@article{oai:twcu.repo.nii.ac.jp:00017926,
 author = {今井, 宏},
 journal = {東京女子大學附屬比較文化研究所紀要},
 month = {},
 note = {During the Puritan Revolution, a government without a King and the House of Lords was established in England, and this was officially named as "a Commonwealth and Free State". This paper primarily deals with the question why the government was not called as a Republic in the sense of a popular government, but as a "Commonwealth". As is generally known, many works had discussed the concept of the "Commonwealth" or "Common-weal" since the beginning of the Tudor Era. Those writers on "commonwealth" had a remarkable common feature which showed that thier motives in writing the books or pamphlets was not anti-monarchical, and that they expected both king and magistrates to defend the people's common weal. We know that an enthusiastic group called the "Commonwealthmen" had tried to achieve their object under the Duke of Somerset in the reign of King Edward VI. When we try to understand the nature of the historical "Commonwealth" of 1649, we should not neglect the inheritance of those "Commonwealthmen". At the core of the newly formed government, a group of the active politicians had a great influence for a short period, and these politicians were different in nature from the Army's Independent Grandees such as Oliver Cromwell. The leading figures in this group were John Bradshaw, Henry Marten, Thomas Challoner, Henry Nevill and Algernon Sidney, and the man chosen as their spokesman was John Milton. Some of them had their ancestors in the Tudor "Commonwealthmen", and highly educated in classical humanism and well informed about foreign affairs, they were the exact opposite of the puritanical and parochial Army leaders. Influenced by their knowledge of the history of Rome, they had a strong commitment to the expansion of the "Commonwealth", a result of which was the enactment of the Navigation Act in 1651.},
 pages = {1--16},
 title = {イギリスにおける「共和政」について},
 volume = {51},
 year = {1990}
}