This law reduced itself to a few elementary rules; not to steal, not to
kill, not to perjure, not to fornicate, not to tyrannize over the weak,
not to mistreat strangers and slaves any more than was necessary. These
are the social virtues, strictly necessary for a common life, useful to
all. The legislator contented himself with naming the most ordinary
sins, asked for a minimum of inhibition. His ideal rarely surpassed a
sort of approximate justice. But the law took for granted the
predominance of evil, the sovereignty of instinct, earlier than the law
and still existing. Every precept implies its infraction, every rule the
practice of the opposite. For this reason the old law, the law of the
first peoples, is only an insufficient channeling of the brute force
eternal and triumphant. It is a collection of compromises and
half-measures between custom and justice, between nature and reason,
between the rebellious beast and the divine model.
Men of ancient time, carnal, physical, hearty, lusty, muscular,
sanguine, sturdy, solid, hairy men with ruddy faces, eaters of raw meat,
ravishers, cattle-stealers, mutilators of their enemies, fit to be
called, like Hector the Trojan, “killers of men,” strong, zestful
warriors who, having dragged by the feet their slaughtered antagonists,
refreshed themselves with fat haunches of oxen and of mutton, emptying
enormous cups of wine; these men ill-tamed, ill-subdued to the law such
as we see them in the Mahabharata, and in the Iliad, in the poem of
Izdubar, and in the book of the wars of Jehovah, such men without the
fear of punishment and of God would have been still more unrestrained
and ferocious. In times when a head was asked for an eye, an arm for a
finger, and a hundred lives for a life, a law of retaliation which asked
only an eye for an eye and a life for a life was a notable victory of
generosity, appalling though it seems after the teaching of Jesus.
But the law was more often disobeyed than observed; the strong endured
it against their will, the powerful who ought to have protected it,
evaded it; the bad violated it openly; the weak cheated it. And even if
it had been entirely obeyed by every man every day it would not have
been enough to conquer the evil perpetually boiling up, held down only
for a moment, rendered harder to enact but not impossible, condemned but
not abolished. It was a reduction of innate fierceness, not its total
extirpation. Men, shackled but reluctant, had learned to pretend
obedience, did a little good where every one could see them in order to
be more free to do wrong secretly, exaggerated the observance of
external precepts that they might the better betray the foundation and
spirit of the law.
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