1,99 €
Niedrigster Preis in 30 Tagen: 1,99 €
Niedrigster Preis in 30 Tagen: 1,99 €
Mehr erfahren.
- Herausgeber: Booksell-Verlag
- Kategorie: Geisteswissenschaft
- Sprache: Englisch
In "A Letter to a Noble Lord," Edmund Burke presents a poignant critique of the British government's policies and the impact of the American Revolution on the institutions of monarchy and aristocracy. Written in 1796, this epistolary treatise embodies Burke's characteristic eloquence and rhetorical flourish, manifesting a rich tapestry of philosophical reflection interwoven with political pragmatism. Esteemed as a foundational text of modern conservatism, Burke'Äôs letter navigates themes of loyalty, tradition, and the dynamic interplay between social hierarchy and individual rights, shedding light on the tumultuous political climate of his era. Edmund Burke, often hailed as the father of modern conservatism, drew upon his experiences as a statesman and his profound understanding of Enlightenment thought to craft this letter. Serving as a member of Parliament and a vociferous critic of the French Revolution, Burke's insights were shaped by his belief in gradual reform over radical change. His deep appreciation for historical continuity and skepticism towards unchecked ambition informed his perspective, making this letter a critical response to the revolutionary fervor threatening the established order. For scholars, students, and politically engaged readers alike, "A Letter to a Noble Lord" is an essential exploration of the relationship between power, responsibility, and the human condition. Burke'Äôs intricate arguments invite reflection on contemporary political dilemmas, urging readers to consider the delicate balance between innovation and preservation in governance.
Das E-Book können Sie in Legimi-Apps oder einer beliebigen App lesen, die das folgende Format unterstützen:
Veröffentlichungsjahr: 2021
Ähnliche
A Letter to a Noble Lord
Table of Contents
Introduction
A retiring statesman turns a personal attack into a public trial of honor, power, and the fragile fabric of constitutional society.
A Letter to a Noble Lord holds its classic status because it distills the late eighteenth century’s fiercest disputes into prose of uncommon energy and poise. Edmund Burke’s mastery of cadence, irony, and moral reasoning elevates a narrow controversy into a meditation on the foundations of civil order. The tract’s fusion of autobiography with political principle has influenced generations of political writing, helping to define what a public letter can accomplish. As a specimen of English rhetorical art, it stands beside the era’s greatest pamphlets, prized for its lucidity, balance of passion and restraint, and its exacting sense of historical responsibility.
Written and published in 1796, Edmund Burke’s A Letter to a Noble Lord was addressed to the Duke of Bedford in response to criticisms of a pension granted to Burke upon his retirement. The immediate occasion was a parliamentary attack; the larger subject is the meaning of public service and the justice of rewarding it. Burke uses the letter form to defend his integrity, to explain the principles that guided his career, and to expose what he takes to be the moral contradictions of his accusers. His purpose is not merely self-vindication but the clarification of constitutional norms at a moment of acute political strain.
Burke’s method is epistolary polemic: a direct address that moves from particular facts to general maxims. He proceeds by historical parallels, legal and institutional reflection, and sharply controlled invective. The letter’s architecture is deliberately cumulative, each section widening the frame from personal grievance to the commonwealth’s interest. A hallmark of the work is its tactical use of ancestry, property, and patronage as touchstones for social responsibility. Burke’s prose—periodic yet pointed—builds moral pressure through antithesis and exempla, transforming an administrative issue into a study of character, gratitude, and the duties owed by rank and office to a nation under stress.
The historical backdrop is Britain’s confrontation with the French Revolution and the wars that followed, a crisis that fractured parties and unsettled inherited loyalties. Burke had already parted with former allies over what he perceived as revolutionary dangers. By 1796 he was a veteran parliamentarian nearing the end of active public life. The pension controversy gave antagonists an opening to impugn his motives; it gave Burke an occasion to recast a personal slight as a lesson in civic ethics. The letter emerges from this tense environment, where questions of reward, reform, and authority were entangled with fears of ideological upheaval.
At its core, the work argues that a polity must distinguish between rewards that sustain virtue and schemes that flatter vanity or license predation. Burke defends pensions as instruments of gratitude for long service, not as ornaments of favoritism. He presses the responsibilities of birth and wealth, insisting that privilege without duty corrodes legitimacy. The letter also clarifies his understanding of continuity: the slow inheritance of laws, manners, and institutions that restrain passion and anchor freedom. Without revealing particulars best discovered in the text, one can say that Burke’s aim is to secure the moral economy of public honor against the erosions of envy and opportunism.
The book’s literary and intellectual significance is considerable. It crystallizes the late pamphlet tradition in English letters, demonstrating how personal address can illuminate abstract questions. A Letter to a Noble Lord complements Burke’s other major political writings while retaining a distinctive intimacy and finish. Its influence lies less in specific policy than in a model of public reasoning: principled, historically informed, and stylistically exact. The letter has been repeatedly reprinted and anthologized, not only for students of politics but also for readers of prose, as a standard of measured force—evidence that the essay and the pamphlet can still shape civic imagination.
The themes that animate the letter are enduring: honor versus calumny, gratitude versus resentment, stewardship versus exploitation. Burke treats property and nobility as trusts that bind their holders to the weak as well as to the state. He contrasts short-term popularity with long-term duty, suggesting that a nation’s stability depends on habits of respect across generations. The work’s emotional undertow—Burke wrote after grave personal losses and upon leaving public office—gives the argument a tempered gravity. Without turning inward, he lets private sorrow educate public judgment, showing how personal experience can sharpen, rather than distort, a statesman’s sense of justice.
As literature, the letter delights in its rhythm, balance, and unflagging clarity. Burke modulates from restrained indignation to solemn reflection, never losing sight of the reader’s need for proportion and evidence. He brings abstract claims to life with compact historical sketches and precisely targeted character analysis. The result is a persuasive texture, not a cascade of assertions. Its epistolary voice—dignified, direct, and sometimes scathing—advances argument without forfeiting civility. Even when the temperature rises, the sentences remain architecturally sound, giving the impression of a mind disciplined by habit and history, not merely inflamed by the dispute of the hour.
The book’s classic quality also rests on its balance of immediacy and distance. It addresses a single controversy while inviting reflection on principles that outlast any session of Parliament. Burke situates contemporary figures within the long arc of national development, making the present accountable to the past and responsible for the future. He refuses to let slogans settle questions of policy, testing them instead against concrete experience and institutional memory. This habit of mind, as much as any particular conclusion, has recommended the work to later readers who seek a way to debate fiercely while preserving a common language of public reason.
For modern audiences, A Letter to a Noble Lord remains resonant in debates over remuneration for public servants, the ethics of patronage, and the rhetoric of denunciation. It offers a vocabulary for distinguishing critique from detraction and for measuring leaders by service rather than spectacle. In an era when reputations can be unmade quickly, the letter models how to assess claims with patience and context. It reminds readers that constitutional health depends on the virtues of those who hold power and those who judge them, and that gratitude for service need not conflict with vigilance against abuse.
This introduction invites readers to encounter the book as both a personal testament and a civic treatise: a defense of a life in public office and a study in the moral architecture of a free state. Its main ideas—continuity, duty, proportion, earned honor, and the steadying force of historical memory—retain their urgency. Burke’s composure under fire, his humane breadth, and his exacting prose secure the letter’s appeal. It remains engaging because it addresses the perennial question of how a society should recognize merit while guarding against corruption, a question as alive today as when he first set pen to paper.
Synopsis
In 1796, Edmund Burke published A Letter to a Noble Lord as a public reply to the Duke of Bedford and the Earl of Lauderdale, who had censured the royal pension granted to him on retirement. He sets out to defend the legality and propriety of that pension, to recount his services, and to restate the principles that governed his conduct. The letter locates a personal controversy within the broader context of Britain’s constitutional order, wartime pressures, and domestic political strife. Burke presents the episode as a test of how a free state honors public service, guards reputations, and distinguishes genuine economy from partisan disparagement.
Burke proceeds by summarizing a long public life in Parliament and administration. He recalls his efforts for economical reform in the civil list and public offices, his advocacy of commercial relief for Ireland, and his pursuit of conciliation in the American crisis. He emphasizes measures designed to restrain patronage, improve accountability, and stabilize public credit. Throughout, he underscores that these initiatives sought practical liberty under law rather than abstract theory. By outlining concrete acts, debates, and legislation, he aims to demonstrate that his claims to honorable reward rest on verifiable labors, not on favor, intrigue, or late conversion to fashionable positions.
