Istvan Hont’s classic work on the theoretical links between the seventeenth-century natural jurists Hugo Grotius and Samuel Pufendorf and the eighteenth-century Scottish political economists remains a popular trope among intellectual and economic historians of various stamps. Despite this, a common criticism levelled at Hont remains his relative lack of engagement with the relationship between religion and economics in the early modern period. This paper challenges this aspect of Hont’s narrative by drawing attention to an alternative, albeit complementary, assessment of the (...) natural jurisprudential heritage of eighteenth-century British political economy. Specifically, the article attempts to map on to Hont’s thesis the Christian Stoic interpretation of Grotius and Pufendorf which has gained greater currency in recent years. In doing so, the paper argues that Grotius and Pufendorf’s contributions to the ‘unsocial sociability’ debate do not necessarily lead directly to the Scottish school of political economists, as is commonly assumed. Instead, it contends that a reconsideration of Grotius and Pufendorf as neo-Stoic theorists, particularly via scrutiny of their respective adaptations of the traditional Stoic theory of oikeiosis, steers us towards the heart of the early English ‘clerical’ Enlightenment. (shrink)

Grotius’s theory of the foundations of law and morality follows a sort of middle way between rationalism and voluntarism. Grotius, far from both extremes, defends both the normative force of the will and the directive power of practical reason. On this basis, he explains that reason serves as the formal cause of law and the will as the efficient cause. Now, the command of the will alone is not yet valid as a law. It must conform to reason. Reasoning so, (...) Grotius places himself within the scholastic-Aristotelian tradition. Accordingly, he holds the primacy of reason over the will and defends the eminently practical, i.e., non-mathematical, character of morality and law. (shrink)