The Problem of Legitimate Authority: Early Modern Hungarian Case Studies

Abstract

The theory of war is rooted in a long-standing philosophical and theological tradition that seeks to justify or reject armed conflicts based on moral, legal, political, and philosophical considerations. This study examines the diverse techniques of war justification, with a particular focus on the perspectives of early modern Hungarian thinkers such as István Werbőczy, Péter Pázmány, Miklós Zrínyi, and Gábor Bethlen. By analyzing premodern Hungarian theories, the research aims to situate these figures within the broader intellectual tradition while also exploring how they interpreted the problem of war in light of the political and religious challenges of their time.

At the core of this investigation lies the problem of legitimate authority, a fundamental principle of just war theory that determines who possesses the legal and moral right to wage war. The study examines the shifting ethical and legal assessments of warfare and their applicability across different social and political contexts. By highlighting the varying approaches to legitimacy among the analyzed authors, this research sheds light on the evolving foundations of war justification and its implications for sovereignty, governance, and moral responsibility in early modern Hungarian discourse.