DOCSLIB.ORG

Human Nature in Hobbes and Thucydides

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Human Nature in Hobbes and Thucydides Human Nature in Hobbes and Thucydides by Jonathan Wensveen A thesis submitted to the Faculty of Graduate Studies in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts in Political Science Carleton University Ottawa, Ontario Canada © 2013 Jonathan Wensveen Abstract As a close reader, translator, and self-professed admirer of Thucydides, Thomas Hobbes was heavily influenced by the former’s account of human nature, provided in his History of the Peloponnesian War. In fact, many scholars (in both political theory and international relations) have been keen to point out just this. Passages, they argue, such as the Plague at Athens and the Civil War at Corcyra, both of which reveal human nature at its darkest, undoubtedly shaped Hobbes’s own understanding and conception of man, the most comprehensive account of which appears in the first part of his most famous and mature work, Leviathan. What many of these scholars fail to acknowledge, however, is that for all of their similarities Thucydides’ account of human nature is also somewhat different from that of Hobbes. Indeed, although Thucydides often describes man at his worst, his History also provides moving examples of man at his best. In contrast to passages such as the Plague at Athens and the Civil War at Corcyra, passages such as the Mytilenean Debate and Pericles’ Funeral Oration highlight the human concern and capacity for virtue and justice, and indicate a recognition on the part of Thucydides (as opposed to Hobbes) that, despite what the primordial imposes on human beings they nevertheless and at the same time yearn for something higher. The purpose of this thesis, then, is to account for this fundamental, yet often overlooked difference. In it, I essentially argue that the difference between Thucydides and Hobbes on the question of human nature can be explained best by looking to Aristotle and Hobbes’s attack on him. More specifically, I argue that Hobbes’s rejection of Aristotle’s political science, moral and political psychology, and account of human nature underlying it, is also and at the same time what necessarily handcuffs him from acknowledging as natural certain aspects of the human condition that Thucydides, like Aristotle, does. Finally, I argue that for this reason, Hobbes’s attack on Aristotle also qualifies, in some ways, as an attack on that thinker he admired most: Thucydides. i Acknowledgements I would like to thank Professor Newell for his willingness to supervise and take me on as a graduate student. I will forever be grateful for his time and generosity as both my teacher and friend. Second, I would like to thank Professor Darby for agreeing to be my second reader and beyond that, for his constant support throughout my M.A. Third, I would like to thank Professor von Heyking—first, for cultivating my interest in political philosophy; and second, for introducing me to Thucydides, whose History I have since fallen in love with. Most important, I would like to thank my parents, James and Mary Anne, for their unconditional love and support. I am proud to be their son. ii Table of Contents Introduction..................................................................................................................................................................1 Chapter 1: Hobbes on Human Nature.............................................................................................................13 Hobbes’s Primordialism........................................................................................................................14 Hobbes’s Reductionism.........................................................................................................................20 The Natural Condition of Mankind...................................................................................................28 Hobbes’s Unnatural Solution..............................................................................................................32 Chapter 2: Thucydides on Human Nature.....................................................................................................42 Pathways to Conflation: The Plague at Athens and The Civil War at Corcyra...............43 The Plague at Athens and The Civil War at Corcyra Reconsidered....................................51 A Gift from the Gods: Thucydides’ Hidden Teaching on Human Nature..........................56 Between Necessity and Justice: The Primordial and the Transcendental in Thucydides..................................................................................................................................................65 Chapter 3: Hobbes’s Attack on Aristotle........................................................................................................73 “The Worst Teacher That Ever Was” ..............................................................................................74 The Leviathan as an Attack on Aristotle’s Metaphysics, Politics, and Ethics...................78 Of Beasts and Gods: Hobbes and Aristotle on Human Nature..............................................89 Spiritedness Versus Vainglory and Madness: Aristotle, Hobbes, and Psychology of Thumos.........................................................................................................................................................96 Chapter 4: Hobbes’s Attack on Thucydides...............................................................................................110 “The Most Politic Historiographer That Ever Writ”? ............................................................111 The Leviathan as an Attack on the History?...............................................................................119 Of Beasts and Gods Revisited: Hobbes, Aristotle, and Thucydides on Human Nature.........................................................................................................................................................132 Disordered Souls Versus Soulless Automatons: Hobbes, Aristotle, Thucydides and the Psychology of Thumos.................................................................................................................139 Conclusion................................................................................................................................................................150 Bibliography............................................................................................................................................................155 iii Introduction Hobbes, Thucydides, and The Question of Human Nature At first, comparing and contrasting a modern political philosopher known primarily for his views on domestic politics to an ancient historian known primarily for his on foreign affairs, may seem odd. Whereas Thomas Hobbes, it might be said, devoted the majority of his life to discussing and theorizing about order within political communities, Thucydides devoted the majority of his to documenting disorder between them. Upon deeper reflection, however, the two share more in common than it might, at first, appear; for although they differ in terms of content (not to mention style) both remain, at the most basic and fundamental level, concerned with the nature of war and peace and with the question of human nature more generally. In fact, for this very reason, Hobbes became a close reader, translator, and self- professed admirer of Thucydides. In his verse autobiography, he tells us that, of the Greeks and Latins he read, “none please’d [him] like Thucydides.”1 And in his own translation of the History, he makes a marginal note shedding light on why. As Richard Schlatter observes, in the margin of Book One, Hobbes wrote “the use of this history” where “Thucydides claimed that ‘he that desired to look into the truth of things done and which (according to the condition of humanity) may be done again.’”2 In marking this passage, however, Hobbes was highlighting more than just the “use” of Thucydides’ History. He was, at the same time and according to Schlatter, “emphasizing a concept which was fundamental in his own thinking as well as in that of Thucydides. The idea of an unchanging human nature, the constant element in history, the common denominator which enables the historian to compare one 1Hobbes, Verse Autobiography, line 84. 2Richard Schlatter, “Thomas Hobbes and Thucydides,” Journal of the History of Ideas, Vol. 6, No. 3 (June, 1945), 357 1 event with another and construct a formula or pattern which is intelligible and useful.”3 (Italics mine) Not surprisingly, therefore, Hobbes’s own understanding of human nature, the most comprehensive account of which appears in the first part of Leviathan (a work that, for all intents and purposes, constructs a “formula or pattern” useful for establishing political order) seems to have been heavily influenced by Thucydides’ description of human nature in his History—so much so, as Schlatter rightly points out, that the descriptions in the Leviathan of how men act read like generalizations from the History.4 Passages, for instance, such as the Plague and Athens and the Civil War at Corcyra, both of which reveal human nature at its darkest, seem to have shaped Hobbes’s own understanding and conception of man. Accordingly and as Peter Pouncey puts it, although “Hobbes does not acknowledge any debt to Thucydides for the formations of his conception of human nature, either in the Dedication or Letter to the Readers, with which he prefaced his translation, or later
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Hobbes and Vattel in Crimea: a Natural Law Critique of the Russian Annexation Juan Martir Xavier University
    Xavier Journal of Undergraduate Research Volume 2 Article 6 2014 Hobbes and Vattel in Crimea: A Natural Law Critique of the Russian Annexation Juan Martir Xavier University Follow this and additional works at: https://www.exhibit.xavier.edu/xjur Recommended Citation Martir, Juan (2014) "Hobbes and Vattel in Crimea: A Natural Law Critique of the Russian Annexation," Xavier Journal of Undergraduate Research: Vol. 2 , Article 6. Available at: https://www.exhibit.xavier.edu/xjur/vol2/iss1/6 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by Exhibit. It has been accepted for inclusion in Xavier Journal of Undergraduate Research by an authorized editor of Exhibit. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Hobbes and Vattel in Crimea: A Natural Law Critique of the Russian Annexation Juan Martir In March 2014, the Russian government—upon learning the people of Crimea voted overwhelmingly by a referendum to secede from Ukraine—announced that it would annex the territory. The international community was shocked. United States Secretary of State John Kerry condemned the move as a revival of outmoded power politics: “You don’t just in the 21st century behave in 19th century fashion by invading another country on a completely trumped-up pretext.”1 This paper argues that, even by earlier standards in international politics, this move by Russia would be considered illegitimate or imprudent. By looking at the incident through the natural law theories of Thomas Hobbes and Emer de Vattel, the annexation would be considered imprudent: by the former because it threatens domestic harmony and is completely illegitimate, and by the latter because it is a blatant violation of the rights of the Ukrainian polity.
    [Show full text]
  • On the Development of Spinoza's Account of Human Religion
    Intermountain West Journal of Religious Studies Volume 5 Number 1 Spring 2014 Article 4 2014 On the Development of Spinoza’s Account of Human Religion James Simkins University of Pittsburgh Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.usu.edu/imwjournal Recommended Citation Simkins, James "On the Development of Spinoza’s Account of Human Religion." Intermountain West Journal of Religious Studies 5, no. 1 (2014). https://digitalcommons.usu.edu/imwjournal/ vol5/iss1/4 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Journals at DigitalCommons@USU. It has been accepted for inclusion in Intermountain West Journal of Religious Studies by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@USU. For more information, please contact [email protected]. 52 James Simkins: On the Development of Spinoza’s Account of Human Religion JAMES SIMKINS graduated with philosophy, history, and history and philosophy of science majors from the University of Pittsburgh in 2013. He is currently taking an indefinite amount of time off to explore himself and contemplate whether or not to pursue graduate study. His academic interests include Spinoza, epistemology, and history from below. IMW Journal of Religious Studies Vol. 5:1 53 ‡ On the Development of Spinoza’s Account of Human Religion ‡ In his philosophical and political writings, Benedict Spinoza (1632-1677) develops an account of human religion, which represents a unique theoretical orientation in the early modern period.1 This position is implicit in many of Spinoza’s philosophical arguments in the Treatise on the Emendation of the Intellect, the Short Treatise, and Ethics.2 However, it is most carefully developed in his Tractatus Theologico-Politicus (hereafter TTP).3 What makes Spinoza’s position unique is the fact that he rejects a traditional conception of religion on naturalistic grounds, while refusing to dismiss all religion as an entirely anthropological phenomenon.
    [Show full text]
  • The Reception of Hobbes's Leviathan
    This is a repository copy of The reception of Hobbes's Leviathan. White Rose Research Online URL for this paper: https://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/71534/ Version: Published Version Book Section: Parkin, Jon (2007) The reception of Hobbes's Leviathan. In: Springborg, Patricia, (ed.) The Cambridge Companion to Hobbes's Leviathan. The Cambridge Companions to Philosophy, Religion and Culture . Cambridge University Press , Cambridge , pp. 441-459. https://doi.org/10.1017/CCOL0521836670.020 Reuse Items deposited in White Rose Research Online are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved unless indicated otherwise. They may be downloaded and/or printed for private study, or other acts as permitted by national copyright laws. The publisher or other rights holders may allow further reproduction and re-use of the full text version. This is indicated by the licence information on the White Rose Research Online record for the item. Takedown If you consider content in White Rose Research Online to be in breach of UK law, please notify us by emailing [email protected] including the URL of the record and the reason for the withdrawal request. [email protected] https://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/ jon parkin 19 The Reception of Hobbes’s Leviathan The traditional story about the reception of Leviathan was that it was a book that was rejected rather than read seriously.1 Leviathan’s perverse amalgamation of controversial doctrine, so the story goes, earned it universal condemnation. Hobbes was outed as an athe- ist and discredited almost as soon as the work appeared. Subsequent criticism was seen to be the idle pursuit of a discredited text, an exer- cise upon which young militant churchmen could cut their teeth, as William Warburton observed in the eighteenth century.2 We need to be aware, however, that this was a story that was largely the cre- ation of Hobbes’s intellectual opponents, writers with an interest in sidelining Leviathan from the mainstream of the history of ideas.
    [Show full text]
  • Freedom and the State: the Social Contract This Course Aims To
    Freedom and the State: The Social Contract This course aims to introduce students to central questions in political philosophy, through engagement with the work of several significant political philosophers: Thomas Hobbes, John Locke, Jean-Jacques Rousseau, Immanuel Kant and John Rawls. The topics with which we will be most deeply concerned include the legitimacy of the state; the limits of the state’s authority; the basis of rights of resistance or rebellion; the relevance of consent to political authority; the nature and value of freedom; the relationship between politics and human nature; and social justice. We will also, as often as we can, attempt to relate the views of these philosophers to contemporary debates. Program of lectures and reading Week 1 (15/01) Lecture 1: Political Legitimacy and the Social Contract Tradition Reading: Easy: Wolf (2006): 34-48. Easier: ‘Authority’ and ‘Political Obligation’ in the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Harder: Boucher & Kelly (1994): ch. 1. Hampton (1997): Chapter 3. Week 2 (22/01) Lecture 2: Hobbes on Human Nature and the State of Nature Primary Reading: Leviathan, Part I, chs. 11, 13-16. Secondary Reading: Easy: Wolf (2006): 8-17. Easier: Levine (2002): 15-32. Newey (2008): ch. 4-5. Harder: Warburton, Pike and Matravers (2000): 100-105. Seminar question: If human nature is, or were, as Hobbes describes it, does it follow that life in the state of nature would be ‘solitary, poore, nasty, brutish and short’? Week 3 (29/01) Lecture 3: Hobbes on the Covenant, the Sovereign and the Right to Rebel Primary Reading: Leviathan, Part II, chs.
    [Show full text]
  • Hobbes' Leviathan. the Irresistible Power of a Mortal
    Gabriel L. Negretto * Hobbes’ Leviathan. The Irresistible Power of a Mortal God No one on earth is his equal a creature without fear. He looks down on the highest. He is king over all proud beasts. Job. 41, 24 0. Introduction In different and complex ways, the philosophy and science of the XVII cen- tury moved away from the recognition of a divine authority in the interpretation of human events to an exclusively naturalistic account of this world. Hobbes has been widely regarded as the most representative figure of this process. At a time where religious beliefs were considered to be the prime motive of human behav- ior, Hobbes’ mature work, the Leviathan, depicted men as egoistic calculators whose overriding concern was the pursuit of private advantage. Following this premise, Hobbes rejected the idea that politics is subordinated to the attainment of the ultimate good in spiritual life and proposed that the supreme authority in this world is a secular state whose sole end is the protection of physical life. In this vein, traditional interpreters have maintained that although half of the Levia- than is devoted to theological arguments, theology is either irrelevant or plays a secondary role for its central naturalistic arguments. I will argue, against the traditional interpretation, that theological arguments are crucial to understand Hobbes’ views on the foundations of political obligation and state authority. While rejecting the idea that Hobbes was essentially a moral- ist or a thinker deeply influenced by religion, I wish to propose that he used the scriptures and religion as part of a strategy of persuasion aimed at creating a sta- ble political authority in a world were religious beliefs were still important com- ponents of human action.
    [Show full text]
  • The Bipolar Longings of Thumos: a Feminist Rereading of Plato's Republic
    The Bipolar Longings of Thumos: A Feminist Rereading of Plato's Republic CHRISTINA TARNOPOLSKY, McGill University Plato's treatment of thumos in the Republic might seem like an odd place to look for mining fresh feminist insights into the complex and political character of human desire. 1 The dialogue itself is often seen as one in which human desire is down played in favor of the godlike and self-sufficient philosopher-kings who are quite unlike the erotic, needy, and striving Socrates of Plato's Symposium (Bloom 1968, 423; Williams 1993, 98-102). For this very reason, feminists have usually looked to the latter dialogue in order to derive a notion of classical desire, either from the Aristophanic notion of eros as a striving for one's better half or from Diotima's notion of eros as a striving for wholeness and as the desire to give birth to a new self in the presence of the beloved. More pro­ blematically, Plato's treatment of thumos in the Republic has primarily been co-opted by conservative, anti-feminist thinkers who see it as the manly and warlike passion of anger or spiritedness that animates men's souls (Berns 1984, 335-348; Bloom 1968, 355, 376). Even commenta­ tors who do not share these kinds of political views tend to see Platonic thumos as that element of the soul which counters desire or eros be­ cause it counters those desires that are lodged in the epithumetic (appetitive/desiring) part of the soul (Koziak 2000, 75, 77; Allen 2000b, 252).2 In this paper I hope to challenge all of these views of the Republic by looking at the complex bipolar longings that characterize Plato's notion of thumos.
    [Show full text]
  • Aeschynē in Aristotle's Conception of Human Nature Melissa Marie Coakley University of South Florida, [email protected]
    University of South Florida Scholar Commons Graduate Theses and Dissertations Graduate School 3-20-2014 Aeschynē in Aristotle's Conception of Human Nature Melissa Marie Coakley University of South Florida, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarcommons.usf.edu/etd Part of the Philosophy Commons Scholar Commons Citation Coakley, Melissa Marie, "Aeschynē in Aristotle's Conception of Human Nature" (2014). Graduate Theses and Dissertations. https://scholarcommons.usf.edu/etd/4999 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at Scholar Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Graduate Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Scholar Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Aeschynē in Aristotle’s Conception of Human Nature by Melissa M. Coakley A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Department of Philosophy College of Arts and Science University of South Florida Major Professor: Joanne Waugh, Ph.D. Bruce Silver, Ph.D. Roger Ariew, Ph.D. Thomas Williams, Ph.D. Date of Approval: March 20, 2014 Keywords: Shame, Anaeschyntia, Aidōs, Aischynē, Ancient Greek Passions Copyright © 2014, Melissa M. Coakley DEDICATION This manuscript is dedicated to my husband Bill Murray and to my parents: Joan and Richard Coakley. Thank you for your endless support, encouragement, and friendship. To Dr. John P. Anton, I have learned from you the importance of having a “ton of virtue and a shield of nine layers for protection from the abysmal depths of vice.” Thank you for believing in me, my dear friend.
    [Show full text]
  • Philosophy.Pdf
    Philosophy 1 PHIL:1401 Matters of Life and Death 3 s.h. Contemporary ethical controversies with life and death Philosophy implications; topics may include famine, brain death, animal ethics, abortion, torture, terrorism, capital punishment. GE: Chair Values and Culture. • David Cunning PHIL:1636 Principles of Reasoning: Argument and Undergraduate major: philosophy (B.A.) Debate 3 s.h. Undergraduate minor: philosophy Critical thinking and its application to arguments and debates. Graduate degrees: M.A. in philosophy; Ph.D. in philosophy GE: Quantitative or Formal Reasoning. Faculty: https://clas.uiowa.edu/philosophy/people/faculty PHIL:1861 Introduction to Philosophy 3 s.h. Website: https://clas.uiowa.edu/philosophy/ Varied topics; may include personal identity, existence of The Department of Philosophy offers programs of study for God, philosophical skepticism, nature of mind and reality, undergraduate and graduate students. A major in philosophy time travel, and the good life; readings, films. GE: Values and develops abilities useful for careers in many fields and for any Culture. situation requiring clear, systematic thinking. PHIL:1902 Philosophy Lab: The Meaning of Life 1 s.h. Further exploration of PHIL:1033 course material with the The department also administers the interdisciplinary professor in a smaller group. undergraduate major in ethics and public policy, which it offers jointly with the Department of Economics and the PHIL:1904 Philosophy Lab: Liberty and the Pursuit of Department of Sociology and Criminology; see Ethics and Happiness 1 s.h. Public Policy in the Catalog. Further exploration of PHIL:1034 course material with the professor in a smaller group. Programs PHIL:1950 Philosophy Club 1-3 s.h.
    [Show full text]
  • Hobbes and the Theory of Social Contract As the Context for Kant's
    Hobbes and the theory of social contract as the context for Kant’s political philosophy Gorazd Korošec f we are to deal with Kant’s political theory, we must put it in the context I of social contract theories. The theory of social contract has a central place in Kant’s political theory and by placing it in this tradition, we shall be able to see where his theory is in accordance with the tradition, and where it differs from it. Social contract theory as a mode of political thought has dominated the Age of Enlightenment, but we can also see a revival of such theories in today’s political philosophy. We can trace the origins of social contract theory in ancient and medieval thought to Augustine, who built on Seneca and Cicero, to William of Ockham and Nicholas Cusanus, and find a number of basic elements for such a theory in Francisco Suarez, a Spanish writer who saw common political consent as necessary for people to be gathered together in one political body. Talking about its origins, we can also mention the tradition of natural law theory, developed by Grotius, Althusius, Lipsius and Seiden, which was subsequently included in a large part in theories of social contract by many of its greatest authors. The idea of individual moral autonomy, grown within the movements of Reformation and Protestantism and applied to politics, provided the intellectual basis for a social contract theory. At its heart is the idea that legitimate government is the artificial product of the voluntary agreement of free moral agents, and that there is no »natural« political authority.
    [Show full text]
  • Separation of Powers in Thought and Practice?
    SEPARATION OF POWERS IN THOUGHT AND PRACTICE? Jeremy Waldron * Abstract: The rationale of the separation of powers is often elided with the rationale of checks and balances and with the rationale of the disper- sal of power generally in a constitutional system. This Essay, however, fo- cuses resolutely on the functional separation of powers in what M.J.C. Vile called its “pure form.” Reexamining the theories of Locke, Montesquieu, and Madison, this Essay seeks to recover (amidst all their tautologies and evasions) a genuine case in favor of this principle. The Essay argues that the rationale of the separation of powers is closely related to that of the rule of law: it is partly a matter of the distinct integrity of each of the sepa- rated institutions—judiciary, legislature, and administration. But above all, it is a matter of articulated governance (as contrasted with com- pressed undifferentiated exercises of power). Introduction My topic is the separation of powers, conceived as a political prin- ciple for evaluating the legal and constitutional arrangements of a modern state. What is this principle and why is it important? The ques- tion takes us in interesting directions if we distinguish the separation of powers from two other important principles that are commonly associ- ated, if not identified with it. These other principles are, first , the prin- ciple of the division of power—counseling us to avoid excessive concen- trations of political power in the hands of any one person, group, or agency; and, second, the principle of checks and balances—holding that the exercise of power by any one power-holder needs to be balanced and checked by the exercise of power by other power-holders.
    [Show full text]
  • Hobbes, Aristotle, and Human Happiness
    Hobbes, Aristotle, and Human Happiness During his life in philosophy Thomas Hobbes engaged in several debates. Among his sparring partners the dearest to him was not a contemporary (such as Descartes, White, Bramhall, or Wallis) but Aristotle. This article explores the tension between Hobbes and Aristotle as it appears in metaphysics (including the study of nature), ethics (including psychology), and politics. The article will close with a comparison of their conceptions of human happiness. First impressions would suggest that Hobbes’s ridicule of Aristotle is thoroughly intended and his appreciation of the Philosopher sensationally low: And I beleeve that scarce any thing can be more absurdly said in natural Philosophy, than that which now is called Aristotles Metaphysics; nor more repugnant to Government, than much of that hee hath said in his Politiques; nor more ignorantly, than a great part of his Ethiques.1 Hobbes’s phrasing is certainly impressive, but if the claims he makes are left unspecified, they remain merely words. Having said that, when explicating Hobbes’s position toward Aristotle and Aristotelianism two issues must be taken into consideration: the exact target and the exact content of Hobbes’s criticism.2 The interrelations between Hobbes and Aristotle and Hobbes and Aristotelianism have been studied at great length and in detail.3 To summarise the major conclusion in Hobbes’s own words: vain-philosophy or spiritual darkness derive “partly from Aristotle, partly from Blindnesse of understanding”.4 It is fairly clear that Hobbes’s primary target is a combination of selected Aristotelian doctrines and their adaptation to the Catholic dogma, or, to follow his own coinage, “Aristotelity”.5 To be content with this, I think, is to overlook the nuances of Hobbes’s position.
    [Show full text]
  • Hobbes's Thucydides
    Histos () XXXI–XXXVII REVIEW–DISCUSSION HOBBES’S THUCYDIDES Luca Iori, Thucydides Anglicus: Gli Eight Bookes di Thomas Hobbes e la ricezione inglese delle Storie di Tucidide (–). Pleiadi . Rome: Edizioni di Storia e Letteratura, . Pp. xx + . Paperback, €.. ISBN ----. obbes’s translation of the Eight Bookes of the Peloponnesian Warre () was the first made into English from the Greek text; it was preceded by that of T. Nicolls (), made from the French translation of C. H 1 de Seyssel () which was itself made from the Latin translation of L. Valla, and was followed in England by an edition of the Greek text with Latin notes by J. Hudson (). This book begins with four chapters on Greek studies and the knowledge of Thucydides in England between and (but despite the dates on the title page has little to say of –), and then proceeds to four chapters on Hobbes and his translation. After the Conclusion there are a catalogue of sixty manuscript and printed versions of Thucydides acquired by Oxford and Cambridge libraries up to , a bibliography, and indexes of names of persons and of passages in Thucydides. In ch. i Iori stresses that, if England could not match continental countries for works of classical scholarship until after the Restoration of , from the beginning of the sixteenth century study of the classics was widespread. Crucial were the foundation of St. John’s College, Cambridge (), Corpus Christi College, Oxford (), and at a more junior level the refoundation of St. Paul’s School, London (), while about the same time the nobility who did not send their sons to school took to employing tutors of Latin and Greek, and some of the leading clergy attracted scholars to their households.
    [Show full text]