Report Template - Jubilee Centre

THE POLITICAL USE OF THE BIBLE IN EARLY MODERN BRITAIN:
Republicans: A Commonwealth of
Popular Prerogative in Service of Liberty
Oceana, I say, cannot be wounded by piercing
the authority of Israel, with which she is
armed cap-`a-pie.
James Harrington, The prerogative of popular
government (London, 1657). 74
If men within themselves would be govern’d
by reason, and not generally give up thir
understanding to a double tyrannie, of
Custom from without, and blind affections
within, thy would discerne better, what it is to
favour and uphold the Tyrant of a Nation.
But being slaves within doors, no wonder that
they strive so much to have the public State
conformably govern’d to the inward vitious
rule, by which they govern themselves.
John Milton, The tenure of kings and magistrates
(London, 1649). 75
This next section is devoted to investigating the civilmodels
of two prominent representative
commonwealthsmen, otherwise referred to as
republicans by their political opponents: James
Harrington (1611-1677) and John Milton (1608-1674).
Each was intensely involved in the constitutional
developments of the Interregnum and resorted to the
Scriptures to model a civil government. Republican
proposals radically differed from their Royalist
counterparts; Republicans emphasised the abolition of
monarchy, pressed for representative and popular
assemblies, and stressed limited executive authority
subordinate to a sovereign legislature. Though
Harrington and Milton did not read the Scriptures
politically the same way, they were both political artisans
who attempted to construct a civil model by wielding
religious discourse within a Protestant theological
tradition. The Bible was the frame, fabric, and
foundation of their proposals. Harrington’s key
republican tract, Oceana (1656), makes for an incredibly
complex read, and it spawned a constitutional
74
James Harrington, The prerogative of popular government (London,
1657), 464. Harrington’s works are all found in J.G.A. Pocock,
ed., The Political Works of James Harrington (Cambridge University
Press, 1977). Harrington’s works will include title, place of
publication and date, but page numbers are referenced in Pocock.
A full listing of Harrington’s works cited here will be noted in the
bibliography. This section is also adapted from chapters 3 and 4
of my 2004 Doctoral Dissertation.
75
John Milton, The tenure of kings and magistrates (London, 1649),
1.
controversy, the larger constitutional outlines of which
Milton denounced in his key republican model The
readie and easie way to establish a free commonwealth
(1660).
Rationale for Choosing these
Republicans
Harrington and Milton were chosen in part because
they attempted to overhaul England’s ancient
Constitution with radical commonwealth models. Their
political philosophies are often misinterpreted because
sections of their models are bracketed from their
protestant theology. More attention is often paid to
Milton’s poetry than his political prose, and Harrington
is tagged as the stereotypical Machiavellian writer with
little regard to his use of the Bible. Their models also
evidence anti-Cromwellian views; even Milton, in the
final analysis, chafed politically under the Protectorate.
Though their proposals rest on contrasting political uses
of biblical texts, Harrington and Milton were Christian
humanists in their approach to biblical interpretation
and use of classical sources. Neither saw any
contradiction in synthesising pagan classical works with
the Christian text to model a commonwealth. After all,
pagan authors bore the image of God and could bear
witness to moral truths. Finally, Milton wrote his own
theological treatise, and both utilised seventeenthcentury
Rabbinic scholarship, though Harrington to a
much greater extent.
Harrington the ‘Machiavellian’ and
Milton the ‘Cromwellian’
Both Harrington and Milton were politically inspired by
their travels to the European continent. The civil
institutions of Venice, Italy especially enamoured
Harrington. Milton too visited Italy, but seems to have
been influenced by Geneva. Both returned to England
stirred to transition into a defining career of political
influence.
Harrington claims he was driven to consider the study
of government to promote the welfare of mankind. He
established himself as a courtier of King Charles I, but
his respect for his majesty, displayed even on the
scaffold, did not diminish his republicanism. He never
held a seat in the Commons, despite his desire to do so
early on in the Civil War, and he was largely a historian,
political scholar and philosopher.
Harrington is consistently interpreted as a
Machiavellian, and considered the measure of English
classical republican political theory. Unfortunately,
19