Preliminary Programme

In this paper I shall show that Niccolò Machiavelli’s work was part of a prominent discussion in Renaissance political thought which identified ‘the domestic’ as a crucial part of ‘the political’. In the century before Machiavelli wrote 'Il Principe' and 'I Discorsi' flourished a discourse in Italian city republics which – by way of an intensive discussion of Aristotle’s 'Ethics' and 'Politics' – saw the household as a crucial part of the city. Thus, the private was understood as one of the most important factors to comprehend, discuss, and analyse politics. Contrary to what is commonly assumed, the role of women as part of the conception of the political was intensively discussed. This paper looks not only at the way Machiavelli participated in the classic discourse on the nature of the state and the role of the family and women in it, but also shows how he simultaneously subverted it. In its conclusion the paper points out that the categories of what is private and what is public in Renaissance political philosophy in general and in Machiavelli’s works in particular are far more permeable than is often thought, so that ‘the private’ takes on an important position in the understanding of ‘the political’ in early modern political thought.

With this argument in mind, this paper attempts a re-thinking of Machiavelli’s work in respect to a gendered exegesis. Machiavelli’s writings, perhaps unlike those of any other thinker of his time, have been analysed for their relevance to notions of gender. Machiavelli is thereby regularly marked as a misogynist, based on a supposed antagonism within his conceptualisation of the feminine and the masculine. I shall examine various aspects of the way that Machiavelli constructed masculinity and femininity, and argue that Machiavelli’s political thought is characterised by a remarkable openness towards the idea of women as dominant agents in the political sphere. (Show less)

During the Medieval period, oaths were frequently used at different levels in society – so much so, that the term “the oath-taking society” has been proposed to replace “the feudal society” in describing it. However, during the Early Modern period, the usage became even more frequent. With the growing administration of the Swedish state, oaths were used at all levels and sworn by people as diverse as the king and the pauper, and other states witnessed a similar development. Central to the state structure were the oaths of allegiance, and during the period they became more and more formalized. They defined the rights and obligations of the two parties concerned, king and subject, and thus helped to establish the Early Modern state. That the oath was taken seriously is evident, and in for example rebellions the argument that the king had broken his oath was used to legitimize the struggle.
However, one group was more or less excluded from this institution; women were not obliged to swear oaths. This paper focuses on the oaths of allegiance taken by the Swedish subjects, and especially what the exclusion of women can tell us about gendered power structures and the state building process. It argues that the oaths during the Early Modern period played an increasingly important role in creating the state and establishing the relationship between king and subject. But by excluding women, and poor or dishonest men, the institution also put limits as to who could be defined as a subject – a discussion that carries on to this day. As the oaths were used to define rights as well as obligations, those outside came to lack an important means of legitimizing their actions when they felt that their rights had been infringed upon.
Drawing from the example of the Swedish Early Modern state, and studying events such as rebellions and territorial shifts, the paper highlights a formative period for the European states and enables a new perspective on the gendered state building process. It considers how the oaths were used, and above all by whom, and what this means when trying to identify the subject of the Early Modern state. (Show less)

Jean Bodin is commonly described and analysed as the foundational thinker of the conception of absolutist political theory and indivisible sovereignty. This paper aims to show that Bodin’s vision of politics is based on his thorough examination of questions of gender, and that in this respect he is part of a long-standing tradition in the Renaissance, in which 'public' politics is routinely scrutinised by a recourse to 'private' matters. I shall show that Bodin’s concept of the state is firmly grounded in a specific conceptual order of the family and the household, and the different relationships of its members. In his 'Six livres de la République' Bodin outlines a moral and legal analysis of the conjugal relationship, which leads to his exploration of the very nature of what it means to rule. Marriage, the marriage contract and Bodin’s most famous analysis, the discourse on the indivisibility of sovereignty, are thus highly interdependent topics. Using a thoroughly historical analysis, this paper shall concentrate on the problems of the contract constructed as the foundation of both the political community (i.e. ‘the state’) and the marital community. The beginnings of our modern notion of the state appears to be characterised by a truly gendered conception of politics; the consequences for the order of the state and for the order of the sexes can still be felt today. (Show less)