Talk:Thomas More
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article falls within the scope of WikiProject Writing systems, a WikiProject interested in improving the encyclopaedic coverage and content of articles relating to writing systems on Wikipedia. If you would like to help out, you are welcome to drop by the project page and/or leave a query at the project’s talk page. |
| ??? | This article has not yet been assigned a rating on the Project’s quality scale. |
| ??? | This article has not yet been assigned a rating on the Project’s importance scale. |
 |
Thomas More is part of the WikiProject Saints, an effort to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Saints on the Wikipedia. This includes but is not limited to saints as well as those not so affiliated, country and region-specific topics, and anything else related to saints. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. |
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale. |
| High | This article has been rated as high-importance on the importance scale. |
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page. | ||
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the Project's quality scale. Please rate the article and then leave a short summary here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article. [FAQ] | ||
[edit] Raphael Hythlodaeus
I didn't see it mentioned in the Utopia page nor in the Utopia section on Thomas More's page, but I included the double/paradoxical meaning of Raphael Hythlodaeus (purveyor of truth/knowledge vs dispenser of nonesense), like the meaning of Utopia (no place / good place).
The Archangel Raphael was said to be the purveyor of knowledge, so, made sense to me to add it.
I checked it in a couple hardcopy encyclopedias and the like, but given More's piety and how witty/fitting (especially given "Utopia") it would be, I didn't think that in the context such a reference would be entirely neccessary.
142.58.211.84 21:11, 30 November 2006 (UTC)J
[edit] The date of More’s birth
If I knew how to add a footnote, I would add the following note in reference to the date of More's birth:
"The most likely date. Confusion in the records of More's birth prevent certainty, and he might have been born on February 7, 1477, or February 6, 1478"
The exact date of More’s birth is a curious mystery. It should be no mystery at all, as we have a precise record of the day, date and hour of the event written by More’s own father as a formal record of the birth.
On two blank leaves at the back of a copy, now at the library of Trinity College, Cambridge, of Geoffrey of Monmouth’s Historia regum Britanniae, a fanciful and very popular collection of legends about the early kings of Britain, John More kept a record, in Latin, of his marriage and of the births of his children. The record of Thomas’s birth can be translated as:
Memorandum, that on the Friday next after the Feast of the Purification of the Blessed Virgin Mary, between two and three in the morning, was born Thomas More, son of John More, gentleman, in the seventeenth year of King Edward, the Fourth after the Conquest of England.
This seems clear enough. People in the 15th Century kept track of time differently than we do, but a little calculation can make John More’s note plain.
Edward IV began his reign on 4 March 1461 when he defeated the army of King Henry VI and seized the throne. The 17th year of his reign ran from 4 March 1477 to 3 march 1478, at least it does if you ignore, as John More did, the embarrassing fact that in 1470 Henry regained the throne for a year before Edward got it back.
The Feast of the Purification of the Blessed Virgin Mary commemorates the visit of the Holy Family to the Temple in Jerusalem to fulfill its duties under the Jewish law, as is recounted in Luke 2:22-35. Since the 7th Century, the feast has been celebrated on the 2d of February. In 1478, the 2d of February fell on a Monday, so the Friday following would be the 6th.
Thus, it is clear that Thomas More was born on Friday, 6 February 1478. Or it would be clear had it not been for John More’s desire for precision, because, at some time after writing the original note he added, right after the words “Blessed Virgin Mary,” the following: “to wit, the seventh day of February.”
It is clear that John More got something wrong. There are three possibilities: (a) John got the day of the week right and the date, but the year was wrong, thus 7 February 1477; (b) John got the day right and the year, but the date was wrong, thus 6 February 1478; or (c) John got the date right and the year, but the day of the week was Saturday not Friday, thus 7 February 1478.
I think the last possibility is the most likely. Thomas was born so soon after midnight that the birth was originally entered as having occurred on the previous day, the Friday. The error was later corrected. --Bvtbvt 16:03, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Photo Captions
The photo caption 'House of Thomas More in London' is incorrect. The photograph is of More Passage at Lincoln's Inn. More never lived in this building, which was built long after More's death. More was a member of Lincoln's Inn, but did not live there. The only building remaining in London where More once lived is Crosby Hall, now in Chelsea.
A small point on another caption, the statue of More is beside, not in front of, Chelesa Old Church.
[edit] Event
An event mentioned in this article is a May 16 selected anniversary
[edit] Only posthumously a saint
"posthumously known also as Saint Thomas More..."
Hasn't everyone who has ever been canonized a saint acquired that distinction posthumously?
- Yes, to become a saint in Christianity one must be dead. TheExile 04:54, 18 April 2006 (UTC)
[edit] early life
"seriously considered becoming a monk"? according to Erasmus, who would have us believe that any man of intellect must require some direct route of access to god. In fact More's time in the Charterhouse (again only testified by Erasmus) was quite commonplace for a lay religious man seeking to: 1, impose a religious (monastic) discipline on his life 2 create an aura around his name, en route to a life in the highest represetative bodies of politics (this accords to his early work for henry were he went unpaid for over a year, another act of rhetorical humility in order to show his devotion to the realm and lack of ambition- itself a hugely ambitous ploy)
furthermore he never abandonded his law career whilst in this charterhouse he became a civic officer for london (deputy sheriff?)
it seems hard to title thomas as doubtful over the course his life should take. yes, the fact that he is reported to have desired a more religous life than he had is important to an article on him. However, surely the point that must be made on close readings of his work is that he consistently strove for harmony between secular and religious life (a civic, christian humanism) until Henry VIII's supremacy act compromised his the concilaition of his ideologies?
let me know if i'm violently wrong -conal 14:57 14MAR06 UK
regarding "also considered joining the Carthusian order. Perhaps because he judged himself incapable of celibacy, More finally decided to marry in 1505" : I am not quite sure if these expressions are precisely true. I do not think Erasmus shared the opinion in the comment above (he was not a monk himself but a free-minded priest). Erasmus writes that, after his years in the Charterhouse, Thomas More married "ne pouvant secouer le désir de prendre femme" (I do not have the original text). He was just in love for an adolescent woman ; but, according to the rules of the time, he agreed to marry her elder sister Jane Colt. I mean, according to Erasmus, the point is not the disadvantage of celibacy, but rather the advantage of marriage. - FrédéricLN 1 apr. 2006
[edit] King's lineage
Disagreed upon bits: "... as the king's lineage was, in his eyes, traceable directly to Jesus Christ, and should remain so."
What does this mean about lineage traceable to Jesus - if he got divorced his lineage would not change, nor would the lineage his children trace through him change if he got divorced. If we mean he future children would be illegimate because of the divorce, they would still have the same lineage, although they might not be eligible for kingship. Besides I was not aware that anyone -ever- beleived that Jesus had children. Certainly More as a Catholic wouldn't have beleived this. -rmhermen
- No, you can find esoteric speculation on this if you care to. It basically comes down to: It would have been unusual and worthy of note if a guy in Jesus' culture wasn't married; nobody notes this; therefore he was probably married. Mary Magdalene is usually given as the best candidate for Mrs. Jesus. (And the wedding at Cana, John 2:1 may be an account of Jesus' own.)
-
- That's a huge amount of speculation, better suited to The Da Vinci Code. Whatever the facts neither More nor Henry believed that Kings were descended from Jesus in the biological sense. DJ Clayworth 19:14, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
I've heard some people talk about the divine right of kings to rule, but that is not an issue of lineage, but rather about authority.
I think that must be a misunderstanding. Wasn't the issue that Henry VIII declared himself head of the church?
...Henry didn't declare himself head of the English church; the method used was statute law in the passing of the Act of Supremacy. In other words, the authority for the change was derived from parliament. BTLizard 6 July 2005 11:03 (UTC)
[edit] Inventor of utopian fiction?
another issue: was More the 'inventor' of Utopian fiction? I know he gave us the word...--MichaelTinkler
There was Plato's Republic, of course, and there was the Greek myth of the Golden and the Silver age, which both have similarities to Utopian literature, and more surely had good knowledge of the Republic (studying in Oxford under the likes of Grocyn will do that to you). But as far as the term Utopian literature goes, Utopia was the first such piece of writing and thus, logically, lent its name to the genre. -- Bringa
[edit] Head of the Church
uhhhh - Cardinal Wolsey was archbishop of York and papal legate of the Church in England pre-Oath of Supremacy, which still isn't quite "head of the church". I'm revising now. --MichaelTinkler
Michael, you've done a fantastic job helping this article along, but I have a question for you: the article says "which required all who should be called upon to take an oath (1) acknowledging the legitimacy," etc., which I misread twice. It seems to me to be worded in such a way that "all who are called upon to take an oath" must do something, when what you mean is "all who are (summoned to the king's court?) must take an oath affirming 1) and 2)." Does that make any sense? I'd change it except I'm not sure I understand what you mean and my entire knowledge of Thomas More comes from the (fantastic, IMHO) movie A Man for All Seasons. --Koyaanis Qatsi
yes, that does make sense, except that it wasn't necessarily the king's court. I know it was at Lambeth, which is the palace of the Archbishop of Canterbury, to take the oath. Hmmm. I love A Man for All Seasons, too (though lately it's come under a little criticism for making More a little toooo mid-century by-damn-I'm-an-independent-American kinda man). I'll look at it and revise.
[edit] folly
"[Desiderius Erasmus]? dedicated his The Praise of Folly to More - the word "folly" is moria in Greek."
moria or moira?
- Moira = fate; Moria = foolishness.
Thanks.
[edit] quotes
Shouldn't the quotes section just link to Wikiquote? There's already an entry for More there at http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Thomas_More . It would be even better if someone would add the two quotes we have here to there. --pie4all88 03:25, 2 Sep 2004 (UTC)
Well they do seem to pop up a lot. There are quotes under George Marshall and under Louis Mountbatten, 1st Earl Mountbatten of Burma just off the top of my head. I think they add a nice bit of flavour to an article. Call me old fashioned. I mean by all means get rid of them but I don't think a couple of quotes at the bottom of a page do any harm. Obviously if there were twenty of them that might be another matter. Tricky one. --Mr impossible 23:26, 2 Sep 2004 (UTC)
[edit] corrections/more detail
Wasn't it in 1534 (and not 1535) that More was called to sign the Act of Succession and the Act of Supremacy? If I remember correctly, he was jailed for fifteen months in the Tower prior to his execution. Also, I'm currently preparing a presentation on More's connections to the European circle of Humanists (Erasmus, Giles, Bude, Lupset, Busleiden...), but I really don't know how in-depth people want this More article here to be. It could do with some serious brushing up though; starting a More biography in his 50th year is surely not a good idea. -- Bringa
[edit] More as Traitor?
- Um, a categorization of this article made me twitch reflexively. How is More classified as a traitor? --Penta 22:16, 19 Oct 2004 (UTC)
- Well he was classified as such by the King and the King's courts. That's why he was executed. DJ Clayworth 19:11, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Non-Christian Utopia
The page describes More's Utopia as non-Christian. It's been years since I read it, but as I recall the Utopians were converted to Christianity by the crew of a European ship that had strayed there. I'll check. Paul B 12.08 15 March 2005 (UTC)
-
- nope. I'm wromng. They are in the process of being converted... Paul B 12.24 15 March (UTC)
[edit] Henry VIII's divorce
The article states " Pope Julius II had issued a formal dispensation from the biblical injunction against a man marrying his brother's widow. ". That is inaccurate. The dispensation was issued because the marriage was not consumated. Queen Isabella said that her daughter was a virgin. The Pope accepted this. - and, of course thats why it would have been politically difficult to agree to Henry's divorce, it would mean calling Isabella a liar. --ClemMcGann 16:21, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Religious intolerance
While Chancellor of England, Thomas More used the police power of the State to imprison, torture and burn alive Reformed Christians. His all consuming passion was to arrest and burn alive William Tyndale—the father of the English Bible. He wrote millions of words refuting William's Tyndale's books. Any description of the man that ignores these unfortunate details is seriously incomplete. -Stibbs 31Oct05
- I've tried to address your concerns in my most recent edits. Eb.hoop 03:10, 1 November 2005 (UTC)
I find the page unfair in this respect. True, 1) Thomas More WAS an opponent to Luther and to any division of the Christian Church, and 2) Thomas More DID condemn Reformed Christians and assumed that to be a legitimate decision for a Lord Chancellor and for the State's Justice. But he but did it very reluctantly, as many examples and testimonies show. In most individual cases he refused to condemn. For this reason, in the sentence "A number of modern writers, such as Richard Marius, have attacked More for alleged religious fanaticism and intolerance (manifested, for instance, in his enthusiastic persecution of heretics).", the word "enthusiastic" is untrue. - FrédéricLN, 1 apr 06
Sir Thomas More unlike the Lutherans in Germany and Henry VIII in England believed it absurd for a secular ruler to be head of the Christian Church. We see how foolish that idea was then and now as Prince Charles will soon be head of the Church of England with Camilla as his Queen. Charles in English law will be the legal head of the Church and not the Archbishop of Canterbury? Maybe Reformed Christians would like President Bush as the head of their Church. He does appear to speak directly to God as Henry VIII did also claim
[edit] Concern for Education
Thomas More was highly concerned with children education. He gave his daughters the same education that his boys' - most uncommon choice at this time [edit : oops, it's already written in "early life"]. His daughter (and confident) Margaret Roper has been a renowned translator and humanist. Two forged words he uses in Utopia do not have any know greek or latin or other roots, and I guess (this is not a very verifiable content) they may have been forged by children at his house : "tranibore(s)" and "syphogrant(s)". - FrédéricLN, 1 apr 06
[edit] Irony (?)
Is the word "ironically" necessary or justified in the following sentence (taken from the lead paragraph)?
- Ironically, he was also added to the calendar of saints in the Anglican Church in 1980.
Thanks for your input --Dpr 03:15, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
- Considering that he was a staunch defender of the Catholic Church and the sovereignty of the Pope, it is indeed ironic that he was added into the Anglican saint calendar. TheExile 18:11, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Infomation
shouldn't the information about him be at the top of the page? 154.20.174.54 03:01, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Was he sacked of Oxford?
because he was studiying greek in his own account?, i just read that on a philosophy book, back then greek was the language of the oh-so-hated orthdox church.
[edit] 49ers fan?
That doesnt sound right. Its in the first sentence. If there is some reasoning behind it then please elaborate. Otherwise i think it needs to be deleted.
