Jean Bodin, scepticism and absolute sovereignty

History of Political Thought

Volumn 17, Issue 4, 1996, Pages 469-498

  Engster, D ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0030328192     PISSN: 0143781X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (140)

1. Julian Franklin provides the best discussion of this point in Jean Bodin and the Rise of Absolutist Theory (Cambridge, 1973). Recently, Kenneth Pennington has argued that Bodin's definition of sovereignty in the République was less original than scholars have generally supposed, since medieval writers also generally defined the prince as a law-making power (K. Pennington, The Prince and the Law, 1200-1600 (Berkeley, 1993)). While generally agreeing with Pennington about the medieval roots of Bodin's theory of sovereignty, I argue below that Bodin's definition of sovereignty was nonetheless more original than Pennington allows. On the medieval roots of Bodin's theory of sovereignty, see also Ralph Giesey, 'Medieval Jurisprudence in Bodin's Concept of Sovereignty', in Jean Bodin: Proceedings of the International Conference on Bodin in Munich, ed. Horst Denzer (Munich, 1973), pp. 167-86.
2. Julian Franklin provides the best discussion of this point in Jean Bodin and the Rise of Absolutist Theory (Cambridge, 1973). Recently, Kenneth Pennington has argued that Bodin's definition of sovereignty in the République was less original than scholars have generally supposed, since medieval writers also generally defined the prince as a law-making power (K. Pennington, The Prince and the Law, 1200-1600 (Berkeley, 1993)). While generally agreeing with Pennington about the medieval roots of Bodin's theory of sovereignty, I argue below that Bodin's definition of sovereignty was nonetheless more original than Pennington allows. On the medieval roots of Bodin's theory of sovereignty, see also Ralph Giesey, 'Medieval Jurisprudence in Bodin's Concept of Sovereignty', in Jean Bodin: Proceedings of the International Conference on Bodin in Munich, ed. Horst Denzer (Munich, 1973), pp. 167-86.
3. Julian Franklin provides the best discussion of this point in Jean Bodin and the Rise of Absolutist Theory (Cambridge, 1973). Recently, Kenneth Pennington has argued that Bodin's definition of sovereignty in the République was less original than scholars have generally supposed, since medieval writers also generally defined the prince as a law-making power (K. Pennington, The Prince and the Law, 1200-1600 (Berkeley, 1993)). While generally agreeing with Pennington about the medieval roots of Bodin's theory of sovereignty, I argue below that Bodin's definition of sovereignty was nonetheless more original than Pennington allows. On the medieval roots of Bodin's theory of sovereignty, see also Ralph Giesey, 'Medieval Jurisprudence in Bodin's Concept of Sovereignty', in Jean Bodin: Proceedings of the International Conference on Bodin in Munich, ed. Horst Denzer (Munich, 1973), pp. 167-86.
4. J. Bodin, Les Six Livres de la République, second impression of the Paris edition of 1583 (Germany, 1977) (hereafter République), p. 124. All translations from Bodin's République are my own.
5. Ibid., pp. 221, 128-32. Franklin, Rise of Absolutist Theory, pp. 1-22; Pennington, The Prince and the Law, pp. 76-118, 119, passim.
6. Ibid., pp. 221, 128-32. Franklin, Rise of Absolutist Theory, pp. 1-22; Pennington, The Prince and the Law, pp. 76-118, 119, passim.
7. Ibid., pp. 221, 128-32. Franklin, Rise of Absolutist Theory, pp. 1-22; Pennington, The Prince and the Law, pp. 76-118, 119, passim.
8. I use the masculine pronoun throughout this paper when referring to the sovereign ruler because Bodin quite explicitly believed that only men were suited for this position. As Susan Okin has pointed out in this regard, one ought not to use gender-neutral language to discuss writers whose ideas were gender-specific, since 'false gender-neutrality' serves only to obscure the gender-specific assumption of their thought, see S. Okin, Justice, Gender, and the Family (New York, 1989).
9. Franklin has demonstrated this point most thoroughly in his Rise of Absolutist Theory, pp. 23-40, 54-69. Other scholars who have also endorsed this position include: J.H.M. Salmon, 'Bodin and the Monarchomachs', in Proceedings of the International Conference on Bodin, ed. Denzer, pp. 359-78; Quentin Skinner, The Foundations of Modern Political Thought, Volume Two: The Age of Reformation (Cambridge, 1978), pp. 284-301. Preston King has most recently argued that Bodin's views about sovereignty in the République were not so very different from his earlier view in the Methodus: see P. King, The Ideology of Order (London, 1974). In light of Franklin's compelling arguments, however, King's case appears untenable.
10. Franklin has demonstrated this point most thoroughly in his Rise of Absolutist Theory, pp. 23-40, 54-69. Other scholars who have also endorsed this position include: J.H.M. Salmon, 'Bodin and the Monarchomachs', in Proceedings of the International Conference on Bodin, ed. Denzer, pp. 359-78; Quentin Skinner, The Foundations of Modern Political Thought, Volume Two: The Age of Reformation (Cambridge, 1978), pp. 284-301. Preston King has most recently argued that Bodin's views about sovereignty in the République were not so very different from his earlier view in the Methodus: see P. King, The Ideology of Order (London, 1974). In light of Franklin's compelling arguments, however, King's case appears untenable.
11. Franklin has demonstrated this point most thoroughly in his Rise of Absolutist Theory, pp. 23-40, 54-69. Other scholars who have also endorsed this position include: J.H.M. Salmon, 'Bodin and the Monarchomachs', in Proceedings of the International Conference on Bodin, ed. Denzer, pp. 359-78; Quentin Skinner, The Foundations of Modern Political Thought, Volume Two: The Age of Reformation (Cambridge, 1978), pp. 284-301. Preston King has most recently argued that Bodin's views about sovereignty in the République were not so very different from his earlier view in the Methodus: see P. King, The Ideology of Order (London, 1974). In light of Franklin's compelling arguments, however, King's case appears untenable.
12. Franklin has demonstrated this point most thoroughly in his Rise of Absolutist Theory, pp. 23-40, 54-69. Other scholars who have also endorsed this position include: J.H.M. Salmon, 'Bodin and the Monarchomachs', in Proceedings of the International Conference on Bodin, ed. Denzer, pp. 359-78; Quentin Skinner, The Foundations of Modern Political Thought, Volume Two: The Age of Reformation (Cambridge, 1978), pp. 284-301. Preston King has most recently argued that Bodin's views about sovereignty in the République were not so very different from his earlier view in the Methodus: see P. King, The Ideology of Order (London, 1974). In light of Franklin's compelling arguments, however, King's case appears untenable.
13. J. Bodin, Method for the Easy Comprehension of History, trans. Beatrice Reynolds (New York, 1945) (hereafter Method), p. 204.
14. Franklin, Rise of Absolutist Theory, pp. 41-53. Salmon, 'Bodin and the Monarchomachs', and Skinner, Foundations of Modern Political Thought, also argue this position.
15. Franklin, Rise of Absolutist Theory, pp. 41-53. Salmon, 'Bodin and the Monarchomachs', and Skinner, Foundations of Modern Political Thought, also argue this position.
16. Franklin, Rise of Absolutist Theory, pp. 41-53. Salmon, 'Bodin and the Monarchomachs', and Skinner, Foundations of Modern Political Thought, also argue this position.
17. Franklin, Rise of Absolutist Theory, pp. 41, vii.
18. Richard Tuck, Natural Rights Theories (Cambridge, 1979); and R. Tuck, Philosophy and Government, 1572-1651 (Cambridge, 1993).
19. Richard Tuck, Natural Rights Theories (Cambridge, 1979); and R. Tuck, Philosophy and Government, 1572-1651 (Cambridge, 1993).
20. Tuck, Philosophy and Government, pp. 31-64, 82-94.
21. The classic work on legal humanism is Donald Kelley, Foundations of Modern Historical Scholarship (New York, 1970). See also W.F. Church, Constitutional Thought in Sixteenth-Century France (Cambridge, Mass., 1941).
22. The classic work on legal humanism is Donald Kelley, Foundations of Modern Historical Scholarship (New York, 1970). See also W.F. Church, Constitutional Thought in Sixteenth-Century France (Cambridge, Mass., 1941).
23. R. W. Carlyle and A.J. Carlyle, A History of Medieval Political Theory in the West (New York, 1903-36), Vol. III, pp. 41-6, 183-4. Church, Constitutional Thought in Sixteenth-Century France, pp. 22-42, 194-212; Esther Cohen, The Crossroads of Justice (New York, 1993), pp. 19-21; Fritz Kern, Kingship and Law in the Middle Ages, trans. and intro. S.B. Chrimes (Oxford, 1948), pp. xix, 149-80; Charles McIlwain, The Growth of Political Thought in the West (New York, 1932), pp. 286, 364-94; Michael Wilks, The Problem of Sovereignty in the Later Middle Ages (Cambridge, 1964), pp. 211-17; Cecil Woolf, Bartolus of Sassoferrato (Cambridge, 1913), pp. 13, 42-3.
24. R. W. Carlyle and A.J. Carlyle, A History of Medieval Political Theory in the West (New York, 1903-36), Vol. III, pp. 41-6, 183-4. Church, Constitutional Thought in Sixteenth-Century France, pp. 22-42, 194-212; Esther Cohen, The Crossroads of Justice (New York, 1993), pp. 19-21; Fritz Kern, Kingship and Law in the Middle Ages, trans. and intro. S.B. Chrimes (Oxford, 1948), pp. xix, 149-80; Charles McIlwain, The Growth of Political Thought in the West (New York, 1932), pp. 286, 364-94; Michael Wilks, The Problem of Sovereignty in the Later Middle Ages (Cambridge, 1964), pp. 211-17; Cecil Woolf, Bartolus of Sassoferrato (Cambridge, 1913), pp. 13, 42-3.
25. R. W. Carlyle and A.J. Carlyle, A History of Medieval Political Theory in the West (New York, 1903-36), Vol. III, pp. 41-6, 183-4. Church, Constitutional Thought in Sixteenth-Century France, pp. 22-42, 194-212; Esther Cohen, The Crossroads of Justice (New York, 1993), pp. 19-21; Fritz Kern, Kingship and Law in the Middle Ages, trans. and intro. S.B. Chrimes (Oxford, 1948), pp. xix, 149-80; Charles McIlwain, The Growth of Political Thought in the West (New York, 1932), pp. 286, 364-94; Michael Wilks, The Problem of Sovereignty in the Later Middle Ages (Cambridge, 1964), pp. 211-17; Cecil Woolf, Bartolus of Sassoferrato (Cambridge, 1913), pp. 13, 42-3.
26. R. W. Carlyle and A.J. Carlyle, A History of Medieval Political Theory in the West (New York, 1903-36), Vol. III, pp. 41-6, 183-4. Church, Constitutional Thought in Sixteenth-Century France, pp. 22-42, 194-212; Esther Cohen, The Crossroads of Justice (New York, 1993), pp. 19-21; Fritz Kern, Kingship and Law in the Middle Ages, trans. and intro. S.B. Chrimes (Oxford, 1948), pp. xix, 149-80; Charles McIlwain, The Growth of Political Thought in the West (New York, 1932), pp. 286, 364-94; Michael Wilks, The Problem of Sovereignty in the Later Middle Ages (Cambridge, 1964), pp. 211-17; Cecil Woolf, Bartolus of Sassoferrato (Cambridge, 1913), pp. 13, 42-3.
27. R. W. Carlyle and A.J. Carlyle, A History of Medieval Political Theory in the West (New York, 1903-36), Vol. III, pp. 41-6, 183-4. Church, Constitutional Thought in Sixteenth-Century France, pp. 22-42, 194-212; Esther Cohen, The Crossroads of Justice (New York, 1993), pp. 19-21; Fritz Kern, Kingship and Law in the Middle Ages, trans. and intro. S.B. Chrimes (Oxford, 1948), pp. xix, 149-80; Charles McIlwain, The Growth of Political Thought in the West (New York, 1932), pp. 286, 364-94; Michael Wilks, The Problem of Sovereignty in the Later Middle Ages (Cambridge, 1964), pp. 211-17; Cecil Woolf, Bartolus of Sassoferrato (Cambridge, 1913), pp. 13, 42-3.
28. R. W. Carlyle and A.J. Carlyle, A History of Medieval Political Theory in the West (New York, 1903-36), Vol. III, pp. 41-6, 183-4. Church, Constitutional Thought in Sixteenth-Century France, pp. 22-42, 194-212; Esther Cohen, The Crossroads of Justice (New York, 1993), pp. 19-21; Fritz Kern, Kingship and Law in the Middle Ages, trans. and intro. S.B. Chrimes (Oxford, 1948), pp. xix, 149-80; Charles McIlwain, The Growth of Political Thought in the West (New York, 1932), pp. 286, 364-94; Michael Wilks, The Problem of Sovereignty in the Later Middle Ages (Cambridge, 1964), pp. 211-17; Cecil Woolf, Bartolus of Sassoferrato (Cambridge, 1913), pp. 13, 42-3.
29. R. W. Carlyle and A.J. Carlyle, A History of Medieval Political Theory in the West (New York, 1903-36), Vol. III, pp. 41-6, 183-4. Church, Constitutional Thought in Sixteenth-Century France, pp. 22-42, 194-212; Esther Cohen, The Crossroads of Justice (New York, 1993), pp. 19-21; Fritz Kern, Kingship and Law in the Middle Ages, trans. and intro. S.B. Chrimes (Oxford, 1948), pp. xix, 149-80; Charles McIlwain, The Growth of Political Thought in the West (New York, 1932), pp. 286, 364-94; Michael Wilks, The Problem of Sovereignty in the Later Middle Ages (Cambridge, 1964), pp. 211-17; Cecil Woolf, Bartolus of Sassoferrato (Cambridge, 1913), pp. 13, 42-3.
30. François Hotman, Antitribonian, ou, Discours d'un grand et renommé jurisconsulte de nostre temps sur l'estude des lois (Saint Etienne, 1980), p. 21.
31. Etienne Pasquier, Œuvres (Paris, 1723), Vol. II, pp. 551-4. Keohane provides a good summation of this letter in N. Keohane, Philosophy and the State in France (Princeton, 1980), pp. 44-5.
32. Etienne Pasquier, Œuvres (Paris, 1723), Vol. II, pp. 551-4. Keohane provides a good summation of this letter in N. Keohane, Philosophy and the State in France (Princeton, 1980), pp. 44-5.
33. In comparing the Methodus and Francogallia, Franklin writes: 'The parallel to Hotman is so perfect that we might even charge Bodin with plagiarism did not the date of publication rule this out', J. Franklin, Jean Bodin and the Sixteenth-Century Revolution in the Methodology of Law and History (New York, 1963), p. 68. See also John Brown, The Methodus ad Facilem Historiarum Cognitionem of Jean Bodin: A Critical Study (Washington, DC, 1939), pp. 43-4; Beatrice Reynolds, Proponents of Limited Monarchy in Sixteenth Century France: François Hotman and Jean Bodin (New York, 1931), pp. 108-9.
34. In comparing the Methodus and Francogallia, Franklin writes: 'The parallel to Hotman is so perfect that we might even charge Bodin with plagiarism did not the date of publication rule this out', J. Franklin, Jean Bodin and the Sixteenth-Century Revolution in the Methodology of Law and History (New York, 1963), p. 68. See also John Brown, The Methodus ad Facilem Historiarum Cognitionem of Jean Bodin: A Critical Study (Washington, DC, 1939), pp. 43-4; Beatrice Reynolds, Proponents of Limited Monarchy in Sixteenth Century France: François Hotman and Jean Bodin (New York, 1931), pp. 108-9.
35. In comparing the Methodus and Francogallia, Franklin writes: 'The parallel to Hotman is so perfect that we might even charge Bodin with plagiarism did not the date of publication rule this out', J. Franklin, Jean Bodin and the Sixteenth-Century Revolution in the Methodology of Law and History (New York, 1963), p. 68. See also John Brown, The Methodus ad Facilem Historiarum Cognitionem of Jean Bodin: A Critical Study (Washington, DC, 1939), pp. 43-4; Beatrice Reynolds, Proponents of Limited Monarchy in Sixteenth Century France: François Hotman and Jean Bodin (New York, 1931), pp. 108-9.
36. Method, p. 2.
37. Jean Bodin, Exposé du droit universel/Juris universi distributio, trans. Lucien Jerphagnon (Paris, 1985), pp. 9-11.
38. Method, pp. 15-17.
39. He wrote: 'History for the most part deals with the state and with the changes taking place within it'. Method, p. 153.
40. Ibid., p. 17.
41. Bodin also applied this idea to individual human beings. Unless they devoted themselves to the divine and natural law he argued that they, too, would suffer disorder and destruction. He wrote: Man has free will to be good or bad, as God says in his Law. I have, he says, put before your eyes good and evil, life and death. Choose, then, the good and you will live. And then more expressly in another place it is written: After God created man, he gave him free will and said: If you wish, you will keep my commandments, and they will preserve you. I have given you fire and water, and you have the power to direct your hand to the one or the other. You have good and evil, life and death, and you will have whichever you please. Jean Bodin, De la Démonomanie des Sorciers (Hildesheim, 1988 [1580]), pp. 8r-v.
42. République, A iii v.
43. Franklin, Rise of Absolutist Theory, p. 49.
44. République, A iii v-A iv r.
45. Ibid., A iiii r. On the theme of divine retribution in Bodin, see Christopher Baxter, 'Bodin's Daemon and his Conversion to Judaism', International Conference on Bodin, ed. Denzer, pp. 10-18.
46. Ibid., A iiii r. On the theme of divine retribution in Bodin, see Christopher Baxter, 'Bodin's Daemon and his Conversion to Judaism', International Conference on Bodin, ed. Denzer, pp. 10-18.
47. W.H. Greenleaf, Order, Empiricism and Politics (London, 1964), pp. 19-20, 125-41. See also W.H. Greenleaf, 'Bodin and the Idea of Order', International Conference on Bodin, ed. Denzer, pp. 23-38.
48. W.H. Greenleaf, Order, Empiricism and Politics (London, 1964), pp. 19-20, 125-41. See also W.H. Greenleaf, 'Bodin and the Idea of Order', International Conference on Bodin, ed. Denzer, pp. 23-38.
49. République, A iiii r-v.
50. Ibid., p. 246.
51. Bodin, Démonomanie, p. 195.
52. Ibid., pp. 196-7.
53. Method, p. 2.
54. Bodin outlined these assumptions most clearly in his Exposé du droit universel/-Juris universi distributio, pp. 6-17.
55. Method, pp. 2-3, 153.
56. Jean Bodin, Universae Naturae Theatrum (Paris, 1596), pp. 2v-3r. This passage will be discussed further in the following section.
57. Method, p. 17.
58. Ibid., pp. 267-82.
59. Ibid., p. 9.
60. Ibid., p. 8.
61. Ibid., p. 268.
62. Ibid., p. 269.
63. Ibid., p. 271.
64. Ibid., pp. 271-9.
65. Ibid., p. 282.
66. Ibid., pp. 223-36.
67. At the end of this section on the human causes of changes in states, Bodin also 'warns' rulers about several new sources of change that did not fit so well into his universalist framework: 'the abolition of ancient slavery from the state, and in recent years the new religions, as well as the rights of vassalage and feudalism, have produced unbelievable opportunities for revolts unknown to the ancients.' Ibid., pp. 221-2.
68. Ibid., pp. 202, 217-22.
69. Ibid., pp. 217, 220-1.
70. Ibid., pp. 236-67, 206-10.
71. Ibid., p. 267.
72. Ibid., p. 256.
73. Ibid., p. 256; see also ibid., pp. 201-5.
74. Ibid., p. 256; see also ibid., pp. 201-5.
75. Ibid., pp. 172-3.
76. Ibid., pp. 203-5, 254.
77. Bodin, Universae Naturae Theatrum, pp. 2v-3r.
78. The full Latin text for this and the previous citation reads as follows: Ex quo satis intelligitur cur ex omni memoria aetatum, temporum, civitatum illius disciplinae fines constitui non poterunt, cum ab hominum arbitrio ac erroribus ita pendeat, ut quae hi praemio, eadem illi supplicio digna iudicent. Quae certe me revocarunt ab instituto de legibus, quarum delectum ex omnibus fere omnium populorum moribus ac institutis inter se comparatis diuturno labore collegeram, ut certum aliquid constitueretur, reputantem omnia populorum edicta, decreta, leges ad hominum arbitrium ac libidinem temere ferri, nisi divinae, id est naturae lege velut in labirinto caeca filo regente vestigia nitantur. (Ibid.)
79. Kenneth McRae, 'Bodin and the Development of Empirical Political Science', International Conference on Bodin, ed. Denzer, p. 342; see also Kenneth McRae, 'Introduction', in Jean Bodin, The Six Bookes of a Commonweale, trans. R. Knolles (Cambridge, 1962 (1606)), pp. A35-6, where this claim is better supported.
80. Kenneth McRae, 'Bodin and the Development of Empirical Political Science', International Conference on Bodin, ed. Denzer, p. 342; see also Kenneth McRae, 'Introduction', in Jean Bodin, The Six Bookes of a Commonweale, trans. R. Knolles (Cambridge, 1962 (1606)), pp. A35-6, where this claim is better supported.
81. Jean Bodin, De Republica Libri Sex (Paris, 1586), p. 356; see also McRae's edition of The Six Bookes of a Commonweale, p. 396.
82. Jean Bodin, De Republica Libri Sex (Paris, 1586), p. 356; see also McRae's edition of The Six Bookes of a Commonweale, p. 396.
83. Quanquam ignarus divinarum legum, non tarnen earum quas ab ipsa natura arripuimus, et expressimus, nam si quis animi sui complicatas tabulas evolvere velit, iam se ipse doceat eum virum bonum esse qui profit quidem quibus possit, noceat vero nisi lacessitus inuria nemini: quae nullis sunt populorum legibus comprehensa quinetiam multa pestifere, multa perniciose iuberi ac prohiberi videmus, quae non magis legum nomen merentur, quam si furiosus ea concessu suo sciscitat. Bodin, De Republica, p. 630; Six Bookes, ed. McRae, see appendix, p. A155.
84. Quanquam ignarus divinarum legum, non tarnen earum quas ab ipsa natura arripuimus, et expressimus, nam si quis animi sui complicatas tabulas evolvere velit, iam se ipse doceat eum virum bonum esse qui profit quidem quibus possit, noceat vero nisi lacessitus inuria nemini: quae nullis sunt populorum legibus comprehensa quinetiam multa pestifere, multa perniciose iuberi ac prohiberi videmus, quae non magis legum nomen merentur, quam si furiosus ea concessu suo sciscitat. Bodin, De Republica, p. 630; Six Bookes, ed. McRae, see appendix, p. A155.
85. Bodin, De Republica, p. 350; Six Bookes, ed. McRae, p. 389.
86. Bodin, De Republica, p. 350; Six Bookes, ed. McRae, p. 389.
87. Bodin, De Republica, p. 357; Six Bookes, ed. McRae, p. 397.
88. Bodin, De Republica, p. 357; Six Bookes, ed. McRae, p. 397.
89. Bodin, De Republica, pp. 360-2; Six Bookes, ed. McRae, pp. 400-2.
90. Bodin, De Republica, pp. 360-2; Six Bookes, ed. McRae, pp. 400-2.
91. After citing a passage from the Latin version of the République in which he demonstrates Bodin's more sceptical attitude towards history, McRae writes: 'Such remarks are scarcely to be found in any of the French editions.' McRae, 'Bodin and Empirical Political Science', p. 342, n.16.
92. République, pp. 416-17. 'La iustice et raison qu'on dit naturelle, n'est pas tousiours si claire qu'elle ne treuve des adversaires: et bien souvent les plus grands lurisconsultes s'y trouvent empeschés, et du tout contraires en opinions, et les loix des peuples sont quelques fois si repugnantes, que les uns donnent loyer, les autres punissent pour mesme faict: les livres, les loix, les histoires en sont pleines, et seroit chose infinie de les conter par le menu.'
93. Ibid., p. 511.
94. Ibid., p. 542.
95. Ibid., pp. 51-2. 'Et quant à ce qu'on dit que la servitude n'eust pas duré si longuement, si elle eust esté contre nature: cela est bien vray és choses naturelles, qui de leur proprieté suivent l'ordonnance de Dieu immuable: mais ayant donné à l'homme le chois du bien et du mal, il controvient le plus souvent à la defense, et choisit le pire contre la loy de Dieu et nature. Et l'opinion depravee en lui a tant de pouvoir, qu'elle passe en force de loy, qui a plus d'authorité que la nature, de sorte qu'il n'y a si grande impieté, ny meschanceté, qui ne soit estimee, et iugee vertu et pieté.'
96. Franklin, Rise of Absolutist Theory, p. 49, n.17.
97. Method, p. 259.
98. République, A ii v, 1.
99. Franklin, Sixteenth-Century Revolution in the Methodology of Law and History, pp. 72-3.
100. Baxter, 'Bodin's Daemon', pp. 1-21. Paul Lawrence Rose, Bodin and the Great God of Nature (Geneva, 1980), pp. 164-5, passim.
101. Baxter, 'Bodin's Daemon', pp. 1-21. Paul Lawrence Rose, Bodin and the Great God of Nature (Geneva, 1980), pp. 164-5, passim.
102. Baxter, 'Bodin's Daemon', pp. 10-14.
103. 'Quod si verum est rationi semper ac legi divine locum esse oportere, nec ipsam Palaestinae finibus concludi, cur non ubique terrarum lex illa de servitiis ac libertate tam utiliter, tam sapienter a Deo lata vim habitura sit, potius quam quae humanis ingeniis excogitata fuere?' De Republica, p. 45. This same statement appears in a condensed form in the French version of the République, p. 67.
104. 'Quod si verum est rationi semper ac legi divine locum esse oportere, nec ipsam Palaestinae finibus concludi, cur non ubique terrarum lex illa de servitiis ac libertate tam utiliter, tam sapienter a Deo lata vim habitura sit, potius quam quae humanis ingeniis excogitata fuere?' De Republica, p. 45. This same statement appears in a condensed form in the French version of the République, p. 67.
105. Another example along these same lines appears in Bodin's discussion of the family. In this discussion, Bodin appealed directly to the texts of Genesis and Deuteronomy to establish the rightful power of the husband over the wife, as well as of the father over his children, and then complained that these practices had largely been obliterated over the course of history and now needed to be restored (R, 20, 27-30, passim).
106. République, p. 4.
107. J.W. Allen, A History of Political Thought in the Sixteenth Century (London, 1928), pp. 415-16.
108. On these themes, see Stephen Holmes' chapter on sovereignty in Passions and Constraints (Chicago, 1995), pp. 100-33.
109. République, p. 124.
110. Ibid., p. 608.
111. Ibid., pp. 129-33, 149-56.
112. Ibid., pp. 211-12. 'Puis qu'il n'y a rien plus grand en terre apres Dieu, que les Princes souverains, et qu'ils onts establis de luy comme ses lieutenans, pour commander aux autres hommes, il est besoin de prendre garde à leur qualité, à fin de respecter, et reverer leur maiesté en toute obeissance, sentir et parler d'eux en tout honneur: car qui mesprise son Prince souverain, il mesprise Dieu, duquel il est l'image en terre. C'est pourquoy Dieu parlant à Samuel, auquel le peuple avoit demandé un autre Prince: C'est moy, dit-il, à qui ils ont faict inure.'
113. Method, p. 282.
114. République, p. 152; see also ibid., pp. 416-17.
115. République, p. 152; see also ibid., pp. 416-17.
116. Ibid., p. 161.
117. Ibid. 'Ie dy neantmoins que ces distinctions y sont necessaires: car le Prince n'est pas plus obligé au droit des gents, qu'à ses propres edicts: et si le droit des gents est inique, le Prince y peut deroger par ses edicts en son toyaume, et defendre à ses subiects d'en user: comme il s'est faict du droit des esclaves en ce royaume, iaçoit qu'il fust commun à tous peuples, et le peut faire aussi és autres choses semblables, pourveu qu'il ne face rien contre la Loy de Dieu. Car si la iustice est la fin de la loy, la loy oeuvre du Prince, le Prince est image de Dieu, il faut par mesme suite de raison, que la loy du Prince soit faicte au modelle de la Loy de Dieu.
118. Ibid., p. 150.
119. For this interpretation, see also Franklin, Rise of Absolutist Theory, p. 79.
120. République, p. 133.
121. Pennington, The Prince and the Law, pp. 8-9, 276-84.
122. République, p. 122.
123. Ibid., p. 224.
124. Skinner, Foundations, Vol. II, p. 288.
125. République, p. 122.
126. Ibid., p. 221.
127. Ibid., pp. 131-3.
128. Ibid., p. 215.
129. Ibid., p. 124.
130. Ibid., p. 145.
131. Ibid., p. 142.
132. Ibid., pp. 153, 156.
133. Ibid., p. 160. Franklin notes that Bodin was one of the first theorists in France to endorse the idea that 'the king never dies' (Franklin, Rise of Absolutist Theory, p. 72).
134. Ibid., p. 160. Franklin notes that Bodin was one of the first theorists in France to endorse the idea that 'the king never dies' (Franklin, Rise of Absolutist Theory, p. 72).
135. République, pp. 860-2. Franklin, Rise of Absolutist Theory, p. 73.
136. République, pp. 860-2. Franklin, Rise of Absolutist Theory, p. 73.
137. Holmes, Passions and Constraints, pp. 100-33.
138. République, p. 575.
139. Ibid., p. 343.
140. Ibid., p. 632.