DEPARTMENT OF ENGLISH

UNIVERSITY OF DELHI
INTERNAL ASSESSMENT ASSIGNMENT
COVER SHEET
SEMESTER I

NAME OF THE STUDENT: LAVISHA TANEJA

COLLEGE: SRI VENKATESWARA COLLEGE DELHI UNIVERSITY

EXAM ROLL NO: 2121002

PAPER CODE: 120351102

PAPER NAME: EARLY MODERN WORLD

TITLE OF PAPER: “More’s Utopia presents a debate between Early Modern

Progressive ideas and Medieval Collectivism.” Write a note.

DATE OF SUBMISSION: 26TH MARCH 2022

DECLARATION: I certify that this is my own unaided work, and does not contain
unreferenced material copied from any other source. I understand that plagiarism is a
serious offence and may result in a drastic reduction of marks awarded for the term
paper. This assignment has not been submitted, or any part of it, in connection with
any other assessment.
More was a witness to the rapid changes of Reformation and Enlightenment and the
birth of modern capitalism. Throughout the Renaissance, what constituted an ideal
commonwealth was the standard question of debate, where the laws are just and
which seeks to promote common benefit of the population. Utopia reflects the
tensions present between economic progress of early modern era and the lingering
values of medieval Christian heritage. The rise of capitalism during the era saw a
radical change in the principles of work and property from highly personal
fundamental human attributes into institutionalized modern economic abstractions of
labour and property (1). The central question that More is putting forth is whether
utopia as Hythloday represents fosters human happiness and pleasure or is it
oppressively totalitarian?

The ambiguities in the book are conspicuous as More led a life dramatically
inconsistent with Utopian order. More was a devout Catholic who during Reformation
staunchly opposed the heretics and Lutherian regime and tortured the Protestants
whereas Utopia is shown as tolerant of all religions and those who vehemently
attempt to convert others are banished or enslaved. Bruce in her work highlights the
incongruence between ideal Utopian practices and More’s own life and beliefs. She
states that Utopia becomes more a distorted reflection of the real England than its
antithesis. The society Hythloday describes banishes lawyers (More was a lawyer
himself), allowed women priests, tolerates expression of pagan beliefs, encourages
euthanasia and permits not only divorce but subsequent remarriage. In my opinion,
Utopia is a satirical reflection on the social and political problems of England in the
sixteenth century, while, at the same time, it shows ambiguity in the proposed
solutions.(2)

Utopia is an equivocation between a ‘place of perfection’ that is an idealistic

society and ‘a place of non-existence’. It is often considered to be a conflict between
ancient or medieval and the early modern world. Thomas More has established a stark
contrast between the imaginary city of Utopia and European old world of his time.
Book 1 is a moral outrage at the status quo by Hythloday that exposes the brutalities
of English life, describing the world of early Tudors in which exists inhumane laws
that hang the unemployed for stealing considering it to be far too extreme and cruel,
unbridled greed that dispossesses a farmer of his land in order to increase profitable
wool trade(enclosure laws), unjust distribution of property and resources, rapid price
inflation and treacherous treaties. Book 2 describes the world of justice, rationality
and religious tolerance where people live in harmony and devote their time to useful
work and learning, where exists no privatisation of property, a communal society and
no religious persecution.
 More’s political motives are inextricably linked with the Renaissance Humanist
perspective that can be accounted for its modern progressive ideas. The denunciation
of injustice and immorality, of abuse of power and authority, of the oppression of
poor and weak and of the self-serving behaviour that produces factionalism and war
mirror the moral pathos of Erasmus’ concept of humanism. Skinner argues that with
his work More aspired to change the political and social climate of Renaissance
England by implementing humanist beliefs into government institutions. Humanists
agreed that a life dedicated to virtue and learning far surpassed a life that concerned
itself with public affairs.

The perfection of utopian commonwealth depends entirely on the elimination of

private property. The society that Raphael Hythloday describes is a welfare state
providing every member of the community with necessary amenities, a society
characterised by communal way of life. Geert Hofstede characterises collectivism
against individualism that prioritizing communal goals over individual motives. More
liberates his Utopians from the passions engendered by acquisition and loss by
making them adopt a communality of goods and therefore they are relieved of the
entire ideological weight that distorts European civilization. “No hierarchical society,
he claims could ever in principle be virtuous, for in maintaining ‘degree’ we
encourage the sin of pride that is the most hideous vice of all”. Pride only ensures that
citizens will be divided and treated unjustly due to a hierarchical structure which
becomes the foundation within the commonwealth. Once virtue is reinstated in
political and social life, there is a real chance for an egalitarian society to take shape
because monetary aspects and private property would not exist to fuel the sinful
haughty pride of those who are in position of authority and power.

The utopian commonwealth also has intellectual and political roots as shown in
Aristotle’s politics and Plato’s Republic where equal allocation of goods and abolition
of private property is deemed necessary for a fair and just distribution and proper
organisation of human affairs. As Plato suggests in Republic that the state will never
function properly until kings have philosophers as their political advisors, he could be
kept from abusing power. This passage also exists in utopia which indicates the
humanist bent of More’s inclinations and his idea of what an ideal state should be. In
this country there is a wide tolerance and therefore it has many kinds of religions and
sects in which the excitation of religious fanaticism and condemnation of the faith of
others is completely prohibited. He not only sought to portray a perfectly virtuous
commonwealth, but indicated that, in spite of their heathenism, the Utopians are more
truly and genuinely Christian than the nominally Christian states of western Europe.
(J.H. Hexter, More’s Utopia, The biography of an idea).
 While the first book of Utopia presents a clear criticism of the social institutions
and practices that were central to European life during More’s time, opinion is divided
over whether the society represented in the second book of Utopia is intended to be an
ideal antidote to those failings (3). The argument among scholars is less about the
text’s obvious rejection of the existent order than it is over what sense to make of the
presence in Utopia of numerous institutions and practices that are certainly
disagreeable and appear irreconcilable with an ostensibly utopian state. It projects a
commonwealth that cannot acquire stability with its impractical equality and
communal outlook. Skinner says, "it also embodies by far the most
radical critique of humanism written by a humanist". Utopia faithfully
upholds the fundamental principle of humanist ideas that the notion of political power
should be based on true nobility of virtue, assigning highest importance to
development of mind and learning but at the same time it propagates a quasi-
totalitarian nature of society with its rigid and coercive social structure, regimentation
of its citizens daily lives and absolute prohibition of political discussion. Enslavement
or execution are immediately meted out to those who commit any of the following
grievous crimes that indicates a bleaker dimension inherent in their social customs,
making plans about public matters outside the senate or the popular assembly,
adultery and seduction and even leaving the city without permission. The authorities
maintain the population of household and in the country as a whole at optimal levels
by transferring people between its colonies implying strict rigidity of the system and
curtailed personal freedom.

By regulating the most minute details of its citizens lives: their free time, the
garments they wear, communal dining halls, and the all perpetrating gaze. Their social
order based on discipline, control and supervision renders the whole system
transparent with its dark and grim reality where subjects are devoid of any
individuality, reflective capability and inwardness as Stephen Greenblatt
demonstrates. Their population exists being a part of public realm where there is an
agency of control.The Utopians usually realize in their behavior the Erasmian ethics,
but as their practices do not reflect any inner conviction, they stand in diametrical
opposition to the humanist human ideal.

WORKS CITED:

(1) Thomas More’s Utopia: Origins of modern images of labour and capital
https://www.marketsandmorality.com/index.php/mandm/article/viewFile/1434/1165

(2) Satire and Ambiguity in More’s Utopia

https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/19566776.pdf
(3)Honan Yoran More’s Utopia and Erasmus’ No Place
https://www.academia.edu/1062910/Mores_Utopia_and_Erasmus_No_place/

(4) Sir Thomas More's Utopia and the language of Renaissance humanism
QUENTIN SKINNER

(5) Thomas More’s utopia (A Nortan critical edition)