1,720,976 research outputs found
Preface. Monisms and Pluralisms in the History of Political and Social Models
No full textThe Preface connects the volume with the previous one and, starting from Isaiah Berlin's concept of Monism and Pluralism, highlights the idea that inspired and related each other the essays collected in the book
The Achaeans of Homer and those of Hobbes: from a pluralistic monism to absolutism
No full textWhen in the 70s of the 17th century Thomas Hobbes translated the Homeric poems from Greek into English in order to make them "a continuation of Leviathan by other means" (2008) he had to handle very carefully the original texts because of their being often at odds with his political theory. The essay, through a lexical analysis, analyses the translations with a view to stress how the Malmesbury philosopher changed the Iliad and the Odyssey in order to bypass the pluralistic monism of the original version and make it as similar as possible to his absolutism
Simbolica e politica del viaggio del monarca. Sul rapporto fra le categorie politiche e il valore delle pratiche di viaggio nell’India antica
No full text
The millet: an intermediate body of the Ottoman religious and legal pluralism
No full textEven if there still is a wide debate about the nature and the de nition of the empire, most scholars agree that every empire consists of something called a ‘core’ and something called a ‘periphery’. Furthermore, most of them agree that both ‘core’ and ‘periphery’ are situated in geographically bounded spac- es inhabited by culturally differentiated elites and populations. The Ottoman Empire (1302-1923) was one of the most important and long-lived traditional empire of European history. Like others (Habsburg and Romanov) it was characterized by the vastness of the territory and by the ethnic, religious and linguistic diversity. The Ottomans successfully maintained the imperial rule over a vast domain for many centuries thanks to their intrinsic exibility and ability to integrate diverse populations through pragmatic and tolerant poli- cies. To do that, the Ottomans created new institutions as intermediate bodies, between the core and the peripheries culturally and geographically conceived. Among these the institution of millet represents an original example of a vertical integration model as well as an innovative instrument involved in the management of interethnic relations. The term millet, originally used to refer both to one of the religions and the religious community itself, has been used to account for the administrative and legal status of the large numbers of non-Muslim under the Ottomans between the 15th and the 20th century
The millet: an intermediate body of the Ottoman religious and legal pluralism
No full textEven if there still is a wide debate about the nature and the de nition of the empire, most scholars agree that every empire consists of something called a ‘core’ and something called a ‘periphery’. Furthermore, most of them agree that both ‘core’ and ‘periphery’ are situated in geographically bounded spaces inhabited by culturally differentiated elites and populations. The Ottoman Empire (1302-1923) was one of the most important and long-lived traditional empire of European history. Like others (Habsburg and Romanov) it was characterized by the vastness of the territory and by the ethnic, religious and linguistic diversity. The Ottomans successfully maintained the imperial rule over a vast domain for many centuries thanks to their intrinsic exibility and ability to integrate diverse populations through pragmatic and tolerant policies. To do that, the Ottomans created new institutions as intermediate bodies, between the core and the peripheries culturally and geographically conceived. Among these the institution of millet represents an original example of a vertical integration model as well as an innovative instrument involved in the management of interethnic relations. The term millet, originally used to refer both to one of the religions and the religious community itself, has been used to account for the administrative and legal status of the large numbers of non-Muslim under the Ottomans between the 15th and the 20th century
Central monism and suburban pluralism: Plutarch and Dio of Prusa between needs of the principatus and claims coming from local communities
No full textThe article deals with the problem of the political relations between Rome and the outskirts of the Empire in the Political Thought of Plutarch and Dio Chrysostom from the perspective of the dichotomy Monism-Pluralism. The essay, principally focusing on some of the Political Moralia by Plutarch and the Third Discourse on Kingship by Dio, highlights how these authors conceived the precarious balance between a monist centre needing a unitary politics and a plurality of local communities with their peculiar traditions, customs and internal institutions
- …
