Humanism, Reading, and English Literature, 1430–1530 (review)

Daniel Wakelin defines humanism as “a self-conscious commitment to return to the classics.” The work of several decades has charted “a small but fertile field of humanist activity in England during the fifteenth century” (4). It is, however, generally thought that humanism in Latin, whether of England or of Italy, had little impact on English literature of the century. Wakelin’s purpose is to identify English literature of the fifteenth century that “studies or imitates classical literature in this self-conscious way” (8). The chapters are arranged chronologically, but overall Wakelin’s aim is to disrupt old narratives rather than to offer a new one. Instead of offering a summary, map, or itinerary to guide readers and shape their expectations, he offers a metaphor. His monograph will mix anew the materials of literary history and the history of humanism with the history of reading. In the six chapters that follow, we are invited to observe Wakelin in his literary laboratory, assembling large amounts of original data and reading them closely. The result “blends an unpredictable compound”; received histories will “dissolve” and “we must begin concocting them afresh” (22).

An introductory chapter discusses humanism as a practice of reading, focusing on readings of Boethius. The translations of De consolatione philosophiae by Chaucer and John Walton, and a translation of Vegetius’s Epitoma rei militaris possibly also by Walton, are analyzed in relation to evidence for humanist readings of these texts. Marginal comments and glosses and parallel texts (English alongside Latin) suggest that later readers have “intruded their classical passions into the English translations” (14). Wakelin handles the evidence with exemplary care and imagination. It reveals a “process,” though not its full extents or purposes (as Wakelin observes with his characteristically dry wit, “thoughts which fit into margins are small ones” [17]).

Chapter 2 focuses on the role of Humfrey, Duke of Gloucester (1390–1447), in promoting humanism and its impact on vernacular literature. Duke Humfrey’s historical role as patron of Italian authors and scholars and collector and donor of humanist books is less the focus here than his representation as a reader—which, Wakelin points out, strongly shapes our knowledge of his historical role. The focal texts in this chapter are Lydgate’s Fall of Princes (commissioned by Humfrey), the anonymous On Husbondrie (1441–43), and various letters. In these sources, Humfrey’s reading is represented as essential to the prince and statesman. The very page design of On Husbondrie (helpfully described in detail, though an illustration would have been useful) implies that the text is intended for a reader trained in the reading of Latin taught in school and university. Humfrey, as an “imaginary humanist reader” (49), serves as a model for real readers to emulate. One example of emulation is Knyghthode and Bataile (1460), another translation of Vegetius, whose form and page design in all three copies imitate those of On Husbondrie.

Wakelin returns to Knyghthode and Bataile in chapter 3, considering this translation of Vegetius alongside a translation, ascribed to Osbern Bokenham, of De consulatu Stilichonis, a fourth-century poem by Claudian in praise of general Stilicho. This translation was made for Richard, Duke of York, in 1445 and survives in only one manuscript. This copy provides the Latin original in parallel with the English translation. Wakelin carries out a close comparison of source and (mis-) translation to substantiate his point that “in trying not to say much a poem one thousand years out-of-date proves ideal” (77). The message is in the process itself: “The activities of translation and allusion . . . themselves suggest the greatness of the present just by recovering antiquity” (80). So with Knyghthode and Bataile. Ancient practical instruction in warfare is unimportant (hardly surprisingly); “what matters instead is the humanist process of recovering of the past” (81), though this text also demonstrably responds to contemporary politics.

Chapter 4 focuses on the reading and writing of William Worcester (1415–c. 1483), probably best known as secretary to Sir...