Sir Thomas More (1478-1535) was influential during the reign of King Henry VIII of England. During his reign he held many influential positions, and also wrote the classic book Utopia, published in 1516. In the book he discusses an ideal - utopian - model of society. Ezra Cox explains.
The book Utopia, otherwise known as “a little, true book, not less beneficial than enjoyable, about how things should be in a state and about the new island Utopia”, is a monograph which is a work of fiction and a socio-political satire. The monographs author is Sir Thomas More. More was an important statesman, lawyer, and humanist under the rule of King Henry VIII. More is widely known for his refusal to take the Oath of Supremacy, the oath that made the King the supreme head of the church, and this had More summarily executed for treason as More was a devote Catholic.
Regarding the monograph's time of completion, More published the book in 1516. Furthermore, More’s reason for publishing Utopia has been theorized by numerous historians. For instance, in historian J.H Hexter’s book About Utopia, Hexter argues that “More wanted his readers to take seriously the community of life and property that he ascribed to the commonwealth of the Utopians”(1), while David M Bevington argues that More created two personas to say different sides of the usefulness of Utopia as a state and how Utopia can be a blueprint for a nation.(2) Bevington argues that the character Raphael Hythloday’s “platform is the common ownership of property and specifies that Hythloday refuses to concede the feasibility of gradual reform”.(3), and More’s persona argues in favour of gradual changes within practical politics.(4) The two arguments from Hexter and Bevington comment upon the topic of Tudor society. The two arguments correlate as Hexter and Bevington speak of no property and More’s intention to spread the way of living in his Utopia. Whereas the targeted audience could be Henry VIII, as More addressed the greatness of Henry at the beginning of Utopia, “Henry VIII, the unconquered King of England, a prince adorned with all the virtues that become a great monarch”.(5) The praise for Henry and More’s creation of two personas in his monograph demonstrates how More did not want to be seen as criticising his King but the two personas gave him some leeway into delivering his thoughts on a ‘perfect state’.
Civic humanism
More’s Utopia is a useful and important piece of fiction because it explores ideas of civic humanism. Civic humanism is a form of republicanism that involves the fusion of political engagement with classical learning.(6) The first instance of More’s humanism comes from when his Greek and most important character Hythloday utters that “Rome did not leave anything important besides the writings of Seneca and Cicero”.(7) Secondly, More’s Utopia has several references to Plato’s imaginary republic.(8) The monograph illustrates a perfect republic, in which its society is equal, there is no King or Emperor, no private property and no individual cares about the need for wealth or riches. This idea at the time is similar to an alien-like nation because, during the sixteenth century, the majority of nations were controlled primarily by their King. Hence More’s political thinking and thoughts on politics at the time can be attributed to a conversation between Hythloday, persona More and Peter Giles. Hythloday says, “Friends should not expect that for their sake I should enslave myself to any king whatsoever”.(9) Peter articulates, “I do not mean that you should be a slave to any king, just so you can assist them”, Raphael “The change of the word does not alter the matter”.(10) The small conversation taken from More’s Utopia puts into reference More’s political awareness at the time. More had meant that any advisor to a King would be a slave as no King would listen to proper reason. This could have been More’s thoughts on becoming an advisor and future chancellor under Henry as More had already stated in his monograph that “each King has many wise men in his ear”.(11)
Additionally, More’s idea of no private property and equality in society can be likened to the idea of Communism. More’s book and name invoked the support of the Soviet states, as well as in support of the anti-communist position of the papacy as stated by Bevington.(12) As well as Brendan Bradshaw's quote “Utopia is not simply an imaginative reconstruction of society as it might have been in a state of perfect nature, it is rather More’s conception of how a just society could be created, human nature being what it is”(13), both Bradshaw and Bevington interpret how More conceived the idea of a perfect and equal state but Bevington argues how Utopia has been viewed through time as its ideas have linked with modern-day communism. This is because communism as an ideology reiterates the need for no private property and no social order. Thus, More’s Utopia is a key piece of literature because it can be used and read for its ideas of a republic that would not be seen in Europe until the twentieth century.
More’s theory of a perfect state in Utopia has been contested and compared in other contemporary monographs, such as Sir Thomas Smith’s De Republica Anglorum. A major similarity between More and Smith's works is the displacement of a King or ruler. Smith explains the “Continuance of rule, from the kings of Rome to the consuls, to the triumvirates, to the direct rule of Scylla and Caesar”(14), and “For the usurping of the rascality can never long endure but necessarily breadth and quickly bring forth a tyrant”.(15) Whilst Smith remarks how a ruler would eventually become a tyrant or dictator, in More’s Utopia there is no King but a Prince who does not have control and would be removed from office if he tried to control the populace of Utopia.(16) A contrast between Smith and More is how Smith sees the family in a commonwealth - he argues how women would take care of the family whilst the husband would be the main breadwinner.(17) More inversely remarks that men, women, and children would be accustomed to agriculture, therefore women have a role that would contribute to society.(18) The two monographs have interesting comparisons and were completed at similar times. As for Smith’s opinion on women, he was not in favour of the other sex and thought they should not meddle in affairs of government and ought to remain at home to take care of the home.(19)
What do you think of Thomas More’s Utopia? Let us know below.
Bibliography
Smith, Thomas Sir, De Republica Anglorum, a discourse on the Commonwealth of England (London, 1583).
More, Sir Thomas, Utopia (London, 1516).
Hexter, J. H, ‘Intention, words, and meaning: The Case of More’s Utopia’, New Literary History vol 6, no 3, History and Criticism: II (1975), 529-541.
Fokkema, Douwe, ‘The Utopia of Thomas More’, Amsterdam University Press (2011), 31-48,
Caudle, Mildred Witt, ‘Sir Thomas More’s “Utopia”: Origins and Purposes’, Social Science vol 45, no 3 (1970), 163-169.
Bradshaw, Brendan, ‘More on Utopia’, The Historical Journal vol 24, no 1 (1981), 1-27.
Bevington, M. David, ‘The Dialogue in “Utopia”: The Two Sides to the Question’, Studies in Philology vol 58, no 3 (1961), 496-509.
References
1 J.H Hexter, ‘Intention, words, and meaning: The Case of More’s Utopia’, New Literary History vol 6, no 3, History and Criticism: II (1975), 529-541 (534).
2 David. M Bevington, ‘The Dialogue in “Utopia”: The Two Sides to the Question’, Studies in Philology vol 58, no 3 (1961), 496-509 (496).
3 Bevington, ‘The Dialogue in “Utopia”: The Two Sides to the Question’, 496.
4 Bevington, ‘The Dialogue in “Utopia”: The Two Sides to the Question’, 496.
5 Sir Thomas More, Utopia (London, 1516), 1.
6 Mildred Witt Caudle, ‘Sir Thomas More’s “Utopia”: Origins and Purposes’, Social Science vol 45, no 3 (1970), 163-169 (164).
7 More, Utopia, 2.
8 Douwe Fokkema, ‘The Utopia of Thomas More’, Amsterdam University Press (2011), 31-48 (32).
9 More, Utopia, 5.
10 More, Utopia, 5.
11 More, Utopia, 8.
12 Bevington, ‘The Dialogue in “Utopia”: The Two Sides to the Question’, 496.
13 Brendan Bradshaw, ‘More on Utopia’, The Historical Journal vol 24, no 1 (1981), 1-27 (5).
14 Sir Thomas Smith, De Republica Anglorum, a discourse on the Commonwealth of England (London, 1583), 12.
15 Smith, De Republica Anglorum, a discourse on the Commonwealth of England, 12.
16 More, Utopia, 8.
17 Smith, De Republica Anglorum, a discourse on the Commonwealth of England, 22.
18 More, Utopia, 10.
19 Smith, De Republica Anglorum, a discourse on the Commonwealth of England, 19.