Abstract
Desiderius Erasmus (1467–1536) was to travel an important stage further along the road to modern times and was quickly to understand that there was a vast difference between his views and those of Colet. Something of this was already evident from that remarkable conversation with Colet in 1499 on “the Agony in the Garden.”1 It is not important for our study to discuss the subject of that conversation, but the manner in which Erasmus writes about it in his letters shows both what separates him from Colet and that he had learnt from him: (1) to combine platonic metaphysics with the Gospel to form a docta pietas, (2) to turn away from an all too exclusive literary interest and to direct his attention more to the religious element, in order to use his knowledge of Latin — rapidly extended also by a knowledge of Greek — to understand the Holy Scriptures better,2 (3) to understand the Bible not as a collection of texts, to be interpreted theologically, but to try to understand each gospel and each epistle as a treatise, to be understood in its entirety, in a similar way to a treatise or poem by a classical author.3 Erasmus was to apply this manner of reading the Bible more and more thoroughly and, in the footsteps of Laurentius Valla, to amplify it with a philologically critical search for the original text and the correct meaning of the words.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
This “danger” (for the orthodoxy) of what Erasmus taught is also seen by Rudolf Padberg, “Erasmus als Katechet”: Untersuchungen zur Theologie und Seelsorge, IX, 1956: III.
Luden Febvre, Au coeur religieux du XVIe siècle (1957): 200.
Enchiridion means “small manual” and also “dagger.” The first English translation was published in 1533: A book called in latyn Ench. mil. chr. and in Englyshe the manuell of the Christen Knyght.
Bibliotheca erasmiana, Bibliographie des œuvres d’Erasme, Gent, 1897 ff.
Cf. P. Mestwerdt, Die Anfänge des Erasmus, Humanismus und Devotio moderna (1917): passim.
Iwan Pusino, “Der Einflusz Picos auf Erasmus,” Zeitschr. für Kirchengeschichte 46, Neue Folge 9 (1928): 75-96, has accepted that relationship too literally, cf. Hans Baron, “Zur Frage des Ursprungs des deutschen Humanismus und seiner religiösen Reformbestrebungen”: Hist. Zeitschr., 132 (1925): 434, 435; — Alf. Auer, Die vollkommene Frömmigkeit des Christen, nach dem Enchiridion des Erasmus von Rotterdam (1954): 79, 80, shows in detail for the Enchiridion the similarity to, and dependence on the Florentine Neoplatonists.
In the dedication of Erasmus’ edition of Cicero’s De officiis (to Jacobus Tutor), cf. A. Hyma, “Erasmus and the Oxford Reformers”: Bijdragen voor Vaderlandsche Geschiedenis en Oudheidkunde, 7e Reeks, VII (1936): 151; — in his letter to the same, d.d. 28. IV. 1501 Erasmus calls Cicero’s books “aureos libros”: P. S. Allen, Opus epistolarum Des. Erasmi Roterodami denuo recognitum et auctum, I (1906), no. 152.
Lucubratiunculae aliquot Erasmi canonici ordinis divi Augustini, Antwerpiae 1503.
It was published 70 times in the course of the years, he wrote a second, which has become known as Catechismus, in 1533 for St. Paul’s School in London, as an “explanatio” of the Symbolum, the Ten Commandments and The Lord’s Prayer, cf. Rudolf Padberg, “Erasmus als Katechet”: 1, 2.
Institutio principis christiani (1516).
Meissner, England im Zeitalter von Humanismus: 72.
”Reason or system of coming in a short way to true theology.”
Realencyclopädie für protestantische Theologie und Kirche, begründet von J. J. Herzog, 3 V: 438.
Allen, Opus epistolarum contains 3141 letters to and from Erasmus, published in 9 volumes.
Cf. J. von Walter, “Die neueste Beurteilung des Erasmus” (Christentum und Frömmigkeit, Gesammelte Vorträge und Aufsätze, 1941).
What Erasmus contested were in no way only the excesses, which are usually distinguished as “popular belief” from “true” Catholicism, while the Reformation is often delineated as a “healthy reaction” against these excesses only.
Inquisitio fidei (Colloquia ed. P. Rabi, 1712: 309).
The formulation is of A. Renaudet, Erasme, sa pensée religieuse et son action d’après sa correspondance (1518-1521) (1926): 45.
Karl Schätti. Erasmus von Rotterdam und die römische Kurie (1954): 16.
Maynard Smith, Pre-Reformation in England: 495; — the judgment on Erasmus’ translation of the New Testament, while not in accordance to the Vulgata: Car. Duplessis d’Argentré, Collectio judiciorum de novis erroribus qui ab initio XIII seculi usque ad annum 1713 in Ecclesia proscripti sunt et notali, II (1728): 53 ff.
Schätti, op. cit.: 56; 16: “papa abbas caritatis cognomina sunt non potestatis (quotation from: Enchiridion).
Aug. Renaudet, Etudes e’rasmiennes, 1521-1529 (1939): 151.
Padberg, op. cit.: 103.
Laus Stultitiae, caput LIV.
Op. cit.: cap. LIX.
”Convivium religiosum”: Colloquia ed. P. Rabi: 130.
Enchiridion non ad ostentationem ingenii aut eloquentiae conscripsi, verum ad hoc solum, ut modérer errori vulgo religionem constituentium in ceremoniis et ob-servationibus pene plusquam Iudaicis rerum corporalium, earum quae ad pietatem pertinent mire negligentium (Opus epistolarum, I, no. 181 (1504).
Enchiridion: Desiderius Erasmus Roterdamus, Ausgewählte Werke, herausgegeben von Hajo Holborn (1933): 82.
Opus epistolarum, IV no. 1196, Erasmus to Vincent Theodorici, March 1521: (Illud fateor, admoneo locis aliquot, minimam religionis partem esse in cibis, cultu aut similibus ceremoniis) summa esse in purgatis affectibus et officiis charitatis.
The latin word is mancipat, i.e. transfers himself as a slave; Enchiridion (Hol-born): 63.
Duplessis d’Argentré, op. cit.: II: 48.
Non invidemus maiestati pontificis Romani. Utinam habeat vere quod illi tribuunt, nec labi possit in his, quae sunt pietatis. Utinam vere possit animas exi-mere e purgatorii suppliciis Non est meum.. convellere, quod usu publico receptum est; optare tarnen fas est, ut divinus ille spiritus afflet mentes pontificum ac principum, ut sic ista velint perpendere, ut plus verae pietatis adjungatur populo minusque sit superstitionis (Ratio se? methodus, ed. Holborn: 206-208).
Quid igitur est religio? Est prorsus cultus numinis, et observatio praeceptorum illius. Quae sunt illa? Longum est, sed ut in summa dicam, in rebus quattuor est sita. In quibus? Primum ut recte pieque sentiamus de Deo, de scripturis divinis atque ut ilium non vereamur modo, tanquam dominum, verum etiam amemus ex intimis affectibus, ut patrem beneficentissimum. Secundum, ut summa cura tueamur in-nocentiam: ea est, ne quem laedamus. Tertium, ut teneamus charitatem, hoc est, ut de omnibus, quantum datur, bene mereamur. Quartum, ut servemus patientiam. Ea praestat, ut mala nobis illata, si mederi nequeamus, patienter toleremus, non ulciscentes, nec malum malo referentes. (”Confabulatio pia”: Colloquia, ed. P. Rabus: 59).
Enchiridion (Holborn): 56.
”Paraclesis ad lectorem pium, Des. Erasmi praefatio in Novum testamentum”: Des. Erasmus, Ausgewählte Werke … herausgegeben von Hajo Holborn (1933): 140, 141.
Quotation from De Amabili ecclesiae concordia in J. Lindeboom, Erasmus, on-derzoek naar zijn theologie en zijn godsdienstig gemoedsbestaan (1909): 61.
Padberg, op. cit.: 75, 80.
”Confabulatio pia” (Colloquia, ed. Rabus).
Renaudet, Etudes: 147.
”Inquisitio fidei.”
cf. Padberg, op. cit.: 6. Kapittel.
Lindeboom, op. cit.: 68; compare the discussion with Colet on the Agony in the Garden, p. 132 supra.
Renaudet, Etudes: 147 (quoted from Paraphrases in Evang. Marci 6, 16).
Renaudet, Erasme: 25.
The Father is very often called God, the Son sometimes, the Holy Spirit nowhere expressly, quoted in Lucien Febvre, Le problème de l’incroyance au XVIe siècle, la religion de Rabelais (1947): 261.
Meissner, op. cit.: 72.
Erasmus von Rotterdam, Briefe, verdeutscht und herausgegeben von Walther Köhler (1947), Einleitung: XXX.
Renaudet, Etudes erasmiennes: 112, 49.
Padberg, op. cit.: 103.
Renaudet, Etudes: 31, 35.
hoc. cit.: chap. IV.
Quotation from “De pueris instituendis” in: Hans Treinen, Studien zur Idee der Gemeinschaft bei Erasmus von Rotterdam und zu ihrer Stellung in der Entwicklung des humanistischen Universalismus (1955): 142.
“Bildung ist bei Erasmus nicht eruditio, sondern Durchbildung des Menschen zu seiner höchsten sittlichen Würde als Mensch und als Christ” (Köhler, Briefe: XXXVIII).
Köhler, op. cit.: XVII.
Enchiridion (Holborn): 135.
Renaudet, Erasme: 15.
Renaudet, Préréforme et Humanisme, 434, 435.
Latin: religio, liter.: union, bond, was often used for monastic life or rule, but it signifies also: religion.
Sed tu forsitan bonam foelicitatis partem existimas inter confratres emori. At fallit et imponit ista persuasio non solum tibi verumetiam prope universis. In loco, in cultu, in victu, in ceremoniis quibusdam Christum et pietatem collocamus. Actum putamus de illo qui véstem albam commutarit in nigram, aut qui cuculum pileo verterit, qui locum subinde mutet. Ausim illud dicere, magnam pietatis per-niciem ex istis quas vocant religionibus exortam esse, tametsi pio fortasses studio pri-mum inductae sunt. Deinde paulatim creverunt et in sex milia discriminum sese sparserunt. Accessit summorum Pontificum autoritas nimium ad multa facilis et indulgens. Quid enim laxis istis religionibus conspurcatius aut magis impium? lam ad laudatas si te conferas, imo ad laudatissimas, praeter frigidas quasdam et Iudaicas ceremonias, haud scio quam Christi reperias imaginem. Ex iis sibi placent, ex iis alios iudicant et condemnant. Quanto magis est e Christi sententia totum orbem christianum unam domum et velut unum habere monasterium, omnes concanonicos et confratres putare, baptismi sacramentum summam religionem ducere, neque spectare ubi vivas sed quam bene vivas. (Allen, Opus epistolarum, I no. 296; the letter was never published, but copies were in circulation before Erasmus died, op. cit.: 564).
Laus Siultitiae, cap. LIV.
Cf. the Dialogues: “Virgo misogamos” and others, and, more elaborate, the treatise Matrimonii) christiani institutio.
Erasmus’ own commentary: “De utilitate colloquiorum ad lectorem”: Colloquia, ed. P. Rabi (1712): 860.
Renaudet, Erasme: 19.
La doctrine de la réversibilité des mérites … eut violemment heurté son sens de la justice et lui eut semblé pure déraison (Renaudet, op. cit.: 17).
Enchiridion (ed. Holborn): 34.
Laus Stultitiae, cap. LIV.
Loc. cit.: cap. XLVII.
Enchiridion (ed. Holborn): 118.
Loc. cit.: 52, 41.
Quoted in: Lindeboom, Erasmus: 72.
Laus Stultitiae, cap. XXXIX.
Quid autem aliud est Christi philosophia, quam ipse renascentiam vocat, quam instauratio bene conditae naturae? (Paraclesis, ed. Holborn: 145).
Quotation from Hyperaspistes in Lindeboom, op. cit.: 73.
Cassirer, Die platonische Renaissance: 75.
For this controversy cf.: Karl Zickendraht, Der Streit zwischen Erasmus und Luther Uber den Willensfreiheit (1909).
Jacques Etienne, Spiritualisme érasmien et théologiens louvanistes, Un changement de problématique au début du XVIe siècle (1956): 110, 113 f., 138, 144 (Driedo against Erasmus).
Zickendraht, op. cit.: 34.
Enchiridion (Holborn): 113.
Cassirer, Die platonische Renaissance: 75.
Quotation from De magnitudine misericoridiae Dei in: Lindeboom, Erasmus: 75.
Dilthey, Analyse und Weltanschauung: 76.
Padberg, op. cit.: 63.
De magnitudine (cf. n. 8, p. 152).
Zickendraht, op. cit.: 80.
Loc. cit.: 152.
Cf. the dialogue “Pietas puerilis”; in the passage relating to this “Colloquium” in his own commentary (De utilitate Colloquiorum ad lectorem) Erasmus doubts whether the confession was established and therewith deprives it of compelling respects: “suscipiendam esse … quasi nobis esset instituta a Christo:” Auer, Die vollkommene Frömmigkeit: 168, and supra p. 134.
For Erasmus’ idea about prayer: Enchiridion (Holborn): 29; on other observances cf. the dialogues “Cyclops sive Evangeliophorus” and “Pietas puerilis.”
hoc. cit., the opposite was specially defended by one of the most violent Louvain opponents of Erasmus, Jacobus Latomus (Etienne, Spiritualisme: 166). With regard to this point too Erasmus remained faithful to his old views, although he later says, with somewhat more emphasis, that he will always maintain the institutions, without however attaching any value to them.
”Militis confessio”; — Laus Stultitiae, cap. XL, XLI.
Luther blames Erasmus that he does not wish to include, amongst the “Jewish works,’ judged by Paul as of no importance, all works, including the opera moralia, while Erasmus only includes the formalistic, opera ceremonalia. (Padberg, op. cit.: 108; — Zickendraht; op. cit.: 146).
”Colloquium militis et Carthusiani”: Colloquia éd. P. Rabi: 245 ff.
Renaudet, Préréforme et Humanisme: 279; — amongst his poems, chiefly those written prior to 1510, there are some dedicated to the Virgin Mary, but in them too there is less mention of her “intercession” than of the example she gave, cf. The Poems of Des. Erasmus, introd. and edited by C. Reedijk (1956).
Laus Stultitiae, cap. XLI.
”Apotheosis capnionis, De imcomparabüi heroe Johanne Reuchlino in divorum numerum relato” (Reuchlin was the target of sharp persecution led by the Dominicans!): Colloquia ed. P. Rabi, 186-195).
Laus Stultitiae, cap. XL; — Renaudet, Etudes: 236.
Lindeboom, Erasmus: 113; — Laus Stultitiae: XLVII; — Rudolf Stähelin, Erasmus’ Stellung zur Reformation, hauptsächlich von seinen Beziehungen zu Basel aus beleuchtet (1873): 24-29.
”Pietas puerilis.”
Enchiridion, ed. Holborn: 73.
Lindeboom, Erasmus: 138 (quotation from the letters of Erasmus).
Loc. cit.: 143; Renaudet, Erasme: 12; In the Catechism of 1514 he speaks of Christ’s presence sub imagine panis vinique (in the image of bread and wine), and when in that of 1533 he uses the word “sacrifice,” he adds “mystic” to it, to which Padberg remarks: “curious here is precisely the avoidance of the terminology of religious mediaeval theology” (Padberg, op. cit.: 56, 107).
Lindeboom, Erasmus: 137; — in Christiani Matrimonii institutio he also stresses the element of community in the Lord’s supper and the moral effect of the eucharist; — Auer, Die vollkommene Frömmigkeit: 166, 169.
Lindeboom, op. cit.: 65 (from Supputatio errorum Beddae).
hae (evangelicae litterae) tibi sacrosanctae mentis illius vivam referunt imaginem ipsumque Christum loquentem, sanantem, morientem, resurgentem, denique totum ita praesentem reddunt …… (Paraclesis, ed. Holborn: 149; this “admonition to the pious reader,” of Erasmus’ Ratio seu methodus, is one and all an encouragement to read the Gospel and that it may come in the hands of all, of whatever status they are).
unicurn multoque omnium efficacissimum adversus omne vel adversitatis vel tentationis genus est crux Christi, quae eadem est et errantibus exemplum et laboran-tibus refrigerium et pugnantibus armatura. Haec est una contra omnia tela nequissimi obicienda. Proinde convenit in hac diligenter exerceri, non quidem vulgi more, quo quidam dominicae passionis historiam cotidie relegunt aut crucis imaginem adorant aut millenis signis eius totum undique corpus communiunt aut fragmentum aliquod sacrati ligni domi servant aut ita certis horis supplicium Christi recolunt, ut ei tanquam homini iusto et indigna patienti humano affectu condoleant atque illacriment (Enchiridion (Holborn): 117).
See p. 113 above.
Enchiridion (Holborn): 45.
This in contrast to Luther, who still has a very clear idea of the devil and hell, cf. inter alia: Ein Sermon von der Bereitung zum Sterben (1519, Werke, Weimarer Ausgabe, II); for Erasmus the devil is not a demon, but the evil which must not be exorcized, but combated, cf. Auer, Die vollkommene Frömmigkeit: III.
”Inquisitio fidei.”
Loc. cit.
Enchiridion (Holborn): 120.
Lindeboom, Erasmus: 107.
In psalmum LXXXV expositio, quoted: Lindeboom, op. cit.: 107.
Supputatio errorum Beddae, quoted: loc. cit.; — Enchiridion (Holborn): 176.
M. van Rhijn, Studien: 47.
A. Auer bases Erasmus’ whole piety on the 5th canon from the Enchiridion: “ut in hoc uno constituas perfectam pietatem, si coneris semper a rebus visibilibus, quae fere vel imperfectae vel mediae sunt, ad invisibilia proficere iuxta superiorem hominis divisionem” (that you should see this as perfect piety, if you always try to proceed from the visible things, which are either imperfect or neither good nor bad, towards the invisible, in accordance with the above mentioned division of man). (A. Auer, Die vollk. Frömmigkeit: 81). That is something quite different from mediaeval symbolism. Renaudet, Erasme: 14, quotes from a letter of Erasmus: “I have taught that the least part of religious life consists in ceremonies and abstinences, that the principal is in the purgation of desires and the exercising of charity.”
Enchiridion (Holborn): 25, 119, 120; — compare: Cassirer, Die platonische Renaissance: 75.
What Renaudet (Études: XVIII) formulates as: “cette religion du pur esprit et de la libre foi qui s’achève en une spiritualité nourrie de St. Paul et de l’Evangile, conseillée et modérée par la raison classique.”
What he expresses in De praeparatione ad mortem in a rather old-fashioned way by saying that the devil leads us to many doubtful questions [just those which are of great importance for the Catholic and the Reformed person] about the nature of creation, immortality, resurrection of the flesh, predestination, the power of sacraments, etc.
Cf. the numerous passages referring to this point in: Padberg, op. cit.: 84; Zickendraht, op. cit.: 25-29; Auer, Die vollkommene Frömmigkeit: 46; Etienne, Spiritualité: 35, 46.
An nescis, ? Christiane miles, iam tum, cum vivifici lavacri mysteriis initiabaris, nomen dédisse te duci Christo, cui bis vitam debebas, pariter et donatam et restitu-tam, cui plusquam teipsum debebas ? Non succurrit te verbis conceptis in tarn benigni imperatoris iurasse sententiam, eius sacramentis veluti donariis auctoratum tuumque ipsius diris devovisse caput, si minus pacto stares? (Enchiridion (Holborn: 24).
Padberg, Erasmus als Katechet: 104, quotes the main Catechism (1533): “Qui exactius locuti sunt, sacramentum appellant jus jurandum aut obligationem, numinis ac religionis interventu,…”
He expresses himself disapprovingly about the resultant customary “exorcism and formulae, through which Satan and his lusts are renounced.” (“Convivium re-ligiosum”: Colloquia ed. P. Rabi: 130 f.; Auer, op. cit.: III.
Etienne, op. cit.: 15, 27, 28.
Laus Stultitiae, cap. LXVII.
Enchiridion (Holborn): 36; — Erasmus gave his opinion about the religious observances particularly clearly in a letter which he wrote to the Bishop of Uten-heim (1522, Epistola apologetica de interdicto esu carnium), referring to the fact that some Evangelically-minded had broken the order concerning fasting on Palm Sunday in Basle: he finds fault with the spectacular aspect of the act, but demands freedom for all to follow the order or break it, and finishes with these words: “he sins less who eats meat throughout his whole life than he who, in the question of food and drink, treats his neighbour, who is willing to love God’s commandments, in a neglectful and hostile manner.” (Rud. Stähelin, Erasmus’ Stellung zur Reformation: 19).
When he made his will in 1524, he does not, in contrast to the frightened man who is about to die in “Funus,” instruct his friends to recite psalms or to have a mass read, but to bring about with care an edition of his works (Renaudet, Études érasmiennies, 230).
The story of Erasmus’ last hours and his attitude to death is now definitive in: Cornelis Reedijk, “Das Lebensende des Erasmus”: Basler Zeitschrift, Band 57 (1958): 23-66; all arguments which intend to prove, that Erasmus died as a true son of the Orthodox Church, are by this article completely refuted.
iam olim fractus, fusus, exutus atque adeo triumphatus a nobis, sed in Christo, capite nostro a quo procul dubio vicissim vincetur et in nobis: Enchiridion (Hol-born): 28.
Lat. pietas, i.e. faithful service [to a person, one’s country or the gods] from a feeling of respect and dependence.
Enchiridion (Holborn): 85.
Quid igitur faciet Christianus? Negliget ecclesiae mandata? …. damnabit pias consuetudines Immo si infirmus est, servabit ut necessarias, sin firmus est et per-fectus, tanto magis observabit, ne sua scientia fratrem offendat infirmum …. Haec oportet non omittere, sed ilia necesse est facere. Non damnantur opera corpo-ralia, sed praeferuntur invisibilia. Non damnatur cultus visibilis, sed non placatur deus nisi pietate invisibili. Spiritus est deus, et spiritualibus victimis flectitur. Turpe sit Christianis ignorare, quod gentilis quidam poeta non ignoravit. (Enchiridion (Holborn): 85). — Ne tu mihi caritatem esse in templo frequentem esse, signis divo-rum procumbere, cereolos accendere, numeratas preculas iterare. Nihil istis opus habet deus (loc. cit.: 82). — Num ut his aut his caerimoniis utamur? num ut sic aut sic vestiamur? ut his aut his cibis victitemus? ut tantum psalmorum exhauriamus? Nihil horum. (loc. cit.: 79)
Duplessis d’Argentré, Collectio judiciorum, II: 48 ff.
Si vulgus Christianorum spectes, nonne prora et puppis vitae Ulis in ceremoniis est? (”Convivium religiosum’’: Colloquia ed. P. Rabi: 167).
Sed in oratione Catonis, quamquam praeclara est, tamen fiduciam aliquis taxare posset, ut ab arrogantia profectam, quam raultum oportet abesse ab homine Chris-tiano.
He draws his knowledge about the affects and man, internally and externally, mainly from the Classics and in the Enchiridion bases his Christianity thereon (Enchiridion: 41-47, Laus Stultitiae Cap. LXVI); for a detailed account of this classical interpretation of the bible and Christianity, see Auer, Die vollkommene Frömmigkeit: 129-133.
P. Smith, A Key to the Colloquies of Erasmus (1927).
Augustin Renaudet, Dante humaniste (1951).
Renaudet, Erasme et l’Italie (1954): 6; idem, Etudes: XIV, 29, 136.
Dil they, Analyse und Weltanschauung: 74; — Stammler, Von der Mystik zum Barock, 42.
Enchiridion (Holborn): 31: neque equidem usque quaque improbaverim ad hanc militiam [sc. studium Scripturarum] velut tirocinio quodam praeludere in litteris poetarum et philosopharum gentilium, cf. loc. cit.: 32, 71.
Sacris quidem Uteris ubique prima debetur autoritas, sed tamen ego nonnun-quath öffendo quaedam vel dicta a veteribus, vel scripta ab ethnicis, etiam poetis, tam caste, tam sancte, tam divinitus ut mihi non possim persuadere quin pectus illorum, cum ilia scriberent, numen aliquid bonum agitaverit …. non possum legere librum Ciceronis [……], quin aliquoties exoscular codicem ac venerer sanctum illud pectus afflatum coelesti numine.
Renaudet, Etudes: 55.
et fortasse latius se fundit spiritus Christi quam nos interpretantur. Et multi sunt in consortio sanctorum qui non sunt apud nos in catalogo.
André M. Hugo, Calvijn en Seneca, een inleidende Studie van Calvijns Commen-taar op Seneca, De Clementia (1957): 110, 129.
Renaudet, Etudes, 22; Enchiridion (Holborn): 35.
Renaudet, Préréforme et Humanisme: 492.
Fritz Mauthner, Der Atheismus und seine Geschichte im Abendlande, I (1924): 166.
Renaudet, op. cit.: 493.
A. Renaudet, “Le message humaniste et chrétien d’Erasme”: Sodalitas Eras-miana, I: Il valore universale dell’ Umanesimo (1950): 47, 48.
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1961 Martinus Nijhoff, The Hague, Netherlands
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
van Gelder, H.A.E. (1961). Erasmus. In: The Two Reformations in the 16th Century. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-011-9564-5_5
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-011-9564-5_5
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-011-8720-6
Online ISBN: 978-94-011-9564-5
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive