Analysis of Tyranny in European Political Philosophy: From the Middle Ages to Modern Times

Since late antiquity and till Early Modern time tyranny had been an issue of a great importance for any set of ideological concepts as well as for any system of political philosophy. During this millennium-long period theories of tyrannical rule had stimulated the development of political philosophies and caused paradigmatic shifts of political and legal reasoning in general. In its initial point (i.e. since IV AD)a conventional understanding of tyranny had framed itself within a Platonist(Patristic) description of a tyrant as a degenerated person who subjected his own reason and will to perverted passions. So to prevent tyranny a ruler ought to re-subject his passions and carnal impulses to the reason embodied in divine and human laws. The earlier versions of this theory (e. g. presented by Alcuin or Agobard of Lyons) had focused on the need for spiritual perfection of rulers while the later ones (e. g. those of John of Salisbury and Aquinas) noted the legal aspects of anissue first of all. The development of this so to say normative paradigm of theorizing had reached its peak in writings of John of Salisbury and Thomas Aquinas on the right of subjects to resist tyranny. A set of inner antinomies had prevented a successful accommodation of those theories to legal & political practice while the need for such an accommodation increased. A shift to a new paradigm of political thought had begun in the theories of state of Bartolo da Sassoferrato and Azzo and continued in the political philosophy of Italian civic humanists and Machiavelli. According to them a tyranny emerges from a conflict between the needs of political systems & rulers and the lack of available resources (both natural and societal) rather than from a moral perversion of the ruling persons. An adequate analysis of a tyrannical – and vice versa of a good – government thus required empirical circumstances (not just eternal laws) to be taken into account.