Who said this? “The distinguishing feature of the community and the city is that every individual should maintain free and undisturbed control of his possessions.”
And: “those charged with the defence of the state will dissociate themselves from the kind of lavish distribution which robs Peter to pay Paul. Their primary concern will be to ensure that the individual keeps his possessions through the just processes of law and the courts; that those in greater need are not victimized because of their lowly status, and that the wealthy do not incur envy in retaining or recovering their property; moreover they themselves are to employ all possible means both in war and at home to enhance the power, territories, and revenues of the state.”
Answer overleaf . . . .
If you said Locke or one of the other early modern “possessive individualists,” you’d be wrong.
It’s Cicero.
Rather supports Milbank’s claim that early political economy involved a revival of Roman conceptions of property and self-possession.
Peter Leithart
Peter J. Leithart is President of Theopolis Institute. He is the author of numerous books on theology, literature, and culture, including Theopolitan, Defending Constantine, and Baptized Body.
More from History
Continue reading related articles
Realness of Things Past
Greg Anderson began thinking about the thesis of his Realness of Things Past while working on a book on the “state” in classical Greece. He discovered there was no such thing as an Athenian “state,” and that conclusion led him to question the way historians do history. Instead of running…
The Power of the Margins
David Martin (1929-2019) was a secularization skeptic. He acknowledged that modern societies typically undergo a process of "differentiation," in which various sectors of social and political life free themselves from the oversight of religious authority. He acknowledged that in many modern societies religious institutions and values are "marginalized." But he…
Zwinglian Symbolism
Nathan Mitchell (writing in the Oxford History of Christian Worship , 324) denies that Zwingli taught a "mere symbolist" according to which the Supper "simply served to remind believers of the great benefits bestowed on them through Christ's passion and death." Zwingli wasn't a symbolist "in any modern sense." Mitchell…
In Medias Res
Your weekly digest for all things Theopolis.