霍布斯决定在1628年翻译和出版修昔底德的历史,这无疑是对当时英国日益加剧的政治紧张局势的反应。在1620年代,查理一世和议会之间的麻烦升级,因为国王坚持为一系列不受欢迎的战争筹集资金。在国王公开向西班牙宣战后,他开始积累自1588年以来最大的军事随行人员。出于各种原因,包括西班牙人手中卡迪斯遭受的早期损失以及战争对贸易的负面影响,议会不情愿向国王提供额外资金。与法国的关系逐渐恶化加剧了这种情况。法国自己的海上冲突导致了对国际贸易构成更多障碍的禁运。此外,英国和法国之间的紧张局势因法国继续拥有英国船只(最初是借来的)以及两国之间长期酝酿的宗教差异而增加。在1626年议会否认查尔斯的供应请求后,国王通过强制贷款筹集资金,私人个人通过这笔贷款向国王贷款。这些行动不仅使议会与国王之间的关系紧张,而且还揭示了这两个权力中心之间的一些意识形态差异,具有严重的政治影响。最重要的问题涉及国王的权威及其与法律的关系。查尔斯主张一种神权的王权理论,根据这种理论,上帝通过他的王室任命的恩典授予他权力,以他自己的特权在法律之外行事。国王声称他只会在必要时采取法外行动,并且只为了共同利益,才能缓和他的观点。尽管有这种自我约束的说法,但他的一些行为与他的善意宣言相冲突。例如,国王坚持在法律之外监禁的权利,引发了对他的言辞是否可信的严重怀疑。 1628年在议会提出的“权利请愿书”试图保护对象的自由免受国王的威胁行为,例如强迫贷款,法外监禁和士兵的贿赂。

美国耶鲁大学文学Essay代写:霍布斯对修昔底德的翻译

Hobbes’s decision to translate and publish Thucydides’ history in 1628 was certainly a reaction to the growing political tensions in England at this time. In the 1620s, troubles between Charles I and Parliament escalated due to the King’s insistence on raising funds for as series of unpopular wars. After the King openly declared war on Spain, he began to amass the largest military entourage since 1588. For a variety of reasons, including early losses suffered at Cadiz at the hands of the Spanish and the negative effects of war on trade, Parliament was reluctant to grant additional funds to the King. This situation was compounded by a progressively deteriorating relationship with France. France’s own maritime conflicts led to embargoes that created more barriers to international trade. Furthermore, tensions between England and France increased on account of France’s continued possession of English ships (which were originally on loan) and because of long-simmering religious differences between the two nations. After the Parliament of 1626 denied Charles’ request for supply, the King raised funds through a forced loan, by which private individuals were made to loan money to the crown. Such actions not only strained the relationship between the Parliament and King, but also revealed a number of ideological differences between these two centers of power with serious political implications. The most important issue concerned the King’s authority and its relationship to the law. Charles advocated a divine right theory of kingship according to which God granted him the power, by the grace of his royal anointment, to act outside the law at his own prerogative. The King tempered his view by claiming he would take extra-legal actions only when necessary and only for the good of the commonwealth. Despite this claim of self-restraint, some of his actions conflicted with his declaration of good faith. The King’s insistence on the right to imprison outside the law, for example, sparked serious doubts as to whether his word could be trusted. The Petition of Right, presented in Parliament in 1628, attempted to preserve the liberties of the subjects against the threatening actions of the King, such as forced loans, extra-legal imprisonment, and the billeting of soldiers.

发表评论

电子邮件地址不会被公开。 必填项已用*标注