Erasmus’s Novum Instrumentum

By Alexandre Mourlon

Title	Novum Instrumentum / Novum Testamentum omne / Ioannes Frobenius Candido lectori S. D. En Novum Testamentum ex Erasmi Roterodami recognitione / Novum Testamentum .
Editor	Johann Froben and his successors
Date	1516 / 1519 / 1522 / 1527 / 1535
Printing Location	Basel, Switzerland
Contributors	Desiderius Erasmus Roterodamus
Language	Greek and latin
Location	Several copies of each edition are preserved in Basel. Digitalized copy of each edition from the platform e-rara : 1516, 1519, 1522, 1527 and 1535

The New Testament of Erasmus

The New Testament of Erasmus is a foundational work of the sixteenth century, marking a turning point in the history of biblical publishing and religious reform. Five different editions exist, all printed in Basel in the workshop of Johann Froben, then by his successors after Froben’s death in 1527.

At the beginning of the sixteenth century, Europe was in full effervescence with the Renaissance, an intellectual and cultural movement emphasizing a return to ancient sources, the rediscovery of classical Greek and Latin texts, and the rise of humanism. This period was marked by technological advances such as the invention of the printing press by Johannes Gutenberg around 1450, which enabled the mass diffusion of knowledge and challenged traditional authorities, including that of the Catholic Church. In this context, Desiderius Erasmus of Rotterdam, born around 1466 in the Netherlands and deceased in 1536 in Basel, stands out as one of the most influential humanists of his time. Educated in Augustinian monasteries and influenced by thinkers such as Lorenzo Valla, Erasmus traveled widely through Europe, taught at Cambridge and Oxford, and corresponded with figures such as Thomas More. His work, imbued with a critical and reforming spirit, sought to purify Christianity from medieval excesses by promoting a “philosophy of Christ” based on morality and the direct study of Scripture. It is within this historical and intellectual framework that his edition of the New Testament appeared in 1516, titled Novum Instrumentum omne, published in Basel by Froben, an audacious act inscribed in the debates on the reform of the Church, anticipating the controversies of the Protestant Reformation initiated by Martin Luther the following year.

Context and structure of Erasmus’ biblical edition

Before Erasmus’s edition, the Bible in Western Europe relied primarily on the Vulgate, a fourth-century Latin translation by St. Jerome, declared the official version at the Council of Trent in 1546, though it had already been dominant for centuries. However, this Vulgate, transmitted through medieval manuscripts copied by hand, suffered from accumulated errors: interpolations, omissions, and alterations introduced by unskilled or theologically biased scribes. Renaissance humanists, inspired by the principle ad fontes (“back to the sources”), criticized these imperfections and called for a study of the original Hebrew (Old Testament) and Greek (New Testament) texts.

Erasmus, who mastered ancient Greek thanks to his studies and the influence of scholars such as Jacques Lefèvre d’Étaples, undertook to correct these deficiencies using limited but valuable sources: primarily eight Byzantine minuscule manuscripts from the twelfth to fifteenth centuries borrowed in Basel (such as Minuscules 1, 2, 2814, 2815, etc.)[1], personal notes from manuscripts he had seen in England and Brabant, back-translations for the Book of Revelation, quotations and fragments found in patristic authors (Origen, Chrysostom, Jerome, etc.) to validate variants, as well as other patristic manuscripts mentioned in his correspondence but not identified today.

His 1516 edition was revolutionary: it marked a historic turning point as the first printed edition of the New Testament in its original Greek, granting direct access to ancient sources and promoting rigorous philological criticism against the accumulated imperfections of the Latin Vulgate. Emphasis was resolutely placed on the text itself, presented in two parallel columns, the Greek on the left and Erasmus’s refined Latin translation on the right, a layout meant to highlight linguistic comparison for more faithful understanding, without visual overload. The revised 1527 edition innovated by adopting three columns, integrating the Church’s official Vulgate alongside the Greek and the Erasmian version, to allow explicit comparison.

Unlike medieval Bibles full of marginal notes, Erasmus’s philological and exegetical commentaries were not printed in the margin but placed in a separate volume or at the end of the book, reinforcing the primacy of the sacred text over human interpretations and avoiding distractions for the learned reader. These notes, often critical of the Vulgate, aimed to restore the original meaning of Scripture, for example in the famous Comma Johanneum (1 John 5:7–8), which Erasmus omitted in his first editions due to insufficient manuscript evidence, provoking intense debates with conservative theologians.

Finally, the work is notable for its austere visual presentation: in the first three editions (1516, 1519, 1522), illustrations are scarce and limited to ornamental woodcuts framing the title pages, often the same grotesque, humanist motifs, with slight variations in the third edition. This reflects a scholarly and reformist approach in which Erasmus prioritized textual purity and the revitalization of Christianity through rational study of the sources, rather than through decorative imagery that might distract from the spiritual essence. This approach marks a turning point in the history of biblical publishing, promoting a more scientific exegesis accessible to lay scholars.

Erasmus’s motivations

In the early sixteenth century, the Catholic Church was experiencing a period of turmoil marked by widespread abuses and a loss of spiritual credibility. Dominated by a hierarchy often perceived as corrupt, it was criticized for practices such as simony (the selling of ecclesiastical offices), nepotism, clerical immorality, including accusations that priests, monks, and nuns failed to observe vows of chastity and poverty, and above all the sale of indulgences, promising the remission of sins in exchange for money, as exemplified by Johann Tetzel’s 1517 campaign to fund St. Peter’s Basilica in Rome. These abuses, coupled with rigid scholasticism and centralized papal power under figures such as Alexander VI or Julius II, fueled growing dissatisfaction among the faithful and intellectuals, fostering calls for internal reform even before the Protestant Reformation initiated by Luther.

It is precisely within this climate of moral and theological decay that Erasmus’s motivations for editing the New Testament should be understood. A committed humanist, he sought to revitalize Christianity by returning to the pure sources of Scripture, promoting the “philosophy of Christ”, a simple evangelical morality centered on love and inner piety rather than external rituals and complex dogmas. Convinced that the Church’s corruption stemmed partly from a poor understanding of Scripture, distorted by centuries of faulty copying in the Vulgate, Erasmus sought to correct these errors through a critical edition based on the original Greek, in hopes of fostering a peaceful, scholarly reform of the Church from within, without schism, and to spread a Christ-centered wisdom capable of transforming individuals and society. This enterprise, motivated by humanist ideals and a desire for spiritual purification, reflects his commitment to accessible education and his satirical critique of ecclesiastical abuses, as seen in his Praise of Folly (1511)—while anticipating the debates that would soon ignite Europe.

A publishing adventure

The first edition of Erasmus’s New Testament is often described as a very rapid project, from October 1515 to March 1516, driven by both the desire not to be overtaken by competing projects and Froben’s ambition to present the book at the Frankfurt Book Fair in March 1516. Erasmus himself, in various letters, admitted that this New Testament had been “thrown together rather than edited.” In a sense this is true, but it requires nuance.

This undertaking was an editorial adventure that began long before 1515, and, above all, Erasmus was not alone. Erasmus specialist Marie Barral-Baron Daussy has detailed this adventure[2]; here is a brief summary.

In reality, the project’s genesis was very long. One may consider it to have begun in 1499, when, influenced by the English priest John Colet, Erasmus discovered a profound interest in Scripture as a means of illuminating the mysteries of God. This was the starting point of his desire to recover the original text of the Word of God, motivating him to learn Greek.

Around 1505–1506, Erasmus began working on the Latin text, notably influenced by Lorenzo Valla’s work, leading to an early attempt at a new Latin translation that was soon abandoned. In 1507 he wrote to Aldus Manutius, expressing surprise that the latter had not yet produced a Greek edition of the New Testament, suggesting Erasmus’s early interest in the project. In 1511, while in Cambridge, Erasmus truly began his project of a Greek edition after discovering four ancient manuscripts written in Greek. At that point he refined his vision: the goal was no longer merely to correct existing Latin texts using Greek sources, but to produce the purest possible Greek text based on multiple manuscripts. This Greek text would then serve as the essential foundation for a new Latin translation, the Novum Instrumentum.

In the following years, Erasmus collated additional ancient Greek and Latin manuscripts. Meanwhile, Froben grew increasingly anxious, he wanted to be the first to print the Scriptures in Greek. Although Manutius died in 1515, the Complutensian Polyglot Bible had been printed in 1514 and awaited only papal authorization to be published (which it received in 1520).

In 1515, while Erasmus was in England, he received a letter from his friend Beatus Rhenanus: “Froben desires to have your New Testament, and he will give you as much for it as anyone else.”[3] Erasmus thus returned to Basel. Froben provided him with a team of scholars, with all the advantages and complications this implied, to undertake a true race against time. The humanist found himself editing the Greek text, producing the Latin translation, and writing annotations, all while supervising the presses and reading proofs, as the work was printed progressively.

Despite all this, the project was a success, and the edition was indeed presented at the Frankfurt fair as Froben intended.

The reception of Erasmus’s New Testament

From 1516 onward, Erasmus’s editorial and translation work attracted great attention among the scholars of his time. Guillaume Budé admitted in a letter to Erasmus that, upon learning the New Testament was available, he immediately stopped what he was doing to devote himself entirely to reading it. It is difficult to fully capture the impact of this edition, but one may cite Richard Simon, a seventeenth-century theologian and Bible translator, who wrote in 1693: “Erasmus’s critical remarks have in some way served as the foundation for those who commented on the books of the New Testament after him.”[4]

However, Erasmus’s undertaking was courageous, considering that the commentary and editing of biblical texts were traditionally monopolized by the Church and its scholastic theologians. Although he held a doctorate in theology, Erasmus was working here as a grammarian and philologist in the tradition of Lorenzo Valla, whose Annotationes he had previously edited. Erasmus hunted down errors in the Vulgate. Yet, tragically for him, he was regarded by the Lutherans as a servile papist, while many Catholic theologians denounced him as a Lutheran. As a result, Erasmus and his work faced virulent criticism and numerous controversies.

In a letter to Juan Maldonado, the humanist wrote: “When the New Testament came to light, then truly, like men possessed, they called for Erasmus to be stoned.”[5] Though slightly exaggerated (a recurring feature in his correspondence), many criticisms indeed erupted during the 1520s, including a violent dispute with Noël Béda, rector of the Paris Faculty of Theology. The Parisian doctors despised Erasmus’s attempt to restore the biblical text, seeing it as a rejection of scholastic authority. Erasmus was therefore censured.

Matthew 24: an eschatological prophecy echoing the troubles of the time

Matthew chapter 24 perfectly illustrates the perpetual drama of Erasmus’s life: a fervent advocate of moderate and scholarly reform within the Catholic Church, he sought to purify ecclesiastical practices without embracing the radical, schismatic Reformation initiated by Luther and others. This passage, an eschatological prophecy spoken by Christ on the Mount of Olives, describes the impending destruction of the Temple of Jerusalem as a symbol of coming tribulations, with apocalyptic signs such as false messiahs, wars, famines, earthquakes, persecutions, the abomination of desolation, and the darkening of the sun and moon, before the glorious coming of the Son of Man on the clouds to gather the elect. It culminates in a call to vigilance, comparing the end times to the days of Noah or the unexpected return of a master, insisting on the ignorance of the exact hour, known only to the Father.

This prophetic motif, laden with symbolism regarding the evils of the world and divine judgment, was often invoked in relation to the troubles of the era, such as the 1527 Sack of Rome by the imperial troops of Charles V, perceived by some as divine punishment. It was also explicitly cited by Thomas Müntzer, the radical leader of the Peasants’ War in 1525, who drew on this passage and others to justify his call for violent revolt:

“Up! Up, while the fire is hot! Do not let your sword cool. Do not let it weaken. Bang! Bang! Forge it on the anvils of Nimrod! Cast down their towers! As long as they live, you will never be free from the fear of men. As long as they rule over you, no one can speak to you of God. Up! Up, while it is day! God goes before you. Follow! Follow! All these events are written in Matthew 24, Ezekiel 34, Daniel 7, Ezra 10, Revelation 6— all writings that explain Romans 13.”[6]

Confronted with such extreme interpretations and the violence they engendered, Erasmus expressed his horror and dismay in a letter dated 5 September 1525, written in Basel to Polydore Vergil:

“A cruel and bloody drama (crudelis et cruenta) is being played out here. The peasants rush headlong to their death. Every day there are fierce clashes between nobles and peasants, so close that we hear the roar of cannons and weapons, and almost the groans of the wounded. Imagine our situation! It is a deadly epidemic spreading with extraordinary speed across every corner of the world.”[7]

This reaction underscores his visceral rejection of revolutionary excess, preferring peaceful reform rooted in critical study of Scripture rather than armed insurrection. Yet his adversaries, such as Noël Béda, exploited these events to argue that Erasmus’s work did not strengthen piety but instead encouraged social disorder.

Conclusion: A work more humanist than theological — the example of the illustrations

As noted above, the five editions are austere in terms of illustration—though not entirely absent. They provide important insight into Erasmus’s editorial project. In the first three editions (1516, 1519, 1522), woodcuts frame certain pages, mainly the opening pages of each book of the Acts or the Gospels. If we consider the case of the Gospel according to Matthew (visible below), what do we see? Primarily columns, putti in various poses, and satyrs (not devils, despite the horns and goat feet). This is a grotesque style, common in Renaissance art of that region, combined with hybrid motifs clearly inspired by antiquity.

Thus, these illustrations are not primarily theological in the traditional sense. They do not depict direct biblical scenes or explicit Christian symbols (crosses, saints, dominant haloes), and they avoid sacred iconography that might distract from the purified text Erasmus presented. Instead, they reflect a humanist Renaissance aesthetic: grotesques (satyrs, putti, hybrids) inspired by ancient Roman frescoes rediscovered at the time (such as those in the Domus Aurea), symbolizing a fusion of pagan antiquity and Christianity, with a touch of satirical humor that humanizes the work and subtly critiques ecclesiastical rigidity, very much in line with Erasmus’s spirit.

This reflects the Northern Renaissance humanism in which the art of printing (via Froben and figures like Holbein) transformed the sacred book into an aesthetic and intellectual artifact, prioritizing reason and classical sources over medieval devotion. In sum, these decorative elements are more humanist than theological, serving to embellish and intellectualize the text rather than interpret it spiritually.

[1] For more details, see Patrick Andrist, « Erasme 1514-1516 et les étapes de la préparation du texte et des prologues grecs du Novum Instrumentum. Le témoignage des manuscrits. » dans La Bible de 1500 à 1535, Turnhout, Brepols, 2018, p. 135‑196.

[2] Marie Barral-Baron, « Erasme et l’édition du Nouveau Testament de 1516: Entre travail collaboratif et “folie” du texte » dans Le Nouveau Testament d’Érasme: 1516 regards sur l’Europe des humanistes, Turnhout, Brepols, 2020, p. 63‑78.

[3] « Froben désire avoir de vous le Nouveau Testament et il vous en donnera autant que qui que ce soit » Beatus Rhenanus to Erasme, april, 17th 1515 : Allen 328 II, p.63.

[4] Richard Simon, Histoire critique des principaux commentateurs du Nouveau Testament, depuis le commencement du Christianisme jusques à nôtre tems i.e. temps avec une dissertation critique sur les principaux actes manuscrits qui ont été citez dans les trois parties de cet ouvrage. Par Richard Simon .., Rotterdam, Reinier Leers, 1693, p. 404.

[5] « Quand le Nouveau Testament vit le jour, alors vraiment comme des possédés, ils appelèrent à lapider Érasme. » Marie-Madeleine de la Garanderie (ed), La Correspondance d’Érasme et de Guillaume Budé, Paris, Vrin, 1967, p. 54.

[6] « Sus ! Sus. Tant que le feu est chaud ! Ne laissez pas refroidir votre glaive. Ne le laissez pas faiblir. Vlan ! Vlan ! Forgez en tapant sur les enclumes de Nemrod ! Jetez à bas leurs tours ! Il n’est pas possible, aussi longtemps qu’ils seront en vie, que vous vous libériez de la crainte des hommes. Tant qu’ils régneront sur vous, on ne pourra pas vous parler de Dieu. Sus ! Sus, pendant qu’il fait jour ! Dieu marche devant vous. Suivez ! Suivez ! Tous ces événements sont écrits dans Matthieu 24, Ézéchiel 34, Daniel 7, Esdras 10, Apocalypse 6, tous écrits qui expliquent Romains 13. ». Joël Lefebvre (ed.), « Lettres choisies » dans Thomas Müntzer (1490-1525) : christianisme et révolution : Écrits théologiques et politiques, Lyon, Presses universitaires de Lyon, 2021, p. 183‑222.

[7] Allen, n° 1606, t. VI, p. 160, 1. 17-21. From Jacques Chomarat, « Un ennemi de la guerre : Érasme », Bulletin de l’Association Guillaume Budé : Lettres d’humanité, 1974, vol. 33, n^o 4, p. 463.

Ressources

Andrist Patrick, « Erasme 1514-1516 et les étapes de la préparation du texte et des prologues grecs du Novum Instrumentum. Le témoignage des manuscrits. » dans La Bible de 1500 à 1535, Turnhout, Brepols (coll. « Bibliothèque de l’École des Hautes Etudes »), 2018, p. 135‑196.

Barral-Baron Marie, « Erasme et l’édition du Nouveau Testament de 1516: Entre travail collaboratif et “folie” du texte » dans Le Nouveau Testament d’Érasme: 1516 regards sur l’Europe des humanistes, Turnhout, Brepols (coll. « Nugae humanisthicae »), 2020, p. 63‑78.

Chomarat Jacques, « Un ennemi de la guerre : Érasme », Bulletin de l’Association Guillaume Budé : Lettres d’humanité, 1974, vol. 33, n^o 4, p. 445‑465.

Garanderie Marie-Madeleine de la, La Correspondance d’Érasme et de Guillaume Budé, Paris, Vrin, 1967, 352 p.

Lefebvre Joël (ed.), « Lettres choisies » dans Thomas Müntzer (1490-1525) : christianisme et révolution : Écrits théologiques et politiques, Lyon, Presses universitaires de Lyon (coll. « Hors collection »), 2021, p. 183‑222.

Simon Richard, Histoire critique des principaux commentateurs du Nouveau Testament, depuis le commencement du Christianisme jusques à nôtre tems i.e. temps avec une dissertation critique sur les principaux actes manuscrits qui ont été citez dans les trois parties de cet ouvrage. Par Richard Simon .., Rotterdam, Reinier Leers, 1693, 1060 p.

The five editions :

Novum Instrumentum omne : diligenter ab Erasmo Roterodamo recognitum & emendatum, … una cum Annotationibus …, Basel, 1516.

Novum Testamentum omne : multo quam antehac diligentius ab Erasmo Roterodamo recognitum, emendatum ac translatum, non solum ad Graecam veritatem, verum etiam ad multorum utriusque linguae codicum, eorumque veterum simul et emendatorum fidem … Augustini. una cum Annotationibus recognitis, ac magna accessione locupletatis, quae lectorem doceant, quid qua ratione mutatum sit. … : Addita sunt in singulas Apostolorum epistolas Argumenta / per Erasmum Rot., Basel, 1519.

Novum Testamentum omne / tertio iam ac diligentius ab Erasmo Roterodamo recognitum, non solum ad Graecam veritatem, verumetiam ad multorum utriusque linguae codicum, eorumque veterum simul & emendatorum fidem, …. una cum Annotationibus recognitis, ac magna accessione locupletatis, … : Addita sunt in singulas Apostolorum epistolas, Argumenta per eundem, Basel, 1522.

Ioannes Frobenius candido lectori s. d. en Novum Testamentum, ex Erasmi Roterodami recognitione, iam quartum damus studiose lector : adiecta vulgata translatione, quo protinus ipsis oculis conferre possis, quid conveniat quid dissideat. …. Adiecta est Pauli peregrinatio Latina, cum praefatione Chrysostomi, in omnes epistolas Pauli. In annotationibus praeterquam quod autor exactiora reddidit omnia, magnam accessionem adiunxit ex Graecorum voluminibus … vetustissimis exemplaribus Latinis, quae nuper est nactus. … : Accessit & locorum annotatu dignorum index non aspernandus, Basel, 1527.

Novum Testamentum : iam quintum accuratissima cura recognitum / a Des. Erasmo Roter.. cum Annotationibus eiusdem ita locupletatis, ut propemodum opus novum videri possit, Basel, 1535.