ABSTRACT
When studying the history of philosophy, it is useful to distinguish between exegetical interests in the actual doctrine of a thinker and attention to the philosophical promise in his or her doctrine. In the Anglo-American world, Charles-Louis de Secondat, baron de Montesquieu (1689-1755), has become something o f a bit player among canonical political theorists, and there isn’t particularly much appreciation either for the promise o f his doctrine or its details. This is a little odd: O ne would have thought, for example, that at the time of a trendy “new institutionalism” in political science, scholars might be interested in the Frenchman whose views on institutional design were cited so prominently in the Federalist Papers. It is also unfortunate, since M ontesquieu’s thought is complicated (because the ideas are hard to pigeonhole), interesting (because he offers a rich analysis of agents and institutions), and relevant (because the analysis is still applicable and illuminates, in particular, liberalism).
