Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-fwgfc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-14T13:37:14.489Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Bodin and the Development of the French Monarchy

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 February 2009

Richard Bonney
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

THE ‘history of ideologies’ is now very much the vogue since Professor Quentin Skinner's fine study on The foundations of modern political thought. Whether or not one agrees with all aspects of his interpretation of Bodin—and Dr Parker might argue that it fails to draw out sufficiently the moral philosopher inside the jurist, while Professor Rose might prefer to stress the Judaizing tendencies of the theorist as a central preoccupation—it is a testament to the decisive impact made by Skinner on the history of political thought that no-one has challenged his new and radical approach. It is no part of the purpose of this paper to do so. Indeed, an understanding both of Bodin's predecessors and of the ideological conflict of the 1570s which influenced the drafting of the Six bookes of a commonweale (the title given to the République by its first English translator, Richard Knolles) is fundamental before any appreciation of the theorist can be made free from distortion. It is no use at all asserting that Bodin started from scratch, even on the issue of sovereignty, where he made his most original contribution. Bodin himself minimized his originality, basing his commentary on the powers historically enjoyed by French kings. The French king had traditionally regarded his authority as that of princeps legibus solutus, as an absolute ruler above the law. If the French king had been unable to do those things described by Bodin, in the view of that author, ‘il n'estoit pas Prince souverain’. Bodin also noted the contribution of the canon lawyers of the Middle Ages to the development of his political theory and remarked that Pope Innocent IV was he who best understood the nature of sovereignty.

Type
Research Article
Information
Transactions of the Royal Historical Society , Volume 40 , December 1990 , pp. 43 - 61
Copyright
Copyright © Royal Historical Society 1990

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

1 For his discussion of Bodin, , Skinner, , The foundations of modern political thought. II. The Age of Reformation (Cambridge, 1978), 284–301Google Scholar. A recent study of French political thought consciously adopts at least a history of ideologies veneer, but is disappointing on Bodin: Keohane, N.O., Philosophy and the state in France. The Renaissance to the enlightenment (Princeton, NJ 1980), 67–82CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

2 Parker, D., ‘Law, society and the state in the thought of Jean Bodin,’ History of political thought, ii (1981), 253–85Google Scholar.

3 Rose, P. L., Bodin and the great God of nature (Geneva, 1980)Google Scholar. Also idem, ‘Bodin's universe and its paradoxes: some problems in the intellectual biography of Jean Bodin’, Politics and society in Reformation Europe, ed. E. I. Kouri and T. Scott (1987), 266–88.

4 See Bonney, R.J., L'absolutisme (Paris, 1989)Google Scholar, chapter one.

5 Bodin, J., Les six livres de la république … (Paris, 1583Google Scholar, repr. Darmstadt, 1977), 154. Idem, The six bookes of a commonweale, trans. R. Knolles (1606), ed. K. D. McRae (Harvard, Mass., 1962), 107. Esmein, A., ‘La maxime princeps legibus solutus est dans l'ancien droit public français’, Essays in legal history …, ed. Vinogradov, P. [Vinogradoff] (Oxford, 1913), 205Google Scholar.

6 Bodin, , République, 132–133Google Scholar. Idem, Commonweale, ed. McRae, 92. The Papal origins of the theory and practice of absolute sovereignty have recently been stressed by Professor Prodi: Prodi, P., The Papal prince. One body and two souls: the Papal monarchy in early modern Europe, trans. Haskins, S. (Cambridge, 1988)Google Scholar.

7 Although King has made a start in considering Bodin's influence on Hobbes: King, P., The ideology of order. A comparative analysis of Jean Bodin and Thomas Hobbes (1974)Google Scholar.

8 Parker, D., ‘Sovereignty, absolutism and the function of the law in seventeenth-century France’, Past and Present cxxii (1989), 36–74, at p. 71CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

9 Ibid., 72.

10 Ibid., 48.

11 Relatively short shift is given to the intendants of Louis XIV in Mettam, R. C., Power and faction in Louis XIV's France (Oxford, 1988), 211–17Google Scholar. Something of the flavour of this account is provided by the opening remark to this section of the book at p. 211: ‘There are a number of reasons why the intendants could not have been the cornerstones of “absolutism” that some old-fashioned historians have maintained them to be.’ The present author is embarked on a detailed study of the intendants during the personal rule of Louis XIV.

12 There is no mention of the provincial intendants in Parker, , ‘Sovereignty, absolutism and the law’. At p. 65Google Scholar, in the context of the grands jours of Auvergne, he comments that ‘justice by commission of this sort, cutting across all vested interests, was perhaps as near to absolutism in the popular sense as the crown ever got’.

13 There have been some exceptions, notably at the Munich conference on Bodin: Polin, R., ‘L'idée de République selon Jean Bodin’, Jean Bodin. Proceedings of the international conference on Bodin in Munich, ed. Denzer, H. (Munich, 1973), p. 349Google Scholar; also ibid., p. 469: in the discussion, Freund asserted that the development of the commission was ‘fondamental pour toute pensée politique postérieure’, while Derathé noted that the distínction between officier and souverain was ‘plus importante, plus développée dans la littérature postérieure que chez Bodin’.

14 Hintze, O., ‘The commissary and his significance in general administrative history: a comparative study’, The historical essays of Otto Hintze, ed. Gilbert, F. (New York, 1975), 281–2Google Scholar.

15 Skinner, 300.

16 Keohane, 81.

17 Franklin, J. H., Jean Bodin and the rise of absolutist theory (Cambridge, 1973), 99–100Google Scholar.

18 de Seyssel, C., La monarchic de France [1515], ed. Poujol, J. (1961)Google Scholar.

19 Budé, G., De l'institution du prince [1518]Google Scholar (repr. 1547; facsimile repr., Farnborough, 1966).

20 Bodin, , République, 372Google Scholar. Idem, Commonweale, ed. McRae, A77, 278.

21 Bodin, , République, 380Google Scholar. Idem, Commonweale, ed. McRae, 284.

22 Ibid.

23 Bodin, , République, 381Google Scholar. Idem, Commonweale, ed. McRae, 285.

24 Bodin, , République, 387–8Google Scholar. Idem, Commonweale, ed. McRae, 289.

25 Bodin, , République, 392–3Google Scholar. Idem, Commonweale, ed. McRae, 293.

26 Bodin, , République, 393Google Scholar. Idem, Commonweale, ed. McRae, 293. The ordinance of 21 October 1467 stated that ‘désormais nous ne donnerons aucun de noz offices, s'il n'est vaquant par mort ou par résignation faicte de bon gré et consentement du résignant, dont il apperre [sic] duement, ou par forfaicture préalablement jugée et déclarée judiciairement et selon les terms de justice, par juge compétent …’: Ordonnances des rois de France de la troisième race, ed. Pastouret, C. E.J. P. et al. (1820), xvii. 26Google Scholar.

27 Bodin, , République, 132–3Google Scholar. Idem, Commonweale, ed. McRae, 92.

28 Kantorowicz, E. H., The king's two bodies. A study in medieval political theology (Princeton NJ, 1957), 384–6Google Scholar.

29 Loyseau, C., Cinq livres du droit des offices (1613 edn.), 570Google Scholar. For Loyseau's importance as a theorist: Lloyd, H. A., ‘The political thought of Charles Loyseau, 1564–1627’, European Studies Review, xi (1981), 53–82CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

30 For Loyseau: Lloyd, H. A., ‘The political thought of Charles Loyseau, 1564–1627’, European Studies Review xi (1981), 53–82CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Idem, The state, France and the sixteenth century (1980).

31 Ibid., 571.

32 Ibid., 569.

33 Picot, G., Cardin Le Bret, 1558–1655, et la doctrine de la souveraineté (Nancy, 1948)Google Scholar.

34 Bret, C. Le, De la souveraineté du roy (1632), 149Google Scholar.

35 Ibid., 160.

36 Ibid., 151.

37 Ibid., 160.

38 Arrêts du conseil du roi. Règne de Louis XIV. Inventaire analytique des arrêts en commandement. I, 20 mai 1643–8 mars 1661, ed. Pesant, M. Le (1976), no. 1630Google Scholar. A[rchives] N[ationales] E 1698 no. 35 and E 1700 no. 26, 18 Feb. 1652.

39 Giesey, R. E., Haldy, L., Millhorn, J., ‘Cardin Le Bret and lese majesty’, Law and history review, iv (1986), 23–54CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

40 Dupont-Ferrier, G., ‘Le rôle des commissaires royaux dans le gouvernement de la France, spécialement du xive au xvie siècle’, Mélanges Paul Fournier (1929), 171–84Google Scholar, Bonney, , Political change in France under Richelieu and Mazarin, 102Google Scholar.

41 It has long been established that this was the earliest commission: Hanotaux, G., Origines de l'institution des intendants des provinces (1884), 10Google Scholar. More recently: Antoine, M., ‘Institutions françaises en Italie sous le règne de Henri II: gouverneurs et intendants, 1547–1559’, Mélanges de L'école française de Rome xciv (1982), 815–18Google Scholar. For the 1560s: Bonney, , Political change, 140Google Scholar. For Sade de Mazan in 1577: Buisseret, D.J., ‘Les précurseurs des intendants du Languedoc’, Annales du Midi, lxxx (1968), 87–88Google Scholar. Professor Antoine has discovered a number of new commissions from the period before 1577. However, most of these are not intendants de justice, although the individuals appointed may be regarded as their functional precursors: Antoine, M., ‘Genèse de l'institution des intendants’, Journal des savants (1982), 283–317, especially 291–7Google Scholar.

42 Bonney, R.J., Political change in France under Richelieu and Mazarin, 1624–1661 (Oxford, 1978), 135–59, 244–5Google Scholar.

43 Bonney, , Political change in France under Richelieu and Mazarin, 46–7, 72–4, 237, 453 5Google Scholar.

44 Antoine, M., Le dur métier du roi. Études sur la civilisation politique de la France d'ancien régime (1986), 61–80Google Scholar.

45 Bonney, , Political change in France under Richelieu and Mazarin, 146, 149, 155, 275Google Scholar.

46 Ibid., 272.

47 Ibid., 249–50.

48 A[rchives] D[épartementales du] Gers (Auch) C 362, printed ordinance of Pellot, 15 Apr. 1666; his instructions to subdelegates, 12 June 1666; his undated printed ordinance concerning Barthélémé Carrère, drawn up on the report of his subdelegate, Pierre Chadebert, an avocat in the Parlement of Toulouse.

49 Bonney, , Political change in France under Richelieu and Mazarin, 428Google Scholar.

50 Antoine, , Le dur métier du roi, 69Google Scholar.

51 AN E 199b, fo. 146, 15 Feb. 1645.

52 For Colbert's hostility to subdelegates: Ricommard, J., ‘Les subdélégués des intendants au xviie et xviiie siècles’, L'information historique xxiv (1962–1963), 144–5Google Scholar.

53 AN G7 124, 20 June 1682.

54 AN G7 101, 19 July 1682.

55 AN G7 112, 18 Aug. 1682.

56 Antoine, , Le dur métier du roi, p. 76Google Scholar and the articles by Ricommard, J. there cited, notably, ‘L'édit d'avril 1704 et l'érection en titre d'office des subdélégués des intendants’, Revue historique, 195 (1945), 24–35, 123–39Google Scholar.

57 de Sainte-Suzanne, C. V. E. Boyer, L'administration sous l'ancien régime. Les intendants de la généralité d' Amiens (Picardie et Artois) (1865), 583Google Scholar.

58 AN G7 92, 8 Sept. 1710. There had been difficulty in finding purchasers in Béam as late as 1706: AN G7 117, 5 Oct. 1706.

59 Antoine, , Le dur métier du roi, 125–79Google Scholar.

60 Ibid., 130, 169–70.

61 AN G7 116, 24, 25 Nov. 1704. AN G7 118, 20 Jan. 1710. AN G7 119, 8 Mar. 1711.

62 AN G7 117, 5 Oct. 1706: ‘luy ayant donné cette commission …’.

63 AN G7 118, 20 Aug. 1709.

64 Most recently, a distinguished study by Hamscher, A. N., The conseil privé and the Parlements in the age of Louis XIV: a study in French absolutism (Transactions of the American Philosophical Society, lxxvii, 1987)Google Scholar.

65 AN G7 92, 22 Dec. 1710. This carton has several examples.

66 AN G7 127, 19 Jan. 1709. Foullé de Montargis, the new intendant, sent a draft decree with the appropriate power based on those granted to Montgeron, his predecessor, in the case, but with a simple substitution of names.

67 AN G7 127, 18 May 1707.

68 AN G7 128/130, 16 Aug. 1714.

69 AN G7 508, 21 June 1713.

70 Kamen, H., The war of succession in Spain, 1700–15 (1969), 115 and references at n. 104, and 390Google Scholar.

71 The author is grateful to Professor Juan Gelabert of the University of Cantabria (Santander) for communicating this information in a letter of 25 November 1988, and for commenting on this article in draft form.

72 Thompson, I. A. A., ‘The rule of the law in early modern Castile’, European history quarterly, xiv (1984), 221–34, esp. at p. 222CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Kagan, R. L., Lawsuits and litigants in Castile, 1500–1700 (Chapel Hill, NC, 1981)Google Scholar.

73 The author is grateful to Professor Gelabert for sending a copy of this commission in a letter of 20 November 1987. The source is Archivo General de Simancas (Valladolid), Consejo y Juntas de Hacienda, legajo 671.

74 Bonney, , Political change in France under Richelieu and Mazarin, 49, 146Google Scholar.

75 Kamen, , op. cit., 37Google Scholar.

76 Kamen, H., Spain in the later seventeenth century, 1665–1700 (1980), 17Google Scholar.

77 Cárceles, B., ‘The constitutional conflict in Castile between the council and the Count-Duke of Olivares’, Parliaments, estates and representation, vii (1987), 51–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

78 Jago, C., ‘Habsburg absolutism and the Cortes of Castile’, American historical review, lxxxvi (1981), 307–26CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Thompson, I. A. A., ‘Crown and Cortes in Castile, 1590–1665’, Parliaments, estates and representation, ii (1982), 29–45CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Idem, ‘The end of the Cortes of Castile’, Parliaments, estates and representation, iv (1984), 125–33.

79 Botero, G., The reason of state [1589], ed. and trans. , P.J. and Waley, D. (1956)Google Scholar.

80 Lipsius, J., Six bookes of politicikes or civil doctrine [1589], trans. Jones, W. [1594] in The English experience, 287 (Amsterdam/New York 1970)Google Scholar.

81 Hamilton, B., Political thought in sixteenth-century Spain. A study of the political ideas of Vitoria, De Soto, Suárez and Molina (Oxford, 1963)Google Scholar. Lewy, G., Constitutionalism and statecraft during the golden age of Spain: a study of the political philosophy of Juan de Mariana, SJ (Geneva, 1960)Google Scholar.

82 Skinner, vol. ii., 177–8, 182–4.

83 Cárceles, , op. cit., 56Google Scholar.

84 Koenigsberger, H. G., ‘The statecraft of Philip II’, European studies review, i (1971), 3Google Scholar.

85 Stradling, R. A., Philip IV and the government of Spain, 1621–1665 (Cambridge, 1988), 301Google Scholar.

86 Thompson, , ‘The end of the Cortes of Castile’, 126Google Scholar.

87 Thompson, , ‘Crown and Cortes in Castile’, 34–5, 42Google Scholar.

88 Bodin, , Republique, 142Google Scholar. Idem, Commonweale, ed. McRae, 98.

89 Skinner, vol. i., x, xi, xiii.

90 Ibid., vol. i., xiii.

91 Ibid., vol. ii, 355–6, 358. For the application of this development to France: Lloyd, H. A., The state, France and the sixteenth century (1980)Google Scholar.