The end of God’s prophetic reign over his people and Israel’s demand to be ruled by an earthly king “like all other nations” represent a real turning point in the political and religious history of the Jews. The aim of this paper is to reconstruct how the events narrated in the First Book of Samuel have been interpreted by some of the most important political thinkers of the late Middle Ages: from John of Salisbury, whose reading of 1 Sam, 8 is functional to a reflection on the origin and nature of tyranny, to those who, like Thomas Aquinas, refuse to see in God’s angry reaction to Samuel’s request an indiscriminate condemnation of any earthly monarchy; from Ptolemy of Lucca, whose interpretation of that biblical passage seems to exclude a fully legitimate monarchy, to John of Paris, John Wyclif and John Fortescue, who use it, respectively, to take a clear stand in favour of a regimen commixtum, to question the pro-monarchical attitude dominant at that time, and to prove the superiority of a “political and royal” system of government.

Essere (governati) come tutti gli altri? Il contributo dell’esegesi di 1 Samuele, 8 alla teologia politica tardomedievale / S. Simonetta. - In: RIVISTA DI STORIA DELLA FILOSOFIA. - ISSN 0393-2516. - 76:3(2021 Sep), pp. 491-510. [10.3280/SF2021-003007]

Essere (governati) come tutti gli altri? Il contributo dell’esegesi di 1 Samuele, 8 alla teologia politica tardomedievale

S. Simonetta
2021

Abstract

The end of God’s prophetic reign over his people and Israel’s demand to be ruled by an earthly king “like all other nations” represent a real turning point in the political and religious history of the Jews. The aim of this paper is to reconstruct how the events narrated in the First Book of Samuel have been interpreted by some of the most important political thinkers of the late Middle Ages: from John of Salisbury, whose reading of 1 Sam, 8 is functional to a reflection on the origin and nature of tyranny, to those who, like Thomas Aquinas, refuse to see in God’s angry reaction to Samuel’s request an indiscriminate condemnation of any earthly monarchy; from Ptolemy of Lucca, whose interpretation of that biblical passage seems to exclude a fully legitimate monarchy, to John of Paris, John Wyclif and John Fortescue, who use it, respectively, to take a clear stand in favour of a regimen commixtum, to question the pro-monarchical attitude dominant at that time, and to prove the superiority of a “political and royal” system of government.
divine kingdom; Israel; royal government; despotic regime; mixed constitution
Settore M-FIL/08 - Storia della Filosofia Medievale
Settore M-FIL/06 - Storia della Filosofia
Settore SPS/02 - Storia delle Dottrine Politiche
Dipartimenti di Eccellenza 2018-2022 - Dipartimento di FILOSOFIA
Article (author)
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
simonetta(491-510).pdf

accesso riservato

Descrizione: bozza finale
Tipologia: Publisher's version/PDF
Dimensione 260.97 kB
Formato Adobe PDF
260.97 kB Adobe PDF   Visualizza/Apri   Richiedi una copia
Pubblicazioni consigliate

Caricamento pubblicazioni consigliate

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/2434/869728
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus 0
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? ND
social impact