Hostname: page-component-7b7567c8c-2n9c9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-14T05:11:49.370Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Thomas Hobbes's “highway to peace”

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 May 2009

Donald W. Hanson
Donald W. Hanson
Affiliation:
Professor of Political Science at the University of Utah, Salt Lake City.
Get access

Abstract

It is widely agreed that the work of Thomas Hobbes established and continues to nourish the tradition of “realism” in international political theory. But this association is in many ways paradoxical, and above all because Hobbes's avowed purpose was to “show us the highway to peace.” It is usually assumed that he aimed exclusively at internal peace while resigning himself to permanent rivalry among states, but there are a good many indications that this may not be an adequate interpretation. Hobbes devoted substantial effort to explicating several modifications of the inherited intellectual tradition, in both politics and education, that seem to have been intended to promote beneficial effects in interstate relations. When these substantive aims are taken into account, rather different lessons seem to emerge. One, in particular, is that it may be misleading to think of the Hobbesian tradition as one of realism.

Information

Type
Articles
Information
International Organization , Volume 38 , Issue 2 , Spring 1984, pp. 329 - 354
Copyright
Copyright © The IO Foundation 1984

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.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

1. Leviathan, “Review and Conclusion,” p. 511 (EW, 3: 713). The initial page references are to Leviathan, ed. Oakeshott, Michael (New York: Collier, 1962)Google Scholar. Chapter references are given for Leviathan in order to make the use of other editions feasible. In some cases I also supply references to SirMolesworth's, William editions, The English Works of Thomas Hobbes (London: John Bohn, 1839–1845)Google Scholar, and Thomae Hobbes Malmesburiensis, Opera Philosophica quae Latine Scripsit (London: John Bohn, 1839–1845): hereafter, EW/and LW, followed by volume number and pageGoogle Scholar.

2. Walzer, Michael, Just and Unjust Wars (New York: Basic Books, 1977), p. 4Google Scholar; Beitz, Charles R., Political Theory and International Relations (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1979), pp. vii, 8, 27–28, 32, 65Google Scholar; Hoffmann, Stanley, Duties beyond Borders (Syracuse, N.Y.: Syracuse University Press, 1981), pp. 11, 14Google Scholar.

3. Bull, Hedley, “Hobbes and the International Anarchy,” Social Research 48 (Winter 1981), pp. 725, 728, 729, 738Google Scholar.

4. Walzer, , Just and Unjust Wars, p. 4Google Scholar. For a full-scale account of Thucydides exactly along Walzer's lines, see Pouncey, Peter R., The Necessities of War: A Study of Thucydides' Pessimism (New York: Columbia University Press, 1980), esp. pp. 139–50Google Scholar. Pouncey's appendix (pp. 151–57) discusses “the affinity between Thucydides and Hobbes,” one that is undeniably there. Nevertheless I distinguish Hobbes from his great predecessor, and not just because Hobbes generalized while Thucydides dwelt on particularities (although that is anything but unimportant). For an especially illuminating discussion, see Aron, Raymond, “Thucydides and the Historical Narrative,” in Politics and History: Selected Essays by Raymond Aron, trans, and ed. by Conant, Miriam Bernheim (New York: Free Press, 1978), pp. 20–46Google Scholar.

5. Hoffmann, , Duties beyond Borders, p. 14Google Scholar.

6. Beitz, , Political Theory and International Relations, p. 36Google Scholar.

7. Leviathan, chap. 43, p. 436 (EW 3: 602).

8. Waltz, Kenneth N., Man, the State, and War (New York: Columbia University Press, 1959), pp. 85, 165–66Google Scholar. Waltz does not undertake an analysis of Hobbes in the otherwise comprehensive development of his three images of the causes of war; indeed, the book contains no reference at all to Hobbes's text or even a bibliographical entry. Beitz, , Political Theory and International Relations, p. 35, fn. 49Google Scholar, suggests that Hobbes's account conforms to Waltz's third image. Beitz says Waltz illustrates his third image by Spinoza and Rousseau. Actually, Waltz (pp. 161–62) employs Spinoza as an example of his first image, and by way of contrast with Kant (for the second image) and Rousseau.

9. Bull, , “Hobbes and the International Anarchy,” p. 717Google Scholar.

10. Especially helpful is Hoffmann, Stanley, The State of War (New York: Praeger, 1965), pp. 56–67Google Scholar.

11. Macpherson, C. B., The Political Theory of Possessive Individualism (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1962), pp. 9–106Google Scholar; Thomas, Keith, “The Social Origins of Hobbes's Political Thought,” in Brown, Keith C., ed., Hobbes Studies (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1965), pp. 185–236Google Scholar; Skinner, Quentin, “The Ideological Context of Hobbes's Political Thought,” Historical Journal 9, 3 (1966), pp. 286–317CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

12. Watkins, J. W. N., Hobbes's System of Ideas (New York: Barnes & Noble, 1968)Google Scholar, concentrates on Hobbes's ideas on method; Warrender, Howard, The Political Philosophy of Hobbes: His Theory of Obligation (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1957)Google Scholar; Ross, Ralph, Schneider, Herbert W., and Waldman, Theodore, eds., Thomas Hobbes in His Time (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1974)Google Scholar, provides essays on diverse topics, as do Baumrin, Bernard H., ed., Hobbes's Leviathan: Interpretation and Criticsm (Belmont, Calif: Wadsworth, 1969)Google Scholar, Cranston, Maurice and Peters, Richard S., eds., Hobbes and Rousseau (Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1972)Google Scholar, and Brown, Hobbes Studies. Hood, F. C., The Divine Politics of Thomas Hobbes (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1964)Google Scholar, argues that Hobbes is to be interpreted as a traditional Christian moralist; Pitkin, Hanna, “Hobbes's Concept of Representation,” Part I, American Political Science Review 58 (06 1964), pp. 328–40CrossRefGoogle Scholar, and Part II, ibid. (December 1964), pp. 902–18; Goldsmith, M. M., Hobbes's Science of Politics (New York: Columbia University Press, 1966)Google Scholar, presents a very careful general account; Gauthier, David P., The Logic of Leviathan (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1969)Google Scholar, systematically develops a distinction between the formal, general definitional aspects of Hobbes's moral and political theory and its substantive content; McNeilly, F S., The Anatomy of Leviathan (New York: St Martin's, 1968)Google Scholar, argues that there are important developmental aspects in Hobbes's political writings that are too often overlooked.

13. Strauss, Leo, The Political Philosophy of Hobbes (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1952), esp. pp. 30–43Google Scholar, emphasizes Aristotelean elements; JrSpragens, Thomas A.The Politics of Motion: The World of Thomas Hobbes (London: Croom Helm, 1973), explores Hobbes's debts to Aristotle in detailGoogle Scholar.

14. Bowie, John, Hobbes and His Critics: A Study of Seventeenth Century Constitutionalism (New York: Oxford University Press, 1952)Google Scholar; Mintz, Samuel I., The Hunting of Leviathan: Seventeenth-Century Reactions to the Materialism and Moral Philosophy of Thomas Hobbes (London: Cambridge University Press, 1962)Google Scholar. On enthusiasm see Skinner, “Ideological Context of Hobbes.”

15. The principal exception is Bull, , “Hobbes and the International Anarchy.” The phrase is from De Cive, “The Author's Preface,” p. 98 (EW, 2: xiv)Google Scholar. Initial page references are to Hobbes's own English version, as printed in Man and Citizen, ed. by Gert, Bernard (Garden City, N.Y.: Anchor Books, 1972)Google Scholar.

16. The Elements of Law, Natural and Politic, ed. by Tonnies, Ferdinand, 2d ed. (New York: Barnes & Noble, 1969)Google Scholar, “The Epistle Dedicatory.” All references to this work will be to this edition, and will be given as Elements. See also De Cive, pp. 93, 275 (EW, 2: vii, 186); Leviathan, chap. 30, p. 248 (EW, 3: 325); chap. 31, p. 270 (EW, 3: 357–58); “Review,” pp. 509–10 (EW, 3: 710–711); EW, 1: ix and 7:471.

17. De Cive, p. 91 (EW, 2: iv).

18. On his wishes see Leviathan, “Review,” p. 511 (EW, 3: 713).

19. Oakeshott, Michael, “The Moral Life in the Writings of Thomas Hobbes,” in Rationalism in Politics (New York: Basic Books, 1962), p. 283Google Scholar.

20. De Cive, p. 103 (EW, 2: xx); Leviathan, “Review,” p. 511 (EW, 3: 713); EW, 4: 414–15 and 7: 335, 344.

21. Finley, M. I., The Ancient Greeks (New York: Viking, 1964), pp. 42, 43Google Scholar.

22. The Peloponnesian War, trans. Wamer, Rex (New York: Penguin Books, 1972), 3: 81–84Google Scholar.

23. Ibid., 4: 61 and 8: 48.

24. Laws, trans. Taylor, A. E., in The Collected Dialogues of Plato, ed. by Hamilton, Edith and Cairns, Huntington (New York: Bollingen Foundation/Pantheon Books, 1964), 625e–626a and 626dGoogle Scholar.

25. This is not to suggest that Rousseau did not have a great deal to say about the former but only that his central concern was with internal reconciliation, as brought out so well in Shklar, Judith N., Men and Citizens (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1969)Google Scholar.

26. Laws, 629d (see also 744d, 856b–c), and 829a.

27. Politics, II: 1265a, 1267a; IV: 1291a; VII: 1327a–b.

28. Ibid., II: 1261a–b.

29. Ibid., V: 1301b.

30. Ibid., 1293b–1298a.

31. The City of God, trans, by Dods, Marcus (New York: Modern Library, 1950), 3: 30, 3: 29, and 19: 5Google Scholar.

32. Abundant evidence is presented in Cowell, F. R., The Revolutions of Ancient Rome (London: Thames & Hudson, 1962)Google Scholar, and Mazzolani, Lidia Storoni, Empire without End (New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1976)Google Scholar; Cicero, , De Officiis, 1: xxv, 85Google Scholar (see also De Legibus, 3: xviii).

33. Leviathan, chap. 13, p. 99 (EW, 3: 112). Cf. Peloponnesian War, 1: 75. Hobbes's own translation of this passage may be found in EW, 8: 81, where the Athenians say that their empire was expanded “chiefly for fear, next for honour, and lastly for profit.”

34. Elements, pp. 1, 75; Leviathan, “Author's Introduction,” p. 20 (EW, 3: xi–xii); EW, 1, “The Author's Epistle,” and pp. 1, 72; EW, 4: 275–76; Behemoth or The Long Parliament, ed. Tonnies, Ferdinand (London: Simpkin, Marshall, 1889), p. 29Google Scholar. All references to this last work will be to this edition, and will be given as Behemoth.

35. Elements, “Epistle Dedicatory,” and pp. 1–2; De Cive, pp. 91–93, 95–98, 103–4 (EW, 2: iv–vii, x–xiv, xxi); Leviathan, chap. 29, pp. 237–38 (EW, 3: 308–9); chap. 30, pp. 247–49 (EW, 3: 322–26); chap. 31, p. 270 (EW, 3: 357–58); “Review,” pp. 503, 510–11 (EW, 3: 702, 713); EW, 4: 232–33.

36. Shklar, Judith N., “Facing Up to Intellectual Pluralism,” in Spitz, David, ed., Political Theory and Social Change (New York: Atherton Press, 1967), pp. 280–84Google Scholar.

37. A fine account of exploded authorities is given in Hazard, Paul, The European Mind (New York: Meridian, 1963), Part 1Google Scholar.

38. Discourses on the First Ten Books of Titus Livy, ed. by Crick, Bernard (New York: Penguin, 1974), 1, Preface, chapsGoogle Scholar. 3, 9, 11, 39; 2, Preface; 3, chaps. 9, 31, 43.

39. Ibid., 1, Preface, chaps. 1, 6, 10, 30; 2, Preface, chaps. 2, 4, 6, 16, 17, 23, 30; 3, chaps. 1, 25, 31, 49.

40. The Complete Essays of Montaigne, trans, by Frame, Donald M. (Stanford, Calif.: Stanford University Press, 1965), p. xiiiGoogle Scholar.

41. The Philosophical Works of Descartes, trans, by Haldane, Elizabeth S. and Ross, G. R. T. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1931)Google Scholar. On capability, 1: 81–82, 88, 98, 106–8, 121, 171–79, 197; on accumulation, 1: 82, 91, 121, 125–26.

42. Elements, p. 70; De Cive, p. 109 (EW, 2: 1).

43. Elements, p. 29; De Cive, p. 150 (EW, 2: 47); Leviathan, “Introduction,” p. 20 (EW, 3: xi); chap. 4, p. 40 (EW, 3: 28); chap. 6, p. 48 (EW, 3: 40–41); chap. 8, p. 62 (EW, 3: 61); chap. 15, p. 123 (EW, 3: 140).

44. Elements, pp. 39, 86; De Cive, pp. 90, 99, 115, 142 (EW, 2: ii, xv, 8, 38); Leviathan, chap. 15, p. 119 (EW, 3: 140).

45. On insatiability see Elements, pp. 30, 47–48; Leviathan, chap. 6, p. 55 (EW, 3: 51); chap. 8, p. 62 (EW, 3: 61–62); chap. 11, p. 80 (EW, 3: 85–86); De Homine, p. 54 (LW, 2: 103). Initial page references to this last work will be to the translation of Charles T. Wood, T. S. K. Scott-Craig, and Bernard Gert as printed in Gert, Man and Citizen, followed by citation of the Molesworth edition. On self-interest see Leviathan, chap. 14, p. 105 (EW, 3: 120); chap. 15, pp. 114, 118, 121–22 (EW, 3: 133, 138, 143); chap. 18, p. 141 (EW, 3: 170); chap. 19, p. 145 (EW, 3: 176–77).

46. Leviathan, “Review,” p. 509 (EW, 3: 710).

47. Elements, pp. 18–19, 45; Leviathan, chap. 2, p. 27 (EW, 3: 11); chap. 3, p. 31 (EW, 3: 16); chap. 4, p. 33 (EW, 3: 18).

48. Elements, pp. 102–3; De Cive, pp. 167–69 (EW, 2: 66–68); Leviathan, chap. 17, pp. 131–32 (EW, 3: 156–57). Hobbes could not resist the temptation to rebuke Aristotle, for elsewhere he makes it clear that he understood that Aristotle was not confused on the point: “When Aristotle calls them [bees] political or social creatures, he did not intend it really that they lived a civil life, but according to an analogy, because they do such things by instinct as truly political creatures do out of judgment” (EW, 5: 89). Presumably, the passage Hobbes has in mind is Politics, I, 1253a 7–18.

49. Aristotle, , Politics, II, 1267aGoogle Scholar. For Hobbes on diversity see Elements, pp. 23, 29; De Cive, pp. 92, 122, 141, 150–51, 178, 282–83, 351 (EW, 2: v, 15, 36, 47–48, 77, 196, 277); Leviathan, chap. 4, p. 40 (EW, 3: 28); chap. 6, pp. 48, 50, 53 (EW, 3: 40–41, 43, 47–48); chap. 11, p. 80 (EW, 3: 85); chap. 15, pp. 118, 123 (EW, 3: 139, 146); chap. 26, p. 214 (EW, 3: 274–75); De Homine, pp. 47, 68 (LW, 2: 96, 116).

50. De Cive, pp. 282–83 (EW, 2: 196); Leviathan, chap. 6, pp. 48–49 (EW, 3: 40–41); chap. 15, p. 123 (EW, 3: 146); chap. 26, p. 214 (EW, 3: 274–75).

51. Politics, I, 1253a 10–12; Leviathan, chap. 3, p. 31 (EW, 3: 16); chap. 4, pp. 33, 36 (EW, 3: 18, 22–23).

52. Elements, pp. 19, 22, 64–65, 68; De Cive, pp. 344–45, 367–68, 374 (EW, 2: 268–69, 295–96, 304); Leviathan, chap. 4, pp. 34, 36–37 (EW, 3: 20, 23–24); chap. 5, pp. 43–44 (EW, 3: 32–35); De Homine, pp. 39–41 (LW, 2: 90–92); EW, 1: 36; EW, 7: 78.

53. Kerferd, G. B., The Sophistic Movement (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1981)Google Scholar; the quotation is from Guthrie, W. K. C., The Sophists (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1971), p. 63CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Leviathan, chap. 2, p. 23 (EW, 3: 4) echoes the single most celebrated doctrine of Protagoras: “Man is the measure of all things, of the things that are that they are, and of the things that are not that they are not.” See Plato, , Cratylus, 386aGoogle Scholar; Theaetetus, 152a; Aristotle, , Metaphysics, XI, 6, 1062bGoogle Scholar.

54. On Plato see De Cive, p. 374 (EW, 2: 304); Leviathan, chap. 31, p. 270 (EW, 3: 357); chap. 46, p. 481 (EW, 3: 668); EW, 7: 346.

55. See Pears, David, Ludwig Wittgenstein (New York: Viking, 1970), esp. pp. 179–98Google Scholar, for a discussion of what Pears calls Wittgenstein's anthropocentrism. Wittgenstein seems to have been prepared to draw logic itself into question. See, for example, Wittgenstein, , Philosophical Investigations, trans, by Anscombe, G. E. M. (Oxford: Blackwell, 1958), 1, ss. 81, 89, 90–101, 107–111, 115–116, 118–119, 122–133, 158, 198–199, 201–202, 217, 219, 241–243, 327, 330, 337, 339, 341, 355, 373, 377Google Scholar. Some of the questions raised are discussed in Pitcher, George, ed., Wittgenstein: The Philosophical Investigations (Garden City, N.Y.: Anchor Books, 1966), pp. 420–96CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

56. Elements, pp. 16–18; De Cive, pp. 345, 367–68, 373–74 (EW, 2: 269, 295–96, 302–4); Leviathan, chap. 3, p. 31 (EW, 3: 16); chap. 4, p. 35 (EW, 3: 21–22); chap. 5, p. 41 (EW, 3: 30); chap. 31, p. 269 (EW, 3: 355); chap. 32, p. 271 (EW, 3: 359); chap. 34, p. 286 (EW, 3: 380); chap. 46, p. 484 (EW, 3: 673); De Homine, pp. 37–39 (LW, 2: 88–90); EW, 1: 14, 16, 36–37, 55–56, 388, 531; EW, 7: 183–84.

57. Elements, pp. 24–26; De Cive, pp. 367–68, 373–75 (EW, 2: 295–97, 303–5); Leviathan, chap. 4, pp. 35–40 (EW, 3: 21–29); chap. 5, pp. 45–46 (EW, 3: 35–38); chap. 8, p. 62 (EW, 3: 61); chap. 15, pp. 122–24 (EW, 3: 144–47); chap. 20, pp. 157–58 (EW, 3: 195); chap. 25, p. 195 (EW, 3: 246–47); chap. 30, pp. 247–49 (EW, 3: 322–25); chap. 46, pp. 478–79 (EW, 3: 664–65); De Homine, pp. 41–43 (LW, 2: 92–94).

58. Elements, pp. 51, 92, 183–84; De Cive, pp. 262–63 (EW, 2: 171–72); Leviathan, chap. 3, p. 31 (EW, 3: 16); chap. 4, pp. 33, 37 (EW, 3: 18, 24–25); chap. 15, pp. 122–24 (EW, 3: 144–47); chap. 18, pp. 137–38 (EW, 3: 164–65); chap. 19, pp. 143, 145–46 (EW, 3: 173, 176–77); chap. 30, p. 249 (EW, 3: 325–26); chap. 31, p. 270 (EW, 3: 357–58); chap. 43, pp. 427–28 (EW, 3: 589–90); “Review,” pp. 503, 510–511 (EW, 3: 702, 712–14); Behemoth, pp. 39–40, 62, 64, 160.

59. Leviathan, chap. 3, p. 31 (EW, 3: 16).

60. Elements, p. 94; De Cive, p. 229 (EW, 2: 135); Leviathan, chap. 17, p. 129 (EW, 3: 153). The quotation is from De Homine, p. 40 (LW, 2: 91).

61. Elements, p. 22; De Cive, pp. 168–69 (EW, 2: 67); Leviathan, chap. 4, p. 34 (EW, 3: 20); chap. 5, p. 43 (EW, 3: 32–33); chap. 6, p. 55 (EW, 3: 50); chap. 7, p. 57 (EW, 3: 53); chap. 8, pp. 67–68 (EW, 3: 69–70); chap. 11, p. 83 (EW, 3: 90); De Homine, pp. 40–41 (LW, 2: 91–92); EW, 1: 36. Auden, W. H., “‘The Truest Poetry is the most Feigning,’” in Collected Shorter Poems, 1927–1957 (New York: Vintage, 1975), p. 317Google Scholar.

62. De Cive, pp. 168–69 (EW, 2: 67).

63. This translation from Part I of De Corpore is taken from Hobbes, Thomas, Computatio Sive Logica/Logic, trans, by Martinich, Aloysius, ed. by Hungerland, Isabel C. and Vick, George R. (New York: Abaris Books, 1981), p. 185Google Scholar. Cf. EW, 1: 8.

64. On inconclusive experience see Elements, p. 16; Leviathan, chap. 20, p. 158 (EW, 3: 195); EW, 7: 398. On improvements see Leviathan, chap. 30, p. 248 (EW, 3: 324).

65. De Cive, p. 151 (EW, 2: 49).

66. Ibid., p. 98 (EW, 2: xiii); see also p. 344 (EW, 2: 268); EW, 1: x; EW, 7: 76 expresses a more moderate view: moral philosophy “has been a great hindrance to the peace of the western world.…”

67. On method see Elements, p. 1; De Cive, p. 92 (EW, 2: v–vi); Leviathan, chap. 5, pp. 43–44 (EW, 3: 33); EW, 1: 8. The phrase is from De Cive, p. 96 (EW, 2: x).

68. Leviathan, chap. 21, p. 163 (EW, 3: 202).

69. Leviathan, chap. 5, pp. 45–46 (EW, 3: 36–37); chap. 26, p. 209 (EW, 3: 267–68).

70. Ibid., chap. 4, p. 40 (EW, 3: 29).

71. Elements, pp. 20–21, 31; De Cive, pp. 373–74 (EW, 2: 3O3–4); Leviathan, chap. 2, p. 24 (EW, 3: 6); chap. 3, p. 28 (EW, 3: 11–12); chap. 4, pp. 36–37, 39 (EW, 3: 23–25, 27–28); chap. 5, p. 42 (EW, 3: 30–32); chap. 46, p. 482 (EW, 3: 671); EW, 1: 36, 37, 70, 84.

72. Elements, pp. 16–17, 20–21; De Cive, pp. 344, 367–68, 373–74 (EW, 2: 268–69, 295–96, 303–4); EW, 4: 335.

73. Elements, p. 63; De Cive, pp. 163, 165, 179, 365 (EW, 2: 62, 63, 78, 293); Leviathan, chap. 18, pp. 137, 140 (EW, 3: 164, 168); chap. 21, p. 163 (EW, 3: 202–3); chap. 32, p. 272 (EW, 3: 360); chap. 38, pp. 329–30 (EW, 3: 444); chap. 42, p. 393 (EW, 3: 537); EW, 4: 268, 272–75.

74. De Cive, p. 179 fn. (EW, 2: 78–79 fn).

75. Ibid., p. 232 (EW, 2: 140).

76. Elements, pp. 39–40, 51–53, 169, 175–78; De Cive, pp. 165, 179, 252–54 (EW, 2: 63, 78, 160–63); Leviathan, chap. 6, pp. 50, 53 (EW, 3: 43, 47–48); chap. 8, p. 63 (EW, 3: 62–63); chap. 13, pp. 98–99 (EW, 3: 111); De Homine, pp. 57–58 (LW, 2: 106); see also EW, 4: 242–45.

77. Leviathan, chap. 18, p. 137 (EW, 3: 164).

78. Politics, II, 1263b; V, 1310a. On Hobbes's educative state see Elements, pp. 51, 183–84; De Cive, pp. 262–63 (EW, 2: 171–72); Leviathan, chap. 18, pp. 137, 139–40 (EW, 3: 164–65, 167–68); chap. 30, pp. 247–53 (EW, 3: 322–31); “Review,” p. 503 (EW, 3: 702); Behemoth, pp. 39–40, 70–71, 160; EW, 4: 438.

79. The word is borrowed from Geertz, Clifford, The Interpretation of Cultures (New York: Basic Books, 1973), p. 35Google Scholar.

80. Elements, pp: 183–84; De Cive, pp. 148, 262–63 (EW, 2: 44–45, 171–72); Leviathan, chap. 15, p. 122 (EW, 3: 144–45); chap. 30, p. 249 (EW, 3: 325–26); Behemoth, pp. 39–40; De Homine, p. 52 (LW, 2: 102); EW, 4: 439.

81. Leviathan, chap. 29, pp. 237–38 (EW, 3: 308–9); chap. 30, pp. 247–49 (EW, 3: 322–35).

82. Elements, p. 51.

83. Ibid., pp. 183–84; De Cive, p. 263 (EW, 2: 172); Leviathan, “Review,” pp. 510–11 (EW, 3: 713); Behemoth, p. 71. The quotation is from Leviathan, chap. 30, p. 249 (EW, 3: 325).

84. De Cive, pp. 262–63 (EW, 2: 171–72); see also Elements, pp. 183–84.

85. Leviathan, chap. 13, p. 102 (EW, 3: 116); chap. 14, pp. 105, 108, 111 (EW, 3: 119, 124, 128–29); chap. 20, p. 151 (EW, 3: 185); chap. 27, p. 221 (EW, 3: 285).

86. Elements, “Epistle Dedicatory”; Leviathan, chap. 18, pp. 139–40 (EW, 3: 167–68); chap. 30, p. 249 (EW, 3: 325–26); chap. 47, pp. 497–98 (EW, 3: 693–95).

87. Hirschman, Albert, The Passions and the Interests (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1978), p. 31Google Scholar.

88. Elements, pp. 87–88; Leviathan, chap. 30, p. 258 (EW, 3: 340); Behemoth, p. 31.

89. Elements, p. 66; De Cive, pp. 96, 252 (EW, 2: x–xi, 160); Leviathan, chap. 5, p. 46 (EW, 3: 37–38); chap. 8, pp. 61–62 (EW, 3: 60–62); chap. 15, pp. 123–24 (EW, 3: 146–47); chap. 20, p. 158 (EW, 3: 195–96); chap. 21, pp. 162–63 (EW, 3: 201–3); chap. 25, pp. 192, 195 (EW, 3: 242–43, 246–47); chap. 27, p. 219 (EW, 3: 282); chap. 30, p. 258 (EW, 3: 340); De Homine, p. 68 (LW, 2: 115–16); Behemoth, pp. 3, 23, 43, 70, 155, 158–60; EW, 7: 399.

90. Leviathan, chap. 18, p. 141 (EW, 3: 169); chap. 30, pp. 250, 254 (EW, 3: 327, 333).

91. Ibid., chap. 19, p. 144 (EW, 3: 174); chap. 30, p. 258 (EW, 3: 340); Behemoth, p. 142.

92. De Cive, p. 267 (EW, 2: 178); Leviathan, chap. 27, pp. 221, 224–26 (EW, 3: 285, 290–91); chap. 30, pp. 253–54 (EW, 3: 332–33); see also chap. 15, pp. 118–19 (EW, 3: 139).

93. On the sovereign's duty see De Cive, pp. 169, 177, 223 (EW, 2: 68, 76, 128); Leviathan, chap. 17, p. 132 (EW, 3: 158); chap. 18, pp. 134, 137 (EW, 3: 159, 163–64); chap. 19, p. 143 (EW, 3: 173); chap. 25, p. 195 (EW, 3: 246); chap. 26, p. 200 (EW, 3: 254). On defense see Elements, p. 184; De Cive, pp. 260–62 (EW, 2:169–71); Leviathan, chap. 18, pp. 138–39 (EW, 3: 166); chap. 29, p. 244 (EW, 3: 319).

94. Elements, pp. 111, 168; De Cive, p. 177 (EW, 2: 76); Leviathan, chap. 20, pp. 157–58 (EW, 3: 195); chap. 21, p. 167 (EW, 3: 208); chap. 29, p. 237 (EW, 3: 308).

95. The phrase is from Leviathan, chap. 28, p. 236 (EW, 3: 307). See also Elements, pp. 180–81; De Cive, pp. 266–67 (EW, 2: 176); Leviathan, chap. 24, pp. 185–86 (EW, 3: 232–33).

96. Leviathan, chap. 18, pp. 139–40 (EW, 3: 167–68).

97. Ibid., chap. 18, p. 137 (EW, 3: 164); see also Elements, pp. 183–84; De Cive, p. 263 (EW, 2: 172).

98. Leviathan, chap. 21, pp. 162–63 (EW, 3: 201–3); chap. 29, pp. 241–42 (EW, 3: 314–15); Behemoth, pp. 3, 23, 43.

99. The quotation is from Behemoth, p. 40. See also ibid., pp. 14, 16–18, 20, 40–41, 148; see also Leviathan, chap. 29, pp. 237–38 (EW, 3: 309); chap. 30, pp. 252–53 (EW, 3: 331–32); chap. 46, p. 482 (EW, 3: 670); chap. 47, pp. 497–98 (EW, 3: 693–95); “Review,” pp. 510–11 (EW, 3: 713); EW, 7: 399–400.

100. Elements, p. 184; De Cive, p. 267 (EW, 2: 177); Leviathan, chap. 24, p. 187 (EW, 3: 235–36); chap. 29, p. 245 (EW, 3: 321).

101. Leviathan, chap. 20, p. 155 (EW, 3: 191), and chap. 24, p. 187 (EW, 3: 236); De Cive, pp. 217, 267 (EW, 2: 121, 177).

102. De Cive, p. 267 (EW, 2: 177); Leviathan, chap. 29, p. 245 (EW, 3: 321).

103. Leviathan, chap. 29, p. 245 (EW, 3: 321).

104. Ibid., chap. 25, p. 197 (EW, 3: 250).

105. Elements, pp. 180–81; De Cive, pp. 266–67 (EW, 2: 176–77); Leviathan, chap. 24, p. 185 (EW, 3: 232–33). On Athens' failure see Elements, p. 87.

106. Leviathan, chap. 29, pp. 241–42 (EW, 3: 314–15).

107. Politics, VII, 1331a, 1333b–1334a. Cf. Leviathan, chap. 17, pp. 129–30 (EW, 3: 154–56); De Cive, pp. 166–71 (EW, 2: 63–70).

108. De Cive, pp. 114–15 (EW, 2: 7); Leviathan, chap. 43, p. 424 (EW, 3: 584).

109. Elements, p. 164; De Cive, pp. 371, 375–77, 381 (EW, 2: 300, 305–7, 312); Leviathan, chap. 43, pp. 425, 428–32 (EW, 3: 585, 590–96); Behemoth, p. 63; EW, 4: 345.

110. Leviathan, chap. 12, p. 97 (EW, 3: 108–9); chap. 29, p. 238 (EW, 3: 309); Behemoth, pp. 18, 40–41, 148; EW, 4: 432; EW, 7: 399–400.

111. De Cive, p. 373 (EW, 2: 303); see also Leviathan, chap. 19, p. 150 (EW, 3: 183–84).

112. This way of phrasing the point I have borrowed from Geertz, , Interpretation of Cultures, p. 35Google Scholar.

113. Beitz, Political Theory and International Relations.

114. Leviathan, chap. 6, p. 55 (EW, 3: 51); chap. 8, p. 62 (EW, 3: 61–62). The famous language of chap. 11, p. 80 (EW, 3: 85–86), should, I think, be read in this light: “So that in the first place, I put for a general inclination of all mankind, a perpetual and restless desire of power after power, that ceaseth only in death.”

115. Behemoth, p. 16.

116. The principal issues at stake here are conveniently presented in Brown, Hobbes Studies, chaps. 2–4.

117. Elements, pp. 100–101; De Cive, p. 149 fn (EW, 2: 45–46 fn); cf. Leviathan, chap. 17, pp. 129–30 (EW, 3: 154).

118. Leviathan, chap. 27, pp. 226–27 (EW, 3: 292–93); chap. 30, p. 257 (EW, 3: 337–38); chap. 45, p. 472 (EW, 3: 655); Behemoth, p. 54; De Homine, pp. 67–68, 81–82 (LW, 2: 115–16, 129); EW, 4: 256, 346. This point is already apparent in Hobbes's first published work, his translation of Thucydides; see EW, 8: xxii.