Catholic and Protestant Translations of the Imitatio Christi, 1425–1650

From Late Medieval Classic to Early Modern Bestseller

Maximilian von Habsburg

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2016
• ISBN:
  9781317169291
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Theology & Religion
• Subtopic: History of Religion

The Imitatio Christi is considered one of the classic texts of Western spirituality. There were 800 manuscript copies and more than 740 different printed editions of the Imitatio between its composition in the fifteenth century and 1650. During the Reformation period, the book retained its popularity with both Protestants and Catholics; with the exception of the Bible it was the most frequently printed book of the sixteenth century. In this pioneering study, the remarkable longevity of the Imitatio across geographical, chronological, linguistic and confessional boundaries is explored. Rather than attributing this enduring popularity to any particular quality of universality, this study suggests that its key virtue was its appropriation by different interest groups. That such an apparently Catholic and monastic work could be adopted and adapted by both Protestant reformers and Catholic activists (including the Jesuits) poses intriguing questions about our understanding of Reformation and Counter Reformation theology and confessional politics. This study focuses on the editions of the Imitatio printed in English, French, German and Latin between the 1470s and 1650. It offers an ambitious and comprehensive survey of the process of translation and its impact and contribution to religious culture. In so doing it offers a fresh analysis of spirituality and devotion within their proper late medieval and early modern contexts. It also demonstrates that spirituality was not a peripheral dimension of religion, but remains at the very heart of both Catholic and Protestant self-perception and identity.

CHAPTER ONE
Introduction

The Imitatio Christi is considered one of the classics of western spirituality. Within less than a century of its composition, it existed in more than 800 manuscripts, no doubt benefiting from the devotio moderna’s prolific manuscript-copying tradition. The movement’s geographical position was advantageous, facilitating access to the Dutch-, French- and German-speaking worlds and resulting in numerous vernacular versions of the Imitatio. The conservative nature of the early printing industry ensured that the Imitatio enjoyed widespread circulation both in Latin and in the vernacular, with over 100 editions printed before 1500.1

An identifiable 639 editions were published between 1500 and 1650 in a wide range of languages (including Czech, Hungarian, Polish and Ukrainian), thereby meriting the Imitatio’s classification as a bestseller.2 No work was reproduced or translated more times during this period, other than the Bible.3 It was widely printed throughout Europe and beyond in China and Japan, and its circulation also transcended confessional boundaries. The Imitatio was appropriated by various Protestants from the south-west German and Swiss Protestant lands, and from Elizabethan and early Stuart England. The text’s promotion by the Society of Jesus was integral to its continued success. Due to the Order’s size and with its extensive provision of religious literature, the Imitatio retained its preeminence in the seventeenth century.

It is tempting to suggest that, like all bestsellers, the Imitatio became a text that people wanted to possess. Its popularity remained largely unaffected by the transition from late medieval to early modern Europe. Its distribution had no apparent geographical or linguistic boundaries. Johan Huizinga attributed the success of the Imitatio to its timelessness:

the Imitatio is not limited to one cultural epoch; like ecstatic contemplations of the All-One, it departs from all culture and belongs to no culture in particular. This explains its two thousand editions as well as the different suppositions concerning its author and its time of composition that fall into a range of three hundred years.4

In practice, one should be wary of overemphasizing the so-called ‘universality’ of the Imitatio’s spirituality in a manner which suggests a transcendence of cultural boundaries.5 The success of the Imitatio cannot be explained by separating it from its contemporary culture, as Huizinga intimated. One can only fully appreciate the Imitatio’s appeal by relating different editions to the religious cultures from which they emerged. Integral to this investigation is the nature of late medieval and early modern translation. Translators of the Imitatio were not always slavishly faithful to the original text; the practice of translation was often determined by the socio-cultural environment.6

The Imitatio was also interpreted in various ways and appropriated by a broad range of individuals and groups. Spirituality, and thus devotional literature, does not exist in a vacuum. The emphasis on inward forms of piety cannot be analysed separately from liturgical, doctrinal and even secular concerns. It is difficult to explain the Imitatio’s popularity without considering the wider religious context for its appropriation, transmission and reception.7

One would expect that modern historians would have done justice to explaining the widespread diffusion of the Imitatio. However, scholarship has focused almost exclusively on researching the identity of the Imitatio’s author; to this day, it cannot be stated with certainty who wrote the Imitatio, though Thomas à Kempis (1379/80–1471) seems to be the strongest claimant.8 The attribution of authorship to other writers was made as early as the fifteenth century. The majority of scholars focused on the different manuscript recensions, of which there are a considerable number extant.9 Incipits, title pages and colophons referred either to Jean Gerson (1363–1429), the fifteenth-century Chancellor of the University of Paris, or to Kempis, an Augustinian canon of the Windesheim Congregation, or to St Bernard of Clairvaux (1090–1153), or else the work was left anonymous.10 Numerous incunabula, such as the 1483 edition printed in Venice, promoted Gerson as the author, while other editions frequently included his De meditatione cordis alongside the Imitatio.11 Kempis’s name was also used on title pages and his standing was further reinforced by the inclusion of the Imitatio in three early editions of his Opera Omnia, printed in 1492 and 1494 at Nuremberg, and by Josse Bade in 1523 at Paris.12

The disagreements over authorship persisted throughout the sixteenth century with one additional (though less frequently cited) contender, Ludolph of Saxony (d.1378).13 It is difficult to determine precise geographical trends for the attributions of authorship, although Kempis’s name appeared more frequently in the German-speaking lands and in the Low Countries, while Gerson was more prominent in Spain, France and Italy.14 Such was the confusion that numerous Latin editions (mainly printed in Lyons) presented Gerson as author on the title page, while favouring Kempis in the main body of the text.15 The early Jesuits called the Imitatio the ‘Gerçonzito’, though they appeared to change tack in the later sixteenth century by which time they supported Kempis’s authorship.16 By the seventeenth century, members of different religious orders vied with each other in proposing their respective claimants for authorship. The Augustinian canons and Jesuits normally attributed the text to Thomas à Kempis, while the Benedictines nominated Giovanni Gersen as author (as opposed to Jean Gerson).17 It was claimed that Gersen was an Italian Benedictine Abbot from the thirteenth century, though it is unclear whether he even existed at all.

Subsequent centuries did not lead to a declining interest in the authorship debate. If one peruses the secondary works concerning the Imitatio in the (printed version of the older) British Library catalogue, over 75 per cent of the works listed relate to the authorship debate.18 In the nineteenth century, P. E. Puyol upheld the claims of Giovanni Gersen by referring to the French and Italian manuscript traditions of the Imitatio.19 Later scholars paralleled their early modern counterparts by relating the Imitatio to other works of their designated author. For example, G. Udny Yule undertook a statistical evaluation of the Imitatio’s language and how it corresponded with Kempis’s other works.20 Others compiled critical editions of Kempis’s works, such as Pohl’s volumes published in Freiburgim-Breisgau.21 In the 1950s, Pierre Debongnie and Jacques Huijben provided the most comprehensive defence of Kempis’s authorship to date; this included a convincing refutation of the attribution to Gerson.22

It was subsequently asserted by J. van Ginneken that the Imitatio could not be attributed to a single author. In his view, the basic framework for the Imitatio was initially composed by Gerard Groote, later embellished by various copyists including Gerard Zerbolt, and finally polished by Thomas à Kempis.23 While van Ginneken’s thesis is difficult to substantiate, it retains certain plausibility, especially regarding the devotio moderna’s tradition of spiritual note-taking (rapiaria).24 It also points to the differences between the early and late modern understanding of authorship. Although Kempis does seem to be the most likely candidate, the thesis presented here would not be undermined if his claims to authorship were disproved; of greater significance is the fact that the Imitatio proceeded from the devotio moderna.

Another reason why the Imitatio has received little attention is because the subject of spirituality was previously ignored by historians. This book forms part of a broader historiographical tradition, which has promoted the historical value of studying spirituality.25 Caroline Walker-Bynum argued that while the historians of medieval spirituality once analysed the various interpretations of the stages of mystical progress, they now address ‘how basic religious attitudes and values are conditioned by the society in which they occur’.26 The comprehensive surveys of late-medieval religion by Robert Swanson and Eamon Duffy illustrated how the rhythm of secular life was affected by the liturgical calendar, with its cycle of fasting and festivals; it becomes very difficult to separate the secular and religious spheres.27 What Larissa Taylor argued for France, that ‘religion was not an abstract syste...

Table of contents

• Cover Page
• Dedication
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Contents
• Acknowledgements
• Abbreviations
• 1 Introduction
• 2 The Imitatio Christi in the Context of Late Medieval Devotion
• 3 The Imitatio Christi and the Devotio Moderna
• 4 From Manuscript Classic to Early Printed Bestseller: The Imitatio Christi in Europe, c.1470–c.1530
• 5 Nourishing Lay Hunger for Devotional Works: English and French Translations of the Imitatio Christi, c.1480–c.1530
• 6 The Printed World of the Imitatio Christi, 1531–1620: Protestant Editions in Latin and the Vernacular
• 7 The Translation of the Imitatio Christi by Protestants
• 8 The Place of the Imitatio Christi in the Protestant World
• 9 The Printed World of the Imitatio Christi, 1531–1620: Jesuit Editions in Latin and the Vernacular
• 10 ‘The Partridge of Spiritual Books’: Ignatius Loyola, the Spiritual Exercises and Jesuit Appropriation of the Imitatio, c.1522–c.1620
• 11 The Place of Thomas à Kempis’s Imitatio Christi in the Ministry of Jesuit Spirituality
• 12 Conclusion
• Appendix: Introduction to the Bibliography on the Imitatio
• List of Abbreviations (for the Short Title Catalogue of Imitatio Christi)
• Short Title Catalogue of all Latin and Vernacular editions of the Imitatio Christi, c.1470–1650
• Bibliography
• Index