Richard Taverner's interpretaion of Erasmus in proverbs or adagies

WATE Richard Taverner’s Interpretation of Erasmus in Proverbes or Adagies Olive B. White PMLA, Val. 59, No. 4. (Dec., 1944), pp. 928-943. Stable URL: http:/links.jstor.org/sici 2sici=0030-8 129%28 1944 12%2959%3A4%3C928%3 ARTIOEI%3E2.0.CO%3B2-I PMLA is currently published by Modern Language Association. Your use of the ISTOR archive indicates your acceptance of ISTOR’s Terms and Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/about/terms.html. JSTOR’s Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the ISTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at http://www.jstor.org/journals/mla.html. Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. ISTOR is an independent not-for-profit organization dedicated to creating and preserving a digital archive of scholarly journals. For more information regarding ISTOR, please contact support @jstor.org. http://www.jstor.org/ Tue Feb 28 11:13:22 2006

Richard Taverner's Interpretation of Erasmus in Proverbes or Adagies Reviewed work(s): Source: PMLA, Vol. 59, No. 4 (Dec., 1944), pp. 928-943 Published by: Modern Language Association Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/459321 . Accessed: 02/06/2012 04:03 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org. Modern Language Association is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to PMLA. http://www.jstor.org

ERASMUS IN PROVERBES OR ADAGIES OR his work on the Bible in English and for his translations from Erasmus, Richard Taverner has had a modest importance in early Tudor literature.' In other respects, he has been an easy man to disregard. He misses the pioneer's distinction in both his fields; he obscures the interest of his own utterances by offering them in the guise of translation; even what we know of his life suggests no highly individual achievement.2 In summary, his biography traces a path well worn by his generation of humanists-scholars trained at Renaissance Oxford and Cambridge, men matured in the dramatic, dangerous school of experience that was England between the fall of Wolsey and the death of Henry VIII. The times welcomed such a useful scholarship as Taverner devoted to education, politics, and religion. We, in turn, may increase our understanding of those times by recognizing, not simply the work he did, but also his methods and some of his results. For such a study, his little book preserved in exemplars of six editions, Proverbesor Adagies . . . gathered out of the Chiliades of Erasmus, has the double interest of revealing more of Taverner's thought than we should expect to find in it and of helping to color the fame of Erasmus in England.3 Though Erasmus had antagonists in England as elsewhere, that fame was prevailingly auspicious during most of his life. The learned-friends or enemies, correspondents, and readers-could know directly from his works where he finally stood in the critical religious struggle of the 1520's and 1530's;4 except among controversialists who chose to quote the 1 For his translations, see Harold H. Hutson and Harold R. Willoughby, "The Ignored Taverner Bible of 1539," The CrozerQuarterly,xvi (1939), 161-176; Charles Read Baskervill, "Taverner's Gardenof Wisdom and the Apophthegmataof Erasmus," SP xxix (1932), 149-159; Henry B. Lathrop, Translations from the Classics into English form Caxton to Chapman, University of Wisconsin Studies in Language and Literature (Madison, 1933), pp.70-71. 2 Dictionary of National Biography sub Taverner; Hutson and Willoughby, op. cit., pp. 165-167. 8 Two editions represented by copies in the Huntington Library are the basis of this study: Prouerbes or adagies with newe addicions gatheredout of the Chiliades of Erasmus by Richard Tauerner. Hereunto be also added Mimi Publiani (London, 1539), and Proverbesor Adagies gatheredout of the Chiliades of Erasmus by Richarde Tauerner. With newe additions as well of Latyn prouerbesas of Englysshe (London, 1545). As Professor Baskervill noted (op. cit., pp. 150-151), the title page of 1539 argues an even earlier edition. The six editions listed in STC (10436-10441) range from 1539 to 1569, a long life for a book of this sort. 4 The letters of these years, particularly to correspondents in England and Spain, are allimportant evidence (P. S. Allen and H. M. Allen, Opus Epistolarum Des. Erasmi Roterodami, vols. vi-x [Oxford, 1926-1941], passim [vols. ix and x ed. H. M. Allen and H. W. Garrod]).

middle-aged Erasmus against the elder,6 his significant writings from Hyperaspistes Diatribe aduersus Seruum Arbitrium Martini Lutheri (Basle, 1526) till his death ten years later could have left little doubt of his central position. Men with small Latin or none, however, had to feed their curiosity about the mighty Erasmus on the crumbs of quotation and of reference scattered in controversy and on his works as they came into the vernacular. The first of these in English-Gentian Hervet's rendering of De Immensa Dei Misericordia and Margaret Roper's of Precatio Dominica (both 1524-1525/26)6-had the virtue of presenting Erasmus in some of the writings which, a few years later, he himself recommended as suitable for popular reading.7 In spite of this favorable beginning, however, the long-enduring English emphasis on The Praise of Folly, some of the most notorious Colloquies, and a few passages in Enchiridion Militis Christiani also started early. The traditional picture of Erasmus as Luther's inspiration and betrayer, as-by the gentlest interpretation-a reformer who loosed forces he was too timid to guide to the end, is one of the most tightly framed in the gallery of the Ichabods of history. Though not completely obliterated, the portrait suggested by the little devotional works translated in the 1520's and such successors as Thomas Paynel's version of De ContemptuMundi (1533) is far more shadowy than the popular one encouraged by many of the translations of the 1530's-for example, that of Enchiridion which is probably Tindale's (1533),8 Ye Pylgremage of Pure Devotion (?1536),9 or Taverner's Proverbes(1539). 6 See,for example,Tindale'sfamousgibe (1530)at both Moreand "hisdarlingErasmus" (Answerto Sir ThomasMore'sDialogue,ParkerSociety [Cambridge,1850],p. 16). 6 A. W. Reed, "The Regulationof the Book Trade beforethe Proclamationof 1538," Early TudorDrama (London,1926), pp. 169-173;John Archer Gee, "Hervet'sEnglish Translation,with its AppendedGlossary,of Erasmus'sDe ImmensaDei Misericordia," PQ, xv (1936), 136-152, and "MargaretRoper'sEnglish Versionof Erasmus'Precatio Dominica,"Reviewof EnglishStudies,xmII(1937),257-271. 7 See especiallyhis letter to AlfonsoFernandez,the discreettranslatorof Enchiridion MilitisChristianinto Spanish(Allen,op.cit.,VII,356-357,Ep. 1969).Erasmus'suggestions for translationare "De misericordiaDomini, De matrimonioChristiano,Paraphrases, in quatuorPsalmos,et si qua sunt huiusmodiquae,percommoduminterCommentariolos pretemtractata,possuntconduceremoribushominum."Cf. ThomasPaynel'srenderingof his complaintagainst those who "(nat withstandyngethat I am a lyue, and commaunde the contrarie)do vulgateand put fortheabrodesuchetrifilsas I wrotewhanI was yong to exercisemy style, nat thinkyngethat they shuldebe spredabrodeand commonfor euery man to haue"(De Contemptu Mundi [London,1533],sig. A4). 8 John ArcherGee, "Tindaleand the 1533 EnglishEnchiridionof Erasmus,"PMLA, XLIX(1934),460-471, and "JohnByddellandthe FirstPublicationof Erasmus'sEnchiridion in English,"ELH, iv (1937),43-59. 9 Henryde Vocht, The Earliest English Translations of Erasmus's COLLOQUIA,1536-1566 (Louvain,1928).For the date of the book,see especiallypp. xli-li.

Adagia is, in many ways, one of Erasmus's central scholarly achievements. He probably worked harder on his editions of the Fathers, his Novum Instrumentum, his Paraphrases; but no other enterprise-not even the accumulating Colloquia-testifies to such long devotion as his gathering, comparing, and annotating of pithy sayings from the literatures of antiquity. Between the first edition of Adagiorum Collectanea (Paris, 1500), with its 818 entries, and the final Adagiorum Chiliades of 1536, we see his sustained enthusiasm at work. Has Erasmus often been called modest? At least, the count of his aphorisms, of which he had finally 4,151, is a prodigal underestimate, for most of the entries include variants and analogues of the main quotation.10 After the thousands of this harvest, Taverner's hundreds in Proverbes seem a scanty gleaning. There is, however, something pleasantly Erasmian in the increase between the edition of 1539, with its 187 proverbs, and that of 1545, with 235.1 Like his master, Taverner must have been busy from edition to edition, for the later one introduces, not only further adages from the Latin, but also fifty-one English proverbs-folk wisdom wedded to learning.'2 The slimness of Taverner's work, even in its enlarged form, finds a match in the apparent simplicity of his treatment. As two scholars noticing the little book in other connections have remarked, this simplicity is misleading, for what the Englishman does with his source differs greatly from it.13 The directions of change are worth a more careful charting than a summarizing description alone can give. If Taverner were to be judged as a humanist, his ignoring of most of Erasmus's parallel passages and erudite scholia would be disappointing; he clearly had no intention of impressing anyone with the learning which we know he possessed. His brevity might even suggest that he had drawn on some convenient epitome, such as Adagiorvm Omnivm, tam Grcecorumq Latinoru Aureum flumen ... D. Erasmi Rot ... secundum ordine Alphabeti, per Theodoricum Cortehoeuiumselectum . . (Antwerp, 1530); but Proverbeslacks the efficient good order of digests, with their implication that here is, if anything, an improvement on the original, and it includes occasional bits that must have come from Erasmus's own pages. Taverner's prologue admits cheerfully the disparity between his master's work and his: 10The comparisonsin this paperarebasedon Froben's AdagiorumChiliadesDes.Erasmi (Basle, 1539).In the prefaceto the editionof 1533,Erasmuswrotethe historyof the work (OperaOmnia[Leyden,1703],vol. ii, sig. *3). See P. S. Allen'sappraisalof Adagiaas one of Erasmus's"twomost notablecompositions"(Erasmus:LecturesandWayfaringSketches [Oxford,1934],pp. 61-66). 11The indexof 1539omitsseveraladagesincludedin the volume. 2 Repeatingand occasionallydoublingthesenative proverbs,Taverneruses themin the interpretationof fifty-four,all told, of Erasmus's. 13Lathrop,op. cit., pp. 70-71; Baskervill,op. cit., pp. 150-151.

Forasmocheas I thynke it wol be no les pleasauntethen profitablevnto you (goodreaders)to hearesome of the most nette &handsomeprouerbeswhichthe incomparablelerned man Erasmus Roterodamhath in his boke of Chiliades gatheredto gether out of the moste approuedauthors:althoughit be a matter of great importaunceto handle them in their kynde, and a prouincefarresurmountyngthe sklendercapacitieof my wytte: yet foryoursakesand for the loue I beareto the furtherauce&adourmentof my natiuecountrey, I wyll not stycke aftermyne accustomedmaner,whichis rudioriac crassioriminerua,to makehere a brefecollectionof someof them.l4 Though a quick comparison shows that Proverbesdepends heavily on the early part of its source, closer scrutiny finds a late adage breaking a selected run from the first half just often enough to indicate that Taverner used the full work. So we cannot mark him down as the translator who begins a vast enterprise only to abandon it one-twentieth done. To be sure, a precisionist may ask if the result of such clipping and chopping as Taverner's is justly to be called translation. The fault is ours if we insist on that description. The title pages announce only a "gathering out of the Chiliades of Erasmus." The great name occurs, however, not only on the title page and in the prologue, but also in occasional parenthetical notes like these: "as full eloquentlye declareth Erasmus," "sayeth Erasmus," "sayth this excellent clerke,"'5 and in fuller notes sending the reader to the source. Where, for example, Erasmus has written a tract of several thousand words (sixteen quarto pages) on Dulce bellum inexpertis, Taverner translates: "Batell is a swete thynge to them that neuer assayed it," and adds: "He that lysteth to knowe more of this prouerbe, let him go to Erasmus which hadleth in his Chiliades this prouerbe both ryght copiously & also eloquently."'6 Another long essay by Erasmus, the partly autobiographical one on Festina lente (somewhat more than eight pages), elicits this comment after the translation: "Yf ye liste to knowe more of thys prouerbe most worthy continnallye to be borne in mynde, reade the Chiliades of Erasmus, who hadleth this mater at large."17Even the forgetful reader, then, could not lose sight of Erasmus through the book nor fail to think it carefully rendered. In spite of this deference to "the flower of eloquence," "the incomparable lerned man Erasmus"'8-perhaps even because of the magic in the honored name-Taverner takes interesting liberties with his text. His 14Sig. Aiv in both edd., 1539and 1545(somevariantsin spelling).Cf. Taverner'similar apology for his inadequatepraisesof King Henry in his prefatoryepistle to The Most SacredBible (London,1539): "Certes,it far passeth bothe the slender capacitieof my 16Sigs. Eviii-Fi. wyt, and alsothe rudeinfancyof my tong" (Sig. tr.ii.). 16Sig. Gi v; (1545)sig. Iiii; cf. AdagiorumChiliades(1539),pp. 845-861. 17Sig. Dv and v; cf. Adag. Chil., pp. 349-357. 18Mimi Publiani (boundwith Proverbesof 1539, with a joint title page but separate sig. Aiv. signatures),sig. Bi; Proverbes,

work is a medley of methods: there are passages as happily translated as anyone could wish; fair paraphrases skillfully naturalizing foreign material; and purposeful substitutions, excursions, and additions. To distinguish his own views from his author's, he does not employ such typographical aids as some of his contemporaries used in controversy and in translation.19Even an occasional marginal hand, emphasizing striking passages from Erasmus and some of Taverner's own contributions as well, lacks the merit of a single connotation. Once, to be sure, in the discussion of Ignavis semperferice, which four times within as many pages insists that this treatise on excessive holydays is Erasmus's, Taverner remarks scrupulously: "Hytherto haue I translated the wordes of that renowmed clerke Erasmus," before he adds: "But now in Englande thanked be god through the hygh benefyte of oure incomparable prince Henry the .viii. dyverse superfluouse holydayes be already abrogate."20 Most of the time, however, only a comparison of Latin and English shows us where Erasmus is speaking and where Taverner. Such must have been the case for sixteenth-century readers if any stopped to ask whether what they read presented Erasmus faithfully or not. The changes, beyond simple condensation, fall into two major groups: those introducing Erasmus to moderate and devout English readers of 1539 and the 1540's in a probably more acceptable guise than he wore in the original; and, on the other hand, those attributing to him opinionsreligious, political, and social-that may be described as post-Erasmian or even wholly inconsistent with Erasmus's views. In the first of these groups, some of the most striking examples are the changes which give Proverbes a stronger scriptural coloring than the source has. Readers who had begun to know Erasmus in the tiny devotional works rendered by Gentian Hervet and Margaret Roper would find nothing strange in this fact; and proponents of the "new learning," in the senses of the Reformation rather than of the Renaissance, would be reassured by the Christian emphasis. Of course, Taverner's contemporary work on the revision of Matthew's Bible (1539) may have made the scriptural coloring of Proverbesalmost unconscious. The way he uses his material, however, is no less interesting for the possibility that the memorable phrases are as natural a language for him as the English proverbs he cites.21 19Cf. e.g., TheApologyeof Syr ThomasMore,Knyght,(London,1533),passim,where differenttype fonts markthe quotationsfromthe "Pacifier"and fromMore'sown earlier utterances,and Nicholas Udall's edition of Erasmus'sApophthegmes (London, 1542), wherethe samedeviceseparatesthe translator'scommentaryfromthe text. 20 Sig. Fii. Tavernercontinueswith a denunciationof papalauthority. 21 Do his quotations,of whichabout a scoremay be distinguishedfromcasualallusions,

As we should expect, to be sure, Erasmus frequently cites scriptural parallels to his adages; but amid the humanist's wealth, they count for no more than comparable aphorisms of Pythagoras or Plato or gnomic verses from Homer, Euripides, Terence, or Horace. How different, then, is the effect when Taverner omits all the pagan wisdom and retains only the scriptural illustration! For example, of Erasmus's citations under Occulte musices nullus respectus, Taverner is content with that from the twentieth chapter of Ecclesiasticus;22 again, where Erasmus brings Sophocles and Homer as well as Saint Paul into the discussion of Mulierem ornat silentium, Taverner writes: Silence garnysheth a woman. Assuredlye there is no tyre, no apparayl that better becometh a woman then sylence. Whych thynge also the Apostle Paule requyreth, whyle he forbyddeth women in the churche or congregacion to speake, but wylleth them to aske theyr husbades at home, yf they be in doubt of any thynge.23 Sometimes Taverner keeps one or two of the pagans but, by the excision of the rest, makes the biblical reference, perhaps even subordinate and incidental in the Latin, particularly emphatic. On Erasmus's well-packed page, for example, the comment, "Et euangelicum illud de uia arcta, qua ducit ad uitam," is but one among many elucidating Difficilia, quc pulchra; not so in Taverner's rendering, however, for after mentioning correspondto the renderingsin his Bible?Curiously,no. The discrepanciesarestriking;e.g., Proverbes:"he toke bread,and thankesyeuen, brakeit and sayde to his disciples,take, eate, this is my bodye, whiche is betrayedand brokenfor you" (sigs. Hi V-Hii,with marginalreference:"Math.26, Mar. 14, Luc. 22, I Cor. 11"). Bible:"Jesustoke bredand whenhe haddegeuen thankes,brakeit, and gaue it to the disciples,and sayde:Take eate, this is my body" (Math. 26; sigs. Bv v-Bvi). "Jesustoke breed,blessedand brake,and gaue to them and sayd. Take, eate, this is my body" (Mark14; sig. Di v). "Andtakyngbreedand gyuyng thankes,he brakeand gaue it to them, sayinge:This is my body whichis gyuen for you" (Luke22; sig. Fi ). "For the Lorde Jesus the same nyght in which he was betrayed,toke breed:and thanked& brake,and sayde. Take ye, and eate ye: this is my body whichis brokenfor you" (I Cor. 11; sig. Mii v). Nor is there recognizablecorrespondence betweenthe quotationsin Proverbes and Coverdale,the earlierMatthew's,or the GreatBible (exemplarof 1541seen).Even whenErasmus includesthe samescripturalcitationas Taverner,the latteris likelyto makean independent translation;e.g., ErasmusinterpretsDurumest contrastimulumcalcitrare(Acts 9) with "durumaduersum deumpugnare"(Adagiorum Chiliades,p. 115,subContrastimulumcalces); Tavernerplacesthe Paulinesentenceas his headingand rendersit "It is hardekyckynge againstthe gode" (sig. Bvi). His Bible gives "It is harde for the to kycke agaynst the prycke"(Acts 9; sig. Hiii v). 22Sigs. Cviii V-Di;Adag.Chil.,p. 258. 23 Sig. Gii; Adag. Chil., p. 880. Cf. "in the churcheor congregacion"with Erasmus's "in ecclesia."

Solon alone among the ancients, he elaborates thus: "which thyng also teachethe vs our Guyde & sauiour Christe sayng that narowe is the way which leadeth to lyfe," and he adds the marginal reference, "Math. 7."24 Even when the original gives a little more attention to the scriptural material, it is less striking in a full company than in almost solitary state. In discussing Amicorum communia omnia, Erasmus makes a long, characteristically classical explication before he remarks on the similarity between the ideals of the Pythagoreans and the teaching of Christ, the starting point for Taverner, who amplifies the idea with denunciations of both monks and Anabaptists.25 The biblical emphasis increases with Taverner's independent citations offered in Erasmus's name. For the latter's completely classical development of Mali corui malum ouum, we find substituted, with a marginal reference to Math. 7:26 An euyll tre (sayeth Christ) can bryng forth no good frute. Our foreparetes Ada & Eve were for theyr trasgressiondepriuedof originalliustice, of the true feareof God,of the true and pureloue of God,of the true and perfyteknowlege of God. etc. Wherforeall we that be spr6geof them, ca not but be lykewyse spotted & naturallycorruptedwyth the same vyces.27 While Saint Jerome serves to begin the discussion of Diues aut iniquus est, aut iniqui hares in both Latin and English, Erasmus then appeals to Plato, Menander, and Plutarch; but Taverner turns to the Gospel: How trueit is not only experienceteacheth,but ourleaderand capitayneChriste also in hys doctrinedeclarethvnto vs whych bycause he wolde frayevs fr6 the wycked Mammon,sayeth a camel shall sonerpasse througha nedles eye, than a rych man entre into heuen. Meanyng that it is excedyngharde for such as flowein worldlygoodesto haue a mynde vntangledwyth the same, & to beare themseluesvprighttowardesgod and man.28 Though Aesop in illustration of Non uidemus manticc quod in tergo est may have seemed too edifying or possibly too amusing to discard, Taverner replaces Persius, Horace, and even Saint Jerome with "accordyng to the euangelical prouerbe, we can see a mote in other mens eyes, where in oure owne we can not espye a greate beame."29Equally brief is his sub24 26 Sigs. Giv v-Gv; Adag. Chil., p. 14. Sig. Dv v; Adag. Chil., p. 360. Incorrectly changed to Math. 5 in 1545 (sig. Ciii). 27 Sigs. Cii v-Ciii; cf. Adag. Chil., p. 301. 28 Sigs. Dii v-Diii; Adag. Chil., p. 307. In the last sentence of his commentary, Taverner moderates his strictures with Old Testament examples: "Yet I woll not gaynsay but a m, may be rych and not put hys confidece in hys ryches, as Dauid, Job, Abraha and many other Patriarches were." 29 Sigs. Hiv v-Hv (1545 only); Adag. Chil., p. 223. Interestingly enough, Erasmus uses the sentence from Saint Matthew in his comment on the very next adage: Festucam ex alteriusoculocijcere(pp. 223-224).

stitution of another sentence from the Sermon on the Mount for Epictetus in the discussion of Cibum in matellam ne immittas; between Plutarch and Horace, he inserts: "So that it is al one in effecte with that sayenge of Christ. Cast not perles afore swyne."30 Such substitutions are responsible for some of the rare passages in which Taverner exceeds the length of the original. So he does when, in the spirit of More before him and Shakespeare after, he moralizes Omnia idem puluis: All is one selfe dust or ashes.Fromearthwe came,and to earthwe shall.Yea the scrypturesayeth: that ashes we be, and to assheswe shal reuerte.Now amonges asshesor dust I prayyou what greatdifferenceis there?How wol ye discernethe asshesof a kynge,of an Emperoure,of a Duke, of a greatbyshopfromthe Ashes of a cobleryea of a begger?31 To the funereal thought, Erasmus gives but four lines and an echo from Lucian. More surprising still is the contrast between Taverner's long essay on Panem nefrangito and Erasmus's forty words. In this extraordinarily brief discussion, to be sure, the latter establishes the analogy between Pythagoras's teaching and Christ's from which Taverner develops his plea against the profanation of the Eucharist, a plea fortified by appeal to Matthew, Mark, Luke, and Paul.32 Less frequent than these biblical additions and emphases, but likewise auspicious for his master's fame, are some of Taverner's alterations touching princes, a theme on which he had more reason than Erasmus to be discreet. The latter never underestimated the worth of a king's favor in terms of gifts and prestige; but surely not till the very end of his life did he glimpse, in the martyrdom of his friends, the power of princes over liberty and life. Taverner, however, whether in 1539, at the end of a bloody decade, or in 1545, when he himself had been in prison, had learned one of the prime lessons of the time, the lesson in which the Duke of Norfolk had tried vainly to coach More: "Indignatio principis mors est." So reading Erasmus on Multce regum aures atque oculi, a not very serious discussion citing Lucian, Aristotle, Aristophanes, Euripides, and others-but not Saint Paul-we may wonder what Taverner will make of such levity as endows kings not merely with ears but "iis... tam asininis ac longis." No such graceless folly! Instead, we read: Kynges haue many eares & manye eyes, as who shuldesaye, no thynge can be spoken,nothyngedoonso secretlyagaynstkyngesand Rulers,but by one meanes or otherat length it wol come to theirknowlege.They haue earesthat lysten an hundredmyles from the, they haue eyes that espye out more thynges, then 0sSig. Gvii; Adag. Chil., p. 18. 31 Hvi and v (1545 Adag. Sig. only); Chil.,pp. 237-238. n Sigs.Hi-iii;Adag.Chil.,p. 21. Cf. n. 21, supra,andpp. 942-943,infra.

men wolde thynke. Wherfore it is wysdome for subiectes, not only to keep theyr princes lawes and ordinauicesin the face of the worlde, but also preuely: namely syth Paule wold haue rulers obeyed euen for conscience sake.33 The marginal note "Roma. 13" enforces a doctrine already dear to the King.34 Elsewhere, too, Erasmus is schooled to speak equally acceptable vituperation and flattery, both wanting in the original discussion of Frons occipitio prior: These thynges tende all to thys ende, that euery man shulde as muche as maye be, execute hys busynes, hys callynge, hys office by hym selfe and not by vycares or deputies, as nowe we se done, well nere of all degrees of men. There be Kynges, there be Cardinalles, there be Bishops, Prelates and sondry other officers and magistrates in Christendome, whych do all by vycares and deputies, but themselues lyue in most ydelnes and in all kyndes of pleasure lyke popes. Wold god these wold take exemple of our most vigilat prince and soueraygne lord kinge Hery the eyght, who not only setteth vigilant deputies and ministers under hym, but also loketh hym selfe ryght busely vpon hys charge comitted vnto him of god.35 Similar in tone is the little introduction to an anecdote reporting Henry VII's acid comment on the sermon of a friar who dared to denounce the life of princes. Taverner contrives thus to pay a pretty compliment to the dead author as well as the living king: All be it I studye in these prouerbes to be shorte, yet it becometh not me an Englysh man and the kynges seruaunt to passe ouer wyth sylece the thynge, that Erasmus beynge a straunger vnto vs vouchsaued here to recorde of the moost prudent and excellet prince kinge Henry the .vii. father to our moost drad souerayne lorde that now is."36 The relation of subject to ruler was not the only theme inviting the moralist to reflection in a time that had some notably hard lessons to teach about the mutability of fortune, about trust and distrust, about 33Sig. Aiiii; Adag.Chil.,pp. 60-61. 34 Cf. the expositionof the thesisin Tindale'sTheObedience of a ChristianMan (London, 1528);James Gairdner,TheEnglishChurchin theSixteenthCenturyfrom theAccessionof HenryVIII totheDeathof Mary(London,1903),pp. 126-127.In Taverner'sBible,Romans 13 has both the heading,"Theobedienceof men vnto theyr rulars,"and a marginalhand against"Wherforeye mustnedesobayenot forfeareof vengeaunceonely:but alsobecause of conscience"(sig. Liiii v). 35 Sigs. B [misprint for A] vii v-viii. Contrast the relative mildness of Erasmus's "At hodiefereepiscopi&regesomniaalienismanibus,alienisauribusatqueoculisagunt,neque quicquamminusad se pertinereputant quamrempub.aut priuatissuisque distenti, aut uoluptatibusoccupati"(Adag.Chil.,p. 68). See also the commentof ProfessorLathropon Taverner'sadditionshere (Translations from theClassics,p. 71, wheremost of the passage aboveis quoted). 36 Sig. Evi v, sub Ne puero gladium; Adag. Chil., p. 492.

basic human experience. Moralist, avowedly Erasmus was; yet Taverner deepens his appeal to the thoughtful average man in such additions as these: "It is commonly sene by the hygh prouidece of God that goodes vnlawfully gotten vanysh awaye, no man knoweth how" (sig. Cviii v). "Suche persons [as offer a stone in one hand, bread in the other] be in Englad not a fewe" (sig. Di v). "Wythout fayle it is harde at thys daye to mete with one whom thou mayst trust in all thynges" (sig. Dvi). "There is no person, be he neuer so ryche, neuer so myghtye, neuer so muche in hys princes fauour, yea though he be hym selfe a prynce, a kynge, a kesar, but nedeth the ayde of fredes" (sig. Dviii v). "Semblably manye men & women there be which by their owne noyse and bewrayeng of them selfes, seke theyr owne bande and destruction" (sig. Gvi [only in 1545]). "Lorde God; what personages, what families, what cities, ye what realmes and hole countries haue been vtterly subuerted and ouerthrowe by the malice of neighbours. Agayne on the other syde, nothinge is better, nothinge more commodiouse, nor pleasaunt, than is a good and honest neyghbour, which thyng is elegantly declared by our englysshe prouerbe, which speketh in this wise. A nere neyghbour is better than a farre frende" (sig. Gi [only in 1545]). Especially by 1545, Taverner had had more experience in some of these matters, good and bad, we may believe, than Erasmus ever had. To a modern reader, Taverner's critical additions-social, political, and religious-seem the most significant of all. What effect could they have had on Erasmus's reputation? For one thing, of course, men who sympathized with the changes of the time undoubtedly relished the support that so famous a scholar as he seemed to give them; their appreciation helped to decide the familiar judgment of him in the English-speaking parts of the world. However much encouragement some of his own pronouncements have given to this idea of him as a reformer before the Reformation, it is an incomplete and distorted estimate; yet it has meant for his name such celebrity as the scholar, no matter how prodigious, would probably never have enjoyed. In the shaping of this particular reputation, the many translators during the first decades, and not Taverner alone, had strategic advantages. To be sure, their changes were frequently so slight as to be probably unconscious: the word added, the word dropped, may testify simply to a quickly fixed habit of thought. If, for example, Erasmus wrote "pontifices," he meant "the bysshoppes of Rome," one of Cromwell's propagandists may well have reasoned, and that was that.37Since the assumption aligned the great humanist among the supporters of the King's policy in religion, so much the better. 87 So Taverner in the discussion of Ignauis semperferi? sunt (cf. p. 932, supra).

We are not considering villainous misrepresentation but, rather, the result of two interesting facts-the way ip which a few decades, particularly in that century, can alter the inflection of criticism, and the differing effect of the utterance in the two languages. Though neither fact needs laboring, a glance at each may be useful reminder. What a man could say in 1500 or 1515, as for centuries past, without grave suspicion of disloyalty to the Church became within a few years comfort to the forces of revolt. In our own troubled day, we cannot miss the reality of that situation, for we have seen similar confusion and shifting in the development of current ideologies. Englishmen like Taverner recognized the basic principle when they tried to halt religious and social change on a steep grade. Less acute than the difference caused by a few years may seem that due to language. What Erasmus wrote in Latin, however, he addressed to an international company of readers, clerics and scholarly laymen. When he spoke sharply of churchmen or princes, he spoke chiefly to them and to their counselors; and relatively few outside the family knew what he was saying. Even well-whetted words, then, had a kind of safety edge that no lively rendering into a vernacular could possibly have. Translation meant, not only that the family doors were flung wide, but that curious outsiders caught the most abusive remarks and, naturally enough, improved them in repetition. The embellishments are not all that we need to note, however; highly revealing, too, are the differences in temperature and in pressure between the Latin and the English.38 That Erasmus becomes at least a Protestant sympathizer in translation is less surprising than that he becomes a Henrician, opposed to the extremists of the day and, in his conservatism, probably acceptable to many insurgent Englishmen only because of his supposed antipapalism. Some of the doctrinal commentaries have no parallels in the Latin. Viuorum oportetmeminisse, for example, invites Erasmus to explore several classical utterances on the remembrance of the dead and the need men have to be no less mindful of absent friends than of the present. Discarding all this matter, Taverner substitutes a strenuous twofold reproach of those who spend their money in commemoration of the dead rather than in charity to the living: And yf they go aboute to extendetheyr lyberalitie& to do any good dedes, they haddeleuerlasheoute theyrwyckedMammonon the deade,than on the quycke. So lyttel regardthey haue to the lyuely ymagesof God,whomgod neuerthelesso 8 Consider,for example,what Tavernermakesof Fronsoccipitioprior(p. 936,supra,and

tedereth, that what so euer we bestowe vpon them, he couteth bestowedeuen vpo hymselfe.3 Still more eloquent evidence of conditions in England at the time than gibes at Catholic practice are Taverner's denunciations of extremists, whether they espoused doctrines politically dangerous in their antinomianism or inclined to such evangelical excess as licensed the plowman to speak as a prophet. Whereas Erasmus, discussing Multitudo imperatorumCariam perdidit, could speak calmly of anarchy, Taverner not only emphasizes the lesson with a marginal hand, but also heightens the feeling of the passage even while he holds fast to its intention: Whereforethis prouerbeaduertisethvs that nothynge is more noysome nor more pestiferousto a c6m6 weale, then the ouermochelibertye of a multitude, whereno man chieflyeis obeyed,but eueryman doth as himlusteth.This unleful libertie or licence of the multitude is called an Anarchie,A mischiefsurely in manerworsethe any Tyranye.40 As elsewhere, by this dramatic clipping of a passage which in the original continues with illustrative quotations, Taverner sharpens his strictures. The dread of anarchy recurs more insistently in the English pages than in the Latin: "Inutilis populus, nisi principis autoritate gubernetur" has this elaboration: "That commonaltie is nothynge worth, that is not gouerned by thauthorite of a prince. In suima, wher is an anarchie and no monarchie, I meane, where one hedde & ruler is not, but euery ma as a lorde doth what hym lusteth, there is no thynge well done."41Such anxiety reminds us not only of the disturbances, like the Pilgrimage of Grace, that threatened Henry's ministers, but also of some of the antinomian ideas astir in spreading religious groups of the time. "Monkry at this day" detains Taverner less than "the wycked Anabaptistical secte, whiche woll haue no Rulers, no order, but which go about to disturbe the hole world with horrible confusion."4 This arraignment, curiously enough, attaches to the gentle aphorism, Amicorum communia omnia. When the fear of "prophane and straunge doctrines"43drives him, Taver39 Sig. Bii V;the editionof 1545adds: "Alsothis prouerbehath place agaynstthem that immoderatelyebewaylethe dead. Wherevnto agreethoure Englysheprouerbesayenge. We oughtto lyue by the quyckeand not by the deade"(sig. Biii). For the Latin,see Adag. Ckil.,p. 79. 40Sigs. Fiii -iiii. Erasmusthinks tyranny still the worse evil: "Hanc Grtci uocant &vaplarv,malum pene tyrannidepeius,qua nihil potest esse peius" (Adag.Chil.,p. 541). 41Sigs. Fv v-vi,subOuiumnullusvsussi pastorabsit;Adag.Chil.,pp. 546-547. 4 Sig. Gv; cf. Adag.Chil.,p. 14, wherewe find no concernabout eithermonksor Anabaptists. 4 Sig. Fiiii and v, subCoeno puramaquamturbansnunquaminueniespotum;Adag.Chil.,

ner loses the charity that in quieter sentences he describes with considerable beauty. Yet to the men who held forbidden tenets, as well as to the dreamers of Utopias, he would grant this much: "Lawes (as testifyeth thapostle Paule) be not made for the ryghtuous persons, but for horemongers, aduouterers, theues, traytours, mansleers and suche other. If al were good we shulde nede no lawes."44 In spite of such a concession, Taverner is no optimist and no leveler; his distrust of the people is as deep-rooted as Erasmus's or their classical masters'. At times, he underscores his contempt more heavily than does Erasmus, as when in the discussion of Nihil ad Parmenonis suem he declares: "Assuredly suche a fonde beast is the people, that the thynge that they ones take into theyr heades, be the contrary neuer so apparant, they styffely vpholde."45 We may wonder, then, whether there is not social propaganda, as well as a clever translator's use of vivid language, in such thoroughly naturalized exhortations as these: "It becometh not Jacke Strawe to reas6 of princes maters,"46and "Let not the shomaker medle further then hys shoes. Lette the ploughman talke of his plough."47 Vigorously inclusive is his still later injunction: "Let the kobler medle wyth clowtyng his neyghbours shoes, and not be a captaine in felde, or meddel wyth maters concernynge a common wealth. Let them iudge of controuersies in the christen religion, that be lerned in the same, and not euery Jacke plowman."48 Not truly Erasmus's, this zeal to keep the humble in order! Yet, much of the time, Taverner seems to be pleading for moderation. In this effort, of course, Erasmus sets him an example; but the disciple sometimes outstrips the calm pace of the teacher. For one thing, as the tracts of Christopher Saint-German and other contemporaries testify, conditions in England encouraged "pacifiers." In the year of the Six Articles, it was important to urge the middle way between "gospellers" and "Papistes": "All that haue the gospel hangynge at theyr gyrdels be no gospellers. Nor agayne all that disprayse the leude fasci6 of the Papistes be not forthwyth Heritiques."49More temperate, as well as length44Sig. E [misprintfor D] iiii and v, sub Boncelegesex malis moribusprocreantur; Adag. Chil.,p. 337. 45Sig. Giv v. The misprintParmenionisin the headingis correctedin the next line. Adag. Chil.,pp. 26-27. 46Sig. Ciii v, sub Qucesupranos, nihil ad nos. As interestingas the appearanceof Jacke Strawehereis theomission of theology, linkswithpolitics:"quidenegociis whichErasmus principum,aut theologiemysteriistemereloquuntur"(Adag.Chil.,p. 218). 47Sig. Biii and v, sub Oportetremum ducere qui didicit; cf. Erasmus'sillustrationsfrom Plutarchand Horace(Adag.Chil., p. 87). Sig. Ei and v, sub Quam quisquenorit artem, in hac se exerceat;Adag. Chil., pp. 416-417. qui habent citharam, sunt citharcdi. Misers and kings serve Erasmusas illustrations(Adag. Chil., p. 230). 49 Sig. Cv, sub Non omnes

ier, is the interpretation Taverner gives the archaphorism, Ne quid nimis: Some can not do but they ouer do, ether in the redresseof the abuses in the churchthey wyll runne to farre & quyte and cleane take away al honest ceremonies,tradicions,and lawes, or els in the mayntenyngeof that is honeste,they woll wythout choysestyffely defedeyea and kepe styll in theyr churchesal customes, ceremonies,and traditi6sbe they neuer so detestably abused and gone from the fyrst instituti6So hardeit is to kepe the goldenmediocritiewhych the sayd Poete Horacefull wyttely describeth.60 In still another little discourse on this moving theme, Taverner is wholly content to follow Erasmus closely for these two sentences moralizing Quot homines, tot sentencice: ThapostlePaule not forgetfullherofaduertysethvs, that for the excludyngeof contencionwe suffereueryman to abundein hys owne sence,whose counsayleyf oure diuinesin Christendomewolde followe, there shuldenot be at thys day so greatdissensi6in the churchin matersof smalweyght.Fortherebe manythynges whichwithoutdaungerof the christenrelygyonmayebe unknowenwel ynough.61 Because Taverner frequently raises the pressure in a timely adage, the few examples of his reducing it are notable. Passages that might be construed as socially inflammatory evidently made him cautious. For about ten years-from, let us say, the time of The Supplication for the Beggars (1529)-one branch of Protestantism had agitated against wealth and privilege in ways recalling Lollardy and the Peasants' Revolt. In its desperate tone, this literature differs from the main body of English religious writings of every conviction with their basic Christian pleas for charity and justice. Certainly, the violent contrasts in Tudor economy attested by Simon Fish, More, Starkey, and many other witnesses must have led a moderate man to puzzled meditation. Honest concern over the dangers of fanaticism to the social fabric may explain, then, such an unusual muting as that in Taverner's rendering of Pecunim obediunt omnia.52 50Sig. Ciiii v; Adag. Chil., pp. 226-227. Consideringthe un-Horatiancontext here, we may wonderat Taverner'snot pinninghis argumentto Plutarch's"pietatemesse mediam inter c6temptumnuminum& superstitione"(p. 227). 51 Sig. Bv and v. Though pagan poets surroundSaint Paul in the original-Persius, Horace,Terence,Euripides,and Homer-the Christianemphasiswhich Tavernerpreserves is strong: "Huc allusisseuidetur & diuus Paulus apostolus,cum admonet,ut ad sinamusunuiquenquein suo sensu abundare.Cui consiliosi praecludendaemulationem theologorumuulgusauscultaret,n6 esset hodie tanta digladiatiode nihili quastiunculis: Sunt enimomninoquaedamquaecitrapietatisdispendiumignoraripossunt" (Adag.Chil., p. 99). 62On the relationsbetween social and religiousagitation at this time, see especially in England(London,1908),I, 307-309 and JamesGairdner,Lollardyand theReformation passim.

Though Erasmus might safely write: "Vide quid populo iurent principes, quid episcopi, quid abbates, imo quid in baptismo Christiani omnes,"53 there had been mutterings to hint that princes could fall as easily as bishops and abbots. The last reproach alone is, therefore, enough for even a client of Cromwell to translate: "Thys prouerbe was neuer better verifyed than at thys daye amonges Christen me, which neuertheles by their professi6 ought to despyse worldly goodes."54 More than once Taverner mitigates a specific censure of wealth. To some rich men he gives the comfort of good company-David, Job, and Abraham,55In 1545, revising his first essay on Nequicquamsapit, qui sibi non sapit, he goes so far as to elaborate an unedifying defense of self-interest: "I can not denye but a man maye very well after an honest sorte loke to his owne profyt and gaynes where he is in that place as he may helpe hym selfe. For as oure common prouerbe sayeth. He is an euyll cooke, that can not lycke his owne fyngers."56 In scale with his whole undertaking, most of Taverner's supplementary remarks are brief; so his few long essays are the more impressive. Of these, the treatise developing Panem nefrangito is a particularly eloquent tract for the times. After translating Erasmus's forty words. Taverner applies the lesson of Pythagoras to the tragic discord of his own day: Christenmen be in dede breakers,but no eaters of this bread that Pythagoras speaketh of. What discorde,what contenti6, what mortall hatred, is betwen Christians,it woldemakea true Christenmanshartebledeto se. And yet Christ with a farregreatersolenitietaught his disciplesthis concordthe euerpythagoras did. At a solenesouperthe nyght beforehis departureout of this worldfromvs, he toke bread,and thankesyeuen, brakeit and sayde to his disciples,take, eate, this is my bodye, whichis betrayedand brokenfor you. This do ye, in remembraunceof me etc. Lo with how expresse& lyuely a sacramenthe hathe incorporatevs into him selfe.He makethvs all one with him,yea and all one togither with in our selues.And yet settyng this most sacredSymboleand sacramentat naught,by malice& discordwe disseuerourseluesone of vs froman other,yea & cosequetlyfromhim that thus in hys ownbodye hatheknytte vs together.Is not the brede(sayth S. Paule) whichewe breakethe partakyngeof the lordesbody? [Marg.n. -1. Cor.10.]For we beyngemanybe one breadand one body. We be all partakersof one breadand of one cuppe. Christehimselfespeakingof Judas who vngentlyebetrayedhim sayd, He that eateth breadwith me hath liftedvp his hele ayensteme. I prayeyou do not we Christeme (at lest wey whichewyl so be called)expresse& resembleJudas?yearlyeby thys solemnesacramentwe be incorporatein Christ,we be partakersof his body, we eate the misticalbread, This in outwardeapparaunceis a symboleand argumetof an excedyngvnitie and 63Adag. Chil., 64 p. 128. Sig. Bvi v. 66Sig. Diii; cf. n. 28, supra. 6 Sigs. Cii V-Ciii (1545).

brennyngcharitie.But inwardlyvery Judassesyea and outwardlyto, we lyft vp our heles, we kyck, we spume, ayenste Christe.Wherforeto returneto my purpose we be breakersand not eaters or (to speakemore truly) we be vnworthy etersof this mysticalbreadenot discernyngethe lordesbodye.And for thys cause I meanefor the prophanacionof thys sacramentno doubte the terriblethretenynges that Paule speakethof, be comevpon vs. Many of vs be weakeand many slepe.[Marg.n. -1. Cor.11.]67 Not accidentally, we may believe, does this essay of his own, to all intents offered in Erasmus's name, bring both the edition of 1539 and that of 1545 to a close. Panem ne frangito (one of the Symbola Pythagore) occurs near the beginning of Erasmus's work.58 Then, too, instead of placing the added proverbs of 1545 at the end of the book, Taverner inserts them a few pages earlier and leaves a group from 1539 in their original position. Thus Proverbesadapts Erasmus to his Tudor readers. Because it is a composite work, it preserves more significant evidence for the history of ideas in sixteenth-century England and for a study of Erasmus's fame and influence there than any which a faithful translation could offer. OLIVE B. WHITE Bradley Polytechnic Institute 67Sigs. Hi-Hiii. Cf. p. 935, supra. Adag. Chil., p. 21.