Classical Humanism and Republicanism in English Political Thought: 1570-1640.

This study aims to show that themes derived from classical humanism and from Italian humanist republicanism played a role in English political thought from the late Elizabethan period up to the Civil War. Peltonen challenges the scholarly perception, which he associates especially with J.G.A. Pocock, that "classical humanism" in its political dimension "appeared twice in England. In its original form it . . . flourished during the early part of the sixteenth [century]. It fizzled out, however, in the middle of the century to reemerge transformed" in the classical republicanism of the 1650s (2). To demonstrate the actual continuity of classical humanist political thinking across this supposed gap, Peltonen begins by introducing the main humanistic themes to which he will return throughout the book, illustrating their presence in writings from the 1570s and 1580s. Among them are the value of the vita activa, "true nobility" as a function of personal merit, service in an army of citizens and in offices of civil governance as modes of civic participation, and the concept of the mixed constitution, combining elements of rule by the one, the few, and the many, as an appropriate framework for the life of the active citizen and of the state.

The second chapter shows the appearance of these themes in Elizabethan treatises on the civil life of towns and the governance of Ireland and translations of works on the states of Poland and Venice. The greater part of the book deals with the reign of James I. Peltonen recognizes the importance of the vocabularies of royal absolutism, the ancient constitution, and "Tacitism" in Jacobean political discourse, but argues in favor of a place for Ciceronian and republican themes as well. After surveying a variety of texts from anonymous political tracts to Jonson's plays, Peltonen discusses three figures in depth. Texts by Bacon are analyzed for their development of the Machiavellian theory of civic grandezza; Thomas Hedley's speech on impositions in the Parliament of 1610 and Thomas Scott's pamphlets from the 1620s are shown to use humanistic arguments as well as ones with other ideological backgrounds. Finally, Peltonen sees continuity but also a "partial decline" (280) in the humanist tradition's impact from 1625 to 1640.

The most important problems in this study have to do with some fuzziness about what claims are being made. Peltonen recognizes that "central notions of classical humanism . . . were not necessarily by themselves incompatible with support for a strong monarchy" (165), and that "it would be highly misleading to equate republicanism with humanism" (8). It is not always clear what implications (if any) for the role of "classical republicanism" are to be drawn from some of the data supplied, such as statements about the active life or true nobility in educational or moral treatises. It is also not completely clear how great a role is being ascribed to either Ciceronian humanism or republicanism relative to other factors in the era's political discourse; some general statements on this score are very cautious, some fairly expansive.

On the other hand, the book's great value for scholars lies in its gathering together of a wealth of material relevant to its topic. Other scholars in recent years have mentioned particular instances in which humanistic and quasi-republican arguments surfaced in Elizabethan and Jacobean discourse; here a broad range of sources is systematically surveyed. Treatments of individual texts are lucid and perceptive. Peltonen has organized a body of evidence which should be taken into account in the ongoing analysis of this crucial period in the history of political thought.

JOHN F. McDIARMID New College, University of South Florida