In the fall of 1500 Erasmus was staying in
Orleans to take refuge from the plague then raging in Paris. During this time,
he wrote a number of letters to Jacob Batt, the town clerk of Bergen and
Erasmus' most helpful compatriot, inveigling a goodly amount of money out of
Anna van Borssele, the Lady of Bergen.Several of these letters provide the best
evidence in favor of the 'Erasmus was gay' hypothesis. The most revealing one
was written in November of 1500. Apologizing for failing to honor an earlier
promise to come to Bergen to visit, Erasmus cited lack of money, illness, and
the difficulty of winter travel. Then he added:
"Another
consideration was the gossip that might spread among ill-natured persons if I
went back to see you so often."
Nor is this some odd fluke; two months
earlier he had explained a similar decision in much the same way:
"...there
might be some who would wonder why I kept rushing back to see you."
These two quotes are difficult to explain
without recourse to the 'Erasmus was gay' hypothesis. The best alternate
explanation is that rumors of a homosexual relationship were afoot, rumors that
Erasmus and Batt knew to be false, but that neither wanted to lend credence to.
This alternate explanation, while plausible, raises the new issue: why were
such rumors afoot in the first place?
Another strange comment in the November
letter:
"The
extreme care you take when you write is something I approve of, but rest
assured that his case, you can gossip as freely as you like."
['his case' refers to the reliability of the
messenger.] Clearly, Erasmus and Batt are discussing extremely sensitive
matters, and their comments must not under any circumstances get into the wrong
hands. A gay relationship would fit this situation perfectly. But there is one
difficult detail in this explanation: Erasmus advises Batt that he can gossip
as freely as he likes. Why did he use the word 'gossip'? Sharing homosexual
intimacies is nowhere near the same thing as gossip. Perhaps it was gossip about
other gays. Perhaps it was gossip about the various rich and powerful actors in
their lives. Indeed, in the same letter Erasmus gossips shamelessly about a
number of very important people. He refers to the bishop of Cambrai in a
variety of compromising terms: "frivolousness", "brazen
folly", "lunacy". And he concludes his comments on his former
benefactor with this: "I am all the more eager, while I am in Paris, to
bring off some splendid feat that may burst his spleen with envy." This is
certainly bigtime gossip, gossip that Erasmus would not want to reach the
bishop's eyes. This, I think, provides a better explanation for the above
quote.
However, there are other comments in these
letters that muddy the logical waters considerably. The November letter also
contains a long paragraph recommending Erasmus' former servant-pupil Louis for
employment of some sort. While singing the boy's praises, Erasmus never
suggests anything remotely lascivious. He speaks at length about the boy's neat
handwriting, his good character, and his poverty. I would think that, if
Erasmus had been gay, he would have experienced the boy while he was his pupil,
and then recommended him in that fashion to Batt, or even warned him off -- but
nothing of the sort appears here. It's not proof, but it certainly weakens the
claim that this letter is an intimate communication between gay lovers.
The September letter also has some material
that complicates any interpretation. Immediately before the "there might
be some who would wonder" sentence, Erasmus gives another reason why he is
reluctant to come:
"while
I approve of the lodging you showed me at Pierre's I still have a reservation,
which you know, about such a situation, not because I fear for either my
continence or my reputation but simply to ensure that no dubious reports filter
back to Pierre as a result; for, as you know, the mass of mankind, especially
at court, dislikes members of the literary profession, and would gladly accuse
us of the vices they themselves habitually practice."
Apparently this lodging would in some manner
make Erasmus vulnerable to accusations of vice from enemies at the court of
Hendrik van Bergen. It seems unlikely, though, that Erasmus is referring to
'homosexual vice', because he clearly states that the vices in question are
habitually practiced by members of the court. Homosexuality in that culture was
a decidedly minority practice -- Erasmus would not have used that phrasing to
refer to homosexual behavior. I believe that Erasmus is referring to garden
variety heterosexual fornication, which was much more popular among the rich
and famous of that culture (and many others as well).
My overall conclusion is that these letters
provide us with contradictory hints. The worries about people talking about too
frequent visits provide undeniable support for the 'Erasmus was gay'
hypothesis. However, this support is certainly circumstantial and indirect. The
other comments redirect our suspicions in completely different directions. No
firm conclusions can be made from these letters.