The Philosophy of Fine Art, volume 1 (of 4): Hegel's AesthetikHegel, Georg Wilhelm Friedrich
Philosophy
The Philosophy of Fine Art, volume 1 (of 4): Hegel's Aesthetik
Hegel, Georg Wilhelm Friedrich
Aesthetics
accident, but rather as an obstruction and misfortune whose necessity
simply consists in assuming precisely this particular form rather than
another.
(_β_) But, to turn now to our second type of the collision, inasmuch
as the external powers of Nature are not that which is most essential
to the interests and contradictions of human life, in cases where they
are found closely associated with such spiritual relations, they will
present themselves merely as the ground from which the collision breaks
forth in its true character. This is the point of view from which we
must regard all situations, where we trace the original source of
conflict in the facts of natural _birth._ We will shortly distinguish
between three particular cases of this.
(_αα_) In the first place we have the right that is bound up with
natural condition, that which constitutes relationship and inheritance
for example, which for the very reason that it stands in close
connection with Nature carries with it a number of relations that are
bound up with her, and this though the right, the fact is one and only
one. The most important example of this is the right of succession to
the throne. It is important to observe that this right must not as
yet, in relation to the collisions which spring from it, be absolutely
fixed by rule, otherwise the resultant conflict will be of quite
another character. If, that is to say, the right of succession is
not as yet entirely controlled by legislation and the social order
which it implies, no wrong will necessarily attach to any one of the
alternatives, namely, whether it be an older or younger brother, or any
other relative of the royal household who obtains the sovereignty. But
inasmuch as sovereignty is a qualitative rather than a quantitative
possession, which cannot like gold and other material goods be divided
up according to a just principle, dispute and contention is inevitably
the result of such a form of succession. When Œdipus, for example,
leaves the throne of Thebes without a ruler, he leaves his two sons
confronting each other with a right and claim of equal strength. The
brothers arrange to occupy the throne alternately from year to year.
Eteocles, however, breaks the compact and Polynices brings an army
against Thebes to enforce his right. The antagonism of brothers has
always been in the history of art a fruitful source of collision; it
commences indeed with the story of Cain who slew his brother Abel. In
the tale of Shah-Rameh, the earliest example we have of a Persian book
of heroic legend, it is a contention of throne succession which is the
source of the most varied conflicts. In this Feridu divided the Earth
among his three brothers. Selm receives as his portion Rum and Chawer;
Turan and Osin are given to Thur, and Fredysh becomes lord of the Earth
from Iran. All three, however, claim the land which belongs to his
brothers, and endless quarrels and wars are the result. In the Middle
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