In the letter to More that serves as introduction, Erasmus is justifying the propriety of ridiculing the vices of the human race in general.
Praeterea qui nullum hominum genus pretermittit, is nulli homini, uiciis omnibus iratus uidetur.
Translation: Besides the one [i.e. the satirist] who targets the general kind of men, displays anger at no [ particular ] man, [but] at the vices of all [men].
I really needed a “but” or “instead”, which was not there. Is this dative expression nulli homini, viciis omnibus, frequently seen, when the intended meaning is “not-this-one-but-all”?
I really needed a “but” or “instead”, which was not there. Is this dative expression nulli homini, viciis omnibus, frequently seen, when the intended meaning is “not-this-one-but-all”?
Yes. It’s an implied adversative, made even clearer by the chiastic structure of “nulli , omnibus.”
Note the anaphoric nullum … nulli too, and the contrastive chiasmus of homini, viciis. While there’s no kind of persons he spares, it’s no person but all vices that his anger seems directed at.
Erasmus is well versed in the effective use of rhetorical figures. They’ll have come as second nature to him.