The disciplined citizen: Thomas Hobbes, neostoicism and the critique of classical citizenship

Australian Journal of Politics and History

Volumn 45, Issue 4, 1999, Pages 506-524

  Burchell, David ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0033249152     PISSN: 00049522     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/1467-8497.00078     Document Type: Review

References (129)

1. Thanks to Jeffrey Minson and Duncan Ivison for helpful thoughts and advice. Thanks also to the reviewers for the Australian Journal of Politics and History for their thorough comments and excellent critical suggestions.
2. A. Oldfield, Citizenship and Community: Civic Republicanism and the Modern World (London: Routledge, 1990), pp. 178-81.
3. G. Bock, Q. Skinner and M. Viroli eds., Machiavelli and Republicanism (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1991).
4. Q. Skinner, Liberty Before Liberalism (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998), pp. 3-11, 59-60; Q. Skinner, "Two Concepts of Citizenship", Tijdschrift voor Filosofie 55 (1993), pp. 403-419. Cf. Q. Skinner, "The Idea of Negative Liberty: Philosophical and Historical Perspectives", in R. Rorty, J.B. Schneedwind and Q. Skinner eds., Philosophy in History: Essays in the Historiography of Philosophy (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1984). See also Skinner's parallel work on Hobbes and rhetoric, especially Reason and Rhetoric in the Philosophy of Hobbes (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996), interestingly presents a somewhat more ambivalent view of Hobbes' engagement with neo-classical "civil science".
5. Q. Skinner, Liberty Before Liberalism (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998), pp. 3-11, 59-60; Q. Skinner, "Two Concepts of Citizenship", Tijdschrift voor Filosofie 55 (1993), pp. 403-419. Cf. Q. Skinner, "The Idea of Negative Liberty: Philosophical and Historical Perspectives", in R. Rorty, J.B. Schneedwind and Q. Skinner eds., Philosophy in History: Essays in the Historiography of Philosophy (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1984). See also Skinner's parallel work on Hobbes and rhetoric, especially Reason and Rhetoric in the Philosophy of Hobbes (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996), interestingly presents a somewhat more ambivalent view of Hobbes' engagement with neo-classical "civil science".
6. Q. Skinner, Liberty Before Liberalism (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998), pp. 3-11, 59-60; Q. Skinner, "Two Concepts of Citizenship", Tijdschrift voor Filosofie 55 (1993), pp. 403-419. Cf. Q. Skinner, "The Idea of Negative Liberty: Philosophical and Historical Perspectives", in R. Rorty, J.B. Schneedwind and Q. Skinner eds., Philosophy in History: Essays in the Historiography of Philosophy (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1984). See also Skinner's parallel work on Hobbes and rhetoric, especially Reason and Rhetoric in the Philosophy of Hobbes (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996), interestingly presents a somewhat more ambivalent view of Hobbes' engagement with neo-classical "civil science".
7. Q. Skinner, Liberty Before Liberalism (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998), pp. 3-11, 59-60; Q. Skinner, "Two Concepts of Citizenship", Tijdschrift voor Filosofie 55 (1993), pp. 403-419. Cf. Q. Skinner, "The Idea of Negative Liberty: Philosophical and Historical Perspectives", in R. Rorty, J.B. Schneedwind and Q. Skinner eds., Philosophy in History: Essays in the Historiography of Philosophy (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1984). See also Skinner's parallel work on Hobbes and rhetoric, especially Reason and Rhetoric in the Philosophy of Hobbes (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996), interestingly presents a somewhat more ambivalent view of Hobbes' engagement with neo-classical "civil science".
8. M.G. Dietz, "Hobbes' Subject as Citizen", in M.G. Dietz ed., Thomas Hobbes and Political Theory (Lawrence, Kansas: University of Kansas Press, 1990), pp. 92, 96 and 104-107.
9. Oddly, Hobbes' views on citizenship have been given little emphasis in the major collections on his political thought such as K.C. Brown ed., Hobbes Studies (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1965) and G.A.J. Rogers and A. Ryan eds., Perspectives on Thomas Hobbes (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1988) One of the few substantial recent discussions is in C. Condren, The Language of Politics in Seventeenth-Century England (London: Macmillan, 1994) chapter 3, passim but especially pp. 99-100. Condren's argument is that Hobbes, as part of a wider trend, systematically subsumes the concept "citizen" within the concept "subject": as my argument here may suggest, my own hunch is that for Hobbes citizenship is a particular form of the wider category of subjection.
10. Oddly, Hobbes' views on citizenship have been given little emphasis in the major collections on his political thought such as K.C. Brown ed., Hobbes Studies (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1965) and G.A.J. Rogers and A. Ryan eds., Perspectives on Thomas Hobbes (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1988) One of the few substantial recent discussions is in C. Condren, The Language of Politics in Seventeenth-Century England (London: Macmillan, 1994) chapter 3, passim but especially pp. 99-100. Condren's argument is that Hobbes, as part of a wider trend, systematically subsumes the concept "citizen" within the concept "subject": as my argument here may suggest, my own hunch is that for Hobbes citizenship is a particular form of the wider category of subjection.
11. Oddly, Hobbes' views on citizenship have been given little emphasis in the major collections on his political thought such as K.C. Brown ed., Hobbes Studies (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1965) and G.A.J. Rogers and A. Ryan eds., Perspectives on Thomas Hobbes (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1988) One of the few substantial recent discussions is in C. Condren, The Language of Politics in Seventeenth-Century England (London: Macmillan, 1994) chapter 3, passim but especially pp. 99-100. Condren's argument is that Hobbes, as part of a wider trend, systematically subsumes the concept "citizen" within the concept "subject": as my argument here may suggest, my own hunch is that for Hobbes citizenship is a particular form of the wider category of subjection.
12. The passages from De Cive I examine here have no direct parallels in any of Hobbes' earlier or later works, so far as I am aware. The Elements of Law contains extended discussions of the equality of humans in the state of nature, and of the formation of the social contract, but there is no direct reference to the classical claim about "man" as a "social animal". F. Tönnies ed. (introduction by M.M. Goldsmith). Thomas Hobbbes: The Elements of Law, Natural and Politic (London: Frank Cass, 1969), pp. 94-5. In Leviathan there are of course a number of celebrated polemics against Aristotle and "the Greek and Latin authors" in relation to classical doctrines of freedom and tyranny. R. Tuck ed., Thomas Hobbes: Leviathan (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1991), p. 150; cf. pp. 470-471. But again Hobbes passes directly from the well-known chapter on "the natural condition of man" to his equally celebrated passages on the original contract without any mention of the classical doctrine of the "social animal". Tuck ed., Leviathan, pp. 86-100.
13. The passages from De Cive I examine here have no direct parallels in any of Hobbes' earlier or later works, so far as I am aware. The Elements of Law contains extended discussions of the equality of humans in the state of nature, and of the formation of the social contract, but there is no direct reference to the classical claim about "man" as a "social animal". F. Tönnies ed. (introduction by M.M. Goldsmith). Thomas Hobbbes: The Elements of Law, Natural and Politic (London: Frank Cass, 1969), pp. 94-5. In Leviathan there are of course a number of celebrated polemics against Aristotle and "the Greek and Latin authors" in relation to classical doctrines of freedom and tyranny. R. Tuck ed., Thomas Hobbes: Leviathan (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1991), p. 150; cf. pp. 470-471. But again Hobbes passes directly from the well-known chapter on "the natural condition of man" to his equally celebrated passages on the original contract without any mention of the classical doctrine of the "social animal". Tuck ed., Leviathan, pp. 86-100.
14. The passages from De Cive I examine here have no direct parallels in any of Hobbes' earlier or later works, so far as I am aware. The Elements of Law contains extended discussions of the equality of humans in the state of nature, and of the formation of the social contract, but there is no direct reference to the classical claim about "man" as a "social animal". F. Tönnies ed. (introduction by M.M. Goldsmith). Thomas Hobbbes: The Elements of Law, Natural and Politic (London: Frank Cass, 1969), pp. 94-5. In Leviathan there are of course a number of celebrated polemics against Aristotle and "the Greek and Latin authors" in relation to classical doctrines of freedom and tyranny. R. Tuck ed., Thomas Hobbes: Leviathan (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1991), p. 150; cf. pp. 470-471. But again Hobbes passes directly from the well-known chapter on "the natural condition of man" to his equally celebrated passages on the original contract without any mention of the classical doctrine of the "social animal". Tuck ed., Leviathan, pp. 86-100.
15. It is worth noting that Hobbes' depiction on Aristotle, like the great bulk of his polemical assault on the "nonsense" and "gibberish" of the schools, is something of a caricature. Here I am using the standard English translation of 1651, available in H. Warrender ed., Thomas Hobbes: De Cive: The English Version (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1983) and B. Gert ed., Thomas Hobbes: Man and Citizen (London, 1978), the latter contains the full text of De Cive and selections from De Homine. However, contra Gert and Warrender, Richard Tuck has recently demonstrated that this was almost certainly an unauthorised translation. See R. Tuck, Philosophy and Government, 1572-1651 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993), p. 316 and R. Tuck, "A New Date for Filmer's Patriarcha", Historical Journal 29 (1986). Accordingly, where the exact wording of Hobbes' original text is important, I have returned to the Latin original.
16. It is worth noting that Hobbes' depiction on Aristotle, like the great bulk of his polemical assault on the "nonsense" and "gibberish" of the schools, is something of a caricature. Here I am using the standard English translation of 1651, available in H. Warrender ed., Thomas Hobbes: De Cive: The English Version (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1983) and B. Gert ed., Thomas Hobbes: Man and Citizen (London, 1978), the latter contains the full text of De Cive and selections from De Homine. However, contra Gert and Warrender, Richard Tuck has recently demonstrated that this was almost certainly an unauthorised translation. See R. Tuck, Philosophy and Government, 1572-1651 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993), p. 316 and R. Tuck, "A New Date for Filmer's Patriarcha", Historical Journal 29 (1986). Accordingly, where the exact wording of Hobbes' original text is important, I have returned to the Latin original.
17. It is worth noting that Hobbes' depiction on Aristotle, like the great bulk of his polemical assault on the "nonsense" and "gibberish" of the schools, is something of a caricature. Here I am using the standard English translation of 1651, available in H. Warrender ed., Thomas Hobbes: De Cive: The English Version (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1983) and B. Gert ed., Thomas Hobbes: Man and Citizen (London, 1978), the latter contains the full text of De Cive and selections from De Homine. However, contra Gert and Warrender, Richard Tuck has recently demonstrated that this was almost certainly an unauthorised translation. See R. Tuck, Philosophy and Government, 1572-1651 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993), p. 316 and R. Tuck, "A New Date for Filmer's Patriarcha", Historical Journal 29 (1986). Accordingly, where the exact wording of Hobbes' original text is important, I have returned to the Latin original.
18. It is worth noting that Hobbes' depiction on Aristotle, like the great bulk of his polemical assault on the "nonsense" and "gibberish" of the schools, is something of a caricature. Here I am using the standard English translation of 1651, available in H. Warrender ed., Thomas Hobbes: De Cive: The English Version (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1983) and B. Gert ed., Thomas Hobbes: Man and Citizen (London, 1978), the latter contains the full text of De Cive and selections from De Homine. However, contra Gert and Warrender, Richard Tuck has recently demonstrated that this was almost certainly an unauthorised translation. See R. Tuck, Philosophy and Government, 1572-1651 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993), p. 316 and R. Tuck, "A New Date for Filmer's Patriarcha", Historical Journal 29 (1986). Accordingly, where the exact wording of Hobbes' original text is important, I have returned to the Latin original.
19. For Aristotle's arguments on the "naturalness" of society, see J. Warrington ed., Aristotle's Politics and Athenian Constitution (London: Dent, 1959), pp. 5-7.
20. Tuck ed., Leviathan, pp. 463-5.
21. By "accident" here Hobbes is gesturing to a more precise sense of the word in medieval logical disputation in which it designated a non-necessary attribute of a phenomenon. See his Short Tract on First Principles, in Tönnies ed., Elements of Law, p. 194.
22. Gert ed., Man and Citizen, p. 111. The phrase forensis quaedam amicitia in Hobbes' Latin original might equally mean "friendship of the forum" - the implication is not a narrowly commercial one.
23. On these dates, see Tuck, Philosophy and Government, pp. 315-6.
24. Warrender, De Cive: English Version, p. 44; Howard Warrender, De Cive: Latin Version. Elementa philosophica de cive (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1983), p. 92. Gerhard Oestreich's translation from the Latin original is more in tune with my arguments here: "Man is not fitted for society by nature, but by discipline". G. Oestreich, Neostoicism and the Early Modern State (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1982), p. 269.
25. Warrender, De Cive: English Version, p. 44; Howard Warrender, De Cive: Latin Version. Elementa philosophica de cive (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1983), p. 92. Gerhard Oestreich's translation from the Latin original is more in tune with my arguments here: "Man is not fitted for society by nature, but by discipline". G. Oestreich, Neostoicism and the Early Modern State (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1982), p. 269.
26. Warrender, De Cive: English Version, p. 44; Howard Warrender, De Cive: Latin Version. Elementa philosophica de cive (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1983), p. 92. Gerhard Oestreich's translation from the Latin original is more in tune with my arguments here: "Man is not fitted for society by nature, but by discipline". G. Oestreich, Neostoicism and the Early Modern State (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1982), p. 269.
27. A point made clear in the "Review and Conclusion" to Leviathan, where Hobbes speaks distinctly of "contrary faculties" such as reason and eloquence being reconciled by a combination of "education and discipline", Tuck ed., Leviathan, p. 483.
28. See D. Knox, "Disciplina: The Monastic and Cleric Origins of European Civility", in J. Monfasani and R.G. Musto eds., Renaissance Society and Culture (New York: Italica Press, 1991), pp. 107-35.
29. This is certainly what he meant in a strikingly similar formulation in the English-language Behemoth, written some twenty years later, where he mobilised the same dichotomy, using the English terms "nature" and "discipline": "Every man by nature, without discipline, does in all his actions look upon, as far as he can see, the benefit that shall redound to himself from his obedience". W. Molesworth ed., Thomas Hobbes: Behemoth: The History of the Causes of the Civil Wars of England (New York: n.d. 1682), p. 69. Here "natural" men follows his instincts of obedience, without understanding "why it is their duty to do so"; the presumed but unstated opposite is the "disciplined" man, who is both obedient and mindful of the sound reasons for his obedience.
30. Gert ed., Man and Citizen, p. 68; Warrender ed., De Cive: English Version, pp. 145-6. Compare Hobbes' use of the term "manners" in Leviathan, Tuck ed., Leviathan, pp. 69-70.
31. Gert ed., Man and Citizen, p. 68; Warrender ed., De Cive: English Version, pp. 145-6. Compare Hobbes' use of the term "manners" in Leviathan, Tuck ed., Leviathan, pp. 69-70.
32. Gert ed., Man and Citizen, p. 68; Warrender ed., De Cive: English Version, pp. 145-6. Compare Hobbes' use of the term "manners" in Leviathan, Tuck ed., Leviathan, pp. 69-70.
33. Gert ed., Man and Citizen, p. 100.
34. Warrender ed., De Cive: English Version, p. 150.
35. Tuck ed., Leviathan, p. 233.
36. I have no space here to consider the wider modern historical and theoretical literature on social discipline, or its strengths and limitations. Here the locus classicus is still Weber's discussion in Economy and Society. Weber sees military discipline as the source of all early modern social discipline, but does not discuss the ethical or political origins of these military techniques: H.H. Gerth and C. Wright Mills eds., From Max Weber: Essays in Sociology (London: Routledge, 1948; new edition 1991), pp. 253-264. More recently Michel Foucault stressed the emergence of "the disciplines" in the eighteenth century as the source of modern social discipline - though he again had little or no interest in the prehistory of this story: M. Foucault, Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison (London: Allen Lane, 1977). M. Foucault, The Care of the Self (The History of Sexuality), vol. 3 (New York: Random House, 1986), partly remedies this absence by focusing on classical Stoic techniques of self-cultivation, while M. Foucault, "Governmentality", in G. Burchell, C. Gordon and P. Miller eds., The Foucault Effect: Studies in Governmentality (London: Harvester, 1991), explicitly it briefly links techniques of self-government to the government of populations.
37. I have no space here to consider the wider modern historical and theoretical literature on social discipline, or its strengths and limitations. Here the locus classicus is still Weber's discussion in Economy and Society. Weber sees military discipline as the source of all early modern social discipline, but does not discuss the ethical or political origins of these military techniques: H.H. Gerth and C. Wright Mills eds., From Max Weber: Essays in Sociology (London: Routledge, 1948; new edition 1991), pp. 253-264. More recently Michel Foucault stressed the emergence of "the disciplines" in the eighteenth century as the source of modern social discipline - though he again had little or no interest in the prehistory of this story: M. Foucault, Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison (London: Allen Lane, 1977). M. Foucault, The Care of the Self (The History of Sexuality), vol. 3 (New York: Random House, 1986), partly remedies this absence by focusing on classical Stoic techniques of self-cultivation, while M. Foucault, "Governmentality", in G. Burchell, C. Gordon and P. Miller eds., The Foucault Effect: Studies in Governmentality (London: Harvester, 1991), explicitly it briefly links techniques of self-government to the government of populations.
38. I have no space here to consider the wider modern historical and theoretical literature on social discipline, or its strengths and limitations. Here the locus classicus is still Weber's discussion in Economy and Society. Weber sees military discipline as the source of all early modern social discipline, but does not discuss the ethical or political origins of these military techniques: H.H. Gerth and C. Wright Mills eds., From Max Weber: Essays in Sociology (London: Routledge, 1948; new edition 1991), pp. 253-264. More recently Michel Foucault stressed the emergence of "the disciplines" in the eighteenth century as the source of modern social discipline - though he again had little or no interest in the prehistory of this story: M. Foucault, Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison (London: Allen Lane, 1977). M. Foucault, The Care of the Self (The History of Sexuality), vol. 3 (New York: Random House, 1986), partly remedies this absence by focusing on classical Stoic techniques of self-cultivation, while M. Foucault, "Governmentality", in G. Burchell, C. Gordon and P. Miller eds., The Foucault Effect: Studies in Governmentality (London: Harvester, 1991), explicitly it briefly links techniques of self-government to the government of populations.
39. I have no space here to consider the wider modern historical and theoretical literature on social discipline, or its strengths and limitations. Here the locus classicus is still Weber's discussion in Economy and Society. Weber sees military discipline as the source of all early modern social discipline, but does not discuss the ethical or political origins of these military techniques: H.H. Gerth and C. Wright Mills eds., From Max Weber: Essays in Sociology (London: Routledge, 1948; new edition 1991), pp. 253-264. More recently Michel Foucault stressed the emergence of "the disciplines" in the eighteenth century as the source of modern social discipline - though he again had little or no interest in the prehistory of this story: M. Foucault, Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison (London: Allen Lane, 1977). M. Foucault, The Care of the Self (The History of Sexuality), vol. 3 (New York: Random House, 1986), partly remedies this absence by focusing on classical Stoic techniques of self-cultivation, while M. Foucault, "Governmentality", in G. Burchell, C. Gordon and P. Miller eds., The Foucault Effect: Studies in Governmentality (London: Harvester, 1991), explicitly it briefly links techniques of self-government to the government of populations.
40. Tuck, Philosophy and Government, passim.
41. Ibid., chapters 2-3 passim; cf. M. Viroli, From Politics to Reason of State, 1250-1500 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992), chapters 3-6. Viroli's argument is that Machiavelli was fundamentally a Ciceronian humanist fallen among reason-of-state thieves: Viroli, From Politics, chapter 3.1 say "neo-Ciceronian" here because, as I have explained elsewhere, I believe Cicero's own conception of the "offices" of citizenship to be less distant from Hobbes' than is often supposed. See my "Civic Personae: MacIntyre, Cicero and Moral Personality", History of Political Thought 19 (1998), pp. 101-118.
42. Ibid., chapters 2-3 passim; cf. M. Viroli, From Politics to Reason of State, 1250-1500 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992), chapters 3-6. Viroli's argument is that Machiavelli was fundamentally a Ciceronian humanist fallen among reason-of-state thieves: Viroli, From Politics, chapter 3.1 say "neo-Ciceronian" here because, as I have explained elsewhere, I believe Cicero's own conception of the "offices" of citizenship to be less distant from Hobbes' than is often supposed. See my "Civic Personae: MacIntyre, Cicero and Moral Personality", History of Political Thought 19 (1998), pp. 101-118.
43. Ibid., chapters 2-3 passim; cf. M. Viroli, From Politics to Reason of State, 1250-1500 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992), chapters 3-6. Viroli's argument is that Machiavelli was fundamentally a Ciceronian humanist fallen among reason-of-state thieves: Viroli, From Politics, chapter 3.1 say "neo-Ciceronian" here because, as I have explained elsewhere, I believe Cicero's own conception of the "offices" of citizenship to be less distant from Hobbes' than is often supposed. See my "Civic Personae: MacIntyre, Cicero and Moral Personality", History of Political Thought 19 (1998), pp. 101-118.
44. Oestreich, Neostoicism, p. 17.
45. The dedication is reproduced in Immanuele Bekkero ed., Cornelius Tacitus, ab J. Lipsio et.al., (Weidmann, 1831), pp. iv-v. The same passage contains the reference to similitudo temporo: "in qua similitudo et imago plurima temporum nostrorum".
46. Oestreich, Neostoicism, p. 25.
47. On Lipsius' Tacitus, and its various editions, see Mark Morford, 'Tacitean Prudentia and the doctrines of Justus Lipsius", in T.J. Luce and A.J. Woodman eds., Tacitus and the Tacitean Tradition (Princeton NJ: Prince ton University Press, 1993), pp. 129-51.
48. Oestreich, Neostoicism, p. 30.
49. nd edition, n.p.
50. This reminder appears in Lipsius' "argument" for Seneca's eleventh epistle: Lodge, Workes, p. 182.
51. Peter Burke, "From Tacitism to Reason of State", in J.H. Burns ed., The Cambridge History of Political Thought, 1450-1700 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press), p. 492.
52. M. Raeff, The Well-Ordered Police State: Social and Institutional Change through Law in the Germanies and Russia, 1600-1800 (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1983), p. 37.
53. Dietz, "Hobbes' Subject", p. 96.
54. J. Lipsius (William Jones trans.), Sixe Bookes of Politickes or Civil Doctrine (Amsterdam: De Capo, 1970 [1594]), p. 140. For the Latin original see J. Lipsius, Opera omnia, postremum ad ipso aucta et recensita (Antwerp: Plantin, 1637), volume pp. 1-116. Here I have mostly followed the admirable 1594 English translation, modernising the spelling so as not to unnecessarily complicate Lipsius' sparse Latin prose. I have also contracted antique forms (i.e. "foreeth" becomes "forces"), and removed capitals and emphases. Where a word is important I have put the Latin original after it in italics.
55. J. Lipsius (William Jones trans.), Sixe Bookes of Politickes or Civil Doctrine (Amsterdam: De Capo, 1970 [1594]), p. 140. For the Latin original see J. Lipsius, Opera omnia, postremum ad ipso aucta et recensita (Antwerp: Plantin, 1637), volume pp. 1-116. Here I have mostly followed the admirable 1594 English translation, modernising the spelling so as not to unnecessarily complicate Lipsius' sparse Latin prose. I have also contracted antique forms (i.e. "foreeth" becomes "forces"), and removed capitals and emphases. Where a word is important I have put the Latin original after it in italics.
56. Lipsius later published much more on military questions, drawing on his understanding of Polybius. His De militia romana libri cinque was first published in Antwerp in 1595. See J.L. Saunders, Justus Lipsius: The Philosophy of Renaissance Stoicism (New York: New York Scholars Press, 1955), pp. 45-57.
57. Lipsius, Sixe Bookes of Politickes, pp. 141-2.
58. Ibid., pp. 51-2, emphasis in original.
59. Lipsius, Opera omnia, volume 4, p. 83.
60. The term coercio also has implications of confinement, restraint, enclosure, and pruning - the last in particular echoing the horticultural "discipline" typical of the era: "Man ... disciplined nature too, with the artistically clipped trees and hedges of seventeenth-century parks and gardens". Oestreich, Neostoicism, pp. 269-70.
61. Lipsius, Sixe Bookes, pp. 152-6.
62. Ibid., pp. 156-8.
63. K. Mannheim, Man and Society in an Age of Reconstruction: studies in modern social structures, with a bibliographical guide to the study of modern society (London: Kegan Paul, Trench, Trubner, 1940), p. 255.
64. O. Hintze, "Military Organisation and the Organisation of the State", in F. Gilbert ed., The Historical Essays of Otto Hintze (New York: Oxford University Press, 1975), pp. 198-202. On the English example, with both its differences and similarities, see J. Brewer, The Sinews of Power: War, Money and the English State, 1688-1776 (London: Allen and Unwin, 1989), passim.
65. O. Hintze, "Military Organisation and the Organisation of the State", in F. Gilbert ed., The Historical Essays of Otto Hintze (New York: Oxford University Press, 1975), pp. 198-202. On the English example, with both its differences and similarities, see J. Brewer, The Sinews of Power: War, Money and the English State, 1688-1776 (London: Allen and Unwin, 1989), passim.
66. Oestreich, Neostoicism, p. 271. Cf. W.H. McNeill, The Pursuit of Power: Technology, Armed force and Society since AD 1000 (Oxford: Blackwell, 1983), chapter 4.
67. Oestreich, Neostoicism, p. 271. Cf. W.H. McNeill, The Pursuit of Power: Technology, Armed force and Society since AD 1000 (Oxford: Blackwell, 1983), chapter 4.
68. P. Pasquino, "Theatrum Politicum: The Genealogy of Capital - Police and the State of Prosperity", in Burchell et.al. eds., The Foucault Effect, pp. 109-110.
69. On the English relationship to "police", see M. Dean, The Constitution of Poverty: Toward a Genealogy of Liberal Governance (London: Routledge, 1991), pp. 55-57.
70. Raeff, Well-Ordered Police State, p. 72.
71. Pasquino, "Theatrum Politicum", p. 114; on Petty, see T. Aspromourgos, "Political Economy and the Social Division of Labour: The Economics of Sir William Petty", Scottish Journal of Political Economy 33 (1986) and P. Buck, "Seventeenth Century political Arithmetic: Civil Strife and Vital Statistics", Isis 68 (1977).
72. Pasquino, "Theatrum Politicum", p. 114; on Petty, see T. Aspromourgos, "Political Economy and the Social Division of Labour: The Economics of Sir William Petty", Scottish Journal of Political Economy 33 (1986) and P. Buck, "Seventeenth Century political Arithmetic: Civil Strife and Vital Statistics", Isis 68 (1977).
73. Pasquino, "Theatrum Politicum", p. 114; on Petty, see T. Aspromourgos, "Political Economy and the Social Division of Labour: The Economics of Sir William Petty", Scottish Journal of Political Economy 33 (1986) and P. Buck, "Seventeenth Century political Arithmetic: Civil Strife and Vital Statistics", Isis 68 (1977).
74. Raeff, Well-Ordered Police State, pp. 87-8.
75. Mary Dietz also notes the importance of chapter 30 of Leviathan, but interprets it as a listing of civic virtues in the classical republican sense: Dietz, "Hobbes' Subject", pp. 107-111. I am indebted to Duncan Ivison for pointing out to me the relevance of this passage in Leviathan for my wider argument.
76. Tuck ed., Leviathan, pp. 233-36.
77. Ibid., pp. 238-9.
78. The standard edition of Petty's collected works is C.H. Hull ed., The Economic Writings of Sir William Petty (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1899), the corresponding passages (in Petty's Treatise of Taxes) are: on beggars, p. 20; on labour schemes, pp. 29-31; on taxation policy and its rationale, pp. 91-95.
79. See inter alia, Tom Sorell, "Hobbes' UnAristotelian Political Rhetoric", Philosophy and Rhetoric 23 (1990), pp. 96-108 and "Hobbes' Persuasive Civil Science", Philosophical Quarterly 40 (1990), pp. 342-51; Victoria Silver, "Hobbes on Rhetoric" in Tom Sorell ed., The Cambridge Companion to Hobbes (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996), p. 329-45 and Conal Condren, "On the Rheotrical Foundations of Leviathan", History of Political Thought 11 (1990), pp. 703-20. Skinner's Reason and Rhetoric in the Philosophy of Hobbes, for all its great erudition, seems to me to miss much of this complexity.
80. See inter alia, Tom Sorell, "Hobbes' UnAristotelian Political Rhetoric", Philosophy and Rhetoric 23 (1990), pp. 96-108 and "Hobbes' Persuasive Civil Science", Philosophical Quarterly 40 (1990), pp. 342-51; Victoria Silver, "Hobbes on Rhetoric" in Tom Sorell ed., The Cambridge Companion to Hobbes (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996), p. 329-45 and Conal Condren, "On the Rheotrical Foundations of Leviathan", History of Political Thought 11 (1990), pp. 703-20. Skinner's Reason and Rhetoric in the Philosophy of Hobbes, for all its great erudition, seems to me to miss much of this complexity.
81. See inter alia, Tom Sorell, "Hobbes' UnAristotelian Political Rhetoric", Philosophy and Rhetoric 23 (1990), pp. 96-108 and "Hobbes' Persuasive Civil Science", Philosophical Quarterly 40 (1990), pp. 342-51; Victoria Silver, "Hobbes on Rhetoric" in Tom Sorell ed., The Cambridge Companion to Hobbes (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996), p. 329-45 and Conal Condren, "On the Rheotrical Foundations of Leviathan", History of Political Thought 11 (1990), pp. 703-20. Skinner's Reason and Rhetoric in the Philosophy of Hobbes, for all its great erudition, seems to me to miss much of this complexity.
82. See inter alia, Tom Sorell, "Hobbes' UnAristotelian Political Rhetoric", Philosophy and Rhetoric 23 (1990), pp. 96-108 and "Hobbes' Persuasive Civil Science", Philosophical Quarterly 40 (1990), pp. 342-51; Victoria Silver, "Hobbes on Rhetoric" in Tom Sorell ed., The Cambridge Companion to Hobbes (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996), p. 329-45 and Conal Condren, "On the Rheotrical Foundations of Leviathan", History of Political Thought 11 (1990), pp. 703-20. Skinner's Reason and Rhetoric in the Philosophy of Hobbes, for all its great erudition, seems to me to miss much of this complexity.
83. See inter alia, Tom Sorell, "Hobbes' UnAristotelian Political Rhetoric", Philosophy and Rhetoric 23 (1990), pp. 96-108 and "Hobbes' Persuasive Civil Science", Philosophical Quarterly 40 (1990), pp. 342-51; Victoria Silver, "Hobbes on Rhetoric" in Tom Sorell ed., The Cambridge Companion to Hobbes (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996), p. 329-45 and Conal Condren, "On the Rheotrical Foundations of Leviathan", History of Political Thought 11 (1990), pp. 703-20. Skinner's Reason and Rhetoric in the Philosophy of Hobbes, for all its great erudition, seems to me to miss much of this complexity.
84. I support this claim in more detail in a forthcoming paper, "The Civis Perspicax: Rhetoric and Restraint in Early Modem Citizenship".
85. Oestreich insists that several of Hobbes' key concepts in his mature works probably derived in the first instance from Lipsius: the distinction between inward faith and outward profession, and between reason and opinion (ratio and opinio), and the dangers of excessive liberty of thought, see Oestreich, Neostoicism, p. 115. I have neither the space nor the expertise here to investigate these assertions, though it is worth noting that they would constitute a useful programme of scholarly research in their own right.
86. On Gassendi, see Noel Malcolm ed., The Correspondence of Thomas Hobbes (Oxford; Clarendon Press, 1994), 2 volumes, p. 834; on Descartes, see Stephen Gaukroger, Descartes: An Intellectual Biography (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1995), pp. 65-7.
87. On Gassendi, see Noel Malcolm ed., The Correspondence of Thomas Hobbes (Oxford; Clarendon Press, 1994), 2 volumes, p. 834; on Descartes, see Stephen Gaukroger, Descartes: An Intellectual Biography (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1995), pp. 65-7.
88. This I have deduced from the information given in the lists unearthed by J.J. Hamilton, "Hobbes' Study and the Hardwick Library", Journal of the History of Philosophy 16 (1978), pp. 450-1.
89. Cf. Tuck, Philosophy and Government, p. 282. In a 1656 letter to Hobbes, Henry Stubbes refers casually to Lipsius' arcane De recta pronunciatone, a work buried at the end of volume 1 of the Opera Omnia - clearly assuming that Hobbes understands the reference.
90. Malcolm ed., Correspondence, p. 384.
91. J.H.M. Salmon, "Stoicism and Roman Example: Seneca and Tacitus in Jacobean England", Journal of the History of Ideas 50 (1989), p. 212.
92. R. Schlatter ed., Hobbes' Thucydides (New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press, 1975), p. 27. This is one of the very few favourable references to any modern authority in any of Hobbes' major works.
93. nd edition, 3 volumes, p. 11.
94. Cf. Tuck, Philosophy and Government, chapters 1 and 2.
95. C. Tacitus, "Dialogua de Oratoriubs", in Agricola, Germania, Dialogus (Harvard, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1970), p. 278. Tacitus' words are inflatus, tumens, superfluens and parum Atticus. Cf. M.W. Croll, (J.M. Patrick and R.O. Evans eds.), "Attic" and Baroque Prose Style: The Anti-Ciceronian Movement (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1966), pp. 54-82.
96. C. Tacitus, "Dialogua de Oratoriubs", in Agricola, Germania, Dialogus (Harvard, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1970), p. 278. Tacitus' words are inflatus, tumens, superfluens and parum Atticus. Cf. M.W. Croll, (J.M. Patrick and R.O. Evans eds.), "Attic" and Baroque Prose Style: The Anti-Ciceronian Movement (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1966), pp. 54-82.
97. D. Johnston, The Rhetoric of Leviathan: Thomas Hobbes and the Politics of Cultural Transformation (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1986), p. 67.
98. Ibid., chapter 3, passim.
99. R. Kirk ed. (J. Stradling Irans.), Two Bookes of Constancie, Written in Latin by Iustus Lipsius (De constantia libri duo)[1594] (New Brunswick NJ: Rutgers University Press, 1939), pp. 20-32; Burke, "Tacitism", p. 493. Stradling was a member of Sidney's Neostoic circle: Salmon, "Stoicism and Roman Example", p. 206.
100. R. Kirk ed. (J. Stradling Irans.), Two Bookes of Constancie, Written in Latin by Iustus Lipsius (De constantia libri duo)[1594] (New Brunswick NJ: Rutgers University Press, 1939), pp. 20-32; Burke, "Tacitism", p. 493. Stradling was a member of Sidney's Neostoic circle: Salmon, "Stoicism and Roman Example", p. 206.
101. R. Kirk ed. (J. Stradling Irans.), Two Bookes of Constancie, Written in Latin by Iustus Lipsius (De constantia libri duo)[1594] (New Brunswick NJ: Rutgers University Press, 1939), pp. 20-32; Burke, "Tacitism", p. 493. Stradling was a member of Sidney's Neostoic circle: Salmon, "Stoicism and Roman Example", p. 206.
102. M. Todd, "Seneca and the Protestant Mind: The Influence of Stoicism on Puritan Ethics", Archiv für Reformationsgeschichte 74 (1983), p. 185.
103. Thomas Lodge ed., The Workes of Lucius Annaeus Seneca (London: William Stansby, 1614). Lodge's dedication is to Thomas, Earl of Suffolk - another Neostoic. See Salmon, "Stoicism and Roman Example", pp. 199-200.
104. Bacon was influenced both by the doctrines of Lipsius and the histories of Tacitus: Oestreich, Neostoicism, pp. 114-117. Ben Jonson was an inveterate Tacitian, and fashioned the house rules for his London club on Roman precepts collected by Lipsius: Salmon, "Stoicism and Roman Example", p. 219; J.E. Mason, Gentlefolk in the Making: Studies in the History of English Courtesy Literature and Related Topics from 1531-1774 (Philadelphia: Pennsylvania University Press, 1935), p. 284.
105. Bacon was influenced both by the doctrines of Lipsius and the histories of Tacitus: Oestreich, Neostoicism, pp. 114-117. Ben Jonson was an inveterate Tacitian, and fashioned the house rules for his London club on Roman precepts collected by Lipsius: Salmon, "Stoicism and Roman Example", p. 219; J.E. Mason, Gentlefolk in the Making: Studies in the History of English Courtesy Literature and Related Topics from 1531-1774 (Philadelphia: Pennsylvania University Press, 1935), p. 284.
106. Bacon was influenced both by the doctrines of Lipsius and the histories of Tacitus: Oestreich, Neostoicism, pp. 114-117. Ben Jonson was an inveterate Tacitian, and fashioned the house rules for his London club on Roman precepts collected by Lipsius: Salmon, "Stoicism and Roman Example", p. 219; J.E. Mason, Gentlefolk in the Making: Studies in the History of English Courtesy Literature and Related Topics from 1531-1774 (Philadelphia: Pennsylvania University Press, 1935), p. 284.
107. Salmon, "Stoicism and Roman Example", p. 199.
108. Ibid., pp. 206-213, 224.
109. T. Hobbes, The Questions Concerning Liberty, Necesity and Chance, Clearly Stated and Debated Between Dr Bramhall, Bishop of Derry, and Thomas Hobbes of Malmesbury (London: Andrew Cook, 1656), p. 195. A recent scholarly assessment backs up Bramhall's view: see J.C. Kassler, "The paradox of power: Hobbes and Stoic Naturalism", in S. Gaukroger ed., The Uses of Antiquity: The Scientific Revolution and the Classical Tradition (Dordrecht, Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1991). (In an otherwise stimulating article, Kassler misidentifies this quote as Hobbes' own self-description, when it is clearly attributed in the text to Bramhall.)
110. T. Hobbes, The Questions Concerning Liberty, Necesity and Chance, Clearly Stated and Debated Between Dr Bramhall, Bishop of Derry, and Thomas Hobbes of Malmesbury (London: Andrew Cook, 1656), p. 195. A recent scholarly assessment backs up Bramhall's view: see J.C. Kassler, "The paradox of power: Hobbes and Stoic Naturalism", in S. Gaukroger ed., The Uses of Antiquity: The Scientific Revolution and the Classical Tradition (Dordrecht, Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1991). (In an otherwise stimulating article, Kassler misidentifies this quote as Hobbes' own self-description, when it is clearly attributed in the text to Bramhall.)
111. Hobbes, The Questions Concerning Liberty, p. 194.
112. Ibid., p. 197.
113. Lipsius, Sixe Bookes, pp. 62-63; cf. Saunders, Justus Lipsius, pp. 30-31.
114. Lipsius, Sixe Bookes, pp. 62-63; cf. Saunders, Justus Lipsius, pp. 30-31.
115. Saunders, Justus Lipsius, pp. 11-42. There was another Lipsian "cult" in the quintessentially Catholic Spanish court in the late sixteenth and early seventeenth centuries: T.G. Corbett, "The Cult of Lipsius: A Leading Source of Early Modern Spanish Statecraft", Journal of the History of Ideas 36 (1975).
116. Saunders, Justus Lipsius, pp. 11-42. There was another Lipsian "cult" in the quintessentially Catholic Spanish court in the late sixteenth and early seventeenth centuries: T.G. Corbett, "The Cult of Lipsius: A Leading Source of Early Modern Spanish Statecraft", Journal of the History of Ideas 36 (1975).
117. Cf. R. Koselleck, Critique and Crisis; Enlightenment and the Pathogensis of Modern Society (Boston: MIT Press, 1988), pp. 23-41.
118. Kirk ed., Two Bookes of Constancie, pp. 92-93. Here again I have modernised the 1594 English translation (see footnote 39 above).
119. Ibid., pp. 94-96.
120. Ibid., pp. 96-98. This was one of Lipsius' favourite metaphors: see the 1581 dedication to his Tacitus, where he writes of those "in whose hands are the rudder and tiller of the republic". Bekkero, Cornelius Tacitus, p. iv; cf. Morford, "Tacitean Prudentia", pp. 138-9.
121. Ibid., pp. 96-98. This was one of Lipsius' favourite metaphors: see the 1581 dedication to his Tacitus, where he writes of those "in whose hands are the rudder and tiller of the republic". Bekkero, Cornelius Tacitus, p. iv; cf. Morford, "Tacitean Prudentia", pp. 138-9.
122. Ibid., pp. 96-98. This was one of Lipsius' favourite metaphors: see the 1581 dedication to his Tacitus, where he writes of those "in whose hands are the rudder and tiller of the republic". Bekkero, Cornelius Tacitus, p. iv; cf. Morford, "Tacitean Prudentia", pp. 138-9.
123. Tuck ed., Leviathan, pp. 150 and 461.
124. I have no space to discuss this wider literature. Two examples are, however, the Civic Life or Vita Politica of Simon Stevin (CV Swits and Zeitlinger, 1590), and Samuel Pufendorf's much more well-known treatise on "man and citizen". It so happens that Stevin was a student and lecturer at the University of Leiden at precisely the moment when Lipsius was on of its "most respected and famous" scholars, and that Pufendorf was also (much later) a student of Leiden, where he was influenced by the Lipsian legacy of Stoic teaching, as well as by Hobbes' De Cive. See Simon Stevin, Civic Life in Annie Romein-Verschoor ed., The Principal Works of Simon Steven (Amsterdam: 1966) and James Tully ed., Samuel Pufendorf: on the Duty of Man and Citizen According to Natural Law (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1991). See also the discussion in my "The Attributes of Citizens; Virtue, Manners and the Activity of Citizenship", Economy and Society 24 (1995).
125. I have no space to discuss this wider literature. Two examples are, however, the Civic Life or Vita Politica of Simon Stevin (CV Swits and Zeitlinger, 1590), and Samuel Pufendorf's much more well-known treatise on "man and citizen". It so happens that Stevin was a student and lecturer at the University of Leiden at precisely the moment when Lipsius was on of its "most respected and famous" scholars, and that Pufendorf was also (much later) a student of Leiden, where he was influenced by the Lipsian legacy of Stoic teaching, as well as by Hobbes' De Cive. See Simon Stevin, Civic Life in Annie Romein-Verschoor ed., The Principal Works of Simon Steven (Amsterdam: 1966) and James Tully ed., Samuel Pufendorf: on the Duty of Man and Citizen According to Natural Law (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1991). See also the discussion in my "The Attributes of Citizens; Virtue, Manners and the Activity of Citizenship", Economy and Society 24 (1995).
126. I have no space to discuss this wider literature. Two examples are, however, the Civic Life or Vita Politica of Simon Stevin (CV Swits and Zeitlinger, 1590), and Samuel Pufendorf's much more well-known treatise on "man and citizen". It so happens that Stevin was a student and lecturer at the University of Leiden at precisely the moment when Lipsius was on of its "most respected and famous" scholars, and that Pufendorf was also (much later) a student of Leiden, where he was influenced by the Lipsian legacy of Stoic teaching, as well as by Hobbes' De Cive. See Simon Stevin, Civic Life in Annie Romein-Verschoor ed., The Principal Works of Simon Steven (Amsterdam: 1966) and James Tully ed., Samuel Pufendorf: on the Duty of Man and Citizen According to Natural Law (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1991). See also the discussion in my "The Attributes of Citizens; Virtue, Manners and the Activity of Citizenship", Economy and Society 24 (1995).
127. Michael Walzer, "Citizenship", in Terence Ball, James Farr and Russell L. Hanson eds., Political Innovation and Conceptual Change (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989), p. 215.
128. Tully ed., On the Duty of Man and Citizen, pp. 175-6.
129. TH Marshall, "Citizenship and Social Class", reprinted in Class, Citizenship and Social Development (Chicago: Chicago University Press, 1977 [1949]).