Tyranny, or the oppression of the weak by the strong, is another of
the many traits of character common to man and the lower animals.
But whether or not that strength belongs to the body or the mind, it
is tyranny all the same. Taken in its most obvious form, it not only
manifests itself in many of the animals in the oppression of the weak
by the strong, but also in the killing and the eating of the same, even
though they be of the same species. Human cannibals act in just the
same manner, eating their enemies after they have killed them. There is
hardly an animal in which the milder forms of tyranny may not be found.
Insects, especially, manifest it in a light manner when they drive
away their fellows from some morsel of food which they desire to keep
to themselves. Among gregarious animals, the herd or flock is always
under the command of an individual who has fought his way to the front,
and who will rule with imperious sway until he has become old and in
turn has been supplanted by a younger and more vigorous rival. In the
poultry-yards the same form of tyranny is manifest, one cock invariably
assuming the leadership, no matter how many may be the number of birds.
There is a curious analogy between these birds and human beings,
especially those of the East, whether at the present day or in more
ancient times. Many petty chieftains are found in Eastern countries,
but there is always to be met with one among them who is more mighty
than the rest, and who holds his place by superior force, either
of intellect or military power. Challenged by one of the inferior
chiefs and victorious, he retains his post, but if vanquished, his
conqueror takes his place, his property and his wives. But curious
to relate, with men as with birds, the members of the harem seem to
trouble themselves very little, if any, about the change of master.
The Scriptures are full of allusions to the invariable custom that
the conqueror takes the possession of the harem belonging to the
vanquished. David did so with regard to the women of Saul’s household,
and when Nabal died, who had defied the authority of David, so the
latter, as a matter of course, took possession of his wife, together
with the rest of his property. And when Absalom rebelled against David,
he publicly took possession of his father’s harem, which was a sign
that he had assumed the kingdom.
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