Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-g7gxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-19T05:38:40.518Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

LAW IN THE VINDICIAE, CONTRA TYRANNOS: A VINDICATION

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 September 2006

GEORGE GARNETT
Affiliation:
St Hugh's College, Oxford

Abstract

Dr Anne McLaren has disputed the interpretation of the Vindiciae, contra tyrannos (1579) as a work in which Roman and canon law were fundamental. She correctly identifies Quentin Skinner and me with this interpretation. She bases her case on two sorts of evidence: the alleged paucity of Roman law citations, as compared with scriptural ones, in the margins of the original text; and our alleged failure to appreciate the ‘context’ of the Vindiciae, which, she suggests, means how it was translated and used in England, primarily in the seventeenth century. This response argues that she has seriously underestimated the number of legal citations, ignored the use of legal material which is not cited in the margins, and failed to appreciate that Scripture is interpreted in accordance with the categories and principles of Roman and canon law. It further argues that sixteenth-century France, not seventeenth-century England, is the proper ‘context’ in which to understand the book; and that substituting her assessment of English interpretations for what the original says is illegitimate.

Type
Communication
Copyright
© 2006 Cambridge University Press

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.)

Footnotes

I should like to thank John Robertson, Magnus Ryan, and Quentin Skinner for commenting on a draft of this essay.