A

JOURNAL

OF POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY

September 1981
141

Volume 9 Numbers 2 & 3

The

Larry

Arnhart

Rationality
and

of

Political Speech: Aristotle's Rhetoric

An Interpretation 155 Jan H. Blits Manliness

of

Friendship

in Shakespeare's Julius Caesar 169

Mary
Jerry

Nichols

The Winter's Tale:

The Triumph 191 207 Weinberger

of

Comedy

over

Tragedy
A

On Bacon's Advertisement

Touching Teaching

Holy

War

John Parsons, Jr.

On Sir William Temple's Political

and

Philosophical

229

Susan Power

John Locke:

Revolution, Resistance,
245

or

Opposition?

Barry
Philip

Cooper

The Politics
of

of

Performance: An Interpretation

Bolingbroke's Political
the

Theory Theory
in the

263

J. Kain

Labor,
Law
as

State,

and

Aesthetic

Writings

of

Schiller

279
301

Michael H. Mitias

the Basis of the State: Hegel

Stanley

Corngold

Dilthey's
A Poetics

Essay
of and

The Poetic Imagination:

Force

339

Kent A. Kirwan

Historicism

Statesmanship
of

in the Reform Argument 353

Richard

Woodrow Wilson
of

Velkley Grady Marty

Gadamer

and

Kant: The Critique

Modern Method

Aesthetic Consciousness in Truth

and

365

Robert C.

Bertrand de Jouvenel:

Order, Legitimacy,
385 397
William R.

and

the Model of Rousseau

Rawls

and

the Harried Mother

Jiirgen Gebhardt

Ideology

and

Reality:

The Ideologue's Persuasion in Modern Politics 415

Kenneth W. Thompson Science, Morality,
and

Transnationalism

Discussion
427

Peter T. Manicas

The Crisis
on

of

Contemporary
and

Political Theory:

Jacobson's Pride

Solace

Book Reviews
437
Patrick

Coby

by Harvey
439 Will

The Spirit of Liberalism, C. Mansfield, Jr.

Morrisey

Political Parties in the Eighties,

edited

by

Robert A. Goldwin

interpretation
Volume Q

JL

numbers 2 &

Editor-in-Chief

Hilail Gildin

Editors

Seth G. Benardete

Hilail Gildin

Robert Horwitz

Howard B. White (d.1974)

Consulting

Editors

John Hallowell

Wilhelm Hennis

Erich Hula Ellis

Arnaldo Momigliano Sandoz Leo Strauss

Thompson

Michael Oakeshott

(d.1973)

Kenneth W.

Associate Editors

Larry

Arnhart

Patrick

Coby

Christopher A. Colmo

Maureen Feder Jensen Will

Joseph E.

Goldberg

Pamela

Morrisey Grey

Assistant Editor
Production Manager

Marianne C.

Martyn Hitchcock

Authors submitting Style Sheet

of
and

manuscripts

for

publication

in

interpretation are requested

to follow the MLA

to send clear and readable copies

manuscripts and editorial correspon

their

work.

All

dence

should

be

addressed to

interpretation,

Building

G Room 101, Queens

College, Flushing,

N.Y. 11367, U.S.A.

Copyright

1982

Interpretation

Libertyito Lbec\yCkssics
Gustave Le Bon
The Man
and

His Works

A presentation with introduction, first translations into English, and edited extracts from Le Bon's major works by Alice Widener. The founder
Bon
of social

psychology, Le
the

(1841-1931)

predicted

worldwide advance of socialism and almost all

its

now-

apparent

social,

political and economic

consequences.

The

extracts are

from

Le Bon's The Crowd, Psychological Laws of the Evolution of Peoples, The Psychology of Socialism, The Evolution of Matter, Opinions and Beliefs, The Psychology of Revolutions, and Aphorisms of
Modern Times. Hardcover

$8.00,

Paperback $3.50.

We pay postage, but

prepayment,

require

on orders

from

individuals. Please allow four to six weeks for delivery. To order

this

book,

or

for

copy

of our

catalog,

write:

LibertyPres.s'/LibertyCYa.w/c.s
7440 North

Shadeland, Dept. 468 Indianapolis, Indiana 46250

LfoertyPtess ]Jperb/Cbssics
THEPOUTTCIZATION
OF SOCIETY
The Politicization
Edited "The
of

Society

by
in

Kenneth S. Templeton, Jr.

state

church

increasingly replaced the determining how we should

Oxford
professor

has

behave,"

writes

R. M.

Hartwell in his introduction. "Politics

is

religion."

now

Fourteen

scholars
of modern

examine

the central problem

society its significance for the individual.

are

the

growth of

the state

and

They

Carneiro, Felix Morley, N. William Marina, Rothbard, Murray Robert A. Nisbet, Jacques Ellul, Giovanni Sartori, Michael Oakeshott, Donald M. Dozer, Herbert Butterfield, John A. Lukacs, Jonathan R. T. Hughes, Butler D. Shaffer, and F. A. Hayek. Hardcover $10.00,
Paperback $4.50. We pay postage, but
prepayment,
require

Robert L.

from individuals. Please allow four to six weeks for delivery. To order this book, or for a
on orders

copy

of our

catalog,

write:

LibertyPress /Liberty-Classics 7440 North Shadeland, Dept. 469 Indianapolis, Indiana 46250

THE RATIONALITY OF POLITICAL SPEECH: AN INTERPRETATION OF ARISTOTLE'S RHETORIC

Larry Arnhart
Idaho State

University

Is

rhetoric some

form

of rational

politics?

Or is it merely

a means

lacious

arguments and appeals sophistry?

discourse about the intelligible reality of for verbally manipulating men through fal to irrational impulses? In short, can rhetoric be
to inter
the

distinguished from One

might

pret, evaluate,
rule of reason about and

and

say that the rhetorician by his use deliberate about political action
political affairs.

of public speech maintains

somehow

in

Does
what

not rhetoric require political men to talk

thereby
what

to think about

they have done,

apprehend

are

doing,

or will

do?

Does "We

not rhetoric thus elevate politics

weigh we

by bringing

thought to bear upon action?

minds,"

it perfectly in our Pericles declared in his funeral oration, "not accounting words for a hindrance of action but that it is rather a hindrance to action to come to it without
undertake and

instruction But employ

that
can

before"

of words also

(Thucydides, Peloponnesian War II

darker
side.

40).

rhetoric emotional

has

Does

not

the rhetorician sometimes to move

appeals

and

deceptive

arguments

his listeners to
techniques

whatever position

he

wishes?

Indeed, does

not rhetoric consist of

side of

be

used as

other

words,

there

easily for the wrong as for the right surely is some justification for the
speakers

any issue? In
criticism of

ancient

rhetoric as

stronger.

permitting As Gorgias boasted,

to

make

the weaker argument appear to

be the

"Many

are the men who shape a men about

seems

false

argument 11).

and persuade and

have

things"

persuaded

many

So the
means

problem

is that,

while rhetoric

many in some

(Helen

respects to

be the

by
is

which reason guides political rational

action, it often seems to be an art of

extent that

deception that hinders

rhetoric question

deliberation. Furthermore, to the

of political rhetoric
political

the primary

mode
or

reasoning, how
a genuine

one of

decides this
will

as

to

whether

not

is

form

reasoning

determine the

place of reason

in

life.

The rationality of rhetoric becomes especially dubious if scientific demon stration is taken to be the sole model of valid reasoning. For it is obvious that
rhetorical argument cannot attain

the exactness and certainty that

is

possible

in

scientific

nal,

rhetoric must

inquiry. And therefore if only scientific demonstration is truly ratio be irrational. As a result, rhetoric becomes virtually indistin

guishable

from
the

sophistry.

For

since

there are no

rational standards

for

political

discourse,
deception

power of rhetoric must

depend

upon manipulation

through verbal

and not upon

any

pervasive

intelligibility

of the speech

itself. As

142

Interpretation

further consequence, the political itself becomes irrational. Since the ordinary discourse of citizens about political things has little to do with scientifically demonstrable knowledge, the political life of men must be understood to be
guided

by
as

opinions with

little foundation in
the rationality

reason.

But
realm

could one save

of political speech
as

and of

the

political

whole

by

viewing

rhetoric

between

science and sophistry?

This

could

occupying some middle ground be done if one could show that the

realm of reason extends

beyond the
argument

confines of scientific

demonstration,
truly
rational

and even

therefore that

rhetorical

can

be in

some

sense

though it lacks the certainty

one would restore the

and exactness of scientific

meaning

of rhetoric as rational

knowledge. In this way discourse.

And in fact this

would seem

to be the project that Aristotle sets for himself the

sophistical

in the Rhetoric. For he

practice

criticizes

rhetoricians,

whose common

is to

use

purely

emotional appeals

to distract their

listeners from the is essentially a proof. He explains

subject at

hand, for failing

reasoning
as

to

see

that the true art of rhetoric

mode of reasoning, although without the rigor of apodictic

rhetorical

tion of the enthymeme that

reasoning through enthymemes, and it is in his concep his theory of rhetoric is most fully embodied. My
rhetorical

claim, therefore, in this essay, is that Aristotle's

of the

theory is
on

an account
of

rationality
here.1

of political speech.

To

fully

substantiate

this interpretation

the Rhetoric would require a much more extensive

commentary

the text than

is

possible

But I

can at

least

state some of

the major points.

How Aristotle

uses

from

science on the one

of

hand

his theory of the enthymeme to differentiate rhetoric and from sophistry on the other, becomes clearer
persuasion, which
and

four tripartite distinctions. First, the enthymeme, differs both from instruction in the light
opinion,
absolute
which provides

is the

aim of

from

compulsion.

Second,

premises

truth, but

neither

for the enthymeme, does not conform to is it absolute falsehood. Third, the probability char inferences falls
somewhere

acteristic of most enthymematic

and mere randomness or chance.

Finally,

the

enthymeme

between necessity itself differs from a

shall comment

strict

demonstration but
on each of

without

being

a sophistical

fallacy. I

briefly

these points.

// That
men are

by

nature

both

rational and political

is

manifest

in the

natural

human capacity for speech. Men are naturally more political than gregarious animals, Aristotle says in the Politics (1253315-18), because human commu'Here I can only sketch the outline Political Reasoning: A Commentary
198 1
of an argument that
"Rhetoric"

I have developed in detail in Aristotle (DeKalb: Northern Illinois

at the

on

on

the

University
of

Press,

). I have

applied

Aristotle's

rhetorical
Rhetoric"

theory

to American rhetoric in an unpublished

paper, "The Federalist as Aristotelian

(presented

1979 Annual

Meeting

the

Midwest Political Science Association, Chicago, April 18-21).

The
nity
rests upon a union

Rationality

of Political Speech

143

in discourse

and

thought. Other animals may signify to

pain

one another with

their voices their sensations of pleasure and

but

men

through rational speech

(Xoyog)

can share with one another their concepts of

expediency,

justice,
can

and

goodness.

Human beings

achieve

more

intimate

community among themselves than is possible for

human beings
speech.

other

creatures, because only

found their

association

on

mutual

understanding through

One
speech rational

might conclude

from this that

rhetoric

the artful practice of public

is the fundamental activity of politics, and that politics expresses the nature of men insofar as political activity is founded upon rhetoric. But Or is it
perhaps not

does only

rhetoric encompass the whole of politics?

a

important for

limited

realm of political

life? That Aristotle does

politics with rhetoric

is

clear

from. his

remarks at the end of the

simply identify Nicomachean

to make

Ethics. Speeches
men virtuous

or arguments

(XoyoC), he

explains,

are not sufficient

(i

17^4-1 i8ob28).

At best they

are effective with youths who

because
noble.

of some natural endowment or good moral

training have

love

of

the

Most men, especially in their youth, live by passion and the pleasures of the body, and hence they can be controlled by force but not by arguments. For
these people it
youth own.

is necessary
moral

to do those virtuous

coercively habituate them from their things that they would never choose to do on their
of a

that the laws

Thus the

training

community

requires

that the legislator apply

legal

compulsion where moral persuasion would

be futile.

It is

at

this point that Aristotle criticizes the sophists for showing their
politics

ignorance

of

by
1

(Nicomachean Ethics

i8iai2-i6).2

making it the same as, or lower than, rhetoric This is often taken to indicate that Aristotle

thought the sophistical view of politics to

one might

infer something

quite

be too cynical, but from the context different: the sophistical assumption that the

art of persuasion can govern all political

the true harshness of political

side of

activity manifests a naive blindness to life. Rhetorical reasoning displays the nobler
activity
governed

politics, that area

of political

by

persuasion and

through

speeches.

But

most men respond not

to persuasion

but to force,

therefore
through

the greater
repetition persuaded

part of politics must

be

concerned with

compelling men,

and

habituating them,

to do without thought what

to do. The success of rhetoric, Aristotle

be they implies, presupposes the

could never

the laws of an ethos in the community that makes people open to The taming of the most irrational impulses demands force rather than argument; but once the lowest part of the soul has been subdued, the

formation

by

persuasion.

rhetorician can appeal

to that part of the soul that can be persuaded

by

reason.

Rhetoric is therefore

subordinate

to politics since the multitude of men would

'Henceforth I

shall abbreviate

my

references

to Aristotle's works as

follows: Eudemian Ethics

(EE), Nicomachean Ethics (NE), Politics (P), Posterior Analytics (PoA), Prior Analytics (PrA), Rhetoric (R), Sophistical Refutations (SR), Topics (7).

144
never uated

Interpretation
be
amenable to rhetorical

reasoning

unless

they

were

first properly habit

affairs
makes since

by

the

laws.
introduces the
rule of reason

Hence
moves men

rhetoric

into human
yet

it

by

persuasion rather

than

by

force. And

Aristotle

it

clear

that rhetoric
persuasion

fails to

attain

the highest level of reasoning insofar

as rhetorical

falls

short of scientific or philosophic

instruction (R

1355322-29).

The ician
the

exact

knowledge rarely draw the

and complex

struction are must

effective

in

political speeches.

demonstrations necessary for scientific in To be persuasive, the rhetor

premises of

his

enthymemes not

from the first

of

principles of

particular

sciences, but from the common opinions

his

audience.

And he

must

simplify and abbreviate his line of reasoning so that ordinary citizens can grasp it quickly and easily (R 135738-23, 139^24-30, 1419318-19). Thus the
good rhetorician csn

persusde, but he csnnot instruct. the enthymeme are derived from

might seem
common

Since the false form for the

premises of

opinions,

and since opinion

surely differs from truth, it

snd regards

that the enthymeme is

of

reasoning,

therefore that all

rhetoric enter

is

sophistical.

But

in fact Aristotle

the common opinions that

the enthymeme ss

being

most

part neither

completely true nor completely fslse but 3t

least partislly true (R i357b2i-25, 1361325-27; NE i098b26-30, ii45bi-7; EE i2i6b28-35). Therefore, although this reliance on opinions does impose
certain

limits

on enthymematic

argumentstion, this does

of reasoning.

not prevent

the en
opin

thymeme from
ions"

being

a valid

form

Although the "reputable

(evdo^a) on any particulsr subject sre ususlly confused 3nd even ap parently contradictory, Aristotle assumes that in most cases they manifest at least a partial grasp of the truth and therefore that any serious inquiry into moral
or political subjects must start

from them. So

while

Aristotle treats
or

certain sub
ethical

jects

differently
since

in the Rhetoric than he does in the Politics

rhetoric

in his

treatises,
reflect

involves

opinions

in their

original

state

without

the

refinements

of philosophic

in

some

"happiness"

account of

examination, his expositions in the Rhetoric still fundamental manner those in his other works. For example, the (etidaiftovia) in the Rhetoric clearly reflects, even if
the philosophic understanding of
with
"happiness"

somewhat

dimly,

set

forth in the

Nicomachean Ethics (compare R 1360^5-19 see also P I323b2i-i32434, 1325^4-31).

NE I097b7-2i, U76b4-7;

Furthermore, in its dependence

guished common

on common opinions, sophistry.

rhetoric

is distin
not with

both from

science and
with

from

Each

science are

begins

opinions, but

the

primary truths that

fundamental
as

to the

science

(R 1358317-27, PoA 7ibi8-72a6, SR I723i2-i72b4). (But

even these scientific truths
of

shall

indicate later,
sense

depend ultimately
are

on some

common-

wh3t

understanding appear to be

things.) And sophistry

opinions

consists either of

srguing from

common

but

not,

or

appear

to follow necessarily from

common

opinions

making something when it does not (SR

of

The

Rationality

of Political Speech

145

i65a37-i65bi2, I76b29-i77a8).
cannot

Moreover,

the fact that sophistical arguments

be truly derived from

of

common

opinions confirms the epistemological

solidity

these opinions. the

One

of

limitations
part

of common

opinions,
case.

however, is

that

they usually
have
most cases

hold for the

probable

most not

but

not

in every

Therefore,

enthymemes

but
in

necessary validity,

since the conclusions are true 3chieve

in

but

not

all.
.

Enthymemes, then, rarely

one exception noted

the necessity of scientific

enthymeme

demonstrations The
on

by

Aristotle is the
1357324-34).

founded

"necesssry

sign"

(TEKjxfjQiov)

(R

That

enthymematic

reasoning usually involves probability rather than necessity does not make the reasoning invalid. For, according to Aristotle, both the things that happen 3lways or by necessity and those that happen as a rule or for the most psrt, csn be
objects of

knowledge.

Probability

must

be distinguished from chance,

be-

csuse unlike probable cannot

things those things th3t happen only rarely or

by

chance

be known (PoA 87^9-28). That is

rhetoric should rest upon probabilities

is

consistent with

the Aristoteli3n principle that one should demand only that

appropriate

degree
politics

of certitude th3t

to the subject matter. For like ethics and

the subject

of rhetoric with

man action can

be known

is human action, and the regularities of hu probability but not with absolute certainty (R truth,
since

1356314-17, 24-33,

i402b2i-37).

Since the its

premises aim

enthymeme rests upon opinion rather than absolute

and conclusion are probable rather

persuasion rather

than necessary, and since

enthymematic

its

final

is

than

instruction,

reasoning lacks

the rigor of scientific demonstration. And yet rhetorical argument

is

still a valid

form

of

reasoning,

and therefore

it

provides an alternative

to sophistry. Popular

grasp of reality that cannot be dismissed as are fit objects of reason because they presuppose false. Probabilities simply regularities in things, which are not random or by chance. And, finally, the
opinions manifest a commonsense
persuasion

for

which

the rhetorician strives requires an appeal to reason rather

than force.

But to

support

the

claim one

that Aristotle's Rhetoric

must answer

is

theory

of rhetoric as

truly
made

rational

discourse,
could

the serious objections that can be

to this interpretation. In particular, the

following
defective

four

points

deserve

at

tention.

(1) It

be

argued

that enthymemes cannot be valid

or otherwise

because Aris

totle defines them as incomplete more, even if the

syllogisms.

(2) Further
be
argued

enthymeme were a genuine

persuasion

syllogism, it

could still

that Aristotle's discussions of

through the character of the speaker

and through the passions of the audience would show the reliance of rhetoric on

irrational
parent as

appeals.

(3) Also,

since

Aristotle insists that

and since

rhetoric

includes ap
in

"proofs,"

well as genuine

he describes it

as a neutral

strument that

does

not

may be used on either side of any issue, one clearly distinguish rhetoric from sophistry. (4)

might

infer that he

Finally, Aristotle's

146
remarks seem

Interpretation
in Book Three
of the

Rhetoric

on

the style and arrangement of

not view rhetoric as
objections.

speeches

to be further

evidence that

he does

founded

on ra

tional argument. I shall reply to each of these

///

Aristotle's

enthymeme

is

true syllogism; and therefore it is not, as has

been commonly assumed, an incomplete syllogism. For if the enthymeme were to cite only one argument from the text an invalid or incomplete syllogism
why would Aristotle distinguish between apparent and true enthymemes declare that apparent enthymemes "are not enthymemes since they are
syllogisms"

and not

(R

139733)?

Aristotle
Tig)

refers

to the enthymeme as "a sort of

and some readers

syllogism

(ovKkoyio\iog
use of

(R 135539-10),
enthymeme

have tsken this

Tig

thst the

is

not 3

true

or complete syllogism.

But the

implying falsity of this

3S

interpretation is
25b2o-3i).

made evident

by

a passage

in the Prior Analytics (24aio-i6,

of

Here Aristotle

explains

that

his theory
3

the syllogism in the Prior

Analytics is

his theory of Posterior Analytics: "for demonstration is

more general than

"demonstration"

(cxnodeitig) in

the

kind

of syllogism

[ovkkoyia/xog
no reason to

rig], but

not

every

syllogism

is
Tig"

demonstration."

Since there is

believe that
tion"

"demonstration"

that the phrase ovkkoyiopLog

is anything less thsn 3 true syllogism, it is clear is intended only to indicate that a "demonstra
to be differentiated from other kinds (see also

is

one

kind
8).

of syllogism

Poetics

1 450a 1

Likewise,

the enthymeme can be one distinctive type of

which

syllogism without

being

syllogistically defective,

is born

out

by

Aris

totle's repeated references to the syllogistic character of the enthymeme

(see,
PoA

for example, R i362b29-30, 139439-11,

7131-11).
are

i40ob25-33; PrA

68b8-i4;

Since the

premises 3nd

therefore the conclusion of the enthymeme

founded
be

on common opinions 3nd are probable

but

not

absolutely certsin,
the enthymeme

the

enthymeme

differs from the

scientific

syllogism;

3nd since

must

simple enough

to be understood

by

the

ordinary man, it differs from

entails

the dialecticsl syllogism. But neither of these points

that the enthymeme

be

an

invalid

or

incomplete

syllogism.

Enthymematic reasoning is popular because by providing listeners with "quick it satisfies their natural desire for learning (R i400b25-33,
learning,"

i4iob6-35).
and obvious

For this reason, the

nor

enthymeme should

be

neither

too superficial
enough

too

long
it

and

complex.

It

should

be

simple

to be

quickly grasped, but

at

the same time it should give the

should

listeners the

pleasure of

learning
One is to

something
of

new:

be informative

without

being
of

esoteric.
learning"

the ways to mske the enthymeme an

instrument

"quick

abbreviate

it

by le3ving

unstated whatever

the listeners can

be

expected to

add on their own

of

(R 1356319,

1357317-23).

But this

practical rule

is

not part
3bbre-

the definition of the enthymeme; snd

furthermore,

even when

it is

The

Rationality

of Political Speech
syllogism as stated

147
thought
most

viated, the enthymeme is a complete

in

despite its

incompleteness

as stated

verbally (PoA

76b23-28).

Even in the

rigorously
well
3bbrevi3-

demonstrative ressoning, Aristotle suggests, premises thst are known need not be explicitly ststed (PoA 76b 1-23). Moreover,
tion of enthymemes

clear or

the

is

tribute to the love

unstated

of

lesrning

found in the

audience.

For

when a spesker

leaves

those steps in the reasoning thst the lis

shows them to

teners csn
arguments of

essily supply themselves, he

help

construct

the very

by

which

they

are

persusded; 3nd thus he

on

gives

them the sstisfaction

thinking

through the

reasoning

their own.

IV

Aristotle begins the Rhetoric

who on

by

condemning those

sophistical rhetoricians

rely exclusively thereby exciting preventing them from msking 3 rationsl judgment about the issues at hand. These speakers ignore the enthymeme, which is "the body of for rhet
proof"

the psssions of their listeners 3nd

oric.

But

when

Aristotle
bssed

sets out the three

"character"

includes
spesker)
"speech"

appesls snd or

on

(jzioTEigy (eOog) (that is, the

"proofs"

of

rhetoric, he
of the

"character"

"psssion"

"argument"

the psssions with

(jtddog) ss supplementsry to persussion through the itself (Xoyog); and in Book Two he carefully delineates which the rhetoricisn must desl. Thus Aristotle seems to
sudiences through their passions

throw into doubt the rationslity of rhetoricsl srgument

techniques

for moving

by introducing the S3me that he initially con

demns.

A
the

closer

ex3min3tion,

however,
with

will

show

th3t Aristotle's emphssis on

of

enthymeme

is

consonsnt

his treatment

the passions, because the

enthymeme combines reason 3nd p3ssion.

enthymeme

Since it is "the
the three

body

proof,"

of

the

is the

vehicle not

just for

"proofs"

one of

Xoyog

but

for

all

three

koyog,

edog,

andnadog(R

1354312-16, I354b20-2i,

I396b28-

139736,

I403a34-i403bi).

conclusion as a probable

Enthymemes may be used not only to est3blish a truth, but also to alter the emotions of the listeners or

to

develop

their confidence
rhetoricisns

in the
not

character of

the speaker. Aristotle

denounces

the

becsuse they 3ppeal to the passions of the in a defective msnner. Their solicit3tion of this because do but audience, they it were sn integral p3rt of 3n enthymematic scceptsble if would be the psssions
sophistical

srgument

pertinent

to the subject under exsmination,

but their

exclusive re

liance

on the psssions with no connection to

with

3ny form

of argument

only dis

tracts the listeners

things irrelevant to the matter 3t rmnd (R 1354313-15,

"belief"
"trust,"

3Since
tion with

nioric can

be translated

as

or

Aristotle's
as

use of this word

in

connec
of a

rhetoric

has been interpreted

But in fact Aristotle

by

some

commentators

rhetorical reasoning. syllogism

employs

the term to refer

suggesting the to any belief that

weakness

arises

from

or

from induction (see PrA 72a2o-72b4; T ioobi8-22; SR id^by, NE U39b32-34,

I323a34-i323b7).

H42ai8-2i;/>

148
1 354b 1

Interpretation

8-22,

135639-19).

The

sophist

excites

the psssions to

divert his lis

pas

teners from
sions of

rational

deliberation,

but the Aristotelisn speaker controls the

with them.

his listeners

by

reasoning

Aristotle

assumes

that the

passions are

in

some sense

rationsl, snd th3t 3

rhetoricisn can talk an

sudience

into

or out of a passion
response

by

convincing them
circumst3nces

that the

psssion

is

or

is

not

3>ressonsble

to the

3t

hand (R 1378320-31, i38ob30-33, 1382316-18, 1385329-35, 1387b! 8-21, I403a34-i403bi). Since a psssion is slwsys about something, since it 3lw3ys
refers

to some object, it is

ressonsble

if it

represents

its

unressonsble must alwsys

if it does

not.

Men's
3re:

psssions sre not slwsys

correctly or ressonable, but they

object

believe th3t they

they hsve
The
mere

ressons
psssions

for their
msy

psssions although

their reasons are not

slways good ones.

often 3rise require

from false

judgments
whether

about

reslity, but the

suffices

fsct thst

psssions

judgments,
his

true or

f3lse,

to show the

rationsl chsrscter of

the passions.

And

a rhetorician who understands this csn

le3rn to

chsnge

the psssions of

listeners

by changing their minds. It is the rationality of the passions that distinguishes them from purely bodily sensations 3nd sppetites. It would be ridiculous to judge 3n itch or 3
pang
order of

hunger
sbsurd

as

true or

false,

ressonable or

unreasonsble;

snd

it

would

be

equslly

to srgue

with a man who

felt

an

itch

or a sensstion of

hunger in

to convince him thst

his feelings
A

were unjustified.

But it is
to

not ridiculous

to judge 3 msn's

snger as reasonable or unreasonable or

try

to argue

with

him

when

his

anger

is

unjustified.

man's anger

depends

upon

his belief that

sens3-

anger

is

3 proper response appetites

to something thst hss occurred,

but

a msn's
or

tions or physicsl
iT.49a25-11.49b3).

do

not

require

that he

believe this

th3t (NE

The

passions are rationsl

in thst they

sre

founded

on

judgments

of wh3t

the world is

they

sre

like, but they sre less than perfectly reasonable to the extent that founded on shortsighted, psrtisl, bissed, or hastily formulated judg
passions often

ments.

Yet the fact that the

the

depend

on

should not obscure

fsct thst they do

require some sort of

defective ressoning ressoning, snd it is for controlling the listeners indi

reasoning.

this element of ressoning thst gives the rhetoricisn s lever

psssions.

Thst

enthymemes sre often

directed to the

emotions of the

cates agsin

the

difference between irrelevant to is

a practical

enthymematic and

demonstrative
since

Emotions

are

scientific

demonstration; but
sim

enthymemstic

argumentation

form

of

reasoning, its

is to

move men not

just

to think,

but

also

to act; and srgument cannot

move men

to action unless

it

somehow elicits

the

motivstionsl power of emotion.

V The interpretstion
of the enthymeme tti3t
srgument

I hsve

sdvanced

here suggests
epis-

that Aristotle considered rhetoricsl

to be

governed

by definite

The

Rationality
that

of Political Speech

149

temological standsrds. But his trestment of enthymemes includes 3 study of

"apparent

enthymemes"

is, fallacious

arguments

snd

there sre other

exsmples of the csre with which

niques of verbal power to

Aristotle instructs the

art of rhetoric

rhetorician

in the tech

deception. Indeed, the

is

said

to provide the

be

persussive on the opposite sides of

prevent this srt

from

being

used to sdvsnce

every question. So whst is to fslsehood snd injustice rather than

their opposites? In other words, whst

is to

keep

the Rhetoric from

being

hsndbook for
First
of

sophists?
rhetor

all, it may be answered that Aristotle recognizes th3t if the

well

ician is to be

armed, he must know all the tricks of sophistry so that he can defend himself. The Aristotelian rhetorician might even have to em properly ploy such tricks himself in those cases where otherwise bad means are justified

by

their advsncement of good ends (R 1355329-34,

would

I407332-I407b7).
example of

Pre-

sumsbly, Aristotle
tician: although
a

have the

rhetorician

follow the
those

the dialec
at

he

prefers to spesk
sble

only

with

who msint3in

discussion

high level, the dislectici3n is lous opponents by using their

the point of showing himself

to defend himself in debstes

with unscrupu

own sophisticsl wespons sgsinst more skillful with

them,

even

to

their wespons th3n

compare/?

they

sre

themselves (T 108333-37, i64b8-i5; SR I75a32-i75b3;

I407b7).4

1407332-

In

some

cases, Aristotle does instruct the rhetorician in srguing opposite

sides of sn

issue

depending
to be

upon which side

is

most

fsvorsble to his is

position st

the

moment.

But this is

not a sophistical

exercise, because in each esse there is

something
recognize

valid

said on

both

sides.

In

practicsl mstters there snd

sometimes
msn must

equslly strong
this

support

for opposing srguments, that,

although

the prudent

(see, for
be

exsmple, R I375a25-i376b3i).
the rhetorical srt in itself
rhetoric

It
and

should also

said

is

morally
sre

epistemologically the just. Even though there

prescribed sudience.

neutral

instrument,
sre no
ends

tends to serve the true snd

srt

intrinsic to the

itself,

ends

by

the

rhetoricsl situstion

the spesker, the subject mstter, snd the

good chsrscter sre more

Since

speskers who

display

persussive, the to hide

noble rhetorician

has

3n sdvsntsge over

the sophist,

who must attempt

his bad

character

(R 135636-13,
to the

137836-19).
subject

Also,
and

the sophisticsl speaker

is

restrained audience.

by

the nature of the

respect sre

matter

by

the opinions
case

of

the

With

subject more

m3tter,

it is generally the

that the

true snd the

opinions of

just

nsturally

easily

srgued and more

persuasive; and the

the audience generally

displsy

this S3me

tendency (R 1354321-26,
I409a35"

1355312-23,

36-38,

137^5-11,

I373b3-i3.

I39a4-i396bi9,
who

I409bi2,

i4iob9-35).

Thus, in

most

cases, 3 speaker

has something to
1402323-28, (see
Thucyd-

hide is

more vulnerable

than one who has not (R i397b23-25,

give a good speech

1 41 931 3-1 7).

It is difficult to

for

bsd

csuse

"Does Aristotle discuss

assumption of

the tricks of the

base to instruct

good men and thus

to dispel the

smug
with

bad

men

that good men must be naive?

see also

See R 1355329-34;

compare

R 137333

Xenophon, Anabasis II. vi. 24-26;

1313334-13^39.

150

Interpretation
War III 36-48). This is
not

ides, Peloponnesian
times the
seems

to

deny, however,
stronger. mske

that

some

wesker srgument csn

be

made not

to sppesr the

But
the

snd

this

to be Aristotle's point

is it

ususlly

essier to

stronger

argument appesr

to be the stronger,

especislly

when

it is skillfully

presented?

VI

Mstters

of style snd composition seem extraneous to

the

rationsl content

of rhetoric since

they

seem

unnecessary for the

mstters

substantive argument of

issues.

Indeed,

when

Aristotle takes up these

in Book Three, he begins

a concession

by

complsining thst s concern with such things is only audiences (R 1403^5-1404312, 141535-141632). But in his trestment
extent not
well

to corrupt

of

these elements of rhetoric, Aristotle stresses the

to

which

they
the

contribute to rationsl srgument. since

For Aristotle

good style

is

merely ornsmentstion,

the goodness of style is determined

of

by

how

it

S3tisfies

nstural

desire

listeners for

learning

through

ressoning

(R

I404bi-i3,

i408b22-29,

1409323-1409^2,

1410318-22,

i4i2b2i-32,

1414321-28).

ical style,
"quick

provides

Metsphor, for exsmple, the most important instrument of rhetor listeners, in 3 msnner simitar to the enthymeme, with
(R 140535-12, 33-37, i4iob6-35, I4i2b9-I2,
arrangement

lesrning"

18-28).

And

Aristotle insists that the best

substantive srgument as state

for

a speech

is

that which presents the

his

case and

clearly and directly as possible: a speaker should first then prove it (R 14T.4330-14T.4b18). The Aristotelian rheto
S3me end

rician strives
enthymemstic

for the

in his
clesr

style snd composition 3S not commonplsce snd

he does in his informstive but

ressoning

to

be

but

not recondite.

VII I hsve
argued show

that Aristotle views rhetoric as rationsl

discourse,

snd thst

he

wishes

sophistry,
scientific

of ressoning to be distinguished from ressoning is less exsct snd less certain than demonstration. Measured by the standards of strict, demonstrative

to

th3t rhetoric is s form

even

though rhetoricsl

usually qualify as genuine ressoning st all. But such argumentstion C3n be seen to be quite rationsl if it is judged sccording to the logicsl criteris of rhetoric. Aristotle's theory of rhetoric
rests on the sssumption thst one should evsluate political arguments

logic,

the political argumentation of citizens

does

not

according
or
exscti-

to their degrees of plausibility

tude.

without

demanding

absolute

certainty

sre sble to

Thus Aristotle's theory conforms to the logicsl practice of citizens, who judge the plausibility of arguments despite the fundamentsl uncerof all practical reasoning.
what would rhetoric

tsinty

But
protest

the modern political scientist say sbout sll this?

not 3 vslid

He

might

th3t

is surely

form

of

ressoning

since

it

vioktes even

The

Rationality

of Political Speech
rstionslity.5

151

the most elementsry rules of scientific

The fundsmentsl problem,

he

might

explain, is thst the

rhetoricisn's srguments csn

which

the commonsense political opinions from

common opinions are
at

be only 3S relisble ss he draws his premises, but

reflections clsim of political

best

uncertain

and

inexact
no

reslity

snd 3t

worst unexsmined prejudices

with

to truth.

In

con

trast to the rhetorici3n's

of common

dependence

on

the vsgue

3nd

deceptive impressions
might
appeal

sense, the contemporary

criteris of s
scientific

political

scientist

to the
of

epistemological political

methodology for

precise

standsrds

knowledge. But does

the modern scientific method provide s better

stsrting point for politicsl inquiry than does rhetoric? This question was first clesrly posed by Thomss Hobbes. For he
Aristotelisn
study, and in
political science and applied

rejected

the

scientific

method

to political

doing

so

he became the founder

of modern political science. psychological

Now

Hobbes did

admire

Aristotle's Rhetoric for its

insights; but he

certsinly denied Aristotle's clsim, which is essentisl for his rhetoricsl theory, thst common opinions csn be the foundstion of politicsl ressoning. Clsssicsl
political philosophers such as

Aristotle

could never

lesd

us

to genuine politicsl

knowledge, Hobbes
for

argued, because "in their

false."6

writings snd

discourse they tske

principles those opinions which sre

vulgsrly received,
of

whether true or
political

fslse;
and

being

for the

most

psrt

Instead

Hobbes 's

political science would st3rt with exsct principles

starting definitions

with

opinions,

snd

sxioms;

from these
provide
project

one would

deduce

a theoreticsl

framework thst

would

the certsinty snd precision

of geometry.

Thus did Hobbes initiate the

themselves.7

to which msny political scientists

political opinions as

Is there sny thing to be ssid the foundation

today hsve devoted in fsvor of Aristotle's relisnce

of political

on common one

knowledge? On the

hand,

Aristotle's theory

of rhetoric as s vslid

form

of politicsl

the assumption thst common opinions reflect a rational

reasoning depends on grasp of politicsl life.

But,

on

the other

hsnd, Aristotle
distorted

presents

those opinions 3S often

offering

confused, crude,

and

view of political

reslity, thus

fslling

short of

the

rigor, refinement,

3nd comprehensiveness

seems that political opinions are

necesssry for political philosophy. It the starting point for the Aristotelisn politicsl
point.

scientist, but

they

sre

only the stsrting

Thst is to S3y, the

respect thst

he

gives to those opinions does not require 3n uncriticsl scceptsnce. politicsl

Since the
com-

theorist seeks to move from opinion to

the contemporary
politicsl

knowledge, he
scientist,
rhetoric

will not

5From the
nothing
more

perspective

of

msy

appear to

be

See, for example, Murray Edelman, The Symbolic Uses of Politics (Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1964), pp. 18-21, 29-35, 41-42, 96-98, 115-17, 121, 124-25, 161, 172-73. 179-81; Edelman, Politics as Symbolic Action (New York: Academic Press, 1 97 1 ) pp. 1-2. "Elements of Law, 1. 13. 3. See John W. Danford, Wittgenstein and Political Philosophy (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1978), pp. 16-42. "See, for example, Harold Lasswell and Abraham Kaplan, Power and Society: A Framework for Political Inquiry (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1950).
than the
manipulation of

irrationsl

symbols that

do

not reflect empirical reality.

152
pletely
sccept

Interpretation
the
3nswers given

in

politicsl

speech.

And
will

yet

even

in his

movement

beyond the
which

common politicsl

opinions, he
will

be

guided

by

the

questions

to

those opinions point: he

try

to give

sn adequate snswer

to the

questions

thst politicsl opinions snswer only

common opinions so

inadequately*

But if Aristotle finds

scend

defective thst he hss to tran

them, why does he not reject them from the stsrt in order to resson from scientific principles in the msnner sdvocsted by Hobbes? Aristotle might an
swer with two scientist

types of

arguments.

First,

the phenomens studied

nstursl scientist

by

the politicsl

differ from those

method.

studied all

by

the

in

wsys

thst

justify

difference in

Second,

reasoning,

even that of the natural

scientist,

depends ultimately upon the truth of our commonsense understanding of things. Because politicsl phenomens are contingent rather than necesssry, snd

becsuse they tist, Aristotle

thst would
gent

sre

essentislly

cognitive rather than

physic3l, the

politicsl scien msnner contin and

might srgue, must rely on commonsense opinions in 3 be insppropri3te for the nstursl scientist. Politicsl reslity is upon

becsuse it depends

humsn The

choices

thst change

from time to time

will

from
ple,

one situation to another.

n3ture of political

life

vary, for

exam

depending

upon

the type of

regime

in

existence: oligarchic politics

differs
to the

from democratic
organization snd

politics.

regime

is

s product of certain choices ss

the gosls

of politicsl rule.

To

understsnd

these choices, the

common opinions.

politicsl scientist must

study them

as

they

are msnifested

in

And it

would

be

s mistske to

try

to exsmine these things ss if

or

they

were

ss

unchangeable ss

the Pythsgoresn theorem

the

motion of

the plsnets. More

over,

politicsl

things sre not physicsl objects thst csn be studied through sense
politicsl scientist who

perception.

restricted

himself to

sense

dsts

would

never
when

see

snything

politicsl.

For
what

politicsl people an

phenomens

come

into

one psys sttention

to

think about politics as

sppesl

only indicated by
un

view

what

they say
But in the

about

it. Thus, again,

to politicsl opinions is

avoidable.

most

fundsmentsl respect,
upon

all

icsl

science

depends

commonsense

ressoning not just thst of polit opinions. This is so becsuse all

our commonsense awareness of conclusions

reasoning
of things.

rests upon presuppositions

drawn from
the

The

rules of

logic

govern

deduction

from

prem

ises, but these rules csnnot determine the truth or falsity of the first premises. Reasoning is grounded upon fundamentsl sssumptions thst csnnot be proven
becsuse they sre the source of sll proofs. A conclusion is demonstrated when it is shown to follow from certsin premises. And the premises msy themselves be
shown

to

follow

as conclusions

from

other premises.

But eventuslly

one must

"Here
Epilogue,"

and elsewhere

in Essays
and

on the

in these concluding remarks I have drawn ideas from Leo Strauss, "An Scientic Study of Politics, edited by Herbert J. Storing (New York:
1962),
pp.

Holt, Rinehart
ophie
Politics,"

Winston,

307-27; Wilhelm
and

Hennis, Politik

und praktische Philos-

(Berlin: Luchterhand, 1963), pp. 89-115; The Review of Politics, 39 (July, 1977),

Eugene F. Miller,

"Primary Questions

in

298-331.

The
reach principles

Rationality

of Political Speech

153

that are taken as true without proof, these

being

the starting
assumptions

points of reasoning.

Indeed,

are not the rules of

logic themselves

that cannot be

proven

logically?
unprov-

Even the

most rigorous empirical science cannot avoid reliance on

sble sssumptions.

tion thst one msy generalize

Scientific induction, for exsmple, rests on the presupposi from particular cases, which depends in turn on
that nature falls into recurrent patterns: one
must as

the

broader

assumption

sume

that the universe is governed

one moment to

by laws,

and that

these laws do not change

scientific

arbitrarily from

another.9

Thus does
This is

knowledge

pre

suppose a prescientific

knowledge
first

of things.

what

Aristotle

means when

he

says that to examine the

principles of

any science,

one must appeal

to the "common

opinions"

(evdo^a)
ioia37-ioib4).
seems to make

that are the source of the principles (T

great
twentieth-

iooai8-ioob22,

Werner Heisenberg, the

the same point
as
when

century physicist,
cepts of natural

he

observes:

"the

con

language, vaguely defined

knowledge than the

they

are, seem to be

more stable

in the

expansion of as an

precise

terms

of scientific

language,
This is
are

derived
the case

idealization from only limited groups of because, on the one hsnd, "the concepts of natural language
connection with

phenomena."

formed

by

the immediate
require

reality";
precise
lost."

but,

on the other

hand,
which

scientific

concepts

idealization

and

definition through

"the im

So Heisenberg concludes: "We know reality is that any understanding must be based finally upon the natural language because it is only there that we can be certain to touch reality, and hence we must be
mediate connection with

skeptical about
sential

any

skepticism with regard

to this natural

language

and

its

es

concepts."10

similar

line

of thought

is found in the

writings of

Alfred

North Whitehead. For

although

he helped to formulate

modern mathematical of

logic, he insisted: "Logic,

of

conceived as a superb

an adequate analysis

the advance

thought, is
Our

fake. It is

instrument, but it
reality is

requires a

background

of common

sense.""

commonsense awareness of

more reliable

than

any

epistem-

ological will

theory

could ever

depend

upon

how

well

be. In fact, the truth of any epistemological theory The it accounts for our reliance on common
sense.12

Hobbesian

political

scientist

may think he

csn

scquire

political

knowledge

9On the

assumptions

Physics,

2 vols.

necessary for modern science, see A. D'Abro, The Rise of the New (New York: Dover, 1951), I, 14-27. See also my article, "Language and Nature in
Investigations,"

Wittgenstein's Philosophical

Journal of Thought, 10 (July, 1975),

pp. 200-202.

194-99.

"'Physics
2nd ed.

and

""Immortality,"

Philosophy (New York: Harper & Row, 1958), in The Philosophy of Alfred North Whitehead,
1951),
p. 700.

edited

by

Paul Arthur

Schilpp,
for

(La

Salle, 111.: Open Court,

is
a theme of

The importance

of

"common

sense"

mathematics

l2One
"common

should

keep

my unpublished paper, "Mathematics and the Problem of in mind here the long rhetorical tradition of speculation about the

Intelligibility."

nature of

See, for example, Thomas Reid, Essays on the Intellectual Powers of Man (Cambridge: M.I.T. Press, 1969), pp. 556-68; and Hans-Georg Gadamer, Truth and Method (New York: The Seabury Press, 1975), pp. 19-29.
sense."

1 54
through a
ence.

Interpretation
formal
method

that is

totally

abstracted

from

commonsense experi

But in

practice

his

choice of assumptions will always

be guided,
How

even

if he

unintentionally,
even

begin

by his own natural grasp of looking for political phenomena

like? As
with

political reality.

could

know

what politics was

if he is completely lost, he will where he wants to get to, it does Hobbesian political scientist knows
sensible

already Lewis Carroll's Alice, he must learn that never find his way; for if he does not know
not
matter

if he did

not

somehow

which

way he
admit.

goes.

But the

more

than

he

will

For like any

things

that directs
at the

human being, he begins with his scientific inquiry. He is

even

a natural awareness of political not

completely lost

after all.

He knows surprising

if only vaguely, where he wants to go; that he usually finds a way to get there. To fully understand the fundamental importance of
start,
ence

so

it is

not

commonsense experi

for

political

reasoning, one

must see

the limits

of

the Hobbesian method,

and one must recover the

Aristotelian tradition
part

of political science.

Aristotle's

Rhetoric is

an

essential

of that

tradition.

Aristotelian text, it brings into

view the common political opinions of

More clearly than any other human

political

beings

as

the primary ground of political knowledge. Although the

scientist must sophical

eventually

go

beyond those

opinions through a process of philo guidance.

refinement, he

must always

look to them for

continually turning his

political are

attention

to the political questions

For only by found in ordinary

things as

speech, can the student

of politics understand political

they

in themselves.

MANLINESS AND FRIENDSHIP IN

SHAKESPEARE'S JULIUS CAESAR

Jan H. Blits

University
The city of Rome had besides its proper few. It is believed by some to have been
["strength"

of Delaware

name another secret

"Valentia,"

one, known only to a

"Roma"

the Latin translation of

read

in Greek];

others think

it

"Amor"

("Roma"

was

backwards).
I

G. W. F. Hegel, The Philosophy of History, Part III, Section

Shakespeare's Julius Caesar

men who made republican glory.

examines the

lives

and souls of

the sort of

Rome the foremost

model of political greatness and

in the play have the strongest desire for worldly glory honor as the highest good, relentlessly strive to win it. They and, regarding look up to the things that make men strong and, having tremendous pride and
The
men we see

trust in their own "strength of

another of

spirit"

(I.iii.95),1

jealously
as

contend

with

one

controversy"

for outstanding distinctions. Their hearts are, (I.ii. 108). Loving victory, dominance,
equate manliness and

Cassius says, "hearts

and

honor, they
sums

charac

teristically
of

human

excellence.

Cassius

their

humanity

when,

bemoaning
the

Rome's

acquiescence

up their view to Caesar, he says,

But,
And

fathers'

woe

while! our

minds are

dead,

mothers'

we are govern'd with our

spirits;

Our

yoke and sufferance show us womanish.

(I.iii.82-84)
Rome is Even Portia,
woman's

a man's world.
Brutus'

No

one

in Caesar has
misogynist.

a good word

for

women.

noble

wife, is a

Even she,

ashamed of

her
nor

belong
in

heart, insists that the best human qualities If a woman like herself happens to to
women.2
sex"

neither come show

from

them,
she

she

does

so

spite of

her

sex.

She is "stronger than [her] her

correlation

(II. i. 296);

is

manly.

That

s womsn must somehow overcome

nsture

to show the

highest

virtue points or

to the close the

rising

sbove

common

or

men's

sctivities

snd smbitions

rising up merely humsn things. Throughout the plsy sre repestedly expressed in terms of standing,
msnliness snd
men"

in Caesar between

rising, climbing to new

snd and

heights, "soar[ing] (II.i.24) reaching "the upmost

expressed

sbove
while

the

view of

scorning everything
of

their defects and defests

'References
ed. are

in the contrsry terms

Caesar,
ed.

(I.i.74), below; bending, bowand

to the Arden

editions of

Julius

T. S. Dorsch,

Antony

and

Cleopatra, Ridley :II.i.292ff.; II.iv.6-9, 39-40. For

much as

M. R.

(London:

Methuen,

1964).
patriots'

the Roman
1

disparaging
156-159;
"ancestor(s)"

their maternal origins as

1 14, they IV.iii.118-122; V.iii. 67-71; V.iv.1-11. Note also that I.ii. 111, I.iii.80-84, II. i. 53-54, III.ii.51. For the fact that see Cicero, Tusculan Disputations, II. 43.
"man,"

revere their paternal origins, see I.ii.i 1

I.iii.80-84; II. i. 294-297;

"virtue"

always refers only to men: derives from the Latin word for

156

Interpretation
crouching,

ing, lying,
and

fawning, falling,

sinking,

kneeling,

shaking, trembling,

The manly is associsted with the firm, the brilliant, the cold, the independent, the high and the noble; the womanish, with the soft, the dull, the warm, the dependent, the low and the lowly. The manly is the outstanding; the
melting.3

womanish, the
womanish

obscure. neither.

does

The manly both contains and confers distinctions. The Like the body, it is the great equalizer. It tends to level
that the manly love
of

all

important

differences.4

Shakespeare

shows

distinction

engenders a charac

teristic attitude towards the world. It things thst thresten to

is

one of

resisting

and

overcoming

all

the

drag

s msn
part

down

or overshsdow

him. This fundsmental

attached

Roman
ness.

stance

is

reflected

in

by

the great importance

to wakeful

Early

on

the ides of

been "awake

night"

all

(II.i.88).

March, Brutus Indeed,

tells the other conspirators that

he has

Since Cassius first did I have

not slept.

whet me against

Caesar,

(11.

61-62)
of

His servant, Lucius, Brutus says, the

men"

can

"Enjoy

the

boy
232).

has

none of

honey-heavy the "busy

and
outside

dew

slumber

because,

as of

care[s]"

that occupy

"the brains

(11. 230,

But the

conspirators

Caesar

alike

have been kept

awake

by just

such cares.

Only

those

the political realm

belong
his

in bed.

Thus Brutus left "his Caesar

awske

sends

Lucius back to bed

to "go to
237ff.).
bed"

soon after
bed"

awakening him and, shortly

afterwards, tells

Portia, too,
(11.

when she complains of

having

wholesome
Cassius'

But he himself is

aroused

to act against

by

(11. 46ff.);
to
"prick"

cause

accusing him of sleeping and urging him to then, arguing that they need nothing but their Roman them to action, he spurs his co-conspirators on by associating
anonymous note snd
women"

"The melting

spirits of

in

contrast

to "uY insuppressive mettle of our

bed"
Ii4ff.).5

(11. returning "to his idle too far to say that from the Roman point of view nothing very happens in bed.6
with each man

spirits"

It is

not

going
ever

interesting

Brutus
manliness.

and

the others understand the private

at

world

to be destructive of
of Philputs

Sardis shortly before the decisive battle to succumb to is to succumb to necessity. Brutus finally ippi, sleep work aside and prepares for bed only becsuse "nsture must obey
(IV.iii.226). Nstural necessity, he

As he indicates

his

necessity

implies, is

not psrt of

his

nsture.

His

noble

3E.g., I. i. 72-75;

204-210; IV. ii. 23-27; IV. iii. 38-50,

I.ii. 99-136; II. i. 21-27, n8, 142, 167; III. i. 31-77, 122-137, 148-150, 66-69; V.i. 41-44; V.iii. 57-64.

4I.ii. 268-272; I.iii.80-84; II. i. 122, 292-297; IV. iv. 6-10, 39-40. 3See also I. iii. 164, II. i. 98-99; and cf. in context IV.iii.92ff. For Lucius, see further IV. iii. 235-271. And for Caesar's estimation of "such men as sleep see I.ii.i89f. Also, note II.ii.116-117.
a-nights,"

as the possibility of a Roman woman warrior like Antony's wife Fulvia is totally in Caesar (see Ant., I.ii. 85-91; II.i.40; II. ii. 42-44, 61-66, 94-98; also I.i.20, 28-32; I.ii.101 106), so too is Caesar's erotic interest in a woman like Cleopatra (see ibid., I. v. 29-31, suppressed

6Just

66-75; II. ii. 226-228; II. vi. 64-70; Ill.xiii. 1 16 1 17;

cf.

JC, I.ii.1-11.

Manliness
nsture

and

Friendship

in Julius Caesar
"look for
rest"

157
a time of

is to

oppose necessity.

So

while women snd children

rest"

(1. 261), Brutus "will

"murd'rous

niggard"

sleep

with

only "a little

opposes

(1.

227).

He
ob sur

slumber"

opposes scurity.

(1. 266) because he

Men like him

resist all

forms

of

any form of because to recline is to reclining

render one's

downward The in

pull

standing in the world. Their characteristic opposition to the earth's is well expressed by Alexander the Great's remark that, more
was not a
god.7

than anything else, sleep and sex reminded him he

specific character of prove

manly

virtue

is indicated

herself in the thigh to

plans confidence.

that she is strong enough to

by Portia, keep

who gashes

Brutus'

secret

believe, is
are

that men

The important difference between the sexes, are stronger than their bodies but women are
are weaker

she seems not.

to

Women
might rather

inconstant because they

than

bodily

fears

and

pains.8

One

therefore suppose that their characteristic trait is concern with necessary than with noble things. But Portia's
subsequent actions reveal wound

something
proof of

she

herself fails to is

see.

The

self-inflicted out

she calls

"strong

my

constancy"

(II. i. 299) turns

to be no proof at all. As soon as Brutus

leaves,
tor

she

overwhelmed and

by

anxious

(1. 301)

manly

endurance

fears for his welfare, and her strong quickly vanish. There are evidently death. Love for her husband

"patience"

worse makes

tures for her than

bodily
of

pains and even

her

more a woman than

the superiority to her

body

makes

her

a man.

If,

as she

says, "The heart

actions

woman"

is

"weak

thing"

(II. iv. 39-40), its weakness, her

seem

to show, stems not from fear but from affection, than herself.

from

loving

another more

While
such an

manliness no

doubt

sustains a

timocracy like

the Roman republic,

zens, bound together

honor-loving regime is often praised for fostering by a common ancestry and upbringing,
the
mutual claims
"man"

fraternity. Its
are

citi

free

and

equal;

they
or

respect

to rule that only manly virtue can

enforce.

It is

therefore

fitting

that
and

only
the most

is

mentioned

in Caesar

more often

than

"love"

in the play is that of the leaders of the republican faction. In fact, Brutus and Cassius call each other although Shakespeare never explains that they as many as eight
elaborated

"friendship"9

friendship

"brother"

times10

are and

brothers-in-law."
Cassius'

Shakespeare's

silence

is appropriately entirely
regime

misleading.

Brutus
the
and

fraternal form
nurtured
defending.12

of address seems

elective and a sign of

sort of
which

friendship
not as

by

the manly

under which

they live

they die

Their

friendship does,

I think,

epitomize the repub

lic, but

just

suggested or

usually

understood.

'Plutarch,
'"Man"

Alexander the

Great,

22.3.

Tor the importance of constancy, see Caesar's claim to (including its variants) appears 148 times;
"Rome"

divinity
51

at

III. i. 31-77,
"friend,"

esp. 58-73.

"love,"

times;

"Roman"

"Romans"

comparison,

occurs

38,

and

together

35 times.

Only

53 times. By Caesar's name is

"man."

mentioned more often

than 232, 236, 247, 303; see also

10IV.ii.37, 39; IV. iii. 95, 211, "See Plutarch, Brutus, 6.1-2.
i:Shakespeare's
silence also

II.i.70.

has the

effect of

concealing that Cassius is married, thus making

him

appear a

fully

spirited or public man.

158
The implications
the tensions
quarrel express

Interpretation
of

the Roman

view of virtue sre

Csssius'

strikingly

revesled when

inherent in Brutus

snd

friendship

surfsee

in

their

ugly
the

at

Sardis late in the

play.

Indeed,
principal

manliness

and

friendship

are

themes of the quarrel. Two

Cassius'

the

scene:

i) presuming

upon

expressed

threads, closely tied, love, Brutus

run through challenges

(esp. his and, in particular, demeans and taunts his proud anger him shames Cassius until IV. iii. 38-50); and 2) he refuses to confess any love contempt and will do self by announcing that he utterly despairs of
manliness
Brutus'

anything to have his love (11.

occurs not io6ff.).
makes

92-106).

Whst is

perhsps most

telling,

however,
(11.
still

during

the

quanel

itself but

during

their apparent

reconciliation

Cassius'

previous

conciliatory

efforts

notwithstanding, Brutus
and

him

solicit an explicit admission of

love

forces him to his

plead

for it,
the

moreover,

by

Brutus'

accepting

degrading

characterization of

anger as

effect of an

irritable, unmanly disposition (11.

39-50,

106-112).

Thus
asks,

Cassius,

apologizing for

having

gotten

angry in the first place,

love
enough

diffidently
me,

Have

not you

to

bear my

with

When that

rash

humour

which

mother gave me

Makes

me

forgetful?
"Yes,"

And Brutus sealing

answers

with

only

a meager

to

which

he quickly adds,

Cassius'

disgrace,
.

and

from henceforth

When

you are over-earnest with your

your mother

Brutus,
you so.

He'll think

chides, and leave

(11.

18-122)
Cassius'

Brutus
spirit.

confesses

He

shall

only to having excuse his

enough

love to

overlook

womanish

"over-earnestness"

because he

shall regard such

fits

Cassius'

of temper
proper

as

the chiding of

mother

rather than

the

spirited

anger

to a

man.

Men
than to

such as

Brutus

are ambitious

for love.

They

wish

to

be loved

rather

love because

tributes of esteem.

honored.13 Both are being loved closely resembles being Love between such men is therefore jealous; like honor, it is
love"

ardently sought snd only begrudgingly given. Unrequited "shows of (I.ii. 33,46) therefore amount to confessions of envy. A Roman, moreover, is
man's man.

He

admires

love. The
not

erotic

Antony is

manly disparaged

men and seeks

love from
in

men

he himself
and

could

by

his

own men

Antony

Cleopatra

simply because he flees battle to pursue Cleopatra but more generally because he fights bravely chiefly to impress a woman and win her love. As one
of

leader's led, / And we are women's vii. 69-70). The republican contest for love, however, is a contest in (Ant., III. manliness for the love of other msnly men. Moments before the qusrrel, Brutus,
officers

his

complains, "so

men"

our

snticipsting the heart

of

the quarrel, contrasts true and false

friends. The

differ-

"Aristotle,

Nicomachean Ethics, 1159313-15.

Manliness
ence

and

Friendship
Using

in Julius Caesar
a metaphor

159
war

turns wholly on manly strength.

from

to

describe

what constitutes a

fslse friend, he ssys,

But hollow men, like horses hot Make But
at

hand,
spur,

gallant show and promise of their mettle;

when

they

should endure the

and

bloody

They fall their crests, Sink in the trial.

False friends
are

like deceitful jades

(IV. ii. 23-27)

hollow

warriors.

They

lack the dauntless

of

strength

they

pretend
and

to have. The quarrel brings out the significance

this view of virtue

friendship:
friend
mesns

the

msnly

contest

for love issues

finally
of a

in

a struggle to crush a

by
to

win

unmsnning his proud hesrt. Love is victory in the defest snd shame
a contentious virtue.

not an end

in

itself, but

rather a

friend.14

Manliness is
the teeth of

It is

"virtue"

that "cannot live/ Out of

finally
than

(II.iii.n-12). Untempered, it is hungry, devouring, and self-consuming. Nothing could lower Cassius more in esteem
Brutus'

emulation"

by

one

his swallowing his repeated he loves; brsv'd by his

It does

abuse snd

brother"

openly confessing thst he is "Hsted (IV. iii. 95). But msnly love is spirited,

not sffectionate.

collapsing the distance between men into intimacy but rather at expanding that distance to the point where friendship finally becomes impossible, ss Csessr himself most vividly demonstrates. As
not aim at
msnliness

not

stop Rome's civil

at

is displayed primarily in battle, so the combat between warriors does the city's walls. It pervades their loves as well as their enmities.
strife seems to

be Roman

friendship

writ

large.

Antony,
confirms

the

major

counterexample,
one
can

the rule.

No

is in many ways the exception who doubt that his love is spirited and has an
victory in love is
altogether and

ambitious quality.

But his

sought-for at

different from

Brutus'. Just "nobleness

of

as

he declares

the outset of
embrace

Antony

Cleopatra that the

life"

is for lovers to

when such a mutual pair

And

such a twain can

do't, in

which

bind,

On
We
so

pain of stand

punishment, the

world

to weet

up peerless,

(I. i. 36-40)
wishes

too,
own

when

he thinks Cleopatra has killed herself for him, he

to end

his

life

so

that,

reunited

in

death, they

can win even greater

acknowledg

ment as a matchless pair:

I come, my queen: Eros! Where souls do couch on flowers,

Eros!

Stay
we'll

for me,
hand in

hand,

And

with our and

sprightly

port make shall want

the ghosts gaze:

Dido,
And
l4See
15Cf.
esp.

her Aeneas,
haunt be

troops,

all

the

ours.

(IV.xiv.50-54)15

IV. iii. 41-50.

mention of

Cassius'

Aeneas (I.ii.111-114).

160

Interpretation
wants

Antony
greatest

to out-love all other great lovers

world

and

be

recognized

as

the

lover the

imply

the defeat of all other

the defeat of

his

own

ever known. The achievement he imagines may heroic lovers, but his victory would in no sense be love (JC, lover. He does not seek to win another's

has

"hot"

IV.ii.19)
triumph

while

is

shared

coldly withholding his own. On the contrary, his envisaged by Cleopstrs snd is, moreover, their shsred glory ss s
wished-

singular couple. not even

their

for prospect that nothing at all, Indeed, it rests on the bodies, will ever again separate their souls. It is the victory of
and

the

utmost

devotion
neither

intimacy

between "a

pair."

mutual

Antony
dominate

resents

Caesar's domination like Cassius,

nor

seeks

to

hesrts like Brutus. Yet, while hsving grest love for Csessr, he never presumes sn equality with him. His ready submission may therefore seem to foreshadow the Empire where the Emperor has no equals and
other men's all citizens are reduced

to private men subject to his

will.16

But

Antony

loves

Caesar solely for his superlative nobility and not for his favors. To him, Caesar (III. i. 256-257). was "the noblest man / That ever lived in the tide of
times"

Antony's heart is ruled, as Cassius conectly fears, by "the ingrafted love he (II. i. 184), a love which Caesar's murder turns into the most bears to
Caesar"

savage

desire for

revenge.

It is

not

hard to

see that what

Antony
like

gives

to

Cleopatra,

or gives

up for her, is
islands"

meant

to measure his
that

love.17

Not only his

small change

giving her "realms "dropp'd from his battles he loses or,

and

and

so

bounteously
also,

they

are

pocket"

(V.ii.92), but

and even more

importantly,

the

more

exactly, the losses he actively pursues, the "Kingdoms

provinces" away"

desth

sll

(III. x. 7-8), and most of sll his self-inflicted he "kiss[es] love.ls this is meant to measure his overflowing The same is true of
vengeance

his ferocious

for Csesar's

assassination.
an act of

However
giving,

cruel

and even

inhumsn,
true!"

the vengesnce

is,

sbove

all,

not

of taking.

Its

indiscriminate savagery is intended to prove "That I did love thee, Caesar, O, 'tis (III. i. 194). It shows that he will spare nothing that he will even sink
to the level of a beast and scourge all human or humane

feeling

from the

innocent lavish
give

as as the guilty (III. i. 254-275) for his love. As different as they appear, Antony's terrible vengeance for Caesar is of a piece with his
well gifts and enormous sacrifices

for Cleopatra. It
"deer"

manifests a

heart that

will

Roman"

up everything dear for his (Ant., I.iii.84) is nothing if

contrast to
and

"strucken"

(III. i. 209). This "Herculean

not a

thoroughly immoderate lover.

Cassius is
one as

In
often

Antony, "lean

hungry"

and
playful.19

austere and

unerotic,

petty

envious,

and never

No

in Caesar

speaks of the

shame of unmanliness as much or as

vehemently

he. Yet, notwithstanding

1291.

16Paul A. Cantor,

Shakespeare'

Rome (Ithaca: Cornell Univ. Press, 1976)

grest to

"Ibid.,
love that
can

148-156.
of course

"Antony
"See
esp.

insists that his love is too

(I.i.15).

be

measured:

"There's

be

reckon'd"

beggary

in the

I.ii.

189-207.

See

also note 12 above.

Manliness
his
ardent wish to

and

Friendship

in Julius Caesar
manly, Cassius is the
snd

161

be entirely
of

spirited and always

leading
If

republican

example

the tension between

war"

msnliness

womsnliness.

Brutus is

lstely
and

"with himself

st

(I.ii. 45) because

at war with a

for Rome

Caesar, Cassius is
mixed s

always

his conflicting loves himself because of the

of

conflicting sides of his him towards others and

but

unstable nature

manly Cassius' temper is much more volatile unquestionably shrewder than Brutus, and his psssions far less restrained. Despite his strong self-contempt for any
real or

one

pulling him back

or away.

womanly side drawing Although he is

imagined trace

of

softness, his

sffection

is

stirred ss

easily
at

by

sorrow as

his manly resentment is provoked for others, even his equals. He

Cicero's murder; bears
sorrow

by

envy,

and

he

often shows solicitous care

alone

shows

deep feeling
who

the news of
man

and

in sharp

contrast to

Brutus,
of

boasts that "No

better"

and then

feigns ignorance

his

wife's

death to impress how

much

his Stoic endurance, he is willing to let takes to heart the "insupportable and touching
other men with
loss"

others see of

he

have "in
a

art"

as much

manly

patience as

Brutus to

endure

Portia's

Portia. Cassius may suicide "like

not

Roman,"

"But

nature,"

yet

my

he

realizes or perhaps

confesses, "could
than Brutus
Brutus'

bear it

so"

(IV. iii.

143-194).

If he

appears more concerned

with

manliness, he

does so, paradoxically, precisely because he lacks

friend"

manly

constancy and reserve. The man Cassius calls his "best Their

is his lieutenant Titinius (V. iii. 35).

in Caesar
of

friendship

is probably the
as

nearest

example

the sort the

republic claims
brothers'

to foster and Brutus suggests

when

he describes "hearts / Of

temper"

(III. i. 174-176).
will.

sharing "all kind love, good thoughts, snd Cassius and Titinius do indeed have mutual regard

reverence

and good

Yet their

friendship
in
the
a

is

not altogether unlike

Brutus

Cassius'

and

It too

demonstrates, men. Appropriately,

sents other's

though

different way, thst

Philippi

scene at

their deaths. Each kills

hoi.or-loving depicting their friendship also pre himself, blaming himself at least in part for the
msnliness separates

death. Their suicides, however, feel great sorrow and affection for his
Romanness (V. iii. 51-90), Cassius
out

are not the same.

Whereas Titinius

can

commander without

losing

pride

in his

cannot wish

to

die for love

the

of another with

feeling
to

shame at

his

own unmanliness.

During

Titinius'

ing

expressly to
where

love for him,

tell

asks

him to

battle, Cassius, appeal take his (Cassius') horse

friend
or

and ride
moments

he

can

whether certain troops are

enemy; and,

later, learning

that Titinius

has been

encircled

for joy, he jumps to the wrong

says

conclusion.

Deciding
so

horsemen shouting then to kill himself, he

by

in disgust, O,
To
coward

that

I am, to live

long,

see

my best friend ta'en before my face. (V. iii. 34-35)

Cassius'

The

quslities

sunounding
play.

death
and

are a

major

figures in the

Rashness

considered unmanly by fatalistic despair, born of

all

the

weari-

1 62
ness and melancholic
cowsrdice
things20

Interpretation
self-doubt, lead to his mistake,
act. and
and

his

own

imagined

determines his
suicide

Cassius'

it certainly is many Yet whatever else it is is an act of friendship. Because his manliness is partly
another man who soon returns

by its opposite, he can wish to die for the tribute in kind. But, importantly, Cassius
tempered

tries to stifle

his fond
to

wish.

the his unmanly qualities, he intends his suicide side of his nature that allows him to choose death thinking of anything but his honor. Ruled by his spirited heart, he kills himself, ultimately, more out of

Ashamed

of all

repudiate

manly
of

pride or shame than

love

or sorrow.

The

fundamentally

his

affection and pointed a

friendship by
up

with

Titinius is indicated both

by

Roman quality his suppression of his own

the way each man emulates the others brave death.

But it is
though

most of all

by

the more

bssic fsct thst

Csssius'

"best

friend,"

nobleman, is not his equal. Whatever closeness

there may be between them

depends As
so

decisively
Cassius'

on

the distance their

unmistakable

inequality

preserves.

suicide points shows of

to the limits of closeness among Roman men,

within a

Portia's

the limits of sharing the

Roman

marriage.

It

marks

the

unattainability
attempt of

intimacy

she

desires from

a virtuous marriage.

Portia's

to persuade Brutus to confide in her contains the play's only expression

erotic

intimate,
him

love.

Calling

herself "your self,

half,"

your

she tries to

"charm"

by By
all your vows of

my

once commended

beauty,

love,

and that great vow

Which did incorporate

and make us one.

(II. i. 271-274)

Love's desire
speak as

or goal seems

to inspire love's own special language. Lovers

if nothing at all separated them. Love not only makes or shows them equals, but even incorporates them and makes them indistinguishable parts of Yet Portia makes this plea upon her knees. She says she would not have
"one."

to kneel if Brutus

were gentle.

or presupposes mutual respect.

His customary gentleness, she suggests, implies We see for ourselves, however, that Brutus is in
than equals, and gentlest of all with
associates of

fact

much gentler with unequals

his

servant

boy, Lucius. Portia

reticence and
Brutus,"

nevertheless

his

recent

ungentleness

with

his

distance. "Within the bond

marriage,"

she

continues, "tell me,

Is it That

excepted
appertain

should

know Am I

no secrets your self

to

you?

But,
To

as

it were, in

sort or

limitation,
bed,
suburbs

keep

with you at

meals, comfort your

And talk to
2"Cassius'

you sometimes?

Dwell I but in the

lsst

words

(V. iii. 45-46), like

Brutus'

(V. v. 50-51),

acknowledge
matter of

Csesar's

personal

victory, in the former

case ss s matter of

revenge, in the latter ss a

love.

Manliness
Of

and

Friendship
harlot,
not

in Julius Caesar
no more,
wife.

163

your good pleasure?

Brutus'

If it be

Portia is

his

(11. 280-287)

But because
sort or

she

is "his

wife,"

Portia is indeed

Brutus'

"self /But,

as

it were, in
subsequent
wife,"

limitation."

And her

"suburbs"

metaphor of

as well as

her

self-inflicted wound

tells us why. "You are my true and honourable

Brutus

assures

her,
As dear to That
"dear"

me as are the sad

ruddy drops
(11. 288-290)

visit

my

heart.
Brutus'

him,21 Portia may be to but manly virtue rests on his valuing his heart more than his blood, his public life more than his marriage. As her
"suburbs"

own metaphor of

ironically
there. The

anticipates, Portia only

"visits"

Brutus'

heart;
what

she

does

"dwell"

not

love

of

fame

and

honor does.
would tell

Portia

wishes

her

conjugal plea would

succeed, that Brutus

of"

her

"by
as

the right and virtue of my place / 1 ought to know

(11.

269-270).
sex"

Yet,

her

having

already taken
she never

steps to prove

(1. 296)

indicates,
his

could never consider a woman

man

to win

confidence.

reslly expected his equal, she thinks she must prove herself a She realizes that, to the extent she is a woman,

herself "stronger than [her] it would. Recognizing that Brutus

Brutus

will never give

extent she proves

her his trust. She fails to realize, however, that, to the herself a man, he can no more unfold himself to her than to
weakness
proof can

any other man (cf. I.ii. 38-40). Since honor requires him to hide his from everyone he respects and whose respect he seeks, her manly
succeed no revesl

better than her

conjugsl pies.

Although Brutus

st

lsst

promises

to

his secrets, he in fsct lesves home just moments lster snd does not return Portia's self-inflicted wound succeeds only in before s
Csessr'
sssassination.22

shaming him to bear his troubles with prayer to be worthy of such a "noble
21Note that Brutus 22Brutus
reveal cannot never

greater

manly

patience.
23

It inspires his

wife"

(11.

302-303).

have

returned

actually says he loves Portia, though he speaks often of love. home after II. i. When he leaves with Ligarius, he says he
done"

will

his

plans

"to thee,
arrive

as we are

afterwards

they

together at

(II. i. 330-331); and soon going / To whom it must be Caesar's house to escort him to the Capitol (II.ii.lo8ff.). Yet

there

is

no

inconsistency
the

in Portia's

knowing

in II. iv

what she asks

to be told in II. i.

She knows

as

Brutus'

much when she asks

secret as she
conspirators

does later

when she almost

blurts it

out.

Whether

or not

she

has

overheard

(who leave

almost

immediately

before It

she

enters), it is clear

from

what

she

says

and

does in the

earlier scene

that she knows that what troubles

Brutus is
Brutus'

political and

involves him in dangerous

rest.

clandestine nighttime meetings.

would not require much wants to

for her to imagine the

secret; rather,
she

Shakespeare's point, I think, is

me your

not that

Portia
on

know

counsels"

wants

him to "Tell

(II. i. 298)

the grounds that she

is

worthy of his trust. 23For a contrary view of Portia and Brutus, Plays and Their Background (London: Macmillan

see

Mungo MacCallum,

Shakespeare'

Roman

Company, 1967) 235f., 272L, snd Allan Bloom, Shakespeare's Politics (New York: Basic Books, 1964) 101-103. See also Jay L. Halio, The Personalist, Vol. 48, No. I "Harmartia, Brutus, and the Failure of Personal
and
Confrontation,"

(Winter 1967)

51-52.

164
Portia does
not

Interpretation
really
of

understsnd

the virtue she tries to

emulste.

She hss
thst

too exslted s view

manliness

msnliness

to see its limitstions. that makes one

She

recognizes

involves the

sort of strength

superior

to

bodily

pains also

and

pleasures, but

not that at the same time and

for the

same reason

it

tends to make one superior to personal affection and sorrow. She

is drawn to
of

Brutus because
the same.

of

his

virtue and

imagines he

would

be drawn to her because

She does not,

Believing
to every

manliness
excellent

the highest virtue, she also believes it supports

or gives rise

human quality
that

as well.

or perhaps

cannot,
strives

see that the virtue she most admires resists the

for

noble

distinction,
own

it distances
a

men

sharing she desires as it from one another as it

and a

distances them from their

the

bodies. In both

literal

figurative sense,

distance between Portia

and

closely parallels her sudden her manly proof, is the piteous

"impatience"

Brutus leads to her death. Her suicide, which loss of constancy when Brutus leaves home after
culmination

of

the madness caused

by

her
over

extreme

for his

return

from the

wsr snd

her desperate

"grief"

the growing power of his

shows and

just how

much

Csessrisn foes (IV.iii.151-155). Her touching death her hsppiness and even her life depend on the closeness

well-being of the man she loves. Portia is the only character in Caesar to die solely for the love of another. Despite her real shame at the weakness of a woman's heart, hers is the only suicide not meant to prove manly strength. No
quite suicide

is less like Portia's than Brutus'. Everyone

a

understands

his,
or

properly, to have been

manly,

death-defying

act.24

By killing
honor
of

himself in

high Romsn
desth"

fsshion, Brutus deprives his

enemies of the

killing

cspturing him. In snother sense ss well, however, "no msn else hath honor by (V.v.57). Brutus, like Caesar, dies tasting his unshared glory. The his
very last time he
corpses:
mentions

Cassius is

when

he

comes upon

his

Titinius'

and

Are

yet two

Romans

living
ever

such as

these?

The last

of all the

Romans, fare
Rome

thee well!

It is impossible that

Should breed thy fellow. Friends, I owe To this dead man than you shall see me I
shall

moe pay.

tears

find time,

Cassius, I

shall

find time.

(V. iii. 98-103)

Acknowledging the way befitting what

Titinius in the

republican cause

has been lost, Brutus

always
stood

praises

Cassius in

the republic

same

breath. He

fellow citizens,

as sons of

him and them, in other words, as equals, as Rome (cf. V. iii. 63). For himself, however, Brutus
praises praises

had

for. He

24V.v.52ff.;
dead Cassius
the play.

cf.

V.i.98-113, V.iv.

"brave"

V.iii.58ff.). It is

passim, V. v. 23-25. By contrast, only Titinius calls the (V. iii. 80); despite everything, his death is seen by others as womanish (see

perhaps not

surprising

that no one mentions

Cassius in

the

last two

scenes of

Manliness
seeks preeminent mentions

and

Friendship

in Julius Caesar
Just
as

165
he
never again

distinction,

not republican equality.

(IV.iii.

189

Portia (even in soliloquy) after stoically bidding her farewell at Sardis 191), so he forgets Cassius entirely when, about to kill himself, he
the glory

envisions

he

shall win

for his life:

Countrymen,

My heart
I found

doth

joy

that yet
was

in

all

my life

no man

but he

true to me.

shall have glory by this losing day More than Octavius and Mark Antony

By

this vile conquest

you well at

shall attain unto.

Brutus'

So fare
Hath

once; for

tongue

almost ended

his life's history.

eyes; my bones
attain
would rest,

Night hangs

upon mine

That have but labour'd to

this hour.

(V.v. 33-42)
Brutus'

thoughts center on himself. He imagines his fame and glory as

his

alone,
and

neither

blurred

nor obscured sees

by

any fellow Roman. More

personal

importantly
somehow

surprisingly,

however, he

his

haps

even enhanced

by

his

country's collapse.

victory His "life's

undiminished and per

history"

stands above or apart

from Rome. Brutus had

of course claimed

to be

guided

only by his country's good. "I know had said of Caesar, "but for the

him,"

no personal cause

to spurn at

he

general"

ing, he had
friend
wss

argued, was a

personal

(II.i.n-12). Indeed, Caesar's slay sacrifice: "Not that I loved Caesar less,
as the sscrifice of s so
of

but that I loved Rome

proof of

more"

(III. ii. 22-23). Moreover,

public-spirited

desr

his

fully

virtue,

too wss

his declsred
slew

willingness

to kill himself if necessary for the good

Rome,"

best lover for the

death"

good of

he had
it

pledged at

my Caesar's funeral, "I have

turn

Rome: "as I

the same dagger for myself,

when

shall

please

(III. ii.

46-48)."

Yet,
is

when

Brutus does

finally

my country to need my his sword upon him

speaks

self, Rome's
personal not a word allusion

welfare

"joy"

"glory,"

snd

in

praise of

proudly of his but while in effect eulogizing himself, he ssys the republic or to lament its Indeed, his only
absent

from his thoughts. He

passing.26

to Rome is that he

shall

have

more

personal triumph eclipses

the "vile

conquest"

glory than her of Rome herself.

conquerors.27

His

Brutus
regards

sees

his
as

end as more

his death

far he

epitomizing and completing his than a last-ditch effort to salvage

virtuous some

life. He

honor from left to

defeat,

even while

understsnds suicide ss

the only honorable choice

25See

also

I.ii.8i-88.
Brutus'

he ssys in the corresponding speech in Plutarch "that not one of my friends hsth failed me at he begins, (Brutus, my Shakespeare's not complain of my fortune, but only for my country's sake. do and I need, my Plutarch, ed. W. W. Skeat (London: Macmillan and Company, 1875) 151. 27The last time Brutus mentions Rome is also the last time he mentions Cassius. 26Compare
silence

here

with whst

52.2-3):

"It

heart,"

rejoiceth

"

166
him (V.v. 23-25; manly love. Just
sake of see slso as

Interpretation
V.i.98-113). His

Lucilius

bravely

risks

is his crowning conquest in his own disgrace and death for the
end

Brutus'

defending
the
refusal of

Brutus'

likewise,

manly honor (V.iv. 12-25; "poor remains of

with

see also

V.v. 58-59), so,

when

friends"

to kill him
their

he
to

asks them to

fills his heart

joy

because he

understands

reluctance

28 personal loyalty and sacrifices spring from love (V.v. 1-42). Brutus believes the show of his loving admirers and friends serve to how, to the last, he is held in esteem by Rome. In more than the most obvious way, his death is Caesar's

fitting
and

revenge.

For in

Brutus'

own

eyes

the ultimate

measure

of

his fame
Rome"

glory is

not

his itself

public-spirited
him.29

men's personal

devotion to
as

devotion to his country but his country In the end, the virtue of the "Soul of
not patriotism.

(II. i. 32 1)

shows

manliness,

The Roman love

separates

of

distinc
not

tion, spurring him to only from his friends herself. Brutus does him "the
noblest

master other men's snd

hearts,

Brutus

finally

fsmily, but

even, or perhsps

especislly, from Rome

of course win

singulsr praise
all,"

and glory.

Antony,

who calls

Roman

of

them

says,
elements

His life So

was

gentle, and all the

mix'd

in

him,

that

Nature

might stand was a

up

And say to

all the world,

"This

man!"

(V.v. 69,73-75)

In

spite of of

Antony's

generous

praise,

or rather

precisely because
Even in "gentle

of the ambi

guity issue in the

Roman
none of

"a

man,"

the

untempered affirmstion of manliness seems

"mix'd"

ultimately to
Brutus,"

repudiation of one's

nature.

the

view of excellence encourages

the desire to have

all of the and

manly

and

the womanly

qualities.

Stressing hardness, distance,

and weakness.

assertiveness,

it teaches
avoid all scribes and
er"

men a willingness

to risk simple cruelty and callousness in order to

signs of

softness,
brothers'

dependence,
temper"

"hearts / Of

as own

shsring "sll

Brutus, we saw, de kind love, good thoughts,

quarrel with

reverence."

But his

sctions, psrticulsrly in the

his "broth

Cassius,
her

remind us

that while Rome was

founded
sacred

by

a pair of as

brothers,
not

even

own

traditional accounts

depict her
as

origins

lying

in

fraternity but
29This
Brutus"

fratricide.30

Moreover, just

Shakespesre

frequently

reminds us of

28MacCallum,
(V.v. 60)

271.

spirit of personalism allows

Octavius to take into

service those whom

he

says

"serv'd
to

he does

not

say, "serv'd Rome under

Brutus"

and who are recommended

even

him

on

the basis of their personal

devotion. Note that

of
Rome,"

Massala

speaks of

Brutus

master"

(V.v. 52, 64-67). For

and

discussion

the spirit of personalism in

Caesar,

see

"my Jan H. Blits,

as

"Caesarism
40-55-

the End of

Republican

The Journal of Politics, Vol. 43. No.

Brutus' Cassius'

1 (Feb.

1981)

30It is striking
"brother'

and

occur

in the

scene at

revesling that all eight of Sardis and in the

and

references to each other as

context of a contest of wills. second when

brother"

The first
Cassius'

occurs

in the opening words of their quarrel; the charge, demands to know how he should wrong "a

literally

Brutus, answering
not

angry his
enemies

if he does

wrong

even

Manliness
the literal mesning of

and

Friendship
so

in Julius Caesar
slso reminds us
wolf.32

167
thst those ssme

Brutus'

nsme,31

he

ssy Romulus wss nurtured by s sheShakespeare, I admires Roman virtue. In Caesar he shows that such excellence think, truly does indeed involve more than human strength. But Shakespeare's appreciation
sccounts
of

Romsn

manly virtue is by Rome's own traditional

no

means

unqualified.

His

portrayal

of

Rome, like
Romans

accounts of

her

foundations,

suggests that the

ultimately debase the human in

order to elevate the man.

(IV. ii. 37-39). The third

shames snd

reference

occurs

when

by acknowledging he is "Hated by the fourth not long sfter the qusrrel itself
(1. 211), tries (but

himself

one

Cassius, "aweary of the despairingly he loves; brsv'd by his (IV. iii. 95); when Csssius, commsnding "Hesr me, good
brother"

world,"

brother"

fails)

to counter

Brutus'

willful

plans and references

then is forced for the first time to defer explicitly to his seem,

overruling of his more prudent bsttle will (11. 223-224). The next two Just
a moment or so

by

contrast, to stress

reconciliation
brother"

and even amity.

lster,
our

Csssius, taking leave, begs his "dear

souls"

not

to let "such

division'

ever come

"'tween

again; and

(11.

232-236).

Brutus, assuring him thst everything is well, bids "Good night, Despite one's first impression, however, use of "good
Brutus'

brother"

good

brother"

does

not

reflect a restored of their quarrel phrase springs afford

a dozen lines after Cassius explicitly submits to his will, his use of the from the generosity of a conqueror, not the msnly esteem of sn equal. Brutus can to show Cassius greater friendliness and even praise him more highly than ever before

equslity or and less than

mutual respect

between him

snd

Cassius.

Coming

in the

general wake

(1. 231) precisely because Cassius, having been forced to friendship, can no longer threaten his domination. Indeed,
brother"

acknowledge

the

inequality

in their

Brutus'

valediction

comes

in direct

Cassius'

response to
ever call anyone
Brutus'

valediction

"Good night, my
accordance
with

lord"

"Good night, good (1. 236). At no

other time
references

does Cassius
"brother"

his

"lord."

In

to

both involve

issuing

Cassius military
moral

orders

this, the last two (11. 247, 303). The only

all

other time either man conspirators when conspiracy's

is

"brother"

spoken of as the other's

Brutus, forcing Cassius

III. i. 77.
the
connection

to bow to his

(II.i.70) directly precedes the meeting of domination, supplants him as the

leader.
esp. st

3lMost

l:I.ii.i-n; for

between the Lupercsl

race

and

the

story

of

Romulus,

see

Plutarch, Romulus 21.3-8,

and

Ovid. Fasti II.38iff.

THE WINTER'S TALE: THE TRIUMPH OF COMEDY OVER TRAGEDY

Mary Pollingue Nichols

Catholic

University

of America

At the
comic poet

end of

the

Symposium, Socrates
msn

tries to persuade a tragic poet

snd

snd a

thst the same

csn

drsmstize both tragedies becsuse

of

comedies

(223d).

Socrates'

sssertion seems psrsdoxicsl

the grest differences

between tragedy snd comedy ss we ordinsrily understsnd them. The choice of one of these drsmstic forms seems to imply s view of the humsn situstion snd

consequently of the function of the poet thst is st odds with the choice of the other. One csn see the different responses to life thst characterize the two
genres

by

contrasting the

masks associated with each one. wrote

Shakespeare, however,
that
contain elements of

both tragedies

and

comedies,

and even plays

both. The Winter's Tale is the

most obvious combina

tion of

tragedy and comedy: it has the appearance of two distinct dramas, a three-act tragedy followed by a two-act comedy. The two parts of the play are
separated

by

a sixteen-year

time span

and

involve two

sets of principal charac

ters. What is the difference between

compose

tragedy

and comedy?

How

can one man

both kinds

of plays?
can one

And,

given what

Shakespeare has done in The

a

Winter's Tale, how

nevertheless not

play contain both a tragedy and lose its unity? The answers to these questions
an analysis of and

comedy

and

and the whole

formed

by

the play come to light through

the action of

its

parts:

the tragedy, the transition to the comedy,

the comedy.

The

Tragedy
opens the

Archidamus, lord of Sicily, of

Archidamus does

a a

lord

of

Bohemia,
what

"great

difference"

play by reminding Camillo, a between Bohemia and Sicily. Although

not

indicate

he mesns, he
when

immediately

reveals

one

difference between Bohemia

the
present visit of

and

Sicily:

his

childhood
us,"

friend

and

Leontes, king of Sicily, returns king of Bohemia, Polixenes, "our

in
so embsrrsssed

entertainment shall shame

for "we

cannot with such magnificence

rare

I know

say"

not what

to

' (I. i. 8-1 3). Archidamus is

country's

failure to

mstch

Sicily's

msgnificent

sppears richer and more splendid

in its

court

courtly entertsinment. life than Bohemia. Archidamus its

visitors

by his Sicily
senses

drinks"

jokes that Bohemia

(unintelligent
us"

will give

"sleepy Sicily
desires

to

"that

[their]
us,

of our

insufficience)
In

may, though
sre

they

cannot praise snd to

as

little

accuse

(I. i.

13-15).

indulged

some extent

satisfied,
'All

while

in Bohemia they
to

are moderated, or perhaps

dulled.
Methuen,
1866).

citations

The Winter's Tale

are

to the Arden edition (London:

170
Camillo
moves

Interpretation
the conversation

from the

"insufficience"

of

Bohemia's

entertainments

to the incompleteness of the

kings'

friendship. Although the

of

kings
their

were

"train'd together in their

continued through

childhoods,"

because
gifts,

"royal

neces

friendship

"interchange

of

letters, loving

embas-

sies,"

rather than through personal contact

(I. i.

22-29).

Since Bohemia is

now

in childhood "cannot visiting his old friend, the affection "rooted betwixt (I. i. 23-24). For Camillo, time does not destroy but choose but branch
now"

them"

only arrests. What Camillo "the heavens continue their In Camillo's

presents as
loves"

necessary,
31-32).

however, he

soon prays

for:

(I. i.

commonplace

appeal

to
will

heaven, Shakespeare
initiate the
play's

warns

us

of

trouble: a quarrel between the

friends

action our

and

the

tragedy
called

of the

first

part of the play.

refer

The "great difference betwixt

quarrel

Bohemia

Sicily"

and your

can

to the

by

the names of their countries, as

between the kings, who are often well as to the differences between the

countries.

Shakespeare's
and
of

dissimilsrity impossibility

pun prepares us to reflect on the relationship between hostility. The tragedy of the first part of the play involves the friendship between dissimilar human beings.

Archidamus turns the conversation, rather abruptly, to the excellence of Leontes's son, Mamillius, "a gentleman of the greatest promise that ever came
(I. i. 35-36). (We see that Archidamus is revealing another into my difference between Bohemia and Sicily when we find out in the next scene that Polixenes
also
note"

has

son,

with

whom

Archidamus

must

also

be

familiar.)

Mamillius, Archidamus says, is "an

on crutches ere

comfort"

unspeakable

to

Sicily; Camillo

agrees that the child "physics the subject, makes old

he

was

born desire

yet

their life to see him a

an excellent

hearts fresh: they that went (I. i. 37-40).

man"

The

prospect of seeing the maturity of for living, Camillo believes, although

versstion

human

being

is

fit

reason
con-

one

be

otherwise unfortunate. of a

The

hss

moved

from the

anticipated completion

friendship
ends,

to the
we see

anticipated maturation of an excellent

a

human being. As the

and the

scene

disagreement between the lord live for,

men

of

Sicily

lord

of

Bohemia. Without
asserts.

anything to
amus,

would

be

content

to

die, Camillo

Archid

desire to live, they will invent a reason for living if they do not have one: "If the king had no son they would desire to live on crutches till he had (I. i. 44-45). Archidamus should know about for he comes from the country that boasts neither this, nor a
thinks that since men
one"

however,

"magnificence"

human

being by

"of the

promise."

greatest

the more moderate

gested

Bohemia. The

Sicily seems to have greater goods insufficiency of moderation might be

who

than

sug

the

fsct thst it is Polixenes

the old friendship. He is the visitor, and

period of nine months.

spparently initiates remains in Sicily for

the renewal of the rather

long

Political duties fear "of

what

now call chance

may

Polixenes home, but Leontes, ignoring Polixenes 's / Or breed upon [his] (I. i. 11-12), urges
absence"

him to stay

another week.

When Leontes

asks

his

wife

Hermione to try to

The Winter's Tale

persuade their

171

"too

coldly"

friend to stay, she reproaches her husband for charging Polixenes (I. ii. 29-30). Her rhetoric proves successful. She first suggests to
should srgue thst

her husband that he

edges

"All in Bohemia's

well."

She

acknowl

the validity of public

sre

demsnds

upon a ruler's private

made.

inclinations, but
son

she

denies that demsnds Polixenes to

return

now

being

Nor does love for his

move

home,
a

she

argues, for he does

not give this as a reason

for

leaving. Hermione
will allow

next attempts

to bargain: if Polixenes stays now, Hermione

Leontes

longer

visit

in Bohemia. Hermione's concession,

refuses

a move
own

that in a political situation might indicate weakness, is premised on her

rule of

Leontes. When Polixenes

(I. ii.

her compromise, Hermione threatens

to employ force: "Will you go yet? / Force me to

keep

you as a

prisoner, / Not

like
a

guest?"

51-53).

Because Polixenes

prefers to

be

a guest rather than

prisoner, he
moved

yields.

have

from

gentleness to

then to threats of
enes
with

simply political, she would from harshness, argument, to compromise, and force. But Hermione is obviously being plsyful, and Polix but her friend. Because
a

If Hermione's

rhetoric were

is

not

her

political opponent out of affection ss

friend desires to be desire to be for

with

his friends
and

for them, Polixenes

would

Hermione

Leontes

long

ss there were no

compelling

ressons

depart-

ing. When Hermione

sssumes

thst she hss overcome Polixenes 's ressons for

and to threaten, she is pretending that a he is naturally inclined to do. Hermione's because it implicitly appeals to Polixenes's

departing
friend
playful

and

proceeds

to bargain
what

must

be induced to do force
how

threat of

succeeds much

friendship:
threat of

indicating

Polixenes's

presence

is desired, Hermione's

force says, in effect, stay because I want you to stay. Although Polixenes placed his political duties above his private desires in planning to
return

home, he is

not always

immune to the

appeals

of

love

or

friendship.
or

Underlying
ship.

Hermione's

playful political rhetoric

is

a rhetoric of

love

friend

Her

speech masks what

is

playful and

loving

in

form that is

serious and

political.

Having charged less coldly than her husband, and succeeded where he failed, Hermione turns the conversation to the playful days of childhood that Polixenes and Leontes shared. Something that she notices in Polixenes appar
ently leads her to think that he is different from her husband: "Was not my lord But Polixenes does not see sny difference. The / The verier wag friends were slike in their childhood innocence ss well ss in their youth, when (I. ii. 71-73). were "higher rear'd with stronger their "wesk
o'

th'

two?"

spirits"

blood"

Because

of their

high spirits, Polixenes

cover

avers,

they

must admit

their guilt to

heaven. Perhaps to up his suggestion that he and his friend have yielded to sexual desires forbidden by God's law, Polixenes claims that the temptations
wives. But Polixenes has only entangled himself that implied has sex, lawful or unlawful, is sinful. Hermione further, for he ii. 67-68). We may suppose that vehemently objects to such an implication (I. Polixenes is grateful to Leontes for interrupting by inquiring whether Polixenes

that led them to sin were their

172
has been
persuaded

Interpretation
to stay. Because Leontes hss
not

been listening, he hss friend. He does

at

not

lesrned from Hermione how to

sppeal successfully to a into the conversation, however, sn exsmple of his own success and st the ssme time puts forwsrd sn spproval of love and
contrasts
with

bring
that

persuading,

marriage

sharply only once to better purpose than she just spoke in winning Polixenes over, Leontes says, namely, when she accepted Leontes's marriage proposal. At that time Leontes had some difficulty in winning her: "Three crabbed months
spoke

Polixenes's hint that

even

lawful

sex

is

sinful.

Hermione

had

sour'd

themselves to death / Ere I could make thee open

love"

thy
she

white

hand /

And clap thyself my (see V. iii. 36). Hermione

enes

(I. ii.

102-04).

He

was

the

lover,

the

beloved

agrees

that she twice spoke to good purpose and offers Polix

her hand. In

an aside

infidelity. His friend has

wife's not

made

Leontes abruptly and violently him a cuckold. Why else

speaks of would

Hermione's
yield

he

to his

entreaty to
own.

his

stay but not to his own? Perhaps even his son, Mamillius, is What has moved Leontes to such thoughts? Although his passion
the
to

seems

inexplicable,
to

his

inferiority

Hermione

insecurity underlying his jealousy might be fostered by an inferiority that we glimpse in comparing Her
with

mione's speech self suggests

Polixenes

Leontes's

cold

charge,

and that

Leontes him

in his description
unable

of

his

courtship.
of

When Leontes is

to hide his passion, Hermione asks the cause

his

"distraction"

(I. ii.

149).

He thought he

saw

himself

as

lad

when

he

looked

at

his son, he says, but he lies: his

son with
of

passion

involves his

inability

to see

himself in his
to subjects

because
said

any certainty. Although Mamillius might bring his great promise, he gives his father "some

comfort

comfort"

because he is
others, but he

to look like him (I. ii. 208). But it is women who say this,
might

and women will

makes

say anything (I. ii. 130-31). Mamillius his father anxious. for his distraction

bring

comfort to

Leontes's
of

excuse

changes the subject to the

kings'

love

their sons. Polixenes claims that

his

son

is
matter:

all

my exercise, my mirth, my

Now my

sworn

friend,

and then mine

enemy;

My
He
And

parasite, my soldier, statesman, all.

makes a
with

July's

day

short as

December;
in
me

his varying
would

childishness cures

Thoughts that

thick my blood

(I. ii. 166-71).

Polixenes's

son's

"varying
his father
blood"

childishness"

(or his ability to play

as

even contradic

tory parts)
would

gives

a new perception of

time and cures "Thoughts that

sad
and

thick

[his]

perhaps

thoughts the

fearful

ss

desth. In

moving his viewer from s Tale.

Winter'

ssdness to mirth,

child prefigures

the course of The

The Winter's Tale

Leontes

173

goes for a walk and meets Camillo. He assumes that his wife's is well known and that he has been made a laughingstock (I. ii. adultery 215-19). He insists that Csmillo poison Polixenes. Csmillo soon meets Polix

enes,

who

has just

encountered
of

Leontes

and noticed

how

upset

he is. Perhaps

conscious of

Leontes's lack
/
as

restraint, Camillo had

wears at

earlier warned

him, "with
and and

a countenance as clear
queen"

friendship

feasts

keep

with

Bohemia /

with

your

(I. ii.

343-45).

Leontes
grief

cannot
of a

conceal

his passion,

Polixenes

supposes that province

Leontes's

is that

man who

has lost

some

dearly

loved

(I. ii.

370-71).
and

When Camillo

warns

Polixenes
of
a

they

escape to

Hermione to feel the full force

she asks

Leontes's

passion.

Bohemia, they leave Not yet suspecting danger,

rather

Mamillius to tell her

tale. He chooses a sad tale

than a merry

one, for "a sad tale's best for

goblins"

winter"

(II. i.

25).

He

offers one of no control.

"sprites
it"

and

of

forces

or elements over which man

has

tells such tales

27-28).

frequently, for Hermione

observes

"you're

powerful at

He evidently (II. i.

is

on

By chance, a winter's tale, a sad tale, is appropriate now, for Leontes his way to imprison Hermione, and thus to initiate a series of events that
consequences.

have tragic

Enraged

by

Polixenes's
are

departure, Leontes is
against

certain

that

Polixenes, Cam
Just he
as

illo,

and

Hermione

plotting

his life

and crown. meant that

Leontes

assumed that commit

Polixenes's

admiration

for Hermione

would

try

to

him

entirely.

adultery with her, he now assumes that Polixenes will try to replace In assuming that Polixenes has no restraint, Leontes assumes that
counterpart

Polixenes is like himself. Leontes's Polixenes is the ironic

are alike.

his similarity to to Polixenes's belief that he and his friend

mistaken assumption about

Hermione

gives

birth to

daughter in

prison.

Her companion,

Lady

Paul
child"

ina,

takes the
40).

baby

to Leontes because he
or

"may

soften at

the sight of her

(II. ii.

Paulina's boldness
shown

hsrdness his

contrasts with

the gentleness that

undertakes the task
office

Hermione has
of

in

previous scenes.

Although Paulina
child

informing
best"

the

king
I'll

of the

birth

of

because "the

/ Becomes

woman

(II. ii. 31-32),

use

she expresses

her determination in forceful terms:

wit

the tongue I

have; if

flow from 't

As boldness from my bosom, let 't not be doubted (II. ii. 52-54). I shall do good

Psulina has Leontes

42-44).

deserved

reputation

for boldness:
lady"

after not

commands

"that

audacious

Paulina

he imprisoned Hermione, to come near him (II. ii.

Nevertheless Hermione lets Paulina take her

baby

to Leontes. Perhaps
and

she sees that

must

her

own gentleness

is insufficient to

move

Leontes

that she

rely

on

Paulina's boldness. Hermione's

earlier

threat of force was, after

all, only
mstters

playful.

worse.

iii. 26-27.) But Paulina's boldness only makes Leontes becomes more enraged. In the end Psulins leaves the
(See V

174

Interpretation
with

baby

Leontes,

who tricks

Paulina's husband, Antigonus, into agreeing to

public

abandon

the

baby

on some

deserted isle.
trial for adultery and treason.

In the third act, Hermione is brought to Leontes desires that her trial be
public so

that he may be "clear'd / Of

justice"

being
II. i.
self-

tyrannous, since we so openly / Proceed in 163-65). Leontes depends greatly on the good
esteem.

(III. ii. 4-6;

cf.

opinion of others

for his

From the
at

moment

he

suspected

adultery, Leontes has

shown a

fear

of

being

laughed

196-98).

(I. ii. 188-90; I. ii. 217-18; I. iii. 23-26; II. i. 50-52; II. i. Leontes wants neither to be ridiculed nor to be considered a tyrant.

Yet his

passion now

forces him to dismiss

as

all sensible

advice,

and

his "most
tyranny"

cruel usage of

[his]

(II. iii.

1 16-19).

Paulina says, "something savours / Of His desire not to be laughed at has turned him into s tyrant.
shows no concern over so

queen,"

Although Hermione
wsnt

to

maintsin

her honor. She desires to do

lsughed st, she does less for her own sske thsn for

being

her children's, for she pssses her honor onto them. Indeed, this honor is more vsluable to her than her life (III. ii. 42-45). When Leontes asks for her death,
she claims not
goods

to

consider

it

punishment, for she has been deprived

of

the

living: Leontes's favor, Mamillius (from whom she is now barred), her infant daughter, and her public dignity. She wonders "what blessings I have here alive / That I should fear to (III. ii. 107-08).
that made her life
worth
die?"

She

confirms

Camillo 's

opinion

that people

desire to live only if they have

sight of an excellent alive appear to

something human being to be that good, the

private or personal.

good

to live for. But

while

Camillo thought the

goods that

keep

Hermione

be

At the The
cile

news of

Mamillius's death, Hermione

asks

swoons and

is

carried out.

ing

Apollo's pardon, and states his intention to recon himself to Hermione. But Paulina enters screaming tyranny and announc Hermione's death. She informs Leontes that his crimes allow no forgive
chastened

Leontes

ness

(III. ii. 207-14).

Leontes has
nated: a spouse's

none of

the reasons for

living

that Hermione earlier

desig

favor, Mamillius, an infant daughter, or public dignity. As for Leontes's public dignity, Leontes will engrave the cause of his wife's and
son's

deaths

on

their gravestones "unto / Our shame

perpetual"

(III. ii.

236-38).

Leontes's

model

in Shakespeare's source, Pandosto,

to those sackless souls whose

wants

to "offer

[his] guilty
vigorous

blood

a sacrifice

lives

are

lost

by [his]

folly."2

Leontes, in
are now

to

die,

although

contrast, without any reasons for living, indicates tears and mourning will characterize his future (III. ii.

no

desire

238-43).

We

in

a position

to ask why the action of the

first

part of the

has

ended

in

sadness.

What

are the elements of a

tragedy?

Why

play did it happen?

We begin

with

two

men who are

trying

to

be

friends,

yet who are

different

and

2Robert Greene, Pandosto,

reprinted

in The Winter's Tale,

p.

198.

The Winter's Tale

do
not understand

175
did
not act as

that

they

are

different. If

each man

if the

other with

were

like him, there

surprised when acts ss

would

have been
msn,
snd

no quanel.

Polixenes is familiar

Hermione; he is
He is
Polixenes

a moderate

his

moderation permits

his fsmilisrity.
For the

Leontes

supposes thst

his

familiarity

implies impropriety.
own.

if his friend's judgment

without

would

be identicsl to his
would

immoderste Leontes,

he too he

supposes

be impossible, snd fsmilisrity impropriety thst his friend is like himself. If Polixenes were like Leontes,
mske

would not

unwittingly
and

Leontes

jeslous; if Leontes
alike or

were

like Polixenes,

Polixenes'

actions would not make

either

him jealous. There

would

be

no

tragedy
their

if Leontes

Polixenes

were

if they

fully

understood

differences. Other factors

snd contribute to the trsgedy.

By

Polixenes

convince

Leontes thst his

suspicions

retresting from Sicily, Csmillo sre justified. Their flight

seems wesk and unmsnly.

Leontes did thresten Csmillo's death. Paulina, how

with

ever, argues vehemently

cruel punishments

Leontes,

and

nevertheless

does

not

suffer

the

that he threatens (II. iii. 94-95; 113; 132-40). In

"loss"

contrast

to

her, Camillo appears too cautious. His lack of boldness outcome. On the other hand, part of the tragedy is the
princess, and

contributes
of

to the

the new that

for this Paulina's boldness is

Leontes in

responsible.

Paulina

claimed

soften his anger, but showing the princess to Leontes would be a bold move to when

Paulina leaves her

with

rage, she divorces boldness from s

occurs

ressonsble cslculstion of success.

Tragedy

because Camillo's
passion.

cautious

acts

and

Paulina's bold

ones

strengthen

Leontes's
of

Just

as

Camillo

should not

have left Hermione in the hsnds

princess

Leontes,

so

Psulins

should not

hsve left the

in his hsnds.
because Mamillius languishes
news.

Trsgedy

occurs also

and

dies,

and

Hermione

collapses when she endures even when

hears the

Their desire to live is

of the good

they

are

deprived

strong that it things for which they live.

not so

Too

12-17). It is not surprising that nobility leads to tragedy (III. iii. Leontes cannot see himself in his son. Mamillius's weak will is no doubt and goblins. A related to his propensity to tell frightening winter tales of sprites man a world man to hostile such beings is irrational and world inhabited
much

by

cannot make

his home. If

men are

necessarily
actions

separated

by

their

differences, if
and

friendship
appear

is impossible, if human
and

necessarily have

undesirable

even tragic consequences

because of their one-sidedness, then the world

man

does

irrational

hostile to

a condition

metaphorically

expressed

by

belief in fearful

sprites and goblins. not

Tragedy

occurs

least because

of

Leontes's
wife and

passion.

His

violent

jeal

loved by his Underlying a by ousy reveals his desire to be their love desire to be loved is a desire to be lovable, but Leontes can demand supposed injustice done the at anger His of it. with justice only if he is worthy love. At the core of their of him indicates that he believes he is in fact worthy

his friend.

176

Interpretation
a suppression

his passion, which is most obviously the cause of this tragedy, is of the disjunction between wish and reality. Leontes's actions is less than
perfect and result

deny

that

he

in

great

disorder.
with certain

A tragedy
often seem

occurs when

human beings

imperfections interact

with one another.

Their imperfections do
with

not always

indicate their vices, but

Men's differences, manifested in hostility. (Polixenes's modera lead them to and their virtues, misunderstanding tion and Leontes's inordinate desire for good things are examples, as well as
concomitant

their virtues.

Hermione's gentleness, Paulina's boldness, good things that men do harm them, and the
with

and

Camillo's caution.) Since the

good things about them are mixed

natural or

imperfections, there seems to be something in the order of things, whether divine, that is hostile to man. Two attitudes toward this situation, a
hard one,
are presented as

soft one and a

resigned

leading

to tragedy. One may be so

to the

does Mamillius. The

frustrating character of life that one loses one's will to live, as frightening sprites of his tales, inexplicable and threaten
the
actions of

ing,

appear

to

control

those most
and act as

dear to him. On the

other

hand,

one might rebel against the

if nothing mysterious will have sprites, any effect on one's life. Specifically, Leontes acts as if he can understand his wife, who is superior to him, and his friend, who is different from him. He
assumes

he

can

righteously

dispense justice understanding

not
also

upon

the guilty. He acts as if the

world permitted complete

and control.

In the last

part of the

play, comedy

appears possible

resignation and

rebellion, but

simply because there is a mean between because some men may not be subject to a

condition

that demands resignation or rebellion.

The Transition to the The last

scene of the

Comedy
fourth
act provide abandon

third act and the first scene of the

a transition to ment of chorus events.

the

play's comedy.

The former involves Antigonus 's

the second is a

the princess and his

who

death;

soliloquy

by
on

the deathless

Time,

informs

us of

the passage of sixteen years and its interim

provide reflection
man can

The two scenes, taken together,

and the

thereby help tragedy in The Winter's Tale.

natural order and

us to understand

how comedy

supersede

Antigonus is
A
storm

at

sea,

looking
of

for

a place

to abandon

Hermione's daughter.
storm reveals that the

threatens. While the

oppose the

mariner

believes that the

views

heavens
means

loss

Perdita, Antigonus

the storm as heaven's

to her

destruction. Natural

phenomena are presented as opaque guides to

heaven's

will.

abandons Perdita in Bohemia. A shepherd, who is trying to find his lost sheep before they are devoured by a wolf, finds the baby and takes it up "for (III. iii. 76). He believes that the gold he finds with the is
pity"

Antigonus

baby

fairy
are

gold, for "it

was

told

me

should

be

rich

by

fairies"

(III. iii.

116).

We

The Winter's Tale

moving from a world in which sprites fairies are thought to bring joy. The
"some
changeling"

177
frighten
for
men

and goblins

to one in which

shepherd also supposes that the

baby

is At

a child

left

by fsiries

in

exchsnge

some mortal one.

the same time that there arises the

who

possibility possibility

of a world of a

inhabited

by

fsiries

bring joy,

there

slso arises the

human

being

who somehow

transcends

ordinary humsn limits.

shepherd's

A clown, the
sea
and

son,

reports thst

that

Antigonus himself is
the clown, he called
unlike old

being

torn

Antigonus 's ship is destroyed st and eaten by a bear. When

the clown
would

Antigonus
The
clown

saw

for help, but

did

not

interfere.

is

his father,
child

who wishes

that he

have "been

by

to

have help'd the

of

man!"

(III. iii.

106-07).

Antigonus's
abandon:

misfortune reminds us

his

earlier wish

for the
Some

he is forced to

powerful spirit nurses!

instruct the kites

and

and ravens

To be thy

Wolves

Casting
Like

their savageness

bears they say, aside, have done

(II. iii. pity,
of 185-88).

offices of

pity
expected

But
not

bear, from

whom

Antigonus

mauls

him to death. He dies

hungry"

because

of nature's

malice, but because

never curst

clown

notes, bears "are

also

but

when

they

its indifference, for, as the are (III. iii. 128clown's

cowardice.3

29).

Antigonus dies
of

because

of

human vice, the

who

The

office

pity is

performed

by

the shepherd,

takes

Perdita "for in

pity."

Nature's indifference, human baseness, and human onus's destruction and the baby's salvation.
At the

goodness operate

Antig

beginning
bad,
a

amoral order good and

Act IV, the chorus Time reveals the existence of an that overlooks human events: Time is both joy and terror for the
of

the

force that both

makes and unfolds error

(IV. i.

1-2).

Not

only is Time indifferent to the virtue and the vice of those whom it affects, Time inclines equally to making error and bringing it to light. Time also claims an absolute power over man: "it is in my power / To o'erthrow law, and in one
custom"

self-born

hour / To
over and

plant and o'erwhelm

(IV. i.

7-10).

Time is

force

that

lords

limits the
that the

structures
audience never

nevertheless observes

resulting from human striving. Time would pass its time well by watching
worse spent than

the play, snd wishes thst

its time

be

in this

manner.

By

concluding us, inasmuch The

with an expression of goodwill

for
sn

all

as

Time began
of

by

proclaiming

its audience, Time indifference to msn. first

in the indifference
snd

surprises

beginning
the

the fourth

set repests msn

the end of the

psrt

of

the

plsy (the

the indifference of Time to

storm and

is

reflected

of nsture

besr)
is

to the msriners,

moves

the

shepherd

a reflection of

Perdita. The pity that Time's benevolence. The new beginning

Antigonus,

of the

play

generalizes

the end of the

to a call

tragedy in
when

that

it

provides

cosmic

3The
51-77)-

clown

later

responds

for

help

there

is

no risk to

his

own

life (IV. iii.

178
restatement

Interpretation
of
what

has happened

on

human level. The

which or

question

of

the

relationship between the two halves of the play, at Time appears, turns on the possibility of goodwill
where

juncture the

chorus

benevolence in

a world

destruction

and salvation occur at random.

The The
scene chorus

Comedy
the passage of sixteen years, sets the
of

Time, having
grown

chronicled

in Bohemia. Time tells Perdita "now

us of

Leontes's grief,
/ Equal
with

Polixenes's

son

Florizel,
24).

and of

in

wond'rin

grace

(IV. i.

We

look forward to the possibility that Perdita will fulfill the promise that Mamillius was thought to bear. If Time's effect has not been to heal all wounds, the
passage of

Time

nevertheless allows

for the birth

of new possibilities. unities

(See III.
order to

105-07.) Shakespeare violates the traditional dramatic present a fuller vision of human life.

i.

in

The play has begun again in another sense as well, for again someone is expressing a desire to leave someone who persuades him to stay. This time
Polixenes
return persuades

to

Sicily

Camillo to stay in Bohemia, although Camillo desires to to die at home and to comfort the penitent Leontes (IV ii. 5-9).
to leave

As Polixenes

earlier wanted

Sicily

for

political

reasons, he

now wants which

Camillo to stay for

political reasons:

"Thou, having

made me

businesses,
done"

none without thee can

sufficiently manage,
with

must either

stay to execute them

(IV

thyself,
13-17).
what
what

or

take away
we

thee the very service thou hast

reminded of

ii.

Because

have just been

Polixenes does is
mortal:

not reckon on. wants

Camillo

to go
permit

clearly completely depend on home because he foresees his death. But

He
should not so

time,

we can see more

for Polixenes it is
attempt

"death"

to

him to

return

to

Sicily

(IV. ii.

2).

His

to hold off change is reminiscent of

his description

of

his

own child

hood,
as

when

he thought "there

was no more

behind, / But
own

such a

day

to-morrow

(I. ii. 63-65). to-day, / And to be a boy Polixenes abruptly changes the subject to his
at
and

eternal"

son,

Florizel,

who

is

spending time

the cottage of a shepherd girl "Of most rare

agree

note"

(IV. ii.

43).

Polixenes
out what

disguised to the shepherd's cottage to find is going on. Meanwhile on s country rosd we meet the rogue Autolycus, very ragged, but singing s hsppy song. He gives s brief sccount of himself, snd therefore
to go
stsnds out not reflective characters.

Camillo

simply ss the only singer in the plsy but Autolycus used to wear fine clothes

as one of
and serve

its

most

Florizel,

but he has been dismissed. have His

According

misfortunes, for he has means

his song, he does not mourn over his to live still (IV. iii. 1-22). While he claims to
to
also appears that

joy

because he has life, it song

he has life because he has joy. is

more useful than

second

praises the virtues of

being

merry: mirth

sonow, because the merry

can accomplish

their goals more

quickly (IV. iii.

The Winter's Tale

119-22).
might

179
as a

Autolycus
unable to
playful

can obtain what

is necessary for life,

sorrow

despondent

man

be
a

do. We

see the truth of this statement confirmed when we

of

witness

rendition sees

its

converse:

is

not conducive

to life.

When Autolycus
pretends
clothes

the clown approaching, he grovels on the ground, and

to be a gentleman who has been

who

beaten,

and robbed of

his money

and

by Autolycus,
is

dressed him in his

to warrant

present rags.

Implying

that his

condition

death, he groans to the oncoming clown, "pluck but off these rags; and then, death, (IV. iii. 52-53). In this con dition Autolycus cries the classic tragic lament, "O that ever I was (IV
so miserable as
death" born!"

iii.

56).

He

reminds us of a

tragic

teaching

that

thing is
acts

not to

have

come

into existence,
conveyed

and the next

life is miserable, that the best best is, having come into

existence, to leave it as quickly as

out

possible.4

In his feigned

despair, Autolycus

playfully the truth

appears ss

tragedy

by Mamillius's death. Now, however, to be mocked snd to be used as an instrument to something

brings the
clown

cloak one's purposes.

Autolycus 's
picked.

pretense

close enough to

have his

pocket

Autolycus then looks forward to the sheep-shearing festival of which the clown spoke, where like a wolf he himself will shear the unsuspecting His sheep (IV iii. 1 15-18). Autolycus's name literally means "the wolf
itself."

pretense

court, it is having indeed Autolycus who has beaten, robbed, and dressed Autolycus in rags. The facts of Autolycus's story are true, but his reaction to those facts is a pretense.
assumes that out of

before the clown, however, is in Autolycus is responsible for

one sense not a pretense at all.

If

one

been thrown

Only

to the better man Autolycus to disgrace

or misfortune.

pretends

to

be is death
not

an

appropriate re

sponse
reasons

Autolycus does

justify

his life

by finding

does Leontes, whose name also is the name of a beast. The similarity between the two men, however, goes only so far. Autolycus's indifference to his petty vice finds no counterpart in Leontes's grief for

living

any

more than

for the

great

harm he has

caused.

While Leontes does

possibility. shepherd. relation

not consider

suicide, he
of

does not, like Autolycus, parody the the wolf is the antithesis of the good
When
we reflect on

The lion is the

king

beasts;

Autolycus's

same man might write

both
a

comedies and

tragedy, we can tragedies. A comedy in

of a would

to

see

how the Auto

noble

which

lycus

starred would

be

lowly

imitation

tragedy: a character

less

than one
grief.

finds in tragedy

acts in a way that of

bring

a nobler character to

Autolycus has lost the favor

and

the one he served, disgraced himself at

court,

disrupted his life; he has But he is joyous,

such
circumstsnces:

suffered a pallid version of what

Leontes

has

suffered.

and

distraught in
wants

ridicules the possibility of being he plsyfully pretends to be someone who

even

to

die in the face

the
mirth of

of

the

world's evil.

His joke
we

doubly
view

serves

life: the

humor

and

the joke

support

life, if

may

his joke in the

4See Sophocles, Oedipus

at

Colonus,

1224-26.

180
way in which he of life out of the
views

Interpretation
his merry song;
and

his joke brings him the

sustenance

clown's picked pockets.

Autolycus thus lacks the nobility

of a

tragic figure. Without the nobility, there is no pain;

can and

when we see comedies we

forget
laugh

or

blind

ourselves

to the suffering about which

and without

tragedy

reminds

us,

A forgetting would cause tragedian who of Autolycus's exploits could be written a abstracts comedy by from nobility. Such a comedy serves life, just as Autolycus's joy serves life.
at what with

tears.'

nobility

But

since

this kind

of

comedy blinds
on our

and therefore

deceives us, it is

a or

joke

on

us, just as Autolycus's joke is

the clown. Perhaps

being

deceived

blinded

is

a small price

to pay, if

knowing

necessarily brings
of

sonow and

defeat.6

Before the
and

guests anive at sees

't"

the sheep-shearing

festival,

we meet

Florizel

Perdita. Florizel

the festival as "a meeting

the petty gods, / And you

at ease with

[Perdita]
her
console

the queen on

(IV

iv.

3-5).

Perdita, in

contrast, is ill

goddess'

costume as well as with

the prince's country garb. Florizel tries to

them"

their

her with the thought that he merely imitates the gods, who "Humbling deities to love, have taken / The shapes of beasts upon (IV iv. 26-27). He then claims superiority to the gods, since "my desires / Run not
my lusts / Burn hotter than my When Perdita claims that Florizel will not be able to
mine

before

honour,

faith"

nor

(IV
resist

iv.

33-35).

his father's

opposition to their

marriage, Florizel

protests:

Or

not

Or I'll be thine, my fair, my father's. For I cannot be

nor

Mine own,
I be
not

anything to any, if
am most constant no

thine. To this I

Though

destiny

say

(IV. iv.

42-46).

Florizel

destiny
thing
Stsnd Perdita

resists not merely the authority of his father and king, but also that of itself. Whatever Florizel means by destiny, he does not mean some

powerful enough to
responds to

determine his life in

view of

Florizel's

destiny
8

with a prayer:

way contrary to his desires. "O lady Fortune, /

appears not to realize that

suspicious!"

you

(IV. iv.

51-52).

Florizel

by Leontes's lords for blaming Leontes for what he has done, be punish'd, that have minded you / Of what you should forget" (III. ii. Does Paulina's later contrivance of a resurrection scene serve as her penance?
rebuked

5Paulina,

acknowl

edges, "Let

me

225-26).

drinks" of poetry would be like Archidamus's that prevent awareness of "sleepy Camillo protests that such drinks are unnecessary (I. i. 11-18). 7Cf. Falstaff, who, dressed as a deer for his lovemaking, questions, "When gods have hot backs, what shall poor men The Merry Wives of Windsor, V. v. 11-12. See Aristophanes,
"insufficience." do?"

'This kind

Clouds, 1080-82. 8Soon at the sheep-shearing festival, Perdita

When the disguised Camillo
.

reminds others of

limits to human

achievement.

envisions
.

Perdits

as a shepherdess who cares

gazing"

he "would lesve grszing and only live by that blasts of Janusry / Would blow you through
men not

at and of the

through,"

for mankind, he claims her (IV. iv. 109-10). "You'd be so lean Perdita reproaches him. She reminds
of other

only

of

the

limitations

of chance

and

wills

men, but also of

necessities.

bodily

The Winter's Tale

fortune may turn
without

181
may
not

out

badly

for him, that

chance

be

force that,
"I bless

any activity
chance

on

his part,

will conform events

to his benefit or desires.

Perhaps the
time,"

that

brought him to Perdita

supports

his

confidence:

the

ground"

he says, "When my good falcon made her flight across / Thy father's (IV. iv. 14-16). Perdita immediately cautions, "Now Jove sfford you
chance

csuse!"

Florizel's faith in

is his

evinced

by

his lack

of

his father's difference

ence

certain opposition to

marriage

to Perdita (IV

any plan to counter iv. 412-14). The

of a

we see

between Florizel
court and
us'd
fear"

and

between life in

life in the
(IV

country.9

Perdita may be a reflection "Florizel's

17-18).

differ Perdita
son

greatne

says, "hath not been

of a

to

iv.

Because Florizel is the

him
no need

king,

she

means, necessity has imposed

upon

to limit his

desires. He is

accustomed to

Florizel
provoked

stands

getting whatever he wants. in contrast to Mamillius. While Mamillius told

attempts to remove
red with
o' mirth"

sad

tales that

fear,

Florizel

fear. When Perdita fears the future,

merry"

he

counsels not

her "let's be / The his

mirth

(IV. iv. 54), "be

"darken

th'

feast (IV. iv. 41-42;

part of the

see also

IV

(IV. iv. 46), iv. 24-25).

The

"mirth"

word
of

appeared son

in the tragic
165-71).

play only in Polixenes's

description

(I. ii.

be is

so not

because he

senses no restrictions on

Florizel is merry and urges others to his ability to fulfill his desires. It

surprising that he sees no cause for sadness. The sad tales of Mamillius portrayed a world in which frightening goblins affected men's actions.

Perdita, in her
sistent with

awareness of
she

human limitation,

resembles

her brother. Con

guests arrive

this awareness,
Perdits'

is

not

inclined to her for

rule.

When the

st

the

(IV

festival, iv. 62-70;

mistress

feast's

the feast presiding see also IV. iv. 71-72). Although Perdita begins to play the when rebuked by her stepfather, her silence soon allows others
s
stepfather chides

not

over

to make the decisions concerning the

entertainment

(IV. iv.

153-54; 2I4;

310-14;

341-42).
s primary act as mistress of the feast is distributing flowers to her When the disguised Polixenes and Camillo receive flowers that last

Perdita'

guests.

throughout the winter, Polixenes observes that Perdita appropriately

ages

"Fit[s]

our

/ With flowers

winter"

of

(IV. iv.

78-79).

True to character, Perdita

to his age.

derives from his

her
guests

remark a standard guest

by

which she

tries to distribute flowers to all

appropriate

each of

should

receive

flowers

Her

dispensation

flowers

will remind

the recipient of his relationship to time, that

is,

of

his

mortality. of

Perdita's distribution

the

fitting

soon encounters an obstacle.

Polixenes

'Shakespeare
with respect conversstion

makes no attempt

in The Winter's Tale to

and

to the nstural setting or with respect to the inhabitsnts.

in Greene's Pandosto between Dorastus Fswnia

praises

country life ss idyllic, either He omits sny rendering of the Fawnia (the counterparts of Florizel and
represent

country life in contradistinction to court life (p. 208). In the first scene in the Bohemian countryside, we see a bear who mauls Antigonus to death (III. iii. 57-58), and then a shepherd who complains of the vices of the young (III. iii. 58-68).

Perdita) in

which

182
and

Interpretation
Camillo deserve
not

the flowers

of winter are

but the flowers

"nature's

of

autumn, she
which she

asserts, but the fairest flowers

refuses

bastards,"

of autumn

because they are grown by crossbreeding, which she thinks repugnant to nature (IV. iv. 87-88). Because Perdita will distribute only what nature produces, she is doubly limited by nature: autumn flowers, appropriate
to cultivate

for Polixenes

and

Camillo, do
autumn

not

bloom in midsummer,

when

occurs; even if it were

Perdita

could not give them the

sheep-shearing fairest flowers

because

she will not crossbreed.

It is in human

fitting

that a ruler responds to

Perdita'

intimation that the

role of art

affairs

is illegitimate. If
of

art

is illegitimate, the laws

by

which rulers an art

govern and

the art

improves

nature's

statesmanship are also illegitimate. If there is products, Polixenes says,

Yet
But
nature

that

is

made

better

by

no mean

nature makes that mean: you

so, over that art,

Which That A

say

adds to nature,

is

an art

nature makes.

You see,

sweet

maid,

we

marry

gentler scion to the wildest

make conceive a of nobler race

stock,

And

bark

of

baser kind

By

bud

(IV. iv. 89-95).

about of art

It is ironic that Polixenes

condemn

upholds

in his

sons

case.10

a matchmaking practice he is While Polixenes sees the importance not

to

in

improving
improve

nonhuman

nature, he does
counterpart

appear to understand that

art can

men.

Unlike his

in Pandosto, Polixenes does

princess."

not attempt

to arrange a marriage

for his

son with a suitable

He

seems unaware

that the statesman must manage the passions.

chance to make

Perhaps like Florizel he trusts to Polixenes's theory

things work out well.

now says she agrees with of art and

Although Perdita
nature,
she

still refuses to will cultivate

cosmetic.

She

crossbreed, arguing that the improvement is only nature's bastards, she says, "No more than, were I
youth to

painted, I

would wish

/ This

Desire to breed

by

me"

(IV. iv.

101-03).
all art

say 'twere well, and only therefore / But even if one disapproves of

cosmetics, it does

not

follow that

For example, Perdita does

to gymnastics.

not show

is similarly worthy of disparagement. how her censure of cosmetics applies also

Appropriately, since Perdita 's disapproval of art allows no place for education, her excellence does not proceed from education (IV. iv. 58284). Later a servant announces that she could rule for everyone
everyone,
10J. H. P. Pafford,
passage
editor of

the Arden edition

of

The Winter's Tale,

points out the

(p. 94,

note

to lines 88-97).
own age and p.

irony

of this

"Egistus (Polixenes), realizing his

I have is to
worst,
see

his

son's age,

tells him that "the only care that

me

thee well

married"

(Pandosto,
best"

203).

"Thy
he

youth warneth

to prevent the

and mine age

to provide the

(p.

202).

Although his foresight

that
should

proves

does

ineffectual, Egistus
his
son's

understand that

he

should

be

a mstchmsker and

be

watchful over

passions.

The Winter's Tale

would

183
is the
product

love

and

follow her (V. i.

105-12).

Her

excellence

solely

of

nature,

and she could rule

everyone, it is said,

without art. resistance

That

we cannot

accept

the servant's assertion

son.

is

shown

by

Polixenes's

to her marriage

to

his

He

rejects

for his

son

the naturally beautiful in favor of the conven

years

tionally

sound.

Similarly,

sixteen

esrlier, he did

not

try

to

make

the

beautiful Hermione his

Perdits'

own

in defiance

of sll convention.

s
enes'

failure

to rule

Polixenes simply
cultivste
will not

fsilure to

persusde

Perdits to

by beauty is matched by Polix by srt the most beautiful flowers.

bastards, just
as

His

rhetoric will

is defective: Perdita
not,
at

cultivate nature's

Camillo

Perdita later
agsin with

respond

Polixenes's request, stay in Bohemia. And Florizel and to Polixenes's command that they never see each other iv.
426-42).

silence

(IV

They

will

immedistely disobey
is
sufficient to
weakness.

it. We
whether

wonder whether

Polixenes thinks that

threat of

speech alone

rule,

Hermione's

playful

force

pointed

to his own

Continuing
mer, because

her distribution, Perdita

and

gives

to some guests flowers of sum

103-08).

they

sre men of middle age

(IV. iv.
autumn

She

earlier

told

Polixenes that he

Camillo
order

should

have

flowers,

not winter ones as

he had suggested, in flowers

to match their

age.

At that

point the reason are not

for her

correction was ambiguous: either are not appropriate

Polixenes
old.

and

Camillo

old,

or winter

to the
must

Because

midsummer

flowers

belong

to

men of middle

age, Perdita

have

given autumn

flowers to Polixenes
autumn place

snd are

Csmillo

not

appropriate
winter

to the

becsuse they are of middle age but because old. Her distribution thus reserves a
must

flowers

for the dead:

flowers
of

be

appropriate

for the dead. Polixenes's belief that the last

the dead. The man who argues

flowers

the year

belong

to the

old neglects

that art should improve nature and therewith defends the possibility of human

achievement, perhaps defends the possibility so strongly because he forgets to

give a place to

death. He ignores

whatever might

limit his

powers.

In

spite of

the difference between Polixenes and

father.12
Perdita'

Florizel, Florizel is
old

the true son of his

calls to mind

s correction of the

flowers due to the

reckoning.

silently

what

the statesman omits

from his

When Perdita

comes
o'

to Florizel and the other youths, she wishes that she

day"

had "some flowers

1 13-14).

th'

spring, that might / Become your time of

(IV. iv.

To

all except

the middle-aged, to the group no member of which

appropriate

is

named, Perdita lacks the

she

flowers to
criterion

give.

Because it is midsummer,
absurd.

has only

midsummer

flowers; her

for distribution is

Only
a

the least important are

given

their due.
of

Shortly
claims

after

Perdita's distribution
turns out to

flowers,

servant

announces

singing peddler,
that the
183-88).

who

be

the disguised Autolycus.

The

servant

peddler's

If

all men's

singing resembles the pied piper's piping (IV. iv. ears do grow to Autolycus's tunes, as the servant says,
am"

,2Compsre Florizel's "whst I was, I

presented above.

(IV. iv. 465)

with the characterization of

Polixenes

184
he
would rule all men

Interpretation

by

means of

his

singing.

(We

are reminded of another

servant who

declares Perdita to be
powers

so

beautiful that

all men would

follow

her.)
that

But Autolycus's Autolycus / father

fall

short of

his

promise.

The

clown

suggests

continue

and

his singing for the clown and the shepherdesses, for "My (IV. the gentlemen are in sad talk, and we'll / not trouble
them"

iv.

310-13).

Others, therefore,

ballad"

are unaffected with not

sings

(IV. iv. 287);

preoccupied

by the "merry discovering his son's

him from

Autolycus
con

intentions

cerning Perdita, Polixenes does beauty nor Autolycus's music can

tentions.

listen to Autolycus. Neither Perdita's

concern over

relieve

Florizel's in

Autolycus "hsth
and

songs

for

sizes,"

msn or

womsn, of

sll

the servsnt ssys,

"no

milliner can so

fit his

gloves"

customers with

(IV. iv.

193-94).

Ac

cording to this description Autolycus can give to each

whst

is

fitting

the very

thing Perdits
does
man-made no

sttempted

to do. It

is

obvious st once that

Autolycus's distribution

not suffer

the limitation to

which

Perdita's is

subject.

Since he dispenses
servant gives us

ballads, he

need not wait the

bounty

of nature.

The
as

hint

whether

Autolycus fits ballads to his

age,
or

hearers'

souls,
of

Perdita tries to fit bodies. for her guests, payment for

Autolycus

flowers to her

guests'

to a specific condition
out
of

their

While Perdita distributes Autolycus distributes in his

hospitality
laces,

or

goodwill

own

interest. Not only does he demand

as

his ballads, but he deifies man-made

gathering,
so

sells such
articles

things

ribbons,

and clothing.

his singing, the servant informs the that his listeners desire to have them; his singing renders what he

by

means

of

sings about

lovable (IV. iv.

might

209-13).

Because Autolycus
a

uses

his ballads to
what

sell not not

his articles, he necessary his

songs
omnipotent:

be

said

to give his listeners

desire for

is

or appropriate

to them. In this regard,

however, Autolycus is

his merry songs cannot distract Polixenes from his sad talk, fail to make his merchandise attractive to Florizel and Perdita (IV. iv.
as

just

357-6i).

Only

the clown and the two shepherdesses want to purchase

request

Autolycus's

ballads. Before they

and

ballads,
with

an

reveals their relationships.

The

clown

interchange among the three of them has made love with one of the women
of

has

promised

to do the same

the other. Both women are awsre

the

situstion snd neither will

is jeslous

of

the other, nor

does
(IV

either seem to

hsve ill

for the The

clown.

They joke

sbout their situstion

iv.

233-50).

the third, after rejecting the first two Autolycus offers. The clown evidently seeks a ballad that combines joy and sorrow, for he loves "a ballad even too well if it be doleful
matter

clown

snd

the two women ssk for

ballads, buying

merrily set (IV. iv. 189-92).

down,

or a

very

pleasant

thing indeed

and

lamentably"

sung

fit the birth to money bags (IV. iv. 263-66). True to character, Autolycus here rebukes an excessive love of gain; Autolycus
outlandish predicaments that
crime.

The first two ballads In the

offered

involve

first,

a usurer's wife gives

The Winter's Tale

is only his
not
cheat,"

185

crime of

"petty highway

because

of

the punishments sttached to the greater

self-preservation.

that excessive

robbery (IV. iii. 27-30). His moderation is in the service of He sees only thst one is punished for immoderation, and desire may bring a reward: if the usurer's wife loves money

excessively she might prefer to give birth to money bags more than to children. Later Autolycus acknowledges that he is insufficiently a rogue, for he does not thrive as much as he might if others were ignorant of his knavery (V. ii. Autolycus's disguises succeed, Autolycus fails to disguise the fact that the undisguised Autolycus is a rogue (IV. ii. 13-14; 98; 103). By
113-23).
all

While

showing that Autolycus fails to thrive because he is is, Shakespeare playfully indicates that he disagrees
erate condemnation of

not more a rogue than with

he

Autolycus's immod

immoderation.
second

The
fish"

villain of she

Autolycus's

ballad is flesh

a woman

"turned into
her"

a cold

because

"would

not exchange

with one

that loved

(IV

iv.
of

176-82).
attempt

Autolycus
conquer

understands

the resistance to

bodily impulses,

kind

having any is only "a cold Again, Autolycus reveals himself in his ballad. He also reveals his listeners: they are moderate lovers of gain
to

nature,

as ridiculous rather
fish."

than tragic. Far from

dignity,
and

the

woman

do

not

lads Autolycus
shepherdesses

hesitate to "exchange flesh"; they follow the teachings of the bal wants to sing for them. The clown expresses his love for the

by

paying them

with

trinkets that peddlers sell, and the

shep
not

herdesses

are sstisfied with such

much

fsvors.

They

sre sll

selfish, but

they do

desire very in giving

357-6i).

for themselves. Shskespesre

emphssizes the

low

sspect of

the relstionship smong these characters

snd

receiving trifles

with

lster contrssting s love thst delights the love of Florizel and Perdita (IV. iv.

by

Perhaps because the

punishment of vice

clown

does

not see that

virtue of

these two bsllsds sbout the

own

sctuslly tesch the

his

vices, he
290).
parts
of

rejects

them
snd

(IV. iv. of s third, "Two msids wooing s Dorcas join Autolycus in singing, for the ballad has three

msn"

in fsvor

Mopss

two maids

each

speak

to a

man

who

has

promised

his love to
to the

each

them.

Singing

the third ballad evidently

with reference

clown and

the shepherdesses,

Autolycus
or

shows

them their own situation as merry rather than as reprehensible

without

dangerous. A triangle
what

jealousy
part of

and with

mirth, provides a contrast

a triangle with
us

to

is dramatized in the first

and without mirth.

The Winter's Tale:

jealousy
why
ters
of

The first two ballads together

help

to understand

a triangle

may be

without

jealousy

and

hence

without

tragedy. The charac

this triangle

neither want enough nor sacrifice enough

to involve them

selves

in

tragic situations.
and the characters about whom and

Autolycus
noble enough shepherdesses

to

whom

he

sings are not

for

tragedy. Shakespeare contrasts the love of the clown and the

of

but

also with

only with the tragic triangle of the first part the love of Florizel and Perdita, who are the main
not

the play,

characters of

186
The Winter's Tale's
comedy.

Interpretation
He thus indicates that low comedy is not the to tragedy. Aristotle said that tragedy involves better men,
or

only
while

alternative

comedy involves baser

the clown,
and

lower

men who are

Autolycus,
no

the shepherdesses
not.

ugly without giving fit Aristotle's description of In fact, they impress of the first part
us as

pain.13

comic

characters, but Florizel and Perdita do

being
men

less

noble than the characters of the

would

tragedy

of the play.

Shakespeare's comedy like Autolycus.

fit Aristotle's definition if it involved only

guests
are treated

After Autolycus exits, the

to a dance

by

countrymen

dressed up like satyrs. During the dance, Polixenes and the shepherd whisper about Florizel and Perdita. As a consequence of the conversation, Polixenes

decides that the

345).

affair

is "too far

gone"

and

"'tis time to

them"

part

(IV. iv.

Since the

tions of

has already informed Polixenes of Florizel's declara love for Perdita (IV iv. 170-78), he now evidently tells him of
shepherd

Florizel's intention to marry her. Not until his son confirms the shepherd's report does Polixenes's anger burst forth. Florizel's intention reveals that he
places

love

above

every

political concern.

Unlike Leontes, Polixenes

what no

can con

ceive of a man

loving

a woman without

attempting to possess her.

Not only does Florizel cally advantageous, but he

choose a wife without also tells

considering his disguised father that

sake of

is

politi are ser so

goods

for him
vice of

possessing Perdita (IV. iv. 372-79). When Florizel thus

worth

unless

it be for the

placing them
shows

in the

himself to be

different from his father, Polixenes reveals his identity and threatens the lovers. Like Leontes, he has difficulty in seeing himself in his son.
Polixenes's Leontes's
anger and

his threats

of

harsh

punishments are reminiscent of

anger and threats

in the first
snd

part of

the play. Here the potentisl for

tragedy
might

srises, since Florizel

out

Perdits

might

csrry

his threats if the lovers

remain adamant. and

be sepsrsted, or Polixenes As the earlier conflict

the present conflict

turned on the
turns on the

difference between Leontes

Polixenes,

difference between Polixenes and Florizel. Despite Polixenes's anger, however, it is Florizel who parallels Leontes. Both Leontes snd Florizel sre passionate and determined lovers who reject anything that runs counter to
their passions.

Moreover,
reason

as

the

jealous Leontes
of

will

not

listen to reason,

Florizel his iv.

refuses

to listen to the reason

"fancy."

If his The

does

479-80).

problem of

advised only by his he welcomes madness (IV. fancy, obey the last part of the play is why the events we not

Camillo

and will

be

witness

do

not result

in tragedy.

avoid his father's commands by running Camillo recommends that the couple go to Sicily. He plans Perdita, away to inform Polixenes of their destination and then go with him in thus
with

When Florizel determines to

pursuit,

fulfilling
not

his desire

to return

home. How this

will

help

Florizel

and

Perdita is
order to

clear.

Camillo decides that Florizel

should

disguise himself in

"Aristotle, Poetics, 144831-5

and 1449331-38.

The Winter's Tale

reach

187
on

the ship safely.

and on the

Autolycus enters, musing

of men.

the success of the the

of

sheep-

nothing"

shearing men have

gullibility

"Admiring

his song,

come close enough to

have their

pockets picked.

To Autolycus's

delight, Camillo proposes to exchange Florizel's courtly dress for Autolycus's rags. Autolycus, formerly in Florizel's service, now serves him again. And Autolycus, thrown out of court by Florizel, is now dressed in courtly garments

by

him. This

servant and master appear to

be in

need of each other.

Florizel has

recently declared his intention to risk all for love (IV. iv. 539-42). But Florizel also risks the lives of Perdita, the shepherd, and the clown, along with his own
(V. i. 151-52).
not seek gain

Autolycus,
runs

on

the

other

hand,

although a

lover

of

gain, does

if he his

must risk

102-03).

When he

life (IV. iii. 26-30; see also IV. iii. into Camillo and Florizel, he shakes in fear lest they
own of
M roguery (IV. iv. 628-30). We first encounter Florizel. Later, in the last act, once the recogni

his

have

overheard

boasting

Autolycus

after a quarrel with

tions and reunions occur, Autolycus persuades the shepherd and the clown to
give a good report of

him to Florizel (V. ii.

156-57).

Perhaps Autolycus him to forget his

He

and

Florizel

will

be

reconciled. counsellors

In the last act, Leontes's

sins

try

to persuade

past

for

which

he has his

paid

the penance

of sixteen years of sorrow. will

should

remarry,

they believe,
opposes

so that

his kingdom

have

an

heir (V. i.

27-29).

Paulina

remarriage

by

Hermione (V. i. 12-16;

34-35).

reminding him that he killed the flawless Leontes is definitely a changed man, for he
ruled by Paulina only because him. In speaking to him of the

is

now

easily

ruled

by

Paulina. However, he is

she exploits the passion and grief that control good of

his kingdom, his

after

counsellors are reasonable. and

Soon
nounces

Florizel

Perdita

arrive

at

the Sicilian court,

lord

an

Polixenes's
allow

approach. marriage

Florizel

appeals to

Leontes to try to i.
218-19).
I5

persuade

Polixenes to
"you

his

to Perdita. He appeals to Leontes's youth, when

now"

ow'd no more to time

/ Than I do

(V

In

contrast

to

Polixenes,
from

whose admiration of

beauty (e.g.,

IV. iv. 156-59) does

not

sway him

convention's

restraints, Florizel and Leontes ignore conventions of social

station when attracted

lowly
(V. i.

station

is

no

beauty. Not only does Leontes think that Perdita's impediment to her marriage to a prince, but he even desires

by

to have her for himself. Paulina

223-26).

must rebuke

him,

and remind

him

of

Hermione

Meanwhile Perdita's stepfather,

who

has

come

has been

apprehended

by

Polixenes. The

scene

along on Florizel's ship, is set for recognitions and

and daugh-

reunions, for the

l4The clown, in
order

shepherd will reveal

spite of

how he found Perdita. Father

to amend his

life,

or that

his simplicity, perceives that Autolycus must become courageous in his fear of death is his strongest passion (V. ii. 154-75). Does the
s coward

clown perceive

Autolycus's defect becsuse he too is

esrlier reminded

(III. iii. 96;

of youth.

126-28)?

When Florizel entered, Leontes is so reminded of Polixenes that he is tempted to "call [Florizel] brother, / As I did him, (V. i. 127-29). Does Leontes still not and speak of something wildly / By us perform'd in reminiscing about the errors of youth? perceive that Polixenes would not, like Leontes, delight l5Florizel Leontes
of other
before"

"sffections"

188
ter are united,
and

Interpretation
Florizel may now wed Perdita without opposition. The to Paulina's house to see a statue of Hermione that so apes
speak.

joyous assembly
nature put

goes

that one expects it to

Had the

sculptor

"himself eternity

and could

breath into his All

are

work,"

he "would beguile
the sight

nature of
of

her

custom"

(V. ii.

93-101).

filled

with wonder at

the statue. Leontes

believes

that

Hermione herself; he knows that to think the statue lives is mad to the "settled senses of the ness, but he prefers "the pleasure of that (V. iii. 71-73). (Here again we see a resemblance between the old king he
sees
madness" world"

of

Sicily

and

soon claims

that she can make the statue move. Leontes would

its future king, Perdita's husband. See IV. iv. 483-85.) Paulina have her do so,
powers"

or about apparently unconcerned whether she is assisted by "wicked some "lawful (V. iii. 89-98). When the statue moves, Leontes asserts
business"

"If this be magic, let it be an art lawful as (V. iii. 110-11). What he lawful coincident with declares is the means to the fulfillment of his desires.
Just
now as

eating"

he

earlier

declared lawful the

means

means

by

which

Hermione

would

die, he
alive.

declares lawful the

It is
soon clues

by

which she will

live.
and

clear that

there has been no statue

Hermione is

Collecting
gave

the poet has

laid,

we suppose

that some sleep-inducing

drug
she

her the

appearance of

death

and

that she has lived these sixteen years at

104-07).

Paulina's house (V. iii. 18-20; V. ii.

says, to see

She has

preserved would

herself,

Perdita, for the

oracle gave

hope that Perdita

be found. We
see

are reminded of the

beginning:

subjects on crutches would

desire to live to

Mamillius mature, so excellent a man he promised to be. Hermione, however, has had no way of knowing Perdita's excellence; she preserved herself to see her because
she

is "mine

own"

(V. iii.

123).

Paulina
wing
me

encourages everyone

to rejoice, while she, "an old turtle, / Will

to some wither'd
am

bough

and there

My

mate, that's

never

to be found this

again, / Lament till I

reminder of

lost"

(V. iii.
not at

132-35).

The play

would end with

death if Leontes had

this point proposed that Paulina marry

Camillo. Since these two

characters

have been be

implicitly
not

contrasted throughout

the play, their marriage appears to

good effect on each. as

a marriage of opposites appears plan

that

will

have

Leontes's

proposal

beforehand, but
husband it
until

a reaction

to

Paulina's

to

as something planned lament the death of her

her

own

death. Leontes

appears exasperated when

Paulina in
to stamp to Perdita's

troduces a sad note into the general rejoicing, and he acts

out

immediately
reaction

(V. iii.

135).

(His

reaction

resembles

Florizel's

warning that
note rather

the prospect of

may not turn out well for them.) While Leontes can replace death with the prospect of marriage so that the play ends on one than the other, marriage cannot forestall death, at lesst not for long.
events

While

joy

msy
more

promote

life,

there sre

limits. Leontes

csn rejuvenate

his

sub

jects little

thsn he csn resurrect the dead

kind
of resurrection

Mamillius.16

'"Paulina

enacts a

from the dead

observed

when she summons

Hermione down from

the platform or pedestal.

It has

often

been

that

Christianity

mskes

tragedy impossible

The Winter's Tale

The
raises
end of

189
the statue
of

the play,

by

means of

its

references to

Hermione,

the question of the power of art (V.

ii. 94-101; V. iii. 15-20; 65-68;

men, snd then csuse them to
not

no).

If

man can make perfect reproductions of

might

live, he
can

nullify the power of desth. Here srt is

are

iii. 19-20;

68), but human beings

deceiving

others

imitating nature (V. by suggesting that art

do

so.

Shakespeare, however, does what the imaginary sculptor and Psulina are supposed to be able to do, for he creates lifelike figures and makes them move and speak. Because Shakespeare's art is not a pretense, like Paulina's, his
imitation is
not a

mockery

of men.

But

what

kind

of nature

is Shakespeare
or at

imitating? The indifferent to

tragic man

nature embodied

in Mamillius's

winter tale

is hostile
The

least

man

a world of

faces is

characterized

joined because they sre acted who had some virtue, but
virtue. men

frightening by disunity: the good contradictory. Trsgedy occurred

who seemed excellence contradicts
might resign

sprites and goblins.

nature that

things cannot

be

con

when chsrscters

inter

necessarily to lack
others, the
themselves to this

an opposite

As

long

as one not

human
exist.

good

for

which rebel

strive

does

Men

fact,

against

it,

or make

themselves callous to it

by forgetting

it. As

we

have seen,

the

lead to tragedy, the last to the low comedy of Autolycus. Shakespeare's But play ends not with the disunity that prevails in the first part

first two

reactions

of the

play, but

with

the

unions and

the

reunions of

the characters. The dif

end.

ferences among the

rebellion,
or

characters

do

not appear

to be in conflict at the

Unity

appears as natural as

disunity. Man
with

can respond to nature not with resignation,

unions and

forgetting, but
own of

joy. Moreover, the

the reunions

that the poet shows on stage may

goodnesses

be

a reflection of a

unity

of the various

human

in his

soul.17

At the
tion of an

beginning
winter's

the play, Camillo

maintained

that seeing the comple

as

excellent

human

being

made

life

worth

living. Just

Shakespeare

finishes the

tale that Mamillius left unfinished, he may also point to

the fulfillment

of the

prophecy Camillo

made

about

Mamillius. Mamillius's

understanding of the meaning of a winter's tale

because it
Corinthians
removes

is

as one-sided as

Mamillius

the sting of desth.

15:

55-57.)

(See, for Here, however, Paulina can

at

example, Paul's Letter to the

"resurrect"

Corinthians, I

died. The Christian 'The

union of

imagery
over

the end of
and

Hermione only because she has not The Winter's Tale points to the contrast between

Christianity's triumph

tragedy

Shakespeare's.

in the complete human soul, for example, is reflected Paulins snd Csmillo, but slso in the reconcilistion of union in the on the political level only between Florizel and Autolycus and the marriage of Florizel and Perdita. Florizel is a man who iv. 42-46); he immoderately risks would resist even destiny itself in order to fulfill his desires (IV.
boldness
not

and moderation

his life
with

and even the

lives

of others.

Autolycus,

with

her

more elevated submission

to nature, serve as
Polixenes'

his strong desire for preservation, and Perdita, correctives to Florizel. But if either of these
and

characters

place:

simply ruled Florizel, the marriage Perdita might have submitted to

the
point

between Florizel

Perdita

might not

have taken
would

demands (IV. iv. 442-51),

and

Autolycus

not see

in risking

one's

life for the

woman who appeared

to him only as an encumbrance

(IV. iv. 678-80).

190
himself. He
winter's
winter. spent and

Interpretation
understands a winter's

tale to
not

be

a sad one, one appropriate to a

connote

day. But
winter's

a winter's

day

does

necessarily

the gloom of
well

day

is

a short

one,

or one when time

flies because it is

(I. ii.

169).

The

chorus

Time

provided

the transition between the

was transformed

tragedy

the comedy. The neutral or

speech

indifferent Time

by

the end of

his

suggested

men well

beneficent one, who wished man to spend his time well and that watching The Winter's Tale was the way to do it. Time wished as if he loved them. Perhaps the poet himself speaks at the end of
a

into

Time's

soliloquy.

Or

perhaps we are on

seeing the

poet remake

Time in his

own

image. His benevolent influence fluence

of

the affairs of men replaces the

possible

indifferent in

Time. His benevolence is

and

because

of

his

comprehensiveness.
Winter'

Comedy
blinds
us

tragedy
and

are not

rather, comedy triumphs over

to suffering

equally tragedy. We do is

commingled not

in The
a

Tale;

have

to the situation that necessitates

not universal.

low comedy that suffering, but a com

man can

edy that

asserts that this tragic condition

If

satisfy his
as great a

desires,

then life need not be a ceaseless striving, and death does not necessar
man unfulfilled.

ily

find

At least in this sense, death

would not

be

cause of sadness as

it

otherwise would

blindness

of

laughter but the first / We

assembly exits,

each of the cast

joy of looking

be. 18 Shakespeare's comedy brings not the insight. Midst the general rejoicing, the

forward to telling his

(V. iii.
152-53).

part

"in this

wide

gap
us

of time since

dissever'd"

were

Leontes

reminds

that the play has been about the differences that separated the chsrscters snd

thst now those

differences

no

longer dissever them.

Unity

appears

to

reign.

"But

see

Aristotle, Nicomachean Ethics,

ni7bio-l5.

ON BACON'S ADVERTISEMENT TOUCHING A HOLY WAR

J. Weinberger
Michigan State

University

As I have

argued

elsewhere, the fragment Advertisement

Touching

Holy
the

War is the formal

remark

catalyst that unifies

Bacon's Great

Instauration.'

Bacon's
of

in the Epistle
provides

Dedicatory

about the completeness of the

division

sciences
whole.2

the clue to the completeness of his scientific project as a

noblest part of

While the

the new physics, medicine,

remained

in

complete, Bacon

presented

his

complete

tesching

sbout

the virtues snd risks

of scientific conquest

in his

secret and retired political

science, which is intro

duced in the New Atlantis. The New Atlantis is apparently incomplete because it presents a pattern of scientific perfection that lacks an open account of
political science.

But the New Atlantis is

complete

because it includes

teaching
as

about government that

is indirect

and secret

because it is dangerous
surface

and prob

lematic. The New Atlantis is

such

complete

beneath the
soul

it

opens

to the full
whole of

teaching
Bacon's

about the corpus.

its

virtues

only because and its parts

contained

in the

two dimensions becsuse esch text slwsys

them. Each text

Bacon's writing has three rather than hss two surfsces plus whst is benesth
and

is

open

to what is beneath it as a text

then again is open

to the

project

described in the Great Instauration

and

what

is beneath that into

description.
The Advertisement
at once catalyzes the parts of

Bacon's

corpus

completed whole and also participates

in that

whole.

Its

surface as a

text

opens

is beneath it only as it is tied to the New Atlantis as one part to another. Its surface consists in the dialogue as such and in the scientific fortune promised in the Great Instauration and introduced in the New Atlantis. If the

fully

to what

Advertisement treats

a mix of
active

"religious
then

considera

and civil

in

a mixed

"contemplative

way,"3

and

it

also

treats

civil

and

ecclesiastical

policy

as means

to

man's scientific

fortune. In the New Atlantis, the

the
provisional

provisional a means of

teaching
science science

about politics appears as

secrecy

which

is

to

its
the

end

and

which

is

abolished

by

the revelation

of

Bensalemite final secrecy

to the rest of the

world.

The final teaching

world.4

appears as the

required

by

problematic end of

science, and this secrecy

is

not abolished

by

the revelation of Bensalem to the

As the Advertisement is tied to the New

'For the details

70

of

the

Utopia: An Introduction to the

(September 1976), 866-72.

following argument see Reading of the New

ed. and

Atlantis,"

J. Weinberger, "Science and Rule in Bacon's American Political Science Review,

2The Works of Francis Bacon,

Heath, 14

vols.

(London: Longman
15.

Co.,

James Spedding, Robert Leslie Ellis, and Douglas Denon etc., 1857-74), hereafter BW, VII, 13-14.

Advertisement, BW VII,
Weinberger,
pp.

880-85.

192

Interpretation
so

Atlantis,
wise

is it

analogous to

the New Atlantis in regard to formal incomplete

ness and posthumous

publication.5

We

must expect

that the Advertisement like

as

treats problems

of civil and ecclesiastical

policy both

to the means to

scientific conquest and ss

to the

finsl offspring
the

of msn's scientific

fortune.

Bacon describes the

mesnings of
"pious"

characters of

their nsmes.

Eusebius,

the moderate

or

"reverent",
is
noted

and

he is the

dialogue, but he does divine, hss s namesake of Eusebius,

not explain nsme

the

meaning
of

the

Bishop

Caesarea,
of

who

for his Ecclesiastical

History

and

for his lost

epitome

universal

"God's

reward."

"my

gift

is

God."

history. Gamaliel, the Protestant zealot, has a name meaning Zebedaeus, the Roman Catholic zealot, has a name meaning Martius, the military man, has a name of obvious meaning; it
Mars"

means

"sacred to

the god of war.

Eupolis,
of

the politique, has a name

comic

meaning "good rary

of

city"

and

is the

namesake of
victim

Eupolis the

poet, contempo
the

Aristophanes,
name

and

reputed

Alcibiades.

Finally, Pollio,
and

courtier, has a

meaning "one
namesake of

adorns"

who polishes or

suggesting "to
and writer of

bear rule"; he is the

Pollio the Roman

politician

history, tragedy,
armed

and erotic poems. opens when

The dialogue Pollio wittily

are

Pollio interrupts

Martius'

complaint

against

Christendom,

which

is

part of a

discussion

being

held

Eupolis'

st

house.
city"

remsrks

thst the persons who meet in the house of the "good

mske a good world.

friends, like
the

the

Eusebius, Gamaliel, Zebedaeus and Martius differ and yet four elements, and Eupolis, because he is temperate and

without

passion, is the fifth essence, the substance of the

whole and unites

heavenly

cosmos that
make

vaults

its

parts.

Eupolis

retorts that

if they five

up

the macrocosm, Pollio

is the

microcosm

because he

refers all

things to himself

both in

speech and

deed. Pollio does

not

deny

this characterization; rather, he

asks about those who act

are weaker

like him but

are not

frank. Eupolis

replies

that

they

but
of

discussion

dangerous than Pollio, and he invites Pollio to join their Christendom, for they welcome his opinion. Pollio professes
more
post-

the need to be stirred from his

travelling,

afternoon
when

drowsiness by

their

speeches, but then he

acknowledges this

offers to wake
and opines

the speeches

favor

that Pollio will think their to effect. But

they sleep. Eupolis discourses to be

interrupted
war."

dreams, being
speech will

good wishes without power

Pollio'

Martius'

affect

drowsiness because it
and

was the

"trumpet

of

Eupolis bids Martius to begin again, armed Christendom.

In
armed

Martius

repeats

his

complaint against

contrast to the unarmed

Christian

soldiers and the armed merchants, the propagate the

Christian

princes and potentates

have been loath to

faith

by

their arms.
of

Martius

mentions three exceptions to

this. The

first,

the noble
of

battle

Lepanto,

contrasts with the

far less

noble adventures of

Sabastian

5See De Augmentis, BW V,

79. cf.

Weinberger,

p.

871.

On Bacon's Advertisement
Portugal
aid and

Touching

Holy

War

193

Martius'

Sigismund the Transylvanian, but Martius lists them as equals. To memory, Pollio interrupts to mention the example of the extirpa
and
Pollio'

tion of the Valencian Moors. Martius has nothing to say about this example

is silent, but
Gamaliel

s second

interruption triggers
spproves of

a sectarian exchange
Martius'

between

and

Zebedseus. Gamsliel
his

omission of

because he
approved
sectarian

did

not approve

the action against the Moors.

politique

Zebedaeus,
military

course,
this

it. In

accordance with

nature, Eupolis
Martius'

moderates

quarrel

by directing

the subject back to

Martius'

speech.

Eupolis jus

tifies his suggested return to

and speech

subject

by

directed

at

have nothing to do with the extirpstion subjects, it cannot be sorted "aptly with the
continues to exhort
war against

subject saying that of the Moors becsuse, being

war."

Martius'

actions of

Martius
guing that
point, he
and a

his listeners to is

support religious war

by

ar

the infidels is also

war

not

to be equalled for secular

and

greatness and

terrene honor. Such a the examples

of

not

impossible,

to prove his

offers

the Castilians

who conquered

the

West Indies
asserts that

the

navigation and conquest of

Emmanuel

of

Portugal. Martius

these two

feats

were not motivated

by

the propagation of the Christian

faith,

but that they have enriched Christendom and have enlarged the boundaries of Spanish estate, and that in these feats the spiritual and temporal honor and good have been
conjoined. point

At this

Pollio interrupts Martius

of

a third time
who are

to

remind

him

of the

difference between kinds erty

who

infidels: those

like the brutes, "the prop

occupant,"

of which passeth with are civil

the

possession and goeth such

to the

and

those

people,

where

possibility
such

of possession

does

not obtain.

Martius

answers

that he knows of no that however

difference "amongst

reasonable

souls"

and argues

civil a people

is,

whatever

is in

order

for the

greatest good of a people

Martius
were

emphasizes savages

brute

justify any action taken against them. his point by doubting that the people of Peru or Mexico at all; these peoples were justly subdued, and yet it is
enough

is

to

possible to contrast the political and religious sophistication of the victims of

the Spaniards

with

the

barbsrous,
a

cruel

tyranny

of the

Turkish

empire.

Pollio interrupts Martius between idolaters

and

fourth time to
who

remind

him

of the

distinction
Again

the Turks

"do

acknowledge

God the

Father."

Martius has nothing to say, but Zebedseus interjects s reprehensive, stern his second interruption, Pollio warning to Pollio not to fall into heresy. As with silent while Martius confesses his makes no further comment or rebuttal. He is
zeal

for the
and

cause of a war against

the Turks

over

any

other

both in

point of

religion

honor. But Martius

weakness

admits

to mistrusting his
so

own

judgment be

cause

of

its

and

his zeal,
Eupolis

and

he

requests

the others who are

various war.

interpreters

of the

divine law to

speak about

the lawfulness of such a

moderation

The

moderate politique

compliments

Martius for his

and announces
Eupolis'

his intention to distribute the

as

parts of

the ensuing conference.

treat whether war

distribution is

follows: Zebedaeus

will

for

194
propagation of

Interpretation
the faith alone is

it is lawful; Gamaliel will treat whether such a war is obligatory for Christian princes and states; Eusebius will treat the comparative: whether such a war is to be preferred over

lawful,

and

in

what cases

extirpation of

heretics,

reconcilement of

schisms,

pursuit of either

lawful temporal
wait upon

rights

and

quarrels, and how far such a war should

mingled with

these
as

matters, be

them,

or

pass

them

by

and

give

law to them

inferior to itself; Pollio Eupolis

then resume

will

submit

the argument to the test of possibility;

will prove the enterprise of a

holy
and

war

his

speech that will persuade and agree

be possible; and Martius touch "means and

to
and

will

preparations."

The discussants
and

to this division

distribution,

they

agree to

to continue the discussion the

adjournment.

next

day. But the supposedly

order of speeches correct

drowsy

stop Pollio

interrupts the

Pollio 's final interruption disturbs the Eupolis. Pollio

acknowledges
unless

determined

by

Eupolis to be

for he believes that

a

Christendom is

ground

in thinking him a skeptic, and molded into a new paste,

willingness

holy

war

is impossible. But Pollio

the five discussants
mad and with

professes

his

to concur
and

with

the

hope

of

the good world, as it were

sober.6

to assert

that Athens is
ness

the

business."

To demonstrate his willing to comply with the positive consideration, he will "frankly contribute to He advises that if they would have a holy war, they must choose "fresh
years,"

only Democritus is

a pope of

between

fifty

and

sixty,

and must asks

have him

called

Urban. Eupolis
more serious.

says that

Pollio

speaks

well, but he the

that Pollio be a little

met

Bacon then informs

us that

discussants

the

following day

as

they had

agreed.

Pollio

made some

sporting speeches,

which are not pre

sented, to the effect that the

holy

war

Janissaries, Tartars,
reported speeches speeches.

and

Sultans. We

had already begun because he dreamt of reenter the dialogue as Msrtius begins the flsw in
Eupolis'

by

wsrning

of s possible of

distribution

of

the

Msrtius

and preparations of a

placing is to follow Pollio's and

order

objects to the

the parts. His speech about

means

holy

war.

Since this

means often affects opinions

debate sbout the possibility necessarily best because consideration of concerning possibility, Martius warns Pollio and
is
not

Eupolis'

Eupolis

discussion

peremptorily or conclusively until they have heard his he asks them to be prepared to reply to his speech. means, Bacon tells us that all commend Martius for his caution, and Eupolis,
of

not

to speak

and

following
Into the

Martius'

example,

question of

refines his distribution to account for an omission. lawfulness (distributed to Zebedaeus), Eupolis inserts the

following
ity
or

question: whether

holy

war

is to be it is to

pursued to the

displanting

and

extermination of peoples and whether

enforce

belief
the

and punish

infidel

only to

subdue peoples so as to open

forcefully

door for the "spiritual

sword,"

i.e., for

persuasion and
msde this

instruction

snd whst

is

fitting

for

souls snd
will

consciences.

Hsving

smendment, Eupolis explsins thst it

be

"Advertisement,

BW VII, 25,

n.

1.

On Bacon's Advertisement
Zebedaeus'

Touching
to

Holy
of

War

195

psrt of

speech and speech and

hands
ss

the

discourse

Zebedaeus,
the

whose speech

is the final
bined.

is

as

long

the preceding parts

dialogue

com

Zebedaeus

announces a sixfold plan

of all

his intention first for the is

to

"distinguish the Second

Third

cases"

for his speech, which is dictated by of lawfulness. First will be the

princes

question of whether

it is lawful for Christian

the faith.
will

to wage

unprovoked war

propagation of restore once

be the
be the

question of whether

it is

lawful to

Christian

countries to the
will

Christian faith, if this

non-Christian war.

question

a part of

the case of a

holy

war.

question of whether

it is

lawful to free Christians from

agsin

servitude to

infidels in

countries,

if this

question

is

a part of

the case of a

holy

Fourth

will

be the
places.

question of whether

it is lawful to

make war to purge and recover

holy
to
will

Fifth

will

be the
and

question
or

of whether

it is lawful to
on

make

war

revenge

blasphemy

cruelty

bloodshed inflicted
war

Christians. Sixth

be the

question of whether enforcements of not

holy

conscience,
others are

and

may be pursued to the expulsion of people or how it is to be moderated so that Christians do

"forget that
a seventh

men."

To this
not

sixfold plan of a

questions, Zebedaeus
"precedes"

adds

consideration.

It is

question, but it
Martius'

all

the

questions and was suggested

"in

manner"

a what

discharges them. In this last consideration,

considers

which

by

Zebedaeus

true charges against the

suppress

Turks, Zebedaeus
empire, though

will present

his

opinion

that a "war to religion,

the

[Turkish]

we set aside pauses and sn

the

cause of

were a

just

war."

Zebedaeus
agsinst

then proceeds to his speech. After

an

introductory
men's

blood by sscrificing msking warning war justice of a against the discusses the natural Zebedaeus in an unjust war, Turks. He opines that a war against the Turks is lawful according to the laws of

idol

or moloch of

Jesus

nature, nations,

and

the divine law. The justice of such a

warrant of

war will consist

in the feeble

merit of the cause, the

the

jurisdiction,
of

and

the

form

of prosecution.

He

will

ignore the
and so

civil and positive

law

the Romans because

they

are of

"engines,"

he

will

ignore the

opinions and writings of

many
of

the

late
His

Schoolmen. Zebedaeus then treats the

presentation principle of of

evidence

of

the law of nature.

the lsw
nstursl

of nsture

consists

the

right to govern,
obey.

which

solely is thst

of s

defense

Aristotle's born to

some creatures are as a truth

rule and others are

born to
can

Zebedaeus takes this

such

"as Aristotle

limiteth it": If there

exists

be found
beast
or

between
s

man and

between

inequality body and

esse

between
soul,

man and man as

such

inequslity
is
s proof

will

Zebedseus'

invest

right

of government.

The

whole of

speech

thst

slthough this

proportion seems sn

impossible

"and the

case

possible, and such as

for men, the judgment is true hath had and hath a being, both in partic is difficult

nations."

ular men and

Zebedaeus

acknowledges

that determination of the proposition

because beyond Aristotle's

and

simple standard of

intelligence,

courage,

honesty,
to who

probity

of will sre required

for government,

snd men never sgree ss

196
is
most

Interpretation
worthy snd not "in the
so most

fit to

rule.

Therefore, Zebedseus
"in the (even though

sccepts

Aristotle's
concludes

compsrstive"

view

but

privstive.

rather

Thus he

thst "where there is a that is

subdue

heap

of people

called a people or a

state)
to

altogether unable or
them."

indign to govern, it is just for a civil Before arguing the esse in its psrticulsrs, Zebedseus
to the role of s personsl

people sdds

thst

he does laws

not refer

tyranny but

rather

to cases where the

of a state are against

the laws of nature and nations.

of the existence of such cases

Zebedaeus divides his discussion

parts.

into three

subdued. nations

Firstly he will Secondly he

that

consider will

whether

there

are

such of the

nations

that can be
and

consider

the

breaches

laws

of nature

divest

a nation of all right to government.

Finally

he

will consider

whether

these breaches exist in any

government,

namely,

in the Ottoman

Empire.

With have
no

respect

to the first point, Zebedaeus asserts that there are nations that
govern and on

right to

that

ought

to be subdued. The

determination

of

these nations
of

is based
man's

the

original

donation
of

of government.

The foundation

dominion is

being

the

image

God,

that

is, his

possession of natural govern and

reason.

Only

if

this

divested. Original
poor men of

sin

image is totally or mostly defaced is the right to does not subvert the right to rule as some fanatics
argued.

the
and

Lyons have

Zebedaeus

quotes

God's

words to show

Noah

his

sons

to prove his point, and he quotes the

prophet

Hosea to

that there though

are governments that

God does

not avow

by

His

revealed argues

will,

even

they

are ordained

by

secret providence.

Zebedaeus do

that the prophet's to perverse and

words

do

not

refer

to evil governors or tyrants the words

and

but

rather

defective
"for the
now,

nations.

Furthermore,
of

not refer

to

idolatry

the Jews

then,

the

idolatry

of

idolatrous nations, the Heathen then and

all

are sins of a

far

differing

nature, in

regard of the special covenant and

clear manifestations wherein

tion."7

God did

contract and exhibit

himself to that
as

na

they differed from contemporary idolatrous peoples, who are among the nations in name which are no nations and which are outlawed and proscribed by the law of
nature and

The Israelites differed from the

Canaanites, then, just

nations,

or

the

immediate

commandment of

God.

Zebedaeus
tion of all men,

gives seven examples of such nations:

(i)

pirates,

who are

the

common enemies of man and against whom

there is

natural, tacit

confedera

(2)

rovers

by land, (3)

the

Assassins, (4)

the Anabaptists of

if they had done no actual mischief, and things to be lawful according to "the secret and variable

Munster,
of

even

peoples who
motions and

hold

all

instincts

spirit,"

the

in the

(5) instances like the fictional Amazons where all government is hands of women, (6) the Sultany of the Mamelukes and like instances
laws
of nature and

that are perversions of the

nations,

and

(7)

the people of the

West Indies. In
Ibid.,
32:21. 30-31.

all of

these cases, any nation,

Biblical
quotes are:

however far off, may

destroy

Zebedaeus'

Genesis 1:26; Genesis 9:2; Hosea 8:4; Deut.

On Bacon's Advertisement
them.

Touching

Holy

War

197

Regarding
were

the last example, Zebedaeus remarks to Martius that the West

Indians Indian

propagation of

properly subdued by the Spaniards even if the question of the the faith is set aside. This latter point is true because the West
of

practices

human
thst

sacrifice and

cannibalism,

which

are

breaches

of

nature's
st

law,

caused the

West Indisns to forfeit their territory. Zebedseus

sdds

this point,
toward"

however,

he is loath to

justify

"the

cruelties which were

first

used

the West Indians. Zebedaeus ends his list

of examples of nations

that are no nations with a general example. He argues that the example of
Hercules'

labors

shows the consent of all nations and ages

for the "extirpation

and

debellating
Zebedaeus

of

giants, monsters,

and

foreign

tyrants."

next sets

down arguments,
such

rather

than examples, to prove thst

subdued

there are states that are no states, which must

be

by

civil nations.

First,

men

are

bound to
of

subduing

action

by

implicit

confederations and
colonial
of

bounds. Examples
mother

such

confederations

and

bounds

are:

ties to

nations, the unity customs, and,

of common

language,

the sharing

fundamental
to speak

laws
of

and

finally,

common

humanity. Zebedaeus

refuses

the tie of common

others must one

false worship, but he says that Christians more than acknowledge "that no nations are wholly aliens and strangers to
and

another"

that

Christians

must not

be less humani

charitable

"than the

person
puto."s

introduced Zebedaeus

by

the

comic poet:

Homo

sum,

nihil a me alienum

asserts that such tacit confederations are active and against

"such

routs and shoals of people as

All

nations

must

suppress

have utterly degenerated from the laws of such peoples, and this is to be measured
measured

nature."

not

by
of

juridical
the law

principle.

Rather, it is to be
neighbor,
says that to

by

the law of love (New

of the common

Law),

of

love

of one's

and

the

law

origin

mankind.

Zebedaeus

deny

his

argument

is

almost

to be a schis

matic,

and with

his bellicose final remark,

the

dialogue

ends abruptly.

Like the New Atlantis, the

most

obtrusive

feature

of

the Advertisement

Touching A Holy War is its doubly indirect because it is

penetrate

spparent
an

incompleteness. The Advertisement is

a

incomplete dialogue. As

dialogue up

we can

the Advertisement only

by discerning
speech whole

a whole made

of parts

that

are not

Bacon's

words or views simply.

Although Bacon

causes

the characters
speak

to speak, their
their

speech

is

not

Bacon's But the

about

to the extent that

woven

they

from

characters

or

natures.

out

of

the separate parts

characters make

represents

Bacon's teaching
of

the highest
we are

matters.

The

up

an

image

the cosmic whole, as

told

by

the witty

Pollio,
view

and the

speeches treat a mix of the universal and the particular

religion and

Bacon tells

us

in the Epistle Dedicatory. The

parts:

whole of

Bacon's

policy as is fash

ioned from two

of the

the action of the dialogue and the possible completeness

work.

apparently incomplete
35.

"Advertisement, BW VII,

The

quote

is from Terence, The Self-Tormentor, 1.77.

198
A survey
meets of the

Interpretation
dialogue's
plan shows

it to be

more complete

than

first

the

eye.

Eupolis distributes the

speeches of

the discussion to the partici

Zebedaeus'

pants,

and of

the six speeches proposed, only two are

Eupolis'

provided:

long
and

but apparently truncated speech and Pollio's speech, which is out of place distribution of subjects is not left untreated in the very brief. But is his distribution
of speeches.

same proportion as

Of

seven

distributed

sub

jects,
The

all

but

one are mentioned and answered

by

the two speeches provided.

Zebedaeus'

question of

lawfulness is

question of a war against adumbrated

in its entirety by the Turks dischsrges "in s

covered even

speech.

The

msnner"

the six particulars

with

by Zebedaeus,
And

though it is not strictly concerned

the

"cause law.

religion."

of

such a war against

the Turks is consistent with natural

obligation of

Zebedaeus'

speech assimilates and argues

discharges the

Gamaliel,
of

for Zebedaeus
confederations.
polis'

that

war against

the Turks is

binding
of a

because

implicit
Eu

Pollio's

speech
war

testing
to

the possibility

task of proving

holy

be

possible are

discharged

holy by

war and

Pollio's

sum

Martius'

examples of mary speech and beyond its appointed task to assimilate

holy

war.

Pollio's brief

speech proceeds

Martius'

final

obligation.

Not only does

consist of a
new

Pollio

acknowledge
provides

tion, but he
and

possibility by the fundamental

his

participation

in the

positive considera

means and preparations.

These

the recommendations that Christendom be "ground and

paste"

molded

into

that a new pope named Urban must embody the principle of

a pope

fresh
be

ness or youth

youth, for

between led

fifty

and

sixty

years of age

does

not represent must

strictly

understood.

Thus Pollio's

suggestion

is that Christendom

completely
The only

changed and

by

the principle of youthful urbanity.

How, then, is
subject chsrscter who

the distribution of subjects and speeches still incomplete?

not not

discussed is "the
spesk,

comparative,"

assigned

to the only

does is

Eusebius,

the nonsectarian, moderate

divine

who

is

pious and who

named

for the

writer of ecclesissticsl snd universsl

history.

The incompleteness
snd speskers.
war

of subject mstter mstches

the

incompleteness

of speeches

As it stsnds, the Advertisement

presents sn argument about whether

holy
and

that covers the questions of

lawfulness
peoples

including
by

legality

extends

to

displanting

and

exterminating
It

obligatoriness,

possibility,

means and preparations.

presents this srgument

means of the speeches of

Pollio, Martius,
Gamaliel
and
Eusebius'

and

Zebedaeus

that assimilate the subjects and speeches of

Eupolis

and exclude

the subject and speech of

Eusebius.

subject

treats the mix of civil and religious considerations. It

of

treats the relative

importance

holy

war with respect

Eusebius'

to

immediate

and urgent

matters of civil and ecclesiastical policy.

and namesake.

subject matches

his

name

The

writer of ecclesiastical and universal

history

is

to treat the

distribution

of civil and ecclesiastical

duty

with respect

to men's obligations to
and

a universal cause. so whatever of

Formally,

the thematic center of the

dialogue is missing,

teaching

fills the gap left the dialogue.

by

Eusebius'

absence

constitutes the positive

On Bacon's Advertisement
The
action of the

Touching
Pollio

Holy
of a

War

199

dialogue

opens with
a

joining

a conference of men

of eminent

delivered
ence,
nor

quality interrupting holy war being Martius. We do not know the immediate reason for the confer by do we know why Pollio joined them from court. Including the initial
and speech

in favor

interruption,
round

we witness

five interruptions
of

by

Eupolis'

distribution
when

the speeches.

Pollio that lead up to and sur Pollio's second interruption comes

exhortation of

early in the dialogue

warfare and reminds result of squabble

he bresks into
of

Martius'

to

holy

or pious

Martius

the

"extirpation

the Moors of

Valencia."

The

Pollio's interruption is

a sectarian squabble and

Eupolis'

the moderation of thst

by

the moderate politique Eupolis.

Martius'

focus

of

the discussion back to

moderating returns the invective against the Turks. Eupolis

Msrtius'

speaks

for

Msrtius, filling
Martius'

the

gsp left

by

silence st

Pollio's remark,
the
nature of

and explains
martial

silence

by

referring to his

martial nature and

affairs,

which proscribe actions against unarmed civilians.

The first
politique and

action of

the

dialogue

produces an alliance

between the
not

moderate answer

the fervent soldier. But this alliance

as we

Pollio's question,
mention of

learn in the

sequel.

directly Immediately following

Indies, Pollio

does

Msrtius'

the savage Spanish conquest of the West

again

inter

rupts some

to remind Martius of the kinds of infidels. Some infidels sre civil and
are not

condone

the inhuman treatment

different from the brutes. Not only does Pollio's suggestion of the less than human humans, but
Martius'

reply

subverts even the

humane

alternative

implicit in Pollio's

suggested

dis

tinction. Whatever may

mention

have been the

of

reason was

for

Martius'

silence at
a

Pollio's
narrow

of the

Moors

Valencia, it
sorts with

not

from

squeamishly

understanding Pollio's second

of what

aptly

the actions of

war.
Martius'

and

third interruptions
and

exacerbate while

pious blood-

lust, and the alliance between Martius ian dispute, does not moderate

Eupolis,

Martius'

martisl zesl.

moderating a sectar Msrtius spproves of the

bloody Spsnish conquests of the West Indies, which sre described ss bsrbsrous even by the zeslous Zebedseus. The first snd second sctions of the dialogue sre interruptions by Pollio that pose questions of extreme modes and methods. These questions are answered indirectly in favor of extreme modes and meth ods, and in part they are so snswered by mesns of s link between moderstion
snd

militsry

zesl.

This link is

never

broken,
of

snd

it

points

to the sssimilstion of

moderstion

to zesl. After the

forging
of

their sllisnce, Eupolis the moderate

Martius'

politique makes no protest of moderation against

Eupolis'

extremism or
an

lack

of

moderstion.
tius'

first defense

Msrtius is

inadequate defense Pollio's third Indies.

sectarian

of

Mar

Eupolis'

nonexistent

moderation, and
whatever was

silence after victims of

interrup
done

tion implies that to the

done to the

the Spaniards can be

of

Turks,

who are worse

than the civilized

again raises

brutes

the

Zebedaeus'

Pollio's fourth interruption

passions.

When Martius has

monotheists

no answer

for Pollio's
warns

suggested

distinction between true

the danger of

and

idolaters, Zebedaeus

Pollio

of

heresy. The

200
time and location
Zebedaeus'

Interpretation
of

the dialogue

Paris in
no

16219

underscores

the unsaid threat

of

warning.

There is

discussion

or resolution of this
admits

theolog
a war

ical problem; rather, Pollio is against the Turks and asks for

silent while

Martius

his

zeal

for

help

in

determining

the lawfulness

of

the action their al

of

from

men

who

are

well

versed
Martius'

in the divine law. In

aid and makes

concert with

liance, Eupolis
speeches.

comes

to

the

central

distribution

the

The

structure snd movement of of speeches snd spurs

the dislogue consist

Martius'

of

the

Eupolis'

mix of

distribution

Pollio's

and

interruptions. Pollio's fourth

interruption

the movement of the dialogue to its climax, for he raises the

question of the

Turks'

difference from idolsters,

which causes

Msrtius to

men

tion lswfulness

snd

Eupolis to distribute the

speeches

And

Msrtius'

interruption the

following day

reminds

regsrding lawfulness. the speakers about how

then prompts Eupolis

seriously the matter of means must

to expand
Zebedaeus'

speech

be considered, to include the limits

which

of methods and means.

The

structure and movement of

the dialogue sre such thst Eusebius is expelled from

the dialogue. Pollio's final

interruption,

Eupolis'

which occurs after

distribu

tion,

gives the answer to

must

Martius'

subject of means and shows

how

Eusebius'

expulsion
promised

be

understood. war

by

holy

is,

Pollio thinks that the Christian universality along with philosopher's stone, the "rendez-vous
us

of cracked
a

brains."10

Bacon tells

why the

alchemist's

dream

and

the hope for

holy

war are alike as such a

meeting

place.

They

are alike

because "in their

propositions pretence or

the description of the means is ever more monstrous than the

end,"

which end

is
of

nevertheless

noble."

But in the be

case of

the

religious and civil

universality

ject (ecclesiastical

and universal

Christianity, history), the true

Eusebius'

which would

sub

means are

inseparable from
absence

the possible truth of the end, and there can be no true means.

Eusebius'

from the dialogue is

universal

be trusted,
modern

the

end

history including the miracle of revelation itself, completed or perfected history will replace the sacred history in dividing times and declaring of days, and the true universal history must be the story of man's
fortune,
be
which

Bacon's teaching about ecclesiastical and in the Advancement of Learning. Because no miracle can ever
consistent with

scientific

is

man's

voyage to

Bensalem

and

the conquest of

God's

hegemony.12

The

means to the noble end of

end of

alchemy

and universal

his
the

tory
light

can

mended

only if the

God's

providence

is

replaced rule.

by

perfection of science and man's consequent

Eusebius'

liberation from God's

of

In the
must

of

absence, Pollio's suggested reformation

Christendom

The Battle
BW VII,
35.

of

Lepanto is the
of

earliest
was

The Battle

Lepanto
24.

military adventure mentioned by Martius, Advertisement, fought in 157 1, fifty years before the time of the dialogue

according to Martius.

'"Advertisement,

BW VII,

"Advancement of Learning, BW III, 362, ^Weinberger, pp. 876-78.

289.

On
consist

Bacon'

Advertisement
or

Touching
by

Holy

War

201

in

a new

Catholicism

universality led

a new principle of youth.

This universality is
preserve

none other than the universal claim of science to save and

of man's scientific

the corruptible things. The universal principle

for

tune governs the pursuit and evaluation of civil and ecclesiastical policy, and

these matters are

tacitly
of

assimilated to the
Eupolis'

speeches

of

Martius, Pollio

and

Zebedaeus
speeches of

by

means

revision

of

his distribution. Together their

treat the means to the

new universsl

human fortune. Special treatment policy is

to

"the

comparative"

is

obviated

by

the supreme urgency of the scientific

project. clesr:

Whatever the
consists

civil or ecclesissticsl methods snd mesns

mstter, the

messure of

It

in the

necessary for

mankind's voyage

Bensalem.
Eusebius'

expulsion and

tacit replacement

by Eupolis, Martius, Pollio,

and

Zebedaeus

signifies more

than the replacement of divine providence and grace

also signifies

by
the

man's scientific

fortune. It

the expulsion of moderation from

as a

dialogue, for
Martius'

although

Eupolis is described

politique, his

moderation

is

allied to

moderate msn. without

zeal, only Eusebius is explicitly identified by Bacon Pollio's sporting chsrscterizstion of Eupolis ss "temperate
and
must

as a snd

passion"

be

seen
and

in the light
Martius'

of the whole

fashioned from

Eupolis'

distribution Given
must
of

and

Pollio's

Eusebius'

expulsion

guiding from the dialogue,

of the action of
Eupolis'

the dialogue.

politique moderation

be problematic,
new

and we must wonder at

the law that governs the practice

the

holy

war.

Without rejecting the barbarism Martius lates

and answers

the question of means and

easily accepts, Pollio assimi preparations distributed to Martius.

so

The unity of the dialogue is fashioned by Bacon's weaving of a unity of immoderate natures by means of the moderate politique and the lubricious
courtier.

For it is Eupolis, the

moderate

politique,

who connects

the opposing

characters

by

the distribution
the

of

tasks

and who mskes

the explicit addition of

the question
and

of

limits

of methods and

means,

and

it is Pollio, the

smooth

jocular courtier,

who prompts
with

interruption,
the problem

and, along
of

it meaning by his final distribution, Martius, guides the dialogue as a whole toward
the
gives

immoderate

methods and means.

The

movement of the sake of a new

dialogue
war,

discloses the
and the

moderation of sectarian passion

for the

holy

aim of this

holy

war

is

such

that the end justifies the means.

The

Advertisement is
as such

a set of speeches governed

by

the principle of moderation, the principle

but

it

argues

for the

abandonment of moderation as

governing

the

mesns

to

msnkind's

true universsl fortune. It comes ss no surprise thst the

and methods

discussion
the

of the law governing means immoderate divine Zebedaeus.

is treated in its entirety

by

Martius'

Although Pollio's
rations and

speech assimilates what

subject of means and prepa

in fact determines
would govern

their end must

be,

Zebedaeus'

speech

treats

the law that to

the

instances,

application, and

limits

of means.

It is

Zebedaeus that Eupolis distributes the fundamental

question

concerning

202
means,

Interpretation

i.e.,

the question of limits and

degrees, in
it is

this case, whether

holy

war

is to

Zebedaeus'

proceed

to the extermination of peoples. the

speech culminates

the

speeches and action of

dialogue,
Eusebius'

and so

completes

the reconstruction of

the good

world required

by

expulsion. speech

His

speech

imitates the

struc

ture of the

dialogue, for
The

Zebedaeus'

presented

by

a part of an articu

lated

whole.

general question and

the six particulars are subsumed

by

the

secular question of a wsr sgsinst nsture snd nstions rsther

the Turks thst csn the

be justified

by

the Isws of
ends

thsn

by

divine lsw. And the dislogue

Zebedaeus'

before

Zebedseus discusses the divine lsw. As Bacon lates the divine to the

wsr sgsinst

the Turks from the perspective of the

speech assimi and consequence of

weaves secular.

it into the dialogue, It repeats the movement

the

dislogue

ss s

moderation

whole; it expels the divine and obliterates the distinction between and immoderation with respect to means. Like the whole of the
outward moderation

dialogue,

Zebedaeus'

his

Eupolis'

subtle change of

con

cern about extermination and expulsion

to expulsion or enforcements of con

science, his warning

against

making

a moloch of

Jesus,

and

his disapproval

of

Spanish

barbarity

veils

the subversion of moderation implicit in

of

his

speech.

The
as a

omission of

the divine law is unsurprising in the light

consideration
with

the dialogue
with

whole.

Serious

of such scientific

law is incompatible fortune. But

of

the re

placement of
proposes

divine fortune law

although

Zebedaeus he
"as for the

to treat the

of nature and

the law

nations,

and although

suggests separate

treatments of them
speaks of

by beginning
a
war

his

speech with

law

nature,"

of

he

them together without articulating a distinction

between them. His

argument
of

justifying
nature, but

against

the

Turks begins
cases
so as

by
to

referring only to the law

exclude

when

he limits the

"personal

tyranny,"

he

speaks of cases where

"the constitution,
nations, he

cus

toms,
when

and

laws

of a state are against the

laws

nations.

of nature and

Finally,
speaks of

he lists the

examples of nations

in

name that are no

them as nations outlawed and proscribed

Zebedaeus'

by

the

laws

of nature and nations. of nature and

indifference

to the

difference between the laws

nations should come as no

the reader that he

the

will

surprise, for at the outset of his speech he informs ignore the evidence of Roman law and so the writings of
on

Schoolmen. It

wss

the

bssis

of

the Romsn lsw thst the distinction to rest.

between the lsws

prince of consists

of nsture snd nstions wss understood

According to

the

the

Schoolmen,

in the

difference between the laws of nature and nations difference between man and the brutes. Aquinas argues that the
the
to all animals, while the law of nations applies

law

of nature applies

only to
the evi

msn,

snd of

the evidence he gives to reflect this essentisl

"jurist."13

difference is

dence divine

the Romsn

In the

sbsence of

positive

law,

Zebedaeus'

speech suggests that

sny discussion of the eternal or the law governing meth

man and the

ods and means abstracts

from the

moral

distinction between
refers to

brutes;

"Summa Theologica,

II

II, Q.57, A,

3.

Aquinas

Ulpian, Digest, I, i,

[.

On Bacon's Advertisement
it
must not

Touching

Holy

War

203

be forgotten that the

sixth particular encompassed

question of

by

his delibera
methods

tion about a war against the

and means.
Zebedaeus'

Turks treats the

extraordinary

argument

in the

sequel confirms

his immoderate intention. His

Aristotle's discussion

argument consists of a subtle

slavery.14

but

crucial modification of

of
ment about

It is

of course

astonishing that Zebedaeus presents Aristotle's argu

slsvery (psrt of the discussion of the household) ss the srgument for the natural right to govern regarding men and nations without mentioning the distinction between natural and conventional slavery and without mentioning
the kinds of rule. But the subtle change that
where a man

is just

as

important. Aristotle
degree that
man

asserts

differs from

other men to the same

differs

from the brutes

or

the soul differs from the

body,
in
a

such a man must mode

be taken to
and never
such

be

slave.

But

whereas

Aristotle

argues

hypothetical

asserts men.

that there are such men, Zebedaeus argues clearly that there are
whereas

Thus

Aristotle

asserts that the slave must apprehend reason

in
the

other men

and so suggests an

immeasurable difference between

assertion.15

man and

brutes, Zebedaeus

On the contrary, for Zebedaeus, if men's natural reason is only mostly defaced, they may nevertheless be treated argument from the as if they have no rational According to
makes no such
souls.16

Zebedaeus'

law

of

nature, the

principle of

holy

war

is

unencumbered

by

the moral distinc

tion between man and the brutes. It

own

would appear

that Zebedaeus subverts his

warning that it not be forgotten that men are men. It could be said that our case is overstated because Zebedaeus
to be "understood in the
rather

presents

his

comparative"

argument

than as a universally
presents

applicable argument

for the

natural right

to

rule.

Thus he

his

argument

as the

basis

of a principle that applies

only

where people are

like brutes, i.e.,

heap"

only in the simple, extreme, and "altogether unable or indign to

of the natural

rare cases where a people

is "but

and

govern."

Zebedaeus admits that the question

and

right to

rule

is complex, difficult,
easy
cases

easy only in the

extreme

cases,

and

he limits the

possible

by

excluding the rule of personal

Zebedaeus'

tyranny. But the

remainder of

speech

demonstrates the

actual exis

tence of that the

such

easy cases,

and although the seven examples conform

to his claim

simple cases are

rare, the

last,

general example subverts

his

claim to

rarity and his The last example is

exclusion of personal tyranny.

a general example used

to demonstrate the existence of

nations which sre no nations and which

have

no

right to

govern

because

of their

defilement

of

the

original

donstion

of government, nstursl

resson, snd which

example

brutes. This lsst sre, therefore, morally indistinguishsble from the

l4Aristotle, Politics
"When Aristotle
statement of
statement

1252b

1-5,
that

I253b-I256a.

concludes

that there are some nstursl slaves,

would

he draws his does

conclusion

from

the

characteristics

determine
snd

a man to

be

a natural slave.
not

Of

course

the

does
pp.

not prove that such men

exist,

Aristotle's
30.

conclusion

follow.

l6Cf.

195-96, above;

Advertisement, BW VII,

204
demonstrates that the

Interpretation
seven examples are
and

to be included in the

general catego

ries

of

giants, monsters,

foreign

tyrants.

The

general example

blurs the
tyrants.

distinction between Zebedaeus

agrees

personal with

tyrants and peoples governed

by

personal

Martius'

charge"

"true
and

against

the

Turks,
it.

which

is

grounded on rather

the

tyranny

of the

Ottomans

the

subjugation of

their people
Zebedaeus'

than on breaches of

nature's

law

as

Zebedaeus

presents

argument of

is directed

against

those

who are

"utterly

degenerated from the laws

peoples'

nature,"

Turks,
and

who

but he includes among such "routs and Martius.17 are honorable foes according to
of

shoals

of

the

In the light

the tension between

of possible

Zebedaeus'

last,

general

example

his

moderate
men

limitation

cases, we must conclude that at the treated as brutes may well be

Martius'

least those

who

may be

considered and

many indeed. As
means,

a speech about the

Zebedaeus'

speech repeats and

law governing extraordinary methods and justifies licentious bloodlust.

Zebedaeus joins the sanguinary alliance between Martius and Eupolis regarding the kinds of infidels. His reading of the prophets shows him to be one of the "reasonable
souls"

who see no relevant

degrees

of

idolatry. For Zebedaeus, the

and the

only hesthen "then

relevant

difference is between the Jews

now."

"then"

idolstry

of

the

Zebedaeus'

snd
Martius'

argument against possible enemies.

the Turks includes and

enlarges the scope of

Zebedaeus
ate

of course can give no

contemporary
in

example of

God's immedi

commandment

against

particular people
people

that is no people.

Biblical
original

evidence that would

fit any

1621 must

The only be the evidence for the

a a

donation

of government coupled with

the

determination that in fact

people

is

no people and

is,

rather,

"rout

shoal"

and

indistinguishable from

herd

have dominion, but in quoting God's words to Noah, Zebedaeus modestly omits what follows. The animal larder.18 realm over which Noah's offspring rule is mankind's speech completes the fabric woven by Bacon from the speeches of Zebedaeus, Martius, Pollio and Eupolis. As the central part of this fabric,
of animals men

brutes. Over the

shall

Zebedaeus'

Zebedaeus'

speech characterizes and means

the

to be used in the replacement of the

limits governing the extraordinary methods divine promise with the prom
tells us what

ise

of

science.

Bacon's

subtle which

art

he,

rather

than

Zebedaeus,
against the

means

by

the

"manner"

in

Zebedaeus'

speech

discharges

the questions of

the divine

lawfulness
But

of

holy

war.

The

holy

war of

Christendom

Turks

represents the war of the new Catholicism of science against nature's

at

corruptibility.19

the same

time, it

represents the
32-36.

British policy that is to

"Cf. Advertisement, BW VII, 20, 22, 23, 28, '"Genesis 9:3-5.

"It

should

be

noted

that

Gamaliel,

the

Protestant zealot,

makes

but

one short speech and

that he plays

no part

in the

whole constructed of

the speeches of

Zebedaeus. Although Gamaliel is not expelled from the pears. We might wonder if he appears only because of his zeal and if Bacon thought Catholicism could teach better lessons about universal conquest than could Protestantism.

Eupolis, Martius, Pollio, and dialogue as is Eusebius, he almost disap

On Bacon's Advertisement
conquer astical

Touching
as

Holy

War

205

the world for science. The

must

Advertisement teaches
evaluated
can

that civil and ecclesi to man's scientific

moral

policy
and

be

pursued

and

means

fortune

that the limit of these means

man

include indifference to the

pursuit

distinction between
scientific

and
on

the brutes.
proper civil
of

The

and capture

of msn's and

fortune depends
movement,
and

and ecclesiastical

policy,

the
or

structure,

content

the

dialogue disclose the

policy
of

complex

problematic moderation

necessary for the

the new

new

the new universsl

wsr-

fsre. The
prepared

moderstion of

holy

warriors must always

be

open

to and

for the

opposite of moderation.
mediate work that

The Advertisement is the

comprehensive well.

functions
and

as a

key

to Bacon's
mediate as

teaching

about science and

man,

its teaching is

It

answers the most general and

important

question

touching

the nature of

must be prepared to possibility that the end justifies the means and that proper means may be incompatible with moderation. As was noted, the teaching of the Advertisement must be seen in the light of the New Atlantis, and so viewed it
means.

The

moderate partisan of man's scientific

fortune

embrace

the

illuminates the
of other

means

nations."20

whereby the revelation of Bensalem becomes "the good Evalustion of the moral teaching about means depends on the
man's scientific means

good promised

by Bensalem,

fortune. But the Advertisement

world, for
we also see a change

does

not

of worlds

only teach about the from old to new.

whole

to a

new

The
united

playfully dubbed

by

Pollio

as

the "good

world"

is the

old world

by Eupolis, the temperate, passionless, good city and comic poet. The city in this old world is formed by unreformed Christianity. This is why the good city in the old world is exclusive as defended by the conventional pro
of

priety
who

the comic poet and yet is passionlessly temperate and so able to unify

or embrace a world.

The

old world

has

a place

for Zebedaeus, the harsh

changes

zealot

favors
of

a universal on

Christian kingdom. Bacon

city.

the old world

of

by
as

the the

action

Pollio
man

Eupolis'

Although Eupolis thinks

Pollio

individual
new

opposed

to the cosmic whole,

replaces

Pollio,

the spokesman
as

for the

science

of

nature,

Eupolis,

the

fifth essence,

the unifying

principle of the new world. alone speaks of

As Pollio

represents

the promise of science and the new

possibility, he

represents the

final

and efficient csuse of

whole of which

Eupolis hss become

s sepsrste psrt.

The

new good world

is

unified

by

the one

who refers snd professes

thst he refers all things to

himself.
sub of

Pollio's
sumes

selfish cosmopolitanism composed of combines

history,
claim

eros,

and

tragedy

the Christian city that

the exclusive,

conventional

propriety

the

comic poet and

the soft inclusiveness of the

shows

to universal rule.
refer all

But Pollio's

plsyfulness

that

although

he may

things to

himself, he does
Pollio's lack

not always so profess.

Bacon

of course causes and shsres

of candor.

He informs
1 66.

us of

his

presence

by

narrating the

dia-

2Wew Atlantis, BW III,

206

Interpretation
and

logue, frank,
world and

he hides Pollio's
more
and

unreported speeches

from

us.

As Pollio is less than

so

he is

dangerous. The
then

parts of

the old

world molded

into the

new

by

Bacon

held together

by

Pollio

are religious and martial zeal

the

passionless

temperance of the

Christian

city.

As the Christian city

replaces

the

ancient

city

as

the horizon for viewing the whole and man's place

in the whole,
the
new

so

the Christian city must give way to the city as

determined

by
it

science of nature. open

But then the

city's moderation of

is

problematic

must

be

to

its

opposite.

Bensalem'

s outward moderation

the comic, which we never see

poet.

comedy is no longer the city: is grimly serious, and Pollio wears the guise of worn by Eupolis, who is named for the comic

The locus

The

new universal whole united

by

the principle of
see

humanism is dictum

open to

immoderation,
comedy.

eros,

and

tragedy,
to

and

we

this through Pollio's playful

comic

Zebedaeus'

Chremes'

reference

famous

causes us to

wonder about what experiences are

to be included among human affairs in the

slave returns

new world.

In Terence's comedy the

of

to his place, the debts owed

to the courtesan are paid, and the conventional virtue of the

as

family

is

reaffirmed

befits the justice

and

tragedy,

conventional

comedy does not ground so become superior to it, by revealing the grounds for the pious, propriety of the city. Nor does comedy become independent from
world

the city. In the new

tragedy

as

pure playfulness and

dialogue. Rather, Pollio

universal

Zebedaeus

in itself, like the rhyming puns of the Platonic present comedy in the service of man's
gods no

scientific

fortune. Since the free

longer

rule

in Bensalem,

and

since wisdom

there has nothing of

playfulness about

it,

we can understand

Bensalem's
that

scientific promise
and

only

by understanding

Bacon's implicit

argument

comedy

tragedy

are the same

because together they disclose the full

possibilities of perfected

human desire.

ON SIR WILLIAM TEMPLE'S POLITICAL AND PHILOSOPHICAL TEACHING

J. E.

Parsons,

Jr.

At first
teaching.

sight

it

might appear as

that Sir William Temple had no political

Temple was,

aim

to

demonstrate,

an

Epicurean,

and

Epicurus
Epicu-

taught that the apolitical

politics.

life is

superior to and nobler than the

life devoted to

However,

this objection can be answered in two wsys.

First,

resnism presupposes a general and comprehensive reflection on political

life,

as

in Lucretius, De rerum natura, the latter Temple fully led an Epicurean life only
retirement

part of after

Book V.

Second, Sir William

his
permanent
was a

1680,

following

from

politics at the age of

fifty-two. Prior

to that

time, Temple
English does

political advocate

and,

indeed,
portrait
a

sponsored a plan to alter the

of

constitu

tion.

Thus Macaulay's
and as

him

as

man a

inclined to "valitudinarian
neutral"1

effeminacy"

"not

mediator"

but

"merely

scant

justice
Tem

to Temple. What gave rise to this judgment is

ple's

a misacknowledgment of

Epicureanism

and the
a

accompanying
philosopher.2

view that

Temple

was

only

a states

everything Macaulay writes about Temple is to be dismissed, though it is chiefly in Temple's own works thst we find the vindicstion of his thought as well as that of his character and
man and not

not, first of all,

Yet

deeds.

Accordingly,
and
never

a certain

tension does exist between Temple the statesman

Temple the Epicurean

philosopher.

For

while

he

states

in his Memoirs: "I

had my Heart set upon any thing in publick Affairs, but the Happiness of and Greatness of the Crown; and in Order to that, the Union of Country, my he also states in his which alone I thought both could be both, by
Epicurean essay
These
no,
are

atchiev'd,

on gsrdens thst

his

privste

bent
ask

wss

for

s retired

life

snd thst

Questions that

Man
of

ought at

least to

himself,

whether and

he

asks others or

and to chuse

his Course
or

Life

rather at

by

his

own

Humour

Temper,

than

by
a

common

Accidents,
more

Advice
own

Fool knows

in his

Friends; House, than

of

least if the Spanish Proverb be true, That

Wise Man in
ends and
another's.3

We may
action are

observe

from this that the

support of

Temple
country,

proposes
and

for

political

nonpartisan, the

king

that the motive

works.

is

the advice of

friends,
of

as appears

from

several passages action and

in his

It is this

nonpartisanship statesmanship

the ends of

his

political

the fact that Temple's

than partisan

consisted

in

administration

and negotiation rather

politics that make

it

possible to

lessen the tension between the

statesman and

'T. B. Macaulay, Critical and Historical Essays (Leipzig, Tauchnitz, 1850), III, 151, 236. :Macaulay, Critical and Historical Essays, III, p. 160. 3Sir William Temple, Works, ed. Jonathan Swift (London, 1740), I, 351, 189, emphasis in
original.

208

Interpretation

the Epicurean philosopher in his character.

more

For,

while

Sir William Temple is

yet

public-spirited

ststesmsn

thsn s public-spirited philosopher,

the

latter

chsrscter

does

not sltogether escspe

him. In his

own words we

find the has been

ststement: a great

"I

can

truly

say, that

of all

the Paper I have

blotted,

which

deal in my Time, I have the Intention of some publick

contain

never written

Good."

any thing for the Publick without This statement might be considered to
political

in

compass the essence of

which

Temple's

Epicureanism, along

with

the

following, in

Temple

writes

concerning his

role as a negotiator and

peacemsker:

Peace is
or

a publick

Blessing,
or

without which no

Man is

safe
or

his Life: Neither Innocence

but in Danger
can give
us."

or

Laws

are a

Guard

in his Fortunes, his Liberty, Defence; no Possessions are

and

enjoyed

Fear,

which

equally lose the Pleasure

Ease

of all

that

Fortune

This quotation,
mediately
ple's
of

while

it

applies

immediately
peace

to peace abroad, also more

ss

covers

the situation of internal

threstened,

it

wss

in Tem

lifetime

by

incipient

civil wsr.

At in

no

time wss this truer thsn st the time

Temple's

self-enforced retirement

1680

during

the Popish Plot furor snd

the Exclusion Bill crisis. Rsther thsn accept the position of

Charles IPs cabinet, Temple opted for retirement, rather midst of the downfall of the Roman republic, who remained
with all

secretary of state in like Atticus in the

on good terms

both sides, but refused to be a partisan. Again, like leading his fsvorite modern Montaigne, suthor, Temple preferred a retired life to one exposed to continual dangers and temptstions to commit insalubrious deeds. As
the
men on

Montaigne

wrote during the civil wars of religion in France: "It is no smsll for one to feele himself preserved from the contagion of an age so pleasure, infected as ours. [And Montaigne mentions] this Epicurus, most agreeing
. . .

with

my manner. We turn accordingly to the directly Epicurean sayings to be found in Temple's writings. These are discovered in Miscellanea, Part III, "Heads de
. .

as essay upon the Different Conditions of Life and follows. (1) "A thinking Man can never live well, unless content to die"; (2) "The greatest Prince, possess 'd with Superstition and Fears of Death, more signed sn of common Fortune, and well constituted Mind"; (3) "A Man's Happiness, all in his own Opinion of himself and other between one Man and another; onely whether Things"; (4) "The Difference a Man governs his Passions, or his Passions Him"; (5) "We ought to abstain from those Pleasures, which upon Thought we conclude are likely to end in Pleasure."6 more Trouble or Pain, than begin in or they Joy
. . .

for

Fortune"

unhappy, than any private Man

Certain

comparable sayings are

disclosed in

the writings of

Epicurus

him-

4Temple, Works, I, 272-73. 'The Essays of Montaigne, trans. John Florio (Tudor Translations) (London, 1893), III, Temple, Works, I, 306-07.

24, 59.

Sir William Temple's Political

self,

and

Philosophical

Teaching

209

(i) "Become
a

accustomed

good snd evil consists

to the belief that death is nothing to us. For all in sensstion, but death is the deprivation of sensation.

And therefore

mortality of because it takes swsy the crsving for immortality"; (2) "But the many moment shun death as the greatest of evils, at another yearn for it as a

right understanding that death is nothing to us makes the life enjoyable, not because it adds to it an infinite span of time, but
at one respite

from the life

evils of

life. But the

wise man neither seeks

to escape life nor fears

nor

the cessation of
seem

life, for
the

neither

does life is

offend

him

does the

absence of

to be any evil";
satisfies

(3) "Self-sufficiency

is the

greatest of all

"Nothing
pleasure

man who

not satisfied with a

riches"; (4) little"; (5) "And since

reason we

is the first

good and natural

to us, for this very

we

do

not

choose greater

every discomfort

pleasure

but

sometimes

pass

over

many pleasures,

when

accrues to us as

the

result of

them.

comparing Temple with Epicurus himself on these five topics we discern the Epicurean propensity in Temple's way of thinking. may clearly Wentworth De Witt, an historian of Epicurean thought, points As Norman

Thus

by

out:

"From France the doctrines

period

of

Gassendi

were carried

to England
which

in the fall his

as

Restoration

and won a vogue

for Epicurean
In addition,
named or of

studies
"8

lasted for

about seventy-five

years, roughly from 1650 to 1725. this

period.

Temple's

writings of

into

almost

the

midpoint of

further indication
of

Epicureanism is thst the only philosopher follows: "Upon the Gardens of Epicurus;
1685.

in the title

his

writings

is

Gsrdening,"

an

essay

written

in

The
ence

result of

Temple's

adherence

to Epicureanism is his
after

oft-stated prefer

for

ancient over modern

learning. Temple,
to that
effect.9

all,

is

rather an ancient

in

temperament and philosophy than a modern, and for this reason

Mscsulay
that

dismisses

most

of

his

writings

Yet

when

we

remember

Jonathan Swift, the

ancient as opposed

protege of

Temple's last

years

in retirement,

was also an

to a modern, we may quite pardonably revise for ourselves

Macaulsy's

poor estimste of

Temple's intelligence. For it

the
side of

wss

justifisbly

possi

ble in Temple's time to

choose

the sncients

in the

sncients-moderns

toward the close of the seven controversy thst raged in France and England a teenth century. Nor was this merely literary argument; it also touched upon
political

science, as we shall see

in Temple's
us to

political

teaching.

At this point, it behooves

Virtue,"

examine

Temple's essay, "Of Heroick

as a suitable

introduction to his

political

teaching
York,

proper.10

As Temple

states

initially in

this essay:

"Among

all

the Endowments

of

Nature
pp.

or Improve-

'Epicurus: The Extant Remains,

trans. Cyril

Bailey
His

(New

1970),

85, 137, 89.

8Norman Wentworth De Witt. Epicurus

and

Philosophy

(Minneapolis:

University

of

Minnesota Press, 1954), P- 356'See Macaulay, Critical and Historical Essays, III, 241-42. was written after Temple's political teaching proper (1672), it '"Although "Of Heroick lead sway from that teaching, because its theme is more can serve better to lead toward than
Virtue"

properly

prepolitical

than

postpolitical.

210
Art"

Interpretation
of

ments

by

which

men

have

excelled

and

distinguished themselves,

there are principally only two that have "the Honour of

and of

being
. .

called

Divine,

giving that Esteem

or

Appelation to

such and

as possessed

them in very

eminent

Degree;
another

which are

Heroick Virtue,

Poetry.
on

Temple treats
virtue rather

Poetry
an

in

essay,

and

it be

can

be

said

to

feed

heroic
Art,"

than

to supply its

place. of

It

should

noted

that Temple suggests that

heroic

virtue

is

"Endowment
most psrt.

Nature"

and not sn
means

"Improvement
virtue

of

the

This
and

that heroic

is

natural

poetry for natural in the virtue,

unlike

sense of
states

inborn

original,
to

not a product of convention. virtue

Now,

while

Temple

that it is

easier

define heroic

in terms

of effects and examples

than through definition proper,

arises

he does deliver this definition: that

native

such virtue

from "some

great

and

Excellency

of

Temper

or

Genius tran

Fortitude."12 scending the common Race of Mankind in Wisdom, Goodness and Such virtue is advantaged by noble birth, improved by special education, and

assisted

by

good

fortune,

so that

heroes

are

honored

and obeyed

during

their

lives it is

and

bewailed

and adored after

wisdom appears

to be of more significance than

death. In the definition that Temple offers, fortitude, as we shall see. For
"in the
or

wisdom whose greatness appeared

the Institutions of such

Laws, Orders
snd

in Excellency of Inventions Governments, as were of most Ease,

...

Safety
fellow

and

Advantsge to Civil
st

Society."13

Such tslents

politicsl

fsction

home

foreign

oppression

devoted to remedying in relieving both sbrosd,

were

snd

countrymen snd

foreigners from the

founders
and

violence of

tyranny.

Thus,
and

unlike as

in Machiavelli, these
a

great

legislators
are to

practiced

first

foremost
became
and

politicsl,

nontyrsnnical wisdom.

They

be divided into two

(who
to the Epicurean

groups that

in fact
kings

merge

into

one:

the

first inventors

of useful arts

perhaps

snd

the founders of civil society

according

doctrine)14

the first authors of any good and well-instituted civil government in any

coun

try,

who

may

also

be inventors lifted

of the arts.

By

means of these

discoveries safety

and and

institutions,

men were

above savage and

brutish lives

to the

convenience of civil

society, the enjoyment

of private

property, the

observance

of civil or religious orders, and

the obedience of wise laws.

By
and

such all

means,
of

further,
arts.

were

obtained

security, plenty, civility,

industry,

kinds

Such founders

were obeyed as princes and

lawgivers in their

own

times,
and

and were cslled

of

by
to

posterity

by

the nsme of heroes. Such were the founders

the four grest sncient empires:

Assyris, Persis, Greece (Mscedon),

and

Rome.
and

According

Temple, Saturn

Jupiter

were

originally kings
pagan pantheon.

of

Crete

later deified, supplying the

origins of the

Greek

Temple
and

traces the origins of all religions to

human

invention, excepting

Judaism

"Temple, Works, I,
nIbid. uIbid.

191.

l4See James H. Nichols, Jr., Epicurean Political

1976),
p.

Philosophy

(Ithaca: Cornell

University Press,

139.

Sir William Temple's Political

and

Philosophical
in
relation

Teaching
perhaps

211
for

Christianity,

which

he does

not mention except

to

Islam,

prudential reasons.

the
and

Cretan

Among the Greek heroes, Temple numbers Theseus, founder of Athens; king, Minos; snd Lycurgus, founder of Spsrta. Alexander the Great
grest csptains and

Caesar are, in Temple's sccount,

conquerors, but

not

authentic

heroes due to their

with

considered

defects. This distinction is enough, when Temple's demotion of Mahomet, to show his disagreement
moral

with

Machiavelli,

since

Temple does

not

honor "armed

prophets"

who

do

not

uphold

the highest standards of morality. Machiavelli honors founders for their

power and

authority rather than for their political wisdom. Temple states thst the heroes of the four grest monsrchies

Cyrus, for

exsmple,
can

hsving

been immortslized
Virtue"15

by

Xenophon

ss

"the truest Chsrscter that

and

be

given of

Heroick

(in the

Cyropaedeia)

their achievements

are what
and

inspire contemporary instruction of princes and provide the modern examples for political discourse

statesmen

in Europe

and reflection.

They

for Europeans, or descendants of Europeans. But they are not the only models of virtue in the world, nor are their regimes the only govern ments worthy of imitation. Then Temple describes the Chinese empire, the
are authoritative empire of

the

Incas,

the Goths

(including

the

Tartars),

and

finally

Islam.

Temple
the

mentions

"the Islamic Empire,

the Inca's
was

which seems

to have been in all points

fiercest

as that of

the gentlest, that of China the wisest, and

World."16

that of the Goths the bravest in the

Passing

for

a moment over

both

Islsm

snd

the

Incss,

we

find two

of the csrdinal

virtues,

courage and

wisdom,

incarnated in two different regimes, the Gothic and the Chinese. Temple, even more than Montesquieu, draws a distinction between absolute monarchy and
despotism.17

The former is the

absolute rule of

wisdom, or, at
the latter

least,
is the

of

long

experience

(understood

as practical

wisdom),

whereas

absolute

entirely base and arbitrary. The former charac terizes China, the latter Islam. What transforms the Chinese autocracy into the rule of embodied wisdom is that the Chinese emperor does not make a decision
rule of the ungoverned passions,
without

the

assent of

the

highly

educated

Confucian mandarinate,

and even

the

Tartar invaders

submitted themselves to this

enthusiastic

dianoetic form

of government.

In

Islam, due
rulers

to the

and fanatic origin of their religion, the Muslim

by nothing but religion. As for the Gothic limited monarch, leader in war and peace, its council of constitution with its this Constitution has been celebrated, as framed barons and its commons: ".
have their
whims constrained
.

with great

Wisdom
out

and

Equity,

and as the truest and and

justest Temper that has

"18

ever

been found

between Dominion

Liberty.

In addition, it fulfills

'Temple, Works, I, "Temple, Works, I,

194. 225.

"Cf. Montesquieu. On

the

Spirit of

the

Laws, XI,
of

9-

See Thomas L. Pangle, Montesquieu's

P- 70.

Philosophy

of Liberalism (Chicago:
220.

University

Chicago Press, 1973).

'"Temple, Works, I,

212
the political norm of
enough political

Interpretation
governing "all freedom consistent
all."

by
with

It

seems

that in order to

have

authority, the virtue needed in the

Gothic

regime of

bravery
popular

is courage, the hallmark of the ancient Britons. Because of the their sncestors the English enjoy s limited, mixed regime, which is in the
use of absolute

as monarchical

authority
whose

as

it is free in the

allowance of

liberties. The British

of

constitution

thus represents the ancient

Gothic
is
cour

balance
age.

king, lords,
states

and

commons,

As Temple

in the

summation of

guiding "Heroick Virtue":

corporate virtue

Now the true

Number
of

original

Greatness

of

strong is the Natural Strength

and able of

Bodies

of

any Kingdom or Nation may be their Native Subjects [the roots

all the rest

accounted of

by
.

the

courage]

This

Governments,
second

is Art, Discipline,

or

Institution.10

But

conquerors

are

founded the
constitution

orders and

in glory institutions of the

and

fame to those for

who

originally times,

various governments.

If the Gothic

is the best balsnced

snd most appropriate one

modern

the Chinese regime most approaches the Platonic paradigm of rule

wisdom.

by

embodied

It

seems

that Temple may be willing to derogate wisdom as the

of courage or
Kant,20

supreme virtue

in favor
and

resoluteness,
welfare of

distinctly

modern tenden

cy,

as

in Descartes

for the

his

own political regime.

Or it

is

rather perhaps

that

he

sees

the operative virtue for his plsce and time as

courage tempered
wisdom.

by

prudence snd as

unavoidsble, if

not preferable to rule

wisdom

by
in

At the very lesst, Temple does not divorce his chsrscterization of the Gothic constitution.
After
such sn

from

courage

introduction,
significant

we come to

Sir Willism Temple's

politicsl

tesching

proper as presented

in "An

Essay

upon

the Original and Nature of

Government."

It is

that the essay

starts with

was written

in

1672

during

Tem

ple's active political career.

It

the proposition that the nature of man the variation observed among men

is the

same

in

all times and places and that

is due to
arise

climate and
several

consequently
utterly

differing

humors
and
"

and

passions, from
of mankind.

which

the

customs, educations, opinions,

not

laws
.

Further,

if

revolutions

do

destroy
or

the state,

Time to its
permanent

natural

Constitution,

something

near

it commonly returns in it."21 The concept of a

and some
conceives

overturning

or revolution so prevalent

twentieth-century thought, is entirely

"revolution"

lacking

in Marx, Nietzsche, in Temple. Instead, he

of

as a return which

to the natural status quo

before the
out.

outbreak of civil exempts more

war,

the English upheaval of 1640-60

bears

Also, Temple
since

the historical part of

Scripture from his Operation

of

political

analysis,

"the

immediate

and evident

Divine Will

and

Providence is

a theme of

'Temple, Works, I,

230.

20See Descartes, Philosophical Letters (Oxford, 1970), p. 165; I. Kant, The Doctrine of Virtue, Part II of The Metaphysics of Morals, trans. Mary J. Gregor (New York: Harper Torchbooks), p. 67.

2lTemple, Works, I,

95.

Sir William Temple's Political

Divines Temple
and not common observes
Men"

and

Philosophical

Teaching
not of

213

and

the subject "of our

Faith,

Reason."

in passing that the

under

geographicsl extremes of north snd south

hsve

despotism, but that the moderate climates are "used to more moderate Governments, running anciently into Commonwealths [i.e., and of later ages into Principalities bounded by laws, which differ republics]
slwsys

lived

less in Nature than in

a

Name."22

Unlike

some

moderns, Temple does

not

draw

so

sharp insight that in Europe the Gothic

republics and empires. government: autocratic
of rule of

distinction between

ancient and modern regimes, constitution

has

replaced

notwithstanding his the ancient form of

of

In addition, Temple discerns only two basic forms

despotism,

whether religious or

secular,

and

the regime

or six

law. Under these two heads may fall many more kinds than the five regimes enumerated by Plato, Aristotle or Polybius, according to whether

the despotic autocrat is mild or

or

fierce

and whether the rule of

selectively based, for exsmple. Further, the Provinces of the Netherlsnds snd in Polsnd fall

politicsl regimes

law is extensively in the United

by

under no category yet invented theorists, ancient or modern. The sncient Mediterranesn princedom, sccording to Temple, wss not s tyrsnny. The prince served as general-in-chief in war and in peace lived with political out armed guards as chief of

the

popular councils and assemblies.

Such

was

the the

monarchy Gothic constitution, thus revealing ern regimes. The commonwealths

volstile which

of

Macedon, for

example, and it in some

some or

ways approximated

continuity between
of sncient

ancient and mod

republics

times were more

thsn the ancient princedoms, and

frequently

revolved

into tyrannies,
oligarchy sup
condition with

sprang naturally from purely

popular regimes.

Where

an

pressed the multitude, the multitude often resorted to autocratic rule, contented

to see those
themselves.
political

they hated
A multitude,
and

and

feared before

now

in

an

equal

orders

Temple, is incapable of framing or founding institutions, though it is quite capable of conserving or

says

maintaining them when once formed. The founders of civil society are always individual princes, as in Machisvelli; but unlike Mschisvelli, Temple does not
accept the class analysis

of, say, the Roman polity, but rather, as

with

Aris

totle, the lose its republican

regime

analysis.23

liberty

For example, according to Temple, Rome began to only when the Roman regime could not ensure that

the

plebs

only

elect patricians to public office.

A
world a

good reason
was

that the

for the many commonwealths or republics of the ancient combined riches of these communities inclined toward
The
same
motive can

republican

regime.

be found in the

modern

world

inclining
this
ancient

the United Provinces of the Netherlands toward a republic, although

particular regime republic

exactly be described as the modern form of an due to the factor of Christianity. As Temple expresses his
cannot
95.

-Temple,

Works, I,

am

indebted for this distinction to

s

Machiavelli'

New Modes

and

Orders (Cornell

Harvey C. Mansfield, University Press).

Jr. See his

forthcoming

book

214
general point

Interpretation
where Men grow to great Possessions, they grow more Safety, snd therefore desire to be governed by Lsws and Magistrates Other own Choice, fearing all Armed and Arbitrary Power.

here:

"

intent

upon

of their reasons

for this

republican

trend are the smallness of cities, which makes it

easy for the people to gather together in assemblies, and the mutual commerce of men in small cities rendering their wits nimble and making them political
reasoners. and

The

opposite

of

the

republican

trend occurs in the extreme north

south where

the sparseness of population and the lack of cities, except

render

as

the residences of absolute rulers,

the people apt to accept

despotism

and its arbitrary decrees in the same manner as they accept the weather and the will of heaven. The poverty of such a people also inclines them in this

direction. In addition, the less moderate climates by excessive heat or cold, and for that reason men
servitude. geous

enervate grow

the spirits of men

tamer and more fit

for

In the
so

more

temperate regions men are more inspirited and coura

autocracy.

and

less liable to despotic

significance

of climate

in Temple, though found in

political

This theory part in

and

of

the political

Aristotle, fore
possible

shadows

Montesquieu's

theory

of

climate,25

it is just

that

Montesquieu may have read Temple on this subject. Certainly, Temple's theory here sccords with what we may call his political Epicureanism, according to which man is first of all a sensuous, earth-bound animal, though capsble of
subsequent guidsnce

by

resson. snd

Yet

even

between despotism itself is

the regime bssed on rule of

lsw, every

government

by

slwsys s restraint and

Temple

asserts

that sll rule is

Resort."26 Therefore, when men contend equslly sbsolute, "where it is in the lsst for liberty it is either for s chsnge of rulers or out of nostslgis for forms of

government

they have formerly been used to and now regret, forgetting the inconveniences, pressures, and complaints of their former regime. This inter
of

pretation of

revolutionary change clearly puts Temple among the conservatives his age, though unlike the more radical and less liberal Hobbes, he does not
the more or less limited
monarchies of

condemn all resistance or revolt against

his time. In this Temple is it

was

closer to the political

27

Marquis

of

Halifax than to Hobbes, for

Halifax,

sometime

confederate of

Temple's,

who

master

minded

the revolution of 1688.

If
the

political power rests with or

the people

and political

authority
always

rests with

few

the one, it is always opinion that

inclines

political power to respect

political authority.
are

"For Power, arising from Strength is

few.'m

in those that

governed, who are many: But

who are

that govern,

Authority, arising from Opinion, is in those This is the reason why "vast Numbers of Men

:4Temple, Works, I, 96. 25See Montesquieu, On the Spirit of the Laws, XV-XVII.
-Temple,

Works, I,

77.
Revisited,"

"See J. E. Parsons, Jr., "Halifax: The Complete Trimmer (September 1978), 66-94.

Interpretation. 7, No. 3

28Temple, Works, I,

97, emphasis in

original.

Sir William Temple's Political

submit

and

Philosophical

Teaching

215

their lives
of

be Force

Fortunes absolutely to the Will of because it "must or that constitutes "the true Ground and Founda Custom,
one"

and

Opinion"

tion of all

Government,
Hume the
wrote

and

that

which subjects

Power to

Authority."

Temple

shares with opinion.

view

that the authority of

all government rests on public of

Hume

in his

"Essay IV,
on

Of the First Principles

of

Government":

".

as

Force is

always

the

side

the governed, the governors have

on opinion

nothing to support them but opinion.

government

It is, therefore,

only that
most

is founded;

snd

this msxim extends to the most despotic and

popular."29

militsry governments, ss well ss the most free and most Hume.30 conviction, Temple may correctly be said to anticipate

In this

Temple

constituent parts.

dom,

authority in terms of its Natural political authority derives from the opinion of wis goodness, and valor, or courage in the persons who possess it. Temple
examines the origin of natural political
wisdom

defines

as

that which makes men

attain

judge

what

are

the best ends and

what sre

the best means to

a

them. Wisdom is more than mere prudence the proper judgment

of

because it has
and can

theoretical

dimension,

the best ends,

the

be termed noetically inclined phronesis. For Temple, as for Aristotle, ends are supplied by nature, but it still requires rational choice or delibera
between the best
Temple
alternative ends.

tion as to choice

This is

what

wisdom,

properly understood, does. Goodness is defined

by

as the

quality that

makes men prefer

their

duty
term

and promises
"honesty"

before their

passions or self-interest.

Temple

also uses the

as a synonym

virtues would
passions

be

sophrosyne or

of self-interest

goodness. The Greek term here among the temperance, because temperance tempers the through thumos. Valor or courage (andreia) is the

for

lowest

"

of

the virtues
want either

and

as

it

gives

Awe,

and promises

Protection to
makes

those who

Heart

or

Strength to defend themselves: This

the

Men among Women; and that of a Master-Buck in a numerous Authority "" Herd. Temple, it should be noted, leaves out justice as a constituent of natural political authority, and he seems to substitute duty for justice, a ten
of
.

dency
age

that

would anticipate

the pure

practical reason of

Kantian
not

morality.

We

should,

however,
wisdom

observe that Temple

here,

as

before, does

dissever

cour

from

but insists

on

their union.
political

Derivative from these three

virtues

constituting
ss

natural political

suthority sre three subsidisry

Wisdom"32

virtues.

"Eloquence,

it is

pssses

for

Mark

of

is the first. From

goodness or

honesty,
on

the derivative virtue

is

per

sonal

besuty. From

vslor or coursge

the derivstive
effect

conventionsl nobility. opinion of nstursl

These subsidisry

virtues

hsve

some

the

public

politicsl authority, but especislly if they resemble the originsls from which they subsidderive. A further source for suthority, which is grester thsn sny of the

29David Hume, Essays: Moral, Political and Literary (Oxford University Press, 1963), 30Hume cites a writing of Temple's in his Essays, p. 423. note.

p. 29.

31Temple, Works, I.
*Ibid.

98.

216

Interpretation
virtues, is the
opinion of

isry
be

divine fsvor

or

the

sppesrance of piety.

Piety,

as

it is thought a way to the favor of God and

an effect of

good

fortune

as

it

seems either authority.

to

piety

or of prudence

and

courage,

produces

Also

secondarily, splendor of

living,

observance of of

obedience,

i.e., fealty,

and a rich or

equipage,

seem

to be the

reward

those virtues already

mentioned

the

effect of good

fortune. "From

all these

much strengthened and confirmed as

authority partly on differs from Burke in seeing at the origin

natural political

by nothing so Temple evidently founds prescription, anticipating Burke. Temple

Authority by
of civil

arises, but is

Custom."31

of prescription

founder In
obliged valor.

or

continuing from "time founders.

mind,"

out of

society not a gradual process but the discrete acts of a

order

to gain new authority and discard the old, revolutionaries are

public

to sttsin, in

opinion,
seized.

a reputation

for wisdom, goodness,

and

Thus

power must

be

This induces
obeyed or

a general

Change

of

Opinion, concerning

the

Person

or

Party
So

like to be in Effect
of

followed

by

the greatest or strongest part of the People.

...

as

Government may be esteemed to grow strong or weak, as the increase.34 these Qualities in those that Govern is seen to lessen or
all

general

Opinion

Power

must

be

seen

to follow authority in all civil societies, ss s nstural

motions

law,

just

as

in

natural

bodies, bodily

follow those

of

the mind, the many

always

pursuing what the few who are trusted begin or advise. Natural political authority, therefore, is the origin of all
and

regimes

among

men,

it

precedes contract as

the chief principle

of

government,

although the

principle of contract
Laws."

is

established

"by

the great Writers concerning Politicks

and

Here,

in his

reliance upon political

the principle of natural political author

more an ancient than a

ity, Temple
modern

shows

his

Epicureanism to be

doctrine. For

even

if

men are conceived

to come together to agree

contractually on any civil constitutions, they do so not as individuals but already as heads of families whom they represent. Thus the origin of natural authority is the suthority of the pstrisrchsl fsmily. In this tesching Temple leans toward Aristotle, according to whom the polity is composed of
political overgrown

families. But Temple does

animal,
and

not

agree

with

Aristotle that
a political

man

is

naturally
rean.

a political

in this

shows

himself to be

Epicu

Some

of

them [political

theorists] lay for

their

foundation,

that Men are sociable Crea

tures and naturally disposed to live in Numbers and Troops together.

are

Others,

that

they

naturally creatures of Prey, and in a State of War one upon another; so as to aVoid Confusion in the first Case, and Violence in the other, they found out the Necessity of agreeing upon some Orders and Roles, by which every Man gives up his common Right for some particular Possession, and his Power to hurt and spoil others for the Privilege
"Ibid.

"Temple, Works, I,

98-99.

Sir William Temple's Political

of not

and

Philosophical
upon such

Teaching

111

being

hurt

and spoiled

himself. And

the

Agreement
common
...

Contract,
make

with

the Consent to execute them

by

Strength

and

Orders, by mutual Endeavours, they

must

to be the Rise of all Civil Governments.

,

So that, if Mankind

be

ranged

to one of these Sorts [i.e.

man as a political
. .

animal,

or man as a warlike

beast]

I do

not

know. well

which

it

will

be.

any Government:

Or, if they

are

Nor do I know, if Men are like Sheep, why they like Wolves, how they can suffer it.35

need

Accordingly, Temple
homo homini lupus
apolitical of

rejects

both the

zoon politikon of

Aristotle
as

and

the

Hobbes. Men do

not come to sight

first

antisocial,

individuals, but
snd

as members of a

family. Temple's

rejection of

both

Aristotle

Hobbes

on

this point indicstes the unique character of his

political

although the absolute primacy of the family is not a teaching to for be found, example, in Lucretius. Man, according to Temple, is neither a political nor an antipolitical animal at first, but finds his way into political life

Epicureanism,

through the

family

more or

less

as a result of a series of accidents.

From the

family,
political

the first lawgivers of civil society spring, not

or

institution

founding

of a preeminent man or men.

by contract, but The foundation of

by

the

natural

authority is thus patriarchal, a doctrine thst the Msrquis of Hslifsx told Sir Willism Temple wss taking too far "that Principle of Paternal Dominion
. . .

for fear

of

destroying
exploded residual

the Rights of the

of

People,"36

so close

to him did it seem to

retsined

be to the
sccount

system

Sir Robert Filmer. If Temple

in his

the

truth of the Filmerian system, but under careful restraint,

prerogatives of

he did

not

do

so

to discredit the
whose

the people, but to vindicate the

constitu

Gothic constitution, in
tion. For the

balance he transposed the Restoration

provided

patriarchal

family

the

model of

the Gothic constitution,

the

patriarch

corresponding to the

king,

the legitimate sons and

commons.

heirs to the

barons

or

nobility, and the

servants

to the

The

Example,"

continued

its

own

being

through "Lesson and

religion gating primitive moral distinctions and teaching Opinion is thus the basis of suc adversity. in to a higher and a greater if long-lived, becomes a Pater ceeding patriarchal families, and the patriarch, Temple nstion. chief of s the specificslly relates the origin of the an patriae, patriarchal cient British nation to the family and its institution of
Nature" "Deference."

family forming and propa by "having Recourse

patriarchal

Incidentally, Temple interrupts his thority

of one

political

discussion to discuss "the Au

and

the Ancients in Matters of

Opinion,"

finds that it is

not clear such a

another."

"why

Age

of the

World

should

be

wiser

than

For if

distinction be drawn, it is

rather

the later

ages

that could claim

they enjoy
we see

more experience

"of the

more particular

superiority Life."37 Here Experiments of

more or

since

clearly that Temple's

political

Epicureanism belongs
snd

less to the
tout court

period of active politics

ending in 1680,

thst

his Epicuresnism
in

thst hails the superiority of the

sncients

to the moderns

lesrning

only,

33Temple, Works, I, 36Temple, Works, I, "Temple, Works, I,

99339101.

218
develops
explain ss a result of

Interpretation Temple's
politicsl retirement

from

politics after 1680. not

in psrt why his csrefully in thst Temple, unlike Lucretius, mskes the family the primal condi tion of man. We cannot therefore expect Temple's full philosophical teaching
to be
present at all points

Epicuresnism does

This may follow Lucretius very

in his life. It is only

as a result of

further

reflection

in

retirement

that Temple supported the Epicurean superiority of the ancients over

the moderns in learning.

Returning
patriarchal

to Temple's political

Epicureanism,

we see that

Temple traces

Family

seems

authority throughout all stages of a nation's political growth: "Thus to become a little Kingdom, and a Kingdom to be but a great
estate

Family."38

In the third

Temple

sees
"

the role

of contract:

In the

corre

sponding

family

structure

Temple

notes:

What is due to the Servants

by

Contract,
observed and

Temple is fit for them to enjoy, may be provided. how tyranny or despotism is the rule of a harsh, intemperate, willful,
or what
patriarch.

arbitrary

"And therefor Martial Law is

of a

of all

others

the most

absolute,
gain

and not

like the Government

soldiers

Father, but
of

Master."4"

Riches to for it be

hired

or

mercenary
of

is but "a Support

decayed

Authority,"

serves

the interest

the governors, instead of the governed, which ought to

and

the

same.

Thus Temple derives both despotism

patrisrchsl

the regime

of

the rule of

law from the

the latter as

fsmily,

the

former
But

seen as

its

decay

and

corruption,

its health

and

strength.

even

where

prevalent, the people control the ultimate power, which

arms.

mercenary armies are is their united force of

For "common
of

Pay

is

faint Principle

of

parison

Religion, Liberty, Honour, Revenge

every Soldier [of the people] have as much at to have spirited all the great Actions and Revolutions
should

and Action, in Com Necessity; which makes Heart as their Leaders, and seem or of

Courage

the

World."41

James II

have

considered

these words

of

Temple's, for in ignoring them, he

no army.

discovered to his loss that in the breach he had Temple defines

eldest son
eldest son natural an

important concept, as the right of an right, to succeed his father as head of a patriarchal family or state. If the fails to maintain his natural political authority or else dies before he
leaves
a child

can succeed and

in his place, his father "s

children

(now mature)

collectively have a natural right to elect a successor. Sometimes, as when the father comes to lose his authority and many of the better sons increase theirs,
the regime naturally turns into
contracted
an

aristocracy.

But if

such

government

is

into the hands

of a

few

who establish

it in their families

dynas-

ticslly, the regime is correctly termed sn oligsrchy. If the sons and heirs are impoverished and the servants by industry and virtue arrive at riches and
esteem, the
,sIbid.
nature of

the government

inclines

to a

democracy

or popular state.

3Temple, Works, I, "Temple, Works, I,

i[Ibid.

101. 102.

Sir William Temple's Political

Pure

and

Philosophical
and

Teaching

219

democracy

is

inherently

unstable of

itself

is

nearest

the condition of

confusion or
of one or a

anarchy

unless upheld or

directed

by

the natural political authority

without

few,
of s

though this may occur within republican forms

or nobility.
comes

the

designation

king

At last, Temple

to the main problem (which I have

contract

suggested

inheres in the third estate) of how to account for regimes, once we have considered natural political
"Governments founded Authority. Hobbesian between serving
. .

in the formation As Temple

of

authority. succeeded

writes:

upon

Contracts,
with

may have

those founded on
not

But the

model of

contract, according to
everyman

Temple, is
of

the

contract

of everyman

in the

state

nature, but
ob nat

princes

and

subjects

already

living

in

natural political authority.

Accordingly,

civil society and already Temple founds contract on

with

ural political political contract

authority,
as a

not

the other way around, as the

Hobbes. If

natural

authority

principle represents

teaching

of

the ancients and

that of the moderns, Temple appeals always to the more

reflections on

basic,

ancient

teaching in his
for his
and shows

the origin of civil society. Thus

he

provides a as

way

political

Epicureanism to
political

develop

into his later Epicureanism in his later

such,

how his

teaching

can eventuate

philosophical

teaching.

Temple observes,
evolution of

as we

hsve noted, the importance

of prescription

in the

for be

a right. more

rights. All custom, with length and force of time, grows to pass Temple svoids s natural law explanation of rights, and thus tends to
even qualifies

Burkean than Lockean. He

the act of a

the universal foundation of

adopt order and

cities

by

prince or princes:

When families

laws,

they do so as "either invented by the Wisdom of some one, or some few Men; and from the Evidence of their publick Utility received by all; or else intro Time."" Commonwealths were nothing more in their duced by Experience and
but free cities, adds Temple, though fsvorable circumstances have some times greatly increased such dominions. Such enlarged free cities "seem to be more Artificial, as those of a single Person the more Natural Government;
origin

being

forced to supply the Want of Authority by Wise Inventions, Orders and The natural political authority of a prince would seem to corre spond to what Machiavelli says of an old prince in an old state. One supposes
Institutions."44

that Temple has in mind here as the historical the case of Rome.

example of clever

institutions

Popular
opinion of

governments

and aristocracies

those

politicsl quslities

lack authority becsuse the public that inhere in rule can never be as great in
governments snd aristocracies seem

several persons as

in

s single one.

Populsr

to have been introduced

was

by

great

legislators like Lycurgus

or

founded

by

a confluence of refugees

in

different fashion.

Solon, but Venice Equally, the

42Temple, Works, I, 103, 43Temple, Works, I, 104,

Ibid.

emphasis sdded. emphssis sdded.

220

Interpretation

way to popular government is often facilitated by the regime throwing off some former tyranny or disliked form of government. Such popular regimes were Rome after the Tarquins and the United Provinces of the Netherlands after their
revolt

from Spain. Yet

none of these regimes can as we see

on natural political

authority,

the former and William of

with

relying in the ascendancy of Decius Brutus in Orange in the latter. Though monarchy is the regime
suthority, the form of government best

long

subsist without

the

most natural political

for every
snd

nstion

is the

one

longest

accepted snd suthorized

msnners of

by

custom snd

use,

by

mesns of which
sion.

the humors snd

the people find their essiest expres

Temple

adds the

following

consideration:

It may be that those

are

the best

governments

in

which

the best men govern. The forms of government are less the governors, "which may be the Sense of what

important than the

was said of old

persons of

(taking

wise and good

Men to be

meant

by Philosophers)
or

that

the best Governments were those where Kings

phers
Kings."45

were

Philosophers,
method

Philoso

Finally,
regimes and

we come

to

Temple's discussion
political

of the

best

for stabilizing
compares

forestalling

instability. To begin with, Temple

the best political structure to a pyramid, wide at the base and narrow at the
apex.
of

The

ground of all government

is the

consent of

the people or the majority

the people, which proceeds from reflection on the past, reverence of natural authority,
of
a sense of

political

the present ease, plenty and safety, opinion of the

future, fear
est

the present government, and hopes of another. Thus the broad

bottom is

a popular

majority,

and the narrowest

top

of

the pyramid is the

authority
and

of a single person.

government that alienates the

of the people narrows

affections, loses

the opinions, and crosses the

enlarges

interests

the natural bottom

the apex, to fall

of

so

that stability is impaired and the government is

almost certain governs

itself.

Monarchy
firmest

of

the best

kind, i.e.

where the prince

more

by

the affections, opinions, and interests of his people, mskes the safest and
government.

than

any which is

other

Monarchy

of

the worst

kind,

of an opposite nature

to what we

snd most unstsble of governments. of the general

hsve just described, is the Likewise, s republic, the more it

weskest psrtskes

humor

snd

bent

of

authority founded on the

the governors,

of some one

person, is

the people snd spires up to s head by the the best. Conversely, a republic that is not

general

humors

and

interests

of

the people,

but only

on

those of

is the

worst and most unstable. an

regime

that is

inverted
shake

pyramid

may

stand

for

some time

in

propi

tious circumstances,
eign violence will

but any

negligence of the governors or

domestic
conquest
of

and

for

severely

it. The

success of
and

foreign

generally
or

proceeds

from the
vicious

disesteem, dissatisfaction,
or effeminate nature.

indifference
examples
state

the people,

from their

Notable

strength of well-structured regimes are

the

Athenian

history during the Persian

of the

in

43Temple, Works, I,

105.

Sir William Temple's Political

wars, Rome at the time of the the

and

Philosophical

Teaching

221

Carthaginian wars, Venice's

self-defense sgsinst

Turks,

the recent republics of

Switzerland,

and others.

Examples

of

the

foreign

conquest of

badly

structured regimes are

Alexander's

conquest of

Per

sia, Rome's
to the

conquest of

the great Asian and Egyptian

kings,

the

fall

of

Rome

barbsrisns,

the conquest of Spsin

by

the

Moors,

snd of the ancient

Britons

by
of

the Saxons. Temple cites

especially the

wars of religion

in France

as unrest

caused

by narrowing the popular consensus. More recent examples of the fall badly structured regimes are the English Restoration of 1660 and the Dutch upheaval of 1672. Thus by dwelling on Dutch affairs, Temple concludes his
essay with the implication (which is clearer elsewhere) that the English do well to imitate the Dutch in certain of their policies. This
reflection would

brings to

a close

Temple's

political

teaching

proper.

Before

we turn to snd some

his

philosophical
of

implicstions

tesching, it is necesssry to consider his ststecrsft his politicsl Epicuresnism. A very characteristic
Epicuresnism is its inherent tolerstionism
Netherlands."

sspect of

Temple's

politicsl

or spirit

This teaching is presented in Temple's "Observations Upon the United Provinces of the
of toleration.

earliest published

work,

There Temple
religious

in Chapter V, "Of their persecution "designs all Mischiefs to

states

Religion,"

that forcible conversion or

a namely, "Violence, Oppres in short, the miserable Intemperance, Injustice, and, Cruelty, Rapine, sion, Effusion of Human Blood, and the Confusion of all Laws, Orders, and Virtues Such, apparently, was the effect of the policy of forcible recon among version to Roman Catholicism, so hated by the Dutch at the hands of Spain. Furthermore, as Temple definitively explains: "Belief is no more in a Man's Our religious beliefs according to Power, than his Stature, or his Feature.
Men."
. .

Nation,"

Christian teaching are to be ascribed to God's grace and not to our God having predestined some to the correct faith and others to an
one.

own

will,

erroneous own

In

either

case, the

choice

of religious

belief is

not

within

one's
of

power. perhaps

Accordingly, Temple

makes

a plea

for

religious toleration
of

beliefs,
or, in

excluding from his scheme only the toleration his time, of Roman Catholicism.
A Man that tells me, my Opinions [in religious matters] impertinent or unreasonable, because they differ from His,

the

intolerant,
or

are

absurd

ridiculous,
a

seems to

intend

Quarrel

instead

of a

Dispute.

Yet these

are

the

common

Civilities, in Religious Argument,

and mean always their
general

of sufficient and conceited

Men,

who

talk much of

Right Reason,

own;
guage

and make their private

Imagination the Measure of

and

Truth. But

such

Lan
at

determines

all

between us,

the Dispute

comes to an end

in three Words
and

last,

which

it

might as well

have

ended

in

at

first, That he is in the Right

am

in the

Wrong.47

Mankind

agrees upon and

the worldly

end of

religion,

which

is

our

happiness
and

here

and now,

hss
55. 56.

slways

supported

the virtues that

lead to

felicity

"Temple, Works, I, "Temple, Works, I,

222 tranquillity in
understand

Interpretation
private

life

as well as

the

manners and

dispositions that lead to

the peace, order, and safety of all civil societies. Temple professes not to

how

men could

have

obtained the reputation of

being

religious,

who

"come to put so grest s Weight upon those Points of Belief

which

Men

never

hsve have

agreed never

in,

and so

little

upon

those of Virtue and

shows

Morality, in

which

they

disagreed."48

Temple

the bias of his political

Epicureanism
the moral and

here for, like Locke,

civic aspect.

and

later, Jefferson, in his does, for

and

tolerationism he attenuates the

metaphysical and supernatural aspect of

Christianity

in favor

of

This Locke himself

.

example, in On the Reasonableness

work make

of

Christianity
at

Locke's Arianism
popular

Socinianism in this

it

clear

that
son

best Locke in his

in his Lockesn

politicsl

teaching is a Epicuresnism or hedonism is

civic

neo-Christian.49

neo-Christian.50

Similsrly, Jeffer If we

are

forced to

characterize

Temple's religion,

we would also

neo-Christian, like Locke, retaining the moral and at the expense of its metaphysical, supernatural

say that he was a teaching of the Evangel

teaching.51

We

now

turn to Temple's statecraft, or the acme of Temple's statecraft, in

partisan

his intervention in
nently the English
consider the

English

politics

with

his
to

attempt to

alter perma

constitution.

But before

we turn
of

effect

of

Temple's advocacy
summed

this, it is necessary first to the Dutch alliance on English

follows:

domestic

politics.

Macaulay

up

this result as

The ascendency of France was inseparably connected with the prevalence of tyranny in domestic affairs. The ascendency of Holland was as inseparably connected with the
prevalence of political

liberty

and of mutual

toleration among Protestant

was a

sects.52

In this

somewhat

in the
which

original

meaning

indirect sense, Temple of being a lover of

whig, a

conservative

liberal

privacy.

The Dutch alliance, for

he

strove so

their own properties at the Court. "Hbid.

long and so well, was a sign that Englishmen could enjoy leisure, freed from undue interference in their affairs by

"'For Locke's Socinisnism,

(Turin:

see

Einaudi,

i960),

pp.

370,

376.

gives the most

broadly

erudite and

C. A. Viano, John Locke: Dal razionalismo illuminismo On Viano, Peter H. Nidditch has this to say: "Viano's book instructive account, and is the most bslsnced snd best organized
all' whole."

in its coverage, among existing books on Locke's thought as a (John Locke, An Essay Concerning Human Understanding, ed. Peter H. Nidditch [Oxford, 1975], p. ix.) 50As for Jefferson's Epicureanism or political hedonism, we have only to remember the phrase in the Declaration of Independence, "the pursuit of happiness coupled with Jefferson's avowal to Adsms: "I, too, am sn (quoted in Harry V. Jaffa, The Conditions of Freedom: Essays in Political Philosophy [Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1975] at p. 108). Jefferson's
"

Epicuresn"

neo-Christianity is expressed in his religious work The Life and Morals of Jesus of Nazareth. "Hume writes (The History of England [Philadelphia, 1822] IV, 478-79): "The abuses, in the former age, arising from overstrained pretensions to piety had much propagated the spirit of

irreligion;
Besides
these

and

many

of

the

ingenious men,
profession
. . .

of

wits and

scholars,

by

this period, lie under the imputation of deism. Halifax [and] Temple are supposed to have adopted
186.

principles.''

"Macaulay, Critical

and

Historical Essays. Ill,

Sir William Temple's Political

We
next

and

Philosophical

Teaching

223

inquire into the

politics

significance of

Temple's direct intervention in

English domestic
end

in his

attempt to change the constitution and

bring

an

to the

most severe crisis of

the reign
of

of

Chsrles II,

the Exclusion Bill crisis

was

of 1679-81.

Briefly,
of

the bsckground

this intervention

the following. In
returned

the

beginning
at

1679, in the

midst of

the Popish plot

furor,

Temple

to

England

the order of

Chsrles II. The king, buffeted

on sll

sides, especislly

by

predominsntly whig parliament, attempted to persuade Temple to tske the post of secretary of state. Temple delayed and demurred at this step, and instead presented the king with s novel plan to avoid further
misgovernment and

the election of s

Temple's Council
and

allay the mounting grievances of psrliament snd people. to dissolve the presently existing fifty-member Privy supplant it with a new Privy Council of thirty members, by whose
plan was

advice alone more or

the

king

should

govern,

no

longer relying

on a small cabinet of

less

secret advisors. of

Fifteen

members of

the new council were to

be

great

officers

state,

pledged

support of
noblemen

the Crown. The other

and gentlemen structure
of

immense property holdings to the by fifteen were to be equally wealthy independent

their

the greatest weight in the country.

This
of

plan

follows from the

described

by

Temple

of

the Dutch Council

thirty
This

that mediated between the States General and the House of

Orange.53

attempt,

which was

in

effect a plan

to moderate the unstsble monarchy with a

wss

representative plutocratic

change

aristocracy in the Dutch msnner, the English constitution. As Macaulay suggests:

reslly

a move

to

We are strongly inclined to suspect that the appointment of the new Privy Council was really a much more remarkable event than has generally been supposed, and that what Temple had in view was to effect, under colour of a change of administration, a
permanent change

in the Constitution.

Temple's

plan was

to give the

Privy

Council King's in the

something
measures

of the constitution of a
are a

Parliament. Let the

nation

see that all the order

directed

by

Cabinet

composed of representatives of placemen

State, by
to

Cabinet

which

contains, not

every alone, but independent

and popular

noblemen and gentlemen who sacrifice

have large

estates and no a

salaries, and who are not stake, and the credit

likely
they

the

public welfare

in

which

they have

deep
of a

which

have

obtained with the

country, to the

pleasure

Court from

which

they

receive

nothing.54

Temple naturally expected a certain nucleus within the council, of which he was a member, to direct the king's policy. Otherwise, a thirty-member body would be too unwieldy in partisan politics. The intervention of such a body between

king

and parlisment

mesnt,

for

one

thing, thst the influence

the

of

French

money, directed

through

Chsrles II to the

notsbles of

kingdom,

would no

longer have
plan:

effect.

As the French

ambassador

Barillon

objected to

Temple's

"Ce

sont

des Etats [an

envisaged role

As for the Estates], non des Assembly extraorit would be an to Temple, of parliament, according only
of

conseils."

53See Macaulay, Critical and Historical Essays, III, 216. 5"Macaulay, Critical and Historical Essays. Ill, 205-06, 215.

224

Interpretation
check on

dinsry

the sctivities of the

Crown

and would tend

to fulfill the

kind

of position scheme

it held

during

the reign of Elizabeth I.

Unfortunately, Temple's
a

completely miscarried; if it had not, there is

likelihood that
commented:

no

revolution settlement would

have

occurred

in

1688.

Macaulay

Had this plan,

composed

with

some

modifications, been tried at an earlier period, in a more mind,

and

state of the public

by

better sovereign,

we are

by

no means
.

certain that
perfidious

it

might not

have

effected the purpose

and

for

which

it

was

designed.

The
the

levity

of the

King
the

the

ambition

of

the chiefs

of parties produced

instant,

entire, and

irremediable failure
on

of a plan which

nothing but firmness,

to
a

public

spirit, and self-denial,

part of all concerned

in it

could conduct

happy

issue.55

It

would

hardly

"Constitution,"

the new

be useful, at this juncture, to go into further detail on how as Temple cslled it, happened to fail. The important
received the

thing
tory.

to

remember

is that it
in

initial

support of

Lord Halifax the

"Trimmer,"

and so was

one sense at
again

least

nonpartisan as

This nonpartisanship
straw

reflects

something

of

between whig and Temple's political

Epicureanism,
the

last

a quality that links him in some ways to Halifax. Finally, ss in this affair, the king prorogued psrlisment without even men

tioning his intention

conduct

to the new council,

month

by

whose sdvice sgain

he hsd
Temple

pledged

to

the government only s

before. Once

was urged

to accept the post of secretary of state, but ultimately to no avail. In the en

suing
of

election

for psrlisment, Temple

was chosen member objection

from the

University
of

Cambridge,

though there arose some possible

to him on account

his he

espoussl of

tolerationism in his early essay on the Netherlands. In 1680

seat

Temple took his

refused

for the first

and

last time in the House

of

Commons. But
himself

to take sides in the Exclusion Bill

controversy
wss

and absented

from the House. He

soon afterward renounced all public

"Constitution"

life for

good.

Needless to ssy, Temple's icsl tesching proper. Politicsl society is

in full
and

sccord with

his

polit

pyramid,

the sltercstion between

king

snd parliament meant

that there was too

little

weight near the spex.

The
have

crestion of s politicsl

intermedisry
parliament,

between

king

and parliament would

functioned chy

as a second

while at

the same time

to continue with some stability.

Temple's advocacy
sccords with

of a

allowing the monar kind of representa

tive aristocracy would have shifted weight toward the

top

of the pyramid while

balsncing

the

especially as that the English It

It eminently prefigured in
whole.

his

politicsl

teaching

proper,

"Observations,"

where

Temple

suggests

implicitly
long
bent,

should

imitate Dutch institutions. Epicureanism

It
tout court of

now remains to consider the

Temple's
again

retirement

from

public

life

after 1680.

seems correct to

say

that this

retirement was

principslly
We

motivsted not

only

by

Temple's

philosophicsl

but

also

by

the conspicuous

failure

of

his

one and

partissn politics.

csn also

say that

whereas

only intervention in English Temple's projected revolution

"Macaulay, Critical

and

Historical Essays. Ill,

217. 219.

Sir William Temple's Political

and

Philosophical

Teaching

225
and

by
it

administration

failed becsuse
revolution

of

its

utter

nonpsrtissnship, his friend's

succeeded

political slly's

lster

in

1688

namely Halifax's

because

was

less

nonpartisan

significant

that Sir Willism

in succeeding to unite the Temple st least msde the

aristocracy.56

At any rate, it is

sttempt.

Returning
Conditions "The
of grestest

to Temple's "Hesds

designed for
find the

Life

Fortune,"

snd

we

esssy upon the Different following Epicuresn opinions:

sn

Advsntsge Men hsve

by

Riches sre, to Give, to

and

Build,

to

Plsnt,

snd mske pleasant

Scenes

of which

Pictures

Statues

make

the pleasantest

Psrt"; "A
sttains

himself."57

Man ought to be content, if he have nothing to reproach In addition, Temple never tires here of reiterating that a man never happiness unless he has learned to accept death and not fear it. But the
good

chief work

that

mskes

Temple

not

only

an

Epicurean but

also

in

a sense an
rejects

ancient

is "An

Essay

upon

the Ancient and Modern

Learning."

Temple

the characteristic claims of such moderns ss Descsrtes snd Hobbes to hsve

surpassed

the ancients in philosophy and political science, but as sn Epicuresn

Temple
seme of natural

slso

does

not accept

the clsim thst Plsto

snd

Aristotle

represent

the

philosophy Aristotle

and political science as such.

That is his

problem.

As for
Temple

philosophy, Temple even questions Epicurus on this point

and all

as well as

Plato
of

and

the

moderns.

An

unkind critic might accuse

misology snd deliberate here is still recognizsbly an

obscurantism on

this point. But Temple's position

embraces

ancient one

he

the view of the ancient

skeptics, like Sextus Empiricus: "But all the different Schemes of Nature that have been drawn of old, or of late, by Plato, Aristotle, Epicurus, Des Cartes,

Hobb[e]s,
Man.

or

any

other

thst I know of, seem to sgree but in one

thing,

which

is

the Wsnt of Demonstration or

. .

Satisfaction,

to any

thinking

and unpossessed

Temple

adds pertinently:

Yet in the Midst

of these and
seemed of

many

other such

Disputes

and

Contentions in their Natural

and upon

Philosophy, they
after the rather several

to

agree much

better in their Moral

their

Enquiries
be

Ultimate End

Man,
of

which was

his Happiness,

their

Contentions

seem'd to

in Words, than in the Sense

Authors
or

of

their

Opinions,

or

in

the true

Meaning
of

of their

Masters

their

Sects: All
of

concluded

that Happiness was the chief

Good,

and ought to
was

be the Ultimate End

Happiness.59

Man;

that as this was the

End

Wisdom,

so

Wisdom

the way to

From

what

follows

we can

here

assume

that Temple leaves out the modern

philosophers as

belonging

to

such s moral sgreement

sncient philosophers managed to manifest.

He

states was

smong themselves ss the that the conflict, for ex

superficial

ample, between the Epicureans

and the

Stoics

and

semantic,

Revisited,"

56See Parsons, "Halifax: The Complete Trimmer

pp.

66-94.

"Temple, Works, I, 5Temple, Works, I,

work of

306, 173,

308. emphasis

in

original.

This

and the

following

quotations occur

in

1685, "Upon the Gardens of

173.

Epicurus."

5Temple, Works, I,

226
rather

Interpretation
than

being

one of substance.

What this

argument

leads to is
truth.

a praise of

Epicurus

as the chief moral philosopher

to be credited
and

with

The Epicureans
when

were a

they

placed

fortunate in their Expression, Man's Happiness in the Tranquillity of Mind, and Indolence of
.

intelligible in their Notion,

wondered

Body. generally

I have
against

often

how

such

Epicurus,

by

the Ages that

sharp Invectives came to be made so followed him, whose Admirable Wit,

Felicity
of

of Expression, Excellence of Nature, Sweetness of Conversation, Temperance Life, and Constancy of Death, made him so beloved by his Friends, admired by his Athenians.60 Scholars, and honored by the

Temple himself is

not concerned about

in this he is
care of
well as

nonmodern and non-Christian

spreading the Epicurean teaching for, apparently, Epicurus can take

himself. "But Epicurus has found

so great

Advocates

of

his Virtue,

as

Learning

and

Inventions,

that there need no more; and the

Testimonies does

of

Diogenes Laertius depend

alone seem

too sincere and impartial to be disputed or

. .

want not

the Assistance of Modern Authors.

on such modern reason

It is

evident

that Temple

Epicureans

as

Gassendi for his

own moral

doctrine;

this is a

further

In "An

Essay

why Temple is genuinely upon the Ancient and Modern

an ancient.
Learning,"

Temple

advocates
and

the superiority of the ancients

history. It in

should

be

noted

in poetry, that he does

political science not

(including

ethics),

necessarily invoke their superiority

snswers the modern objection thst
"ancients"

natural science or metaphysics.

Temple

we see

fsrther than the

ancients

Greek ancients, than

establish

whom which

this point,

of the East before the supposing saw farther. Temple expends much effort to they is not very interesting but is necessitated by the

by

argument as

he

views

it. It may be that the

rely,
as we

ancients are superior on

to the modems
of

because they did but on their own

not always

do,

learned traditions
was

the past,

great native abilities.

Thus

learning
True,
in

less

cluttered

in the

ancient world and more open to native genius.

since the ancients there

medicine not

has been in astronomy the Copernican covery

great of

system and

Harvey's dis

the circulation of the

blood,

but these have

changes, especially in the

conduct of medicine. of

Most

of

necessarily led to the innovations

of the modern world are

due to the invention

the compass (and gunpowder).

Temple

even speculates

that since the first bloom of the Renaissance 150 years

a certain

before his time, there has been

So far have
we

decay

of

learning
we

and genius:

been from

improving

upon

those Advantages

have

received
and

from

the

Knowledge
us,
our

of the

Ancients,
seem to
which

that since the

late Restoration

of

first Flights

upon our

Wings,

have been the highest, has hindered us from rising

emphasis

and a sudden above certain

Learning Damp

to

Arts among have fallen

Heights.62

Temple, Works, I, Temple, Works, I, Temple, Works, I.

174,

in

original. original.

174, emphasis in
164.

Sir William Temple's Political

and

Philosophical

Teaching

227
un

Surely,
doubted

there is a certsin

fslling
and

off

in

political

philosophy from the

genius of

Machiavelli to the

more mechanical solutions of the political

problem advocated

by

Hobbes

if

not altogether or the

true across
view

Locke. That is to say, Temple's view here, the bosrd, is certsinly defensible. (It is not

"our"

view

Americsn

becsuse Americs hss its

for Greek

roots

in the Enlighten

ment.)

Next Temple

evinces s preference and

no

snd

Lstin

over the modern

Europesn languages because Latin

ern

Greek

are not corruptible

like the

mod

European languages

and

have

barbarisms in them.

Among

the eminent

modern

writers, Temple cites

most of whom

Machiavelli, Cervantes, Rabelais, Montaigne,

to the first bloom of the Renaissance. He
as

and

Bacon,
the

belong

regards

present writers of

France (such
example.

Moliere

and

Racine)

to

be

of as

lesser
signs

stature

than

Montaigne, for

A further

reason that

Temple

to the lapse of

learning in

his time is
and the

the quarrels and

of patronage of

various sects within

Christendom

lack

by the learning by great

or ought

disputes

kings

and princes.

For thinkers

and

writers, says

Temple, honor is

to

be

a much stronger principle than gain.

of

honor is
which

their

commanders.

Gain is the pay of common soldiers as Here Temple displays his aristocratic bias,
preference

is in full

accord

with

his

for the
on

ancients.

Finally, it is

unsocial pedants who

have

most made

inroads

the

commonwealth of modern

learning. The
at the court of

reverse of

this

is the

vein of

Charles II

and makes

ridiculing everything that prevailed it possible, as Temple says, for there to be hsve
ssid s

ministers of state who would rather

witty thing thsn hsve done

wise one.

Temple

concludes

his trsditionslism
of

with

the well-known sphorism of

so

Alfonso the Wise, Men

King
to

Arsgon: "That among

course

many Things
all the rest are

as are

by

possessed or pursued

in the

of

their

Lives,

Bawbles,

besides Old Wood

and

burn, Old Wine

to

drink, Old Friends

to converse with,

Old Books to

read.""

Temple, Works, I,

169,

emphasis

in

original.

JOHN LOCKE:

REVOLUTION, RESISTANCE, OR OPPOSITION?

M. Susan Power
Arkansas State

University

Summary
John Locke's theory of rebellion hss been studied by numerous scholsrs, but few hsve psused to consider his newly-founded rights to resistsnce and opposition. Here the controversy surrounding Locke's contributions to the American political tradition is considered in relationship to Locke's theories of resistance, opposition,
and rebellion. rebellion

The

author concludes that

the disagreement over Locke's

more

theory

of

has

obscured snd shrouded

his

important ideas

about resistance

and opposition.

/. Introduction

John Locke 's theory of rebellion has been most frequently viewed retrospec tively in a scholarly effort to evaluate his influence on the Revolutions of 1688 and
1776.

In the process,

some of

Locke's important

contributions

to political

theory

have been

obscured and

interesting,
freedom to
efforts
dence.1

lost. Locke's theory of rebellion is neither novel nor but his advocacy of the important rights of a loyal opposition and the
criticize governments

has been

neglected and

because

of our reiterated

to connect Locke with Thomas Jefferson

the Declaration of Indepen

commentators over the

In addition,

serious

disagreements

exist

between

nature and extent of

John Locke's influence

upon

the political thought of the

American revolutionary era. After my analysis of Locke's theories of resistance and opposition, I will attempt to illuminate the extent snd nsture of the controversy

surrounding Locke. The supporters of the view thst Locke hsd extensive influence tend to interpret him as an advocste of natural law and individual rights and
sssociste

itself is
Lockean

said

his philosophy with the Declsration of Independence. Thst document to be the foundation stone of our public philosophy. Other prothe thesis of his massive American influence
Whig-Liberal.2

writers support
viewed as a

largely

because he is

Recently,

some conservative

libertarians

'Carl Becker, Declaration of Independence: A Study in the History of Political Ideas (New York: Random House, 1942). Julian Boyd, The Declaration of Independence: The Evolution of the Text as Shown in Facsimiles of Various Drafts by Thomas Jefferson (Princeton, N.J.: Princeton

University Press,
Press, 1978),
pp.

1945).
the American Revolution (New

2Morton White, The Philosophy of

York: Oxford

University
writers

5, 142, 161, 163, 192, 193, 287. White

theory
of self-evident

thinks the two most

important

influencing
nstursl

Locke and revolutionary thought were John

and natural

Jean Jacques Burlamaqui. Locke's influ truths,

whereas

ence contributed the rationalistic

Burlamaqui's theories

of

law

rights

were

most

important. White thinks the American framers did

not

contribute

losophy

of

or philosophical knowledge. White argues that the phi anything original to either moral rights presented in the Declaration is consistent with the exercise of extensive govern

mental power and asserts

in his supplementary

notes

that government

helps

men

to attain

rights. To

230
have
restored

Interpretation
Locke to
a position of great
climste.3

honor

as an alleged

intellectual leader of

the American philosophicsl

Curiously,
philosophy
persons

those

who

wish

to sssociste s strong individuslistic politicsl

view

with

the Americsn tradition

Locke

ss

the

founding father,
hand,
tend to

whether conservative or who

wish

liberal. The anti-Lockeans,

on the other or

be

to base

America

upon

either religious

communitarian

philosophies.4

Among the anti-Lockean writers to be reviewed later are those who

stand on

stress
and

majority rule, those who trace the historical development logical implications of his social contract hypothesis, and those who look at Locke's
religious attitudes.

Locke's
political

Some

seek a more radical origin

for the American bssed upon

snd

tradition

and others associate and

his

views with those of

Thomas Hobbes. s

If Locke 's influence

importance

as a political philosopher sre

the supposition thst he is the revolutionsry era's the

lesding nstursl rights thinker,

discovery

is

made

that Locke was neither a natural law theorist nor a strong

position vis-a-vis

supporter of

individual rights, then his

the American political

founding and the Declaration of Independence may have to be reconsidered. Three interesting possibilities arise: first, Locke may not have influenced the Declaration
because it is

document; second, Locke did influence the Declaration, but its writers misunderstood Locke; or third, Locke had little influence on the authors of the document, and later commentators have misun
a

traditionsl nstursl law

derstood both Locke If one does

natural
of

and his relationship to the Declaration. find any similarity among the Lockean views of majority rule, law and rights, and the American political tradition, the possibility remains not a

discovering

correspondence

between his

social

contract

device

and

the

American
rejected ment of

constitutional tradition.
unsound.

However,

several students of this problem

have

the claim as

John W. Gough

examines the

historical

develop

these theories in both Europe and America. He proves

medieval

twelfth-century
sive

they began in the investiture controversy and claims they became a perva
seventeenth
century.6

intellectual influence in the

He

says

the American

secure rights is compatible with positive governmental actions to obtain rights conceived as ends. Cf. Kenneth M. Dolbeare, Directions in American Political Thought (New York: Wiley, 1969), pp. 19, 20, 12. Dolbeare thinks Locke most influential because he says his philosophy represents

liberalism, individualism, and natural rights. 3Donald J. Devine, "John Locke: His Harmony between Liberty
(1978),
of
p.

Virtue."

and

Modern Age. 22

246. "John Locke is

one of the

few

major philosophers who can

be

used to provide a

snd moral foundstion for Americsn snd Western regimes orgsnized sround the concept liberty. Yet, in recent yesrs, revisionist interpreters from literally every perspective hsve main tained either that Locke is confused and, therefore, not able to provide a foundation for sny culture; hedonist." or, that Locke actually was s relativistic

theoreticsl

"Garry Wills, Inventing

N.Y.: Doubleday, 1978).
p.

America: Jefferson's Declaration of Independence (Garden City,

Locke,"

5Bemard Bailyn, The Ideological Origins of American Politics (Cambridge: Belknap, 1967), 36. Cf. Francis Edward Devine, "Absolute Democracy for Indefeasible Right: Hobbes versus Journal of Politics. 37 (1975), 767, 765, 763.
6J. W. Gough, The Social Contract (Oxford: Clarendon Press. 1957).
pp.

3, 81, 84, 83.

John Locke: Revolution, Resistance,

Puritan
refugees utilized the social contract

or

Opposition?

231

device

ss s mesns of

legitimizing their

conceptions of s church organization and

that these theories were widely used

throughout the
of

early

colonial period.

the contract

theory

to William

Moreover, A.J. Beitzinger traces the origins Ames, William Perkins, John Preston, and
studies of the socisl contract

Thomas

Hooker.7

Adding
his

up these historicsl

theory,
to

one comes

to the conclusion that any original or sole influence to be

of social contract symbol should

attributed

Locke because
concludes

be seriously doubted. If one that the determinste intellectual influence during the American revolu

tionary

period yesrs

derived from
before the

prior, indigenous development starting

st

lesst

hundred

Revolutionsry outbresk, then one should begin a study of

seventeenth-century American Puritsn
political
reli

the tradition with

gious

an examination of

idess

snd not with

John Locke.
concepts

There
have
an

are certain

key

in Locke 's

theory

that are alleged to

isomorphic relationship to the Declaration of Independence, and, thereby, to the basic propositions of the American political tradition. But we have assem bled
substantisl evidence

from

vsriety

of sources

thst Locke did not support

wss not originsl snd thst

trsditionsl natural
one of s

law,

that his social contract

theory
or

(rsther only

multiplicity
snd

of contemporary contrsctsrisn

theories),
may

his

views on

msjority rule Constitution.

psrlismentsry supremscy msy

a

not resemble

those in the

Proving

theoreticsl the

interrelstionship between Locke's idess and the

upon

American tradition
rebellion.

via

Declaration, hinges

the relevance of the right to

I,

therefore, direct the

snd

argument of

this essay to a detsiled textusl

which

snslysis of those portions of the sbout politicsl

Two Treatises in

Locke

explicstes

his idess

chsnge,

then compsre these with

key

passages

in the Declara little influence

that

tion. I

find the theoretical

the
conclusion
.

resemblances

between the two texts to be insignificant

and reach
upon

that Lockean theories of change had very

the Declaration A
of

careful

rereading
much-

of

Locke

s work

led

me

to reconsider the

importance
are

his theories

of resistance and opposition and

vaunted

to

conclude

they

vastly

more

important than his

theory

of rebellion.

//. Analysis of the Text

Locke's

analysis of revolution

is found in the last four

chapters of

the Two

Treatises: "Of Paternal, Political,

and

"Of Conquest"; "Of Tyranny"; and "Of The Dissolution of position on rebellion is based essentially upon the following
government or governor so sets ss

Despotical Power, Considered Together"; His

Government."

srgument: when s

to

come

into

conflict with eternsl and

lsw,

ss

is the

esse with

despots,
A

sbsolute

monarchs, conquerors,

usurpers, no obligation to

obey

remains.

stste of war

then exists, and a right to rebel, to resort to

force

comes

into operation. However, right to resistance,

Locke distinguishes between the right to rebellion

their distinctive characteristics

and the

and emphasizes

by

7A. J. Beitzinger, A History of American Political Thought (New York: Dodd, Mead, 1972),
pp.

50, 116, 117.

232

Interpretation
them in different
chapters.

tresting

Tyranny is
are

differentiated from

despotism,

and of

he carefully lists
governments and

conditions

for the

exercise of the

right to

resist.

Dissolution

the right of opposition

discussed in the book's last

chapter.

Locke's discussion
discussion
with of

of rebellion occurs within the context of a of s

traditional

despotism. The idea

right to

oppose

tyranny did

not originste

him. For exsmple, St. Thomas Aquinss is

itself
with a or

no sdvocate of passive resistance:

If to
the

provide

king

be deposed

have his

king belongs to the right of a given multitude, it is not unjust that power restricted by the same multitude if, becoming a
It
must not

tyrant, he

abuses the royal power.

be thought that

such a multitude

is acting

unfaithfully in deposing the tyrant, even though it had previously subjected itself to him in perpetuity, because he himself has deserved that the covenant with his subjects should not be

kept,

since, in

ruling the multitude, he did not act faithfully

as the office of aking

demands.8

Locke 's

consideration of the same subject centers upon

the definition and clarifica

tion of the
vague.

rights of rebellion

and resistance.

The discussion is orthodox,

brief,

and of

The topic is introduced

with an analysis of

despotism

and a

definition

tyranny in the book's concluding chapter. According to Locke, paternsl, political, Despotic power "is an Absolute, Arbitrary
another

and

despotic

powers are

different.

Power"

exercised of nature

by

one person over

to take

his life. Since the basic right

no contract

is the individual right to

can

self-preservation,

giving up

or

restricting this right

be
in

vslid.

Therefore, despotic power csnnot be

can never
"beastly,"

granted

by

nsture, compact,

or conquest and
such a

be moral, good rule. If any political ruler irrational fashion, he places himself into a
190-91. Cf. Quentin

attempts to act state of

ed.
war.9

No right to

"St. Thomas Aquinas, The Political Ideas of St. Thomas Aquinas

York:

Dino Gigongiari (New

of Modern Political Thought: Volume Two: The Age of Reformation (London: Cambridge University Press, 1978), pp. 347^-8. Skinner writes a brilliant chapter on the right to resist as it was developed in the
pp. sixteenth century.

Hafner, 1953),

Skinner, The Foundations

At the

end of that chapter

he

concludes that

"It

would

be

a mistake,

however.

to think of the development of this modern

achievement of

'liberal'

theory

of constitutionalism concepts

the seventeenth century. As will

by

now

be clear, the

essentially as an in terms of which

Locke

and

his

successors

developed their

views on popular

had already been largely articulated and refined over a radical jurists as Salamonio, in the theological treatises
well as

sovereignty and the right of revolution century earlier in the legal writings of such
of such

Ockhamists

as

Almain

and

Mair,
a

as

in the

more

famous but derivative

writings of

the

Calvinist

revolutionaries.

genera

tion before Locke produced his classic defense of the people's right to resist and remove
nical

tyran

government, Oliver Cromwell

reassure

report) to

himself

about the

had already found it quite sufficient (according to Burnet's lawfulness of executing Charles I by engaging in 'a long dis
power, according to the principles
of

course'

about

'the

nature of the regal

Msrisna

Buchanan'

and

(Burnet, I,

76)."

p.

'John Locke, Two Treatises of Government, ed. Peter Lasslet (Cambridge: Cambridge Univer sity Press, 1960; Mentor Books, 1965), p. 428. Cf. Stewart Edwards, "Political Philosophy BeLocke," limed: The Case of Political Studies, 17 (1969), 289. Edwards discusses Locke's stipulative definitions and reminds us that argumentation by assuming the points at dispute in a covering defini tion is merely postponing any discussion of those issues. In interpretation "The Second is yet another example, however imperfect, of the definitional mode of about
Edwards'
Treatise"

arguing

politics. point.

Edwards

claims

Locke

redefined

rebellion, whereas I take

different

position on that

John Locke: Revolution, Resistance,

exercise runs

or

Opposition?

233

despotic

the risk of
or

be gained by conquest in an unjust war. The despot being destroyed in the future by persons who have had their rights
power can

invaded
consent,
often

destroyed. No

matter that most governments are not

based

upon

and

that conquest or usurpation

a

frequently

establishes

despots;

by

majority.10

community never loses its original right to a The bssic ethical axiom involved is that promises
cannot create moral obligation or right.11 obedience.

de facto rulers, legislature approved

or

false

consent

extorted obligate

by
the

force

Only free consent can

a conquered

individual's

He

continues

by

saying that if

people are ever allowed

to participate in

decisions,
"12
others'

this ends absolute power, and

"as

soon as

any Compact enters,

rule.13

Slavery ceases.

An have
a

aggressor who unjustly invades legitimate right to The people government always retain the

rights in

an unjust war can never under a

who

have been forced to live

despotical
resort

to force until a form of

right to free themselves from it, and to government is established that meets with their

consent.

For

no

Government

can

have

a right to obedience

from

a people who

have
in
a

not

freely

consented to

it;

which

they

can never

be

supposed to

do,

till

they

are put

full

state of

Liberty
Laws,
also till

to choose their

Government due

and

Governors,
14
. . .

or at

to which

they have themselves or their Representatives,

their
property.

least till they have such standing given their free consent, and

they

are allowed

Locke
or

writes

that whether rulers have always to act

under

the

laws

of

their country
the

not,

they

can never

be

exempted

from the

obligations of eternal
"Conquest"

law,

laws

of

God
that

and nature.

Locke

concludes the chapter on

with

the statement

off a Power, which Force, and not Right hath set over anyone, though it hath the Rebellion, yet is no Offence before God, but is that, which he allows and countenances, though even Promises and Covenants, when obtained by Force, have

shaking
of

name

intervened.15

When

usurpation

occurs, such ss

when a person assumes prescribed

the exercise of any

portion of power

by

ways other

than those

by

the

laws

of

the commu

nity, there is no

obligation

to obey. Even if the form of government

usurper

is

not

changed,
and,

no obligation exists

because the

is

not

the

legally

authorized ruler

consequently,

not

the person the people had approved.

p.

Government

by despots,

'"Locke, Two Treatises,

433. Cf.

Sterling
be

Philosophy
on the

of John Locke (New York: Russell & Russell, 1962),

of

Power Lamprecht, The Moral and Political p. 149. "In spite of his insistence
revolutionist."

right

revolution, Locke
of

can

hardly

spoken of ss s

Cf. Martin Seliger,

Action,"

"Locke's

Theory

Revolutionary
qualification

Seliger

points

to the property

Western Political Quarterly, 16 (1963), 550, 568. upon voting as a limitation upon the majority that is to
position

approve of rebellions. revolutions.

He

concludes. that

the tenor of Locke's

is

against

supporting frequent

"Locke, 12Locke, 13Locke, '"Locke, "Locke,

Two Treatises, Two Treatises, Two Treatises, Two Treatises, Two Treatises,

p.
p.

440. 430.
432.

p.

pp. pp.

441-42.

443, 444. Cf.

p.

446.

234
absolute

Interpretation
monarchs, conquerors, and
no moral obligstion
usurpers

is

not

founded
crested.

upon a social con

tract; therefore,
law
exists.

to obedience is
a

rebellion against

these governments

is

not

wrong;

hence,

right to

rebellion consistent with eternal

St. Thomas, arguing from

altogether

different premises, "the

reaches the

same conclusion.

In

chapter
which

eighteen, Locke defines

can

tyranny
to."16

as

exercise of

Power beyond

Right,
when

nobody

have

Right
the

Tyrannical

government

happens

the

ruler makes

his will,

not

law,
his

the rule, when his actions do not

actions are motivated

preserve the citizen such ss

's property,

and when

by

"irregular
that the

passions,"

smbition, revenge,

snd covetousness.

Locke

ssys

difference between

a constitutional monarch and a tyrant

is that "a

king

makes the

laws the limit of his power and the good of the public the end of his
tyrant makes
all give
,

government; the

"17 Wherever the laws end, way to his own will and appetite. tyranny begins whether it involves one man or many and even if it concerns a mere

matter of

nity to
says

compel a subject

exceeding legal limits. If a ruler uses the military forces of the commu to do something that is not written in a law, then Locke
without an aggressive state of war writes of opposition and

the ruler, acting

himself into

legal authority, may be opposed since he has placed by using force to invade the rights of others
.

Here Locke
the

resistance,

not of rebellion.

He clearly

notes

difference because he has just

chapter.

concluded

his discussion

of the right to rebellion

in the preceding between

the law.

Importantly, Locke does

unacceptable system of government a

monarchy is an la Thomas Paine. He clearly distinguishes

not write that
and a

s constitutionsl monsrch with extensive prerogative powers who acts

passed

according to laws

by

Parliament

tyrant who makes his personal

will

Having thus defined tyrannical government and asserted s right to resist such
government, Locke
upon pauses

to consider the

limitations

and conditions to

be

placed

the

right of the subject

to resist illegal exertions of executive power. When he

is finished

listing
subject

these conditions, Locke's right of resistance is neither very

radical nor revolutionary.

For example,
that

no prince
an

individusl
ally.

"imsgine"

msy

may be resisted just because an injustice has been done to him person

Politics and instead of Government and Order leave nothing but Anarchy and Confusion. "18 According to Locke, the first condition for morally justified resistance is that the acts should have been done in
will unhinge and overturn all an unjust and unlawful way.

"This

Otherwise

resistance to

lawful

government

is to be

condemned.

Although the

fsvor

of

exempting the

king may be above criticism, and Locke does srgue in king from such sttscks, opposition msy be msde to acts
p.

Two Treatises, p. 448. Cf M. Seliger, The Liberal Politics of John Locke (New York: Praeger, 1969), p. 317. 18Locke, Two Treatises, p. 449. Cf. John Dunn, The Political Thought of John Locke (Cam bridge: Cambridge University Press, 1969), p. 50. "It is not a book about how to construct govern ments or about just when it is desirable to resist, but a book about why under some circumstances men have a right to
.
resist."

16Locke, 17Locke,

Two Treatises,

446.

John Locke: Revolution, Resistance,

performed

or

Opposition?

235

by

"inferior officers.

"

The second condition for lawful resistance is that

such should not

be

made against the

king, but

against

his

ministers who

may be

they attempt to use unjust force. Since the king's authority is based upon the law, he csnnot grant to any of his ministers the law.19 power to act against the However, Locke extends to the monarch vast
powers under no

questioned, opposed, and resisted if

the prerogative power to act in certain circumstsnces where there sre

lsws, in

esses of
.

emergency,

snd

in

some

instsnees
right

even sgsinst

the specific

working The third

recourse

of ststues

condition

for the

exercise of the

of resistsnee

is thst if legsl

for the

obtsinment of redress

for injuries

or

dsmsges

exists under the

provisions of
relief.

the
an

Where

justification for using force to gain act of injustice does not do irreparable damage where life is not in
,

lsw,

then there can be no

danger,

then one should appeal to the

law. The fourth

condition

involved

wide

spread and repeated offenses.

.if

the unlawful acts

done

the remedy which is due

resisting, even in

by the Magistrate, be maintained (by the Power he has got) and by Law, be by the same Power obstructed; yet the Right of
Acts
of

such manifest

Tyranny,

will not

suddenly, or

on slight

occasions,

disturb

the

Government
unless

For Locke thinks that

dissatisfaction

with tyrannical acts

is

widespread and

intense,

that a

few

"heady

malcontents"

could not overthrow a government.

But if either these illegal Acts have extended to the

Majority of the People; or if the Mischief

such

Oppression has light only on Consequences seem to threaten all,

and

some
and

few,

but in

Cases,

Laws,
cannot

and with them their

they Estates, Liberties,

are persuaded

in their

and

Lives

are

Precedent, and Consciences, that their in danger, and perhaps their

as the used against

Religion too, how they

tell.21

will

be hindered from resisting illegal force

them, I

A long train of abuses tending in the direction of the establishment of tyranny is

not

exactly

the same

government

thing as saying into operation; that X is

will

that X
not

has

not succeeded

now, in
to the

fact,

in placing a tyrannical tyranny. But if the people arbitrary power, the king is the

see several examples of actions

tending

establishment of

Locke thinks they

"Locke,
ment.

be

persuaded

that the

ultimate objective of

use violence against

Two Treatises, pp. 450, 451 Cf. p. 452. Locke does defend the individual's right to both unlawful private acts and also private acts of violence against the govern
.

But his

prudential advice

is that individuals

who seek to use violence against a tyrannical

government "are sure to

ment puts

perish."

him into

a state of

Therefore, the war and, hence,

when

wise man waits until

the

use of

force

by

the govern

makes resistance against

the

established governors

legitimate.
The
time
use of

force is justified
Right to

others'

use of violence threatens one's

was put

life

and

leaves

no

to- appeal

the case to the courts. "The

loss

irrepsrsble;

which

to prevent, the Law of

Nature

gave me a

destroy him,
p.

who

had

himself into

a state of war with

me,

and

destruction."

threatened my

:"Locke, Two Treatises, 2lLocke, Two Treatises,

452. 452-53. Cf. Dunn, Political Thought,

pp.

pp.

178, 181-82, 186.

236
establishment of

Interpretation
tyranny. To summarize, the

four

conditions

for the

exercise of

the

right of resistance are:

(1) Real acts by the executive-ministerial officisls outside of the lsw; (2) Prolonged, frequent instsnces of sbuse; (3) Extension of injustices to the majority or to such individuals as present
a threat to

all;

and available through the established system

(4) No legal remedy

or
damages.22

for injuries

Locke's right
change persons
without

of

resistance, in the American system, enables the majority to

presidential

in the

office, in

Congress,

and

in the Supreme Court

provides

resorting to

revolution or

force. Our Constitution

snd stste

extraordinary
csn

majorities

in Congress

legislatures to issue
amendments.

authority for calls for a new

an

constitutionsl convention or to propose

individual

Hence,

Ameri

majority

would

have
,

no right

to rebel because these provisions exist.

Accord

ing to Locke 's premises

the law already provides a peaceful means to seek redress

for injuries. In addition, no individual or minority has, according to Locke, a right to resistance for this right belongs to the majority. He clearly thinks thst scsttered individual
apathetic ends acts of corruption or violations of

the law will not sufficiently arouse

an

majority to support resistance to a government. His right to resistance

up being conservative in effect because it requires support by the majority. Many modern radical or revolutionary movements attempt to build a case for
a system

the moral corruptness of

revolutions minorities.

based

upon

individual

acts of

injustice. Modern

are, Locke to the contrary, many times led and orgsnized by militsnt Nevertheless, Locke msy have correctly estimated the need for injus

think

tices to be extensive before majorities are willing to act. Those revolutionaries who they can move the masses because of injustices done to others or to isolated

individuals may be constantly frustrated in their efforts to arouse the apathetic. On the other hand, Locke may have underestimated the capacity of one misguided individual
minorities.

to

influence

others and also the power of

highly

organized,

militant

In the
provide made

next

chapter, Locke turns to the

problem of

how the majority is to

for
a

a new

legislature. He
when and

also considers

the issue of how changes are to be

in

cabinet,

if the

thst

chsnging

the government or

king refuses to mske them. Locke clesrly ststes dissolving the legislsture for sn election is not the

In the first sentence Locke maintains that dissolution of government is to be clearly distinguished from the dissolution of society, the political community, and its union derived from the social contract. The destruction of a society following conquest is different from the dissolution of
same
society.23

thing as the dissolution of

the

governments

from

within.

Locke is

writes that a government

is dissolved
it

when the

legislature is

not able

to carry out the

not

functions

assigned to

it in the

social contract.
and

To dissolve the "Locke, 23Locke,

Two
Two

government

the same

thing

as to overthrow

does

not

Treatises, Treatises,

p.

452.

pp.

455, 456, 466.

John Locke: Revolution, Resistance,

constitute rebellion
.

or

Opposition?

237

Changing the government by calling for elections and altering

in
which

the ministerial personnel would not produce a

Locke lists the follow from

ples

ways

the

revolutionsry change in the system. legislature is dissolved and the consequences that
Most
of

changes

in the

executive-legislative relationship.

his

exam

involve

"undue"

interference

by

the

chief executive

in the

affairs of the

legislature. This leads Locke to

suggest remedial action on the part of the

legisla

tive opposition, or psrty fsctions.

by

majority

rule.

It

exercises

Locke's supreme, sovereign legislature operates the power given in trust to the government for the
the preservation of
property.24

promotion of common good and

When

anyone other

thsn the

legislsture
to obey

suthorized

by

the majority makes a

law,

the people are not

obligated

and

a new

legislature.25

may take steps (unspecified, but including force) to establish The specific cases when the legislature is chsnged snd the
are:

government

dissolved

(1)
which

When

a single person replaces

the

will of

the
no

legislature

with

his will,

happens

when orders are executed prince

that

have

(2)
time;

When the

hinders the legislature from meeting

methods without

legislative authorization; at its appointed

the consent or contrary

(3) When
to the common

the prince alters election

interest

of

the people;

(4) When (5) When

the people are subjected to the executive neglects to

enforce

foreign domination; and the laws that have been

passed

by

the

legislature.26

Locke
In these
provide
and

concludes:

like cases,

when

the

Government is dissolved, the People

a new

are at

for themselves,

by

change of

Persons,

or

Form,

erecting or both as they

Legislative, differing from

shall

the other,
and

liberty to by the
prior

find it

most

for their safety

to the

good.27

Locke clearly indicates that he has in

to the establishment
of

mind resistance

legislature
warding

tyranny,

as a means of prevention, of

off

the

necessity for revolution. It is tyranny hss been achieved.

This is in
effect no more than to

altogether

wrong to wsit to urge resistance until

bid them first be slaves,

tell them

and then to take care of their

Liberty,
secure

when

their Chains

are on ,

from Tyranny, if there be

a

no means

they may to escape it,

act

like freemen

Men

can never

be
28

till

they

are

perfectly

under

it

Men have The

ture
or

right to

act

to

prevent tyranny.

second

category

of governmental
trust.29

dissolution is

when either

the

legisla
such

the

prince acts

contrary to its

If a breach

of trust should

happen,
and

as an attempt to establish absolutism, the

legislature forfeits its power,

then the

24Locke, 25Locke, 26Locke, "Locke, 28Locke, 29Locke,

Two Treatises, Two Treatises,

pp.
p.

375, 428. 456, 459.

456. 459.

Two Treatises, Two Treatises,

Two Treatises, Two Treatises,

pp. p.

p.
p.

460.
460.

238
people

Interpretation
have
a

right to

resume

their original liberty.

a new election).

legislature

(presumably by holding

They may establish a new The legislature abrogates its

or attempts
people.

trust when it invades the property rights of

individuals,
of

to act in an
executive

arbitrary way with the lives, liberties, destroys trust when it

. . .employs

or

fortunes

the

The

the

Force, Treasure,
his purposes;

and

Offices

of the

Society,

to corrupt the

Representatives,
to their

and gain

them to

or

openly

pre-engages the

Electors,

and prescribes

by Solicitation, Threats, Promises or otherwise won to his designs; and imploys them to bring in such, who have promised before-hand, what to Vote,
choice, such, whom he has
and what

to

Enact.30

Locke

objected

to the king's efforts to

and

construct a court

party, to influence the

outcome of

elections,

to use electoral tactics to influence the

and new model

legislature.
what

Thus to regulate Candidates and Electors,

to cut up the Government

the ways

of

Election,

is it but

by the Roots and poison the very fountain of publick

Security.31

Locke

opposed extensive participation

by the crown

in the incipient development

the
of

of political parties and

its

effort

to

extend executive-monarchical control over

emerging trust because the

own

power of

Parliament. He
was

claims these actions constituted a

breach

king

replacing the

will of elected representatives with

his

will,

snd

this he thought was

remedies

subversive of government.

However, he is vague

about the precise

institutional legislature
trust"?

mechanisms are to

for this dsnger. For exsmple, just what type of be provided to enable the people to obtain a new
this is necessitated

or to conduct sn election when and

by

"breach

of

Who is to determine, happened?

Locke
now proceeds

how is it to be

determined,

that such a breach has

to several arguments that defend

his

position sgainst
resist must

allegations that

it

would promote chronic

instability. First, the right to

resembles the

be

used with caution.

sentence that

clearly

Declaration

of

Inde

pendence

follows:
and

But if a
the

long train of Abuses, Prevarications,

visible to the
are

design

People,

and

they

cannot

Artifices, all tending the same way, make but feel, what they lie under, and see,

whither

they

endeavor to put the rule

Government
are so

was

going 'tis not to be wonder'd, that they would rouse themselves, and into such hands, which may secure to them the ends for which at first erected; and without which, ancient Names, and specious Forms,
that

far from
the

being better,

they

are much

worse, than the state of

Nature,

or pure
off and

Anarchy;
more

inconveniences

being

all as great and as

near, but the remedy farther

difficult.32

This

sentence

includes

a second argument against the charge

that

Locke's

right of
govern-

resistance would

frequently
p. p.

turn into
461. 461.
463.

right of revolution, thus unhinging

30Locke, 3 'Locke, ,2Locke,

Two

Treatises, Treatises, Two Treatises,

Two

p.

John Locke: Revolution, Resistance,

ment.

or

Opposition?

239

Not

so

Locke

says.

Revolutions

will not

hsppen just because

of misman

agement.

It is

much more
run

dangerous to

expose

the people to the possibility of

tyranny, than it is to
criticize and man who

the risk of

instability derived from a right in the people to

acts.33

to oppose rulers bent on tyrsnnicsl

In addition, Locke

tries to use

force to

destroy
their

just

government other

crime, is a common enemy, snd a people, in

rebellion;
some

pest.34

On the

says any is guilty of the greatest hand, "it is lawful for the
all resistance

cases, to

resist

King."35

And finally,

is

not

from taking place. The context of the passage from which the fsmous quote is tsken is sn srgument for
either or prevent rebellion

indeed, it may

forestall

distinguishing resistsnce from rebellion

The third
elections condition out not

and of

revolution.36

for dissolution
a new

the government

and

the

calling

of new

turns

to be

third category, but rather a series of arguments

justifying the general need to give the people the power to change the composition of the legislature, snd presumsbly slso to slter the csbinet. According to Locke, his
"doctrine
of s power

in the

people

to

provide

for

s new

legislsture
use

"

will provide and

sgsinst rebellions

becsuse the

resl rebels are

those who

force to break

oppose state of
. . .those

laws.37

Lawless

rebels sgsinst

the enforcement of the

lsws,

who creste s

war,

sre most

likely

to be persons in plsces

of suthority.

again in opposition to the Laws, do Rebellare, that is, bring back War, and are properly Rebels: Which they who are in Power (by the pretence they have to Authority, the temptation of force they have in their hands, and the Flattery of those about them) being likeliest to do; the properest way to prevent the evil, is to shew them the danger and injustice of it, who are under the greatest temptation to run who set

up force

again the state of

into

it.38

Moreover,
"design"

resistance estsblish

to

tyranny is

also

justified in the

case of a

conspiracy

or

to

tyrannical government.

...

the

neglect of

the

publick good
. .
.

is to be

taken as evidence of such a

design,

or at

least

sufficient cause of resistance ought

because he betrayed or forced his People

whose

liberty

he

39 carefully to have preserved.

The

statement provides

a wide scope

for definitions

of actions

that could be

violations of an unspecified public good.

In the last

paragraph of

the

book, Locke

writes

that so

long

as the governors

act within the terms of the social

contract, the legislative

or sovereign power

cannot return to the people. power to the sovereign.

By signing the contract, the people transfer all political But if definite limits for legislative sessions were men
only
463, 465.

tioned in the

original

contract, if the sovereign power had been made

pp.

"Locke, 34Locke, "Locke, '"Locke,

Two Treatises, Two Treatises, Two Treatises, Two Treatises,

p.
p. p.

467. 468.
468. Cf.
p.

453. Locke

trains"

also mentions

"long

in this discus

sion of tyranny.

"Locke, Two Treatises, "Locke, Two Treatises, 39Locke, Two Treatises,

p.

463.

p.
p.

464. 467.

240
temporary,
the people.
or

Interpretation
if the legislature forfeited its power, then
as supreme
supreme power returns

to

Acting
the

power, the people

erect a new
persons.40

hsve the right to

of

either continue or retain

the legislative
old

power

in themselves,
of new

form

government,

the

form

under

direction

///. Conclusions

John Locke 's theory variously

viewed as

of political change and the

right to

revolution

has been

However,