Abstract

The objectives of my research are to make a reconstruction of Paolo Sarpi's (1552-1623) political thought and to place his ideas in the proper historical and philosophical contexts. I will compare Sarpi's writings to those of his contemporaries, such as Francisco Suarez, Johannes Althusius, William Barclay, Paolo Paruta, Justus Lipsius, and, especially, Jean Bodin and Thomas Hobbes. I will also define Sarpi's position with regard to Neoepicureanism, Neostoicism and Scholastic political philosophy. My hypothesis is that Sarpi's urge for the absolute power of the sovereign ruler can be derived from his natural philosophy, according to which all things – men included – were in the state of constant motion. Furthermore, Sarpi considered men in many ways weaker than animals, since – because of excessive reflecting – men had lost the capability of acting naturally and instinctively. The firm rule of a sovereign was Sarpi's remedy against the ubiquitous motion and oscillation of things. I will also define his ideas concerning e.g. such issues as sovereignty, property, obedience, jurisdiction and the role of the church within a state.

Outline

The objectives of my research are to make a reconstruction of Paolo Sarpi's (1552-1623) political thought and to place his ideas in the proper historical and philosophical contexts. My point of departure is Sarpi's natural philosophy, that is, his concepts of man, ethics and universe. Then, by using Sarpi's political writings, I will focus on his ideas concerning e.g. sovereignty, property, freedom, obedience, obligation, jurisdiction, and the role of the church within a state. In other words, I will investigate Sarpi's ideas of man as a “political animal”, as a social and civil being. What comes to the context, I will compare Sarpi's writings to those of his contemporaries, such as Francisco Suarez, Johannes Althusius, William Barclay, Paolo Paruta, Justus Lipsius, and, especially, Jean Bodin and Thomas Hobbes. I will also define Sarpi's position with regard to Neoepicureanism, Neostoicism and Scholastic political philosophy.

Right now Sarpi's political thought is a most topical theme, because all of his approximately 1100 written consultations ( consulti ) to the senate of Venice are going to be published. So far only about a hundred of them have come out in various editions. The consulti are the most essential source for anyone studying Sarpi's political thought, for they contain his definitions and ideas of sovereignty, property and other relevant issues. Traditionally – as far as Sarpi's political thought is concerned – scholars have concentrated mostly in his views about the relations between church and state, or, between the spiritual and temporal power. This is understandable, since most of the published consultations have dealt with this subject. It is also the most persistent theme in Sarpi's political writings. However, with the complete edition of the consulti , the scholars will have an easy access to a much wider range of issues dealt by Sarpi. Another significant improvement in the field is the complete edition of Sarpi's philosophical writings ( Pensieri naturali, metafisici e matematici , a cura di Luisa Cozzi e Libero Sosio, Milano-Napoli 1996), with which it is possible to define not only Sarpi's natural philosophy, but also his ideas of such political issues as justice, law, and the relations between republic, society and religion.

So far, the best introductions to Sarpi's political thought are the works written by Chabod, Bouwsma, Wootton and Frajese. The first, written already in 1952, deals with some of the earliest consulti and defines Sarpi's ideas about the relations between church and state. There are only slight references to other political writers of the period. Bouwsma's book (1968) operates within the Venetian context and is concerned with the Venetian struggle against certain claims made by the Pope. Sarpi is depicted as a defender of traditional republican values, a stance which, in my opinion, needs some sharpening. Wootton's book (1983) pays more attention to the international intellectual context, providing for example a chapter on Tacitism. However, a great part of the book is dedicated to justify its principal claim, which holds that Sarpi was an atheist. There is nevertheless a political aspect in Wootton's work as well, and, as a matter of fact, he argues that Sarpi endorsed the theory of absolutism. Furthermore, quite contrarily to Bouwsma's argument, Wootton claims that Sarpi had nothing to do with political liberty, which, on the other hand, was one of the main premises of classical republicanism. What comes to Frajese's book (1994), it concentrates mainly in Sarpi's ideas about the church and state dichotomy. Consequently, there is a need for a study, which will take into consideration Sarpi's ideas about the abovementioned political questions in the light of the new edition of consulti (and those still unpublished ones), and which will also pay attention to the connection between Sarpi's natural philosophy and political thinking. Indeed, there is still much work to be done in the contextualization of Sarpi's political thought and that is the area where my research intends to make a new contribution.

I am going to realize my research by scrutinizing the writings of Sarpi (the consulti , the pensieri , the letters, the Istoria del concilio tridentino , the Istoria dell'interdetto and so on) and by placing them in the context of the writings of Bodin, Paruta, Lipsius, Suarez, Barclay, Althusius, Hobbes etc. While Cozzi and Sosio have explored – among other things – Sarpi's Epicureanism, Stoicism and Aristotelianism in their introductory articles and particular annotations for individual pensieri , Frajese has focused on Sarpi's skepticism. These philosophical positions are important for understanding Sarpi's epistemological and ethical views. I will use the 1996 edition of the Pensieri as the principal source for reconstructing Sarpi's idea of the nature of man and for defining Sarpi's philosophy of motion, one of the central themes in my study. Once all this is established, I will define Sarpi's concepts about various political issues using primarily the consulti , but also his other writings.

I agree with Wootton's claim that Sarpi was a supporter of absolutism. My principal hypothesis is that Sarpi's urge for the absolute power of the sovereign ruler can be derived from his natural philosophy, according to which all things and phenomena were natural and – at the same time – they were also under constant motion. Furthermore, men were not to be elevated above animals, but, instead, in many cases judged to be weaker than them. The wretchedness of men had its roots in excessive reflecting, since it disturbed the instinctive and natural way of behaving, which was, on the other hand, such an evident and positive characteristic in animals. On the other hand, Sarpi held that passions were detrimental too, because they reinforced the state of motion and unrest. Consequently, the absolute power of the sovereign ruler was the necessary prerequisite for a peaceful and stable society. Sarpi does not talk about the Hobbesian war “of every man against every man”, but it seems plausible, that he had fears very similar to those of Hobbes'. In fact, Sarpi seems to have belonged to a different kind of intellectual culture than e.g. Machiavelli, Gasparo Contarini and Paolo Paruta. One of the main reasons for this was his Scholastic education and his interest in the new scientific advancements put forth by such men as Galileo Galilei (with whom Sarpi was in collaboration for several years). In spite of the fact that Hobbes shows certain contempt towards scholastics, there seems to be many things in common between the two: a mechanical and deterministic worldview, a rather negative idea of man, and the urge for the absolute power of the sovereign ruler. Sarpi's natural philosophy oscillates between Aristotelianism and the new Galilean science, while Hobbes clearly prefers the latter. However, both are convinced of the fundamental influence of motion in all things. Because of this unavoidable and ubiquitous unrest in the state of things (men included), neither of them believed in men's capability of living peacefully without submitting themselves under the absolute rule of a sovereign power.

Naturally, what comes to the absolute sovereignty, there is a connection to Bodin's thought. Although Sarpi never mentions the French in his writings, he had two common friends with him (Arnaud du Ferrier and Jacques Gillot). It seems plausible that Sarpi knew the political theories of Bodin. There is a fascinating connection between Sarpi and Hobbes as well: Hobbes translated the letters that Fulgenzio Micanzio, Sarpi's closest friend and associate, wrote to William Cavendish in 1615-1626. In some letters Micanzio writes about Sarpi and thus it is evident, that Hobbes had at least some kind of an idea of Sarpi's personality and writings. They may have met each other in 1614, when the European tour of Cavendish and Hobbes brought them to Venice (the correspondence between Cavendish and Micanzio suggests that at least they had met personally in Venice).

As one of the principal themes of my study is Sarpi's idea of man as a “political animal”, it is necessary to pay attention also to what Sarpi writes about the social life and the relations between different men. It is clear that Sarpi's idea of man was pessimistic and he understood perfectly well the need of simulation in most social events: he once wrote that he was compelled to wear a mask and he believed that in Italy no one could live without one. Similar thoughts are to be found in certain writings of his friend Micanzio, and, for example, in the Ricordi by Francesco Guicciardini. During the following centuries this culture of simulation developed into a culture of politeness, a general phenomenon in the eighteenth-century Europe. According to Sarpi it was always best to agree with the common opinion and to conceal one's real thoughts. Being a civil or political “animal” required thus a participation in a complicated game of simulation.

It is important to bear in mind that because of his vast correspondence Sarpi was extremely international, he was familiar with all the latest intellectual trends – and with the traditional ones as well – and he used them to shape a political philosophy, or, a political strategy, which would best meet the needs of the early seventeenth-century republic of Venice. He was also very eager to serve his country, as becomes evident from his first consultation. It is clear that Sarpi's contribution to the governmental actions of Venice was significant and not least because his written consultations functioned for many decades as precedents for his successors. Although Chabod has sometimes been criticized for having interpreted Sarpi merely as a political figure, it seems that politics was – besides science – the main object of interest in Sarpi's thinking. God was somewhere beyond human understanding and thus not amongst Sarpi's principal preoccupations (at least as far as his writings are concerned). Religion, in turn, was divided into two different spheres: spiritual and temporal. It is the latter sphere about which Sarpi usually writes and that belonged to the field of politics.

The first volume has already come out: Paolo Sarpi, Consulti 1606-1609 , vol. I, a cura di Corrado Pin, Pisa-Roma 2002.

For the connection between Sarpi and Bodin, see my article “Paolo Sarpi and the Colloquium heptaplomeres of Jean Bodin”, published in the web-site www.storiadivenezia.it/saggi .