Eric J Hutchinson

At the conclusion of his , a treatise on the law of nature, how it is grasped by the human mind, and how it coheres with the Decalogue, Niels Hemmingsen claims to have eschewed the use of theological sources in his argument, claiming instead to have demonstrated ‘how far reason is able to progress without the prophetic and apostolic word’. Yet the reader of the treatise will notice several citations of theologians alongside those of pagan poets and philosophers. This essay demonstrates that there is less here than meets the eye, that is, that Hemmingsen quotes theologians only to buttress what one can know from natural reason or the classical tradition, even when he is discussing God, and thus he does not violate his own stated principle.

Because the Danish Protestant theologian and philosopher Niels Hemmingsen (1513-1600) is today little known outside his homeland, some of the claims made for his initial importance and continuing impact can appear rather extravagant. He is described, for example, not only as having "dominated" the theology of his own country for half a century1 but more broadly as having been "the greatest builder of systems in his generation." In the light of this indefatigable system building, he has further been credited with (or blamed for) initiating modern trends in critical biblical scholarship, as well as for being "one of the founders of modern jurisprudence." Illuminating this last claim especially are the more specific claims for Hemmingsen as having been "an important forerunner for more recent founders of natural law," most specifically Hugo Grotius, often deemed the "father" of modern natural law. Such attributions rest primarily on the content and influence of Hemmingsen's De Lege Naturae Apodictica Methodus ("On the Law of Nature: A Demonstrative Method," 1562), which was read widely throughout early modern Europe. The narrative in which the natural law jurisprudence of Grotius and the Enlightenment emanated from that of Hemmingsen is, however, not quite so tidy, as others have also emphasized the great differences between Hemmingsen and Grotius. This confusion with respect to the relationship among Hemmingsen, Grotius, and modernity is perhaps entirely understandable, though, in view of Francis Oakley's droll observation that, among commentators, "there appears to be little agreement about the precise nature of the novelty, or 'modernity,' or break with scholastic thought patterns they so persistently (if somewhat mystifyingly) ascribe to Grotius." E. J. Hutchinson and Korey Maas, "Niels Hemmingsen (1513-1600) and the Development of Lutheran Natural-Law Teaching," Journal of Markets & Morality 17, no. 2 (Fall 2014): 595-617.

Ausonius' poetic Epistula 18 (Green) appears on its surface to be nothing more than a trivial piece of flattery for Ausonius' younger protégé, Paulinus of Nola, the letter's addressee. That, in fact, is how it has been read for several centuries. Upon closer examination it becomes clear that the poem's superficial elements of praise, though doubtless sincere enough in the admiration they express for Paulinus, conceal a (perhaps playful) second agenda in the poem: self-advertisement for Ausonius himself, in respect to both his political and his literary attainments. Ausonius carries out this agenda by means of poetic technique, multivalent use of words, and self-referential allusion to his own poetry. This short letter demonstrates the high level of sophistication attained by literary correspondents in Late Antiquity.