16 PRAISERS OF FOLLY time each of these forms is developed out of a medieval genre, the sermon joyeux, the fablias, and the morality play. ‘To extend this brief introduction further, however, would be £0 incur the censure and ridicule of the frst fool we shall meet; for she is especially impatient of lengthy introductions and eager to speak for herself. For this moment she is the protagonist ro whom we must give ‘our attention as she leads the action on what King Lear, in a more poignane contest, called “this grexe stage of fools.” [2 ERASMUS’ STULTITIATHE PRAISE OF FOLLY guceusveuoueuueauEsOnERED Tx was the wises: man of his age, Desiderius Erasmus of Rotterdam, who created the most foolish fool of al. Hailed by his contemporaries "sicut si esset miciculum Mundi,” " he was honored everywhere for his vast leering and profound wisdom; and in the dawn of printing the shadow of hisinffuence was cast across the whole of Europe, from Sweden co Spain, wich » rapidity and ubiquitousness chat had no precedent. The story of how, in a world that prided itself upon its revival of leaming, this illegitimate son of an obscure father came to be courted by princes and popes and scholars is too well known to bee told again, bue we may recall that even so unlikely a figure as Jack Wilton once made a notable detour to see “aged learnings chief ‘ornament, that abundant and superingenions clarke, Erasmus.”* To bbe sure, by the time Nashe came to record the peregrinations of his ‘unfortunate hero, Erasmus had already been dead for over half a cen= tury; yet this very face would seem to ancicipate the extent to which his repatation and esteem outlived him. For over ewo hundred years after his death, che great humanist remained one of the most widely read and respected of European authors, and as late as 1751 Samuel Johnson, who subsequently awarded him one of the crowns of the *Epiaole obscure irony, od ae. Francis Git Stokes (Newt Haven, agsherts TTEE Wonks of Toomas Nasbe, ed. Ronald B. McKerrow (London, 10-10).ERASMUS’ STULTITIA Muses in a Greek epigram, proclaimed that “he will stand for ever in the first rank of literary heroes.”* ‘Had Erasmus himself been able co read Johnsoa’s tribute, he would have been the frst to recognize it as an echo of the traditional lo mnevie epithe, orchamos andrén. As such, Johnson's very phrasing tay be Seen a the product of chat system of learning which Erasmas paps more can any other individual, helped co establish in Europe pet aehich, und) yesterday, was the common heritage of educated men. Today, however, though he continues to occupy that rank of Trerary pre-eminence which Johnson predicted his books, with one cexception, go uncead; and ofall the paradoxes that inform Erasmas life none js more ironic than that ¢his tan, whom Roger Ascham once called “the ornament of learning in our tyme,” * should now be best emembered for his defense of ignorance. His other, more scholacly ooks lie interred in the pomp of folios, abandoned to the predacity ff wvorms and scholars; and even the man himself stands as bee more than a shadowy, uncertain ghost before us. Bu his fool Stultta con- ‘inuee, year after year, to climb her pulpit and deliver her oration to thew audiences in every language, as vivid and ridiculous as she was then she first appeared one morning in Chelsea over four centuries go. Even those Who may not have heard her speak in propria per. sen have, whether they knew it or not, listened to her accents and her ironie laughter echoing down the centuries, from Hamlet co TC. Enrwicker, from Don Quixote to Felix Krull. For ehe irony of her persistence, striking though it i, is no more striking than the per- Sistence of her iron Trony ithe invention of the Gree but when their day was over that ange, wey laughter faded into silence, leaving ater ages igno- ant of the sound, Although late antiquity and the Middle Ages were fond of the antithesis between jest and earnest, they had somehow lost the ability to conceive of the two in synthesis, which is the pre- ee Roreels Life ofJobmon of. Geonge Beck Hill and LF. Powel (Orfor Ie eee rs of Samael Tobron (Landen 110), Vs 337 ence a sain, 398 30 oc elstion of Toe hs agi Ceram jmed to hi knowledge {eer hen fe wl and fo ever he Sm Fee ei Work, ede We A. Waght (Cambridge, Fags 1, pir THE PRAISE OF FOLLY a reise for iony "A bewer meaphor” aceaning © J. ALK. Fenn vould be oe call Lony te mebling cape betwen jst nd carey and Thorn fs gone on ete of inane qth raoring to Baro the Great thing, Wea.” Enum fins The mar and ect of Enanisn feay 8 ome. thing we shall consider in detail when we come to his fool, who may be td cals the fice ah Tony tase Locka. For ho moment, however, we may simply observe that whether or not Eras tm hntaly Berar vee clascalanaqy Thomson ich jestion wh Se ee sroold ave aback we anor ak ie without rcaling fis ees at the rt hk Boyan vag ered ‘tony from Lorenzo Vall; yet co reread Valla wich this in mind is een aa pete ht ch characterizes if Valla or some other this mater — and ther are indeed uy examples of so-called irony Into eae tt fa te ist post-clssical author to employ irony in any.sustained fashion and to perceive its infinite potentialities. Moreover, it is Erasmus who is | Se repens Ee he mee as cred w many sere try la sioce his were the books char were eumsated and read Sond Bare In much the same way, Eras y be BS rams may be ido hae given Bary the parndox ofthe Wine Fool For though de pesonfed oxymoron Serica esc Seat Chr nd chee in mare rcs enon ceo oder sed et er, spposce Sete Sgurel Sela the More econtion, Tere Sec Ernst Robert Curtius, European Literature amd the Mi i Pe Rares comme eae do AB ek Sate elias Bataros "Vets ecb, © Here Exo i cooventber uponttn al ge de nuke Abdfocaches ton Se Niobe Fils neue if goss eel maps bode homeaaram dviarmngeeferum raenboy perce doplcrar > Thetex of thi leer can Se found in Es Gavi, Pi Tay de Gaivoccns Clcoce Sepp abae Salsasa ERASMUS' STULTITIA for the fist ie, the implications ofan ironie and paradoxical drama Ghaton of Nicholas of Cus's dacts ignorant were fully realized vad, because of the book's popularity, given widespread currency. So ‘Widespread was iin fact, dat one may doubr if Viola could have Uiscrved of Feste that "This fellow i wise enough co play the fooh ‘Koad to do that well craves a kind of wit,” had she nor, like 2 good pupil of Ascham, read her Erasmus. "ase how much of Erasmus Shakespeare himself had read i impos- sible to determine, but it seems probable tha his debe is greater than hv been commonly supposed, It would be surprising, given the pop- larity of eerain Exasmian text, if it were not. We now know, for rample, that Ben Jonson and George Chapman, both of whom al Snitely had larger Latin than their sval from Seratford read Eras- thus with care and profit; many of their most celebrated passages have, on sent century, bein revealed to be nothing more {han gifted ernslatons from Eris IF the casts of Jonson 254 Tapiman show us nothing else they a-lease demonstrate that Erasmus svrshiin the ae" and we may infer that Shakespeare, who breathed ar ane sins most have been familiar with such eurreneeransations ts Chaloner’, as well a5 with chose Latin works he i likely to have read at the Stratford Grammar Schocl. ‘With the exception, however, of Batsillon’sbrillian study of Spas ish Eraumianiom, the entire question of Erasmus’ influence on Euro- pean literature and thought remsins to be examined in detail. There Five been a few hints and guesses; there a certain amount of spe- ihe evidence; and the bibliography of the Bibliotbeca erasmina,” though incomplete and oceasionaly inaccurate, is of some help in providing a starting point. What evidence we do possess points toa Thenomenaly widespread dissemination of Erasmus’ books, not only Ihe "schoolbooks" (Colloquia, Adagia, Copia, Apophtbegmats, Si via), but also especialy the Enclirdion mils chrisiani and the ‘Morise encomium. Ie is, in short, no exaggeration to say, a5 one shakespeare, Pele Nighy 1Shegpeae Tee aun, Paranda he etn of Valpone ced rei eee rhnes igs amd ape Ls Sheth res a Famine 2 Jt Re enh dee Renee (ars 93) ot rt Ercan, rane Face Cat 127 carne hidlowapis dr gers eume in Boren Deen, ed ities an ea Bg. J At sa A Rees (Go, Sor ‘THE PRAISE OF FOLLY scholar has, chat the figure of Erasmus dominated th inflcnoe contined, though nor in quite so dom the rest of the century and beyond Ta 1628, over a century after its publication, the young Milton was to find the Encomim “in every~ ‘one’s hands” at Cambridge. nce | i ‘Gon isa kind of augury: of it is the Enconsioon that was destined to live and.to have “a greater and influ- ence on Earopeanleatre than any ofthe oer worl of Ens fis?" One small measure ofthis influence may be found in Volar, ho though ou aie of Eran fe oblige, when ie ce to write the entry Folie For the Dictionnaire pbilosopbique, to begin, by ping ot reno gus of eng ra which today would be nothing more than a fais insipid common sak . fairly insipid common Despite is popularity, the Encomio is the mos dificult of Eras ans’ works, precisely hesatse ofthe naire of is iony and paradox and if, ike Machiaveli’s Principe, few books have been more influen- SB char en mae ended. The Encars et ic 5 in this respect typical of the many who followed him. When Martin Dorp suggested co Erasmus that he write 2 pa asa corrective to The Praise of Folly, he made evident hs tora to comprehend what Brus had writen" One can only sympathize withthe author’ dspising sgh: “T wonder what has got ito that tman’s mind!” In England, Philip Sidney seems to have wndertood ie bewer and speaks of ie in conjuction with a verse adapted from Ovid, “ue lest vias prosimtate mal” remarking that ic as ‘nother foundation then the superficall pare would. promis.” * Chalones, Erasmus fist English translator, also recognized the “in ant a way, through 80 na, Te Wf Maman 9 Se 9 sree is oats at Rik seen of ‘bat was later deleted. a a“4 ERASMUS' STULTITIA we poe, wenn of suche a Them and wn suche a pena, Be sae ett hs bomges”® On the ter hand, Assam, thongh he or ee hs stente an elie hat he wre weg a Pemandek owl appt have misead te FE ae ins one reence toi cn be Ken 3 See erie af hs Rating” Indo aly Fel 0 exemple oI Spam by ‘Thomson tht Eran conten can conn aaryexcepuon of his dea fen, Si Boras with he ipo ered my hen More died, noone 3 The Ma haar, tey applauded his wis but ey aon eee er his ell nor hi Iny."* a ae ch afore oe speech of asus wie fool aaa ae wah te same pe tha Casas coined to de nay be ds ee ignore a vincent opposite Tan a te jean eae, pbe and cnet Fen i ree enncden he sys, he sips, wisom an Fy proces the qaity of ony To be able © th coco ca ets cen ype of mind of which BESS Yb ae gra anne: Whe more may ch eet Ene chs only a conan moments Pj a lin which oud urgeon. Alnor in come momen of wnsidon when one ePoeh isin the process of dying and another is being born. Irony, then, is i nh Proce OE Rlugh tn belongs to hae Nowdrp Peye ely ace” of experince 70 wha Longin aa ey go the Homer of the Ostey, called the sting un — Tr re orders eBeovec miaight add ee fat al decepon, / The fare furl” ee at Erasmus, everyone knows, was such a moment inthe coun of Hisory, a moment rely posed between the moribund ure of iy Metre Refornason, J thi sts eis arid er ful to see that epoch itself as an analogous kind of a onan, The ped compriingrougly te At cence ape celery is cueeied i 1 cought to decade ay confluence of apart coven, 2d "+S Thos Ctaloners Trandaion of The Prac of Foi" ed, Carence # ir aie Havard Univesity 195» 0s h Rc Werks pap; se 0 8 Toman, ron 23 THE PRAISE OF FOLLY 25 northem, ancient and modern, naturalistic and idealistic, secular and religious, pagan and Christian. It is the supreme moment of that syn- thesis we call Chistian humanism. Jean Seznec has given a suggestive description of ie in terms of che pagan gods, and the iconographic achievement he is concerned with is symptomatic of much else: Basen hs ny dent of he Sets cy rh 2 stam sits jot bectose 4 "pagan cle of ie is now Beng pro- Tesed with the gods ants incarmiion the neod is fle of bringing thee tui int line withthe sprit values of Chisanity—~ofreeonelng the fo world Humanist an att appear fora bri momen, co hate moe: ceded in accomplishing this ren the Renalsnes, in i moment of flowering, sts synths or rater thie Fogle harmony. Bot the 5 fecnth cerry, a5 advances is forced to avow the dachrd it thooghe tha been succesfully hidden. An es of eis and reaction then dawns This reconciliation of wo worlds is apparent wherever we tom in the early sixteenth century: we can observe it in the sculpture of Michel Colombe and hear i in the polyphonies of Jannequin, and the tile of one of the books of Jean LeMaire de Belges, written at almost exactly the same time as the Encomrum, seems to sate it emblem cally as La concorde des deus langages — “the harmony of two cul- tures.” Visually the finest lower of ehe hybridism of northern and southern strains is the work of Erasmus’ friend, Albrecht Diirer; and ‘with the same horticultural image Augustin Renander has described the Encomi itself as a fower of Hellenism and humanism, nowr- ished by a sap that continues to be popular and gothic. Written in 1509 and first published in 1511, the Moriae encomtum stands in spirit halfway becween Pico della Mirandola and Martin Luther. That rasmus conceived of it as he joumeyed from Iraly to England, or that he wrote it in “an Italianate England,” * may be seen as equally symbolic of the spirit of its epoch. Indeed, the more we examine Stul- his speech, she oe i seems to sam p—oF rather yee into che Janus-head of paradox —all of the contradict _of her age. Not te lest significant of these contradictions i the meta- snorphosis, at precisely the time of Stultia’s fist popular stecess, of the name of “the subtle doctor,” Duns Scotus, into the commonly Jan Same, The Suro of the Pan Gos Dut San (New York so) P30 Rtn Renna, frame e Fale (Genes, 95s P10. ‘Remy la, pret vee6 ERASMUS' STULTITIA accepted epiher for a fool, Sri herself wil claim that the sol BF seotas tis more prickly than a porcupine or hedgehog,” and abel’ Epistemon will derive the tae of Seow from the Greek jective skoteinos, meaning obscure or bind Thus, a8 one of the svhest men of the Middle Ages becomes the quinesence of folly for AE ape he stage is set for Exasmas Stalks and che very etymol- say of the word dnce ser, coincidently, almost to parody che PEL Sf Erase’ book and its panning eeferenceto Sir Thomas More, = ME 159-0 eR Vases 2 THE EPISTLE DEDICATORY oucuegueveusvouuceuseugREseEEE Tr was in More's house chat the Moriae encom was writen; it ‘was at his suggestion that it was expanded; and ic i co him that it is dedicated. Like most Renaissance epistes dedicarory, Erasmus’ let- ter to More is not only encomiastc of the reepient but programmatic of the work as wel, and init we are cold when, why, and how the Encominom was composed. Any examination of Stltta’s oration cvght therefore to begin with a consideration of this dedication, Because iti a lerer to More, Erasmus’ closest friend, some scholars have used it as important evidence about che compesition and nature ofthe Encomnium, assuming that if Erasmus were direct and accurate ‘vith anyone ie would be with More, Read on the basis ofthis assump- tion, the piste has been considered particularly valuable; for if as some have assumed, Erasmus is here speaking without a mask, this ‘Would then be a far more “trustworthy” statement than anything he says after he dons the persona of Stubta. Ver such an assumption fas ro take into account the public nacre ofthis epstle, which was, afer all, specifically written to be prince at the head of the Enco- unr, and jos as an autobiography isnot the same thing as journal, 0-an epistle dedicatory and a leer represent two quite di ferent genres. The epistle does indeed contain important evidence about the composition and nature of the Ercomivn, but much of that ‘evidence lies between the lines; and this lerter is not so ingemuous, nor drs aathor so unmasked, as ether would wish to seem. Ta the epistle, the base paradoxical device of the28 ERASMUS' STULTITIA wefan of wisdom and ignorance, i setup. “I have called my centson of vil ure Fae of ori bets of Your vo sabieh comes as neat to the Worl for fely as you are far from een of The Gceronan oxpason nest ne — and oer neat tapes ths ated from context for it Sane ne catency in which Erasmus had deliberately con- doer Concept of ene and fares* Nonetheless the iony rics one mde pla: ie can be tasted cites 38 “The Peake of Poly or "The Pre of More” and if Folly trade and PRG Nore2 hl leaned and wholly gracious.” From the ut, aan ates of More and Moris andthe concepts of wisdom and rae of abeence and presence re itetionally confused Scelg ttn shai and svg te wellworn ran ahi he enn cin th ly and avy for Me eae Orhers may judge mes they wll sys but unless ane ates ae bay, [have prised fll ina way noe wholly Teas i pn tn premise, ofcourse, cat che ene Encoston to ae pone seriousness ofthe joking follow Bed aa nes inthis prefatory epi, Tris may led to sexous ae recs ay give prof, and while nosing lis than 0 ang os hangs tingly, noting is more graceful than to treat se aha each a way hac yo sem to be less han ring “Fre Suping wih words y ike the comsaneuse ofthe double (or Fe erg eg huracerite ofthe syle Erasmas enplys in dhe ra eae the syle lf becomes in this way a reflection of the ion parndones ofthe argument. Foe a aed we regard ois and serous ings 1 etiece in Renasance defers of scalar and “gh” iter aoe ably brought forth to seer objecons against works a a a hls (liars) tan be a theologian.” Yer when Ae “gu ale Meee gl pot wm Nese wept eee gr ects abnene memoria non alter fro solebam, eam race proses conaeadine cOnsevea POSE GL Be Seana fran erejdicom: tame, ai plane me flit ogni io = Sa ine ugar sonn Svar, seus a racer adicr oo ie TE (i Eons Uren sil mopacis, qua sea mogorie sSguaro plas FEF etn quam ie tesce nog ut mA mines gam mp Fee idea ‘THE EPISTLE DEDICATORY 29 it appears, however briefly or tentatively, before the paradoxical tide Moriae encomiu, it also serves to warn the reader chat he should look below the surface of the joking that is to follow. Chaloner, who unlike many Renaissance translators seems to have understood the work he rendered, comprehended this face and the verbal device, and to drive their implications home to his English readers he reiterated them in his own ineroduetion: A Folic it mse be thought in me to have spent eyme in engishyng of this Boks erie of Fe "wheres the tame ie selle seth to et oorth no wisedome, or mater of grate: unlese pethappes Erasmus, che trout throf, dled to mocke men, in callyg it one thyag, and ieanyng an other? Despite these allusions, however, the esoteric aspects of the En- coma are little more than hinted at, Not only was it dangerous to bbe more explicit, bue Erasmus was concerned with defending himself against the attacks he could foresee. The defensive arguments he employs here are those he was to return to and expand in such urter- ances as the famous etter to Martin Dorp and, ater, after the attacks had in face hegon, in the adage Ollar astentare.® His defense begins, in the best humanistic tradition, with a citation of classical precedents, and the catalogue he supplies is the usual one, such as we find, for ‘example, in Nashe's Praise of the Red Herring.’ Though Erastus? lise i, happily, briefer than Nashe’s it includes the most famous mock panegyries— the pseudo-Homerie Barrachomyomachis, the pseudo Virgilian Culex, Ovid’s Nus, and that favorite of Renaissance authors from Spenser to Gelli to Montaigne, Plurarch’s Gryllus ‘This argument from precedent is buteressed by several moral angu- ‘meats, all of them traditional and all of them repeated and elaborated in the leree to Dorp. Ihave, says Erasmus, censured only the general manners of men (Commmunem hominwm eitam) and have mentioned no one by name, thus attempting to teach rather than to “bite."* ‘What is more, he claims that by attacking all clases of men he has il, "Cte Foe SEE Hynes (yp) and LB Tfo-4sD. Nash Works ik aye Fors deamon of ts tain and 4 more comple auloge, see MeKetions nee TV, 387-95. Se alo Ac 8. Pee, “Things woot iene casi Peeiey, 3 Cgedy’ fear and AE Malloch "The ehniqaes sn onto of the Renan Prado SL (9) ‘ME 'Vie "At en gut vias ocinun ea tat, wt Beem omnino pesingse sominai,quaso, wun orders videtean dcere poise mone?1° ERASMUS’ STULTITIA spown that he wat angry at no induc rater. a ll ces? Peay aS ance alege a real” Be pins co os ta dry avoned moving hough tse orale ver ae apt eer may ener en Jo's tenet of Sane pinis, and actually as ne might have guess Sianing from Erasmo lower © Dorp atom eS alana Vi generalis ext de vitis disputatio, ibi mullius exse personae InPTr eet ct ret ae ey SME Vie “Prsteres qu polln hominua genes prastermii, i mal amis, Sea ee ee a ent oni 8 at sn ym ut ag eee Ae Seiten seh set Pm fs eel pps He Se Fie, a ct a kL ys, en pe SRE ai’ mo geo MEY, “ef Nai THE EPISTLE DEDICATORY ” ‘These, then, are the main points in the epistle dedicatory that any ‘casual reader comes away with. What is more, they are the points that Erasmus wished him to come away with. Yer if we examine the cpistle with a more penetrating eye, certain questions present them- selves, the answers t0 which bring us closer to Erasmus’ intentions in writing it and lead us directly into the techniques of the Encomitem itself. One may, for example, wonder why Erasmus should have fel ic necesary to repeat the familiar clichés in defense of satirie and “frivolous” literature to More, of all people. Not only was More doctissimus, but it was he himself who had led Erasmus eo Lucian, ‘And it was Lucian who had fished the murex up for both of them. Erasmus’ epistle dedieatory to his translation of Lucian's Gallus, written two years before, had been quite explicit about the nacure of the game." Certainly Erasmus knew — he says in the epistle that he knows—how much More enjoyed this kind of joke which the two of them had found in Lucian. Presumably, therefore, no one less needed a justification of the Moriae encomium, nor would anyone have been more familiar than More with the traditional defenses. Why, Eraamus asks at the end of his epistle, should Tsay these things to you? The answer, of course, i thar More did not need he epistle, that, a5 Ihave already suggested, it was not written for More but for the Encommivom, because Frasmus intended that the reader should be Ted into that work by way of this epistle. Evident though these facts ar, their corollary has not always been so easily perceived: that Erasmus is not here talking privately and frankly to a friend, bur publicly to his readers and future erties. He is, cherefore, wearing as much of a mask as he is in the encomium itself, though not quite the same mask Te is to this mask chat we may ateribuce the lie Erasmus tells in the very first sentence of the epistle. For the Encomrivm, as we know very well, was not composed by Erasmus as he traveled from Tray to England, but rather in More's own house after he had arrived there. Some scholars, confronted with what Erasmus says in the ex dow li vocenut, apd docs visi alu.” Qn Liss, see EE 14s9 ‘iotvcseanmia st A. Renae “frum, sae eon ecore jasgck Rete Beorque, CRIT (ign) 98 ‘Zh Tgas-6 og) "Tanrom bin in decendo gratse tent in naenendo fel" tatam “a igando lepers, a orden et, se pda allasonus, ‘Sooo gin nogar seria mee dene vor ic, ern condo det ==2 ERASMUS' STULTITIA spite and what he aeknowedges in anotes lesen ave aemed cra che decrpuney by cining hat though he wrote is book oe ie thou up whe traveling Such an explanation is Feta impale bites unnecesary Ke abo mises the pin. ie mastael isnot the expansion of the contradition, but ripe enone why Frases Ferperted the inacrsey that his rae non onthe journey. Equally unnecesury and misgoided so ee eo dscumion ofthe dieting, “Ex Rore, quot dus Meee ADVIL” which Erastus placed atthe end of the episle. Scholars have often debated what Erasmus meant Dy rus See alin has conjectured that does noc necessy mean aaa ee ates have thoughe (why waite co More from bis own Cee or osibly Se Gennain-des Prés® Yer surely what Eras- aoa be che dain that te Bnconim was writen in the ies means PY han the eis and ee pon he is emphasizing is the coun Ne making when he writes a che began of his Fine ore pe Red Herring, “of my note-books and all Books ese hee Pee emery Lam berezued” All these devices the ex rae the eras yoy tern he ple hobby ie nor aan desrpons of how he wrote se Bacon sania wel, wie and wah any boks at his dipole are ety) Ysimers Fe protests too much, and we may be forgiven Heaee tng if there were no Doo in Mores house that he could a ae um 8 simply wing these excaes ro remove hs aes the batdeground of sclaship on which ic coal more eat etched: Tuy whenever an adversary might atempe © Se PSs dhru, Ere could lays expan tha his vor Fee ten ty, tha he was ony joking hat ws all simply "RE Tog (7): “Diversbar id cempors ped Moram smeum ox Tels rever~ 7 52 for example 1. Brons, “Enemas 1h Stier” Desticbe Remdicay Ct ogee 9s ‘Bee te TEE La 20 Nahe Werke I 5-6. . TN Ee ES, ex nos amte comple anos Muyosfradgn co 200 (OE LD Tagat ocr incites go, mals Mrorgm admins dj ris dee cre ip ete Ct ao HE Hg wenum dolor a a ea coach Et men uiera onde feat awe Tort empl dies dol sors leq in faucibus sade esis OGTR lan encom dre, te Be se afresh ‘Eels hoc velo sacameno eeu tothece ernie for axa of thee argent THE EPISTLE DEDICATORY 2 4 game. Ie is a trick chat Fala, with his dagger of lat, also new. (OF the many disclaimers which Erasmas profes the en voyage excuse parioularly interesting, since i helps us to locate the Bo- ‘comin within a cerain tadon, Perhaps the etlst Renaizance ase ofthis particular antscholastic device is Perarehs in his own book on folly. In the De sl ipixs ef mutorian Sgnoranta he i a pains to mas the reader belive tht his race was wrinen en voyage Pepecteally, whi sting in a boat gong down the Po2* Ths, he reflly explains that hs book could not pos be scholarly. nom deniquegraitatem (babet}) and tha itis bo wonder ifthe and and speech ofthe ster Gout a bie (fucout) for hacobation requis 4 Tamp, scholarship sud, The theme ofthe Bota conclu that we find in Boccseco and ethers i in is insitence upon removal from the work of hard fact and moral codes, an analogous device to di claim a cerain type of responsibil, and Marguerite de Navatr, in her mization of Boccaei, removes her character from any schol reporiility 2s wel by specially excluding frm che group “those Who lad studied and were men of lesers”* Sinialy, More's Utopia vas not only pu down on paper in spare moments "onelye that tyme, whyehe eae from epe and meat), Bu kaso sled co te nothing more than a recounting of what he had been gol, thus supposedly frecing him “of al the sbour and seady belonging tothe inventen ofthis work "*" Finally, Peares desetipton of wring ina boar may remind s that Cans also claimed tht his philosophy Gf leamed ignorance eame to him “at sea wile rearing from Greece” while atthe same cine Perarch’s verb fluctua antipates Montaigne’ explanation thar he wrore down whatever came into fis head, “divers et ondoyant” as e was attempting to describe his own ignorance Pete, Des ie mtr geen b Pas pe sepons eon, oo asl apse oo oe wn te fens Hed Be cee ee el ec eee ana A OY ete ae es ickcnayw hswek foe il paek ns ee fargerie de Navate, EHeptamivon dc Michel Panga (Pat, 2050), p. 9 Tote Mote, Dep Ralph Retysson, eds JH Lupton (Oxford 90s), mt AL Carr, Ic snd Kovmot i er PDioopie der Rensance ‘(Leiprig and Berlin, 1927), p. 8a. ss aleERASMUS' STULTITIA sat Eramus caine nt he wets Be peach nde he ott ate” S'S wi pened nee oe eee Stee is ead or falls from bis pe, “dum milla lucubea- Sa Fon yen of sy and ten Sing Soa te Pop are wrest ckesp yor pice ae ee ncholsy fo Ensm insenc ‘upon the unscholaly conditions under which the Enconnion was pon ih ade naence upon he ry charter Sor adr and fo deat (ooo enon of ee ton and ie re each jy ge, fe, words Wiha nein tp ep 0 ahh re te me ingot Nr hw). Le the Eco ES ea mae bern plying ae of a eee tiyiese” For ons game Se Pens sth sh sm Fe a sans (mine ge So few Im of dfsing carters of play oma i Ne he ceed es he gE ca eo er dhe ge nls oe ke Tex, tas en On dh ay comprehen eles 2a a cas these ha onl nd ne aware of he er oma a pet 2 5 Seine ko a Groner ey empesend Seas mls ano ms ee ace a wish Eras sean Be Ret To re arch mrre and foneon of the "enc ha! mpc he pe Ss Fe a a ec cal erry, she sae Fenn ore ae ae muse now sein of bath before those of Ee ey he sage of he Rf M ME ae yaitasse in arudine lorgs- "Fido Ludens (Bont, 1955), ch. t- On, Erasmus a5 bemo Inga ln SS Hane og tn wis RUE ET Clonee Frome des Chien mac dom Eo ade ee se om om Rotordan (Diselor, 1950, PP 8 THE IRONIC MOCK ENCOMIUM egcvouucvesseescogss Ton i Siti gin, oe ands he dfs Movin Eres’ Look. I ough wo come ws smshing of evupebe and surly ie dito i fmt rear; for nothing inthe tile oF the epi ddixtory prepares us forthe fac that cis enconium of fll ico be delivered ty Folly here, There indeed, no precedent for ITs the lneruy ton The ele of the book, though inentonaly imeligen, wellead reader of ag: Thee wuld doubles hive teen cenain amusement in Gading that Brand's ship, lunehed les than two decides before, had been sad so mphanly into prs, but the moek-encomiic gente was not uafuna,and the reader woul protably have recaled a once that long tradition of works hich prised "Basie, Pale, quran fever, ls, baln, dnd pages ofthat sre” To have found that tis Pll here who fDatls pay lure cccudooel tome greet xpi, epevly sos in Bran book ir was Wisdom who occupied the palpr and preached amonshingly tothe fool siting beneth er. Moreover, as some Tears ay have rernrbered, the one tne that one of Brands foals Sid mount eo the pulp, he was srk dumb. Yer scully, forthe *Scbsinn Mendy, The Sip of Flr Alene arch, eT. H. Joieon (Edinburg and London, 18745 x vols.), 1, 1195 Mh 273, 231. ,36 ERASMUS' STULTITIA ridiculous to speak was no less traditional than for the rdiculous.to be praised like the vicious and the bexial, the ridiculous and foolish iad early won the right of speech in literature. ‘What would have been astonishing to the reader of 1511, however, is the face that here the ridiculous is praising iself. Fools had spoken before this and foolishness had been praised; but never before had a ool praised foolishness. Erasmus’ great originality, then, was to make Seultva both the author and the subject of her encomium, to conceive ‘of “Moriae” as being simultaneously both objective and subjective genitive. Thus, “The Pease of Folly” only translates half ofthe ete FE might more accurately be rendered as “Folly’s Praise of Folly “As Erasmus’ title chus doubles back on itself, it tends to cancel itself out in the fashion of a double negative. Ar least one is already tancalied by the doubt that it may cancel itself out, Or is it pethaps Serually a tiple negative? Docs doubt ence! out doubt? To begin to ‘xamine the problem is to condemn oneself to a vertiginows semantic labyrinth. For the praise of folly, being a mock praise, isin face the ‘ceurare of folly; but if Folly is thus censuring folly, Wisdom would presumably praise folly. OF, to look ac ie from another angle, if she praise of folly is by its mock-encomiastic narue, actualy the praise PF wisdom, Folly must be praising wisdom. Bur if Folly praises ‘wisdom, thea Wisdom would presumably censare wisdom, One is Ubliged eo surrender to the manner of Gererude Stein and say: £0 praise folly is fooling, but if Folly i foolish and Folly s praising Folly, Fhen the foolish is fooling — that is, wisdom is being praised. Yet if the unwise is praising wisdom, it is folly to do so, and wisdom to pase folly. If the reader is by now thoroughly los, Tam not Enrprised, Nor, for that mater, woald Erasmus be; for ie isin just this way that he intended to confuse his reader. The simples statement of his strategy — that Folly praises folly — propounds an insoluble ‘lemma of permanent uncertainty similar to the famous statement of Se. Paul that Epimenides the Cretan sail Cretans always lie#* "The complex strctre and elect of sc ree ambit have inereing sod Fa eee ee Ae ras and mole aye oni mode dco and pee ap sce see grt ta Ss dependences dcop hg new Ope of ony at pres the se ee sheicance cht Eee Scrpetenening wee scence of inal perpecie, THe aa ae ae ee Py alcer ar ivesags i indspenble for any examination ear tae Thule to refer the ined reads co the brent pan scald 2 ton A Saaly tthe Psyeblogy of Pzoral THE MOCK ENCOMIUM 37 Erasmus book is 1 mock enconium —bat at the same tine the sci insted. Eno of so ater ack scone he Mes encom lost dvs ae Ems ‘only Swift steely approximates, Cetin oder authors have + nes doe somthing anlogas and thea common date levees that are often very simlar u,with the exeption of Sif no one has employed his particular ratgy in qutthe way Fras oc wo eco sem ly ht Hass id or tan pean frraure, He appears, in fact, to have invented a new kind of irony. aan ho hs a bens weve, emt il be anil hat there sone partclar probable inptton, if oe dieet source for the kind of irony Erasmus has ereated. Though we find nothing like iin ee mock encom we do find oti ey a the thoughe of the most prominent pagan in Erasmus’ hagiarchy, Socrates. “There isa passge i the Apology, which wll be examined in greater deel when we consider Rabin that comes astonishingly cose to the technique ofthe Encomiun: thi the pase about the oracle gx Des where Sorat he she we fen arr inovsidar he porn Ke knox sean tat Sua hel givens of faving red hs Phonic work an real is Ince rams AC one pot ner elegy, Sin ores hat at she saying may at igh sem foish or absurd, and yet icis reilly profowndly toe Few sage semenes in the Encontn demonsrate more elewly the puzre of Chinese bors that Ersan irony contsins. Srl ay tac what sem to be he absurdities ae actually truths, Ye, because Seultia says it, it may not beso, since the eh of Sra aye fans: Bacio hat ci the ols of Sli oughe wo be eth; and perhaps whar Ens saying ‘What at first sight may scom trie is realy absurd.” How san we tell which he mean? ‘The annwer i that he means nether one FRerecmein (Now Vo) Gant hd etn, “Te Bers Sa ST a enh tr tes Tee nein of ye Co Brio Kaptan Seis Si fr ri onl Cm i os ss re oe ate i ae "Fee, A ray ks CEN fens eRe aim prone feos sn et PR aa pin fone stan forts aque araréam, sed amens ERASMUS' STULTITIA the other, but both, and more than both. Once cannot reduce Ensmian irony, any more than one can Socratic irony, to a simple formula, even the complex statement of the mechanics of this irony two paragraphs above is a dangeroxs oversimpliication. Folly is Tool and Folly is wise, bue the head of Janus i greater than both “this faves. One right, indeed, propound as a general theory the fact that the highest tropes operate on a formula of one plus one equals three, Empson has demonstrated this ro be tue of ambiguity, and {udents of the drama know that the meaning of a play is greater than She eam of the “meanings” of the characters. So, in the sume way, the greatest works of art (as Socrates scrs to suggest atthe end Of the Symposia) incorporate both the comic and the tragic visions but inhabit a higher sphere than either. If Dorp, Erasmus’ frst critic, misread the Eacomium by taking every statement literally later erties fave often tmsread it as badly by taking every statement for its opposite, Either postion tends ro miss the point and we cannot realy ceRerstand the Encomium until we see the truth and realize the iplicadons of a recent crit’ obsersacion tha in the Praise of Folly rey “docs more than affect the meaning. ‘There theme and tone blend: the irony Becomes the meaning.” * Thar Erasmus should have writen his mose famous book in this manner should not be surprising. The man who attacked both the Church and the Church's attacker at the same time, who urged that Luther be protected by the princes but refused ro side with Luther, teh placed Socrates in the same order of che blesed with St: Path Shvicasly conceived that truth was rarely simple, His biographer Huizinga has emphasized: I Erasmus so often hovers over the borderline between earnestness and eee rhe hardly ever gives an incisive conclusion, it is not only due aac tac and fea to com himself. Everywhere he ses the shad- eee blending of the meaning of words. The terms of things are no Fo crane co the man of the Middle Ages, a5 crystals mounted in Sp ike assertions 50 hte that T would fis allowed by the inviolable "What is (gold or stars in che firmament tuly tae sides with the sceptics wherever it Srrbadty of Holy Seriprure and the decrees of the Chute ‘exempt from error?"* +. R. Thompson, ts Ten Clloguies of Samus New Yo 2957). SE RDG ea of Roterdam, Fe Hopman (Landon, 95. 16 THE MOCK ENCOMIUM 39 ie cores Duhamel signals thi i writes *{ would rely call hin the Eg of bur Sule nee “poe vlan ur uy of te mut mia he =i tose hie of quston nin ray ght f wisdom” Ver the eagedy of Erastus’ life lay esac here, nth guaty of mind hat wo incomprcnle t fs coment = Gre Won of em ve reed empresa, mc Tos lon, of Ens psn fm er Laer mee eee or the mons of Spain at teacher but even is fiend Diner one dy entered in his journal the poignant cry, “O Era z wo wilted Mebea?" "The Lutes could ssere, Due Exam, had he ar! Durer question, cul ony ha sve Hur ahr rer Se is mouthpiece Sela is ambiguously vaclltory, unsure even of what folly and what wisdoes “wpa hee tos Sone of you al swe or ithe fy mie we ner, al es Cannot ll chm pure Even Line oes hiker conde ‘come to, the sentence still seems to say that t ke aos be wise. But then, of chi ni lie a fol Aad co ie ofcourse, tis sid by Stl, foo, Sad so nd cunelves ones aga lot in the lyri The substitution by the Renaissance humanists syllogistic argumentation is a phenomenon wh fesroren bes ch has often been Gennes Dskanel, Deus Faron (ai gy spore esealy ven sense opprection Erssmed mundo Hinoria Esp Condon “Gf Whe ering rea New pase never 0 ea anything eae ; Fyfe armen sting cay. He pave very ade of» gosto dae. {ive afte done theme, ava tome pce wich Tough dered a tcl of cosstncy sd si-contaactet Disbtaer of ued Noes Wikis eg Recorded by Eason Pee (ew Yor, Met Books 9) pS ein Selah Nats Grd dr Oral Sd Th. mms fcnfen, eK Lange sod FFs (Hale am Sle cps tn ei ein es ta pe ee mig GEES: “Gono itt decoro penone, vara corecsonen? ise depere, ide Slate pares naman4 ERASMUS' STULTITIA auested to, Ie is enough merely to observe here that Stltita’s role fs orsror and lier claim that oratory is che least mendacious.migor «ar indicative of her Erasmianism indeed, her very phrase Caratio, minime mendax anim specutwm) is stolen from ‘Erasmus! “Apophbegmata wiere he derives the idea from Soeraes, via Xeno- ‘lon * Accordingly, when she sep up tothe pulpit, Seu Fro an oration which i classical in form, and no points more labored inning of her speech than that she is not going to ‘i Lae ee Haye Hudson demonitated that the form of her spezch adheres closely ro_the_ paradigm of orat da eee by Cuilnn’™aogh, 2 we Sal Se 18 ren dlosce to Greek models for enccmia than to Roman models for public address. Acceprng for the moment, however the Quinn Faradigm, we can observe how Sultia’s speech begins Trond, moves chrough a narration snd partion co the confirma Grluch comprises the main body of the speech), and ends with the teaditonsl peroration. Ina typical geture, Sula herself moc! ‘Sine form Tater in her speech when she attacks the sermons of che Shonks Equally typical of her poine of view are hee aubyteon of i ant-pardcion for the parton and her sarcastic attacks on those ya tpl such orion with Greck tags, a device whi se Fonelf will employ throughout her encomium, even the Greek rite ‘of which is also exposed to her sidicule"* Discounting the partition, which is devoted to her refusal co give a partition, dhe exordivm and naraton comprise an inodueton. fn ica introduces the main. sheres shat will inform the res of the ‘Fark: She begins by describing herself, and i is doubtless sgniicane Fat the firs thing she says —characteristically worded as a double negative —is that she is noe ignorant: neque enim som nesca, The Urgning sentence, in ts Cicefonian lengeh and elegance, ineoduces cE SID an ic ao cnet hee Kine Boa sep le seins Jom Ty ad Ben Jorn, wo, abe i ot of Vi, RP Ae Tay hc spin A a on pa ane atthe Paste of the mind, No gle renders 4 mans forms oe ee sare mb spect (Janon, Work, VII #9), a irda Prac of Poly by Deserta Bran (ics, 192)+ 1 in enum paginara fonsibs legunur win nota pases persia THE MOCK ENCOMIUM s0 many of the book’s devices and techniques that its worth ing in Some deeal.* x ae Howe so ever men commonly take of me ( : iy talke of me (8 pare Tam not ignoreunt wale pres gy on GLI yea cen rndogs those hat ae vei ooks ofall ye that Tam she, Coney (Isle) who though mye ina Glen: that as soone aI came forth to sey myn afore ths your so ouable asembli, by and by ll your lokes began to elere up: untendyng, yal your loles began ro cere up unbendym the rounygof jou bowes &lughyng ups me wih so ete # cou tinance, es by iy trouth me semeth evn, tac all ye (whom I ste here presen) de fate sit ye were well while, and roughly moysed prs) do ‘wel whied, and thoroughly moysted hte ect vine ofthe Hoes Geiey nt wt» purcon Of the juyee ofthat mervallus herbe Nepentes, whiche hath force to poss nthe roche here: Whereas before ye all Fete and glommyng, sit ye had come lately from ‘Trophonias cave all—as John Donne, who recalled it, also insisted;'" for while we a ‘eomamine dm aq homies eo lad nde maple ct puma, Sod Slee stan cou frequniimam drape ae eps ona ‘oh ps ini tte ote line enter, Ben fee expo seis pace ner, ur daasth Hanercintn pecan won sae apate 81 ny nda ets “a by much nig eo ee ss Toa at fo tg hee To wey oa SS fave gmt fon ment he ow a a at ‘Berd Klien ng ton he tl hg Charest Colin (New York Madesn obser, oasirapweser, 7 12h" Domnero ERASMUS' STULTITIA may question emubili (they are, obsislyIughing at her, not with fe), Wwe cannot question rin (chey ae laughing) Tes typical shat Jn one searence she should employ a quotation from a Latin play~ Mtaghe (Tetence), a Greek: pore (Homes), and even one from Teens own Adagiz® Tei, finally, indicative of the message she is to propouind tha she shoul, atthe very outset of her spete ake it for grinced at gaiery and dronkencess are to be extolled and that Sadness and the melancholy effects of religion (the Delphic oracle of Zeus Trophonius) should be deplored. ‘With the quas-Lueretan description of spring inthe nex sentence, Seu introduces the images of sunshine, veralty, and pleasore wrth which she is repeatedly to characterize herself in her encomium, She then proceeds fo announce that i is her pleasure 0 play the sophia fora while — nor, she insists, the pedantic kind of sopist who ‘Showadays the bane of schoolboys, but that ancient kind who tool: the name Sophise to avoid the infamous name Wise2* Though Listius tes bis cuxcomary explanation of this remark by ascribing ito the cova personae, we recogaize the usual method in Stulta’s mad- ieee Stmlary when, several sentences late, she ells herelf she eve pestower of all good things, we may recall chat in the Encbividion Erasmus had applied an almost identical epithe, from che apochryphal Wisdom of Solomon, to “che wisdom of Christ whieh the world thinks folly" Sralia then explains that she i co praise herself in the speech she will make, and she takes a swipe a those wise ones (Gapientes vos) who claim itis foolish fora person to praise himself Even if it, she asks wittly, what could be more in character (modo slecorion)? Following the rational Quinsiian order, Sala then proceeds to the partion. In the land of medieval oratory, this particular plot [Of ground was feserved especially fo the encampment ofthe School- sheds the goniat loci was Petrus Hispanus, the toureys held there Ment combats by choplogie. All dae the humanist spi hated most See LB Is, Homer, Oise, Wasps gd LB Uap ME 9 Lam tin pes 4 ee joan een ceri, guod hod mage Gott ee imiaor gus goo infanem™ Sopher ‘ogame grt Sophias ro cn ia pt kx leg: Von fe ese ea bona wom A et hmoneraile bear per ant So. pe THE MOCK ENCOMIUM 48 seemed to be centered here in divisiones and defintiones, and ie was the partition that was most commonly attacked of avoided in humanist xx ‘Sti’ somfal ping nod at che purion may be Borat ny hand ye sal ear an unaied ndsodine col, choghe somuche perhaps the tru, Whiche I woulde not ye shulde tyke were Sled of ne for 3 eaouy, fo avaunee chery the Bypenese of my witte, $= commonly thx ered en do, Who pug foe ye Kaowe Se boke sore fun whole nan wyme Radin call ye and hee fomerymes none of their owne doyng, will sweare yet, that they made it bue for a reereacion of theyr graver studies, or rather a fast as penne teu roe: For ry ifn verb ye ne to speae eight Set le on my tres ende But tothe end ye ake wat for T doe warne ye of afore hande, that I in no wyse will, accordyng to these fom Sophisters and Retrens mune: go abot to sew Gy di ion what I'am, and muche lesse use any division: In as mache as I holde bot the oe an the othe for unl tokens eet comprehend Rivers esse ender line, whose nforse seta & waver: Sly orcs o divide fin woe ooeremee ll en doo so toll ‘consent. And yet I can not tll ro what purpose it shoulde serve, to epre- Seca crand Hao rma of ay when prem et dibecne me wih your ds For am bere (ye ts) dhe diseributrie and See fa Telemed Myon Gres a Late Sin Ee Sta bere insists upon the spontaneous and unlabared quale of her oration, much as Erasmus had nse upon thoes same qualities in his book. Indeed, she pokes fan a che very excuses Erasmus had tsed in the epstc dedictory o More and was to we agin in the leer to Dorp: “amen tru sbi qua per Tosom serpeam” What fr she human aack an Pct of Spin st ep. ch. Walter. Ong, Rar Aji en be Decry of Diop (Comrie ts tp) On OM SME sc."h me emmporam quidem ime era, ed eo vine seeped rig Orono feck. Nan ‘Seu nents eu oyasonem soe al ee Zac oe men gh Ine pt, fla ua rerun gear“4 ERASMUS? STULTITIA rs an exase from Eras, however, becomes a ita defense va julien At pains throughout sis bret partion coin that emi ary she es whatererenes er ead sod das meme, ata had ear calle “he mere sigh of me" ole stow nent) rather than to any representation of henlf. The finn ime ses ho he piled gpa ions from the Scolnen by rfsing ro compete on ‘her aoante Te alla gue, and ene can hardly deem he work eae enough to al for an answer. At the same time, chere i 3 eae, ey aspect eo this argument, or Stok i also caning 2 Tie en anguent ain ots. What the pon she sof ny even speaking, when you cin e me for yourses and my Me Steno so Samieaable? "Ae i ome one contendyng ha Referee Sophia, myght noc cig with my cody Toke be Chee For nme (je muse tye) is no place for seg festours ecxmees], asf can noe sie one thyngy and eynke an thee!" Gnomes (fc) are at offensive co hee a5 ehey are t0 Titec o Dean Swift or almost any ofthe grea sors, Wh sae pote implies tat they are the property of Wislom, Sinko mows Te opps anions ren nd 2etutodons thar we nomally find in the paraion are the cosmeties aeree Slmen and they are 28 More wee to Martin Dorp, not sais but fase" The scholas the Schoolmen, are sid to be wise, but they are really hypocrites and mdrosstoi, most foolish. May, we not indeed, Scolttia asks, call them mdrosopboi? —a word that ‘Chaloner was to render forall time as “foolelosophers.” Thus Stolttia uses a partion ro refs to deliver a partion and more ling dan her revelation of the hypocrisy of the Schoolmen is her demonstration of their futility. How, she asks, can you force into the bounds of 2 GeGnition what is universal? How can you divice what is integral? She is speaking, of cours, of the cult of folly. Bar —and the imple ‘°ME 6 Past guns gus me Minerva ast Sophinm ese comps, non stn eo Som i Sos dla scene ot, nen das sims See, Pe A os pe Tacs leas toe aad Lente slo, ald in pecore prea Noemie of Se Thom eo Mowe, ein ato Pepossonin Gut vost un pacrpouncum mie?” Ce atalino, Romo, pe 3. THE MOCK ENCOMIUM 4s sin is unmistakable —she might jus as well be speaking of the tls Crist Tis the more devastating that she should aac the Setowimen with thr own favorite weapon, the partion, since by fejting that parcuaroratorieal device she hat rejeted the ve basis ofall their endeavors. z ° Tes not only the Scholmen who find thenselves under er atc, however, Sho makes eqeal fun of the “nos temporsthetores” he frat scholars. In dong so, she edule by plieaon Eras tise °T have thought good to borows” esas of her eoinage andrsopbo, alge ofthe Rbtricin of thse die who plainly hyn then selves demygodey if ---thel ean shew evo tongs” ie se adds none of her wit de, «dancin ey sare with the horelech® Now, ofall Ersmo® gears, none more fuman or mre begin than that be pies himel nthe Ship of Foot as one ofthe pasengers. Folly as univenal in hs word a8 Iying sas among the Cretan te athor of eat on fll ino more ‘ep then Epienis, So Sela makes fon of Erasmus exces and his knowledge of Greek, and later, when she atacking the fale of slaty a wil make an equivocal sack st well om the ‘rorhp of aint named Ersimas (ME 78. Sia, nthe Cyclops colloguy,Polyphemus argues thatthe world mus e nesting fs end Because ei tn eorropeon are so widespread. "people whore, buy, Sc, pow, engage in wry, bul, Kings make var, pris dy 10 make money, thesogins hake syllogism monks tun up and down the world, the populace in eal, Enams wring colloquy thee sno end’ the eis tha beter us” If Sua extends het Irony to include Erasmus, however, she also extends to inlade, flys herlf 5 well She may excuse hr ws of Gres terms at his jonerre by chiming tha she doe eco make fun ofthe bing th she coninas 10 employ the device throughout the rest of her Aap Vien a noe gg pee eo npc ain GD vere ele i ate PO Gigs eeees = TS ESS SSE ht oa ge hl a ee TSC ey ne ahi god ent i a ae ae ate cna ta ‘Gus vendung foenrane et foneranur,sedieane: Reps beligermar, Scere Siar spends csi Tcl ee gang Mac prec ane {ane popule tuna, Erma ree cologuas denique ni malorum abe, Fame si soca, balan, peti seo, rum bone ino46 ERASMUS' STULTITIA speech i Preeeons some lede Greck words 26 ornament, even marrationparl on section. The difficulty arises from the fact that gan a1 ally, but rather Zen, and ecers we Sind tha he ial pars of an eicosium ths ft oe ul encamsnes ering te ih. Acorn Hee Minera nor aid he Bega her in welock, bu aes 3 TESS ean er, The Pre of Fall, by Deiderias Branmas New York, "9B 6 paren, pide Lira” Unity of Ccao Stns i Cet Phioogy igs) 8-261 8 e- P15-5 THE MOCK ENCOMIUM ” vigorous, “full of hote bloudde, bur muche fuller of Nectar drink.” This Plutus of whom Stulitia speaks with such filial devotion is che god of wealth —wealth that upsets the world and governs wars, ‘marriages, and all human activities. But we must remember that this is alo Plumus the god of plenty, companion to Demeter, who is responsible for the abundance of erops, good harvests, and che full Dreadbasket that Hlesychius calls euplouton. Scultca’s mother was Neotés, Youth, by far the fairest and gayest of the nymphs. Her patrs, the mention of which provides one of those rhetorical occasions for the description ofa lacus amoenus which Curtius has traced through medieval lceracare,” was in the Fortunate Isles themselves * where all thynges grow [“Junsowed and untilled("]. In whiche iles neither labour, nor age, nor any maner sickenesse feigneth, nor in the fields there dooe either Nettles, Thistles, Mallowes, Brambles, Cockle, or suche Iyke bagage grow, but in swede thercof Gylofloures, Roses, Lilies, Basile, Violettes, and suche swete smellyng herbes, as whilom grew in ‘Adonis gardeins, dove on all sides satisfie bothe the sents, and the sight. These gardens that, as Shakespeare describes therm, “one day bloot'dy and fruitful were the next” and that served Milton as a kind of prototype for Eden were a land that almost every Renaissance poct was to rediscover. The original source for these isles is, of course, the description of the land of the Cyclopes in the Odysiey, but one wonders if Spenser may not have remembered Stutitia's own descrip tion of her fatherland, where nature is triumphant and luxuriant and where “Ne needs there Gardiner to set, or sow,/To plant or prune” (EQ, MLvixxxiv). ‘The rogues’ gallery of attendants and companions that Seultitia introduces after her description of the Fortunate Isles comes closest to the category in che epideictic paradigm termed anatropbé, that section of an encomiastic speech which deals with the special circum- stances of the subjece’s youth, One mighe expect to find an extensive and hilarious treatment of this, on the order of that which we find, eats opens Leer, pp trae, oe a tec, nue wot rato uepan’a ope sols nal eg BP Bhmve ast fata auras hoe geno magne conclu. Sed pam oc, snl ee mais adtandlanr moe patacsnepethe snarics: ares Tt, 7s Poi hyecthon Aone hora48 ERASMUS' STULTITIA for example, in Pantagruel; bue Sclttia, always more interested in the presene than in the pase and, indeed, sill in that time of youth ‘which would properly form pare of the anatrophé, mercly gives & Iist of her nurses (Drunkenness and Ignorance) and her companions (Galf-Love, Flatery, Forgetfulness, Laziness, Pleasure, Madness, Seosvality, Intemperance, and Sound Sleep). If they sound more like aging of juvenile delinquents than fic playmates for a goddess, chat ‘of course is intentional. Foolery and roguery go hand in hand, and ie is only to be expected that the greatest fool of all should travel in the company of the deadly sins, now expanded from seven to eleven. Such “anrestrained loose companions” as Henry IV once described 4 similar band of rogues, eall up stock antipathetic responses in our minds; and just 28 we ridicule the Foal, so we censure the rogues that artend her. On the other hand, we have already seen that Seultitia may not be as foolish as we may have expected, and the second of hher nurses, Ignorance, has alzeady been confused with Wisdom. The careful reader may therefore be properly skeptical of his response to this simple list of vices. By the time Sralttin has finshed her speech, they, like everything else, will have been demonstrate 1o be some- thing other than what they seem. Tt is too early in the speech for Seulkita eo reveal the trae nature of her companions here, for we ‘would not believe her; but as they are swept along with her in the flood of therorie to come, they impercepeibly suffer a sea-change. ‘With the exeeption of Philauti, they are hardly mentioned agains yee when Stulia has descended from che pulpit, when the applause fas died down and we think back to the companions she has iad, we are suddenly aware that she has spent her youth not among viees, but “With this eatalogue of companions, Sclttia finishes her introdue- tion and moves into the central part of her speceh, which may be Uivided into three sections oughly corresponding to Burgess’ Aph- thonian categories of praxcis, synbrisis, and epilogos. The first, the praxes, concerts the achievements aad atributes of Stultca or what Dean has labeled “The Powers and Pleasures of Folly.” The second, which is more implicitly than explicitly a synkrisis, is an account of “The Followers of Folly.” And the end of the speech, the epilogos, is the celebrated description of the “Christian Fool.” ‘Thus the fol- Towing outline may be set up to demonstrate the adherence of the THE MOCK ENCOMIUM 9 Encomium to the Aphthonian encomiastic scheme as well as to the Quintilian oratorieal paradigm. Fol’ gresting ‘sori ely wl pra benelé procinion — jexremporsaconsy sarzaon Folly wal ne deliver (rpetaion| partion getoe ‘Fly bie ) snatophé Fol companions “The powers snd ple | Ss 1 cendemon ‘yrs Thefallower of Fay (Tie Chin Fook crip: [yw re pena pete Alchough sch a schematization is exsently of interest only to the specialise inepideici literature, it does atleast demonstrate the pos tton that the More encomim occupies inthis particular tradtion, 2 tradcon chat was mos familar o Erasmus a it manifested itself in Lucian In enphaszing the Greck ater than the Lain prortype for Stu's speech, T have not wished to detract from Hudson's contribution to our undersondng of the structure of this ormtoa, ‘what is important above al isto recognize, ashe did that Erasmus ‘work is clase in naure, But the Aphthonian paradigm, in exposing the component parts of what Quintin calls te confirmation, docs seve he fer inp at hai th pra thes thae is the central section of Srultitia's speech. The praxeis, “The Powers and Pleasures of Folly,” occupies not only the most pre- dominant posion, but something close to half of the length of the nie speech in an edition of eighty-nine pages, the synkriis cakes Up twenty-ocven pages, wheroos the prarcis takes up thirty-nine, oF Half again as many. This is highly significant for any understanding of the Encomiun. When the average reader has remembered ths Boake Bsn ms lye rene he is che ack fon the clergy, the princes the papacy, and other estates, Ths isthe fection mos dscased by commento, just as i wat che teedon ‘most notorious, because mst scandalous in Erasmus’ own day. ButERASMUS' STULTITIA he sands for. To be sore, the syn an the praeis: the synlrs s constructed onto Shure that is mefe invective, wheres the sublr ironies ofthe pe are those ofthe introductory pats of ac hd oes aef-contaditory: One senss that the attack on the monks ar princce was wren in different spirit, as wel asin a differenr plead with a eruder satire, and fe may even be that this was dhe fart Erasmas added, almost as an afterthought, afer bis frien in Chitaea had urged him to contin the work he read to them. in any evens if the pages to follow seem co light the description of Salis’ followers and to concentrate more upon the description ‘Gf Sia evel, he reason is simply tha the former is beter known nd more easly understood, whereas the late is not only more elusive ine contains the central and most orginal par of Eras’ argument, Te gore of the Fool dominates her speech the nature of her folly Ti atthe beart of her message. Lhe ‘etng equivalent ofthe ssious piilosophy expounded in the Encbiriion malic christiani — whichis hat Erasous claimed the Encoitan was — is to be found not Thneh inthe plangent laments and angry denancitioos of the folly of the satcenticentury world asin th lambent ironies and laughing pine with which Sela describes her own tue marore vont een i qo ss cet ce py ta Sa ee eee aed nano scram ie Mori quam quod in aces neabra~ ais Po ee i se FER Succi est in Each, Admorere_voluimes, non marere, progeas, 4 THE TRANSVALUATION OF VALUES: TECHNIQUE eouugueseeecooRscnrTzseeuNR Srouzm’s encomium is outrageous. The curses of mankind she boasts of as her gifts the frailties and failings of humanity she extols as desired achievements; and she lovingly contemplates the vices of her companions as though they were virtues. Laughing and jeering, coaxing and bullying, she dances us into a Land of Cockayne, a world fof loxury and drunkenness, idleness and irresponsibility. Yet che farther we go, the graver the dance-step becomes. The voice, as we listen to it chattering on, imperceptibly modulates into tones of high seriousness and moral purpose. And at moments we even perceive tears behind all that laughter. The Land of Cockayne, when we get there, proves not to be the anticipated utopia of indolent illusion, but a religious world of terrible sincerity. How does she manage it? cis not merely that, as Duke Senior said of Touchstone, she uses her folly as a stalking-horse and under the presentation of that shoots her wit, Erasmus’ irony does not work that way. What we initially tend to dismiss as a stalking-horse turns out to be a Trojan hose instead: a fowler does not lurk somewhere underneath; an armed adversary hides within. The Encomim, as Exssmus never tired of explaining, is a game. Yer 35 we watch this game being played and listen to Stultiia push her joke so far thac she jokes herself into seriousness, we become aware of how well i illustrates Hiizinga's observation that “play can2 ERASMUS’ STULTITIA tery well inode seronsnes In is profound sey of che element Of ous ia eultare, he almost seems to have given a description of svhat happen inthe Encomf: "Any game can a any tine wholly Tom aap vth the players The conta beoween pay and seriooses i atwayy fd The inferior of ply 8 consinally being ost by the corresponding superiority of is seriousness, Play eres to serous- tess ant teioustes fo lay Pay may rs to igh of beauty and Sublmity that leave sro fe beneath"* ‘Willa Blake tlived tht if the fool were o prs in his folly he wold become wise? and we feat Sea achive wisdom in jst that way. Ae the begining, however, her folly is—or appears be “ole She speaks in eulogy of foolish youth as opposed to wise ages of levity as opposed to gravry, of drnennes and iermperance we gyal’ eo sory and rest, She advocates rashoess and ‘Sonntlsm and license; she condemns predence and reserence and Cispline I Self-Lave is her close companion, modesy i coally Set her As her speech progress sion and deception tumph Sve reality and roth, and resson ard Stoic honor are rejected for union and Fpicurenn plesare, Te iz 38 chough the pursed and Mereatng vies in Mantegm'sfamovs allegory inthe Louse had Enddenly rumed and wor the field after al, rowing the foress of Minerva, Yee more than a defeat that takes place; for, under the Sequiing spall of Sulit ero, a kind of metamorphosis has cceured:& ltr ar, Pal Kl, has pied portrait of «Mephico Sts Pallas” and iis hat Hind of araformacon that Srl eects Sere, just asthe paying turns into high seiousnes, so what seems Wine te ot oe ev and wat hal semed evil becomes wistom, ‘Ths inthe couse of her spec rises becomes pradence, pasion Tecomes reno heilasion, Billy, the sel, and inorsnce Sua process of earsmutation hasbeen decribed by Edgar Wind, who properly sees as character of cern tends of thought Uinoughene the sbecenh ceorry, at "eanvauation of values.”* Nicatehe's phone ba convenient one tows in this connection, 80 Tong as we recognize thae by Unset aller Werte he intended t0 "Hn Home aden Wns Ble The Marge of Heaven and Hel “Peover of Hel.” CEIRPP Myer nthe Rentzance (New Haven, 1958), p TRANSVALUATION: TECHNIQUE, 8 suggest something more drastically revolutionary and destructive than the ironic inversion of values which Stuliia performs. To be sure, there have always been thinking men who have questioned the ac- cepted values of sociery; they are usually the martyrs of that society, and Socrates and Jesus are their prototypes. Skepticism, if ic is not sterile, leads to revaluation, and out of the skepticism of the sixteenth century such trends emerged with sufficient predominance for us to speak of a movement’ The old accepted terms and standards and values came to be re-examined, revaluated, and redefined. Wisdom, honor, virtue — those concepts of the Stoies upon which humanism singe ‘Petrarch had built its foundations —were questioned and doubted, Whitehead was fond of claiming chat Western thought was a series of footnotes to Plato, and one may add as a corollary to this the observation that Western ethics is largely a series of footsteps after Zeno, For, from a certain point of view, our Western heritage may be seen as one of Seoicism, where nomos — custom, law, conven- tion — informs all the aspirations and judgments of man. Yet at other ‘moments in history an Epicurean standard of 2) been brought forth as a corrective to excessive Stoicism. The study of the transvaluation of valucs in the sixteenth century, when an increas- ing number of men were turning to Lucretius rather than to Cicero in some senses, a study of the revival of Epicure- anism —or pseudo-Epicureanism, as it may often more properly be labeled. A faller examination of this trend must be deferred until che next chapter when its relationship to Erasmus will become more apparent, bu it must be mentioned now as an integral part of Stulita's device of turing values upside down. ‘Wind has given a brief description of this process and hinted at its relation to neo-Epicureanism: SSo much has boen written in recent yents on the continuation of the Mig dle Ages into the Rensisanes, and of mediaeval modes of thought in “The ne Thode Spencer cn sh pe “cunt Ree” to char Sou pesapl be conreson a hs Colage nx bert samcwhar debe Oy she nu and prodigal ow of in Hum Hay, The Couecr Rensonce (New ‘Yor, io) The defers ofthis book have often ben pened one (nam notsbly by BO. Kesar in ts (vos 8-73) be mes als be sid tae seas 8 fale fk my fo he yl gut an aa. ivi ele to deft he broad sutines of te aajr reds of sep inthe ie Ronco "s4 ERASMUS? STULTITIA Renaisanee Phtonian that we ae apetounderestinae the deckve “rans ‘ituton of talus" which Ficino and some of his Florentine feends UHlted'n the theory of mocals: A noble frm of iasebiity or sean, Stuineds conrdiction i tern as Tonga rt was clase inevocaly 3, Wgealy sin, ee under the infuence of Seneca's De iryakhough the ‘ucneatelantacaon continued, a "noble rage” was separated off fom the common viee and Gefended ay viwe by Florentine humans in ful by Bruni, Palmer, Plan, and Landi. By a ia tts Mason de vice of sloth, the horace, was tilled into noble tnclncholye fOr alinough cede emai a deadly sin an Ariorelin Tefncmen of the affiction became the privilege of inspired men. Te is {Sin thse Remiscnce vinetons of melancholy and age a= noble Jumons tha the eult of noble colypee should be compared Like acedis dm the ie of lexis conse tobe ele 3 a eal sin, and the Tulete soaps thot incontinence, was pcrred in het image. And yet, rae ery of Ploy sued sins by Epica noble ‘peas as kode as te som Bone of the Nebpltonss® Ie is precisely this sort of transmutation that Exasmus attempes to cffect in the Encominam. To each of the Stoic virtues an Epicurean ‘opposite is contraposed, notin order to destroy so much as to qualify the accepted Stoie value. The device itself is as old as Socrates, and ies lassie formulation was given by Chamfore when he observed that, to have a just idea of things, one must take words in che opposite sense from that given them by the world.* One of Castiglione’s courtiers suggests a similar process when he refers to “covering a vice with the name of its neighboring virtue, or a vireue with the name ofits neighboring vice.” * Seultta herself follows Chamfort’s dictum, tand we are always aware that what is being attacked is not only the accepted meanings of words, but also “the world” thar gives such meanings their acceptance. Yet, at the same time, itis important not to misconstrue the significance of Erasmus’ gesture oF to miss its subtlety, Ie is the gesture, always, of the “king of but.” He is not totally against those Stoie virtues waich Seultitia attacks any more than he is totally for them; nor is he unconditionally in favor of those “Epicurean” virtues juse because Stultiia extols chem. Thus, when Stulttia praises drunkenness, we are certainly not to ehik that Erasmus is advocating Bacchanalian orgies. What we are to see is ‘Wind Matric poe. ‘Nichi Seas Me Chamfore, Oavores comple Pars 8-39 “uidcut Casio, Libr de Coregano, ef V- Can (Horne 047s P38 TRANSVALUATION: TECHNIQUE ss thac he is redefining the nature of sobriety and happiness and truth itself, He pretends to espouse the most outrageous Epicurean licenses in order to show the fallacies of their Stoic restraints, He does so not to advocate without qualification the former, but rather to redefine the later. “There is no passage more illustrative ofthis method or more charse- teristic of the book than that in which Stultitia discusses the Stoic ‘concept of prudence. It is a pasage that looks forward co Falstaff at Shrewsbury, and it is so importan, so illustrative, and so sclf- explanatory that, despite its length, it must be quoted in full” “Than sir, seyng I have this chalenged unto me the praise of fortitde, and of indusriousnese, what if Tce Prudence also? perhaps some will sae 4s soone myght Tgoe about to mingle fyre and water. But forall that f hope to bringe itt pase fa hitherto you have dooen, ye vouchsave me your ears, and atentvenesse. And fyrs of all if Prudence consisteth in Inge practise and experience of thynges, unto whether of these maie the hhonout ofthat name better square’ Either to this wyseman, who partly fondtams and py for dasardnese of Bere, ange noth ot cfs that Toole, whom neither shame, beyng shameles, nor peril, Bey reels, mi fue from provyng ay tiyag- A wyseman foporess Hort sco hi ke andthe eet moh Ba me eityg sone ‘of woordes. A foole in jeopardyng, and goyng presently where chynges Sie tobe knowne,gutheath (ones Tan dcoured) the perfec re pr Eyce, Whiche afer seemeth, northstandyng his Mindhese, tbe Seen, sha he sied thus, “A fooke knoweth the chyng, that i ones dooen. For here be swo song lees gu ache know of thyngs fo be gathered, chat i to sie, same and dreade: shame, that cats a mie before pens myn: and dead, ta, hewyng the pres, scousueth men om venteyng any enterpies. But I Fie mae, and am wonte £0 WY} thowe Its cleane arate "Vex few men conae, how many ways ei availeth to blousshe at nothyng, and dare dooe every thyng. But now ME 46-50; “Engo psteagnam mi forcneins et ndestriaeladem vinden, quilt profearse fudqoe vindcem? Sef dere aig ede opera lgoem ae ‘Mice licebie Verb oe quoguesoccvsrom arbor, sor oso qiod antec ec sibs ngpe amis eshte Petipn 2 rerum su const pode ‘rum rings compeee: ca Coganminis hones i spent, qu pati 6b pore, Partin ob nin tiniistery i aggre’ an fle, got neq peor gue Fics oeque pesoulam quod aon perpen ab ala re detec Sepics af bos ecru onfogir ste hine ments tocum angus eck Stl ademas eon Inner pecans feo ver n fallor, prodenfam alge Id quod visi site Ror cco com a Badr vine te Sa el dp acelpor ad cogaioncm rerun parsndam aba, ii fun fone Shino! et met qu eteso penlaaydchorarar ab aes aco. At hs tagoice ltcrt Sulcia Prot morales trligene ad quam moles alse quote imodiate conducsr, mangasm pudscee, et il nan andere, Quod © pr56 ERASMUS’ STULTITIA lo) andi ye tke pradence after the ata whan iret in judgement Ce ae Sages hecken ye (lpi you) howe farce sey ae 2 oe me i ace cf profenon. For fat es Ta ert, wal humin tygesiyke the iflens or dul ages ar lates hays evo facts mucke one and sen, that what Fe te ju ye lokyng itn ye sule fyde icles and art ter sc wine ed eo be deaths what are, be Fe Sen he beggeys wae cunnymg, soe what song, feble: what Mable ile wink glasome, sadde: ovine happie, unlucky’ what friendly, Tat Ui, wh healionbe, noysone. Baefely the Silene ents beng seh Salo, ye al Syne hyngesvoumed into a Ne se rose ord o sre tne spoken to iy, goe fo, 1 wil blaee thin more plan. Ip yam, who ihe tht eonfesih not Sse bose dhe, ant a great ode? bate ee he bath no good ‘phase he mye nor with those gooddes he hath, can be sted seater ick boc pote than the poorest Than aghine ait be be aos coalesce: mow is he no ode, but move subject than 8 SSvtane and afc ts rue male ye stan also the ocers. Bot this sere txanple Now i ute bes ye mune wha eane hereby, But ie ave ye ie freer Ion at a solme stage pe, wou Bee apt plcke of he plers gunntes wes they were sy take upon Hy to ack ce she ker ote tse ad tie fees See eee lars shuld he ot (cow yo) tars al che mater? and cee esd tbe ped oo of the place with stones? Ye one Ss ye seaightwales a nly tnumutalon fn thynges tat who es 85 Yh aren, shoe than spose to bea an: who secmed vor Decl chew hs hore hea: wb counted dhe kynge, shuld Round eo cal and who pied god sige skulle become a coer {ott 2 foe Vet ake sie ths eto and st sone take ava all Snes fn sc mache isthe feigoyng and counertaeyng ii that 8 Gifu ee bela: So Mew lf is fe of oral en, what See ah kynde of sage pa? where men come footie di “eniam aeeipere malane cam gute rer jodi contat, and bseeo, quam pro act noe sane ee, Dan cn ae Percale Alcbialls Som, ios bebe faces rimaom iar soe dies ‘cpa und pm oe oe in pT Mc) HisTmort quod foonim,deforme: quod opuenan i pagpecrnns quod Besa erosun! quod door, incre food euiasum, ibe, quod geser a ese quod ews tate quod progetun, avenam: quod Sci, i i apd team toes, bal eae ese pe 8 rae Tg ea fone nm pulopice detum idem, age pagso, gue areas ncren pls fad, Cus Reger non er opalentun, edo srt Aces mull Sabon ucts ey tga I a fa naan Aes e Tun anu haber pans ace vt ja oF STi of Ai conde dum, Ie cers gungoe phlowphag Ieee Sed Ane Schpuvice ponine sae st Ar guar hace? inguit igus, Audie quo rem ‘SE Sad stnis i soda lobular agen pena detraere cone, TRANSVALUATION: TECHNIQUE 57 aie one none ari an ote ina other, eck pig hs par, staffolde, and yet sometyme maketh one man come in, two ot three tymes, eth sundse pues and appara, as who before ecpreeared a bynge png clthedallin pups, banyng no more but ste ym sel ie ‘tbe hen sine he ween yu A at phic can no mare be plied. Here nowe if one ofthe waemens Come Ee) em ane dw appa sn ane eth great prince, whom all men honor a theit god and soveraigne, deserveth ssc ecae man sang ite te heen ened by ee he obsth so many, and so wie vies hs males. Or than elon wal me oe pn or a Head ee yng of a bec ey hrs ci hve te emcee a oe Furthermore, woe an ater glotyng in hi smes ond saneens both iia a bse bee so man tes nae fn i i ie meh oe of tc pen” An ne Feo tty mate men de ht for Hamad’ dag er oxy nore fonds Can prodenes ut en And dk he nt ara Son (tow ye) oe pth ot hice ae at ak onal fe fee ee a eh “gs Beale Ta poe aes oe earecets ees aaa ae fect, Sn ep TS ee Se el 5 his Sa pe pl Ain lst ed ue Bane quem omnes ut Deum ae dominim suspicion nec hominem ese, qd Sar eS cee ier or ae tee ee ae ae setenv aa Sal ET age le mieten ates ttbon el da ies ic lena Sl a Santa tt Esai Sin pate te Btn ote Sa eee aU cn ae lt Sl ma ate EEE acm has a ale nd eon8 ERASMUS' STULTITIA sr wil no ake the market ae seh? nora east membre the I Urquasyng, “Other denke chy drink, ot ss, and goe thy wale?” On the of gu sie seas prt cave vo know nothyng yon gate See So ee ude of her men Joo, de Sep en eneand ected wih hme: Baro ‘aie thei). And in good faieth I will not muche denie it, upon cone a a Bret to davemble, or ete sis he gh PAYNE SERS pats of eh ie Fools euh in where angels fear co tread. Flly does not deny its aie ches in with them, 2 che head of ther sans, Bu che question Sees evnoc such imprudent acon precisely the source of sr, dence Flo ean one letra pradence except shrough esperene Bia considered “sn the world” tobe vse and sgacins prodence BRM nothing more than ‘shame, that eats a mist before mens wn ead decade tat, sewing the perils, discousaileth men From seauryng any enerprses” The wisdom and prudence displayed rete Potente of this world are veaious at bes, “were sng wardens of weoordes” (eras voce args); and St. Paulina age frm the hse chapter of I Corinthians which Erastus quotes ae eroviaion (39), bad wamed: "For xe is written, I will dee ee adam ofthe vse, and wll bring ro nothing the under- Sindy of the prodent" Tei the hed imprudent fol who “a ee or and goyng presenly where thyages are co be Known, separ Coles am deceived) the perfect true prance” No er cn can be accomplished if man bs hanstrang by prudence, IPG seas Si sp na ener page “cis Fu “Teray” (pnudentr exqirees {ME 33]) into the antecedents or €on- sencscafat te acon; bu after the experience of the ation he wil have leamed rue pradence or aac of pradence of judgment? Tes here chat Sean makes ee mon cian point and most claly reveals her (and Eason’) aes ss The page of the Silenus extends far beyond her present srehcat ro become exible of her es vpeec and eo yy ae y of thought —2 way ofthoughe which was, significantly awed by Erusnas in both the Encbiidion and the Adegit 10 Trained socThe source ofthis imagery of course, Aebiades CAmuruon of Socrates to.2 grotesque Aigsine of a Senos which 1 po LBM e780. TRANSVALUATION: TECHNIQUE, s9 surface it may seem ridiculous or trifing, but undemeath it contains zgallipots of apothecaries,” implying that he got the comparison direct Paro, Sporto is. SLB lizrace “gue let a, vel de se, quae cum la spelen, et prima, quod jon, roe vite iets videsor eich ines 20 pops contemplate SE el de Son gabe feu ange min pa eeu MLD I yiB-C: “Hjosmodi Senos fut Diogenes, rulgo cane habits, Verum in hag eine dina soiddam aamadvererst Aleraer Maga “SLB gym bent eran Scaearcanae Lise i consis in super, rial onongtam fe Bs penetes gue nd anagogen, rina adores ap iD "An non mises quid Sens fit Chri? « SRiLya)iprol and Viral Trance Boca, Ty Adsoncomone of Learing (London and New York, Every- nals Library. 190) p3860 ERASMUS' STULTITIA equally true. If you open the Sileaws, you will find everything slaty revered. Theatre conn of te tana of las J focrdared upon this simple assumpsin, Te finds its authorities in aoe alamed tat iworance Yas wisdom and in Csi, wo Shimed that death was life. At the same time che image of eheSilenus fas another faction: ic bears not only the implication of paradox fat the hine of concealment as well. The internal eruth ip hidden behind the external fagade, even as ce seriousness hidden within the jung. When Erasmus and Rabelais refer heir readers co the Sleran ty are throwing out the hit that cere isan esoteric mean sna to what they have written, Thus the image of the Silemas sue~ ‘cinctly expresses those two characterises of the Renaissance employ- nent of the mixed style of the Spoudogeloion that were new: whereas The Middle Ages had tended to place jest and earnest in anthesis, forthe Renaissance earnestness could be both contained and concealed vn jes Tn. dening he concer of prune of det, Sui cmploys the Boo so oo summary 2 jugmet Hall haan Sf do, in fac, have a bifronal quality, iis impraden to judge them as though they did not; true prodence consiss in refraining from noting such contradictions and disparities, in pretending not to ec Seer Baimost iapomible co determine what is che odin ofthe double-edged sword she wings so hefty inthis pussige fers to the ruler who is slave to his passions, or when deh aie, we Bly Bow how 0 terpret bet sre Fx surely iti folly to Took up to a ruler who is only 2 cee Ue ety motto spt Cea th ho Fa re esky Rnd yet a he same time i i just a great a folly thar you make Ife sem death. Frasmian tony is epitomized ia the Sonciing sects of ss page on prado ans erry ving Stultitia says can (and should) be taken in two ways. Ina thing Sea note acommotite ons ng they aze in another sensei i folly accept the world asi i: The foe a scr delights in stripping off the world’s masks of hypoerisys yo in er heart of heats she kno as well she preacher of Ecce TRANSVALUATION: TECHNIQUE 6 astes that the number of fools is infinite, chat the mask is a part of life In Stultta’s analysis of the true nature of prudence, we have a paradigm of the method Erasmus generally employs to effect a trans- valuation of values. A value (prudence) is transvaluated by means of praising its opposite (rashness and self-deception); the fool's gold ‘of both is refined by the alchemy of the fool into the pure gold of a new value (true prudence based on understanding). The reader ied imo chi ramvaluacon gradly and unwitingy, x sar urs to sympathy. For the Erasmian technique is to begin with satire; and Gn the simplest level, this advocacy of rashnessand sel deception from the mouth of a fool is nothing more than satire. Rash irrational acts are, afterall, bad: they lead to wars and erime and sin, and the wise man is doubtless the Demosthenes who runs away to live and fight another day. Similarly, certain masks and hypoctisies should not be accepted without question, and Erasmus spent mos of his life stripping the masks off priests and princes. Therefore, as Stultitia begins her attack on prudence we are doubtless expected co read it as wwe should any other satire and reject what she ironically praises. Yer in the end the satire is spoiled, manquée, A humanity, a sympathy for human frailty inevitably enters in, as it does in the satires of Samuel Johnson," and deflects the point of the satirical dagger. For rashness, Tooked at in a certain way, may actually be prudence. To live a all is a kind of rashness, bur itis better to live than not to live. Iris better, and finally more prudent, to accept experience and learn from it than to retreat to the so-called prudence of those who claim co learn about life in their libraries. Life itself, in Raleigh’s phrase, is only “a play of passion.” # We are all actors ll masked; but the mask is an essential, integral part of life, and, like Max Beerbohm's Happy Hypocrite, wwe are finally indistinguishable from our mask. By means of this argument, itis not so much rashness and self-deception that Erasmus advocates as a new kind of prudence, a prudence which is redefined and revaluated in the very process of praising, partly in satire, parely in sympathy, its opposite "ME 37. See aso the accounts inthe Apopiubegmats (LB V.227E) and te Adagia & nop (LB VaaqE) andthe Ad . sh fadcbied 9 Profesor Walter Jeekion Bate for pining out me shit emia pect of John’ ee “Tae Roo of Sr Wale Rah ob 8M. Lahm CLndon, 1) 1s is inerestng to nove that this oer, wih enpoys the Eramien sage age Ferenc tothe came jet pe nde with 3ERASMUS' STULTITIA 6 y THE TRANSVALUATIO OF VALUES: APPLICATION, gouvgouecsecussssessuTNssesNS Exam per mother's daughter Stl begins her spore by ng Toolish youth, thar time of life which would seem to in- Enrporate all the ignorance and license that the wise man Teams, a, he grows older, to shun, Children, born of the folly of the bedy are witless and carefce,iresponsble and selsh; they are fools. Beardless and inexperienced, they stand in opposition to che bearded gravity and experience of age. Yet, as much a beard-hater as any of Jolan’s Gorinthian Christians, Scltia insts upon how lovable children ace and points out how passionately men cling to their own youth, The cares and pans of life come with age and knowledge, and who would not prefer the insouciance and happiness of youth? As for those beards, she adds, stealing a joke from one of Lucian’s epigrams, they ray be the sign of wisdom, bue goats have them too; and Vall, who also used the same wittcism, i even more explicit about whom he has in mind: “those goats beards, mean to sty, the Stoic” * Child- hod the happiest time of lifey but al to soon the shades of the prison house close about the growing boy and the happy songs of Innocence are quiekly replaced by the plaintive laments of experince. “Te father and farther he is cetired from me, the lese and lsse he 2 Antbotosa Grazes, Lae. *fornza Val, Sri loaf ert e, Giorgio Rade (Florence, 1953s