The Book Named the Governor (Thomas Elyot)

A bit on Elyot's life from Wikipedia:

Sir Thomas Elyot (c. 1490 – March 26, 1546), was an English diplomat and scholar. [...] In 1531 he produced The Boke named the Governour, dedicated to King Henry VIII. The work advanced him in the king's favour, and later that year he received instructions to proceed to the court of Charles V, Holy Roman Emperor, to try to persuade him to take a more favourable view of Henry's proposed divorce from Catherine of Aragon. With this was combined another commission, on which one of the king's agents, Stephen Vaughan, was already engaged. He was, if possible, to apprehend William Tyndale.

The Boke is a manual in the instruction of young nobles, especially princes, to prepare them for governance. It was widely admired as a book of political and moral philosophy. I find it (mostly) dull.

Some observations:

* Elyot's argument for social hierarchy seems based in two notions. First, qualities within nature are distributed variably (strength, beauty, and usefulness among plants, for example) by the purpose of God; therefore, those entities with the greatest degree and diversity of excellencies ought to be valued the highest. Understanding is the chief quality of humanity; therefore, those who are most understanding ought to be held in highest esteem. Second, each sort of craftsman is suited to his own art and aims for excellence within that sphere; conversely, an excellent craftsman may be hopelessly incompetent outside of his sphere, yet no less worthy in his own right. Therefore, those who ought to govern are those best trained in the craft of governance: justice, foreign relations, and martial endeavors. The problem: the first argument calls not for an aristocracy, but an oligarchy of philosophers, while the second leads to a professional bureaucracy. Also, the notion of "understanding" shifts between the arguments: first it is merely the rational faculty, but later becomes expertise in the theory and praxis of a craft. In other words, an excellent blacksmith might meet the criteria of the first argument, but not the second, while a cunning general might not rank first in understanding, yet surpass the wise blacksmith on the battlefield. So, is the governor the wisest man in his society, or merely the best trained in the arts of governance? Elyot's defense of hereditary nobility isn't going well...

* Make sure an infant noble has a healthy nurse: it builds character. ("But not an Irish nurse!" Hush, Spenser.)

* The noble youth's education in the fine arts is primarily pragmatic. Music is acceptable in youths of ability, but they must only play in private, for their own relaxation: Achilles is held up as an example, calming his rage with a private harp session. (A noble who performs music in public reduces his estimation in the eyes of his subjects, being merely an entertainer.) Similarly, sculpture and painting are acceptable only in their utility: a noble trained in sculpture may better design and improve siege engines, while one that paints may better draft maps of enemy territory or plans of fortifications, or illustrate principles of geometry or astronomy. Portraiture has a more interesting use, however...

* This is way cool. A painting noble youth may, in reading of some exemplary person in ages past, be "inflamed to the imitation of vertue":

he forth with taketh his penne or pensill, and with a graue and substanciall studie, gatherynge to him all the partes of imagination, endeuoureth him selfe to expresse liuely, and (as I mought say) actually, in portrayture, nat only the faict or affaire, but also the sondry affections of euery personage in the historie recited, whiche, mought in any wise appiere or be perceiued in their visage, countenance or gesture...

* Learning how to swim is "right profitable in exstreme daunger of warres". Also longbows are a great form of exercise and (incidentally) great in a fight. Yeah, Tom's all about the wars.

* Elyot's top seven things a governor ought to consider when raised to office, preferably in a room alone by himself:

1. All honor proceeds from God, and if He deigns to take it away, no earthy means will suffice to keep or regain it.
2. Office is not only honor and wealth gained, but also great care and burden.
3. The greater the office, the greater the care it will take to fill, and the less time available for personal pursuits.
4. All the costly jewels and garments of office were fashioned by commoners, and to be overcome by them is to be bested in virtue by mere craftsmen.
5. Don't view your subjects as cattle or tools for your own personal convenience; instead, secure your reputation with genuine virtue, not fear.
6. Governors are set up on high and seen by all, even their private lives. Set an example for the people, because a governor's subject will be like him.
7. Crap, I lost count. Make that six things. Oh, look! Here's a poem!

* A governor should possess the quality of majesty: a dignity of appearance, speech, and motion which arouses reverent admiration and awe in the subject. It should not be fierceness, which only arouses fear, but instead honorable sobriety and gravity, coupled with temperance and courtesy.

* Clothing should be suited to the time: modest ordinarily, but suitably magnificent for occasions of state. Similarly, ornament and decoration in the governor's home ought to turn the viewer's mind to wisdom and virtue: paintings of instructive fables and histories, prominently placed maxims and mottoes suitable for contemplation.

* Nobility originated with the general consensus that certain folk, living among equals, were more virtues or more profitable to the common good than were others. These folk became known as "gentlemen". Their children, following their virtuous example, were called "well-born". This pattern repeating through successive generations, the family comes to be called excellent or "noble". Therefore, the longer a noble family continues in virtue and right governance, the more properly noble they shall be esteemed.

* "[T]here is no doctrine, be it eyther diuine or humaine, that is nat eyther all expressed in historie or at the leste mixte with historie." This statement, made in the defense of the study of history generally, leads to a fascinating discussion of Holy Writ, in which Elyot asks what "may be saide to haue no parte of historie"? His answer: nothing. Most books of the OT, and the Gospels and Acts in the NT, are obviously history; but even the prophets, psalms, and epistles are themselves anchored in a contemporary historical context and refer to past history. While some critics I've read denigrate many Christian (especially Protestant) writers for "dehistoricizing" scripture, Thomas Elyot seems intent on historicizing it, viewing it as writing that originated in a time and place, an origin which continues to be important in understand what was written. Way cool.