Preface, 1572-07-11, Thomas Erastus to Johannes Crato von Kraftheim

From Theatrum Paracelsicum
Author: Thomas Erastus
Recipient: Johannes Crato
Type: Dedication
Date: 11 July 1572
Place: Heidelberg
Pages: 2
Language: Latin
Quote as:
Editor: Edited by Julian Paulus
Thomas Erastus, Disputationum de medicina nova Philippi Paracelsi pars tertia, Basel: Pietro Perna 1572, sig. Aaa2r–Aaa2v [BP.Erastus.1572-01]
Translation: Raw translation see below
Abstract: 12 years ago, Erastus received a booklet from his friend Camillus Franchino. This booklet contained a debate between scholars on the underlying cause of diseases. Erastus deliberated long on how to respond, wanting both to satisfy his friend's inquiry and respect the learned men involved. Instead of critiquing each argument, Erastus decided to address the central issue, aiming to clarify his position and the broader topic. He integrated this response with his arguments against Paracelsus for coherence. With the passing of Camillus, Erastus seeks a new patron and turns to Johann, trusting in his renowned reputation and wisdom to shield and lend credibility to the work. (generated by Chat-GPT)
Back to Paratexts
Back to Texts by Thomas Erastus

[sig. Aaa2r] Illvstri viro, nobilitate, doctrina, et virtvte praestanti D. Iohanni Cratoni a` Crafftheim, Cæs[areae] Maiest[atis] Consiliario, & Archiatro intimo, Domino suo honorando, Thomas Erastus S[alutem] P[lurimam] D[icit].

Camillus Franchinus, Medicus Bononiensis, olim socius studiorum meorum, & amicus mihi charißimus, ante annos duodecim ad me misit libellum continentem disputationem duorum doctißimorum virorum, De causa coniuncta morborum, obnixè me rogans, vt quid de disceptatione illa sentirem, ad ipsum perscriberem. Anceps & dubius diu hæsi, quòd & amico gratificari cuperem, & inter viros doctißimos arbitrari non auderem: præsertim cùm alterius nomen expressum non inuenirem, & alteri, vt præceptori, tantùm me debere intelligerem, quantùm persoluere nunquam possem. At cùm ille rogare ac responsionem flagitare non desineret, ita eam temperare volui, vt & satisfacerem amico, & concertantes non læderem: ac nihilominus quid de causa seu controuersia sentirem perspicuum facerem. Ergo argumenta contendentium inter se sigillatim examinare non libuit, sed causam tractare placuit: vt quid in vtroque videretur desiderari poße cognosceretur. In hoc igitur scripto et duab[us] aijs epistolis omnia complexus sum, nisi me vehementer fallit animus, quæ ad perfectam huius controuersiæ explanationem [sig. Aaa2v] pertinent. Cæterùm quia in tertia parte disputat, nostrarum Antiparacelsicarum de hac ipsa quæstione disserendum mihi videbam, vt & tempori parcerem, & ocio melius vterer, scripta, in quibus me hanc rem tractauiße recordabar, coniungere tertiæ disputationi visum est. Quia verò D[ominus] Camillus, cuius rogatu libellum hunc exaraui, hoc mundo relicto ad superos migrauit et proinde alius ei patronus quærendus fuit, ad te, vir præstantissime, confugit: vt qui sub clarißimi nominis tui splendore, authoritate, dignitate quam excellens tua virtus, & rara doctrina tibi peperit, facilè tutum se fore speret. Eius si patrocinium suscipere dignaberis, quod facturum te humanitate tua freti confidimus, haud veremur, vt aliquis oppugnare tentet. Nullus etenim adeò videtur eße temerarius, vt, quæ à te viro iudicij acerrimi examinata & approbata nouit, oppugnare temerè velit. Vale feliciß[ime]. Heidelbergæ, V. Idus Iulij Anno M. D. LXXII.

English Raw Translation

Generated by ChatGPT-4 on 15 August 2023. Attention: This translation is a machine translation by artificial intelligence. The translation has not been checked and should not be cited without additional human verification.

To the illustrious man, distinguished by nobility, learning, and virtue, Mr. Johann Craton von Crafftheim, Counselor to the Imperial Majesty, and his close personal physician, his honored master, Thomas Erastus extends the warmest greetings.

Camillus Franchinus, a physician from Bologna, once a fellow student of mine and a most cherished friend, sent me a booklet twelve years ago containing a debate between two very learned men on the underlying cause of diseases. He earnestly asked me to write to him my thoughts on this debate. For a long time, I hesitated, both wanting to please my friend and not daring to judge between such learned men, especially when I could not find the name of one of them and knew I owed the other as much as a teacher that I could never repay. But when he persisted in asking for a response, I tried to shape my answer in a way that would satisfy my friend without offending the debaters and also make clear my views on the issue. Therefore, I chose not to examine the arguments of the contenders individually but to discuss the issue as a whole, so what seemed lacking in both could be understood. In this work and in two other letters, I believe I have covered everything necessary for a complete explanation of this controversy. However, since I address this very question in the third part of our arguments against Paracelsus, I thought it best to save time and make better use of my leisure by combining the writings in which I remembered addressing this topic with that third discussion. But since Mr. Camillus, at whose request I wrote this booklet, has departed this world for the next, and a new patron was thus needed, he turned to you, most distinguished sir, hoping that under the brilliance, authority, and dignity of your renowned name - achievements earned through your outstanding virtue and unique learning - he would find safe haven. If you should choose to take on this patronage, which we trust you will given your kindness, we have no fear that anyone will attempt to attack it. For no one seems so rash as to recklessly challenge what is known to be examined and approved by you, a man of the sharpest judgment. Fare you very well. From Heidelberg, 11th of July, Year 1572.