Constitutional Consensus and Puritan Opposition in the 1620s: Thomas Scott and the Spanish Match

1982 ◽  
Vol 25 (4) ◽  
pp. 805-825 ◽  
Author(s):  
P. G. Lake

In 1620 Thomas Scott published a notorious pamphlet entitled Vox Populi. This purported to recount the proceedings of the Spanish council of state and denounced the devious machinations of Gondomar, the Spanish ambassador, and by implication the pro-Spanish policy of King James. Once Scott's authorship became known he took the traditional way out and fled to the Low Countries. There he served as a preacher with the English regiments and as a minister at Utrecht. He also continued his pamphlet commentary on events in England. Scott, then, was that well-known figure, the radical puritan opponent of the Jacobean regime. He has certainly been cast in that role and until recently such a view of his career would have seemed unexceptionable enough. However, of late there has emerged a corpus of work which might be thought to render any such view of Scott untenable. On the one hand, the existence within the mainstream of English protestantism of anything approaching a coherent body of puritan attitudes has been challenged, at least until the emergence of Arminianism polarized religious opinion and almost created a self-conscious and aggressive puritanism where there had been none before. In the political sphere it has been claimed that within the predominant view of constitutional and political propriety any attempt at concerted opposition to royal policy was both conceptually and practically impossible.

Author(s):  
Svetlana M. Klimova ◽  

The article examines the phenomenon of the late Lev Tolstoy in the context of his religious position. The author analyzes the reactions to his teaching in Russian state and official Orthodox circles, on the one hand, and Indian thought, on the other. Two sociocultural images of L.N. Tolstoy: us and them that arose in the context of understanding the position of the Russian Church and the authorities and Indian public and religious figures (including Mahatma Gandhi, who was under his influence). A peculiar phenomenon of intellectually usL.N. Tolstoy among culturally them (Indian) correspondents and intellectually them Tolstoy among culturally us (representatives of the official government and the Church of Russia) transpires. The originality of this situation is that these im­ages of Lev Tolstoy arise practically at the same period. The author compares these images, based on the method of defamiliarisation (V. Shklovsky), which allows to visually demonstrate the religious component of Tolstoy’s criticism of the political sphere of life and, at the same time, to understand the psychological reasons for its rejection in Russian official circles. With the methodological help of defamiliarisation the author tries to show that the opinion of Tolstoy (as the writer) becomes at the same time the voice of conscience for many of his con­temporaries. The method of defamiliarisation allowed the author to show how Leo Tolstoy’s inner law of nonviolence influenced the concept of non­violent resistance in the teachings of Gandhi.


2021 ◽  

Carl Schmitt emphasised the crucial importance of the friend–enemy dichotomy for the political sphere. Is the connection between the concept of the enemy and politics still relevant today? Or does the political sphere need to be defined quite differently, on the one hand, and does the problem of enmity need to be dealt with beyond the political sphere, on the other? Since the publication of this book’s 1st edition, the issue of ‘enmity’ has by no means been settled, as recent terrorist attacks have shown. On the contrary, hatred of those who think differently seems to be on the increase, and they are then demonised as ‘enemies’. This development is explored in the contributions to the book’s 2nd edition. Rüdiger Voigt, professor emeritus of administrative science at the University of the German Armed Forces in Munich, is the author and editor of numerous books on state theory and state practice.


Rhizomata ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Malcolm Schofield

AbstractNo Heraclitean fragment that bears on the political sphere compares with Fr.114 in length or theoretical ambition. Its basic preoccupation as often is with human intelligence and the need for better understanding. But its claim about the resources available to understanding is developed by means of an analogy with the city’s reliance on law and thereby on the ‘one divine’. And this is the dimension of the fragment that has most engaged scholars. It is generally supposed that a main lesson taught by the analogy is that, important resource though its law is for a city, ‘what is common’ provides understanding with a much stronger resource. This paper argues that that interpretation is misconceived: there could be no more powerful source of support than the ‘one divine’. Heraclitus’ point is rather that humans need to muster more strength to get the support available to understanding than citizens have to exercise in accessing that available in the law.


Author(s):  
Manuel Antonio Sebastián Edo

En el Senado siempre hubo individuos que se opusieron a Octavio y varios de ellos llegaron a conspirar contra él. Tras el confinamiento de Lépido del ámbito político, lo cual hizo que quedaran Antonio y Octavio frente a frente, este último fue objeto de varias conspiraciones. Esta forma de oposición más violenta es la que predomina en el relato de las fuentes clásicas, que recogen importantes datos para conocer las relaciones entre el Senado y el princeps. Sin embargo, de entre ellas, hay un hecho particular que llama la atención, ya que se trata de un caso de oposición no violenta y que llega a ser ensalzado en las fuentes (Tac., Ann., 3, 75), representado por el jurista Marco Antistio Labeón. En primer lugar, para abordar el tema recopilaremos los casos anteriores a Antistio Labeón que se opusieron a Augusto y haremos un breve perfil biográfico del personaje. Finalmente, indagaremos en los casos en los que Labeón mostró su oposición a la figura de Augusto.AbstractIn the Senate there were always individuals who opposed Octavius and  several of them came to conspire against him. After the confinement of Lepidus from the political sphere, which caused Antonius and Octavius to remain face to face, the latter was subject to several conspiracies. This form of more violent opposition is the one that predominates in the ensemble of the classic sources, which collect important data to know the relations between the Senate and the princeps. However, among them, there is a particular fact that attracts attention, since it is a case of non-violent opposition and that it becomes extolled at the sources (Tac., Ann., 3, 75), represented by the jurist Marcus Antistius Labeo. To address the issue, first, we will collect the cases before Antistius Labeo which opposed Augustus and make a brief biographical profile of the character. Finally, we will investigate the cases in which Labeo showed his opposition to the figure of Augustus.


2000 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
pp. 39-78
Author(s):  
Marcelo Blidstein

This article examines the political and ideological components of the Mexican Constitutional Assembly of 1917 and offers a new and more heterogeneous interpretation of this composition. Here, a dividing line is drawn between the political followers of either Carranza or Obregón, on the one hand, and other representatives who, despite their ideological proximity to the obregonistas, acted independently on the political sphere. A further group comprising those representatives who were not aligned with any of the other three groups is also considered. / Este artículo trata sobre la composición política e ideológica del Congreso Constituyente mexicano de 1917 y propone una interpretación nueva y más heterogénea de dicha composición. El artículo traza una línea divisoria entre los diputados constituyentes aliados políticamente a Carranza y a Obregón, por un lado, y a otros delegados, que pese a compartir una ideología que guardaba gran similitud con la de los obregonistas, eran independientes en cuanto a la esfera política. Además de ello, existía un grupo, mayoritario y heterogéneo formado por diputados que no estaban alineados con ninguno de los otros tres grupos.


Author(s):  
Nicolas Wiater

This chapter examines the ambivalent image of Classical Athens in Dionysius of Halicarnassus’ Roman Antiquities. This image reflects a deep-seated ambiguity of Dionysius’ Classicist ideology: on the one hand, there is no question for Dionysius that Athenocentric Hellenicity failed, and that the Roman empire has superseded Athens’ role once and for all as the political and cultural centre of the oikoumene. On the other, Dionysius accepted Rome’s supremacy as legitimate partly because he believed (and wanted his readers to believe) her to be the legitimate heir of Classical Athens and Classical Athenian civic ideology. As a result, Dionysius develops a new model of Hellenicity for Roman Greeks loyal to the new political and cultural centre of Rome. This new model of Greek identity incorporates and builds on Classical Athenian ideals, institutions, and culture, but also supersedes them.


Author(s):  
Ross McKibbin

This book is an examination of Britain as a democratic society; what it means to describe it as such; and how we can attempt such an examination. The book does this via a number of ‘case-studies’ which approach the subject in different ways: J.M. Keynes and his analysis of British social structures; the political career of Harold Nicolson and his understanding of democratic politics; the novels of A.J. Cronin, especially The Citadel, and what they tell us about the definition of democracy in the interwar years. The book also investigates the evolution of the British party political system until the present day and attempts to suggest why it has become so apparently unstable. There are also two chapters on sport as representative of the British social system as a whole as well as the ways in which the British influenced the sporting systems of other countries. The book has a marked comparative theme, including one chapter which compares British and Australian political cultures and which shows British democracy in a somewhat different light from the one usually shone on it. The concluding chapter brings together the overall argument.


Itinerario ◽  
2009 ◽  
Vol 33 (2) ◽  
pp. 17-27 ◽  
Author(s):  
Már Jónsson

On 2 January 1625, the English ambassador Robert Anstruther met with King Christian IV of Norway and Denmark and requested his participation in a union of Protestant states against Emperor Ferdinand II and the Catholic League in Germany. Within three days, King Christian proposed to contribute five thousand soldiers for one year, as part of an army of almost thirty thousand men. In early June, despite opposition from the Danish Council of State, reluctant to put a huge amount of money into foreign affairs, Christian decided to join what he called “the war for the defence of Lower Saxony”. He then headed an army of mercenaries southwards through Lower Saxony, secured all crossings over the river Weser and prepared to confront the Catholic forces. On 29 November, it was decided that Denmark would be in charge of military operations in Northern Germany, whereas England and the United Provinces would provide a monthly subsidy. The political and military prospects for Denmark were excellent, to say the least. It had the fourth strongest navy in Europe (after Spain and the two new allies), and only a few years before the Danish warships had been described by a French observer as “merveilles de l'océan”. A small standing army of two regiments had recently been established and Denmark was the fourth European state to do so after France, Spain and the neighbouring Sweden.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document