Schoeck_2010_EnvyATheoryOfSocialBehaviour.pdf

OSTRACISM-DEMOCRACY AND ENVY IN ANCIENT GREECE 249
We believe with Ranulf that these considerations in no way invalidate his
basic theory of envy as the motive of ostracism. Plutarch had good
grounds for describing ostracism as 'a humane way of assuaging envy. '
Ranulf would hesitate to call ostracism an institution for the appeasement
of envy simply because Greek authors of the time, such as Pindar,
when referring to ostracism, complained that noble deeds could expect
only spite and envy in return; nor would Ranulf be satisfied with
Herodotus' statement when he remarked on the monstrous envy of the
Athenians. For Ranulf the decisive evidence is rather the correlation
between the institution of ostracism and all the other manifestations of
the envy of the Athenians and their gods. His hypothesis is supported,
above all, by the attitudes of three Greek writers-Aeschylus, Sophocles
and Herodotus-whose works most fully express the prevailing
ethos of the time when ostracism was at its height. For an Athenian it was
unthinkable that a man could be happy and prosperous in every way
throughout his life. It was the duty of the gods to prevent this. Often
enough, though, the citizens themselves seemed to be zealously engaged
in spoiling or frustrating any such good fortune as might arouse their
resentment.
Now Herodotus does not say that Aristides was banished by ostracism
because his fellow citizens were envious of him, but he immediately
follows his factual description of the banishment with the remark that
Aristides was the best and most honourable man in Athens. The envymotive,
according to Ranulf, emerges more clearly in an anecdote related
by Plutarch. It tells of a farmer, who did not know Aristides by sight,
writing his name on the sherd. Aristides asked him what that statesman's
crime might be, that he should be banished, to which the farmer replied:
'r do not know him, but it annoys me to hear him cried up everywhere for
his righteousness. ,20
A significant reason for the failure of so many social scientists to
acknowledge the reality of envy as a motive could be the influence of
such theoreticians as Emile Durkheim and Edward A. Ross, who postulate
as reality a social entity that lies above or outside its individual
members, i.e., the idea of 'society,' and who maintain that all restraint
exercised over individuals or groups within that society are the outcome
20 Ranulf, op. cit., p. 136.