Skip to content
Home

Utopia (book)

Thomas More's 1516 book Utopia describes an imagined island commonwealth; part satire, part political thought experiment, it coined the term 'utopia' and influenced later debate about ideal societies.

Utopia is a short book written in Latin by the English lawyer and humanist Thomas More and first published in 1516. Its full original title is De Optimo Republicae Statu deque Nova Insula Utopia, commonly translated as On the Best State of a Republic and on the New Island of Utopia. The work presents an extended fictional account that combines travel narrative, political critique and social description. For a modern overview see Utopia (book) and for information on its author see Thomas More.

The book is framed as a dialogue. In the first part More and two companions discuss moral, legal and political problems of contemporary European states; the second part takes the form of a traveler's report about a distant island society. The traveler, who goes by the name Raphael Hythloday, describes the island's customs, institutions and laws in detail. This fictional island is central to the work and often cited when people discuss model or imagined polities: the island of Utopia.

Image gallery

6 Images

Key features of the imagined society

The island's social arrangements are portrayed as deliberately organized and communal, offered both as contrast and critique to sixteenth‑century European practices. More's description includes several notable elements:

  • Widespread communal ownership or tightly regulated property use rather than private accumulation.
  • Structured schedules of work and shared labor intended to balance productivity and leisure.
  • Emphasis on public welfare: organized hospitals, education, and systems to support the poor.
  • Religious plurality and tolerance within limits, together with civic order and laws meant to promote common benefit.
  • Legal customs and punishments that differ markedly from contemporary European courts, often emphasizing rehabilitation and service.

These features are presented not as a blueprinted program for immediate adoption but as material for reflection about justice, governance and the distribution of goods.

Language, form and the name "Utopia"

More wrote in Latin, addressing educated readers of his time. The word "Utopia" itself is a learned coinage that evokes a double meaning: from Greek roots it can suggest both "no place" (ou‑topos) and "good place" (eu‑topos), which fits the book's ambiguous tone. Modern readers encounter different translations of the title and of many passages; the text's combination of irony, moral argument and fictional description has produced varied scholarly interpretations. For discussion of the term's later semantic shift, see utopia.

Interpretation of More's aims has long been contested. Some scholars read the work as earnest political philosophy, others as satire or rhetorical exercise aimed at exposing the contradictions of European states. The dialogic and partly fictional form allows More to raise difficult questions without offering unqualified prescriptions.

Influence, reception and legacy

Utopia quickly became a reference point in European intellectual history. It helped create a literary genre of utopian writing and influenced later authors who imagined ideal commonwealths or used imaginary societies to criticize their own. Over centuries the word "utopia" broadened to describe any idealized, often unattainable social design; by contrast, the label "dystopia" later emerged to name works that emphasize the dangers of totalizing visions. Attempts to found real communities inspired by utopian ideals occurred in various times and places, but such experiments typically ran into practical, economic or political challenges. For summaries and further resources see general introductions such as the imagined society overview and related bibliographies at Utopia (book).

Today More's Utopia remains read both for its historical significance in the Renaissance and for the continuing questions it poses about justice, property, governance and the limits of political idealism. The book's layered irony and its mixture of serious proposals with fictional distance help explain why it endures as an object of study and debate.

The life of the Utopians

The first part of the work has a framework plot, in which Thomas More made a detailed criticism of the political and social conditions of the time in Europe, especially England. He strongly denounced, for example, the practice of capital punishment, which in England threatened even thieves, so that for them there was no difference between stealing and murder. In the second part, he describes the organization of the future state of Utopia and the living conditions of its inhabitants.

Utopians live in cities and form family groups. Adults enter into a monogamous marriage. There is generally a patriarchal hierarchy, and the elders rule over the younger ones. Superfamilially, the community is organized like a monastery, with communal kitchens and communal meals. An annually elected head ("phylarch") supervises a family association of 30 families. Private property does not exist, everyone receives free of charge the goods produced by the community for personal use, which he desires. Men and women work as craftsmen six hours a day. In what craft a citizen is trained, he can decide himself. Work is compulsory, and Utopians are sent out into the countryside on a rotational basis to farm communally. Schooling is compulsory for children. The especially gifted receive a scientific or artistic education. Scientific lectures are open to the public, and attending them is the most popular pastime among Utopians. The citizens attach particular importance to providing the best possible health care for everyone who is ill. Men and women regularly practice for military service. War criminals and criminals, some of them bought from abroad as death row inmates, must perform forced labor. Religious tolerance prevails in the secularly organized community.

The state is a republic. Each city is governed by a senate composed of temporary elected officials. The head of each city is elected for life; if he develops tyrannical traits, he can be deposed.

The Utopians do not know money transactions. But they are said to accumulate much of it through an overproduction of goods, and use it to maintain mercenary armies or to trade. The Utopians themselves do not value gold.

Cities may only reach a certain size. Overpopulation is compensated by migration or the formation of a colony abroad. Conversely, if there is a shortage of inhabitants, there is a reflux from the colonies or overpopulated cities.

Abolition of private property

In the first part, there is a conversation before a meal together, discussing various circumstances, what would be the best constitution of a state and where possible. Here, Morus has his interlocutor Raphael Hythlodeus say on the question of property:

"Quanquam profecto mi More (ut ea uere dicam, quae meus animus fert) mihi uidetur ubicunque priuatae sunt possessiones, ubi omnes omnia pecunijs metiuntur, ibi uix unquam posse fieri, ut cum Republica aut iuste agatur, aut prospere, nisi uel ibi sentias agi iuste, ubi optima quaeque perueniunt ad pessimos, uel ibi feliciter, ubi omnia diuiduntur in paucissimos, nec illos habitos undecunque commode, caeteris uero plane miseris.

[...] haec inquam, dum apud me consydero, aequior Platoni fio, minusque demiror, dedignatum illis leges ferre ullas, qui recusabant eas quibus ex aequo omnes omnia partirentur commoda. Siquidem facile praeuidit homo prudentissimus, unam atque unicam illam esse uiam ad salutem publicam, si rerum indicatur aequalitas, quae nescio an unquam possit obseruari, ubi sua sunt singulorum propria. Nam quum certis titulis, quisque quantum potest, ad se conuertit, uantacumque fuerit rerum copia, eam omnem pauci inter se partiti, reliquis relinquunt inopiam, fereque accidit, ut alteri sint alterorum sorte dignissimi, quum illi sint rapaces, improbi atque inutiles, ..."

"And in general, my Morus - to say honestly what I think - it seems to me that wherever there is private property and where everyone measures everything according to the value of money, it is hardly possible for justice to prevail in a state and happiness to reign, unless one were of the opinion that justice prevails there, where the best comes to the worst, or that happiness prevails there, where everything is distributed among a few and even these few are not well off in every respect, but the rest are quite bad.

[As I said, when I think of this, I understand Plato better and am less surprised that he refused to give laws to people who did not want to know anything about an equal distribution of all goods of life among all. For the wise man easily recognized that this is the only, sole way to the general good, if one decrees equality of circumstances; but this can hardly ever take hold where the individual disposes of property. For if every one, by reference to guaranteed legal titles, may direct what he can to his mill, there may be as much as he likes: but only a few ever divide the whole wealth among themselves, and leave the rest in poverty. It is generally the case that some deserve the lot of others: those are robbers, scoundrels, and good-for-nothings, ..."

- Thomas Morus (1478-1535): Utopia, Liber I. (Translation by Alfred Hartmann, first published by Birkhäuser Verlag, Basel 1947.)

Related articles

Author

AlegsaOnline.com Utopia (book)

URL: https://en.alegsaonline.com/art/103741

Share