My experience with political philosophy in French

This is a follow-up to a blog post from 2014. (For this earlier post, click here.)

I wrote a post some years ago about my experience with French (available here), in which I told how I had used my French up to that time. I’ve done a number of things with my French since that time which merit an update of this post. These involve reading some political philosophers in the original – mainly Montesquieu, Rousseau, and Tocqueville. I have blog posts about each of these three individuals with a discussion of their respective ideas elsewhere, so I will not attempt to duplicate that coverage here. Rather, I will describe the experience of reading these men in the original French; and what it felt like to use my French in this new way.

François-Marie Arouet, better known as “Voltaire” – more about what I read from him later

A review of William Blackstone’s “Commentaries on the Laws of England”

“The objects of the laws of England are so very numerous and extensive, that, in order to consider them with any tolerable ease and perspicuity, it will be necessary to distribute them methodically, under proper and distinct heads ; avoiding as much as possible divisions too large and comprehensive on the one hand, and too trifling and minute on the other ; both of which are equally productive of confusion.”

– Opening lines of William Blackstone’s “Commentaries on the Laws of England” (1760’s), Book 1, Chapter 1

So I spent four and a half years reading Sir William Blackstone’s “Commentaries on the Laws of England.” This is a four-volume work which influenced our Founding Fathers. The first volume was originally released in 1765, and the last was originally released in 1769. This is one of the best books that I’ve ever read, as I’ve tried to show in other posts. But this is the first post in which I’ve attempted to give an overview of the entire work. Thus, I will try to summarize the work for those who’ve never read it before. In doing so, I will give my reaction to the different volumes of Blackstone’s “Commentaries,” and what parts of each volume most stood out to me personally.

Title page of the original edition of the first volume of Blackstone’s “Commentaries”

The most serious crimes that anyone can commit (according to Blackstone)

“Of crimes injurious to the persons of private subjects, the most principal and important is the offence of taking away that life, which is the immediate gift of the great creator; and which therefore no man can be entitled to deprive himself or another of, but in some manner either expressly commanded in, or evidently deducible from, those laws which the creator has given us; the divine laws, I mean, of either nature or revelation. The subject therefore of the present chapter will be, the offence of homicide or destroying the life of man, in its several stages of guilt, arising from the particular circumstances of mitigation or aggravation which attend it.”

– William Blackstone’s “Commentaries on the Laws of England” (1769), Book 4, Chapter 14

So I recently finished reading William Blackstone’s “Commentaries on the Laws of England.” This is a four-volume work that influenced our Founding Fathers. For me, the most interesting of these volumes was the last one, which was entitled “Of Public Wrongs.” It contains a number of notable chapters, among them a chapter entitled “Of Homicide.” Like the rest of this volume, this chapter was first published in 1769.

Alexander Hamilton, a fan of Blackstone’s “Commentaries”

Yes, Blackstone was a monarchist – but not an absolute monarchist

“All regal governments must be either hereditary or elective : and, as I believe there is no instance wherein the crown of England has ever been asserted to be elective, except by the regicides [or “king-killers”] at the infamous and unparalleled trial of king Charles I, it must of consequence be hereditary.”

– William Blackstone’s “Commentaries on the Laws of England” (1760’s), Book 1, Chapter 3

Blackstone’s hero was Sir Edward Coke, a nemesis of King Charles the First

Sir William Blackstone was a great fan of Sir Edward Coke (whose last name is pronounced “Cook”). But Sir Edward Coke was one of the enemies of King Charles the First. Thus, it might seem strange that Blackstone condemned those who executed his hero’s nemesis (as shown above). But it’s not as strange as you might think, if you consider some of the context. This post will show some of this sometimes-missing context. Thus, it will help to explain some parts of Blackstone’s “Commentaries” that have not aged well today. For example, it will help to explain why Blackstone was a monarchist – albeit a constitutional monarchist.

Sir William Blackstone

A review of David Starkey’s “Henry VIII: Mind of a Tyrant”

Warning: This post contains some mature themes in it. Although I have tried to discuss them tastefully, there’s no way to take them out of this story – it’s Henry the Eighth, after all.

It is one of the great soap operas in history. When he divorced his first wife, Henry the Eighth also changed England from Catholic to Protestant – the most prominent aspect of the story. But presenter David Starkey had already covered this particular soap opera eight years earlier in 2001. Why, then, did he return to this subject in 2009? I’m sure that his fascination with Henry the Eighth must have been part of it. After all, this topic was the subject of David Starkey’s dissertation, making him a true expert on this area. But there is one other reason, which was that his previous film was called “The Six Wives of Henry VIII.” Thus, it is mainly focused on the wives. Mr. Starkey thus hadn’t gone into as much depth on Henry the Eighth himself. But now, as Mr. Starkey says in this film, he was finally ready to write Henry the Eighth’s biography. And he tells the story with such human interest that it will be likely to appeal to a wide audience.

Henry the Eighth

A review of “War of the Century: When Hitler Fought Stalin” (BBC)

Note: The Russians usually refer to their own part of World War II as the “Great Patriotic War.” Some Eastern European countries use this same term. But in Germany (and in most other Western countries), it is known as the “Eastern front” – or, more informally, the “Russian front.”

They call it the “War of the Century” here – the massive conflict between Nazi Germany and Soviet Russia. To me, World War II as a whole is better-deserving of this title than any one of its parts, even this part. Nonetheless, I should acknowledge that the Russian front really was quite massive, and was cataclysmic for both sides. It is a war between two of the cruelest superpowers of the twentieth century. There were innocent victims on both sides, and there were cold-blooded murderers on both sides – with both sides having plenty of each. To me, this documentary seems to cover them in the right proportions, by painting both sides in a negative light. The war was a vicious and brutal conflict which lasted for nearly four years. Thus, it seems to make for great television, particularly with the moving way that the BBC covers it here. They show the human drama of the story, and tell it with a flourish.

The unknown story behind the King James Version of the Bible

“If God spare my life, ere many years I will cause a boy that driveth the plough, shall know more of the Scripture than thou dost!”

– William Tyndale (author of an early translation of the Bible into English), in a heated exchange with a priest

What led up to the King James Version of the Bible (first published in 1611)?

Even today, the King James Version of the Bible is the most commonly-used Biblical translation in the United States. Its influence is declining in some other English-speaking countries, but its status still remains strong today in many others. Even among atheists like Richard Dawkins, it is acknowledged as “a great work of literature.” Dawkins also added that “A native speaker of English who has never read a word of the King James Bible is verging on the barbarian.” Certainly the KJV (as it is often abbreviated) has had a great influence upon the history of the English language. One would have to turn to Shakespeare to find comparable influence upon the history of our own language. I would like to pay a brief tribute to the unsung heroes who helped to bring us this translation into English, as well as those who brought us other translations into other languages. But my focus here will be on the history involved, and what led to the writing of the King James Bible.

St. Jerome, mentioned below