1. Introduction. 2. The era of Thomas More. 3. Biography. 4. Creativity. 5. Mor-humanist and “Utopia”.
5.1. Religious and ethical concept of “Utopia”.
5.2. Social system of "Utopia". 6. Conclusion.
1. Introduction.
Utopian socialism as a great achievement of social thought, which was one of the most important sources of scientific communism, owes the birth of many ideas to Thomas More. Written by More in 1516. “A very useful, as well as entertaining, truly golden book about the best structure of the state and about the new island of Utopia,” or “Utopia” for short, gave the name to pre-Marxist socialism. In his works, More proposed democratic principles for the organization of state power that were completely new for his era, posed and solved legal problems from a humanistic position. Formed during the period of formation of the capitalist formation, the emergence of early capitalist relations, More's views have not lost their historical significance. His project of an ideal state still causes sharp clashes of opinions between scientists from different countries. The life and work of T. More, a scientist, poet, lawyer and statesman, attracts the attention of many researchers.
2. The era of Thomas More.
End of the 15th century marked the advent of a new time. The economic development trends of this period determined the beginning of the process of primitive accumulation of capital. In England and other most developed countries of Europe, new social relations are emerging - capitalist, new classes are emerging, nations are emerging, the centralization of state power is increasing, which prepares the transformation of class-representative monarchies into absolutist ones. New trends in ideology manifest themselves with particular force, which becomes the first arena where the battle flares up against feudalism, the spiritual enslavement of man by the Catholic Church, against scholasticism and superstition.
In Italy already in the 14th-15th centuries, and in other European countries from the late 15th to early 16th centuries, the Renaissance began - a movement unfolded under the banner of the “renaissance” of ancient culture. Around the same time, the ideological movements of humanism and church reformation appeared. Each of them had its own form of manifestation and range of socio-political ideas.
The overwhelming majority of humanists of the era of T. More were people of moderately progressive views. They called for the development of education, the eradication of extortion and ignorance in the state apparatus, the mitigation of cruelty in laws and morals, but nothing more. However, more radical teachings also arose in the depths of humanism. The author of one of them was T. More, an outstanding English humanist of the 16th century. His political and legal views not only reflected the emergence of new social and political relations, but, above all, revealed their inherent internal contradictions.
In England at that time, the initial accumulation of capital on an unprecedented scale caused the ruin of small commodity producers - both artisans and peasants. Peasants-copyholders suffered especially hard - people who were personally free, but who owned their land temporarily, according to “copies” - medieval documents, the extension of which after a set period depended entirely on the landlord - the feudal owner of the land.
In connection with the development of the English cloth industry, the need for raw materials for it increased sharply, which led to the rapid growth of sheep breeding in the late 15th and early 16th centuries. The country was undergoing a massive conversion of arable land belonging to large landowners into pastures. Landlords sharply expanded the practice of so-called “fencing” - the seizure and fencing of communal lands, which included the original peasant plots. Such a huge number of peasants were ruined and driven from their lands that even the rapidly developing industry could not provide them with employment.
At the same time, the English state established the so-called vagrancy laws, which were called “bloody legislation” in history.
The bourgeoisie, from the moment of its emergence, was burdened with its own opposite; with every major bourgeois movement, independent movements broke out of that class, which was the more or less developed predecessor of the modern proletariat. These included the movements of T. Munzer and the Anabaptists during the Reformation and the peasant war in Germany in the beginning. 16th century, G.Babeuf - during the years of the French bourgeois revolution of the late 18th century.
T. More's doctrine of the ideal state arose in an era when the contradictions of bourgeois social relations were already beginning to take their toll, despite the preservation of the foundations of feudalism, but the question of the correct structure of society could not yet be resolved due to the absence of capitalist production and the industrial proletariat generated by it.
3. Biography.
Thomas More was born in London on February 7, 1478. The parents, grandfathers and great-grandfathers of the great English thinker belonged to wealthy London citizens, from among whom members of city governments and representatives of English cities in the House of Commons of Parliament were usually elected.
Thomas More's maternal grandfather in 1503. was elected to the post of Sheriff of London, his service in another matter was associated with the legal corporation, Lincoln Sinn, in which Thomas's father, John More, also serves.
The life of the City of London and the field of law were familiar to Thomas Tom from a young age. His own activities also unfolded in them, providing him with rich material for observations and conclusions.
Thomas was the second of John More's six children, but the eldest son, and his father intended him for a legal career. Thomas received his general education at one of the best London secondary classical schools at that time, located at the monastery of St. Anthony.
After school, according to the customs of his environment, young Thomas served as a page in the house of Archbishop (later Cardinal) Morton and, on his advice, was sent to Oxford University, where he studied for less than two years, since his father was not inclined to turn his son into a scientist.
Since 1494 T. More's studies begin in the London Inns, first in the New Inn, and then in Lincoln Sinn. In 1502 he receives the title of Queen's Counsel.
He masters the best achievements of previous and contemporary philosophical, political, historical, and legal thought, and becomes an expert in antiquity. T. More explores the socio-political orders of many countries and peoples, deeply studies the political history of England, and shows interest in theological literature, where the main things for him are the works of the fathers of the Christian church. In them he tries to find rational meaning and positive social significance.
In the last years of his stay in Lincoln University and at the beginning of his legal practice, T. More established close friendly relations with the outstanding Dutch humanist Erasmus of Rotterdam, the English humanists W. Grotsin, T. Linacre, D. Colet.
The process of the formation of T. More's worldview is difficult to trace due to the lack of necessary historical documents. He showed a critical attitude towards the world around him already at the age of 25-26, when he wrote his first works, epigrams, and political poems.
T. More's political activity began in 1504, when he was elected to the House of Commons of Parliament.
In 1510 T. More was elected to the House of Commons for the second time and was soon appointed one of the assistant sheriffs of London, becoming a civil judge. He remained in this post for about 7 years, gaining fame as a fair and humane judge.
By the time of the creation of Utopia, T. More had achieved a level of success that was significant for his environment. There seemed to be nothing connecting him with the lower strata of society. And yet, such a connection existed. He showed deep sympathy for the working people and the oppressed. This sympathy, on the one hand, and deep insight into the essence of social and political relations for that time, on the other, were the main reasons that led T. More to the views on the need to restructure society, state power, and change laws.
"Utopia" was written by More in 1515-1516. He started it during a trip to Flanders as part of the embassy appointed by King Henry 8 to resolve conflicts that arose between England and the Netherlands regarding mutual trade in wool and cloth.
The circumstances surrounding the creation of Utopia are little known. According to Erasmus of Rotterdam, T. More first wrote its second part, and then the first. At the same time, he worked on his other work - the chronicle “The Story of Richard 3”.
Soon after traveling to Flanders and Calais, where he participated in negotiations with French merchants, More received and accepted the invitation of King Henry 8 to enter his public service.
When Henry 8 ascended the throne, More dedicated to him the poem “On the Day of the Coronation of Henry 8, the Most Glorious and Happiest King of Britain,” where he sharply criticized “power without borders,” “violation of laws,” general oppression, slander and ignorance that existed under Henry 7, and expressed hope for fundamental changes that, in his opinion, should have occurred in the policy of the new king. The literature about T. More emphasizes that he had a heightened sense of civic duty, which, in all likelihood, led him to royal service. It is also not accidental, apparently, that, having become one of the members of the Royal Council, T. More joined the commission that considered all petitions received in the royal name and recommended that the king make one decision or another.
The subsequent life of T. More had two different periods. Initially, the king showed clear favor towards him. T. More received the rights of a knight, he was appointed assistant treasurer, in 1523. elected Speaker of the House of Commons. In 1529 Henry 8, on the recommendation of the Royal Council, makes More Lord Chancellor, that is, his Prime Minister.
Since 1532 Another, tragic period begins in the life of the thinker. The change in his fate was closely connected with More's negative attitude towards the sudden turn in the king's church policy, which was carried out in 1532-1534. a reform as a result of which the former Catholic Church in England was placed under the authority of the king, and the king himself, on the contrary, was freed from any power of the Pope.
The reform, despite its motives, was of a relatively progressive nature, promoting the development of the national sovereignty of the English state, but More could not understand this.
At the very beginning of the church reform, T. More resigned from his duties as Lord Chancellor. Then Henry 8 waged a persistent and methodical struggle against the former “favorite”.
The first of the accusations against T. More of “high treason” - for communication with a certain “soothsayer” of the king’s death - was a simple slander and failed. The second - for refusing to swear allegiance to new royal acts - led to the imprisonment of T. More in the Tower.
Despite the persuasion of his relatives, his congenial wife and eldest daughter, T. More did not agree to recognize the reform of the royal act, which denied the supremacy of the Pope.
At the beginning of his imprisonment, this threatened to condemn him not for “high treason,” but for treasonable intent, which could not entail the death penalty. But Henry 8 passed through parliament a number of other acts, according to which everyone was obliged to swear allegiance to the king and recognize all of him, including new titles. Denying even one title of king was equivalent to high treason. The Court of the King's Bench, whose commission was selected by Henry 8 himself, handed down a severe sentence to T. More to a painful execution. “By the grace of the king” it was replaced by cutting off the head.
Thomas More's death left behind a large literary legacy, only partially published during his lifetime. In addition to the works mentioned above, it includes extensive correspondence, poems, epigrams, original translations, the autobiographical work “Apology”, “Dialogue on Oppression against Adversity” written in the Tower, etc. Not all of T. More’s works have been fully studied. The true pearl of everything written by T. More remains his “Utopia”. She made his name immortal.
4. Creativity.
Thomas More's literary work is distinguished not only by its richness, but also by its variety of genres. More's personal fate, like all his work, was closely connected with the turbulent and complex era of humanistic quests and the acute socio-political struggle of the Reformation and Counter-Reformation.
Being at the very center of the ideological and political struggle of his time, More, with his characteristic enormous temperament, honesty and sincerity, reflected the hopes and aspirations of the humanistic environment to which he belonged. And in this sense, his poetry and prose represent a bright page in the spiritual life and struggle of an entire generation of European humanists who discovered at the turn of the 15th-16th centuries. striking commonality of their intellectual interests and ideological quests. In particular, Latin poetry, “The History of Richard 3” and especially More’s “Utopia” perfectly convey the spiritual atmosphere, with its clearly defined range of ideas, that was characteristic of the humanistic circle of Colet, More, and Erasmus on the eve of the Reformation.
If More's later religious treatises are, in a sense, the result of the development of the humanistic concept of the Reformation era, or rather, they reveal its transformation into its opposite, then everything written by More on the eve of the Reformation reflected optimistic dreams of a just reorganization of society on a reasonable basis, with the assistance of wise rulers and through church reform.
Among More's works of the pre-Reformation period, an important place belongs to his poetry. More's poetic work, including more than 250 Latin poems, epigrams and a poem for the coronation of Henry 8, falls on a brilliant period in the history of English humanism and at the same time the happiest time in the life of More himself.
Political themes occupy a prominent place in More's poetry. Speaking about the political motives of More's poetry, we should, first of all, highlight the problem of the best political structure of society, which is closely related to the problems of “Utopia” and worried the minds of many humanists in Europe at that time. Interpretation by humanists of the 16th century. one way or another, was associated with the ideal of a perfect sovereign. What should a perfect sovereign be like, capable of ensuring public welfare? To be a servant of the people, upholding laws and protecting peace.
The traditions of ancient love of freedom and hatred of various forms of tyranny, preached in the works of Erasmus and More, in the conditions of feudal Europe of the 16th century. had a deeply progressive significance, contributing to the development of the political ideology of the emerging bourgeoisie.
Condemning political tyranny and opposing it with his ideal of a sovereign, More resolutely rejected the idea of the allegedly divine origin of the king's power and developed the idea of the origin of royal power from the people. On this basis, More considered it not only possible, but also necessary to raise the question of the responsibility of the sovereign to the people, arguing that “the people, by their will, give power and take it away.”
Thomas More, like his humanist friends, sincerely believed in the possibility of realizing the ideal of an enlightened monarchy. For More, the good will of an enlightened monarch, under the conditions of that time, seemed to be the most acceptable and most realistic means of implementing a reasonable reorganization of society on the basis of humanistic principles.
More's Latin poetry also reflected the mood of the pre-Reformation era. It is known how important the issue of church reform occupied in the humanistic concept of a perfect society. Following his mentors and friends John Colet and Erasmus, who dreamed of church reform and a reasonable reorganization of society in the spirit of the ideals of early Christianity, More in his epigrams wittily ridiculed the vices of the Catholic clergy. He castigated their luxury and money-grubbing.
Paying tribute to the deeply progressive ideological struggle of More and Erasmus against church obscurantism, superstitions and vices of the Catholic clergy, one should still not lose sight of the fact that, despite the severity and uncompromisingness, their criticism was based on a positive program of reforms, the goal of which was not in the overthrow of Catholicism, and in the cleansing of the church from the vicious clergy, and theology from scholastic dogmatism. Dreaming of restoring the “true” teaching of Christ by returning to the ideals of early Christianity, More, Erasmus and their like-minded people hoped to renew and strengthen the Catholic Church, making it the support of a just reconstruction of the entire society. This project reflected not only the specifics of the social environment from which the humanists were born, but also the historical uniqueness of the spiritual life of the era.
5. Mor-humanist and “Utopia”.
Knowing well the social and moral life of his homeland, the English humanist, Thomas More, was imbued with sympathy for the misfortunes of its people. These sentiments of his were reflected in the famous work with a long title in the spirit of that time - “A very useful, as well as entertaining, truly golden book about the best structure of the state and about the new island of Utopia...”. It was published with the close participation of Erasmus of Rotterdam, a close friend, who dedicated his “Praise of Folly,” completed in More’s house, to him in 1616 and immediately gained great popularity in humanistic circles.
The humanistic worldview of the author of "Utopia" led him to conclusions of great social relevance and significance, especially in the first part of this work. The author's insight was by no means limited to stating the terrible picture of social disasters, emphasizing at the very end of his work that upon careful observation of the life of not only England, but also “all states,” they represent “nothing but some kind of conspiracy of the rich, under the pretext and under in the name of the state, thinking about their own benefits."
Already these deep observations suggested to More the main direction of projects and dreams in the second part of Utopia. Numerous researchers of this work have noted not only direct, but also indirect references to the texts and ideas of the Bible (primarily the Gospels), especially to ancient and early Christian authors. Of all the works that had the greatest impact on More, Plato's "Republic" stands out. Many humanists, starting with Erasmus, saw in Utopia a long-awaited rival to this greatest creation of political thought, a work that had existed by that time for almost two millennia.
If not the most characteristic, defining feature of the socio-philosophical doctrine underlying “Utopia” is the anti-individualistic interpretation of social life, conceivable in an ideal state. Consistent anti-individualism necessarily requires the abolition of private property. Maximum equality in the size of property and the accompanying equalization in consumption was a frequent demand of popular opposition movements in the Middle Ages, which usually received religious justification. Elements of it are also present in More, as an active supporter of “Christian humanism”, who appealed to primitive Christianity with its ideals of universal equality.
5.1. Religious and ethical concept of "Utopia"
The inherent desire of the humanists of the Erasmus circle, to which T. More belonged, to combine the ideological heritage of pagan ancient literature with the teachings of Christ, Greek philosophers and the New Testament gave rise to a number of modern researchers, both in our country and abroad, to call the thinkers of this circle “Christian” humanists", and this movement - "Christian humanism".
The most significant point in the so-called “Christian humanism” was the rationalistic criterion in the interpretation of socio-religious issues, which at that time constituted the most powerful and promising side in the development of humanism as a form of bourgeois enlightenment, clearing the way for a new anti-feudal worldview of the future bourgeois society.
It was in line with these humanistic quests, which creatively synthesized the ideological heritage of antiquity and the Middle Ages and boldly rationalistically compared political and ethnic theories with the social development of that era, that More’s “Utopia” emerged, which reflected and originally comprehended the full depth of the socio-political conflicts of the era of the decomposition of feudalism and primitive accumulation capital. To understand the humanistic concept of both More himself and those around him, it is very important, along with the socio-political problems of Utopia, to also explore its aesthetic and religious aspects. This task has become especially relevant in modern conditions, when historiography, based on a very tendentious interpretation of “Utopia,” is trying to reduce all its ideological content to Christian ethics. Thus, the originality of “Utopia” is emasculated, its significance as an outstanding work of social thought, which expressed not only the urgent needs of its time, but was also far ahead of its time in a bold attempt to design a perfect social system that would put an end to the existence of classes and estates, is denied.
Turning to the analysis of the ethical aspect of "Utopia", it is easy to notice that the main thing in Utopian ethics is the problem of happiness. The Utopians believed that “for people, all happiness, or its most important share,” lies in pleasure and enjoyment.
However, according to the ethics of the Utopians, human happiness does not lie in all pleasures, but “only in the honest and noble”, based on virtue and ultimately striving for the “highest good”, to which “virtue drives our nature.” By posing and solving these “eternal” problems, More reveals a thorough acquaintance with ancient Greek philosophy, in particular with the writings of Plato and Aristotle. This is evidenced not only by the commonality of the problems and terminology posed, but also by numerous textual coincidences of “Utopia” with Plato’s dialogues “Philebus”, “Republic”, as well as Aristotle’s “Ethics”.
At the same time, we are talking about a deep understanding of the essence of Plato’s ethical philosophy, without distortions and Christian bias, which it would be natural to assume from the Catholic More. First of all, this is revealed when More considers such important categories as pleasure and enjoyment.
Utopian ethics defines the concept of “pleasure” as “every movement and state of body and soul, in which, under the guidance of nature, a person enjoys.” Just as in Plato's dialogue Philebus, Utopia provides a thorough classification of the types and types of pleasures.
Most of all, Utopians value spiritual pleasures, which they consider “first and dominant.” These are the pleasures associated with the exercise of virtue and with the consciousness of a blameless life. Moreover, in the spirit of the teachings of the Stoics, virtue means “a life in accordance with the laws of nature,” to which people are destined by God.” But if nature inspires us to be kind to others, then it does not imply that you should be harsh and unmerciful to yourself; on the contrary, it itself nature prescribes to us a pleasant life, that is, pleasure, as the ultimate goal of all our actions. The author of “Utopia” proceeded from the conviction that asceticism is contrary to human nature. And in this one can see the humanist’s reaction to feudal-Catholic ethics. The exception, according to the ethics of the Utopians, is permissible only when a person voluntarily neglects his own good for the sake of ardent concern for others and for society, “expecting greater pleasure from God in return for his work.”
Otherwise, it is completely stupid to torment yourself without benefit to anyone “because of the empty ghost of virtue.”
It is noteworthy that the perfect ethics of the Utopians was based and argued almost exclusively by the arguments of reason.
The Utopians considered their ethics to be the most reasonable, primarily because it is useful for society as a whole and for each member of society individually, since the principles of this ethics, from their point of view, most of all corresponded to the very essence of human nature, manifested in man’s desire for fortunately. Another criterion that guided the citizens of a perfect state in their ethical philosophy was religion, which postulated the idea of the immortality of the soul, its divine destiny for happiness. The humanity of Utopian ethics was also reinforced by the belief in afterlife reward for good and bad deeds. The Utopians were convinced that people were destined by God himself to a virtuous life, that is, life “in accordance with the laws of nature.” Substantiating the ethics of a perfect state with the help of religion, the author of Utopia proceeded from the false idea of the incompatibility of human morality with atheism, and in this he remained a son of his time. However, something else is important: the religion of the Utopians itself is imbued with the spirit of rationalism and acquires a somewhat utilitarian character, since it illuminates only what is in the interests of the entire society. From religion we take exactly as much as is required to substantiate humanistic ideals, in particular the most reasonable, from More’s point of view, ideals of ethics and politics. Thus, the author of Utopia persistently tries to reconcile religion with public benefit and the arguments of reason. In his unconscious desire to snatch the human mind from religious shackles, providing him with unlimited opportunities for knowledge, he comes to the need to declare everything reasonable pleasing to God. The rationalistic moment in the religion of the Utopians plays such an important role that, in the end, the voice of reason, for example, in such a matter as public benefit, is perceived by the Utopians as the voice of God; and the very process of cognition of the surrounding world acquires divine sanction under the pen of a humanist. And in this sense, the peculiar religion of Utopia anticipates the philosophical deism of the Enlightenment, which served as nothing more than a convenient and easy way to get rid of religion. Glorifying reason and appealing to reason in everything (even when solving religious problems), the religion of Utopia does not raise the question of the personality of God, but recognizes him as the root cause of the world. Such a religion has nothing in common either with Catholicism or with future Protestantism.
It should be emphasized the historical merit of Mora, who at the beginning of the 17th century. boldly proclaimed the idea of complete religious freedom, basing the religious order of a perfect state on the law according to which no person could be persecuted for his religious beliefs. The religions of the Utopians differed from each other not only on their island, but also in each city. True, what was common to the religions of the Utopians was that they necessarily prescribed to all citizens strict adherence to reasonable and useful moral norms for the whole society, as well as established political orders, i.e., instead of what, from the point of view of the Morahumanist, represented a universal human value: philanthropy, a combination of personal interests with the public good, as well as the prevention of religious civil strife. The maintenance of these reasonable moral and political standards, according to More, was best ensured by belief in the immortality of the soul. Otherwise, the citizens of Utopia enjoyed complete freedom of religion. Everyone could propagate their religion “only calmly and judiciously, with the help of arguments,” without resorting to violence and refraining from insulting other religions. The idea of toleration, put forward by More on the eve of the Reformation, long anticipated the principle that was formulated only at the end of the 17th century. The “Edict of Nantes”, not to mention the fact that in resolving the religious issue the author of “Utopia” was much more consistent than the compilers of this document. Unlike contemporary Europe, there was no religious strife and hatred in Utopia: pagan beliefs and Christianity coexisted equally there. The striking contrast that exists between the natural, rationalistic and non-confessional humanistic religion of Utopia, with its wide tolerance and respect for the religious beliefs of other peoples, and the official Catholicism of the times of the Reformation, religious wars and popular heretical movements is obvious. However, More himself, who created his “Utopia” during the period of humanistic searches for ways to reform the church, apparently did not consider the religious concept of “Utopia” to be contrary to the teachings of Christ and the Christian religion. Moreover, some features of the religious concept of the Utopians were so attractive to More that he would probably be glad if Catholicism, simplified and purified of scholasticism as a result of the reform, borrowed them for the benefit of all Christianity.
In 1520, the remarkable fighter for freedom and equality, Thomas Munzer, passed away. This happened in Germany. And 15 years later in England, the head of another remarkable man rolled off the scaffold - Thomas More. The fame of these two people at one time resounded throughout Europe. They lived in different countries and had nothing in common either in methods of action or in temperament, but both were communists by conviction. One is an agitator, organizer and people's leader, who gathered peasants and artisans, before whom the ruling princes and clergy shuddered. The other is a scientist and statesman who reached the highest position of Lord Chancellor at the court of the English king and wrote essays that surprised the whole world. Both were equal to each other in courage and firmness of conviction, both had the same goal - achieving a just system of society, and both ended their lives on the scaffold.
They were the first to widely preach the ideas of communism in the era of religious struggle against feudalism.
In the 16th century, new colonies in America and newly discovered lands, which gave untold wealth to English merchants, began to purchase English goods. Sales increased, and, therefore, it was necessary to increase production. The demand for English wool began to grow in foreign markets, and it became so expensive that raising sheep became much more profitable than renting land to peasants. Then the landowners began to drive out the tenant farmers from their lands, which they needed for pastures. The peasants left without land had no choice but to sell their labor, their working hands to merchants in manufactories. So, starting from the 16th century, a new economic system began to gradually take shape in England - the capitalist one. It is called so because capital played the main role in it, with the help of which a merchant could start a large enterprise and buy the labor necessary for this. In addition to the ruined peasantry, a huge number of dismissed servants and various hangers-on of the nobility appeared, who turned out to be unnecessary due to the cessation of internecine wars. As a result of all this, more people were left without work than the industry could absorb. And at that time, being unemployed was enough to fall into the hands of the executioner, because poverty and unemployment were declared crimes worthy of the death penalty.
In 1520, the English king Henry VIII declared that only elderly and disabled beggars were allowed to beg, while healthy ones were sentenced to lashes and imprisonment. They should be tied to a wheelbarrow and scourged until blood begins to flow from the body; then they must take an oath to return to their homeland or to where they have lived for the last three years, and get to work... And what kind of work? Where can I find it?
In 1536 the law became even stricter. If someone is caught a second time as a tramp, he is again punished with whips and his ear is cut off, and the third time he is executed as a serious criminal and an enemy of society. According to the chronicler, under Henry VIII, 7,200 people were executed in this way. But with this the king could not eliminate poverty.
The declaration of unemployment and poverty as a crime worthy of the death penalty, as well as dreams of resurrecting the equality and brotherhood of the ancient Christian communities, could not stop the growth of contradictions. And there was only one person at that time, a man who was so courageous and far-sighted that he was able to show people a new path to resolving all contradictions and difficulties, to indicate a step on a new path to a different social system. This man, who painted a hitherto unprecedented picture of the future of communism, was Thomas More, the King's Lord Chancellor. He was born in London in the family of a judge in 1478. After school he studied at the university in Oxford. But his father wanted to make him a lawyer and therefore deprived him of any help. More lived from hand to mouth, he was haunted by need, often he had nothing to buy even boots. Eventually he had to leave the university, and at the behest of his father, he began to attend law school in London. In 1501, he became a lawyer, sensitive, responsive and selfless. Until 1504, Thomas More lived near the Carthusian monastery, attended church services and himself wanted to become a monk, but abandoned this intention when he was convinced that the clergy had lost their former severity and abstinence. He returned to secular life and in 1504 was elected to parliament, where, despite his youth, he had significant influence.
At that time, England was already taking part in world trade and London acquired the importance of a world city on a par with Lisbon, Antwerp and Paris. When King Henry VIII came to the throne, More was soon sent as one of the ambassadors to the Netherlands to conclude a trade treaty. He stayed in the Netherlands for 6 months. Negotiations left him a lot of free time, and here he wrote his famous essay: “The Golden Book, as useful as it is funny, about the best structure of the state and about the new island of Utopia” (“utopia” - in Greek - “a place where No"). The first edition of the book appeared in 1516, and then it was reprinted an infinite number of times in all European languages.
In this book, More described an ideal state without oppression of the weak and without forced labor.
The impression from “Utopia Island” was enormous. This work immediately placed More among the first politicians in England. In his book, More paints in living images a picture of a well-organized state, already created and living a full life on an imaginary island. The life of this classless nation-state is described so completely that More seemed to have resolved all the contradictions. More knew life too well to believe that any class, no matter how just its intentions, could retain power in its hands without oppressing the poor majority. More looked far into the future and contrasted the communist system, in which everything belongs to everyone, with a class society. In his state, everything was distributed according to the principle: labor is compulsory, everyone works as much as he can and gets what he needs, every work is rewarded according to his deserts, and every person lives in luxury, although no one receives more than the other. There is no private property. On the island of Utopia there are 24 large cities, identical in language, customs, laws and institutions. In addition, the country has estates equipped with all the necessary agricultural implements. People live in these estates, gradually leaving the cities for the countryside. Each rural family should have at least forty members, men and women. From each family, every year 20 people, after spending two years in the estate, return to the city and are replaced by twenty others - city dwellers who learn farming from the remaining twenty, who have already lived for a year on the estate and therefore know agriculture. A queue for farmers is introduced in order to so that no one is forced against his will to engage in hard and painstaking agricultural labor for too long.
Villagers cultivate the fields, care for livestock and cut firewood, which they transport to the city. They are also engaged in the artificial hatching of chickens using special apparatus for hatching eggs... The main occupation of the Utopians is agriculture, but along with this, everyone learns a craft as their specialty, and both men and women study it. Their crafts consist mainly of processing wool and flax; in addition, there is the craft of mason, blacksmith and carpenter. The remaining branches of labor have very little application.
In Utopia they work only six hours a day: three hours from morning until lunch, then they rest for two hours and after rest they work for another three hours. Then follows dinner. They go to bed early and sleep for eight hours. Everyone spends the rest of the time at their own discretion. Six hours of work a day is more than enough to produce the things you need for a healthy and enjoyable life.
Everyone works, except for the leaders of society and those who have received permission from the people to devote themselves to science. If such a person does not live up to the expectations placed on him, then he is again transferred to the category of artisans.
Rural residents produce food for themselves and for the townspeople. The latter also work for the city and rural areas. Each city annually sends three of its wisest elders to the capital, who decide common affairs for the entire island. They collect information about where and what there is an excess or deficiency, and then the second is eliminated first. Cities that give their surplus to others receive nothing from them for this, because they themselves use everything they need from others, also without remuneration. Thus, the entire island is like one family. Money in Utopia is completely unknown. All things are available in abundance. There is no reason to assume that someone will demand more than he needs, because everyone is sure that he will never have to endure need.
Huge magnificent palaces were built on every street in the city. They are inhabited by “syphogrants” - officials who are elected one for every 30 families. There are 30 families attached to each of the palaces, living on both sides. The heads of the kitchens of these palaces come to the market at certain hours, where everyone takes the necessary products needed for 30 families. But the best products are first sent to the sick in hospitals.
At certain times, every 30 families go to their palaces for lunch and dinner. In the markets, everyone is not prevented from taking as much food as anyone wants, but there is no one who would voluntarily dine separately at home, when there is plenty of good and ready-made food nearby in the palace. Women take turns preparing food in the palace, and boys and girls serve at the table.
The main task of elected siphogrants is to ensure that no one is idle. All siphogrants appoint a prince from among four candidates chosen by the people. The position of prince is for life. He is deprived of his position only if suspicion falls on him that he is striving for autocracy. Religion on the island is a personal matter for everyone. Priests, like all officials, are elected by the people.
The population of Utopia hates war and considers military glory the most unenviable. War is necessary only to defend one's homeland or one's friends and to liberate an oppressed people from the yoke of tyranny. Scientists are held in high esteem. They are freed from physical labor, but doing science is not a monopoly of scientists. There are usually public readings early in the morning, which are open to all men and women. Depending on their inclination, they listen to readings on certain subjects.
So, in Utopia there is no private property and no money. Everyone is engaged only in the affairs of society, and everything is distributed evenly according to the principle: everyone works as much as he can and receives as much as he needs. And although there is no property, everyone there is rich and everyone has a calm and carefree life.
Thomas More's communism was utopian, unrealizable. However, it was created by a deep knowledge of life and understanding of the needs of that era. More was the first to make an attempt to adapt communism to the newly emerging capitalist society and was the first in the world to put forward the basic principle of communism, which later became part of Karl Marx's theory of scientific communism: from each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs.
For More, science comes to the service of people for the first time. Science, which seemed hostile to Christianity, becomes necessary in the creation of a new, just system. Mor makes science accessible to everyone as the highest pleasure. But More did not indicate the path to achieving a communist society, and at that time he could not do this.
At the beginning of my analysis, it seems appropriate to briefly characterize the personality of the author "Utopias" by Thomas More and his life, to outline the historical period of the early 16th century for a better understanding of the work.
Thomas More was born into a wealthy urban family in London in 1478 and received an excellent education. He acquired his primary education at the College of St. Anthony. Before entering Oxford University, More was in the house of the Bishop of Canterbury, Cardinal Morton, where he served as a page. The Cardinal really liked the young man, and for the first time he predicted a brilliant future for Thomas. In More he studied with outstanding lawyers - William Grotsin and Thomas Linacre. It was during these years that More entered the circle of humanists who opposed medieval scholastic theology and sought to put the study of man himself in first place. However, Thomas's father did not share his interests and forced him to fully concentrate on studying law. Thanks to this, after completing his studies, More quickly gained fame as an excellent and decent lawyer, a defender of the offended and oppressed.
At the age of 26, he was elected to parliament for the first time. But he did not get along with King Henry VII and withdrew from active political activity until the king's death in 1509. During this period, More was appointed several times by the king under the patronage of English merchants to negotiate with merchants from the continent to Flanders and Calais. It was during one such trip in 1516 that he began to write Utopia. After successfully completing his missions, Pestilence attracts the king's attention. Henry VIII brings More closer to him, high appointments follow one after another. In 1521 - speaker of petitions addressed to the king, in 1523 - chairman of the House of Commons, in 1529 - lord chancellor. This was an unheard-of phenomenon at that time, since for the first time a person from a bourgeois, rather than an aristocratic environment, became the second person in the state after the king. Nevertheless, fame did not go to his head, and throughout his state activities he followed his principles, did not engage in “compliance”, and was practically independent of the king, which led to frequent conflicts.
Fatal for Mora was a clash with the king on the basis of religious politics, although they had previously clashed on issues of budgetary policy. As you know, More was an opponent of the reformation, which began in 1517, and condemned Martin Luther. Henry VIII was also her opponent, but a few years later he quarreled with the Pope and decided to destroy the power of Rome in England, since he saw in this both political and financial advantages (freedom from the power of the pope, rich land holdings). But More did not support him in this and paid dearly for it.
In 1533, the king was proclaimed head of the English church and all subjects were required to swear an oath to him in this. More refused to do this and ended up in the Tower. During the investigation, he boldly defended his position and behaved with the dignity inherent in his noble character. He was found guilty and executed in London on July 7, 1535. This is how this great man, the founder of the philosophy of socialism, ended his life.
Now it’s worth looking at the political map of Europe of that period. The end of the 15th century and the beginning of the 16th century was a period of constant wars and changing coalitions. The continent is dominated by the Habsburgs, led by Emperor Charles V, France and the German principalities are fighting against him, and wars are blazing throughout Western Europe. The English king, based on the political situation, joins first one or the other, spending his treasury on increasingly expensive trips to continental Europe. The fight is going on for every piece of land, castle, town. In such a situation, diplomatic representatives who deftly know how to conclude both alliances and truces are very important. Thomas More is one of these worthy men. At the same time, any of the rulers defends exclusively their personal interests and benefits, and not the people’s or the state’s. Thomas More feels this very subtly, which prompts him to write “Utopia.”
“Utopia” is a book illustrating the ideal model of the state and the structure of society, to which all people and states should strive. There is no doubt that in his book he relies on Plato’s work “The Republic,” which he has always been very fond of since his student days. But More uses the work of the ancient thinker only as the foundation of his book, adding to it all the contemporary realities, especially those relating to the emerging industrial capitalism and its consequences.
The work is written in the form of a story about a journey to an unknown country. This was caused by the beginning of the era of great geographical discoveries; it is no coincidence that the description is carried out on behalf of one of the companions of Amerigo Vespucci. For the first time, Europeans became acquainted with the customs, traditions and life of new, previously unfamiliar peoples, which pushed people to understand their own lives within the framework of their contemporary society. And More boldly expresses these thoughts, criticizing many of the vices and ulcers of that time. That is why he divides his work into two parts, in the first he describes the contemporary socio-political and economic situation in Europe, exposes all the problems and contradictions within and between peoples, and in the second part he paints an idealistic picture of the life of the fictional people of the New World.
This bright contrast is necessary in order to attract people's attention to modern ills of society, make them realize this and begin to change something in order to correct, improve or eradicate at least something. After all, people always need a guideline to which they will strive. This structure of a philosophical work was first used by More. He brilliantly coped with the task set for himself, since his book produced a tremendous effect in European thinking and perception of reality. Now it’s worth moving directly to the analysis of the work itself.
First book
The first book begins with a description of the historical panorama of the early 16th century. Thomas More arrived as an ambassador to Flanders to resolve disputes between his king Henry VIII and his opponent Emperor Charles V. In Antwerp, between negotiations, More, through his friend Peter Egidio, met a very interesting person, Raphael Hythloday, a Portuguese traveler.
It turns out that Raphael participated in three travels of Amerigo Vespucci, during which he saw and studied a lot about the life and government of the local residents. He briefly describes what he saw. Talking with him, More and his friend are surprised that with such knowledge the Portuguese has not yet become an adviser to some monarch to improve the latter’s lands. For the Portuguese, the complete impossibility of this is obvious. Raphael enters into an argument with his opponents in order to prove to them his uselessness for the thoughts of any sovereign in the field of foreign and domestic policy. More argues that the sovereign is the benefactor of the people, from whom all useful measures for the subjects should come. But the sovereigns, according to Hythloday, are more concerned about wars and the seizure of new lands and wealth than the well-being of their own people. This is a completely objective statement, due to the fact that during that period the formation of absolutism began, which reached its peak in subsequent centuries.
The interest of the sovereign was paramount; the prevailing opinion was that the monarch knew better, what was more useful to the people and the country. In addition, in any court favoritism, flattery, and denunciation prevail. An intelligent person with his own opinion and certain principles will not last that long, and the sovereign will not tolerate people often disagreeing with him. To make the discussions closer to reality, the interlocutors directly turn to England and its internal structure. Hythloday gives the example of a conversation with Cardinal Morton of Canterbury. And this is the conclusion our traveler came to.
The question concerned the poor, beggars and thieves, the reasons for their mass distribution in England. How does Raphael feel about this? Such phenomena are caused by the unfair distribution of responsibilities and income in the state and incorrect prioritization of state policy. There is a huge class of nobility who live on the labor of others, which is full of idle servants, incapable of useful activity and accustomed to an easy life. Also, too much money is spent on artificially caused wars, which also result in ruin and a huge number of cripples and disabled people. The state takes care of large owners who, in their personal interests, dispossess peasants of land for the purpose of raising sheep (a special case characteristic of English agriculture), and the state does not interfere with this. All these circumstances push people to commit crimes, because they have nothing else to do to survive and feed their families. The justice system, based on the application of similar punishment for theft and murder, is also unfair. This is disastrous for the state, as it encourages people to commit more crimes, while having the same risks. In all these statements, the cardinal finds a grain of truth, praises the Portuguese for his insight, he likes Hythloday’s arguments; Everyone around the cardinal, who at the beginning of the conversation was skeptical about the traveler, instantly agrees with this. This again proves that servility exists even among clergy and church hierarchs. Such interesting and non-standard judgments make Mora again wonder why Raphael does not become an adviser to the king. It is necessary to again substantiate the uselessness of Raphael’s knowledge for the royal courts, to come from the other side in this issue.
This time the Portuguese turns his example to the French court. All royal assistants are busy thinking about various foreign policy actions with the aim of seizing new lands, new wars, and forming profitable short-term alliances. At the same time, even the French kingdom itself remains unsettled, not to mention the newly acquired possessions. The consequence of such a policy is the weakening of the state, since both the rebellious new territories and the state itself are ruined and exhausted in this struggle. Accordingly, it is impossible to sit on more than one chair, and you need to take care exclusively of your kingdom, without encroaching on other people's territories.
The next question is the royal treasury and the welfare of the people. Almost any sovereign strives to fill his treasury in one way or another, and this is where advisers come in handy, capable of extracting taxes from anything, so as not to cause too much discontent among the population. Moreover, these courtiers believe that the main stronghold of power is to prevent the people from spoiling themselves with wealth and freedom. Poverty and lack are supposedly capable of teaching humility and obedience. But the king is chosen by his subjects to respect the welfare of the people, he must first take care of the people's welfare. After all, the main unrest always occurs due to dissatisfaction with the system of the poor classes, seeking to profit from something. Instead of accumulating huge wealth in the treasury, it is better to use this money for good and useful things for the state, the development of the social security system for the population.
In response to all such examples, Thomas More objects, saying that one must strive “in a roundabout way” towards good goals without the desire to immediately radically change everything, without maximalism. To this, Hythloday remarks that he wants to speak only the truth, without this there will be no benefit from him, there are many flatterers even without him. The “roundabout way” will not lead to anything good, but will only do additional harm, spoiling even the most correct person with the best intentions with his conciliatory policy. There is no such thing as the least evil, either you say what you think, or you yourself change for the worse under the influence of corrupt people. This is the lot of a true philosopher, therefore he has no place in public administration, according to Raphael, in the modern realities of life. Then Raphael comes to his main conclusion, the basis of his contemporary society, which destroys people. This is nothing more than a phenomenon of private property.
Where there is private property, there is no equality and prosperity due to constant hostility, the desire to seize as much property as possible, including at the expense of other people. All this leads to the polarization of society into a few haves and many have-nots. More objects to the Portuguese, arguing that without private property no development is possible. He is right in this, if we take into account that without incentives to work, a person loses the desire to work hard and fruitfully, laziness arises, and the desire to shift some of the responsibilities to others. It is difficult to develop principles that stimulate a person without personal interest. Hythloday agrees that a prosperous society without private property is hard to believe; To do this, you need to learn more about Utopia and its orders. A reasonable question arises about the level of civilization of the Utopians in comparison with the Europeans. The Portuguese tells us that the Europeans are more talented, but the Utopians are more diligent and industrious. They quickly borrow useful innovations from other nations, without spoiling their exemplary practices. And it's all about a more reasonable form of government that promotes prosperity and development. After such serious statements, More asks Raphael to describe the Utopian lands in more detail, without missing a single important detail. And we, accordingly, now move directly to the analysis of the state of the Utopian state, its laws, customs and traditions.
Second book
The Utopian state is located on an island protected by natural barriers, such as shoals, reefs, and the shores are also reliably fortified, so that the island is a powerful defensive unit. In ancient times it was a peninsula, but after a victorious war, ruler Utop ordered to strengthen it and dig a canal between it and the land. It was he who brought the wild people to a high degree of culture and education. This is the brief history of this state. Raphael goes on to describe the administrative structure of the country, based on the equality of cities, with the primacy of one, Amaurot, at the center of the state. In addition to cities, there are also villages in which residents work in turns for two years. No one can escape this responsibility.
The island's agriculture is very productive due to the fact that people are united in families of 40 people, representing a form of organization of society in the form of small teams responsible for a certain part of the work. Next, the Portuguese describes the city of Amaurot from the point of view of its location on the ground and its internal structure. The city is very strongly fortified, beautiful, all the buildings are typical and do not stand out from the general background, residents even change their houses by lot every 10 years, since there is no such thing as private property. This promotes equality in society, the absence of greed and envy. All buildings are very neat, they use the latest achievements of the people of Utopia and are not inferior to similar European ones.
The procedure for determining officials in the city who are also responsible for maintaining this exemplary order is also interesting. Every year, every 30 families elect an official, a phylarch. Every ten such phylarchs is headed by a person called a protophylarch. All these officials choose the prince, one of 4 candidates proposed by the people. The position of the prince is for life, provided that he has no desire for tyranny and usurpation of power, which is quite reasonable. Protophylarchs are elected every year, which ensures that there are no injustices in governance. They always consult with the prince to make the most effective decision. Any decision on public affairs can be made only through the Senate or the People's Assembly, which helps to suppress any attempts to usurp power. In order to avoid hasty conclusions and decisions on the part of the Senate, none of the proposals are considered on the day they are introduced.
Now let's talk in more detail about the occupations of the population on the island. Agriculture is common to all residents; no one is exempt from it. In addition to this, everyone learns some kind of trade, usually his father's trade. If he wants to study another craft, then he simply transfers to another family in which they are engaged in this activity. This practice is very interesting, it ensures general employment and interest in one’s work; The phylarchs must ensure that there is no idleness. But there is no backbreaking work, since the Utopians have a fairly free day, taking into account 6 hours of work and 8 hours of sleep.
They usually spend the rest of their time on science and self-development. At the same time, in their free time they never gamble, preferring more intellectual and useful activities, such as music and dancing, and public lectures. Thanks to this, the moral health of the population is not undermined by harmful and vicious entertainment. Such a convenient distribution of time would be impossible without the involvement of almost all categories of the population in the processes of labor and production, taking into account the capabilities of the latter. It is also important to point out the reasons for exemption from labor. This right was enjoyed either by phylarchs or by individuals released from labor on the advice of the people and clergy for a thorough study of the sciences. The abilities and aspirations of people to acquire knowledge are taken into account. From this category of the population, persons are selected for all administrative positions in the state (ambassadors, rulers, clergy, etc.). Thanks to people’s careful attitude to their responsibilities, nothing falls into disrepair, nothing gets neglected, but develops dynamically. Accordingly, all structures and complexes (buildings, production sites) do not require expensive repairs.
It is also important that in the state of the Utopians everything is in abundance. This contributes to a happy life in the state, because they believe that burdensome work is harmful, it is necessary to work as much as is sufficient to maintain social needs at an acceptable level. This is a completely healthy and strong foundation of the state, based on the well-being of all citizens, and not individuals. Then it is worth saying that the Utopians follow the principle of maintaining a certain number of inhabitants at the family, city, and island levels. They resettle surplus people to colonies outside their state, and, if necessary, return them from there. It is a completely reasonable principle that maintains stability in the state, the population at a certain level, and is quite effective in the event of food shortages on the island, epidemics and other unpleasant events.
The process of obtaining material benefits by the inhabitants of the island is no less unusual. Produced goods are deposited in special warehouses, from which each father of the family can take as many goods as he needs. Such a principle seems impossible, because greed and the desire for acquisition are rooted in the consciousness of European man. But the Utopians have everything in abundance; there is no point in striving for accumulation in this case. Social services are also strikingly different from the European reality of More's time, manifested in excellent medical care and food distribution, regardless of a person's status.
Harmony reigns in families, the younger ones respect the elders, but at the same time, the life together of different generations does not consist only of moralizing conversations, but is also filled with various pleasures, as long as nothing unpleasant happens from them. After all, the human soul was born for happiness, and not for harsh and ascetic beneficence. At the same time, another principle comes into play, based on respect and recognition of the interests of other members of society.
Phenomena unnatural to human nature, such as a pub, a brothel, a wine shop, do not exist in a Utopian state. All this contributes to the healthy spirit of the residents, turns them away from laziness and idleness, and vicious behavior. Inevitably, from all the previous facts, the conclusion follows that the island of the Utopians is completely self-sufficient, which makes it possible to make strategic reserves in case of any unforeseen situations. And at the same time, there are still many free goods that, through the state and under its control, are exported to other states at a reasonable price.
Exporting a variety of goods from agricultural products to purple, they receive in return the iron and precious metals they need, gold and silver. These metals are found in abundance in the country and therefore have virtually no value for the Utopians, unlike the Europeans, who are ready to do anything for such treasures. These values are necessary for recruiting soldiers in other countries, fielded instead of their residents, since human life is the most precious thing for the Utopians. Or gold is used to bribe enemies and bring discord into their camp. To ensure that the thirst for profit does not undermine society, the authorities of Utopia have invented a very active way of using it. Precious metals and stones are used to make chains for slaves, children's toys and dishes for the dirtiest needs. All this contributes to discouraging residents from the desire to possess these metals.
Raising a person by his wealth, and not by his intelligence or merits, is sheer stupidity. But the inquisitive mind inherent in the Utopians is held in high esteem in the state. The diligence of the inhabitants is manifested in the fact that they absorb information very quickly, which is manifested in their rapid acquisition of the Greek language and comprehension of the complex works of the ancient Greek classics. The citizens of Utopia received this opportunity thanks to Raphael and his vigorous activity. It is now worth considering the issue of slavery in a Utopian society. They turn into slaves either their own citizens for committing shameful acts or representatives of foreign peoples sentenced to death and ransomed by the Utopians. Sometimes hardworking and poor representatives of other nations voluntarily go to the Utopians, they are treated mildly, but the Utopians themselves, who have fallen into slavery for bad deeds, are treated doubly harshly. After all, how can you commit a crime with such an ideal and prosperous life? There is no excuse for this.
It is equally important, in my opinion, to consider such a civil institution of society as marriage and marital relations. The state seeks to discourage people from promiscuous cohabitation by severely punishing adultery. Such behavior undermines the family, the unit of society, and sows discord. When choosing a mate, Utopians pay attention not only to spiritual qualities, but also to appearance, sometimes examining each other like horse buyers. What dictates this behavior? This is due to the fact that among Utopians it is possible to have only one wife; accordingly, you need to weigh the pros and cons before making a choice, because then you will carry this lot for the rest of your life. Divorce is possible either in case of adultery, or in case of intolerable character, as well as in case of mutual desire with the consent of the Senate. But such cases are rare among Utopians who have qualities such as duty, nobility, respect, etc.
In general, the Utopians cultivate noble deeds in every possible way, erecting monuments and statues to outstanding statesmen in public places. Thus, the people are encouraged to creatively and honestly work for the benefit of the whole society. A good idea, also effective due to severe punishments against those officials who were not distinguished by crystal honesty. Also, to maintain the foundations of the state, there are a small number of laws that are understandable to every resident of the island. There is also such an institution as independent defense in court, which contributes to the objectivity of the investigation and decision-making. Thus, simple-minded people are protected from the machinations of cunning and intriguers.
The fame of the justice of the Utopian officials quickly spread throughout the surrounding countries, especially those that the Utopians had liberated by force from tyranny. Such states ask the inhabitants of a free island for themselves as officials. Such peoples are allies of Utopia. At the same time, in the minds of Utopians in matters of friends and allies, there is a key difference with European reality. Unlike European monarchs, the Utopians do not enter into any agreements, since they do not trust this form of agreement. In Europe, the greatness of such a thing as a treaty is indestructible. And at the same time, they are violated many times, since some official or state adviser periodically finds a loophole in the complex and confusing wording of the agreements. Utopians believe that treaties acquire too much influence in the minds of peoples after their conclusion, which contributes to the disunity and bitterness of people, despite their historical and natural fraternal community. Working closely with neighboring countries and peoples, the Utopians cannot avoid periodic hostilities of various forms of fierceness. Let's take a closer look at this issue.
In general, they do not tolerate war as a phenomenon and begin it only in a few exceptional cases: an attack on their borders, an attack on the possessions of their friends, trampling on the trade and other interests of their friends, the salvation of some people from tyranny. Victories achieved at the cost of great bloodshed do not cause them joy, because there is nothing more valuable than human life in the minds of the Utopians. At the same time, victories achieved by any other means, by cunning or deception, are revered by them as very heroic and worthy deeds. In such a situation, intelligence is used, a human feature that is not inherent in any other living creature. Similar methods include introducing discord into the camp of enemies, such as offering bribes, rewards for betrayal, and extraditing state leaders and the most important officials, alive or dead. Thus, the greed of peoples allows the Utopians to easily and without much effort disorganize the resistance of other peoples by causing a split in one way or another. The death of a small part of the top representatives of such states allows us to save the lives of many ordinary people who participate in the war against their will. Thanks to the abundance of jewelry, the Utopians have the opportunity to carry out bribes at the very top of the power ladder, pitting nobles against each other in the struggle for the power they desire, thereby reducing the enemy’s combat potential to a minimum. But to conduct combat operations, military contingents are still needed, albeit limited. There are several sources for these purposes: these are either soldiers of allied countries, or soldiers recruited in other states for money, mercenaries. The Utopians themselves act as strategists and military managers. But sometimes ordinary citizens of Utopia also have to fight as soldiers. Prudently, they avoid unnecessary and minor battles, but when necessary and unavoidable battles, they stubbornly fight to the last opportunity.
The Utopians observe all moral rules when conducting battle, do not maim or kill people in vain, and willingly take prisoners. What a contrast with any European theater of war, where no one spares human life, and blood always flows like a river. In addition to this, they sacredly honor the truces concluded with enemies and do not destroy infrastructure or farmland in the enemy’s country. Captured villages and cities are not plundered, and civilians do not suffer any insults or oppression. Nothing like this can be imagined, for example, during the fighting between the French and the Spaniards, where the innocent local population suffered the most. War booty taken from the leadership of the state is transferred to the Utopian allies, while the inhabitants of the island themselves do not take anything for themselves, since they are provided with everything in abundance. The only form of increasing Utopia's capital during wars is the acquisition of part of the estates of local nobles who oppose them into ownership by the Utopian state. Such income makes it possible to keep these territories under control and maintain peace and stability there.
Now it is worth paying attention to the last aspect that characterizes Utopia. This is religion and its features. The first important feature is the diversity in the pantheon of gods; almost every city has its own religion, and the state does not impose one for all residents. But all these ideas about God agree that their nature is one, simply manifested in different essences. You can profess your religion without any fear, but at the same time you cannot campaign for it en masse, vilify other beliefs, thereby sowing confusion among the masses. You can convert to your religion, but only in an exclusively peaceful way, thanks to persuasion and evidence. The Utopians do not think of a non-believer as a person in principle, since the absence of faith is interpreted as a rejection of the higher nature of the human soul. After all, such a person is not afraid of anything except the legislation, which he can bypass if he wants. This means that he is extremely unreliable; you cannot trust him with important matters. The attitude of citizens towards death is also very interesting. They consider death to be the transition of the soul to supreme bliss. Those who part with this world with fear are afraid of the end due to the fact that their soul is burdened with some bad deeds. The rest of the people die cheerful, because they are sure that they are following the call of God and nothing bad will happen to them in that world. Various superstitions are also not characteristic of them. The few priests are universally respected, as they are elected by the people through voting. Priests are engaged in monitoring human morals and raising boys and young men. At the same time, there is a completely unthinkable phenomenon: women can also be priests. Other peoples also respect them, thanks to their intercession and peacekeeping during hostilities, and their promotion of peace agreements. In general, the religion of the Utopians is maximally rationalized and humanized, freed from various superstitions and remnants of the past.
Conclusion
Thomas More's work "Utopia" is one of the greatest philosophical works in human history. It formulated the most advanced ideas of the time, revealed the main contradictions of the period of the birth of capitalism in Europe, the discrepancy between the interests of elites and ordinary citizens, pointed out the most pressing problems of ordinary people, such as poverty, hunger, etc., and called on the society of that period to become more just and healthy. More sought to establish clear boundaries and relationships between religion and reason, to make society more humanistic and open in its model, avoiding both the complete denial of religion and various superstitions. And although this is only an ideal model, it reflects the ideas and provisions that every state should strive for in its development, based on greater social justice and general well-being. He sought to highlight domestic policy as a higher priority over foreign policy; one must first of all worry about the lives of one’s own citizens and their well-being.
The impetus for writing this book was undoubtedly More's impressions of the rural life of the population of England, difficult and unenviable, and of the moral state of his contemporary urban and high society, saturated with incorrect and inert morality, distorted by the excessive interference of scholastic philosophy in the minds of people. Also, in his opinion, the main problem of separation and alienation of people lies in the presence of private property, which fuels the thirst for profit and acquisition. More's scheme does not show us a ready-made recipe for how to rebuild society, but roughly outlines a path that can lead people to happiness and prosperity. It is no coincidence that More wrote his work in a discussion form. “Utopia” became the forerunner of socialism, which later received not only the theoretical justification given by More, but also practical ways and principles of implementation that are actually feasible within society. That is why the role of this book cannot be overestimated.
Thomas More truly became the founder of such a movement in philosophy as utopian socialism, which was difficult to imagine before him. Thus, he forever inscribed his name in the history of mankind, being one of the first to consider in such detail and detail the issues of social inequality and injustice in society.
It is in it that such techniques arise that later became standard, such as the description of a journey to distant countries, the discovery of a previously unknown exotic country in which an ideal, socialist society exists.
It is not for nothing that the title of this book served as one of the terms that denoted the entire teaching: “utopian socialism.”
Then its author, Thomas More, was an influential English statesman with a brilliant career. In 1529 he became Lord Chancellor of England, the first person in the state after the king. But in 1535 he acted as a decisive opponent of the transformation of the church, which, under the influence of the Reformation, was carried out by King Henry VIII. More refused to swear allegiance to the king as the head of the newly created English church, was accused of treason and was beheaded in 1535. Four centuries later, in 1935, the Catholic Church accepted More as one of its saints.
"Utopia" is written in the form of a conversation between More, his friend Aegidius and the traveler Hythlodeus. Hythloday saw the whole world and carefully observed life. Participating in the journey of Amerigo Vespucci, he was, at his request, left with several comrades “at the limits of the last journey.” After wandering across the seas and deserts, Hythloday ends up on the island of Utopia, where he discovers a state living according to fair laws, once established by the wise legislator Utop. To appreciate the impression that Utopia made on contemporaries, one must keep in mind that all this was written at the very beginning of the era of great discoveries, even before the novels of Defoe and Swift.
In the first direction, the central thesis is that modern European states are instruments of the selfish interests of the rich:
“After repeated and attentive contemplation of all the currently prosperous states, I can swear that they appear to be nothing more than a kind of conspiracy of the rich, advocating under the name and sign of the state for their personal benefits” (42, p. 188).
The real reason for this situation is private property and money:
“However, friend More, if I tell you my opinion honestly, then in my opinion, wherever there is private property, where everything is measured by money, a correct and successful course of state affairs is hardly ever possible” (42, p. 73).
“...but if it (private property) remains, then the largest and best part of the population will forever remain with a bitter and inevitable burden of sorrows” (42, p. 74).
As an example, crime is analyzed, which is attributed entirely to the depravity of the social system:
“In doing this, are you doing anything other than creating thieves and punishing them at the same time?” (42, p. 57).
The legislation of that time, which punished thieves with death, is considered not only unfair, but also ineffective. Instead, Hythloday offers customs that he saw among the Polylerite people living in the mountains of Persia:
“in this regard, I have not observed a better order among any people...” (42, p. 59).
These customs consist in turning caught thieves into state slaves. As a sign of their status, one ear is cut off. Lazy
“they are not so much punished with shackles as they are rewarded with blows” (42, p. 60).
Finally, to prevent escapes, denunciations are encouraged: the slave who reports such a plan receives freedom, the free one receives money. The caught fugitive slave is executed, and the free one who helped him is enslaved.
“You can easily see how humane and convenient they (these laws) are,”
The narrator concludes (42, p. 61).
The gloomy picture of the life of European states is contrasted with the description of an ideal state on the island of Utopia. This is not a dry treatise on government or political economy, but a living picture of life. The clothes of the inhabitants, their activities and entertainment, the appearance of cities and temples are described. Thanks to this, it becomes clearer to us which features of this life the author wants to highlight as more significant.
Utopia is a republic governed by elected officials called "fathers" by its subjects. All life in this country is regulated by the state. There is no private property and money. The basis of the economy is universal labor conscription. And first of all, it is mandatory for everyone (or almost everyone) to work for a certain period of time in agriculture:
“All men and women have one common occupation - agriculture, from which no one is spared” (42, p. 83)
Citizens who have reached a certain age are sent to work in the villages, and after they have worked there for 2 years, they move to the cities. In addition, everyone learns some kind of craft, which he does the rest of the time. The work takes place under the supervision of officials:
“The main and almost exclusive occupation of siphogrants (one of the varieties of “fathers”) is to care and see that no one sits idle, but that everyone diligently works at his craft...” (42, p. 84).
The uniformity of population distribution is also regulated by the state through mass relocations:
“These sizes (of communities called families) are maintained by moving into less populated families those who are superfluous in very large ones. If the overcrowding of the city generally exceeds the proper limits, then the Utopians will make up for the emptiness of their other cities” (42, p. 88).
“If some accident reduces the population of the Utopians’ own cities... then such a city is replenished by the return resettlement of citizens from the colonies” (42, p. 89).
The narrator sympathetically emphasizes the uniformity and standardness of the way of life that arises in this way.
“As for clothing, with the exception of the fact that its appearance differs between persons of one sex or another, as well as between single and married people, its cut remains the same, unchanged and constant all the time...” (42, p. 83).
The outerwear is a cloak.
“The color of this cloak is the same throughout the island, and, moreover, it is the natural color of the wool” (42, p. 87).
This applies not only to clothes:
“There are fifty-four cities on the island, all vast and magnificent; their language, customs, institutions and laws are exactly the same. The location of all of them is also the same, as far as the terrain allows” (42, p. 77).
“Whoever knows at least one city will recognize all the cities of Utopia, they are all so similar to each other, since the nature of the area does not interfere with this” (42, p. 80).
All consumer products are obtained from public warehouses, and everyone can take as much as they need. However, food in general is largely centralized:
“although no one is forbidden to dine at home, no one does it willingly, because it is considered obscene and stupid to waste labor on preparing inferior food when luxurious and plentiful food is ready in the palace so close by” (42, p. 90).
We are talking about voluntary shared meals. But in describing them the narrator somehow gets confused and says:
“here (in the palaces) these families should dine” (emphasis added by us - author) (42, p. 90).
And the description of shared meals is more reminiscent of rationing than distribution according to needs:
“Dishes of food are not served in a row, starting from the first place, but each best dish is presented first of all to all the elders, whose places are especially marked, and then the rest are served with this dish in equal shares” (42, p.
Shared meals are typical of the general trend: the life of an inhabitant of Utopia should take place in front of everyone.
“They have not a single liquor store, not a single pub; there is not a brothel anywhere, not a single case of debauchery, not a single brothel, not a single illegal gathering; but being in front of everyone creates the need to spend all their time either in their usual work or in decent rest" (42, p. 92).
“The doors are double doors, they quickly open with a light pressure and then, closing themselves, they let anyone in - to such an extent the Utopians have eliminated private property. They even change the houses themselves every ten years by lot” (42, p. 81).
Anyone who wants to take a walk outside the city must take permission from his father, the wife from her husband, and the husband from his wife. Anyone traveling to another city must obtain permission from officials.
“They are sent simultaneously with a letter from the prince, testifying to the permission given for the journey and prescribing the day of return: (42, p. 92).
“If anyone transgresses his limits on his own initiative, then, caught without the prince’s letter, he is subjected to shameful treatment: he is returned as a runaway and severely punished. Anyone who dares to do the same thing a second time is turned into slavery” (42, p. 93).
(More on slavery will be said later.)
In Utopia, there was an individual monogamous marriage, but the story does not say whether it was concluded at the request of the bride and groom, or whether the issue was decided by parents or officials. But the state strictly monitors the observance of chastity before marriage and the mutual fidelity of spouses. Guilty people are punished by being sold into slavery. The Utopians compare getting married to selling a horse, and on this basis, before marriage, the bride is shown naked to the groom, and the groom is shown to the bride - since when buying a horse, they remove its blanket!
Utopians are not burdened with hard work - they work only 6 hours a day, devoting the rest of the time to sciences, arts and “decent rest”. The explanation of how they, despite this, achieve abundance is this: in Europe the labor of the poor creates wealth, which for the most part goes to support the idle, but in Utopia everyone works. The list of idle people is very interesting: in the first place are women, then priests and monks, then landowners and their servants!
The Utopians are apparently equal to each other in everything - in compulsory labor service, in the color and cut of their dresses, in the structure of their houses. But this is far from complete equality. Officials and those to whom an official decision is issued are exempt from labor service
“grants forever this liberation for a thorough study of the sciences” (42, p. 86).
“From this class of scientists they choose ambassadors, clergy, tranibors (highest officials) and, finally, the head of state himself...” (42, p. 86).
If you compare this with another part of the story:
“For the most part, everyone grows up learning their father’s craft” (42, p. 83),
then an idea arises of a closed class, almost a caste, in whose hands is the leadership of the state. As for the rest of the population, the narrator speaks about it as follows (saying that laws should be simple, not requiring complex interpretation):
“The common people, with their slow intelligence, are not able to reach such conclusions, and they don’t even have enough life for this, since they are busy getting food” (42, p. 116).
And this picture of equality is completely destroyed when we learn that life in Utopia is largely based on slavery. Slaves do all the dirty and hard work. But slavery apparently has more than just an economic function. The source of slaves is:
“...they enslave their own citizen for a shameful act or those who were doomed to execution among foreign peoples for a crime he committed” (they are bought or received for free), (42, p. 110).
“Slaves of both kinds are not only constantly busy with work, but also shackled in chains; treatment of slaves who come from among the Utopians themselves is more severe...” (42, p. 111).
“The work of these persons brings more benefit than their execution, and on the other hand, the example scares them away for a longer time from committing such a shameful act. If, after such treatment towards them, they begin to rebel and resist, then they are stabbed to death like wild ones beasts that neither prison nor chain can curb" (42, p. 114).
The story about Utopia also contains a description of the general worldview of its inhabitants. It is based on recognizing pleasure as the highest goal of life. Refusing them
“This can only happen when someone neglects these advantages of his for the sake of ardent concern for others and for society, expecting in return for this suffering greater pleasure from God.” (42, p. 107).
In Utopia, complete freedom of conscience reigns, limited only by the fact that Utopia
“with inexorable severity he forbade anyone to degrade the dignity of the human race so low as to come to the point of admitting that souls perish along with the body and that the whole world is rushing in vain, without any participation of Providence. Therefore, according to their beliefs, after real life, punishments are prescribed for vices, and for virtue - rewards" (42, p. 128).
Some Utopians consider the Sun to be god, others - the Moon, and still others - one of the ancient heroes. But they all admit
“a certain single deity, unknown, eternal, immeasurable, inexplicable, exceeding the understanding of the human mind, spread throughout the world not by its bulk, but by its power: they call him father” (42, p. 126).
The worship of the Utopians is akin to such abstract theism. There are no images of gods in the temples. The worship service consists of those praying together with the priest singing praises to God to the music. Both men and women can be priests, men can be married.
Recently, as the narrator reports, Christianity has become known in Utopia and has found many followers there. True, one preacher who called other religions pagan and threatened their followers with eternal fire was arrested and convicted. The narrator’s idea is very interesting that the rapid spread of Christianity in Utopia is explained by the similarity between the communist system of the Utopians and the order in the first apostolic community, which
“is still preserved in the purest Christian communities” (42, p. 127).
Appeal to the communist character of the community described in the Acts of the Apostles was a favorite argument of heretical sects, and it is difficult to imagine who, if not any of these movements, the author meant by the “pure Christian community” contemporary with him.
If you look at More as a martyr who gave his life for the ideals of the Catholic Church, then Utopia will amaze you with how far it is from these ideals. In addition to a sympathetic description of the hedonistic worldview, a colorless theistic religion, one can also find direct, although disguised, attacks against Christianity and the Pope. Apparently, so far no one has been able to explain how these two concepts coexisted in one person.
But if you look at Utopia as a work of literature of chiliastic socialism, it is striking in its moderation. We do not see the abolition of the family, the community of wives, or the state education of children in isolation from their parents. Obviously, the new, secular movement in socialism begins, as it were, from afar, not at all from those extreme concepts that were formulated in the heretical movements.
Very briefly The ideal structure of the island of Utopia, where money and private property are abolished, and rulers are chosen by citizens, is contrasted with the European powers of the 16th century, where wars are fought for foreign lands.
The book begins with a kind of introduction - a letter from Thomas More to his friend Peter Aegidius with a request to read “Utopia” and write down whether any important details have escaped More.
First book
The story is told from the perspective of Thomas More. He arrives in Flanders as an ambassador and meets Peter there. He introduces his friend to the experienced navigator Raphael, who has traveled a lot. Raphael, having learned many customs and laws of other countries, identifies those that can be used for good in European countries. Peter advises the navigator to use his knowledge by getting a job as an adviser to the sovereign, but he does not want to do this - the kings pay a lot of attention to military affairs and strive to acquire more and more lands instead of taking care of their own. All advisers, as a rule, support the ruler in this, so as not to spoil their reputation and fall out of favor. Raphael condemns the war and considers it pointless. Petty theft and murder are punishable by the same punishment: death. The rich bathe in luxury, spending their time in idleness, and the common people work hard, begging, which contributes to crime.
Each power considers it necessary to have an army and an unlimited amount of gold to support the army, but war is necessary at least in order to give soldiers experience in massacres.
As a true philosopher, Raphael wants to tell the truth, so he should refrain from engaging in public affairs. The navigator talks about a state whose customs and laws pleased him.
Second book
The island of Utopia is named after the founder of this state, Utop. There are fifty-four cities on the island. Manners, institutions and laws are the same everywhere. The center is the city of Amaurot. The fields are evenly distributed between all areas. Urban and rural residents change places every two years: those families who have not yet worked here arrive in the villages.
Amaurot is surrounded by a deep moat, loopholes and towers. This is a clean and beautiful city. Near each house there is a beautiful garden. Private property has been so abolished that every ten years the Utopians change their houses by lot.
Every thirty families elect a phylarch (or siphogrant), over ten phylarchs and their families stands a protophylarch (or tranibor). All two hundred protophylarchs elect a prince who leads the country. He is elected for life. In other positions, persons change annually.
All men and women in the country are engaged in agriculture. In addition, everyone learns some kind of craft, which is passed on by inheritance. If someone does not gravitate towards the family business, he is transferred to a family that is engaged in the required craft. The working day lasts six hours. Free time, as a rule, is devoted to science or their business. The most diligent in the sciences are promoted to the rank of scientists. From them the clergy, ambassadors, tranibors and the head of state - adema are chosen.
While working, the Utopians wear skins; they walk through the streets in cloaks (the cut and color are the same throughout the island). Everyone has one dress for two years.
In families, they obey the elder. If the cities are overpopulated, then the citizens of Utopia are resettled in the colonies, and vice versa. In the center of every city there is a market where goods and food are brought. There everyone can take as much as they need: everything is available in sufficient abundance. The entire siphograntia gathers in the palaces for public lunches and dinners.
Utopians can move between cities with the permission of the Tranibors and Syphogrants. For arbitrary movement, the Utopian will face punishment; if he violates it again, he will be subject to slavery.
Everything needed in Utopia is available in such quantities that some are given to the poor in other countries, and the rest is sold. The Utopians use money only in foreign trade and keep it in case of war. They despise gold and silver: they shackle slaves in shackles made of these metals; the Utopians do not use them at all. Precious stones serve as toys for children. Growing up, they leave them.
The Utopians reached great heights in science and art. If foreigners visit them, the citizens of Utopia become thoroughly acquainted with their culture and sciences, quickly comprehend and develop them at home.
The life of the Utopians consists of virtue and pleasures of body and spirit. Relations are built on honesty and justice, citizens help the weak and take care of the sick. Health is one of the main pleasures; beauty, strength and agility are also valued.
Utopians or representatives of other nations sentenced to execution are turned into slavery for a shameful act. The labor of slaves brings more benefits than execution.
Seriously ill people are given the right to end their suffering: after all, life is pleasure, such an act is not considered a sin. Adultery is severely punished.
The Utopians consider war to be an atrocity, therefore, to win, first of all, they use cunning, bribery of those close to the enemy sovereign, and so on. If this method does not help, they rely on military battles. The Utopians hire foreign soldiers and pay them generously. Their citizens are placed only in leadership positions. They may go to war to defend oppressed peoples, but they never allow battles to take place on their own lands.
In Utopia, citizens freely choose any religion. No one has the right to try to forcibly convert another to one’s faith or to humiliate someone of a different faith. Most believe in one god, calling him Mithras. No one is afraid of death: a new, even happier life promises a meeting with God.
Priests are held in high esteem not only among the Utopians, but also among other peoples. They are also elected by the citizens of Utopia, and women can also be elected. Priests are not subject to trial. They can even stop the battle and save the losers, including the opponents of the Utopians.
Raphael finishes the story, and More, noting his fatigue, does not dare to speak out about the absurdity of some of the laws of the Utopians.
