Between Aristotle and Cicero: the Problematic of the Genesis of Society in the Second Half of the 13th – Early 14th Century

This article examines the origin of society and the state within the framework of political thought of the second half of the 13th – early 14th centuries. The traditional view of researchers on this problem is to emphasize the special role of Aristotle’s ‘Politics’ in the transformation of medieval ideas about the origins of the state and society. This study polemicizes with this approach. The author addresses a wide range of representatives of late medieval political thought and shows that, firstly, the use of ‘Politics’ was limited; secondly, the scholastics had an alternative to Aristotle in the person of Cicero, whose political theory reached the Middle Ages in fragments. Furthermore, Augustine’s ideas about the origin of the state and society, despite the dissemination of political Aristotelianism, still remained authoritative for the political thought of the period under consideration. Drawing upon an analysis of the works of notable scholars such as Thomas Aquinas, Brunetto Latini, Duns Scotus, Aegidius of Rome, and Engelbert of Admont, the author arrives at the conclusion that, despite the availability of a complete translation of ‘Politics’, Cicero’s ideas have not lost their relevance, and his doctrine of the origin of society and the state could be used by medieval authors both independently of Aristotle and in compilation with him. This study facilitates discussion regarding two approaches of Scholastics in the latter half of the 13th century and the early 14th century to the issue of the genesis of the state. These approaches are eclecticism and the utilization of Aristotle’s theories while maintaining a notable degree of autonomy in their own intellectual systems, as evidenced by frequent divergences from the content of Aristotle’s ‘Politics’.