ABSTRACT
John Stanley may have been based in a political science department but he was essentially cast in the mold of an historian of ideas. John was interested in the empirical coordinates of behavior rather than the rational implications of dynastic power, and hence a consideration of bottom-up politics of society rather than top-down politics of the state. John was a special sort of figure—he approached Marx, Engels, and Sorel as one would Byron, Keats, and Shelley. He enjoyed reveling in their world, entering it as a friendly critic, and conducting a dialogue with the dead, but not with the deaf. John evolved slowly over time: from a commentator on the work of classical figures in political doctrine and social theory to an interpreter of such figures and work. The primary lesson is that John's work was predicated on and dedicated to exactitude and rectitude.
