Robert Filmer - Icon Profile | Alexandria
Robert Filmer (c. 1588-1653) stands as one of the most controversial political theorists of the Stuart era, whose defense of absolute monarchy and patriarchal power challenged the emerging liberal philosophies of his time. Best known for his posthumously published work "Patriarcha," Filmer articulated a divine right theory of kingship that would later provoke John Locke's influential rebuttal in "Two Treatises of Government."
Born into the English gentry at East Sutton, Kent, Filmer's ideas emerged from a tumultuous period when traditional authority structures faced unprecedented challenges. His earliest known writings appeared in the 1620s, coinciding with growing tensions between Parliament and the Crown that would eventually erupt into the English Civil War. As a steadfast Royalist, Filmer's manor house became a center for cavalier resistance, leading to his imprisonment in 1643.
Filmer's political philosophy, grounded in biblical interpretation, argued that political authority descended directly from Adam's paternal power, bestowed by God himself. This seemingly antiquated notion belied a sophisticated attempt to counter contemporary social contract theories. His works, including "The Anarchy of a Limited or Mixed Monarchy" (1648) and "Observations Concerning the Originall of Government" (1652), constructed a comprehensive framework linking familial and political authority. Intriguingly, while his contemporaries largely dismissed his arguments, Filmer's ideas experienced an unexpected resurrection during the Exclusion Crisis of 1679-1681, when his "Patriarcha" was finally published.
The legacy of Filmer's thought extends far beyond its initial reception. While his absolute monarchist positions were thoroughly critiqued by Enlightenment thinkers, his insights into the relationship between family structures and political authority have found new relevance in contemporary discussions of authority, legitimacy, and governance. Modern scholars have begun reexamining Filmer's works, finding in them prescient observations about the nature of power and sovereignty that resonate with current debates about populism and democratic legitimacy. His intellectual journey from forgotten royalist theorist to a figure of renewed academic interest raises intriguing questions about how political ideas persist and transform across centuries of social change.