[23] Erasmus of Rotterdam and the Dissemination of His Writings

Erasmus of Rotterdam and the

Dissemination of His Writings

in German (1519-1536)

by HEINZ HOLECZEK I. THEMEAND DEVELOPMENT

the title of this essay should imply that the Reformation period had Ito F some extent been influenced by the theme "Erasmus in German," no evidence can be found in the German literature on humanism and the Reformation. On the contrary, it seems to be universally acknowledged that Erasmus wrote exclusively in the classical tongues and that it was therefore hard to believe that his writings could have been of much importance in any one vernacular tongue, being, as they were, particu- larly addressed to the learned. That the Prince of Humanists might also have written for the common man is an uncharted thought. Neither is it an obvious one since, in literary production, we are inclined to think in terms of authorship rather than impact. Indeed, the occasional references in some studies to the effect that English or German versions existed of this or that Erasmus text had, in the initial stages of my work, streng- thened rather than lessened my own impression that his influence in the vernacular was negligible. This seemed to be borne out by the fact that not one German study on this subject could be found. Nor, apparently, is there a bibliography of the translations of the works of Erasmus that 2 were made during his lifetime.

' See, for example, "Newald-de Boor," the standard history of German literature (Hans Rupprich, Die deutscheLiteratur vom späten Mittelalter bis zum Barock[Munich: 1970-1973]); cf. also Hans Rupprich, "Erasmus von Rotterdam. Versucheines Wesensbildesim Rahmen einer Geschichte der deutschen Literatur," FestgabeF. Weinhandl(Berlin: 1974), 359-374. As biographicalexamples see Richard Newald, ErasmusRoterodamus (Freiburg: 1947),Karl August Meissinger, Erasmusvon Rotterdam(Berlin: 1948), and Karl August Meissinger, Erasmusund die öJfèntlicheMeinung (Bad W örishofen:1948). 2 The BibliothecaBelgica of F. van der Haeghen (Ghent: 1897-1915) is incomplete. Irmgard Bezzel's Erasmusdruckedes 16. Jahrhundertsin bayrischenBibliotheken: Ein bibliog- raphischesVerzeichnis (Stuttgart: 1979)contains only about two thirds of the known German Erasmus editions and is, thus, not a complete bibliography. Of Erasmus' translators only " Leo Jud is bibliographicallyaccessible (Irmgard Bezzel, "Leo Jud als Erasmusubersetzer,"

[23] 24

German scholarship thus demonstrates a singular lack of interest in this question. The situation is, however, somewhat better in the literature of other countries. In regard to various national languages, scholars have raised questions concerning Erasmus' knowledge of the language, his affinity to the individual national literatures, and the impact of his writings on them. The most rewarding approach thus far has been the question of his influence on individual national literatures. In England, as in France and Spain, it is taken for granted that an early version of the Enchiridion militis christianae, for instance, belongs to English literature and is, therefore, a teaching subject. This is, for certain reasons, not so in Germany: while the classical authors or, say, Shakespeare's influence on German drama are subjects widely treated here, the possibility of Eras- mus' influence on German literature is reserved to the study of a small humanist elite, educated in Latin. German historians, moreover, perceive the sixteenth century largely in the context of a reformation motivated by theological dogma. Diffuse phenomena, such as the extensive prop- agation of Erasmus' writings in the vernacular, merely create confusion. It is not my purpose here to review scholarship in various European countries, but there are two scholars whose works relate closely to our own question: Marcel Bataillon3 who traced and summarized the fun- damental influence of Erasmus on Spain-and thereby encouraged a number of further studies on the subject-and Margaret Mann Phillips who, in a more general essay with the deliberately provocative title "Erasmus and Propaganda," rightly maintains that "few single authors can have been as much translated and read as Erasmus. "4 But her study concerned only France and England. Moreover, since her conclusion has not yet been tested for the German-speaking region, it is not surprising that August Ruegg opines that Erasmus' influence was greater in Spain

DeutscheVierteljahresschri_ft fiir Literatur- und Geistesgeschichte,49 [1975], 628-644). Hans Volz, "Bibliographie der im 16. Jahrhundert erschienenen Schriften Georg Spalatins," Zeitschrift fiirBibliothekswesen und Bibliographie 5 (1958),83-119, is too narrow and does not list Spalatin's anonymous Erasmus translations. 3 Marcel Bataillon, Erasmoy Espana (Mexico City: 1966). 4 Margaret Mann Phillips, "Erasmus and Propaganda: A Study of Erasmus in English and French," ModernLanguage Quarterly 37 (1942),1-17. See also Margaret Mann Phillips Erasmeet des debutsde la riform_francaise 1517-1536 (Paris: 1934).