Jus belli, possession and usurpation
in Order and conflict
Abstract only
Log-in for full text

You are not authenticated to view the full text of this chapter or article.

manchesterhive requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books or journals - to see content that you/your institution should have access to, please log in through your library system or with your personal username and password.

If you are authenticated and think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.

Non-subscribers can freely search the site, view abstracts/extracts and download selected front and end matter. 

Institutions can purchase access to individual titles; please contact manchesterhive@manchester.ac.uk for pricing options.

ACCESS TOKENS

If you have an access token for this content, you can redeem this via the link below:

Redeem token

Anthony Ascham in the first part of the Discourse said that, according to jus belli, 'possession' was the prerequisite for rightful obedience. In the second part, he went to speak 'to subjects obeying an usurper power, after an obligation of Allegiance to another Power'. In The Bounds and Bonds Ascham replied to the Presbyterian opponents of the republican government saying that 'things are considerable only so far as they may reach the ends for which they are'. His response drew mainly on Hugo Grotius's De Jure, and expressly on his treatment of the sovereign rights deriving from victorious war grounded in the law of nations. Ascham's political argument in support of the politics implemented by his patrons in the Parliament, and, after Pride's Purge, in the Rump, was mainly drawn from Grotius. The Machiavelli on which Ascham drew (like in most of his sources) was arguably that of The Prince.

Order and conflict

Anthony Ascham and English political thought, 1648–50

Metrics

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 59 14 0
Full Text Views 36 10 0
PDF Downloads 7 2 0