Two Histories of Compromise
Two Histories of Compromise

Summary/Abstract: Since almost everybody agrees with the definition of politics as “the art of compromise” the general disregard of this concept is intriguing, to say the least. By tracing down the overlooked conceptual history of compromise, the essay signals for the first time the ignored difference between the usages of compromise on either side of the English Channel starting as early as the sixteenth century. It offers as possible explanation for such discrepancy a different apprehension of political representation between England and continental Europe, especially France – a difference with long-lasting consequences. I check this hypothesis by comparing and contrasting the theories of social contract in England and France respectively, pointing out how the forgotten work of Gilbert Burnet, a contemporary of John Locke, proves that in seventeenth century England the social contract came to be assimilated with a generalized compromise.

• Details
• Contents