Book Reviews : Marsilius of Padua: The Defender of Peace. Volume I: Marsilius of Padua and Medieval Political Philosophy. By ALAN GEWIRTH. (New York: Columbia University Press. 1951. Pp. xvi, 342. $4.75.)

• Author: William Kent
• Date: 01 December 1951
• Published date: 01 December 1951
• DOI: 10.1177/106591295100400418
• Subject Matter: Articles

65.7

ing

a

just

distribution

of

all

commodities

regardless

of

their

origin.

This

reviewer

agrees

with

Hobson

that

imperialism

belongs

to

the

field

of

social

pathology,

but

he

can

accept

neither

Hobson’s

analysis

nor

his

recommf&dquo;ncl~tion~-

EGON

E.

BERGEL.

Springfield

College.

Marsilius

of

Padua:

The

Defender

of

Peace.

Volume

I:

Marsilius

of

Padua

and

Medieval

Political

Philosophy.

By

ALAN

GEWIRTH.

(New

York:

Columbia

University

Press.

1951.

Pp.

xvi,

342.

$4.75.)

A

clear

and

penetrating

interpretation

of

a

political

thinker

of

any

date

and

of

almost

any

quality

can

be

extremely

useful

in

our

own

times,

for

it

can

describe

for

us

a

model

to

be

imitated,

or a

horrible

example

of

what

not

to

do,

or

both.

Mr.

Gewirth’s

careful

and

thorough

analysis

of

Marsilius

of

Padua

exhibits

for

us

a

philosopher

with

both

strengths

and

weaknesses,

and

it

can

therefore

be

of

great

service

not

merely

to

those

who

have

a

specialized

interest

in

the

late

Middle

Ages,

but

also

to

all

who

are

concerned

with

the

development

of

an

accurate

and

comprehen-

sive

mode

of

treating

the

political

problems

of

the

present

or

any

other

time.

Although

Marsilius

was

neither

perfect

nor

timeless,

a

searching

examination

of

his

position,

of

its

character,

sources,

and

consequences,

gives

great

insight

into

the

nature

of

political

thinking.

The

chief

work

of

Marsilius

was

the

Defensor

pacis,

completed

in

1324.

(An

annotated

translation

will

soon

appear

as

the

second

and

final

volume

of

Mr.

Gewirth’s

study.)

Its

principal

effort

was

to

argue,

on

the

basis

of

both

reason

and

revelation,

that

the

claims

of

the

pope

to

ultimate

political

power

represented

a

&dquo;perverted

opinion ...

pernicious

to

the

human

race.&dquo;

It

is

full

of

conclusions

about

such

enduringly

important

topics

as

the

relation

of

church

to

state,

freedom

of

speech,

and

the

devices

of

government;

and

it

offers

the

reader

such

reinforcement

or

crystallization

of

his

own

ideas

as

he

can

obtain

from

seeing

that

someone

long

dead

agreed

or

disagreed

with

him

on

any

of

these

subjects.

But

though

reinforcement

is

comforting

and

crystalliza-

tion

can

be

most

useful,

Mr.

Gewirth’s

study

is

far

more

significant

than

any

mere

presentation

of

Marsilius’

conclusions

could

be.

The

kind

of

interpretation

which

is

developed

in

this

study

makes

much

clearer

than

secondary

accounts

usually

do

the

fundamental

workings

of

an

acute

mind,

and

thus

presents

for

inspection

and

reflection

not

merely

con-

clusions

but

also

basic

orientations.

Marsilius

believed

that

political

authority

lies

ultimately

with

the

people

as

a

whole.

But

political

science

and

philosophy

must

ask

whether

and

in

what

sense

this

belief

is

warranted;

and

how,

in

detail,

the

people’s