Bradshaw’s “More on Utopia”

In “More on Utopia”, Bradshaw explains past interpretations of Utopia and looks more into More’s purpose in writing it. His main argument is centered around Hexter’s interpretation and hypothesis on Utopia, which Bradshaw claims is “unsustainable”[i]. However, Bradshaw does not attempt to falsify Hexter’s theory, but rather he examines it further and builds upon it as well as past knowledge to better understand Utopia. Bradshaw goes about this by trying to answer two main questions. First, he tries to determine what More intended to describe in writing Utopia, and second, what More’s purpose was in describing it[ii]. Bradshaw begins by claiming that before Hexter gave his interpretation, Utopia was meant to be taken literally. Bradshaw stated that it was simply meant to “depict how reasonable human beings might organize their society relying on the powers of natural reason”[iii]. Because of this, Bradshaw moved on to his second question- what was the purpose of writing it? Bradshaw claims there are a few different interpretations, the most traditional of which examines “whether the utopian commonwealth was proposed by more as an idyll or as an ideal”[iv]. This is a widely accepted debate, and one which is intertwined throughout Bradshaw’s argument. Here, Bradshaw shifts to Hexter’s point that Utopia is connected with Christianity. He states that because the central aspect of Christianity is virtuous living, “the Utopians, despite their lack of Christian rituals, are true Christians, while the inhabitants of Europe, despite their observance of Christian rituals, are not”[v]. This presents a unique and ironic paradox because the pagan utopians are virtuous, whereas the Christian Europeans are egotistic and are concerned with wealth and power. The idea that Utopia was meant to serve as a model of a true Christian society continues to be the core of the argument and is used to prove that “Utopia is not a pagan idyll. It is a Christian ideal”[vi]. However, this leads to Bradshaw’s shift where he begins to look at the counterarguments to Hexter’s hypothesis. It is agreed that Utopia is a model of a Christian society, despite the lack of the actual acts religion. However, Fenlon proposes it is more of an illusion, therefore bringing it back to the original debate of whether it is an idyll or an ideal. He continues to disprove it by saying, “when More depicted the utopians as a community that lacked knowledge of the Christian gospel, he could never have intended them to provide a model of a truly Christian commonwealth”[vii]. He argues that it is impossible for anyone to come to that conclusion when there is no real evidence to prove it. Therefore, he claims Utopia has to be taken as a non-Christian society that is purely based on morals and virtue and separated from religion. Throughout the article, Bradshaw presented his argument through other scholars’ interpretations of the text, to which Bradshaw examined and then built upon.

[i] Brendan Bradshaw, “More on Utopia,” The Historical Journal 24(1), 2

[ii] Bradshaw, “More on Utopia”, 2

[iii] Bradshaw, “More on Utopia”, 2

[iv] Bradshaw, “More on Utopia”, 2

[v] Bradshaw, “More on Utopia”, 4

[vi] Bradshaw, “More on Utopia”, 5

[vii] Bradshaw, “More on Utopia”, 8