What is a political regime (politeia)? To what extent is its character a consequence of education (paideia)? To what extent is its character a consequence of rule by a political class? What presumption underpinned classical republicanism? Was it a reasonable presumption? Why were the ancient Greeks and Romans so skeptical with regard to commerce? What does it mean to speak of a martial economy? What was the character of the education the ancient Greek polis gave its citizens? How does pederasty fit in? What accounts for the character of the Spartan regime? How was Lacedaemon organized politically? Compare and contrast Sparta and Athens. What does Aristotle mean when he describes the human being (anthropos) as "a political animal?" Benjamin Franklin once described man as "a tool-making animal." From our perspective, who is more nearly right? In Aristotle's view, what makes of a people a political community? What do Pericles' two orations tell us about the Athenian outlook? Could either speech be given in a liberal democracy today? How close is Cicero's thinking to that of Aristotle? What can we learn from Livy's account of the rape of Lucretia? What can we learn from his discussion of the career of Coriolanus? Why does Polybius include a discussion of funerals and of the Roman military camp in his account of the Roman constitution? In the opinion of Sallust, of Livy, and of Tacitus, why did the Roman republic ultimately collapse?

What was the character of medieval liberty? Why is it so rarely a focus of attention today? Why did self-government flourish in the high Middle Ages? What occasioned self-government in the guilds, the towns, and the monarchies of Western Christendom? Did it flourish because of or despite Catholic Christianity? Why was there no analogue to this in Eastern Christendom? Why was there none under Islam? Is Machiavelli a friend or a foe of liberty? Does he reaffirm Europe's classical heritage or reject it? What was the character of the Rome he imagined in his Discourses on Livy? Did Machiavelli restate or reject Livy's account of the foundations for republican freedom? What was the character of the republicanism espoused by Marchamont Nedham? Did it differ at all in spirit and institutions from that proposed by Machiavelli? What did Thomas Hobbes think of classical republicanism? How did he respond to Machiavelli? What did Machiavelli, Nedham, and Hobbes think of the Christian church? How does James Harrington fit into this scheme? What was the character of his republicanism? To what degree is Locke an heir to these arguments? What does he add to the picture that was not there before? When were Cato's Letters published? What is the character of the polity espoused therein? To what degree are these arguments familiar to Americans? What does Montesquieu do with this political tradition? How does he reshape its arguments? Where lies his emphasis? What does he mean by principle? In his opinion, how do republics, monarchies, and despotisms differ? Why does he speak of monarchy as a moderate government? What does he mean by liberty? Why does he so praise the English form of government? What is the principle of the English government? Do the English enjoy liberty?

To what degree do the arguments advanced by the American colonists echo those of the ancient Greeks and Romans? To what degree are they a restatement of the arguments advanced by the English republicans and their Whig successors? Do they owe anything at all to Machiavelli? Do they owe anything to Montesquieu? How do the arguments of the Massachusetts House of Representatives in 1765 and 1768 differ from the argument of the Declaration of Independence? Is it possible to trace a development in the argument of the Colonists? What do they emphasize more as the conflict with Great Britain proceeds? What becomes less important? Is it true, as Edmund Morgan says (p.100), that "all the colonial demands might have been satisfied within the limits of [the] empire"? How would the colonial demands have changed the empire? How did the American revolutionaries understand "the laws of nature and of nature's God" and the "unalienable rights" of man? What did they mean by proclaiming that "all men are created equal"? How did they deduce from those principles the moral necessity of government founded on consent? Is it true, as Edmund Morgan claims (p.76), that the Declaration of Independence "would not have precluded a monarchial form of government for the United States"?

What was the nature and what were the defects of America's first national constitution, the Articles of Confederation? Outline a chronology of the major events of the Constitutional Convention as if you were describing the plot of a play. What are the major "turning points" of the action? Who are the major characters? What are the major differences in structure, powers, and functions between the various plans in the Convention? How was the question of the authority of the Convention and the proper scope of its deliberations raised and dealt with? What were the major questions in the construction of the major institutions of the Constitution? Where is the concept of "judicial review" and the overall character of the judiciary formulated in the Convention's deliberations? Why is the Judiciary so sketchy in the final Constitution as opposed to the other branches? How did the issue of slavery slip in and out of--and occasionally dominate--the deliberations of the Convention? How really "novel" is the United States Constitution? If it is truly novel, how so? If not, why did its framers believe that it was? Is there a "design" or "overarching theory" to the final Constitution? Or, is it best understood as a "loose compromise" without guiding principle to either its whole structure or its parts? What did some of the major players in the Convention consider the Constitution's major defects? What do you think the Constitution's major defects are/were? From the perspective of ancient regime analysis, was the American constitution democratic? aristocratic? monarchical? mixed? How was the Constitution influenced by Machiavelli, the English republicans and their Whig successors, and Montesquieu?

What is Publius' ends/means argument? Does it imply that our Government is unlimited in its powers? What is the Anti-Federalist response to Publius? To what extent can and should government be limited by restricting constitutional grants of power? What is Publius' view of federalism? Does the Constitution establish a stable, limited federalism or an uneasy compromise tending toward consolidation? How important is federalism to the maintenance of limited government? What is the case for the separation of powers? What view of politics underlies it? What is the argument against it as presented by the Anti-Federalists? To what extent do they agree with current critics of separation? Is separation a source of energy, liberty, and institutional vigor or a cause of stagnation, confusion, and irresponsible government? What is Publius' argument for an energetic government? What leads his executive to be a source of that energy? How does he understand the job of presidential leadership? How democratic is his executive? Does the Constitution establish Presidential government? What is Publius' argument against a Bill of Rights? Why do the Anti-Federalists desire a Bill of Rights? Do their arguments differ from the current defenses of a Bill of Rights? How essential is the Bill of Rights to the maintenance of liberty in America?

What issues dominated the task of constitutional and political formation after the ratification of the Constitution? What differing interpretations of the new constitutional structure and of national purpose divided the Federalists from the Jeffersonian Republicans? What is the historic significance of the election of 1800? Is John Marshall's argument for judicial review persuasive?