Home  ›  Art Should Be a Tool of the State and Promote the Wellbeing of the Body Politic

Art Should Be a Tool of the State and Promote the Wellbeing of the Body Politic

Written By Saturday, April 30, 2022 Add Comment Edit

Metaphor comparing a polity to a concrete torso

The frontispiece of Hobbes's Leviathan shows a body formed of multitudinous citizens, surmounted by a king's head.[1]

The body politic is a polity—such as a city, realm, or state—considered metaphorically as a concrete body. Historically, the sovereign is typically portrayed as the body's head, and the analogy may also be extended to other anatomical parts, every bit in political readings of Aesop's fable of "The Belly and the Members". The prototype originates in ancient Greek philosophy, beginning in the sixth century BC, and was later extended in Roman philosophy. Post-obit the high and late medieval revival of the Byzantine Corpus Juris Civilis in Latin Europe, the "body politic" took on a jurisprudential significance by being identified with the legal theory of the corporation, gaining salience in political thought from the 13th century on. In English law the paradigm of the torso politic developed into the theory of the king'south two bodies and the Crown as corporation sole.

The metaphor was elaborated further from the Renaissance on, as medical knowledge based on Galen was challenged by thinkers such as William Harvey. Analogies were drawn between supposed causes of disease and disorder and their equivalents in the political field, viewed as plagues or infections that might exist remedied with purges and nostrums.[2] The 17th century writings of Thomas Hobbes developed the image of the trunk politic into a modernistic theory of the state as an artificial person. Parallel terms deriving from the Latin corpus politicum be in other European languages.

Etymology [edit]

The term torso politic derives from Medieval Latin corpus politicum, which itself adult from corpus mysticum, originally designating the Catholic Church as the mystical body of Christ merely extended to politics from the 11th century on in the form corpus reipublicae (mysticum), "(mystical) torso of the commonwealth".[3] [4] Parallel terms exist in other European languages, such as Italian corpo politico, Polish ciało polityczne, and High german Staatskörper ("state body").[three] An equivalent early modern French term is corps-état;[5] contemporary French uses corps politique.[3]

History [edit]

A visualization of the body politic metaphor in a 14th-century French manuscript.
The male monarch is caput. Adjacent, the seneschals, bailiffs, and provosts and other judges are compared to eyes and ears. The counsellors and wise men are linked to the centre. As defenders of the commonwealth, the knights are the hands. Because of their constant voyages, the merchants are associated with the legs. Finally, laborers, who piece of work shut to the earth and back up the trunk, are its anxiety.

Classical philosophy [edit]

The Western concept of the "torso politic", originally pregnant a human club considered every bit a collective body, originated in classical Greek and Roman philosophy.[6] The full general metaphor emerged in the 6th century BC, with the Athenian statesman Solon and the poet Theognis describing cities (poleis) in biological terms as "pregnant" or "wounded".[7] Plato's Republic provided i of its about influential formulations.[viii] The term itself, however—in Ancient Greek, τῆς πόλεως σῶμα , tēs poleōs sōma , "the body of the state"—appears every bit such for the first fourth dimension in the tardily 4th century Athenian orators Dinarch and Hypereides at the beginning of the Hellenistic era.[9] In these early formulations, the anatomical detail of the body politic was relatively limited: Greek thinkers typically confined themselves to distinguishing the ruler as head of the body, and comparison political stasis, that is, crises of the state, to biological disease.[10]

The prototype of the trunk politic occupied a central place in the political thought of the Roman Republic, and the Romans were the first to develop the anatomy of the "body" in total detail, endowing it with nerves, "blood, breath, limbs, and organs".[eleven] In its origins, the concept was particularly continued to a politicised version of Aesop's legend of "The Belly and the Members", told in relation to the first secessio plebis, the temporary departure of the plebeian order from Rome in 495–93 BC.[12] [13] On the account of the Roman historian Livy, a senator explained the state of affairs to the plebeians by a metaphor: the various members of the Roman body had go angry that the "stomach", the patricians, consumed their labours while providing nothing in return. However, upon their secession, they became feeble and realised that the stomach'southward digestion had provided them vital energy. Convinced by this story, the plebeians returned to Rome, and the Roman body was made whole and functional. This fable formed a paradigm for "most all surviving republican discourse of the body politic".[12]

Late republican orators adult the prototype further, comparing attacks on Roman institutions to mutilations of the republic'southward body. During the Showtime Triumvirate in 59 BC, Cicero described the Roman country as "dying of a new sort of disease".[fourteen] Lucan's Pharsalia, written in the early on regal era in the 60s Advertisement, abounded in this kind of imagery. Depicting the dictator Sulla as a surgeon out of control who had butchered the Roman body politic in the process of cutting out its putrefied limbs, Lucan used vivid organic language to portray the pass up of the Roman Republic as a literal process of decay, its seas and rivers becoming choked with blood and gore.[xv]

Medieval usage [edit]

The metaphor of the body politic remained in use after the fall of the Western Roman Empire.[8] The Neoplatonist Islamic philosopher al-Farabi, known in the Due west equally Alpharabius, discussed the epitome in his work The Perfect State (c. 940), stating, "The excellent city resembles the perfect and healthy trunk, all of whose limbs cooperate to make the life of the animate being perfect".[sixteen] John of Salisbury gave information technology a definitive Latin high medieval form in his Policraticus effectually 1159: the king was the body'due south caput; the priest was the soul; the councillors were the centre; the optics, ears, and tongue were the magistrates of the law; one hand, the army, held a weapon; the other, without a weapon, was the realm'southward justice. The trunk's feet were the mutual people. Each member of the trunk had its vocation, and each was appreciative to piece of work in harmony for the benefit of the whole trunk.[17]

In the Tardily Middle Ages, the concept of the corporation, a legal person made up of a group of real individuals, gave the thought of a body politic judicial significance.[18] The corporation had emerged in purple Roman law nether the proper noun universitas, and a conception of the concept attributed to Ulpian was collected in the 6th century Assimilate of Justinian I during the early Byzantine era.[xix] The Digest, forth with the other parts of Justinian's Corpus Juris Civilis, became the boulder of medieval ceremonious law upon its recovery and notation by the glossators beginning in the 11th century.[20] It remained for the glossators' 13th century successors, the commentators—especially Baldus de Ubaldis—to develop the idea of the corporation every bit a persona ficta, a fictive person, and employ the concept to human societies as a whole.[xviii]

Where his jurist predecessor Bartolus of Saxoferrato conceived the corporation in essentially legal terms, Baldus expressly connected the corporation theory to the ancient, biological and political concept of the body politic. For Baldus, not only was man, in Aristotelian terms, a "political animal", but the whole populus, the body of the people, formed a blazon of political animal in itself: a populus "has regime every bit part of [its] existence, just every bit every beast is ruled by its own spirit and soul".[21] Baldus equated the torso politic with the respublica, the state or realm, stating that it "cannot die, and for this reason information technology is said that it has no heir, because it always lives on in itself".[22] From here, the image of the trunk politic became prominent in the medieval imagination. In Canto XVIII of his Paradiso, for example, Dante, writing in the early on 14th century, presents the Roman Empire as a corporate body in the course of an regal hawkeye, its body made of souls.[23] The French court writer Christine de Pizan discussed the concept at length in her Book of the Body Politic (1407).[24]

The idea of the body politic, rendered in legal terms through corporation theory, also drew natural comparison to the theological concept of the church as a corpus mysticum, the mystical torso of Christ. The concept of the people as a corpus mysticum also featured in Baldus,[25] and the thought that the realm of France was a corpus mysticum formed an important office of tardily medieval French jurisprudence. Jean de Terrevermeille [fr], around 1418–19, described the French laws of succession every bit established by the "whole civic or mystical body of the realm", and the Parlement of Paris in 1489 proclaimed itself a "mystical torso" equanimous of both ecclesiastics and laymen, representing the "body of the king".[26] From at to the lowest degree the 14th century, the doctrine developed that the French kings were mystically married to the body politic; at the coronation of Henry 2 in 1547, he was said to have "solemnly married his realm".[27] The English jurist John Fortescue also invoked the "mystical torso" in his De Laudibus Legum Angliae (c. 1470): just as a concrete body is "held together by the fretfulness", the mystical torso of the realm is held together by the law, and

Merely as the physical body grows out of the embryo, regulated past one head, so does at that place issue from the people the kingdom, which exists equally a corpus mysticum governed by one man equally head.[28]

The rex'southward trunk politic [edit]

In England [edit]

In Tudor and Stuart England, the concept of the body politic was given a peculiar additional significance through the thought of the male monarch'southward two bodies, the doctrine discussed by the German-American medievalist Ernst Kantorowicz in his eponymous piece of work. This legal doctrine held that the monarch had 2 bodies: the physical "king body natural" and the immortal "King body politic". Upon the "demise" of an individual king, his body natural savage abroad, but the trunk politic lived on.[29] This was an indigenous development of English law without a precise equivalent in the rest of Europe.[xxx] Extending the identification of the body politic as a corporation, English jurists argued that the Crown was a "corporation sole": a corporation fabricated up of one body politic that was at the same time the body of the realm and its parliamentary estates, and also the body of the royal dignity itself—two concepts of the torso politic that were conflated and fused.[31]

Elizabethan jurists held that the immaturity of Edward VI'south body natural was expunged past his body politic.

The development of the doctrine of the male monarch'south two bodies tin exist traced in the Reports of Edmund Plowden. In the 1561 Case of the Duchy of Lancaster, which concerned whether an earlier gift of country made by Edward VI could exist voided on account of his "nonage", that is, his immaturity, the judges held that it could not: the rex'due south "Body politic, which is annexed to his Trunk natural, takes away the Imbecility of his Torso natural".[32] The king'south body politic, and so, "that cannot exist seen or handled", annexes the body natural and "wipes away" all its defects.[33] What was more, the body politic rendered the king immortal equally an individual: as the judges in the example Loma v. Grange argued in 1556, once the rex had made an act, "he every bit Male monarch never dies, just the Rex, in which Proper name it has Relation to him, does ever go along"—thus, they held, Henry Viii was still "alive", a decade after his physical death.[29]

The doctrine of the ii bodies could serve to limit the powers of the existent rex. When Edward Coke, Chief Justice of the Common Pleas at the time, reported the manner in which judges had differentiated the bodies in 1608, he noted that information technology was the "natural trunk" of the male monarch that was created by God—the "politic trunk", by contrast, was "framed by the policy of homo".[34] In the Instance of Prohibitions of the same year, Coke denied the king "in his ain person" whatsoever right to administer justice or society arrests.[35] Finally, in its declaration of 27 May 1642 soon before the start of the English Civil War, Parliament drew on the theory to invoke the powers of the body politic of Charles I against his body natural,[36] stating:

What they [Parliament] do herein, hath the Postage of Royal Authority, although His Majesty seduced past evil Counsel, do in His own Person, oppose, or interrupt the same. For the King's Supreme Power, and Imperial Pleasure, is exercised and declared in this High Court of Law, and Council, after a more eminent and obligatory manner, than it can be by any personal Act or Resolution of His Own.[37]

The 18th century jurist William Blackstone, in Book I of his Commentaries on the Laws of England (1765), summarised the doctrine of the male monarch'southward body politic as it subsequently developed subsequently the Restoration: the king "in his political chapters" manifests "accented perfection"; he tin "exercise no wrong", nor even is he capable of "thinking incorrect"; he can have no defect, and is never in law "a minor or nether historic period". Indeed, Blackstone says, if an heir to the throne should acquiesce while "attainted of treason or felony", his assumption of the crown "would purge the attainder ipso facto". The king manifests "absolute immortality": "Henry, Edward, or George may dice; but the king survives them all".[38] Presently after the appearance of the Commentaries, notwithstanding, Jeremy Bentham mounted an all-encompassing attack on Blackstone which the historian Quentin Skinner describes equally "almost lethal" to the theory: legal fictions like the body politic, Bentham argued, were conducive to royal absolutism and should be entirely avoided in law. Bentham's position dominated subsequently British legal thinking, and though aspects of the theory of the trunk politic would survive in subsequent jurisprudence, the thought of the Crown as a corporation sole was widely critiqued.[39]

In the late 19th century, Frederic William Maitland revived the legal discourse of the king'southward two bodies, arguing that the concept of the Crown equally corporation sole had originated from the amalgamation of medieval civil police with the law of church property.[40] He proposed, in contrast, to view the Crown as an ordinary corporation amass, that is, a corporation of many people, with a view to describing the legal personhood of the land.[41]

In France [edit]

A related but contrasting concept in French republic was the doctrine termed by Sarah Hanley the king's i torso, summarised by Jean Bodin in his own 1576 pronouncement that "the king never dies".[42] Rather than distinguishing the immortal body politic from the mortal torso natural of the rex, as in the English language theory, the French doctrine conflated the two, arguing that the Salic constabulary had established a unmarried king torso politic and natural that constantly regenerated through the biological reproduction of the imperial line.[43] The body politic, on this account, was biological and necessarily male, and 15th century French jurists such as Jean Juvénal des Ursins argued on this basis for the exclusion of female heirs to the crown—since, they argued, the king of France was a "virile office".[44] In the ancien régime, the king's heir was held to digest the body politic of the old king in a physical "transfer of corporeality" upon his accession.[45]

In the United States [edit]

James I in the second charter for Virginia, likewise every bit both the Plymouth and Massachusetts Charter, grant body politic.[46] [47] [48]

Hobbesian country theory [edit]

Thomas Hobbes, c. 1669–70

Aside from the doctrine of the king's two bodies, the conventional image of the whole of the realm as a torso politic had besides remained in use in Stuart England: James I compared the part of the rex to "the office of the head towards the body".[49] Upon the outbreak of the English Civil State of war in 1642, nevertheless, parliamentarians such every bit William Bridge put forward the argument that the "ruling ability" belonged originally to "the whole people or torso politicke", who could revoke it from the monarch.[50] The execution of Charles I in 1649 made necessary a radical revision of the whole concept.[51] In 1651, Thomas Hobbes's Leviathan made a decisive contribution to this effect, reviving the concept while endowing it with new features. Against the parliamentarians, Hobbes maintained that sovereignty was absolute and the head could certainly not be "of lesse ability" than the torso of the people; against the purple absolutists, however, he adult the idea of a social contract, emphasising that the body politic—Leviathan, the "mortal god"—was fictional and bogus rather than natural, derived from an original decision past the people to constitute a sovereign.[52] [53]

Hobbes'south theory of the body politic exercised an important influence on subsequent political thinkers, who both repeated and modified information technology. Republican partisans of the Commonwealth presented alternative figurations of the metaphor in defence of the parliamentarian model. James Harrington, in his 1656 Commonwealth of Oceana, argued that "the delivery of a Model Authorities ... is no less than political Anatomy"; it must "imbrace all those Muscles, Fretfulness, Arterys and Bones, which are necessary to any Role of a well social club'd Commonwealth". Invoking William Harvey's contempo discovery of the circulatory system, Harrington presented the torso politic as a dynamic organization of political circulation, comparing his ideal bicameral legislature, for example, to the ventricles of the human middle. In contrast to Hobbes, the "caput" was over again dependent on the people: the execution of the constabulary must follow the law itself, so that "Leviathan may come across, that the hand or sword that executeth the Law is in information technology, and not above information technology".[54] In Germany, Samuel von Pufendorf recapitulated Hobbes'south caption of the origin of the state as a social contract, but extended his notion of personhood to argue that the state must exist a specifically moral person with a rational nature, and not simply coercive ability.[55]

In the 18th century, Hobbes's theory of the country equally an artificial body politic gained wide credence both in United kingdom of great britain and northern ireland and continental Europe.[56] Thomas Pownall, later the British governor of Massachusetts and a proponent of American freedom, drew on Hobbes'southward theory in his 1752 Principles of Polity to debate that "the whole Torso politic" should be conceived as "one Person"; states were "distinct Persons and independent".[57] At around the aforementioned fourth dimension, the Swiss jurist Emer de Vattel pronounced that "states are bodies politic", "moral persons" with their ain "agreement and ... will", a statement that would become accepted international law.[58]

The tension between organic understandings of the body politic and theories emphasizing its bogus character formed a theme in English political debates in this catamenia. Writing in 1780, during the American Revolutionary War, the British reformist John Cartwright emphasised the artificial and immortal character of the body politic in order to refute the use of biological analogies in conservative rhetoric. Arguing that information technology was improve conceived every bit a motorcar operating past the "due activeness and re-action of the ... springs of the constitution" than a human body, he termed "the body politic" a "devil-may-care figurative expression": "It is not corporeal ... not formed from the dust of the earth. It is purely intellectual; and its life-spring is truth."[59]

Modernistic constabulary [edit]

The English language term "torso politic" is sometimes used in modern legal contexts to describe a type of legal person, typically the state itself or an entity connected to information technology. A torso politic is a type of taxable legal person in British law, for example,[60] and likewise a form of legal person in Indian law.[61] In the United states of america, a municipal corporation is considered a torso politic, as opposed to a private body corporate.[62] The U.S. Supreme Court affirmed the theory of the state as an artificial body politic in the 1851 instance Cotton fiber five. United States, declaring that "every sovereign Country is of necessity a trunk politic, or artificial person, and every bit such capable of making contracts and property belongings, both real and personal", and differentiated the United States' powers every bit a sovereign from its rights as a body politic.[63]

See likewise [edit]

  • Social organism, the concept in sociology
  • Volkskörper, the German "national body"
  • Lex animata, the king as the "living law"
  • Kokutai, a related Japanese concept
  • Royal we

References [edit]

  1. ^ Kenneth Olwig (2002), Landscape, nature, and the trunk politic, University of Wisconsin Press, p. 87, ISBN978-0-299-17424-eight, The frontispiece to Thomas Hobbes'southward Leviathan ... is a particularly famous example of the depiction of the body politic ...
  2. ^ Jonathan Harris (1998), Foreign bodies and the body politic: discourses of social pathology in early modern England, Cambridge University Press, ISBN978-0-521-59405-9
  3. ^ a b c Musolff, Andreas (2017). "Metaphor and Cultural Cognition". In Sharifian, Farzad (ed.). Advances in Cultural Linguistics. Singapore: Springer Nature. pp. 328–29. ISBN978-9-811-04055-9.
  4. ^ Kantorowicz, Ernst H. (2016). The King's Two Bodies: A Study in Mediaeval Political Theology (Princeton Classics ed.). Princeton: Princeton University Printing. pp. 207–208. ISBN978-0-691-16923-1.
  5. ^ de Baecque, Antoine (1997). The Body Politic: Corporeal Metaphor in Revolutionary France, 1770-1800. Trans. Charlotte Mandell. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press. p. xv. ISBN978-0-8047-2817-1.
  6. ^ Dobski, Bernard J.; Gish, Dustin (2013). Dobski, Bernard J.; Gish, Dustin (eds.). Shakespeare and the Body Politic. Plymouth: Lexington Books. p. 6. ISBN978-0-739-17095-3.
  7. ^ Brock, Roger (2013). Greek Political Imagery from Homer to Aristotle. London & New York: Bloomsbury Academic. p. 69. ISBN978-i-472-50218-6.
  8. ^ a b MacKinnon, Patricia L. (1988). The analogy of the torso politic in St. Augustine, Dante, Petrarch, and Ariosto (PhD). University of California, Santa Cruz. p. iv.
  9. ^ Brock 2013, p. 70.
  10. ^ Brock 2013, pp. 70–71.
  11. ^ Walters, Brian (2020). The Deaths of the Republic: Imagery of the Body Politic in Ciceronian Rome. Oxford: Oxford University Press. p. 1. ISBN978-0-198-83957-6.
  12. ^ a b Walters 2020, pp. seven–9.
  13. ^ Rollo-Koster, Joëlle (2010). "Body Politic". In Bevir, Marker (ed.). Encyclopedia of Political Theory. Vol. one. Thousand Oaks: SAGE. p. 134. ISBN978-1-412-95865-3.
  14. ^ Walters 2020, pp. 75–77.
  15. ^ Walters, Brian (2019). "Sulla's Phthiriasis and the Republican Trunk Politic". Mnemosyne. 72 (6): 964. doi:x.1163/1568525X-12342610. S2CID 211665064.
  16. ^ Rosenwein, Barbara H., ed. (2018). Reading the Eye Ages: Sources from Europe, Byzantium, and the Islamic Globe (3rd ed.). Toronto: University of Toronto Printing. p. 206. ISBN978-1-442-63674-3.
  17. ^ Dumolyn, January (2006). "Justice, Equity and the Common Proficient: The State Ideology of the Councillors of the Burgundian Dukes". In Boulton, D'Arcy Jonathan Dacre; Veenstra, Jan R. (eds.). The Ideology of Burgundy: The Promotion of National Consciousness, 1364–1565. Leiden: Brill. pp. 12–13. ISBN978-9-004-15359-2.
  18. ^ a b Canning, Joseph (1996). A History of Medieval Political Idea: 300–1450. Abingdon: Routledge. p. 172. ISBN978-0-415-39415-iv.
  19. ^ Duff, Patrick Westward. (1938). Personality in Roman Private Law. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. p. 37.
  20. ^ Canning, Joseph (2011). "Civil (Roman) Police force". In Lagerlund, Henrik (ed.). Encyclopedia of Medieval Philosophy: Philosophy Between 500 and 1500. Dordrecht: Springer. p. 221.
  21. ^ Canning, Joseph (2011). Ideas of Power in the Belatedly Middle Ages, 1296–1417. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. pp. 145–46. ISBN978-ane-107-01141-0.
  22. ^ Genet, Jean-Philippe (1998). "Politics: theory and practise". In Allmand, Christopher (ed.). The New Cambridge Medieval History. Volume VII: c. 1415–c. 1500. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. pp. 18–19. ISBN978-0-521-38296-0.
  23. ^ Monateri, Pier Giuseppe (2018). Dominus Mundi: Political Sublime and the World Guild. Oxford: Hart. p. 52. ISBN978-1-509-91176-9.
  24. ^ de Pizan, Christine (1994). Langdon Forhan, Kate (ed.). The Book of the Body Politic. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. pp. xviii–xx. ISBN978-0-521-42259-viii.
  25. ^ Kantorowicz 2016, p. 210.
  26. ^ Kantorowicz 2016, pp. 219–20.
  27. ^ Kantorowicz 2016, pp. 221–22.
  28. ^ Kantorowicz 2016, p. 224.
  29. ^ a b Kantorowicz 2016, p. 13.
  30. ^ Kantorowicz 2016, pp. 20, 446.
  31. ^ Kantorowicz 2016, pp. 448–49.
  32. ^ Kantorowicz 2016, pp. 9–10.
  33. ^ Kantorowicz 2016, pp. 4 n5, 11.
  34. ^ Kantorowicz 2016, pp. fourteen, 423 n362.
  35. ^ Hasanbegović, Jasminka (2021). "On the (Un)Changing Gauge Icons and Their Creators: On Deborah, Coke and Montesquieu, Posner and Barak, and Some Others". In Chiassoni, Pier; Spaić, Bojan (eds.). Judges and Adjudication in Ramble Democracies: A View from Legal Realism. Cham: Springer. p. 76. ISBN978-3-030-58185-five.
  36. ^ Kantorowicz 2016, p. 21.
  37. ^ Parliament of England (1642). A Declaration of the Lords and Eatables in Parliament, concerning his Maiesties Proclamation the 27. of May 1642. London: William Gaye. p. 4 – via Early English Books Online. Spelling modernised.
  38. ^ Blackstone, William (1765). Commentaries on the Laws of England. Oxford: Clarendon Printing. pp. 238–42.
  39. ^ McLean, Janet (2012). Searching for the State in British Legal Idea: Competing Conceptions of the Public Sphere. Cambridge: Cambridge Academy Press. p. 4. ISBN978-ane-107-02248-five.
  40. ^ George, Garnett (1996). "The Origins of the Crown". Proceedings of the British University. 89: 171–214.
  41. ^ McLean 2012, pp. 4–5.
  42. ^ Hanley, Sarah (1997). "Mapping Rulership in the French Body Politic: Political Identity, Public Law and the 'King'due south One Trunk'". Historical Reflections. 23 (ii): 134. JSTOR 41299087.
  43. ^ Hanley 1997, p. 136.
  44. ^ Hanley 1997, p. 140.
  45. ^ de Baecque 1997, pp. 100–102.
  46. ^ "The Second Charter of Virginia; May 23, 1609". 18 December 1998.
  47. ^ "Charter of the Colony of New Plymouth Granted to William Bradford and His Associates : 1629". 18 Dec 1998.
  48. ^ "The Charter of Massachusetts Bay : 1629". 18 December 1998.
  49. ^ Attie, Katherine Bootle (2008). "Re-Membering the Body Politic: Hobbes and the Construction of Civic Immortality". ELH. 75 (three): 497–530. doi:10.1353/elh.0.0011. JSTOR 27654624. S2CID 162034742.
  50. ^ Skinner, Quentin (2009). "A Genealogy of the Modernistic Land" (PDF). Proceedings of the British Academy. 162: 340.
  51. ^ Attie 2008, p. 498.
  52. ^ Skinner 2009, pp. 342–43.
  53. ^ Attie 2008, pp. 500, 502.
  54. ^ Attie 2008, pp. 507–508.
  55. ^ Skinner, Quentin (2018). From Humanism to Hobbes: Studies in Rhetoric and Politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. pp. 365–66. ISBN978-1-107-12885-9.
  56. ^ Skinner 2018, p. 371.
  57. ^ Skinner 2018, p. 370.
  58. ^ Skinner 2009, p. 352.
  59. ^ Ihalainen, Pasi (2009). "Towards an Immortal Political Torso: The State Machine in Eighteenth-Century English Political Discourse". Contributions to the History of Concepts. 5: 34–35. doi:10.1163/187465609X430845.
  60. ^ Harris, Peter (2013). Corporate Taxation Constabulary: Structure, Policy and Practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. p. 21. ISBN978-1-107-03353-5.
  61. ^ Bhattacharya, Ananya (7 June 2019). "Birds to holy rivers: A listing of everything India considers "legal persons"". Quartz . Retrieved 24 May 2021.
  62. ^ Fippinger, Robert A. (1993). The Securities Law of Public Finance (2nd ed.). Practising Law Institute. p. ii n6. ISBN978-0-872-24054-4.
  63. ^ Cotton 5. The states, 52 U.S. 229 (1851).

boyettewilbeend.blogspot.com

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Body_politic

0 Response to "Art Should Be a Tool of the State and Promote the Wellbeing of the Body Politic"

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)

Iklan Atas Artikel

Iklan Tengah Artikel 1

Iklan Tengah Artikel 2

Iklan Bawah Artikel