Andreas Aktoudianakis PhD thesis

220 Pages·2016·3.5 MB·English

VIRTUE, HONOUR AND MODERATION:
THE FOUNDATIONS OF LIBERTY IN MONTESQUIEU’S
POLITICAL THOUGHT
Andreas Aktoudianakis

A Thesis Submitted for the Degree of PhD
at the
University of St Andrews

2016
Full metadata for this item is available in
St Andrews Research Repository
at:
http://research-repository.st-andrews.ac.uk/

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
http://hdl.handle.net/10023/9889

This item is protected by original copyright

This item is licensed under a
Creative Commons Licence
Virtue, Honour and Moderation:
The Foundations of Liberty in Montesquieu's Political
Thought

Andreas Aktoudianakis

This thesis is submitted in partial fulfilment for the degree of
PhD at the
University of St Andrews

22 / March / 2016
1. Candidate’s declarations:

I, Andreas Aktoudianakis, hereby certify that this thesis, which is approximately 78000
words in length, has been written by me, and that it is the record of work carried out by me,
or principally by myself in collaboration with others as acknowledged, and that it has not
been submitted in any previous application for a higher degree.

I was admitted as a research student in September 2011, and as a candidate for the degree of
PhD in May 2012; the higher study for which this is a record was carried out in the
University of St Andrews between 2011 and 2016.

(If you received assistance in writing from anyone other than your supervisor/s):
I, Andreas Aktoudianakis, received assistance in the writing of this thesis in respect of
language, grammar, and syntax, which was provided by Ms. Katherine Palfrey.

Date 22/March/2016 signature of candidate ……………………

2. Supervisor’s declaration:

I hereby certify that the candidate has fulfilled the conditions of the Resolution and
Regulations appropriate for the degree of PhD in the University of St Andrews and that the
candidate is qualified to submit this thesis in application for that degree.

Date …………… signature of supervisor ……………………

3. Permission for publication:

In submitting this thesis to the University of St Andrews I understand that I am giving
permission for it to be made available for use in accordance with the regulations of the
University Library for the time being in force, subject to any copyright vested in the work
not being affected thereby. I also understand that the title and the abstract will be
published, and that a copy of the work may be made and supplied to any bona fide library
or research worker, that my thesis will be electronically accessible for personal or research
use unless exempt by award of an embargo as requested below, and that the library has the
right to migrate my thesis into new electronic forms as required to ensure continued access
to the thesis. I have obtained any third-party copyright permissions that may be required in
order to allow such access and migration, or have requested the appropriate embargo
below.

The following is an agreed request by candidate and supervisor regarding the publication
of this thesis:

PRINTED COPY a) No embargo on print copy

ELECTRONIC COPY a) No embargo on electronic copy

Date: 22 / March / 2016 signature of candidate ………………….

Date: 22 / March / 2016 signature of supervisor …………………
ABSTRACT

Liberal thinkers have suggested different theories that legitimise the state’s various
processes, institutions, and use of coercive power. However, their theories cannot account for
those motivations that cause men to put their lives in danger when standing against political
oppression. The study of Montesquieu's theory of government can aid liberalism’s
incomplete account of the political motivations that incline men to defend their liberty.
Toward this end, this thesis studies Montesquieu's notions of virtue and honour, and
challenges the meaning they have been accorded in previous studies. This thesis suggests
that Montesquieu combined these notions in order to conceive a type of motivation that
inclines individuals to defend their liberty against encroachment. In order to recover this
type of motivation, this study will adopt an approach of close textual analysis with attention
to the context.
Virtue and honour play a crucial role in Montesquieu’s political thought because they
foster the preservation of government. Virtue inclines citizens in republics to act with self-
sacrifice. However, that virtue does not aim toward the attainment of excellence or of God’s
grace; rather, Montesquieu conceived virtue in relation to public utility. Honour inclines the
subjects of monarchy to pursue their selfish desires in order to derive public benefits.
However, Montesquieu did not conceive honour in connection with the liberal motif of the
invisible hand; rather, he conceived honour in connection with the pursuit of glory. By
combining honour and virtue, Montesquieu conceived a type of motivation that can foster
the preservation of liberty in modernity. This motivation enables individuals to enjoy their
liberty in times of peace by pursuing their selfish desires; in times of crisis, it inclines them
to perform great actions in order to defend that liberty against political oppression.
Considering Montesquieu's type can aid liberalism’s account of political motivations in the
contemporary debate.
EDITIONS AND ABBREVIATIONS

The following abbreviations will be used to refer to Montesquieu's writings, followed
by book, chapter, and page numbers. Otherwise this thesis relies on André Masson's edition,
which was published in three parts as the Œuvres Complètes De Montesquieu in 1950.
EL The Spirit of the Laws. Translated and edited by Anne M. Cohler, Basia
Carolyn Miller & Harold Samuel Stone. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press, 2004.
Pensées Pensées. Translated, edited, and with an Introduction by Henry C. Clark
(Indianapolis: Liberty Fund, 2012).
LP Persian Letters. Translated, edited, and with an Introduction by J.
Davidson. (London: Routledge, 1923).
CR The Complete Works of M. de Montesquieu (London: T. Evans, 1777), 4
vols. Vol. 3.

The following abbreviations will be used to refer to Aristotle’s writings, followed by book
and chapter.
Politics The Politics. Translated by Benjamin Jowet. 2 vols. (Oxford: Clarendon
Press, 1885).
EE The Eudemian Ethics. Translated by A. Kenny. (OUP Oxford, 2011).
NE Nicomachean Ethics. Edited and translated by R. Crisp.(Cambridge
University Press, 2000).

The following abbreviations will be used to refer to Cicero’s writings, followed by book and
chapter.
De Off De Officiis. Translated by Gardiner, G.B. (Aberdeen University Press;
London; 1899).
Rep The Republic and The Laws. Translated by N. Rudd. (Oxford University
Press; New York; 1998).

The following abbreviations will be used to refer to Machiavelli’s writings, followed by book
and chapter and page number.
Prince The Prince. N. Machiavelli: The Chief Works and Others. Edited and
translated by Allan Gilbert. (Duke University Press, 1989).
Disc Discourses on Livy. N. Machiavelli: The Chief Works and Others. Edited
and translated by Allan Gilbert. (Duke University Press, 1989).
Hist History of Florence and of the Affairs of Italy. This text was typed up
from a Universal Classics Library edition, published in 1901 by W. Walter
Dunne, New York and London. The translator was not named.
(Pennsylvania State University, 2007).

The following abbreviations will be used to refer to St Augustine’s writings, followed by page
number.
DCD The City of God. Translated by Henry Bettenson. (Penguin Books; London;
2003).
NEG Grace and the Will According to Augustine, Karfíková, L. (Brill 2012).
DLA On Free Choice of the Will. Translated by Thomas Williams. (Hackett
Publishing Company, 1993).
PHR Grace and the Will According to Augustine, Karfíková, L. (Brill 2012).

5
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

This thesis would not exist without the exceptional mentorship of my supervisor, Dr.
Gabriella Slomp. Gabriella tirelessly read my work and offered me detailed comments that
really helped me to improve my writing and critical engagement with the study of political
theory. I could not have hoped to work with someone who is more critical, encouraging and
professional than Gabriella. Her commitment to perfection and scrutiny will serve from now
on as a standard that will guide my future engagements.
In addition, I wish to acknowledge the support from other Faculty members at the
School of International Relations in St Andrews, most notably Professor Anthony Lang,
Professor Nicholas Rengger and Professor Patrick Hayden. Over the last five years, they have
contributed to the development of my ideas and research during my MLitt and PhD. At my
alma mater, the American College of Greece, Mr. Daniel McCormac deserves mention. It
was he who first helped me realise how exciting and stimulating I found the study of political
theory. Also, Dr. Haris Vlavianos, whose class inspired me to consider critically the relevance
of the ideas of past thinkers to the present.
In addition to this academic guidance, I also wish to acknowledge the support of my
family. The completion of my studies could not have been possible without them on my side.
I consider myself very lucky being a son, brother and grandson to Evangelos & Eleni, Nikolas
and Jaja. Finally, I particularly wish to express my gratitude to Kate Palfrey, whose
encouragement helped me to walk toward the light every time I found the weight on my
shoulders restricting.
CONTENTS
Abstract 3
Editions and Abbreviations 4
Acknowledgments 6
Contents 7

Part I: The Character of Politics
Introduction 10
Thesis Statement and Contribution to the Literature 22
Methodological Note 23
The Plan of this Study 27
The Foundations of Liberty 30
I. Montesquieu’s Method of Classification 31
II. Human Nature, Law and the Purpose of Politics 36
III. Montesquieu’s Original Typology of Regimes 40
IV. The Pursuit of Liberty in Montesquieu’s Original Typology 46
V. The Pursuit of Liberty in England 55
VI. Conclusion 61
Reading the Commentary: Virtue, Honour and the Principle of England 63
I. Interpreting England’s Principle in Connection with Honour 64
II. Conflating the Principles of England and Monarchy 71
III. Interpreting England’s Principle in Connection with Fear 78
IV. Interpreting England’s Principle in Connection with Virtue 84
V. Conclusion 94

Part II: Liberal Aspirations
Honour: More than Laissez-Faire 98
I. Gloria in Machiavelli 99
II. Honour and Laissez-Faire in Mandeville 105
III. The Aspect of Power in Montesquieu’s Notion of Honour 111
IV. The Psychological Motives of Honour 118
V. Conclusion: The Conceptual Heritage of Montesquieuian Honour 125
Virtue: a Matter of Utility 129
I. A Conceptual Ambiguity in Montesquieu’s Notion of Virtue 130
II. Pagan Virtue: the Pursuit of Excellence 133
III. Christian Virtue: Pious Humility and Grace 141
IV. Montesquieuian Virtue: Self-sacrifice as a Means to an End 147
V. Conclusion 156
English Liberty: a Matter of Principle 159
I. The Eighteenth-Century Debate on Luxury 160
II. Montesquieu’s Early Response to the Debate on Luxury 172
III. England’s Principle and the Englishmen’s Psychological Motives 176
IV. Montesquieu’s Response to the Debate on Luxury 184
V. Conclusion 189
Conclusion 191
Bibliography 204

8
Part I: The Character of Politics

9