Condren, C., ‘Marsilius of Padua’s Argument from Authority: A Survey of its Significance in the Defensor Pacis’, Political Theory, v (1977).

Excerpt:

“Classical rhetoricians emphasized that the mode of argument was as important as the content; ultimately, that they were inseparable. Aluid est distincto, aliud separatio. The point is pertinent to Marsilian studies. Much time has been spent on Marsilius’ concepts, but little on the way they are elaborated through the citation of authorities. Certainly some attention has been given to the extensive documentary reference in the Defensor Pacis, but it has been generally misdirected by an unprofitable concern with “influences” or “sources.” Unlike reference to a source, the citation of an authority involved no firm distinction between historical intelligibility and contemporary importance, but involved the use of whatever words the authority provided for the purpose of arguing about the present. Neither did the authority function simply to support independently advanced arguments; it was a means of assertion and a self-contained demonstration of validity, by virtue of the name whose words were used. Authoritative argument, therefore, did not presuppose those canons of interpretive propriety which are now associated with the use of sources or evidence, and by not recognizing Marsilius’ authority usage for what it is, we are all too likely to assess him anachronistically.”

Online:
JSTOR