Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-8ctnn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T19:28:27.909Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Seneca's Apocolocyntosis as a Possible Source for Erasmus' Julius Exclusus*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 November 2018

Marcia L. Colish
Marcia L. Colish*
Affiliation:
Oberlin College
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The Julius exclusus has generated a good deal of attention on the part of twentieth-century scholarship, especially since the publication of Wallace K. Ferguson's critical edition in 1933. Primary interest has centered on the debate concerning the authorship of the dialogue, with the prevailing scholarly opinion assigning the work unequivocally to Erasmus. According to the present consensus, Erasmus composed the Julius at some point between the death of Pope Julius II in February 1513 and his departure from England for Basel in July 1514. The work was known to members of Erasmus’ circle by August 1516 and was first published in 1517. With the issue of authorship and dating settled to their general satisfaction, Erasmian scholars have recently begun to direct their attention to the substance of the Julius, particularly its ecclesiology. On the other hand, the investigation of Erasmus’ possible sources for die work has received comparatively sketchy treatment.

Type
Research Article
Information
Renaissance Quarterly , Volume 29 , Issue 3 , Autumn 1976 , pp. 361 - 368
Copyright
Copyright © Renaissance Society of America 1976

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

*

The research on which this paper is based was made possible by a fellowship from the Institute for Research in the Humanities, University of Wisconsin.

References

1 Erasmus, Desiderius, Dialogus, Iulius exclusus e coelis, ed. Ferguson, Wallace K. in Erasmi opuscula (The Hague, 1933), pp. 65–124.Google Scholar

2 See the exhaustive analysis of the literature on the authorship question in McConica, James K., ‘Erasmus and the “Julius“: A Humanist Reflects on the Church,’ in The Pursuit of Holiness in Late Medieval and Renaissance Religion: Papers from the University of Michigan Conference, ed. Trinkaus, Charles with Oberman, Heiko A., Studies in Medieval and Reformation Thought, 10 (Leiden, 1974), 451–453, 467-471.Google Scholar

3 Ibid., pp. 446-451; Ferguson, p. 41; Sowards, J. Kelley, introduction to The Julius Exclusus of Erasmus, tr. Pascal, Paul (Bloomington, 1968), pp. 7, 11–12, 14.Google Scholar

4 Most notably McConica, ‘Erasmus and the “Julius,“’ pp. 444-491, and other scholars he cites.

5 Ibid., p. 447.

6 Sowards, pp. 27-28.

7 Ibid., pp. 114, 125, 132, 133, 140, 141; Pascal, introduction to his translation, p. 39; pp. 28-29.

8 See in particular the thorough study by Trillitzsch, Winfried, ‘Erasmus und Seneca,’ Philohgus, 109 (1965), 270–293 Google Scholar; Phillips, Margaret Mann, ‘Erasmus and the Classics,’ in Erasmus, ed. Dorey, T. A. (Albuquerque, 1970), pp. 11–17.Google Scholar

9 ‘Erasmus as a Satirist,’ in Erasmus, ed. Dorey, p. 51.

10 For literature on the issues of authorship, title, and textual transmission, see Allan Perley Ball, The Satire of Seneca on the Apotheosis of Claudius Commonly Called the ‘AIIOKOΛOKTNTΩΣIΣ (New York, 1902), pp. 24-28; L. Annaei Senecae, Divi Claudii ‘AIIOKOΛOKTNTΩΣIΣ, ed. Carlo F. Russo, Biblioteca di studi superiori, filologia latina, 3 (Firenze, 1948), pp. 7-40; Marti, Berthe M., ‘Seneca's Apocolocyntosis and Octavia: A Diptych,’ American Journal of Philology, 73 (1952), 24ff.CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Walther Just, ‘Senecas Satire auf die Apotheose des Kaisers Claudius in ihrer politischen Bedeutung,’ Wissenschaftliche Zeitschrift der Universität Rostock, gesellschafts- und sprachwissenschaftliche Reihe, 15, Heft 4/5 (1966), 48; Athanassakis, Apostolos N., ‘Some Evidence in Defense of the Title Apocolocyntosis for Seneca's Satire,’ Transactions of the American Philological Association, 104 (1974), 11–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

11 Seneca, , Apocolocyntosis, 10–11 Google Scholar, tr. W. D. H. Rouse, Loeb Classical Library (London, 1961), p. 391, n. 1; Ulrich Knoche, ‘Das Bild des Kaisers Augustus in Senecas Apocolocyntosis,’ Wissenschaftliche Zeitschrift der Universität Rostock, gesellschafts- und sprachwissenschaftliche Reihe, 15, Heft 4/5 (1966), 463-470.

12 Ball, , The Satire of Seneca, pp. 74–78 Google Scholar; Weinreich, Otto, Senecas Apocolocyntosis, Die Satire auf Tod, Himmel- und Höllenfahrt des Kaisers Claudius: Einfuhrung, Analyse und Untersuchungen, Übersetzung (Berlin, 1923), pp. 104, 128.Google Scholar

13 A full discussion of the circumstances surrounding the copying of these manuscripts and their textual characteristics is provided by Eden, P. T., ‘William Gray, Bishop of Ely, and Three Oxford Manuscripts of Seneca,’ Classica et mediaevalia, 21 (1960), 29–42.Google Scholar

14 The copy of this work consulted is in the Columbia University Library. See also Ball, , The Satire of Seneca, p. 92.Google Scholar

15 To Ruthall, Thomas, Opus Epistolamm Des. Erasmi Roterodami, ed. Allen, P. S. (Oxford, 1910), II, no. 325, p. 53.Google Scholar

16 Ibid., 1, no. 222, p. 460.