Dear Brian, this sounds a rather interesting project. I think that you must be interested in the antient virtue ethical tradition, with megalopsyche at the centre of a possible research into it.

Let me suggest at a first glance my friend's, Andreas Kinneging's book on the intellectual resources of European aristocracy: http://www.transactionpub.com/title/Aristocracy,-Antiquity-and-History-978-1-56000-222-2.html

You are certainly aware of Montesquieu's identification of monarchical constitution and the key notion of honour.

Finally, Ortega y Gasset might also be relevant, as he defends a sort of elitism in his ciritque of the revolt of the masses.

Best,

Ferenc

These are helpful.  I welcome others who have ideas.

Briefly, the association with artistocracy is quite of interest to me.  And, the notion of fulfillment of a social demand in honour killing (even if reviled by others) is helpful to think with as well.

I can add some suggestions from a social anthropological perspective: 'Honour, family and Patronage' (John Campbell; 'Honour as a red herring' by Alison Lever; two edited collections: 'Honour and Shame' (J G Peristiany); and 'Honor (sic) and Grace'. (Peristiany & Pitt-Rivers)..some essays in which deal with the gender dimensions of honour. But there are lots of other relevant, ethnographically based, pieces which don't have the word honour/ honor in their titles...

Look Raymond Jamous ed in l'honneur; Editions Autrement series Morales n°3 1991

Anthony Appiah recently wrote a book called the "honor code". It covers a lot of the figures already mentioned and looks at honor from a very Hegelian perspective.

Brian,

in 1975 and again in 1989, I argued that honour was a matter of identity -- you have honour as a chef or as a male or female or as a Marine or as a mother -- any social identity that you value. When I impugn your honour, I am accusing you of not being worthy of that identity. Associated with an identity are rules, norms that encompass both criteria for assignment to that social category/status and criteria for the assessment of relative standing within that status. So I can accuse you of being a bad chef, or the ultimate insult to someone proud of being a chef and who interacts with others in terms of that identity, you are not really a chef at all! See Barkow, J. H. (1975). Prestige and culture: A biosocial approach. Current Anthropology, 16(4), 553-572. doi: 10.1086/201619; and esp, Barkow, Jerome H. (1989). Darwin, Sex, and Status: Biological Approaches to Mind and Culture. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.

This continues to be a very rich and varied conversation, running a wide disciplinary gamut. (thank you).  I invite colleagues to keep sending thoughts, as I do believe the concept / praxis reaches extremely widely in cultural, philosophic, and pragmatic ways.4

Dear Brian,

The answer to your question is expected specific to European context. I am patently therefore ineligible to say anything. Notwithstanding, you might find Philip Mason's "A Matter of Honour: An Account of the Indian Army, its Officers and Men" will give you a comprehensive appreciation of the British understanding of the Indian sense of honour and how this understanding resulted in the genesis of one of the most formidable armies that ever came into being.

Hope this helps. Have a great day.

Dear Srinivasan, 

Thank you for this. I am very interested in reading Mason's work.  And to the contrary, you are entirely eligible!    I take seriously the extent to which Europe has never been insulated from its own imperialist reach beyond the geography we call Europe, and the ricochet's of colonial interchange pointed to by Dipesh Chakrabarty in his Provincializing Europe.  Foucault referred to such ricochet's as well.  Honour appears in so many social and historical milieus, and those milieus in turn are or can be in complex and particular ways fluid with each other.   What captures me at this moment is how northernist power and political regimes (an notably Canada's, constituted out of colonial encounter as it has been) have turned it in complex ways, especially if there might be positive, generative potentialities in that.

all best.

Thank you for this Ted.  The transition and translation from Medieval to Early modern practices is especially interesting.

I think the concept of honor is fundamental is discerning the difference in how we distinguish moral sentiment at every level.

There is a new theory in moral and political philosophy called “Dual Morality.”

It proposes that just as we evolved the five physical senses of sight, smell, touch, hearing and taste to help us navigate our material environment of trees and tornadoes, so too did we evolve two distinct “social senses” to help us successfully maneuver through our social environment of people and groups.

These two social senses come into play depending on how we perceive our surroundings. One of them guides our feelings of right and wrong in times of ease and plenty and the other takes over in times of want or danger. Each of us carries both senses with us at all times, and each of us has a predilection to favor one sense over the other. But we are all capable of using either.

These social senses make themselves known in many ways:

In our political expression we recognize them as “liberalism” vs “conservatism”

As an economic expression we recognize them as “socialistic” vs “capitalistic”

When we describe the psyche we use the terms “personality” vs character”

When times are easy we operate in our liberal pattern of moral understanding where terms like "honor" or "reputation" or "virtue" have no real meaning. Times are easy, there is enough for all, and where there is no risk and no pain there is no vice. We all can survive and so we can imagine we are all equally valuable.

However, in prolonged times of want, danger, and hardship, our other moral pattern of behavior guides us. Here there is not enough for all and maybe we all cannot survive.

Under these conditions it is imperative that we be seen as one of the "better people" and we are judged as superior based on how well we conform to the established patterns of behavior and traditions that have secured the well being of our group. If we follow these traditional patterns we display VIRTUE, we have HONOR, and we deserve RESPECT.

Such terms lose meaning in opulent democratic times where we need not know our neighbors to survive.

But when times are tough and our survival depends on the trust of our neighbors, being seen as virtuous, honorable, and respectable means the difference between life and death.