Only there must be art in the vengeance, and the
satisfaction must be compounded of the material injury and moral
humiliation of the offender. A mere brutal, clumsy triumph of force was
held by public opinion to be no satisfaction. The whole man with his
sense of fame and of scorn, not only his fist, must be victorious.
The Italian of that time shrank, it is true, from no dissimulation in
order to attain his ends, but was wholly free from hypocrisy in matters
of principle. In these he attempted to deceive neither himself nor
others. Accordingly, revenge was declared with perfect frankness to be
a necessity of human nature. Cool-headed people declared that it was
then most worthy of praise when it was disengaged from passion, and
worked simply from motives of expedience, 'in order that other men may
learn to leave us unharmed.' Yet such instances must have formed only a
small minority in comparison with those in which passion sought an
outlet. This sort of revenge differs clearly from the avenging of
blood, which has already been spoken of; while the latter keeps more or
less within the limits of retaliation--the 'ius talionis'-- the former
necessarily goes much further, not only requiring the sanction of the
sense of justice, but craving admiration, and even striving to get the
laugh on its own side.
Pages:
472
473
474
475
476
477
478
479
480
481
482
483
484
485
486
487
488
489
490
491
492
493
494
495
496