1. Bruce Mansfield, Phoenix of His Age (Toronto, 1979), and Man on His Own: Interpretations of Erasmus, c. 1750–1920 (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1992).

2. Sylvana Seidel-Menchi, Erasmo in Italia 1520–1580 (Torino: Bollati Boringhieri, 1987), 19, 124. This study is based on Inquisition records.

3. To quote Seidel-Menchi again, that the influence of Erasmus’s writings “escaped his control even during his lifetime is a datum that has been widely documented”: Erasmo in Italia, 19. Compare Erasmus’s modest and not very successful efforts to influence the burgeoning industry of German-language translations of his works: Heinz Holeczek, Erasmus Deutsch: Die olkssprachliche Rezeption des Erasmus von Rotterdam in der reformatorischen Öffentlichkeit, 1519–1536 (Stuttgart: Frommann-Holzboog, 1983), 280–281.

4. The most recent treatment is in Jean-Claude Margolin, Érasme, précepteur de l’Europe (Paris, 1995), chap. 6, “La Percée d’Érasme en Pologne et les avatars d’érasmisme dans les régions daubiennes,” especially pp. 192–208, based on French-language works, some by Polish scholars. But the value of Prof. Margolin’s observations is somewhat limited by the book’s lack of either footnotes or a bibliography.

5. Mansfield, Phoenix of His Age, 7–20, quotes also from Beatus Rhenanus (d. 1547), the closest friend of his Basel years, in his preface to the 1540 Opera Omnia: Erasmus had recognized “that ecclesiastical discipline had declined far from the purity of the Gospels, and that the Christian people were weighed down by many practices, and that the consciences of men were ensnared by various tricks.”

6. Henry de Vocht, History of the Foundation and the Rise of the Collegium Trilingue Lovaniense, 1517–1550 (Louvain, 1951–55); Jerry H. Bentley, “The New Testament Orations of Gerardus Morinck,” Humanistica Lovaniensa 29 (1980): 194–236; and Lucien Ceyssens, “Les Débuts du Jansenisme et de l’anti-Jansenisme à Louvain,” in E. J. M. van Eijl, Facultas S. Theologiae Lovaniensis, 1432–1797 (Leuven, 1977), 383.

7. Save as noted, this paragraph is based on Seidel-Menchi, Erasmo in Italia, chapter 1, “Erasmus noster: Un preludio.” There was also, in Seidel-Menchi’s view, a certain reaction against the anti-Italian sentiments of Erasmus’s German humanist admirers: cf. Jacob Ziegler to Erasmus, dated in Rome 22 February 1522, letter 1260 : 143–169 (V, 22–23, CWE 9 : 31–32); on Ziegler’s antipapalism, Kurt Stadtwald, Roman Popes and German Patriots (Geneva, 1996), chap. 4.

8. Letter 1479, 31 August 1524, to Haio Herman of Emden, then a student at Padua, in Allen, 5 : 515–520, published with the 1529 Opus Epistolarum.

9. Seidel-Menchi, Erasmo in Italia, 50, 87–88.

10. See my chapter 12, notes 45–47.

11. Letter 3002 : 650–655, in Allen, 11 : 96–97; letter 3007 : 5, in Allen, 11 : 112, with Allen’s note; letter 3052 : 31–35, in Allen, 11 : 226, Erasmus tells Conrad Goclenius he has declined the honor of a cardinal’s hat; in letter 3066 : 23–68, in Allen, 11 : 241–243, Bishop Piotr Tomicki remonstrates with him for having done so.

12. Andreas Flitner, Erasmus im Urteil seiner Nachwelt (Tübingen, 1952), 39–46; Margolin, Érasme, précepteur de l’Europe, 113–119; Mansfield, Phoenix of His Age, 26; Seidel-Menchi, Erasmo in Italia, 281–282.

13. For a comparison between the philological achievements of Erasmus’s Novum Instrumentum of 1516 and the far more cautious Complutensian Polyglot, the New Testament portion of which was ready for publication well before 1516, see Jerry H. Bentley, Humanists and Holy Writ: New Testament Scholarship in the Renaissance (Princeton, 1983), chapters 3 and 4.

14. Marcel Bataillon, Erasme et l’Espagne, 3 vols. (Geneva: Droz, 1991), 1 : 133–155.

15. Bataillon, Erasme et l’Espagne, 1 : 167, 173, 189–202. Erasmus objected to any tearful commemoration of Christ’s death because it was theologically incorrect and because it was reminiscent of the ancient rite, among women, of bewailing Adonis: LB 9 : 493CD, 617DE, 619AB, 823–825. He also complained about passion plays (LB 9 : 998D) and excessively graphic portraits of the suffering Christ (825F).

16. Bataillon, Erasme et l’Espagne, 1 : 255–261, 284, 301, 410. But Holeczek, Erasmus Deutsch, 18–20, has found for up to 1550 some 4,000 extant copies of 275 editions of 80 Erasmus texts in German, including single epistles or excerpts from larger works.

17. Bataillon, Erasme et l’Espagne, 1 : 465–466, 475–507, 526–527. See also CE for sketches of Maldonado (2 : 370–371), Valdes (3 : 366–368), Vergara (3 : 384–387), and Virues (3 : 400–401). Virues was the Spanish Benedictine whose book in his defense Erasmus initially mistrusted: see my chapter 13, note 17, above.

18. Seidel-Menchi, Erasmo in Italia, 80, confirms Vergerio’s observation from the libraries of those accused of heresy by the Inquisition in Italy. On England, James K. McConica, English Humanists and Reformation Politics (Oxford, 1965), 116–120, 190–195, 235–258.

19. On Berquin, see above, introduction to Part II, note 20; Seidel-Menchi, Erasmo in Italia, 83; Carlos Gilly, “Juan de Valdes: Übersetzer und Bearbeiter von Luthers Schriften in seinem Dialogo de Doctrina, ” Archiv für Reformationsgeschichte 74 (1983): 257–305.

20. Seidel-Menchi, Erasmo in Italia, 111–112; see my chapter 12, note 3.

21. Mansfield, Phoenix of His Age, 89–93; cf. Flitner, Erasmus im Urteil seiner Nachwelt, 16: Melanchthon also attributed to Erasmus, during his 1520 interview with Luther’s prince at Cologne, a comment somewhat sharper than anything found in Spalatin’s account or in Erasmus’s Axiomata pro Causa Lutheri (see above, my chapter 9, note 29): “Luther has struck at the crown of the pope and the bellies of the monks.”

22. Charles imposed on Protestant Germany a religious settlement known as the Augsburg Interim (1548), which was accepted by Melanchthon and his disciples but rejected by those who called themselves “Genuine Lutherans [Gnesio-Lutherani].”

23. There is no indication from Erasmus’s letters that he and Duke George ever met face to face, but the duke in his letters did scold Erasmus for being excessively cautious, e.g., letter 1550 : 27–30, in Allen, 6 : 27 (CWE 11 : 41).

24. Flitner, Erasmus im Urteil, 12–18; Mansfield, Phoenix of His Age, 89–97.

25. Mansfield, Phoenix of His Age, 99–103, 52, 108–110.

26. See my chapter 12, note 53.

27. See my chapter 12, notes 2, 29.

28. On this treatise, Mario Turchetti, “Une question mal posée: Erasme et la Tolérance: L’idée de Sygkatabasis, ” Bibliothèque d’Humanisme et Renaissance 53 (1991): 379–395.

29. Letters 2715, 2786, in Allen, 10; John Patrick Dolan, The Influence of Erasmus, Witzel, and Cassander in the Church Ordinances and Reform Proposals of the United Duchies of Cleve during the Middle Decades of the Sixteenth Century, Reformationsgeschichtliche Studien und Texte 83 (Münster: Aschendorff, 1957), 30–86; Irmgard Hoess, “Georg Witzel,” CE 3 : 458–459.

30. Mario Turchetti, Concordia o Tolleranza? François Bauduin (1520–1573) e i “Moyenneurs” (Geneva, 1984), 13, 51–53, 114–116. The author also notes (p. 396) that men of the middle party (moyenneurs) like Bauduin were a generation later than Erasmus, and had to contend with different problems.

31. Cassander to Joachim Hopperus, 24 July 1562, cited by Turchetti, Concordia o Tolleranza? 392; Dolan, The Influence of Erasmus, Witzel, and Cassander, 87–108.

32. Mansfield, Phoenix of His Age, 43–48. At the synod of Dordrecht (1618–1619) orthodox Calvinists definitively excluded from church positions followers of the late Jacobus Arminius, also known as Remonstrants from a petition protesting against such exclusion. The Arminians had refused to accept the doctrine of absolute predestination and they campaigned for a form of state control over the church that was contrary to Calvinist norms for an autonomous ecclesiastical polity. See Carl Bangs, Arminius: A Study in the Dutch Reformation (Nashville and New York, 1971).

33. For Lydius see Flitner, Erasmus im Urteil, 90–92; for Lydius’s Apologia, LB 10 : 1759–1780.

34. Flitner, Erasmus im Urteil, 96–100.

35. Flitner, Erasmus im Urteil, 102; Geraard Brandt, The History of the Reformation and Other Ecclesiastical Transformations in and about the Low Countries, 4 vols. (London: T. Childe, 1720–1740), 1 : 308–309. See also Margolin, Érasme, précepteur de l’Europe, chapter 3, “Du College Trilingue de Louvain à l`École Illustre’ de Leyde, ou l’age d’or de l’humanisme pedagogique aux Pays-Bas.”

36. Andries Jacobszoon, “Prothocolle van alle die reysen…bij mij gedaen,” 2 vols., Gemeentearchief Amsterdam, vol. 1, entry for 19–21 August 1532 (the quote); see also Resolutiën van de Staten van Holland, 276 vols. (n.p., n.d.), 1 : 202, entry for 24–25 April 1533, and letter 2815 : 15–25, in Allen, 10 : 243, Allen’s note. According to the “Tresoriers Rekeningen” of Amsterdam for these years (Gemeentearchief Amsterdam), the highest paid city official had an annual salary of 70 guilders.

37. J. A. L. Lancee, Erasmus en het Hollandse Humanisme (Utrecht, 1979), 145–147.

38. Flitner, Erasmus im Urteil, 137.

39. Johan Huizinga, Erasmus and the Reformation (New York, 1957), 193–194; see also the Dutch authors discussed by Flitner, Erasmus im Urteil, 137.

40. See the paper by M. E. H. M. Mout in the collection of essays to be edited by Christiane Berkevns-Stevelink and Hans Posthumus Meyjes, based on a conference held at the Netherlands Institute for Advanced Studies (Wassenaat) in May 1993: “Le Pay-Bas, carrefour de la tolérance en l’Europe.”

41. The reference is to the 1508 adage “Auris Batava” (“The Batavian Ear,” on which see M. E. H. M. Mout, “‘Het Bataafse Oor.’ De lotgevallen van Erasmus’ Adagium ‘Auris Batava’ in de Nederlandse geschiedschrijving,” Mededelingen van de Koninklijke Nederlandse Akademie der Wetenschappen, Afdeling Letterkunde, n.s., vol. 56, no. 2 (Amsterdam, 1993).

42. For translation and commentary on the 95 letters and information on Erasmus’s Polish correspondents, see Maria Cytowska, Korespondencja Erazma z Roterdamu z Polakami (Warsaw, 1965).

43. Encompassing much of what is now Russia, Belarus, and Ukraine as well as the Baltic states, Poland-Lithuania was created by the marriage in 1385 of Polish princes Jadwiga with the hitherto pagan monarch of Lithuania, Wladislaw Jagiello.

44. W. Pociecha, “Zygmunt (Sigismund) I 1506–1548,” in W. F. Reddaway, J. H. Penson, O. Halecki, R. Dyboski, The Cambridge History of Poland (Cambridge, 1950; reprint, New York, 1971), 301–322; Zygmunt Wojciechowski, Zygmunt Stary (1506–1548) (Warsaw, 1979), especially chaps. 2, 5, 8, 12, 13, and 15.

45. The Sforzas ruled Milan from 1454 to 1498 and intermittently thereafter, but from 1535 the duchy became a Spanish-Habsburg dependency.

46. Zygmunt’s first wife (married 1512) had been Zapolyai’s sister, Barbara.

47. Halina Kowalska, “Sigismund I,” CE 3 : 249–251; Jerzy Kieskowski, Kanclerz Krzysztof Szydlowiecki z Djiejow Kultury i Sztuki Zygmuntowskich Czasow, 2 vols. (Poznan, 1912), 1 : 209–221, 237–255; Wojciechowski, Zygmunt Stary, 276–313, especially 278–279, 282–283 (the phrases in quotes).

48. Maria Cytowska, “Hieronim Laski,” and “Jan (II) Laski,” CE 2 : 294–296, 297–301.

49. One exception might be a diplomat and later bishop Erasmus never met, Johannes Dantiscus, who was lionized by Erasmus’s friends in Brabant for his forthright defense of biblical philology at the highest levels of the court in Brussels: Cytowska, Korespondencja Erazma z Polakami, 11–13; Jakob Jesperson to Erasmus, letter 2570 : 83–109, in Allen, 9 : 385–386. Zebrzydowski was the nephew of Andrzej Krzycki, on whom see below, this chapter, note 52.

50. Allen quote in his introduction to Erasmus to Zygmunt I, letter 1819, in Allen, 7 : 59 : 60; Erasmus to Laski, 8 March 1526, letter 1674 : 16–22, in Allen, 6 : 279, indicates that Erasmus was originally thinking of a letter that Laski himself would bring to the court on his return. This was the same letter in which Erasmus was at pains to explain to Laski his differences with Pellikan on the Eucharist: see my chapter 11, note 61.

51. See the honorable mention of Laski and his uncle in letter 1593 : 133–144, in Allen, 6 : 138; Laski was at this time (August 1525) still resident in Erasmus’s house.

52. Erasmus to Szydlowiecki, letter 1593 : 136–139, in Allen, 6 : 138; Halina Kowalska, “Andrzej Krzycki,” CE 2 : 275–278, suggests that Krzycki may have given copies of his books (see below, this chapter, note 68) to the Laskis to pass on to Erasmus; Erasmus to Krzycki, letter 1629 : 1–10, in Allen, 6 : 194; to Tomicki, letter 1919 : 1–6, in Allen, 7 : 275.

53. James D. Tracy, The Politics of Erasmus: A Pacifist Intellectual and His Political Milieu (Toronto, 1978), 53–54; CE 2 : 299: during the period that Jan (II) Laski was in the diplomatic service of Janos Zapolyai (1529–1531), he refrained from corresponding with Erasmus, lest he cause embarrassment to both.

54. For Gattinara’s request that Erasmus edit Dante’s De Monarchia, a classic statement of the Ghibelline or imperialist argument vis-à-vis the papacy, see letter 1790a, in Allen, 7 : 470–471, with Allen’s introduction to letter 1872, in Allen, 8 : 157, and Bataillon, Érasme et l’Espagne, 249; in Beatus Rhenanus’s 1540 vita of Erasmus, “An un-Erasmian imperialism is the one note that does not ring true: ‘Indeed Erasmus has always sought to give honor to the most noble house of Austria’”; Mansfield, Phoenix of His Age, 17–20.

55. Tomicki to Erasmus, letter 3014 : 66–71, in Allen, 11 : 129, published by Erasmus in 1536; Erasmus to Henckel, letter 2230 : 21, in Allen, 8 : 296, published in 1532.

56. Letter 2174 : 16–22, in Allen, 8 : 189; letter 2295 : 9–19, in Allen, 8 : 319–320; cf. chap. 7, n. 26.

57. “Puerpera” (“The New Mother”), ASD I : 3, 454, “Carolus molitur nouuam totius orbis monarchiam” (my italics). The translation by Craig Thompson, The Colloquies of Erasmus (Chicago, 1965), 269, “Charles is preparing to extend the boundaries of his realm,” does not capture the sting in this remark. For the dispute with Carvajal, Erasmus to Alfonso Valdes, letter 2126 : 4–40, in Allen, 8 : 90, with Allen’s note concerning the Colloquia. Erasmus here disputed Carajal’s invocation of Aristotle: the philosopher indeed “prefers” monarchy as a form of government, but “he refers not to a monarchy over the whole world, but to the ruler that each people has, like the Cretans.”

58. Letter 2225 : 8–10, in Allen, 8 : 289; letter 2481 : 63–70, in Allen, 9 : 254; the reference to “two suns” may be an allusion to the traditional analogy by which the emperor was said to rule on earth as the sun ruled in the sky, an analogy defended by Carvajal but rejected by Erasmus.

59. Maria Cytowska, Korrespondencja Erazma z Polakami, 11; letter 2279 : 2–4, in Allen, 8 : 369; Archivos de Simancas, Estado 638, no. 6, a ten-page report of Laski’s mission on Ferdinand’s behalf (March 1540); Erasmus to More, letter 2211 : 39–41, in Allen, 8 : 272. See also Jan Laski to Erasmus, from Cracow, ca. 25 August 1533, letter 2862 : 61–71, in Allen, 10 : 295:

As to what you write about the Turk being driven off [letter 2780 18, X, 180], would that it were true! He for his part boasts that he nowhere saw the enemy come to meet him…and I pass over the thousands of men who either perished or were carried off into perpetual slavery. It is certain that the Sultan himself, to whom every tenth captive is counted out, received 7,000 for his portion—you can guess the rest. Thus do we triumph over the Turks. On this fight between the two Caesars [emperors], I send you an elegent epigram brought from Italy, which elegantly gives each what he deserves.

In Polish usage, the sultan was referred to as the Caesar of the Turks. For various parts of the Mediterranean there is evidence for fevered speculation about a climactic struggle between the two great rulers for world dominion: Sanjay Subrahmanyam, Centre du Hautes Etudes en Sciences Historiques (Paris), “Sixteenth Century Millenarianism from the Tagus to the Ganges” (unpublished paper).

60. Letter 1819 : 136–147, in Allen, 7 : 63, with Allen’s introduction to the letter, pp. 59–60; letter 1915 : 40, in Allen, 7 : 268, with Allen’s note.

61. Letter 1954 : 9–10, in Allen, 7 : 333; to Krzycki, letter 2030 : 52–57, in Allen, 7 : 450, and to Szydlowiecki, letter 2032 : 8–12, in Allen, 8 : 452. Neither of the last two letters was published.

62. Antonin to Erasmus, letter 1810 : 65–8, in Allen, 7 : 31; Erasmus to Antonin, letter 1825 : 6–10, in Allen, 7 : 72. Cytowska, Korespondencja Erazma z Rotterdamu, 14, calls attention to this advice to Antonin, as well as to an effort to “rein in” the “adventurous anti-Habsburg policy of Hieronim Laski” in letter 1915 : 15, in Allen, 7 : 267: “I would scold Hieronim for his boldness, were it not too late”; as Allen points out, Hieronim was now in Istanbul negotiating an agreement between Zapolyai and the sultan.

63. Letter 2713 : 7–20, in Allen, 10 : 91; the text continues with a description of the two papal legates in Charles’s camp, the one a Medici nephew of the pope and the other Erasmus’s old enemy, Girolamo Aleandro.

64. For a model work of its kind, see the ongoing Austrian edition of Ferdinand’s correspondence, appearing as volumes of the series Veröffentlichungen der Kommission für Neuere Geschichte Österreichs: Wilhelm Bauer, Die Korrespondenz Ferdinands I, Familienkorrespondenz bis 1526, vol. 11 (Vienna, 1912); Wilhelm Bauer and Robert Lacroix, Familienkorrespondenz 1527–1528, and Familienkorrespondenz 1529 und 1530, vols. 30, 31 (Vienna, 1938); Herwig Wolfram, Christiane Thomas, and Gernot Heiss, Familienkorrespondenz 1531 und 1532, vol. 58, parts 1–3, (Vienna, 1973–1984).

65. Letter 2452 : 29–32, in Allen, 9 : 189. This was also the standpoint of Erasmus in Consultatio de Bello Turcis Inferendis (1530), LB 5 : 345–368: Christian powers must if need be gather their strength for resisting the Turk, but peace would provide both a respite for the body politic and an opportunity for conversion of the Turks.

66. Letter 1393, and Allen’s preface to letter 1419, in Allen, 5 : 399–400.

67. Catalogus Lucubrationum (Catalogue of Works), in Allen, 1, p. 31, line 28–p. 32, line 36 (CWE, letter 1341A, 9 : 343–345). Allen positively identifies two of the Luther letters in question and has a suggestion for the third.

68. Halina Kowalska, “Andrzej Krzycki,” CE 2 : 277, and letter 1629, in Allen, 6 : 194–195 (CWE 11 : 318–320): Hieronim Laski gave Erasmus Krzycki’s Encomia Lutheri (1524), and on a subsequent visit Jan Laski brought Krzycki’s De Negotio Prutenico Epistola (1525), a justification of King Zygmunt’s recognition of the erstwhile grand master of the Teutonic Knights as duke of Prussia. With a letter acknowledging both gifts (1629), Erasmus sent Krzycki in return the work of another learned bishop, Cuthbert Tunstall’s De Arte Supputandi. Krzycki sent another of his works via Marcin Slap (who with Zebrzydowski visited Erasmus in 1528), his De Ratione et Sacrificio Missae (On the Doctrine that the Mass is a Sacrifice), and Erasmus’s response may have been more along the lines of what the Polish bishop had hoped for in 1524: “Here in Freiburg two books have appeared, the one by Guimundus, the other by Alger [both edited by Erasmus], both asserting that the Lord’s true body and blood is present in the Eucharist, in my judgment not infelicitously. The same publisher would have reprinted your work, except that he feared your publisher might be bringing his wares to the Frankfurt book fair”: letter 2375 : 1–15, in Allen, 9 : 25.

69. Letter 2175, in Allen, 8 : 190–191. See above, my chapter 11, note 62.

70. Kowalska, “Andrzej Krzycki”: letter 2876 : 23–26, in Allen, 10 : 314–315, and letter 2911 : 22–26, in Allen, 10 : 363. See CE 2 : 299: Erasmus evidently did not know that Laski himself had sent one of his servants to Wittenberg to open contacts with Luther and Melanchthon. Margolin, Érasme, précepteur de l’Europe, 200, reads Erasmus’s description of Melanchthon in the letter to Laski “an obvious exaggeration, or a touch of humor,” since Melanchthon’s irenic orientation was known to all. But this reading is not consistent with the specific flavor of Erasmus’s correspondence with Poland, stressing religious orthodoxy.

71. Halina Kowalska, “Andrzej Zebrzydowski,” CE 3 : 473–474; Wladislaw Wislocki, ed., Andrzej Zebrzydowski: Korespondencja z Lat 1546–1553, Acta Historica Res Gestas Poloniae Illustrantia, vol. 1 (Cracow, 1878). P. Fox, “The Reformation in Poland,” Cambridge History of Poland, esp. 330–346; Mansfield, Phoenix of His Age, 24.

72. Wislocki, Korespondencja, letters 53, 55, 56, 60, 62, 66, 71–73, 79–80, 87, 91, 104, 109, 128–129, 143, 154.

73. Wislocki, Korespondencja, letters 28, 170, 181 (the letter to Bona), 194, 246, 346. It seems he was allowed to build his kitchen and he did attend the diet.

74. Wislocki, Korespondencja, letters 175, 187, 250, 275, 280, 333, 340, 352, 455.

75. Wislocki, Korespondencja, letters 33, 43, 90, 224, 248, 253, 358, 385, 401, 476, 485.

76. Wislocki, Korespondencja, letters 398, 430, 431.

77. Wislocki, Korespondencja, letters 87, 330, 837.

78. Wislocki, Korespondencja, letters 398, 431, 837; Kowalska, “Zebrzydowski,” CE 2 : 494.

79. See above, chapter 11, notes 58–63; Allen, 6 : 209, quotes from a letter of Laski to Pellikan, 31 August 1544:

Although you were a supporter of Oecolampadius’s doctrine, he did not so much condemn it as say that it was not sufficiently proven to him, so that I did not think there would be a rupture in your friendship: especially because Erasmus, in his liberty of speaking with me, plainly testified that he could not be certain of the foundation [ratio] of his doctrine either. For he said that certain things about the doctrine to which he held bothered him, but he could find no solid basis for changing his belief.

80. The best study is Halina Kowalska, Dzialalnosc Reformatorska Jana Laskiego (Wroclaw, 1969). See also Maria Cytowska, “Jan Laski,” CE 2 : 297–301; Hermann Dalton, John a Lasco: His Earlier Life and Labours, trans. Maurice J. Evans (London, 1886); Oskar Bartel, Jan Laski, Czesc I, 1499–1556 (Warsaw, 1955); and Andrew Pettegree, Emden in the Reformation (Oxford, 1992), 21–24, 32–34 (the quote).

81. Oskar Bartel, “Johannes a Lasco und Erasmus von Rotterdam,” Luther Jahrbuch 32 (1965): 47–66. In this connection Bartel discusses Laski’s vehement denunciation of monastic life and his irenicism, though he believes Laski can have found support for the latter in Melanchthon as well as Erasmus.

82. Bartel, “Johannes a Lasco und Erasmus,” 61.

83. Bartel, “Johannes a Lasco und Erasmus,” 63–64, notes that Laski in his earliest Reformation writings avoided reference to Luther and only began to speak favorably of the Wittenberg reformer after about 1545.

84. Bartel, Jan Laski, 149–151; for the Epitome’s views on the Eucharist and on communion with Anabaptists, see Abraham Kuyper, ed., Joannis a Lasco Opera, 2 vols. (Amsterdam, 1866), 1 : 550–553 (see also the “Epistola ad quendam doctum amicum de verbis Coenae Domini,” pp. 557–572), and p. 521: “Nunquam illos [Anabaptistas] a nobis nostraque communione excludendos ullo modo esse putavimus…” (“We have never believed that they should in any way be excluded from communion with us”).

85. Kuyper, Opera, 484–485; Calvin’s influence is stressed by Bartel, “Johannes a Lasco und Erasmus,” 61, 63.

86. Kuyper, Opera, 486, 487, 489. J. Wayne Baker, Heinrich Bullinger and the Covenant: The Other Reformed Tradition (Athens, Ohio, 1980), chap. 2, “Predestination and Covenant in Bullinger’s Thought.”

87. Kuyper, Opera, 495, 496, 498, 499.

88. Kuyper, Opera, 489–502.

89. Allen, 7 : 275, mentions that an edition of (the first part of) Hyperaspistes was published in Cracow in 1526, with a dedication to Tomicki.

90. LB 10 : 1340CE, 1530C, 1459BC, 1451DE, 1340CE (again), 1398A.

91. Douglas H. Schantz, Crautwald and Erasmus: A Study in Humanism and Radical Reform in Sixteenth-Century Silesia (Baden-Baden, 1992), 147.

92. The battle for Erasmus’s legacy between Catholics and Protestants is best documented by McConica, English Humanists and Reformation Politics.

93. Seidel-Menchi, Erasmo in Italia, 54.