In fact, these early studies at the University were full of profit to
Erasmus. He was at the centre of the best culture of the earlier time
and the reviving spirit of the new classic learning was beginning
to make itself felt. In his references to this experience it suited
his purpose and his disposition always to throw contempt upon his
teachers and upon all learning except that which seemed to him to
reflect the glory of antiquity. Indeed, if he had been forced to
content himself with the dry quibbling of the "Scotist" theologians
who were still the dominant party at Paris, he would have found
himself in dreary company enough. But we find no reason to think
that there was any compulsion upon him to take any teaching he did
not like. Greek had already begun to make its way as an attainable
subject at Paris, and Erasmus was beginning to feel the charm which
this, the choicest vehicle of human expression, was to exercise upon
his whole life.
His first Paris residence was interrupted by illness, in consequence
of which he returned for a time to the bishop of Cambrai. The bishop
seems to have been willing to keep him indefinitely at his court,
but not to have provided for his further maintenance elsewhere.
With restored health Erasmus was back again at Paris and now, for
the first time, on a really independent footing. For the moment
he ceased to consider the question of patronage and began to give
lessons to private pupils. Beatus, unquestionably prompted by Erasmus
in all details, says that "the Englishmen at the university could
find no one among the professors of liberal study in the whole place
who was able to teach more learnedly or accustomed to teach more
conscientiously." And then he goes on to make a comparison between
this youth and the two best-known professors of literature at the
time in Paris. One of these, Faustus Andrelinus, was evidently a type
of the gay, reckless spirits who found in classic study an enjoyment
purely intellectual and who used its moral standard as an excuse for
all looseness of life. His manner of teaching was "popular" to the
point of flippancy, designed rather to catch the applause of the
crowd than to merit the approval of the learned. It is to Erasmus'
credit that he did not allow his classic enthusiasm to carry away
his judgment of this person. The other teacher, Gaguinus, was a
more serious scholar, but not so far advanced and not yet regularly
teaching publicly.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account