Did The Increasingly Radical Resistance Theories Of

The Late Sixteenth Century Have Any Effect In Pr Essay, Research Paper

Calvin had a maxim that leaders

were .ordained of God. and that good leaders were therefore blessings upon a

people, whereas bad leaders were punishment for .the wickedness of the

people... Calvin was aware of the

problem of inciting rebellion against Catholic princes and the repression it

might bring . a fear confirmed by the St. Bartholomew.s Day Massacre . but he

did reserve the right to passive disobedience, especially where staying within

the law required one to neglect or overturn a duty to God.. He also claimed that magistrates were

appointed to restrain the .tyranny of kings. and so they had the right to rebel

and overthrow intolerable governments. Calvin.s

thesis was unclear, as it failed to set down all the practical means and

justifications for rebellion.. The

magistrates never found out who they were to obey and what they were to do.. Moreover, what one should do in

circumstances such as though during the Wars of Religion when the

superstructure of the state was hostile to Calvinism remained unclear.. Moreover, what one should do in the face of

absolute Catholic repression (as opposed to the potential and partial

repression seen in Calvin.s day) was never clarified.. In terms of theories of resistance, Calvin and Luther were of

very similar opinion.. Luther.s

pamphlet, Ravaging Hoardes, makes explicit reference to the fact that

peasant revolt was bad, and actually shared Calvin.s view of society. The most important person in

determining resistance theories through the sixteenth century was the one of

the idea.s greatest opponents. The sixteenth century.s most famous political

philosopher, Machiavelli, was a devoted Catholic and gained experience between

1498 and 1512 in the Florentine diplomatic corps. He was engaged in a variety

of roles in France, the Papal States and Germany.. Sacked by the new Medici government in 1512, Machiavelli was

writing in part at least in order to regain some influence and perhaps to win a

new appointment.. Dedicating his works

to the Medicis, Machiavelli exhorted them not just to rule Florence, but also

to restore Italy and to liberate her from the barbarians. Machiavelli was an extreme

pessimist and thought all men were prone to giving .vent to their malignity

when opportunity offers. and he thus saw the .princely virtues. (clemency,

liberality, honesty, honour etc.) as disadvantages when dealing with more

pragmatic people... In his view, a

prince had licence to .act in defiance of good faith, of charity, of kindness

and of religion. in order to .maintain his state... In essence, Machiavelli thought that in pursuit of national

objectives, Christian virtues should be discarded.. ........... Although The

Prince and The Discourses were unpublished until after his death,

these books circulated widely and within a generation of his death in 1527, he

had been universally attacked by Catholics and Protestants.. It is perhaps unsurprising that in the

aftermath of the Medici St. Bartholomew.s Day Massacre that Calvinists should

begin to see Machiavelli and the .murderous Machiavel. Medicis, to whom

Machiavelli wrote his adivce, as atheist tyrants set on destroying them.. The perceived effect of Machiavelli.s

writings on Catherine de Medici, whether conscious or not, seem to have spurred

many Calvinist writers to begin to endorse theories of resistance designed to

protect themselves from extinction threatened by Machiavellian Catholic rulers

willing to savagely butcher, murder and destroy their subjects without

qualm.. It is the effectiveness of these

theories and their Lutheran and Catholic counterparts, written with the

specific purpose of raking back the tide of supposed Unchristian tyranny against

minorities that this essay will attempt to gauge. This era.s Zeitgeist is

a difficult one to trap for the non elite members of society.. Without the self confidence of a

constitutionally protected bourgeois class and without the guarantees of the

modern Rechtstaat, the consequences for social disorder and uproar were

very grave.. The strict oligarchy of the

time was harsh and could make the life of any resistant party nasty, brutish

and short without qualms, legal interference or backlash.. Meanwhile, the lack of modern

communicational media made the possibility of raising a force capable of making

any sustained or organised force difficult..

Such simple brakes on any potential resistance movements or reactions

must be borne in mind when considering the question, as it would be unfair to

judge the power of authors over their audiences if we bear a modern view of

social fluidity and mobility. After the St. Bartholomew.s Day

massacre, Gentillet argued that the Medici influence on France had unleashed

the horrors of the massacre, a massacre of Machiavellian characterist

Внимание, отключите Adblock

Вы посетили наш сайт со включенным блокировщиком рекламы!
Ссылка для скачивания станет доступной сразу после отключения Adblock!

Скачать