Repository | Book | Chapter

The bee and the sovereign II

Joseph Campana

pp. 59-78

What is a political animal? Centuries of political theory have responded to the implications of Aristotle's assertion that the human is a "political animal in a greater measure than any bee or any gregarious animal" while more recent decades witness a great unfolding of the politics of the animal. If we are to take Aristotle's Politics as a foundational text, the fracture point between the politics of animals and the political ani- mal occurs not only in the definition of what is or is not human but in the capacity to form a polity. Aristotle, not surprisingly, prioritizes humans over other creatures in a gesture that depends on the enumera- tion of capacities humans alone purportedly possess, especially speech (as opposed to "mere voice [which] can indicate pain and pleasure"), which has the power to "indicate the advantageous and the harmful, and therefore also the right and the wrong."1 Human speech thus indexes moral judgment, "the special property of man in distinction from the other animals ... it is partnership in these things that makes a household and a city state." 2 Moments later, however, another dimen- sion of the political appears. "Thus also," Aristotle insists:

Publication details

Full citation:

Campana, J. (2014)., The bee and the sovereign II, in P. Cefalu, G. Kuchar & B. Reynolds (eds.), The return of theory in early modern English studies II, Dordrecht, Springer, pp. 59-78.

This document is unfortunately not available for download at the moment.