© The Author 2013. Oxford University Press and New York University School of Law.
All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: [email protected]
Book Reviews
Thomas Hobbes. Leviathan, edited by
N. Malcolm (The Clarendon Edition
of the Works of Thomas Hobbes,
vols. 3–5). Oxford University Press,
2012. 1323 + xvii pages. £200. ISBN:
9780199602629.
There exist many fine editions of Hobbes’s
Leviathan (in English alone there are, for
example, the ones provided by Michael Oakeshott; Edwin Curley; G.A.J. Rogers & Karl
Schuhmann; and Richard Tuck). The edition
under review, however, is not simply another
edition of this classical text; it is without any
doubt the edition for generations to come.
This is certainly true for the whole project of
the Clarendon Edition, which “aims to present original material as accurately as possible,
omitting only those aspects of it that are of no
potential importance for the study of its meaning” (vol. 1, p. 308). Noel Malcolm has completed an extraordinary task by providing this
critical edition of Hobbes’s English and Latin
Leviathan. His introduction is separately published as the first of these three volumes, followed by volume 2, which gives the Latin and
English text of the first two books of Leviathan,
and volume 3 which contains books 3 and
4. Printing the Latin and the English on opposite pages allows the reader to easily compare
the two texts. Thus, to a certain extent it may
even be possible to find one’s way through the
Latin without proper knowledge of this language by comparing it with the English.
The exhaustive scholarly apparatus of
explanatory notes, index, bibliography, list
of manuscripts, and bibliographical description is invaluable for any scholar engaging
with Hobbes’s thought. For this achievement
alone, the scholarly community will remain
indebted to Noel Malcolm. Of particular interI•CON (2013), Vol. 11 No. 4, 1123–1133
est are the explanatory notes, which “have
also been used to correct all inaccurate references to biblical passages. Some of these inaccuracies may have been caused by scribal or
compositorial error, but some may be authentic expressions of Hobbes’s citation-by-memory, and it would of course be wrong for an
editor to elide the evidence of this; all such
cases are therefore handled in the explanatory notes” (vol. 1, p. 311). The introduction,
as well as the presentation of the text, provide
a stunning insight into Hobbes’s puzzling use
of various different editions and translations
of the Bible. This puzzle is not resolved here,
but it certainly helps to sharpen our view on
Hobbes’s challenging and intriguing discussion of religious and theological issues. After
all, his Leviathan was a “Discourse of Civil and
Ecclesiastical Government” (vol. 3, p. 1141).
Crucially, the richness of detail and scholarly rigor do not blur the user-friendliness
of this stupendous edition. On the contrary,
many will be relieved to see that so much information is shared so competently and so generously. And only occasionally does the reader
get an inkling of just how much work must
have gone into these three volumes (see, e.g.,
vol 1, p. 91 n. 353). In 2002 Malcolm published a collection of essays under the modest
title Aspects of Hobbes. Publishing the results
of his extraordinary research as an “introduction” is an even greater understatement. The
first of these three volumes certainly has the
quality of one of the most stringent monographs on Hobbes of the last decade.
One of the central and important parts of
Noel Malcolm’s introduction is his discussion
of the relationship between the English and
the Latin Leviathan. He convincingly shows
that earlier interpretations—such as those by
Zbigniew Łubieński and François Tricaud, who
had argued that “Hobbes wrote the Latin ver-
1124
I•CON 11 (2013), 1123–1133
sion of Leviathan first, at some time between
1646 and 1649” (vol. 1, p. 171)—should be
revised. Malcolm demonstrates in meticulous detail that all the evidence suggests that
Hobbes translated the Latin version in 1667–
1668 from the English text. But the introduction does much more than pursue philological
or historic interests. The one aspect which
I want to highlight here has been debated for a
long time and remains puzzling to scholars. It
concerns Hobbes’s Review and Conclusion of the
English edition, which he omitted in the Latin,
instead adding an Appendix in three chapters.
These provide fundamental changes, which
can be explained by the entirely different situation after the Restoration in 1660; but Noel
Malcolm’s discussion goes far beyond this contextualised interpretation.
Hobbes had written in the 1651 English
edition of Leviathan that
if a man, when his Country is conquered,
be out of it, he is not Conquered, nor
Subject: but if at his return, he submit to
the Government, he is bound to obey it. So
that Conquest (to define it) is the Acquiring
of the Right of Sovereignty by Victory.
Which Right, is acquired, in the peoples
Submission, by which they contract with
the Victor, promising Obedience, for Life
and Liberty” (vol. 3, p. 1135). Malcolm shows how the question of the preparation of the Latin text of Leviathan, which
silently drops the Review and Conclusion of the
English text from 1651, also helps to assess
how we should read Hobbes’s emphasis on
“the mutuall Relation between Protection
and Obedience” (vol. 3, p. 1141). This clearly
implies that allegiance can shift depending
on who is victorious. Allegiance is given to
the stronger victorious party since this one
can effectively provide protection. These circumstances can change during a conflict like
the Civil War. However, it seems to me to go
too far when Malcolm asserts that “inducing royalists to submit was a central part of
the ‘Review and Conclusion’ “ (vol. 1, p. 77).
Hobbes’s concern certainly is security and
thus the condition for peace, regardless of
who is able to provide it. But he must have
been aware that his Leviathan would not have
been received favorably in Cromwell’s England, and any royalist who wanted to make his
peace with the new regime would be better of
not having Hobbes’s Leviathan in his baggage
when approaching the new mandarins.
But such considerations . . . are of secondary importance. The primary fact is that
Hobbes was setting out a theory about the
need of sovereign rule, the nature of that
rule, and the threats to it. (vol. 1, p. 82)
Despite the stunning range of detail and
scholarly minuteness, Noel Malcolm certainly
does not lose sight of what is essential about
Hobbes. These volumes do not only provide
the ultimate edition of Hobbes’s masterpiece,
but without any doubt they also point into
numerous directions for future research.
Peter Schröder
University College London
Email: [email protected]
doi: 10.1093/icon/mot064
Beverley Baines, Daphne Barak-Erez,
and Tsvi Kahana (eds). Feminist
Constitutionalism. Global Perspectives.
Cambridge University Press, 2012.
494 pages. $39.99 (pbk). ISBN:
9780521761574.
Sometimes reading a book is like a journey
into a foreign country, an inspiring experience providing the reader with manifold
impressions, insights, and outlooks. When
a book provides new information, thoughts,
cross-connections, and multiple perspectives
on one or more topics; when a book encourages the reader to question assumptions that
until then had the ring of normalcy; in short,
when a book profoundly broadens the reader’s horizon, then the book takes the reader
on an intellectual journey. Feminist Constitutionalism. Global Perspectives does just that.
Its 24 contributions are thought-provoking,