Herbert, Donne, and Humility

One article I really enjoyed this weekend was Sidney Gottlieb’s “Herbert’s Political Allegory of ‘Humilitie.’” In this article, Gottlieb closely examines one of Herbert’s lesser-analyzed poems, “Humilite,” and considers how Herbert uses the poem to show the breakdowns of virtue in the English court, particularly in patronage. In the poem, the Vertues all sit on a throne together, and each (except Humilitie) is given a different gift. The gifts are all body parts, a fact that Gottlieb argues highlights the cut-throat, non-loving nature of patronage (472). The fact that the Vertues need gifts also shows that the Vertues are no longer self-sufficient (473). This fits in well with the idea that, in this time period, the responsibility for morality shifted from the monarch/court to the artists, which is the basis of my thesis. Because the king/court (symbolized by the Vertues receiving gifts upon a throne) are no longer self-sufficient, the responsibility for defining virtue must come from somewhere else. As Herbert writes this poem to point out the problem, it can be argued that he is coming forward to point the way to true morality, as many writers (Donne, Hobbes, etc.) attempt to do during this time period. I believe that it is also relevant that, in a court that used to value sprezzatura, true morality is seen increasingly not as being good at everything without trying, but instead in trying: in demonstrating good, hard work. Instead of all of the Vertues working together to make the perfect kingdom, as might have been in an earlier poem, Humilitie is the best Vertue which saves the others—temporarily—from total destruction (475). It is not necessarily being good at everything, but being good at one particular thing, that can spell morality in seventeenth-century England.

Donne’s “Meditations” can be related to my theme/thesis in a similar way. As I argued in class, Donne’s “Meditation 4” is a study in self-insufficiency: by referencing the Physician, Donne is fundamentally arguing that humankind cannot take care of itself (Norton 1420). While Elizabethans projected sprezzatura to show their own larger-than-life-ness (and, in some cases, to claim divine qualities), Donne shows that man can never reach the realm of God: in fact, he is always in need of God to save him from himself. Instead of being proud of themselves for all of their talents, Donne would likely argue that the greatest quality is humility before God. Like Herbert, Donne is an artist who is claiming a different understanding of morality than the court’s, a message that was ripe for the time, especially since the court was seen as so immoral during James I’s rule.

I thought this article was fascinating, and I would recommend it as background reading for anyone who is planning on using Herbert in their paper. Gottlieb also talks a bit about Herbert as writing “poetry of criticism” and about Herbert’s work as structurally arguing that morality can only come to someone while apart from the court. You should check it out!

Gottlieb, Sidney. “Herbert’s Political Allegory of ‘Humilitie.’” Huntington Library Quarterly 52.4 (1989): 469-480. JStor. Web. 25 April 2015.