This collection of essays originates from the 2003 Marsilius of Padua World Congress hosted by the International Medieval Congress at Leeds, England. The book presents not so much an overview of twentieth-century scholarship as various seminal ideas that might lead to reinterpretations of the controversial political philosopher of the early fourteenth century. The collected papers clearly witness that the tendency of situating Marsilius in intellectual and political contexts such as republican, corporatist, Aristotelian and Ciceronian traditions, which dominated the scholarship in the 1980s, has significantly receded; instead, a great number of papers focus seriously and positively on Marsilius' argumentative strategies (as opposed to Conal Condren's dismissal of the Marsilian theory as pure polemic). The book consists of fourteen essays, and is divided into three main sections: ‘Historical background’, ‘Methods and sources’ and ‘Theoretical premises’. The three sections are preceded by Cary J. Nederman's engaging (and often amusing) survey of current scholarship from the 1980s onwards. The chapter covers not only published books and articles but also conference papers. However, the scope is not comprehensive: apart from deliberate understatement about his own contributions, Nederman does not discuss some important works like Janet Coleman's A history of political thought from the Middle Ages to the Renaissance (2000), Roberto Lambertini's La povertà pensata (2000) and a series of Paolo Marangon's writings.

The section ‘Historical background’ begins with Frank Godthardt's richly documented biographical study which argues that Marsilius intended to leave Paris after the publication of the Defensor pacis and was possibly appointed archbishop of Milan. Gabrielle Gonzales's study of the relationship between Marsilius and the poverty controversy revisits the territory well-trod by historians including Kerry Spiers, Conal Condren and Jürgen Miethke. The chapter aims to show that ‘Marsilius's words changed the course of the debate by giving the friars the necessary tools to rephrase the argument’; the promise, however, is not sufficiently fulfilled. Thomas Turley's chapter offers an interesting account of the papal camp's polemical response to the Defensor pacis: contrary to the conventional view presented by Richard Scholz, responses from the ‘papal camp’ were diverse. Guido Terreni and Sibert of Beek in particular went beyond the traditional hierarchical view by attacking Marsilius' alleged inconsistencies in the light of Marsilius' own argumentative strategies, thus presenting a helpful analysis of various sources which are not discussed by George Garnett in his Marsilius of Padua and the ‘truth of history’ (2006).

The largest and perhaps the most significant of the three sections, ‘Methods and sources’, features papers that touch upon Marsilius' argumentative methods from various angles. Annabel Brett's discussion of issues involved in translating the Defensor pacis not only highlights dilemmas inherent in translating key concepts but also addresses the larger question of how the translator's own interpretative position shapes the translated text. The article can also be read as a useful guide to the historical practice of reading a primary text closely in the original language. Floriano Jonas Cesar's chapter shows some interesting insights into cognitive certitude in Marsilius' political argument – a topic often examined in relation to Ockham – thus suggesting a new direction of research. Cesar's and Alexander Aichele's chapters address the issue of Marsilius' medical knowledge: another possible avenue for further research, once suggested by Jeannine Quillet and more recently by Annabel Brett. Holly Hamilton-Bleakley, on the other hand, takes on the traditional issue of Marsilius and natural law in the light of new studies on medieval theories of natural law, suggesting that the Marsilian argumentative style is reminiscent of natural law theory. Michael Sweeney's account of Marsilius' idea of grace provides an intriguing glimpse of his (often overlooked) theological thinking, thus endorsing Stephen Torraco's (again, often neglected) view that Marsilius was critical of the contemporary ‘politicisation’ of grace.

In the final section on ‘Theoretical premises’, the Marsilian view of religion and its relation to politics is explored by Bettina Koch whose comparison of Marsilius and Hobbes suggests a resemblance between the two thinkers in terms of viewing the Church as a potential threat to civil government and society. The comparison, however, is intended to address a larger question of continuity between late medieval and early modern political thought, which perhaps requires further exploration and explanation. The last three papers enquire into the fundamental theme of Marsilius' political thought. Vasileios Syros compares and contrasts Marsilius' idea of popular sovereignty with the views on the sovereignty of the multitude in commentaries on Aristotle by Peter of Auvergne and Nicolas de Vaudémont. Whereas Syros starts from ‘a prominent place’ of the idea of popular sovereignty in Marsilian theory, Joseph Canning radically reconsiders the core of Marsilius' theoretical concerns; he offers a plausible alternative view that ultimately the Marsilian theory revolved around the locus and nature of power (and lack of it), thereby challenging Cary Nederman's interpretation that emphasises the primacy of popular consent. Gerson Moreno-Riaño's response to the debate over Marsilius' central concern concludes the book by suggesting that his argumentative strategy was deliberately decentralised to claim the equal importance and interconnectedness of popular consent and power, thus rejecting Condren's purely polemical Marsilius.

One of the virtues of a collection of essays such as this is to display a wide range of interpretative possibilities. It is exactly what this book does. Although the standard of the essays is uneven, it is none the less a welcome addition to modern scholarship and promises to be a springboard for further research.