Thomas More's Utopia - TOPIC 8

English Medieval and XVI Century Literature

Lecturer: Jesus Tronch Prez
Clara Martnez Cervera

TOPIC 8: Utopian attitude towards riches and communal life

One of the main topics which provide the backbone of Thomas More's text Utopia is the issue
of private property. Hence, in Book I Hythloday (traditionally translated as peddlar of nonsense)
introduces the debate on the topic of poverty and theft. He argues that in societies such as the
British at that time, men were, on the one hand, pushed to robbery, since a wide range of the
population lacked the essential means for well-living, and on the other hand, ironically
condemnedto death penalty for a crime they were, in a way, forced to commit. According to
Hythloday this is immoral because:
"All the goods in the world are not able to countervail mans life." (More, 1478
1535:409-410)
The introduction of this debate works as a springboard from which Hythloday jumps to the
discussion of private property and the social problems that derive from it. As Susan Bruce
points out in her introduction to Utopia, More borrows the Platonic idea presented in Plato's
Republic according to which the grounds for poverty, inequality and injustice are to be found in
private property because it fosters inegalitarian distribution of goods and therefore greed and
envy for what other can and one cannot possess. Hence, we see how, already in this first part in
the narrative, More introduces a critical view on the attitude towards riches in England at that
time; criticism that will eventually be developed in Book II when Hythloday presents the
radically different social organisation established in the land of Utopia.
In that first part of the Book, Hythloday very much puts the stress on monarchs' hypocritical
attitude towards their subjects, pointing out how they would put in practice all the strategies at
their reach in order to suck the money out of the common men while they lived in absurd
abundance.
"And verily one man to live in pleasure and wealth, whiles all other weep and smart for
it, that is the part, not of a king, but of jailer." (More, 14781535: 772-774)

Thomas More's Utopia - TOPIC 8

English Medieval and XVI Century Literature
Lecturer: Jesus Tronch Prez
Clara Martnez Cervera
According to critics, More, by these sardonic references to monarchs, would be attacking "the
previous monarch, Henry VII, who died the richest and probably the most hated. He combined
unscrupulous greed with skinflint stinginess" (Greenblat, 2006: Footnote page 541)
As we know, the debate takes place mainly between Hythloday and a character named after the
author's family name. This makes it hard for us to distinguish which is More's (the author) point
throughout his narrative, because, as we will see, this dichotomy of opinions is prolonged till
the very end, so that we will never get a clear answer.
Thus, whereas Hythloday states by the end of Book 1 that:
"Thus I do fully persuade myself, that no equal and just distribution of things can be
made, nor that perfect wealth shall ever be among men, unless this propriety be exiled and
banished. But so long as it shall continue, so long shall remain among the most and best part of
men the heavy and inevitable burden of poverty and wretchedness." (More, 14781535: 909913)
More, the character within the book, contests that view by rather affirming that:
"But I am of a contrary opinion (quoth I) for methinketh that men shall never there live
wealthily, where all things be common. For how can there be abundance of goods, or of
anything, where every man withdraweth his hand from labour? Whom the regard of his own
gains driveth not to work, and the hope that he hath in other mens travails maketh him
slothful." (More, 14781535: 929-937)
As we have seen so far, readers find in the first book a depiction of how things were working in
England at the time, but it is in the second book where a contrastive alternative will be
presented when Hythloday deals with the way Utopians live and how they relate to goods and
riches. He stresses the fact that in Utopian society all the goods are at the reach of anyone
wanting to take them with no retribution demanded in exchange. And yet, theft is not to be
feared in that society since it is founded upon the security that no one lacks anything he or she
could need. Therefore,
"Seeing there is abundance of all things, and that it is not to be feared, lest any man will
ask more than he needeth. For why should it be thought that man would ask more than
enough, which is sure never to lack?" (More, 14781535: 1380-1383)

Thomas More's Utopia - TOPIC 8

English Medieval and XVI Century Literature
Lecturer: Jesus Tronch Prez
Clara Martnez Cervera
Utopian society's most sacred principle is egalitarianism, something that is reinforced by their
communal way of living. They live distributed among different households of which the leader
is always the oldest man. The pieces of work of every family are stored in different market
places from which any man can freely dispose. Furthermore, Utopians share meals in big halls
where all the city eats together the food prepared in common by women of the several
households.
We can therefore, state that More presents a communal, if not communist, way of living based
upon the idea that nothing belongs to no one and hence, that everything belongs to everyone.
Something that, in Hythloday's view, is the key to banish greed from men's hearts. For doing
away with private property, means doing away with the desire of possessing.
But what is probably the most striking aspect of Utopians' relation with material things, is their
attitude towards riches, that is gold, jewels... because it radically differs from European attitude
at that time, or even nowadays.
Aware of the attractiveness of precious and rare metals and their ability to awaken disturbing
passions in men's hearts, Utopians decide to make of those materials something common and
random, rather than something to be treasured and carefully kept away from others' eyes. Thus,
they allow children to play with pearls, they show precious pieces in the most vulgar places and
make slaves and fugitives wear golden earrings, bangles and chains transforming them into an
element of public scorn rather than admiration.
To reinforce this striking attitude, the author introduces an anecdote in the narrative, according
to which, a group of further visitors who went to Amaurot, ignoring their consideration towards
riches entered the city arrayed " in cloth of gold, with great chains of gold, with gold hanging at
their ears, with gold rings upon their fingers, with brooches and aglets of gold upon their caps,
which glistered full of pearls and precious stones" (More, 14781535: 1604-1606). Being the
Utopians used to see those garments in slaves and runaways; they bowed with reverence to the
ambassadors' servants and ignored the first.
By means of the inclusion of this anecdote, More makes fun of his own time, since European
attitude can be easily identified with the ambassadors' behaviour. Hence, by analogy he puts
forward European countries' superficiality and stupidity which, as Susan Bruce remarks in her
critical introduction: "competed with one another to find faster ways of tapping into the

Thomas More's Utopia - TOPIC 8

English Medieval and XVI Century Literature
Lecturer: Jesus Tronch Prez
Clara Martnez Cervera
immense riches (gold, spices, and, progressively and appallingly slaves) of Asia and Africa."
(Bruce: 10)
Nevertheless, despite the all-equalitarian aim of Utopian society, we would like to stress out the
fact that it is still an early modern estate society and mainly patriarchal, since not only is Utopia
a country depending on slavery, but we do also find a clear division between higher social ranks
such as the syphogrants and tranibors, and the common men. Besides, women are subject to
male authority because they pass from their fathers' to their husbands' hands, not being able of
having a household of their own.
Maybe because of this incongruities present in the core of Utopian society, as well as because of
the ambiguity with regards to Thomas More personal aim when writing the text, critical views
cannot reach an agreement on how Utopia should be read. Susan Bruce presents a division
between those who see it as a serious political manifesto, and those who rather deem it a
sarcastic and humoristic practice from the part of More. Logan, from his part also talks about
the possibility of reading the text as an example of how "even the attractive arrangements that
are theoretically possible are in practice very difficult to achieve." (Logan: 23).
Be as it may, we agree with Bruce that "Perhaps the 'More-within-the-text' and Hythloday are
not 'different' characters, then, but both representations of different aspects of More-the-author"
(Bruce: 24). Furthermore, we deem this ambiguity, or duality of thought, common to human
psyche in general, as one of the elements which makes of Utopia a text of actuality still in the
21st century, since it is able to trigger thought and debate, by, instead of offering any clear
solution, undermining readers with uncertainty, forcing us to ponder not only More's times but
also ours.
Bibliography
Bruce, Smith, ed. Three Early Modern Utopias: Utopia, New Atlantis, and The Isle of Pines.
Oxford:Oxford UP, 1999.
Logan, George M., Robert M. Adams, and Clarence Miller, eds. More: Utopia: Latin Text &
English Translation. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 1995.
Greenblatt, Stephen: The Norton Anthology og English Literature. The Sixteenth Century. The
Early Seventeenth Century. New York. London: W.W. Norton & Company, 2006.