III. FROM THE RESTORATION TO ANNE…

III. FROM THE RESTORATION TO ANNE

Sec. 1

The broad outcome of the monarchic restoration under Charles II is the intensifying of the royalist sentiment by way of reaction from the Rebellion and the autocracy of the Protector. It has been held that had Richard Cromwell had the energy of his father he might easily have maintained his position, so quietly was his accession at first accepted; and no doubt his irresolution made much of the difference between success and failure; but nothing can be clearer than the leaning of the mass of the people to the "lawful" dynasty. It is a proof of Cromwell's complete dislocation of the old state of touch between the official classes and the public,[1145] that the army leaders had no misgivings when they commenced to intrigue against Richard, and that Monk was so slow to declare for the king when the event showed how immense was the royalist preponderance. During the Rebellion, London, led by the Puritans, had dominated the country; under the Protectorate, town and country were alike dominated by a selected official and military class, representing a minority with military force to impose its rule. As soon as this class began to disrupt in factions, the released play of common sentiment began to carry all forward on a broad tide towards a Restoration; the only footing on which the English people could yet unite being one of tradition and superstition. The anarchy of a State still unfitted for republican government had before brought about the Protectorate: it now led back to the monarchy. And that the new monarchy did not become as absolute as the contemporary rule of Louis XIV was solely owing to the accident of the later adhesion of the restored dynasty to the Church of Rome, which the mass of the people feared more than they did even the prospect of another Civil War. It was the memory of the Fronde that enabled Louis to override the remains of the French constitution and set up an autocracy; and the same force was now at work in England. It was the memory of the Civil War that made the people so much more forbearing with the new king, when his private adhesion to the Catholic Church became generally suspected,[1146] than their fathers had been with his father. By temperament and from experience they were disposed to do anything for the throne; but the general fear of Popery on the one hand, and the special royalist aversion to the Puritan sects on the other, plunged the State into a new ferment of ecclesiastical politics, the strifes of which so far absorbed the general energy that ill-luck in the commercial wars with Holland seems to have been almost a necessary result, even had the king ruled well. Not that the generation of Charles II was a whit less bent on dominion and acquisition than the decade of the Protectorate.

In this new situation, under a king too little devoted to his trade to choose really sagacious courses, but too shrewd to ruin himself, occur the beginnings of parliamentary statesmanship, in the modern sense of government in harmony with the Crown. The powerful administration of Strafford had been a matter of helping the Crown to resist Parliament. The very capable though unforeseeing statesmanship of the Pyms and Hampdens of the Long Parliament, again, was a matter of resisting the Crown; and with Shaftesbury such resistance recurred; but the indolence of the king, joined with his sense of the dangers of the old favouritism, gave rise to the principle of Ministerial Government before partisan Cabinets had come into existence. Clarendon had in him much of the constitutionalist temper. Shaftesbury, however, was better qualified both by training and parts for the task of statesmanship in a stormy and unscrupulous generation. Read dispassionately, his story is seen to be in the main what his careful vindicator would make it--that of a man of average moral quality, with exceptional energy and resource. The legend of his wickedness[1147] is somewhat puzzling, in view of his staunch hostility to Romanism, and of his political superiority to the famous Deist statesman of the next generation, Bolingbroke, who has been so little blackened in comparison. A reasonable explanation is that Shaftesbury was damned by the Church for resisting the king, while Bolingbroke's services to the Church covered his multitude of sins. But the idle rumours of Shaftesbury's debauchery[1148] apparently damaged him with the Protestant Dissenters, and his wickedly reckless policy over the Popish Plot might easily secure him a share in the infamy which is the sole association of the name of Titus Oates. Here also, however, he has been calumniated. Burnet, though plainly disliking him, says nothing of debauchery in his life, and declined to believe, when Charles suggested it, that he had any part in trumping up the falsehoods about the Plot.[1149]

There can be no reasonable doubt that Shaftesbury honestly believed there was a great danger of the re-establishment of Popery, and it is not at all improbable that he credited some of the tales told, as Lord Russell solemnly testified at the scaffold that he for his part had done. To acquit Russell and criminate Shaftesbury is possible only to those who have made up their minds before trying the case. It is practically certain, moreover, that some vague Catholic plotting really did take place;[1150] and in the then posture of affairs nothing was more likely. Shaftesbury, like the other capable statesmen of the Restoration, was in favour of toleration of the Dissenters; but like all other Protestant statesmen of the age, he thought it impossible to tolerate Catholicism. Nor can it well be doubted that had Charles or James been able to establish the Roman system, it would have gone hard with Protestantism. It is true that the only exhibition thus far of the spirit of tolerance in Protestant and Catholic affairs in France and England had been on the part of Richelieu towards the Huguenots, themselves intensely intolerant; but it could not reasonably be supposed that an English Catholic king or statesman, once well fixed in power, would have the wisdom or forbearance of Richelieu. The two systems, in fine, aimed at each other's annihilation; and Shaftesbury simply acted, politically that is, as the men of the First Rebellion would have done in similar circumstances. Instead of dismissing him as a mere scoundrel, we are led to realise how imperfectly moralised were all the men of his age in matters of religion and racial enmity. The friend of Locke can hardly have been a rascal.

For the rest, he was admitted even by the malicious and declamatory Dryden to have been a just Chancellor; it is proved that he opposed the Stop of the Exchequer; and he sharply resisted the rapacity of the royal concubines. In his earlier policy towards Holland he conformed odiously enough to the ordinary moral standard of the time[1151] in politics, a standard little improved upon in the time of Palmerston, and not discarded by those Englishmen who continue to talk of Russia as England's natural enemy, or by those who speak of Germany as a trade rival that must be fought to a finish. His changes of side between the outbreak of the Rebellion and his death, while showing the moral and intellectual instability of the period, were not dishonourable, and are not for a moment to be compared with those of Dryden, most unstable of all men of genius, whose unscrupulous but admirably artistic portrait of the statesman has doubtless gone far to keep Shaftesbury's name in disesteem. It may be, again, that his sufficient wealth takes away somewhat from the merit of his steadfast refusal of French bribes; but the fact should be kept in mind,[1152] as against the other fact that not only the king and some of the Opposition but Algernon Sidney took them.[1153] On the whole, Shaftesbury was the most tolerable of the Ministers of his day, though his animus against Catholicism made him grossly unscrupulous toward individual Catholics; and his miscalculation of possibilities, in clinging to the scheme of giving Monmouth the succession, finally wrecked his career. He had almost no alternative, placed and principled as he was, save to call in the Prince of Orange; and this would really have been at that moment no more feasible a course than it was to declare Monmouth the heir, besides being more hazardous, in that William was visibly less easy to lead. Of Shaftesbury, Burnet admits that "his strength lay in the knowledge of England"; and when he took a fatal course, it was because the whole situation was desperate. His fall measures not so much the capacity of Charles as the force which the royalist superstition had gathered.

Sec. 2

This growth can be traced in the clerical literature of the time. The conception of a "divine right" inhering in kings by heredity--a conception arising naturally as part of the general ethic of feudal inheritance--had been emphasised on the Protestant side in England[1154] by way of express resistance to the Papacy, which from the time of Gregory VII had been wont in its strifes with emperors and kings to deny their divine right and to assert its own, formally founding the latter, however, on the "natural" right inherent in masses of men to choose their own rulers, even as the citizens of Rome had been wont to elect the Popes.[1155] The total effect of the English Rebellion was to give an immense stimulus to the high monarchic view, not now as against the Papacy, but as against Parliament. When the learned Usher drew up at the request of Charles I his treatise[1156] on The Power communicated by God to the Prince, and the Obedience required of the Subject, he proceeded almost wholly on arguments from the Scriptures and the Fathers; not that there were not already many deliverances from modern authorities on the point, but that these evidently had not entered into the ordinary stock of opinion. On the papal side, from Thomas Aquinas[1157] onwards, the negative view had been carefully set forth, not merely as a papal claim, but also as an obvious affirmation of the ancient "law of nature." Thus the Spanish Jesuit Suarez (1548-1617) had in his Tractatus de Legibus, while deriving all law from the will of God, expressly rejected the doctrine that the power of rule inheres by succession in single princes. Such power, he declared, "by its very nature, belongs to no one man, but to a multitude of men,"[1158] adding a refutation of the patriarchal theory which "might have caused our English divines to blush before the Jesuit of Granada."[1159] At the beginning of the seventeenth century, again, while leading Englishmen were affirming divine right, the German Protestant Althusius, Professor of Law at Herborn, publishing his Politica methodice digesta (1603), declares in a dedication to the States of Friesland that the supreme power lies in the people.[1160] Hooker, too, had stamped the principle of "consent" with his authority, very much as did Suarez.[1161]

But the compiler of The History of Passive Obedience since the Reformation,[1162] after showing that the tenet[1163] had been held by dozens of Protestant divines and jurists after the Reformation, and even strongly affirmed by Nonconformists, is able to cite nearly as many assertions of it in the reign of Charles II as in the whole preceding period. The clergy were, indeed, able to show that the principle of non-resistance had been a common doctrine up to the Great Rebellion; and, though the contrary view was on the whole more common,[1164] it well illustrates the instinctive character of political movement that the democratic doctrine had followed the course of action step by step, and not preceded it. There had been resistance before the right to resist was formulated in the schools. And Bishop Guthry records that at the General Assembly in Edinburgh in January, 1645, "everyone had in his hand that book lately published by Mr. Samuel Rutherford, entitled Lex Rex, which was stuffed with positions that in the time of peace and order would have been judged damnable treasons; yet were now so idolised that, whereas in the beginning of the work Buchanan's treatise, De Jure Regni apud Scotos, was looked upon as an oracle, this coming forth, it was slighted as not anti-monarchical enough, and Rutherford's Lex Rex only thought authentic."[1165] So Milton's answer to Salmasius, vindicating the right of rebellion as inherent in freemen, marks the high tide of feeling that sustained the foremost regicides. But in the nature of the case the feeling swung as far the other way when they had touched their extreme limit of action; and when the royalist cause came in the ascendant, the monarchical principle was perhaps more passionately cherished in England than in any of the other European States.[1166] How it normally worked may be seen in Dryden's sycophantic dedication[1167] of his All for Love to Lord Danby (1678), sinking as it does to the extravagant baseness of the declaration that "every remonstrance of private men has the seed of treason in it." It was in this very year that Charles and Danby made the secret treaty with France, the revelation of which by Louis soon afterwards brought Danby to the Tower; and Danby it was who three years before carried through the House of Lords a bill to make all placemen declare on oath that they considered all resistance to the king unlawful.

The handful of remaining republicans and political Liberals, appealing as they did to tradition in their treatises against the traditional pleadings of the Churchmen and royalists, could have no appreciable influence on the public, because the mere spirit of tradition, when not appealed to as the sanction of a living movement of resistance, must needs make for passivity. Algernon Sidney's posthumous folio on Government in answer to Filmer's Patriarcha, arguing the question of self-government versus divine right, and going over all the ground from Nimrod downwards, point by point, is a far greater performance than Filmer's; and Locke in turn brought a still greater power of analysis to bear on the same refutation; but it is easy to see that Filmer's is the more readable book, and that with its straightforward dogmatism it would most readily convince the average Englishman. Nor was the philosophy all on one side, though Filmer has ten absurdities for the other's one, and was so unguarded as to commit himself to the doctrine that the possession of power gives divine right, no matter how come by. Sidney himself always argued that "Vertue" entitled men to superior power; and though he might in practice have contended that the choice of the virtuous should be made by the people, his proposition pointed rather plainly back to Cromwell, acclaimed by Milton as the worthiest to bear rule. And to be governed by a military autocrat, however virtuous and capable, was as little to the taste of that generation as it was to the taste of Carlyle's. Even a clergyman could see that the political problem was really one of the practical adjustment of crude conflicting interests, and that there could easily be as much friction under a virtuous monarch as under a dissolute one. The conscientiousness of the first Charles had wrought ruin, where the vicious indolence of the second steered safely.

As Filmer and Sidney, besides, really agreed in awarding "the tools to him who could handle them," and as the most pressing practical need was to avoid civil war, the solution for most people was the more clearly a "loyal" submission to the reigning house; and no amount of abstract demonstration of the right of self-government could have hindered the habit of submission from eating deeper and deeper into the national character if it were not for the convulsion which changed the dynasty and set up a deep division of "loyalties," keeping each other in check. In the strict sense of the term there was no class strife, no democratic movement, no democratic interest; indeed, no ideal of public interest as the greatest good of the whole. Thus Harrington's Oceana, with its scheme of "an equal Commonwealth, a Government established upon an equal Agrarian, arising into the Superstructures of three Orders, the Senat debating and proposing, the People resolving, and the Magistracy executing by an equal Rotation through the suffrage of the People given by the Ballot"[1168]--this conception, later pronounced by Hume "the only valuable model of a commonwealth that has yet been offered to the public,"[1169] although the same critic exposed its weakness--was in fact as wholly beside the case as the principle of the Second Coming. No man desired the proposed ideal; and the very irrelevance of the systematic treatises strengthened the case for use and wont. The political discussions, being thus mostly in the air, could serve only to prepare leading men to act on certain principles should events forcibly lead up to new action. But the existing restraints on freedom did not supply sufficient grievance to breed action. The dissenters themselves were almost entirely resigned to their ostracism; and the preponderance of the Church and the Tory party was complete.

Luckily the political fanaticism of Charles I reappeared in his son James; and that king's determination to re-establish in his realm the Church of his devotion served to break a spell that nothing else could have shattered.[1170] The very Church which had been assuring him of his irresistibility, having to choose between its own continuance and his, had perforce to desert him; and the old panic fear of Popery, fed by the spectacle of Jeffreys' Bloody Assize, swept away the monarch who had aroused it. He would have been an energetic king; his naval Memoirs exhibit zeal and application to work; and he had so much of rational humanity in him that in Scotland he pointed out to the popes of Presbyterianism how irrational as well as merciless was their treatment of sexual frailty. But his own fanaticism carried him athwart the superstition which would have sufficed to make him a secure despot in all other matters; and when the spirit of freedom seemed dying out in all forms save that of sectarian zealotry, his assault on that brought about the convulsion which gave it fresh chances of life.

Sec. 3

While practical politics was thus becoming more and more of a stupid war of ecclesiastical prejudices, in which the shiftiest came best off, and even theoretic politics ran to a vain disputation on the purposes of God towards Adam, some of the best intelligence of the nation, happily, was at work on more fruitful lines. The dire results of the principles which had made for union and strife of late years, drove thoughtful men back on a ground of union which did not seem to breed a correlative malignity.[1171] It was in 1660, the year of the Restoration, that the Royal Society was constituted; but its real beginnings lay in the first years of peace under Cromwell, when, as Sprat records, a "candid, unpassionate company" began to meet at Oxford in the lodgings of Dr. Wilkins, of Wadham College,[1172] to discuss questions of natural fact. "The University had, at the time, many Members of its own, who had begun a free way of reasoning; and was also frequented by some gentlemen, of Philosophical Minds, whom the misfortunes of the Kingdom, and the security and ease of a retirement amongst Gowns-men, had drawn thither."[1173] In constituting the Society, the associates "freely admitted men of different religions, countries, and professions of life," taking credit to themselves for admitting an intellectual shopkeeper, though "the far greater number are Gentlemen, free, and unconfined."[1174] Above all things they shunned sectarian and party feeling. "Their first purpose was no more then onely the satisfaction of breathing a freer air, and of conversing in quiet one with another, without being ingag'd in the passions and madness of that dismal Age;"[1175] and when they formally incorporated themselves it was expressly to discuss "things and not words."

It is noteworthy that the French Academy, which gave the immediate suggestion for the constitution of the English Royal Society, contained almost no authors save belletrists and ecclesiastics. In the list of members down to 1671 (Relation cited, p. 336), I find no writer on science save De la Chambre, the King's physician. And the first important undertaking of the Academy (projected about 1637) was a Dictionary. Sprat (p. 56) suggests that the Royal Society has usefully influenced the Academy in the direction of the study of things rather than words. (Compare the avowed literary ideal of the authors of the Relation, p. 373.) But although the French group from the first tended mainly to literary pursuits, they too aimed at a "free way of reasoning," "et de ce premier age de l'Academie, ils en parlent comme d'un age d'or, durant lequel avec toute l'innocence et toute la liberte des premiers siecles, sans bruit, et sans pompe, et sans autres loix que celles de l'amitie, ils goutoient ensemble tout ce que la societe des esprits, et la vie raisonnable, ont de plus doux et de plus charmant" (Relation, p. 7).

And even while Sprat was writing, the French were making up their scientific leeway. In 1664-65 there was published in English a translation of A General Collection of Discourses of the Virtuosi of France upon Questions of all Sorts of Philosophy and other (sic) Natural Knowledge made in the Assembly of the Beaux Esprits at Paris, by the most Ingenious Persons of that Nation (2 vols. sm. folio), wherein, though the scientific discussions are distinctly amateurish, there are many speculations likely to stimulate both French and English experiment. There is indeed little to choose in point of solidity between the early themes of the English Royal Society and those of the French Academy. On the other hand, the French Government specially promoted exact study. In 1666 Colbert established the Academie Royale des Sciences, for the promotion of Geometry, Astronomy, Physics, and Chemistry, building a laboratory and an observatory, and inviting to France Cassini and Huygens (Life of Colbert by Bernard, in ed. of Colbert's Last Testament, 1695). Colbert further founded the Academie Royale d'Architecture in 1671; and had set up what came to be the Academie des Inscriptions in his own house. All three bodies did excellent work. (See the acknowledgment, as regards science, in Lawrence's Lectures on Comparative Anatomy, etc., 1819, p. 13.) In France, besides, the philosophy and science of Descartes made way from the first, and it was his works that first gave Locke "a relish for philosophical things." On the other hand, Sprat, who was not without an eye to literature, and made a reputation by his style, acutely notes (p. 42) that "in the Wars themselves (which is a time wherein all Languages use, if ever, to increase by extraordinary degrees, for in such busie and active times there arise more new thoughts of some men, which must be signifi'd and varied by new expressions)" the English speech "received many fantastical terms ... and with all it was enlarg'd by many sound and necessary Forms and Idioms which it before wanted"; and he proposes an authoritative dictionary on the lines of the French project.

The English naturalists would have nothing to do with theology, "these two subjects, God and the Soul, being only forborn."[1176] Reasoning from the development of military faculty in the Civil War, they decided that "greater things are produced by the free way than the formal"[1177]--a principle already put forth by Renaudot, in the preface to the reports of the French Academy, as the guide of their procedure. By attending solely to results and questions of concrete fact, the inquirers were "not only free from Faction, but from the very causes and beginnings of it";[1178] and in the language of the time they held that "by this means there was a race of young Men provided against the next Age, whose minds receiving from them their just Impressions of sober and generous knowledge, were invincibly arm'd against all the inchantments of Enthusiasm"[1179]--that is, of religious fanaticism. And with this recoil from fanaticism there went the stirring and energetic curiosity of people habituated to action by years of war, and needing some new excitement to replace the old. While many turned to debauchery, others took to "experiment."[1180] Says Sprat:--

"The late times of Civil War and confusion, to make some recompense for their infinite calamities, brought this advantage with them, that they stirr'd up men's minds from long ease and a lazy rest, and made them active, industrious, and inquisitive: it being the usual benefit that follows upon Tempests and Thunders in the State, as well as in the skie, that they purifie and cleer the Air which they disturb. But now, since the King's return, the blindness of the former Age and the miseries of this last are vanish'd away: now men are generally weary of the Relicks of Antiquity, and satiated with Religious Disputes; now not only the eyes of men but their hands are open, and prepar'd to labour; Now there is a universal desire and appetite after Knowledge, after the peaceable, the fruitful, nourishing knowledge; and not after that of antient Sects, which only yielded hard indigestible arguments, or sharp contentions, instead of food: which when the minds of men requir'd bread, gave them only a stone, and for fish a serpent."[1181]

Here too, then, there was reaction. It could not suffice to lift the plane of national life, which was determined by the general conditions and the general culture; nor did it alter the predominance of belles lettres in the reading of the educated; but it served to sow in that life the seed of science, destined to work through the centuries a gradual transformation of activity and thought which should make impossible the old political strifes and generate new. Out of experiment came invention, machinery, theory, new scepticism, rationalism, democracy. It is difficult to measure, but not easy to over-estimate, the gain to intellectual life from even a partial discrediting of the old preoccupation with theology, which in the centuries between Luther and Spinoza stood for an "expense of spirit" that is depressing to think of. Down even to our own day, the waste of labour and learning continues; but from the time when two-thirds of Europe had been agonised by wars set up or stimulated by theological disputes, the balance begins to lean towards saner things. The second generation after that in which there arose a "free way of reasoning"[1182] saw the beginnings of "Freethinking" in those religious problems which were for the present laid aside, and the foundation of a new experiential philosophy. New and great reactions against these were to come; reactions of endowed clericalism, of popular sloth, of new "enthusiasm" generated in new undergrowths of ignorance, of recoil from terrific democratic revolution. But the new principle was to persist.

Sec. 4

It is not easy, at this time of day, to accept as a scientific product the confused theory of constitutionalism which gradually grew up in English politics from William the Third onwards. The theory in all its forms is in logic so invertebrate, and in morals so far from satisfying any fairly developed sense of political justice, that we are apt to dismiss it in derision. In so far, indeed, as it proceeds on a formulation of the "social contract" it is always severely handled by the school of Sir Henry Maine, which here represents the anxiety of the upper classes since the French Revolution to find some semblance of rational answer to the moral plea that all men are entitled to political enfranchisement and social help on the simple ground of reciprocity, supposed to be canonised for Christians in the "Golden Rule." Locke, of course, was not thinking of the working mass when he wrote his Letters on Government, any more than when he helped to draw up a constitution for South Carolina endorsing slavery.[1183] But he was at least much nearer rational morals than were his antagonists; the provisions for liberty of conscience in the South Carolina Constitution are notably far in advance of any official view ever previously promulgated; and in subsuming the "social contract" he was but following Hooker and Milton, and indeed adapting Aristotle, an authority whom Locke's later critics are wont to magnify.

Sir Frederick Pollock, in his Introduction to the History of the Science of Politics (p. 20), assumes to have saved Aristotle from the criticism which assails the "social contract" theory, by saying that Aristotle regards a "clanless and masterless man" as a monster or an impossibility, whereas the "theorists of the social contract school" take such a man to be the social unit. There is really no reason to suppose that Aristotle would have denied a pre-political state of nomadic barbarism such as is vaguely figured by Thucydides (i, 2); and as a matter of fact he does expressly posit a process of society-making by compact, first by the utility-seeking combination of families in a village, later by the villages joining themselves into a State, whose express purpose is "good life" (Politics, I, ii). It does not cancel this to say that Aristotle also makes the State "prior" in the rational order to man, for his "prior" (I, ii, 12-14) is not a historical but a metaphysical or ethical proposition. In the third book, again (c. 9), he endorses a proposition of Lycophron which virtually affirms the social contract.

And just as the school of Maine attacks the social contract theory for giving a false view of the origin of society, so did Bodin long ago, and at least as cogently, attack Aristotle and Cicero for defining a State as a society of men assembled to live well and happily. Bodin insists (De la Republique, 1580, l. i, c. i, p. 5; l. i, c. vi, p. 48; l. iv, c. i, ad init. p. 350) that all States originated in violence, the earliest being found full of slaves. It is true that Aristotle at the outset implies that slavery is as old as the family, but he still speaks of States as voluntary combinations for a good end. As to the first kings he is also vague and contradictory, and is criticised by Bodin accordingly. Aristotle was doubtless adaptable to the monarchic as well as to the democratic creed; but Bodin's criticism suggests that in the sixteenth century he was felt to be too favourable to the latter.

It may be worth while to remark that the notion of an unsociable "state of nature" prior to a "social contract" was effectively criticised by Sir William Temple in his Essay upon the Origin and Nature of Government (1672). With a really scientific discrimination he points to food conditions as mainly determining gregation or segregation among animals, observing: "Nor do I know, if men are like sheep, why they need any government, or, if they are like wolves, how they can suffer it" (Works, ed. 1814, i, 9, 10). In the next generation, again, the ultra-Hobbesian view was keenly attacked and confuted by Shaftesbury within a few years of Locke's death (Characteristics, early edd. i, 109-11; ii, 310-21). As I have elsewhere pointed out (Buckle and his Critics, p. 395), the "contract" theory lent itself equally to Whiggism and to High Toryism.

Towards the end of the eighteenth century we find the Radical Bentham (Fragment on Government, 1776) deriding it as held by the Tory Blackstone. But Rousseau himself (preface to the Discours sur l'inegalite) avowedly handled the "State of Nature" as an ideal, not as a historical truth; and Blackstone did the same. It is therefore only a new species of abstract fallacy, and one for which there is no practical excuse, to argue as does the school of Maine (cp. Pollock, as cited, pp. 63, 75, 79, etc.) that the theories in question are responsible for the French Revolution in general, or the Reign of Terror in particular. Revolutions occur for reasons embodied in states of life: they avail themselves of the theories that lie to hand. The doctrine that "all are born equal" or "free" comes from the Institutes of Justinian, and is laid down in so many words by Bishop Sherborne of Chichester in 1536, and by the orthodox Spanish Jesuit Suarez early in the seventeenth century (Tractatus de Legibus, l. ii, c. ii, Sec. 3). The first-mentioned passage is cited by Stubbs, iii, 623-24, and the second by Hallam, Literature of Europe, iii, 160.

The derivation was bound to warp the theory; but such as it is, it represents the beginning of a new art, and therefore of a new science, of representative government. A variety of forces combined to prevent anarchy on the one hand, and on the other the fatal consolidation of the monarch's power which took place in France.[1184] The new English king was a Protestant, and therefore religiously acceptable to the people; but he was a Dutchman, and therefore racially obnoxious; for fierce commercial jealousy had long smouldered between the two peoples, and war had fanned it into flames that had burned wide. Further, he was a "latitudinarian" in religious matters, and zealous to appoint latitudinarian bishops; and the retirement from London forced on him by his asthma deepened tenfold the effect of his normal coldness of manner towards all and sundry. In the very Church whose cause he had saved, he was unpopular not only with the out-and-out zealots of political divine right, but with the zealous Churchmen as such, inasmuch as he favoured the Dissenters as far as he dared. So hampered and frustrated was he that it seems as if nothing but his rare genius for fighting a losing battle could have saved him, despite the many reasons the nation had for adhering to him.

One of these reasons, which counted for much, was the political effect of a National Debt in attaching creditors as determined supporters to the Government. The highest sagacity, perhaps, could not have framed a better device than this for establishing a new dynasty; albeit the device was itself made a ground of hostile criticism, and was, of course, resorted to as a financial necessity, or at least as a resource pointed to by Dutch example, not as a stroke of statecraft. What prudence and conciliation could do, William sought to do. And yet, with all his sanity and enlightenment, he failed utterly to apply his tolerant principles to that part of his administration which most sorely needed them--the government of Ireland. Even in England he could not carry tolerance nearly as far as he wished;[1185] but in Ireland he was forced to acquiesce in Protestant tyranny of the worst description. The bigotry of his High Church subjects was too strong for him. On the surrender of the last adherents of James at Limerick he concluded a treaty which gave the Irish Catholics the religious freedom they had had under Charles II when the Cromwellian oppression was removed; but the English Parliament refused to sanction it, save on the condition that nobody should sit in the Irish Parliament without first repudiating the Catholic doctrines. This was not the first virtual breach of faith by England towards Ireland; and it alone might have sufficed to poison union between the two countries; but it was only the first step in a renewal of the atrocious policy of the past.[1186]

At the Restoration the ex-Cromwellian diplomatists had contrived to arrange matters so that the monstrous confiscations made under the Commonwealth should be substantially maintained; though the settlement of 1653 had been made in entire disregard of the Act of Oblivion by Charles I in 1648; and though Charles II avowed in the House of Lords in 1660 that they had "showed much affection to him abroad." So base were the tactics of the Protestants that many Irish were charged with having forfeited their lands by signing under compulsion the engagement to renounce the House of Stuart; while those who had compelled them to the act now held the lands as royalists. But the decisive evil was the base indolence of the King. As Halifax said of him, he "would slide from an asking face";[1187] and what Clarendon called "that imbecillitas frontis which kept him from denying"[1188] made him solve the intolerable strife of suitors by leaving possession in the main to those who had it. The adventurers and soldiers finally relinquished only one-third of their estates;[1189] and only a few hundreds of favoured Irish were restored to their old lands, under burden of compensation to the dispossessed holders.[1190]

When the resort of James II to Ireland gave power to the oppressed population, it was a matter of course that reprisals should be attempted. The English historian glibly decides that they should not have been permitted; that the King "ought to have determined that the existing settlement of landed property should be inviolable"; and that "whether, in the great transfer of estates, injustice had or had not been committed, was immaterial. That transfer, just or unjust, had taken place so long ago that to reverse it would be to unfix the foundations of society."[1191] Thus does the race which claims to be civilised prescribe a course of action for that which it declares to be uncivilised.[1192] It is further suggested that the English interest in the Irish Parliament would have "willingly" granted James a "very considerable sum" to indemnify the despoiled natives for whom during a quarter of a century it had never moved a finger. There is not the least reason to believe in any such willingness; and it was in the ordinary way of things that the wronged race should not exhibit a moderation and magnanimity of which the wrongers had never for a moment shown themselves capable. The Irish Parliament of 1689, indeed, took care to indemnify all purchasers and mortgagees, while dispossessing original holders under the Cromwellian Settlement;[1193] but it passed an Act of Attainder in the fashion of the age; and when the Protestant cause triumphed, the revenge taken was a hundredfold greater than the provocation.

It was the legislature, not the crown, that did the work. Under the tolerant and statesmanlike King, the Irish Protestant Parliament proceeded to pass law after law making the life of Catholics one of cruel humiliation and intolerable wrong. There is nothing in civilised history to compare with the process by which religious and racial hatred in combination once more set the miserable Irish nation on the rack. The extreme political insanity of the course taken is doubtless to be attributed to the propagandist madness of James, who had just before sought to give all Ireland over to Catholicism. Fanaticism bred fanaticism. But the fact remains that the Protestant fanatics began in the reign of William a labour of hate which, carried on in succeeding reigns, at length made Ireland the darkest problem in our politics.

Hassencamp (pp. 117, 125) insists that the penal laws "were not dictated by any considerations of religion, but were merely the offspring of the spirit of domination," citing for this view Burke, Letter to a Peer (Works, Bohn ed. iii, 296), and Letter to Sir Hercules Langrishe (Id. ib. p. 321). But this is an attempt to dissociate religion from persecution in the interests of religious credit, and will not bear criticism. Burke, in fact, contradicts himself, assigning the religious motive in an earlier page (292) of the Letter to a Peer, and again in the Letter to Langrishe (p. 301). When the Protestants went on heaping injuries on the Catholics in the knowledge that the people remained fixed in Catholicism, they were only acting as religious persecutors have always done. On Burke's and Hassencamp's view, persecution could never take place from religious motives at all. No doubt the race feeling was fundamental, but the two barbaric instincts were really combined. Cp. Macaulay's History, ch. vi (2-vol. ed. 1877, i, 390-93).

As regards Irish trade, commercial malice had already effected all that religious malice could wish. Even in the reign of Henry VIII a law was passed forbidding the importation of Irish wool into England; and in the next century Strafford sought further to crush the Irish woollen trade altogether in the English interest, throwing the Irish back on their linen trade and agriculture, which he encouraged.[1194] Strafford's avowed object was the keeping Ireland thoroughly subject to the English crown by making the people dependent on England for their chief clothing; and to the same end he proposed to hold for the crown a monopoly of all Irish trade in salt.[1195] Cromwell, on his part, was sane enough to leave Irish shipping on the same footing as English under his Navigation Act; but in 1663 the Restoration Parliament put Ireland on the footing of a foreign State, thus destroying her shipping trade once for all,[1196] and arresting her natural intercourse with the American colonies. In the same year, a check was placed on the English importation of Irish fat cattle: two years later, the embargo was laid on lean cattle and dead meat; still later, it was laid on sheep, swine, pork, bacon, mutton, and cheese. In William's reign, new repressions were effected. The veto on wool export having led to woollen manufactures, which were chiefly in the hands of Dissenters and Catholics,[1197] the Irish Parliament, consisting of Episcopalian landlords, was induced in 1698 to put heavy export duties on Irish woollens; and this failing of its full purpose, in the following year the English Parliament absolutely prohibited all export of manufactured wool from Ireland.[1198]

To this policy of systematic iniquity the first offset was a measure of protection to the Irish linen trade in 1703; and this benefaction went almost solely into the hands of the Scotch settlers in Ulster.[1199] Even thereafter the linen trade of Ireland was so maimed and restricted by English hindrances that it was revived only by continual bounties from 1743 to 1773. And this twice restored and subsidised industry, thus expressly struck out of native and put in Protestant and alien hands, has been in our own age repeatedly pointed to as a proof of the superiority of the Protestant and non-Celtic inhabitants over the others in energy and enterprise. As a matter of fact, many of the Scots who benefited by the bounties of 1703 in Ulster had recently immigrated because of the poverty and over-population of their own country, where their energy and enterprise could do nothing. Irish energy and enterprise, on the other hand, had been chronically strangled, during two hundred years, by English and Protestant hands, with a persevering malice to which there is no parallel in human history; and the process is seen at its worst after the "glorious Revolution" of 1688.

Modern English writers of the Conservative school, always eager to asperse Ireland, never capable of frankly avowing the English causation of Irish backwardness, think it a sufficient exculpation of their ancestors' crimes to say that Irishmen have not taken up the old industries since they have been free to do so. Thus the late Mr. H.D. Traill meets Irish comment on Strafford's treatment of the Irish woollen trade by saying that the complainants "in these days prefer other and less worthy industries to those which they have now been free to practise, if they chose, for generations" (Strafford, 1889, p. 137). This is a fair sample of the fashion in which racial and political prejudices prompt men otherwise honourable to devices worthy of baseness. It should be unnecessary to point out, in reply, that when the Irish industries had been so long extirpated as to be lost arts, it was simply impossible that they could be successfully restored in competition with the highly developed machine industry of England. Other countries set up new industries under high protective duties. This Ireland could not do. But the most obvious considerations are missed by malice.

The beginnings of modern parliamentary government thus coincide with the recommencement, in the worst spirit, of the principal national crime thus far committed by England; and this not by the choice of, but in despite of, the king, at the hands of the Parliament. In the next reign the same sin lies at the same door, the monarch doing nothing. The fact should serve better than any monarchic special pleading to show us that the advance towards freedom is a warfare not merely with despots and despotic institutions, but with the spirit of despotism in the average man; a warfare in which, after a time, the opposing forces are seldom positive right and wrong, but as a rule only comparative right and wrong, evil being slowly eliminated by the alternate play of self-regarding instinct. Gross and wilful political evil, we say, was wrought in the first stages of the new progress towards political justice. But that is only another way of saying that even while gross political evil was being wrought, men were on the way towards political justice. A clear perception of the whole process, when men attain to it, will mean that justice is about to be attained.

Sec. 5

Even while the spirit of religion and the spirit of separateness were working such wrong in Ireland, the spirit of separateness was fortunately defeated in Scotland, where it had yet burned strongly enough to make perpetual division seem the destiny of the two kingdoms. We learn how much political institutions count for when we realise that in Scotland, just before the parliamentary union with England, there was as furious an aversion to all things English as there has ever been shown in France of late years to things German. The leading Scots patriots were not only bitterly averse to union, but hotly bent on securing that the line of succession in Scotland after Anne should not be the same as that in England; this because they held that Scottish liberties could never be secure under an English king. The stern Fletcher of Saltoun, a Republican at heart, had to play in part the game of the Jacobites, much as he abominated their cause. But both alike were defeated, with better results than could possibly have followed on any separation of the crowns; and the vehement opposition of the great mass of the Scots people to the Parliamentary Union was likewise defeated, in a manner hard to understand. The heat of the popular passion in Scotland is shown by the infamously unjust execution of the English Captain Green and two of his men[1200] on a charge of killing a missing Scotch captain and crew who were not even proved to be dead, and were afterwards found to be alive. The fanatical remnant of the Covenanters was as bitter against union as the Jacobites. Yet in the teeth of all this violence of feeling the Union was carried, and this not wholly by bribery,[1201] as was then alleged, and as might be suspected from the analogy of the later case of Ireland, but through the pressure of common-sense instinct among the less noisy. There was indeed an element of bribery in the English allowance of liberal compensation to the shareholders of the African Company (better known as the Darien Company), who thus had good cash in exchange for shares worth next to nothing; and in a certain sense the reluctant English concession to Scotland of freedom of trade was a bribe. But it is by such concessions that treaties are secured; and it needed a very clear self-interest to bring round a Scotch majority to union in the teeth of a popular hostility much more fierce than is shown in our own day in the not altogether disparate case of Ulster, as regards Home Rule. Burton and Macaulay agreed[1202] that the intense wish and need of the Scottish trading class to participate in the trade of England (as they had done to much advantage under Cromwell, but had been hindered from doing after the Restoration) was what brought about the passing of the Act of Union in the Scots Parliament. No doubt the moderate Presbyterians saw that their best security lay in union;[1203] but that recognition could never have overridden the stiff-necked forces of fanaticism and race hatred[1204] were it not for the call of plain pecuniary advantage. A transformation had begun in Scotland. The country which for a hundred and fifty years had been distracted by fanatical strifes, losing its best elements of culture under the spell of Judaic bibliolatry, had at length, under the obscure influence of English example, begun to move out of the worst toils of the secondary barbarism, not indeed into a path of pure civilisation--the harm had gone too deep for that--but towards a life of secular industry which at least prepared a soil for a better life in the centuries to come; and even for a time, under the stimulus of the new thought of France, developed a brilliant and various scientific literature. The Darien scheme may be taken as a turning-point in Scottish history; an act of commercial enterprise then arousing an amount of energy and sensation that had for centuries been seen only in connection with strokes of State and sect. It is not agreeable to idealising prejudice to accept Emerson's saying[1205] that the greatest ameliorator in human affairs has been "selfish, huckstering trade"; but, barring the strict force of the superlative, the claim is valid. It is the blackest count in the indictment against England for her[1206] treatment of Ireland that she deliberately closed to the sister nation the door which the Scotch, by refusing union on other terms when union was highly expedient in the view of English statesmen, forced her to open to them.

FOOTNOTES:

[Footnote 1145: Armand Carrel (Histoire de la Contre-Revolution en Angleterre, ed. Bruxelles, 1836, p. 8) notes the "apathetic indifference" to which Cromwell's imperialist rule had reduced the middle classes.]

[Footnote 1146: It is to be noted in this connection that at first the secret was very well kept. There can be no reasonable doubt that Shaftesbury and Lauderdale were kept in the dark as to the Treaty of Dover, in which Charles agreed with Louis to introduce Catholicism in England. Macaulay's suggestion to the contrary comes of his determination to hear nothing in Shaftesbury's defence.]

[Footnote 1147: This is accepted by Armand Carrel, who calls him (Histoire de la Contre-Revolution en Angleterre, p. 6) "homme d'une immoralite profonde."]

[Footnote 1148: It is to be regretted that Green, while admitting that Mr. Christie was "in some respects" successful in his vindication of Shaftesbury, should have left his own account of Shaftesbury's character glaringly unfair. Verbally following Burnet, he pronounces Ashley "at best a Deist" in his religion, and adds that his life was "that of a debauchee," going on to couple the terms "Deist and debauchee" in a very clerical fashion. And yet in the previous paragraph he admits that "the debauchery of Ashley was simply a mask. He was, in fact, temperate by nature and habit, and his ill-health rendered any great excess impossible." The non-correction of the flat contradiction must apparently be set down to Green's ill-health. As a matter of fact, the charge of debauchery is baseless. Long before Mr. Christie, one of the annotators of Burnet's History (ed. 1838, p. 64, note) defended Shaftesbury generally, and pointed out that "in private life we have no testimony that he was depraved." Cp. Christie, Life of Anthony Ashley Cooper, 1871, i, 316.]

[Footnote 1149: History of His Own Time, ed. 1838, p. 290.]

[Footnote 1150: My old friend, Mr. Alfred Marks, whose masterly book, Who Killed Sir Edmund Berry Godfrey? (Burns and Oates, 1905), decisively establishes the suicide theory, and disposes of the counter-theory of Mr. John Pollock, did not dispute the fact of the vague plotting of Coleman. No one can say how much of such loose and futile scheming there was.]

[Footnote 1151: How odious it was may be gathered from Dryden's Annus Mirabilis and Marvell's Character of Holland, pieces in which two men of genius exhibit every stress of vulgar ill-feeling that we can detect in the Jingo press and poets of our own day.]

[Footnote 1152: Dryden's charge, in The Medal, of "bartering his venal wit for sums of gold" during the Rebellion, is pure figment. It is an established fact that even as Councillor of State, to which office there was attached a salary of L1,000, Shaftesbury, then Sir Anthony Ashley Cooper, received no salary at all. See note to Mr. Christie's (Globe) ed. of Dryden's poems, pp. 127, 128.]

[Footnote 1153: Christie's Life of Ashley Cooper, ii, 293, note. Perhaps it is not sufficiently considered by Mr. Christie that Sidney regarded France as a possible ally for the overthrow of monarchy in England. Cp. Hallam, ii, 460-61. His position was not that of an ordinary Parliamentary bribe-taker. See Ludlow's Memoirs, iii, 165, et seq. And the English Government had sought to have him assassinated.]

[Footnote 1154: In 1603 Lord Mountjoy in Ireland laid it down as the doctrine of the Church of England that his master was "by right of descent an absolute king," and that it was unlawful for his subjects "upon any cause to raise arms against him." These words, says Dr. Gardiner (History 1604-43, i, 370), "truly expressed the belief with which thousands of Englishmen had grown up during the long struggle with Rome." For earlier discussions see Stubbs, i, 593, More's Utopia, bk. i, and Hooper's Early Writings, ed. 1843, p. 75.]

[Footnote 1155: As Hallam notes (Middle Ages, 11th ed. ii, 157), the French bishops in the ninth century had claimed sacerdotal rights of deposing kings in as full a degree as the Popes did later. In that period, however, bishops were often anti-papal; and the papal claim practically arose in the Roman and clerical resistance to the nomination of Popes by the Emperor, though Pope John VIII had in his time gone even further than Gregory VII did later, claiming power to choose the Emperor. Id. pp. 165-83.]

[Footnote 1156: Buckle is wrong (i, 394) in dating the beginning of the revival of the doctrine "about 1681." Saunderson's edition of Usher was first published in 1660.]

[Footnote 1157: The words of Thomas are extremely explicit: "Si [principes] non habeant justum principatum sed usurpatum, vel si injusta praecipiant, non tenentur eis subditi obedire." Summa, pt. ii, q. civ, art. 6. The right of the Pope to depose an apostate prince was, of course, constantly affirmed.]

[Footnote 1158: Tractatus de Legibus, lib. ii, c. ii, Sec. 3.]

[Footnote 1159: Hallam, Literature of Europe, ed. 1872, iii, 161.]

[Footnote 1160: Hallam, as last cited, p. 162. Bayle notes (art. "Althusius," and notes) that the treatise was much denounced in Germany.]

[Footnote 1161: Ecclesiastical Polity, bk. i, ch. x, Sec. 8.]

[Footnote 1162: Amsterdam, 1689-90, 2 vols.]

[Footnote 1163: It is to be noted that "Passive Obedience" had different degrees of meaning for those who professed to believe in it. For some it meant merely not taking arms against the sovereign, and did not imply that he was entitled to active obedience in all things. See Hallam, ii, 463.]

[Footnote 1164: Filmer begins his Patriarcha (1680) with the remark that the doctrine of natural freedom and the right to choose governments had been "a common opinion ... since the time that school divinity began to flourish." Like Salmasius, he fathers the doctrine on the Papacy; and, indeed, the Church of Rome had notoriously employed it in its strifes with kings, at its own convenience; but it had as notoriously been put forward by many lay communities on their own behalf, and had been practically acted on in England over and over again. And it is clearly laid down in the third century by Tertullian, Ad Scapulam, ii.]

[Footnote 1165: Memoirs, 2nd ed. p. 177.]

[Footnote 1166: Though it is substantially maintained by Grotius, De Jure Belli et Pacis, 1625, I, iii, 9-12.]

[Footnote 1167: Johnson was moved to pronounce Dryden the most excessive of the writers of his day in the "meanness and servility of hyperbolical adulation," excepting only Aphra Behn in respect of her address to "Eleanor Gwyn." But Malone vindicates the poet by citing rather worse samples, in particular Joshua Barnes's "Ode to Jefferies" (Life, in vol. i of Prose Works of Dryden, 1800, pp. 244-47). They all indicate the same corruption of judgment and character, special to the royalist atmosphere.]

[Footnote 1168: Toland's ed., 1700, p. 55.]

[Footnote 1169: Essay (xvi of pt. ii) on the Idea of a Perfect Commonwealth. Cp. Essay vii, on the tendencies of the British Government, where Harrington's unpracticality is sufficiently indicated.]

[Footnote 1170: Cp. Carrel, Contre-Revolution, p. 212, as to the "profound discouragement" that had fallen on the people in 1685. Cp. p. 213.]

[Footnote 1171: "Our late Warrs and Schisms having almost wholly discouraged men from the study of Theologie." W. Charleton, The Immortality of the Human Soul demonstrated by the Light of Nature, 1657, p. 50. (Cp. Baxter, The Reformed Pastor, 1656; ed. 1835, pp. 95-100.) Charleston, as his title and that of his previous work on Atheism show, uses no ecclesiastical arguments.]

[Footnote 1172: The French Academy, formally founded in 1635, had in a similar way originated in a private gathering some six years before (Olivet et Pelisson, Relation concernant l'Histoire de l'Academie Francoise, ed. 1672, p. 5). There may of course have been many such private groups in England in the period of the Commonwealth.]

[Footnote 1173: History of the Royal Society, 1667, p. 53.]

[Footnote 1174: P. 67. Sprat mentions that many physicians gave great help (p. 130).]

[Footnote 1175: P. 53.]

[Footnote 1176: History of the Royal Society, 1667, p. 83. The French beaux esprits were not afraid to discuss now and then the soul, or even God, contriving to do it without theological heat. See the Collection cited, Conferences 6, 16, 79, 87, 142, etc.]

[Footnote 1177: History, p. 73.]

[Footnote 1178: P. 91.]

[Footnote 1179: P. 53.]

[Footnote 1180: So too with the non-combatants. Note, for instance, Locke's recoil from the scholastic philosophy, and his early eager interest in chemistry, medicine, and meteorology. Anthony a Wood records him as a student "of a turbulent spirit, clamorous, and never-contented"--that is to say, argumentative.]

[Footnote 1181: History of the Royal Society, p. 152.]

[Footnote 1182: Sprat, of course, carried the "free way of reasoning" only to a certain length, feeling obliged to deprecate "that some Philosophers, by their carelessness of a Future Estate, have brought a discredit on knowledge itself" (p. 367); and "that many Modern Naturalists have bin negligent in the Worship of God"; but he still insisted that "the universal Disposition of this Age is bent upon a rational Religion" (p. 366). Compare the Discourse of Things above Reason, by a Fellow of the Royal Society (1681), attributed to Boyle, and published with a tract on the same theme by another Fellow.]

[Footnote 1183: If, that is, the section providing for slavery be his. It probably was not. See Mr. Fox Bourne's Life of Locke, 1876, i, 239. His influence may reasonably be traced in the remarkable provisions for the freedom of sects--under limitation of theism. Id. pp. 241-43. Mr. Fox Bourne does not deal with the slavery clause.]

[Footnote 1184: Thoughtful observers already recognised in the time of James II that if England developed on the French lines religious freedom would disappear from Europe. See the tractate L'Europe esclave si Angleterre ne rompt ses fers, Cologne, 1677.]

[Footnote 1185: This may be taken as certain; but it is not clear how far he wished to go. Ranke (History of England, Eng. tr. iv, 437) and Hassencamp (History of Ireland, Eng. tr. p. 117) are satisfied with the evidence as to his having promised the German emperor to do his utmost to repeal the penal laws against the Catholics, and his having offered the Irish Catholics, before the Battle of Aghrim, religious freedom, half the churches in Ireland, and half their old possessions. For this we have only a private letter. However this point may be decided, the Treaty of Limerick is plain evidence. On the point of William's responsibility for the breach of that Treaty, see the excellent sketch of The Past History of Ireland by Mr. Bouverie-Pusey (1894).]

[Footnote 1186: Cp. the author's Saxon and the Celt, 1897, pp. 146-56.]

[Footnote 1187: A Character of King Charles II, ed. 1750, p. 45.]

[Footnote 1188: Continuation of the Life of Clarendon, in 1-vol. ed. of History, 1843, p. 1006.]

[Footnote 1189: Hallam, iii, 396, following Carte and Leland.]

[Footnote 1190: Bishop Trench (Narrative of the Earl of Clarendon's Settlement and Sale of Ireland, Dublin rep. 1843, pp. 84-93) declares that not only were all re-appropriations to be compensated, but the 54 nominees added to the original list of 500 loyalist officers to be rewarded had not received an acre of land as late as 1675. Hallam sums up on Anglican lines that the Catholics could not "reasonably murmur against the confiscation of half their estates, after a civil war wherein it was evident that so large a proportion of themselves were concerned." In reality, much more than half the land had been confiscated; and all the while the bulk of it remained in the hands of men who had themselves been in rebellion! The settlement was simply a racial iniquity.]

[Footnote 1191: Macaulay, ch. vi, Student's ed. i, 393.]

[Footnote 1192: Id. ib.]

[Footnote 1193: For a full account of the procedure see Thomas Davis's work, The Patriot Parliament of 1689, rep. with introd. by Sir C. Gavan Duffy, 1893.]

[Footnote 1194: Cp. the author's Saxon and Celt, pp. 160, 161, and note.]

[Footnote 1195: H.D. Traill, Strafford, 1889, p. 81.]

[Footnote 1196: Lecky, History of Ireland in the Eighteenth Century, i, 174.]

[Footnote 1197: See Petty, Essays in Political Arithmetic, ed. 1699, p. 186.]

[Footnote 1198: The checking of the Irish wool trade was strongly urged by Temple in the English interest (Essay on the Advancement of Trade in Ireland, Works, iii, 10).]

[Footnote 1199: See Dr. Hill Burton's History of the Reign of Queen Anne, 1880, iii, 160-63. This measure seems to have been overlooked by Mr. Lecky in his narrative, History of Ireland, i, 178.]

[Footnote 1200: Green's ship and crew were first seized without form of law in reprisal for the seizure in England, by the East India Company, of a Scotch ship belonging to the old Darien Company, whose trade the India Company held to be a breach of its monopoly. The charge of slaying a Scotch captain was an afterthought.]

[Footnote 1201: On this see Burton, viii, 178-85; and cp. Buckle, 3-vol. ed. iii, 160, as to the rise of the trading spirit.]

[Footnote 1202: Burton's History of Scotland, viii, 3, note.]

[Footnote 1203: Id. viii, 168.]

[Footnote 1204: "It is a marvel how the Edinburgh press of that day could have printed the multitude of denunciatory pamphlets against the Union" (Burton, viii, 131). "The aristocratic opponents of the Union did their utmost to inflame the passions of the people" (id. p. 137, cp. p. 158, etc.).]

[Footnote 1205: Following Hallam, Middle Ages, iii, 327.]

[Footnote 1206: Properly speaking, the action of "England" was the action of the merchant class, which in this case most exerted itself and got its way.]

Spotted a typo or a problem in this chapter? Tell us

IV. INDUSTRIAL EVOLUTION

At all times within the historic period trade and industry have reacted profoundly on social life; and as we near the modern period in our own history the connection becomes more and more decisively determinant. In the oldest culture-history at all known to us, as we have seen, the commercial factor affects everything else; and at no time in European annals do we fail to note some special scene or area in which trade furnishes to politicians special problems. Thus the culture-history of Italy, as we have also seen, is in past epochs inseparably bound up with her commercial history. But as regards the north of Europe, it is in the modern period that we begin specially to recognise trade as playing a leading part in politics, national and international. The Mediterranean tradition is first seen powerfully at work in the history of the Hansa towns: then comes the great development of Flanders, then that of Holland, then that of England, which gained so much from the influx of Flemish and Dutch Protestant refugees in the reign of Philip II, but which was checked in its commercial growth, under Elizabeth and James alike, by their policy of granting monopolies to favourites.

Sir Josiah Child puts "the latter end of Elizabeth's reign" as the time when England began to be "anything in trade" (New Discourse of Trade, 4th ed. p. 73). Cp. Prof. Busch on English trade under Henry VII, England unter den Tudors, i, 71-85, with Schanz, Englische Handelspolitik, i, 328, where it is stated that in the latter part of the sixteenth century there were 3,000 merchants engaged in the sea trade. This seems extremely doubtful when we note that the whole foreign trade of London was stated in Parliament in 1604 to be in the hands of some 200 citizens (Journals of the House of Commons, May 21, 1604), and the total customs of London amounted to L110,000 a year, as against L17,000 from all the rest of the kingdom. As Hume notes (ch. 45, note), a remonstrance from the Trinity House in 1602 declared that since 1588 the shipping and number of seamen in England had decayed about a third. (Cit. from Anglesey's Happy Future State of England, p. 128.) This again, however, seems doubtful.

Broadly put, the fact appears to be that after a considerable development of woollen manufacture in the towns during the Wars of the Roses (above, p. 393), when sheep-rearing must have been precarious and wool would be imported, there was a general return to pasturage under the Tudor peace, the towns falling away, with their manufactures. Attempts were made under Henry VIII and Edward VI to develop the English mining industries by means of German workmen and overseers, but apparently with no great success (Ehrenberg, Hamburg und England im Zeit. der Koen. Elisabeth, 1896, pp. 4-6). It was after the persecution of Protestants in the Netherlands under Charles V had driven many tradesmen to England for refuge that manufacturing industry notably revived; and in 1564-65 we find the year's exports of England reckoned at L68,190 for wool and L896,079 for cloths and other woollen wares; the whole of the rest of the export trade amounting only to L133,665 (Brit. Mus. Lansdowne MS. 10, fol. 121-22, cited by Ehrenberg, p. 8; cp. Cunningham, Industry and Commerce, ii, 82-83; Gibbins, Industrial Hist. of England, 3rd. ed. pp. 132-33.) After the fall of Antwerp, again, much of the commerce of that city fell to the share of England, some of her commercial and artisan population following it (Froude, Hist. of England, ed. 1872, xii, 1-2).

In the same period the commercial life of north Germany, which had hitherto been far more widely developed than that of England (Ehrenberg, pp. 1-11), was thrown back on the one hand by the opening of the new ocean route to the East Indies, which upset the trans-European trade from the Mediterranean, and on the other by the new strifes between the princes and the cities (id. pp. 34-49); and here again English trade came to the front.

The "Merchant Adventurers," ready enough to accept monopolies for their own incorporations, were free-traders as against other monopolists;[1207] and not till all such abuses were abolished could England compete with Holland. And though they were never legally annulled even under the Commonwealth, "as men paid no regard to the prerogative whence the charters of those companies were derived, the monopoly was gradually invaded, and commerce increased by the increase of liberty."[1208] France at times promised to rival both Holland and England; but she at length definitely fell behind England in the race, as Flanders fell behind Holland, by reason of political misdirection. In the middle and latter part of the seventeenth century, all the northern States had their eyes fastened on the shining example of Holland;[1209] and commerce, which as an occasion of warfare had since the rise of Christianity been superseded by religion, begins to give the cue for animosities of peoples, rulers, and classes. The last great religious war--if we except the strifes of Russia and Turkey, which are quasi-religious--was the Thirty Years' War. Its very atrocity doubtless went far to discredit the religious motive,[1210] and it ranks as the worst war of the modern world. Commerce, however, for centuries supplied new motives for war to men whose ideas of economics were still at the theological stage.[1211] The eternal principle of strife, of human attraction and repulsion, plays through the phenomena of commerce as through those of creed. The profoundly insane lust for gold and silver, which had so largely determined the history of the Roman Empire, definitely shaped that of Spain; and Spain's example fired the northern nations with whom she came in contact.

Prof. Thorold Rogers is responsible for the strange proposition (Economic Interpretation of History, p. 186; Industrial and Commercial History of England, p. 321) that the chief source of the silver supply of Europe, before the discovery of the New World, was England. He offers nothing but his own conviction in proof of his statement, to which he adds the explanation that the silver in question was extracted from sulphuret of lead. It seems well to point out that there is not a shadow of foundation for the main assertion. That the argentiferous lead mines were worked seems clear; but that they could produce the main European supply without the fact being historically noted is incredible. On the other hand, silver mines were found in Germany in the tenth century and later, and there is reason to attribute to their output a gradual rise of prices before the fifteenth century (Anderson's History of Commerce, i, 67). In any case, there is no reason to doubt the statement of the historians of the precious metals, that what silver was produced in Europe in the Middle Ages was mostly mined in Spain and Germany. See Del Mar, History of the Precious Metals, 1880, pp. 38-43 and refs.; also Ehrenberg, Hamburg und England im Zeitalter der Koenigin Elisabeth, 1896, pp. 4, 9; Menzel, Geschichte der Deutschen, Cap. 276, end; and Kohlrausch, History of Germany, Eng. tr. 1844, p. 261.

The direct search for gold as plunder developed into the pursuit of it as price; and wealthier States than Spain were raised by the more roundabout method which Spain disdained.

This was soon recognised by Spanish economists, who probably followed the French physiocrats, as represented in the excellent chapters of Montesquieu on money (cited above, p. 363). See the passage from Bernard of Ulloa (1753) cited by Blanqui, Hist. de l'econ. polit., 2e edit. ii, 28. Cp. Samber, Memoirs of the Dutch Trade, Eng. tr. 1719, pref. Apart from the habits set up by imperialism, the Spaniards were in part anti-industrial because industry was so closely associated with the Moriscoes (Major Hume, Spain, p. 195); and the innumerable Church holidays counted for much. Yet in the first half of the sixteenth century Spain had a great development of town industrial life (Armstrong, Introd. to same vol. pp. 83-84). This is partly attributable to the new colonial trade; but probably more to the connection with Flanders. Cp. Grattan, The Netherlands, pp. 66, 88. About 1670, however, manufacture for export had entirely ceased; the trade of Madrid, such as it was, was mainly in the hands of Frenchmen; the Church and the bureaucracy alone flourished; and although discharged soldiers swarmed in the cities, what harvests there were had to be reaped by the hands of French labourers who came each season for the purpose. Hume, as cited, p. 285. This usage subsisted nearly a century later (Tucker, Essay on Trade, ed. 1756, p. 25)

Holland in the seventeenth century presented to the European world, as we have seen, the new and striking spectacle of a dense population thriving on a soil which could not possibly be made to feed them. "Trade" became the watchword of French statesmanship; and Colbert pressed it against a froward nobility;[1212] while in England a generation later it had acquired the deeper rooting that goes with the voluntary activity and self-seeking of a numerous class; and already the gentry freely devoted their younger sons to the pursuits which those of France contemned.[1213]

The turn seems to have been taken in the most natural way, after Parliament was able to force on James I a stoppage of the practice of granting monopolies. At his accession, the King had sought popularity by calling in and scrutinising the many monopolies granted by Elizabeth, which constituted the main grievance of the time.[1214] Soon, however, he conformed to the old usage, which had in some measure the support of Bacon;[1215] and in 1621 it was declared that he had multiplied monopolies twentyfold.[1216] The most careful historian of the period reports that though they were continually being abused,[1217] they were granted on no corrupt motives, but in sheer mistaken zeal for the spread of commerce.[1218] It would be more plausible to say that when interests either of purse or of patronage lay in a certain direction, those concerned were very easily satisfied that the interests of commerce pointed the same way. At length, after much dispute, the Lords passed, in 1624,[1219] a Monopoly Bill previously passed by the Commons in 1621;[1220] and though some of the chief monopolies were left standing, either as involving patents for inventions or as being vested in corporations,[1221] mere private trade monopolies were for the future prevented.

It was a triumph of the trading class over the upper, nothing more. As for the corporations, they were as avid of monopolies as the courtiers had ever been; and independent traders hampered by monopolist corporations were only too ready to become monopolist corporations themselves.[1222] Under Charles I, for instance, there was set up a chartered company with a monopoly of soap-making, of which every manufacturer could become a member--a kind of chartered "trust," born out of due time--the price paid to the crown for the privilege being L10,000 and a royalty of L8 on every ton of soap made. For this payment the monopolists received full powers of coercion and the punitive aid of the Star Chamber. After a few years, in consideration of a higher payment, the King revoked the first patent and established a new corporation. Similar monopolies were granted to starch-makers and other producers; the Long Parliament pursuing the same policy, "till monopolies became as common as they had been under James or Elizabeth."[1223]

Part of the result was that about 1635 "there were more merchants to be found upon the exchange worth each one thousand pounds and upwards than there were in the former days, before the year 1600, to be found worth one hundred pounds each."[1224] The upper classes, as capitalists and even as traders, were not now likely to remain aloof. But all the while there was no betterment of the lot of the poor. "That our poor in England," writes Child after the Restoration, "have always been in a most sad and wretched condition ... is confessed and lamented by all men."[1225] Child's theory of the effect of usury laws in the matter is pure fallacy; but his estimate of men's fortunes is probably more accurate than the statement of the Venetian ambassador in the reign of Mary, that "there were many merchants in London with L50,000 or L60,000 each."[1226] Howell, in 1619,[1227] expresses a belief that "our four-and-twenty aldermen may buy a hundred of the richest men in Amsterdam." Yet, though it was also confessed that among the Dutch, and even in Hamburg and Paris, the poor were intelligently provided for,[1228] no such necessity was practically recognised in England,[1229] either by Puritan or by Cavalier, though before the Rebellion the administration of Charles had not been apathetic;[1230] and a century later there were the same conditions of popular misery and vice, with a new plague of drunkenness added.[1231] By that time, too, the corporation monopolies were strangling trade just as the private monopolies had formerly done;[1232] while France, which in the latter part of the seventeenth century gave such a stimulus to English and Dutch industry by the suicidal Revocation of the Edict of Nantes, had recovered both population and trade,[1233] and was on a commercial footing which, well developed, might have given her the victory over England in the race for empire.

Everywhere in the seventeenth century, however, the new development meant new strife. Protestant England and Holland, Catholic France and Protestant Holland, flew at each other's throats in quarrels of trade and tariffs; and for the monopoly of the trade in cloves, Dutch and Spanish and English battled as furiously as for constraint and freedom of conscience. The primitively selfish and mistaken notion men had formed of commercial economy was on a level with the religious impulse as it had subsisted from the beginning of Christendom; and even as each Christian sect had felt it necessary to throttle the rest, each nation felt that its prosperity depended on the others' impoverishment. To spite the Dutch, the Cromwellian party in 1651 passed the Navigation Act, prohibiting all imports of foreign goods save in English ships or those of the nations producing them. In practice it was a total failure, the effect being to injure the English rather than the Dutch trade; but the Dutch themselves, who were fanatical for their own Asiatic monopoly trade, believed it would injure them, and went to war accordingly.

The eulogy of the Navigation Act as "wise" by Adam Smith (put, by the way, with a "perhaps") is one of his worst mistakes. Roger Coke in 1672 testified (Treatise on Trade, p. 68, cited by M'Culloch) that within two years of the passing of the Act England lost the greater part of the Baltic and Greenland trades; and Sir Josiah Child's New Discourse of Trade shows in detail that the English by about 1670 or 1690 had lost to the Dutch even much of the trade they formerly had. (See Preface to second and later editions, and compare M'Culloch, note xi to his edition of the Wealth of Nations, and McCullagh, Industrial History, ii, 340.) The one direction in which the Act seems to have been successful was in stimulating shipbuilding and seafaring in the American colonies. (See Prof. Ashley in the Quarterly Journal of Economics, Boston, November, 1899, pp. 4-6.) Joshua Gee, in his Trade and Navigation of Great Britain Considered (1730, 6th ed. p. 113), expressly ascribes a "prodigious increase of our shipping" to "the timber trade between Portugal, etc., and our plantations," one result being that English ships have "become the common carriers in the Mediterranean, as well as between the Mediterranean, Holland, Hambro', and the Baltic." He says nothing of the Navigation Act, but lays stress on the cheap building of ships in New England, and notes (p. 114) that the Dutch habitually hire English ships "to transport their goods from Spain, etc., to Amsterdam, and other places."

Even among expert merchants there was no true economic science, only a certain empirical knowledge, reduced to rule of thumb. Hence the traders were for ever tending to strangle trade, and the ablest administrators fell into the snare. Everywhere they tended to be possessed by the gross fallacy that they could somehow sell without buying,[1234] and so heap up gold and silver; and to secure at least a balance in bullion was considered an absolute necessity. This was the most serious error of the policy of Colbert, who secured a balance of social gain to France by stimulating and protecting shipping and new industries,[1235] but failed to learn the lesson that foreign commerce in the end must consist in an exchange of goods. Thus, though he resisted the ruinous methods of Louis XIV,[1236] he lent himself to the theory which, next to the hope of making the Netherlands a province of France and so an arm of French naval strength, stimulated the policy of war. By repeatedly raising his tariffs he forced the Dutch to raise theirs; whereupon France went to war. Had he known that the Dutch could not sell to France without buying thence, and vice versa, he would have rested content with establishing his new industries.

M. Dussieux (as cited, p. 127) frames a deplorable demonstration that Holland was impoverishing France and destroying all industry there by selling more articles than she bought. As if any country could go on buying in perpetuity without selling in payment. M. Dussieux goes on to admit that France before Colbert had some great industries, and a great agricultural export trade, as must needs have been. His argument shows the survival of the mercantilist delusion that trade can drain a productive country of its bullion. It is evident that Colbert helped trade more by checking fiscal abuses and promoting canals and roads than by protecting new industries. On the whole he seems to have gravely injured agriculture (id. pp. 89, note, and 133); and Adam Smith's criticism (Wealth of Nations, bk. iii, ch. ii; bk. iv, ch. ix) remains valid. He was "imposed upon by the sophistry of merchants and manufacturers, who are always demanding a monopoly against their countrymen," and by prohibiting export of grain he depressed agriculture, the natural and facile industry of France, and so promoted the rural misery which at length inspired the Revolution. It was essentially by way of reaction against his error that the Physiocrats fell into theirs--the denial that any industry was productive except agriculture. Even if he had not prohibited export of grain, his import duties, in so far as they excluded foreign products, would have checked the grain exports which had formerly paid for these. Thus, as M. Dussieux admits, Colbert failed to secure prosperity for the peasantry while he was helping industry. (Cp. Brandt, Beitraege, as cited.) Colbert in the nineteenth century had the benefit of the doctrine that monarchism prepared for democracy in France, and there is some truth in the protest of Morin that on this and other grounds he became the object of "un culte ridicule qui brave les notions les plus elementaires de l'economie publique" (Origines de la democratie, Introd.--written in 1854--p. 48). Morin goes so far as to charge on Colbert equally with Louvois the misfortunes of France under Louis XIV (id. pp. 88, 120).

Of course the rival nations were equally self-seeking. Prohibitive tariffs were necessarily lowest with the most specifically commercial State, the Dutch; and the free trade doctrine began early to be heard in England.

E.g., from Dudley North. Macaulay, ed. cited, i, 253. See the quotations in M'Culloch, as above cited. Pepys, in his Diary, under date 1664, February 29, tells how Sir Philip Warwick expounded to him the "paradox" that it does not impoverish the nation to export less than it imports. For earlier instances of right thinking on the subject see the author's Trade and Tariffs, p. 65 sq. The repeal in 1663 of statutes against exporting bullion was carried in the interests of the East India Company, and apparently on a false theory; see it in Child, New Discourse, p. 173. Cp. Shaftesbury, Characteristics, Treatise II, pt. i, Sec. 2, end, as to the advantage of a "free port." This had been partially insisted on, as we have seen, by the Merchant Adventurers in the days of Elizabeth and James; and Raleigh strongly pressed it in his Observations touching Trade and Commerce with the Hollander and other Nations, presented to James. Works, ed. 1829, viii, 356-57. Raleigh, however, was a bullionist.

But whether rulers leant in the direction of free trade or strove to heap up import duties as did France, they went to war for monopolies and for imposts. Holland had as determinedly sought the ruin of Antwerp as England did that of Holland. And as the race-principle embroiled nations on the score of trade, so the class-principle set up new feuds of class in all the nations concerned. The new trading class fought for its own hand as the trade gilds of the Middle Ages had done; and the fact of its connections with the gentry did not prevent animosity between gentry and traders or investors in the mass. Thus were the old issues complicated, for good or for ill.

Prof. Cunningham (English Industry and Commerce, ed. 1892, ii, 16-17) offers an unexpected defence of the "Mercantile System," under which bullion was striven for as "the direct means of securing power." "The wisdom of the whole scheme," he writes, "is apparently justified by the striking development of national power which took place during the period when it lasted. England first outstripped Holland and then raised an empire in the East on the ruins of French dependencies." After this argument Dr. Cunningham falters, observing: "But even if the logic of facts seems to tell in its favour, there is a danger of fallacy: success was attained, but how far was it due to the working of coal, and the age of mechanical invention, and how far to the policy pursued?" There is really no need to suppose such an antinomy between "the logic of facts" and any other logic. The only legitimate logic of facts is that which takes in all the facts. Now, seeing that France was as much devoted as England to the Mercantile System, and that in the terms of the case she failed, it cannot have been the Mercantile System that secured success to England. The logic of facts excludes the hypothesis. As for the "outstripping" of Holland, a country with perhaps a fourth of England's population in the eighteenth century, we have seen that the Mercantile System, as operating in the Navigation Act, totally failed to attain its purpose, and that Dutch decadence was largely due to monopolies--i.e., to acceptance of the Mercantile System. The working of coal, on the other hand, was a real wealth-making force, certainly conducive to naval and other empire. But more allowance is to be made for the fact that France had heavy continental quarrels on hand while she was fighting England in Asia and America.

If at this stage we seek to discover the manner of life of the working class in England, we shall find it hard to reach a confident conception. Many phrases in Shakespeare remind us that as towns grew there grew with them a nondescript semi-industrial class, untrained for any regular industry and unable to subsist without industry of some sort. In the latter part of the seventeenth century we seem to see a process of elimination at work by which the organisms capable of enduring toil are selected from a mass to which such toil was too irksome. In 1668 Sir Josiah Child writes that the English poor in a cheap year "will not work above two days in a week; their humour being such that they will ... just work so much and no more as may maintain them in that mean condition to which they have been accustomed." That, accordingly, a high price for bread was a good thing, as forcing the poor to industry, became the standing doctrine of such publicists as Petty.[1237] In the next generation, Mandeville puts as indisputable the statement that "the poor" will not work any more than they need to maintain bare existence. When, late in the eighteenth century, we find Adam Smith, with French testimony to support him, denying that the pinch of poverty makes for industry, we are left in doubt as to whether the improvement came by a positive dying out of the lazy types through the new plague of alcoholism, or through the gradual exemplary force of a higher standard of comfort as seen among the more industrious. Probably both influences were at work. But it was at best in a grimy under-world of degeneracy and hunger, squalor and riot, that there were laid the roots of the new mechanical industries which were to make England the chief mill and counter of Europe.[1238] And when we find one of the acutest observers of the next generation arguing that a large body of the needy poor is the right and necessary basis of industry and public wealth,[1239] we realise that the new life was to be as hard for the toilers as that of any earlier age.

Conclusion

It is in the reign of the last of the Stuarts, whose sex made her perforce rely on ministers to rule for her, and whose unenlightened zeal[1240] thus missed the disaster which similar qualities had brought upon two of her predecessors--it is in the reign of Anne, swayed by favourites to an extent that might have made monarchy ridiculous[1241] if monarchists had gone by reason and not by superstition--that there begins recognisably the era of government by parliamentary leaders, representing at once, in varying degrees, monarch and people; and it is at this point that we begin the biographical studies[1242] to which the foregoing pages offer an introduction. But under new conditions and phases we are to meet for the most part repetitions and developments of the forces already recognised as at work from time immemorial. Thus early have we seen in action, on the field of English history, most of those primary forces of strife whose play makes the warp of politics, ancient and modern; and the distinct emergence, withal, of that spirit which, rare and transient in ancient times, seems destined to inherit the later earth--the spirit of science, which slowly transmutes politics from an animal to an intellectual process, raising it from the stage of mere passional life to the stage of constructive art, and from the social relation of rule and subjection towards the relation of mutuality and corporate intelligence. Politics, we formally say, is the process of the clash of wills, sympathies, interests, striving for social adjustment in the sphere of legislation and government. The earlier phases are crude and animalistic, and involve much resort to physical strife. The later phases are gradually humanised and intelligised, till at length the science of the past process builds up a new phase of consciousness, which evolves a conscious progressive art. That is to say, the conscious progressive art develops in course of time: it had not really arisen in any valid form at the period to which we have brought our bird's-eye view. It had transiently arisen in the ancient world, as in Solon and, far less effectually, in the Gracchi; but the conditions were too evil for its growth, and the course of things political was downward, the animal instincts overriding science, till even when there was compulsory peace the spirit of science could no more blossom. In English politics, soon after the beginning of the eighteenth century, the conditions brought about civil peace under a new dynasty, which it was the function of the statesmanship of the dynasty to maintain. At the same time the spirit of science had entered on a new life. It remains to trace, under successive statesmen and in the doctrine of successive politicians, the fluctuations of English progress towards the great Utopia, the state of reconciliation of all the lower social antipathies and interests, and of free scope for the inevitable but haply bloodless strifes of ideals, which must needs clash so far as we can foresee human affairs. The progress, we shall see, is only in our own day beginning to be conscious or calculated: it has truly been, so far as most of the actors are concerned, by unpath'd waters to undream'd shores. The hope is that the very recognition of the past course of the voyage will establish a new art and a new science of social navigation.

To make a new aspiration pass for a law of progress merely because it is new would, of course, be only a fresh dressing of old error. There is no security that the scientific form will make any ideal more viable than another; every ideal, after all, has stood for what social science there was among its devotees. The hope of a moral transformation of the world is a state of mind so often seen arising in human history that some distrust of it is almost a foregone condition of reflection on any new ideal for thoughtful men. A dream of deliverance pervades the earliest purposive literature of the Hebrews; a fabled salvation in the past is made the ground for trust in one to come. Wherever the sense of present hardship and suffering outweighs the energetic spirit of life in the ancient world, the young men are found seeing visions, and the old men dreaming dreams; and the thought of "the far serenity of Saturn's days" becomes a foothold for the Virgilian hope of a golden age to come. A hundred times has the hope flowered, and withered again. Confident rebellions, eager revolutions, mark at once its rise and its fall. In our own age the new birth of hope arises in the face of what might have seemed the most definitive frustration; it becomes an ideal of peaceful transformation under the sole spell of social science, with no weapons save those of reason and persuasion. The science of natural forces has widened and varied life without greatly raising it in mass. Yet the new science, we would fain believe, will conquer the heightened task. In the fulfilment or non-fulfilment of that hope lies for the coming age the practical answer to the riddle of existence.

Without such a hope, the study of the past would indeed be desolating to the tired spectator. Followed through cycle after cycle of illusory progress and conscious decline, all nevertheless as full of pulsation, of the pride of life and the passion of suffering, as the human tide that beats to-day on the shores of our own senses, the history of organised mankind, in its trivially long-drawn immensity, grows to be unspeakably disenchanting. Considered as a tale that is told, it seems to speak of nothing but blind impulse, narrow horizons, insane satisfactions in evil achievement, grotesque miscalculation, and vain desire, till it is almost a relief to reflect how little we know of it all, how immeasurable are the crowded distances beyond the reach of our search-light. Alike the known and the unknown, when all is said, figure for us as fruitless, purposeless, meaningless moments in some vast, eternal dream.

Poi di tanto adoprar, di tanti moti D'ogni celeste, ogni terrena cosa Girando senza posa, Per tornar sempre la donde son mosse; Uso alcuno, alcun frutto, Indovinar non so.[1243]

The untranslatable cadence of Leopardi has the very pulse of the wearied seeker's spirit. Yet, through all, the fascination of the inquiry holds us, as if in the insistent craving to understand there lay some of the springs of movement towards better days. We brood over the nearer remains, so near and yet so far, till out of the ruins of Rome there rise for us in hosts the serried phantoms of her tremendous drama; till we seem to catch the very rasp of Cato's voice, and the gleam of Caesar's eye, swaying the tide of things. Still, the sensation yields no sense of fruition; Rome the dead, and Greece the undying, drift from our reach into the desert distance. Beyond their sunlit fragments lies a shoreless and desolate twilight-land, receding towards the making of the world; and there in the shadows we dimly divine the wraiths of a million million forms, thronging a hundred civilisations. The vision of that vanished eternity renews the intolerable burden of the spirit baffled of all solution. For assuredly, in the remotest vistas of all, men and women desired and loved, and reared their young, and toiled unspeakably, and wept for their happier dead; and the evening and the morning, then as now, wove their sad and splendid pageantries with the slow serenity of cosmic change. Great empires waxed to the power of wreaking infinite slaughter, through the infinite labour of harmless animal souls; and seas of blood alternately cemented and sapped their brutal foundations; and all that remains of them is a tradition of a tradition of their destruction, and the shards of their uttermost decay. Not an echo of them lives, save where perchance some poet with struggling tongue murmurs his dream of them into tremulous form; or when music with its more mysterious spell gathers from out the inscrutable vibration of things strange semblances of memories, that come to us as an ancient and lost experience re-won, grey with time and weary with pilgrimage. But to what end, of knowledge or of feeling, if the future is not therefore to be changed?

Save for such a conception and such a purpose, the civilisations of to-day could have no rational hope to survive in perpetuity any more than those of the past. The fullest command of physical science, however great be the resulting power of wealth-production, means no solution of the social problem, which must breed its own science. The new ground for hope is that the great discipline of physical science has brought with it the twofold conception of the reign of law in all things and the sequence of power upon comprehension, even to the controlling of the turbulent sea of human life. With the science of universal evolution has come the faith in unending betterment. And this, when all is said, is the vital difference between ancient and modern politics: that for the ancients the fact of eternal mutation was a law of defeat and decay, while for us it is a law of renewal. If but the faith be wedded to the science, there can be no predictable limit to its fruits, however long be the harvesting.

FOOTNOTES:

[Footnote 1207: Schanz, Englische Handelspolitik, i, 332 ff. The Merchant Adventurers were incorporated under Elizabeth (id. i, 350).]

[Footnote 1208: Hume, History of England, ch. 62, near end.]

[Footnote 1209: Dr. Cunningham (ii, 101, 102, 104) notes the feeling under the first Stuarts.]

[Footnote 1210: See Buckle, 3-vol. ed. ii, 42, 1-vol. ed. pp. 308-9, and his citations, as to the anti-ecclesiastical character of the Peace of Westphalia.]

[Footnote 1211: Cp. Storch, quoted by M'Culloch, Principles of Political Economy, Introd., and Schoell's addition to Koch, Hist. of Europe, Eng. tr. 3rd ed. p. 110. On the tendency of economic science to promote peace, see Buckle, i, 217, 218; 1-vol. ed. pp. 120-25.]

[Footnote 1212: See the so-called Political Testament of Colbert, Eng. tr. 1695, p. 351.]

[Footnote 1213: Petty, Political Arithmetic, ch. x (Essays, ed. 1699, p. 273). Even noblemen are mentioned as sometimes putting their younger sons to merchandise. Cp. Toynbee, Industrial Revolution, p. 63; and Josiah Tucker, Essay on Trade (1751), 4th ed. p. 43.]

[Footnote 1214: Gardiner, History of England, 1603-42, ed. 1893, i, 100.]

[Footnote 1215: Id. iv, 2.]

[Footnote 1216: Id. iv, 1.]

[Footnote 1217: See Gardiner, as cited, iv, 8, for a sample, and in particular pp. 41-43 for the notorious case of Sir Giles Mompesson and the inn licences.]

[Footnote 1218: Id. iv, 6, 7.]

[Footnote 1219: Id. v, 233.]

[Footnote 1220: Id. iv, 125.]

[Footnote 1221: Id. vii, 71.]

[Footnote 1222: Id. viii, 74, 75.]

[Footnote 1223: Hallam, Constitutional History, ii, 11.]

[Footnote 1224: Sir Josiah Child, New Discourse of Trade, 4th ed. p. 9.]

[Footnote 1225: Id. p. 87.]

[Footnote 1226: Lingard, Hist. of England, 6th ed. v, 262.]

[Footnote 1227: Epistolae Ho-elianae, ed. 1891, i, 25.]

[Footnote 1228: Child, New Discourse of Trade, p. 88. As to the good management of the Dutch in this regard, cp. Howell, as cited above, p. 334.]

[Footnote 1229: Child, whose main concern was to reduce the rate of interest by law, proposed (p. 98) to sell paupers as slaves on the plantations, "taking security for ... their freedom afterwards." An antagonist (see pref. p. xi) proposed a law limiting wages.]

[Footnote 1230: Above, p. 434.]

[Footnote 1231: Josiah Tucker, Essay on Trade, 4th ed. pp. 46, 105.]

[Footnote 1232: Id. pp. 28, 50, 51; Richardson's Essay on the Decline of the Foreign Trade (often attributed to Decker), ed. 1756, pp. 46-64.]

[Footnote 1233: France also, of course, still kept up trade monopolies (Tucker, p. 36).]

[Footnote 1234: The fallacy was indeed soon exposed as such by the more enlightened economists. Thus the French writer Samber, in his Memoirs of the Dutch Trade (Eng. tr. ed. 1719, p. 75), speaks of the French rulers of Colbert's day as having "entertained a notion that they could carry on trade after a new unheard-of method: they proposed to sell their goods to their neighbours, and buy none of theirs." But this was none the less the prevailing ideal of the age. Cp. Jansen's General Maxims of Trade, 1713, cited by Buckle, i, 217.]

[Footnote 1235: Cp. A. von Brandt, Beitraege zur Geschichte der franzoesischen Handelspolitik, 1896, pp. 25-28.]

[Footnote 1236: L. Dussieux, Etude biographique sur Colbert, 1886, ch. vi, Sec. 2.]

[Footnote 1237: Cp. Child, New Discourse, p. 17; Petty, Essays, p. 205; Tucker, Essay on Trade, 4th ed. pp. 45-57. For a general view of the discussion see Schulze-Gaevernitz, Der Grossbetrieb, 1892, Einleitung.]

[Footnote 1238: As early as 1641 the Manchester woollen industry is noted as flourishing. Early in the next century it had immensely increased. Schulze-Gaevernitz, as cited, pp. 26, 27.]

[Footnote 1239: Mandeville, Fable of the Bees, Remarks Q and Y.]

[Footnote 1240: "That narrow and foolish woman." Hallam, Constitutional History, iii, 124, note. Cp. Buckle, i, 419: "a foolish and ignorant woman."]

[Footnote 1241: "It seems rather a humiliating proof of the sway which the feeblest prince enjoys even in a limited monarchy, that the fortunes of Europe should have been changed by nothing more noble than the insolence of one waiting-woman and the cunning of another. It is true that this was effected by throwing the weight of the Crown into the scale of a powerful faction; yet the house of Bourbon would probably not have reigned beyond the Pyrenees but for Sarah and Abigail at Queen Anne's toilet" (Hallam, iii, 210).]

[Footnote 1242: A work in course of preparation.]

[Footnote 1243: "Then as to all this activity, so many movements of all things celestial and all things earthly, turning without ceasing, only to return forever there whence they set forth, I can divine no use and no fruition" (Leopardi's Nocturnal Song of a Nomad Shepherd in Asia).]

INDEX

Aargau, 338, 346, 349

Abbott, Dr. E., 37, 106 n.

Abderrahman I, 154

---- III, 153

Abdy, Prof., 201, 373

Abortion in Greece, 102, 117

Abyssinia, 179

Academy, the French, 444 n., 445

Achaian League, 51

Adams and Cunningham, 331, 351 n.

Adrian IV, 235

AEschines, 50

AEschylus, 136

Aetius, 96, 185

AEtolian League, 51

Ager publicus, 77

Agis, 51, 104

Agrarian distress, 403-5

Agriculture, 88; Egyptian, 56; Roman, 76, 79, 82 sq., 94; Greek, 99, 108, 117; Feudal, 202; Italian, 221; Dutch, 328; English, 88, 348 n., 403; Scandinavian, 270, 283; Swiss, 347, 348

Alaric, 185

Alba Longa, 14

Alboin, 188, 194

Albuquerque, 358

Alcibiades, 46, 50

Alcuin, 189

Alexander the Great, empire of, 111

---- of Parma, 307, 309, 310

Alexandria, 133, 134

Alfonso de Sousa, 362

Alfred, 370 n., 375

Algiers, French. 57 n., 156-7, 177

Alkman, 132

Allen, C.-F., 264 n.

Almohades, the, 155

Almoravides, the, 155

Althusius, 441

Alva, 308

Amalfi, 194, 204

Ambrose, 194

Amphictyonic Councils, 53

Amsterdam, 315; bank of, 324

Anabaptism, 306, 307

Anarchism, 424

Anastasius, 96 n.

Anaxagoras, 46

Anglo-Saxons, 275, 369-76

Anne, 468

Anskar, 267

Antioch, 133

Antonines, 89, 113, 117, 166, 167

Antony, franchise policy of, 4 n.

Antwerp, 308, 310, 311, 313

Anund Jakob, 267, 272

Anytus, 50

Appenzell, 337, 338, 344, 347

Apuleius, 167

Aquinas, Thomas, 118 n., 212, 235, 440

Arab character, 146 sq.

Architecture, 150, 151, 192, 205, 220

Arianism, 97, 168

Aribert, 206

Ariosto, 230

Aristocracy, Roman, 17, 21, 22 sq., 29-30, 78; and culture, 62, 166; and politics, 70; Greek, 42, 49, 98, 109; Feudal, 200, 202, 209; Italian, 236, 245, 255; English, 288, 376, 379, 385, 390 sq., 396, 403, 410; Dutch, 306; Scandinavian, 275, 276, 277, 281; Portuguese, 355; Swiss, 336, 348; French, 391, 415 n., 461

Aristotle, 50, 127, 448 sq.; on militarism, 45; on slavery, 98, 133 n.; on Sparta, 101 n.; on population, 102; on education, 126; and Aquinas, 212

Aristophanes, 50, 135

Armada, 308, 311, 314, 399, 408

Arminianism, 310

Arnold of Brescia, 235, 246

Arnold, M., 434

Arnold, W.T., 78

Artaxerxes, 113

Art, evocation of, 63, 122, 134, 150, 159, 220, 327, 409; in Athens, 48-49, 106; in medieval Italy, 220-21, 225; in Holland, 327; in Portugal, 359; in England, 409

Arteveldt, J. van, 299

Ashley, Prof., 379 n., 394

Asia Minor, 55, 123

Associations, religious, 113, 115

Assyria, 135

Aston, Sir A., 428

Astronomy, 149, 150, 151

Athaulf, 186

Athens, variety of stock in, 16; social problem in, 40, 107; reforms of Solon in, 40 sq., 99; morals in, 47-48, 50; superstition and ignorance in, 45 sq.; art and letters in, 48-49, 106, 124; imports of, 84; commerce of, 99; buildings of, 105; silver mines of, 105-6; citizenship of, 124; retrogression of, 134

Attila, 185, 191

Attraction and repulsion in politics, 5-7, 23, 28, 202, 207, 210, 257 sq., 299, 369, 377, 386, 460; modes of, 70

Augustine, 34, 118 n., 168, 261

Augustus, 81, 83, 164

Australian aborigines, 128

Aurelian, 87 n., 184, 185

Autocracy. See Despotism and Tyranny

Avitus, St., 187

Babylonia, 68

Bacchic mysteries, 164

Bacon, 461

Bagaudae, the, 175

Bagehot, cited, 23 n., 57 n.

Bain, R.N., 264 n., 277 n.

Balfour, A.J., 72 n., 171 sq., 180 n.

Ball, John, 390

Banking, 218, 435

Barante, 292

Barneveldt, 310, 318

Barros, 359

Basle, 338, 344, 346, 348

Bayle, 326

Beaconsfield, 72

Becker, cited, 9

Becket, 377

"Beggars," Confederacy of, 306

Beghards, 305

Behn, Aphra, 442 n.

Belgium, 260, 307

Belisarius, 96, 184, 191, 194

Bent, J.T., 181

Bentham, 449

Berbers, 154 n., 155

Berlin, University of, 139

Berne, 336, 337, 338, 343, 344, 345, 346, 349

Bertrand, A., cited, 64

Bibliolatry, 152, 154, 157, 396, 405, 410

Bijns, Anna, 326

Bikelas, cited, 143, 144

Bishops and Italian cities, 198, 206

Black Death, 380, 384, 386, 387, 388

Blackstone, 449

Blake, 420

Blok, P.J., 292, 296

Blossius of Cumae, 81

Boccaccio, 226

Bodin, 449

Boeckh, 37, 41, 107, 108, 109

Boissier, cited, 159 n., 162

Bolingbroke, 437

Bologna, 205, 208, 211, 212

Bordier, 334, 335

Borghini, 217

Borgia, Cesare, 233, 253

Botta, cited, 229 n.

Boulting, 195 n., 196, 202 n.

Boyle, 447 n.

Brazil, 317, 361-68; population in, 362; prospects of, 366-67

Brethren of the Common Lot, 305

Bribery in Rome, 22

Britain, economic basis of, 59, 79

Browning, O., 181

Bruce, 308

Bruges, 297

Brun, 336

Brunehild, 186

Brussels, 297

Brutus, 79

Bryce, cited, 4, 58, 189 n., 199, 201

Buchanan, 441

Buckingham, 415

Buckle, on national character, 1 n., 4; on Montesquieu, 28 n.; on food and life conditions, 55; on Spanish fanaticism, 155, 304; on climate and civilisation, 361; on Magna Carta, 392; on Delolme, 392; on Divine Right, 440 n.; on Anne, 468 n.

Bullion delusion, 80, 464 sq.

Burckhardt, 182; as sociologist, 36; on Greek happiness, 47; on Sparta, 130; on Spain and Italy, 230, 233 n.

Burghley, 400, 406, 407

Burke, 453

---- U.R., cited, 119, 169, 191, 192

Burnet, 438, 439

Burrows, Prof., 123

Bursian, C., 65

Burton, Hill, 11, 414 n., 456

Bury, 38; on Roman Empire, 34 n.; on Solon, 43; on Christian disunion, 97 n.; on Heraclius, 116 n.; on Greek Art, 122 n.; on the Dorians, 130-31; on Byzantine superstition, 145 n.; on Roman currency, 175 n.

Busch, 392 n.

Butler, W.F., 181, 196, 197 n., 206, 211

Byzantium, 34, 93, 95, 96, 114 sq., 143 sq., 152, 186

Cade, Jack, 388, 406

Caesar, franchise policy of, 4 n.; revenue policy of, 73; policy of doles of, 82; policy in Campania of, 91; and Corinth, 110

Calderon, 359, 413

Calvin, 301, 343, 344, 398, 435

Calvinism, 306, 310, 326, 344, 396 n., 398

Camden, 398, 407

Camoens, 359

Cantu, 181

Capitalism, in antiquity, 86, 104, 108; in Florence, 218, 248 sq.; in Holland, 316, 318, 324; in America, 365; in England, 393, 403, 434-35, 462

Caracalla, 4, 175

Carlyle, 264 n., 419, 429-30

Carmagnola, 249

Carrel, A., 436 n., 437 n., 444 n.

Carthage, 28 n., 30, 86

Castruccio Castracani, 243, 255

Cathari, 220

Cato, 32

Cats, 307, 326

Catullus, 165, 166

Celibacy, Sacerdotal, 235

Celts, 187, 190, 192, 258, 279, 375, 378

Chancery, Court of, 432

Chapman, 412, 413

Charlemagne, 188, 189, 191, 192, 267, 295

Charles I of England, 410, 414 sq., 426, 443

---- II of England, 319, 320, 437, 438, 442, 443, 451

---- III of Spain, 363

---- IV, 246

---- V, 300, 301, 302, 304, 309 n., 311

Charleton, W., 444 n.

Chasles, Ph., cited, 74

Chastity, barbaric, 184

Chaucer, 384, 386

Chemistry, 149, 150

Chievres, 302

Child, Sir J., 316, 458, 462, 463 n., 464, 467

Chilperic, 186

China, polity of, 56, 57, 59-60, 67, 73, 180, 260; secret societies of, 26 n.

Chinese and Europeans, repulsions of, 6

Chivalier, 294 n.

Chivalry, 383

Christian II, 276

---- III, 277

Christianity, conditions of success of, 27, 114-15, 165; effects of, 28; and progress, 34-5, 179, 205, 272, 431; and Roman Empire, 95, 96, 97, 265; and heresy, 97, 115, 168, 300, 303, 344; spread of, 112, 114-15; and infanticide, 117-18; and slavery, 118 sq., 214 sq., 372-73; and culture, 142, 144, 168, 280; and Islam, 149, 157; in Gaul, 167; and morals, 186, 210, 272, 431, 434; and Italian disunion, 210; in Scandinavia, 265 sq., 272, 274; and fish eating, 293; in modern Holland and Belgium, 307; strife of sects in, 422

Chrysostom, 118

Church in politics, 96, 145, 152, 168-69, 198, 203, 206, 210, 223, 234, 235, 265, 274, 377, 391

Cicero, on Roman politics, 20-21; on manumission, 215

Cimabue, 220

Cincinnatus, 12, 19

City States, 29, 38 sq., 52, 53, 124, 179, 198, 202 sq., 209 sq., 286 sq., 295

Civilisation and superstition, 46; modern, roots of, 169

Civilisations, primary and secondary, 55 sq.

Clans, Highland, 11, 67

Clarendon, 437, 451

Class degradation, effects of, 62, 68, 372; relations in England, 376, 379; as political factor, 70

Classes, strife of, in Rome, 17 sq.; in Greece, 38, 45; in Florence, 229 sq.; in Flanders, 296-97; in Switzerland, 336, 350; in England, 393-94, 405

Claudian, 167

Claudius II, 185

Clemenceau, 271

Cleomenes, 51, 104

Clientes, Roman, 11

Climate and race, 193, 361

Cloacae, the Roman, 14

Clothaire, 186

Clovis, 187

Coal civilisations, 79, 88, 365, 366

Coinage, alleged debasement of, by Solon, 41; Roman debasement of, 175; Papal debasement of, 223; debasement of, by Henry VIII, 397. See currency

Colbert, 140, 315, 445, 446, 461, 464, 465

Cologne, 288

Colonies, Greek, 39, 48, 100; and culture, 63 n.; Roman, 86; Scandinavian, 271; Dutch, 312

Comines, 391

Comitia, Roman, 9 sq.

Commerce, Roman, 76-7, 80; Athenian, 99, 108; Greek, under Roman Empire, 113; Byzantine, 117; Italian, 211, 218-19, 221, 256, 383; Danish, 273; Norwegian, 284; Medieval, 288; Dutch, 297, 310 sq.; Portuguese, 357 sq.; Anglo-Saxon, 370; English, 380, 393, 404, 459; Irish, 453; Spanish, 461; and civilisation, 70, 99, 104, 109, 113, 205, 211, 221, 287, 315, 457, 458; and war, 297, 460

Compass, the, 205

Competition of societies, 58, 70

Comte, A., 2 n., 4

Conrad the Salic, 203

Conradin, 241

Conservatism and isolation, 56, 144; Chinese, 60; Egyptian, 125; and militarism, 132-33; English, 424

Constantine, 27 n., 114, 117, 215

Constantinople, evolution of, 116 sq.

Consuls and Italian cities, 198, 203, 207

Corinth, 105, 110, 131 n.

Corporations, religious, 160, 235, 377

Cox, Sir G., cited, 66, 161

Creed politics, 405, 415, 424

Creighton, Bishop, 401 n.

Cremona, 216

Crete, polity of, 59 n., 131-32, 133

Crichton and Wheaton, 264 n., 272, 273, 275

Cromer, Lord, discussed, 177 sq.

Cromwell, Oliver, 318, 417-21, 424-33, 453; Richard, 436; Thomas, 395

Crusades, effects of, 69; and slavery, 214, 296; and civilisation, 383

Culture, Greek, 46 sq.; and the sexes, 61; importance of diffusion of, 62

Culture-contacts, effects of, 57, 63; conditions of success of, 57, 58; and Greek civilisation, 64, 122; in Christendom, 69, 150; in Japan, 69, 70; in modern Europe, 138 sq.; and Saracen civilisation, 146; and Roman civilisation, 158, 163, 164; and post-Roman civilisation, 189, 193; and medieval Italy, 211, 219, 254; and England, 212 n.; and Scandinavia, 279; and Holland, 326; and Renaissance, 340; and England, 375

Cunningham, Dr., on Greek civilisation, 36, 129; on Roman expansion, 67; on Roman wars, 76 n., 78 n.; on Roman decline, 93-4; on Athenian expenditure, 106 n.; on Greeks and Phoenicians, 129, 150; on Black Death, 388; on the Tudors, 402; on Puritanism, 433; on the mercantile system, 466

Curiae, the Roman, 8 sq., 203

Currency, Roman, 80, 175; Byzantine, 96; Dutch, 311

Curtius, E., 130

Cybele, cult of, 163

Dahn, F., cited, 188 n.

Danby, 442

Daendliker, 331, 339 n.

Dante, 213, 217, 226, 233, 240 n.

Daremberg, Dr., cited, 147-48

Darien Company, 456

Daru, 255 n.

D'Aubigne, 430-31

David, J., 292

Davies, 291

Davis, Sir J., 67

---- H.W. C., 378

"Death," political, 33-4, 59

Decay, social, 22, 25, 32, 59, 69, 170 sq.; socio-physiological, 186; socio-psychological, 61, 112, 141, 280, 411-13

Defoe, 413

Dekker, 406 n.

De la Chambre, 445

Delacourt, 313

Delaunay, cited, 10, 11

Della Torre, 241

Democracy, Roman, 19 sq.; Greek, 38 sq., 46 sq.; French, 72; American, 38 n., 365, 366; Scandinavian, 276, 278; Flemish, 300; Dutch, 306, 310, 311; English, 388, 414 sq.; Italian, 209 sq., 225; Swiss, 350 sq.; conditions of success of, 52; and intellectual life, 139

Demosthenes, 50, 105, 136

Denmark, structure of, 265; political evolution of, 268, 271, 273, 273-74; religion in, 268; slavery in, 273, 274; commerce of, 273; Reformation in, 276-77; culture of, 280-81

Dennis, G., 185

Denton, Rev. W., 385

Descartes, 326, 446

Despotism, and food supply, 55-6; as political factor, 70; and art, 135 sq., 166, 220, 224 sq.; and culture, 141, 153, 224 sq.; and decadence, 173; in Holland, 299; in Portugal, 357-58; spirit of, 455

Deutsch, cited, 149 n., 157 n.

De Witt, 291, 317, 319, 324

Dicaearchus, 105

Dierauer, 331, 334

Diocletian, 96, 113, 175

Dionysos, cult of, 164

Diophanes, 81

"Divine Right," 440 sq.

Doge, the title, 204 n.

Dogma and intellect, 61

Doles, Roman, 26, 82, 87; Byzantine, 116

Domesday Book, 371, 376

Domitian, 166

Dorians, 130 sq.

Dozy, cited, 154 n., 155 n.

Drama, Greek, 126-27, 135; French, 140; Elizabethan, 140, 406, 409-13; Roman, 165; Spanish, 359, 413

Draper, 34, 56, 67

Drogheda, siege of, 427-30

Droysen, 135 n., 148 n.

Droz, E., cited, 3 n.

Druidism, 266

Drunkenness, English, 463, 467; Scandinavian, 278

Dryden, 439, 442

Duccio, 220

Duffy, Miss, 182

Dunham, 187, 195, 197 n., 264 n.

Dureau de la Malle, 24, 91

Dussieux, 465

Earle, Prof., 385

East Indies, 312, 324

Ecclesia, Athenian, 41

Economic causation, ix, 71; Roman, 75 sq.; Greek, 98 sq., 133 sq.; Italian and other, 212, 215 sq., 221; Scandinavian, 270, 277; Dutch, 293, 295, 306, 313 sq., 324; Portuguese, 359-60; Brazilian, 366; English, 397, 411, 412

Education and democracy, 63; Greek, 123, 126; Saracen, 153, 154 n.; Italian, 231, 247 n.; Scandinavian, 276; Dutch, 319, 325-26, 330; Portuguese, 364, 365; Swiss, 346, 353-54; Brazilian, 367; English, 391, 396, 419 n.

Edward III, 380, 384, 394 n.; IV, 392, 393; VI, 397

Effen, Van, 326

Egypt, effect of Nile on polity of, 56; civilisation of, 64; culture of, 68; art of, 125, 135; human sacrifice in, 129; modern, 177; Moslem, 222

Eichhorn, 191

Eleusinia, the, 132

Eliot, 415, 416

Elizabeth, 398, 399-402

Emerson, 457

Emigration, Greek, 100; Scandinavian, 270-71; Swiss, 348, 353

Emilius, Paulus, 78

Empire, sociological process of, in Rome, 25 sq., 33, 87 sq., 92, 166, 170 sq.; in Byzantium, 115 sq.; in Greece, 133 sq.; in Turkey, 176; in Florence, 249, 252; in Scandinavia, 265, 271; in Holland, 316, 324; in France, 320; in Britain, 323, 384, 386; in Portugal, 356 sq.; and literature, 359

Enclosures, 393, 403

England, evolution of, in Anglo-Saxon times, 61, 191, 192, 204, 370, 374-75; after Conquest, 69 n., 212, 288, 371 sq., 376, 384; in Tudor period, 392 sq.; process of Rebellion, 414-17; Cromwell's rule, 417-23; Restoration politics, 423, 436 sq.; influence on French culture, 138; influence on German culture, 139; and Spain, 406-7, 420; in eighteenth century, 229; Reformation in, 238, 396 sq.; Industrial evolution of, 458 sq.; present polity of, 72, 79, 87 sq., 261; and Holland, 318, 319, 320, 323, 425, 463; and France, 320, 384, 392

Ennius, 158, 165

Epicurus, 135

Epimenides, 133

Equality, schemes of, 104

Equilibrium, social, 71, 114

Erasmus, 348

Erik I and II, 268

Essex, 399 n., 406, 407

Etruscans and Romans, 16, 158, 159 n.; civilisation of, 25, 185; unity of, 68

Euripides, 46, 131

Europe, political variety of, 59

Exposure of infants, 100, 270

Ezzelino, 239

Falkland, 423

Fatalistic reasoning in politics, 178

Faustrecht, 286, 378

Favourites, royal, 382-83, 415, 468

Federalism, in Greece, 51-52; in Italy, 233; in Netherlands, 295, 309; in Switzerland, 331, 332 sq.

Ferdinand, Duke, 224

Ferguson, cited, 14

Ferrero, on Roman character, 8 n.; on Roman trade, 11 n., 76 n., 79 n., 83 sq.; as sociologist, 75; on Roman civilisation, 176

Feudalism, 199 sq., 295, 335, 371, 374, 395

Filmer, 441 n., 442, 443

Finance, Roman, 77 sq., 92 sq., 119-20, 175; Byzantine, 96, 116; Greek, 106 sq.; Spanish, 309, 311; Papal, 221, 223; Dutch, 310-11, 328; Portuguese, 363, 364; English, 88, 397-98, 419, 420

Finland, 278, 283 n.

Finlay, as sociologist, 38; on Roman finance, 78; on Roman decline, 94; on Byzantium and Lombard invasion, 95; on Eastern Empire, 97, 115, 119-20, 143; on Greece under Roman Empire, 113 n.; on Christianity and slavery, 118 n.; on philosophic schools at Athens, 143

Fisheries, Danish, 273-74; Dutch, 293, 311, 313, 317, 329; Portuguese, 355

Flanders, 288 n., 294, 295, 296, 302, 309, 311, 321, 380

Fletcher of Saltoun, 455

Flint, Prof., cited, 73, 74

Floods in Netherlands, 298

Florence, constitutions of, 202, 211, 240, 241, 243, 245; political evolution of, 206-7, 243 sq.; factions at, 202, 207, 213, 236 n., 239 sq.; and her allies, 208; industry of, 211, 218; wealth of, 217, 219; interest at, 217 n.; art in, 220, 226, 227 n.; and papacy, 223; under Duke Ferdinand, 224; literature of, 226; causes of eminence of, 229; commercial development of, 231; militarism at, 231; and Pisa, 237, 248, 252-53; and Venice, 243, 249; under Medici, 249 sq.; taxation in, 251; collapse of, 254

Food and polity, 11 n., 55, 65, 73, 293, 315

Ford, 413

Fowler, W. Warde, 37; cited, 23 n., 29 n., 66, 161 n.

France, intellectual evolution of, 138, 140, 212; and Holland, 319, 464-65; and England, 320, 323, 377-78; empire in, 320; religion in, 321; population in, 322-23; and Switzerland, 349

Franks, polity of, 186, 188, 192, 197

Frederick Barbarossa, 210, 216, 235

---- II, 211, 216, 219

---- the Great, 139

---- of Denmark, 276

Freedom of the press, 310, 344

Freeman, on Greek federation, 51-52; on Greek history, 66; on Athenian citizenship, 124 n.; on Simon de Montfort, 382

Free trade, 284, 465

French politics, 1-3. See France

---- Academy, 444 n., 445

---- Revolution, 72, 149 n., 397, 449

Fribourg, 337, 338, 344, 346

Fronde, the, 415 n., 436

Fronto, 167

Frontiers, theories of, 178

Froude, 402

Fustel de Coulanges, 52, 67, 265 n.

Fyffe, cited, 66

Gaeta, 204 n.

Galileo, 227

Galton, 121

Gardiner, on House of Commons, 380 n., 382; on Lollardism, 396 n.; on Scotch Calvinism, 398; on Elizabeth, 400 n., 401, 402; on Henry VIII, 401; on Eliot, 416; on Cromwell, 419-20, 425 n., 427 n.; on Lilburne, 424 n.; on Drogheda, 428-30; on Barbone Parliament, 432

Gasquet, Dr., 388

Gaul, Roman and Christian, 94, 167, 173, 192

Gaultier de Brienne, 244

Gee, 464

Geijer, 264 n., 272

Gelasius, 194

Geneva, 341, 343, 344, 347, 349, 350, 353, 410

Genius, in politics, 15; evocation of, 63, 121 sq.

Genoa, 204, 211, 218, 225, 229, 248; modern, 255-56

Geographical causation, 28, 124, 293, 295, 332, 335

Germany, effects of subdivision of, 58; trade of, 79; intellectual evolution of, 138-9, 340; political and social evolution of, 184 sq., 222, 286, 378; medieval, 216; Reformation in, 238, 239, 342

Ghent, 295, 296, 300

Ghibelines and Guelphs, 209-10, 226, 239 sq.

Gibbon, on Byzantium, 144; on population of Roman Empire, 172 n.; on pestilence in the Empire, 174; and Sismondi, 187; on Theodoric, 188 n.; on the Lombards, 196; on Roman slavery, 374

Giddings, 5

Gilds, German, 199; trade, 207, 379, 393, 394

Giles, H.A., cited, 6 n., 73 n.

Gillies, 38

Glarus, 336, 337, 338, 344, 347

Gneist, 375

Godkin, L., cited, 38 n., 62

Gold-mining, 80, 92-3, 358, 363, 460

Gondebald, 187

Gontran, 187

Gospels and slavery, 118

Goths, 184, 186, 192

Gouraud, C., 28 n.

Gray, 56

Gracchi, 20, 21, 24, 81, 82 n.

Gratian, 90

Grattan, T.C., 291

Greece, superstition and ignorance in, 46 sq.; structure of, 53, 64, 65; population in, 101 sq.; industry in, 109, 113; conquests of, 78, 98, 110; under Roman Empire, 112-14; evocation of art in, 123 sq.; literature in, 126 sq.

Greek civilisation, 64, 68, 121 sq.; in Italy, 29; evolution of, 36 sq., 98 sq., 159; modern, 156-57

"Greek fire," 116

Green, Captain, 455

Green, J.R., on Anglo-Saxons and Christianity, 266 n., 372; on English slavery, 372, 373, 374; on Reformation, 397; on Elizabeth, 400; on English poverty, 403 n.; on Hobbes, 421 n.; on Shaftesbury, 438 n.

Greene, 411, 412

Greenidge, cited, 12, 14 n.

Gregorovius, 182, cited, 188 n., 189 n., 210, 212 n.

Gregory the Great, 197, 212 n., 374

---- VII, 212 n. See Hildebrandt

---- X, 240

---- XIII, 223

Grenvelle, 304

Grisons, 338, 346

Grote, 37, 331; on Solon, 41; on Greek polity, 44; on Athenian Imperialism, 47 sq.; on Pericles, 49; on culture contacts, 58, 64; on "race," 64, 66, 131-32; on Lycurgus, 99; on Greek infantici de, 101; on Lesbos, 126; on Athenian drama, 127; on Sparta, 131; on Crete, 131-32; on Switzerland, 331 n., 332 n., 354

Grotius, 309, 310, 326, 442 n.

Grundy, Dr. G.B., 36, 65

Gubbio, 225

Guicciardini, F., 232 n.

---- L., 291, 313

Guilliman, 334

Guizot, on Roman Empire and Christianity, 26 n., 96; on European progress, 58; on Gaulish monasteries, 167; on Christian persecution, 168 n.; on Teutonic barbarism, 184 n.; on Charlemagne, 189; on France and Germany, 192 n.; on decline of slavery, 213-14, 215; on the Reformation, 238

Gustavus Vasa, 274, 277

Guthry, Bishop, 441

Hadrian, 113

Hakam I, 154

---- II, 153

Halifax, 451

Hallam, on genius, 121; on the Lombards and Italy, 198; on feudalism, 201; on Venice, 229; on Simon de Montfort, 382; on Henry VII, 392 n.; on English nobility under Henry VIII, 396; on Anne, 468 n.; on Ireland, 451 n.; on Whigs and Tories, 421 n.; on Charles I, 417 n.; on James I, 414 n.

Hamburg, 287

Handel, 140

Hannibal, 30

Hansa, 274, 286-90; of London, 287, 288, 393

Harald Bluetooth, 268

Harald Klak, 268

Hardwick, 266, 267

Haren, Van, 326

Harold Fairhair, 268

Harrington, 443

Harrison, F. 425-26, 428-30

Hartmann, L.M., 182

Hassencamp, 450 n., 452

Hawkwood, Sir J., 248

Hazlitt, W., cited, 396 n.

---- W. C, 181

Heeren, cited and discussed, 37, 39 n., 234, 237

Hegel, cited and discussed, 5 n., 58

---- Karl, 199, 379 n.

Hegewisch, 138

Hektemorioi, the, 41

Henry the Fowler, 197 n.

---- the Navigator, 356

---- IV of England, 391

---- V of England, 386, 391

---- VII of England, 394

---- VIII of England, 395, 401, 402

Heracleia, 104

Heraclius, 115-16

Heredity, official, 120, 199, 235

Heredium, the Roman, 12 sq.

Heresy, 97, 115, 168, 300, 303, 390

Herodotus, 127, cited, 44, 129

Hertzberg, 38, 67, 113 n.

Heyd, W. von, 183, 222

Hiero, 136

Hildebrandt, 59 n., 203, 206, 235

Hill, Rev. G., 371

Hippocrates, 127

Hippodamus, 104

Hisham, 154

Historiography, modern, viii, ix; Greek, 127

Hobbes, 421-22; on communism, 13

Hochart, on Constantine, 27 n.

Hodgkin, T., 181, cited 184 n., 202 n.

Holbein, 408

Holberg, 281

Holland, primary conditions of, 293; slavery in medieval, 295-6; empire of, 312; political evolution of, 294 sq.; historiography of, 291-2; industry in, 294, 296, 310 sq.; factions in, 296-7, 298, 299; despotism in, 300; revolt of, 301 sq.; religious distribution in, 307; constitution of, 309; commerce of, 310 sq., 328-9; finance and currency of, 310-11; public debt of, 312, 328; and England, 318, 320, 323, 425, 463; and France, 319, 320, 464-65; decline of, 321 sq.; capitalism in, 324; culture evolution of, 325 sq.; art in, 327-28; population in, 327, 328-30

Holm, 37, 134 n., 136 n., 141

Homer, 126

Honorius, 94, 173, 185

Hooft, 326

Hooker, 441

"Hooks and Codfish," 298

Horace, 165, 166

Houses, Athenian, 105; Italian, 205

Howell, 325, 463

Hudson, H., 312

Huguenots, 272, 303, 321, 343, 438

Humanists, Italian, 227

Hume, cited, 58, 102, 109, 133 n., 348 n.

Huns, 184, 185, 197

Hunt, W., 181

Huxley, cited, 61

Hygiene, ancient, 91

Ibn Khaldun, 155-56

Ibsen, 282

Iceland, 270, 271, 278 sq., 340

Ihne, cited, 16 n.

Illyria, 194

Image-worship, 145

Imperialism, Roman, 25 sq., 89; Athenian, 47 sq.; Greek, 50 sq.; Ancient and modern, 177 sq.; Barbaric, 189; Danish, 269, 271; Dutch, 318; British, 323, 384, 407, 420-21

India, evolution of, 74; British, 57 n., 177, 179; Portuguese, 358, 362

Indigitamenta, 160 n.

Indulgences, Catholic, 342

Industry, in Greece, 109; in Italian cities, 205, 211, 218-19; in Netherlands, 294, 296; in Iceland, 454; in Spain, 461; modern, 467

Infanticide, 26, 38, 100, 117

Innocent III, 236

---- IV, 210

Inquisition, 303, 308, 362, 406

Interest, Roman limitation of, 20; Roman, 79 and note; Florentine, 217 n.; in Holland, 313, 321

Ionia. See Asia Minor

Ireland, 189, 192, 378; English misgovernment of, 406, 418, 426-33, 450 sq.

Ireton, 429

Islam, 61, 149, 153, 154, 179

Isocrates, 50

Isolation and polity, 56, 144

Italy, structure of, 28; Greek cities of, 29; modern, economics of, 85; post-Roman, evolution of, 85, 183 sq.; medieval, culture evolution in, 90, 152, 209 sq.; republican collapse in, 233 sq. See Rome

Jacquerie, 387

James I, 398, 401, 414, 415, 461

---- II, 444, 452

Japan, evolution of, 69-70, 74

Java, 312, 329

Jeffreys, 444

Jesuits, 350, 362-63

Jewry, 67, 125, 146

Jews, modern, 358, 361

John II of Portugal, 355, 357

John, King, 392

Johnson, 442 n.

Jonson, Ben, 412, 413

Julian, 57 n., 94

Juste, 292

Justice, in Greece, 48

Justin, 95

Justinian, 96, 116, 118, 143, 449

Juvenal, 166

Kampen, J. van, 292, 307

Kant, 138; cited, 5

Keightley, 161

Kemble, J.M., 371, 372, 373

Keymor, 317, 325

Kings, Roman, 18

Kleisthenes, 44

Kleon, 50

Knox, 398

Knut, 268, 271

Koran, the, 154

Kyd, 411, 412

Ladislaus, 249

Laetus, P., 227

Laing, 281 n., 325

Laissez-faire, 135

Lamprecht, viii, ix

Land question, in Rome, 11 sq., 77; in Greece, 40, 104; in Anglo-Saxon England, 375

Lane-Poole, S., cited, 151, 155

Langlois and Seignobos, 421 n.

Language, in politics, 158 n., 191, 258, 385; and culture, 221, 326

Lanzone, 206

Larroque, cited, 214 n.

Laud, 415 n.

Laurium, mines of, 106-7

Law, Roman, 112, 197, 205; Teutonic, 195-96, 197; schools of, 212

Leagues, Greek, 51; Italian, 207; German, 286, 287, 336; Swiss, 334, 336 sq., 350

Lecky, 391

Leclerc, L., cited, 150

Leghorn, 224

Leibnitz, 325

Leicester, 400

Lennep, J. van, 292

Leo the Isaurian, 145

---- X, 221, 223, 253

---- H., 182, 199, 204 n., 206, 209 n.

Leopardi, 470

Le Play, 1 n., 34

Lesbos, 126, 136

Leslie, Cliffe, 405

Liberalism, 421, 423

Licinian laws, 19, 80

Lilburne, 424

Lisbon, 312, 358, 364

Literature, evolution of, in Greece, 126 sq.; in Rome, 165 sq.; in Italy, 212-13, 226; in Sicily and Provence, 219-20; in Scandinavia, 278 sq.; in Holland, 326; in Germany, 340; in Portugal, 359, 363; in England, 384, 408-13; and empire, 359

Livy, 164

Locke, 442, 446 and note, 448

Lollardism, 305, 390-91, 396

Lombards, polity of, 188, 194 sq., 203, 204

Long, G., 79 n.

Lope de Vega, 359, 413

Louis the Fat, 214

Louis XIV, 319, 320, 321, 436

Louvain, 297

Louvois, 320

Luebeck, 287

Lucan, 166

Lucca, 218

Lucerne, 334, 335, 338, 339, 346, 349

Lucretius, 165

Lucullus, 79 n.

Luther, 342

Lyall, Sir A., 177

Lycurgus, 44, 99

Lynch-law, 378

Macaulay, Lord, 76, 133 n., 255, 419 n., 423

---- G.C., 411-13

Mackintosh, 381 n.

McCrie, 238

McCullagh, 38, 292, cited 295

McCulloch, 292; on Roman doles, 83; on the Dutch, 328

McDiarmid, 407

Machiavelli, 226, 254; on the Lombards, 188 n.; on the Papacy, 210; on Florence, 217; ideal of, 233; on Guelphs, 239

Magellan, 357

Magna Carta, 380 n., 381, 391, 392

Mahaffy, as sociologist, 37; on prehistoric civilisation, 15; on Greek infanticide, 101; on Greek population, 102; on Greek commerce, 109; on Cilician pirates, 110; on Greek art, 123; on Sparta, 132, 133 n.

Mahon, 34

Maine, Sir H., 56, 448, 449

Maisch, 42

Maitland, F.W., 370 n., 371, 374

Malaria in Italy, 90-1

Malone, 442 n.

Mallet, E., 353

Malthus, cited, 26 n., 100, 273, 282-84, 352

Mandeville, 467, 468

Manley, 427-28

Marck, W. van der, 308

Marcus Aurelius, 167

Margaret of Norway, 275

Marignano, 341

Marius, 24

Marks, Alfred, 438 n.

Marlborough, 320

Marlowe, 411

Marvell, 421, 439 n.

Mary of England, 397

---- of Scotland, 399

Maspero, cited, 125 n.

Mathematics, 149

Matilda, Countess, 206, 207

Maurice (Emperor), 96, 115

Maurice of Orange, 310, 313

Maximilian I, 300

Mazarin, 415 n.

Mazdeism, 125

Medicine, evolution of, 127, 147 sq.; schools of, 212

Medici, the, 225, 227, 249 sq.

Megalomania, 261

Megara, 124 n.

Melville, Andrew, 398

Menander, 118, 135

Menard, cited, 132

Mencius, 73-4

Mental development in Greece, 46

Menzel, 139 n.

Mercantile system, 460 sq.

Merchant Adventurers, the, 459, 466

Merimee, 3

Merovingian Kings, the, 187, 191

Mexico, 361

Meyer, Ed., on Quirites, 9 sq.; on Roman land law, 12; on Greek taxation, 42; on Solon, 43 n.; on Greek civilisation, 64; on ager publicus, 77 n.; on Roman culture, 158 n.

---- Ernst von, cited, 150

Michel Angelo, 254

Milan, 194, 199, 206, 210, 211, 218, 219, 225, 241, 249

Militarism, and democracy, 21 sq.; Roman, 25, 55, 76; and culture, 61, 131, 153, 341; Spartan, 131; Saracen, 153, 154; Turkish, 157; Florentine, 231; Dutch, 318; Swiss, 341; English, 425

Mill, J.S., 58, 121

Milman, 146 n., 197

Milton, 426, 431, 441, 448

Mining, Roman, 80; Greek, 105-6; Brazilian, 363; medieval, 460

Ministerial Government, 437, 468

Mitchell and Caspari, 41, 42, 44 n., 136-37

Mitford, 37, 38

Mithraism, 27, 113, 165

Mommsen, on Quirites, 9; on the plebs, 10; on Roman land law, 12, 13; on Roman city life, 14 n.; on Roman taxation, 77; on the Antonines, 89; on Roman religion, 158, 160, 162; on antiquity of writing, 160 n.; on the Celts, 190, 192

Monasteries, 167, 402-3

"Money economy," 80

Monk, 436

Monopolies, trade, and civilisation, 59; Athenian, 108; Byzantine, 117; Dutch, 313, 315, 316, 463; English, 320, 321, 323, 404, 415, 459, 461 sq.; Flemish, 296; Papal, 223; Portuguese, 356, 358; Spanish, in Italy, 223; Hanseatic, 289

Montaigne, vii, 230

Montesquieu, on civil war, 25; as sociologist, 28 n.; on Hannibal, 30; on soil and polity, 56

Montmorency, 386

Moors. See Saracens

Morals, Greek, 47 sq.; Byzantine, 118; Frankish, 186-87; English, 395, 433

More, Sir T., 403 n., 405, 408

Morgarten, 335

Morin, F., cited, 3 n., 118 n., 465

Morley, Lord, cited, 66

Mosheim, 265-66, 434

Motley, 291; on Celts and Teutons, 187, 238, 300 n., 304, 307; on the Reformation, 238; on Dutch slavery, 295; on Spain and Holland, 302

Mountjoy, Lord, 440 n.

Mueller, K.O., cited, 130, 131 n.

Mummius, 110

Murray, Gilbert, 129

Mysteries, religious, 160

Mythology, Greek and Roman, 124, 159 sq.

Names of abuse, 372

Nantes, Edict of, 321

Napier, Capt., 181

Naples, 195, 204 n., 211, 224, 225, 249

Napoleon, 349; Prince, cited, 3 n.

Narses, 185 n., 188, 194

National character. See Race

National Debts, 312, 322, 364, 450

Nationality, notion of, 257 sq.

Navigation Act, 318, 425, 453, 463, 464

Navy, English, 294 n., 314; Spanish, 314; Dutch, 314

Nerli, 227 n.

Nero, 186

Netherlands. See Holland

Neuchatel, 347, 349

Newman, F.W., cited, 9

Niebuhr, cited, 11 n., 108

Noeldeke, 149 n., 151

Normandy, 376, 381

Normans, 191, 211, 375

North, Dudley, 466

Norway, structure of, 269; political evolution of, 268-69, 274, 277; religion in, 268-69; Reformation in, 277; population in, 282, 284, 285

Oates, Titus, 438

Odoaker, 185, 194

Odour in races, 6

Oebly, 344

Olaf the Lap King, 267: Tryggvason, 269; St., 269

Oligarchy, 255

Oman, cited, 117, 118

Orange. See William of

Orosius, cited, 186

Ortolan, cited, 10 n., 11

Otte, 264 n.

Otto I, 188, 189, 198, 201

Overton, R., 424 n.

Padua, 212

Paederasty in Greece, 103

Painting, Italian, 220-21, 223, 225, 288-89

Pais, Prof., 15

Palermo, 225

Papacy, and Italian disunion, 210, 234-35, 240 sq., 253; and culture, 212, 227, 237; and slavery, 215; and trade, 223; finance of, 223; and art, 225, 226; and celibacy, 235; and Rienzi, 246; and Florence, 246; and Divine Right, 440

Paparrigopoulo, 36

Parliaments, 378, 380 n., 381

Parma, 216, 240 n.

Parthian empire, 113

Paterini, 220

Patricians, the Roman, 17

Patriotism, 258, 262, 308, 406, 407; and art, 411

Patterson, W.R., 36, 76

Paul, 118

Paul the Deacon, 270

Pauw, De, 142

Pavia, 199

Pearson, C.H., 74, 378, 380 n.

Pecock, Bishop, 390

Pedro II, 366

Peele, 411, 412

Peisistratos, 42, 43-4, 137

Pelham, Prof., cited, 10

Pepys, 466

Pequods, the, 433

Pericles, 46, 48, 49, 105, 106, 124

Perrens, F.T., 181, 182, 226 n., 227 n., 249, 252 n.

Persia, 113, 115, 125, 156

Pertinax, 87 n.

Peru, 56, 361

Perugia, 225

Petit, cited, 101

Petronius, 166

Petty, 314, 316, 427, 467

Phaleas, 104

Pheidon, 104

Philip II, 301 sq., 309, 311, 312

---- IV, 304, 359, 413

Philip of Macedon, 50-1

Philippus, Lucius Marcus, 21

Philosophy, Greek, 47, 113, 127, 135

Phocas, 115

Phoenicia, 127, 129, 150-51, 159 n.

Physiology and sociology, 27 n., 71

Picton, J.A., 431 n.

Pignotti, 182

Pindar, 136

Piracy, Cilician, 110; Algerine, 223; Scandinavian, 270, 272, 293, 296

Pisa, 178, 205, 211, 224, 225, 226, 231, 237, 242, 248, 252

Pitt, 323

Plato, 50, 102, 109, 127

Plebs, the Roman, 9 sq., 15, 17 sq., 77, 163; privileges obtained by, 19 and n.

Pliny the elder, 86, 91

Pluquet, 270

Plutarch, 128, 133 n.

Podesta, the title, 240 n.

Poetry, Greek, 126; English during Commonwealth, 421, 439 n.

Poehlmann, R., 183

Poisoned weapons, use of, 129

Politics, definition of, 1, 468; theories of, 52, 62, 104, 233, 448

Pollock, Sir F., 448

Polyandry, 101

Polybius, cited, 103

Polytheism and politics, 266

Pombal, Marquis of, 281 n., 358, 363

Pompeius, 110

Pontalis, 292

Popish Plot, 438

Population in Rome, 19, 24, 26, 91; in Greece, 38 sq., 100 sq., 111, 117, 172; in Scandinavia, 270, 273, 329; in Roman Empire, 172 sq., 194; in Holland, 294, 327, 328-30; in Switzerland, 339, 348, 352 sq.; in Portugal, 329, 358; in Brazil, 362; in feudal England, 371 sq., 388-90; in France, 322-23; in Ireland, 427; control of, 52, 53

Populus, the Roman, 10 sq.

Portugal, evolution of, 355-68; exploration by, 221, 356 sq.; population in, 329; finance of, 363, 364

Positivism, 366 n.

Pott, cited, 9

Poverty in Rome, 17, 19 sq., 76 sq. (see Doles); in Greece, 39 sq., 98; and culture, 63; in Scandinavia, 272-73; in England, 380, 395, 390, 402-403, 404, 405, 434, 462-63, 467; in Holland, 325, 330

Powell, Prof. York, quoted, 279

Presbyterianism, 398, 410, 417, 444

Priesthoods, 125, 142, 160, 235, 266

Printing, effects of, 221, 226

Privateering, 319 n., 323

Procopius, 144

Procter, Colonel, 181, 197 n.

Progress, 469 sq.; European, factors in, 35; nature of, 54; in the East, 73, 180

Proletariate, Roman, 17, 80; Greek, 39 sq.; Flemish, 297; Dutch, 315; Italian, 244, 247 sq.; English, 380, 387, 434, 467

Protection, evocative, 135, 140, 224 sq.; 283, 314, 315

Provence, 219, 220

Prudentius, 35 n.

Publilius, 20

Puchta, 12

Pulszky, 398 n.

Puritanism, 343-46, 418 sq.; 430 sq.

Pym, 416

Pythagoreanism, 190 n.

Quirinus, 9

Quirites, the name, 9

Race, theories of, 1 sq., 23 n., 29, 31, 60, 64, 66, 123, 128 sq., 146 sq., 158, 183, 190, 193, 209, 233-34, 237, 257, 271, 275-76, 300 n., 304, 307, 339, 369, 378; crosses of, 50, 148, 164, 184, 271, 377; homogeneity in, 56, 184, 339; function of, in politics, 70

Raleigh, 314, 466

Ranke, 182, 184 n., 198, 450 n.

Rashdall, Dr., 212 n.

Rationalism, Greek, 46; Saracen, 155; medieval, 220; modern, 326, 422, 447

Ratzel, 59

Ravenna, 195, 204, 212

Reade, Winwood, cited, 64

Reber, 123

Redskins, civilisation of, 361

Referendum, 351

Reformation, 221, 237; in Italy, 237 sq., 306; in Spain, 238, 303, 306; in France, 238, 306; in Germany, 192, 238, 239, 305-6, 342; in Holland, 238, 301 sq.; in Scandinavia, 276 sq.; in Switzerland, 341 sq.; in England, 238, 395, 396-98; in Scotland, 398; in Iceland, 280

Religion in politics, 70, 177, 265 sq.; at Rome, 17, 19 n., 159 sq.; as substitute for politics, 26 sq., 397; paralysis of intellect by, 61, 237; and monarchy, 265 sq.

Rembrandt, 327

Renaissance, 220, 225, 227, 339-40

Renan, 147

Republics, Italian, 183-256

Republicanism, Portuguese, 367-68; English, 423, 442

Reumont, A. von, 182

Revolutions, South American, 366

Rhodes, 104, 140, 228

Richard II, 387, 390

---- III, 394

Richards, E., 192 n.

Richelieu, 140, 438

Rienzi, 233, 245-46

Rilliet, 331, 334, 335

Rio-Branco, 362 n.

Robertson, E.W., on Roman heredium, 12

---- W., 303

Rodogast, 185

Roger II, 218

Rogers, Prof. Th., 292; and economic interpretation of history, 75 n.; on trade in sixteenth century, 221-22; on Holland, 298; on population in medieval England, 388-89; on Lollardism, 396 n.; on enclosures, 404; on medieval production of silver, 460

Rolf, 271 n.

Rome, political evolution of, 4, 8 sq., 16 sq., 28 sq., 67; early civilisation of, 14, 15; economic life of, 11 n., 75 sq.; land system of, 11 sq.; effects of war in, 21 sq.; bribery in, 22; army finance in, 25; Pagan, religion of, 27, 159 sq.; and Carthage, 30; deterioration of, 31 sq., 69; barbarian invasion of, 57, 95-6; slavery in, 76; commerce in, 76-77; finance in, 77 sq., 172-73, 175; doles in, 82; agriculture in, 76, 79, 82 sq.; fever in, 90 sq.; confiscation of Pagan revenues in, 90; collapse of, 92 sq.; Church of, 95, 96, 168-69, 204, 206, 209, 212, 214 sq., 221, 234, 235, 399; and Greece, 110 sq., 134 sq., 158; law of, 112, 197, 205; art and letters in, 125, 158, 165 sq.; and Lombards, 195; influence of, on Italian cities, 204; in thirteenth century, 208; under Rienzi, 245-46; German conquest of, 254

Roscoe, 182, 223, 227 n.

Round, J.H., 378

Rousseau, 349, 449

Royal Society, 444-46

Royalism, 299, 300, 381, 394, 399, 416, 436

Royer-Collard, 2

Rubens, 327

Russia, culture-conditions of, 135, 139-40; and the Far East, 178

Rutherford, S., 441

Sabines and Romans, 9, 14, 15, 16

Sacra, Roman, 9

Sacrifice, human, 129

St. Gall, 346, 349

Saint-Simon, 2 n.

Salerno, 212

Salimbene, 240 n.

Salmasius, 441 n.

Salting, 294

Salvation Army, 28 n.

Salverte, cited, 5, 56

Salvian, 35 n., 119, 214

Samber, 464 n.

Sappho, 126, 136

Saracens, and Christendom, 69; and Byzantine trade, 117; civilisation of, 146 sq.; and Italy, 197, 211, 212 n.; and Sicily, 219; and Provence, 219

Savigny, 191, 203

Savonarola, 252

Saviour Gods, 115, 164

Scandinavia, prospects of, 260-61, 285; evolution of, 264 sq.; histories of, 264 n.; religion in, 266 sq., 272; population in, 270, 273, 282 sq.; social conditions in, 272-73, 278; Reformation in, 276 sq.; separatism in, 275-76, 278; culture evolution of, 278 sq.

Schaffhausen, 338, 344, 347

Schanz, 392 n., 458

Scherer, H., cited, 222

Schlegel, 413

Schwegler, cited, 10, 12, 13

Schweitzer, 264 n., 273 n.

Schwytz, 332, 333, 337, 338, 344, 347

Science, evolution of, 127, 145 sq., 281, 326, 348, 444 sq.

Scotland, intellectual evolution in, 61, 398, 414 n., 456; union with England, 455-57

Sculpture, evolution of, 125 sq., 135, 142, 161, 162

Seebohm, 370 n., 388

Seeley, on decadence, 174-75; on small nations, 259; on national greatness, 261; on Holland, 317; on England and Spain, 433 n.

Selim I, 222

Semites, evolution of, 67, 146 sq.

Senate, the Roman, 18, 87, 163

Seneca, 434

Senior, N., cited, 65

Separatism, 132, 209, 231-32, 275, 276, 298, 335, 422

Servius Tullius, 15, 16

Sexes, equality of, 61, 142, 143, 150

Sextus Empiricus, 100

Sforza, 225, 249

Shaftesbury, First Earl, 437 sq.

---- Third Earl, cited, 5-6, 281 n., 449

Shakespeare, 405-7

Sheep farming, 403, 404

Sherborne, Bishop, 449

Shipping, Dutch, 313, 314, 315, 329; French, 315; English, 370, 402, 458, 464; Irish, 453

Shuckburgh, cited, 29, 31, 77

Sicily, taxation of by Rome, 31; and Saracens, 219; literature of, 219; revenue of, 224; medieval invasions of, 241 sq.; Parliament in, 381

Sidney, Algernon, 439, 442, 443

Siena, 220, 225

Silk manufacture, 116, 120, 218, 255

Silver, Greek production of, 105-6; medieval production of, 460

Simon de Montfort, 378, 381, 382

Simonides, 136

Sismondi, 182, 350; on the Merovingians, 187; on the tenth century, 189, 197; on the Lombards, 195, 198; on feudalism, 202; on Italian Republics, 205 n.; on Provence, 220 n.; on Papal rule, 223; on despotism and letters, 230; on Gaultier, 245; on Italian proletariate, 247; on the Medici, 249; on national egoism, 259 n.

Sixtus V, 223

Slave-trade, Portuguese, 356; English, 374, 407

Slavery, and civilisation, 62-63, 176-77; Roman, 23-24, 76, 81, 94, 110, 112-13; Greek, 39 and note, 43, 101, 110, 133 and note; Christian, 118 sq., 213 sq.; Brazilian, 362, 363, 365; Scandinavian, 273, 274; Dutch, 293, 295; Portuguese, 356, 358; Swiss, 332; English, 370-74, 380, 388, 418; decline of, 213 sq.

Slavs, 115, 117, 264

Smith, Adam, 59 n., 215, 324, 382, 464, 465, 467

Snobbery, national, 261-62

"Social contract," 349, 448

Socialism, 352

Sociology, course of, 60, 147; in seventeenth century, 316

Socrates, 46, 102, 127

Soleure, 337, 338, 344, 345, 347

Solon, 40 sq., 99, 100

Somaliland, 129

Sousa, Alfonso de, 362

Spain, Roman, 23, 24, 80, 92, 173; Christian, evolution of, 156, 221, 222-23, 305; Parliament in, 382; and Portugal, 360-61; and Italy, 223-24; and Holland, 301 sq.; Inquisition in, 303; finance of, 311; and England, 406-7; prospects of, 156, 260; stagnation of, 222-23, 230, 311, 361; industry in, 461; Gothic, 191; Saracen, 150 sq.

Spalding, 136, 181, 224

Sparta, polity of, 51, 98, 101, 103-4, 130 sq.; women in, 130 n., 142

Spencer, H., 2 n.

Spiegel, 146 sq.

Sprat, 444 sq.

Spreghel, 326

Sprengel, cited, 150

"State," the word, 309

Staley, E., 182

Stephen, King, 377

Stephens, H.M., 355 n., 359, 362 n.

Stilicho, 96, 185

Stoics, 118-19

Strabo, 103

Strafford, 415 n., 437, 453

Strife, modes of, 6-7, 70

Struensee, 281

Stubbs, Bishop, on Teutons, 196; on feudalism, 200, 201; on Spain and Germany, 305; on Normans, 375; on Parliament, 387 n.; on Magna Carta, 392; on English commerce, 403 n.; on enclosures, 404

Suarez, 440-41, 450

Sulla, 21, 25, 82, 86, 110

Sumptuary laws, 415

Superstition, Roman, 27; Greek, 46; Byzantine, 145; and natural phenomena, 304

Sweden, structure of, 265; political evolution of, 267, 274, 275; religion in, 267; polygamy in, 272; slavery in, 274; population in, 283-84, 329

Switzerland, 260-61; structure of, 67; evolution of, 331 sq.; histories of, 331; population in, 339, 352 sq.; culture evolution of, 339, 341 sq.; Reformation in, 342 sq.; modern, 350 sq.

Sybaris, 39 n.

Symes, Prof., cited, 389

Symonds, J.A., 182, cited 96, 197 n., 210, 224-25, 238; discussed, 225-32

Synthesis, 5

Syracuse, literature at, 136

Tacitus, 118 n., 184

Taine, 1-3

Tanquelin, 306

Tasso, 230

Taxation, Roman, 31, 77, 110; Athenian, 42; Byzantine, 119-20; Moslem, 152; Dutch, 321 n., 322; English, 395, 404, 415, 416; Spanish, 223, 300, 311; Florentine, 251; Papal, 223; Venetian, 228; Scandinavian, 278

Tell, myth of, 334-35

Temple, Sir W., 291, 315, 319, 321 n., 324, 449

Testa, 215 n.

Teuffel, on Roman degeneration, 32-3

Teutomania, 183, 187, 190, 192, 238, 300, 304, 307, 378

Teutonic evolution, 184 sq., 306, 340

Tertullian, 441 n.

Theodoric, 187-88, 191, 194

Theognis, 40

Theresa of Portugal, 355

Thessaly, 132, 133

Thierry, 385 n.

Thirlwall, 37; cited, 103, 106 n., 136 n.

Thirty Years' War, 460

Three, the number, 8

Thucydides, 45, 49, 128

Thurgau, 338, 346

Ticino, 338, 346, 349

Tocqueville, De, 1 n., 62

Toleration, 438, 450

Torquemada, 303

Totila, 187

Traill, H.D., 454

Trench, Bishop, 451 n.

Trollope, T.A., 181, 236 n.

Troubadours, 219, 220

Tuebingen, 139

Tucker, Dean, 322-23

Turkey, religion in, 154; prospects of civilisation in, 157, 176, 260; empire in, 176

Turner, Sharon, 370

Tyndale, 390

Tyranny, effects of, 51, 173; and art, 135 sq.; Greek, 137; at Florence, 244; in England, 392 sq.; in Scotland, 398

Twysden, 398

Ulster, 454

Umiliati, 218, 289 n.

United States, civilisation of, 88, 119, 365

Universities, 139, 211, 325, 348, 419 n.

Unterwalden, 332, 333, 337, 338, 344, 347

Urban II, 215

Uri, 332, 333, 337, 338, 342, 344, 347

Usher, 440

Usury, Roman, 76, 78, 79; Roman legislation against, 20; in Greece, 39-40; medieval, 217; in England, 435

Utopia, 469

Utrecht, 295

Valais, 337, 338, 346, 349

Valentinian, 90, 93

Valla, L., 227

Vandals, 92, 191

Vandyck, 327, 416

Variation, social, 144

Varro, 161 n.

Vaud, 338, 346, 349, 352

Vaughan, 418

Velasquez, 135, 327, 359, 413

Venice, evocation of art in, 63, 225, 226, 228; trade of, 120, 222, 228, 293; rise of, 195, 254; and Byzantium, 204, 254; and Turks, 222; social conditions in, 227-28; and Florence, 241; and France, 253; polity of, 254-55

Verity, Dr. R., cited, 27 n.

Verres, 32

Vespasian, 166 n.

Vicente, 359

Vico, 11, 227

Vieusseux, 331

Viglius, 304

Vijnne, 292

Villainage in England, 371 sq.

Villani, G., 217, 247 n.

Villari, Prof., 182, 218, 226, 236 n.

Villemain, 420 n., 433

Vinogradoff, 371, 372

Virgil, 165, 166

Viscontis, 241, 245, 246, 248, 249

Visigoths, the, 119, 191

Volney, 34

Voltaire, 59, 349

Vondel, 326

Wagner, 140

Waitz, 200

Walckenaer, 34, 56, 74, 121

Wales, 258, 384

Waller, 421

Walloons, 307

War, persistence of, 6-7; and democracy, 21, 24, 45, 72; private, 202, 286, 290; in medieval Italy, 216, 237; and class relations, 379-80; and civilisation, 383, 386; alleged benefits of, 383

Ward, Lester, 121

Wealth, adventitious, effects of, 59

Weaving, 205, 294

Webster, 413

Wends, the, 266, 272

Wenzelburger, 292

Whigs and Tories, 421 n.

Whitney, 59-61

Whittaker, T., 52

Whistler, cited, 122

Wiclif, 390

Wicquefort, 309

William of Orange, 301, 308, 309, 318

---- the Conqueror, 376

---- III, 450

Wissowa, 160 n.

Wittich, 185

Women, status of, 61, 141-42, 143, 150, 151

Woollen trade, 218, 289 n., 294, 380, 403, 453, 459

Writing, antiquity of, 160 n.

Xenophon, 105, 107

Ypres, 296

Zeno, 135

Zimmern, Miss, 289 n.

Zola, on war, 6

Zschokke, 266 n., 331

Zug, 336, 337, 338, 347

Zurich, 336, 337, 338, 339, 342, 343, 344, 345

Zwingli, 342, 343

PRINTED BY WATTS AND CO., JOHNSON'S COURT, FLEET STREET, E.C.

Spotted a typo or a problem in this chapter? Tell us