28 On the life of Rudolf Agricola (1539) CR XI, 438–46
28 On the life of Rudolf Agricola (1539)
CR XI, 438–46
Oration on the life of Rudolf Agricola, of Frisia, given in the month of July by Johann Sachs of Holstein, when he conferred the title of Master on some worthy and erudite young men, at the University of Wittenberg1
It is most profitable for us to understand correctly the kind of life in which we abide, and the obligation given to us by divine providence, that is, the preservation and propagation of the true teaching about religion and other worthy things. For even though other ranks and orders of life have more magnificence, nevertheless, if we judge truly, the schools have the greatest merit. The realms and all states should protect them in particular. For, since men are made for the purpose that knowledge of God may shine in this world, and since civil society is established by divine providence so that there would be assemblies of teachers and students, and knowledge of God be kindled and spread wide, it is sufficiently clear that it is the highest duty of all rulers to preserve the Church and the schools. Consider, I entreat you, how majestic and venerable the congregations of the angels are. The assemblies of scholars must be their images on Earth; this is certainly an obligation and a duty. They should in the same way profess what the angels sing: ‘Glory to God in the highest, and peace on Earth, and joy to men.’ Thus the schools must worship God and propagate the teaching that is useful for the peace and harmony of the Church, and also what brings about heavenly joy for men. If we consider this great dignity of our obligation, and ponder it in our minds, we shall both love studies and the schools more, and shall be greatly delighted by these scholarly rites and assemblies. If there is anyone who is not moved by so weighty a reason to love schools, then ‘the hard Caucasus, bristling with rocks, has brought him forth, and the Hyrcanean tigers suckled him’ [Virgil, Aeneid IV.366f]. Therefore it behoves us to preserve this custom of graduation, which we recognise as an advantage to the order of learning.
Since it is the custom to have an oration on studies on this occasion, and others who have more authority often show either which road is to be taken,
1 For a comparison with other lives of Agricola, see James Michael Weiss, ‘The Six Lives of Rudolph Agricola: Forms and Functions of the Humanist Biography’, Humanistica Lovaniensia, 30 (1981), 19–39.
or admonish you to strive for the knowledge of the best arts, I have decided to speak about the life of Rudolf Agricola, as far as I could examine it. For good examples have great power, and good dispositions are most greatly roused and kindled by the consideration and admiration of virtue in excellent men. Furthermore, the life-stories of learned men shape the judgement of the young on many things. It is well known that when Rudolf first improved the style of speech and dialectic in Germany, and showed a better method of learning, students were admonished in a useful way by many of his utterances and discussions. Even though there is no one who does not love Rudolf's name for his erudition and merits, nevertheless a private sense of duty impels me to speak about him. For my home is not only near Friesland, but also a colony of the Frisians, which even today retains the name Frisia Minor in Holstein, and in the ruling of the state it preserves, not without merit, the impartiality of the ancient law. Therefore I judge that the praise of Rudolf in some way also pertains to my fellow-citizens, and since that is the case, I hope that you will approve of my decision to speak about Rudolf's life-story – although I myself also wish that it were gathered together more richly by others who have lived among those who knew Rudolf's life and study better. We have gathered little, taken partly from his own writings, and partly from those who remember the discussions of the old men who were familiar with Rudolf at the University of Heidelberg.2 And I have decided not to give a eulogy, for, since he achieved great fame by his eloquence, which can be judged from his writings, he does not need praise, especially not that of one who is not eloquent. I weave only a historical account, in which I truly enumerate what I inquired about his life, morals and opinions, and I shall cite most eminent witnesses. Furthermore, this mentioning of studies and opinions is no less profitable for students than it is for a warrior to know the stratagems and counsels of ancient leaders. Therefore I now come to the life-story.
Rudolf Agricola was born in Friesland, on a farm not far from the town of Groningen, of honest parents whose means were not bad for the standards there. Therefore they were able to supply their children generously with funds for studying. Since I have not heard anything about his studies in his early childhood, I did not think that I needed to invent anything. No one can achieve outstanding virtue without great power of intellect and some
2 Melanchthon was a student at Heidelberg and probably heard about Agricola from the latter's friends and colleagues there: see Quirinus Breen, ‘Melanchthon's sources for a Life of Agricola: the Heidelberg Memories and the Writings’, Archiv für Reformationsgeschichte 52 (1961), 49–74.
enthusiasm, and since this is a very sharp goad to good dispositions, without doubt Rudolf grasped the first elements of the arts quickly, as it is said about heroic nature: ‘Before his years he achieved courage and manly concern.’ For from his writings and counsels, too, the power and ardour of his intellect are evident.
When the Germans used a most corrupted kind of speech, and there was such ignorance of letters that our people could not even conjecture what it meant to speak correctly, while, on the contrary, even absurdity was admired, Rudolf alone first began to perceive these faults with his ears and his mind, and to desire a better manner of speech. This was the sign of an extraordinary sagacity – of the powers of intellect and of knowledge, because he fashioned a kind of speech that was pure, magnificent, sonorous, without awkwardness, and also appropriate to the weight and seriousness of the subject-matter. Nor was it only sagacity, but also a certain loftiness of mind and an admirable avidity to learn, because, having some means, he travelled to Italy in order to search for a better kind of teaching. If I am about to say much in praise of his intellect, I could also expand this by a commendation of my home country. For just as Friesland once flourished by the greatness of its exploits, so now, too, it brings forth intellects that are by no means base, but are suitable for letters as well as for the guidance of great things. As it seems to me, they are not only sagacious and rational, but also endowed with noble-mindedness and an extraordinary loftiness of mind. But, as I said, Rudolf's genius can be judged from his writings.
I hear that he first shook off his inexperience at Louvain, where, when he had become acquainted with some Frenchmen, he immediately studied French with them – either in order to avoid the carousing of the Germans, or because the French were more erudite. When he had quickly grasped what is taught in the schools on dialectic and philosophy, he himself used to search for better things in his mind and, hiding himself in libraries, he read good writers following his own counsel, debating much, in the meantime, with the more learned about more accomplished philosophy. But he had heard that the study of Greek and Latin was being renewed in Italy at the time. For after the fall of Byzantium many Greeks, driven from their country, came to Italy, and they renewed philosophy and eloquence there; after the collapse of the Roman Empire the study of these had utterly abated in Italy. He understood that philosophy could not be grasped without the Greek language. Therefore he decided to journey to Italy in order
to improve the style of speech by the fellowship and examples of eloquent men, and to get to know the sources of philosophy.
He came to Ferrara, where at the time the study of philosophy and eloquence flourished more than at the other Italian universities. For Ercole, the Duke of Ferrara, perceived that concern for assisting matters of erudition belonged to a good ruler's duty, and he himself enjoyed the writings of learned men. Theodorus Gaza was in Ferrara, who surpassed all the Greeks who were in Italy then in erudition and eloquence. Guarini taught Greek and Latin there, a most diligent man. The poets Strozzi were there, with whom Rudolf appears to have been well acquainted.3 The writings of mathematicians who then lived at Ercole's court also survive. In short, all the arts were taught most successfully there. What more desirable thing could happen to an intelligent man, who was aflame with the true love of knowledge and was avid to learn, than to live in such an assembly of learned men? There he contended with Guarini in prose, in verse with the Strozzis, and he debated about philosophy with Theodorus Gaza and the other excellent men. He heard teachers of all the arts. Since he trained his intellect equally by a variety of knowledge, and exerted himself in eloquence, he turned the mouths and eyes of all of Italy towards himself. With great success he discussed and explained authors of either language in that university, and he gave orations to the great approval of the learned.
Furthermore, it was a great success for a German to give satisfaction to the Italians – who judge in a capricious and haughty way – not only in erudition and manner of speech, but also in beauty of delivery. I do not believe that the Italians thought so highly of any German before him that they listened with admiration to him teaching in public, and were equally satisfied with his erudition, his manner of speech and his delivery. I hear that Erasmus was often asked in Italy to give an example of his erudition and eloquence by giving a public lecture. However, he could never be prevailed upon to do his friends' will in this matter, for fear that the Italians would ridicule a German's pronunciation. And Erasmus often extolled Rudolf's nature, which he asserted was capable of imitating the Italian beauty without absurdities.4 Indeed, musical natures are more talented for pronunciation
3 Agricola was organist to the court of Duke Ercole I d'Este (1471–1505) at Ferrara. Agricola could not have met Theodore Gaza (1400–76) at Ferrara, since the latter left by 1450. Here, Melanchthon is probably thinking of the Strozzi poets, Titus and Ercole, but Agricola only knew Titus. Battista Guarinus (1434–1513) succeeded his father, the humanist Guarino Veronese, at Ferrara.
4 For Erasmus' interest in Agricola, see Lisa Jardine, Erasmus, Man of Letters (Princeton, 1993), pp.83–98.
and delivery than others. It is well known that Rudolf excelled in music to such an extent that he composed songs; indeed, that he was very pleasing to the Italians, because he sometimes played the lute at banquets of learned men.
One can judge how much persistence he had from the fact that he copied all of Quintilian with his own hand. He himself indicates that while in Italy he read Pliny's Natural History diligently, perhaps spurred by the opportunity of inquiring into plants more easily there. Without doubt he saw Aristotle and Theophrastus in the translation by Gaza, and when he read those he decided that he needed to add Pliny, in order to observe from where Gaza had taken the Latin names. This comparison was most profitable to him for increasing both his knowledge of things and his wealth of words. Then, when he had improved himself among most learned men, he finally returned to his home-country, where he did not stay for long.
Some time after his return he was invited to Heidelberg by Dalberg, Bishop of Worms, and Pleninger, whom he calls Pliny.5 For in Italy Rudolf had been very well acquainted with them, and later they both came to the court of the Count Palatine Philip, who was noble, and not ignorant of letters, and endowed with great affability, and wanted a court adorned with learned men. The chancellor Dalberg was then made Bishop of Worms. He called Rudolf to Heidelberg, either in order to train himself to write correctly by his company, or in order that the young might have someone to fashion their style. He made use of Dalberg's association as long as he lived. And although he was free to be idle, he nevertheless publicly taught Greek and Latin at the university for the benefit of the young. Nor did he consider it too dishonourable for himself to teach like a courtier – as, now, many who are only lightly imbued with erudition shrink from teaching; such is the arrogance of this most perverted century. He often undertook debates in all disciplines. In philosophy he corrected the absurd opinions of the Scholastics. There he also wrote books on dialectic, in order to cleanse the art, and by leading it from the dark into the light and into view, to show its use. Old men at Heidelberg tell that his morals were honourable and chaste, and most alien to spite, malevolence and wantonness. He did not have the habit of provoking the capricious by inopportune
5 Johann yon Dalberg (1455–1503) became the Bishop of Worms in 1482. He was highly esteemed by Philip, the Elector Palatine, and supported humanism. Through his efforts Agricola was called to the University of Heidelberg, of which Dalberg was chancellor. For Dietrich (d. 1520) and Johann yon Pleningen (d. 1506), see Breen, ‘Melanchthon's Sources’, p. 53, and for Johann yon Pleningen's biography of Agricola, see Weiss, ‘Six Lives of Rudolf Agricola’, pp. 34–7.
reprimands, so that he would not sow the seeds of strife in the school, and he often said that a guest had to conceal many things, as the Greek verse says: ‘A stranger should keep silent rather than brawl’ (Xenon de sigan kreitton ē kekragenai). He was often consulted by the learned, both in philosophy and in the other arts. He translated much of Aristotle and interpreted it for those who examined his opinions. At the time no one had seen Aristotle's books on animals. Thus his service was most agreeable to the learned, when at some time he quoted a remarkable passage from it; when they discussed what Aristotle thought of the immortality of the human soul, this sentence, taken from the book On the Generation of Animals, was received with great astonishment: ‘the mind is added from outside; it is not born from the matter of the body’. Sometimes he imparted to the students something from Aratus about the position, rising and setting of the stars.6
He was not without service to the teachers of other disciplines. By chance a debate occurred between theologians and lawyers about the saying: ‘He who does not serve the canons of the synods serves the Gospel in vain.’ While some twisted this in order to strengthen superstition in ceremonies, and others lamented that the saying (to rhēton) was too hard and said that it had to be mitigated by some interpretation, Rudolf said that in general in the interpretation of the law a knowledge of history and antiquity was very profitable. In particular, all needed to know the history of the Church and its past disputes, in which an interpretation of old sayings could often be found. The ancient synods, he said, called ‘canons’ the points of doctrine decided upon in the synods only, and not instructions about ceremonies, and there was no doubt that the former was the meaning of this saying, but that it was later distorted by error. It is true that the Gospel is not served by those who spurn the decrees against the Samosatene, or Arius, or the deeds of the Macedonians;7 for the most ancient synods were called together because of conflicts of dogma, and not because of increasing ceremonies. What an unworthy utterance would it be to say that faith in Christ is useless and inane without the observation of all human rites? Or that the light and eternal life in the mind would be extinguished if some ridiculous ceremony were neglected? He added that such rites could often be omitted without any sin. By this very skilful interpretation he gave satisfaction to all.
6 Aratus, ancient Greek poet and author of the poem, Phaenomena.
7 The Samosatene are Paul of Samosata and his followers: see note 3 oration 23, p. 185. Arius (c. 250–336) put forth a heretical view that denied the divinity of Christ. Macedonians are the followers of Macedonius (d. 362), who defended a semi-Arian view.
Often he also explained, to those who asked him, what could be sought from history in civil law, such as the passage about interests. In the same way, he explained what was an undefended action (erēmē dikē) [Thucydides, History, VI.61], and then what were the degrees of ancient Roman trials. As for what he wished for in theology, I remember that Josquin of Groningen,8 an old man of outstanding piety and seriousness, wrote that in his youth he was present at the sermons of Rudolf and Wessel,9 in which they lamented the darkness of the Church, and reproved the profanation of the mass and of celibacy. In the same way they also discussed the justice of faith, why it is that Paul repeats so many times that men are justified through faith and not through deeds. Josquin wrote that they openly rejected the belief of the monks which claims that men are just through works. He also writes that they thought, with regard to human traditions, that those are mistaken who devise for themselves the esteem of veneration, and judge that they cannot be violated. I am not inventing any of this, for Josquin wrote these things almost literally.
And it is sufficiently credible that Agricola debated assiduously about Christian doctrine, in particular since he was acquainted with Wessel, who had the highest intellect, to which he added the greatest erudition in all disciplines, as well as the knowledge of Greek and Hebrew. In addition to that he was experienced in religious disputes. Expelled from Paris for having reproached superstitions, he came to Basle; there they called him Basil of Groningen instead of Wessel. Capnio relates that at the same time he taught theology, Greek and Hebrew to the students, if any wanted to study with him.10 When he had returned to Belgium from there, Rudolf often looked more like an older man though he was younger, but more learned in Latin and Greek, and glowing with enthusiasm for Christian doctrine. He himself often proclaimed that he was to devote what years he had left to the Holy Scriptures; if he had lived longer, he would without doubt have accomplished outstanding work for the Church. However, the studies he actually made were also profitable to the Church, because he
8 Goswin van Halen (c. 1477–1530) was a famulus to Wessel Gansfort and studied under Alexander Hegius, both of whom were close friends of Agricola; see Weiss, ‘Six Lives of Rudolph Agricola’, pp. 24–7.
9 Wessel Gansfort (1419–89), born in Groningen, was accomplished in Latin, Greek and Hebrew. After taking his BA and MA at the University of Cologne, he travelled and stayed in Louvain, Paris, Cologne, Heidelberg, Zwolle, Rome, Venice and Paris. During his travels he met several humanists, including Agricola and Alexander Hegius.
10 For Johann Reuchlin (1454/5–1522), see note 8 oration 4, p. 35. He arrived in Heidelberg only after Agricola's death, however.
called back our men to a better method of learning. That service is not to be rated lightly. But I return to the story of his life.
When he lived in Heidelberg in such a way that he was most dear to all those who were learned and good, he not only came to be known to the Duke Palatine Philip, but the prince also enjoyed his company, and often summoned him to weighty deliberations. When, as happened, ancient empires were mentioned, and Rudolf called to mind now Greek, now Roman, history, the prince commanded him to translate many things, not only from the histories, but also from the poets. He asked him to put together for him a complete sequence of four monarchies, in order that he could see the order of things better, and consider their growth and changes, and the causes of these; for these examples in particular can instruct princes in many things. Therefore Rudolf put together a most learned epitome from the Bible and Herodotus, about the empire of the Assyrians and the Persians, about the civic dissensions of the Greek cities, from Thucydides and Xenophon, and about Philip and Alexander and the latter's successors, from Diodorus and Polybius. Then he selected some most excellent passages from Roman history. Finally he gathered the principal facts about the German empire. In this work he not only took pains to narrate these great things clearly, but also to instruct the prince about many things, in passing, as he was reading it; it was manifest in this matter that he excelled not only in erudition, but also in civic sagacity. However, when his age had advanced, and he had already begun theological lucubrations, not long after his fortieth year, he was released from human concerns. I hope that immortal joy has been given to him, since we read that he thought piously about Christ, and devoted his studies to the glory of God, and we hear that his conduct was pious and honourable. There you have the story of Rudolf's life.
Now it remains for you to preserve the memory of this great man gratefully. Consider what an ornament he was for Germany, and what a service he has done for erudition. For he was the first in Germany to correct the manner of speech, and he kindled the study of Latin and Greek; therefore we all owe him much. Also, admonished by his examples and sayings, the young should learn to judge more sagaciously on studies, and imitate his diligence and application, of which weaker intellects have much more need than those heroic natures, for whom many things come to pass, so to speak, without effort (anērota). They should also learn to heed his counsel in studying, that is, that he did not separate arts joined together by nature, but
in either kind he strove with the greatest effort of his mind and intellect, and I encourage you all, as much as I can, to do so as well. And for that purpose the scholarly exercises have been established, so that we may strive in either kind, as we need to do in order to be of use for the Church and the state. For neither can knowledge of things be obtained in the right way without practice in speaking, nor are those who are without the knowledge of things suitable for expounding serious matters. Furthermore, if we do our duty diligently, God will honour us with rewards: God will preserve the Church as well as the schools, which are an important part of the Church, even though they are neglected by those who are in charge, who certainly go far astray. Because of the Church and the schools they themselves and the states are protected. Therefore they in turn should be thanking us; if they do not do so, God will punish them, and will nevertheless show some haven to the Church, the schools and our rank, as he promised that he would not abandon those who strive to propagate and honour knowledge useful to the Church. I have spoken.