Bodin and the Development of the French Monarchy

1990 ◽  
Vol 40 ◽  
pp. 43-61 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard Bonney
Keyword(s):  
Political Theory ◽  
Middle Ages ◽  
Political Thought ◽  
History Of Political Thought ◽  
Moral Philosopher ◽  
Original Contribution ◽  
History Of ◽  
Pope Innocent Iv ◽  
Do So ◽  
Radical Approach

THE ‘history of ideologies’ is now very much the vogue since Professor Quentin Skinner's fine study onThe foundations of modern political thought. Whether or not one agrees with all aspects of his interpretation of Bodin—and Dr Parker might argue that it fails to draw out sufficiently the moral philosopher inside the jurist, while Professor Rose might prefer to stress the Judaizing tendencies of the theorist as a central preoccupation—it is a testament to the decisive impact made by Skinner on the history of political thought that no-one has challenged his new and radical approach. It is no part of the purpose of this paper to do so. Indeed, an understanding both of Bodin's predecessors and of the ideological conflict of the 1570s which influenced the drafting of theSix bookes of a commonweale(the title given to theRépubliqueby its first English translator, Richard Knolles) is fundamental before any appreciation of the theorist can be made free from distortion. It is no use at all asserting that Bodin started from scratch, even on the issue of sovereignty, where he made his most original contribution. Bodin himself minimized his originality, basing his commentary on the powers historically enjoyed by French kings. The French king had traditionally regarded his authority as that ofprinceps legibus solutus, as an absolute ruler above the law. If the French king had been unable to do those things described by Bodin, in the view of that author, ‘il n'estoit pas Prince souverain’. Bodin also noted the contribution of the canon lawyers of the Middle Ages to the development of his political theory and remarked that Pope Innocent IV was he who best understood the nature of sovereignty.

A Virtue for Courageous Minds

2012 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aurelian Craiutu
Keyword(s):  
Political Theory ◽  
French Revolution ◽  
Political Thought ◽  
Moral Virtue ◽  
Individual Liberty ◽  
History Of Political Thought ◽  
Common Notion ◽  
History Of ◽  
Benjamin Constant ◽  
Intellectual Foundations

Political moderation is the touchstone of democracy, which could not function without compromise and bargaining, yet it is one of the most understudied concepts in political theory. How can we explain this striking paradox? Why do we often underestimate the virtue of moderation? Seeking to answer these questions, this book examines moderation in modern French political thought and sheds light on the French Revolution and its legacy. The book begins with classical thinkers who extolled the virtues of a moderate approach to politics, such as Aristotle and Cicero. It then shows how Montesquieu inaugurated the modern rebirth of this tradition by laying the intellectual foundations for moderate government. The book looks at important figures such as Jacques Necker, Germaine de Staël, and Benjamin Constant, not only in the context of revolutionary France but throughout Europe. It traces how moderation evolves from an individual moral virtue into a set of institutional arrangements calculated to protect individual liberty, and explores the deep affinity between political moderation and constitutional complexity. The book demonstrates how moderation navigates between political extremes, and it challenges the common notion that moderation is an essentially conservative virtue, stressing instead its eclectic nature. Drawing on a broad range of writings in political theory, the history of political thought, philosophy, and law, the book reveals how the virtue of political moderation can address the profound complexities of the world today.

scholarly journals How Should We Categorize Approaches to the History of Political Thought?

2020 ◽  
Vol 83 (1) ◽  
pp. 91-114
Author(s):  
Adrian Blau
Keyword(s):  
Theoretical Analysis ◽  
Political Theory ◽  
Political Thought ◽  
Two Dimensional ◽  
History Of Political Thought ◽  
One Dimensional ◽  
History Of ◽  
New Framework

AbstractThis paper proposes a new framework for categorizing approaches to the history of political thought. Previous categorizations exclude much research; political theory, if included, is often caricatured. And previous categorizations are one-dimensional, presenting different approaches as alternatives. My framework is two-dimensional, distinguishing six kinds of end (two empirical, four theoretical) and six kinds of means. Importantly, these choices are not alternatives: studies may have more than one end and typically use several means. Studies with different ends often use some of the same means. And all studies straddle the supposed empirical/theoretical “divide.” Quentin Skinner himself expertly combines empirical and theoretical analysis—yet the latter is often overlooked, not least because of Skinner's own methodological pronouncements. This highlights a curious disjuncture in methodological writings, between what they say we do, and what we should do. What we should do is much broader than existing categorizations imply.

Roger Boesche: The Strange Liberalism of Alexis de Tocqueville

1988 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 419-422
Author(s):  
James Schleifer
Keyword(s):  
Los Angeles ◽  
Political Theory ◽  
Political Science ◽  
Political Thought ◽  
History Of Ideas ◽  
Alexis De Tocqueville ◽  
History Of Political Thought ◽  
History Of

Roger Boesche, Chair of the Department of Political Science at Occidental College in Los Angeles, lias already written several thoughtful articles about Tocqueville, each marked by clarity of thought and expression: ’The Prison: Tocqueville’s Model for Despotism,” Western Political Quarterly 33 (December 1980):550-63; “The Strange Liberalism of Alexis de Tocqueville,” History of Political Thought 2 (Winter 1981): 495-524; “Why Could Tocqueville Predict So Well?” Political Theory 11 (February 1983): 79-104; “Tocqueville and Le Commerce’. A Newspaper Expressing His Unusual Liberalism,” Journal of the History of Ideas 44 (April-June 1983): 277-92; and “Hedonism and Nihilism: The Predictions of Tocqueville and Nietzsche,” The Tocqueville Review 8 (1986/87): 165-84.

Review: Jeremy Waldron’s Political Political Theory

2016 ◽  
Vol 18 (3) ◽  
pp. 437-446
Author(s):  
David Runciman
Keyword(s):  
Political Theory ◽  
Conceptual Understanding ◽  
Political Thought ◽  
History Of Political Thought ◽  
Contemporary Politics ◽  
History Of

This collection seeks to ground political theory in the study of institutions, particularly the constitutional relationship between different branches of government. It makes the case that ‘constitutionalism’ has become a thin doctrine of political restraint. Waldron wants to identify a fuller conceptual understanding of how the functions of government can be empowered and articulated. In doing so, he sets out a position that is distinct from both moralism and realism in contemporary political theory. I explore how well the later distinction holds up: how successfully does Waldron’s approach marry realist concerns with the rigour of analytical political theory? I also discuss the role it leaves for the history of political thought and whether it can deal with the populist strain in contemporary politics.

The Opinion of Mankind

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paul Sagar
Keyword(s):  
Political Theory ◽  
Political Thought ◽  
David Hume ◽  
State Theory ◽  
The State ◽  
Political Organization ◽  
Scottish Enlightenment ◽  
History Of Political Thought ◽  
The Enlightenment ◽  
History Of

What is the modern state? Conspicuously undertheorized in recent political theory, this question persistently animated the best minds of the Enlightenment. Recovering David Hume and Adam Smith's underappreciated contributions to the history of political thought, this book considers how, following Thomas Hobbes's epochal intervention in the mid-seventeenth century, subsequent thinkers grappled with explaining how the state came into being, what it fundamentally might be, and how it could claim rightful authority over those subject to its power. Hobbes has cast a long shadow over Western political thought, particularly regarding the theory of the state. This book shows how Hume and Smith, the two leading lights of the Scottish Enlightenment, forged an alternative way of thinking about the organization of modern politics. They did this in part by going back to the foundations: rejecting Hobbes's vision of human nature and his arguments about our capacity to form stable societies over time. In turn, this was harnessed to a deep reconceptualization of how to think philosophically about politics in a secular world. The result was an emphasis on the “opinion of mankind,” the necessary psychological basis of all political organization. Demonstrating how Hume and Smith broke away from Hobbesian state theory, the book suggests ways in which these thinkers might shape how we think about politics today, and in turn how we might construct better political theory.

Re-Telling the History of Political Thought

2002 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
pp. 29-49
Author(s):  
Katherine H. Bullock
Keyword(s):  
Political Theory ◽  
Political Thought ◽  
Philosophical Thinking ◽  
History Of Political Thought ◽  
Proper Role ◽  
History Of

This paper explores the construction of the canon of political theory. I argue that the interpretation of the canon that defines ancient pagan Greeks as the founders of western political thought, includes medieval Christian thinkers, and yet defines out Muslim and Jewish philosophers is based upon western eth­nocentric secular assumptions about the proper role of reason, experience and revelation in philosophical thinking.

Review of: Skinner K. Sources of modern political thought in 2 vol. Vol. 1: The Renaissance / Trans. from Eng. A. A. Oleynikov. 464 p.; Vol. 2: CONTENTS The Reformation / Trans. from Eng. A. A. Yakovlev. 568 p. M., 2018.

2018 ◽  
pp. 355-362
Author(s):  
А. Задорнов
Keyword(s):  
Middle Ages ◽  
Political Thought ◽  
Russian Language ◽  
History Of Political Thought ◽  
Fundamental Study ◽  
Early Modernity ◽  
Historical Texts ◽  
The Reformation ◽  
History Of ◽  
Special Approach

Выход перевода на русский язык исследования Квентина Скиннера, впервые изданного сорок лет назад, рождает закономерный вопрос о его актуальности и том контексте, который этот двухтомник неизбежно обрел с момента первого издания. Если ответ на первый вопрос очевиден: в русскоязычной литературе это пока единственное специальное фундаментальное исследование политической мысли Ренессанса и Реформации (конец XIII — начало XVI вв.), — то с контекстом дело обстоит сложнее.Целью данного труда автор считает решение трех задач: анализ источников по истории политической мысли Средневековья и раннего Модерна, формулировка на основе этих текстов новоевропейского концепта «государства» и презентация особого авторского подхода в области интерпретации исторических текстов. The Russian translation of Quentin Skinner's study, first published forty years ago, raises the legitimate question of its relevance and the context which this two-volume work has inevitably acquired since the first edition. While the answer to the first question is evident - it is so far the only special fundamental study of Renaissance and Reformation political thought in Russian-language literature (late thirteenth or early sixteenth century) - the context is more complex. The aim of this work is to solve three problems: the analysis of sources on the history of political thought of the Middle Ages and early Modernity, the formulation on the basis of these texts of the New European concept of "state" and the presentation of the author's special approach in the field of interpretation of historical texts.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document