Interpretation

A JOURNAL

J_ OF

POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY

Fall 1989 Ernest L. Fortin

Volume 17

Number I

Thomas Aquinas

and

the

Reform

of

Christian Education
Michael Palmer The Citizen Philosopher: Rousseau's

Dedicatory Inequality
41 David Bolotin

Letter to the Discourse

on

The Concerns

of

Odysseus: An

Introduction to the 59
Morton J. Frisch

Odyssey
the American

Edmund Burke Constitution

and

69

Mera J. Flaumenhaft

Seeing

Justice Done:

Aeschylus'

Oresteia
111

Roger D. Masters Celia McGuinness

Evolutionary Biology

and

Naturalism

127

The Fundamental Constitutions of Carolina as a Tool for Lockean

Scholarship
Book Reviews

145

William Mathie

The Rhetoric of Leviathan: Thomas Hobbes and the Politics of Cultural

Transformation

by

David Johnston

152

Chaninah Maschler

Death An

and

the

Disinterested Spectator:

Inquiry into the Nature of Philosophy by Ann Hartle

Interpretation

Editor-in-Chief Editors

Hilail Gildin

Seth G. Benardete

Christopher Bruell

Charles E.

Butterworth Hilail Gildin Robert Horwitz (d. 1987) Howard B. White (d. 1974)

Consulting

Editors

Joseph

Cropsey

Ernest L. Fortin Erich Hula

John Hallowed V. Jaffa

Wilhelm Hennis David Lowenthal (d. 1973)

Harry

Arnaldo Momigliano (d. 1987) Michael Oakeshott Ellis Sandoz Leo Strauss Kenneth W. Thompson Maurice Auerbach Patrick Fred Baumann

Associate Editors

Wayne Ambler Colmo Mindle

Michael Blaustein Joseph E.

Coby

Christopher A. Grant B.

Edward J. Erler

Maureen Feder-Marcus

Goldberg

Pamela K. Jensen

James W. Morris

Will

Morrisey
Leslie G. Rubin

Gerald Proietti

Charles T. Rubin

John A. Wettergreen (d. 1989) Bradford P. Wilson Hossein Ziai* Michael Zuckert Catherine Zuckert
Manuscript Editor Laurette G. Hupman Subscription rates per volume (3 individuals $21

Subscriptions

issues) :

libraries
students

and all other

institutions $34

(five-year

limit) $ 1 2

Postage

outside

$4 extra by $7.50 by air.

U.S.: Canada $3.50 extra; elsewhere surface mail (8 weeks or longer) or

and payable

Payments: in U.S. dollars Postal Service

within the
or a

by

the

U.S.

financial institution located

U.S.

contributors should send three clear copies with

their name, affiliation of any

postal/ZIP

kind,

address with

full

code,

and

telephone

number on

the title

page only;

ed.,
text

or manuals or

follow The Chicago Manual of Style, 13th based on it; and place notes in the
current

follow

journal

style

in printing

notes.

Composition

by

Eastern Graphics

interpretation, Queens College, 1 1367-0904, U.S.A. (718)520-7099

Flushing, N.Y.

Interpretation J_
Fall 1989
Volume 17 Number 1
Ernest L. Fortin
Thomas Aquinas
and

the Reform

of

Christian

Education
Michael Palmer The Citizen Philosopher: Rousseau's 19

Dedicatory Inequality
David Bolotin
the

Letter to the Discourse

on

The Concerns

of

Odysseus: An Introduction to

41

Odyssey
and

Morton J. Frisch Mera J. Flaumenhaft Roger D. Masters

Edmund Burke

the American Constitution

Aeschylus'

59

Seeing

Justice Done:

Oresteia

69
111
as

Evolutionary Biology

and

Naturalism

Celia McGuinness

The Fundamental Constitutions of Carolina a Tool for Lockean Scholarship

127

Book Reviews
William Mathie The Rhetoric of Leviathan: Thomas Hobbes and the Politics of Cultural Transformation 145

by
152

David Johnston Chaninah Maschler

Death
and the

Disinterested Spectator: An

Inquiry
Hartle

into the Nature of Philosophy

by

Ann

Copyright 1989 ISSN 0020-9635

interpretation

Thomas Aquinas
Ernest L. Fortin
Boston College

and

the Reform

of

Christian Education

My story begins where it ends with a few remarks about Umberto Eco's international best seller, The Name of the Rose (W. Weaver translation, New
York, 1983),
life blind
a novel

dealing

with a series of strange murders

that disrupt the

of a once peaceful medieval

and aged

monk,

was reputed

monastery whose library, presided over by a to be the finest in all of Christendom. The is
pierced
a

dark mystery surrounding these named William of Baskerville, Ockham

and

murders

by

a philosophical sleuth

who represents

cross

between William

of

Sherlock Holmes, two men of outstanding intellectual virtue. We discover that the hideous crimes were perpetrated by none other than eventually the librarian himself, not for any selfish motive, but in the name of religion and for the
had
sake of

its

preservation.

By

fortuitous turn
of

come

into

possession of

the missing portion

devoted to comedy, which the old man was body's reach because its recovery boded nothing but evil for the Christian faith. Comedy, he reasoned, extols the base at the expense of the noble, the low at
the expense
of

of events, the monastery Aristotle's Poetics, the one determined to keep out of every

the high.

By heaping
and

ridicule on as a

things that ought to be held

to dismantle
provokes

sacred, it foments doubt

functions

tool

with which

"every
a vile

holy

image"

and venerable
"villeins"

(p. 476). The laughter that it

is

sport, fit for

and

fools,

who

indulge in it for the

sole purpose of

allaying their secret fears. The true name of fear is fear of God. Whereas tragedy instills that fear into our hearts, comedy cancels it. It teaches that to

free

oneself

from it is the

beginning
The

of wisdom.

Christ did

not

laugh

and nei

ther should we. That the rabble should do so is of no consequence since nobody

takes them seriously

made

anyway.

case of

Aristotle

was

different. His treatise

the
wise and a

comedy respectable,
elevated

an object of esteem on

the

part of

the to

learned. It
which

it to the

rank of an art and conferred upon

it

dignity

it is

not entitled and that

it

would never

have

enjoyed otherwise. was

Therein

lay

the danger.

Allowing

such a

book to become known

world"

"the Luciferine

spark that would set

fire to the

whole

(p. 475).

The
not

pious monk was not

because he had

misunderstood

entirely mistaken. If he was afraid of Aristotle, it is him but because he had understood him only
case

too well; for it is certainly the

that the recovery of Aristotelian philosophy

numerous encroachments on

had led

by

an

implacable logic to

the

domain

of

faith. His

shortsighted

the diffusion

of

the

new

strategy nevertheless backfired. The futile attempt to halt ideas resulted only in the destruction of the monastery

interpretation, Fall

1989, Vol. 17, No. 1

Interpretation
therewith,
of the whole world of

and,

faith

William in

explains earlier

a space of years or

in the novel, the days, but "over the

vivid

learning for which it stood. As hiding of books may be of some use

and

centuries

it is

all"

no use at

(p. 286).

Eco's

novel

illustrates in

fashion the

problem

that lies at the

heart

of

the educational endeavors of the Middle Ages: that of reconciling the truths that
come

to us from divine
medieval grew

revelation with
which

the philosophical wisdom of

Greece

and

Rome. The
out

university,
our

has

no exact equivalent with of

of which

own

modern

studies, its division into

faculties,

and

university its practice

in antiquity and its formal program of

awarding
this

degrees,

was

originally

created

for the

express purpose of

dealing

with

problem.

By

and

large,

the new institution sought to promote the twin goals of classical educa
of

tion, namely, the formation

the

human

being
sum

and

the citizen, but

with

the

understanding that these goals would goal of forming Christians. Three terms

henceforth be

subordinated

to the higher
which

up the ideals to

it

was

dedicated:

"humanity,"

"civility,"

"Christianity"

and
.

humanitas, they
everywhere,

civilitas,

christianitas means

Although the three

nature

overlapped

to some extent,

were

by

no

identical. Human

is the

same always and

whereas

citizenship

inevitably

varies

from

place

to place
was was

and

from

one moment

in his among deter

tory
mine

to another. As for the medieval

all

which

Christianity, it world in its totality

but

one of the religions object was to

divided. The

how

three goals could be made to support one another and collaborate

in reasonably harmonious fashion. How this state of affairs had come

of which need

about

is

long

to

be

recounted

for

present purposes.
of

story only the main lines The first point to note is

religious

that the Christian tradition is the only one

the great

traditions

of

the

West to have incorporated the study reason it was able to do so is that,

presents

of

unlike

philosophy into its curriculum. The Judaism and Islam, Christianity

law
or a

itself first

and

foremost,

not as a sacred

divinely

mandated

social system
"faith"

or a sacred

encompassing every aspect of human life and thought, but as a doctrine the basic tenets of which lend themselves more in
a sense

readily to,
ated with

and

invite,

the

kind

of rational

investigation that is
use of

associ

the notion of theology.

Significantly,

the

the word

"theology"

to designate the scientific study of the the twelfth century and is a

made

divinely

revealed

truth

dates only from

direct
if

product of

the novel efforts that were then

of

to clarify, organize,

and

need

be defend the datum

as

Revelation. Prior

to that

time,
of

"theology"

had meant,

it does for Plato

and

Aristotle,

the

teachings

the poets

matics which concerns

"economy"

regarding the gods, or else that part of Christian dog itself with the nature of God in contradistinction to the
for these had been laid
the

or

the divine governance of the universe.

added that much of groundwork efforts
of

It

should

be

by
of

the early church

fathers,

to

whom

belongs the honor

transform it into
of the content of

being

first

to

introduce philosophy into the fold

and

an

instrument

capable

leading

to a

more

penetrating grasp

their religious

beliefs

Thomas Aquinas
the so-called "intelligence
the simple "rule
of

and

the Reform of Christian Education

of the

faith,"

intellectus fidei,

as

distinguished from
the

faith,"

regula

fidei. Not

everyone was convinced of

writers were

legitimacy
posed to

of such an endeavor.
of

Some Christian

vehemently op

the study

the

pagan classics on grounds similar

to those of Eco's

librarian

gladly have boycotted them altogether. To anyone who (zetesis) for wis already possessed the whole truth, the philosophical dom was impious or, at the very least, superfluous. St. Paul himself had repeat
and would
"quest"

edly

warned against

it,

and with good reason

(e.g., Col. 2:8; I Tim. 1:4

was

and

6:4; II Tim. 2:22; Tit. 3:9).

element of praise gave

Nowhere in his Letters

and

it

possible

to

find

an

for it. Pagan literature

learning

were the pods that one

to swine

and on which

the Prodigal Son had fed after squandering his

share of the paternal

Athens had nothing

Poor Aristotle,
art so evasive

whatever

heritage (cf. Luke 15:16). In Tertullian's famous phrase, to do with Jerusalem:

invented dialectics, the
so art of building up and tearing down; farfetched in its conjectures, so harsh in its
an

who

in its propositions,
really treating "sterile he have

arguments,

so productive of contentions and

everything these,

of nothing! and

genealogies,"

questions,"

embarrassing even to itself, retracting Whence spring those "fables and endless "words that spread like a From all
cancer?"

when

the apostle would

would

restrain

us,

he expressly philosophy human

"philosophy"

names

as that

against which

us

be

on our guard.

Writing

to the

says, "See that no one beguile tradition of

men and

you

through

and vain
Spirit."

Colossians, he deceit, after the

He had been
at

Athens

and

contrary had become acquainted

while

to the wisdom of the

with

Holy

that
and

wisdom which pretends

to

know the truth,

it only

corrupts

it

is itself divided into its

own manifold

heresies
with

by variety Jerusalem? What

a and who

of

concord

mutually is there between the

repugnant sects.

What indeed has Athens to do

Academy

and the

Church,
in
of

between heretics
Solomon,"

Christians? Our instruction

that

comes

from "the
should

porch of sought

had himself been taught

"the Lord

be

heart."

simplicity

of and

Away
no

with all attempts composition!

to produce a mottled
want no curious

Christianity

Stoic, Platonic, Heretics, 7.)

To the

dialectic

We

disputation

after

possessing Jesus Christ,

inquiry

after

enjoying the

gospel!

(On the Exclusion of

question of whether

Christians

ought to

be

educated or not

there was

ready answer: they had only to read the Bible, which was admirably suited to the fulfillment of every intellectual need. Anyone interested in first principles
could turn to the

Book

of

Genesis,

which contained a sublime account of

the

origins of all things.

For

moral

philosophy, there was the wisdom literature of

all of

the Old

Testament; for history,

the
sheer

its historical books;

and

for poetry, the anything that

more would

Psalms,
might

beauty

of whose

language

was unmatched

by

be

encountered elsewhere. argument

Others found the

less than

persuasive and

decided that

tual

have to be done if Christians were to equal their pagan counterparts in intellec achievement. The Bible was, after all, a bit short on rational discourse.

Interpretation
as

Important

it may have been in every

any
which

other

respect,

it did
As

not

back up its

assertions with

sort of argument and made no pretense of

supplying the contemporary

disciplines through
scholar

the human

mind

is

perfected.

one

has remarked, the only biblical character to give a reason for anything is the serpent in Genesis, and he is not generally held in odor of sanctity. Unlike Aristotle's unmoved mover, the God of Sacred Scripture does not come
across

in the first instance

children were
cult,"

as a

thinking being. This did

cult

not

mean,

however,

that his

forbidden to think. The

that he demanded was a

"reasonable
son.

Paul's

strictures relative

logike latreia (Rom. 12:1), one that entailed the use of rea to the quest for new knowledge were to be be

taken seriously, but

they

were not said:

the New Testament's last word on the sub

ject, for Christ

Son. It Israelite
and all

himself had

"Seek (zeteite)
equated with

and you shall pods eaten

find.'"

Hence

pagan wisdom could not

was more

simply be

the

by

the

Prodigal

like the

captive woman of

Deuteronomy,

whom

the faithful
won

was

legally

permitted

to take

as a wife once

the battle

had been

the male enemies

duly

slaughtered

(Deut. 21:10-14).

were certain conditions

to be

met:

the

poor woman

had to

shave

Granted, there her head, pare

her nails, get rid of her pagan ornaments, and be given a full month to bewail her kin; but if, at the end of that relatively mild ordeal, the romance was still
on, the
marriage could

take

place. with

The

same wisdom was also needed

to fight

the opponents of
compared powerful

Christianity

their own weapons,

in

which case

it

could

be

to the sword that the young David

and with which

managed

to wrest from his more to cut

off

adversary inter alia, St. Jerome, Letter 70 [to Magnus].)

The
problem might

he then

proceeded

his head. (Cf.

have been less

acute were

it

not

for the fact that Chris

on

tians had

no schools of

their own and were therefore

education.

totally dependent
all

the

pagan school

for their formal

Like it ideal

or

not,

to read Homer or

Virgil,

at

the

risk

of

being

exposed
of

to a way

young students had of life that stood

and was often

at a considerable remove

from the

moral

the

Gospel

in

open conflict with

it. The only remedy was to interpret these authors in such a way as to give the impression that what they taught was not really that different from what Christians believed.

One

of

the finest examples that

we

have To

of

this

"Christian"

pagan classics

is Basil the Great's

address

Young Men

on the

reading of the Benefits to Be

Derived from the Writings of the Greeks,2 which is all the more remarkable as it contains a large number of references to classical texts, rendered literally or
more often writers.

in the form

of a

paraphrase, from

a wide range of poets and prose

What is

peculiar about

it is that
or

all

these citations have been subtly

or quasi-Christian meaning.

distorted

and given a

Christian,

pre-Christian,

Even Odysseus is held up as a model of outstanding moral virtue and praised for, of all things, his truthfulness. It does not take much ingenuity to realize

that, far from bearing out Basil's contention, the original text opposite. It reveals an Odysseus who lives on everyone's lips

proves the exact

with

his

"wiles"

Thomas Aquinas
rather

and the

Reform of Christian Education

a consummate

than his virtuous deeds

and who

is

liar to boot (Odyssey,

IX, 19-20). The trick

what one was more

consisted
and

in editing the text

without
reason with

without

letting

on

that this is

doing

hence

arousing
his

the student's curiosity

any
was

than was necessary. There is every

aware of the

to think that Basil himself

sources.

fully

liberties he
chides

was

taking

In two distinct but

of

related

passages, he
tables"

those who think of

songs"

happiness only in terms

"range
over

"overloaded
sea,
as

and

"dissolute

and who some

every land
their

and

if

compelled

to pay tribute to

exacting

master

by

ceaseless

activity."

Yet he knew that the

adventure, but

restless

traveler who scours earth and sea in

agrees with

search of

nonetheless

politely
the

his Phaeacian hosts

with

that life is

never more pleasant

than

when

houses

are

filled

music, the

tables laden with bread and meats, and the cups overflowing with wine freshly drawn from the mixing bowls (cf. ibid, IX, 5-10) is none other than the fabled Odysseus, who has just been hailed as the epitome of every Christian virtue. Why Basil should have adopted this method of procedure is not difficult to

imagine. Good
most people

readers are rare.

a

It is

a matter of common experience

that

what

find in

book is little

more

than what

they

themselves
was

bring

to it.

Having

been taught that the best

virtue, the young

part of classical

literature

devoted to the

praise of

student would poem

be

predisposed

to look for a confir

mation of that view

in any

that he chanced to come across. The risk

involved in the

contact with a pagan writer was neutralized

in

advance

by

the

superimposition of a

Christian image that

not

only

valorized certain elements at

the expense of others but created the

existed

illusion

of a greater of

kinship
Bible.3

between the

poet's thought and the

teaching

the

than actually All in all, the

pedagogy had
to a

much

to

recommend

it.

By

reflecting

on

it,

one catches a

faint

glimpse of the enormous spiritual transformation that the passage

from

a pagan

Christian

civilization

demanded

and

in turn

effected.

Before three

centuries

had elapsed, the

of

lowly

Christians
mocked

whom

Celsus,

the

earliest philosophic critic

the

new

faith, had
elite of

fishermen"

as

"theologizing

had become the

intellectual

the Roman Empire.

The only ancient writer to draw up a blueprint of what a Christian school might look like if it were to be established is Augustine, who, in Book II of his
treatise On Christian then known

Doctrine, lists

all of

the human disciplines as

can contribute not

they

were

with a view

to showing how

they

to a better knowl

edge of the truths of

gustine's

the Christian faith. It is therefore

the
medieval

work, on

which

read

by

modern scholars as a

university was treatise of "Christian

largely based,
Its
aim

surprising that Au has been

culture."

is less to for in

resolve the difficulties inherent in any attempt to bridge the gulf between pagan and

Christian thought than to liberal

sketch

the type of education that is called

society that takes the Bible as

enkuklios paideia or
mathematical arts on one side

its

ultimate norm.

Accordingly,

the whole of the

arts program of the ancients,

mathematics

which

included the
and and dialec-

proper, geometry, astronomy, grammar, rhetoric,

music

and

the arts of language on the other

8
tic

Interpretation
is inserted into
at work a

larger framework
theology,"

and provided with a new rationale.

not

Already
mous

in this scheme, in theory if

of

in

actual practice,

is the fa

"reduction

the arts to

reductio artium ad

theologiam, that
rather

characterizes medieval education at

more

its

peak.

It is typical
this
matter

of

Augustine's

Platonic than Aristotelian

of

approach to

that

it

views all

things

in the light
one

their very highest principles. In the end, there is one and

sapientia, which

only

wisdom,

una

is informed
the human
at

and governed mind

by

divine

revela

tion.

Any
it

other

knowledge to
pagan

which

may have access, includ

ing
and

the whole of
alone

philosophy, is is the highroad to human

best

partial and uncertain.

Christianity

wholeness or perfection.

The trouble that later

granted that the rejects
was all rel

writers would

have

with

this

view

is that it takes for

anyone who

it

after

Christian faith is the only true faith and hence that having known it is necessarily at fault. As long as

Christianity

but universally acknowledged in the West, there was no reason to quar with it, and indeed it remained the dominant view among theologians to the
the Middle Ages. The first great challenge to it came
with

end of

the

rediscov of

ery

and

the Latin translation

century.

of

Aristotle's

works

during

the first half

person of

the

thirteenth

It has been

rightly

pointed out

that, in the

Aristo

tle, the West was confronted, not just with a new philosophy, but with philoso phy simply. Here for the first time was a complete, fully developed, and coher
ent account of

human life that

owed

conceivably be

construed as an alternative to

nothing to divine revelation and could it. The Arts Faculty, where phi

losophy
and

was

taught and whose role had previously been

of

limited to that

of a

propaedeutic to the

theology, suddenly assumed greater prominence study became the locus of the liveliest debates among scholars. Its Masters, who
of
were no

had been in the habit

mitted,

longer

quite so eager

moving up to theology as soon as circumstances per to leave philosophy and began to make a
shook

lifelong
The
tions

career of crisis

teaching it.
the foundations
of

that ensued
a

Christendom

and

has been

described

by

distinguished historian
the four
of

with a penchant

for sweeping
of the

generaliza

as one of

major crises of recorded

history,

the other three

being
The
of

the Aryan invasions pire,

and

the second

millenium

B.C., the fall

Roman Em

the still unresolved crisis of present-day

came to a climax

civilization.4

western

whole

issue

in 1277

with

the condemnation
culled or

by

the

bishop

Paris, Etienne
works of

Tempier,

of

219

propositions

condensed

from the

judged to be totally at odds with the basic truths faith.5 of the Christian Tempier, whose action has been severely criticized by modern scholars, was in fact more broadminded than most of them are willing
and

the Arts masters

to grant. What he objected to was not that these controversial matters were

being

debated in the

schools

chosen

to make a public

issue

Christians. The

irony

is that

engaged in the debate had them, thereby endangering the faith of simple by promulgating his syllabus Tempier unwittingly
of

but that the Masters

Thomas Aquinas
did
as much as anyone

and the

Reform of Christian Education

to

bring

the infamous doctrines to the on, no educated

attention of a

larger
of

audience.

From that

moment

person would

be ignorant

them.

Be that

as

it may, the

challenge

had already been

met

to some

extent

by

Thomas dance

Aquinas,

who undertook

to reform the whole of

theology in

accor

with the situation created by the rising tide of Aristotelianism. Whereas Augustine had thought only in terms of a "single una sapientia which included all of the truths uncovered by the pagan philosophers and

wisdom"

brought them to completion, Thomas

wholes, one governed

spoke of

two

wisdoms or

two perfect

reason,
are

and the other

by by principles

principles

that are available to the unaided human

exceed

that

the mind's natural capacity and

knowable only through divine revelation. With or without any further intervention on God's part, the universe had its proper perfection inasmuch as it
thus

contained within
or of

itself that

by

means of which

elevates

returning to its principle. it by assigning to it an be

aware of when

attaining its end Grace does not destroy the nature; it merely end that is higher than any to which it might
capable of
unprecedented

it is

aspire or even

left to itself. With

asks

boldness,

the

very first
sophical

question of the

sciences,

some other science

Summa of Theology is

"whether, besides
aliam

the philo

needed,"

namely, sacred science

Utrum

sit

necessarium,

praeter philosophicas

disciplinas,

doctrinam

haberi
The

almost as

if to

imply

that divine revelation

was somehow expendable.

question was not without

far-reaching

practical

implications.

Speaking fig

uratively, Augustine has the

warned

that one cannot safely appropriate the spoils of

Egyptians,

that is to say, pagan

learning
to

and

philosophy, without first ob

on

serving the Passover (On Christian Doctrine, II, 40-41). Thomas,

the other

hand,
until

evinces a greater willingness

postpone

the celebration of the Passover

the
of

Egyptians have been despoiled

and even until such

time as the

whole

land
in

Canaan has been

duly

annexed.

It

goes without

saying that,
are

since

the

order of nature and

the order of grace both stem from

God, they

necessarily astray
and

harmony

with each other.

If, by any
can

chance, human reason should perceive a

gone

contradiction

between them, it

only be because it has

rashly
true.

assented to propositions that are neither self-evident nor

demonstrably

The
and

great merit of the new approach was

that,

by

recognizing the

legitimacy
discus
and

the

integrity

of

the

natural

order,

it

provided a common ground of

sion

between Christians

and other

believers

as well as

between believers

nonbelievers. It also supplied the

made

natural

foundations

of political rule and

thus

for

a clearer

distinction between the

spiritual and temporal powers.

of

Al

though Thomas seldom dwells on this problem, his use

gave a new
more

Aristotle's Politics
others

impetus to into it. As

political

philosophy

and encouraged

to

delve
the

deeply

a result, the notion of

over

citizenship

regained some of

importance that it had lost

the centuries and became a major concern of

10

Interpretation
Dante
and

such prominent writers as soon resurrect

Marsilius
order

of

Padua. Dante himself

would

the term

politizare

in

to to describe the type of political

esp.

activity that had again become possible These general observations call for a

(see

Dante, Monarchy I, 12).

remarks, which, I

series of additional

hope,

will

bring

the problem into

sharper and

focus. The first is that Thomas's

needs

attempt to

harmonize biblical faith

Aristotelian philosophy

to be

interpreted

judiciously

and

in the light

of

the theological context to which

it
of

belongs. Thomas himself

any
such enterprise.

appears

to have been

fully

cognizant of

the

limits

It is

by

no means

evident, for

instance,
all,

that

Aristotle's
the

notion of virtue as expounded

in the Nicomachean Ethics is

compatible with

true spirit

of

the Sermon on the Mount. There

is,

after

a world of

difference
upon

between the
all

magnanimous man who takes pride

in his

noble

deeds,

seeks above

to please

himself,

and

finds his

greatest reward

in the honor bestowed

him

by

his fellow human beings,

and

the humble follower of

Christ

who

de

honors, is taught to think of others rather than of himself, and joyfully acccepts to be held in contempt and even die for his divine master contemni
spises
et mori pro

te

just

as

there is

a world of and

difference between the

courageous

warrior who

sacrifices

himself

everything that

is dearest to him for his

country
cases,

and

the saintly Christian

who gives actions

greater reward

in heaven. The
would

up his earthly life in exchange for a may be materially the same in both

but,

as

Pascal

later say, they

with

belong

to two

formally

different

and

incommensurable
The

orders.

second remark was

has to do
exploit

the Aristotelian notion of nature,

which

Thomas
on

the first to

to the full and which met with fierce opposition

the part of the other theologians inasmuch as it posed a direct threat to

notion of

biblical
if the

divine

omnipotence.

If God is the
not

supreme master of all and

whole of creation

depends

on

him

only for its coming into

being

but

for its internal structure, it is hard to think of nature as endowed with an intel ligible necessity over which no one, not eve., God, has any control. Between divine freedom
dle
ground and and philosophical necessitarianism

there

seemed

to be no

mid

Scotus tried valiantly to find a out of the dilemma the existence of an indefinite number of way by positing ideas in the divine mind, among which God was free to choose if he decided to hence
no possible compromise.

create,

as

in fact he did. This means, variety

was

however,
equally
conclusion

that the universe as we know

contingent universes.

it

is only

one of a

of possible and

The

same who

tendency

carried to

its logical

by

William

of

Ockham,

denied the

existence of

intelligible

natures or universal

ideas

altogether.

On this

telling, God is at liberty to do or command whatever he likes. He could even order us to hate him if he so desired. There are no limits, intrinsic or extrinsic, to the exercise of his absolutely free will.
Thomas's lectualism
own solution

to this

thorny
as

problem avoids the extremes of seeks to preserve

intel

and of

voluntarism

insofar

it

both the intrinsic God

as creator.

intelligibility

the the universe and its total

dependence

on

Thomas Aquinas
One
of

and

the Reform of Christian Education

11

the consequences of this

more moderate stance

is that it
than

understands

virtuous

behavior
and can

as

essentially

a matter of reason rather

of

blind

obe

dience to the
play in it
nonetheless

commands of a capricious

God. Education has

offense

a crucial role to

be

pursued without
even as

any

to the divine majesty. It

is

true that,

he

strives

to preserve the thrust of Aristotle's

analysis of the moral

with a constellation

life, Thomas
infused
or

subverts

it

by

capping the

natural virtues person who

of

supernatural

virtues;

for,

the

believes in the superiority of these supernatural virtues is bound to differ in character from the one who thinks that the only virtues worth cultivating are the
ones to which nature points as the

highest

of all possible

human

achievements.

This brings me to my next point, which is that Thomas's philosophy and, for that matter, the whole of medieval philosophy assumes a tone that is rather more doctrinaire than that of classical philosophy. This should not cause any
great

surprise, given the

as opposed to the

extreme

importance that

attaches

to the unity of doc

world.

trine,
great

unity

of social

structures, in the Christian

Three

issues

came

to dominate the intellectual scene: the notion of creation,

divine

providence and

foreknowledge,
the issues

and

the personal

immortality

of

the hu

man soul.

Those

were

on which

the theological tradition and the

and

nonreligious philosophic tradition parted

comapny

they
with

touched upon the rational premises on which

understandably so, since belief in divine revelation

was predicated.

If it

could

be

shown

this world, has no knowledge

of or control over

conclusively that God has nothing to do human affairs, and does

not mete out

justice in the

next

world,

theology

was

in

ruins.

Because it took
theologians as
evil,"

these

possibilities

seriously, philosophy

was singled out

by

some

the enemy par excellence, the very "tree of the

knowledge

of good and

as

Bonaventure

went so

far

as to call

it:
of eternal

Philosophy
seek to

must

bow before the dictate

truth and not before that of mere

rational thought

in the

worthless manner of mercy?

the ancient

(pagan)

thinkers. Do you

enjoy God's threefold

Be

humble

servant

by despising

yourself,

assisting your neighbor, and respecting God. What is Christian philosophy? It is Those who love Holy Scripture also love philosophy insofar as it humility.
. . .

strengthens their

faith; but philosophy is

mixed with error.

the tree of the

you are an

knowledge
of the

of good and

evil, for its truth is

you

If

imitator

philosophers,

say, 'How could Aristotle be

mistaken?'

and you

do

not

love

Holy Scripture;

necessarily fall away from faith. If you say the world is eternal, you know nothing of Christ. If you say there is but one intelligence in all things, no
you

happiness

after

this life and no

resurrection of

the dead

if

you eat of

this tree of

the knowledge of good and evil, you are

the philosophers
must

be

avoided

falling away from faith. Those who study must be on their guard; everything contrary to Christ's teaching as being deadly for the soul (Third Sunday of Advent, Sermon 2,
it
to be at first glance, for it these pivotal

in Works, IX, 62-63).

The

problem was more subtle than

appears

not so much

in the fact that the

philosophers rejected

lay doctrines,

12

Interpretation

although strability. mination alone

they

sometimes

did,

as

in the fact that they issue in

regard

questioned

their demon-

What distinguishes the

to

philosophical mind at

its highest is its deter

which

to withhold judgment on any

unable arrive at a

to

human

reason

is

definite

conclusion.

In the final

analysis

the con
positions

test

was not

between two mutually

the

exclusive and
on

equally dogmatic
peculiar

but between theological dogmatism

philosophical skepticism on

the one hand and a

brand

of

other. spilled over

The

same skepticism
of

inevitably
morality,

into

other

domains

and partic

ularly into the domain if the farmer live from the

and

were even more obvious.

where its potentially dangerous implications Centuries earlier, John Chrysostom had observed that

the

blacksmith,

the carpenter and the pilot, and all those who

work of

their hands had to wait for Plato to tell them what

abandon their

justice before

is, they
ever

would

have to

trades and

would

die

of starvation

having

had

a chance to perform a

practical advantage of

just deed (cf. Hom. in Matt., 1,1 1). The the theological position was that it removed any linger

ing doubt concerning the ultimate goodness of justice and thus offered the clar ity and firmness of direction that for the most part constitute the prerequisites of
decent human behavior. Its
which vision was

that of a morally consistent universe in

and

the good are

was

always rewarded

the wicked always punished. The theoretical premises whose certi

on which

disadvantage

that its teachings

rested on

tude left something to be desired. The

recalls

"dogmatism"

it had to fall back

in some manner the dogmatism of the early modern period, for which it have may remotely paved the way, although it is important to observe that this dogmatism has its roots in divine revelation and thus differs sharply from the dogmatism based
thought.
on
radical

skepticism

that

typifies

so

much

of

modem

What
tension

we

finally
its

come

to is a conflict or,
western

if

not

that,

at

least

a permanent

at

the heart of the

tradition,
a

with neither side of

tion to establish
"systematic"

own claims or refute

those

the other.

being in a posi Only a completed

or

philosophy, that

is to say,

giving distinguished from

unfinishable quest

an adequate account of

the universe in terms of its

philosophy that has succeeded in intrinsic causes, as

a philosophy that understands itself as an unfinished and for the truth, can claim to have ruled out the possibility of

divine revelation; and, conversely, only a theology that has succeeded in dis pelling the mystery in which it is ultimately grounded, even if by so doing it should destroy itself, can command universal assent. This tension between the two most noble guides to life that human consciousness at its highest level has brought to light is
as

long

as one and

necessarily something to be lamented. It can be fruitful knows how to live it, or as long as remains open to
not

philosophy

theology

theology

to philosophy. It may even account for the enormous

intellectual vitality that western thought has demonstrated across the centuries. My fourth and last comment concerns the predominantly dialectical tone of
medieval

university

education.

To

anyone

trained in the classical

tradition,

one

Thomas Aquinas
of

and

the Reform of Christian Education

as

13

unerotic or

be called, is its character. By that time, the Bible had replaced the Muses and a true story had been substituted for the beautiful lies of the poet as the mandatory starting point of one's ascent to the higher realms of learning.
the
most of

striking features

Scholasticism,

it

came to

"unmusical"

Homer

and

Virgil

were no

longer

authorities

to be reckoned with and the to be a live option. The

view

of the world reflected

of

in their

works

had

ceased

West,

course, had
and

never

known Homer

save

through the mediation of the Latin

poets,

the

infintely
had
a

more gentle and pious

Virgil had

long

been

co-opted as

an unconscious precursor of

the new age. Whereas the Church Fathers wrote

rhetorical and

books that duced

still

distinctly

cast, their Scholastic followers

pro

philosophical

commentaries

theological disputations. Dogma was the cold syllogism in all its forms
communication.

subjected

to the

regime of

dialectics

and

became the
logic

preferred medium of

intellectual

It is

symptomatic

of the spirit of the age of

and not as a resides

that, in the Thomistic scheme, poetry is treated as a part part of politics, as it had been by Plato and Aristotle. Its in its

chief

interest

being
in

a mode of

feeble
plina

attempt at

knowledge,
to

the lowest in fact of the disciplines

so

discourse among others, a first infima disci-

inferior
than
on the

even

rhetoric

far

as

the poet uses

images

or metaphors

to convey his thoughts (Thomas Aquinas, Com Posterior Analytics mentary of Aristotle, Prooemium). In a world that was already overwhelmingly Christian, both rhetoric and poetry had lost their real raison d'etre and survived only in the form of sermons and liturgical
rather
plausible arguments

hymns days
to it

calculated

to reinforce a faith that practically everyone

accepted.

The

were past when one

had to

make a case

for that faith

and win people over

by

great civilizations as

appealing to their passions. Medieval Christendom is one of the few known to us which had God and not some outstanding poet There
was a price

its

educator.

to be paid for this extraordinary privilege. As

ever more

time went on,

ments pitted

theology itself became

and

abstract,

indulging

in

refine

that sapped its vitality

had little

significance

beyond the

quarrels

that

rival

schools of thought against one another. as was

The

spirit of genuine

in

quiry was gradually lost, rise to it two centuries earlier.

The
the
crucial

the insight into the

problems

that

had

given

turning
of

point came toward

the

end of

the thirteenth century and

beginning

the fourteenth. Heralded

by

the crisis of 1277 to which I have

already alluded, it found its

poetic masterpiece of

literary

expression

the Middle Ages and

in Dante's Divine Comedy, the the encyclopedic work in which the in

a new and

various strands of medieval thought come together

dazzling

syn

thesis. In no

other medieval work are

more

the

goals of

humanity, civility

or citizen

ship,

and

Christianity

with one another.

Original

deftly interwoven and brought into finer harmony in its literary form, the Comedy is no less novel in
world and

its its

attempt

both to introduce the Muses into the Christian It is had begun to

to revali
with

date the

notion of citizenship.

a matter of chance that northern

Italy,
the

plethora of small communes,

experience a rebirth of

politi-

14
cal

Interpretation

life, but it is not a matter of chance that the Comedy, which is thoroughly political in its inspiration, should have done so much to foster that rebirth. That
political

horizon is

nevertheless

only the first

of

its three

great

horizons. Beyond

lay beginning
heaven
called

it

the larger horjzon of the philosopher, whose Olympian gaze ranges to

end o/the universe and can

from
the

of

the fixed stars,

on which

who, from the lofty vantage point look back toward that "little threshing

of

floor"

Earth
with

the

endless

drama

of

human

passion

is

played

out,

some

times

astonishing fierceness:
With my
of

sight

returned through all and each

the seven spheres, and saw this globe

such that and

smiled at

its paltry appearance;

and

that counsel I approve as best

which

holds it for least;

he

whose mind

is

turned elsewhere
can

truly be

called righteous

(Par., 22,133-38).

Finally,
passed

this

philosophical

horizon,

vast as

by

the presumably larger horizon opened up

it may have been, is itself encom in the last ten cantos of the

Comedy,
The
much as

that of

divine

revelation.

old

ambiguities

remain,

however,

and

they haunt Dante's

poem

as

they had haunted the works of his classical mentors. We know from Aristotle and his medieval disciples that it is only in the best regime that the
good
man

and

the good

citizen

coincide,

and

we

know from

not a

few

of

Dante's

contemporaries that an analogous question was

man and

being

raised

in

regard no one

to the relationship between the good

the

good

Christian. Since

has

ever seen

the best regime except in

make

books, human beings rarely have any

political arrangements under which

choice

but to

the best of the

flawed
the

they
kind
not

are called upon

to live. Given the right education,

by

which

mean

the

of education that education

is

geared to

development

of our common nature and

just

in the

spirit of the
of

regime, the

more

fortunate
far

or gifted ones

could aspire of

to a

degree

intellectual

and moral perfection not

superior to that
was unable suffer at

society

at

large.

Admittedly,
tyrant
or

the scheme was

foolproof, for it
the ambition

to guarantee that noble and

decent human beings

tyrannical
mob.

would never

have to
of

the hands

of some

Part

of

the

Chris

tian Middle Ages was

precisely be

to guard against such an

ing
of a

government

to the rule

of natural

just life

would always

present

eventuality by subject law. With that, the necessary conditions and the possibility of a clash between the

requirements of

humanity,
for

civility,
all. was

and

Christianity

would

be greatly reduced,

if

not eliminated once

The light
that

cloud

in the distance
as

that human perfection is subject to

different
in the

understandings
of reason

according illumined by faith. We

it is

examined

in the light

of reason alone or

again come

face to face

with the problem

had

shadowed the efforts of the medieval

theologian from the start: the

Thomas Aquinas
apparently
distinct issue is

and

the Reform of Christian Education

15

unresolvable conflict
as

between divine
of

revelation and philosophic rea

son conceived not and

merely irreducibly different

two bodies

doctrine but

as

the

grounds of

two

ways of

life. Where Dante

stood on

this

key
vast

a problem

that preoccupied his early readers

more than

it does the

majority
a our

his twentieth-century commentators. No one doubts that he Christian, and to this day his poem stands as the greatest Christian
of

wrote as

poem

in

tradition. To

what extent

he

also

thought as a Christian is
midst of a

another matter.

The

sudden reappearance of the

Muses in the

society from

which

they had supposedly been banished forever

distance the
medieval mind

comes as a

timely

reminder of

the

had traveled from its its later

years.

religious

beginnings to the
to

increasingly
against

secular orientation of

The

gigantic effort

bring

the entire realm of politics under the aegis of religion

had, it

seems, turned

itself

and given

way to
of

a concerted attempt on the part of

influential

thinkers to
could

reinsert

the

whole of religion

into

a political context.

Dante himself

find

no

better way

divine faith

and natural reason

negotiating the issue of the relationship between than by leaving it to thoughtful readers to make
we

up their own minds as to how that relationship might best be articulated. In this roundabout fashion we come back to the problem with which began
and which

is

so

librarian's

mistake was to equate

aptly formulated by the librarian in Eco's novel. The laughter with derision. To be sure, comedy is

not without

its dangers

an unscrupulous or

easily become a deadly weapon in the hands of irresponsible writer, but this is not its only function and it is
and can one.

certainly

not

its highest
there

As William
prevent

explains and as

the

example of

Dante

demonstrates,

is nothing to

it from

being

placed

in the

service of

truth, nobility, or piety and quite possibly all three at once. In this regard, its status is no different from that of the other intellectual disciplines, which can likewise be
put to a

variety

of

uses, some good and some bad. Augustine

art of
of

had
to

said as much about rhetoric, the

the sophist as

well as

that of the states

man,

which others against

had

accused

him

employing

and which

he

was obliged

defend

his detractors:
both truth in the
and

Since
would

by

means of the art of rhetoric

falsehood

are

urged, who
unarmed

dare to say that truth

should stand who wish

person of

its defenders

against

lying,

so that those

to

urge

their listeners

benevolent,

or

attentive, or
of that art?

falsehoods may know how to make docile in their presentation, while the

defenders plausibly

of truth are
while

ignorant

the defenders of

Should they speak briefly, clearly, and truth speak in such a way as to tire their listeners,
and render what

make themselves

difficult to understand,

they have

to

say dubious?
while

Should they

oppose the truth with

fallacious
either

arguments and assert

falsehoods,

the defenders of truth have no ability

to defend the truth or to oppose the

false? Should they, urging the them, moving them while the defenders
as to think this to

minds of

their

listerners into error, ardently

and somnolent? of

exhort

by

speech so that

they terrify,
cold,

sadden, and exhilarate them,

of truth are sluggish,

wisdom?

Who is
which

so

foolish

be

While the

faculty

eloquence,

is

of great

16

Interpretation
value

obtained

in urging either evil or justice, is in itself indifferent, why should it not be for the uses of the good in the service of truth if the evil usurp it for the of perverse and vain causes in defense of iniquity and error? (On Christian winning

Doctrine, IV.ii,3.)
Eco's librarian

was a

fanatic

whose others

fear,

which

he

could

detect in

animosity toward Aristotle was rooted in but not in himself. That is why he was

willing to

go

to any extreme, not excluding murder, to achieve

his

otherwise
proposed

commendable goal.

What he failed to
the eye of

see

is that in this instance the

remedy the blindness that

more successful. and

was worse

than the disease. His physical

afflicted

blindness is only a symbol of his mind. Dante was more clever and
advantage of
one

His

solution

had the
of

preserving both Aristotle light does it

shed

the Christian faith

end

instead

What in the
on

is the

legacy

of

sacrificing the Middle Ages

to the other.
and what all

the
or

issues that face

us at the present moment?

My

too sketchy remarks this broad ques

to have

may
tion.

may not provide the basis for an Still, it should be obvious that our

adequate answer to
own

age,

which seems

lost

confidence grounded

in itself

and

in

which

conviction, to the
much

in

neither reason nor

Revelation, has
know
called

it exists, is to learn from a civiliza

extent that where

tion that prized them above all else. I

of no

university today
master of

the

Bible

and the philosopher whom

with

Dante

"the

those

know"

who

are taken

brought to their

anything like the seriousness that our medieval predecessors study. The paradox in all of this is that the age that is custom
faith"

arily referred to as the "age of in highest honor. I take it as a

religious

is

also

the age

in

which

Aristotle

was

held

sure sign of our predicament that

the only two

thinkers

of

the

modern period of

to enjoy

almost universal respect are

Pascal

and

Kierkegaard, both
are still with

them notorious critics of reason. Religion and

philosophy

inkling
and

of what

it

might

us, but in their present form they hardly give us an mean to live in a world that is permeated with divine
either of

human

meaning.

The former is category

divorced from

reason or condescend

to

ingly a dessicating
retreated
of

subsumed under the

myth; the

latter,

even when not reduced

empiricism or the mere therapeutization of our

a metaphysical and ethical

language games,
of

has
the

into

possibility

guiding

our choices as

neutrality that deprives it human beings and citizens.

choose

any
are

"Values"

order of

the

day,

and each

individual is free to
personal value. call

his

own or

to refuse

the choice if that

ern

happens to be his

Little
a

wonder

that the mod

university
it

should

have decided to

itself

"multiversity."

It has

no

principle of
as

order,

and without such a

principle, there is

no wisdom.

Hopeless

appears to

be,

the situation nevertheless has a

relative

advantage over

other,

more stable situations. and cultural

Insofar

as

it is

characterized

by

the

traditions
mental

horizons, it
in
ways

allows

for

a reconsideration of

shaking of all the funda

human
in

alternatives

that would have been unthinkable at other

of

moments

our

history. The

sense

disintegration that

so

many

of our

Thomas Aquinas

and

the Reform of

Christian Education

17

thoughtful contemporaries have experienced is itself an invitation to undertake

a

fresh

or nontraditional assessment of

the tradition to

which

the ruling

con

sciousness of our

day

is the mostly

unconscious

heir.

ENDNOTES

du IHe

1. Matt., 7:7. See, on this subject, J. Danielou, "Recherche et tradition Nouvelle Revue Theologique 94 (1972), 449-61.
siecles,"

chez

les Peres du He

et

Pegis, The Wisdom of Catholicism (New York, 1949), 9-26. 3. For further details concerning Basil's method of procedure, cf. E.L. Fortin, "Christianity and Hellenism in Basil the Great's Address Ad in H.J. Blumenthal and R.A.
Adulescentes,1'

2. English translation in A.

Markus, eds., Neoplatonism and Early Christian Thought: Essays in Honour of AM. Armstrong (London, 1981), 189-211. 4. S. Mazzarino, Aspetti sociali del quarto secolo: Ricerche di storia trado-romana (Rome, 1951), Introd. 5. See, for an English translation of Tempier condemnation, R. Lerner and M. Mahdi, eds., Medieval Political Philosophy: A Sourcebook (New York, 1963), 335-54.

The Citizen Philosopher:

Rousseau's

Dedicatory

Letter to the Discourse

In Memoriam

on

Inequality

Robert H. Horwitz

1923-1987

Michael Palmer

University

of Maine

It

was not

Jean-Jacques Rousseau's
He

practice

to

write

dedicatory

letters for

his

and

Origin Foundations of Inequality Among Men (Second Discourse).' In his Dis course on the Arts and Sciences (First Discourse), Rousseau had attacked what
philosophic works. made one exception: the
on the was

Discourse

the Enlightenment extolled. His thesis, in a sentence, the arts

and

that

developments in

sciences, far from generally

and were same

improving

human life, had actually

greatest of political evils:
of

corrupted

mankind,

paving the way for the

the new
views of

despotism. At the
culminated
was

time,

understanding
the

human
the

wisdom

that

in the

"progressive"

philosophes of

Enlightenment his

actually destructive of philosophy. But it was the Second Discourse, according to Rousseau, that principles which made it "a work of the greatest
"completely,"

revealed

importance"

(Gagnebin
merely
civil

and

Raymond, 1959,

p.

388). And the Second Discourse is

not

an attack on on civil

the Enlightenment view of progress

in the

arts and sci

ences, but

societies stand on
of

beginning
tainly

society as such. It apparently leads to the conclusion that all illegitmate foundations, thus anticipating the famous the Social Contract: "Man is born free, and everywhere he is in
picture of

chains."

The

human society
pessimism.

presented

in the Second Discourse

cer

gives cause

for

deep

It is

a picture of man's admission

decline from his

natural

beginnings,
durable

complicated

by

Rousseau's

that the "happiest

epoch"

and most

in human history,

the age that was "best

for

man,"

and

"the

world,"

veritable prime of the

was a social condition

(Masters, 1964,
Meeting
of

A substantially different first version of this paper was presented at the Annual Canadian Political Science Association, Montreal, 1985. I am grateful to several
erees,

the

anonymous ref

and especially to Professors David Lowenthal and Daniel Cullen for their generous and painstaking criticisms of subsequent drafts. While revising this paper for publication, I was saddened to hear of the death of Robert Hor

witz, of whose generosity I

memory.

was

more

than once the beneficiary. 1 dedicate this article to his

wish

For this

reason more than

any other, I

it

were

better.

interpretation, Fall

1989, Vol. 17, No. 1

20
pp.

Interpretation

150-51). This is the Discourse, paradoxically, to which Rousseau affixed his only dedicatory letter, addressed to the city of his birth, the republic of Geneva.

Controversy
abated.

over

Rousseau's intention
comment on

The best known

of

the

immediately, and has never letter is that of Du Pan, a former First

arose after

Syndic

Geneva, writing
us

to Rousseau shortly

its

publication:

"You have
I fear it
not as

followed the
will
are"

movements of your

heart in the

Dedicatory Epistle,

and

be found to flatter

too much; you represent us as we ought to

be,

we (Masters, 1964, p. 229). (For this and other contemporary reactions in Geneva, see Starobinski, 1964, pp. 1286-89, Cranston, 1983, and Miller, 1984.) The controversy concerns whether Rousseau wrote the letter to pay

"honor to the ideal Citizens

of

of
p.

the ideal

State"

of

his dreams

(Miller, 1984,
a

25),

or whether

this

Geneva, at least "flattering

the

Geneva
is
meant

image"

"to teach the Genevans

obinski,

lesson"

concerning their political

deficiencies (Star

1964, p. xlix). Guehenno (1966, 1:304)

suggests

letter simply to
verted to

expedite the restoration of

when

Rousseau may have written the dedicatory his Genevan citizenship, lost years
of

earlier, at the age of sixteen,

he had fled the city

his birth

and con

by

Catholicism in Turin. Miller (1984, p. 25) has adequately responded showing the letter was not published until months after Rousseau left Ge
and

neva, his citizenship already recovered,

the manuscript to almost
that when
no one.

that while

at

Geneva he

showed

Indeed, Rousseau

notes

in his Confessions

he

read

the manuscript of the Second

professor of mathematics and experimental and

Discourse to Jean Jallabert, a physics at Geneva (later Councillor

(Gagnebin
and

Syndic), he 1959, p. 394).

For
more on

omitted

reading the

"Dedication"

Raymond,

the adventures in Geneva

pp.

of

the

manuscript of

Launay (1971,
the time of
yet

233-34). The

view of

Cranston (1983,
uncritical

pp.

the letter, see 9, 52) that, at

who

writing the letter, Rousseau was "an been "robbed of his illusions about his
...

patriot"

had

not

city,"

native

or

its

variation

in

Miller (1984, p. 25), that Rousseau "safeguarded his Geneva by completing the letter to his "ideal before his
to

ignorance"

of

the real

republic"

actual return

Geneva, is untenable, as I hope my reading of the letter demonstrates. On this point, I follow Masters (1968, pp. 192-95). For Masters, too, the "Dedica
tion"

Rousseau's teaching about the "best and he indicates that Geneva, or any Christian regime, must fall short of the best for Rousseau. I hope to demonstrate that the key to understanding Rousseau's letter to the Genevans is an appreciation of its rhetorical context. How can the virtuous
concerns

regime,"

"Citizens

of

Geneva"

of

the First Discourse

essay revealing
illegitimate
even

"completely"

justify

publishing
was

a philosophical and the

the truth about the origins of

foundations

humanity

of civil society?

This dilemma
and was

for the

present,

author of the

First

Discourse,

resolved,

implicitly, implicitly, in that

The Citizen Philosopher

essay.

21

Rousseau there distinguished the

the Platonic

classical

understanding

of

philosophy,

grounded on a radical plified

distinction between knowledge

and opinion and exem

own

by

Socrates, from
in the
pp.

the

pursuits of

his

fellow Encyclope
and

dists

who aspired

to reconcile philosophy and politics, knowledge

name of progress.

opinion,

and to of this

become

public educators see

(For

brief discussion
see

thesis,

Masters, 1964,

7-14; for

fuller treatment,

Strauss,

1947.)
I
maintain

that the

itly by

to the citizens of

philosophes of

to the Second Discourse, addressed explic Geneva, is simultaneously addressed implicitly to the Enlightenment Europe, with the intention of enlightening them,

"Dedication"

example, concerning how philosophes should address citoyens. Rousseau demonstrates that a political philosopher must address nonphilosophic citizens

politically To

and

that

political

philosophy is
philosophical

as much

the

political

treatment of

philosophic questions as understand

the

treatment of
not

political ones.

properly

the

letter to Geneva is
whether

Rousseau is

sincere or

saucy,

his

"eulogy"

only to determine whether to Geneva is zealously

to permit one to
and

hyperbolic,
question more.

or even

"couched in terms sufficiently

extravagant

its

sincerity"

(Masters, 1964,

p.

15). The letter

is, in fact, both

It is Rousseau's

public presentation of

ship between the republic of Geneva and reveals that Rousseau's thinking about the deepest
and

his understanding of the relation his philosophic thought. The letter

questions can

be presented,

philosophiz may be understood, without reference to Geneva, because his in childhood birth and facts of his brute that the limitations ing is free of any under (as he Geneva might have imposed upon him. Rousseau qua philosopher

stands

the philosopher) distances himself from Geneva.

Indeed, he
he

states ex will use a

altogether

plicitly in the language that

introductory
suits all

section of

the Second Discourse that

nations, or, rather, will forget time and place

whom

to think only of the men to

he

speaks.

And

are

these the

academicians of

Dijon? No. Rousseau

rather

imagines himself in the Lyceum

and

of

Plato

and
p.

Xenocrates forjudges, 103).

also

the human

race

for his

audience

Athens, with (Masters,

the
politi

1964,

But Rousseau intends

imism"

to

relate

his

philosophical concerns and

"Dedication"

cal concerns of the republic of

of

Geneva. The

lightens the "pess

the picture of human society found in the Second Discourse

gives some ground

by

offering these thoughts to a fatherland that

modern republican optimism.

for optimism,
true father

It

reveals

both how the

"ideal,"

philosopher's

land

must remain

his

own philosophical
concerns

and
citizens of

how the

philosopher can

responsibly Rousseau's
sincerity.

address

his

to the

the fatherland of his birth.

praise of

Geneva thus displays both

irony,"

philosophic

irony

and patriotic

(On "philosophic

see

Strauss, 1964,

p.

51;

compare

Plato,

reasonable Lovers 133d-e, 134c.) Geneva is flawed, but attachment to it is genbecause it keeps alive the possibility of republican government amidst the

22
eral

Interpretation
monarchical corruption

neither

simply to flatter

nor

eigtheenth-century Europe. insult the Genevans, but to instruct them,

of

Rousseau intends
and at

the

same time to instruct the

philosophes.

The Genevans

are

(or

should

be)

citi

zens; the

philosophes are cosmopolites.

Rousseau is essentially
philosophical,
of

philosopher,

not a patriot.

(Or,

we might

say, he is

i.e.,

critical, patriot.)
as a cosmopoli

But he

refuses

to parade himself before the country

his birth

tan sophisticate.
and

He

wishes

to demonstrate the superiority,

social criticism

both

philosophical cosmopolitan

political, of his

"patriotic"

to the

philosophes''

social criticism.

He instructs the Genevans concerning

of a

patriotism and

the

phi

losophes concerning philosophy. What follows takes the form

such, it may be

commentary

on

Rousseau's letter. As

compared with the similar effort of

writes

Einaudi

(1967,

pp.

150

65). Miller (1984)

of assumptions

extensively on the letter, but analyzes it on the basis different from mine: "I will attempt to reanimate and give very fresh force to the whole of Rousseau's Alpine fantasia. My primary guide
.

in this task

will

be Rousseau's

own

dedication

of

his Second Discourse to

Geneva,

although
and

Switzerland

supplementary material will be drawn from the passages on Geneva in the Letter to D'Alembert (1758), La Nouvelle

Heloise (1761), and a few other sources. The goal is to restore for the purposes of study the Alpine city of Rousseau's reveries: a model of harmony, a world of (p. 26). Miller has written an informative and imaginative book,
perfection"

but fails to
speculations

understand
on

the letter to Geneva correctly; for one

fantasia"

thing, in his
writings of

Rousseau's "Alpine
the Social Contract to

he treats

various

Rousseau, from
ence"

letters

to Mme.

Dupin,

without

discrimi

nation, despite his professed awareness that the question of Rousseau's "audi is an important one to consider when reading him (pp. 67-68). Through

out
pp.

my commentary, I have followed the laconic 253-54).

consists of an

suggestions of

Strauss (1953,

Rousseau's letter
and a

closing,

which are

opening salutation, twenty-two paragraphs, consistent in Starobinski (1964), Masters (1964), and

Cranston (1984). The letter divides itself neatly in half. After the opening salu tation, Rousseau devotes eleven paragraphs to a portrait of the society into
which

he

would

have

chosen to

be born had he been (per impossible) free to

not

choose.

Examination

reveals

it is

Geneva but

what

call

"the

philosopher's

fatherland."

the second
an
on

After repeating the opening salutation in the twelfth paragraph, in half of the letter Rousseau presents to his "distant fellow
portrait of

citizen

idealized

Geneva,

which serves

to promote political
under

reconciliation

the ground of

love

of country.

This I discuss

the

rubric

"the

citizen's

fatherland."

Between my discussions of the two halves of the letter, I digress to comment briefly on Rousseau's epigraph to the Second Discourse in order to indicate the philosophic ground on which Rousseau establishes his ideal fatherland and from which he offers patriotic criticism of
his
real one.

The Citizen Philosopher

THE PHILOSOPHER'S FATHERLAND

23

Rousseau begins his letter "TO THE REPUBLIC OF

salutation
LORDS."2

GENEVA"

with

the

"MAGNIFICENT,
His

MOST

HONORED,

AND

SOVEREIGN

have been startled to discover this saluta tenor, directed to the Genevan people, not the magis trates an indication of the republican thrust of Rousseau's intention. Rousseau begins by addressing, and for most of the letter speaks to, the Genevan people as a whole. Rousseau was well aware how unorthodox it was to address his
contemporaries must

tion,

of such artistocratic

dedicatory

letter to the
p.

republic
who

of

Geneva

rather

than its magistrates; see

Cranston (1983, Perdriau

ciates

349)

cites

Rousseau's

response to a

letter

of

Jean
asso

("Pedriau"

throughout

Cranston),

a pastor and one of

Rousseau's

in

Geneva,

who

had

raised

this objection.

The opening

sentence asserts

"only

the virtuous citizen may properly

acknowledge."

give

his fatherland those honors that it may worked for thirty years to deserve the
vain.

Rousseau himself has

citizen,"

appellation

"virtuous
"zeal."

but in

by the right that ought to be his authorization to pay public homage to his fatherland, Rousseau is prompted by He very zealously praises the Genevans. They seem to "possess society's greatest advantages and
to have best prevented its
established
abuses." men"

Rather than

among

and

"the

They have combined "the equality inequality they have instituted

...

nature

in the
(Ge

manner most approximate to natural nevan

law

and most

favorable to

society."

society has
with

achieved

only

an approximation of what would

not

be in

accor

dance
would

been born in Geneva, Rousseau have felt himself "unable to dispense with offering this picture of human
natural

law.) Even had he

society"

to the

Genevans.
p.

Starobinski (1964,
would

1289) interprets Rousseau's

even

statement not

to mean he

freely

choose

citizenship in Geneva

had he

been bom there.

This

is held, explicitly or implicitly, by all Rousseau's commentators. Miller (1984, p. 43) states it forcefully: "How emphatically Rousseau approves
view of

this society is

made clear

by
. .

the rhetorical device that structures the early

.

paragraphs of seau's

the dedication.

Geneva is

birth. That is
of

a contingent

fact

of

simply the patrie of Rous his existence. More significantly,

not

Geneva is his city

essence of what

choice,

an

emblem of

his

self-conscious

freedom,

the

his inability, human things

human society ought to be an eidetic intuition achieved of his in the free play reveries, to 'imagine that the nature
could admit of a

by
of

better

one.'"

But

neither

Starobinski's

view

that

Rousseau

makes

his

actual past

the object of a

wish

(1958, Part 1),

nor

Miller's

away in an Alpine reverie, is adequate. In this first half of the letter, Rousseau reveals a standard for political life utterly unrestricted by accidents of time and place. For an interesting discussion of the
variation, that Rousseau is
swept
"Geneva"

"Switzerland"

roles played

by

and

in Rousseau's intellectual

odys-

sey,

see

Barber (1985). Barber

chronicles

Rousseau's disenchantment

with Ge-

24

Interpretation
am and

neva; I nevans,

suggesting Rousseau others, to believe.

was

never as

enchanted

as

he led the Ge

Having
and

noted

the historical fact

of

his birth

within

the

walls of

Geneva, in

the immediate

sequel

Rousseau liberates his

mind

describes the society into which he would been free to choose. In this section of the letter

from those confining walls, have chosen to be bom, had he his

vision of

his true father

land

Rousseau

never

deigns to mention, birthplace

that

nor even allude

Rousseau's

freely

chosen

would

to, Geneva. be "a society of a size limited

the possibility of
one

by
the

the extent of human faculties

is, limited by

being

well

governed";

one where

"all the individuals

knowing

another,

neither

obscure maneuvers of vice nor notice and

the modesty of virtue could

be hidden from the have in

chosen

judgment

public."

of

the

In short, Rousseau

would

to

live in

society limits of the human capacity for trust and a truly common haps more than any other writer in the modern period, Rousseau
natural and

modelled on

the

ancient

polis, a city restricted

size

by

the

good.

Per

understood

appreciated

the

virtues

of not

the the

ancient

model

society,

however,

is

ancient

city (Strauss, 1953, city as it understood

would

254); his itself, as we

p.

shall see.

In
a

addition to

preferring

a polis,

Rousseau
where

have

chosen to

be bom in

democracy, "wisely

tempered,"

the sovereign

and

the people would

have

"only

one and

the same

interest,

so

that all movements of the machine

always

tended only to the common

and

happiness."

And this is

not possible

"unless

the people the only desirable

the sovereign

[are]

person."

the same

Democratic
happiness,"

government

is

government that can secure the government.

"common
the

thus the only

tempered"

(What is

meant p.

by

qualification

"wisely
dreams."

will emerge

below.) Miller (1984,

41)

remarks, "This is the kind of democ

racy Rousseau imagined in Geneva: this is the homeland of his contrary, it is precisely "the kind of democracy Rousseau imagined in
and

To the

Geneva,"

"the homeland

of

his

dreams,"

that Rousseau distinguishes in the letter.

and not

Rousseau "would have live in

wished

to live

die
to

free."

To "live

free"

means

to

a particular relation

to the

laws,
. . .

live

without

the

constraint of

laws. It is to bear their "honorable

condition

yoke"

salutary

and gentle

proudly, the

being

that

everyone

do

so equally. one

Rousseau is especially concerned "that no himself above the law and that no one outside
was obliged to recognize a wish
or pope no

in the

state could

declare

laden
(not

with

impose any law the state significant political implications.

could

No

man

no

king,

priest, outside,

even a messiah?)

is to be
the

above

the

law. And
reason?

no one

power

temporal or spiritual, is to be able to

or religious

impose any law

It is

"divine"

especially
writes

law
a

upon

state.

The

"impossible,"

Rousseau, for both

what

"national
of

chief and a

"foreign
make"

chief to

be

well obeyed

"whatever division is Caesar's

"modern"

even to render unto

Caesar

and unto
of

authority they may God what is

the

God's. In short, Rousseau

opposes the

dualism

earthly

and

The Citizen Philosopher

25
his

heavenly
followers The
and

fatherlands.
meant:

(By

"modern,"

mean

here

what

Machiavelli

and

Christian

as opposed to
of

pagan.)

central and

longest

the eleven paragraphs between Rousseau's

first

second

salutations
LORDS"

to his

"MAGNIFICENT, MOST HONORED, AND

for understanding the letter as a the problem of the founding of a free republic,
the

SOVEREIGN
whole.

provides

key

The

paragraph addresses

one where all are equal

before the law; the

the

work

to

which

the letter is
of

attached

inequality among striking is that here in the middle of this address to the Genevan people, Rousseau calls not the Genevans but the early Romans "the model of all free
question of
origin and men.

is devoted to the
What is

foundations

most

peoples."

Rousseau "would however

good

not

have

wished

to

live in

its laws

be."

might

The

difficulty
is
an

with

newly instituted republic, newly instituted republics

is that the
duration in
period

government

may have to be

constituted

differently
period of
prove

than one

in

long-established

republic.

Indeed,
and

there

initial

indeterminate
a

which

the people

the

government

may

imcompatible,

in

which

the state would

be

subject

to

disturbances,

even

destruction.

The

characteristic of republics

"once

peoples are accustomed

is freedom, but freedom is not for all peoples: to masters, they are no longer able to do without
statement:

them."

Rousseau

adds a

strikingly anti-revolutionary
masters,
an unbridled

shake off the yoke of their

a people moves

in attempting to farther from freedom,

opposite."

"mistaking
revolutions chains

for freedom
"almost

license

which

is its

Peoples'

always

deliver them to how the

seducers

who

only

make

their

heavier."

We

get an

intimation
calls

of

author of

the Second Discourse

a work could at a man

that profoundly

into

question

the foundations of all civil society

the same time speak of

ner.

revolution

in

so guarded and even

discouraging

Whatever truth there is in the

view

father,
where

of the modem revolutions of the

father, left, for "Man is bom free; and every

or grand
world

that Rousseau is the

he is in

chains,"

to become "Workers of the

chains,"

unite; you have to Rousseau's

nothing to lose but

your

something had to be

added

thought, something
added,
modem and what

non-Rousseauan, perhaps

anti-Rousseauan.

What had to be

the author of the First Discourse would not have added,

a univocal

is the

belief in

history

of social progress.

Rousseau knew
not

a revolu

tion

was

coming, that the

modem

ancien regime was progress.

finished. But he did

was

share,

as

Marx did, the

ered

faith in

He consequently
p.

very

much

both

by

what seems
after

to bother Marx very little: the

problems

that shall have to

be faced

the

revolution

(compare Gildin, 1976,

247).
seducers

People's

revolutions

"almost
that

always"

deliver them to from the

but the de
the Tarquins

based,

slavish,

stupid mob

emerged

oppression of

Roman mob eventually became the most respectable of all peoples. What the needed was to be guided through the transition period with great wisdom, and they then, once their origins had been "in a way lost in the night of
time,"

26

Interpretation
become the
have
constituent element of the
wished

could

kind

of republic

into

which

Rous

seau would

to be

bom,
of

the home of the

and

most respectable of all

peoples

because

courage" morals"

of

their

"severity

"spirited

a people

"not only free but worthy of being Rousseau does not share the characteristically
so."

modem conviction

that

funda
citi

mental political problems can

be

solved

by

institutional

means.

republic's
of

government and
zens:

laws, "however
and

good,"

cannot assure

the

freedom

its

severity

of morals

spirited

courage

are

necessary.

Rousseau thus The

adopts

something like the

politeia:

ancient

view, but

not

simply the

ancient view.

ancients considered the most

the regime, the

gime

important thing politically to be the question of is the regime democratic or oligarchic? From the re
question

everything transformed into

ety,"

else

follows. For Rousseau, the

the
would

is

narrower.

It is

"government"

a question about

as opposed to
understood

the "soci
and

distinction that

scarcely have been

in antiquity,

is, in fact, incompatible with the classical conception of politeia. (See Jaffa, 1972, pp. 65-67, for a clear statement distinguishing the classical con
which

ception of politeia

from the

"state"

modem conceptions of
"freedom," "virtue,"

and

"society".)

In addition, for
to

Rousseau,

not are

is the

standard

by

which

judge

political are

life. The Romans

the "model of
all

the "most respectable of all

peoples"

because they
wisest:

free

peoples."

One

might think the most

most

respectable of all peoples would

be the

most

moderate,

pious,

justest,

or

the most

virtuous of all peoples.

Not Rousseau. Rousseau's

model

be the

ancient polis,

but he

understands

it

differently

than

it

understood

may itself.

Rousseau
once we

understands virtue as a means toward the

higher

end of

freedom. (But
legitimate to

have

accepted an perhaps

instrumental
means

view of

virtue, is it
put

not

look for other,

surer,

seau appears to reduce virtue

it differently, Rous to freedom. In any case, just as it had long been

to

freedom?) To

understood that not all peoples are capable of virtue,

not all peoples are capable of

Rousseau

maintains that

freedom. (On the difficult

see

question of pp.

the mean
com

ing

"freedom"

of

in Rousseau's thought,
pp.

Strauss, 1953,

277-82;

pare

Plattner, 1979,

12-13.)
presentation of

Concerning
cient

Rousseau's tendentious
observation of
we

the character of the

p.

an

city, consider the

our system of and

Fustel de Coulanges (1956,

11):
and

In

education,

live from

infancy

in the

midst of the

Greeks

Romans,
judge
we of

become

accustomed

continually to
us to

compare them to ourselves, to

their

history by
. .

our own, and to explain our revolutions

by

theirs.
. .

What
.

have

received

from them leads

believe that
. .

we resemble them.

Hence

spring many

errors

not without

danger.

institutions

Having imperfectly
of
of

observed the
us.

of the ancient

city,

men

have dreamed

reviving them among

They

have deceived themselves

about the

liberty
put

the ancients, and on this

peril.

very

account

liberty

among the
must

moderns

has been

in

The "ancient
made
phers"

city"

be distinguished

not

by
of

the modem philosophers,

but
pp.

as well

only from interpretations of it from the "city of the philoso

antiquity (Strauss, 1964,

240-41).

The Citizen Philosopher

Does

27

practice?

Rousseau, himself, not appeal from ancient philosophy to ancient Is this not implied, for example, by the comparison between Cato and Socrates in Political Economy (Masters, 1978, p. 219)? Compare the extended
treatment of

Rome in Book 4
in

of

the Social Contract.

not

Having
he

observed

that Rousseau's model republic is

a special

Geneva but

ancient

Rome (albeit
places on a

understood

way),

we are stmck

that the

next condition

his

chosen

fatherland is that it be "diverted

by

fortunate impotence

from

As every schoolboy knows, the Roman repub lic was the conquering republic par excellence. Rousseau appeals from the Genevan to the Roman republic, but here is another indication that his stan
of

fierce love

conquests."

dards

are not

those

of antiquity.

Coupled

with

fortunate
In
a

location,"

its fortunate impotence, the city would have an "even more which would relieve it from any fear of being conquered.
would

word, the

city

desire, like
to
maintain

the

"wise"

Otanes

of

Rousseau's

sole

footnote to the letter, in the use of arms in

which suit

neither order

to mle nor be mled. The citizens would be trained that "warlike ardor and spirited courage

freedom

so well and whet

the appetite for

it,

rather

than

from the

necessity In the

to provide for their own

next

defense."

four paragraphs, Rousseau indicates what he had in mind when he stated, "I would have wished to be bom under a democratic government The right of legislation would be common to all citizens. wisely
tempered."

But Rousseau because they

of

would not excluded

have

approved plebiscites on

like those

of

the

Romans,

from the deliberations

the safety of the state those

who were most

the rights enjoyed

interested in its preservation, absurdly depriving the magistrates by common citizens. Rousseau would prefer that only the
power

magistrates

had the

to propose

new

laws. Even then he

on

would

have that

power used

cautiously,

and

hope, in
its
of

addition, that

those rare occasions the

people would

hesitate to
the
great

give

consent

to any changes
makes

in its constitution, for

"it is

above all

antiquity

laws that
what

venerable."

them

holy

and

Rousseau

"ancient"

adopts the
all

view,

vative"

position, that
undermine

but the

most

may properly be called the "conser necessary changes in a regime tend to

its stability,
of

and

that even necessary changes

consider

by

the

exigencies

military policy;
are not
"modem"

(e.g., changes dictated Aristotle, Politics, 1268b22harm. But

note

1269a29,
seau
"holiness"

1274bl

123)

necessarily
and

without

how Rous

follows Machiavelli's
of

reading
"executive"

of

the Bible in attributing the

would

laws to their antiquity

Moses'

to nothing else. (Machiavelli

modes

insist,

of

course, that
more

after

he descended Mount
the

Sinai had

than a

little to do
as

with

the success of

his Decalogue!)
a republic where
adminstrative and exec

Rousseau "would have fled

people augmented
utive

ill-governed"

necessarily

its legislative
own

power

by

retaining the

functions in its

hands

one of the vices that

should

in his

view mined

(democratic) Athens. Rather, they

tant decisions

merely

sanction

the laws and

impor
would and

proposed and reported

by

the city's

magistrates.

The latter

be

elected on

the ground of merit alone, annually, to

administer

justice

28

Interpretation
the state.

govern

Rousseau

concludes

these remarks with

and

comments

on

the

"fatal

misunderstandings"

that may beset republics,

comments

the

requisites

for "sin

reconciliation"

cere and perpetual

which

are

usually taken to be

allusions,

albeit

ironic,

to

certain events

in the

history

of

eighteenth-century
of

Geneva (see, for example, Masters, 1964, pp. 229-30). Such are the advantages Rousseau would have sought in the fatherland
choosing.

his

He

again addresses
LORDS."

SOVEREIGN
a

his "MAGNIFICENT, MOST HONORED, AND He avers that if Providence smiled on his fatherland in
were granted a enjoyed

few

other was

respects, for example, if it

fertile

countryside

(as

Geneva

not), he

would
with

have

happily

these things

"living
.

peace
.

fully

in

sweet

society

the virtues; and

leaving

decent
seau

patriot."

and virtuous
not reside

all my fellow citizens, practicing toward them behind me the honorable memory of a good man and a We cannot help reminding ourselves that Rous

did

in Geneva.
the

Genevans why he is addressing them, and has described the kind of society he would have chosen for his birthplace, had he been free to choose. To casual readers, it appears to
of

In the first half

letter, Rousseau has indicated

to the

be

description

of

Genevan

society.

To less

casual

readers, like the former

First Syndic Du Pan, it appears to be a zealously exaggerated, if well-meaning, description of Geneva's virtues. In fact the letter has (thus far) not been about

Geneva

at all.

Careful readers should not be surprised, then, to find Rousseau now, after a dozen paragraphs, saying that if he were reduced to living in other climes than those of his (actual) fatherland (as he was, in fact, by an "imprudent youth"), he would, "moved
citizens,"

by

tender and disinterested

affection"

for his "distant fellow

discourse"

address

to them

"approximately
one.

the

following

(my

em

phases), that

is, What, then, was

as a
rather

not

the preceding

the preceding description? Starobinski describes

discours"

the/o//ow-

ing
it is

description "Discours dans le

the other way
around.

(1964,

p.

1291). I

should think

called

"discours dans le

discours"

We have already had what might helpfully be (a "discourse within the discourse")

get

Rousseau's tendentious eulogy to the ancient polis and now we are going to Rousseau's zealously exaggerated, if well-meaning (or not), description of
society.
"discourses"

Genevan

But why two paragraph, Rousseau

should

within

the

letter? In the last

not

sentence of

the first

writes:

"even had I
to

been bom
with

within your walls,

have believed

myself unable

dispense
all

offering this
me

picture of

human society to that

ture
of

people

which, of

others, seems to
prevented

to possess

society's greatest advantages and to

have best

its

abuses."

What

pic

human
is

society?

Rousseau

never refers

course

in the letter. Is it
mind

possible that the

explicitly to the Second Dis "picture of human Rousseau

society"

has in

as much the one we

eleven paragraphs of the

letter,

as

find in the immediate sequel, the succeeding the one we find in the Second Discourse

The Citizen Philosopher

itself? Does Rousseau
even purport

29

bolically, in the
picture of

paragraphs

describe Geneva, however hyperbetween his first and his second salutations to his
to
LORDS?"

"MAGNIFICENT, MOST HONORED, AND SOVEREIGN

Is the human society Rousseau felt himself unable to dispense with offering to the Genevans the picture of the fatherland he would have chosen instead of Geneva, had he been free to choose? Cranston (1984, "It
intended
where p.

52)

offers

this

judgment concerning
regime

the

letter

as a whole:
of

was not unnatural all

that some readers should even suspect Rousseau

having

the time to attack the

Genevan

by

the device of praising it

it least deserved

principles

trayed.

showing how far it had fallen from its by expounding the principles which it had most conspicuously be But this, 1 believe, is to impute to Rousseau a more devious sophistica
praise and of

tion than

he

polemicist."

possessed as a
"polemicist,"

I believe Cranston

underestimates

both

and his propensity for "devious sophis Rousseau describes two fatherlands in the to the Second Discourse: the one of Rousseau the philosopher; the other of the citizen of as a
tication."

Rousseau's talents

"Dedication"

Geneva. To clarify the

citizen's, not
so much

relation

between the

philosopher'

fatherland

and

the

dedicate the Second Discourse, is the philosophic purpose of Rousseau's letter to the republic of Geneva. Starobinski correctly suggests the letter is meant "to teach the Genevans a lesson"; but Rousseau also
to

intends to teach

lesson to the

philosophes of

Enlightenment Europe.

DIGRESSION ON AN EPIGRAPH

Rousseau's
upon
"nature"

model

for

political

life is the

ancient

polis, but

he

"improves"

it. He follows Machiavelli in admiring antiquity as against modernity, but as Rousseau understands it in the Second Discourse is the standard
he
criticizes

by

which

both. Rousseau's disagreement from their disagreements

with

ems and

Aristotle

"nature."

stems

about

both the early mod It is helpful

here

to reflect for a moment on the only writing other than the

places

dedicatory

letter

that Rousseau
course

between the title

to

of

the Second Discourse and the

not

dis

itself: the

epigraph

from Aristotle. This is

adumbrate one.

the place for an

extended

interpretation, but I digress

The
epigraph

is in

Latin translation
reads:

of a sentence corrupt

from Aristotle's Politics

which

(1254a36-38). In English it
are well ordered
natural"

"Not in
nature,
calls

things, but in those

the

accordance with p.

should one consider

mind

that which

is

(Masters, 1964,
the foundations

229). It

to

famous

statement

from have

Rousseau's introduction
examined

to the Second Discourse: "The philosophers who

of

the state of nature, but

none

society have all felt the necessity of going back to of them has reached (Masters, 1964, p. 102).
it"

Rousseau
modem

uses

the quotation from Aristotle to indicate his criticism of the

nature"

"state

of

theorists,

most

obviously Hobbes

and

Locke. He

ap-

30
peals

Interpretation
to classical political philosophy to begin his
as
critique of modem political
ancient

philosophy, just

he

appeals

from

modem

Geneva to
we

Rome. But if

we

turn to the context of the quotation in the

Politics,

find that

it

juxtaposed
to

with

its

context on

the title

page of

Rousseau's Second

implies, when Discourse, a

us

critique of classical political

compare

philosophy

as well.

(Note how Rousseau invites

to

the

contexts

by

supplying the

citation

the citation for the epigraph on the title page of

Aristotle; he did not supply the First Discourse.)

of

The "first

context

in the Politics is Aristotle's discussion in the first book

of

the

pairing"

human beings

forming

the

household from
of

which

the polis, the

the association most salubrious to the

good

development

human

virtue and

life,

will emerge.

generation"

the sake of
sake of others

This first pairing includes that of "female and male for and that of "mler by nature and mled by nature for the

preservation,"

that
as natural a

is, it

appears

that for some persons to

be

enslaved

by

is

human

phenomenon as procreation.

Aristotle deals

with

immediate objection, that slavery is merely conventional and not at all natural, in a perplexing manner: he discusses property and the art of acquisition
the

(1253b23ff.). We leam that the just

and

acquistion of slaves

is

kind

of

hunting,
"wild

that man's

hunting

is

natural and

just

and should

be

used against

beasts

and that part of mankind which

is

meant

mled"

(1256b25-27). It is in the
of mler and

middle of mled

but is unwilling to be by this discussion a demonstration

nature

that the distinction

pervades

all of nature

that

we

find

Aristotle's

remark about corruption and nature that

Rousseau
is

cites.

The Second Discourse is Rousseau's

work on man's origin and

nature,

espe

cially the origin of

with

inequality

among

men.

This

inequality
not a

inextricably
and

linked

the unjust origins

of private property.

It is

frolic in the

esoteric

garden to suggest

that Rousseau chose his

epigraph

carefully,

that reflec

tion on his

may be a helpful entry point to his philosophic teaching. the Citing authority of Aristotle on the title page of the Discourse, Rousseau appears to be appealing to Aristotle's understanding of nature, according to
choice which

the nature of
that
and

being

is best

seen

in its perfection; but he manifestly

as a
well

rejects

teleological

understanding,
substitution of

as

the

Hobbes

Locke (the

summum

crypto-teleology of malum for a summum

bonum). Rousseau's

is peaceable, herbivorous, solitary, and aso cial. Aristotle's is a hunter of wild beasts and other men, naturally part of a and intended by nature for life in a polis; a man without a city is household, like a beast or a god. According to Rousseau, the city is always unnatural,
natural man

although we

may

observe that

for Rousseau, too,

a man without a

city is like

man, and his dreaming, solitary walker, In particular, for Rousseau slavery is unnatural and wholly unjust, but the ancient city was impossible without slavery. Rousseau may appeal from
respectively.
modem to ancient political

beast

or a god: consider

his

"natural"

philosophy, from the

modem

to the ancient city, but

ancient

he

appeals

from
in
a

ancient political

philosophy

understood

new, radically

modem

Strauss, 1953,

pp.

252-94;

compare

city to nature, in the Second Discourse (see way 1979). Plattner,

and the

The Citizen Philosopher

In challenging slavery, Rousseau
tradition
could also

31

be
a

said to accept

the ancient

according to that denied "natural

civil

which

slavery,"

society arose from in particular

contract,

an ancient tradition

Lucretius'

account of

the genesis of

271

n.

society in De Rerum Natura, which serves, according to Strauss (1953, p. for Rousseau's own account in the Second Dis 37), as the
"model"

course.

We have already remarked that it is ancients Plato and Xenocrates whom Rousseau accepts explicitly as his judges. Illuminating discussions of Aristotle's understanding of the of the family, acquisition, and
"naturalness"

slavery (1983).

are

Ambler (1984,

1985,

and

1987), Nichols (1983),

and

Zuckert

But let

us return

to the letter.

THE CITIZEN'S FATHERLAND

GENEVA"

The
can

second

half

of

Rousseau's letter "TO THE REPUBLIC OF

sections

itself be divided into

speaks

Rousseau
LORDS"

directly

to three classes of Genevans:

corresponding to its various addressees. his "dear fellow citi

Citoyennes"

zens"

or rather of

his "brothers"; the "MAGNIFICENT AND MOST HONORED Geneva, her magistrates; the "aimables et virtueueses

of

Geneva,
address

that

is,

the

women

or,

we might

say, his

"sisters."

In the

course of not

his

to the

magistrates of

Geneva, Rousseau
Genevan
the
echo words of

speaks

about, but does

directly

address a

fourth
to

element of
will

society:

the clergy. It is in these

represent
all ought

passages that
nevans as
citizens.

Rousseau
ought

(to

Du Pan)

the Ge to be is

they

be,

not as

they
his

are

and what

they

Rousseau begins his

"brothers"

address

to

did in the first

and civil

paragraph of

the letter: "The

can

more

sounding very I reflect upon

nature of

much

like he

your political can

situation, the less I

better."

imagine that the

human things

admit of a

But between the first

paragraph and

its echo, here, Rousseau

has precisely imagined and described in some detail a better political and civil situation. The two complementary sentences serve as something like bookends that comes between them. (Note that Mil for the "discours dans le
discours"

ler's judgment, cited above, that Rousseau would have chosen to be bom in Geneva begins by quoting from the first sentence of the second paragraph of the letter, and ends with a quotation from the fourteenth paragraph, conflating
"discourses"

the two
recognize

[Miller, 1984,

p.

43]. This is

symptomatic of

his failure to

correctly the

significance of what

he

calls

Rousseau's "rhetorical de
"brothers"? "The bonds
addition

vice.")

What
of

makes

Rousseau

and

his dear fellow

citizens
us."

blood

as well as

the laws

unite almost all of

In

to the explicit

qualification

("almost"),

we should note an

with a portion of

Geneva's population,

Rousseau may be united extremely small portion, by bonds of

that
while

32

Interpretation
actually
united with none

blood, he is

by

Geneva's

laws,

neither

the

first

nor

last time he draws our attention to this fact.

Essentially,
is
a

what

Rousseau has to say to his dear fellow

which

citizens

is their lot

very

good

one, for

they may

claim no credit.

The full

and universal

recognition of

their sovereignty, their excellent constitution, their precious

free

dom

all are

due to the

efforts of

their ancestors: their

happiness is "all
remain

estab

lished."

The only
you

precaution

left for them to take is to

united, obey the

laws,
one

and respect

their magistrates. Rousseau queries rhetorically: "Does

a more

any

among

know

upright,

more

enlightened,

more respectable

body

in the

universe of

than that

of your magistracy? of

Do

not all

its

members give you

the example the

moderation, of

reconciliation?"

most sincere

passage; it should also

cludes the answer all the more

for the laws, and morals, simplicity Masters (1964, p. 230) notes the irony of this be remarked that Rousseau's rhetorical question pre
of respect
might

that Geneva's Calvinist clergy

since

be

such a

body. This is

stiking

Rousseau has just bid the Genevans to look

deep

into

their hearts

and consult

that specifically Christian phenomenon:

"conscience."

Rousseau's
LORDS,"

address

to those "MAGNIFICENT AND MOST HONORED

Geneva's magistrates, may be divided into four parts: a praise of the Genevan people in general; a praise of Rousseau's father in particular; advice to
the magistrates concerning the people;
praise of

Geneva's

clergy.

Rousseau

addresses

the

magistrates

as

"MAGNIFICENT AND MOST

HONORED LORDS"; they are not sovereign. All commentators remark on this implication. (See, for example, Cranston [1983, pp. 51-52; 1984, p. 349], and

Ellenburg [1976,
portant

p.

256];

note

Ellenburg's

remark

that this anticipates the im

distinction between
reminds

sovereign and government

in the Social

Contract.)
position

Rousseau

the magistrates that

and

by

their

fellow citizens,
"virtue,"

by

no

they have been raised to their one else. He speaks of the

particular

magis

"talent,"

"merit,"

and

but their
relation

superiority to
people of

magistrates of

other cities

derives from their

to the free

Geneva,
order

"men

others,"

capable of

governing

who

have

chosen magistrates

"in

that

they

themselves be

governed."

It is the

character of

the people of Geneva that adds

special luster to the magistracy of these magnificent and most honored lords. In his letter to Perdriau (see Crantson, 1983, p. 349), Rousseau defends having

addressed

his letter to the Genevans

as a whole, rather than

the magistrates,

by

claiming he reserved his eulogies in the letter for the magistrates, and his ex hortations for the citizens. It is perhaps more helpful to observe that Rousseau
eulogizes the mlers when

speaking to the mled,

where

the mlers, but

leaves

no question

eighteenth-century Geneva
and oligarchs.

consisted
not

speaking to lies. Political strife in sovereignty of quarrels between democrats esentially

to adjudicate the rival claims to mle;

and the ruled when

Rousseau does

try

he
the

emphasizes, rather, the good that the two

factions

possess

in

common:

fatherland.
The
republic of

Geneva

was

in fact

functioning

oligarchy in the

eighteenth

The Citizen Philosopher

33

century (Cranston, 1983, pp. 13-17, 340-41). It was Machiavelli who taught us how to manage the conflicts between the popular and princely Rousseau strives rather to eradicate them by encouraging a common love.
"humors."

Rousseau, in
on

concert with all

the

"modems,"

shares

Machiavelli's
end

perspective

many things political, but

not.

where

Machiavelli in the
citizen"

relies on

fear,

Rousseau does Rousseau

wishes

to speak of one "virtuous

of

Geneva in

particular:

his father, Isaac Rousseau. Anyone who knows anything about Rousseau's fa ther must find these passages rather hilarious (see Masters, 1964, pp. 230-31,
and

Green, 1955,

pp.

1-12). There is

no question

that Isaac Rousseau was "not

distinguished among his fellow are"? And what are they all? Why, the rights
own
birth"

citizens."

But

was

he really

"only

what

they

all

equals

"by
a

education,

as well as

of nature and of
which

of

the magistrates, inferior to them only

by by their
the

will, for

the magistrates owe them

debt

of gratitude.

Suffice it to

say,

as much as

example

Rousseau may claim to wish better records remained of the his father set for the Genevan people, he was fortunate they did not!
named

That Rousseau's father is the only Genevan deserve the cherished appellation "virtuous

in the letter
adds

who

is

said

to

citizen"

ironic insult to injury.

exile."

(Crocker [1968, p. 251] remarks the insolence of this "exhaltation of a citizen For an "his who had been in bad odor until he was finally forced into
torical"

portrait of

Isaac Rousseau,

see

Cranston [1983,
address

chap.

1,

and pp. 37-

38, 50,93-94, 114, 192, 255].)

Rousseau discusses but does Would it be inappropriate to
not

directly

the clergy

of a

Geneva.
a

address

members of of

the clergy

in

letter to

"republic"? Is their
and

status of

different from that

the citizens,

male and

female,

the magistrates

Geneva? Are they

somehow excluded

from the

body

constituting Rousseau's "MAGNIFICENT, MOST HONORED, AND SOVER EIGN LORDS"? Does it not go without saying that Rousseau would never address the clergy, even hyperbolically, as "SOVEREIGN LORDS"?
The clergy, Rousseau tells us,
magistrates,
or rather are

"those

who consider

themselves as the
fatherland."

the masters,

of a more

holy

and sublime of

But

"rare exception"; they love the glory and happiness republic, and may be placed in the ranks of its "best the ground of this eulogy? In Geneva, these "venerable pastors of

Geneva's
nevan

are a

the Ge

citizens

What is
are the

souls"

"zealous trustees

of

the

sacred

dogmas

authorized

by

laws,"

the

that

is,

not

zealous trustees of

any dogmas

not authorized

by
to

the laws. Just as Geneva's

of their relation

magistrates are superior to other magistrates

especially because
other no

to the Genevan people, her clergy

cause of their relation to the

are superior

Genevan,

and

precisely

clergy especially be other, laws. "I note,

men of

respect,"

with a pleasure mixed with astonishment and

much

Rousseau writes, "how

they

abhor

the

atrocious maxims of

those sacred and barbarous

whom

history

provides more

than one example, and who,

that

in

order

to uphold the

the

pretended

rights

of

God

is to say their

own

interests

were all

34

Interpretation
of

less sparing
spite more

would always

human blood because they flattered themselves that their own Rousseau does not hesitate to call such men, de be
respected."

their

barbarity,

and

the

atrociousness of

their maxims,

"sacred"! (This is
"holy"

"Machiavellian"

shocking than the emerged in the first half of the

men"

letter.)

the that understanding And who are these "sacred and barbarous
of

who uphold

the "pretended rights of God"? Starobinski

remark

(1964,

p.

1293)

dares in

suggest

this

may apply to
most prone

mind

even

greater examples

Calvin himself (but Rousseau may have biblical ones, like Moses and David). The
to

clergy are,
regard other

indeed,

those

disturb the

public repose.

They

may

themselves as masters of another

fatherland,

or rather servants of an
must

master, and Rousseau has already insisted there

be

no

"foreign

chief"

in

a good regime.

Finally, Rousseau has

worthy
of the appellation willingness

few

words

for the

women of

Geneva.
He

Addressing
them
as

them as "aimables et virtueuses

Citoyennes,"

he indicates he
as

considers

"virtuous
to
grant

citizen"

the

men.

demonstrates, in
to

addition, his

Genevan citizenship to

others as well as

himself:
of

not

only does he
which at at

refer

to himself in the
was

letter,

and sign

it,
p.

as a citizen women
n.

Geneva,

that time he that time

not, but he
not.

also calls

Geneva's
222

"citizens,"

which

they

were

(Miller, 1984,

60,
is
in

asserts that

"the

question of

uncontroversial.

Rousseau's patronizing attitude toward I controvert him. I rather think Rousseau may by
with

women

counted

some

respects, along
to

tion movement; compare

According
"chaste

Locke, among the founders of the women's libera Schwartz, 1984, and Nichols, 1984). Rousseau, women commanded at Sparta by means of their
do they deserve to
command at

power,"

and thus

Geneva. The

"power"

here is the granting of sexual favors, the in its being "exercised solely in conjugal
the irony:

"chastity"

of which appears
union."

to

consist

"Notwithstanding

these
of

words

in

praise of

Cranston (1983, p. 319) notes chastity, Rousseau set off

(He
also

for Geneva in the company reports how the "virtuous "chaste

power,"

his mistress,
who

Therese."

humorously
their that the

aunts"

helped

raise

Rousseau

wielded claim of

p.

primary "despise
"chaste

effect of
vain
power"

19.) It is interesting that Rousseau should female command will be to teach the men

Geneva to

luxury."

According

to ancient authorities, the exercise of their

resulted

by
lovers

the Spartan
of

women

becoming

luxury (consider,

for

precisely in the Spartan men example, Aristotle's Politics

"extravagances"

1269bl2ff.). Rousseau is not blind, however, to bad effects that may result from the mle of women over men. Indeed, the of the young people of Geneva, their "childish tone and ridiculous their admiration for "pretended grandeurs, frivolous compensations for servitude, which will never be worth as much as august are due to their come under the
airs,"

freedom,"

"debauched Is Rousseau suggesting these problems could be obviated by granting the women of Geneva citizenship, as he does in his salutation to them? (Presumaof
women."

influence

having

The Citizen Philosopher

35
have

bly,

this would entail the

kind
the

of civic education

Aristotle

suggests might

mitigated

the

problems created

by

the position

of women at

Sparta.) In any
ironic
voice as

case, Rousseau's
the rest of the
women need

flattery

of

women of

Geneva is in the
of

same

letter. To

correct the

"extravagances"

the youth,

Geneva's

the gentle
of

only be always what they are, "the chaste guardians of morals and bonds of peace; and continue to exploit on every occasion the rights
and of nature

the

heart

for

the

benefit
polis

of

duty
and

virtue."

and
of

Consistent

with

his

reinterpretation of

the ancient
of

in the first half

the

letter, Rousseau

emphasizes

the importance

peaceableness,

the role
not a

promoting it. Note that the women of Geneva, praised for making the city austere. The women, in

play in Calvinist religion, are

women can replace the clergy as fatherland through the

way,

the city's moral guardians, and attach the citizens to the

family.
To
whom

is the

penultimate paragraph of

the letter

addressed?

There is

no

salutation,
women.

yet

He

expresses

the

Republic."

Rousseau clearly is no longer speaking solely to Geneva's hopes for the "happiness of the citizens and the glory of he admits, "with the brilliance that dazzles "It will not
shine,"

eyes."

most

"Dissolute
taste"

posed men of
luxury"

and
value

will

will find no satisfaction here, nor will "the sup find anything to admire: "all the refinements of softness be absent. There will be only men, a spectacle possessing a

youth"

surpassing that of all others. What sort of glory is this? In the first half
as

of

the letter Rousseau cites the

Romans
ples.

the model of all

and

Sparta

free peoples, and the most respectable of all peo Athens have also been mentioned, but it is the Spartan women
the Athenians are an
example not

who are praised and

to

be

emulated.

Histori

cally, Sparta's glory

Athens'

like Rome's
glory
on

prowess;
achievements

lasting

her outstanding military her intellectual virtues, or, we might say, her
was

based

on

in the

arts and sciences.

Neither Rousseau's

freely

chosen

father

land

nor

his

reformed

Geneva

will shine

for its

accomplishments on

the

battle

field,
ments

and

there

are not even allusions

made,

except

proscriptively, to

achieve

in the

arts and sciences.

But do Rousseau's
reminded rative

actions not speak

louder than his

words?

in this

respect of

Thucydides. While Thucydides

at

nowhere

We may be in his nar

discusses the intellectual life that thrived

Athens,

the

accomplishments

more everlasting glory than anything Pericles praises does not fail, subtly but powerfully, to indi Thucydides in the funeral oration, of which

have brought her

Athens'

cate

superiority
all

over

Sparta in this

sphere: an

he begins his narrative, his

wrote

"possession for

time,"

with,

"Thucydides,

Athenian,

the

war of

the

Peloponnesians and the

eau's

Athenians"

(my

emphasis).

On the title

page of of

Rouss

discourse

we

find, "By

Jean-Jacques Rousseau, Citizen

Geneva."

Rousseau's

picture of more

eau, himself, is

Geneva may be closer to Sparta than to Athens; Rouss Athenian than Spartan. This is why, in fact, it was prac
that Rousseau should settle at Geneva after
recover-

tically

out of

the

question

36

Interpretation

his citizenship (consider Cranston, 1984, p. 51). (The most recent detailed from Geneva is Miller [1984, pp. 52-54]. For a account of Rousseau's

ing

"exile"

Pericles'

commentary
Thucydides'

on

judgment

of

Athens in his famous funeral oration, Pericles, see Palmer [1982].)

praise of

and

In the final paragraph, Rousseau again MOST HONORED, AND SOVEREIGN

"indiscreet
self as a opposed
excess"

addresses

his He

"MAGNIFICENT,
pardon refers again

LORDS."

He begs

of which

"patriot,"

and again also

he may have been to his

"legitimate."

guilty.
which

for any to him

"zeal,"

in this last

paragraph as

to the

first, is
reads:

called

The closing

"I remain,

with

the

most profound

respect, MAGNIFI
most

CENT, MOST HONORED, AND SOVEREIGN LORDS, Your

and most obedient servant and

humble
The
returned

letter is dated from

Chambery

fellow citizen, Jean-Jacques on June 12, 1754. Rousseau officially

on

Rousseau."

to the Protestant religion, and regained his

afterwards again

revoked, permanently),

Genevan citizenship (which was August 1, 1754. On the date the

letter is signed, then, Rousseau was neither a member of the Genevan church, nor a Genevan citizen, nor a Genevan resident. We can only conclude that he

consciously

chose

to leave a permanent

record of

these

facts.3

CONCLUSION
GENEVA"

Rousseau's letter "TO THE REPUBLIC OF

consist of two
of

must addresses

be

seen to

distinct

parts.

In the first
would

half,

Rousseau
to be

the question

the society into

which

he

have

chosen

choose

the timeless

question of

"the best

regime."

bom, had he been free to Einaudi (1967, p. 158)

Rousseau's theory
p.

remarks that of

the letter contains "the

most complete outline of

the

state

before the Social

p.

Contract"

(compare

Grimsley, 1983,
politeia

121,

and

Miller, 1984,
Rousseau's

72). What

are

its

main

features? democratic
(regime). This human

political

ideal is

a polis with a

requires a social approximation to

the equality

of condition enjoyed

by

beings in
social
and

nascent civil

society,

and

consequently

the abolition of the radical

inequality that developed historically. Both that nascent social condition the history of the emergence of radical inequality are described in detail in
indeed,
virtue entire are serves

the Second Discourse. Social equality

the

polit

ical
and

goal of

freedom.

Among
not

the requisites of
service of

freedom

morals

"spirited ideal is neither

The
must

courage,"

in the

conquest, but

of

"severity independence;
of

the

to mle nor

be

mled.

democracy
no

must not

be

doubt

where

be participatory, plebiscitary democracy. There sovereignty resides in the will of the people but the
be

democratic

regime

must

"wisely

tempered."

things, what we call the separation dination of divine authority to civil

This requires, among

state,
or

other

of church and

rather, the

subor

authority,

and what we call separation of

The Citizen Philosopher

powers, at least between the
must

37

legislative

and executive

functions.

Magistracy
Genevan

be elective,
second

and

for brief tenure.

of

In the

half

the

letter, Rousseau
Genevans for light
of

presents a portrait of virtues

society that
rather,

ironically praises the insufficiently possess, in

they do not possess, or the ideal. The letter as a whole is

own

Rousseau's

public presentation of the

relation, in his
and

mind, between the

timeless concerns of political

philosophy

the temporal concerns of political

life. may be distinguished, like the two halves of this letter, according to whether they deal primarily with the permanent question of the best regime, or with Rousseau's assessment of contemporary political life. A prime candidate for the former category is the Social Contract; for the latter, Rousseau's
major writings

Letters Written from the Mountain. (For discussion

of

Rousseau's

critique of

Geneva,
see

and argument

that the society of the Social Contract is not

pp.

Geneva,
and

239-40], Starobinski [1964, Ellenburg [1976, references; compare Shklar [1969, chap. 1].)
pp.

1664-65],

their

The

view of

Cranston (1984,

p.

13)

that "we must remember that at the time

he [Rousseau] was working on the Discourse on Inequality he had not looked far behind the splendidly republican of Genevan society, is untenable. The "picture of human Rousseau finds himself unable to dispense with
facade"
society"

offering to the city of his birth is as much the picture of the society into which he would have wished to be bom instead of Geneva as it is the picture found in
the

Second Discourse. Republican Geneva

model

of

the eighteenth century

is

not

Rousseau's best

for "the best

regime."

Rather, Rousseau's
politics of

reflections on

"the

regime"

permit

him to

correct

the deficient

eighteenth-century especially

republican

Geneva.
exhorts

Rousseau
class

the Genevans to

put

aside

their differences

differences

and

devote

themselves to the common good of their father

land. He emphasizes, indeed exaggerates, the equality that reigns among them. He wishes to reconcile the oligarchs and the democrats, the magistrates and the
clergy, the
men and

the

women.

Perhaps

most

seau's remarks

appreciates the political

can

concerning women. He calls importance of women. He highlights the

and all

noteworthy (today) are Rous for female citizenship; he certainly

critical role

they play in nurturing the "severity of are requisites of political freedom. It is above
as

courag morals"

"spirited

that

the

mediation of

the women,
of

moral

guardians, that

will

conduce

to the

unprecedented

combination

martial virtue and peaceableness that

is to

characterize

Rousseau's

new regime. of

Rousseau

also

indicates in the letter how the "political

philoso

the

Enlightenment

philosophes

is

insufficiently
and

political, that

is,
be

politic.

His fa
good

mous quarrel with

the

philosophes concerned

(among

other

things) the
produced.

ness of an enlightened citizenry,

how the latter

could

Rous

seau,

himself,

abjures

all

displays

of cosmopolitan sophistication questions

before the
and

Genevan
dations

citizenry.

In the Second Discourse, he society

more

the origin

foun

of political

radically than any Enlightenment

philosophe.

38

Interpretation
not revel

But he does

in

flaunting
He

the politically dangerous aspects of

rather speaks of

his teach
as one of

ing

before the

unenlightened.

to them
who

ironically
lacks

them. He is the self-deprecating "citizen

Geneva"

has labored for three

sufficient vir

decades to
tue.

earn the appellation

"virtuous

citizen,"

but

who

The letter "TO THE REPUBLIC OF

the First Discourse and the Second
Geneva"

GENEVA"

serves as a
and

bridge between "Dedica be in the

the

Discourse,

indicates how the "Citizen

of
tion,"

of

the former can publish the latter. In the light of the

the radical

teaching

of

the Second Discourse is perceived to

manner

service of civil society.

This is precisely the

whom

in

which

Socrates,

founder

of political

philosophy, introduced philosophy into the city (Republic

471c-472a). in how to

Following Socrates,
to citizens
a

he

praises so

highly

in the First Dis

course, Rousseau gives

speak

philosophes of all

times and places an

lesson

of more

than

"historical"

exemplary lesson interest.

NOTES

1. In 1753, Rousseau dedicated his

would made
Duclos'

opera Le Devin du Village to M. Duclos, and declared it be his only dedication. The exception of the dedicatory letter to the republic of Geneva was with permission. (See Confessions, Gagnebin and Raymond, 1959, p. 382.)

alterations,
citation

I have followed the Masters (1964) translation of the Second Discourse, with only occasional and the French text of Starobinski (1964). Where I quote Rousseau in English, but the III: 55-64). In my
so commen as

is to a French text, translations are mine. 2. Rousseau's letter in its entirety can be found in Leigh (1965
usually omit references for frequent citation superfluous.
will was quotations

tary, I
render

because I

will

follow Rousseau

closely

to

3. It

in
p.

Chambery
25)
of claims p.

Miller (1984, guarded his

suggests

ignorance"

Rousseau spent his early adult life after his flight from Geneva. Rousseau's completing the dedicatory letter at Chambery "safe Genevan reality. In his Confessions (Gagnebin and Raymond, 1959, p.
that
at

392), Rousseau Cranston (1983,

he dated the letter

suggests

Chambery

to avoid quibbling in France or Geneva.

323)

Rousseau

wished

to avoid embarassment in France or Geneva.

REFERENCES

Ambler, W. 1984. Aristotle

17:487-502.

on

acquisition.

Canadian Journal of Political Science

1985. Aristotle's understanding

tics

of

the naturalness of the city. Review of Poli

47: 163-85. 1987. Aristotle

on nature and politics:

The

case of slavery.

Political

Theory

15:390-410.

Barber, B. 1985. How Swiss is Rousseau? Political Theory 13:475-95. Cranston, M. 1983. Jean-Jacques: The Early Life and Work of Jean-Jacques Rousseau,
1712-1754. New York: Norton. 1984. Jean-Jacques Rousseau: A Discourse
guin.
on

Inequality. New York: Pen

Crocker, L.G. 1968. Jean-Jacques Rousseau: The Quest (1712-1758). New York: Mac
millan.

The Citizen Philosopher

39

Einaudi, M. 1967. The Early Rousseau. Ithaca: Cornell University. Ellenburg, S. 1976. Rousseau's Political Philosophy: An Interpretation from Within.
Ithaca: Cornell University.
Fustel de

Coulanges, N.D. 1956. The Ancient City. Garden City: Doubleday. First
and

pub

lication: La Cite Antique (1864). Gagnebin Raymond. 1959. Oeuvres Completes de Jean-Jacques Rousseau, Vol. 1
and the
.

Paris: Gallimard.

Gildin, H. 1976. Revolution

tract.

formation

of political

society in the Social Con

Interpretation 5:247-65.
1983. Rousseau's Social Contract: The Design of the Argument. Chicago: Uni
of

versity

Chicago.
of His Life
and

Green, F.C. 1955. Jean-Jacques Rousseau: A Critical Study

Cambridge: Cambridge University.

Writings.

Grimsley, R. 1983. Jean-Jacques Rousseau. New Jersey: Barnes and Noble. Guehenno, J. 1966. Jean-Jacques Rousseau. 2 Vols. Trans. J. and D. Weightman.
London: Rutledge
and

Kegan Paul.
and

Jaffa, H. 1972. Aristotle. In Strauss

phy.

Cropsey (eds.), History

ecrivain politique

of Political Philoso

2nd

ed.

Chicago: Rand McNally.

(1712-1762). Grenoble:

Launay, M. 1971. Jean-Jacques Rousseau:

L'A.C.E.R.

Leigh, R.A. 1965

Musee Voltaire.

Correspondence

complete

de J. -J. Rousseau. Geneva: Institut

and

et

Masters, R.D. 1964. Jean-Jacques Rousseau: The First

York: St. Martin's. 1968. The Political

Second Discourses. New

Philosophy of Rousseau. New Jersey: Princeton University. 1978. Jean-Jacques Rousseau: On the Social Contract with Geneva Manu
Political Economy. New York: St. Martin's.
.

script and

Miller, J. 1984. Rousseau: Dreamer of Democracy New Haven: Yale University. Nichols, M.P. 1983. The good life, slavery, and acquisition: Aristotle's introduction
politics.

to

Interpretation 11:171-83.
western
political

Nichols, M.P. 1984. Women in

13:241-60.

thought. Political

Science Review

Palmer, M. 1982. Love

Review 76:825-36.

of

glory

and the common good.

American Political Science Discourse

Plattner, M. 1979.

Rousseau's State of Nature: An Interpretation of Inequality. De Kalb: Northern Illinois University.

the

on

Schwartz, J. 1984.
of

The Sexual Politics of Jean-Jacques Rousseau. Chicago:

and

University

Chicago.
Citizens: Rousseau's Political Theory. Cambridge: Cambridge

Shklar, J. 1969. Men

University.

Starobinski, J. 1958. Jean-Jacques Rousseau: la transparance et i obstacle. Paris: Plon. Starobinski, J. 1964. Oeuvres Completes de Jean-Jacques Rousseau Vol. 3. Paris: Galli
mard.

Strauss, L. 1947. On

the intention
and

of

Rousseau. Social Research 14:455-87.

1953. Natural Right

1958. Thoughts
on

History. Chicago:

University

of

Chicago.

Machiavelli. Glencoe: Free Press.

1964. The City and Man. Chicago: Rand McNally. Zuckert, C. 1983. Aristotle on the limits and satisfactions of political life. Interpretation
11:185-206.

The Concerns

of

Odysseus:

An Introduction to the
David Bolotin

Odyssey

St. John's College, Sante Fe

In the

proemium

to the

Odyssey, Homer

asks

his Muse to tell him

about a

versatile or

wily man, who saw the cities of many men and

and who also suffered much

and

in his heart in his

comrades.

efforts

learned their mind, to win both his own life

us, then, to
strengths
admire

the

homecoming
as
a man or

of

his

Homer

encourages

Odysseus

who own

used

his
and

wiliness

and or

his
to

other

both for

himself,

safely home from Troy. Now it is tme, as the proemium tells us, that Odysseus failed to save his comrades, while he alone survived. But the proemium also tells us
that their deaths
reckless or

to

win

his

life,

for others,

bring

his

comrades

his fault, but if anyone's their own, since they foolish enough to eat the forbidden cattle of the Sun.
were not

were

This
concern

picture of

Odysseus

as a man who combined self-concern with a

just

for

others
of

very

beginning

is further developed, and even deepened in a sense, at the the Muse's response to the proemium. There we see Odys
die"

seus in the company of the goddess Calypso, but as a captive, and with such a desire for his wife and home that, in Athena's words, "he yearns to (I 59).

We In

are thus

already

prepared

for the later disclosure that he had

rejected

Ca

lypso's

offer of

unaging

immortality
much

if he

would

other

words, however

Odysseus

wanted want

marry her (V 136; VII 257). to win his own life or sur

vival,

as the proemium meant

suggests, he didn't
and never

to

live,

not even as an

immor

tal, if this

abandoning

longing

to return

home, then, his

wishes

seeing again his wife and home. In his for himself and his sense of duty to

merely as present in him together, but as united in a single desire. And the Muse's story as a whole is a story of how Odysseus was able to satisfy this just desire of his heart. It is important to note, in this connection, that Odysseus required the help of
others are seen not

the

Olympian

gods

in

order

to

escape gods

Calypso's island

and

to return home.

Later, he

also relied upon

the

to

help

him defeat the

suitors who were

courting his wife against her will and who had usurped control of his household and his kingdom. This role of the gods, moreover, is not tangential to the plot
of

the

Odyssey, but belongs

addressed

at

its very
for

core.

poem, Zeus
sation of

the

assembled

gods,
evils.

Practically at the beginning of the defending them against men's accu

He
used

their

being

responsible

the example of

Aegisthus,
should

who

had been

warned

by

the gods

of vengeance

from Orestes if he

kill

interpretation, Fall

1989, Vol. 17, No. 1

42

Interpretation
to
show

Agamemnon,
upon

that men also,

by

their own recklessness,

raised

bring

evils

themselves beyond what

whose

is fated. Athena then

the question of

Odysseus,
while

captivity on Calypso's island despite his sacrifices to the gods he had been at Troy would seem to be evidence in suppport of men's
(cf. II

original charge

230-234; V 8-12). But Zeus

replied

that he had not

forgotten Odysseus, and he told Athena, among other things, that they should now arrange for his homecoming, which Athena proceeded to do. Accor

dingly,
text of

the story
Zeus'

of

the

Odyssey

comes to

light from the

goodness or

beginning
justice,

in the

con

gods'

attempt

to vindicate the

or their claim

to be the protectors of pious and

Odysseus'

just

men.

At the

end of

the poem, moreover,

returned and taken
words:

when vengeance upon

father Laertes learned that his

the suitors, he
expressed

son

had

his

joy

in the

following

"Fa

ther

Zeus,"

tmly

paid

he said, "you are the price for their

not

still gods on reckless

high Olympus, if the

suitors

have
other

arrogance"

(XXIV 351-352). In

words, it is
existence as

justice, but the very tmst in their merely the belief in the that had been in question for Laertes as a consequence of his gods,
And the culmination, in
have
succeeded a

gods'

family's
Laertes'

ordeals.

sense,

of the

whole

poem

is

reaffirmation of

the genuine existence of those gods

without whose

help

Odysseus

would not

in returning home simply the story

or

in reestablishing just
and pious
we

justice in his kingdom.

But
Odysseus'

story,

of

course, is
with

not

of a

man restored

to his rightful place

us about

the

help

of the gods.
was

The first thing,

that he
was

recall, that Homer tells

and when

him is that he

wily,

not

just,

him to Athena, he called him outstanding among mortals for his intelligence, as well as for his sacrifices to the gods. intelligence, moreover, while it may not have added to the justice of his heart, Zeus first
spoke of
Odysseus'

certainly did make him a better leader, one who was unusually able to carry out his just intention of helping his comrades and his family. It was Odysseus, after
all, who

finally
Again,
least

succeeded

523 ff.).

on

his

in conquering Troy (XXII 230; cf. IV 269 ff.; XI journey home he was resourceful enough to keep him his
comrades alive until

self and at

some of on

they

were

destroyed through
with

their own

folly

the Island of the Sun. And his wiliness, together warrior,

enabled

his

other excellences as a

him to

succeed

in

freeing
own

his household

from the Ithaca.

violence of

Penelope's

suitors and

in restoring his
and of

just

kingship

to

An important
comrade and a
who once

Odysseus'

aspect of
skill at

intelligence,
deception
and of

his

excellence as a

leader, is his

disguise. Unlike Achilles,

a man who concealed

told him that he hated "like the gates

Hades"

thing in his mind and said another (Iliad IX 312-313), Odysseus was a consummate liar. And ignoble as his lack of scruple in this regard may have seemed to Achilles, it served to increase his value as a comrade. For it was, to repeat, a deceptive scheme of Odysseus, and not the straightforward valor of
one

Achilles,

that won the

war

for the Achaeans.

Moreover,

Odysseus'

success

in

The Concerns of Odysseus: An Introduction to the

saving his

Odyssey
on

43
his
not

family
himself

and
as a

his kingdom from Penelope's

suitors

depended
this

disguising

beggar in his

own

home. To
which

maintain seemed

disguise,

only did he have to lie about his relish, but he also had to endure
remarkable reflected

identity,

he

to do

with some

outrageous

insults from the

suitors.

And his
not

capacity for enduring insult

on

could never

have

emerged

had he

deeply

the costliness, to those dear to him as

well as

to

himself,

of

the apparently nobler that

insistence

on always
of

had led Achilles to the extremity even of sending, albeit unwittingly, his
superiority as a comrade ligent awareness of the
well-being, of
and a

receiving due honor, an insistence cursing his own fellow-soldiers and best friend to his death.
Odysseus'

own

leader

rests

in large measure, then,

on

his intel

deficiencies, from the perspective the posture that Achilles had regarded as the
intelligent
enough

of a community's noblest.

Odysseus
on

was

to

know, among
right

other
men.

the gods

by

themselves to set things

was

however,
turn to

that

he

efforts superfluous.

say, among for the gods never promised to make human impious, Indeed, it was Athena's own suggestion that Odysseus re
of a

things, This is

not

to rely

not to

his household in the disguise in the battle

beggar,

and she

later

withheld

her

assistance valor

against the suitors

long

enough

to test his

strength and

(XXII 236-238).
the initiative

Odysseus, for his

he had to,

part, though he

was quite capable of

taking

when

acknowledged

that the gods were the ones

ultimately

responsible

for the

punishment of

the suitors. For

instance, imme

diately destiny

after

from the have

he had killed them, he told his old nurse Eurycleia that it was gods and their own cmel deeds that had destroyed them (XXII
Odysseus'

41 1416). Far from

seems to nious and

being
him

at an

odds, then,

with

tme piety,

intelligence

made

manly

efforts on of the

exemplary servant of the gods, one whose inge his own behalf and on behalf of others helped bring
gods'

about the

fulfillment
as

just

and

beneficent designs.
and

This initial impression

the gods

of

the

Odyssey, however,
must

especially this

view of much

defenders

of

justice,

be

supplemented or corrected

by

evidence to the
example

contrary from within the poem. Perhaps the most shocking in this regard is the fate of the Phaeacians, who were severely punished
with punishment of

by Poseidon,
seus

home. This

Zeus's consent, for their very generosity in bringing Odys Phaeacian generosity is so distressing to con
off

template that the Muse breaks

execution

just before telling of its final (XIII 128-187). Now the Phaeacians had, it is tme, been warned of her
narrative

Poseidon's
also were

for giving safe convoy to all men, and they Odysseus in particular. But while these facts may told that he hated
grudge against them
Phaeacians'

raise questions about the

pmdence,

they

justice
tice
of

and

nobility

of

their

behavior,

and

thus

help

seem only to add to the highlight the apparent injus

their treatment at the hands of the

gods.
Phaeacians'

Now Odysseus presumably knew nothing of the failure to was well acquainted himself with the
gods'

fate. Yet he
or at

support

justice,

least
most

to do

so

in

timely, consistent,

and

intelligible

manner.

To take the

44

Interpretation
example,
son

obvious

he became the

object of

Poseidon's
that
was

blinded his defense

the

Cyclops,

or

for

an action

merely for having surely just, if violence in

wrath

against a cmel oppressor

is

ever

just. This

wrath of

Poseidon,
deaths
of

more

over, was a direct cause, unmentioned in the proemium, comrades, and it also led to the long delay in his
seus'

of

the

Odys
(IX

own

homecoming

526-636;

cf.

XI 112-120). For it
Poseidon's

was

nearly ten
to

years

Olympians

opposed

will

by trying
was

help

before any of the other Odysseus to return home.

Even previously, moreover, all when he was trapped in the

gods

when

he

Cyclops'

first setting out from Troy, and above cave, he received no help from the
who

(cf. however IX

339),

not even

from Athena,

had been his

patroness

throughout the war (III 218-222). To

helping
soldiers

him. She had

acted

was

angry

at

be sure, Athena had her reasons for not the entire Achaean army, since some of the
no

unjustly toward her in the aftermath of their

and

(III

130-136;

V 108-109; I 326-327). But there is

victory at Troy indication that Odysseus

accuse

had any

share

in these actions,

Athena's failure to her for her

wrongdoing,

when

he later

reproached

long

absence

him of any (XIII 316-319,

the

339-343), strongly
sey may fail to
chooses

suggests

that he was

innocent. Now
this
since

we readers of

Odys

appreciate
and

the

weight of

long,

between Odysseus

the

Olympians,
at

and nearly total, breach Zeus's daughter, the Muse,

to begin her tale precisely to arrange for

the moment of

finally began

Odysseus'

its healing, when the gods homecoming. But Odysseus himself first
all

experienced this

breach

as one

that, for

he knew,

might never

end,

and

he

had many years to towards him.

This fuller
Odysseus'

gods'

reflect on the

absence and

their apparent injustice

picture of

harsh

an

additional

problematic relationship to justice, and of in that regard, prepares us to see and to appreciate intelligence. For he was intelligent dimension to

gods'

the

experience

Odysseus'

gods'

enough to reflect upon the evidence of the

justice. He he
made

only it his business to

not

registered such weigh

evidence,
and

as

unreliability as supporters of it forced itself upon him, but

it,

to examine

how far divine

support

for

justice

might extend.

Early

in the

course of

his way to make trial of his comrades, "whether they are overbearing, savage, and unjust, or whether (IX 175-176). And to test they love strangers and have a god-fearing
went out of
mind"

his homecoming, for instance, he the Cyclopes in order to leam, as he told

whether the

Cyclopes

the gods, to test whether

fear among them

swer

by

god-fearing was also, and above all, to test they were the kind of beings to have inspired pious punishing their injustices. So eager was Odysseus to an
were
and put

just

this question that he

his For

own
with

life,
little

and

the lives of twelve of

his best

comrades,

deliberately

at risk.

strong
would

wine to protect

him, he

chose to wait

more than a sword and a supply of for the Cyclops Polyphemus in his

cave, despite his

be,

ments nor

plea and despite his own foreboding that the man indeed he was, a mighty savage who respected neither just judg laws (IX 213-215). Polyphemus, of course, rejected with scom Odas

comrades'

The Concerns of Odysseus: An Introduction to

ysseus'

the

Odyssey

45

request

for

hospitality,

as well as

his

appeal

in the

name of

Zeus the

avenger of suppliants and strangers.

And

when

he then

proceeded

to kill and

devour two
men

Odysseus'

of

comrades, the

prayers of

Odysseus

and

his remaining

for

help
and

from Zeus

went unanswered.

It is tme that later,

after

blinding

the

Cyclops

the other

escaping from his cave, Odysseus called out to him that Zeus and gods had taken vengeance on him for his cmel deeds (IX 475^479).

But it is unlikely that Odysseus

embroilment with and

fully

believed these

words even as which

he

said

them. And at all events, this encounter with

Polyphemus,

led to the
of

long
Zeus

Poseidon,

must of

have deepened justice.

Odysseus'

distmst

the other gods as defenders

efforts

home safely, in the face of seemingly unjust opposition from the gods, helped teach him something else about the gods, namely that despite their reputation as being omnipotent, their power, both
to return

Odysseus'

individually
gave

and

collectively,

was

quite

limited. Hermes, for

instance,

once

him

drug

whose nature was such as as

to render the goddess Circe power

was

less

against

him (X 281-324). And

Odysseus'

for the Olympian gods, Poseidon

while on

unable
reason was

to prevent
that Athena gave to
of

homecoming,
him for
not

the other

hand,

the explicit

her fear but

acting sooner to help bring him home Poseidon (XIII 341-343). Odysseus knew from Calypso, more
consented

over, that even Zeus had

to the

deaths

of all

his

comrades who

had

killed,
to

under most of

extenuating circumstances, the cattle of the

Sun,

out of

apparent

fear

Helius'

threat that otherwise he would take his sunlight down

Helius'

Hades (XII 377-390; IX 526-536; regarding the limits to power, consider XI 109; XII 128, 323, 374-376). Finally, Odysseus knew that all the
gods
men

together

would

have been

powerless

to

prevent

hadn't

opened

the

bag
was

of winds

that

he had been

homecoming given by Aeolus

learned,
to
omnipotence

his

if his
(X 69
to

and context).

the

pious

indeed mistaken, as he Aeolus that he didn't believe in the

Odysseus
and

soon

reveal

gods'

(X 72-79;
and
well-

compare

X 27

79

with

X 68). But he

was nevertheless

intelligent

advised not

to believe in it in fact.
was of course compelled

During
thena
and

Athena's absence, Odysseus in

order

to rely on his
even after Aon

own resourcefulness

to

survive

(cf. IX 420-423). Yet

Zeus had

resumed

their activity on

his behalf,

and

behalf
and go

of

justice in Ithaca, he did not give up his habit of pmdent distmst reliance. When Calypso told him, for instance, that he could finally his first
wasn't
reaction was

self-

home,

to suspect a trick and to

require

her to

swear

that she

when his raft was planning to hurt him (V 173-179). Soon afterwards, veil with which, him a Leucothea gave being battered by Poseidon, the goddess she said, he should swim to shore. Yet Odysseus refused to abandon his raft or
goddess'

to rely

on

the

veil until the as

was

continuing
on

storm would

leave him
never

with no

alternative

(V 356-364). And
promises once

for Athena in particular, he back

Ithaca. Although
she

wholly

relied on

her

he

promised, for

instance,

that she would ensure

his

success against

the suitors, and then defend

46
him

Interpretation
against

their angry relatives, Odysseus

and

was pmdent enough

to make plans

without

her

to act on them (XIII

392-396; XX 36-55; XVI 281-297; XXI

he first
returned

226-241; XXIII 1 17-140). It is

her that her warning about the he added that he would fight he

tme that when

to

Ithaca he told his

at

enemies against

in his household had

three hundred

saved

life,
his

and side

men with

her

(XXIII 383-391). But his thanking her for her warning was already on his guard against the suitors, in
warned

was mere part

flattery,

since

from

having

been

previously by the souls of Teiresias and Agamemnon. His talk about three hundred men, then, may also be presumed to have been flattery, designed
to

keep

him in her
Odysseus'

good graces and thus get whatever success

help

he

could

from her.
and

Indeed,
and

in

deceiving

Athena through his

flattery,
for

in

outwitting her

more

generally, despite her fame among the

gods

shrewdness

sagacity, is

a significant aspect of

tion of Athena even suggests

his outstanding intelligence. His that in some important respects, such

decep
as

the

knowledge
(XIII

of

their own concealed

cf.

thoughts,

mortals can

be

wiser

than the gods

296-299;

299-302

and

318-323).
gods were not always

Odysseus'

awareness

that the

able,

and

in

some cases

not even

willing, to defend the

than merely

cause of

justice

seems to

have had

further

consequence seems

teaching him to be more independent of them. It also to have helped weaken his own attachment to justice, and to have
his
own

strengthened

tendency

to unscmpulous behavior. Here I

used against enemies

am not refer

ring

merely to the guile that Penelope. For in

he

like Polyphemus
which was

or the

suitors of

addition

to such

deviousness,

apparently

necessary for the

of

sake of justice or a common

good, Odysseus

was also capable

being
a

selfish even

remarkably selfish. Indeed, he seems to have been already somewhat before the war at Troy, as we see from the fact that Agamemnon

had

after

his harsh

hard time persuading him to go there (XXIV 119). But after the war, and experiences with Athena and the other gods, there were occa Odysseus seriously
neglected

sions when
as

his

own

comrades,

even

going

so

far

deliberately

to subject them to an increased risk of death in order to lessen

the risk for himself.

Now before giving evidence in support of this last claim, I step back and respond to an objection that might well arise in it. For
that if
one might suppose that a good man would not act no matter what,
was

must

first take

connection with

circumstances

Odysseus
If I

in fact

so

selfishly under any and in particular, the gods did or didn't do selfish as I claim, he is unworthy of our serious
give serious attention

attention.
man.

am

right, however, Homer did

we can

to

such a

And I think

begin to

see

his

reasons

for

doing

so

if

we remind

ourselves of

Achilles,

life

of virtue was

any among the Achaeans to the (cf. Iliad XI 783-784). For even Achilles, as we leam from the
a man as as

dedicated

Iliad,
as

once

tempted

by by

the kind

of selfishness us

am

here attributing to
Achilles'

Odysseus. To
it
was

understand this

foretold

to him

temptation, let his mother, was

first

recall that

fate,

either to

live

a short

but

glorious

The Concerns of Odysseus: An Introduction to

the

Odyssey

47

life, if he fought
dedication to foreknowledge

at

Troy,
is

or a

long

but inglorious

one at

home. Now
to

Achilles'

virtue of an

evident

from the fact that he

and

went

Troy, despite his

quit the

early death,
so

that he fought without apparent hesitation

for

more

than nine years. But there tempted to do

came a moment when and

he

fighting,
dwell

and was

for good,

it is this

moment

that I want to

on.

After Agamemnon

committed

the outrage of robbing him

of

his

mistress

Briseis,
and

and when no one

drew from the

the
rest of

fighting

and prayed to

in the army intervened on his behalf, Achilles with Zeus for vengeance against Agamemnon

the army. Now

Zeus,

as we

know,

Achilles'

granted

prayer, but

he

was a

bit

slow

in making it

clear

to Achilles that he had done so. After a

while, he did turn the tide of battle against the

Achaeans, but he had

could win a

waited vic

long

enough so

that darkness

fell before the Trojans

decisive
Zeus'

tory. Now
sponse

during
an

this time of fear among the

prayer was offer still

Achaeans, but

while
came

re

to

Achilles'

somewhat

unclear, Odysseus

to

Achilles
rejoin

on

embassy to

lavish

gifts

from Agamemnon if he

would

the fighting. Achilles

refused

this offer, as we might

have expected, but

and

some of the reasons

new

that he gave for

doing

so are

surprising,

they
the

reveal the
was

temptations that

he

was

facing. What he said, in the first place,

that

there is no thanks

for

always

fighting

without respite against

enemy.

He

added that the one who stays

most

fights

most receives an equal portion as man are

the one who

behind, that the bad man and the good importantly, that death comes equally
much

held in

equal

honor,

and,
who

to the
of

idle

man and

the one

does

(Iliad IX 316-320). In the light

and the

the insult that he had suffered

Zeus'

from Agamemnon
give clear support

army,

and even

more, in the light of

failure to

powerfully aware that it made any difference, in the end, whether or not one had lived virtuously. Achilles also told Odysseus that he received no advantage from having always

to his claims as a man of virtue, Achilles became more of his own impending death, and he was no longer convinced

risked his life in war, and he compared his fighting on behalf of Menelaus and Agamemnon to the activity of a mother bird who gives her food to her chicks,
for her herself. Now it may be tme, as Achilles went on to acknowledge, that he could still look forward to immortal glory as his re ward for remaining in the war. But with his new doubts about virtue, and his
while

things

go

badly

heightened
even

awareness of

impending death, he

was

no

longer

convinced of

that

glory would be a sufficient compensation he had previously regarded as the life of virtue he now spoke of as a throwing away of his own life, in the interests of others, rather than enjoying that life, or living it, for himself.

lasting

for the loss

his life.

And

what

Achilles did, to be sure, tell Odysseus to warn the army of his intention to war, and in the end, of course, he did not yield to the temptation to do so. For despite his anger at the Achaean army for its failure to support him against Agamemnon's violence, he still cared for his fellow soldiers, and he

leave the

48

Interpretation

could not

distress

bring finally

himself to
convinced

abandon

them in their distress.

answered

Moreover,
his
prayer

that

very
ven

him that Zeus had

for

geance, thus restoring his

gods

conviction

that men of virtue are not

forgotten

by

the

(Iliad XVI 236-238; cf. I 411-412). But even in case, we see that the dedication to virtue and nobility was bound up with a hope for rewards, indeed for rewards so great as to be a consolation in the face of death. As a
result, this dedication
could

Achilles'

be shaken,

and was

shaken,

once

Achilles lost his

to provide

confidence that the gods

those great rewards.

sufficiently So if Odysseus yielded,

were

concerned

with virtue

as

claim

he

did,

to the tempta
not

tions of selfish self-protectiveness, these temptations were at

unknown

least

to Achilles.

suggestions about the

Odysseus'

Accordingly, justice,
gods'

and

in the light

of

the Odyssey's

wholly harsher

there

is

some reason

to pay attention to

selfishness.

And

all the more

is this the

case once we

leam from the saying that he

Odyssey

Achilles'

what

soul

told

Odysseus in Hades. For

by

would rather

be

hireling

to a poor man on earth than mle over all the dead (XI

488-491),

soul suggested, at any rate, that he might have been better leave the war, and to abandon his Achaean comrades, in order to prolong his own life. To return now to Odysseus, perhaps the most striking evidence of his selfish concern for his own survival, and of his being at least neglectful of his men, is

Achilles'

advised to

his behavior

at

the land
anchor

of

the Lastrygonians. There he allowed eleven of

while

his
and

twelve ships to

in the harbor,
a

keeping

his

own at a chosen

distance,

moreover, the scouts that he sent

out were

body

of ships

(cf. X 1 17). As
scouts,

result,
the

when

apparently the Lastrygonian

from the

main

king

unexpec

tedly killed
seus and

one of the
crew

and

other

two fled toward the ships, Odys

safely while the Lastrygonians were in the harbor, all of whom they killed. It is only by ignoring this incident, or by limiting his attention to the men from own ship, that Homer is able to suggest, in the proemium, that Odysseus was his
were able to escape occupied with

the

men

Odysseus'

not responsible

for the deaths

of

his

comrades.

And

even

in the

case of all

these
might

shipmates, the

proemium

is wrong in suggesting that Odysseus did

with

he

have done to
of

save

them. In particular, he did not share

soul of

them the explicit

warning from the

the

Tieresias

and

Circe

against

Sun,

even

were sure to

though, die if the flocks

of

according to the prophecy,

were

eating the sheep or cattle it was the comrades who

276).

Evidently, his fear

fail to heed
with

harmed (XI 104-115; XII 127-141, 261his men's despair in the aftermath, in case they
warning, prevented him from sharing the full

should

an explicit

them. And it is at least plausible that what he most feared was prophecy not the danger to them, but the danger to himself, and to his own prospects of in case should become too despondent, after failing to home, returning they heed the full prophecy, to keep trying to return home themselves. Odysseus did

indeed try to protect his comrades by the forbidden flocks, but then later, at

having
a

them swear

an oath not

to harm
tempt-

time

when extreme

hunger

was

The Concerns of Odysseus: An Introduction

to the
an

Odyssey
part of

49
the

ing

them to

break that oath, he

although

went off

by

himself to

isolated

island. And

the reason he alleged for going

off alone was

to pray for

from the gods, it is at least equally likely that he wanted to give the men a chance to break their oath, as he feared they would do at all events, without

help

first threatening
the
rades"

or

committing any
even spoke of

violence against

Phaeacians, he
on evidence of

himself

as

him. Indeed, in his story to having "escaped from his com

that occasion (XII

strong
weigh

his

selfishness

335). His going off alone, then, is especially in allowing fear for his own safety to out
only in his treatment
of

his

concern

for his
to his

comrades.

Odysseus'

selfishness

is

evident not

his comrades,
to

but

also

in

relation

wife and

family, for he
an entire

was unfaithful

Penelope,
remained

even

to the

extent of

being

inconstant in his desire for home. He

year,
and

willingly

with

the goddess Circe for

until

did

not resume

his

journey
There

home

his

comrades

finally

begged him to do

so

(X 466-486).

time, moreover, when he was glad to be staying with Calypso (V 153). We don't know how long this period lasted, since the Muse begins her
was a and
Odysseus'

story well after it was over, but at all events, these dalliances with Circe Calypso are both instances of disloyalty to his wife and family. And
selfishness, towards his
significance to own

family
words

as well as

his comrades,
that

allows us

to see added

Homer's

in the
of

proemium

he

was

"seeking

to

win

his

life

and

the

homecoming

his

comrades."

For

we now see

the conflict

between these two desires,

rades, but rather the at least not entirely,

and

the suggestion even arises that what Odysseus that he sought along
with

wanted above all was not the

homecoming
his

his

com

preservation of

own

life,

life that

need not

be lived,

at

home.

This last suggestion,

rejection of

however, is emphatically

Odysseus'

contradicted

by

Calypso's offer of immortality. By rejecting this offer he seems to have shown, in a most powerful way, that there was something more important to him than his own life or survival. Now this does not necessarily mean that he
was

acting

unselfishly.

Still,

the

question must

arise,

at

have mortality with a goddess and chosen instead to live and die with his aging wife. Was he simply rejecting the tedium of life with Calypso in favor of the plea sures, however short-lived, that he could hope to enjoy at home? Or did that
man so selfish as we
seen should

Odysseus to be

this point, of why a have turned down im

very tedium
ness,
give
of

with

Calypso

remind

him

of the wrongness, as well as the empti

and

living

him the

strength

only for himself, and thereby deepen his desire for home to resist her beguiling offer?

This
shows

be answered, I think, through indirect evidence, which that the Odysseus who returned from Calypso's island was not the kind
question can

of man who would choose to subordinate all considerations of

honor

or

duty

to

his

self-interest.

For

after

leaving

Calypso

and

coming to the land of the Phaea

since Troy, including in particular cians, he told his hosts the story of his life Phaeacian the crucial fact of Poseidon's anger against him, even though the

50

Interpretation
had
revealed that

king
of

Poseidon

was

already threatening to
put

punish

them
and

for

giving

safe

convoy to all men (VIII 564-571). Despite the

wish

Odysseus'

to

return

home, then, he
of

his

homecoming
risk they

urgency in

depth
in

jeopardy
rightly,

rather than allow

his hosts to be ignorant

the special

would mn

giving convoy to him. Now it is tme that he presumably expected, and

as

it turns out, that the generous and naive Phaeacians would not withdraw the offer they had already given to take him home. But he could not have been sure
of this.

Indeed, it
of
a while

appears

that the influential

queen

Arete

even

hinted,

after
at

hearing

Poseidon's

anger against

Odysseus,

that

they

should

detain him

least for
and

(XI 339

and context).

deeper than
it
resistance to
Odysseus'

mere calculation

It must, then, have been something that led him to take the risk of being so truthful,

stands

to

reason

that this deeper sense of honor was also at work in

offer.

his

of

In this connection, it may also be relevant to note response to the Phaeacian bard song about the binding Ares and Aphrodite. This song ridiculed the two of them for being caught in Calypso's
Demodocus'

the act of adultery, and exposed together

before the before

male

gods,

by

Aphrodite's he
could

husband Hephaestus. But

caught

Hermes'

aside

to Apollo
all

that he

wished

be

in

still

tighter

bonds,

and exposed

the goddesses,

as well as

the gods, if only he truer meaning,

might

which

points to the song's sleep beside golden Aphrodite is to celebrate this act of illicit love and to ridicule the
enjoyed

powerless cuckold

Hephaestus. Now Odysseus

this song, to be sure,

about

but he did
the

not praise

it,

as

he

Demodocus'

praised

singing

the sad fate of

threw a

Achaeans,
and

or even as

he

praised

the two young Phaeacians

who

ball

back

they leapt and danced (VIII 367-369, 370-384, 487-498; cf. 250-253). And his failure, in this case, to give the praise that the Phaeacian
forth
as

king
other

was so

evidently

eager

to receive (cf. VIII

235-255)

suggests, among

things, Even before he left Calypso, in consistently selfish. For example,

some genuine respect on

his

part

for the laws

was

of marriage.

fact, Odysseus

far from

being

simply

or

when nearly half of his men failed to return from Circe's house, he insisted on going back to try to rescue them, and he even added to his danger by going off alone, without compelling the one re

turning
was no

member of

the

original

Circe had told him that Scylla

party to accompany him. Later, moreover, after would kill six of his comrades, and that there

defense
his

against

her,

since she was an

immortal, he

nevertheless armed

himself,
protect

and stood

men against

conspicuously in the front of his ship, in order to try to her. So while Odysseus would sometimes put his men
to
protect

at additional risk

in

order

his

own

life,

there

were also

times

when

he

did the he took

opposite.
on

Indeed,

on

the two

occasions

I have just cited, the

or

risks

that

his

men's

behalf

seem even

to

have been imprudent

irresponsible

in

disappeared

For when he went off alone, to try to rescue the men who had Circe's island, he was risking not only his own life, but also, and more than he had to, the lives of the remaining men, who probably could not have made it home without him. And his making himself such a
a commander.

on

conspic-

The Concerns of Odysseus: An Introduction to

uous

the
we

Odyssey

51

target

for Scylla is
be

open
so

to the same

objection.

Now

have to

wonder

how

a man who could

great, and even

selfishly self-protective could also have taken such irresponsible, risks on behalf of his men. And with regard to

the incident
the great
arises

Circe's island, which follows immediately after he had allowed majority of his men to be killed by the Lastrygonians, the suspicion
on

that what clouded his

judgment

that

he

was not a selfish coward

partly the desire to persuade himself (cf. Iliad XI 408 ff.). But however we intepret
was remains

Odysseus'

complexity, the simple fact

that he was acting, on both

these occasions, primarily out of concern for his men, or out of his sense of
what

he

owed

to them in

justice (cf. XII 245-259).

attachment to and

Another

Odysseus'

sign of

anger against

the

suitors of

Penelope

their

justice is his anger, above all his accomplices. Anger is so charac

is
at

teristic

of

him, in fact,

that a word

for

anger

the

root of

his name,

a name

he had

recieved

from his

maternal grandfather

Autolycus

as a reminder of

Au
the

tolycus'

own anger against

many

men and women

throughout the world (XIX

406-409). And
concern

whatever

the relation may be in general

between

anger and

for justice, anger on Ithaca was rooted largely in his sense of justice, or his sense, in particular, that his household belonged to him by right. Hence he became most angry not at the suitors themselves, although they
of course were

Odysseus'

the greatest threat to

serving-

him, but

at

his

own

disloyal servants,

and

especially those among his

was so when

women who

had

slept with the suitors.

He

pained, in fact,

at

the need to preserve his

remind cave

had to

Cyclops'

still required him to let them be, that he himself, in all seriousness, that he had endured worse in the (XX 6-21; cf. XXII 164-177). The concern for justice, more

seeing disguise

these women go off with the suitors, at a time

over, helped
most

the suitors themselves, as is perhaps he on the morning of the battle, at an omen rejoiced, clearly from Zeus, in the belief that "he had punished the (XX 120-121). That anger was nourished by a concern for justice does not mean,
nourish

his

anger against

evident when

sinners"

Odysseus'

to be sure, that it

was always

just. For instance,

after all

the other suitors had

been killed, their soothsayer Leiodes clasped him by the knees and begged for his life, saying that he had never spoken or acted wantonly with any of the servingwomen, and that he had tried to stop the other suitors from doing so. The Muse herself
man

confirms

this claim,

by telling

us that

Leiodes

was

the one
at

among the suitors who hated their them all (XXI 146-147). Odysseus, however, He killed him
at

wantonness and

that

he

was

indignant

was unmoved

by

Leiodes'

plea.

once,

after

replying, with an angry

prayed

look,

that as a soothsayer
never

among

the suitors Leiodes must have often

and

for him

to

return

home,

310-329). Yet is it home for twenty

grounds?

for Penelope to marry him instead and to bear him reasonable or just for a husband who has been
years,
of
and

children

(XXII

absent

from

moreover, because

his

own

missing dalliance
on at

without a

trace for ten of them

in part,

to kill a harmless man on these

occasion suggests a certain

Now

Odysseus'

cmelty

least this

52

Interpretation
in his
concern

shallowness

tion, fact remains that

his
attachment

given what we

know

of

for justice, and this is hardly a surprising sugges his selfish behavior on other occasions. But the for justice
was present

the concern

to his home and his anger against

in him, strengthening both those who would deny him

what

he

regarded as

his rightful
while

place

there.

Odysseus, then,
second

was nonetheless more

caring less for justice than it had appeared at first, attached to it than it might have seemed from a merely
gods'

look. Moreover, and in keeping with this, his distmst of the justice was also less complete than it may have seemed at a second glance. This

is clear, for instance, from the omen that he asked for and received from Zeus, which made him believe, on the morning of his battle against the suitors, that
he had already punished the sinners (cf. XXI 413-415). But a still more reveal ing instance of his hope for divine justice occurs when he first arrived on

Ithaca,
land's he

after

his

conveyance

home

by

the Phaeacians. Athena

recognize and

had disguised the

he thought

appearance so

that he failed to

it,

and

for

a moment

that the Phaeacians had deceived him

spoke aloud

taken him elsewhere. In his

distress,

to

himself,

"May
seem

Zeus the

god of

accusing the Phaeacians of injustice, and he added, suppliants punish them, he who also watches over other
transgresses"

men and punishes whoever

(XIII 209-216). Now this

prayer

may
ex cir

surprisingly naive for Odysseus, but the apparent anomaly can be plained, I think, in terms of what are, for him, the somewhat anomalous
cumstances.

The usually cagey and self-protective Odysseus had just taken the considerable risk of telling the Phaeacians about Poseidon's anger against him,
and this generous an

frankness

on

his

own part

led him to believe that he deserved

from them, despite the risks to themselves. When equally it appeared, however, that they had deceived him, he had no one to turn to but Zeus in order to even the score. And since, moreover, it was his own justice or
generous response

generosity that had apparently gotten him into this trouble, he felt entitled to ask Zeus to intervene (cf. XIV 401^-08). In other words, his hope for justice

from the

gods was rooted as

contributed,
also allowed

he then

imagined,

primarily in his own attachment to justice, to his need for divine intervention and
at

which which

him to believe that he deserved it. And

least

on

this occasion,

his belief that he deserved divine

whatever experience

help

allowed past

him to hope for

of

it,

despite
support

had led him in the

to be distrustful

Zeus'

for justice. for his

belief that he deserved generosity from the Phaeacians in return generosity toward them suggests that his concern for justice was not simply divorced from self-concern. Indeed, we see as much from the mere fact that his hope to punish the suitors was also, and not so incidentally, a hope
own

Odysseus'

to recover for

himself his
to

own

household

and

his kingdom (cf. I 40-41). But

and

the connection between

comes more

Odysseus'

concern

for justice

his he

self-concern expressed a

fully

light if

we examine a passage

in

which

hope

still

deeper than the hope

to resume

his life

on

Ithaca. He

spoke of this

The Concerns of Odysseus: An Introduction to the

Odyssey

53

hope,
cians.

even

though he seems not to have been

fully

conscious of at

a remark

to

Nausicaa

immediately

after

his

arrival

the

land

its presence, in of the Phaea

think that it
then"

His

words

to her were as

follows: "a

divinity

has

now thrown me ashore not

here,
will

so that

here too, I suppose, I

might suffer evil.

For I do

cease, but the gods will still

cf.

bring many [evils]

to pass before

(VI

XXIII 286-287). Despite his claim, then, that he did not expect 172-174; his troubles to cease, he ended this statement by saying that he still had many
evils

to

endure

"before

then."

indeed
569).

looking

forward to it

an ultimate release

He thus suggested, in other words, that he was from evils (cf. IV 33-35, 561
to

Apparently, his journey

miserable was

him how

to be

Hades, where the soul of Achilles had told dead, did not destroy in him the hope that he
await other men.

would somehow

be

spared

the final evils that

Perhaps he

Heracles, whom he met in Hades only in the form himself, as Odysseus told the Phaeacians, "re (XI 601-603). Odysseus, like joices in festivities among the immortal Heracles, was one of the select few to descend to Hades during his lifetime,
thought of
of a

himself

as another

phantom,

since

Heracles

gods"

and so

it is
as a

not

implausible that he

might

have hoped for from evils,

remark

fate

as rare and as

blessed
I think,

the one he believed that Heracles already

enjoyed.

But there is also,

this deeper root

deeper

root of

his hope for

a release

and

emerges when we consider the context of

his

to Nausicaa. Odysseus

had recently left Calypso's island, where he had again rejected, for one last time, her offer of unaging immortality. He had just completed, then, his great
est act of

renunciation, his

renunciation of

the desire to

save

his

own

life. And

this

act of

release
man.

renunciation, in my view, is the immediate source of his hope for a from evils. For it helped assure him that he was, fundamentally, a just
a

As

result, he believed that he deserved

a release

from evils,

and since

he believed that he deserved it, he was able to look forward to it with hope, just as he was also able to believe in gods who would fulfill that hope. To be sure,

Odysseus has been

his

so miserable with

Calypso that he may

not

have

regarded

rejection of the offer to

be her immortal husband

as a clear sacrifice of

his

own pleasure or profit.

strengthened ness of care sacrifice

Still, his renunciation of immortality must surely have his belief in his willingness to sacrifice, and hence in his worthi
from the
gods.

But here

arises a or

difficulty. For however

would

great a

have been willing to reward that he hoped for make, it was not greater than, or even so great as, the in return. There is no evidence, at any rate, that he ever dreamed of renouncing a good that would compare with an ultimate release from evils. And since the

he believed that he had made,

that he

gain

that he looked forward to in the

end was greater than

can also

regarded as sacrifice

in the

name of

justice

be

seen

any loss, what he and I would even

to justice

say,

seen

best

not as

sacrifice, but primarily as a means to this hoped-for end.

was

The

self-concern

that

bound up
was not

Odysseus'

with

attachment

was not necessarily, of course, an enlightened self-concern, connected with

and

the behavior

his

pious

hopes

necessarily

always pmdent.

For

not

to

54

Interpretation
has already been indicated, his confident hope that the gods would what he regarded as his just cause on Ithaca seems to have led to blunders in his
plot against

repeat what

support

several uncharacteristic
was so

the suitors. For

instance, he

moved, by Athena's shining presence while he and Tele machus were secretly removing weapons from the main hall of the palace that he forgot his own plan of leaving two sets of arms available for them to fight
as

it seems,

with

(XIX 31-44;

cf.

XVI 295-297

and context).

Now this

mistake was not a

fatal one, as it turned out, but it machus, in the midst of battle, to

Telemachus'

was

serious,

since the need to send

Tele
with

get armor

from the storeroom, along Odysseus

was

negligence

in

leaving

the storeroom door ajar, allowed some of

the suitors to get armor for themselves. As a result,

ment

for

a mo

extremely frightened, and the ensuing battle was much more difficult for him than it would otherwise have been (XXII 95-159). Another serious error
on

the

is his allowing Telemachus to go directly home, alone and in hut in the country, where he had gone at first after daytime, from his visit to Nestor and Menelaus. For as Odysseus knew, the suitors had al
part
Eumaeus'

Odysseus'

ready tried to kill Telemachus on his voyage back to Ithaca, heard from Eumaeus that their attempt to keep

and

he had

also

Telemachus'

return a secret

from the
seus'

suitors
of

had failed (XVI 464-469;

cf. not

130-134, 328-337). Now Odys

explicitly tied to his hopes from justice that seems
suitors

lack

caution, in this

instance, is
just
gods.

the gods, but it does

unreasonable again to

presuppose a

tmst in the strength of

in the

absence of

To be sure, the

did

not

try

kill Telemachus, either on his way home from the country or after for wards, they were unwilling to do so without a sign of Zeus's approval, and they received no such sign. Zeus may even have sent an omen, on the day after

Telemachus had
attack on

arrived safely at the palace, signifying his disapproval of an him. Yet the fact remains that the suitors were at least considering

another attempt

to kill him.
on

Antinous,

one of their

leaders, had

proposed

to

his way home from the country, and he had given from point of view, in favor of his proposal (XVI the strong arguments, XX 241-247). Moreover, it is hard to see how Telemachus could 363406;
ambush and
suitors'

kill him

have

escaped such an ambush.

Odysseus'

Accordingly,

the

mere

fact

of

his

survival

does

not mean that

trustfulness had been well-advised.

Telemachus did survive, just as Odysseus won battle against the suitors, and though the role in securing these out comes may have been relatively small, it was nevertheless sufficient for the
yet
will

And

it

be

said

the

gods'

occasions.

So

while

these instances do raise doubts that he

was

Odysseus'

about

pmdence,

they by

no means prove

reliance on

the

gods and

seriously unwise in the degree of his their justice. The more important question, at any rate,
a release

concerns the wisdom of

his deeper hope for

whether

from

evils.

Now Homer's
this ultimate

Muse

never tells us even

reward, but
one's wish

he did or did explicitly if ignorance about the gods and the

receive

not receive

afterlife were to

frustrate

for certainty that he did

it,

the

mature

Odysseus

might still

The Concerns of Odysseus: An Introduction

appear as a

to the

Odyssey

55

kind

of model of wisdom or of

human

wisdom.

For

quite apart

from his cunning and versatility, the Odysseus who returned home from Ca lypso's island seems to have learned the secret of a good human life, a life of
contentment with

his fate

and of whole-hearted communion with

his

wife and

family.
This impression,

however,
his

of

Odysseus
called

as a wise man contented with

his

fate

and at one with

family

is

into

question

by

several
of

jarring details,
or con

details
cern of

which also raise

the old question about the these

depth

his justice

for

others.

The

most conspicuous of

details

occurs

in the final

scene

the whole
against

poem.

In this last

scene

Odysseus

was so caught

battle
call

the relatives of the defeated

over

suitors

up in the heat of that he failed to heed Athena's

to stop pursuing his victory to

make a

them,

and

he thus

almost

lost the

oppor

tunity Zeus,
own

lasting

peace

for his kingdom. It

required a

thunderbolt from
on

and a

behalf

and

further threat from Athena, to persuade him to act sensibly that of his kingdom. To be sure, he rejoiced when he

his

finally

did obey Athena, but his delay in doing so makes us wonder whether Odysseus the warrior would ever become fully reconciled to the life of peace and prosper

ity
test

that

was ahead of

him

at

home (XXIV 485-486). Questions in

connection with

about

Odys

seus'

future life
he first

at

home

also arise

his father Laertes

Laertes
of

by

when

approached

mocking him and by not him (XXIV 235-240). It is tme that he broke down
once

his puzzling decision to revealing his own identity he

still grieved of

and embraced

lovingly
doubts

he

saw

how

much

for him.
depth to
at

But the cmelty his love, and it

with

his initial

approach

suggests, nonetheless, a lack

raises

about whether

he

could ever

become

fully

home

his father. I

might also gave to

relatives.

mention, in this regard, the remarkably gmdging

exhortation that against the

and old

he

his

son

Telemachus just before their final battle

competitiveness

suitors'

Although the
was

between Odysseus delight to the

his

son on

this occasion

relatively mild,

and even gave

Laertes, it

suggests the

it

makes us wonder again

possibility how well Odysseus

of more serious was

discord in the future, and SOSgoing to age (XXIV home in

a

SIS).
A further indication that Odysseus did
that
would not return

frame
him

of mind

lead him to find

contentment

there

occurs at a moment of partic

recognized

ularly high emotion, just after Penelope has finally tainty and they have embraced one another in a long

with cer

and

tearful

reunion.

After

they had
ahead of

ceased weeping,

Odysseus

said

to Penelope that

they

still

had troubles his

them, and that the soul of Teiresias had foretold he would have to accomplish a great or measureless task home. Odysseus did
not,

to him in Hades that

even after return

however,

go

into the details

of

the prophecy, but

replied

instead he
was

asked Penelope to go to bed

with

him. Penelope

that his bed

more but ready whenever he wished, detail about his future ordeal. Odysseus in response, though he did of course some mild irritation at it (XXIII grant his wife's request, began by expressing she also asked

him first to tell her in

56

Interpretation

264 ff.). And it is surprising that he would show this irritation at what was surely a reasonable request from the wife he loved. But whatever the reasons

for it, his irritation, or his failure to appreciate the immediacy of her need for assurance that he would eventually return home again to stay (cf. XXIII 286287), betrays considerable insensitivity to Penelope's feelings, and it casts a
shadow over the poem's promise of a
Odysseus'

happy

marriage

in the future.

wise and

homecoming, it now appears, was not the beginning of a life of just contentment in harmony with his family. Indeed, one may even
the

suspect that

long journey
as

still ahead of

unwelcome to

him

he told Penelope that it

him may not have been so entirely was. (Compare XXIII 267 with

XI 121,
with

and

consider, especially in the light of I

as

3,

Odysseus'

small addition

to

the prophecy

he had

reported

it to the Phaeacians. Also

going to find
support

compare

XII 160

XII

49.) Yet

there is no reason to believe that

further travel

could ever

supply the
no reason

contentment

he

was not

at

home. In particular, there is

and such
uncertain

to believe that further travel alone could ever resolve any remaining
gods'

doubts
well

about

the extent

of

the

for justice
make

doubts may

have been

still alive at

in

him, helping

to

him

how he

fully

to

give

himself to his life

at

home. But to find the

contentment that
would

was still

lacking
more

the time of

his homecoming, Odysseus

have

required even

than such knowledge about the gods. What he needed, above all,
sense.

is

wis a

dom in the largest

more or

Moreover,
his

wisdom

in this large

sense

had been

less
life."

conscious

object of

quest all

along, as Homer

indicates, I
to win

believe, in
his
own

the proemium, where he tells us that

Odysseus

was

"seeking

Previously,
to the

to be sure, I have treated this phrase as if

quest

it

were

merely

equivalent

nounced,

or rather seemed elsewhere

for survival, a quest that Odysseus had re to renounce, in his rejection of Calypso's offer of in Homer the
word

immortality. Yet
means

translated as "to

win"

always

to acquire something one does not yet possess, rather than to preserve
win was

something one already has. And so by saying that Odysseus was seeking to his own life, or his own soul, Homer seems to mean, above all, that he

seeking to win it for the first time, to win it, in other words, as his own, or to win it for himself. This attainment of one's own life is the core, 1 think, of what Homer means by wisdom, and the desire for such wisdom was
Odysseus'

ultimate more

desire. Now it is beyond the

what such wisdom might

scope of this paper to

try

to

characterize
would

fully

be,

other than to suggest that

it

have

Odysseus to live contentedly, at home or even elsewhere. But at all Odysseus events, failed, it seems to me, to attain this wisdom, and he would continue to fail, despite his evident concern for his own life, and even, in a sense, because of it. For the shallowness of his concern for justice, or the ease
enabled with which

he

persuaded

himself that he

was

fundamentally just,
from the

closed

him

off

from

access to tme

self-knowledge,

and all

the more

attainment of

his

tme life.

By
us

justice in

Homer, who was wise, seeks to nourish the concern for his listeners, most massively by focusing his or his Muse's story,
contrast,

The Concerns of Odysseus: An Introduction to the

Odysseus'

Odyssey

57

not on

travels, but

Homer
at

points

to the

kinship

on his edifying punishment of the suitors. And between the simple concern for justice and wisdom

addresssing the Odyssey to the just and pious swineherd Eu the maeus, only character in the poem to whom he or his Muse ever speaks (XIV 55, 165, 360, etc.). By encouraging our concern for as directly

its highest

by

"you"

justice,

as

he

addresses

the questions regarding justice that

Odysseus'

story

necessarily raises, Homer points the way toward the

life

of wisdom that even

Odysseus failed to

attain.

Edmund Burke

and

the American

Constitution

Morton J. Frisch
Northern Illinois

University

It is

curious

indeed, if

not

incredible,

that Edmund
eighteenth

Burke,
century,

considered the

greatest commentator on constitutions

in the

hardly

uttered

a word and never an opinion on

makes no mention of

the American Constitution. His correspondence

the momentous
came

happenings in America between 1787

about the effect that

and

1789. The

nearest

Burke

tion was a remark made

anything in September 1788 to the

form"

to saying

American Constitu "America looks

as

if

she were

taking something like

on

by

ratifying the proposed Constitu

tion

(Correspondence, V415),
debate fitted for

and an admission made

in the House

of

Com

mons

the Quebec Government bill on

May 6, 1791
In
all

that the Ameri

cans were well

a republican government.

probability, Burke

never gave a second

thought to the ratification of the American Constitution

and,

even

though he championed the American cause

was silent about

during

the American

Revolution, he

conspicuously inception in 1789. Burke surely must have been aware that the American reg ime was making its accommodations with England once its new Constitution

the American regime after its

in place, but he never commented on Washington's Proclamation of Neu trality of 1793 relieving this country of obligations incurred under a 1778 treaty
was
with

France

or even

took notice of the

Jay Treaty

negotiated with

his

own

country in 1794. In an 1814 letter to Adrian Van Der Kemp, John Adams claimed that, prior to 1786, the organization of free government was a subject little studied by Burke, and that Burke had not taken notice of it until the publication of the first
Adams'

volume of

States of America. But Burke

spirit of republics

Defense of the Constitutions of Government of the United wrote in 1791 that he had "studied the form and
studied

very early in life; [that] he [had]

them

with great

attention, was]

and with a mind undisturbed

by

affection or

prejudice; [and that he

be poorly cultivated reader of Burke's Letter 109). without this Moreover, every (Works, IV: to the Sheriffs of Bristol written in 1777 will know that he had given much thought to the subject of free government during the period of the American
convinced

that the

science

of government

would

study"

Revolution. It is consequently clear that Burke had studied free government treatise. Burke understood the prior to his coming into contact with presumed to have reasoning required for free government and, therefore, can be
Adams'

been

well qualified

to

comment on

the American Constitution.

interpretation, Fall 1989, Vol. 17, No. 1

60

Interpretation
David Hume
wrote

in 1741 that "there is

. . .

no

doubt but

a popular government

may be imagined more perfect than 7). Hume might well have settled for
would not

constitution"

our present

moderate

monarchy in

have

precluded

his

looking

for

republicanism

(Hume, Essay England, but that elsewhere. Burke, fol

lowing Hume,
he
the

wrote

to Charles-Jean-Francois Depont in November 1789 that

to be unable to conceive of a constitution other
a republican

was not so narrow-minded as

than the British Constitution

opposite principles of

(presumably

one) that

could reconcile

(Correspondence,
in Government

energy in government and the liberty of the individual VF45-46). But combining "the requisite stability and energy
the individual attention to
what
liberty"

with

(and these

are

Mad

ison's

own

words) is precisely

the Constitutional

Convention

was reputed

to have

accomplished.

The Federalist Papers describes the

as

critical

task

of

the

rendering republicanism a defensible form of gov British Constitution, by reconciling the contradic tion between the demands of energy and liberty. Yet Burke never once men

Constitutional Convention
ernment,
as

defensible

as the

tioned the American Constitution in his

spite of the

writings on of

the French

Revolution, in
Whatever

fact that he had

stated

in the House

Commons in 1 79 1 that he

believed the Americans

else can

were well

fitted for

a republican government.

be said, it his

seems

that Burke took quite seriously the possibility of a

at

republican political order on a par with the

least in

part

apparent

British Constitution, vindicating indifference toward the American Constitution.

Even before the French Revolution, in counseling reconciliation with Amer ica in 1775, Burke praised the Americans for having formed governments (re

ferring

to their Committees of
of

Correspondence)

without

their

being

"transmitted It
was not

through any

the ordinary artificial media of a positive

formed,"

constitution.

he said, "and transmitted to them in that condi ready tion from (Works, 11:129). Burke chose to investigate constitutions by almost looking exclusively at the French and British constitutions, and the high
a manufacture
England"

point of

his

"made"

argument was that

unplanned ones.

In his

writings on

radically inferior to the French Revolution, Burke favored the

constitutions are

constitution that was

formed

on no regular plan and that

a great

had

no

unity

of

design,

but that

came

into

being

"in

length

of

time,

and

by

accidents,"

the unintended outcome of accidental causation

seemed to

variety of (Works, V:373). He

a great

have believed that

have been
that

accidents that occur over a period of time

bring

about,

by

their combined effect,

something

that is superior to anything that

reason would

able to accomplish.

Burke

argued

an accidental

becoming

guarantees a type of perfection

superior to that

freedom

or

resulting from a planned order because it is in agreement with individuality. What the French revolutionary theorists did was to
regime,
and

make a planned

every interference
threat to

with

the individual that

would

freedom and, therewith, to a free soci ety. We are entitled to surmise, therefore, that Burke's lack of enthusiasm for or lack of interest in the American Constitution has something to do with its necessarily
result constitutes a

Edmund Burke
planned character.

and

the

American Constitution

61

It

cannot

be denied that the American Constitution

Newtonian
model

was es

tablished

by

conscious

construction, but it was not, as has been suggested,

constructed on a mechanistic

(Hofstadter, 1948, 8). The Arti

were

cles of

Confederation inasmuch
as

served as a point of

departure for the Convention's delib

to revise that constitution.
shows

erations

the

delegates'

instmctions

That they decided

directions that

not

to

follow those instmctions

the Articles
pointed
was

how important their

previous experience under

ironically
itself
was

in moving them in new directions them backward toward monarchical power.

energetic executive power

What
can

presented

as

independent,

in the Ameri

Constitution

simply transformed monarchical power, that

their own previous experience under the that the strength and

is,

the inte
consid

gration of monarchical power within erable reflection on

the republican framework. It took

Articles for the

of a

leading
was

framers to

recognize

independence framework if

monarchy

would need

to be integrated within the republican

republicanism

to survive as a viable constitution of government.

on

In Burke's view, the coming into being of a sound political order was based a process, not on abstract doctrines or theories. He denied, therefore, that
to guide practice and, even more, asserted that the instrupractice

theory is sufficient sion of theory into

did

tends to

mislead or even corrupt practice.

Witness

the French revolutionary

not attach much

constitution.

If

one were

to speculate as to why Burke

one might con
and

jecture that he have had little

than
and can

regarded reason

importance to the American Constitution, it, understandably, as only a blueprint He is

noted

thus

would

to give much thought to a constitution that was no more that a "constitution on

paper

a scheme on paper.

is

one

thing,

in fact

another"

and experience at

(Works, VIL77). Therefore,

to

the Ameri

Constitution,

the time of

its inception, had

be

conceived of as essen

tially incomplete. But however indifferent to the American Constitution Burke may be thought to be, he surely would have recommended that a pristine con
stitution should

be fitted to

country
the

rather

than making a country conform to

the

theory

of

the constitution, which

recommendation

is

consistent with what

happened in America Burke's

when one

during

period of

the completion of the founding.

enigmatic

obtrusive silence

concerning the American Constitution is

takes

into

account

his

astuteness

as

an

observer of

contemporary
the
silence.

affairs and

his

previous

interest in American
not a
"made"

affairs.

His

preoccupation with

French Revolution is clearly Burke's animus against

speak about asm

sufficient

explanation

for that his

constitutions

may

explain

reluctance

to

the American Constitution

or even account

for his lack his

of enthusi part of

for that constitution, but it did

not mle out a recognition on

the

possibility of a republican order on a par with the British Burke seems to have been a passive witness to the appearance
can

Constitution.
of

the Ameri
and

Constitution. He

preferred

to

concentrate on

the French Revolution

its

cies

the doctrinaire revolutionary constitution, realizing the extent to which for the level of political responsible were Revolution French the inherent in
tenden

62

Interpretation
of

fanaticism in France. This intrusion

ance of a revolution of cused on

theory into

practice

that

is,

the appear

doctrine

and

theoretic dogma
on the

kept his

attention

fo

the French Revolution. His Reflections the

Revolution in France

takes

on

character of a theoretical critique of political

doctrinarism. The
threat to indi

American Constitution,
vidual

on the other

hand,

presented no possible

freedom

and provided ample safeguards on the

for

property.

In his Reflections
mation of a

Revolution in
the

France, Burke tempering

observed

that the for

free

constitution requires

together of the

"opposite

elements of liberty and restraint in (Works, 111:560). He referred to the capacity of the British Constitution (a free but not a republican constitution) to unite or conciliate the elements of energy in government and
one consistent

work"

the

liberty
it

of

the individual through the

perfect

mutual control of

the various parts of

and power.

the system, thus achieving a though

model might appear

balance between
that his

liberty

But

that he was recommending the British Constitution as a

made

constitution, Burke

it

clear

view of

that constitution as

second to none did not mean that he was recommending it for others to ser vilely copy. Rather he intended the theory drawn from it to illustrate the princi
ples of a constitution

already made; he free

was not

recommending the copying

of

its

stmcture.

The formation

of

constitutions was a matter of

the theorists of the

seventeenth

and eighteenth centuries.

continuing concern for John Locke had a

hand in writing The Fundamental Constitutions of Carolina, while John Milton had written a treatise entitled The Readie and Easie Way to Establish a Free Commonwealth
whereby
an

and

James Harrington

treatise entitled

Ways

and

Means

subject as a

Equal Commonwealth may be Suddenly Introduced, treating the purely theoretical theme. Hume had written that "the subject [of
a new system of

establishing
any the
were

government] is surely the

who

most

worthy curiosity

of

wit of man can

possibly devise. And

fixed

by
an

the universal consent of the wise

knows, if this controversy and the learned, but, in some

future age,
either

by
be

opportunity might be afforded of reducing theory to practice, dissolution of some old government, or by the combination of men

to form a new one in some

would no exaggeration

distant

world?"

part of

the

(Hume, Essay 16). It

constituted

to say that the American Constitution

that

reduction of

theory

to practice that Hume

had envisioned, but Burke

appeared

less

sanguine than

Hume

about

the construction

of new constitutions.

He

as

that "the science of constmcting a commonwealth, or renovating, or reforming it, is, like every other experimental science, not to be taught a priori. Nor is it a short experience that can instruct us in that practical science.
serted
. .

The for

science of government

being, therefore,
. .

so practical

in inself,

and

intended

such practical

purposes,

it is

with

infinite

venture upon

pulling down
models and

an

edifice

which

degree for
without

ages

the common purposes of

patterns
of

having

to any in any tolerable society, or on building it up again approved utility before his
caution that
man ought

has

answered

eyes"

Edmund Burke (Works, 111:311-12). More

easie

and

the

American Constitution

63

than

that, Burke

would

say, there is no readie and

way to form a free commonwealth. Burke was acutely aware of the difficulties inherent in the formation of free constitutions, but allowed for the possibility that a republican government
might succeed

in America. He had

emphasized

in 1777 the importance

of colo

in making the Americans accustomed to popular government. It is from this circumstance that he was later able to say (in 1791) that the Ameri
nial assemblies

cans were well

fitted for

a republican government.

He

cautioned at the same

time, however, that neither the British nor the French pure republican form with safety, and that further
might as

could

be brought into the

that

republican elements

be introduced into their basis. Burke

regimes would need

to be built upon monarchy

as the

their essential
other parts of

considered

monarchy

"essential
of

basis"

of

the

the mixed constitution, and

"by

the energy

that mainspring

alone,"

he asserted, "those republican parts must be set in (Works, IV: 109-10). But what he meant by monarchy was, practically speaking, mo
motion"

narchical

power, the powers

traditionally

associated with the

monarch, powers
as energetic execution

that Hamilton
executive

described, from a somewhat different point of view, power. Burke unambiguously stated that "the office of
It is
not

is

an office of exertion.
power"

from impotence that

we are

to expect the tasks of

(Works, 111:398). He had learned

(or
at

well, within the range of his experi

ence, the

critical role of monarchical power

in the

effective

functioning

of a

mixed constitution

least the

need

for

a substitute

for

monarchical power

in the

case of

France,

since

it

was

already

de facto
with

republic). con

Burke

could not explain what was

wrong

the French revolutionary

stitution without constitution

giving

some thought

to the reform or regeneration of that to recommending the formation of a

and, accordingly,

comes close
. .

"political

executive

magistracy

environed with

sideration"

as a substitute served that the

for

monarchical power

dignity, authority and con (Works, 111:497-98). He ob

deliberative discretion in
originating any process,
re

first his

executive officer under

without

the French revolutionary constitu

sort of

tion

was no more

than "a machine,

function,"

any

any

one act of

and

"without
or

power of

pardon"

without power of publicanism

suspension, mitigation,
mind

(Works, 111:497). The

Burke had in

for France

seemed

to assume "some sober and

sensible sort of republic, which

dom"

in

which

there was no

mention at all of a

king, but

held

out some reasonable

(Works,

IV:414). We

are thus presented with a

security to property, life, and personal free Burke who was flexible

said that a popular possibility of republicanism. Just as Hume had government might be imagined more perfect than the British Constitution, so Burke admitted that he could conceive of a constitution other than the British

about the

that

could reconcile the opposite principles of

of

energy in

government and

the

liberty

the individual. The very least that can

be

said

is that Burke,
rubric of

as a

consequence of the

influence

of

Hume's

political

principles, was able to enter

tain the possibility

of a stable

free

government outside

the

the

mixed

64

Interpretation
open

regime, but he left

tion.

the

question of

the viability of the

American Constitu

It

should

be

recognized

that the American Constitution was a contrivance of

abstract

reason, a condensed, systematic, and

document. It

would

be

mislead

ing

to suggest that the American Constitution

was a regenerated

constitution,
the

some variation of

the New York state constitution.

By his

silence about

constitution of a regime

he had

formerly

almost

reveals a measured caution,

for his

principles would

singularly defended, Burke hardly have permitted him

the test of experi
of a new commonwealth

to

make pronouncements on a

document that had

not yet met

ence.
...

Thus follows his I

will not

statement:

"[In]

the

fabrication

take their

promise rather

than the performance of the

suppose

Constitu
could

tion"

(Works, VIL98). Yet it

seems

impossible to
"made"

that

Burke

understand the
which

American Constitution

as a

constitution

in the

sense

in

tion. It
not

he described the French revolutionary constitution as a constitu is extremely unlikely that Burke would have accused the Americans of
their previous experience into account in the process of their consti
reformers

"made"

taking

tution making as the French

state constitutions

very

much

in

mind

had done, since the Americans had their in the act of constituting or reconstituting
to define precisely in advance how

their frame

of government.

Burke did

not

believe that it

was possible

an abstract plan of government would work

in

practice.

The

most remarkable

attribute of
of

The Federalist Papers is that they evaluate a constitution, by way defending it, before that constitution becomes an acutal working document,
that subsequently

an evaluation

has

assumed

the status of a commentary. But

was was

Hamilton,
mindful

whose conceptualization made

well aware of

the limitations

of

The Federalist Papers possible, He "speculative parchment

was submitted

provisions."

that,

when

the Constitution

to the test of practice, many

things

would

have to be

worked out

that could not

be

accounted

for in the
the

original

document, but this

experience.

awareness

did

not prevent

him from

discussing

theoretical tioned

merits of a plan whose principles

he

perceived

to have been

sanc

by

Hamilton

saw

the need to

infuse

republicanism with ex

cellences creation

learned from monarchy,

of an

without

departing

from republicanism,

by

the

executive

with

certain of

of the

characteristics

or characteristic

powers of a monarch.

By

way

contrast, the French Constituent

Assembly,

finishing
served

the

work of

reconstructing their regime

posed to the creation of a

strong and that the French Constitution of 1789-91 had failed because it far
as

in 1791, was unalterably op independent executive. Lord Acton ob

carried

the

reaction against monarchical power so

to paralyze the
a republic that

executive.

Burke

had been brought face to face in 1789

with no executive and

with

had been formed

therewith no

real government.

indebted to Burke for the recovery of the distinction between theory and practice that had been obfuscated by the doctrinaire theorists of the French Revolution. Burke had learned from Aristotle that practice must be understood
are

We

Edmund Burke
on

and

the American Constitution

65

its

own

terms and that the

sphere of politics

he

opposed

Aristotle in arguing that

not prevent

practice

is relatively self-contained, but is more fundamental than theory Burke's

admiration

insofar

as

the construction of constitutions is

concerned.

for

Aristotle did ory and,

tion and

him from questioning the

ultimate

superiority
of

of

the

with

it,

the conscious construction of constitutions. Burke maintained

that theories of government cannot be

known

independently

their construc

that,

by inference,

the theories

are not prior

to the construction. He

made much of

the fact that speculative

men

have taken theories that they have

sound regimes are

derived from

a government and

then supposed that the government was made

from those theories. It

not constituted

would appear that

Burke believed that

by

thought

but

come

into

being

without

guiding reflection,

by
de

slow growth rather

than

by

conscious making. of a well-constructed constitution was

as a process

Hamilton's
scribed

view of

the

formation

in the opening

number of

The Federalist

intimately

related

to conscious reflection

and reasoned choice

in

contradistinction

to accident and
new

force. He further
science of

stated

in the

ninth

number of

those essays that "the

politics"

had

contributed

constitution-making process, but he

sumed

never

substantially to the thought for a moment that

politics,"

reasonableness of

the

unassisted

reason could produce a well-constructed constitution.

Hamilton had simply

as

that,

by

virtue of

"the be

new science of

the excellences of repub

or avoided.
of

lican A

government could

retained and

its imperfections lessened

with

substantial portion of

The Federalist deals

the

defects

of

the Articles

Confederation
posed

and completes would

that critique with an

explanation of

how the

pro

Constitution

certain

that the best

constitution comes

remedy those defects. Burke, on the other hand, was into being only through continuous ac
were well

commodations

to changing circumstances, slowly, not to say imperceptively.

openly stating that the Americans government as late as 1791, he implicitly

Yet

by

fitted for

a republican

admitted

that

republicanism

(and

even a
was

republicanism) working itself out in America. It consciously Americans were well fitted for a repub that the indeed easy for him to see
created was government

lican

by

virtue of their previous experience with colonial assem

blies, but he does

unfolds the

not

say

word

about

the American Constitution. the French Revolution

Burke

consequences of

his

examination of constitutions

in his

discussion
can

of

the formation
at

of

free

and, as it turns out, the Ameri

the Burkean requirements

Constitution,
free freedom
"the

least in its conception,

satisfies

of a

constitution of

in that it

reconciles

the

principles of

energy in
on

government

and the ence to

the individual. It is therefore

possible

to say that his refer

the Revolu
whether

republic,"

sound constitution of a could

in his Reflections

tion in

France,

reasonably apply to the American

Constitution,

that was in Burke's

mind or not

(Works, III,

397).
regimes

Burke
therefore
means

recognized remarked

the impermanence of all

and constitutions and

that a state without the means of some change

is

without

the

of

its

conservation.

But he

was

convinced

that pmdence rather than

66

Interpretation
the controlling virtue in the
conservation

wisdom was what

of constitutions or

in

is

required

to

make a constitution effective.

He

was more

definite than
folly"

Aristotle in asserting that "wisdom is not the most severe corrector of in political matters, for wisdom admits of no compromise whereas the essence of
politics

is

compromise pmdence

(Works, 111:443). Burke

adaptive political

stressed

in

all

his

political writ

ings that
the
nite

is the

virtue, the

director,

the regulator,

standard of all political

practice, for "human affairs are susceptible of infi

unlooked-for"

modifications,

and combinations

wholly

new and

(Works,

IV 469). His

approach

to the renovation of constitutions emphasized adaptation to practical political necessities) rather than regime

(making
change,

accommodations

which perhaps accounts

for his

apparent

indifference to the American

Constitution. Thus Burke

to
pass with

allowed

the ratification of the American

Constitution
not

hardly

a mention of what
modem

has turned

out

to be the most significant

regime sure

transformation in

how

a constitution would turn out

was a presumption

times, but understandably he could in advance of its promulgation.

eighteenth

be

There is the
to know

in the

work of what

theoreticians and

century that the best constitution theories. Hume thought it to "be advantageous in the kind, that
we

[constitution] is

most perfect

may be
as

able

to

bring

any

real constitution or

form

of government as near

it

possible,

by

such gentle alterations and

society"

innovations
conceded

as

may
of

not give too great

disturbance to for
prac

(Essay
tice

16). Burke

that

theory has

some relevance

in that it

marks out

the

proper ends

government, but he manifestly

renovation of

subordinates

theory

to

practice

insofar

as

the construction and

with

constitutions are concerned.

Practice has to do

exceptions, modifications,

balances,
excesses certain

compromises,

and mixtures

that become necessary correctives to the

that theoretic perfection can produce. In the

last analysis, Burke

planning,

was

that freedom in society

is best

provided

for
of

by

an unstmctured constitu

tion that

lacks unity of design. He rejected unity because he believed that the emphasis making
struction of constitutions was a serious

design,

conscious con

on plan or

design in the

threat to freedom. Foremost in Burke's

mind was

the

constitution whose end was

freedom.

Hume

wrote

in 1775 that he be
said about

was

"an American in

[his]

principles,"

but the

same could not

Burke

even

though Burke

was a great supporter of regarded

the American cause

during

the

revolution

(Hume 1932, 11:303). Burke

model

the unstmctured British Constitution as the

constitution

whereas

the
was

American Constitution
never of

with

its foundations in "the

politics

new science of

in his focus. The

whole organization of

government, from Burke's

and can never

point
effect

view, must be "a consideration of

convenience"

be "the

of a single

instantaneous

regulation"

(Works, 111:311; IV:50). The

on

emphasis

in

the American

Constitution

rested

mainly

creating

and

delimiting

offices and

authorities and

delegating

to them written grants of power. It had too much of a

practical

planned character

to suit the

bent

of

Burke's thought.
that Hamilton claimed that

It

was

by

means of

"the

politics"

new science of

Edmund Burke
the
proposed constitution was able

and

the American Constitution

67

to transcend traditional republicanism in the

direction
whether

of a perfected republican

constitution, but Burke had

serious

doubts

science"

freedom in society was "a thing which lies in the depths of abstruse (Works, 11:229). "The legislators who framed the ancient republics
was

knew that their business

apparatus

too arduous to be accomplished

with no

better

than the

metaphysics of an undergraduate and would not

the mathematics of an

exciseman"

(Works, 111:476). Burke

have been impressed

ilton's

contention

that republicanism

becomes transformed
The very best

or perfected

by Ham by vir

tue of "the new science of

would

politics."

speculative

projects, he

say,

are

contaminated

by

their own abstractness. There was not the

slightest

doubt in Burke's

mind

that tme theories

are

inherent in the

actual

constitution rather

than existing independent of their construction.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Acton, John E.E.D., Lectures on the French Revolution. New York, 1959. Burke, Edmund. The Correspondence of Edmund Burke. Edited by T. W. Copeland et al. 10 vols. Chicago, 1958-78. The Works of Edmund Burke. 12 vols. Boston, 1888. Hofstadter, Richard, The American Political Tradition, New York, 1948. Hume, David. The Letters of David Hume. Edited by J.Y.T. Greig. 2 vols. Oxford,
1932.

Essays, Moral, Political,

and

Literary,

rev. ed.

Indianapolis, 1975.

Seeing

Justice Done:

Aeschylus'

Oresteia

Mera J. Flaumenhaft
St. John's College, Annapolis

No
lar

one

knows for in the lives

sure when

human beings first

gathered together

to

watch

their fellows stage a play.

events

And

no one

knows

when

formal trials became

no evidence

regu

of civilized communities.

There is

that these

institutions developed together. But the watching of trials seems to have much in common with the watching of plays. Speech, action, and props are arranged
to

display

events that are not

a staged representation and

really occurring as they are watched. In each case, imitates past or possible events, and elicits the passions Perennial interest in
accounts of

judgments

of

the

assembled spectators.

"dramatic"

and recent

trials, the continual popularity of courtroom dramas and movies, interest in televised crimes and trials, all suggest that dramatic
judicial judgment
are

reen-

actment and

fundamentally
first
and

related

to each other.
of

Perhaps it is
world

no accident that the

foremost drama

the Western

is

about at

the establishment of institutional public justice. Presented in a

city where,
selves as

different times, the same citizens are required to constitute them collective spectator in the theatre and collective jury in a court of law,
at once a poetic and a political event.

the Oresteia is

community of the deepest

and on what

comes to

look together to

see that

It tells the story of how a justice is done. As such, it is one

meditations on

human beings

as moral and

law-abiding beings,

is necessary to heal individuals, families, and communities when violated. But it is even more than a meditation on justice and have been they punishment, even more than a guide for those who make institutional arrange
ments

for

handling

such matters.

The trilogy

itself,

staged

for

citizen-specta wonder

tors,

contributes, as the courts

do,

to making justice

visible.

No

Aes

chylus wanted to tell this

story in the theatre.

Aeschylus'

as

This essay follows the order of the plays do, that its readers be

plays patient about

and, in

so

doing, demands,
As in the Or

the

outcome.

esteia, the full meaning

come to on

of suggestions at

the

beginning

of

the discussion will

light only toward the end. The first two parts of the essay, which focus the first two plays of the trilogy, discuss kinship and revenge in

commu-

and

to my "Looking Together in Athens: The Dionysian Tragedy in The St. John's Review, Spring, 1984, 48-59. Quotations from the Oresteia in the present essay are mostly from Richmond Lattimore's translation (Chicago, 1953), in which line numbers closely follow the Greek text. Translations that differ from Lattimore's are my

This essay is
Festival,"

a companion-piece

which appeared

own.

interpretation, Fall

1989, Vol. 17, No. 1

70

Interpretation
the primary institution is family. This discussion does not aim at Rather, it focuses on the theme of vision. Part One, on
explores

nities where

full

literary

exegesis.

Agamemnon,
outsiders power private

the inadequacies of private

justice in

communities where

have

no visual access

into the

affairs of private public

households,
not yet

and no

to

act on what

they

can see.

Although
and

justice is

possible,
of

justice has its satisfactions,

An
examination of

these, too,
as

are related

to the

looking

the

actors.

Clytemnestra

the stage

director

of a symbolic when

drama that

convicts

her husband in her eyes,

suggests

that, later,

justice

becomes public, it must still in some way exhibit the violator as she does. Part Two shows that, in The Libation Bearers, Argos is still a city in which justice
is
executed

from

within

the family. But the middle play opens a

between the

restricted views and cyclic revenge of

Agamemnon

and

passageway the full

view and conclusive

justice

promised

in The Eumenides.

Again,

the

discussion
The Eu
a com

focuses

on what

is

visible and on who

is

watching.

Part Three,
staged

on

menides, describes the genesis, in

Athens,

of

munity

of citizens

fully

on view

to each

other.

fully Publicly

visible public

law in

trials resembling

theatrical dramas

replace

the privately staged dramas of

Clytemnestra.

They

clearly face each

well as

articulate other

the alleged violation and require the accused and accuser to

in the

sight of their shared community.

ble in the
and

judicial arrangements, develop as even nonnative city. Under the aegis of Athena, Orestes is acquitted
age-old

Foreign relations, as outsiders become visi

of

his matricide,
civic order.

the

deities

of

blood

revenge are assimilated

into the

But
raises

even as

it

celebrates

this humane and intelligent solution, the last play the effects of rational

deep

questions about political enlightenment and arrangements.

institutional judicial be lost,

and

Part Three

attempts

to articulate

what

may

as well as what

spectators.

Looking
of this

at

is gained, in the formation of a community of ourselves in the the light of the Oresteia, Parts Three
citizen-

Four

essay

ask what we can

Athens,
displays
of

as we constitute our own returns to

Aeschylus'

judicial

leam from Argos, as well as from and penal institutions. Finally, the
to be

discussion

theatre.

Partly drama,

our

humanity

and reminds us

that,

human,

partly trial, the tragedy we must not lose sight

first things.

PART ONE THE HOUSE ABOUT THE HEARTH: AGAMEMNON

The Agamemnon repeatedly displays people whose fortunes are determined by a reigning family, but who are excluded from full action in the affairs of that
upon their masters, attached to their oikos ('house, house ), most of them are primarily onlookers. They observe alone or together, but they do not constitute a full community of observers. They stand on the
hold'

family. Dependent

roof,

or

before the gates,

hoping

for

message,

imagining

what

is

happening

Seeing
within.

Justice Done:

Aeschylus'

Oresteia

71

The Watchman, Choms, and Cassandra are haunted by the violations of the House of Atreus, but cannot affect events. Their visions of the past are filled
for
with accounts of others who witnessed and appealed with

their eyes, but these out

and

whom

there

could never

be full justice. Clytemnestra,

unlike

siders, takes

action

in her

own case.
must

Disturbing

though she

is, her deeds

the account she gives of

herself

ened,

civilized arrangements with a

be taken seriously, even as more supercede her bloody personal revenge.

"dogwise"

enlight

The play begins

the palace, waiting for a

solitary Watchman lying signal light. Beyond the

upon

the roof of

announcement expected of
tongue"

him, he is

not

free to

speak:

there's an "ox on his

(36). Obedient

watchdog to the house, he looks, not only on his from the queen. His ambiguous, riddling speech is

her to rise from her bed

victorious return of whole

and raise an ololugmos not

own behalf, but on orders disturbing, yet he cries for ('a joyous cry') (28) for the of

her husband. He thinks

the gods. Theous

only

the queen,
word

but

of the

household
word of

and of

('gods') is his first

dynasties
and

and, thus,

the first
observe

the

play.

He

cannot see

these gods. But he has been able to

the

distant

processions of

heavenly

looks forward to the

joyful earthly processions that will greet his lord's homecoming. By the time he finishes speaking, it is clear that something is very wrong in Argos. He says (31), but we never see him dance or even he, too, will "make a choral
prelude"

speak with another.

materialize. a

The

anticipated

"choirs

of multitudes

in

Argos"

(23)

never

As the Choms enters, the Watchman remains fixed permanently immobilized spectator. We never see him again.
The Choms
comes on

upon

the roof,

phasize

in full motion, but their dancing soon serves to how immobilized they also are. Unlike the Watchman, they look
"Ares"

em as a
aged

group, but their looking, too, is ineffectual. witnesses (78); they are "no stronger than a

is

no

longer in these

child"

(81). Like the Watchman,

are never consul

they have

no public role.

Unlike

other

tragic

Chomses, they

ted or confided in

by

their mlers. Their authority is not political but mantic;

power"

they have only "singing

the great oikos,
unable

(106). Positioned

always outside vision

the gates of the past,

our eyes some

to see within,

they

turn their

upon

depicting

past events as

if they
saw.

could see

them, making

present

in

even pictures

they

never

By

making memory visible,

they

gain

control over the past in which they may have muttered, but had no say. The Choms speaks repeatedly of people who have no shame, who behave as if no one is watching. Like the Watchman, they look to the gods, who are "not
unregardful"

unjust

man

(ouk askopoi) (461) and send him to

return

of murderers.
"obscurity"

The Furies

will strike

down the
"unseen"

(amauron) among
explains

the

(aistois)
suggests

(463-67). On his

to

Argos, Agamemnon

how the

gods

cast votes

for Ilium

and all

her

people

to be destroyed. His

anachronistic

image

the Athenian jurors

we shall see

in the third play, but the image is into

which

urn"

shattered pebbles

by

the thought

of

the

"bloody
not

the gods cast their

cyclical vendettas

(815). Immortal voting does

bring

an end

to the

72

Interpretation
The
mortals are agents of

of mortals.

the gods, and the

righting of one
watches

violation

always

brings

a new one.

Aeschylus'

Zeus, like

the all-seeing gods in

Homer,

all, but he

himself is not visible to the eyes of mortals. Awesome power, he has no looks, no shape; he is never made manifest on stage. His justice is certain, but un
predictable, murky,
a source of

fear

more

than of confidence. His

and

bird omen,

for example, was (116-17), but only the slightly

able to of outside

"clear-seen"

(phanentes)

"watched

all"

by

mantic seer could

say

what

it

meant.

(pampreptois) Calchas, standing

is

the human community,

observes what

the others observe and

Calchas'

interpret the

mysterious signs of

the

god.

But

many mantics,

gives no guidance

for

action.

vision, like that Though he is a trustworthy

the community whose eyes though he's

seer, he contributes little to the

political

foresight

of

he is. Zeus is
not

sure to strike

down

shameless violators who act as

looking, but he is very

It
soon

remote clear

he

oversees.

becomes

from the people, the oikos, and the city that that there are many deities in the world, and
mortals who

that

they

often

guidance.

impose conflicting demands on the Repeatedly, in Agamemnon, perplexed

subjunctive or optative. all

look to them for

their fu

mortals speak about with one eye on

tures
sighs

in the

Agamemnon,
to
who

the gods,

"May

be

well"

(217)

as

he

resolves

kill his daughter. Even for those

respect can

who are not

torn

by

conflicting demands,
prosperity.
out"

Zeus

and regard the

right,

there is no assurance of
good win

All they
was

say is,

"Sing

sorrow,

sorrow, but may

(121).

As the Choms describes

at as

it,

Agamemnon

surely

given a acted

difficult

choice

Aulis. But it is if
no god or

clear

that,

once

he

made

his decision, he
as

sacreligiously,
the way
stmck nor

human

would notice and

judge. Aeschylus
in
a painted

emphasizes

it looked: Iphigeneia her

murderers with

scene"

on

the altar,

"lovely

(242),
her eyes,

"eyes'

pity"

arrows of

(241). But

neither

the

appeals of witnesses, nor the consciousness of

ing

sacrificers.

She looked in

vain

all-seeing gods deterred her dar for justice. Like the Watchman and the Bound
and

Choms,
the

she was also

limited in her

motion and speech. appeal

gagged, her

speech overcome
house"

by force,

her only

to

justice

was a checked

"curse

on

(237).
remembers

In
were

later ode, the Choms

watching.

They

emphasize

Helen. She, too, behaved as if no one the ephemerality of her presence and her
visible on stage.
on others.

beauty. Aeschylus
"sees"

never makes

her

only

the effects she

has had

Her

own

As in Homer, the audience lack of responsibility is

crime.

intensified because
disruptions that

no one ever

really

responded to

her

Despite the

vast

result

from

the crimes of

Paris

and

Helen,
of

there

is

no

disin
mere

terested public examination. The citizens

onlookers to the violation

and prophets

Argos

were

in the

great

house. A in

royal

family

was

insulted.

Obligated to

save

face, they

pursued a great war

a private vendetta

fought

by

unwilling citizens and ambitious foreigners. Paris and his city are punished; the Argives win the war. But Menelaus is a loser. How can the victory address his

Seeing
loss? After
tom"

Justice Done:

Aeschylus'

Oresteia
and a

73

she

left, Helen's
seems

"traces"

(stiboi)

remain

in his

bed,

"phan

(phasma)

to mle the house. But in the

"vision"

Aphrodite is gone"; the (opsis) slips the war, the Herald reports that Menelaus, like

his eyes, all from his hands (414-26). After

gaze of

"blank

Helen, is

now

"lost to

sight"

(aphantos) (624). For

the violations that reduced her husband and many young Argives to nothing, Helen is never visibly punished. There is not even a private face-to-face reckoning. As a result, the case is never really brought to a conclu
Menelaus'

sion.

visions are of

Helen before

she

betrayed him. He does

not

imagine her in the

restored

act of violation.
"home."

The legends tell

manhood

how,
the

after

the war, he

her to their
story
of

But his

is

never restored.

Homer

com

pletes the

Helen

and

Menelaus in Book Four

of

of

Odyssey,

one of the
written.1

most painful and poignant

depictions
made

looking

the other way every

Helen,
allow

whom

the gods
and

herself

we, and all who

offers a memory-deadening dmg to appearances. Despite their decomm, up keep know their story, find it hard to look.

have

barren,

her husband to

Let

us return now

to the

living

protagonists of the

Agamemnon,
signs

to their

views of

justice

and

to further connections between viewing and justice. Clyt

with visions:

emnestra, like

Menelaus, has been filled

beacon

from Troy,

her daughter's murder, the children of Thyestes and Troy, dreams of her hus band's gashed body at Troy, and that body seen in the flesh. In her private
thoughts
venge. and

in her dreams

she

has

rehearsed of

her injuries
house"

and staged

her

re

She depicts herself

she must

as a

"watchdog
own

the

(607). To

see

justice

done,

take justice into her

hands. She

anticipates

Agamemnon's

reentry into the house.

what

light
than this for woman to

is

sweeter

behold,

to spread the gates before her husband home from war

and saved

by

a god?

(602)

This opening of the gates (pulas) to her husband is the first of many such openings in the trilogy, some of which will reveal things too horrible to look in Part Two, moving through the gates will become a major theme. But for now, Clytemnestra's sense of justice requires that, not only the distant gods, but she herself and other human observers witness the
upon.

As

we shall see

wrongs

Agamemnon has

committed.

Unlike Menelaus,

she

insists

on a show

down. What exactly does she need to see? Clytemnestra persuades Agamemnon to
woven, embroidered, dipped in
precious

walk on

tapestries. These cloths are

dyes.

Trampling
when

them means

destroy
The

ing

the visible

work of not

the oikos,

its labor

and

cooperation,

its

accumulated

wealth

that should

be taken for
oikos

granted even

it is

plentiful.

woven tapestries

hold the

together.

Birthclothes, bedclothes,

and death-

clothes are the visible signs of the coherence of a

family

87; Kass 1981;

Lebeck 1971, 74-86). The

violations of

in time (Jones 1962, others in this story are

74

Interpretation
disregard
of

often associated with the

household
and

goods:

Paris "trampled

on

the

inviolable"

delicacy

of

things
of

(371-72),

Helen

walked

lightly

away from

the soft curtains

her

marriage

bed. When Agamemnon

ground"

sacrificed

Iphigeneia,

her dyed

(239). Now, before the house, Clytemnestra forces Agamemnon to imitate his disregard for the blood of his
saffron robes

fell "to the

family

through his disregard for the blood-red

will

possessions of

their

inside, Agamemnon

be bound

by

the very

bonds he

chose at

house. Once to break. Even

his temporary reluctance here shown him guilty.

recapitulates

his hesitation

Aulis. She has

There is
violations.

another

By

way in making him

which

the

welcome scene

displays Agamemnon's

walk on

touching the ground he has come his trampling of precious goods, recapitulates
the
earth.

tapestries, Clytemnestra keeps him from home to. His separation from the ground, like
the

The House

of

Atreus

pours of

blood

on

he has already violated the ground the blood of Thy

ways and of all

estes'

children and

Iphigeneia,

the innocent Trojan young,

and were and

the

quarrel young Argives who died for the ground (452-55). Agamemnon destroyed Troy

Atreids'

buried in the wrong the ground it stood on. he

returns

There is

a special

horror

about

this. The way in which

home

reflects
re

his

violations of

home

ground.

Compare him

with

the earthy Herald who

peatedly greets the land, the earth in which he now knows he'll be buried 7). In the Odyssey, Odysseus kisses dry land after emerging from the

(503sea and

(V.463);
is
never

when
it"

told

he's

set

foot

on

his

own

home, he

rejoices

in the land

"he kissed

mentioned, is

(XIII. 354). Homer's Agamemnon, whose sacrifice of Iphigeneia an innocent who comes home to be murdered by the evil
it"

Aegisthus. Like Odysseus, he "clasped his native land and kissed (IV. 522). When Agamemnon returns home, his deliberate separation from
Aeschylus'

family
not

and oikos

is

represented and

by

his

separation not

from his

own earth.

He does
until

kiss the earth, second play, in the

oikos and

Clytemnestra does burial ground,

let him touch it. Not

he
resume

the to

family

will

his

proper relation

the

its

earth.
see

Why
him in
props, is

must

Clytemnestra

revenge?

The "carpet be the

scene,"

Agamemnon in this way before she murders with its tense arguments and vivid red
"dramatic"

always said to

most some

in the

play.

It is indeed

a staged

representation

for herself and, in

agon word comes

tentative way, for her

spectators

in

Argos. The theatrical

sense

that she produces is a

test,

trial,

not

in the full
that

that the

to have

by

the end of the

trilogy but like it in

re-

it

questions and exhibits the man whom she must

judge. It

views

symbolically

the acts
and

of which

he is
earth.

accused:

destroying
of

the

household

goods and children,

violating the
at

She

has, him,

course,

convicted and

killed him

several

times already,

imagining
herself
with

his
the

violations
not

in her dreams

and

in her

thoughts.

Now,
but to

last,

she welcomes

to restore him to their unravelled

evidence

home,
he is

provide

incriminating

that she needs to

convict

him. Justice (dike)

entails

showing (deiknumi)

the accused

for

what

Seeing
(Huizinga

Justice Done:

Aeschylus'

Oresteia
and

75

1955, 80; Chantraine 1968, 1-2:284). After seeing

prepared

Agamemnon's violations, Clytemnestra herself is

to

execute

exhibiting justice.
the

Agamemnon,
confrontation,
and

the chief character in her

drama, is deeply disturbed by

the various
spectators

and

is

self-conscious about

the people
goods. and

the gods

who watch
must

the conqueror trample his

aware that

household

Al

though Agamemnon
carpet scene

be

he is

on

trial for his

life,

that the

and
not

displays his guilt, he never acknowledges that the incident tries convicts him. To do so would be politically impossible. The charges are articulated and evidence is not discussed. His defense also must be in
vague

would

trampling purple tapestries, and whether Priam from the bath, from (eso) the house (1343) to no one in particular, and dies without publicly defending his innocence or acknowledging his guilt. The presence of a third person, Cassandra, who wit
code

disclaimers

about

do it. He

"within"

cries out

nesses the murder and then

is

executed as

further

"evidence"

in his

case makes

the privacy of the case even more striking,

seer.

especially

since she

is

literally

Cassandra
seen

at

first looks like

one of those

Aeschylean extras, included to be

but

not

heard. Though

she

the

moment of greatest suspense

becomes the primary speaker for 300 lines at in the play, she retains something of this first
tme visionary
whose verbal power comes

visual character.

She herself is but in

lies

not

in

reasoned argument

picture painting.

She

from
is

distant kingdom
to happen and

with eyewitness reports of

its destruction. But

and

she also sees what

through the gates of

about

the house to
why.

which she's

been brought,
horrors

knows

Crying idou,

idou

('look') (1125),

and

depicts the

ancient and present

of

the

borate ('see') (1217), Cassandra family that dwells within.

disturbed

But the Choms

wants no prophets. would rather

Usually
to the

by

their

inability

to see

very much, they now her witness (1317) as As

the
"martyr"

look

away.

she

bore

witness means

earlier

Cassandra insists that they bear horrors she now depicts.

she, like the Watchman
and

a mere

the Greek to

"witness"

Choms, has little

to have
eye

contribute

to the effecting of

justice. It is her

special

curse

no one understand or
inward,"

believe

what she says. a

Seemingly incoher
from the Choms

ent, "her

turned

she speaks

in

different
erratic.

meter

She dances up to the (Scott 1984, 7). Her dance is solitary, frantic, gates and is repeatedly repelled, entering only to die, the last evidence of Agamemnon's guilt, the last revealing element in the tableau that Clytemnestra

has

arranged

in the bath. Before Cassandra enters,

the palace gates
with

she speaks of

her imminent
that:

death, identifying
that

the

gates of

Hades,

and prays

the stroke be true,

with no convulsion, with a rush of

blood
rest

in

painless

death, I may
no

close

up

these eyes and

(1291-94).

In her last speech,

strike

longer

mantic and

wild, she asks that the avengers who

simple slave who

her

murderers avenge as well

"one

died,

a small

thing,

76

Interpretation
killed"

lightly
but

(1325-26). Earlier

she said

that Agamemnon and she must

another avenger

die,
a

not

"vengeless

by

the
and

"mother-killing
sandra
respect

scion,

(1279), for avenger of his

anticipated

gods"

will

return,

father"

(1280-81). Although Cas

never

includes herself in this

revenge, justice is

done

with

to her. Tme to her prophesy, Orestes eventually

as we or

returns as

avenger, but

only for his father. So far

know, Cassandra is
human
court.

never mentioned again

by
her

the

Choms, Orestes,
master,
are

gods,

Her

own

family,

annihilated

by
the

new

has already

entered

Hades and, in her world,

revenge and

mourning rites
oikoi of with

the responsibility of

kin;

she will

have

neither.

Among

Argos,
social

there is no justice for a stateless foreigner. The only character

significance

no

(McLeod

1982, 142),
and

she a

can

only

claim

"stranger's

grace"

(epixenoumai)
children,

(1320). Cassandra dies

witness,

not

only to
also

the deaths of

Thyestes'

Agamemnon,

the people of

Troy, but

to the inadequacies of divine justice in the

case of a

human

girl once

touched

by

a god who

turned against

her. The Choms first begged Clytemnestra to "be

healer"

(paion) (98). But Cassandra, made sick (146,512), knows that "no healer stands over this
paints poets

by

"healer"

god

called

(1248). She vividly her pictures, but like her, they are ephemeral, preserved in the stories of and priests, but providing no binding precedents in the affairs of men.

story"

Like the Watchman, the Choms, and Iphigeneia, her body is bound, her speech is impaired. She can only watch, curse, and hope that things will come right in
the end.

Alas,

poor men,

their destiny. When all goes well

a shadow will overthrow

it. If it be

unkind

one stroke of a wet sponge wipes all and

the

picture

out;

that is far the

most

unhappy thing

of all.

(1327-30)
the twelve Argive
again excluded
elders

After Cassandra

enters

the palace,

we see

it is

likely

that the

Choms

members speak

serially

from the action,

the

unable

to see the their

crime

they know is being

is fixed
at outside

committed.

Not

part of restrict

family or
vision.

household,

position

the gates that

though

their

They

cannot enter
will

to act

the private

hearth,

future, too,

be determined

by

what

takes place

they know that their within. Those insiders who

soon subject

"trample to the
there are
pened?

ground

deliberation's

honor"

(1356-57) may
see"

these

connected outsiders to tryranny.

no

"It is

clear

eyewitnesses, so how
as we

can

(horan paresti) (1354), yet about what has hap be certain they
to

The

king,

have seen,
of

cries out

from

within

to no one

in

particu

lar. Even the brief deliberation

together"

the Choms is fragmented.

They

wish

to "take

counsel action upon

(1347), but the twelve voices do not speak to each other; the which they agree is to take no action. They are paralyzed because
has
occurred

they have
pazein) is
should

no recognized access to what

not

within; "to

guess"

(to-

"to know

clearly"

(saph eidenai) (1369). A frantic

'

erratic

dance
com-

accompany

this fragmented consultation. We have yet to see tme

Seeing
munal speech or motion

Justice Done:

Aeschylus'

Oresteia

77

in the Oresteia. This

will come

only

when a commu

nity can arrange to look together. Violent deeds in most Greek tragedies
gers who make us see what cannot

are reported

by

eyewitness messen
of

be

shown on stage.

The deaths

Antigone,
the

Jocasta,
play's

and

Pentheus, for
action

example, are narrated

negligible.

by

outsiders whose personal

importance to the

is

But in Agamemnon,

Clytemnestra,

protagonist, the

murderer

herself,

once more appears at the palace

gates,

attempting to communicate with those who are defined by being outside them. She is shameless as she describes the obscene carnage and exhibits her own bloodied hands. Before desire for herself Just
tions
personal
we

dismiss her
we must

revenge,

and

as

why she exhibits what she before she punishes Agamemnon,

merely aberrant in her try to understand how she understands has done.
as primitive or she must see

for herself his

viola

or at

least,

reenactments of

them

so she

herself

must strike

him down
that

and see

his

reaction.

The

offstage murder and

her description

emphasize

there are two

blows, followed

by

third.

Surely, in the brief

meet

moment of

between

those first two

"accuser,"

blows,

the eyes

of

the

"defendant"

those

his

"victim,"

and to satisfy her, one last time, that she is indeed executing justice. Between Clytemnestra's two blows, Agamemnon And she must feel must acknowledge, albeit silently, that he is being
punished.2

"judge,"

"executioner,"

his death

and see

it

with

her

own eyes
must

the Choms says she has blood in them.

To satisfy
non,

her, his punishment my husband, a corpse, the

be

literally
this
right

firsthand: "This is Agamem

work of

hand,

righteous

craftsman"

(1404-6). She has already described his death:

Thus

falling

he

gasps out

his life,

pouring forth a sharp spurt of blood and hits me with a dark sprinkling of
com

bloody dew bursting

the

I rejoicing not less than the sown bud rejoices in the god-given rain. passage,
and

(1388-92)
are

This

horrifying
for the

the

whole

preceding report,

in the

present

tense. Once again Clytemnestra is

and
audience.

an eyewitness

Why

does

she represent

recreating the scene for herself her satisfaction in this extraordin

ary image of ritual sacrifice, moist fecundity, and birth? It is because Agamemnon's violations had, in some way, killed his wife. brittleHer almost superhuman energy in the earlier part of the play has a dry
ness about

it; it is

associated with

fires

and great

distances. It is

paralyzed,
gone

waiting ten years, has killed the "dearest

pent-up energy
of their

of strained

and watching.

Agamemnon has been

labor"

shoot"

(1417)

of

her womb, the

"young
Troy"

love (1525), and replaced his wife with "every Chryseis at (1439). She, in turn, has contaminated her womb by taking in an inferior man, an enemy of her husband's house. The adultery destroys Agamemnon as her husband before she destroys his life. Although she has taken up with Aegisthus

78
and

Interpretation intends to
continue this

union, Clytemnestra's

little to do

with

lust for his denied

successor.

Nor,
and

as some

resentment at

being

sexual gratification

by

Agamemnon has does it express her suggest, Agamemnon's long absence.

murder of

restaging of it are about another kind of lust the lust for revenge which, denied satisfaction, bums out the sur vivor, making continued life impossible for her as well as for her dead kin.

Rather,

the

murder and

her staging

Only

the

death

Iphigeneia'

of

s murderer can refertilize

her

mother's womb.

In

way, Aegisthus is irrelevant.

Killing
seem

Agamemnon

cannot

bring

Iphigeneia back

from the

dead, but it does

of wombs and

to restore her mother to

returns.

life.3

Clytemnestra

anticipates this rebirth are

before Agamemnon

Her first

words

images

birth,

"reborn"

of

light,

and she greets

husband in

elaborate strained metaphors of refreshment and

upon"

in the play her returning rebirth: he is the "When the

her revenge, is
root

"running spring a parched wayfarer lives, yet the leaves will come
almost

strays

(901),

and

again"

(966). Later,

describing

she

dances

with satisfaction.

The
place. could sent

imagery

of thirst and

hunger in be

connection with revenge

"tasted."

a common

To satisfy, justice I drink hot

must

seen and even

Hamlet's cry, "Now

arranges

blood,"

is the cry
guilt of

of all avengers.

He too

to

repre

in

a real

play

the

the wrongdoer. "The

Mousetrap"

moves of

the

would-be avenger as much as

it

"catches"

the "conscience

the

king"

(III, ii).

It is his

most vigorous attempt

me."

to respond to

his father's

ghost's

exhortation,

"Remember
If

In the Iliad Zeus tells Hera:

you were

to enter the gates and great walls and eat Priam raw and Priam's the
other

children and

Trojans,

then you

might

heal

your anger

(IV. 34-36).
says that

Books later, the

ransom,
tor:

mortal

Achilles, refusing
would not

to eat

with

his comrades,

and even

death,

satisfy his hunger for

revenge against

Hec

Would that in any wise wrath and fury might bid me carve raw, because of what you have wrought. (XXII. 346-47)

your

flesh

and eat

it

Would-be
and

avengers also

imagine

feeding

the corpses of their enemies to dogs

birds. In the revealing old legends, they actually do eat their enemies (Bacchae). The Choms imagines Clytemnestra standing above the corpse of her husband, like a carrion crow (1472-73). She sees herself as the old Avenger of
the House
retaliation
of

Atreus. The
all

voluptuous satisfaction of

her hunger for up in the

makes

revenge

is

in kind for
of

their crimes,
of

finally
which

summed

horrifying
his
victim

descriptions
eaten who

the

"feast"

Thyestes, in

the avenger

eat an abominable meal.

Like the

Fury

with whom she also

identifies,

she

is

away by the memories of past wrongs. Unlike the diminished Menelaus, lives on with barren Helen, drugging himself to forget the painful past,
name retaliating.

Clytemnestra, tme to her self by remembering and

with

(famed memory Revenge is

klutos,

mneme)

restores

her

sweet as she sprinkles

herself

the

blood

of

the

man who wronged

her.

Seeing
The
showers of
own

Justice Done:

Aeschylus'

Oresteia

79

into her
self

horror

be

punished.

blood, water, and rain that revitalize Clytemnestra soon turn for, by murdering, she contaminates herself and must her By the end of Agamemnon, the house is falling, the rain turns
all and the reaping time bitter (1655). In her libations turn to blood and tears, her milk to

bloody (1533),

the harvest monstrous,

The Libation Bearers

blood. But, though it is temporary, the intense

gests
with

sweetness of
act

her

revenge

sug

that the very violence of the passion behind her

the

may be
and

connected

fruitfulness

and

flowering
Her

of

human things. It is

somehow appropriate

to human nature to want to take justice those

and

into

one's own

hands,
and

to

bloody

hands in

doing
at

so.

argument with the

without

Choms

suggests the

lawcourt

trial

in the third play, but

work points

the "legal

framework"

the "indepen

dent
scene

arbitrator"

there (Taplin

clearly

to the later one

revenge

1977, 328; Podlecki 1966, 68). This in that it offers a challenge to the city law
can an antiseptic civil survivors as on

that

will replace

the blood

depicted here: how

justice rituals

of clean

hands

and no more

blood

the ground satisfy the

well as

the reviving rain of blood in the

are

clearly

incompatible

with

civilized

first play seems to do? Such blood life. Before Clytemnestra

bloodies her hands, she must see Agamemnon reenact his crimes. By executing him herself, she also literally sees that he is punished. Perhaps enlightened institutional justice
can remember

her

needs

by

attending to the importance

perhaps comes

of

seeing for those who have been be made fully whole again only possible in Argos. Agamemnon deteriorates
at

wounded.

Finally,
city

these wounded can to see

when a whole

in

way

not

the

end

into

unresolved

bickering between
claims as

the

Choms
gisthus,

and

Aegisthus,

who

first

appears not

late in the

play.

Unlike Homer's Ae
to have been

Aeschylus'

Aegisthus does

do the killing. He him only

in

on

the planning, but Clytemnestra

mentions

her

protector

(see

Thomson 1968, 247). Although Aegisthus, too, speaks of revenge, the very fact that he does not bloody his own hands makes him seem less serious than

Clytemnestra. To turn, Aegisthus

woman"

the

Choms'

feeble

curses and vague

hopes for
now

Orestes'

re

opposes

threats of violence. Clytemnestra

all

speaks

"as

(1657),
order

and

for reconciliation, urging assuring Aegisthus that he

the theatre spectators

to

return

to their homes (pros

and she

have the
enter

power

to

domous) bring good

to their house

(domaton) (1673). As they

with a

the palace, the elders the

closed gates and

retreat,

leaving

last

view of

the now empty roof. What has become

great public celebration?

of

the Watchman and his

hopes for

The

actors go off an exit

separately

or

Agamemnon does

not

end

with

procession

(Taplin

in fragmented groups; 1977, 331-32).

Argos is not yet a fully constituted The last word of Agamemnon

,

community.

"house"

(domaton

the text is corrupt), re

minds us that the

primary

experience

family. Repeatedly,
hearth"

the oikos

for the human beings in this play is still is defined as the "house [oikos, domos] about the depart to fight
people

(427,851,968). Its
"father"

men

primarily

as a

and

his

distant enemy, also defined (537,747). The victorious Achaians send

a

80

Interpretation
back
over vast

messages

distances

across unpeopled cliffs and

streams, rocks

and mountains, between places connected, There are guest friends as well as enemies are mentioned

not out

by roads, but by beacon fires. there Odysseus and Strophius

this world.

but developed international

relations are not part of

Although they roam far from home, for these men, as well as for their women, place is determined by the hearth. The Choms says that Clytemnestra offers
sacrifices to the gods of
gods of

the city, to those above and those

below,

and to

the
as

the sky and market place

(88-90), but
is

she mentions the gods

only

they

relate

to her family. The Herald

overjoyed

to return to his native

land,

but he

(513). The rest of only briefly of the "gods of the the play gives us little sense of public places in Argos, either of natural places or of those built by humans of roads, common altars, or buildings other
speaks

marketplace"

than the great palace whose

returns says own go

facade dominates the

stage.

When Agamemnon
gods,"

from Troy, he speaks of the business of the "city and the he'll convene a full council of citizens (844-46). But his attention is

and

on

his

hall,

the "home about the

hearth"

to a temple to

make offerings

(domous ephestios) (851). He does not to the common gods but to the fire in his own
focus"

house (de Coulanges 1956, 27). "The focus is First and foremost a household patriarch, this
share

the
monarch

(Jones 1962, 85).

no obligation to
at

has

his deliberations

with council or

jurors.

They

may

look, but only

mountains,

his

discretion. The
earth status
and

any the hearth

of

place place

between is
an
vague.

nature's

place

soil,

and and

Between theous in the first line

gap.

domaton in the

last,

there

is

immense
at or

Between the

great gods and

the

family hearth,
and act at the

there

is little to look
of

to. Distant gods and next of kin

world of mortals.

watch

to insure a kind

justice in the

But

what takes place

hearth is secret, langes 1956, 37).

concealed

from the

view of mortal strangers

(de Cou

Deep

in the past,

brother

stole

his brother's

wife.

As punishment, he

was

his own children. The grotesque forced unknowingly to eat to reabsorb the of Atreus and Thyestes is horrifying image of the turning inward that story is
characteristic of
can

Argos. Until these

mortals move
satisfying.

beyond the
must

family,

their

justice

be,

at

best, only temporarily

and a

There

be

a more effec

tive passage between inside tween the city

and other

cities,

outside, between the hearth and the city, be passage that would allow for a better view.

PART TWO THROUGH THE GATES: THE UBATION BEARERS

In

The

Libation
now

Bearers,
and no

Aeschylus longer

rehabilitates

the

oikos

violator,

Agamemnon,
in the first
each other.

dead

visible

to his kin. The

restoration occurs

part of the

play, as the surviving kin become once

with

more visible

to

This happens

the

help

of observers

who, though

they

are not

Seeing
blood relations,
play,
are part of the

Justice Done:

Aeschylus'

Oresteia

81

household. Unlike the

observers

in the first

they

are recognized

by

the

family,

and

they

consult

the action. The

action and are court

Choms in the first

part of the

play,

and

course of freely lades later, urge Py

in the

heeded. The drama that bridges kin

widens

revenge

in Argos

and

the

trial

in Athens depicts
,

the vision of all the actors,

both insiders

and out

siders.

Although there is

not yet a

tion Bearers

a significant

full city of assembled onlookers, The Liba shift in view.

next of

In Agamemnon

most of

the king's

kin

are out of sight.

Iphigeneia is
avoid

dead,

and

the

young Orestes has been

sent to a guest-friend

in Phocis to

his witnessing the murder or becoming the visible focus of resistance to Ae gisthus and Clytemnestra. In the early stages of the story, Electra is never
mentioned;
with no one even catches a glimpse of

her. The Libation Bearers he

sees

opens

the long-absent Orestes

ground.

trying

to make sense of what

in the

family
might

burial

The female Choms

of

enters

furtively,
of

perhaps

separately, carrying
point
.

libations, speaking
remind us of

their terror and

and

forebodings. At this
the Agamemnon

they
much

the Watchman

Choms

Too

blood

has

stained
or

this ground, and the house is hidden in darkness.

Electra, too, fears

to look

to be seen.

quiet and

dishonored,

shall and
and

pour out

my father died this offering for the ground to

as
who empties garbage out of

go, like one

drink, doors,

turn my eyes, and throw the vessel far away (96-99).

she and

Before erly
the

recognize each other.

her surviving kin can come together to act, they The Libation Bearers, like Agamemnon, The flares from distant But the
are

must

prop

opens with
"proofs"

interpretation

of visual symbols.

Troy

are

(tekmeria,) (Ag.352)

across vast unknown places.

signs

interpreted in

the Atreid burial ground are local and personal.

necessary to restore They for first the the violated oikos and its members. time, Orestes shows himself for what he is. Unlike his father in the previous play, Orestes exhibits "On
trial"

not of

his

separation

from the
exhorts

oikos

but his

attachment

to

it. As he

presents proofs
recognize visu

his

identity, he
from

Electra to look
contains a

at

the exhibits, to
of vision words

ally

the passage (225

ff.)

string

something

she

remembers

another

time. As the Choms has told

essential

her, just before

to
no

she sees

the offerings, memory is

to

family

justice. The hair is

could

recognizable

because it looks like her

one of

own

(174-76); it

belong

other of

the

"evidence"

townspeople (188). There is the

sets of

a second piece of

(tekmerion) (205):

hers. Again, her natural love and liking Electra and the Choms think Orestes has belong to what is visibly like. At first sent the hair offering because, as an exile, "He can never again set foot upon think he is dead to them. But he has returned and his this (182); footsteps
resembles
land"

they

footprints,
"stepping"

recognized

like his hair,

Orestes'

in the Oresteia.

looks, are signs of the first homecoming, unlike his father's, is

by

their

proper

charac-

82

Interpretation

terized

by

tears and the

careful

kicking, trampling

missteps of

placing of his foot on home ground. Unlike the the Agamemnon these steps are the first steps
,

towards reconstituting this household in the eyes

of

its dead

and

living
play

mem

bers,
clear

and

in the

eyes of

the gods.

But,

as we shall

see, the

middle

makes

it

that the

reconstitution of

the household
observers

will

also require

"middle"

wit

nesses

visible and and

identifiable

between those
gods. and

who are

personally
exhorts
small

involved,

the

farseeing
her

but too-distant

Having
Electra to
piece of native

offered
"look"

visual evidence

in the hair
proof that

tracks, Orestes

(idou) (231)
a

at a

last

he is her brother. The

weaving,

bit

to this

oikos.

of swaddling clothes, or baby blanket, identifies him as Like his nurse's memories later in the play, the cloth

of this family was torn apart, Helen's dropped Iphigeneia's bedclothes, mantle, Clytemnestra's trampled tapestries, and the woven nets in which she killed her man, all recede when Electra examines a scrap of cloth and recognizes the "dearest treasured darling

reminds us of a time abandoned

before the fabric

of

my father's lives to (235-38).

me"

house,"

these children

of

(terpnon omma) who brings back "four By recognizing each other in the family burial ground, the house, one an exile and the other like an outcast slave,
a

"joyful

sight"

can, for the first time, feel that they are at home. As we have seen, the gods witness all that men do. Spectators on high, they judge and punish but are not themselves much affected by what they see. Be neath the earth there is another assembly of spectators, ancestral watchers who
"deities"

are also

in

some way.

The

earth

they dwell in is local

unseen"

ground, at

tached to

a particular

house

and

family
also

that live on it. Like that of the gods,

"The

wrath of the

[dead]

father"

"comes

(oukh

horomenen)

(293

as members of the oikos extended through time, living on somehow beneath the earth, the deified dead relatives, unlike the detached immortal Olympians, are influenced by what the living do. Libations poured on their

94). But

keep them alive to the living, just as flowers and green plants in our cemeteries keep our dead somehow alive to us. The children sense that their
graves

ancestor

watches

over

them

and

expects

looks forward to

their

action:

(epopteusai makhen) (489). "Earth, let my father emerge to watch me Two things are expected of Agamemnon's surviving kin. Since he was de nied proper burial and mourning rites (Ag. 1554; L.B. 439^14,982), they must

fight"

first
his

see

to it that these ritual

ceremonies are completed.

For them to

go on

living, it is necessary for him to be laid to rest. Second, they must retaliate for violent death. Like Clytemnestra, until they see his murderers punished,
remain

they

unsatisfied, just

as

they

would

be if the funeral rites in the

were

not

completed.

Electra
witnesses

and
as

Orestes
as

come

into focus to
ancestral
of

each other

presence of

living
Atreid
the
was

well

dead

onlookers.

Unlike the

male

Choms in

Agamemnon,
oikos.

the

female Choms internal

The Libation Bearers is

this

part of the

Privy

to the

affairs of

family, they may

argues

even enter

orchestra

from inside the

palace gates.

(Taplin

that

a side

entry

Seeing
more

Justice Done:

Aeschylus'

Oresteia
within.

83

likely.) Unlike
the hearth

the excluded Argive elders,

they

watch

from

They

share

and pour

libations in the burial

absorbed

are outsiders who

have been

It is important that they into the household. Electra invites them

ground.
now share a

as

friends to

share
. .

in counsel, for they

ekhthos en

house"

(koinon

domois)

"common enemy in the (101). Taken from their own

fathers'

houses (76-77), now "friendly slave women from foreign lands

of a murdered once their

others"

to part of this adopted new

perhaps

house,

these

from

Troy
they

urge action on
are oppressed

behalf

father. Although in the early

masters are reunited

scene

by fear,

young

they
or

express

their views clearly, are

consulted,

and even at one point tell their superiors when to

silent"

(265). Orestes tells them "to be

(582),
justice

and

they

are responsible

for

Aegisthus'

stop speaking "speak in the way that will help return without bodyguards (770the principle of the

us"

73). These inside-outside

must come

witnesses affirm

first play, that

from the blood

relatives of

those

who

have been injured:

Here in the house there lies

for this, not to be brought from outside, never from others but in themselves (471-74).
the cure

When the time for

see

action

comes, these

women are out of view and

they do

not

those

who act.

They

hear

Aegisthus'

cry
the

and

ask, "What has been done in

the

house?"

(871). But,

unlike
what

confused and excluded

Choms

of

Agamem

happening inside. Likewise, when Orestes is killing Clytemnestra, they know exactly what he is doing and why. They speak clearly and in concert, dancing together. Orestes reappears after only forty
non, this

Choms knows

is

lines,
is

as

if to

report that

he has fulfilled

their expectations.
of this

Although their
are

relief

soon seen

to

be illusory, the
and

"witnesses"

"just

revenge"

clearly

different from Cassandra

Another
observer

the impotent Argive elders.

accompanies

Orestes in his

homecoming
most of
Pylades'

and

revenge.

unlike and

Like Cassandra, Pylades stands silently on stage through her long mantic speech and ineffectual visions, his
presence as a

the
one

play.

But,

brief line

discerning
Ever

observer are cmcial

confines of

to the story of the Atreids.

and

They
light form

too signal

a move

from the dark

since

house

kin to the

clearer

of streets and cities.

Agamemnon

yielded

to persuasion in the
no masculine

of a woman and entered the palace gates, there

has been

presence on

stage;

we

have been
and

occupied with

the

powerless

Argive Choms,
and

the effeminate

Aegisthus,

with

Electra, Clytemnestra, Cilissa,

two
vigorous

the

Choms
more

of slave women.

The

return of

young

men

to Argos sig
even

nals a shift

to the world of men,

always

less

attached oikos.

to the

oikos and

important
as

a shift to a tie beyond the

Although Orestes has

re

turned

the

son of

the House

of

doubt has

widened

his

point of view

Atreus, his long, but not permanent, exile no (Kuhns 1962, 27, 31, 50; Rosenmayer
too can be both insider and the
guest-friend outsider.

1982, 297-98). With Pylades, Orestes

Pylades is the
son of

Strophius

of

Phocis,

to whom Clytem-

84

Interpretation
Orestes. He is from
ground
whose

nestra exiled

outside the

Atreid

family;

the

footprints he
He
comes as

leaves in the burial Orestes

as a

are

clearly different (208). He has accompanied

friend

ties are

by

choice, not

by

nature.

first appearance, the presence of another self who is tmly this stranger is jarring; outsiders are usually excluded from the family burial ground (de Coulanges 1956, 34-35). For 900 lines, Pylades stands silent in this
other.

From

Pylades'

private

place, but he is

fully

visible.

At the local

cmcial

moment, he

urges

distance
brief

from internal ties. He Apollo

speech at

speaks

in the

name of a sworn oath and or

the oracle of

Pytho,
clear.

cosmopolitan,
a question

not

family,

Pylades'

shrine.

is

It is

that requires thought and an answer. His persua

moved

sion

is

not

the murky Peitho that

a rational reminder of

Agamemnon

at

Aulis hold

or

before the

palace, but
promises.

the way in

which words

a man to sworn
of

We

are

beginning

to move from the ambiguous language

to a more public

songs,

supplications, wishes,
stands still.

and curses
speaks of

discourse. And Pylades

Although he too
reminds

dancer. Pylades
the
verbal

Orestes

for kin revenge, unlike the Choms, he is no the absolute justice of family revenge, but
and

exchange points

toward political
which

judicial
to

speech

in the third
to

play.

The legal language in

trial.

Orestes
Pylades

responds

Pylades

also points

the

impending
Aeschylus

plays on the name of

as

he

plays with

the names of Zeus

(Ag. 160-66), Helen (Ag.. 688-89), Apollo (Ag.. 1080-82), and Pallas Athena (Eum. 753-54) (Lebeck 1971, 23, 47-48, 159). When Electra and the women into the house, the men remain outside. Orestes, who earlier proved himself an insider by his looks and words, now temporarily distances himself.
are sent

Disguised
with

as an outlander with a

foreign accent, he

will

"go to the

outer gates

Pylades"

(eph 'herkeious
the

pulas

Puladei)
of

(561-62). The

following by

lines

(565-71)
see nestra.
of

emphasize

anticipated

crossing

the threshold. The next time we

and are admitted

them, they

are

knocking

at the gates

(pulai)

Clytem
gates

Shortly after, Orestes and Pylades finally penetrate the innermost the house in which Orestes will kill his mother.
In

Agamemnon,
knowledge

the

feeble Choms

stands outside

the palace gates

with no

sure

or part

to play as murderous justice takes place

within.

Cas

sandra witnesses gates of

these murders before they occur, but she speaks only of the Hades (Ag. 1291). In Agamemnon, Clytemnestra keeps appearing at the
what she's

gates to
outside

justify
is

done within, but

no

tme

communication with those

house,
occurs

In The Libation Bearers, the Chorus stands outside the but they have been within and they help prepare for the action that within. Pylades, first referred to as a "fellow (sunemporou)
possible. an outside witness who enters within the gates and
within

wayfarer"

(208), is
panies of

finally

accom

the house. The justice he witnesses is the ancient justice kin revenge, but his overseeing of the act previews the way in which an entire city of outsiders will some day penetrate the walls of private households. will see that justice is done without requiring another relative to stain his They

Orestes

Seeing
hands. The Libation Bearers,
the city of The

Justice Done:

Aeschylus'

Oresteia

85
and

positioned

between the

oikos of

Agamemnon

Eumenides, is the threshold

goes

we cross as we move

toward mak

ing justice
As
we

visible.4

have seen, Agamemnon

to his death

edging that he is

being

tried

and punished.

without explicitly acknowl In The Libation Bearers, the victim

trapped; this case, too, is closed from the beginning. But there is an important difference. As Clytemnestra faces her death, she acknowledges what is
also

is clear, and she and her accuser argue over the facts and motives. Thus, although this is still summary and private justice, it differs radically from her own symbolic exhibition of her victim's guilt and her retaliation, and from those of Thyestes is

happening

and

explicitly

makes a case

for herself. The

accusation

and

Atreus

as well.

The

articulated confrontation with

the accused is the

first

step into the light from dark revenge and feud justice to public trial. The ac cused, with her eyes wide open, is now a self-conscious observer, as well as participant, in her own trial and punishment. As Orestes
and

Pylades take Clytemnestra to her death

their sorrow for her

within

the palace, the

women outside express

but

reiterate their support

for Or

estes.

The deed utterly

as

must
die"

be done "so that the

(934).

eye of the

house [ophthalmon oikon]

shall not

They

the

family,

the leader who will guide and look out

"end"

have looked to him, the most precious part of for them. Now, naively,
"this
bloodlettings"

they look forward

to the

of
[idein]"

chain of

(933)

to the

"light that is here to behold

(961).
as

Orestes,
steps

as concerned to
within

justify

his deed

his

mother was

to

justify hers,
(idesthe)

from
and

the palace and exhorts the spectators to

again"

"behold"

(973)

"behold

(idesthe

d'aute)
of

father Helios, "the one overseeing all be his (martus) in his day
"witness"

things"

(980). Not only his own father, but (ho epipteuon) (985), may
pant'

"justice"

(dikei)

that

he

"justly"

(en-

dikos) killed his

Did
she

mother

(987-88):

do it

or

did It

she not?

My

witness

[marturei] is
sword. conspires

this great

Aegisthus'

robe.

was thus she stained smear of of

Dip

it

and

dip

it again, the

blood

with time

to spoil the

beauty

this

precious

thing (1010-13).

reenacting and rehearsing her crime in his own eyes and in those of the people he addresses, Orestes displays her with her murder instmment and with

By

her accomplice,
means

and

finds her
to

guilty.

Once again, to
the acts of

bring

to

justice (dike)
accused.

to

show

(deiknumi),

re-present

which

the guilty is

After striking her down, he feels that he has began in the cemetery at the play's opening.

completed

the return to life that

stay at home and after avenging his father's death. Unlike Clytemnestra, he knows that the retributions he insists on cannot revivify him or release him

But Orestes knows, resume an ordinary life

almost

immediately,

that

he

cannot

from the recurring Atreid

curse.

The inversions

of

Argos, previously

expressed

86
in

Interpretation
Thyestes'

eating his

own

children, are here represented

own mother.

in Clytemnestra's
satisfaction
come"

dream of the nursing snake that devours its

short

Orestes'

is

lived. Although he

claims

that "all men of

Argos in time to

will

"witness"

(marturein)

the evils

not yet

properly
against are still

constituted as a

he has righted (1040-41), at this time Argos is city of witnesses. Pylades is a foreigner, inef

fectual
Choms

family Furies, and he departs without speaking again. The female, foreign, house servants. Although they have suggested
effective city.

they are not yet an Agamemnon, they have the last

and proper exit procession.

the outside,

Unlike the
are still

old men at

the end of

word.

But they

the second play ends with a question.

Here, too,

only standby witnesses, there cannot yet be a

a crowd

They
of

should not

be increased to

for

operatic
can see

stage effects at

the end

the play (Taplin

the evidence that Orestes shows

1977, 357-58). The Choms them but, like Pylades, they cannot
as the

see the

hideous Furies

who appear allow

to

him
his

immediate
hate"

consequence of

his deed.

Nor does Aeschylus

the spectators in the theatre to see them yet. On

of mother's

these dread "bloodhounds

Justice is

still

in the hands
eyes

"watchdogs."

of private and

(1054) he must look alone. Like Clytemnestra, they

the

have blood in their

their

(1058). Their looks

looking

that supercedes

looking

are

the subjects of the third part of the trilogy.

PART THREE FROM FURIES TO JURIES: THE EUMENIDES

The Eumenides identifies the

of

the city. To avoid

founding of a public court with the foundation repeatedly bloodying the hands of the next just avenger,
to

the community

arranges

look together

with

those who have been personally

wronged,

and

to see to it that the

alleged violator will

be

impersonally

acquitted and

or punished.

As

mortals

begin to look for justice locus

not

only to the gods

to

their own
polis

kin, but

to themselves as
of

part of a wider peopled

community

of mortals, the

becomes

a visible

action,

by
all

public agents as well as

private ones.

Gods,

city, citizens,

and outsiders

look very different

by

the

end of the trilogy.

We first
see"

"see"

the Furies through the

at

eyes of

the Pythian priestess. She

runs

from the temple in horror

"things terrible to
d'

speak and

terrible for the

soon

eyes

to

(he deina lexai, deina

ophthalmois

drakein)

(34). Apollo

declares

of

the Furies that the "whole way of their shape

is

guide"

(pas d'uphegeitai

tropos morphes)
seen

(192-93) to what they are. Before this, the Furies have been only by those they pursue: by Clytemnestra, as snakes in her guilty dream

visions, and
menides

by

Orestes

after

he

murders when

her. The first

emerge

is the

one the

Furies take

they

major step in The Eu from the temple and cross makes

the threshold into open daylight. At Delphi and at them visible to all the stage characters and, for the

Athens, Aeschylus
first time, to the

spectators

in his

audience.

Let

us

look

upon

their shape and see what it reveals.

Seeing
The looks
of the of and

Justice Done:

Aeschylus'

Oresteia

87

these Furies

are

the

key

to how

they look

at

things. Daughters
essen

Earth

Night, they

are

nether-divinities, wingless, serpentine,

place

tially

attached

to place. Their peculiar

is dark Tartarus below the

earth.

In

their ministerings to mortals

they
they

are guardians of

human beings

as

beings

defined
ents,

by

the hearthplace.

Especially

concerned with violations against par

old

age, and suppliants,

preserve

the sanctity of kin

and

and

blood

rela

tions,
hearth.

relations

among those who

the

live,

They

also guard

arrangements

nonblood neighbors and guest-friends relate

worship humans have made for providing for from distant places, but always as they

cook,

around

the same

to the
private

oikos.

altar, tion, flees from the place he has violated, the Furies pursue him and keep him in place. Their song is a "binding song"; their victim is forever bound to his
and origins.

Low to the ground, they care for the ground as founda burial place for the oikos. No matter how far a violator

Although the Furies

work

are

vigilantes, their

pursuit

is

more visceral than visual.

in the dark, away from Helios (386,396). Their eyes are gummy, They ever sleepy, not the locus of their primary sense. Like bloodhounds with noses
to the ground,
prints which

they

smell

their

evidence.

It is

not

the looks

Orestes'

of

foot

that attract their

attention.

They

grind their victims

into the

ground onto

they drip poison (780-87). Like Clytemnestra, they are hungry for re (mnevenge; they feed on their victims (304-5). They are mones) (383), (manures) (318), who bring infertility and cancer to the seeing and the blind (322). But, though they have a long memory, they are shortsighted (Winnington-Ingram 1933, 100). They strike indiscriminately, of ten failing to distinguish an offender from those connected to him. Thus, each
"rememberers"

"witnesses"

act of

justice is simultaneously
of

a new violation.

Furies

punish

descendants for
crime of

the sins
prince.

fathers, According to Furies-justice,

their
and strike
of

down

a whole people

for the

their
and

Thyestes'

children, the

sons of

Atreus,

the children

Troy

must

pay the

price of

their attachments.

only to place, the Furies are also attached to each other. Al individ articulated though later tradition represents them as three named

Attached

not

uals, here

"company"

"troop"

they

are characterized
name. women

as

or

(lokhos) (46),
their
"shape"

bearing only looks. They

resemble
"shape"

a collective
seem

The Priestess has

or not women. are

difficulty describing
Although in

to

be

they
intertwined

Gorgons or, perhaps, Harpies, they is shapelessness. She first sees them describe themselves
as

neither; the essence of their

as a single mass of

"linked"

snaky bodies. They 1986 production at the

attachment

to each other (307). A

emphasized

University

of

Chicago's Court Theatre

their

by bagging
Chomses,

them into a

physical

heap.
unlike

Like
women

all

this one must dance.

But,
are

the old

men or

the slave

guardians of place, these close physical relation

in the first two plays, the Furies closely linked dancers

to the ground, aim to

characteristically dancers. As
who always retain

their own

bring

their

victims

down. One look

88
at

Interpretation
them
reduces even slitherers

the

erect priestess of

Apollo to

all

fours (37). The Furies away from it.

are

sniffers,

and, in their
earth

great

chomses, swoopers, and stampers who

upright against and

move

horizontally
are

to the

as

well as

Their feet

"vindictive"

(372); they
That

"trample"

have trampled
expressed as

or overstepped.

an

(338) and step over those who instinctive desire for revenge should be
This is
a gut

dancing

is

not so strange.

response; those

who

have have
she

been Her

deeply

violated would

dance

on

the graves of their enemies. the deaths of

steps

As

we

seen, Clytemnestra

comes alive with

her husband

and

Cassandra.

movements might approach

dance

to accompany the

jubilation

feels. As their
chant. motion

is dance,

Furies'

so the

speech

is song
those

collective rhythmic
with

Their sung

"arguments"

are characteristic of
on

tunnel vision.

Single-mindedly
no

they insist

the mere

fact

utterance,

interest in circumstances, intentions, or a string of repeated words "get him, get him, get him, 1 is the first sample of the repetitions of stanzas and even entire ( 30) in the
play.

polluting violation; they have subsequent repentance. Their first

of a
him"

get speeches

that we shall hear later

speech

Although they

make an

argument, their

tion.

primarily Cassandra characterizes

is

not

a medium

for articulation, exchange, them as a "choms that sounds

"music"

and

free

explora

together"

(khoros

xumphthongos) (Ag.,1186). Their

is "not
those
most

of

the

lyre"

(aphormiktos)
and

(333); it

cannot

accompany

speech.

The Furies Their

ask

only

rhetorical questions.

They
make

don't

exchange

differing

views about
votes.

they

pursue,

they don't
is the

decisions
there

by
and

counting

impressive

utterance

song,"

"binding
memorial

"curses"

they
are

themselves are called

no

(417). From time im emerging into the kind

of

has been

light
trial

at

an

Delphi, they inquiry they

arguing led to Athens where,

with

Furies.

But,

after

by

agreeing to participate in a
a new

are certain and

to be superceded
with

one that will replace

The
not

chanting dancing striking thing about the looks of the Furies is that, though they are human in form (412), or unequivocally women (48), they are somehow
most
of

by looking

justice,

and talking.

female. Daughters
suggests

Mother Night

that the desire for

of women
heart,"

(321), they have no father. Their gender hands-on, immediate, private justice may be more
men.

characteristic strength of

than of

For

all

her

assertiveness

and

"male

Clytemnestra

acts as a woman.

Women

are characterized

by

attachment

to place, earth, and growing

things;
men

to the kin blood

carried within and nourished altars and

without; to the

they

marry; and nature,

they have to the hearth

and
men.

burial

grounds

they

tend. Their lives are,

by

inside, dark,

silent, far more

dominated
are

by bodies,

place,
all

and of

time than are the lives of those

with

The female Furies

guardians

above

the "same
as

blood"

(homaimos) (605).
case,

If they have to

choose

among blood relations,

mother and child

in this
thought

mother and child

take precedence,

for

may be

literally

to

have

shared

blood.

The Olympian

pantheon contains male and

female

gods.

In the

earlier plays

Seeing
we

Justice Done:

Aeschylus'

Oresteia

89

Eumenides, for the first time, they Athena, like the Furies, have looks. Apollo's young, upright, shapely body, however, points away from body, away from the past, memory, and attachment to home, family, and place. The play in which
much about

have heard

them. In The

appear on

stage.

Apollo

and

he

appears

begins

on

the

road at

Delphi. Apollo

and

his

shrine are not autoch

thonous to this place.

He has
with

succeeded

the older female divinities

new male

Earth,
who

Themis,
the

and

Phoebe
the

the

help

of a

relatively

god,

Zeus,

is

now presented as
earlier plays.

completion and reconciliation of

the

The

appropriation and

transformation

of place would

conflicting deities in be un
Argos. The Pythia's

thinkable for the fixed palace, altars, and

speech points

hearthplaces
thus

of

to the resolution of the whole

we

trilogy (Lebeck 1971, 36). Unlike

the

exclusive private places about

have

seen

far,

the shrine

has

a neutral

detached feel
eled

by

all

it. An international place, it is located at a crossroads trav the Hellenes who worship there; anyone may come to look.

Apollo, the anthropomorphic and emphatically male "prophet of his father, (19), is associated with light as opposed to dark, with distanced vision as opposed to attachment and touch, with "speaking (exaudomenos)
Zeus"
out"

(L.B.,212)
songs. ples

and music of the lyre as opposed to stamping feet and binding Apollo is singular, distinct, individual and he is no dancer. The princi he will articulate point to a justice of autonomous individuals, separable

from their pasts, home grounds, houses, and families. But Orestes cannot be saved at Delphi. The male, public, enlightened detachment suggested by Apol
lo's looks is inadequate

by

itself. As
and god

we shall

see, Apollonian liberation brings

its

own

characteristic
of

dangers,
is the right

Aeschylus is
to
put

fully
on

aware

of

them.

But

"Apollo
in the

ways"

the

Orestes

the road. The next

step
must

emergence

from the

age-old cycle of

kin

revenge and

Furies justice

be the step he takes to Athens. This last detachment from the burdens of his Argos past will make it possible for him eventually to return to Argos as his proper place. But, by then, the meaning of place, for him and for the Athenian
audience that watches these plays, will

have been

transformed.

Athens is clearly different from Argos. The Athenians are mentioned for the first time in the Prologue to The Eumenides as builders of roads and cultivators
of wild

land (13-14). Unlike those

who are

bom

and

die in the inherited Argive

of

oikos, Athenians

are self-conscious placemakers.

The community
place, the
than

families

at

Athens looks outward,

citadel.

focusing

on a

high

public

Temples,

public

buildings,

and roads rather

Acropolis, over the hearth, palace, and

cemetery are their primary places. Their stories focus on their shared goddess; the hearth of her house (669) is open to all. Aegeus and Theseus are mentioned
as unproblematic

founders

of a city, as opposed to a

family
eating,

dynasty. There
or perverted

are

no references to remembered

legends

of

incest,

child

hospi

tality in their distant

peacefully to public life.
a

past.

democracy

monarchy seems to have given way that invites full citizens to cross the threshold to

The

ancient

90

Interpretation

As the city becomes the dominant visible place in the eyes of its citizens, it develops a permanent special place in which public judgments are enacted.

Accused

violators are no

longer to be judged

and punished

in the
and

place

deemed
pri

appropriate

by

distant

gods or next of

kin. Clytemnestra's city

Orestes'

vately The place

staged trials are not appropriate when the whole

of

must view

the case.

justice is

set off
and

from
at

family

dwellings
view.

no one

is bom,

lives,

dies,
court of a

or

is buried there

it is,

last, in full

It is

often said

that the

is open, unroofed, to avoid polluting any closed building by the presence murderer. But the shared, public, on- view nature of the Areopagus is at
as

least

important. We
of

see the same concern

for

a visible place of

justice in the

description

the

Achilles'

primitive court on
circle."

shield of

in the Iliad (XVIII. 504). It

is

set off

in the "sacred

The location

the new public court also points

to the shift in gender suggested above. The Areopagus

is the hill

on which male
Theseus'

Athenians defeated the female Amazons

who

once challenged

city

(685)

and were

defeated. The justice

of

the new court will be primarily male

justice. The trial

marks the
of

the accused takes place in

an

articulated

time as

well as

an

articulated place.

A herald

announces

the start of the proceedings and a tmmpet

be

surprised

beginning of the presentation of evidence. No longer can the accused by his accusers. As a result, the investigation will take time; court
immediate, less
swift, than Furies justice. Although institutional

justice is less

justice

remembers the past and acts

for the

future, it
future

aims

to

isolate
merge,

a violation prophesies

in time, to frame it. In Agamemnon,

and curses are unspecific about

past and

events

time, and causation is unclear (Lebeck 1971, see also ch 3). In The Eumenides, the old private ven 36; deRomilly 1968, dettas, which seem to have no beginning and can never come to an end, give
way to the
public

trial,

which

limits the

control of

the

past over

the future. But

the participants must be assured that institutional justice is the authority that the fixed and that the Areopagus has a
age-old

permanent and

has

hearth

had,

although the citizens private

know

beginning
time"

and

is not, like

hearths,

eternal,

Athena repeatedly asserts that the court that its authority "for the rest of (572).
Like the
"trials"

concludes past conflicts will retain

private

of

the first two plays, the

public one requires a

visible reconstmction of

the alleged violation. Clytemnestra compells Agamem

a symbolic

non to exhibit

himself in
same way.

imitation

of

his violations, his

own

and

her

son sets

her up in the
reviewer public

As

we

have seen, these

reenactments spur

the injured

to execute justice

immmediately,

and with

hands. Although
of

trials remove the staging and execution from the hands

"dramatic"

the injured

parties, like the

past.

earlier

imitations, they
a as a

too re-present the acts of the

story

Just

paradigm

every drama can be considered here so every trial can be seen

as

detective
play,

Oedipus is the
which

drama in

the

dialogue
request

consists

entirely

of questions and answers.

"evidence"

Orestes'

trial opens

with a

for

"witnesses"

(marturia)

and

(tekmeria) (485).

Athena's

Seeing

Justice Done:

Aeschylus'

Oresteia

91

invitation to the prosecuting Furies to open the case uses the technical legal language that itself echoes the language of the theatre. They are to be the
act"

"producers

of

the

(pragmatos

didaskalos) (584).
and

Opening
ries,
are
meant

statements, as

judges

lawyers

sometimes

instmct

modem

ju
are

like

plot summaries or playbill notes

in theatre

programs.

They

story is reenacted in the production itself. Prosecutors and advocates, like the Furies and Apollo, are partly narra tors, partly new actors in the spectacle. They bear witness (485,594,609) and
to orient the audience before the

link the testimonies

what

of

the

original actors and witnesses who review and reenact

they

saw,

heard,

said,

and

did,
of

"props"

often with original or simulated

of

"costumes."

and

But the locks

hair, fragments

cloth,

footprints,

and

woven nets presented at public

trials are evidence, not for private recognitions

and

responses,

as

ment.

Injured

parties now

in the Atreid graveyard, but for public examination and judg bear witness as an alternative to, rather than as a spur
revenge"

to, personal retaliation. In civilized societies, becomes a socially sanctioned form of

restaging the
share what
events

in

question

in

a public

"bearing witness at a public trial (Jacoby 1983, 354-58). By arena, these witnesses formally
of spectators. of

they have seen with several new kinds All-seeing but invisible Zeus, with his scales
in this
new

justice, is
as

no

longer the
all acts

main witness of

form

of narrated

drama. Just

he

was

behind

Furies justice in the first two plays, he still backs up Athenian proceedings. But Zeus is not the most prominent Athens
goddess
now

and confirms
overseer

the

to whom

looks. Rather,

under

the

supervision of

the manifest, bright-eyed the action and weighs

Athena,

a collective

body

of mortals witnesses with

the evidence. Juries look together

unlike

those who have been wronged

but,

Furies, they do
to bear

not

entirely

share their point of view.

These

new wit

nesses are

thus less shortsighted than both the original

witness.

ones and

the Furies who

later

claim

time, both blind

"best"

and

Through the jury, justice becomes, at the same farsighted. Athena says the Athenian juror-judges are the (487). But in the play, they
are not

of

her

citizens

from any
or

particular else.

class,

and

there is no indication that

represent

they

are experts

in law

anything

Rather, they
rectly
tus.

the city

as a

whole,

as well-informed citizens who

di

participate

in the

administration of

justice.

They

are not set off

from the

general population

by

special

dress;

their looks affirm their

after

representative sta

They

have known

each other

before the trial and,

it,

will continue

to

face

each other and their

fellow

citizens as well as

those

whose case

they

now

witness.

They

are

drawn
the

by

lot from different families impotent

not

of

the polis (Kuhns

1962, 66). Unlike

excluded onlookers and witnesses

martyr-witnesses of

the
are

Argos plays, these Athenian

charged to witness and to act.
mine

are

passive

spectators;

they

Their

view of

the

reconstructed past will will affect

deter

the futures

of

their fellows. Their witnessing

their own
a

futures
kind
of

as

well, because their

jury duty

is

part of their own political

training,

public

schooling

that teaches them to judge their neighbors as

they

themselves

92

Interpretation
on

may someday be judged. (For comments tion, see Tocqueville 1966, I:ch. XVI).
their private
sense of
attachments

American juries
shifts

and civic educa

Jury duty
Jurors
and

their attention

from

to public

concerns.
"nigh,"

are neighbors

in the fullest
to those who
a

the English word;

"near,"

"neigh-bor"

may be derived

from

"eye."

the same roots as

Being

juror

means

being

on view

and views of live nearby, and sharing the common business, places (See Harrison [1968-71] and Gamer [1987] for descriptions of the actual

city

work

ings

of courts and

juries

at

the time Aeschylus

lived.)
for
public witnesses

By

recapitulating the

alleged crime

in

a public place

in

trial, the city passes through the private oikos gates to mle takes place within. Nonblood now judges and may punish, because
a public
viewed as
rics"

about what
all

blood is

having
longer be

been

violated.

The

defiling
whole

is

no

a private matter.

The

fabric
whole

must

examined and rewoven. of pollution.

rending community has been rent and its The trial serves as a ritual act to rid the
a ceremonial expiation or of communal purification

and

of

household "fab

community

cleansing and a restoration of involved in a trial interestingly

ning, it is conjectured,
expelled a symbolic

Like revenge, it is balance. The sense

echoes

the origins of the theatre. In the begin the community actively prosecuted and

all members of

"scapegoat."

At

some

point, some, and the

"action,"

finally

most,

of

these active

participants

became
end of

watchers of

monial witnesses.
of

By

the

the

the

house"

"watchdog"

or

Furies
a

now charged

by

Athena to be

Oresteia, justice no because, in this tribunal, the whole city is (706) and to become "sentry on the
land"

affirming it as cere longer requires an "eye

effectively vigilant. Every Orestes now has a collective Pylades whose official function is to accompany its fellow citizens through the gates. No longer reliant on the murky evidence of seers and prophets, the public viewing aims to be
clear.

With the
as vision

advent of public

institutional

justice,

speech and motion

as well

are clarified. of the

Unlike the
court

repeated stalled speeches of

the

Furies,

the

discussion
The

litigants in
of

is

dialogue in

motion.

Although the jurors

constitute a ally.

kind

"collective
of

ordered

stepping

for the community, they vote individu the twelve Athenian jurors as they cast their votes
mind"

provides a

the twelve

striking Argive Elders

and with

contrast with as

the

confused speeches and

frantic

motion of

they try

to imagine

what

is

happening

behind the

Atreid gates,
ena's new

the stamping repetitions of the bent-over Furies. In Ath

upright"

court, "all

must stand

(708). It is

sometimes said

that the

dense,
But the

ambiguous,

proleptic

language in Agamemnon is
as well as of

a sign of a

rich, but
text.

overexcited,

undisciplined

imagination,
of

the

badly

preserved

increasing

clarity

Aeschylus Orestes is
justice
at

could write

diction in the concluding play makes it clear that clearly and simply when he wanted to (Rosenmayer

1982, 104). The

meant

emergence of

fully

public

speech

in the Athenian trial

claims of

of

to contrast

with

the silences, curses, and murky

kin city

Argos.

Similarly,

the great final procession, in

which an entire

Seeing
walks

Justice Done:
meant

Aeschylus'

Oresteia

93

together to

its

public

hearth, is

to contrast

with

the bound

paral

ysis, frantic motion, and vengeful dancing of the first two plays. The momentous shift in the relationship between family and nonfamily that
occurs as public

institutional justice

replaces

family justice,

is

accompanied

by
no

a change
cities.

in the relationship between the citizens of one city and those Societies with increased mobility and contact with strangers
on

of other
can

longer depend
are entrusted
attached

family
the

watchdogs

to insure justice. In
maintained

Athens,

public courts

with

vigilance

formerly

by

permanent

families

to one place.

The

essence of

the hearth
'stay,'

family, is its fixity (as in histemi, from

61). As
one we

(hestia), which defines a 'stand') (de Coulanges 1956,

relations

have

seen

in the first two plays,

war with

"foreign"

consist, on the

hand,

of

the terrible

the

distant

walled

other,
and

of personal guest-friendships

like those

of

city of Troy and, on the Agamemnon with Strophius

Odysseus. There is nothing in between. In Agamemnon and The Libation Bearers, the word xenos sounds repeatedly. A world of guest-friendships is
overseen

by Zeus,
and

xenios, the guest god (Ag.

violations of

61,362,748),
Orestes'

and

xunestiou, the

hearth

god

(Ag.104). The

this

Thyestes'

world

feast,

the adul
mother

tery
and

of

Paris

hosts

are

Helen, Cassandra's murder, all perversions of the intertwined

shifts

murder of principles of

his

family

and

hos

pitality.

The Eumenides

the focus from

hearth

and oikos

to city

and more not

fully

developed international heads

of

Orestes'

relations.

trial results in a

treaty,

between
political

families, but between

of the explore

the cities of Argos and Athens.

Many

discussions
at the time

play Aeschylus wrote (Podlecki 1966, 81

the meaning

of

the alliance in Athenian politics

ff.; Dover 1957; Stoessl 1952;

McLeod 1982; Euben 1982). But its deeper interest lies in the fact that it de velops coevally with public institutional justice within the city. Both develop
ments

involve

a new attitude

to

what

gates of

family
is

households

open

to the community

the city

now open

to admit outsiders.

is originally foreign, unfamiliar. As the around them, so the gates of Xenios is heard infrequently in the last
and

play

and

not used at all

"friend"

in the last three hundred lines. The jurors

"strangers"

Orestes is

are referred to as

or on

in

a general way.

Although the Furies

no

continue to

insist

the protection of god, guest, and parents, Zeus

as

longer
means

referred to as

Zeus xenios, but

Zeus
and

agoraios

(973). The

new epithet

"of the

assembly,"

marketplace or

is

also associated with courts and

Cosmopolitan Athens, always open to suppliants and for takes within itself its first official resident aliens, the transformed and eigners,
activity.

forensic

kindly Eumenides.
ronistically
protected
and

In the first two plays, Aeschylus uses the word metic anachmetaphorically in connection with xenos. In Agamemnon, for
compared
xenios.

example, the

Phocis, In Eumenides,

to metics (metoikon) in the sky (Ag., 57), are Libation Bearers, Orestes is metoikon in In The by Zeus to his native Argos (L.B., 683-84). but "all foreigner [xenon]

Atreids,

forever"

this

foreigner is

rehabilitated

by

his host city

and

then sent

94

Interpretation
same

home. At the
me"(xunoiketor

time, Athena invites the defeated Furies to "live with (khoras metaskhein) (869) emoi) (833) to "share our
country"

and,

having

persuaded

them to

do so,

calls

them

metoikoi

(1011). In their

own

last speech, the Furies refer to their status as a metoikia ('guestship') (1017). The play ends by affirming that there will be peace forever between the people of Pallas and their metics (1045). In the concluding procession of the trilogy,

Furies, their looks utterly transformed, march in crimson robes (Thomson 1968, 275). In the theatre of Dionysus, these robes would be recognized as the official costume of real-life metics in Athens. Although they form a recogniz
the
"class,"

able

transplanted aliens differ

from

native

families
group.

or

tribes

in that

they

can never

be

more

than a conventionally

defined

They

do

not come

from demes, neighborhoods associated with cities. Although Athens eventually formulates
trial procedures
"relatives"

exclusive
special

tribes, but from

other

tax, mercantile,
unconnected

and even

for their

"kind,"

they

are

originally

individuals,

only by law. The last play suggests that, in a community where justice has been transferred from kin to city, outsiders can at last "be at home (met-oikeo) insiders; even foreigners can have a proper place.
with"

But in
ued

Aeschylus'

theatrical

Athens,

as well as

in his

own

city, the

contin

distinction between

native citizens and metics

indicates

a conviction

that

the distinction between one's

own and others should not

be utterly

obscured.

Although Athena's city has no walls and her gates are open to all, the aliens who cross her threshold and dwell within are never completely assimilated (See Flaumenhaft 1984 for
tlement
with

discussion

of

the festival arrangements). Athena's set

her first metics, the Furies, suggests that full enlightenment and total familiarity with what is alien is not her goal. The progressive thmst of the

trilogy is

more complicated than

it

might at

first

seem.

Courteous to

everyone

in her court, Athena facilitates the victory of male Apollo over female Furies and then turns her, and our, attention back to them. Enlightened and masculine
though she may rational,

be,

she

is female be

enough

to recognize that the power of the

visible new court must

supported

by

another

power, the

establish

ment of which she proclaims with as much

solemnity

as she proclaimed the

power

of

founding its being

still

of

the Areopagus. The

effectiveness of

this other

is

function
than

the open

less rational, less visible, less open to the court on the hillside. In their new abode, the

gaze of mortals

is

transformed Furies will

will remain guardians

be

underground.

Sitting

on

their

deep

thrones, they
with

of

the deep-seated
exhorts

passions

depicted in the

earlier plays.

Like judges today, But

she recognizes

Athena
the

her

citizen-jurors to

judge

their minds.

Furies'

argument

that the

"hearts"

of the citizens also matter:

watch

"Terror is

good"

(to deinon eu)

after

as a. control

to

keep

18). Thus,
the ringing

the

somewhat

tinny

arguments of

(episkopon) Apollo, we hear

on the

heart

(517-

once again
enlightened

language

of the

Furies

and

Clytemnestra. Even in the

the

city, the Eumenides

tion of

retain power over

households,
continue as

marriages,

and genera

human beings (903ff).

They

will

watchers, supervisors,

Seeing
sentries, now

Justice Done:
than

Aeschylus'

Oresteia

95
will

for the

whole and

city

rather

for

separate

families. Citizens

retain solemn awe

for
of

bring
will

sacrifices all

to the
time"

the

private

hearths

old,

be "for

hearth which, like (Kuhns 1962, 87-88). Even as

new public

she reshapes

them into a

recognizable civic

institution, Athena, like

the shape

in the play, attempts to articulate the importance of shapeless fear and inarticulate wonder as guards against anarchy, tyranny, civil war, and the sickness and blight that accompany them.
less Furies
earlier

So Athena insists
But there Although the

on

the

continued power of

the

now-resident

Eumenides.

about the possibility of maintaining this power. is close, we surely celebrate the acquittal of the confessed mother-murderer. The dark fears of the first play have given way to steady torchlight. The blood-soaked earth of Argos recedes into the past as we gaze remain questions

vote

upon a paved

city

surrounded

by

fmitful

earth.

Man-hearted

woman and

inef

fectual

men are superceded

by "maidens,

wives,

elder women

in

processiona

manly citizens. And the short-lived ololugmoi of the tormented Atreid household are replaced by the communal ololugmos of a rejoicing city

(1027),

and

(1047). At the
to look

Aeschylus'

end of the

trilogy,
on

Athenian

audience

may have
a great

processed out of the theatre with the stage crowd

Athenians

now,

at

last,

back together

their own

progressive

history. But thoughtful

members of

that audience

and

today's

might sense of

Athens
even

and the successful

incorporation

the Furies

that, with the triumph of into a city that makes

the
the
world.

foreigners familiar, something has

procession, the
clarified political

gone out of

Despite the

colorful

language

less vibrant, less powerful than that at the start of Lebeck 1971, 135-36). After Orestes departs, the only humans on stage are a crowd of anonymous Athenians (Lattimore 1953, 31). Compared with Clytem
nestra,

last play seems flat, the trilogy (Euben 1982, 31;

of

Agamemnon,
given

even

Aegisthus,

these people must feel smaller.

at the end of

Even the
seem

gods seem somehow

diminished

the trilogy. This may

they have apparently undergone. The con flicting, unpredictable, vengeful; invisible, and distant forces of Agamemnon are now integrated, articulated, gathered together, at last, a pantheon. Athena
odd,
the development
and

Apollo

walk

them. But as

civic

among mortals; their looks are guides to those who look to gods, Athena and Apollo, and even Zeus who meets with

Moira
ever

to sanction the new settlement,

be"

have

different feel from "Zeus ineffable "bestower

what

he may

(Ag.160),

the awesome,

almost

of power

and

beauty"

goes

(Ag. 356). Apollo's departure, after the unremarked (Winnington-Ingram 1983, 147),

ringing farewell to Orestes, and Athena leaves in pro

some

cession

among the crowd of anonymous Athenians. Despite their honored status, the divine Furies have, in
as

sense, been

put

to rest. We feel this

several senses.
walk

they

move off at

the end: khairete

and stampers

'farewell'

means

in

These

once-

vengeful

dancers

have been taught to

In becom
of

in procession;
the

once

ing

part of

city's

in place, they will foundation, they have

sit still on their thrones.

also

been buried. In the triumph

96
the

Interpretation
cosmopolitan

city,

being

out of sight

power. root

Might the

new enlightened ways and

may dilute rather than enhance their institutions so successfully take

that the Furies might cease to stir in the earth? The

very

progression to

ward rational

at

the same

needs

liberated human life, with its ever-widening horizons, may mean, time, the dissipation and even eradication of the very passions and that characterize human beings. I mean attachment to private family and
sense of self

place, the

that

develops in

opposition

to others as

foreigners,

and

the insistence on some

form for

of revenge as the

for the

violation of

this self and what

paternal

only tmly satisfying it considers its own.

recompense

Apollo's
nings of

argument

civilized,

public

justice;

priority is necessary to establish the begin insofar as it is detached, it emphasizes mas

and

culinity.

The

notion

that the father is the tme parent,

"estrangement"

the mother

only

"stranger"

(xenos) brotherhood, as essential features

for
parents and children attenuation of

to his seed, points to

as well as

to extended
words used

of enlightened modernity.

(For

The

in The Libation Bearers, see Lebeck 1971, 114-30). the dark blood attachments depicted in Agamemnon and The
evident

Libation Bearers is
part,
we

bear babies in

public

in the way we ourselves now live. For the most institutions outside the home and swaddle them
We
adopt

in

clothes made

by

anonymous strangers.
we give

homeless

children who

do

not share our

looks;

them our names and

We

move

schools

repeatedly and reestablish our good. And we have rational legal

the families
around

love them tmly as our own. hearths where jobs are interesting and
procedures

hearths
count

and

them when

they

are no

for reconstituting these longer satisfying. We

with criminals

"naturalized"

foreigners among
way, and

our citizens.

We deal
clean

in

rational,

nonviolent

keep

our own

hands

in the

process.

We

have
nians

achieved

technological feats
most

undreamed of

by

the most enlightened Athe

and our we

and, for the

part,

we attribute our successes

failures

to
our

ourselves.

And

when our much-extended

lives

are

over,

rarely

bury

dead

with each other or

in

places attached

to our own. These changes have

owe our

made possible enormous advances

in human life. We

health,

prosper

ity, peace, and civility to them, But, as we have suggested, the

Apollo's detachment

and

few

of us would choose

to live differently.

triumph may be a

qualified one. of

of mother

male-supporting goddess, never bom from the head of Zeus, point to the losses
move

from child, and the vote "fostered in the dark of the

and

womb"

Athena, the (665) but dancing,

dangers implicit in the

towards enlightenment depicted in the Oresteia. Perhaps the

prophetess

hysterical
Trojan

Cassandra,

torn

Atreid children, refused the implications of his strange combination of overwhelming something power and distanced rationality. Could Cassandra, in some dark, unarticulated
and about

wailing the deaths of to bear Apollo's child because she sensed

from her

family

and

way, have foreseen the tendencies that issue in two

real and one

twentieth-century trials,
of modem

one

fictional, but

each a paradigm

for the dilemmas

justice?

Apollo's

argument about the paternal parent and the mother as stranger to

Seeing
the
child

Justice Done:

Aeschylus'

Oresteia
son

97

in her

womb points

far beyond the trial

the

of

Clytemnestra's
M."

to the

contemporary trial that

place

concerned

child called

"Baby

The trial took

a child and

in New

Jersey
in

in 1987. A "surrogate
After the birth
of the

mother"

conceived

carried

it to

term

accordance with a contract she

had

made with

the

man who con

"contributed

sperm."

baby,
The

she refused
"father"

to honor the

tract, accept her fee, and give up the intended to become the "adoptive
receive

child

to the

mother."

jury

his wife, who had to decide who would

and

custody

of

the baby. The case

raised questions about which parent matter more

is

"most
and a

parent,"

about whether

blood ties

than quality of rearing,

host

of other questions

familiar to

us

from the Oresteia.

"generated"

Every

detail

of

"Baby
take

M's"

life

and

that of the adults who

her

was exposed

to

public view. place

Even her conception, an enlightened, businesslike event, did not in the dark. Healthy and well-provided for, yet detached from the

mother who

bore her,

not yet sure of

her

name or of

the household to

which she

belonged,
Camus'

she was

the subject of a

rational

lawsuit that

could never

have

satisfactory
might

resolution.

The Stranger

also

depicts the direction in

which

The Eumenides

point.5

The narrator, society only

whose suggestive name

in

a cosmopolitan
punctuated

where everyone seems moments of

is rarely used, is a stranger xenos. He lives a hazy exis

pleasure.
"love"

tence

by

sharp

physical

He

never set

his father, and rarely sees his mother. He doesn't his girlfriend but is willing to marry her. Like her, his are accidentally acquired. His work is of no interest; he eats haphazardly, alone or with whoever is there;
eyes on
"friends"

and

he doesn't

care whether
eats

he lives in Algiers
there
and

or

Paris. His

"home"

is

a rented

apartment
"home"

he rarely
aged.

his

mother

dies in

an

institutional

for the

past and no care

only in the present, he has no attachments to the for the future. He does not believe in God or in a life after

Living

death. The trial that is

a sentences

him to death for his

suited

meaningless murder of an

Arab

perfectly voyeuristic, indifferent journalists

place; witnesses
who

judicial

arrangement

to his way of life

jury

of

strangers;

looking

for

news

for bored

readers

in

another and

hardly
go

know the accused, the victim,

through the
motions

or each

other;

lawyers

barely
sent or

evoked

abstractly in the brightly lit courtroom, and no connections of his are pre mentioned. All we know of these dark Arabs is that, anachronistically

who

of a

trial. The dead man is

in this
who's

cosmopolitan world of strangers,

they

are out

to take revenge on a

man

insulted

the sister of one of them.

some

Evidently

the Furies

are still alive

for

them. At
one

first, Meursault feels

before. But
he
was.

during

the trial he
as though

says

interest in his trial; he has never witnessed he "was barely conscious of who or

where

He feels

he is

being
and

"scrutinized"

by himself,
a stranger at and

and

never catches the eye of the girl who wants to

trial, he feels like a "gate congruous that he should be sentenced in

own

map," crasher"

marry him. Like "off the

his

finds it in

the name of the

French

people.

"Why

98
not

Interpretation
the Chinese or German
people?"

he

wonders.

The

sentence of

death

will

be

carried out reminds

by

an efficient

machine; no people are mentioned, and the guillotine

him

of a

shining

laboratory

instrument. In this
sentence

world of

rootless,

pas

sionless,
place"

unconnected

strangers, the

of execution

"in

some public

also seems an

incongruous

anachronism. of

The

murderer never regrets

his

murder, only the

anticipated convicted

loss

the immediate pleasures of his flat

day-to
con

day

"life."

He is

largely

on

distorted

"evidence"

about

his

mother's

funeral. But, as the nameless prosecutor says, there is a nection between the murder and Meursault 's distance from his
prosecutor

"psychological"

mother.

The
the
a

does

not

realize,

as we

must, that the court, the

journalists,

police, the

Arabs, Algiers, Paris,

and

he himself form

a coherent whole.

It is

way from the deaths of Agamemnon, Aegisthus, and Clytemnestra to the deaths of Meursault's mother, the nameless Arab, and Meursault himself, but a

long

thread mns between them.

The

acquittal of

Orestes

and

the victory of Apollo is

alike.

rightly

celebrated

by

Athenian
under the

and modem viewers

But

we no

longer live

with

Eumenides

ground,

and

there is little in our lives to remind us that these guard

ians be

are ever watchful.

Having

made

the choice for

Athens, however,

we can

mindful

that there are

other choices yet

to be made. What we

have learned
we ar

from Argos, Clytemnestra,

range

and the

the

day-to-day
by

workings of our political

Furies may clarify alternatives as institutions. Perhaps the

to

choice

for

enlightenment need not

lead

inevitably

Baby

M in the

spotlight and the

Stranger dazed

the Algerian sun.

PART FOUR

MAKING JUSTICE VISIBLE: TRIALS AND TRAGEDIES

Present-minded

goddess that she

is, Athena is primarily

part of much

concerned with the

will explore plays.

founding
first
of

of the city's court and arrangements

hearth. The last

this essay

institutional discuss

that are not

are

discussed in
political.

Aeschylus'

The

these institutions
ourselves.

recognizably
their power

In

discussing
sight,
yet

Furies

retain

by being

out of

them, we not invisi

ble. Should
and

not a political community, in apprehending suspects and in trying punishing criminals, attempt to combine the exhibition of violators with their removal from sight? And is not a community also affected by what is on view

in its

public

theatre? To think

about

the tragic drama

our

as a civic

teacher,
a

we must return political

to

Athens, for
as

the theatre in
of

times is not so recognizably

was

institution Aeschylus

the Theatre

Dionysus

in

Aeschylus'

city.

Our

consideration of
on what

both judicial

and theatrical arrangements will

focus

once more

shows us about what

are

human beings Kin

need to see. are

In Argos, people families keep watch

bound

by

their looks.
and

resemblances
each

clear,

over

their own,

citizens

recognize

other.

In

Seeing
larger,
more

Justice Done:

Aeschylus'

Oresteia
no

99

mobile, cosmopolitan societies, where

family

is

longer the

primary influence, it is less likely that people will be on view to each other either before or after violations are committed. Crime in big cities is increased

by

anonymity

and

by

tolerance

for

unconventional

behavior

and

insults. Unfa

miliar people who

don't

recognize each other's

looks
when

are more

likely

to look

the other way when crimes are committed and

are punished.

those who commit them

community begin to deal with those who "trample on Clytemnestra, Orestes, and the Furies arrange swiftly to isolate their apprehended victims behind closed doors. They reveal the only
How
should a political
right?"

the

"punishment"

after

it has been

accomplished.

After The Eumenides, the pursuit,

apprehen

sion,
effect

and punishment of violators

is

out

in the open,

visible

to all. The initial

may be one of public awe, but eventually the visible administration of justice may become less dramatic, more business-like. Ironically, the public
process closed

may become so routine that it might even retreat once more behind doors not of private houses but of impersonal institutions. In our

times,

apprehended suspects are usually detained until legal procedings can be initiated. A community must decide whether the movements of such suspects should be visible or out of view to their fellow citizens. For example, should

local jails
observed

and courthouses

be located

where

they

and

their activities can

be

by

ordinary

citizens on

their way to school, work, or the post office?

Most

of us are

cuffed suspect

understandably disturbed as we pass an officer hustling a hand out of a wagon into the sheriff's office. The suspect may hide

his face, and we will not stare. Nevertheless, we have taken note of each other and have been reminded of the sort of community we live in. Both the need to notice and our mutual reluctance to look indicate the connection between public
morality
and shame.

hearings
This
pects

by

closed-circuit television

Recent technology has between

made

it

possible

to conduct bail

judges'

chambers and

local jails.

eliminates expensive and

between jails
"private,"

and courtrooms.

time-consuming Paradoxically, however,

of

transport and guarding of sus

the

new

video

equipment reduces the public

visibility

the

judicial

process.

Bail hearings

become instead

but

now

impersonal,

matter

between

officials and accused

of a public event visible to

of

injured

parties and all

interested

citizens.

has already been emphasized in visibility our consideration of The Eumenides. The play suggests that, at his trial, the convicted violator must face his accusers and punishers and acknowledge that
of court trials

The importance

he

will

pay the

consequences of

his

violation with

his

eyes open.

He, too,

sees

justice done. Unlike Agamemnon, Helen, Clytemnestra, and Aegisthus, he knows that, though he once acted as if no one were watching, the eyes of
him. If a visibly staged public trial is important, perhaps when we resort to more from a civic point of view be lost something may speed to behind-the-scenes plea efficient, up the judicial process. Is bargaining it always better for speedy justice to take precedence over visible justice? When
others are now upon

100
civil

Interpretation
trials
replace

kin revenge,

perhaps

the community can to

witness

try

to remember

how important it is for kin

and unrelated citizens

the proceedings.

Surviving
In
court citizens

kin are usually the

see

most visible and vocal spectators at murder

trials.

literature it is

commonplace

to hear the most

law-abiding,

peaceable

justice done, I'll be satisfied. If they let him off, I'll The 1987 French trial of the Nazi officer, murder him with my own Klaus Barbie, had as its main end the face-to-face confrontation of this mur declare: "If I
hands."

derer

with

his

victims.

Barbie's

refusal

to

remain present at

his trial deprived "new

as

his
out

victims of

the

main satisfaction

that the trial could, at this to

to them. Newspaper reports that

referred

his

walkout as a

late date, hold It

escape."

was clear

forcing

"butcher"

the
and

to face his

victims at

last

human beings least

as

among important
point

other

human beings, any technical

to acknowledge

his crimes,

was at

as

conviction

that the trial might produce. The same

is

often made

by
is

those who object to plea bargaining. The

a recurrent theme

importance

of

visual confrontation

in

most

discussions
advice

of crime and pun

ishment

from detective fiction to trial

lawyers'

books to books

about

trials (Wishman non,

and

1986, 102). Unlike

at one
contact,"

the

"trials"

of and of

Thyestes, Helen, Agamem

Clytemnestra

extreme,

the Stranger at the other, our

trials aim at "eye

element should

but in the

presence of

of revenge

justice that
eliminated?

must

confirming witnesses. It is an be transformed in public courts. But

In Athens the
modem

it be entirely
"looking"

The

of

jurors

must also

be

considered.

entire citizen
citi

population zens ever

routinely serve on juries in

served as

judges in trials. In large

It is
also

cities, few

or even attend trials.

do

will

have

seen each other a

in

other contexts

before

a trial.

unlikely that those who As we have seen, from the

past and

the trial is

set

"frame"; it is
it?

a contained action articulated

from the future. But

of the

should we not

be

careful

lest the frame

exclude too much

life that
citizen,

contains

Jury

service

is

a rare experience

in the life

of a

modem

often confined

aware of

the final disposition

future

conviction.

routinely When they acquit, they rarely hear of a Their job is to judge the accused, not to solve a case or
of cases.

to a

few brief days. Jurors

are not

the punishment that

their

satisfy the injured. When they give guilty verdicts, they are often unaware of follows, because judges often sentence after a trial. Might

failure to

see

the trial through to its very end

jurors'

judgments?
continue

They
a

that

they

to be

diminish the gravity of the look together may during the trial, but do they feel after it? After a recent trial, the jurors "all community
together
again.

said we'd

be in touch,

and maybe get

guess

that
try"

won't

hap

pen, but

when we were

leaving
will

the courtroom

we all said we'd

(Wishman

1986, 250). Is it
The
panied

possible

for justice to become

too

impersonal?
accom
modem

looking by carefully

of juries

be effective,

as we

arranged public

looking

at and with

have seen, only if it is juries. As a

judge instructs the jurors:

Seeing
Not only
appear

Justice Done:
innocent loses

Aeschylus'

Oresteia
they
must

101

must

juries

exonerate the

and convict

the guilty,

to be

doing

that.

If the

public

confidence

that juries are rationally

settling

violent

disputes between society

revenge,
cf.

and

those accused

acts of vigilantism,

lynchings,

and riots are not

offending it, personal far-fetched consequences

of

(Wishman

1986, 43;

Jacoby 1983,

362).

Public

observation

and supervision public

have

always

been

essential
and

features

of

jury

trials. In

free societies,
expected,

"interested"

officials,

news

reporters,
witness

private citizens are

and even

encouraged, to

the proceedings.

This last group is especially interesting. On the one hand, they observe because it is in their interest to supervise and monitor this public business. But this

group has
there

also always contained people who

"entertaining."

find the

"dramas"

they

witness

"interesting"

and

and other citizens attend courtroom cannot

These retirees, students, housewives, dramas in person. Working people who

"media,"

do this

get

their reports through the

which, like

juries,

serve as

"watchdogs"

against

injustice in
of

modem

democracies. It has been

suggested

trials, like other public events, would contribute to public interest and care for the law. Once again, however, experience with modem video technology suggests the drawbacks of this suggestion. Consider
that the routine

televising

the theatricalization

of

televised congressional

hearings, interestingly
Law."

confused

by

many viewers "The People's

with

trials. Consider also the popularity of TV shows

like

Court,"

"Divorce

Court,"

and

"L.A.

Their

appeal ranges

from curiosity about the rich and famous, to the desire to make one's own judgment and compare it with that of a real judge, to identification with the
"characters,"

to

an

interest in

"psychology."

Like many soap

these television
reports

opera

fans

who

confuse the

fictions they

watch with real are

life,

viewers are often

unclear about whether

they

especially since the fusion is found in the recently

in the fictional
murder

"plots"

watching trials, vary in how

of

"scripted"

they

are.

trials, or theatre, The ultimate con

a

reported real-life trial of

Joan Collins,

soap

actress whom the same audience

had

watched

take the stand as a TV character

trial of her TV husband (Ryan

1987; Sanger 1987). This

kind

be extremely dangerous in a community whose institu tional system of justice depends on the ability of its citizens to see clearly, and to make distinctions. When public looking in the theatre or in the courts
of slippage can

degenerates into private voyeurism, both civic and private virtue are likely to decline. Through television the public now has access to a greater than ever before in human history. We see to the far limits of the earth and into the
"view"

most private situations. can

be

no

"eye

contact"

But this viewing is essentially private viewing. There between watcher and watched; and, in the case of

to

trials, the consciousness of being exposed to millions of viewers is too abstract have the effect that personal face-to-face, or more local, shaming has. Fi
millions watch

nally, since the

citizens to

in

private

homes,

television does not allow

look

together.

If trials

were

televised,

we would

have easy

access to

102
what

Interpretation
is usually behind the closed doors of private homes and even of public But we would also observe these things from behind closed doors. Tele
takes
us through

courts. vision

the gates

whose penetration

the Oresteia

dramatizes,

but it may Is a
suggests

not provide an effective middle ground

between

private and public.

"media"

public,

now

mostly

a television

public, enough? The Oresteia

more

that human beings

require a

community that is

immediately

felt
is

and visible

(Flaumenhaft 1984).

The

same concern

for

public vision might

help

decide

what punishment

appropriate when a suspect

has been judged

guilty.6

ishment

within

the community might

be

preferable

For example, visible pun to banishment. Homer tells

communities

of people who

have killed

and are expelled an

from their

to avoid

invisible outsider, continual blood By turning shed is avoided and the surviving kin may be spared the constant offense of having to view the violator, a difficult sight even if there has been some recom
blood feuds.
pense.

the killer into

But exiling the killer may be just another way of averting one's eyes and looking away. The banishing community shows him for what he is, but then
makes

his former

him invisible. Banishment may punish the violator by depriving him of place and identity but, in time, if he no longer sees his home place,

he may develop satisfying attachments to a new home. As we have seen, the Furies both drive the offender from his home and keep him bound to it. For
those
who

have been

violated and who remain

in place,

even an effective

ban

ishment ceremony may fail to satisfy. They may require visible punishment within the bounds of the place they once shared with the violator. We might remember the description of Helen here: although in exile, she left a
Choms'

"phantom

vision"

in Argos She

and reduced
whole

those she

shamed

to less than their

former

selves.

To become
the justice

non's punishment.

and of

again, Clytemnestra needs to see Agamem Orestes retaliate in the very places their victims
pleases.

ofended

them;
is

it

The

worldwide pursuit of

former Nazis

(like Klaus
punishment

Barbie)
more

who pose no continued

important than

mere

indicates clearly that visible removal. Punishment at home keeps

threat

the convicted criminal as an example before the eyes of other would-be crimi

nals, but it aims at

more

than utilitarian deterrence. It speaks to those who

do

live

by

the expectations and bonds of the community. It affirms that

attachment

to community,

like ties to in

a natural
place

family, is
way
of

permanent

(Oldenquist 1986,
recognize

78). Visible
ries"

punishment

is

continuing to

the "Fu

in

an

enlightened,

civilized community.

Civilization
her

cannot accept

Clytemnestra's

savage pleasure
who would

in the blood
dance
round

of

husband,
desire to

or allow the satisfactions of

those

the

gallows or electric chair.

But

should civilization

entirely

suppress

the

passion

ate

see

justice

executed?

Perhaps the

punishment of convicted crimi

nals, like their

prison

trials, should not be removed too far from sight. It is tme that like accused criminals in handcuffs, are deeply disturbing sights walls,
citizens.

to

law-abiding

Furthermore, they

take up valuable space

and present a

Seeing
danger to those distant

Justice Done:

Aeschylus'

Oresteia
reasons

103

living
the

near

them. It is easy to appreciate the punishment,

as well as

for the

removal of

place of

the

place of

judgment,
the rea

from the ordinary

sons

law-abiding

life

of a community.

Less

obvious are

that

might argue against removal.

Large, isolated
most

prisons make rehabilita

were

tion of

convicted violators

less likely. Small-town jails

all

intended

as

tempo

rary

holding

places

until

but the

incorrigible detainees
on view

could

be

reintegrated

into the

community.

Remaining
severed

to

law-abiding

citizens,

jailed
most

violators were not

part,

thoroughly they looked like themselves. Huge

"pens"

from their

past

identities. For the

penitentiaries

in distant locations,
than
rehabilitation

however,
centers,

are often

to

keep

society's outcasts rather

as

"penitent."

originally intended to be, for those who had become they Such places tend to reduce prisoners to faceless nonpersons in uni
were
. . .

form or, worse, to beasts also Camus 1960, 143). The

them

who require

feeding

(Wishman

1986, 13;

see

into

reform as

it

might

in their looks, however, may not shame do if others could see them, but is often merely a
change

means

to control. Also

unclear

is the

effect such prisons

violent

have
once

on

those who
are out of

incarcerated these

outcasts.

Except for

outbreaks,

they

sight, they are, for the most part, out of mind. To the larger community, the changed looks and reduced lives of inmates are invisible. They are, in effect,

banished but But these

those times

without

the advantages of banishment. "Prison

volunteers

awareness"

pro

grams attempt

to

bring

to prison

inmates for
and

quasi-social contacts.

programs

involve very few people,

"tours"

the motives of and effects on

areas are some

who participate are unclear. given

Teenagers from high-crime

such

would-be violators

important,
cilities"

sight-seeing will discourage 275). does it have this effect? More But (Jacoby 1983, the distant location and euphemistic names of these "correction fa
prison

in hopes that

who

may fail to satisfy those who have been violated and to remind those live with them that justice has been and is being done. Once again, "jus

tice must not only be

done; it

must

be

seen

to be

believed"

(Gross 1983, 111).

Perhaps it is for
native

not too wasteful of space and too offensive to civilized sensibilities and out-of-town sight-seers

Chicagoans

to look down from the Sears

Tower

and

to see, in one
on a

direction,
roof

municipal

buildings and, in the other,

should also consider

prisoners
side

exercising life that might be

nearby

below. We

the out

observed

from captivity

by

these

prisoners

and, more to return

patch of

likely by those to law-abiding

in the jail lives than

of a smaller town.
Camus'

Might they be
who sees

more an

likely
empty

Stranger,
in
an

only

sky from his cell, or than a dom, too, must be on view.

prisoner

isolated

state

"pen"? Perhaps free

The importance lators

might

ceration.

visibility in apprehending, trying, and incarcerating vio for some violations, more visible punishments than incar suggest, This does not mean, of course, public torture or executions, or even
of

milder exposure to public censure,

like

stocks or

dunkings. The

hanging

of a

pickpocket

has

often

been

observed

to be the most

inviting

and

lucrative

oppor-

104

Interpretation
other pickpockets, and experience

tunity for
as

has

long

shown

that

turning (1963),

the

execution of

justice into
souls and

public spectacle

is

as

bad for the

souls of

the punishers the tor

it is for the

bodies

of

those punished. Cesare Beccaria

influential eighteenth-century

opponent of capital punishment and public

ture,
the

nevertheless argues an advantage of penal servitude: spectator

which more

"It inspires terror in

of lesser impression which,
crimes"

than
closer

in the

sufferer

[48].
will

Public
make

punishment an

crimes,
while

are

to men's

hearts,

these, deter them from the Unlike Orestes, who is acquitted and returns to his city the first guilty murderer in the Bible is sentenced to a life

deterring

them from

graver

(57).

looking
of

like himself, fugitive wandering

The
mark of

(there

are not yet other

deters tion,
the

distinct communities) murderers and, for Cain himself, is

he builds his
city.

and of visible shame.

an

Cain
the

indelible

sign of

his

separa

even after

Thinking

about

Cain does

not suggest

return

to public excoriation of scapegoats, but it

does invite

reconsideration of

place of shame might

in

civilized communities.

For lesser

crimes than

Cain's

and

Orestes',
and

devices like taggings, bumperstickers,

and other visible publication of violators

newspaper confessions

apologies,

the trials and punishments of

legally
sight?

convicted

be

more

effective

than

banishing

them from our

And

what

if

one concludes

complete and permanent removal

that, in some cases, capital punishment the from the sight of fellow human beings (Hades

is Greek for 'unseen') is the appropriate sentence? It seems right that execu tioners be anonymous, blindfolded, masked, and plural, so that public justice in
the
name of

the community may be done

impersonally,
and

so

that

no new

Clytem
rela

nestra will

bloody

her hands. Recent

accounts of

the desire of surviving voyeuristic,

tives, curious journalists, fellow citizens to witness

public spectacles example of
either

professors of

sociology,

bloodthirsty
never

executions make

it

clear

that such acts must

be

live

or on

television. This

last

suggestion

is

another

how

modem video

technology

could pervert civic visibility.

Yet the
closed

gravity doors. It has been

to observe
such a

of an execution

demands that it

not

be done completely behind

to be
witnessed

suggested that one

way to allow an enlightened community

executions

dark

event would

be for

officially

by

tive

community juries witness the trials that

well

representatives

perhaps elected

legislators

just
the

as representa

convict such violators

(Bems 1979, 187-88).

One may

be

reluctant
most about

to embrace

capital punishment as

only

appropri

ate response
who retain

to the

heinous
it

crimes.

But it does

seem that

especially those
to

doubts

should

advocate,

instead,

public and visible ways

violators of the laws. For if civilized, institutional justice fails to satisfy in the ways we have been considering, private revenge is likely to sup plement it where the public institutions are felt to be inadequate. Or, just as bad, as I have been suggesting, human beings who have lost the passions that
with

deal

require satisfaction

may

cease

to demand redress.
a cmcial

At the

end of

the

Oresteia,

step has been taken. The Athenian trial

Seeing
provides

Justice Done:

Aeschylus'

Oresteia

105

the solution, the remedy, to the

political

age-old

horror in Argos. But the

other
Orestes'

difficult

decisions

about

arraignments, trials, punishments, and

out.

proceedings

that of

his

concerning violators are yet to be worked family before him, suggest that when juries

story,

and

replace

Furies,

the judi

cial arrangements should

pay

special attention

to the way things look.

Let
what

us conclude

by

returning to

Athens,
see.

its

citizens could and should

Its

own

city that looks

paid close attention

to

its

public

buildings,
attest

assemblies, courts,

festivals,

processions, and, above all, its theatre

civic

to

this concern for the visible

in

life. In the Oresteia, Athena

persuades

the

Furies that they will be accorded permanent reverence in their new residence. The public hearth will be a visible focus for what they stand for. But unlike
other

divinities

on the

Acropolis,

the Eumenides themselves

will not

be

visible.

Their continuing
not

power and

the awe

being

accessible

to the sight of

they inspire has something to do with their mortals. On the other hand, as they fear at
work

first,
Their

and as place

I have

suggested

above, their hiddenness may

of

the other

way.

beside the house

Erechtheus is

under

the ground; the temple

shines

that the
she

in the sunlight, but they themselves are out of sight. Athena suggests Athenians will know that they are there, unseen, but ever vigilant. But makes no arrangements for future generations of Athenians, bom under the
of

blessing
sight.
Furies7

these dread goddesses, to

behold them
of

or to

imagine

what

is

out of

It is left to Aeschylus in the theatre

and

Dionysus regularly to
with

exhume

the

to

bring

the Athenians

face-to-face

them and

with

the

Argive but

events

that led to their

taking up

residence

in Athens. Wise
stages

goddess

though she

is, Athena,
not

like Apollo, does

not

dance. She

trials and processions,

"theatrical"

tragedies. Aeschylus knows that full human beings require tragedies.

From the
private

beginning,
and

I have

called attention

to the

aspects of

justice

and suggested analogies

between the
a whole

public court and

the

public

theatre. Trials

tragedies both invite

community

of

citizens to viewings of stories that contradict and undermine civic exhibit what

conforming life. Both

the

is usually out of view: suppressed or deviant behavior that violates boundaries enforced by the city. Citizen-spectators look, listen, and judge
recapitulations of past events. are

the protagonists in both judicial and theatrical

But there The

differences

as well.

courts

display
old

criminal violations as wrong.

Although their justice dif

fers from the

well as

Furies justice

by

deeds,

their stance toward the crimes

considering intentions and circumstances as they view is unequivocally nega

moral,
citizen spectators

may pity the plaintiffs and even identify with a condemned criminal, but they know that the events they view are entirely regrettable. Defendants and advocates attempt to
realm of the political and

tive. In the

arouse pity, and trial

tors"

lawyers

"rehearse"

witnesses and
"spectators."

defendants But the first

their "ac
aim of the

to achieve the desired

effect on

the

court

is to inspire
and which

speak,

pity but fear. This is the phobos of which the Furies Athena insists must be retained in the enlightened legal sysnot

106

Interpretation
replaces

tem that
flight.'

them. The word

who

is derived from phebomai, 'to be

put

to

Like those
play, is

behold the
a

Furies,
"flee'

those

who witness

the reconstruc
a

tions of terrible acts

in

trial will

from

like

framed representation, the

"real"

continuous with

the trial

life that

comes

trial, imitated there is entirely before and after it. Thus a writer"action"

similar ones.

Although

juror in
It

a murder

muses:

was

like

the courtroom with

cast.

morality play, with all the different acts, all performed all the different players. And we the jurors were
charge shook me and

on the stage of

part of the
play.

But the judge's

woman

The Collins

really bled,

into realizing that this wasn't just a Rafshoon's life really was on the line

(Wishman 1986, 249-50).

When possible, the them as such. Although trials

ticipants do
somehow
frame"

"actors"

"play"

themselves,
are punctuated

and

jurors

and spectators and

judge

by

beginnings

ends,

and par

shift roles at

the end of

"breaking
The

of

at the
and

conclusion.

them, there is not an abmpt (See Goffman (1974) for an exhaustive

"framing,"

analysis of

looking
and

of spectators are

Wishman (1986, 250) for the ends of trials.) in the theatre of Dionysus is somewhat different.
contain a

The pity

fear that

inspired there

dimension

not

included in the

pity and fear of the law courts. Although theatre spectators are also invited to look and judge, they do not deliberate. Their judgments of rennacted past deeds
will not

have immediate
place

political consequences

for

real people.

Thus,

though it

too takes

in

sively political; it is

carefully arranged civic context, this looking is not exclu not for the sake of action. Even though the story is about
Athenians
seen and live- Athenians
"framed"

themselves,
the

and

stage-

may

merge as

they leave
in
a

theatre, the events

there are more

than those

revealed

trial. The tragedies

cities suppress:

make visible

the terrible things

child

deina

that enlightened

the rapes, parricides, adulteries, that have been

overcome

eating, defiled corpses,

progress toward civili

and passionate revenges zation.

in the
and

In the theatre

all viewers

stand, like Pylades

like jurors,
and

at

the

gates will

or on

the threshold and look than that

within. of court

But their jurors

view of such

terrible things

be

more complex

who aim

merely

rightly

to

eliminate

them.

In The Eumenides, Clytemnestra and Orestes and the whole Argive experi ence that they bring to Athens are, like the Furies, "terrible to speak and terri ble for the
see"

eyes

to

(34).

They

Sophocles'

remind us of

Oedipus in the (deinos

men

Athenian

grove of

the Furies: "terrible to see, terrible to

stage

hear"

horan deinos de kluein) (Oed. Col., 141). As the grant Orestes the gift of his life, and Oedipus the
ened

Athenians in the his death, the

view

plays

gift of
as

enlight

city

receives a gift

in

return.

For in

Orestes,

in Oedipus, they may see,

to
civilized
Aeschylus'

without
cities.

risking their own destmction, what is usually out of And they may leam from what they see. Similarly,
together in the theatre
of

fellow

Athenians, looking
thing
of

Dionysus, may
to their

experience some

the elemental

instincts that

are as essential

humanity

as are the

Seeing
rational arrangements

Justice Done:

Aeschylus'

Oresteia

107

that have superceded them. In that the institutions of the

facing

these

buried things, forget

or

they may be
should

reminded

civilized

city

must not

the passions revealed

in these

old

stories.

Even

enlightened citizens as vigilant

do

demand that impersonal institutions be

and

in apprehending,

trying,

punishing violators as next of kin once were. Male distance should not obliterate female insistence that it is right to defend and, maybe, even to kill for what is one's own by nature. Nonrational attachments to what is our
own,
and

the

need

for

some

form

of visible

retaliation, should not be

com

pletely disregarded, Public punishment, bilitation. But

even as with

they

are contained

by

our more

its

eyes on the

future,

aims at

orderly impulses. deterrence and reha

requires visi
so antiseptic

should

it

not remember

that the past

somehow

ble

revenge?

Our institutional

arrangements should not

become
the

and abstract that we of

lose

sight of our

first

in

all senses of

word

demands

justice. The linear

progress

that

produced

the city's rational

life is

celebrated

by

enlightened
of

Athens in the

midst of a

festival that

deliberately

shatters

this way
shad

life

and

returns, somehow, to first things. The nighttime processions,

owy, formless masquerades, and the every-felt presence of Dionysus through

out the

festival,
The

make

it

clear that this

passions.

spectators

is the time for reaffirming nonpolitical in the theatre may have been seated by tribe, and
tribal presentations, underlining the to
weaken.

Dionysiac dithyrambs
ments

were

that

other civic arrangements attempted

The

family attach Assembly did

it is to

not meet

during

the

Great Dionysia

and so no

trials were held. Hard as

imagine,
At the

convicted prisoners were released on

core of

bail

during

the festival period.

the festival is the

Oresteia,

which,

while

inviting

its

viewers

to celebrate the progressive triumph of the court at

dwell in the house

Apollo's

peaceful

Atreus, to come partner (Eum.26), but

of us of

Athens, first forces them to face to face with Dionysus, not as

raw.

unassimilated,

It is

no accident
Euripides'

that the Furies

so often remind

the Dionysian maenads in

songs

Bacchae (Flaumenhaft 1984; Whallan 1961, 1946). The of cyclic revenge are heard once more, not merely as the

and

dances

ancient echoes of

rightly

suppressed

barbarity, but
the

as the eternal reverberations of what makes us ends

with

human. Although human tragedy in

Oresteia

the possibility of the resolution of

political

solutions, Aeschylus
city.
Athenians'

himself, in
In their

the theatre, rein

troduces the possibility of tragedy into the tions in assemblies and courts, the
nestra and the

subsequent view of

delibera
Clytem

face-to-face

Furies

will

be

as

formative

as

the detached reasoning of

rational arrangements

Apollo,
main

Athena, and taining fear

terror
at

the jurors. In addition to Athena's

of

for

invisible
of

powers

under

the

hill, Aeschylus

orchestrates sheer
of

the looks

things.

By

playwright thus supplements

reenacting the story of the House the political job of the courts, and

Atreus,

the the

completes

unfinished work of the goddess.

it

possible

for Athens to

see

Together, Athena and Aeschylus might make justice done. And, perhaps, the Oresteia can also

give some guidance to us.

108

Interpretation

ENDNOTES

1. C.S.

Lewis'

(1977)

unfinished

story, "After Ten

Years,"

Menelaus'

captures
at

mixed yearn emphasis

ings for love, revenge,

Menelaus'

and

dignity

as

he

recaptures

Helen
eye

Troy. Note the

and

in

Lewis'

story discrepancy Agamemnon's victory and 2. As Avenger in Arthur Conan Doyle (1930, 79) says, "There is no satisfaction in vengeance unless the offender has time to realize who it is that strikes him, and why retribution has come upon
on

visions,

Menelaus'

Helen's looks, their loss.

contact,

the

between

him."

3. A

similar revival

is

claimed

by

a character

in

story described
the
middle

by

Susan Jacoby, Wild

as a

Justice (New York, 1983), p. 56. 4. Robert Fagles and W.C. Stanford (1975) also penetrate the massive (64). Thomson (1968)
walls''

speak of argues

play

"new attempt to
that of

that

Orestes'

situation parallels

initiate in the Eleusinian mysteries, who, after an extended agon, becomes part of the visionary company. In The Libation Bearers, the contest is carried out under the supervision of his friend.
an

The Chorus is "admitted into the

secret of the but they may not its execution. Pylades is to accompany him into the palace, "to stand over him and (253). Of course, the triumphant echoes of the mysteries in this scene are soon reversed in despair (257). Fagles and
watch"

plot"

"behold"

Stanford

also emphasize

the rites of passage and initiation themes

(68, 69, 86).

world"

5. Walter Bems (1979, 156-63) says the novel is a "brilliant description of our as Camus saw it, but uses the novel itself to argue against the anticapital punishment position Camus
espoused

in "Reflections

on

the

Guillotine (Camus 1960, 220, 222).

My

summary
translation.
et

of

the novel

emphasizes

the relations among the themes of attachment, visibility, and public justice as the
us

Oresteia invites

to consider them. I have used the Stuart Gilbert

with

(1946)

6. Readers familiar

Michel Foucault's Discipline

with

and

Punish (Surveiller

punir)

will

find that many

visibility
and

of

its themes overlap

those of the present essay.

transporting, incarcerating, punishing,

public power make

and rehabilitating convicted ceremony is especially interesting. However, his concern for strategies of him concentrate on two models at the expense of a third. He describes the sovereign/

These include judging, criminals. His emphasis on

monarch who controls unindividuated masses

through public shows of power;

he

also explores the

modern use of
after

democratic,

administrative surveillance

to

control

they

are apprehended and are subject

to comprehensive
mutual

individual violators, especially observation in incarcerating institu

even modem

tions. But he

is less

concerned with

the continual

viewing that
of a

democratic

institutions
7. It

might aim

at, and this is the kind

of politics

that interests me here.

tragedy.

was

the practice not to

have

more

than one performance

Apparently, how

ever, after Aeschylus

died,

as a special

way of honoring the civic playwright be responsible for this, the repeat performances
purposes

honor to him, his plays were permitted to be repeated. This was itself a civic act. Although Aeschylus could not literally
of

the

Oresteia, I

shall

suggest,

fulfill

one of

the

for writing the drama to begin

with.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Aeschylus. 1953. Oresteia. Tr. Richard Lattimore. Chicago. Beccaria, Cesare. 1963. On Crimes and Punishments. Tr. Henry Paolucci. New York. Berns, Walter. 1979. For Capital Punishment. New York.

Camus, Albert. 1960. "Reflections

on

the

Guillotine."

In Resistance, Rebellion

and

Death. Tr. Justin O'Brien. New York. 1946. The Stranger. Tr. Stuart Gilbert. New York.

Chantraine, Pierre. 1968. Dictionaire Etymologique de la Langue Grecque. Paris. de Coulanges, Fustel. 1956. The Ancient City. Garden City, N.Y. de Romilly, Jacqueline. 1968. Time in Greek Tragedy. Ithaca, N.Y.

Seeing
Studies 77:230-37.

Justice Done:
Aeschylus'

Aeschylus'

Oresteia

109

Dover, K.J. 1957. "The Political Aspects

of

Eumenides. Journal of Hellenic

Doyle, Arthur Conan. 1930. "A Study in

Garden

Scarlet."

In The Complete Sherlock Holmes. American Political Science Review

In Oresteia: Agamemnon,

City, N.Y.
and the
Oresteia."

Euben, J. Peter. 1982. "Justice

76(l):22-23.

Fagles, Robert,

and

W.C. Stanford. 1975.

"Introduction."

The Libation Bearers, The Eumenides, by Aeschylus. Tr. Robert Fagles. New York. Flaumenhaft, Mera J. 1984. "Looking Together in Athens: The Dionysian Tragedy and
Festival."

The St. John's Review XXXV, Number 2 (Spring):48-59.

Foucault, Michel. 1979. Discipline and Punish. New York. Gamer, Richard. 1987. Law and Society in Classical Athens. London. Goffman, Irving. 1974. Frame Analysis. New York. Gross, John, comp. 1983. Oxford Book of Aphorisms. Oxford. Harrison, A.R.W. 1968-71. The Law of Athens. Vol. II. Oxford. Huizinga, J. 1955. Homo Ludens: A Study of the Play Element in Culture. Boston. Jacoby, Susan. 1983. Wild Justice. New York. Jones, John. 1962. On Aristotle and Greek Tragedy. New York. Lecture, University of Chicago. Kass, Amy A. 1981. "The Homecoming of the and the Judge: The Growth of Moral Richard. 1962. The City, House, Kuhns,
Penelope."

Awareness in The Oresteia. New York.

In Oresteia, by Aeschylus. Chicago. Lattimore, Richard. 1953. Lebeck, Anne. 1971. The Oresteia: A Study in Language and Structure. Cambridge,
"Introduction."

Mass.

Lewis, C.S. 1977. The Dark Tower McLeod, Colin. 1982. "Politics and
44.

and

Other Stories. New York.

Journal of Hellenic Studies The Public Interest
no.

the

Oresteia."

CII:I24

Oldenquist, Andrew. 1986. "The Case for

ter).

Revenge."

82(win-

Podlecki, Anthony. 1966. The Political Background bor, Mich.

of Aeschylean Tragedy. Ann Ar

Rosenmayer, Thomas G. 1982. The Art of Aeschylus. Berkeley, Calif. Parade July 5, 8-9. Ryan, Michael. 1987. "They Tell It to This Judge on Washington Post Au Sanger, Trustman. 1987. "Soaking Up the Summertime gust 2, C1-C3. Scott, William C. 1984. Musical Design in Aeschylean Theatre. Hanover, N.H. American Journal of Philology Stoessl, Franz. 1952. "Aeschylus as a Political
TV." Soaps."
Thinker."

LXXIII.2: 113-39.

Taplin, Oliver. 1977. The Stagecraft of Aeschylus. Oxford. Thomson, George. 1968. The Oresteia of Aeschylus. New York.

Tocqueville, Alexis de.

Mayer
and

1966.

Democracy

in America. Tr. George

Angry?"

Lawrence,

eds.

J. P.

Max Lemer. New York.

Whallon,

William. 1961.

"Why

Is Artemis

American Journal of

Philology Philology

LXXXII:84-88.
1946. "Maenadism in the
Oresteia."

Harvard Studies in Classicial

68:317-27.

Winnington-Ingram,

R.P. 1933. "The Role

Apollo."

of

Apollo in the

Oresteia."

The Classical

Review Al (July): 97-104.

1983. "Orestes
and

In Studies in Aeschylus. Cambridge.

on

Wishman,

Seymour. 1986.

Anatomy

of a Jury: The System

Trial. New York.

Evolutionary Biology
Roger D. Masters
Dartmouth College

and

Naturalism

Contemporary
of

research

in the life

sciences challenges

the common

under

history. Findings in the study of hominid evolu standing tion, ethology, neurophysiology, sociobiology, and linguistics can no longer be ignored by anyone seriously interested in human political and social behavior.
human
nature and

The task is difficult because it is necessary to integrate

ophy,
and

biology,

political philos

the social sciences

in

an age of academic specialization. contradict

And the

results will

be

controversial and

because they human

nature.

prevailing

opinions con

cerning science, ethics, A it

"naturalistic"

approach

to human behavior has three principal conse

quences.

First, it

can provide a new

foundation for the

moral

social sciences.

Second,
us a pro

can offer an objective

basis for

deeper understanding of our found change in attitude is

three issues is appropriate.

species'

judgment. Finally, it can give place in the world. Because such a

a separate

involved,

discussion

of each of

these

I. SCIENCE AND THE STUDY OF HUMAN BEHAVIOR

Behaviorism is dead. Behaviorist theorists

ior"

sought universal

"laws

of

behav

that predict the response of

any

organism

to

specific stimuli

(e.g., Skinner,
individ
to a
respond

1965); contemporary biology

uals

shows

that different species

within

and even

of

different development

or age ways.

single

species

given stimulus

ganism

is

a passive

in very different "black

The behaviorist

conception

that the or
reflexes

box,"

with

few innate

responses

beyond

(e.g., Kuo, 1967), has been contradicted by research in ethology, neurology, and social psychology. The cues stimulating an organism are often pre programmed in the central nervous system; a particular stimulus can elicit dif
ferent
of

responses

depending

on

the individual

or

the

social context.

The

effects

conditioning

and experience stressed

by

behavioral

psychologists

are also

*This

article

is

adapted

sity Press, 1989;

cal

volume shows more

$25.00), fully how

from the Epilogue to The Nature of Politics (New Haven: Yale Univer that pp. 234-49, from which it is reproduced by permission. Since
"naturalistic"

approach can relate

the traditional concerns of politi

philosophy to the contemporary life sciences, only

selective references are cited

here.

interpretation, Fall 1989, Vol. 17, No. 1

112

Interpretation
cannot alone provide a comprehensive explanation of

important, but they

man

hu

behavior.
movement

The behaviorist
often

in

social science was nonetheless useful.

It has

been

science:

life is impossible to study in the light of natural for phenomenologists, historical determinists, nihilists, deconstructionasserted

that human

ists,

and traditionalists

alike,

purpose and subjective experience render our spe

cies unique.

Although this belief has

was

now

been disproven
school

by

advances

in the
"will."

life sciences, behaviorism

comforting myth The difficulty
to link the
proach used an patterns of of with

long

the primary

that challenged the

the autonomy

of an was

immaterial

and uncaused

human

behaviorism

not, as its critics charged, that it sought

rather

natural and

the social sciences, but

scientific

that the behaviorist ap

model.

inappropriate

discipline

as

its

In

discovering
the univer to build

conditioning

and response

that

do

occur

albeit not with

movements'

sality
upon
cal

supposed

by

the

founders^behaviorists

sought

the

science of physics attempts

(Peters

and

Taijfel, 1968); in

economics and politi

science,

to discover

society were likewise based on ment in the social sciences, behaviorism generally failed to appreciate the im pact of Darwinian biology, not to mention the extent to which the physical
sciences

basis for understanding human Newtonian physics (Bentley, 1908). As a move

a scientific

themselves had been transformed

by

quantum mechanics and

the the

ory

of relativity.

Many

of the reasons against a scientific

study

of

human

social

life

can

disap
that

pear when

the biological sciences are taken as its theoretical foundation. New

establish relationships and place.

tonian physics appeared to

were

between

cause and effect

independent

of

time

Transposed to human affairs,

"determinist,"

such a per

"reductionist"

spective could

only

appear

and

to cite two fre

quent criticisms

(e.g., Lewontin, Rose,

and

Kamin,

1984).

Properly
Because

under

stood, evolutionary

biology
is

leads in

different direction.

of

the

multiplicity
put

of causal

levels in

it,

"absurd"

reductionism

living systems, as one leading in biology (Simpson, 1969).

in
one

neo-Darwinian
"Determinism"

implies

causal
of

links that

always move

direction,

on

the model of the

metaphor

transmission
political

force

by

billiard balls

which

became the implicit

for

theory (Hobbes, Leviathan, Ch. 2-3; Bentley, 1908). Living

more of

systems

are at

infinitely

complicated,

since causal processes operate

simultaneously
selec

the levels

the ecosystem (webs of interaction among

and

species as well as

between
tion

living

beings

the physical environment), the species (natural the

of gene

frequencies),

group (the

stimulation of organisms

by

events

in

the physical and social environment),

mental and

and

the

individual (irreversible

develop
have

idiosyncratic
the
shared

events).

Discoveries in
been generally
action of

life

sciences challenge a number of principles that

social scientists. as

by

tic relationships

(whether defined

First, instead of seeking determinis the influence of the environment or the

on probabilities.

genes), the life sciences focus

The

"laws"

of behav-

Evolutionary Biology
iorism
assumed

and

Naturalism
so

-113

that all organisms respond

in the

same

way,

that

experi

ments with mice and rats could

theories

likewise

presume

illuminate human behavior; that different individuals respond to

approach

most economic market

forces in
"organ
sci

the

same way.

Beneath this

has been the

assumption that all similar.

isms,"

like

all atoms of

ences reveal

that

each

essentially human individual (with the exception

hydrogen,

are

Since the life

of

is genetically different, the extent of similarities and species and between humans and other animals must
search rather

identical twins) differences both within our

now

be

a subject of re

than a theoretical assumption

(Kitcher,

1985).

Philosophers have
teaches us that

long

spoken of

"the

Man."

nature of

Evolutionary biology
human beings
range of
confuses

"Man"

does

not exist.

Rather,

populations of attributes

encounter varied environments which elicit

distinct

from the
"Man"

human
the

responses produced

by

natural selection.

To

speak of

individual,

the group, and the species, and

blurs the difference between

and without such natu

males and

females. Individuals have different

the

natures

rally occurring variation, in general, be described

which some are selected

evolution could not occur.

Biological

processes

can,

as

production of a multitude of variants on context and prior

among

depending
and

history.

Second, "innate
many
of the otherwise

ideas"

biological

puzzling

aspects of

necessary to explain human behavior. The natural propensities

processes seem since the triumph of
environment

human

organism

empiricist
ual

forming philosophy behavior. Evidence is mounting that the inheritance and development of such divergent characteristics as mathematical or musical genius, dyslexias,
are as

generally dismissed important as the

Locke

and

in

individ

schizophrenia,

depression,
As
more

criminality,

and other

ganic substrate.

is learned

about genetic and

personality traits have an hormonal influences

or on

behavior,

there is

no reason

to assume that the inheritance and development of

personal characteristics will

be impossible to

explain

in

nonreductionist, prob the life cycle.

abilistic model of the

interaction

of nature and nurture through

The

argument against naturalistic explanations of

inception,
ences

in

part political

between individuals,

human behavior was, at its (though not thereby unreasonable). Natural differ such as the father's power over the family, were

once viewed as gued

divinely

ordained grounds

for

political

authority;

as

Locke

ar

scmtiny.

in the First Treatise of Government, such arguments do Because environmental determinism had served as a

not withstand
philosophical

foundation for the Western constitutional principle that all citizens are equal before the law, it is hardly surprising that a biological perspective on human
affairs was
tive"

long

opposed on the grounds that

it

would

be

inherently

"conserva

"reactionary."

or

Modem evolutionary theory

sofar as the phenotype

removes

this

difficulty
for

(cf. Masters, 1982). In

is simply

"vehicle"

genetic replication superior

(Dawkins,
None
essen-

1982),

no

individual know

can claim

to be

"naturally"

in

all respects.

of us can

which genes will

turn out, in future environments, to be

114

Interpretation

tial for continued human life. All one can know

essential nerable

for

certain

is that

variation

is

to every

living

species; homogeneous gene pools are

peculiarly
whose

vul

to

unanticipated

disaster. Far from (as in the

being

a sign of

inferiority, differ

ences are often advantageous

disability
gration).

is the

counterpart of genius

Respect for

each

reading in tasks requiring nonverbal, spatial inte individual can be based on genetics and the theory of

case of those

dyslexics

natural selection.

Finally,
search

the change and complexity that are at the center of the life sciences
and caution

require more sophistication

than have hitherto characterized re

and pedagogues

in the

social sciences.

Psychologists

have

pretended

that

one could understand the

of

the central

nervous

way humans think without knowledge of the stmcture system; now we know not only that different cognitive

processes

tend to

ent aptitudes

be localized precisely, but that individuals have quite differ reflecting different neurological stmctures and functioning. Many have
analyzed cultural norms as

sociologists and anthropologists

if they

could

be

chosen at will

predictable

human groups, whereas ethology and sociobiology reveal relationships between behavior and ecology or social environment

by

that apply to humans as

well as

to other species

(Maynard-Smith, 1978, 1984;

understandably
question

Alexander, 1979, 1987; Tiger, 1987) Given the complexity of these issues,

most people

the possibility or relevance of scientific studies of human affairs. The to the very concept of a science of human behavior carries with

hostility
the
more

it, however,
As

implication that

we

are

totally

unfettered

by

natural

constraint.

is

learned in ecology, neurobiology, and molecular genetics, the presumption that human behavior is uncaused or controlled by "free becomes less and less
will"

tenable. In
neer"

place of

the hubris of either the behaviorists (who sought to "engi

on

human behavior

the

model of mechanical

engineering)

or

the human

ists (for

whom all social

life is

a question of choice and subjective

intention),

biological

perspective suggests
of

humility
more we

and

dignity.
not

Knowledge

the causes of human behavior does

limit human freedom.

Contrary

to popular

belief,

the

know

about physiological and genetic and

causation, the
choice can cancer

more

independent from
of

accident

blind determinism
"free."

our

become.

Discovery
those

the genetic

and cellular processes

involved in

has is

not made quite

with

the disease any less

since
a

If anything, the
creates

problem

the opposite,

science make

of

human behavior

choices that most people are

ill-prepared to
respects,

(Kass, 1971).
revealing

In this

as

in many

other

modem

medicine provides a

indication

of

the potential (and

politics and social

dangers) of a more comprehensive science of behavior. Expanding knowledge of human biochemistry, ge

netics, and

about science and

ethology is not "free

likely

to

be

prevented
as

by

philosophic arguments

will."

modification of
man

behavior become
us

biology forces

to make

engineering and chemical political realities, greater knowledge of hu ethical decisions. As in medicine, the question
genetic

Instead,

Evolutionary Biology
is
no

and

Naturalism
that

1 15
were

longer

whether

humans

can

influence

events

and

processes

hitherto

neither understood nor controlled

by

human

choice.

Now,

we are

de

ciding if

we ought

to do things that are made possible

by

scientific

knowledge.

II. TOWARD A NATURAL BASIS FOR ETHICS

At first, it appears that natural science cannot be a foundation for any moral Were teaching beyond the justification of the status quo: "Whatever is is
humans
not endowed with such complex central nervous

right."

the most

diverse

responses

to

force. As it
committing Traditional

is, humans

are

systems, permitting identical situations, this objection might have all too liable to mistake their own self-interest,
on a scale unknown

folly

and wickedness

among

other species.

moralists

from Plutarch ("That Beasts Use

no

Reason,"

Moralia)
because

to

Rousseau (Second
animals"

are

Discourse) had more in tune with

cultural

difficulty

showing that

so-called
arises

"lower
of

"nature"

than humans. Evil

thinkers

the very traits that many

excellence:

contemporary

describe

as

signs of rapid

human
social called

rationality,

change, the centralized state

"hypercomplexity."

diversity, (Tiger, 1987)

have

scientific

knowledge,
what

in short,

Morin (1963)

our

Because humans
tive"

appear to

emancipated other

themselves from the "instinc

modem social and ethical

or mechanical causes

found in

species,

theorists have

typically
As
a

concluded

that

nature can no

longer be
the

a standard of

ethical evaluation.

result, Western

civilization since

eighteenth

has been
(for

confronted with a pervasive opposition

are subjective or principles can

between
and

nihilists or

century historicists
whom need

whom all values

relative)

doctrinaires (for

theological

or

ideological

be imposed
can now

on others

by

force if

be). A way

out of

this profound dilemma

be found

by

using

evolution

ary biology as the basis of ethical judgment. Both relativism and dogmatism can be transcended
to human life. Logical
"fact"
"value"

by

a naturalist approach

positivism

which proclaimed precludes

that a "gulf between

and
of right and

(Brecht, 1959)

any

scientific

basis for judgments

science and

is insufficient as an account of the relationship between wrong human behavior. Although skeptics and historicists had good rea dogmas parading in the cloak of "Natural provides the foundation for ethical standards consistent
yet open
Law,"

son to challenge absolute

neo-

Darwinian
are,

biology
so

with

the Western tradition

to

change and reasoned opinions

debate. These
that

assertions

however,
in

plained

some

contrary to contemporary detail.

they

need

to be ex

A. Beyond Nihilism

In

one

form

or

another,

relativism

and nihilism
physics

have dominated Western destroyed the image

the picture of a
of a

secular thought since

Nietzsche. Advances in
confronting

divinely

ordained cosmic order,

us with

universe

116
based

Interpretation
on chaotic and random processes.

observation all
moral

depends

on one's
will

If the human meaning of a physical location in time and space, it seems obvious that
relative.

judgment

likewise be

For

over a

century, Darwin's

challenge to the literal interpretation of the Bible had the same effect: a species

descended from the be

governed

apes and adapted to varied environments

ordained and

does

not appear
Law."

to

by

divinely

Arguments for the

nature,
while

existence

of

universally valid "Natural God based on the presumed

century,
were

predominant

in the

eighteenth

harmony of indeed an inap

claim

propriate

foundation for
own

ethical or political principles. are

superior

The tendency to
was

that one's

naturally by Social Darwinism, which misinterpreted evolutionary principles and trans formed them into an apology for Victorian differences in social class and sta
compounded
"nature,"

beliefs

to others

tus. Given the palpably false and self-serving uses of the concept of

it

is little

wonder

that most intellectuals and scientists preferred skepticism or

even nihilism to

dogmatism
of and

and

ideological deception.
mood

dichotomy."

In the philosophy Reason

science, this

took the form of the "fact-value

was a

logic

seemed

to show that it

"naturalistic fal

lacy"

to claim one outcome is

preferable

to another on scientific grounds. Like

the pre-Socratics in ancient tific perspective on social

quate philosophic

Greece, logical positivists open the way to a scien behavior, but their relativism cannot provide an ade account of human life (Strauss, 1953). For the relativist or
"values"

nihilist,
own

each

individual's

are as good as another person's: such a perspective

"do

your own

thing."

Ultimately,

is in

contradiction

with

its

premises.

Thoroughgoing
of others

relativism presumes

that we cannot make

moral

judgments

because

no one can

fully

share another's perspective.

Language is

taken as a
would

totally arbitrary
said that one

set of conventions.

be

no reliable means of communication and no science.

Were this entirely tme, there The Greek Her

aclitus
us

had

that

Cratylus, taking

this argument to

"cannot step into the same river twice"; Aristotle tells its logical conclusion, argued that one
even once and

can't

step into the same river merely waved his finger.

If
all

therewith stopped speaking and

language

and

human

culture were

totally arbitrary
merely
a

conventions, science

would also

be arbitrary
an adequate

and all communication

form

of compulsion.

Were this
predict

account,
us.

natural

scientists could neither

describe

nor

the

world around

nihilists would cal

can

have to
on

refuse to

To be consistent, thoroughgoing relativists and benefit from modem medicine and technologi
otherwise

devices based discover

who

science, for to do

is to

admit and

that some humans

to give the
scien

and communicate

truths about the

world

tists

do

so uncontested power.

In practice,

relativism and nihilism

donism. Once traditional morality and of scientific objectivity, the only basis

usually become a rationalization for he religion have been rejected in the name
of ethical

judgment

comes

to

be

subjec-

Evolutionary Biology
"value."

and

Naturalism

117

tive
pleasure

is

predictable

Given this choice, that most people prefer their self-interest and from the theory of natural selection. The individual's
comfort, taken as a the central
"facts" "value"

desire for
phers of

self-preservation and

by

some philoso

science, is surely one

to

of

of an application of evolu

tionary biology
The logical
"facts"

human

affairs. s argument

positivist'

that

"values"

cannot
one

be deduced from widely

chosen

is thus

doubly

contradictory.

On the

hand,

the

most

"value"

individual hedonism
when
"facts"

or at

least

self-preservation

is

biological "fact";
tion because the
about a vists

the physician says a patient

show

"ought"

obviously a to have an opera

quite

appendicitis, the patient is unlikely to complain

on a

fallacious logical deduction. And

the other

hand,

the logical

positi ethical

themselves have unwittingly

on

derived

"value"

(it is bad to defer to

(traditional dogma

doctrines based
to

authority) from

"fact"

a presumed

seems

be inconsistent
Just
as

with natural science).

Plato

and

Aristotle transformed the hedonism

tradition capable of

of

the Greek Sophists to

our own

into

a scientific and philosophic

lasting

day,

contemporary

naturalism can go

beyond

relativism

and nihilism.

Arguments

rejecting traditional orthodoxy in the name of new scientific perspectives over state the human relevance of chance, accident, and chaos. In neo-Darwinian

theory,
purpose

natural

selection

is driven

by

events

that

have

neither

meaning

nor

but it

results

in

living

beings

whose

pose within

the constraints of time and place. For

behavior has meaning and pur Aristotle, human ethics were

derived from biology, not from physics (Masters, 1987). The discovery that the cosmos lacks the harmony of the Newtonian world view may contradict eigh
teenth century theological
principles.

doctrines; it does

not

lead

ineluctably

to Nietzschean

B. Beyond Dogmatism

and

A Priori

Morality
should not

The

insufficiency
in the

of relativism and

hedonism

blind

us

to the tmth

dogma. Inclusive fitness theory teaches that humans, like other animals, typically behave in ways that benefit their physical health and welfare. Those in power, benefitting from the perquisites of
contained
challenge to traditional

status and
"natural"

wealth,

can

be

expected greater

to

justify

the existing state

of affairs

as

and

appropriate; the
such

the social or political

inequality,

the more

likely
can

it is that

justification

will take

the form of dogmatic orthodoxies.

or

Ethical absolutes, readily be interest. Moral

whether rooted

in theology

in

a presumed

"natural
own

law,"

used

by

elites

to

justify

customs or policies

in their

self-

relativism
choices

individual's
as a

is profoundly egalitarian. If (as long as they are "sincere")

no accident

"values"

are sui
would seem

generis,

each

to be beyond

ethical criticism.
challenge

It is

that

relativism and
"natural"

hedonism

were

developed
medieval

to doctrines of divine

or

law

rooted

in

118

Interpretation
with

thought:

the rise of the market economy and constitutional to take responsibility for his own

democracies,
and

each citizen needed

life. As historicists logical

positivists

Marxists like to
political

point

out, doctrines like those

of

the

have
to

implications. changing world, no human action The imposition of abstract

can

In
time

can

be judged

without reference

and place.

and universal norms without regard

to circumstances

itably
is

favor

some

become naturally unjust, for such a priori standards inev people over others. Precisely because each human genotype
an and absolutist.

of equal

importance from

cannot

be dogmatic, intolerant,
to Kantian

evolutionary perspective, While most

a naturalistic ethics

secular philosophers

would accept

this argument as a reason for rejecting religious

rationalism and other a priori ethical

fundamentalism,
Debates
concern often

it

extends

theories.

An

example will

illustrate the defect

of ethical absolutes.

ing

the equality of the sexes in contemporary Western the quest for a universal
solution:

industrial society
and therewith

reflect

for some,

men and women should

be

equal

in

all

respects; for

others

the traditional
are

family

the dis

tinct roles of men and

women

the

foundation

of civilization.

From both

perspectives, it is usually assumed that those with the contrary view are short sighted and selfish. The difficulty, however, lies in the assumption that there is
a single answer

to the

question of

the appropriate role of each sex.

and

In socially stratified cultures as diverse as medieval Europe India, it was customary for men and women to have different
and

traditional

political

rights

privileges; in many hunter-gatherer societies, the two

sexes

have roughly

equal status.

While
can

some might use

these differences as evidence of cultural

relativism,

they

environment.

readily be explained as responses to the social and physical Since similar differences in gender roles are found in other spe why
some cultures

cies,

a naturalistic approach can explain

invest equally in
(Dicke-

males and

females

whereas others

treat the two sexes quite

differently

mann,

1979; Alexander, 1917).

assume that

To
cal

there is a single

"logic"

of male and

female

social and politi

roles, without reference to time and

place, is contrary to evolutionary biol

ogy (Kitcher, 1985). While it would be absurd to claim that the practices of the caste society of traditional India should be a guide in Western industrial de
mocracies, it is equally
as unwarranted
and vice.

to dismiss

all social norms unlike our own

based

on

ignorance

It is

understandable enough

that

people

de

scribe their own customs as

"natural,"

but this label does

not

justify

the imposi

tion of universal ethical criteria on others

Such
trines

ethnocentrism
of

is

all the more

living in very different circumstances. suspect today because contemporary doc

economy
and

equality

are suited

to a

market

have been

used

to

extend

the power

and wealth of capitalist societies at

the expense of the "third

Moral
others

or political

doctrines that

are

in

one's own

benefit

cannot an

be forced

on

contrary
as an

to their self-interest without

of power.

"tme"

thereby using

ostensibly
theological

theory

instmment

This

caveat applies not

only to

Evolutionary Biology
intolerance
come

and

Naturalism

-119

and

dogmatism, but

to the

philosophically

stylish since

reasoning that has be Kant. The "categorical seems to

a priori ethical
imperative"

provide an

to define a

appealing foundation for a rational ethics. Insofar as it is impossible norm of behavior without reference to circumstance, however, ethi ultimately
should

cal abstractions nalist garb.

enshrine parochial customs and

interests in
of Justice

a ratio

One

Rawls'

example

suffice.

celebrated

Theory
be

(1971)
a

proclaims

that a

rational norm must

be

one that could

adopted

behind

"veil
of

ignorance."

of

Like the Kantian

that the individual

categorical

imperative,
his

Rawls'

principle

justice
one

requires

be

unaware of

circumstances

in life. At
of natural

level,

this could

be described

as an approximation of

the effects

selection on situation
norms

future

generations: since none of us can predict the exact social

each

of our

grandchildren,

has

an

that would not

Rawls'

favor

some classes or groups against others.

interest in establishing The

cultural restate

ment of

principle

social situations

in

which rapid social

in this form indicates, however, that it mobility is considered normal

applies

to

and even

there, only over the long run. In day-to-day behavior, context matters; to treat everyone in exactly the same way would make all forms of reciprocity im
moral.

No

primate

behaves toward

others as

if it is behind "a
is
the

veil of and

igno

rance"; inclusive fitness theory what Axelrod (1983) calls the

on naturalistic others. grounds

shows us that reciprocal altmism

"TIT-FOR-TAT"

hence

strategy

more reasonable past

than an a priori ethics

ignoring

behavior

of

It is

worth

noting, in

fact,

that ethical doctrines postulating a

priori or ratio

nally defined universals tend to be enunciated by males. As Carol Gilligan (1983) has shown, women are more likely than men to insist that concrete
circumstances should

qualify
society

abstract moral mles.

While formal definitions

of

rights

and

duties

are appropriate

in

some areas

such as

legislation that be taken

will

be

binding

on an entire

across generations
without

they

cannot

as the

judgment contrary only imposing reasoning to evolutionary principles and inconsistent with the practice of many humans. A naturalistic ethics must consider differences of time and place, and therefore
mode of ethical a style of

provides an alternative to

both

religious and philosophic

dogmatism.

C. Relative

Objectivity

and

Moral

Reasoning
universalism are unsound

That both

moral relativism and

doctrinaire

is

an

easily
pairs

resolved paradox.

The human brain tends to

right/left); many
cultural

code concepts
reflect

in

binary
or

(up/down; in/out;
in

norms

linguistic

symbolic systems

which such mental stmctures are embedded

ethical

(Levi-Strauss,
antinomies,

1958, 1962). Although

there
are other

theorists often engage

in

similar

logical

and mental stmctures

Sophist). To

comprehend the world

in

dualism (cf. Plato, the limits of one's transcends that way

besides
simple

120

Interpretation
place, it is necessary to use
conceptual

own time and

tools

like the Socratic

to the

dialectic.
without In contemporary physics, no measurement is point in space and time from which it is made. Water boils at
"tme"

reference

different tem

perature at sea

level

and on a mountain

top. When

it is 3:00

pm

is

noon

in San Francisco. Such

obvious propositions seem one

in New York, it to be forgotten as

that their

soon as moral principles are at own cultural standards are

issue. On the

hand,

people pretend

torical or cultural

universally tme; on the other, the discovery of his differences is used to demonstrate that ethical principle is
"relativism"

merely

a question of subjective preference. and

"Relativity"

words are similar.

ing
to

the pretense
were

do not mean the same thing merely because the In the sciences, objectivity can be attained only by abandon that a human can be in the position of a divine observer whose
tme without qualifications of time and the
place.

judgments

One

might wish

have the

power of

invisible but
not

omniscient narrator of a nineteenth cen

tury

novel; alas,

such

is

the

situation of

proximation poses

to tmth accessible to us,

whether

any in

living

science or

the qualification of principles in terms of

and

closest ap in ethics, presup the domains to which they

being. The

the perspective from which they are uttered. apply Historicists and Marxists are fond of emphasizing this principle, using the

relativity

of

things to show that alternate theories or customs are time-bound.

Evolutionary biology

teaches

us

that

all

living

species are organized

in

ways

that depend on the past as well as on the present. Unlike historical

determinists,
improve

however, biologists do
ment or

not

imply

that the process of change

is

one of

future (Ruse, 1986; Alexander, 1987). A new naturalism, like contemporary physics, leads to moral reasoning that is based on "relative objectivity": truths that depend on time and context
that we can necessarily predict the
are nonetheless tmths.

Ethical judgment depends

the action
ognized

on

the point of view of the observer as well as on

religious and ethical since

being

observed.

Traditional

doctrines

often rec

this elementary fact.

Indeed, only

Kant,
have

whose ethics

imply

degree
that

of

rationality
reason.

once attributed

to God alone,

philosophers pretended un

tmly

universal standards of right and

aided

human

It is time to

adopt a

wrong could be discovered by humbler way of judging affairs.

III. HUMAN NATURE

The

new naturalism

described here

requires profound changes

will

in

our attitude contro

toward both science and morality. Although these ideas versial, advances in the life sciences force
us

be

highly
is

to

reconsider what

meant

by

human

nature.

Now that

biology

is

capable of
system

thought as events in the central nervous

explaining the mysteries of and the differences of human

Evolutionary Biology
culture as adaptations are at odds with
other.

and

Naturalism
of

-121

to the environment, traditional doctrines

science.

human

nature

contemporary
a

We

will

have to

abandon one or

the

Humans have
sponses

nature, but it is

complex

and changing. are

Societies

are re

to the social and physical environment, but

stable equilibrium.

Because humans encoding

and

use speech and

in virtually they language to supplement the

never

genes as a means of

transmitting information, contradictory inten

tions and

behaviors
"solved,"

are ubiquitous

ing

conflicts,

political

in any human society; to mitigate the result life is natural to our species. Social conflict can therefore
"perfect"

never

be

nor can

human institutions be invented.

Differences in judgment
temperaments as
well

as

inevitable, for individuals have distinct innate unique experiences; increasingly, neurological and
are
people

psychological evidence

demonstrates that

have different

ways of pro

cessing identical information (e.g., Sullivan & Masters, 1988). Such variability in perception and judgment is clearly an adaptive trait, particularly for a species

living
of an

in

varied and

changing

environments.

While few

contest

this conclusion
and ethical

evolutionary

approach to

human cognition, it has

political

consequences.

Different
one person

ways of
"right"

perceiving the
and others

same event are not always evidence that

is

"wrong."

In the

scientific
of

community,

proposi

tions are formed in a way that permits disconfirmation

a slow

hypotheses

and

hence

but

significant process of

distinguishing
more

the

plausible and accurate state politics and

ments about

the

universe.

Consensus is

difficult in

ethics,

where we are

forced to judge individual

events and to choose specific courses

social

of action

before

knowing
is

their outcomes. In
a

life, therefore,
of

of modes of cognition

desirable

and

necessary way

the plurality gaining information

in

an uncertain world.

Unless be the
ance

one

human

being tmly

attains supernatural

wisdom, it will probably

case that no single person could provide perfect political or ethical guid
an entire society.

for

Any

extensive scientific

knowledge

understanding of the world is necessarily limited when law

seem more

even

if based

on

applied

to a wide

variety

of

individual

cases and specific social problems. on the mle of

political systems

based

in

From this perspective, accord with human informal deci

nature than totalitarian or autocratic regimes. sion

Like the

process of

making

and consensus

in face-to-face bands, forms

political processes associated

with republican or constitutional

of government provide an

for

political participation consistent with our social nature;

can

tionary biology
right"

become the basis

societies

of a

discussion

of

opportunity in this sense, evolu that which is "naturally

or

healthy

for human

(Masters, 1986; 1987).

whom an objective analysis of all

naturalistic approach

to human life leads to a philosophical perspective

remarkably like
a

that of

Aristotle, for

forms

of

government showed that

"mling

and

being

mled

in

turn"

in

a mixed regime was observation and

basis for the best

regime

(Politics, VII). On

the one

hand,

122

Interpretation
different
political regimes are

explanation of the

possible;

on

the other, ethical

reflection on

judgment
human

of

better

and worse can

be derived from theoretical

the

condition.

The divorce between the human

and natural sciences can

be

overcome, though at the cost of abandoning beliefs and attitudes that

accepted

have been

in the West for understanding

several centuries. of what

Rediscovering

human

nature will

change our
nature.

it is to be human

as well as what

is

meant

by

The HUMAN in Human Nature

concept of the species
since

Our
and

Homo

sapiens

has been

marked

by

unnecessary
the accep
these goals
were

indefensible hubris
revolution.

the Renaissance and, more particularly, since the

of medieval

industrial
tance
of

With the decline

"conquest

Christianity

and

Bacon's
set

nature"

projected

of

through science, Western civi

success of and

lization led

forth to dominate the known world; the very ineluctably to the presumption that human rationality
form
of

freedom
as

the

"highest"

life. As

secular

interests
come

replaced

belief in God divine

the central

force in human affairs, many have

either

to think of themselves as humans

with

individually

or

collectively

endowed

power

(e.g., Halle,
human

1965).

nature.

Evolutionary biology does not permit We are living beings, no more

in
our own eyes.

such an exaggerated view of precious

than any other

living

form

except

Because

we can eat or

the environment, we are at the

top

of

food

chain

kill virtually all other animals in what is technically called

we are

"top

carnivores."

But this does

not mean

that

independent

of natural

necessity

or

to abstract

evolutionary destiny. Political doctrines that seek human beings from the natural world cannot be a tme representation
control of our

in

of our situation.

Philosophers

pretend

that our reason can be the foundation of an ethical life

superior to that of other animals

(the

"beasts"

as

it is

said).

On the contrary,
sur

observation of other species and analysis of the

human brain leads to the

prising

conclusion

that morality is usually

more a phenomenon of emotion

than

of reason.

est; moral ness,

All too often, logic and rationality are used to rationalize self-inter feeling is precisely that the feeling of outrage at injustice, unfair

or selfishness.

Similar

responses occur

basis

of a social repertoire that can and

be

analyzed

among other animals, forming the in ethological terms (Hinde,

and symbolic capabilities of
we share with other

1982; Sullivan
humans
make

Masters, 1988). The linguistic

and

it

possible to repress or

disguise the feelings

primates.

Cultural tradition
tmth to

individual
our

learning

produce error and evil as

well as wisdom and

(Tiger, 1987). From

lower
a price worth

a naturalistic of

perspective, it is
condition.

therefore

appropriate pride

assessment

the

human

Wounded
earth.

may

well

be

paying for the

preservation of

life

on

Evolutionary Biology
B. The NATURE in Human Nature
If Western
culture since the

and

Naturalism

123

Renaissance has
also

overestimated nature.

the faculties and

dignity
benefit
trated
as

of

human

beings, it has

depreciated

In

our

culture,

natural

things are all too often merely to be used, controlled,

of

and manipulated attitude

to the

transient human desires. In

political

theory, this

is

well

illus

by

the labor
and

theory

of

value,

shared

by

such otherwise

different thinkers

Locke

Marx: for

most

modems, nature

provides resources or raw mate are

rials
The

but

without

human activity, these

materials

nothing

more

than

worthless potentialities.

counterpart of this temper in philosophy is the belief that meaning is from human thought and language. From 17th century nominal derived solely ists to contemporary deconstructionists, it is taken for granted that humans are

the only source of intention treated

as

and substantive

meaning in the
purpose,

universe.

Nature is intrinsic

impermeable

and

dead matter,

without

intention,
If

or

value comparable

to the ideas and

challenges

goals of men.

Naturalism
altmism

directly
a

this view of the

world.

selfishness

and

meaning for humans, it is because the social consequences of individual behavior are similar for other species. Neither consciousness nor humans (Crook, 1981; Bonner, 1980). Beauty,

have

cultural variation are unique to and

humor may be highly developed among humans, but their roots are in play, nature, not in arbitrary convention (e.g., Lorenz, 1970-71; Alexander, 1987). Those tempted to resist these assertions would do well to reflect on Jane

Goodall's because

(Goodall, 1986), particularly (e.g., de Waal, many by 1982). Individual self-consciousness, intentionality, laughter, deceit, pity, mur
prolonged observation of chimpanzees
points

of confirmation of so

other observers

der,

and warfare

have

now

all

been

observed

among

chimpanzees.

If these

"meaning,"

phenomena are at the root of

then surely humans

cannot pretend

that meaning itself is

absent

from the

animate world. more theological

Our
cause

difficulty

in this

regard

may be

than

philosophic.

Be

natural of

many harmonies to buttress

seventeenth and eighteenth

religious

century thinkers belief

against

used

the observation of
attribution

secularism, the

meaning Nature could

with

to nature was associated in the

represent purpose
of

modem mind with

divine intention.

the intention

only if a caring God created the whole thereby demonstrating his omnipotence and love to man if
and

kind. Such

arguments went out of

physics.

fashion, particularly
mention

under

the impact of

twentieth century

The philosophy

of ancient

Greece (not to

many

oriental schools of

testify to the existence of alternative ways of relating to nature. for example, explicitly denied the view that meaning and purpose in Aristotle, nature depended on the existence of an intentional supernatural agency or di vine principle. As Aristotle puts it (Physics, 199b), nature is like "a doctor thought)
should

doctoring

himself:

natural purpose

is immanent in

living

things,

not extrinsic

124

Interpretation
not

to them. Animate nature,

mental point of reference

inanimate

physical

processes, can be the

called

funda
more

for humans;

what

the Greeks
all

logos is

readily
A

seen

in the

organization of

information in
of

living

systems

than in

physical systems governed

by

the Second Law

Thermodynamics.
replace physics or mathe

new naturalism suggests not

only that

biology

matics as

the "queen

sciences"

of

the

(Simpson, 1969), but

and purpose

that nature
world.

thereby

should recent

be

revalued as a source of

meaning

in the

While the

concern

species reflect
"manage"

for preserving the beginnings

ecological of such a

balance

and

protecting
to

endangered
pretend

shift, it is

not enough

to

natural processes.

Confronted
culture

by

technologies that permit us to pro

as none

duce
of

new species at

will, our

faces

before

us

the challenge

complete with

coming to terms with nature. The the invention of "new

yet

potential of

natures,"

realizing the Baconian project, may be far more horrifying than

has

been

realized

(Kass, 1971).
the

C. The Place of Human Nature in

Cosmos

These issues lead focus

of

us

to

metaphysics and

theology,

which are

far from the

on secular

this essay. Since my approach has been

would

intentionally
one

based

reasoning, it

be both impudent

and unwise

to pretend to assess the impli

cations of modem

biology

for belief in God. No

quite enough to

individual

can pretend

to

know everything; it is surely

sophical or religious

have

suggested

the renewed im

portance of questions that were central

during

past epochs of

Western

philo

inquiry.

There is, of course, no doubt that Darwinian biology has been perceived as a direct challenge to revealed religion. The history of the reception of evolution

ary

principles

and

the opposition to

teaching

them
of

in

public

schools

should

remind secular or

issues

posed

by

modem

scientifically oriented readers biology. "Creation

the pervasive theological

although

science,"

clearly

not a

science as

that concept has

and

been

used

in the West, is obviously

which

a challenge

to

the biological theories

must rest.

findings

on

a naturalist approach

to ethics

ples as well as

In suggesting that a new naturalism can for a more objective science

attack

provide grounds
of

for

ethical princi

my intention to

religion; one

can

human behavior, it has not been question intolerant dogmatism without

implying
substance

that

all

theological

beliefs

are

in

a naturalist perspective that could not religious

false. On the contrary, there is little of be said to be consistent with

virtue, the mle of

many
respect

though not all

doctrines. Humility,
none of

law,
the

for

others and

for the

natural world:

these consequences of a
viewed as a

naturalist perspective on religious

the human condition need

be

threat

by

believer.
enough

It is tme

that a literalist reading

of

the Biblical account of creation

is

at odds with

evolutionary

biology

and,

indeed, for

the scientific

and

philo-

Evolutionary Biology
sophic

and

Naturalism

1 25

temper more generally. thinkers

of

But

some of

the

most

serious

and profound

religious

the Judaeo-Christian tradition have not had

could reconcile

difficulty

on and

this score. If St.

Thomas Aquinas

Aristotelian philosophy

Christian

belief, surely it is not out of the question that a return to principles like those of Aristotle could be viewed as complementary to religious faith
rather

than as antagonistic to it. Three

principles of

our civilization:

science, ethics,

and religious

for Western
the
cost of

culture

if

harmonizing

two

of

meaning have characterized belief. It would surely be tragic these three could only be achieved at

the third.

Since Socrates, political theory has been devoted to an inquiry into human nature and its consequences for social life. Among the Greeks, it was presumed
that the

knowledge
of

of nature

had fundamental implications for

A
return

a philosophical

understanding is needed, for

philosophy.

the human

condition.

to this element of our tradition

practice of

scientific research can no

longer be ignored in the

The biological

sciences must come to the center of our attention

Thyself"

if

the Socratic injunction "Know

is to

remain alive.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Alexander, Richard D. 1979. Darwinism

Washington Press.

and

Human Affairs. Seattle:

University

of

1987. The Biology of Moral Systems. Hawthorne, NY: Aldine de Gruyter. Axelrod, Robert. 1983. The Evolution of Cooperation. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Uni

versity Press.

Bentley, Arthur F. 1908. The Process of Government. Chicago: University

Press.

of

Chicago

Bonner, John Tyler. 1980. The Evolution of Culture in Animals. Princeton: Princeton

University

Press.
the

Brecht, Arnold. 1959. Political Theory:

Thought. Princeton: Princeton

University

Foundations of Twentieth-Century Political Press.

Crook, John H. 1981. The Evolution of Human Consciousness. Oxford: Oxford Univer
sity Press.

Dawkins, Richard. 1982. Replicators and Vehicles. In Cambridge Sociobiology Study Group, eds., Current Problems in Sociobiology, Cambridge, England: Cambridge

University

Press. Pp. 45-64.

Dickemann, Mildred. 1979. The Ecology of Mating Systems in Hypergynous Dowry Societies, Social Science Information. 18: 163-195. Gilligan, Carol. 1983. In a Different Voice. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Goodall, Jane. 1986. Social Rejection, Exclusion, and Shunning among the Gombe Chimpanzees. In M. Gruter and R. Masters, eds., Ostracism: A Social and Biolog
ical Phenomenon. NY: Elsevier. Pp. 79-88.

Halle, Louis J. 1965. The Society of Man. NY: Harper and Row. Hinde, Robert A. 1982. Ethology. Glasgow, Scotland: William Collins. Kass, Leon R. 1971. The New Biology: What Price Relieving Man's Estate? Science,
174: 779-788.

126

Interpretation
and the

Kitcher, Philip. 1985. Vaulting Ambition: Sociobiology

ture.

Quest for Human Na

Cambridge: MIT Press.

Kuo, Zing- Yang. 1967. The Dynamics of Behavior Development. NY: Random House. Levi-Strauss, Claude. 1958. Anthropologic Structurale. Paris: Plon.
1962. La Pensee Sauvage. Paris: Plon.

Lewontin, Richard, Rose, Richard,

Pantheon.

and

Kamin, Leon. 1984. Not in Our Genes. NY:

and

Lorenz, Konrad Z. 1970-1971 [1931-1963]. Studies in Animal

Vols. 1-2. Cambridge: Harvard Press.

Human

Behavior,

University Masters, Roger D. 1982. Is Sociobiology Reactionary? The Political Implications of Inclusive Fitness Theory. Quarterly Review of Biology, 57: 275-292. 1986. Ostracism, Voice, and Exit: the Biology of Social Participation. In M.
Gruter
and

R.

Masters,

eds., Ostracism. NY: Elsevier. Pp. 231- 47.

1987. 1989. 176-192.

eds., The Crisis of Liberal

Evolutionary Biology and Natural Right. In W. Softer and K. Deutsch, Democracy Albany: SUNY Press. The Nature of Politics. New Haven: Yale University Press.
.

Maynard-Smith, John. 1978. The Evolution

of

Behavior. Scientific American, 239:

Morin, Edgar. 1973. Le Pardigme Perdu. Paris: Le Seuil. Peters, Richard and Taijfel, Henri. 1968. Hobbes and Hull Metaphysicians of Behav ior. In M. Cranston and R. S. Peters, eds., Hobbes and Rousseau. NY: Doubleday
Anchor. Pp. 165-166.

Rawls, John. 1971. A Theory of Justice. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Ruse, Michael. 1986. Taking Darwin Seriously. Oxford: Basil Blackwell. Simpson, George Gaylord. 1969. Biology and Man. NY: Harcourt, Brace and World. Skinner, B. F. 1965. Science and Human Behavior. NY: Free Press. Strauss, Leo. 1953. Natural Right and History. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Facial Dis Sullivan, Denis G. and Masters, Roger D. 1988. Happy Warriors: plays, Emotions, and Political Support. American Journal of Political Sci
Leaders'

Viewers'

ence,

32:345-368.

Tiger, Lionel. 1987. The Manufacture of Evil. NY: Harper and Row. de Waal, Franz. 1982. Chimpanzee Politics. London: Jonathan Cape.

The Fundamental Constitutions of Carolina for Lockean Scholarship

Celia McGuinness
Student, University of California, Hastings College of the Law

as a

Tool

The Fundamental Constitutions of Carolina is the ugly duckling of Lockean scholarship. Writers treat Locke's other political and historical relationships at
great

The Fundamental

length but discuss this potentially very useful source only superficially. Constitutions, written in 1669, can be read as a practical

statement of political

beliefs that Locke later

on

enshrined

in his Two Treatises

on

Government

and

Letter

Toleration. Despite the

written

composite nature of

its

au

is generally considered Locke's political maturity, the Fundamental Constitutions is very similar to his philosophy, and deserves a deeper consideration than it generally receives. In

thorship

and

despite its

being

before

what

the

Treatises, Locke only

image.
on

sketches

clearer

Analyzing

his beliefs; in the Constitutions, he gives a this work together with the Two Treatises and the
statements on

Letter
and

Toleration helps to clarify Locke's

of

religion, the form

and civil

extent

government,

and

the

connection

between property

rights,
The

colonization,

and slavery.

proprietors meant

the Fundamental Constitutions to be the permanent

governing document of Carolina, the province granted them by King Charles II. Ill-fitted to the needs of a rough new colony and lacking avenues for
change, the document lasted
no more

than eight months

was

in its

original

form.
con

After four
cern

revisions over a period of

years, it

finally

abandoned.

Our

here is the

July 21,

1669

version

which, according to Parker

(1963:128),

"an apparently complete written in Locke's hand and sent to the colony. The proprietors later claimed that it was only a draft and that the March
was

copy,"

1, 1670
of

version was official

(Parker 1963:130-31). In Parker's version, the

articles are often ordered

differently

from the

version

that appears

in

collections

Locke's

work

(1824), from

which parallel citations will

be

provided.

Locke's shadowy personal life makes his relationship to his patron, Shaftes bury, difficult to ascertain. They met when Locke was called to treat a painful
sore on

the earl's back. He later became Shaftesbury's secretary and friend.

proprietors received

When the
as

well;

no one contests that

controversies arise

duty. The
and

secretary writing down the Constitutions was part of his when scholars debate his contribution to the con
Locke

their land grant, Locke served as their

polarized views. tent, Shaftesbury's Brown Louise Fargo biographer, (1933),

the literature tends toward

gives

no

interpretation, Fall

1989, Vol. 17, No. 1

128

Interpretation
for the Constitutions. Even though down
she recognizes
hand,"

credit at all nal

that, "the She

origi

draft

of

the Fundamental Constitutions is in Locke's

set

she considers

it

philoso

to "represent Shaftesbury's ideas

by

that

goes so

far

as

to say:
were

At the time the Constitutions

service,
more

drafted, he had been

two years in Ashley's

in

a medical

time that his

employment

capacity than any other. It was after and not before this brought him in touch with the field of politics (156-57).
accuracy.

Brown's in 1669

statements

flout historical
interest

Locke

was

thirty-seven years old

envoy's secretary.

and

had

a year's political experience as a

British

He

lacked had dicate

Letter

neither political

nor political conviction.

Indeed, by

1660 Locke
to adju

written an unpublished

certain religious matters.

on

essay The

defending

the civil

magistrate's right

preface

foreshadows, in many
later:

ways, the

Toleration,
not

published

twenty-nine years

I have
of

the same

apprehension of

liberty

that some

have,

nor think the

benefits

it to

consist

in

liberty

to men, at pleasure, to

adopt themselves children of

God,

and

from thence
to
pull

assume themselves

heirs

of

the world, nor a

liberty

to

ambitious men

down

well-framed

constitutions, that out of the ruins to

they

may build themselves fortunes;

subjects

not a cf.

liberty

be Christians

so as not to

be

(King 1830, 1:14-15;

Macpherson 1962, 258-59).

The

rhetoric

lence.

may betray youth, as Brown implies, but it hardly betrays ambiva Certainly it shows that Locke considered post- Restoration political issues
and

thoughtfully
out

that,

at some

level, his philosophy

remained constant through

his life. Locke

and

Reducing
acquaintance

Shaftesbury's

friendship

to a simple patient-physician

flies in the face

perhaps

of other evidence as well. closest

The biographer Jean Le

mentions

Clerc (1706),

Locke's
on all

friend in Holland,

that Shaftes

bury
the

consulted

Locke

issues,

considered medicine

his least important

accomplishment,

and encouraged

Church

and

State,
the

and which might

States"

him to study "those matters, that belonged to have some relationship to the business
and

of a

Minister

of

(p. 6). Locke

would not

Shaftesbury's

friendship

was

close and

deep; Shaftesbury

have ignored

or rejected out of

hand

Locke's

views about

the Fundamental Constitutions.

Brown's. Hewatt's
owned

The eighteenth-century historian Alexander Hewatt's position contrasts with sources include the South Carolina archives and papers

by

the Lieutenant Governor William

Bell,

scion of officeholders

from

the colony's
pended

solely

inception. Hewatt (1779, 1:44) on Locke's ideas:

government, consisting
of no

contends that

the

proprietors

de

model of

less than

an

hundred
agreed

and

twenty different

articles,

was

framed

by

this learned man, which

they

to establish, and the

careful observation of which to

bond themselves

and their

heirs forever.

The Fundamental Constitutions

Brown
Brown
own

of

Carolina

129

and

Hewatt

take extreme positions; no extant physical evidence re

solves the conflict precisely.

Yet

a middle ground

may be confidently held. As copy he sent to placed in the final

a

admits, we

have

copy

of

the Fundamental Constitutions in Locke's

to Article 96 in

hand; further, Locke

placed a note next

friends. He disclaimed writing that article, saying it was draft against his judgment and over his objections (Locke 1824, 9:194; Laslett

1960, 30). This

tions alone;

proves

it

also

conclusively that Locke did not compose the Constitu proves that he had a critical voice in its composition and
Although the
issue will never
works shows

implies that he
settled,

agreed with the other articles. of the

be

a comparison philosophical

Constitutions
echoes

with

his life.

other

how

Locke's

writing

his

political

RELIGION AND GOVERNMENT

One

of

Locke's

most

religious and

the secular,

resounding themes is the demarcation between the the civil and the ecclesiastical power. In his Two

Treatises of Government (Laslett 1960), Locke surmises that civil government sprang from the human need to secure property. Originally governed only by
the law of nature, humans
possessions
were

absolutely free to
as

preserve their persons and not

in any

manner

they
or

chose,

long

as

they did

impair "the Life,

(Second
no

the

Liberty. Health, Limb freedom

Goods

of

without valid reason

Treatise, 42). When they

more of their
ment

move

into

civil

government,

people

surrender

than is

absolutely

necessary.

As Locke says, "Govern

(Second

has

no other end

but the

Property"

preservation of

Treatise, 94).
individual
not so much

In

all other matters not

pertaining to
wrote

government's proper role, each

is

autonomous.

Thus,
as

Locke, "Law, in its

true

Notion, is

the Limitation

Interest,
the Law
enlarge

and

direction of a free and intelligent Agent to his proper prescribes no farther than is for the general Good of those under
the

the end of Law is not to

Freedom"

abolish or

restrain,

but

to preserve and

(Second Treatise, 57).

The

general

good

being

limited to the

preservation

of

property,

Locke's

government is theoretically restrained from legislating religion. Locke's Letter on Toleration (here after referred to as Letter) specifies that people join govern
ment

to advance their "life,

liberty, health
such as money,

and

indolency

of

body;

and

the

possession of outward
like"

things,

lands, houses, furniture,

effectual

and the

(Locke 1824, 5:10). The Church,

worshipping
of
souls"

by
God

comparison,

is "a voluntary accord,

to the salvation of
a

in

order to the public

their government;

(Letter, 5:13) God taught

people created civil

people

to worship but did not establish

society,

not a

framework tor

religion.

Each

institution has its

together"

realm, separate and

who attempts

distinct. "He jumbles heaven

to combine their

and earth

(Letter, 5:21)

jurisdictions. Locke's

130
thesis

Interpretation

in the Letter

on

Toleration thus

encompasses

freedom from

encroach

worship both by individuals and by the state. Although the Church may confuse heaven and earth as easily as government governmentmay, Locke directs his energies in the Letter toward discrediting
ment on religious

established religion.

He holds that the

"And

people grant civil magistrates power

only

to enforce laws

and punish.

upon this ground

1 affirm, that the

magis

trate's power extends not to the establishment of

of

worship,
and

by

the force

of

his

laws"

any article of faith, or forms (Letter, 5: 12). Such power is both unnec
"impertinent"

essary
against

irrelevant. Physical force is

conviction.

(Letter, 5:12), impotent

make

religious

While force

might

successfully

people

change an outward

form
be

of

worship, "true

and

inward

persuasion of

the mind
compelled

and such

saving is the nature

religion consists

in the
force"

of the understand

ing,
on

that

it

cannot

to the belief of anything

that

by

outward

(Letter, 5:1 1). Moreover, Locke believes

inner belief: "Faith only,
God"

God

wants

only worship founded

procure

and

inward sincerity,
who

are

the things that

acceptance with

(Letter, 5:28). Those

religion

dictate

religion therefore of
and
. . .

fend God, for "the

end of all

is to

please

him,

liberty

is

end"

essentially necessary to that Even granting for the sake

(Letter. 5:30). inner is

conviction can

of argument that

be

affected

by

physical

force, Locke
which of all

contends

that belief does not

ensure salvation.

Only

God knows
very does

the

world's professions

the right and true one; the

proliferation of religions shows that no

human

being

can

be for

sure.

There

fore, granting
not

the

magistrate

power

to

establish and enforce a particular

faith
be

help
by

the people, and precludes them from searching

and perhaps

finding

the true religion themselves.

Moreover,

people's

faith

should not

determined

their residence; "that which heightens the absurdity, and

very ill

suits the religion of a

deity,

men would owe

their eternal happines or misery to

the places of their

(Letter, 5:13). In his Third Letter for Toleration, Locke

only
prevents

nativity"

noted that the nature of civil power

not

the

magistrate

from

imposing
a man

religion, but

requires

him to

safeguard

freedom for

all religions as well.

For force from true,

a stronger

hand to in the

bring

to religion,

which another thinks

the

being
such

from

injury injury is one

an

that

state of nature

every

one would avoid; protection

and so

of the ends of a

commonwealth,

every

man

has

right to toleration

(5:212).
afforded an

The Fundamental Constitutions

rather
tions'

uncommon

principles.

Many

opportunity to establish Locke's elements of the Fundamental Constitu

toleration
can

s position on establishment of religion and

be found in the

Letter

on

Toleration. Article 87

embraces the thesis that civil peace requires

religious

freedom:
be
concerned

But

since the natives of that place, who will

strangers to

in

our

plantation, arc

utterly

Christianity,

whose

idolatry, ignorance,

or mistake gives us no

The Fundamental Constitutions

right to expel, or to use them

of

Carolina

131

ill;

and those who move

from

other parts lo plant

there,

will

expect us

unavoidably be of different religions, the liberty whereof they will to have allowed them, and it will not be reasonable for us on this account
civil peace

to

keep

them out; that

may be

maintained amidst

the

opinions and our agreement and compact with all men

may be

diversity of duly and faithfully

be
without
which wc

observed; the violation whereof, upon what pretense soever, cannot

great offence to

Almighty

God,

and great scandal

to the true religion,

protess:

Therefore, any
it

seven or more persons

agreeing in any

religion shall

constitute a church or profession, to which

they

will give some name,

to

distinguish

from

others

(Locke 1824. 9:97).

words very close to the Letter on Toleration, this article recogni/es that individuals do nothing unlawful when they profess disparate faiths. They do only what every individual has a natural right to do, attempt to save his soul.

In

This

article

departs from Locke's

position

their religion the true one,

whereas

every church is orthodox to itself; believes to be true; and the contrary it

Yet Locke The
gion."

only slightly. The proprietors declare Locke considers orthodoxy empty; "for Whatsoever any church believes, it
pronounces to

be

error"

(Letter, 5:19).
believe the

was not concerned that the proprietors crucial point was

believed

theirs the "true reli

right to

others'

that

they

recognize

same.

can also

Some apparently less permissive elements of the Fundamental Constitutions be seen in the Letter on Toleration. Locke places restrictions on tolera
and so

tion,

does the Constitutions. Although

one might

in any form, disbelief could not be permitted. Atheism tions of Locke's political system. A person who does
never

shakes the not

be free to worship God very founda believe in God

can

feel bound

to the social contract,

which

is

a sort of promise

before Him.

Disbelief Lastly,

endangers civil society.

Locke is painfully
who of

explicit:

those are
and

not at all

to be tolerated

deny

the

being

of can

God. Promises, have

no

covenants,

oaths, which are the

bonds

human society, but

even

hold
all

upon an atheist.

The taking away

of

God,

though

in thought, dissolves

(Letter, 5:47).

Locke

recognized the engenders.

deep

commitments

faith

can produce and people

the respect

for

authority it
gion

Religion is the bond that holds

to their word and

their contract. When the issue is community safety,

not

becomes the

magistrate's concern.

The Letter

on

individual souls, reli Toleration says, "A good

true piety, concerns also
mens'

life, in

which consists not

the

least

part of religion and

the civil government: and in it lies the safety both of

commonwealth"

souls and of

the

(5:41).

While the

government

may

not establish religion,

may have a valid secular purpose. We can Fundamental Constitutions, which provides that "no be
a

laws concerning religion trace that belief to Article 86 of the

man shall

be

permitted to

freeman

of

Carolina

or

to have any estate or habitation within

it,

that doth

132

Interpretation
a

not acknowledge

GOD;

and that

GOD is publicly
which states

and

solemnly to be

wor

shipped."

The

rationale

for Article 91,

of

that no

person above age

seventeen

will

have

protection

the law unless such person is a registered

member of a at religious

church, also becomes clear. Article

not erode religious and

94, prohibiting

seditious

talk

meetings, does

freedom, but

protects

it (Locke

1824, 9:100, 101, 103). Freedoms

safety.

restrictions

together ensure society's

Thus far Locke

general political

and

the Fundamental Constitutions agree.

The

Locke's

consistency between the Fundamental Constitutions and beliefs compelled him to point out where they deviated. Thus,
which made

as mentioned

above, he disclaimed Article 96 (1670 version),

the

Anglican
It
shall

church the official religion

for Carolina:
for the

belong

to the Parliament to take care

of

building

of

Churches
of

and the

public

Maintenance

according to the the National Religion

Divines, to be employed in Church of England, which, being

of

the Exercise the

Religion

only true

and

Orthodox,
and of

and

the

King's Dominions, is

so also of

Carolina,

therefore, it

alone shall

be

allowed to receive public maintenance

by

Grant

Parliament (Parker 1963, 181).

This
ment

article

does

not appear

in the 1669

"draft,"

lending

credence

to the argu

that Locke did not write

was

it

or wish

it included in the Constitutions.

most

Religious toleration may have been

the
church of

probably the
officials

heated issue

of

1669. Charles II
was nonetheless

a secret all

Catholic, but

the Church of England

state,

English

colonies wished to almost

vary that

strictness.

swearing by The Carolina

its tenets. Yet the

faraway

proprieto

motive was

religious

certainly commercial. Like many colonial investors, they guaranteed freedom in their charter, then advertised it to attract disgruntled immi
and the

grants

from England

Puritan

colonies

(Kaye 1905, 33; Seliger 1968,

con went

1 16n). Hence, they felt

simultaneous pressure

to carry toleration into their

stitutions and to conform to

England's

censorious codes. antipathy.

Thus Article 96

into the Constitutions, despite Locke's

religion

This direct
conflict

establishment of

directly

offended

Locke's
more

sentiments.

Yet the

between the two

documents highlights the

basic

agreement

between them, that property is

government's correct province.

FORMS OF GOVERNMENT

Locke clearly held that beyond that. All

magistrate's part

governments

only

role was

to protect property (in

the large sense of both one's

body
The

and possessions), and could make no claims as we saw with

other actions

derive from that role,

preeminence of
and consistent with

the civil

in

religion.

property,

and the

hierarchy

it

creates, is easily discerned in

tions.

the Fundamental Constitu

When Locke

considered the

formal

elements of a

legitimate

government,

The Fundamental Constitutions

he
stated

of

Carolina

133

that consent,
on

not a specific political says

form,

was

his

concern.

The Sec

ond

Treatise

any Political
capable of a

"that, Society, is nothing but the

Government

which

begins

and

actually

constitutes

consent of

any

number of
Society"

Freemen

majority to unite and incorporate into such a

the power to choose their government,

(99). Origi
accor

nally

vested with
.
.

they may "so

good"

dingly
perfect

make compounded and mixed

Forms

Government,"

of

democracy

to

hereditary

monarchy, "as

monwealth'

to Locke meant "not a

they Democracy, or any Form

the Latines signify

think

ranging from (132). 'Com

of

Government,
word

but any independent

to
which

Community
best

which

by

the

civitas,
and

the

word which

answers

in

our

Language is Commonwealth,
which

properly English does not Locke

tion

most

expresses such a
.
.

Society

of

Men,

Community
appear

of

Citty

in

(133). Although the Two Treatises

democratic,

places more emphasis on executive power and gives political participa

over

to a select group

of men.

nature

Before outlining his legitimate government, Locke reiterates that the state of has three great weaknesses: it lacks an established, consistently followed
a

law;

known

and

impartial judge;

and power

to support and execute sentences.

Government

requires

legislative, judicial,
absorbs

and executive

authority to
relegates

remove

those liabilities. But Locke

plicit complement

the

judiciary

into the

executive as an

im

to the latter's punitive power. He also

with other

the

federa
a

tive power, which deals

states, to the
and

executive. of

He

makes

it

broad

discretionary
is

power, "left to the Pmdence

Wisdom

those whose hands it

in,

to be managed

for the

good"

publick

(174). When the jurisdictional dust

of government remain.

settles, only the

much power

executive and
each

legislative branches
relation

How

does

have in

to the other?

Locke

emphasizes that

"the first

and fundamental positive

Law

of all

Com

monwealths, is the establishing of the Legislative

power"

(134). The people,

giving
power
comes

over

their natural power of

as

self-preservation

to the government, vest that

in the legislative "the

long

as

the government exists. The

legislative be
unalterable executive's

supream power of

in the hands
must needs

where

Commonwealth, but sacred and (134). The the Community have once placed
the
it"

enforcement role

is necessarily
to

subordinate:

"what

can give

Laws to another,

be

him"

superiour

(150). because it

Yet if the legislative is

of

supreme

the executive's power

extempore?

laws to the executive, what The executive fulfills its federative duties
gives as we saw

not

solely according to standing

law,

earlier, but through 'pmdence

Moreover, Locke recognizes extralegal power in the executive itself. "For the Legislator not being able to foresee, and provide, by Laws, for the executive may use its discretion all, that may be useful to the
and wisdom'.
Community,"

legislative permission, "as the publick good and advantage shall (159). The public good may require the executive to transgress the law as well, where observing it would harm the public weal. "This Power to act prescription of the according to discretion, for the publick good, without the
to act
without
require"

134
Law

Interpretation
and
sometimes

against

it, is

that which

is

Prerogative"

called

(Second

Cropsey 1963, 459). 160; cf. Treatise, The Fundamental Constitutions embodies the dominant
Strauss
and

executive

that

Locke feu

describes.

Proprietary
It

government

in Carolina
of

was

equally

a corporate and

dal

system.

established a

board

directors

within a grandiose and compli

cated oligarchic

hierachy,

and a

property

system characterized

by

feudal land

laws. Each
powerful

proprietor controlled some aspect of

government, and the two most

bodies,

the Palatine's Court and the Grand

Council,

together

directed
first

them.

The

eight proprietors acted as the

board

of

directors

and composed the

or

tier of nobility. The eldest

presided over

proprietor was made

the chairman,

Palatine; he

the Palatine's

Court,

which

seven other proprietors.

Each

proprietor

simply consisted of himself and the had his own court as well, with duties

corresponding to his title: Chief Justice, Chancellor, Constable, High Steward, Treasurer, Chamberlain, and Admiral. The Constitutions gives the titles Land
grave and

Cacique to the
or

men

the adjuvant
equal voice

'Councillor'

positions

composing the second tier of nobility. These held in the proprietary courts, and each had an among the seven proprietary courts. The High Constable's Court
affairs

in his

respective court.
were parcelled out

Executive Three "shall

courts

powers

controlled

the

federative

power.

order and

determine

of all

military

by land,
etc.,

and all

land

forces,
belongs

arms, ammunition, artillary, garrisons,

war"

and

forts,
in

and whatever

unto
war on

(Parker 1963,

36; Locke 1824, 9:39). The Admiral's Court

well

managed

the high seas, as

as

"all

cases

matters of without shall

trade between the

the limits of Caro

merchants of

Carolina

amongst

themselves, arising

lina;

as

also, all controversies in

Merchandising

that

happen between deni

zens of

Carolina

foreigners"

and
peaceful

(Parker, 37; Locke 9:41,42). The Chancellor's

Court facilitated
other"

any
minor

foreign policy and treaties "with neighbor Indians or (Parker, 34; Locke 9:50). Although the executive did not hear all judicial cases, the Palatine's Court chose all judges. The heard
appeals

propr

courts

for

civil and criminal a semiannual

proprietors

cases; murder, treason,

and capital

offenses were treated

by

Grand Council. While the

courts, the Grand
eight

roving commission appointed from the had wide discretion over their own
the executive
and

Council,

which comprised all members of and

the

proprietors, twenty-eight landgraves

oversaw the most

caciques,

fourteen free

holders
cil was

important

aspects of government.

The Grand Coun

among proprietors or among the proprietor's war; issue orders to the Admiral's and Constable's courts regarding raising and disposing of troops. Most importantly, it set the agenda for parliament and itself passed all bills before they could be considered there. The Grand Council also dispensed the that parliament allotted to money
controversies

to

judge any

courts; declare

peace and

specific uses (Parker 160, Article 46, as revised in margin notes; Locke 9: Article 50). Since all the nobles had a vote both in their court and in the Grand
,

The Fundamental Constitutions

of

Carolina

135

Council,
men;

the

power of

Carolina

was

effectively

reserved

to a small group of
necessary.

among them, however, In case there was any doubt

reserved a

compromise was about who

undoubtably

really

controlled

the government,
consent

Article 32
of

large

prerogative

to the Palatine's Court. With the

the Palatine

and

three proprietors, the Court had

power

Parliaments, to pardon all Offences, to make Elections of all Officers in the dispose; power, by their Order to the Treasurer, to dispose of all public Treasure, excepting money granted by the Parliament and by them directed to Some particular public use; and also, shall have Negative upon all Acts, and Orders, Votes, and Judgements of the grand Council and the Parliament,
to
call
Proprietors'
. . . . . .

also, shall have a Negative upon all Acts and orders of the Constable's Court and

Admiral's Court relating to wars; shall have all powers granted to the Proprietors by their patent from our Sovereign Lord the King, except in such things as are limited
margin

by

these fundamental connstitutions.

,

(Parker, 157, Article 32,

as revised

in

notes; Locke 9:

Article

33.)
to Locke's
or

All these

prerogative powers of the executive seem quite acceptable

theory. It raises again the question yet unanswered: Which power,

legislative

executive,

reigns supreme?
outline

In Locke's theoretical

for legitimate government, the legislative

the original power of government; without

holds supremacy
a

by

virture of

being

legislature,

the

executive would not exist.

Yet, shading in his

outline, Locke
a

envisions

a government

in

which

the executive

legitimately holds

kind

of

preeminence.

He says,
where the

In

some

Commonwealths
vested

Legislative is
who also

not always a share

in being,

and the

Executive is

in

a single

Person,
to

has

there that single Person in a very tolerable sense may also

in the Legislative; be called Supream

.

having
without

also no

Legislative

superiour

him,

there

being

no

Law to be

made
other

his consent,

which cannot

be

expected should ever subject enough

him to the

Legislative, Treatise, 151).

part of the

he is properly

in this

sense

Supream (Second

Thus the legislature is

not

will not always

be the

supreme

branch

of government.

"It

necessary,

no nor so much as

convenient, that the Legislative should be

in being. But absolutely necessary that the Executive Power should, because there is not always need of new Laws to be made, but always need of
always

Execution
Locke's

of

the Laws that are

made"

(153).

statement

describes the Fundamental Constitutions

almost perfectly.

On first sight, the legislative power appears strangled by the executive's pre rogative grip. Parliament consisted of "the Proprietors, or their deputies, the

precinct

Caciques, 65; Locke, 9:71), sitting in

and

Landgraves

and one

Freeholder

out of

very It
at met

(Parker,

one chamber, each with one vote.

biannually
with

unless called more often,

but the Palatine

could

dissolve it

any time

136

Interpretation
three

consent of

proprietors and

Each parliamentary act had to be the Palatine before it became law.

proprietors.

ratified

by

six

Yet despite the

card

executive's controls over vision of

parliament, the

latter

body

held

one

that illustrates Locke's

the legislative power.

Parliament held the

through
particu and

power of

the purse, the ability to

guide or

limit the

executive's actions

the raising and spending of money, the ability to grant

money to 'some

lar

public

use',

as the

Constitutions
some

said.

Only

parliament could raise

taxes;

if it directed money to These

cern

use, the Palantine's Court could not override it.

and spending reflect Locke's con is that the executive might usurp its overbearing mle. Therefore, although Locke

arrangements with respect greatest

to

taxing

that the

danger in

government

members'

property to

support an

thought everyone should

still

pay taxes
own

consonant to

his wealth,

it

must

be

with

his

Consent, i.e.
Taxes
on

the Consent of the

Majority, giving it

either

by

themselves,

or

their Representatives chosen

claim a

Power to

lay

and

levy

the

by them. For if any one shall People, by his own Authority, and
the

without such consent of the

People, he thereby invades

Fundamental Law of

Property,

and subverts

the

end of

Government (Second Treatise, 140).

Even though

executive prerogative

limited the Carolina Parliament's

power

to

legislate, it
ment

could still obstruct or refuse

the executive's plans. It could refuse to accept a

at all.

burdensome tax did

not

to appropriate money for government

an

Parlia

have to bend to

its

position and

force
on

a compromise.

overbearing executive. It could easily protect The Fundamental Constitutions and the
the same critical balance between the

Second Treatise

Government

maintain

two branches of government, guide

and executor.

POLITICAL STATUS AND PROPERTY

While the

structural

balance survives,

neither

the Second Treatise

nor

the

Constitutions in any way favors egalitarianism. The concern in the Second Treatise for protecting the legislature reflects Locke's deeper concern to protect
property.

The Second Treatise

pickt
under an

specifies
Oak"

that
or

man

has

an equal right

to

"the

up property does not, however, mean equal quantity of property. God "gave it to the use of the Industrious and Rational One who can use the land has
. . ."(34).

Acoms he

(28)

the land he tills. Equal right to

every right to it, no matter how disproportionate the amount, "the exceeding of the bounds of his just Property not lying in the largeness of his Possession, but in the perishing of any thing uselessly in it" (46).

Locke
more

considers the use of

money

further

sanction of

disproportionate

goods, money

being

"tacit

consent"

and

voluntary
the product of,
which

that "a

man

fairly

possesses

land than he himself

(50).

can use

the overplus, Gold and

anyone"

Silver,

by receiving in exchange for may be hoarded up without injury to

The Fundamental Constitutions

The Fundamental Constitutions likewise
Although
veals establishes an

of

Carolina

137

aristocratic

language

pervades

oligarchy of wealth. the Constitutions, looking beneath re

status.

that property, not blood or merit, determines

From the Palatine's

Court to the roving judicial commissions, land is the key to sovereignty. As one of its first tasks, the Constitutions divides Carolina "into Counties; each
county shall consist of eight Seigniories, each Precinct shall consist of six
ony, seigniory,
and
eight
Colonies"

Baronies, and four precincts; (Parker, 4; Locke, 9:3). Each bar

acres.

colony

covered

12,000

Proprietors

owned

the seig

niories; landgraves and caciques, the baronies. The rest of the land would be the Balance of Government may be divided "amongst the poeple; that so 9:4). This so-called balance was definitely (Parker, 5; Locke,
. . .
preserved"

weighted and

in favor

of those with

the most land. Rank corresponds to property,

sheriff, a man must qualify have 500 acres; to become a constable of a colony, 100 acres. Justices of the various courts required 300 to 500 acres: registers of precincts, 300 acres; and
registers of a

to control: to

as a member of parliament or

colony, 50

acres

(Parker, 145 Article 66; 147, Articles 75, 78;

160-61, Articles 55, 57, as revised in margin notes; 163, Article 84 as revised in margin notes; Locke, Articles 61, 72, 91, 63, 85). The Constitutions pro
vides

that freeholders acquiring more than 3,000 acres of land could be granted

the title of Manoral Lord.

That

freeholder

could achieve noble rank proves concern.

roles

further that blue blood

was not

the

dominating

Parliament

and

the

judiciary

were not

the only public

restricted

to

landowners. The Constitutions linked property to suffrage. No man could vote for even a parliamentary representative "that has less than fifty acres of free

hold
mate of

within

the

precinct"

said

(Parker, 66; Locke, 9:72). Whether

significant.

or not

fifty

acres was a nominal

amount, the implication is

one must own property.

To have

legiti

interest in society, the Constitutions. Feudal

requirements

Property

was

the centerpiece

sense that with

and

pertaining to freeholders and property goes control. The Constitutions

which

"leet"

men

furthered the land tenure

revived

the quitrent system,

"Chief-rents"

hearken back to the fifteenth

century.

Quitrents,

called
were

relinquishing a percentage of his harvest, the villein paid a fixed sum. The term quitrent later came to represent any form of payment that "absolved or made the tenant from his personal obligation
the

originally a Instead of working

in the Constitutions, were not themselves true rents. They consideration in lieu of the feudal villein's manoral duty. lord's land
or

quit"

of service.

Similarly, Carolina's freeholders

longer
motivated

paid a

fixed

proprietors; the

amount never varied and was not connected

yearly to the to land values. The

sum

the relationship between lord and labor. taken its place. Allowing the commu has commodity tation made the English system more flexible, and long after other feudal sys tems had died or evolved, the American colonies functioned under proprietary
concept of service no

The

concept of work as a

government.

138

Interpretation
a source of revenue

More than

recognition of a

Andrews (1919,

hierarchy and 15-20) says,

for the proprietors, quitrents were a tangible subservience to the lord. The historian Charles
was

"Rent

the bond between the lord and the

ownership."

land,
son

the symbol of territorial

province answered attitude emanated

It

meant

in the

to the

proprietors

essentially that every both as employee and as

per sub

ject. That
Leet

from the belief,

consistent with

Locke's,

that

land
liter

and political privileges are men represented

inseparable.

the serving class in the Constitutions.

and manors of

They

were

ally serfs, housed in the baronies

not
man or woman

the nobility.

Freeholders

could

have leet. The Constitutions specify that the lord was to assign each leet ten acres to work, "they paying to him therefore not more than
acres"

one eighth part of all

(Parker, yearly produce and growth of the said 156, Article 25, as revised in margin notes; Locke 9: Article 26.) The leet man was "under the jurisdiction of the lord without appeal from he
, him;"
. . .

did

not

"have

liberty

to go off from the Land of his

particular

Lord

and

live

anywhere else without

seal"

Licenses

obtained

from his in

said

(Parker, 155, Article 22,

of the

as revised

margin

Lord, under hand and notes; Locke, 9, Article

providing a hearing have made a contract
revision, the clause
contracts.

25). The first draft

Constitutions incorporated
lord "in
case

a clause
. .

for

complaints against the

the Lord

shall

or agreement with

his

tenants"

(Parker, 137, Article 26). In

version

disappeared
clause

and

the

accepted

does

not

mention

The

new
not

did ensure, however, that no man would be a leet man "who has voluntarily entered himself a Leet man in the registry of the County

Court"

(Parker, 156, Article 24; Locke, 9: Article 25). As long

the

as

the leet man retains

liberty

to choose his servitude,

rather

than

being

forced into it, Locke's

philosophy
the

considers the arrangement valid.

He says,

Authority
not

of

the Rich

Proprietor,
of

and

the Subjugation of the

the

Needy Beggar,
Man,
who

began

from the Possession

his Subject to
Power

the

Lord, but
than

Consent

of the poor submits upon

preferr'd

being

starving.

And the Man he thus he has

consented

pretend to no more

over

him,

to,

to, can Compact

(First

Treatise, 43).
government

We find that though

to

it,

their equal power

is legitimate only if all men originally consent to consent dissolves once civil stmctures are estab
Properties"

lished. Government, created "that Men might have and secure their (Second Treatise, 139), belongs only to those who have the properties. More
over, the size
pate.
of

the property

determines

the

degree to

which men

may

partici

inequality from natural equality (cf. Macpherson it 1962, may seem, Locke has left no philosophical gap. His civil theory derives logically from his premise about the unlimited right to own
civil

Locke has drawn 251). Ironic

as

property

and

the privileges which property brings to society. Locke did

per-

The Fundamental Constitutions

ceive the

of

Carolina

1 39

shortcoming in his property

philosophy:

believing
People

that government exists sole

ly

to

protect

necessarily
which

supposes and requires, that the

must

should

have Property,

without

they
in

be

suppos'd to entered

lose that

by

end

for

which

they

into it, too

gross

ent'ring into Society, which an absurdity for any Man to

such a right

was the own.

Men

therefore the Law

Society having Property, they of the Community are theirs

not consider

have

to the goods, which

by

(Second Treatise, 138).

But Locke does

those

men whose sole

bodies,

those

whom

his

supposition and requirement exclude. work concerned

property resides in their Locke dismissed

and

unlanded

laborers because his

best. The
remarks

government,

their part was

passive at

he

made

servant's position

he

made almost a

in the Second Treatise concerning the in passing. It remained for the Fundamental
government would

Constitutions to illustrate how

Lockean

function.

SLAVERY AND CONQUEST

Despite the

unpropertied

right to
a civil

accrue property and judge. He would never be and are

inferior position, he still had the natural the civil right to sue for protection of his person to
man's

confused with

slaves,
and

who

may

not

own
of

property
their

"subjected to the Absolute Dominion

Arbitrary

Power

Masters"

contorted

arguments,

(Second Treatise, 85). The slavery issue, one of Locke's most causes great consternation among his reviewers. The First

Treatise states,

directly hardly to
plead

opposite to the generous

for't"

Man, and so Temper and Courage of our Nation; that 'tis be conceived, that an Englishman, much less a Gentleman, should (Wood 1974, 15n; Laslett 1960, 43). Yet the Second Treatise envi
so vile and miserable an of slavery. proprietors agreed with

"Slavery

is

Estate

sions a

legitimate
a

All the

black

slavery:

one was twice governor of

slave-owning colony; three owned plantations in the Caribbean; five invested in the black labor trading companies. Locke himself held stock in the

Virginia,

Royal Africa
tinue their

Trading

Company. Without doubt, the

proprietors

desired to

con

practices

dates slavery, and freeman of Carolina

Slaves"

in Carolina. Indeed, the Fundamental Constitutions man Locke supported the mandate. Article 101 reads, "every
shall

have

absolute power and

(Parker, 164,

as revised

in

margin

authority over his Negro notes; Locke, 9: Article 110).

and civil

Locke's defense

of

liberty,

natural

freedom,

right,

though quali

fied, hold,

still seems

incongruous

against

this unwavering
elucidates

support of slavery.

If the

thesis that the Fundamental Constitutions

we must somehow resolve

Locke's philosophy is to
seems useful

the dissonance. It

to

view

the

conflict alongside

Locke's ideas

about colonization. of colonization

Martin Seliger
a

(1968, 118)
inane
devia-

claims that "Locke's

justification

is

flagrant

and

140
tion

Interpretation from his

condemnation of

foreign

conquest.

Its

ostensible weakness might

attest not

if those were way of contrast the strength of his humane principles, On the contrary, Locke justification of his impugned in similarly

by

slavery."

makes a sort of

logical

exception

regarding colonization,
the

which we can

find in

his discussion
Locke

of

slavery

as well.
against

speaks

strongly

legitimacy

of conquest and of
an unjust

usurping

property have no Title

after conquest.

"[H]e that Conquers in

and

War,

can

thereby

Obedience of the (Second Trea tise, 176). A conqueror has no legitimate right to their property either, keeping it only by virtue of superior force. Even in a just war, one where the defender is victorious, reparation due to the conquerer "will scarce give him a Title to
to the

Subjection

Conquered"

any

Countrey he

shall

Conquer. For the Damages

of

War

can scarce amount

to

the value of any considerable Tract of land, in any part of the the Land

World,

where all

populous country with an established gov differs from colonizing a place like America, where land lies fallow. The distinction rests in Locke's definition of legitimate property. He makes the ernment comparison

is possessed, and none lies In Locke's thinking, conquering a

waste"

(183).

between England
of

and

the New World:

An Acre

Land that bears here

with

Twenty

Bushels

of

Wheat,

and another

in

America,

which,

the same

Husbandry,
.

would

do the like, are,

without

doubt,

of the same

natural, intrinsick Value. But

a

yet

the Benefit Mankind receives from

other

the one, in
. .

year, is

worth

five 1

and

from the

'Tis Labour, then which puts the greatest which it would scarcely be worth any thing:

part

possibly not worth a Penny, of Value upon Land, without

for all that the Straw, Bran, Bread, of that Acre of Wheat, is more worth than the Product of an Acre of as good Land, which lies wast, is all the Effect of Labour (Second Treatise, 43).
...

Wasteland is

not

limited to

proper use and not simple civil government

uninhabited land. Legitimate ownership lies in inhabitation. Since the Native Americans had no
and

by

Locke's definition
was

certainly did
even
all

not

tend their land

maneuver.

properly, colonizing America

legitimate,

necessary land

"God,
also

when

he

gave

the World in common to

are almost obliged

Mankind,
all

commanded

Man

to

labour"

(32). Men

to tend

lying
a

unused. so

As Locke

colonization

is

an exception

to the

moral mles

governing

conquerer,

makes an exception

for the

province

in his

stance against slavery.

His

description

of

slavery has
and a

almost no resemblance to the

institution

of

slavery
a

then established.

Slavery, he

avers, is "the State of War continued, between

lawful Conquerour,
another

Captive"

(24). When in the

state of nature one per

son commits a crime against

another, "the Offender declares himself to live

Equity"

by

Rule,

than that of reason and common

(8).

Doing

so, he for

feits his life to the one offended. By his natural right of self-preservation, the intended victim may punish the criminal as he will, "because such Men are not
under

the ties

of

the

Common Law

of

Reason, have

no other

Rule but that

of

The Fundamental Constitutions

Force right
own

of

Carolina
(16).

141
this

and

Violence,
and

and so

may be treated
no

as

Beasts

Prey"

of

By
to

and

the right to reparation, the

one offended
it"

may "make

use of

him to his
end

Service,

he does him

injury by

(23). If the

slave wishes

his captivity, he may commit suicide, rendering himself the punishment he deserves. His suicide does not break the human constraint placed on him by God because the
slave

has become morally

colonies

a subhuman

'beast', forfeiting his

to the use of

capacity for ethical consent. Yet slavery as practiced in the

captives

bore

no resemblance

beaten in
of

just

war.

Two

solutions present themselves.

In the

first,
the

instead

fruitlessly trying
revealing.

to connect the two

institutions,

we

consider

lacuna itself

within specific

Locke discussed slavery in the first and second treatises contexts that caused him to exclude black slavery. The slavery

depicted in the treatises is slavery of political conquest. It is slavery on the order of the Roman form, slavery between two similar societies, slavery be
tween two humans with the same rational nature. When Locke wrote the Two

Treatises he had
mind.

white

men,

Europeans,

people capable of
not

But

we can speculate that

Locke did

making contracts, in believe that all people shaped

might

like humans had the boundaries

material

same capacities:

"I think I

say, that the

. .

certain

of that species are so

far from

being determined,
nor

that very the defini

doubts may

still arise about

it. And I imagine that

none of of

tions

of

the word man which we yet

are so perfect and exact as to

have,

descriptions

that sort of
person

animal,
. .

satisfy a considerate inquisitive (Locke 1959, I, bk. 3, ch. 6, 27, 78). Whether or not the argument persuaded Locke himself, the fallacy
useful.

would

have been extremely how less than human

Arising

from his intuitional perception, it facili

must

tated a sort of syllogism: black slaves were property; so blacks

and

be

some

lack

rational capacity.

Given the

physical similarities

that seventeenth century writers found between blacks and apes, questioning the delineation of species made it easier to believe that although blacks looked
and acted

would allow

like men, they were not quite the same. That scientific justification Locke to except blacks from his prohibiton of slavery. His not

mentioning blacks in the Second Treatise tends to show that Locke did not distinction worth mentioning. Winthrop Jordan (1968, 239) notes that "before the Revolution, the English colonists generally felt no need to
consider the

expound or even mention the Negro- Ape

connection."

Locke certainly

was

willing to

make exceptions

when

they

suited

obviously found it

convenient not

to

mention a slave's

his purpose, however, and he right to revolt. Far from

colonization

being
tion,

'flagrant
supports

and

inane',

the slavery exception, like the

of

excep
for
not not

the

practices

the Fundamental Constitutions in America.

Thus, colonizing
a civilized

America is

permissible

because it does
no prohibitions

not meet standards

country; black slavery breaks have the same capacities as men. Civil

because blacks do

compacts and natural

freedom do

apply to

them.

142

Interpretation
perhaps we need not resolve

Yet
all.

the

conflict

between

liberty

and

slavery

at

In the

second solution that presents

itself,

the tension between

freedom in the Two Treatises is

tutions.
of

consistent with a similar

slavery and tension in the Consti

provides a modicum

Despite the

undeniable

fact

of

slavery, Article

98

freedom for
Since

slaves:

Charity

obliges us

to

wish well

to the
or

Souls

of all men, and shall

Religion

ought

to alter nothing
all

in any

man's civil

Estate

Right, It

be Lawful for Slaves,

as

others, to enter themselves and be of what church or

shall shall

any of them think best, and thereof be as fully members as any freemen. But yet, no Slave hereby be exempted from the civil dominion his Master has over him, but be
profession

in

all other

things in the same State and condition he was in before

(Locke, 9:108).
"civil Estate
condition"

The first
or

sentence appears

to consider slaves to be people

having

Right";

the second sentence

firmly

places

them in the "State

and

of absolute obedience.

Considering
so strange that

the contradictory views of slavery held by the proprietors, is it Locke's writings are contradictory as well? The Letters on Tol

eration, concerned with the spiritual realm, held that God accepted no spiritual

date

inequality. The Two Treatises, written in defense of property, needed to vali physical inequality. Though philosophically inelegant and analytically un satisfying, Locke's position on slavery simply reflects the position that most of
Britain held
at

the time.

CONCLUSION

Where Locke's
mental

philosophical writings

leave

us with

questions, the Funda

space

Constitutions of Carolina lends insight to fill in the gaps. Because of the limitations and the nature of the Constitutions, this analysis has been
superficial and

necessarily
can

tentative at points.

Nevertheless,
Locke's deeper

the Constitutions

usefully illustrate

a practical application of

philosophy.

One hopes
both

that the connections

made

here

will provoke new and and

analyses of

the Fundamental Constitutions

troublesome issues in Lockean

scholarship.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Andrews, Charles M. 1919.

Colonies

"Introduction."

In The Quit-Rent System in the American

Appleton-

W. Bond, Jr. New Haven: Yale University Press. Brown, Louise Fargo. 1933. The First Earl of Shaftesbury. New York: D.

by Berverly

Century Company, Inc. Hewatt, Alexander. 1779. An Historical Account of the Rise and Progress of nies of South Carolina and Georgia. 2 vols. London: A. Donaldson.
Jordan, Winthrop. 1968. White Over Black: American Attitudes Toward
1550-1812. New York: W.W. Norton & Company.

the

Colo

the

Negro,

The Fundamental Constitutions

of

Carolina

143

Kaye, Percy Lewis. 1905. English Colonial Administration Under Lord Clarendon, 1660-1667 Johns Hopkins University Studies in Historical and Political Science, edited by J.H. Hollander, W.W. Willoughby, and J.M. Vincent, vol. 23, nos. 5-6.
Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Bentley.

University

Press.
ed.

King, Peter. 1830. The Life of John Locke, 2nd

Laslett, Peter,
Cambridge
ed.

vols.

London: H. Colburn

and

R.

1960. Two Treatises of Government: A Critical Edition. Cambridge: University Press.

Le Clerc, Jean. 1706. The Life and Character of Mr. John Locke. London: Clark. Locke, John. 1824. The Works of John Locke. 9 vols. London: C. Baldwin. 1959. An Essay Concerning Human Understanding, annotated, with prole
gomena

by

Alexander Campbell Fraser. 2

vols.

New York: Dover Publications.

Macpherson, C.B. 1962. The Political Theory of Possessive Individualism. Oxford:

Clarendon Press.

Parker, Mattie Erma Edwards,

Raleigh: Carolina Charter Unwin Ltd.

ed.

1963. North Carolina Charters

and

Constitutions.

Tercentenary

Commission.

Selinger, Martin. 1968. The Liberal Politics of John Locke. London: George Allen &

Strauss, Leo,
Rand

Joseph Cropsey, McNally & Company.

and

eds.

1963.

History

of Political Philosophy. Chicago:

Wood, Peter. 1974. Black Majority: Negroes

Knopf.

in South Carolina. New York: Alfred A.

Book Reviews

David Johnston, The Rhetoric of Leviathan: Thomas Hobbes and the Politics of Cultural Transformation (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1986)
xx

+ 234 pp., text edition

$25.00.

William Mathie Brock

University
great merit of

It is the
offers a
political

compelling

solution

David Johnston's The Rhetoric of Leviathan that he for a major problem facing the student of Hobbes's
causes of

teaching. In the twenty-ninth chapter of Leviathan Thomas Hobbes

claimed

for the first time that the internal be

overcome once and

the dissolution of the

com

monwealth could

for

all

(Leviathan, 167,
Not the

original edi
mere estab

tion, 1651). What

can explain

Hobbes's bold
as

new claim?

lishing

of civil and moral

philosophy
this

science, for Hobbes

will

later

claim

that he had already

accomplished viii-ix).

when

he

published
new

De Cive (De Corpore,

nevertheless

Epistle Dedicatory,
to some or
versions of
all of

Might Hobbes's

hope

be linked

those features of Leviathan that distinguish it from earlier teaching? In Leviathan Hobbes has supplemented his
and

his

political

account of sovereign

right

the

obligation of subjects with a

theory

of autho

rization that is has quietly

to promote his

much admired

by

some of

his

students.'

recent

In Leviathan he duties is

abandoned

the once common opinion that one

eternal welfare

of a ruler's

subjects'

by

establishing those religious

doctrines he

and practices most

likely

to advance

it,

an opinion

he had

affirmed when

enumerated those same albeit

hypothetically,

duties in his Elements of Law and still acknowledged, in De Cive. In Leviathan Hobbes pays much more atten
administration of sovereign power

tion to the organization and

much

than previously,

less to the identification

considerations

and comparison of

the kinds of commonwealth;

and

indeed,
Cive

belonging

to the

latter discussion in the Elements

Locke's
account of

De

now point towards, if not beyond, between legislative and executive. In Leviathan the

the distinction

acknowledgement of natu within

ral

human equality

acquires a new prominence

both

Hobbes's formation
the
sover

and enumeration of the natural

eign's performance of of religious even

laws

and as a standard against which

measured.

his

office

is to be

Finally,

the nature and basis

belief,

the

reconciliation

of theological and civil

obligation,
of

and

the interpretation of

scripture which

had

comprised

the subject

four

out

of twenty-nine chapters of

the Elements

and six out of

twenty-eight chapters of

De Cive have become the theme of more than half of Leviathan. Johnston's Rhetoric of Leviathan shows how the several novelties of Leviathan can be
related to one another and to

Hobbes's

new

hope
of a

of

ending the

chaos charac

teristic

of western political

life. On the basis

generally

plausible account of

146

Interpretation
aim of political

velops a shrewd

Hobbes's changing conception of the interpretation of

philosophy, Johnston de

Leviathan'

s stmcture and

leads

us

far towards

understanding of Hobbes's fundamental intention. Although Johnston does not deny the continuing significance of Hobbes's discovery in middle age of the great explanatory power of axiomatic reason
a more adequate

revealed

in Euclidean geometry for his

political

science, he insists that the

renewed

key

to understanding Leviathan is that it

same problem of praise

marks

Hobbes's

interest in the

effectively transmitting ideas which had led him earlier to Thucydides so highly. Although Hobbes did intend his 1640 manuscript,
readers'

The Elements of Law, to influence political debate by changing his opinions, his political argument was there developed in a form "essentially
scientific as opposed
pected such a

to

rhetorical

in design"(26). Nor
achieve

could

Hobbes have

ex

logical demonstration to
his

his

political aim

for he

repeats

in that

same work

longstanding
explained

conviction as

to the power of rhetoric and

impotence

of scientific reason

to shape popular

belief(28-29, 61). That he did

proceed so can
restricted

only be
or

by

readership,

that the

political

supposing the Elements intended for a world for which it was composed it
soon
might

seemed

less desperate to Hobbes

"natural human

than

would, that Hobbes still hoped

capacity"

that

reason as a

be

made

to master the passions

despite his

its weakness, or simply that Hobbes had not as yet conceived of any alternative. In any case, if Hobbes had subordinated the task of political persuasion to that of scientific exposition in his Elements, in Le
own analysis of
viathan

he "reversed the

priorities"

(70).

ment, first stated in his Elements but

never

According to Hobbes's political argu importantly modified, the fear of

causes and

death
can

guided
men

by
"to

a rational account of curb

its

the

means of

avoiding it

lead

their other passions and subject themselves to a common

sovereign" proposition"

but this

"key

behavioral

is drawn from

an account of

human
turbed

nature with which

by

the actual

reality may may extent of this divergence and

or

not coincide.

Increasingly

dis

armed with a more sophisti

cated analysis of

standing

of

its causes, Hobbes had arrived in Leviathan at a new under his enterprise: "the aim of political philosophy should be to change it"(70). To Hobbes, it seemed now to be both to transform the imaginative world of his contempor
explain

the world, not merely to

necessary
aries

and possible

their culture

so as

to remove those features

resisted

of

their theological and

of political are

metaphysical
on a rational

understanding that

the

establishing
The

basis. Hobbes's

own metaphysics and

theology

authority linked to his

political argument as
new

they

serve this polemical aim. addressed

new aim also

implies

audience:

Hobbes had

indirectly
growth of

to shape public opinion

his Elements to the powerful, through the universities; impressed

hoping by the
if he
able

literacy

he hopes in Leviathan to
seem to

directly

influence

the many.

In his Elements, Hobbes treated did think it acquired, this did not

reason as a natural

human capacity
of mention

him worthy

to

govern the passions except when undermined

by

the various possible abuses of

Book Reviews
speech; in general,
well

147

men

know that death is the

means of

greatest evil though

fail to discover the best

to the

avoiding

it(94 95).

they may In Leviathan Hobbes

large
new

stresses reason's acquired or artificial character and concedes a portance

im fear

fear

of

invisible

spirits as a passion that can overcome the

of

death, leading ignorant

death(96-101). Here

and superstitious men

to think there is

a worse evil replaced

than

the antithesis of reason and rhetoric

reason and science on

is

by

the "opposition

between knowledge,
of

the one hand and this change

ignorance,
in the illusions

superstition and magic on the other"(109).

We

can see

revised

which sense and

psychology imagination

Leviathan

as

Hobbes

seeks now

to eradicate the

can

generate, to
and

establish a natural expla

nation of madness as excessive

passion,

to

overthrow

Aristotle's

anthro

pomorphic account of motion.

sition at

More importantly, the

enables

recognition of

this oppo

the

heart

of

Leviathan

Johnston

to

explain

Hobbes's
more ade

preoccupation with scriptural exegesis and

theological argument far

quately

than

have those

others who

have in

recent years even acknowledged

these parts of the work. (Johnston shows,

that divine sanctions underpin

opposite such
and of

for example, that Warrender's claim Hobbes's theory of obligation is "virtually the

political philosophy as depends upon theological his discussion of scripture premises, way opinions so that they theology is necessary in order to shape his

the truth"[150,n.35]). Though Hobbes's

in

no

readers'

might

be ready to
of the

accept

his

rational account of authority. service of an enlightenment

Leviathan is
that

essen

tially
purge and

a work of rhetoric

in the

will secure

the

primacy

fear

of

death

over

that

other

fear

which

is the

seed of

religion,

Christianity
prove

of

those elements that have

and even establish

made

it

"carrier
of

of superstition

spiritual

darkness",
of

the authority

science, which

"cannot doctrine

that the principles

upon which was

it

rests are true"(131).

Hobbes's treatment

seem more palatable

Christianity hardly designed to make his political its consistency with the ordinary prin by showing
on

ciples and prejudices of

Christians;
for the

the contrary, Hobbes

shocked and meant

to shock those prejudices,

extinction.
of

success of opinions of

his

venture

depended
as

upon

their

In particular, the false

Christians

to the

immortality

the soul, the significance of miracles, and the meaning of the "kingdom of
must

God"

be uprooted if political authority is to be rationally secured. This be obtained if our interpretation of revelation is governed always by may reason both the mles of logic and what we know of the operation of the natural world and by the recognition that the aim of scripture is not to ad
result vance our

tion. In

understanding of the natural world but to show us the way of salva fact, as Johnston shows, Hobbes's refutation of the soul myth and of
of

the dark doctrines

a

hell

and

purgatory that hinge

upon

it

and

have

constituted

"dagger

aimed at

the

heart"

the

presence of and

Christianity
counters

of every commonwealth that has had to endure derives directly from Hobbes's materialist meta

physics

is only

confirmed

scripture.

Hobbes

dubious reading of apparently contrary the threat posed by the belief in magic, miracles and

by

148

Interpretation
on

prophecy
that

supernatural admits

hand without denying the metaphysical possibility of does so, Johnstons argues, both because the argument he events; the possibility of the miraculous while draining it of political po
the
other

tency is
tion
of

more effective given

his

readers'

presuppositions and

because is to

no

rig

orous proof

is

possible

for the

scientific as opposed
can of and

to the magical interpreta

the

world(157). of

What Hobbes
and

does

do

implant
in his
to think

"suggestions
readers'

deception
will

insinuations

dishonest

intentions"

minds

that

eventually

erode their superstitious

genuine and

beliefs

through the distinction Hobbes draws between

false

miracles

is

finally
means

to conclude that

all miracles are

"the

concoctions of

ignorant,

super

stitious minds"(161).

Hobbes's

readers are

likely

to

reach

the conclusion he

them to reach
references

long
a

Biblical from

to

before they have accepted his metaphysics. As to the kingdom of God that papists and presbyterians have
their own claims to authority, Hobbes argues
can

differently
kingdom
covenant

exploited to support

scripture of

that

this, properly understood,

his
chosen and

only

refer

to that worldly

God

and

people,

which was established

first

by

the

between Abraham

God,
be

renewed

Saul became

second coming. and

king Contrary

and which will

reestablished
view

by Moses, and abolished when by Jesus at the time of his

to the Christian

that the New Testament perfects

account of the
model

accordingly ought to direct the interpretation of the Old, Hobbes uses his Mosaic pattern to explain the function of Christ and even as a for
all subsequent commonwealths.

At the

outset we recalled

Hobbes's
might

new

hope in Leviathan that the internal On the basis hope

of

causes of political

dissolution

be

overcome.

Johnston's

interpretation

as so

far

described,

the grounds of this

are unclear nature

for the

recognition of the roots of religious superstition

in human

only to exacerbate the problem Hobbes must resolve. His task is

expose and so eradicate abuses of reason associated with

no

may seem longer to

reason, but to trans

to

form the culture, or souls, Hobbes saw his own time as

of

of

his

readers.

In

fact, according

Johnston,
that his

one

that favoured this task

despite the fact

of

teaching radically departed "from

especially
these Western parts

the Practise of the greatest part

the world,

ing

of

this

opportunity is obscured,

(Leviathan, 193). Hobbes's understand however, by his use of the atemporal

see

an-

ithesis
and sion

of state of nature and

commonwealth; to

this understanding we
of

must

turn rather to his reading of

history

and

especially

the

"genesis,

corruption

decline does

of

Christianity "(190). If,

us

as we mean to

argue, Johnston's discus

not

lead

to

an altogether

satisfactory

account of

Hobbes's

assess
new

ment of

Judaism

and

Christianity

or of

the reason in this for Hobbes's

optimism, it is the
to recognize
sion of

The Rhetoric of Leviathan that it compels us the huge importance of this question for any adequate comprehen
great merit of enterprise and of our own world as

Hobbes's

it has been

shaped

by

that

enterprise.

Johnston rightly

recognizes

that Hobbes's

discovery

of

the natural seed

of

Book Reviews
religion

149

in

men's

fear

and

ignorance

affords no

basis to distinguish tme

natural causes

religion

from
an of

superstition and
of

that if rational
cause this
of

inquiry
has

into

may lead
religious

one

to

idea

deity

as a

first

no more

to do

with

the

beliefs

Christians than
concludes

with

those

the

gentiles.

What is less

certain

is

whether

he

rightly tion for Hobbes between the

Politiques"

from these
has been

considerations
religion of

that there is

no meaningful

distinc "hu

the gentiles,

which as a part of

mane civil

used

by

its

authors
and

to make men more obedient to

which

authority, and the

Politiques"

religion of

Jews

Christians,
God's

Hobbes labels direc

"Divine
tion
religions

because
grown

undertaken

"by

commandement and

(Leviathan, 54; 1 91, n. 11). Though it be

. . .

tme for Hobbes that "all

and

have

in the

soil of

ignorance

superstition"(191)

and
pur-

that Moses no less than the gentile legislators

used religion

for

a political

pose(192-193), there does

seem

to

be for Hobbes
and

distinction between the

and

religion of the gentiles on the one

hand

both

Christianity
both

Judaism

on

the

other and

this distinction
standpoint.

would

seem

to contain
not see

a problem and a

promise stituted

from his

Because he does

the special problem con

by

Judaism and,
special

define their
tack upon

later, Christianity, Johnston can recognize but not promise. Certainly, Johnston does show that Hobbes's at
in its
than
papist or

Christianity

Presbyterian forms

and

its

central

doctrines
with,

aims at more

its transformation into

a civil religion compatible

or supportive

of, Hobbes's

teaching
and

on sovereignty.
presbyters'

collapse

in mm

of

papal, episcopal,

He indicates why the power could lead Hobbes

more

to think that a radical assault upon

millenium might now succeed. cal religious

Christianity

impossible for
enthusiasm

than a
radi

He

perceives

Hobbes's
of

for the

freedom that
can

resulted

from the decline

and

Christianity,

though he

concludes that enlightened

Hobbes's "political

concerns"

rationality

be

"self-sustaining"

especially his doubt whether would "not permit him to en

of

dorse any tmly general freedom of belief"(205). The insufficiency ston's account begins to appear in his treatment of this dilemma.
Johnston insists that
chaos
we must reformulate
analytical

John

"the

antithesis

between

order and

implied

by

Hobbes's
Now

argument"

as this opposes absolute sover

eignty in the
political

commonwealth

to a state of nature defined

by

the breakdown

of

political authority.

we see that we must

distinguish between any ordinary

"ethical
chaos"

breakdown

and such a situation of cultural upheaval or

own time.

as characterized

Hobbes's
are we

Yet if

we must understand

the state of

nature
we

thus, how
of

to

reformulate

its
of

alternative?

How,

more

exactly, are
religious

to conceive this

alternative with

in light

Hobbes's

equation of

the

freedom

his time

the

condition of

the early Christians

a condition

Hobbes both

praises and condemns as

leading finally
not

to the rise of that eccle

siastical power that would as

destroy

freedom

and endanger all civil authority?

If,
the

be

Johnston observes, shown how the "politics

enlightened

rationality is

self-sustaining, it needs to

transformation"

of cultural

is to

proceed within

Hobbesian

commonwealth once established.

Johnston

supposes

that the role of

150

Interpretation
be
restricted account

rhetoric might yet on

his

own

in uprooting the "weeds of this task must be a continuing one. Johnston does
to
use

its

supers

associate

Hobbes's his

omission of

the

promotion of

his his

subjects'

eternal welfare

from his
tion

enumeration of the sovereign's

new concern

duties

and

new concept of authori explain

zation with
of

for

public opinion show

but fails to

the contribu

the former change or to

right of

unlimited natural subjects"(81).

how the latter tmly adds to the already the sovereign "new rights previously those of his
Christianity"

Having

observed

that "the origin, corruption and decline of

is
of

the central theme of the Hobbesian account of

history

set out

in Parts 3
and of

and

Leviathan Johnston
of

writes

chiefly

of the corruption of

Judaism

the origin

Christianity
this

as an attempt to renew

Judaism destined to fail because infected

by ing

same corruption.

By

"corruption"

here Johnston
Judaism"

means

the

introduction
to this
no

from the Greeks

of elements of superstition event

and, especially, demonology. Term

it "the decisive

in the decline

of

Johnston

attributes

corruption the

fact that the doctrines

and ceremonies

invented

by

Moses

longer

sustained authority(194).

political and exposure

Yet according to Hobbes the conflict between leaders characterized the Jewish experience long before its priestly to Greek superstition; indeed, in the generation after Joshua "the
the people
. . .

greater part of pleased

took occasion as oft as their

Govemours dis
to
. .

them,

change the
and

by blaming sometimes the Policy, sometimes the Religion, Government, or revolt from their Obedience at their pleasure
.

did

everyone

that

which was right of

in his

"

own eyes over

(Leviathan, 255).

If, "from
of
no

the

first institution
in the
same

God's Kingdome
with

the Jews the

Supremacy
this was

Religion

was

hand

that of the

Civill

Sovereignty"

better

understood

by

the Jews than

by

Hobbes's
or

contemporaries.

What,
of

then,

could

be the meaning

or value of a

Judaism
of

Christianity

freed

its

corruption

by

the superstitious

demonology
that

the

Greeks? Johnston

suggests

that Moses gave the Jews a

rational"

religion

was

"monotheistic
"to

and perhaps es

sentially
simpler

and

that Christ

asked men

return to their ancient and

would seem

faith in the

one tme

God"(194,195). Yet it in the

to have been to their usual

and

this same monotheism that

led the Romans to

make an exception

policy

of complete religious toleration

Romans'

case of the

Jews

Hobbes
State

seems to confirm the

identification
can one

of the

Jews

as a people who must

think it "unlawfull to acknowledge subjection to any Mortall

whatsoever"(LeWaf/ia,57).

King

or

easily distinguish a pure from a cor rupt Christianity in terms of any difference, say, between the actual teachings of Christ and the beliefs of those Jews and gentiles who accepted his teaching for Christ himself spoke the language of superstitious demonology when he cast
out

Nor

devils. (Hobbes's
but
what

explanation that

Christ intended to teach

must

not natural sci of

ence

is

needful

for

salvation cultural

collapse

in light

Johnston's
common

demonstration
wealth.)

of the

necessary

foundations

of a

rational

Book Reviews
If Hobbes's Saul
as

151

analysis of the

Jewish

experience

before

and after

the

election of

king

and of

the

Christian

experience

before

and after

the

conversion of

civil mlers

to

Christianity

reveals some special obstacle to the

implementation

of

his

we might

civil

teaching, whereby begin to understand Hobbes's new hope of overcoming the causes of strife? Or is the radical transformation of Christianity Hobbes intends only
might we not
same analysis a clue

political

find in this

another stresses of

way of describing its complete elimination? As we have seen, Johnston Hobbes's recognition of the extent of his departure from the "practise
parts"

the greatest part of the world, especially of these Western

and

the

new

grounds

for

pessimism constituted

by

his identification

of

the natural seeds of

superstition. not ace

But the

gulf

wholly the product of to De Cive the Socratic

between Hobbes's teaching and western practice is Judaism or Christianity. According to Hobbes's pref
embrace of civil and moral

ultimate cause of comparable

dangers

and mischiefs

philosophy has been the for the commonwealth to

the extent that Hobbes still observes in Leviathan that "there was never any

thing

so

deerly bought,

as these

Western

parts

have bought the

learning

of

the

Latine tongaes."(Leviathan,lll). Nor, indeed, is it correct to say, as Johnston does, that the treatment of the causes of sedition in Leviathan is dis

Greek

and

tinguished from Hobbes's

earlier accounts

by

the

weight

he

now

attaches

to

"public

ideology"

opinion or and

as opposed to

"objective
was can at

conditions"(78).

In the
and

Elements

De Cive eloquence,

or rhetoric,

least

necessary

possibly

a sufficient condition of

sedition, for
of

it

both

augment and create

the passionate sense of

discontent, hope
the
.

success,

and pretense of right

that

jointly
are

suffice

for this
.

result and

false

opinions used

to

justify

such action ancient

sophistry

of the "those previously insinuated by the eloquent civil philosophers (see Mathie, "Reason and Rhetoric in Hobbes's Interpretation, 14/2,3 (1986), pp. 283-284).

Leviathan,"

If then the
em

entire elimination of

Christianity

and

Judaism from these

"Westmight

parts"

would not remove

this

other obstacle

to Hobbes's

teaching,

their transformation

otherwise understood serve

we can

this purpose and account

for

Hobbes's

new

hope? Here

that Hobbes's

restatement of of

Leviathan in the language

use of that same

only observe as others have done previously, his teaching on the sovereign representative in authorization ought to be understood in light of his
explain

language to

how the

person of

God

was

bome first

by

Moses, secondly by Christ,

and

thirdly by

the

apostles

and their successors

person of

including
have

sovereign.2

now

the

civil

Bearing

at once

the

those

who

covenanted

to obey him

and that of

"ghostly"

comes the separation of civil and

God, Hobbes's civil sovereign over authority and bestows a new kind of
upon

freedom

upon

his

might otherwise
obedience of an

precisely have been incurred

posed

subjects

as

he takes

himself

whatever perform

sin

by

them in those acts

they

in

him. The issue

author

issue for its

is

whether

by The Rhetoric of Leviathan though not Hobbes may not have sought to overcome

the continuing threat to

civil

life

posed

by

the Socratic tradition in "these West-

152
em

Interpretation
parts"

through a new freedom of conscience

as

grounded

representative

authority Christianity. Reflection

ston's assumption wise man should
men
. .

derived from his

reinterpretation one

in the theory of of Judaism and

question

upon

this issue could also lead

admiration of

to

John
as

that Hobbes's
.

Thucydides for writing

"a

write

(through in

words understood
him"

by

all

men), that

wise

only

should

be

able to recommend

does

not

influence the
that larger

subsequent

transmission of his
sent work served

own political teaching(71). However this may

be,
of

the pre

is

of great value

for causing

us

to

seek out

political aim

both

by

Hobbes's

political

argument and

by

his treatment

biblical

theology; its failure may be to former.

underestimate

the

contribution of

the latter to the

NOTES

1.

See,

especially, David

Johnston

praises this work as

Gauthier, The Logic of Leviathan, (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1969). (80, n.28) while recognizing that Hobbes does not seem to regard this
he. (82-83).
that to "authorize the sovereign is above all to appoint
rap"

innovation bear

do Gauthier

and

2. Clifford Orwin has

our person
.

remarked

him to

to God and to take the

for

doing

so which

is to "confer
"

upon subjects a novel

freedom

to act singlemindedly in their worldly interests

says that

(Political

Theory

3,no.l,p.38).

Harvey

Mansfield Jr.

"Hobbes invented

modern representative government as an attack on

yet may have borrowed the very idea Science Review 65, no. 1, p. 109).

Christianity"

of

it from Christianity. (American Political

Death
phy.

and

the Disinterested Spectator: An

By

Ann Hartle. (Albany: State

Inquiry into the Nature of Philoso University of New York Press, 1986.) 263

pp.:cloth,$49.50; Paper,$16.95).

Chaninah Maschler, St. John's College, Annapolis

Ann Hartle's
on

second as

book is in

more

than one way linked to her earlier book

Rousseau. Here
proud as

the

life life

of

there, Augustine's life of prayer is the foil that sets off the philosopher. Here as there, death is given center stage.
chosen

Here

there, the texts

to study how a philosophic life differs from

Descartes'

religious

Plato's Phaedo

and old

Discourse in the
go,

new

book,
the

Rousseau's Confessions in the

ordinary.

are,

as philosophic works

out of

The majority of books classified as philosophical by librarians are argumentative. The books through which Hartle conducts her inquiry into the
nature of philosophy are, biographical. or at

least

seem

to

be, biographical

and even auto

In The Modern

Self in Rousseau's Confessions Hartle

tried to show that what

Rousseau

offers

in the Confessions is

not a chronicle of

his life but

rather

"a

Book Reviews
philosophical work of
and the
art."

153

In

somewhat the same

spirit,

she urges

in Death

Disinterested Spectator that the Phaedo, the dialogue from which we thought we learned how fearlessly Socrates met death, and the Discourse, the
autobiographical narrative that seemed to

fill

us

in

Descartes'

on

intellectual
...

history,
One

are

"poetry"

rather
fable"

than "history": "The Phaedo is

a myth

the

Discourse

...

(p. 6). books is that only Augustine's

and

remarkable consequence of this emphasis on the artfulness of the

provident philosophic authors
retains

left to posterity by their book Heilsgeschichte

The
two books
require
whose

the status of history.

of

present review will not

do the job
a

studying

together, though I believe

will not even

just

appreciation of

appraising Hartle's her thought would book

it. It high

ambition

is

apparent

be minimally adequate to the from its title and whose subtlety

and

new

by itself,

patience with some overwhelming.

times excruciating

literary
and

complexity is
I
shall

quite

Hartle's

eye

for detail

ability to
are

raise questions about all manner of

literary
and

and argumentative qualia comment on

astonishing.

merely try

to explain

the four chapter headings. These are: Chapter

lope

and

the

cartes:

Occupation

Bee; Chapter II, Augustine: The Look of and Preoccupation; Chapter IV, Conclusion: Death

I, Socrates: Pene Pity; Chapter III, Des

and

the

Disinterested Spectator. Socrates: Penelope

Bees
made their

and the

Bee. Penelope's

name comes

up

at

Phaedo 84a.

entry
want

at

82b

and are reintroduced at a

91c,

when

Socrates

says

that he

doesn't

to go off like

bee

leaving

his

stinger

in his friends.

Hartle treats the two comparisons, both want to be seen through and looked at,
was

of which are as

cautionary, as sayings that

cross out

though

they

something that
to

to be stetted
context

as well.

The
which

of

the Penelope

comparison

is

Socrates'

address

Cebes,

starts, roughly, in the

middle of

77a.

Seemingly

ministering to the fear

esti

of self-dispersion at question about

death (77e), though in tmth asking a ti the soul, Socrates proposes that they consider
do
and things

(what is

it?)

what

the charac

teristics

are of things that

that do not disintegrate. He answers to

that things that stay self-same are

disintegration,

whereas

things that

be simple and thus not subject to likely alter belong to the class of composites liable
the
equal

to extinction. To the former class

one should sometimes translate as

belong, for instance,

"the just
plain and cloaks and

itself (perhaps fine itself. To lot

equal")

and the

the latter

belong

men and

horses

any

other

things which, while

a whole of

sometimes called
other names

by

the same

name as

the

various

itselves, bear

jured up
ways.

besides; hence are composites. Now the complex things just con is, men, horses, cloaks are of course complex in a variety of Men, the subject of our immediate interest, are (for instance) compounds
that

of soul and

body. Their

bodily

part can

be

seen

(like their cloak?)

and

heard

(like the

voice of

the lyre?). But

what of

their soul?

It is invisible,

inaudible,

154

Interpretation
soul

intangible. The
and

is

as

imperceptible

as

the itselves are.

the

immutable
the

aula

(peculiarly

well represented

by

the equal

Since, then, the soul itself, upon

in this
one

which all

mathematical

sciences

depend)

are similar

respect,
of

why

not

suppose souls

to bear the further likeness to the itselves

being

indissoluble?
The from
argument
soul

just

sketched
on and

is followed

by

fervent description
itself"

of the phi

losopher's
tion."

as

intent

"gathering itself into

"as
much as with

bodily

possible"

community,

(80e), withdrawing itself to "concentra giving

the same ground as the that inasmuch as

Thus the

conversation

Cebes
at

goes over

earlier address to

Simmias

(starting

64c). It

confirms

being

dead is

from body, and living philosophically is the effort at such detachment, it would be irrational for the philosopher not to welcome death as consummation. A philosopher who desires, or tries, to avert
a state of of soul

detachment

the final

life devoted to untying soul from body would be compounded with body many times, thereby turning his own cathartic enter prise into something as pointless as Penelope's work of weaving and unweav
after a

"break"

re-

ing

her father-in-law's funeral

secure than

shroud.

I feel far less

Hartle in

identifying

one

thing in

Platonic dia

logue

as

edifying

mythos and another as

anenuton

logos (perhaps
(idle

also edifying).

More

over, I

suspect am

that "Penelope's

ergon"

labor) is

a stock compar

ison. I

therefore disposed to constme the to life in the

suggestion

that the picture of a

sense of

philosopher wedded
word as well as

body

is

absurd

(in the technical

the

the colloquial)

"straight."

It is

not at all clear

to me that Indian

stories of metempsychosis and the scala naturae that goes with

them

are
raft

inser image

ted solely for the benefit of nonphilosophic types (note the Buddhist
at

85d

and compare

Odysseus 's

raft).

Being

so

foolishly

innocent

as

to believe

that the authors of serious

literature, while no doubt teaching, and even ad dressing different audiences diversely, are nonetheless also studying something for themselves, trying to get it clear, working it through by writing it out (as do mathematicians), I tend to think about and by means of Platonic images, sto
ries, and arguments toward what I guess to

be the
said

subject under

investigation.

This leads

me

to pay less attention to

are

who

Once spoken, words and thoughts the dialogue. As a consequence, unweaving joins up
on the other.
with

"out

there"

something for me, in the

Cebes'

than does Hartle.

mini-cosmos of

Socrates'

simile of

73d

on the one

hand

and

Penelope's weaving and with question at 87bff

(which
cloak

Stephanus 73d belongs

ticipates
ures

to the

dialogue's

section on recollection
vs.

an

by contiguity by fig there, as a term in the following analogy cloak:cloak's user or owner:: lyre:lyre's user or owner::body:soul. Stephanus 87b belongs to the passage after the disquisition on misology: Cebes asks whether the relation of soul to
resemblance ").

Hume's "association

body
the

mightn't

be like that
will

of a weaver

to the last cloak

he

wove and wore.

of

With the best

in the

world

cannot manage

to become persuaded

Book Reviews
dramatic
and

155

individuality
seem

of

Cebes

and

Simmias. But their two images

same well of

of weaver

lyre

to me to be tapped from the

pun on autos

deep

likenesses from

Socrates'

which

The life in those

not

(self) (the dialogue's opening word) also springs. images (and they are all images of life) is too palpable for me
with.

to feel pressed to use them to think

Are

not

Goethe

who sings of

"weaving
well

life's

living

cloth"

(und

weben

as

the modem biologist

who

des Lebens lebendigen Kleids) investigates how cells weave organs

Cebes'

as and

how
age?

organs reweave

themselves in the injured

living being

using
of soul as

im

Or, again, don't

our own most simple and most sophisticated notions of system

stmcture, organization,

derive from

Simmias'

image

the

body's harmony? It is hard for

me not to attribute to

Plato,

the maker of the the life of

drama,
things.

similarly

naive

interest in the
put

character and source of

living

Feeling
as

entitled

to

the three men's metaphors

take metempsychosis and the

longing

for life together, I also for deliverance from the wheel of rebirth

naively,

expressing

revulsion at

life.

cates

Hartle's way of reading differs in that she much more strenuously demar dramatic individuality. Convinced that Simmias and Cebes are yokels in
she takes

philosophy,
one to go to

little interest in their "mere

metaphors."

Socrates is the
"irony."

Accordingly (engaging in idle labor) refers, ing of arguments for the soul's
unweaves them on

for instmction. And Socrates, Hartle gives oblique readings

as we all
primacy.

know,

tends to

Prattein

anenuton ergon

for example, to

Socrates'

immortality. He
as

weaves

weaving and unweav them in the daylight; he

the

sly.

Just

Penelope's tme
avoid a
weaves

purpose

is

Laertes'

not to get

funeral
suitors,
soul's

cloak so

completed, but rather, to

"feigning."

decisive
the

confrontation with arguments

the

Socrates is

He

various

for the

invulnerability, permanence, divinity to still the fear of death. He un lack of cogency (e.g., pp. 57, 73) weaves them, that is, hints at the
arguments'

because he loves tmth life

more

than he loves himself

also stands

or

his friends.
while

For Hartle, the Penelope image

of a

for the need,

"loosening"

philosopher, continually to reinstate the

of soul soul

from

living the body

The

("theoretical virtue") and the mling of body work is never done, and is in that sense ously
unwoven reweaves

by

("practical

virtue").

"futile,"

because

what was so strenu

itself.

Finally,
opher's

the Penelope image is used to let

embraced conception

passionately
there is
the
no

ring out some version of Husserl's of "philosophy as infinite task": "The philos
in
task"

'immortality'

is his

entrapment

an endless

(p. 200). Although

solution,"

"final

that

should not make us

hate

arguing.

Hartle deems

section on misology,

which

falls

at the center of the

dialogue, its "crucial

section"

occurs,"

edo

(p. 52). "It is here that the brief exchange between Socrates and Pha between them (p. which according to her concludes with a
"pact"

53),

as

a result of which
Socrates'

Phaedo becomes something

more

(or less) than

the

chronicler of

last day. Phaedo, if I

understand

Hartle correctly,
not as

will

tell Echecrates "wie

es eigentlich

(as it really was)

eyewit-

156
ness

Interpretation
but
"eigentlich"

as the

soul-witness,

who would protect what was most

(authentic)
Stoic
not

about

Socrates,
but love
of

would of

testify. Most authentically Socratic is not

or argument. compare

impassivity

discourse

The extremity

of evil

is

death but hatred

logos (89d, but

. .

83c).
the life of argument is good.

Whether [particular] It is at least a holding

.

arguments are

true or

false,

action against the of

irrational.

By
This, it

remaining unchanged,
to me, is the real

by holding
present.

fast to the life Socrates's last

argument, Socrates brings about a change in those

'cures'

In Phaedo's words, he
of

them.

seems

meaning

words

[about owing

a cock to

Asclepius]

(p. 59).
the

"Socrates's

cure

is

accomplished,"

tinction between tmth

certitude"

and

according to Hartle, (p. 59).

"by

means of

dis

14, 55, 72, 78, 81, 211), the stinger that Socrates says he may have left in his friends, and which they need perhaps remove, is some possible untmth. On p. 54, Hartle identifies it as actual decep tion: Socrates, to avoid seeming pitiable, used Phaedo's love and loyalty to
simile of

As for the

the bee (pp.

have him frame

ful"

an account that would make it appear that philosophy is "use for removing the fear of death (cf. p. 215). Not so. Philosophy cannot console human beings for their not being divine. Philosophy lacks pity, because the divinity to which its practitioners strive to assimilate themselves is stark,

merciless, beautiful

nous theoretikos.

one

Augustine: The Look of Pity. The God of Augustine does console. At least, may hope He will. He who created human beings and their world from

nought and who maintains them all

in

being
of

does

not

despise

us

for

being human,

too human: The Christian belief in the

of

immortality

the soul is not based on the overcoming

the human as such. The resurrection of the

body
mind

means

human immortality,

not

the

immortality

of

the

'purified'

disembodied

(p. 121).

Descartes: Occupation
other commentators on

imacy
when

of the modem

age."

and Preoccupation. Hartle, like a fair number of intellectual history, has grave doubts about the "legit These doubts are succinctly expressed by the three

main words of

her

chapter

heading. Descartes, in Part III

morality,"

of the

Discourse,

describing

the mles of his "interim to the

mot
"cultivation"

speaks of the philosophic of one's

"occupation."

life (the life

In

given over

reason)
the

as an
"transvaluation"

context this

is the

juste because it

expresses

of

philosophy into pertise that has

ful."

a useful profession.
"techniques"

and

Henceforth philosophy is a metier, an ex uses technical language. And it is to be "use Part I

of

Quoting

the passage toward the end of

the

Discourse,

where

Descartes

writes

"I

always

had

an extreme

desire to leam to distinguish the tme

actions and to walk with assurance

from the false in

order to see

clearly in my

Book Reviews
in this
life,"

157
goal

is its

certitude

Hartle italicizes the phrase "in order in action; the ability to distinguish the
[as it
was

to"

and comments:

"The

tme
. .

from the false is

know-how

not

for

own sake

in

premodern philosophy]..

Contemplative knowl
practical

edge

is

no

longer distinguished from know-how,

on

and

(po

litical wisdom) is

the way toward

becoming

know-how technological. While

this type of reading of the Discourse (which Hartle backs up

meticulous analysis of

by

minute and

the text) is

familiar, her
with she

claim

that there

mns

through the

Discourse

kind
pp.

"preoccupation"

of

death

is, I believe,
death,"

somewhat of a

novelty (see
understands

146ff). She does not,

obsessed

writes, "mean to

suggest
rather

that he

[Descartes] is pathologically
the activity
of

by

the

fear

of

but

"that he

(p. 147). One philosophy in its relation to thesis of her book is, if I understand her correctly, that philosophy is always a totalizing life-choice in the face of death. This is what she seemed to argue in

mortality"

her book
Socratic
gerian

about

Rousseau. In Death

and

the Disinterested Spectator even the

exhibited

renunciation of

totality is, I believe,

in

some such

Heideg
and

frame. for the

moment

Supposing
that
cartes'

that Hartle's reading

"roots"

of

the Discourse is just

knowledge"

"modernity"

has Cartesian its

(cf. the "tree

of

in Des
Des

"Letter to the Translator

"project"

of the

Principles"),
The

what

is wrong

with

cartes'

is clearly ridiculously things, that one take stock of what is wrong politically, economically, socially, intellectually in to program. day's world, and discriminate which ills are the result of
and
execution since? question

too

large,

since

answering it

would

require, among

other

Descartes'

Hartle's book does

points

in

some such

cartes'

program?

openly ask the question, though I do believe her book direction. Shrink the question: What's wrong with Des Hartle's answer seems to me to be strikingly like that of Eva
not

Brann, Karl Lowith, and others. It is the purist's answer: is neither fish nor fowl, neither pagan nor Christian. It is,
"perversion"

Descartes's

program

to use Brann's

coin

age,

a
at the

of

Christianity. She

writes:

very heart of the philosopher's attempt to escape death [by himself to Mind Divine]. Hope is possible only on account of God's assimilating compassion. [The] change in the notion of the divine, the change from

Pride is

disinterested

spectator to compassionate actor

undertaken

[is]

what makes possible

(but

not

inevitable)
attempts to and as an

the modem project

in

Descartes'

Discourse. Descartes

imitation

begin from nothing, to rebegin philosophy as a purely human activity Descartes rejects both the of the divine compassion.
. . .

Socratic
and the

philosophy Augustinian dependence

notion of

as an endless task

[Husserl

and

Penelope conflated]
certitude of

on a compassionate

God. The

his

self-

assertion

is the

beginning

of the task of

reversing the

effects of original sin

(p. 135;

cf. pp.

202ff,

207).
Modernity' "

Eva Brann's 'Roots of (St. essay entitled "A Note on John's Review, Winter 1985), I tried to record some of my reasons for ques modthis line of thought. Briefly, it seemed to me that the founders of

In

a small

tioning

158
emity

Interpretation
were not obliged to agree
with

Hartle that "hope is

stand

possible she

only

on

account of nounces?

God's

compassion."

Where does Hartle

when

so pro

putting my objection would be to urge that the foun ders of modernity may well have held that "reversing the effects of original and "reversing the effects of the doctrine of original are two different
of
sin"

Another way

sin"

things.

Long

before them, Julian

of

Eclanus

wrote

to Augustine:

You

ask me

human
makes

nature.

why I would not consent to the idea that there is a sin that is part of I answer: It is improbable, it is untrue, it is unjust and impious. It

it

seem as

if the devil
.

were

the maker of
that

men.

It

violates and

destroys the in the

freedom

of the will

by

saying

men are so

incapable

of virtue that

very they are filled with bygone sins (In Peter Brown, Augustine of Hippo (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1967), p. 387).
wombs of their mothers

Julian, it

seems, held that God

would

be

malicious

if

a natural

human disposi

tion could not,

by

natural

discipline, be

turned toward good.

Augustine's doc
I

trine of original sin outraged Julian's religious sensibilities.

Distinguishing
am not

doctrine from fact does

Descartes'

not presuppose religious conviction.

maintaining that

coming
cloaked

out on the same side as

Julian is due

to his sharing Julian's piety. It is possible, though not necessary, that it was
rhetorical reasons that

for

Descartes

his

project

(of

delivering

human be

ings from

teachings that made miracles necessary

if life

was

to be endurable) in

purporting to show that God cannot be the devil (alias malicious demon). The audience he was addressing and hoped to win over was, after all,
an argument

Christian.

Indeed, it is Hartle
manifestly superior of human equality
choice of

rather

than I who seems to hold that

and goads

Descartes,
life

the

man who

flatters

his

audience with suppositions as a

and who

describes his

choice of a philosophical

metier, only have done these things as a lapsed Christian. At least, she writes as though the baneful choice of making philosophy which she exposes by her analysis of the Discourse could only have been made
could
"useful"

by

rebel, not against the Christian church but against the Christian God:
whole of

The

Descartes 's project,

and

as the search

for

self-reliance and

certitude,

begins to
work,

appear as

the stmggle against the effects of original sin: sickness, pain,

death,

the so-called

darkening
. . .

of

the intellect. Descartes

is

attempting to do what faith believes that only God can do. From this point of view, Descartes's
whole enterprise is based on the most monstrous pride. This view is only confirmed by the fact that he presents his project not as a matter of pride but as an undertaking of the greatest compassion and, indeed, like Redemption, for all mankind (p. 208).

I have

several

difficulties

with

the

just-cited

passage.

First, I

am

uncon a

vinced that

the search for certainty, the

Parmenides'

fascination
the

with rational

necessity, is

peculiarly Cartesian item. lic, Aristotle in the Metaphysics

goddess, Plato's Socrates in the Repub

speak of
"unshakeable"

all

(bebaiotate

Book Reviews
arche).

1 59
Peirce

agree with
"fallibilist."

Hartle
But I

that Socrates in the Phaedo

would need

looks like

what

called a

to hear
calls

in far

greater argumentative

rather than and

literary

detail

about what

Hartle

"the distinction between tmth

certitude"

before I

could alter

tioned

by

Hartle in

a note on p.

my present conviction that Dewey (men 251) is historically in the right in claiming that

modem

philosophy inherits the

Descartes'

search

sequently,

enterprise of

for certainty from ancient thought. Con laying (or finding) firm foundations does in that
odd

not, to me, seem dependent on

the rebel the grave

Christianity
he

is dependent

on what

rebels against. of

Second,

Hegelian way in which while I acknowledge

of orthodox

tianity,
sin,
on

difficulty that, from the standpoint knowing non-acknowledgment of the

not

any kind

Chris

truth of the doctrine of original

on

the ground that the doctine is

based

fact,

must appear as

itself

symptom of original sin

("darkening
cited

of the

intellect"

to the tmth that "the tmth

is

not

in us"), I do not, in the

project

passage, find

reasons

and

his

from that

religious perspective. which

And I

gestion which

that "this

view,"

is,

presumably, the

Descartes

stands

condemned, is
Descartes'

"confirmed"

forjudging Descartes troubled by the sug Augustinian one in and by presenting by

am
Descartes'

his

"compassion."

"Compassion,"

project as one of of

Hartle

explains

in

foot

note, is her translation word in Paul Robert's to the

sort of

own word generosite.

I haven't tracked the

of the French Language, but doesn't it refer largesse that is supposedly distinctive of people of gens, noble

Dictionary

men and women of

(cf. the "gennaios

word

falsehood"

of

the Republic)*! If my
me

under

loading the just, standing dice by not allowing Descartes the option of a morality of noblesse oblige that bypasses Christianity instead of being its product. Her reply, I imagine, will be
is
then Hartle seems to

Descartes'

to be

to saddle

me with questions about

how I

would square

the Discourse's opening

paragraph about would

the

equitable

distribution

of good sense with noblesse.

That

be fair. I

would

thus be led to study Nietzsche's the morality of benevolence

Genealogy
which

since that

is the book

where

of Morals, Hartle so much

most

mistmsts, in Descartes

and

in the
It

world

today, is

subjected

to the

thor
most

oughgoing scrutiny vividly larized

states

and critique.

is, I believe,
times,
our

also

the book

which

first

the thesis that

modem

times,

are an epoch of

"secu

Christianity."

Conclusion: Death
ter's major theme
another not

and the

Disinterested Spectator. Wonder is the last chap

to a famous passage in the Theaetetus and

because, according

in Aristotle's Metaphysics,

wonder

is the

source of philosophy. an

Surely,

wonder is a stepping back, acknowledging that only of philosophy? If means and breaks loose from "everyday immersion in action, in the web of meets the (p. 8), then the stance that is today so glibly called
"aesthetic"
ends"

description. While Hartle, quoting Husserl in

"wonder"

footnote,
she pays

acknowledges

that

or are amazingly little at nonphilosophers, too, the incense lamp swing, Miranda tention to these other folk (Galileo watching
"curious,"

160

Interpretation
new

people

exclaiming "How beauteaous mankind is! O brave in Monet painting his haystacks, any and
it,"

world, that

has
the

such

all of us some of

time,

for the She

so

reasons mentioned

little

explains
palm

in the opening what it is about

"useful"

paragraph of

Aristotle's Metaphysics).

philosophers'

wonder and contemplation

(although stargazing and painting haystacks are no differ ent from philosophy in being only extrinsically) that I feel genuinely unclear about what philosophy is according to her.
that give it the

Much be

of

the textual analysis

and argument

in Hartle's

Inquiry

into the Na

ture of Philosophy steers toward

useful.

fighting

the idea that philosophy is or ought to

is clearly enemy number one though his name is never mentioned, thought it should) because it is powerless to make the world better. Moreover, to expect philosophy to be
It
ought not

"change"

the world (as

Marx,

who

publicly
what

consequential

is

not

only to

endanger

the public realm

but

also

to

min

philosophy is
no purpose

the

inherently pleasurable
well

that has

beyond itself. I may

trinitarian
and

activity of noticing and thinking have missed something, but it

of

looks to
the
oras"

me as though the

hierarchy

making,

doing, thinking
of

of

Republic, Nicomachean Ethics,

Diogenes Laertius's "Life

Pythag

is simply taken over, with no attention paid to the possible need for finer discriminations. The case for the philosopher's life given over to thinking being

essentially self-serving life is repeatedly stated in terms of the thesis that (see especially p. 71) and assumes a "philosophy claims to overcome
an
death"

"more than human

stance"

(p. 8

and

throughout). But

what

it is that the

philos such

opher thinks about and

the

manner of

his thinking

and

precisely why
these things

thinking is best described

explained.

as

straining toward
and

divinity

are not

We
when

are given one clue: gains

Tragedy

the stance of the tragic

protagonist

he

knowledge

of

his former ignorance (anagnorisis)

are somehow

held to
she

come closest to
not wonder

Hartle it is does

philosophy (e.g., pp. 194-95). This suggests that for but terror that is the beginning of philosophy. Indeed,

so write:

Philosophy
returns to about

begins
the

as an escape

from death

and thus presupposes mortality.

Then it

its

conditions and

becomes

a meditation on
a

death. Socrates's discourse

death

on

day

of

his death is both

and an

time while waiting to

die,

diversion from death, a passing the unblinking steady looking at death (p. 219).

The fear
(p. 71).

of

death

allows the question of the soul's nature to come out of

obscurity

From these

passages

it is evident, to
these are one

answer

my

own question about

the philos

opher's subject

matter, that one of the things he thinks about is the human soul,
and

self,
all

mind and whether

the

same or

different. But
of

what about

the other things that people on philosophy

departments'

reading lists talk

about, for instance space, time, matter, the principle

noncontradiction, the

Book Reviews
nature of mathematical

-161

knowledge,
And

the logical

relations

between

norms and

facts? Are these in

argument

or out?

on what principles?

according to
the

which all such questions nature of

certainly imagine an depend on or are included in I

could
an argument

the

question about

the soul. Perhaps such

is implicit

in Hartle's book. I But

ask even when

wish

it

were

explicitly developed.
Hartle's book I
must

confine myself to the express topic of

soul's nature presuppose
of

why do questions about the Isn't life at least as much the

The free human
a meditation on

fear, fear

of

death?
of

"horizon"

death

as

death is the horizon

life?
not

being

thinks
on

of

death but

nothing so little as of death and his wisdom is life (Spinoza, Ethics, IV, Proposition 67).
of

It

was

because I thought that the Phaedo is

the same persuasion as the

some of would

passage

from Spinoza's Ethics just

earlier

cited

that I

included
in the

my

own reac
what

tions to its
she

is

imagery describing is

in this

review.

Perhaps Hartle

reply that

how

one

becomes

"free"

relevant sense.

Then my

becomes, why through terror, why not through love? Another way of this is, I suppose, why does sublimity (in Kant's or Burke's sense) putting
question outrank

beauty?
much

I very
obscure

hope that the generally

It is

dissenting
full
of

tone

of

this review does not

much

the fact that I found Death

and the

Disinterested Spectator very

worth reading.

beautifully
were

written and

fine

apenjus.

Conceivably, if

the hints
wonder

on pp.

196ff
via

further developed
and

hints

to

inquiry

acknowledging
much as

delineating

about proceeding from discrepancies in feeling,

thought, and attitude stands, it looks to me

conflate

of

our

disagreement

would

fall

away.

As it

though Hartle's book tries to do the impossible

with

Plato

and

Aristotle

both Husserl

and

Heidegger.

JACOB KLEIN
Lectures
*

and

Essays

JACOB KLEIN
Lectures
*
'
""

CONTENTS
The World
s

s,j

and

""

"Essavs

-'.

1986

393 pages,

hardcover, $22.50

World ? On a Physics and the Sixteenth-Century Algebraist D The Concept of Number in Greek Mathematics and Philosophy ? Modern Ration alism ? Phenomenology and the History of Science D The Copernican Revolution D The Problem of Freedom ? History and the Liberal Arts D The Problem and the Art of Writing ? The Idea of Liberal Education D Aristotle, an Introduction D Leibniz, an Introduction ? On the Nature of Nature D On Dante's Mount of Purgation ? On Liberal Education ? The Myth of Virgil's Aeneid ? A Note on Plato's Parmenides D On Precision ? About Plato's Philebus ? Plato's Ion ? Speech, Its Strength and Its Weaknesses D Plato's Phaedo
of

"Natural"

TO ORDER: Send a check for $22.50 plus $1 for postage and handling to ST. JOHN'S COLLEGE BOOKSTORE, P.O. Box 1671, Annapolis, MD 21404. (Maryland residents add $1.13 state sales tax.)

INTERPRETATION
A JOURNAL OF POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY Queens College, Flushing, NY 11367-0904 U.S.A. (718) 520-7099

Subscription

rates per volume

(3 issues): individuals $21

Postage outside (8 weeks or

institutions $34 (five-year limit) $12 U.S.: Canada $3.50 extra; elsewhere $4 extra by surface mail longer) or $7.50 by air.
and all other

libraries

students

Payments: in U.S. dollars and payable institution located within the U.S. Please

by

the U.S. Postal Service

or a

financial

print or

type

ORDER FORM FOR NEW SUBSCRIBERS

(NOT FOR
RENEWALSCURRENT

SUBSCRIBERS WILL BE BILLED)

wish

to subscribe to INTERPRETATION.
name address

? bill me

D
___

student

payment enclosed

ZIP/postcode ?
airmail

country (if outside U.S.)

GIFT SUBSCRIPTION ORDER FORM Please

enter a subscription

to INTERPRETATION for
___ ,

name address

student

_____

ZIP/postcode

airmail

country (if outside U.S.)

from:
name

? bill me

payment enclosed

address

ZIP/postcode

INTERPRETATION

will send an announcement

to the

recipient and acknowledgment

to you

RECOMMENDATION TO YOUR LIBRARY

to: the Librarian, I recommend that
;

our

library

subscribe

to
at

INTERPRETATION,
the institutional

a journal of

political philosophy

[ISSN 0020-9635],
signature name

rate of

$34

per year

(three issues).

date

position

INTERPRETATION, Queens College, Rushing, New York 11367-0904, U.S.A.

WAYNE STATE UNIVERSITY PRESS

Now in A

New,

Expanded Edition

An Introduction to Political Philosophy

TEN ESSAYS BY

Edited

and with an

Introduction

by

Hilail Gildin

Four essays supplement the original 1975 edition to present a clear introduction to the views of Leo Strauss regarding the nature of political philosophy, its chief contemporary antagonists, its classical Strauss' thoughts forms, and its modern version. Readers discover
on what political

philosophy has been

and should

be

again.

389 pages

ISBN 0-8143-1901-7, cloth, $29.95 ISBN 0-8143-1902-5, paper, $15.95

Contents Introduction PART ONE What is Political Philosophy? On Classical Political PART THREE Progress or Return? The Contemporary Crisis in Western Civilization

Philosophy
The Three Waves of Modernity Natural Right and the Historical Approach An Epilogue
PART TWO Introduction to History of Political Philosophy

What is Liberal Education? Liberal Education and

Responsibility Bibliography
Index

Plato

^_fcj^ WAYNE STATE UNIVERSITY PRESS Leonard N. Simons Building 5959 Woodward Avenue Detroit, Michigan 48202 (313) 577-6120

Forthcoming
Joseph

Cropsey

The Whole
Timaeus

as

Setting

for Man: On Plato's

Govert den Hartogh

Made

by

Contrivance
and

and the

Consent

of

Men:

Abstract Principle
Richard Myers

Historical Fact in Locke

Christianity
Greatness

and

Politics in Montesquieu's

and

Decline of the Romans

and

Mark S. Cladis

Emile Durkheim

the Provinces of Ethics

Reviews Will

Morrisey

on

Patrick

Coby; Mary Nichols;

and

Catherine

Zuckert Robert R. Sullivan

on

Horst-Jiirgen Gerigk

ISSN 0020-9635

Interpretation, Inc.
Queens College

Flushing

N.Y. 11367-0904 U.S.A.

"0
o

r
3
O

03

Z
o
3

y
2
o
K>

00

C r
JO

"0

D
o
1 Vi

3
H

T3

>

CD

re era