a ees Some Ne ~ oo v Ae eer = pe . a . . . 3 matt Cente ceided ache, Spa es ete aan eh SSraaa nt bs) ‘e rie Seek ed ee ee Poe ore es ste een CEM Pees tga ee RP Division “PNZ 2" es mores a = Py ifs 3 Z . 5 | ~ ' iy 4 it ' ; : ve / é ay iY L > { ©) eM ot 4 7 Ac: oe | > ‘A io) ? = a . ; ta - >| ; ‘ 7) F a , 1 , 4 “<< c=) ‘ P Ps THE LITERATURES OF GREECE AND ISRAEL IN THE RENAISSANCE Paes REN AG Oa . ve a Mii : ne ra P tee ARRAN OF PRINTED f* a ee | Pd ) ry 4 Q fete | on } y INV LU Lous j Wy | ne ~~”! { PAY The Literatures of Greece and Israel in the Renaissance By Rev. Francis B. Denio, D. D. (Address delivered before Bangor Theological Seminary by Rev. Francis B. Denio, D. D., professor emeritus. ) 1925 THE STRATFORD COMPANY, Publishers Boston, MAssACHUSETTS Copyright FRANOIS B. DENIO Printed in the United States of America ee af | TEM Ay Wea ve a Aetuahl eh ON i ‘ve 4 To THE Memory oF My WIFE WHO DURING FORTY-FIVE YEARS STRENGTHENED ME WITH LOVE AND WISE COUNSEL Fe Gey NEA AS HY) Nate ie Rath The Literatures of Greece and Israel in the Renaissance HE theme proposed for consideration con- cerns a section of that great chapter in European history known as the Renaissance. This chapter of history may be designated as the three centuries beginning with the year 1350. It may be described in a general way as due to the renewal of intellectual life in the western part of the old Roman empire. Much of this region was once a part of the home of the old Graeco-Roman civilization. ‘The barbarian invasions into Italy, France, Spain, and England had driven learning and letters into the monasteries and ecclesiastical foundations. The learning cherished in these places was chiefly that which was valued for monkish or the priestly life, while the larger frac- tion of the life of letters, both worthy and un- worthy, of ancient culture was neglected. After the barbarian migrations had ceased, and affairs in western Europe began to take on a more settled form, intellectual activity became a larger [1] The Literatures of Greece and Israel in the Renaissance factor in human life. About the close of the eighth century, a little before the year 800 A. D., Charlemagne initiated an intellectual foundation. The tradition of that work may have been main- tained during the anarchy of the tenth century. In the eleventh century indications appear of the coming of the university of Paris. By the year 1200 there were three great centers of intellectual activity in Europe; in Paris for theology, in Bologna for law, and in Salerno for medicine. At that date neither Oxford nor Cambridge had be- come in any sense a rival of Paris, though they were beginning to be seats of learning. By the year 1350 the intellectual activity of Europe had brought into existence eleven univer- sities in Italy, seven in France, four in Spain, one in Portugal, two in England, and one on the con- tinent east of the Rhine, at Prague in Bohemia. Why speak of a revival of learning beginning about 1350 when there was already so great in- tellectual activity? It is for the reason that about this date new elements became active in the life of western Europe, which were called the New Learning, and which within the next three hundred years largely revolutionized the educa- [2] The Literatures of Greece and Israel in the Renaissance tional systems of western Europe. This introduc- tion of the new learning to western Europe is called the Revival of Learning. Another name which is often more appropriate is the Revival of Letters. ‘This will sometimes be used by prefer- ence. These three centuries called the Renaissance saw men bestirring themselves vigorously in many directions, in art, in the discovery of new worlds, in that discovery of the physical world the result of which is named science. These and many other developments in social and political life are a part of the Renaissance. But these activities are no part of our present theme. Rather we have to do with the discovery of an old world, and of a for- gotten civilization by mastering the literature of that old world. This is more exactly what is meant by the revival of learning, or the revival of letters. Or, in other words, it was “‘the quick- ening of human intelligence by renewed acquaint- ance with the literature, the philosophy, the civ- ilization of classical antiquity.” It was the recovery of the classical Latin, Greek and Hebrew literatures. Our theme is the recovery of the Greek and Hebrew literatures, [3] The Literatures of Greece and Israel in the Renaissance and the meaning of that recovery for the world. This recovery began in Italy and continued there until toward the year 1500 when the progress of letters crossed the Alps and speedily mastered and revolutionized the educational systems of France, Germany and England. This movement was the outcome of centuries of history, some fea- tures of which should be called to mind. In order to understand the beginning of the movement, its progress and the conditions of its success, it is necessary to recognize the place the Latin language had in the educational life of west- ern Europe, and the place the Latin classics had in the beginning of this movement. Latin was the language of the church in west- ern Europe, and it had been from the beginning. Therefore it was the language of the schools in monasteries and episcopal foundations, and con- - sequently it came to be the language of the uni- versities. In short it was the universal language of learning in western Europe. It was not a cul- tured Latin. Cicero would have regarded it as a degenerate and barbarous speech. There was little desire in the church to culti- vate a classical standard of speech. For centuries [4] The Literatures of Greece and Israel in the Renaissance ecclesiastics had looked with suspicion on any cul- tural study of classical Latin literature unless it was directly for ecclesiastical ends. Gregory the Great, pope 590-604, directly antagonized study of Latin grammar for securing correctness of speech and elegance of expression. Occasionally a monk or a priest found pleasure in classical Latin, but the general feeling was that such pleas- ure was a forbidden fruit. The revival of learn- ing began with an interest in Latin classics which was too mighty for ecclesiastics to control. During all the centuries of darkness and dis- order it had been possible both to find access to classical Latin literature and to read it. On the other hand the knowledge which western Europe had of Greek literature had long vanished. In- deed it was held to be the language of heretics and to contain writings full of error and therefore it was to be avoided. Once Latin literature, and, in Italy, Greek lit- erature had occupied a place of power. ‘They had lost it because of their paganism more than for other reasons. ‘These literatures contained ideals with which Christianity could never be in harmony. Indeed some of the more polished [5] The Literatures of Greece and Israel in the Renaissance poets, especially those of Rome, so glorified the flesh that a clean-minded person can feel only dis- gust with their writings. Poetry, at its best, was saturated with polytheism. ‘The representations of the deities in Homer were such that Plato would have his poems excluded from his ideal re- public. Moreover Christianity had been compelled to measure weapons with these literatures. In the struggle to establish the reasonableness of its faith the church had passed a test more severe than the persecutions of the empire. ‘The writ- ings of the early Christians which have come down to us show that their struggle was against ~ greater intellectual odds than their successors have ever known. Symonds says of this struggle: ‘“[he church of the early Christian centuries while battling with paganism recognized her deadliest foe in litera- ture. Not only were the Greek and Latin mas- terpieces the stronghold of a mythology that had to be erased from the popular mind; not only was their morality antagonistic to Christian ethics; in addition to these grounds for hatred and distrust, the classics idealised a form of human life which [6] The Literatures of Greece and Israel in the Renaissance the new faith regarded as worthless. What was culture in comparison with a human soul? Why should time be spent on the dreams of poets, when every minute might well be spent in pondering the gospels? What was the use of making this life refined and agreeable by study when it formed but an insignificant prelude to an eternity wherein mundane learning would be valueless?” (Revival om Leanning; p..59:) Here is the chief reason why the Latin classics were neglected and the Greek classics forgotten. Not absolutely forgotten, for scattered here and there through the dark centuries and the middle ages were scholars who had a sense that in Greek could be found a valuable helper to a more per- fect knowledge of the Bible; and once in a while such a scholar in some way attained a modest knowledge of the language. Hebrew was a language even more unknown than Greek. Its knowledge was confined to the Jews. Once in a while a Christian scholar had a feeling that Hebrew could be of use in biblical learning. Such a scholar was rare. [7] The Literatures of Greece and Israel in the Renaissance Such in brief was the condition in the Middle Ages of the knowledge of the Latin and Greek classics and of the Hebrew language. As has been said the revival of letters came with the recovery of the Latin and Greek classics. It began in Italy, and it began with the Latin lit- erature which was at hand and which could be read by every one who was at all lettered. ‘This was wholly normal. For any revival of letters as a whole the Latin classics were a natural be- ginning, an easy stepping stone. For Italy, how- ever, it was more than a stepping stone, and there it was regarded more highly than among the other peoples who shared in the great move- ment. As this fact limited somewhat the influence of the Greek classics in the revival of letters in Italy, the reasons for it deserve notice. Classical Latin had Rome for its home, and the Italian people through the Middle Ages regarded them- selves as heirs to all the greatness that Rome once had. They looked on themselves as more than the custodians of Rome’s literature. It was their mission to be its continuators. Although the one great poet of the Middle Ages, their [8] The Literatures of Greece and Israel in the Renaissance Dante, had written his masterpiece in the lan- guage spoken by the Italian people, the genera- tions immediately following despised it because it was not in Latin. They were obsessed with the idea that they might recover the past greatness of Rome if they should revive the ancient lan- guage, renew its literary life, its institutions and social life. ‘“The beginners in the humanistic movement were conscious that what separated them more than anything else from their Roman ancestors was want of elegance of diction.” (Symonds id., p. 525.) The person who most fully represented this devotion to the Latin classics and who gave di- rection to its subsequent development was Petrarch, sometimes called the first modern man, and better, the first of the humanists, a term soon to be noticed. The life of Petrarch began in 1304 and continued until 1374. The date given above for the beginning of the Renaissance falls within his life, and at a point when he was at the height of his influence. In 1341 when he was 37 years old he was crowned poet laureate and was ac- knowledged to have earned his laurel crown “chiefly by his skill in Latin writing and by his ; [9] The Literatures of Greece and Israel in the Renaissance zeal for the literature of the ancient Romans.” The awakening sense of the value of literature was accompanied by a reaction against the limita- tions of the intellectual life as found in the uni- versities then in existence, and in ecclesiastical foundations. ‘That life was dominated by scho- lasticism, a tone of mind both unliterary and anti- literary. Scholasticism addressed itself to that side of the intellect which is manifested in the processes of deductive logic. When it dealt with Scripture it deduced the meaning of Scripture according to the requirements of its “fourfold” meaning, the historical, figurative, allegorical and mystical senses. When outside the control of the specific first principles of deductive logic there were no safeguards against the wildest fancies. The genuine historical spirit was unknown. The realm of literature includes regions that are unknown to scholasticism. Literature con- cerns the world and whatever is of interest to men. Its readers learn to see life through the eyes of other persons. Thus they can absorb a vivid sense of truth, and even of reality, and so learn more of the realities of life in their breadth. Literature furnishes diversion from the wear and [10] The Literatures of Greece and Israel in the Renaissance fret of life; it quickens insight into human char- acter and into the meaning of life; it helps to gain increased sympathy for men in their toil and suf- fering, and in their aspirations for noble living; it is stimulus for thought, and yet more for im- agination; it kindles worthy emotions and offers inspiration for worthy conduct; it offers visions of noble ideals; it may impart courage for the hard and depressing experiences in life; and it can help men in their questionings concerning the problems of life and destiny. Whether or not Greek literature did all these things it had more to offer than was found in the classic Latin literature. Literature has its power because it is composed of writings which concern experiences universal to men, which touch their permanent interests, which are characterized by insight into their vital interests, which are sincere and truthful expres- sions of reality and which come close to the hearts of men and lay hold of them by reason of the per- vasive energy of the imagination. Scholasticism provides no such food for the souls of men. Beside writings such as these the productions of scholasticism were not literature. The souls [11] The Literatures of Greece and Israel in the Renaissance of men,crave mightily for ministry such as litera- ture offers. The generation of Petrarch found something of this craving met in Latin literature, and in the nascent Italian literature. They pro- claimed the classic Latin literature as the literae humaniores, letters more humane than scholastic- ism produces, hence they were called Humanists. The classics have not ceased to be called the Humanities. Petrarch and his companions believed firmly that the classic Latin writings were the finest ever produced, and many continued in this obses- sion for more than a century after the death of Petrarch; as for example a leading Roman hu- manist then refused to learn Greek lest injury should come to his Latin style of which he was vain. Another advised against the reading of the Latin Vulgate translation of the Bible, lest this too should injure one’s Latin style. Nevertheless Petrarch and others came to be- lieve that the Greek literature contained some- thing which would be of value to them. In fact their study of the Latin authors pointed them in that direction, especially Horace and Cicero. The [12] The Literatures of Greece and Israel in the Renaissance former enjoined the sons of Piso if they would write poetry: vos exemplaria Graeca nocturna versate manu, versate diurna. ‘Make Greece your model when you write And turn her volumes over day and night.” —(Conington’s trans.) Similar sentiments are found many times in Latin authors. Yet this precept could not be car- ried into practice until one had learned Greek. Those first humanists neither knew Greek nor had they opportunity to learn it. For a few de- cades they sought vainly for some one to open the door of knowledge to them. The world with the knowledge of Greek letters lay east of the Adria- tic Sea. Its chief center was Constantinople, the capital of the Eastern Empire. For centuries Greek and Roman Christians had held each other as excommunicated heretics. The Greek language was believed to be full of heretical writings. The very letters of the Greek alphabet were regarded with suspicion. It is not at all certain that in Petrarch’s time a single person lived in Italy who had the knowl- [13] The Literatures of Greece and Israel in the Renaissance edge and capacity to teach the text of a classical Greek author. After various ineffectual attempts to secure in- struction in Greek letters for Italy, Manuel Chrysoloras of Constantinople was induced in 1396 to come to Florence and teach in the uni- versity of that city. His work was the beginning of the modern teaching of Greek in western Europe. The university of Florence — what does the word university now suggest to you? For one thing it suggests a library with thousands of printed volumes, and sometimes scores or even hundreds of manuscripts. It also suggests text books possessed by students for study. here was nothing of the sort for the study of Greek in the Florence of 1396. In fact, we have no reason to suppose that a single copy of any Greek classic was owned in Florence. A school for the study of languages—what does that now presuppose? textbooks of elemen- tary lessons, grammars and dictionaries as well as the texts of the classics to read. So far as our knowledge goes we must believe that not one of these things existed for the classroom of Manuel [14] The Literatures of Greece and Israel in the Renaissance Chrysoloras when he began his four years of teaching in Florence from 1396 to 1400. How the work was carried on we must judge from a description of the work of a professor of rhetoric, as the teacher of Latin classics was styled. “Tn picturing to ourselves the method pursued by the humanists in the instruction of their classes, we must divest our minds of all associa- tions with the practice of modern professors. Very few of the students whom the master saw ~ before him, possessed more than meager portions of the texts of Virgil or of Cicero; they had no notes, grammars, lexicons or dictionaries of an- tiquities, or of mythology to help them. It was therefore necessary for the lecturer to dictate quotations, to repeat parallel passages at full length, to explain historical allusions, to analyze the structure of sentences in detail, to provide copious illustrations of grammatical usage, to trace the stages by which a word acquired its meaning in a special context, to command a full vocabulary of synonyms, to give rules for ortho- graphy and to have the whole Pantheon at his fingers’ ends. In addition to this he was expected to comment upon the meaning of his author, to [15] The Literatures of Greece and Israel in the Renaissance interpret his philosophy, to point out the beauties of his style, to introduce appropriate moral dis- quisition on his doctrine, to sketch his biography, and to give some account of his relation to the history of his country and to his predecessors in the field of letters. In short the professor of rhetoric had to be a grammarian, a philologer, and historian, a stylist and a sage in one. He was obliged to pretend at least to an encyclopedic knowledge of the classics and to retain whole vol- umes in his memory. All these requirements, which seem to have been satisfied by such men as Filelfo and Poliziano, made the profession of elo- quence — for so the subject matter of humanism was often called — a very different business from that which occupies a lecturer in the present cen- tury. Scores of students, old and young, with nothing but pen and paper on desks before them, sat patiently recording what the lecturer said. At the end of his discourses on the Georgics or the Verrines, each of them carried away a compendi- ous volume, containing a transcript of the au- thor’s text, together with a miscellaneous mass of notes, critical, explanatory, ethical, aesthetical, historical and biographical. In other words a [16] The Literatures of Greece and Israel in the Renaissance book had been dictated, and as many scores of copies as there were attentive pupils had been made. The language was Latin. No dialect of Italian would have been intelligible to the stu- dents of different nationalities who crowded the lecture room.” (Symonds, Revival of Learning, pp. 124ff.) Chrysoloras prepared a grammar in Greek for his scholars. It was entitled Erotemata, i. e. Questions, or a Catechism, and this was used for more than a generation, either in Greek or in a translation, by the learners of the language. The Erotemata of Chrysoloras did not include a syn- tax. This first came in the grammar of Theodore Gaza in 1445. ‘These grammars had to be dic- tated, as in fact all the instruction must be, text, translation and explanation, thus giving the ele- ments of grammar and dictionary all together with the text. Let us remind ourselves that dur- ing the first generation of this work, the art of printing was yet to be, and it was a full generation after its invention before it came to the aid of the universities. The lecture room of Chrysoloras was crowded with students. Vergerio, a professor in the uni- [17] The Literatures of Greece and Israel in the Renaissance versity of Padua, aged 26 years, resigned his chair in order to go to Florence and attend these lec- tures. After four years in Florence, Chrysoloras taught in other Italian cities. This was the beginning of a century of study of the Greek classics in Italy. Pupils of Chry- soloras became teachers in turn, imparting the in- struction that they had received. The treatment accorded to Chrysoloras attracted other Greeks to Italy that they might share the profit and fame that came to him. Another class of teachers con- sisted of Italian scholars who went to Constan- tinople and there qualified themselves to teach. Noteworthy among these was Guarino of Verona who became professor in the university of Fer- rara and made it so famous that many students were attracted to it from countries beyond the Alps. Still another class of teachers began to appear before 1450 of scholars who had never left Italy, but who had gained their knowledge under the guidance of the teachers previously mentioned. Among these was Vittorino da Feltre who taught in Mantua from 1423 to 1446 in the palace of the Marquis Gonzaga. He is one of the most [18] The Literatures of Greece and Israel in the Renaissance attractive persons of the whole revival of learn- ing. One is tempted to describe him and his work in much detail. It must suffice to say that he taught for the development of the whole person- ality of his pupils, body, mind and spirit in a man- ner that would have pleased Plato as Plato’s mind is revealed in his Republic. As Petrarch is called the first humanist, so Vittorino has been called the first modern schoolmaster. The primary need of a pupil is a competent teacher. How this need was supplied for the teaching of Greek has been shown. His next need is books, texts of the authors, grammars and dictionaries. As already indicated the materials for such books were given by the teachers in their lectures. The books first needed were the texts of the classics. Gradually this need was supplied, and libraries were gathered. At an early stage of the revival of Greek let- ters the text might exist for the pupil only in the memory of the teacher who himself was not al- ways fortunate enough to own a text. Otherwise it existed only in a manuscript, and the manu- scripts of some authors were rare. ‘This scarcity was remedied in part by the purchase of manu- [19] The Literatures of Greece and Israel in the Renaissance / scripts from the East. Agents of Italian patrons of learning ransacked the sources of documents for those of which they had heard. Scholars sought the privilege of copying manuscripts for their own needs. Copying manuscripts became a profession. When the Turks captured Constan- tinople in 1453 Greek scholars took refuge in Italy bringing precious manuscripts with them. Thus it became possible to gather libraries com- posed of manuscripts. Five notable libraries of this sort were gathered in Italy during this cen- tury. Frederick, Duke of Urbino, who died in 1482, six years before any Greek text was printed, gathered a library of 772 manuscripts, of which 604 were Latin, 93 Greek, 73 Hebrew and 2 Italian. It is well to emphasize the fact that these libraries were manuscript books. They were gathered very largely before printing began to aid Greek letters. Even after this beginning for quite a period the wealthy buyers of books de- spised a printed volume in comparison with the manuscript ones. The first Greek author printed and published of which the date is certain was Homer, published in 1488, 92 years after Chryso- [20] The Literatures of Greece and Israel in the Renaissance loras began his work in Florence. Within the next thirty years all the greatest and most vol- uminous Greek authors had been published. First editions of lesser Greek authors continued to be published during the following hundred years. Even now the public occasionally has the sensa- tion of the first publication of such a writing. The first Greek textbook published was a grammar in 1476. ‘Thus it is evident that stu- dents had to copy all grammatical teaching for 80 years, and their texts for at least 92 years. The earliest printed Greek dictionary of which I have learned was printed in 1497, so that for a hundred years Italian pupils had been writing the materials of a dictionary as dictated by their teachers. It is reported, however, that this dic- tionary had existed as a manuscript for 20 years and had been available for copying for 17 years. It was under conditions such as these that the revival of learning ran its course of a hundred years in Italy beginning at Florence in 1396. It gradually spread and increased until before the end of the third quarter of the century it was ab- sorbing a large part of the intellectual life of Italy. [21] The Literatures of Greece and Israel in the Renaissance The pupils were led into the exploration of a world hitherto unknown. To this they were im- pelled, in part, by curiosity, as well as by mental hunger, and also by the desire to gratify the love for beauty. ‘The literature revealed a past that had something of life richer than anything in the life they knew. It was a life of individuality and of freedom of thought, of clearness of vision when anything was actually seen, and of full re- spect for human reason. The literary life of Italy was turned from pro- ductive activity to the task of interpreting Greek life from its literature, and also to the business of translating the Greek classics into Latin, be- cause a demand for such translations came from the collectors of books. ‘These, when wealthy, each demanded a new translation made especially for his own collection. Among the translations, that of Plato made by Ficino is still reputed the best ever made in Italy. During this century the bulk of the pioneer work for the study of the Greek language was done. ‘The materials for grammar and lexicon were quarried out of the texts. The beginnings of textual criticism were well made. As manu- [22] ~ The Literatures of Greece and Israel in the Renaissance scripts began to come from the east they were found to be divergent in some degree. Which was right? Why was it right? How had the error. come to be made? Again, was a phrase obviously wrong? If so, what was the correct phrase? Questions such as these occasioned the foundation of the science of obtaining the cor- rect text of an ancient author who cannot in per- son tell what he meant to say. Again a notable beginning was made in histori- cal criticism when Laurentius Valla “exposed as a forgery the mediaeval document” known as the Donation of Constantine “that testified to the transference by Constantine of the sovereignty of Italy and the west to Pope Sylvester.” Beginnings such as these were of the highest importance as will appear later. Scholars of other countries were able to appropriate the methods and adapt them to higher needs. There was a darker side to the picture. In the latter half of the century the Italian human- ists became vain of their attainments, jealous of one another, and as a class developed habits of self-display and arrogance. They also prized the mode of expression more than the thing to be [23] The Literatures of Greece and Israel in the Renaissance expressed. ‘The use of polite letters, of the hu- manities in Latin and Greek, failed to awaken the Italian humanists of the latter quarter of the century, as a whole, to other and better things than erudition and a polished manner. Among them were those whose devotion to Latin letters lauded in word and by deed the paganism of ancient Rome, even in its grossest forms, and even attempted to revive these fea- tures of its life. Bright features against this background were the Platonic Academy at Florence, and the culti- vation of letters in some schools, notably Ferrara. As the century drew to a close the study of classical literature spent its force as a creative power in Italy, but began to manifest such power in France, Germany and England. From these lands young men had been coming to Italy to gain the new learning, and carrying back the fame of it to their own countries. Often they aroused in- terest, and now and then they engaged in teach- ing it. In France a pronounced attempt was made as early as 1458 to establish the teaching of Greek in the university of Paris. The lecturer stayed [24] The Literatures of Greece and Israel in the Renaissance one year. Afterward Greek instruction was in- termittent for fully half a century. Still the cir- cumstances were much better than they were in Italy a century earlier. In France Latin literature had no advantage over Greek on account of race pride or historical associations as was the case in Italy. It was indeed the universal language for scholars. As such it might perhaps replace one’s native tongue, as with Erasmus, who is said to have lost the lan- guage of Holland to which he was born, and who cared not to communicate with any person save in Latin, unless perhaps in Greek. Although he valued Latin as a vehicle of communication, he testified emphatically that “without Greek the amplest erudition in Latin is imperfect.” Not only was the attitude of scholars toward Latin different from the attitude in Italy, but quite new conditions for study had been produced by the art of printing. Although instruction in Greek might be intermittent in Paris, the paucity of teachers was not so serious a lack as it once had been. The year 1500 saw the texts of most of the Latin authors in print. The greater Greek authors came soon after, so that a pupil need no [25] The Literatures of Greece and Israel in the Renaissance longer depend on a teacher for the text of an au- thor. Grammars had begun to multiply. Dic- tionaries were soon to become numerous. ‘The private study and reflection of a student could count for much more than previously. ‘The great- est classical scholar of France in the first part of this new century was Budaeus whose “untiring in- dustry and indomitable perseverance,” with even a small amount of instruction brought him attain- ments which surpassed those of any preceding scholar and secured for him the primacy of Eu- rope in erudition. Other aspiring students who lacked his industry and perseverance were obliged to go from France to Italy until after the accession of Francis I to the throne in 1515. Budaeus induced the king to establish the royal college in 1530 where Latin, Greek and Hebrew were taught, and thus was secured permanent and adequate instruction in these languages. His example and influence may have contributed much to make erudition the mark of Greek scholarship in France. Certainly by the time of his death in 1540 the feeling had become strong in France that he who knew not Greek knew nothing. In that year was born J. J. Scal- [26 ] The Literatures of Greece and Israel in the Renaissance iger whose diligence was similar to that of Budaeus, and whose erudition so surpassed that of any predecessor that his name is still a symbol of the highest erudition attainable. It was in the early days of this development that John Calvin began his studies and that in the spirit of a humanist, pure and simple. He began Greek at Bourges in 1530, and continued the next year in Greek and Hebrew in Paris. In France scholars busied themselves in trans- lating Greek authors into French, rather than into Latin as had been done in Italy. The effect of the work in translation is thus described by Pattison: “The attempt to translate — and translation was one of the chief occupations of the educated — the juxtaposition of Greek and Hebrew forced upon them a sense of the comparative poverty of the modern idiom more keenly than any other of its deficiencies. The progress of the language was the ambition of every writer; and progress was identified with a material increase of the vo- cabulary.” (Essays 1. p. 118.) Hence the translators enriched their French by appropriating the words from Greek. After a [27] The Literatures of Greece and Israel in the Renaissance little the very taste developed by the study of Greek revolted at this method of enriching the French language. Apparently the result was dis- astrous to the study of Greek for the very knowl- edge of it came to be thought pedantic and was left for professional scholars whose duties re- quired them to know it. During the fifteenth century while lovers of the new learning were being attracted to Italy, Hol- land had become a source of intellectual life and stimulus. The pursuit of learning here had an origin quite different from that elsewhere. The center of this movement was the system of schools initiated in the Netherlands by the Brethren of the Common Life. This movement began in the eastern part of Holland at about the time of the work of Chrysoloras in Florence. Its prime pur- pose was religious. To this end the Brethren of the Common Life engaged in the production of good books (manuscripts at the outset), and in the education of the young for the purpose of ‘raising up spiritual pillars in the temple of the Lord.” The Brotherhood founded not a few schools in the Netherlands, and in the adjacent parts of [28] The Literatures of Greece and Israel in the Renaissance Germany by the year 1400 or soon after. Among their earliest leaders was one who proved to be a distinguished educationalist. arly in the de- velopment of these schools the leaders insisted upon the study of the Bible in the Latin “Vul- gate’’ in their classes; ‘‘they placed German trans- lations of Christian authors into the hands of their pupils; they took pains to give them a good knowledge of Latin.” It is to be noticed that these leaders were not humanists, but men of piety, zealous for the promotion of Christian character. ‘The chief vehicle of their teaching was not Latin, but the mother tongue. Their school at Herzogenbusch (Bois le Duc) put Greek into its course at the very start in 1424. Please notice the fact that this was the year after Vittorino da Feltre began his work in Mantua. The school founded in 1496 in Liege came to have as many as 1,600 scholars. The original school at Deventer achieved the highest fame of all un- der Alexander Hegius (1474-1498) and had under him fully 2,000 pupils. It contributed much directly to the revival of learning in Germany, and less directly to France and England. ‘The [29 | The Literatures of Greece and Israel in the Renaissance moral tone of its influence was higher than that of Italy taken as a whole. The parallel to Vittorino in time was equally a parallel in moral aim. ‘The chief difference was in the prominence given by the Brotherhood to the Latin Vulgate, and to the use of the mother tongue as the chief vehicle of education. It is said that ‘“‘seldom, if ever before, had so much attention been paid to the intellectual and moral training of youth.”” ‘The ideal when matured on the cultural side gradually approached that of Vittorino, and at its most complete stage work was done “not distinguishable from that of a Faculty of Arts in a contemporary university.” The glory of these schools is that from them went intellectual. and religious leaders who at home and in other lands were a healthy and note- worthy stimulus to the cause of sound learning, good morals and religion. It was a corrective of the influence of many of the later Italian hu- manists. Losing itself in the current of the re- vival of learning it helped to redeem it. The earliest great name to the credit of these schools is that of Thomas 4 Kempis, the author of the Imitation of Christ. He was trained in the [30] The Literatures of Greece and Israel in the Renaissance school at Deventer. At the close of his school days, being of a quiet and contemplative disposi- tion he asked and obtained a place in the con- vent of St. Agnes near the town of Zwolle, about 25 miles northerly from Deventer and where the Brethren had a school. Thomas was born in 1380, studied in Deventer in its earliest days, and during his long life until 1471 had much contact with the pupils of the Zwolle school, and he is credited with having been an important inspiration to many of them. Note- worthy among these were John Wessel, Rudolph Agricola and Alexander Hegius. ‘The two first rendered important service in the revival of let- ters, especially in Germany, and the third has al- ready been mentioned as the master of the Deven- ter school at its best. Hegius in turn had under him at one time Erasmus who became one of the foremost humanists of Europe, rendering import- ant service to Greek letters. By the time of Hegius Greek had become an important factor in these schools. It is not unlikely that Greek was taught by teachers who had studied in Italy, but the impulse for sound learning seems to have come entirely from native sources. [31] The Literatures of Greece and Israel in the Renaissance The establishment of a Collegium Trilingue at Louvain in 1517 for Latin, Greek and Hebrew was a further step of progress in the Netherlands, but is not to be attributed directly to the Brother- hood. In Germany the revival of learning began in various centers before the year 1500. John Reuchlin was among the earlier influential leaders. He studied Greek at Paris in 1473 under John Wessel (named above) and later in the university of Basle. Chief among all the early promoters of Greek in Germany was Rudolph Agricola, also mentioned in connection with Thomas a Kempis. He died while still in his prime, in 1485, yet, when the German humanists of the sixteenth century looked “back upon the origins of the new learning in their own land, they, with one accord, claimed as their forerunner Ru- dolph Agricola.”’ The ground for this claim is not wholly evident from the records extant. The unanimity of the testimony from those most com- petent to testify has caused general acceptance of the statement. His spirit received its character in Holland, his scholarship was matured in Italy. [32] The Literatures of Greece and Israel in the Renaissance Another great leader was Philip Melanchthon, born in 1497, educated in Pforzheim, the native place of Reuchlin, who was brother to Melanch- thon’s grandmother; also at the universities of Heidelberg and Tubingen. He attained in 1518, before he was twenty-two years old, the reputa- tion of being the foremost humanist in Germany. Two years earlier Erasmus had written of him: “Eternal God, what expectations does not Philip Melanchthon raise, who, though a youth, yea, rather, scarcely more than a boy, deserves equal esteem for his knowledge of both languages! What sagacity in argument, what purity of style, what comprehension of learned subjects, what varied reading, what delicacy and almost royal elegance of mind!” Henceforth an Italian university was no neces- sity for an ambitious German student. In the year 1518 Melanchthon was commended by Reuchlin as the fittest man for the Greek chair in the university recently founded by Frederick the Wise, elector of Saxony at his capital city, Witten- berg. Thither went Melanchthon, the humanist. There he convinced Germany that Greek, though unsurpassed as a literature for culture, and a field [33] The Literatures of Greece and Israel in the Renaissance for rich erudition, could render its choicest service as the servant of religious education. Melanchthon taught Greek to Martin Luther. He resisted the attempt to transfer him from the chair of Greek to that of theology. He did not belittle theology, for he held it to be the “queen of the sciences.”’ He did theology the greatest possible service by insisting on giving the best pos- sible preparation for the study of the Scriptures in their original tongues. He held theology to an exegetical foundation. Yet, while he made Greek his first thought, he actually taught subjects out- side Greek: Hebrew at times, Latin, Rhetoric, Logic, Mathematics and Physics. All this was the work of Melanchthon the humanist. In truth he seemed to have a genius for education. So his generation thought, and sought his counsel, and offered him the oppor- tunity to give shape to their educational ideals and methods. Accordingly he gave education in Ger- many a character which endured through several generations. Humanism gave no finer contribu- tion to the world than it gave through Melanch- thon. Nothing in the history of Germany is more precious than what she achieved under the guid- [34] The Literatures of Greece and Israel in the Renaissance ance of Melanchthon. Would that the power of his spirit might be revived! Humanism in England had much the kind of be- ginning that it had in other countries outside of Italy. Interested young men went to Italy, largely to Ferrara, attracted thither by the fame of the two Guarinos, father and son, and of Theodore Gaza, a Greek, and the most competent teacher of his time, also the author of a grammar which Erasmus used at Cambridge as the best available. Some of the Englishmen taught Greek on their return, or promoted its study in other ways. Among these was John Colet who had studied in Italy in 1493-1496. Like others he was shocked by the morals of many Italian humanists, and re- coiled from their example. On his return he be- gan in 1497 to lecture in Oxford on St. Paul’s Epistles. ‘This he continued to do in London after he had been appointed dean of St. Paul’s Cathe- dral in 1505. Of importance for Greek scholarship in Eng- land and also for biblical learning was the arrival in 1498 of Erasmus in Oxford. His entrance into the circle of scholars associated with Colet was of great benefit to them and to him. He was soon [35] The Literatures of Greece and Israel in the Renaissance to become the first man of letters in Europe, and he was gaining a name and influence that was inter- national. For this reason a few more words should be given to him. Born in Rotterdam in 1466 he was a Hollander. In his youth he had made a beginning in Greek at Deventer while Hegius was there. Rudolph Agricola paid a short visit to Deventer while Erasmus was there and won an admiration from the boy which years later Erasmus expressed in no moderate terms. After experience in various educational cen- ters, including Paris, Erasmus went to Oxford in his thirty-second year. ‘There he cultivated Greek more fully. He was fond of his English associates and sympathized with their temper and the tone of their scholarship. Going later to Italy he there matured his Greek scholarship, and ed- ited books published by the Aldine press in Venice. He returned to England and taught Greek in Cambridge university in 1511-1514. There he engaged in his preparation of the Greek Testa- ment, with a Latin translation which he was shortly to publish. His desire was ‘“‘that the weakest woman should be able to read the gospels and the Epistles of St. Paul; that the husbandman [36] The Literatures of Greece and Israel in the Renaissance should sing portions of them to himself as he followed the plough; that the weaver should hum them to the tune of his shuttle; and that the traveler should beguile the tedium of the road by repeating their stories.’’ Among the learned and pious men who associated with Erasmus at Cam- bridge was William Tyndale who came to share this pious longing of Erasmus and to give the New Testament in English to his own nation. Erasmus returned to the continent, and from Basle gave the world in 1516 the first Greek Tes- tament it saw published. Later he was helpful in securing the establishment of the College at Lou- vain for the teaching of Latin, Greek and Hebrew which has already been mentioned. A friend of his had given a generous endowment for the Hebrew chair and died soon after. But for Eras- mus the project might have failed. He had great influence and was listened to on all sides with more than ordinary respect. ‘It was known that Erasmus would present of the events of the day the true humanistic view—the view of reason un- dimmed by sectarian passion.” (Pattison i. 129.) The influence of Erasmus in England was of importance both for the promotion of Greek [37] The Literatures of Greece and Israel in the Renaissance learning and the support of men such as Colet. The relation between the study of Greek and that of the Scriptures established at that time was never lost. English humanism had a religious tone from the beginning. Greek scholarship in England was also busied in the translation of Greek authors into English. Thus the non-scholarly part of the reading public was introduced to the life and thought of ancient Greece and Rome. ‘The resultant material con- tributed to the literary development of the Eliza- bethan age. English humanism had no finer repre- sentative than John Milton whose literary powers were as versatile as those of any Italian humanist, and whose Latinity was adequate to inflict a crush- ing blow on the man famed as the first scholar in Europe. . | The story of Hebrew is not nearly solong. At this point attention should be called to a fact of importance. It is the distinction between the literature of Greece and its life and civilization on the one hand, and the literature of Israel with its life on the other hand. The literature of Greece was a pagan literature, the product of pagan life. ‘The life from which the Greek Testa- [38] The Literatures of Greece and Israel in the Renaissance ment was produced was far different and it is no part of a pagan literature. It came from the later development of the life which produced the Hebrew Bible. That the Greek Testament is no part of the development of Greek literature 1s largely recognized in the histories of that litera- ture. In harmony with all this is the fact that during the first century of the revival of learning in Italy slight attention was given to the Greek Testa- ment. Greek texts were issued in Italy for at least thirty years before the publication of a Greek Testament, and then it was not until after it had been published both in Spain and in Switzer- land. Indeed, the first Greek Testament pub- lished in Italy was a reprint from one in Switzer- land. Hellenic culture in the first Christian centuries had held the Greek Testament in contempt, re- garding it as deficient in literary excellence. Per- haps the Italian neglect of it was due to this cause, even as various Italian humanists despised the Latin Vulgate for the same reason. The neglect of the Greek Testament is readily understood when it is recognized as outside the literature of [39] The Literatures of Greece and Israel in the Renaissance Greece. That the vocabulary of the New Testa- ment is Greek is due to historical conditions, but its spirit is not Greek. It belongs to the religious development which produced the Hebrew Old Testament. An important confirmation of the position just stated is the fact that part (how large a part is not settled) of the New Testament was first produced in the Aramaic language. One of the problems of New Testament scholarship 1s, How much of the New Testament was first ex- pressed in Aramaic, a sister of the Hebrew lan- ouage? In the light of these facts in the discussion of the two literatures the Greek New Testament is to be treated as the Hebrew Old Testament is treated, as part of the classic literature of Israel. It is to be remembered that during the centuries before the revival of learning, while neither Greek nor Hebrew was known, the literature of Israel had been accessible in the translation known as the Latin Vulgate. All through the Middle Ages this was a body of literature common to western Europe although imperfectly known. It was really a revival of learning to make the knowl- edge of it general as was done in Deventer, and [40] The Literatures of Greece and Israel in the Renaissance the rest of the schools of the Brotherhood of the Common Life. While Greek had once been a part of the cul- tural knowledge of Italy, Hebrew had been un- known except by Jews and some of the earlier Christians. Origen and Jerome had few succes- sors. One of the more notable ones was Nicolaus de Lyra, a Christian teacher in the University of Paris who died in 1349 after he had written two commentaries on the Bible based on a diligent study of the original languages. Before the year 1500 the non-scholarly part of Germany, Bohemia and England had begun to be- come acquainted with the literature of Israel in their own tongues as translated from the Latin Vulgate. Such a Bible was printed in Bohemia in 1487. One had already been printed in Ger- many in 1466, and from that date until 1521 thirteen more editions had been printed in Ger- many. In England it had not been printed, but for more than a hundred years wandering priests and others had made the Wycliffite version of the Vulgate familiar to those who would listen to it. As has been seen, when Greek learning crossed the Alps it was taken up with a spirit akin to that [41] The Literatures of Greece and Israel in the Renaissance of Vittorino, but more fully taught by experience and more fully aware of the needs of the time. Experience had taught more fully the strength and the weakness of Greek letters. ‘Uheir strength was the strength of ripely developed mental powers which God had created. Their weakness was that due to the blindness of a people that knew not the living God, the God who not only ereated the heavens and the earth, but who also created men in order that they might come into such a fellowship with himself as belonged only between persons with a holy character. Greek let- ters needed dedication to him who gave the capa- city to produce such marvellous literature. The spirit of the Brethren of the Common Life —the Hebraic spirit in short—was the spirit in which the new learning was met by a multitude, and they dedicated Greek letters more to the ser- vice of God than to culture as such. Aside from Manetti I have learned of no use of the Greek | Testament earlier than that recorded of John Colet when he began lecturing on the Epistles of Paul, in 1497 in Oxford. Soon the study of the Greek Testament and of the Hebrew Old Testa- [42] The Literatures of Greece and Israel in the Renaissance ment began to be closely associated and they had in the main a parallel course. So far as I can learn the Italian humanists be- gan to be interested in Hebrew before the Greek Testament became an object of attention. Appar- ently one of the first of them to have such an interest was Gianozzo Manetti who lived in the first half century of the Italian revival. Toward the end of the century others of them were led by curiosity to begin the study of Hebrew in order to master the treasures of knowledge that were supposed to be in the Jewish theosophic system called the Kabbalah. A number of scholars came under the influence of this delusion. For com- panions they had even soberminded statesmen and hardheaded warriors. Is it possible that this ac- counts for the 73 Hebrew volumes in the library of Frederick Duke of Urbino (1444-82) out of the total of 772? Even Pico de la Mirandola (1463-1494), that Italian marvel of erudition, afirmed that ‘no science yields greater proof of the divinity of Christ than Magic and the Kab- balah.”’ As Greek letters had been learned from Greeks so Hebrew was learned from Jews. ‘Through [43 ] The Literatures of Greece and Israel in the Renaissance centuries of study of their Bible with immense industry, sometimes ill-directed, they had accumu- lated a great body of material; grammatical, lexi- cal and exegetical. ‘They took advantage of the invention of printing for the publication of their Bible before the Christians did for their Greek Testament. Beginning with the publication of the Hebrew Psalms in 1477, they followed with other parts of the Old Testament and by 1484 the whole Hebrew Bible was published four years before the first classic Greek author was pub- lished. ‘Thirty-two years later when the first Greek Testament was published they were print- ing the fourth edition of the Hebrew Bible. Dur- ing these thirty-two years they had several times published parts of the Old Testament, sometimes with elaborate commentaries. When Christians took up the study of the Greek New ‘Testament the help they had was a great mass of general knowledge of Greek learned from the study of the Greek classics. At the same time when they began the study of the Hebrew Bible they received a great amount of help derived from the protracted studies of the Jews. Was the co- incidence a mere accident? (44) The Literatures of Greece and Israel in the Renaissance One name associated with the beginning of He- brew studies is that of John Wessel, for he was one of the earliest humanists to be interested in the subject. He died in 1489, four years after the death of Rudolph Agricola, whom he had induced to begin the study of Hebrew several years before. The great name for the promotion of the study of Hebrew by Christians is John Reuchlin. As already seen he had become one of the leaders of Greek study in Germany. About the time that Wessel died Reuchlin came under the influence of Mirandola and absorbed an enthusiasm for the Jewish Kabbalah. He turned, however, to the study of the Hebrew Scriptures and became an ardent supporter of their study. ‘his is his chief claim to the honor of succeeding generations. Basing his work on material gathered by the Jews he published in 1506 a large volume containing a Hebrew grammar and dictionary. Germany took up the study with zeal. The Hebrew Bible and the Greek Testament became indispensable auxili- aries of the Reformation. ‘They also superseded the Latin Vulgate as the basis of our modern translations of the Bible, and are today the ulti- mate textual standard for its meaning. [45 ] The Literatures of Greece and Israel in the Renaissance Our theme concerns the part that the litera- tures of Greece and Israel had in the Renaissance or better the revival of learning. It has been im- possible to estimate their share and their influence in the movement at all adequately except by bringing before our minds the more important historical features of this revival. In summing up this influence we note that one effect due to the Greek classics was a proper esti- mate of the human body. The ascetic reaction against the sins of the flesh had come to dominate Christian thinking. Especially difficult was it in the Middle Ages to gain a sane estimate of the body. Great credit is due to Vittorino for the methods in his school at Mantua. Greek letters had convinced him that the proper ideal of a personality is that it should be “fully rounded, harmoniously developed.” The sane ideal of sym- metrical personality taught by him became a pat- tern for generations. St. Paul’s affirmation that the body is a temple of the Holy Spirit gives scrip- tural sanction to this ideal. A second result that humanists promoted was the Greek passion for knowledge for its own sake. Indeed, Greek letters presented to the mind the [46] The Literatures of Greece and Israel in the Renaissance joy of intellectual activity as a worthy and desir- able part of human life. Associated with this was confidence in the power of the mind to gain knowl- edge. The Greek passion for knowledge began to form in the intellectual activity of the century the mental habits needed for the correction of the mental deficiencies of the time. ‘These deficiencies concern the conception of knowledge and its use, and especially the activities of the imagination. Knowledge is gained directly by observation of facts in the world of physical nature or of persons. It is gained indirectly through human testimony. This testimony may come orally or by written records. No person is immune from error in the gaining of knowledge by any of these methods. Five centuries ago our intellectual forbears were immensely more liable to error in every direction than our more immediate ancestors. The advance made was greatly indebted to the study of the Greek classics. ‘To these writings are due the initial impulse toward sound methods in seeking knowledge and beginning of correct habits in ex- amining evidence. “The Greek literature was the product of minds that had attained the habit of [47] The Literatures of Greece and Israel in the Renaissance seeing clearly, speaking pa and recording accurately. The defects of our intellectual forbears were not in lack of intellectual force or in imaginative power. These were at times almost excessive and were little disciplined at the best by the logi- cal training of scholasticism. The allegorical interpretation of a writing took precedence even of its historical treatment. In the interpretation of Scripture a fourfold sense was commonly afhrmed: a literal sense, a figurative sense, an allegorical sense and a mystical or spiritual sense. [hus in a single sentence the word Jerusalem would be held to mean literally a city, figuratively a faithful soul, allegorically the church militant, and spiritually the church tri- umphant. Their method of studying Scripture had no means for excluding these fancies or even puerilities. Moreover, what passed for Heese at that time was often faintly marked by a sense of fact: nor was the value of sober fact estimated at its real value. Fancy often took the place of judg- ment in presenting facts and prevented a genuine [48] The Literatures of Greece and Israel in the Renaissance perception of them. ‘These defects are not yet wholly absent from mental operations. In learning the life of Greece from the study of its literature the purpose of the humanist was too engrossing to tolerate childishness. These ex- - plorers of the new intellectual domain were finding in Greek literature ‘‘an ideal of life, both socially and intellectually by which they might profit in the present.’’ Or, as phrased by another, they were discovering “a classical world which had been for- gotten or concealed, one, moreover, whose civilisa- tion had been superior to their own in political and intellectual freedom, in literary and speculative development and social culture.”’ The humanists wished to learn exactly what belonged to that civilization. “hey needed historical fact. The very spirit of Greek letters called for it. ‘This does not mean that all parts of Greek literature were thought to be of equal value. Humanists like Vittorino and Guarino of Verona, like Origen, Basil the Great and other Christians long before them, felt that there was much in Greek literature which was not antagonistic to their Christian faith. But they also saw clearly that not all this literature had high educational [49] The Literatures of Greece and Israel in the Renaissance value and, therefore, they did not teach the classi- cal writings indiscriminately. They saw also, clearly, that the knowledge offered in these writings could be gained only by the correct interpretation of the written records. Not fancies, but objective fact alone could satisfy the desire of these humanists. There was little obvious temptation to pervert the text by allegorizing in the interest of any theory. The normal desire of the humanist was to interpret a writing so as to know its meaning, to learn its attitude toward life, or the revelation of the life expressed in it. If there were two or more manuscripts of a writing, these were hardly ever identical at every point. When there was disagreement a demand was made upon the judgment to decide which one was correct. It might be that a reading was ob- viously wrong, even impossible. ‘This called on the judgment to determine why it was wrong, and what correction ought to be made. This meant the learning to reason inductively, something not taught in the logic then current. All this work promoted the development of the scientific habit of mind, and of the proper valua- [50] The Literatures of Greece and Israel in the Renaissance tion of facts. Thus were the Italian humanists led into the beginnings of true interpretation and criticism. It was fortunate that these beginnings were made while dealing with a subject in which there was comparatively little temptation to sub- jectivity and arbitrariness; where the desire was strong for knowledge of facts, and. where dog- matical prepossessions had so small a place. Another benefit from Greek letters was the cul- ture of beauty and grace in literary creation. The discipline which brought balance and sobriety to the mind in the study of historical fact also cha- stened the mind from its fanciful exuberance. In the work of the imagination of the Middle Ages ‘the materials mastered the man; he wandered in a wild-wood filled with innumerable paths, fol- lowing now one and now another in forgetfulness of his plan, if he had any; that sway of reflection which is necessary for the perfection of art was unknown. In the best works of classical antiquity, the reverse of all this is true; reason stood by the side of imagination, rejecting with a frown what- ever did not conduce to the main design, and re- pressing every tendency toward the overstrained and unnatural.’’ Such models as these when [51] The Literatures of Greece and Israel in the Renaissance greatly admired and diligently studied, could but chasten and discipline the taste of European letters. ‘Akin to this remark is another, that the forms of classical antiquity were needed to awaken and direct the sense of beauty. The unregulated lux- uriant, half-educated minds of the Middle Ages could in no way so soon get rid of their defects as by becoming familiar with the style and laws of composition of the ancients. Greek taste, the ex- quisite sense of proportion and fitness, the beauty and grace which breathe in language, style, metre, and all art although transmitted chiefly through the Romans, an inferior race in this respect, speak- ing an inferior language,—these were the source from which a new sense of elegance, finish, and propriety, new laws of composition, a new style of art, a higher culture of society were to emanate.”’ (Theodore Woolsey, in New Englander, xxiii. 664M.) Thus the development of culture was accelerated by centuries. These results did not come immediately, nor’ during the Italian stage of the revival of letters. While the beginnings were made there and then, [52] The Literatures of Greece and Israel in the Renaissance the process of educating the imagination and taste was slow and long. | Of course the scholars who studied for the sake of the literary qualities learned their lesson far sooner than most. Those who sought knowledge alone were little observant of aught else. ‘The non-scholarly producers of literature could not be directly affected. These must first be affected through the translations of the classics into mod- ern languages. ‘he translations by their selection and treatment of materials, and by the structure of the writings could contribute to the education of the non-scholarly world. Later also came the influence of such writers as had absorbed the ex- cellencies of Greek literature by direct study of it and who reproduced them in their native tongue. Another aspect of the value of this literature which is the obverse of things already noticed is the fact that Greek letters brought quite full recognition of the truth that literature has in it- self a value for man because of the pleasure which it brings, because of the capacities of the soul which it quickens into activity, and because of the breadth of the culture which it promotes. [53] The Literatures of Greece and Israel in the Renaissance The scientific attitude of mind fostered by Greek letters was not onesided. Greek letters taught to exclude fancy from historical statement, it forbade ungrounded subjective opinion, or any subjective opinion where objective evidence was available. It brought also a corrective for that form of scientific habit which can see no facts, truths or realities save in physical objects perceptible by the senses. With various imperfections unavoid- able in the beginning of a great work, the Platonic Academy at Florence learned and taught that there are great truths and realities of the human life unreached by the physical senses. The moral appeal of Plato made the noblest appeal of which Greek literature was capable, and was the strongest resource it had to withstand the crass paganism of the later stages of Italian humanism. To recapitulate the modes in which Greek let- ters showed power: They imparted a sense of the value of culture as a good in itself; They fostered a passion for knowledge, full, [54] The Literatures of Greece and Israel in the Renaissance exact and objective, and a correct instinct how to arrive at it; They aroused a sense of beauty, of symmetry, of perfection in the expression of what was in the mind; They strengthened the sense of the reality out- side and above the phenomenal life of man, as Aeschylus, Plato and Demosthenes show; They gave emancipation from authority which was merely human. Why, then, was there such paganism in the later Italian humanists? An occasion for this relapse into paganism was the emancipation from merely human authority. The cause was lack of moral principle to take the place of external restraint. This paganism was the outcome of a century of deterioration. Men of the days of Petrarch had felt the an- tagonism between ecclesiastical authority and what seemed to them to be indisputable fact. This frame of mind rendered them open to the liberat- ing influence of that literature which alone ‘‘dis- played human nature in the plenitude of intel- lectual and moral freedom.”’ Greek letters threw open a wide gateway into a broad realm of free- [55] The Literatures of Greece and Israel in the Renaissance dom from authority, and the alluring novelty of this intellectual life broke the bonds of intellectual authority in Italy for a hundred years. It may be that the majority of men when enter- ing into a life of freedom are unable to distin- guish between it and license. Certainly the majority of the later Italian humanists, after the freedom of thought was gained, showed them- selves incapable of using it and the utterance of it as it ought to be used. ‘They heeded not the lessons that their pursuit and attainment of knowl- edge might have taught them. Humanism had become a profession of letters subject to royal or wealthy patrons. Elegance of expression was the chief virtue. The favor of patrons meant ease, comfort, luxury. Their dis- favor meant poverty and suffering. Other author- ity failed; why practice any self-restraint ? Here was the weakness of Greek culture. It grew out of a pagan life, and hence was incom- plete. The love for beauty and the passion for knowledge were there but these are not enough. The ideal of culture with beauty as the dominant note cannot produce a symmetrical life. Neither can it do this with the passion for knowledge [56] The Literatures of Greece and Israel in the Renaissance dominant. Nor yet can the two so sustain each other as to bring about a symmetrical personality. The majority of the Italian humanists adored beauty, in some form; those of France worshiped knowledge. So it was with many humanists else- where. Something was lacking. Culture cannot be an end in itself. It is doomed to failure as to the production of symmetrical manhood. Such manhood comes only when the ideal of goodness is joined with the other two. Further this ideal may stand second to nothing else, for it alone can give the others their highest value. It is said that Petrarch, the first humanist, had as an ideal for the guide of his life ‘“‘the double lights of culture and conscience.’”’ When ideals are cooperating as on an equality now one will claim the primacy and now another. If the pri- macy is uncertain, now here, now there, stability of character is lacking. In Petrarch’s double lights one of the elements needs to be dominant in deciding the character of the whole, and must always be conscience. ‘There is no substitute for the sense of duty, and there is nothing higher than it, except God. When humanists failed to heed the voice of conscience or to be ruled by duty, a [57] The Literatures of Greece and Israel in the Renaissance pagan literature could not remedy the deficiency. It had not the moral dynamic in it, because it came out of a life deficient in that dynamic. Not by knowledge or intention did these hu- manists cast up a highway for the coming of God. Yet in spite of their moral defects the Italian hu- manists made all subsequent generations their debtors. They “rescued from destruction the treasures of antiquity, and prepared the way for a proper understanding of, them. ‘Their method was crude; their knowledge was imperfect; their attention to rhetorical forms ludicrously exag- gerated. Yet they laid the foundations of classi- cal philology, of the science of grammar, of intelli- gent criticism, of clear expression. They stood at the opening of a new era, and their labors only furnished the foundation for the labors of others.”’ (Creighton, History of the Papacy during the Reformation, 11. 343.) ‘Italy had not only led the way—she had done the heavy work of clearance as well. She had recovered the long-buried treasure of classical literature; she had laid the foundations of textual criticism; she had produced grammars, treatises and other aids to study. ‘The Italian leaders had [58] The Literatures of Greece and Israel in the Renaissance thus broken ground for those who came after them; scholars in northern countries, to the enor- mous saving of time and effort, were able to enter into their labors and adapt them to their own needs.” (Hudson, Story of the Rennaissance, 53 f.) Thus it should be said that in spite of all the weaknesses of Italian humanists, during that cen- tury under the influence of Greek letters “‘they created the new atmosphere of culture, wherein whatever was luminous in art, literature, science, criticism and religion has since flourished.” When Melanchthon in his Inaugural at Witten- berg, August 29, 1518, and again after the Leip- sic discussion in 1519, put the Greek and Hebrew Scriptures in the supreme place of.external author- ity, and thereby made the study of Greek and He- brew the necessary preliminary to the scientific study of theology, he did more than all previous humanists toward correcting errors which they had criticized. He fairly justified the extravagant estimate which Erasmus had published respecting him. Indeed, he also corrected the fundamental weakness of humanism by making Greek letters a servant instead of a master. For the ideal of the [59] The Literatures of Greece and Israel in the Renaissance “holiness of beauty’? he substituted that of the “beauty of holiness.” Thus was humanism dis- armed of the paganism which so marred its in- fluence in the land of the humanists. In making this principle operative Melanchthon and Calvin, who also began his career as a human- ist, gave examples illustrating the highest service Greek culture can render; not as presenting a norm of literary beauty and culture, nor yet as a source of knowledge, but as a help in attaining the most adequate preparation possible for under- standing the word of God. The humanists (as Hellenists) brought to He- braic-minded scholars the text, dictionary and grammar of the New Testament and a matured discipline for its study. It was fortunate that Melanchthon and Calvin learned the methods of critical study wrought out in the study of the Greek classics and before the passion had arisen for gaining -notoriety by propounding some hitherto unthought of novelty in interpretation or theory. They studied while the object of critical study of the Greek classics was literary and un- warped by religious desires or preconceptions, and while the subject was still so novel that other [60] The Literatures of Greece and Israel in the Renaissance novelties need not be introduced. ‘The truly scien- tific habit of mind in its search for truth is more easily formed in a discipline where the aims are simply intellectual and the appeal to the feelings the least possible. We may, therefore, think it a part of the provi- dential education of the race that the method of the interpretation of writings and of the scientific observation of literary facts were learned by men through the study of pagan literature. ‘Thus it was on neutral ground that the problem was solved of gaining sound knowledge from written sources. In this manner, with freedom from theological prejudices or controversy, an instrument was pre- pared and presented to Melanchthon and Calvin by which Protestant teachings were provided with their subject matter and by which they could be defended. The influence of the literatures of Greece and Israel combined in the revival of learning was that they furnished the controlling factors of the lite- rary, intellectual and religious development which _ began in that era, and for which factors no sub- stitutes have yet been found. [61] ek Ca PUY ae Pani OOga } ri e.. a AP « vfs is Fg sa ay Py es nt . PN721 .D39 ge literatures of Greece and Israel in on Theological Seminary—Sp A 1 1012 00027 8798