 58/19.
4. Sykeater, p. 286.
i
 38 ROBERT COOGAN
,Here Sylvester sounds like Hythlodaeus. One of Raphael's faults is
that he overwhelms by a rush of feeling and prevents dialogue by the
finality of his judgments. It seems that the reader should respond to
Raphael as do persona-More, Morton, and Bud&. Bud6 believes in
~ G h l o d a e u sto &e extent that he wants the three divine principles of
Utopian l e d a t i o n fixed in the minds of all mortals (11).
E. SURTZ'S VIA MEDIA
In the Yale Utopia, Surtz presents a more moderate view than the
Yale triumvirate and places great stress on the dramatic aspects of the
Utopia As a result, he says, "it is no more possible t o say that the words
which More puts into his own mouth represent his genuine sentiments
than it is t o hold him accountable for words which he puts on Hythlodaeus'
lips" (cxxxvi). In The Praise of Wisdom, in The Raise of Pfeusum, and in
the Commentary t o the Yale Utopia, Surtz accumulates biographical and
historical considerations that delineate More's view on all the major issues
in the Utopia and thus reveals how More stands in relation to Hythlodaeus.
Sura's introduction t o the Yale Utopia makes a literary evaluation
that emphasizes the advantage of dramatic objectivity ; i.e., there is "the
tension between the author's apparent lack of personal emotion and his
-
very r e d feelinp;, which, however, he merelv, implies and the reader must
inf&" (cxxxvi): He describes H thlodaeus' twofold function as follows :
As a fascinating character wio holds readwa spellbound with ptnonal
anecdote and amazing travelogue, he draws all the parts together and
unifies the whole. As an individual who % somewhat eccentxic,
visionary, and uncompromising, he strongly defends views contrary
to current opinion in order to make his readers inquire and think.This
radical humanist is one of More's greatest wiurnphs. (cxlii)
Thus, Surtz would not accept the total rejectmn of Hythlodaeus. He feels
that More prevents us from completely sympathizing or identifying with
Hythlodaeus in two ways. First, persona-More offers sound and enduring
arguments against compulsive communism and has the parting words
that object t o some Utopian institutions (245). Secondly, since More
makes Hythlodaeus overstate his case, Surtz thinks that the reader would
hesitate t o accept parts of his message. Although Hythlodaeus is intelligent
and engaging, he is also melodramatic ; and, consequently, one cannot
take his position as "fully normative."l This interpretation seems t o be
the soundest. More's mariner solves no problems, rather he raises funda-
mental and often unanswerable questions.2 For example, does the active
life surpass the contemplative ? Is public better than private ownership ? In
light of the conflicting rights of the individual, the family, and the state,
1. For a confinnation of Surtz's interpretation and an interesting treatment of
Hythlodaeus' sentence structures, eee the review of the Yak Utopia by Ch~i?nceH.
Miller, English Longuuge Notes, 3 (1966), 30349.
2. For two studies which approach the Utopia from different viewpoints and which
arrive at this interpretation,see David M. Bevington, "The Dialogue in Utopia : Two Sides
to the Question," Sfudies m Philology, LVII1 (1961), 496-509. C. S. Lewis, English
Literamre in the Sixteenth Cenmry (Oxford, 1954). 167-171.
NVNC WVO VT VOLO 39
what reconciliation provides for the best state of the commonwealth ? A t
what point has injustice become so rampant, that there is a need - i n
Sylvester's words - for a "total demolition job" on society ?
RICHARD AND RAPHAEL
It will be useful now t o examine More's method of characterization
and t o comment on certain dimensions of ~ ~ t h l o d a e u
ins order t o show
how he stands for the Renaissance and how he would be admired by More.
For his greatest creations, Richard I11 and Hythlodaeus, he employed the
same method, namely, delineate immediately the broad outline of the
character, employ contrast, and emphasize a dominant trait, Richard
and Hythlodaeus both appear in a setting where dissension is evident : i n
a death-bed oration King Edward IV pleads for national unity ; on a
commission t o Flanders More seeks t o solve weighty matters and t o gain
international harmony. ~ e s i d eEdward - "of visage louely, of bodye
myghtie, stronge and cleane made"1 - the noble king loved by his people,
More places his youngest brother,
little of stature, ill fetured of limrnes, croke backed, his left shoulder
much higher then his right, hard fauoured of visage... He was mali-
cious, wrathfull, enuious, and from afore his birth, euer frowarde. (7)
The picture of Richard which More draws with seven hundred words a t
the begining of the history has lasted for eenturies. More, who contemned
auguries and divination, cleverly uses the'fact that Richard could not be
delivered of his mother "vncutte" :
Hee came into the worlde with the feete forwarde, as menne bee
bane outwarde,and (as the fame runneth) also not vntothed, whither
menne of hatred raporte aboue the trouthe, or elles that nature
chaunged her course in hys beghinge, whiche in the course of his
lyfe many thinges vnnaturallye committed (7).
Hard upon this unique description of Richard's birth, More presents
the dominant a a i t of his character, the dissimulation which is the main
guideline in the interpretation of the history. More speaks of Richard as
"not letting t o kisse whome hee thoughte t o kyll... Frende and foo was
muche what indifferent." (8) More's parting stroke in the brief initial
portrait applies the mark of Cain t o Richard : "Somme wise menne also
weene, that his drifte c o u e r t l ~c o n u a ~ d e lacked
, not in helping furth his
brother of Clarence t o his death." (8)
More gains much by stressing the dissimulation of Richard at the
very beginning of the work. Richard's words and deeds can become
powerfully ironic. For example, when racke en bury refuses t o murder
the royal children, Richard says, "Ah whome shall a man trust ? " (83).
Richard swears that he will not dine until Hastings has died - Hasting,
therefore, got a very short shrift, for the king must keep his word (49)
1 1. The Yale Edition of the Complete Worb of St. Thomas More, vol. 2, me
k
e Histoy of King R i c W In, ed. by R.S. Sylvester (New Haven, 1963), p. 4. The
r pages references in the next two paragraphs are to this edition.
5-
I
 40 ROBERT COOGAN
Before sending the royal children to the Tower, from which "they never
came abroad", Richard kisses them. (42) More forces the reader to
participate in this "green world", to interpret every word and deed of the
tyrant who makes illusion the order of reality for his kingdom. By so doing,
More forces the reader t o see the need for a just king and for a just
world where things are what they appear to be.
In the introduction to the Utopia, More is as eager to emphasize
Hythlodaeus' indepengence as he was to reveal Richard's dissimulation.
As in the History, More keeps adding depth and color t o the initial lines
of the portrait which do not change. The moderate humanists - Tunstd,
Giles, and More - are comparable to Richard's brothers and King Edward
in that they provide the basic contrast with the hero. Tunstd and More
strive to resolve a dispute between Henry VlII and the future Charles V.
Because ofadisagreement, negotiations cease: and the thirtyeight-year-old
More, anxious to return to his family, has reservations about the advantages
of service to the king.
After the moderate humanists in service have been presented, More
swiftly delineates Hythlodaeus and emphasizes his independence. The
twenty-nine-year-old Giles is so enthusiastic when he f m t speaks of
Hythlodaeus that he prevents More from returning a greeting (49)
The independent voyager, Giles says, is somewhat like the adventurer
Ulysses and most like the philosopher Plato. He is not at all like the
ill-fated seaman Palinurus (49). He is autonomous enough t o have devoted
himself "unreservedly t o philosophy" (51). When he was young, he left
his pammony to his brothers so that he might be free to travel. While
voyaging under Vespucci, he further demonstrated his desire for freedom
when he wrested by force (extorsit) the permission to stay at the farthest
point of the last voyage -- "and so he was left behind that he might have
his way" (51).The departure from the farthest point stresses his love of
liberty. Giles notes the two sayings ever on the lips of Hythlodaeus : "He
who has no grave is covered by the sky" and "From all places it is the
same distance to heaven." (51)
VlVO VT VOLO
Equally appropriate would be the motto, "uiuo ut uolo" (56).
Hythlodaeus' independence provokes the reader as much as Richard's
dissimulation dws. Because his allegiance is to justice, he can battle every
person in Christendom - pope, abbot, theologian, logician, king, lord,
warrior, courtier, lawyer, and even the humanist who recommends service
t o the kim. He reduces to absurditv so manv "normal" institutions - the
English economic system, the chivilric and ;end codes, the papacy and
religious orders, the prevailing systems of education and law -- that one
must constantly ask : does a veil of deceit hide the decay beneath civi-
lization ? Is Christian Europe a "green world" ?
Although More did not choose for himself the way of life of the
independent philosopher, it is evident that he had a high regard for it.
NVNC VlVO VT V O M 41
As Petrarch at the dawn of the Italian Renaissance proposed the ideal of
the unattached man of letters, More too, in the morning of the Northern
Renaissance, creates the freedom-loving Hythlodaeus. Both replace clerical
and courtly ideals by the Ciceronian motto of the unattached philosopher -
uiuo u t uolo.1 In the debates of the civic humanists, the pendulum gradually
swung from Petrarch's excessive independence to Palmieri's praise of the
active life.2 Yet Pico and Erasmus, the humanists most admired by More,
both lived lives of almost Petrarchan detachment. It is not necessarv to
linger on Erasmus' love of the philosopher's independence since he is one
of history's exemplars of this way of life. In the Commentary to the Utopia,
Surtz points out that Erasmus uses the motto in De contemptu mundi. In
the chapter immediately following the praise of the solitary life, Erasmus
applies to the monastic life Cicero's definition of liberty - potestas v i m -
di u t velis.3 Pico, that model lay Christian, loved liberty above d l
thin@ ; the central notion of the Oration on the Dignity of Man -- one
manifesto of the Renaissance - is that man is free to determine his destiny.
Pico, More says following the Vita Pici, loved liberty above all and refused
to serve in church or in court. Three years before his death, he gave away
his wealth in order t o gain greater peace through detachment. According
to Savonarola, the world had seen nothing like Pico for the last 800 years
(EW, I, 9) Giles makes the same claim for Hythlodaeus (21). More's
early poetry on Fortune expresses a similar admiration of the philosopher's
detachment. It is the philosophers like Socrates, Byas, and Democritus
whom Fortuna cannot defeat. Democritus was so eager t o study and to
be hee from the burdens of riches that he gave his patrimony to his
countr men.4
TX; youthful More .hexished this ideal for himself. His letter t o Colet
(October 1504), seems to echo Petrarch's own attitude toward the joys of
rural solitude and toward the horrors of the city.s Writing t o John Holt,
the youth of twenty-three applies t o himself the unattached philosopher's
motto :
DbO gracia, satis valemu atque (quod pauci de se fateri possunt)
ita viuimua vt volumu.6
When More was in service, he was uneasy under its restraints ;when
he res@ed the chancellorship, he relished the return of his freedom. From
these instances, it is evident that More regarded highly the independent
philosopher's way of life.
1. Petrarch, De vita solitaria, ed. Antonio Al-ura (Naples, 1943), p. 47.
2. See Hans Baron, "Ciaro and the Roman Civic Spirit," Bttlletin of the John
Ryhndc Librw, XXIl (1938). 72-97.
3. Erasmus, "De contemptu mundi," in Opem omnia.. studio et opem Jmnnis
M,10volr. (Leyden, 1703-06), V, 1252.
4. For a treatment of Byas and Democritus, see my article, "Petrarchand Thomas
More," No.21 (l969), Moream, pp. 20-21.
5. De vitn solitaria, Bock 1, Tractate ii ;Correspondence, p. 7.
6. Comspmdence, p. 3. Selected Lerrers, p. 2 : 'Thanks be to God, I am feeling
-
quite weU ;and - something few peopb can say for themselves I am living my Efe just
as I desire."
42 ROBERT COOCAN
In addition to placing Hythlodaeus in this distinguished group, More
numbered him among the followers of Plato. Besides comparing
Hythlodaeus' travels with the journeys of Plato, Giles adds that
Hythlodaeus' favorite author is Plato (87). At the conclusion of the dialogue
and in the exordium, Hythlodaeus has recourse to the authority of Plato.
He finds the institutions of Plato's ideal state superior to Europe's (101).
He endorses Plato's refusal t o make laws for any nation which will not
legislate an equal sharfng of all goods (105).
By depicting Hythlodaeus as a philosopher and admirer of Plato,
More reflects the Platonic interest of his own circle as well as the Platonic
revival of the Florentine Academy. Petrarch is partially responsible for
the origin of this revival, for he possessed precious manuscripts of some
of Plato's dialogues and he was one of the first modems to make Plato
the foremost puosopher.
Thus, it seems that More wants the reader t o admire his independent
philosopher. One does not reject him because of this idealism that detach-
ment nurtures. After all, there must be The Education of the Christim
Rince to balance Machiavelli's The Rince ; someone must set Utopia
against England with its maneating sheep and heavily laden gallows-trees.
PETRARCAS CONTRIBrnON
In order to look upon Hythlodaeus in the light of R e n h a n c e hu-
manism, it will be useful to touch on Petrarch's contribution in this respect.
Petrarch travelled extensively to discover such texts as the Pro Archia and
the Latin translation of the Phaedo. He would edit, copy, and disseminate
them. In the classics, he found truths and exemplars of virtue t o com-
plement those in the Christian tradition. Because he felt that Plato was
closer to Christianity and more conducive to virtue than Aristotle, he
disparaged the scholastics, the dialecticians, and the Averroists, thus
bringing about a major intellectual upheaval.
In some respects, Hythlodaeus represents this intellectual tradition
as it appeared in the b h Renaissance. His travels - a necessary com-
plement to formal study - are used t o disseminate Christianity as well as
the New Learning. He provides the Utopians with a knowledge of Greek
and a collection of Greek texts. His mentioning the problem caused by
faulty readings and his specific reference to the Adine text of Sophocles
reflect Christian humanism's interest in textual matters. Since his travels
were a search for wise institutions and since he commends the moral bent
in Utopian education, Hythlodaeus clearly endorses the voluntarism that
marks C h r i s t . humanism from Petrarch to More. Like Petrarch, he has
no use for scholastic subtlety, especially as taught in the Small L0gicab.l
In Book I, the humorous recital of the spat between the toady and the
friar - who was a theologian - obviously satirizes a sterile scholasticism.
1. For More's antipathy towards decadent scholasticism, see Edward Surtz,
me h i s e of Reasurn (Cambridge. 1957), p. 105.
NVNC WVO V T VOLO 43
Hythlodaeus' intense concern with religion is characteristic of the
Northern Renaissance. This concern appears in his concept of justice and,
especially, in the ultimate source of his values - the Gospel. He never
commends European justice ; he often speaks of it ironically or sar-
castically. For the sake of brevity, only representative passages will be
cited. English laws go beyond justice in their rigidity (61). Capital
punishment for theft is vain as well as iniquitous (71). The imaginary
king's laws which impose fines for the transgression of motheaten edicts
are likewise a masque of justice (93). Compared to the laws o f t h e
Polylerites, E n g l ~ ~justice
h deserves but contempt (81). Raphael's final
verdict is that Europe's justice, like that of Thrasymachus, is a conspiracy
of the rich and the strong against the poor and the weak.
a
Hythlodaeus gives clue to his -concept of justice when he demands
that a comparison be made between European justice and Utopian fairness
(aequitac) (239). In Aristotle's Ethics, equity is justice beyond positive
law ( 1137b5-1137b30). As More 'wrote the Utopia, Wokey was making
m'jor innovations in the En&h judicial system which were based on the
principle of equity. Through the Court of Chancery, he would execute
justice in a way that would temper the rigors of common law. More
approved of Wolsey's policy in this respect and later became a judge in a
court of equity, the Court of Requests. Ideally, courts of equity would pass
judgment in cases where positive law through changing times or unique
circumstances ran counter either to right reason or to the law of God. For
these very reasons, H~thlodaeusobjects t o England's penal code. F i s t , it
is unreasonable : it encourages rather than discourages murder. Equity has
no meaning (73-75). Surtz's comments on these harsh Manlian laws is
pertinent - Erasmus stated that those who steal salad should not die with
murderers and that the Manlian laws are opposed to equity and humanity
(341). Secondly, the penal code neither conforms to the stem Mosaic law
nor to the law of mercy (73-75).
If any thing, Hythlodaeus leans too strongly to the absolute sovereignty
of divine law and tends, like Luther in 1515,2 to disparage human law.
Thus. on the eve of the Reformation, Hythlodaeus proposes equity as a
principle that contrasts to common~law- a development in
early sixteenth-century England - and he calls
UTOPIA A N D WOLSEY.
cardinal Wolsey would certainly be pleased with Hythlodaeus'
counsels on enclosures and on equity - two issues prominent in the mind
of England's new Lord Chancellor (Dec. 1515). Swiss mercenaries with
whom his emissary Pace was negotiating in 1516 did act like the Zapoletans.
1. See Stuart E. Rall, "The Development of Equity in Tudor England," American
Journal oflegul History, 8 (1964), 1-19.
2. See F. Edward Cranz, "An Essay on the Development of Luther's Thought on
Justice, Law, and Society," tkrrvmd ?7teobgical Studies, 19 (1959). pp. 3@71.
 44 ROBERT COOCAN
It is possible that More's political rise and the publication of the Utopia
ue not just a coincidence. Little has been made of More's letter (Jan,
1517) telling a member of Court that he had thought of dedicating the
Utopio t o Wolsey. There is no unanimity among biographers as to the date
of More's entry into royal service. He received Court payment which was
made retroactive to 1516. When More was writing Book I in February of
1516, he told Erasmus that he refused a pension. On February 17,1516,
Ammonio w r g e t o Erasmus that on his return f o m Flanders More was
&st on line to wish good morning to the chancel1or.l Thus it seems that
More returned to E n g h d determined to serve. His letter t o 'Erasmus
(c. 20 Sept. 1516) makes it clear that he wanted his book to satisfy,
not only humanists, but also ~oliticians,and whom more than the newly
appointed Lord Chancellor ? The author would be a man well worth having
in the Council ; he had thought deeply not only on domestic and foreign
affairs but also on the councilor's role - its dangers, its need for accom-
modation, its m o n e t q and humanitarian rewards.
T o return now t o the Erasmian idealist, Hythlodaeus. By relying so
strongly on divine law, Hythlodaeus shows that in the second decade of
the sixteenthcentury he is the man of the hour - the reformer. The sense
of urgency which surrounds the exordium and the peroration gives his
words a prophet's intensity. His three references to Christ reveal this
aspect of his character. As he concludes the debate on councilorship and
proclaims the superiority of Utopian practices, Hythlodaeus states that
the message of Christ is an absolute standard which must not be accom-
modated to the perverse morals of men (101). This is the only place in
U t o p i ~where More speaks directly of dissimulation. My previous refer-
ences to Richard JW show what he thought of dissimulation at the time
he composed Utopia. Sharing his creator's hatred of dissembling, Hythlo-
daeus refuses to adapt the message of Christ to Europe's unchristian
standards. Of all the points that he makes during the s e ~ i o inn the garden,
this one is the strongest. The doctrines of Christ should be preached from
the housetops (101). Metaphor and irony enforce his argument. Metaphor
through 3 s evokingthe Lesbian rule of soft lead. Irony as he lays bare the
absurdity of accommodating the Gospel's message by saying that it allows
men to be "bad in greater comfort." (101)
When ~ ~ t h l o d a ereports
us the advent of Christianity among Utopians,
he notes that they had been impressed by the communism of Christ's
disciples. Since he sees Utopian communism as the most efficacious remedy
for European &it is very significant that he refers to Christ at this point
(219). The truest followers of Christ, he holds, still practice communism
(219). In a word, he relies so heavily on the law of Christ that he uses it
t o recommend the most crucial and controversial issue in his program
of reform - communism. Erasmus and Colet lean to this view. *
1. See Surb's comments on 54/14.
2. Sa Surtz's comments on 8/25-26 and 21815-6
NVNC V l v o VT VOLO 45
In his last reference to Christ. Hythlodaeus insists that the wisdom o f
Christ urges men to adopt Utopian standards. This particular allusion
should be viewed in conjunction with the others. Hythlodaeus f i t men-
tions Christ at the climax of the debate. He next uses his name to endorse
the Utopians' cardinal institution, communism. Although each of these
instances has a special pertinency, Hythlodaeus reserves his concluding
appeal to Christ for the most crucial moment in the intense peroration. I f
one reads the book with Erasmus' comment in mind - More's Utopia
'
discloses the causes of evil in the commonwealth - then, this final mention
of Christ stands at the very climax of More's masterpiece. The moment
after calling upon the authority of Christ for the final time, Hythlodaeus
names the monster that is the ultimate source of evil in European com-
monwealths :
Nor does it occur to me to doubt that a man's regard f w his own
interests or the authority of Christ our Savior - who in I% d d o m
could not fail to know what was best and who in His goodness would
not fail to counsel what He knew to be best - would long ago have
brought the whole world to adopt the laws of the Utopian common-
wealth, had not one single monster, the chief and progenitor of all
%
plagues, shivcn against it -- I mean Ride (243).
To a Christendom where pride has triumphed, Hythlodaeus - speaker of
nonsense - preaches foolishness.
1. Opua EpQtolmum Des. Erasmi Roterodami, ed. P.S. Allen et of., 12 wls.
(Oxford, 1906-58), 11, 483.
lona College, New Rochelle Robert COOGAN, C. F. C.
REVIEWS OF UTOPlA
H .W. Donner , Studia NeapkLealagica, XXVII. 1965.
"Nobody h a s w r i t t e n of t h e UZoph w i t h more l e a r n i n g
and i n s i g h t t h a n F a t h e r S u r t z . His e d i t i o n of t h e Yale
Sdeoted Wokhd must be warmly welcomed. F a m i l i a r i t y , howe-
v e r , i n t h e c a s e of More,so f a r from b r e e d i n g contempt, in-
v a r i a b l y l e a d s t o enthusiasm, and t h e v e r y e x c e l l e n t
I n t r o d u c t i o n . . . does n o t go f r e e from a s u s p i c i o n of over-
enthusiasm. The a n a l y s i s of t h e l i t e r a r y form i s f u l l of
new o b s e r v a t i o n s and could h a r d l y b e b e t t e r e d ... In spite
of j e r k s and j o l t s t h e t r a n s l a t i o n i s v e r y r e a d a b l e , and
t h e wordiness i s , i n a s e n s e , n o t un-Morean."
 46
Chicago, March 26, 1971
Dear AbbC Marchadour,
4

It is indeed pleasing to learn that the Autumn 1971 issue of

Moream Quarterly will be a Festschrift in honor of Rev. Edward
L. Surtz, S. J.
It was my privilege and pleasure to take two graduate courses
at Loyola U n ~ ~ n i tofy Chicago from Father S u r e : English 443,
St. Thomas More and Utopian Literature, 1st sem. 195556 ;and En@
444. Spenser, 2nd sem. 195556. My dissertation on Spenser was orig-
inally suggested by two term papers written in the Spenser course
following specific assignments by Father Surtz : Report on Scholarship
of Tke Shephemdes Calender and Literary Analysis of Colin C h t s
Come Home Agmne.
Out of the papers grew the dissertation "An Interpretation of
Spenser's Colin C h t s Come Home Aguine" (1960), written under the
direction of Father S u m . Out of the dissertation grew two articles
and a book :
"Spenser's Colin Clout : The Poem and the Book," Popers of the
BibliogruphicalSociety ofAmerica, LVI (4th quarter, 1962), 397-413.
"The Figures of Rhetoric in Spenser's Colin d o u t , " kblications
of the Modem Language Association of America, LXXIX (June, 1964),
206-218. (Reprinted in Rhetorical ~ n d y s e sof Litermy Works, ed.
Edward P. J. Corbett ;New York : Oxford UnN. Press, 1968, pp.
147-185, and incorporated, with slight changes, as Chapter 2 of
the book.)
An Interpretation of Edmund Spenser's Colin Clout (Cork, Ireland :
Cork UnN. Press, 1969 ;Notre Dame, Indiana : UnN. of Notre Dame
Press, 1969).
Less directly associated with my work under Father Surtz but
springing from studies in rhetorical modes of the past and present,
begun when I was a student of his, is another article, "Teaching the Rhetor-
ical Approach to the Poem," in Rhetoric : Tkeories for ~pplication,e d
Robert M. GorreU. National Council of Teachers of English (Champaign,
IU., 1967),pp. 82-89.
May 1 add that 1 count it a particular blessing, ~rivilegeand pleasure
to have known Father S u m , f m t as a student and later as a friend and
to glow faintly in the reflected light which his brilliant critical work,
especially on St. Thomas More's Utopia, has cast !
Very sincerely yours,

Sam MEYER
(Chairman, Language Arts Department,
Morton College, Cicero, lllinois)