J.G.A. Pocock and the idea of the ‘Cambridge School’ in the history of political thought

History of European Ideas 45 (1):83-98 (2019)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

ABSTRACTThis article offers a reinterpretation of the origins and character of the so-called ‘Cambridge School’ in the history of political thought by reconstructing the intellectual background to J.G.A. Pocock's 1962 essay ‘The History of Political Thought: A Methodological Enquiry’, typically regarded as the first statement of a ‘Cambridge’ approach. I argue that neither linguistic philosophy nor the celebrated work of Peter Laslett exerted a major influence on Pocock's work between 1948 and 1962. Instead, I emphasise the importance of Pocock's interest in the history of historiography and of his doctoral supervisor, Herbert Butterfield. By placing Pocock's intellectual development in these contexts, I suggest, the autonomy of diverse versions of the ‘Cambridge’ approach can more readily be perceived.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 76,297

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

The economy and Pocock's political economy.Ryan Walter - 2008 - History of European Ideas 34 (3):334-344.
Book Review. [REVIEW]J. Pocock - 2007 - History of Political Thought 28 (4):747-751.
The Weight of the Moment: J. G. A. Pocock's Politics of History.Dana Simmons - 2012 - History of European Ideas 38 (2):288-306.
Varieties of political thought.Iain Hampsher‐Monk - 1996 - British Journal for the History of Philosophy 4 (2):409 – 419.
Contextualism: From Modernist Method to Post-analytic Historicism?Mark Bevir - 2009 - Journal of the Philosophy of History 3 (3):211-224.

Analytics

Added to PP
2019-06-06

Downloads
25 (#465,601)

6 months
5 (#154,227)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

References found in this work

Introduction.James S. Fishkin & Peter Laslett - 2002 - Journal of Political Philosophy 10 (2):125–128.

Add more references