Abstract
R. G. Collingwood’s description of the difference between the ‘inside’ and ‘outside’ of an event had profound implications for historians of political thought in the 1960s, when it played a role in inspiring the articulation of the approach to intellectual history that has come to be known as that of ‘the Cambridge School’.2 Collingwood’s choice of the example of Ceasar’s death at the hands of assassins seeking to save the republic was fortuitous, in so far as the work of those associated with the Cambridge School has heavily contributed to a remarkable upsurge of interest in republicanism as an historical tradition of political argument.3 Much has been written about this development since the publication of John Pocock’s The Machiavellian Moment in 1975 and Quentin Skinner’s The Foundations of Modern Political Thought in 1978; with the recent appearance of reassessments of historical republicanism by these authors, a re-evaluation of the subject is timely.
The historian, investigating any event in the past, makes a distinction between what may be called the outside and the inside of an event. By the outside of the event I mean everything belonging to it which can be described in terms of bodies and their movements: the passage of Caesar, accompanied by certain men, across a river called the Rubicon at one date, or the spilling of his blood on the floor of the senate-house at another. By the inside of the event I mean that in it which can only be described in terms of thought: Caesar’s defiance of Republican law, or the clash of constitutional policy between himself and his assassins. The historian is never concerned with either of these to the exclusion of the other. He is investigating not mere events (where by the mere event I mean one which has only an outside and no inside) but actions, and an action is the unity of the outside and inside of an event. He is interested in the crossing of the Rubicon only in its relation to Republican law, and in the spilling of Caesar’s blood only in its relation to a constitutional conflict. His work may begin by discovering the outside of an event, but it can never end there; he must always remember that the event was an action, and that his main task is to think himself into this action, to discern the thought of its agent.
R. G. Collingwood, The Idea of History (1946)1
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Notes
R. G. Collingwood, The Idea of History (Oxford, 1946), p. 213.
J. Tully, ed., Meaning and Context: Quentin Skinner and his Critics (Princeton, NJ, 1988), pp. 55–6.
D. Castiglione and I. Hampsher-Monk, eds, The History of Political Thought in National Context (Cambridge, 2001), pp. 175–88.
A. Patten, ‘The Republican Critique of Liberalism’, British Journal of Political Science 26 (1996), 25–44.
P. Pettit, Republicanism: a theory of freedom and government (Oxford, 1997).
J. W. Maynor, Republicanism in the Modem World (Oxford, 2003), pp. 1–32.
D. Weinstock, ‘Introduction’ to D. Weinstock and C. Nadeau, eds, Republicanism: history, theory and practice (London, 2004).
D. Castiglione, ‘Republicanism and its Legacy’, European Journal of Political Theory 4 (2005), 453–65.
Robert Filmer, Patriacha and Other Writings, ed. P. Laslett (Oxford, 1949).
John Locke, Two Treatises of Government, ed. and intro. P. Laslett (Cambridge, 1960).
H. Baron, The Crisis of the Early Italian Renaissance: civic humanism and republican liberty in an age of classicism and tyranny (Princeton, NJ, 1955, 2 Vols, revised 1966).
C. Robbins, The Eighteenth-Century Commonwealthman: studies in the transition, development, and circumstances of English liberal thought from the Restoration of Charles II until the War with the Thirteen Colonies (Cambridge, Mass., 1959).
F. Gilbert, Machiavelli and Guicciardini: politics and history in sixteenth-century Florence (Princeton, NJ, 1965).
B. Bailyn, The Ideological Origins of the American Revolution (Cambridge, Mass., 1967).
G. Wood, The Creation of the American Republic, 1776–1987 (Chapel Hill, NC, 1969).
J. Dunn, The Political Thought of John Locke: an historical account of the argument of the ‘Two Treatises of Government’ (Cambridge, 1969).
R. E. Shalhope, ‘Towards a Republican Synthesis: the emergence of an understanding of republicanism in American history’, William and Mary Quarterly, 3rd series, 29 (1972), 49–80.
I. Kramnick, Republicanism and Bourgeois Radicalism. Political ideology in late eighteenth-century England and America (Ithaca, NY, 1990).
M. P. Zuckert, Natural Rights and the New Republicanism (Princeton, NJ, 1994).
J. Hankins, ‘The “Baron Thesis” after Forty Years and Some Recent Studies of Leonardo Bruni’, Journal of the History of Ideas 56 (1995), 324–30.
W. J. Connell, ‘The Republican Idea’ in J. Hankins, ed., Renaissance Civic Humanism (Cambridge, 2000), pp. 14–29.
J. G. A. Pocock, ‘The History of Political Thought: a methodological enquiry’, Philosophy, Politics, and Society, 2nd series, ed. P. Laslett and W. G. Runciman (Oxford, 1962), pp. 183–202.
J. Dunn, ‘The Identity of the History of Ideas’, Philosophy 43 (1968), 85–104.
Q. R. D. Skinner, ‘Meaning and Understanding in the History of Ideas’, History and Theory 8 (1969), 3–53.
J. G. A. Pocock, ‘Quentin Skinner. The history of politics and the politics of history’, Common Knowledge 10 (2004), 532–50 (537–8).
I. Hampsher-Monk, ‘Political Languages in Time: the work of J. G. A. Pocock’, British Journal of Political Science 14 (1984), 159–74.
S. Collini, ‘General Introduction’ in S. Collini, R. Whatmore and B. Young, eds, Economy, Polity, Society: British intellectual history, 1750–1950 (Cambridge, 2000).
J. Gunnell, Political Theory: tradition and interpretation (Cambridge, Mass., 1979).
C. Condren, The Status and Appraisal of Classic Texts (Princeton, NJ, 1985).
P. L. Janssen, ‘Political Thought as Traditionary Action: the critical response to Skinner and Pocock’, History and Theory, 24 (1985), 115–46.
D. Harlan, ‘Intellectual History and the Return of Literature’, American Historical Review 94 (1989), 581–609.
R. Tuck, ‘History of Political Thought’, in P. Burke, ed., New Perspectives on Historical Writing (Pennsylvania, 1992).
M. Richter, ‘Reconstructing the History of Political Languages: Pocock, Skinner and the Geschichtliche Grundbegriffe’, History and Theory 29 (1990), 38–70.
M. Bevir, The Logic of the History of Ideas (Cambridge, 2001).
K. Palonen, Quentin Skinner: history, politics, rhetoric (Cambridge, 2003), pp. 29–60.
J. Coleman, ‘The History of Political Thought in a Modern University’, History of Political Thought 21 (2000), 152–71.
D. Runciman, ‘The History of political thought: the state of the discipline’, British Journal of Politics and International Relations 3 (2001), 84–104.
K. Haakonssen, ‘The History of Eighteenth-Century Philosophy: history or philosophy?’ in K. Haakonssen, ed., The Cambridge History of Eighteenth-Century Philosophy (Cambridge, 2006), pp. 3–25.
C. Robbins, review of The Machiavellian Moment, William and Mary Quarterly, 3rd series, 33 (1976), 335–7.
J. Hexter, review of The Machiavellian Moment, History and Theory 16 (1977), 326–7.
D. R. Kelley, review of The Foundations of Modern Political Thought 40 (1979), 666.
Q. Skinner, Machiavelli (Oxford, 1981).
R. Rorty, J. B. Schneewind and Q. Skinner, eds, Philosophy in History (Cambridge, 1984), pp. 193–221.
J. Pocock, The Machiavellian Moment Florentine political thought and the Atlantic republican tradition (Princeton, NJ, 2003), pp. 83–330.
Q. Skinner, The Foundations of Modern Political Thought Volume One. The Renaissance (Cambridge, 1978), pp. 3–48, 69–112, 139–89.
J. Pocock, ‘Machiavelli and the Rethinking of History’, Il Pensiero Politico, 27 (1994), 215–30.
J. Pocock, ‘Political Thought in the English-speaking Atlantic, 1760–1790’, in J. G. A. Pocock, G. Schochet and L. G. Schwoerer, eds, Varieties of British Political Thought, 1500–1800 (Cambridge, 1996), pp. 246–320.
J. Pocock, ‘The Machiavellian Moment Revisited: a study in history and ideology’, Journal of Modem History 53 (1981), 49–72.
H. F. Grœnvelt [Dumont, S. Romilly, J. Scarlett], Letters containing an account of the late Revolution in France, and Observations on the Constitution, Laws, Manners, and Institutions of the English (London, 1792), Letter 1, p. 11.
J. Pocock, Barbarism and Religion, Vol. III: The First Decline and Fall (Cambridge, 2003).
N. Tarcov, review of The Machiavellian Moment, Political Science Quarterly 91 (1976), 382.
M. Goldie, review of Barbarism and Religion, Vols 1 and 2, Political Studies 48 2000, 1045.
B. W. Young, review of Barbarism and Religion Vol. 3, Albion 36 (2004), 528–9.
Q. Skinner, Machiavelli (Oxford, 1981), pp. 56–73.
Q. Skinner, The Foundations of Modern Political Thought. Volume Two. The Age of Re formation (Cambridge, 1978), pp. 302–48.
Q. Skinner, ‘A Third Concept of Liberty’, Proceedings of the British Academy 117 (2002), 237–68.
B. Worden, ‘Factory of the Revolution’, London Review of Books (5 February 1998), 13–15.
I. Hampsher-Monk, review of Liberty before Liberalism, Historical Journal, 41 (1998), 1183–7.
G. Newey, ‘How do we Find Out what he Meant? Historical context and the autonomy of ideas in Quentin Skinner’, Times Literary Supplement (26 June 1998), 29.
P. Springborg, ‘Republicanism, Freedom from Domination, and the Cambridge Contextual Historians’, Political Studies 49 (2001), 851–77.
B. Fontana, ‘In the Gardens of the Republic’, Times Literary Supplement (11 July 2003).
P. Zagorin, ‘Republicanisms’, British Journal of the History of Philosophy 11 (2003), 701–14.
M. Albertone, ‘Nuove discussioni sull’idea di repubblica nel XVIII secolo’, Rivista Storica Italiana 114 (2002), 458–76.
J. Moore, review note, Political Studies Review 2 (2003), 56–7.
D. Wootton, review of Republicanism: A Shared European Heritage, English Historical Review 120 (2005), 135–9.
M. Albertone, ed., Il Repubblicanesimo Moderno: L’idea di repubblica nella riflessione storica di Franco Venturi (Naples, 2006).
J. C. D. Clark, English Society, 1688–1832: ideology, social structure and political practice during the ancien regime (Cambridge, 2000 [orig. 1985]).
I. Hont, ‘Introduction’ and ‘The Rhapsody of Public Debt: David Hume and voluntary state bankruptcy’ in I. Hont, The Jealousy of Trade (Cambridge, Mass., 2005), pp. 1–156, 353–325.
M. Sonenscher, ‘The Nation’s Debt and the Birth of the Modern Republic: the French fiscal deficit and the politics of the revolution of 1789’, History of Political Thought 18 (1997), 64–103, 267–325.
J. Dunn, ‘The Identity of the Bourgeois Liberal Republic’ in B. Fontana, ed., The Invention of the Modern Republic (Cambridge, 1994), pp. 209–10.
J. Shklar, ‘Montesquieu and the New Republicanism’ in J. Shklar, Political Thought and Political Thinkers (Chicago, 1998), pp. 244–61.
D. Hume, ‘Of Civil Liberty’, Political Essays, ed. K. Haakonssen (Cambridge, 1994), p. 52.
Q. Skinner, ‘States and the Freedom of Citizens’ in Q. Skinner and B. Strath, eds, States and Citizens. History, theory, prospects (Cambridge, 2003), pp. 11–27.
R. Price, Observations on the Importance of the American Revolution (London, 1785), p. 72n.
Political Writings, ed. D. O. Thomas (Cambridge, 1991), p. 164.
G. E. Aylmer, review of The Foundations of Modem Political Thought, English Historical Review 95 (1980), 149.
F. Venturi, Utopia and Reform in the Enlightenment (Cambridge, 1971), pp. 18–19.
F. D’Ivernois et al., An Historical View of the Constitution and Revolutions of Geneva in the Eighteenth Century (London, 1784), p. 321.
E. Clavière and J.-P. Duroveray, Pieces justificatives, pour messieurs Du Roveray & Clavière (Geneva, 1780), pp. 52–3.
F. D’Ivernois, ‘La loi de la réélection, envisagée sous son vrai Point-de-vue’, Mémoires (Geneva, 1780), p. 55.
M.-C. Pitassi, De l’orthodoxie aux Lumières. Genève 1670–1737 (Geneva, 1992).
F. D’Ivernois, Des Révolutions de France et de Genève (London, 1795).
D. Wootton, ed., Republicanism, Liberty, and Commercial Society, 1649–1776 (Stanford, Calif., 1994), pp. 45–81, 139–98.
B. Worden, Roundhead Reputations. The English Civil Wars and the passions of posterity (Harmondsworth, 2001), pp. 122–46, 209–10.
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Copyright information
© 2006 Richard Whatmore
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Whatmore, R. (2006). intellectual history and the history of political thought. In: Whatmore, R., Young, B. (eds) palgrave advances in intellectual history. Palgrave Advances. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230204300_7
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230204300_7
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, London
Print ISBN: 978-1-4039-3901-2
Online ISBN: 978-0-230-20430-0
eBook Packages: Palgrave History CollectionHistory (R0)