In the sixteenth century, the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth was a multicultural and multidenominational country, where religious freedom was guaranteed by the General Warsaw Confederation Act of 1573. This climate of religious tolerance allowed a culture of public theological dispute to flourish within the realm. Printed in Vilnius in 1584, Gaspar Wilkowski’s Dziesięc mocnych dowodów [Ten Strong Reasons]—a translation of Edmund Campion’s Rationes decem—captured this culture of controversy and polemical dispute. To understand the significance of Wilkowski’s book this essay will situate it in its wider historical context of cross-confessional debates between Catholics and the Polish Brethren. Three other books will be discussed to demonstrate that Wilkowski’s translation was clearly written as an instrument of polemical dispute. A textual analysis of the work shows a change of emphasis from Campion’s book, consequently affecting the reader’s reception of the translated work. Understanding how the translator, in this case Wilkowski, made conscious changes in the original text to accommodate the particular needs of his target readership helps explain the purpose and structure of the Polish translation. In short, Wilkowski wanted to make his translation as relevant to his readers as possible.
* The research findings presented in this paper are the result of a research grant titled “Subversive Publishing in Modern England and Poland” which is funded under grant number dec-2011/01/D/hs2/03125 by the National Science Center of Poland.
In December 1584, Gaspar Wilkowski published a second Polish translation of Rationes decem by the English Jesuit Edmund Campion (1540–1581). It was titled Dziesięc mocnych dowodów [Ten Strong Reasons] and appeared only a few months after the Polish Jesuit, Piotr Skarga (1536–1612), had published his own translation, the Dziesięć wywodów [Ten Disquisitions]. Differing significantly from Skarga’s translation, Wilkowski employed Ten Strong Reasons as a means to extend an ongoing theological dispute with members of the Polish Brethren Church. He had first entered into this dispute a year earlier after his conversion from Arianism, described in his Przyczyny nawrócenia do wiary powszechnej od sekt nowokrzeńców samosateńskich [The Causes for the Conversion to the Universal Faith from the Samosatene Anabaptist Sects]. In this work, Wilkowski narrated his road to Catholicism, providing a comprehensive summary of the “errors of Arian teaching.”
In recent years, there has been renewed historiographical interest in the English Jesuit, Edmund Campion, affording us a deeper understanding not only of Campion himself but of the profound impact his mission and writings had on his contemporaries.1 Significant research into previously unknown manuscripts has illuminated new perspectives on Campion’s cultural and cross-confessional significance. For example, Gerard Kilroy’s transcription of Campion’s earlier, previously unknown, Nascentis Ecclesiae generatio prima, transcribed and preserved by communities related to Sir John Harrington (1561–1612) and Thomas Tresham (1534–1605), testify that, despite repression by the Elizabethan government, the memory of Campion was preserved and his works passed among—and across—communities.2 Despite this wide interest in Campion’s life and his works, one particular aspect has yet to be explored: the European reception of Campion’s last work, the Rationes decem, first printed in Oxfordshire’s Stonor Park in 1581. The significance of this work in the theological polemic of post-Reformation England has been thoroughly demonstrated elsewhere by Thomas McCoog. What still remains understudied is the transnational influence of Campion’s controversial work.3 And despite the fact that Allison and Rogers recorded seventy-five editions of the Rationes decem in Latin and other European languages, still little is known of how Campion’s most popular work was received locally. This paper will aim to partially remedy this deficiency.4
Although Campion never went to Poland, his reputation as a gifted orator had reached as far as the northeastern region of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, that is, Vilnius. Surviving historical documents attest to the close interest and admiration of the Polish king, Stephan Báthory, and the Polish Jesuit community for the “sweet tongue” of this English Jesuit.5 After Campion’s martyrdom, the Polish Jesuit Piotr Skarga published a Polish translation of Rationes decem in 1584 and included a biography of the English Jesuit in his monumental work Żywoty Świętych [Lives of Saints] from the second edition of 1585 onwards.6 Polish scholars, such as bibliographer Karol Estreicher and historian Urszula Szumska, have written about Campion’s reception in Poland.7
Nevertheless, despite the sustained—and now renewed—interest in Campion, the Polish reception of his Rationes decem has not yet been thoroughly investigated. Drawing upon contemporary texts and an analysis of Wilkowski’s translation of the Rationes decem, I will elucidate the role Campion’s Rationes played in the local context of polemical debate. Undertaking a second Polish translation gave Wilkowski the opportunity to transform Campion’s text, which was initially addressed to the academic communities of Oxford and Cambridge, into a discourse more suitable to the readers Wilkowski clearly had in mind—the members of the Polish Brethren Church. Wilkowski’s Ten Strong Reasons, replete with footnotes and commentaries, was a challenge to the leaders of the Polish Brethren community to take part in a polemical dispute. Moreover, Wilkowski’s translation was designed to address his local readers. To his translation he added a summary of other texts that helped familiarize the readers with Rationes and the person of Campion, and also included his reply to yet another book, Antidotum, probably published in 1582.8 In this sense, Wilkowski’s Ten Strong Reasons can be seen as a case for explicitation translation strategy put forward by the translation theorist, Anthony Pym. Explicitation, defined as “making explicit in the target text what is implicit in the source text,” is used by translators for many reasons. Pym argues that it is a technique employed to bring the source text closer to the target audience by the extensive use of “communicative clues,” which minimize any potential form of misunderstanding and so help to diminish what he terms as the “risk of non-cooperation in communication” in the case of translated texts.9
The Calvinae Ecclesiae Minor: The Polish Brethren in the Commonwealth of Two Nations
Before looking at Wilkowski’s text, it is necessary to establish the context of its publication and the religious climate in the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth at the time.
Stanisław Kot argues that evidence of an Arian presence in the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth as a distinctive group of radical reformers dates back to 1529.10 According to Alexander Bruckner, other traces of anti-Trinitarianism in the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth can be found in documents dating back to 1546, when certain members of the Calvinist church were reported to have met in “secret gatherings in Kraków,”11 six years before Lelio Sozzini (Laelius Socianus, 1525–1562), Faustus Socianus’s uncle, visited the country in 1551. The first man who officially defended anti-Trinitarian and Anabaptist teaching was a former Catholic, Peter Gonesius (1530–1572), after his return from Zürich in 1556. Gonesius was officially condemned in the Synod of Secymin in January 1556 for his Arian teachings, particularly his rejection of the Athanasian Creed and the doctrine of the Holy Trinity.12 Bruckner notes that documents testifying to the existence of the Calvinae Ecclesiae Minor, understood as a minor church within Calvinism, can be also found in a letter from a Calvinist minister from Vilnius printed in a book in 1566 by Benedykt Herbst (1531–1598).13 In the text, the minister complained of “certain brothers in the faith who claim the teaching of the Holy Trinity to be a falsehood, wish to destroy the memorial of the Passion of Christ [Holy Eucharist], and advocate for the removal of such feasts as the Nativity of Christ and the Resurrection.”14 They likewise distinguished themselves by their pacifism and opposition to the use of the “magisterial sword” in the maintenance of civil order.15
The Arians, who described themselves as Polish Brethren, flourished within the vibrant intellectual culture of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. They first developed in its most important cities, such as Kraków, Lublin, and Vilnius, and were especially popular amongst the nobility. Nevertheless, members of the Polish Brethren were challenged by Catholics, Calvinists, members of the Reformed Evangelical Church, and Lutherans (of the Evangelical Church of Augsburg), and were sometimes excluded from public debate for their radical views.16 Because of their growing influence, Arians were banished from larger cities and had no real intellectual center until the establishment of Raków.17 Here, the Polish Brethren founded their own academy and established their printing press until their banishment in 1658, after they were accused of disloyalty to the Polish crown for collaborating with the Swedish forces which invaded Poland in the years 1655–1660.18
After breaking from the Polish Calvinist Church, a faction of the Brethren moved to Lublin under the leadership of Marcin Czechowic (c.1532–1613) and Jan Niemojewski (c.1526–1598). Czechowic was a former Catholic priest who in 1550 became a Calvinist at the court of Mikołaj “the Black” Radziwiłł (1515–1565) in Vilnius. In 1565, he became an Arian brother and in 1567 moved to Lublin where, together with six other ministers, he built the first center of Polish Brethren teaching in the city. Together with Stanisław Paklewski (d. 1567), also a former Calvinist educated in Basel, they established a church and began debating with Catholics and the leading Polish Calvinists. They also founded a school that met in the house of Stanisław Tęczyński (d. 1561), the mayor of Lublin. After the mayor’s death, the house came into the possession of the Jesuits who converted it into the first seat of the Jesuit college; today it is part of the complex of buildings belonging to the city’s cathedral.19 Amongst those whom Marcin Czechowic won to the Polish Brethren cause was judge and senator Jan Niemojewski, who had formerly been Catholic and Calvinist. Owing to Czechowic’s influence, Niemojewski moved to Lublin in the late 1560s, where he became a leading Arian polemicist until his death in 1598.20
Theological disputes were the custom of the day in the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. These events were attended not only by churchmen, but by the townsfolk as well. They provided an an opportunity for Lutherans, Calvinists, Polish Brethren, and Jesuits to debate theological points of disagreement, long before the Society first established their college in the town in 1581.21 At the end of 1581, Czechowic and Niemojewski challenged the Jesuits to a public debate. The Society was represented by Stanisław Warszawiecki (c.1529–1591), a former Lutheran educated in Wittenberg, who had become a Jesuit in 1567; and by Justus Rab, S.J., (1543–1612), a former Calvinist. This dispute took place in the Jesuit parish church and was attended by senators, the nobility, and townsfolk, and lasted for two days. The issues debated were the divinity of Christ and the holiness of the Catholic Church. According to the historian Stanisław Załęski, this particular debate led to the conversion of some members of the Polish Brethren Church, including Gaspar Wilkowski (d. late sixteenth century; exact biographical dates unknown), whose baptism in 1582 was solemnly celebrated and widely attended by the intellectual elite of the city.22
Gaspar Wilkowski’s Reasons: The Break from the Community
Wilkowski’s conversion deeply affected the Polish Brethren community in Lublin and was much celebrated by the Jesuits,23 partly because he was the son of a prominent member of the Polish Brethren, Balcer Wilkowski. Gaspar Wilkowski was, as he would sign his books, a “medical doctor of Lublin.”24 In his Reasons, Wilkowski narrates that he was educated in Germany, and travelled to Italy where he first experienced his own religious crisis.25 Upon returning to Lublin, he met a canon of Płock and Warsaw, Zacheusz Piekarski (1533–1597), who came to Lublin as a deputy of the Crown Tribunal.26 This friendship eventually led to Wilkowski’s conversion. It is assumed that he converted to Catholicism in 1582/3 because soon after, Wilkowski published Reasons.27 He eventually moved from Lublin to Vilnius, where he was employed as a doctor in the court of Mikołaj Krzysztof Radziwiłł (1549–1616), himself a Catholic convert from Calvinism. Aside from Campion’s Rationes, Wilkowski also translated another work, Desiderosus, albo ścieżka do miłości Bożej [Desiderosus, or the Path to Divine Love]. This was first published in Kraków by Andrzej Piotrkowczyk’s publishing house in 1589, and reprinted in 1594, 1599, and 1734, as well as in Lwów in 1747.28
Karol Estreicher mentions twelve existing copies of Gaspar Wilkowski’s Reasons. One of these copies, currently kept in the Czartoryski Library in Kraków, is particularly valuable not only for its clear provenance markings but also for the autograph dedication of the author to his father. The dedication—“To his beloved Father, Balcer Wilkowski, my kind father with hopes of paternal acceptance and Christian charity, do I send this book that it be kindly read”—is a moving testimony of filial affection. Moreover, this particular copy bears markings of readership with underlining, marginal notes, and manicule drawings throughout the work.
The book opens with a five-page dedicatory epistle to the Polish king Stephan Báthory and a fifteen-page preface addressed to the Polish Brethren or Nowokrzency [Anabaptists]. This in turn is followed by two books, one titled “The Conversion to the Christian Faith from the Sect of the Anabaptist and Samosatene Doctrine” (Book One, 1–155) and the second titled “Conversions to the Universal Faith from the Anabaptist and Samosatene Sect” (Book Two, 1–95).
Many are those who have converted from heresy to the Universal Church […], yet few have written of their conversion and have provided the reasons and motives of it. I, therefore, give a testimony of my own conversion for the glory of God and for the abundant joy of the Church in and out of a spirit of service to those in error.31
hence according to them [Arians] the Polish and Latin words are to be translated coarsely [in simple language]. […] And if we see that in the Gospel of St. John, the Latin is translated so coarsely in Polish. Surely there are much more of these in their translation. Where thus is the certainty of the faith and of the Word of God?33
In the second book, Wilkowski assumes a stronger polemical tone that openly attacks several theologians, calling Desiderius Erasmus (1466–1536) a “poor theologian” and Theodore Beza (1519–1605) a “hyprocrite” (Book 2, 11). As Estreicher observes, Wilkowski does not quote extensively from the leading Counter-Reformation theologians such as Stanisław Hosius (1504–1579) or Gabriel Sadecius;34 it would appear that Wilkowski wanted to create the impression of having written a separate and individual work, independent from the works of the prominent Polish apologists of the time.35 What begins, then, as a personal testimony of conversion evolves into a polemical work on various aspects of Polish Brethren teaching, starting from the interpretation of the sacred Scriptures, the papacy, and the divinity of Christ. It addresses specifically the works of prominent leaders of the Polish Brethren Church, in particular Marcin Czechowic and Jan Niemojewski in Lublin, and Szymon Budny in Vilnius.
The Polish Brethren’s Reply to Wilkowski: Exclusion from the Community
In 1583, Niemojewski published Okazanie, iż Kościoł Rzymski nie jest Apostolski ani Święty, ani jeden, ani powszechny [A Demonstration that the Roman Church is neither Apostolic, nor Holy, nor One, nor Universal], a work which argues against the universal nature of the Catholic Church and the position of Wilkowski.36 The book opens with a two-page preface in which Niemojewski articulates the need to prevent men from falling into the errors spread by Hieronim Powodowski (1543–1613) and Gaspar Wilkowski. Niemojewski explains that he writes “so as to save all men from those who deceive in error and in the service of the Anti-Christ, the Church, holy, Apostolic, one and Catholic, spread in spoken and printed word. It is against all these men, that is Father Sokołowski and Wilkowski, who of late here in Poland have printed work against our Church that I write this book.”37 The preface is followed by ten chapters that question the apostolic succession of the Roman church and papal authority (4–150). This is then followed by a 96-page (151–247) reply to Wilkowski’s Reasons. Niemojewski closes with an afterword to the reader and includes an open letter by Wilkowski’s father, Balcer (249–257), who writes, “I humbly beg Our Lord, God with this shameful countenance and humbled bow but with a desperate heart and spirit, in the name of my gracious son and as a Father, whom a son has vowed to obey and who in constant and good conscience transmitted the entire faith” (249), before asking his son to return back to his old faith, not for the sake of his father, but for the sake of Christ and the praise of His name.
The following year, a further book addressed to Wilkowski was published by Grzegorz of Żarnowiec, another senior leader of the Polish Brethren, Antidotum, albo lekarstwo na odtręt od Ewangelików [The Antidote, or Remedy to the Illness of the Evangelicals].38 This work opens with a six-page preface and is comprised of two books, the first one titled “In which the Reasons for the Conversion from the Anabaptist Church Listed by the Physician of Lublin in his Books are Debunked” (1–28) and a second one titled “In which the Reasons for which the Physician of Lublin Remains in the Papacy are Debunked” (29–83). The preface opens by addressing Wilkowski’s work, pointing out that the author aims to challenge Wilkowski’s Reasons in defense of the truth. In this book, Grzegorz of Żarnowiec lays out a summary of Wilkowski’s Reasons, challenging each one of them. In the second book, he proceeds to defend Arian doctrine by attacking such issues as the legitimacy of sacred tradition (28–36) and the sacraments (73–83). The book closes with a brief one-page afterword, in which the author declares how he has defeated each one of Wilkowski’s arguments: “And [thus] dear Christian and Kind Reader, I have debunked each one of the Lublin doctor’s ‘Reasons’ not only to prove that he is ‘wrong’ but so that you may not so lightly take [Wilkowski’s] reasoning too easily [and] so that you may not accept only too lightly any accusations against the Evangelical Church” (84).39
Wilkowski’s Ten Strong Reasons—Explicitation as a Cooperative Attempt at Communication Across Communities40
Having realized that it would be difficult to please everyone, I, with God’s assistance and the insistence of your Majesty, took to translating this work into Polish […]; yet having learned that Father Piotr Skarga, a man of great gifts and a worker in the vineyard of our Lord, had already undertaken the translation of this work on order of his Majesty, the King […] I put this work aside, until I received in writing from Father Piotr Skarga himself a request to publish this work.42
In the early seventeenth century, a member of the Polish Brethren, Thomas Pisecius, replied to Edmund Campion and published Responsio ad decem rationes Edmundi Campiani, which was printed twice, in 1610 and in 1615.43 Pisecius appends to his book a brief reply to Gasper Wilkowski. It therefore seems reasonable to conclude that twenty-five years after its publication, Wilkowski’s text was still being read and commented on by the Polish Brethren.
The book was printed in fine Gothic font, which was used for Polish vernacular texts. Of the three extant copies of Wilkowski’s translation listed in Estreicher’s Bibliografia polska, I have inspected two, one in the Ossoliński Library in Wrocław and the other in the Czartoryski Library in Kraków. The third one, which, according to Estreicher, belonged to the Polish Academy of Arts and Sciences in Kraków, seems to have been lost some time ago, as it was not listed in the library catalogue made in 1956. I have also identified two additional copies: one in the University Library of Warsaw and another in the National Library of Russia in Saint Petersburg.44 At the time of writing, I have only inspected three of these four existing copies, all of which have provenance markings. There are no differences in the books’ font and text layout, nor in the textual content. The paper bears the watermark of an ornamented crest with an initial “W” inside, which came from Vilnius paper mills and the title page indicates that the books were printed by the press of Mikołaj Krzysztof Radziwiłł.45 The volume is in quarto format of ninety-one pages: the dedicatory epistle to Queen Anne Jagiellonian of eight pages (iir–vv), the translation of the Rationes decem in sixty pages (1–60), which is then followed by a biographical note on Campion of eight pages (61–68) and finally Wilkowski’s “Odpowiedź krótka na Antidotum” [A Short Reply to the Antidotum] which occupies the last thirteen pages (68–91). In terms of word count, Wilkowski’s translation is a much longer text than the original, consisting of 14,533 words, whilst Campion’s Rationes numbers only 9,071. In comparison, Piotr Skarga’s Polish translation comprises 9,774 words.46 As yet, I have not determined how popular the book was except for the provenance markings found on all the existing copies. The copy found in the University of Warsaw once belonged to the Norbertine community of Witów in southern Poland.47 The copy in the Ossolineum Library in Wrocław bears more markings of provenance indicating three former owners: a Father Grzegorz who owned the book in 1650; a Dominican named Vincentius Reszkovius of Sochaczew; and Józef Maximilian Ossoliński, the founder of the Ossoliński Library in the nineteenth century.48 The copy in the Czartoryski Library in Kraków bears an unidentified stamp with the initials “W.W.” and in all probability was acquired by Władysław Czartoryski in the nineteenth century.
Particularly notable about Wilkowski’s translation is its size, sixty-two percent longer than the original. This is due to the frequent use of the technique of explicitation, since what Campion expresses in very short sentences is translated into longer and elaborative ones by Wilkowski. Adding to the length are Wilkowski’s very detailed footnotes expanding on nearly every one of the reasons, apart from reasons six and seven, on the Church Fathers and on the history of the church, respectively.
Wilkowski employed explicitation so frequently because he wanted both to expound and emphasize certain points. It is usually seen to take three forms in the text: a translator’s expression of something which is not in the original text; a translation that overtly expresses something which is implied by presupposition in the source text; or a shift of emphasis by the writer in the target text either through lexical choice or shift of focus.49 Translation scholars debate whether explicitation comes about as a result of the translation process itself,50 or is due to the lack of the translator’s expertise.51 Others have argued that it is used as a conscious translation strategy or as a means to make a given text optimally relevant. These two functions seem to best explain Wilkowski’s reasons for using explicitation.
When analyzing the detailed exposition of Arian teaching in the translation, one presumes that Wilkowski’s target readers are both Catholics—who need to know the nature of the Arian doctrine—and members of the Polish Brethren. Wilkowski was clearly speaking as a convert, knowledgeable of Arian teaching and consciously aware of counter-arguments which his opponents may raise. In the very first reason of the Rationes decem, discussing how the sacred Scriptures were interpreted and translations of the Bible consequently differed in particular editions, Wilkowski includes the following extensive footnote: “Here too in Poland and in the Grand Duchy of Lithuania we find many teachers of the Holy Bible […] who arguing amongst them publish and preach their errors” (7). By appending the footnote with this additional information, Wilkowski makes the source text more relevant to the target readers; it makes them realize that Campion’s arguments are as relevant in Poland as they are in England.
Wilkowski also made frequent lexical shifts when translating a word and choosing a much stronger equivalent to create emphasis. In this example from Reason One, on sacred Scriptures, Campion writes of how fragments of the sacred Scriptures are “aliquas correxerint; aliquas corroserint, aliquas evulserint” [corrected, corroded, and others disauthorized] by the Reformation fathers.52 Here Wilkowski uses stronger expressions, such as “ogrzyźć i okąsać” which literally can be translated as “to bite and gnaw around of” such as in the fragment, “niektórych cząstek poprawili, drugie ogrzyźli i okąsali, drugie wydarli” [they have corrected some fragments, others they have deformed and seriously damaged].53
Mox ad personam Christi progrediar. Quaeram ista sibi quid velint; Christus de Filius, Deus de Deo? Calvino; Deus ex sese; Beza: “Non est genitus de Patris essentia.” Item: “Duae constituantur in Christo unionem hypostaticae, altera animae cum carne, Divinitatis cum humanitate altera.” “Locus apud Ioannem: ‘Ego et Pater unum sumus,’ non ostendit Christum Deum ‘homoousion’ Deo Patri.” Sed et ‘anima mea, inquit Lutherus, odit verbum ‘homoousion.’”54
Postąpię do osoby Chrystusowej. Spytam ich, na co to nasadzono, co o Chrystusie Synu Bożym, Bogu z Boga? Calvinus mówi, że jest “Bóg z siebie samego”; a Beza iż “nie jest urodzony z istności ojcowej”, i co tenże mow, iż “dwoje są w Chrystusie hipostaticae uniones, jedno dusze z ciałem, a drugie Bóstwa z człowieczeństwem.” Przy tym ono miejsce u Jana świętego w kapitule 10: “Ja i Ociec jedno jesteśmy—“nie ukazuje tego, iż Chrystus jest homousios, to jest jednej istności z Bogiem Ojcem” według Kalwina. Ale i Luter mówi: “W nienawiści ma dusza moja to słowo homousios.”55
I shall now turn to the person of Christ. I ask them, that which has been reasoned on Christ, the Son of God, God from God? Calvin says, the [He] is “God from his own”; while Beza says, that [He] is born of the essence of the Father.” And he says once again that, “Two Unions are in Christ [two] hypostatical unions, one of the soul with the body, and a second of Divinity with Humanity.” And in that passage of St. John in chapter 10: “I and the Father are one.”—“I cannot demonstrate that Christ is homousios, that is of one essence with God the Father,” according to Calvin. And also Luther says, “Hatred has my soul for this word homousios.”56
This excerpt contains two significant textual shifts which are not found in Campion’s text. First, Wilkowski adds the exact source of the quotation from John 10, and includes an additional citation from Calvin: “I cannot demonstrate that, Christ is homousios, that is of one essence with God the Father.” Also, Wilkowski adds a long footnote, complete with the exact citation of different aspects of Arian teaching which he—following Campion’s strategy of simply quoting the originals to display their incoherence—categorizes under “On God” and “On Christ.”
Wilkowski seems to have employed explicitation here to minimize any risk of misunderstanding. He wanted to make his arguments clear to his target readers, namely, the Polish Brethren. He quoted them extensively throughout the work to prove not only how well acquainted he was with their teaching but also to demonstrate how knowledgeable he was in Arian reasoning and argumentation. All possible “communicative clues” occur throughout the text, ensuring the reader’s cooperation, at least during its reading. Anthony Pym would call this use of explicitation a form for building “optimal relevance” by bringing the source text much closer to the target audience.57
The structure of the book also demonstrates how Wilkowski utilized editorial shifts to adapt the text to his immediate target readers. At the end of the book, Wilkowski includes another text “Krótka sprawa o autorze tych książek y odpisie na nie / y o odpowiedzi na przyczyny nawrócenia / Gaspra Wilkowskiego” [A Short Biography of the Author of this Book and a Reply to the Reasons for the Conversion of Gaspar Wilkowski]. Here, Wilkowski provides a short narrative of Campion’s life, which incorporates a paraphrased version of Campion’s letter to the Privy Council, and also mentions the reply to the Rationes by Cambridge theologian William Whitaker (1547/8–1595) and the Scottish Jesuit John Drury’s (d. 1623) reply to Whitaker. Finally, in the last pages of this book, Wilkowski writes a short reply to Grzegorz of Żarnowiec’s “Krótka odpowiedź na kalwinskie Antidotum” [A Short Reply to the Calvinist Antidote]. Here, Wilkowski refers to Grzegorz of Żarnowiec’s recent book and challenges each one of his arguments, dwelling on the issues of the papacy and the divinity of Christ in particular. To my knowledge, this publication seems to have closed the Arian debate at least until the early seventeenth century, with the publication of Thomas Pisecius’s aforementioned Responsio ad decem rationes Edmundi Campiani.
This article has provided the historical background of Gaspar Wilkowski’s translation of Edmund Campion’s Rationes decem and an analysis of its use of explicitation. Wilkowski used Reasons as a means to extend and shape contemporary theological debates with members of the Polish Brethren. Understanding the reception of Rationes decem within the local communities in which the text was translated helps our understanding not only of the transnational but also cross-confessional impact of Campion’s polemical work.
Such research inevitably raises more questions and offers avenues of further inquiry. One fruitful line of investigation would be exploring further replies to this translation, not only by members of the Polish Brethren but also other Protestant churches in the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. It would also be worthwhile to consider how this debate shaped the Arian language of dispute in their later publications. Additional research might aim to make a comparative analysis of Skarga’s and Wilkowski’s translations. Such research can offer a deeper understanding of the truly international impact of Edmund Campion’s Rationes decem.
As Gaspar Wilkowski’s Dziesięc mocnych dowodów illustrates, Edmund Campion’s Rationes decem had a significant influence on the cross-denominational and transnational debates of the time. It also illustrates the international reach of early modern Jesuit missionary work, impacting as it did on the fissured circles and communities within the Reformation church. As such, Campion’s book, published in a makeshift printing press in Stonor Park in 1581, traversed the natural border of the English Channel, crossing national and religious boundaries in mainland Europe to reach beyond England’s magisterial reformers and draw attention from the radical Polish Brethren.
1 For example, The Reckoned Expense: Edmund Campion and the Early English Jesuits, ed. Thomas M. McCoog, S.J. (Boydell: Woodbridge, 1996).
2 Gerard Kilroy, Edmund Campion: Memory and Transcription (Ashgate: Aldershot, 2005). See also Gerard Kilroy, “The Queen’s Visit to Oxford in 1566: A Fresh Look at Neglected Manuscript Sources,” Recusant History 31 (2013): 331–373.
3 Thomas McCoog, S.J., “The Flower of Oxford: The Role of Edmund Campion in Early Recusant Polemics,” Sixteenth Century Journal 24 (1993): 901–913.
4 Antony F. Allison and David M. Rogers, The Contemporary Printed Literature of the English Counter-Reformation between 1558–1640 (Scholar Press: Aldershot, 1989), 24–29.
5 In a letter dated April 21, 1581, addressed to the papal nuncio Andrea Caligari, King Stephan Báthory wrote of having been moved deeply after reading Campion’s “Challenge”: Monumenta Poloniae Vaticana. I.A. Caligarius: Epistolae et Acta 1578–1581, ed. Ludwig Boratyński (Polska Akademia Nauk: Cracow, 1915), 618–619. Boratyński erroneously concludes that the king was reading Campion’s Rationes, which was not yet in print. I am grateful to Gerard Kilroy for this point.
6 Ania Kapuścińska, Żywoty Świętych Piotra Skargi: Hagiografia – Parenetyka – Duchowość (Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Szczecińskiego: Szczecin, 2008), 11. Żywoty Świętych was printed up to six times during Skarga’s lifetime and was an extremely influential text as it was designed to “counter-attack the waves of heterodoxy” that were sweeping Poland.
7 Karol Estreicher, Bibliografia polska, vol. 14 (Drukarnia Uniwersytetu Jagiellońskiego: Cracow, 1896), 33–34. Urszula Szumska, Anglia a Polska w epoce Humanizmu i Reformacji (Księgarnia Krawczyńśkiego: Lwów, 1938), 91.
8 Grzegorz of Żarnowiec, Antidotum albo lekarstwo na odtręt od Ewangelików, pana Kaspra Wilkowskiego (1582). Only one copy of this book is known to exist and it is found in the Czartoryski Library in Kraków.
9 Anthony Pym, Explaining explicitation, 9: http://www.tinet.org/~apym/on-line/translation/explicitation_web.pdf (accessed December 30, 2013).
10 Stanisław Kot, Idealogia polityczna i społeczna braci polskich zwanych arianami (Insytut Popierania Nauki: Warsaw, 1932), 11–12; the English translation is Socianism in Poland: The Social and Political Ideas of the Polish Anti-Trinitarians in the Sixteenth and Seventeenth Centuries, trans. E.M. Wilbur and Victor Weintraub (Boston, 1957).
11 Walerjan Krasiński, Zarys dziejów powstania i upadku Reformacji w Polsce (Nakładem “Zwiastuna Ewangelicznego”: Warsaw, 1903), 213–214.
12 Ibid., 213. Two years later in the Synod of Brześć Litewski in today’s Belarus, Gonesius further expounded on his anti-Trinitatian teachings, which were eventually published in a book, Przeciw chrztowi małych dzieci do Wawrzyńca Krzyszkowskiego (Węgrów, 1562): Karol Estreicher, Bibliografia polska (Drukarnia Uniwersytetu Jagiellońskiego: Cracow, 1899), 231–232. Gonesius’s works are very rare, as shortly after they were published they were declared heretical by the Synod Fathers and were ordered to be burned: Krasiński, Powstanie i upadku Reformacji, 215.
13 Alexander Bruckner, Różnowiercy polscy (Nakładem Księgarni Naukowej: Warsaw, 1905), 188–189.
14 Ibid., 194.
15 Ibid., 141–142. See also Kot, Idealogia polityczna, 58–59.
16 Bruckner provides a text of a dispute between members of the Polish Brethren which took place in the Synod of Lwów, January 20–26, 1568: Bruckner, Różnowiercy polscy, 164–182.
17 Raków became an important intellectual center of the Polish Brethren from 1574 onwards, when Aleksy Rodecki first established a printing press there. Alodia Kawecka-Grzyczowa, Ariańskie ofycyny, 76. In fact, in 1610 Thomas Pisecius published his reply to Edmund Campion. Thomas Pisecius, Responsio ad decem rationes E. Campiani (Typographeo Sternaciano: Racoviae, 1610).
18 When the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth was invaded by the Swedish forces of Charles X Gustav (1622–1660) during the Second Northern War of 1655–1660, some members of the Polish Brethren sided with the Swedish forces hoping that greater religious freedom would be granted by the Swedish monarchy. After the Swedish forces were defeated, the Polish parliament declared in 1658 that members of the Polish Brethren should either convert to Catholicism or leave the country.
19 Aleksander Kossowski, Protestantyzm w Lublinie i Lubelskiem w XVI i XVII w. (Dom książki polskiej: Lublin, 1933), 28–29.
20 Roman Pollak, Bibliografia literatury polskiej “Nowy Korbut”: Piśmiennictwo staropolskie (Instytut Badań Literackich: Warsaw, 1965), 19–20.
21 Julian Grzesik, Bracia Polscy w Lublinie i na Wołyniu w XVI i XVII w. (Liber Duo: Lublin, 2010), 89–93.
22 Stanisław Załęski, Jezuici w Polsce, vol. IV, part I (Drukarnia W.L. Anczyca: Cracow, 1905), 339–340.
24 Stanisław Kośmiński, Słownik lekarzy polskich (Księgarnia Gebethnera i Wollfa: Warsaw, 1888), 548.
25 Roman Pollak, Nowy Korbut: Piśmienictwo staropolskie, vol. III (Państwowy Instytut Wydawniczy: Warsaw, 1965), 392–393. See also Janusz Tazbir & Lech Szczucki, Literatura ariańska w Polsce w XVI wieku (Instytut Badań Literackich: Warsaw, 1959), 651.
26 In 1578, King Stephan Báthory established the Trybunał Koronny [Crown Tribunal], or the Iudicium Ordinarium Generale Tribunalis Regni, which was the highest court of appeal, thus delegating the monarch’s judicial power to the elected noblemen. This decision greatly strengthened the power of the nobility in the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth.
27 Gaspar Wilkowski, Przyczyny nawrócenia (Drukarnia Mikołaja Radziwiłła: Vilnius, 1584), 5–6. Copy of the Czartoryski Library, Kraków (call number: Cim 1515 I).
28 Karol Estreicher, Bibliografia polska, vol. 33 (Drukarnia Uniwersytetu Jagiellońskiego: Cracow, 1939), 21–23.
29 Wilkowski, Reasons, Aiv. Although the book does not identify which press printed it, the watermark, which shows a castle gate in a crest with a crown, is probably from the Seduva paper mill (watermark 1165) dating back to 1561, once found in Vilnius (watermark 1672) dating to 1595: E. Laucevicius, Paper in Lithuania in XV–XVIII Centuries (Mintis Publishing House: Vilnius, 1967), vol. I, 197; vol. II, 228–229.
30 Wilkowski, Reasons, §r.
32 Szymon Budny consulted various existing texts for his own translation, including the Vulgate, the Septuagint, other existing Latin translations, and the synoptic and apocryphal gospels. See Rajmund Pietkieiwcz, “Piśmo święte w języku polskim w latach 1518–1638” (Ph.D. thesis, University of Wrocław, 2002), 254–255.
33 Ibid., 50–51. Hence, in verse John 1:1, which in the Vulgate reads as “et Deus erat Verbum,” it is translated by Jakub Wujek, S.J., as “a Bogiem było ono Słowo.” This is rendered by Budny as “a Bóg było słowo.” In Wujek’s translation, Bóg is inflected in the fifth case (narzędnik) in accordance with Polish grammar. This case is usually used as the nominative predicative. Budny’s translation on the other hand, is an exact translation of the Latin, with no change of case. Szymon Budny, Biblia to iest księgi starego y nowego przymierza. Znowu z ięzyka Ebreyskiego, Greckiego i Łacińśkiego na polski przełożone (Maciej Kawęczyński: Nieśwież, 1572), 55; Jakub Wujek, Biblia Novum Testamentum (Andrzej Piotrkowczyk: Cracow, 1593), 301.
34 Gabriel Eutropius Sadecius was a Jesuit who published the book, Apologia pro Collegii Posnaniensis de Trino et Uno Deo assertionibus adversus Samosatenicorum Anabaptistarum animadversiones in Poznan in 1583. Other than in this work, there is no biographical information about Sadecius available.
35 Estreicher, Bibliografia polska, 22.
36 Watermark of the “axe” no. 1059, made in Przemyśl, eastern Poland, in 1540 or no. 1060 made in Lublin in 1545: Jadwiga Siniarska-Czaplicka, Filigrany papierni położonych na obszarze Rzeczypospolitej Polskiej od początku XVI do połowy XVIII wieku (Ossolineum: Wrocław, 1969), 37 and figure cxciv.
37 See Jan Niemojewski, Okazanie (A Demonstration), A2r–v.
38 The watermark seems to be a horseshoe with a cross in the middle from paper mills dating to 1581 from Zakliczyn: watermark no. 302 in Siniarska-Czaplicka, Filigrany papierni, 28. In the final page of the book, we find handwritten notes by the Jesuit Kazimierz Ostrowski (1669–1732). Ostrowski taught philosophy and theology at the Society’s St. Stephen School in Kraków. Estreicher notes that there is only one existing copy. It is currently in the Czartoryski Library in Kraków (call number: Cim. 932 II). This work was published anonymously, but Wilkowski believes that is was by Grzegorz of Żarnowiec.
39 Ibid., 84.
40 Gaspar Wilkowski, Dziesięć mocnych dowodów (Drukarnia Mikołaja Krzysztofa Radziwiłła: Vilnius, 1584). Copy inspected: Czartoryski Library, Kraków, call number: Cim. 920 II.
41 Estreicher, Bibiografia polska, 34.
42 Wilkowski, Dziesięć, iiv–iiir.
43 Thomas Pisecius, Responsio ad rationes decem (Typographica Sternanciano: Racoviae, 1610): Jagiellonian University Library, call number: O 1020. This particular copy bears underlinings and markings of “nb” made by a sixteenth- or seventeenth-century reader. This copy is bound with the 1610 Racovian catechism.
44 National Library of Russia, St. Petersburg, call number: nlr 188.8.131.52.
45 Watermark 1037 produced in Vilnius in the years 1578–1579. See Laucevucius, Paper in Lithuania, vol. I, 188; vol. II, 166.
46 Edmund Campion, Dziesięc wywodów, trans. Piotr Skarga (Drukarnia Mikołaja Radziwiłła: Vilnius, 1584). Copy consulted: Czartoryski Library, Kraków, call number Cim. 1174 I.
47 This book is bound in a nineteenth-century leather binding, and was probably acquired by the University Library of Warsaw in that century: call number:
Sd.614.329. See Halina Miczkowska, Katalog druków XVI wieku, vol. 3 (Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Warszawskiego: Warsaw, 2007), 80.
48 Call number: XVI Qu 1772. It is available online: http://www.dbc.wroc.pl/dlibra/aresults?action=SearchAction&dirids=1&QI=8C65AD2C0B2AA56CF16A029bbc6C77B8-9. See Maria Bohonos, Katalog starych druków Biblioteki Zakładu Narodowego im. Ossolińskich. Polonica XVI wieku (Wydawnictwo Akademii Nauk: Wrocław, 1965), 92.
49 Candace Séguinot, “Pragmatics and the Explicitation Hypothesis,” ttr Traduction, terminologie, rédaction 2 (1988): 106–114.
50 Shoshana Blum-Kulka, “Shifts of Cohesion and Coherence in Translation,” in Interlingual and Intercultural Communication: Discourse and Cognition in Translation and Second Language Acquisition Studies, eds. Juliane House and Shoshana Blum-Kulka (Günter Narr Verlag: Tübingen, 1986), 17–35; Kinga Klaudy, “On Explicitation Hypothesis,” in Transferre necesse est: Current Issues of Translation Theory, eds. Kinga Klaudy and J. Kohn (Dániel Berzsenyi College: Szombatheley, 1993), 69–77; Maeve Olohan and Mona Baker, “Reporting ‘that’ in translated English: Evidence for 47 subconscious processes of explicitation?” Across Languages and Cultures 2 (2000): 141–158.
51 Jean-Paul Vinay and Jean Darbelnet, Comparative Stylistics of French and English: A Methodology for Translation (John Benjamins: Philadelphia, 1995); Birgitta Englund Dimitrova, Expertise and Explicitation in the Translation Process (John Benjamins: Philadelphia, 2005), 33–63.
52 Edmund Campion, Rationes decem (S. Brinkley: Henley-on-Thames, 1581), 5.
53 Wilkowski, Dziesięć, 6. “Ogrzyźć” was then used in the context of goats or ants that “gnaw around” grass or a piece of fragment, emphasizing the derogatory nature of the remark.
54 Campion, Ten Reasons, 23.
55 Wilkowski, Dziesięć, 34.
56 This is my own translation of Wilkowski’s text.
57 Anthony Pym, “On Cooperation,” in Intercultural Faultlines: Research Models in Translation Studies, ed. Maeve Olohan (St. Jerome: Manchester, 2000), 181–192.
In a letter dated April 21, 1581, addressed to the papal nuncio Andrea Caligari, King Stephan Báthory wrote of having been moved deeply after reading Campion’s “Challenge”: Monumenta Poloniae Vaticana. I.A. Caligarius: Epistolae et Acta 1578–1581, ed. Ludwig Boratyński (Polska Akademia Nauk: Cracow, 1915), 618–619. Boratyński erroneously concludes that the king was reading Campion’s Rationes, which was not yet in print. I am grateful to Gerard Kilroy for this point.
Ania Kapuścińska, Żywoty Świętych Piotra Skargi: Hagiografia – Parenetyka – Duchowość (Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Szczecińskiego: Szczecin, 2008), 11. Żywoty Świętych was printed up to six times during Skarga’s lifetime and was an extremely influential text as it was designed to “counter-attack the waves of heterodoxy” that were sweeping Poland.
Stanisław Kot, Idealogia polityczna i społeczna braci polskich zwanych arianami (Insytut Popierania Nauki: Warsaw, 1932), 11–12; the English translation is Socianism in Poland: The Social and Political Ideas of the Polish Anti-Trinitarians in the Sixteenth and Seventeenth Centuries, trans. E.M. Wilbur and Victor Weintraub (Boston, 1957).
In 1578, King Stephan Báthory established the Trybunał Koronny [Crown Tribunal], or the Iudicium Ordinarium Generale Tribunalis Regni, which was the highest court of appeal, thus delegating the monarch’s judicial power to the elected noblemen. This decision greatly strengthened the power of the nobility in the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth.
Call number: XVI Qu 1772. It is available online: http://www.dbc.wroc.pl/dlibra/aresults?action=SearchAction&dirids=1&QI=8C65AD2C0B2AA56CF16A029bbc6C77B8-9. See Maria Bohonos, Katalog starych druków Biblioteki Zakładu Narodowego im. Ossolińskich. Polonica XVI wieku (Wydawnictwo Akademii Nauk: Wrocław, 1965), 92.
Shoshana Blum-Kulka, “Shifts of Cohesion and Coherence in Translation,” in Interlingual and Intercultural Communication: Discourse and Cognition in Translation and Second Language Acquisition Studies, eds. Juliane House and Shoshana Blum-Kulka (Günter Narr Verlag: Tübingen, 1986), 17–35; Kinga Klaudy, “On Explicitation Hypothesis,” in Transferre necesse est: Current Issues of Translation Theory, eds. Kinga Klaudy and J. Kohn (Dániel Berzsenyi College: Szombatheley, 1993), 69–77; Maeve Olohan and Mona Baker, “Reporting ‘that’ in translated English: Evidence for 47 subconscious processes of explicitation?” Across Languages and Cultures 2 (2000): 141–158.