Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
JOURNAL
OF POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY
May
1983
Volume 1 1 Number 2
139
Arlene W.
Saxonhouse
171
Mary
Pollingue
and
Acquisition:
1 85
Aristotle
on
Satisfactions
of
Political Life
207
Timothy
Fuller
Temporal Royalties
and
Virtue's
Airy
Voice
225
Jeffrey
Barnouw
of
and
Hobbes
249
and
the Ass: a
Commentary
the Book
of
JL JL A
i^\to^
JL
ii
w*~J
JL \*^f
i^C^L
l^JL
v_^JL
JL
Volume
number 2
Editor-in-Chief Editors
Hilail Gildin
Robert Horwitz
Consulting
Editors
John Hallowell
Wilhelm Hennis
Erich Hula
Arnaldo Momigliano
Michael Oakeshott
Ellis
Sandoz
Kenneth W.
Larry Arnhart
Jensen
Will
Patrick
Coby
Christopher A. Colmo
Maureen Feder
Joseph E.
Goldberg
Pamela
Morrisey Grey
Bradford Wilson
Assistant Editors
Design & Production
Marianne C.
Laurette G. Hupman
Martyn Hitchcock
manuscripts
for
publication
in
dence
be
addressed to
interpretation,
Copyright 1983
Interpretation
University
of Michigan
since
subtitle
Peri Rhetorikes.
stood as
ically
its
rhetoric
as
contrasted
with
My
call
argument
is that the
analysis of
the
dialogue
be
extended
to
what
unspoken
dialogue,
War
and
war.
theme, that which lies behind the action and the discourse of the In the background of this dialogue stands the Peloponnesian
Thucydides'
particularly
account
of
that
war.
Within the
dialogue,
to the
Callicles,
politics of
stands
expression
behind Athenian
of
politics and
inconsistencies
express
more.
her
comes
from the
an
erotic
longing
for
Philosophy
response
by
Socrates is
also
and
eros
driven
activity.
contrasts
in the
Thucydides'
to
history
of
war
The
following
analysis with
the Gorgias
will
Thucydidean
"Of
war
and
of are
battle, they
the first
say,
so
Socrates."
These
and
words of
share, O
by
Callicles
Gorgias'
to
Socrates
Socrates'
companion,
Chaerephon,
recognizes
they
arrive after
rhetorical
display
has
ended.
Socrates
the
"But
then,
The
as the
come after
the feast
and arrive
(447a).
us
sentiments
here expressed,
of
know,
much
are
worthy
Shakespeare's
Falstaff,
who
in
fray
and
Fits
dull fighter
and a
of
keen
guest."'
trepi
battles
this
to the story
Science Asso
earlier version of
at
Meetings in Washington, D.C. I am indebted to the reviewers for this journal for several helpful points and to a most thoughtful letter from Robert Eden. 1. Act IV, scene 3. While it may make sense to arrive late for a battle, it hardly makes sense
to
arrive
late for
a war.
Thus,
word right at
the
beginning
of the
dialogue
of
in
immediately
alert us
to
its
significance.
Newhall Barker
The Dramatic
1891), p.
nature of
Mimetic Features of the of Plato (Baltimore: Isaac Friedenwald, 31, comments on the "artistic placing of the first word, polemou, which indicates the but does not proceed to tell us in what way it does so. the
dialogue"
"Gorgias"
140
of
Interpretation
neither records
fearful his
of
battles
nor overanxious
reluctance
to hasten to feasts
Socrates'
(174a,
d)2
and,
Alcibiades'
medium of
speech,
in battle. As be
battles, sparring
and
feasts
Polus
Gorgias
are
ready to The
Socrates'
ostensible
cause
of
tardy
arrival us
friend. "He is
explains could
responsible
(aitios); he forced
anything.
Socrates'
agora,"
not explain
is how Chaerephon
eager to
hear
have
allowed
restrain
him. But
we
his late
arrival about
has
other connotations ,
if
keep
Chaerephon's trip to the oracle at Apology Delphi. We do know, however, that Chaerephon is given to great enthusiams. In the Charmides, his welcome to a Socrates just returning from the battle at
Potideia is described In the
comedies of
by
Socrates
as
reaching
(153b).4
anemia and
reflect a man
study.5
Socrates
and
not preclude an
In the
Charmides,
with great
enthusiasm, he inquires
details surrounding the battle of Potideia, and indeed it is he who seats Socrates in the dialogue next to the future tyrant Critias. Nor does Chaerephon's en
thusiasm for Socrates preclude
other
friends
or prospective teachers.
of
Though in
Philostratus
the
records
Gorgias
by
Chaerephon,6
as
friendly (philos)
Socrates
with
Gorgias
he
will
be
able
"to
heal"
formance,
tion, if
that of
not
and
sake give
demonstra
today,
While Chaerephon is
friendly
with
with
Gorgias, his
association
does
not equal
Callicles, for it is
Callicles is gracious,
and
Callicles that Gorgias is staying while in Athens. he invites Socrates and Chaerephon to visit him at
"whenever"
any time to talk with Gorgias. But we do not wait for (447b) for Socrates to talk with Gorgias. Rather, Socrates is eager to begin the questioning
2.
At the
beginning
of
feast is
not enough
to bribe Socrates to
be
as
well
of
and
speeches as
feasts
Plato's
(e.g.,
4.
in
Socrates'
speech, 46^-4656).
of
Self-knowledge: An Interpretation
"Introduction,"
Charmides,"
Interpretation, 6 (1977), 142; also Apology 21a. 5. Philostratus, Lives of the Sophists, 483. E. R. Dodds, (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1959). P- 6, provides a list of the various
appears.
Plato's
which
"Gorgias"
comedies
in
Chaerephon
6. Philostratus
483.
141
undefined space.
takes place in an
All
we
is that it is
within
(endon,
447c).
It is
within
this
indefinite
space that
the
interlocutors
will
try,
not always
successfully, to
speak
freely,
to exercise
b)
and
it is
within
put
to him
by
eager,
after
display,
wisdom
of this
man
who could
in the theater As
at
at
Athens
and
have the
ex
courage
theme."7
Delphi, Chaerephon,
plicitly
to
Socrates'
Socrates, is to ask the question which leads investigations. Thus the Gorgias, through Chaerephon's
abbreviated
initial
man
before
(485c), becomes in
fateful questioning of the oracle of Apollo. The undefined locale Gorgias becomes the setting for the trial of Socrates, where, as in the Apology, he attacks the values of Athens, its goals and the grounds on which
led
after the of the
it bases its
about
actions.
At the
end of
the
dialogue,
as
in the Apology, he
achievements of
will
talk
death,
politics, a
world of
bodies
based
on
opinion.8
Among
dialogue, Callicles is the one Platonic char deme, Acharnia, who remains elusive, unnoted in by
any other ancient source. The other characters of the dialogue are known. Gorgias is the famous orator and teacher from Leontini in Sicily who believed
that
soul
because
of
the
limits
of
human reason,
could
speech
had
than physical
could
force
a
or
drugs
have
over the
of
employed cities.
be
magical
potion
capable of
body.9
As
we shall
beauty
Gorgias'
youth who
follow him to
house. It is
for its own sake, but for the power which it promises to one who possesses it. Polus is also from Sicily, but from the most prosperous and fair city of
Agrigentum. Less famous
as and younger than
entitled
the
author
of
work
Techne,
is the
recipient
of
somewhat
scornful mention
who
begins the
the
was
dialogue,
central,
a real
pivotal point
in the dialogue. I
myself
have
no
person.10
When Plato
wants characters
to
remain unidentified
they
remain
quite anonymous.
One
remains
Callicles was,
researchers.
as
Dodds does,
gives
and us
then why he
some clues:
to modern
His deme
7.
Philostratus 482.
who strives with
8. Even Pericles
historian Thucydides
9.
10.
immortality
this.
his
on
do
Helen
11.
142
Interpretation
a
Acharnia,
invasion
mined
thickly
Athens,
suffered
heavily
in the first
of the
Peloponnesians
reason
deter
comes
to fight a
to a successful
He thus
from
an area
in
is
approved.
His beloved
Demos,
the son of
Pyrilampos,
ties
early death for this outspoken young man of the dialogue, but his insignificance perhaps also underscores the inability of the Athenians themselves to accept openly the Callicles to the leaders
Athens
and
to
Plato.12
Dodds
suggests an
expression
of
relation
to
other cities.
Such
language
could
only be
or
houses, in the
councils of
government
leaders,
in the
works of exiled
historians.13
been too ready to exercise his Athenian parrhesia publicly as well as privately. But perhaps Callicles is more than a real person who failed to become part
of
the standard
discourse
of
the fifth
and
fourth his
centuries
B.C.
would
like
the
whether
Callicles
with
grand speech
defending
of
431
to 404, ex
pressing in
the values
which
the
during
the Peloponnesian
which
War.14
He
shows
counter-arguments
Socrates'
questioning
seeks on questions of pleasures.
and
refuses
and
Socrates
false
the
real and
Athens is
Chrysis
at
at
war.
year
of
the
priestess-ship
of
battle
after
of
Argos, in the Ephorate of Aenesias at Sparta, six months after the Potideia, the Lacedaemonians break their thirty-year treaty with Athens
only fourteen years and invade Attica. The war between the two great powers of Greece has begun. The war will devastate much of Greece and signal
the end of what we know as the glory of Hellas. The
Athenians,
they
as
Thucydides
has led
us
to
believe,
are
fighting
Persian Wars, while the Spartans fight from a fear of the expansion of Athenian power. The first year of the war is uneventful. The Thebans attack Plataea; the Lacedaemonians ravage the farms in the plains of Attica; Pericles speaks words of praise for Athens as he commemorates the Athenian dead. The next year, the
11. K. J. Dover, Aristophanic Comedy (Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1972), p. 79. 12. Plutarch, Lives. Pericles 13. 13. Terrence Irwin, Plato's "Gorgias", translated with notes (Oxford: Clarendon Press. Clarendon Plato Series, 1979), p. 175 asks: "How claim many would be shocked by
Callicles'
by
powerful
states
is
all
not
With
say,"
reference
to
Thucydides, he
of
makes
two
reporting,
to
do."
be
rational
"(2) Even
and
fine to do
what
they
Cf.
492d.
143
and then voted
Pericles is fined
(503c).*
back
into
office.
Shortly
Some
years
later,
427,
while
the
war still
rages, extending
now
to
some,
such as
Greece, and while the Athenian subjects become restless the Mitylenians, begin to rebel, Gorgias from Leontini visits
time.*
His
mission
is
not to
display
comes to Athens as an envoy for his city, requesting that the Athenians fulfill their treaty obligations and help the Ionian Leontines against the threatening Syracusans, allies of Sparta. His crowds.
prose
Rather, he
speech,
of an elegance unheard
Athenians,15
but
scholars
differ in
In 422,
in the
both
sides
begin to feel
war-
weary, a young
and
Demos,
sides
the son of
Pyrilampos,
beauty
of
to
of an older
man.*
Peace
in the
war
battle. But
the
during
of
had
shown
his
courage
in
battles
Delium He
Potideia
comes to
political
secures
for Athens
formerly
pro-Spartan
Argos, Mantineia,
the Olympic
makes
and
Elis. He
games.
He
parades adorned
luxuriously
Socrates
so
he
Eros
with a
in the his
awkward position of
trying
to seduce
a
at
being
beloved.*
He,
who
speaks
with
lisp,
scorned
by
Callicles (485b),
on to
persuades
Sicily
Sicily itself,
Carthage Socrates
guardian
philosopher and
Meton the
astrologer
did
not
venture.
may have
spirit."17
the
But Alcibiades is
uses
among those
or salt mines
of
Sicily. He instead
his
artful speech
to persuade and
the
Spartans,
help
slave
to the
his
master and
his
master's
(47ia-d)
comes an
kingdom.*
Soon
afterwards
ally
of
the
Athenians,
praised
by
*A11 the
events
marked with
an asterisk are
described
as
having
happened recently
or
being
contemporaneous with
the dialogue.
xn.53.
15. 16.
Diodorus
Siculus,
Compare for
example
the assessments in F. E.
431-421
B.C.,"
History
17.
(Cambridge:
University Press,
p.
V,
p.
223, and A. F.
83.
144
Interpretation
to do
whatever good
enthusiasm and
he
was able
to
do.18
Poets
such as
Euripides
the invita
Agathon
his
court.
tion.19
Archelaus
the
praise
refuses
accession
he
cut
straight
better
preceded
(ii.
100.2).
for the ship building on which their naval power is built. By the year 399, the year in which Socrates is to be executed by the citizens of Athens, Archelaus will be dead, murdered at the hands of one of his countrymen, his
beloved.20
In
411
and
b.c,
Minor
with the war now extending Alcibiades back in favor in Athens, sons of
eastward
to the coast
of
Asia
per
Euripides'
play Antiope is
formed.*
The twin
each turns to a
Antiope and Zeus are brought up by different vocation; Amphion devotes himself to music, his lyre, Zethus turns to
of more and
to
hunting
and
the care
of what
that
own.
is,
to the acquisition
stage
to the
tending
On
they debate
a
Athens'
continues,
again.
government
changing from
Callicles,*
democracy
406
Aristocrates,
friend
of
and a member of
Hundred, is
part of an expedition
to
Arguinusae in
B.C.
The Athenians
by
a storm and
the confusion
following
the
battle, fail to pluck the living and the dead from the ocean. The generals, among them Aristocrates, are tried upon their return to Athens.* Socrates, one of the
prytanes
in
charge of the
assembly
on the
day
is
that
they
are to
be tried, but to
protests
of all
the generals
against the
law,*
no avail.
war
The generals,
over.
including Aristocrates,
appears
are executed.
Two
years
later,
the
is
to take place
during
Some have
suggested
dialogue
a certain
they have
the effect of
giving the dialogue a certain timeliness, that is a close association with the war that dominates Athenian political and artistic life for these twenty-eight years. An understanding of the characters in the dialogue and their arguments cannot be disassociated from the political circumstances surrounding the dialogue,
frequency
throughout. the political references tie the dialogue to the time period
underscore
At the
of the
same time
war,
they
also
the
fictitious
nature
of the
dialogue. This
to
dialogue
18. 19.
could never
have taken
this
has something
do
Dodds, p. 241. Aristotle, The Art of Rhetoric, Aristotle was Whose, it is not 20. Alcibiades ii, I4id.
"hubris."
I398a24.
clear.
The
excuse which
Socrates
gave
according
to
An Unspoken Theme in
Callicles'
Plato'
Gorgias: War
or
with
own elusiveness.
Is he
is he
not real?
the
Thucydides'
history
of
tied to the
details
out of which an
that
Plato,
war
dialogue to
The
the
explain
the
to reveal its
its
vanity.
ahistorical
dialogue,
the
dialogue because
which
of
timing but
to
perhaps also
of the characters
involved,
facts
of
suggests the
necessity
what we would
today
of
call the
history
than
to that
truth which
fully
in the fictions
Platonic dialogues
in the
researches of
any history.
Polus
comes
from
city
of such wealth
that
fashioned
silver,
and of such
"glorious",
of
Sicily."21
"lofty city lavish above all in Why Polus has joined Gorgias
not one
gods,"
eye
not
told.
His city is
glories of campaign.
when
Sicily,
pleading for Athenian aid. His city stands as one of the of the few cities able to remain neutral during the Sicilian
when
But that
day
Athenian
with
ships enter
Syracuse's
waters
is far
off
Polus tagging along. And while we do not known why Polus comes to Athens, we do know why he follows Gorgias; he is eager for power, for the power which rhetoric gives, and he is assured by
arrives
Gorgias
in Athens
Gorgias that the way to get power in the city is to learn the art of urge for power that drives him to follow Gorgias, that keeps him It is
rhetoric.22
Polus'
in
to
Gorgias,
of
so that one
day
perhaps
simply
the role
day
rhetoric
for
Socrates
eager to
cisely is its power, this power which Polus so earnestly seeks. Gorgias is the greatest good (megiston agathon) for human beings (anthropois,
it
452d).
Presumably
we
must
he
means
only
some
humans,
of
is
good, because
it is the
cause
(aition)
interpolate "some
next phrase
humans,"
some
as
it is
developed in the
to
by
in
the
city.23
not acknowledge
freedom
21.
Olympian Odes
22.
Kathleen Freeman, Greek City-States (New York: W. W. 11. 6-10, and in. 2; and Frag. 1922.2.
word
Norton,
1963),
p.
64; Pindar,
The
for
power which
runs
through the
dunamis
Only
reading
of
intensity
and
of
the
usage
of this term.
Helen (paragraph
8)
where
as the greatest
dunastes,
that though
smallest
body
is least visible, it
accomplishes
23.
speech
in Thucydides,
146
Interpretation
rhetorician which
for the
he
and
Polus
so
praise
means
in
turn slavery
for
The free
person
in Greece is
not
only
is
not ruled
slaves.
by
into
Gorgias, confirming
the
will
rhetorician
the power
make
(dunamis)
of other
Socrates,
shows
how
you
can
slaves
be
doctor into
a slave
(doulon),
(doulon)"
(542e). Gorgias
be
used
to
listen to
medical ad or a
vice,
or an
of
advice of a
Pericles
Themistocles,
control of
he
or she
may
be,
will
his
her
master.
Polus is
not so
benign in his
greatest unlike man
visions of
ing
to
power
in the
en
tais
polesin, 466b).
He,
Gorgias, does
he envies,
artisan
to do good deeds.
The
after whom
he
wishes
himself,
master
is the tyrant
rather
of
and powerful
now, a
than a slave. Once he was the mere son of a slave to a king. Now
he
as
king
has
achieved complete
liberty
to
do
as
he
wishes.
Yes, he
committed
many crimes to acquire this freedom, killed many people, deceived others, but now he must be truly happy, having exchanged slavery for freedom. If Socrates does not admit that he too envies Archelaus, he is simply being obstreperous.
Surely, Archelaus
subjects'
can
do
whatever
he
wishes
in the city, he
can
can
property, he
can send
kill them,
Archelaus did
not acheive
art of
rhetoric,
but the
Polus
wishes to
follow life
Archelaus'
no more
than a servant to
Gorgias,
yearns
answer
a
ing
Gorgias'
for him
no
when
for he
he
longer
when
people,
wants
he wants,
when
how he
wants.
Polus'
vision
is limited in many
ways
is
as
that
well
it is limited
search
by
he
and
indeed Gorgias
for is
a
city.24
mastery over fellow citizens, a mastery possible through words. deal with mastery over other states, nor the They mastery which Thucydides' mission is intended to avert from Leontini. As history so vividly shows, in this realm the most elegant speeches have no effect. When Gorgias had talked about the greatest power, rhetoric, he had talked about and
envision
is
do
not
Pericles'
24.
on
mission
ignores the
to
influence
cities
as
whole.
concerning relations between states, he He sees only parts within a city. failure
are correct?
his
mission as a
See
pre
16.
147
feats: they
role
persuaded
leaves
out
in
reference to
both
of
these men
is,
of
of
course, their
in the incredible
expansion of
Athenian hegemony,
enslave the
the
of
freedom Athenians
the
Persian Wars to
islands
Aegean,
or
dunastes
power
Aegean. The
power
which
is
exercised
exclusively
within
the
activities of
Archelaus
which strengthened
the cities of
Greece, his
and
Polus'
success
in
increasing
relationships
understanding of power and political events is confined to within the city, he can be, as Callicles points out so well, manipu
confusion over what
lated
by
Socrates into
within
is
is
conventional.
He functions
envies call and
men within
the
city.
He
the
actions of shameful
Archelaus, but he
cannot call
(kalon); he
between
an as
must
them
(aischron). He is trapped
Archelaus'
by
nature
actions
him
individual
the city,
happy, but admitting that by convention, by the traditional values of they are not good. Because he is limited by the perspective of the
cannot separate what exists
city, he
by
by
convention; it is only
of the
once
he
can
break away from the laws distinguish between the two. Within the city nomos is the
once
he
city that
physis;
same as
The
praise of
the
person who
Socrates'
questioning
nomos
which
shift
back
and
forth,
as
to
physis and
nomos
again.26
Gorgias
and
as
indeed they
should when
talking
must
before
and
men who are citizens, of their rejection of the traditional values of justice
virtue
on
which
and
function. Gorgias
cannot
according to is
which used
the city
unjustly; Polus
the ends good.
to
achieve unjust
ends, but
one who
is willing
values
to
look
and
outside
is willing to
totally
to look to a
nature unlimited
by
the
the
political community.
He
inequality
and the
taking
himself he
of
look to the
human
relationships
between
sees
cities
for the
rising
unconditioned
motivations of
beings.27
Callicles
as
above
the conflict
between
so much so that
two concepts
25.
The
en
tais polesi
is strikingly frequent in
Polus'
speech:
466a,
b, d;
467a
at 452d.
of aischron and
26. 27.
E.g.,
introduction
(shameful)
and
478a,
b, d.
History,"
Convention in
Thucydides'
Polity
10
(1978),
148
Interpretation
new
in
startling
of
phrase
"the law
nature"
of
law
inequality
supported
by
nature
herself,
as seen
among
significantly among nations where the question of of, but not followed. The relations between cities
right
(dike) is only
to
spoken
war
and the
inclination to
states
become the
model which
Callicles
will use
justify
the actions
within
within
the city
if he
earlier
interlocutors beyond the city walls and why as his own person he must cast aspersions on those who have succumbed to the verbal power of the Socratic dialectic
.
Polus,
He
envies agreed
praised
too,
and yet
has just
or she
that
rhetoric
must
be
used
to
bring
he
be friend
or
family,
to
justice
help
asks
the enemy
who
has
committed an who
injustice
escape punishment.
Callicles
or
Chaerephon
as one
knows Socrates
well:
"Is Socrates
serious
is he
playing?"
(481b).28
Chaerephon
who may be an enthusiastic follower of Socrates, but who is not known for his wit, believes (emoi men dokei) that Socrates is in necessarily "Ask him he urges Callicles, repeating exactly deed very
yourself,"
serious.29
Callicles'
advice
to,"
dialogue (447c).
what
"By
the gods, I am
said and
most eager
has
talks
agreed
Socrates has
Polus
,
upside
down (anatetrammenos
481c).
Instead, he
was
of
and of
love.
had
not the same
"O
Callicles, if
people
a certain
suffering for
suf
fered (espaschen) a private suffering (idion ti pathos) different from others it would not be easy to demonstrate (epideixasthai) to another one's own suf
say this
knowing
and
now
happen to be Athens
suf
the same
thing, both
being
in love
with
two beloveds. I
and and
son of
Clinias
Philosophy,
you
the demos of
[Demos]
suffering.
the son of
Pyrilampos"
similarity of experiences, from a companionship in basis for the dialogue between Socrates and Callicles
a
is
not
Their
keep surfacing in the subsequent dialogue. is love, the sense of lack, of needfulness. suffering The Symposium is the locus classicus for the relationship between suffering
common pain or
28.
At the
beginning
of
the
also turned
Gorgias?"
to
Chaerephon
asks
to
learn
Socrates'
state of mind.
"Is Socrates
eager
he
(447b). Callicles
appears
to have
29.
cannot answer
Callicles'
question without
bring
149
are
Surrounding
Socrates'
stophanes and
Diotima,
longing
which,
needs
the soul
a vision of
true
beauty
independently
being
on
the
body
and provides
the lover
can
with a nonphysical
immor human
satisfaction of true
love
occur
only
when
the
be bounded bodies
by
the
needs of
the
body;
political
life focused
human beings in
their cities
is
centered on the
to one another
organized
in
varied units
which must
be housed,
clothed and
The suffering
words,
can
of the
body
which
can
only
feels love, a lack of what is outside it, from body, not before. The suffering, in
needs
other
The
of
speeches of
only cease when the human being becomes divine. both Aristophanes and Alcibiades refuse to deny the
to accept a solution
which abstracts
the
body,
refuse
from
body
as
Socrates,
appearing to be
the
convinced
by Diotima,
which
seems
longing
by
of
the
body,
the pains
itself,
love
half.
to attain a physical
immortality
and
or at
least
a physical completion.
Both
speeches
Aristophanes
Alcibiades
emphasize the
Aristophanes'
and suffering.
Alcibiades'
satisfaction with
tioned, made to seem lacking by the presence, the words, the music of his Socrates. Eros is disruptive. It does not let the lover live in happy self-satisfac
is
outside
her, be it
the
demos
of
Athens,
language
pain no
the Demos of
Pryilampos,
Eros
and
or
the true
beauty
capable of perception
Aristophanes
state
of
and
Diotima
at
way
out of
that
in the
longer human,
no
with
which and
lover in
driven
a sense
has died
become
to
her
a god. are
To be human is to
Socrates
by
these human
they both
for the
suffer.
It is philosophy
political
the end of
speech as
the test
Callicles. Callicles must respond to the consistency of philos he cannot. He makes arguments from politics, while Socrates but ophy (482a), from philosophy, from the vision which Diotima held before arguments makes
him
of an eternal,
unchanging
beauty,
an
However,
30.
The
ot
analysis
in this
section owes of
a great
deal to the
Symposium."
Speech
Alcibiades: A reading
Plato's
131-172.
31.
Cf. Republic
u.369-374d.
150
Interpretation
which
Diotima
offers
the
political.
Aristophanes
Alcibiades,
men,
in
their own
way
are tied to
the
body
be
satisfied.
They being
continue
engaging in
of
the
city
as each searches
for
be
achieved.
Thus,
search
the
polis and
the political
not
If
one of
Aristophanes'
halves does
next
find its
in
one
person,
it
continues others
its
for
to the
hemisphere
of appropriate
an unattainable completion.
Alcibiades does
by
Aegean, does
drawn
stay
She
pursues
more,
by
the
Sicily;
she
does
herself rest,
nor
does
Pericles tried
during
for more, for the unattainable But the wholeness Pericles offers, as we shall see, is a completion which out of "human flesh and color and other mortal nonsense to a divine
have her
cease
her
endless search
rises
beauty"
(21
1 e).
citizens
and
leaders
of
Athens, do
nor
not
desire the
wants
Neither Callicles
Polus
the
to persuade
power so
in
speech
They
that
that
bodies.
They
and
want
to be able through their power in the city to satisfy the varied wants
of their physical
longings
Thucydides'
History
and
human
passions
on
ships
between
within
The fear
of
Athens is
what
starts
(whatever the prophases, excuses, may be). The desire for Athenians on to invade Sicily. Eros is there as well, not always
yet
as
more
drives the
articulated,
fully
motivating the actors in this greatest of upheavals. Pericles, praising Athens he commemorates her dead, exhorts her citizens to become lovers (erastes) of
your eyes on 1).
her
day,"
each
he
says to
(11.43.
Pericles'
beautiful
speech
beautiful,
make
capable of
creating
longing,
a passion
her,
their
beloved.34
It be
is through her that they will reach a condition of defined not by their bodies which die, but by the immortal
sepulchres
immortality,
is
what
that
they
will
be their
Pericles,
the city
for Diotima.
32. 33. 34.
They
out of
her
body
and
Thucydides
Thucydides
1.70.9.
11. 65. 7).
See Nussbaum, p. 156, on the role of the eromenos, the beloved, as an unmoving object to be desired, in Greek homosexuality. She effectively applies here the analysis of K. J. Dover, Greek
Homosexuality
(Cambridge: Harvard
University Press,
1978),
to the
study
of
Platonic
thought.
151
last forever; they both give human beings an immortality which was for the gods; they both defy the limitations of the body, one previously through the political devotion of the citizen, the other through the inquiries of
reserved
the philosopher.
They
stand
in
opposition and
in their
struggle
for the
same goal.
Socrates
show
erastes
does
not survive
long
beyond
Pericles'
speech.
love
of of
Athens,
the
of
sustain once
the
plague
strikes the
bodies
in Athens. Pericles
in his her
next speech
politeia
and the
why Athens is to be loved. It is no longer for the beauty of life she creates. These fade quickly before the physical illness. She is to be loved because
of the she protects and satisfies
traumas of
war and
bodies
individuals
who
comprise
the city,
because
her
welfare
Individual
good
fortune is
of
ful Athens
the funeral
oration
city to protect that fortune. The beauti becomes no more than a tyranny (11.63. 2)
complete
balancing hazardously
between the
domination
the po
Pericles'
to
beautify her,
both
and eros
disappears from
Book VI,
until
Sicily
longer
and
Alcibiades
there to be
desired,
Sicily]"
to become the
eromenos.^
"And
eros
fell
on all alike
no
pressed
thing
relates
the wealth of
Sicily
and,
the
indeed,
eros
body
more,
of
Alcibiades. The
by
Pericles did
to
lead
anywhere.
Rather,
bodies, for
does; it leads
eros
Sicily,
Gorgias.36
It is precisely the
characterized
for
particulars
Spartans,
freedom
and
by
their
hesuchia, they
adventure
to grow
while
remain still.
of more which
an empire
is
what
leads to their
greatness,
what makes
his
event ever.
and
passivity
of
the Spartans
leaves them
as still as stones or as
speaks
dead
and
as corpses
(49e).37
When Callicles
35.
violently
that
of
forcefully
same
in the
as the
middle of the
Gorgias,
Sicily
that
and
It is
interesting
to
note
it is in the
book
decision to
go
to
Aristogeiton
political
eros recur
by
450b
The relationship between Gorgias and Sicily is underscored in the dialogue by the Sicilisms Gorgias. I must rely here on the interpretation of others, e.g.. Barker, p. 3, who cites as an example pointed to by the scholiast Olympiodorus. Dodds, p. 196, is skeptical.
Corinthians'
37.
For the
above
speech
in Thucydides,
1. 68-71.
152
Interpretation
he
but
speaks not of
Athens,
only be
nor of
Sparta; he
speaks not of
Potideia
nor
Corcyra,
more than
what one
has,
drive
restrained
by
the enchanting
words of
have the
strength of character
to
acquire
These
are
the
many
of
who
for their
Sparta
own preservation or
Callicles does
not mention
Sicily
or
Athens, but
states,
the views he
expresses remind us
the
relationships
between
such
relationships which
have
gone unnoted
in the discourse
the
rise
to the surface as
city is
seen not
only from
within
its
walls,
but
as part of a
larger
world
where
Callicles"
in the
middle of
times coherent or
consistent.
It
comes
in
Socrates'
response
to
speech about
lover,
is,
not
all except
philosophy)
place on
and
demands beloveds
ask
their lovers.
Only
philosophy,
with
does
when
not respond
directly, just
as
Socrates did
not respond to
directly
Callicles had
asked whether
Socrates
about
was serious
in his
arguments with
speech
Socrates is playing,
most
whereas
serious, since
and
until we
in fact, it may be here that Socrates is indeed understand the nature of our loves and passions as
of our sufferings which come
human beings,
what
particularly
from
a sense of
upside
is lacking;
or not.
we shall never
know
whether our
lives
are to
be turned
of
down
on two
different kinds
lack
for, but
dichotomy
from shame, from a shame derived from what Callicles sees between nature and convention, and the enslaving of free
with an
false
Callicles begins
youth, but really
accusation:
"O
a
Socrates,
which
you
act
like
an
insolent
makes
than
demagogue"
(482c). Socrates
of
speeches to appeal
is the beloved
Callicles.
times times
Socrates is trying to subvert Callicles and transfer the demos to himself. Three in the next few lines Callicles is to call Socrates a demagogue, but four he
accuses seems
Socrates
as
Callicles
here,
of making others suffer, of being the cause for pain. indeed elsewhere in this speech, confused. The dema
gogue strokes
whatever
task the
who
Socrates,
happy, willing to perform demogogue asks of it. It is the demagogue, according to is pained by the disharmony within himself, disharmony caused
by
he
by
the constantly
to please. But
Callicles
sees
153
what
he is
talking
of
about?
Is his
grand speech
demagoguery
and the
flawed, as suggested by this initial equation of the listeners, rather than demagoguery and suffering
Gorgias teaches? This is
not
the pleasing,
soothing
to
phrases
the
only
problem
in his
Many
According
shame.
Callicles,
the suffering
Socrates
causes
comes
from
to others,
The political, the public man is driven on by shame, by how he appears by how the many view him. His value comes not from himself, but
opinions of others.
To be
of
ashamed
in front
of others
leads to suffering
because it
suggests a
denial
a
esteem.38
However,
while
shame
may lead to
and
withdrawal,
both Gorgias
which comes
Callicles try to do (458b, 497bc, 505d), the suffering from eros, which Socrates and Callicles share, leads to action
of power or
suffering
Socrates'
which
Socrates
to others comes, on
Callicles'
account, from
refusal to allow
they do
are
not
believe What
and
cannot
man
defend, for
needing to
not
that
justice
and
equality
noble.
public
to the many for his power would dare to say that justice is
good?
noble,
so of
What
public man
in
democracy
would
dare to
fend the many by openly acknowledging a doctrine of injustice and inequality? The Athenians, speaking to the Spartans before the war started, could not do it. The Corinthians had
against come
into deal
words of condemnation.
Sophrosune,
exo
inability
and
to
with
affairs
outside
(ta
pragmata,
1).
Spartan hesuchia, in
their
activity,
makes
them responsible
of
friends
and
allies
(1.69.
1).
The Spartans
are trampled
friends
unaided of
in
situations of
act to
movements
the enslaving
Athenians,
enslavers.
They
after
sit
back, nursing
pursue
more, that
this speech
is, harm for Sparta's allies and for all by the Corinthians, questioning the value
of
and
ships
Rather
they
we
must
have"
"Not unreasonably (oute apeikotos) do we possess what (1.73. 1). The history of the Persian Wars where Athens was the
argue:
saviour of
Greece
by
most
important
elements
in the de
feat
of
the Persians
(troops, leadership,
unhesitating enthusiasm,
to stand where
1.74. 1
),
prestige, the
pride
they
Thrasymachus'
38.
Cf.
blush, Republic
350d.
154
Interpretation
to the
empire
do
with regard
are
.
monians, because
(epiphthonos)"
hostility
of their strength
(i
.75.
They
did
not act
from the
view
that because
must
they
lie
on
let the
And
fall
under
Athenian domination
rule.
lesser (hesso)
are
by
the more
(1.76.2) worthy (axioi) of their justice and equality in their dealings with their would be.
position and
indeed
more
eager
to
show
subjects
than
the
Spartans
In this
public speech
the
Athenians, despite
by
the
Corinthians,
virtue and nature.
show their
deference to the
are ashamed
bad,
justice.
They
before the
public
to say
what
is true
by
This they can do only in the privacy of a meeting with the leaders of Meios. There the language of values is discarded. Don't talk to us of right and wrong. You know as well as we that right "in human speech is judged from
an equal
submi
necessity while the strong do what they can (v. 88). There the necessity of nature dominates and the
and
strength of
ians
alone
justifies her
not
conquest.
In the
confines of
the meeting
room
in Meios,
the Athenians do
injustice, for their praise of inequality, for their exclusive concern with interest. Thus, they do not have to hide their ambition for power and domination
with
fancy
deeds
of
the past.
The
demands is
not
starkly only necessary, but approved by the gods (v.105.1). Right is appeals to the many, but what physis demands. Both Gorgias
and
of nature are
Polus
are
at
Sparta,
unable
to
give
up
noble are
sounding
phrases of
justice
virtue,
evil
of
equality
and goodness.
They
in
trapped
by
Socrates
words"
"working
with
(483a),
over
who
sees
their reasons for studying rhetoric the same aims which the Athenians had as
they
expanded
for domination
others,
and
others, to become
unjust rather
dunastai,
suffer
to be
free
men
who
enslave
to
be
than
injustice. Callicles
the perspectives of
Gorgias
Polus; he
Athenian leaders
at
Meios do,
within
the
space,
by
the
Socrates
and which of
upon
themselves as
they
talked to
Meios. He openly declares what others held back because of fear, but more likely they were
were unable to articulate the assumptions which
leaders
they
because they
underlay their
statements con
good and
bad, just
and unjust.
values cited
in the
dialogue
belong
to the real man, the aner, the one who can take more
(483b).
155
able
to
bring
They belong
must call
to the slave
(andrapodos,
whom
greediness
(to pleonektein)
(483c).
a slave
Callicles ap
would crave
pears
certain that
Only
of
life,
life
where one's
desires
He
can never
briefly
The
and
met and
then
instantly
about
reignited.
Not to have
seeks
of
is to be dead.
real man
is the
eternal consumer.
is
unconcerned
the absence
an
those passions,
final
resting place, a finis ultimus. The slave seeks death because he seeks cessation from passions which can never be satisfied and thus never afford him any
pleasures.
We love
must not
forget
by
Socrates'
speech
on
and
philosopher
does
not
stop
searching;
his
passion
as a
for truth it
beauty
end
do
either, so
long
as
he lives
death
life
which
both Callicles
Socrates know
of as eternal searching.
For
Socrates death may be a resolution, a completion, though his possibly comic vision in the Apology (4oe-4ic) suggests that his life of eternal questioning
would not of
defeat,
necessarily end with death. For Callicles death can only be a sign of benefit only to those who do not know how to live well, to
own passionate
satisfy their
desires
Not to be
able
loves,
living.
of
to allow oneself to
be trampled in the
life
be
worth
this he asserts declaratively. When Callicles analyzes the conditions and causes
of and
Oimai,
I believe, he
establish
says
weak are
limit
actions of
position now you
strong
make
men.
in
of weakness vis-a-vis
reference
"Calculating
of
what
is in
has
interest,
turned
to the
language
justice,
which
never
anyone quire
of
it"
away from getting more (pleon echein) who had the strength to ac (1.76.2). The language of justice, in other words, is the discourse The
weak
fear the
stronger
(erromenesterous
kai dunatous, 483c); they fear that the strong will take more than their fair share, as indeed the Athenians did in Greece. And so the weak, for example
39.
gndsin.
similar
language in the
Corinthians'
speech:
epitelesai
ergoi
ha
an
strong
men are
hikanoi
ontes
ha
an noesosin epitelein.
40.
156
the
Interpretation
Spartans (1.86. 1-5), say that the Athenian actions are evil, that they are unjust and not in accordance with the nomoi. To want more than one's fair
(equal)
share
is
condemned
by
those
who are
weak,
by
envy the
truly strong
man or
(oimai, 483c),
we must
love
Callicles
Just
appears
here
as no
be
careful.
moments
"demoses",
them.
rejection of states rather
and
his
views and
his language to
to hear
Certainly
demos
could not
be
Callicles'
gratified
equality
or could they?
If
we
focus
on
the
relationships
beween do
Callicles'
arguments
indeed
please the
Athenians,
Greece
enchanting language of dike as they enlarged their empire. Pericles admits to the disheartened Athenians: the taking of the empire which they hold like a
tyrant may have been unjust (adikon), but to let it go would be dangerous
must
be
viewed
from two
perspectives.
Within,
the
demo
demands equality among its citizens, isonomia; its unity derives from this equality binding all citizens together into a coherent whole. Without,
the city stands
in
unequal
deficient, desirous
to
of
relationship to her neighbors; the city stands as more, eager to take what is not its own, pleon echein,
early
his
speech the
inequality rather than equality. Callicles reveals incompatibility between the ground rules of
of
in the
action
within
the city and the ground rules which apply outside. He appeals to the
as
demos,
Athens
Socrates,
not
by
approving up
of their
democratic,
to make
demos'
egalitarian
which
Pericles
conjures rather
when
trying
whole and
by encouraging by
of
the
vision of
itself
of
the
super-city.41
chains to which
and words of
he
refers
serve as a metaphor
Socrates'
for language,
words
words of praise
make the
words, the
restrain a
Polus
or an
Alcibiades
even a master of
such as
Gorgias flustered. Words have the capacity powerful. Gorgias is right. It is the power of
of
from
which
and yet
to reassert
Callicles tries to break away in the first half in the second half when he turns to relations
his
speech
within
the city,
where a common
language
language
to nature,
are crucial.
Callicles turns is
no
first to
animals and
language
of
justice
injustice,
to whom the
and
dictates
and
of nature speak
directly,
stronger
without the
intervention
of morals
virtues,
41.
Cf.
Alcibiades'
speech to the
Athenians,
157
to
barbarians,
who
those
who
uncivilized,
who
animal-like no
beings
of
do
not speak
have
be
not
language
justice
and virtue. or
"With
(poioi
march against
Greece,
his father
against the
Scythians? Or
able
of
the
sort"
Is it because he has
of whom were
ness
of
defeated
by
those wars,
Herodotus,
invade
right, those
who
bounds,
given
not
are punished
by
jealousy (phthonos)
not
can never
Callicles'
be
escaped?
Callicles him
Plato
avoids the
Plato
played with
speech,
point?
a set of
false
examples to prove
purpose of
his
central
but dubious
Has
Callicles'
undercut
by making him appear foolish? the defeats faced by Darius and Xerxes by
Zeus
by
of
turning
next
(traditionally
the
distributor
justice)
which
he believes, oimai, 483c) a nomos tes physeos the Persian tyrants followed in their invasions of weaker lands. But this
that there
so
is (or
in
neither case
may be quite different from what Callicles envisions, since did Zeus smile on the adventures of the invaders, of those who
behind this
and
out
burst is,
animals,
of
they
more.
assert
with one's
fair
share
does
not matter as
they
another,
they satisfy
Callicles
their
desire for
They
are
acting
on
the principles
which
by
the gods,
which
by
Thucydides progresses,
by
not
But Callicles turns quickly from nations to men, to individuals. He does stay long in the realm of relationships between states where his examples
raised
have
of
doubts
about
the validity
of
his beliefs,
about
considers
where
the fate
of one
of
the structure
city
men
the language
us are
justice
and
in
justice is used,
man, the
our
the strong
(katadouloumetha. 483c)
real man
by
a
our
charmed good
just. The
would
having
strong
enough nature
hikanen,
He
484a),
flee
believes,
nature
oppose
(para physin,
us as
forth revealing himself as our ruler and nature would shine forth. Callicles here
describes
again
man, but he
Athenians,
158
cities
of
Interpretation
Greece have
shown
this
independence
of
who
have
rejected
relationships
between states,
forth revealing the true justice Callicles next adds to the evidence from
the pious poet
of nature.
nature
(animals)
that
words of of men
nomos
from Thebes,
violence
who proclaimed
and of
gods, turns
into justice, that nomos, presumably the Callicles had just proclaimed, supports the actions of
Heracles (484b).
attempts
he
Geryon,
However,
out
in but
one
of
several
bears
the
controversy,
which
did
not
flourish
until several
s poem
and
it is hazardous to
retroject
into
.
Pindar'
only
by
later
generation.
Nor is it
likely
unto
to support the
view
that
itself
[Pindar]
and
of
emphasizing
opponent not see
unheroic qualities
in
Heracles
his
Callicles,
though, does
Platonic does
not
He does
declare interest
what
of
is just,
or as another
character phrased
it, justice is
well,
neither
the
the
stronger.43
Callicles
nor, we
know the
poem
(484b),
may surmise, the meaning of the poem. He must thus turn to paraphrasing. He does not spend his time memorizing poems, the activity for the affected, the effete, those who do not act. He knows as little about poetry at this point as he
does
about
philosophy,
which
he
now urges
Socrates to
abandon as
he
moves
his
to
speech.
Callicles is
second
eager
reveal
half. He had
the
called
of
Socrates "in
(482c)
demagogue
at
the begin
of
ning
of
first half
meaning
demagogue, much less the truth. Again he claims he is going to turn to the truth (484c), but his two truths are irreconcilable. One truth, that Socrates is a demagogue, hardly conincides with the second truth that Socrates
the word
as a philosopher will
be
unable
Callicles'
understanding he does
to
not
of what
is true is
from
one moment
unless we were
demogoguery, but
not understand
do. His
is that the
philosopher
does
how
control the
many
rather
than be controlled
by
them.
he
Callicles is inconsistent precisely because he makes a fundamental shift as moves from one part of his speech to the next. In the first part, he had
42.
"Pindar, Nomos,
and
123.
See
in Harvard Studies in Classical Philology, 69 (1965), p. in A. E. Taylor, Plato: The Man and His Work (Cleveland and New
p.
Heracles,"
117,
n. 2; and
Dodds,
pp. 270-272.
Republic,
1.338c.
159
the superman
or
of
force,
the
in
which
force
and
fraud
are
virtues.44
The
second
half
of
the
speech
deals
the city
second
city based on an equality which had been half deals with the survival of individuals among
equal citizens speech.
the set
of
political
of
relationships
survival, not
leadership, is
the topic
the second
Callicles'
part of
What is
neces
sary between states is different from what is needed within states. The opposi tion in the first half of the speech was between dike, justice, the battle cry of
the weaker, and those who are strong, who
ever, as it
assumes an
worse
is
deny equality. Within cities, how by Callicles, there is a conflict between philosophy which inequality between better and worse individuals, between better and
posed which assumes an
equality
of all
citizens,
good
and
bad, before
Callicles does
rather
immediately
must
the phrases
he
uses suggest
the level
politics, that
of
reputation, of
seeming, of
or
appearance.
eudokimos
One
aner
have the
reputation of
being
and
kalos kagathos
must
being
an
(a
respected
man,
484d),
one
know
the
others,
what appeals
nomon aperioi
will repel
them.
Philosophers
to
remain not
only
(inexperienced in the
laws)
but
unable
manipulate
They
are thus
rather
laughable,
affairs,
worthy
of such scorn as
Polus heaps
on
Socrates (462e), in
private or
than esteem.
They
as
are
laughable
whether
they
participate
in
public
just
or so
are
hoi
politikoi when
they
spend
becomes
by
the
this dialogue.
The
inconsistency
encourages
is transparent
and
has been
frequently
pointed out.
First,
their
Callicles
to the
opinions of we
super-
heroes. How
recognize
can
reconcile
do
The city
the
cannot endure
easily
the the
of of
the individual
Pericles.45
all, the
Alcibiades,
Themistocles,
even
It
cannot
first
part.
The Archelaus,
so admired
by Polus,
is to be
his
own men.
Callicles
quotes more
lines
an
of
a more contem
about relationships
a poet
from his
own
city
rather
Hobbes, Leviathan,
Socrates
were all
ed.
makes a point
83
(Ch. XIII).
political
leaders
Athens
badly
treated
by
160
speaks
Interpretation
for
all
of
Greece. He
quotes
from
a passage
most
likely
spoken
by
do
Euripides'
Antiope. We
a plea
for individuality,
a recognition of the
different
assures
abilities which
have. It is from
The
such natural
difference,
Socrates
not
in
the Repub
lic,
agree
with
his
compa
triot Euripides.
most
approach
or
so
485a)
is to
partake of
two
ways of
life
and
then
being
politics.
He does
not encourage
the
diversity
philosophy.
Zethus
praises
and
he does
not
encourage
the pursuit of
The
eudokimos aner
is the
proper pattern of
longer
engages
in the
he is
to
longer
engages
in philosophizing
he is
of an age
enter politics.
when one
is
youth, but it is a
thing
most
laughable
many.
it. The
philosopher
He
He
aloof, off
in
corner
whispering, the
two
or
joining
in the
the
center of
activities,
varied meetings of
the
He is
not a part of
whole and
does
not
care about the opinions and values of the whole. of and uninterested
earlier section of
in the
opinions of
Callicles'
speech, is
threatening
speech
freedom
of the
With the
there
shift
city on which Callicles depends. in focus from the first half of the in the
meanings of
to the second
half,
who
is
a comparable shift
slavery
and
free
man
is the
breaks the
The
Athens
dom Polus
around
and
Callicles
second concept of
freedom is
man who
one centered
"liberal"
is judged
his
peers as
by help
one
his friends
held back
one who
they
need
of
his
The
slave
in the first
section
is
by
the opinions
not attend
does
philosophy Such
an
man, to continue to
him to be illiberal, to lack the graces of a lisp and to be unable to help his friends or
harm his
enemies.
(douloprepes),
around
unfree
(aneleutheron, 485b-d)
does
a slave who
as
to understand directions.
(eleutheros) is
in battle
and
in
again, as at the
He
appears
liberal,
eager to
beginning of help
the
dialogue, Callicles
makes
appears gen
a
his friends. He
speech to
46.
See Dodds,
p. 274.
161
not meant
Socrates,
him. It is
Euripides'
one
filled
with
good
feeling (eunoia,
he had
486a),
to
anger
Antiope, Zethus
extensive.
. .
conceit
is
"I happen to
(peponthenai)
words
Euripides'
There
come
to
me
he
[Zethus]
act
spoke
before his
brother"
(485c).
and
Don't
like
youth,
Socrates.47
Give up
philosophy.
as
Become
mature
or so
city.
Don't
shamefully,
do those
pursue
yourself
killed,
appearing
power of
dizzy
any
gaping open in the courtroom, subject to the to harm you. Don't allow others to be rude to
example, 461c). Don't lose your
give
power
you
(as,
we might
note,
was
Polus, for
to
help
is
yourself. of called
city.
Be
persuaded
by
me,
up
the private
affairs,"
music
what
encourages
Callicles,
again
by
of the
There is
of music
irony
through
his
knowledge
is
able to
Thebes,
whose
lyre
moves
private caught and
is built. It is he
urges:
helps the
city.
Yet Callicles
by
in debates
about
whom
goods"
his
speech
to
phile
Socrates,
not
486a)
trust
with
warm
brotherly
offer
this
He
Callicles'
questions
(489c).
Why
take
does Callicles
seriously?
sincerity and suggests that it is ironic Socrates this friendly advice, which Socrates
part explain
does
of
not
not
Does this in
Callicles'
the shift
Callicles'
speech?
Is
speech who
a cover
Socrates? Is
Socrates the
superman
does
see
nomoil
clearly the fallibility of the nomoi, Is not Socrates able to rise above,
chains of
facilely
not
in his discussion
come
between
and
dike does
opinion of
the
many?
Does
not
this
knowledge,
not
him to become
demagogue? Does he
Callicles,
speech
because
of
his
Callicles is frightened is
an attempt
of the
power
Socrates;
into the
city
philosopher
is
not useless;
him to break away and stand above the other slaves. The he is not simply foolish. The philosopher is threaten
ing, threatening
nize the
Philosophy
distinction between
quotes
and
convention, as
47.
When Callicles
of meirakiodei
the passage
from Euripides, he
Callicles'
changes
Instead
(youthful, childish) in
"Gorgias"
version, there
is in
p.
147.
162
Interpretation
attack against
his initial
Socrates. Those
men
in supposedly whispering
chains and
paralyze
corners
They
up by the nomoi of the in corners, two or three at a time. They speak out in the open out in the of the dialogue (447a)agora, as Socrates has informed us right at the beginning The philosophers thus threaten the survival of the city for they are privy to
the secrets of Callicles. Socrates
they want, to enslave, subdue, many. Indeed, they do not even whisper in isolation
is
Callicles'
enemy.
The
appeal
to give up to
not sincere.
It is
an appeal meant
disarm is
Socrates,
an appeal
reputation
Socrates'
model what
life, but
pretends
also
freedom from
subjection
Callicles
that
pursuit of
philosophy is
a conscious choice.
But
Socrates'
because this
assumption about
is clearly incorrect, he
each with or
must
try
to disarm
Callicles'
Socrates.
pending
speech
on
whether
its
own
truth
de
The
within
from
outside.
have contradictory goals. Scholars have debated: is The answer to such a question Callicles a democrat, or is he an must. depend on which half one reads, which must thus suggest the inadequacy
thus appears to
of such an analysis.
Let
leave debates concerning particular political orienta Callicles as the political man, the man of action, like
us
city.
or
oligarch,
the
philosopher's response
and
justified.
philosopher must
do this in
of
to both parts of
on
Callicles'
speech; he
and
must show
the
deficiencies
both
visions
the one
hand,
the superman
the supercity who scorn the opinions of the many, on the other the political
man who
is dependent
on
the opinions
of
Callicles has
better
man must
by
nature.
ask,
Pindar
are
praise'.'
This
only
under
questioning.
The better
the stronger,
Suddenly, Callicles,
Socrates'
under come
manipulation,
into
democrat (458d).
Superiority
does indeed
individuals, in
Freedom is
not
being
slave
tinguish between slave and free. Cf. 5l4d and 515a; in 514c
or women.
vision.
for Callicles, but Socrates does not in his discourse dis he does not speak differently to men
is
a significant attack on
Callicles'
Considering
Callicles
49.
of
Callicles in the
Gorgias,"
Proceedings of
democrat,
p. 52.
the
Cam
bridge Philological Society, 20 (1974), p. 48 on either side. Kerferd sides with those who
and
in
notes 2 and as a
see
Callicles
An Unspoken Theme in
field. But Callicles
superiority
and
Plato'
Gorgias: War
163
a simple equation
who
between
numerical
know how to
manipulate assem
blies,
the
demagogues
how to
language well, and there are those who know if they were many on the battlefields (for
clarifies.
cf.
The better is
489d)
nor
not
"the litter
slaves"
of
(doulon, 488c;
of
is it
bodily
strength.
ruler,
Archelaus
Callicles'
and
man of
is,
(491b, d)
those
are
able
minds.50
The
natural
justice
he had
the
masters of empires.
a new
nor
level
of
interaction
or
which
had
not
been
raised
within
speech,
by
Polus
Gorgias
namely ruling
this
notion.
"Come now, my
ruled?"
friend,
what of
themselves? Are
with
or
being
call
offensively,
(hedus,
sweet?).
fools
(sophronas)"
moderate
is offering
"How
a new or
different form
slavery,
again
mastery.
could
the
happy
human
being (eudaimon)
be
slave
(douleuon)
to
anything?"
(49id)
one who
is to live
correctly (orthos) must release his passions, satisfy his desires, and constantly fill himself up (apopimplanai). This or so Callicles believes (oimai, 492a)
is
not
possible
of manliness
they
along
see
the many and thus, because of their lack find fault with the satisfying of one's desires; (anandrian), they it as shameful intemperance. The truth (492bc) is, Socrates, that
(ou
dunatonf for
freedom is
with
not
mastery
over oneself,
the power
(dunamis)
and
Slavery
life
is
being
than
unable
to
fill
what
is empty,
thus
unable
to
find that
and
elusive
missing half in
worse
Aristophanes'
model,
being
miserable
finding
death.
edge
Socrates'
problem, according to
epithumia
Callicles, is that he does not acknowl for happiness and for life (492c). To
As Hobbes has lead to
to
so
be
without
desires is to be dead
of
The foreshadowings
us, these desires
Hobbes
these
insatiable desires
one to
must
war.52
satisfy
50.
one's
desires leads
build up
see
one's strength,
develop
same
39.
We
must
problems
as
be defined
desires. It is this
which
them
the Athens
they both
in
of
of
51
Forms We
of ou
dunaton
appear
three times
point
492a.
52.
work
should
not
forget
Hobbes'
at this
that
first currently
acknowledged
published
is
a translation of
Thucydides.
164
to
Interpretation
whether
military strength,
of
or manipulative
the denial
slaves.
Socrates
He does
accuses not
Callicles: he does
sufficient
importance
of equality.
attention
to
over others
and
geometry (508a). Equality is a realm which emphasizes friendship. Callicles, the one with
lives
one who
by having
power over
or as a
others, cannot
happy
with
city interacting equality is to die. The self-satisfied city and the self-satisfied individual, their equality, are weak. Sparta had allowed others to trample her
accept
To
as an
individual
in the mud, to
Callicles'
486c)"
punch
advice
to
Sparta
parallels
advice
(pragmata,
which
(cp. Thucydides,
pursuit of
of
active
in her
inequality, in her
with even
of
the power
enable as a
city
a
is only
are
temporary resting
outside who
war subside.
must always
be in
because there
practice
those
threaten
still, to
its traditional
hesuchia,
within
could not.
Political life
pursuit
city to
another
life
of
the constant
of more.
What Callicles
because
of
his failure to
states
of relations
between
be transferred to
built
relations within
(koinonia)
eagerness act
are
within
equality upon which friendships and community (5070-5083). The tension in Callicles is between
and
for
power over
others,
the desire
graciously in his
so as
to build up a store of
friends
487cd).S4
really his equals, his friends do not protect him. While he pretends that Socrates is his friend and that he cares for Socrates, he nevertheless tries to control
and
professions of
treat others
Socrates
he
cannot.
It is
an
irony
of
history
for his
53.
that Callicles
survival
becomes dependent
Socrates'
on
pupil and
friend
alone
Note
Hobbes'
state of nature
of
of nature with its emphasis on the acceptance of equality as the (Levithan Chap. XV). We must, of course, remember that Socrates those whom he guides in his discourse with them. On this level fear is
Callicles' Socrates'
law
justified. However, unlike Callicles, inequality is private desires by domination over others. On this level
54.
not
for the
fear is
is that
sake
of satisfaction
of
Callicles'
not
justified.
these
men.
Dodds,
p.
background
and character of of a
He
concludes:
"The
group
of ambitious
young men. drawn from the jeunesse doree of Athens description of as 'the typical Athenian
Callicles'
It certainly does
not support
Lamb's
Democrat.'"
165
most powerful and
Athens'
leaders
with
as
ones
who
gorge the
city,
will
fill her
(empepleand all
kasi, 5i8e-5i9a)
such
harbors
and
dockyards,
imports,
filth (phluarion). The politicians, Themistocles, Cimon, Pericles, all try to make Athens a master over her neighbors so as to fill the with such city
garbage so
feel
lack
or
truly
beautiful. These
city,
will
they
give to the
hegemony
be
over other
Greeks,
while
seized and
held
hegemony
fills does
not
should
the Athenian
of that which
form
of
dialogue
which
to encourage
not profess
to fill the
with anything.
inequality
proposes
nor
conclusions or victory point among the interlocutors. The conception of in this dialogue is not the power to fill another
any
It does
Socrates
to
make
another
serve
one's
own
interests. It is
of
a conception
making
one
better,
not
what one
lacks
not
and
imports
vs.
or other such
filth
but
virtue.
The Gorgias is
philosophy as a way of life. It is also about Rhetoric leads to domination over the opinions of others,
over
to the domination
comes
the bodies
from
dissatisfaction
has,
and a supposition
lead
to the fulfilment
to what
those desires. Polus and Callicles give expression twentieth century formulation of politics who how. Socrates is to question that formulation of
is to become the
classic and
implicit in it.
with
Because the
politicians
harbors
and walls,
they do
not make
They
offer
imports,
makes
but the
citizens
of what
them better
is truly beautiful.
(cf.
They
by
the
Socratic
sium 2 1
irony
into
Alcibiades'
a sense of needfulness
experience, Sympo
6a). What lack they do feel comes from a desire for more of what has already given them pleasure, from the passions which once filled are quickly better.55 reignited. Socrates finds fault with the politicians for not making citizens
But
we
may
ask
why
should nor
does
not
help
make
the politicians,
and
domination. To
and
that
is
55. Scholars have had difficulty understanding how Pericles made the citizens worse, as Socrates claims, rather than better. They turn to such points as payment for attendance at the assembly and for military service. Cf., e.g., Lodge, 237; W. H. Thompson. The Gorgias of Plato (London. George Bell, 1905), p. 226; and Dodds, pp. 335-356. The problem here is that all
these
not
analyses
look
at
a political
perspective,
from the
from the
perspective of
the philosopher.
166
Interpretation
be
satisfied
lack
by
by
the
politicians who
give
harbors into
flow.
Filling
nor
filling
the
leaky
for the city a state of completion. jar (493ab). The walls are never enough,
external conquests,
the
harbors,
nor
for domination
because Athens herself, like the human body, can satisfied. It is the constant need for more, however, that never be completely leads to stature, and the ambivalence surrounding her position in
over others
Athens'
Greece
at the end of
brilliantly by
is
Thucydides, especially in
both
mired,
with
more,
and model
result of
her
refusal
to be content
little,
to deaden her desires. And yet, of course, she loses the war; en
politicians such as
couraged
by
too
The Athenians do
limit
or question
They
refuse
during
Callicles,
man of
eager to please
both demoses,
refuses
to accept any
with
deadening
of a
Socrates. He is
action,
a man whose
first thought
and
display
mastery
of words
is
of war
on seeing Socrates arrive late for a battle. He is a free man, unlimited in his
He is
completion,
of
ends,
of quiet.
willingness to
good
aim
which will
have
final
even a
if
humanly
or goal
those
which
only lead to
Callicles'
desire for
more.
from different
conceptions of
power, vision,
to
distinguish between
good and
bad
former. He
Callicles
continues
refuses to participate
seriously in the
subsequent conversation.
guest
concerning worse and better relationship between pleasure and pain and cessation of desire. The subsequent discussion carried on by Socrates in a comedy of his own never resolves these questions. Do pain and pleasure cease at the making moment of fulfilment? The lovers spoken of by Diotima and Alcibiades and
50 1 c).
Gorgias (497c,
desires,
the
Aristophanes feel
the
pain as
does any
growth,
passionate
to pursue
beautiful,
is
no
because
no
of a sense of
there
change,
movement
cannot and
does
desire,
56.
and
Socrates'
description
of
his life
of
questioning in
the
Apology.
167
or
He
urges
the
tempering
of
eros,
whether
(507d)
which
and
what
leads to making
masters and
free,
some
Callicles
cannot
fully
try
to understand as he
withdraws
from the
speech
for true
pleasures.
on
Callicles'
with
inconsistencies because
and
the one
free
men and
slaves,
by friendships, a city populated by others about whom one in which one survives on the esteem of others. The two perspec cares, city tives clashed. The inequality of the first half clashed with the equality of the
second
not understand
equality,
that
he focuses
and
power over
himself,
he
and
because he
in
a
distinguish between
the
bad,
cannot exist
searching for
a whole as
community it
such as
friendship
pursues
truly beautiful.
The topic
of war
does
the
not surface
frequently
in the Gorgias. It
as
be
possible to read
dialogue,
And the
and
if the
during
But it
was.
influence
our under
standing of the conditions which existed within the city and within the indi The city states of Greece could not exist without an awareness of the external threats which faced them, both from other Greeks and from the bar
vidual.
barians
fifth century
b.c
Euripides, Aristophanes,
Socrates'
and
Thucydides
to this
war. and
life
was touched
by
the
Plato's understanding of Socrates be disassociated from that war. The Gorgias is generally
moral choices
Socrates'
place
in the city
cannot
recognized as a
dialogue
one
about
rhetoric,
and about of
concerning
what
type of
life
war, the
unspoken
theme of the
dialogue,
gives
dialogue,
as
to cities
themselves,
a greater
depth,
where rhetoric
a model with
war
for victory and in the background. The moral choices in their turn depend its
concern
is only
on the existence
of a
(508a).
War,
however,
is
tale is a
the question of
that the
wholeness
to death
whether
leaky
and
well
to the
see as
individual
as
long
as she/he/it
lives. The
Polus
Gorgias
deriving
from
rhetoric
is
limited
power
though
limited to
a power within
the city.
they may call it the greatest good. It is Callicles, like Athens and her leaders, sees
and over other peoples.
a greater power,
But that
168
power
Interpretation
passions ness
also limited by its never-ending nature. To live is to want; to kill the is to be dead. Neither the city nor the individual can ever find whole while alive in the human body. The completion sought through power over
is
characterizes
closer
than the
continual
search through of
for
symbol of
the
inability
long,
at
least,
as
bodies
bodiless
warriors
and memories of
funeral
oration.
The
answer which
philosophy in the
person of
Socrates
gives
to Athens and
through the
to Callicles is not a
wars of
never accessible
from
one of
domina but
tion to
which will
making
citizens
better,
that
is,
they
will not
be dependent
on others
be
wholes
in themselves
by
values and
nomoi of
is
individual
not so
will
be
able
dominate herself,
so
slaves and
masters, but
that there
abhors
made
is
the
the
disappears.
Philosophy
whole,
quest
(457d),
best
by
be
a complete
best city
neither
would
be
have
hegemony
complete
But,
person
is possible; is alive,
neither
the
without
needs,
at
least
so
long
as she
nor
existing in isolation from other cities can come into being. Philosophers, as Socrates so vividly demonstrates in both the Apology and the Crito, is very
much a part of
is
not
self-sufficient; the
philosopher
It
Wholeness
would
exclude reveals
an
The
chaos
of
from
digmatic
events.
The
whole war
is
understood
by comprehending
avoids
in detail the
of
its
progress.
The Gorgias
records.
the
details
the
history
those
Athenians
reflected
speech, in the
to the various
political
leaders
who
turn
Athens into
an empire and a
threat to the
freedom
of
most men call peace is only a word; in fact there exists by nature between every city and every other The city of the Laws tries to escape this fact. The city of the Republic does not. The city of Athens cannot. Political philosophy cannot be disassociated from wars, from the topic of history. 57.
a state of unproclaimed war
city."
169
Athens
itself
serves
to alert us
society greater than herself. But the war to the limitations of both politics and philosophy. The
part of a over
political
eros
others,
suggests
deficiencies
whole, a
of
in Greece to imitate, to
raise
her
above
the
activities of
But he in
could not.
strates,
cannot
survive
a world
The city at rest, as Sparta demon that is in motion. Athens was part of the
Athens'
Greek
Socrates similarly is
a part of
activities.
without an which
Neither city
nor
individual, including
awareness of
the deficiencies
larger unit,
in
its turn,
comprised of
and
lacking
completion.
The
unspoken
theme of this
dialogue helps to
neither
reveal this
be escaped, life
by
politicians
that the
entails
as master
is
also
the
life
as
slave,
the philosopher
life
for
what one
lacks,
a search of which
and
Man (1964;
Aristotle
rpt.
Chicago it
.
and
London:
University
of
Chicago
self-
239, has
and
written at
essay
on
sufficiency
a
of
the city
as
Plato
presuppose
on such
society
of cities or
its
being
essentially
a member of
it
The lesson
philosophy; it
presupposes.
of
work
of
self-
excludes the
sufficiency
of the
sufficient nor
city is it essentially
necessarily
which classical
political
a part of a good or
"society"
characterized
the
on
philosophy just order comprising many or all cities. The lack of the cities or, in other words, the omni
the highest aspirations of any city toward
The city is
neither
self-
War
puts a much
lower ceiling
justice
that
than
classical
from the
which
evidence of
philosophy might seem to have the Gorgias, Plato is very much aware of the limits
political
War"
admitted."
would argue
on
human
achievement
the "omnipresence of
imposes. Classical
political
philosophy does
not
ignore the
The Good
Life, Slavery,
and
Acquisition:
University
of America
Modern
argument
readers of
Aristotle's Politics
by
Aristotle's
con poli
for
natural
slavery,
and perplexed
by
demnation
of commerce.
They
often attribute
his
time.1
shall
argue, in contrast, that Aristotle inten slavery, and that this failure
mankind's
tionally fails
points
to
demonstrate the
of
existence of natural
of
to the
deeper issue
Book I
the Politics
dependence
on
or
rule
benefit from
being
needy.
By
satisfying
which
some of man's
basic needs,
sity
of
political
free
men.
is
characterized
by
political
also
inhibits
rule
political
life to the
extent
that
politics
is
by
freedom from
Aristotle
by
on
the
bodily
it
pleasures which
commerce
provide.
condemns
commerce,
also
for
while
it
helps to free
man
nature,
inhibits his
or
capacity
advantageous and
his capacity for politics, the just. The freedom from bad
aspect
for
nature
com
has both
a good and a
due to the
plexity
Aristotle's
living
him to
to
living
well.
dependence
i.
should
on nature
is
Sir David Ross, for example, writes, "It is, though regrettable,
regard as
belonging
to the
that was so
was."
Aristotle (London:
class
Methuen,
1953),
of
241.
Ross finds
commercial
"too much a
reflexion
illiberal p. 243. See also Emest Barker, The Political Thought of Plato and Aristotle (New York. Dover, 1959), pp. 368, 375-76, and 389. More recently, R. G. Mulgan explains Aristotle's argument for natural slavery in the following way: "We
must not
forget
where
that he
slaves,
is writing
within a not
society
make
which
granted
and
though
they did
up the
responsible
for the
leisure
which made
slavery for labour force, were largely Greek culture and civilization
possible."
ancient
world, as far as we
know,
advocated
the
abolition of
Consequently, "[ajgainst
slavery
was natural
the
debate be
about slaves
whether
not,
as
it
seems
to us,
were
about whether
there
slaves."
should
but
about
why there
should
be
Hence there
to slavery is natural, or might makes right. Since the latter justification of Aristotle, Aristotle is left with the former. Aristotle's Political Theory, An Introduction for Students
alternatives:
"unthinkable"
of Political
Theory
(Oxford: Clarendon
Press,
1977),
pp. 43~44-
172
Interpretation
I
Near the
beginning
sake of
of
the
Politics, Aristotle
exists
says
into
being
31).2
for the
life, but
for the
(i252b30-
Commentators have
this
statement.3
to the
problematic char
acter of
What is the relationship between the end of a thing's its existence? According to Aristotle, something comes
into
being
for the
sake of
its
natural
end, the
realization of
its
perfection.
The
acorn, for example, comes into being for the to understand how something can have both
sake of
difficult
an end of of
its
common
understanding
one
Aristotle's
even of artificial
things as
having
itself,"
ends peculiar
to
"peculiar to
the other as an
being
for
for the
sake
exchange"
(1257313). While
make
man produces an
artifact
an end peculiar
to
itself, he
ends
can
it
serve
variety
of ends.
includes
Man
to the shoe.
exchanges shoes
for
other
items,
and
that exchange
having
which pur
by his
own
labor.
have
contained
The
and
woman
is for the
sake of generation
(1252326-27),
the
household
satisfies
man's
"merely daily
says
needs"
(1252^4-17).
By
I, however,
educa
Aristotle
tion of
household is the
its
members
in
virtue
for the
sake of
ends
his dis
slavery by observing that slavery allows the master to turn to politics philosophy (1255D3). Ends other than those implied in the origins can
control
development,
not
since
development
to
can
be
modified
by
human
choice.
The
end of
Nature may
sake of
2.
be
so
benevolent
nature
as
incline
men to come
living
well, but
is flexible
do
so.5
All
references
in parentheses,
unless otherwise
lations
3.
are mine.
Barker, p. 268; Thomas Aquinas, Commentary on the Politics, trans. Ernest O'Neill, in Medieval Political Philosophy, ed. Ralph Lerner and Muhsin Mahdi (Ithaca, New York: Cornell University Press, 1972), p. 308. 4. But see Aristotle's account of two in De Anima, 4i2a-b.
p.
Ross,
328;
L. Fortin
and
Peter D.
"actualities"
5.
come
Aristotle into
accounts
neither
for
in
a similar
virtues
being
by
nature"
contrary to
we
The
actualization of a whereas
potential,
as
seeing is the
virtues,
actualization of sight;
because
we practice
they
are
because we have sight, we see. become morally virtuous. On the other hand, not contrary to nature. We can train ourselves to
and
Acquisition
173
is
a political animal.
Aristotle
pain.
argues.
Nature does nothing in vain, and man possesses speech, Speech is unlike mere voice, which indicates pleasure and
Other
Only
speech,
however,
can
indicate the
to
advantageous
and the
harmful,
and
unjust.6
association
in
faculty
of speech
indicate
because their
pleasure
is their
good.
speech about
because the
be guided simply by the but needs instead speech for perfection. The teaching his naturally pleasant, that man is a rational (and hence political) animal implies that nature has failed
pleasant can cannot
to provide man
with
his good,
although
it has
allowed
him
reason
in
order
to
providence
becomes
man's opportunity.
slavery.
exist, Aristotle
reveals
that
slaves nature
necessary, to
If there
are no natural
slaves,
has
not
The beneficence
of nature
Early
his
"can foresee
body"
in the Politics, Aristotle describes the natural with his and the natural slave as the
mind"
the
one
who with
"can do
what
is
mistake,
identify
"in
a
the slave
with
the
female,
ss
niggardly way"; it
work
makes
[pur
Each
being
has
one
rather
than many,
be
perfected
are not
fully
However, in the beginning of his discussion of nstursl slavery, Aristotle served that the head of a family needs tools to accomplish his work: Every
say
assistant
is
as
it
were a
for
several what
perform
its
ordered, or
and
by
seeing
of the statues of
Daedalus
the tripods of
Hephaestus, if
we cannot
train a stone to
move upwards
NE,
I I03ai4-H03b7.
Thomas
and
exercis
"founded
by
moral virtues
does
not
depend
on a complete
disjunction
By
in
an
immediate is
sense.
advantageous and
the harmful?
"Human
the
speech
signifies what
is harmful. It follows
in this, that
some
signifies
just
and
the
unjust.
For justice
injustice
consist
harmful p. 310. See also unequally as regards useful and equally Political Animal: Nature and Convention in Human Speech Laurence Berns, "Rational Animal The Review of Politics 38 (April 1976), pp. 177-78. and
are treated
or
Politics,"
things,"
174
Interpretation
harps
of
quills played
themselves,
have
no need of
assistants,
[I253b33-i254ai].
Aristotle
states
slave
variety
of
slave, if he is to be
made
a good one
one, has
complexity;
restricted
would
even
by
nature
job alone, he is
way,"
not
to one job.
Nature
more
and
certain
tasks
be
peformed
sole occupation.
Nevertheless
man
has become
a
flexible; he is
condition of
Moverover, foresight is
what
foresee
to do in advance,
By implication,
acts
a good slave
foresees
what should
be done he
exercises
accordingly.
He
performs
different tasks
when
that a
useful slave
foresees
what should
be done
without
depending
defines the
on
his master,
or
master.
To the
extent
natural slave.
rather
for example, weaving, he proceeds to assert that a slave is a tool for action than for production (125438). Tools for action are articles of property,
and articles of
property
belong
to
another
(125439-11). In
spite of
Aristotle's
suggestions
his
productive
concerning the independence of the slave his foresight as well as capacity Aristotle refers us to his complete dependence on his
next says that although the master
master.
Aristotle does
not
is the
master of the
slave, he
belong
to the slave in the way that the slave belongs to the master
would anyone suppose
(125439-13). But
belongs to the
slsve?
In ssserting the contrary, Aristotle brings up the issue of the msster's depen dence. From time to time in Book I, Aristotle identifies the n3tursl msster with
the
free
msn
opposite of
both. But
since
course of
defining
Hsving
snyone to
seem
defined "the is
s
nsture of the
snyone who
by
just for
be
slave"
3nswer to the
former
question would
to
imply
s nstursl
slsve,
by
definition
it is
sdvsntageous and
to snother.
Aristotle
whst
pursues
"by looking
srgume
lesrning
from
hsppens"
"by
(1254321-22).
is ruling
snd
Aristotle
"In every
one,"
snd
being
ruled
throughout "sll
nsture
composite
thing,
where
msny things
there is
something ruling
something
ruled.
Aristotle
gives exsmples:
snd msn
body,
femsle,
and
Acquisition
175
The
observstion about
issue,
which
is
whether who
.
ststes thst
"sll men,
.
composites, however, cannot decide any two men form such a composite. Aristotle differ ss grestly as the body from the soul, snd the
bessts from msn, are by nsture slsves, for whom it is best to be (i 254b 1 6-20). Aristotle still does not demonstrate the existence of nstursl
slsves, but he is further
ruled"
the
body
a soul as well as a
body, how
could
Strictly
the
master and
difference between
soul and
the
body,
completely
the slsve
is
be
more
desd
slsve
for
who,
hsving
no
body, hss
it
no needs a us
Aristotle
immediately
underlines the
difficulty by telling
rather
resson,"
but only
so ss to perceive
thsn
it
(i254b23-25).7
hsppens,"
At lsst turning to "whst Aristotle ssserts thst nature intends to make the bodies of free men different from those of slaves, the latter "strong for necessary the former "erect and unserviceable for such things, but
service,"
useful
for
life."
political
Unfortunately,
but
not
nature
does free
"often"
not
of
(literally, "msny
free men, (i254b33~34). In
natural slaves
while
often
have
souls
bodies
other not
body
required,
do.8
do is
slaves,
while
free
men often
In light
stated: nature
of
the
development
of the
argument, Aristotle's
are
conclusion
over
"It is
clear
by
nature
not
free men,
and others
by
slave"
(125531-2;
emphasis mine).
It is
now
body"
7.
and
cannot maintain
consistently both that "the slave is a mere and is able to listen to the voice
soul"
of
reason, p.
slavery
vitiate
his theory
of natural slavery.
theory
must always
His theory, according to Barker, is like all false theories: "a false fall into inconsistency, if it deals with all the facts and data of its subject; and
must contradict
some of these
facts
goes,"
p.
368.
Ross
comes to a
similar conclusion:
theory,"
"Aristotle's treatment
also notes and
soul,"
implicitly
p.
242.
Mulgan
the
inconsistency
animal-like"
wholly
of the
physical and
part of the
human
p.
43.
his granting that "the slave has even the emotional and desiring See also p. 41. Mulgan observes "If [Aristotle] has given one
or racial
classic
defences
of genetic
supremacy,
he has done it in
way that
makes
refuted,"
p. 43. readily 8. What exactly is the difference between the bodies of free men Aristotle says that the bodies of free men are "useful for political refutation easy; not all such are so
doctrines
When
life,"
he divides the
occupations
of political useful
life into
service
in
war
and
in
peace,
I254b29~34.
subdues
Is the
body
of
master
(free man)
the slave
in war,
he
not
be
strong
176
concedes
Interpretation
to the conventionslists thst some slsves 3re so
(I25533ff.).9
by
convention
only
3nd
not
by
nsture
We hsve
C3p3city
excellent
of
resched
when
3nd
the
body
by
in
body,
who slso
Dsedslus,
Nature
Aristotle
makes
hsppens to be perfectly loysl. The ststues earlier, are useless because they run
the souls of slaves, but
ssid.
with
"often"
away.
bodies
might
unservicesble
While
such
msn
being
spesks
Aristotle
slave when
force,"
the
friendship
there can
be
no
friendship
war csn
(I255bi5-i6). When
Aristotle
nsture
maintains
that
be
justly
not
employed
fit to be
ruled
but
willing"
who
sre
(i256b25). The
friendship
be
pro
between
moted
therefore seems tenuous. It might sppesr to the slsve in useful skills snd
by
the
s educstion of
in virtue,
ss
Aristotle Aristotle
recommends
(i255b25ff.;
i26ob2-3),
except
be
he is
more
only fails to
slavery, he
for freedom.
If indeed there
sre no nstural
slaves,
who
masters a
and
benefit from
master: man and
being
Nature is
harsh
is needy
by
nature,
and
he
cannot
satisfy his
injustice to
others.
The
advantsgeous
is
not
simply free to pursue the good life: not only that nature does not provide for him, but he
who
must
by enslaving
His
others
do
not
deserve to be
good
enslaved. without
He
cannot pursue
the
just, naturally
ends,
violating the
dependence
natural
on nature
Aristotle's description
The
is
not
the good.
Slavery, however,
distance toward
freeing
man
simply from
merely necessary existence. At the end of his discussion of slavery, Aristotle mentions how greatly advantageous slavery is: the possession of slaves frees a man so that he can engage in politics and philosophy (i255b37). Since slavery
makes politics and
politics and
philosophy
philosophy possible, the question implicitly can relieve msn of his unnatural slsvery
arises whether
to nature.
9.
Barker it is
notes
diminish the
slavery:
Aristotle's distinction between natural and conventional slaves would "Aristotle's Barker writes, "may seem to us to defend possible that it struck his contemporaries as also an p. 369.
that
doctrine,"
attack,"
and
Acquisition
111
II
The lsrgest
part of
Book I is
on scquisition.
holds,
the
property, is
of
msn's mesns
for
use
job
of
the hesd
the
family
is to
his job to
scquire
property? or
life
sctivity.
msn
mesns
of
living,
or
is he
dependent
brings up the possibility that a beneficent natures provides man with what he needs. The issue underlying the discussion of slavery, the beneficence of nature, now becomes explicit.
on
something
external?
Book I Aristotle
raises
of man's
speaks
pertains
"throughout
nsture"
sll
who also
nature"
to politics, and
the
heterogeneity
ruling
and
of
Aristotle,
in contrast,
also
sees not
only that there are rulers and ruled throughout nature but
"many
different kinds
of
being
ruled"
(1254325).
But is there
some order or
discussion
of
enslaved, but
sssursnce, or even
likelihood,
nsturslly inferior to their enslsvers. Hsving suggested that there is no common good between master and slsve, Aristotle turns directly to the question raised
by
question of
In
discussing
of
the scquisition of
provides
food,
Aristotle
gives sn srgument
for
nature's
providence.
Nature
the wsys
life
of
many different kinds of food, and has differentisted the animals by giving them different faculties for obtaining
eat
some are
nomadic, others
obtain
solitary.
So too
ways.
with
they
food in different
and
There
herdsmen, hunters
of various
kinds,
farmers.
This
argument
for
nature's providence
indicates
man's neediness:
man's man
from the way in which he acquires the necessities. Aristotle includes injustice: And need leads to among the natural modes (1256336)." sometimes "live He tells us that men of acquisition by
ner of
life itself
results
"piracy"
pleass
combining the
10.
vsrious
pursuits,
"supplementing
the more
deficient life
when
it
11.
Leo Strauss, The City and Man (Chicago: Rand McNally, 1964), p. 19. It is difficult to see how piracy could be a just mode of acquisition. Is piracy the
others what
violent
taking from
own efforts?
they have
Or perhaps piracy refers to the enslaving of I have argued, then piracy in this sense also is unjust.
But if there
are no natural
slaves,
as
178
Interpretation
short
hsppens to fall
how to
as
provide
in
being
self-sufficing"
(I265b3~5). Man
must
choose
for himself,
Aristotle
and
and pleasure
increase
through
he takes less
own
efforts.
he
scquires on
his
thst nsture
bestows food
all, just as
animals
bring
forth for
with their
young
enough sustenance
themselves"
able to provide
(I256bn-I2;
for the
of sake
emphasis mine).
mature animal as
man"
provides
(I256b22). He
whst
to
that there
is
no
natural
barrier to
man's
scquiring
he is
sble to
subdue, for he
immedistely
indicates that
being
acquired.12
wsr, in
esses where
it"
hunting
msnkind
but
also
designed
by
nature
for
subjection refuse
to submit to
(T256b25-27).
nstursl modes of scquisition other snd
thsn trade
not nec
herding, fsrming,
men
piracy,
fishing,
hunting
(i256bi-2). These do
into
They
may be
undertaken
of acquisition
by
in
cluding war among them (i256b25-27). Exchange, however, obviously brings men into contact with one another. Exchange is natural, Aristotle says, for men
must obtain
from
others what
they happen
to
lack,
while
they
exchange what
ex-
they have in
use of
surplus
of
money
grows out of
chsnge, for it is
exchanging
goods.
Along
with
the
sn
money
word
by
suthoritstive
Greek
for convention, or kw, nomos (i257bio; see Nicomachean Ethics, 1133329-32). The invention of money therefore strengthens the bond between trsders. They now hsve
sgreements or conventions thst regulste
with
stamping of coins which determine their for money, nomisma, is derived from the
(1 2573358".). The
the
invention
of
forming
12.
and
for
man out of
context,
such and not
naivete,"
Barker
nevertheless notes
conception of
early thought should indulge itself in the distinction between this "external
teleology"
Aristotle's "fine
as their
p. 376.
and
internal
'destined
eater'
but
as
teleology, in which man is the end of other things, the final aim towards the production of which nature
moves
See
also
Ross,
p.
126.
13.
and at
Harry
Jaffa
hunting,
a species of war,
the
modes of acquisition.
Cropsey
and the
(Chicago: Rand
McNally,
is trade, culminating in usury. War and trade are alternative History of Political Philosophy, ed. Leo Strauss and Joseph 1963), p. 80. See also Joseph Cropsey, Political Philosophy
on
mation and
Issues of Politics (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1977), p. 39, of the predation of war into the salutary predation of peace, the mercenary
"the transfor
quest
for
increase
gain."
and
Acquisition
179
as sn unnstursl mode
Why
does Aristotle
nevertheless
describe moneymsking
of scquisition?
In concluding his discussion of nstural acquisition, Aristotle explained that natural acquisition is limited by its end, living and eventuslly living well, just as any tool is limited by its end or function (i256b28-39). But
now
Aristotle
seek
argues
becsuse they
life
life. And
to
as
since the
is
unlimited, men
desire
means
by
Appsrently,
desire for
unlimited
for
Unlimited moneymaking is premised on the denial of mortality. And to deny one's mortality is to deny one's corporeality. Aristotle refers to those who think
that money
useless of close
is
"entirely
by
nature, because it
is
subsistence"
dying Moneymaking is
to
man with
snd a man rich in money may lack the necessities (1257b 10-14). And there is the story of Midas, who came of hunger due to his insatiable desire for money (1257^5-17). an unnatural mode of
world of
from the
natural
Moreover,
the advent of money, particular items such as shoes are no longer needed
Money
thst
sppesrs of
is
composed of s
vsriety why
snother.
Aristotle Men
men
desire
identify
of
the enjoyment of
bodily
plessures
living
to
his
nstural neediness st
the ssme
unnstursl
in
to
bodily
plessures,
msn
does
not rise
to the
politics st its best. msnly independence of politicsl rule th3t chsrscterizes Of the forms of moneymsking, usury is "the most contrary to but interest increases the "came into being for the sake of
nature
Money
thst money itself (125805-6). We should not suppose, however, for an end other than the end for the usury is unnstural because it uses money being. The into came shoe, we remember, came into sake of which money
amount
of
being
for
an end peculisr to
of exchange
it
was used
for the
sake
as
as
end
being city too comes does not take his bearings entirely from
one end,
into
for
exists
for
higher is
one.
Aristotle
the origins.
Usury
srtificisl
s psrsdigm
for
the
unnstural
comes
from the
artificisl,
snd
hss
no
origin
in
nature.
than money
since
removes
man
more
being does
so
from
some particular
180
Interpretation
something
come
from
nothing.14
do
not
necessarily completely
control
origins
sltogether.15
[the forms
scquisition]
to their
in
order
to
understsnd
Aristotle
will
use"
regsrd
(i258b9-
into its branches. Then, of the mode involving commerce, there is exchsnge, usury, snd lsbor for hire. The lstter includes the workers without srts, "who sre useful by mesns of their bodies
n).
He divides the
nstursl mode
slone"
(i258b28). The
nstural
slaves
by
definition
(1252334)
for
are
men
now
working for
hire. The
convention of
services.
for necessary
goods.
and
money has made it possible In order to pay other men, the head of the more money than is necessary for the purchase
family
of
of needed
money permits him to employ others to do necessary tasks therewith to free himself for other occupations. Aristotle now tells us there His
extra
is
a third mode of
acquisition,
with elements of
both the
natural and an
the com
mercial violence
kind. He
to
nature
in
order
to use
felling
activity that
and
does
an
mining,
activity
it does
readily
provide.
I believe that do
the
violence
peak of
we should
be
reminded of
Aristotle's
political
science,
which must
to man's
nature.
natural
inclinations in
thst he
order to raise
him to his
place at
Aristotle
says
will
lesve
detsiled
tion to others.
of
He
recommends that
"someone
moneym
by
which
moneymaking"
honoring
(125933-6). One
such method
is
monopoly. out of
hundred talents
Far from condemning this making of money out of money, Aristotle emphasizes that the method can be used politically. While he shows that a private use of monopoly is harmful to a tyrant's affairs (1259330-32), he concludes that "to know [how to secure a monopoly] is useful for statesmen slso, for msny cities
money"
(1259335-37). Whst divorces msn from scquiring nsture 's heterogeneity is now recommended if it csn be subordinsted to politicsl
need such mesns of
ends.
The first
the
psrt of
Book I is
neediness, as it is
revealed
in
sep arating himself from nature through unnatural modes of acquisition. Aristotle's suggestion for the politicsl use of commerce, which concludes his discussion of
scquisition,
14.
human institution
of slavery.
The
second part of
Book I is
about man's
provides a
admits that
of
Book I, in
which
Aristotle
Barker
from
word
nothing.
to usury on the ground that it makes something come But Barker believes that this is a false inference from the peculiarity of the Greek
385-387.
of
Aristotle
15.
for interest. For his discussion, see pp. Jaffa suggests that Aristotle's praise
root of
just
war and
his
due to the
extreme
injustice is
bodily
p.
80.
and
Acquisition
181
to the
family,
be
He
now claims
that
can
understood
remains an
properly only in the context of political life. integral part of the city, but the city exists for the sake
man
on
brute
nature without
natural world.
within
Before
discussing
about
the
family, Aristotle
of the
returns
to
family
is
more
its
insnimste property, the question of the virtue of the slsve arises. Does the slsve hsve only the virtue of s tool or a servant, or also such virtues as courage,
justice,
can
slave
in the latter sense, he would be a human being, but Aristotle has had to describe him as less than human in order to justify slavery. After calling
of our attention
be
and of
It
is
capable
of moral
from undermining his earlier argument altogether by maintaining that the slave is capable of moral virtue only in a sense. There are different kinds
refrains
of courage and moderation.
There is the
virtue of a
man, just
as there not
is the
virtue of a
within
(i26oa2-28). 16
the concept
ends
But does
of
the
diversity
call
humanity,
into
question the
unity
life? Book I
with
inability
to
speak of
in
which
the same applies to the virtue of a man. While virtue appears inseparable
life,
political
life itself
A
assumes a
forms. Virtue
varies
from
regime
to
regime.
consideration of politics
irreducible
which
nstursl
diversity
Aristotle's
thst commerce
Aristotle
be lived
within
the context of s
particular regime.
argument suggests
by
is
variety
As
we
of good
lives.
16.
have seen, Aristotle distinguishes the rule of male over female from the rule of CSee p. 173 of this paper.) Nevertheless both kinds of rule are defined as the rule
superior over
the naturally
command mine).
than the
female,
political
is
some
departure from
nature"
(I259b2,
emphasis
Aristotle
classifies
the
female
is
permanent
and
rule
is the
rulers
rule
of equals
who
try
in his
way
reminiscent of
footpan (I258b-I259a).
of
According
situation:
a
to
Herodotus, Amasis
utensil
made
golden
god
in imitation
his
own
former
had become
an object of reverence,
as
Amasis,
formerly
king
eminence of
(Herodotus, ii.172). The male's preeminence over the female, it appears, resembles the pre footpan. Again nature is improvident, since it fails to provide men with inferior
Amasis'
and obedient
wives, just as it
fails to
provide slaves.
If
nature's
practical
improvidence demands
of
again could
be
seen
as man's opportunity,
it is only
by looking
beyond the
life.
182
Interpretation
Sophocles'
Aristotle finds
poet
support
for the
diversity
to
of virtues
from
observes.17
Ajax. The
said, "Silence
woman,"
Aristotle
Yet it is the
maddened
Ajax
a
tivities.
It is
this, when his wife Tecmessa questioned his ac madman, Aristotle might be saying, who does not listen to
who
the good
Yet Aristotle
sppropriste? sppropriste: veals
be
At the
beginning
when speech
becomes
the political
community is
the
the
advantageous and
hsrmful,
(1253314-16). The
conjunction of of
just,
snd
ss revesled of
by
the
politicsl community.
the
sdvsntsgeous
In
unavoidable
advantageous
man
in establishing civil societies. And commerce, not because it distsnces him from his nstursl world
time
body
snd
its plessures,
existence of
makes
from the
gross
slavery
possible.
Until the
cities,
man appear
probably existed for the sake of survival, or wealth. They are not ciites that deserve the name of cities (see i28ob7-8). Could Aristotle have thought that
cities
truly deserving
such cities
And
was
it his
chosen
task
to
bring
into
existence through
his
political science?
The
grestest
scquisition st
politicsl
Aristotle's
the city's
of
existence,
its genesis, mskes its first sppesrsnce A silence smong womsnly msy be sppropriate, especially if un like Tecmessa's, attacks a man's pride as he goes about the womanly speech, business of defending his honor. Aristotle's politics, after all, centers on political
to the end of
msnkind.18
17. 18.
Sophocles, Ajax,
It
might
293.
be
life, first
on
appeared
in
of their union.
Such
an objection
depends
by
religion.
men
Aristotle
were
human development.
When
themselves ruled
of
by
king they
by
king; they
kingly
must
they indicate
good
man's
dependence
and
bondage
ficiency
go
freedom. The
be
life
at which
the
this sense
least,
beyond
It
might
life, first
appeared not
in Aristotle's
speech
philosophizing about politics is beyond the a passage in Book I, is in order. Aristotle begins the politics with a criticism believe that "political rule, kingly rule, household management, and despotic rule
These
men
distinguishing Aristotle's political science from Plato's scope of this paper, the following suggestion, based on
of are
those the
who
same."
also
(125238-14). It is commonly
understood that
Aristotle,
political
difference between a small city and a large household Aristotle is referring to Socrates and Plato. But for to despotic rule, is essential to the city's aiming at the good
no
point of
view, then,
Plato did
life for
which cities
and
Acquisition
is that
of
183
men over
freedom, for
of the
political rule
free
free
men
(I277bi6).
Awareness
degree
of mankind's
dependence
on
may life.
Ajax
life.20
commits suicide.
his
death.19
When
she
is
unsuccessful,
she
laments his
thereby
affirms
the goodness of
Suicide
presupposes a
or sufficient
detschment from
not worth
living
were
at all costs.
try
found
cities.
Yet if
politicsl
life
no sccess
bsck to
s nstursl world,
suicide might
humsn
condition.
Aristotle intends to
bring
cities, or
communities
degree
of good more
considerably
living. He is sgsin playing the woman's part, insight than Tecmessa, and with a large degree
of
manly
assertion.
19.
to
help
to save a man
is
die,"
eager
to
Ajax, 81
Ajax, 891-903.
Aristotle
on
of
Political Life
Catherine H. Zuckert
Carleton College
attempts
that the
distinctively
human lies in
political
action.
She thus
reminds
her
readers of
that man
is
and its essentially controversial character at the same time she dissociates herself from the ancient philosophic understanding. Unlike explicitly the Latin commentators who reveal their misunderstanding by reducing political
politicsl animal
retain a sense of
the
distinctively
the
life
of
the
polis.
Nevertheless,
these
it is
hierarchy
way
of
challenge.1
brilliantly
life
by
and the
politics.2
politics
to philosophy is
in the
works of
machean
Ethics, he suggests three different peaks of human excellence mag nanimity, justice, and contemplation. And in the Politics, he presents the life of
the statesman or jzofarixog more or less
in its
own
terms,
as
life
worth
own sake or
essentially
The
picture
Aristotle
action
gives of political
self-satisfying one. life differs, moreover, in important Although it is true that the Politics
or unless the neces
respects
Arendt
polis
praises.
begins
by
does
sities of
the polis
characterized
by by
the oikos, it
a
is
not
true,
as
and private.
and
(jioXixeia)
not
shapes
so
infuses
life, especially
family
as
through totalitarian
controls,
of
course, but
opinion.
rather
by
praise and
blame
expressed either
in legisla
not
tion or mere
animated
Second,
political
life
depicted
or
by
Aristotle is
as
"immortality"
"distinction"
clsims.
Arendt
by
several
incommensurable needs,
com-
there
is
enduring
problem
both
of
providing the
requirements and of
penssting those who do. Politics essentislly of recognition rule, which is a question not merely justice. Since this
question politics
concerns
or
of
can
be
answered
tinuing deliberstion,
is
sn
inherently
dis
theory does
University
pp.
10, 17-18,
2.
City
and
186
Interpretation
both. Finslly, the fundsmentsl pluralism of humsn life thst Arendt herself stresses mskes it impossible for sll members of s community to psrticipste
fully
a
in
public or politicsl
yet
decisions. Man
explained
meaning
to
be
fully
of chance
(birth)
of state
and plsce
(the division
lsbor).
Only by
means of a vast
as
political
participation.
a a s
of
"the
political."
As Aristotle shows,
is both
limited humsn
"search"
endeavor
Politics is
not
it
chsrscterize
relstions or sssocistions.
meet
does
politicsl
sctivity
srises
only
humsn beings
fundsmental
procreative
Since the
members of a and
feed
must continue
to produce
requirements of
both
family
labor)
limit the
scope
of political
economic relations
Aristotle shows, however, why neither purely social nor satisfy human beings. And in showing why political activity
reveals
"regime"
(jzoXltelcx)
that
is,
an order
ing
of
disparate
in
Through his
discussion
of regime
Aristotle thus
enables us
all political
activity
sgreement,
from
an attachment
to their
way.
own
existence, but
they
to
do
not
all
define their
own
of
existence
in the
same
Msn's bssic
in
concern
preserve
his
life
determining
economic
the wsy of
life
individusls
never
or communities
considerations
slone
suffice
of
thst
is,
humsn life
can
sbove the
level
be
altered
by
is his
decision
ss to whst
even
is
most
importsnt;
every human
own
being
values
own
existence,
tends to overestimate
his
importance,
Some
everyone
men seek
moreover;
their
desires
csn
others,
be fulfilled only through being elevsted sbove to engage in politics. Since most humsn
their
of exis
specific
very
out
depends
snd enforce
beings
mean
and
so
rulers
in
particular act
ment
(1267330-35) does
or unjust.
not
oppressive
It does
mean
that
and maintain
a regime
which recognizes
Aristotle
weight
on
the
Limits
and
187
deliberation,
and such
only in the context and on the bssis of political experience. Aristotle's very first claim that the polis constitutes the highest and most comprehensive form of human association surely flies in the face of the modern
liberal tendency to view the stste ss Yet our own experience in
society.3
sepsrate and
one of the
in
least
liberal democ
of pri
racies ought
vate
endesvor,
the object
of
the
lsw is to
protect
of
freedom,
the "right
privscy,"
to
for
emergence
Americsn
democracy
into
economic
enterprise, reli
and even the
gion,
all
intellectusl
it is
snd srtistic
endesvor, the
fsmily,
so
individual's
also
conception of
himself. If
not
political
or
influence is
pervasive, it is
fairly
clear that
primarily
directly
coercive.
And Aristotle's
man"
second
sweeping
claim
is that
politicsl rule
(literally
"political
but usually translated statesman) is essentially different from that of a master and that of a father. Our tendency (stemming from Locke) to associate govern
ment political
primarily with legislstion lesds us not only to underestimate the extent of influence but also to conceive of political action primarily in terms
snd
enforcement.
of command
Since
command
on
and
force
are
universal,
we
conclude, so is
politics
politics.
Aristotle suggests,
"power"
primarily in terms
of
involves
fundamental
misconception of
the nature
of political order.
Politicsl
sary kinds
cal
If there
order
male-femsle
If there is
no
food,
there will
be
no
people,
of
the intelligent
organization
labor to
organizstion of
provide the necessary goods. Aristotle Isbor in terms of the msster-slave relaat
production
of goods
level
requires
division
of
anything more than individual sub lsbor. The fact that there are necessary
that politics
economic conditions
for the
is
life
until
their vitsl
Under
unfavorable
require sll
survive.
Unlike Marx, Aristotle insists that the first form of human sssociation, the family, consists in the merger of two different natural relations: the erotic,
male-female or procreative relation as well as
in the
3.
narrower, V. Jaffa,
modern
sense,
division
of
lsbor. Self-preservstion
Joseph Cropsey, ed..
"Aristotle."
Harry
in Leo Strauss
1972),
PP-
and
History
of Political
Philosophy
(Chicago: Rand
McNally,
65-68.
188
Interpretation
individual level.
"Barbarians"
on a species as well as an
make
the mistake of
women
confusing the two distinct relations, Aristotle argues, when they trest ss slsves. Procrestion is not simply snother form of production; the does
not
fsmily
solely from the requirements of survivsl or need. On the con trary, Aristotle suggests, there is slwsys s positive sttrsction to life itself ss well as to other human beings st the root of every humsn society. Human
develop
merely from necessity but also from desire. Once formed, however, the association affects both the constituent needs and
beings form
desires. To
uality
while must
family
groups
not
maintain
the
family,
and so give
sex
be
restricted
both
with regsrd
bssic form
of
higher,
several,
irreducibly different parts or relations. Aristotle's approach fundamentally pluralistic and fundamentally hierarchical.
is
s central to compound of the
The
"regime"
concept of
politicsl psrts. order
his
or
because he
under-
stsnds
ss
several,
or
different
As
sll
parts
household
sffected
shaped
irreducibly by the
requirements of affected
so all parts of
by
the particular way of life the members of the polis seek to preserve. their needs, Aristotle observes, their
desires
ex-
not merely wsnt life, they wsnt s good life, the best life pos in sible; seeking the good life, they form politicsl sssocistions. In con trast to the formstion of the household order or fsmily, the oikos, which srises
snd
They do
instinct
snd
instituted inten
tionally,
Although
men sre
nsturslly inclined
spontaneously emerge the benefactor to mankind, Aristotle observes, was first invented and instituted political order (1253331-34).
greatest
At
more csuse
a subsistence
ruled
by
necessity.
Once
men produce
than
they
need,
also choose a
instinct is
direct their
lives becsuse
able
of
the indeter
minacy
virtue
or openness
of
human
nature.
They
by
of
their rational
faculty or logos. But as Jean-Jscques Rousseau develop their speech and resson only in sssocistion
later
with
There is, strictly speaking, no completely individual capacity for self-rule. Rather than emphasize the openness or of
stresses
the
importance
and
choice, that
is,
of
developing
can and
man's practical
foundation.
Although human beings
cally,
polis
clearly do exist without associating politi is prior to the individual, because each
Aristotle
develops his
qualities
msn
on the
Limits
and
189
"individuality"
particularity as well as his distinctly human only in political association. The quslities which most distinguish one from snother develop only through specislizstion snd s division of lsbor.
or ss one man uses all
So
long
is
not apt
to
develop
live
at
his energy to provide for himself and a family, he talent for geometry, music or painting. Since human
sbove subsistence except
beings
csnnot
sny level
in
cooperation with
others, the choice of s wsy of life csn be msde only through sssocistion, snd
men sssociste with esch other sn sgreement sbout whst
only
on
the
bssis
of
the
friendship
do
not
is
right or
just. Men
should
who
trust esch
do
not
sbout whst
they
do; they
thus
seek to
defend them
their
nstursl
asso-
selves
develop
potentisl
lives,
their
logos, only in
politicsl
founded
is
just. Human
beyond the
is
sion of pleasure
and pain
to calculations
as
of what
useful
harmful. But
can
men
logos is
not
calculate what
Aristotle
understands
it. How
"X"
of measure of what
is
useful or
hsrmful to? Logos thus includes the ability to articulate, compare and rank various desires, to determine what is right, ss well ss the cspscity to deter
mine whst
is
conducive
and express
only in politicsl association. Although individuals acquire both their distinctive talents
and traits
along
of
with their
are not merely or completely labor. On the contrary, Aristotle argues, there are
division
differences in indi
makes
vidual of
potential; it is the
existence of such
differences that
the division
labor rational, productive, and generally beneficial. If there were no such differences in potential, neither differentiation nor hierarchy of any kind would be just. Specialization would merely constitute a restriction and contor
natural
tion of human
potential.
All
ultimately
on arbi
trary
The
the
Aristotle's discussion
characteristics of all
and
two
fundamental
of
human
(1)
the utility
of a
division
labor,
(2)
Marx, Aristotle
suggests
Through
individusl humsn
and
does
not rule
body,
that
is, if
there is no
intelligent direc
of physical
long
survive.
Rule
of
thus necessary
4.
By
reprinted
p.
159.
190
Interpretation
has
a right to control the actions of another com are related to each other as soul
is to body.
orders
nstursl
slsve
humsn
being
to
follow
not
to direct his
life. He lscks
enough
foresight
snd control
to order
own sffsirs
sufficiently to
survive without
direction. Rule
by
s msster
is
good
for the
tence,
just
so preservstion
when
sre nsturslly sttached to their own exis regsrded ss good. Although msstery is be msy certsinly both psrties benefit, the justice of msstery does not rest on the
humsn beings
consent of
becsuse the
nstursl or
justly
enslsved man
precisely becsuse he is not sble to determine or to do whst is best for himself. The masters have to determine which men ought to be slaves and
is
enslsved
force them to
than consent,
common
serve.
Mastery
can
be just
does
even when
it
rests on
force
rule.
rather
but forceful
conquest
not suffice
to establish
just
Only
benefit
establishes
justice.
associate with each other not
reason
human beings
is for their
mutual
or pleasure,
wss
but
mutual
benefit does
necessarily
slsves.
mean equal
benefit.
men
or unobservsnt enough to or
believe thst
benefit the
They
tske slsves be
they
for the
benefit
mon
of the
mssters,
which
does
not emphssize
the com
benefit
for the
is
mere preservation
tially instrumental character of mastery. Despite a common opinion to the con trary, Aristotle argues, careful examination of the situation shows that command
snd control of volved
beings his
snd the
division
of
lsbor in
in thst
master will
find
to
manage
for him
so
that
he
will
be free to
or virtue consists
engage
in
politics or
excellence
does
in
a
not consist
way
of
merely in the recognition of superiority by others; it life, a kind of activity thst the psrticipsnts find satisto some other good. Aristotle's suggestion that
fying
in
itself,
not as a means
be
performed snd
by
"divine
machines"
msy
mske
the dif
ference he
sees
between
Technology,
rather
again the
msstery intelligent direction of physical force, is supposed to in ability to realize our desires; it is essentially instrumental
or valuable
politics
clesrer to
than
choiceworthy
and
in
and
of
itself. It
could
only
replace
politics, deliberation
ment and
judgment
by
rigidly restricting
serve.5
the mental
develop
de
the variety of
life it is
supposed to
Both the
pend upon
the
intelligent
use of
force to
division
of
labor
5.
and
There are, indeed, some who fear that it will. Cf. Joseph Weizenbaum, Computer Power Human Reason: From Judgment to Calculation (San Francisco: Freeman, 1976), and Jacques
1964).
Aristotle
on the
Limits
free
and
-191
to produce enough to
coercion and a
some
Both the
need
for
division
of
master-slave relation
belong
order,
to the
household; both
but
neither constitutes
are
parts or elements of
which makes
every
political
it
distinctly
and
political.
On
politics all.
to which
can
beneficial to
when
extent of such
briefly
he
observes
"intends"
"intention."
First,
she
difficult if
not
be visibly distinguishable (I254b27~34). In fsct, it is impossible to tell who is s nstursl slsve snd who s msster,
becsuse the primsry difference is one of intellectual potential rather than physi cal strength, and intellectual potential cannot be seen. In order to be identified,
intellectual
potential
has to be actualized,
and,
and
the
actualization
depends
upon a
(family)
his
later,
political position.
report
has
recently
much on
reminded
very
men
family
have
good
family
not suffice
to
produce
excellence,
not
moreover.
As Aristotle
sons,
observes
(i255bi-5), outstanding
public
men
do
always
not
only because
sons
often
neglect
their own
families but
excellence and
because the
do
not
have
the same
potential.
"intends"
Human
is
it. Social
political
simply inherited, although nature again order, the division of labor, does not and
perfectly reflect the differences in individual potentisl clearly talent, becsuse the development of potential into excellence presupposes
and
social order.
order
the
natural as
the
standard of right.
Contrary
much
to
Marx, Aristotle
an ox.
suggests that
from
need as
well.6
One
himself
alone with
only
Unfortunstely,
most
the same
tendency
ever
they
Although
acquisition ought
by
"mesns"
fully
its
sstisfying life,
or
since
must
be determined
see
by
"end"
purpose,
it is
much essier, ss
Aristotle observes, to
the utility
of goods
men
and
money thsn
it is to find
fully
satisfying way of life. Most much as they can, because they are
ultimately
they
sre
with
living
will
well
(I257b4i-i258&2).
emphssizes,
amsss ss
As Hobbes lster
need, so
human beings
ss possible
never
know exsctly
whst
they
they
in
a
much
future
acqui
possible.7
contingencies as
desire for
sition results
fundamental
156-58.
Rather than
money
and goods
6. Marx,
7.
op.
cit., pp.
Thomas
192
to
Interpretation
of activity,
more goods.
improve the quality of their lives by raising their level men exercise and improve their faculties in order to acquire first illustration Aristotle
well, that
uses
most
The
is indicative. Men
need courage
in
order
to
live
con
is,
not
to live
quest,
never
they
find
in fear, but in mercenary armies or wars merely into a means of acquiring more wealth.
own
for
They
in their
(external)
of most
rewards.
Although Aristotle's
men
view of
the primary
driving
is thus
quite
similar
to
Hobbes',
The
a positive attachment to
life
rather
death
or the unknown.
something to
account
by
the desire
for
acquisition or mere
only
of the majority,
Hobbes does
not reveal
few
can achieve
full
not
satisfaction
in philosophy
and always
or government.
consist
is,
so
long
division
of
be
able
to devote his or
most
her life to
good
Nevertheless, if
is conflict, force
men
seek
without
is bound to be
And
where
there
be
The
use of
force is therefore
necesssry in instituting politicsl order not only to provide necessities in the form of the msster-slsve relstion but slso to desl with the conflict thst results
from the
of
expsnsion of
productive success of a
division
natural
result
so
much
of
goods
the
unlimited
human desire, the productivity of modern fundamentally alter the situation. As Aristotle argues in
range
give
rise
by
"factions."
between
by
and
making the
citizens of
his
politeia
as
much
especially like
radical
each other as
possible
having
most
is radically defective, according to Aristotle, in both means and end. If a political society necesssrily comprehends several different conflict csnnot be reduced by functions, destroying differentistion without
destroying the possibility of politics ss well. cisely in determining the difficult question
smong which groups of citizens Like Plato, Aristotle asserts that
but Aristotle
function for
criticizes
snd
Politicsl deliberation
of which
consists pre
activities
to encourage
how to
education
not
is the way to
Plato for
recognizing
education.
If the farmers
the
same
education,
will
they
different functions?
Aristotle
on the
Limits
and
193
means
educational scheme
Education
largely by doing,
protect an
inseparable from
way
of
which
on education to
Humsn beings
sre
all
nsturslly first attached to their own existence. By having all citizens own property in common, Aristotle argues, Plato insures that no one will take any
of
care of
it. Each
will not
tend to
leave the
to
"commons"
msnagement of the
to others,
and
it
will
be
possible
identify
no one
the
failure
of
any
specific
individual to
contribute
his
share
because
hss sny
psrticulsr responsi
bility
to the
for any
specified psrt.
snd
The
strongly
fsmily
extension of
By
making
so
the
city into one big family, Plato does much as dissolve it. No one any longer
The foundation
of the on
tie, therefore,
"belongs"
traditional
family
is
not
solely
economic
or
primarily bssed
function, sccording
relstions.
fsmily
can
comprises three
different
one.
One is the
Women
are not
and
between husband
equals, as
opposed
of children
(1259b!).
conjugal
relstion
is
not
Third
and most
important, however, is
children csn
relstion
to children.
Like sdults,
be
only if
but
to take
only for their own children, as an extension of themselves or, at least, as a duty for which they are publicly and individually held responsible. The family structure is thus necessary, because men will care for their children
the trouble
identifisble ss theirs. As Aristotle only when these are publicly and privately between politicsl snd subpolitical differences indicstes in his discussion of the associations in Book I, the family is economically necessary to produce future
generations of
to
preserve
the
by taking
csre
life to their
children.
The
fsmily
life
will
therefore slso
(1260b 12-18).
is,
or ought
to
be,
the
first
concern of
system will
be
provided and
the
laws
will regulate
a public ss more
194
Interpretation
studies.
of
formsl
the division
position will
entirely within the private family, be unjust, because privste weslth snd family certainly determine future occupations rather than individual potential. Citi
educstion remains almost will
If
labor
be
encouraged
to
care
rather
than what is
the
Spartan
equal,
although
education
for both
males and
he
suggests
be
(1260a).
Unlike Plato,
plsce
fsmily
however, Aristotle srgues that public efforts cannot entirely reties. Personsl sttention is importsnt not merely becsuse humsn
beings desire it, but becsuse it is such a clesr indicstion of whst is vslued. If educstion is truly deemed to be important, fathers will concern themselves with it not only in general, in the law, but also as it specifically concerns
their own sons.
Indeed,
achieved
concern
for the
existence
and
men
future
in
of
their own
families
unity
constitutes one of
the strongest
bonds uniting
a polity.
Political Aristotle
cannot
be
by destroying
itself
man's attachment
to his own,
suggests, because
politics
Aristotle limitation
states
his full
function
the
of the
family
a critique of
family
structure
involves
another
only as fundamental
on not
justice. Plato
suggested
"community
their
of wives and
children"
only in
order
to
rather
develop
poten
tial, that
(except
is,
as a matter of
justice
I, Aristotle
woman
claims that as
when
the
master rules
the slave
by
nature, so the
man
is,
her
implicitly possibility explicitly discussed in the Republic (4550-4563) thst s womsn inferior to 3 few men will still be superior to most. Since he insists thst the conjugal associstion is
recognizes
the
in the immediste
generally
see
between equsls,
the basis
in turn, it is difficult to
why
he
nevertheless
concludes
of
describing
household,
the three
different kinds
of rule
or
relations
in the
Aristotle
in is
council
do, but
the
different. Where the slave does deliberation (fiovXevtixov) at all, both women woman's participation is axvgov, without authority,
without
as
(dasXeg). To ssy that the womsn deliberates authority, rule or decisiveness (the alternative meanings of xvgioc;) is much as to say that her reason does not rule because she does not rule.
undeveloped
not
the child
Aristotle does
ception
why
she
does
not
rule
or
justify
the ex
equality in political relations. Aristotle admits that his discussion of the family and the proper excellence and functions of its varied psrts in Book I is not complete (i26ob8-20). The question must be reconsidered in the context of the discussion of the different
regimes
to the ordinary
becsuse it is
question
of
Aristotle
rulers.
on
the
Limits
sfter
and
195
The
fsmily is,
all,
but
the part
is
When Aristotle
returns to
the
different
virtues of
in Book III (1277^4-30), he also dis the two sexes. The only virtue peculiar to rulers.
he concludes, is cbgovrjoig or practicsl resson which is and can be developed only in the process of governing, that is, in use. Otherwise the virtues of the
ruler and and of must know how to obey (himself before he can rule. The virtues of the two sexes differ, not because others) differences in natural potential for deliberation, according to Aristotle, but
because
the
of
their
According
the woman
he
uses
to describe the
(Is Aristotle guilty of an ironic pun here? The verb female function, cbvXctTTEtv, hss the ssme root ss Plsto
uses
to describe the
rulers
definition lence
of
seems
bsck to the
srt of war,
described
ss s
form
of
the art of
sexual
divi
more
sion
of
differences in
physical
strength
than
deliberative potential; and the woman's silence or is a product more of place than intellectual deficiency. Aristotle's discussion of slavery makes it clear, moreover, that he does not regard physical strength as a legiti
mate ground
"modesty"
for
rule."
of others
Defense is usually considered to be just while tsking the property and lives is not. Perhaps for thst resson Aristotle includes the srt of wsr or
the
hunting
of slsves
Only
oikonomia
and art of
the
as
she
chick
the yolk,
is the taking
be
even
in
be forced to best
serve others
by
some of of
freed, be
of nstural
taking
himself.) Even
uneven
the
politicsl order
does
not
snd cannot
correspond
exsctly to the
distribution
potential
among individuals.
a natural
Just as slavery is finally justified not merely by individuals in talent but also as a necessary means
the political association, so
tics.9
is the
perpetual
debarment
Some
must provide
the
necessities so
be free. So Aristotle
Wives,"
paper Community of 8. See also Arlene Saxonhouse, "Aristotle's Critique of April 19-21. prepared for presentation at the Midwest Political Science Association meetings,
Press,
Even Susan Okin, Women in Western Political Thought (Princeton: Princeton University teleological 1979). p. 235. admits that Aristotle treats women in accord with his general
to the rule for men.
196
Interpretation
his
critique of
some one
I, however, Aristotle
suggests
thst it
is
desirable to find
to oversee the
in
order
Why
couldn't
wife
also
hire
household
not sppesr
manager?
In
contrast on
to slsvery, the
subordinstion of women
does
to
rest
primsrily
True,
not
is
a prerequisite snd ss
of politicsl
life; but it is
to nstursl
sufficient.
Men
be educsted;
Aristotle
points out
critique
of
Plsto's
will
to mske
politicsl
order correspond
ferences,
certsin
men
sttend
they
women
their deliberative
fsculties in
thst
public
life
to
be the his
need
to
msximize esch
husbsnd's
conviction
his
wife's
sre
own
so
thst
he
will s
for
educstion
decresses, in
need of
democracy for
a
serves,
so
does the
snd
children.
natural of
foundation, but
own
that
appears
to
consist
in
man's
love
his
than
in differ
between the
sexes
in
potential
intellectual
ability.
much aware of
its primsrily
existence
economic msnifestation. so
differ,
are not
He simply insists that as forms of human do the expressions and demsnds of self-interest. Since sll
points out
interests
simply economic, he
cannot
in his
critique of
Phaleas,
all
conflicts of
nomic end
interest
be
solved
solely
will
by
economic means.
Because
eco
desires
giving
extend
beyond need,
as soon
as need
is
met,
by
Some
try
simply because
they
want more
men ss
being
better. Since
things, but because they wsnt honor, to be recognized by other economic desires resdily expsnd beyond need, eco
snd csn
nomic conflict
is inevitsble
be
regulsted
that
of a
is,
government.
Government
will also
different kind.
or
Relatively
few
people
opportunity
people will
be
merely to be left
not of
Prompted
by
stsrvation, people
tively
in
rare
and
certainly
may revolt, but such popular uprisings are rela long duration. The people who desire s place
so much as a
government on an
"more,"
desire for
ongoing basis will not be prompted by need which is most often a desire for recognition.
Political
origin.
civil
is thus not fundamentally or properly speaking economic in for that reason, Aristotle suggests, it is possible to obtain Precisely if the desire for recognition, office, or honors of the few mskes peace,
conflict
in purely
they
sre granted
io.
Aristotle
on
the
Limits
and
197
force (i267b4-io).
The wsy in which s community sllocates offices and honors is thus absolutely crucial, because it determines the kinds of activities or achievements ambitious
men pursue and whether or not
they
the
will see an
opportunity to
"people"
realize their
de
the regime.
Aristotle
with
set
leadership
be led
The
thus the
can
decisive
phenomenon,
or educated
us
Aristotle
which
is not the only motive become tyrants, to have the power to do whatever they want, or as he says, to have pleasure without pain. They are mistaken in this attempt, he suggests, because there are always
reminds
that the
recognition
brings
men
into
politics.
also seek to
"costs"
"trade-offs"
or
in
politics of
the kind
we
context of
the
division of lsbor. The only source of pure plessure is philosophy, presumsbly ss Plsto argues, because the truth is the only good human being can share without losing any themselves, that is, the only good they can truly hold in
common and noncompetitively.
not support
Montesquieu's later
suggestion
that
consists
fundsmentslly
Aristotle
in
an
appeal
to the
desire for
of ancient
is
basically
military."
argues that
this
is true
practice, particulsrly of
constitute
thst
the
prowess
does
not
of a ruler, as
Aristotle
plex
it, is primarily intellectual. It consists in determination Aristotle himself begins in Book III of
presents
duplicating
what
the com
not
is just
only
not
in
general
but
also
in the
specific circumstances.
Such
considerations
apply
fundamental law, or the organization of offices and only to the founding, the honors in the constitution, but also potentially to every piece of legislation, as Aristotle observes, small every particular administrative decision, because, can change the entire changes, in the qualifications for voting, for example,
constitution
(128934-6;
1303321-25).
It takes
to
foresee the
continually
long-term
necessary
effects snd so
of current actions.
These deliberations
snd
thus
They
are
tirely
form
without
pain, becsuse
since
political
decisions
involve hsrd
3lternstives
snd 3lw3ys
h&ve costs,
they
few
of government,
only
benefits. Everyone
slwsys sttend
Most
primsrily to the
people ever
means of their
own self-preservation.
If very few
political
will
fully
1 1.
understand
the
reasons
for any
set of
lsws. Most
obey
on
the bssis
IV, V.
198
Interpretation
trust or belief that the laws sre beneficisl.
general
of s general
belief
will
be brought into
question.
Hippodamus'
suggestion that
innovation
s
should
be
Since every change hss such forms should even be considered. Reform
undermining
obedience to the
politics
law.
possible and reason
major source
Improvement in
provement.
is
of
im
or
Politicsl
resson
is essentislly deliberative
rather
thsn
linesr
and
simply additive, however, for two reasons. First, there sre competing commensurable elements to be weighed, and second, the weight of
pends somewhat upon
non-
each
de
The
one
most
important
political
decision,
or
as we
determining
In short,
what who
the offices
honors
shall
them.
should rule.
This
question
im
possible
function. Several
politicsl affairs.
to provide what
right
most
essential
to the
association
in its
No
one
group
denied the
right
least
will
have
some
just
grounds
for
complsint.
The primsry
and
sttschment to
his
own exis
tence of esch individusl will, moreover, tend to mske esch group overestimste
the
importance
almost
of
its
own
contribution
denigrate the
services of others.
Conflict
never not
necessarily results;
whether
dissent is
be
underlying any
Man's
self-love con
only
invalidates
justice.
There
Unlike
question,
modern
who should
are two
kinds
of considerations
to be taken
into
account.
First,
broad
criteria set
by
the ends of
is
more
becoming
volves sgreement on s
polities can trade or slly with politically united (1280a). Political sssocistion in desirable way of life, and those who contribute to the
of
maintensnce of this
distinctive way
life have
in the
simply
contribute to
its
subsistence
by
pro
viding food
are not
defending
necessarily
performed
soldiers,
discrete groups, however. Farmers can become judges. In order to determine what
by
also
polity be
groups
in making decisions for the community, and to look at the specific circumstances or people to see deserve
and
so
what
extent,
which
group
to rule.
most revealing case. because they are able
Mechanics
or
artisans
represent
the
limiting
"nstursl
Clearly,
Aristotle
to order their
on
the
Limits
and
199
lives
and preserve
from
doing more. They contribute to the msintensnce of the life of the city, but they csnnot psrticipste in politics or government in any very mesningful becsuse have not the sense, time, experience, or occasion to follow and they participate in public deliberations. The institution of political association does
not,
therefore,
full human
potentisl.
wellAristotle concludes, therefore, that they should not be citizens in sny ordered regime (i 278s). Have they not been treated unjustly, we might respond;
they, too,
vote?
contribute
to the common
that
good.
Should they
not at
lesst be
sllowed
to
Aristotle
would respond
they enjoy
in
exchange
they, too,
are
preserved.
Nevertheless, he
it is dsngerous
not
to
some shsre
enjoyment of power;
for
a polis with a
body
they
disenfran
necessarily be
and
a polis which
will view
is full
of enemies
the
government as
if they
participate
with
in it to
a certain extent.
Aris
of
his
recommendstion
regsrd
to artisans
in full
view
Democracies tend to be
totle observes, but
or vote
more stable
than other
forms
of
government, Aris
they
also tend to
be ill-governed. If the
people
decide issues
psrty platform directly, they do so on the bssis of insdequste information and disregard for the need to adapt to changing circumstances. If they merely vote for officials to make these decisions for them, they must be
a
for
very fine judges of character (i28ib-i282a; I326b2). Usually they are Either they blame officials for problems they had no control over, or they
vate sycophantic scoundrels.
not. ele
(Aristotle
Athens'
trestment of
s government which
Perikles
as well ss
implicitly
frees the
acquisitive
desires. It
will neces
sarily be
quisitive
reasons
corrupt in itself and corrupt the people. The only check on the ac desires is reason, but Aristotle recognizes that the people who see the why acquisition should be limited are few, so few that they will not
press
be
apt
to
their claims
see that
to
rule. will
They have
"outvoted"
too
much
practical others.
sense
(130404-5).
extent
They
they
be
on
in
effect
by
To the
not
to
which
all
government
rests
it is
based
on reason.
reason can solve the political problem.
Although
not
Aristotle
suggests that
it is
likely
to
be
effective possible
regime
very is not
often
at
least
not
fully
effective.
The best
regime
which
elevates
worst
abuses of power.
In
"mixed
the
or polity, elections and offices are structured so that powers of the people
they balance
desires
(numbers)
wealthy.
and their
relatively many
moderate
against
varia-
There
are
possible
structures or
200
Interpretation
no such mixture
is
possible where
there
is
not
Only
has
an
interest in
keeping
the
would suffer
from
property
regimes
by
by
Even
which
do
not
intentionally
and
explicitly
their
citizens
have
regimes
predominantly
are
economic
factors have
Many
on
fundamentally
only
two types
democracies
in contemporary
not
political science
between
psrticipstory.)
Distinguishing
describe
"people"
them merely
in terms
involved does
regimes or s
still
represents
by
s psrt,
very
often
in its
own self-interest.
Politics is
The
government of
ent, moreover,
gimes ss either
msny educsted middle-clsss citizens is significsntly differ from the rule of poor pesssnts. Men tend to cstegorize all re
democracies
or
the to
bssis
be the only mutually exclusive characteristics of ruling classes. Since it is possible to be both poor snd brave or rich snd educated, democracy and oli
garchy
scribe or simple economic and numerical classifications
a regime.
do
not suffice
to de
There
are
democracies,
self-interest
classes makes
in terms
a
evidently
nomic
and
and
narrowly
terms, there
are still
defines its interest primarily in eco important practicsl differences smong oligsrchies
self-interest,
as
democracies.
action always reflects
Political
Aristotle
presents
it, but
that
fact
sll not
alone
does
not suffice
to show that it
is
unjust or will
be
effective.
Like
human beings,
depends
see
rulers act for their own good. Whether their rule is just or how they understand their own interest. The best man would that it is not in his interest to abuse s slsve or srtissn; the middle clsss
on
is
also
in its
public sets
politically self-controlled, but for economic rather than moral reasons, but not on an individual or private level. Although a mixed
regime
is
not possible
without a
large
middle
class, that
is,
the best
regime
generally possible depends on the existence of s certsin distribution of weslth, the distribution of wealth is not in itself politically determinative because gov
ernment can change
the
or outright expropriation.
The
political effects of so to
duction,
the effect
indirect. They affect the polity largely through have on the characteristic attitudes of the people. they The differences Aristotle describes among democracies and oligarchies, for
speak, are more
Aristotle
on
the
Limits
and
201 property
and
Aristotle
slwsys
production"
snd
the "mode
smsll
on the other.
or
highly
persed,
stsble.
lsndholders
farmers, it is
apt to
be
or
fsrmers necesssrily hsve to spend most of Since they sre geographically dis
it is difficult for
often.
directly
opposing
in
political
deliberation very
and to
maintsin
They
sre
tend, therefore, to
of
law
widespresd
distribution
in their
rather
property immediate
(by
oppressive
in de
The
same
is true
of sn
oligsrchy
will
composed of
msny
other
citizens
who csn
quslificstion.
If,
on
the
hsnd,
and
power
the lsw
be
to meet regularly
to change
them to congregste.
st
They
will
be
spt
to
expropriste
the
holdings for
of
the rich,
lesst to tsx
an
property hesvily, in
order
to pay themselves
public service.
Likewise,
few very weslthy fsmilies who recognize no clsim oligarchy right or humsn excellence but wealth is apt to adopt very oppressive laws
composed of s even
of
or
in
an sttempt to
incresse their
own sre
holdings
even
more.
The distribution
portant not
economic
is
or
just. Distribution
and
production"
the "mode of
are
way
of
life
of a
habits
snd opinions,
especially
with regard
to the law.
Surely it
way
of
would
be best if
rationally decide
sre
what
is the best
pre
life
and then
necessary,
however,
not entirely rational, and not all members of a cisely because human beings are to engsge in extended deliberations. A divi leisure society will ever have the
sion of
lsbor is necesssry
with
their
tssks.
When they
csnnot
be
desires
intentionslly
snd willingly,
it is
slone does not suffice to produce obedience to the necesssry to use force. Force lsw, however, becsuse it is too clear that force may be used to gratify the acquisitive cannot
desires
of the
rulers whst
at the
expense
of
be
persusded
to do
is
right or
slone,
they msy
still
it
as
in
ject,
after
all, to legal
control.
improve the
chsracter of citizens
approximate
indirectly
through
economic regulation.
Although Aristotle's
is
justly
associsted with
202
Interpretation
is the only means by which human beings for self-rule, he does not advocate participation
seems as
can per realize
se.12
psrticipation potential
their
full
On the
con
trary, he
interested
as
James Madison in
diffusing
and
directing
into
the self-interest of those who have not been educated to public service
private and
largely
economic one's
directions.
Organizing
the
a
arguing
or pres
own
interest
at
expense of others
does
not
develop
faculties. There is
big difference
between
public
deliberations concerning the good of the community, or political participation properly speaking, and interest group sctivity. Aristotle does not merely point out the wsy in which the privste pursuit of economic self-interest, ss opposed
to the use of public power to sttsin economic
benefits, lesds
brosder
to more stable,
less
oppressive government.
He
scter of or
low
order of moderation
and
self-control, which
self-rule.
is
a reflection at
least
of man's
higher
fuller capacity
sim
sde-
for
As
a student of
both Machiavelli
of
and
Montesquieu, Msdison
whether we retsin sn
concern.
The question,
course, is
or politics
understsnding
of either
legislstion
if
we
it
controls or
restraint.
Rather than
almost all
advocate
participation,
Aristotle
supports
in
law is ususlly superior to ad hoc decisions, he srgues, because it is freer from passion and hence more reasonable. Not only is
cases.
The
rule of
interest
or attachment
product
decisions
made
in
particular
determination
of what
is
direct
adjudication of
general
controversies,
of what
however, it
is
right
cannot
legislators'
understanding
moreover,
will not
and appropriate.
them, that
is,
laws
be good,
self-
they
in question; they
wisdom
which
be
will
lesson in
control
There is
of the
no
substitute
finally
for
political
combines
knowledge
limits these
of
place
on
the achievement of
of
law
Aristotle thus
returns
at the end of
essential tension
conditions
for
political
life
asking
12.
be
citizens.
Political Theory, Vol. 3. No. 4 Undemocratic Party in Robert A. Goldwin, ed., Political Parties, U.S.A. (Washington, D.C.: American Enterprise Institute, 1980), PP- 34-49: Sheldon Wolin, Politics and Vision (Boston: Little Brown, i960), pp. 58-63.
(November 1975),
pp.
and
Political
Responsibility,"
System,"
Aristotle
on the
Limits
and
203
Although the
cretion,
rule of
law is
individusl dis
pervert the
Aristotle
should
srgues thst
rule
if
is
wiser
than sll
resson.
his
It
countrymen com
would
bined, he
end of worse.
sbsolutely.
He hss
more
were subordinsted
to the
Nevertheless, the
and limiting case, because politicsl relstions are essentially deliberative, con ducted among equals, and there is no real, interpersonsl exchsnge of opinion or equslity in the absolute rule of one man. His rule is, therefore, not truly polit
ical. If
a man
such an
would, he
extraordinary man wished to benefit his countrymen, and such would legislate for them. Political knowledge must be essen
yet
tially
acts
upon
it,
should the
opportunity
arise,
above politics
(interestedness) itself.
suggestion
Aristotle's lation
act
and that
from
lster
offered
by
Mschiavelli concerning the importsnce of "Legislstor."13 Aristotle certsinly does role of the
use religion new constitution
"founding"
by
Roussesu
on the
legislator
to convince the people who cannot understand the reasons for his to adopt it as a matter of divine
will.
He does
(1322^2-37), but he
not
seems to much
hsve the
respect
ing
institutions in
mind.
He himself does
when
indicste
for the
or their
worship
he
humsn
chsrscteristics snd
observes thst
represent pro
his
resders
to
sttempt
to deceive or
second
I308b30-
40).
The
of
difference follows from the first. Aristotle denies the any radically
particular
possi
bility
must
instituting
suited
new
political
order.
Institutions
snd
laws
be
to the
character
of the
people. material
If these institutions
ways, as
serve
to educate as
well as
in
they
can,
and through
precept.
Political
order
is
not
damentally
and
a product
primarily of force.
s mstter of rhetoric
any
more
than
it is fun
points
more
knowledge than to any specific set of reforms. Here, too, his work stands in marked contrast to Plsto's Republic, at least on the surface. If political
consists
knowledge
largely
of
improve
on
the
basis
these
reflections,
ss
Aristotle
argues
may in Book II
(i264ai-5;
sion
to
man will hsve the occa 1269a), it is extremely unlikely that any that it is ss difficult observes Aristotle scratch. from legislate
entirely
to reform sn existing
regime
ss
it is
The
leg-
13.
Prince
204 islator
Interpretation
needs
to know
which
limits
of
the
possible, that
small
is,
to have
knowledge, in
changes can
to achieve even a
change.
Small
effects.
Aristotle
snd
know generally
sctivity because
organization
than making
on
specific
recommendstions
only be
"ought"
csuse the
what we can
depends
know far
do.
matters of
is
easier
than to
persuade
act
justly.
(I3i8bi
5)
Aristotle
most
addresses
the Politics
simply
stated,
is, obey
rulers,
and
association
on
friendship,
ernors
trust
in the character,
good
intentions
the gov
The
people
slone.
They
The
can grow only on the bssis of experience. sny government, Aristotle thinks, thst lesves them serve in the army to defend it, if they are paid (1297b
1-15).
that the
tion.
rulers
Any
obey their own laws; they must want to preserve the constitu infraction of the law must be immediately and seriously punished.
most
Aristotle differs
from both
modern
political
philosophers
and
con
temporary
politicsl scientists
snd ef
fectively
people
crucisl
in
politics.
not
believe is
right or
their
but
also to
to do
what
is beneficial (although
not
society in
rule,
ss a
order
to maintain
of
necessarily equally beneficial) for all members of a a regime. The fact that all ruling groups claim to for
the
common
mstter
right,
good, is
not
merely
kind
of
"white-washing"
or propaganda.
It
reflects
the
fundamental
benefit
Human beings
associate
common
or
pleasure,
of
and
all
The rationality
these asso
is simply
Few
how to
institutions; fewer
be farsighted
long-term
or
under-
live
fully
are
lives
or
live
lihoods
Politicsl
associations will
benefits
will
long as they benefit most of the inhabitants, even largely be rather low and concrete personal safety and
it is in the interest
powers so
of most of rulers men
Although Aristotle
does
not
srgues that
to be
just, he
self-
express
much
fsith in the
to exercise
control.
The
acquisitive
regim
Aristotle
would
unnaturally
unjustly
Aristotle
on the
Limits
and
205
the mechanics rather than give the contributions of necessary goods public rec
ognition
by
making
srtissns citizens.
Short
of
serves,
rulers
fortune
snd so undermine
the
itself
In arguing the
"virtue."
any selfless On the contrary, his Politics differs from Plato's Republic primarily because
Aristotle
puts self-interest
importance
of
own makes an
foremost. "To feel that something is one's of oneself is surely natural. Self
ishness is
justly blamed,
of oneself more
but this is really not so much love of oneself as love than one (I263a4i-i263b5). Beginning with man's
not
but
also
why
same
of the rulers
The
rise
desire,
the
desire
As
not only to live but to live well, that gives justice also limits both. The limits are, in the
first
instance,
economic.
we
fu
fsmily
fsmily
psrticulsrly to educste the young. So long ss there sre differences smong fsmilies snd there will be differences so long ss there is s division of lsbor
the division or sllocstion of tasks smong sdults,
correspond visible or
including
governing,
will not
perfectly to differences
snd
in
natural potentisl.
Potentisl
per se
is
not
identifisble,
its
sctuslizstion
is fostered
or restricted
by fsmily
circumstsnce.
Aristotle thus
shows
in psssing thst
equsl
modern,
realized.
liberal form is something of a myth which can Unlike Plato, Aristotle does not propose any "noble
need not
Aristotle
be confined, that it is
or vocations
not
even
appropriate, in
recognized
democracies
and that
all
contributions
tend to
be
in
But he
suggests
lead
such a
desire is freed,
and there
is
no
wsy
of
mere
life
to
its
own terms.
give rise
competition
for
government.
If humsn beings
for their
good,
be
psrtisl
however,
benefit
consent. of
snd those
in
office
will
have
its
Force
will
slwsys
be necesssry
Aristotle
to msintsin order.
And,
ss
s mstter
fsct in
contrast to right,
observes
thst
politicsl
power
tends to
who
devolve
understsnds
thst
it is in his
own
citi
zens will
(actually
of
subjects)
rather
find that he is
unable
to benefit them
and
completely
or equally.
neces
sity
providing the
basics, food
defense,
mandates
division
of
labor
206
which
Interpretation
makes
it impossible for
sll
to psrticipate in
political
deliberations
snd
so to
develop
fullest
extent possible.
Most human
beings
will continue
they do
be
an
Unlike Plato,
whose philosophers
must
be forced to
(Republic 579c),
Aristotle
suggests
inherently
is
so st
Aristotle's
level, however, in
thought or
effect. certain
In showing the limits of political action, Aristotle thus also teaches a kind of self-restraint. If his resders do not become Utopians or radical
reformers,
they
also
surely do
not
become
nihilists and
despair
of
humanity.
Temporal Royalties
in The Tempest
Timothy Fuller
The Colorado College
and
Virtue's
Airy
Voice
tempest which
of
but in the
midst
time.
is to ssy that it begins not only One msy thus be reminded that the
ship are chsr But these are
imposed
The
by
hoped for
within.
the circumstances
and time.
ordinary
are
passengers.
master, the
boatswain,
within
the
They
the
all, in greater
Rather, they are, in order of appearance, the ship's King of Naples, and the apparent Duke of Milan. or lesser degree, "authorities", yet they are all en
itself. Both Alonso is. However,
that respect,
sppesr
compassed
king
snd
first
with
msster?"
Literally, they
ss
the play
will
show, the
master
is the
storm
and
hence, in
thst a
the master
is
evident snd
who
msster of
the storm
is Prospero,
is
not evident.
It is
worth reflection
king
snd a
duke
is
neither of
these masters
is the
master
here. In these
mastery is
ambiguous.
Next in
patience
order
of appearance
who
is the
old
councillor
Gonzalo,
who
advises
to the
boatswain,
remind
is angry at the interference of the king and him of who they are. This reminder is inef
usurped
by
we will not
hand
a rope
more; use
no
your
(i.i. 20-22).
'
But Gonzalo
by
him"
authority here. On the other hand, he is heartened the apparent authority of the boatswain who "hath no drowning msrk upon (i.i. 27). The bostswain is contemptuous of the howling of the passengers
also
has
who of
are
westher or our
recognition
is
then undercut
who curses
by
the appearance
of
Sebastisn,
.
King
of
Nsples,
the boatswain to a
faretheewell
nor
Sebastian is
This
the first
character
to appear who
the
is
neither
an
authority
for
delivery
are
at
annual
meeting
of
16-18, 1981.
All
citations
edition edited
by Northrop
also
Frye,
1970.
edited
by
been
consulted.
208
Interpretation
But this
seems
respecter of authority.
to
curse
the
not
boatswain
ss
(i.i. 41-42), suggesting thst this apparent authority is respecter of authority even though he holds it.
well worsens and
inevitable
the
thresh-
King
of
and
snd curse.
The
king
snd prince
snd
hsve
some conventionsl
not. a
piety
st
hold
Antonio do
Rsther, they
certain
done"
sbsndon
the
king
sbout
ss
apart.
Gonzalo
affects
degree
of patience
in ssying "the wills sbove be (i.i. 62). One msy summsrize the first scene of the plsy by ssying thst it dramatizes the uncertainty of authority in the face of the elements. This reminds us of
our
his
temporality
hsbitusl
and snd
or
be
made
to this drama of uncertain authority. The ship's master and bostswsin respond
with
skill to their
fsmilisr
adversity;
Gonzslo
responds with
resignation;
the
King
fear
the Prince
with conventional
with
self-preserving instinct.
opens with s
The
tuousness.
It
tranquility sntitheticsl to the first scene's tempesspeech of Mirsnds, the wondering one, who begins,
father"
"If
by
your
srt, my dearest
presented
not
only in
wonder, philosophically, for philosophy appears in the first scene only tangentially in Gonzalo's resignation, but also in the unsmbiguous relstion of suthority between fsther snd child, snd in the
a rhetoric of reflection and
sense of commsnd
thst is implied
by
reference
to Prospero's
speech:
"srt"
But Mirsnds
in her first
for suffering empathetically with the insistence that if she were a "god of
to preserve rather than to
pates
victims of the
she would
have
of
used
her
power antici
destroy
daughter
Prospero
the conclusion to
which
Prospero himself
which
will come
be trans
reslizstion when
he
ss
power
of
destroys
in her
by
an act of
is his.
sn
By snticipsting
speech
renouncing the very power which Prospero's lster sction. Mirsnds transforms
3
sbstrsct
proposition renunciation
sbout
will
life into
self-ensctment
in the
midst of
life.
use
Prospero's
power
justly.
of
Prospero, in telling Miranda the full for the first time, begins by asking her to "Lend thy hsnd / And pluck my msgic gsrment from me. So, / Lie there my (i.ii. 23-25). This is the first occssion for Prospero to renounce his msgic
background
of
A further indicstion
this is thst
their situation
srt"
srt.
Underlying
Mirsnds's
amszement
is
history
Pros
loss
of events
events
at sll
msgical.
Prospero's
commsnd to
"be
sside of
lsying
authority is
connected to
his
revelation of the
Temporal Royalties
of
Virtue'
and
Airy
209
also
his authority in Milan. The setting aside of the magic garment is setting sside of the childhood illusion sbout the authoritstive psrent.
Mirands
professes
the
sssur
something of her esrliest childhood in Milsn. And, ss the story begins to be unfolded Mirsnda wonders whether their coming to the islsnd wss s curse or
s
blessing
"both"
snswers
were
Literally
it is
a curse
to
be exiled, but
blessing
thst
they
sble
to survive.
But it
is,
more
importantly,
in
Thus,
by
of recollection confrontation of
ii,
which
Prospero
produces
in Miranda is
her first
swsre
with
wonder
produces.
sspect
Mirsnds is
csused
by
her
a
"remembrance"
her early
childhood
But, ultimately, remembering is necessary if one is to blessing the have understanding thst is the msrk of humsn wisdom on humsn things.
and a curse.
For,
while
exercise of
the
power
Prospero his
entrusted
state
/ To
ear,"
what
tune
pleased
it is
also
true that Prospero was the true source of this sad state of affairs. The tempest
produced
in Miranda is
a reflection
of
the tempest
within
Prospero himself.
constituted
Prospero's
out of
recollections excite
following
which
his
sctusl political
descent
Italy
of
to exile,
in juxtaposition to Antonio's is
a political
assumption of
face
royalty"
(i.ii. 104),
ascent to
being
"god
power"
of
but
descent in the
sense of a revelstion of
the corruption
of
his
soul
in
endless smbition.
Prospero
now
sees thst
could
Antonio,
be
of
unlike
Prospero,
csnnot comprehend
the
thought thst s
library
s sufficient
concludes
exercising "temporal
the
For Antonio,
be
exhibited
return
ambition.
He thus
pact
with
King
of
King would support his extirpation of Prospero and Fearing an outcry from the people of Milan, however,
and
the
conspirators
set
Prospero
Miranda
adrift
th'
in the
sea"
sea
rather
than kill
them outright,
and so
they
were
(i.ii.
149).
Their
eventual
ssfe srrivsl on
who
msde possible
by
the
generosity
of
Gonzslo,
This
hsd pity
with sustensnce
both
edible
snd
intellectual. Prospero
calls this an
and sn
set of chsrity.
remembrance of providentisl
instance,
following
thst will
Miranda's innocent
charitsble
instinct,
of a
eventuste
from Prospero's
msrks
recollections of
This What
moment
slso
the
occssion
new
beginning for
his
Prospero.
wss
recollected
ss
prior
misfortune
is
sbout
to turn to
sdvsntsge. enemies
Fortune is
now
"bountiful",
now
she
210
Interpretation
from
power
beginning
ascent.
but the
action of
the
play
proper
the outset, an
This
structural
feature
an
supports portant
among
is, in
im
sense,
not
to
King Lear;
only to be found repestedly within the plsys but runs through the Shskespesresn corpus generally. (See, for exsmple, D. G. Jsmes in The
descent is
Dream of Prospero.) Prospero hss been presented with sn "suspicious whose influence he must court if his fortunes sre not forever sfter "to (i.ii.
178-184). snd
stsr"
droop"
sre
not
drooping, Mirsnds's
Ariel
mskes
eye
lids sre,
Ariel
Prospero's
servsnt
his first
appesrsnce.
reports
thst he
as
hss
carried
out
in
precise
of the alone
storm on the
on
directed
by
others
sbout,
hsrbor,
plsn
the crew to
must
be
csrried out
sleep below deck. The remsinder of Prospero's between 2 p.m. snd 6 p.m. The moment of fortune
already
referred action
to
is
reinforced
by
which all
the
remaining
equivslent
is to be undertaken, which,
by
scholsrs, is roughly
to the time
it tskes to
In the
Prospero
who
conversation
wss
preceded
the isle
by
the exile
Sycorax,
msgicisn,
is
contrasted
or from serving evil to serving good. If serving black magic to white magic Sycorax had the power to imprison Ariel, Prospero had the power to release him. The release wss predicated on service, for a time, to Prospero. Ariel
in working off this indebtedness. And, although the action of the run from 2 p.m. to 6 p.m., the freedom of Ariel is to come after is to play two days (i.ii. 229), presumably to give him time to guide all back to Milan. During the dozen years when Ariel was incarcerated in a pine tree he
engaged
is
howled
and
screamed
in
such
way
as
have the
power
to amend
a nymph
to be
invisible to
all
but himself
Prospero. He initiates
wake
his
thus
invisibility by
clear
exiting,
whereupon
Miranda is bidden to be
given sight of
up.
It is
that
Miranda is
not at
this point to
Ariel.
against
her wishes, to be
given sight of
Caliban,
whom
"esrth"
detests
as a villain.
slave and
of
is
addressed as
presents
the ruler
the
isle
by
Sycorax. Thus, for Caliban, Prospero is the usurper who, as we know, has arrived here because of being usurped. But Caliban had attempted the overthrow of Prospero by raping Miranda in the hope of populating the islsnd with Cslibans. This stirs Mirands to curse Cslibsn. Unable to be im printed with goodness, Caliban wants to imprint goodness with himself, to
spring
of
Temporal Royalties
subdue
and
Virtue's
Airy
21 1
to be
self
it to his how to
power. speak
To be imprinted
to
with goodness
taught
snd, thus,
be
sble
consciously.
But it
would appesr
to self-swsreness
result of
sre
language is
unsavory to ssy the least. Caliban's view is that the knowing how to curse. This might be expected from the
we
have here
a confrontation
responses
human in the
condition.
seeing the
world
and
being
revolted
by
innocence,
not alter
she
may
not always
accurately distinguish one from the other does her disposition. The other response, in Caliban, consists
who
in the
heightening
was
whst
Whether it Cslibsn
most
Prospero
or
Miranda
who taught
is disputed
are
by
scholars), in the
of
important
both Miranda
and
Caliban
the results
Prospero's
has the capacity to unlock both orderliness and disorderliness in these two but, cases, has remained in control of both. On the isle Prospero's rule is both just and competent.
tutelage. Prospero
The
to
Ferdinand,
allayed
accompanied
by
a consequence of the
music.
loss
by
god
Ariel's
of
song is in the
waters and
some
also
his
spiritusl sbove
frenzy,
snd
he is led
on
by
on
no
esrth-
bound
Just
sound snd
it is
him.
on
as
Ferdinand is led
raise
by
a spirit,
on
so
Miranda,
Prospero to
a
spirit
her
eyes to
look
Ferdinand, is
taken
noble.
It is
likely
her
directly
Thus, Prospero
encounter with
the
first
encounter of
Mirands
snd
Ferdinsnd. Esch
esse
is returning from
sea snd
sn
encounter
with
the
distssteful:
in Mirsnds's
the
Cslibsn; in Ferdinand's
the
grief of
losing
Mirands
ss
divine
snd
s goddess
he
supposes
her the
and
The
proper
union
of male
female is the
as
encounter of
presented
a mistsken
perception
the p3rt of
It is the
results
conclusion
to
which
Whst
2.
is
complex
ruling
3nd
about
being
this en
their
Upon
reflection,
answer
readers
may
themselves.
counter?
The
as
is
by interpreting
Moreover,
attitude
reveal
unplumbed
depths
chess) in a manner unmistakably reminiscent of is intimated in those striking human interactions which experience, drawing thought beyond all ordinary objects of con
(they play
sideration
into the
mysteries of conscious
life.
212
ruled.
Interpretation
met s goddess of
the
islsnd,
3sks
if
she csn
direct his
there,
snd
if
she
is
s maid.
She
surprises
him
by speaking
spp3rently or thst he
spirit
reminds
Ferdinsnd that,
as
his f3ther is
now
desd, he is
would
the
le3ding
were
spesker of
king,
be if he
st
hss
recognized rules
divine spirit,
snd
hss
Prospero
Mirands
potentisl
the
King
of
of
Nsples
Ferdinsnd;
they
must
nonetheless,
constitute
their
msrks
them
for
each
other,
and
and
together
the
key
to the
reconciliation
Milan
Nsples thst
tske plsce
lster.
st this point understsndsbly thinks of Milsn ss subordinate to Naples because he thinks Alonso has ruled Antonio. But of course Prospero rules
Ferdinsnd
isle. He
will
be
able
Miranda
and
Ferdinand,
now
thus achieving what, for example, Lear could not intention has succeeded, for Ferdinand and Miranda "have
achieve.
Prospero's
eyes"
changed and as
and
Ferdinand has
ceased
thinking
be
of
Miranda
of
as
goddess
begun to
is
not
queen
Naples.3
But just
so
she
ready to be relessed from the tutelsge free of due submission to the old king.
of
Prospero,
s
Ferdinsnd is
not yet
Wishing
of
to
keep
mstters complicsted
for
arriving
with
trescherous
intent to
by
Prospero's hypnotic
charm.
Measure Prospero is exemplary of the union of power and justice as is denced by his use of power here to unite those who should be together. The first
scene of the second act
of
begins
with
Gonzalo's
speech of conso
for human beings every day it is "our theme of (u.i.6) as human. But few live through impending mortality to enjoy merriment once more. One ought to weigh sorrow against comfort.
present
woe"
death is
consolation
his son,
so
and
Antonio
and
Sebastian
make
fun
of
Gonzalo. Just
as
they
showed
themselves to no advsntsge
now
desth,
they
seem,
hsving
in the opening scene's confrontstion with escsped, to hsve forgotten the ordinsry
enough
mortslity
of
life
which
Gonzalo wisely
has
not
forgotten. Gonzalo
condition
Prospero,
and
is
ensbled to see
opportunity in it
as well as
danger,
are
and,
more
importantly,
opportunities
and
Antonio
mindful
of
However,
conspiracy. most
their notion of
Every
opportunity is entirely one of self-assertion occssion of life is the razor edge between life snd
snd
desth
3.
desth
of
whstever
potentisl
in
single
One may note here the coalescence of the divine, the political-legal, and the passionate dramatic moment. A comparison of the method by which this is brought about in
other
Temporal Royalties
and
Virtue's
Airy Voice
in The Tempest
213
for nobility there msy be in the soul of an individual. How such occasions sre used will determine whst sssessment is to be msde of the chsrscter enscted
and so revealed.
Every
set is
s self-disclosure.
But
whst
is disclosed is
not
only
of
is
required.
An
sction
is
slso s consequence
the
the
chsrscter.4
is entertsined, that's
/ Comes to
ridiculed reveals
grief
Gonzslo 's
"dollar"
is
by Sebsstisn
snd
on
"dolor"
and as
not
(n.i.19)
So
slso
well
Gonzalo's
stubborn persistsnee
to be bothered.
in trying to console Alonso, who prefers Adrisn's sttempt to see s delicste climste or
is
fen. Whst's
green
to
Gonzslo is tswny
might
to Antonio.
ses-
water stained.
be
expected
in their
situation.
By
contrast,
marriage
Sebastian,
of
he turns to Alonso, chides him for insisting on the his daughter in Tunis against their advice and thus setting in
when
led to their
the loss
of
Ferdinand.
actions and
Alonso 's
parallels
fate, looked
at
of
his
own
Prospero's. There is
way, then, in
Sebastian has
a clearer
perception thsn
Gonzslo,
who wishes
sbstrsct.
He
speculstes thst
close
here is
a place
for
a new
commonwealth as a natural as
anarchy,
point
to nature and
without sovereignty.
Sebastian
and
Antonio
out, this
be founded
wealth
by
an
act of sovereignty.
beginning"
end of
his
common
forgets the
(11. i.
154).
Among
of
other
innocence in this
extended
innocence is
a
its
origins. of a
The
pre-
description
by
Gonzalo
his
vision
quite
clearly
4.
expresses
view
of conduct
like that
qualified
when
Shakespeare's: "This
not
unresolved
and
inconclusive
character of as
human
remarkably conduct is
(and
they
are understood
recognized which
self-enactments; that
is,
at
they
are performed.
There is
least the
to-vanish
echo of an
imperishable
achievement and
when
soon-
victory,
when
his
loyalty
is it
fortitude
and
the evanescent
defeat,
full
are
the con
or other
siderations.
But
nowhere
more than a
distant
echo.
Self-enactment (virtuous
not a generic
wise) is itself
identity."
an episodic and an
as ondoyant and as
of unresolved a
fugitive;
unity but
dramatic
Michael Oakeshott, On Human Conduct (Oxford, 1975). P- 84. Self-enactment has to do with "an agent's sentiment in choosing and performing the actions of an action is the action itself considered in terms the he chooses and performs
'motive'
of the
sentiment
or sentiments
procure
in
which
it is in
chosen
and
performed
choosing
an agent
an
action as
is he
always
meaning to
satisfaction
thinking
of
to think and enacting or re-enacting himself as he wishes to be chooses to think is related to his understanding and respect for himself, to the
chooses
integrity
his
character,
he
must respond
action."
by
choosing
Op.
214
Interpretation
psrsdise where there would
sbundsnce"
fallen
be
neither
lsbor
nor struggle
but "sll
vision
which
further
world
consolation
to Alonso is to
Alonso
"nothing"
commonwealth
is known
can
by
speculative
dream. It
be
understood
commonwealth which
psrsllel
he eventually dissolves as a nothing, and perhaps slso in to Cslibsn's sim to people the islsnd with Cslibsns. Whst is envisioned is revelstory
of
by
of
esch
the
Ariel
Gonzslo is
snd
Alonso to
sleep.
imsginstion to Antonio,
who sees
s crown on
csnnot
swske or
dresming. He
they
sre
dre3ming
Antonio,
on the other
hsnd,
3ccuses
Sebsstisn
while
of not
exercising his imsginstion snd thus sllowing his fortunes to die he lives, or slumber while he wskes (11. i. 2 10). One
might conclude
st
embodiment of
his dream
within
3re presented
here in the
for itself
where
of
itself
would
be
ssfe or sppropriste.
Sebastian
recognizes 3wske
by
speech to
him is
snoring.
Who then is
distinction between Antonio's smbition, which is to in Sebastian's stature threefold to be the teacher of ambition and Sebas
s
tian's
confession of
laziness. Sebastian's
encourages
a
natural
tendency is
to ebb
(ll.i.216will
Antonio's
ambitiousness.
Antonio
teach
in which, so to speak, way he taught Prospero about ambition by overthrowing him. The man of ambition looks for opportunities to realize ambition. For now, Antonio can realize his
ambition reminiscent of the manner
ambition
Sebastian
in
for Alonso
for Gonzslo is
of
beginning
Claribel
out
But
as
Sebastian takes Antonio's meaning he remembers that Antonio over be a source of discomfort to Sebastian. However,
Antonio
uses
it
as s mesns to persusde
well
my gsrments sit upon me, / Much fester thsn before. My brother's servsnts / Were then my fellows; now they sre my (11. i. 266-68). Antonio thinks
the man this is his dream whereas the play seems to be saying that power shows the man for what he is. One notes also that, whereas in Gonzalo's dream there would be a natural anarchy, or a spontaneous equality of men and women, Antonio's dream is of tyranny and distinction in his favor. His dream is consistent with his sction. This disturbing turn of events prompts that
power makes
Sebsstisn to feel
not
remind
Antonio
of
his
"conscience"
Antonio
confesses thst
this
deity
in my
bosom"
sn stheist
Temporal Royalties
with
Virtue'
and
215
of conscience
kindred
earth
or
brotherly
upon"
brother,
contempt seems
he lies
ambition are a
full
realization
of
his
He in
own
mortality
sll
be
not
unimpressed
by
it. He can, in
psrsllel
the mortality
others
but
in himself. He is
to
Cslibsn in wishing to populate the world only with his own image, but becsuse, unlike Cslibsn, he has the sttributes of full humanity, he is a lower character
Caliban because he hss the cspscity to dissemble in order to exploit the reslity of the humsn condition. If Alonso is no better thsn the earth he lies
than
beings,
then
for Antonio in
it is
slso
more
slive
seclusion.
Cslibsn
at
least
recognizes
that there
is
in books
(m.ii.89 90).
self-
The
humsnity
which
is
constituted
is
made
human in the
enactment
the dreams
of
imprint the
matter will
earthiness
make
with
form. Who
con a as
trols
the
teaching
who
form to
difference. Sebastian,
(11. i. 2 16), that is
of smbition.
slothful
fellow
will
describes himself
with
as
"standing
matter,
be imprinted here
to Antonio's plans
Antonio's form
His
quick
submission
is
explained
by
passive
vision
of another. The watery Sebsstisn is properly slothful snd phlegmatic. Thus Antonio's case becomes his precedent (n. i. 284). Alonso's sleep shall be like Prospero's study. Neither study nor
persuaded.
Having
little imaginative
grief can
be
comprehended
by
is
in the ordering
of
humsn
sffairs.
rouse
Gonzalo
and
and
favor Gonzalo
to
Prospero,
real
and
Gonzalo
Ferdinand. The
second scene of
Alonso, being saved, set off to search for Act II plays Cslibsn, Trinculo and Stephano.
and
Caliban's first
look
at
Stephano
Trinculo (11.ii.114)
to Miranda's
convinces
at
him that
things"
they they
are
"fine
This is
parallel
first look
Ferdinand
from the
prefers
moon
snd
he
will
conduct
these
on
a tour of
the
island. He
selves shows
They, believing
them
Caliban
in wishing to submit himself to yet s new msster. In the mesntime, Act III, scene i, opens with the enslsved Ferdinsnd, whose burdens sre nothing when redeemed by the thought thst he is serving
his
slavish nature
Mirands. She
Ferdinand
met.
revesls
her
she
name
to
him,
all
against
and
opines
that
is flswless
outstrips
and
the
first
that
he has
imagination
ssys
depsrting
commands
that,
in 3Ctuslity he is
216
Interpretation
a series of professions
There follows
the other. Love
in
to
be the
servsnt of
Antonio
and
induces self-tempering and marks the contrast to the ambitious slothful Sebasti3n who sre incspable of love or self-restraint.
(m.i.89).5
We
are
immediately
reminded
of
is
not
free
by
the re
appearance of
Caliban, Stephano
Stephano to
and
Trinculo
at
the
outset of
Act III,
scene
can
ii.
Caliban
and
entreats
overthrow
Prospero
with
so
that Stephano
rule
equated
self-assertion
once
more. ss
Again
have
be
called
the tyrsnnicsl
imsginstion
constantly
appear
being
upset
by
the presence of
that Caliban
spirators sgsinst
is simultsneously sttscking Trinculo, thus setting the con esch other. Ariel spesks in Trinculo's voice snd thus csuses
Stephsno to drive Trinculo further away from him. Cslibsn then proposes thst they murder Prospero in his sleep, so thst Stephsno will be sble to rule,
to possess Mirsnds snd to create offspring
schieve
will
his
Csliban is to Stephano
Antonio is
to Sebastian.
But Ariel is
intervening
counsels cslmness
again and playing tunes which csuse fright. Cslibsn because the isle is "full of noises, / Sounds and sweet sirs
not"
(m.ii.130). These
spurs
sounds orchestrate
Caliban's
How
and
his description
rule.
condition of
Prospero. But it
with
would appear
disappear
the
destruction
to suggest
Prospero. There is nothing in the speech of Caliban thst the sweet sound of the isle is not dependent on Prospero snd
of
Ariel
rule.
even
though,
of
When Caliban
not
dreams, he dresms
thst the
thst
drop
not
but he does
surrounded
understsnd
dresm just
riches
is fulfilled in
living
would
by
the sweet
sweet
hsrmonies
of
Thus,
are
surprisingly, he
what
riches were
if the
"dreams"
to
he alresdy become
enjoys
inferior to
reign
"realities"
in the
of
Stephano.
Caliban
cannot
of
dreaming,
a metaphor
and
appreciate
just,
If this
which
would
be to live
encompassed
in the
art
harmonious imagination.
action
is
it may also be said that Caliban cannot appreciate the rule of the poetic as what distinguishes the human being from mere esrth. Act III, scene iii, brings us bsck to Alonso 's psrty. The scene opens with both Gonzslo snd Alonso wesry from wsndering in s msze. Alonso tells
as seems
itself,
likely,
then
Gonzslo,
5.
"Sit down
snd rest.
/ Even here I
will
put off
my
hope,
snd
keep
For Antonio,
prevents
self-restraint
inertia that
most
attempting
much.
is only concealed ambition. For Sebastian, there is only the For the former, everything is permissible; for the latter,
much
trouble.
Temporal Royalties
Virtue'
and
Airy
217
drowned"
speech
in Act V,
scene
i,
Prospero's first
sesrch on
renuncistion
tend"
in Act I,
scene
Our frustrate
ss
not
it
sppears
to
Alonso, but
islsnd's
relstion mocks
to the
stormy
condition of
the powers of
temporal, humsn existence, whose undulation the human imagination to order the world in its own
attitude of
Gonzalo
and
Alonso is
drsms-
by
the contrast
snd
immediately
thst
made with
the attitude
now shsred
between
Antonio
Sebsstisn. dramstic
s contrsst 3
new
Immedistely following
music
hsrmony
snd
sweet
srise,
sccompsnied
by
refreshed
and
inspired,
while
Sebastian
bsnquet. Typicslly, Gonzslo snd Alonso sre and Antonio respond with touristic
The appearing shspes sre, to Alonso, more gentle snd kind than human beings. And, in sn aside, Prospero editorializes that Alonso speaks
amusement.
well
because
some
there
are
worse
thsn
devils. The
gentle
but
monstrous
shspes vanish
and
despairing
Antonio's
best is
past"
usefully
with
"prologue"
reflect
very
see
reminiscent
of
so that at
this
moment
wicked see
opportunity
where
the decent
only
cause
for despair,
that this
would
arrangement
must
be
emblematic
of a providentisl
Prospero.
only intimsted in the vsnishing moments of time. If it is true, ss Senecs remsrked, thst the good differ from God only in the element of time, reflection compels
the thought that
our vision of right order
Underlying
nsturslly is snother
but it is
one
is
fleeting
divine
would almost
certainly be firm
For it is
and constant.
But this is
which underlies
the play
to Shakespeare's
grest
art.
poetic
constancy in the midst of endless Peterson that "time in the Renaissance cosmology is only the
motion,
a condition rather thsn sn
sgent,"6
measure
of
snd go on to
ssy
of
immortality is
comprise
agency
par excellence.
If,
following Hooker,
opportunities
we
were
to
admit
causeth
both"
things nor
of
things, be led
although
it
contain
(Ecc. Pol.
11.383),
we would
on
is
suffused with
being
note
because
experience eternal.
in its fleetingness,
excites also
unsvoidsbly
thst the
end with
On the
other
hand,
thst
we
will
snd
it
will
come vision
to sn
the
ending
the
plsy.
is itself,
sfter
Marino,
1973). P-
r7-
218
sll,
Interpretation
snd
not
fleeting
sharply
constsncy
unquslified.
To
quote
temporal things
more
sctively
psrticipste
in the
eternal.
On the
hand,
to be
aware of process
is to be
more
sharply
aware of
its
remorseless-
ness and of
dependency
it."7
This
in
sn act of contemplstion
denies the possibility of ignoring the temporal intimstes the superiority of poetic vision to philo
seeing further thsn philosophy of but in ss creatures or theology seeing crumbling dust must see: "A breath Thou srt Desth's thou art, / Servile to sll the skyey influences
sophic or
fool"
m.i.8
1 1).
Humsnity
is free
not to
be
not
temporal,
to
choose
in
self-ensctment of s
its visions,
snd
by
such
visions
be
the
of
the
occssions
snd grain
instigstors
of
with
them.
It is
seeing
universe
in
ssnd, seeing substsntislity in the merest momentsry contiguity of goings-on. Time is duration to be endured. Self-ensctment is enduring according to an
agent's
with self-understanding.
opponents
into
confrontation
time as duration but in the shelter of the island. The reduction in com
of
plexity
of the
each
life thus
achieved
allows
the
drsmstic
evocstion
of
the timeless
presence
in the
midst of
characters.
What distinguishes
of time.
from is
another
is the
to
use
character
makes
Nobility
of response
connected
seeing
love
and
persistently occasioning the necessity forgiveness. Whst Prospero will finslly schieve is the extension
condition as
human
the
temporality by
have
the marriage of
Ferdinand
changed
Miranda,
as
almost
commentators
noticed.
What has
has become
law
of
the enchanted
isle instead
resurgent
Such agency is to be
this way is the
mark of
seen as
teasing constancy
out of nothingness,
and
in
7.
Op.
may wonder to what extent this is a specifically Christian interpretation of It is true that the virtues of love and forgiveness are specifically associated with Christiantiy. It is also true that there are many occasions of Christian symbolism in Shake speare's play which cannot be dismissed as mere ironies. However, what these usages meant to
the play's action.
8. The
Shakespeare this
author
is
unable
despite
having
examined
What is
unmistakable
is the dominance
of poetic vision
the relation of poetic vision to a profound confrontation with mortality, and reconciliation. At the very
failing, hope,
and
least it
would seem
justice
the one
hand;
and
faith,
and
on
the
other.
He
could not
without
not seem
likely Shakespeare
have
achieved
merely ironic negation of the tradition which rested on the intimation of the eternal in the temporal a tradition which itself
achieve
by
exploring Christian themes the profundity he did, in fact, the Augustinian meditation on
rested
on
an
affinity for
Plato's complementary
account of what
human
experience must
inevitably
involve.
Temporal Royalties
"emblematic
struction of
narrative",9
and
Virtue's
Airy Voice
an
in The Tempest
of
-219
that
is, it is
imitation
action,
or
it is
humsn
sction not
from the
implicitly
in human from
action
but
above so to speak.
who
directly
or
seen.
It is seeing human
semiconscious.
characters
low
characters
are reslistic
cynical
simply
moment of
Every
agent
a promise and a peril, for at every moment the human between merely temporal royslties and virtue's siry voice. Prospero's vision is s momentsry unificstion of these themes before time
moment
is thus
is
caught
sweeps sll
on
the
other
hsnd,
the
a vision
and
sign of
its
in
all of
moments
of
human
the
en
durance. It is the
which st
fleeting
Antonio
unity
snd
the real
snd
ideal
hsd been
hopelessly
hand,
sepsrsted as the
between Milan
on
on the one
the dukedom
the other.
In this
reflective moment
in the
midst of
time
none of
the reslities
the
humsn
can
condition
whst
is
ssserted
what
be the
occasion
deeper
vision
it
must
visible and
transitory
At any rate, Ariel returns now to make the banquet vanish, and he reveals himself as the minister of Fate demanding of Alonso, Sebsstisn snd Antonio
repentance of thunder.
power:
and
from this
point on
an
Prospero high
praises
Ariel's
work
has
reached the
height
of
clap his
"My
charms
In their distractions: they now sre in my stste Alonso thinks the clouds, the winds
Prospero. The tempest has
and
now revesled
itself
Fste
snd 3 call
to remembrance
hence
repentance.
Thus, Alonso
Alonso / And
wishes with
assumes
that the
loss
of
Ferdinand is the
recompense
for his
allisnce with
Antonio
to
sgsinst
in the
The
mud.
e'er plummet
sounded with
mudded"
confrontation
the ethereal
snd
Antonio
confront
is their
the
tempest.
island,
the second to
self-awareness.
By
and
contrast
the
first
scene
of
with
Prospero, Ferdinand
to release Ferdinand
good.
Mirands, in
s situstion where
beginning
and
from his
monishes
thralldom.
found
Prospero
ad
Ferdinand to be
Ferdinand
and
mskes s
life"
snd
long
9.
Peterson,
op.
cit., p. 215.
220
Interpretation
of passion
lapses
Ariel
The
Ferdinand
the
and
and
now
will produce
masque
masque.
duly
celebrates and
fertility
what
of
sky
and earth
in the lives
spirits,
which
fancies"
of
Ferdinand
Miands. Ferdinsnd
is to
come
by
remarking,
by
mine art
confines
called
to enact /
"Spirits, My present
(iv.i. 120-22). Ferdinand understandably wishes for time to stand still for the fair thing it has revealed. But time will not stand still, for at the moment of harvest in the wearying August of the mssque, Prospero's fsncy
now
shifts
visions
the island
of
shift
with
confirms
the
interior drama
of
hsd
plsyed with
the thought
humsn life
masque,
beautiful,
majestic,
evil."10
transient:
but it
would not
do. It is instesd
bitter drams
of good snd
"In the
end
upon
society
in the
event
itself."11
The
return
a comprehensive view
who
leading
to moderation:
is
crowned
/ With
immortality
voices
lead. Prospero's
remembrance of
fears to follow / Where airy Caliban 's conspiracy is, naturally, the
occasion
for remembering the general atmosphere of conspiracy Prospero has inhabited, and, necessarily, in the end, the fact that he himself has conspired
against
in Prospero's
own
is
evident to
snd
in
reflecting
the
stuff
on
of
Cslibsn
which
recognizes a
to transform
which
human beings
formed. Caliban's is
nature
on of
Prospero's
dwelling
Thus, Caliban and his co-conspirators now like animals and are driven out by spirits in
snd
dogs chasing prey. Now all Prospero's enemies are st his mercy, resched. The king snd his followers hsve become
hunting
is
sufficient msgicsl
for Prospero. He
powers. under
his
to
Prospero's
They
thus lie
foul
and
muddy,
humanity. As they
repentance which
are
of reason overcomes
gradually led back into the human condition the flood their muddiness. Their humiliation is the prerequisite to
is the
beginning
and
not of
their
degradation but
of their ascent
That there is
virtue
intimated for
Gonzalo is
10. 11.
some
time,
in Alonso has been strongly in his first reunion with Prospero. Antonio may be held
p.
of course virtuous.
Sebastian
and
by
some
136.
James,
op.
cit., p. 150.
Temporal Royalties
virtue
and
Virtue's
Airy
revesl
221
becsuse
of
Prospero's direst to
Alonso'
without
to remind
loss of Ferdinand by saying he saying that he has lost his daughter to Ferdinand. Alonso of his separation from his daughter Claribel.
s
apparent
having
restored
Duke
of
Milan
now
produces
Ferdinand.
The
"all
of
play's conclusion
us"
contained
in Gonzalo's
reflection that
in
one voyage
no msn wss
his
own"
(v.i. 209-13).
snd
dresms.
Possibly
the lsst
evil
for Prospero
in cynicism, the
psrs-
Antonio
in
psrts
Antonio is, like Iago, an antipoetic mind who sees the world instesd of by totsl In this dilemms the eternsl is only,
malady.
vision."
doxicslly,
s momentsry solution within the terms of the human condition. The incipient lawlessness of humanity can be subdued "only for a moment in a scene created
by
wholly
poetic s
consciousness."12
The
enacted self
is itself
fugitive;
not s generic
unity but
s
drsmstic identity.
of sdditionsl
considerations:
There are,
however,
and most
number
it
would
be
structure,
remarking its evanescence both in theme commentators have done so. To this point, the dis
without an attempt
cussion
has
proceeded
mindful
in
and of
to be
of
that the
his
vision
is
"baseless"
is
"insub
that
pageant"
stantial
(iv.i.
155).
On the
other
hand, it
is
be
reaffirmed
there is
fabric This
and
pagesnt,
snd
their reslity
constituted
in their
msterislity.
certifies
roots of sents
philosophy and theology, and leaves no doubt that Shakespeare pre both a conception of excellence or nobility ss real, snd slso s forthright sccount of the difficulty of schieving these quslities. Since thst schievement
is intuitive
snd/or
intellectusl, it is
esrlier
s mstter of
poetic seeing.
It hss been
poetic
suggested
thst,
within
philosophicsl or theological seeing. To the extent seeing is superior to that is so in The Tempest, it is because the srt of seeing the Tempest seems to demsnd poetic seeing, snd, if proof were needed, The
"insubstsntisl"
itself is proof,
of such seeing.
The
rank of characters
lack
of
it,
which
they
possess, and
possibility in the play is based on the vision, or on the degree to which they can learn,
the
sheer
previously they hsd not seen. This is, Prospero snd thus is reminiscent of of course, true in the highest degree of Measure. for Measure in insight Vincentio's Duke
when given a
fresh chsnce, to
see whst
12.
York,
1976),
222
Interpretation
other
On the
snd
hsnd,
there is s clesr
difference
of tone
has
more
teaching
of
about
the value
of
domestic
or
familial
divine
orderliness virtue
for the
maintenance extremes
of political order
in
a condition of moderate
suburbs
(between the
which,
mesn
snd
perfection
on
Does this
long
route not
described
kind
abandoned a
of
teaching for
dependence
of
imsginstion
ss
for the
imperfectibility
much evidence
to suggest otherwise.
of proper marriage
and
is
maintained
in The Tempest
in their
vision
in
a semidivine presentation.
other and reinforced
Ferdinand
Miranda
are united
of each
by
sky in the msrrisge mssque. But this is done in s wsy thst remsins consistent with The Tempest's internsl integrity snd themstic cohesion. In the second
plsce, Prospero's descent from
snd
power which
is
repsired
by
an ascent
in wisdom,
his
his
proper post
in Milan
hensive vision,
Shskespesre's
vision
recurrent theme of
larger
moderation
display.
greatest effort to achieve a
on
moral
and
subsumed
mesn not
the thought that consistently underlies his teaching life. This play seems to assert that generic unity is in dramstic identity. But whst does it mesn to ssy thst? Does it
political
On the contrary, it is
vision
if there is it does.
something in the
snd sober
we must
poetic
thst persists,
excellence,
judgment
clesrly
ss
Rsther, ssy thst no humsn sgent of such poetic seeing persists. To the extent thst the vision of The Tempest is specificslly Prospero's vision,
or, for thst mstter,
sleep,"
specificslly is
Shskespesre's, it
behind"
must
be "rounded
with
dissolving
instead
persist.
(iv.i.i54ff.). To the
extent that
least
mysterious presence
presence
However, its
seen
only Prospero's or Shakespeare's, but is in the text itself, it obviously must in the text depends on its continued potential
the observers themselves
for
being
by
successive observers.
But this
who will
"practice"
potential what
depends in
some
measure
on
know
of
they
are
being
expected
to see.
Implied, therefore, is
be
reaffirmed on
seeing
but
which must
every
who of
occasion
by
thus
distinguishing
do
In this way The Tempest may be understood the highest sort, and necessarily reminiscent, in its own idiom,
not
see.
teaching
put
the experience
of
of
Socrates. To
see
in this
sense
avoid
is to
into
practice a vision of
human
conduct
but,
simultaneously, to
the reduction
Temporal Royalties
of such cannot vision
with
and
Virtue's
Airy
223
temporality
of
humsn things,
sny certsinty be of permanent value in guiding humsn beings through the vicissitudes of historical existence. It is the vision to which one
subscribes rsther thsn s command which one must obey.
optimism
There is
fundamental
in this understanding that what is to be seen can be seen despite the conspiracy against it, and that it can be resffirmed in every psssing moment.
It is thus
s vision which seeks exercise of
beings in the
of whst
their sgency,
the possibility
of s
conception
humsn sgency
should
le3d to
snd
sn
elusive, but
The purity
of missdventure
try
hsnd,
insofsr
they msy be
revesled
Prospero's is
of a
misadventure
in
political responsibilities
political responsibilities. misadventure
different
sort
from
Furthermore, Prospero's
lesds to
grester,
more
compre
hensive understsnding symbolized by his two insdvertent snd the second by choice under
Prospero's initisl
motives
the
first
of unlimited
power.
betray
limited
perception,
subject
to revision snd
improvement, but
snd, in the event,
Antonio's
be
transformed or transposed
might
into his
different
urging.
Of Caliban, it
where which
be
said that
They
are some
between instinct
would
and
reflective
They
snd
permit
us
he
might
be
able
to
advsnce.
Antonio is
unsmbiguous
in this sense,
srise
lower.
tslk of the higher snd the
The
the
question
will,
of course,
and
ss
to
whether
lower,
the
and of
base
the
noble,
the
admirable
and
despicable,
the
benevolent
sentiment
if
self-enactment
is the
self-chosen
the actor
sssess
by
to
which
to
of
motives?
this
swareness
the
comprehensive
range of possible
motives
The
range
is
real and
imposes itself
by
natural
is
meant
experience
imposes
upon
humsn
But it is
not
only
natural.
range of motives of
is
slso
orderly
snd csnnot
we
be
expressed otherwise
thsn
in
terms
better
we are
or
worse.
Thus,
msy be flooded
by
motives
but
not
permitted
to be unaware of their
msny implications in
possible a
moral sense.
Finally, it may be
remarked
that no
hierarchy
motives
224
Interpretation
This is true
enough.
of
is
sppsrent.
But
or
whst
is decisive is the
motives,
snd of
revelstion of
of
chsrscter
in respect, first,
schieved
better
worse
second,
the
srrsngement
by
esch
well-disposed
individusl
the
better
motives
(including
srrsnged).
consideration of
Ususlly, Shskespesre
the
stsndsrd
in
s chsrscter who
motives
is
an
both
well-disposed snd
exhibiting
sn extensive
array
thus
hierarchy
of
of
the
virtues
of
in
importance
depend in
chsrscters.
each
on
imposes
a
on
the
The The
relstive
does
not
prevent
hierarchical
arrangement
cases.
require
different in
arrangements
in different
each case
is
among the good things in the midst of diminish one virtue for the sake of another. On the contrary,
one
virtue
upon
for the
sske
of
virtue
sltogether.
Were this
must
not
the esse,
contingency
of virtue
would overwhelm
virtue.
The
good msn of
if he is to
outwit the
deceptions
the
wicked
this if it is
From this
nificant
"Epilogue"
point
of
view, the
on
sig
with will
dimension: Prospero's
strength st
overthrown,
he is
reduced
to the
fsint
the
disposal
not
temporality.
But if he is
to be
"confined"
depend
vision
on
is, it
his
will
depend
his
to resubstantiate it as
successors. of
Their
breath
must
fill his
sails or else
his
project was
seeing
wishes of
now
"to please",
he
to
be
In addition,
to persist
in the
us
persistence about
their pleasure.
rank
In the meantime,
the play
has taught
something
the
of pleasures.
Thus,
would of
while
has
provided
a precept
for seeing better. To insist thst this is insist thst the dreams of politics are not
not
political
tesching
be to
encompassed
by
the dream
life.
The Pursuit
and
of
Happiness in Jefferson
and
Hobbes
Jeffrey Barnouw
John
Dewey Fellow,
ig83~84
maintained
including
he
was
"preservstion
whst
of
life,
snd
liberty
with
the pursuit of
widespresd
happiness,"1
conviction
respect
stating smong his compstriots, but slso msking to the inaliensble right to the pursuit of hsppiness
he felt to be
particularly
s complex
fsr-resching
provides
implicstions for
is
constitutions! theory.
The
snd
series
is
sn
sscending
order: self-preservstion
s prerequisite of
liberty,
Following
construe
he tends to
pursuits
and ultimately Hobbes, individusl ss ssfegusrding security, liberty themselves politicsl, nor necesssrily public. If he thus and political as so-cslled
negative
Hume
Montesquieu, Locke
conceives
liberty
in
terms,
not
as
an
end
in itself but
goal'
as
as
making
possible other
of
the 'ultimate
progresses.
open-ended, s
it
Jefferson is
provide
not ssserting thst legitimste government has an for the hsppiness of its citizens. On the contrary, with
obligstion regsrd
to
to the
constitution of
the
stste
the
emphssis
is
'pursuit'
ss much on
ss on
whst
'hsppiness'.
Not only is it not the plsce of the stste to determine hsppiness or whst should be the psrticulsr gosls for its citizens; the quslity of endeavor itself represents s vslue both for the individusl snd for the stste.
might constitute
In securing the is
essenti3l
pursuit of
hsppiness,
the stste
is
mesnt
s spirit of enterprise
in its people,
striving for
indi
vidusl'
spontsneous
fulfilment the
crux of
it is
recognized
liberty
of the
is in turn
ing
just
The tssk
present
in Jefferson's
writings
essay is to elucidate the relation of these ideas against the background of analogous constellations of
who
were
ideas in Bacon
new
and
Hobbes,
psychology
of endeavor
associated
science
in the
seventeenth
century.
been
I.
Bacon has
extent
ss
hss the
draught"
of the
Thomas Jefferson,
423.
226
of
Interpretation
sffinities and
will
his
with
lesding
is
msde of
writers
not
of
the later
Enlightenment.2
To discern
continuities
sffinities
the ssme ss
contribute snd
tracing
sources
or
influences.
No
sttempt
be
here to
the
directly
immediste
sntecedents
idess
expressions
the Declaration of
of of
Independence, but it
endesvor
csn
in Bscon
snd
be shown, for example, thst the understsnding Hobbes is more relevsnt to Jefferson's conception
the pursuit of
hsppiness
snd
its
politicsl rsmificstions
hsppiness.'
thsn the
idess
elsborsted
reflect which or
by Locke under the hesding 'pursuit of s distinctly different snd even opposite psychology.
proceeds
history
in terms
of continuities which on
snd
sffinities on
need
be less
rigorous
less
illuminsting
will
th3n thst
insists
influence.
reveals
Its cogency
depend
it
in
interpreting
writers or
configurations of
ideas,
whether
in
an
individual
writer or a par
its
correlations
between different
disparate
ages
of coherence.
At the beginning,
we must see
how the
pursuit of
happiness is relsted, in
that is
to George
Jefferson's thinking, to
politicsl
order snd
liberty
he
enlightenment.
can
In
1786
wrote
Wythe that
of
foundation
than "the
preservation
freedom
happiness"
diffusion
interest,
and then
only
when
they
informed. The
mean not
connection
becomes but
is taken to
only the
spread
the advance of
knowledge,
and
corresponding
change of
interests
and purposes.
In
8 16 Jefferson wrote,
and
laws
institutions
must go
hand in hand
more
human
mind.
As that becomes
new
more
developed,
enlightened,
discoveries
times.4
are made,
circum
truths
disclosed,
the change of
stances,
institutions
must advance
also, and
said
keep
to
It is
significant
that this
was
not
vindicate
the
Revolution,
the
well
constitution
of a new
republic, but to
2.
of
I have followed up
several strands
linking
Bacon to Hobbes,
and
Hobbes to
various
figures
the
3.
Enlightenment, in
essays cited
in
notes
and 50-52.
August 13, 1786, Papers X: 244f. Cf. to James Madison, December 20, 1787. To Samuel Kercheval, July 12, 1816, in The Writings of Thomas Jefferson, ed. Andrew A. Lipscomb and Albert Ellery Bergh (Washington, D.C., 1903ft.), XV, 41. Next paragraph:
4.
XV, 40. (Where the appropriate volume of Papers has not yet been published. I will cite Writings.) Jefferson's letter to John Adams, June 15, 1813, Writings XIII: 254f., makes the same point in broader terms.
and
Hobbes
227
men
posterity sgsinst venerating the Revolution in the wrong wsy. "Some look st constitutions with ssnctimonious Jefferson remsrks.
reverence."
They
it.
.
suppose what
.
forty
alter or
preceding age a wisdom more than human, and be beyond amendment. I knew that age well; I belonged to It was very like the present, but without the experience of the present; and years of experience in government is worth a century of book-reading.
they did
to
Forty
years
esrlier
a
he had
written
that "it
is the
right
of
the people to
of
abolish"
to
form
of government that
new
their
on
government,
principles
happiness."
laying likely to
its foundation
effect their
ssfety
a
Reformulating
this in
1816, Jefferson
adapts
the motive of
basis. "Esch
of sll which
generation
is
ss
independent
it believes
ceding,
as
that
was
had
gone
a right to choose of
for itself
the
form
of government
its
happiness."
for the
of
government that
at
lesst,
the
founding
in its
not
originsl
form, like
sn achitectural
foundation that
can
be built
but
altered, but
rather calls
repeated renewal
which reaches
deeper than
mere sdsptation of
heritage,
to measure the
of the
form it
of
of
against
the prevailing
will come
(common)
sense
goals
was
instituted to
promote.
We
back to
consider
the implications
founding
of
(not 'permanent
time
revolu
of
new
understanding
into the
sphere
of
For Jefferson it
new republican
was
precisely
1786
safeguard,
as
well
as
virtue,
of
the
form
of government
Writing
msss
kings,
of
sbsndoned
the
hsppiness
of an
the
people,"
people or
conversely security agaist the rise of priests, nobles or kings in a republic representative democracy. This is Jefferson's point when he tells Wythe,
as
.
snd
the
of
happiness
informed
"Preach
crusade
common
against
people.
ignorance,
Let
our
establish
and
In the preceding
were
head"
year
he had
written
to Richard
people
sensible"
becoming
as
universally
to
of
"the
want
of power
in the federal
destruction,"
"the flaw in
its
snd thst
sccordingly "s
the powers of
Congress
wss
becoming
general."
In this
response
he
recognizes an essentisl
trait of republicanism,
The happiness
of governments
like
truly
so
the mainspring,
as to
is
that
they
are never
to
be despaired
When
an evil
becomes
glaring
228
Interpretation
they
arouse
themselves, and
it is
redressed.
into
best disposition to
the
This truth in
during
late war,
s
acter
Calamity
so
was our
best
a
physician.
The letters
we
have drawn
on
far
present
variety
of as
contexts,
yet
between
public
happiness,
and
the people's
government
concern,
and
stability
recognize
of republican
respond
has begun to
situations,
emerge.
The capacity to
to
negative
and
touchstone,
permsnence"
for
s republic.
The ides
(to
use
is
or
should
be its
own
focus,
is precisely, snd not st sll Jefferson's expression) "belongs to the bssis of the snd the parsdoxicslly, continuity enduring strength of the polity. new conception of is introduced into politicsl thought with the A history
ides thst
snd esch generation which
living,"
should consider
before."
of the
preceding
self-
"all
had
gone
One
to a
critic
this functional
centeredness
'rights'
as
necessarily
'our'
leading
lsck
of concern
for the
needs
snd
of
concern
for
to
'entail'
concern such ss
not
we and
construe
'our')
and
the
constraining situations,
the nstionsl
debt,
to
future
generations.6
Jefferson in fsct
the obligstion
not
offers a rationsle
for
posterity,
responsibility
of
entsiled
foreclose their possibilities, which is bssed not in s in the heritsge, but precisely in the ides thst the fruits living. It is in
s
the
esrth
belong
to the
September 6, 1789, thst he takes up "the question, whether one generation of men has a right to bind Again the context of French politics,
another."
now
very different, is
an
month
hsd
seen
5.
6. In Wills
"modem
of Independence (New
York,
1978),
Garry
which
goes
in his
'the
eagerness
to debunk the
living,'
purposes
"pulse-quickening
for
liberals"
quote
earth
belongs to the
By
of
making any
each generation
of one's posterity,
claim
live only for itself, Jefferson would not only inhibit the entailing but the enhancing of its life. He would teach men not only to live quit from the dead, but quit of the claims as well since only the
unborns'
living
should
enjoy
earth's usufructs,
(p. 127)
Wills
even suggests
it
would
be
consonant with
Jefferson's idea if
"acquire
the means
native
for its
own enjoyment
by aliening the land itself sell it off and leave by short-sighted management, returning quick
none of
it to
profits."
interest in posterity as part of the self-interest of Lafayette, April 11, 1787, criticizing the short leases on land in France, in contrast to England where long leases, linking the generations, "render the farms there almost hereditary, [and] make it worth the farmers while to manure the lands Papers XI: 284.
on as
when
he
writes
to the Marquis de
highly."
and
Hobbes
229
decrees sbolishing privileges. The immediate implication of his principle seems to be the very opposite of what Garry Wills inferred. "I set out on this ground, which I suppose to be self-evident, that the earth belongs in usufruct to the living; that the dead have neither powers nor rights
over
it. The
portion occupied
snd reverts
by
any individusl
society."
cesses to
be his
when
himself inherits
cesses to
be,
to the
Jefferson
property
not
by
natural right,
but
by
law
of
member,
and to occu
which
he is
subject.
Then,
no man can,
by
lands he
him in that occupation, to the payment of debts contracted by him. For if he could, he might during his own life, eat up the usu fruct of the lands for several generations to come; and then the lands would belong
pied or
to the
dead,
living.7
The 'in
principle
belongs
to the
living
and
the qualification
usufruct'
is
connected
only brings out what is implied in the with Jefferson's view that property is
emphasis on
'the
living'
but
one
which
is
estsblished
by
snd subject to
the civil power. This view of property to the conception of the pursuit of hsppiness ss s
clear
Whenever there is in any country, uncultivated lands and unemployed poor, it is that the laws of property have been so far extended as to violate natural right.
earth
The
is
for
man
to
on.
If for the
encour
agement of
industry
be
we allow
it to be appropriated,
employment
provided to
right
the
fundamental
or
to
labour the
to the
unemployed."
Whether in
1776
not
Jefferson's
original
reference to
of
the pursuit of
a correction of
happiness
the
con
was
influenced
triad
by
the
idea
effecting
ventional
(Lockean)
'life, liberty
property,'
and
it
seems
highly
probable
by 1789 Jefferson saw the pursuit of hsppiness as an inalienable right which is incompatible with a natural right to property or inheritance, and that this conflict was sddressed in his principle 'the esrth beongs to the
that
living.'
pencilled
in
suggested emendstions of
the
phrases
forward
Wills does
under
citizen,'
7. earth
Papers XV:
392-93.
not
recognize
belongs to the
p.
living
and
is
not
natural
civil
right. In
different context,
231, he
refers
Locke
and
linking
in
a
him
with
Hutcheson,
of
a correlation that
regard and
in general,
trenchant
critique
Enlightenment,'
William
Inventing America by Ronald Hamowy, "Jefferson and the Scottish and Mary Quarterly'^, no. 4 (October 1979): 503-23. If neither Locke
and
property rights as civil in origin, Hobbes did. 8. To the Reverend James Madison, (the statesman's cousin William and Mary,) October 28, 1785, Papers VIII: 682.
nor
Hutcheson
saw
President
of
the
College
of
230 de
son
Interpretation
honneur"
snd
"le droit de
propriete"
snd
sppsrently
suggested thst
the
lstter be
replsced
by
"Is
recherche of
du
bonheur."9
The stability
of
and
continuity individual
being
in
the pursuit
happiness. This
a
new
configuration of of
ideas in Jefferson's
(based
in
effect
as
intro be
duced
argued
conception
political
thought,
will
below, but it is
a conception
analogous
of
configurations) that
hsd slresdy proved its worth in other Revolution snd the Enlightenment. This
progress and
spheres
culture
in the Scientific
of
characteristic
interrelation
can
pursuit,
most
posterity
work of
as
dimensions
of
historical time
be delineated
Francis Bacon.
regarded yet
Bacon
as one
has
on what
he
might owe
to
Bacon.10
Beyond any strictly identifisble debt in scientific mstters or methodology, I believe Jefferson msy hsve derived from his resding of Bscon s bssic theme of his political thought. Such s connection, lacking explicit testimony, is
incspsble
of
proof,
but
what
and
depth
of
the
analogy, that
is, its
9. The Letters of Lafayette and Jefferson, ed. Gilbert Chinard (Baltimore, 1929). pp. 80-82; Chinard, Thomas Jefferson, The Apostle of Americanism (Ann Arbor, 1957), pp. 232-34. and Adrienne Koch, Jefferson and Madison: The Great Collaboration (New York, 1964). pp. 80-81.
Chinard
abuses
claims
of an additional
reason, beyond
that might
keep
abreast
lumieres,"
for revising
generations.
succedent,"
generations qui se
'the
earth
belongs to the
living,'
62-96, Koch
resists
the
tendency
to
'the
happiness'
pursuit of
in note 8. This issue is also addressed in chapter 3 of American Conceptions of Property from the Seventeenth to the Twentieth Century (Bloomington, 1977). Scott writes, p. 42, "it is tempting to conclude, but impossible to prove, that in 1776 Jefferson
sensed
the
disparity
between
certain
contemporary forms in
it
its
of private
property
and
Locke's
concept
idealized 'natural
of
property'
and
individual
property,
Jefferson
stead
Happiness.'"
This is fair
with an
enough
as
far
as
goes,
linked from
the
beginning
right
natural
to a
established
property
and
n.
relations. at
The Jeffersonian
a
keep
7)
sovereign
power
distance in
note
p.
519
62.
made
this point at
with
very just
this
same
session of a conference on
Enlightenment'
sponsored
by
of
the
East-Central American
region of
the American
Society
for
Eighteenth-Century
1979,
at
Studies
and the
Institute
Early
10.
History
and
Williamsburg, Virginia.
2,
1814,
To Benjamin Rush, January 16, 181 1, Writings XIII: 4. Cf. to Walter Jones, January Writings XIV: 48. Douglass Adair explores one aspect of the deeper resonance of
and attitudes
and the
Founding
in Jefferson, in his essay, "Fame and the h others (New York, 1974), pp. 3-26.
founding
esp.
Fathers,"
reprinted
16-20.
The only
on the
sub
stantive reference
have been
able to
find is in "Report
ed.
Methods
Obtaining
P- 970.
1943),
and
Hobbes
231
disciplining
and
of
experience.
snd
He
was on
to reliance to
teachers, tradition
and
particularly
classical
philosophy.
According
and
Bacon, Plato
whole,
Aristotle
presented
(their)
science as a closed
of
completed
which
mind,
exploiting and reinforcing the predisposition is evident in common induction or experience in its
instances,'
the
passive
that
is,
experiences
a
that do
not
fit its
and
thereby
knowledge
without
loose
to
ends.
Science,
native
Bacon,
be
and
therefore
to msn's mind.
The
nstursl concern
perience must
by
attention
to the
faults
limits
of current csn
knowledge. (It is in
be
s
analogous
sense
tescher.) Experience ss initistive snd cslsmity is the foundstion of science, for Bscon, because it throws into relief
hand'
Only
an
this pervssive, if
implicit,
is
at
'personsl'
recourse
to
a real
individual
assures
handing
snd
on.
Bacon
criticized
the presentstion of
(supposed)
He
science
in finished form
resssurance,
vener-
becsuse this
rather than
stion of
seemed to
him
cslculated to
to stimulate "expectant
inquiry."
the schievements of the sncients and the related assumption that these
could not
be
surpassed
or
improved, because
human power,
such
attitudes
"tend wholly to
snd
the
unfair circumscription of
which not
and to s
deliberate
fsctitious
despsir,
One
suguries of
hope, but
and spur of of
industry,
away the chances of experience which Bacon took as justifying hope is the
prog-
ressivitv
of science,
arts. sort
he
saw
prefigured
in the
cumulative
advance
of
the
mechanical
He
of
contrasted
this
with
in the
history
of that
fruits
and
works, seeks
All the
tradition and
not of
succession of schools
is
[disciples],
in them
II.
ed.
inventors
and
those
who
bring
find it
to
further
they,
and
perfection on
the things
invented. In the
some
mechanical arts we
do
not
so:
the contrary, as
more
having
breath
of
life,
are
continually growing
becoming
perfect.12
Spedding, Ellis,
and
as translated in The Works of Francis Bacon, Heath (London, i857ff.), IV: 86. For fuller treatment of the themes paragraphs, see
of this
the
following
Science,"
in Francis Bacon's Moral Psychology of and "Bacon and Hobbes: The Conception
my essays, "Active Experience vs. Wish-Fulfilment The Philosophical Forum 9 (1979): 78-99, Experience in the Scientific
which are extended
Revolution,"
of
Science/
Technology &
note 28.
the
Humanities
in the
articles cited
below,
12.
as
232
Interpretation
This progressivity, like utility itself, is an indication for Bacon that the knowl edge involved is rooted in reality. "Knowledge which is founded in nature
knowledge
on opinion
can,
of
increase."13
A tradition based
is is
grounded sense of
mediated
in the
testing.
in the
The
relstion
of one
by
problems.
primsry involvement in practice, the individual engagement with In this sense Bacon distinguished two types of continuity [or
all
particular
"touching
by
men's
the tradition
handing
on]
of
knowledge,
delivered
the one
Critical,
dantical. For
proper
knowledge is
either
by
teachers,
or attained
endeavours."14
A
are
critical
tradition,
and
of
which
and
Baconian
science
examples,
on
Jeffersonian
continuity
the repeated
initiative
of
individuals
who
bring
heritage
opinion'
to the test of their own experience. It stands in marked contrast to the passive
sort of tradition
in which,
as
make a
'leader
of
great, like
ciphers
coming
general
after an
integer, in
that
"they
have
never given a
valid assent to
judgment."15
the
from
an act of
independent
not
This broad analogy of Baconian and Jeffersonian ideas, which may or may be a reflection of direct influence, will help to underline a crucial point
role of
about the
the 'pursuit of
happiness'
in Jefferson's idea
concerned with
of a republic.
It is
not
be
directly
the happiness of
rather
'benevolent'
absolutism), but
The determinstion
of whst
indeed rely on, their concern, their pursuit. thst happiness is to include is precisely psrt of the
in Jefferson's
"
words
there
is
emphssis
not
so
much
on
hsppiness,"
ss on
likely
to
of
The
of
each
American polity to the pursuit generation, which can of course include their
a
care
welfare
posterity, represents
fundamental
acknowledgement of the
realities which
time brings.
The American
republic
marks
radical
break
in
a number of
respects,
one of
13.
From Redargutio
philosophiarum
not
translated in
ed.
Philosophies'
p.
127.
14.
15.
From The Advancement of Learning, Works III: 413. From Cogitata et Visa, as translated in Philosophy of Francis Bacon,
p. 95.
and
Hobbes
233
being
the reversal of the attitude toward time as the medium of change and
chance.
J. G. A. Pocock has
only
the
argued thst
for
clsssical
republicanism time
government'
meant
instability
of
and
of
we recognize
universality
Aristotelisn
escape
polis,"
he
claims.
"We
the aim
politics and
is to
imperfection
strict opposition
between
in the
and
'commerce'.
integrity
latter
of the could
of the univer
theory
to a static
ideal. The
multiplying his
encouraged the
satisfactions and
transforming his
culture of
in
temporal process: it
could enable men
idea
rigidity
institutions
to
master
the politics of
Instead
meant ss
of
which
American independence
party'
to the
he
"
cslls of
Jeffersonisn
agricultural
mythology."17
opposition
and of
commercial
of
life,
not
and
overlooks perceived
the
intimate interdependence
sought
the
two,
which
Jefferson
only
but
to further.
criticized
I have
of
Pocock's
construction of
of a persistence of
virtue,
length
elsewhere.18
The
clsssicsl with
model
sketched
by
Pocock is
of
incompstibility fundamentslly idess of the stste must hsve been sffected by the new significsnce snd dignity sssumed by individual interest and initiative, both in
suggests
the 'pursuit of
happiness'
how
'private'
the tion in
in
to
political participation.
reinforce
The Revolu
America
good, ss
exemplified
by
Jefferson's
championing
the rights
of commerce.
His
spprecistion of
16.
"Civic Humanism
and
and
Thought,"
Language
17.
and
88,
90.
pp.
mythology"
For "Jeffersonian
relations
Pocock,
97L
Such
up,
the
and
commerce
approached
sound
basis, in Joyce
Journal of
Appleby,
American
of
"Commercial
Farming
the
'Agrarian
Myth'
in the
Republic,"
Early
History 68,
no.
Jefferson?"
Thomas
18.
4 (March 1982), and "What is still American in the Political William and Mary Quarterly 39, no. 2 (April 1982).
Philosophy
"American Independence:
Revolution
ed.
of the
Republican
Ideal,"
tion and
Eighteenth-Century Culture,
1983).
234
Interpretation
must
be
seen
as
contributing to his
as
conception
of
the pursuit of
history, it
wss
in
psrt
the
possibility gave experience an active relation to an essentially open reality future. Bacon had written, "Men's anticipations of the new are fashioned on
the
model
of
the old. The old governs their imagination. Yet this is a com
pattern of
thought."19
pletely fallacious
the 'new thst
We
can
snd
illustrate the
this
relation
between
science'
of the seventeenth
century
new sense of
possibility,
s
is,
future, by pursuing
further
elsborstion of
thinking. Pru
dence,
of
is tsken from
by
Hobbes
ss
experience, depends
possible, that
inferring
given
appearances
to their
is,
conjectured,
such
causes.
Based
on
tions of events,
experience
is essentially
of
in its
approach
"The
other
[mode
thinking] is,
with
we seek all
by
a
is to say,
to
we
imagine
what we can
do
it,
when we
have
Hobbes's immediate
power s
point
cause
thst
is in
or
our
possible, thst
is,
knowledge,
science,
in
underlying insight links the capacity for science not so much with the urge to practical control (which is as true of prudence, shared by animsls), but rsther with msn's distinguishing trait of curiosity. All thinking or regulsted "discourse
of
of the
Invention."
for Hobbes "is nothing but Seeking, or the fsculty In the reorientstion of experience from psssive to sctive thst
the
no
mind"
is
connected
with
sn
open
future thst is
longer
expected snd
instinctively
imsginstion
des-
"required'
to conform
to the terms
the psst.
whst csn
Such
snd
sn
openness to shows
possibility, to
be
"our
schieved
regsrd
by
endesvor,
"21
Jefferson to ssy to
Price,
with
to government
"wherein the
people are
truly
in
a
the
mainspring,"
motto
is truly 'nil
perandum'
As he
wrote
letter two
years
later, "It is
sll other
part of the
American
character resolution
to consider nothing ss
and contrivance. snd to
. .
desperate;
to surmount
every
sid,
we
difficulty by
sre obliged
Remote from
to
invent
19.
20.
ourselves."22
The
Philosophy
Bacon,
p. 96.
Leviathan,
21.
22.
Macpherson (Baltimore, 1968), p. February 1, 1785, Papers VII: 631. To Martha Jefferson, March 28, 1787, Papers XI: 251.
ch. 3. ed.
96.
Spelling
modernized.
and
Hobbes
new
235
sense thus
in the
corresponded to s
snd sre
people.
Hope
curiosity, imsginstion
universsl
initistive,
can
humsn
chsrscteristics.
But
on
psrticular
chological nature
they quality is, to a considerable degree, historical in its constitution snd influenced by ideas, including ideas about human nature. We have examined the role of
new
constellation
take
and
the 'pursuit of
with
happiness'
in Jefferson's
political
thinking
and traced
its ho
conception of science
The integration
as
of
the pursuit of
legal foundation
of
back,
to
Bacon, however,
and who
but to Hobbes. It
the pursuit of the state as
which was
was
Hobbes
as a
first
happiness
'natural'
or
'inalienable
right,'
relying for its stability and legitimacy rooted in the pursuit of happiness. To
and
on
spirit
in its
appreciate
fully
Hobbes's
undeniable and
must
but indirect
scarcely
snd
Americsn,
we
psrticulsrly the
status
Jeffersonisn,
of
government,
foundstion: the
snd
constitutionsl
mind
the pursuit
hsppiness
ss
right,
the trait of
thst gives reslity to the pursuit snd mskes possible its role in msintsining the connection between the two strands, we must begin
of
s stsble polity.
To
understsnd
with
Hobbes's
snslysis critique of the
humsn nsture, which, like Bacon's, was both an in the sspect of interest here, sn idesl projection. As in his snd,
conception
of past-oriented prudential
mind
experience mode of
and the
nstursl
predisposition
that
is
reflected
in thst
elsboration of
of
could
find
resources
for his
conception
in Bacon.
In The Advancement of Learning, Bacon is concerned not only with moti vating science, but with understanding motivation snd the psychologicsl bssis in humsn sctivity generally. In snticipstion of the contrast between Pedsnticsl snd Critical types of tradition with particular reference
of
'sdvsncement'
to "the
one
knowledge,"
progression
of
and
life
of
man
cannot
attain
to perfection of
knowledge,
the
wisdom
of tradition
is that
sort
which
inspireth the
or
of
tradition
felicity handing on
on,"
of continuance snd of
proceeding."23
The
wiser
knowledge
ensures
that
it "is delivered
ss a thresd to
be
spun
thst
insight
23.
Interpretation
might expect
thst
in this
or the
context
Bscon
to a self
concern as
for posterity,
higher
egotism of
that regard
fame, but he is
of
content
here to
concentrate on and
proceedin
"felicity
of continuance
the
individual,
suborn
we
must
of
'plessure in
which serve
proceeding'
which
the
Mind,'
"to instruct
snd
sction
Good"
snd
sctive
There Bscon
upheld
srgues
for
"priority
sideration
of
the Active
our estste
which
he
ssys
is "much
to
by
the con
of
to
be
fortune."
mortsl
snd
exposed
Moreover,
is in
he sdds,
The
pre-eminence
likewise
of this
Active Good is
proceeding; variety;
upheld
by
the
affection which
natural
in
man
towards variety
and
and purposes of
life,
there
is
much
their their
inceptions,
ends.24
Fall,
work
exercise and
experiment,
and
lesst
with respect
to intellectusl effort:
"Only lesrned
pleasure
men
love business
action
as
an
action
taking
is itself
no
in the
itself,
and not
in the
purchase."
in
proceeding,'
sppetite
new sre
satiety, but
however,
It is this
'Georgics
chsrscter of of
he
seeks to
vindicste, in his
the
Mind,'
by
Bscon
countering snd redirecting bssic tendencies of stoicism. Socrates sgsinst s Sophist in debste, "Socrates placing
and
constant
peace
of
much
After weighing both sides, Bacon supports the Sophist to the effect thst 'to sbstsin from the use of s thing thst you msy not feel s want of it; to shun the want that you may not fear the loss of it;
are
enjoying."
the precautions of
Bacon's
crucial
and
cowardice.'26
stoicism can
be
seen
in his
conception of
how to learn from experience, to which he ironically assimilates the stoic idea of by an adroit reversal of its intention. For a stoic, 'suf
'suffering' fering'
means
undergoing draweth
superiority
suffering,
and
and enduring external necessitation, but with an inner indifference to it. Bacon speaks rather of "a wise and industrious and contriveth use and sdvantage out of that which
which
contrary."
In
effect this
is the
sort of
undergoing
which
complements
24. 25.
26.
the undertaking or
initiative
aspect
in that form
of experience
Works III: 424!'. From Advancement, Book I, Works III: 296, 272, From Advancement, Book II, Works III: 427.
317.
and
Hobbes
237
leads to science,
from
adverse experience
depends
on
"the
exsct snd
precedent stste or
disposition."27
It is this undergoing thst is implied in the fsmous Bsconisn msxim: "Nsture to be commsnded must be which is the bssis of his clsim that "human knowledge and human power meet in one; for where the cause is not known
obeyed,"
and
is in
operation as the
rule."28
This
point
knowledge
of effect
by
for Hobbes's conception of science starting of knowledge of cause or production, which I way
thst relstion
have
shown to
be
related
to a new sense of
of experience.
of
The bssis
of
Bscon's
germinal
idea
of
'pleasure in
expsnded and
deepened in
or
an empirical
.
'endeavor'
integration
Hobbes's
with
of
feeling
and
motive,
of plessure snd
appetite,
ss
which
account
of sensstion
of
snd
thinking
ss
well
willing, is snslyzed
insight. Instesd
sttempting to desl
the positive
with
difficulties
of
Hobbes's grasp
or
of mentsl processes
here,29
interdependence
conatus
desire
pursuit,
act
not at
impulses to
motives
which
Hobbes
competing
combining
of
Pesce,"
as
develop)
but
at
the level
of conscious striving.
In
chapter II of
on
"the difference
together in
Manners,"
"those
To
living
of this
Felicity
life,
consisteth not
in the
nor
For there is
no such
Summum Bonum, (greatest Good,) as is spoken of in the Books of the old Moral Philosophers. Nor can a man any more live, whose Desires are at an end, than he,
whose
Senses
and
Imaginations
are at a stand.
Felicity is
of
desire, from
way to the
one object
the
former, being
but the
later.30
predisposition
of
human
nature
leads to
fundamental
for the
and
actions,
not only to the procuring, but slso differ only in the It may be surprising to have Hobbes's notorious phrase, "I put for a general
inclinations
men, tend,
snd
life;
27. 28.
29.
Works III:
434-
I, Aphorism
and
See my
essays,
of
Journal of the
History
of
Philosophy Epistemology
30.
18 (1980):
the
Continuity
and
of
of his
to Bacon and
p.
Hobbes,"
Isis
71
(1980): 609-20.
Leviathan,
160.
Spelling
modernized
here
in
subsequent quotations
work.
238
Interpretation
of all a
inclination
offered as
power,"
gloss
'the
hsppiness.'
pursuit
of
This is in
the term
psrt
because
as
sinister construction
has been
put on
Hobbes's
'power'
use of
if it
others,
where
'sense of
self.'31
in Hobbes,
future
msn
which
apparent
Good."32
holds in this context, is "present means, to obtain some as predicated of The desire of "Power after
the
in general,
reflects
desire to
assure
and
desire"
power
which can
keep
all
individuals in
awe and
function
as a power
for securing
present and
future
If
we
can
understand
how the
open-ended
related
for Hobbes,
sight
into the
hsppiness
snd
the hsppiness
Jefferson in the Declaration of Independence. Civil pesce for Hobbes is the precondition of all meaningful human pursuits, and even the
supposed
by
psre
(Comattaining and keeping of pesce is conceived by him in terms of endesvor. Jefferson's "Peace is my passion.") The constituting of a common coercive power or
sovereignty
constant
releases
state
of
nature, that
is,
from the
rational
which
expectation
conflict, in that it
makes
it
safe
and
thus
to follow what
to seek
he
cslls
"the
first,
snd
Fundsmentsl Lsw
of
Nsture;
is,
Peace,
and follow
it.""
In Hobbes's
or general
definition, "A Lsw of Nsture, (Lex Naturalis,) is s Precept, Rule, found out by Resson, by which s msn is forbidden to do is destructive of his life, or taketh away the means of preserving
In the
state
of nature
same."
the operative
rule
to endesvour
obtain
Pesce,
ss
fsr
ss
he hss hope
and
of all
it,
that
he may seek,
own
Pesce"
use,
helps
and
sdvsntsges
of
It is
by
long
"sre
commsnded to
or alienate
nstursl rights
order
(Jus, "liberty
to
do,
or
to
forbesr")
in be in
which
Hobbes
ssys must
or
Renounceth it; it is
either
consideration of some
other good power
himself;
or
for
some
By
a
conceiving
of
the constitution of
common natural
or
as
liberties
of
individuals,
as
the
'social
contract'
voluntary act,
the
proviso:
"and
of
the
31.
1976),
32.
pp.
See Hobbes, Thomas White's De Mundo Examined, trans. Harold Whitmore Jones (London, is rendered as 466-69, where
'potentia'
'potential'
Leviathan,
p.
150. 190.
33.
Leviathan,
p.
Following
paragraphs,
pp.
189, 192.
and
Hobbes
himself."
239
A
contract
every
is
some
Good
to
binding
or persistent endeavors
entered
over
time. The
is
sn open-ended
one,
into to
secure
future (sppsrent)
natural right
While
can
be he
up his
to
to the use of
right of
force, for
example,
be
understood
"lsy
down the
life."
resisting them, thst ssssult him by force, or tske swsy his Self-preservstion is sn insliensble right. But the life which is msde secure
sovereignty is
more
by
for
which
transferring
it."
in his life,
life,
ss not
to be wesry
of
In the preceding
chspter of
Leviathan, "Of
snd
which
kind,
ss
concerning their
Felicity,
in
snd
Misery,"
Hobbes hsd
no plsce
characterized
the
"there is
uncertsin,"
of
Death, Desire
Hope
living,
and a
by
their
Industry
The
civil can
the
future
reliable
to the extent
be
motivsted
by
st
living"
Similsrly,
with
the outset
where
of
the chspter,
speaks of
of
the Sovereign
Representative,"
Hobbes
which
he
was trusted
peopl
the Sovereign
Power,
namely the
procuration of
he adds,
"By Safety
of
here is
which
not meant a
Contentments
or
life,
every
man
by
lawful Industry,
himself."
without
danger
hurt to the
Commonwrites
In
a parallel passsge
order to
in De Cive he
of end
ss
the
preservstion sssemble
of
life "in
its
did
men
freely
they
live
delightfully."34
At the
same
time Hobbes
holds that
than
government
"can
confer no
more
to
[its subjects']
civil wars,
civil
happiness,
that
being
preserved
from foreign
purchased
and
they
wealth
which
they have
stipulates
by
is
a
industry."
their own
that "this
intended
general
should
be done,
by
in
care
public
applied
to Individuals
.
...
but
by
Providence,
contsined
Instruction,
persons
snd
in the msking,
own
snd
esses."35
individual
of the people
only
by
recently to
13,
para. 4.
show
Leviathan,
Leviathan,
p.
376, cf. De
Cive.
ch.
p. 376.
240
Interpretation
for the
with
founding
of the
with
American
republic.
The affinity
of principles
is
greater
Hobbes than
Locke
or
the
classical republican
tradition,
and extends
only to Hamilton, Madison and the Federalist, but slso, snd quite centrally, Declaration. One could pursue this affinity further with to Jefferson and the regard to natural equity, inalienable rights, and the civil (not natural) basis
not
of
which
source of
ideas that
proved
crucial
conception of point
The like
s
essentisl nstural
for Hobbes
ss
survivsl
secures ss
something
the goods
right
to endesvor, to life
one object
but
"a continusll
progresse of
the
desire, from
consensus,
snother."
to
By definition,
could not snyone else.
hsppiness'
be determined
clear
by
by
or
by
snyone
for
implication
Hobbes's
conception of
desire is that
good
even
determine,
and
once and
defining
our ends
interests is itself
A further
conception
implication, disturbing
in his
Hobbes's desire is
of endesvor
empiricsl psychology.
The
object of
desire,
that
is, desire is
a passion
or passive response
becsuse they
not
sre
good
but
good on
but insight
experience.
Hobbes's psrt,
represents undenisble
inconsistency
of
festure
It
humsn
Recognition
circulsrity in
experience
is
sn essentisl
fsctor in
diversity
of vslues.
slso supports
to the
future
which
snticipstes
to the present
will emerge
from humsn
of
sctivity.
of
With their
spprecistion
the
s
interdependence
pursuit
snd
plessure,
Bscon
snd
Hobbes introduced
Dewey
trait
tendency, later brought to full fruition by relativize the distinction between means and
ends, and to
deny
the
has been
to
noted
fixity
of
of ends.
similar and
human
practice
submitted
sustsined
"
in The Lost World of Thomas Jefferson. Jeffersonisns [sre] men immersed in sction, who were
sctivity."37
inexplicit
In
whst
Boorstin
See the essay cited in note 18, which was first given as a paper in 1976 at the Bicentennial of the American Society for Eighteenth-Century Studies. Frank M. Coleman, Hobbes and America: Exploring the Constitutional Foundations (Toronto, 1977) has a critical, but superficial
Meeting
and
A far better treatment leveling view both of Hobbes and of the 'constitutional is George Mace, Locke, Hobbes, and the Federalist Papers: An Essay on the Genesis of the American Political Heritage (Carbondale, 1979), which claims that Hobbes is more relevant than Locke not only for Madison and Hamilton but for Jefferson as well. See my reviews of these two
works and of
foundations.'
and
Current Bibliography,
n.s.
6, for
1980.
Hobbes, but
Rousseau.
37.
mistaken
of natural
rights theory
finished
by
from
pp.
The Lost World of Thomas Jefferson (Boston, i960), p. 148. Subsequent 149, 197, 199L, 53, and 226. See also pp. 198, 203, 214 and 239s.
quotations are
and
Hobbes
241
theodicy, actually
explsined
"the Jeffersonian
evil,
intended
ss
designed
indirectly
to promote
sctivity."
orientstion with
of men politicsl
prsgmstism, but
sees
it
ss s spirit which
they
were
was
duties
moral ends of
the
Boorstin
notes
thst "concepts
the 'public
interest'
. . .
were
political but construes this simply strikingly as an inadvertent flaw, not s deliberate revision of republicsnism. Clsiming that "Jefferson never seriously suggested that cosmopolitanism and breadth of
absent
mind might
from Jeffersonian
thought,"
fit
a msn
to
discover the
society,"
Boorstin fsils
political
to recognize
discarded the
of classical
society
be determined.
of
Similsrly
humsnistic
perhaps
Boorstin finds
"strikingly
little discussion
individusl"
hsppiness in the
Jefferson
sense of the
because
by
'humanistic'
in Jeffersonisn writing,
while
means was
'normative',
goals of
which
individual
Boorstin
pursuit
individual"
accuses
him
of
Boorstin clsims, virtuslly emptied of its personsl but this rsther reflects s Jeffersonisn tendency to define hsppiness only formslly in public terms since its mesning wss to be just
was
'personsl'
hsppiness
thst.39
A tug-of-wsr between
fulfilment is
sssured that
projected
in
For example,
he has
now
writes to
Monroe in 1782,
in
a greater are we made
we are made
were
yet
for
ourselves.
right
It
contrary to
feeling
his
.
indeed
ridiculous
to
suppose a man
has less
would
in
himself than
and not that
changed.40
one of
neighbors or all of
This
liberty
for
the
38.
dizee,"
ment
E.g. Immanuel Kant, "Ueber das Misslingen aller philosophischen Versuche in der Theoin Werke, ed. W. Weischedel (Darmstadt, 1966), VI: 105-24, which follows up the argu Werke VI: 85-102, esp. pp. 92, ioif., of "Mutmasslicher Anfang der
Menschengeschichte,"
on
these
grounds.
The
is
not
to be judged
by
contemplative reason,
reality.
of the
man's
relation
standing back from its entanglements, since our obligation to act is part theodicy, As already for Leibniz, and for Johnson as a critic of to providence must be practical not intellectual. See my essays, "Readings of
'philosophical' Moral'
and
and
Literature,"
1/2,
(Spring
1976):
of
17-39,
Concept'
Enlightenment,'
'Period
In his
the
on
Enlightenment I (Studies
39.
Voltaire
pp.
189-96.
My
for
in the
context
of a
defense
on
of
American
sociability,
Jefferson
the
respect
privacy:
"There is
not a
country
earth, where
there is
attentive
greater
tranquility;
where the
laws
are milder, or
better obeyed;
others."
to his own
business,
447.
or meddles
less
with
that of
X:
May
242
That
Interpretation
essentially
private.
liberty is
It is the
who
liberty
which
entered
the world
of political
thought with
Hobbes,
from 'the
silence of
liberty,
secured
by
civil
tion of
lsw, hss become 'politicsl liberty'. The clsssicsl republicsn identifica liberty with political life in the sense of dedication to the public good
reversed. or sscrifice of privste or
requires
questionsble.41
The [Spsrtsn
philosophical petite
Roman]
republican
virtue,
like the
stoic
conception, is defined
by
its
antagonism
by Bacon,
Hobbes
and
their
by
of
an active
of artificial of the
needs.
Instead
and
seeing this
as
threat to
the
integrity
personality
attempting to undermine it
by
an
internal
discipline
inent
an approach which
Rousseau
most prom
writers of
desire
in
The ongoing
only
finally
appreciated as a
fact,
as a
determinability
provided
be
avoided
open-
by
any
absolutization of
and
profound
under-
of
individuslity.
sn
element of
gives s
itself
certsin
to sctivity.
Lessing
wrote:
represented
whose possession
has
made to
find
out the
any man is, or thinks he is, but the honest effort he truth, is what constitutes the worth of a man. For it is not but through the inquiry after truth that his powers expand, and
ever
in this
alone consists
his
growing
perfection.
Possession
makes
calm,
lazy,
proud.43
The 'hsppiness
snticipstion of s
pursuit'
of
gosl, but
also
certsinly borrows something from the plessursble involves enjoyment of the effort itself.
can
The
pursuit
of
happiness
be
misconstrued
as
chase
after
an
ever
receding
of
goal
or
pursuit,
41.
only if one identifies hsppiness with the end, the cessstion, what Hobbes termed "the repose of s mind It makes
Leviathan,
pp.
satisfied
In
chapter 21 of
266f., Hobbes
of
shows
that the
of
'liberty'
which
is
celebrated power
by
individuals, but
"to resist,
ment of
invade
people."
other
In
Athens, for
subjected
example, was
country
the
to them.
That
of
October 31, 1823, Jefferson wrote, "The govern that of the people of one city making laws for the whole Lacedaemon [Sparta] was the rule of monks over
a
letter
of
laboring
slavery."
Writings XV:
"The Critique
Classical Republicanism
Clio 9 in
and
the
Vico's New
42. 43.
Science,"
Understanding
of
(Spring
in
1980): 393-418.
essays cited
Duplik,"
Lessing, Werke,
32f.
and
Hobbes
243
difference
whether one
sees
desire in
state
opposed to or akin to
fulfilment. In the
quoted,
light, Lessing,
a good
Leibnizian,
denial is
of
conceived of perfection as
an
open-ended progressive
quality, a
finished;44
this
idea
of perfectio
as a process
characteristic of
the Enlightenment.
could
perspective or
be
cited
from Montesquieu,
Diderot,
or crucisl
even
Burke
ss well ss
Herder
ss
Lessing.
But there is
poses
one
figure, ususlly
to
to the
Enlightenment,
conative
who
sn obstscle
to this general
terizstion:
Locke. The
and
psychology that
was so essential
empiricism
in Bacon
sre
Hobbes,
fsr less
evident
and the corresponding conception of humsn nsture, in Locke thsn in Leibniz. This is psrticulsrly importsnt
under consideration
claimed
Jefferson's idea
frontstion
provide
conclusion.
III.
'HAPPINESS'
VS. PURSUIT
In
Inventing
Gsrry
Wills
devotes
of
s chapter to
'pursuit', giving
phrase
emphssis
to "elements
determination
pursuit
necessity,"
snd
in the
"'necessity
this
one
determines to
a
bliss.'"
the
of
His
main
source of examples,
included, is
single
chapter
from Locke's
and not
Essay
the
political
for the
eighteenth
formed
a triad with
Bacon
and
Newton.
on
model'
A 'Newtonian
determines the
conception
of pursuit
focused
by
Wills,
the csussl
moved chapter
necessitstion
of a universal gravitation
desire.45
of wills
resistably In the
of
by
the objects of
'Necessary'
headed
from the
'
phrase
human
rstion's
claimed
lsw."
Out
The
is
stated as a
law.
it.46
heaven's bodies, is
come
a process
open
to
to
describe
44.
emphasize
this
neglected
aspect
Leibniz in
review
in
Eighteenth-Century Studies
pp. 511-16. quotes
12,
Contrast
Hamowy
(note 7 preceding),
'pursuit'
94
In his discussion
of
Wills
telling
passage
from Bacon's Advancement. "It is order, poursuite. sequence, and interchange of application, But Wills reduces the laws of nature, including those of the 'state which is mighty in or mechanics far too literally to catch the liveliness and power of physics laws of to of
the
original metaphor.
244
Interpretation
devotes that
chapter to
as a
Accordingly Wills
losophy'
discussion
explanation
of
'mechanical
phi
in the
eighteenth
century,
if in
of the
Declaration's
opening.
In
an
earlier psper
I hsve srgued,
of
on
'necessity'
in the
course
humsn
events
is
sn sppeal
in the
vidusl
sense
spplied not to
indi
but to
in thst 'state
nature'
of
In the
same vein
srgued
first
principles
of civil
. .
society
msy
violsted,
snd
the rights
invsded,
men
then
lsw
We
stone snd
in psssing that Hamilton adopts this srgument from Blackcontrasts it with doctrines supposedly tsken by his opponent Sesbury
'Mr.
Hobbes'
from the
no
sinister
This
should suggest
how Hobbes
csme
to hsve
overt
influence in
or
Revolutionsry Americs,
although or
through
Priestley
Locke
direction that
decisive
neces
impact. This is
sitation
Locke's
conception
of the
causal
thst determines
mechsnics of motivstion
derives
dissgree
when
claims that
Locke's denial
to an
of
'freedom
of
is
not
only
consistent with
but
material
As he says, "The
will
is determined
by
its
object."
but important difference in the way this ides is taken by Hobbes and by Locke, leading to a major difference in their conceptions of pursuit. Locke
understands motivation
principally in terms
of
'uneasiness',
that
is, in
negative
terms:
What determines
the will?
Action, is only
uneasiness:
The motive, for continuing in the same State in it; The motive to change is always
or
some
but
some
nothing setting us upon the change of State, or upon any new Action, uneasiness. This is the great motive that works on the Mind to put it upon
will.4"
long
chapter
'Of Power',
on which
Wills bases his argument, Locke motivation, but deprived of the open
'endeavor'
forwsrd-urging
quality that
characterizes
in Hobbesian
psy-
47.
quoted
See the beginning of the essay cited in note iS preceding. The passage from Hamilton is in Gerald Stourzh, Alexander Hamilton and the Idea of Republican Government (Stanford,
p. cf.
pp. 15-22. In a letter to J. B. Colvin. September 1970), 10, 20, 1810, Writings XII: 419, Jefferson says, "The law of self-preservation authorizes the distressed to take a supply of
force. In
all
laws
of necessity,
"
of
self-preservation, and
of
the public
laws
of meum and
tuum
that
is,
civil
laws
of property.
This is
within
An Essay concerning Human Understanding, ed. Peter H. Nidditch (Oxford. 1979), p. para. 29 of Book II, Ch. 21, to which further references will be made by paragraph parentheses in the text. On 'uneasiness', para. 31-34.
and
Hobbes
245
For Hobbes
conatus
is
not reducible
is it
regulated
by
an
essentially
negative 'uneasiness-principle'.49
The determinist
more restrictive
implications
of
fsr
in Locke thsn in
Hobbes,
revised
implications. He
Locke himself is clesrly not happy with such the chspter st several stsges in later editions, intro
snd
ducing
with
different
conception of
freedom,
which
is mixed,
most
uncomfortsbly,
Hobbesisn
msy
conception.
The
model
spprosch
seem to
by
intro
ducing
pulling
stoics contrast
the notion that the mind can suspend motives that are weighing or
on
it. This is
variant
of
the epoche
which
classical
sceptics
and
claimed
to
cumulstive
the process of
and
(mutually
sction,
corrective
sees
interacting)
ss
projected
courses
of
Locke
while
the will
"perfectly
distinguished from
desire"
(30).
Thus,
the
will,'
it msy seem s plsusible msxim that 'the greatest good determines Locke concludes "that good, the greater good, though apprehended be so, does
makes us
and acknowledged to
to
it,
determine the will, until our desire, (35). uneasy in the want of
not
it"
raised
which
relativist
definition
good'
of
wss
whst wss
desired,
the 'grester
a new
thst
normative
element,
determination
'good'
of
is decisive
see this or
for
by
an
fails to
omits
to
acknowledge
has in
effect
brought
'hsppiness'
of
snd pursuit.
desire,"
writes
Locke, "for
so shows
we con
and
whatever of
we
feel
of
uneasiness,
much,
it
happiness"
lack]
(39). This
more
than
Locke is from any idea of the happiness of pursuit. Locke sees in the unavoidsble concern with hsppiness the possibility of leverage to mske a predominating determinant of the whst he considers to be 'the grestest
how
removed
will, that
is,
in
as
earnest,
snd
use
in
pursuit
of
hsppiness.
[Wills
a
cites
clear or
this statement
view of
the
first
and
of
the
formula];
yet
good,
great
confessed
good,
without
being
for it
it"
moved
by it,
(43). if they think they csn mske up their hsppiness without In the preceding psrsgrsph Locke hsd resffirmed the Hobbesisn
"Whst
49.
perspective.
. .
hss
sn sptness to produce
writers
Plessure in
and
us
is
thst we csll
confuse
'good',
his
use of
for
Many
on
Tonnies on,
the term
with that of
Spinoza,
246
no other
Interpretation
resson, but for its
happiness"
sptness
to produce Plessure
spparent
in us,
wherein
(42). It is
be
made con
good"
confessed
is
rsther
known to be
someone else
apt
to
produce grest
hsppiness
not
to
the one
for'
concerned
but to
(like
Locke)
who
'knows
whst's good
the
of
the
sre
perfect, secure,
moved
snd
lssting
hsppiness in
future
wants
stste,"
"not
good."
by
He
them to use
stoic-sceptic
capacity to
so
as
motives
working
and solid
on
them,
and
constant
true
happiness"
(51,
context).
They
must
not
determination
in
of pursuit.
Wills
similate
elides
bent
of
Locke's
composite
approach
order
to as
to the 'Newtonian
all
model'
the attraction
should
which
ultimate good
bliss
beyond
will. with
cspscity,"
(but evidently does not) exert on the human Wills writes, "to resist the pull of things
grest
smsll
of
hsppiness but
'resl'
proximity,
in
order
to be true
snd solid
would
hsppiness."
Although
of
remote,
'true
because
have the
model
model no
as
must
such
simply
a
the
has
'should'
"'Pursuit'
way
accommodating
[he claims]
gives that can
response
to the gravitational
reality,
on
build
make
human
motion."50
objection to
such a program
of
'human
science'
In
an earlier
conception of
motivation,
which
leads him to
Locke,
of
also provides
a sound
and
improving
human
freedom.51
But Hobbes's
motive such of
world"
interacting
forces,
as
only led to
posit
his
second
conception
made
seem more the victim of experience. application and of the concept of mind
Hobbes,
and
on the
contrary,
of
with
his
'endesvor'
parallel
in his
sdsptation
Galilean
of
mechanics
in his
analysis
motivation
in terms
'inner
former,
showed
how freedom
Inventing America,
"Materialism
202ff.
and
p. 242.
Freedom,'
Studies in
Eighteenth-Century
and
Hobbes
247
be
understood
ss
adequate
determination
of our motives
by
by
our
motives.52
In this respect,
as
as
in others, Leibniz
critical
was
is
evident
in his
responses
to
very Locke
much a and to
follower
of
Hobbes,
moti-
'endeavor'
point of
vstion
the
concept out
is nicely brought
by
one of
his
snswers to the
lstter:
properly speaking, motives do not act upon the mind, as weights do upon a balance; but it is rather the mind that acts by virtue of the motives, which are its dispositions to
act.
as
the author
mind
strong ones, and even that it prefers that which is indifferent before motives; this, I say, is to divide the mind from the motives, as if
they
were outside
the mind
and as
if it
the mind
had, besides
motives, other
motives."
dispositions to act,
by
virtue of which
Where Locke
apprehend
maintains
ourselves
that, "whilst we are under any uneasiness, we cannot happy, or in the way to it; pain and uneasiness being,
and
by
every one,
concluded
felt to be inconsistent
to the
happiness"
with
Leibniz
counters that
never
"it is
essential
happiness
of created
would
hsppiness insensste
greater
consists
in
complete
sttsinment,
which
them
and
uninterrupted
progress
towards
goods."
The
consistent
Hobbesian
conception of
freedom
grounded
not
determinstion
thus
sctions, ss
of
in the
'endeavor', its
ans-
fully
anticipates
Jefferson's idea
logues in the Continentsl Enlightenment. Initiative and risk-taking are as es sential to this sense of endeavor as is being determined or driven. In his
Heart,"
and
My
positive
Jefferson
counterposes
calculation
of
against
to the urge to
claim
credit
Necessity"
52.
would
In "Of
make
Liberty
and
Hobbes
answers
his
view of
human
action
deliberation
or consultation useless:
"It is the
consultation
necessitateth
him to
and
choose
to do one
thing
vain
rather than
another,
is
not
in
vain,
by
how
much
nece
R. S. Peters (New
York,
I have
argued
Kantian transcendentalism,
arrives at a similar
identification
freedom
and
determination, "The
Morality
of the
Sublime: Kant
Schiller,"
and
Studies in
Romanticism 19 (Winter 1980): 497-514, esp. pp. 5i3f. Clarke's Fourth 53. Para. 15 of Leibniz's answer to
ed.
Philip
p.
241
I touch
on this aspect of
and
with
Hobbes
Leibniz,"
and
Faith in Bacon
Hobbes,
the
Theodicy
of
1981): 607-28. See Leibniz, Journal of the History of Ideas 42. no. 4 (October-December, Remnant and Jonathan Bennett (Cambridge, New Essays on Human Understanding, tr. Peter
'uneasiness'
'endeavor'
1981), pp.
or
169,
172 and
186, on
and
pp
164-66,
183
and
188-89
on
'disquiet'.
248
Interpretation
success of
for the
the
hszsrd,
when
hazard
seemed sgsinst
us, snd
we ssved our
country."54
colonists'
rights
from their
of
at
their
'plus
Esrly
settlers
of
to the call
ultra,'
which
of settled
of
Gibrsltsr
of
of the
In
s sense
they hsd
sought out a
'state
a
nsture'
in exercising
has
given to all men, of
of
departing
which
chance,
there establishing
seem most
societies,
under
quest of new
habitations,
as, to
and of
shall
and regulations
them,
likely
to promote public
happiness.55
A nstursl, inslienable
venture.
right
to the pursuit
of
happiness
was
affirmed
in their
Cosway, October 12, 1786, Papers X: 451. Jefferson is clearly both 'heart'; his richly ambivalent relation to stoicism needs further study. Sec his letter to John Adams, April 8, 1816, Writings XIV: 467.
54.
'head'
To Maria
and
55.
"A
Summary
View
of
the
Rights
of
British
America,"
Papers I:
122.
The Lion A
and
the Ass:
on
Commentary
Robert Sacks
St. John's College, Annapolis
and
Santa Fe
CHAPTER XXXV
I.
JACOB, ARISE, GO
UP TO
BETH-EL,
GOD,
of
return under
to
Beth-el,
condi
sppesrs
life
the
in the dresm
will not
be
possible.
By
virtue of
their circum
Wsy,
constituted return
forced to
the mes
to the scene
the
former dream
hoping
that God
would make
sage of the
first dream
more explicit.
2.
HIM,
YOU,
AND BE
CLEAN,
journey
back to Beth-el
by having
his house
put
suspected
away Rachel
being
in
possession of
Labsn's
gods snd
difficulty
is the is
he
ssw
in Chspter
Thirty-
Cleansing,
tary
which
antidote
for defilement
as
discussed in the
commen wsys
to Gen. 34:11,
accomplished
in
a combination of at
sscrifice. verse:
One
of the
fundamental
ways of
appears
in the
following
And
upon whatsoever
whether
any of them,
vessel
when
they
are
dead,
must
doth fall, it
or skin,
shall
be
unclean;
it be any
or sack,
whatsoever
vessel
it be,
wherein until
any
the
work
of wood, is done, it
even;
so
or raiment,
be
put
into
water,
and
it
shall
be
unclean
it
shall
be
cleansed
(Lev.
11:32).
Cleansing
is
is done
by
washing in
water as
in the days
of
the Flood.
Only
water, in its
kinship
to chaos, is
object
sufficient
to carry away
not con
with
it everything
which
superfluous.
The
itself, however, is
evening, that
real. and
Evening,
which
had
arisen
by
itself
as an uncreated mixture of
considered
the
beginning
of
the world's
inability
250
to
Interpretation
confines, now, precisely because
of
its
undefined chsr
scter, provides
We had
when we
our
for the possibility of s chsnge in character. first glimpse of the double role that water is
considering the Philistines and their
men,
capable of
were
relation
to David
playing in the
commentsry to Gen. 23:1. Those respect for the Ark ss well ss the
nificance of water
which
lately
come
stood at
of
srt of wsr. We shall return to the double sig in the commentary to Gen. 49:10 by considering the lions the base of the great lsvsbo thst held the wsters of sblution
in front
bear
Solomon's Temple.
csnnot
Often things
be
clesnsed
immedistely
unclean
snd
if she
days
a maid child,
be
two weeks, as in
her
separation:
and six
(Lev.
12:5).
Cleansing
is the
opposite
of
defilement,
of
used
which
we
discussed in the
com
mentary to Gen. 34:11. In the Book to describe the pure gold which was
Exodus it is
Meeting
Mai.
state.
and
the Ark itself (see Ex. Chapters 22 and 28). In this context the
by
fire
until all of
the
removed
(see
3:3).
The
gold
used
intentionally
in its
natural
Purified is
gold
had to be
in
nature
a mixture and
in making the Ark because gold as found hence not adequate for man. Partly for these reasons
to thst world of mixtures, especislly line must be drawn between that world shsrp sacrifice becomes possible.
and
psrtly becsuse
during
in
which
Defilement in itself is
must
It is
part of
the
world and
be lived
with.
The
sin,
however, is
by
act
psrtsking in the sscrificisl meal while in a state of defilement. For there is no cleansing: there is only banishment (see Lev. 7:21).
AND LET US ALTAR UNTO
3.
DISTRESS,
AND
Jacob
went.
will
now
return
with
me
in the
way
which
I It
Jacob's
manner of
describing
lay
God
at
this
point
is
somewhat curious.
seems almost to
following
and
man.
Up
to
now
Jscob
That
him
God has
which
Shechem
snd
the
difficulties
Jscob
there.
AND THEY GAVE UNTO JACOB ALL THE STRANGE GODS WHICH WERE IN THEIR
HAND,
EARS;
AND
gods.
Before returning to Beth-el Jscob purifies his house by burying their strange There sppesrs to be s reference here to Chspter Thirty-one. Jscob, st
The Lion
lesst
st
and the
Ass
251
Lsbsn's
gods were
with
indeed
stolen
by
one of
his
gods
together
the esrrings
of which we will
in
by Shechem.
indicate the
exis and
The
tence
use
the
definite
srticle
is
of a psrticular snd
fsmous
oak near
Shechem,
indeed there
was such
an osk. most of
tions of
spesking it wss s very old osk which lasted throughout Israel's history. Following its history in msny of the English transi the Bible is, however, sometimes confusing becsuse the word for oak
translated/?/^.
ss one csn
Drsmsticslly
is
often
So fsr
wss
tell the
strange gods
to
12:6).
passed through the land unto the place of Shechem Moreh. And the Canaanite was then in the land (Gen. of Moses uses the osk of Moreh as a signpost when he gives the people
the
oak
and
and
it
was under
this tree that Joshua wrote and set up the Book of the Lord (Josh. 24:24). In
spite of all of
foreign
gods which
of
lay
buried
whose
under
this tree
wss
finally
Abimelech,
The
after osk
the son
Gideon,
story
king by
in Shechem (Judg.
that
9:6).
becomes
immediately
the crowning of
King Abimelech,
see also the com
Jothsm
gsve
his fsmous
psrsble of
kingship
mentary to Earrings
Gen.
slso
34:11).
plsy
s seessw role
in the development
of
from
wss
by
by Asron to build the Golden Cslf (Ex. 32:2), but it Bezaleel to build the Ark (Ex. 35:22). The last-time they
connection with the
are mentioned
is in
Ephod
which
Gideon
msde sfter
he
hsd
refused
a
the kingship.
unto
referred
to ss s
thing
which
became
snare
Gideon
into
one
his house (Judg. 8:27). It msy hsve group to hsve msde Abimelech 's king
people
snd
its
power
smong the
certsinly
gsve
force to Abime
contention thst
if he
s
king
(Judg. 9:2). In
have
set a precedent
slightly lsrger context Gideon's privste Ephod may for the private Ephod of Micah which played such an im
of the
portant part
in the decline
private wor
of the
ship away from the people, who were to have Lord (see commentary to Gen. 15:17).
5.
AND THEY JOURNEYED: AND THE TERROR OF GOD WAS UPON THE CITIES THAT WERE ROUND ABOUT SONS OF JACOB.
THEM,
6.
SO JACOB CAME TO
LUZ, WHICH
IS IN THE LAND OF
CANAAN,
THAT
IS,
BETH-EL, HE
252
7.
Interpretation
ALTAR, AND CALLED THE PLACE EL-BETH-EL:
OF HIS BROTHER.
s ssfe
journey, but he
returns to
Beth-el to
where
he
fled from
face of his brother. In spite of God's protection, Jscob is still confused becsuse he sees no wsy of fulfilling the divine plsn of estsblishing s well-ordered society upon s just foundation.
the
8.
BUT
DEBORAH,
REBEKAH'S NURSE
DIED,
BETH-EL UNDER THE OAK: AND THE NAME OF IT WAS CALLED BACHUTH.
Deborah, Rebekah's
In
order
famous
oak.
The
if it
were an oak
it
will
be necesssry to
Rebeksh's Isssc
and
She
was
for blind
old
most of
his life
snd ssw to
it thst
the
blessing
wss csrried
through Isaac
delivered safely into the hands of Jacob, even though Isaac was not fully swsre of whst he hsd done. The womsn buried under the oak in Beth-el wss
plsn
who cared
very young
the
child.
man
The
oak at
long
of God
was
was
found
young
years
by
his
encounter with
King
Jeroboam. This
the
the coming of
King
nineteen
body
of
the young
man
of God
under
they
were
to come.
guarding a promise which would not be fulfilled for many The same long-range care is symbolized by the nurse. This oak
to the oak at Shechem which concealed the gods that came
stands
in
opposition
Abimelech,
oak at
the son of
Gideon. But
and
lasted
much
Shechem
its
promise was
fulfilled
by
King
is
Josiah.
snd
Time,
part of
destroy,
doubts.
significance
The
of
oak
is
called
in Hebrew Allon-bachuth, the oak of tears. The be discussed in the commentsry to Gen. 45:14.
9.
PADAN-
ARAM,
10.
HIM, THY NAME IS JACOB: THY NAME SHALL NOT JACOB, BUT ISRAEL SHALL BE THY NAME:
AND HF
HIM, I
MUL-
The Lion
TIPLY;
and
the
Ass
253
ISAAC, TO
THEE I WILL
GIVE
IT,
The hss
not spoken.
mstch
finslly spoken sgain, and yet one msy also say that He Jscob hsd slresdy schieved the nsme Israel sfter his wrestling (Gen. 32:28). He knew very well thst he hsd been sent God Al
silent
God hss
by
mighty snd thst he would become a company of nations (Gen. 28:3). The lsnd hsd been promised to him and to his fathers many times (Gen. 28:13), and he himself had already
understood
father
of
Appsrently,
new
in the
words of
Appsrently, God is
13.
still silent.
AND GOD WENT UP FROM HIM IN THE PLACE WHERE HE TALKED WITH
HIM.
14. AND JACOB SET UP A PILLAR IN THE PLACE WHERE HE TALKED WITH
HIM,
THEREON,
15.
AND JACOB CALLED THE NAME OF THE PLACE WHERE GOD SPAKE WITH
HIM BETH-EL.
The is
a
history of pillars snd the role it plays in the development of the people fascinsting and curious subject. Jacob was the first great builder of pillars.
one at
Beth-el
it
once
waking from his dream. (Gen. 28:18, 22) to his wives (Gen. 31:13). He built another one as a
after will and
memory of his sgreement with Lsbsn (Gen. 31:45-52), snd he build two in the present chspter one to commemorate the present moment
permanent one
Moses
and of
built
s pillar at the
of
Aaron, Nadab
effects
Abihu,
and we
the
disastrous
thst
moment
snd
legitimate
slready
Moses hsd
commanded
people
they
enter
23:24).
and
build any
pillars
(Lev. 26:1);
onomy they
are
are
told not
only
I
specifically told not to build any to God because their worship should be
place
which
shall choose
(Deut.
12:3-5), the
15:9.
in the commentary to Gen. goes so fsr ss to ssy the Lord hates pillars (Deut. 16:22). The first illegitimate pillar was built by Absalom in
us
important for
The text
self-commemoration
and
immediately
after
Jeroboam's
revolution
built
on
and under
every
green tree
(I Kings
254
Interpretation
of
a great
builder
of
southern
kingdom to the
altar which
they became the counterpart in the Jeroboam built at Beth-el in the northern
work of
and
tearing
them
down
in the
reign of
Josiah,
altar at
he destroyed the
23:14).
Beth-el, long
the symbol of a
divided
nation
(II Kings
Perhsps the best wsy of understsnding the radical change in the Biblical atti tude toward pillars is to consider the present text more deeply by comparing
it
with
Jacob's last
journey
On that
occssion
he
poured
oil on the
which
would
be
snother
dsy
in
kingship
to his
people.
This time he
sdds a
libation
of wine.
Up
22,
until
this point Jacob had forgotten the wine. In other words the one
forgetting itself (see commentaries to Gen. 9:21, Understanding the verse in this way begins to reveal the full
meaning of Verse Eight in which Deborah, Rebekah's nurse, died. Jacob had forgotten that ideas can sleep while life continues. Man's ability to forget and
to remember
spite of
is the
the New
Way
to be established in
sre will
the fears
which
Jacob felt
at
the
end of
battles
and
be forgotten
life
be
possible.
For
become evident, it is
proper
that
something
should
be
said at
method of
reading the
with which
Bible. It is difficult to
we come
in the
sense of s tool
to the
book,
other than
by
is
shown.
assuming Nonethe
of
less it is Abrahsm
clear
when
by
he built
Bible
altars
Following
the
indication that
the
wished
be
read
in
such a
manner,
we tried
to recall
given place or
in
story evolved. In one sense our task was msde essy because of the modern invention of the concordance. In another sense we have seriously failed to participate in the Bible when we used that book.
general a
If
we
had
not
would
have been
slow process of
as the author
remembering and forgetting which would have duplicated life understood it. The author's way is not merely a literary device.
of men snd their wsys.
Men live
by
traditions
into the land only to arise from time to time for good or for bad. At times they are forgotten and then suddenly reappesr on the surfsce. The Bible is not only sn sttempt to lay the roots of 3 tradition;
bury
themselves
deep
The Lion
it is
also a
and the
Ass
255
dramatic
showing-forth of
how
such
traditions
some
are
possible, but
one
cannot see
least in
1 6.
BETH-EL;
EPHRATH;
AND RACHEL
TRAVAILED,
PASS,
LABOUR,
THAT THE
HER,
l8.
AND IT CAME TO
PASS,
DEPARTING, (FOR
SHE
DIED)
THAT SHE CALLED HIS NAME BEN-ONE BUT HIS FATHER CALLED HIM
BENJAMIN.
The
had
asked
for has
finally
come, but
Rachel,
even on
her
the
and
death bed,
son
rejoice
of my
in birth; the nsme she gave to her son means This time Jacob can no longer accept Rachel's way
of my
right
re-names
the
hand.
19.
AND RACHEL
DIED,
EPHRATH, WHICH
IS BETHLEHEM.
20. AND JACOB SET A PILLAR UPON HER GRAVE THAT IS THE PILLAR OF
JOURNEYED,
22.
AND IT CAME TO
PASS, WHEN
LAND,
THAT
REUBEN WENT AND LAY WITH BILHAH HIS FATHER'S CONCUBINE: AND
sleeps with
connection
ss-
Bilhah
became
sn
less
than
it hsd been
of
previously.
One
this relstionship
see the com
mild
esse
of
Reuben
49:3.
23.
THE SONS OF
AND
LEAH; REUBEN,
JACOB'S
LEVI,
24. 25. 26.
AND ZEBULUN:
AND THE SONS OF BILHAH, RACHEL'S HANDMAID; AND THE SONS OF ZILPAH, LEAH'S
DAN,
AND NAPHTALL
27.
CITY OF ARBAH,
So
and
old
Isaac is
still alive.
by
now most of us
It has been msny years since we have had either forgotten him or thought that he
him,
dead.
was
256
Interpretation
come to s msjor chsrscter
first
msjor chsrscter
to die wss
Ssrsh;
she
died
127
yesrs
(Gen.
the
23:1),
seven
yesrs
wss
to
msn
sfter
Strangely
Isaac
was
Jacob,
died
99,
which
would mean
that
his life
after
sixty years old at the birth of the birth of Jacob was precisely
120 years.
In
a more complicated
thing is
true of Abraham.
He
st the sge of
and
175 (Gen. 25:1). Now Isaac was born when Abraham was Sarah died when Isaac was 40 (Gen. 25:20). If one allows one year for
mourning, that would mean that Abraham was 140 when he married
or
Keturah,
when
that he
lived
with
Keturah for 35
years.
Now Ishmael
was
born
Abraham
may 85. In the commentary to Gen. 25:1 we showed that Abraham had two lives one which he led as a private man and the other which he led
Abraham
was as the
was
86,
and therefore we
presume that
he
founder
of
presupposes that
his
private
life lasted he
Ishmael life
was
Keturah,
sre
the
length
of
of that
which
85
yesrs plus
35
yesrs or
exsctly
length
life
God
prescribed
to msn.
There
interesting
esses which
The
part of seen
Wsy
lssted
until
he hsd
his
son
included the
the birth of
over.
he took in preserving the Way. Isaac's his son. Once he had passed on the seed his
care
private
work was
essentially
Abraham's
private
life
was
full
and rich;
it
and would
establish
have
produced
the New
at
would
have
remained unknown.
Moses died
the two lives.
his
distinction between
28. 29.
AND THE DAYS OF ISAAC WERE AN HUNDRED AND FOUR-SCORE YEARS. AND ISAAC
BEING OLD AND FULL OF DAYS: AND HIS SONS ESAU AND JACOB BURIED HIM.
As in the
case of
of
his
sons.
Again his
25:9).
death
seems to
be
private and
Way
(see Gen.
CHAPTER XXXVI
ESAU,
WHO IS EDOM.
2.
CANAAN;
ADAH THE
HIVITE;
3.
The Lion
and the
Ass
257
chspter
desling
with
the
descendsnts
of
Essu, is by
most
artless
whole
chapter of
of
artless
will
in the
become Hivites,
women
suddenly become men, nsmes will sppesr from nowhere like rabbits out of hsts, snd brothers who slmost hsve identicsl names will suddenly become one. There
are two reasons
for
as
this artlessness.
First,
the author, as
it were,
In
presents
the
history
of
Essu
if it had been
preserved
by
his
own children.
doing
so
he
reproduces
long
tradition con
cerning Ishmael. The way of the wild ass is not a way that keeps records. But Esau, as a strange mixture between the New Way and the wild ass, does
keep
records.
However, they
is his
bit.
the author
of
The
reveals
other reason
By
his
apparent artlessness
the nature of
These
facsimile
traditions as
they
come
our author
be
so unlike the
The
ried
problem
immediately
The first
verses.
Esau had
the
mar
three
women.
Beeri,
Hittite;
the
second wss
of
Ishmsel (Gen.
28:9).
becomes Adah
is
of
now
considered
Bashemsth. Bsshemsth, in the mesntime, hss become Aholibamsh the dsughter of Ansh, the dsughter of Zibeon the Hivite. And
Mshslsth's
nsme
hss become Bsshemath, just to round difficult Anah will turn out to be male
a
things off.
and a
To
make of
descendant
Seir,
rather
thsn
being
Hivite
three-ring
circus as we go along.
4. 5.
ELIPHAZ;
REUEL;
JEUSH,
AND
JAALAM,
ESAU,
6.
BROTHER JACOB. WENT INTO THE COUNTRY FROM THE FACE OF HIS
7.
MIGHT DWELL TOGETHER; FOR THEIR RICHES WERE MORE THAN THAT THEY
STRANGERS COULD NOT BEAR THEM AND THE LAND WHEREIN THEY WERE
BECAUSE OF THEIR CATTLE.
There
since
seems
to be some
question about
migration
to Seir
in
he
sppesrs
to hsve
that country
before
Jacob's
8.
9.
OF ESAU THE FATHER OF THE EDOMITES AND THESE ARE THE GENERATIONS IN MOUNT SEIR:
258
10.
Interpretation
SONS;
ELIPHAZ THE SON OF ADAH
THE WIFE OF ESAU, REUEL THE SON OF BASHEMATH THE WIFE OF ESAU. 1 1
.
AND
GATAM,
Eliphsz's first-born
which
son.
Temsn. is
mentioned ss
the fsther
of
the tribe to
that other Eliphsz from the Book of Job belongs (Job 2:11), but none of
ever sppesrs
in the books
with which
hsve been
desling
except
We may not take the direct route to understanding this verse, but like the Children of Israel, who feared the giants and were forced to take the longer
route which year
lasted
also
forty
long
excursion.
Our
fortywith
journey
list
of
chapter of
the Book of
Numbers
us
the
spies
sent
out
land. Let
consider
them individually.
The tribe
unknown.
of
Reuben
sent
Shammus the
sent
son of
Zsccur
whose grsndfsther
is
of
of
Simeon
Shsphst the
and
son of sent
Judsh
sent
son of
Jephunneh,
Issachar
Igal the
Joseph,
famous Joshua, son of Nun, but even his grandfather is unknown. There is little sense in going through the rest of the list. In only one case can the geneology of the spies be trsced bsck beyond the second generation. This is a very peculiar circumstance
whose grandfather also unknown.
Ephraim
sent the
to
find in
book
which relies so
hesvily
on
of
fsmily
is
even true of
Joshus
indeed.
detour to
understsnd
At this
they
were sttscked
by
sppesred
suddenly army in
battle (Ex.
Little had that
role
was
heard
of
him
again until
Nadab
and
Abihu,
God
the sons of
Aaron,
It
was
in
the
formation
of
sccompsny Moses, snd from thst time on he the gsp together with Moses (Ex. 33:1 1). It wss he
and
csmp during the affair of the Golden Calf (Ex. 32:17), Moses when Lldsd snd Midsd were prophesying in the
Before
middle
the csmp.
becoming
sensitivity to the dangers of wildness. Aside from Joshua, Caleb was the only spy who wss Children of Israel hsd the prowess snd stsmins to fsce the
returned, the other spies
convinced gisnts.
snd
thst the
of
the lsnd
The Lion
and
the
Ass
259
us go up at once and possess it; for we are it (Num. 13:30). Nonetheless the people becsme frightened
and revolted.
It
of
Israel
yet
would
be forced to
able
years
were not
God,
together with
Joshua,
As
the
to
journey
fulfilled
(Num. 24:22-25).
we mentioned at of
the
beginning
of
this
fathers
the
fifth
son of of
Kenizzite (Num. 32:12) snd hence s direct descendsnt Eliphsz, the son of Essu, just ss Csleb 's son-in-lsw, Oth-
the
Judges,
wss
himself
snd
Judg.
This
rsther
shocking turn
in the
that
light
while
of the
second suffered
chapter of
Deuteronomy, in
which
it is
pointed out
Israel
to
conquer
in slavery for four hundred years in Egypt, Esau was able the land of the Horims who seem either to be giants or at least to
(see Deut. 2:12,
of
be in
21-23).
son of
Jephunneh,
mentary
direct descendsnt
Essu,
descendsnt
12.
Eliphsz hsd
snother son
will
by
s concubine nsmed
Timns, but
ject
of concubines
be discussed in the
following
chspter.
Our
present
is to discuss Israel's relationship to that other son, Amalek. The country of Amalek was first mentioned as having been captured by Chedorlsomer in Chapter Fourteen during the time that he wss fighting the
problem gisnts. often
Amslek,
to
ss we
know,
wss not s
gisnt, in
spite of
will
be
Our
tssk will
be to
understsnd
kinship
ss
well ss
see whst
distinguishes them. Israel successfully eluded the srmy of Phsrsoh by Reeds they revolted becsuse of stsrvstion. Moses success
of
fully
quelled the revolt, and God promised to provide manna for the starving
people.
The
Raphidim
where
Just
sbout the
from
rock, the Amslekites sttacked from the rear. This was the begin
was to
last for
centuries.
The Amalekites,
related
being
descen
Syrians,
whom
we
many
occasions.
260
Interpretation
the brothers
access
who were
They
them
were with
to have
welcomed
Israel
and to
have
provided
easy necesssry to tske the lsnd of the Ammonites. Had this plan worked the Jordan River would have formed the eastern border, and the unity of the people would
assured.
would not
have been
have been
For
as we
remember, it
country which forced the eastern provinces The Amalekites were to have been one of the first to
receive the
New
Way
in fulfillment
Israel they The
of
the
fundamental
clear
promise.
By being
made
it
that
so
long
as
they lived
Jethro in
would never
be fulfilled (Ex.
17:8).
and
which
critical
it
was
determined
Way
should
immedistely
gisnts.
sfter this
written
law took
place
in Raphidim
suthor seems to
indicste the
relsting these two incidents, the difference between the Amslekites snd the
By
The
of
irrstionsl forces
but
by
means
borders
snd covensnts
The Amalekites
on
of
Israel
showed
that the
deeply
within
them.
waters of
the universe and borders are to hold back the chaotic waters of the
these
Philistines,
the
as
laws
were
intended to
contain
the
chaotic
waters
within
Maobites
or
the
were closer
in kin than
our
either
waters
within
souls
just
Since they
are psrt of us
they
cannot
be
excluded
by
Their cowsrdly
method of
sttsck
from the
originsl
Wsy
The
should
be trested
for
follows:
book,
and rehearse
I utterly blot
the
remembrance
it in the
(Ex. 17:14).
These
the spies
up
as
living
among the
by
brought back
the reports
concerning the
invincibility
of the new
land (Num.
13:28,29).
rebuked
After God
him
My
servant
becsuse he
alone would
have been
face the
giants.
The
author
were
living
Caleb too
was a son of
The
following
over the
morning the men woke up and saw the Promised Land right hill. With a sudden burst of courage they decided to attack imme-
The Lion
and the
Ass
261
their courage came too
chased
diately
late
called
without
and
they
were
waiting the appointed forty years, but defeated by the Amalekites, who
we shall
them to a city
strange
desth
of
Aaron.
people,
snd
immedistely
sfter
he died That
the
Amslekites
that
regain
mean
allowed
but brief
following
could
it
looked
without
as
though the
or
Children
Israel
themselves
under
God
king
lesder, Judsh
The first
snd
Simeon
recaptured snd
Horma
with esse.
There
between Israel
during
the
sttsck csme
shortly
was
sfter again.
death
of
Othniel,
were
Thus,
The Kenizzites
descendants
problem.
of
Esau. So
long
as
Othniel
alive
protection sgainst
had
always
a son of
Esau himself,
man.
There
were a
few
more skirmishes,
but in
until
the reign of
King
Saul.
with
hsd appsrently tsken the opportunity to conquer Amslekites, Israelite lsnd during the Philistine war (I Sam. 14:48), but it was sometime
the
who
wsrs
becsme
well
serious.
kingship hsving
sgsinst
been
divine decree
the Amalekites.
wsrned
the
Kennites, they
who
were
st that time
living
Amalekites,
whom
to leave so thst
would not
we remember
Moses'
Hobsb,
from the commentsry to Gen. 25:1, were fsther-in-lsw (Judg. 4:11). For the second time between the Amslekites
snd
hss
msde s connection
Jethro.
spared the
Ssul
of
was proud of
his
success
life
Agsg
their
king
the
and
snd ssved
said,
They
rest
have brought
the
we
best of
the
words of excuse
to Ssmuel sre
the oxen, of sheep have utterly destroyed (I Sam. 15:15)- Saul's quite moving, but Ssmuel only snswers, Hath
and
the
to sacrifice unto
delight in burnt
offerings
and sacrifices as
in obeying the
better than sacrifice, and to hearken of the Lord? Behold, to obey is than the fat of rams (1 Ssm. 15:22). As s result Agsg wss hscked to pieces by
Ssmuel,
The
that the
snd the
kingship
swsre
wss tsken
which
from
the
line
of
Ssul.
sympsthetic
way in
Saul's
position
is
presented makes
it
evident
suthor
is
Amslek is
sppesr monstrous.
262
Interpretation
with
dealing
wsys.
history
internal
but
with
book
about s
the
nature
of peoples which
and
their
Amslek
as an
csnnot
be thought
of ss
foreign
race
is to be
at
wiped
out
but
Looked
in that way
we can see
why there
facets
which might
During
in Ziklag,
vassal
to
King
Achish Amale
to
and
his
men
had
attacked
Israel. But
during
was
kites (I Sam.
27:8).
While Saul
attacked
battle
with
the camp at Ziklag. When David returned he found Ziklag in ashes, all his belongings captured, and his wives tsken prisoner. But he wss sble to de-
his belongings
with
only
bsnd
of men.
Although
King
fice to
the
Ssul lost his throne for preserving Amslekite csttle ss a sacri possession of all the Amalekite goods and dis
who
tributed them
who
did
not
equally among all of his men, to those fight. The pass3ge resds 3S follows:
came to the two
whom
fought
and
to those
And David
hundred
men, which
were so
could not
follow David,
they had
and
brook Besor:
him:
forth
to meet
David,
with
and when
David
came near
he
saluted
them.
and
Then
said,
Belial, of those
will not give wife and
with
David,
of Because they went not with us, we have recovered, save to every man his
answered all
his
Ye
shall not
do
so, my
they may lead them away, and depart. Then said David. brethren, with that which the Lord hath given us. who hath
the company that came against us
matter?
preserved
us, and
delivered
into
our
hand. For
to the
was
who will
hearken
in this
But
as
his
part
is that
goeth
down
battle,
so, this
so shall
his
be
.
by
it
the stuff:
they
And it
from
that
day forward
he
made
Israel
unto
Among
Amalekite As
the men of
Horma (I Sam.
30:30).
This insistence
ban
on
goods which
placed upon
Saul.
we related
in the commentsry to Gen. 14:4, Ssul wss wounded during war and asked his armor bearer to relieve his suffering with
armor
bearer
refused
a man
Dsvid's camp to report Saul's death. According to his account, Saul asked him to do the same service by holding the sword, and the young man complied. When David discovered that the young man was an Amalekite his
reaction was no weaker
met
Agag. As in the
msn.
esrlier
occssion the
were ss
Amalekite
decent
His
exsct words
follows:
The Lion
He
and
the
Ass
263
upon
come upon
because my life is yet whole in me. So I stood upon him, and slew him, because I was sure that he could not live after that he was fallen: and I took
me,
the crown that was upon
his head,
and
the
bracelet
that was on
his
arm, and
have
brought
them
hither
unto
As in the bound up
esse of
Ishmsel, something
with
to be closely
of
with
Israel,
even though
it
What
makes the
of
Bible
an
interesting
book is
its
awareness
of
that the
value. villain
centuries.
Haman,
of
Esther,
s
descendant
of
of
Agag
(Esther 3:10),
and the
hero, Mordecsi,
wss
descendsnt
Kish,
the Ben-
jsminite,
13.
the fsther of
King
Ssul (Esther
2:5).
14.
AHAH
THE DAUGHTER OF
ZIBEON,
15.
THESE WERE DUKES OF THE SONS OF ESAU: THE SONS OF ELIPHAZ THE
OMAR,
DUKE
ZEPHO,
DUKE
The
show
list
of
order
to
the kind of
they lived
lived in
Apparently,
Esau,
who
by its
own
duke. This
the
repetition revesls
snother
difficulty
given
within
sons of
Eliphsz,
the
the son of
given
Adsh,
in Verses Fourteen
one can see
Fifteen is
the son
compared with
list
in Verse Eleven
s son of
thst
Korah,
of
Eliphsz. This
confusion
is
prob-
the author because it reminds us of a sbly intentionsl on the psrt of (see Num. difficulty in Israel hsving to do with Korah, the Levite
similar
16
and
17,
17.
and
commentary to Gen.
20:7).
NAHATH, DUKE
ZERAH,
18.
JEUSH,
THESE WERE THE DUKES THAT CAME OF DUKE JAALAM, DUKE KORAH:
AHOLIBAMAH
264
19.
Interpretation
ESAU, WHO IS EDOM,
AND THESE ARE THEIR
DUKES.
Verse Seventeen is in
Eighteen is in
perfect
perfect
sgreement with
with
Verse Thirteen
except
snd
Verse
sgreement
Verse Fourteen
thst it must
be
20.
THESE ARE THE SONS OF SEIR THE HORITE, WHO INHABITED THE LAND:
AND
LOTAN,
21.
AND
SHOBAL,
AND
DISHON,
EZER,
Zibeon
was
the
grsndfsther
of
Essu's
wife
mother
Ansh hss suddenly become her uncle. It is two brothers nsmed Dishsn snd Dishon.
22.
be
AND THE CHILDREN OF LOTAN WERE HORI AND HEMAN: AND LOTAN'S
wss
the mother of
Amslek,
st
ALVAN,
MANAHATH,
AND 24.
EBAL, SHEPHO,
AND ONAM.
ZIBEON;
WILDERNESS,
AS HE FED
DISHON,
AND AHOLIBAMAH
Ajah may have been the father of Saul's famous concubine, Rizpah, with whom Ishbosheth sccused Abner of hsving slept. This sccusstion wss the imAbner'
mediste
csuse of
snd
of
3:8
and
23:1).
Rizpah
also
the
David
which
hung
the
in
order
of
because
of
the
deeds
house
commentary
to Gen. 22:6).
wife of you
Anah, the son of Zibeon, was the mother of Aholibamah, the Dishon, the son of Anah, was also her brother or his brother as
as we shall soon see
Esau.
wish, but
he
was
two
brothers
all
in
one.
26.
DISHAN; HEMDAN,
AND
ESHBAN,
AND
ITHRAN,
27. 28. 29.
THESE; BILHAN,
AND
ZAAVAN,
AND AKAN.
ARAN. DUKE
The Lion
and the
Ass
265
and the chsos
Dishon has
30. DUKE
finally
become Dishan
is
complete.
CAME OF
After
31.
brief
brothers hsve
now
become two
EDOM,
sgain.
BE
CITY WAS DINHABAH. 33. AND BELA DIED. AND JOBAB THE SON OF ZERAH OF BOZRAH REIGNED IN
HIS STEAD.
34.
HIS STEAD.
35.
AND HUSHAM
DIED,
BEDAD, WHO
SMOTE MID
MOAB, REIGNED
DIED,
AND SAMLAH OF MASREKAH REIGNED IN HIS STEAD. AND SAUL OF REHOBOTH BY THE RIVER REIGNED IN
AND SAMLAH
DIED,
HIS STEAD.
38.
AND SAUL
DIED,
DIED,
PAU;
WAS
MEHETABEL,
THE DAUGHTER OF
MATRED,
out to
The kings
Edom turn
can
be
found
throughout the
find
of
a man named
Saul,
and
Baalam's
father is there,
40.
as well as the
king
Syria.
ESAU,
AC
TIMNA,
41.
DUKE
ELAH,
DUKE
PINON,
42. 43.
KENAZ,
DUKE
EDOM,
ACCORD
This list
the
sons of
purports
to
be
in
which
the names of
Esau
It
contains well
known
sons such as
Kenaz
snd
and
God
where
the Dukes
snd s couple of
the others
266
Interpretation
of errors concludes
This comedy
ststed st
the discussion
of
As
we
the
un weeded gsrden.
The book
These be
beginning of the chspter, it is intended to Only one thing must be sdded. of Deuteronomy begins with the following
Moses
spake unto all
the results of sn
verses:
Israel
on this side
Jordan in the
and
wilderness,
in the
Tophel,
and
Laban,
and
Hazeroth,
Dizahab (There
are eleven
by
Kadesh-barnea.)
(Deut.
i :i
,2)
Scholsrs hsve
geographically,
often wished
to delete Verse
Two,
since
it
mskes no sense
not
geography in the
Deuteronomy
It is
a repetition sense
oral
itself
as
sn address
by
Moses to the
people.
in
speech of of
the
deeds
contsined
it is the
beginning
Israel,
One
tradition as such.
This
began the
tradition in
of
was
delivered
by
Seir,
pen
the unweeded
garden
traditions.
day
the author
his
and wander
of
Seir.
CHAPTER XXXVII
STRANGER,
On msny Actually it is
passages
have
spoken of the
four hundred
years
in Egypt.
relevant
from
read:
is to begin the
count.
The
from Genesis
said unto not
And he
that
thy
seed shall
be
a stranger
in
land that is
theirs,
them: and
they
hundred
they
I judge:
they
And
thou shalt go to
thou
shalt
be buried in
generation
hither
again:
for
the
iniquity
of the Amorites is
(Gen. 15:13-16)
However it is
closest
not possible
following
verses:
And these
and
Kohath,
sons
of the sons of Levi according to their generations: Gershon, Merari: and the years of the life of Levi were an hundred thirty and of Gershon; Libni,
and
seven years.
The
sons
and
Shimi, according
to their families.
And the
Izhar, and Hebron, and Uzziel: and the rears of Kohath; Amram, the life Kohath an were hundred of of thirty and three years. And the sons of Merari: Mahali and Mushi: these are the families of Levi according to their generations.
The Lion
and
the Ass
267
sister
Moses: (Ex.
of the
life of Amram
were an
years.
6:16-20)
Kohath
wss
Now
since
went to
Egypt, it is
obvious the
four hundred
as well.
yesrs must
which wss
spent
in Canaan
The
not
used
here to
remind us
be
2.
BILHAH,
ZILPAH,
HIS FA
THER'S WIVES: AND JOSEPH BROUGHT UNTO HIS FATHER THEIR EVIL REPORT.
it
mskes
The two
a
psrticles
involved
sre eth
particle
is
in
or
but may also mean with. The second one among, but may be used to show the direct object of
object
direct
verbs such as
for
pear with
ruling or caring for. The direct object of the verb meaning to flock usually requires the particle eth. The same two particles ap the same verb in Verse Twelve, which clearly must be translated:
father'
reader who
knows
Hebrew the
particles
of
conclusion of
if the
are
they
must
must
be taken in Verse
are
Twelve
be translsted: These
shepherded
the generations of
Jacob. Joseph,
being
he
his
and
brothers among
The
was a
lad,
that
is the
sons
of Bilhah
his
father'
s wives.
frightened Joseph
thsn to something evil. At sny rate the only other time in is the description of the report which the spies brought
gisnts
(Num.
CHILDREN, BECAUSE HE
WAS THE SON OF HIS OLD AGE: AND HE MADE HIM A COAT OF MANY COLOURS.
4. AND WHEN HIS BRETHREN SAW THAT THEIR FATHER LOVED HIM MORE THAN ALL HIS
BRETHREN, THEY
HATED
HIM,
Verses Three
us
and
Four
of
contain
which shall
face
for the
remainder
well
defined
This
order
would
require
s preference
be necesssry in the life of his people. for the eldest son. At the ssme time
most
youngest son
to
be the
cspsble, snd he
wss slso
st-
268
Interpretation
wss
trscted to
snd
Joseph's youth, psrtly becsuse Jscob himself psrtly because of the heroic streak in his
.character.
The
he
It
presented
to Joseph seems
to
cause the
anger.
the Tamar
by
13:12).
noted
it
should
be
Benjamin is
5.
being
one of
dream,
6.
them, hear,
i pray
you,
dreamed: 7.
arose,
your sheaves
stood round
about,
8.
him,
or shalt thou have dominion over us? and they hated him yet the
more for his
dresms uninterpreted,
snd
is relstively clesr there is no indicstion why these specific symbols are The word for sheaf never appears again in the books with which we have been dealing. However, the notion of binding may imply the unity of each
ing
used.
tribe.
9.
DREAM,
BRETHREN,
THE
AND
SAID, BEHOLD,
SUN AND THE MOON AND THE ELEVEN STARS MADE OBEISANCE TO ME.
IO. AND HE TOLD IT TO HIS
FATHER,
THER REBUKED
HIM, AND SAID UNTO HIM, WHAT IS THIS DREAM THAT THOU
HAST DREAMED? SHALL I AND THY MOTHER AND THY BRETHREN INDEED
Given the
author's
way
of
ss
relating the
well
world to the
literally
a
ss
metaphorically.
large extent, wss sble to rule over the fsmine; snd if he fsmine, he rules over nature, and the sun and the moon do bow
down to him.
1 1
AND HIS BRETHREN ENVIED HIM: BUT HIS FATHER OBSERVED THE MATTER.
12. 13.
AND HIS BRETHREN WENT TO FEED THEIR FATHER'S FLOCK IN SHECHEM. AND ISRAEL SAID UNTO JOSEPH, DO NOT THY BRE I HREN FEED THE FLOCK
IN SHECHEM? TO
COME,
HIM,
HERE AM I.
The Lion
14-
and the
Ass
269
WITH THY
BRETHREN,
FLOCKS;
HEBRON,
AND HE CAME TO
SHECHEM.
Israel
sent
observed
their
feeling
their
towsrd him.
Shechem
snd
wss
in
which
they
am
could
kill
The
Go, I pray
and
thee and
Here
race
They
was
are
bits
fragments
of a conversation
before. God
asking Abraham to kill his only son, thing will happen again.
Ever
since the sffsir st without established posed
and now
as
the new
land
could not
be
bloodshed. He his
other solution
to the problem
was sacrific
by
the eminence of
son and
youngest son.
ing
his dearest
on
reflecting
only hoped that through this sacrifice his sons, after the horrors of their own deeds, would be able to pull themselves
s of
just
society.
wss s
Nesr the
which
end
series
of
put
incidents
to sleep,
two sons
mske
it
evident thst
awaken.
Jacob's fesrs,
the
while
they
could
be
would one
day
First,
were
between Joseph's
which
Ephraim
thousand
out
and
Manassah, during
Ephraim
of
judgeship
were
of
Jephthah, in
Now
struggle
at
forty-two
pointed
men of
killed (Judg.
12:6).
as we
have
before,
the days
the Judges
a constant
in
which
Israel
would
be conquered,
would arise.
Judge
would arise of
his death
another
who reigned
when
was
The only time in which this two Judges peacefully led Israel after the
in
peace.
kingship
of
Abimelech.
The
problem came
sffected
Joseph's
younger
brother Benjamin
of the
more
directly. The
made
massacre of
Book
of
Judges
it
evident
desperately
needed s
king. In
reoccurred when
Saul
finally
to
all
united
the
people
by hewing
15.
SEEKEST THOU?
17.
SAY. LET US GO TO DOTHAN. AND JOSEPH WENT AFTER HIS BRETHREN, AND
FOUND THEM IN DOTHAN.
270
Interpretation
the
Fortunately
gone to
msn whose
arrival and
had
Shechem he
we
by
s mysterious
identity
know
is
not revealed.
Therefore,
that the
do
know
or not
whether
it
was
the
man
with we
whom
Jacob
wrestled
lonely
evening
(Gen.
32:24).
Nor do
whether
it
was one of
in front
of
Abra
18:2).
which
Dothan,
famous
the
city in
Joseph
was not
killed,
was also
war
6:13
the com
l8.
OFF,
THEM,
COME
NOW, THEREFORE.
AND WE WILL
HIM,
SOME
PIT;
SAY,
HANDS;
AND
SAID,
22.
WILDERNESS,
HIM;
THAT
HANDS,
slept with
one
his father's
wife
in Gen. 35:22, it is
be the
to
try
and
save
the son
we shall
fragments
of
try
commentary to Gen.
47:5.
23.
AND IT CAME TO
THAT THEY STRIPT JOSEPH OUT OF HIS THAT WAS ON HIM. 24.
AND THEY TOOK
COAT,
HIM,
AND CAST HIM INTO A PIT: AND THE PIT WAS WATER IN IT.
author
says
And the
pit
was
empty,
there
was
no
water
in
it,
mind
wster
Chapter Twenty-six, Verse Thirty-seven, in which Isaac finally after all his diggings. If finding water was Isasc's great act then
be
related to
the hidden
tradition.
at
lesst
up
and
Joseph
will
have to begin
25.
AND THEY SAT DOWN TO EAT BREAD: AND THEY LIFTED UP THEIR EYES
AND
LOOKED,
AND
BEHOLD,
The Lion
EAD, WITH
and
the Ass
111
MYRRH, GOING
The
sold
caravan of
and myrrh
to be them
yesrs
they
selves
be msking the ssme trip, carrying spicery and balm and myrrh (see Gen. 43:1 1 and for the calculation see the commentary to Gen. 47:28).
,
26.
IS IT IF WE SLAY
COME,
ISHMAELITES,
HAND BE UPON
HIM;
While Reuben's
wiser.
plan
was
plan of
seems
to be the
This
wisdom
is displayed in
First
if Joseph
again.
were
to return to
He is
also wise
his If
He
in difficult
Perhsps his
greatest wisdom
msnsging is
revealed was
in the twofold
after
nature of shown
the
sppesl
which
he
makes gain
to
his brothers.
only
he had
them that
they
would
murder of
he
appealed
sppesls
both to
whst
is lowest in them
appeal
sppesl
to the to the
lowest, they would not have heard the highest, highest they would hsve lesrned nothing.
the
28.
PIT,
FOR TWENTY PIECES OF SILVER: AND THEY BROUGHT JOSEPH INTO EGYPT.
This
passage
has
caused
great
difficulties
According
to
Verse Twenty-eight,
who
whoever
drew Joseph
him to the Egyptians. This is essentially in agree maelites, states that Potiphar bought Joseph from the which ment with Gen. 39:1, Ishmaelites. One problem remains. According to Verse Thirty-six of the present it was the Midianites who sold Joseph to Potiphar. In addition we must in turn
sold
chapter,
ask ourselves
are mentioned
in the
present verse.
So far
as
the
present author
The
out
solution and
by
the Rabbis
is
that the
who
sold
in turn
him to the
Ishmaelites, in
Ishmaelites via the the brothers sold Joseph to the Thirty-six the Midisnites
ern solution
sold
Midianites,
snd
Joseph to Potiphsr
to
assume
vis
to the
difficulty is
According
to
one of them
him
to the
accord-
272
Interpretation
ing
to the other
they
sold
position
makes
the
further
assumption
There is one other possibility which should be exsmined, though it too hss its difficulties. Since the Midisnite merchsnts sppear right before the words
they drew,
sume thst
the
normsl
it it
wss
wsy of interpreting Verse Twenty-eight the Midisnites who drew Joseph out of the pit
would
be to
ss-
snd sold
him to
be inter
by
for Gen.
42:22, in
which
Do
hear
me?
Therefore, behold,
he hsd
said would sssume
also
is his blood
re
mind whst
in Verse Twenty-two
thst he is
thinking
more
slavery.
In
Gen. 42:13 the brothers, thinking of Joseph, merely say And one is not. The phrase is ambiguous becsuse it could mesn either one is not with us or one no
longer exists, thst is to ssy, he is dead. If the latter interpretation is intended,
this
would
imply
evil
beast found
pit and
no conclusions can
In any case,
themselves ss
even after
repented slavery.
hsving
sold
Taking
brothers
hsd
the
Midianites,
we sssume
merchantmen ss
would
if
thst the
Midisnites,
psssing by,
occurred
ssw
the
to them ss
occurred
In the mesntime,
order to
secretly in
free Joseph, it is
more thsn
likely
thst he would
have
arranged matters
way thst their meal would have taken plsce st some distsnce from the pit, sllowing him to relesse Joseph without being noticed.
such a
in
This Joseph
own
even sfter
they
repent
it
wss
likely
of
that the
brothers believed
their
story
about
animal.
ancient
commentaries
assumed
Verse Thirty-six many of the that the Ishmaelites bought Joseph from the
assumption
mskes more
Because
brothers
sense
and then
sold
thsn the
modern
Midianites
sold
in the text, but it, too, is only assume that in Verse Thirty-six Joseph into Egypt indirectly by sell
ing
and
The
difficulty
with
this
Forty-five, Verses
as
Four him
Five, in
which
Joseph clearly
the present
his brothers
having
sold
possibilities remain.
If Joseph's
statement
must reject
hypothesis, in
The Lion
and
the
Ass
273
verb
drew
com-
to
other
possibility
of
will
be discussed in the
no clesr
wsy
solving the
present
difficulty,
mstter
several one
notions
present
themselves for
our consideration.
No
how
it
seems to
be importsnt to the
suthor
isnites
This msy in part account for their lster actions. On the other hand, since the Ishmaelites are so rarely mentioned in the Bible one feels obliged to give an
account of
their
presence.
Joseph's
journey
29.
over
desert country
in the 30.
pit;
brethren,
and
and
i,
31.
coat,
blood; colours,
and they brought it
to their
father;
and
said,
33.
and he recognized
it,
coat;
an evil beast
him;
clothes, and
loins,
35.
and all his sons and all his daughters rose up to comfort
but he refused to be comforted: and he
him;
down into the grave unto my son mourning. thus his father wept
FOR HIM.
After
having
csnnot
sctuslly
bring
themselves to
ssme conclusion
an evil
beast hath
by
the
words evil
the plan
on which so much
depended, He
the
following:
will give peace
And I
in the land
and ye shall
lie down,
afraid: and
your
beasts
out
of the
land,
neither shall
he
ssys:
save
my flock,
they
shall no more
be
a prey: and
will judge
And I
will set
up
them,
and
he
shall
feed them,
David; he
shall feed
them,
he
shall
be
their shepherd.
And I the
274
Lord
Interpretation
will
be
their
servant
David
a prince
spoken
it. And I
them a
and
covenant
of peace,
beasts to
cease out
they
shall
dwell safely in
sleep in the
Ezekiel'
woods.
(Ez. 34:22-25)
s comment seems to
verse
be right
the
evil
beasts
sre men.
Jscob in this
is
slso
thinking
of men snd
of strange psssions.
only hopes the evil beasts will be quieted. The fsther will not be comforted
The
sons wish
they
in
whst
wsy they
sre
guilty
the
snd
in
whst
innocent. The story is further wsy they brothers may now believe their own lie.
36.
complicated
by
POTIPHAR,
AN OFFICER
The last
verse of
again
in Egypt. It has
double function. Not only does it sssure us thst we will hesr more of Joseph, but it will slso force us to see Chapter Thirty-eight as part of the Joseph
story.
Forthcoming
Barbara
Articles
Tovey
Shskespesre's
Tempest
snd
Apology
The Republic
of
Anne M. Cohler
Laws
of
A.
Anthony
Smith
Ethics
snd
Jurgen Hsbermss
on the
Robert Sscks
The Lion
snd the
Commentsry
Book
of
Discussion
Thumos''
Thomss West
and
Reviews
Michsel A. Gillespie
Heidegger'
Time"
Political
and the
Possibility
of
Blitz
Short Notices
Will
Morrisey
Rousseau's Emile
Introduction, Translation
and
Notes
by
on
Reasoning by Larry
Arnhart
ISSN 0020-9635