Abstract

Michael Oakeshott conceives the history of European political thought as a structuring of ideas and arguments of the practical experience aimed to understanding political expressions in vogue in the culture of a people. It is not a continuous and cumulative history of abstract and disembodied ideas, as it is wrongly conceived, but of some men who thought politics in a certain way on the basis of the language and of the set of actions, moral beliefs and contingencies of the people which they belong to. The article highlights the comparison between Oakeshott, Quentin Skinner and Gianfranco Miglio on the search for the most appropriate method to be applied in the study of the history of political thought