1 / 37

The Impact of the Press on Authority

The Impact of the Press on Authority. The Impact of Print: Authority. The Foundations of Authority Religious Authority Political Authority Intellectual Authority Consequences of weakening authorities. Foundations of Authority.

rosellab
Télécharger la présentation

The Impact of the Press on Authority

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. The Impact of the Press on Authority

  2. The Impact of Print: Authority • The Foundations of Authority • Religious Authority • Political Authority • Intellectual Authority • Consequences of weakening authorities

  3. Foundations of Authority • How did leaders claimed authority in the Early Modern Period (1500-1789)? • Conquest • Inheritance • Divine sanction • Miracles • Patronage • Books • Art • Analogies to nature

  4. The state of monarchy is the supremest thing upon earth, for kings are not only God's lieutenants upon earth and sit upon God's throne, but even by God himself they are called gods. There be three principal [comparisons] that illustrate the state of monarchy: one taken out of the word of God, and the two other out of the grounds of policy and philosophy. In the Scriptures kings are called gods, and so their power after a certain relation compared to the Divine power. Kings are also compared to fathers of families; for a king is truly parens patriae [parent of the country], the politic father of his people. And lastly, kings are compared to the head of this microcosm of the body of man

  5. Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God. (2) Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation. (3) For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same: (4) For he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil. (5) Wherefore ye must needs be subject, not only for wrath, but also for conscience sake. (6) For this cause pay ye tribute also: for they are God's ministers, attending continually upon this very thing. (7) Render therefore to all their dues: tribute to whom tribute is due; custom to whom custom; fear to whom fear; honour to whom honour.

  6. I conclude then this point touching the power of kings with this axiom of divinity, That as to dispute what God may do is blasphemy....so is it sedition in subjects to dispute what a king may do in the height of his power. But just kings will ever be willing to declare what they will do, if they will not incur the curse of God. I will not be content that my power be disputed upon; but I shall ever be willing to make the reason appear of all my doings, and rule my actions according to my laws. . . I would wish you to be careful to avoid three things in the matter of grievances:

  7. First, that you do not meddle with the main points of government; that is my craft . . . to meddle with that were to lesson me . . . I must not be taught my office. Secondly, I would not have you meddle with such ancient rights of mine as I have received from my predecessors . . . . All novelties are dangerous as well in a politic as in a natural body. and therefore I would be loath to be quarreled in my ancient rights and possessions, for that were to judge me unworthy of that which my predecessors had and left me.

  8. Thesis • Because print undermined religious, political, and even intellectual authorities, it unleashed a crisis in the ways Europeans explained authority by the mid 1600s.

  9. The wide availability of Bibles undermined the Church’s control over religion.

  10. Print contributed to the decline of the prestige of the Church leaders

  11. How did print encouragereligious fanaticism? What was the influence of such fanaticism on authority?

  12. Much of the Netherlands was operating as a republic by the late 1500s.

  13. James I • Son of Mary Stuart (Queen of Scots) • Ruled England 1603-25 • Wrote Basilikon Doron (Royal Gift) in 1599 to his son, Henry. • Engaged in ideological quarrel with Sir Edward Coke over prerogative courts

  14. Charles I • Maintained a lifelong devotion to the divine right of kings • Even his advocates considered him less than brilliant and lacking people skills • By Van Dyck, 1635

  15. Archbishop William Laud1633-45

  16. Puritans

  17. Edward Coke, 1552-1634 • Champion of Common Law against Stuarts’ support of royal prerogative • Author of the Petition of Right, 1628 • Rival of Francis Bacon

  18. The Book of Common Prayer, published in 1637 triggered an uprising against the royal government in Scotland.

  19. Reaction to the Book of Common Prayer 1637

  20. Print unleashed a torrent of inaccurate and misleading material

  21. Print changed the reputation of the ancients by exposing their flaws

  22. What does this choice as the second book printed tell us?

  23. Ptolemy’s Map

  24. Mappae MundiT-O mapTerra Oceana

  25. Ortelius’ Map, 1597

  26. DürerSelf Portrait in Venice1498

  27. Adam and Eve

  28. Print removed the dependence on patronage

  29. DürerSelf Portrait1500

  30. The Apocalypse1498Conquest,War, Justice, Pestilence

  31. Conclusion By creating a fundamental reassessment in the nature of authority, print encouraged authors to develop competing views for the just composition of authority.

  32. Unnerved by the English Revolution of the 1640s and 1650s, Thomas Hobbes wrote the Leviathan in 1651 as a defense of monarchical power.

  33. By 1690 John Locke had responded with a different view of social contract theory.

More Related