LIFE, CHARACTER, AND INFLUENCE OF VOLUME ONE CHAPTER I BIRTH AND PARENTAGE For the common man the world has no more than a passing glance; he spends his life within his own particular circle and one day disappears therefrom, while the world notes not the year of his coming nor that of his going. But if a man shall arise who shall arrest the world's attention, and who shall win more for his tombstone than the hopeful natus est and the ultimate hic iacet, then is that man great, and the world remembers him and does him honor. Desiderius Erasmus was born at Rotterdam on October 27th, year uncertain, but most probably 1466. He himself indicates many different years, but it is possible that he was purposely indefinite for reasons which will appear later.1 There is a certain amount of mystery surrounding the relations existing between his parents at the time of his birth. There is a story, common to all his biographers, based on some details which Erasmus gave to Conrad Goclen, his confidential friend, in a document which has been called the Compendium, to the effect that his father Gerard or Gerrit, who was a native of Gouda, a town in Holland about twelve miles from Rotterdam, had betrayed a maiden named Margaret, the daughter of a physician of Zevenberge, another small village nearby, and that his parents would not allow him to marry her because they intended him for the Church. The story goes on to tell that she went in due time to Rotterdam, where Erasmus was born, while Gerard, despairing of ever being able to right the wrong he had done her, went away to Rome where he made his living as a copyist. One day he received a letter from his relatives informing him that Margaret was dead, on receipt of which news Gerard's heart was broken and he became a priest. After a while 1 It is of absolutely no importance whether he was born on the 27th or the 28th of October, but I think his statement in the Compendium vitæ, written by himself when there was no longer any necessity for being hazy, may well be accepted; and in that document he expressly states that he was born on the vigil of Sts. Simon and Jude, which falls on October 27th. As to the year, I shall go into that matter when treating of the Grunnius letter. he returned home and found that he had been imposed upon, and that Margaret was still living. Too late he knew the mistake he had made in becoming a priest, for his vows were then irrevocable. This rather dubious story, which, if true, would indicate a very poor spirit in Gerard or any other man, shows its inherent falsity by running up against a hard and unyielding fact, namely, that Erasmus had a brother named Peter, older than himself by three years; and Erasmus' testimony on this point is not to be gainsaid. Some of his biographers, assuming that the letter to Lambert Grunnius hereafter to be given, in which Erasmus speaks of his brother under the name of Antonius, is not to be taken for gospel truth, but only in an imaginary sense, feel that they have solved the difficulty. Unfortunately for their hypothesis, Erasmus tells us in another place that he had a brother, and mentions him explicitly. In a letter to John Emsted informing him of the death of Froben, the printer of Basle, he exclaims, "The death of my own brother did not overwhelm me; the loss of Froben is more than I can bear." Lastly and most important of all, we have a letter from Erasmus to this brother Peter, which we will give later with its proper context. It is borne in upon us that all this romantic story shrouding the birth of Erasmus was invented by him because there was something to conceal, and the facts as we now have them bear us out in that conjecture. His birth to him was a thing of shame which poisoned his whole life. He had a proud and aristocratic spirit, and the sordidness of his father's lack of dignity in consorting with a servant was utter humiliation. He never mentioned either of them with affection, and never named them in his writings more than once during his whole life. Their illicit connection was of several years' duration, and must have been generally known to the townspeople. In the Compendium he told some of the facts, but colored them highly. Much as we regret to give credence to J. C. Scaliger's testimony, knowing as we do the bitter feelings that he entertained towards Erasmus and the venomous language in which he couched his allegation, yet only by accepting his version of the affair can this matter ever be explained on any reasonable basis. Freed from its scurrility, Scaliger's information, which he claimed to have received from prominent fellow-townsmen of Erasmus, is that Erasmus was born illegitimate; that his father was a priest who, after having been frequently admonished by his bishop for his disorderly life, was finally suspended, and thereupon left his native land." This explains everything. No longer need we wonder at the reticence of Erasmus when we remember his numerous enemies, literary and theological, who would have been only too happy to curb that proud * Eras. Ep. 963. All the references to Erasmus' letters, except where otherwise noted, are to the splendid edition of P. S. Allen, M.A., Ph.D., LL.D., of Oxford, Opus epistolarum Des. Erasmi, admirably printed by the Clarendon Press. "Nunc populares tui, aliquot etiam vicini, viri boni, nobiles, te aiunt ex incesto natus concubitu, sordibus parentibus, altero sacrificulo, altera prostituta, qui pater tuus semel atque iterum a pontifice castigatus, cum ex illius præceptionibus ad vetera sclera noua propensione fieret irritatior, exilio mulctatus vertit solum." (See J. C. Scaliger, Ep. 15.) spirit with this choice bit of scandal. So Gerard's trip to Rome would then have been taken in order to have his ecclesiastical censures removed; his failure to marry Margaret would be naturally due to his inability to marry her or any woman since he was in priest's orders; his return to his own country after having been restored to his privileges by the Roman Curia, and his fidelity to his vows ever afterwards-all these results would naturally follow his reconciliation with the Church authorities. Then, too, the terms used by Leo X in freeing Erasmus from the disabilities which might in the future prevent him from holding benefices in the Church point strongly in the same direction. The words that the Pope used are these: "Ex illicito et, ut timet, incesto damnatoque coitu genitus." Here Erasmus had given his confidence to the Pope, who was a personal friend, and to whom presumably he had told the whole story, or as much of it as he deemed absolutely necessary; and the Pope said that Erasmus feared, not only that he was illegitimate, as would follow from the word illicito, but also that he was born incesto damnatoque coitu, where the word incesto has its classical meaning of a violation of religious law, which would here have been committed by his father if a priest, deacon, or subdeacon." 4 The Church for many centuries had strongly reprobated the marriage of the clergy, and had vigorously sought out and punished the offenders; yet in spite of her utmost endeavors the practice would no sooner be eradicated in one locality than it would break out in another. It followed as a consequence that many of the clergy and women of otherwise good character incurred this condemnation of the Church. There being no marriage ceremony possible, the children of such secret unions were unavoidably subject to the stigma of illegitimacy. Such offspring were, however, supported and educated by both parents, and brought up as tenderly as the children around them; but since it was well known that this practice on the part of the clergy was prohibited by the Church, much scandal ensued as the result of infringing her discipline. Now Scaliger was not the only one to assert that Erasmus was the son of a priest. Pontus Heuterus mentions the fact in his list of the great illegitimates of the world, and Eppendorff is referring to it when, in his pamphlet against Erasmus, he says: "What does it matter to me from what hand, or from what priest or monk, or from what dunghill a man shall have sprung, provided that by his gifts of genius he shall overcome and make amends for what was not his fault.' Father Teofilo Reinaudo makes a statement of similar import in his catalogue of the illustrious writers of Germany. So it would seem, on a survey of the evidence, both that given by Erasmus himself and the exact statements left us by others, that the following is a reasonable presentation of the case. Gerard, the father • Eras. Ep. 517. "Et deinde licet defectum natalium patiatur, ex illicito et, vt timet, incesto damnatoque coitu genitus, ad omnes etiam sacros et presbyteratus ordines promotus de licentia sui superioris existens," etc. (See Eras. Ep. 517.) * See Hen. ab Eppendorff, Iusta querela ad D. Erasmi libellum, etc. Hagenau 1530. of Erasmus, fell in love with his housekeeper Margaret, but, being in Holy Orders, could not marry her. They had two children, Peter and Erasmus, whom the father assisted the mother to rear and educate. Scandal having arisen over the matter, the young ecclesiastic was summoned to Rome to do penance and be relieved of his ecclesiastical censures, which could only be accomplished after he had solemnly promised to give up the connection, and to avoid giving scandal in the future. This simple statement of the case, which does not essentially vitiate the testimony either of Erasmus or of those who have written about the circumstances of his birth, seems to us the most natural explanation of something which has always proved a stumbling-block to the biographers of the great humanist. But that such a condition of affairs as is here disclosed in the relations existing between his parents was not uncommon in his day, is very evident from the most casual perusal of the proceedings of the various Church councils which were held from time to time to correct this and other faults of the clergy. Instructions were given to the bishops to proceed against such clerics at the Councils of Constance, 1414; Salzburg, 1420; Cologne, 1423; Tortosa, 1429; Freising, 1440; Mainz, 1441; Tours, 1448; Lyons, 1449; and Cologne (Second Council), 1452. We may also add the Council of Basle, where a decree was made, on January 23, 1435, against the incontinence of some of the clergy: that is to say, against those living in public concubinage, "Who shall be deprived for three months of the fruit of their benefices, and that if they refuse to obey, they shall be declared incapable of enjoying any benefice; that if they fall again after being restored, and give no signs of amendment, they shall be declared incapable of holding ecclesiastical dignities forevermore." Before leaving this phase of our subject, we realize that, after so many centuries, the matter might have been allowed to remain in the oblivion where it has so long rested. This might well be so except for one vastly important reason. Erasmus was the innocent victim of circumstances for which he was not responsible. All his days he had to bear the stigma of what was no fault of his own. He constantly writhed under the consciousness of it; it continually obtruded its repellent face under the most embarrassing circumstances and at the most inopportune moments of his career; it had to be overlooked or its concealment connived at several times when it was a question of observing the rules of strict ecclesiastical discipline; and, when he had become famous in the Church and was the Councilor of the Emperor, he at last supplicated the Pope to relieve him once and for all of the disabilities which the canon law of the Church had for so many years held over him. This, we think, is the secret of his terrible animosity against those priests and monks who, by their disordered lives, were the cause of shame and misery to others; to which we may add the fear that he might one day be compelled to return to the monastery which he had left, he hoped, forever. Before going further, it might be well, in view of the slurs which were cast on Margaret, to fix her status in life. As far as we know, |