40 pages • 1 hour read
John LockeThe First Treatise of Government
Nonfiction | Book | Adult | Published in 1689A modern alternative to SparkNotes and CliffsNotes, SuperSummary offers high-quality Study Guides with detailed chapter summaries and analysis of major themes, characters, and more.
Preface-Chapter 2Chapter Summaries & Analyses
Preface Summary
Locke explains that his purpose is to “make good” King William III’s claim to the English throne by grounding that claim in the “consent of the people” (I). Some pages of Locke’s original draft have disappeared—he does not say how—but he believes that what remains will be more than enough to answer Filmer’s divine-right argument. Although Filmer is deceased, others have taken up the divine-right mantle, citing Patriarcha as their sacred text. Locke addresses First Treatise, therefore, not to Filmer but to his disciples.
Chapter 1 Summary: “The Introduction”
Filmer’s Patriarcha argues for the divine right of kings to absolute power. Locke regards this doctrine as an attack on all government and a deliberate subversion of society. Neither Scripture nor reason support it. Furthermore, the doctrine is new. It originated in the era preceding the English Civil War (1642-51), when Anglican clergymen such as Robert Sibthorpe and Roger Maynwaring preached divine-right sermons. Locke explains that his purpose in First Treatise is not to review the history of this doctrine but to refute Filmer’s argument for it.
Chapter 2 Summary: “Of Paternal and Regal Power”
Filmer rests his argument for the divine right of kings on the assertion that fatherly authority is royal authority, that God vested this authority in Adam, and that all such authority belonged to Adam’s kingly descendants. Locke criticizes these assertions on two grounds. First, in Patriarcha’s opening chapter, Filmer never explains what constitutes fatherly authority. Locke devotes two full pages to random quotations, strewn throughout Patriarcha, which merely claim fatherhood as a “divine unalterable right of sovereignty” vested in kings (11). Filmer also ignores the Decalogue’s injunction to honor both father and mother. Second, Filmer never proves, by Scripture or by reason, that God vested monarchical authority in Adam. In search of such proof, Locke consults Filmer’s Observations, where Locke finds three relevant claims: “God’s creation of Adam, the dominion he gave him over Eve, and the dominion he had as father over his children” (16). Locke concludes by promising to address each of these claims in subsequent chapters.
Preface-Chapter 2 Analysis
The Preface and first two chapters introduce an important background element, along with all three of the book’s major themes.
In the second sentence of the Preface, Locke explains that his purpose is to vindicate the Glorious Revolution against charges of usurpation from the supporters of the deposed King James II. The early placement of this reference to England’s new king, William III, shows that Locke did not set out to write a timeless piece of political philosophy. First Treatise is, above all, a work of advocacy on behalf of a political and constitutional arrangement Locke favors, inspired by current events at the time of writing.
At the beginning of Chapter 2, Locke summarizes Filmer’s “great position” as follows: “men are not naturally free” (5). This is the foundation of Filmer’s divine-right doctrine, as it operates on the assumption that social hierarchies have existed since the beginning of time, with kings always presiding at the top of the social pyramid in some form. Furthermore, in denying that mankind possesses natural freedom, Filmer lays the groundwork for the idea of absolute authority for kings. If men are not naturally free, then government mechanisms that grant a degree of representation and freedom to the common man are optional, and perhaps even unnatural, compared to natural kingly authority. Locke contrasts this position with his own insistence upon the natural freedom of mankind.
In Chapter 2, Locke also outlines how Filmer’s arguments rest on a particular interpretation of Biblical Scripture. Throughout First Treatise, Locke will respond to Filmer both by interrogating Filmer’s arguments and in turning to Scripture himself to verify or refute Filmer’s claims. The centrality of Scripture for both theorists reflects the Christian worldview within which both thinkers have to operate while formulating their political ideas. In Locke’s time as well as Filmer’s, the Bible was regarded as the most important authority, with the idea of a Creation and an all-powerful God accepted as facts. Therefore, the story of the Creation and of Adam’s role within it is of crucial importance for both thinkers, as both Locke and Filmer must make their cases by interpreting that story as a historical precedent (or lack thereof) for kingship.
Locke also criticizes divine-right doctrine on practical and historical grounds. The divine-right principle produces chaos; its advocates have “unsettled the titles, and shaken the thrones of princes” (3). The divine right of kings is also a novelty that human beings “have not had the wit enough to find out until this latter age” (4). This is an important argument, for it places divine-right advocates in the position of defending not tradition and authority but revolution and chaos. If Scripture does not authorize divine-right monarchy—and Locke argues it does not—then Filmer and his supporters have proposed a dangerous innovation in government.
Finally, Chapter 2 introduces Locke’s argument for fatherhood as irrelevant to political authority. It is important that the concept of fatherhood as equivalent to monarchical power receives its own chapter—and that it is the book’s first substantive chapter—for this is the foundation of Filmer’s divine-right argument: God gave Adam absolute monarchical power rooted in Adam’s identity as the world’s first father.
Related Titles
By John Locke
