From Humanism to the Reformation: Letters of Recommendation in Early Modern Germany (1490-1560)

Home , Caspar Aquila, Conrad Goclenius, Ernst Badian, Georg Witzel, Girolamo Aleandro, Heinrich Stromer

James Milton Kooistra

A thesis submitted in conformity with the requirements

for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy

Centre for Medieval Studies

University of Toronto

395 Wellington Street 395, rue Wellington Ottawa ON K1A0N4 Ottawa ON K1A0N4 Canada Canada

Your file Votre reference ISBN: 978-0-494-39884-5 Our file Notre reference ISBN: 978-0-494-39884-5

NOTICE: AVIS: The author has granted a non L'auteur a accorde une licence non exclusive exclusive license allowing Library permettant a la Bibliotheque et Archives and Archives Canada to reproduce, Canada de reproduire, publier, archiver, publish, archive, preserve, conserve, sauvegarder, conserver, transmettre au public communicate to the public by par telecommunication ou par Plntemet, prefer, telecommunication or on the Internet, distribuer et vendre des theses partout dans loan, distribute and sell theses le monde, a des fins commerciales ou autres, worldwide, for commercial or non sur support microforme, papier, electronique commercial purposes, in microform, et/ou autres formats. paper, electronic and/or any other formats.

The author retains copyright L'auteur conserve la propriete du droit d'auteur ownership and moral rights in et des droits moraux qui protege cette these. this thesis. Neither the thesis Ni la these ni des extraits substantiels de nor substantial extracts from it celle-ci ne doivent etre imprimes ou autrement may be printed or otherwise reproduits sans son autorisation. reproduced without the author's permission.

In compliance with the Canadian Conformement a la loi canadienne Privacy Act some supporting sur la protection de la vie privee, forms may have been removed quelques formulaires secondaires from this thesis. ont ete enleves de cette these.

While these forms may be included Bien que ces formulaires in the document page count, aient inclus dans la pagination, their removal does not represent il n'y aura aucun contenu manquant. any loss of content from the thesis. Canada ii

From Humanism to the Reformation: Letters of Recommendation in Early Modern Germany (1490-1560) James Milton Kooistra Doctor of Philosophy Centre for Medieval Studies University of Toronto © Copyright by James Milton Kooistra, 2008

ABSTRACT:

This study offers a cultural and intellectual history of letters by humanists and reformers written to recommend candidates for positions in the schools, the clergy, or government service in early modern Germany. These letters were shaped by the educational, cultural, professional or doctrinal agendas of humanism and Protestantism.

The thesis illuminates the triangular relationship among authors, those recommended, and the recipients of the letters. Particular emphasis is placed on the role friendship and kinship played in letters of recommendation, for the letters show that a deliberate and continuous attention to the fashioning and advertising of one's album amicorum, one's list of friends, was necessary in order to win powerful patrons among established intellectuals. In the first half of the sixteenth century, the reformation perturbed humanist patterns of personal and professional friendship, as creed and confession came to displace the bonae literae as the common ground amongst friends. This study also explores the rhetorical strategies by which humanists and reformers recommended neophyte scholars for positions in education, church or state. The words and phrases used in letters of recommendation not only provide a graphic depiction of the person of the recommended, but also reveal what their authors identified as the qualities of the ideal job candidate. The rhetoric of the letters changed over the period, as previous concerns for a proper humanist style became subsumed in more immediate concerns of confession, orthodoxy and public iii concord. The letters enhance our understanding of the job market for people with advanced education, of how people obtained positions, and of the grounds on which hiring decisions were made. Humanists and reformers wrote informal, personal recommendations that were intended just for their friends, but formal recommendations to a university senate, a nobleman or town council. Moreover, they promoted the scholarship of other scholars by writing prefaces to their proteges' publications, using strategies developed for letters of recommendation to recommend the works as well as the men. iv

TABLE OF CONTENTS

List of Abbreviations v

Introduction 1

1. Humanist Friendships, the Backbone of Recommending 12

2. Humanists and Reformers as patres and patroni 46

3. Humanism and the Letter of Recommendation 89

4. The Influence of the Reformation on the Letter of Recommendation 147

5. The Preface as a Type of Letter of Recommendation 194

Conclusion 223

Bibliography 229 V

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

AK Die Amerbachkorrespondenz. Edited by A. Hartmann and B. R. Jenny. Basel: Verlag der Universitatsbibliothek, 1942-.

Allen Opus epistolarum Des. Erasmi Roterodami. Edited by P. S. Allen et al. Oxford: Clarendon, 1906-58. 11 vols, and index.

Basel UB Basel, Universitatsbibliothek

BrOek Briefe undAkten zum Leben Oekolampads zum vierhundertjdhrigen Jubilaum der Baseler Reformation. Edited by Ernst Staehelin. Leipzig: Heinsius, 1927-1934. Reprint, New York and London: Johnson Reprint, 1971. 2 vols.

CEBR Contemporaries of Erasmus: A Biographical Register of the Renaissance and Reformation. Edited by Peter G. Bietenholz and Thomas B. Deutscher. Toronto, Buffalo and London: University of Toronto Press, 1985-1987. 3 vols.

CMB Correspondance de Martin Bucer. Edited by Reinhold Friedrich et al. Leiden: Brill, 1979-.

CR Philip Melanchthon, Opera quae supersunt omnia, in Corpus Reformatorum, vols. 1-28. Halle, 1834-1860.

CWC The Correspondence of Wolfgang Capito. Edited by Erika Rummel with the assistance of Milton Kooistra. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2005-.

CWE The Collected Works of Erasmus. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1974-.

HBBW Heinrich Bullinger Briefwechsel. Edited by Ulrich Gabler et al. Zurich: Theologischer Verlag Zurich, 1973-.

MBW Melanchthons Briefwechsel: Kritische und kommentierte Gesamtausgabe. Edited by Hans Scheible. Stuttgart-Bad Cannstatt, 1977-.

Millet Millet, Olivier. Correspondance de Wolfgang Capiton (1478-1541): Analyse et index (d'apres le Thesaurus Baumianus et autres sources). Strasbourg: Publications de la Bibliotheque Nationale et Universitaire de Strasbourg, 1982.

Mutian Der Briefwechsel des Conradus Mutianus. Edited by Karl Gillert. Halle: Hendel, 1890. 2 vols. vi

Reuchlin Briefwechsel: Johann Reuchlin. Edited by the Heidelberger Akademie der Wissenschafiten. Stuttgart-Bad Cannstadt: Frommann-Holzboog, 1999-.

Rhenanus Der Briefwechsel des Beatus Rhenanus. Edited by A. Horawitz and K. Hartfelder. Leipzig: Teubner, 1886. Reprint, Hildesheim: G. Olms, 1966.

Schiess Briefwechsel der Bruder Ambrosius und Thomas Blaurer, 1509-1567. Edited by Traugott Schiess. Freiburg-im-Breisgau: Fehsenfeld, 1908-12. 3 vols.

Vadian Vadianische Briefsammlung. Edited by E. Arbenz and H. Wartmann. St. Gallen: Fehr'sche Buchhandlung, 1890-1913.7 vols.

WABr D. Martin Luthers Werke: Briefwechsel. Weimar: Hermann Bohlaus Nachfolger, 1930-78. 15 vols.

Zurich SA Staatsarchiv des Kantons Zurich

ZwBr Huldreich Zwinglis samtliche Werke. Volumes 7-11: Zwinglis Briefwechsel, volumes 1-5. Edited by E. Egli et al. Zurich: Theologischer Verlag, 1911-35. INTRODUCTION

The idea for this thesis evolved over the course of my involvement with the edition and translation of the first volume of the correspondence of Wolfgang Capito, headed by Erika Rummel. My initial task for the project was to provide English summaries of all the letters that are readily accessible in modern editions, such as the correspondence of noted figures like Martin Luther, Martin Bucer, Ulrich Zwingli, Ulrich von Hutten, Johannes Oecolampadius, Philip Melanchthon and Beatus Rhenanus. In due course, I was also assigned the duty of transcribing and translating numerous letters that exist only in manuscript. In carrying out these assignments, I soon noticed a familiar pattern: a significant number of these letters contained recommendations, usually a brief word or two, assuring the recipient of the trustworthiness of the bearer of the letter. As I compared the correspondence of Capito with that of his contemporaries, this same pattern held true, with the exception of Rhenanus, whose correspondence deals primarily with matters editorial. A cursory reading of the available correspondence of humanists and reformers revealed that letters of recommendation formed a vital part of Renaissance epistolography and played a key role in the interaction amongst humanists in their various capacities in academia, scholarship, church and state. Scholars were admitted into academic sodalities, and introduced and recommended to the right people for the sake of a job or stipend. Furthermore, their publications were endorsed by means of prefatory letters and given reviews in the personal correspondence of scholars. Letters of recommendation were often the sole means of disclosing an opinion about a scholar within the Republic of Letters, whose members were scattered far and wide across 2

Europe. This "republic" was a humanist institution, but unlike the academic community

of the scholastic theologians, which was of a corporate nature, the literary republic was a

community that shared a spirit or attitude, or to use a modern term, a "culture" that

cherished the literature of classical antiquity. The Republic of Letters represents a huge

cultural shift, a collapse of the old clerical culture and the rise of lay culture that was

literate.

Letters of recommendation were the medium through which scholars advanced

their way through the republic. They served to introduce new members, vouch for their

character and credentials, attain employment or even a publication. Letters of

recommendation elicited a number of responses from an author, ranging from honour to

annoyance. On 24 May 1543, Ambrosius Blaurer wrote a letter to Heinrich Bullinger,

claiming that he did not "feel any annoyance" on account of Bullinger's "truly obliging

recommendations," that he "countfed] it amongst the chief delights," if he could ever be

of assistance to anyone whom Bullinger recommended. For Blaurer, it was doubly joyful

to receive a letter of recommendation from Bullinger, since it allowed him to support not just "good and gifted people," but also to honour Bullinger's judgment and their

friendship.2 For most humanists and reformers, however, it could be burdensome to

1 The literature on the Republic of Letters for the Early Modern Period is extensive. See Constance M. Furey, Erasmus, Contarini, and the Religious Republic of Letters (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006), which demonstrates "how Catholic men and women of letters created a distinctive kind of religious community rooted in friendship and spiritualized scholarship;" Herbert Jaumann, ed. Die europaische Gelehrtenrepublik im Zeitalter des Konfessionalismus/The European Republic of Letters in the Age of Confessionalism (Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz Verlag, 2001); Corinna L. Vermuellen, "Strategies and slander in the Protestant part of Republic of Letters: image, friendship and patronage in Etienne de Courcelles' correspondence," in Self-presentation and social identification: the rhetoric and pragmatics of letter writing in Early Modern Times, edited by Toon van Houdt et al., 247-280 (Leuven: Leuven University Press, 2002); Karl Enenkel, "Epitaphs on Erasmus and the self-definition of the Republic of Letters," Erasmus of Rotterdam Society YearbookH (2001): 14-29. 2 Schiess 2, Ep. 1010 (summary). The original autograph is in Zurich SA EII 343a, f. 279: "Tantum vero, mi venerande Bullingere frater, abest, ut quicquam molestiae sentiam ex illis tuis vere officiosis commendationibus, ut in summis deliciis numeram, si quando mihi liceat etiam tua caussa humanum aut 3 recommend someone and an imposition to satisfy the request made in a recommendation.

On 25 September 1542, Melanchthon lamented to his friend, Joachim Camerarius, "You won't believe how much of my time is spent in writing letters [of recommendation] for the affairs of students; for that reason, you will have to forgive my negligence in writing to you."3 Though he was aware of the importance of recommending, Melanchthon's exasperation is typical of humanists and reformers, who were forced to place their own research on hold for the sake of fostering the careers of their students by writing letters of recommendation.

Letter-writing in general consumed much of the time of humanists and reformers, and their correspondence frequently contains a litany of excuses either for the brevity of a hastily-written letter or for a lapse in communication, as well as assurances that such a lapse did not reflect a cooling of affection or a breakdown in friendship.4 On 13 February

1517, Erasmus commented upon this duty in a letter to Thomas Grey and Pierre Vitre:

"Letter-writing is a duty, but I couldn't possibly answer everyone, even if I did nothing else."5 Those with a particularly extensive network of friends, associates and patrons, like

Erasmus and Melanchthon, struggled to keep up with their letter-writing and admitted to being overwhelmed with their own workload and mountain of unanswered correspondence. At the close of a letter to Paschasius Berselius, a Benedictine member of the Strasbourg sodalitas, Erasmus wrote:

You will forgive me, dear Paschasius, if I write a careless letter to a friend who deserves better things, but besides the great toil of my researches which beneficum esse erga eos, quos alioqui toto pectore demereri cupio. Sic enim conduplicato profimdor gaudio, quum bonis et dotis, deinde vero etiam a te mihi commendatis viris adesse rescula quapiam possum." MBW Ep. 3048 (summary); printed in CR 4.870: "Non credas, quantum mihi temporis in scholasticorum negotiis, quibus litterae dandae sunt, pereant: quare negligentiae meae in scribendo veniam dabis." 4 E.g. CWE 4, Ep. 528. 5 CWE 4, Ep. 528. 4

overwhelms me at the moment, I am burdened with such bundles of letters from all parts that if I were fit and at leisure this by itself would be too much for me.

Complaints of this sort are commonplace in humanist correspondence. Nevertheless, apart from messages transmitted by word of mouth, letter-writing remained the medium of communication in sixteenth-century Germany for the exchange of news, information, gossip and ideas, as well as of matters pertaining to education, research, church and state.

Humanists recognized the vital role of letters of recommendation in their lives.

Gabriele Jancke has recently pointed out in her excellent study of sixteenth-century

German autobiographical writings that humanists acknowledged the importance of letters of recommendation as they reflected upon their careers in their autobiographical texts.

These, she argues, were written by authors who wanted to represent themselves not as autonomous individuals but rather as involved in relationships and as members of networks.7 The well-connected humanist poet, Simon Lemnius, boasted that it was the recommendation letters from his former teachers, which he had in hand when he came to

Wittenberg to study, that drew the attention of Melanchthon and his colleagues, and therefore provided a jump-start to his career:

Therefore when I first came to Wittenberg, equipped with recommendations from the most illustrious men, all the students immediately embraced me with the utmost kindness. Not even Philip Melanchthon can ignore how all the learned men of Upper Germany had recommended me. All the people of Wittenberg know how very dear and close I was even to Philip Melanchthon, who always praised me and my intelligence the most. On top of that, other learned and distinguished men also cultivated and paid attention to me.8

6 CWE 5, Ep. 735, dated 9.12.1517; cf. CWE 5, Ep. 633 and CWC 1, Ep. 89. 7 Gabriel Jancke, Autobiographie ah soziale Praxis. Beziehungskonzepte in Selbstzeugnissen des 15. und 16. Jahrhunderts im deutschsprachigen Raum (Cologne et al.: BShlau, 2002), pp. 135-41. 8 Quoted in Ibid., p. 107: "Cum igitur primum Vitenbergam clarissimorum virorum commendationibus ornatus venissem, me statim omnes studiosi summa cum benevolentia sunt amplexi. Neque Philippus Melanchton quidem ignorare potest, quam fuerim ab omnibus doctis viris superioris Germaniae commendatus. Quam etiam Philippo Melanchtoni charissimus et familiarissimus fuerim, omnes Vitenbergenses sciunt. Qui me semper meumque ingenium plurimum laudavit. Praeterea etiam alii docti et excellentes viri me coluerunt et observaverunt." 5

Jancke is correct in pointing out that there has been surprisingly little research on recommendation letters and the culture of recommending in early modern Europe.9 None of the contributors to the collection of essays, Der Brief im Zeitalter der Renaissance, discusses the genre.10 Bianca van der Aa has written a brief article analyzing the art of recommendation in the twelve extant letters between the East Frisian historian, Ubbo

Emmius (1547-1625), and the Heidelberg professor of history, Janus Gruter (1560-1627), noting the difference in rhetorical styles between their informal and formal recommendation letters.11 Other articles focus on specific letters of recommendation written for an individual, describing the historical circumstances which necessitated the letters but make only passing references to their rhetoric and refrain from discussing them within the context of the culture of Renaissance letter-writing. Vincent Ilardi has written an article that examines coded letters of recommendation in Renaissance Italy.

The presence of codes sheds light upon the means by which clients were recommended within the competitive world of Renaissance patronage and the caution demanded of patrons in discriminating amongst recommended clients. None of these studies offer a

9 Ibid., p. 135, n. 96. Cf. Vincent Ilardi, "Crosses and carets: Renaissance patronage and coded letters of Recommendation," American Historical Review 92.5 (1987): p. 1127, n. 1. 10 Franz Josef Worstbrock, ed. Der Brief im Zeitalter der Renaissance (Weinheim: Acta Humaniora, 1983). 11 Bianca van der Aa, '"Iuvenes gnavi, probi ac modesti...' or the art of recommendation. An analysis of the correspondence of Ubbo Emmius and Janus Gruter," in Roma, magistra mundi: itineraria culturae medievalis. Melanges offerts au Pere L. E. Boyle a I'occasion de son 75e anniversaire, edited by Jacqueline Hamesse, vol. 3, pp. 367-381 (Louvain-la-Neuve: F^deYation des Instituts d'Etudes M6dievales, 1998). 12 See Antonia Gransden, "Letter of recommendation fromJoh n Whethamstede for a poor pilgrim, 1453/4," The English Historical Review 106.421 (1991): 932-939; Thurston Dart, "A letter of recommendation written for John Bull in 1617," Revue beige de musicologie 17, no. 1-4, (1963): 121-124; Carl Hopf, "Empfehlung des Erycius Puteanus fur den Kanzler des Erzbischthums Thessalonisch Contarinus Palaeologus," Altpreufiische Monatsschrift 8 (1871): 371-2. In an interesting article on self- recommendation in the Church of England from 1700 to 1900, W. T. Gibson shows that self- recommendation remained a key factor in nominations to positions in the Church through the nineteenth century, whereas in the civil service and the newer professions, advancement by merit had already taken root. Cf. W. T. Gibson, '"Unreasonable and unbecoming': self-recommendation and place-seeking in the Church of England, 1700-1900," Albion 21.\ (1995): 43-63. 13 Ilardi, pp. 1127-1149. 6 synoptic treatment such as I propose here. Mark Morford's survey of Justus Lipsius' letters of recommendation comes closest to the topic at hand. He first introduces sixteenth-century conventions of this sub-genre of humanist epistolography and then focuses on what the letters tell us about Lipsius' relations with his students.14

The aim of this thesis is to conduct a more comprehensive study of the culture of recommending in early modern Germany and to examine the influences of humanism and the Reformation on the letter of recommendation. The chosen time-frame (1490 to 1560) corresponds roughly to the beginning of Erasmus' career and the end of Melanchthon's.

The correspondence of both scholars will figure prominently, along with an extensive selection of letters of their contemporaries. My study inevitably touches upon the broader issues of humanism and the Reformation. Hitherto, scholars have focused their attention on defining humanism and understanding the relationship between the two movements.

Following the lead of Paul Oskar Kristeller, who declared that humanism was "a characteristic phase in what may be called the rhetorical tradition in Western culture,"15 historians have come to regard humanism not as the Renaissance successor to medieval scholasticism, but as an educational movement focused on rhetoric and classical literature, and based on the curriculum of the studia humanitats - rhetoric, grammar, poetry, history, and moral philosophy. This new attention to the humanities, developed first in Italy, made its way to northern Europe in the late fifteenth century, a generation before Luther began his career as a reformer. Much has been written about the influence

14 Mark Morford, "Lipsius' Letters of Recommendation," in Self-Presentation and Social Identification: The Rhetoric and Pragmatics of Letter Writing in Early Modern Times, edited by Toon van Houdt et al. (Leuven: Leuven University Press, 2002), pp. 183-98. Morford states that just over 1% of the correspondence of Lipsius consists of letters of recommendation, although I suspect that only formal recommendations are included in that figure. 15 Paul Oskar Kristeller, Renaissance Thought and Its Sources, edited by Michael Mooney (New York, 1979), pp. 23-4. 7

of humanism on the Reformation, largely in response to Bernd Moeller's famous

assertion, "No humanism, no Reformation." Erika Rummel argues that ultimately humanism was subsumed by the Reformation as humanistically-trained reformers applied

their philological and linguistic skills primarily to biblical exegesis and less so to the

1 n

production of critical editions. Indeed, with the exception of such noted scholars as

Melanchthon, reformers concentrated their scholarly efforts on producing theological

works, commentaries and vernacular translations of the Church Fathers and

contemporary scholars.

Letters of recommendation provide an interesting lens through which to examine

the relationship between humanism and the Reformation. They display the conventions

humanists and reformers used to recommend people. The changes to these conventions

that occurred over the period reveal as much about the relationship of humanists and

reformers to classical antiquity as their personal and professional agendas as scholars.

While historians have tended to focus their attention on the educational or theological

contributions of certain humanists and reformers, my study seeks to elucidate how

humanism functioned on a practical level and how the theological disputes of the

Reformation played out in the daily correspondence of reformers. Letters of

recommendation reveal much about the academic and clerical job market, and the hiring

processes in early modern Germany. They draw attention to the ways by which scholars

influenced the opinions of their friends regarding other scholars. Moreover, they inform

Bernd Moeller, "The German Humanists and the Reformation," in Imperial Cities and the Reformation. Three Essays, edited and translated by H. C. Erik Midelfort and Mark U. Edwards, Jr. (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1972), p. 36. 17 Erika Rummel, The Confessionalization of Humanism in Reformation Germany (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000), p. 154, n. 5. For an For an extensive bibliography on this relationship, see p. 154, n. 5. 8 us about the social relations that gave them strength and about patronage in sixteenth- century Germany.

It is important, however, to note that the rhetoric of modern letters of recommendation and their sixteenth-century counterpart is generally different. There will be moments when we will focus on a set of recurring phrases, what they meant or how they were read. Letters of recommendation of sixteenth-century Germany also had somewhat different parameters than modern ones. The formal testimonia, which offer a detailed description of the recommended person's family background, character, lifestyle, education, work experience and faith, provide the closest parallel to the modern letter of recommendation. As we shall see, recommendations came in many forms: a passing commendation for the courier; a paragraph in a letter between friends containing a recommendation; the testimonia or iudicia addressed to an unspecified reader, as well as the prefatory letters, recommending the author and his book.

The first two chapters supply the social context of letters of recommendation.

Chapter one explores the role of friendship that formed the basis of letters of recommendation. Letters were written by established scholars to introduce young men to a network of scholars bound by friendship. These letters frequently included a specific request: that the recipient inscribe the name of the recommended person into his album amicorum, his list of friends. It was friendship that was often the chief motivator for a recipient to respond to a letter of recommendation. The second chapter observes a particular aspect of Renaissance patronage - the relationship between teachers and their students. Humanists and reformers frequently took in students as servant-pupils, and the co-habitation helped strengthen a letter of recommendation. In these households, humanists and reformers stood in loco parentis, performing many of the duties of their charges' biological fathers. Moreover, as hosts to numerous young men, they acted as their patroni, providing not only for their material welfare but also fostering their careers by way of letters of recommendation.

The next two chapters focus on the letters of recommendation written by humanists and reformers and explore the changes that developed over the course of the first half of the sixteenth century. In chapter three, attention is given to the rhetoric and purposes of letters of recommendation. The chapter first considers the rhetoric and style of letters of recommendation, which were written according to the guidelines prescribed in Renaissance letter-writing manuals and inspired by classical authors, such as Cicero and Pliny. The latter half of the chapter takes a look at the purposes for which these letters were written, namely for scholars applying for positions as teachers or editors, or to have their books printed. This is an important consideration since the purposes of the recommendation reflect the chief concerns of humanists: that is, the study of classical languages; the revival of classical style; the evaluation and interpretation of texts within their historical context; the restoration of classical texts, both pagan and Christian; and the application of classical ideals to education, society, and politics. The fourth chapter examines the changes to the letters of recommendation brought on by the Reformation.

Since most reformers themselves were humanistically trained, their letters of recommendation manifest the qualities characteristic of the movement. On account of the

Protestant Reformation, though, new developments were introduced both to the process of recommending as well as to the letters themselves. The Reformation brought changes to the job market and consequently letters of recommendation had to be written to secular 10 rulers and magistrates upon whom fell the responsibility of hiring preachers and teachers.

As a safeguard against recommending or hiring a potential heretic, reformers began personally examining the confessional credentials of those they recommended and duly noting their approval in their recommendations. Moreover, in keeping with the reformers' emphasis on the vernacular, mention of the recommended person's ability to "speak the language of the people" was added to the existing emphasis on Latin and Greek, the quintessential skills of the humanists. Finally, whereas friendship underlay humanist letters of recommendation, in the Reformation period, family connections gave recommendations added strength.

The final chapter takes us from the private forum to the public, from the personal letter of recommendation to the prefatory letters prefixed to the printed text. These prefaces functioned as a type of letter of recommendation and evince many similarities, both in form and function. Prefatory letters were written to recommend both an author and his message. Much like the personal letter of recommendation, they highlight the author's character, education, morals, and faith. Though prefatory letters are not letters of recommendation in the strict sense, they nevertheless influenced their readers in terms much the same as a recommendation. Just as letters of recommendation were written by established scholars to help foster the careers of younger ones, so prefatory letters were solicited from noted scholars to help endorse the publication of budding scholars, to boost the sales of their book and to demonstrate to the reader why the book should be read.

Humanists and reformers likened the letter of recommendation to a portrait of an individual. Their letters provide a graphic depiction of the young scholars they recommended. Just as some portraits in art galleries are of unknown subjects, while 11 others are named and familiar, so too will this thesis abound in examples of letters of recommendation for unknown and unnamed scholars. It would be desirable, of course, to know more about the obscure people, especially since much of the information about them is regrettably open-ended. There is no way, for instance, to determine the success rates of the letters of recommendation for them. They are not without value to the historian, though, since the words used to recommend these nameless people still add up to a typology of an ideal scholar or preacher. The words and phrases used to recommend people in sixteenth-century Germany parallel the artist's palette, an array of colours through which humanists and reformers provided a Bild of those they recommended. As we shall see, most letters of recommendation were hand-delivered, allowing the recipient to verify whether the textual portrait matched the real thing. On the other hand, many of the recommended people are familiar and well documented. In such cases, we will focus not only on the words and phrases used to recommend them, but also on the story behind the recommended person, on the social relations that underscored the recommendation, and the final outcome. Letters of recommendation reveal much about how humanists and reformers, in their capacity as patroni and patres, helped foster the careers of younger scholars by recommending them and their works to the wider community of scholars and reformers, who were bound by friendship and faith and who maintained contact with one another by means of letters. 12

1. Humanist Friendships, the Backbone of Recommending

In a friendly letter to the jurisconsult, Johannes Brotephus, written 7 January 1533,

Claude Chansonnette, a fellow jurisconsult, began with the stereotypically humanist rhetoric of apologizing for his own audacity even to have written a letter to an already busy man, pestering him into reading his own mere triflings. He hoped that Brotephus would take his actions in good part and accept his sole excuse for being a nuisance:

For there was no other reason [to write] than that saying rendered into Latin from the Greek: Amicorum communia esse omnia (Friends hold all things in common). But just as the bonds of friendship exist not so much for the sake of usefulness as for the sake of the joining together of hearts, so that community of all things should be measured not by external goods, but by the true goods of mind and heart. Accordingly, I did not want to (nor could I, even if I had wanted to; nor ought I, even if I had been able to) face so brazenly the distinguished celebrity of your name with an open heart, as they say,1 if there were any other society more steadfast than that of those who either share a common interest in sacred studies or are blood relatives.

Chansonnette's sole reason for having written the letter is the adage with which Erasmus begins his vast compilation of ancient sayings, the 1508 Aldine edition of the Adagiorum chiliades, a significant promotion from its position as the ninety-fourth adage of the collection's much smaller, earlier manifestation, the Collectanea (Paris, 1500). Erasmus justifies the move on the grounds that "it seemed good to place it as a favourable omen at the head of this collection of adages," hoping that it would set the tone for the rest of the collection, highlighting the themes of friendship and property which underscore the entire

1 Erasmus, Adages 2.9.54. 2 Adalbert Horawitz, "Briefe des Claudius Cantiuncula und Ulrich Zasius von 1521-1533," in Sitzungsberichte derphilosophisch-historischen Klasse der kaiserlichen Akademie der Wissenschqften 93 (Vienna, 1879): 452-3: "Nullum enim aliud fait argumentum, quam ex eo, quod a graecis sumptum latine dicitur: Amicorum omnia esse communia. Sed ut amicitiae nexus non tam utilitatum gratia quam animorum coniunctione constat, sic ea rerum omnium communitas non externis sed veris illis ingeniorum atque animi bonis metienda est; turn vero si omnium societatum vix ulla firmior quam eorum, qui et similium studiorum sacris et sanguinis aut adfinitatis iure coniuncti sunt, non volui, nee si voluissem potui, nee si potuissem debui sublimem istam tamque latissime patentem nominis tui celebritatem non obviis, quod aiunt, ulnis suscipere." 13

•a

Adagia. Margaret Mann Phillips and others have already drawn attention to the

relocation of this adage to the initial position as evidence of Erasmus' deep commitment

to friendship.4 Most recently, the adage has received the attention of Kathy Eden, who

argues that the idea that "friends hold all things in common" gave Erasmus the

framework for a novel understanding of the relationship between the classical and

Christian traditions. Erasmus inherited his understanding of both friendship and common

property from an ancient philosphical tradition that went back on the one hand to

Pythagoras and Plato and on the other hand to early Christian writers, such as Jerome and

Augustine. Eden argues that the Adagia "invites its readers to join a community where all

things are held in common" including, what we today would call intellectual property.5

By providing a collection of wise and pithy sayings of the ancients, framed by his own

commentaries and applied to the needs of a Christian society, Erasmus attempted to show

the inner harmony of the two traditions, both of which pointed to what he would later

term the philosophia Christi.6 Eden examines this common ownership of the intellectual

property of the past within the context of new print technologies of the period and

questions of copyright.

The adage, however, had broader cultural implications than the mere common

ownership of the intellectual property of friends, both ancient and modern, for it also

underlay the sixteenth-century culture of recommending. Friendship, after all, formed the

backbone of letters of reference and recommendation in early modern Europe, giving 3 Erasmus, Adages 1.1.1. 4 Margaret Mann Phillips, The "Adages" of Erasmus (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1964), esp. Part I, "The Character and Growth of the Adages" 3-165. For a brief bibliography of various scholarly studies of the Adages, see Kathy Eden, Friends Hold All Things In Common: Tradition, Intellectual Property, and the Adages of Erasmus (New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 2001), p. 3, n. 3. 5 Kathy Eden, '"Between friends all is common': the Erasmian adage and tradition," Journal of the History of Ideas 59 (1998): 408. 6 Eden, Friends Hold All Things In Common, 140. 14 them both their weight and authority and creating a sense of obligation between the

author and recipient to help out one another's friends.7 If friends do indeed hold all things

in common, then by the same token friends should also hold their friends in common, as

Juan Luis Vives reminded Erasmus on 14 July 1522 at the close of a letter: "Please give

my greetings to all your friends in your part of the world, who by the same token are my

friends too."8 Because of the vital role friendship played in effecting a recommendation,

especially for the humanist community scattered across the German Empire, young

scholars went to great lengths to fashion friendships with existing members of the

community, usually by entreating an established scholar to inscribe them into their album

amicorum, their list of friends. Each list, in turn, intersected with that of other humanists,

thereby forming a vast network connecting the humanist community. These friendships

were not necessarily intimate, but began as a professional support system of like-minded

scholars, from which something more personal could (and often did) develop.

The purpose of this chapter is to elucidate the importance of friendship in letters

of recommendation within the humanist community, with a focus on the letters of

introduction that were written to secure these friendships and inscriptions into the

recipient's album amicorum. What I propose to do is, first, to examine the problems that

flattery posed both for the authors of letters of introduction entreating friendship as well

as for the recipients who had to remain vigilant so as to distinguish a flatterer from a

friend; second, to explore the social function of the album amicorum and its importance

for humanists; third, to examine the implications of friendship for letters of

7 On the central role of friendship in humanist correspondence, see Florika Egmond, "Correspondence and natural history in the sixteenth century: cultures of exchange in the circle of Carolus Clusius," in Correspondence and Cultural Exchange in Europe, 1400-1700, edited by Francisco Bethencourt and Florika Egmond (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007), 124-131. 8 CWE 9, Ep. 1303,11.65-6. 15 recommendation; and finally, to discuss the influence of the Reformation on humanist friendships and networks. What I will demonstrate is that letters of introduction opened the door for scholars to form friendships that connected them to the larger humanist network, where friends, who held all things in common, helped one another out through recommendations. So when Melanchthon wrote to his friend Veit Dietrich on 10 May

1537, recommending the Polish bearer of the letter, Andrzej Frycz Modrzewski, who was heading to Nurnberg to learn German,9 he also added a recommendation for

Modrzewski's long time friend and travel companion, Jan Vinarius, "especially since nothing is more civilized than to love the friends of friends as well."10

Letters of Introduction and the Problem of Flattery:

In his treatise on letter-writing, De conscribendis epistolis, Erasmus reminds the reader, "Isocrates cleverly pointed out that an excellent overture to the forming of a friendship is to praise a person in his absence before those who we suspect will pass this on to others."11 Scholars knew that in order to gain a recommendation, they had to extend their social and academic networks beyond the confines of their hometown. While visiting Tournehem to pay court to his prospective patron, Anna van Borssele, Erasmus sarcastically advised his friend, Johannes Falco, on 3 February 1499: "Always put your personal advantage first; cultivate friendships for your own interest." The best way to do that was either to write a letter to some scholar introducing oneself (in modern terms: a letter of application) or to have a letter of introduction written by a third party (in modern terms: a letter of reference). In De conscribendis epistolis, Erasmus places letters

9MBWT7,Ep. 1901. 10 MBW11, Ep. 1902: "... praesertim cum nihil sit humanius, quam amicorum amicos etiam diligere." uCWE25,p. 182. 12 CWE 1, Ep. 87. 16

of introduction in the "conciliatory" class because it is through them that "we insinuate

ourselves into the good graces of a person previously unknown."13

As Christine Treml has correctly noted, a letter of introduction, with all its rhetorical embellishments, reads more like a writing sample, allowing its author to show

off his humanist credentials while seeking the desired inscription in the recipient's album amicorum.14 Take, for instance, the letter of introduction from the jurisconsult and

historian, Johann Krachenberger to Conrad Celtis, written on 13 April 1492: "I had

already made up my mind that if I had to write to you, I would write not in the usual

manner, but with exquisite ingenuity, as befits someone like you, and that I ought to send

to you a letter as elegant as possible."15 Likewise, on 11 November 1517, the seventeen-

year-old Johannes Alexander Brassicanus, soon to be crowned poet laureate by Emperor

Maximilian, wrote a letter of introduction to Michael Hummelberg, a humanist scholar in

Ravensburg, asking to be inscribed into his album amicorum. Brassicanus pulled out all the stops and wrote a letter filled with flattery and self-abasement, classical allusions and

quotations, written in fine humanist Latin, and topped off with an elegiac poem dedicated

to Hummelberg's brother - all in an attempt to be inscribed in Hummelberg's list of

friends.16 Often scholars also attached a sample of their own work, usually a translation,

as did Petrus Mosellanus, who included a sample translation of an unspecified text of St.

13CWE25,p.203. 14 Christine Treml, Humanistische Gemeinschqftsbildung: Sozio-kulturelle Untersuchung zur Entstehung eines neuen Gelehrtenstandes in derfriihen Neuzeit (Hildesheim: Georg Olms Verlag, 1989), p. 84. 15 Der Briefwechsel des Konrad Celtis, edited by Hans Rupprich (Munich: C.H. Beck'sche Verlagsbuchhandlung, 1934), p. 51, Ep. 28: "Proposueram animo, quodsi tibi scribendum foret, non vulgari modo, sed exquisito ingenio quemadmodum te, virum doctissimum, deceret, elegantiores quas possetn dare litteras oportere." 16 Adalbert Horawitz, "Analecten zur Geschichte des Humanismus in Schwaben (1512-1518)," in Sitzungsberichte der Kaiserlichen Akademie der Wissenschaften. Philosophisch-historische Klasse 86 (Vienna, 1877): 272-5. 17

Basil in his letter of introduction to Reuchlin on 5 January 1518. Euricius Cordus, too, introduced himself in a letter to Johann Lang in Erfurt towards the end of 1515 or the beginning of 1516, proffering at the same time some of his own poetry "for the sake of initiating a friendship," and urging Lang to take in good part "these triflings of mine."18

Corresponding with an established humanist scholar, however, made the applicant susceptible to criticism of his writing style, as Friedrich Nausea discovered when he found himself at the receiving end of Erasmus' advice in a letter written 8 March 1526:

So, my dear Nausea, since I know so well what a dangerous disease this itch to write is, my advice to you is to spend several years reading and rereading the best authors. When, with their help, you have developed a mature style, you will be better able to take the stage in the captious and haughty theatre of the world. And don't seize on the first subject, but choose something suited to your temperament and your powers. In this way you will gain renown - a little later perhaps, but more solid and lasting. If you follow my advice, some day you will thank me for having given it, and I shall congratulate you on having taken it. But if you don't, you will at least appreciate the deep interest which I take in your success.19

As with letters of introduction, the overall tone of letters of advice was supposed to be one of frankness, displaying the candour of a true friend. Here Erasmus is following the guidelines he himself had written for such letters, emphasizing that one should temper criticism with praise. In this case, however, the criticism is coupled not with praise, but with the announcement that he did not have "a flimsy pretext" for writing a letter to the magistrates at Frankfurt. Nausea had hoped that Erasmus would intercede on his behalf

Illustrium virorum epistolae Hebraicae, Graecae etLatinae ([Haguenau], 1519), Book 2, ff.z3r-[z4r] . 18 Epistolae Langianae, edited by Hermann Hering (Halle, 1886), Ep. 9, pp. 9-10; cf. Henning P. Jurgens, "Drei Jahrzehnte Korrespondenz zwischen Philipp Melanchthon und Johannes a Lasco," in Fragmenta Melanchthoniana. Zur Geistesgeschichte des Mittelalters und derfriihen Neuzeit, edited by Gilnter Frank (Heidelberg: Verlag Regionalkultur, 2003), vol. 1, pp. 147-162, esp. 152-3, where he discusses the first letter from Jan Laski to Melanchthon, 7 March 1534, introducing the bearer, Nikolaus Anianus Burgonius, Since Laski was initiating contact with Melanchthon himself, he adjoined a ring to the letter as a gift for Melanchthon. 19CWE12,Ep. 1673,11.7-17. 20CWE25,p. 189. 18 before the city council concerning the growing pressure on Nausea by the city's evangelical party.21

The trouble with letters of introduction, though, was the risk of flattery. Cicero, whose letters provided a classical model for humanists, recognized the risk in determining the genuineness of the request for friendship, and therefore advised in his dialogue on friendship: "Let flattery, the handmaid of vice, be far removed [from friendship], as it is unworthy not only of a friend but even of a free man."22 Erasmus, too, urged the reader of his letter writing manual to make a careful effort to "remove any suspicion of [it]." Writers of letters of introduction were frequently admonished to tone down their praise.24 When academic peers, on the other hand, wrote to one another, they still praised the writing style and scholarship of the other, but much more as a mutual academic pat on the back, an expression of the collegiality of the humanist community manifested through the networks of alba amicorum, as we shall see later on.25

In any event, expressions of flattery are very well documented, yet have received no attention as a rhetorical trope in Renaissance epistolography. What would

Renaissance readers even have considered flattery? There did not seem to be a transalpine difference to it, despite Erasmus' insinuation in his response to the two flattering letters of introduction from the jurisconsult, Ulrich Zasius, entreating his

21CWE12,Ep. 1673,11. 18-24. 22 Cicero, De amicitia 24.89. 23CWE25,p.203. 24 Cf. a letter fromMichae l Hummelberg to Heinrich Bebel, written on 13 November 1517, urging him to advise Johannes Alexander Brassicanus to "be more sparing in praising me, since I have no outstanding talent, as he joked learnedly about me/Sed moneas velim in me laudando parcior sit, non adeo ingenio praesto, ut de me docte lusit;" printed in Horawitz, Analecten, pp. 277-8. 25 Cf. an exchange between Ulrich Zasius and Wolfgang Capito (CWC 1, Epp. 15b and 15c). 26 There is no entry on flattery in the Encyclopedia of Rhetoric, edited by Thomas O. Sloane (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001). Cf. Jason Gleckman, "Thomas Wyatt's Epistolary Satires: Parody and the Limitations of Rhetorical Humanism," Texas Studies in Literature and Language 43.1 (2001): 29-45. 19 friendship: "Let us have none of that exchange of compliments with which scholars in

Italy habitually regale one another, and speak the honest, simple truth as one German

(germanus) to another," punning on germanus, which means both 'German' and

97 'sincere'. In his opinion, Germans were more straightforward and less prone to employ

9R flattery in their letters than Italians.

Flattery was most often associated with the court, where rulers were surrounded by what many considered to be a group of yea-sayers (assentatores) and flatterers 90 (adulatores): the courtiers. Humanists were well aware of Lucan's ancient advice: "Let •J A him who wants to be godly leave the court." Thus, when Capito underwent a career change in 1520, relinquishing his position as preacher in Basel for a courtly one as cathedral preacher and counsellor to Albert of Brandenburg, archbishop of Mainz, his •2 1 humanist friends besought him not to go because of that very association. Petrus

Wickram, then canon at St. Thomas in Strasbourg, wrote to him on 26 January 1521 to congratulate him on the move, especially for the positive influence that he hoped Capito would bring to the court, "unless you have become a different man among the • ^9 courtiers." In a letter to Oecolampadius, Erasmus bluntly reported, "Capito is the complete courtier, and is getting on very well." When the letter was published in the

27 CWE 3, Ep. 307. 28 On Italian humanist epistolography, see Frank-Rutger Hausmann, "Francesco Petrarcas Briefe an Kaiser Karl IV. als 'Kunstprosa'," in Der Brief im Zeitalter der Renaissance, edited by Franz Josef Worstbrock (Weinheim: Acta Humaniora, 1983): 60-80, and Helene Harth, "Poggio Bracciolini und die Brieftheorie des 15. Jahrhunderts. Zur Gattungsform des humanistischen Briefes," in ibid., pp. 81-99. 29 See CWE 27, pp. 135-7; Cf. Seth Lerer, Courtly Letters in the Age of Henry VIII: Literary Culture and the Arts of Deceit (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997), especially the bibliography of books on courtly culture on p. 208, n. 2. 30 Lucan, De bello civili 8.493-4. 31 See James Kittelson, Wolfgang Capito: From Humanist to Reformer (Leiden: Brill, 1975), pp. 57-60. 32CWCl,Ep. 72. 20

Epistolae ad diversos (Basel, 1521), Capito naturally lodged a bitter protest. The perceived corruptive influence of courtiers on resident scholars was deeply ingrained in humanists, and Capito was forced to defend himself against such libels and rebukes on numerous occasions.34 Other labels for the "flatterer" were Gnatho, Colax, Gelasinus and

Penulus, ancient literary characters representing the flatterer and parasite, whose names humanists frequently applied to their opponents.35

Having to distinguish between flatterers and friends was an on-going concern. For that reason, already in 1513, Erasmus produced a translation of Plutarch's How to

Distinguish a Flatterer from a Friend, dedicated to Henry VIII, in which he explains that

monarchs, by the very circumstance of their exalted station, attract a host of friends,

thereby making it "difficult to distinguish true friends from false," that is, from the

flatterer "who acts the role of a friend in order to insinuate himself into one's favour."36

In the Greco-Roman world, the relationship between friendship (philia), flattery

(kolakeid) and frankness of speech (parresia) was often discussed, with candour or frank

CWE 8, Ep. 1158 and note 6. Erasmus even included a fictitioussampl e letter of advice for someone forced to enter a career at court (see CWE 25, pp. 195-7). 34 Cf. CWE 9, Ep. 1374 and CWC 1, Ep. 102. 35 As does Capito, for instance, regarding Edward Lee, an early critic of Erasmus, in a letter to Martin Gertophius, published as the preface to Erasmus' Responsiones ad annotationes Ed. Lei (Antwerp, 1520), CWC 1, Ep. 54: "For whatever he is worth, he is a Gnatho, but he flatters only himself and agrees only with himself and attributes everything to himself alone, and cannot bear anyone unless they admire and adore whatever falls from Lee's lips even if it is imprudent." See also Jean Despautere's Ars epistolica (Paris, [1518]), f. Aii v: "These new formulas of greeting [i.e. the parasitically flattering type], unknown to any very learned man, were only then born, when the theologians, after the orators and grammarians had been thrown out, themselves began to administer the schools, by far surpassing every skill of Gnatho, Colax, Gelasinus, Penulus, and whatever type of parasite there has been, as attested by Desiderius Erasmus/Haec nova salutandi forma doctissimo cuique incognita, turn demum nata est, ubi theologi eiectis oratoribus et grammaticis ipsi ludum literarium administrare coeperunt, omnem Gnatonis, Colacis, Gelasini, Penuli et quicquid unquam parasitorum fuit, artem longe antecedentes, teste Desiderio Herasmo." 36 CWE 2, Ep. 272. For an analysis of this work, see Troels Engberg-Pedersen, "Plutarch to Prince Philopappus on How to Tell a Flatterer from a Friend," in Friendship, Flattery, and Frankness of Speech: Studies on Friendship in the New Testament World, edited by John T. Fitzgerald (Leiden: Brill, 1996), pp. 61-79. 21 criticism viewed as the trait that distinguished the true friend from the flatterer. The topic has recently received scholarly attention in a collection of essays, with particular focus on its relationship with Paul's use of friendship language in his correspondence with the Philippian church and to the concept of frank speech in the Pauline epistles,

Acts, Hebrews, and the Johannine corpus. Frankness of speech continued to test the bonds of friendship amongst humanists.39 In September 1495, Robert Gaguin, the most

distinguished and influential of the French humanists of the late fifteenth century,

chastised Erasmus for his effusive use of flattery in a no-longer extant letter to him, which Erasmus had written in an attempt to gain entry into the circle of Parisian humanists: "You take it upon yourself to furnish an excessive quantity of compliments,

by way of recommendation.... Take away all the pretence that lies in flattering words and

come with unveiled face."40 Similarity, on 5 March 1520, Oswald Myconius, then a

humanist teacher in Lucerne, wrote to Capito, expressing his admiration for him and his pleasure at having had the chance to meet him recently in Basel. "Far be it from me to

flatter you," he continues, but then explains, "... I say what my mind, which is very

simple, tells me to say," before proceding to ranking Capito second only to Erasmus in the study of the bonae literae and his contributions to theology, and thanking him for

37 David Konstan, "Friendship, frankness and flattery," in Fitzgerald, ed., pp. 7-19, esp. 10. 38 Friendship, Flattery, and Frankness of Speech: Studies on Friendship in the New Testament World, edited by John T. Fitzgerald (Leiden: Brill, 1996). 39 Cf. CWE 12, Ep. 1687, a letter to Willem Bibaut: "Two or three honest mentors would have done me much more good than many thousands of eulogists. I cannot think what benefit their excessive approbation brought me except to make me an object of envy." 40CWEl,Ep.43. 22 having taken an interest in him.41 Such frankness also characterizes Folly's monologue in

Erasmus' Praise of Folly, who at the beginning claims:

I've no use for cosmetics, my face doesn't pretend to be anything different from my innermost feelings. I am myself wherever I am, and no one can pretend I'm not - especially those who lay special claim to be called the personification of wisdom, even though they strut about like apes in purple and asses in lion-skins.42

Folly's frankness of speech, her "what you see is what you get" attitude, is meant to show up the dissembling flattery and sycophancy of people pretending to be scholars.

Flattery was most often employed as a rhetorical device in the salutatio and captatio benevolentiae, the first two parts of a letter according to the traditional five-fold division, a rhetorical strategy or means, as it were, of expressing politeness towards the recipient and of securing his goodwill. In her analysis of the use and rhetoric of captatio benevolentiae in the correspondence of the Cely family (1472-1488), T. S. Roura has found that the captatio benevolentiae occurs not only at the beginning of the letter, as was traditionally dictated in the original ars dictaminis manuals, but also throughout the body of the text.43 The same holds true for early sixteenth-century humanist letters of introduction, as demonstrated by Nikolaus Basellius' letter of introduction to Erasmus, where the captatio benevolentiae concludes the letter.44

Beginning with Petrarch, humanists rejected the rigid prescriptions of the medieval dictamen and advocated instead freedom and spontaneity and accommodation

41 CWC 1, Ep. 37. Cf. CWE 4, Ep. 560, Mosellanus to Erasmus: "You must also make some allowance for the warmth of my feelings towards you, which you can gauge fromthis , that in the course of seeking your acquaintances I have been ready to wear the mask of effrontery." 42 CWE 27, pp. 87-8. 43 T. S. Roura, "The pragmatics of captatio benevolentiae in the Cely letters," Journal of Historical Pragmatics 3 (2002): 253-72. 44 CWE 3, Ep. 391. 23 of style to the recipient. Melanchthon' s letter of introduction written on 23 March 1528 to Conrad Goclenius, begging to be numbered in his album amicorum, provides an excellent model of the polite epistolary exchange between peers, as suggested by humanist letter-writing manuals.46 Both Erasmus and Vives in their letter-writing manuals focus their attention on the salutatio, providing similar advice regarding a proper greeting, in imitation of the ancients who kept their salutation brief and were sparing in their use of epithets. "The greeting should not be tiresomely long-winded, or parasitically flattering, or pedantically affected," advised Erasmus.47 Both provide examples of epithets tailored to the social station, profession, temperament and personality of the recipient, but continue to remind the readers not to be excessive in their use, for a lack of sincerity in these polite formulas could easily be detected by the recipient and sound just plain silly.49 Humanists recognized the practical or literary function of flattery in the polite discourse of letter writing.50 Consequently, applicants made a concerted effort to embellish their letters of introduction while avoiding empty flattery.

Flattery reflected the unequal relationship between the applicant and his more

senior counterpart, whose friendship was sought. For that reason, letter-writing manuals

Charles Fantazzi, introduction to Juan Luis Vives, De conscribendis epistolis (Leiden: Brill, 1989), pp. 12-17. 46 MBW T3, Ep. 666. 47 CWE 27, p. 55. 48 See Seija Tiisala, "Power and politeness: languages and salutation formulas in correspondence between Sweden and the German Hanse," Journal of Historical Pragmatics 5 (2004): 193-206. Tiisala examines the ways in which power relationships between Sweden and the German Hanse were manifested, including the choice of language, conventional expressions of politeness, use of laudatory adjectives when addressing the recipient, use of adverbs to express deference or hedging, and elaborations in orthography. 49 CWE 25, pp. 50-62, especially his sample parasitical greeting on p. 53 and Juan Luis Vives, De conscribendis epistolis, edited and translated by Charles Fantazzi (Leiden: Brill, 1987), pp. 69-81. Jean Despautere repeats the same warning not to come across as a flatterer in the salutation and then recycles several examples from Erasmus' letter writing treatise in his Ars epistolica (Paris, [1518]). 50 CWE 25, p. 50; cf. Juan Luis Vives, De conscribendis epistolis, p. 23 and Tiisala, p. 199. Though, for the most part, a thing of the past in English, such formulaic expressions of politeness in the greeting when corresponding by letter are still employed by many other European languages, e.g. the German "Sehr geehrter Herr/Sehr geehrte Frau," or the Dutch "Geachte Heer/Mevrouw." 24 advised the reader to be modest in accordance with the circumstances and the recipient, as Vives wrote: "Let there be in every petition a sense of modesty (for whoever makes a request puts himself in an inferior position), but this modesty will be greater or less according to circumstances and individuals."51 Modesty typically expressed itself in self- abasement, where the author would praise the recipient to the skies, yet modestly downplay his own contribution to the humanities, admitting his reluctance to even write to such an esteemed scholar. Encouraged by Oecolampadius, Melanchthon wrote to

Capito on 17 May 1519, entreating his friendship because they were both striving to revive Christian literature and fighting the same enemy: "deceived sophists," that is, scholastic opponents of the bonae artes. He ranked the people involved in the revival of

Christian literature: Erasmus has initiated the movement by casting the dice, Capito and

Oecolampadius come next, then Luther and Karlstadt, and finally, Melanchthon modestly states: "I follow them, but at a long distance." Melanchthon knew where he stood at that time in the academic pecking order, though he did admit that it was his ambition to rise.

Oftentimes, though, the recipient would respond with as much polite and modest discourse, returning the compliment made through the initial flattery and modesty of the applicant.54

51 Juan Luis Vives, De conscribendis epistolis, p. 41. 52 See, for example CWE 3, Ep. 391, a letter of introduction from Nikolaus Basellius to Erasmus written some time around February 1516, "though you are a great scholar and I an ignoramus and a man of straw," hoping nonetheless that Erasmus would enrol him "even in the lower rank among your friends, that I may gain more courage for the future and write more freely as friend to friendan d as a pupil to his lord and master." 53MBWTl,Ep. 57. 54 Cf. a letter fromHummelber g to Johannes Alexander Brassicanus, dated 13 November 1517, in Horawitz, Analecten, p. 276: "I so applaud and congratulate you that I wish as much as possible not so much that you be inscribed in my circle of friends as I in yours. For if you think that it will be an honour for you to be numbered in my list of friends, truly I shall consider it a wonderful honour just to be given a low seat amongst your friends/ Ita applaudo et congratulor ut quam maxime, qui te non tam meo amicorum rationario, quam me tuo inscribi cupio. Si enim tibi laudi futurum arbitraris, te meis adnumeratum, nae ego pulchrum censebo me inter tuos non imo subsellio honoratum." 25

The Social Function of the Album Amicorum:

Flattery as a rhetorical topos in letters of introduction, however, would remain

empty rhetoric unless it served to achieve a particular goal. Despite official

discouragement, flattery was habitually employed in letters of introduction, primarily

because it served as a prelude to another epistolary topos that was commonplace - the

request to be inscribed in someone's album amicorum, his list of friends. "O write me in

the list of your friends!" pleaded Oecolampadius (in Hebrew) on 23 January 1519 to

Kaspar Amman, his academic senior.55 Later, on 5 February 1520, Otto Brunfels wrote to

Beatus Rhenanus, asking him to "inscribe Otto, as you say, amongst your friends."56

Christine Treml has recently written on the topic of alba amicorum in her important

dissertation on humanist community-building.57 She focuses her dissertation on the

biographies of 233 humanists who lived between 1470 and 1540. Her examination of these applications for friendship (Freundschaftsbewerbungen), based largely on the

correspondence of Conrad Celtis, Johann Reuchlin, Johann Cuspinianus, Joachim

Vadian, Konrad Peutinger, Willibald Pirckheimer and Christoph Scheurl, proves the

extensiveness of this way of making contact within the humanist community. She even

cites a letter from Luther to Cuspinianus, begging him to "place me in the list of your

CO friends." Like their classical models, humanists defined the act of letter-writing as "a

55BrOekl,Ep. 50. 56 Rhenanus Ep. 150: "Vale et, quemadmodum ais, Ottonem inter amicos tuos inscribito." 5 Christine Treml, Humanistische Gemeinschaftsbildung: Sozio-kulturelle Untersuchung zur Entstehung eines neuen Gelehrtenstandes in derfrilhen Neuzeit (Hildesheim: Georg Olms Verlag, 1989), pp. 81-98. 58 WABr 2, Ep. 397, quoted in Treml, p. 86: "Suscipe ergo et me in tuorum album." 26 conversation between absent friends," and admitted the virtue of initiating and fostering such long-distant, yet long-lasting, friendships.59

Beyond the rhetoric of flattery for the recipient, letters of introduction served a vital social role - inscribing new members into these alba amicorum. These, I believe, were not necessarily lists of friends in an intimate sense, but a notional list of humanist

scholars, who shared a mutual respect for one another's scholarship, binding a network of

scholars committed to the bonae artes, a community that transcended ethnic, linguistic,

social, institutional and national boundaries.60 Treml contends that the alba amicorum were a "recognizable principle in humanist friendship that helped to build the elaborate network of relationships amongst the new elite and served as a consolidating and

organizing idea for a community of scholars scattered across the entire empire."61

Humanist friends were fellow scholars one could count on for support when under attack

from other scholars, critical of one's work. Both Reuchlin and Erasmus successfully mobilized their own alba amicorum to orchestrate letter-writing campaigns defending the

cause of the bonae literae.62 Furthermore, friends were colleagues with whom one could exchange books and manuscripts, discuss the meaning of obscure passages, and propose reforms.

Treml, p. 92 and Judith Rice Henderson, "Humanist letter writing: private conversation or public forum?" in Self-Presentation and Social Identification: The Rhetoric and Pragmatics of Letter Writing in Early Modern Times, edited by Toon van Houdt et al. (Leuven: Leuven University Press, 2002): 17-38. 60 Lisa Jardine, Erasmus, Man of Letters: The Construction of Charisma in Print (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1993), p. 153: "The 'world' thus held together by the bonds of epistolary exchanges which affirm the 'friendship' of writer and recipient is one which is not equivalent to a single institution, or even a single nation. The published letter crosses physical and ideological boundaries, to link separated individuals with shared educational agendas. All their distinctive differences are overlooked; what is specified is the affection implicit in a shared project pursued with intensity - that most cherished of classical bonds (amicitia) which ensures communication and understanding." Cf. Eckhard Bernstein, "Group identity formation in the German Renaissance humanists: the function of Latin," in Germania latina/Latinitas teutonica. Politik, Wissenschaft, humanistische Kultur vom spdten Mittelalter bis in unsere Zeit, edited by Eckhard KeMer and Heinrich C. Kuhn (Munich: Wilhelm Fink Verlag, 2003): 375-386. 61 Treml, p. 82. 62 See below, pp. 28-9. 27

What we find in letters of introduction is the groundwork for the social phenomenon that blossomed in the mid-sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. In the early modern period, the notional "list of friends" became the actual album amicorum, a kind of scrapbook scholars would carry around, in which friends and scholars they would meet at home or while travelling abroad would write personal greetings and testimonies. Many included emblems, mottoes, recommendations and images.63 They became fashionable in the mid-sixteenth century and the practice continued well into the twentieth.64 At the beginning of the sixteenth century, the request was made by the author to be inscribed in the album of the recipient in a metaphorical sense, whereas by the mid-sixteenth century, one would get friends and scholars to inscribe themselves in one's own album in a physical sense. It must be noted, though, that not all requests to be inscribed in the recipient's album were about friendship per se, i.e. a professional assocation of like- minded friends of good will, especially when found in a dedicatory letter, which was usually addressed to some magistrate or ruler. The difference between the two is that the goal of the latter is not so much friendship or collegiality as patronage, that is, financial backing or official protection.65

Wolfgang Klose, a leading scholar of the album amicorum as a physical object, is wrong when he writes that alba amicorum "were not yet known to the humanists" and that "there is no mention or tradition of any sort to be spoken of in Erasmus," in his entry on "Freundschaftsalbum," in Historisches Worterbuch der Rhetorik (Tubingen: M. Niemeyer, 1992-), vol. 3, p. 472. 64 A vestige of the culture of the album amicorum still survives in North American high schools, where students get their friends to sign their yearbook, their (photo-)album amicorum. 65 On 26 December 1515, Mosellanus ended a dedicatory letter of his translation of some works of St. Basil (Leipzig, 1516) to Adolph, bishop of Merseburg and duke of Anhalt, with this plea: "Please deign to inscribe your Mosellanus in the list of those who are most dedicated to Your Highness on account of your virtues/Mosellanum tuum in eorum album adscribere digneris, qui tuae amplitudini ob virtutes tuas summas sunt deditissimi." Cf. Jacqueline Glomski, "Careerism at Cracow: The dedicatory letters of Rudolf Agricola Junior, Valentin Eck, and Leonard Cox (1510-1530)," in Self-Presentation and Social Identification, pp. 165-182. Glomski identifies various tactics which the early sixteenth-century writer of the Latin dedicatory letter used to approach patrons and win over the support of the reading public. 28

The topos of the alba amicorum was certainly not just a formality. The alba amicorum became an invaluable means to network throughout a community where friends held all things in common. Many of Erasmus' newly found friends mentioned that they noticed their own reputations increase on account of their association with him. On 7

July 1516, Guillaume Bude wrote to Erasmus:

I carry [your letters] around with me almost from door to door, because I think it good for my reputation that many people should be aware of my close relations with you. Besides which, I shall use your approval as a weapon against my detractors, if need arises; for I know that I have deserved to have many detractors, although whether I have or not, I do not yet know.66

The following month, John Watson in Cambridge admitted in a letter to Erasmus: "I have met many people who seemed to me to regard themselves as better scholars because they know you; and they thought more of me too for the same reason."67 Many scholars such as these came to enjoy the benefits of their association with men like Erasmus, whose own album amicorum included many names.

Having an extensive network of friends proved extremely beneficial for those seeking advancement or further recommendations. Given the strategically public nature of humanist friendships, manifested most notably in the published letter collections, scholars knew how to use such friendships to their own advantange. On 20 August 1541,

Melanchthon wrote to Veit Dietrich in Ntirnberg, recommending the unnamed bearer of the letter:

Young men know of our friendship, which I don't mind. For I want our students to notice and celebrate our friendship, as Pythias and Damon.... [BJecause adolescents know that I am loved by you, they seek recommendations to you. Thus, this adolescent, sent here by our Paul [Eber], wanted me to pave the way for

66 CWE 3, Ep. 435,11. 18-23; cf. CWE 6, Ep. 852, a letter fromMaarte n van Dorp, 14 July 1518, by then on terms of intimate friendship with Erasmus after their initial feud (cf. Epp. 304 and 596), which shows his anxiety to be known as Erasmus' friend in Basel and elsewhere in order to restore his own reputation. 67 CWE 4, Ep. 450,11. 19-22. 29

an approach to you with my letter. He is intelligent and properly learned, for which reason you should take him on.68

Here Melanchthon draws an analogy between his own close friendship with

Dietrich, his former student, and the proverbial friendship between the classical heroes,

Pythias and Damon. Cicero, too, often drew on the close relationship between himself and the recipient in order to justify his motives in making the request in the first place, and safeguard himself from any possible accusation that he is acting out of self-seeking motives (ambitione),69 Around the beginning of 1494, Willem Hermans wrote to Jacob

Batt "for the sake of inaugurating a friendship," mentioning their common friend,

Erasmus, and adding: "And anyone whom Erasmus loves, I must inevitably love also, for

I respect him so highly that I consider as deserving of all affection anyone whom he has

deemed worthy of his own."70 Consequently humanists deliberately mentioned the names of mutual friends as they networked their way through the community.71 In the context of

a letter of introduction, then, the applicant links himself to this academic network, and

identifies a common Umwelt, thereby assuring the recipient of his trustworthiness on

account his being a friend of the latter's friends.

MBW Ep. 2792 (summary); printed in CR 4.645: "Norunt adolescentes amicitiam nostram, nee id moleste fero. Volo enim nostras scholasticas amicitias conspici ac celebrari, ut Pythiae et Damonis.... [Q]uia sciunt me abs te diligi adolescentes, petunt ad te commendationes. Ita et hie adolescens, missus istuc a Paulo nostro, voluit, ut aditum sibi ad te patefacerem meis Uteris. Est ingeniosus et probe literatus, quare eum complecteris." 69 Cicero, Ad familiar es 13.5. 70 CWE 1, Ep. 35. 71 Cf. Jeremy Boissevain, Friends of friends: Networks, Manipulators, and Coalitions (Oxford: Blackwell, 1974); Manuel Castells, The Rise of the Network Society, 2nd ed. (Oxford: Blackwell, 2000); J. M. Nas and Antonia J. Houweling, "The Network Metaphor: An assessment of Castells' network society paradigm," Journal of Social Sciences 2.4 (1998): 221-232; For an extensive bibliography on "Social Capital", see Klaus Eichner, comp., "Literatur "Soziales Kapital,"", http://www.sozialwiss.uni- hamburg.de/Isoz/Eichner/Literatur/Soziales_Kapital/soziales_kapital.html (accessed 11 August 2007); Stanley Wasserman and Katherine Faust, Social Network Analysis. Methods and Applications (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1994). 30

One of the best examples of name-dropping comes from a letter from Peter

Eberbach, an apothecary, jurist and humanist in Erfurt, to Johann Reuchlin, written some time before 22 August 1513. Eberbach uses the opportunity to entreat Reuchlin's friendship by praising Reuchlin's campaign in defence of Hebrew scholarship and by mentioning the names of some friends they hold in common: Konrad Mutian, Georg

Spalatin, Heinrich Urban and Crotus Rubeanus, whom he calls "witnesses of [his] life"; in other words, mutual friends who can vouch for him. To ensure he has enough referees, he adds the names of two other mutual friends at the end of the letter, Johannes

Trithemius and Konrad Peutinger.72 This letter nicely shows the reciprocal benefit of friendship. As the Reuchlin-Pfefferkorn debate escalated, Reuchlin needed to demonstrate as much public support as possible. What a feather in the cap it must have been for Eberbach to have this letter included a few years later in the Letters of Illustrious

Men, a collection of letters by numerous supporters of Reuchlin, printed in 1519 as part of a letter-writing campaign, mobilized by the humanist community to show solidarity for

Reuchlin. In fact, one should read the Letters of Illustrious Men as a published album amicorum, a list of Reuchlin's friends who rallied together in support of one of their friends.73

The Letters of Illustrious Men, then, are not dissimilar in purpose to the coat of arms of the German humanist Crotus Rubeanus, which depict a portrait of Crotus flanked by those of twelve of his personal friends, all contemporary humanists. As Eckhard

72 Reuchlin l,Ep. 222. 73 Cf. the collection of letters compiled in support of Erasmus in his quarrel with Edward Lee, Epistolae aliquot eruditorum, nunquam antehac excusae, multis nominibus dignae quae legantur a bonis omnibus (Antwerp: Hillen, May 1520). An enlarged version appeared that same summer by the same press, followed by an expanded edition in August 1520 by Froben in Basel under the title Epistolae aliquot eruditorum virorum, ex quibus perspicuum quanta sit Eduardi Lei virulentia. 31

Bernstein has noted, the overall impression points "to the typical humanist form of a community, a 'sodalitas'." Such heraldry permitted scholars to announce their list of some of their friends to the broader community in the form of an academic genealogy, modelled on the illustrious bloodlines of the nobility.74 Published collections of correspondence, such as the Letters of Illustrious Men, played an important role in humanist group-identity formation. As Lisa Jardine states, they functioned "intrinsically

[as] an exercise in self-portraiture." Despite the benefits to scholarship of modern, critical editions of correspondence, Jardine is correct in stating that it can be misleading to disentangle letters from the overall narrative of a printed collection of letters, placing them in chronological order, for in so doing one misses their performance as an act of self-representation. As in the case of Erasmus, these collections often underwent numerous emendations and editions, as scholars deliberately sought to mediate a specific image of themselves or some other scholar as members of an intellectual community centred around a prominent scholar.75

The Implications of Friendship for Letters of Recommendation:

The dynamics of third-party letters of introduction or letters of reference are different from those written by the applicant himself, because the former were written between friends, or at the very least, academic peers. Consequently any flattery is really an expression of collegiality. Letters of reference took the initial letter of introduction, entreating the recipient to be inscribed in his album amicorum, to the next level, opening up new doors for someone to meet other scholars within the broader academic community. Friendship continued to underlie both letters of reference and letters of

74 Bernstein, pp. 375-6. 75 Jardine, pp. 14-20 and 147-74. 32 recommendation, giving them both weight and authority. What was initiated by the letter of introduction requesting inscription into one's album amicorum, as discussed earlier, found its immediate benefits in these letters of reference, where friends helped each other out by either recommending their own friends or effecting the recommendations of others. They were frequently written to introduce itinerant scholars who were passing through a town in search of lodgings and pleasant company to the local humanist sodalities, thereby connecting them to the broader academic community. They often took the form of testimonia and indicia, bearing witness to a person's merits or services, which scholars could display to verify their academic credentials when abroad. Some, however, just contain the simple request for the bearer to be shown the local sights while in town.

Letters of reference continued to serve many of the same functions as letters of introduction, as discussed above, including the request to have someone inscribed into the recipient's album amicorum. On 9 December 1514, Willibald Pirckheimer wrote to

Beatus Rhenanus, asking Beatus to introduce him to Erasmus, who was then living in

Basel and whose friendship he was "particularly eager to secure." He reminds Beatus that he himself had made his acquaintance via their "common friend Konrad Peutinger," and now would like to meet Erasmus via Beatus' recommendation: "Do your best, I beg you, to enable me to make friends with the great man; it will be the most acceptable service you can render me. Likewise on 11 May 1519, Christoph Scheurl in Nurnberg wrote to

Melanchthon, hoping he might use his authority to arrange for the bearer of the letter,

Gregor Schlusselfelder, to meet German scholars, especially Johann Reuchlin. The following year, Ulrich Zwingli wrote to Beatus recommending Jakob Ceporinus, a

CWE3,Ep.318. MBWTl,Ep.56. 33

"trilingual young man and (as far as we are able to tell) altogether learned and most keen on seeing you," with the hope that "you accept him amongst your friends. Through this recommendation, Ceporinus joined Beatus' album amicorum, and Beatus then arranged for him a position as corrector for Andreas Cratander, the Basel printer. Ceporinus' premature death in 1525 came just a few months after his call to Zurich as lector in Greek and Hebrew. Hoping to insinuate himself into Beatus' friendship, on 10 August 1521,

Melanchthon wrote to Michael Hummelberg, well aware that his friendship with Beatus was "long-standing and close." Just over a month later, Hummelberg wrote a letter to

Beatus, urging him to "sincerely and wholeheartedly love [Melanchthon] in return, who loves you so clearly and strongly," even quoting Melanchthon's request verbatim, "lest you think that I am just telling you a fable."80 As in cases where an individual wrote on his own behalf, so too an intermediary sometimes needed to be persistent to achieve the desired end, for Hummelberg was obliged to write a few times to Beatus.81 Not all letters of reference were successful, however, as Henry Bullock discovered on 31 August 1516 when Erasmus denied him the request to have his friend Edmund Pollard admitted in his household.82

There is a world of difference, however, between a letter of application, requesting to be inscribed in someone's album amicorum, and asking someone else to do it for you, as in the case of a letter of reference. The former allowed the author to display his own writing capabilities, while the latter relied on the existing friendship between the

78 Rhenanus Ep. 180. 79MBWTl,Ep. 159. 80 Rhenanus Ep. 213. 81 Rhenanus Ep. 233, a letter written by Hummelberg again to Rhenanus, 15 July 1523, on Melanchthon's behalf, who had earlier asked Hummelberg to foster his love for Rhenanus (see MBW T2, Ep. 276). As before, Hummelberg cites Melanchthon's plea verbatim in his letter, adding: "Do this so that Philip may know of my diligence." 82 CWE 4, Ep. 456 in response to Ep. 449. 34 author and the recipient. Why a scholar would choose one approach over the other is not altogether clear - such strategies were not discussed in humanist letter-writing manuals.

The letter of introduction is more personal, yet the latter carried more weight, where the flattery topos assumes the role of cementing an existing friendship between the author and recipient. Consequently, referees drew on that relationship, hoping it would add weight to the request, a topos common to such letters. The topos had a classical source. In a letter to Appius Claudius Pulcher recommending L. Valerius, for instance, Cicero wrote:

He is of my household, and one of my most intimate friends. He is unfailing in his expressions of gratitude to you; but he also writes that what would carry the greatest weight with you is a letter from me. I beg of you again and again not to let him be disappointed in that expectation.84

Therefore it should come as no surprise that humanists borrowed the topos when making requests, as in the case of letters of reference and recommendation. On 29 May 1521,

Capito wrote to Georg Spalatin, then chaplain and secretary of Elector Frederick of

Saxony, recommending the bearer of the letter, one Balthasar Hawer, whose father

Capito once knew. Since Hawer was in search of a position at court, Capito hoped that

Spalatin might use his connections to have him appointed there, adding: "Do so for my sake, at least. Whatever happens, please let him know casually of our friendship, for the sake of which you wish him well."85 To underscore the importance of friendship in letters

Der Briefwechsel des Konrad Celtis, Ep. 222. 84 Cicero, Epistolae adfamiliares 3.1.3; Cf. Cicero, Epistolae adfamiliar-es 13.6a.3-4, 13.10 and 13.16.3. 85 CWC 1, Ep. 96. Similarly, when Nikolaus Megander of Sitten wrote to Boniface Amerbach, some time before 1542, requesting him as "the Maecenas and asylum for all poor people," to procure a winter coat for the bearer, Antonius Frysius, "so that he may feel that my recommendation was of use to him/ut sentiat meam commendationem sibi usui fuisse" (AK 5, Ep. 2463). Cf. Der Briefwechsel des Konrad Celtis, Ep. 222, a letter from Johannes von Laudenburg in Ulm to Conrad Celtis, 25 July 1499, recommending Andreas Stiborius of Pleiskirchen, a licentiate in theology, hoping "that [Stiborius] might feel that my recommendation to you was not run-of-the-mill (ut meam erga vos promotionem minime sentiat vulgarem)," in other words, that a recommendation from Stiborius might be effective. 35 of reference, on 8 August 1534, Melanchthon wrote to Marcus Crodelius in Torgau, asking him to host some Wittenberg students and guests of Melanchthon, who wanted to watch the royal procession of Dukes George and Henry of Saxony through Torgau, stressing that, "if I find out that they have been deserted by you, I shall think that you have done the greatest injury to our friendship."86 Similarly, on 5 May 1539,

Melanchthon wrote to Mateusz Przybyllo, city physician of Wroclaw, recommending Jan

Krzysztoporski, who was on his way back to Poland, "because he thought that his return to you would be more agreeable, if he would arrive bearing some letter from us." He heartily recommends Krzysztoporski to Przybyllo and his friends, explaining that he highly regards a previous recommendation of Andrzej Frycz Modrzewski. That recommendation "opened up an approach for him to my friendship, after which I

R7 embraced him willingly on my own judgment."

Many authors of recommendation letters promised to return the favour made to friends when recommending an individual, by employing another common topos that the

"favour done to me is a favour done to you." This reinforced the give-and-take relationship between author and recipient that was formed when recommending. On 20

September 1522, Agrippa von Nettesheim wrote to an unidentified recipient, passing along the latest gossip concerning Luther and begging him for more, but adding also a recommendation for the courier, highlighting his language skills and background: "I pray that you will offer yourself to such a man as his patron so that he may recognize that our 86 MBW T6, Ep. 1475: "Sin autem intellexero eos abs te desertos esse, maximam iniuriam te amicitiae nostrae fecisse iudicabo." Cf. MBW T5, Ep. 1373, a glowing letter of recommendation from Melanchthon to Johannes Stratius in Poznan for Stephan Reich, his student, hoping that his recommendation would carry some weight and that Stratius would not think that it was mere rhetoric; MBW Ep. 3511, a letter to Camerarius, reporting that he had sent a letter of recommendation to Matthias von Wallenrode, the chief official (JHauptmann) of Coburg, not because it was necessary, but as a token of their friendship. 87 MBW T8, Ep. 2195: "Nam cum initio commendatione Fricii, quae apud me valet plurimum, aditus ei ad meam amicitiam patefactus esset, postea eum libenter meo iudicio complexus sum." 36 friendship is not just an ordinary one. If there is anything I can do for you or your friends,

I shall never shrink from it."88 Likewise, in a letter written to a friend of his in Basel, quite possibly Claude Chansonnette, recommending the bearer of the letter, Thomas

Gyrfalk, Agrippa wrote: "May you in good faith consider this same person recommended and grateful, and should you be able to confer any other benefit on him you will really be doing something for me and I shall pay you back." Letters of recommendation, like gift- exchanges, created a sense of indebtedness, obliging the beneficiary to return the favour at an opportune time, thereby compounding the reluctance at having to make the request in the first place.90

For that reason, many authors frankly expressed their unwillingness to write a recommendation, stressing that the applicant had extorted the letter from them by repeated and insistent requests, as did Melanchthon on 10 June 1522, in a reluctant letter of recommendation for Michael von Kreitzen to Georg Spalatin:

Kreitzen has been pestering me for an entire month now to write to you about his case, although he's never disclosed yet the entire affair. I only hear that he is looking into either deserting or changing some parish, I don't know which one. I have put off writing because I know that I do not have enough sway in affairs of this sort and do not willingly abuse either your goodwill or trust. Now he has finally extorted this letter from me altogether unwillingly, that I would rather dig [ditches] than write. If his request is fair and you hope to be able to achieve something, let him not feel frustrated by you.91

Heinrich Cornelius Agrippa, Opera Omnia (Lyon, 1600; repr. Hildesheim: Olms, 1970), vol. 2, p. 735, Ep. 23: "Oroque talem te ei praebeas patronum, quo cognoscat amicitiam nostram vulgarem non esse. Ego si quid pro te tuisque amicis efficere valeam, nullibi unquam subterfugiam." 89Ibid., p. 757, Ep. 52: "[QJuam optima fide eundem commendatum gratumque reddas et si quod aliud beneficium in hominem hunc contuleris, in meipsum collocatum esto et ego retribuam." 90 See Natalie Zemon Davis, The Gift in Sixteenth-Century France (Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 2000), especially chapters 1 and 2. 91 MBW Tl, Ep. 228: "Fatigat me integro iam mense Creytz, ut ad te de sua caussa scribam, cum nunquam tamen rem omnem exposuerit. Tantum audio de sacerdotio quodam, haud scio, deserendo an mutando, agere. Distuli scribere, quod et in huiusmodi negociis parum me posse sciam et tua turn benignitate turn fide non libenter abutar. Nunc tandem extorsit mihi hanc epistolam adeo invito, ut fodere interim quam scribere maluerim. Quodsi aequum est quod petit et per opportunitatem impetrari posse nonnihil speras, aequum est te dare operam, ne per te possit videri frustratus." Likewise, Melanchthon's reluctant letter of recommendation written m 1534 for the unnamed courier to Konrad Heresbach illustrates the unwillingness of many humanists to bother the recipient by the "trifling" demands of letters of recommendations:

This young man is demanding his inheritance from some priest there by you. He asked me to recommend him to you. I prefer by far to write to you about more serious matters and ones worthy of both of us, than about such trifles. For how often do I recommend to you futile cases of this sort? But give pardon for the times, for it is not of the human heart to refuse even this type of duty. Therefore, give him as much as your humane character demands.92

On 16 October 1537, too, Melanchthon wrote to Joachim Camerarius, recommending the bearer, Michael Rheticus, who, after three years of teaching and now suffering from

Wanderlust, had asked Melanchthon for a letter before leaving for Tubingen. "Although I do not willingly burden you with this type of duty, nevertheless," he writes, he hopes that

Camerarius can secure for him some sort of teaching position in the area.93 No wonder that Erasmus, in a letter to Pierre Barbier, 31 August 1525, recommending the unnamed courier, kept his request brief: "I shall not trouble you with a recommendation, but if there is anything you can do for him, I am sure you will be assisting a good man."94

Erasmus, like his peers, understood from experience how time-consuming it was to write such letters and did not want to further burden his friends with another favour to ask.

Referees had to select carefully the rhetoric to use in such letters, especially since many relied on their closest friends very frequently, as Melanchthon did with his former

MBW T6, Ep. 1466: "Hie adolescens repetit haereditatem a quodam sacerdote istic. Rogavit me, ut se tibi commendarem. Ego vero malim longe de rebus gravioribus et magis utroque nostrum dignis ad te scribere, quam de talibus nugis; quoties enim iam huiusmodi futiles causas tibi commendo? Sed dabis veniam temporibus, et est humani animi etiam hoc genus ofFiciorum non recusare. Dabis igitur ei, quantum tua humanitas postulabit." 93 MBW T7, Ep. 1958: "Etsi non libenter onero te hoc genere ofFiciorum, tamen te rogo, ut si eum iuvare potes, sine tuo incommodo, ne ei desis; quaerit discipulos, aut aliquam conditiunculam, cui par videbitur. hactenus mores satis modesti fuerunt, et in litteris quantum profecerit, oratio eius et versus indicant." 94 CWE 1, Ep. 1605. Cf. MBW Epp. 2041 and 3048. 38

students and close friends, Joachim Camerarius and Veit Dietrich, as well as his steadfast patron in Numberg, Hieronymus Baumgartner.

Despite the burden of writing letters of recommendation, some authors,

nevertheless, used the opportunity of recommending the bearer of the letter to introduce themselves, as did Tiedemann Giese on 28 March 1536 in a letter to Melanchthon,

recommending Eberhard Rogge Jr., the bearer of the letter and the nephew of Eberhard

Rogge Sr., then mayor of Culm and a trusted friend of Melanchthon:

I seem to be doing something no less novel than preposterous, if I, not even known to you by reputation, recommend Rogge to you, that is Tiro to Cicero. But I conceded not only willingly but also eagerly to the one asking for this letter when he was on his way to you, because I surmised that he asked for it not so much to ingratiate himself to you but more to insinuate me in the embrace of your friendship, trying to make you as much [of a friend] to me as he is. Moreover, since he sees that I love him as much as you do, I cannot but love the effort of this man attempting to facilitate and be the middleman in initiating our friendship.95

Giese, who had gotten to know Rogge as his preceptor over the past three years, praises

Rogge's intelligence and fine character, and does this as a means to sing his own praises

of Melanchthon. Giese then volunteers to back up any recommendation Melanchthon

may write on Rogge's behalf, but adds a final plea that through this letter of

recommendation for Rogge, he himself might be recommended to Melanchthon: "But

even if I am able to use this opportunity to write my recommendation for him in turn to

bring it about that I am made most recommended to you, I am afraid to confess that I am

MBW T7, Ep. 1713: "Rem videor facturus non minus novam quam praeposteram, si ego, ne fama quidem tibi notus, tuum tibi Roghium commendem, hoc est Tironem Ciceroni. Verum postulanti epistolam, quum esset profecturus ad te, non libenter modo sed etiam cupide obtemperavi, quod id eum interpretatus sum facere non tam ut ipse ad te gratior rediret, quam ut me posset amicitiae tuae amplexibus insinuare habens perspectum, quantus ipse apud me sis. Cum autem videat in se quoque diligendo quam non cedam tibi, non possum non deamare hominis industriam hoc conantis ut ad ineundam inter nos gratiam ipse medius esse possit." guilty in this regard, even of embezzlement. Similarly, on 1 August 1552, Melanchthon wrote to Peter Widmann, a medical doctor in Koniggratz, using the opportunity of writing a letter of introduction for the bearer, Wolfgang Mylius, a reformer in St.

Joachimsthal (Bohemia), to insinuate himself into Widmann's friendship. Mylius, a mutual friend of Johannes Mathesius, was seeking Widmann's friendship, whose skill in medicine and botany he had heard about, and whom he therefore wanted to meet.

The Influence of the Reformation:

As the Protestant Reformation spread in the 1520s, publicized mention of one's friendships often became a source of great anxiety and potential embarrassment for those friends, especially when the religious views of those in one's album amicorum were unclear. Over time, many friendships were broken and names were blotted from the lists, as religious differences drove a wedge between friends. In a letter to Oecolampadius,

Erasmus expressed concerns about the strains of the religious divisions on their friendship, after Oeolampadius mentioned their friendship in the preface to his commentary on Isaiah:

What will [my opponents] say when they read in your preface 'our friend the great Erasmus,' especially since the subject of your work offered no occasion for mentioning my name? ... So if you wish me to believe that your feelings towards me are such as you say, please delete 'our friend Erasmus' and keep your praise for another occasion.98

Ibid.: Ego vero si etiam queam ex hac mea commendatione hoc commodi suffurari mihi, ut vicissim ille me tibi commendatissimum efficiat, non verebor hac in parte vel peculatus me obnoxium fateri." 97 MBW Ep. 6516; printed in Hans Volz, "Neue BeitrSge zum Briefwechsel von Melanchthon und Mathesius, II.," Archivfur Reformationsgeschichte 29.3-4 (1932): 260-1: "Etsi non dubitabam, quin hunc virum Mylium et propter Mathesii amicitiam et propter virtutem amanter excepturus esses, dedi tamen et ego has ei ad te literas non solum, ut ipsum tibi commendarem, sed potius, ut intelligeres me quoque tuae amicitiae cupidum esse. Nihil tam est conveniens quam amicorum commnes esse amicos.... Spero igitur utrique hunc vestrum congressum suavem et iucundum fore ac Deum oro, ut iter Mylii regat et eum foeliciter ad te et rursus ad nos ducat." 98CWE 11, Ep. 1538 Introduction and nl;cf. CWE 11, Ep. 1559. 40

Erasmus himself made sure this letter was published in his Opus epistolarum of 1529 in order to distance himself publicly from the religious views and actions of men like

Oecolampadius. At a time when doctrinal boundaries were as yet unclear, an atmosphere of suspicion and mistrust arose. Overly sensitive scholars and printers expressed their misgivings when their names were not mentioned in the tributes to someone else's book, interpreting the omission as a sign of a falling out. For that reason, Johann Ruser wrote to

Erasmus in 1517, on behalf of the Strasbourg printer Matthias Schiirer, who had obviously felt that he was on the "outs" with Erasmus, urging the prince of humanists not to "blot him out of the roll of your friends,"99 something far from Erasmus' mind, as he himself claimed in his response.100 In 1526, Erasmus wrote to Hieronymus Emser, explaining why he had omitted Emser's name from the list of those who had written against Luther in the Spongia adversus aspergines Hutteni (1523):

But even if I had known it, you should not rush to the conclusion that I dislike everyone whom I fail to mention. In any case, we live in such an age that it is sometimes quite unsafe for me to set down the names of even my closest friends, so malicious are men's tongues.101

As Erasmus and many like-minded humanists were forced into the arena of the religious debate, theological differences pitted former friends against one another. On 4 May 1525,

Erasmus wrote a letter to Thiebault Bietry: "I believe I belong to that small minority who do not lightly or quickly abandon a friendship or bear a grudge even when they have been

The letter no longer exists, but Erasmus' response repeats Ruser's plea not to blot Schtlrer fromhi s list of friends and confirms his friendship with Schiirer and even embraces that of Ruser (CWE 5, Ep. 606). Cf. Allen Ep. 2069, a letter fromDanie l Stibarus to Erasmus, 18 October 1528, begging him "to keep me in the same place amongst your friends,wher e you recently placed me/Me, quaeso, quern inter tuos nuper posuisti, eo loco retineas." 100 CWE 5, Ep. 633. 101 CWE 12, Ep. 1683; cf. CWE 4, Ep. 459, a letter from Capito, reporting that people had been wondering if he and Erasmus had had a falling out since Erasmus did not make mention of Capito in his New Testament. 41

bitterly wronged on more than one occasion." Despite this claim, the Reformation

debate compelled him to terminate a number of his friendships, which had become a

liability to his own academic and religious reputation, including those with

Oecolampadius,103 Otto Brunfels,104 Wilhelm Nesen,105 Heinrich Eppendorf,106 Ulrich

von Hutten,107 Johann Eck,108 Konrad Pellikan,109 and Capito. When the latter eventually joined the Reformation cause after months of duplicitous manoeuvering between both

camps, he betrayed his old friend Erasmus along the way, who had once regarded him as

his intellectual heir.110 Capito's conversion incurred Erasmus' wrath and the breakdown

of their friendship. Erasmus concluded his final letter to him on 2 September 1524 with

the chilling closing signature, "Erasmus, once your friend in Christ."111 The breakdown

of many of Erasmus' friendships with humanists-turned-reformers was a far cry from a

more ecumenical statement he made to Marcus Laurinus on 1 Febrary 1523:

I dismiss no one from my friendship if he is a little over-inclined towards Luther, nor do I renounce the friendship of anyone if he is more than normally hostile to Luther, since each acts as he does from honest conviction. For so I interpret the case, both in a friend and in an honourable man.

102 CWEll.Ep. 1573. 103 Cf. CWE 3, Ep. 373, a letter to the reader at the beginning of his annotations to the 1516 Novum Instrumentum, praising Oecolampadius as his Theseus and Epp. 421, admitting that Oecolampadius was not as helpful as he had hoped. See also CWE 4, Epp. 520,11. 75-6 and 563,11. 38-43; and CWE 5, Ep. 797. 104 CWE 11, Ep. 1615, a letter to Brunfels, breaking off their friendship. 105 CWE 9, Ep. 1257, a negative letter of recommendation to Conrad Goclenius regarding Wilhelm Nesen. 106 See CWE 10, Ep. 1437, a letter to Conrad Goclenius regarding Eppendorf and regretting having recommended him and spawned such a rascal; cf. CWE Epp. 1371, 1565,1893, 1934 and Allen Ep. 2048 (to Louis Berquin): "Nunc mihi praeter Thrasonem ilium res est cum vipera, iuvene cui morbus et frontem ademit et mentem. Nee ullus est tam abiectus canis quin rebus sic exhulceratis possit laedere. Levius duco cum tota theologorum facultate confligere quam cum huiusmodi sterquiliniis." 107 See CWE 10, Epp. 1376 and 1378,1379, all negative recommendations of Hutten. 108 See CWE 6, Ep. 910, from Melanchthon, regarding Eck turning on Erasmus, despite having been previously recommended to him. to9 See CWE 11, Epp. 1637-40; 12, Epp. 1644, 1674 and 1737. Shortly before Erasmus' death, the two men were reconciled upon Pellikan's initiative. 110 CWE 4, Ep. 541. 111 CWE 10, Ep. 1485. 112 CWE 10, Ep. 1342,11. 748-53. Cf. CWE 10, Ep. 1356. 42

Nonetheless, terminating certain friendships became a necessary manoeuvre for Erasmus as he sought to assert his loyalty to the Catholic church against his Catholic opponents, a measure supported by letters affirming such loyalty from friends whose orthodoxy was secure.113 On 4 February 1525, Willibald Pirckheimer wrote a letter to Paul Phrygio, explaining that Kilian Leib, an Augustinian prior in Rebdorf, "no longer considers me a friend, since he was suspicious of my friendship on account of the gospel truth."114

Indeed, Pirckheimer's initial support of Luther's reforms upset many Catholic humanists, but he eventially returned to the Catholic fold in the later 1520s. Some listed in

Melanchthon's album amicorum also came to suffer the consequences of his friendship.

Although Melanchthon's approach to theology and reform was far more accommodating than Luther's, nevertheless the Roman Inquisitors prevented one Lelio Sozzini from visiting his father on account of his association and friendship with Melanchthon.

Consequently the latter had to use his imperial connections to acquire a letter of safe conduct for Sozzini.115

During the 1520s, when confessional boundaries were still undefined, more moderate reformers strove to affirm their loyalty to and maintain their friendships with men like Erasmus. The first extant letter from Joachim Camerarius to Erasmus, 30

September 1524, for example, was written out of concern that "there ha[d] been some change in [Erasmus'] feelings towards [him]," and to defend himself against rumours that he had divulged Luther's letter and Erasmus' reply regarding their debate on the will.

113 See CWE 9, Ep. 1299, a letter to Joost Lauwereyns, in which Erasmus boasts he has got letters of support fromnumerou s people demonstrating that he is not a Lutheran. 1 WillibaldPirckheimers Briefwechsel, edited by Helga Scheible (Munich: Beck, 2001), vol. 5, p. 306, Ep. 899: "Prior in Rebdorf [=Kilian Leib] non amplius mea utitur amicicia, quoniam ilia ei ob evangelicam veritatem est suspecta." 115 MBW Epp. 8438 (to Maximilian II), 8439 (to Johann Sebastian Pfauser), 8440 (to Sigismund II August of Poland). 43

And so he adds, "Forgive me, Erasmus: 'love is all fear and all anxiety'," a quote from

Ovid.116 Camerarius' teacher and friend, Melanchthon, also maintained his friendship with Erasmus, in all likelihood because as moderate reformers, they both strove to maintain the consensus of the church.117 Likewise, Stephen Gardiner, then secretary to cardinal Thomas Wolsey in England and just beginning his rise to prominence in church and state, wrote to Erasmus on 28 February 1526, introducing himself by recounting an amusing story, affirming his constant loyalty to Erasmus ever since their first encounter in Paris sixteen years earlier, when he had made a salad for Erasmus, who was then a guest at his master's home.118 Most scholars concluded their correspondence requesting the recipient to send greetings to "all the brethren" or "all our friends" in the destination city, often naming certain friends in particular, perhaps as a way of affirming their friendship and collegiality, first during the humanist-scholastic debate of the 1510s, and then during the Reformation debates.

The Reformation undermined the local sodalities of humanistically-minded men that gathered in various cities across Europe. The breakdown of certain friendships between humanists led to the decline of the local sodalities, those groups of friends and scholars, who shared in common their research interests.119 Certain members chose a new

116 CWE 10, Ep. 1501. 117 See Timothy J. Wengert, Human Freedom, Christian Righteousness: Philip Melanchthon's Exegetical Dispute with Erasmus of Rotterdam (New York: Oxford University Press, 1999). 118 CWE 12, Ep. 1669. In his hurried response, written 3 September 1526, Erasmus expresses delight at the recollection of Gardiner and his salads, and his gladness that the two have a patron in common, Cardinal Wolsey, and finally, requests that Gardiner forward some greetings to old friends of Erasmus living in England (CWE 12, Ep. 1745). 119 These sodalities slowly evolved into the Academies of Sciences that sprung up all across Europe in the eighteenth-century, complete with publications of their proceedings and scholarship. Cf. Treml, pp. 46-77. For literature regarding some local sodalities, see Harald Dickerhof, "Gelehrte Gesellschaften, Akademien, Ordensstudien und Universitaten. Zur sogenannten „Akademiebewegung" vornehmlich im bayerischen Raum," Zeitschrift fur bayerische Landesgeschichte 45 (1982): 37-66; Jan-Dirk Muller, "Konrad Peutinger und die Sodalitas Peutingeriana," Pirckheimer Jahrbuch fur Renaissance- und Humanismusforschung 12 (1997): 168-186; Hermann Wiegand, "Phoebea sodalitas nostra. Die sodalitas litteraria Rhenana. - 44 set of friends. In February 1524, Konrad Mutian wrote to Erasmus from Gotha, describing how their local chapter was breaking up: "[Justus] Jonas, [Kaspar] Schalbe,

[Johannes] Draconites and Crotus [Rubeanus] have deserted our circle and joined the

Lutherans." He then (mistakenly) reports that Eobanus Hessus "has taken my advice and repented," for Eobanus never wavered in his commitment to Luther and the reformation.120 Towards the end of November 1527, soon after the death of Johann

Froben, Erasmus wrote to Germanus Brixius, reporting that the sodality in Basel is

"scanty {yard) but candid." All that is left is a triumvirate: Beatus Rhenanus, Boniface

Amerbach and Heinrich Glarean. "These men cherish me with their reassuring words; I promise you will be most pleased with them all."121 On the other hand, Melanchthon's testimonia - highly rhetorical and embellished letters of recommendation, bearing witness to {testimonium) or giving an opinion (iudicium) about a person's merits or services, which the recommended could use when travelling about either in search of a job, room-and-board or further studies - attest to the fact that well into the mid-sixteenth century Melanchthon could still appeal to a sense of collegiality amongst "learned men," perhaps old friends of friends, who understood the importance of studying abroad, to help such students out. In the end, however, it was religious conviction that friends most importantly held in common in the age of confessionalization.

Friendship formed the backbone of recommending and continued to do so despite the disruptive influences of the Reformation on the network of alba amicorum. These friendships began with the initial letter of introduction written with the aim to be

Probleme, Fakten und Plausibilitaten," Pirckheimer Jahrbuch 12 (1997): 187-209; and Christian Wieland, "Universitas als Sodalitas. Uberlegungen zu einer Religionsgeschichte der mittelalterlichen und frUhneuzeitlichen Universitat," Saeculum 47 (1996): 120-135. 120 CWE 10, Ep. 1425. 121 Allen Ep. 1910: "Hi me suis alloquiis geroboskousi; quibus omnibus te fore gratissimum enguo." 45 inscribed into someone's album amicorum. It connected the applicant to a network of humanist scholars, which extended across the German empire and Europe. Because, as the ancient adage stated, friends hold all things in common, fashioning such friendships became crucial not only to one's own career development, but also to defending oneself against critics, as notably demonstrated by the letter-writing campaign mobilized by

Reuchlin's friends in his support. Friends helped one another out by writing letters of introduction and recommendation, both of which carried weight and authority primarily because of the underlying friendship between the author and the recipient. The

Reformation caused the breakdown of many of the existing friendships, forcing scholars to evaluate their relationships and possibly fashion new ones along confessional lines. As the 1530s unfolded, humanists and reformers found themselves recommending not only the friends of friends, but also the relatives of their friends, as we shall see in the fourth chapter. At the foundation of every letter of recommendation were the friendships that bound humanists together, forming a give-and-take relationship between the author and the recipient, obliging the beneficiary to return the favour at a given point. In the next chapter, I shall examine the relationship between young scholars and their professors and masters, a relationship that was formed in the household of many humanists, whose homes functioned as de facto boarding schools. There, too, the patron-client relationship had mutual benefits for both, and over time many of these developed into strong friendships, which affected subsequent recommendations. 46

2. Humanists and Reformers aspatres and patroni

In the spring of 1497, Erasmus wrote a letter to Christian Northoff advising him how best to embark on a scholarly career:

Your first endeavour should be to choose the most learned teacher you can find. ... As soon as you find him, make every effort to see that he acquires the feelings of a father towards you, and you in turn those of a son towards him. Not only ought we to be prompted to this by the very principles of honour,... but your friendship with him is of such importance as an aid to learning that it will be of no avail to you to have a literary tutor at all unless you have, by the same token, a friend. Secondly, you should give him attention and be regular in your work for him, for the talents of students are sometimes ruined by violent effort, whereas regularity in work has lasting effect just because of its temperance and produces by daily practice a greater result than you would suppose.1

Here Erasmus addresses an important component of humanist education: the concern to find someone suitable to function in the capacity of both teacher (praeceptor) as well as father (pater), the root of 'patron' (patronus). Both aspects are recalled in the German word for a male doctoral supervisor, Doktorvater, literally 'doctor-father.' This letter touches upon a fundamental aspect of humanist culture: the relationship between humanists and their pupils, a relationship that was cultivated at home and which often resulted in a letter of recommendation.

In this chapter, I shall explore the two vital relationships humanists developed with their students: that of father and patron. Both resulted from living together in the same home, where mutually beneficial services were exchanged, not unlike the apprenticeships of artists- and craftsmen-in-training. Much of the correspondence amongst humanists sheds light on the system of patronage that allowed scholars to pursue their studies and further their careers, as humanists habitually asked their friends and colleagues both to welcome young men into their homes and to act as their patron. As

'CWEl,Ep.56. 47

hosts to numerous young boarders, these humanists stood in loco parentis, that is, as

father-figures, both nurturing and educating them as well as chastising and

recommending them. The years of living together allowed for a stronger letter of

recommendation, providing sufficient time for the author of such letters to get to know

well the person being recommended and for friendship and mutual respect to develop. As

patrons, humanists actively sought to promote the careers of their students, writing letters

of recommendation for them in support of their job applications. If successful, the newly

hired men became valuable contacts in a network of people on whom the humanist hosts

could subsequently rely to have other young men recommended. Circles of influence

emerged around particular humanists by way of their students and guests, through whom

the patron could continue to exert influence after their departure.2

The practice of humanists acting as patrons inevitably touches upon the larger

topic of patronage, which has received considerable attention in recent decades from

anthropologists, sociologists, political scientists, and historians.3 The latter have not only

2 See Conradin Bonorand, Aus Vadians Freundes- undSchiilerkries in Wien (St. Gallen: Fehr, 1965); Helmut Slaby, "Magister Georg Calaminus und sein Freundeskreis," Historisches Jahrbuch der Stadt Linz (1958): 73-139; Karl Hartfelder, "Der humanistische Freundeskreis des Desiderius Erasmus in Konstanz," Zeitschriftfur die Geschichte des Oberrheins 47.1 [n.s. 8.1] (1893): 1-33; Theodor Wotschke, "Paul Ebers markischer Freundeskreis," Archivfur Reformationsgeschichte 28 (1931): 242-59 and 29 (1932): 18-34; Hermann Arthur Lier, "Der Augsburgische Humanistenkreis mit besonderer Berucksichtigung Bernhard Adelmanns von Adelmannsfelden," Zeitschrift des Historischen Vereinsfur Schwaben undNeuburg 7 (1880): 68-108; Christian Krollmann, "Johannes Poliander und sein Freundeskreis. Zur Vierhundertjahrfeier der Stadtbibliothek in KOnigsberg," Mitteilungen des Vereinsfur die Geschichte von Ost- und Westpreufien 16 (1941/42): 20-27; Johannes Sembrzycki, "Die Reise des Vergerius nach Polen 1556-1557, sein Freundeskreis und seine Konigsberger Flugschriften aus dieser Zeit. Ein Beitrag zur polnischen und ostpreuBischen Reformations- und Literaturgeschichte," Altpreufiische Monatsschrift 27 (1890): 513-584; Karl Schottenloher, "Konrad Heinfogel. Ein Ntlrnberger Mathematiker aus dem Freundeskreis Albrecht Diirers," in Beitrdge zur Geschichte der Renaissance und Reformation. Joseph Schlecht am 16. Januar 1917 als Festgabe zum sechzigsten Geburtstag dargebracht (Munich: Datterer, 1917): 300-310; Gunter Glauche, "Die Regensburger sodalitas litteraria um Christophorus Hoffmann und seine Emmeramer Gebaude-Inschriften," in Scire litteras. Forschungen zum mittelalterlichen Geistesleben, edited by Sigrid Kramer and Michael Bernhard, Bayerische Akademie der Wissenschaften. Philosophisch- historische Klasse. Abhandlungen 99 (1988): 187-200. 3 See Heiko Droste, "Patronage in der Frilhen Neuzeit - Institution und Kulturform," Zeitschrift fur historische Forschung 30.4 (2003): 555-590; Birgit Emich et al., "Stand und Perspektiven der 48 examined the pecuniary side of patronage, but have also shown that early modern patronage was "a flexible and informal system, based on the mutually beneficial exchange of goods and services."4 In sixteenth-century Germany, patron-client relations resembled those of antiquity, with an emphasis on amicitia, on having "friends in high places."5 Scholarship has tended to focus on these "friends in high places" who acted as patrons of the arts and sciences. Historians, however, have overlooked a more personal and fatherly aspect of patronage, in which humanists themselves acted as patrons of young men. These young scholars often addressed certain older humanists aspatronus, not necessarily because of any financial patronage, but because those humanists had acted as their patronus, much like a modern-day supervisor, and even father-figure in the early stages of their career. The term 'patron' denoted respect and continued to be used, even after the younger scholar, the protege, himself became an established scholar.

The Humanist Household:

German hospitality has a long history. Leopold Hellmuth has investigated the subjects of hospitality and right to hospitality amongst the ancient Germanic peoples, with particular attention to classical and Old Norse sources. He concludes that Germanic hospitality, in constrast to Greek and Roman hospitality, "did not create a long-lasting or even hereditary bond between the host and his guest."7 Any on-going relationships that

Patronageforschung. Zugleich eine Antwort auf Heiko Droste," Zeitschriftfur historische Forschung 32.2 (2005): 233-265; and S. N. Eisenstadt and L. Roniger, "Patron-Client Relations as a Model of Structuring Social Exchange," Comparative Studies in Society and History 22 (1980): 42-77. 4 Elizabeth May McCahill, "Finding a job as a humanist: the epistolary collection of Lapo da Castiglionchio the Younger," Renaissance Quarterly 57 .4 (2004): 1314. 5 Ronald Weissman, "Taking Patronage Seriously: Mediterranean Values and Renaissance Society," in Patronage, Art, and Society in Renaissance Italy, edited by F. W. Kent and Patricia Simons (Oxford: Clarendon, 1987), p. 37. 6 See below, pp. 76-8, for a discussion of this term in both ancient and early modern societies. 7 Leopold Hellmuth, "Gastfreundschaft und Gastrecht bei den Germanen," in Osterreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften. Philosophisch-historische Klasse. Sitzungsberichte 440 (Vienna, 1984): p. 350. 49 developed, he attributes to individual characters and the situation and not to the

o institution of hospitality as such. His study, however, does not go beyond the early

Middle Ages. The frequency of on-going relationships between humanists and their guests suggests a more classical than Germanic model for humanist hospitality, with an emphasis on amicitia, a friendship not only with those in high places, but also those within the realms of church and academia, who had good connections. It is for that reason that Erasmus, who understood the importance of friendship and alba amicorum, advised

Northoff in the abovementioned letter to fashion a friendship with his teacher. For it was within humanist households, those de facto boarding schools, that these relationships were cultivated on which many recommendations were grounded.

Gadi Algazi has recently written that it was in the Renaissance that traditional prohibitions against professorial marriage began to erode. A result of this was that married professors and masters founded households, which many students joined, expecting to find room and board, instruction and even patronage. This not only marked the gradual loss of importance of German colleges as communal frameworks for living and studying, but it also caused a significant restructuring of a scholar's way of life.

These households, where the teachers stood in loco parentis, were built upon a system of mutually beneficial exchange of goods and services, as typified early modern patronage, where, ideally, both humanist host and their servant-pupils should benefit from the arrangement. What developed in humanist households was a give-and-take relationship, whereby the boarders performed a variety of tasks in exchange for room and board, an education, and ultimately a letter of recommendation letter for a career in church, *Ibid. 9 Gadi Algazi, "Scholars in Households: Refiguring the Learned Habitus, 1480-1550," Science in Context 16.1-2 (2003): 9-42. academia, state or the world. The host, on the other hand, received extra income, but also

a team of pupils to perform a wide range of tasks - copying and editing of manuscripts,

correcting pageproofs, delivering letters, purchasing books, and reporting on the latest

news and gossip, especially regarding the course of the Reformation, as it quickly gained

momentum in the 1520s. Moreover, the humanist host gained valuable contacts in other

cities through the students whose education he sponsored and whose careers he later

fostered. The ultimate goal was friendship and the ability to place former students in jobs

around the Empire by way of recommendation.

Two studies from the 1960s chronicling the lives of some of the servant-pupils who lived in the households of Ulrich Zasius and Desiderius Erasmus, provide a window

into the households of both humanists and a sense of the joint responsibilites of both host

and guest.10 The correspondence of humanists supplies invaluable snapshots of the daily routines of some of their students.11 A study schedule for a Polish student, Adrian

Chelmicki, prescribed for him by Melanchthon in June 1554, specifies which subjects

Hans Winterberg, Die Schiller von Ulrich Zasius (Stuttgart: W. Kohlammer, 1961); Franz Bierlaire, La familia d'Erasme: contribution a I'histoire de I'humanisme (Paris: J. Vrin, 1968); see also Steven Rowan, Ulrich Zasius: A Jurist in the German Renaissance, 1461-1535 (Frankfurt: V. Klostermann, 1987): 73-4; and J. I. Catto, "Masters, patrons and careers of graduates in fifteenth-centuryEngland, " in A. Curry and E. Matthew, eds., Concepts and Patterns of Service in the Later Middle Ages (Woodbridge, Suffolk, UK; Rochester, NY: Boydell Press, 2000), pp. 52-63. 11 Cf. a letter from Adam Publius, a servant-pupil of Konrad Mutian in Gotha, to his former master, Heinrich Urban in Erfurt, written 5 May 1514, in which he relates an incident that had occurred that day. During supper, Mutian had told them a story from Pliny about the amazing intelligence of ravens, having been reminded of it after another servant-pupil, Vulcanus Drusus, brought one home. This Mutian concluded with a story from Valerius Maximus that the assassination of Cicero was preceded by a raven first dislodging the iron pin from a sundial before making right for Cicero and biting the fringe of his gown. Having told this story, Publius adds: "You have, esteemed father, the sayings of one day. We are concerned with such things and we entrust the rest to God," (Der Briefwechsel des Mutianus Rufus, edited by Carl Krause (Kassel: A. Freyschmidt, 1885), p. 415, Ep. 344); see also, CWC 1, Ep. 70, a letter fromFeli x Ulscenius in Wittenberg to Capito, 13 January 1521, which provides a description of student life in Wittenberg, reassuring him that "there is nothing to call the students away from their studies." 51 and books ought to be studied and when, with time alloted for eating, prayer, rest and leisure.12

Running a de facto boarding school was no small task and could be quite costly.

The going annual fee for boarders at the home of the juristconsult, Ulrich Zasius, in

Freiburg-im-Breisgau in 1505 was 26 Rhenish gulden for room and board and lessons, or

24 for just the lessons.13 Yet, as Steven Rowan has noted, fees seem to have changed

little when Zasius agreed to take in the young Italian scholar, Augustino Planta of

Lugano, in a letter written 24 March 1528:

I will take on the young Italian if he is ready to be obedient. I already have a young Frenchman at my table. Thirty gulden is the cost for room and board. In the winter he will have his own heatable room, which he will have to heat at his own expense. You know yourself what there is to eat and drink: sometimes plenty, sometimes sparse. Since I do not know him, he will have to give me a good pledge for the money. If he finds it a bother to live with me, I will look around and find him another place to rent comfortably. You know my household customs: he will have to go to church, live quietly, especially at night, and he cannot bother the other members of my household. I shall in all faith oversee his studies.

Money was always an issue, and so Zasius requested that Planta give him a guarantee of payment. On other occasions, humanists had to get involved in making sure fees were

12 MBW Ep. 7228 (summary); printed in CR 10.99-100. There is a German translation in Gttnther Wartenberg, trans., "Wie man lernen und studieren soil: De instituendis duobus pueris (undatiert). Ratio studiorum in Melanchthon deutsch, edited by Michael Beyer et al. (Leipzig: Evangelische Verlagsanstalt, 1997), Vol. l,pp. 102-5. 13 See the letter from Zasius to Sebastian Brant, 25 July 1505, printed in Karl Felix von Halm, "Beitr8ge zur Literatur und Geschichte aus ungedruckten Briefen," Sitzungsberichte der philosophisch-philologischen und historischen Classe der k. b. Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Munchen 1 (1871): 276: "Qui non propriis aediculis sed in mea domo habere velint XXVI florenos rhenenos, qui vero solam mensam meam sequi et lectiones, propriis autem domibus, propriis autem domibus agere cupiant XXIIII fl. pendere consueverunt." 14 AK 3, Ep. 1250: "Iuvenem Italum, si obsequi paratus est, ad me accipiam, qui alioqui iuvenem Gallicum in mensa habeo. Conductio XXX floreni sunt pro domo, lecto et mensa; propriam in hyeme stubam habebit, quam suis impensis calefaciet. Quae aesui, quae potui sunt, tu nosti aliquando piguiora, aliquando strictiora. Super pecunia danda necesse est quod idonee caveat, cum eum non noscam. Quod si gravate ferret aput me habitare, videbo (simul hoc resciero), quo gentium commode conduci possit. Morem meum nosti; nam cogitur ecclesiam visitare, domi (maxime noctu) manere, familiam meam non ledere, et si quae sunt similia. Studium autem omni ex fideimpartiar. " I have slightly altered the translation provided in Rowan, p. 73. 52 paid by the negligent students whom they had recommended or for whom they had found lodgings. On 29 May 1521, for instance, Petrus Mosellanus wrote to apatronus of his,

Johann Hesse, then cathedral preacher in Wroclaw, regarding the finances of a student whom Hesse had recommended to Mosellanus the previous year. Mosellanus had, in turn, arranged for this student, Johann Seidlitz, to live in the home of Andreas Camitianus, a friend of Mosellanus and later rector of the University of Leipzig. The boy, it seems, had been quite a financial burden to Camitianus, costing him over 40 gulden a year, just for

"food, drink, clothing, books and medicine." Since Mosellanus had recommended the boy to Camitianus, he felt obliged to make sure Seidlitz's father paid off the debt. The fact that Seidlitz had "an incredible wild side," and did not seem interested in school, probably did not improve his situation.15 Given the burden of running a boarding school, especially having to ensure that fees were paid, it is no wonder that Melanchthon lamented the miserable state of scholarship and the lack of supporting funds in a letter written in the mid-1520s addressed to Georg Spalatin, secretary of Frederick the Wise, elector of Saxony, and later court preacher. Spalatin used his influence to promote the university reform demanded by Luther and Melanchthon.

But I run a boarding school for the sake of your public affairs. For it would be awful if there were no teacher here to whom the boys from abroad could safely be sent. But no one of that host of teachers besides me and [Johannes] Longicampianus runs a boarding school; or if he does, it is only because of me. A good part of the masters shy away from the great burden; others are turned off by the low pay of teaching children. One in how many has the means of [running] a public school? Finally, the great arrogance of the majority of lecturers, and their slothfulness I often find depressing. Nor is there much of a return from private lectures or efforts in this poor harvest and it is difficult to bear the expense, while I avoid shabbiness, which is very alien to my nature and character.

15 CR 1.522-3: "In causa est adolescentis incredibilis ferocia: quam frangere, quando flecti non potest, saepe frustra conati sumus multi. Breviter, ut est adolescens egregie ingeniosus, sic indomitus." 53

The last line suggests that even though Melanchthon did not make much money from teaching students, there was nevertheless a certain living standard, which he was unwilling to forego. He continues describing his diligence and frugality - "my wife hasn't had new clothes since we've been married (nulla nova vestis uxori, quandiu habui, empta est)" - and lamenting that he will not have anything to bequeath to his children apart from his name and reputation.16 Given that running a boarding school did not offer good financial return, it was for Melanchthon clearly a labour of love, motivated by his commitment to teach.

Melanchthon frequently wrote letters to his friends, requesting them to welcome yet another student into their household. Given the imposition placed upon the recipient,

Melanchthon often mentioned the nuisance and sense of obligation that underscored each request, as he did in a letter to his friend and former student in Niirnberg, Veit Dietrich, dated 19 May 1538. The letter was written on behalf of the courier, Hieronymus von

Hirnheim, a Wittenberg student for the past three years, who at first was going to head back to his hometown, but had decided to stay behind in Nurnberg and needed a patron there:

Although, now and then, I fear that you do not take to heart these recommendations, which I am in the habit of giving to you on behalf of our guests, I reckon nevertheless that you do not turn down learned and good men. I do not recommend someone just to be an expense to you, but I send you learned and good men, who desire to have there [in Nurnberg] aproxenos, as they used to call it, a patron, as it were. For I believe that all my [proteges] are your concern as

MBW T2, Ep. 366: "Domestican vero scholam publicae vestrae rei caussa habeo. Nam turpe esset neminem hie praeceptorem existere ad quern pueri tuto mitti possent peregre. Nemo vero praeter me et Longicampianum ex ilia turba docentium domi ludum habet; aut si quis habet, me autore habet. Bona pars magistrorum absterretur oneris magnitudine; alios pudet sordidi muneris docendorum puerorum. Scholae publicae quotus quisque rationem habet? Denique tanta est in lectorum turba superbia, tanta inertia, ut me saepe pigeat vivere. Neque vero ex privatis praelectionibus aut laboribus in hac annonae caritate multum redit, et sumptus aegre tolero, dum vito sordes, quae a mea natura atque ingenio sunt alienissimae." Cf. Erasmus' similar comments about his financial situation in 1523 in a letter to Johann von Botzheim, in which he explains that his character "will not tolerate meanness and squalor," CWE 9, Ep. 1341 A, 1. 1765. 54

well.17

Despite the imposition of such requests, the payoffs were meant to be mutual, as we shall see later on. The priority that humanists placed on finding homes for young men, either

1 8 as students or as apprentices, is evident by the sheer number of such requests in humanist correspondence.19 Such frequent requests initiated a process by which young scholars were introduced to humanist pedagogy and culture, cultivated in the bonae artes, and then recommended to the respublica literaria in due time.

Though Erasmus, as earlier mentioned, had advised Christian Northoff to choose the most learned teacher he could find, normally young men were placed in a household by a third-party request. The requests came from kings, princes, noblemen, court officials, city councils,21 friends and fellow humanists. Most of the students concerned fell into three categories. The first comprised the poor in need of a home and education.

For instance, on 27 January 1530, Capito wrote to Oecolampadius asking him to find a

17 MBW T8, Ep. 2041: "Etsi interdum vereor, quo animo accipias commendationes, quas ad te soleo hospitibus nostris dare, tamen opinor te non gravatim excipere doctos et bonos viros. Nee ego quenquam ita commendo tibi ut sumptui sit; sed homines doctos et bonos, cupientes istic habere aliquem - ut vocabant olim -proxenon et quasi patronum ad te mitto. Meos enim omnes tibi quoque curae esse statuo." 18 See the Capito-Zwingli exchange, CWC 2, Epp. 256,258, 267, 271-5, and 282, regarding the search and placement of a young man who wanted to be an apprentice to a pharmacist, for whom Capito acted as guarantor. 9 See Melanchthon in seinen Schiilern, edited by Heinz Scheible (Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 1997), a collection of essays, each focuses on the influence of Melanchthon on a particular student of his; and Martin H. Jung, "Pietas et eruditio. Philipp Melanchthon als religiQser Erzieher der Studenten," Theologische Zeitschrift 56 (2000): 36-49. 20 See MBW T7, Ep. 1848, a letter fromDuk e Albert of Prussia to Melanchthon, 18 February 1537, recommending the bearers, Christoph Albrecht von Kunheim, Georg von TruchseB and Georg Venediger, asking him to arrange a preceptor for their studies in Wittenberg; MBW T8, Ep. 2177, a letter, 2 April 1539, from Albert of Prussia recommending two noblemen, Karl and Georg Gera, his stipendiaries, who are going to study in Wittenberg, and asking Melanchthon if they can study with him in his home; WABr 9, Ep. 3456; MBW Ep. 2399,21 March 1540, Duke Albert to Melanchthon and Luther, recommending the sons of Georg von Kunheim and Christoph von Portugal, Erhard von Kunheim and Lorenz von Portugal respectively, for accommodations at the home of Christoph Jonas. 21 See MBW T7, Ep. 1800, for example, a letter from the city council of GQrlitz to Melanchthon written on 27 October 1536, addressing him as "a highly learned man, and an especially favourable friendan d patron {achtbar hochgelahrter Herr, besonders giinstiger Freund und Forderer)," and asked him to arrange a good preceptor for the courier, Bonaventura Roseler, the son of the mayor of G8rlitz. 55 place with a "hero" for a poor, but promising and obedient seventeen-year-old student of his.22 Unable to find a "hero," Oeocolampadius wrote back the following week, agreeing to take the youth on himself and give him the chance to attend some of his lectures and sermons in exchange for domestic duties.23 In the second category were the students already financially supported by a stipend from a city council or some financial patron, a

Maecenas and hero, as they were called.24 Finally there were the sons of noblemen, whose fees subsidized the education of the poorer guests. In the case of the wealthy students, the dynamics of the relationship between host and guest were different, because there the teacher found himself in the awkward and humbling role of being both patron to and patronized by such well-off students. The teacher frequently rewarded them with a dedicatory epistle to one of their works. One just has to see the coats of arms in the

Melanchthonhaus in Wittenberg of numerous noble families, whose sons lived with and studied under Melanchthon, to appreciate the debt many humanists owed to such guests.

Given the vast number of such requests, it is surprising how few responses can be found in humanist correspondence, making it difficult to determine their success rate.

Such information can only be gathered or inferred from remarks and clues in the correspondence of humanists. In a letter to Marcus Crodelius in Torgau, written on 29

October 1544, Melanchthon states that both he and Bleikard Sindringer thank Crodelius for teaching Sindringer's son and for having taken him on with tender love (philostorgia).

They urge him to continue guiding, teaching and overseeing the son.25 Requests that were

22 BrOek 2, pp. 414-5, no. 722; CWC 2, Ep. 401 (summary). 23 BrOek 2, pp. 415-7, no. 723; CWC 2, Ep. 402 (summary). 24 For an examination of stipends and educational grants for students at the University of Wittenberg, see Andreas GOBner, Die Studenten an der Universitat Wittenberg: Studien zur Kulturgeschichte des studentischen Alltags undzum Stipendienwesen in der zweiten Htilfte des 16. Jahrhunderts (Leipzig: Evangelische Verlag, 2003). 25 MBW Ep. 3720 (summary); printed in CR 5.521. 56 followed through seemed to have been effected on the basis of existing friendships as well as a sense of duty. Who could turn down such requests, especially given that it was

Homer who had said that one should "treat a guest and a suppliant as though he were one's own brother."26 On 7 August 1559, Melanchthon paraphrased this Homeric line as

"wise men should be treated as guests in place of brothers {fratrum loco sapientes hospites habendos esse)" in a letter to Jakob Bording in Copenhagen, recommending the bearers, Ulrich Mordeisen, a member of Duke August of Saxony's entourage, and his companion, Franz Kram, in the hope that Bording would take the time to befriend them both.27

In his excellent study of Erasmus' household and description of the manifold duties of his numerous servant-pupils, Franz Bielaire includes an edition of a section of

Gilbert Cousin's On one's household, or, On the role of servants?* which prescribes the give-and-take nature of the relationship between patron and servant:

The services depend a great deal on good will, the one well deserved and the other well earned. Then, from the start, each party should be accommodating to the other, to the point that feelings of mutual good will may develop. For many a friendship has been broken before one got to know the other. Many servants who do not give you a good first impression, will please you on closer inspection. Two things contribute to that mutual good will: on the one hand the agreeableness of masters and their ability to put up with the smaller infractions of their servants; on the other hand, the deference of the servants.29

Cousin, who was Erasmus' servant-pupil from 1531-35 seems to recall his time as a positive learning experience: "For so many years I was kept from inappropriate

26 Homer, Odyssey 8.755-6. 27 MBW Ep. 9020 (summary); printed in CR 9.198. 28 "Oiketes, sive de officio famulorum" from Gilbert! Cognati Nozerini opera (Basel, 1562), vol. 1, pp. 219-223, quoted in Bierlaire, p. 113. 29 Ibid., p. 115: "Quorum [officiorum] primum est, ut uterque in alterum benevolum animum suscipiat, ille benemerendi, hie demerendi. Magna pars officiorum est bona voluntas. Dein ut initio uterque alter sese accommodet, donee ex mutua notitia coeat benevolentia. Inter multos enim dissilit amicitia priusquam alter alteri sit cognitus. Multi prima specie displicent, qui proprius inspecti placent. Ad id conducet ex una parte dominorum comitas, et ad leviores lapsus conniventia; ex altera famulorum obsecundatio." 57 friendships; for so many years I had good room and board, for so many years I lived in honourable company; I saw the characters of men; I learned many things; I became known to good men; I put off boorishness."30 Cousin does not devote much attention to the actual tasks of servant-pupils but rather focusses on the attitudes that the patron and servants should have towards one another. Patrons should put up with the minor faults and infractions of their servants, and correct them over time, but dismiss servants only for major offences, such as theft and adultery. While servant-pupils were often obliged to perform a wide variety of services, be it cooking, cleaning, copying manuscripts, conveying messages or delivering letters, it is important to keep in mind that not all servants were pupils, and not all pupils were servants. Some were hired simply as famuli, servants, who performed some of the more menial tasks around the house, such as cooking, cleaning, picking up provisions and emptying chamberpots. This was especially true for the households of unmarried scholars, such as Mutian, Erasmus and Zasius.31 It seems that most married professors "accorded their wives the role of running their household and taking care of their material needs."32

In his examination of the servants of Erasmus, Bierlaire outlines the many duties performed by these servant-pupils, including acting as copyists, secretaries, collators, copy-editors, translators, trusted couriers and messengers. While the students gained invaluable experience from copying manuscripts and helping as copy-editors and proofreaders to put out the editions their hosts were working on, the humanists themselves recognized the indispensable service their students provided. For instance, in

30 Ibid., p. 118: "Tot annis semotus fui ab improbo contubernio, tot annis tecto ciboque sum bene habitus, tot annis vixi in honesto contubernio, vidi mores hominum, multa didici, innotui bonis, exui mores agrestes." 31 On opposition to professorial marriage by humanists, see Algazi, pp. 16-7. 32 Algazi, p. 24. 58 his Apologia qua respondet invectivis Eduardi Lei, Erasmus credits the contributions made by his servant-pupils, who had aided him in editing his Novum Testamentum:

If I had to declare the names of all from whose advice this edition derived some benefit, I would have had to give an honourable mention to my assistants, to whom I gave the task of restoring order in the annotations or occasionally of comparing the Greek with the Latin.33

When asking a colleague to take someone into his home, Melanchthon would sometimes employ a particular Greek word and ask the recipient to be an ergodioktes, a taskmaster (in modern terms: a supervisor). The context suggests that Melanchthon means for the recipient to supervise a young scholar's studies. For instance, on 22 July

1537, he wrote to Georg Spalatin in Altenburg, agreeing to see to it that the young man, whom Spalatin had recommended and sent to him, get a teacher [emendatorem scriptorum] and a "taskmaster" (ergodioktes). Since the young man, he notes, was

"already experienced in grammar," he did not need a "domestic teacher," but that "his expenses should be taken into account." What Melanchthon probably means is that the young man already had a basic education and was ready for more advanced studies, for he himself promises to "inspect his studies," in order to prove to Spalatin that all his students are very dear to him.34 Elsewhere, on 19 March 1556, Melanchthon wrote to

Georg Agricola in Amberg, recommending Sebastian Ering, Agricola's relative, wishing

Agricola to be his ergodioktes, should Ering keep up his studies with Agricola.

Though ergodioktes was meant to be a benign designation, it seems that some humanists were quite the slave-drivers, as is evident from the experience of poor Conrad

33 CWE 72, p. 23. 34 MBW T7, Ep. 1921: "Curabo ut adolescens hue a te missus habeat emendatorem scriptorum kai ergodiokten, nam domestico praeceptore non habet opus, cum iam calleat grammaticen, et sit habenda sumtuum ratio. Inspiciam eius studia et ipse; volo enim tibi persuasissimum esse, tuos omnes mihi carissimos esse." 35 MBW Ep. 7752 (summary); printed in CR 8.697: "Commendo tibi Sebastianum, et te, si labores scholasticos tecum sustinebit, volo ergodiokten esse." 59

Gesner. Already in a desperate financial situation in 1529, the fourteen-year-old Gesner had written a letter to his godfather, Zwingli, appealing to the reformer for aid. Zwingh granted the request, but the stipend was lost in the confusion after Zwingli's death at the battle at Kappel in 1531. On 15 June 1532, Oswald Myconius, in whose household

Gesner had lived from 1526 to 1529, wrote to Capito in Strasbourg, asking him to take in

Gesner, and explaining the miserable situation of Gesner: first of all, Gesner's father, like

Zwingli, had been killed in the battle of Kappel in 1531, leaving his mother and many children, several of whom had already died from the plague. Secondly, he had been living in the household of Johann Jakob Amman since 1529, but Amman could no longer maintain his young charge, because after the defeat of the evangelicals at Kappel, the

Zurich magistrates had compelled him, as a canon, to send money each week to help pay the salaries of rural priests, who had been forced into exile. Having laid out the miserable state of Gesner's affairs, he thus writes a glowing recommendation:

There is no reason why I should describe his character at great length; you will soon see what type of nature he has. For my part, I hope that he will please you. He is a good boy. What he does not know, he learns willingly; what he knows, he applies himself to most diligently. I say this because I have known him since he was a little boy, and unless God has altered something, I have no doubt but that he will become most dear to you. But, do not let [his] height shock you, he is sixteen years old, no more. You will find him compliant and ready to do anything you wish him to do. If you receive him, I know you will favour him more than the rest. Yet in the meantime, you will be doing his relatives such a service that you will receive immortal thanks. For one of them, an uncle of the boy [Johannes Frick], who was recently elected master of the court, has written to me, for which reason, what I am saying, I can easily understand [i.e. the full story about Gesner]. And so, I commend to you Conrad, for just so long as you act as a father towards him, you will have him obeying you.37

* ZwBr 4, pp. 325-6, Ep. 929. 37 Millet, Ep. 482 (summary). The autograph is in Zurich ZB ms. F 81, no. 311: "Ingenium huius non est, ut multis veham, videbis mox quale natura sit. Equidem spero tibi placiturum. Bonus est, quae nescit, discit libenter. Quae scit, obit diligentissime. Haec dico, quod noveram a puer[o] et nisi Deus aliquid immutaverit, non dubito, quin charissimus tibi futurus fit. Ne vero proceritas te terreat, sedecim annorum est, non amplius. Tractabilem invenies, et ad manum, quocunque tandem volueris uti. Si receperis, nosci, cui nam prae caeteris gratum facias. Interim tamen et cognatis adeo inservies, ut immortales sint habituri 60

Capito took in Gesner, but seems to have taken his role as ergodioktes a little too seriously, for towards the end of October 1532, Gesner wrote to Heinrich Bullinger in

Zurich, complaining about the situation in Capito's home and imploring him for his advice and aid. Stuck in Strasbourg "uncertain of [his] affairs," and "unsure of what to do" and "deprived of all hope and counsel", he thus entreated the Zurich reformer:

For what hope would be left to a wretch, whose youth - an irrecoverable time - has altogether perished beyond all result? Youth, the best time to study, slips by, I say, and I am left exclaiming, "No one will drag me backwards." How little time to learn is left for those, who are involved in so great affairs of their masters, you yourself can guess. There is no hour, no rather, no moment, which I can call my own to indulge myself freely in the Muses. You know that line of Homer: 'Slaves, when their masters cease to direct them, no longer wish to do their work properly, for Zeus, whose voice is borne afar, takes away half his worth from a man, when the day of slavery comes upon him' [Odyssey 17.322-3]. And so, I ask Your Kindness to deign to offer me in my doubt some counsel regarding my affairs. If I were permitted a stipendium no smaller than that of others, I shall return to you, if permitted. But if not, I shall have to abandon the Muses against my will. I'd like you to make me more certain as soon as possible so that I may know as soon as possible what I should do."39 gratias tibi. Nam ex his avunculus adulescentis, qui nuper in curiae magistrum electus est, ad me scripsit, unde quod dico, facile possum intelligere. Commendo itaque tibi Conhardum, nam tantispere agas patrem erga ipsum, dum obsequentem fueris habiturus." 38 On Gesner's situation in Capito's house, see Johannes Hanhart, Conrad Gefiner: Ein Beytrag zur Geschichte des wissenschaftlichen Strebens und der Glaubensverbesserung im 16ten Jahrhundert (Winterthur: Steiner, 1824), p. 16f. In the entry for his own name in his Bibliotheca universalis (Zurich: Froschauer, 1545), p. 180v, Gesner wrote this of his time with Capito: "Deinde post obitum patris, qui labore assiduo in vita nos aluerat, angusto multis liberis patrimonio relicto, ego aliquandiu aqua inter cutem afflictus, mox in pristinam ope divina restitutus valetudinem, cum in patria Mecoenates studiorum mihi deessent, Argentoratum descendi, ubi aliquot menses optimo felicis memoriae viro Wolfgango Capitoni non sine fructui n bonis Uteris inservivi: inde reversus in patriam et publico stipendio auctus, cum Ioanne Frisio meo tanquam fratreGallia m ingressus per anni spacium Biturigibus paedagogum egi (stipendium enim sumptibus in libera studia faciendis non respondebat) ibi docendo alios ipse plurimum profecisse mihi videor: quippe nullum fere tempus vacabat, quo non Latinis aut Graecis authoribus legendis astrictus essem." 39 HBBW 2, Ep. 144: "Quid enim misero reliquum esset spei, cui adeo citra omnem fructum iuventutem perit irreparabile tempus? Praetervolat, inquam, iuventus, articulus studendi optimus, meque relicto clamat: oudeis erne draxetai exopisthen. Quantulum studendi relictum sit illis tempus, qui in tantis dominorum versantur negotiis, ipse coniicere potes. Nulla hora, immo nullum momentum est, quod meum dicere licet, quodve libere musis indulgeam. Nosti illud Homericum: Hemisu gar t' apetes apoainytai euryopa Zeus Aneros, eut' an min kata doulion emar helesin. Rogo itaque humanitatem tuam, consilium aliquod rerum mearum mihi dubio praestare dignetur. Si mihi stipendium non tenuius aliorum stipendio permittetur, ad vos, cum licebit, redibo. Sin minus, musae invito relinquendae erunt. Certior per te fieri, quam primum licebit, cupio, ut, quid agam, quamprimum sciam." 61

Capito must have been sympathetic, however, for he wrote a follow-up letter on 17

November 1532, addressed to both Bullinger and Leo Jud, praising Gesner, "an

adolescent not only of greatest promise, but also one of whom one ought not to be

ashamed," and advising that he be granted a stipend to study in a foreign country.40 In

fact, Gesner received the following year a stipend and left for Paris in February 1533 for

two years.

In loco parentis:

In September 1515, Boniface Amerbach wrote a letter to his teacher and patron

Zasius, in whose home he had lived, which begins with his approval of the ancient saying

that teachers stand in loco parentis. As a token of appreciation for Zasius' role in his life

as father-figure, he included a small gift with the letter:

There are those who want a teacher [to stand] in loco parentis, magnanimous Zasius. How excellently and wisely that is spoken I leave to the judgement of others; to me it seems an oracle. In fact, why should a good teacher not take precedence over a parent? Since the one supplies life, which we hold in common with beasts, the other the cultivation of the mind, not to mention knowledge of everything, in which we excel not the beasts but also men, as Cicero has taught [inDeoffwiis I.\6].4i

As proof of the veracity of the claim, he mentions that Plato was glad to have had

Socrates as his teacher, just as Alexander the Great was grateful for Aristotle. One of the

foundational principles of humanist education was the idea that a teacher stood in loco parentis. This notion was taken from classical antiquity. In contrast to Plato's view of the

40HBBW2,Ep. 151. 41 AK 2, Ep. 533 (summary). The editors have printed most of this letter, but summarized the portion cited here. The original autograph is in Basel UB, C Via 73, 336: "Sunt qui praeceptorem loco parentis esse voluerunt, magnanime Zasi. Quam egregie sapienterque id, aliorum esto iuditium, mihi certe oraculum dixisse videntur. Immo cur bono praeceptori non posthabendus est parens? Cum hie vitam, quam cum brutis communem habemus, ille ingenii cultum subministrat, adde omnium rerum cognitionem, qua non brutis sed et hominibus, ut Cicero docuit, praestamus." 62 teacher as midwife, it was Quintilian who saw the teacher in loco parentis.42 In his De pueris instituendis, Erasmus enumerates the qualities of the ideal schoolmaster, confessing that it was an easier task to list them "than to find any who actually corresponded] to that ideal." He advises the reader that it would be "beneficial if the prospective teacher deliberately adopts a fatherly attitude towards his pupils; in this way his students will undertake their studies with great enthusiasm, while he himself finds less tedium in his work." Humanists and reformers believed that teachers and tutors stood in loco parentis, assuming the responsibilities of educating, nurturing, feeding and even disciplining the young.44 In a letter of recommendation for his former student,

Bartholomaeus Schonbach, Johannes Mathesius in St. Joachimsthal wrote to Paul Eber in

Wittenberg, on 29 September 1556, noting that Schonbach had considered him in loco parentis since childhood. It is clear from the letter that over the years Mathesius had developed paternal affection for Schonbach and therefore urged Eber to find a position in a church for him.45 Letters of introduction written to humanists requesting admission for someone into their homes illustrate the expected paternal role played by those humanist hosts. In the spring of 1557, for instance, Niels Hemmingsen, a Lutheran professor of theology at the University of Copenhagen, wrote one such letter to Melanchthon on behalf of Peder Pedersen, his pupil for the past five years and the son of a former student

42 On Plato, see David Sedley, The Midwife of Platonism: Text and Subtext in Plato's Theaetetus (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 2004). On Quintilian, see his Institutiones 2.2.4 in the section "De moribus et officiis praeceptoris." 43 CWE 26, pp. 333-4. 44 Steven Ozment, "The Family in Reformation Germany: the Bearing and Rearing of Children," Journal of Family History 8 (1983): 159-176; Gerald Strauss, "The Social Function of Schools in the Lutheran Reformation in Germany," History of Education Quarterly 28.2 (1988): 191-206; and Nicholas Terpstra, "In loco parentis: Confraternities and Abandoned Children in Florence and Bologna," in The Politics of Ritual Kinship: Confraternities and Social Order in Early Modern Europe, edited by Nicholas Terpstra (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000), pp. 114-131. 45 Johannes Mathesius, Ausgewahlte Werke, ed. Georg Loesche, vol. 4 (Prague, 1904), p. 566. 63 of Melanchthon, asking him "to take him on as [his] own son, to help him and foster him," while he would promise in return "to do the duty of a pupil" when the opportunity

46 arises.

It was within the context of the humanist household that many young scholars were rechristened by their patrons with the humanist names that would remain with them the rest of their career and contribute towards the group identity formation of humanists.47 In May 1514, Konrad Mutian wrote a letter to Heinrich Urban that he was pleased with his new servant-pupil, a young man whom Urban had recommended, named

Adam Pub or Bub, but informs that he had decided to rechristen him: "His surname is ridiculous, and for that reason has to be changed, yet not altogether. I have made Publius out of Pub by claiming back an ancient name from antiquity." Relating how he had explained to Publius about some of the famous Publii in classical literature and history, he then lets slip a small criticism of his new servant-pupil, which grew into a pet peeve.

"Enough of Adam Publius, whom, if you wish to greet with three names, call him

Lentulus [= Slowpoke]. Actually, don't. That slipped out by accident, although the fact is, he is slow and tardy; but call him Vitalis, because he arrived on St. Vitalis' birthday."48 The newly rechristened Publius himself wrote a letter to Urban on 15 May, proudly announcing his new name, relating how Mutian had told him all about the MBW Ep. 8933 (summary). Printed in Bjarn Kornerup, "Et Brev fraNiel s Hemmingsen til Melanchton," Kirkehistoriske Samlinger 6.R.6 (1948): 158-160: "Hie Petrus Petreius, charissime praeceptor, meus discipulus fait quinquenarium, cuius pater fait olhn tuus discipulus, vir praestans et pius, qui, cum faisset consul decennium, obdormivit in Christo nostro mesite. Verum cum ad vestram academiam profecturus esset, petiit, ut se tibi, colende praeceptor, commendarem. Quare rogo, ut hunc tanquam proprium meum filium complectaris, iuves ac foveas. Ego vicissim, charissime praeceptor, faciam discipuli officium, si quando ulla faerit occasio oblata." 47 Bernstein; cf. Kasper Risbjerg Eskildsen, "How Germany Left the Republic of Letters," Journal of the History of Ideas 65 (2004): 421-432. 48 Mutian 2, pp. 21-2, Ep. 363: "Cognomen hominis ridiculum est, ideo mutandum, non tamen omnino: feci ex Pub Publium, vetus nomen ex antiquitatis memoria repetendo. ... Hactenus de Adamo Publio, quem trinomium [?], si vis salutare, dicito Lentulum. Non ita. Excidit hoc mihi, quamvis re ipsa sit lentus et tardus; sed dicito Vitalem, quod natali die Vitalis advenerit." 64 famous Publii in the past. He was unaware, however, of his new nickname, Lentulus, a negative character trait which Mutian occasionally ascribed to Publius when he did not get tasks completed on time, which contributed to Mutian's increased annoyance towards him over the next two years.49 The role of assigning a new name, however, did not necessarily fall upon the head of the household, but upon a famous scholar, who acted as apatronus. On 2 September 1516, Capito wrote a letter to Erasmus, which he signed as follows:

Wolfgang Faber, that is, the Smith, is the name I bear commonly, a barbarous word and most unsuited to my nature, which has nothing of the craftsman about it. I wish you would make the letters in the name Wolfgang sound a little less harsh, and whatever you call me I shall gladly adopt, whether Wolfgang or something else.50

Erasmus responded on 26 February 1517, addressing the letter as "To the distinguished theologian, Wolfgang Faber Capito of Haguenau, a true expert in the three tongues."51

The name of Capito comes from classical antiquity and was loosely based on his German surname, Kopfel. He still must not have been altogether satisfied with this name, for he yet slightly modified his name, Faber, to Fabricius. Wolfgang, however, stuck. On 22

March 1517, Beatus Rhenanus reported to Erasmus that their friend 'Volaganius' intends to publish three books of Hebrew grammar. Volaganius must have been put forward as a suggestion for an elegant version of his name, Wolfgang.52 Likewise, Melanchthon (born

Schwarzerd) received his humanist name in 1509 at the age of twelve from his famous

Der Briefwechsel des Mutianus Rufus, pp. 415-7, Ep. 345; cf. Idem., p. 415, Ep. 344, an earlier letter to Urban, dated 5 May, in which Publius promises him always to remember Urban's kindness towards him, "so long as a vital spirit still lasts in my vital limbs {dum spiritus vitalis hos vitales reget artus)," playing on his cognomen Vitalis. For Mutian's increased annoyance towards Publius, see Mutian 2, Epp. 423 and 546. 50 CWE 4, Ep. 459. 51CWE4,Ep.541. 52 CWE 4, Ep. 556. 65 relative Johann Reuchlin while a student in his household.53 Many young scholars, like

Publius, Capito and Melanchthon, were first introduced into the broader humanist community with their new humanist names and kept them throughout their career. This rechristening of younger pupils is an interesting phenomenon, for it essentially amounted to a usurpation of the priestly role by humanists, whereby the vernacular Christian name was replaced by a more univeral humanist name, marking the shift from the biological family to the humanist household, where the teacher stood in loco parentis. This new identity prepared young scholars for their entrance into the humanist community at large.

Some people, presumably non-academics, however, were critical of this rechristening process, interpreting the adoption of a humanist name as a rejection of one's family heritage. In 1536, the German poet and theologian, Georg Aemilius, gave a stunning defence of the practice of renaming young humanists in a letter to his father,

Nikolaus Ohmler in Mansfeld, who had earlier reproached his son on account of his name change.54 Aemilius explains that it was his teacher Melanchthon who had given him the name, since it was less harsh (mollius) than Ohmler and sounded very similar, not thinking that he was actually assigning a new name, but a gentler version of the old. 5

What is interesting about this letter is that it illustrates a clash between the interests of the biological father and his desire to pass down his vernacular family name versus those of the teacher standing in loco parentis, offering the son a name by which he was to be known throughout the humanist family. Aemilius argues, however, that a name-change is customary for scholars, listing examples of such cases both contemporary as well as

53 Reuchlin 3, p. 152, n. 33. 54MBWT7,Ep. 1717. 55 Niklas Holzberg, "Ein vergessener Schiiler Philipp Melanchthons: Georg Aemilius (1517-1569)," Archiv fur Reformationsgeschichte 73 (1982): 94-122. 66 biblical: Gregor Briick (bridge) became Gregorius Pontanus after the Italian humanist

Giovanni Gioviano Pontano; Michael Coelius and Johannes Agricola (born Schneider) had latinized their family names; Jakob Moltzer took his humanist name, Micyllus, from a character in a dialogue by Lucian; Rudolph Agricola changed Dietrich von Pleiningen's name to Plinius; Marsilio Ficino renamed Martin Prenninger Uranius; even Christ himself changed the names of the apostles Simon and Saul to Peter and Paul, not to mention the fact that the patriarch Abram and his wife Sarai became Abraham and Sarah.

Having demonstrated that changing one's name is a longstanding practice, Aemilius then shifts his response to the accusation that a name change represents an aversion to one's family heritage. While he believes that the accusation should not be altogether dismissed, he contends that there are far worse acts of impiety against one's parents than a name change: arrogance, intellectual vanity, impudence and obstinacy. He states that he has always striven to show respect towards his parents and gladly uses his German surname when writing in German. As further proof, he lists examples of men past and present who changed their family names: Titus Pomponius, whom Cicero renamed Atticus, used his family name in the forum, but his other name in literature and dialogues. Johann Reuchlin happily used his humanist name Capnio, which had been given to him in Italy by

Hermolao Barbara, who had thought that his German surname sounded uncouth to learned Italians. Nonetheless, Aemlius states that Reuchlin's use of Capnio did not represent a rejection of his family heritage, which he celebrated in his writings. Finally,

Aemilius protests any claim that his humanist name was inspired by the Roman general,

Aemilius Paulus, since he is not a soldier, but a scholar. How widespread criticism of the humanist practice of changing one's name was is unknown, but this case highlights an 67 interesting conflict that could arise as a young boy made the transition from his biological family to the humanist household and community.

The paternalism of humanists towards their student boarders is also manifested in their concern about the material and financial well-being of their proteges. Mutian once asked Heinrich Urban in Erfurt to procure a dog for his servant, Benedictus Rufus.56 In

May 1514, he wrote to Urban, this time asking him to buy a leather cap (galericulum) for another servant-pupil, Adam Publius, even if it meant spending 22 Thaler or more. The reason, he explains, is that Publius had been invited to help carry the relics of St.

Boniface in the procession at Erfurt on 5 June and wanted to be dressed nicely.57

Likewise, Nicolaus Megander in Sitten asked Boniface Amerbach to get a winter coat for his student, Antonius Frysius.58 One of the most interesting of Wolfgang Capito's early proteges was a young man identified as Felix Ulscenius, about whom, however, little is known. It is clear from the correspondence that he was receiving financial assistance from Capito. Most likely, he was a student in Wittenberg whom Capito, in his capacity as counsellor to Albert of Brandenburg, archbishop of Mainz, sponsored to keep tabs on local affairs, especially Luther and the course of the Reformation at Wittenberg.

Ulscenius' letters to Capito, spanning the years 1522 to 1523, include reports of sermons by the Wittenberg reformers urging the congregation no longer to attend mass, of priests getting married, of monks forsaking their vows and of disagreements between the reformers.59 Of these letters, a number attest to the exchange of money to finance his

Mutian 1, Ep. 86. Mutian 2, Ep. 370; cf. Ep. 384. AK 5, Ep. 2463. See CWC 1, Epp. 70,111-2,117-9,127-8,132-3, 135 and 140. 68

studies and upkeep.60 On 13 January 1521, Ulscenius expressed his gratitude to Capito,

his "sweet teacher," for all the favours that he has bestowed upon him, adding: "O how

fortunate I am to have you as my patronl What more could I ask of the gods than a loyal father in this world, such as I have now, who excels the rest in every way. I hope the

thought will never enter your mind that you have bestowed your favour on an unfeeling

person."611 have italicized the words 'teacher', 'patron' and 'father' in order to

emphasize that Ulscenius himself acknowledged his role in the Doktorvater-client

relationship, as discussed in the introduction to this section.62

On occasion, students had to be disciplined by their teachers just as a father

disciplines his son. Some humanists were honest in forewarning their friends about the

flaws of the young men they were recommending, conscious of the possible "paternal"

discipline needed to correct them. On 11 January 1544, Thomas Blaurer wrote to

Boniface Amerbach, asking him to welcome the bearer, Jodocus Petrus Nytthart of

Constance, into his household. He warned him in advance, though, of Nytthart's vices,

describing the young man as "half-wild and hardly even semi-human," who is "on his

way to ruining his life with heavy drinking," and who "doesn't listen to his teachers."

Recognizing the undesirability of having a student in the home, he adds: "But let him be

subject to rules, punishments and scolding, and if he does not want to be corrected, let

him be a harnessed man." The last phrase, 'a harnessed man' is an Erasmian adage,

60 Cf. CWC 1, Epp. 111,118, 127-8 and 132. 61 CWC 1, Ep. 70. 62 Cf. BrOek 1, Ep. 118, a dedicatory letter fromOecolampadiu s to Caspar Hedio for a translated sermon of Chrysostom, which he closes: "Faxit Deus, ut propediem libere tuo amicorumque conspectui reddar, quibus me commendes et inprimis magno 1111 heroi nostro acpatrono, Capitoni Fabricio" [emphasis added]. 63 AK 6, Ep. 2605: "Rogarunt me Iudoci Petri Nithardi frater atque affines, cives nostri, ut iuvenem commendarem tuae humanitati, non ilium ut frugi, sed ut semiferum, ut vix etiam semihominem; ita pergit aetatem suam vinositate assidua deturpare nee audit magistros.... Sed legibus et poenis subsit, si minus corrigi voluerit, increpatione: hypozygiodes ho anthropos." 69 implying, as the hippological association suggests, the reining in of one's behaviour, in much the same way a rider would do to his horse.64

Servants and pupils were dismissed, if their behaviour got out of hand or their performance was deemed less than satisfactory. In these situations, pupils would sollicit another humanist to intercede on their behalf, as is illustrated by the cases of Benedictus

Rufinus and Johann Scharf. Rufinus lived in Mutian's home for around ten years, apart from a few interruptions, probably starting in 1502 after Mutian returned from Italy until he was eventually dismissed and replaced by Adam Publius. After Rufinus committed

(or, at least, was blamed for) a number of stupid and careless mishaps,65 the relationship between Mutian and Rufinus became progressively worse, until Mutian finally dismissed him in 1512.66 The next time we hear of him is in a letter of introduction from an Italian, named Crisostomo, insinuating himself into Mutian's album amicorum and beseeching him to readmit Rufinus and restore him to his former favour.67 Similarly, on 24

September 1553, Melanchthon wrote to Johannes Crato in Wroclaw, regarding his relative, Johann Scharf. Reading between the lines, it seems that Scharf had been dismissed by Crato for being an unruly student, and Melanchthon, like Crisostomo, was writing to intercede on his behalf, begging that he be readmitted. He reports that Scharf promises "to comply with the counsels and authority of his tutors and he wanted me to intercede on his behalf in order to return to your good graces." The best indication of a

64 Erasmus, Adagia 4.3.47. 65 Some time in 1509, Ludwig Londergut de Rain, vicelord of Erfurt came for a visit. Presumably using one of Mutian's horses, the nobleman went for a ride, but fell off and broke his leg. This was obviously a distinct embarrassment for Mutian, for he wrote to Urban, casting the blame on Rufinus (Mutian 1, pp. 223- 4,Ep. 152). 66 Mutian 1, p. 201, Ep. 142: ""He was loyal in carrying out my commands, but I, a morose man, could not put up with the licence (Jicentid) of his age. He is wretched and poor/Fidus in obeundis mandates nostris, sed etatis illius licentiam homo morosus non tuli. Miser est et inops." 67 Mutian 1, pp. 336-7, Ep. 255. 70 change of heart in Scharf, he explains, is the fact that he blushed: "As Socrates once said when he saw a adolescent blush after being scolded, 'This is the colour of virtue.'"68

The father image was invoked as well when rifts occurred between humanists and their proteges. The early career of Caspar Hedio, a former student of Capito at the

University of Basel, where he completed his licenciate in theology in 1519, is a case in point. In October 1520, he followed his teacher to Mainz to serve as his assistant, and in

1521 succeeded him as cathedral preacher. When Hedio was invited to become cathedral preacher in Strasbourg in October 1522,69 a position Capito had coveted as well, there was a temporary falling out between them. On 29 September 1523, Oecolampadius tried to convince Capito that his situation was not as bad as it seemed and that he ought to entrust the matter to God. He likens the relationship between Capito and Hedio to

Abraham and his nephew Lot, thereby illustrating the patron-client relationship with a biblical model: "Till now, you have taught him very well, like Abraham his junior, Lot.

You enriched him with spiritual gifts, and you held him in place of a son." He urges

Capito not to be upset, but to accept the situation as a demonstration of his love and magnanimity. He does not want anything to spoil his friendship with both Capito and

Hedio. Oecolampadius believes that God is punishing them for not being effective enough in reforming the church. He tells Capito to act soon and to follow his advice.

MBW Ep. 6973 (summary); printed in Flemming Ep. 38, p. 46: "Etsi igitur vidimus aetatis errata in tuo adfine, tamen speramus naturam eius ad virtutem flecti posse. Promittit se obtemperaturum esse tutorum consiliis et auctoritati et me voluit deprecatorem esse, ut reditus sibi ad benevolentiam tuam pateat. Haec signa sunt boni ingenii, ut Socrates dicebat videns adolescentem obiurgatum erubescere 'Hie est' inquiens 'virtutis color.'" 69 The official letter of invitation to Hedio fromSigmun d von Hohenlohe, the Dean, and Chapter of the Strasbourg cathedral, dated 27 October 1522, is in Strasbourg, Archives Municipales 1 AST 43, f. 75. Hedio assumed the position on 7 September 1523. 70 BrOek 1, pp. 256-7, Ep. 276. 71

Capito responded on 26 October 1523, and complained that it seemed as though everyone, including Oecolampadius, was taking Hedio's side. He regrets having quit his position with Albert of Brandenburg that February before securing his post as cathedral preacher in Strasbourg, only to have the position unexpectedly usurped by his friend, former student and boarder. Capito's sense of outrage can be appreciated. He had been vying for the position since it first became available in 1520.71 It is therefore understandable that in the same letter to Oecolampadius, Capito regrets having taught

Hedio the very skills and techniques that are now being used against him.72 The two men, nevertheless, were soon reconciled. Hedio took up his position as cathedral preacher in

Strasbourg, and in March 1524 the congregation of Young St. Peter in Strasbourg called

Capito to become their preacher. In a letter to Capito, dated 16 September 1524, Urbanus

Rhegius too drew on the paternal metaphor to bemoan the rift that the Reformation had caused between him and his former patrons, Eck and Fabri. The latter, he writes, was

"once almost a father figure to me," but "now hates and tears Urbanus to pieces as violently as possible."73

Familiarity Breeds Trust:

Mark Twain once quipped that, "Familiarity breeds contempt - and children."

With regard to teachers, Erasmus, too, warned that they must show restraint in their kindness, for otherwise "familiarity will breed contempt and destroy all shame and respect." He advocated professional distance with the students and the use of corporal

71 See CWC 1, introduction. 72 BrOek 1, pp. 260-3, Ep. 179. 73 CWC 2, Ep. 194. A poem by Rhegius to Gabriel von Eyb, bishop of Eichstatt, was included in Eck's Disputatio ... (Augsburg: Miller, 1517), f. Al v. Likewise, there is a brief poem by Rhegius to Eck that was printed at the end of Eck's dedicatory letter to his Elementarius dialectice (Augsburg: Miller, 1518), f. Alv. Cf. a letter fromMichae l Hummelberg to Fabri, dated 1 August 1521, in which Hummelberg attempts to assuage Fabri, who felt wronged by Rhegius. Cf. Horawitz, Analecten, p. 151. 72 punishment as a last resort so as to encourage a positive learning environment.74 In the

context of the humanist household, however, familiarity with one's students also bred trust, which had important ramifications for letters of recommendation, giving them extra

strength and reliability. Knowledge of the recommended person's character and

intellectual capabilities came largely from living together in the same home. On 17

October 1528, Oecolampadius wrote to Zwingli, recommending the physician, Janus

Cornarius, a Wittenberg alumnus, for a position as city physician in Zurich, admitting that he had "not eaten a peck of salt with him."75 Oecolampadius' adaptation of the

classical adage, "Trust no man, unless you have eaten a peck of salt with him first,"

indicates, in other words, that he did not personally know him well, but felt obliged

nonetheless "not to deny someone a recommendation who has been recommended to me

by friends." Erasmus' explanation of this adage is that "one cannot tell what a man is

really like until one has lived with him for some time and has had prolonged dealings

with him." The adage also underscores the importance of the author's familiarity with

the recommended. In this case, however, Oecolampadius felt confident enough to

recommend Cornarius, trusting the positive recommendations his friends had given him.

As it turned out, Oecolampadius had had little to fear from recommending Cornarius,

who pursued a successful career in medicine and eventually became dean of the Faculty

of Medicine at the newly founded University of Jena.77 Despite the years of living together, humanists could not anticipate that some of their former proteges would

eventually leave the Catholic fold and join the evangelical cause. On 2 November 1524,

74 CWE 26, pp. 333-5. 75 ZwBr 3, p. 577, Ep. 767. 76 Erasmus, Adagia 2.1.14. 77 Cf. a letter from Jakob Wimpheling to Sixtus Herman, dated 2 November 1524, in which Wimpheling reports about a conversation he had had with his former prot6ge\ Jakob Sturm. 73

Jakob Wimpheling reported to Sixtus Herman about a conversation he had had with his former student, Jakob Sturm. When the latter converted to the evangelical faith in 1523,

Wimpheling chided Sturm for being "suffused with Wycliffite poison (veneno

Wickleffico suffusus)." In response, Sturm retorted, "If I am a heretic, then you made me into one."78

Capito, too, made a point of stating that he could personally attest to the character of the unnamed young man whom he recommended to Ambrosius Blaurer on 2 January

1527 for a position as schoolteacher, since he had "meticulously examined the way he lives."79 On the other hand, Capito was a bit too quick to recommend Johann Dietelius, a member of his own household. Concern for his own reputation forced him to retract a recommendation he had written on 22 May 1540 to Matthias Erb in Reichenweier on behalf of Dietelius. The initial recommendation is a qualified approval of the young man as tutor in the household of Johannes Hospinianus (Wirth), professor of Greek at the

University of Basel, adding that Dietelius is prone to unnamed "vices" typical of young men.80 The very same day, Capito wrote yet another letter to Erb, this time taking back his recommendation, as new information about Dietelius came to light in the meantime:

I recommended Dietelius a great deal in my last letter even though I had some suspicion about his morals. For a miserable youth has the markings of its own disaster. Since then, I have found out things that make clear to us that the young man in fact has been overcome by temptation. I find these things so displeasing that I would not at all like that someone addicted to such vices be thought well of by good men upon my recommendation, much less that he be placed in charge of teaching innocent young children. For he is expected to share Hospinianus' job. For that reason, I pray that he not be approved by you and appointed on my

Jakob Wimpfeling Briefwechsel, edited by Otto Herding and Dieter Mertens (Munich: Wilhelm Fink, 1990), vol. 2, pp. 879-84, Ep. 357: "Bin ich ein keczer so hant ir mich zu einem gemacht." 79 CWC 2, Ep. 318: "... vitam actam accuratissime pervestigavimus." 80 Millet Ep. 728 (summary). The original autograph is in Basel UB, Ki.Ar. 25b, 159. recommendation to perform this small function.

Upset at his discovery of Dietelius' vices, Capito retracts his recommendation in a bid to safeguard his own reputation until Dietelius has shown definite signs of coming to his senses, in the belief that with firm discipline and a stern scolding, Dietelius will turn around. "For this reason," he continues, "receive this person as one who has failed to obtain my recommendation, or rather, has earned your reproof, just as recently I have been convinced that he should be considered reprobate." Having absolved himself of any responsibility, Capito states that "it is up to you to make a decision about Dietelius without my backing." As a postscriptum, Martin Schalling, Capito's fellow colleague in

Strasbourg, confirms in his own hand Capito's negative recommendation. This case nicely illustrates the concern authors of recommendation letters had for their own reputation and the lengths to which some would go to uphold it. On 7 August 1540,

Capito wrote again to Erb concerning Dietelius. It seems that in the intervening months,

Capito's anger had subsided since the overall tone of the letter is much more forgiving.

Nonetheless, he beseeches Erb to warn Dietelius about the seriousness of his offence and to remind him of the negative consequences it may have on his own future job prospects if he does not turn his life around:

For a repentant person should be forgiven for everything. This cannot come to pass if his case is made public to many people. Therefore, please carefully warn the man about the risk and tell him not to give any sign of wicked lust or desire

81 Millet Ep. 729 (summary). The original autograph is in Basel UB, Ki.Ar. 25b, 162: "Ego multis Dietelium commendavi proximis Uteris etsi nonnihil de vita eius suspicionis antecesserat. Habet enim iuventus misera calamitatem suam. Interea rescivimus ea quae hominem quadam in re victum tentatione declarant; et ita nobis ea displicent ut neutiquam vellemus talibus vitiis obnoxium, nostra commendatione bonis in precio esse, multo minus ut innocentiae puerili gubernandae praeficeretur. Nam in parte debet laborum esse cum Hospiniano. Iccirco oramus, ne nostra testimonio vobis probetur et officiolo illi praeficiatur." 2 Ibid.: "Quare sic hominem recipite ut a nobis non commendatum vel potius ut vobis reprobatum, prout proxime, nobis tanquam reprobandus exploratus est. ... Vestrum igitur sit de Ditelio statuere sine nostra suffragio." 75

for the property of a friend. Otherwise the reputation of the man will have been so burdened that he will scarcely be able to obtain a position amongst good men for his entire life. Make a great deal of the matter even if it is not the worst case. A rather careless mind should nevertheless be frightened, lest he fall into a graver error.

Capito concludes the letter by informing Erb that Hospinianus did not take in Dietelius, and that he now recommends instead the bearer of the letter, Laurentius Montanus

(Berger), for the position. Montanus is a godly and learned man, who can teach both rhetoric and dialectics. He adds that Hedio is of the same opinion.83 Both Erasmus and

Capito learned from their own mistakes the risks in recommending people too hastily and strove not to repeat the same errors in judgment in their recommendation letters. In other cases, reformers simply refused to recommend someone if his negatives traits were widely known. In the summer of 1528, Petrus Gynoraeus, parish priest at Rumlingen, became the principal figure in a public sexual scandal in the city, for which he was pilloried and led to the city gate by the hangman, to the embarrassment of Zwingli and

Oecolampadius, who had earlier recommended him. At the beginning of June 1528,

Oecolampadius wrote to Zwingli a negative depiction of Petrus Gynoraeus, describing him as a man who,

deserving the worst with regards to the gospel, was publicly flogged and expelled from here with great disgrace, to the huge jubilation and triumph of his adversaries. He always asked us to recommend him, a man so wicked and self- centred, placing his own portion with adulterers, himself twice an adulterer. And thus men deceive us daily and effect that we would not dare recommend anyone.85

Millet Ep. 733 (Original manuscript, Basel UB ms. Ki.Ar. 25b, 163): "Resipiscenti enim condonanda sunt omnia, quod fieri non possit si res ad plures emanaret. Iccirco, oro moneas hominem de periculo diligenter et ne ullum nefandae libidinis aut amici alienae rei cupidi signum de se praebeat. Famam hominis alioqui ita aggravandam, ut apud bonos locum obtinere per omnem vitam vix queat. Ita rem amplifices etsi res non pessima tamen terrendus est animus incautior ne gravius impingat." Cf. Millet Ep. 736 (summary). 84 CEBR 2, pp. 54-5. For an accurate report of the scandal, see Allen Ep. 2054 and AK 3, Ep. 1264. 85 ZwBr 3, p. 486, Ep. 728: "Petrus Gynoreus, de evangelio pessime meritus, virgis publice cesus magnaque cum ignominia hinc eiectus est, mirum, quanta adversariorum iubilatione ac triumpho. Semper petivit a nobis commendari, homo tarn male sibi conscius, portionem suam ponens cum adulteris, ipse bis adulter. Ita nos quotidie fallunt homines et faciunt, ne quem commendare audeamus tandem." 76

Familiarity with the recommended also played an important role in the transmission of letters. Humanists and reformers had their own personal reasons to write a character reference for the letter courier - they wanted to ensure that their letter, which often contained subject matter of a confidential or controversial nature, not get into the wrong hands. Furthermore, many couriers also delivered copies of manuscripts, books and money along with these letters. Humanists often hired their own students as couriers, for the simple reason that they had gotten to know them well by living together, and for that reason trusted them to deliver confidential letters and material and to report on possibly incriminating news and gossip, especially concerning the course of the

Reformation. The story of Jan Paul, a 24-year-old Flemish medical student, who had been working as a physician in Metz, recounted by himself (in the third person) to Heinrich

Cornelius Agrippa, illustrates the risks involved in transmitting controversial material by courier. Paul had been entrusted by Jean Rogier, curate of Ste. Croix in Metz and friend of Agrippa's, to deliver, at the request of Agrippa, two controversial books: a copy of

Johannes Trithemius' De stenographic! (On Secret Writing) as well as a copy of De geomantia, which Agrippa himself had left behind in Metz. Having enjoyed Paul's company and familiarity for several months and having observed his character, Rogier assured Agrippa that he "did not hesitate to entrust this most secret business of ours, which you asked earnestly of us in your last letter, and I am confident that he will deliver

0*7 everything most faithfully to you." The story takes an amusing turn when on 26 July

1526, Jan Paul himself wrote to Agrippa from the city of Langres that he had been robbed along the way by a travel companion of his money and was now compelled to pose as a

86 Agrippa, vol. 2, pp. 799-800, Ep. 20. 87iWfi?.,pp.805-6,Ep.26. 77 physician in order "to scrape together some money" to complete his intended journey.

Given his youthful appearance and attire, he told the people of Langres that he had a brother who was the royal physician, none other than Agrippa himself, a ruse which

oo rendered him more pleasing to the people of Langres. As he writes, he promised to deliver the books, which were in his safe keeping, but pleaded with Agrippa not to say anything about his ruse, but "to allow me to pretend that you are my brother."89 Given the controversial nature of the two books, Agrippa seems to have been far more concerned about their safe return than he was about Paul's ruse.90

When humanists did find a "very safe" courier, they went to great lengths to write a positive commendation for him to ensure the recipient, their friend, of the trustworthiness and reliability of the said courier. On 13 November 1520, Petrus

Mosellanus wrote to Capito, adding a few words regarding the courier, one Bernhard

Coppinger, a Jewish convert to Christianity, whom he describes as "an upright and trustworthy man." Consequently, Mosellanus writes: "You can write back through him about everything, even the most private matters. He would sooner die than betray his friends. I have had him stay in my house for one and a half years, and I know him as I know myself."91 Coppinger delivered at least three letters, including Mosellanus' letter to

Capito. He also delivered a letter from Mosellanus to Mutian in Gotha, in which

"Bernhard the Hebrew" is described as "a man of integrity, but a bit superstitious."

Similarly, on 25 August 1523, Agrippa wrote a letter to an unnamed friend, attesting to 88 Ibid, pp. 817-8, Ep. 38: "But I confess, I lack the distinguishing marks of a physician, namely, older and more ostentatious clothes, by which people judge a physician/Sed desunt mihi, fateor, praecipua medici ornamenta, aetas videlicet grandior et cultus pomposior, ex his enim populus iudicat medicum." 89 ft/a?.,pp . 807-9, Ep. 28. 90 For the events of this story, see Ibid, pp. 799-800, 805-9, 813-4, 817-8, Epp. 20, 26, 28, 33 and 38. 91 CWC 1, Ep. 62. 92 Mutian 2, p. 271, Ep. 596: "Qui has tibi reddet, integer est homo, Bernhardus Hebraeeus, superstitiosior paulo." 78 the trustworthiness of the courier, a certain Antonious Palanchius of Freiburg: "Trust him as though you were speaking directly to me. Hide nothing from him which you wish me to know and if there is anything else left, however important it may be, which you wish to be kept secret between us, you can entrust it safely to him."93 Ensuring the fidelity of the courier saved the author the trouble of writing a lengthy epistle without jeopardizing confidentiality. The benefits of employing one's own students as couriers were reciprocal: the humanist was guaranteed a trustworthy courier, and the students had a chance to meet other scholars and thereby expand their networks of humanist friends.94

Humanists as Patroni:

The benefits of living with and studying under a well known humanist scholar motivated many people to go to great lengths to have their sons admitted into these homes. For that reason, Martino Bovollino wrote to Erasmus on 29 June 1530, regarding his son, Lazaro, then a servant-pupil of Heinrich Glarean in Freiburg-im-Breisgau:

On my order, that little boy of mine is on that account following Glarean, because Glarean, in general a famous man, is made illustrious by his familiarity with Erasmus. And so the young man may boast that he is a disciple, if not of Erasmus, then at least of his friend. I am held back by the majesty of such a great man to write more about this boy to you; but whatever orders he has from me, he himself knows. It is absurd that I am boring such a great man with my trifles, but who could stop himself from saying what has been on his mind? If only Erasmus would agree to let my son be his attendant and to serve him at my expense! Let his hire be only for the glory of your name, if he is pleasing; and I shall consider

Agrippa, vol. 2, p. 751, Ep. 42: "[E]am illi fidem habeto, ac si meipsum coram colloquaris. Nihil ilium celato, quae me scire velis et si quid reliquum est, quantum etiam id sit, quod inter nos secretum esse velis, illi tuto committas." 94 Cf. Ibid., pp. 754-5, Ep. 49, a letter fromAgripp a to an unnamed friend, 19 October 1523: "So oportune, so trustworthy and so wholesome has the present courier, who is most known to you, presented himself to us that there is now no need for me to write the long letter (and practically a book) I was going to write to you. He can explain everything to you abundantly and copiously/Tarn oportunus, tarn fidus, tam integer sese nobis hie obtulit praesentium lator, tuaeque reverentiae notissimus, ut quas longas ac ferme ad volumen usque ad te scripturus fueram literas, omnino iam non sit opus. Siquidem is tibi omnia coram abunde copioseque exponet." 79

that just a bit is being lent at interest, if through your goodness you grant me his.

People across Europe understood the implications of being numbered amongst the student-boarders of a famous humanist, such as Erasmus or Melanchthon. As Bovollino confesses, he hopes his son may become one of Erasmus' servant-pupils, a step up from his son's current position as pupil to Glarean, a man, he admits, already famous by his assocation with Erasmus.

Each student, however, had the same goal in mind: an education and upbringing in the home of a humanist, who not only stood in loco parentis but also functioned as their proxenos or patronus. Both terms derive from classical antiquity. In ancient Greece, aproxenos was an individual (usually wealthy) whose voluntary duty was to take care of the representatives of another state when these travelled to his polis. Much like a modern- day consul, his duties included using the influence he had in his own city to promote policies of friendship or alliance with another city and providing representatives with hospitality - entertainment, food, and shelter.96 In ancient Rome, a patronus, on the other hand, was a legal term that referred to an advisor and protector who represented his client in court. One could also be a patronus of an entire city or province, whose function was to settle diplomatic disputes. Applied to the sixteenth-century context, aproxenos was a

Allen Ep. 2337: "Filiolus ille meus meo iussu propterea Glareanum sequitur, quia Glareanus, alioquin vir clarus, Erasmi familiaritate illustratur, ut adolescentulus, si non Erasmi, saltim eius necesarii se iactet esse discipulum. Contineor tanti viri maiestate de puero hoc tibi ulterius scribere; quid autem a me ipse habeat in mandatis, ipse scit. Absurdum est ut tanto viro meis neniis sim tediosus; sed conceptum sermonem continere quis poterit? Utinam assentiat Erasmus ut meus filius illi meis sumptibus famuletur et serviat! Merces eius sit solum gloria nominis tui, si placet; putaboque non modicum foenerari si hoc mihi per tuam benigitatem conceditur." 96 Matthew Dillon, Pilgrims and Pilgrimages in Ancient Greece (London and New York: Routledge, 1997), p. 14. See also, S. Perlman, "A Note on the Political Implications of Proxenia in the Fourth Century B.C.," The Classical Quarterly n.s. 8.3/4 (1958): 185-191. 97 See Christopher Burnand, "The Advocate as a Professional: The Role of the Patronus in Cicero's Pro Cluentio," in Cicero the Advocate, edited by Jonathan Powell and Jeremy Paterson (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004), pp. 277-289; cf. Ernst Badian, Foreign Clientelae (Oxford: Clarendon, 1959); John Rich, ed., Patronage in Ancient Society (London and New York: Routledge, 1990); and R. P. Sailer, 80 professor or master who provided hospitality to a young man from another city.

Likewise, these scholars acted as patroni for their students, at times by securing financial aid for them but, more important, by helping them advance in their careers and obtain them a job. Once a student had entered the home of a particular humanist, the patron- client relationship could be mobilized to foster his career, most notably through a letter of introduction or recommendation. Authors of letters of introduction and letters of recommendation specified their intention by employing either the term, proxenos or patronus. Melanchthon could not resist the wordplay when, on 17 June 1556, he wrote to

Matthaus Collinus in Prague, asking him to be aproxenos for the young Simon

Proxenus.98 On 3 March 1538, Melanchthon wrote to Veit Dietrich in Nurnberg, asking him to welcome the bearer of the letter, Nikolaus Gallus of Kothen, and even to be "a proxenos for him to meet erudite men."99 The context suggests that by proxenos,

Melanchthon wishes Dietrich to use his influence and connections to introduce Gallus to other scholars. Likewise, on 15 October 1538, Melanchthon wrote to Eberhard Rogge in

Kulm, recommending the bearer, Matthias Zimmermann, who wanted to befriend Rogge, hoping that an association with Rogge would represent Zimmermann in the court: "I know that you will thank me, because I shall have been the instigator and proxenos for you to admit such a great man into your friendship."100 In this case, Melanchthon identifies himself as the proxenos, that is, as the middle-man introducing Zimmermann to

Rogge.

Personal Patronage under the Roman Empire (Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press, 1984), pp. 7-39. 98 MBW Ep. 7861 (summary); printed in CR 8.783. 99 MBW T8, Ep. 2004. 100 MBW T8, Ep. 2106: "Scio te mihi gratiam habiturum esse, quod tibi autor faerim kaiproxenos, ut talem virum in amicitiam admitteres." 81

The career of Petrus Mosellanus (1493-1524) serves well as a case-study of how the humanists promoted their proteges and how humanists mobilized their alba amicorum to secure jobs for their clientes, their students. It is easy to empathise with Mosellanus in his eagerness to find a permanent teaching position, as he reports on 25 May 1516 to his patron Mutian how an anticipated well-paid position in Bohemia, probably at the

University of Prague, fell through. He adds that Spalatin had earlier written to him not to be depressed if he did not get the appointment and not to expect getting the job.

Mosellanus nevertheless continues in an optimistic mood, describing his activities as lecturer:

But do not regard this as a major setback. In fact, better luck smiles upon my merits, but I have paid for it by both many and laborious lectures so that there's no free time left in which I can apply the strength of my intellect to translating Greek texts. Our personal library is expanding and daily increases so that, if nothing else, at least I shall have this solace amongst my troubles.101

We get then a picture of a young scholar preoccupied with lecturing with little time for his own work. He concludes his letter by addressing Mutian as "the sole friend I have in this part of Germany, into whose heart I can pour forth my feelings." What is especially interesting is that he signed the letter, "Mosellanus, your Phaedrus," drawing an analogy with Phraedrus, a student of Socrates. Mosellanus did the same in a letter written to

Johann Lang, an Erfurt theologian, in 1521.102

Concerned with his Phaedrus' stroke of bad luck, Mutian wrote a letter to Peter

Eberbach in Erfurt soon thereafter, on 13 June 1516, describing how the position in

Mutian 2, p. 224, Ep. 559: "Neque vero hec ita accipias, quasi ad triarios res mea redierit. Immo fortuna meis meritis maior arridet, verum hanc ipsam et raultis et laboriosis praelectionibus coemimus adeo, ut nihil sit ocii super, quo ingenii nervos transponendis graecis intendere liceat. Augetur ac crescit quotidie libraria nostra supellex adeo, ut si nihil aliud, hoc tamen solatii in nostris erumnis habeamus." See also the letter from Mosellanus to Spalatin, written 7 July 1516, relating to him how the job in Bohemia fell through, printed in J. and W. Krafft, eds., Briefe undDocumente der Zeit der Reformation im 16. Jahrhundert (Elberfeld: Lucas, 1875), pp. 146-7. 102 Original autograph is in Munich SB, elm 10366, f.15: "Mosellanus tuus Phaidros. 82

Bohemia resulted in a no-hire, in an effort to secure a position for Mosellanus at the

University of Erfurt:

I have made a Phaedrus of Petrus. This Attic Muse writes Greek beautifully and teaches many students. I would like him to live there by you, for the Englishman, [Richard] Croke, is offering courses in Greek at Leipzig. This Mosellanus is still a mere boy, (to give you an indication of what he's like). He's a godly and eloquent man who knows Latin and also Greek so well that you'll be amazed. He reads ably, recites Homer, Hesiod and Theocritus. Even if he were in Rome itself, he would find praise. Please write to Phaedrus and invite him under these terms that he if he wants to move, he should hasten down to you. He has lost his Bohemian patron. The beloved prince is more selective than he was before. He denies stipends to not a few, mindful of his finances, although by rights ought to be called everyone's Maecenas.103

Whether Eberbach actually made an offer of employment to Mosellanus or not, is not known. In any event, Mutian continued to promote his Phaedrus to other humanist scholars. On 13 September 1516, he wrote a letter to Johann Reuchlin in Stuttgart, relating a visit by Richard Croke to his home and mentioning how Croke had expressed a desire to learn Hebrew. Mutian then added that "Phaedrus" and some other young scholars were also present at the time. Attached to the letter, Mutian notes, is a letter from

Mosellanus.104 Whether this was the letter Mosellanus had written to Mutian about the no-hire in Bohemia or not is uncertain. What is important is that Mutian as patron was making contacts with prominent German humanists on Mosellanus' behalf.

On 9 January 1517, Mosellanus contacted Mutian again, apologizing for having lost contact. He explained that Mutian probably never wrote to him because he had no idea of his whereabouts. To make up for the interruption of their correspondence,

Mutian 2, p. 226, Ep. 562: "De Petro feci Phaedrum. Hec Attica Musa belle grecissat, docet plurimos. Vellem isthic ageret, nam Lipsi Crocus grece profitetur Britannus, hie Mosellanus est adhuc admodum adolescens, homo, ut faciam summariam indicaturam, pius, disertulus, latinus atque ita grecus, ut admirari possis. Legit apte, cantat Homerum, Hesiodum, Theocritum. Eciamsi Rome esset, laudem inveniret. Scribe, amabo, ad Phedrum et invita sub hac lege, ut, si locum mutare velit, ad vos devolet. Amisit Boemum. Princeps delector tenacior est quam fuit. Negat stipendia non paucis suo consulens fisco, etsi omnium Mecenas dici hire debeat." 104 Reuchlin 3, pp. 351-356, Ep. 293. 83

Mosellanus presented to Mutian a sample of his recent work, a Latin translation of some works of Basil the Great:

How successful I have been I leave to your judgment and that of others into whose hands it might come. I have certainly made every effort possible not to seem to fall short of the high standards of our age of eloquent speech in my style, that is, by using unaffected and simple language and the flower of figurative

speech.1155

As requested, Mutian did forward his translation to his friends, for on 21 April 1517, he wrote a letter to Johann Lang, to which he adjoined Mosellanus' translation of Basil and letter, adding: "You'll see how elegant and refined his style is."106 Finally, Mutian had something to back up his previous recommendations of Mosellanus' quality as a Greek scholar. One year later, on 5 January 1518, Mosellanus wrote a modest letter to Reuchlin praising the famous Hebrew scholar. At the end of the letter he added: "I am sending together with this letter a small work of Basil recently translated into Latin through my efforts, along with some other things, which I pray you will gladly accept, as the first fruits of my small talent."1 7 In this way, Mosellanus could show to humanists throughout

Germany what he was capable of as a scholar.

As is the case today, a university position often did not open up until someone else retired or moved away, and so it was not until Richard Croke, professor of Greek at

Leipzig, moved back to England in March 1517 that Mosellanus was hired as his successor, with an annual salary of 70 Gulden.108 Duke George, however, had wanted to lure Erasmus there, for he had Hieronymus Emser write a letter to Erasmus on 15 March Mutian 2, p. 240, Ep. 573: "Quo id successu, tuum aliorumque, in quorum manus pervenerit, esto iudicium. Nos certe summa ope annisi sumus, ne seculo huic nostro dictionis turn inaffectata simplicitate turn figurarum velut flore parum respondisse videri possimus." 106 Mutian 2, p. 241, Ep. 574: "Videbis eleganciam et cultum orationis." 107 Illustrium virorum epistolae ([Haguenau], 1519), f. Z 3b: "Mittimus una cum his Uteris opuscula quaedam Basilii nostra nuper industria latio donata cum aliis quibusdam, quae ut huius ingenioli primicias, laeta precor fronte suscipias." ,08CWCl,Ep. 100. 84

1517, inviting him to come to Leipzig to teach Greek there as successor to Croke.109 Ever aspiring to be an independent scholar without the demands of teaching, Erasmus was never one to be tied down to a fixed position, and consequently declined several such offers in the course of his life.110 Croke therefore encouraged Mosellanus to write to

Erasmus, whom he intended to visit on his way to England. He obviously recognized that

Mosellanus needed to make more academic friends beyond the small circle of humanists in Saxony. On 24 March 1517, Mosellanus wrote a letter to Erasmus seeking his acquaintance and begging to be included amongst his list of friends.111

Unfortunately for Mosellanus, he faced never-ending feuds with his more conservative colleagues. His scholastic opponents in the faculty of theology resented that he, a humanist, was using his philological skills and applying them to their territory, theology. They exerted enough influence at the university that in 1518, the university refused to contribute its part towards Mosellanus' salary beyond a year. His annual salary of 70 gulden must have been funded both by the university and by Duke George.

Fortunately for Mosellanus, another position opened up. In the spring of 1518, Frederick of Saxony asked Reuchlin to suggest two names of scholars to teach Hebrew and Greek at the University of Wittenberg.112 There were two candidates for the position: the 24- year old Petrus Mosellanus and the 21-year old Philip Melanchthon. Mosellanus had the support of Luther, Georg Spalatin and several Wittenberg faculty members; Melanchthon

luyCWE4,Ep. 553. 110 In 1518, he boasted of invitations to Spain, France, Switzerland, Germany, and England, invitations that came from three kings, two dukes, and nine ecclesiastical princes, cf. CWE 5, Ep. 809,11. 147-53. 111 CWE 4, Ep. 560. 112 Ludwig Geiger, ed., Johann Reuchlin. Briefwechsel (Stuttgart 1875; repr. Hildesheim: G. Olms, 1962), pp. 29-30, Ep. 25. 85 had the support of Erasmus and Reuchlin. Mosellanus did not stand a chance;

Melanchthon got the job. He was simply better connected.

Ultimately Mosellanus would remain in Leipzig and find a stalwart Maecenas in

Duke George, who even silenced Mosellanus' scholastic critics at the university. On 26

July 1521, Mosellanus wrote Capito that he had been hired by the faculty of theology and that his salary had thus been raised from 70 to 100 gulden. Nevertheless Mosellanus added that he had reservations about the position: "For this appointment brings with it the inconvenience that at some later time it will be necessary that I become the administrator of the entire college [i.e. the Fiirstenkollegium]. Since this duty calls me away from my studies, I loathe it very much." In hindsight the position of professor of Greek at the

University of Wittenberg went to the right candidate. Luther ended up having reservations about Mosellanus, whom he would later describe as "strongly Erasmian

(fortiter Erasmianus)."lu Regardless, Mosellanus' life came to a premature end in 1524.

Luther found his right hand man in Melanchthon, who, despite everyone's apprehensions about his health, lived till 1560.

Fostering and promoting the careers of one's students also meant giving advice and following their careers. Melanchthon was often flooded with requests to suggest possible candidates to fill a wide range of posts throughout Germany . On 19 January

1546, Melanchthon wrote to his former student, Adam Siber in Chemnitz, informing him that the city council of Halle had asked him to suggest for them a gubernator for the school to succeed Emericus Sylvius, who was forced to resign due to his health. If Siber was interested in the job, he should come to Wittenberg to obtain a letter of

113 CWC l, Ep. 100. 114 WABr 2, p. 545, Ep. 499. 86 recommendation. Halle, he writes, is a great city, filled with learned men and located close to two universities, Wittenberg and Leipzig.115 A letter written by Melanchthon to

David Voit in Jena, a former Wittenberg student, on 15 August 1559, best illustrates the extent to which Melanchthon went to keep his ear to the ground for job opportunities for his students. In the letter, he advises Voit about various job prospects: Halle needs a rector for their school; Marienberg is in search of a pastor; there is a position as lecturer available at the University of Konigsberg; finally, in the postscript he adds that Duke

Johann Albrecht of Mecklenburg is on the lookout for a pastor who can also teach theology at the University of Rostock.116

Students were expected to express their gratitude towards their teachers, who, over the course of the years, had often invested much time in training, disciplining, fostering, promoting and recommending them. On 13 January 1521, Felix Ulscenius wrote to Capito, expressing his gratitude for everything that he had done for him:

Since ingratitude is regarded by far the most absurd of all vices, I have at any rate the intention of giving you thanks. For the man must have a very kind heart who overwhelms with his favour someone from whom he can hardly hope a good deed in turn. How much do I deserve from you, sweetest teacher? Not a single stick! O how fortunate I am to have you as my patron!117

Along the same lines, on 24 September 1556, Josias Menius, head of the school in

Niirnberg, wrote to Melanchthon, thanking him for his support and for having recommended him the previous year to both Hieronymus Baumgartner and Hieronymus

Besold in Nurnberg, two recommendations which helped him obtain the job:

Reverend preceptor and patron. I respectfully thank Your Excellence, because you have promoted me rather often with many kind deeds and have always acted in fatherly love towards me. If only I could in turn publish even something to

115 MBW Ep. 4120 (summary); printed in CR 6.16-7. 116 MBW Ep. 9032 (summary); printed in CR 9.901-2 u7CWCl,Ep. 70. 87

demonstrate my gratitude either in love or my obedience or anything else, I would do it most eagerly.

Both of these letters are expressions of gratitude for the efforts Capito and Melanchthon made on their behalf, but also for the fatherly care and concern by which they were trained and fostered, underscoring the Doktorvater role played by many humanists.

Turning one's back on one's teacher, on the other hand, especially over a theological issue, was considered the ultimate act of ingratitude and betrayal. In 1537, Melanchthon delivered an oration at the promotion of the masters of arts at the University of

Wittenberg, entitled On the Ingratitude of the Cuckoo, inspired by the ingratitude of a former student of his, Jakob Schenck, whom Melanchthon disparagingly referred to as

"that Freiburg demagogue." Schenck, who had matriculated at Wittenberg in 1526, had become an antinomian theologian and consequently became involved in a dispute with his former preceptor, which Melanchthon resented. The debate occasioned the oration. It is immediately clear from the oration that Melanchthon had an axe to grind. He relates the story, as told by Aristotle, of the cuckoo, which lays its eggs in the nest of another bird and whose hatchlings are fed by the surrogate mother, whom they eventually gobble up, committing thereby the ultimate act of ingratitude. He then applies that story to everyday life, where ungrateful men represent the cuckoo. Without mentioning names, he states:

And yet it often happens, that though educated and instructed with great faith, afterward, [students] forget all good deeds and, incited by either ambition or natural ill-will or envy, make attacks against their teachers, not only to harm them, but in an attempt to oppress and destroy the bonae artes with their hatred for their teachers. Does this type of cuckoo not seem worthy of hatred?119

118 MBW Ep. 7969 (summary); printed in CR 8.853: "Reverende praeceptor and patrone. Gratias tuae excellentiae reverenter ago, quod me saepius multis beneficiis auxisti, et paterno animo semper fuisti erga me praeditus. Utinam possem vel amore vel obedientia mea aut aliis rebus aliquando gratitudinis significationem vicissim edere, facerem id cupidissime." 88

On 4 December 1542, Melanchthon wrote to Joachim Camerarius in Leipzig, expressing his hope that Schenck's successor, Alexander Alesius, would not be as ungrateful towards him.120 Acts of ingratitude towards one's patron were in fact rare, but the moral lesson about the ingratitude of the cuckoo at a commencement ceremony must have been a good reminder for all the graduates that day. Consequently, many students did their utmost to avoid such an accusation.

The evidence cited in this chapter demonstrates that patrons were not only people in high places, such as popes, rulers and wealthy merchants, but humanists themselves, who, by using their connections, could both act as father-figure to their servant-pupils and as patron to their students, promoting their careers by way of recommendation. It was within the context of the humanist household, where the system of patronage effected a mutually beneficial exchange of services between the host and guest. Behind every recommendation were relationships initiated by letters of introduction, validated by lists of mutual friends and strengthened by the familiar interaction in the home of a particular humanist. Increasingly, the relationship built at home between humanists and their proteges, bound more by confession and orthodoxy than by shared cultural ideals, came to dominate. Though the relationship between humanists and their proteges was not always perfect, nevertheless, humanists, in their capacity as 'fathers' and 'teachers', fostered and promoted the careers of their charges.

CR 11.339: "Et tamen saepe fit, ut educatus atque institutus magna fide, postea oblitus omnium beneficiorum, et incitatus ambitione, aut naturae malevolentia, aut invidia, impetum faciat in praeceptorem, nee nocere tantum ipsis, sed odio ipsorum bonas artes opprimere et delere conetur. An hoc cuculorum genus non videtur odio dignum?" r20 MBW Ep. 3101 (summary). 89

3. Humanism and the Letter of Recommendation

In the prefatory letter to the Novum Instrumentum, Erasmus makes specific mention of

Johannes Oecolampadius, who had assisted him with the Hebrew, confessing that the project could not have been done single-handedly "without [his] Theseus" - a singular accolade from a distinguished scholar.1 Oecolampadius subsequently wrote a letter to

Erasmus on 27 March 1517 "to prove that your praise of me was not ill-advised," and to ensure that he had upheld his promise "to make what you said about me prove true."

Consequently, he briefly relates to Erasmus the humanistic preoccupations in which he had been involved since Erasmus' departure from Basel in May 1516, namely an index to the Opera Omnia of Jerome as well as a tragedy, The Nemesis ofTheophilus, which is no longer extant.2 The compilation of the index, he writes, was a joint endeavour by himself and a young man, Johannes Brenz, "who is as industrious as he is enthusiastic in studies of all kinds." At the end of the letter he commends to Erasmus the young rising star,

Philip Melanchthon, rhapsodizing that "he richly deserves your affection; he will make a second Erasmus, in eloquence, in ability, in learning, and in manner of life. If any

German can, he will make a new Erasmus."

Commendations such as these are commonplace in humanist correspondence, and formed a vital aspect of the interaction amongst humanists in their various capacities in the worlds of academia, publishing, church and state. A letter of recommendation, whether private or public, formal or informal, could make or break, vastly enhance or diminish the reputation of a scholar. Just as a glowing recommendation could open

1 CWE 3, Ep. 373,11. 75-6. For the adage, see Erasmus, Adagia 1.5.27. 2 While the play does not seem to have survived, its prologue to Willibald Pirckheimer has, cf. BrOek 1, pp. 39-41, Ep. 32. 5 CWE 4, Ep. 563. seemingly unlimited career possibilities, so a critical letter of recommendation could harm one's reputation. A good example of this is how the scholastic theologians suffered, individually and as a class, from the negative publicity they received from humanists, who used their personal and published correspondence to lampoon them, their methodology and contributions to scholarship as sub par, inept, and boorish. Indeed

Maarten van Dorp, for instance, felt the brunt of the negative publicity so deeply that he begged Erasmus to reverse the effect and advertise their reconciliation by mentioning his name somewhere "so that everyone may see that we are in complete agreement," humbly requesting Erasmus to recommend him to Thomas More, Richard Pace, Beatus

Rhenanus, Ulrich von Hutten or Guillaume Bude.4

Whereas the first two chapters have focused on the sentiments and connections which helped foster and promote the careers of scholars, in this chapter we shall turn our attention to the medium used: the letters of recommendation themselves, first to their rhetoric and then to their purpose. The choice of words used to recommend someone is a useful indicator of what qualities humanists themselves saw as representative of their agenda to promote the bonae literae. The young men they recommended were Christian scholars, who, like Jerome centuries before, possessed the combined virtues of being doctus m&pius, that is to say, they were learned and godly men, who applied their linguistic skills to the promotion of classical, patristic and biblical studies for the reform of religion and society. In the opinion of many humanists, these studies were saddled by barbarous Latin, muddled by scholastic theology, and hindered by the lax morals of the clergy as well as the secular and ecclesiastical rulers. As we shall see, humanist letters of

4 CWE 8, Ep. 1044,11. 57-8. Cf. Erika Rummel, Erasmus and his Catholic Critics (Nieuwkoop: De Graaf, 1989), vol. l,p. 13. 91 recommendation were written primarily for people applying to positions as teachers of

Latin, Greek and Hebrew, or as textual editors, reflecting the activities that were at the heart of the humanist program: the promotion of the three languages and the editing and publishing of texts.

The Rhetoric of Letters of Recommendation:

Humanist letters of recommendation reflect the rhetoric of classical models, especially of those found in the correspondence of Cicero and Pliny, but adapted to the needs of the humanist community of sixteenth-century Germany. They were based on the advice given in contemporary letter-writing manuals, most notably of Erasmus and

Vives, who instructed their readers in the art of praise and blame.5 Not all humanist letters containing recommendations were written for that specific purpose. Many were ordinary letters between friends containing an incidental and casual recommendation for someone. For example, on 21 August 1505, Konrad Mutian recommended his protege,

Georg Spalatin, to Heinrich Urban, citing verbatim the words Pliny the Younger used to praise Servanius' new son-in-law, Fuscus Salinator: "He himself is studious, both literate and talented; like a boy in his simplicity, a young man in his courtesy, an old man in his dignity."6 The act of recommending and disclosing an opinion about someone, as we shall see, manifested itself in a variety of ways - from the simple use of epithets, that is, the adjectives placed in apposition to the names of individuals mentioned in the letter, to the perfunctory and informal recommendations between friends. More formal letters of recommendation {testimonia and iudicia) to institutions and governing bodies expanded

5 Cf. John O'Malley, Praise and Blame in Renaissance Rome: Rhetoric, Doctrine, and Reform in the Sacred Orators of the Papal Court (Durham, N.C.: Duke University Press, 1979). 6 Pliny the Younger, Letters 6.26.1; Mutian 1, p. 21, Ep. 14: "Ipse est studiosus, literatus etiam, disertus etiam, puer simplicitate, comitate iuvenis, senex gravitate." 92 the brief epithet into a fuller description of the recommended person and his background and credentials, essentially providing a textual portrait of him. Letters of recommendation are an important genre in humanist epistolography and attest to the relations between authors and the persons recommended, who were usually a student, friend or a friend of a friend. These letters demonstrate the virtues of the type of scholars humanists sought to promote in their bid to get young men of their persuasion appointed to various jobs and positions. Above all, they help elucidate how humanists themselves defined their movement and depicted its participants.

Humanists had many models of recommendation letters at their disposal and were able to draw inspiration from the rich tradition of their classical, patristic and to a lesser extent medieval predecessors. Medieval letter-writing was heavily influenced by the ars dictaminis, the art of composing formal Latin letters according to complex forms and rules, a practice eventually phased out by the more fluid guidelines found in humanist letter-writing manuals, which included examples of recommendation letters plucked from the ancients as well as examples of their own invention.7 Erasmus preferred students to use as models the letters of Cicero, Pliny, Symmachus, Apollonius, and amongst his own contemporaries, those of the Italian humanist, Angelo Poliziano, rather than those of

Francesco Negro, Giovanni Mario Filelfo, Enea Silvio (later Pius II), Gasparino of

Barzizza, Giovanni Antonio Campano, and Charles Viruli. This did not mean that he denied that "there [was] anything worthy of imitation in them," but because he preferred to use "outstanding examples" rather than "the mediocre and merely ordinary."8 Since

7 For a more extensive history of the development of letter-writing from antiquity to the early modern period, see Fantazzi, introduction to Juan Luis Vives, De conscribendis epistolis, pp. 1-9; and Henderson, pp. 17-38. * CWE 25, p. 44. 93

Negro did not use classical models in his popular Opusculum scribendi epistolas (Fano,

1515), he was criticized by Erasmus, who deemed the work unsuitable for schoolboys.9

The Novum epistolarium (Bologna, 1489) of Filelfo was also given a negative review by

Erasmus, who considered the book "muddled and disorderly," "defective both in scholarship and in suitability to the purpose in hand," and "repetitive," in effect, plain

"rubbish."10 Erasmus continued to disparage the efforts of his Italian predecessors in the field of producing letter-writing manuals, sparing only the contributions of Giovanni

Sulpizio da Veroli and Niccolo Perotti.11 Erika Rummel suggests, however, that Erasmus' antagonistic attitude towards his predecessors may have been posturing, a "part of his personal style and writing style," whose "extreme statements cannot be taken literally."12

Certainly for humanists, the ars dictaminis had ultimately run its course. Its rigid rules were no longer considered fashionable for the early modern world, which preferred more flexible and concise letters to the convoluted letters of the Middle Ages.

In 1522, there appeared in print Erasmus' own contribution to the art of letter- writing, his De conscribendis epistolis, a "long and rambling" (to use Charles Fantazzi's words ), yet highly influential treatise, in which he provides advice and instruction on how to write a wide variety of letters, accompanied by a wealth of examples drawn both from the classics as well as his favourite humanist authors and himself. Mark Morford, who has written on the subject of Justus Lipsius' letters of recommendation, writes that

Erasmus was "the first to criticise the convention of putting letters of recommendation in

9 CWE 25, p. 44; CWE 1, Ep. 117,11. 33-7. 10CWEl,Ep. 117. 11 Charles Fantazzi, "Vives Versus Erasmus on the Art of Letter-Writing," in Self-Presentation and Social Identification: The Rhetoric and Pragmatics of Letter Writing in Early Modern Times, edited by Toon van Houdt et al. (Leuven: Leuven University Press), p. 40. 12 Erika Rummel, "Erasmus' Manual of Letter-writing: Tradition and Innovation," Renaissance and Reformation 25.3 (1989):303. 13 Fantazzi, "Vives Versus Erasmus on the Art of Letter-Writing," p. 39. 94 the rhetorical category of the genus demonstrativum."14 Instead, he placed recommendation letters along with letters of request and other types under the category of

letters of persuasion, one of the three sources of all the kinds of letters: persuasive,

demonstrative, and judicial, as found in Quintilian.15 Since the goal of letters of

recommendation was to persuade the recipient to effect the favour, it made sense for

Erasmus to place them under the category of letters of persuasion, whose concern, he wrote, was to incite the will, to teach by proofs, and to change a way of thinking.16

Despite the shift in genus, in his discussion of the letters of the demonstrative class,

Erasmus admits that since the "demonstrative class is rarely employed on its own," there

is often overlap with the other classes, including the letters of recommendation,

consolation, request, encouragement, etc.17 Elsewhere, too, he writes that a letter of

recommendation is a mixture of two classes: the demonstrative and deliberative (or

persuasive), the former "when we give a favourable description of the person we are

recommending," and the latter "when we show that the request itself is honourable,

profitable, or easy."18 The question concerning the category to which letters of

recommendation belong is indicative not only of the difficulty of classifying letters

according to various genera, but more importantly of the focus of the letters themselves.

If the focus is on the recommended person, then the letter is demonstrative; but if it seeks

to talk the addressee into doing something, then it is persuasive.

14 Morford, p. 185. 15 CWE 25, p. 71; cf. Quintilian 2.4.25 and 3.8.6. 16CWE25,p.73. 17 CWE 25, p. 205. 18 CWE 25, p. 182. 95

Morford writes that Erasmus' treatment of recommendation letters "represents a significant stage in the[ir]... liberation from the rules of rhetoric."19 Gone are the formulaic letters of recommendation following the rules of the ars dictaminis, and in their stead are dozens of examples of letters focusing on the characters of the three persons involved in a recommendation - the author, the recommended and the recipient. Erasmus believed that the author should take into consideration the characters of all three by choice of wording and appropriate rhetoric, so that he might establish "a sense of humanity in the delicate negotiation that a recommendation involves." Juan Luis Vives shared the same opinion in his clear and concise discussion of the matter in his own letter-writing treatise, De conscribendis epistolis, of 1534. His primary precept was that the person being recommended should be worthy of the writer and the recipient of the letter in his character, intellect, social standing, and achievements.21 The rhetoric of recommendation letters should always be accommodated to the characters of the three persons involved. The Augsburg reformer Wolfgang Musculus begins his prefatory letter to his Latin translation of the Opera Omnia of Basil the Great with the following words:

"In the opinion of Agesilaus, king of Macedonia, excellent reader, whenever he heard someone being praised or blamed, he felt (and rightly so) that the characters of those who were speaking should be considered no less than the characters of those about whom they were speaking."22 For that reason, Musculus admitted feeling unworthy to take on the honourable task of appending his own preface to the works of the Church Father: "... if I

19 Morford, p. 187. 20 Ibid. 21 Fantazzi, introduction to Juan Luis Vives. De conscribendis epistolis, pp. 9-14. 22 Wolfgang Musculus, ed. and trans., Opera D. Basilii Magni Caesariae Cappadociae episcopi omnia (Basel, 1540), fol. ah: "Sententiam Agesilai Macedonum Regis, optime lector, qua ille non frustra quoties aliquem vel laudari audiebat vel vituperari, non minus existimabat discendos esse mores eorum qui loquebantur quam eorum de quibus loquebantur." 96 wanted to add anything to his praises I would be doing nothing else than if I, clearly a fool, attempted to add some light to the very rich splendour of the sun with a poor lantern." Musculus' modesty, typical of such prefatory letters, illustrates Erasmus' point that the characters of all three persons involved in the recommendation must be taken into consideration, a reflection of the power dynamics in the triangular relationship.

Humanists frequently employed epithets, or adjectives added in apposition to the names of rulers and magistrates, as well as to the names of their own friends, colleagues and opponents. These epithets, or apposites, as Quintilian calls them,24 are important indicators of the personal opinions and relations of the author with regard to the person mentioned. Erasmus' lengthy reply on 21 September 1514 to Jakob Wimpfeling's invitation to join the Strasbourg sodality, which carefully lists each member of the sodality, followed by epithets of praise, is indicative of the importance he attached to the recognition of his "fellow Germans," and is typical of epithets following the names of friends and colleagues. National identity was becoming increasingly a matter of

9S importance and pride. Both Johann Wildenauer and Philipp Voyt of Freiburg also

9ft praised Erasmus in letters to Boniface Amerbach as the "pride of Germany." Erasmus himself waffled on his own heritage, identifying himself at times as a Dutchman, but at

Ibid.: "... ut si laudibus illius aliquid adiicere voluero, nihil aliud fecero quam si ditissimo solis splendori de paupere lucema lucis aliquid plane ridiculus adferre coner." 24 Quintilian 8.2.10 and 8.6.40. 25 Cf. AK 2, Ep. 505, a letter fromGlarea n to Boniface Amerbach, dated 2 October 1514, regarding the first edition of his Descriptio Helvetiae: "But if perchance it seems that I have been somewhat excessive in praising the fatherland, they will be reminded that I did this not at the expense of any nation you will and did so even modestly, although passionately (for all wretched men are accustomed to be drawn by flattering assent)/Quod si forte nonnullis in laudanda patria excessisse videbor, meminerint me id sine cuiusvis nationis detractione et modeste quidem, quamvis cum affectu (solemus enim miseri homines cuncti assentationibus trahi) effecisse." 26 AK 2, Epp. 560 and 622. other times as a Frenchman or German, depending on the situation. When he became embroiled in disputes with the French humanists, Christophe de Longueil and Guillaume

Bude, for instance, humanists everywhere took the opportunity to contrast the men's nationalities: French versus German.28 Swiss humanists, on the other hand, had to overcome the stereotype of being a motley group of mercenaries, and letters of recommendation for them contain disclaimers that the recommended does not fit the

Swiss stereotype.29 Conversely, letters to them urge them to prove it wrong.30

Humanists considered the writings of Varro, Cicero, Demonsthenes, as well as those of Poliziano, to be the epitome of a refined and polished style, and they hailed one another as a modern-day or "second versions" of them. This likening to classical or contemporary heroes was typical.31 Elsewhere they praised one another as the "ornament

(decus) of their age.32 Erasmus was universally known as the "prince of humanists."33

Less usual, but still flattering, was the use of the Hebrew "crown of my head," with which epithet Oecolampadius concluded his letter to Erasmus, cited at the beginning of this chapter.34 In contrast, humanists likened their opponents to Thraso, a character in

Terence's play Eunuchus, whose name became synonymous with the blustering

27 James D. Tracy, "Erasmus Becomes a German," Renaissance Quarterly 21.3 (1968): 281-288; Istv&n Bejczy, "Erasmus Becomes a Netherlander," Sixteenth Century Journal 28.2 (1997): 387-399; Ari Wesseling, '"Or Else I Become a Gaul': a Note on Erasmus and the German Reformation," Erasmus of Rotterdam Society Yearbook 15 (1995): 96-8; Ibid., "Are the Dutch Uncivilized? Erasmus on the Batavians and his National Identity," Erasmus of Rotterdam Society Yearbook 13 (1993): 68-102. 28 Cf. AK 2, Ep. 674; CWE 7, Ep. 1026; Allen Epp. 1812 and 3043. 29 Cf. Erasmus' letter of recommendation for Heinrich Glarean, CWE 4, Ep. 529. 30AK2,Ep.505. 31 For examples of comparison with Varro, see CWE 3, Ep. 310 and 4, Ep. 531; for Cicero, see CWE 3, Epp. 310 and 319 and 4, Ep. 556; for Cicero and Demonsthenes, see CWE 4, Ep. 574; for Poliziano, see, CWE Ep. 408, and CWC 1, Epp. 15b and c; for. 32 CWC 1, Ep. 32, 44, 67-8, 95. 33 Cf. Richard J. Schoeck, Erasmus of Europe: The Prince of Humanists (1501-1536) (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 1993). 34 CWE 4, Ep. 563,11. 63-4. 98 braggart. Humanists and reformers alike also demonized their opponents by characterizing them as "the devil incarnate" or "a horned beast."36 Whereas humanists drew on classical and contemporary humanistic sources for inspiration, a shift occurred with the Reformation. Luther, for instance, was frequently likened to the biblical figures of Elijah and Daniel or to the proto-reformer, Jan Hus, reflecting a shift in the priorities in cultural reference points initiated by the reformers.37

Erasmus supplies many examples of epithets suitable for persons of various ranks, but advises the reader to use them sparingly, judiciously and appropriately, lest one resort to flattery in an effort to persuade. Above all, the characters of the people involved should also be taken into consideration so as to avoid potential misunderstandings by:

transferring what suits one group to another, such as calling a girl 'venerable', an old man 'charming,' a king 'modest', and a matron 'invincible,' but also against attributing obviously false qualities to anyone. Thus you should call an ill-taught theologian 'eminent' rather than 'learned,' or a stupid and indolent prelate anything but 'alert,' and a conspicuously miserly king 'merciful' rather than 'generous.' For each of them is inwardly aware of his own qualities and would take this as an insult, just as if you were to call a deformed old man 'a handsome youth' or a dwarf 'an outstanding hero.'39

Erasmus advises the reader against superstitious adherence to formulaic epithets for pontiffs, cardinals, kings, emperors, princes, etc., since the common practice of his day was to apply only certain epithets to people of different ranks, as if "in a set formula."

Therefore, the pope was addressed as "Most blessed father," cardinals as "very reverend

As Capito calls Edward Lee in a letter to Martin Gertophius, cf. CWC 1, Ep. 54. 36 As does Veit Geisfel regarding Franz von Sickingen (AK 2, Ep. 587), and Johann Eck Melanchthon (AK 2, Ep. 693), respectively. Luther called Erasmus the "devil incarnate" in a letter to Nikolaus von Amsdorf (WABr 7, p. 34, Ep. 2093). 37 CWC 1, Ep. 24; AK 2, Ep. 671. cf. MBW Tl, Ep. 235, a letter from Johannes Alexander Brassicanus to Melanchthon which is dated "3 September in the fourth year after the spirit of Elijah was made manifest (3 Nonas Septembris anno a manifestato Heliae spiritu quarto)," in other words, after Luther became a publicly renowned scholar in 1518. See also Robert Kolb, Martin Luther as Prophet, Teacher, and Hero: Images of the Reformer, 1520-1620 (Grand Rapids; Baker, 1999). 38 CWE 25, pp. 57-63. 39 CWE 25, p. 59. 99 lordships," and archbishops "very reverend," but bishops and abbots, "reverend."

Furthermore, he continues,

The king of the French alone is called 'most Christian,' the king of Spain alone 'Catholic,' the king of England 'most serene,' the emperor alone 'ever august,' dukes 'most illustrious,' other members of the lesser nobility merely 'illustrious,' and others 'most noble.'

Instead, Erasmus prefers to be able to address the pontiff as "evangelical shepherd," for if he truly did serve Christ and the Christian flock, then "I have given him a worthy title,"

and if not, then "I have given him a subtle reminder of what he should be." Here

Erasmus is expressing his pet peeves with the established convention. His comment

displays certain humanistic sensibilities and good stylistic advice, but in practice, he kept to convention, knowing full well, as he admits, that were he to address the pope by any

other epithet than "Most blessed father," the document would then be dismissed or torn

up.41 In addition to his discussion of epithets, he provides a list of adjectives appropriate

for people of various ranks, status and profession, a useful collection - a thesaurus, as it

were - of words for authors to use in letters of recommendation. These words allowed the

authors to provide a clear and concise character assessment of an individual. This list

supplied humanists with a palette from which they could choose the colours in which to

depict and portray an individual in writing.

Just as Renaissance humanists published their collected correspondence as a

performance in self-portraiture, so letters of recommendation functioned as a textual

portrait of the character of the person recommended, suggesting a connection between

letters of recommendation and the sixteenth-century vogue for portraiture, a nexus

between words and images, as it were. The analogy of the literary portrait derives from

40 CWE 25, pp. 60-1. 41CWE25,p.61. late medieval and humanist conviction that the visible actions and body of the outer man were essential expressions of the inner self, an idea whose roots were found in the writings of the ancient Greeks and Romans.42 Horace's famous simile ut pictura poesis

(as is painting so is poetry) was often invoked "to confirm the parallel between the two

arts."43 This juxtaposition is made in the inscription on Quinten Metsys' 1519 medal of

Erasmus and later again on Albrecht Diirer's famous portrait of Erasmus of 1526: the

Latin states that the image has been made according to the living likeness, and the Greek that his true portrait is delineated in his written works.44

Erasmus rivalled the famous portrait artists of his day, Hans Holbein and Albrecht

Durer, in his masterful pen portraits of Thomas More and his household. On 23 July

1519, Erasmus wrote a letter to Ulrich von Hutten, which is a brilliant portrait of his best

friend, More. Erasmus hoped to immortalize More by composing a description of him for the general public. He was keenly aware that he was playing the role of an artist, using the pen instead of the brush:

... not everyone can appreciate all More's gifts, and I doubt if he would endure to be depicted by any and every artist. It is, I suspect, no easier to produce a portrait of More than one of Alexander the Great or Achilles, nor did they deserve their immortality any more than he does. Such a sitter demands the skill of an Apelles, and I fear there is less of Apelles in me than of Fulvius or Rutuba. I will try, however, to do you not so much a picture as an outline sketch of the whole man,

Joanna Woods-Marsden, Renaissance self-portraiture: the visual construction of identity and the social status of the artist (New Haven and London: Yale University Press, cl998), pp. 13-7. 43 The comparison continues through the sixteenth century. In his examination of Montaigne's Essais as exercises in self-portraiture, Richard L. Regosin writes that certain humanists "saw the significance of their art embellished when, by analogy with the portrait, they could claim for their writing the capacity to penetrate external appearance and express human interiority." See Richard L. Regosin, The matter of my book: Montaigne's Essais as the book of the .^//"(Berkeley et al.: University of California Press, 1977), pp. 175-6. Cf. Rensselaer W. Lee, Ut pictura poesis: the humanistic theory of painting (New York: W. W. Norton & Co., Inc., 1967) and John Graham, "Ut pictura poesis," in The Dictionary of the History of Ideas http://etext.lib.virginia.edu/cgi-local/DHI/dhi.cgi?id=dv4-63 (accessed 12 August 2007). 44 Latin: Imago ad vivam effigiem expressa; Greek: uTen kreitto ta syngrammata deixei." 101

based on long-standing and intimate acquaintance, as far as my observation or memory will serve.45

When humanists presented textual depictions of either their friends or foes, as Erasmus does here, they likened themselves to Apelles, the famous Greek painter of antiquity. In

September 1519, Boniface Amerbach wrote to his former preceptor, Zasius, regarding his letter to Guillaume Bude: "Alexander [the Great] was never depicted by Apelles with the same skill as you have presented him in writing with his own colours."46 On 7 October

1519, Amerbach wrote to Ulrich von Hutten, reporting that Johann Eck had written an apologia against Melanchthon, dismissing him as a mere grammarian (gramfmjaticum).

For that reason, he tells Hutten to help out Melanchthon so that "he may graphically depict the vain talker in his own colours."47

How "life-like" were these verbal portraits, and how sincere their "painters"?

Vincent Ilardi has written an interesting article on the question of sincerity in letters of recommendation, referring specifically to coded letters of recommendation in fifteenth- century Italy, written by a patron on behalf of a client with the expectation that the letter be disregarded or given little consideration by the recipients. They expected them to be sensitive to the presence or absence of secret signs or codes agreed on in advance by the correspondents, or to act in accordance with the instructions given in a follow-up letter to ignore the contents of the previous letter. A similar practice can be found in the letters of recommendation of sixteenth-century German humanists, where the authors would

45CWE7,Ep.999,11.23-31. 46 AK 2, Ep. 680: "Sed quid, inquis, de mea ad Budaeum epistola Compendio dicam: nunquam pari ingenio ab Apelle Alexander depictus est, quam graphice hunc tu suis reddidisti coloribus." On the comparison of Renaissance artists to Apelles, see Woods-Marsden, p. 23. 47 AK 2, Ep. 693: "Calcaria tu addes Philippo, ut mataiologon graphice suis depingat coloribus." Cf. AK 2, Ep. 675,11.45-7. 48 Vincent Ilardi, "Crosses and carets: Renaissance patronage and coded letters of recommendation," American Historical Review 92.5 (1987): 1127-1149. 102 disguise their true feelings by writing in Greek any unflattering phrases used to describe the recommended person, who would typically hand-deliver the letter. The use of Greek in humanist correspondence in general also enabled the author to express his true sentiments about someone else or some issue both safely and diplomatically, an increasingly necessary endeavour when engaged in negotiations over theological and political matters.49 The inclusion of Greek words played a dual role. On the one hand the use of Greek is inclusive, establishing a link between the writer and the reader based on the humanistic interests that linked them, and on the other hand, is exclusive, keeping away outsiders, including the courier, from the Hellenized cryptic comments in the letter.

Erasmus had already recommended the use of Greek for the purpose of secrecy and creating distance between the writer and the content of his writings in his Copia: "Finally we can use Greek words when we wish our meaning not to be understood by all and sundry; and - not to go through every possibility - whenever there is a certain convenience, we are justified in mixing Greek with Latin, especially when writing for the educated public."50 Some authors must have felt a bit of Schadenfreude, knowing that their letter-courier was unsuspectingly delivering a negative letter of reference with all the juicy bits safeguarded in Greek. On 27 August 1526, Erasmus wrote a letter to

Guillaume Cop, physician to the king of France: "The bearer of this letter wants very much to be commended to you. He can better explain what his business is. He is a merchant, one of Mercury's men and a terrible windbag (kaiphlyareus megas). You may

See Erika Rummel, "The use of Greek in Erasmus' letters," Humanistica Lovaniensia 30 (1981):55-92. Cf. CWC 2, Epp. 309 and 314, where Capita suggests to Zwingli that they use coded language in their correspondence when discussing potentially incriminating subjects. 50 CWE 24, p. 318, quoted in Ibid, p. 67, n. 59. listen to him by all means, but don't be taken in {alia me piteuseis)." Melanchthon used a similar technique in a letter to Veit Dietrich in Nurnberg on 6 February 1536, in which he reports about the negotiations with the English emissaries in Wittenberg concerning the divorce of Henry VIII from Catherine of Aragon. He praised Nicholas Heath but

disclosed in Greek his negative opinion about Edward Fox, bishop of Hereford: "But the bishop has the habits of chief priests - it does not seem that he is altogether favourably disposed."52 Such cautionary disclosure was especially important, for, as Melanchthon reported that same May to Dietrich, the doctrinal discussions with the Englishmen were

still underway: Heath was positive, but Fox was not.53

With such use of coded letters of recommendations, one may wonder how the recipient could ever trust a recommendation. The answer, I believe, is quite simple. The majority of humanist letters of recommendation were composed by friends and addressed to friends, who were already bound by common networks and sodalities. If there were

conflicting recommendations for the same person, then a follow-up letter was written to

clarify the issue. This was done by Oswald Myconius on 25 September 1539 in a letter to

Matthias Erb, from whom he had received a positive recommendation for Johannes

Crispinus, but a negative one from someone else:

You once commended Crispinus to me as a good man. Afterward, a letter came from someone, which, when read to me, plainly undermined everything of yours. I was surprised, for your testimony is of great weight to me. I wasn't able to give judgment about the other letter, for I didn't know who the author was. Yet the words had a certain effect on me. In the meantime, I took a closer look at Crispinus' life and character, etc., and found no disagreement with your testimony. In my absence he was appointed preacher. His audience really likes him. I would like to hear from you again what you think, not about him, for I

51 CWE 12, Ep. 1735,11. 37-40 and nl8. 52 MBW T7, Ep. 1695: "alia ho episkopos echei to synethes ton archiereon. oupanu dokei eunoikos echein." 53MBWT7,Ep. 1707. 104

know him myself, but about those, whose testimony altogether contradicts yours. He himself does not deny what the author of the letter indicated there, but he dismisses the injuries and the slanders of hateful men, lest they too be picked up by foreigners. What I ask is that you write back in a few words so that we may have some advice in some form or other, for we are otherwise labouring under inexplicable evils.54

Like the previously mentioned Francesco Negro, Erasmus composed his own exemplary letters of recommendation, but, as Morford notes, was "much more concerned to make use of classical models, above all, Cicero."55 Erasmus remarks, "While there are very many examples of the recommendatory class of letters in Cicero, the one beginning,

'News had not yet reached me' sums up the whole set of rules of recommendation in itself.56 Despite that comment, Morford claims that Erasmus found in Pliny's letter to

Priscus recommending Voconius Romanus his most useful example, and proceeds to an analysis of its basic structure.57 This letter served as a useful model later for Justus

Lipsius as well, who shared Pliny's sensitivity to the "difference in power and status between a great public figure ... and the recommender."

Just as letters of introduction should be free of flattery, so too should letters of recommendation be free of any spirit of self-seeking (ambitio), both on the part of the

author and the recommended person. Erasmus suggests that writers of recommendation

letters take into consideration the spirit and nature of the request, and emphasize that the

Original autograph, Basel UB, Fr Gr 119, f. 50: "Crispinum ollm commendasti apud me ut virum bonum. Venerant postea literae, a quo nescio, quae mihi praelectae plane subvertebant isthaec omnia. Mirabar, nam testimonium tuum magni ponderis apud me esse. De alterius scriptis iudicare non licuit, nam unde forent nescivi. Nonnihil tamen me moverunt. Inspexi diligentius interea vitam, mores et siqua sunt alia, inveni non dissonantia a tuo testimonio. In absentia mea in suggestum elevatus esse. Placet auditoribus mirabiliter. Quamobrem vellem iterum audire ex te quid sentias, non de illo, nam idipsum novi, sed de eis, qui testimonium adeo tuo contrarium scribunt. Quod designavit ille non negat, sed iniurias aversatur et odiosorum molimina, ne ab alienis quoque recipiantur. Paucis quod peto rescribere poteris, quo et nobis sit aliqua ratione consultum, qui malis alioqui laboramus inexplicabilibus." 55 Morford, p. 186. 56 CWE 25, p. 183; Cicero, Adfamiliares 2.6. 57 Morford, pp. 186-7. Pliny, Epist. 2.13. Morford incorrectly identifies the letter as 2.23. person of the recommended is both deserving of the recommendation and thinks well of the recipient, highlighting once again the triangular relationship.58 Neither the author nor the recommended person could afford to give the impression of being self-seeking

(ambitiosus), as Melanchthon explained on 20 October 1550, in a formal testimonium for the Danish magister, Hans Jorgensen (Sadolin):

It was the custom of the ancient church to bear witness for honest students concerning their character and studies, so that the well-endowed and those travelling about for the sake of their studies can be distinguished from truants, who wander about as impostors or as those lying about in ambush. For this reason, we give these testimonia not for personal ambition, but for the sake of duty.59

This abhorrence of self-seeking individuals is natural, but the specific mention in letters of recommendation that the motive for the request is free of ambitio is a trope borrowed from Cicero, who frequently stressed that either he or the recommended person was free of any self-seeking motives.60 Erasmus drew on this tradition in his dispute with Edward

Lee, criticizing both his character as well as his backhanded tactics. In a letter to

Leonardus Priccardus, dated 1 July 1519, he complains about Lee and describes him as an overzealous youngster who wishes to to take a short-cut to a reputation by taking on a reputable scholar such as himself.61 He repeats the same objections in a letter to Lee himself on 15 July, complaining that Lee's self-seeking motives and method of attack against Erasmus do not represent a true Christian spirit. In Erasmus' opinion, Lee epitomized the very opposite virtues of a Christian humanist, that is, negative character

58CWE25,pp. 181-2. 59 MBW Ep. 5925 (summary). Printed in Holger Rordam, Mester Jorgen Jensen Sadolin (Odense, 1866) pp. 162-3, no. 14: "Vetus ecclesiae consuetudo est, honestis auditoribus dare testimonia de moribus et studiis, ut bene morati et studiorum causa peregrinantes discerni ab erronibus possint, qui vagantur ut impostores aut insidiatores. Ideo haec testimonia non ambitione, sed officii causa damus." 60 Cf. Cicero, Adfamiliares 13.1.5; 13.5.1; 13.7.4. 61 CWE 7, Ep. 993,11. 23-4. 62 CWE 7, Ep. 998. 106 traits and a misapplication of his linguistic skills to slandering another scholar instead of promoting the bonae literae.

On 5 April 1542, Veit Amerbach wrote a letter of recommendation to Georg

Spalatin in support of a young master, Johann Kirchhoff, who, having heard that the

schoolmaster in Bern had been dismissed, had asked Amerbach to recommend him for the now vacant position:

I could not say no to the man for many reasons, of which these are the principal: that he is modest, upright and most fond of everything that is honourable; also he has thus far been engaged in the study of the bonae artes in such a manner that he seems to me suitable to teach in that place; furthermore, he has taught before at Colditz not without the favour of the citizens and the benefit of the children, to my reckoning. I add, if you'll allow me, that the man has made use of my services for some time in studying the bonae liter ae and for that reason it has barely been a year since he was adorned with the title of magister. Finally, he was born well to an honest family, a consideration which should not be considered unimportant, as you know. And to add after everything else what is most important: I do not think that he readily takes second place to anyone in his love for the Christian religion. Wherefore, my most learned Spalatin, I ask you to help this young man in this matter. You will not be giving bad advice to that village, as I altogether hope, and you will be doing something pleasing to me and worthy of yourself. My zeal and efforts will never fail you, whenever you can use them rightly.63

In this letter, Amerbach clearly spells out the positive qualities of Johann Kirchhoff, which have earned him a recommendation in his effort to attain the position of

schoolmaster in Bern. First, he describes his character, his humanist education, teaching experience and public appeal, then adds something about his family background and finally proves the steadfastness of his Christian faith. This letter by Amerbach follows

Original autograph, Munich, Staatsbibliothek, elm 2106, ff. 49v-50r: "Hoc officium non potui denegare homini multas ob causas, quarum hae sunt praecipuae, quod est modestus, probus et omnis honestatis amantissmus, quoque hactenus ita est versatus in bonarum artium studiis, ut videatur mihi satis ad docendum in eo loco idoneus et praeterea docuit antea Colidici non sine favore civium et utilitate puerorum, ut existimo. Addo, si pateris, usum esse hominem mea opera diu in tractandis bonis literis, adeoque nunc fere annum esse cum ornatus sit magisterii titulo. Postremo natus est bene in honesta familia, quae res non est contemnenda, ut nosti. Et ut postremo scribam, quod est primum, non puto eum cuiquam facile cedere amore erga religionem Christianam. Quare, mi doctossime Spalatine, rogo te, ut iuvenem hac in re adiuvares. Non male consulas ill! oppido, ut omnino spero, et rem facies mihi gratam neque te indignant. Meum studium et officia nunquam tibi deerunt, quandocunque poteris eis recte uti." 107

some of the guidelines for letters of recommendation set forth by Erasmus in his De conscribendis epistolis: "We shall give such a description of the man that in view of his modest behaviour, uprightness, learning, integrity, culture and nobility, he should be

deemed worthy of the highest approval by all respectable citizens and particularly by the

one to whom we write."64 In other words, not only should authors of recommendation

letters note the character, and educational and family background of the recommended person, but they should also bear in mind the triangular relationship created in a letter, by tailoring its contents to the recipient. Finally, towards the end of his discussion, Erasmus adds: "A recommendation should be short and not too detailed, especially if we are writing to someone to whom we ourselves have been strongly recommended, for it

should have the authority of evidence rather than the appearance of a discussion."65 Did

Erasmus follow his own advice? Let us look at an example, his letter of recommendation for the famous Swiss humanist, Heinrich Glarean (1488-1563).

It is important to know the context of Erasmus' letter. Around February 1516,

Urbanus Rhegius, then professor of rhetoric and poetry at the University of Ingolstadt, wrote a letter to Johannes Fabri in Basel, conveying an offer of a post at the University of

Ingolstadt to Erasmus from Duke Ernest of Bavaria. The duke, he explains, was intent on turning the university into one of the best in Germany by recruiting the top scholars at his own expense. His hopes already set on Erasmus, the duke meant "to spare no expense to secure [him]." Rhegius urged Fabri to persuade Erasmus to accept the lucrative offer of

200 gulden per annum.66 Though he ended up turning down Duke Ernest's invitation,

Erasmus still felt obliged to repay the kind gesture, and so, on 7 March 1516, he wrote to

64CWE25,p. 181. 65CWE25,p. 182. 66CWE3,Ep.386. 108

Rhegius, recommending Heinrich Glarean, who had been crowned poet laureate at the age of twenty-four by Maximilian I, for the position of professor of poetry at Ingolstadt, praising his skills in poetry, in the various branches of mathematics, Aristotelian philosophy, theology, geography, history and Greek. Having lauded Glarean's academic qualifications, Erasmus proceeds to a brief and personal character description:

Besides which he is just the right age for the work. He is coming up to thirty, an age which is too old to be treated disrespectfully and [is by] far the most capable of all kinds of hard work. Glarean, however, apart from his age, is especially gifted by nature with the desire and capacity for scholarly work. What he does not know, he is eager to learn; what he knows, he is ready and generous to teach. His personality is lively and cheerful; you could fairly call him a man for all seasons. I will add one last argument, which I think should count among the very first: integrity is his second nature. He has a great aversion to the intemperance of these fashionable drinking-parties, and to dicing, obscenity, and wenching; the mere mention of them disgusts him. [...] I thought you might be grateful if I wrote and told you this. And I know the man I am recommending.67

This letter demonstrates that Erasmus does indeed conform to his own rules as set forth in

De conscribendis epistolis insofar as he observes the partition of academic ability and character, personality and work habits.

Glarean did not take up the position at Ingolstadt, but continued to run a school in

Basel. Erasmus, however, did not give up on this rising star. That same summer, he urged him to consider moving his school to the Netherlands.68 On 5 September 1516, Glarean responded, politely turning down Erasmus' invitation, explaining that once an alliance between France and the Swiss cantons is signed, he expected to be working in Paris with a salary of 200 ecus a year. In the meantime, he wrote, he had thirty students at his home, who were paying him 120 ecus a year, an inadequate fee, he admits, given the

CWE 3, Ep. 394; for similarly glowing letters, cf. CWE 4, Ep. 529 and Allen Ep. 2651,11. 58-9. CWE 3, Ep. 440. 109 workload. To aid Glarean in securing a position in Paris, Erasmus wrote a glowing recommendation letter to Etienne Poncher, then bishop of Paris, on 14 February 1517. He explains that he first got to know Glarean while in Basel, and that, in his opinion, Glarean was "as much the man you want as anyone could be."70 The letter of recommendation, "a brief but most reliable account of him," is divided up into three sections. In the first part,

Erasmus writes:

By birth a Swiss (for that country too begins to add distinguished learning to its renown in arms), in the prime of life, being not yet past thirty, of robust health, and a very hard worker, he has spent some years already in teaching the liberal arts first in Cologne and then in Basel, and not without great success. He is a doctor of what they call the Seven Arts, and not (like the majority of men of that rank) in name alone. In sophistic philosophy he was an expert, but having seen the error of his ways is now an enemy and a renegade.

He then relates how Glarean had advanced far in scholastic theology, but due to the constant quibbling and disputing amongst theologians, had retreated, "deciding to draw

Christ from the fountain-head and not from their standing pools," for which reason he had begun to master Greek. As in the letter to Rhegius, Erasmus reiterates Glarean's skills in poetry and prose, history, music, and geography, as well as his expertise in the various mathematical subjects. He then proceeds to a character description:

[H]e has such a high standard of character and conduct, a rare gift in men of this sort, that not only in thought but even in talk he abhors all trace of anything improper, while he is passionately devoted to true personal religion. [... T]here is not much love lost between him and the theologians, not the scholarly sort, with whom he gets on very well, but those one could name who beyond the mumbo- jumbo of some pointless questiones have learnt nothing. [...] Apart from that, he is as far as could be from all self-conceit and pomposity, having very easy ways, adaptable to any sort of society. Bid him sing, and he will sing without hesitation; if you would rather he read, he will read. If you felt like levity, he can be a very merry fellow; but should you wish to be serious, he will at once become quite different. And yet, adaptable as he is, he is incapable of flattery.

CWE 4, Ep. 463. CWE 4, Ep. 529. 110

Here again, we see the familiar partition into academic qualifications and character. In addition, we have here a striking example of the triangular relationship, taking into consideration the recipient's interest. In other words, Erasmus tailors his words to show that the multi-talented Glarean is flexible enough to serve the recipient in any capacity.

Moreover, in the letter to Duke Ernest he says nothing as elaborate as here about Glarean being a humanist. Here we have the salient features: he goes back to the sources, he despises the scholastics, he has all-round learning. In 1517, Glarean did move to Paris but returned to Basel towards the beginning of 1522, eventually assuming a lectureship in

71 poetry at Freiburg in 1529.

The concluding remarks in Erasmus' letter of recommendation for Glarean give further clues as to what Erasmus considered to be virtuous characteristics of a humanist

scholar: "If you wish to know how he stands in the world, he is quite uncommitted: not given to excesses, no admirer of money, not hampered by a wife nor bound by any vows

save those of baptism."72 A life of moderation and temperance was a commonplace virtue for the humanist; it is in the area of the marital status of the recommended person, however, where we see a new trend occur. It was in the Renaissance that traditional prohibitions against professorial marriage began to erode.73 An increasing number of humanists began to marry, much to the chagrin of their celibate colleagues, who saw the bonds of marriage as a yoke and a hindrance to scholarship. Erasmus, a lifelong celibate,

See CWE 9, Ep. 1264. On Glarean's time in Paris, see Albert Bilchi, "Glareans Schiller in Paris (1517- 1522) nebst 15. ungedruckten Briefen," Der Geschichtsfreund 83 (1928): 150-208. 72 CWE 4, Ep. 529. 73 Algazi, p. 9. Ill was one of those humanists who, though he did not view marriage as ideal for scholars, nevertheless spoke passionately in defence of the institution of marriage in general.74

Many humanists, who were heirs to the scholarly tradition extolling celibate life, criticized their friends when they got married. When Helius Eobanus Hessus married in

1514, Mutian did not conceal his disappointment in his young protege, protesting that marriage would hamper his freedom of movement as a scholar and inhibit his job prospects. As Gadi Algazi points out, on account of Hessus' marriage, he was barred from church service, rendered ineligible for a professorship at the University of Erfurt and was no longer considered a potential candidate for court service.75 Marriage would continue to pose difficulties for certain scholars as they applied for positions. When the

Collegium Trilingue in Leuven threatened to dismiss its professor of Greek, Roger

Rescius, on account of his marriage, it was Erasmus who came to his defence. On 30

March 1527, he urged the president, Nicolas Wary, to tolerate any inconvenience arising from Rescius' marriage and warned that it would be difficult to find a successor so competent.76 Conrad Goclenius, a colleague of Rescius, concurred with Erasmus on the matter.77 Though he considered a life of celibacy the ideal for a scholar, the case of

Rescius demonstrates that Erasmus was not so implacably opposed to the notion of the married scholar that he would not recommend one, especially when the reputation of a respected scholar was at stake. With the Reformation, however, marriage became the norm rather than the exception for scholars and preachers (at least amongst Protestants),

74 See Erasmus' colloquy "Coniugium," in CWE 39, pp. 306-27, and his treatise on marriage, Institutio christiani matrimonii, in CWE 69, pp. 203-438. For an analysis of Erasmus' views on marriage, see Hilmar M. Pabel, "Reading Jerome in the Renaissance: Erasmus' Reception of the Adversus Jovinianum," Renaissance Quarterly 55.2 (2002): 470-497; cf. Rainer Pineas, "Erasmus and More: Some Contrasting Theological Opinions," Renaissance News 13.4 (1960): 298-300. 75 Algazi, p. 16-7, esp. 17, n. 20. 76 Allen Ep. 1806A; cf. Ep. 1768. 77 CWE 12, Ep. 1768. 112 who were urged to get married and fulfil their procreative duties. One by one, reformers broke their priestly vows of celibacy and got married, often to the widows of their friends and fellow ministers of the Word.78 For some reformers, though, such as Melanchthon and Calvin, the celibate life remained the ideal, and they only married after succumbing to social pressure, agreeing to take on a wife for the care of their domestic affairs and households.79 References to the marital status of the person of the recommended, then, are important indicators as to how humanists and reformers perceived the institution and the role of the scholar in the world.

The Purposes of Humanist Recommendation:

Accompanying the familiar humanist rally cry "Ad fontes" was the need for personal tutors, teachers and professors of the three languages: classical Latin and Greek and eventually biblical Hebrew. Letters of recommendation had to be written so that humanists could obtain positions promoting the bonae literae, teaching the three tongues and, as we shall see later on in this chapter, editing classical, patristic and biblical commentaries in the new humanistic style. For at the heart of the humanist program were the teaching of these three languages and the application of the philological skills to classical, patristic and biblical texts. Around February 1516, Erasmus wrote a very encouraging letter addressed to a "teacher of the liberal arts," Johann Witz (Sapidus), the young rector of the prestigious Latin school in Selestat, emphasizing the importance of his calling, which should not be undermined by concerns over a salary cut. He urges him not to be drawn by the lure of the court, where flattery and ambition were thought to reign. Erasmus presents a very eloquent and passionate defence of the duty of teachers:

Algazi, pp. 20-5. Ibid., pp. 17 and 24, n. 54. 113

To be a schoolmaster is an office second in importance to a king. Do you think it a mean task to take your fellow-citizens in their earliest years, to instill into them from the beginning sound learning and Christ himself, and return them to your country as so many honorable upright men? Fools may think this is a humble office; in reality, it is very splendid. For if even among Gentiles it was always an excellent and noble thing to deserve well of one's country, I will not mince my words: no one does more for it than the man who shapes its unformed young people, provided he himself is learned and honorable - and you are both, so equally that I do not know in which of them you surpass yourself. As for the reduction in your salary, Christ himself will make it up to you abundantly in his own way, for virtue is its own sufficient reward. [...] An upright man who is above all temptation is what that office needed, a man devoted to his duties even if he is paid nothing.80

On 14 August 1518, in the final paragraph of a letter to Paul Volz, Erasmus reiterated the plea, admonishing Volz to tell Sapidus that he should remain a scholar, true to himself.

That this comment should appear at the close of the very letter that would become the preface to the 1518 Froben edition of the Enchiridion, a programmatic work in which

Erasmus outlines his goals as a Christian humanist, serves as a concluding reminder to all humanists that teaching was at the heart of their agenda.

As humanists began to join the university staff and apply their philological skills first to classical and then to biblical sources, a debate arose with the universities of

Germany between the scholastic theologians and the humanists. Disputes erupted over academic qualifications, and academic turf wars ensued, as scholastic theologians accused the humanists of being cupidi rerum novarum, i.e. rebellious innovators, and trespassing into their sacred territory, not as theologians, but as philologists and grammarians. The debate was particularly heated in the older universities of Germany, where the traditions of scholasticism were deeply rooted. It was less virulent in the more

80CWE3,Ep.391A. 81 CWE 6, Ep. 858,11. 642-3. 82 See Erika Rummel, The Humanist-Scholastic Debate in the Renaissance & Reformation (Cambridge, MA and London: Harvard University Press, 1995). 114 recently founded universities, such as the University of Wittenberg, whose mission was expressly humanist from its beginnings. Letters of recommendation for humanist teachers and professors were essential to place the right people of the right persuasion in jobs in schools and universities in order to ensure the success of their agenda. While the teaching of Latin was not an exclusive domain for humanists, they did seek to promote a purer form of the language, in keeping with the classical authors, instead of the medieval Latin, which had undergone significant stylistic and grammatical changes over the centuries.

Later reformers, too, duly noted the linguistic capabilities of those whom they recommended for teaching posts at universities, even likening their linguistic skills to ancient models, as Melanchthon did on 22 November 1546, in a letter of recommendation for Matthias Flacius Illyricus, then professor of Hebrew at the University of Wittenberg.

He ranked Flacius higher than the "quintilingual Epiphanius of Salamis." The next section of this chapter will focus on letters of recommendation for teachers and professors of Greek and Hebrew, which were the exclusive domain of humanists, and humanistically trained reformers.

Knowledge of Greek was rare throughout western Christendom during the Middle

Ages. The arrival of Chrysoloras in Florence in 1397 was the decisive moment in the hellenization of the Renaissance. The Council of Ferrara-Florence in 1438 and 1439 brought a great number of Greeks to Italy, including Cardinal Bessarion, as well as a great deal of interaction between Greeks and Latins. With the fall of Constantinople in

1453, more Greek emigres fled to Italy, bringing with them manuscripts as well as their

83 Cf. CWE 7, Ep. 1051, a letter from Erasmus presumably to an unsuccessful candidate for the Latin chair at the Collegium Trilingue, an unnamed man, possibly Alaard of Amsterdam, who had applied for the position as successor to Barlandus, and whose application was evidently not supported by Erasmus. The position eventually went to Conrad Goclenius. 84 MBW Ep. 4456 (summary); printed in CR 6.286. 115

or expertise m Greek. These Greeks immediately began to teach their language to Italian humanists who were keen to learn the ancient tongue. This spearheaded a wave of editions of classical and patristic authors. Around the turn of the sixteenth century,

Erasmus learned Greek and eventually applied his skills to editing and retranslating the textus receptus, the Latin Vulgate of Jerome. Initially, most Greek teachers were

Byzantine refugees or emigres, and that meant that Italian humanists had to learn Greek from Orthodox Christians. Eventually, however, they were replaced by Latin Christians, who had mastered Greek sufficiently to teach it themselves. How did German humanists describe the qualities that made for a good Greek teacher in sixteenth-century Germany?

The following cases illustrate what qualities humanists sought to promote when recommending candidates for jobs as teachers or professors of Greek. They also shed light on the hiring processes for such positions and the important role of letters of recommendation. These recommendations by German humanists for Greek teachers exhibit a bipartite division of character and linguistic skills, and a favourable likening of the recommended person to Italian humanists, who set the standards for eloquence; they also hint at new concerns for orthodoxy.

On 19 July 1518, Ambrogio Leoni, a Greek scholar living in Venice and connected with the Aldus press, wrote a letter to Erasmus, informing him that a position was being advertised for a professor of Greek to replace Marcus Musurus (d. 1517), for a

salary of 100 Venetian ducats. Erasmus had already been encouraged to apply in June

1517, but did not.86 The job opening had aroused much interest and attracted a large field of competitors. A two-month period had been prescribed, Leoni writes, "in which 85 See John Monfasani, Byzantine Scholars in Renaissance Italy: Cardinal Bessarion and Other Emigres. Selected Essays (Aldershot: Variorum, 1994). 86 CWE 4, Ep. 589,11. 18-31. 116

candidates are to give in their names and to demonstrate by publicly going through and

expounding Greek authors what manner of men they are, and whether tongue and brain

are any good." The best of the applicants thus far, he writes, is one Pietro Alcionio, who has already produced a number of Latin translations of Greek works, in particular

orations of Isocrates and Demosthenes as well as works by Aristotle, done "in such pure

Ciceronian style that you might think you were reading our Arpinate himself."87 What is

interesting about this case is that it gives us an idea about the hiring process for

professors of Greek in sixteenth-century Europe. Special preference was given to men

with good character and linguistic skills.

In his response to Gilles de Busleyden concerning the on-going search for a

professor of Greek at the Collegium Trilingue of Leuven, Erasmus states that the only

possible candidate that came to his mind was Rutgerus Rescius, an excellent and learned

man, but admits he has reservations since he would "prefer to start with men of

established reputation."88 In 1518, Erasmus wrote to Johannes Lascaris, advising him to

fill the vacant Greek chair at the Collegium with "a native Greek, from whom his

audience could acquire the true pronunciation of Greek at first hand." He adds that his

opinion is supported by those involved in the hiring process. The choice of a Greek

professor proved difficult. Amongst the potential candidates were Rutger Rescius, Robert

de Keysere and Jacobus Ceratinus, the latter a man Erasmus held in high esteem,

although, as he wrote to Lascaris, he preferred a native Greek. This preference for a

native-Greek speaker is odd, given that Erasmus admitted in his De recta pronuntiatione that the pronunciation of Byzantine Greek was different from that of classical or even

CWE 6, Ep. 854,11. 57-80. CWE5,Ep.691. 117 koine Greek. As the interlocutor, Bear, states: "Our modern pronunciation, whether we

are Greek speakers or Latin speakers, is almost totally wrong." Elsewhere Bear says,

"The educated speech of Greeks today has been taken over from that of the common people, and you know what sort of a model they are."89 This, however, is not that

important, Erasmus asserts here, since "today our sole object in learning Greek is to be able to read ancient literature, not to converse with ordinary Greeks."90

Humanists strove to learn Greek first from a native speaker, with the expectation

that once the rudiments in Greek and Latin had been taught, the students could "safely go

forward with the study of both languages in equal harness."91 The problem with recommending and hiring a native-Greek speaker was that they often could not speak

either Latin or German, as was the case with Clemens Palaeologus, a monk from the

Greek monastery of St. Catherine's on Mount Sinai, who repeatedly travelled in Europe to raise funds for the house. On 11 July 1517, Christoph Munzer, a vicar at the

Strasbourg cathedral, wrote to Bruno Amerbach about Palaeologus, whom Amerbach had previously recommended to him. Munzer was pleased with the man, but admitted that

since he did not speak Latin, Ottmar Nachtgall (Luscinius) had to act as translator.92

Beatus Rhenanus and his fellow docti at the Froben press conversed with him and practised their Greek with him: "He knows Greek very well, so Bruno and I stammered it with him." They must have consulted with him about any philological questions concerning Greek in the press' printing agenda.

CWE 26, pp. 409-20; here 409 and 411. CWE 26, p. 409. Ibid. AK 2, Ep. 586. CWE 5, Ep. 594 and AK 2, Ep. 635. 118

Erasmus' strong recommendation of Jacobus Ceratinus as a replacement for

Petrus Mosellanus, professor of Greek at Leipzig, who died on 14 April 1524, serves as one final example of the ideal characteristics of a Greek professor promoted in humanist letters of recommendation. The search for a successor for Mosellanus also gives us the first indication of what impact the Reformation would eventually have on the recommending and hiring process of Greek professors, as will be further discussed in the next chapter. Following Mosellanus' death, Duke George of Saxony, patron of the

University of Leipzig, wrote to Erasmus on 21 May 1524, asking him to suggest a successor, "who must however be entirely free from all taint of the Lutheran faction."94 A letter from the duke to Erasmus the following November confirms that Erasmus still had not responded to this request.95 On 12 December 1524, Erasmus finally did respond to

Duke George, warning that it would be difficult to find a suitable successor because most persons who had sufficient mastery of Greek did not satisfy the duke's insistence that the successor be firmly opposed to Luther.96 In his response to Erasmus on 14 February

1525, Duke George admits that he agrees that the search will be difficult, but remains adamant that the candidate be orthodox.

The following month, on 26 March 1525, Erasmus wrote to Duke George, informing him that an unnamed close friend of his is willing to accept the post: "In his mastery of Greek he is more than a match for three Mosellani and he is no less fluent, I understand, in Latin."98 The close friend was none other than the Dutch humanist,

Jacobus Ceratinus. On 8 and 9 April 1525, Erasmus wrote a series of letters of

94 CWE 10, Ep. 1448. 95 CWE 10, Ep. 1520. 96 CWE 10, Ep. 1526. 97 CWE 11, Ep. 1550,11.87-90. 98 CWE 11, Ep. 1561. 119 recommendation on behalf of Ceratinus, whom he strongly and successfully backed as a candidate for the Leipzig chair of Greek. He addressed these letters to Heinrich Stromer,

Duke George, Hieronymus Emser, Martin Hune and Willibald Pirckheimer." Ceratinus himself delivered the first three letters. In none of the letters does Erasmus make mention of Ceratinus' orthodoxy or lack thereof. Instead he focuses on Ceratinus' skills in Greek and Latin and his character. He compares him favourably to Mosellanus, and mentions the existing offers of employment from the Collegium Trilingue. In each of the letters,

Erasmus specifically states that he himself had gained a very thorough idea of Ceratinus' abilities, admitting that he "ha[s] often been embarrassed in the past by being too free with [his] praise," a hint at his bad experience with his former secretary, Heinrich

Eppendorf, whom he had warmly commended to the duke in 1522, but from whom he had subsequently become bitterly estranged.100 Despite his admitted proverbial distaste for comparisons, he emphatically states that Ceratinus is a better scholar than

Mosellanus; that he is, in fact, "worth more than ten Mosellani."101 Moreover, Ceratinus' knowledge of Greek is such that, "there are scarcely two or three scholars in all Italy with whom I should be hesitant to compare him; in Latin too he maintains the same high

1 ("19 standards." Ultimately, Ceratinus received the appointment at Leipzig at the beginning of the summer term. In fact, specific reference is made in the matriculation records to

Erasmus' intervention.103 Although he was appointed on Erasmus' recommendation, he did not please the Saxon ruler, and left his position there only to return to the Netherlands around the beginning of September 1525, prompting Erasmus to blame his premature "CWEll,Epp. 1561, 1564-8. 100Cf.CWEll,Ep. 1565n3. 101CWEll,Ep. 1568. 102 CWE 11, Epp. 1561,11. 9-14; 1565,11. 11-18; 1568,11. 11-13. 103CEBRl,p.289. departure on his Lutheran leanings. The case of Ceratinus nicely illustrates the problems humanists faced in recommending one of their own candidates for a teaching position in a world that was becoming increasingly confessionalized, as will be fleshed out in the next chapter. We also see other elements in recommendation letters that we have not seen hitherto: praise of the candidate's mastery of both Greek and Latin, comparison of his linguistic skills to those of other humanists, in particular the Italians, who set the modern standards of elegance and proficiency, but also open admissions on the part of the author of the increasing need to be cautious and to know well the person one is recommending so as to avoid possible embarrassment.

We shall now turn our attention to recommendation letters written for tutors, teachers and professors of Hebrew. For once the humanists had restored classical Latin and mastered Greek, a few select scholars also took up the challenge of Hebrew. The study of Hebrew posed its own set of problems, which are reflected in the recommendation letters. These had to be tailored to the recipient, given that many

Hebrew teachers were Jews. Humanists began to learn Hebrew not out of any zeal for

Jewish scholarship, much less out of a sense of philosemitism, but mainly in faithfulness to their rally cry "ad fontes," that is, to master the language of the Old Testament.

Hebrew was considered barbarous compared to the elegance of Greek and Latin. Even one of the foremost Christian Hebraists of sixteenth-century Germany, Konrad Pellikan, admitted in his prefatory letter to his Hebrew edition of the book of Proverbs, dated 1

August 1520: "But who would have believed that the idiom of the rude and barbarous

Hebrew language, albeit the most holy language, would be pleasing to such delicate

CWE 11, Ep. 1611,11. 5-7. Cf. CWE 12, Ep. 1683nl5. 121 minds and ears after the very sophisticated and celebrated Latin and Greek literature?"105

Later, in the prefatory letter to the reader to his Commentaria bibliorum (Zurich, 1532-9), dated 12 August 1532, he traces the decline of knowledge of Hebrew in the Latin West.

He comments on the principal medieval Jewish scholars, referring to the "Talmudic fables" of the Jews, admitting only qualified praise for the work of the Kimhi brothers,

David and Moses. Their commentaries should not altogether be dismissed, for "at any rate, they found a way to interpret the scriptures plainly and simply, and in a way not so

Jewish to the extent that our own people, of pious learning and strengthened heart, cannot but achieve something through them." The problem with Jewish commentaries, he continues, was that they were not Christocentric, and therefore suspect. For that reason, he writes, "it would be much safer, wiser and more pleasing to accept from the Jews only their grammatical observations, and that too with discretion."106 In other words, Christian

Hebraists learned Hebrew primarily as a tool for their biblical studies, but also to controvert "Jewish blindness." Given the widespread anti-semitism and anti-Judaism of the age, why would Jewish scholars teach their sacred language to gentiles, to the very people who might likely use this new tool against them? The answer, Eric Zimmer suggests, is twofold: economic motives and the hope that the study of Hebrew by

Christians would usher in a Messianic age and bring learned Christian men closer to

Konrad Pellikan, Mishlei Shelomot. Proverbia Salomonis, which was published together with Sebastian Milnster's Epitome Hebraicae grammaticae (Basel: Froben, 1520), fols. a2-a3: "Quis vero credidisset, ut rudis et barbarae Hebraeae linguae, licet sanctissimae, idioma, post tarn cultissimas ac inclytas Latinas atque Graecas literas, tam delicatis ingeniis et auribus arridere potuerit?" 106 Konrad Pellikan, Commentaria bibliorum (Zurich: Froschauer, 1532-39), Vol. 1, fols. A4r-v: "Viam alioqui scripturas interpretandi planam et simplicem ingressi, et non adeo Iudaicam, quin nostri pie docti et animo firmati, per eos queant proficere.... Multo autem tutius fuerit, multo conducibilius et iucundius a Iudaeis tantum accipere grammaticas observationes, et quidem cum iudicio..." 122

Judaism. From the Christian standpoint, the concern that the study of Hebrew would mark a slippery slope towards Judaism fuelled the greatest fear and suspicion towards

1 OR

Hebrew scholarship.

The bulk of those recommended in early modern Germany were, to no surprise,

Christian. However, as more and more humanists desired to learn the Hebrew language, many asked their friends and colleagues to recommend a suitable Jewish scholar from whom they could learn that ancient biblical tongue. Until knowledge of Hebrew became more prevalent amongst gentiles, scholars were initially forced to resort to studying under

Jews, or, at the very least, under Jewish converts to Christianity. For instance, as Zimmer reminds us, Reuchlin expanded his study of Hebrew mainly with the assistance of two

Jewish scholars, Jacob Loans, personal physician to the Holy Roman Emperor Frederick

III, and the noted biblical commentator, R. Obadiah Sforno.109 Both Jewish and Christian teachers of Hebrew faced age-old prejudices, as attested by the Reuchlin-Pfefferkorn debate, which threatened the very survival of Hebrew literature in the German empire. At the close of a letter to Boniface Amerbach, Johann Knoder hopes a number of their friends are well, including Hieronymus Jod of Pforzheim, later professor of law at

Freiburg, naming him "Jerome the Jew (but not Apella)."110 Horace mentions Apella the

Jew in his Satires (1.5.100), drawing on the Roman stereotype of Jews as being peculiarly superstitious.

Erasmus, too, expressed his misgivings with regards to Hebrew in a letter to

Capito, a renowned Hebrew scholar, fearing that "the rebirth of Hebrew studies may give 107 Eric Zimmer, "Jewish and Christian Hebraist Collaboration in Sixteenth Century Germany," The Jewish Quarterly Review 70 (1980): 69-88; here 81-2. 108 Cf. CWC 2, Ep. 361, Pellikan's letter to Capito warning him about the danger of reading the Talmud. 109 Zimmer, p. 70. 110 AK 2, Ep. 542: "Hieronymus Iudaeus (non autem Apella)." 123

Judaism its cue to plan a revival, the most pernicious plague and bitterest enemy that one can find to the teaching of Christ."111 Humanists and reformers alike relished the false rumour that the papal legate Girolamo Aleandro was a Jew, seeking any news from their friends to confirm the veracity of the rumour, hoping all along for just one more negative attribute with which to discredit and defame the famous legate and opponent of the

119

Reformation. In an age rife with anti-semitism and anti-judaism, letters recommending

Jews, Jewish converts to Christianity and professors of Hebrew were different in both their content and style, reflecting the underlying phobias and mistrust most people felt towards the Jewish community. When on 10 April 1511, Reuchlin recommended to

Nikolaus Ellenbog, a Benedictine monk at the abbey of Ottobeuren, an unnamed Jew,

"both by race and religion" to teach Hebrew in the monastery, he added: "Don't think that he should be thought little of just because he hasn't converted to our faith yet," knowing the reluctance some might have in welcoming a non-Christian into the monastic community. "For we should treat him all the more humanely," he continued, "so that, induced by our character and good works, he will be allured to prepare for himself a dwelling with God." Thus, Reuchlin advocated a more tolerant attitude towards the Jew in order to draw him into the Christian faith, lest an intolerant approach turn him away from the gospel. Should Ellenbog not wish to take the Jew on, Reuchlin asked him "at the

111CWE 4, Ep. 541. See also CWE 10, Ep. 1425, Mutian to Erasmus, February 1524, complaining about the obstacles to humanism: "The harm is done by the half-converted Jews, who show wonderful cunning in the air of piety they give themselves and so undermine the credulity of those who know no better. ...It is a great mistake to put a baptized Jew in charge of education. Those gentry go flocking to Luther; they are his advisers, and are valued in return." 112 Cf. CWE 8, Ep. 1166; Allen Epp. 2414 and 2578, as well as CWC 1, Ep. 75 very least" to cover his travel costs. Specific mention of the faith of the Hebrew instructor is characteristic of letters of recommendation for Hebrew scholars and Jews.114

Ellenbog had begun to search for a suitable Hebrew teacher for the abbey several years before. Already in 1508, he wrote to Alexius Wagner, mentioning how during their last conversation, Wagner had spoken about a young man, a Jew by birth, but baptized

Christian, who was studying Latin in Freiburg and was living in poor conditions. Since

Ellenbog wanted to learn Hebrew, he suggested that the Jew stay at the monastery, give

Hebrew lessons in exchange for learning Latin from his fellow monks, for he believed that Hebrew was important to know.115 On 1 August 1508, Wagner responded to

Ellenbog, reporting that the Christian Jew was not living in Freiburg, but with a pastor, a doctor of canon law. His master did not want to give him up so easily. Wagner explained that when he finds another Christian Jew, he will forward him to Ellenbog.116

The letters of recommendation for Michael Adam, a Jewish convert to

Christianity, are especially noteworthy because Adam continued to wear peyot, the distinguishing hairlocks worn by Jewish males, even after his conversion. In 1538, he came to Zurich, where he helped Pellikan translate into Latin seventeen tractates of the

113 Reuchlin 2, Ep. 175: "Accedit ad te praesentium mearum literarum baiulus hortatu meo, Iudaeus et genere et doctrina, quern tibi praeficio Hebraicarum literarum doctorem, si velis et quantum velis. Quod si opera sua tibi opus fuerit, utere. Nee contemnendum putes, quod nondum conversus ad nostram fidemest . Tanto enim humanius a nobis tractandus fuerit, ut nostris moribus et operibus bonis inductus alliciatur ad se praeparandum Deo habitaculum. Poterit igitur te tuosque fratres docere, quanto tempore voles, haud multis expensis et paene nullo cum onere. ... Rogo te vero, ut, si eo uti nolueris, nihilominus tamen digneris ei aliquantulum peculii nomine viatici humaniter elargiri, ut itineris ad te labor compensetur." 114 Cf. a letter from Johannes Schwebel to an unidentified recipient, dated 21 April 1524, in which Schwebel writes that he would like to have a "Jewish or Christian" Hebrew teacher to help him study the Bible, Centuria epistolarum theologicarum adloannem Schwebelium (Zweibruecken, 1597), pp. 73-4, Ep. 25: "Vellem autem vel Iudaeum vel Christianum peritum et diligentem in lingua Hebraica haberem praeceptorem, teneor enim linguae sanctae desiderio, sciens, haud facile quenquam feliciter versari in divinis Uteris sine linguarum peritia, praesertim qui publicis concionibus praeesse cogatur." 115 Andreas Bigelmair and Friedrich Zoepfl, eds. Briefwechsel. Nikolaus Ellenbog (Minister: Aschendorff, 1938), Book 1, Ep. 48. 116 Ibid Ep. 49. 125

Talmud, "a slow and arduous task since Adam did not know Latin and could not read

117

German." At the advice of Pellikan, he also collaborated with Leo Jud on a revised edition of Zwingli's translation of the Bible, the Ziircher Bibel.m In 1543, he delivered a series of letters and reports between Bullinger and Ambrosius Blaurer in Constance.119

On 24 May 1543, Blaurer wrote a letter to Bullinger, in which he expressed his misgivings about Adam'speyot: I have begun to take a special liking in the Lord to your Michael Adam because you and our [Paul] Fagius alike give such full testimony to his sincerity. Those circumcised people [i.e. Jews], however much dyed [i.e. converted to Christianity], are otherwise always extremely suspect, since experience has taught us that this race of people usually change their hair, but never their mindset. But in fact, it seems to me that some of the grace of Christ beams forth in the habits, manner of speech, and conversations of this good Michael, so that he very much recommends himself to me, and so much so that if I could perhaps accommodate him in any way, I would not at all deny him the opportunity.

Blaurer adds that Adam was currently living in Isny at the home of Fagius, the noted

Christian Hebraist, but not for much longer, since Fagius was suffering from terrible migraines.120 Blaurer's remark about Jews never altering their mindset, even if they have converted, is a variant of the adage, "A wolf may change his hair, but not his heart." It

117 Steven G. Burnett, "Christian Aramaism: The Birth and Growth of Aramaic Scholarship in the Sixteenth Century," in Seeking Out the Wisdom of the Ancients. Essays Offered in Honor of Michael V. Fox on the Occasion of His Sixty-Fifth Birthday, edited by Ronald L. Troxel et al. (Winona Lake, Indiana: Eisenbrauns, 2005), p. 431. 118 Melchior Adam, Vitae Germanorum theologorum (Heidelberg, 1620), p. 296: "Anno trigesimo octavo Tigurum venit Michael Adam neophytus ex Iudaeis, qui Pellicano consulente cepit cum Leone Iuda emendare Germanica Biblia." The German Bible was entitled Die gantze Bibel, das ist alle Biicher allts unndneiiws Testaments, den urspriinglichen Spraachen nach auffs alter treuwlichest verteutschet (Zurich, 1540). 119 Cf. Schiess 2, Epp. 869, 871, 873, and 1035. 120 Schiess 2, Ep. 1010 (summary); the original autograph is in Zurich SA E II 343a, f. 279: "Michaelem Adamum vestrum deamare in Domino unice cepi, quod tu pariter et Fagius noster synceritate ipsius tarn plenum feratis testimonium. Alioqui valde semper suspecti sunt recutiti isti, quantumvis tincti, quandoquidem res ipsa docuit hoc hominum genus pilos non raro, ingenium vero nunquam mutare. Sed profecto in moribus, oris habitu et colloquiis boni huius Michaelis Christi gratiae elucere mihi nonnihil videtur, ut sese ipse mihi valde commendet et ita profecto, ut, si qua forte commodare illi possem, haudquaquam ullam occasionem negligerem." 121 Erasmus, Adagia 3.3.19. 126 betrays a general prejudice towards Jews and suggests that he suspected the genuineness of Adam's internal conversion, since externally he still appeared Jewish. The fact that

Adam still wore peyot also sheds light on the struggles Jewish converts to Christianity must have experienced as they sought to forge new identities as Christians. On 10 July

1543, Blaurer wrote again to Bullinger, recommending Adam in turn to him "just as you described him to me," and informing Bullinger that he was looking forward to Adam's return. Adam appears to have been much sought after by the Swiss reformers for his expertise in Hebrew, since Blaurer wrote to Bullinger on 22 September, saying that if

Bullinger was not pleased with Adam, then he would gladly take him back.123 In 1545, it was reported that Adam had been appointed lecturer in Hebrew at the University of

Zurich.124 He also worked as a printer in Constance and Zurich, where he produced

Yiddish translations of the Pentateuch (Constance, 1543-1544), Joseph ben Gorion's

Josippon (Zurich, 1546), and the five Megillot, the collection of the Old Testament books of Song of Songs, Ruth, Lamentations, Ecclesiastes and Esther, according to Jewish

19S tradition.

In their bid to learn Hebrew, humanists gave preference to native-speakers, as was the case for Greek instructors, and so it is no wonder that the above-mentioned pastor did not readily want to give up his Hebrew guest. On 19 March 1510, Reuchlin recommended to Ellenbog a certain Johannes, a Jewish convert to Christianity, who in a few years time "has so thoroughly learned our Latin language that he has skipped the

Schiess 2, Ep. 1023 (summary); the original autograph is in Zurich SA EII 343a, f. 283: "Michaelem quem plane talem qualem mihi describebas inveni vicissim tibi commendo." lh Schiess 2, Ep. 1033. 124 Schiess 2, Ep. 1225. 125 Cf. Israel Zinberg, A History of Jewish Literature, translated by Bernard Martin (Cincinnati: Hebrew Union College Press; New York: Ktav Publishing House, Inc., 1975). bachelor of arts, which is a sign of fairly advanced studies." He explains that Johannes does not demand a salary, but rather hospitality and training towards the priesthood.

Reuchlin thought that Johannes seemed "devout and upright," and although he may not have been "very learned," Reuchlin judged him learned enough to teach both the basics and pronunciation of Hebrew to the monks, so that they might later be able to work their way through his grammar on their own.126 Ellenbog must have been satisfied, for he sent

Reuchlin a letter the following month thanking him for their new Hebrew instructor.

Here we find reference to a characteristic unique to recommendation letters for Hebrew instructors: the assurance not only that the instructor is Christian, or at the very least an open-minded Jew, but that he also knows Latin. For the marginalized Jewish community of sixteenth-century Germany, this was obviously not something that could be presumed.

Both the above-mentioned letters to Wagner and from Reuchlin prove that some Jewish

instructors of Hebrew had difficulties with the Latin, but learned Latin in exchange for

Hebrew instruction. Franz Posset has written an interesting essay, chronicling the life of

Nikolaus Ellenbog, with special attention to the exchange of letters between him and

Reuchlin. The primary focus of their correspondence was on matters relating to their

shared interest in biblical humanism and their zeal for the Hebrew language. The case of

Ellenbog demonstrates that Reuchlin had supporters even amongst the Benedictine humanists of Ottobeuren, who hired instructors of Hebrew on his recommendation.

Our final case concerns a series of letters of recommendation written on behalf of the physician Matthaeus Adrianus, who in 1501 published a Hebrew grammar in Venice,

126 Reuchlin 2, Ep. 162. 127 Reuchlin 2, Ep. 165. 128 Franz Posset, "When Monks Were Eager to Study the Sacred Languages: Nikolaus Ellenbog, Monk of Ottobeuren, Swabia," in Idem, Renaissance Monks: Monastic Humanism in Six Biographical Sketches (Leiden and Boston: Brill, 2005): 154-71. and eventually moved to Basel in 1515, where he taught Hebrew to Capito and offered his services as a Hebraist to the Amerbach brothers. The letter of recommendation from

Pellikan to Johannes Amerbach, dated 22 January 1513, is a wonderful example of a recommendation both for a Jew and a Hebrew instructor. It shows all the typical characteristics of such letters: mention of Adrianus' Latin and Hebrew skills, his faith, and background:

From Reuchlin's letter I believe you will understand the prominence and learning of the man who bears this letter. He is a very serious Hebraist, an accomplished and learned scholar. But on account of errors in his Latin grammar you have to listen to him patiently. I have learned more from him than from any other person, and I have studied through many a sleepless night with him. Let your sons listen to him interpret the Bible as he far as he can in Latin. They should overlook the fact that he speaks without concern for grammatical agreement. You will see the mysteries of true Hebrew veiled in Latin wrappings. He is a very Christian man, converted from the Jews; I have the highest opinion of him. The more I hear him talk, the greater his authority and the more sincere his friendship appears. But you will learn by experience. You support the humanist and Hellenist, Johannes Cono. Please welcome this highly trained Spanish Jew, easily the foremost Hebraist of Germany.129

Not only was Adrianus the Hebrew instructor of Capito, but while in Heidelberg, he taught the language to Oecolampadius and Johannes Brenz. In the fall of 1517, he was called to be the first professor of Hebrew in the newly founded Collegium Trilingue, thanks in large part to the efforts of Erasmus, who thought highly of his knowledge of

Hebrew. His letter to Gilles de Busleyden is characteristic of letters of recommendation for Hebrew instructors:

There has lately arrived here one Matthaeus Adrianus, by race a Jew but in religion a Christian of long standing, and by profession a physician, so skilled in the whole of Hebrew literature that in my opinion our age has no one else to show who could be compared with him. If my judgment in this matter does not carry enough weight with you, this is the unanimous testimony of everyone I know in Germany or Italy with any skill in the language.13

The Correspondence ofJohann Amerbach: Early Printing in Its Social Context, translated and edited by Barbara C. Halporn (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 2000), pp. 359-60; cf. Idem, pp. 360-1. 129

In a follow-up letter, Erasmus advises Busleyden not to be turned off by Adrianus "if in

Latin he is not equally fluent and polished," for he can attest that Adrianus' Latin skills

are sufficient to teach Hebrew. It is ironic that Erasmus, who knew very little Hebrew,

could legitimately write a recommendation for a professor of Hebrew, but even as late as

1531, he wrote to Busleyden about his lack of success at finding a professor of Hebrew

for the Collegium Trilingue to replace Jan van Campen, who had resigned his academic

chair in November and entered the service of the Polish ambassador, Johannes

Dantiscus.131 Although Adrianus taught Hebrew to Capito, there was a falling out

between the two of them. In the dedicatory letter to his Hebraicarum Institutionum libri

duo (Basel, 1518), Capito alludes to him (without mentioning his name) as "a resentful

Jew." Evidently he was not pleased with Adrianus' teaching methods. The exact nature

of their falling out is not known, but Erasmus mentions in a letter to Capito, written 13

March 1518, that Adrianus angrily denied the claim that he was indebted to Capito and

was threatening to expose errors in Capito's Hebrew grammar.133 Later, on 19 October

1518, Erasmus again reported to Capito about Adrianus' ongoing annoyance with him.134

Finally, on 30 April 1520, Martin Luther informed Capito that Adrianus had been hired to teach Hebrew at the University of Wittenberg for a salary of 100 gulden.135 Thus, in

general, we see the underlying anti-semitism rearing its head in the recommendation

letters for Hebrew teachers. It often continued to dog Jewish teachers of Hebrew, even if they had converted to Christianity, as many had. Once again, we see that characteristic

130 CWE 5, Ep. 686,11. 7-13; cf. Epp. 687, 689-91 and 699. 131 Allen Ep. 2588. 132CWCl,Ep. 11 133 CWE 5, Ep. 798. 134 CWE 6, Ep. 877. 135 WABr 2, pp. 93-95, Ep. 282 and CWC 1, Ep. 43 (summary). unique to letters of recommendation for Hebrew instructors: mention of the person's proficiency at Latin as well as a willingness to compromise on his fluency in the language, especially if the instructor, as a Jew, had not received the usual educational upbringing in Latin that could be expected of a Christian. Hebrew, of course, was not a native tongue even for Jews, but rather a liturgical language reserved for religious observance and biblical studies. As non-Christians, however, they did not receive the same solid grounding in Latin as did their Christian counterparts, and consequently, their

Latin was often inadequate.

Recommendations for Books to be Printed:

Thus far we have examined humanist recommendation letters for teachers and professors, which were the principal occupations of humanists. However, humanists were also heavily involved in editing and translating the texts of classical, patristic, contemporary, and even medieval authors. Sodalities of scholars formed around certain printers, who hired humanists to hunt down manuscripts of unpublished texts and to purchase books for reprinting. Printers also customarily employed the expertise of humanists to edit, translate and write commentaries to texts, which were deemed representative of the bonae literae. James Hirstein has recently written an article on the circle of humanist scholars involved with the famous press of Johann Froben in Basel.

His study focuses on Capito and the vital role he and his fellow docti played at the press in shaping Froben's printing program.136 Humanists applied their philological skills to editing and translating texts and readily cooperated with printers by advising them

136 James Hirstein, "Wolfgang Capito and the other Docti in Johann Froben's Basel Print Shop," in Reformation Sources: The Letters of Wolgang Capito and his Fellow Reformers in Alsace and Switzerland, edited by Erika Rummel and Milton Kooistra (Toronto: Centre for Reformation and Renaissance Studies, 2007), pp. 19-45. 131 whether or not a text should be printed.137 By way of a letter of recommendation or simply by word-and-mouth, humanists provided printers with editorial advice and played a strong role in directing the publishing programme of printers.

Letters of recommendation were written for scholars, who were sent out on reconnaissance missions to monasteries and foreign lands by printers and scholars in search of manuscripts to publish or books to reprint. On 1 May 1526, Erasmus wrote one such letter to Leonard Casembroot on behalf of the bearer of the letter, Hieronymus

Froben, who was on his way to Italy. He explains facetiously that the purpose for

Froben's sojourn was to search for "old manuscripts, which he is prepared to purchase, beg, borrow, or steal." He adds: "You could assist him greatly in this, and I strongly urge you to do so. Not only will you help the cause of learning, but you will be doing a service to people on whose gratitude you can count. I expect you to send back with Hieronymus not just a letter, but a whole volume."138 When potential gems were located, humanists consulted with their friends to determine their authenticity, so as not to suffer the embarrassment of publishing a fraudulent or wrongly attributed text.139 Humanists mobilized their networks and utilized the expertise of their friends before embarking on an editorial project.

Recommendations for printers centred on three aspects: the quality of the printing, the type of works printed, and the motivation to print. Erasmus carefully nurtured the

137 Humanists also consulted with one another as to whether their own work was worthy of publication, cf. CWE 5, Ep. 604, a letter fromErasmu s to Glarean, asking him to give his opinion about some adjoining essays. 138 CWE 12, Ep. 1705. 139 Cf. AK 2, Ep. 583, a letter from Jakob Salzmann, a schoolmaster in Chur, to Bruno Amerbach, reporting to Bruno that he had found a prologue of Jerome to some sermons of Origen in "a very old codex written in practically illegible script;" however, because Bruno's copies of Jerome, both printed and manuscript, did not contain a prologue to the book of Numbers, he sent it to Bruno, to ask him to get Erasmus, who was thoroughly acquainted with Jerome's works, to confirm its authorship. image of the Froben press in Basel with which his works are most frequently associated, as being a nordic counterpart to that of Aldo Manuzio, the famous Venetian printer. It was, after all, the only printing press north of the Alps that not only published humanist texts on a similar scale and with the same degree of quality, but which also boasted a team of learned humanists, including Erasmus. In his letter to Johann Froben, dated 25

August 1517, which became the preface to Froben's edition of More's Utopia and

Epigrammata (March 1518; repr. November/December 1518), Erasmus praises the quality of the Froben press, which "stands so high that a book can earn a welcome among the learned for no better reason than that it is known to issue from the house of

Froben."140 On 14 July 1518, Maarten van Dorp urged Erasmus to send greetings to

Froben, about whose output he writes: "What has he printed that is not distinguished for its scholarship, and so well finished too!" Nicolas Berault, too, expressed his hope that the latest works of Erasmus would be "really well printed; I mean, of course, in Froben's types, which are the clearest and most elegant and agreeable that one can imagine."141 In their prefatory letters and general correspondence, humanists also praised certain printers for not being motivated by profit but by their commitment to the bonae literae. On

November 1518, for instance, Michael Hummelberg wrote to Bruno Amerbach, praising his character and his printing skills, and complimenting him for producing quality texts, not just for the sake of profit.142

Most importantly, however, humanists wrote letters both to their friends, offering their advice whether a book should be printed or not, as well as to printers,

140 CWE 4, Ep. 635. Cf. Peter R. Allen, "Utopia and European humanism: the function of the prefatory letters and verses," Studies in the Renaissance 10 (1963): 91-107. 141 CWE 6, Ep. 925 and n20. 142 AK 2, Ep. 639. recommending books for publication. The following four case studies illustrate the

involvement of humanists in the printing of texts and the role of their letters of recommendation. They demonstrate that young scholars, before they had made a name

for themselves, required letters of recommendations from renowned humanists to get their first fruits published. They show how the humanist community, consisting of both

scholars and printers, was mobilized to see these works brought to light and help launch

the careers of young humanists. The first case involves the 1512 publication of

Oecolampadius' Declamationes ... depassione by Matthias Schilrer in Strasbourg. The

second examines recommendations not to print a book, using as an example the fate of

Oswald Myconius' unpublished dialogue, Philirenus. The third case concerns

recommendation letters written to print a book, using as an example Myconius'

commentaries to Glarean's new and improved Panegyricon, which describes the land and people of Switzerland. Myconius sent copies of his commentary to his friends before the text was published to find out what they thought of it. Their positive recommendations

encouraged him to have it published. Our final case is slightly different in nature. It

concerns the letter of recommendation by Luther, urging the city council of Basel to lift

its ban against the 1543 publication of Theodor Bibliander's Latin translation of the

Qur'an.

Our first example concerns the publication of one of Oecolampadius' earliest works, his Declamationes ... depassione et ultimo sermone (Strasbourg: Schtirer, 1512), a series of sermons on the seven last words of Christ from the cross. What makes this case unique is that it demonstrates the process by which a manuscript made it into print and from there into the hands of the reader by way of recommendation. At the time of 134 publication, Oecolampadius (1482-1531) was a relatively unknown preacher in

Weinsberg, a position he obtained in 1510 after completing his studies at Heidelberg,

where he came into contact with the Alsatian humanist, Jakob Wimpheling, professor of theology at the university. On 9 October 1512, Ulrich Zasius, a professor at the

University of Freiburg, wrote a letter to Wimpheling, requesting him to have

Oecolampadius' Declamationes published by the Strasbourg printer, Matthias Schurer,

and to write a prefatory letter for the work. Zasius recommends the book for its humanist

and theological qualities:

Oecolampadius, a man both learned in many subjects, and skilled and solid in theology, has written some declamations of the Lord's Passion, which are uniquely inventive and beautifully smoothed by his polished Latin, and, what is most important, they are very remarkable in the richness of their wise utterances. If you have time, could you be bothered to adorn this work with a letter? If I had the kind of erudition or eminence to be able to illustrate the works of skilled men with a preface, I certainly would have adorned the work with my recommendation. It is up to you and people like you, who produce eminent work yourselves, to add light to someone else's work. Finally, see to it that this distinguished and affecting work get published by your countryman, Matthias Schurer, for the benefit of many people, who are affected by the Passion of Christ.143

Zasius' modesty suggests a conceit. Though he himself declines to write a prefatory

letter, hoping all the while that Wimpheling would write an additional, if not better, one,

he in fact ends up supplying one. Wimpheling complied with Zasius' request to write a

preface and to urge Schurer to publish the work. On 26 October, he sent the declamations

to Schurer, explaining in a brief letter that Zasius wanted the work published specifically

Jakob Wimpfeling. Briejwechsel, vol. 2, pp. 716-7, Ep. 295: "Icolampadius ille homo multifariam doctus et cum doctrina dexter ac solidus, scripsit dominicae passionis declamatiunculas et inventione raras et latina tersitate pulchre levigatas, denique, quod praecipuum merit, sententiarum ubertate perquam conspicuas. Si vacaverit, tuo id opus epistolio ornare non graveris. Si eius essem vel eruditionis vel eminentiae, ut peritorum virorum lucubrationes cum praedicatione illustrare possem, equidem et mea commendatione ornassem. Tuum est tuique similium, qui, ut ipsi insignia cuditis, ita alienis lumen addere poteritis. Proinde apud tuum gentilem Matthiam Schurerium efficies, ut hoc insigne et amabile opus incude sua multorum, qui Christi passioni afficiuntur, usui fabricetur." 135 by him. He therefore urges Schurer to print the text, in which he believes many godly people, both secular and spiritual, who love "more polite literature (politiores litems)" will take pleasure.144 Schurer satisfied the request and the work was printed by the end of the year. Both letters from Zasius and Wimpheling were included as prefatory material,

along with Oecolampadius' undated dedicatory letter to Gregor Lamparter, chancellor of

Duke Ulrich of Wurttemberg.145 The story, however, does not end here. Oecolampadius'

Declamationes, which Wimpheling had described to Schurer as a devotional handbook, were subsequently recommended by Wimpheling as inspirational literature for preachers.

At the end of the dedicatory letter to his edition of a commentary on Matthew by the ninth-century monk, Christian Druthmar of Aquitaine, published in Strasbourg in 1514,

Wimpheling urges Georg Nigri, professor of philosophy at Heidelberg, to exhort his

students when preaching from the pulpit "not to weaken the impact of the salubrious teachings of Johannes Oecolampadius' Declamationes by setting a bad moral example."146 This honourable mention of Oecolampadius' book in the prefatory letter to an edition of a work by a medieval author nicely rounds off the process by which manuscripts first came to be published and then recommended in turn as reading material for students. Despite the high esteem Zasius and Wimpheling held for Oecolampadius in

1512, it would not survive the Reformation. When Oecolampadius converted to the evangelical cause and became the chief reformer of the city of Basel, both men turned against their former protege. When an explosion of gunpowder took place in Basel in

1526, many interpreted the incident as an omninous sign of God's judgment for the city's

144 Ibid., vol. 2, pp. 721-2, Ep. 297. 145BrOekl,Ep. 14. 146 Jakob Wimpfeling. Briefwechsel, vol. 2, pp. 758-61, Ep. 310: "Exhortare [tuos auditores] quoque, ut [ex suggestu concionaturi] ex Declamationibus Ioannis Icolampadii ad vitam verbis consonam imbuti salutares doctrinas pravis morum exemplis nequaquam enervent." 136 heresy. It prompted Zasius to toy with the reformer's humanist surname, redubbing

Oecolampadius (= house lamp) Sathanecolampadius (=Satan's lamp).147

The next two case studies concern two texts by Oswald Myconius, the first

recommended for publication, the latter not. Though the Roman poet, Horace, once

wrote, "Let your literary compositions be kept from the public eye for nine years at

least,"1"0 these cases illustrate that humanists were keen to get their texts printed in a

timely fashion and made available to the public. Before these texts were printed,

however, they were sent around to fellow humanists, who read the works through and

passed their judgment by way of recommendation as to whether they should be printed or

not, just as anonymous readers do for the presses of our modern era. Myconius (1488-

1552) studied at Basel (BA 1514) and taught at schools in Basel and Lucerne. In 1522 he

was dismissed on account of his sympathies with Zwingli's reform ideas and moved to

Zurich, where he taught at the cathedral school until 1531. He then became minister of St.

Alban's in reformed Basel and Oecolampadius' successor as professor of divinity at the

university. In his youth he befriended Heinrich Glarean, on account of whose friendship

Erasmus wrote to Myconius on 26 August 1518, encouraging him to "win glory in the

field of literature for that Switzerland of yours, already so glorious in arms."149 At the

request of Glarean's friends, Myconius wrote a commentary to the second edition of

Glarean's Descriptio Helvetiae (Basel: Froben, March 1519). He was keen to ensure that

his commentary was not only correct but approved of by fellow humanists. As he prepared his commentary, he consulted Vadian, in particular, about any questions he had

147 AK 3, Ep. 1145, quoted in Rowan, p. 160. 148 Horace, Arspoetica 388. 149 CWE 6, Ep. 861. The letter was the last one to be included in the Auctarium, a collection of 63 letters to and fromErasmu s compiled and edited by Beatus Rhenanus and printed in Basel in 1518. with regard to Swiss geography. It is especially interesting that Myconius not only

wrote the commentary at the request of Glarean's friends, but that he would not let it get printed until it met with the approval of other scholars as well. Myconius passed along

copies of his commentary to Vadian, Zwingli, Johannes Zimmermann (Xilotectus) and

others for them to review and recommend whether it was suitable for publication or not.

On 12 November 1518, Myconius wrote to Vadian, telling him that his commentary was

soon going to be printed, and asking him to read it through to check for any errors before

it got published.

Run through the entire book, if you have the time, but if not, then take a look at the description of the parts of Switzerland. Do not bypass it. It would be to my disadvantage. For till now I have not seen all that many topographical descriptions, except for the writings of Caesar and others of the time, as I had no one whose example I could follow. Moreover, you could be the most exact judge about what may be wrong and what may be well written, for nothing of this sort escapes your attention. You have seen Zurich, Lucerne, Uri, etc. Compare the subject-matter and words, then give the judgment not of a friend, nor of a flatterer, but of a very harsh judge; for if there is anything made up, I prefer your judgment, that is the opinion of a most learned and friendly man rather than of some opponent.151

A few months later, Myconius wrote a similar letter to Rhenanus, explaining that his

commentary had already met the approval of Vadian, Zwingli and Zimmermann, but that

he was not sure "whether they [approved] rightly, for they love me, they love our

fatherland, and that may have blinded their judgment." He therefore asks for Rhenanus'

opinion, "for we know that in matters of literature how great is your judgment, in fact, so

150 Vadian 2, Epp. 137 and 138. 151 Vadian 2, Ep. 138: "Libellum transcurrito, si licet per otium, totum, sin licet minus, perspice partium Helveticarum descriptionem; hanc nolo omittas; omitteres non sine malo meo. Nam topographicas depictiones non adeo multas hactenus vidi, nisi scriptas pro tempore, ut apud Caesarem et alios; quamobrem neminem habui, quem mihi proponerem. Quid autem erratum, quid bene scriptum sit, tu, quern nihil tale fiigit,iudicar e poteris exactissime. Vidisti Tigurum, Lucernam, Uriam etc. Rem et verba comparato, dein iudicium ferto non amici, minus adulatoris, sed iudicis severissimi; si quid enim hallucinatum, malo nasum tuum, hoc est hominis et doctissimi et amicissimi, quam inimici cuiuspiam." great that it is highly recommended by Erasmus." Myconius' anxiety about his first publication illustrates his own inability to distinguish a flatterer from a friend. Peter

Bietenholz writes that Myconius suffered from an inferiority complex, which may have stemmed from his own perceived inadequacies as a self-taught theologian.153 Whatever the source of his insecurity, it is clear that a number of humanists read through his commentary before it was published and were pleased. Finally, on 17 March 1519,

Myconius wrote to Glarean:

For quite some time, I have kept putting off finishing my letter to you mainly because I wanted first to finish my commentary on your book so I could send off the letter together with the book. The end I have been hoping for has arrived. I believe Valentinus will deliver the book to you. Supported by the recommendation of Vadian, Xilotectus, Zwingli and Rhenanus, I was quite happy to publish it. Even if they had disliked some things here or there, or anything for that matter, or were not altogether satisfied, believe me, I would have held back its publication. For I am not so desirous of praise nor do I hope so much for a reward that I would want to be thrust into the public at the risk of your reputation. For which reason, should it occur that you are not pleased with everything, don't blame me, but those who didn't warn me of my errors. Since I am altogether unable to judge my own work, I submitted myself to them. I gave them the whole book and entrusted them to throw it into the fire, if they found it unworthy of print. Even they will attest that it is true. But you can see what they accomplished. For the rest, whether you are pleased with it or not, please write me back. For I ask and beseech just that one thing.154

Rhenanus Ep. 87: "Ex meis vero quidam modo rogitarunt, ut extradam, nolui obtemperare, nisi prius foret probatum ab aliis. Probarunt itaque ex meis Joachimus Vadianus, Zinlius, Xilotectus et multi alii, sed nescio an recte, nam me amant, amant patriam, unde fortassis caecius iudicarunt....; scimus enim, in re literaria quantum sit judicium tuum, nempe tantum, ut quod sit ab Erasmo nostra plus quam commendatum." 153CEBR2,p.475. 154 Original autograph, Zurich ZB F 81, f. 302: "Diutius literas ad te meas intermisi ob hanc potissimum causam, quod expectare volui finem commentarioli mei in libellum tuum, ut turn literas simul cum libello transmitterem. Finis adest optatus, Valentinum credo ad te adferre. Vadiani et Xilotecti et Zuilii et Rhenani commendatione permotus, hilarius in lucem dedi. Quod si vel hoc, vel illud ab his reprehensum fuisset, aut aliquid omnino, vel tantillum displicuisset, crede mihi, apud me retinuissem. Non enim tarn sum laudis cupidus, neque fructus tantum spero, ut voluerim in publicum detrudi cum periculo famae tuae. Quamobrem siquid occurret non omnibus modis tibi arridens, culpam non in me, sed illos reiicias, qui me non admonuerant erratorum. Ego de meis iudicare cum prorsus nequiverim, submisi me illis: totum libellum dedidi; commisi, ut, si indignus luce foret, vulcano traderent. Id verum esse, vel ipsi testabuntur. Fecerunt autem quod vides. Reliquum est, ut sin tibi placeat, seu displiceat, ad me perscribas. Id enim unum rogo atque obsecro." 139

Not only was this Myconius' first publication, but it was a commentary published

alongside the second edition of Glarean's Descriptio. Myconius was keenly aware that as joint-publication, his work placed the reputation of Glarean at stake. It represents a

complex process of letters from humanists who recommended Myconius and his

commentary, who in turn recommended Glarean's work to the general reader. With the

support of reputable scholars his commentary seems to have been well received, for on

22 June 1519, Myconius wrote to Vadian: "Things are going well with my book, if going

well means that it has been published."155

The third case involves a dialogue written by Myconius in 1519, entitled

Philirenus [i.e. Lover of Peace], in which, according to Zwingli's summary, he urges

pastors not only to love peace but also to preach peace and quiet.156 It is interesting that

the dialogue, which was initially praised by his Basel friends, did not end up getting

published. This was the result of the recommendations of several readers, including

Capito, who considered it too critical and disadvantageous to Erasmus, who was then

involved in a dispute with the Leuven theologians. Moreover, its publication would be ill-

timed, for Switzerland at the time found itself divided over the issue of whether the

Confederation ought to uphold its traditional policy of hiring out its young men as

mercenaries. The cities of Lucerne and Zurich opposed the policy, and by 1521 Zurich

had banned the hiring out of her citizens as mercenaries. Rhenanus characterized the two

sides of the debate in his edition of Marcellus Virgilius' De militiae laudibus oratio

(Basel, 1518). In the dedicatory letter to Johann Jacob Zurgilgen, a young man from

155 Vadian 2, Ep. 157: "Cessit prospere cum libello meo, si haec prosperitas est, quod in luce est." 156 ZwBr 2, Ep. 105: "Insinues te praeterea pastoribus, qui circum vos sunt, doceasque, ut sint eirenophiloi, pacem ac quietem constanter praedicantes et oikositian, quatenus populo ad dulcem quietem inclinato lucriones vel lurcones isti non habeant, quos principibus adducant." 140

Lucerne, he praises the bellicose virtues of the Swiss, comparing them to the ancient

Spartans, but notes that opinion has recently changed and that there are many who now consider "war as pestilent and unworthy of Christians (bellum ut rem pestiferam et

Christianis indignam execrari)." He names a number of supporters of that view, including Zwingli and "other doctors of the evangelical doctrine and not of human traditions."157

The fate of Myconius' unpublished dialogue illustrates some interesting facts about the cooperation between humanists and printers, but it also sheds light on the process leading up to the publication of a book. As with Myconius' commentary to the

Glarean text, the story of this dialogue gives further proof that humanists acted as readers to evaluate the contents and quality of a given text before publication. In the case of

Myconius' Philirenus, Capito recommended that the text not be published. The case also sheds further light on the degree of Capito's involvement with the Froben press and of his role as editorial consultant.158 On 21 November 1519, Caspar Hedio wrote to Zwingli that he had read the dialogue and was pleased with the way Myconius had treated the subject matter "quite skillfully and charmingly (scite admodum et venuste)." He informs Zwingli that Capito was going to read it on his journey from Selestat to Basel, and that upon his arrival, they (that is, the docti at the Froben press) would see to it that it be published. If the Froben press is too busy, he writes, then they will persuade Andreas Cratander to

157 Rhenanus Ep. 82. 158 Cf. AK 2, Ep. 644, a letter from Glarean to Bruno Amerbach, dated 21 December 1518: "Moreover, Conrad [Resch] reported that [Agostino Giustiniani] had published some things, which he now wants to be published in Basel, and that he especially asks that you and Capito, since no one else has the skills in this department, to be mindful of the former glory of the city of Basel and that the book be diligently edited, for the day will come that a good part of whatever good comes from Basel will be associated with you (Porro retuli Cunradus, et ipsum episcopum quaedam edidisse, quae velit nunc Basileae excudi; sese magnopere rogare te et Capitonem, quando nemo alioqui huic provinciae satis facere queat, ut memores essetis pristinae gloriae Basileiensis urbis et liber diligente emendetur; futurum enim, ut, quicquid inde boni oriatur, bonam partem vobis acceptum referri)." 141 publish it.159 On 26 November 1519, Zwingli wrote to Myconius that Hedio was pleased with the dialogue and that Capito, no doubt, would be too and would see to its publication, adding that Hedio himself had written to Myconius about the matter.160 A few days later, Zwingli again wrote to Myconius, this time praising the contents of the dialogue, believing that there was no better way "to kill two birds with the same stone

(uno saltu lepores duo capiuntur), that is, to combat those who side with the princes and their military campaigns and those who have no use for them.161 Not surprisingly,

Zwingli and Hedio, who were on the irenic side of the dispute, supported the dialogue's publication.

On 10 December 1519, however, we have the first indications that Philirenus would not end up being published. For on that day, Hedio wrote to Zwingli, informing him that he had relayed to Myconius Capito's opinion of the dialogue. As it turned out,

Capito and Erasmus thought it advisable for Myconius to hold off the publication until a more opportune time, since the dialogue dealt with a theme often brought up by Erasmus, that is, the urging of rulers to pursue an irenic foreign policy. They felt that Myconius had treated his subject-matter skilfully, but since it also contained criticism of monks, they were afraid that Myconius would exacerbate Erasmus' on-going dispute with the Leuven theologians. The result would be to bring great hatred not only against him, but also

i3VZwBr2,Ep. 102. 160 ZwBr 2, Ep. 104: "Dialogus tuus mire placuit Hedioni, ut literae eius ad nos missae testantur, auguranti, ut par est, non minus placiturum Capitoni, quique sit eum prelo subditurus. Scripsit tamen ipse ad te Hedio." 161 ZwBr 2, Ep. 105: "Videtur mihi non alia commodius via posse illorum conatibus contra iri, nisi unica hac arte, qua tamen, ut dicitur, uno saltu lepores duo capiuntur, dum illi discunt iras frenare,ferru m in Christianos hebetare; isti, dum nullo sunt principibus usui, coguntur illorum aulas atque studia deserere." 142 against Erasmus and the New Learning. Hedio gave a fuller explanation in a letter written that same day to Myconius:

Erasmus is on the watch for the right time to give the okay to all his friends. In the mean time, it is necessary that you do not write sharply. Capito has conceived something, but till now is suppressing it, on the advice of Erasmus.163 We hope that you will do the same, most loving Myconius. Froben has the dialogue, but Capito asked me to write this to you. Tell me what you think. The advice of a friend pleases me. If you do this, you will not be acting imprudently.164

Myconius gave in to the Basel humanists and was eventually happy that his dialogue was not published. Copies of the dialogue continued to be passed amongst humanist friends.

The last mention of the dialogue comes from a letter from Konrad Grebel in Zurich to

Joachim Vadian, dated August 1520, in which he makes reference to the military turmoil in Switzerland on account of the French. He then adds: "I have read, though I knew it had nothing to do with it, Myconius' dialogue Philirenus about not waging war, which is forever worthy on account of its truth."165

These three cases illustrate how humanists wrote letters of recommendation to one another and to printers to have the works of young scholars published so as to launch their careers. One final example serves to demonstrate how letters of recommendation

ZwBr 2, Ep. 107: "Scripsi Myconio de suo dialogo quid sentieritf!] Capito. Putat non inconsulto factum, si adhuc aliquandiu foverit in sinu; se signum daturum, cum tempus erit omnibus nobis defendendi emergentes literas. Id quoque Capitoni praeceptum ab Erasmo, qui statim imploraturus est symmachian. lam gregorei. Pessime volunt theologi Lavonienses[!] Erasmo et Erasmicis. Cunctatores oportet nos agere. Datum est omnibus licentiatis et bachalaureis, ut inquirant in libros Erasmi. Pax semel inita est, rursus rupta, et verendum, ne pax non sit pax. Si unquam perniciosius tentatum est in veterem eruditionem et Christianas literas, dispeream. Armemus pectora nostra! Pugnandum erit contra teterrimos hostes, contra miseram turbam mataiologon. factus est syncretismus multorum, et nos oportet synkretizein. 163 Most likely a reference to Capito's prefatory letter to Erasmus' Responsiones ad annotationes Ed. Lei (Antwerp, 1520). See CWC 1, Ep. 54. 164 ZwBr 2, Ep. 107n8: "Erasmus gregorei, ubi tempus erit, amicis omnibus signum daturus. Interim oportet non sevire stilo. Capito quaedam pepererat, sed monente Erasmo supprimit hactenus. Idem a te, amantissime Myconi, futurum speramus. Frobenius habet dialogum; sed hec iussit Capito, ut ad te scriberem. Tu, quod visum fuerit, significato. Placet mihi amici consilium; quod si amplecteris, non facis imprudenter." 165 Vadian 2, Ep. 207: "Legi, dum nihil aliud agere scirem, Myconii de non bellando dialogum Philirenum, vel ob veritatem perpetuitate dignum." 143 were also written to governing officials to defend the publication of certain controversial texts. The case involves a letter by Luther to the city council of Basel, urging them to lift their ban on the publication of the first complete Latin translation of the Qur'an by

Theodor Bibliander ([Basel: Oporinus], 1543).166 In Luther's letter, which was prefixed to the edition as part of the extensive prefatory material, neither the author nor his message is recommended; instead the publication of the translation is endorsed to encourage its readers to get to know Islam better by reading its principal book and recognize the errors contained therein. In 1542, Luther received a copy of the text from

Bibliander. In the summer of 1542, Oporinus had begun printing his copy of the text when the city council of Basel invoked their right of censorship law, and seized the copies of the Qur'an already in the press. They arrested Oporinus, and set his hearing for

1 August.167 Opinion amongst the leaders in Basel and environs was mixed: in favour of the publication were Oswald Myconius, Max Bertschi, Konrad Pellikan, Martin Bucer, and Caspar Hedio; opposed were Sebastian Munster, Jakob Truckenbrot, Boniface

Amerbach and Wolfgang Wyssenburg.168 When Luther found out about the actions of the council, he immediately stepped in and wrote to the city council of Basel on 27 October, urging them to lift the ban, arguing that it was important that the Qur'an be printed "to

Sarah Henrich and James L. Boyce, "Martin Luther -Translations of Two Prefaces on Islam: Preface to the Libellus de ritu et moribus Turcorum (1530), and Preface to Bibliander's Edition of the Qur'an (1543)," Word& World 16.2 (1996): 250-266; J. Paul Rajashekar and Timothy J. Wengert, "Martin Luther, Philip Melanchthon, and the publication of the Qur'an," Lutheran Quarterly 16.2 (2002): 221-228; see also Harry Clark, "The Publication of the Koran in Latin: A Reformation Dilemma," Sixteenth Century Journal 15.1 (1984): 3-12; and Georg Christ, "Das Fremde verstehen. Biblianders Apologie zur Koranausgabe im Spiegel des Basler Koranstreites von 1542," in Theodor Bibliander. Ein Thurgauer im gelehrten Zurich der Reformationszeit, edited by Christine Christ-von Wedel (Zurich: Neue Ziircher Zeitung, 2005), pp. 107-24; Victor Segesvary, L 'Islam et la Reforme: etude sur I 'attitude des reformateurs zurichois envers I'Islam (1510-1550) (Lausanne: Editions L'Age d'homme, 1973). i67 Clark, p. 8. 168 Christ, pp. 118-23. 144 honour Christ, to do good for Christians, to harm the Turks, and to vex the Devil."169 The council responded to Luther, however, defending their actions and saying that they had acted on the advice given by Capito and Grynaeus six years earlier when Oporinus had first proposed the idea for the publication. In the end, however, out of respect for Luther and Bucer, the council complied, under the condition that the name of the publisher

(Oporinus) and of the city of publication (Basel) remain anonymous and that no copies of the Qur'an be distributed in the city.170

Luther concludes his prefatory letter to the Qur'an by exhorting the reader to

"fight on all fronts against the ranks of the devil," - Jews, papists, Anabaptists, Servetus, and now Muslims: "Therefore, it is of value for the learned to read the writings of the enemy in order to refute them more keenly, to cut them to pieces and to overturn them, in order that they might be able to bring some to safety, or certainly to fortify our people

171 with more sturdy arguments." Accompanying Luther's preface to the first edition of the Qur'an were two other prefaces by Melanchthon and Bibliander. In much the same tone as Luther, Melanchthon condemns the content of the Muslim holy book and points out the heresies contained within. On the other hand, Bibliander, in his own lengthy prefatory letter to the reader, defends the publication of the Qur'an for much different reasons. Most importantly, he demonstrates that Islam is a Judeo-Christian heresy, and should therefore be handled in a similar way as the Church historically has dealt with heresies. Knowledge of the Qur'an can enable Christians to combat Islam not by force 1 79 but by persuasion. Ultimately, as Timothy Wengert points out, Luther and

169 Quoted in Rajashekar and Wengert, p. 222. 170 Clark, pp. 10-12. 171 Ibid., p. 266. 172 For a summary of Bibliander's preface, see Christ, pp. 112-8. 145

Melanchthon wanted to have the Qur'an published in order "to refute it rather than to promote the religion of Islam."173 As these prefaces show us, both Luther and

Melanchthon encouraged people to read the Qur'an not out of a spirit of inter-faith dialogue or to better understand Islam, but to expose its errors and spread the gospel of

Christ, much like the motives of humanists and reformers to learn Hebrew.

What we learn from these cases is that there was extensive cooperation between humanists and printers in the business of publishing books. Humanists needed to publish the fruits of their labour and printers needed to publish approved books that would meet the needs of the scholars as well as generate profit for their own businesses in a very competive market. Humanists recommended books for publication and thereby influenced the printing programme of German presses. Conversely, printers employed humanists for their philological skills in the production of these texts, for which reason scholarly communities of humanists developed around the printing presses. Moreover, as the Myconius cases demonstrate, we learn that humanists acted as readers of manuscripts, recommending whether the texts should be published or not. This helped safeguard the reputation not only of the author, but also of the printer. Letters of recommendation played a key role in the scholarly output of humanists, both in determining whether their efforts should be published or not, and which printer should publish them.

Humanists compared the act of recommending to painting, where words were carefully chosen from the palette of their extensive vocabularies to depict fellow scholars in recommendation letters. What picture did they seek to paint? What can their recommendation letters tell us about how humanists viewed themselves and their movement? Apart from the obvious biographical information contained in a

173 Rajashekar and Wengert, p. 223. 146 recommendation letter, humanists promoted candidates who were of upright moral

character, learned, well-connected, multi-lingual and godly; in essence, they were men

who combined the two virtues of doctus and pius, as exemplified by Cicero and Jerome,

whose life humanists, such as Erasmus, sought to emulate. Moreover, a triangular

relationship between the author, the recommended and the recipient undergirded

humanist recommendation letters, which drew upon the existing friendships and networks

amongst scholars. These letters of recommendation also shed light upon the nature of the

humanist movement itself, for we can draw a clearer definition about what humanism, the pursuit of the bonae literae, meant for sixteenth-century German humanists by examining the primary purposes for which their recommendation letters were written: for teachers

and books. For therein lies the heart of the humanist agenda. Humanists were most

actively engaged in teaching students, in passing on their philological skills, and in

printing texts. Letters of recommendation built up the careers of humanists, enabled them to find jobs and get their works published. 4. The Influence of the Reformation on the Letter of Recommendation

The letters of recommendation written during the period of 1520 to 1560 fall into three general categories: first, private recommendations found in the correspondence amongst friends; second, recommendations for candidates applying for university positions; finally, letters of recommendation to rulers and city councils for positions in public office and church. We have already witnessed the first two sorts in the correspondence of humanists who wrote letters to their friends and patrons for the purposes of recommending young men as private tutors, professors and editors. It is the third category, however, where we see a new development occur in the Reformation era. For after breaking from the Catholic Church, Protestants established their own ecclesiastical hierarchies and founded their own universities. In the process, they created a new climate in which letters of recommendation functioned. Before the Reformation, the process of appointing someone to a benefice involved the patrons who had the right of presentation

(ius patronatus) and the ecclesiastical authorities who confirmed the appointment. In the

Reformation era, however, congregations themselves demanded a voice in the selection process. Lay people - congregations, city councils, and local rulers - became increasingly involved in hiring the pastors and overseeing the reformation in their churches or domains. They often acted upon the recommendation and advice of the reformers. The churches and universities gradually became extensions of the authority of the local magistracy and regional rulers, and conformed to their particular creed and confession. For that reason, letters of recommendation for pastors and teachers were addressed to city councilmen and local magistrates. Although the unity of Christendom was broken by the Reformation, city councils desired to achieve some degree of unity 148 and concord within their municipal jurisdictions just as reform-minded preachers, city magistrates, and princes sought to create a unified front against the Catholics. Some of these clerical appointments by city councils were seen as temporary until a hoped for general church council would make a final decision about whose authority it actually was to appoint pastors. In this chapter, then, we shall turn our attention to the new elements appearing in letters of recommendation in the wake of the Reformation and examine them under three headings: the credentials of the recommended person, the circumstances in which they are recommended, and the strategies employed by the recommender.

Much of the evidence will be drawn from the correspondence of Melanchthon.

His letters provide a particularly rich repository through which to explore these changes.

On account of his vast network of friends and contacts, Melanchthon frequently wrote recommendations for a wide range of persons: pastors, candidates for university positions, civil servants, refugees, and even positions as organists, cantors, and court astronomers. The sheer number of letters of recommendation by Melanchthon is testimony to his distinguished reputation across Europe. His humanistic training commanded respect, even in a confessionally divided world. What is also interesting is that his letters of recommendation demonstrate his penchant for sacrificing a strict emphasis on creed for the sake of concord in cases where the confessional orthodoxy of the recommended was not paramount.

The Credentials of the Recommended Person:

From the outset of the Reformation, reformers were concerned to recommend people who supported the locally endorsed creed to positions in church, academia and the civil service in order to maintain peace and concord and to spread the evangelical 149 message. They duly noted that those they recommended "taught Christ purely" or had a

"correct understanding of Christian doctrine."1 The letters of recommendation written on behalf of the Dutch theologian, Albert Hardenberg, the future cathedral preacher of

Emden, who was accused of being a Zwinglian by Lutheran reformers, attest to his orthodoxy. On 9 September 1544, Bucer wrote to Ambrosius Blaurer, recommending

Hardenberg, whom Melanchthon and Hermann von Wied, the bishop of Cologne, had recommended to him. On 28 September, Bullinger too wrote to Blaurer, begging him and his brother Thomas "to confirm Hardenberg in the true and orthodox opinion of the

Lord's Supper." This was especially necessary since the interpretation of the eucharist was one of the touchstones of orthodoxy. He notes that Hardenberg "has received many calls from many princes and cities."4 On 8 October, Blaurer responded to Bullinger, saying that Hardenberg was "just as you, Bucer and Vadian depicted him," a wonderful reminder that reformers, just as the humanists, understood the similarity between a letter of recommendation and an actual portrait. In the letter, he praises Hardenberg's erudition, godliness and orthodoxy. He is impressed that Hardenberg is so "far removed from the arrogance of the Sorbonne and the superstition of the monks" that one would never have even thought that Hardenberg himself had once been a monk. He mentions that there was no need for him and his brother to confirm Hardenberg's understanding of the Lord's

Supper, since he seemed "to speak and think rightly and in an orthodox manner about that most august mystery."5 Two days later, Bullinger responded, rejoicing that Blaurer was

1 Cf. HBBW 1, Ep. 43; MBW Epp. 7346 and 8776. 2 For the most comprehensive study of Hardenberg, see Wim Janse, Albert Hardenberg als Theologe. Profil eines Bucer-Schiilers (Leiden, New York and Cologne: Brill, 1994). 3 Schiess 2, Ep. 1118. 4 Schiess 2, Ep. 1127; cf. Ep. 1129, a similar letter from Vadian to Blaurer. 5 Schiess 2, Ep. 1131 (summary). The original autograph is in Zurich SA E II 357, f. 102r: "D. D. Albertus ille Hardenbergius plane talis est, qualem tu, qualem Bucerus, qualem denique Vadianus noster hunc nobis 150 pleased with Hardenberg.6 The verbal portraits of Hardenberg painted by Bullinger,

Bucer and Vadian reveal an image of a man whose convictions were deemed right, pure and orthodox. In what follows, we shall examine the qualities of the recommended person extolled by reformers in their letters of recommendation. They give us a clue as to what Bild they tried to draw of the ideal Protestant scholar or minister. a) Orthodoxy:

The confessionalization both of hiring policies and of recommending becomes evident as soon as people realized that Luther and Lutheranism were there to stay.

Catholics wanted no one who showed evangelical leanings;7 meanwhile evangelical factions hired only those who championed their own local creed, that is to say, Lutherans did not recommend Zwinglians, and vice versa. Shortly after the death of Petrus

Mosellanus in 1524, the staunchly Catholic Duke George of Saxony initiated a search for a successor to Mosellanus, stipulating, however, that the applicant not be a Lutheran. In his response to the duke, Erasmus confesses that it was already difficult "to find someone who is an expert in both languages," and even more difficult "to meet your additional requirement, that it be someone who has absolutely no connection with the Lutheran party." Erasmus admits that he could not think of anyone suitable, who could satisfy both criteria.8 As we saw in the last chapter, when Erasmus finally ended up recommending

depinxistis. Deus bone, quam erudite, quam pie, quam expedite, quanta cum gratia de omnibus solidae religionis nostrae capitibus loquitur, quanta illi morum suavitas, quanta humanitas, quam alienus est a Sorbonico isto supercilio et monachorum superstitione, ut monachum certe fuisse nullo prorsus indicio deprehendere possis.... nobis enim de augustissimo illo mysterio recte ac plane orthodoxe loqui et sentire visus est." Cf. Schiess 2, Ep. 1010, a letter fromBlaure r to Bullinger recommending a Transylvanian man named Martin: "Plane talis mihi visus est, qualem tu mihi depinxisti." 6 Schiess 2, Ep. 1134. 7 See CWC 1, Ep. 110a, the letter of recommendation fromAlber t of Brandenburg (though written by Capito) to Leo X on behalf of Johannes Fabri, to support his efforts to obtain the bishopric of Constance. The letter notes Fabri's contributions to the campaign against Luther. 8 CWE 10, Ep. 1526,11. 229-237. 151

Johannes Ceratinus for the position in three separate letters addressed to Duke George,

Heinrich Stromer, and Hieronymus Emser,9 he was careful to specify that he had personally verified Ceratinus' commitment to the Catholic faith, admitting regret for having recommended certain people in the past.10 The conversions to the reform movement of leading humanist scholars prompted Erasmus himself to adopt a more cautious policy when recommending. No one wanted a recommendation he had written to come back to haunt him later on, for that might reflect poorly on his own reputation and disturb the harmony of the triangular relationship characteristic of humanist recommendation letters. For that reason, when Capito recommended Johannes Chelius to

Ambrosius Blaurer on 26 November 1525 for the position of schoolmaster, he assured

Blaurer that "he will not embarrass you and your friends, for he combines learning with modesty."11 No one wanted to be responsible for the hiring of someone who might cause dissension within faculty and ecclesiastical ranks. Taking Erasmus' lead, authors began to screen those whom they recommended and to make specific mention of their confessional leanings so as to avoid any potential future embarrassments.

Erasmus experienced firsthand the embarrassment of having highly recommended many of the promising humanist scholars who later became leading Protestant reformers.

His Catholics opponents did not miss the opportunity to draw attention to this fact. In his

Epistola apologetica (Antwerp, 1530) to Erasmus, the Leuven theologian, Frans

Titelmans, who had earlier published a critical review of Erasmus' New Testament scholarship, inveighs against "Erasmians," that is, scholars who have applied their philological tools to a reexamination of scripture and Catholic theology. Then he turns to

9 For a discussion of the strategy of writing multiple letters, see below. 10CWEll,Epp. 1564-6. 11 CWC 2, Ep. 260. 152

Erasmus and asks him pointblank what has become of his disciples, that is, his Erasmians

- Oecolampadius, his "Theseus," or Hutten and Melanchthon, whom he had thought so

promising. "All the men, whom you used to praise to the skies, whom you called the

most eminent representatives of this field of studies, have become captains and leaders of

heretics - am I not right?"12 Erasmus could not deny that he had recommended

Oecolampadius, Hutten and Melanchthon, not to mention Capito, to whom Erasmus had

once passed the proverbial torch, and who also converted to the evangelical camp,

becoming one of the leading reformers of Strasbourg.13

Given the rapid rise of sects in the 1520s, and the ensuing bitter theological

disputes, rifts and even wars between confessional opponents, reformers were keen to

achieve doctrinal uniformity and conformity within their own ranks. By 1530, three main

factions had developed amongst the evangelicals: Lutherans, Zwinglians, and the

signatories of the Tetrapolitan Confession of 1530 that was endorsed by the Strasbourg

reformers. Those willing to subscribe to an established set of confessional articles of faith

and who abstained from fanatical or seditious opinions were prime candidates for a

position in church, academic or the civil service. Protestant rulers, too, participated in this

process by issuing guidelines for the professors of the universities that lay within their

realms. For that reason, Duke Ulrich of Wurttemburg promulgated new ordinances for

the University of Tubingen on 3 November 1536. These ordinances stipulated, inter alia,

that all faculty members be "Christian men" of the "right, true evangelical teaching and

godly truth." This qualification was reinforced by a loyalty oath. When the University of

Tubingen was looking for a new professor of theology in 1537, the faculty approached

12 Quoted in Rummel, Erasmus and his Catholic Critics 1, pp. 20-1. 13CWE4,Ep. 541. 153

Melanchthon to suggest a possible candidate.14 On 12 October 1537, Melanchthon wrote a letter to Johannes Brenz in Tubingen, informing him that he could not think of anyone to nominate for the vacant position, but expressed his wish that the candidate be moderate and learned:

If only we could give your university a suitable professor of theology; I do not spurn scholars of modest accomplishments since I still have not obtained that modest level required from a teacher. For just as Homer expects a good prince to be 'both a noble king and a mighty spearman,' so I want this theologian to be a prudent professor and an erudite doctor, so that he may be 'in both ways prudent to rule and to teach.' For you will permit me to change the meaning of the Homeric verse somewhat. I do not permit you to apply that saying 'I want to be mighty in the city' to a theologian. For he was speaking about a private man, not about the leader of a very great and difficult profession, who ought to be 'an example of the believers in speech and conduct', as Paul says [in 1 Tim. 4:12]. Or do you think that he was an intermediate man, that is a private man? Moreover, since I cannot indicate anyone to you at this time, I will let you use your own judgment; I must not pronounce about an unknown man, especially since I have found out in many cases how much and how often I have been fooled even by men whom I know. I see that a new type of sophist is being born, as other giants were born from the blood of the giants. Unless good and prudent men restrain the petulancy of those sophists in public matters, I fear major disturbences in the church.1

Likewise, in a letter to the city council of Rostock, recommending Johann von Emden for a position as professor of law at the university, dated 29 January 1556, Melanchthon stressed the importance of installing qualified people (tiichtigen Personen) in churches

14 Richard L. Harrison, Jr, "Melanchthon's Role in the Reformation of the University of Tubingen," Church History A13 (1978): 276. 15 MBW T7, Ep. 1952: "Utinam possemus academiae vestrae idoneum gubernatorem theologici studii dare! Nee ego aspernor mediocres, ut qui illam mediocritatem, quae in gubernatore necessaria est, ne ipse quidem adhuc assecutus sim. Ut enim Homerus in bono principe requirit, ut sit amphoteron basileus t'agathos krateros t'aichmetes, ita hunc theologum volo et gubernatorem prudentem esse et eruditum doctorem, ut sit amphoteron phronimos kosmesai, ede didaskein; concedes enim mihi Homericum versiculum nonnihil mutare in nostro argumento. Mud non permitto: detorquere te ad theologum; thelomenos enpolei einai. Nam ille de privato loquebatur, non de gubernatore maximae et difficilimae professionis, qui debet esse typos ton piston en logo kai en anastrophe, ut inquit Paulus. An tu hunc meson, id est privatum, hominem esse censes? Cum autem hoc quidem tempore indicare vobis neminem possim, sinam tuo te iudicio uti; mihi de ignoto non est pronunciandum, presertim cum multis exemplis compererim, quantum me sepe noti fefellerint. Video novum quoddam genus sophistarum nasci, velut ex gigantum sanguine alii gigantes nati sunt. Ac nisi boni ac prudentes viri in rebus publicis petulantiam illorum cohercebunt, metuo maiores ecclesiae motus." 154 and universities, especially in the midst of much unrest and the Turkish threat, hoping that "through the University of Rostock Christian doctrine and other arts will be long preserved by the descendants in many lands."16 In his capacity as praeceptor Germaniae,

Melanchthon was particularly aware of the importance of a Christian and, more specifically, Protestant education and of the duty of older scholars to recommend appropriate young men to the right people. On 27 March 1553, Melanchthon wrote a letter of recommendation to Johannes Forster in Wittenberg, reminding him that they should "foster good and correct minds, so that the church may have for posterity suitable men to refute the furies of fanatics."17 Likewise, on 14 April 1557, Melanchthon stressed the importance of recommending the appropriate people to the right positions in a letter of recommendation to Johannes Crato on behalf of an unnamed young man: "It is altogether necessary that we, being much older, bring help to those of good intellect and strive for the sake of the republic that both the advancement of teaching and governance

•I O be entrusted to the appropriate people."

In order to confirm the confessional orthodoxy of the recommended people, reformers and scholars put a candidate through a screening process before recommending them. The examination of the recommended person's doctrines and beliefs marked a new trend in the process of recommending, and became an expected feature. On 10 August

1547, Duke Moritz of Saxony wrote to Melanchthon, stating that he should first examine the bearer of the letter, Wolf Heiderich of Freiberg, for a stipend and, if he was suitable,

16 MBW Ep. 7704 (summary); printed in Flemming, p. 55, Ep. 54. 17 MBW Ep. 6776 (summary); printed in CR 8.55-6: "Quare oro, ut ei benefaciatis. Foveamus bona et recta ingenia, ut habeat ecclesia ad posteritatem homines idoneos ad refutandos fanaticos furores." 18 MBW Ep. 8190 (summary); printed in Flemming, p. 59, Ep. 63: "Necesse est omnino nos grandiores natu, quantum possumus, bonis ingeniis opem ferre et reipublicae causa anniti, ut idoneis commendentur et doctrinarum propagatio et gubernatio." 155

Melanchthon should then write a letter of recommendation for him to Leipzig.19

Churches and city councils requested reformers and professors to examine the doctrinal positions of ministers and reformers whose views were considered suspect and likely to

cause disputes and rifts within their churches, universities and communities. The

recommendations and Gutachten (theological opinions) written by reformers following

these examinations helped resolve theological disputes and even clear those suspected of

heresy. On 12 January 1530, for instance, Bucer wrote to Zwingli recommending

Nikolaus Guldi of St. Gallen, a former Anabaptist: "This brother, undoubtedly well

known to you before as an enemy of the church on account of the depravity of his errors,

has asked to be introduced now and recommended to you through us, so that he, having

acknowledged the error of his ways, may sincerely return to the church."20 He hoped that

his recommendation would convince Zwingli of the genuineness of Guldi's conversion so

that he might be able to find some sort of teaching position in Switzerland. Capito and

Oecolampadius also wrote letters of recommendation to Vadian on behalf of Guldi,

attesting to his genuine conversion. Likewise, around mid-December 1544,

Melanchthon wrote a letter of recommendation to Matthaus Poler in Marienberg on

behalf of Martin Gilbert, who had been accused of heresy. Melanchthon states that he has

held a high opinion of Gilbert for a long time and was therefore disappointed to hear that

Gilbert had become the target of suspicion. He mentions that Gilbert had been examined

by the University of Leipzig and cleared of any heresy. Moreover, Luther, Cruciger and

19 MBW Ep. 4846 (summary). 20 CMB 4, Ep. 269: "Frater hie tibi antea ut hostis eccleiae indubie ex improbitate erroris suis admodum notus, innotescere et commendari iam tibi per nos petiit, ut qui cognito errore suo ad ecclesiam ex animo redierit." Cf. Ep. 271. 21 Cf. CWC 2, Epp. 399-400, 451; BrOek 2, pp. 409-13, Ep. 719. 156

Melanchthon had personally discussed Gilbert's Christology and were satisfied with his response. In a spirit of peace and concord, Melanchthon now recommends him:

It is most useful for the church of God that all of us who teach in the churches and the schools be completely at one, as Christ often commands; before his own death, he asks the eternal Father that he may bestow concord to his disciples, when he says: 'Father, sanctify them in truth, that they may be one, just as we are one, so that there may be concord with you and amongst them.' I pray with Christ that the eternal Father may bestow this concord on you there.22

As this letter shows, Melanchthon sought to maintain concord amongst German

Protestants and his recommendations demonstrate his yearning for peace and concord between the churches in the face of doctrinal controversies.23

Experience taught Melanchthon to examine carefully the confessional stance and doctrinal orthodoxy of those he recommended so as to avoid spawning theological disputes and to maintain a degree of religious concord. On 31 January 1555, he reported to Johannes Petreius Jr. in Zwickau that the bearer of the letter, Wolfgang Streber, was going to be examined and ordained, and that he would be a good pastor to his congregation in Crossen.24 The testimonium Melanchthon, together with Johannes

Bugenhagen, wrote to the city council of Braunschweig in support of Martin Chemnitz on

25 November 1544 is an excellent example of how a recommender prepared himself to

MBW 3759 (summary); printed in CR 5.430: "Utilissimum est ecclesiae Dei, nos omnes, qui cum in ecclesiis turn scholis docemus, coniunctissimos esse, ut saepe mandat Christus, et ante agonem suum petit ab aeterno patre, ut concordiam docentibus largiatur, cum ait: 'Pater, sanctifica eos in veritate, ut sint unum, sicut et nos unum sumus, ut sint tecum et inter se Concordes.' Hanc concordiam ut vobis istic largiatur aeternus pater et ego cum Christo oro." 23 For similar episode, see the letters of recommendation and indicia written concerning Matthias Lauterwald, then pastor in Eperies (modern-day PreSov, Slovakia) and a former student of Melanchthon, who was embroiled in a dispute with Michael Radaschinus, pastor in Bartfeld (modern-day Bardejov, Slovakia), in 1554 over the doctrine of justification. The city council of Eperies sought a resolution to the dispute and asked a number of theologians for an opinion as to whether Lauterwald's position disagreed with official Wittenberg policy. Melanchthon, the Wittenberg theologians and others investigated the matter and submitted to the council their judicium, or verdict, recommending that Lauterwald be removed from office, if he refuses to agree with the general consensus of the Lutheran church. See MBW Epp. 7300- 1. 24 MBW Ep. 7395 (summary). 157 be able to write about the beliefs of those he recommended. Chemnitz had previously been librarian to Duke Albert of Prussia in Konigsberg. While there, he became involved in a theological controversy with Andreas Osiander over the doctrine of justification by faith.26 Osiander, maintaining the infusion of Christ's righteousness into the believer, impugned the Lutheran doctrine of imputation; Chemnitz defended it with striking ability. Since Duke Albert sided with Osiander, Chemnitz resigned the librarianship. In

1553, he returned to Wittenberg, where he lectured on Melanchthon's Loci Communes, before accepting a call to become coadjutor to the superintendent in Braunschweig,

Joachim Morlin, who had known him in Konigsberg. The letter begins by praising the city of Braunschweig as one of those which Christ is preserving for the propagation of the gospel truth, as is evident by the call of the city council extended to Chemnitz, "an honourable and erudite man." Then Bugenhagen and Melanchthon proceed to depict

Chemnitz as a man suitable for the position:

We attest both that his character is honest and that he has a heart that loves truth and public concord and that avoids deceits and sophistry, and that he rightly knows the doctrine of the church of God. As Paul commands, faithful and suitable men should be chosen to teach, and that they should teach other suitable men. We know that this Martin is that sort of man, because he has set forth in the presence of others both in church and in university lectures the sum of his doctrine. He has studied both the history of the church of every age as well as the disputes of old, and has taken into consideration what the true church thought about dogmas and what were the confessions and explanations of the godly men, who refuted the fanatical men. Therefore, as supported by true testimonies, he embraces the genuine consensus of the catholic church of God, which the confession of the Saxon churches, presented to Emperor Charles V at the Diet of Augsburg in 1530, declares, and which the church of God in the wonderful city of Braunschweig professes. For Martin opposes every seditious opinion and heated debates with

He was ordained on 25 November 1544, according to his certificate of ordination, co-signed by Bugenhagen, Johannes Forster, Georg Maior, Melanchthon, Sebastian Froschel and Lucas Hetzer, cf. MBW Ep. 7345 (summary). 26 Cf. Anna Briskina, Philipp Melanchthon und Andreas Osiander im Ringen urn die Rechtfertigungslehre. Ein reformatorischer Streit aus der ostkirchlichen Perspektive (Frankfurt a.M.: Peter Lang, 2006). 158

that confession.

The letter stresses certain qualities which would make Chemnitz a ideal candidate for the

position of preacher in Braunschweig. Chemnitz, they write, seeks public concord and

has a correct understanding of Christian doctrine. Moreover, he has both teaching and

preaching experience. He is trained in historical theology and the history of theological

disputes within the church. Finally, he embraces the Augsburg Confession of 1530,

which he uses as a basis to oppose seditious opinions. Chemnitz's involvement in the

dispute with Osiander prompted the writers to highlight his particular confessional stance

in light of such theological rifts within the Lutheran party. Chemnitz found himself in the

same theological camp as Melanchthon and Bugenhagen, as well as Joachim Morlin,

whose co-adjutor he became. He moved to Braunschweig on 15 December 1554, and

there spent the remainder of his life, refusing subsequent offers of important offices from

various Protestant princes of Germany.

For many Lutherans, it was the Augsburg Confession of 1530 that became the

standard by which to examine a candidate and judge his theological credentials. This

helped ensure that those they recommended thought "rightly" about key doctrines of the

faith. The confessional orthodoxy of the recommended person was particularly important

to prove when writing a letter of recommendation for a position at a university or church.

27 MBW Ep. 7346 (summary); the original autograph is in Wolfenbtlttel HAB, Cod. Guelf., Mittlere Briefsammlung, ff. 177r-178v [Bugenhagen]: "... testamur et mores eius honestos esse, et mentem veritatis et publicae concordiae amantem, et fugitantem prestigiarum et sophistices et recte eum intelligere doctrinam ecclesiae Dei. Cumque iubeat Paulus eligi ad docendum homines fideles et idoneos, hikanous kai heterous didaxai, Talem esse hunc Martinum cognovimus, quia et in templo et scholasticis praelectionibus perspicue summam doctrinae aliis exposuit. Inquisivit et historiam omnium ecclesiae temporum et vetera certamina et consideravit, quid semper vera ecclesia de dogmatibus indicaverit, et quae fuerint confessiones et enarrationes piorum qui refutarint fanaticos homines. Confirmatus igitur veris testimoniis amplectitur consensum Catholicae Ecclesiae Dei incorruptum, quern et confessio ecclesiarum Saxonicarum, quae exhibita est imperatori Carolo Quinto in Augustano Conventu anni 1530, recitat et quam profitetur ecclesia Dei in inclyta urbe Brunsviga. Abhorret etiam Martinus ab omnibus seditiosis opinionibus et furoribus pugnantibus cum ilia confessione." 159

On 4 February 1544, Melanchthon wrote to Johannes Praetorius in Wroclaw, recommending Martin Krowicki, who preferred to return to his homeland rather than move to Bohemia, despite an earlier recommendation for him to Johannes Mathesius in

Joachimsthal, Bohemia. In the letter, Melanchthon states his concern about dissembling men and attests to Krowicki's doctrinal orthodoxy:

I understand that you know this man, Martin Krowicki. Since you know that the man is upright and thinks correctly, and that he is acceptable in your judgment, you will state and conclude that I have not recommended him heedlessly to others. I know that there are men everywhere who dissemble. They should be examined before they ask for a recommendation from us. Since I have personally discussed many things with this Martin, I have heard him affirm that he embraces the confession of our church.29

Here Melanchthon could safely recommend Krowicki, after having personally examined him and heard him state that he adhered to the Augsburg Confession. Likewise, in a letter of recommendation to Kilian Goldstein, a jurist in Halle, written for Justus Jonas Jr., the son of the reformer, on 19 April 1551, Melanchthon states that the son acknowledges the

Augsburg Confession as his doctrinal norm, just as Goldstein had done at the Colloquy of

Worms in 1540.30 Even in the testimonium for a teaching position written on behalf of

Johannes Hoffler, dated 16 October 1556, Melanchthon declared that Hoffler has upheld the Augsburg Confession, the "confession of Duke Johann Friedrich of Electoral

Saxony."31

The case of an Ethiopian deacon, named Michael, who stopped by in Wittenberg in 1534 on his way to France, demonstrates that Melanchthon was willing to be flexible

28 MBW Ep. 7031 (summary). 29 MBW Ep. 7080 (summary); printed in CR 8.22If: "Intelligo hunc virum, Martinum Crovitium, tibi notum esse, quern, cum scias virum integrum esse, et recte sentientem, tuo eum iudicio complectendum esse, statues, et iudicabis me eum non temere aliis commendasse. Scio dissimiles esse homines ubique, et prius considerandos esse eos, qui testimonia nostra petunt. Quare cum hoc Martino multa collucutus sum familiariter, et audivi eum affirmantem, se amplecti confessionem ecclesiae nostrae." 30 MBW Ep. 6055 (summary). 31 MBW Ep. 7994 (summary); CR 8.875. with regard to certain doctrinal differences for the sake of the unity and concord of the church. On 31 May, Melanchthon reported to Benedikt Pauli that Martin Luther and

Melanchthon had discussed the doctrine of the Trinity of the Orthodox Church with the

Ethiopian, despite the language barrier.32 Armed with letters of recommendation from

Luther and Melanchthon, Michael left for France. In the recommendation to Bucer,

Melanchthon wrote that having discussed with him many religious topics and Christian doctrine, the Wittenberg reformers formed the impression that Michael was a religious person. In the testimonium, he recommends Michael to the reader for three reasons: firstly, that he espouses the creed of the western Church, in particular with regard to the doctrine of the Trinity; secondly, that the different rituals and ceremonies of the Eastern

Church did not break the unity of the Christian faith; and finally, that the Lutheran liturgy for Holy Communion accords with that of the Eastern Church.34 Even though Michael was not a Lutheran, nevertheless the customary inquiry into his doctrinal beliefs was conducted, which seemed to have satisfied Luther and Melanchthon. One must bear in mind, however, that Melanchthon could afford to be more ecumenical in this case, since the recommendation was not for a church or academic position in Germany, but for a letter of introduction and recommendation for an itinerant scholar on his way to France.

In 1548, Johann Valentin Deyger, a preacher from a town not far from Augsburg, was forced into exile on account of his evangelical beliefs. Unwilling to submit to the teachings and rites of the Catholic Church imposed upon Protestant clergymen by the

Augsburg Interim of 1548, he approached his former teacher, Johannes Stigel, an orator and poet in Jena, for help. On 8 May 1549, Stigel wrote a letter to Melanchthon,

32 MBW T6, Ep. 1444; cf. Luther's recommendation in WABr 7, Ep. 2126. 33MBWT6,Ep. 1459. 34 MBW T6, Ep. 1460. mentioning that Deyger had asked him for a recommendation. In response,

Melanchthon wrote a testimonium for him on 2 July 1549, which explains Deyger's situation, but also offers a broad basis by which to judge his beliefs: his adherence to the

Augsburg Confession and to the consensus of the catholic church, that is the church historical and universal: "Moreover, he embraces the consensus of the catholic church of

God, which the Saxon churches with one heart and voice profess together with the catholic church of God according to the Augsburg Confession presented to the august

Emperor Charles at the Diet in the year 1530.36 Melanchthon's testimonium for Deyger produced the desired effect, for according to the Wittenberg matriculation records,

Deyger was admitted without fees on 13 July 1549 and his album amicorum survives to this day. Melanchthon's testimonium for Deyger is interesting because not only does he use the Augsburg Confession as a doctrinal standard, but also the consensus of the small- c catholic church, an allusion to the ninth article of the Apostle's Creed.

Capito, on the other hand, believed that the Apostle's Creed should suffice as a basis for defining the essentials of the Christian faith and regretted the need for further articles.38 As a result of this latitudinarian attitude, he befriended noted Anabaptists and wrote letters of recommendation on their behalf. In the late 1520s, a number of heterodox men, such as the Anabaptist, Wilhelm Exel,39 Caspar Schwenckfeld and

Michael Servetus, were periodically guests at his home, during which time he had the

35 MBW Ep. 5523 (summary). 36 MBW Ep. 5582 (summary); printed in CR 7.422-3: "Amplectitur autem consensum Ecclesiae catholicae Dei, quem Saxonici Ecclesiae uno spiritu et una voce cum catholica Ecclesia Dei profitentur, iuxta confessionem Augustae in conventu anni 1530 exhibitam Imperatori Carolo Augusto etc." 37 Friedrich Seek, "Eines der fruhesten Stammbiicher: Stammbuch Johann Valentin Deyger, Eintragungen von 1552 bis 1554," in Kostbarkeiten aus alter undneuer Zeit, edited by Hans.-Peter Geh and Wolfgang Kehr (Karlsruhe: Badische Landesbibliothek, 1992), pp. 128f. 38 CMB 4, pp. 275-86, Ep. 340; CWC 2, Ep. 426 (summary). 39 ZwBr 2, pp. 556-7, Ep. 465; CWC 2, Ep. 282 (summary). occasion to discuss matters of theology with them. Around June 1530, he wrote to

Zwingli that the controversial theologian, Martin Cellarius, was "one of ours," but already in 1525, Capito was forced to dispel rumours that he supported the beliefs of the

Anabaptists.41 He went on to write the prefatory letter to Martin Cellarius' De operibus

Dei (Strasbourg, 1527) as well as to Caspar Schwenckfeld's Apologia und erclerung der

Schlesier (Strasbourg, 1529).42 Dionysius Melander Sr. wrote to Capito on 9 January

1528 that "false brethren" were saying that Capito "think[s] wrongly about the Trinity and the divinity of Christ."43 Yet on 18 May 1529, Capito still reported to Zwingli that

Schwenckfeld, "who breathes the spirit of Christ," had arrived in Strasbourg.44 He believed that the reformers were not using enough persuasion with the Anabaptists and was willing to endure their doctrinal differences so long as they did not advocate

"seditious views" - that is, refused to submit to the civil authorities and caused public unrest.45 His initial unwillingness to judge a person's faith by a fixed set of doctrines, such as a confession, instead of by a more general and universal statement of faith, such as the Apostle's Creed, led to dissent amongst the Strasbourg reformers. On 17

September 1531, Oecolampadius wrote to Capito that he was worried about the people

40 ZwBr 4, pp. 622-4, Ep. 1044; CWC 2, Ep. 413 (summary). 41 CWC 2, Epp. 257 (summary) and 258 (summary). 42 CWC 2, Epp. 335 and 393. 43 CWC 2, Ep. 346. 44 ZwBr 4, pp. 124-26, Ep. 842; CWC 391 (summary). 45 CWC 2, Epp. 367 and 438 (summary). For a discussion of the Anabaptists and social unrest, see Klaus Depperman, Melchior Hoffman: Social Unrest and Apocalyptic Visions in the Age of Reformation, translated by Malcolm Wren (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1987); James M. Stayer, Anabaptists and the Sword, 2nd ed. (Lawrence, Kansas: Coronado Press, 1976); John Derksen, "Nonviolent political action in sixteenth-century Strasbourg: the Ziegler brothers," The Mennonite Quarterly Review 78.4 (2004): 543- 556; and Idem, "The Schwenckfeldians in Strasbourg, 1533-1562: a prosopographical survey," The Mennonite Quarterly Review 142 (2000): 257-294; Emmet R. McLaughlin, "The politics of dissent: Martin Bucer, Caspar Schwenckfeld, and the Schwenckfelders of Strasbourg," The Mennonite Quarterly Review 68.1 (1994): 59-78; Idem, The Freedom of Spirit, Social Privilege, and Religious Dissent: Caspar Schwenckfeld and the Schwenckfelders (Baden-Baden: V. Koerner, 1996); and Stephen B. Boyd, "Anabaptism and social radicalism in Strasbourg, 1528-1532: Pilgram Marpeck on Christian social responsibility," The Mennonite Quarterly Review 63.1 (1989): 58-76. 163

Capito was receiving into his home, namely Servetus and Schwenckfeld, adding that

Capito needed to decide: if he approved of the teachings of Bucer and the Swiss reformers, he must not consort with their opponents. He admonished Capito that his tolerance might turn out to be the cause of dissension rather than peace, which he desired. Shortly thereafter, Capito was lured back to the orthodox views of his colleagues and repented of his Anabaptist leanings.47 On 10 October 1531, Capito wrote to Joachim Vadian that he was pleased with the man whom Vadian had recommended to him and affirms that the man is free of the Anabaptist superstition.48 By 16 November

1533, Bucer could boast to Ambrosius Blaurer, "Capito is wholly ours now."49 While letters of recommendation could confirm and guarantee the orthodoxy of the recommended in an age obsessed with confessional tags, as the case of Capito illustrates, sometimes the questionable orthodoxy of the author himself cast doubt upon the recommendation. b) Love of Peace, Concord and Moderation:

Thus far we have examined the presence of confessional elements in letters of recommendation by reformers. Those they recommended were expected to hold the right and correct understanding of key doctrines, often in line with an established set of beliefs, such as the Augsburg Confession. The letters of recommendation by reformers also extolled people who were lovers of peace, concord and moderation. In a letter of recommendation to Johannes Agricola in Berlin, dated 18 April 1546, written on behalf of Christoph Lasius (1504-1572), the bearer of the letter, whom the city council of

46 BrOek 2, pp. 681-3, Ep. 932; CWC 2, Ep. 450 (summary). 47 Schiess 1, Ep. 259. 48 Vadian 5, Ep. 648; CWC 2, Ep. 453 (summary). 49 Schiess 1, Epp. 368 and 377. 164

Spandau had called as their pastor, Melanchthon writes: "But now I recommend to you this learned, wholesome and eloquent Lasius, who is contaminated by no fanatical opinions of Christ."50 Likewise, on 18 March 1554, Melanchthon reported to Michael

Meienburg in Nordhausen that Andreas Fabricius, who "by nature is averse to factions

(natura alienus est afactionibus)," would like to write first to his brother before he accepts an offer to teach at the school in Nordhausen.51 Melanchthon took the liberty himself to inform the brother, Georg Fabricius in Meissen, on 22 March, that he should expect to hear from Andreas soon. On the advice of his brother, Andreas decided to apply for the position, which promised a salary of 90 to 100 gulden per annum, plus board.53

When Melanchthon speaks of "fanatical" opinions and "factions," he has in mind people who are stubborn and do not know their proper place or respect boundaries.

Instead, they are given to intriguing and meddling in other people's affairs. He uses a

Greek word to describe what the recommended person is not, namely, polypragmon, a busybody (Latin: curiosus). When asked to find a replacement for the late Ambrosius

Moibanus, the pastor of the church in Wroclaw, who had died in January 1554,

Melanchthon had initially recommended Erasmus Sarcerius for the position, but he declined the offer, preferring instead to remain in Mansfeld. For that reason, on 11 March

1554, Melanchthon wrote a letter of recommendation to Johannes Crato in Wroclaw. This time, at the request of the Wroclaw city council, he recommended a citizen of Wroclaw,

Johannes Aurifaber. He begins the letter by stating that he does "not want, with my letters

50 MBW Ep. 4237 (summary); printed in CR 6.468: "Nunc vero tibi commendo hunc doctum, integrum et facundum et nullis contaminatum fanaticis opinionibus Christi Lasium." 51 MBW Ep. 7118 (summary); CR 8, p. 242, Ep. 5566. 52 MBW Ep. 7124 (summary). 53 Cf. MBWEpp. 7138 and 7141. 165

[of recommendation], to kindle ambitious rivalries and lusts of power, which have always severely afflicted the church." He describes Aurifaber as "well learned, shy by nature and not a busybody. He does not seem mature enough [to teach at] the university (Musaeum), although I have not seen him in a while. I consider him eloquent, but I fear that he is a busybody."54 The context suggests that Aurifaber would be a good candidate for the position since he will mind his own business, not spark new theological controversies, and not stir up trouble by interfering in other people's responsibilities, i.e. Aurifaber will not tell the councillors of Wroclaw how to run their city.

Melanchthon occasionally also employed the Greek adjective in its verbal form, polypramonein, when apologizing for writing a letter of recommendation in the first place, not wanting the request to come across as unwarranted interference. On 12 October

1537, he wrote a testimonium to the senate of the University of Tubingen on behalf of

Matthias Garbitius Illyricus, who was applying there for the position of professor of

Greek.55 He explains from the start that there were two reasons for writing the recommendation:

Wherefore, right from the beginning, both on account of our personal friendship - and nothing is sweeter to me than its recollection - and for the sake of the respublica liter aria, I ask you not to think that I want to meddle [polypragmonein], as they say in Greek, in someone else's university; but with a simple and open heart, I thought I should indicate to you my opinion of Matthias

MBW Ep. 7108 (summary); printed in Flemming, Ep. 43, p. 49: "Semper ecclesiam duriter afflixerunt ambitiosa certamina etphilarchiai, quas non velim meis Uteris accendere. ... Nunc senatui iterum interrogatus respondeo et sum hortator, ut Iohannem Aurifabrum civem accersant, qui et recte doctus est et natura moderatus est kai ouk esti polypragmbn. Aetas Musaeo nondum matura mini videtur, etsi diu eum non vidi; facundum esse existimo, phoboumai de polypragmosynen." 55 MBW T7, Ep. 1951: Quare initio et propter pricatam amicitiam, cuius recordatione mihi nihil dulcius est, et reipublicae literariae causa a vobis peto, ne me in aliena academia existimetis velle, ut graece dicam, polypragmonein; sed simplici et candido animo vobis et iudicium de hoc Matthia meum, et quod mihi videretur de publicis studiis significandum esse duxi. ... Venio nunc ad deliberationem vestram de munere, ad quod accersitur Matthias, ac rursus peto, ne suspicemini, me in aliena republica velle curiosum esse. Nihil enim praescribam vobis, sed ostendam optimo animo, qua in re ego existimem, Matthiae ingenium profuturum esse reipublicae." Cf. Ep. 1919. 166

and what I think should be done regarding public education. [...] Now I come to your deliberation about the offer, for which Matthias is being summoned, and again I ask that you do not suspect me of wanting to be meddlesome [curiosus] in someone else's affairs. For I will prescribe nothing to you, but am merely showing with the best intention that I believe, with regards to this issue, that Matthias' intelligence is going to benefit your republic.

As he goes on to explain in the letter, although Garbitius was applying for the position of professor of Latin, Melanchthon felt that Joachim Camerarius was better suited for that position, and Garbitius for a professorship of Greek. Moreover, he explains that Garbitius is shy and has not had much experience lecturing, and since more students study Latin than Greek, a more dynamic professor was necessary. His recommendation must have carried much weight, for on 25 December 1537, Oswald Gabelkofer in Tubingen wrote to

Thomas Blaurer, reporting that Garbitius was teaching Greek there, and Camerarius

Latin.56

Likewise, when the Silesian city of Lowenberg threatened to dismiss their school rector, Caspar Orthmann, Melanchthon wrote a letter of recommendation to the city council on 6 August 1559, defending Orthmann, but also expressing his own concern not to give the impression of being meddlesome and interfering with the council's jurisdiction. In the letter, he praises Orthmann's skills in Greek and Latin prose and poetry and notes that he "has a correct understanding of Christian doctrine and is God fearing, peace-loving and has good morals." He explains that he is noting these qualities because the councilmen "do not want to have an unlearned and unruly schoolmaster, but the type that can lay down the correct foundations in Christian teaching and in languages, and thereby offer the youth a Christian education and also instruct them to learn harmony and peace." He concludes the letter by reminding the council that it is incumbent upon

Schiessl,Ep. 794. them to "act more diligently to a find a learned, God-fearmg and peace-loving person for the governance of the church and school.57 Curiously, Melanchthon sent a copy of the letter that same day to Orthmann himself, informing him that he had sent the original to a contact of his in Lowenberg, Heinrich Paxmann. He advised them both to go read it through and determine for themselves whether or not it should be passed on to the city council. This is a rare case where the author asks the recommended for his approval of the recommendation. The letter highlights the key characteristics Melanchthon advocated in a Christian schoolmaster, i.e. the recommended should display linguistic skills, have a

"correct" understanding of Christian doctrine and good morals, and be peace-loving.

Most importantly, however, the recommended person should not be meddlesome or a busy-body, but instead a person who minds his own business, respects boundaries and is not inclined to intrigue. c) Knowledge of the Vernacular:

As did the humanists, reformers duly noted the linguistic capabilities of those whom they recommended, typically their ability to read and write Latin and Greek, and occasionally Hebrew. With the Reformation, however, came an emphasis on the vernacular and vernacular scholarship. The reformers pressed for vernacular versions of the Bible translated so that laypeople might read and interpret Scripture by themselves.

They often discussed theological points in their correspondence with magistrates and in their open letters to the general public. Since the audience consisted largely of laypeople who were not university trained, reformers frequently abandoned the preferred lingua

MBW Ep. 9018 (summary); printed in Flemming, pp. 64-5, no. 74. 58 MBW Ep. 9019 (summary); printed in CR 9.894: "Exemplum literarum, quas ad senatum vestrum scripsi, eo misi... doctori Paxmanno, ut, cum legeritis, deliberitis, an exhibendae sint." franca of academia, Latin, in favour of the vernacular. With the drive to preach and read in one's native tongue, references to the vernacular infiltrated letters of recommendation.

Reformers advised those whom they recommended to seek employment in regions where they would be readily understood by their congregation. Their recommendations show that reformers were sensitive to the inability of the laity to understand Latin or even another German dialect and to their objection to having to listen to Latin rituals. On 21 July 1528, Zwingli wrote a letter of recommendation to Ambrosius

Blaurer on behalf of an elderly Carthusian, Johann Schneewolf (Chiolycus), noting, however:

But since he is of advanced age and since the elderly cannot easily receive a new grafting, it so happens that he does not seem even to understand a word of our language. But it seems conducive to us, especially to the people of Bern, since they vehemently abhor the lingua peregrina [i.e. High German?], if he could be put in charge as minister of the Word near you or your neighbouring [towns], but especially at Augsburg, Ulm or Nordlingen. Do what you can.59

The following month, Zwingli wrote to Konrad Sam, a pastor and reformer in Ulm, recommending the same Schneewolf and his younger brother, Peter, for a position in a church: "Since their language, call it Austrian or Lower Austrian, seems almost strange and foreign to us, I have always advised them to betake themselves to those regions in which they might be understood a bit more easily."60 Melanchthon, too, gave similar advice regarding pastors in search of a position at a church. On 23 November 1545, he wrote a letter to Laurenz Moller, a preacher in Hildesheim, in which he asked him to

ZwBr 3, Ep. 736: "Provectae autem aetatis cum sit, nee inveterata novam insitionem facile recipiant, factum est, ut nostratem linguam ne verbo quidem agnoscere videatur. Nostri autem, praesertim Bernenses, quum a peregrina lingua vehementer abhorreant, conducibile videtur esse, si alicubi circum vos aut vicinos vestros praefici possit verbi ministerio, maxime tamen Augustae, Ulmae aut NSrdlingae. Tu quod poteris, facito." 60 ZwBr 3, Ep. 754: "Cum autem eorum lingua, puta Austriaca sive Pannonica, nostris ferme peregrina et aliena videatur, semper eis consului, ut sese in eas provincias reciperent, in quibus paulo rectius possent intelligi." 169 recommend a certain Theodoras to Nikolaus Glossenus, pastor of the church in

Magdeburg, "where the people will understand his language."61 Similarly, on 25 July

1555, Melanchthon wrote to Matthaus Collinus in Prague, requesting him to welcome the

Hungarian bearer of the letter, Johannes Trugnitius (Drugnetius) of Koros, who had been recommended to him by the Strasbourg preachers. He spent a month with Melanchthon, who then sent him with a letter of recommendation to Thomas Nadasdy in Hungary: "I judge that he is not a bad man, but is a late learner, and has not begun the rudiments of grammar. I gave him the advice to return to a place where his language is understood and where he may serve any church in teaching the gospel."6 Knowledge of the vernacular also played a role in finding employment for exiles. On 25 May 1558, for instance,

Melanchthon wrote a letter of recommendation to Johannes Aurifaber in Konigsberg on behalf of the Protestant Englishman, William Barlow, who had been deprived of his bishopric of Bath and Wells upon the accession of Mary I in 1553. In the letter,

Melanchthon explains that because Barlow knew German, he preferred to work in Prussia rather than in Poland. If Barlow did indeed assume a position in Prussia, he did not remain there long, for the following spring, Melanchthon recommended him to Elizabeth

I, who had ascended the throne upon the death of her sister in 1558.64

In other instances, letters of recommendation were written for people who were travelling abroad to learn another language. On 10 May 1537, Melanchthon recommended to Veit Dietrich the Polish bearer of the letter, Andrzej Frycz Modrzewski,

MBW Ep. 4071 (summary); printed in CR 8.174: "... ubi linguam eius intelligit populus." 62 MBW Ep. 7540 (summary); printed in CR 8.513, Ep. 5819: "Iudico non esse malum hominem, sed est opsimathes, nee initio didicit grammaticen. Dedi ei consilium, ut redeat in ea loca, ubi lingua eius intelligitur, et serviat alicui ecclesiae in docendo evangelio." 63 MBW Ep. 8629 (summary). 64 MBW Ep. 8880 (summary). 170 who was setting out for Niimberg with his long-time friend, Jan Vinarius, to learn

German.65 Likewise, on 5 May 1559, he wrote a letter of recommendation to Matthaus

Collinus in Prague on behalf of the bearer of the letter, Johannes Cruciger of

Quedlinburg, who was on his way to Prague to learn Czech, something which

Melanchthon admitted, "I would also like to do, since many towns and villages of that area have Czech names. If I were younger, I would hope I could use it on long journeys."66

Knowledge of the vernacular also played a role in recommending people for positions at schools and universities. In the summer of 1541, Melanchthon wrote a series of letters of recommendation to Veit Dietrich in Niimberg on behalf of Johannes

Lubbeke, who was looking for a lectureship. According to these recommendations, it is evident that Lubbeke, a nephew of Johannes Bugenhagen, had difficulties obtaining a position. On 19 August 1541, Melanchthon wrote to Dietrich, asking him to "apply all

[his] efforts" to bring the issue to an end, adding that Lubbeke "speaks High German fairly well (mediocriter imitatur linguam Superioris Germaniae). Once can sense the urgency, since the following day, Melanchthon wrote again to Dietrich, requesting him to expedite the matter.69 Still unable to find a position for Lubbeke in Niimberg,

Melanchthon solicited the aid of Joachim Camerarius in Tubingen on 12 September

1541, asking him "to help [Lubbeke] in finding a position," preferably in Upper

M MBW T7, Epp. 1901-2. 66 MBW Ep. 8944 (summary); printed in CR 9.814-5: "Expetit hie Iohannes cognitionem linguae Henetae, quam et ego valde expeto, cum harum regionum oppida et pagi plurimi adpellationes habeant Henetas, et, si iunior essem, sperarem, earn mihi usui fore in longinquis peregrinationibus." 67 MBW Epp. 2787 and 2790 (summary). 68 MBW Ep. 2791; CR 4.644-5. 69 MBW Ep. 2792; CR 4.645. 171

Germany."70 The same day, we find out in another letter to Dietrich that Liibbeke was once again compelled to hunt for another position either in Nurnberg or at the University of Tubingen, after the position promised to him by Dietrich was offered to a Silesian instead. Therefore, Melanchthon asked Dietrich once again to do his best to find a position for Liibbeke, adding: "You know that I am embarassed to use the help of friends, but in this case I want you to forgive me because I wish to please our friend,

Bugenhagen."

An even better example of how important a role knowledge of the vernacular had come to play even at the university level concerns the search for a Polish-speaking professor of theology for the University of Konigsberg in 1545. On 30 June, Georg

Sabinus, professor of poetry and rhetoric at the university, wrote to Melanchthon at the request of Duke Albert of Prussia, informing him that the duke was searching for a professor of theology who could also speak Polish, since he was planning a Polish translation of the Bible for the Polish-speaking Lutherans within his realm.72 Friedrich

Staphylus' name was suggested as a possibility. On 1 August 1545, Melanchthon wrote to Duke Albert a letter in German, recommending the magister Friedrich Staphylus of

Osnabruck, who spoke both Polish and Lithuanian, as professor of theology for

Konigsberg: For he is godly, very learned in Christian doctrine and other praiseworthy arts and languages. He can speak Polish and Lithuanian and has for a long a time now had a young duke and others under his tutelage. I know him to be moral and not

70 MBW Ep. 2807; CR 4.656. 71 MBW Ep. 2808; CR 4.657: " Scis me verecunde amicorum opera uti. Sed in hac causa velim mihi des veniam, quia satisfacere cupio amico D. Pomerano." 72 The resulting Konigsberg Lutheran New Testament of Stanislaw Murzynowski (1551-1553) was the first complete translation of the New Testament to be printed in Polish. See David A. Frick, Polish Sacred Philology in the Reformation and the Counter-Reformation: Chapters in the History of the Controversies (1551-1632) (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1989). 73 MBW Ep. 3932 (summary). frivolous, and I hope that he will remain steadfast in the one, pure and true doctrine, and that where he has his residence he will manage to help faithfully preserve the unity of the church of Christ.74

On 6 September 1545, the duke responded, thanking Melanchthon for his expert opinion of Staphylus, which persuaded him to hire Staphylus as professor of theology on his return from Italy.75 On 13 December 1545, Melanchthon again wrote to Albert, expressing his fear that Albert was offended by the delayed arrival of Staphylus.

Melanchthon reiterated that Staphylus' "erudition is altogether so great that I think that no one should easily be preferred over him in that profession to which he is being called, and he knows Polish."76 After a few months delay, Melanchthon could report to the duke on 17 April 1546 that Staphylus had accepted the position. He would set out for

Konigsberg after the Leipzig spring fair, but did not want to commit himself for more

77 than a year." It was difficult for the Prussian dukes to attract and retain scholars at the remote University of Konigsberg. On 17 June 1546, the duke responded, beseeching

Melanchthon to persuade Staphylus to remain for longer than a year.78 Later that month, 70

Albert wrote again, glad that Staphylus had arrived. Albert must have been pleased with

Staphylus, for in a letter to Melanchthon, dated 30 July 1546, he reports that he attends his lectures whenever possible.80

74 MBW 3977 (summary); printed in CR 5.813: "...denn er ist gottforchtig, wohlgelehrt in christlicher Lahr und andern loblichen Ktlnsten und Sprachen. So kann er polnische und Litausche Sprach, auch hat er allhie einen jungen Graven und andre lange Zeit in seiner Zucht gehabt, da!3 ich ihn sittig und nicht leichtfertig erkannt habe, und hoffe, er werd bei der einigen, reinen, wahrhaftigen Lahr bestSndiglich bleiben und Eintrachtigkeit der Kirchen Christi treulich helfen erhalten, wo er sein Wesen haben wird." 75 MBW Ep. 4006 (summary). 76 MBW 4090 (summary) printed in CR 5.907: "De Staphili contatione vereor Celsitudinem vestram hac mora offendi. Sed profecto tanta est eius eruditio, ut neminem ei facile in ea professione ad quam vocatur anteferendum putem, et scit linguam Polonicam." Cf. MBW Epp. 4098,4122, and 4144. 77 MBW Ep. 4233 (summary); printed in CR 6.111. 78 MBW Ep. 4288 (summary). 79 MBW Ep. 4301 (summary). 80 MBW Ep. 4342 (summary). 173 d) Family Connections:

Attention has earlier been drawn to the underlying importance of friendship in securing a letter of recommendation. As reformers abandoned their clerical vows of celibacy in favour of marriage, we see a new trend appear: letters of recommendation for the sons and relatives of reformers. These letters typically emphasize the relationship of the son with his father, whose faith and contribution to the church gave the recommendation strength. The recommendation of the children of reformers not only suggests the prevalence of nepotism in hiring, but it also marks the beginning of the rise of clerical and professorial dynasties, which become the norm in the seventeenth and

01 eighteenth centuries. The fact that connections are noted between the recommended and his father in the letters of recommendation of sixteenth-century Germany signals the early development of these dynasties. The mention of family connections is simply an extension of the album amicorum, which we witnessed in the first chapter, where the author would introduce the recommended person to a network of friends. That practice continued into the Reformation era, but it was supplemented by recommendations based on family connections. The letter of recommendation that Melanchthon wrote on 27

March 1553 to Johannes Forster in Wittenberg on behalf of a Wittenberger, a certain

Sebastian, who was applying for the position of cantor in the castle church of Wittenberg, may also fall into this category. It is interesting that not only does he praise Sebastian's poetic skills and education and attest to his orthodox beliefs, but he also states that

81 See Richard Kirwan, "Empowerment and Representation at the University in Early Modern Germany: Helmstedt and WUrzburg, 1576-1634," (Ph.D. diss., Trinity College Dublin, 2006). Kirwan argues that as princes founded confessionalized universities, such as those of Helmstedt and WUrzburg, these professorial dynasties became extensions of the court, a sort of academic nobility as it were. Cf. Peter A. Vandermeersch, "Teachers," in A History of the University in Europe. Volume II: Universities in Early Modern Europe (1500-1800), edited by H. de Ridder-Symoens (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996) 227-9; on marriage strategies by professors, see Algazi, 18-25. 174 preference should be given to homegrown talent, since "it is pious to prefer the sons of citizens." In other words, the city of Wittenberg is the metaphorical parent and preference should consequently be given to its sons.82

In September 1557, Melanchthon wrote a general letter of recommendation for the recent MA, Theophilus Grynaeus (1534-1583), addressed "to all who read this letter."

The letter begins with a classical and biblical quotation from Theocritus and the Psalms about how the children of godly men are blessed, before moving on to praise of the illustrious Grynaeus family, beginning with the famous Simon Grynaeus (1493-1541), his nephew, Thomas Grynaeus (d. 1564), for whose son, Theophilus, the recommendation is written:

There is a verse by a Greek poet (these people have produced numerous poets), but the most divine sentence that has been handed down for the consolation of godly families is that "The children of the pious, not the impious, live the better life" [Theocritus, Idyll 26.32], which in the Psalms goes like this: The generation of the upright will be blessed [Ps. 112:2]. Moreover, the celebrated family Grynaeus is known by the monuments of Simon Grynaeus, who both excelled in erudition and rightly invoked God and aided the study of doctrines, which are most felicitously useful for life and the church. Moreover Simon's brotherfs/c] is Thomas Grynaeus, who was recently professor of Greek literature at the famous University of Basel. Now he teaches at a church in the neighbourhood of Basel. Since he both rightly invokes God and faithfully serves the church, one must not doubt that God will look after his children.83

This combination of Theocritus' Idyll 9 and Psalm 112 is almost formulaic, for

Melanchthon frequently employed it in his testimonial Having proven by a classical and

MBW Ep. 6776 (summary); printed in CR 8.55-6: "Pium est anteferre civium filios." 83 MBW Ep. 8372 (summary); the original autograph is in Basel UB, Fr.Gr. 119, ff. 92r-92bv: "Versus est graeci poetae, in quo numeri quidem sunt ipsius poetae, sed sententia multo ante divinitus tradita est ad piarum familiarum consolationem: Eusebeonpaidessi ta loia, dyssebeon d'ou, quod in Psalmis sic dictum est, Generi [sic] rectorum benedicetur. Nota est autem familia Grynea celebrata Simonis Grynei monumentis qui et eruditione excelluit, et Deum recte invocavit, et studia doctrinarum, quae sunt utiles vitae et ecclesiae foeliciter adiuvit. Est autem frater Simonis Thomas Gryneus, qui recens in inclyta academia Basiliensi, graecorum scriptorum interpres ruit. Nunc docet ecclesiam vicinam Basileae, qui cum et recte Deum invocet, et fideliterecclesia e serviat, non dubitandum est Deo etiam filios eius curae futures esse." 175 biblical quotation that God blesses the children of godly men, and since the work and writings of both Simon and Thomas Grynaeus are proof of their own godliness, it follows that Theophilus too will produce a godly work. At this point in the testimonium,

Melanchthon focuses his attention on the godliness, integrity and education of

Theophilus:

For already the benefits of God can be discerned in his son, Theophilus Grynaeus, whose mind is receptive to learning and whose nature is peaceful and moderate. Since an excellent education accustoms a person to be upright, seek true knowledge and call upon God, he has not only the beginnings of those virtues, which are the product of our diligence and discipline, but also other better qualities, which the Son of God kindled in his heart by the light of the gospel and his Holy Spirit. First, at his father's home, he learned the Latin and Greek languages; then he learned in our university arithmetic and the sources of the other parts of philosophy. In addition to these sweetest studies he also learned the doctrines of the church, in which matter it cannot be doubted that his studies are the more pleasing to God, because even his mind is godly and he has determined to serve the church by teaching.85

The remainder of the letter is devoted to praise of God and prayers that God may safeguard his church and preserve families like the Grynaeus family. Picking up on the biblical image of the relationship of Paul and Timothy, he hopes that Theophilus may learn from his father's teachings and faith:

Therefore, since this Theophilus is truly dear to God, I congratulate the father, a godly man, on his son, and I thank God, who has bestowed nurseries of this sort on the church, and I pray that he may kindly preserve the church and families of this sort. I even commend the son to his father Thomas, and I urge him in turn to help out his son's studies and see to it that a teaching position in a church somewhere be granted to him. Moreover, just as Paul said that Timothy was an assiduous listener and discerner of his own teachings, so may Theophilus be an

84 Cf. MBW Epp. 6473 and 7994. 85 MBW Ep. 8372 (summary); Basel UB, Fr.Gr. I 19, ff. 92r-92bv: "Ac iam beneficia Dei in filioTheophil o Grynaeo cernuntur, in quo et ingenium est capax doctrinarum et narura placida est ac moderata. Cumque optima doctrina ad honestos mores, et ad veram agnitionem ac invocationem Dei adsuefactus sit, sunt in eo non solum illarum virtutum initia, quae nostra diligentia et disciplina efficiuntur, sed aliae quoque meliores, quas Filius Dei luce evengelii et Spiritu Sancto in pectore eius accendit. Primum domi apud patrem didicit linguam latinam et graecam; deinde in academia nostra didicit arithmeticen et aliarum philosophiae partium fontes. His dulcissimis studiis et ecclesiae doctrinam, qua in re studia eius Deo gratiora esse, non dubitandum est, quia mens etiam pia est, et decrevit ecclesiae servire in docendo." 176

assiduous listener, following his father's teachings and faith. What better thing can any family hope for than for a father and his sons to worship God with like piety and with one voice, and at the same time serve him in this godly service of teaching the gospel? So great a good I wish for this family. I have provided this true testimony for this Theophilus not only in my name, but also on behalf of my colleagues, by whom, on account of his erudition and virtue, he has been publicly honoured with a master's degree. Moreover, I pray that the Son of God, our Lord Jesus Christ, who said, "lam the vine, you are the branches [John 15:5]," may preserve the church amidst these horrible disorders of the human race and the collapse of empires and that he may at last insert this Theophilus in his branch, and make him an instrument to bless his own heart and the hearts of others.86

Likewise, two sons of the Thuringian reformer, Justus Menius (1499-1558), "a man well deserving of the church {bene meriti de ecclesia)," namely, Eusebius and

August, were able to ride the wave of their father's godly reputation in their search for employment. At the request of Sigismund Schorckel, the rector of the University of

Greifswald, Melanchthon recommended to him on 9 February 1550 three possible candidates to teach at the university: Eusebius Menius, Johannes Cingularius or Matthaus

Roseler, all three gifted individuals. He asks, however, that Schorckel diligently plead the case (causam diligenter agas) of Menius, "whose father is known to many in the court," presumably to the university senate.87 Later, on 27 February 1550, Melanchthon reported to Justus Menius that he had written to Schorckel on behalf of his son, adding that he had

Ibid.: "Cum igitur hie Theophilus vere sit Deo carus, gratulor patri, viro pio hunc filiume t Deo gratias ago qui talia ecclesiae seminaria tribuit, et precor, ut ecclesiam et tales familias clementer servet. Ipsi etiam patri Thomae filium commendo, eumque adhortor ut deinceps et studia filii iuvet, et alicubi munus docendi in ecclesia ei tradi curet, ut autem Paulus inquit Timotheum fuisse adsiduum auditorem et sectatorem suae doctrinae, ita sit Theophilus assiduus auditor patris parakolouthon autou didaskalia kaipistei. Quid optari melius ulla familiae potest, quam ut pater et filii simili pietate et una voce Deum celebrent, et simul in hac pia militia docendi evangelii ei serviant? Hoc tantum bonum et huic familiae opto. Tribui autem hoc verum testimonium huic Theophilo non tantum meo nomine, sed etiam collegarum meorum, a quo propter eruditionem et virtututem gradu magisterii philosophici publice ornatus est. Oro autem filium Dei dominum nostrum Ihesum Christum, qui dixit: Ego sum vitis, vos palmites, ut ecclesiam inter has horribiles generis humani confusiones et imperiorum ruinas servet, et hunc Theophilum sibi tanquam palmitem inserat, et faciat eum organum salutare suae animae et aliis." 87 MBW Ep. 5726 (summary); CR 7.543-4, no. 4667. made mention of his name. Another son of Menius, the lesser known August Menius, also benefited from his father's reputation. On 1 May 1559, Melanchthon wrote to

Johannes Marbach in Strasbourg, recommending him for a position in the school at the former Franciscan monastery. The focus of the recommendation is entirely on his late father:

His father, as you know, usefully served the church of God in Thuringen, taught by preaching and writing, refuted the Anabaptists with the sharpest arguments, settled controversies of doctrine and marriage, oversaw the inspections of the churches, even regulating their income. For these great labours this is the thanks he got: that he was expelled with great loss, because he had written that new obedience is necessary to retain the Holy Spirit. Now for that same reason, the excellent men, the pastor of Jena, [Andreas Hiigel] and Victorin [Strigel] have been imprisoned. I know that you and others, who abhor sophistry, reflect upon this with great grief. Therefore, let us, who love both truth and peace, as is written: Love truth and peace [Zechariah 8:19], safeguard our bond with greater zeal. I very much ask that you give your support to this August Menius.89

Justus Menius, a Philippist, had become involved in debates with gnesio-Lutherans, over the role of good works, asserting that they were necessary in order to retain salvation.

Here very little is said of August, but instead the request is made on the basis of his father's contributions to the church and as a bid for unity amongst Protestants in the midst of theological controversy.

On 7 June 1555, Melanchthon wrote to Georg Fabricius in Meissen, recommending the bearer of the letter, Caspar Cruciger Jr., son of the late professor of theology at the University of Wittenberg, Caspar Cruciger Sr., "both on account of the

88 MBW Ep. 5741 (summary); CR 7.553, no. 4679. 89 MBW Ep. 8939; CR 9.812: "Pater, ut scis, utiliter servivit ecclesiae Dei in Tyrigetis, docuit voce et scriptis, refotavit katabaptistas acerrimis contentionibus, diiudicavit controversias dogmatum et coniugiorum, rexit inspectiones ecclesiarum, etiam in reditibus ordinandis. Pro his magnis laboribus haec est reddita gratia, ut pulsus sit cum magno damno, quia scripserat, novam obedientiam necessariam esse ad retinendum Spiritum Sanctum. Nunc propter eandem causam captivi sunt viri optimi Pastor Ienensis et Victorinus. Haec scio te et alios, abhorrentes a sophistica, non sine magno dolore cogitare. Maiore igitur studio coniunctionem nostram tueamur nos, qui et veritatem et pacem diigimus, sicut praeceptum est: Diligite veritatem et pacem. Valde te oro, ut huic Augusto Menio opem feras." memory of his father and his own virtues." The younger Cruciger joined the Faculty of

Arts at the University of Wittenberg in 1557 as professor of poetry. After Melanchthon's death, he took over the latter's position as professor of theology.90 At other times, the reputation of a father or uncle may have acted as a hindrance if they had been known for their radical and heretical views. When Melanchthon wrote to Johannes Brenz, then evangelical preacher in Schwabisch Hall, on 17 December 1543, asking him to help find a position in a church or school for Anton Bodenstein, a nephew of the radical reformer,

Andreas Karlstadt, he had to assure Brenz that the nephew was not like his uncle: "I hope that his talents will be of use to the city, for he has a more placid disposition than his uncle, whose writings, nevertheless, were writings of moderation after the first offences."91

Mothers asked reformers to recommend their sons for jobs. On 8 April 1559,

Hieronymus Baumgartner in Nurnberg wrote to Melanchthon concerning the bearer of the letter, an unnamed nephew of the reformer, the late Martin Frecht, at the request of his mother, who had asked him to "recommend him as accurately as possible." Little is said of the recommended, but the attention is placed on the mother, "a woman so totally dedicated to holy writ that she barely talks about anything but the words of scripture, and is witty enough but goes on a deal. Moreover, she wants her son to complete his studies in a place where the gospel is preached sincerely and purely." This letter is interesting

90 MBW Ep. 7520 (summary); CR 8.502-3, no. 5806. 91 MBW Ep. 3401; printed in CR 5.255: "Spero eius ingenium usui fore reipublicae est enim placidius ingenio patrui, cui tamen etiam post primas offensiones ta mathemata mathemata fuerunt moderationis." 92 MBW Ep. 8919 (summary); Wolfenbuttel HAB, Cod. Guelf. 109 Noviss. 2°, f. 39r: Hieronymus Baumgartner to Melanchthon, 8 April 1559: "Eum ut tibi quam accuratissime commendarem summis precibus a me efflagitavit mater, mulier tota dedita sacris studiis, ita ut nihil fere loquatur aliud, quam scripturae verba, alioqui facunda salis et dicacula. Cupit autem filium studiis suis colophonem addere eo in loco, ubi vox evangelii citra dubitationem sonet sincera et incorrupta, quod consilium mihi quoque probatur." 179 since little is said of the son, but instead Melanchthon focuses on the garrulous mother's godly character and her concern for her son's studies.

The case of Heinrich Bullinger, Jr., who matriculated at the University of

Wittenberg on 1 October 1555, shows that fathers, too, took an active role in recommending their sons. On 22 August 1555, Heinrich Bullinger, Sr. in Zurich wrote to

Melanchthon, asking him to receive his son into his home as one of his students. The son left Zurich on 22 August and travelled to Wittenberg via Strasbourg and Frankfurt, bringing with him letters of recommendation by Johannes Sturm and Jan Laski.94 A couple of years later, Melanchthon wrote a glowing testimonium for the son, praising him for three main reasons: first, because he learned Latin, Greek and Hebrew "in order to understand correctly the sources of theology and other honourable arts (utfontes doctrinae de Deo et aliarum honestarum artium recte cognosceret);" second, because he studied natural philosophy in order to know the handiwork of God; finally, because "he embraces the doctrine about God revealed by the illustrious divine scriptures and encompassed in the prophetic and apostolic writings and recited in the Apostolic, Nicene and Athanasian Creeds, and he follows the consensus of the church of old."95 The testimonium is a clear summary of the ideal Protestant scholar, whose talents were being employed for godly purposes.

The Refugee Problem:

We shall now turn our attention to the religious and political climate that affected the job market and forced people to relocate and seek employment elsewhere, armed with

93 MBW Ep. 7561 (summary). 94 MBW Epp. 7574 and 7589. 95 MBW Ep. 8212 (summary); CR 9, pp. 150-1, Ep. 6243: "Amplectitur autem doctrinam de Deo patefactam illustribus testimoniis divinis et comprehensam in scriptis propheticis et apostolicis, et recitatam in symbolis, apostolico, Niceno et Athanasiano et consensum veteris ecclesiae sequitur." 180 letters of recommendation explaining their circumstances. The sixteenth century was plagued by wars, pestilence and doctrinal disputes. Many people were forced to flee from their homes on account of the religious wars, such as the Schmalkald War (July 1546 to

April 1547) or to escape religious persecution. Towns and cities were overrun by troops of an opposing confession, and many people found themselves reduced to refugee status.

Universities, too, periodically closed on account of the political and religious turmoils.

As a result, many people were temporarily or permanently laid off and were forced to seek employment or to continue their studies elsewhere. On 25 August 1550,

Melanchthon wrote a letter to his friend, Michael Meienburg, a city councillor of

Nordhausen, expressing his gratitude that God in times of tribulation continued to raise up men like Meienburg, who fostered and preserved the education of students:

Even if the times are tough, as Paul mentions, and impede education and the studies of many poor men, nevertheless, God grants us some who bring aid to some students and do not altogether neglect their studies. Their piety is pleasing to God and useful to posterity. Therefore your generosity will be pleasing to God in this regard and conducive for the preservation of literature.96

In July 1546, the Schmalkald War erupted. The war was waged between the

League of Schmalkald, a coalition of nine Lutheran princes and eleven cities, which had been established in 1531 as a defensive force against Catholic forces under the control of

Emperor Charles V. The Protestant forces, led by John Frederick, Elector of Saxony and

Philip of Hesse, were defeated by Charles' army in 1547, and Duke Moritz of Saxony, the emperor's Protestant ally, received the electoral dignity and was placed in charge of all of Saxony. The universities of Wittenberg and Leipzig temporarily closed, and even

96 MBW 5888 (summary); printed in CR 7.447: "Etsi tempora saeva sunt, ut Paulus nominat, et impediunt educationem et studia multorum pauperum, tamen Deus dat aliquos, qui opem ferunt aliquibus discentibus, et non prorsus negligunt studiosos. Horum pietas Deo grata est et utilis posteritati. Erit igitur et vestra liberalitas in hoc genere Deo grata, et conducet ad conservationem literarum." 181

Melanchthon was forced to relocate, first to Zerbst and then to Nordhausen until the end of the war. The closure of universities interrupted the studies of many students and forced them to resume them elsewhere. On 10 November 1546, Melanchthon wrote a testimonium for one such student, Petrus Rennaeus of Perugia, who had come to

Germany that summer with recommendations from various scholars and who was financially supported by the city of Niirnberg. He had been studying theology at the

University of Wittenberg, but when the university was transferred to Magdeburg on account of the war, he asked Melanchthon to write for him a testimonium, so that he might follow his professors to Magdeburg and find a place there to stay.97 Matters did not work out for Rennaeus in Magdeburg, for on 7 March 1547, Melanchthon wrote a letter of recommendation for him to Cardinal Jean du Bellay, bishop of Paris, explaining that on account of the Schmalkald War, Rennaeus could no longer remain in Germany and

OR would complete his studies in France. He wrote yet another testimonium for Rennaeus on 25 March as a letter of introduction to potential hosts along his way to France."

On 28 October 1546, Melanchthon wrote two separate letters to Johannes Hess and Ambrosius Moibanus in Wroclaw, recommending the bearer of the letter, Johannes

Betzold of Schweidnitz, for a position in a church there, reckoning that Betzold had a better chance of finding a position there than in Ducal Saxony, on account of the ongoing war between Dukes Moritz and Johann Friedrich of Saxony.100 Likewise, on 29 October

1546, Melanchthon wrote a letter to Duke Albert of Prussia, explaining that after he and

Joachim Camerarius had spoken with Georg Sabinus, they had decided that Victorin

97 MBW Ep. 4444 (summary). 98 MBW Ep. 4629 (summary). 99 MBW Ep. 4665 (summary). 100 MBW Epp. 4421 and 4423 (summaries). 182

Strigel was a suitable candidate to be professor of theology at Konigsberg.101 Writing from Zerbst on 24 December, Strigel asked Melanchthon for advice in whether he should accept the call to the University of Konigsberg. Personally, he hoped that God would not let education go under in Saxony, given the temporary closure of the universities of

Wittenberg and Leipzig due to the Schmalkald War. He added that he would rather stay in Wittenberg or serve his hometown, Kaufbeuren, than face the wretched climate of

Prussia. Melanchthon responded the next day saying that although one might prefer to find a hiding-place from the political turmoils rather than engage in teaching publicly, professors ought not to avoid their teaching responsibilities, since the church must be served. He promises to put in a good word for Strigel when the University of Wittenberg reopens. He admits that Strigel will feel out of place in Prussia, but should be able to overcome that difficulty. Ultimately, Melanchthon writes, Strigel must decide for himself and ask God to guide his decision.

At the end of 1546, the city of Leipzig was besieged. Joachim Camerarius, who was professor in Leipzig, reported to Melanchthon on 2 January 1547, that he and his family had fled to Merseburg. The following month, 13 February 1547, Melanchthon wrote to Camerarius, now in Erfurt, recommending the bearer of the letter, Michael

Beuther, who taught astronomy in Greifswald. Beuther, he explained was concerned about Camerarius' well-being on account of the siege of Leipzig and wanted to visit him in Erfurt.104 On 27 April 1547, Melanchthon in Zerbst wrote a letter to Friedrich

Henninges in Luneburg, recommending an unnamed mathematician and astronomer for a

101 MBW Ep. 4424 (summary). 102 MBW Ep. 4509 (summary). 103 MBW Ep. 4517 (summary). 104 MBW Epp. 4531 and 4586 (summaries). 183 position at the school in Liineburg, since he had been laid off on account of the closures of the universities of Wittenberg and Leipzig.105 Even though the universities of

Wittenberg and Leipzig reopened after the Schmalkald War ended, their survival was not guaranteed and the political situation was still dangerous, as Melanchthon explained on

30 July 1549 to Christoph Pannonius, a professor at the University of Frankfurt/Oder, who had hoped to attain a position at Wittenberg. Melanchthon advised him to search for a position as a lecturer in Latin and Greek in Posen, promising that if Wittenberg and

Leipzig remained open, Joachim Camerarius and he would help him out.106 Despite the inconvenience of the temporary closure of the universities in Saxony, Melanchthon was pleased to report to Caspar Hedio and Johannes Marbach in Strasbourg on 12 August

1550 that studies had returned to normal: "With the goodness of God, the study of doctrine still flourishes moderately in the universities of this region, and in the churches the voice of doctrine is the same as it was before the war."

So far we have examined cases of recommendations for men affected by wars, but letters of recommendation were also written for men forced into exile on account of their religious beliefs. On 6 April 1537, Melanchthon wrote a letter to Veit Dietrich in

Ntirnberg, recommending the unnamed bearer of the letter, an English nobleman, forced into exile for having spoken out against Henry VIII's divorce, since he favoured Mary

Tudor. Henry VIII apparently incarcerated him, but after a year and three months, he escaped. Since he seemed to be a modest man, Melanchthon asked Dietrich to

105 MBW Ep. 4728 (summary). 106 MBW Ep. 5602 (summary). 107 MBW Ep. 5872 (summary); CR 7, 643f, Ep. 4771: "Dei beneficio adhuc stadia doctrinae mediocriter in his vicinis academiis florent, et in ecclesiis vox doctrinae est eadem, quae fait ante bellum." 184

1 OR recommend him to his friends. In another case, on 11 February 1540, Melanchthon wrote to John Calvin in Strasbourg, recommending an Italian priest named Girolamo, who was forced to flee Siena "because he said some things rather openly against the pope and the luxurious lifestyle of the priests." After spending some time in Wittenberg, the priest wanted to head to Savoy, where he hoped to find a position in a church. He concludes, "I have sampled many Italian minds, but let us do good to some, if we can."109

On 17 May 1540, Ambrosius Blaurer wrote to Heinrich Bullinger, recommending

Girolamo to him, explaining that Girolamo had spent around ten days at his home.

Blaurer thought that he seemed "extremely pious and moderately erudite," and added that he came with recommendations from Melanchthon to the people of Bern.110 On 28 May

1540, Blaurer again wrote to Bullinger, urging him to help Girolamo so that he might set out for Bern. Now after spending twenty-two days with him, Blaurer writes that he could not detect anything untypical of a good man.111 Likewise, on 14 May 1546, Melanchthon recommended to Peter Medmann a young man from Gelderland, Matthias Erdensis, for a teaching position somewhere. As he explains, Erdensis had been forced into exile "on account of his love of true doctrine."112 The above-mentioned cases are testimony to the many hardships brought on by the wars and religious turmoils of the sixteenth century.

Nevertheless, reformers did their best to help out these exiles and victims of war by means of recommendations. Melanchthon writing to Matthias Albert in 1534, and asking him to help out the unnamed bearer of the letter, who was expelled from his homeland,

105 MBWT7,Ep. 1881. 109 MBW 2366; printed in CO 11, Ep. 208: "Degustavi multa italica ingenia. Sed si possumus beneficiamus aliquibus." ,10HBBW10,Ep. 1395. ulHBBW10,Ep. 1399. 112 MBW Ep. 4261 (summary). 185 added, "for it is right that we all are affected by his calamity."113 Indeed, few escaped the turmoils of the time.

Multiple Letters of Recommendation:

As towns and cities adopted the Reformation, the responsibility of appointing ministers and school teachers fell upon the town and city councils. This marks a significant change from the traditional practice, whereby priests were appointed from within the Catholic hierarchy. Consequently, reformers addressed these councils when they recommended people for positions in local churches or schools.114 Conversely, city magistrates also approached reformers, asking them to recommend one of their friends to another reformer for a position in a chuches. On 14 March 1535, for instance, Caspar

Hedio wrote a letter to Ambrosius Blaurer, recommending the bearer of the letter,

Johannes Schonstein, for a position as adjutor in Beinheim, a town in Alsace. Adolf von

Mittelhausen, a former Strasbourg senator, had recommended him to Hedio. Although

Hedio had not heard him preach, Schonstein seemed modest and meek. He recalls that

Christ only entrusted his flock to John after his disciple acknowledged his love for him three times, and therefore urges Blaurer to hear him out and then make a decision. If

Schonstein did not seem suitable for the position, perhaps he could be called at a future time.115 The letter indicates the reformers did not simply recommend people in order to indulge the will of the magistrates; instead, their first priority was to appoint appropriate people to positions in the church. Normally, however, reformers gave recommendations to city councils for people applying for vacant positions in church or school. On 25

113 MBWT6,Ep. 1516. 114 For a sample of letters of recommendation by Melanchthon to city councils for deacons, ministers and pastors, see MBW Epp. 2127, 3143,4394,4843, 4976, 7625, and 8030; for teachers and rectors, see MBW Epp. 1217, 1259, 1338, 1944, 2025, 2209, 3151, 3163,4015, and 5617. 115 Schiess 1, Ep. 533 (summary). 186

March 1549, Melanchthon wrote a letter of recommendation to the town council of

Dommitzsch on behalf of Veit Richter of Wittenberg, then pastor of Pratau, for the vacant position of pastor in Dommitzsch, since Petrus Huberinus of Stendal had declined the call he had received for the position.116 Likewise, on 6 September 1549, Melanchthon wrote a letter of recommendation to the city council of Zwickau for Esrom Rudinger, who was applying for the position as rector of the school there.117 On 11 September, Melanchthon reported to Camerarius that he had already sent the recommendation to the council.118

Later, on 6 November, he informed Johannes Luther that Rudinger obtained the

119 position.

Melanchthon's letters of recommendation reveal an important strategy that he employed when recommending people. For every letter that he addressed to a governing official or body, be it a prince, duke or city council, he also sent a personal letter to one or more of his contacts, usually a friend and often a former student and protege, whose career he had helped advance and who normally had connections with those who made the hiring decisions. The letter to the municipal council or nobleman, who had the right of presentation, was typically in German, whereas the letters to his scholarly contacts were in Latin. In September 1551, Melanchthon wrote two letters of recommendation on behalf of Nikolaus Scheller, a highly acclaimed professor of mathematics, to Christoph

Stathmion and Matthaus von Wallenrode, both in Coburg, requesting them, in turn, to recommend Scheller to Duke Johann Ernst of Saxony. The letter to Stathmion begins with a quotation from Theocritus' Idyll 9: "A grasshopper is dear to a grasshopper and

116 MBW Ep. 5482 (summary). 117 MBW Ep. 5617 (summary). 118 MBW Ep. 5625 (summary). 119 MBW Ep. 5675 (summary). 187 an ant to an ant, says the poet. How much more is it proper that there be friendship and a bond between philosophical natures?"120 The classical quotation serves as a prelude to

Melanchthon's request that the two men recommend Scheller to the duke. Melanchthon was thereby appealing to the solidarity that he expected academics should demonstrate, by recommending one of their kind when asked. Melanchthon frequently solicited the help of his friends. He asked his contacts to use their connections to add weight to a letter of recommendation written to a town council or prince. For instance, on 18 April 1559,

Melanchthon wrote two letters of recommendation for Johannes Schelhammer to

Hieronymus Baumgartner and Hieronymus Besold, both well-connected men in

Nurnberg, asking them to help secure for Schelhammer a position in a church or

191 school. To Baumgartner, a city councillor, he added that he had also written a letter to the city council, "but we need you to our patron (sed tepatrono nobis opus erif)." In other words, Melanchthon requested that Baumgartner would use his connections to add weight to the recommendation. Though Melanchthon's letter to the city council is no longer extant, the council responded on 8 May, informing him there was no position available, but that they would grant Schelhammer 10 Taler on account of Melanchthon's 1 99 positive recommendation. Likewise, on 20 February 1540, Melanchthon wrote a letter of recommendation on behalf of Matous (Matthaus) Collinus to Martin Klatovsky, administrator of the church of Prague, Thomas z Javorice, chancellor, and Heinrich

Dvorsky, professor at the University of Prague, asking them to use their authority to help find a position for Collinus. Later that year, on 1 October, he wrote two separate letters to

120 MBW Ep. 6194 (summary); printed in CR 10.47: "Tettix men tettigiphilos, myrmeki kai myrmex, inquit poeta. Quanto magis inter naturas philosophicas amicitiam et coniunctionem esse decet?" Cf. Ep. 6195. 121 MBW Epp. 8927-8 (summaries). 122 MBW Ep. 8949 (summary). the city council of Prague and to the rector and senate of the University of Prague, recommending Collinus for a position at the university, which he eventually attained, becoming the first professor of Homer at that university. In an effort to bolster

Tilemann Krage's application for the position of overseer of the churches in Kiel,

Johannes Bugenhagen, Melanchthon and Johannes Saxo together wrote two separate letters, both in German, to Duke Adolf von Schleswig-Holstein and to the city council of

Kiel.124

The case of Andreas Wesling (d. 1577), who in 1552 applied to be professor of

Hebrew grammar at the University of Rostock, which lay in the territory of Duke Johann

Albrecht von Mecklenburg, also exemplifies Melanchthon's strategy of writing multiple letters of recommendation. On 10 September 1552, Melanchthon wrote a series of such letters on behalf of Wesling, two of which were addressed to Johannes Aurifaber and

Johannes Draconites, both Wittenberg alumni and both professors at the University of

Rostock, asking them to have Wesling recommended to the duke as professor of Hebrew.

In the letter to Aurifaber, he relates that Wesling had until recently been professor of

Hebrew at the University of Konigsberg, but left because of a theological feud with

Andreas Osiander. Melanchthon asks Aurifaber to have Wesling, "a faithful, candid and peace-loving man," recommended to Johann Albrecht, and if no position can be given, then, at least, to find him some preaching position in a church. To Draconites,

Melanchthon explains that Wesling had "asked for a letter [of recommendation], so that

123 MBW Epp. 2379, 2516 and 2517. Cf. MBW Epp. 4014-5, letters by Melanchthon to Caspar Aquila in Saalfeld and to the Saalfeld city council, respectively, recommending the bearer of the letters, Basilius Ungar of Torgau for a position as schoolmaster. 124 MBW Epp. 4220-1; Cf. MBW Epp. 4513-4 and 4516, letters by Melanchthon to Wolfgang Fuhrmann, Duke Georg von Anhalt and Anton Musa in Merseburg, respectively, recommending the bearer of the letters, Pankraz Veltbeck, for a position in a church. Veltbeck eventually received a position in Zerbst (cf. Ep. 4514). 125 MBW Ep. 6557 (summary); printed in CR 7.1067. 189 he might more easily be introduced to you." Melanchthon notes that Wesling, an "honest, upright and candid man," would like to meet Draconites and that the two should get along well because of their common interests. Finally he asks that if the [University of Rostock] needs a professor of Hebrew grammar, to "encourage those, who make the decision, to give this part of the task to this honest man. I have no doubt that his efforts will benefit the youth."126 As Melanchthon had disclosed in the letter to Aurifaber, he also wrote a letter to Johann Albrecht, recommending Wesling as a "learned and honest man" who has been teaching Hebrew at the University of Konigsberg, but would now like to teach at the

University of Rostock. He stresses that there was special need for rigorous Hebrew grammar instruction at the university and affirms that Wesling would only further adorn the already praiseworthy university and be of benefit to the students because he "teaches rightly and is faithful and candid."127 By the spring of the following year, Wesling still had not obtained a position at Rostock. To that end, Melanchthon wrote again to

Johannes Aurifaber in Rostock on 12 March 1553, asking whether the duke had made his decision yet regarding Wesling. The top candidate for the position was Matthias Flacius

Illyicus, but when he declined an offer from the university, preferring instead to live elsewhere than to teach Hebrew grammar there, Wesling eagerly assumed the position.

Again Melanchthon reiterates that Wesling is "an honest and erudite man, and a lover of public concord." Finally on 8 May 1553, Melanchthon wrote two letters to his Rostock contacts, one to Johannes Aurifaber and the other to David Chytraeus, a former student of

Melanchthon's and university professor at Rostock since 1551, thanking them all for their

126 MBW Ep. 6559 (summary); printed in CR 7.1069: "Experieris virum honestum, rectum, et candidum esse. Si istic desideratur grammaticae Ebraeae lector, quaeso ut sis hortator, ut hanc laboris partem huic honesto viro mandent hi, qui haec consilia gubernant. Non dubito eius operam iuventuti profoturam esse." 127 MBW Ep. 6560 (summary); CR 7.1070. 128 MBW Ep. 6761 (summary); CR 8.46. help in calling Wesling to Rostock. On 24 May 1553, he sent another letter to

Draconites in Rostock, introducing Wesling, who wanted to become friends with

Draconites, his new colleague, since "he knows that you understand the doctrine of the

church rightly and excel in knowledge of Hebrew." Again, he describes Wesling as "an honest man, a lover of communal concord and averse to detractions (alienum ab

obtrectatione)." Wesling also arrived in Rostock with letters of recommendation from

Melanchthon to Johann Albrecht and Jakob Bording (1511-1560), professor of medicine at the university and personal physician of Johann Albrecht.

One final example of these multiple letters to contacts and government officials

comes from the case of Peter Ketzmann. On 2 July 1545, Melanchthon wrote a letter of recommendation to Joachim Camerarius in Leipzig on behalf of Ketzmann for the position of rector of the school in the neighbouring town of Grimma. In the letter, he mentions that Simon Pistorius had said that the town is very salubrious and that

Ketzmann would come as soon as Melanchthon had time to write a letter of

119

recommendation for him. On 18 July 1545, Melanchthon again wrote to Camerarius,

beginning his letter with the recollection that Duke Albert of Saxony had been born in

Grimma. He then switches to Greek and relates the known sleepiness of the people of

Grimma, for which reason Ketzmann will feel right at home, a possible coded warning

that Ketzmann is lazy. As indicated in the letter to Camerarius, Melanchthon also

wrote a letter of recommendation (in German) to the city council for Ketzmann. In it, he

explains that the pastor of Grimma, Johannes Schreiner, had asked him to find "another 129 MBW Epp. 6822 and 6825 (summaries). 130 MBW Ep. 6840; CR 8.99. 131 MBW Epp. 6847 and 6849 (summaries). 132 MBW Ep. 3937 (summary). 133 MBW Ep. 3957 (summary). 191 qualified person" to succeed the previous Schulmeister of the St. Michael School of

Grimma, Johannes Kiihn, who had taken up a post elsewhere. Melanchthon provides some educational background to Ketzmann, who first studied three years in Wittenberg, followed by three years under Joachim Camerarius in Leipzig, before returning to

Wittenberg to get his M.A. degree. He depicts him as "moral, quiet and earnest, and well learned in the languages and arts, which one is supposed to teach the youth." On top of that, Melanchthon adds that he is a good musician.134 Throughout his lifetime,

Melanchthon wrote many such letters as we have seen above on behalf of countless individuals to city councils, dukes, princes and university senates, often accompanied by private letters to his own friends, urging them to pull strings to effect the recommendation.

In this chapter we have examined the influence of the Reformation on the letter of recommendation. With the Reformation came shifts in the job market. The responsibility of hiring clergymen, who were previously appointed from within the Catholic ecclesiastical hierarchy, now fell upon individual congregations, city councils and other territorial governments, in whose jurisdiction the churches lay. Moreover, princes and dukes began to found their own universities based on a particular creed. Letters of recommendation, therefore, were addressed to these people, whose decision it now was to hire pastors, teachers, and professors. In the case of Melanchthon, we see that multiple letters were frequently written for the same person, one to the hiring body, and others to contacts with influence on the city council or ruler. Moreover, the circumstances for which many of the letters of recommendation were written are testimony to the political and religious turmoils, brought on largely by the Reformation debate. While the

134 MBW Ep. 3958 (summary); CR 5.796. 192 recommendation letters written by reformers continue to exhibit many of the characteristics of the humanist letter of recommendation, as outlined in the preceding chapter, nevertheless, they include new elements unique to the Reformation era. Having learned from their own mistakes not to recommend anyone too hastily, reformers began to examine the creed and confession of those whom they recommended and to specify the confession to which he subscribed. Likewise, reformers encouraged the use of the vernacular both in their sermons and in their writings, and consequently references to the ability to speak the local language appear in their letters of recommendation. Since reformers promoted clerical marriage, in time, their sons were recommended, often on the basis of their father's godly reputation and contribution to the evangelical cause. The letters of recommendation written during the period of the Reformation provide us with a

Bild of what qualities reformers sought in those whom they recommended for positions as pastors and professors. They had to be doctrinally sound, have good morals, and be men who minded their own business. Candidates were encouraged to apply to positions where their talents would best serve the community and where they would be understood by the people. In their quest for peace and concord, reformers did their utmost not to promote those who might later cause further dissension within the church by promoting heterodox opinions. Although the adoption of the Augsburg Confession as a doctrinal standard for many Lutherans was meant to provide unity amongst reformers, Terence's familiar adage, "So many men, so many opinions," rang all too often true. Nevertheless, reformers strove to recommend suitable and appropriate candidates for positions in church, state and academia, who would promote the gospel and not cause further schisms within the church. In their capacity as pastors and professors, reformers wielded a 193 remarkable degree of influence, by recommending approved men of evangelical convictions for a wide range of jobs, thereby ensuring the dissemination of the

Reformation through those whom they recommended. 194

5. The Preface as a Type of Letter of Recommendation

In the preceding chapters, we examined letters of recommendation written by humanists and reformers in their private correspondence with their friends and patrons, city councils and university senates. Most of these letters were personal and remained confidential. With the advent of printing in the fifteenth century, however, came a new development in letters of recommendation. Out of the classical and medieval tradition of beginning a text with prolegomena developed the practice of affixing a prefatory letter to the printed text. These prefaces came in the form of dedicatory epistles and letters to the reader, and were modelled after letters of recommendation. According to Karl

Schottenloher, the earliest printed prefatory letters are found in the editions of the texts of

classical and patristic authors, published in Rome by the German printers, Konrad

Sweynheim and Arnold Pannartz, with the help of an Italian humanist, Giovanni Andrea

de' Bussi, during the years 1467-1472. These letters were addressed to the pope with the

intention of gaining his support for the undertaking of the printings as well as to confer

greater authority on the editions with his name. By the sixteenth century, the prefatory

letter had become a standard feature of printed texts.1

Considerable scholarship has been devoted to individual prefatory and dedicatory

letters.2 Much of the focus of these studies has been on the function of such letters within

1 Karl Schottenloher, Die Widmungsvorrede im Buch des 16. Jahrhunderts (Minister: Aschendorffsche Verlagsbuchhandlung, 1953), p. 2. His work is for the most part an inventory of dedications with summaries of their contents. 2 Cf. Neil Adkin, "A Note on the Dedicatory Epistle to Erasmus' Edition of Cyprian: non minus cordatissimi quam maximi titulo clarus," Bulletin Du Cange 53 (1995): 207-210; W. Ian P. Hazlett, "Calvin's Latin Preface to his Proposed French Edition of Chrysostom's Homilies: Translation and Commentary," in Humanism and Reform: The Church in Europe, England, and Scotland, 1400-1643. Essays in Honour of James K. Cameron, edited by James Kirk, 129-150 (Oxford: Blackwell, 1991); Olivier Millet, "Les prefaces aux traductions francaises de la Bible (1523-1588): la question de la langue," in Traduction et adaptation en France a la fin du Moyen Age et a la Renaissance: Actes du Colloque organise par I'Universite de Nancy II, 23-25 mars 1995, edited by Charles Bucker, 373-87 (Paris: Honore" 195 the realm of Renaissance patronage. Both Jacqueline Glomski and Peter Schaeffer, for instance, have identified the tactics and typology which the writers of the Latin dedicatory letter used to approach patrons, to present themselves, to establish their scholarly credentials, to promote their own careers, and to win over the support of the reading public. Other scholars have approached the topic from a more literary perspective. Kevin Dunn, for instance, focuses on the prefatory rhetoric of the works of

Protestant writers (Luther and Milton) and select exponents of the new science (Bacon,

Descartes, Hobbes, amongst others), in order to study the ways in which writers of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries struggled to establish their authority, to define themselves as authors and to regulate their relations with their readers.4 Coming from the realm of literary criticism, Gerard Genette examines not only the structure and evolution of what he calls "paratexts," but also their function, that is, the effect they are supposed to have on readers. He defines paratexts as those liminal devices and conventions, both within and outside the book, that form part of the complex mediation between book, author, publisher, and reader, that is, the titles, forewords, epigraphs, and modern publishers' jacket copy that are part of a book's private and public history.5

Renaissance prefaces still manifest the triangular relationship between the author, the recipient and the recommended that characterized humanist letters of

Champion, 1997); Wilfrid Werbeck, "Martin Luthers Widmungsvorrede zu "De votis monasticis," Luther 62.2 (1991): 78-89; Raimund Redeker, Lateinische Widmungsvorreden zu Mefi- und Motettendrucken der ersten Hdlfte des 16. Jahrhunderts (Eisenach: Karl Dieter Wagner, 1995); Barbara Henze, "Erwartungen eines Theologen an die Obrigkeit. Der "Fuldaer" Georg Witzel (d. 1573) in seinen Widmungsvorreden," Archivfiir mittelrheinische Kirchengeschichte 49 (1997): 79-97. 3 Glomski, pp. 165-182, and Peter Schaeffer, "Humanism on Display: The Epistles Dedicatory of Georg von Logau," Sixteenth Century Journal 17.2 (1986): 215-223. 4 Kevin Dunn, Pretexts of Authority: The Rhetoric of Authorship in the Renaissance Preface (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1995). 5 Gerard Genette, Paratexts: Thresholds of interpretation, trans. Jane E. Lewin (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997). 196 recommendation, but with some modifications. Though ostensibly addressed to an

individual, be it a patron or a friend, the audience was, in fact, much larger, that is, the entire readership. As Peter Schaeffer writes, the subject-matter of the book "was defined by the epistle's purpose - the transmission of a book to a recipient, and beyond this, its presentation to the public."6 Humanists and reformers were fully conscious of the performative nature of prefatory letters, where the preface acted as the author's stage and the reader the audience. Prefixed to Erasmus' edition of the Greek text of Chrysostom's

De sacerdotio is a prefatory letter addressed to Willibald Pirckheimer, in which Erasmus

alludes to this larger audience, explaining that since so many of his letters to Pirckheimer

were evidently lost in transit, "this time I have decided to send you a thousand copies in the hope that at least one will get through to you."7 In most cases, the dedicatee received

the letter at the same time as the general reader was able to purchase the book.8

It is the purpose of this final chapter to demonstrate how prefaces functioned as a

type of letter of recommendation. We shall focus our attention first on prefaces written by

a third party, recommending the publisher or author of the book; and second, on prefaces

written by the editor/translator of a book, recommending the classical or patristic author

edited/translated. In both cases, prefaces afforded the author, editor or translator an

opportunity to spell out their goals as clearly as possible, and to showcase their literary

and rhetorical skills without praising themselves. Prefatory letters became the platform

from which humanists and reformers endorsed an author as well as his message. As

6 Schaeffer, p. 215. 7CWEll,Ep. 1558 8 See CWE 6, Ep. 986, a letter fromHutte n to Erasmus, dated 5 June 1519, which was published in Hutten's edition of Erasmus' Ratio, and which did not reach Erasmus until after he had read it in print. Cf. CWE 10, Ep. 1378, a letter to Zwingli, August 1523, published as the preface to Erasmus' Spongia adversus aspergines Hutteni, which was being printed when Hutten died. The scorn Erasmus showed towards the late Hutten in the Spongia was considered distasteful and consequently Erasmus wrote a new preface for the second edition (cf. CWE 10, Ep. 1389). 197

Erasmus wrote to Henry VIII on 23 August 1523 in the dedicatory epistle to his paraphrase on Luke: "It seems to me then that I shall not waste my time if I spend a few words in recommending to you, first Luke the physician, and then the medicine that he brings with him."9 This endorsement was achieved in terms reminiscent of letters of recommendation, that is, it included praise both of an author's education and character, as well as the message of the book. As we shall also see, humanists and reformers identified with the of message of the books they endorsed, and consequently their prefatory letters were often programmatic in nature, highlighting themes and concerns central to their movements, making explicit messages implicit in their letters of recommendation.

Humanists and reformers recommended a certain author, translator, editor or printer, whose scholarship, character and skills helped serve to promote either the bonae literae or the advancement of evangelical doctrines and confessional orthodoxy.

A clear presentation of the main themes and positive qualities of the book in the preface was a pre-emptive measure to avoid controversy, since readers were likely to identify the ideas advanced in the text with those of the editor and direct their criticism accordingly. In many cases, however, these measures were unsuccessful, and editors nevertheless became the subject of controversies. Furthermore, they felt that their efforts were not sufficiently appreciated by readers. This prompted Erasmus to explain to Albert of Brandenburg on 1 June 1523 in his dedicatory letter to a new edition of his Ratio that it was more difficult to write a book than to give birth to a child for a number of reasons: first, if there are any defects in the baby, the blame is placed on fate or God, but in an book, the author gets all the blame; second, mothers give birth to a daughter for only one husband, but an author for many readers, and hence many possible critics; finally, a girl

9 CWE 10, Ep. 1381,11.64-6. seeks the approval only of her parents, whereas an author "must curry favour with the multitude, to whose convenience our whole way of life is enslaved."10 Prefaces not only identified which authors were preferred and how they should be interpreted, but they also justified the usefulness of such authors to the reader and their relevance to contemporary debates between scholastics and humanists, Catholics and Protestants. Humanists used the preface as a platform from which to advocate a philological approach to biblical scholarship, while at the same time, to denounce and ridicule the dialectic approach used by their scholastic opponents. During the Reformation period, prefaces became the medium through which polemics were carried on, doctrines spelled out and confessional identities forged. Ultimately, both humanists and reformers were concerned to recommend not only suitable but also orthodox authors to their readers and to instruct them in the correct understanding and use of the sources.

Prefaces by a Third Party:

In sixteenth-century Germany, famous authors were frequently importuned by authors and publishers to provide endorsements, much like blurbs on the back of books today, so as to boost sales of the publication.11 Just as scholars were often reluctant to write letters of recommendation, so too were these requests for endorsements not always favourably received. As Erika Rummel writes, scholars expressed "a great deal of frustration with the practice of publishers soliciting laudatory prefaces." Tired of such solicitations, Erasmus, one day, wrote to the Basel printer, Johann Herwagen that he would no longer "prostitute" his name by supplying endorsements on request. He had earlier been pressed by Herwagen and Nicolaus Episcopius to write a preface to an

10CWE10,Ep. 1365,11. 54-5. 11 Jeffrey A. Trachtenberg, "To blurb or not to blurb? Those snippets on the dust jacket carry a lot of weight, but more and more authors refuse to write them," The Globe and Mail, 31 July 2003, p. R3. edition of Demosthenes. In the end, Erasmus yielded. The resulting preface, however, contains no hint of Erasmus' annoyance, but instead praises the publisher for making classical texts available to the reader. Luther, on the other hand, altogether broke with convention and admitted to the reader in his preface to Antonius Corvinus' 1534 tract on the reunification of the church that "the publisher [had] extorted this preface from me so that the book would appear under my name and ... have a better reception on account of my recommendation." Erasmus' remark, Rummel notes, exemplifies his struggle for personal integrity, while Luther's remark illustrates the unease scholars felt "about the commercial motives of publishers."14 When the Basel printer, Andreas Cratander, asked

Johannes Witz (Sapidus), headmaster of the Latin school in Selestat, to write a preface to a planned edition of the Opera Omnia of Cicero, Witz initially agreed, but later changed his mind, as he explained in a letter to Capita, because he did not think that his Latin was up to par to do Cicero justice.15 Witz's declining of the offer to write a preface illustrates his own desire for personal integrity and his awareness that the reader would expect the

Latin in the preface to match Cicero's eloquence.

Noted scholars were solicited to write commendatory prefaces not only by printers, but also by other scholars themselves. On 3 September 1516, Thomas More wrote a letter to his good friend Erasmus, then in Brussels, enclosing a copy of his

Utopia, and asking him to "do what you can for it."16 Later that same month, he again wrote to Erasmus, expressing more directly his intention: "I sent you some time ago my

12 Erika Rummel, "Humor in Unexpected Places: Witty Asides in Religious Tracts and their Significance for the Historian," Erasmus of Rotterdam Society Yearbook 20 (2000): 37-8. 13 Quoted in Ibid., p. 38. 14 AW., pp. 38-9. 15 CWC 2, Ep. 324. 16CWE4,Ep.461. 200

Nowhere, which I long to see published soon, and well furnished too with glowing testimonials, if possibly not only from several literary men but also from people well- known for the part they have taken in public affairs." More hoped that Erasmus had either shown or described the book to Cuthbert Tunstall, confessing in flattering terms that the book would seem "much more elegant" if Erasmus recommended it.17 Within two years the Utopia underwent three editions (Leuven, 1516; Paris, 1517; and Basel, 1518), with noticeable additions and omissions in the prefatory letters and verses that accompanied each edition.18 In a letter to Wolfgang Angst, Froben's corrector, Erasmus disclosed that he thought the Utopia should also have a letter of recommendation from Beatus

Rhenanus,19 which never materialized. Rhenanus did, however, write a preface to the

Froben edition of More's Epigrammata that was published together with the Utopia in

March 1518.20 Erasmus, on the other hand, ended up writing a brief preface to Froben's

1518 edition of More.21 Peter A. Allen has written about the function of prefatory letters in his investigation of the first three editions of More's Utopia. He argues that the different prefatory letters and verses affixed to each edition not only praise More, but were also "deliberately designed to control the reader's interpretation of the text," and to commend the work "as both a delightful literary game" and a work of practical philosophy, whose principles are those of "the Christian ethic, the traditional and simple philosophy of Christ."22 The prefatory material to the first three editions of the Utopia illustrates how authors and printers mobilized the scholarly community to promote their

17 CWE 4, Ep. 467. 18 Allen, "Utopia and European humanism," p. 91. 19 CWE 5, Ep. 634. 20 CWE 6, Ep. 845. 21 CWE 5, Ep. 635. 22 Allen, "Utopia and European humanism," pp. 91-107. 201 own works by means of prefatory letters and recommendations. Likewise, at the beginning of his career, Melanchthon requested Johannes Lang on 3 April 1519 to write a preface to his scholia on the Pauline epistles.23 Twenty years later, it was Melanchthon who was approached by younger scholars to write prefaces to their work. In April 1549,

Lucas Lossius, rector of the school in Luneburg, wrote a letter to Melanchthon, enclosing a gift and the preface to his Psalmodia, hoc est, Cantica sacra veteris ecclesiae selecta, a comprehensive collection of liturgical music for the use of the Lutheran Church, and asking him to write a prefatory letter for the work.24 On 5 May, Justus Matthias of

Gottingen reported to Lossius, that Melanchthon had read Lossius' preface and had promised a friend that he would write the requested preface, as soon as he got the chance. Melanchthon satisfied the request with a preface to the work, dated 1 January

1550, in which he expresses his hope that the work will help students cultivate a love of music and train them in piety. The full title to Lossius' work makes mention of

Melanchthon's preface, no doubt to help boost sales with the addition of Melanchthon's

26 name.

By contrast, prefatory letters afforded many young scholars the opportunity to obtain their first publication in the form of a short letter to the reader, prefixed or postfixed to a publication by an established scholar, who gave their proteges the chance to piggy-back on their own publication.27 In addition, young scholars wrote dedicatory epistles to the works of their teachers as a token of gratitude for their contribution to

"MBWTl.Ep. 50. 24 MBW Ep. 5503 (summary). 25 A. H. Lackmann, Epistolae diversi argument! a variis adhucam Lossium ... exaratae (Hamburg, 1728): 32-33, no. 15. 26 MBW Ep. 5710 (summary); printed in CR 7.528-30 27Cf.CWEl,Ep.45. 202

education and the bonae literae. Oftentimes, young scholars began their careers as

typesetters and editors for printers, and the permission to include a letter of theirs to the

publication was a reward for their involvement in the printing of the text. The first extant

letter by Capito is a letter to the reader, which appeared at the end of Conrad

Summerhart's commentary on the scholastic theologian, Albertus Magnus. The letter,

dated 25 April 1507, praises the edition and its publisher, Heinrich Gran of Haguenau, for

whom Capito was then working as an editor. It is followed by a short hexastichon, in

which Capito displays his poetic skills. In the poem, we detect hints of his eventual

disdain for the works of the scholastics, for he writes: "The commentary is better, I

believe, than the twisted prose [of the Summa Physice of Albertus Magnus], which

involves fair thoughts in complexities." When the edition was reprinted a decade later,

Capito's letter to the reader and his poem were omitted; moreover, the prefatory letter by

Jacob Wimpheling, which preceded the 1507 edition, was moved to the end of the

volume. In its place, at the head of the text, we find Capito's Epistola deformando a pueris theologo, addressed to his patron, Johann Rudolf von Hallwyl, whose young

cousin, Hartmann, he was tutoring at the time. The change in the reprint of the

commentary's peripheral matter most likely reflects the rising importance of Capito on

the academic scene.

Melanchthon's own entrance onto the academic scene received a jump-start when

he was awarded the honour of writing prefatory letters to a number of releases from the

printing press of Thomas Anshelm in Tubingen, where he was employed while studying

28 Cf. CWE 2, Epp. 173-4. 29CWCl,Ep. 1. 30 CWC 1, Ep. 8. For a detailed study of this letter, see Erika Rummel, "In Erasmus' Footsteps: Capito's Epistola deformando a pueris theologo" in Erziehung, Bildung, Bildungsinstitutionen/Education, Training and their Institutions, edited by Rudolf Suntrup et al, 217-27 (Frankfurt et al.: Peter Lang, 2006). 203 at the university there. By means of these letters, the young and prodigious scholar could showcase his mastery both of Greek and Latin. His first extant letter is a preface to the reader, prefixed to the 1514 Anshelm edition of the Clarorum virorum epistolae, a collection of letters written to his illustrious relative, Johann Reuchlin. In it, Melanchthon claims that the publication of the letters will bring fame to Germany and, in accordance with the opinions of Libanios and Cicero, will be a model for students, who should imitate the style and rhetoric of classical scholars.31 That same year, Melanchthon also wrote a prefatory letter to an Anshelm edition of Bartholomew of Cologne's Dialogus mythologicus, whose work he edited, recommending the text for young students as a model to perfect their writing style. These early prefatory letters by Capito and

Melanchthon demonstrate their interest in the bonae literae and their evolving attitude towards the scholastics.

Scholars also included letters they had earlier received from a renowned scholar as prefatory material to their own works, for the sake of adding prestige to their work by the positive recommendation in the letter. For instance, a letter from Erasmus to

Mosellanus, dated 22 April 1519, was appended as prefatory material to Mosellanus'

Oratio de ratione disputandi (Leipzig, 1519). In the prefatory letter, which reads like a letter of recommendation, Erasmus praises Mosellanus' language and style. He also lauds his contribution at the University of Leipzig to defending the bonae liter ae against

"defenders of ignorance," that is, scholastic opponents of classical languages and the liberal arts. After reading Mosellanus' oration in defence of the study of classical languages, Erasmus concluded:

31MBWTl,Ep. 1. 32MBWTl,Ep. 3. 33 CWE Epp. 948, 980. 204

I thought your gifts so full of promise that I had hardly ever seen their like - your style is so lively, it flows along carrying the reader with it, yet is soundly based on reason; you are acute in detecting a good argument and show yourself the skilled craftsman in presenting it. Your language testifies to wide and varied reading, which in a young man is all the more admirable.

Erasmus states that he is convinced that the two of them are victims of a "sworn conspiracy ... against the classical languages and liberal arts." He offers a satirical collection of episodes illustrating the stupid and stubborn opposition to humanistic learning and to himself personally on the part of certain scholastic theologians. Erasmus concludes the preface by stating that he is tired of battling against the scholastics at his age. He therefore hands on the torch "to you younger men."34 Simon Grynaeus, too, included a letter Erasmus had written to him on 26 December 1525 as part of an annex to the second edition of his commentary on Book VIII of Aristotle's Topica, which was published in 1556, well after Erasmus' death. In the letter of 1525, Erasmus had praised his combined erudition and modesty.35 In this case, the personal letter to Grynaeus was transformed into a printed recommendation of the author of the commentary. The inclusion of letters and poems of friends in an edition had roughly the same function as sending greetings or dropping names in private letters of introduction. They reminded the reader of the network within which the recommendation operated.

Though noted humanists often complained about having to write prefaces to the works of other scholars, their prefaces gave them a platform from which they could recommend to the reader a young scholar, endorse his work, usually his firstfruits

(primitiae) and at the same time promote their own agenda. In these prefaces, the author and his work were extolled in ways reminiscent of the letters of recommendation by

CWE 6, Ep. 948. CWEll,Ep. 1657. 205 humanists. We see the same emphasis on the author's learning, facility with languages and contribution to the bonae literae. Their works, in turn, were recommended to the reader because of their importance for the task of restoring a neglected or corrupted field of study. On 31 August 1518, Jakob Spiegel, the imperial secretary, addressed to

Erasmus his preface for Erazm Ciolek's Oratio ... in celeberrimo Augusten. conventu ... habita (Augsburg, 1518), a speech delivered on 20 August 1518 at the Diet of Augsburg, advocating a crusade on behalf of King Sigismund I of Poland. In the preface, Spiegel praises Ciolek, the bishop of Plozk, as a "man of the highest character, rare learning, and true Roman eloquence, who has a special claim on my attachment because he has the same name as yourself and frequently speaks of you with great respect." He notes how the speech moved the audience to tears and emphasizes the close ties between himself and Hutten, who was still on good terms with Erasmus at that time. The prefatory letter highlights Ciolek's humanist qualities as well as his friendship with Erasmus. Peter

Bietenholz, however, suggests that Spiegel's motives for publishing the address may have been self-serving, a bid perhaps to secure diplomatic support for Maximilian's proposed crusade. In Erasmus' preface to the new edition of Giovanni Crastone's

Dictionarius Graecus (Basel, 1524), prepared by his protege, Jacobus Ceratinus, Erasmus expresses his gratitude "to all those who have made some contribution" to Greek-Latin lexica, especially Guillaume Du Maine, who had collaborated with Jean Cheradame in editing a Greek-Latin lexicon (Paris, 1523). He also praises the efforts of Ceratinus, who

"has the very rare quality of uniting an exact familiarity with Greek and Latin with an incredible modesty." Moreover, Erasmus states why he is writing a preface "for another man's work," explaining that it was he who had urged Ceratinus to undertake the

36 CWE 6, Ep. 863 and headnote. 206 thankless task: "All the more gratitude is due to those, who for the public benefit do not refuse a laborious task which brings no credit and is full of tedium."37 This case nicely illustrates how authors used prefatory letters not only to recommend to the reader the author and text at hand, but also to credit the efforts of those who came before, upon which the current text had been built. A few years later, Ceratinus returned the favour with an elegant and cordial preface to his own De sono liter arum, praesertim graecarum,

•50 libellus (Antwerp, 1527), addressed to Erasmus. One final example comes from

Erasmus' warm, albeit brief, preface to Georg Agricola's Bermannus, sive de re metallica dialogus (Basel, 1530), an early version of his monumental De re metallica (Basel,

1556), which remained the authoritative text on metallurgy for the next 200 years. Petrus

Plateanus, rector of the school in Joachimsthal, wrote a dedicatory letter to the work addressed to Heinrich von Konneritz, superintendent of the mines in Joachimsthal, and then sent the book to Erasmus, asking him on 8 September 1539 to recommend it to

Froben for publication.39 Erasmus complied with the request of his friend and added his own preface, dated 18 February 1530 and addressed to Konneritz's two sons, Andreas and Christoph. Framed as a humanistic dialogue, the three interlocutors discuss a loose agenda of mining topics drawn from their experience of working in the mines in central

Europe. In the letter, Erasmus praises the work, especially for Agricola's ability to hold the attention of the reader with vivid descriptions of the mines. Erasmus reminds the reader, though, that while the silver and gold veins of the earth may make a man rich,

"only the veins of holy writ truly enrich a man." Since Agricola was the town physician of Joachimsthal, Erasmus gives honorary mention to two young humanists, Simon 37 CWE 10, Ep. 1460. 38 Allen Ep. 1843. 39 Allen Ep. 2216. Plateanus' dedicatory letter is printed on pp. 5-9 of Agricola's Bermannus. 207

Riquinus and Joachim Martens, for the efforts to restore the field of medicine. He concludes his preface by saying, "This first attempt by Georg gives me no less hope. I have nothing negative to say about this work and I have no doubt but that Hieronymus

Froben will publish this voluntarily as much for your pleasure as for the good of the scholarship."40 Erasmus' preface to a work, whose subject-matter - mining - was well outside his range of expertise, was written as a favour to a friend. His honorary mention of other young humanists and of the printer, Froben, is a reminder of the network that provides the framework for the recommendation.

Prefaces also afforded their authors the opportunity to provide a negative portrayal of an opponent, much like a negative letter of recommendation, capitalizing on the author's unattractive character and lack of learning. Capito's dedicatory letter to

Erasmus' Responsiones ad annotationes Ed. Lei (Antwerp, 1520) was clearly intended to depict Edward Lee in the worst possible light and to discredit his critical review of

Erasmus' edition of the New Testament. In the letter, Capito mocks Lee and dismisses his book as "morose, superstitious, and foolishly boastful," the work of an author "worthy of the greatest hatred."41 Likewise, in July 1525, Erasmus addressed to Jean de Selve, president of the Parlement of Paris, his preface to his Adversus Petri Sutoris ... apologia

(Basel, 1525), in which he complains about the attacks made by Pierre Cousturier (Sutor) on all new biblical translations, including that of Erasmus, in his treatise, De tralatione

Bibliae (Paris, 1525). In the preface to his Apologia, Erasmus dismisses outright

Cousturier's work and refuses even to dignify it with a response, drawing on an adage by

40 Allen Ep. 2274: "Nee minus spei ostendunt nobis haec Georgii progymnasmata. Quare nee me poenitet huius operae, nee dubito quin Hieronymus Frobenius sit in gratiam vestram, turn studiorum, libenter excusurus." 41 CWC 1, Ep. 54. 208

Horace: '"But of that I shall not say another word.' If an experienced critic like yourself cannot infer from my Apologia what the work and its author are like, then the book itself will give you a full portrait of the man, like a reflection in a mirror." He paints a very negative picture indeed of Cousturier, associating him with those theologians who "have such a deep dislike of languages and literature that nothing pleases them which has any connection at all with polite letters."42 The language Erasmus employs against Cousturier stems from the portrait metaphor used by humanists and reformers to depict people in their letters of recommendation.

Capito's preface to Martin Cellarius' De operibus Dei (Strasbourg, 1527) is interesting since it shares many of the characteristics of letters of recommendation by reformers, that is, praise of Cellarius' character and education, as well as assurance of his orthodoxy. Both the author and his book were controversial. In 1527, Cellarius, a heterodox theologian, arrived in Strasbourg, where he was a guest at the home of Capito.

His De operibus Dei was the first systematic Protestant treatise on predestination, and also included some novel chiliastic notions in its concluding sections. Because of the book's dubious nature, Capito's personal endorsement made his fellow reformers in

Strasbourg uncomfortable. We find here a clear example of a well-known writer promoting a work of a friend, whose academic qualifications and orthodoxy are vouched for after a personal examination in matters of faith. As we saw in the last chapter, the practice of personally examining the orthodoxy of the recommended person was part of the recommendation process that developed during the Reformation period. Capito's own willingness to put himself on the line by endorsing Cellarius' book reflects his own latitudinarian approach to reform. This approach, however, proved untenable, and he was

42CWEll,Ep. 1591. 209 forced to justify his endorsement of the work, and eventually distance himself from his

Anabaptist friends for the sake of unity amongst the Swiss and Alsatian reformers.43 The case exemplifies how reformers sometimes put their own reputation on the line by endorsing books and their authors, whose message coincided with their own agendas.

From the outset of the preface, Capito describes Cellarius as a "man of God, especially endowed with the Spirit." He explains that upon Cellarius' arrival in

Strasbourg, he and Cellarius had discussed "certain dogmas and questions of faith," in particular, the doctrine of predestination. What Capito concluded from this examination was that the two of them shared a "faith and similar ideas about God," and that they had come "to recognize each other's faith and grace of God." He and his colleagues had carefully read through the work and evaluated its contents, concluding:

For we think that this book is not only useful, but extremely necessary in these times to settle disputes, to do away with sects, and to extinguish the resentment which rages most bitterly among the elect. No one has proclaimed the doctrine of predestination in grander terms, as far as I know. Once this doctrine is understood, the idea of free will, which is the worst bane of true religion, flies away as if it had only been a mere dream. No one has given proof of the Spirit in the hearts of the elect more certainly than Cellarius, whence those who are oppressed by evils derive the most certain consolation. No one has used clearer terms or made matters more perspicuous, even for people of average expertise in spiritual matters (for one may speak the honest truth without feeling jealous).

As Capito claims, since he and his Strasbourg colleagues approve of Cellarius' faith, sincerity and beliefs, which he does not proffer "in the manner of the Anabaptists," they decided that "it would be conducive to the public good if we were to make [this book] available to those who were unfortunately unable to enjoy this great treasure." Capito admits, however, that Cellarius' writing style is rather rough, but nevertheless still believes that "it is in the interest of the pious to come to know this as soon as possible, to

On the rift and eventual reconciliation between Capito and Bucer, see Kittelson, 188-196. 210 treat elegant diction as secondary in a book that truly pertains to the glory of God, as this booklet certainly does."44 Despite the opinions advanced in the book, Capito endorsed it since he was promoting his own agenda, his latitudinarian approach to reform.

Capito continually had to assure his fellow reformers of Cellarius' orthodoxy and to defend his private and public endorsement of the work. In his personal correspondence with friends, Zwingli in particular, he always tried to paint a positive picture of Cellarius.

On 18 August 1527, Capito wrote a letter to Zwingli, warmly recommending Cellarius to him in terms reminiscent of letters of recommendation by reformers, and assuring him that Cellarius was a far better man than rumour had it. He acknowledges that Cellarius used to have reservations about infant baptism, but insists that he has always been firmly opposed to the Anabaptist movement. Indeed, he rejects it in his book, De operibus Dei.

After a week of living with Cellarius, Capito had formed the impression that he was a man of God. Though the Wittenberg theologians have been speaking ill of him, Cellarius has not retaliated. He speaks ill of no one, not even of the Anabaptists, who harass him in

Strasbourg. He openly, but patiently, condemns their errors. Much like a letter of recommendation by reformers, the preface vouches for Cellarius' orthodoxy and character, that is, his pursuit of peace and concord. Capito explains that he wrote a preface to Cellarius' De operibus Dei in order to counter the negative reports about him, and to dispel rumours that Cellarius is an Anabaptist. Rather he is a fellow servant of

God, who firmly agrees with the Strasbourg preachers on the punishment of Anabaptists.

Finally, Capito states that he is open to criticism, and therefore asks that Zwingli read through Cellarius' De operibus Dei and note down the offensive passages, which he and

CWC 2, Ep. 335. 211 his colleagues will undertake to emend.45 Zwingli's response is no longer extant. On 24

September 1527, however, Capito wrote back that the Strasbourg preachers had taken into account Zwingli's opinion about Cellarius, but he insisted that Cellarius is not a disturber of the peace. Instead, he is agreeable, fond of Zwingli and Oecolampadius, frequents sermons and lectures, resists his opponents, and disapproves of the Anabaptists.

Cellarius by nature never speaks ill of anyone and reprimands his opponents with friendly words. As he did in the preface, Capito explains that he promoted Cellarius' De operibus

Dei not because of its novelty, but because it pointed to the glory of God.46

Prefaces by the Editor/Translator:

Thus far, we have examined prefaces by outsiders recommending to the reader an author and endorsing his work. In what follows, we shall shift our attention to prefaces written by humanists and reformers to their own works, in particular to their editions and translations of classical and patristic authors. Motivated by the rallying cry, "Ad fontes," humanists scoured libraries and monasteries across Europe for texts that would allow them to produce more accurate and more complete editions and translations. The content of the prefatory letters to the newly edited and printed works of classical, patristic and contemporary authors bears many of the hallmarks of letters of recommendation, and sheds light upon some of the issues at the heart of the respective movements of both humanists and reformers. The remainder of this chapter will focus on the parallels and differences between prefaces and letters of recommendation. On the one hand, in the prefaces by the editor/translator we find praise for the same qualities in the author edited/translated that appear in letters of recommendation: style and learning; morals and

CWC2,Ep. 338, cf. Ep. 341. CWC 2, Ep. 342. 212 character; and love of peace and concord. On the other hand, there are significant dissimilarities between the two epistolary genres. Prefaces tend to be programmatic and have an element of self-praise and self-promotion. By praising the author edited/translated, the writer compliments himself for making the material available to the reader, and implies that he shares (or is far removed from) the qualities praised in the author edited/translated. Moreover, prefaces to editions/translations of authors long dead, particularly the Church Fathers, opened the door for conflicting recommendations and competing appropriations of such authors by confessional opponents, as the Fathers were marshalled for support in numerous polemics of the Reformation period.

Humanists and reformers wrote prefaces to editions and translations of classical and patristic authors who epitomized their own goals as scholars. Though prefaces were written ostensibly to praise a given author, they often became the platform from which the editor or translator promoted his own message and programme. Erasmus recognized the importance of the preface as a programmatic statement in a letter he wrote in January

1525 to the city council of Basel, in which he discusses censorship. He stresses that there is no need to worry about the printing of ancient texts "even if they contain error," since otherwise "no book would appear except the Scriptures." He does note, however, that even with editions and translations to classical and patristic texts "one needs to be on one's guard about prefaces and commentaries to ensure that no dangerous material is added. It is the duty of magistrates, in accordance with the principles of universal law, to prevent the publication of libellous or seditious books."47 It goes to show that Erasmus was aware of the custom of covertly inserting social and other criticism into prefaces to the patristic texts, a ruse he himself practised. Erasmus' actions prompted Luther

47CWCll,Ep. 1539,11. 51-57. 213 reportedly to say on 1 April 1533, after spending almost an entire day reading Erasmus' prefaces to the New Testament:

Erasmus has indeed put out very disgraceful prefaces, even if he did soften them, because he makes no difference between Christ and Solon. Moreover, as the prefaces to Romans and to the canonical First Epistle of John show, he obscures the authority of Paul and John, as if these writings were of no moment, as if the Epistle to the Romans had no relevance for our time, as if the difficulty in this epistle outweighed its value, etc. Is this praise for the book's author? For shame!48

Thus both prefaces and letters of recommendation sought to demonstrate to and persuade the reader of the qualities that made the recommended subject, be it a person or a book, worthy of the recommendation or endorsement. We find that similar qualities were praised in the prefatory letters as in letters of recommendation: the author's style and learning; his and morals and character; and his love of peace and concord. Humanists did not consider style without context, just as in humanistic education intellectual training was inseparable from moral training. This notion translated to their letters of recommendation, where praise of the recommended person's skills was always complemented by praise of his character. So too in prefatory letters, humanists endorsed the works of authors who combined style with character. Of the pagan authors, Cicero was considered the pre-eminent model for Latin rhetoric and style. In the preface to his revised edition of several works of Cicero, including De officiis, Erasmus recommends

Cicero's writings as "worthy to be read by teachers with the young in every school, and read and reread to themselves by the old." He frankly acknowledges his admiration for

Cicero, whose purity, sincerity and virtue often outshines that of Christians, who, though

"brought up on the Scriptures, encouraged by such examples and such rewards,... profess

48 Martin Luther, Table Talk, edited and translated by Theodore G. Tappert, in Luther's Works. American Edition, edited by Helmut T. Lehmann (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1967), vol. 54, p. 189, no. 3033b. 214 the gospel teaching and do not practise it."49 Elsewhere, in the preface to his edition of

Cicero's Tusculanae quaestiones, he expresses his pleasure not only with Cicero's language, but also his moral philosophy. Cicero, he writes, comes as close to a knowledge of God as possible for a pagan, much like the Jews did before the dispensation of the gospel.50

The Church Fathers, too, appealed to humanists and reformers for their style and rhetoric, especially when combined with godliness and faith. Of Cyprian, Erasmus wrote:

"Such is the character of his language everywhere in his works that you experience the speech of a truly Christian bishop who was destined to become a martyr. His heart burns with evangelical piety and his language measures up to his heart."51 Likewise of Basil:

"Whichever subject he treated, his continuous sound and delightful style, which he had not acquired but received at his birth, nowhere failed him. In accordance with his name everywhere one witnesses the presence of a most royal majesty combined with a most admirable humanity."52 His appeal for the combined virtues of erudition and piety in the

Church Fathers is echoed by another humanist, Petrus Mosellanus, in the dedicatory letter to his translation of several works of Basil, which he dedicated to Adolph, bishop of

Mersburg. He writes that these works of Basil will help to restore the Christian faith:

"What can be more apt than to put forth into the hands of studious men than Basil, who, of all the bishops amongst the Greeks, when both knowledge of holy writ and holiness of life once flourished, was easily the prince.

49CWE7,Epl013. 50 CWE 10, Ep. 1390. 51 Quoted in Jan den Boeft, "Erasmus and the Church Fathers," in The Reception of the Church Fathers in the West, edited by I. Backus (Leiden: Brill, 1997), vol. 2, p. 557. 52 Ibid. 53 Petrus Mosellanus, Quae hoc in opusculo contineantur... (Leipzig, 1516), fol. a2r-v: "Nam, ut taceam tuum illud ardentissimum studium in collapsis religionibus restaurandis, cui rei libellus hie potissimus 215

Likewise, in the dedicatory letter to his edition of the Greek text of Chrysostom's

De sacerdotio, Erasmus explains to Pirckheimer the two reasons why he has edited the text: "What made me more sympathetic to the present task was not just the fact that

Chrysostom is a useful model for Christian eloquence, since he has a unique talent for combining pious learning with an appealing style, but I also felt that he is particularly suitable for those who want to acquire a good command of Greek." He intends the edition to be used as a textbook for young men and hopes that Pirckheimer will support a project to edit the complete works of Chrysostom.54 Ultimately, however, the moral element was more important than the stylistic element. For example, in the dedicatory letter to his edition of Arnobius the Younger's commentary on the Psalms, Erasmus professes his appreciation for Arnobius' simple Latin, despite his ungrammatical style, since his godliness nevertheless shines through. Erasmus praises Arnobius' ability to accommodate his language to the general reader. In fact, the usefulness of the work for the general reader justified the use of bad Latin, just as "if he were writing today, he would either write in straightforward French, if he were writing for a French public, or in good Latin, if he were writing for educated readers." In the end, he writes, Arnobius' goal was to stir up Christian piety and promote Christian concord.55 Conversely, in his preface to an edition of the History of Alexander the Great by the Roman historian Quintus Curtius

Rufus, Erasmus criticizes Greek and Roman historiography and presents his negative assessment of Alexander, "one unbalanced young man," on account of whose whims

deserviet, quid aptius convenerit, quam Basilium ilium praesulum omnium, qui apud Graecos cum sacrarum literarum noticia, turn vitae sanctimonia olim floruerunt, facile principem, in manus studiosorum hominum prodire." 54 CWE 11, Ep. 1558,11. 269-73. A complete Greek edition of the complete works of Chrysostom did not materialize until the next century with the 8-volume edition by Sir Henry Savile (Eton, 1610-12). 55 CWE 9, Ep. 1304. 216

Africa, Europe, and Asia were plunged into bloodshed and "whose ambition was not to be satisfied by the limits of this entire earth."56 His negative opinion of the ambitious

Alexander is reminiscent of humanist letters of recommendation, where their authors emphasized that the recommended person was free of ambitio, that is, self-seeking motives.

In Erasmus' dedicatory letter to his Latin translation of two treatises of Plutarch,

De non irascendo and De curiositate, printed with the Greek text by Froben in May 1525, we find two themes that are prevalent in letters of recommendation: an emphasis on temperance and minding one's own business. The subject-matter of these two dialogues of Plutarch - anger and curiosity - he writes were applicable to daily life and he hoped that they would provide an effective cure to their reader.57 Moderation was another quality that was praised in humanist letters of recommendation, yet an excessive display of the virtue, by contrast, was criticized. And so, on 3 February 1526, Erasmus dedicated to the young humanist Frans van der Dilft his translation of an essay by Plutarch that dealt with that them, Peri dysopias (On excessive diffidence). In the letter, Erasmus explains that the reason why he became particularly interested in translating the work was his "realization, when I reviewed the course of my past life, that nothing had got me into greater trouble than diffidence and timidity," and hoped that van der Dilft would learn from Plutarch and Erasmus that "natural modesty does not turn into timidity."58 Erasmus adverts to the difficulties he faced on account of his reluctance to take a firm stand on the matter of the Reformation, and preferring instead to remain in the background, editing and translating texts. Perhaps editing the essay had forced Erasmus to reflect upon the

56 CWE 5, Ep. 704. 57CWEll,Ep. 1572. 58 CWE 12, Ep. 1663. 217 accusations of his opponents of being a fence-sitter. Be that as it may, from these examples we can see how humanists, such as Erasmus, could recommend to their readers not only the classical authors but also their message and writing style.

One final parallel between prefatory and commendatory letters is the emphasis on peace and concord. In his preface to the first edition of Irenaeus' Adversus haereses, a treatise written against the Gnostics, Erasmus praises Irenaeus for being true to his name, seeking an irenic approach to theological disputes. He commends Irenaeus since he spread the faith boldly, despite the threat of persecution, something which, Erasmus believes, is all the more commendable since "there is no discomfort now in professing the name of Christ since there is no danger of legal action against either one's property or one s life."59 After summarizing Irenaeus' educational background and works, he lists the many heretics against which he fought, relying on scripture alone.60 Given the positive contribution made by Irenaeus in combatting heresies, Erasmus writes: "And so I have good hopes that the Lord, in his unsearchable wisdom, will bring good out of the present turmoil in the church and that he will raise up men like Irenaeus to settle our differences and restore peace to the world."61 Erasmus expresses similar sentiments with regards to

Chrysostom. He believed it was vital that Chrysostom be made widely available on account of his eloquence, his ability to apply secular knowledge to serve the Christian faith, and his ability to accommodate his language to his audience. Echoing his comments concerning Irenaeus, Erasmus wishes there were speakers in his own day, who would strive to emulate Chrysostom, even though the religious climate now was more favourable than in Chrysostom's day and age, when Christians were routinely persecuted.

39 CWE 12, Ep. 1738,11.49-51. 60 CWE 12, Ep. 1738,11. 118-202. 61 CWE 12, Ep. 1738,11. 268-71. 218

He blames the religious disputes and lukewarm faith and piety of his own age on the lack of preachers like Chrysostom, fearing that "our conduct is part of the reason why Turks,

Mohammedans, Saracens, Muscovites, Greeks, and all those other nations who are semi-

Christian or schismatic do not join Christ's fold."

Unlike letters of recommendation, prefaces were often programmatic in nature.

Scholars used the preface as a platform from which to promote their own agenda. Either inspired by or in reaction to the subject-matter of the book, humanists and reformers expounded their views on education and reform in their prefaces. Another significant difference between the two epistolary genres is evident in the prefatory letters to the editions/translations produced during the Reformation period by both Catholics and

Protestants alike. Whereas letters of recommendation by reformers were written primarily to and for people whose confessional identity was held in common with their authors, prefatory letters to editions/translations of the classics have a polemical slant, and manifest a clear appropriation of these classical authors for their own confessional cause.

Nowhere is this more evident than in the prefaces to the Church Fathers. Both Catholics and Protestants recommended these authors to their readers as spokesmen for their own confession and used them as support in their theological disputes. Much like conflicting letters of recommendation, this competing appropriation of the Fathers provoked controversy as confessional opponents disputed the perceived biased portrayal and use of the Fathers.63

62 CWE 12, Ep. 1800. 63 A good example of this comes from the prefatory letter to Wolfgang Musculus' Latin translation of the Opera Omnia of Basil the Great (Basel: Froben, 1540). Musculus' preface and translation sparked a debate between him and Johannes Cochlaeus over his perceived biased Latin translation. The case illustrates, on the one hand, how Musculus used the preface to recommend Basil to the reader and to champion him as an evangelical Church Father, who, like the reformers, "took refuge in the Holy Scriptures as if a sacred anchor," when battling his opponents; and on the other hand, how Cochlaeus interpreted Musculus' preface 219

In what follows are examples of letters advancing the editor/translator's platform, a humanistic programme. In 1517, Capito wrote a lengthy letter, in which he recommends a programme for a humanistic education for theology students and laments the predominant role of dialectics in the scholastic curriculum at the expense of scriptural and patristic texts. Ironically, this very humanistic letter was prefixed to an edition of

Conrad Summerhart's Philosophia naturalis, a scholastic work. 4 As Erika Rummel notes, the letter "manifests a decidedly Erasmian spirit and, more particularly, reflects

Erasmus' thoughts on the training of theologians as formulated in the Methodus? Both he and Erasmus dismissed the scholastics on account of their barbarous Latin, their rejection or neglect of classical and patristic writings, which they linked with the corruption of the church and a decline of piety amongst believers.65 Otto Brunfels shared their views on scholasticism. His collection of anti-scholastic passages, entitled Confutatio sophistices is dedicated to Capito. In the prefatory letter he writes that he took up Capito's advice to read the Church Fathers so as "to draw me away from pagan literature."66 After having read Origen, Ambrose, Chrysostom, Nazianzen, Hilary and Jerome, he was impressed not only that their style and rhetoric matched that of the pagan authors, but more importantly, that their writings were not obfuscated by scholastic theology:

Everywhere they echo the apostle, sound of the gospel and mirror the prophets. There is no battle of words amongst them, nor any dissension, except with the and slandered him in response. The debate represents conflicting recommendations of a Church Father by a Protestant and a Catholic, each of whom sought to claim Basil for their own side and criticize the integrity of their opponents. It was Musculus' partisan translation of the Church Father, in which he deliberately translated any words pertaining to monasticism with euphemisms that would make him more appealing and acceptable to the Protestant reader, which triggered an angered response from Cochlaeus, one of Luther's foremost Catholic opponent, in his Sacerdotii ac sacrificii novae legis defensio adversus Wolfgangi Musculi... arrosiones (Ingolstadt, 1544). Musculus responded in turn with his Adversus libellum lohannis Cochlaei de sacerdotio ac sacrificio novae legis aeditum. Anticochlaeus primus (Augsburg, 1544). 64CWCl,Ep. 8. 65 Rummel, "In Erasmus' Footsteps," p. 218. 66CWCl,Ep.25. 220

heretics and philosophers who strive to explain the mysteries of Christ based on human fallacies. They especially detest sects, and that is what convinced me to write, my Fabritius.

Part of the humanistic programme involved an emphasis on developing a knowledge of the "three languages": Latin, Greek and Hebrew. Scholastic theologians, however, sharply criticized the emphasis on languages, especially when humanists began to use philology to interpret scripture. In a letter to John Carondelet, dated 30 March

1527, Erasmus defended himself against reports that a Carmelite in Mechelen had been ranting and raging against languages and bonae literae, associating knowledge of languages with Lutheranism. Humanists as well as reformers believed that language studies were fundamental to a theologian's training, and often spelled out in their prefaces the qualities that made an ideal scholar or theologian.68 In the dedicatory letter to his Confutatio sophistices, Brunfels states his views about what training a theologian should have:

Even a man with a modest education, as long as he has a grasp of languages and a good background in grammar, can be a theologian because the better trained he is in the knowledge of rhetoric, poetry, history and other humanities the better he will be equipped to approach theology. I do not see what else is necessary for a theologian than to be the type of person shaped by scripture and to meditate on the law of the Lord day and night.69

In 1517, Pirckheimer wrote a lengthy preface to a Latin edition of the Greek satirist

Lucian's Piscator (Fisherman), a dialogue between four philosophers about what constitutes a true philosopher. Applying Lucian's criteria to his own age, Pirckheimer distinguishes the true theologian from the impostor. He comes to the defence of Reuchlin and the study of languages, both of which were threatened by scholastic theologians. He

67 Allen Ep. 1806. 68 For a brief overview of the conflicting responses to the value of language studies for theology, see Rummel, Humanist-Scholastic Debate, pp. 112-8. 69CWCl,Ep.25. 221 boldly asserts that the men who attack Reuchlin are not true theologians. Instead, he presents the qualifications he believes a true theologian should possess. These qualities are the ones extolled in humanist letters of recommendation for professors of theology:

A theologian acquires this illustrious title, the title of great wisdom, not because he has a reputation [for being a great theologian] among the common people, not because his colleagues vainly flatter him, but as a result of sleepless night, effort, pain, fasting, and immense and infinite labour. For in addition to grammar, he must know Latin, Greek and Hebrew: Latin, because otherwise he will appear to be a barbarian rather than a theologian on account of his unpolished speech; Greek, because without it he can understand neither the encyclopedia of disciplines nor Aristotle himself, not to speak of its value for our faith; and Hebrew, because all the mysteries of the Old and New Testament are hidden in it. Next, he must also study dialectics, but genuine dialectics that stays within its prescribed limits. Furthermore, if a theologian knows nothing about rhetoric, I do not see how he can communicate the word of the Truth to the Christian people, if at any rate he intends to teach in a way that is intelligible to the people and if he wants to engage them emotionally, so that his messages sticks in people's minds like the tip of an arrow.70

In Pirckheimer's view, a true theologian is one who knows the three languages, dialectics and rhetoric. His letter reads like a set of guidelines for humanists to write letters of recommendation for theology students as well as scholars applying for position in theology at the university.

In this chapter we have focused on how prefaces functioned as a type of letter of recommendation in sixteenth-century Germany. Humanists and reformers used the prefatory letter to recommend not only an author but also his message. These letters shared all the characteristics of letters of recommendation by humanists and reformers, as discussed in the preceding chapters. This holds good for both recommending contemporary and ancient authors. In contrast to the private letter of recommendation, however, prefatory letters were written with a larger audience in mind. Young scholars

Translated in Erika Rummel, The Case Against Johann Reuchlin: Religious and Social Controversy in Sixteenth-Century Germany (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2002) 139. 222

asked noted humanists and reformers to write a prefatory letter to their publications in the hope that their positive recommendation would boost sales and enhance their careers.

Noted humanists, in turn, complied with such requests, albeit sometimes reluctantly, and

praised authors of books in a manner reminiscent of the personal letter of

recommendation. For humanists, and some reformers, the classical authors were

recommended as models to the reader for their language and rhetoric, but also for their

character and moral lifestyle. The Church Fathers were likewise recommended for their

language and rhetoric, but more importantly as examples for how to deal with the

disputes that were plaguing the churches in sixteenth-century Germany. Whatever the

book, though, readers typically read first the prefatory letter and determined whether to

read or purchase the book or not based on the endorsement of its author. As such,

prefatory letters functioned as letters of recommendation by encouraging or dissuading

the reader to read the book and value its contents based on the commendatory words

found in the preface. 223

CONCLUSION

It seems fitting to conclude our discussion by returning to the theme of friendship with which we began. Plato used to say that "friends hold all things in common." This adage was realized by the humanist community of sixteenth-century Germany, whose letters of recommendation were written and effected on the basis of friendship. This common ownership of friends bound vast networks of scholars throughout the German

Empire. Young scholars with few connections were introduced to the broader scholarly community by means of letters of introduction. They begged to have their own names inscribed in the album amicorum of renowned scholars as an affirmation of their friendship and respect, and as an exercise in self-promotion. The more friends and contacts they had, the better their chances to launch a successful career. These friendships were not necessarily personal, but often just professional. They provided a support- system of like-minded scholars, who shared the same commitment to the study of the classical languages and the bonae literae. These friendships were initially fashioned in the households of humanists and reformers, who took young scholars into their homes and under their wings. Humanists and reformers stood in loco parentis for their young proteges, fulfilling many of the duties of their biological fathers by nurturing, disciplining and rearing them; these hosts also acted aspatroni of their young proteges, by watching over them, training and educating them, and ultimately by recommending them to other scholars and financial patrons, for employment as well as stipends. Friendships were naturally formed in these households, and the years of co-habitation made for a stronger letter of recommendation. 224

We have seen that humanists and reformers likened the letter of recommendation to the portrait. How did this portrait change over the time period of 1490 to 1560?

Humanists highlighted in their letters of recommendation the qualities that they sought to promote in their own programme: integrity, good morals, knowledge of classical languages, a fondness for the bonae literae, a dislike of medieval scholasticism, and respect and friendship towards other humanist scholars. Just as Renaissance artists modelled their new art form, the portrait, on techniques borrowed from antiquity, so too did humanists model their letters of recommendation on their classical literary heroes, especially Cicero and Pliny. Humanists abandoned the rigid letter-forms of the medieval ars dictaminis in favour of more personal and engaging letters, peppered with classical quotations, tailored to the individual and flavoured with expressions of friendship.

Reformers, many of whom were humanistically trained, retained many of the same elements as the humanists in their letters of recommendation. Changes, however, were introduced, on account of the Protestant Reformation, which produced a different portrait of the recommended person. To the palette from which reformers chose to depict those they recommended were added references that reflected their priorities. Knowledge of the vernacular was praised alongside knowledge of Greek and Latin, which reflects the growing demand for vernacular literature and scholarship that the reformers promoted as part of their agenda to make available the Word of God in the language of the people.

Moreover, as professors and church ministers abandoned their clerical vows of celibacy, they got married and fathered children of their own. As a result, professional networks of scholars were broadened to include not only friends, but also the relatives of friends.

People were recommended based not only on whom they knew, but also to whom they 225 were related. Above all, reformers duly noted the theological positions the recommended person held with regards to key doctrines of faith. This important new development occurred as confessionalization began to influence hiring policies. Those whose decision it was to hire new teachers, professors and church ministers sought guarantees that those they hired would be doctrinally sound.

The Protestant Reformation not only introduced changes to the letter of recommendation, but also to the job market. Before the unity of Christendom was irrevocably split into competing confessions, humanists recommended scholars for positions as teachers at princely courts and in private households, professors at universities and editors to printing houses. This was the traditional job market for humanists. The Reformation, however, radically altered that market as individual congregations, city councils and other territorial rulers assumed the dual responsibility of regulating the churches and educational institutions, and hiring ministers, teachers and professors to fill any vacancies. This shift took place so that they could oversee the reform of their cities and territories, and maintain control over the institutions from which the evangelical message was spread. Consequently, reformers developed new strategies to recommend their friends and proteges. Multiple letters were written both to government officials as well as to friends with valuable connections to these officials, who might use their influence to add weight to a recommendation. Reformers thus mobilized their network of friends and contacts to ensure that their recommendations would produce the desired result.

Letters of recommendation were written not only to support a job application, but also to help young scholars get their works published. Both humanists and reformers 226 wrote letters to their friends and favourite printers to suggest a manuscript for publication. The prefatory letters they wrote for these books share many similarities with their letters of recommendation. In these prefaces, they recommended to the reader not only the author but also his message in terms reminiscent of letters of recommendation.

There are many parallels between the two epistolary genres in terms of the qualities of the author or translator/editor that were praised: his character and education; his morals and faith; and his commitment to the bonae literae or to the reform of church, society or state. The function of these prefaces was also similar to that of the letter of recommendation. Both sought to persuade their readers by demonstrating why the person should be hired or why the book should be read. As well, just as humanists and reformers wrote letters of recommendation to promote the careers of their proteges, so too did the weight of their names in the prefatory letters lend support for the endorsement of the works of others.

What was the result of the changes? Because friends no longer held all things in common, largely on account of their doctrinal differences, did that mean that scholars fashioned friendships only with scholars whose confession they held in common? This is certainly the case for Urbanus Rhegius and Wolfgang Musculus. On 16 September 1524,

Rhegius wrote to Capito, noting that the basis for their friendship had changed as a result of the Reformation debate:

In the old days we were linked by Aristotle, the master of error, and by a love of secular letters and a kinship of thought, but now we are bound by stronger bonds, namely Christian love, which is the bond of perfection. That has changed our minds so that what is yours is as much my concern as what is my own.1

'CWC2,Ep.215. 227

Years later, Musculus came to a similar conclusion. In 1544, he wrote a small book,

Adversus libellum Iohannis Cochlaei de sacerdotio (Augsburg, 1544), in response to

Johannes Cochlaeus' defence of the traditional understanding of the sacraments and the

Church. In the prefatory letter to Martin Frecht, Musculus cites the classical adage that friends hold all things in common, and notes that it is their shared pursuit for the evangelical truth that has bound them together in friendship.2 Musculus admits that he does not share this pursuit with Cochlaeus:

Cochlaeus, our adversary here, says in some places that he prefers to regard me as a brother and friend than an adversary, but he adds "in the Church." By that he knows in his own manner not about the true church, which is of Christ, but about this present Roman one, full of every type of error, superstition, impiety, simony and cruel tyranny. ... Cochlaeus wishes to regard me as a brother and friend, but I in turn wish to regard not only him, but all the rest of our adversaries as brothers and friends in Christ our Saviour and head, in whom alone there is a true and solid joining together of the elect.3

Both Musculus and Cochlaeus disagreed about what should hold the two men in common. For Cochlaeus, it was the Church, the Roman Catholic Church; for Musculus it was Christ. His Christo-centric interpretation and application of the classical adage precluded any possibility of maintaining a friendship with Cochlaeus, who insisted that the Catholic Church be the common denominator in a friendship. Indeed, as sixteenth- century Germany became increasingly confessionalized, it was often creed and confession that bound together many reformers and scholars in friendship.

2 See above, p. 219, n. 63. 3 Wolfgang Musculus, Adversus libellum Iohannis Cochlaei sacerdotio ... (Augsburg, 1544), f. A3r: "Cochlaeus hie adversarius noster, alicubi se fratrem me et amicum habere malle dicit quam adversarium, sed addit in ecclesia, id quod suo more non de vera ecclesia, quae Christi est, sed de Romana hac praesenti omnis generis errorum, superstitionum, impietatum, simoniae, ac cruentae tyrannidis plena, intelligit.... Cupit me Cochlaeus habere fratrem et amicum. Ego vero vicissim cupiam non eum modo, sed et reliquos adversarios omnes habere fratres et amicos in Christo servatore ac capite nostro, in quo uno vera est ac solida electorum coniunctio." Cf. a letter from Urbanus Rhegius to Capito, dated 16 September 1524 228

As rulers in the ensuing years founded confessionally oriented universities, such as the universities of Marburg, Helmstedt, Wurzburg and Leiden, confessionalization continued to influence hiring policies. This is not to say, however, that the unadulterated pursuit of knowledge and scholarship did not continue or that there were no professional relationships between adherents of different confessions. The relationship of Erasmus and

Melanchthon may serve as an example. As Timothy Wengert has pointed out, both men managed to maintain a professional, albeit sometimes rocky, friendship throughout their lives, because both valued in the other their common pursuit of scholarship and the bonae literae.4 Their continued friendship demonstrates that scholars were able to set aside their confessional differences for the sake of scholarship. If we look ahead to the latter half of the sixteenth century at the career of Justus Lipsius (1547-1606), the famous Flemish humanist, we find an example of a scholar, who switched confessions for professional reasons and maintained a vast network of friends of both confessions. While letters of recommendation addressed the concerns of the institutions that upheld confessional hiring policies and accordingly catered to them, nevertheless, scholars did manage to maintain professional friendships with scholars of other confessions because ultimately they held their research interests in common.

4 Timothy Wengert, "Famous Last Words: The Final Epistolary Exchange between Erasmus of Rotterdam and Philip Melanchthon in 1536," Erasmus of Rotterdam Society Yearbook!^ (2005): 18-38. 229

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Primary sources:

Adam, Melchior. Vitae Germanorum theologorum. Heidelberg: Rosa, 1620.

Agrippa, Heinrich Cornelius. Opera Omnia. 2 vols. Lyons, 1600; repr. Hildesheim: Olms, 1970.

Amerbach, Johannes. The Correspondence ofJohann Amerbach: Early Printing in its Social Context. Translated and edited by Barbara C. Halporn. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 2000.

Die Amerbachkorrespondenz. Edited by A. Hartmann and B. R. Jenny. Basel: Verlag der Universitatsbibliothek, 1942-.

Blaurer, Ambrosius and Thomas Blaurer. Briefwechsel der Briider Ambrosius und Thomas Blaurer, 1509-1567. Edited byTraugott Schiess. Freiburg-im-Breisgau: Fehsenfeld, 1908-12. 3 vols.

Bucer, Martin. Correspondance de Martin Bucer. Edited by Reinhold Friedrich et al. Leiden: Brill, 1979-.

Bullinger, Heinrich. Heinrich Bullinger Briefwechsel. Edited by Ulrich Gabler et al. Zurich: Theologischer Verlag Zurich, 1973-.

Capito, Wolfgang. The Correspondence of Wolfgang Capito. Edited by Erika Rummel with the assistance of Milton Kooistra. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2005-.

Celtis, Conrad. Der Briefwechsel des Konrad Celtis. Edited by Hans Rupprich. Munich: C. H. Beck'sche Verlagsbuchhandlung, 1934.

Centuria epistolarum theologicarum ad Ioannem Schwebelium. Zweibruecken, 1597.

Cochlaeus, Johann. Sacerdotii ac sacrificii novae legis defensio adversus Wolfgangi Musculi... arrosiones. Ingolstadt, 1544. Despautere, Jean. Ars epistolica. Paris: Bade, [1518].

Ellenbog, Nikolaus. Briefwechsel. Nikolaus Ellenbog. Edited by Andreas Bigelmair and Friedrich Zoepfl. Miinster: Aschendorff, 1938.

Epistolae aliquot eruditorum, nunquam antehac excusae, multis nominibus dignae quae legantur a bonis omnibus. Antwerp: Hillen, May 1520. Epistolae diver si argumenti a variis adLucam Lossium ... exaratae. Edited by A. H. Lackmann. Hamburg: Felginer, 1728.

Erasmus, Desiderius. The Collected Works of Erasmus. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1974-.

—. Opus epistolarum Des. Erasmi Roterodami. Edited by P. S. Allen et al. Oxford: Clarendon, 1906-58. 11 vols, and index.

—. Responsiones ad annotationes Ed. Lei. Antwerp: Hillen, 1520.

Gesner, Conard. Bibliotheca universalis. 2 vols. Zurich: Froschauer, 1545-1555.

Halm, Karl Felix von. "Beitrage zur Literatur und Geschichte aus ungedruckten Briefen." Sitzungsberichte der philosophisch-philologischen und historischen Classe der k. b. Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Munchen 1 (1871): 271-92.

Horawitz, Adalbert. "Analecten zur Geschichte des Humanismus in Schwaben (1512- 1518)." Sitzungsberichte der philosophisch-historischen Klasse der kaiserlichen Akademie der Wissenschaften 86 (Vienna, 1877): 217-78.

—. "Briefe des Claudius Cantiuncula und Ulrich Zasius von 1521-1533." Sitzungsberichte der philosophisch-historischen Klasse der kaiserlichen Akademie der Wissenschaften 93 (Vienna, 1879): 425-462.

Illustrium virorum epistolae Hebraicae, Graecae et Latinae. [Haguenau]: Anshelm, 1519.

Kornerup, Bj0rn. "Et Brev fra Niels Hemmingsen til Melanchton." Kirkehistoriske Samlinger 6.R.6 (1948): 158-160.

Krafft, J. and W. Krafft, eds. Briefe und Documente der Zeit der Reformation im 16. Jahrhundert. Elberfeld: Lucas, 1875.

Lang, Johann. Epistolae Langianae. Edited by Hermann Hering. Halle: Gebauer- Schwetschkian, 1886.

Luther, Martin. Table Talk. Edited and translated by Theodore G. Tappert. In Luther's Works. American Edition. Edited by Helmut T. Lehmann. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1967.

—. D. Martin Luthers Werke: Briefwechsel. Weimar: Hermann Bohlaus Nachfolger, 1930-78. 15 vols.

Mathesius, Johannes. Johannes Mathesius, Ausgewdhlte Werke. Edited by Georg Losche, vol. 4. Prague: Calve, 1904. 231

Melanchthon, Philip. Melanchthons Briefwechsel: Kritische und kommentierte

Gesamtausgabe. Edited by Hans Scheible. Stuttgart-Bad Cannstatt, 1977-.

—. Opera quae supersunt omnia, in Corpus Reformatorum, vols. 1-28. Halle, 1834-1860.

Millet, Olivier. Correspondance de Wolfgang Capiton (1478-1541): Analyse et index (d'apres le Thesaurus Baumianus et autres sources). Strasbourg: Publications de la Bibliotheque Nationale et Universitaire de Strasbourg, 1982. Mosellanus, Petrus, ed. and trans.. Quae in hoc opusculo contineantur ...Leipzig: Lotther, 1516.

Musculus, Wolfgang. Adversus libellum Iohannis Cochlaei de sacerdotio ac sacrificio novae legis aeditum. Anticochlaeus primus. Augsburg, 1544.

—, ed. and trans. Opera D. Basilii Magni Caesariae Cappadociae episcopi omnia. Basel: Froben, 1540.

Mutian, Konrad. Der Briejwechsel des Conradus Mutianus. Edited by Karl Gillert. Halle: Hendel, 1890.

—. Der Briejwechsel des Mutianus Rufus. Edited by Carl Krause. Kassel: Freyschmidt, 1885.

Oecolampadius, Johannes. Briefe undAkten zum Leben Oekolampads zum vierhundertjdhrigen Jubildum der Baseler Reformation. Edited by Ernst Staehelin. Leipzig: Heinsius, 1927-1934. Reprint, New York and London: Johnson Reprint, 1971. 2 vols.

Pellikan, Konrad. Commentaria bibliorum. Zurich: Froschauer, 1532-39.

—. [heb]Mishlei Shelomot. Proverbia Salomonis. Basel: Froben, 1520.

Pirckheimer, Willibald. Willibald Pirckheimers Briefwechsel. Edited by Helga Scheible et al. 6 vols. Munich: Beck, 1940-2001.

Reuchlin, Johann. Briefwechsel. Edited by Ludwig Geiger. Stuttgart, 1875; repr. Hildesheim: G. Olms, 1962.

—. Briefwechsel: Johann Reuchlin. Edited by the Heidelberger Akademie der Wissenschaften. Stuttgart-Bad Cannstadt: Frommann-Holzboog, 1999-.

Rhenanus, Beatus. Der Briefwechsel des Beatus Rhenanus. Edited by A. Horawitz and K. Hartfelder. Leipzig: Teubner, 1886. Reprint, Hildesheim: G. Olms, 1966. 232

Vadian, Joachim. Vadianische Briefsammlung. Edited by E. Arbenz and H. Wartmann. St. Gallen: Fehr'sche Buchhandlung, 1890-1913. 7 vols.

Volz, Hans. "Neue Beitrage zum Briefwechsel von Melanchthon und Mathesius, II." Archivfur Reformationsgeschichte 29.3-4 (1932): 260-84.

Vives, Juan Luis. De conscribendis epistolis. Translated and edited by Charles Fantazzi. Vol. 3 ofSelected Works of J. L. Vives, edited by C. Matheeussen. Leiden: Brill, 1989.

Wimpheling, Jakob. Jakob Wimpfeling. Briefwechsel. 2 vols. Edited by Otto Herding and Dieter Mertens. Munich: Wilhelm Fink, 1990.

Zwingli, Ulrich. Huldreich Zwinglis sdmtliche Werke. Volumes 7-11: Zwinglis Briefwechsel, volumes 1-5. Edited by E. Egli et al. Zurich: Theologischer Verlag, 1911-35.

Secondary Sources:

Aa, Bianca van der. '"Iuvenes gnavi, probi ac modesti...' or the art of recommendation. An analysis of the correspondence of Ubbo Emmius and Janus Gruter." In Roma, magistra mundi: itineraria culturae medievalis. Melanges offerts au Pere L. E. Boyle a l'occasion de son 75e anniversaire, edited by Jacqueline Hamesse, vol. 3, pp. 367-381. Louvain-la-Neuve: Federation des Instituts d'Etudes Medievales, 1998.

Adkin, Neil. "A Note on the Dedicatory Epistle to Erasmus' Edition of Cyprian: non minus cordatissimi quam maximi titulo clarus." Bulletin Du Cange 53 (1995): 207-210.

Algazi, Gadi. "Scholars in Households: Refiguring the Learned Habitus, 1480-1550." Science in Context 16.1-2 (2003): 9-42.

Allen, Peter R. "Utopia and European humanism: the function of the prefatory letters and Verses." Studies in the Renaissance 10 (1963): 91-107.

Badian, Ernst. Foreign Clientelae. Oxford: Clarendon, 1959.

Bejczy, Istvan. "Erasmus Becomes a Netherlander." Sixteenth Century Journal 28.2 (1997): 387-399.

Bernstein, Eckhard. "Group identity formation in the German Renaissance humanists: the function of Latin." In Germania latina/Latinitas teutonica. Politik, Wissenschaft, humanistische Kultur vom spdten Mittelalter bis in unsere Zeit, edited by Eckhard Kefiler and Heinrich C. Kuhn, 375-386. Munich: Wilhelm Fink Verlag, 2003. 233

Bethencourt, Francisco and Florike Egmond, eds. Correspondence and Cultural Exchange in Europe, 1400-1700. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007

Bierlaire, Franz. Lafamilia d'Erasme: contribution al'histoire de I'humanisme. Paris: J. Vrin, 1968. den Boeft, Jan. "Erasmus and the Church Fathers." In The Reception of the Church Fathers in the West, 2 vols., edited by I. Backus, 537-572. Leiden: Brill, 1997.

Boissevain, Jeremy. Friends of friends: Networks, Manipulators, and Coalitions. Oxford: Blackwell, 1974.

Bonorand, Conradin. Aus Vadians Freundes- und Schiilerkries in Wien. St. Gallen: Fehr, 1965.

Boyd, Stephen B. "Anabaptism and social radicalism in Strasbourg, 1528-1532: Pilgram Marpeck on Christian social responsibility," The Mennonite Quarterly Review 63.1 (1989): 58-76.

Briskina, Anna. Philipp Melanchthon und Andreas Osiander im Ringen um die Rechtfertigungslehre. Ein reformatorischer Streit aus der ostkirchlichen Perspektive Frankfurt a.M.: Peter Lang, 2006.

Biichi, Albert. "Glareans Schtiler in Paris (1517-1522) nebst 15. ungedruckten Briefen." Der Geschichtsfreund 83 (1928): 150-208.

Burnand, Christopher. "The Advocate as a Professional: The Role of the Patronus in Cicero's Pro Cluentio." In Cicero the Advocate, edited by Jonathan Powell and Jeremy Paterson, 277-289. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004.

Burnett, Steven G. "Christian Aramaism: The Birth and Growth of Aramaic Scholarship in the Sixteenth Century." In Seeking Out the Wisdom of the Ancients. Essays Offered in Honor of Michael V. Fox on the Occasion of His Sixty-Fifth Birthday, edited by Ronald L. Troxel et al., 421-36. Winona Lake, Indiana: Eisenbrauns, 2005.

Castells, Manuel. The Rise of the Network Society. 2nd ed. Oxford: Blackwell, 2000.

Catto, J. I. "Masters, patrons and careers of graduates in fifteenth-century England." In Concepts and Patterns of Service in the Later Middle Ages, edited by A. Curry and E. Matthew, 52-63. Woodbridge, Suffolk, UK; Rochester, NY: Boydell Press, 2000. 234

Christ, Georg. "Das Fremde verstehen. Biblianders Apologie zur Koranausgabe im Spiegel des Basler Koranstreites von 1542." In Theodor Bibliander. Ein Thurgauer im gelehrten Zurich der Reformationszeit, edited by Christine Christ- von Wedel, 107-24. Zurich: Neue Zurcher Zeitung, 2005.

Clark, Harry. "The Publication of the Koran in Latin: A Reformation Dilemma." Sixteenth Century Journal 15.1 (1984): 3-12.

Contemporaries of Erasmus: A Biographical Register of the Renaissance and Reformation. Edited by Peter G. Bietenholz and Thomas B. Deutscher. Toronto, Buffalo and London: University of Toronto Press, 1985-1987. 3 vols.

Curry, A. and E. Matthew, eds. Concepts and Patterns of Service in the Later Middle Ages. Woodbridge, Suffolk, UK; Rochester, NY: Boydell Press, 2000.

Dart, Thurston. "A letter of recommendation written for John Bull in 1617." Revue beige de musicologie 17, no. 1-4, (1963): 121-124.

Davis, Natalie Zemon. The Gift in Sixteenth-Century France. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 2000.

Deppermann, Klaus. Melchior Hoffman: Social Unrest and Apocalyptic Visions in the Age of Reformation. Translated by Malcolm Wren. Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1987.

Derksen, John. "Nonviolent Political Action in Sixteenth-Century Strasbourg: the Ziegler Brothers." The Mennonite Quarterly Review 78.4 (2004): 543-556.

—. "The Schwenckfeldians in Strasbourg, 1533-1562: a prosopographical survey." The Mennonite Quarterly Review 74.2 (2000): 257-294.

Dickerhof, Harald. "Gelehrte Gesellschaften, Akademien, Ordensstudien und Universitaten. Zur sogenannten „Akademiebewegung" vornehmlich im bayerischen Raum." Zeitschriftfur bayerische Landesgeschichte 45 (1982): 37- 66.

Dillon, Matthew. Pilgrims and Pilgrimages in Ancient Greece. London and New York: Routledge, 1997.

Droste, Heiko. "Patronage in der Fruhen Neuzeit - Institution und Kulturform." Zeitschrift fur historische Forschung 30.4 (2003): 555-590.

Dunn, Kevin. Pretexts of Authority: The Rhetoric of Authorship in the Renaissance Preface. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1995. 235

Eden, Kathy. '"Between friends all is common': the Erasmian adage and tradition." Journal of the History of Ideas 59 (1998): 405-19.

—. Friends holdall things in common: tradition, intellectual property, and the "Adages" of Erasmus. New Haven: Yale University Press, 2001.

Egmond, Florike. "Correspondence and natural history in the sixteenth century: cultures of exchange in the circle of Carolus Clusius." In Correspondence and Cultural Exchange in Europe, 1400-1700, edited by Francisco Bethencourt and Florike Egmond, 104-142. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007.

Eichner, Klaus, comp., "Literatur "Soziales Kapital,"", http://www.sozialwiss.uni- hamburg.de/Isoz/Eichner/Literatur/Soziales Kapital/soziales kapital.html.

Eisenstadt, S. N. and L. Roniger. "Patron-Client Relations as a Model of Structuring Social Exchange." Comparative Studies in Society and History 22 (1980): 42-77.

Emich, Birgit et al. "Stand und Perspektiven der Patronageforschung. Zugleich eine Antwort auf Heiko Droste." Zeitschrift fur historische Forschung 32.2 (2005): 233-265.

Enenkel, Karl. "Epitaphs on Erasmus and the self-definition of the Republic of Letters." Erasmus of Rotterdam Society Yearbook 2\ (2001): 14-29.

Engberg-Pedersen, Troels. "Plutarch to Prince Philopappus on How to Tell a Flatterer from a Friend." In Friendship, Flattery, and Frankness of Speech: Studies on Friendship in the New Testament World, edited by John T. Fitzgerald, 61-79. Leiden: Brill, 1996.

Eskildsen, Kasper Risbjerg. "How Germany Left the Republic of Letters." Journal of the History of Ideas 65.3 (2004): 421-432.

Fantazzi, Charles. Introduction to Juan Luis Vives. De conscribendis epistolis, edited and translated by Idem, 1-20. Leiden: Brill, 1989.

—. "Vives Versus Erasmus on the Art of Letter-Writing." In Self-Presentation and Social Identification: The Rhetoric and Pragmatics of Letter Writing in Early Modern Times, edited by Toon van Houdt et al., 39-56. Leuven: Leuven University Press, 2002.

Fitzgerald, John T., ed. Friendship, Flattery, and Frankness of Speech: Studies on Friendship in the New Testament World. Leiden: Brill, 1996.

Frick, David A. Polish Sacred Philology in the Reformation and the Counter- Reformation: Chapters in the History of the Controversies (1551-1632). Berkeley: University of California Press, 1989. Furey, Constance M. Erasmus, Contarini, and the Religious Republic of Letters. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006.

Genette, Gerard. Paratexts: Thresholds of interpretation. Translated by Jane E. Lewin. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997.

Gibson, W. T. '"Unreasonable and unbecoming': self-recommendation and place-seeking in the Church of England, 17 00-1900." Albion 27 A (1995): 43-63.

Glauche, Gunter. "Die Regensburger sodalitas litteraria um Christophorus Hoffmann und seine Emmeramer Gebaude-Inschriften." In Scire litteras. Forschungen zum mittelalterlichen Geistesleben, edited by Sigrid Kramer and Michael Bernhard. Bayerische Akademie der Wissenschaften. Philosophisch-historische Klasse. Abhandlungen 99 (1988): 187-200.

Gleckman, Jason. "Thomas Wyatt's Epistolary Satires: Parody and the Limitations of Rhetorical Humanism." Texas Studies in Literature and Language 43.1 (2001): 29-45.

Glomski, Jacqueline. "Careerism at Cracow: The dedicatory letters of Rudolf Agricola Junior, Valentin Eck, and Leonard Cox (1510-1530)." In Self-Presentation and Social Identification: The Rhetoric and Pragmatics of Letter Writing in Early Modern Times, edited by Toon van Houdt et al., 165-82. Leuven: Leuven University Press, 2002. GoBner, Andreas. Die Studenten an der Universitdt Wittenberg: Studien zur Kulturgeschichte des studentischen Alltags und zum Stipendienwesen in der zweiten Hdlfte des 16. Jahrhunderts. Leipzig: Evan. Verlag, 2003.

Graham, John. "Ut pictura poesis." In The Dictionary of the History of Ideas http ://etext. lib .Virginia, edu/c gi-local/DHI/dhi, c gi?id=dv4-63.

Gransden, Antonia. "Letter of recommendation from John Whethamstede for a poor pilgrim, 1453/4." The English Historical Review 106.421 (1991): 932-939.

Hanhart, Johannes. Conrad Gefiner: Ein Beytrag zur Geschichte des wissenschaftlichen Strebens und der Glaubensverbesserung im 16ten Jahrhundert. Winterthur: Steiner, 1824.

Harrison, Richard L., Jr. "Melanchthon's Role in the Reformation of the University of Tubingen." Church History 47.3 (1978): 270-8.

Hartfelder, Karl. "Der humanistische Freundeskreis des Desiderius Erasmus in Konstanz." Zeitschriftfur die Geschichte des Oberrheins 47.1 [n.s. 8.1] (1893): 1- 33. 237

Harth, Helene. "Poggio Bracciolini und die Brieftheorie des 15. Jahrhunderts. Zur Gattungsform des humanistischen Briefes." In Der Brief im Zeitalter der Renaissance, edited by Franz Josef Worstbrock, 81-99. Weinheim: Acta Humaniora, 1983.

Hausmann, Frank-Rutger. "Francesco Petrarcas Briefe an Kaiser Karl IV. als 'Kunstprosa'." In Der Brief im Zeitalter der Renaissance, edited by Franz Josef Worstbrock, 60-80. Weinheim: Acta Humaniora, 1983.

Hazlett, W. Ian P. "Calvin's Latin Preface to his Proposed French Edition of Chrysostom's Homilies: Translation and Commentary." In Humanism and Reform: The Church in Europe, England, and Scotland, 1400-1643. Essays in Honour of James K. Cameron, edited by James Kirk, 129-150. Oxford: Blackwell, 1991.

Hellmuth, Leopold Hellmuth. "Gastfreundschaft und Gastrecht bei den Germanen." Osterreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften. Philosophisch-historische Klasse. Sitzungsberichte 440 (Vienna, 1984): 1-382.

Henderson, Judith Rice. "Humanist letter writing: private conversation or public forum?" In Self-Presentation and Social Identification: The Rhetoric and Pragmatics of Letter Writing in Early Modern Times, edited by Toon van Houdt et al., 17-38. Leuven: Leuven University Press, 2002.

Henrich, Sarah and James L. Boyce. "Martin Luther -Translations of Two Prefaces on Islam: Preface to the Libellus de ritu et moribus Turcorum (1530), and Preface to Bibliander's Edition of the Qur'an (1543)." Word & World 16.2 (1996): 250-266.

Henze, Barbara. "Erwartungen eines Theologen an die Obrigkeit. Der "Fuldaer" Georg Witzel (d. 1573) in seinen Widmungsvorreden." Archivfur mittelrheinische Kirchengeschichte 49 (1997): 79-97.

Hirstein, James. "Wolfgang Capito and the other Docti in Johann Froben's Basel Print Shop." In Reformation Sources: The Letters ofWolgang Capito and his Fellow Reformers in Alsace and Switzerland, edited by Erika Rummel and Milton Kooistra, 19-45. Toronto: Centre for Reformation and Renaissance Studies, 2007.

Holzberg, Niklas. "Ein vergessener Schuler Philipp Melanchthons: Georg Aemilius (1517-1569)." Archivfur Reformationsgeschichte 73 (1982): 94-122.

Hopf, Carl. "Empfehlung des Erycius Puteanus fur den Kanzler des Erzbischthums Thessalonisch Contarinus Palaeologus." Altpreufiische Monatsschrift 8 (1871): 371-2. 238

Houdt, Toon van et al., eds. Self-Presentation and Social Identification: The Rhetoric and Pragmatics of Letter Writing in Early Modern Times. Leuven University Press, 2002.

Ilardi, Vincent. "Crosses and carets: Renaissance patronage and coded letters of Recommendation." American Historical Review 92.5 (1987): 1127-1149.

Jancke, Gabriele. Autobiographic als soziale Praxis. Beziehungskonzepte in Selbstzeugnissen des 15. und 16. Jahrhunderts im deutschsprachigen Raum. Cologne et al.: Bohlau, 2002.

Janse, Wim. Albert Hardenberg als Theologe. Profil eines Bucer-Schulers. Leiden, New York and Cologne: Brill, 1994.

Jardine, Lisa. Erasmus, Man of Letters: The Construction of Charisma in Print. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1993.

Jaumann, Herbert, ed. Die europdische Gelehrtenrepublik im Zeitalter des Konfessionalismus/The European Republic of Letters in the Age of Confessionalism. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz Verlag, 2001.

Jung, Martin H. "Pietas et eruditio. Philipp Melanchthon als religioser Erzieher der Studenten." Theologische Zeitschrift 56 (2000): 36-49.

Jtirgens, Henning P. "Drei Jahrzehnte Korrespondenz zwischen Philipp Melanchthon und Johannes a Lasco." In Fragmenta Melanchthoniana. Zur Geistesgeschichte des Mittelalters undderfruhen Neuzeit, edited by Gtinter Frank, vol. 1, pp. 147-62. Heidelberg: Verlag Regionalkultur, 2003.

Kirk, James, ed. Humanism and Reform: The Church in Europe, England, and Scotland, 1400-1643. Essays in Honour of James K. Cameron. Oxford: Blackwell, 1991.

Kirwan, Richard. "Empowerment and Representation at the University in Early Modern Germany: Helmstedt and Wurzburg, 1576-1634." Ph.D. diss., Trinity College Dublin, 2006.

Kittelson, James M. Wolfgang Capito: From Humanist to Reformer. Leiden: Brill, 1975.

Klose, Wolfgang. "Freundschaftsalbum." In Historisches Worterbuch der Rhetorik, edited by Gert Ueding, vol. 3, pp. 472-6. Tubingen: M. Niemeyer, 1992-.

Kolb, Robert. Martin Luther as Prophet, Teacher, and Hero: Images of the Reformer, 1520-1620. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1999. 239

Konstan, David. "Friendship, Frankness and Flattery." In Friendship, Flattery, and Frankness of Speech: Studies on Friendship in the New Testament World, edited by John T. Fitzgerald, 7-19. Leiden: Brill, 1996.

Kramer, Sigrid and Michael Bernhard, eds. Scire litteras. Forschungen zum mittelalterlichen Geistesleben. In Bayerische Akademie der Wissenschaften. Philosophisch-historische Klasse. Abhandlungen n.s. 99 (1988): 1-438.

Kristeller, Paul Oskar. Renaissance Thought and Its Sources. Edited by Michael Mooney. New York, 1979.

Krollmann, Christian. "Johannes Poliander und sein Freundeskreis. Zur Vierhundertjahrfeier der Stadtbibliothek in Konigsberg." Mitteilungen des Vereins fur die Geschichte von Ost- und Westpreufien 16 (1941/42): 20-27.

Lee, Rensselaer W. Ut pictura poesis: the humanistic theory of painting. New York: W. W. Norton & Co., Inc., 1967.

Lerer, Seth. Courtly Letters in the Age of Henry VIII: Literary Culture and the Arts of Deceit Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997.

Lier, Hermann Arthur. "Der Augsburgische Humanistenkreis mit besonderer Berucksichtigung Bernhard Adelmanns von Adelmannsfelden." Zeitschrift des Historischen Vereins fur Schwaben und Neuburg 7 (1880): 68-108.

McCahill, Elizabeth May. "Finding a Job as a Humanist: the Epistolary Collection of Lapo da Castiglionchio the Younger." Renaissance Quarterly 57.4 (2004): 1308- 1345.

McLaughlin, Emmet R. The Freedom of Spirit, Social Privilege, and Religious Dissent: Caspar Schwenckfeld and the Schwenckfelders. Baden-Baden: V. Koerner, 1996.

—. "The politics of dissent: Martin Bucer, Caspar Schwenckfeld, and the Schwenckfelders of Strasbourg." The Mennonite Quarterly Review 68.1 (1994): 59-78.

Millet, Olivier. "Les prefaces aux traductions francaises de la Bible (1523-1588): la question de la langue." In Traduction et adaptation en France a la fin du Moyen Age et a la Renaissance: Actes du Colloque organise par I 'Universite de Nancy II, 23-25 mars 1995, edited by Charles Bucker, 373-87. Paris: Honore Champion, 1997.

Moeller, Bernd. "The German Humanists and the Reformation." In Imperial Cities and the Reformation. Three Essays, edited and translated by H. C. Erik Midelfort and Mark U. Edwards, Jr., 19-38. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1972. 240

Monfasani, John. Byzantine Scholars in Renaissance Italy: Cardinal Bessarion and Other Emigres. Selected Essays. Aldershot: Variorum, 1994.

Morford, Mark. "Lipsius' Letters of Recommendation." In Self-Presentation and Social Identification: The Rhetoric and Pragmatics of Letter Writing in Early Modern Times, edited by Toon van Houdt et al., 183-98. Leuven: Leuven University Press, 2002.

Muller, Jan-Dirk. "Konrad Peutinger und die Sodalitas Peutingeriana." Pirckheimer Jahrbuch fur Renaissance- undHumanismusforschung 12 (1997): 168-186.

Nas, J. M. and Antonia J. Houweling. "The Network Metaphor: An assessment of Castells' network society paradigm." Journal of Social Sciences 2.4 (1998): 221- 232.

O'Malley, John. Praise and Blame in Renaissance Rome: Rhetoric, Doctrine, and Reform in the Sacred Orators of the Papal Court. Durham, N.C.: Duke University Press, 1979.

Ozment, Steven. "The Family in Reformation Germany: the Bearing and Rearing of Children." Journal of Family History 8 (1983): 159-176.

Pabel, Hilmar M. "Reading Jerome in the Renaissance: Erasmus' Reception of the Adversus Jovinianum." Renaissance Quarterly 55.2 (2002): 470-497.

Perlman, S. "A Note on the Political Implications of Proxenia in the Fourth Century B.C." The Classical Quarterly n.s. 8.3/4 (1958): 185-191.

Phillips, Margaret Mann. The "Adages " of Erasmus. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1964.

Pineas, Rainer. "Erasmus and More: Some Contrasting Theological Opinions." Renaissance News 13.4 (1960): 298-300.

Posset, Franz. Renaissance Monks: Monastic Humanism in Six Biographical Sketches. Leiden and Boston: Brill, 2005.

Powell, Jonathan and Jeremy Paterson, eds. Cicero the Advocate. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004.

Rajashekar, J. Paul and Timothy J. Wengert. "Martin Luther, Philip Melanchthon, and the publication of the Qur'an." Lutheran Quarterly 16.2 (2002): 221-228.

Redeker, Raimund. Lateinische Widmungsvorreden zu Mefi- und Motettendrucken der ersten Hdlfte des 16. Jahrhunderts. Eisenach: Karl Dieter Wagner, 1995. 241

Regosin, Richard L. The matter of my book: Montaigne's Essais as the book of the self Berkeley et al.: University of California Press, 1977.

Rich, John, ed. Patronage in Ancient Society. London and New York: Routledge, 1990.

Rordam, Holger. Mester Jorgen Jensen Sadolin. Odense, 1866.

Roura, T. S. "The pragmatics of captatio benevolentiae in the Cely letters." Journal of Historical Pragmatics 3.2 (2002): 253-72.

Rowan, Steven. Ulrich Zasius: a jurist in the German Renaissance, 1461-1535. Frankfurt: V. Klostermann, 1987.

Rummel, Erika. The Case Against Johann Reuchlin: Religious and Social Controversy in Sixteenth-Century Germany. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2002.

—. The Confessionalization of Humanism in Reformation Germany. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000.

—. Erasmus and his Catholic Critics. 2 vols. Nieuwkoop: De Graaf, 1989.

—. "In Erasmus' Footsteps: Capito's Epistola deformando apueris theologo." In Erziehung, Bildung, Bildungsinstitutionen/Education, Training and their Institutions, edited by Rudolf Suntrup et al., 217-27. Frankfurt et al.: Peter Lang, 2006.

—. "Erasmus' Manual of Letter-writing: Tradition and Innovation." Renaissance and Reformation 25.3 (1989): 299-312.

—. The Humanist-Scholastic Debate in the Renaissance & Reformation. Cambridge, MA and London: Harvard University Press, 1995.

—. "Humor in Unexpected Places: Witty Asides in Religious Tracts and their Significance for the Historian." Erasmus of Rotterdam Society Yearbook 20 (2000): 34-46.

—. "The use of Greek in Erasmus' letters." Humanistica Lovaniensia 30 (1981): 55-92.

Sailer, R. P. Personal Patronage under the Roman Empire. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press, 1984.

Schaeffer, Peter. "Humanism on Display: The Epistles Dedicatory of Georg von Logau." Sixteenth Century Journal 17.2 (1986): 215-223.

Scheible, Heinz, ed. Melanchthon in seinen Schillern. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 1997. Schoeck, Richard J. Erasmus of Europe: The Prince of Humanists (1501-1536). Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 1993.

Schottenloher, Karl. "Konrad Heinfogel. Ein Nurnberger Mathematiker aus dem Freundeskreis Albrecht Durers." In Beitrdge zur Geschichte der Renaissance und Reformation. Joseph Schlecht am 16. Januar 1917 als Festgabe zum sechzigsten Geburtstag dargebracht, edited by Clemens Baeumker et al., 300-10. Munich: Datterer, 1917.

—. Die Widmungsvorrede im Buch des 16. Jahrhunderts. Miinster: Aschendorffsche Verlagsbuchhandlung, 1953.

Seek, Friedrich. "Eines der friihesten Stammbucher: Stammbuch Johann Valentin Deyger, Eintragungen von 1552 bis 1554." In Kostbarkeiten aus alter undneuer Zeit, edited by Hans-Peter Geh and Wolfgang Kehr, 128f. Karlsruhe: Badische Landesbibliothek, 1992.

Sedley, David. The Midwife ofPlatonism: Text and Subtext in Plato's Theaetetus. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 2004.

Segesvary, Victor. L 'Islam et la Reforme: etude sur I 'attitude des reformateurs zurichois envers ITslam (1510-1550). Lausanne: Editions L'Age d'homme, 1973.

Sembrzycki, Johannes. "Die Reise des Vergerius nach Polen 1556-1557, sein Freundeskreis und seine Konigsberger Flugschriften aus dieser Zeit. Ein Beitrag zur polnischen und ostpreuflischen Reformations- und Literaturgeschichte." Altpreufiische Monatsschrift 27 (1890): 513-584.

Slaby, Helmut. "Magister Georg Calaminus und sein Freundeskreis." Historisches Jahrbuch der Stadt Linz (1958): 73-139.

Sloane, Thomas O., ed. Encyclopedia of Rhetoric. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001.

Stayer, James M. Anabaptists and the Sword. 2nd ed. Lawrence, Kansas: Coronado Press, 1976.

Strauss, Gerald. "The Social Function of Schools in the Lutheran Reformation in Germany." History of Education Quarterly 28.2 (1988): 191-206.

Terpstra, Nicholas. "In loco parentis: Confraternities and Abandoned Children in Florence and Bologna." In The Politics of Ritual Kinship: Confraternities and Social Order in Early Modern Europe, edited by Nicholas Terpstra, 114-31. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000. 243

Tiisala, Seija. "Power and politeness: languages and salutation formulas in correspondence between Sweden and the German Hanse." Journal of Historical Pragmatics 5.2 (2004): 193-206.

Trachtenberg, Jeffrey A. "To blurb or not to blurb? Those snippets on the dust jacket carry a lot of weight, but more and more authors refuse to write them." The Globe and Mail, 31 July 2003, p. R3.

Tracy, James D. "Erasmus Becomes a German." Renaissance Quarterly 21.3 (1968): 281-288.

Treml, Christine. Humanistische Gemeinschaftsbildung: Sozio-kulturelle Untersuchung zurEntstehung eines neuen Gelehrtenstandes in derfruhen Neuzeit. Hildesheim: Georg Olms Verlag, 1989.

Troxel, Ronald L. et al., eds. Seeking Out the Wisdom of the Ancients. Essays Offered in Honor of Michael V. Fox on the Occasion of His Sixty-Fifth Birthday. Winona Lake, Indiana: Eisenbrauns, 2005.

Vandermeersch, Peter A. "Teachers." In A History of the University in Europe. Volume II: Universities in Early Modern Europe (1500-1800), edited by H. de Ridder- Symoens, 210-55. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996.

Vermuellen, Corinna L. "Strategies and slander in the Protestant part of Republic of Letters: Image, Friendship and Patronage in Etienne de Courcelles' Correspondence." In Self-Presentation and Social Identification: The Rhetoric and Pragmatics of Letter Writing in Early Modern times, edited by Toon van Houdt et al., 247-280. Leuven: Leuven University Press, 2002

Wartenberg, Giinther. "Wie man lernen und studieren soil: De instituendis duobus pueris (undatiert). Ratio studiorum." In Melanchthon deutsch, edited by Michael Beyer et al., vol. 1, pp. 102-5. Leipzig: Evangelische Verlagsanstalt, 1997.

Wasserman, Stanley and Katherine Faust. Social Network Analysis. Methods and Applications Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1994.

Weissman, Ronald. "Taking Patronage Seriously: Mediterranean Values and Renaissance Society." In Patronage, Art, and Society in Renaissance Italy, edited by F. W. Kent and Patricia Simons, 25-45. Oxford: Clarendon, 1987.

Wengert, Timothy. "Famous Last Words: The Final Epistolary Exchange between Erasmus of Rotterdam and Philip Melanchthon in 1536." Erasmus of Rotterdam Society Yearbook 25 (2005): 18-38.

—. Human Freedom, Christian Righteousness: Philip Melanchthon's Exegetical Dispute with Erasmus of Rotterdam. New York: Oxford University Press, 1999. 244

Werbeck, Wilfrid. "Martin Luthers Widmungsvorrede zu "De votis monasticis." Luther 62 (1991): 78-89.

Wesseling, Ari. "Are the Dutch Uncivilized? Erasmus on the Batavians and his National Identity." Erasmus of Rotterdam Society Yearbook 13 (1993): 68-102.

—. '"Or Else I Become a Gaul': a Note on Erasmus and the German Reformation." Erasmus of Rotterdam Society Yearbook 15 (1995): 96-8.

Wiegand, Hermann. "Phoebea sodalitas nostra. Die sodalitas litteraria Rhenana. - Probleme, Fakten und Plausibilitaten." Pirckheimer Jahrbuch 12 (1997): 187-209.

Wieland, Christian. "Universitas als Sodalitas. Uberlegungen zu einer Religionsgeschichte der mittelalterlichen und fruhneuzeitlichen Universitat." Saeculum 47 (1996): 120-135.

Winterberg, Hans. Die Schiller von Ulrich Zasius. Stuttgart: W. Kohlammer, 1961.

Woods-Marsden, Joanna. Renaissance Self-Portraiture: The Visual Construction of Identity and the Social Status of the Artist. New Haven and London: Yale University Press, cl998.

Worstbrock, Franz Josef, ed. Der Brief im Zeitalter der Renaissance. Weinheim: Acta Humaniora, 1983.

Wotschke, Theodor. "Paul Ebers markischer Freundeskreis." Archivfur Reformationsgeschichte 28 (1931): 242-59.

—. "Paul Ebers markischer Freundeskreis." Archivfur Reformationsgeschichte 29 (1932): 18-34.

Zimmer, Eric. "Jewish and Christian Hebraist Collaboration in Sixteenth Century Germany." The Jewish Quarterly Review 70 (1980): 69-88.

Zinberg, Israel. A History of Jewish Literature. Translated by Bernard Martin. Cincinnati: Hebrew Union College Press; New York: Ktav Publishing House, Inc., 1975.