book is not extant. Neither the British Museum Catalogue

nor the catalogue of the Thomas Collection mentions it.

49, 15. Christopher Goodman (1520?—1608). Professor of
divinity at Oxford, he was driven into exile by the Marian
persecution, and lived at Strasburg. Afterwards joining the
schism of reformers at Frankfort, he and other English exiles
withdrew to Geneva. Here he and Knox became pastors
and close friends. Goodman's tract, quoted by Milton, was
published in the same year as Knox's First Blast of the
Trumpet (1658), and both pamphlets were circulated secretly
in England. In 1559 Goodman went to Scotland on the
invitation of Knox, and became minister of Ayr, but preached

Notes 147

in various parts of Scotland. Later he returned to England,
and became archdeacon of Richmond. Tried on a charge
of unconformity in 1571, he was obliged to make a full
recantation of his published opinions. His later years were
Spent in peace, and he died at a great age in 1603.

Of Obedience. The complete title is, How Superior Powers
ought to be Obeyd of their Subjects: and Wherin they may
lawfully by Gods Worde be disobeyed and resisted,

49.16. When Kings or Rulers, J). chap. 10, pp. 189-140,

49. 22. By the civil laws a foole or Idiot born, etc,
Jb. chap. 11, Pp. 148-144. The quotation is correctly given,

49. 83. No person is exempt, etc. Jé. chap. 18, p. 184,
Milton has suppressed the Condition under which the ruler
is to be punished—that is, either openly or privately known
to be an idolater.

50. 8. When Magistrates cease to doe thir duty, etc.
The whole sentence, as it stands in the original, is not quoted,
but the suppressed clauses are unimportant (s6., chap. 18,
Pp. 185),

50. 18. If princes doe right, etc. ‘For this cause have
you promised obedience to your Superiors, that they might
herein helpe you: and for the same intent have they taken
it upon them. If they will so do, and keepe promisse with
you accordinge to their office, then do you owe unto them
all humble obedience: If not, you are discharged, and no
obedience belongeth to them : because they are not obedient
to God, nor be his ministers to punishe the euell, and to defend
the good. And therefore your study in this case, oght to be,
to seeke how you may dispose and punishe according to the
Lawes, such rebells agaynst God, and oppressors of your
felues and your countrie (6, chap. 18, p. 190). Notice how
Milton has added and suppressed phrases,

The principal teachings of this book are set forth in
chap. 6, and may be summed up as follows:

(1) To obey man in anything against God is unlawful,
and plain disobedience.

148 The Tenure of Kings and Magistrates

(2) God requires his people to choose such a king as the
Lord doth appoint, and not as they fancy. We can judge
whether a king is God’s choice by God’s word. He should be

One who hath the fear of God before his eyes,
One hating all papistry and idolatry,
He who will promote God's laws.

(3) The government of women is against nature and God’s
ordinances, for God appointed woman to be in subjection to
her husband. The title of the crown belongeth only by God’s
word to the heirs male. Queen Mary is ‘a bastard.’

See Goodman's partial recantation of some of the doctrine
of this book in Strype, Avzals 1. 184 (vol. 7, ed. 1824).

60. 32. Among whom Calvin, etc. Although he does not
make a direct statement, Milton tries to convey the impres-
sion that Calvin, among others, sanctioned Goodman's book.
But Milton knew perfectly well that Calvin would never
have stamped with his approval such revolutionary doctrines,

60. 35. Whittingham. William Whittingham (1524?-1579),
a noted Oxford scholar, was obliged to flee to the continent
in the reign of Queen Mary. He became a leader among
the Frankfort exiles. He and Knox led an opposition party
against the use of the prayer-book. Owing to the schism
created, he withdrew to Geneva with Knox, Goodman, and
other dissentients. In 1559, he succeeded Knox as minister
in Geneva, where he took a prominent part in the translation
of the Geneva Bible. He returned to England in 1560, and
three years later was made Dean of Durham. He was
brought to trial by a royal commission in 1578 on charges
of adultery and drunkenness. Before any verdict was rendered,
he died in 1579.

61. 3. In Prefat. ‘When M. Christopher Goodman, one
of our ministers, according to the course of the text, ex-
pounded both faithfully and comfortably this place of the
Actes of the Apostles, Judge whether it be juste before God
to obey you rather than God, certeyne learned and godly
men moste instantly, and at sondry tymes required him to
dilate more at large that his sermon, and to suffre it to be

va

SB mew wee NS

Notes 149

printed, that not onely we here present, but our bretherne
in England and other places might be persuaded in the
trueth of that doctrine concerninge obedience to the magistrat,
and so glorifie God with us,’

51. 19. Preferments of their outed predecessors, Ecclesi-
astical appointments once held by the ministers of the estab-
lished church, who were driven out because they remained
loyal to the king’s cause.

51. 26. A Treatise called Scripture and Reason. The
complete title is, « Scripture and Reason pleaded for Defensive
Armes: or the whole Controversie about Subjects taking up
Armes. Wherein besides other Pamphlets, an Answer is
punctually ‘irected to Dr. Fernes Booke, entitled, Resolving
of Conscience, etc, Published by divers Reverend and
Learned Divines.’ This book was ordered to be printed by
the Committee of the House of Commons concerning Printing
on April 14, 1643,

51. 27. Seem in words to disclaime, etc. In the preface,
the authors appeal to their Congregations and sermons
‘whether wee have taught any thing, but humble and holy
obedience to all just and lawfull authority.’ They declare that
they are not preachers of sedition, not troublers of Israel ;
on the contrary they pray for the peace of our king. See
also pp. 37, 64,

51. 80. For if by scripture, etc. An elaborate exegesis
of Rom. 18, 1-7 is given in this pamphlet. See pp. 3-6.
Passive obedience to the Powers that be is enjoined in civil
matters, but subjects are not to be bound to suffer tyrannous
violence,

62.8. Amerce him. To be amerced was originally to
be at the mercy of any one as to amount of fine; hence
the active to amerce, to fine arbitrarily or according to one’s
own estimate. Here the fine imposed upon the king is the
loss of his kingdom. Cf. Observ. Art, Peace (Bohn 2. 194):
‘To punish and amerce by any corporal infliction.’

52, 23. This golden ruie. The rule of proportion. Cf.
Barnard Smith, Arithmetic, p. 196: ‘Almost all questions
which arise in the common concerns of life, so far as they

150 The Tenure of Kings and Magistrates

require calculation by numbers, might be brought within
the scope of the Rule of Three, which enables us to find
the fourth term in a proportion, and which on account of its
great use and extensive application is often called the Golden
Rule.’ The same phrase is used in Areop. (Bohn 2. 90).

62. 26. Euclid. Euclid of Alexandria, author of the cele-
brated work, Elements of Geometry. According to Proclus
he lived from 828 to 283 B.C., and was one of the Platonic
school.

52. 27. Apollonius. Apollonius Pergzeus, ‘the great geo-
meter,’ was a native of Perga in Pamphylia, and flourished
in the second century B.C. He was author of a treatise on
conic sections which is still extant.

52, 28. Being undeposable but by themselves. ‘And this
Parliament (what ever other might bee) is not deposeable
[dissoluble] but by themselves. The Sword cannot be Legally
taken from them till they give it up’ (Scripture and Reason,
p. 38). ‘The parliament is bound in conscience to prevent
Tyranny, and preserve themselves, and Religion, Lawes and
Liberties’ (#5. p. 38). ‘They are empowered to take away
the wicked from before the king. The sword may also be
taken out of the hand of God’s anointed till it hath beene
sufficiently imployed, to punish those Malefactors and delin-
quents which he should, but will not strike with it, or rather
will defend and imploy.’ In the sentence, however, we read
that ‘they may Legally and Lawefully take the sword into
theyr hands; and doe not take it out of the Kings, but his
wicked Followers’ (#5., pp. 87, 88). It is this sort of quib-
bling which Miltons condemns.

52, 32. Unmagistrate. Cf. ‘unking the king,’ 35. 5.

53. 11. By what rule, etc. ‘By what rule of conscience
or God is a State bound to sacrifice Religion, Laws and
Liberties rather than endure that the Princes life should come
into any possibilities of hazard, by defending them against
those, that in his name are bent to subvert them? If he
will needs thrust upon the hazard, when he needs not, whose
fault is that?’ (#5. p. 19). See also p. 20.

Notes 151

53. 16. These sacred concernments. Religion, laws, and -

liberties, Concernments, interests. To Rem. Hire (Bohn
8. 2, 29),

53. 19. The Law of Nature. That which is eternal and
immutable, an embodiment of some universal human feeling.
Positive laws were composed ot human and of divine statutes,
See Grotius, De Jure Belli 1.8.8. and 4. 4. 3, Cf. Sec. Def.
(Bohn 1. 264), and Odserv. Art. Peace (Bohn 2. 190). Milton
alludes to Scripture and Reason, p. 51: ‘But how humane
Laws made without or against God's Authority, can hinder
me from the liberty granted me by the Law of Nature, to
defend myself fiom outrageous Violence, being altogether an
Innocent, I cannot See, specially in a case concerning God’s
immediate Honour as well as my safety.’

54. 2. A Judge or inferior Magistrate, etc. ‘Saint Peter
names Governours to be submitted to for the Lord's sake,
as well as the Supreme’ (Scripture and Reason p. 38),

54. 5. St. Peter's rule. 1 Pet. 2, 18, 14.

54. 15. In a cautious line or two. The justification of
resistance to tyranny is plainly urged.

54. 18. See Scripture and Reason, p. 4. For further
references to tyrannical rulers and the right of the Christian
to resist them, see 14., pp. 2, 6, 9, 10, 20, 21, 27, 56.

54. 16. Stuft in. Cf. Reason of Ch. Govt. (Bohn 2. 481):
‘Men whose learning and belief lies in marginal stuffings’;
Apol. Smect. (Bon 8. 109): ‘His own stuffed magazine and
hoard of slanderous inventions,’

54, 22. For divines, etc. This Passage represents the
nearest approach to humor in this treatise. It is altogether
one of the happiest pieces of satire in Milton's prose. See
Introd.

54. 28. Posture was formerly a military term, meaning
a particular position of a weapon in duel or warfare. Cf,
Wood, Ath. Oxon. 2.262: ‘He learned -»» how to handle
the pike and musquet, and all postures belonging to them.’
it was also applied to the ppearance of a body of troops:
‘They are still out of the garrison in a mutinous posture,

2 PRS

cae

ee

152 The Tenure of Kings and Magistrates

with their arms’ (Henry Cary, Mem. of Great Civil War
1.296. Cf. Doct. and Disctp. of Div. (Bohn 3. 184): ‘In such
a posture Christ found the Jews.’ Cf. Scripture and Reason,
p. 71: ‘To draw them into such a posture of defence.’

Motions. A motion was each of the successive actions of
which a prescribed exercise of arms consisted. For instance,
according to the manual of 1760, the officers faced to the
left about in three motions There were also motions of the
firelock. Cf. Of Ref. in Eng. (Bohn 2. 365): ‘Then was the
priest set to con his motions and postures.’

54. 24. Feats. Another military term. Feats of war were
military duties or exercises,

Artillery-ground. In a tract, entitled Ancient Military
Government of London, we read: ‘ Besides the forementioned
Trained Bands and Auxiliary Men, there is the Artillery
Company, which is a nursery for Soldiers, and hath been so
about 80 years. Their Place, or Field of Exercise, formerly
was in the old Artillery Ground, now in Finsbury Fields.’
The Artillery Company dates back to 1585, and the first of-
ficers were called Captains of the Artillery Garden, from the
place were they exercised, From the year 1610 a weekly
exercise of arms was held in the Artillery Garden (The
Antiquarian Repertory, p. 269, London, 1807).

67. 17. Commodity. Cf. Eikon (Bohn 1. 315).

55. 6. Nimble motionists. Motionists, a word now ob-
solete, was probably coined by Milton. In the New Eng.
Dict, the only example of its use is in the present connection.

55. 12. Strook. An old preterite of strike. Cf PL. 2.
165, H. 95.

55. 14. Scripture. An attack on his opponents, narrow
interpretation of Scripture texts. On Milton’s owr use of
Scripture, see Introd.

55. 17. Impotent conclusions. In logic, every syllogism
has three propositions—the major premise, the minor premise,
and the conclusion. If the conclusion contains any term that
has not been used distributively in one of the premises,
such a conclusion would be impotent or invalid.

Notes 153

55. 18. In this Posture. He still retains the military
metaphor. The Presbyterian divines are at drill on the
walls of Sion College.

55. 20. Like Jebusides. Like the heathen enemies of the
Lord’s people, not real Israelites, or me:, hers of the Priestly
tribe of Levites. Although both the jbusites and Adoni-
bezek were Canaanites, the Bible is silent as to whether
Adonibezek was their chief, as Milton implies. Jebusites was
the name of the local tribe which, in the first centuries of
Israel’s occupation of Canaan, held Jerusalem, until its citadel,
the stronghold of Zion, was captured under David. Allusions
to the inability of the Israelites to expel the Jebusites from
their stronghold are found in Jos. 16. 63; fudg. 1.21, aad in
Judg. 19. 10-12 it is described as a city of foreigners (H.D.B.
2. 564).

55.2... Adonibezec. See Judg. 1. 5-7. The real meaning
ot the name is, Bezek is my Lord. Adonibezek was chief
of a Canaanitish tribe. He was defeated by the tribe of
Judah, and was mutilated by having his thumbs and great
toes cut off. According to his boast, he himself had similarly
treated seventy kings.

In this interesting and humorous illustration from Scripture,
Milton compares the two leaders, David cond Adonibezek,
which being translated mean Christ and Charles I. The
Presbyterian Jebusites who cry, ‘Bezek is my Lord’, declare
that Charles is the Lord’s anointed, instead of being true to
their real king, Christ, the Root of David. But these very
divines who now cry up the King, not long ago cut off his
thumbs and toes upon their pulpit cushions, that is, insulted
his sovereignty, cursed him, denounced him, etc. (see 4, 6),
as an enemy of Israel,

55. 33. As the soul of David hated them, etc. See
2 Sam. 5. 6-10, especially v.8; ‘And David said on that day,
Whosoever getteth up to the gutter, and smiteth the Jebusites,
and the lame and the blind, that are hated of David's soul,
he shall be chief and Captain.

55. 85. But as to those before them. Earlier Protestant
divines—Luther, Calvin, Zwingli, Goodman, Fenner, etc.

154 The Tenure of Kings and Magistrates

56, 8. Sub-prelatical. Prelatical, in Milton and other
writers of his time, is a hostile term for Episcopalian. The
force of the prefix here is ambiguous. It may mean after,
in point of time, but the more probable meaning is somewhat.
He cannot call the Presbyterian faction out-and-out supporters
of prelacy, but he means to indicate that their advocacy of
divine right and of a tyrannical church government is in-
clining them in that direction.

66, 11. To an inferior Magistrate lawfull. What is un-
lawful to a private man, may be lawful for an inferior
magistrate. This was one of the ways in which Calvin,
Knox, and others qualified their support of the rights of the
people.

56. 18, That fals and impudent assertion. See 32. 2.

66. 30. Simon Magus. See 48.28 and 51. 16.

56. 81. Sent. This old spelling of ‘scent’ is more correct
than the modern use.

56. 82. Advousons. An advowson was the patronage of
an ecclesiastical office or religious house, the right of pre-
sentation to a benefice or living. Originally it meant the
obligation to defend its rights, or to be its advocate. Cf.
Sterne, Tristram Shandy, chap. 45: ‘And also, the adowson,
donation, presentation, and free disposition of t:. rectory or
parsonage of Shandy aforesaid, and all and every the tenths,
tithes, glebelands.’

Donatives. Benefices or livings which the founder or
patron can bestow, and which are exempt from the visitation
of the bishops or their officers.

56. 33. Inductions. The induction is the ceremony by
which the Presbytery, or its representatives, install a new
minister.

Augmentations. An augmentation was an increase of
stipend obtained by a Scottish parish minister by an action
(process of augmentation) in the Court of Teinds, against
the titular or beneficiary, and heritors.

56. 85. Priests of Bel. See the story of Bel and the
Dragon in the Apocrypha. The priests of Bel, their wives

Notes 155

and children, had a Secret entrance to the great idol, and
Consumed the daily offerings of flour, sheep, and wine made by
the Babylonians. Daniel exposed their tricks to King Cyrus,

57. 4. Fed them Plenteously. All the services performed
by the Presbyterian divines, such as their attendance on the

Westminster Assembly and sermons before parliament, were
liberally paid for by the House of Commons, Ample pro-
vision was also made for the clergy throughout the nation.
See 44, 2,

57. 6. Rais'd them to be high and rich of poore and base.
Many of the Presbyterian and nonconformist divines were
of low birth. From poor and base circumstances they were
lifted by the successes of the army into high and rich po-
sitions. See a tract entitled 7) he Brownist Synagogues (1641):
‘The chief preachers of the Independents are said to be
Green, the feltmaker, Marlin, the buttonmaker, Spencer, the
Coachman, Rodgers, the glover.’ These names are given on
the title-page.

See also Prynne, The Schismatics Sifted, or The Picture
of the Independents (1646), p. 84. ‘It isa miracle or wonder
to the saucie boyes, bold botching taylors, and others most
audacious, illiterate mechanicks run out of their shops into
a pulpit?’

Cf. To Rem. Hire. (Bohn 8. 40): ‘Crept for the most part
out of extreme want and bad nurture,’

57. 9. Thir fellow-locusts. Probably he means the clergy-
men of the Established Church formerly in power. In ancient
times, the locust was a synonym for the most awful greed
and waste. For a celebrated description of the Tavages of
a plague of locusts see J. H. Newman, Callista, chap. 15.
See also Exod. 10, 5,

Here ‘bottomless pit’ refers to Rev. 9, 1-3. Cf. Of Ref. in
Eng. (Bohn 2, 417),

57. 11. Thir impetuous ignorance and importunity. This
last criticism of the di.ines for their domineering attitude to
parliament, and ceaseless clamors for the establishment of
their intolerant church-system, is a repetition of what he has
said over and over again in this pamphlet.

ie

‘

DPR dvs SadlDhirtagt acinar Sk ae

THE HISTORY OF TYRANNICIDE.

Milton’s contribution to a history of tyrannicide is, as we
have said, the most important that has ever been made by
any English author. The subject seems to have escaped the
notice of later English students of the classics, so that it be-
comes necessary for the present writer to add several refe-
rences to those collected by Milton, and to present the
material in a more connected form.

In the heroic age the Greeks seem to have been upholders
of the doctrine of the divine right of kings, for they believed
that the king was the choice of the gods, and to murder
him was an act of sacrilege? In the course of time, however,
the Spartans instituted a regular tribunal for the trial and
punishment of tyrannical kings. Both Pausanius and Agis
were deposed by the ephors and the senate.’ Not alone in
Sparta, but throughout Greece, attempts at despotism became
common; the isolated districts of a mountainous country, and
the isles of the Zgean, saw the rise of numerous small
kingdoms governed by tyrants.t The fickleness of the Greek,
and his natural love of liberty, made the tenure of these
petty tyrants exceedingly precarious, and usually short-lived.
They were frequently driven into exile by sudden revolutions;
in Athens a law of Solon decreed the more merciful punish-
ment of ostracism, instead of death.*

It was not until the murder of Hipparchus by Harmodius
and Aristogiton that tyrannicide became popular in Greece

1 Observ. Art. Peace (Bohn 2. 188).

2 Odyss. 16. 400 ff.

* Thucydides, History, Bk. 8.

« The rapid rise and fall of these tyrannies, and their great
number, may be studied in the exhaustive work of H. G. Plass,
Die Tyrannis.

5 Plutarch. Life of Solon, chap. 19.

Appendix 157

Although this assassination was inspired by motives of private
vengeance, the deed of the two friends became one of the
great traditions -f Greek liberty, and the murderers of the
son of the iyrant Pisistratus were henceforth the subjects
of the poet's song and the sculptor’s chisel. ‘To honor them
and their descendants became an article of republican faith,’ 1
Duruy draws up a list of the honors accorded to the two
heroes; it includes a vase, a painting, two monetary types,
and marble and brazen statues, ‘The Athenians,’ he says,
‘represented the two friends as martyrs of liberty, they
erected statues to the.n, they granted privileges to their
descendants, which the latter enjoyed as late as the time of
Demosthenes, and on festival days they chanted:

‘I will carry the sword wader the myrtle-branch, as did
Harmodius and Aristogiton when they slew the tyrant, and
established equality in Athens,

‘Most dear Harmodius, thou art not dead; doubtless thou
livest in the Islands of the Blessed, where are, they say,
Achilleus the Swift-footed, and Diomedes, the son of Tydeus.

‘In the myrtle-branch I will hide the sword, like Harmodius
and Aristogiton, when at the festival of Athene they slew
the tyrant.

‘Thy fame shall for ever endure upon earth, beloved Har-
modius, and thine, Aristogiton, because you have slain the
tyrant and established equality in Athens.’

Pliny dwells specially on the works of art inspired by
this first famous instance of tyrannicide: ‘I do not know
whether the first public statues were not erected by the
Athenians, and in honor of Harmedius and Aristogiton, who
slew the tyrant; an event which took place in the same
year in which the kings were expelled from Rome. This

‘ Egger, Sur le Meurtre Politique ches les Grecs et ches les Row ains, p. 5.

* Duruy, Hist. of Greece, trans. Ripley, 2,22. This Scolium,
or drinking-song, has been attributed to Callistratus. It is
quoted by Aristophanes, Lysistrata 632; The Acharnians 990, 1098.
For various English translations of this song, and an interesting
sketch of the two friends, see Kennedy, Orations of Demosthenes,
8. 264.

p2

caninaiamaaih

AP we AN

"Soiaiahsantllitnaiiacasescadararn

158 The Tenure of Kings and Magistrates

custom, from a most praiseworthy emulation, was afterwer's
adopted by all other nations.’! Praxiteles also executed ‘two
figures of Harmodius and Aristogiton, who slew the tyrants.’*
Amphicrates made a brazen statue of Leena. ‘She was
a skilful performer on the lyre, and had so become acquainted
with Harmodius and Aristogiton, and submitted to be tortured
until she expired, rather tan betray their plot for the exter-
mination of the tyrants. The Athenians, being desirous of
honoring her memory, without at the same time rendering
homage to a courtesan, had her represented under the figure
of an animal (a lioness), whose name she bore; and, in order
to indicate the cause of the honor thus paid her, ordered
the artist to represent the animal without a tongue.'®

So extravagant was the popular estimation of this murder
of the son of Pisistratus that the Athenians gave a dowry
to a niece of Aristogiton, who was living in poverty in the
isle of Lemnos.* Even so distinguished an author as Plato
joined in the chorus of approbation: ‘For the interests of
rulers require that their subjects should be poor in spirit,
and that there should be no strong bond of friendship or
society among them, which love, above all other motives,
is likely to inspire, as our Athenian tyrants learned by ex-
perience; for the love of Aristogiton and the constancy of
Harmodius had a strength which undid their powei » Cal-
listhenes relates that Philotas, the friend of Alexander, asked
him one day what person was most honored by the Athenians.
He gave the names of Harmodius and Aristogiton, because
they had destroyed tyranny by the murder of one of two
tyrants. Alexander also declared that Athens would be
foremost among Greek cities in receiving the murderer of
a tyrant. It afterwards happened that the pretended author

1 Natural Hist., Cap. 84. 10.

2 [oid., chap. 19.

3 [bid.

* Plutarch, Life of Aristides.

5 Symposium, trans. Jowett, 1. 182.

® Callisthenes, quoted by Arrian, Anabdasis of Alexander, 4. 10;
8. 16; 7. 19.

Appendix 159

of Alexander's death was publicly honored by a decree
Passed by the Athenians. A decree passed in the year 403
B.C. had already authorized any Athenian to kill the citizen
who should aspire to the tyranny, betray the republic, or
Overthrow the constitution, Even down to the days of the
Roman empire the memory of the two friends was honored 3?
for, after the assassination of Julius Cesar, the Athenians
dressed the statues of Brutus and Cassius, and placed them
beside those of Harmodius and Aristogiton on the Agora.?

The earliest reference in Greek literature to the evils of
tyranny is contained in verses written by Solon (circa B,C,
638-558) :

Truth it is that I declined the bloody desperate career
Of tyrannical command, to rule alone and domineer,

In my native happy land, with arbitrary force and fear:
Neither have I since repented; unreproach'd, without a crime;
Placed alone, unparalleled, among the statesmen of the time.’

Another early poet, Theognis of Megara (B.C. 570-848 or
544) was deprived of his Property by a tyrant, and forced
into exile. The following fragments express his indignation:

Court not a tyrant’s favor, nor combine

To further his iniquitous design!

But, if your faith is pledged, though late and loath,
If covenants have pass’d between you beth,

Never assassinate him! keep your oath!

But should he still misuse his lawless power,

To trample on the people, and devour;

Depose or overturn him—anyhow!

Your oath permits it, and the gods allow.

The sovereign single person—what cares he

For love or hate, for friend or enemy ?

His single purpose is utility.®

' For further reference to the praises of these heroes in Greek
literature, see Iigen, Sxoled, id est Carmina Convivalia Gracorum,
passim,

* Dio Cassius, Hist. 47. 21,

* Trans. Frere, Works 8. 356.

‘ Trans. Frere, 3. 861.

* Tid, 862.

160 The Tenure of Kings and Magistrates

Herodotus (B.C. 484—443[?]) was also forced into exile by
a cruel tyrant. In Samos he gathered together his fellow-
exiles, returned to Halicarnassus, his own city, and expelled
the tyrant Lygdamis. His writings show his animus against
despotism, a good instance being the speech which he puts
into the mouth of Miltiades on the eve of Marathon; he
represents the general as appealing to the soldiers to emulate
Harmodius and Aristogiton.

Xenophon (B. C. 444—357([?]), in the dialogue entitled Hieron,
pictures the miseries of a tyrant's life, and refers to the great
honors conferred upon tyrannicides by Greek cities?

Andocides (B. C. 439-399), exiled in B.C. 415, was allowed
to return to Athens upon the fall of the Thirty Tyrants. In
replying to the charge of unlawful participation in the mysteries,
he alludes to the exoneration of the tyrannicide by the Athenian
law, and gives as a law of Solon the text of an oath which
the Athenian was required to take, to the effect that he
would himself kill, if able, any one who overthrew the democ-
racy in Athens, or who set himself up for a tyrant, or should
aid another to establish tyranny. If another should kill
a tyrant, the citizen swore to regard him as one who had
killed an enemy of the Athenians. If a citizen should be
killed in attempting to destroy a tyrant, or in such an enter-
prise, ‘he would accord him and his children the same honor
as was given to Harmoeius and Aristogiton and their de-
scendants.>

Plato (B.C. 428-347) was an unfriendly critic of tyrants,
although he lived for a time at che court of Dionysius. He
did not go to the extent of openly defending tyrannicide,
but his intimate friendship with Dion made him sympathize
with the latter in his efforts to expel Dionysius. Plato taught
that if a man kills another unjustly, he is wretched; if justly,
he is not to be envied. He would evidently consider the

16,109. See also 5.55; 6. 123.

2 As noted above, Milton quoted this dialogue in First Def.
(Bohn 1. 125).

8 On the Mysteries, § 98. Cf. Schelling, De Solonis Legibus, p. 7.
and Schoemann, De Comitiis Atheniensium, pp. 181 ff.

Appendix 161

murder of a tyrant a righteous act, but would not care to
be the assassin. He defines tyranny as ‘the power of doing
whatever seems good to you in a state, killing, banishing,
doing all things as you like.’ He makes Socrates say that
a tyrant has no more real power than a man who runs out
into the Agora carrying a ¢ ' {nthe ninth book of the
Republic, after describing -z excesses of a private person,
he says: ‘This noxious -lass and their followers grow
numerous and become cot :civus of their strength; assailed
by the infatuation of the peopic, they caoose from among
themselves the one who has most of the tyrant in his own
soul, and him they create their tyrant.’? Again he says that
the tyrant is of all men the most miserable, and, in com-
paring the tyrant with the legitimate monarch, he asserts
that one year of the tyrannical equals only twelve hours of
the royal life.*

Aristotle (B.C. 384-822) was even more outspoken in his
condemnation of tyranny than Plato. His famous definition
of tyranny was destined to be quoted by the republican
writers of future ages: ‘There is also a third kind of tyranny,
which is the most typical form; and is the counterpart of the
perfect monarchy. This tyranny is just that arbitrary power
cf an individual which is responsible to no one, and governs
all alike, whether equals or betters, with a view to its own
advantage, not to that of its subjects, and therefore against
their will. No freeman, if he can escape from it, will endure
such a government,’

Demosthenes (B. C. 883-322) quotes the oaths of the Heliasts,
which bound them to oppose tyranny. He explains that
the descendants of Harmodius and Aristogiton are exempt
from certain services demanded from other citizens,’ refers

1 Gorgias 2. 402.

? Dialogues, trans. Jowett, 8, 285.

* Did. 8. 288,

* Toid, (Introd., p. 144).

* Politics, trans. Jowett, 4. 10. 4. See also 5. 5. 6, 5. to 9. 5.
11. 13; 5.11. 15; 5. 11. 80; 8. 7.5.

* Against Timocrates § 149; Against Leptines § 18.

7 Against Leptines § 29,

162 The Tenure of Kings and Magistrates

to the brazen statue erected to their memory,' and calls them
supreme benefactors, to whose memory the people pour
libations, and honor them in songs as the equals of heroes
and gods? The great orator feared that tyrannicide might
be a political necessity in future ages, when the deed of
Harmodius and Aristogiton would have to be repeated.
‘The Syracusans,’ he says, ‘could never have expected that
a scribe, Dionysius, would become their tyrant, nor yet that
Dion with a few ships would be able to expel him.’ ®
Zschines (B. C. 389-814), the rival of Demosthenes in
oratory, was at one with him in denunciation of tyranny,
and in praise of the love of Harmodius and Aristogiton.t
Polybius (B.C. 204-122) says the following in approval of
tyrannicide: ‘To take away the life of a citizen is considered
as a most horrid crime, and such as calls for vengeance;
yet a man may openly destroy an adulterer or robber,
without any fear of being punished for it: and those who
rescue their country from a traitor or a tyrant are even
thought worthy of the greatest honors.’> Again, he observes
that ‘the first conspiracies against tyrants were hat first con-
trived not by men of obscure or low condition, but by those
of noblest birth, and who were the most distinguished by
their courage and exalted spirit: for such are at all times
most impatient of the insolence of princes.’* Aristomachus,
a tyrant of Argos, was put to death in tortures the most
cruel and merciless that ever were inflicted upon man; but
Polybius was of opinion that ‘the wicked tyranny which he
had exercised upon his country might very deservedly have
drawn upon him the severest punishment. Because of his
great cruelty to others and his perfidy, this tyrant should
rather have been led through all the towns of Peloponnesus,

1 Did. § 68.

2 On the Embassy § 280.

3 Against Leptines § 159.

* Against Timarchus § 182.
§ Hist. 2. 4.

* oid, 6. 1.

Appendix 163

exposed to every kind of torture and indignity, and after-
wards have been deprived of life.’

Diodorus Siculus (lived during the reign of Augustus) had
much to say on the subject of tyranny. He calls Sicily ‘the
land of tyranny,’? relates sympathetically the expulsion of
Dionysius by Dion,’ describes the assassination of Alexander
of Pharos,‘ of Dion,® of Philip by Pausanius,* and relates the
awful story of how Timoleon killed his brother, who aspired
to be a tyrant.” In a short chapter which he devotes to the
discussion of tyranny, he quotes a saying of Solon to the
effect that wealthy men are dangerous to the state, because
of their Opportunity by means of Corruption to set up
a tyranny ®; in this book we also find a prolix account of
the cruelties perpetrated by the tyrant Agathocles. Harmodius
and Aristogiton receive the customary honorable mention.®

Plutarch (A.D. 50-120) is the connecting link between
Greek and Latin literature, so far as this subject is concerned.
He was equally at home in denouncing the Pisistratide or
the Tarquins, in praising Thrasybulus or Brutus. His lives
of Solon, Publicola, Timoleon, Cato, Cicero, Dion, Brutus,
and Galba breathe his passionate hatred of tyranny. He
contended that the mildness of the doctrines of the Epicureans
rendered the soul incapable of strong deeds, since this school
had never produced a tyrannicide.!° He praised the philo-
sophical teaching of Plato, however, because it had fortified
the souls of patriots; for it was owing to this inspiration that
Dion had been able to proceed against Dionysius, and
others had dared to murder King Cotys of Thrace.!2 His
parallel lives of Dion and Brutus display Plutarch’s uncom-
promising republicanisra, and his declaration that ‘ the greatest
glory of both men consists in their abhorrence of tyrants and

* Hist, 2. 4. $11.87. 516 6. * 16, 14.

* 16. 3. * 16, 94, 7 16. 65.

* 19.1. Cf. Ure, Origin of the 7; Jyrannis, in Journ, Hellen. Studies
26, 141.

* 8. 87, 92.

1° Moral Maxims, chap. 82. "1 7eia,, chap. 20, 12 sd, chap, 82.

164 The Tenure o Kings and Magistrates

their criminal measures’ is thoroughly characteristic of the
whole body of his political opinions.

Lucian (A.D. 120 (?)—190 (?) speaks of the hopes and fears
which agitate the breast of the tyrant; simply the name of
tyrant is sufficient to create hatred in the her-ts of the
people! The adorers of tyrants are lovers of power and
timeservers, and under the rule of a tyrant the citizen is in
greater danger than if he were among a foreign foe? Lucian
enters upon a nice discussion as to whether a person who
kills the son of a tyrant ought to receive the regular reward
of a tyrannicide; he concludes that the law of tyrannicide
determines the recompense, i. e., the patriotic deed is its
own reward This author also gives some interesting data
as to the lives, customs, and violent deaths of tyrants.

Arrian (flourished in the second century A.D.), besides
quoting Callisthenes’ account of the conversation between
Philotas and Alexander,’ relates that Alexander the Great
sent back to Athens bronze statues of Harmodius and Aristo-
giton, which were recovered at Babylon.®

Although we have already anticipated the Roman point
of view in quoting the republican sentiments of Plutarch,
we find that long before the days of the great biographer
the Latin writers were interested in this subject. Rome had
no Harmodius and Aristogiton to commit a political murder
in her early days, but she produced a stern foe to tyranny
in Junius Brutus, who, even if he did not kill the Tarquins,
at least established a precedent for the deposition of unjust
rulers. Strictly speaking, the Roman republic could not boast
a single case of tyrannicide, but the ancient Brutus, Servilius
Ahala, Marcus Brutus, and Cassius took their places in Latin
literature on a footing of equality with Harmodius and Aristo-
giton. As in other respects the literary fashions of the
conquered became those of the conquerors, so the eulogy

1 Works, p. 465 (Paris, 1615). * 20id., p. 233, * ord. p. 413.
* Joid., p. 211.

6 Anabasis of Alexander the Great, cit, supra.

* Jbid., chap. 10.

ee ee ee eee ee

Pa Bbw

Appendix 165

of tyrannicide became a popular theme with the Roman
poets, orators, and historians. The troublous and corrupt
days of the empire saw the cutting-off of numerous tyrants.
‘The experience of the Roman world,’ says Egger, ‘shows
on a larger scale that which Greece had proved many times,
the powerlessness of murder to regenerate the people and
to establish good government. The republican tradition,
however, obstinately outlived these proofs, for it was perpetu-
ated in the conscience of mankind, in se
in the sophistry of the schools,’!

Cicero (B.C. 106-45), one of the glories of Latin literature,
set his seal of approval upon the Greek custom of honoring
tyrannicide. ‘The Greeks,’ he says, ‘give the honors of the
gods to those men who have slain tyrants. What have I
not seen at Athens? What in the other cities of Greece ?
What divine honors have I not seen paid to such men?
What odes, what songs have I not heard in their praise ?
They are almost consecrated to immortality in the memories
and worship of men.’ Two more quotations from the great
orator of Rome must suffice to represent his uncompromising
views on this topic; both are from his Offices: ‘What can
be greater wickedness than to slay, not only a man, but an
intimate friend? Has he then involved himself in guilt who
slays a tyrant, however intimate? He does not appear so
to the Roman people at least, who of all great exploits deem
that the most honorable,’3 Again he says: ‘Now as to what
relates to Phalaris [the tyrant of Agrigentum], the decision
is very easy; for we have no society with tyrants, but rather
the widest separation from them; nor is it contrary to nature
to despoil, if you can, him whom it is a virtue to slay—and
this pestilential and impious class ought to be entirely exter-
minated from the community of mankind. For as certain

limbs are amputated, both it they themselves have begun
to be destitute of blood, and, as it were, of life, and if they

rious literature, and

Sur le Meurtre Politique, etc » Pp. 28.
2 Speech for Milo, chap. 29.
93.4,

166 The Tenure of Kings and Magistrates

injure the other parts of the body, so the brutality and fer-
ocity of a beast in the figure of a man ought to be cut off
from the common body, as it were, of humanity.’?

Nepos (B.C. 100-24) narrates the deeds of Thrasybulus,
Miltiades, Dion, and Timoleon.

Sallust (B.C. 86—A.D. 34) puts a protest against tyranny
into the mouth of Caius Memmius.?

Livy (B.C. 59-A.D. 17) describes the revolution led by
Brutus against the Tarquins,’ and recites the text of the
Valerian Law against those aiming at tyranny.

Seneca (B.C. 4(?)-A.D. 65) wrote the verses quoted by
Milton in The Tenure of Kings and Magistrates (22. 9).

Persius (A. D. 84-62), in his third satire, exclaims: ‘Great
father of the gods, be it thy pleasure to inflict no other
punishment on the monsters of tyranny, after their nature
has been stirred by fierce passion, that has the taint of fiery
poison—let them look upon virtue, and pine that they have
lost her for ever!’ He refers in the same satire to the dread
ofPhalaris and Damocles, when they heard a voice whispering
to their hearts, ‘We are going, going down the precipice.’

Quintilian (A.D. 35-97 (?) uses as an illustration in his
Principles of Oratory the phrase of Cato, ‘Cesar came sober
to destroy the commonwealth.’* He also employsthe similitude :
‘As physicians prescribe the amputation of a limb that mani-
festly tends to mortification, so would it be necessary to cut
off all bad citizens? The use of all such material in school-
exercises reflects the thought of the age; the Roman Senate
in the days of Nero and Domitian had become cowardly in
its subservience to tyrants, yet the educated classes loved

1 Joid., chap. 7. Other references to Cicero’s writings: tid.
8.21; Letters to Atticus 10.8; 14. 15; 16. 15 (in which he calls
those who kill tyrants tyranncotones); To Brutus, chap. 16, Philip.
1.1.

2 Jugurthan War, chap. 31.

3 Hist, 2. 8. 48. 5.

5 Hercules 922—924.

* Bk. 8, chap. 2.

18, 8; cf. 7.2, 3, 7.

Appendix 167

to talk about resistance, even if they had become too effemi-
nate to take up arms against misrule.

Suetonius (during the reign of Trajan) describes the last
days and unhappy deaths of Tiberius,! Nero,? and Galba,s
and gives a sympathetic account of the revolt of Vindex.*

Tacitus (A.D. 65 (?)-119(?), from the opening words of
his Annals, wherein he states that ‘liberty was instituted in
the consulship of L. Junius Brutus,’ shows his animus against
tyrants, His sketch of the life of Tiberius is one of the most
terrible exposures of tyranny ever written. His best-known
saying on this topic is contained in his description of the
funeral of Junia, the niece of Cato: ‘The busts of twenty
most illustrious families were borne in the procession, with
the names of Manlius, Quinctius, and others of equal rank,
But Cassius and Brutus outshone them all, from the very
fact that their likenesses were not to be seen,’5

Marcus Aurelius (A.D. 121-180), the republican emperor,
was at one with other philosophers of his age in eulogizing
Marcus Brutus: ‘From him I received the idea of a polity
in which there is the same law for all, a polity administered
with regard to equal rights and equal freedom of speech,
and the idea of a kingly government which respects most
of all the freedom of the governed.’ He seems to have
imbibed these views from the rhetoricians of the day, who
taught their pupils to declaim against tyrants: ‘From Fronto
[the rhetorician],’ he says, ‘I learned to observe what envy
and duplicity and hypocrisy are in a tyrant, and that generally
those among us who are called patricians are rather deficient
in paternal affection.’7

Dio Cassius (A.D, 155—?) praises Vindex, who incited the

* Lives, chap. 75.

* Chap. 87, 49.

* Chap. 3, 12, 14, 19, 20,

* Nero, chap. 40; Gaba, chap. 11.
5 3.76,

° Meditations 1, 14.

Li5 Be a

168 The Tenure of Kings and Magistrates

army to rise against Nero, and describes with gusto the
latter’s vices, vanities, and miserable death.’

Appian (middle of the second century) shows his hatred
of tyranny in his relation of the conspiracy of Brutus and
Cassius, and their subsequent misfortunes in war?

Marius Maximus (reign of Severus) wrote the lives of three
tyrants, Avidius, Albin, and Niger.

Trebellius Pollio (reign of Constantine), in an endeavor
to match the roll of the Thirty Tyrants of Greece, whom
Thrasybulus overthrew, drew up accounts of the lives of
thirty Roman foes of liberty, most of them being military
leaders of slight importance.*

Capitolinus (a contemporary of Pollio) imitated him by
writing the lives of the tyrants, Verus, Pertinax, and the
Maximins.

Flavius Vopiscus of Syracuse (flourished circa A.D. 300)
also produced literature of this kind in his lives of the
tyrants, Firmus, Saturninus, Proculus, and Bonosus.

Lucius Florus (reign of Trajan) has a single reference to
this subject in his remark: ‘Brutus and Cassius seemed to
have cast Cesar, like another king Tarquin, from the sover-
eignty.’*

Libanius (A. D. 814-893 (?) lived in a century when
Christianity had inculcated the duty of passive obedience,
but his voluminous writings show all the ardor of Plutarch
against tyranny. He quotes Socrates and Theognis as author-
ities against the prevailing practice of poets in praising
tyrants, even those despots who surpass all in madness and
wickedness. Alluding to the eulogy of Harmodius and
Aristogiton by early poets, he says that he has heard that
no slave should be given the name of either hero’ In
a bold justification of tyrannicide he declares: ‘Whoso

1 Hist, Bk. 63. See also 78. 22; 67. 24; 62, 27.

2 Hist. of Crvit War 4, 114—185.

® See his Thirty Tyrants, See Gibbon’s ridicule of this list,
Decline and Fall 1, 408f.

4 Epitome 4. 2.

® Opera 1.655 (Paris).

169

kills a tyrant subjects himself to greater dangers, and should
receive greater honor, than one who has done equal deeds
in war, because the soldier is sustained by the presence of
his comrades, while the slayer of a tyrant has to act alone.’?
After enumerating the causes of hatred of tyrants, he exclaims:
‘Shall we not love any kind of wickedness before tyranny ' ??
He also treats of the perils of tyrants,’ their punishment,‘
their infamy,5 the cruelt- cf Echetus and Phalaris,* the
Athenian tyrants,’ the destruction of the Theban tyrants,®
and the proper reward of tyrannicide.?

Among the schoolmen of the Middle Ages this subject
received some attention from John of Salisbury, who approved
of tyrannicide,° and from St. Thomas Aquinas, who dis-
approved, although he denounced tyranny." The murder
of the Duke of Orleans in 1407 invested the old question
with new and living interest. The assassin, Jean sans Peur,
gloated over his crime, and contended that the sixth command-
ment did not include princes in its prohibition. Had this
enthusiast stood alone, his strange plea might have been
disregarded, but the Duke of Burgandy was charged with
being the instigator of the crime, and the learning of the
day came to his assistance. Jean Petit, a doctor of the
Sorbonne, publicly maintained the thesis that it is lawful
for subjects to slay a tyrant,!2 while his associates in the
University of Paris drew up rules or maxims on the policy
and justice of taking away the life of any tyrannical person,
declaring that natural, moral, and divine laws authorize each
Person to kill, or cause to be killed, a tyrant, and even to
do it by wiles or snares,8 This question was not to be
decided, however, without the pronouncement of the church.
Jean Gerson was the leader of conservative thought on this

1 1. 62. 2 1, 788, + 1, 396. * 1, 594.
* 1. 628, 785, © °F, 507, 7 1. 651, * 2. 490.
* 1, 590.

'° Polycraticus 8, 17—21,

De Reg. Princ. 1, 2,

*2 Creighton, Hist. of the Fapacy 2. 71, 72.

* Blakey, Hist. of Political Liter, 2, 215.

170 The Tenure of Kings and Magistrates

subject, and, chiefly owing to his denunciation of tyrannicide,
it was condemned by the Council of Constance, which decreed
in 1415 that it was heretical to assert ‘that any tyrant may
be killed by a vassal or subject of his own, even by treach-
ery, in despite of oaths, and without any judicial sentence
being passed against him.'' The Council, for political reasons,
refused to condemn the specific opinions of Petit, and, in
spite of the decree, Pope Sixtus V subsequently publicly
eulogised the assassination of Henri III by Clement, the
Dominican.

Throughet the sixteenth century there was a steady
development of the theory of the deposing power, and the
literature on the question of tyrannicide becomes abundant.
The sermons and exegetical works of the Protestant reformers,
especially those of the second generation, encouraged resis-
tance to tyrants through the intervention of the Huguenots,
and Roman Catholics of France were opposed to the tyrannical
monarch, the former invoking the interests of the state, the
latter those of religion.’ But the massacre of St. Bartholomew
in 1572 created deeper convictions, and exerted a tremendous
effect o.. thin} crs of all shades in politics; the results of that
awful event were really most beneficial to the cause of civil
and religious liberty. It has been pointed out that within
seven years of that seeming calamity were written the most
important revolutionary tracts of the century. The follow-
ing works of that great creative period are especially note-
worthy as bearing on the subject of tyranny : Hotman, Franco-
Gallia (1578); Bodin, De Republica (1576); Boétie, Discours
de la Servitude Volontaire, ou le Contr’un (1576); Languet
(or Du Plessis-Mornay) Vindicita contra Tyrannos (1579); and
Buchanan, De Regni Jure apud Scotos (1579). Of these
writers, Bodin seems to have been the first modern to make
a search in the writings of Greece and Rome on the sub-

1 Creighton, Hist. of the Papacy, 2. 72.

2 Von Ranke, Hist, of the Popes 1, 521. See also Oxenham,
Ethics of Tyrannicide, in Short Studies, p. 409.

5 Armstrong, Political Theory of the Huguenots, in Eng. Hist.
Rev., Vol. 4, 1899.

Appendix 171

ject of tyranny. He draws up a short list of the tyranni-
cides of antiquity, quotes the law of Solon and the Valerian
T aw, and admits that if the king be not an absolute sovereign,
it is lawful for either the People or the nobility to Proceed
against a tyrant by way of justice, or even by open force;
but if he be an absolute Sovereign, as in France, Spain,
England, or Scotland, the subjects do not possess even the
right to bring him to trial, for they have no jurisdiction
over him.! ‘But a tyrannical king may by another foreign
Prince be lawfully slain, as Moses slew the Egyptian, and
Hercules destroyed many most horrible monsters, that is to
Say, tyrants.’ Among the imitators of Hercules he includes
Dion, Timoleon, Aratus, Harmodius, and Aristogiton.?

The author of Vindicie contra Tyrannos refined upon Bodin’s
curious distinction between princes, contending that there
is the tyrant absque titulo and the tyrant ad exercitio, the
former being a ‘surper, and the latter a legitimate prince,
but one who has violated the compact, tacit or expressed,
between himself and his people. The private citizen may
draw his sword against the usurper, but not against the
legitimate prince. The magistrate, however, may be appealed
to, and is empowered to compel a lawful king to do his
duty.3

The formulation of such views had its natural Consequence.
They were carried to their logical conclusion by the Roman
Catholic party. The articles of the League of Paris in 1584
provided for the Suppression of heresy and tyranny, and the
assassination of Henri III was the result. Henceforth the
Jesuit writers regarded any tyrant, and particularly a heret-
ical monarch, as a fitting victim of tyrannicide, The ecclesi-
astical upholders of political murder taught that there were
two kinds of tyrants—usurpers, who might of course be slain,
and despots, to be regarded as worthy of death at the hands

‘ The Six Bookes of a Commonweale, p. 222.

* Jbid., pp. 220, 281.

* Janet, Hist. de la Science Politique, pp. 86, 87.
‘ Armstrong, The French Wars of Religion, p. 58.

Cl

172 The Tenure of Kings and Magistrates

of the individual citizen, after the whole republic had ex-
pressly or tacitly condemned them. This doctrine, to be
sure, allowed much latitude for individual judgment.’ Mariana,
the Spanish Jesuit, in his famous chapter, De Tyranno, in
De Rege et Regis Institutione (1599), gave the frankest ex-
position of this teaching, and may be regarded as the leading
advocate of tyrannicide among the numerous Roman Catholic
pamphleteers, He openly justified the assassination of Henri Ill,
and decided that a tyrant might be killed either publicly
or by craft. At certain kinds of poisoning he drew the line,
but did not object to the poisoning of a tyrant through his
clothes or cushions. With the names of Mariana and Buchanan
we have completed the historical circle, and have reverted
to the views of the Athenians, who chanted the Scolium
to the memory of the murderers of the son of Pisistratus.

1 Figgis, Some Political Theories of the Early Jesuits, in 7rans.
Royal, Hist. Soc. 11. 104, 105.

BIBLIOGRAPHY