Hostname: page-component-84b7d79bbc-x5cpj Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-26T01:52:40.187Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Christianity and Republicanism: A Response to Nederman

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 August 2014

Antony Black
Antony Black*
Affiliation:
University of Dundee
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In reply to Nederman I argue that in the Middle Ages monarchy and republicanism were not mutually exclusive, and that hierarchy and organicism were not specifically Christian ideas, and should not, therefore, be seen as the Christian element in republican thought. One should not assume that Christianity or any other historical ideology has an essential core of unchanging characteristics.

Type
Forum
Information
American Political Science Review , Volume 92 , Issue 4 , December 1998 , pp. 919 - 921
Copyright
Copyright © American Political Science Association 1998

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Black, Antony. 1970. Monarchy and Community: Political Ideas in the Later Conciliar Controversy, 1430–1450. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Black, Antony. 1979. Council and Commune: The Conciliar Movement and the Fifteenth-Century Heritage. London: Burns and Oates.Google Scholar
Black, Antony. 1984. Guilds and Civil Society in European Political Thought from the Twelfth Century to the Present. London: Methuen.Google Scholar
Black, Antony. 1992. Political Thought in Europe, 1250–1450. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9781139170178CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Black, Antony. 1997. “Christianity and Republicanism: From St. Cyprian to Rousseau.” American Political Science Review 91(September):647–56.10.2307/2952080CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blythe, James. 1992. Ideal Government and the Mixed Constitution in the Middle Ages. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.10.1515/9781400862603CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bolgar, R. R. 1958. The Classical Heritage and Its Beneficiaries. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Burns, J. H., ed. 1988. The Cambridge History of Medieval Political Thought. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Canning, Joseph. 1987. The Political Thought of Baldus de Ubaldis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511523113CrossRefGoogle Scholar
D'Entrèves, A. P. 1954. Aquinas: Selected Political Writings. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
Duby, Georges. [1978] 1980. The Three Orders: Feudal Society Imagined, trans. Goldhammer, A.. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Gooch, G. P. [1898] 1927. English Democratic Ideas in the Seventeenth Century. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
John of Paris. 1971. On Royal and Papal Power. Toronto: Pontifical Institute of Medieval Studies.Google Scholar
Kantorowicz, E. H. 1957. The King's Two Bodies: A Study in Medieval Political Theology. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Nederman, Cary J. 1998. “The Puzzling Case of Christianity and Republicanism: A Comment on Black.” American Political Science Review 92(December):913–8.10.2307/2586312CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oakley, Francis. 1962. “On the Road from Constance to 1688.” Journal of British Studies 1(1):1–32.10.1086/385440CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Plato, . 1941. Republic, trans. Comford, F. M.. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Skinner, Quentin. 1978. The Foundations of Modern Political Thought, vol. 1. The Renaisance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Submit a response

Comments

No Comments have been published for this article.