¹ Cf. Shils, E., “The Intellectuals and the Powers” Comparative Studies in Society and History, I, no. 1 (1958), p. 6: “The population of every society, and above all those who exercise authority in it, need to have at least intermittently some sense of the stability, coherence and orderliness of their society, they need therefore a body of symbols, such as songs, histories, poems, biographies, and constitutions, etc., which diffuse a sense of affinity among the members of the society.”Google Scholar

² Evans-Pritchard, E. E., The Nuer (Oxford, 1940), p. 108; and generally, Chap. III, section II.Google Scholar

³ Wilamowitz-Moellendorf, U. von, Aristoteles and Athen (1893), I, pp. 260–90.Google Scholar

⁴ Jacoby, F., Atthis: the Local Chronicles of Ancient Athens (Oxford, 1949).Google Scholar

⁵ Jacoby, pp. 199 ff. and 218 ff.

⁶ For this see Finley, M. I., The Greek Historians (London, 1959), introduction.Google Scholar

⁷ Fritz, K. von and Kapp, E., Aristotle's Constitution of Athens and related texts, (New York, Hafner, 1950),Google Scholar introduction; Fuks, A., The Ancestral Constitution: four studies in Athenian party politics at the end of the fifth century B.C. (London, 1953).Google Scholar

⁸ In his prologue to the Prose Edda; see Young, Jean I., The Prose Edda of Snorri Sturluson (Cambridge, 1954), pp. 23–5. E.g.: “Mountains and boulders they associated with the teeth and bones of living creatures, and so they looked on earth as in some way a living being with a life of its own. They knew it was inconceivably ancient as years go, and by nature powerful; it gave birth to all living things and owned all that died, and for that reason they gave it a name and reckoned their descent from it.”Google Scholar

⁹ Chronology, the attempt first to rationalise mythical happenings and then to date them, provides in works like Newton's, IsaacThe Chronology of Ancient Kingdoms Amended (London, 1728) a classic instance of the sterility of this form of interpretation.Google Scholar

¹⁰ I have been constrained to take the following translations more or less at their face value. They appear to display a series of attitudes of mind consonant with the theme of this article.

¹¹ Yu-lan, Fung, A History of Chinese Philosophy, trans. Bodde, D., two-volume edition (Peiping-London, 1937), I, 55.Google Scholar

¹² Kaizuka, S., Confucius (London, 1956), p. 112;Google Scholar cf. Ware, James R., The Sayings of Confucius (New York, Mentor, 1955), p. 28.Google Scholar

¹³ E.g., Sir Coke, Edward, Eighth Reports, ed. Thomas, and Fraser, (London, 1826), preface, pp. iii–xxiii.Google Scholar

¹⁴ Waley, A., Three Ways of Thought in Ancient China (London, 1939), pp. 37–8.Google Scholar

¹⁵ Fung, op. cit., I, 282–4; cf. Dubs, H. H., trans., The Works of Hsüntze (London, 1928), pp. 72–5.Google Scholar

¹⁶ Declareuil, J., Histoire générale du droit francais (Paris, 1925);Google ScholarHazeltine, H. D., ‘The Renaissance’ in Cambridge Legal Essays (Cambridge, 1926);Google ScholarDelaruelle, L., Guillaume Budé (1468–1540)—les origines, les débuts, les idées maîtresses (Paris, 1907);Google ScholarViard, P. E., André Alciat (Paris, 1926);Google ScholarGilmore, M. P., Argument from Roman Law (Cambridge, Mass., 1941);Google ScholarPocock, , The Ancient Constitution and the Feudal Law (Cambridge, 1957), Chap. I.Google Scholar

¹⁷ Hasard, P., La Crise de la Conscience européenne (Paris, 1935), Chap. II: “De l'ancien au modern”.Google Scholar

¹⁸ Viard, , op. cit., pp. 132–64.Google Scholar

¹⁹ Pocock, , op. cit., pp. 11–14.Google Scholar

²⁰ “…et neantmoins ne se peut apprendre par les liures de Iustinian”. Title of Chap. III in the Paris edition of 1603.

²¹ Anti-Tribonian, ed. cit., pp. 13–15, 18, 20–1, 35–6, 86–7.

²² Anti-Tribonian, pp. 36–37, 101–2, 137–8.

²³ Anti-Tribonian, p. 140.

²⁴ Baudouin, De institutione historiœ universe et emus cum jurisprudentia conjunctione, 1561; Bodin, Methodus ad facilem historiarum cognitionem, 1566.

²⁵ See Gassendi, Pierre, Life of Peireskius, Engl. trans. Rand, W. (London, 1657), pp. 200–02: “For he studied the Lawes, after the liberal method of Cujacius, which tends to illustrate the said Lawes from the Fountains themselves, and fundamental Maxims of Equity and Right, rather than from the Rivulets of the Doctors or Lawyers. And this it was, that chiefly made him affect the study of Antiquity; because it gave him great light therein… And what I said occasionally touching his study of Antiquity, comprehends principally Universal History, which he had so printed in his mind and memory, that a man would have thought he had lived in all places and times. For he held it evermore as a Maxime, that History did serve exceedingly, not only to give light to the study of the Law, but to the ordering of a man's life, and the possessing of his mind, with a rare and ingenuous delectation. For he counted it in some sort, more effectual then Philosophy, because she instructs men indeed with words, but History inflames them with examples; and makes in some sort, that we ought not to think much of our short life, making the same partaker of things and times that are past”.Google Scholar

²⁶ Duck, De Usu et Auctoritate Juris Civilis Romani in Dominiis Principum Christianorum (1653), criticised in Giannone's introduction to his Istoria Civile del Regno di Napoli (1723).

²⁷ Pocock, op. cit., Chap. III.

²⁸ Seyssel, Speculum Feudorum (Basle, 1566), pp. 12–16. Seyssel died in 1520 and this work belongs to an early stage of his career.

²⁹ The main sources for humanist study of feudal law are Cujas, Opera qua de iure fecit, II (Paris, 1637) and Hotman, De Feudis commentatio tripertita (Lyons, 1573), “Disputatio de feudis” which contains (Chap. II) an analysis of the opinions of other scholars “de feudorum origin et instituto”. See also Pocock, ibid.

³⁰ For analysis see Pocock, op. cit., Chaps. III and 1V.

³¹ Published 1669, but written earlier.

³² But cf. Hill, , Puritanism and Revolution (London, 1958), pp. 50–63.Google Scholar

³³ Hill, , op. cit., pp. 71–89;Google ScholarWoodhouse, A. S. P., Puritanism and Liberty (London, 1950),Google Scholarpassim; Frank, J., The Levellers (Cambridge, Mass., 1955);CrossRefGoogle Scholar, Pocock, op. cit., pp. 125–7.Google Scholar

³⁴ Fung, , op. cit., p. 78.Google Scholar

³⁵ Archaeologus (London, 1626);Google ScholarGlossarium Archaiologium (London, 1664; posthumous). Pocock, op. cit., Chap. V.Google Scholar

³⁶ Gibson, E., ed., Reliquice Spelmanniame (London, 1698), pp. 127–32.Google Scholar

³⁷ If the unfinished treatise “Of Parliaments” (Reliquice, pp. 57–65) was composed in 1641; Pocock, pp. 120–22.

³⁸ Pocock, Chap. VIII.

³⁹ “Epistle to the Candid Reader” in Brady, Introduction to the Old English History (1684): “…but as to the Matter here treated of, whoever reads our Old Historians and hath not a true Understanding and Apprehension of it, neither can he truly, and as he ought, understand them, nor will he ever be able to arrive at the Knowledge of our Ancient Government, or of what Import and Signification the Men were that lived under it according to their Several Denominations; of what Power, and Interest they were, what they did, and how they behaved themselves; nor who, nor what they were, that contended with our Ancient Kings about Liberty, and Relaxation of the Government, nor indeed what truly the Liberties were they contended for”.

⁴⁰ Pocock, pp. 218–27.

⁴¹ Robbins, Caroline, The Eighteenth-century Commonwealthman (Cambridge, Mass., 1959).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

⁴² See writers as diverse as Bolingbroke, , Dissertation upon Parties (1734),Google Scholar and Cartwright, Major, Take Your Choice (1776),Google Scholar and The English Constitution Produced and Illustrated (1823). For refutations see, e.g., Tucker, Josiah, A Treatise Concerning Civil Government (1781)Google Scholar and Burke, infra. For modern treatments, Hill, op. cit., chap. HI, “The Norman Yoke” and Butterfield, H., George III, Lord North and the People (London, 1949), pp. 337–52.Google Scholar

⁴³ A Discourse of Government with Relation to Militias (Edinburgh, 1698). I am indebted to Professor Robbins for drawing my attention to this work.Google Scholar

⁴⁴ Robertson, William, A View of the Progress of Society in Europe from the Subversion of the Roman Empire to the beginning of the Sixteenth Century, in Works, III (London, 1824), 9–316. It will be seen that the historical framework in which Macaulay sets his account of seventeenth-century England is the typically eighteenth-century one of the subversion of feudal government by the rise of standing armies; e.g., History of England, Chap. I.Google Scholar

⁴⁵ For a detailed analysis of Burke's affinities with seventeenth-century thought, especially that of Sir Matthew Hale (d. 1675), see Pocock, , “Burke and the Ancient Constitution-a problem in the history of ideas” Historical Journal, Vol. III, no. 2 (Cambridge, 1960).Google Scholar

⁴⁶ “They beyond the seas are not only diligent but very curious in this kind; but we are all for profit and Lucrando pane, taking what we find at Market, without enquiring whence it came.” Spelman (perhaps as early as 1614), in Reliquiœte Spelmannianœ, pp. 98–9.

⁴⁷ Dictionary of National Biography, article “Craig, Thomas” see generally Pocock, , Ancient Constitution, pp. 79–90.Google Scholar

⁴⁸ Istoria Civile, Vol. I, “Introduzione”.

⁴⁹ The development of Sicilian historical thought is studied in Romeo, R., 11 Risorgimento in Sicilia (Bari, 1950).Google Scholar

⁵⁰ Pocock, , op. cit., pp. 59–63.Google Scholar

⁵¹ E.g., Church, W. F., Constitutional Thought in Sixteenth-century France (Cambridge, Mass., 1941);Google ScholarSalmon, J. H. M., The French Religious Wars in English Political Thought (Oxford, 1959);Google ScholarLemaire, A., Les lois fondamentales de la monarchie francaise d'après les théoriciens de I'ancien régime (Paris, 1907).Google Scholar

⁵² Seyssel, , La Grande Monarchie de France (Paris, 1541), ff. 1–11.Google Scholar See Hexter, J. H., “Seyssel, Machiavelli and Polybius VI” in Studies in the Renaissance, III (New York, 1956), 75.Google Scholar

⁵³ Pasquier, , Les Recherches de la France, enlarged ed. (Paris, 1596), Book II, Chap. I, ff. 27^b-29^a, and Chap. II, ff. 29^b-31^a.Google Scholar

⁵⁴ Fortescue, De Laudibus Legum Anglie, Chap. XVII; Coke, , Reports (London, 1826), Vol. I,Google Scholar Part II, pp. vii–viii (preface to Second Reports), H, pp. viii–xxiii (preface to Third Reports) and passim; Davies, , Irish Reports (London, 1674), preface.Google Scholar

⁵⁵ Lemaire, , op. cit., pp. 45–7.Google Scholar

⁵⁶ Lemaire, , op. cit., pp. 71ff.Google Scholar

⁵⁷ Lemaire, , op. cit., pp. 82–91.Google Scholar

⁵⁸ Pasquier, , op. cit., ff. 31^b–43^b, 44^b–45^a, 51^a–53^b.Google Scholar

⁵⁹ Lemaire, , op. cit., pp. 92, 101–2.Google Scholar

⁶⁰ Particularly in the Essais sur la Noblesse de France (Amsterdam, 1732),Google Scholar and the Lettres sur les Anciens Parlements de France (London, 1753).Google Scholar Cf. Simon, R., Henry de Boulainviller (Gap, 1940); I follow the familiar if inaccurate spelling.Google Scholar

⁶¹ Essais, pp. 273–300.

⁶² Maraini, F., Meeting with Japan (London, 1959), pp. 151, 377;Google ScholarTsunoda, de Bary and Keene, , Sources of the Japanese Tradition (New York, 1958), pp. 472–75, 479–88, 506–540.Google Scholar

⁶³ Descartes, , Discours de la Méthode (1637),Google Scholar part 1; Bolingbroke, , Letters on the Study of History (Dublin, 1735),Google Scholarpassim; Priestley, , Lectures on History (London, 1788), passim.Google Scholar

⁶⁴ The New Science of Giambattista Vico, trans. Bergin and Fisch (Ithaca, N.Y., 1948), Book I, Section II, X, pp. 56–7.Google Scholar

⁶⁵ Khaldun, Ibn, The Muqaddimah: An Introduction to History, trans. Rosenthal, F. (London, 1958), I, 6, 9–10, 76–8, 80.Google Scholar