THE GENESIS OF QUENTIN SKINNER’S CONTEXTUALIST METHODOLOGY

Stanislav Hrubiznyi

doi:10.17721/2523-4064.2026/14-2/15

Authors

Stanislav Hrubiznyi Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv, Kyiv, Ukraine https://orcid.org/0009-0000-0521-169X

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.17721/2523-4064.2026/14-2/15

Keywords:

Quentin Skinner, contextualism, history of ideas, history of philosophy methodology, speech acts, illocutionary force, text interpretation, intellectual history

Abstract

Background. This study is devoted to an analysis of Quentin Skinner’s early methodology, in particular its foundational principles, intellectual sources, and ways of responding to criticism. The main focus is on determining how consistent Skinner’s contextualist methodology remained over the years and whether it underwent any significant changes under the pressure of scholarly polemics. Methods. The study is based on a methodology in the history of philosophy, textual and comparative analysis of Quentin Skinner’s early works, as well as his responses to criticism. It employs a reconstruction of the key concepts of his contextualist methodology and traces their functioning within his polemics with opponents. Results. It has been established that the methodological foundation of Skinner’s contextualism was formed in the works published between 1966 and 1972. This foundation rests on the rejection of "perennial" problems, the requirement to interpret texts through their historical and linguistic context, and the clarification of the illocutionary force of utterances as well as authorial intentions. It is shown that in his later writings Skinner does not abandon these principles, but rather refines, specifies, and defends them in response to criticism. Conclusions. It is demonstrated that Quentin Skinner’s early methodology constitutes a coherent and consistent system of interpretive principles that had taken shape by 1972. His later works testify not to a radical change in approach, but rather to the development, clarification, and reasoned defense of the core assumptions of contextualism already formulated in his earlier writings.

References

Austin, J. L. (1961). Unfair to facts. In Philosophical papers (pp. 102–122). Oxford, England: Clarendon Press. Austin, J. L. (1962). How to do things with words. Oxford, England: Clarendon Press.

Blau, A. (Ed.). (2026). Meaning and understanding in the history of ideas and beyond. London, England: The British Academy.

Brett, A., Tully, J., & Hamilton-Bleakley, H. (Eds.). (2006). Rethinking the foundations of modern political thought. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press. Collingwood, R. G. (1939). An autobiography. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.

Dawson, H., & de Dijn, A. (Eds.). (2022). Rethinking liberty before liberalism. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.

Femia, J. V. (1988). An historicist critique of "revisionist" methods for studying the history of ideas. In J. Tully (Ed.), Meaning and context: Quentin Skinner and his critics (pp. 156–175). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Furuta, T. (2021). Without Laslett to the lost worlds: Quentin Skinner’s early methodology. Japanese Journal of Political Science, 1-19. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1468109921000104

Graham, K. (1988). How do illocutionary descriptions explain? In J. Tully (Ed.), Meaning and context: Quentin Skinner and his critics (pp. 147–155).

Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Hacker, A. (1956). Capital and carbuncles: The "great books" reappraised. American Political Science Review, 46, 775-786.

Hennings, K. H. (1985). A note on Marx’s reading list in his Economic and Philosophical Manuscripts of 1844. Economy and Society, 14(1), 128–137. https://doi.org/10.1080/03085148500000007

Keane, J. (1988). More theses on the philosophy of history. In J. Tully (Ed.), Meaning and context: Quentin Skinner and his critics (pp. 204–217). Prince-ton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Lamb, R. (2009). Quentin Skinner’s revised historical contextualism: A critique. History of the Human Sciences, 22(3), 51–73. https://doi.org/10.1177/0952695109104423

Leslie, M. (1970). In defence of anachronism. Political Studies, 18(4), 433–447. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9248.1970.tb01455.x Lovejoy, A. O. (1936). The great chain of being: A study of the history of an idea. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Marx, K., & Engels, F. (1974). Sochineniia (2nd ed., Vol. 42). Moscow, USSR: Izdatel'stvo politicheskoi literatury. Morgenthau, H. J. (1958). Dilemmas of politics. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

Palonen, K. (2003). Quentin Skinner: History, politics, rhetoric. Cambridge, England: Polity Press.

Sibley, M. Q. (1958). The place of classical theory in the study of politics. In R. Young (Ed.), Approaches to the study of politics [add page range if you have it]. Chicago, IL: Northwestern University Press.

Skinner, Q. (1966). The limits of historical explanations. Philosophy, 41(157), 199–215. https://doi.org/10.1017/S003181910005868X Skinner, Q. (1969). Meaning and understanding in the history of ideas. History and Theory, 8(1), 3–53. https://doi.org/10.2307/2504188 Skinner, Q. (1970). Conventions and the understanding of speech acts. The Philosophical Quarterly, 20(79), 118–138. doi:10.2307/2218084

Skinner, Q. (1971). On performing and explaining linguistic actions. The Philosophical Quarterly, 21(82), 1–21. https://doi.org/doi:10.2307/2217566 Skinner, Q. (1972a). Motives, intentions and the interpretation of texts. New Literary History, 3(2), 393–408. https://doi.org/10.2307/468322

Skinner, Q. (1972b). "Social meaning" and the explanation of social action. In P. Laslett, W. G. Runciman, & Q. Skinner (Eds.), Philosophy, politics and society (4th ser., pp. 136–157). Oxford, England: Basil Blackwell.

Skinner, Q. (1974). Some problems in the analysis of political thought and action. Political Theory, 2(3), 277–303. https://doi.org/10.1177/009059177400200303

Skinner, Q. (1975). Hermeneutics and the role of history. New Literary History, 7(1), 209–232. https://doi.org/10.2307/468286 Skinner, Q. (1978). The foundations of modern political thought (Vols. 1-2). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press. Skinner, Q. (1979). The idea of a cultural lexicon. Essays in Criticism, 29(3), 205–223. https://doi.org/10.1093/eic/XXIX.3.205

Skinner, Q. (1988). A reply to my critics. In J. Tully (Ed.), Meaning and context: Quentin Skinner and his critics (pp. 231–288). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Skinner, Q. (1996). From Hume’s intentions to deconstruction and back. Journal of Political Philosophy, 4(2), 142-154. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9760.1996.tb00046.x

Skinner, Q. (2002a). Visions of politics (Vols. 1-3). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.

Skinner, Q. (2002b). Visions of politics: Vol. 1. Regarding method. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press. Tully, J. (Ed.). (1988). Meaning and context: Quentin Skinner and his critics. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.