I cannot concur in Dr. Arnold’s explanation of these words, or
of the general sense of the passage. He thinks that Thucydidês
means to affirm what applies generally “to an opposition minority
when it succeeds in revolutionizing the established government,
whether the government be a democracy or a monarchy; whether
the minority be an aristocratical party or a popular one.” It
seems to me, on the contrary, that the affirmation bears only
on the special case of an oligarchical conspiracy subverting a
democracy, and that the comparison taken is applicable only to
the state of things as it stood under the preceding democracy.
Next, the explanation given of the words by Dr. Arnold, assumes
that “to be beaten in a fair race, or when the terms of the
match are fair,” causes to the loser _the maximum_ of pain and
offence. This is surely not the fact: or rather, the reverse is
the fact. The man who loses his cause or his election through
unjust favor, jealousy, or antipathy, is _more_ hurt than if he
had lost it under circumstances where he could find no injustice
to complain of. In both cases, he is doubtless mortified; but
if there be injustice, he is offended and angry as well as
mortified: he is disposed to take vengeance on men whom he looks
upon as his personal enemies. It is important to distinguish
the mortification of simple failure, from the discontent and
anger arising out of belief that the failure has been unjustly
brought about: it is this discontent, tending to break out in
active opposition, which Thucydidês has present to his mind in
the comparison which he takes between the state of feeling which
precedes and follows the subversion of the democracy.
It appears to me that the words τῶν ὁμοίων are masculine, and
that they have reference, like πάντες and ἴσοι, in the preceding
line, to the privileged minority of equal confederates who are
supposed to have just got possession of the government. At
Sparta, the word οἱ ὅμοιοι acquired a sort of technical sense,
to designate the small ascendent minority of wealthy Spartan
citizens, who monopolized in their own hands political power, to
the practical exclusion of the remainder (see Xenoph. Hellen.
iii. 3, 5; Xenoph. Resp. Lac. x, 7; xiii, 1; Demosth. cont. Lept.
s. 88). Now these ὅμοιοι, or peers, here indicated by Thucydidês
as the peers of a recently-formed oligarchy, are not merely equal
among themselves, but rivals one with another, and personally
known to each other. It is important to bear in mind all these
attributes as tacitly implied, though not literally designated or
_connoted_ by the word ὅμοιοι, or peers; because the comparison
instituted by Thucydidês is founded on all the attributes taken
together; just as Aristotle (Rhetoric, ii, 8; ii, 13, 4), in
speaking of the envy and jealousy apt to arise towards τοὺς
ὁμοίους, considers them as ἀντεράστας and ἀνταγωνίστας.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account