Authority: A Sociological History

455 Pages·2013·2.623 MB·English

by  Frank Furedi

Authority
ASociologicalHistory
Concernwithauthorityisasoldashumanhistoryitself.Eve’ssinwas
tochallengetheauthorityofGodbydisobeyinghisrule.FrankFuredi
explores how authority was contested in ancient Greece and given a
powerfulmeaninginImperialRome.Debatesonreligiousandsecular
authoritydominatedEuropethroughtheMiddleAges andtheRefor-
mation.Themodernworldattemptedtodevelopnewfoundationsfor
authority – democratic consent, public opinion, science – yet Furedi
shows that this problem has remained unresolved, arguing that today
the authority of authority is questioned. This historical sociology of
authorityseekstoexplainhowthecontemporaryproblemsofmistrust
andthelossoflegitimacyofmanyinstitutionsareinformedbythepre-
viousattemptstosolvetheproblemofauthority.Itarguesthatthekey
pioneersofthesocialsciences(Marx,Durkheim,Simmel,Tonniesand
especiallyWeber)regardedthisquestionastheoneprincipalchallenges
facingsociety.
  is an Emeritus Professor of Sociology at the Univer-
sity of Kent in Canterbury, and Visiting Professor in the Institute of
Risk and Disaster Reduction, University College London. Dr Furedi
haspublishedwidelyoncontroversiesrelatingtoissuessuchashealth,
parenting children, food and new technology, and his books and arti-
clesprovideanauthoritativeyetlivelyaccountofkeydevelopmentsin
contemporaryculturallifethathavebeenwidelydebatedinthemedia.

Authority
A Sociological History
Frank Furedi
UniversityPrintingHouse,CambridgeCB28BS,UnitedKingdom
PublishedintheUnitedStatesofAmericabyCambridgeUniversityPress,
NewYork
CambridgeUniversityPressispartoftheUniversityofCambridge.
ItfurtherstheUniversity’smissionbydisseminatingknowledgeinthepursuitof
education,learningandresearchatthehighestinternationallevelsofexcellence.
www.cambridge.org
Informationonthistitle:www.cambridge.org/9780521189286
(cid:2)C FrankFuredi2013
Thispublicationisincopyright.Subjecttostatutoryexception
andtotheprovisionsofrelevantcollectivelicensingagreements,
noreproductionofanypartmaytakeplacewithoutthewritten
permissionofCambridgeUniversityPress.
Firstpublished2013
PrintingintheUnitedKingdombyTJInternationalLtd.PadstowCornwall
AcataloguerecordforthispublicationisavailablefromtheBritishLibrary
LibraryofCongressCataloguinginPublicationdata
Furedi,Frank,1947–
Authority:asociologicalhistory/FrankFuredi.
pages cm
Includesbibliographicalreferencesandindex.
ISBN978-1-107-00728-4(hbk.)–ISBN978-0-521-18928-6(pbk.)
1.Authority. I.Title.
HM1251.F87 2013
303.3′6–dc23 2013016238
ISBN978-1-107-00728-4Hardback
ISBN978-0-521-18928-6Paperback
CambridgeUniversityPresshasnoresponsibilityforthepersistenceor
accuracyofURLsforexternalorthird-partyinternetwebsitesreferredto
inthispublication,anddoesnotguaranteethatanycontentonsuch
websitesis,orwillremain,accurateorappropriate.
Contents
Preface pagevii
Introduction:alwaysinquestion 1
1 Thersitesandthepersonificationofanti-authority 16
2 Socratesandthequestforauthority 31
3 Romeandthefoundingofauthority 47
4 Augustus:arolemodelforauthoritythrough
theages 70
5 MedievalauthorityandtheInvestitureContest 95
6 Medievalclaim-makingandthesociologyoftradition 124
7 Reformationandtheemergenceoftheproblem
oforder 149
8 Hobbesandtheproblemoforder 181
9 Therationalisationofauthority 206
10 Thelimitsoftheauthorityoftherational 229
11 Tamingpublicopinionandthequestforauthority 247
12 Nineteenth-centuryauthorityonthedefensive 273
13 Authoritytransformedintosociology’scause 299
14 Theriseofnegativetheoriesofauthority 328
15 Bypassingauthoritythroughtherationalisation
ofpersuasion 350
v
vi Contents
16 Intheshadowofauthoritarianism 376
Conclusion:finalthoughts 403
Bibliography 410
Index 438
Preface
DuringthepasttwodecadesIhavebeenpreoccupiedwiththedifficulty
thatWesternculturehasingivingmeaningtoauthority.Inanumberof
studiesIexploredthedifferentmanifestationsofthisprobleminrelation
to issues such as disputes over child-rearing, scientific advice or who to
trust in public life. From these studies I became aware of the absence
of a serious account of the cultural devaluation of an idea that once
constituted a central category of philosophy, political theory and of my
owndisciplineofsociology.Thisstudyattemptstofindanswersthrough
thesociologicalinvestigationoftheconceptofauthority.
DuringthepastfiveyearsIhaveattemptedtounderstandhowauthor-
ity emerged, evolved and changed through different historical periods.
This work of historical sociology represents an attempt to mobilise the
experience of the past to help explain why authority today has such an
elusive quality. The story begins with the Homeric legend and leads up
toourpresentdaypredicament.Hopefully,throughprovidingahistori-
cal context for the constitution of theproblem of authority, it will allow
twenty-first-centuryreaderstointerprettherelationbetweensocietyand
authority in a new way. I believe that history provides a unique vantage
pointforunderstandingthedifferentsymptomsofthecrisisofauthority.
Studying and maybe diagnosing those symptoms will be the subject of
mynextbookonthisarea.
Despite the length of this study, it was impossible for a single author
to do justice to the history of authority. The wealth of historical and
philosophicalscholarshipdevotedtoalltheperiodsanddebatescovered
inthisbookistrulyimpressive.Anysociologistsattemptingtofamiliarise
themselveswithSocrates’AthensorHobbes’sEnglandwillfindthetask
atrulyhumblingexperience.Theywillalsobesurprisedbytheimportant
sociological insights that can be gained from the study of the historical
literature.
I used this journey into history as an opportunity to reflect on what
can be learned from old intellectual friends and enemies. After all,
some of the most influential figures in the humanities and social
vii
viii Preface
sciences – Hobbes, Hume, Mill, Marx, Durkheim and Weber – were
deeply concerned about the question of authority. And even when their
viewsappearincompatibletheyhavesomethingimportanttoaddtoour
understanding of the problem. No doubt many readers will note the
influenceofHannahArendtonthewaythattheproblemofauthorityis
conceptualised.ItwasnotuntilIfinishedthebookthatIcametoappre-
ciate her extraordinary intellectual courage of going down a road where
others fear to tread. At a time when many of her colleagues abandoned
thisjourney,Arendtremainedcommittedtocompletingit.
I am grateful to the many colleagues who have helped me to navigate
aroundtheintricateandcomplexscholarlydebatesthatsurroundallthe
subjects covered in this book. In the course of researching and writing
Authority:ASociologicalHistoryIhavehadthepleasureofencountering
a variety of thinkers whose work is often hardly known and therefore
underappreciated. The historian Leonard Krieger has written what are
arguablythemostimportantreviewsofthehistoryofauthority.1 Hisall-
too-brief monographs demonstrate an unparalleled capacity to capture
themovementandevolutionofauthorityinhistory.Hisunexpectedcon-
tribution has significantly influenced the direction taken by this study.
Towardsthecompletionofthisbook,Iencounteredanarticle‘Towards
a Sociology of Authority’ published by a young American sociologist,
Jeremiah Wolpert in 1950. Unfortunately Wolpert passed away a year
before the publication of his immensely suggestive contribution to this
subjectandthereforedidnothavetheopportunitytomakeasignificant
impactonthediscipline.Ihopethatsomeofmyreaderswillfeelstimu-
lated to revisit these ideas as well as those of some of the other scholars
mentionedinthisbook,fortheirideascanhelpencourageamuchneeded
rethinkonthemeaningofauthority.
My close collaborator Jennie Bristow served as a constant sounding
board and her comments have helped to clarify many of the arguments
inthisbook.Ithankherforpatienceandherfriendship.
1 SeeKrieger(1968)andKrieger(1977).
Introduction: always in question
Whentheword‘authority’initsoriginalLatinformwasusedasaform
of self-description by Augustus, the Emperor of Rome, his aim was to
communicatethepossessionofsomethingfarmoreimportantthanmere
military or political power. His self-conscious reference to his unique
auctoritas sought to draw attention to a far more compelling attribute,
which was a dignified moral authority. Augustus’s implied distinction
betweenpowerandauctoritasspoketoaworldthathadbeguntounder-
standthatsomethingmorethanforcewasneededtomaintainorderand
cohesion.
SinceAugustus’stimetherehavebeencontinualattemptstoclaimthe
possession of something more than power. Yet time and again, societies
have found it difficult to find an adequate way of conceptualising this.
In England at least, it was not until the seventeenth century that a new
languagewascreatedtorespondtheunsettledpoliticalrealitiessoughtto
distinguishconceptuallybetweenauthorityandpower.Onepamphleteer
in1642drewattentiontothedistinctionbetweenthetwotermswhich,he
claimed,were‘commonlyconfoundedandobscurethewholebusiness’.1
However,theabsenceofalanguagetocontrastpowerandauthoritydoes
notmeanthatthedistinctionitselfwasabsentfromWesternpoliticalcul-
ture.ThehistorianLeonardKriegerhasarguedthatwhatwassignificant
anddistinctabout‘theChristiandimensionofauthority’wasitsindepen-
dence from political power: while ‘medieval men’ would use the terms
‘interchangeablyinmanycontexts’,a‘contextwasestablishedforthesep-
arationofauthorityfrompower’.2Andcertainly,thedistinctionbetween
authorityandpowerhasbeenanintegralcomponenttoWesternpolitical
theoryforwellovertwomillennia.‘Themostfundamentalofalldistinc-
tions in political thought is the distinction between ‘force’ or ‘violence’
and ‘authority’; between potential, which is physical, and potestas
1 WilliamRobinson’s1642statementinThePeople’sPleaiscitedbyTuck(1974)p.42.
2 Krieger(1968)pp.146and147.
1