Notes and Queries, June 1996 v43 n2 p178(4)

Erasmus's 'Beggar Talk' and Jonson's Alchemist. Sterling, Eric; Evans, Robert C.

Abstract: English dramatist Ben Jonson's play 'The Alchemist' was influenced in part by Dutch theologian and writer Desiderius Erasmus's treatise De Alcumista, which was included in his body of work Colloquia and also by Erasmus' essay 'Beggar Talk.' A comparison of Beggar Talk and Alchemist indicates important similarities between the two works. Jonson's play and Erasmus' Colloquia can be said to have come from two men with the same set of intrinsic values and the same way of thinking.

Full Text: COPYRIGHT 1996 Oxford University Press

The list of actual and possible literary influences on Ben Jonson's play The Alchemist is extremely long, owing in part to the specialized knowledge implied by the work's very title. Scholars have explored Jonson's actual and potential debts to various sources of alchemical lore, from the relatively well known to the highly arcane.(1) One of the most widely available treatments of alchemy in the Renaissance, for instance, was a dialogue on that subject (De Alcumista) included in Erasmus's Colloquia, and Jonson's familiarity with this work seems beyond dispute.(2) However, the potential influence of another Erasmian coloquy that also emphasizes alchemy (plus other matters relevant to Jonson's play) has not been deeply explored or even widely mentioned. This dialogue is entitled '[Greek text omitted]', or 'Beggar Talk'.(3) Significant parallels seem to exist between this dialogue and Jonson's drama. Whether Jonson actually had read this work by Erasmus, or whether he may simply have known of it by reputation, seems at this point impossible to prove conclusively. However, he did apparently own a copy of Erasmus's Colloquia - a fact that increases the likelihood that he may have known the work directly.(4) Indeed, he alludes elsewhere to other colloquies by Erasmus, and, as has already been mentioned, he alludes directly to a different colloquy in The Alchemist itself.(5) The possible relevance of 'Beggar Talk' therefore seems worth discussing.

Although 'Beggar Talk' does record a brief conversation between two vagrants named Irides and Misoponus, most of the dialogue presents the latter's detailed description of how he has radically improved his wealth and dress through skillful practice of alchemical deceit. The subject of begging comes explicitly into the dialogue only near the end, almost as a brief afterthought. In the bulk of the colloquy, Misoponus explains how, while down on his luck, he had run into an old acquaintance who made a bargain with him: in exchange for a few drinks, the friend would teach him the tricks of alchemy. Since acquiring these skills, Misoponus has seen his fortunes radically improve, especially since 'lots of people everywhere ... are dying to learn this art [of alchemy]' and thus make easy targets (251). As Misoponus explains, 'I worm my way into their company every chance I get. I boast of my art. When I see a sucker, I prepare the bait' (251). He explains in great detail how he deceives them by predicting exactly how much gold or silver will result from alchemically treating a certain amount of base metal. While running a closely supervised trial experiment, he secretly places a hollowed-out piece of coal, filled with exactly the predicted amount of gold or silver, into the fire. When the experiment is completed, the dupe naturally finds that the prediction has proven precisely accurate. The dupe therefore confidently invests money in further experiments, although the latter inevitably fail. As Misoponus explains, however, 'I run no risk. The money's paid now. I mention something or other - the pot wasn't clean, or the coals were bad, or the fire didn't have the right temperature. Finally, part of my professional acumen is not to stay too long in the same place!' (253).

The general parallels with Jonson's Alchemist are obvious. Just as Misoponus learns the art of alchemy only after a random meeting with his impoverished old friend, so Face learns the art only after a chance encounter with a beggarly Subtle. Just as Erasmus stresses greatly the suddenly improved dress of Misoponus, so Jonson similarly, and immediately, stresses Face's newly tailored, silken clothes. Just as Erasmus emphasizes how a widespread interest in alchemy provides Misoponus easy access to plenty of dupes, so Jonson depicts a similarly extensive obsession with the art, covering a range of social classes and professions. Similarly, just as Misoponus describes the excuses he offers when the alchemical experiments inevitably fail, so Jonson shows some of his best, most comic inventiveness in rationalizing the failure described in Act IV of his play. Finally, just as Misoponus ends his discussion of alchemy by emphasizing that an alchemist cannot afford to linger too long in the same place, so The Alchemist closes with the sudden dissolution of the 'venture tripartite' and the quick escape of Subtle and Doll Common.

More specific parallels between the colloquy and the play can also be cited. The colloquy, for instance, begins with Irides saying, 'What strange bird do I see flying this way? The face I recognize, but the clothes don't suit' (250). Similarly, Jonson's play begins by emphasizing a character named Face who dresses in the silks of a captain's uniform, an outfit unsuited to his natural status as a household servant (I.i.6).(6) Subtle, his partner and rival, threatens to 'matte / All that the taylor has made' if Face comes any closer (I.i.9-10). In response, Face himself also emphasizes the unexpectedly improved appearance of Subtle, describing how the latter had once gone

pinn'd vp, in the seuerall rags, Yo' had rak'd, and pick'd from dung-hills, before day, Your feet in mouldie slippers, for your kibes, A felt of rugg, and a thin thredden cloake, That scarce would couer your no-buttocks....

(I.i.33-7)

Furthermore, both Misoponus (at 251) and Face (e.g., IV.vii.130-1 and throughout) are masters of disguise. In fact, Misoponus in the colloquy is described as having in the past deliberately 'covered [himself] all over with [fake] sores' (251), just as Face describes how Subtle once in fact

did walke Piteously costiue, with your pinch'd-horne-nose, And your complexion, of the romane wash, Stuck full of black, and melancholique wormes, Like poulder-cornes, shot, at th'artillerie-yard.

(I.i.27-31)

Other moments in the opening scene (e.g., I.i.40-2; 63) also strongly emphasize the theme of changed appearance that Erasmus likewise emphasizes in the colloquy (251-1), but still another point of resemblance occurs when Face stresses how he has helped Subtle win 'credit for your coales' (I.i.43). In fact, in a phrase highly reminiscent of the colloquy, Face mentions 'all [Subtle's] tricks / Of cosning with a hollow cole' (I.i.94) and abusively terms him a 'collier' (I.i.90). Although scholars commonly cite a passage from Chaucer's Canon Yeoman's Tale as an earlier instance of the use of hollow coals by alchemists, Erasmus's colloquy would have provided another highly accessible parallel. Indeed, the editors of the standard edition of Jonson's works do in fact mention this similarity in their note on the passage (H&S, 57), but their citation of the Erasmian dialogue is unfortunately nowhere cited in their edition's index, nor do they point out the possible link in their introductory comments on the play. Nor is the parallel noted by the best recent editors (who usually do mention Chaucer), so it is not surprising that the other similarities between the play and Erasmus's colloquy have attracted little attention by other scholars.

Although Jonson's explicit reference to 'a hollow cole' provides one of the most striking resemblances between his play and Erasmus's colloquy, other references to coal abound in the drama (e.g., II.i.27; II.v.63; III.ii.136; IV.v.73), and a reference even exists to cheating by using a similarly 'hollow die' (II.i.9). Clearly, of course, Jonson did not need to read Erasmus in order to think of hollowing out a piece of coal as a clever alchemical trick, but just as clearly he and members of his audience may have considered this and the other resemblances between the play and the colloquy and may have found the parallels enriching. At the very least, the parallels show that Jonson and Erasmus were writing within the same broad intellectual tradition, the same system of cultural discourse.

A few other similarities between the colloquy and the play seem worth mentioning. For example, just as the dialogue emphasizes how one character is transformed after learning the trade secrets of another, so a similar emphasis exists in the play (I.i.19; 68), especially when Subtle reminds Face that he has 'Made thee a second, in mine owne great art' (I.i.77). Likewise, just as the colloquy stresses how a clever alchemist can leave his former poverty behind him (251), so Jonson creates a similar emphasis in the play (I.i.33-4), especially when Subtle reminds Face how he has 'tane thee, out of dung, / So poore, so wretched, when no liuing thing / Would keepe thee companie, but a spider, or worse' (I.i.64-6). Finally, just as the colloquy stresses the dangers of an alchemist staying too long in one place (253), so the play closes by stressing the sudden need of Jonson's cheats to make a rapid escape (IV.vii.123-8; V.iv.74-9; V.iv.143-5). In these and in other, more important respects, then, Jonson's play clearly resembles the colloquy by Erasmus.

Did Jonson intend the similarities? Was he even conscious of them? Obviously such questions cannot be answered with absolute certainty, but it would not be surprising if Jonson was consciously influenced by Erasmus. He seems to have read many of Erasmus's works, to have respected him as an important predecessor, to have consciously alluded to other works by Erasmus, to have known and alluded elsewhere to the Colloquies, and even to have been influenced quite obviously by one of the colloquies (De Alcumista) within the Alchemist itself.(7) Certainly the Colloquies would have been known by many members of Jonson's original audience. Indeed, Erasmus's work would have been much more widely familiar than some of the highly arcane sources usually cited by Jonson's editors. In any case, the resemblances between 'Beggar Talk' and The Alchemist show that Jonson was writing within the same basic intellectual and social tradition as one of his greatest Renaissance forebears. The play and the colloquy ultimately emerged from the same mind-set and the same system of fundamental values.

ERIC STERLING ROBERT C. EVANS Auburn University at Montgomery

1 See, for instance, the notes and commentary in Ben Jonson, ed. C. H. Herford and Percy and Evelyn Simpson, 11 vols (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1925-52), II, 87-110 and X, 35-166; The Alchemist, ed. Charles Montgomery Hathaway, Jr (New York: Henry Holt, 1903), 90-103; The Alchemist, ed. Duncan Brown (New York: Hill and Wang, 1966), xi-xii; The Alchemist, ed. F. H. Mares (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1967), xxxi-xi; The Alchemist, ed. Alvin B. Kernan (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1974), 227-41; The Alchemist, ed. Elizabeth Cook (New York: Norton, 1991), xi-xiii; and esp. E. H. Duncan, 'Jonson's Alchemist and the Literature of Alchemy', PMLA, vi (1946), 699-710. The Herford and Simpson edition will hereafter be abbreviated 'H&S'.

2 Jonson's debt to this dialogue was noted, for instance, by William Gifford in The Works of Ben Jonson, ed. Francis Cunningham, 3 vols (London: Chatto and Windus, 1904), II, 47 n. and has been mentioned by nearly all subsequent editors. See esp. H&S, II, 98-9.

3 See The Colloquies of Erasmus, trans. Craig R. Thompson (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1963), 248-54. References to this translation will be cited parenthetically by page number.

4 See David McPherson, 'Ben Jonson's Library and Marginalia: An Annotated Catalogue', in Studies in Philology, Texts and Studies series, 71.5 (1974), 43. When Professor McPherson prepared his catalogue, the location of this copy of the Colloquies was unknown. It seems worth mentioning that Jonson often owned multiple copies of important texts.

5 See H&S, XI, 627 for a listing of some of Jonson's allusions to Erasmus. Unfortunately, this listing fails to report some allusions cited elsewhere in the standard edition. For other examples, see H&S, X, 55, 57, 73, 106, and 108. The failure of the index to report these citations offers a good example of why H&S must be used with some caution. For further discussion of the deficiencies of the index to H&S, see Neil P. Probst, 'A Topical Index to Ben Jonson's Discoveries' (forthcoming in the Ben Jonson Journal).

6 Citations are to the text printed in vol. V of H&S.

7 For discussion of some of Jonson's debts to Erasmus (and particularly to the Colloquies) see, for instance, Sara J. van den Berg, The Action of Ben Jonson's Poetry (Newark: University of Delaware Press, 1987), esp. 50-62, and also Douglas Duncan, Ben Jonson and the Lucianic Tradition (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1979), esp. 4450, 61-4, and 185-99. See also the studies cited in the subject index to The Plays of Ben Jonson: A Reference Guide, ed. Walter D. Lehrman, et al. (Boston: G. K. Hall, 1980).