Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dk4vv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T22:42:37.679Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Thomas More and Tyranny*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  25 March 2011

Dermot Fenlon
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Tyranny is a recurrent preoccupation in the life and thought of Thomas More. It is among the first of the subjects which he takes for his own in his earliest examination of Greek prose. It is the theme of a significant number of his Latin poems. It provides the matter of his Richard III and the anti-matter of Utopia: it is among the evils which his imaginary commonwealth is designed to annihilate. ‘He always’, wrote Erasmus, ‘had a special loathing of tyranny.’

Type
Articles
Information
The Journal of Ecclesiastical History , Volume 32 , Issue 4 , October 1981 , pp. 453 - 476
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1981

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 ‘Ab aula principumque familiaritate olim fuit alicnior, quod illi'semper peculiariter inuisa fuerit tyranni, quaemadmodum aequalitas gratissima.’ Erasmus to Huttcn, 23 July 1519, Opui Epistolarum Des Erasmi Rolerodami, ed. Allen, P. S., Oxford 1906–1958, iv. no. p. 15Google Scholar. More's early interest in tyranny can be seen reflected in the texts of Lucian which he selected for translation and commentary in 1506. His interest in the theme is playful in this setting, but is still revealing: More enquires whether tyrannicide deserves a reward and decides against. See Translations of Lucian, ed. Thompson, C. R., Complete Works Thomas More (hereafter cited as CW), iii (I), New Haven and London 1974, 79–127Google Scholar Thompson draws attention to the text of a poem by More on the accession of Henry vm in 1509, marking ‘”the end of our slavery, the beginning of our freedom”. Laws have regained their authority, property is now safe, people no longer dread informers, tyranny is gone”: op. cit., 155, n. to 100/1. He also appends a valuable discussion of the notion ol tyranny in literature and tradition: idem, 149–52. Tyranny is a recurrent subject in More's Latin poems. The Latin Epigrams of Thomas More, ed. L. Bradner and C. A. Lynch, 1953. These also reflect More's concept of equality, noted by Erasmus-the equality of all men is in these poems emphasised by More sometimes to the point of ferocity. But his interest is in equality of spirit, not, as is sometimes mistakenly believed, social egalitarianism. On this point see CW, xii (I), 179–80, the passage concluding ‘the rich man's substance is the wellspring of the poor man's living'. This book, the Dialogue Comfort, is More's noblest work of prose. It takes us behind Utopia to what More himself believed about the Christian view of property, as well as to other matters like the Christian view of suicide and death. Cf. the editors’ Introduction, together with Green, P. D., ‘Suicide, Martyrdom and Thomas More’, Studies in the Renaissance, xix (1972), 135–55CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

2 As also lor the European humanist world. Thus, Erasmus, writing to Hutten (n. 1 above) continues: ‘Vix autem reperies vllam aulam tarn modestam quae non multum habeat strepitus atque ambitionis, multum fuci, multum luxus, quaeque prorsus absit ab omni specie ryrannidis. Quin nee in Henrici octaui aulam pertrahi potuit, riisi multo negocio; cum hoc Principe nee optari quicquam possit ciuilius ac modestius.’ This last saving compliment is surely designed to save Erasmus, not Henry, from suspicion of impropriety. The whole passage seems to betray some unhappiness about More's involvement in the service of princes. The word ‘olim’ in n. 1 above is noteworthy. Did Erasmus think that More was blunting his conscience by entering the service of his king? If so, we may begin to wonder whether More for his own part associates Erasmus with Hythlodaeus, to whom he attributes the ‘philosophia academica’ in Book One of Utopia, in contrast to the ‘philosophia civilior’ which he adopted for himself. See below, p. 461. For a treatment of certain aspects of the Renaissance understanding of tyranny, see Adams, R. P., The Better Part of Valor: More, Erasmus, Colet and Vives on Humanism, War and Peace, 1496–1535, Seattle 1962Google Scholar.

3 It is a nice question at what point More began to hold the two notions of tyranny and martyrdom in harness. His thinking about martyrdom was almost certainly influenced at a relatively early age by the discussions between Colet and Erasmus, which the latter published in 1503 (four years after they had taken place), under the title Disputatiuncula de tedio, pavore, tristicia lesu. Allen, Op. Ep. Des. Erasmi, i. nos. 105, 108–11. Translated Mynors, R. A. B. and Thomson, D. F. S. in The Collected Works of Erasmus, i, Toronto 1974, 202–19Google Scholar. More uses exactly this title, De … Tristitia Chriiti for his prison meditation on martyrdom in 1535, CW, xiv. It is his (by no means academic) contribution to the question. I am grateful to Professor Baker-Smith of Swansea for pointing out die connection to me. More's preoccupation with tyranny can also be found at a relatively early age (n. 1 above). It is essential to grasp that Richard III was in More's mind during die same period which gave rise to the composition of Utopia. Each should be read in the light of the other—Utopia as a continuation of Richard III, and the Latin epigrams as the completion of Utopia. J. D. M. Derrett draws attention to the probable importance of the Sanctuary Case of 1517 for the discussion of sanctuary in Richard III. See his contribution to CW, ix. 244 n. 57 (further noticed in n. 13 below and in p. 470 below).

4 CW, ii. 4–8, 11–13.

5 Ibid., 12.

6 Ibid., Introduction by R. J. Sylvester. See especially p. xcix

7 Ibid., 37–9.

8 Ibid., 39.

9 Ibid., 81.

10 Roper, William, The Life of Sir Thomas More, Knight, ed. Harding, D. P. and Sylvester, R. S., New Haven and London 1962, 208Google Scholar. (Hereafter cited as Roper).

11 A Dialogue Concerning Heresies, ed. Campbell, W. E. under the title The Dialogue Concerning Tyndale by Sir Thomas More, London 1927, 233 and 239.Google Scholar

12 Ibid., 239–40.

13 Contrast the accounts given by Schoeck, R. J., ‘Common law and canon law in their relation to Thomas More’, in St. Thomas More: Action and Contemplation, ed. Sylvester, R. S., New Haven 1972, 15–55Google Scholar, Elton, G. R., Reform and Reformation, London 1977, 51–3Google Scholar, and Derrett, J. D. M., ‘The Aflair of Richard Hunne and Richard Standish’, Appendix B to CW, ix, The Apology of Sir Thomas More, Knight, 213–46Google Scholar.

14 CW, iv. 98–9.

15 Ibid., 100–1.

16 The Four Last Things, in The English Works of Sir Thomas More, ed. W. E. Campbell A. W. Reed, 2 vols, London 1931, i. 488–3. Both Adams (n. 2 above) and McConica, J. K., Thomas More, London 1977Google Scholar, cite this work in passages to which I am here indebted.

17 Ibid., 479.

18 Ibid., 480.

19 Roper, 210.

20 Book IV, ch. 12, in the Campbell edition (n. 11 above), 299. I am grateful to Dr Porter lor drawing this reference to my attention.

21 Scarisbrick, J. J., ‘La cariera politica di Tommaso Moro, in Tommaso Moro e l'Utopia (Atti dei Convegni Licei, vol. 46, Colloquio italo-brittanico, Rome, 20–21 May 1979Google Scholar) Rome 1980, 7–19. Professor Scarisbrick's account of More as Chancellor is not dependent on a solution to the problem of the authorship of the disputed draft Poor Law, concerning which see Guy, J., Thomas More, Lord Chancellor, London 1980Google Scholar.

22 Bowker, M., ‘The Commons Supplication against the Ordinaries in the light of some archidiaconal Acta’. Tram. Royal Historical Society, xxi (1971), 61–77CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

25 Roper, 228.

24 Bowker, M., ‘The Supremacy and the episcopate: the struggle for control, 1534–40’, Historical Journal, xviii (1975), 227–43CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

25 Such seems to be the implication of his intervention in the case of Latimer's preaching at Bristol, Elton, G. R., Policy and Police: the enforcement of the reformation in age of Thomas Cromwell, Cambridge 1972, 112–20Google Scholar.

26 The comparison with Richelieu serves only to indicate a common determination to flatten every independent source of jurisdiction which might compete with the jurisdiction of the crown. Richelieu gave liberty of conscience to Huguenots, a privilege which Cromwell did not extend to diose who rejected his religion of state. The Church in early modern Europe was not an obstacle to the extension of crown authority over local jurisdictions. Neither was it so in England. What was at stake in England was the exercise of jurisdiction in the matter of a sacrament; that and the visible headship of the Church.

27 Roper, 244.

28 Ibid., 248.

29 Ibid., 249.

30 CW, ix. 96–7. Quoted by Derrett, J. D. M. in ‘The Trial of Sir Thomas More’, E.H.R., lxxix (1964, 449–77CrossRefGoogle Scholar, at 477, from The Apologye of Syr T. More Knight, London 1533, fo. 159Google Scholar.

31 ‘Tempora habemus dilKcilia, in quibus nee loqui, nee tacere possumus absque periculo. Capti sunt in Hispania Vergara, et frater eius Touar: cum alii quidam homines benc docti; in Britannia Episcopus Roffensis, et Londinensis, et Thomas Morus. Precor tibi senectam facilem.’ Allen, Op. Ep. Des. Erasm, x. no. 2932, pp. 383–4. Quoted in Bataillon, M., Erasmo y Espana, 2 vols, Mexico 1950, ii. 75Google Scholar, and also in the original French edition of this work.. Professor Vittorio Gabrieli detects a reference to Tacitus in the first sentence.

32 Melanchthon's comments in Corpus Reformatorum, ed. Bretschneider, C. G., ii, Halle, 1835, 918Google Scholar, 1027. English abstracts in Letters & Papers, Foreignand Domestic … Henry VIII, ed. J. S. Brewer and J. Gardner, ix, nos. 222 and 1013. For Giovio and Rivius, see Stapelton, Thomas, The Life of Sir Thomas More, ed. Reynolds, E. E., trans. Hallett, P. E., London 1966, 199Google Scholar, 201.

33 Roper, 228–9.

34 Ibid., 229. It has been suggested that More's story originates in Tacitus, Annals (the daughter of Sejanus).

35 CW, ii. 93.

36 E. E. Reynolds, TheFieldis Won, London 1968, 281.

37 Roper, 229–30.

38 Ibid., 240.

39 CW, xii. 45–6.

40 CW. xiv. 265.

41 Ibid., 273–81.

42 Roper, 250.

43 Rogers, E. F., ed., The Correspondence of Sir Thomas More, Princeton 1947, no. 214, p. 553Google Scholar.

44 CW, xiii. 231.

45 CW, xii. 318.

46 Ibid., 317.

47 Roper, 239, 242.