The paper aims to fill a gap within specialized literature on the relationship between Machiavelli and Harrington. Approximations are usually made from the perspective of republicanism and the reduction to principles. We argue that, from the point of view of method, the authors use both medicine and history as sources of political knowledge. Medicine is treated through metaphors and comparisons between natural bodies and political bodies, using the vocabulary of 'medicines'. The authors also converge in their theoretical understanding of historical continuities and breaks, guided by language and religion, beyond the use of examples. We conclude that these two aspects complement each other by the authors' rejection of the any transcendental criteria for political understanding.
Machiavelli; Harrington; method; medicine; history