Suchergebnisse

Frontmatter -- Contents -- Acknowledgments -- Note on Texts Cited -- Introduction -- Part I: Christian Rome -- Introduction -- 1. The Church and Machiavelli's Depiction of Italy's Historical Situation -- 2. The Ravages of Christianity -- Part II: Pagan Rome -- Introduction -- 3. The Foundation for Tyranny in Rome -- 4. Corruption, Youth, and Foreign Influences -- 5. Machiavelli's Ambiguous Praise of Paganism -- Part III: Machiavelli's New Rome -- Introduction -- 6. Old Lands and Machiavelli's New One -- 7. A Temporal Christianity and the Princes of the Republic -- 8. Machiavelli's Rule and Human Liberty -- Notes -- Works Cited -- Index

Montesquieu's Spirit of the Laws is famous for overtly associating despotism with Asia and the Middle East and not with Europe. A scholar on this basis might be inclined to term Montesquieu an Orientalist, one who gazes at exotic foreign cultures in order to exert control over these distant peoples in both thought and in reality. Sullivan argues, however, that Montesquieu's great work, contrary to first impressions, actually implicates Europe itself with despotism. Specifically, the Frenchman reveals that many of Europe's greatest philosophical and religious ideas are themselves despotic and have inspired cruel and violent practices on the continent and beyond. Indeed, when Montesquieu uses the formulation "idées despotiques" in the work, he refers to the deplorable punishments that such ideas inspire. In some cases, hoary philosophical authorities such as Plato and Aristotle articulate and advocate for such ideas. Remaining ensconced in revered sources, they can wait for centuries to be rediscovered and revived. In other cases, Christians have promulgated ideas that induce human beings to commit earthly outrages for the sake of heavenly salvation. More recently, Machiavelli and Hobbes have introduced terrifying abuses in their attempts to correct those of their predecessors. These despotic ideas possess both longevity and geographical range, and therefore remain a constant threat. Montesquieu seeks to foster in the readers of his masterwork a repugnance for these despotic ideas so that future generations might be relieved of their vicious influence.

AbstractCatherine Zuckert's Machiavelli's Politics offers an unprecedented interpretation of all of Machiavelli's major works. Her interpretation places Machiavelli in his historical context as he understood it and shows Machiavelli seeking a populist alternative in politics. Because her approach and her conclusion have been championed by scholars explicitly opposed to Strauss's interpretation of Machiavelli, she intervenes in the scholarly debates on Machiavelli by drawing seemingly opposed approaches closer together. Strauss acknowledges the importance of Machiavelli's historical situation and understands him as a type of democrat. Nevertheless, in highlighting the functioning of Machiavelli's republic, Zuckert directly challenges Strauss, who, she argues, focuses too narrowly on Machiavelli's war on Christianity to explicate fully Machiavelli's politics. Religion and politics, though, are inextricably linked in Machiavelli's thought, and his treatment of Christianity's ascendency offers insight into his new republicanism. Consideration of Montesquieu's commentary on Machiavelli underscores some of the excesses of the Florentine's political solutions.