Erasmus' Colloquies: Latin and the Good Life
What is a Colloquy?
The Colloquies is a title that does not instantly bring its meaning to mind, rather it leaves non-Latinists baffled. A colloquy is defined as a conversation or a serious discussion, and it was this meaning Desiderius Erasmus had in mind for the work he first published 1518. The edition referenced in this exhibition, which comes from the CRRS collection, is dated to 1540, and it was published in Basel, Switzerland. It contains a collection of dialogues that detail different approaches for an individual on how to conduct themselves in everyday scenarios. The contents of the book include a range of everday subjects: forms of salutation, family discourse, the commands of a master, the penitent virgin, the unequal marriage, the rich miser, just to name a few.1 The book is printed in Latin, but it also contains some Greek text, the other ancient language important to the humanist movement. The Colloquies are, in essence, a textbook of linguistic exercises to help students to practice and improve their Latin, but Erasmus also recognized his book’s potential for inspiring Europe with his humanist ideals. Despite its apparently simple goals, therefore, this little textbook also played a significant part in Erasmus' challenge to the educational institutions of his day: the Church and the universities.
The Colloquies
Throughout the Colloquies depictions of everyday scenes, Erasmus frequently depicts characters that are designed to poke fun at what he saw as the problems rife within the religious and educational institutions of his day. Ignorant monks, corrupt priests, and out-of-touch academics regularly appear within the dialogues. In the context of the Protestant Reformation, however, these light-hearted critiques began to be seen by religious authorities as potentially very damaging. While the first edition of the Colloquies came out just a year after Martin Luther's famous Ninety-five Theses was published, by 1528 sixty-nine passages from the text had been officially censored. Erasmus defended the text in a formal apology (i.e. a defence of the text), stating that the perspectives in the Colloquies represent a range of perspectives, and that he didn't explicitly endorse any of them - such judgements were up to readers. However, the intense anger that was beginning to emerge against Erasmus' humanist critiques of the Church forced him Erasmus to retract some his ideas, to prevent himself from being charged with heresy.
The Importance of Latin
Latin was the common language of the learned community, and for Erasmus, like most humanists, it was the Latin style of ancient Rome that one ought to imitate, rather than the "degraded" style of later medeival Latin. Erasmus thus were modelled all his writings after the ancient writers, imitating what he saw as their stylistic finesse. Erasmus wanted to teach this style of Latin because he saw it as being an incredibly accurate and even musical way of manifesting meaning and ideas. He developed the Colloquies so that youthful pupils as young as seven could learn it through the aid of a tutor. Erasmus believed that by mimicking the ancients, one could master Latin not just in reading and writing, but through speech too. In contrast to the Latin developed throughout the middle ages, which was used and developed by theologians for specialist forms of discourse disconnected from everday life, Erasmus saw the Latin that he was promoting as both richer and more practical.2 It provided rhetorical tools that were just as useful in business as they were in reading and understanding scripture.
Erasmus and Humanism
Desiderius Erasmus of Rotterdam was one of the greatest and notorious humanists of the Renaissance. Yet his personal commitment to the humanist movement, and his related desire to reform Latin pedagogy, came out of his personal dissatisfaction with the educational status quo in the period. He was educated in the Augustinian monastery at Steyn and became a priest in 1492. His monastic life enabled him to pursue his studies in literature, specifically of Greek and Roman classics, but he did not enjoy life in the monastery. It was too strict and high value was placed on mastering self-control, while spending most of the time in contemplation and worship.3 Letters and poems by Erasmus and his peers still remain, and display their interest in Latin through their play with words. Erasmus and his peers found beauty in Latin and wanted to pursue its usage outside of the limited contexts made available to them in religious institutions.
Because of his skills, Erasmus was able to earn a place at the University of Paris, where he continued his studies in Theology. Rather than finding it stimulating, he became disillusioned with the institution and its ideas. In one of Erasmus’ letters, he described the university lectures as, “hair splitting, sophistical quibbling, which made men into quarrelsome pseudo-scholars…”. 4
For Erasmus, his passions were satisfied only when he associated with the humanists in Paris, like Robert Gaguin.5 It was this network of innovative thinkers, committed to using Latin as way to engage with practical everyday problems and moral issues, that truly excited Erasmus. But this community of humanists mostly operated outside the usual instituions of education authority. Like many humanists, therefore, when Erasmus began publishing, his work was initally overlooked, and this played into a life-long antagonism Erasmus felt towards monks and academics, something clearly on display in the Colloquies. In fact, it is possible to see this little textbook as part of Erasmus’ effort to create an alternative educational pathway for future students, and in this way too to challenge the authority of the institutions he found so uncompelling when he was a student.
About the Book
The Colloquies became an influential work, while simultaneously becoming a controversial one. It was used in many schools throughout Europe, but it was recognized by the theological community as a book that went dangerously beyond Latin exercises. In some of its dialogues, Erasmus exercised his capacity for witty satire against the clergy and other scholars, showcasing their hypocrisy, ignorance, and mocking their pretensions. Interestingly, the Colloquies also reflects Erasmus' relatively progressive attitude towards women: unlike many other male intellectuals in the period, he believed that women should be educated. All this infuriated his critics, who not only felt heavily insulted and threatened, but saw the Colloquies as dangerous to religious orthodoxy.
The 1540 edition of the Colloquies held in the CRRS has small proportions, which indicate its easy portability; it could be easily kept on one’s person, or stored anywhere. A student could take this book with them as they travelled to classes, or reference it when needed. The poor and delicate condition of this edition may be due frequent use, a fact that points out how popular the Colloquies remained even after Erasmus’ death in 1536. The book has both the front and back covers missing, wormholes on the frontispiece, some loose quires, and excessive staining. The lack of written marginalia except for one tiny note referencing a Bible passage is perhaps unusual for a study book like this, but everything about the printer's design reflects an effort to make it inexpensive and easy to read. There are no prints or illustrations, except for a few dropcap wood cuts, but there is a helpful index, as well as printed explanatory marginalia at a number of points (see image above).
Controversies and Legacy
Erasmus was no stranger to controversy, and his expliclty defended his exercise book in an apologia called "The Usefulness of the Colloquies." In it, he defended his promotion of antique Latin and the literary culutre of ancient Rome, which was referred to as bonae litterae. He believed these literary resources were not only ideal for teaching students good Latin style, but also provided guidance on maintaining virtue, suggested solutions for practical familial problems, and inspired moral courage for dealing with difficult life choices. He was even bold enough to suggest that at least part of what the ancient pagan writers had to say must have also been inspired by the divine power of the Christian God. While this attitude was unconventional early in Erasmus' life, by the time of his death it had become downright dangerous.
Despite its controversies, the Colloquies remained a popular Latin textbook for decades after its publication. Ironically, however, Erasmus is now perhaps best remembered for promoting vernacular languages rather than Latin, as his new Greek edition of the Bible became an important tool in the subsequent translation of scripture into the languages most uneducated people actually spoke. Erasmus' dream of a European elite trained in a common language based on ancient Roman style seems a little idealistic from a modern perspective. With over a hundred editions printed, however, the Colloquies managed to teach and improve the skills of many learned people during and after the death of Erasmus. It also questioned the authority of powerful institutions and scholars in subtle but important ways, something that did not go unnoticed, especially after the rise of the Reformation. Erasmus faced the challengers of the Colloquies with confidence in his own abilities, making use of the knowledge he worked so hard to gain. The Colloquies was a symbol, for Erasmus, of his own pursuit of betterment, and he saw it as a tool for allowing others to follow in his footsteps. Anyone studying the Colloquies, Erasmus thought, had the potential to equla or even surpass his own achievements.
By: Giuseppina Ieraci
_________________________________________
1. Erasmus, Desiderius, and Craig R. Thompson. Colloquies. University of Toronto Press, 1997.
2. Tunberg, Terence. “The Latinity of Erasmus and Medieval Latin: Continuities and Discontinuities.” The Journal of Medieval Latin 14 (2004): 147–70. https://doi.org/10.1484/j.jml.2.304219.
3. Augustijn, C. Erasmus: His Life, Works and Influence. University of Toronto Press, 1991.
4. Ibid., 28.
5. Ibid.