summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/old/66901-h
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
Diffstat (limited to 'old/66901-h')
-rw-r--r--old/66901-h/66901-h.htm11104
-rw-r--r--old/66901-h/images/cover.jpgbin257765 -> 0 bytes
2 files changed, 0 insertions, 11104 deletions
diff --git a/old/66901-h/66901-h.htm b/old/66901-h/66901-h.htm
deleted file mode 100644
index 461ff1b..0000000
--- a/old/66901-h/66901-h.htm
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,11104 +0,0 @@
-<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN"
- "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd">
-<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" xml:lang="en" lang="en">
- <head>
- <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;charset=utf-8" />
- <meta http-equiv="Content-Style-Type" content="text/css" />
- <title>
- Ancient Rome and Modern America, by Guglielmo Ferrero—A Project Gutenberg eBook
- </title>
- <link rel="coverpage" href="images/cover.jpg" />
- <style type="text/css">
-
-body {
- margin-left: 2.5em;
- margin-right: 2.5em;
-}
-
-h1, h2 {
- text-align: center;
- clear: both;
- margin-top: 2.5em;
- margin-bottom: 1em;
-}
-
-h1 {font-size: 2.5em;}
-h2.part {font-size: xx-large;}
-h2+p {margin-top: 1.5em;}
-h2 .subhead {display: block; margin-top: 1em; margin-bottom: 1em;}
-
-.transnote h2 {
- margin-top: .5em;
- margin-bottom: 1em;
-}
-
-.subhead {
- text-indent: 0;
- text-align: center;
- font-size: smaller;
-}
-
-p {
- text-indent: 1.75em;
- margin-top: .51em;
- margin-bottom: .24em;
- text-align: justify;
-}
-.caption p, .center p, p.center {text-align: center; text-indent: 0;}
-
-.p2 {margin-top: 2em;}
-.p4 {margin-top: 4em;}
-.vspace {line-height: 1.5;}
-
-.small {font-size: 70%;}
-.smaller {font-size: 85%;}
-.larger {font-size: 125%;}
-.large {font-size: 150%;}
-
-p.drop-cap {text-indent: 0; margin-bottom: 1.1em;}
-p.drop-cap:first-letter {
- float: left;
- margin: .02em .4em 0 0;
- font-size: 300%;
- line-height:0.7em;
- text-indent: 0;
- clear: both;
-}
-p.drop-cap.i .smcap1 {margin-left: -.3em;}
-p.drop-cap .smcap1 {margin-left: -1.2em;}
-p.drop-cap.b .smcap1 {margin-left: -1.3em;}
-p.drop-cap.al .smcap1 {margin-left: -1.7em;}
-p.drop-cap.l .smcap1 {margin-left: -1em;}
-.smcap1 {text-transform: uppercase;}
-
-.center {text-align: center;}
-
-.smcap {font-variant: small-caps;}
-.allsmcap {font-variant: small-caps; text-transform: lowercase;}
-
-.bold {font-weight: bold;}
-
-hr {
- width: 33%;
- margin: 4em auto 4em auto;
- clear: both;
-}
-
-.tb {
- text-align: center;
- padding-top: .76em;
- padding-bottom: .24em;
- letter-spacing: 1.5em;
- margin-right: -1.5em;
-}
-
-table {
- margin-left: auto;
- margin-right: auto;
- max-width: 80%;
- border-collapse: collapse;
-}
-
-.tdl {
- text-align: left;
- vertical-align: top;
- padding-right: 1em;
- padding-left: 1.5em;
- text-indent: -1.5em;
-}
-
-.tdc {text-align: center;}
-.tdc.part {
- font-size: 110%;
- padding-top: 1.5em;
- padding-bottom: .5em;
-}
-.first .tdc.part {padding-top: 0;}
-.tdc.subpart {padding-bottom: 1em;}
-
-.tdr {
- text-align: right;
- vertical-align: bottom;
- padding-left: .3em;
- white-space: nowrap;
-}
-.tdr.top{vertical-align: top; padding-left: 0; padding-right: 1em;}
-#toc td {padding-bottom: .5em;}
-#toc .small td {padding-bottom: 0;}
-
-.pagenum {
- position: absolute;
- right: .25em;
- text-indent: 0;
- text-align: right;
- font-size: 70%;
- font-weight: normal;
- font-variant: normal;
- font-style: normal;
- letter-spacing: normal;
- line-height: normal;
- color: #acacac;
- border: .0625em solid #acacac;
- background: #ffffff;
- padding: .0625em .125em;
-}
-
-.footnote {
- border: thin dashed black;
- margin: 1.5em 10%;
- padding: .5em 1em .5em 1.5em;
-}
-
-.footnote {font-size: .95em;}
-.footnote p {text-indent: 1em;}
-
-.fnanchor {
- vertical-align: 60%;
- line-height: .7;
- font-size: smaller;
- text-decoration: none;
-}
-.footnote .fnanchor {font-size: .8em;}
-.fnanchor.smaller {font-size: .5em; vertical-align: text-top;}
-
-.blockquot {
- margin: 1.5em 5% 1.5em 5%;
- font-size: 95%;
-}
-
-.transnote {
- background-color: #999999;
- border: thin dotted;
- font-family: sans-serif, serif;
- margin-left: 5%;
- margin-right: 5%;
- margin-top: 4em;
- margin-bottom: 2em;
- padding: 1em;
-}
-.covernote {visibility: hidden; display: none;}
-
-.wspace {word-spacing: .3em;}
-
-.pagenum br {display: none; visibility: hidden;}
-
-@media print, handheld
-{
- body {margin: 0;}
-
- h1, .chapter, .newpage {page-break-before: always;}
- h1.nobreak, h2.nobreak, .nobreak {page-break-before: avoid; padding-top: 0;}
-
- p {
- margin-top: .5em;
- text-align: justify;
- margin-bottom: .25em;
- }
-
- table {width: auto; max-width: 100%; margin: 1em auto 1em auto;}
-
- .tdl {
- padding-left: 1em;
- text-indent: -1em;
- padding-right: 0;
- }
-
- p.drop-cap {text-indent: 1.75em; margin-bottom: .24em;}
- p.drop-cap:first-letter {
- float: none;
- font-size: 100%;
- margin-left: 0;
- margin-right: 0;
- text-indent: 1.75em;
- }
-
- p.drop-cap.i .smcap1, p.drop-cap.l .smcap1, p.drop-cap .smcap1,
- p.drop-cap.b .smcap1, p.drop-cap.al .smcap1 {margin-left: 0;}
- p .smcap1 {font-size: 100%;}
-/* .smcap1 {font-variant: normal;}*/
-
- hr {
- margin-top: .1em;
- margin-bottom: .1em;
- visibility: hidden;
- color: white;
- width: .01em;
- display: none;
- }
-
- .blockquot {margin: 1.5em 3% 1.5em 3%;}
-
- .transnote {
- page-break-inside: avoid;
- margin-left: 2%;
- margin-right: 2%;
- margin-top: 1em;
- margin-bottom: 1em;
- padding: .5em;
- }
-
- .covernote {visibility: visible; display: block; text-align: center;}
-}
- </style>
- </head>
-
-<body>
-
-<div style='text-align:center; font-size:1.2em; font-weight:bold'>The Project Gutenberg eBook of Ancient Rome and Modern America;, by Guglielmo Ferrero</div>
-
-<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'>
-This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and
-most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions
-whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms
-of the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online
-at <a href="https://www.gutenberg.org">www.gutenberg.org</a>. If you
-are not located in the United States, you will have to check the laws of the
-country where you are located before using this eBook.
-</div>
-
-<p style='display:block; margin-top:1em; margin-bottom:0; margin-left:2em; text-indent:-2em'>Title: Ancient Rome and Modern America;</p>
-<p style='display:block; margin-top:0; margin-bottom:1em; margin-left:2em; text-indent:0;'>A Comparative Study of Morals and Manners</p>
-
-<div style='display:block; margin-top:1em; margin-bottom:1em; margin-left:2em; text-indent:-2em'>Author: Guglielmo Ferrero</div>
-
-<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'>Release Date: December 8, 2021 [eBook #66901]</div>
-
-<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'>Language: English</div>
-
-<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'>Character set encoding: UTF-8</div>
-
-<div style='display:block; margin-left:2em; text-indent:-2em'>Produced by: Turgut Dincer, Charlie Howard, and the Online Distributed Proofreading Team at https://www.pgdp.net (This file was produced from images generously made available by The Internet Archive)</div>
-
-<div style='margin-top:2em; margin-bottom:4em'>*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK ANCIENT ROME AND MODERN AMERICA; ***</div>
-
-<div class="transnote covernote">
-<p class="center larger">Transcriber's Note</p>
-
-<p>Cover created by Transcriber and placed into the Public Domain.</p>
-</div>
-
-<div class="newpage p4 center wspace">
-<h1><span class="vspace">ANCIENT ROME AND<br />
-MODERN AMERICA</span></h1>
-
-<p class="larger bold vspace">A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF MORALS<br />
-AND MANNERS</p>
-
-<div class="vspace">
-<p class="p2">BY<br />
-<span class="large">GUGLIELMO FERRERO</span><br />
-<span class="small">AUTHOR OF “THE GREATNESS AND DECLINE OF ROME,” ETC.</span></p>
-
-<p class="p4"><span class="large">G. P. PUTNAM’S SONS</span><br />
-NEW YORK AND LONDON<br />
-<span class="bold">The Knickerbocker Press</span>
-</p>
-
-<hr />
-
-<p class="newpage p4">
-<span class="smcap">Copyright, 1914</span><br />
-
-BY<br />
-
-<span class="larger">GUGLIELMO FERRERO</span></p>
-
-<p class="p2">Third Impression</p>
-
-<p class="bold">The Knickerbocker Press, New York</p>
-</div></div>
-
-<hr />
-
-<div class="chapter">
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_iii">iii</span></p>
-
-<h2 class="nobreak" id="PUBLISHERS_NOTE">PUBLISHER’S NOTE</h2>
-</div>
-
-<p class="drop-cap"><span class="smcap1">The</span> reader will find in the following pages reference
-to another work by Dr. Ferrero which will shortly
-come into publication under the title of <i>Between the
-Old World and the New</i>. It is in order to explain that
-<i>Between the Old World and the New</i> was brought into
-print in continental editions (in Italy, in France and
-elsewhere) before the publication of the present work.
-The author has, however, decided, that for the English-speaking
-readers of the two volumes it would be advisable
-to change the order of publication and to issue
-first this study of Morals and Manners. The second
-book, <i>Between the Old World and the New</i>, will appear,
-in New York and in London, early in the autumn of
-1914.</p>
-
-<p>
-<span class="smcap">New York</span>,<br />
-<i>April, 1914</i>.
-</p>
-
-<hr />
-
-<div class="chapter">
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_v">v</span></p>
-
-<h2 class="nobreak" id="CONTENTS">CONTENTS</h2>
-</div>
-
-<table id="toc" summary="Contents">
-<tr class="small">
- <td colspan="2"> </td>
- <td class="tdr">PAGE</td>
-</tr>
-<tr class="first">
- <td class="tdc part" colspan="3"><i>PART ONE</i></td>
-</tr>
-<tr>
- <td class="tdl" colspan="2"><span class="smcap">What is Progress?</span></td>
- <td class="tdr"><a href="#toclink_3">3</a></td>
-</tr>
-<tr>
- <td class="tdc part" colspan="3"><i>PART TWO</i></td>
-</tr>
-<tr>
- <td class="tdc subpart" colspan="3">ANCIENT HISTORY AND THE MODERN WORLD</td>
-</tr>
-<tr class="small">
- <td class="tdr">CHAPTER</td>
-</tr>
-<tr>
- <td class="tdr top">I.</td>
- <td class="tdl"><span class="smcap">Ancient Social Systems and Contemporary America</span></td>
- <td class="tdr"><a href="#toclink_21">21</a></td>
-</tr>
-<tr>
- <td class="tdr top">II.</td>
- <td class="tdl"><span class="smcap">Quantity and Quality</span></td>
- <td class="tdr"><a href="#toclink_40">40</a></td>
-</tr>
-<tr>
- <td class="tdr top">III.</td>
- <td class="tdl"><span class="smcap">Woman and Home</span></td>
- <td class="tdr"><a href="#toclink_60">60</a></td>
-</tr>
-<tr>
- <td class="tdr top">IV.</td>
- <td class="tdl"><span class="smcap">The Lesson of the Fall of the Roman Empire</span></td>
- <td class="tdr"><a href="#toclink_77">77</a></td>
-</tr>
-<tr>
- <td class="tdr top">V.</td>
- <td class="tdl"><span class="smcap">Ups and Downs</span></td>
- <td class="tdr"><a href="#toclink_97">97</a></td>
-</tr>
-<tr>
- <td class="tdc part" colspan="3"><i>PART THREE</i></td>
-</tr>
-<tr>
- <td class="tdc subpart" colspan="3">EUROPE AND AMERICA</td>
-</tr>
-<tr>
- <td class="tdr top">I.</td>
- <td class="tdl"><span class="smcap">The American Definition of Progress</span></td>
- <td class="tdr"><a href="#toclink_115">115</a></td>
-</tr>
-<tr>
- <td class="tdr top">II.</td>
- <td class="tdl"><span class="smcap">Facts and Motives in the Modern World</span></td>
- <td class="tdr"><a href="#toclink_139">139</a></td>
-</tr>
-<tr>
- <td class="tdr top">III.</td>
- <td class="tdl"><span class="smcap">More or Better?</span></td>
- <td class="tdr"><a href="#toclink_161">161</a></td>
-</tr>
-<tr>
- <td class="tdr top">IV.</td>
- <td class="tdl"><span class="smcap">The Lost Paradise of Beauty</span></td>
- <td class="tdr"><a href="#toclink_182">182</a></td>
-</tr>
-<tr>
- <td class="tdr top">V.</td>
- <td class="tdl"><span class="smcap">Beyond Every Limit</span></td>
- <td class="tdr"><a href="#toclink_201">201</a></td>
-</tr>
-<tr>
- <td class="tdr top">VI.</td>
- <td class="tdl"><span class="smcap">The Riddle of America</span></td>
- <td class="tdr"><a href="#toclink_223">223</a></td>
-</tr>
-<tr>
- <td class="tdc part" colspan="3"><i>PART FOUR</i></td>
-</tr>
-<tr>
- <td class="tdc subpart" colspan="3">POLITICS AND JUSTICE IN ANCIENT ROME</td>
-</tr>
-<tr>
- <td class="tdr top">I.</td>
- <td class="tdl"><span class="smcap">The Trial of Verres</span></td>
- <td class="tdr"><a href="#toclink_251">251</a></td>
-</tr>
-<tr>
- <td class="tdr top">II.</td>
- <td class="tdl"><span class="smcap">The Trial of Clodius</span></td>
- <td class="tdr"><a href="#toclink_275">275</a></td>
-</tr>
-<tr>
- <td class="tdr top">III.</td>
- <td class="tdl"><span class="smcap">The Trial of Piso</span></td>
- <td class="tdr"><a href="#toclink_299">299</a></td>
-</tr>
-<tr>
- <td class="tdc part" colspan="3"><i>PART FIVE</i></td>
-</tr>
-<tr>
- <td class="tdl" colspan="2"><span class="smcap">The Limit of Sport</span></td>
- <td class="tdr"><a href="#toclink_331">331</a></td>
-</tr>
-</table>
-
-<hr />
-
-<div class="chapter">
-<h2 class="nobreak" id="ANCIENT_ROME_AND_MODERN_AMERICA">ANCIENT ROME AND MODERN AMERICA</h2>
-</div>
-
-<hr />
-
-<div class="chapter">
-<h2 class="nobreak part" id="Part_I"><span class="smcap">Part I</span><br />
-
-<span class="subhead"><span class="smcap">What Is Progress?<span class="pagenum" id="Page_3">3</span></span></span></h2>
-</div>
-
-<hr />
-
-<div id="toclink_3" class="chapter">
-<h2 class="nobreak" id="WHAT_IS_PROGRESS">WHAT IS PROGRESS?</h2>
-</div>
-
-<p class="drop-cap"><span class="smcap1">The</span> object of the essays collected in this volume,
-with the exception of three which recount three
-curious episodes in Roman history, is the investigation
-of the most important differences between the ancient
-world and the modern, between Europe and America;
-in what way and in what particulars the civilisations of
-the ancients and of Europe have been modified respectively
-by the course of centuries and by the passage of
-the Atlantic. The essays were printed in the first
-instance in a monthly publication—<i>Hearst’s Magazine</i>—for
-the perusal of the multitude of hasty readers who
-are content to skip from argument to argument, and
-they are now republished in book form for the benefit
-of those readers who may care to dwell on each argument
-with greater deliberation. This volume may
-be considered as the bridge which connects the <i>Greatness
-and Decline of Rome</i> with a third work which, under
-the title of <i>Between the Old World and the New</i>, will be
-published shortly in New York and London.</p>
-
-<p>A comparison between the ancient world and the
-modern, between Europe and America, suggested to a
-writer of ancient history by two long tours in the New<span class="pagenum" id="Page_4">4</span>
-World—such is the subject of this volume; and such is
-the subject of the further book which at an early date
-will again take up a number of the matters outlined in
-these papers and will submit these to more exhaustive
-consideration. But neither in this volume nor in its
-successor must the reader expect the comparison to
-resolve itself into a definite judgment; and if he imagines
-that he has discovered such a verdict, he may rest
-assured that he is mistaken. This book, and the other
-which will follow it, have been written with the express
-purpose of emphasising how vain it is to spend our time,
-as we do, passing judgment on the progress or decadence
-of the times, of nations, and of civilisations; of showing
-how easy it is to reverse all the reasonings by which,
-impelled by passions, interests, prejudices, or illusions,
-we strive now to exalt, now to abase ourselves by comparison
-with the ancients and by contrasting the inhabitants
-of one continent with those of another;
-of indicating what an easy and sure target irony and
-dialectic have in all the doctrines, opinions, and beliefs
-with which man endeavours to establish his by-no-means
-sure judgments—all the doctrines, including
-that of progress, at least in the sense in which progress
-is generally understood.</p>
-
-<p>Including that of progress? the American reader will
-exclaim, with some misgiving. But are we not living
-in the age of progress? Can that idea of progress
-which every morning rises with the sun and sheds new
-splendour on the two worlds on either side of the Atlantic,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_5">5</span>
-and with the sun arouses them to their accustomed
-tasks—can it be that this idea is but an illusion? No.
-The author of these two books has not so much confidence
-in his own wisdom as to try to discover whether
-man is really progressing or not; whether he is moving
-down the valley of the centuries towards a fixed goal,
-or towards an illusion which retreats with each step he
-takes in its direction. There is one point only which
-the author proposes to make clear. There are at the
-present day, on the one hand, those who despise the
-present and worship the past, extol Europe and depreciate
-America; on the other hand, those who declare
-that they would not give one hour of the marvellous
-present in which they live for all the centuries of the
-past, and who rate America far more highly than they
-do Europe. The author sets out to show that the
-reason why the eternal disputes between the partisans
-of these divergent views are so inconclusive, is that in
-this discussion, as in so many others, each side postulates
-two different definitions of progress, and in their
-discussions of the past and of the present, of Europe
-and of America, they start from this dual definition
-as if it were single and agreed. The result is that
-they cannot understand and never will understand, if
-they discuss for a thousand years, each other’s point
-of view.</p>
-
-<p>The worshippers of the present and the admirers of
-America argue, more or less consciously, from a definition
-of progress which would identify it with the increase<span class="pagenum" id="Page_6">6</span>
-of the power and speed of machines, of riches, and of
-our control over nature, however much that control
-may involve the frenzied squandering of the resources
-of the earth, which, while immense, are not inexhaustible.
-And their arguments are sound in their application
-to the present age, and also to America, if we grant
-that their definition of progress is the true one. For
-though steam- and electricity-driven machinery claims
-Europe as its birthplace, it has reached maturity and
-has accomplished and is accomplishing its most extraordinary
-feats in America, where, so to speak, it found
-virgin soil to exploit. But the opposite school indignantly
-denies that men are wasting their time and
-contributing nothing to the improvement and progress
-of the world, when they strive to embellish it or to
-instruct it, to soothe and to restrain its unbridled
-passions. In their view, the masterpieces of art, the
-great religions, the discoveries of science, the speculations
-of philosophy, the reform of laws, customs, and
-constitutions, are milestones along the road to progress.
-According to these, our age, intent only on making
-money, ought to be ashamed when it compares itself
-with the past. Machines are the barbarians of modern
-times, which have destroyed the fairest works of ancient
-civilisations. History will show the discovery of
-America to have been little less than a calamity.</p>
-
-<p>So two persons who, starting from these two definitions
-of progress, set to work to judge the past and the
-present, Europe and America, will never succeed in<span class="pagenum" id="Page_7">7</span>
-understanding each other, any more than two persons
-who, wishing to measure a thing together, adopt two
-different measures. And the discussion will be the
-more vain and confused, the less clearly and precisely
-the thought of each disputant apprehends the primary
-definition of progress, which does duty as a measure
-for each. Indeed, this unfortunate state of affairs is
-commoner than is generally supposed at the present
-day, with the need for hurry which pursues us in every
-act and at every moment, and with the great whirl of
-ideas and words which eddies around us. To decide,
-then, whether our times are or are not greater than those
-of the ancients, whether America is superior to Europe
-or Europe to America, we must discover which of these
-two definitions is the true one. But is it possible to
-prove that one of these definitions of progress is true
-and the other false? How many to-day would dare
-to deny that man made the world progress when, by
-the use of fire, he launched on the path of victory the
-locomotive across the earth and the steamer across the
-ocean? Or when he captured and led through threads
-of copper the invisible force of electricity adrift in the
-universe? Or when he embellished the world with
-arts, and enlightened it with studies, and tempered the
-innate ferocity of human nature with laws, religion, and
-customs? It is clear that neither of these two definitions
-will succeed in putting the other out of court,
-until men are willing either to superhumanise themselves
-completely, renouncing material goods in favour<span class="pagenum" id="Page_8">8</span>
-of spiritual joys, or, sacrificing the latter to the former,
-to bestialise themselves. So long as men with few
-exceptions continue to desire riches and the control
-of nature, as well as beauty, wisdom, and justice,
-both these definitions of progress will be <em>partially</em> true.
-Each will present to us one aspect of progress. It will
-be impossible, if we adopt only one of the two, to decide
-whether we are progressive or decadent, whether
-America is worth more or less than Europe. Every
-epoch and people will seem at one time and another to
-be progressive or decadent, to be superior or inferior,
-according as the one or the other definition is the basis
-of judgment.</p>
-
-<p>“But,” the reader will say, “why not then combine
-the two definitions in one? Why not say that progress
-is the increase of all the good things which man desires:
-of riches, of wisdom, of power, of beauty, of justice?”
-But in order to make of these two definitions a single
-complete and coherent definition, we should have to
-be certain that it is possible by a single effort to increase
-all the good things of life. Is it possible, and
-to what extent is it possible? That is a second grave
-question which this book and its successor endeavour
-to answer.</p>
-
-<p>Many and various matters relating to Europe and
-America are discussed in this book. Still more various
-and diverse are the discussions in <i>Between the Old World
-and the New</i>, which presents a series of dialogues occupying
-the leisure hours of a two weeks’ voyage, in the<span class="pagenum" id="Page_9">9</span>
-course of which persons of different degrees of culture
-and diverse casts of thought discuss Hamlet and progress,
-machinery and Homer, the Copernican system
-and riches, science and Vedanta philosophy, Kant and
-love, Europe and America, Christian Science and sexual
-morality. These matters are discussed fitfully with
-mad rushes zigzag over the universe; and the fits and
-rushes have somewhat dismayed certain critics on this
-side of the Atlantic. “What a jumble!” they cry.
-“What an encyclopædia, what an enormity it is!
-What can Homer and machinery, Hamlet and America,
-Copernicus and emigration have in common?”</p>
-
-<p>In short, the perusal of <i>Between the Old World and the
-New</i> in the original Italian has produced upon more
-than one critic the same effect as if he had come back
-to his house to find all his belongings, his letters, his
-furniture, his clothes, shifted and turned upside down.
-“What demon has been at work here?” he cries in
-dismay. Such critics are not altogether wrong from
-their point of view. Nevertheless, this demon, which
-is always urging man to turn his home upside down
-in the hopes of arranging it better, no adjuration will
-succeed in exorcising from our epoch. I hope that,
-when presented in the form of a book, these dialogues
-will produce a less alarming impression on America.
-Accustomed as she is to seeing such demons raging in
-her house, she should not permit herself to be prevented
-from taking breath in the satisfaction of having done
-well, by the ambition to do better. To be sure, between<span class="pagenum" id="Page_10">10</span>
-the so-called Homeric question and steam-engines,
-between the discovery of America and the tendencies
-of philosophy, between the troubles which torment us
-in private life and the French Revolution, between
-transatlantic emigration and the architecture of New
-York, there is a connection. It is a profound, an organic,
-a vital connection; for, in the last four centuries, little
-by little, almost imperceptibly at first, then with a
-speed which increased gradually up to the French Revolution,
-finally, at headlong speed from the Revolution
-to the present day, the world has changed in every part,
-in form, spirit, and order. And it has changed in form,
-order, and spirit, because it has changed the order of its
-demands upon man. In compensation for the liberty
-granted him in everything else, it has demanded of him
-a rapidity, a punctuality, an intensity, and a passivity
-of obedience in his work, such as no other epoch has
-ever dreamed of being able to exact from lazy human
-nature.</p>
-
-<p>From the French Revolution onwards, throughout
-Europe and throughout America, the political parties,
-the social classes, and institutions, and the philosophical
-doctrines which supported the principle of authority,
-little by little, but everywhere and unintermittently,
-have given way before the onslaught of the parties, the
-classes, and the doctrines which support the principle
-of liberty. The former have been forced sooner or
-later to allow the right of free criticism and discussion
-to oust the ancient duty of tacit obedience in the state,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_11">11</span>
-in religion, in the school, and ultimately in the family.
-Poets and philosophers have extolled the liberation of
-man from ancient servitudes as the most glorious victory
-man can vaunt. A victory, certainly; but over
-whom? Over himself, as it seems; since the limits,
-within which man was content to rest confined until
-the French Revolution, he himself had erected and
-invested with sacred terrors. It is clear that the slave,
-the tyrant, and the liberator were one and the same
-person. Moreover, one may well think that, in gaining
-his liberty, man has not been born again to a new destiny
-nor has he regenerated his own nature; rather has he
-learned to employ his own energies in a different way.
-Man had lived for centuries within strict limits, which
-confined in a narrow compass his curiosity, ambition,
-energy, and pride. But within those limits he had lived
-with greater comfort and less anxiety than we are living,
-without racking his brains to invent or to understand
-something new every day, not spurred on every hour to
-produce at greater speed and in greater abundance, not
-exasperated by the multitude of his needs nor agitated
-from morning to night by the pursuit of the means to
-satisfy them. But after the discovery of America and
-the first great astronomical discoveries which shed
-glory on the beginning of the sixteenth century, there
-arose in man the first sparks of ambition to seek new
-ways in the world outside the ancient limits. The
-philosophies of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries,
-and still more the first discoveries of science, lent<span class="pagenum" id="Page_12">12</span>
-boldness to these ambitions. One day men realised
-that Prometheus, that clumsy thief, had stolen from
-the gods only a tiny spark of the fire. They planned
-a second robbery, discovered coal and electricity, and
-invented the steam-engine. And behold! the French
-Revolution, which confounded and upset, from one
-end of Europe to the other, boundaries, laws, institutions,
-and traditions—ideal and material limits. Then
-at last man realised that he could conquer and exploit
-the whole earth with iron and fire. At the same time
-as liberty, a new, untiring, formidable eagerness invaded
-the two worlds. All the limits which, for so
-many centuries, had confined in a narrow circle the
-energy and aspirations of even the most highly venerated
-of men fell one after the other to the ground.
-They fell, because the human mind could not have
-launched out into the unknown to essay so many new
-marvels if those ancient limits which imprisoned it had
-remained standing. The multitude would not have
-bowed their necks to the hard discipline of their new
-work, if in compensation they had not been liberated
-from other, more ancient, disciplinary restrictions.</p>
-
-<p>In short, the great era of iron and fire began, in
-which the principle of liberty was destined to assault
-the principle of authority in its last entrenchments,
-and to drive it right away to the farthest frontiers of
-political, moral, and intellectual anarchy. But for
-this very reason the era of iron and fire has seen the
-gradual confusion and reduction to wavering uncertainty<span class="pagenum" id="Page_13">13</span>
-of all the criteria which served to distinguish
-the beautiful from the ugly, the true from the false,
-good from evil. These criteria have become confused
-because they are and can be nothing else but limits;
-limits which are precise and sure so long as they are
-restricted, but become feeble the more they are enlarged.
-But how can a century, which has made itself
-so powerful by dint of overturning the ancient limits
-on every hand, be expected to respect these limits in
-the spiritual world? As a result we find a civilisation
-which has built railways, studded the Atlantic with
-steamers, exploited America, and multiplied the world’s
-riches a hundredfold in fifty years,—we find it obsessed
-by grotesque doubts and eccentric uncertainties with
-regard to the <i>Iliad</i> and the <i>Odyssey</i>, in which generation
-after generation, accustomed to respect amongst other
-limits those imposed by literary traditions, had unhesitatingly
-agreed to recognise two masterpieces composed
-by a poet of genius. So we see the epoch which has
-overturned and destroyed so many thrones and altars
-and made Reason and Science march in triumph
-through the smoking ruins of a score of revolutions,—we
-see it obsessed on a sudden by a thousand scruples,
-halt, ask itself what is truth, whether it exists, and if it
-can be recognised. We see it rack its brains to decide
-whether what we know is a real and objective something
-or only a creation of our fancy. All these scruples and
-doubts are, as it were, the brow of a slope down which
-our epoch slides at headlong speed towards the abyss<span class="pagenum" id="Page_14">14</span>
-of nothingness. And in the century which has given
-man liberty, the certainty of food, comfort in abundance,
-and so many guarantees against the oppression
-of individuals and authorities as were known to no
-previous century; in the century which, by overthrowing
-so many limits, has banished from our midst so
-many reasons for hatred and war, do we not hear a
-thousand voices on every side cursing man for a miserable
-slave and accusing the times of being corrupt;
-crying that conditions must be purified with fire and
-sword, according to some, with war, according to others,
-with revolution? Having once transgressed the limits,
-man has become insatiable. The more he possesses, the
-more he wants. He no longer acknowledges any restraint
-in his desires.</p>
-
-<p>The quantity which vanquishes quality, the liberty
-which vanquishes authority, the desires which blaze
-out anew each time they are satisfied—these are the
-forces and the phenomena which shape and fashion
-our civilisation. For this reason we can, it is true,
-accumulate vast hordes of wealth and conquer the
-earth with iron and fire. But we must resign ourselves
-to living in a new Tower of Babel, in the midst of a
-confusion of tongues. The æsthetic, intellectual, and
-moral confusion of our times is the price nature exacts
-for the treasures which she is obliged to resign into our
-power. This book and its successor have been written
-with the object of throwing light on the obscure but
-vital bond which links together in a living unity the<span class="pagenum" id="Page_15">15</span>
-most diverse phenomena of contemporary life. They
-have not been written, as some have thought, with the
-view of comparing the ancient and the modern civilisations,
-Europe and America, to the detriment of the one
-or of the other; much less with the view of denouncing
-the régime of liberty, on the ground that it corrupts the
-world, and of demanding that it be suppressed. To
-find fault with the tendency of a civilisation, one must
-postulate the fact that history has gone wrong. And
-what criterion, what standard is there which justifies
-a man in declaring to successive generations that they
-ought to have held different objects in view, and
-adopted other means to attain them?</p>
-
-<p>No: the author’s only object has been to sound the
-depths of life, in the hope of tracing that unity from
-which flow forth and into which flow back again so
-many apparently diverse phenomena; that unity in
-which alone thought can find some respite from its
-weary search after the secret of its own being and of
-that of things in general. Without a doubt each one
-of us attains only provisional success in his search for
-this unity; but is not every work of man only provisional,
-and what are we but beings destined to live only for
-an instant? Therefore, I have endeavoured in this
-book to reveal, by way of an analytical and rational
-exposition, set out in the simplest and plainest terms,
-the vital bond of this unity. But, inasmuch as a unity
-is a synthesis, and analysis necessarily modifies and
-disfigures while trying to explain, I have availed myself<span class="pagenum" id="Page_16">16</span>
-in my other work of what is perhaps the most effective
-method of representing the phenomena of life in their
-synthesis: I mean, art. For this reason I have written
-a dialogue, in which I have made my characters begin
-by wandering haphazard over a wide field and jumping,
-apparently at random, from one to another of a series
-of widely different topics. But at the end the various
-topics are gathered into a united whole, showing the
-bond which unites them, in the speeches of the most
-acute and intelligent of the passengers; especially in
-that speech which coincides with the entry of the ship
-from the open Atlantic, the free high-road of the new
-world, into the Mediterranean, the confined arena of
-ancient civilisation. <i xml:lang="fr" lang="fr">Livre désordonné et pourtant bien
-ordonné</i> is the verdict of a French critic, André Maurel.
-How glad I should be if all my readers subscribed to
-this verdict! In truth, this tragic conflict of the two
-worlds, of the two civilisations, of man with himself,
-for licence to dispense with the limits of which he, in
-fact, has need if he is to enjoy the most exquisite fruits
-of life, is a picture so vast as to overtax the resources
-of the painter. But the painter has worked at his
-canvas with so much ardour and passion that he hopes
-to find on the other side of the Atlantic, as on this,
-readers willing to view the defects in his work
-with the intelligent indulgence of which really cultured
-men are always so liberal; readers prompt to
-feel some quickening in response to the few sparks
-of beauty and of truth which the author may have<span class="pagenum" id="Page_17">17</span>
-succeeded in infusing into his work. It is a small
-thing, no doubt. But do not even the tiny rivulets
-which flow through the valleys unite to form the
-mighty rivers in the plain?</p>
-
-<hr />
-
-<div class="chapter">
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_19">19</span></p>
-
-<h2 class="nobreak part" id="Part_II"><span class="smcap">Part II</span><br />
-
-<span class="subhead"><span class="smcap">Ancient History and the Modern World</span></span></h2>
-</div>
-
-<hr />
-
-<div id="toclink_21" class="chapter">
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_21">21</span></p>
-<h2 class="nobreak" id="II-I">I<br />
-
-<span class="subhead">ANCIENT SOCIAL SYSTEMS AND CONTEMPORARY AMERICA</span></h2>
-</div>
-
-<p class="drop-cap al"><span class="smcap1">At</span> the end of the year 1906, while sojourning in
-Paris, where I had been giving at the Collège de
-France a course of lectures on Roman history, I received
-an invitation from Emilio Mitré, the son of the
-famous Argentine general, to undertake a long expedition
-to South America. This invitation evoked general
-surprise. What, my friends asked, was I, the historian
-of the ancient world, going to do in the newest of new
-worlds, in ultra-modern countries, in countries without
-a past and caring only for the future, where industry
-and agriculture fill the place which for the ancients was
-occupied by war? Why, if I was willing to leave my
-studies and my books for one moment, did I not repair
-to Egypt or the East, the scene of so much of the history
-which I had recounted, where the Romans have left so
-many traces of the world which has passed away, and
-where so many important excavations, tending to
-enrich history with new documentary evidence, are in
-progress?</p>
-
-<p>I answered my questioners by pointing out that I was<span class="pagenum" id="Page_22">22</span>
-not a bookworm, whose interest was confined to ancient
-books and archæological parchments; that life in all
-its aspects interested me, and that I was, therefore,
-curious, after devoting so much attention to ancient
-peoples, to study awhile the most modern of nations,
-the newest comers in the history of our civilisation.
-Did my friends suppose that, because I had written a
-history of Rome, I had pledged myself never again to
-direct my gaze to modern life? But, though I explained
-the reason for my voyage in this way, I, no less than
-my friendly objectors, was convinced at that time that
-my travels in America would be only a parenthesis in my
-intellectual life. In other words, I thought that I was
-going to America in search of an intellectual diversion,
-hoping for some relaxation for my mind, obsessed for
-the last ten years by ancient history, in bringing it to
-bear on an entirely different world. That this diversion
-would be useful to me, I had no doubt; but not
-because America might help me to a better understanding
-of ancient Rome, but because to change every
-now and again the subject-matter of my studies and to
-enrich my mind with new impressions always seemed
-to me one of the most profitable intellectual exercises,
-especially for a historian to whom a wide experience of
-human nature is a necessity. To-day, after having
-made not one, but two journeys to America, after having
-seen not only the two largest and most flourishing states
-of South America, but also that North America which,
-more than all the other states of the New World, represents<span class="pagenum" id="Page_23">23</span>
-in the eyes of contemporaries the more modern
-part of our civilisation, the reign of machinery, the
-empire of business, the rule of money, I am no longer
-of this opinion. It is my present belief that a journey
-in the New World is of supreme benefit intellectually to
-a historian of the ancient world; and that, in order to
-understand the life and history of Greek or Roman
-society, it is perhaps just as important to visit the
-countries of America as Asia Minor or Northern Africa.
-That is what I said on one of the last days of my stay
-in the United States to a genial professor of ancient
-history connected with Cornell University, with whom
-I was discussing the most famous schools of the present
-day for the pursuit of historical studies, and the methods
-adopted in these schools. “Many of you Americans,”
-I said, “go to European universities to study ancient
-history. It seems to me that you might well invite
-many European professors to come and go through a finishing
-course in America, studying not only in libraries
-but in the live world, and observing what happens
-in American society. Nobody is in a better position
-than are you to understand ancient society.” My
-remark may seem at first sight a paradox. But it is no
-paradox, if one goes to the root of the problem. For
-what we, men of the twentieth century, call ancient
-civilisations, were really, when they flourished, new and
-young civilisations, with but few centuries of history
-behind them; and so are the American civilisations of
-the present day. For this reason, we find in ancient<span class="pagenum" id="Page_24">24</span>
-civilisations, on however much reduced a scale, many
-phenomena which are now peculiar to American social
-systems; while we should look for them in vain in
-European civilisation, which has more right to call itself
-ancient civilisation than have the civilisations of Greece
-and of Rome. This I propose briefly to prove.</p>
-
-<p>One of the social phenomena which are most characteristic
-of North America, but which would be looked
-for in vain in Europe, is the munificence of the donations
-of wealthy men to the public. Families of great wealth
-in America nowadays feel it incumbent on them, as a
-social duty, to spend a part of their substance on
-the people; to encourage education and culture, to
-bestow benefactions, to help the more needy classes,
-and to assist with their purses the public authorities in
-the execution of their functions. In Europe, the case
-is different. Large fortunes may be numerous, but
-they are kept more in the background than in America.
-Rich men are much more selfish in the enjoyment of
-their riches. Even the richest are, as a rule, content
-to leave some small sum in their wills to the poor, or to
-some educational institution. But donations in excess
-of four thousand pounds are rare, and make a great
-stir. It is for this reason that certain sections of society
-in Europe accuse the upper classes of selfishness and
-hold up before them American generosity as an example
-to follow. But this censure is exaggerated, for the
-times and the social conditions are different in Europe.
-The history of the ancient world shows that this<span class="pagenum" id="Page_25">25</span>
-generosity on the part of the rich is a phenomenon
-peculiar to a certain stage in the development of society,
-which recurs in all flourishing and prosperous, but as
-yet not very ancient, societies. In these, some of the
-public functions are assumed by the rich, because the
-State has not yet had the time to bring them under its
-control and to direct them according to laws by it
-established. If the millionaires of America have, as a
-matter of fact, but few imitators in Europe, they can
-boast numberless forerunners in the histories of Greece
-and Rome. In Athens to begin with, and, later, in
-the Roman Empire, to mention only the most famous
-states of the ancient world, education, charity, public
-amusements, even public works, such as roads, theatres,
-and temples, were always in part left by the State to
-the generosity of wealthy individuals, who felt it their
-duty to contribute out of their means to the public
-welfare.</p>
-
-<p>Amongst the inscriptions which have reached us
-from the Roman world, and which have been collected
-in the <i xml:lang="la" lang="la">Corpus Inscriptionum Latinarum</i>, we find a
-considerable number referring to these donations. In
-all the provinces of the vast Empire, in all the cities
-great and small, stories have been found recounting,
-often in forcible terms, the donation by some citizen,
-during his life or at his death, of a certain sum to the
-city, it might be to construct or repair an edifice, it
-might be to distribute grain to the people in time of
-dearth, or to give bounties of oil on festive occasions,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_26">26</span>
-or to assure to the people the enjoyment of certain
-periodical spectacles, or to supplement the finances of the
-city, which had been thrown into disorder by excessive
-expenditure, or which were not equal to all the calls
-made upon them. Every city, then, had her own
-millionaire benefactors, her little Carnegies, her Huntingtons,
-Morgans, and Rockefellers in miniature, whose
-generosity was necessary to the public good, and to
-whom were raised in gratitude monuments, many of
-which have come down to our time.</p>
-
-<p>The Roman Emperor himself was, at first at any
-rate, only the most generous and the best known of
-these rich donors: a kind of Carnegie, Morgan, and
-Rockefeller of the Empire. Suetonius, for instance,
-tells us what sums Augustus spent in the course of his
-life, out of his private patrimony, on public objects.
-Augustus himself, in the famous <i xml:lang="la" lang="la">Monumentum Ancyranum</i>,
-the great inscription found in Asia, in which he
-gives a clear résumé of the story of his life, enumerates
-many of the gifts which he made to the public out of his
-own pocket. On several occasions, he simply liquidated
-the deficit in the Empire’s budget out of his private
-purse. At another time, he repaired at his own expense
-the roads of Italy which after the civil wars had through
-neglect fallen into disrepair. On countless occasions, he
-spent money for public works, for the relief of famine, for
-popular amusements, for all the forms of beneficence
-then customary, without paying any regard to the
-serious inroads he was making on the fortune which he<span class="pagenum" id="Page_27">27</span>
-would have to leave to his own heirs. This is exactly
-what many wealthy men are doing to-day in the New
-World. It would be in accord with the facts to say
-that those striking largesses were one of the means by
-which imperial authority was gradually concentrated
-at the heart of the Roman State, and surrounded itself
-with so much gratitude, so many interests, and so many
-hopes as to be able definitely to secure the principal
-position amongst all the organs of the State.</p>
-
-<p>But if the Emperor was the most generous of the
-public benefactors, he was not the only one. The chief
-men throughout the Empire followed his example, some
-of them on so elaborate a scale as to challenge comparison
-with the most munificent American millionaires,
-when account is taken of the difference in the standards
-of riches in the respective epochs. The best-known
-figure among these donors is Herodes Atticus, an immensely
-rich Athenian of the second century <span class="allsmcap">A.D.</span>
-What was his origin, and whence he got his money, we
-do not know. Probably he belonged to one of those
-families which had accumulated immense property in
-the provinces, during the first century of the Christian
-era, a century of rapidly acquired and great fortunes.
-This much is certain, that he applied himself to study,
-and became what was then called a rhetor, corresponding
-more or less closely to what we term a professor
-of literature, not however with a view to earning a
-livelihood, but with the object of cultivating his own
-and other people’s minds. Highly cultured, erudite,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_28">28</span>
-and at the same time one of the richest men in the
-Empire, Herodes was a great friend of Antoninus Pius
-and of Marcus Aurelius. But, great as was his reputation
-for wisdom and literary taste, and notwithstanding
-the enhancement of his prestige through the friendships
-of the two celebrated emperors, he left a name in the
-social history of the Roman world more particularly because
-of the vast sums he gave away all over the Empire.
-At Athens, he repaired in a splendid way the most ancient
-and famous buildings of that celebrated city. He presented,
-repaired, and maintained theatres, aqueducts,
-temples, and stadia in the cities of Greece and Italy.</p>
-
-<p>For the rest, several of the most highly admired
-buildings and most imposing ruins in Rome are actually
-gifts made to the public by ancient citizens. Out of
-them all, I may cite the Pantheon, that marvellous
-Pantheon, which we all still admire in the heart of
-Rome, the monument which stands deathless while the
-stream of ages flows by. This was constructed by
-Agrippa, the friend of Augustus, at his own expense, and
-can be compared in this respect to Carnegie Hall in New
-York. Agrippa built the Pantheon from the same
-notions of civic zeal that impelled Carnegie to endow
-New York with his great Hall. And the two monuments,
-built by the personal munificence of two ultra-wealthy
-citizens, with an interval of twenty centuries
-between them, express the same desire to extend to the
-whole people a share in the enjoyment of the donor’s
-private fortune.</p>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_29">29</span></p>
-
-<p>Naturally, my earliest studies in Roman history led
-me to fix my attention on this bountiful munificence on
-the part of private persons in the ancient world, by
-which the rich, either spontaneously or at the call of
-public opinion, took upon themselves a share of the
-public burdens. But I had not fully grasped the meaning
-of this system, until I visited America, and saw the
-colleges, schools, and hospitals founded and subsidised,
-the museums and universities endowed, and all the
-other public institutions aided with millions of dollars
-by the rich business men and bankers of America.
-For Europeans, living on a continent where nowadays
-the State has almost monopolised these functions and
-exercises them zealously, seeming to resent the interference
-of private persons, it is difficult to picture
-correctly a social system in which private generosity is
-at once possible and necessary, the advantages by
-which such generosity is accompanied, and the manner
-in which it is exercised.</p>
-
-<div class="tb">* * * * *</div>
-
-<p>The munificence of the wealthy citizens is only a
-special instance of a more general and more extensive
-phenomenon in which America approaches more nearly
-to the ancient world than Europe; I mean, in that her
-society is less essentially bureaucratic. In the ancient
-world, there was no bureaucratic organisation in any of
-the Greco-Asiatic monarchies founded by Alexander or
-in the latest period of the Roman Empire which could
-be considered to resemble even remotely, on a smaller<span class="pagenum" id="Page_30">30</span>
-scale and merely in broad outlines, that which flourishes
-in the Europe of to-day. Now, in the most splendid
-moments of Greek and Roman history, we find states
-in which all the public functions, even the executive
-ones, were elective; so that they all changed periodically
-according to the whims of an electoral body. The need
-for technical training and professional education for
-the exercise of certain executive functions was so little
-recognised that even the command of the military
-forces and the chief magistracy were filled by public
-election. A general became a general, not in the course
-of his professional career, but at the will of the people,
-assembled in the <i xml:lang="la" lang="la">comitia</i>; and with generals chosen in
-this way, Rome conquered the world. It is impossible
-to imagine a social constitution in more striking contradiction
-to the social constitution of contemporary
-Europe, which entrusts all the executive functions to a
-bureaucracy professionally trained, formed into a rigid
-hierarchy, and dependent on the State, over which the
-people have practically no power. Men in Europe
-become generals or judges because they have studied
-the art of war or law in special schools, not because the
-majority of an electoral body have thought it opportune
-to entrust the office to an individual who has been
-clever enough to appeal to them more strongly than do
-his rivals.</p>
-
-<p>This difference was and is one of the greatest difficulties
-met with by European historians in the study of
-the ancient world. I am of opinion, for example, that<span class="pagenum" id="Page_31">31</span>
-this is one of the weakest points in Mommsen’s history.
-Accustomed to see bureaucratic states at work, European
-historians find it difficult to imagine how those
-states can have prospered in which the magistrates
-changed periodically, sometimes every year, and in
-which there was no professional division between the
-different functions. Instinctively, they tend also to
-paint the ancient state in the colours of the European
-state, attributing to it the same virtues and the same
-defects, and, therefore, representing its weaknesses as
-well as its merits in a false light. For an American, on
-the other hand, especially for a North American, the
-difficulty of understanding the ancient states is
-much less formidable. Certainly the principle of professional
-specialisation is much more highly developed
-in modern American society than it was in the ancient
-societies. Modern civilisation is nowadays too
-complex and too technical to admit of the principle
-of popular election being applied indiscriminately, as
-at Athens or Rome, to all the public offices. What
-sensible man would consent to-day, even in the
-purest of democracies, to the election of the admirals,
-for instance, by universal suffrage? Nevertheless,
-in the American confederation many of the public
-offices, which are now entrusted in Europe to the
-professional bureaucracy, are elective. And this fact
-by itself is enough to represent a distinct <i xml:lang="fr" lang="fr">rapprochement</i>
-between American society and ancient
-society.</p>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_32">32</span></p>
-
-<p>For this reason, an inhabitant of New York can more
-easily than an inhabitant of London or Paris picture to
-himself certain aspects of the life of the Athens or Rome
-of ancient days; especially the continual and frequent
-succession of elections, and the complete change of
-interests and of directing forces involved in the change
-of the magistrates in office. It is true that we in Europe
-have periodical elections, as in America. Periodically,
-in the Old, as in the New World, the people assemble
-to exercise their sovereign right by means of the ballot.
-But if, regarded superficially, the act and the procedure
-are identical, their value and importance are different.
-The populace in the old states of Europe elect only
-consultative and legislative bodies, while the executive
-power remains to a great extent independent of the
-people, residing in a professional bureaucracy whose
-members cannot be changed from day to day.</p>
-
-<p>In America, on the contrary, as in ancient Athens and
-Rome, many of the magistrates who hold in their hands
-and exercise directly governing powers are periodically
-changed at the will of the people, which, therefore,
-moulds more directly the government and its different
-organs and more directly inspires and controls its
-particular functions, just as it used to control them in
-the ancient states.</p>
-
-<p>It is not strange, therefore, that we find ancient Rome
-reappearing in one of the most important juridical institutions
-of the United States, an institution which we
-should search for in vain in Europe, great mistress of<span class="pagenum" id="Page_33">33</span>
-laws though she be accounted. One of the American
-institutions which seems to Europeans most contrary
-to the modern spirit, and for that reason most deserving
-of severe blame, is the right of “injunctions” with
-which American magistrates are invested. To Europe,
-where the bureaucracy, though immovable and little
-subject to control, cannot step outside the precise
-prescriptions of the law in the exercise of its functions,
-this discretionary power of the American magistrates
-seems little less than an instrument of intolerable
-tyranny. A brilliant European, who is a distinguished
-professor of literature in one of the universities of North
-America, but who, notwithstanding a very lengthy
-sojourn in the American republic, has preserved intact
-the ideas and the spirit of the Old World, said to me one
-day in New York: “In this land of liberty, there is one
-tyranny more terrible than all the tyrannies of Europe,
-that of the judicial power!” That a magistrate should
-have the power to give orders, be they of only momentary
-validity, which are the expressions of his own will
-and not of the letter of the law, seems to the European
-a monstrous thing, a relic of the ancient tyrannies,
-which harmonises but ill with republican institutions.</p>
-
-<p>A historian of the ancient world, on the other hand,
-is in a position to understand more easily this seeming
-contradiction. The injunction is nothing else than the
-<i xml:lang="la" lang="la">edictum</i> of the Roman magistrate; the power, that is to
-say, which the Roman magistrate possessed, and which
-the American magistrate, maybe in a less degree,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_34">34</span>
-possesses, of making good with his personal authority
-the lacunæ and deficiencies in the law, on every occasion
-when public order or the principles of justice seemed
-to demand it urgently. In the eyes of ancient Rome, the
-magistrate was not only, as in the bureaucratic states
-of Europe, the cautious and impartial servant and
-executor of the law. He was also the living personification
-of the State and of the general interest, invested
-with full powers of exercising his own judgment, over
-and above the laws, on behalf of the State and of the
-general interest, when the law was found wanting. In
-short, by reinforcing the authority of the magistrates,
-the ancient states endeavoured to make amends for the
-weakening of the State which was bound to ensue from
-the continual electoral changes and the instability of
-all the offices; while Europe, on the other hand, which,
-with her rigid bureaucracies, has made the power of the
-State so strong, can rigorously limit the powers of her
-functionaries with laws of immense scope. But one
-last remnant of the ancient conception, tempered by
-the modern spirit of the State, survives in North America,
-where, the elective principle being more extensively
-applied than in the states of Europe, the tendency is,
-by way of compensation, to reinforce by some discretionary
-power, like the “injunction,” some at least of the
-judicial offices. Perhaps we may explain in this way
-the fact that some European writers in the nineteenth
-century have ventured to assert that the ancients never
-knew what liberty was, even in what were apparently<span class="pagenum" id="Page_35">35</span>
-the most democratic republics; while others have
-maintained that more liberty is to be found in the constitutional
-monarchies of Europe than in the authoritative
-American republics.</p>
-
-<p>Another instance still more curious is afforded us by
-those dictators who, under varying titles and with
-varying success, have appeared in almost all the republics
-of Spanish America, after the emancipation of these
-territories from the mother country. The latest of these
-dictators was Porfirio Diaz, who governed Mexico for
-so many years. Europe has never properly understood
-these dictators. She has mistaken them for caricatures,
-now of Nero, now of Napoleon, and has drawn
-the conclusion that the republics in question were
-impregnated with the disease of tyranny, and could not
-exist in a state of liberty. But a historian of the
-ancient world recognises at once in these dictators a
-modern incarnation of a figure which constantly appears
-in ancient history, the Greek τύραννος, the Roman
-<i xml:lang="la" lang="la">princeps</i>. Pisistratus and Augustus, not Nero and
-Napoleon, are the prototypes of these dictators. States
-based on an electoral system which is not controlled by
-organised parties or by other social forces calculated to
-ensure its working in conformity with precise and certain
-rules, are subject to eruptions of disorder, which
-end in establishing the personal power of that individual
-who succeeds in making the political and administrative
-machine work with comparative regularity.
-Augustus was throughout forty-one years re-elected<span class="pagenum" id="Page_36">36</span>
-every five or ten years head of the republic, because he
-had succeeded, by his influence and personal ability, in
-making the machine of the <i xml:lang="la" lang="la">comitia</i> and senate run
-smoothly, at a time when the Roman aristocracy, which
-had controlled it for centuries, could no longer, owing
-to its own discords, do so. The reason why the power of
-Augustus was prolonged and extended in all directions
-until it became a dictatorship for life, cloaked under
-legal forms, was that he alone seemed capable of ensuring
-a wise government and of preventing civil wars.
-And was not just this the real reason for the long tenure
-of power by Porfirio Diaz in Mexico, and for his prolonged
-presidency, which was merely a dictatorship
-masquerading under republican forms? Anyone who
-wishes to understand the government of Mexico during
-the last forty years might find the history of Augustus
-of great service; just as a profound knowledge of the
-recent history of Mexico might help to the understanding
-of the ancient history of Augustus.</p>
-
-<p>A profound study of ancient history is, therefore, an
-excellent preparation for the rapid understanding of
-certain parts, at any rate, of the American constitution
-and of American society; just as a knowledge of America
-should be an excellent aid to the study of ancient
-history. In fact, in the course of my travels and observations
-in America, after having devoted ten years to
-the study of a large section of ancient history, I have
-realised how much the ancient history, which I had
-studied in Europe, helped me to understand America;<span class="pagenum" id="Page_37">37</span>
-and how much the America which I had before my eyes
-helped me to a better understanding of the distant
-reality of that vanished world of long ago. And if we
-follow the track of these studies and reflections, I think
-that we shall be able to attribute also a more precise
-meaning to that epithet of “young,” which is constantly
-applied to America. Who does not talk a hundred
-times a year of old Europe and young America? Now
-what do these two much-used and much-abused epithets
-mean? That Europe has a longer history than
-America? In that case the contrasting terms would
-not mean much. For that is a simple chronological
-statement, which only demands a knowledge of the
-fact that America was not discovered till 1492 <span class="allsmcap">A.D.</span>
-Do they mean that America is more vigorous, more
-active, more daring than Europe, just as young men
-usually possess these qualities in a greater degree than
-the old? As a matter of fact, many people do use the
-two adjectives in this sense. But, in that case, they
-assume as proved one of the most complex, one of the
-deepest and most difficult problems of modern life,
-that is to say, the problem whether a comparison can
-be struck between Europe and America, and if so, on
-the basis of what criterion? That there should be those
-who strike this comparison and resolve it in this way,
-is not surprising. But no one will be found to pretend
-that the judgment contained in those two words
-“young” and “old,” thus interpreted, can or ought to
-be accepted as true by everyone.</p>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_38">38</span></p>
-
-<p>On the other hand, it is possible to agree on a more
-narrow and precise interpretation of these words; to
-say that America is young and Europe old, because
-America reproduces some of the characters and phenomena
-which we find in antiquity, that is to say, in the
-remotest epochs of our history. European civilisation,
-as the result of her migration to America, there to found
-new states and societies, has really become, in a certain
-sense, regenerated, because she has again become, in the
-light of certain characteristics and certain institutions,
-what she was twenty centuries ago. And if the “youth”
-of America is understood in this sense, it is not rash
-to argue that it too will grow old. The study of
-ancient history can be of a certain practical value to
-those who consider America with the object of divining,
-in this great community, the tendencies and inclinations
-of the future. For students of that history can bring
-a plausible criterion of prevision to their observations.
-In fact, it is not rash to suppose, at least if some unknown
-force does not unexpectedly divert the course of
-events in the New World, that all the parts of American
-life and society which most resemble ancient society are
-destined to disappear gradually, as America grows older
-and elaborates a complex and artificial civilisation;
-just as the ancient institutions and ideas of which we
-find so many traces in America gradually disappeared
-in Europe in the progress of time, as civilisation in the
-Old World became artificial and complex. If this
-prophecy is not fallacious, we should expect history,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_39">39</span>
-which eternally repeats herself, to require the man of
-the New World to witness the same phenomena whose
-more gradual realisation they have already witnessed
-in the ancient world. In the New World also, we
-should expect to see a society regulated by elective and
-authoritative institutions gradually become bureaucratic
-and at the same time fetter every branch of
-political and administrative powers with the tight
-bonds of rigid juridical principles. This will be a slow,
-but profound transformation, in the course of which
-many things will change their position and value.
-Perhaps the inexhaustible public munificence of the
-millionaires will become exhausted, and the State will
-grow in prestige and influence, if not in power.</p>
-
-<hr />
-
-<div id="toclink_40" class="chapter">
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_40">40</span></p>
-
-<h2 class="nobreak" id="II-II">II<br />
-
-<span class="subhead">QUANTITY AND QUALITY</span></h2>
-</div>
-
-<p class="drop-cap b"><span class="smcap1">Suetonius</span> recounts that one day a man presented
-himself to the Emperor Vespasian, and showed
-him the models of a machine, thanks to which the
-Emperor could have finished off the construction of
-certain of his great public works with fewer labourers,
-and at a great saving of expense. Vespasian was full
-of praise for the man’s ingenuity, and recompensed him
-with a sum of money; but he subsequently had the
-model destroyed, saying that he did not wish to have
-any machines which would cause his people to go
-hungry. Applying the standard of modern ideas, how
-should we judge this sentiment and act? Of course, we
-should consider it a strange and absurd mistake. Suetonius,
-on the contrary, quotes the incident to prove
-how wise Vespasian was. In this divergence of opinion
-is revealed the essential difference between ourselves
-and the ancients, between modern civilisation and
-Greco-Roman civilisation, for all that these resemble
-each other in so many particulars; the principal difference
-between the ancient world and America. Although,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_41">41</span>
-as I have shown in my preceding essay, America in certain
-of its institutions and forms of social life resembles
-the ancient world more than Europe, this comparison
-does not hold true so far as the instruments of economic
-production are concerned. In this respect America is
-much further removed from the ancient world than is
-Europe, and represents to-day the beginning of a new
-era and a new civilisation, whose spirit and tendencies
-would be quite incomprehensible to a re-embodied
-Greek or Roman.</p>
-
-<p>Greco-Roman antiquity never dreamed that it might
-be a useful, beautiful, glorious work to invent machines
-of increasing speed and power, and therefore never gave
-a thought to those technical elaborations which are the
-pride of our times. It possessed the elementary machines,
-the lever, jack-screw, the inclined plane; but
-it never tried to combine these into more complicated
-machines. In particular, it never called into play the
-effort to which all the mechanism of modern times owes
-its birth; that is to say, it never tried to endow its
-machines with a more rapid motion than the muscles
-of men or of animals can endow them with, or to search
-nature for motive forces of greater power than these.
-It availed itself only sparingly and on rare occasions
-of the force of running water or of the wind. The
-latter it used only for navigation, and even then with
-regret, hesitation, and fear, as if it were doing an illicit
-and shameful thing. It knew of no combustible other
-than the wood of the trees. Notwithstanding the fact<span class="pagenum" id="Page_42">42</span>
-that Pliny the elder has preserved for us so much
-precious information about agriculture and the ancient
-arts and industries, his writings contain scarcely a
-single hint suggesting that the men of his civilisation
-had any desire to make the instruments of economic
-production more perfect and effective. In one place,
-the sail, as compared with the oar, inspires him to
-write a passage in which the modern reader imagines
-just at first that he has lighted on a sentiment containing
-a distant echo of contemporary enthusiasm for
-progress. “Is there a greater marvel in the whole
-world?” he writes.</p>
-
-<div class="blockquot">
-
-<p>A grass exists [flax, of which sails are made] which brings
-Egypt and Italy so close together that two prefects of
-Egypt, Galerius and Balbillus, crossed from Alexandria to
-the straits of Messina, one in seven days and the other in
-six; and that last summer the senator Valerius Marianus
-reached Alexandria from Pozzuoli in a light wind in nine
-days. There is a grass which brings me in seven days from
-Gades, the harbour near the Pillars of Hercules, to Ostia,
-in four from this side of Spain, in three from the province
-of Narbonne, in two from Africa, as C. Flavius, the envoy
-of the proconsul Vilius Crispus, found.</p>
-</div>
-
-<p>Does it not seem as if we were reading an anticipation
-by eighteen hundred years of that hymn which moderns
-so often raise to the power of steam and to the great
-ocean liners which cross the Atlantic in five or six days?
-But ours is only a brief illusion. The wonder and the
-admiration of Pliny are soon over, and a sort of awe
-takes their place. “<i xml:lang="la" lang="la">Audax vita, scelerum plena!</i>” he<span class="pagenum" id="Page_43">43</span>
-quickly adds. “Creature full of wicked daring!” The
-invention of sails seems to him almost a sacrilegious
-impiety, and his view was that of all the ancients.</p>
-
-<p>In short, the few victories which the ancients had
-won over nature were to them a cause of embarrassment
-rather than of enthusiasm; for they saw in them
-merely a proof of the perversity and foolhardiness of
-human pride. If a contemporary of Sophocles or
-Horace came back to the world, he would probably
-just at first be terrified by what he saw all round him,
-as by the spectacle of a gigantic and unheard-of madness.
-Machinery, which to us seems the most marvellous
-instrument of our energy and intelligence,
-appeared to the ancients a danger, an enemy, and
-almost a sacrilege: an attempt to rebel against the gods
-and their wishes. Consequently, they invented and
-adopted machines—and those but simple and primitive
-ones—only for use in war, especially for siege-work.
-The necessity of conquering made them forget to some
-extent their usual fears.</p>
-
-<p>So great a difference in thought and feeling, in a
-matter which to us seems of such vital importance,
-must arise from deep-seated causes. Why did the
-ancients invent and construct so few machines, and hold
-in such fear the few they had? Why did they wish the
-hand of man to be the principal and the most powerful
-among the instruments of production? Many attribute
-the inferiority of the ancients in this department to the
-comparatively undeveloped state of science. Vast and<span class="pagenum" id="Page_44">44</span>
-profound knowledge of science, they say, is required
-for the construction of modern machines. The ancients
-did not possess this knowledge; therefore, they conclude,
-they could not construct the machines.</p>
-
-<p>But, in this deduction there are two exaggerations.
-The services of science, especially in early times, to
-machines and their progress, are exaggerated; so also
-is the scientific ignorance of the ancients. Science has
-helped materially to perfect certain machines, but has
-actually invented scarcely one. Many of the marvellous
-machines which, at a giddy rate, multiply riches
-all round us, have been conceived for the first time in
-the minds of artisans, <i xml:lang="fr" lang="fr">contre-maîtres</i>, managers of factories,
-and other persons more expert in practice than
-rich in scientific lore. The founder of the great mechanical
-industry, Arkwright, who invented the cotton-spinning
-machine, was a barber. Watt, the inventor
-of the steam-engine, though perhaps a better-educated
-man than Arkwright, was not in any sense a great
-scientist. For the rest, whoever knows the history of
-machinery is aware that science did not begin to concern
-herself with machinery, or to inquire whether her
-studies might help inventors with useful suggestions,
-until the great mechanical industry had already invaded
-the world. Science, then, only followed a movement
-which had already begun, and did not give it the first
-impulse.</p>
-
-<p>Furthermore, the scientific ignorance of the ancients
-is exaggerated. Ancient science is not so well-known<span class="pagenum" id="Page_45">45</span>
-as ancient art and literature; and it certainly did not
-make very striking progress during the last brilliant
-period of ancient history—the Roman Empire. Therefore
-to many, whose knowledge regarding it is comparatively
-superficial, the ancient world may seem empty
-of scientific wisdom. But such is not the case. If the
-Romans never applied much thought to the scientific
-study of nature, the Greeks for their part had laid the
-foundations of many sciences, and had laid them
-boldly and truly. Even the Copernican system had
-been anticipated by Greek astronomers, like Aristarchus
-of Samos and Seleucus of Seleucia, who had maintained
-that the earth revolved round the sun, and that the
-firmament was much more vast than was generally
-supposed.</p>
-
-<p>We need not, therefore, believe that the ancients
-were not able to construct more complicated machines
-than those they used, because they lacked scientific
-knowledge. It would be nearer the truth to say that
-they did not make much effort to raise sciences out of
-the necessarily narrow domain of purely theoretical
-problems, because, independent as they were of machinery,
-they had no need of the practical aids which
-science, if developed in certain directions, can lend to
-the construction of machines. In fact, we men of the
-present day encourage the sciences to search and investigate
-in every direction and to try every path, not
-from a disinterested love of the True nor from an
-intellectual curiosity to spy out the mysteries of nature;<span class="pagenum" id="Page_46">46</span>
-but because we hope that we shall discover, in the
-course of our all-embracing search, laws or bodies or
-forces which will help us to subdue and exploit nature.</p>
-
-<p>The ancients then abstained from inventing and
-constructing machines, not from lack of knowledge but
-from lack of will. The effort seemed to them useless,
-nay, pernicious; and the enterprise did not attract
-them. It remains, therefore, to consider why the
-ancients, in their great struggle to extend the dominion
-of man over nature, felt no need of help from swift
-engines of iron, and, therefore, did not make the effort
-necessary to invent them. This is a question of the
-highest importance for the history of civilisation, for
-by its solution only can we gain an insight into what is
-perhaps the most profound difference between ancient
-and modern civilisation. The difference consists in
-this: while our civilisation is a mechanical-scientific
-civilisation, the ancient was above all things an artistic
-civilisation. Therefore our civilisation tends in the
-main to multiply the needs and the consumption of
-man, so as to quicken production as much as possible,
-while the ancient civilisation tended to limit man’s
-needs and consumption, to hold up to esteem and
-imitation customs of simplicity and parsimony which
-involved a reduction in consumption, and therefore in
-production. If we are to grasp the very essence of our
-history, we must understand clearly how indisolubly
-united are the artistic civilisation and
-the ideal of a simple life, the mechanical-scientific<span class="pagenum" id="Page_47">47</span>
-civilisation and the ideal of a life of extravagance
-and luxury.</p>
-
-<p>Even at the present day, many will be found to extol
-the greatness, the wealth, and the might of the Roman
-Empire as a marvel never surpassed in history. But
-this is a delusion. The Roman Empire seemed marvellously
-wealthy and powerful to the ancients, because
-they had never yet seen greater wealth and greater
-might. But what are the wealth and the might of
-the Roman Empire compared with the might and the
-wealth of the great modern states of Europe and
-America? One observation will suffice to give an idea
-of the difference. We are justified in deducing from the
-great number of facts and data in our possession that
-in the most flourishing and wealthy centuries the
-budget of the Empire, the sum total, that is, of all the
-items of expenditure which the central government at
-Rome had to meet—expenditure on the most important
-public services of so immense an empire, which
-comprised the whole basin of the Mediterranean, and
-a large part of Europe, Asia, and Africa—fell short, far
-short, of the municipal budget of the city of New
-York. Only the man who is conversant with the
-customs of the past in their minutest details can
-fully estimate how much simpler, poorer, and more
-economical the civilisation of the ancients was than
-that which has permeated America and Europe
-since the invention of the steam-engine and electricity,
-when the riches of the New World, exploited<span class="pagenum" id="Page_48">48</span>
-intensively with the help of machinery, began to
-flood the earth.</p>
-
-<p>Consuming little, and content with a life of simplicity
-and poverty, the ancients had no need to produce
-much or to produce at great speed. So they had
-no requirement for machines, whether steam- or electricity-driven.
-The few simple machines, which the
-hand of man or the muscular force of domestic animals
-can operate,—the domestic loom, the horse-propelled
-mill,—sufficed. Therefore, they had no need of science
-to help them to construct new machines of greater
-size and power. They had no need to work at high
-pressure. They could work slowly, with their hands
-and with a few simple instruments, and with them produce
-beautiful, accurate, and finished articles, which
-aspired to a lofty and difficult ideal of perfection.
-Accordingly, art occupied in the ancient world the
-position which science occupies in modern civilisation.
-It was not a refined luxury for the few, but an elementary
-and universal necessity. Governments and wealthy
-citizens were obliged to adorn their cities with monuments,
-sculptures, and pictures, to embellish squares,
-streets, and houses, because the masses wished the cities
-to be beautiful, and would have rebelled against an
-authority which would have them live in an unadorned
-city; just as nowadays they would rebel against a
-municipal authority which would have them dwell in
-a city without light, or against a government which
-placed obstacles and hindrances in the way of the<span class="pagenum" id="Page_49">49</span>
-construction of railways. In those times, the requirement
-was that everything, down to the household
-utensils, even of the most modest description and
-destined for the use of the poorer classes, be inspired
-with a breath of beauty. Anyone who visits a museum
-of Greco-Roman antiquities, in which are exposed to
-view objects found in rich and highly cultivated districts,—that
-of Naples, for example, where so many
-objects excavated from the ashes of Pompeii are to be
-seen,—can easily convince himself of this curious
-phenomenon, and realise more vividly, by contrast, the
-carelessness, roughness, and commonplace vulgarity of
-the objects made by modern machinery. In short, if
-the quantity of the things produced by the industry
-of the ancients was small, for that very reason, and
-by way of compensation, their quality was refined and
-excellent.</p>
-
-<p>The contrary is the case in the modern world.
-The quantity of the things which modern industry,
-thanks to electricity- and steam-driven machinery,
-produces, is prodigious. No century ever witnessed
-the realisation of the miracle of abundance in a
-more marvellous way. But the quality of the things
-suffers in consequence. The ugliness and the crude
-vulgarity of so many objects, which in much poorer
-times had an elegance and a beauty which have now
-vanished, are the price we pay for the abundance of our
-times. The necessities of man have increased beyond
-all measure, and to satisfy them lavish and rapid production<span class="pagenum" id="Page_50">50</span>
-is required. The need for rapid production
-accounts for the invention of so many machines. But
-it is not possible to secure the manufacture by rigid
-hands of iron of so many things at such speed, and at
-the same time to impart to them an exquisitely artistic
-appearance, revealing the personal excellence of the
-artist. It is as much as we can do to impart to them a
-coarse and rude appearance of beauty, with a few
-ornamentations copied casually from the beautiful
-things which our fathers succeeded in creating in
-poorer and less busy times. Machinery, driven by
-steam or electricity, has the advantage of speed over
-the hand of man. It can produce in the same time a
-much greater number of objects. For this reason it has
-triumphed in a time like ours, in which the increased
-necessities of the world demand an extraordinary
-growth in production. But the hand of man,—that
-living and mind-inspired machine,—if it cannot compete
-with machines of iron for speed, is alone capable
-of imparting to things that perfection, that grace, and
-that excellence of form which can fill us with a joy
-which is different from, but perhaps more intense than,
-that afforded by easy and coarse abundance.</p>
-
-<div class="tb">* * * * *</div>
-
-<p>This contrast between ancient and modern times,
-between the civilisations which preceded the French
-Revolution and the modern American civilisation, should
-and would have received more attention than it has,
-had not the students of antiquity been too prone to lose<span class="pagenum" id="Page_51">51</span>
-their way in the maze of a dead erudition. We are
-proud of our wealth and power. We are proud of
-having extended our dominion over the whole planet,
-only a small part of which was known to the ancients,
-and that but vaguely. We are proud of having surprised
-so many of nature’s secrets, of having deciphered
-the mystery of so many laws, of having thrown light
-on so many lurking-places of disease and death, of
-having shaken ourselves free from so many vain fears
-which tormented our ancestors, of having released
-ourselves from so many yokes—political, moral, and
-intellectual—which used to weigh upon their necks.
-We feel ourselves strong, sure of ourselves and of our
-destiny as no men before us in history, in face of the
-blind forces of the Universe, so many of which we have
-subjected to our dominion and forced to serve our
-necessities, our ambitions, and our whims.</p>
-
-<p>Nevertheless, in the midst of all this wealth, this
-power, and this knowledge, a dull sense of disquietude
-vexes men’s souls. Man is not yet content. Every day
-he finds new pretexts or motives for complaining. One
-of the most oft-repeated of these pretexts or motives is,
-that the world is becoming uglier. If in our cities any
-beautiful part remains, it is nearly always the old part.
-In the historical cities, the new parts are horrible, and
-form a strange contrast with the older. The altogether-new
-cities—especially those which have sprung up in
-the last century in America—appear to the artistic eye
-almost always like a sort of anteroom to the infernal<span class="pagenum" id="Page_52">52</span>
-regions. Architecture has become a mother of monsters.
-Sculpture and painting, which were once upon
-a time the two most select amongst the decorative arts,
-protected and pampered by the great ones of the earth
-and adored by the masses, are reduced to the necessity
-of employing a thousand artifices to extort orders out
-of the negligent malevolence of an epoch, whose ornaments
-and monuments seem an encumbrance and an
-excrescence rather than a beauty. There was a time
-when the dress of men and women was a work of art.
-At the present day, only that of women has preserved
-a certain artistic grace and beauty. Let us not
-dwell upon the countless other forms of ugliness which
-have invaded our houses with the furniture, the carpets,
-the candelabra, and the china.</p>
-
-<p>The artistic mediocrity of our epoch is surpassed only
-by the superficiality and confusion of its tastes. Each
-succeeding year sees that which used to appear the
-height of elegance and beauty to its predecessors, despised,
-neglected, and forgotten. All the styles of the
-past and all the styles of the different countries swirl
-round us, before the fickle gusts of fashion. Every
-picture which excites admiration for a moment is
-quickly forgotten by the fickle taste of an age which
-ransacks every corner in search of the beautiful, because
-nowhere can the beautiful be found. Many ask
-themselves what is the origin of this strange corruption
-of taste and of the æsthetic sense. But no two people
-agree on the answer. This one attributes the degeneration<span class="pagenum" id="Page_53">53</span>
-to the decadence of traditions, and therefore
-proposes to open schools and to institute courses of
-instruction. That one, on the other hand, traces the
-responsibility to the lack of liberty afforded the public
-taste and the genius of the artists, a condition of things
-for which these same traditions are to blame. Such a
-one therefore inveighs against the schools and the rules
-of tradition, and would like to see them all swept away.
-Nobody can explain how it happens that so rich, so
-wise, and so powerful a civilisation does not succeed in
-being beautiful, and shows itself powerless to infuse a
-breath of beauty into anything it creates, be it big or
-little, into its cities or into the small objects of daily use.</p>
-
-<p>But the history of civilisation explains this apparent
-mystery. A civilisation cannot deck itself with the
-most exquisite beauties of art, if it cannot persuade
-itself to live with a certain simplicity and to work with
-a certain deliberation. What kills art in our civilisation
-is the mad desire for wealth, the giddy increase of
-necessities, the universal craze for speed, the effort to
-multiply production, the general restlessness of body
-and mind. Beauty is not so simple and commonplace
-a thing as to admit of its examples being multiplied by
-machinery in furious haste. Whether in big things or
-in little, it can only be the result of a long and steady
-effort of the intellect and the will, which must be expressed
-at all costs through the medium of that living
-and marvellous machine, the human hand. If we wish
-to accumulate round us the wealth of the world at<span class="pagenum" id="Page_54">54</span>
-express speed, if we wish to produce and to consume
-with giddy rapidity, we must not be too exacting in our
-demands for quality and beauty in the things produced.
-We cannot have a great deal in this world, and have
-that great deal beautiful.</p>
-
-<p>Therefore, speaking still more generally, we might
-say that in the ancient civilisation the dominant principle
-was quality, in the modern civilisation, on the other
-hand, quantity. In ancient times, the more cultured,
-powerful, and wealthy a nation became, the greater
-efforts it made to produce in every branch of human
-activity but few things, but to ensure the materialisation
-in those things of a difficult and lofty ideal of
-perfection which should find common acceptance and
-admiration. Men of our time, on the other hand,
-direct their efforts towards production in large quantities,
-and at great speed, and are proud of seeing their
-power and grandeur expressed in the formidable figures
-of modern statistics. That the goods produced are of
-deteriorating quality is of small account. Thus the
-ancient civilisations tended, so to speak, towards
-eternity, towards the manufacture of things which, if
-not eternal in the precise meaning of the word, should
-last a long time, should conquer the ages, and should
-succeed in conveying to distant posterity a supreme
-image of their past existence. In very truth, after
-numberless catastrophes and pillagings, the material
-remains of ancient civilisations, which are piously
-preserved to this day, are very numerous. Our age produces<span class="pagenum" id="Page_55">55</span>
-in great quantities, but maybe not a single one
-of the buildings and material objects produced by it in
-such abundance can hope to conquer the ages. Everything
-is precarious, ephemeral, destined to live a few
-months or a few years; destined to a premature death
-from the very first hour of its birth.</p>
-
-<p>And this diversity crops up again in every branch of
-human activity; in industrial as in intellectual activity,
-in art as in literature. We look upon the literatures of
-Greece and Rome as a treasure of inestimable value,
-almost as the foundation of our culture; and we still
-recommend them as models to all who wish to learn the
-difficult art of writing and of speaking with precision,
-elegance, and clearness. And yet how little the ancients
-wrote and read compared with ourselves! The press
-did not exist; paper, now the cheapest of materials, was a
-rare luxury—the papyrus was a most precious Egyptian
-monopoly. Consequently, the number of persons who
-could provide themselves with books was very small,
-and such persons were found only among the <i xml:lang="fr" lang="fr">élite</i> of
-culture or of wealth. The only opportunities of reading
-the people had were afforded by the public notices, and
-by the laws engraved on bronze or marble tablets. In
-those times, there was nothing to correspond in any way
-at all with the newspapers of to-day. In view of the
-very scanty numbers of the readers of books, those also
-who wrote them were bound to be few in number; these
-could not write much. With but very few exceptions,
-the works bequeathed to us by the ancients are by no<span class="pagenum" id="Page_56">56</span>
-means voluminous. Of all the qualities commonly found
-in Greek and Latin writers, sobriety and conciseness are
-the most prominent. These virtues were to some extent
-the product of circumstances. For in times in which
-paper was so dear, and every copy of a book had to
-be prepared specially by an amanuensis, conciseness
-and brevity were the two qualities of importance to
-insure the wide circulation and preservation of a book.</p>
-
-<p>It was, however, just the circumstance that the ancients
-wrote so little that enabled them to carry the art
-of writing to an indescribable pitch of perfection; that
-enabled them to obtain that clearness, that harmony,
-that cadence and proportion of phrase, that concentration
-which has made them the great masters of the
-literary art for all time. And to-day!—A wolfish, insatiable
-hunger for printed paper and reading matter is
-the scourge of our civilisation. Look at the Pantagruelian
-literary orgies to which Europe and America
-surrender themselves! Every day brings its daily paper,
-every week its journals, illustrated or otherwise, every
-month its reviews and magazines. Then we have the
-special publications devoted to a particular art, a
-particular profession, a particular industry, a favourite
-sport, in number without end. We have, too, the
-volumes of every kind and quality with which a crowd
-of publishers congests the book market: novels, poems,
-books of travel, science, political economy, religion,
-sport. Who could enumerate all the kinds of books
-which are published nowadays? Many of these, it is<span class="pagenum" id="Page_57">57</span>
-true, do not find readers, but many do; and a certain
-number, so many readers as to be sold in thousands, in
-tens of thousands, and to be scattered broadcast all
-over the world.</p>
-
-<p>But to satisfy a public which is so greedy of reading,
-an extraordinary number of writers is required at the
-present day, from the obscure editors of provincial
-journals to the favoured few who succeed in winning
-world-fame, and in reaching the position of sovereigns
-or, if you prefer it, satraps of literature. And all this
-enormous multitude of writers is compelled to write
-prolifically and rapidly, because the public wants to
-read voraciously. It must choose diverse topics, and
-vary its themes according to the varieties of fashion and
-events. On the other hand, it is no longer compelled
-to be concise, both because the public often likes prolixity,
-which makes reading comfortable and easy, and
-because, nowadays, printing is so cheap and facile.
-But the art of writing is being lost through this haste,
-this instability of public interest, this prolixity. Every
-tongue is becoming a muddy mixture of words and
-phrases which have dripped from every point of heaven
-on to the daily language and literature. Taste is being
-corrupted, with writers as with readers, deteriorating
-now into negligence and carelessness, now into affectation
-and grotesqueness.</p>
-
-<div class="tb">* * * * *</div>
-
-<p>Quality and quantity: these are the two principles of
-the two civilisations, the ancient and the modern.<span class="pagenum" id="Page_58">58</span>
-They are two opposite principles, a circumstance which
-explains why in the last fifty years the gradual triumph
-of the civilisation of machinery or of industry on a large
-scale, which aims at multiplying the quantity of riches,
-has been accompanied by a decline in classical studies.
-The new generation, even that portion of it that represents
-the educated classes, has broken away from the
-study of a world which, though resembling the modern
-world in so many of its ideas and institutions, differed
-from the present era in the fundamental conception of
-life, and professed an entirely different idea of perfection.</p>
-
-<p>However, if the two principles are mutually exclusive,
-we must ask ourselves, which is true and which false,
-which is good and which is not. Who is in the right,—we,
-who wish to fill the world with riches, even at the
-cost of disfiguring it and making it hideous; or the
-ancients, who were content to live a life of greater simplicity,
-of more leisurely and more peaceful activity,
-but wished to spend it in a persevering effort to materialise
-their ideals of beauty? In how many of the
-confused disputes which set the men of our times by
-the ears is this problem obscurely implied, though the
-disputants are unaware of it? But the problem is a
-terrible one, because it involves all the fundamental
-problems of contemporary life and the very destiny of
-the gigantic operations to which our own generation,
-and those which preceded it, have applied themselves
-with such frenzied activity.</p>
-
-<p>So I will not attempt to solve the formidable problem.<span class="pagenum" id="Page_59">59</span>
-Yet may I be permitted to express a thought, simple in
-itself, but one which presents itself with the smiling
-countenance of hope. It is, that “opposite” principles
-do not mean “irreconcilable” principles. Is it not
-just possible that this craze for work, for riches, and for
-speed, of which we are victims, may slacken somewhat,
-and give men time to collect their thoughts, and to
-piece together again the shattered grandeur of the
-modern world in the image of a more serene and composed
-beauty? Are men really doomed to become
-more insatiable, the richer they become; or will the
-day arrive when they will think it wiser to employ a
-larger part of the immense riches they possess, not in
-producing other riches, but in embellishing the world,
-seeing that beauty is no less a joy in life than wealth,
-and that we ourselves, though all athirst for gold, prove
-that it is so, by searching untiringly in every corner for
-the few remains of ancient beauty?</p>
-
-<p>I feel that I have not the courage to answer this
-question with a brutal “No”; and I hope that many
-others will be of the same opinion. For one cannot
-help thinking that one of the most marvellous epochs
-in history would really begin on the day on which
-Europe and America succeeded in reconciling in a new
-civilisation the two opposite principles of quantity and
-quality, and in employing the extraordinary riches at
-their disposal in adorning and beautifying the world,
-which their energy and audacity have so immeasurably
-enlarged in recent centuries.</p>
-
-<hr />
-
-<div id="toclink_60" class="chapter">
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_60">60</span></p>
-
-<h2 class="nobreak" id="II-III">III<br />
-
-<span class="subhead">WOMAN AND HOME</span></h2>
-</div>
-
-<p class="drop-cap b"><span class="smcap1">Some</span> years ago, in the course of the excavations
-which are being made with such success in Egypt,
-a papyrus was found which is now known among
-archæologists by the name of <i>The Petition of Dionysia</i>.
-This papyrus, which belongs to the second century <span class="allsmcap">A.D.</span>,
-contains on one side some books of the <i>Iliad</i>, on the
-other a defence presented by a certain Dionysia to an
-Egyptian court, before which she was defending an
-action brought against her by her own father affecting
-her dowry and other questions of interest. To escape
-paying his daughter and her husband the sums which
-they demanded, the father had directed the husband
-to return him his daughter, and had dissolved the
-marriage. But the daughter, on her side, maintained in
-her defence that the father had forfeited his right to
-dissolve her marriage and to separate her from her
-husband, because her marriage was a “written” marriage—established,
-that is to say, by an act or document
-in writing. If it had been an “unwritten”
-marriage, Dionysia would not have contested her<span class="pagenum" id="Page_61">61</span>
-father’s right in that case to dissolve it, for no motive
-whatever, merely because it so pleased him.</p>
-
-<p>It would be difficult to imagine a document more
-strange than this, from the point of view of the ideas
-which prevail at the present day in European and
-American society. Matrimony is for us an act of so
-great social importance that the state alone—that is to
-say, the law, and the law courts—can recognise or
-dissolve it. To leave the destiny of a family at the
-mercy of the will of the father of one of the two parties,
-to recognise as his the right to destroy a family at any
-moment to suit his individual interest, without being
-accountable to anyone for so doing, would seem to us a
-monstrous thing. And yet this monstrous thing seemed
-to the whole of antiquity, with few restrictions and
-reservations, legitimate, reasonable, and wise. Differences
-in the organisation of the family existed in
-different countries and in different centuries; but they
-were but superficial, unessential differences. On one
-point, the whole world agreed: that matrimony should
-never be considered an act to be left to the will of the
-contracting parties, but a business transaction which
-the young people should leave to their fathers to arrange.</p>
-
-<p>Matrimony, as it was in Rome, will serve to give a
-clear idea of the ancient world’s conception of the
-family. In Rome, fathers often betrothed their sons
-when they were still children. They made them marry
-when they were still quite young, the males before they
-were twenty, the girls at about sixteen; and they had<span class="pagenum" id="Page_62">62</span>
-the right to oblige them at any moment to divorce each
-other, without being forced to give any reason or
-explanation. A man might be an exemplary husband,
-might live with his wife in the most perfect bliss. If
-the son’s wife, for one reason or another, did not suit
-the fancy of his father, the son might be obliged any
-day to put her away. Amongst others to whom this
-happened was no less a person than Tiberius, at a time
-when he had already become one of the first figures in
-the Empire, and had commanded armies in battle. He
-had married a daughter of Agrippa, and loved her
-devotedly. The couple were considered in Rome a
-model of affection and faithfulness. But, at a certain
-moment, Augustus, who was the adoptive father of Tiberius,
-judged that for political motives another marriage
-might have suited Tiberius better; and he, accordingly,
-obliged Tiberius to divorce her. Tiberius was so much
-upset, that—as Suetonius tells us—every time he met
-his first wife in society, he burst into tears—he, who
-was one of the most formidable generals of his time;
-so that Augustus had to take measures to prevent their
-meeting each other. And yet Tiberius had to give way;
-for his father, in the eyes of the law and in accordance
-with the ideas current in his time, was absolute arbiter
-in these matters! Not even a man in the circumstances
-of Tiberius, who had already been consul, could think
-of rebelling against the paternal authority.</p>
-
-<p>These few facts suffice to prove how often the ideas
-which to one epoch and to one civilisation seem the<span class="pagenum" id="Page_63">63</span>
-most natural, the most evident, and the most simple,
-are, on the contrary, complex and difficult ideas, at
-which mankind has arrived only after a long effort, and
-weary struggles. Is there anything which seems to us
-more reasonable than to leave to young people, who
-wish to found a family, ample liberty of judgment and
-of choice in the matter of the person with whom they
-will have to pass their lives? Fathers, it is true, often
-help their sons by giving advice. They readily place
-at the disposal of their children their own experience.
-But it is only in very rare instances that they maintain
-a struggle <i xml:lang="fr" lang="fr">à outrance</i>, to withhold their children from a
-marriage on which their hearts are set, or to force on
-them a repugnant alliance. We consider that the
-individual’s happiness may depend to some extent on
-his marriage. It is, therefore, just that everybody
-should have ample liberty of choice. If the law purported
-to restore to fathers the right to make or unmake
-their sons’ marriages, we are convinced that at the
-present day the vast majority of fathers would refuse
-to assume such a responsibility, and would consider
-such a power unjust, excessive, and tyrannical. There
-is not a father to-day who, however averse he may be
-to a marriage desired by his son or daughter, does not
-end by telling him or her, provided a little firmness is
-shown in resisting his arguments, that after all it is not
-he, but his son or daughter who has to take the husband
-or wife in question. Indeed, this inclination to pliability
-on the part of fathers towards their sons is increasing<span class="pagenum" id="Page_64">64</span>
-every day. Every day sees a growing disinclination
-on the part of fathers to fetter, in a matter of such delicacy
-and of such importance to the personal happiness
-of the young, the freedom of the latter’s inclinations,
-the spontaneous rush of their feelings. Besides, what
-would be the use of having conquered liberty in so many
-other spheres, if it were withheld in this which, especially
-to the young, seems the most important of all: the
-liberty of yielding to the impulse of that passion which
-at a certain moment of life is the strongest of all, love?</p>
-
-<p>And yet no idea would have appeared more absurd
-and scandalous to the men of the ancient world, the
-contemporaries of Pericles and Cæsar. The difference
-is so radical and profound that it must arise from important
-reasons. In fact, whoever compares ancient
-with modern times easily recognises that the rights of
-sentiment and the principles of liberty have been able
-to triumph in modern society only by virtue of a complete
-transformation in social customs and ordinances,
-which has stripped the family in our times of much of
-its social importance. To-day the family is purely and
-simply a form of social life in common. Man and
-woman cannot live solitary lives. A powerful instinct
-impels them towards each other. Even when the
-instinct is not felt, or is spent, the man needs to live in
-the company of other human beings, to have round
-him a circle of persons with whom he may find himself
-in relations of the closest intimacy. To-day the family
-performs this profoundly human office—this office and<span class="pagenum" id="Page_65">65</span>
-practically no other. Nowadays, man and woman
-study, work, take part in government, compete for the
-conquest of wealth and power, and exercise an influence
-on society—engage in all these activities quite
-outside the family.</p>
-
-<p>But it was not so in ancient times. The family was
-then an independent economic organisation, in which
-the woman had a predominant part. She wove and
-spun, providing every member of the family with
-clothes. She made bread, she dried the fruits for the
-winter, she seized the right moment for laying in the
-necessary supplies of provisions—a most important
-task, in times in which commerce was much less developed
-than it is now. In poor or moderately wealthy
-families, the women wove and performed similar tasks
-with their own hands. Rich women learned to do these
-tasks as children, but later contented themselves with
-superintending their performance by women slaves or
-freedwomen. But, especially in the rich families, the
-woman could contribute a great deal to the prosperity
-or the ruin of the house, according as she was or was
-not active in the performance of her work, zealous in
-her surveillance, energetic and shrewd in giving her
-orders, moderate in her expenditure. Even to-day the
-woman can contribute a great deal, in the wealthy
-classes, to the prosperity of the family. But for this
-she requires only one negative virtue, for all that this
-virtue is not too common or easily acquired: to know
-how to confine her expenses within reasonable limits,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_66">66</span>
-and not to be too ready to gratify her whims. In
-ancient times, on the contrary, if a woman was to be
-useful to her family she needed as well a positive virtue:
-to know how to produce much and well. This explains
-how we come to know that certain emperors’ wives,
-Livia for instance, directed the weaving operations in
-their homes personally and with great zeal, and that
-Augustus was particular not to wear any togas but
-those woven in his house under the eyes of his wife.
-The Emperor and his wife by their example meant to
-recall to all the Roman women the duty of attending
-with zeal and alacrity to their domestic duties.</p>
-
-<p>The ancient family, especially among the upper
-classes, was also a school. The ancient world had few
-institutions of public education; and private instruction
-did not reach a high level of development, except in the
-closing years of the Empire. Though Rome was the
-greatest military power in the world, the family took
-the place of military schools, which were then non-existent.
-The officers, who all belonged to the nobility,
-were prepared in the family. The father was the first
-military instructor of his sons, and on him fell the duty
-of making good soldiers of them. This, indeed, was
-one of the reasons why the aristocracy became indispensable
-to the Roman Empire; because it alone could
-prepare the officers and generals in the family.</p>
-
-<p>In short, the ancient family was a sort of political
-society. Its members were bound to support and help
-each other in difficult and dangerous contingencies, to a<span class="pagenum" id="Page_67">67</span>
-much greater extent than they are nowadays. In
-political struggles, for instance, they were all of one
-colour. It was the most difficult and unheard of thing,
-if indeed not impossible, for a son or a son-in-law to
-attach himself to a different political party from that of
-his father or his father-in-law. If a member of the
-family was implicated in a lawsuit, or financially embarrassed,
-the family was bound to help him much more
-energetically, and at much greater risk, than in our
-day. We see this phenomenon most clearly in Roman
-history. After the aristocracy split into two opposing
-parties,—the conservative and the popular, to borrow
-modern expressions,—a man’s position in one or the
-other party was determined, almost always, by his
-birth. He belonged to one party or the other, according
-as his own family belonged to one or the other.
-Take Cæsar, for example. Why was Cæsar always
-a member of the democratic party, and bound to
-follow its vicissitudes, to the extent of becoming its
-leader and occasioning a civil war, overturning the
-ancient government, and establishing a dictatorship
-which, reviving as it did the saddest memories of
-Sulla’s reaction, could not fail to be odious to the
-majority, and which was the cause of Cæsar’s death?
-It was not the result of any special inclination or ambition
-of his own. Several times he tried to cross over to
-the other party, which had much more power and
-authority; or at any rate, to reach an understanding
-with it. But his effort was of no avail. He was<span class="pagenum" id="Page_68">68</span>
-the nephew of Marius, the most celebrated among the
-leaders of the popular party, and the one whom the
-other party most detested. The first impulse towards
-the whole of the great dictator’s extraordinary career
-was given by this relationship; he had in the end to
-bring about a second revolution, because his uncle had
-already caused one.</p>
-
-<p>It is easy then to understand for what reason, in
-times in which the family performed so many social
-offices and was the pivot of so many interests, marriage
-was not considered as an act to be left to the full discretion
-of the young and to their love, and why the
-fathers were conceded the right to decide for themselves
-in such matters. A marriage involved grave
-political, economic, and moral responsibilities for the
-members of both clans. Therefore the young people
-were required to sacrifice to the common interests of
-their clan some part of their personal inclinations.
-In compensation, they had the advantage, in case of
-danger and of need, of being able to count on the family
-much more than they can nowadays; the family arrogated
-to itself, it is true, certain rights in connection
-with their choice, but in return did not abandon them
-to their fate in the hour of need.</p>
-
-<div class="tb">* * * * *</div>
-
-<p>In short, the ancient marriage, organised though it
-was on lines which appear to us tyrannical, presented
-certain advantages which, if considered carefully, will
-be seen to compensate, at least in part, for the restricted<span class="pagenum" id="Page_69">69</span>
-liberty of choice. In the great transformation of civilisation
-of which the modern marriage is the product,
-men have, it is true, gained, on the one hand, greater
-liberty, but have lost, on the other, certain advantages
-which, in the ancient world, were guaranteed to them by
-the closer and more vigorous solidarity of the family.
-Women, on the contrary, have gained much more in the
-passage from the ancient to the modern world, because
-in exchange for what they have gained, they have lost
-practically nothing. The organisation of the modern
-family is distinguished from that of the ancient especially
-by the much greater concessions it makes to
-the woman. Feminists complain loudly of the present
-condition of woman. It is certain, however, at least to
-anyone with any knowledge of the history of the past,
-that at no epoch have women been so little oppressed
-by men and at no epoch have they enjoyed so many
-advantages as at present.</p>
-
-<p>In fact, if in the ancient marriage so little liberty of
-choice was reserved to the man, it is easy to understand
-that not a ghost of it was conceded to the woman. The
-man had in addition one advantage. Constrained to
-submit to the will of the father as long as the latter was
-alive, he became, when the father died, absolute master
-of his wife, because he could then repudiate her and
-marry another, how and when he chose. The almost
-unfettered liberty of divorce, without any motive, or
-for the most futile motives, might well be some compensation
-to the man for the subjection in which the<span class="pagenum" id="Page_70">70</span>
-father, while alive, kept him. For the woman, there was
-no compensation at all. As long as her father lived,
-she had to obey the man to whom her father gave her.
-When the father was no more, she still remained in the
-power of her husband, who could not only repudiate
-her without any motive, but even marry her to another.
-In the history of Rome, especially, the men used and
-abused this privilege in a way, which to us seems sometimes
-ridiculous, sometimes revolting, and always extravagant.
-Especially in the last century of the republic,
-when the struggles between the parties became intense,
-the most eminent statesmen adopted the habit of consolidating
-their alliances with marriages. Therefore,
-we see every political vicissitude of importance shrouded
-in a curious web of divorces and marriages. Now one
-great man hands his wife over to another, now he
-marries the other’s daughter, now gives him his sister
-to wife. The poor women wander from one house to
-the other, change husbands from one year to another,
-with the same facility with which, nowadays, a traveller
-changes his inn. For all these marriages lasted only as
-long as the political combination on account of which
-they were entered into. When the combination was
-dissolved, divorce broke up all or most of these families,
-and the husbands set themselves to contract new
-marriages. It was so easy for the husband to get a
-divorce. He needed only to write his wife a letter
-announcing his intention!</p>
-
-<p>Life, then, was bound to be not over-agreeable in<span class="pagenum" id="Page_71">71</span>
-Cæsar’s time for an affectionate, delicate, virtuous
-woman who desired the quiet joys of family life. When
-we contemplate from afar the historical grandeur and
-the glory of ancient Rome, we ought not to forget the
-multitude of hapless women which Rome was forced
-to sacrifice—a precious holocaust indeed—to her fortune
-and power. How many women’s broken hearts,
-how many women’s shattered lives went to make up the
-foundations of Roman grandeur! Nevertheless, even
-the greatest evils are never without some small admixture
-of good; and that sorrowful plight of woman in
-ancient times, especially of the Roman woman, was
-offset by one advantage of which liberty has robbed
-the woman of to-day. That is, that in ancient times, a
-woman, whether fair or plain, clever or foolish, attractive
-or insipid, was certain to be married, and that too
-while she was still young. The husband could not
-choose her; but she was sure of finding him, and that
-without undue delay.</p>
-
-<p>In fact, nowhere in the ancient world do we find any
-striking traces of a feminine celibacy like that which
-existed later under the influence of Christianity in the
-convents, or like that which is to-day again coming into
-prominence for social and economic reasons, without
-any religious impress or need of monastic vows, especially
-in the great industrial countries. It seems that
-women of the upper and middle classes, if they were not
-positively deformed and physically unsuited for matrimony,
-all married. Furthermore, inasmuch as marriages,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_72">72</span>
-especially among the upper classes, were
-arranged from political and social motives, no account
-was taken of the beauty of the bride, but of her social
-position, her family, and so on. Historians always tell
-us how many wives the numerous prominent figures in
-Roman history married, and to what families they
-belonged. But it is rare for them to tell us whether they
-were beautiful or ugly, intelligent or stupid, pleasing or
-unpleasing; these details seemed to them of but trifling
-importance. One of the few exceptions to this rule is
-Livia, the last wife of Augustus. All the writers vie in
-celebrating her rare beauty (to which the statues also
-bear witness), her wisdom, intelligence, and virtue. But
-Livia seems really to have been a miracle; for it is a fact
-that, having married Augustus in her earliest youth,
-she succeeded in living with him all her life.</p>
-
-<p>Fifteen or sixteen years was considered the suitable
-age for a bride. Sometimes girls were married when
-they were barely fourteen, while nowadays it is rare
-for a girl to marry before she is twenty, and the
-majority marry between the ages of twenty and thirty.
-Furthermore, in many states of the ancient world the
-legal age for matrimony, both for the woman and the
-man, was much lower than it is to-day in European and
-American legal codes. This is not surprising. In all
-times and in all places in which matrimony is considered
-not as a personal matter of sentiment, but as a
-social act which must be regulated and directed by the
-parents, the object is to marry off the young people as<span class="pagenum" id="Page_73">73</span>
-quickly as possible. Often they are actually betrothed
-when they are still children, and share each other’s
-games of running and jumping. This was a fairly
-common practice in ancient Rome amongst the nobility,
-as it is a thriving custom in the China of to-day.
-Nor is it difficult to understand the reason for this procedure,
-which, considered by itself, seems to us extravagant
-and senseless. Love in all times and in all places
-is a most intractable passion. It is, therefore, more
-easy in such matters, for the elders to impose their wills
-and cold-blooded arrangements, on girls of fourteen or
-fifteen and boys of seventeen or eighteen, than on
-women or men of twenty-five. Naturally such precocious
-marriages, contracted between young people
-who had not yet had a taste of the world, were not free
-from dangers and serious inconveniences. But these
-dangers and inconveniences appeared to contemporary
-eyes less great than those which would have arisen, if
-the young had been left to follow the dictates of their
-own feelings.</p>
-
-<p>In conclusion, another advantage which the ancient
-marriage, with all its many hardships and its want of
-sympathy, assured to the woman was what one might
-call the legal protection of virtue. Nowhere was this
-protection greater and stronger than in ancient Rome.
-In Rome, the legitimacy of a marriage did not depend,
-as it does now in Europe and America, on the fulfilment
-of certain formalities before a priest or a magistrate,
-but on the moral situation of the woman. An <i xml:lang="la" lang="la">ingenua<span class="pagenum" id="Page_74">74</span>
-et honesta</i> woman, to use the expression then current,
-meaning a free-born woman of irreproachable habits,
-could live with a man only in the capacity of his legitimate
-wife. No formality in the presence of any magistrate
-was required. The fact of living with a man and
-being <i xml:lang="la" lang="la">ingenua et honesta</i> sufficed to assure to a woman
-and her own children all the rights appertaining to a
-wife and to legitimate offspring. On the other hand, a
-woman who had lived a dissolute life, had engaged in
-certain employments considered, and justly considered,
-disgraceful for a woman, or who had been convicted
-of adultery, could never become a legitimate wife or
-enjoy the privileges and rights of a legitimate wife.
-There was no ceremony before a priest or magistrate
-which could make a legitimate wife of her. She was by
-law a <i xml:lang="la" lang="la">concubina</i>, and in that capacity for a long time had
-no rights. Only in the course of time could she hope to
-get the rights, much restricted and of little importance
-as they were, which the law gradually conceded to the
-<i xml:lang="la" lang="la">concubina</i>.</p>
-
-<p>To transport this ancient conception of matrimony
-into modern society would doubtless not be possible,
-because it contradicts the great democratic principle of
-the equality of all before the law, on which our social
-organisation rests. But considered by itself this ancient
-conception of matrimony is without a doubt more
-lofty and more noble, and in particular more favourable
-to the woman, than the modern one. For it did not
-reduce the status of legitimate wife to what is practically<span class="pagenum" id="Page_75">75</span>
-a formality, but made it the exclusive privilege
-of the virtuous woman, and therefore assured the
-virtuous woman of a kind of privileged legal position,
-protecting her effectively against the intrigues and
-seductions of the attractive and gay women who, in the
-modern régime, are usually the more dangerous to the
-peace and happiness of the virtuous women, the less
-austere are their habits. In ancient Rome, the law
-guaranteed the virtuous woman that at least no one of
-these women should be able to rob her of the post of
-honour which she occupied in the family.</p>
-
-<p>The comparison of the ancient marriage with the
-modern marriage once more proves to us, then, how
-complex are human affairs, and how difficult it is to
-pass an absolute and definitive judgment upon them.
-Certainly, at first sight, the condition of the woman in
-the ancient family seems to us a horrible one, resembling
-that of a slave. We wonder how nations that had risen
-to a lofty level of social, intellectual, and moral development
-could have tolerated it. But when we consider
-the matter more attentively, we find that even this
-condition, wretched though it was in certain respects,
-was not without certain advantages, which may perhaps
-explain to us why women put up with it for so
-many centuries. The liberty which the woman of the
-present day enjoys has countless advantages; but it has
-made matrimony for her a struggle, in which, if some
-triumph, others are worsted, and those who triumph
-are not always the most virtuous and the most wise.<span class="pagenum" id="Page_76">76</span>
-Also, in this order of things, liberty is an excellent thing,
-especially for the fortunate and the brave; but the
-fortunate and the brave, where marriages and love are
-concerned, are not always those who possess the qualities
-which conduce most effectively to the progress of
-the world and the improvement of the human species.
-Modern liberty has set a high price on beauty and
-intelligence in woman, which is all to the good; but it
-has also made coquetry, frivolity, and vapidity into
-qualities which are useful for the conquest of man, who
-is not always a reasonable being and is even less reasonable
-than usual when he is in love—which is <em>not</em>
-all to the good. For there is no doubt that between
-twenty and thirty years of age a man is much more
-sensitive to the attractions of a frivolous and seductive
-girl than to those of a serious and sensible woman.</p>
-
-<p>All human things, then, have their advantages and
-their disadvantages, and that perhaps is why the world
-never tires of its experiments in diverse directions and
-on every topic. Absolute perfection is unattainable—a
-fact which should make us careful not to boast too
-loudly of the times in which we live, nor to be too ready
-to disparage what preceding generations have done.</p>
-
-<hr />
-
-<div id="toclink_77" class="chapter">
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_77">77</span></p>
-
-<h2 class="nobreak" id="II-IV">IV<br />
-
-<span class="subhead">THE LESSON OF THE FALL OF THE ROMAN EMPIRE</span></h2>
-</div>
-
-<p class="drop-cap l"><i xml:lang="fr" lang="fr"><span class="smcap1">“L’histoire</span> est un recommencement perpétuel</i>,” a
-French writer has said. If the forms in which
-history manifests itself are infinitely various, the forces
-which inspire it are always the same, and are everywhere
-at work, on a large scale or on a small, openly or
-secretly. It is, therefore, not to be wondered at that
-the decadence of the Roman Empire is being repeated
-in our time in the modern world.</p>
-
-<p>This assertion may seem paradoxical and strange.
-What! are we moderns on the downward grade? Why,
-one hears of nothing but progress on every side. Never
-was there an epoch more proud of its loudly vaunted
-achievements. The sciences are adding discovery to
-discovery. The wealth of the world is increasing with
-giddy rapidity. Comfort and culture are spreading in
-every class and in every country. One after another,
-most recondite treasures of the earth are falling
-into our hands. We are gradually fighting down all the
-forces of nature which for so long a time kept our
-ancestors at a distance, impeded them, even threatened<span class="pagenum" id="Page_78">78</span>
-them with death, from the law of gravity to the most
-insidious maladies. Is it permissible to talk of decadence
-at the very moment when man has made
-himself lord of the whole earth, and is even learning to
-fly? History cannot show a richer, wiser, more powerful,
-more daring epoch than the present one. No wonder
-that most people would resent the suggestion that we,
-in the flush of our brilliant successes, are seeing the
-repetition of that ancient and terrible history of the
-last centuries of the Roman Empire, which was one of
-the saddest and deadliest episodes in the world’s history.</p>
-
-<p>And yet that history is repeating itself, to a certain
-extent at any rate. The showy wealth and the noisy
-triumphs of modern civilisation veil, but do not hide,
-this <i xml:lang="fr" lang="fr">recommencement de l’histoire</i> from him who studies,
-in a spirit of philosophy, our times and the decadence
-of the Roman Empire. It is true that there are immense
-differences between the two civilisations and the two
-epochs. But notwithstanding these differences, what
-wonderful resemblances there are! Consider especially
-that disease which corrupted the trunk of the Roman
-Empire, and which is beginning slowly, subtly, insidiously
-to eat the heart out of the modern world.</p>
-
-<p>The disease which killed the Roman Empire was, in
-fact, excessive urbanisation. Neither the attacks of
-barbarism from outside, nor those of Christianity from
-within, would have prevailed against its might and its
-massive weight, if the strength of the colossus had not
-been already undermined by this internal cancer. But,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_79">79</span>
-slowly and steadily, the disease had spread through the
-trunk of the Empire, and had attacked its most vital
-organs one after the other, fostered on its deadly errand
-by wealth, peace, art, literature, culture, religion, all
-the blessings which men most long for and most prize.</p>
-
-<p>In order to understand this extraordinary phenomenon
-of Roman history, we must hark back to the
-generations that lived quietly and in a relatively happy
-state in the flowery times of Rome’s real power and
-greatness. After two centuries of war, at the beginning
-of the Christian era, peace was finally established in the
-great Empire which Rome had conquered. In the days
-of peace, the barbarian West learned from the Romans
-how to cultivate the earth, to cut the forests, to excavate
-the minerals, to navigate the rivers, to speak and
-to write Latin. It became civilised, and bought the
-manufactures of the ancient industrial cities of the
-East. Every fresh market of the West, as it was
-opened up, gave a stimulus to the ancient industries of
-the East, which found in such market a new clientèle.
-Contact with the barbarism of the West rapidly gave
-fresh youth to the old civilisation of the East,—Egypt,
-Syria, Asia Minor,—which had decayed somewhat in
-the great crisis of the last century of the republic.
-Everywhere fresh lands were brought under cultivation,
-methods of agriculture were perfected, minerals
-were searched for, new industries and new branches of
-commerce were opened up. Prosperity and luxury
-preceding in every nation, even the most barbarous,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_80">80</span>
-and in every class, even the poorest, which acquired a
-taste for the luxuries of civilisation.</p>
-
-<p>An epoch of rapid increase of wealth, of lucky enterprises,
-of frequent, close, and varied commercial and
-intellectual intercourse between the most distant
-peoples, began. In every part of the Empire, in Gaul
-as well as in Asia Minor, in Spain as well as in Africa,
-these new trades, these new industries and agricultural
-enterprises gave rise to a prosperous middle class and
-to provincial aristocracies,—<i xml:lang="fr" lang="fr">nouveaux riches</i> families,—which
-gradually came to form the governing class of the
-Empire, migrated to the cities, strode to enlarge them,
-to embellish them, and to make them more comfortable,
-reproducing in every part of the Empire the splendours
-of the urban civilisation after the Greco-Asiatic model
-as perfected by the practical Roman spirit of organisation.
-In every province, the example of the Emperor
-in Rome found imitators. In the first and second centuries,
-every rich family spent part of its possessions on
-the embellishment of the cities, and made provision for
-the common people of profits, comforts, and pleasures:
-they built palaces, villas, theatres, temples, baths, and
-aqueducts. They distributed grain, oil, amusements,
-and money. They endowed public services and assumed
-the rôle of pious founders.</p>
-
-<p>The Empire covered itself with cities great and small,
-rivalling each other in splendour and wealth; and into
-these cities, at the expense of depopulating the countryside
-where nobody was willing any longer to live, it<span class="pagenum" id="Page_81">81</span>
-attracted the peasantry, the village artisans, and the
-yeomanry. In these cities, schools were opened in
-which the youth of the middle class were taught
-eloquence, literature, and philosophy, and trained for
-official posts, the number of which increased from generation
-to generation, and for the liberal professions.
-Thus, in the second century <span class="allsmcap">A.D.</span>, the Empire spread, in
-the sun of the <i xml:lang="la" lang="la">pax Romana</i>, which illumined the world,
-its countless marble-decked cities, as our time spreads,
-in the sun of modern civilisation, the confused and
-smoky opulence of its cities, large and moderate-sized,
-crowded, disordered, a blaze of light by night, bristling
-with chimneys and shrouded in black fog by day. In
-other words, the most important phenomenon in the
-whole history of the Roman Empire, during the first
-two centuries of the Christian era, is, as in the nineteenth
-century, the rapid growth and enrichment of the
-cities.</p>
-
-<p>The phenomenon was not then so rapid nor on so
-large a scale as it is to-day; not a single city in the
-Empire, not even Rome, ever attained, in my opinion,
-a population of one million inhabitants. The cities
-which seemed big in those days would be only of
-moderate size now. Populations and riches were
-smaller. But the phenomenon in itself was the same.</p>
-
-<p>From the third century onwards, the excessive urbanisation
-in the Roman Empire, which had been the
-cause of the splendour and apparent wealth of the
-preceding century, began to change into a dissolving<span class="pagenum" id="Page_82">82</span>
-force, which drove that brilliant world back into the
-chaos from which urbanisation had evolved it. Little
-by little, the expenditure of the urban civilisation, the
-cities and their increasing luxury, out-distanced the
-fertility of the countryside, and, from that moment,
-the latter began to be depopulated and sterilised by the
-cities. With each succeeding generation, the impulse
-towards the cities became stronger. The numbers and
-the requirements of the modern population increased.
-The State and the wealthy classes were inundated with
-requests, prayers, and threats, urging them to satisfy
-these requirements, to adorn and enrich ever more and
-more the cities, which were the glory and splendour of
-the Empire.</p>
-
-<p>In order to feed, amuse, and clothe crowded city-populations;
-to carry through the construction of the
-magnificent monuments whose ruins we still admire;
-to provide work for the industries and arts of the cities,—agriculture
-was, little by little, ground down by ever-increasing
-burdens. The position of the peasant, in the
-solitude of the depopulated countryside, became ever
-more sad and gloomy, just as the cities became fairer,
-bigger, fuller of amusement and festivals. The impulse
-towards the cities increased, and one day the
-Empire awoke to find that its cities were swarming with
-beggars, idlers, vagabonds, masons, plasterers, sculptors,
-painters, dancers, actors, singers—in short, the
-whole tribe of the artisans of pleasure and of luxury.
-But in the fields, which were expected to feed all these<span class="pagenum" id="Page_83">83</span>
-men who had crowded into the cities to work or to idle,
-there was a dearth of peasants to cultivate the land.
-Also, with the disappearance of the rural population,
-the problem of recruiting the army, which drew its
-soldiers then, as always, from the country, became
-increasingly serious. While the cities tricked themselves
-out with magnificent monuments, the Empire
-was threatened with a dearth of bread and of soldiers.</p>
-
-<p>It must be owned that the Empire struggled against
-this menace with desperate vigour. It introduced the
-villeinage of the soil. It tried to bind the peasants to
-the land. It established heredity of trade or calling.
-But the effort was fruitless. Aggravated by one of the
-most tremendous intellectual blunders in the annals of
-history, the crisis became insoluble. The agriculture
-of the Empire, and with it the Empire itself, received
-its death-blow. The East and the West split apart, and,
-left to itself, the West went to pieces. The greatest
-of the works of Rome, the Empire founded by her in
-Europe, including the immense territory bounded by
-the Rhine and the Danube, lay a vast ruin: a ruin of
-shattered monuments, of peoples relapsed into barbarism,
-of perished arts, of forgotten tongues, of laws
-thrown to the four winds, of roads, villages, cities
-razed from the face of the earth, swallowed up in the
-primeval forest which slowly and tenaciously thrust
-out its tentacles, in that cemetery of a past civilisation,
-and entwined the giant bones of Rome!</p>
-
-<p>But the reader will say: “But that is not happening,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_84">84</span>
-and never will happen, to contemporary civilisation.
-Even if it cannot be denied that there is a certain
-analogy between the history of the first two centuries
-of the Empire and that of modern times, the analogy
-stops short at this point. The world will never witness
-another catastrophe like that of the Roman Empire;
-or at any rate, nobody now alive will witness it.”</p>
-
-<p>I heartily concur in this opinion. Modern civilisation
-will resist the ills which assail it better than
-ancient civilisation resisted them. But it will be able
-to do so because it is stronger, not because it does not
-contain within itself the germ of the cancer which
-destroyed the Roman world. Many symptoms prove
-this. I will dilate upon one of them only, the most
-serious, the most salient, the most generally recognised
-and felt, even though few up to the present have seen
-in it an analogy and a resemblance to the great historical
-crisis of the fall of the Roman Empire. I refer
-to the rise in the cost of living.</p>
-
-<p>To-day, Europe and America resound from one end
-to another with a chorus of complaints from men and
-women who have to live in the cities. Rent, bread,
-milk, meat, vegetables, eggs, clothes—everything, in
-short, is rising in price. Even people in the thirties
-can remember having witnessed times of fable, a kind
-of mythical golden age, in which things were worth
-practically nothing compared with their price to-day.
-Governments are besieged with entreaties, threats, and
-prayers to provide supplies, but they do not know how<span class="pagenum" id="Page_85">85</span>
-to do so. What is the cause, what the remedy, of this
-strange phenomenon? Some lay the blame on the
-taxes; some on Protection; some on the merchants and
-speculators.</p>
-
-<p>And indeed, at first sight, the phenomenon seems
-inexplicable. At no period of history was there such
-a determined rush to make money as at the present
-time. No age had at its disposal so many and such
-effective means of making it. The men of to-day are
-obsessed to such an extent by the frenzy for work that
-they no longer have time to live. Statistics tell us in
-exact figures the yearly increase in the production of
-the world. So the earth ought to be wallowing in
-abundance, an abundance such as the world has never
-seen heretofore. How comes it, then, that men everywhere
-complain, and most loudly in the richest countries,
-of the intolerable dearness of everything? What
-is the object, what the effect, of the work of the man of
-to-day, if not abundance but scarcity is the recompense
-of daily toil?</p>
-
-<p>This scarcity is a graver and more complex phenomenon
-than those who most complain of it suppose,
-and is not the fault of government or traders. It is a
-veritable <i xml:lang="fr" lang="fr">recommencement de l’histoire</i>, and the study
-of the Roman Empire can be of the greatest service in
-helping us to understand it. It is the first serious,
-universally felt symptom of that excessive urbanisation
-which was the ruin of ancient Rome. This modern
-society arises from the over-development of the cities,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_86">86</span>
-from the too rapid increase in the needs and luxuries
-of the multitudes who live in the cities. Men and
-money concentrate in the cities, and swell the urban
-industries and luxury, public and private, intent on
-putting into operation all the marvels which the fertile
-modern genius, inspired by competition in the race for
-progress, is continually inventing. The countryside,
-on the other hand, has in the last half-century been
-left too much to itself, and agriculture has been too
-much neglected, exactly as began to be the case in the
-Roman Empire at the beginning of the second century
-of the Christian era. It is easy to guess what must be
-the natural consequence of this lop-sided arrangement.
-The cities grow bigger; industries increase in number
-and in size; the luxury and the needs of the masses,
-crowded together in the cities, augment. On the other
-hand, there is no proportionate increase in the productiveness
-of the land. And so the increase in wealth
-is accompanied by an increasing scarcity of the fruits
-of the earth; and the things which serve to clothe and
-feed us—cotton, linen, hemp, wool, cereals, meat,
-vegetables—nearly all rise in price much more than
-do manufactured goods. This explains the scarcity
-that vexes the cities in proportion to their growth in
-size.</p>
-
-<p>In no country is this phenomenon more apparent and
-interesting than in the United States. Which of the
-nations of the world could more easily revel in the most
-marvellous abundance of everything which it is possible<span class="pagenum" id="Page_87">87</span>
-to conceive? The United States has no lack of territories
-to cultivate; or of capital, which accumulates
-every year in immeasurable quantity; or of strong
-arms, Europe providing her with immigrants in the
-prime of life; or of the spirit of enterprise and of
-untiring energy. And yet, in no country of Europe are
-complaints of the expense of living more generally and
-loudly raised than in the United States. Why? Because
-in America the disproportion between the progress
-of the country and that of the cities, between
-industrial progress and agricultural progress, is even
-greater than in Europe, the home of populations which
-for centuries have been accustomed to a country life.
-Consequently the scarcity is greater and more vexatious
-in the United States, because the wealth of that country
-is greater than that of Europe.</p>
-
-<p>Someone will say: “However that may be, if this
-scarcity which we are experiencing is the most obvious
-symptom of the excessive urbanisation from which our
-civilisation is suffering, the suffering cannot be a very
-serious matter; it must be far from assuming the grave
-and dangerous aspect which it bore in the time of the
-Roman Empire. So in this respect also we can consider
-ourselves lucky; this excessive urbanisation does not
-cause us more than a certain material uneasiness,
-which is felt by the middle and lower classes in the
-cities. In the Roman Empire, on the other hand,
-it produced a historical catastrophe.” All that is true,
-without a doubt, but precisely on this account ought<span class="pagenum" id="Page_88">88</span>
-the lesson, with which the history of the fall of the
-Roman Empire is pregnant, to be read and pondered.</p>
-
-<p>In the Roman Empire, too, for a long time, just as
-now in Europe and America, this excessive urbanisation
-only occasioned a by-no-means intolerable material
-uneasiness to the most numerous and poorest classes of
-town-dweller. In the first and second centuries,—that
-is to say, in the two most prosperous and splendid centuries
-of the Empire,—numerous inscriptions remind us
-of gifts made by rich citizens or precautions taken by
-the cities to meet the scarcity of victuals which pressed
-hard upon the poorer classes. It is scarcely necessary
-to mention Rome in this connection, so notorious is the
-fact. From the day when it became the metropolis of a
-vast Empire, the scarcity of victuals became a permanent
-feature of the city; and the State had to furnish
-the city with the famous <i xml:lang="la" lang="la">frumentationes</i>, which were,
-in the last two centuries of the Republic and throughout
-the Empire, one of Rome’s most serious preoccupations.
-Mistress of a mighty Empire, Rome was for centuries
-sure of being obeyed in the most distant provinces by
-the people that her sword had conquered; but there
-was never a day in the year when she was sure of
-keeping the wolf from the door!</p>
-
-<p>In the Roman Empire also, then, for a long time the
-excessive urbanisation made itself felt in the shape of a
-troublesome, but by no means intolerable, rise in the
-cost of living in the cities. Why did it gradually bring
-about a terrific social dissolution? Because the Roman<span class="pagenum" id="Page_89">89</span>
-Empire, instead of leaving its cities to fight down this
-evil, tried to abolish it by artificial means; and those
-artificial means it applied ever more and more extensively,
-the more serious the evil became. The crisis of
-the cities of the Empire began in the third century,
-which saw the depopulation of the countryside, and the
-diminution of agricultural production, while in the
-cities, on the other hand, victuals were rising in price,
-and the number of beggars was increasing in a most
-alarming way. If the State had allowed this crisis to
-run its natural course, what would have happened?
-Of course things would of themselves have regained
-their equilibrium little by little. Part of the urban
-proletariat, unable to live in the overcrowded cities,
-and seeing themselves condemned to a sort of chronic
-famine and gradual extinction, would have returned
-to work in the fields. When the drain on the population
-of the countryside becomes too great, the evil
-admits of only one remedy: and that is, that life in the
-cities should be allowed to become unbearable to a
-certain number of the citizens, so that they may be
-tempted to exchange it for life and work in the fields.</p>
-
-<p>But the Roman State could not bring itself to let the
-evil follow its natural course. The large cities, beginning
-with Rome, had too great influence with the
-Government; and throughout the Empire the city
-beautiful and rich had come to represent the model of
-civilisation. Little by little, the State let itself be persuaded
-to do for each of its cities what it had done for<span class="pagenum" id="Page_90">90</span>
-Rome ever since its earliest conception of a world-policy
-under the delusion that it could thus stave off
-the impending crisis. With a view to easing the misery
-of the urban proletariat, it took public works in hand
-in every direction, regardless of their utility. It distributed
-victuals free or at half-price. It multiplied
-philanthropic institutions and encouraged the wealthy
-families to imitate and to assist it. But all these
-schemes cost money, which the State could secure only
-by increasing the taxes on agriculture, while the
-wealthy families had to spend in the cities the bulk of
-the wealth which they derived from their country
-property. The result was that life was artificially made
-easier and more comfortable in the cities, and harder
-and more difficult in the country, whereas the natural
-trend of circumstances would have produced the opposite
-effect. The evil, treated in so ridiculous a way,
-became worse. The exodus of the peasants into the
-cities increased, and brought a corresponding increase
-in the demands on the public purse for the amelioration
-of the conditions of city life. The intensification of the
-evil was met by an increase in the dose of the very
-remedy which aggravated it—useless expenditure in
-the cities, ruinous taxes on agriculture. Matters went
-from worse to worse, until the system reached the
-limit of its elasticity, and the whole social fabric collapsed
-in a colossal catastrophe.</p>
-
-<p>This is precisely the mistake which modern civilisation
-must learn to avoid. The catastrophe of the<span class="pagenum" id="Page_91">91</span>
-Roman Empire teaches us moderns one lesson: and
-that is, that the evil from which the great cities of the
-civil world are suffering at present is a salutary, health-giving,
-and beneficent visitation. For it puts a natural
-brake on the growth of cities and of their luxury, and
-keeps the population in the fields, where the rise in
-the price of living brings profit, greater comfort, and
-improved living in its train. It is, in short, the <i xml:lang="la" lang="la">vis
-medicatrix naturæ</i>, which tends to restore the balance
-between agriculture and industry, between the city
-and the country, a balance which the development
-of modern civilisation has upset. Therefore all the
-artificial measures which pretend to mitigate this evil,
-at the very moment when the force of circumstances
-demands that this development shall stop, must be
-pernicious. While they tide over a trifling evil of
-the moment, they lay up for the future troubles and
-difficulties and dangers of infinitely greater gravity.</p>
-
-<p>Even if modern civilisation adopted in its entirety
-the policy pursued by the Roman Empire, and tried to
-eradicate the evil with the same deadly artificial measures
-which only aggravated it, there would still doubtless
-be no ground for fearing a catastrophe in the future
-analogous to that which overwhelmed Greco-Roman
-civilisation. Modern civilisation is too vast, too powerful,
-too deep-rooted, to have any fear of a similar fate.
-But if not destroyed, modern civilisation might be
-profoundly shaken and weakened in the event of its
-imitating the policy of Rome and seeking to favour the<span class="pagenum" id="Page_92">92</span>
-cities overmuch at the expense of the country;—all the
-more shaken and weakened, because, dazzled as we all
-are by the triumphs of the world in which we live, and
-by the surface marks of its powers and grandeur, it is
-much more difficult for us than it was for the ancients
-in a similar case to discern the signs of old age in it,
-and the cracks which are spreading in the edifice in
-which we live.</p>
-
-<p>There is a further lesson to be learned by us moderns
-from the history of the decadence of the Roman Empire:
-and that is, not to mistake the glamour of the
-external manifestations of wealth and power for signs
-of real wealth and power. A civilisation is not always
-in reality richer and stronger in times when it bears
-the most visible marks of so being; we are rather apt to
-find that, when it is most dazzling in outward seeming,
-its decadence has already begun. We often halt in
-stupefaction and admiration before the great ruins of
-ancient Rome, especially those offered by the European
-provinces of the Empire. We think how great, powerful,
-and rich must have been the Empire which could
-rear monuments so massive that all the centuries have
-not been able to sweep them entirely from the face of
-the earth. And yet, if we are to look at these relics in
-their right light, we must remember that practically
-all the great Roman monuments whose remains survive
-to our day on a large scale, belong to the third, fourth,
-and fifth centuries of the Christian era—to the centuries
-of decadence and dissolution. As the Empire weakens<span class="pagenum" id="Page_93">93</span>
-and ages, its monuments become more and more
-elaborate and colossal. A fairly safe rule for guessing
-the century to which Roman monuments belong is to
-assume that the more imposing the ruins, the later is
-the epoch to which they should be attributed.</p>
-
-<p>For Rome herself, the time of the greatest expansion,
-splendour, and population was the middle of the fourth
-century—that is to say, when her decadence was already
-far advanced. Not till then did Rome become, for the
-number and size of her temples, the magnificence of
-her baths, her basilicas, and her private palaces, for the
-beauty of her public gardens, for her size and population,
-the first and most marvellous city of the Empire:
-the portent which evokes the admiration of the whole
-world. How much smaller, on the other hand, how
-much more simple and modest was she in the first
-century, a time when the Empire really was at its most
-flourishing epoch, with its frontiers safe, its population
-on the up-grade, its cities developing themselves by a
-process of growth which was still a perfectly natural
-one, agriculture, trade, and industries in a sound condition,
-and the State well organised and strong.</p>
-
-<p>Nor is this a historical paradox. It is only what
-always happens to a greater or less extent. In families
-as in nations and civilisations, ostentation, display, the
-doing on a grand scale everything, even what might be
-done on a small scale without detriment, or even
-advantageously, are a sign of decadence rather than of
-progress. The passion for the colossal and the enormous<span class="pagenum" id="Page_94">94</span>
-is not a healthy passion, nor does it flourish in epochs
-of strength and sound moral and social equilibrium; it
-is a passion which thrives in epochs of decadence, epochs
-convulsed by a deep-seated disproportion between desires
-and reality, a thirst for excitements and violent
-sensations, lavish in the expenditure of labour and of
-wealth to procure a fallacious illusion of grandeur and
-power, spurred on by a spirit of rivalry and of competition
-which easily degenerates into false pride.</p>
-
-<p>Not the least of the causes contributing to the maintenance
-and increase in the ancient cities of that sumptuousness
-of festivals, ceremonies, and monuments which
-gradually ruined the Roman Empire was the rivalry
-between the big, the medium-sized, and the small cities
-of the Empire, between provinces and districts, between
-classes, families, professions, sects, and religions. When
-a city built a theatre, or baths, or a basilica, at once her
-sister-cities wanted one too, as big or bigger. If a rich
-family built or endowed a temple or baths, the other
-families wished to do the same or more. There was a
-continual competition between the religions to have the
-finest temple or the most sumptuous ceremonial. That
-explains why a little city like Verona, for instance,
-has an enormous amphitheatre, in which the whole
-population of the city could be accommodated several
-times over. That explains why the provinces, the cities
-and private individuals, in this competition of display
-and magnificence, all showered enormous wealth on
-that display, wealth which would have been better<span class="pagenum" id="Page_95">95</span>
-spent in defending the Empire or in preserving its
-economic resources. Many of those remains which
-evoke our admiration to-day meant, in the days when
-they reared their proud bulk to the sky, the ruin of the
-Empire!</p>
-
-<p>And now let us search our own consciences. Can we
-honestly declare that our epoch is untainted by this
-mania for grandeur and display, this spirit of sterile
-public and private rivalry, which caused the ancient
-Roman Empire to squander such vast treasures, and
-cloaked its fatal decadence with a vesture of splendour?
-I cannot suppose that our freedom from such taint
-would be maintained by anyone who remarked the
-headlong growth of public and private luxury, the ever
-swelling vanity of nations, professions, and classes, the
-tendency to mistake in everything the grandeur of
-colossal proportions for the grandeur of intrinsic virtue.
-Whoever casts his eyes around him, in America as well
-as in Europe, sees this impression gaining ground on all
-sides and acquiring force. It fouls the stream of
-politics, religion, literature, philosophy and art. It
-corrupts or transforms the spirit of the upper as well
-as of the lower classes. Not only that, but there is
-a prevailing tendency to consider this impression a
-sign of force, a proof of greatness and of progress. The
-history of Rome admonishes us, then, to distrust this
-illusion, and to sound the spirit of our civilisation to its
-deepest depths—that spirit which to us seems a limpid
-mirror of perfection, while it is really very much the<span class="pagenum" id="Page_96">96</span>
-opposite. If, after twenty centuries of work and study,
-we find ourselves, fortunate heirs of an ancient civilisation,
-in a position to live more safely and more comfortably
-than did our ancestors on this little globe, we
-are not, therefore, justified in altering the moral values
-and virtues to suit our pleasures. The vices, the faults,
-the depraved inclinations of twenty centuries ago remain
-the same to-day and modern civilisation would be
-guilty of the gravest of errors if, deaf to the great lesson
-preached by the ruins of Rome, she boasted of those
-very defects which destroyed in the ancient world one
-of the greatest works of human brain and energy that
-history has to offer.</p>
-
-<hr />
-
-<div id="toclink_97" class="chapter">
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_97">97</span></p>
-
-<h2 class="nobreak" id="II-V">V<br />
-
-<span class="subhead">UPS AND DOWNS</span></h2>
-</div>
-
-<p class="drop-cap"><span class="smcap1">We</span> are always talking about progress. But does
-“progress” mean only the multiplication of
-wealth and of the power and speed of machines, in
-other words, of our mastery over nature? This would be
-a rash assertion. “Progress” implies further improvement
-of, and increase in, the virtues, and the diminution
-of the vices inherent in human nature. Now, can anyone
-who knows the history of ancient civilisation, the
-life, the customs, the ideas, and the moral outlook of the
-Greeks and Romans, say that we have become better
-than they? And if he can say so, how much better have
-we become? Have we become better in every department
-of life, or are there some things in which we show
-a falling-off?</p>
-
-<p>There can be no doubt that we are braver than the
-ancients. Our control of fire has obliged us to be continually
-making calls upon our bravery. The formidable
-machines which we set in motion; the explosives
-which we use so largely; the murderous forces of nature,
-like electricity, which we have brought into subservience;<span class="pagenum" id="Page_98">98</span>
-the thousand dangerous exploits on the sea, in the
-bowels of the earth, and in the giddy heights of the air
-in which thousands, nay millions, of engineers and
-workmen daily risk their lives, have steeled our
-temperaments to quell that blind and instinctive fear
-which lies deep down in human nature.</p>
-
-<p>War is the supreme test of this increased courage.
-War has become rarer, it is true, than it was in the
-ancient world; but how much more terrible and awe-inspiring
-has it become, both by land and by sea, since
-fire replaced steel as the principal weapon! The only
-forms of fire known to the ancients as useful in war
-were boiling oil, which was often used in sieges, and
-the so-called Greek fire, which was employed in naval
-battles—a mysterious compound, into which one suspects,
-petroleum entered, for it was much used by the
-nations and cities of the Black Sea. But both of these
-were but children’s toys compared with the guns,
-shrapnel, and torpedoes of modern warfare. We are
-justified, therefore, in asserting that the men who took
-part in the battles of Marathon, Cannæ, and Zama did
-not need to have hearts so stout or courage so intrepid
-as the men who faced each other in the great battles of
-the Napoleonic era, in the American Civil War, in the
-battles between the Russians and Japanese, or in the
-recent Balkan War.</p>
-
-<p>But if we are more courageous, we are at the same
-time less cruel, a fact which throws our superior courage
-into greater relief. One of the characteristic differences<span class="pagenum" id="Page_99">99</span>
-between contemporary civilisation and those which
-preceded it, up to the French Revolution, is the total
-suppression of the bloody spectacles which, under so
-many aspects and forms, were one of the most sinister
-delights of our ancestors. We find the greatest difficulty
-in understanding how so highly civilised a people as the
-Romans, with so many thoughts and feelings in common
-with ourselves, could have been roused to such a
-pitch of intoxication by the games of gladiators and
-the baiting of wild beasts. And yet the popular passion
-for these bloody games was such that even the emperors,
-in whom they inspired feelings of horror and repulsion,
-like Augustus, were compelled to attend the gory
-spectacles, so as not to appear, by their absence, to
-rebuke those who supported them and to run counter
-to the absorbing passion of the masses for them.</p>
-
-<p>On the other hand, if an ancient Roman came back
-to the world, and saw an American stadium packed with
-people from top to bottom, he would be not a little
-puzzled to explain what could have induced so many
-thousands of persons to have flocked together from afar
-merely to watch a football match,—to collect in such
-crowds, endure such a long journey, and such discomfort,
-just to get a distant view of some youths kicking
-their legs in the air! It would seem to them a truly
-insipid and tiresome spectacle. Their tastes ran to a
-gory struggle, reminiscent of war, to fights between men
-and animals, blood in bucketfuls.</p>
-
-<p>Christianity initiated that education of men’s feelings<span class="pagenum" id="Page_100">100</span>
-which has made us gradually turn away our eyes
-in horror from these atrocious diversions. But how
-slow and difficult this education has been! It can safely
-be said not to have reached its climax until after the
-Revolution. Only the nineteenth century, intent on
-mitigating and humanising the penal law in every
-direction, has finally succeeded in abolishing the last
-of these cruel spectacles, capital punishment. Right
-up to the end of the eighteenth century, condemned
-prisoners were executed throughout Europe with much
-pomp and in the full light of day, in the central squares
-of the cities, at times and places at which everybody
-could attend, as if at a public festival. Indeed, executions
-were invariably attended by an immense public,
-attracted by cruel curiosity to see a man going to his
-death. By diminishing the number of death sentences,
-and by executing culprits in prison yards in the presence
-of a handful of witnesses, or, as is still done in France,
-in public, but at dawn, with the public kept at as great
-a distance as possible, the nineteenth century has put
-the crown on one of the most far-reaching and wonderful
-moral transformations of the human mind, a
-transformation which owes its birth to the words of
-Christ uttered twenty centuries ago, and has given
-modern civilisation one notable reason for boasting
-itself superior to the ancient.</p>
-
-<p>But if we are more courageous and more humane, we
-are, on the other hand, in no way more sober or more
-temperate. As far as these virtues are concerned, the<span class="pagenum" id="Page_101">101</span>
-ancient world cuts a much better figure in history than
-does the modern. We have deteriorated. The modern
-world eats and drinks to excess. It indulges to excess
-in alcoholic drinks and stimulants. The only intoxicating
-drinks known to the ancients were wine and beer,
-and wine they always drank mixed with water. They
-did not know alcohol, nor consequently, liqueurs, now
-so numerous and so highly appreciated; they did not
-know tea, coffee, or tobacco. We can assert positively
-that drunkenness was the rarest of vices in the ancient
-world, while frugality was the commonest of virtues.
-We need not take too seriously those orgies of the
-wealthy to which ancient writers—especially Latin
-writers—so often allude, or the banquets at which
-dishes of parrots’ tongues were served, or pearls dissolved
-in vinegar were drunk. These stories bear a
-strong family likeness to the legends current in Europe
-about “the corrupt state of American society,” and
-are due to the same tendency. They are the exaggerated
-and violent reaction of an ancient puritanism
-against the natural advances of luxury and against that
-kind of moral slackening which always accompanies
-the increase of wealth. Just as the dispassionate and
-unprejudiced European, when he examines at close-quarters
-the so-called “corrupt state of American
-society,” readily recognises that the high-sounding
-expression only indicates certain defects and weaknesses
-which certainly are reprehensible, but which are
-common to the whole of modern civilisation and not<span class="pagenum" id="Page_102">102</span>
-peculiar to America, so the famous Roman orgies and
-the banquets, which have made so much stir, would
-seem to us, if a miracle allowed us to attend them, very
-modest and unassuming affairs compared to our
-ostentatious displays.</p>
-
-<p>As far, then, as sobriety and temperance are concerned,
-we cannot confront our ancestors with too
-haughty a mien. And what shall we say about the
-purity of our customs? That is a much more difficult
-problem, perhaps an absolutely insoluble one. At
-least I, for my part, do not feel myself competent to
-solve it. To judge from Greco-Latin literature and art,
-one would say that in the ancient world, with the
-exception of a few countries and certain epochs, such
-as the centuries during which Rome was controlled by
-a puritan aristocracy, the customs of both men and
-women were very free and easy. But literature and
-art often afford untrustworthy evidence on which to
-base a judgment as to the customs of an epoch. For
-vice, wrong, and crime, though they may shock the
-moral sense, are more interesting subjects for art than
-are virtue and honesty. In short, literature and art
-always seek to describe what is rare, exceptional, and
-dramatic. Therefore, if we wish to judge the moral
-state of an epoch from its literature and art, we must
-know how far and in what degree the faults and vices
-described or chosen for artistic representation are common,
-what is the rule, and how many are the exceptions.
-And how are we to find this out? We shall have to<span class="pagenum" id="Page_103">103</span>
-know the moral state of the epoch, and literature will
-not help us to this knowledge.</p>
-
-<p>Anybody who judged Paris from the novels or dramas
-which deal with Parisian life would be forced to conclude
-that the French metropolis spends the whole of
-its time in amorous adventures. But anyone who
-<em>knows</em> Paris is aware, what is after all an <i xml:lang="la" lang="la">a priori</i> supposition,
-that love occupies in its life a very much less
-prominent place than in its literature; and that the
-writers of dramas and novels go to love for their subject
-by preference, because love admits of more attractive
-treatment than do struggles for money or the
-rivalries of political ambitions and the crosses of the
-intellectual life. For the rest, when we wish to judge
-the customs of an epoch or of a people, we must not
-forget that it is not always the epochs or the nations
-which lament most loudly the depravity of customs
-that are the most corrupt. Far from it! Often the
-epochs which bewail their own vices most bitterly
-are those in which the moral conscience is still lively
-and robust and, therefore, protests against the evil.
-The epochs which are dumb, and seem most virtuous,
-have often reached such a pitch of depravity, that they
-have become indifferent to the evil.</p>
-
-<p>A striking instance of this curious phenomenon is to
-be found in the history of Rome. Horrible stories are
-told of the first period of the Empire,—extending from
-Augustus to Nero,—during which the family of the Julio-Claudii
-were at the helm of the State. History and<span class="pagenum" id="Page_104">104</span>
-literature are full of scandals, and of laments over the
-depravity of the times. In the second period, on the
-other hand,—that of the Flavii and Antonines,—the
-scandals and protests cease. The depravity of the
-preceding century seems suddenly to have mysteriously
-disappeared. The Roman world has, by a kind of
-miraculous conversion, in a few years turned virtuous.
-In fact, not a few historians have thought that this
-miracle did come about, and have credited it to the
-virtuous emperors of the second century. After so
-many bad emperors, Rome at last got some good ones;
-and the trick was done! But anybody who studies the
-facts with a little patience will have no hesitation in
-concluding that the times of the Antonines were at
-least as corrupt as those of the Julio-Claudii; but that,
-while in the first century of the Christian era the ancient
-Puritan spirit of Rome was still alive and vigorous,
-and therefore protested against the deterioration of
-customs with such energy that its protests have reached
-even to our ears, in the epoch of the Antonines, on the
-other hand, this spirit was spent. Consequently,
-everybody resigned himself to the evil, either despairing
-of being able to cure it, or not giving it a thought.
-And so, of the two epochs, that which was painted in
-the blacker colours was, perhaps, really the better.</p>
-
-<p>It is impossible, then, to decide whether our customs
-are better or worse than those of the ancients. It is
-certain, on the other hand, that we are much more
-human than they. For with us, a sentiment, which with<span class="pagenum" id="Page_105">105</span>
-the ancients was very weak, if not non-existent, is lively
-and profound, the sentiment of the moral equality of
-every individual. The ancients simply refused to recognise
-in the slave and in the free man, in the nobleman
-and in the plebeian, in the citizen and in the foreigner,
-human creatures made of the same clay and animated
-by the same spirit, whom the mysterious accidents of
-fortune had placed in different situations, and all of
-whom had certain sacred and inviolable rights in the
-supreme domain of justice. A few philosophers dared
-just to hint at such doctrines, but without laying too
-much stress upon them. And theirs were voices crying
-in the wilderness. The free man, the patrician, and the
-citizen felt themselves creatures of another species and
-of a higher nature than slaves, plebeians, and foreigners,
-towards whom the former group might have capricious
-bursts of benevolence, but to whom they never regarded
-themselves as bound by any obligation. Hence came
-that asperity which appears in all the social relations of
-ancient peoples,—in their laws, their customs, their
-wars, their political quarrels,—and which often seems
-to us in so striking a contrast with the lofty and noble
-culture which adorned the ancient states.</p>
-
-<p>Augustus, for instance, was a grave, well-balanced,
-and prudent man, who avoided all extremes. Yet the
-ancient writers tell us to his credit that he had amongst
-his numerous freedmen several men of the loftiest
-intellect, of wide knowledge, and of transparent honesty,
-who had rendered him great services; but that, though<span class="pagenum" id="Page_106">106</span>
-he held them in great honour, he never invited any of
-them to his table. Such an act of familiarity between
-freedmen and patricians would have seemed to the
-ancients derogatory, and so they praised Augustus for
-having avoided it. To us, on the other hand, this attitude
-of reserve on the part of the great Emperor seems
-strange and incomprehensible, as it would seem on the
-part of a great and wealthy manufacturer who was
-ashamed to dine with the heads of departments of his
-business.</p>
-
-<p>On the other hand, the difference between rich and
-poor was much less marked in the ancient world than it
-is in the modern. This is, perhaps, the most striking
-and important of the lines of cleavage between the
-world of antiquity and that of to-day. The idea of the
-moral equality of men, who are all sons of God, which
-was disseminated by Christianity; the idea of political
-and social equality, which was promulgated by the
-French Revolution, have in modern civilisation cut at
-the roots of the ancient distinctions of class, of religion,
-and even to a certain extent of nationality. But modern
-society is organising itself, in compensation, into
-a hierarchy of wealth. Men may consider themselves
-in theory all equal to one another; but each tries to
-associate with those persons who have approximately
-the same means as he, because it is they who are able to
-have the same habits as he has. Precisely because the
-modern world is so rich and so luxurious, the modes of
-living among the richest, the rich, and the moderately<span class="pagenum" id="Page_107">107</span>
-well-to-do classes show striking differences. And what
-is true of the modes of living is also true of tastes and
-inclinations. Everybody realises nowadays that differences
-or resemblances in habits, tastes, and inclinations
-are what most attract and repel men and influence
-them in treating each other as equals or unequals, when
-custom and tradition have established no other moral
-difference between them. The motor-car is as powerful
-a barrier between the social classes of to-day as was
-aristocratic prejudice before the Revolution.</p>
-
-<p>In ancient times, on the other hand, precisely because
-the world was then so much poorer and simpler, the
-difference in the mode of living between poor and rich
-was much smaller. Both lived in closer contact, treating
-each other really as equals, provided always that
-they were of the same rank socially and politically.
-Augustus, who could not have freedmen, however
-enlightened, to dinner, invited poor, but free-born,
-plebeians. A rich Roman would never have entertained
-a freedman in his house or at his table, or treated him as
-an equal, even if the latter had been as rich as, or richer
-than, himself. On the other hand, he welcomed and
-treated as an equal a citizen free-born like himself,
-however miserable and reduced to living on his bounty.</p>
-
-<p>If, therefore, the ancient conception of the social
-relations was less humane and less generous than ours,
-it was not wanting in a certain moral grandeur that is
-wanting to ours, inasmuch as in estimating a man, it
-subordinated his wealth to ideal qualities, such as free<span class="pagenum" id="Page_108">108</span>
-birth, or good birth, or citizenship. So it maintained in
-society certain moral values which were not to be
-bought with money. The poorest of Roman citizens
-was conscious and proud of possessing something of
-inestimable value, which the richest and most opulent
-of Roman freedmen could not acquire for all his
-wealth; and this sentiment was a very real alleviation
-of, and compensation for, his poverty. Dare we assert
-that in this respect our social system does not fall short
-of the ancient one? Such an assertion would be, in my
-opinion, a very bold one. The gravest weakness in
-modern society consists precisely in this continual increase
-of the power of money, as an all-regulating force
-and universal standard. If the social evolution which
-we are witnessing continues on the path on which it has
-started, in a short time there will be nothing in life
-worth having which is not purchasable for money; and
-then what means will there be left of bridling the greed
-and envy of the poor?</p>
-
-<p>But this superiority of ancient society was in its
-turn the effect of a different conception of wealth, of
-its rights, its duties, and its objects. It is an exaggeration
-to credit the ancients with a simplicity and a contempt
-for riches, qualities which serve as a strange
-contrast with the greed and the insatiable thirst for gold
-which possess the moderns. In ancient times, it is
-true, men preached moderation in desires and taught
-the art of being contented with but little, with greater
-zeal and success than it is taught in modern times.<span class="pagenum" id="Page_109">109</span>
-Nevertheless, the men of those days, with but few exceptions,
-were not less greedy than we, and not less apt to
-consider wealth as the greatest of life’s blessings. Those
-who could, accumulated large private fortunes with the
-same frenzy and the same insatiate greed that inflame
-so many speculators and business men of the present
-day; and many of those who were content to live the
-simple life were converts to this noble and lofty philosophy
-from necessity rather than from conviction. The
-wealth of the ancient world was infinitely smaller than
-that of the modern world. Consequently a large number
-of persons had to be content to live the simple life.
-On this account the religions and the philosophers
-invented many theories and doctrines to prove that
-simplicity and parsimony were more desirable than
-opulence and luxury. That is the reason for the
-numberless theories regarding austerity that antiquity
-invented.</p>
-
-<p>But though the ancients desired riches as much as we
-do, they were not infatuated by the desire to multiply
-them to the same extent as the moderns. In this
-respect, the ancients may truly be said to have been
-more austere and disinterested than we. And the
-difference between their thoughts and feelings on the
-subject and our own is seen most strikingly in one
-fundamental principle, which is, as it were, the keystone
-of the whole fabric of ideas and sentiments which
-concern riches; I mean, the question of putting money
-out at interest. To modern society it seems the most<span class="pagenum" id="Page_110">110</span>
-natural thing in the world that money should earn
-interest. Nowadays, the number of those who lend or
-invest capital in the countless ways offered by modern
-finance is infinite. Every one of these big and little
-capitalists, who possess State bonds, shares in railways
-or industrials, or bank or commercial securities, would
-be thunderstruck if anyone told him that he was behaving
-in an unseemly way. Matters have reached a
-point at which the distinction between investment and
-usury is fading from our minds. And yet numberless
-generations, and not a few of the most brilliant civilisations
-in history, professed the idea that any business of
-that sort was unbecoming. The ancients as a rule, with
-but few casual exceptions, judged it unfitting for a man
-of the respectable classes to earn money in any other
-way than either from land and houses—realty—or from
-direct participation in commerce and the arts; never
-from money lent at interest to others. That was
-usury; and was considered nearly always, with but few
-exceptions of time and place, as the exercise of a degrading
-profession. Wealthy men, with large sums of
-money at their disposal, were able, and were expected, to
-help those who needed money; but with gratuitous,
-not with interest-bearing loans. The letters of Cicero,
-for instance, are full of references to these gratuitous
-loans, for which the great orator, when short of money,
-often asked his friends. When he was in funds, he lent
-to those who were in need. In short, the lending of
-money without interest to upright and honourable persons<span class="pagenum" id="Page_111">111</span>
-was considered in those days a duty of the rich.</p>
-
-<p>Of course, ideas like these about money and interest
-were bound to retard the development of the ancient
-world and the increase of wealth. But they were ideas
-which kept alive in men’s minds a certain noble disinterestedness
-of which it would be difficult to find
-traces to-day, and which makes amends for many of
-the asperities of ancient civilisation.</p>
-
-<p>Considering, then, the separate virtues one by one,
-we find that in some we have progressed, in others we
-have not. Therefore, in certain respects we are better
-than the ancients, in others we are worse. Must we
-conclude that the good and the evil balance each other,
-and that, therefore, there has been no real moral progress
-from the ancient world to the modern? That
-would be, in my opinion, a very bold assertion. It is,
-in fact, undeniable that our moral life is richer in principles
-than that of the ancients, because we have retained
-many of the ancient principles, and have added
-to them the moral principles which were invented by the
-civilisations which flourished after the fall of the Roman
-Empire. We appreciate the virtues of patriotism, civic
-affection, and valour in war which were proper to the
-ancient cities. To them we add the sense of legality
-and right, the need for precise and prompt justice,
-which were invented by the ancient jurists and perfected
-by the moderns. We add charity, mercy, love
-of our neighbour, horror of cruel amusements, virtues
-which Christ taught us. We add the sentiment of the<span class="pagenum" id="Page_112">112</span>
-dignity and the rights of man, which was created by the
-philosophy of the eighteenth century and by the French
-Revolution. We add certain other brand-new sentiments,
-the creation of the civilisation of machinery,
-which are, therefore, stronger in America than in
-Europe: ardour for the new, enthusiasm for progress,
-confidence in our own strength. In war, we fight like
-the Romans, and in peace, we turn our eyes away from
-bloody spectacles. We should hold the gladiatorial
-games in no whit less horror than the most pious of
-Christian monks. We trade like the Phœnicians and
-we love knowledge like the Greeks. We appreciate
-liberty and we appreciate authority. Does not all this
-constitute real progress? And does it not suffice to
-counterbalance certain other defects of ours, such as
-intemperance and the immoderate desire for riches?</p>
-
-<p>I think so. But that does not mean that we are at
-liberty to abandon ourselves freely to our vices and
-defects, under the pretext that they are compensated
-for by other virtues. It is the duty of every civilisation,
-as of every man, to make himself as perfect as possible.
-And this duty we must not forget, not even in the midst
-of the immeasurable triumphs of the richest, most
-powerful, and wisest civilisation that has ever yet seen
-the light of day.</p>
-
-<hr />
-
-<div class="chapter">
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_113">113</span></p>
-
-<h2 class="nobreak part" id="Part_III"><span class="smcap">Part III</span><br />
-
-<span class="subhead"><span class="smcap">Europe and America</span></span></h2>
-</div>
-
-<hr />
-
-<div id="toclink_115" class="chapter">
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_115">115</span></p>
-<h2 class="nobreak" id="III-I">I<br />
-
-<span class="subhead">THE AMERICAN DEFINITION OF PROGRESS</span></h2>
-</div>
-
-<p class="drop-cap"><span class="smcap1">The</span> two visits I paid to South and North America
-between 1907 and 1909 were the result of a lucky
-chance, not of a prearranged plan. In 1906, after having
-been plunged for ten years in the study of Roman
-history, I had no idea of crossing the Atlantic, much less
-of writing a book on America and Europe. I had never
-dreamt that my long researches in the great cemetery
-of the ancient world might start me suddenly one day
-along the road which leads to the New World. But
-destiny willed it so. In November of 1906, by invitation
-of the Collège de France, I delivered in Paris a
-course of lectures on the history of Augustus, in which
-I summarised the fourth and fifth volumes of my
-<i>Greatness and Decline of Rome</i>. There happened to be
-at Paris at that time a distinguished Argentine, Señor
-Emilio Mitré, son of that General Mitré who was one
-of the Republic’s most conspicuous politicians during
-the second half of the nineteenth century. He himself
-was a man of importance in the political world, and
-proprietor of the <i xml:lang="es" lang="es">Nacion</i>, which is not only the biggest,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_116">116</span>
-most serious, and most authoritative newspaper in
-Latin America, but one of the leading newspapers of the
-world. I had contributed to this paper for years, so I
-called on Mitré in Paris. He came to hear my lectures,
-and the day before the concluding one, November
-29th,—he was due to sail for Buenos Aires on December
-1st,—he came to me with a proposal that I should go to
-Argentina and there deliver some lectures. I accepted,
-impelled chiefly by curiosity to see that vast and rich
-country which, for the last ten years, had been so much
-talked about in Italy, and to which during the last half-century
-so many Italians had emigrated. I accordingly
-prepared my lectures, and on June 7, 1907, I sailed from
-Genoa for Buenos Aires with my wife and little boy.
-Every European who crosses the Atlantic and can wield
-his pen with any sort of effect writes his impressions
-when he gets back. Naturally, therefore, I too had
-promised several reviews and one publisher to bring
-back with me a volume of “Impressions of Argentina.”</p>
-
-<p>At six <span class="allsmcap">P.M.</span> on June 8th, we put in to Barcelona.
-Directly the steamer came alongside, the Brazilian
-consul came on board in search of me. He handed me
-a despatch from Baron di Rio Branco, the Brazilian
-Minister of Foreign affairs, who invited me in the name
-of the Brazilian Academy to stop at Rio, and read a
-paper there. I begged the consul to telegraph to Baron
-di Rio Branco that I could not stop on my voyage out,
-as I was expected at Buenos Aires; but that on my
-return I should be delighted to accept his kind invitation.<span class="pagenum" id="Page_117">117</span>
-As the steamer was to put in at Rio, I could
-arrange matters with him <i xml:lang="fr" lang="fr">en route</i>. As the steamer
-resumed her journey, and passed out of the Mediterranean
-into the vast wilderness of the ocean, I busied
-myself with some books of philosophy which I had
-brought along, amongst them, some of Buddha’s discourses,
-which had just been published in an Italian translation.</p>
-
-<p>On June 24th, at 5 <span class="allsmcap">P.M.</span>, we reached the bay of Rio,
-one of the most marvellous spots in the world. But
-while we were gazing from the deck in admiration at
-the gloomy mountains standing round about and the
-woods which covered them, at the city rising from the
-sea towards the mountains, and the roseate glow of
-the setting sun upon the bay, we descried a steam launch
-laden with people coming towards us. It was a deputation
-from the Brazilian Academy and from the Ministry
-of Foreign Affairs, which was coming to take us for a
-motor tour through the city, and afterwards to take
-us to dinner at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, where
-Baron di Rio Branco was expecting us. We hastened
-ashore, and found some motors waiting for us at the
-Pharoux jetty. We jumped in, and were off.</p>
-
-<p>As long as life lasts, I shall never forget that drive
-at sunset, between the dying light of evening and the
-first gleams of the electric lamps, which were just beginning
-to light up the marvellous city built in the
-midst of the remains of the primeval forest on the
-borders of the sea, on the hills, and on the mountains.<span class="pagenum" id="Page_118">118</span>
-I shall never forget our dash through endless streets,
-with hurried glimpses of multi-coloured houses, sumptuous
-palaces half hidden in superb gardens, avenues of
-gigantic palms which stretched far away into the
-night, glorious promenades along the seashore, and
-mountain peaks which beetled above the city. I
-longed to stop the car. But time pressed, and after
-having hurriedly traversed the whole city, we reached,
-about 7.30 <span class="allsmcap">P.M.</span>, Itamaraty (as the palace of the
-Ministry of Foreign Affairs is called), where a select
-company of men and women were awaiting us in rooms
-ablaze with light. As soon as we had been introduced,
-dinner was served; a most sumptuous dinner, into
-which, among the most luscious ragoûts of the French
-cuisine, the thoughtful Minister of Foreign Affairs had
-introduced several Brazilian dishes. I remember the
-<i xml:lang="pt" lang="pt">palmiti</i>, a dish of palm-pith, cooked as we cook asparagus,
-and really delicious; and <i>bakury</i>, a white fruit from
-the equator, preserved in syrup, which reminded me
-strongly of the smell of magnolia and gave me the
-illusion of eating marvellous flowers.</p>
-
-<p>Speeches followed the dinner, whereupon we returned
-on shipboard, but before doing so I had arranged
-in a corner of the drawing-room with Baron di Rio
-Branco, Giuseppe Graça Aranha, now Brazilian Minister
-at the Hague, and a distinguished writer, who was
-then the Minister’s secretary, and Machado de Assis,
-the great writer who was then President of the Brazilian
-Academy, that I would stop a couple of months in<span class="pagenum" id="Page_119">119</span>
-Brazil on my way back, repeat my Buenos Aires
-lectures, and visit the country. At 11 <span class="allsmcap">P.M.</span>, the steamer
-weighed anchor and left the dark bay, in which there
-was nothing now to be seen but the glitter of an infinite
-number of tiny lights.</p>
-
-<p>That night, however, I did not sleep, so stunned and
-dazzled was I by that first fantastic glimpse of America,
-which will remain one of the most singular experiences
-of my life, though, so far, my life has not been devoid
-of strange and curious chances. I had started from
-Europe with no, or practically no, knowledge of the
-two Americas, excepting the little I had picked up here
-and there in books and papers which I happened to
-read. Consequently, my opinion of America was the
-same as that formed by other Europeans: that it was
-the country of material realities, of business, of fortunes
-made rapidly, of wealth stripped of every ornament,
-poetry, beauty, and ideal refinement; that rude and
-bustling America with which all cultured Europeans love
-to contrast Europe as the continent of the Ideal, where
-beauty, wisdom, and every refinement of civil life
-flourish. And behold! my first impression of America
-was as of a strip of India, and the first American city
-I had seen reminded me of the East, and especially,
-for some reason or other, of Bagdad, or rather, of the
-somewhat fantastic idea of Bagdad which I had conceived
-in the days when I read more often and more
-ardently than I do now, the <i>Orientales</i> of Victor Hugo,
-and the other romantic poets of the middle of the<span class="pagenum" id="Page_120">120</span>
-nineteenth century. And in that city, I had been present
-at a succulent and magnificent banquet, at which,
-amidst the refinements of the old civilisation of Europe,
-I had tasted the unknown rarities of the tropics, in the
-company of elegant, cultured, and refined guests, with
-whom I had discussed in French the latest literary and
-artistic novelties, as if we had been on the banks of the
-Seine. Was it a reality or a dream?</p>
-
-<p>Quite other surprises were, however, in store for me
-on my wanderings in America. Four days later, on
-June 27th, we reached Buenos Aires, where we were
-joyfully welcomed by a number of kind folk, who had
-spared neither trouble nor care to make our stay agreeable
-to us. Then began four months of really strenuous
-life, to borrow Theodore Roosevelt’s favourite expression.
-Conferences, receptions, banquets, visits to hospitals,
-schools, factories, workshops, and ranches; trips
-by boat, train, and motor-car. It was a real <i xml:lang="pt" lang="pt">moto
-perpetuo</i>. I passed the month of July at Buenos Aires.
-In August, I plunged into the interior, visiting successively
-Rosario, Mendoza, Cordova, Tucuman, Santiago,
-dell ’Estero, Santa Fé, Paraná, and penetrating right
-up to the foot of the Andes. I travelled about ten
-thousand kilometres in the railway train, observing,
-collecting documents, asking and answering questions,
-and discussing problems. All these, however, were
-labours less tiring than another, which became by degrees
-the principal preoccupation of my mind during
-those two months: the endeavour to put to flight a<span class="pagenum" id="Page_121">121</span>
-demon which kept obstinately springing up before my
-eyes, in conversations, on journeys, during visits, during
-dinner-parties, notwithstanding all the efforts I
-made to keep it at a distance; and which seemed determined
-to reappear at every moment and wound me in
-the inmost recesses of my European pride and in my
-most touchy European susceptibilities. What was this
-demon? It was American progress. Every day I had
-pointed out to me on my rapid journeys, immense and
-marvellous ranches, herds of many thousand head,
-markets overflowing with wealth, magnificent schools,
-and superb hospitals. I was given descriptions and
-demonstrations, in figures and in fact, of the rapid
-spread of cultivation, the increase of production, the
-bewildering prosperity of the banks, the expansion of
-Buenos Aires, now become the second city of the Latin
-world in wealth and population, after Paris. They were
-all interesting things to observe and study. Nevertheless,
-too many of those who showed them to me implicitly
-or explicitly established comparisons between
-this rapid increase and transformation in everything
-Argentine, and the more deliberate advance of the
-great nations of Europe, and deduced the conclusion
-that Argentina was a more progressive and advanced
-country.</p>
-
-<p>The word “progress” is one of those which is much
-misused in Europe. I had no sooner landed in Argentina,
-however, than I recognised that the word had
-quite a different sound and significance on that side<span class="pagenum" id="Page_122">122</span>
-of the water from what it has in Europe. The standard
-by which my new transatlantic friends were unanimous
-in measuring progress was the rapidity of transformation
-and the magnitude of the results. New, modern,
-larger, were to them synonyms of progress and of
-improvement. Consequently, they had only to cast
-their eyes round their own country to find reasons for
-self-satisfaction. But this conception of progress at
-first somewhat amused and somewhat irritated me,
-just as the naïve touches of vanity in the young often
-amuse and irritate grown men. Many a time, when
-we were discussing the progress of Argentina and the
-comparisons, tacit or explicit, which were made with
-Europe, have I said to my Argentine friends:</p>
-
-<p>“Undoubtedly the effort which you are making is a
-noble one, and a paying one. In thirty years, you have
-increased your wealth ten-, twenty-, even thirty-fold.
-You have been wonderfully quick in extending cultivation,
-railways, and population over the vast territory
-which Fortune has given you. You are now flooding
-the world with riches, and, profiting by the experience
-of others, you can transform, reshape, and make perfect
-your public services, your institutions, and your whole
-mode of living in the smallest number of years.</p>
-
-<p>“You make a great mistake, however, if you think
-that the contrast between the rapidity of your growth
-and your changes and the slowness and immutability
-of Europe is any proof of your own nearer approach to
-perfection. That rapidity is a phenomenon of youth.<span class="pagenum" id="Page_123">123</span>
-A child’s weight and height double themselves every
-six months, year, two years, or three years in the first
-years of its life; while an adult stops growing or grows
-so slowly as to be hardly aware that he is doing so.
-Would you deduce from this that a boy of six years of
-age is superior to a man of forty? No. Childhood and
-manhood are two phases of life. Each has its own
-necessity, its own function, its own advantages and
-disadvantages. It is no more possible to compare them
-than it is to compare day and night, dawn and twilight,
-winter and summer; I can see no essential difference
-between the countries of Europe and your own. We
-are all children of the same civilisation; we have been
-nursed at the same breast. We are all like one to the
-other, though we may differ one from the other as
-brothers, or, if you prefer it, as cousins do. So an
-American progress, different from European progress,
-does not exist, though there are countries whose
-transformation, owing to external circumstances, may
-be retarded or accelerated. You have political institutions
-and social orders of less antiquity, and, therefore,
-of less rigidity and less strength than those of Europe.
-You also have a territory to exploit which is vaster,
-very much vaster, and much more easy to exploit,
-because civilisation supplies you, ready to hand, with
-almost perfect instruments for such exploitation. There
-you have the real difference between us.”</p>
-
-<p>Though these arguments were listened to with
-courteous attention, they made but a slight impression<span class="pagenum" id="Page_124">124</span>
-on my hearers. I very soon realised that American progress,
-the rapid increase, that is to say, of the wealth of
-Argentina and the incessant modernisation of the customs
-and institutions of the country, were a sort of
-national religion, which was accepted by most people
-with a blind credence. So in the end, I was persuaded
-that this ardent faith in progress must be attributed
-to the preponderating influence of Buenos Aires, that
-immense city, almost half the population of which is
-composed of European immigrants in search of wealth.
-For it is the largest port, the principal emporium, and
-the financial centre of the Republic, through which
-passes most of the export and import trade, nearly all
-the great stream of wealth which flows out from the
-vast territory over the world, and from the world
-ebbs back to it again: a rich American city, after the
-European picture of such. It is only natural that a city
-whose wealth and size are being multiplied by the
-rapid development of the country should have adopted
-American progress as its religion, and should, through
-its influence, have imposed that religion on the whole
-country. The conclusion of the matter was, however,
-that the Argentine conception of progress was not and
-could not be anything but the passing exaltation of a
-fortunate country which, profiting by circumstances
-unusually favourable, could watch its wealth growing
-round it with bewildering rapidity. That, at any rate,
-was the conclusion I came to, and I thought it both
-reasonable and justifiable.</p>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_125">125</span></p>
-
-<p>With this idea in my head, after a laborious, agreeable,
-and instructive stay of two months in Argentina, I
-sailed for Rio, making on my way thither a brief halt at
-Montevideo. I expected to find in Rio another American
-city like Buenos Aires. I was, however, mistaken.
-Brazil is not, like Argentina, a single body with one
-enormous head. Its economic activity is more diffuse
-and centres in different cities,—for coffee, in São
-Paulo; for rubber, in Manaos; for each one of the other
-great articles of production, in other cities scattered
-over the vast territory. Rio de Janeiro, though the
-chief political and intellectual centre of the Confederation,
-cannot, therefore, be called either the emporium
-or the port, or the economic capital <i xml:lang="fr" lang="fr">par excellence</i>.
-Consequently, it differs widely from Buenos Aires. It
-is less crowded, noisy, and busy. It lives, I might almost
-say, in the shade of its gardens and between the
-forest and the sea, quietly and reposedly. It is the
-only great American city I have visited in which people
-walk at a leisurely pace and not at headlong speed;
-and it not only lives reposedly, but it thinks, and even
-dreams a little.</p>
-
-<p>While at Buenos Aires, we had lived surrounded by
-men of action; we found at Rio a coterie composed
-almost exclusively of intellectuals—literary men, journalists,
-historians, philosophers, and jurists. Most of
-them were state officials and members of the Brazilian
-Academy,—an academy founded about ten years ago
-and modelled exactly on the lines of the Académie<span class="pagenum" id="Page_126">126</span>
-Française,—composed, like it, of forty members, elected
-in the same way, and admitted with the same ceremonial.
-In a small inn situated on the slopes of Corcovado,
-on the outskirts of the town and the forest, whose
-roads were shaded by secular trees, we lived for six
-weeks, just as Plato and his friends lived in the gardens
-of the Academy; discussing art, literature, philosophy,
-right, and morality with the friends whom Graça
-Aranha, the diplomatist and man of letters chosen by
-Baron di Rio Branco to do us the honours of Brazil,
-gathered round us almost daily. At no moment of my
-life have I felt myself so much detached from, and so
-superior to, the accustomed preoccupations which form
-the groundwork of ordinary existence in the modern
-world. And when I found myself living amongst persons
-for whom the culture of Europe represented the
-supreme blessing of life, the greatest pride of civilisation,
-for a moment I believed myself freed from that
-demon of American progress which had dogged me in
-Argentina.</p>
-
-<p>It was an illusion, however, which did not last long.
-Brazil is a country slightly older than Argentina.
-Owing to this reason, to its much greater size, to the
-variety of its climates and lands, which make it impossible
-to concentrate in a single city the direction of
-the whole of national life, and to other contingent
-reasons which it would take too long to enumerate here,
-Brazil has not developed in the last twenty years so
-rapidly as has Argentina. It has, however, developed<span class="pagenum" id="Page_127">127</span>
-much more quickly than any European country. I
-speedily saw that the rapidity of this progress was the
-great national pride of the Brazilians, even of those
-men of letters, philosophers, and writers, who professed
-to be such devoted disciples and admirers of Europe.
-In the same way the great national preoccupation was
-the acceleration, as far as possible, of the progress and
-increase of riches, and the exploiting and modernisation
-of the country, so that Brazil might not appear inferior
-in this particular to the other great states of America.
-An energetic administration had just finished the resanitation
-of Rio de Janeiro, destroying, at the cost of
-vast public works, all the breeding-places of yellow
-fever which up till then had infested it. The administration
-was then renovating it from top to bottom,
-opening streets and squares in the middle of the old
-quarters, constructing spacious promenades and gardens,
-and sumptuous public edifices, in a word, giving
-air and light and splendour and beauty to a city which
-was already beautiful in addition to being placed in
-a unique situation. I think there must be very few
-cities which in a few years have managed to destroy
-and rebuild, according to new plans, so large a part of
-themselves. Naturally the work has cost millions;
-but on the few occasions on which I timidly dared to
-make a remark to this effect, I received the laughing
-answer: “We are optimists; and we believe in progress!”
-This ædilitian transformation of Rio de Janeiro filled
-with pride all Brazilians, including my lettered and<span class="pagenum" id="Page_128">128</span>
-philosophical friends, on account of its rapidity and
-grandeur; and their pride was swelled by the thought
-that no European states, but perhaps the United States
-of North America alone, their great elder brother, could
-have done so much.</p>
-
-<p>Everybody thought, moreover, that the whole of
-Brazil ought to be modernised just like Rio, from top
-to bottom. I visited São Paulo, the great coffee-producing
-state. I traversed from end to end Minas
-Gerães, the great agricultural and mineral state which,
-as a symbol, as it were, of its intention to modernise
-itself entirely, has recently constructed a smiling and
-graceful new capitol, Bello Horizonte, in a most picturesque
-position crowning the hoary Ouro Preto.
-Everywhere I found politicians, officials, professors,
-literary men, commercial men, bankers, Brazilian and
-European immigrants, united in the same thought:
-that railways must be built, machinery bought, able
-engineers engaged, mines explored, cultivation extended,
-and industries founded to increase the
-country’s rate of progress by modernising it entirely.
-It was useless for me to try to prove even to those of
-my Rio acquaintances who were endowed with the
-highest and finest intellectual culture, that this
-conception of progress was too simple and material;
-that real progress is not to make new or to make
-quickly, but to make better; that it is not enough
-to augment wealth, but that it is necessary also
-to put it to good use, a more difficult problem than<span class="pagenum" id="Page_129">129</span>
-the producing of it. I tried to convince my friends that
-if so simple and material a notion of progress acquired
-a strong hold on the popular mind, the public would
-infallibly be impelled to create, not a lofty and noble
-civilisation, but a sort of opulent barbarism. In Brazil,
-as much as in Argentina, my arguments beat harmlessly
-against a faith and a passion which demands no proofs.
-“American Progress” for the Brazilians too was the
-great historical force of the future, which is going to
-create the new world, and the new civilisation whose
-dim foreshadowing seems to be agitating the masses
-at the present time.</p>
-
-<p>We returned to Italy in November. I recrossed the
-ocean from Rio de Janeiro to Genoa in fifteen days,
-during which I reread my books of philosophy. But
-the pages of Bergson, Kant, and Comte, which I read
-in mid-ocean, no longer riveted my attention as they
-had on the way out. For in the time for thought
-afforded me by the crossing, far from the world and its
-troubles, I plunged day by day in a more intense meditation
-on American progress, which, of all the things
-and phenomena I had witnessed, was that which had
-left on me the liveliest impressions. It was clear that
-it was not a theoretical idea, but a passion, a faith, a
-religion fervently embraced by nearly everybody. All
-the arguments which I had advanced to subject it to
-criticism had been fruitless; and not only ignorant men,
-and those eager to make money, but the most highly
-cultivated minds, the very intellectual élite of America,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_130">130</span>
-were blind to the contradictions and logical shortcomings
-of this conception. Nevertheless, was not this
-but an additional reason for studying this phenomenon
-thoroughly? It is not ideas which move and transform
-the world, but passions; and a passion, even if it be
-absurd, is a thousand times more powerful than a wise
-idea.</p>
-
-<p>Now it was not difficult to see what would happen if
-this religion of American progress spread through the
-world. Europe would lose, so to speak, her rights of
-historical primogeniture, and all her ancient civilisation
-would lose a great part of its value. If the rapid
-increase of riches is the supreme measure of civilisation,
-and if, in consequence, the efforts of a people must
-be concentrated on everything which can accelerate
-this increase, it is clear that the most ancient, populous,
-and glorious countries of Europe will not be able to
-keep pace with the young countries and with the
-nations which are masters of vast territories; and that,
-bit by bit, the most glorious civilisations of Europe will
-come to be regarded by the eyes of the rising generations
-as relics and fossils of another age. This danger
-no longer appeared to me so distant and hypothetical
-as to many other Europeans. After what I had seen
-in America, many facts and thoughts and tendencies
-to which I had hitherto paid scarcely any attention in
-Europe, seemed to me to acquire a new significance.
-I saw everywhere, even in the ancient world, traces and
-proofs of the rapid spread of the American idea of<span class="pagenum" id="Page_131">131</span>
-progress, especially among the nations like Germany,
-which have developed industry to a great, perhaps a
-too great, extent; and in all the countries, classes, and
-professions which have identified their interests most
-completely with those of industry. So the enemy who
-threatened the destruction of the ancient civilisation of
-Europe had already invaded the Old World.</p>
-
-<p>It was while I was meditating on these thoughts in
-mid-ocean that the idea occurred to me of writing
-something different from a book of impressions on
-Argentina and Brazil. Too many books of impressions
-of the two Americas are written in Europe; and literature
-of this sort, as copious as it is useless, has justly
-satiated the public. Inasmuch as this idea of progress
-implies a great conflict of tendencies, from which may
-arise a profound upheaval of our civilisation, why
-should I not contrast in a book the two conceptions of
-progress, that which America has created and is trying
-to impose on the world, and that which is even now
-professed in Europe by the classes most faithful to
-tradition, and which they ought to seek to defend? If
-I succeeded in giving a vivid representation of this
-conflict, should I not have described a living part of
-America better than if I had merely accumulated
-thousands of detached impressions and observations?
-And so the idea flashed across my mind of writing a
-dialogue introducing some Europeans and Americans
-who on board a steamer in mid-ocean discussed Europe
-and America, that is to say, progress, in the sense<span class="pagenum" id="Page_132">132</span>
-proper to the word as well as in the sense given to it
-by the Americans. Is not the dialogue an ancient and
-glorious literary form? It is true that for many reasons
-it has lately been neglected, one particular reason being,
-that in modern life, busy and exhausting as it is, it is
-difficult to find a scene which will give verisimilitude
-to a conversation lasting several days. Modern civilisation
-is a civilisation of much action and little discussion.
-However, there is still one scene left in modern life on
-which one can stage with artistic verisimilitude a discussion
-lasting several days: a transatlantic liner. A
-liner is perhaps the only spot in the modern world
-where one may find discussion holding the field.
-Usually discussions on board ship deal with frivolous
-and empty topics. Why might not a writer suppose,
-however, that for once in a way, four or five serious-minded
-persons met on board a liner and began a
-casual talk which later developed into a discussion
-of one of the gravest of the problems which oppress
-our own generation, no less than every one of its
-predecessors?</p>
-
-<p>Among the persons whose acquaintance I had made
-during the voyage, some appeared to me to lend themselves
-to the rôle of interlocutor in the dialogue. So,
-directly I got back, I began to sketch out my dialogue.
-It was then that I experienced a curious phenomenon.
-With every fresh attempt I made to embody in certain
-characteristic personages the American idea of progress,
-as I had observed it in so many of my friends on that<span class="pagenum" id="Page_133">133</span>
-side, and the European idea, as I had many times
-defended it, both ideas seemed to me to evaporate,
-and to lose consistency and colour. That conflict of
-tendencies, ideas, and passions which had seemed to me
-so lively and so profound in my meditations in mid-ocean
-appeared to have melted away after I had
-touched the soil of old Europe. The dialogue which I
-was writing seemed to me cold, dead, and academic.</p>
-
-<p>I was torn in two directions by these difficulties, uncertain
-whether to abandon the enterprise, and asking
-myself whether American progress had not been a
-passing hallucination of the voyage; when towards the
-middle of February, 1908, I received from North
-America a new surprise of a still greater and more
-agreeable nature, in the shape of a letter from Baron
-Eduardo Mayor de Planches, at that time Italian
-Ambassador at Washington, in which he told me that
-President Roosevelt at his last diplomatic reception
-had expressed to him his wish to see me in the United
-States, and to have me as his guest for a few days at
-the White House before his presidential term ended.
-At any time, so courteous an invitation from a man for
-whose culture, intellect, and statesmanlike qualities I
-had so great an admiration, would have given me much
-pleasure. My joy was much increased, however, by
-the fact of its having arrived two months after my
-return from South America. A visit to the United
-States directly after one to South America was a rare
-stroke of luck. For, to tell the truth, in visiting Brazil<span class="pagenum" id="Page_134">134</span>
-and Argentina, I had seen only a fragment of the New
-World. But to come to know that great New-World
-State which by itself personifies America in the eyes of
-all, and to come to know the two largest states of South
-America into the bargain, was equivalent to saying
-that I had studied at least what was most important,
-characteristic, and deserving of study in the boundless
-continent which Columbus discovered. All the curiosity
-to which the rumours and legends current in
-Europe about the United States had given birth in me,
-and which was dominant in the recesses of my mind,
-awoke to life. I forgot the problem of progress, the
-doubts which tormented me, and the problems which
-I had posed to myself on my travels in Argentina, as
-well as the dialogue I intended to write, in my preparation
-for my fresh journey and for the lectures in Roman
-history which I was scheduled to give at the Lowell
-Institute, at Columbia University, and at the University
-of Chicago. I set to work to read as many books
-as I could about North America. I resumed the mantle
-of Roman historian to prepare my course of lectures
-and gave no further thought to the book on America
-which I had promised to write.</p>
-
-<p>On November 1, 1908, I sailed for New York, and a
-three months’ course of the intense life began again for
-me; rapid journeys, incessant visits, interviews with
-journalists, hundreds of conversations, banquets, receptions,
-speeches, and inquiries. I visited schools, hospitals,
-universities, prisons, law-courts, factories, banks,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_135">135</span>
-and co-operative enterprises. I made the acquaintance
-of millionaires and artisans, industrialists and professors,
-lawyers and journalists. I managed to get a
-peep into the wealthy abodes of the rich families of the
-great cities of the East, and into the little houses in
-which the middle classes drag out a crowded and
-pinched existence. I witnessed the frenzy for work,
-the incessant activity, the unending agitation which
-wears out every class in America. Most important of
-all, however, I saw reappear before me—and this time
-in gigantic form, monstrous, unrestrained, almost sublime
-in its savage energy—that demon of American
-progress which had impressed me so much in Brazil
-and Argentina, comparatively small though it had
-there appeared to me, and which in Europe seemed to
-me to have almost melted away. Was it not this which
-imbued everything American with that startling air of
-novelty, extravagance, and grandeur, which stunned
-and almost frightened me? So I devoted myself not
-only to the accumulation of impressions, informations,
-and recollections in profusion; I also set to work in
-the tumult of American life to think again about
-American progress. I made an effort to dive deeper
-down into the nature of this strange phenomenon, to
-guard against its melting away from before me when I
-got back to Europe. And at last, one day, I really
-thought I had found the clue.</p>
-
-<p>My wife and I had been invited to luncheon with a
-cultured and clever author, who knew three languages,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_136">136</span>
-had received an extensive and liberal education,
-and lived by her pen, writing for newspapers, translating,
-and giving lessons. She belonged, in fact, to what
-one might call the intellectual middle class. She lived
-with a sister in a street of old New York, occupying a
-little flat of the kind in which many middle-class New
-Yorkers live. One reached it by a little wooden staircase,
-and entered it by a little door, opening on to a
-little corridor, which gave access to four tiny rooms,
-whose floors creaked under foot and whose walls let the
-voices and noises of the neighbours and co-lodgers be
-clearly heard. Outside the windows and extending to
-the court-yard, the fire-escapes reminded one that the
-house, partly constructed of wood, might at any moment
-catch fire like a match. Naturally there were no
-servants in the house. With her sister’s help the
-charming author, when she returned home, laid
-down the pen and became cook and chambermaid.
-The luncheon, considered from an artistic point of
-view, gave us clearly to understand, that the hands
-which had prepared it did not possess any very considerable
-technical skill. That did not prevent us,
-however, from enjoying ourselves mightily, so interesting
-and pleasant was the company.</p>
-
-<p>Now, while I was eating my luncheon, and looking
-round me, I thought that America must certainly be
-much wealthier than the wealthiest of European countries.
-A woman as richly endowed with intellect and
-culture as my kind hostess, who lived by her pen in<span class="pagenum" id="Page_137">137</span>
-Paris, Rome, or London, would certainly earn less than
-she. And yet the foreign woman could live in better
-style, keep a servant to relieve her of the most troublesome
-and humble of her domestic duties, live in a large
-and less inflammable house, and have fresher and
-better prepared food to eat. If she married a man of
-her own station, she could more easily and with less
-stint, bring into the world, rear, and educate a family.</p>
-
-<p>From my hostess, I passed on to think of all the
-other persons of the same station in life, of those
-middle classes which are everywhere the support and
-foundation of democratic institutions and the great
-reserve of energy of modern civilisation. In New York,
-Boston, and Philadelphia, the great cities of the East,
-I had seen several families belonging to this class. I
-had even been the recipient of their confidences and
-complaints. At that moment, I realised clearly how
-much more difficult and laborious, owing to the greater
-cost of food and lodging, the extreme difficulty of finding
-servants, and the enormous expense of rearing, and
-still more of educating, children must be the life
-of those middle classes in the great cities of the United
-States than in the great cities of Europe. Like my
-hostess, a business clerk, a humble employé, or an
-artisan in the most select industries, though he gains less
-in Paris or in London than in New York, can live much
-better in the former towns. He can eat better, lodge
-more comfortably, employ someone to help in the household,
-and rear his family without excessive drudgery.</p>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_138">138</span></p>
-
-<p>Then I asked myself: “But what is the use of wealth,
-then, if it is not a means of living better, of securing
-some extra ease, comfort, or pleasure? What is the
-reason for this startling paradox, of riches turning
-from a blessing into a torment? How comes it that
-America, which has shown such energy in the exploitation
-of the immense wealth hidden in her boundless
-territory, has not followed up her conquests by converting
-these riches to the benefit of the whole population?
-How is it that, in this fortunate country, it is
-these middle classes who suffer most who yet have an
-influence on the Government such as they have in no
-European country? Why can we find in poorer
-countries individuals and classes who are happier
-because they are better satisfied with their condition?”</p>
-
-<p>It was by reflecting on this problem that I at last
-arrived at a comprehension of the real nature of
-American progress, and that I finally lighted on the
-subject, the frame, and the key of the dialogue over
-which I had so long worried. How and in what way, I
-shall recount in the following chapter.</p>
-
-<hr />
-
-<div id="toclink_139" class="chapter">
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_139">139</span></p>
-
-<h2 class="nobreak" id="III-II">II<br />
-
-<span class="subhead">FACTS AND MOTIVES IN THE MODERN WORLD</span></h2>
-</div>
-
-<p class="drop-cap al"><span class="smcap1">Like</span> every other European, I had gone to North
-America with the fixed idea that it was the
-country of the practical spirit <i xml:lang="fr" lang="fr">par excellence</i>, and that
-the Americans were all men who did not lose themselves
-in dreams, but lived in reality, intent on shaping
-it to their own ends, and acquiring by the most rapid
-means the tangible and sure blessings of life—riches,
-prosperity, power, and the mastery over nature. I
-was convinced that they knew better than anyone else
-the art of increasing the comforts, and diminishing the
-difficulties, of life by the intelligent use of the means
-furnished by nature, fortune, and preceding generations.
-I expected, therefore, to find in America, many facts
-and few ideas; an intelligent and vigorous egoism
-omnipresent; scanty traces of idealism, and but little
-faith in the transcendent principles which so often lead
-dreamers—individuals and nations—to toil and fight
-for fair but unreal chimeras, in the vain hope of distant
-glory or grandeur.</p>
-
-<p>So my first surprise, and a very great one it was,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_140">140</span>
-arose from my examination at close quarters, of the
-policy pursued by the United States in dealing with the
-immense herds of immigrants, who yearly pour into
-their harbours from all parts of the Old World. In
-South America, I had closely observed the cautious
-prudence and really practical sagacity with which the
-republics try to prevent the continual immigration of
-foreigners from disturbing too profoundly the political
-balance of the State, by reserving the government to
-small oligarchies born and educated in the country,
-and therefore capable of directing public affairs with
-a certain continuity of projects and of national spirit.
-This policy of the South American republics is, I know,
-severely criticised in Europe, and especially in Italy,
-by too many persons who judge the affairs of the New
-World by the standard of the ideas of the Old. But to
-a historian of Rome, like myself, to whom history has
-taught the great internal difficulties which were caused
-in every ancient state by the μέτοιχοι or <i xml:lang="la" lang="la">peregrini</i>,
-this policy seemed practical and reasonable, at least
-if it be granted that the principal task of every state
-is that of solving in the best possible way the problems
-of the hour and leaving to the future its own problems.</p>
-
-<p>To grant every year citizenship in a new state to a
-great number of men born and educated in distant
-lands, who come stuffed with ideas and tendencies,
-opinions which correspond in no wise with the utterly
-different situation they find in the new country; to give
-them political rights which they do not want or give a<span class="pagenum" id="Page_141">141</span>
-thought to; to make them, almost by force, the pillars
-of a political constitution which they generally do not
-understand; to hope to transform them in a flash from
-subjects of ancient European monarchies into citizens
-of young American republics—is not all this to do
-violence to the practical ideas of government, and to
-multiply the already great difficulties among which
-every representative régime works, without any compensating
-advantage, not even that of planting the
-immigrants firmly in the new country? The vast
-multitudes which are to-day crossing from Europe to
-America no longer go, as they did once, in search of
-liberty beyond the ocean. They go in search of higher
-salaries, an easier and larger existence, and greater
-probability of bettering themselves. To open to the
-children of immigrants on the same terms as to home-born
-children the high schools, the professions, and the
-public offices—in short, all the roads by which the son
-of a peasant or artisan can climb to the higher <i xml:lang="fr" lang="fr">bourgeoisie</i>—is
-a surer means of planting firmly in the country
-the crowds carried to America on the wave of emigration
-than the concession to them of electoral rights.
-And that is just what the states of South America,
-with their practical spirit, have done and are doing.</p>
-
-<p>With these impressions and opinions, I arrived from
-South America in the America which symbolises in the
-eyes of the world the practical spirit. And in this
-America, to my no small surprise, I found the opposite
-policy to this in actual operation, with all the effects<span class="pagenum" id="Page_142">142</span>
-which I imagined must follow it; in particular, the
-growing difficulty of making democratic institutions
-work smoothly, with an electoral body so swollen, so
-enormous, and so varied and heterogeneous. I often
-had occasion, when speaking or writing in the United
-States, to remember that the cosmopolitan electoral
-body which is the base of the democracy of the United
-States recalls that of Rome, where the freedmen—the
-immigrants of the time—became citizens, and were
-inscribed in the electoral lists, whatever their national
-origin, and even if they were all foreigners, barbarians
-some of them, uncivilised the rest. Nevertheless, there
-is between the United States and Ancient Rome one
-essential difference; and that is, that in the Roman
-Republic, the electoral operations were concentrated in
-the capital, so that the number of persons who took part
-in them, the really active electoral body, was extremely
-small; while in the United States, the electors are
-numbered by millions, and are scattered over a continent.
-Do not most of the difficulties and inconveniences
-of which I have heard America complain in
-connection with its internal politics arise from the
-enormous size of the electoral body and from its
-heterogeneity? For both of these are unique phenomena
-in the history of the world, as until now every
-democracy has governed small, and often the tiniest
-of, states. So this experiment, which America is making,
-without being compelled to do so by any historical
-necessity, is a new and bold one, the final result of<span class="pagenum" id="Page_143">143</span>
-which it is difficult to foretell. As a matter of fact,
-the ancient national oligarchies, which governed North
-America, for so many years after it had gained its
-independence, did not open the doors of the constitution
-to the immigrant multitudes who threatened, if
-admitted, to swamp them. It would have been easy to
-keep at least the first Europe-born generation out of
-politics, because—as I have already said—the greater
-number of immigrants arrive in America without the
-vaguest idea, much less ambition, of obtaining what,
-in a democracy, are the political rights of a citizen,
-and only want big salaries.</p>
-
-<p>How, then, has the United States come to this
-pass? Certainly historical accidents have contributed
-to set the Union in this direction. Historical accidents
-would, however, not have sufficed, if they had not been
-helped by that conception of democracy, not practical
-but mystical, so to speak, which I have found obtains
-among so many Americans. The rights of the people
-are not in America a political doctrine, to be employed
-by the nation and its governors in compassing certain
-ends of general utility, and to be applied only in the
-measure and with the limitations and qualifications
-which make it fruitful of good results and prevent it
-from giving rise to inconveniences. It is a transcendent
-principle, an article of faith, as it were, to be applied
-and developed without too much regard to the immediate
-consequences, which must be endured with
-patience if they are for the moment unpleasant or<span class="pagenum" id="Page_144">144</span>
-dangerous, in the conviction that the principle, being
-just and true, must finally produce beneficial effects.</p>
-
-<p>So, little by little, I was led to ask myself whether
-by chance, in politics at any rate, the South Americans
-and the Europeans were not more practical than the
-North Americans, and whether the North Americans,
-on the other hand, were not great idealists; at least, if
-by the practical spirit is understood the art of solving
-present difficulties by the quickest and simplest devices
-with only an immediately realisable benefit in
-view, instead of multiplying difficulties with future
-benefits in view or for love of an idea or a principle.
-The amazement and uncertainty caused by this preliminary
-survey of the very foundations of the American
-constitution were increased, however, by my
-subsequent observation of the numberless philanthropic
-works, educational institutions, intellectual, political,
-or social foundations which owe their existence to the
-inexhaustible generosity of the American upper classes.
-For though Europeans may think that every American
-thinks only of making money, a few weeks of travel
-and of observation were enough to convince me that
-America is quite as richly, perhaps more richly endowed
-than Europe with wealthy men whose only
-thought it is to spend their money for the good of their
-fellows, for the progress of the nation, in a word, for
-objects of public utility.</p>
-
-<p>However, though American philanthropic works may
-equal and often exceed those of Europe in number and<span class="pagenum" id="Page_145">145</span>
-in value, I have often had occasion to notice one
-difference between those of the two continents: and
-that is, that the American works are not unusually
-inspired by a more intense, I might almost say a more
-ingenuous faith in the power of man over the miseries
-and difficulties of life. The American often addresses
-himself with fervour, energy, and great intellectual and
-pecuniary effort to the eradication of ills which the
-European regards as incurable and irresponsive to
-treatment. And this American faith in the power to
-rectify, revive, and purify nature often struck me, no
-less than many other Europeans, as fringing on the
-chimerical. In short, even in what are called social
-works, the American often seemed to me more idealist,
-more of a dreamer, and less practical than the European;
-more ready, that is to say, to venture on a struggle
-against the innumerable ills of life without being quite
-sure of possessing adequate means for conquering them,
-at the summons of a mystical faith in the progress of
-the world.</p>
-
-<p>As the result of all my observations, I kept asking
-myself whether by chance the United States, notwithstanding
-their great practical activity, might not be a
-much more mystical, idealistic, and visionary people
-than the European gives them credit for. But I did
-not dare answer the question with a resolute Yes or No.
-I could not answer No, because that would have involved
-ignoring facts which were daily obtruding themselves
-on my notice. On the other hand, I dared not<span class="pagenum" id="Page_146">146</span>
-answer Yes, because I was afraid of being accused of
-excessive fondness for paradoxes, and of wishing to do
-violence to current opinions at every opportunity and
-at all costs. So I went groping around for a truth
-which so far I conjectured rather than saw.</p>
-
-<p>I had reached this point in my reflections and observations
-when I was invited to luncheon by our
-friend the author and journalist whom I have mentioned
-in the preceding chapter. When I saw her
-home and mode of life, I could not help asking myself:
-For what reason is the general standard of wealth
-higher, while that of living is no higher, in America than
-in Europe? Why are dwellings in the great American
-cities so small, the distances so great, the communications
-so difficult, provisions so dear, that notwithstanding
-the vast riches of the country, life is for the
-masses and the middle classes more expensive and
-difficult than in many much less wealthy cities of
-Europe? The primary answer was not difficult: Because
-the cities have become too big and populous,
-because their growth has been too rapid in comparison
-with the progress of agriculture, and because a section
-at least of their inhabitants has contracted too expensive
-habits and is accustomed to a life of too great
-luxury. This primary answer, however, gave rise to a
-second question: Why have the cities grown so rapidly,
-and with the cities the luxury of every class? This too
-was easily explained: Because of the rapid development
-of industries. America is a vast continent of great<span class="pagenum" id="Page_147">147</span>
-natural wealth, where capital accumulates rapidly.
-Owing to her ability to accumulate capital readily, and
-to find work for the numberless hands which the overcrowded
-districts of Europe have been supplying for
-the last hundred years to those American countries
-which have need of them, America has been able, not
-only to extend her agriculture rapidly and to exploit her
-mines, but also, and in particular, to multiply her
-industries to the point of packing her larger cities with
-so dense a crowd of inhabitants that life has become
-difficult for the majority of the town populations.</p>
-
-<p>At this point, however, one conclusion seemed to
-emerge from the preceding observations. Suppose
-North America, instead of employing all the capital
-at her disposal in her many industries, as well as the
-capital borrowed from European countries poorer than
-herself, had done as France is doing in Europe, namely,
-had invested part of her capital in foreign countries, in
-loans to governments, cities, railways, industries,
-trades, and agricultural enterprises, what would have
-happened? The demand for labour would doubtless
-have been less in America, and therefore the emigration
-to it would not have been so startling. Her industries
-would have developed less, and her cities would not
-have increased so rapidly. The United States would
-now have a smaller population to support, and one
-better distributed between the cities and the country;
-would have fewer cities, and those smaller. The band
-of fortunates who have made huge wealth out of the<span class="pagenum" id="Page_148">148</span>
-rapid and prodigious development of the cities would
-be smaller, but the middle and lower classes would
-enjoy a more comfortable and easier existence. Their
-condition would resemble much more closely that of
-the middle and lower classes in Europe. They would
-earn lower wages, but those wages, though numerically
-less, would procure them greater comforts and pleasures.</p>
-
-<p>It was now that, after my many discussions with
-others, and my extended solitary meditation on the
-difficult problem, I thought that I had finally confuted
-the troublesome doctrine of American progress. What
-is that progress of which the Americans are so proud
-but the unbridled rush of enterprise which has so
-rapidly multiplied the industries, enlarged the cities,
-and increased the population and wealth of the United
-States? But in that case it was clear that American
-progress contradicted itself. By inciting the American
-people to gather together capital and workers, to open
-their gates to millions of European emigrants, to invest
-their gains in new enterprises or in the enlargement of
-old enterprises, to redouble and multiply in every
-direction efforts and enterprises, so as to form of them
-a mountain with which to scale the heavens, the spirit
-of progress had created in America an opulence which
-teemed with difficulties, contradictions, and embarrassments,
-and which meant for a large part of the population
-a condition somewhat resembling that of King
-Midas: seeing riches all round him, and not being able
-to enjoy them. But to produce riches with no prospect<span class="pagenum" id="Page_149">149</span>
-of enjoying them is an absurdity. Much wiser, therefore,
-was old Europe, which, taught by the experience
-of centuries, refused to let herself be dazzled by this
-idea of progress, and instead of heaping up riches at
-top speed as does the New World, was more careful in
-her choice of new riches to create so that she might
-enjoy them; so that she might make of them a fount
-of well-being, not a cause of difficulty for mankind.</p>
-
-<p>This was the moment at which I was inclined to
-think that all the ideas of America and the optimistic
-spirit which animates them, beginning with the idea of
-progress, could only be a passing ebullition and the
-merry madness of youth. This nation, I said to myself,
-favoured as it is at the moment by unusual facilities
-for the creation of wealth, has been so much carried
-away by its success as to make of riches, which are and
-can be only a means, an end in themselves. A longer
-experience of history will convince America of its
-mistake. One day, however, as I was again pondering
-intently over the facts I had observed, which seemed
-to prove that the Americans were often dreamers,
-idealists, almost mystics in matters in which the Europeans
-show themselves eminently practical, an idea
-flashed across my mind. What if American progress,
-which to me had seemed up to then to be but a youthful
-madness, should prove, if thoroughly analysed, to be
-only an idealistic and semi-mystical conception of
-wealth itself? What if this nation, accused of desiring
-only the immediate possession of worldly goods, was<span class="pagenum" id="Page_150">150</span>
-wearing itself out in an unbridled and diabolical activity
-from dawn till sundown, not with the object of
-increasing its happiness and pleasure, but for a distant
-end, transcending the egoism and even the consciousness
-of the individual? What if all, without knowing it,
-or impelled as it were by a superior, if not directly
-mystical force, were labouring and even suffering for
-this end—a new end, to which history can show us no
-parallel; the conquest of an immense continent from
-one sea to the other, by means of a new instrument
-unknown to our forefathers: steam- or electricity-driven
-machinery?</p>
-
-<div class="tb">* * * * *</div>
-
-<p>From progress, from the democratic and philanthropic
-ideality of the Americans, from the economic
-difficulties with which our kind hostess had to wrestle,
-to machinery and to the conquest of the great territory
-of the United States, may seem a risky, violent, and
-unexpected transition or transitions. As a matter of
-fact, I could not have executed so bold a transition
-unaided. I was helped by my wife, in an indirect, but,
-for that very reason, strange and decisive way. In
-fact, without her help I should not have succeeded in
-finding my bearings in the chaos of my American experiences,
-nor in understanding how and to what extent
-the Old World and the New World are opposed to each
-other; as a result, I could not have written the philosophical
-dialogue on Europe and America, which will
-be published shortly. It seems to me necessary, then,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_151">151</span>
-to recount how this help was given me; and I hope that
-my brief account will not be read without interest.</p>
-
-<p>Several years before we embarked on our journeys
-to the two Americas, my wife had begun a long and
-deep study of modern machinery and of the great
-mechanical industry. Though a daughter of Cesare
-Lombroso, who was a great inventor, she is temperamentally
-inclined to the ancient more than to the new,
-and therefore little disposed by nature to admire the
-gigantic disorder of modern society which other minds
-find so intoxicating. Her innate antipathy to the
-civilisation of steam and electricity had been increased
-a thousandfold by observation of the profound
-perturbation which the great mechanical industry has
-caused in a country of ancient civilisation like Italy,
-densely populated and living on the resources of a
-small territory devoid of great natural riches. But
-when she at last made of machinery an object of
-methodical study, her researches and the evidence she
-had patiently accumulated transformed this antipathy
-into a complex and bold theory, the cardinal idea of
-which I think I can express as follows. Machinery
-produces only apparent wealth and prosperity, because
-instead of diminishing the effort necessary to
-produce the things we need, and therefore their price,
-in reality it increases it. The mechanical industry
-demands immense capital to construct the machines
-and set them going; immense quantities of raw material
-to keep the machinery always busy; the concentration<span class="pagenum" id="Page_152">152</span>
-of the industry in places where combustibles or the
-motive forces abound; consequently an enormous development
-in the means of communication, for the
-exchange of products and raw materials, and a dense
-population accustomed to produce and consume as
-much as possible. Therefore, the civilisation of steam- or
-electricity-driven machines cannot develop without
-rapidly exhausting nature, so to speak—mines, or
-forests, or the fertility of the soil. That explains why it
-flourishes chiefly in vast and naturally wealthy territories,
-which it rapidly exploits and impoverishes.
-Indeed, it explains why it is always seeking for new,
-rich territories, seeking to penetrate unexplored continents,
-like Africa, as soon as it has conquered America.
-Nor is it difficult to understand why nations which live
-in countries of limited natural resources get more harm
-than good, and often become involved in vexatious
-crises, from the introduction of mechanical civilisation.
-It is clear, too, how that civilisation must result in
-making life ever more and more expensive, and therefore
-forcing men to despoil the earth and to work ever
-harder, without ever attaining to satisfaction.</p>
-
-<p>These ideas were the subject of long and lively discussions
-between my wife, her father, and myself.
-These discussions, as was natural with discussions arising
-out of a doctrine which was maturing in the mind of a
-patient seeker after truth, were, so to speak, eccentric;
-they revolved now round one point, now round another.
-Nevertheless, the central point round which they ultimately<span class="pagenum" id="Page_153">153</span>
-revolved was this: whether the wealth for which
-man has to thank machinery is real or apparent. I
-said that, since machinery produces much and at great
-speed, there seemed to me no room for doubt that it
-increased the sum of benefits at man’s disposal, and
-therefore enriched the world. My wife replied that if
-machinery produces much, it also consumes enormously,
-more indeed than it produces, so that a mechanical
-civilisation must always feel itself tormented by the
-necessity of having more than it possesses, and, therefore,
-must be always in a state of indigence. So the
-discussions went on, lively and long, without either
-of the parties convincing the other; and at last I came
-to the conclusion that our <i xml:lang="fr" lang="fr">amour propre</i> must be making
-us persist in the sophistical discussion of an unreal
-question.</p>
-
-<p>When I got to America, however, I saw that the
-question we were discussing was anything but unreal;
-for it was these ideas and discussions which enabled me
-to collate our friend’s economic difficulties with the
-mystical spirit which pervades so large a part of
-American life, and to understand the nature of American
-progress. Were not the economic difficulties encountered
-especially in the big cities, notwithstanding
-the immense wealth of the country, by the most
-numerous classes of America, the decisive proof that
-really, as my wife asserted, the wealth created by a
-mechanical civilisation is to some extent only apparent?
-That notwithstanding the great depredation of nature<span class="pagenum" id="Page_154">154</span>
-carried out with means furnished by science, men’s
-needs increase faster than their riches; therefore that
-mechanical civilisation revolves in the vicious circle
-of an insoluble contradiction? All the same, if America
-had set herself with less eagerness to exploit by means
-of machinery her immense natural resources; if she had
-not welcomed so many millions of men from all parts
-of the world; if she had not invested in machinery and
-industries and railways such a vast amount of capital,
-without a doubt we should find a smaller number of
-people living, and living more comfortably, in America
-to-day; but the conquest of the vast continent would
-not have reached its present pitch, and the world
-would not have witnessed that unparalleled event in its
-history, the bewildering development of the United
-States.</p>
-
-<p>In fact, we must not forget, if we wish to realise what
-a miracle the civilisation of machinery has succeeded
-in accomplishing in the New World, how slow and
-difficult was the expansion of mankind over the world
-up to the end of the eighteenth century, that is,
-during a period when men worked with their hands and
-travelled over their planet on their own legs, or on
-those of animals little swifter than themselves. The
-great plains acted as so many great barriers in the
-way of men’s occupation of the land, because men lost
-their way in them. Consequently men tended to
-settle on little tracts of land, in such a way as to be
-near one another, to be able to communicate easily<span class="pagenum" id="Page_155">155</span>
-with one another, and to exchange their products.
-Everybody knows how slow has been in Europe the
-advance of civilisation from south to north; how many
-centuries were required for the passage of the Alps and
-expansion into Gaul, how many for the crossing of the
-Rhine and extension as far as the Elbe, and again for
-the passage of the Elbe and the advance towards the
-Vistula and the great plains of Eastern Europe. In
-America itself—in the South as well as in the North—up
-to the end of the eighteenth century, the progress of
-population and civilisation was very slow and difficult.</p>
-
-<p>In the twentieth century, on the other hand, a
-prodigy occurred, thanks to steam-engines and all the
-other machines of which the steam-engine is the parent.
-With these machines, men can exploit more rapidly and
-thoroughly all the wealth of the earth, and with the railways
-can export the wealth produced, even from the most
-remote and buried regions, which thus can be peopled
-and exploited. Civilisation, following the railway-lines,
-and armed with fire and machines, in little more than
-fifty years extended from the Atlantic to the Pacific,
-crossing and occupying, however summarily, the immense
-territories of the interior, and binding together
-with a network of communications and interests,
-cities, climates, and territories without number from
-east to west, from north to south. But machinery is
-an inanimate instrument, only to be imbued with
-creative force by the thought and will of man. In
-consequence, this miracle of history would not have<span class="pagenum" id="Page_156">156</span>
-come about if a bold and energetic people had not
-multiplied machines with extraordinary rapidity over
-the whole immensity of their territory; if they had not
-subordinated to this supreme end every other good,
-æsthetic beauty, the preservation of traditions, the
-purity of the national spirit, and even the conveniences
-of life which wealth can give. American progress is
-then a transcendent and mystical idea which inflames
-America with passion and impels it to accomplish the
-new and rapid conquest of its own territory. And logic
-wastes its time looking for and laying bare contradictions
-in it savouring of the absurd. Doubtless, to work
-with frenzied zeal at creating riches in order to be
-unable to enjoy them is an absurdity if judged in the
-light of the interest of each individual; but are not all
-ideals absurd, when judged in the light of the interest of
-the individual? What does it matter to the soldier who
-dies in battle that his country emerges victorious from
-the conflict in which it is engaged, seeing that he will
-not be able to enjoy the fruits of the victory? From the
-point of view of personal interest, it is better to live in
-a country disgraced and diminished by a defeat than
-to die in a country aggrandised by a victory. So the
-privations to which I had seen exposed in the intimacy
-of her home, that kind hostess of ours, who had offered
-us luncheon in her modest flat, no longer seemed an
-absurd contradiction of life. Her privations were
-transfigured into a small personal sacrifice necessary for
-the fulfilment of a great national work, transcending<span class="pagenum" id="Page_157">157</span>
-the interest and the wishes of every individual
-American.</p>
-
-<div class="tb">* * * * *</div>
-
-<p>Thus at last I had grasped American progress and its
-apparent incongruities. It was an ideal of life, born and
-rapidly matured in a new continent during the past
-half century, at a time when the conquest of the vast
-territory by means of machinery was becoming more
-widespread and more intense. It was the ideal of life
-which, overshadowing all the others, had called forth
-from the depths of American society the marvellous
-energy which has staggered the world. When I had
-once found the key to this enigma, many phenomena
-of American life seemed to me clearer. I could easily
-explain to myself why the public attached less weight
-to politics on that side than in Europe, and regarded the
-defects and shortcomings in its political institutions with
-an indifference which to Europeans seems strange; in
-particular, why it preferred having them in a condition
-full of defects and inconveniences rather than any reform
-which increased the power of the State and limited the
-initiative of the individual. I could explain also how it
-had succeeded in keeping alive that spirit of liberty,
-not in politics only, but in religion, administration,
-customs, and culture which often strikes Europeans as
-either excessive or bizarre. The great national work—the
-conquest of the continent—is accomplished much
-more by personal initiative than with the help and
-under the direction of the State; the important point,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_158">158</span>
-therefore, is that personal energy should be subjected
-in this great work to the smallest possible number of
-limits and restrictions.</p>
-
-<p>Lastly, I could explain why in American society, to
-borrow a rather quaint philosophical expression, the
-category of quantity prevails over that of quality.
-During my first few weeks in America, I used to smile
-when I heard some Americans go into ecstasies at the
-thought that everything in America was big, from the
-country to the cities, the factories, and the statistics of
-population; when they gloated over comparisons between
-their own country and the little countries of
-Europe, and statements of the comparative superiority
-in size of things in their own country. I no longer
-smiled, however, when I realised what American progress
-represented. A civilisation, whose principal instrument
-for the accomplishment of its work and for
-establishing itself in the world is machinery, must
-necessarily consider the quantitative criterion the supreme
-criterion of perfection. In what respect, indeed,
-is machinery, regarded as an instrument of production,
-superior to the human hand? Everybody knows that its
-superiority consists not in quality, but in the quantity,
-of its output. Machinery produces much and quickly.
-The hand produces little and slowly. The hand, however,
-can attain a standard of perfection which is
-denied machinery. Man will never succeed in constructing
-a machine capable of sculpturing the Venus
-of Milo or of weaving the marvellous tapestries which<span class="pagenum" id="Page_159">159</span>
-we admire in the museums of Europe. Everything of a
-high degree of perfection is exclusively handmade;
-<i xml:lang="la" lang="la">vice versa</i>, the hand, however, it may strive and labour
-and practise, will never succeed in attaining in its work
-the giddy rapidity of which steam- and electricity-driven
-machines are capable, or in producing in so short
-a time so many good things. Consequently, in a
-civilisation in which machinery predominates, men will
-be continually making fresh efforts to live faster and
-faster, and to produce and consume more and more
-rapidly. They will not be, on the other hand, too
-exacting on the score of quality. They will be content
-with things which look nice, without demanding extraordinary
-excellence or finish in details. They will be
-better pleased to consume many examples of products
-of inferior durability than one single example of products
-of great perfection. Consequently, vagaries of
-taste, continual movement, ready forgetfulness of traditions,
-and abundance of mediocrity, will be salient
-characteristics of machine-ruled civilisation. The great
-works of art which were the glory of past régimes
-will disappear for the present, which will see them
-replaced by objects of medium quality offered in greater
-quantity.</p>
-
-<p>As a matter of fact, I found all these characteristics
-in North America, and they no longer offended me.
-They seemed to me necessary qualities of a society
-which sets out to conquer a boundless territory with
-machinery. Nevertheless, at this point, having solved<span class="pagenum" id="Page_160">160</span>
-the American problem, I was confronted with the
-European problem under a new aspect. If American
-progress, if machinery, if the quantitative criterion of
-perfection are necessary weapons for the accomplishment
-of the great historical work to which the United
-States have set themselves, how are we to explain the
-fact that in the states of Europe also machines are
-being multiplied, the American idea of progress is
-spreading, and the quantitative criterion of perfection
-is prevailing gradually? All of them except Russia,
-which in many respects resembles the United States,
-are countries of an old civilisation, live in small tracts
-of territory, and have not immense continents to exploit.</p>
-
-<p>At this point I saw hovering over Europe and America
-a new, vaster, and more general problem, which dominates
-the two worlds and bestrides the Atlantic like a
-great bridge: the struggle between quantity and quality.</p>
-
-<hr />
-
-<div id="toclink_161" class="chapter">
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_161">161</span></p>
-
-<h2 class="nobreak" id="III-III">III<br />
-
-<span class="subhead">MORE OR BETTER?</span></h2>
-</div>
-
-<p class="drop-cap"><span class="smcap1">It</span> is an undoubted fact that Europe is becoming
-Americanised; that the American idea of progress—understood
-to mean the increase of wealth and the
-perfectioning of the instruments of production—is penetrating
-European society. No profound knowledge of
-European society is needed to recognise this. I would
-even go so far as to say that the only idea which in the
-last fifty years has sunk deep into the minds of the
-masses in Europe is this American idea of progress.
-I must, however, also confess that before I went to
-America I belonged to that group of Europeans,
-numerous enough, especially among the cultured and
-upper classes, which laments this “Americanisation”
-of Europe, and considers it to be a sort of mental
-aberration and decadence on the part of the Old World.
-The idea is fairly wide-spread in Europe. It may
-startle a good many Americans; but it will not seem
-paradoxical to those who spare a moment’s reflection
-for the history of European civilisation up to the
-French Revolution.</p>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_162">162</span></p>
-
-<p>There is no doubt that, considered from the point of
-view of our ancient history, this idea of progress, interpreted
-American-fashion, is a kind of revolutionary
-dissolving force. Perhaps the upheaval which it has
-produced and is producing in Europe can almost be
-compared with that which Christianity caused in the
-ancient civilisation, when it destroyed in the Greco-Latin
-world the political and military spirit which had
-been the mainstay of that world. Indeed, we must not
-forget that from the dawn of history up to the French
-Revolution succeeding generations had lived in Europe
-contented with little, faithful to traditions, and holding
-every innovation to be a danger and every enterprise
-a revolt against God and against the memory of their
-ancestors. It is true that even in those days men
-usually preferred ease to poverty and were not insensible
-to the magnetism of gold. Even then, each succeeding
-generation saw an increase in the wealth of the
-world and in the spread of population over the face of
-the earth. But how slow and spasmodic was the increase!
-Up to the time of the French Revolution it is
-impossible to discern in history any differences in wealth
-and population at intervals of less than a century. The
-change produced by each generation was so small as to
-be barely recognisable. In compensation, the men of
-that time strove to make the world fairer and better.
-Art and religion were their absorbing preoccupation.</p>
-
-<div class="blockquot">
-
-<p>From Greece [says one of the characters in my dialogue],
-which taught the world to write and to sculp, up to the<span class="pagenum" id="Page_163">163</span>
-Middle Ages which built the fairest cathedrals and the
-most fantastic palaces of all times; from the Egypt of
-the Ptolemies, from which the last rays of Hellenic beauty
-illumined the Mediterranean world, up to the Rome of the
-popes and up to the Venice of the sixteenth century, which
-flaunted her marble pomp in the eyes of the world, up to
-the France of the eighteenth century, which immortalised
-her three sovereigns in three world-compelling decorative
-styles; from Augustus, who protected Horace and Virgil,
-up to Louis XIV, who protected Racine and Molière, and
-up to the Marquise de Pompadour, who strove to make
-Paris the metropolis of elegance,—was not the perpetuation
-of a form of beauty the supreme ambition of every nation
-and of every state? Consider the countless efforts made to
-establish in the world the reign either of sanctity or of
-justice or both, from the Roman Empire which created
-law, up to Christianity which strove to cleanse human
-nature of sin, and up to the French Revolution, which
-proclaimed to the world the age of liberty, fraternity, and
-equality.</p>
-</div>
-
-<p>Such was that old Europe which created the numberless
-masterpieces of architecture, sculpture, and
-painting, now so much admired by the Americans;
-that old Europe which discovered America, created
-science, and produced the French Revolution.
-But what remains of that old Europe? American
-progress is busy to-day destroying it; in particular,
-the artistic spirit is rapidly disappearing from the continent
-which for centuries was the world’s teacher of
-beauty.</p>
-
-<div class="blockquot">
-
-<p>Do you seriously believe [asks another of my characters,
-he who in the dialogue defends America and the new ideals<span class="pagenum" id="Page_164">164</span>
-of life] that it is any use nowadays lamenting the fact
-that some rare genius is unable at the present day to give
-birth to his immortal masterpiece in the solitude of his
-pride? At a time when man is inventing increasingly
-powerful machinery, and is conquering the earth, the sea,
-the air, the vast treasures hidden in every nook and cranny
-of the universe; with these marvellous tools in his hand is
-recognising that he is becoming the wizard visioned in
-the legends of centuries; while the masses are clamouring
-for bread, victuals, education, ease, security, pleasures,
-air, light, liberty, all God’s blessings in prodigious and
-yearly-increasing quantities?</p>
-</div>
-
-<p>These words are not the vapourings of a fanciful
-individual. They are repeated a hundred times daily
-in Europe, in a more or less elegant form, for they
-express the kernel of the thought of the Europe which
-is being Americanised. I could quote many examples
-in support of my contention. I will quote one only, a
-characteristic one. A foreigner may often see in the
-smaller Italian cities ancient monuments—churches or
-palaces—which are gradually falling into ruin. The
-nonchalance of the authorities or the ignorance and
-stinginess of the proprietors suffer time to do its deadly
-work, or even help to accelerate it by befouling the last
-relics of a past beauty. The foreigner shakes his head,
-sighs, mutters harsh judgments, and asks himself <i xml:lang="la" lang="la">sotto
-voce</i> whether the inhabitants of that little town are
-barbarians. His stupor would be increased, however,
-if he could speak with one of the locals and open his
-mind freely to him. “We barbarians?”—would answer
-the local shop-keeper, lawyer, doctor, or artisan. To<span class="pagenum" id="Page_165">165</span>
-prove to the foreigner how wrong he was, they would
-tell him that that little town has actually got electric
-light! The municipality, which cannot find a few
-thousand francs for keeping this or that great monument
-in a decent state, will spend large sums on lighting
-with electric light streets in which after 9 <span class="allsmcap">P.M.</span> there
-is nobody to be seen. The adoption of electric light
-is an act of progress, and nowadays even the shop-keeper
-and the artisan understand progress in this
-American sense; while, with the exception of a few
-cultured and art-loving persons, who have no influence
-whatever, nobody ever thinks it a barbarism to allow
-an old monument built by our fathers to fall into
-ruin.</p>
-
-<p>This is a trifling instance; but it indicates the new
-spirit which is now pervading and conquering the
-whole of Europe. The most evident proof of this
-triumph of American progress is the decadence or disappearance
-of all the schools of art. Europe was in
-past centuries, in harder and more difficult times than
-the present, the glorious mother and mistress of civilisation,
-because under diverse forms, she managed to
-create and keep going schools of literature, sculpture,
-painting, architecture, and music. To-day, these schools
-have almost all disappeared; and the few survivors,
-with very few exceptions, are in a state of decadence.
-On the other hand, schools of electricity, dyeing, weaving,
-mechanics, commerce, and chemistry abound and
-flourish; they are the only schools the masses now<span class="pagenum" id="Page_166">166</span>
-require. In past centuries, the states and aristocracies
-of Europe had in various ways protected and encouraged
-the arts; and this protection had been one of the
-principal reasons for their progress. Now this is no
-longer the case. The wealthy classes of Europe to-day
-consider it much more dignified and elegant to build
-motor-cars and aeroplanes than to help painting and
-sculpture. As to the states, if one of them tries to
-encourage some art, protests pour in from every side
-that the expenditure is a wasting of the people’s money
-in the most idiotic way. Italy was for centuries the
-mistress of the world in every art. Yet even in Italy
-bitter complaints are made to-day about the few
-millions which the public bodies have spent in the last
-thirty years in raising monuments to the great men of
-the Revolution. On the other hand, how can sculpture
-flourish, if nobody will pay the sculptors for the works
-which they are capable of executing? And for what
-reason is the State, which possesses ancient monuments,
-unable to spend another million or two on keeping
-alive the tradition of an art which has shed no little
-glory on the Nation? Is not this tradition, too, a
-national heirloom? But the first-born daughter of
-Beauty no longer understands these simple truths.
-Infected by the spirit of American progress, she
-protests that the money spent on art is wasted;
-she is right willing that hundreds of millions be
-spent on the encouragement of the mechanical and
-iron industries.</p>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_167">167</span></p>
-
-<p>There is no need to wonder, therefore, if many Europeans
-regret the Americanisation of the old continent
-as a kind of grievous madness. Europe—especially its
-upper classes—lives a great deal—it could hardly
-help living—in its past history. I have already said,
-that I, too, when I undertook my journeys to America,
-was more or less of this same cast of thought. But in
-America, confronted with this frenzy of desires and of
-works which has attracted from all parts of the world
-and fused into one people so many millions of souls, has
-created so many cities and produced so much wealth,
-it was no longer possible for me to shut my eyes to the
-fact that so vast and profound a phenomenon must
-depend on causes much more complex and grave than
-a simple mistake or mental aberration. For what reason
-was Europe ready to destroy even her secular tradition
-of art for the sake of emulating that rapidity of execution
-and audacity of enterprise which I was then
-witnessing in the New World? This was the problem
-which presented itself to me, after I had grasped the
-meaning of American progress; and which I succeeded
-in solving with the help of my wife’s investigations into
-the history of machinery.</p>
-
-<p>“Christopher Columbus,” says one of my characters,
-in <i>Between the Old World and the New</i>, “not only discovered
-America, but re-endowed man with the globe
-which God had already given him, inasmuch as he
-enabled man at last to know it.” Europe had remained
-content up to the fifteenth century to live in her<span class="pagenum" id="Page_168">168</span>
-little territory, ignorant of how great the world was.
-That earlier limitation, however, only increased the
-force of the impulse, given to man by the discovery of
-America, to scour and ransack the oceans, with the
-object of discovering and possessing the whole plane.
-Between the sixteenth and the eighteenth centuries,
-then, Europe saw the world expanding around her.
-With the expansion of the world, however, came an
-increase in the longing to possess it, to master it, and to
-exploit it. How was Europe to do so, with means so
-scanty, and under the sway of the ancient ideas, which
-said to man, “Dare not!” which taught him to change
-as little as possible the order of things under which he
-had grown up, and not to yield to the temptation of
-over-ardent desires and of over-lofty ambitions?</p>
-
-<p>Then began, in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries,
-that effort of thought and of will which, slowly
-at first, was destined gradually to arm our civilisation
-with all the weapons necessary for the conquest and
-exploitation of the earth. The sciences began their
-advances. The first machines were invented and
-applied. The idea of liberty of progress, of the rights
-of man, and of the popular will began to undermine the
-ancient beliefs and traditions. Nevertheless, it is probable
-that these would have long resisted, and that the
-ancient ties which restrained the human will from the
-great enterprises would have slackened, but not broken
-for who knows how many more centuries, if it had not
-been for that immense event which convulsed the<span class="pagenum" id="Page_169">169</span>
-history of Europe and America, the French Revolution.
-The French Revolution and the great wars to which it
-gave rise made such and so great breaches in the
-ancient prison-walls of traditions and principles in
-which our civilisation was confined that man could
-thereafter easily escape through them and wander
-freely over the vast world.</p>
-
-<p>In fact, after the French Revolution, we see the
-beginning of a new history of the world. The ideas of
-liberty and of progress invade Europe and America.
-In every class and in every nation comes an awakening
-of new desires for comfort and culture. Industry develops,
-railways spread, inventions multiply. Cities
-become thronged and increase rapidly. The great new
-phenomenon of the history of the world, the intensive
-exploitation of America, begins. The new wealth,
-especially that produced in such abundance in America,
-whets men’s appetites. Gradually the desire for comfort,
-ease, and culture spreads to multitudes more
-numerous and to new nations, drives followers along
-in the steps of pioneers, in turn prompts others to
-follow them, and brings crowding on the heels of riches
-already realised, the hungry greed of the masses; in a
-word, impels all Europe and all America to the conquest
-of the earth.</p>
-
-<p>In consequence, not only America, but also Europe,
-saw the beginning fifty years ago of what might be
-truly called the Golden Age of human history, the epoch
-of abundance.</p>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_170">170</span></p>
-
-<div class="blockquot">
-
-<p>What has man dreamt of [exclaims one of my characters]—what
-has man dreamt of, since the dawn of time, but the
-Terrestrial Paradise, the Promised Land, the Garden of the
-Hesperides, the Age of Gold, Arabia Félix; one single thing,
-under various names, the empire of nature and abundance?
-Is not the great myth which centuries have mildly fantasied
-now at last materialising under our eyes?</p>
-</div>
-
-<p>But every medal has its reverse side; and we have
-had to pay, and to pay dearly, for this fabulous abundance
-which man had vainly visioned for centuries.</p>
-
-<div class="blockquot">
-
-<p>The modern world [says another of my characters]
-has crowned quantity at the expense of quality—which is,
-after all, an eternal law. For I can make in a certain time
-things of a certain quality, that is to say, resembling a
-certain model of perfection which I have before my eyes or
-in my mind. But in that case, I cannot make any quantity
-of it which I may require. I must rest content with that
-quantity which I can manage, working with all my zeal.
-I can say, on the other hand: I want so many things of a
-certain quality. But in that case, I can no longer prescribe
-the time necessary to finish them as my fancy bids me. Or
-again: I wish in so much time to make such a quantity.
-Very well; but in that case, I must put up with the best
-quality I can get. So that whoever wants to increase the
-quantity, and to curtail the time must abate his demand
-for quality. And that is just what we are doing to-day
-in this civilisation of ours, in which quantity reigns
-supreme.</p>
-</div>
-
-<p>In the light of this idea that decadence in art, and in
-so many other refinements of life, which many Europeans
-impute to America, seemed to me no longer the
-effect of an aberration on the part of the masses, but a<span class="pagenum" id="Page_171">171</span>
-sort of compensation. We pay, and we ought to pay,
-for the rapid fortunes so commonly made nowadays.
-We pay, we ought to pay, for the speed of the trains,
-the motor-cars, the aeroplane, the telegraph; and the
-price is the mediocrity which pervades everything. We
-cannot have, we must not want, everything in this
-world,—railways as well as beautiful pictures, aeroplanes
-as well as the marvellous furniture which the
-great French artists used to make in the eighteenth
-century, speed as well as good manners. For among
-the reproaches hurled at America by Europe is that of
-having banished from Europe by the example of her
-democracy the good manners of our ancient ceremonial,
-and substituted for it a rather over-simple and over-casual
-cordiality. But can we expect the polished form,
-for which the eighteenth century was famous, to survive
-in the social relations of a civilisation which, like
-ours, is always in a hurry? Among men, who live
-between the train, the motor-car, and the telephone?</p>
-
-<p>Every epoch directs all its efforts towards a supreme
-goal, which for it is the all-important one. There have
-been epochs ablaze with religious fervour, whose chief
-aspiration it was to diffuse and to defend the faith.
-There have been epochs with a profound sense of the
-ambition for glory, which fought great wars. Others
-again have turned their attention to the fostering of the
-arts and sciences. Our civilisation aims, in the first
-place, at the mastery over nature, and the intensive
-exploitation of all the riches of the earth. We enjoy the<span class="pagenum" id="Page_172">172</span>
-advantages of it. We are not inclined to abjure railways
-and telegraphs. We have no wish again to run
-the risk of famine, which was such an ever-present one
-to the civilisations of the past. We enjoy the incredible
-abundance and liberty of the day and are by no means
-eager to return to the pristine régime of discipline and
-parsimony. We Europeans also, then, must resign
-ourselves to paying the price which all these advantages
-cost, and to living in an epoch in which art cannot
-flourish in any high degree, in which religion will no
-longer have the strength to emanate waves of mystical
-ardour, and even science will be cultivated only so far
-as it can be of immediate service to practical ends, by
-intensifying and making more prolific the exploitation
-of natural riches. For this, too, is a phenomenon
-noticeable to-day in every part of Europe: disinterested
-studies are falling into disfavour. Rich as it is, the
-world of to-day is less capable of searching after the
-true for the sole pleasure of expanding the field of
-knowledge, than it was two centuries ago, when it was
-so much poorer. Even scientists nowadays want to
-see their discoveries turned into money.</p>
-
-<div class="tb">* * * * *</div>
-
-<p>The Americanisation of Europe, then, is a fatal
-phenomenon. Europe, from the moment when she
-aspired to great wealth and to the dominion of nature,
-was called upon to renounce her claim to many of the
-treasures of her ancient and refined culture. This was
-the conclusion at which I rested for a moment. And<span class="pagenum" id="Page_173">173</span>
-yet at this point, I, as a European, felt a misgiving.
-If matters stood thus, was not Europe fatally doomed
-to become even more thoroughly Americanised in the
-future? At the present time, the appetites and ambitions
-of all classes in Europe, even the most numerous,
-have been given free rein. Everybody, from the aristocrat
-of ancient lineage to the most obscure peasant,
-wishes to earn, spend, and accumulate as much as he
-can. There is no power, human or divine, which can
-pretend to drive back towards its historical fountainhead
-this immense torrent of greed and ambition.
-Europe, thus, is fated to become increasingly oblivious
-of the traditions of its ancient and disinterested culture;
-to struggle to imitate and compete with America in the
-production of great riches at greater speed. And, as
-America with her immense territories and smaller store
-of traditions is better equipped for the competition, so
-Europe must necessarily become ever more and more
-decadent in the future. The continent destined to
-dominate the civilisation of the future, as Europe
-dominated it up to the middle of the nineteenth century,
-will be America.</p>
-
-<p>There are not wanting persons in Europe who take a
-delight in repeating from time to time this prophecy,
-which to the ears of a European sounds somewhat
-lugubrious. For a moment, when in America, I, too,
-somewhat discouraged by the vitality of which the
-American spirit of progress gives proof, felt myself
-inclined to give ear to these prophets, whom hitherto<span class="pagenum" id="Page_174">174</span>
-in Europe I had always contradicted. Yes, culture in
-Europe was destined to become ever more decadent
-before the invasion of progress interpreted in the
-American sense; quantity, that is to say, the nations
-with vast territories at their disposal and capable of
-rapidly producing vast wealth, would rule supreme in
-the future, while the forces of idealism would lose a
-great part of their ancient empire over the world.</p>
-
-<p>America, however, actually America, proved to me
-that the ancient culture represented by Europe is not
-destined to die out, and that, if Europe is being Americanised,
-America in compensation is being induced by
-an eternal impulse to Europeanise herself! I, like so
-many other Europeans, had gone to America, persuaded
-that the American’s only thought is to make
-money. But in America, I, too, ended with the conviction
-that no country in Europe expends so much money,
-labour, and zeal on founding museums, schools, universities,
-and new religions; on fostering, in the midst of
-the mechanical civilisation and the realm of quantity,
-the arts, the religious spirit, and the disinterested
-sciences; on preventing the loss of that intellectual
-legacy of the past, in which Europe takes an ever-decreasing
-interest, occupied as she is in developing her
-industries and her trade. If, out of deference to history,
-rather than to the present day, we may grant that
-Europe represents in the world’s history the effort
-directed to the perfecting of a lofty culture, artistic,
-scientific, religious, or philosophic,—there is no doubt<span class="pagenum" id="Page_175">175</span>
-but that America is to-day becoming Europeanised;
-is seeking, that is to say, to employ the vast riches
-which she has accumulated by the intensive exploitation
-of her territory in the promotion of the progress of
-art, knowledge, and the religious spirit. Doubtless, not
-all the efforts she makes are successful; but they are
-numerous, intense, and obstinate. Indeed, if America
-is open to any reproach in this relation, it is, in my
-opinion, to that of feeling too ardent an admiration
-for lofty culture—art and science in particular—an
-admiration which sometimes blunts the critical sense,
-and does not permit her to distinguish what in the
-world of the ideal is authentic from what is counterfeit,
-the real gold from pinchbeck. In fact, one can find in
-no European country so lively and profound a trust in
-science as in America. Europe knows that science can
-do a great deal and has done a great deal, but that it
-often promises, or raises hopes of, more than it can do.
-Not so in America. Among the cultured, as among the
-lower classes, faith in the power of science is practically
-unlimited. There is no marvel which the American
-does not expect to see issuing from the scientist’s closet.
-Even the mystical movements in America, whose trend
-is anti-scientific, like to trick themselves out with the
-name of “Science,” which has a kind of magic sound
-and glamour for the men of the New World.</p>
-
-<p>There is the same universal enthusiasm for art in
-America. It might be said that America is determined
-to admire everything which might possibly be beautiful,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_176">176</span>
-of every country, every epoch, and every school. It is
-true that the most engrossing preoccupation of the
-Americans is not that of fostering the arts; they must
-still keep their minds fixed on the conquest of their
-great continent. But it is also true that, in the moments
-of leisure, when they can think of something
-other than business, they fling open, so to speak, their
-arms to the arts of the whole world. Just as all the
-styles of architecture can be found in the great buildings
-of New York, so all the arts which have flourished in
-the course of centuries in Asia and Europe have been
-transplanted into the New World. America, I might
-almost say, wishes to taste and understand all the
-beauties which the past has created; classical literature
-as well as contemporary European literature, Italian
-as well as German music, Greek sculpture as well as
-the French sculpture of the eighteenth and nineteenth
-centuries, Italian as well as Dutch painting, Japanese
-decorative art as well as the styles of the fourteenth,
-fifteenth, and sixteenth Louis. New York, from this
-point of view, is a real artistic cosmopolis.</p>
-
-<p>If, then, Europe is gradually destroying her ancient
-culture, and her great traditions, in order to construct
-railways and factories, to found banks and to initiate
-commercial enterprises, America, on the other hand,
-wishes to employ the wealth gained by the intensive
-exploitation of her vast continent in creating an art
-and a science. How can we explain this contrast?
-“The snobbery of a parvenue nation,” it pleases the<span class="pagenum" id="Page_177">177</span>
-European, with a shrug of the shoulders, to label it.
-But anyone with any knowledge of America and much
-knowledge of human nature will not rest content with
-so glib an explanation. It is true that, thanks to
-machinery, to America, and to the idea of liberty and
-progress, quantity is to-day triumphant in the world.
-Men wish to enjoy abundance. Can they, however,
-confine their wish to abundance, to the increase, that
-is to say, of the quantity of things they possess? Observe
-a peasant who comes to town, turns artisan, and
-earns a higher wage. What does he do? Does he buy
-with his higher wage a second pair of boots, or a second
-suit in addition to and like the one he wore when he was
-poor? No. He adopts the town fashions and buys
-more elegant shoes and clothes, in appearance at least,
-that is to say, like those worn by the upper classes. In
-every country of America and Europe, the differences
-in dress between the upper and lower classes, once so
-great, are disappearing. And why? Because the people
-want to dress like the “Swells”; and modern industry
-spares no trouble to give them at little cost the means
-of satisfying their ambition. In other words, the
-workman wants to invest his higher wage in the purchase
-of finer, or what he thinks are finer, clothes, than
-those he wore before, because to possess a suit of superior
-clothes is to him a greater joy than to have two
-suits of the same workmanship as those he wore when
-he was poorer. In other words, quantity soon satiates,
-and at a certain stage man needs to translate it into<span class="pagenum" id="Page_178">178</span>
-quality, and to employ his wealth to procure for himself,
-not a greater number of things, but more beautiful
-and better things, otherwise wealth is useless.</p>
-
-<p>If this need is lively and profound in the minds of the
-people, how much stronger must it be in the richer
-classes, those with great resources at their disposal!
-A man who possesses ten millions and another who
-possesses one hundred cannot eat ten and a hundred
-times as much respectively as the modest lord of only
-one million, live in a house ten or a hundred times as
-vast, or buy himself ten or a hundred hats where the
-other buys only one. If they used their wealth in that
-way, they would be considered mad, and with good reason.
-They must then strive to procure for themselves,
-with their superior wealth, things of superior beauty or
-quality, to translate their wealth into beauty and merit,
-quantity into quality. There are, it is true, men who
-desire wealth only for the pleasure of creating it, and
-who are indifferent to the other pleasures which it
-brings. At no time, perhaps, were these men so numerous
-as at present among the great bankers, merchants,
-and manufacturers who now rule the economic destinies
-of the modern world. But even to-day, these men, who
-love money as the artist loves his art, in itself and not
-for the pleasures which it can give, are in a minority.
-And so they will always be, because even if—impossible
-hypothesis—anybody in the upper classes developed
-such a fervid enthusiasm for banking, industry, and
-commerce, as to arrive at considering wealth only as an<span class="pagenum" id="Page_179">179</span>
-end in itself, a means of displaying his own ability,
-there would still be the women. Unless it be wished
-that even in the wealthy classes, women should engage
-in business and work, women will be bound always
-to consider wealth as an instrument for the advancement
-of life, procuring for its possessor joys more
-select and articles of superior quality.</p>
-
-<p>In fact, this and no other is the origin of snobbery.
-Snobbery is, I know, an obvious target for sarcasm at
-the present day. And it is easy to laugh at the <i xml:lang="fr" lang="fr">nouveau
-riche</i> who is determined at all costs, even at the price
-of sacrifice and snubs, to frequent houses and circles
-which formerly were closed to him; who is glad to go
-for trips in a motor-car, even if they cause him suffering,
-or to go to the opera even if he falls asleep there, because
-he thinks that by doing so, he is living up to the
-standard of the highest elegance. But if he were not
-under this delusion, what would be the use of his
-wealth to him? What compensation would he have
-for the fatigues and perils he had incurred in its acquisition?
-Snobbery is simply an effort to translate quantity
-into quality to which man is impelled by the very
-increase of wealth. There never was so much snobbery
-as there is at the present time, because there never was
-so much wealth.</p>
-
-<p>Without a doubt, modern snobbery is full of grotesque
-deceptions. The world never contained so many
-<i xml:lang="fr" lang="fr">nouveaux riches</i>, unprepared to enjoy the real refinements
-of life, and destined to be the victims of every<span class="pagenum" id="Page_180">180</span>
-sort of fraud. How often and in how many instances
-do we not see the tragi-comedy of <i xml:lang="fr" lang="fr">Le Bourgeois Gentilhomme</i>,
-Molière’s immortal comedy, acted over again
-at the present day? But one can also find, in America
-perhaps more abundantly than in Europe, families
-whose wealth dates back several generations, in which
-families the mania for the accumulation of riches has
-died down, and which have time, inclination, and culture
-enough to employ their wealth on behalf of the
-most lofty activities of the mind. These are the American
-families who ransack Europe for works of art, who
-found schools and museums, who give work to architects,
-painters, and sculptors, who directly or indirectly
-stimulate an ever-increasing number of the rising
-generation not to concentrate on the making of money,
-but to devote themselves to those intellectual labours
-of which, till a short while ago, Europe had the
-monopoly. And it is the existence of this portion of
-American society and its tendencies that entitle us to
-say that America is being Europeanised.</p>
-
-<p>Europe, then, wishing to live a larger life, after
-centuries of penury and stint, is becoming Americanised,
-and is sacrificing a part of her splendid traditions
-of lofty culture to her desire to learn from America the
-art of producing new wealth rapidly. America, on the
-other hand, having accumulated immense wealth by
-the intensive exploitation of her territory, is becoming
-Europeanised; she is turning, that is to say, to the arts,
-sciences, and most lofty forms of higher culture, to<span class="pagenum" id="Page_181">181</span>
-perfect which Europe has laboured for centuries. Yet
-at this point I think I hear the reader cry:</p>
-
-<p>“Is not this all to the good? Does it not establish a
-marvellous balance between the two worlds? Does it
-not prove that our civilisation is the richest, most
-powerful, best balanced, and most perfect which has
-ever existed? Ought Europe to have gone on living
-for ever in misery, intent only on the perfecting of
-culture, and America to have had never a thought for
-anything but the multiplication of wealth?”</p>
-
-<p>To be sure, if this exchange of wealth and culture
-between the two continents could be effected as well
-and easily as it can be described, our epoch would be in
-very truth an epoch of fabulous felicity. We might
-claim to be, in comparison with preceding generations,
-a generation of supermen. Unfortunately, the difficulties
-are greater than they seem at first sight to be.
-What they are will be seen in the next chapter; we shall
-then see that it has become much easier to produce new
-wealth than to employ it in the creation of a lofty and
-refined civilisation; and that this is the secret torment
-which afflicts Europe and America.</p>
-
-<hr />
-
-<div id="toclink_182" class="chapter">
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_182">182</span></p>
-
-<h2 class="nobreak" id="III-IV">IV<br />
-
-<span class="subhead">THE LOST PARADISE OF BEAUTY</span></h2>
-</div>
-
-<p class="drop-cap"><span class="smcap1">The</span> bewildering growth in the wealth of America
-has affected in many different ways the whole
-world. Economists are studying its effects with much
-zeal. One, and not the least curious, of them, is the
-rise in the value of antiques. From Etruscan ceramics
-to French furniture of the eighteenth century, from
-Greek statues to Italian pictures of every epoch, from
-Tanagra statuettes to the lace, embroideries, tapestries,
-manuscripts, glass, and filigree from every part of the
-world, all the artistic furniture of Europe, Asia, and
-Africa which has survived the ravages of time has
-trebled and quadrupled its value. Few financial speculations
-proved more successful in Europe than the
-collection about fifty years ago of antiques.</p>
-
-<p>Many instances could be quoted to prove this.
-Everybody, even in America, I suppose, has heard
-recently of the great Paris tailor who set to work thirty
-years ago to collect statues, pictures, and French <i xml:lang="fr" lang="fr">objets
-d’art</i> of the eighteenth century. He spent about three
-millions on his collection; and he put it up for auction<span class="pagenum" id="Page_183">183</span>
-last year and cleared fourteen millions! An occurrence
-which made less noise, because it was on a smaller scale,
-but analogous to the foregoing, is the following: A
-journalist, a man of taste and a great admirer of
-beautiful antiques, came to Rome. Everybody called
-him a maniac, because, though he had a family, he
-spent all his savings in buying from the small antique
-dealers and in the Campo di Fiori lamps, books, stuffs,
-and every other bit of antique he could lay hands on.
-Well, he died ten years ago, and left his family nothing
-but a houseful of fine antiques. The family, which
-did not share his mania, sold them, and realised a fortune,
-the income of which was, and is, enough to support
-them in comfort. If the journalist had been
-discreet and had invested his savings in shares and
-bonds, probably his family would now be living in a
-very much humbler way.</p>
-
-<p>It is unnecessary to quote further evidence in support
-of so notorious a fact. Ask any European antiquarian
-the reason for this appreciation, and he will reply unhesitatingly,
-“America.” America for the last thirty
-years has been making assaults on the antiquities-market
-with all the tenacity of her untiring activity,
-and the might of her new-made wealth. Some people
-in Europe—those who have antiques to sell—are very
-glad that it should be so. Others lament, complaining
-that Europe is emptying herself of her treasures in
-favour of the New World. Most people, however,
-smile at what they consider a proof of the incurable<span class="pagenum" id="Page_184">184</span>
-snobbery of the New World. Europe is very ready to
-accuse America of loving antiques only because they
-are rare and, therefore, dear; of fighting dollar-duels
-about them, only to prove their own wealth, without
-any power of judging and distinguishing between the
-good and the bad, though even among antiques there
-are ugly as well as beautiful ones, representing comparative
-grades of beauty. And this accusation too is,
-in its general application, unjust and unsubstantial.
-Anybody who has had any extensive dealings with the
-wealthy houses of New York, Boston, Philadelphia,
-Washington, and Chicago, knows that they contain
-many Americans who are competent judges and buyers
-of artistic antiques. It is true that, from this point of
-view, the big American houses cannot yet challenge
-comparison with the big European houses. Nevertheless,
-numberless are the marvellous ceramics from the
-Far East, numberless the magnificent pieces of French
-eighteenth century furniture, numberless the pieces of
-wonderful lace, glass, and antique <i xml:lang="fr" lang="fr">boiseries</i> which it
-has been my good fortune to see, not without an
-occasional pang, in America.</p>
-
-<p>On the other hand, this reproach, which, couched in
-its usual form, is unjust, contains a modicum of truth,
-which however applies to Europe as well as to America.
-I have often had occasion to notice in wealthy modern
-houses—in Europe as well as in America, but in America
-more than in Europe—that they are adorned
-with many extremely beautiful old pieces, but that<span class="pagenum" id="Page_185">185</span>
-these are too numerous, and too heterogeneous. You
-find in a modern drawing-room material of every epoch
-and from all parts of the world; from ancient Greece,
-and from China of the last century, from the Italian
-Middle Ages and from contemporary Persia. Consequently
-modern houses are too much like small
-museums, in which numbers of wonderful little antiques,
-picked up wherever they were to be had, are exposed
-to view, and in which the modern furniture and adornments
-serve as the show-case in which the antiques are
-displayed, instead of being, as they were in the eighteenth
-century, the principal decoration, of which some
-beautiful antique was the appropriate ornament and
-complement. This inversion of the natural order of
-things would be inexplicable, were we not all of us
-persuaded more or less consciously that old things must
-necessarily be more beautiful than modern ones. For
-this reason we are willing that what we make, the
-modern, shall be subordinated and serve as a tool to
-the antique.</p>
-
-<p>In short, the antique, in Europe as in America, has
-acquired nowadays a value of its own in art, merely
-on the score of its antiquity. I need not dwell on the
-strangeness of this prejudice in favour of antiques in
-an age and in countries in which, directly one leaves
-the field of art behind, one finds so keen a craze for the
-modern. Not to be up-to-date is at the present day the
-greatest reproach we can fling at a man in Europe and
-in America, especially in America. Why then does<span class="pagenum" id="Page_186">186</span>
-modernity in art arouse, not only in old Europe, but
-also, and perhaps more, in young America, so much
-diffidence and mistrust? Why do we, notwithstanding
-the attempts which modern artists make to emulate
-the ancients or to create new things, turn to the past
-when we want to possess or enjoy something really
-beautiful? May this contradiction be the effort of a
-last surviving prejudice? For centuries, man was
-educated to consider all antique things, only because
-they were antique, preferable to modern ones. In
-many respects, we have conquered this venerable prejudice.
-May our attachment to the antique in art be
-the last and most persistent survival of this sentiment,
-itself destined to disappear?</p>
-
-<p>No. This persistent attachment to the antique in
-art is not prejudice; it is the effect of the incurable
-artistic weakness of our epoch. Men are following a
-profound and sure instinct when, in their desire for
-beauty, they turn to the antique; for art is as it were the
-lost Paradise of our civilisation, whose atmosphere we
-are always breathing, but to which the entrance is
-forbidden us. It is a phenomenon of contemporary
-life which usually attracts but little attention; and yet
-how strange it is! The need for the adornment of life
-with beautiful things—for translating quantity into
-quality, as I said above—has not diminished among
-the wealthy classes, and could not diminish, because it
-is a profoundly human need. The world’s upper classes
-never had so much wealth at their disposal as now, and<span class="pagenum" id="Page_187">187</span>
-never had so keen a desire to spend a considerable part
-of it in the purchase of beautiful things. How many
-artistic masterpieces could have been paid for, and how
-many painters, sculptors, and architects of genius
-liberally rewarded with half the sums which have been
-spent in raising fourfold or sixfold the value of the
-antiquities of Europe, Asia, and Africa? Indeed the
-immense growth in the world’s wealth has profited
-the dead, not the living, in the world of art, antiquities
-and not the modern arts. And it was inevitable that
-this should be so. Why?</p>
-
-<p>Because modern times are not adapted to be a golden
-age of art, for a psychological and moral reason, which,
-however, is not to be sought in the practical and commercial
-spirit of modern times. Many of the fairest
-palaces and pictures which we admire in Italy were
-commissioned by merchants who were no less practical
-than modern bankers. The reason is to be sought elsewhere,
-and it is more profound. Modern civilisation
-has conquered with its railways, telegraphs, and steam-boats,
-the whole earth. In fifty years, it has succeeded
-in conquering continents so vast as North America.
-It has created riches so fabulous, in a word, it has
-achieved so much power, because it has broken through
-all the limits within which the spirit of tradition confined
-past generations. Escaping from these limits, it
-has learned to create at great speed. Speed and the tireless
-spirit of innovation are the two formidable weapons
-which have given our civilisation the victory in her<span class="pagenum" id="Page_188">188</span>
-struggle with nature and with the other more conservative
-and more deliberate civilisations. But the
-qualities necessary to artistic excellence are just the two
-opposite qualities: the spirit of tradition and laborious
-deliberateness.</p>
-
-<p>We moderns, victims of the giddy pace at which we
-live, may be somewhat oblivious of the fact; but it is a
-fact that anyone who knows history cannot ignore.
-To create and foster an art really worthy of the name,—Greek
-sculpture, Italian painting, the French decorative
-art of the eighteenth century,—the immense sums
-at our disposal are useless, and the sciences of steam and
-electricity of no avail. I have already had occasion to
-prove this in the preceding chapters. The nations and
-the generations which have created the most famous
-arts and whose relics are still our delight, were poor
-and ignorant compared with us. In order to create and
-foster art, it is necessary to educate generations of
-artists to do good work and generations of amateurs to
-understand and appreciate it. Neither the artists nor
-the public taste can be educated without a spirit of
-tradition and of æsthetic discipline, which induces the
-public to allow the artists the time necessary for the
-perfecting of their respective arts in all their details;
-which induces the artist to recognise the legitimate
-requirements of the public for which he works, and to
-seek to satisfy it by adapting his own work to those
-requirements.</p>
-
-<p>Anyone can see, however, that nowadays these two<span class="pagenum" id="Page_189">189</span>
-conditions have become well-nigh impossible. In the
-gigantic confusion of the modern world, races, cultures,
-and populations are continually intermingling. Generations
-follow each other with the fixed determination
-not to continue what their immediate predecessor has
-done but to do something different. Ancient traditions
-are dying out, and no new ones are being formed or can
-be formed. Change is the order of the day. Sons but
-rarely adopt their father’s professions, and not a few
-die in lands other than those in which they were born.
-Modern society is agitated by a continual process of
-renewal, which is the deep-seated source of her energy
-and activity, but is also a reason for her artistic decadence.
-In this continual mobility of bodies, wills,
-and ideas; in this perpetual change of tendencies, tastes,
-and standards, art is losing her bearings and, alone in
-this age of bold enterprises, is becoming greedy and
-diffident.</p>
-
-<p>Public and artists, instead of helping each other, have
-grown timid. The public no longer does what it likes.
-It no longer has any standard of judgment. It has
-become timid and diffident. It is obsessed by the fear
-of mistaking a masterpiece for a deception or a deception
-for a masterpiece. This uncertainty of tastes and
-desires in the public in its turn bewilders the artists.
-When the painter, the sculptor, the musician, and the
-poet try to find in the desires and inclinations of the
-public the sure indication which in times past used to
-be the support and guidance of artists in their creations,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_190">190</span>
-they find that the public is ready to admire anything,
-but has no marked preference for anything in particular.
-The artist is free, but his liberty is a liberty which
-embarrasses and paralyses him.</p>
-
-<p>Under these circumstances, the adroit artists quickly
-learn the art of exploiting the uncertainties and inexperiences
-of the public, and win riches and honours.
-The crazy and the charlatans seek to intimidate the public
-by perpetrating novelties of extravagant audacity.
-Serious and conscientious artists there are nowadays,
-of course, but everyone has new formulæ of his
-own art, differing from those of everyone else, and
-proclaims his to be the only true, fruitful, and admirable
-formulæ, at the same time denouncing all others as
-freaks. By what standard are we to judge these
-quarrels? Bewildered by so many different attempts
-and judgments, the public ends by turning to the
-antique. It has a vague idea that the past ages may
-have been inferior to our own in all other respects, but
-in art were superior to it. It knows that a work of art
-at least one century old may be more or less beautiful,
-but that it is at least a serious work of art, conceived
-and carried out in good faith, not for the mystification of
-an ingenuous public by some daring theory of novelty.</p>
-
-<p>So the Europeans are wrong in ridiculing the passion
-of the Americans for ancient things. This passion has
-the same origin on the other side of the Atlantic as it
-has on this. In art, our civilisation is destined to
-remain inferior to ancient civilisations, which it has<span class="pagenum" id="Page_191">191</span>
-overshadowed with its wisdom, its power, and its
-wealth. This is the reason for the rapid growth in the
-value of the antique in art, even in the age of modernity
-<i xml:lang="fr" lang="fr">à outrance</i>. We need feel no shame in avowing it
-openly. Civilisations and epochs, like individuals, cannot
-have and expect everything; and the share which
-has fallen to us of the good things of the earth is so
-large, that we can readily console ourselves for the
-loss of this particular one.</p>
-
-<p>Who reasoned thus would reason wisely. Nevertheless,
-the fact is of greater importance than it appears.
-It shows that the balance between the ancient culture
-of Europe and the spirit of American culture—that
-balance which might perhaps have produced the most
-brilliant civilisation in history—will never be perfectly
-secured, at least so long as the conditions of the world
-remain what they now are. America will be able to
-continue her Europeanisation, and Europe her Americanisation,
-as we have seen is the case. But this
-interchange of influences will not have as its only result
-the increase of the wealth of Europe and of the culture
-of America. It will give birth in the two worlds to a
-discontent and an unrest which nothing will be able to
-allay.</p>
-
-<p>In fact, the more its upper classes come under the
-influence of the culture of the Old World, the more
-ardent will become the admiration and desire of
-America for the antique,—for that beauty which the
-civilisations preceding our own created with such<span class="pagenum" id="Page_192">192</span>
-wealth and perfection of forms; the more strongly will
-it be convinced of our artistic inferiority, and persuaded
-that one of the treasures of life we have lost irreparably,
-and can only enjoy in the relics of other generations.
-Every picture or statue or artistic object which crosses
-the ocean and enters America, every museum which a
-rich Maecenas opens in the New World to the public
-or which a city or a state creates, every chair founded,
-and every book of artistic history printed,—everything,
-in fact, which brings the spirit of America into contact
-with the masterpieces of ancient European art, and
-awakens recognition and admiration for them, makes
-America at the same time recognise how comparatively
-decadent is that which our times produce; reveals to it
-that lost Paradise of Beauty around whose closed gates
-we are now condemned to hover. This contact with
-the artistic achievement of the past becomes, therefore,
-at the same time a gadfly of discontent and unrest to
-the upper and cultured classes.</p>
-
-<p>By an inverse process, the further the spirit of American
-progress penetrates into Europe, the more completely
-does it detach the Old World from its past, and,
-therefore, irritates, grieves, and disgusts the classes
-which have enough culture to recognise and admire the
-marvellous arts of that past. With every ten years
-that elapse, we feel that our past, with all its radiant
-glories, has receded a hundred years; that we are plunging
-into a new world, in which riches, knowledge, and
-our power over nature will increase, but which will<span class="pagenum" id="Page_193">193</span>
-be ugly, inharmonious, and vulgar compared with the
-centuries which preceded it. Many Americans fail to
-understand why Europe cherishes so many latent
-antipathies to America, which has never done her
-any harm, directly at least. The real reason for these
-antipathies must be looked for in the artistic decadence
-which accompanies the development of modern civilisation.
-That civilisation has not been created by America
-alone, but by America and Europe combined. Europe
-and America, therefore, share the responsibility
-for this decadence. Yet it suits the European book
-from time to time to see in America the symbol of the
-civilisation of railways, steam, electricity, business, and
-industry on a large scale; and Europeans gladly vent
-on America their spleen for whatever in this civilisation,
-pregnant with good and with evil, offends them and
-arouses regret.</p>
-
-<p>In short, there is an insoluble contradiction between
-progress, as our age understands the word,—between the
-“American” progress, as many Europeans call it,—and
-art. This contradiction has as yet attracted but little
-notice, in the still great confusion in which we live, in
-the initial tumult of this new civilisation which is invading
-the earth. It will be noticed, however, more and
-more strongly, as generation succeeds generation, and
-in many families the primary hunger for wealth is
-satiated and gives way to the desire to “translate
-quantity into quality”: as American love for the
-historical beauties of the Old World increases, and<span class="pagenum" id="Page_194">194</span>
-Europe takes further lessons in the multiplication of her
-wealth. There is no escape or salvation for our civilisation
-from the discontent and unrest which will arise
-from this contradiction. It is a torment which will
-grow with the growth of wealth and culture; which
-nations and classes will feel more acutely the richer
-and the more cultivated they become; from which perhaps,
-one day, America will suffer more severely than
-many European nations; which will oppress the upper
-classes much more heavily than the people. The latter,
-indeed, will not feel it at all, and will alone be able to
-live in modern civilisation, as contented as man ever
-can be in this world.</p>
-
-<p>History often has strange surprises in store. The
-civilisation of machinery tended at its birth to appear
-as a death-blow to the working classes, a godsend to the
-upper classes. For years and years, socialism, generalising
-from the initial rubs, predicted and pretended to
-prove that the great mechanical industry must enrich
-a small oligarchy inordinately, and reduce to the
-blackest wretchedness the great mass of the population;
-that a new feudalism of capitalists, fiercer than the
-barons of the Middle Ages, would seize all the good
-things of the world. A century passes, and we find this
-civilisation giving complete satisfaction only to the
-workmen, because it can content the workmen only
-from the double point of view of quantity and quality.
-It gives them an abundance which only a small fraction
-of the people enjoyed up to a century ago; and, at<span class="pagenum" id="Page_195">195</span>
-the same time, bestows on them a luxury which fully
-satisfies their yet simple and unsophisticated æsthetic
-sense. We may smile when we see in a workman’s
-home mirrors and clocks which are the rudest imitations
-of masterpieces of the Louis XV and Louis XVI styles,
-hideous reproductions from a German factory; and
-coarse carpets which are poor European copies of
-beautiful Turkish and Persian models, the result of the
-substitution of the iron teeth of a machine for the
-industrious fingers of the human hand, and of decadent
-aniline dyes for the brilliant and unfading vegetable
-colours. The workman, however, does not know the
-matchless models of which these objects are the ugly
-copies, and, inasmuch as every æsthetic verdict arises
-out of a comparison, these reproductions represent for
-him the summit of perfection, and entirely satisfy his
-need for beautiful things round about him.</p>
-
-<p>To the upper classes, on the other hand, this civilisation
-has given immense and imposing wealth, such as
-no epoch had ever considered possible; but it has deprived
-them of the means of enjoying it. Wealth
-becomes nowadays more useless, the greater it becomes,
-because a multi-millionaire cannot build himself a house,
-wear clothes, or buy objects a hundred times finer and
-better than the possessor of only a few millions. We no
-longer have artists capable of accomplishing miracles.
-The men of great wealth are forced to compete with
-each other for the relics of past beauty at fabulous
-prices, when they are not inclined to spend all their<span class="pagenum" id="Page_196">196</span>
-wealth for the benefit of others. These relics are not
-sufficient, however, to satisfy the desire for beauty and
-art which grows in our times with the growth of wealth
-and of culture. On the contrary, they only make us
-feel more acutely the decadent vulgarity of everything,
-with but few exceptions, which our age produces.</p>
-
-<div class="tb">* * * * *</div>
-
-<p>Someone will say that, after all, this torment is not a
-very serious one; and that men will easily find means of
-consoling themselves. No epoch, as I have already said,
-can have everything; and modern civilisation bestows
-on the wealthy classes of our times numberless compensations
-for the ugliness of the modern world. One of
-these should be enough by itself to content even the
-most discontented: that kind of bodily and mental
-ubiquity which is enjoyed, thanks to the prodigious
-inventions of modern genius. Cannot the wealthy,
-thanks to their riches, remove from one continent to
-another, travel, have dealings and acquaintances in,
-and receive communications from, every part of the
-world, come to know the most distant and recondite
-beauties of nature and of art—in a word, live over the
-whole globe? A modern great man may well feel
-himself almost a demigod compared with the men of
-two centuries ago, so great is the sway his money gives
-him over the forces of nature, so easily can he escape
-from the tyranny which space and time used to exercise
-over men up to a century ago. May not the intoxication
-of this proud sway be worth as much as the pleasure<span class="pagenum" id="Page_197">197</span>
-which the works of Phidias, Michelangelo, Raphael,
-and Houdon gave to our ancestors?</p>
-
-<p>It is true that the pride of our knowledge and the
-intoxication of our power stun us, and therefore help us
-to bear with greater patience the want of more æsthetic
-pleasures. But this compensation, like all compensations,
-is of its very nature provisional. It is not possible
-utterly to destroy a need inherent in human nature.
-There is at the present day a certain tendency in the
-world to consider art as a superfluous frivolity, as a
-luxury only to be thought of in moments of leisure.
-Art and such-like superfluities are contrasted with what
-are called the serious occupations, the practical realities
-of life: industry, commerce, inventions, business, and
-wealth. Those who hold this opinion forget, however,
-that the sculptures of Phidias and the paintings of
-Raphael appeared in the world long before the steam-engine
-and the Voltaic pile. Are we, too, prepared in
-face of this fact to affirm, with the most advanced
-champion of the American idea of progress in my
-dialogue, that “history was off the track up to the discovery
-of America”? That if men had had any sense,
-they would have invented machinery and developed
-the sciences first, and then created and developed the
-arts? But even if we were prepared to maintain this
-paradoxical theory, another fact of common observation
-would be there to prove to us that beauty is not a
-luxury and whim of gentlemen of leisure, but a primary,
-universal, and indestructible need of our minds, which<span class="pagenum" id="Page_198">198</span>
-every human creature seeks to satisfy as best it can.
-Do we not see every day that the peasant and the
-artisan, items in modern civilisation though they are,
-no sooner have a little money than they try to procure
-for themselves ornaments, either for their persons or for
-their homes, which may be as tawdry as you like, but
-which to them seem beautiful and well worth the expenditure
-of some of the little money they have? Have
-we not seen that one of the merits of modern civilisation
-is that of satisfying the æsthetic needs of the masses?
-Why should we not expect, then, to find the same need,
-though in a refined and intense form, felt by those to
-whom superior intelligence and energy, or the favour
-of fortune, has granted the power to accumulate wealth
-in large quantities, those, in other words, who have at
-their disposal greater means of procuring for themselves
-the pleasures and good things of life?</p>
-
-<p>No: the artistic impotence of modern civilisation is
-likely to prove, to judge by the first effects which are
-now beginning to manifest themselves, a graver phenomenon
-than is at present realised. The upper classes
-in Europe and America will not be able to go on for an
-indefinite length of time living with a consciousness that
-the world in which they find themselves is ugly, coarse,
-and decadent in comparison with preceding civilisations;
-feeling the inferiority of the present more acutely
-the more they study, and at the same time extending
-still further their sway over the world and accumulating
-new riches to console themselves for it. This would be<span class="pagenum" id="Page_199">199</span>
-a state of moral want of balance; and moral want of
-balance cannot continue indefinitely, just as physical
-want of balance cannot continue indefinitely. Either
-our civilisation will abate its aspirations to the level
-of the mediocrity which it is capable of producing in art,
-destroying in itself the remembrance of and regret for
-those ancient civilisations which created so many beautiful
-things; or it will have to put itself into a position
-to satisfy not only the æsthetic needs of the masses, but
-also those of the more cultured and refined strata of
-society. The first supposition appears improbable, or
-at least no man of sense will wish to consider it possible.
-It would mean a relapse of the world into barbarism,
-the end of all the traditions and all the studies which
-have been and still are an indispensable element of
-intellectual and moral refinement. So we are left with
-the other hypothesis, which assumes that man will
-make up his mind one day to make an effort to create
-arts of his own, which will survive comparison with
-those of the past.</p>
-
-<p>Yet the task is an arduous one. As I have already
-said, an art is not created or perfected without the
-spirit of tradition and of discipline; and the attempt
-in our times to re-infuse vigour into the spirit of tradition
-and of discipline, if only in the measure necessary
-for the progress of art, is an enterprise, the difficulties
-of which everyone can understand without a long
-explanation. It cannot be effected without a profound
-intellectual and moral reform, which will bring about a<span class="pagenum" id="Page_200">200</span>
-change in many things besides the originality and power
-of the arts which are to-day languid and decadent. So
-the struggle between American progress and art may
-well be a more important phenomenon than is at
-present apparent; and may well entail transformations
-of far-reaching extent.</p>
-
-<hr />
-
-<div id="toclink_201" class="chapter">
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_201">201</span></p>
-
-<h2 class="nobreak" id="III-V">V<br />
-
-<span class="subhead">BEYOND EVERY LIMIT</span></h2>
-</div>
-
-<p class="drop-cap"><span class="smcap1">For</span> century after century, our civilisation lay low
-in its Mediterranean lair. It knew but a small
-part of Europe, Asia, and Africa; and no pricks of curiosity
-impelled it to ascertain how far the world extended
-over land and sea beyond the vague bounds which
-marked the limit of its efforts. That small part of the
-world satisfied the ambitions of our ancestors, though
-they certainly were not shy and craven. Confined in
-that narrow corner of the earth and with only the scanty
-resources which it could provide, they created literatures,
-arts, philosophies, states, laws, and religions.
-Some of these creations are alive to this day, and help
-us distant descendants to shed a little beauty and to
-impose a little order on the modern world.</p>
-
-<p>Between the fifteenth and the sixteenth centuries
-there began a great change in the history of our civilisation.
-Impelled by the wish to reach India by way of
-the Atlantic, our forefathers began to explore the earth.
-Gradually geographical exploration became the preoccupation
-of governments, the passion of the public,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_202">202</span>
-and the business of a great number of persons who made
-almost a vocation of these daring voyages. And behold
-one fine day, one grand day, the most fortunate and
-daring of the navigators who were exploring the Atlantic
-in every direction discovered America. In mid-Atlantic
-there lay two connected continents, stretching from
-one hemisphere to the other, covering many latitudes
-and a great variety of clime, and much of this vast
-territory was still but sparsely inhabited. It was then
-that our forefathers realised how vast and rich was the
-earth, and how small and poor in comparison seemed
-that Mediterranean world in which for so many centuries
-they had lived. It was then that they began to
-pass beyond the limits within which they had been so
-long confined, to invade and to conquer the outside
-world.</p>
-
-<p>The Pillars of Hercules, which had been the impassable
-geographical limit of the ancient Mediterranean
-world, were not, however, the only bounds which they
-passed; they transcended also the moral and intellectual
-limits which until then had circumscribed their thoughts
-and actions. All the time that the ancient Mediterranean
-civilisation, turned loose into the Atlantic, was
-striking root and expanding in America, an uninterrupted
-sequence of events and movements was
-taking place in Europe, destroying ancient laws, ancient
-traditions, and ancient discipline; upsetting, in other
-words, the bounds placed in the past to the thought,
-the sentiment, and the will of Man. The most important<span class="pagenum" id="Page_203">203</span>
-of these events were: the Protestant Reformation,
-the philosophies of the seventeenth and eighteenth
-centuries, the advances of science, the French Revolution
-and its wars, the birth and the development of the
-great industrial movement, and the all but universal
-triumph of democratic ideas.</p>
-
-<p>Little by little, while the aspect of the globe changed,
-a great revolution was taking place in the spirit of the
-ancient Christian civilisation in Europe, which from
-being dictatorial and traditionalist became free and
-progressive. Religion, which for so many centuries
-had been a kind of severe moral discipline, a life of
-prohibitions, scruples, rules, precepts, ceremonies, and
-rites, changed into a kind of free contemplation of the
-Deity in which the individual conscience had full play.
-Everybody became his own high priest.</p>
-
-<p>The ceremonial of social life, which at no time had
-been so complicated, serious, and exacting, gradually
-became so far simplified as no longer to encumber man
-in his every movement and activity. The State, which
-at one time, hand-in-hand with religion, watched over
-the customs and life of its citizens, accorded greater and
-greater liberty to them. To-day everybody, provided
-he contributes to society his daily sum of work, is free
-to live and think as he likes. Severe laws used once
-upon a time to regulate men’s luxuries and pleasures.
-Every class was forbidden to spend its money in any
-way other than that prescribed by these laws. There
-were times of the year in which men were forbidden to<span class="pagenum" id="Page_204">204</span>
-amuse themselves, and, when amusements were allowed,
-the laws took care that they should not degenerate into
-vice. Nowadays the whole year is one long festival
-and carnival for all who have money to spend; and
-together with freedom in pleasure men have acquired
-also a freedom in vice which would scandalise our
-friends the ancients, if they might come back to life
-again.</p>
-
-<p>Every authority is losing power. The people discuss
-the government and the laws; children take the first
-opportunity of escaping from the authority of their
-parents. The younger generation is convinced that it
-knows more than the older, and values the latter’s
-experience at zero. Traditions are losing their force
-and academics their prestige. Everyone holds the
-opinion he likes in religious, artistic, political, and moral
-questions; just as he is free to regulate his own conduct,
-at his own risk and peril, as he pleases, with the sole
-obligation of respecting the limits imposed by the laws,
-which are for the most part neither numerous nor
-embarrassing.</p>
-
-<p>What is the deep-lying cause of this duplex and contemporaneous
-movement? Why has the old Christian
-civilisation of Europe felt itself in the last four centuries
-unable any longer either to contain itself within the
-ancient material limits or within the ancient ideal
-limits? Why, at the same moment as it advances to
-the conquest of new continents, does it destroy within
-itself all the ancient disciplinary restrictions? Because<span class="pagenum" id="Page_205">205</span>
-in these last centuries it has gradually discovered that
-the earth is much vaster and richer than it suspected;
-that it contains, in old Europe, as well as in young
-America, treasures in much greater abundance than
-it had ever pictured in its dreams; and that it can invent
-tools which bring these rapidly within its reach.
-Gradually, as man found that he could rob nature of her
-immense treasures, there arose and spread from generation
-to generation through all classes in Europe and
-America a craze for wealth and a mad ambition to win
-the mastery over nature, such as the world had never
-yet seen.</p>
-
-<p>To satisfy this craze and this ambition, however, it
-was necessary to break many of the innumerable bonds—religious,
-moral, æsthetic, and political,—which
-limited the energy and initiative of our forefathers.
-How could so many millions of men have brought
-themselves to emigrate to America, if the spirit of
-tradition had not been weakened in Europe, and if
-everybody had continued to hold, as they did once upon
-a time, that the greatest good fortune a man could have
-was that of being buried in the church in which he had
-been baptised? Even to-day there are those who
-lament the diminution, in all the Christian churches
-during the last few centuries, of the number, complexity,
-and rigour of the rites and ceremonies, just as others
-lament that the ceremonial of social life and etiquette
-is dying out. But would not men who are obliged to
-work, travel, and rush about as we do nowadays find<span class="pagenum" id="Page_206">206</span>
-themselves embarrassed beyond the point of endurance
-by a religion which made them spend too much time
-over rites, and by a complicated etiquette like that
-which still prevails in the states of the East, requiring a
-large part of the day to be spent in compliments and
-ceremonies? Europeans often laugh at the architecture
-of New York; and I must confess that I, too, found it
-distinctly bizarre. On the other hand, could that vast
-city have grown and renovated itself so rapidly in
-the last century, and have found accommodation for the
-countless multitudes which throng to it from all the
-corners of the world, if those who built it had troubled
-themselves to observe the rules formulated by the great
-architects of the sixteenth century, in the days when it
-took as much time to build a palace and a church as it
-now does to construct a city?</p>
-
-<p>Modern society, if compared with the societies which
-preceded it, may seem in many of its aspects—and in
-fact it is—ugly, poor in artistic beauty, coarse, and
-brutal. It may even seem atheistic and irreverent,
-frivolous and superficial in matters of religion, and, in
-certain respects, morally lax or downright licentious.
-This kind of disorder, however, which is such a common
-subject of heart-burning, is only the necessary effect of
-the outburst of our energy over the world and nature
-on its path of conquest. A civilisation cannot produce,
-refine, or perfect arts or traditions of elegance and of
-social life, or a morality and a religion, if it does not
-adopt an attitude of reserve, if it does not limit itself<span class="pagenum" id="Page_207">207</span>
-to some extent, if it does not sacrifice its other ambitions
-and aspirations to this object. A civilisation like
-ours, whose supreme aspiration it is to extend in the
-shortest possible time and as far as it can its empire
-over the world; to surpass all the limits which nature
-seeks to oppose to its restless ambitions and to the
-multiform energy of man, must needs sacrifice beauty,
-refinement, elegance, and moral delicacy to rapidity,
-energy, activity, and daring. The discovery and development
-of new countries, the marvellous progress of
-America, the discoveries of science, the perfection of
-machinery, the ideas of liberty which emerge triumphant
-from political revolutions and changes in customs,
-the weakening of the spirit of authority in every department
-of social life, the abolition of so many limits
-which once entangled the movements of man, are
-all phenomena which are mutually and indissolubly
-connected.</p>
-
-<div class="tb">* * * * *</div>
-
-<p>“Yes,” many will say; “and they are phenomena
-which all go to make up the grandeur and glory of the
-modern world. We have power, wealth, knowledge,
-and liberty, the four blessings of which our forefathers
-had little, if any, knowledge. What cause have we
-then to grumble? And amongst all the blessings which
-modern times shower upon us, perhaps the most
-precious—more precious than wealth, power, and
-knowledge—is liberty. If we have no reason to regret
-the past, it is chiefly because our forefathers lived,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_208">208</span>
-imprisoned, and in suffering, within limits which we
-have overstepped. Is there any greater joy for a man
-than that of being able in thought, feeling, and action
-to follow the inner impulse of his own conscience,
-instead of making it bend to an external will, whether it
-be that of the law, or that of the public, or that of a
-tradition? Surely the modern world is the greatest as
-well as the most fortunate which has ever existed?”</p>
-
-<p>That is what many people think, and thoughts like
-this breed the optimism which at the present day cheers
-so many minds. This thought is, moreover, partially
-true; but only partially. For in the intoxication of
-their triumph over nature, of the riches which they
-have conquered so easily and in such abundance, men
-seem not to recognise that this civilisation without
-limits is little by little allowing that same unbridled
-energy to hurry it into excesses which threaten to drive
-it back into that very state of barbarism from which it
-has made so many efforts to escape. The impetus
-which it has acquired, now that it has cast off so many
-of its ancient restraints, is great; but the danger is
-precisely that this impetus may carry it too far.</p>
-
-<p>I have already said that amongst the limits abolished
-by modern civilisation are those which preceding civilisations
-had placed on luxury. How great a change has
-taken place in men’s ideas on this subject during two
-centuries! Simplicity and austerity were considered
-for centuries virtues proper to saints and heroes.
-Christianity had gone so far as to glorify poverty in so<span class="pagenum" id="Page_209">209</span>
-many words. Man, by increasing his needs, only increased
-the number of his masters and tyrants; only
-multiplied for himself occasions for sorrow. The more
-simply a man could live, the freer, stronger, and happier
-he was. In short, in ancient times, up to the French
-Revolution, religion, law, and tradition set limits on
-every side to man’s desire to possess and to enjoy;
-and these limits were so numerous and so close, that
-they entailed no little suffering on the generations constrained
-to live within them. That is why we have upset
-them all. And what is the result? That we no
-longer have any sure criterion by which to distinguish
-reasonable consumption from insensate waste, legitimate
-need from vice. We can no longer say what are the
-limits at which it is reasonable and wise for the peasant,
-the artisan, the small tradesman, the man of leisure,
-the millionaire, the multi-millionaire, the child, the
-woman, the old man, respectively, to cry a halt to their
-desires. All men and all classes arrogate to themselves
-the right to desire, to spend, even to waste as
-much as they can. No one has any clear idea of a
-standard by which to distinguish what he may desire
-and what he ought to deny himself. A kind of universal
-prodigality is becoming obligatory in every class; and
-modern civilisation is hurrying towards an unbridled,
-gross, and oppressive orgy. There is already a large
-number of men in Europe and America who eat, drink,
-and smoke to excess; who over-indulge in intoxicating
-and stimulating drinks; and who spend themselves in<span class="pagenum" id="Page_210">210</span>
-that continual whirl of diversions and distractions which
-form so large a part of modern life. The number is
-fated, however, to grow yet larger, rapidly and indefinitely.
-Is not production increasing on every side?
-Is not progress for us first and foremost the continual
-increase of production? And what avails it to produce
-more, if the riches produced do not find consumers?</p>
-
-<p>The modern world, in freeing men’s desires from all
-the ancient limits and restraints, has given a vigorous
-impulse to human industry. In order to satisfy the
-increased needs of the masses, man has invented
-machinery, and has put a premium on the new countries.
-But precisely because there is no longer limit or
-restraint to men’s desires, industry, which in the past was
-the handmaiden of human needs, is now becoming their
-tyrant. It is creating and multiplying our needs with
-a view to their subsequent satisfaction. In order that
-it may never be short of work, it is tempting men in a
-thousand ways to desire and to consume more. Therefore
-our civilisation has made of riches not the fitting
-means of satisfying reasonable and legitimate needs,
-but an end in themselves. We are obliged to produce
-them in order to consume them, and to consume them
-in order to produce them. Every moment which a man
-does not spend in producing riches, he must spend in
-consuming the riches produced by others; so that he
-can never stay still for one instant, but must jump from
-occupation to amusement, and from amusement back
-again to occupation. He must try to make the day as<span class="pagenum" id="Page_211">211</span>
-long as possible, accustoming himself to do everything
-at full speed, and cutting down the hours of sleep as
-much as possible. Everybody knows that we moderns,
-especially in the great cities, are losing the habit of
-sleeping.</p>
-
-<p>We have not yet mentioned, however, the most
-serious drawbacks of the present-day lack of any fixed
-limit to men’s desires. In the past ages, the efforts of
-religion were directed to educating men to self-introspection;
-to teaching them to explore their own consciences,
-to render account to themselves of their own
-sins and vices, and to try to amend them. One might
-even go so far as to say that from one point of view
-Christianity was principally a melancholy meditation
-on the perversity of human nature, and an effort to
-purify it through meditation, suffering, and the love of
-God. One has only to read the letters of Saint Catherine,
-or the <i>Divine Comedy</i>, or Pascal’s <i xml:lang="fr" lang="fr">Pensées</i> to realise
-to what an extent the moral refinement which is the
-fruit of these meditations preoccupied the loftiest minds,
-and, at second hand, the great ones of the earth in past
-centuries. A considerable part of the energies of every
-generation was consumed in this introspective effort,
-instead of in action; for centuries and centuries, saints,
-moralists, and preachers abounded in Europe, while
-men of action, fit to conquer the world and its riches,
-nature and her secrets, were scarce.</p>
-
-<p>This searching of the inward parts was not always
-soothing by any manner of means. For the past<span class="pagenum" id="Page_212">212</span>
-century and a half, numerous writers and philosophers
-have denounced it as one of the refinements of torture
-with which religion in the past made men’s lives a
-burden to them. Perhaps, however, they are wrong;
-for this effort, which religion made for so many centuries
-to habituate man to self-introspection, self-knowledge,
-and self-judgment, demands a less superficial explanation.
-However great be the force of the laws and the
-vigilance of public opinion, there can be no convenient
-order in a social system, if man does not help by exercising
-some sort of surveillance over himself, if he does
-not give ear to an inward voice, forbidding him to take
-advantage of every opportunity of doing evil with
-impunity which may offer itself. This necessity for
-self-restraint is particularly urgent in connection with
-three duties: the duty of speaking the truth, the duty of
-checking one’s own inclination to pleasure, especially
-in the relations between the sexes, and the duty of not
-using one’s own strength improperly at the expense of
-the weak. Many are the times when we could tell a
-lie with impunity, or even with advantage to ourselves,
-if we wished to do so; and yet it is necessary that we
-should speak the truth spontaneously, in order that
-justice may triumph. How easy it is for the man who
-has become the slave of vice to evade the eyes of his fellows
-and to satisfy in secret his most perverse passions!
-And what system of laws can be conceived which will be
-wise and perfect enough to bar all the countless ways
-in which the stronger can impose upon the weaker?</p>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_213">213</span></p>
-
-<p>Every religion with more or less success—and none
-with more success than Christianity—in centuries past
-helped law and public opinion to regulate this most
-important part of morality. They all made a sacred
-thing of an oath, which is nothing but a covenant which
-every individual enters into with himself to speak
-the truth, even when he could lie with impunity or
-with advantage to himself. They all created a sexual
-morality to regulate love, marriage, and the family.
-They endeavoured in various ways to awaken in the
-consciences of the rich and powerful the recognition
-of certain duties of moderation and charity towards
-the weak and the poor. Nowadays, on the contrary,
-men no longer have time to examine their consciences,
-or to reflect on their own vices and defects, or on their
-own duties and rights. The whole atmosphere of our
-lives is exterior to ourselves; we are always moving
-about and always busy. We have become almost
-incapable of meditation and self-introspection. Our
-times no longer lay any store by this education of our
-inner feelings. The only discipline they impose on
-man is that of work. Everybody, whether of high
-degree or of low, is required, under penalty of losing his
-daily bread or of dropping in the social scale, to fill with
-exactness, precision, diligence, and correctness, the rôle,
-be it little or big, which has been allotted to him in the
-immense operations of our times. But, for the rest,
-everyone is to-day much more free than he was in the
-past to adjust his line of action to his own beliefs, and<span class="pagenum" id="Page_214">214</span>
-to make for himself his own standard and his own laws.</p>
-
-<p>The result is that all the scruples and internal restraints
-with which religion endowed the conscience of
-man in the past are growing rusty from disuse. Our
-civilisation, rich and splendid as it is, threatens to be
-spoiled by fraud, by evil habits, and by oppression.
-There is no doubt about it; not even in these days is the
-discipline of work sufficient in itself to keep the State
-in good order. Man is not a living machine, destined
-only to produce riches. When he leaves his office and
-comes back into the world, the modern man there finds
-a family, sons, parents, friends, persons of the other sex
-who may attract him, men richer and more powerful
-than himself, others weaker and poorer, political institutions
-and public problems; in short, opportunities of
-doing good or evil, temptations dangerous but agreeable,
-and duties painful but necessary. And our times not
-only give him practically no moral assistance to conquer
-these temptations and to perform these duties, but
-rather in many ways incite him to yield to the temptations,
-and to exercise his cunning in evading the duties.
-Fraud in particular is becoming simply second nature to
-our civilisation. What is the great industrial movement
-of modern times but a continual deception for cloaking
-the deterioration which it is bringing about in the
-quality of things as the price of increasing the quantity
-of them? Every day sees an increase in the number of
-cleverly faked objects, which are not what they seem;
-and science—especially chemistry—is the highly paid<span class="pagenum" id="Page_215">215</span>
-accomplice which furnishes industry with the means of
-imposing this colossal deception on an inexperienced
-and ingenuous public. In other words, commerce and
-industry, which play so large a part in modern life, are
-becoming more and more a colossal deception in which
-he succeeds best and makes most money who is cleverest
-at lying to the public and at foisting on them goods of
-inferior quality though superior in outward seeming.
-Now if we see in a social system, on the one hand,
-a weakening of all the internal restraints which keep a
-man from lying and cheating, and, on the other, a premium
-put on that same lying and cheating, must we
-not expect to find fraud permeating the whole system?
-And what will our customs be like, what will life be like,
-in the days when nobody any longer feels any remorse
-or scruple in cheating his neighbour, and when everybody
-becomes cheat and cheated turn and turn about,
-cheat in matters which he understands, cheated in those
-in which he has to rely on other people?</p>
-
-<p>The growing depravity of customs, furthermore,
-threatens us with no less a danger. I do not wish to
-exaggerate the horrors of the modern Babylons, as
-Catholic priests and Protestant ministers are apt to do.
-Their grief at seeing the rising generation turn a deaf
-ear to their wise counsels makes them take too gloomy a
-view of the present state of affairs. Nevertheless, it is
-certain that the customs of modern civilisation are
-hurrying it towards a dangerous crisis. The internal
-restraints are being relaxed, and temptations and facilities<span class="pagenum" id="Page_216">216</span>
-are multiplying with the growth of riches and of
-cities, and with the increasing mobility of persons of
-both sexes, so many of whom it prompts to leave their
-native village or country. Especially in the big cities
-where everyone is unknown, can easily hide away, and
-is watched by nobody; where money has greater power
-over men’s minds because there is more of it and more of
-it is needed,—virtue runs serious and continual risks.
-Without being aware of it, we are undoing, little by
-little, Christianity’s great contribution to the chastening
-of our customs, by suppressing many of the limits
-which Christianity had established with such labour in
-the midst of the unbridled licence of the ancient world.
-We are travelling, therefore, step by step back towards
-paganism, with all its conveniences and all its perils.
-Already, in fact, we can see cropping up here and
-there in the richer and more highly civilised countries
-and classes that mortal sickness which killed the ancient
-civilisations: sterility. One of the reasons why all the
-most flourishing ancient civilisations have perished is
-that at the moment of their greatest glory the population
-suddenly began to dwindle; and this sterility which
-killed them was the effect to a large extent of the licence
-of their customs. Love remains fertile only so long as
-it restrains itself and limits itself. Christianity, by
-subjecting men’s customs to discipline—one of the
-noblest of its services to mankind—succeeded for
-centuries in maintaining in Europe and America an
-incessant fertility, which has proved to be one of the<span class="pagenum" id="Page_217">217</span>
-most potent causes of the increase of our power. But
-now we can see, with the return of the world to paganism,
-the beginning of a new era of sterility, especially in
-the big cities and in the most ancient and most wealthy
-states.</p>
-
-<p>Lastly, I have referred to another danger which
-threatens this our social system, victim as it is of its
-limitless desires; I mean the increase in the opportunities
-for the strong to abuse their strength. This is
-certainly the least of the three evils; for thanks to the
-diffusion of culture and of liberty, the weak have learned
-and are able, to unite in their own defence. Some
-balance of justice is obtained and will continue to be
-obtained by opposing force to force. The balance,
-however, will be in external things rather than in men’s
-convictions. For in this unbridled and limitless chase
-after money and enjoyment, of which the world is the
-theatre, the spirit of charity is obscured; and men’s
-minds become accustomed to a hardness and brutality
-which may perhaps one day startle the world in a disagreeable
-and terrible way.</p>
-
-<div class="tb">* * * * *</div>
-
-<p>It may seem to some of my readers that I take a
-delight in uttering gloomy prognostications of the future
-of modern civilisation. Such, however, is not my intention.
-Who would dare to deny that, notwithstanding
-its defects, the civilisation in which we have the
-good fortune to live is the most splendid and powerful
-on which the sun has ever shone? But its very grandeur,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_218">218</span>
-which is to so large an extent the fruit of our
-boldness in overthrowing most of the limits which
-preceding civilisations had placed to human energy,
-gives birth to a new and formidable problem which is
-already beginning to confront our speed-loving civilisation,
-and which is itself, too, a problem of limits, perhaps
-of the limit <i xml:lang="fr" lang="fr">par excellence</i>. And that problem may be
-expressed in one question: <i xml:lang="la" lang="la">Quousque tandem?</i> Up to
-what point, in our desire to conquer the world and its
-treasures, to multiply riches, and to increase our power
-over nature, must we and can we sacrifice beauty, and
-the forms, ceremonies, and refinements of life, moral and
-æsthetic? Up to what point must we and can we make
-legitimate use of the liberty which the modern world has
-given us; and at what point does abuse of it begin?</p>
-
-<p>This is the vital problem which I have posed and
-tried to dissect in the dialogue which my travels in
-America inspired me to write: the problem treated in
-the speeches and discussions of the many characters,
-European and American, who figure in that dialogue.
-It may seem strange, at first sight, that a discussion of
-the Old World and the New, in which the contending
-parties propose to prove which is superior to the other,
-should end in this second problem, apparently so unlike
-the first; whether it is necessary or not to place a limit
-on the unbridled activity and immoderate desires of our
-times. Anyone who has read the present series of
-essays, however, will be less likely to find this conclusion
-singular and obscure. I have repeatedly said, and<span class="pagenum" id="Page_219">219</span>
-tried to prove, that there is too great a tendency on
-both sides of the Atlantic to find an antagonism between
-Europe and America. If certain tendencies are stronger
-in one of the two continents, and weaker in the other,
-these are differences of quantity, not of quality. America
-is becoming Europeanised, and Europe Americanised.
-However little reflection and cool reasoning the European
-may bring to his abuse of America on the score of
-its excessive zeal in the production of riches, or the
-American to his abuse of Europe on account of the
-scanty remains of the spirit of tradition and conservatism
-in the Old World, each will recognise that he is at
-the same time inveighing against his own continent.
-In fact, Europe applies herself with no less zeal than
-America to the production of greater wealth; and
-America is no less anxious than Europe to enjoy the
-advantages which may even now accrue to the world
-from the spirit of tradition.</p>
-
-<p>Consequently the discussion of the question whether
-America is superior to Europe or Europe to America is
-a futile enterprise and labour lost; because the balance
-between the differences is rapidly adjusting itself.
-Nevertheless, if any difference exists to-day between the
-two continents, it is undoubtedly this: that all the
-phenomena of social life in America are simpler and
-clearer, and less overlaid and obscured by traditions,
-institutions, and century-old ideas and sentiments than
-in Europe. For this reason, the careful observer will
-find in America a much more profitable field for the<span class="pagenum" id="Page_220">220</span>
-study of the dangerous tendencies and exaggerations of
-modern civilisation which are common to Europe and
-America. Of these dangerous tendencies, the one which
-has struck me most in the course of my travels in
-America, and has given me most food for thought, is
-precisely this, which I have treated in this my latest
-work and which forms, as it were, the crown to the
-whole discussion of the dialogue. Modern civilisation
-has accomplished miracles and marvels without number,
-since she left behind her the limits, material and
-ideal, within which the timid generations of old confined
-themselves,—since she outstepped and upset these
-limits on her way to conquer the earth, riches, and
-liberty. Now, however, precisely because she has
-crossed all the limits and no longer has any before her,
-she finds herself impelled on every side, in politics,
-customs, morals, art, and philosophy, to excesses which
-may one day prove very dangerous. Men are beginning
-to have a vague presentiment of this danger. They do
-not clearly see, however, the quarter from which it
-threatens. They disquiet themselves without thoroughly
-diagnosing the evil. And this disquietude may
-perhaps explain the pessimism which afflicts a civilisation
-so flourishing and fortunate in many respects as
-that of our own times.</p>
-
-<p>For this reason, I thought that the great problem of
-the limits might grow little by little, on board a transatlantic
-liner, out of a discussion about America. An
-Italian, who has made money in America, and who, like<span class="pagenum" id="Page_221">221</span>
-so many Europeans who have made their fortune thus,
-is an admirer of the New World, one evening launches
-out into a eulogy of young America at the expense of
-old Europe. He extols the civilisation of machinery,
-progress, and liberty, by contrast with what remains in
-Europe of the ancient civilisation whose efforts were
-directed to improving the quality of things rather than
-augmenting their quantity; which left the world poor
-while it created arts, religions, moralities, and rights.
-The discussion becomes heated, complicated, and diffuse
-until, under the guiding influence of an old savant who
-knows Europe and America too, it concentrates on this
-point: Granted that man was well-advised to exceed
-the ancient limits within which preceding civilisations
-had confined him, to hurl himself on the world and to
-conquer it; up to what point may man aspire to liberty
-in every department of life, without endangering in the
-long run the most precious fruits of his conquest?</p>
-
-<p>The book does not pretend to solve this formidable
-problem. No philosopher, no writer, no book could
-solve it. It can only be solved by a radical revolution
-in the ideas, sentiments, and interests of the masses.
-But the book which I have written purports to throw
-light on some, at least, of the essential aspects of the
-problem. It endeavours to make it clear to the men of
-our time, by harping on a principle of great antiquity,
-great simplicity, and great modesty, which may be
-perhaps usefully recalled to the memory of present
-generations, in Europe as well as in America. That<span class="pagenum" id="Page_222">222</span>
-principle is, that man is a being of limits; and that he
-ought, therefore, to observe in his desires a certain mean.
-A civilisation must remember that it is the sum of the
-efforts of a great many individuals; that these individuals
-may be very numerous, but that each one is a
-small limited being; and that the sum of their efforts
-cannot be infinite. Consequently, a civilisation must
-not let its desires and wishes extend untrammelled in
-every direction. It must learn to confine itself within
-limits.</p>
-
-<hr />
-
-<div id="toclink_223" class="chapter">
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_223">223</span></p>
-
-<h2 class="nobreak" id="III-VI">VI<br />
-
-<span class="subhead">THE RIDDLE OF AMERICA</span></h2>
-</div>
-
-<p class="drop-cap"><span class="smcap1">In</span> Argentina, there are vast and luxuriant valleys,
-over which the train seems to creep toward the very
-edge of a horizon which ever recedes as the traveller
-advances. From time to time, four or five red one-storied
-houses, clustered behind a station, recall to his
-mind the fact that this wilderness is actually inhabited.
-In Brazil, so far as the eye can see, there are ranges of
-mountains, shadowy even in brilliant daylight, in the
-midst of which, from time to time, one mountain stands
-out more distinctly than its fellows. The shadowy hills
-are those still covered by the primeval forest; the others,
-those where the timber has been burned off and replaced
-by coffee plantations; but even here there is no trace of
-human life. One must travel long hours by railroad
-before even catching sight of a village.</p>
-
-<p>In North America, or at least in its Eastern States,
-there are vast and desolate tracts. From time to time
-a village appears, bristling with chimneys. Then the
-traveller slips on into the deserted country. Another
-village appears, only in its turn to disappear. Then all<span class="pagenum" id="Page_224">224</span>
-at once the train begins to rush through the midst of
-houses. On, on it goes. The houses never cease to
-follow it. Huge edifices rise from the midst of the little
-dwellings like giants from a crowd of dwarfs. Automobiles
-and trolley cars move through the streets. It
-is a great city; half a million, a million, two million men
-are crowded together there in the shadow of a thousand
-chimneys, surrounded on every side by an almost
-deserted country. What a strange sight are these
-wildernesses to a European accustomed to live in one of
-the crowded countries of the Old World where men have
-built their houses everywhere, from the shores of the
-sea up to the highest habitable slopes of the mountains!</p>
-
-<p>In observing a phenomenon so novel to his experience,
-the historian of antiquity is deeply interested; and as he
-studies it, like so many other Europeans in the presence
-of the same spectacle, he forgets his own preoccupations.
-The riddle of America rises before him and the desire
-of finding an answer to it turns him from his former
-studies. For America is a true riddle to Europeans.
-During the past thirty years, not only the United
-States, but even smaller American countries like Brazil
-and Argentina, have impressed themselves sharply upon
-the attention of Europe. The Old World has been
-compelled to recognise that America has in her turn
-become a mighty historic force; and that she exercises
-an influence on the Old World which grows continuously
-greater. When one reflects that, only a century and a
-half ago, all these American states were merely poverty-stricken<span class="pagenum" id="Page_225">225</span>
-colonies of Europe, harshly exploited by their
-European masters, one cannot suppress amazement at
-the rapidity with which their destiny has changed.</p>
-
-<p>What power is it which has worked this miracle?
-On this point, it is impossible to feel any doubt; the
-power is wealth. These plains and these mountains
-which look so deserted are tilled, mined, worked with
-intensest energy; and every year, with a generosity
-which seems inexhaustible, they yield to the men who
-have toiled over them prodigious quantities of cereals,
-tobacco, coffee, wool, gold, silver, iron, oil—an enormous
-torrent of riches which pours over the entire
-world. The great industrial cities of North America
-manufacture these raw materials with profits so large
-and swiftly won that to the Old World they seem fantastic.
-In these plains, in these valleys, in these mountains,
-in these cities, labourers receive higher wages,
-merchants and manufacturers make their fortunes
-faster, capitalists come into contact with mightier
-interests, landlords draw higher rents from this prosperity—all
-the sources of profit are more abundant
-than in Europe. And these conditions have made it
-possible for a few of Fortune’s favourites to pile up in
-the course of a single lifetime wealth whose vastness
-makes the brain swim. America has, in fact, succeeded
-in producing riches at a rate of speed that man has never
-yet attained elsewhere in the world. She has been the
-principal factor in the fabulous increase of the world’s
-wealth during the last fifty years. Her riches have<span class="pagenum" id="Page_226">226</span>
-become one of the historic forces of our civilisation, and
-one of the principal preoccupations of the European
-mind.</p>
-
-<p>Whence come these vast riches and whither do they
-go? How is it that America can grow rich so much
-faster than Europe? Is it thanks to far more fortunate
-physical conditions, which bear no relation to the deserts
-of man? Or is it in consequence of moral and intellectual
-qualities which are lacking in Europeans? And
-what will be the ultimate effect of this economic superiority?
-Riches may be the goal of an individual’s
-efforts; for a nation they can only be means to conquer
-the other good things of life which we call civilisation:
-glory, grandeur, power, beauty, knowledge, moral
-refinement. Can America, and will she, make use of
-her riches to rob Europe of the intellectual and moral
-leadership which the latter still possesses? Or will these
-riches, too swiftly won, exercise an evil influence simultaneously
-upon Europe and America, by making both
-continents more materialistic?</p>
-
-<div class="tb">* * * * *</div>
-
-<p>Such is the riddle of America, which, for some time
-past, has been steadily forcing itself upon the attention of
-Europe. To arrive at an answer, we must know whether
-the influence of a too swift economic development of
-the New World upon the higher activities of the mind,
-upon morals, upon science, art, and religion is beneficial
-or the reverse. The detractors of America—and there
-are many of them in Europe—affirm without hesitation<span class="pagenum" id="Page_227">227</span>
-that the Americans are barbarians laden with gold; that
-they think only of making money, and that, in consequence
-of their riches, they lower the level of Europe’s
-ancient civilisation and infect its beautiful traditions
-with a crass materialism. Admirers of America, on
-the contrary—and of these there are as many in Europe
-as there are detractors—will tell you that the New
-World is giving to the Old a unique example of energy,
-activity, intelligence, and daring. Let old Europe then
-give heed; beyond the Atlantic, young rivals are girding
-themselves with new weapons to dispute with her the
-superiority of which she is proud. What must one
-think of these conflicting answers to the puzzle?</p>
-
-<p>Let us begin with the reasoning of the detractors:
-“Americans are barbarians laden with gold.” In order
-to simplify the discussion, let us limit our examination
-to the United States, which is justly entitled to represent
-contemporary America with all its qualities and
-all its defects. No long sojourn within the borders of
-the United States is necessary to convince a person that
-in the great Republic people think only of making
-money. A writer partial to paradox might well amuse
-himself with proving that the Americans are more
-idealistic than the Europeans, or even that they are a
-mystical people. Anyone who cares to find arguments
-to establish this thesis may well be embarrassed by
-their number. For instance, would a people which despised
-the higher activities of the mind have been able
-to create the philosophical doctrine which is popularly<span class="pagenum" id="Page_228">228</span>
-known to us under the name of “Pragmatism”? The
-Pragmatist affirms that all ideas capable of rendering
-useful service are true. He takes utility as his standard
-of the measure of truth. This theory has seemed to
-many writers of the Old World a decisive proof of the
-practical mind of the American people, who never forget
-their material interests, even in connection with metaphysical
-questions. This, however, is a mistake.
-Pragmatism does not propose to subordinate the ideal to
-practical interest. Its purpose is to reconcile opposing
-doctrines by proving that all ideas, even those which
-seem mutually exclusive, can help us to become wiser,
-stronger, better. What service is there then in struggling
-to make one idea triumph over another instead of
-allowing men to draw from each idea the good which
-each can yield? In a word, Pragmatism, as America
-has conceived it, is a mighty effort to give the right of
-expression in modern civilisation to all religious and
-philosophical doctrines which in the past have stained
-the world with their sanguinary struggles.</p>
-
-<p>A beautiful doctrine this, which may lend itself to
-many objections; but true or false, it proves that the
-people who have conceived it, far from despising the
-ideal, have such respect for all ideas and all beliefs, that
-they have not the courage to repel a single one. Such
-a people wishes to learn all and understand all.</p>
-
-<p>Another proof of this same characteristic is furnished
-by American universities. Europeans have all heard
-descriptions of these great American universities,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_229">229</span>
-Harvard and Columbia, for example. They are true
-cities of learning with vast and splendid buildings,
-gardens, pavilions, laboratories, museums, libraries,
-athletic fields for physical exercises, pools where
-students can go to swim. They are enormously rich
-and, at the same time, always in dire straits. How can
-that be? Because no speciality or item of perfection is
-allowed to be lacking. All the languages and the
-literatures of the world which have reached any degree of
-importance, all the histories, all the sciences,—judicial,
-social, moral, physical, natural,—all the divisions of
-mathematics, and all the philosophies, are taught there
-by hundreds of professors. Private citizens of the rich
-classes, bankers, manufacturers, merchants, have in a
-great degree met from their private purses the steadily
-growing needs of the universities.</p>
-
-<p>There is the same tendency in art. That American
-cities are ugly, I willingly admit. It would need much
-courage, no doubt, to brand this affirmation as false,
-but it would also be unjust to deny that America is
-making mighty efforts to beautify her cities. All the
-schools of architecture in Europe, especially that of
-Paris, are full of Americans hard at work. The sums
-which cities, states, banks, insurance companies,
-universities, and railroads, have spent in beautifying
-their magnificent edifices is fabulous. Not all these
-buildings, by any means, are masterpieces, but there are
-many which are very beautiful. America has architects
-of indisputable worth. In Europe, men like to repeat<span class="pagenum" id="Page_230">230</span>
-that Americans buy at extravagant prices objects of
-ancient art, or things that pass for such, not distinguishing
-those which are beautiful and ancient from
-those which are inferior and counterfeit. But those who
-have seen something of the houses of rich Americans
-know that, although there are snobs and dupes in
-America, as everywhere else, there are also people who
-know the meaning of art, who know how to buy beautiful
-things, and who search the world over for them. You
-will find in the streets of New York every variety of
-architecture, just as you find in its libraries all the
-literatures of the world, and in its theatres all the music,
-and in its houses all the decorative arts.</p>
-
-<p>“The barbarian laden with gold” is, then, a legendary
-personage, but it is not at all surprising that such a
-conception should exist. Modern society is organised
-in such fashion that it is impossible even to conceive of
-a people at once rich and ignorant. Industry, business,
-agriculture, demand nowadays very special technical
-knowledge, and a very complete social organisation;
-that is to say, they imply a scientific, political, and
-judicial civilisation of a reasonably high order. Thus
-America is not at all uninterested in the higher activities
-of the mind. It would be more just to say that as
-a nation, and without regard to individual instances, she
-interests herself in such activities less than in industry,
-in business, and in agriculture. But is not this also the
-case with Europe? Who would dare affirm that the
-progress of the arts and sciences and letters is at this<span class="pagenum" id="Page_231">231</span>
-moment the principal concern of the governments and
-of the influential classes of the Old World? We Europeans
-have only to listen to what people round about
-us are saying. Their talk is all of bringing the cultivation
-of the land to economic perfection, of opening coal
-and iron mines, of harnessing waterfalls, of developing
-industries, of increasing exports. Kings who rule “by
-the grace of God” publicly declare that nothing interests
-them so much as the business of their countries!</p>
-
-<p>If all this were characteristic only of American barbarism,
-we should be obliged to admit that Europe is
-Americanising herself with disconcerting rapidity. But
-this economic effort of Europe in turn presents nothing
-that need surprise us; like the American development,
-it is only the dizzy acceleration of a vast historic movement
-whose beginnings go back to the far distant day
-when an obscure and obstinate Genoese set sail, and in
-the midst of the waters of the Atlantic crossed the
-impassable boundary of the Old World. Yes, before
-that day, Europe had created admirable arts and literatures,
-profound philosophies, consoling religions, lofty
-morals, wise systems of justice, but—she was poor.
-She produced little, and produced it slowly; she had
-defied tradition and authority; she had fettered human
-energy by a multitude of laws, precepts, and prejudices.
-To humble men’s pride, she kept repeating to them that
-they were feeble and corrupt creatures. She taught
-them to use Virgil’s beautiful figure that they were like
-“a rower who painfully forces his boat against the<span class="pagenum" id="Page_232">232</span>
-current of the stream. Evil be on his head if for one
-instant he forgets, and ceases to struggle against the
-current’s force; in that moment, he is lost; the flood
-sweeps away his fragile boat.”</p>
-
-<p>One fine day, however, Europe discovered a vast
-continent in the midst of the ocean. Then it dawned
-upon her that Prometheus had been but a clumsy thief,
-for he had stolen only a tiny spark of fire; she discovered
-mines, coal, and electricity. She created the steam-engine
-and all the other machines which have been
-derived from it. She succeeded in multiplying riches
-with a rapidity unimagined by remoter ancestors.
-From that moment, man no longer contented himself
-with dreaming of the Promised Land. He wished to go
-there. He destroyed all the traditions, the laws, and
-institutions which place limitations upon the store of
-human energy. He learned to work swiftly. At a
-single stroke, he conquered liberty and riches, and he
-conceived the idea of progress. If America seems to-day
-to symbolise this movement, which has turned the
-world topsy-turvy, the movement was derived from
-Europe. After having conceived the idea of such a
-revolution, could Europe remain untouched by it?</p>
-
-<div class="tb">* * * * *</div>
-
-<p>It would appear then that the riddle of America is
-very simple. The answer contains nothing to make us
-uneasy. The riches of the New World threaten no
-catastrophe to the noblest traditions of our civilisation.
-For New York’s wealth is only a part of the riches<span class="pagenum" id="Page_233">233</span>
-produced in the same economic development in the
-two worlds. The ultimate development of these
-mighty riches might be merely a general advance, both
-material and ideal, of Europe and America. Rich and
-prosperous Americans might try to assimilate the culture
-of Europe, and on her part Europe, in her effort to
-increase her own riches, might seek to equal America.
-But a historian of antiquity who returns from America
-cannot share this optimism. In the lap of modern
-civilisation, there are twin worlds struggling with each
-other for leadership. But these two worlds are not, as
-people are apt to think, Europe and America. Their
-names are Quality and Quantity.</p>
-
-<p>The civilisations from which our own is sprung were
-poor indeed. They set limits to their desires, their
-ambitions, their spirit of initiative, their audacity, their
-originality. They brought forth slowly and a little at a
-time, and suffered continuously from the insufficiency
-of their material resources. They looked upon the
-amassing of wealth merely as a painful necessity; but,
-in all things, they sought to attain the difficult model of
-perfection, whether in art, or in literature, or in the
-realms of morality and religion. The aristocratic
-character of almost all the industries of the past, the
-importance which was formerly bestowed on the decorative
-arts and on all questions of personal morality,
-ceremonial, and form—these are all proofs of it. It was
-Quality, not Quantity, which carried our forefathers
-forward. All the limitations to which these civilisations<span class="pagenum" id="Page_234">234</span>
-were subject, so astonishing to us to-day, were only the
-necessary cost of these perfections which men once so
-ardently desired. We have turned upside down the
-world our ancestors lived in. We have made our goal
-the multiplication of riches. We have won liberty,
-but we have been obliged to abandon almost all the
-ancient ideals of perfection, sacrificing Quality in
-everything.</p>
-
-<p>How many of the difficulties which torture this
-brilliant period of ours so cruelly are the result of this
-duel between Quality and Quantity! Look, for example,
-at the present crisis in the study of the classics. Why
-did men formerly study Homer and Cicero with passionate
-zeal? Because, in those days, the great Greek and
-Latin writers were the models of that literary perfection,
-so greatly admired by the influential classes, which was
-not merely an ornament of the mind. The attainment
-of perfection often carried with it the admiration of the
-public, fame, sometimes even glory and high rank.
-In this last century, however, these models have lost
-much of their prestige, either on account of the multitude
-of literatures which have come to be known and
-liked, or because they have proved troublesome to a
-period compelled to write too much and too quickly.
-Just imagine a candidate for the presidency of the
-United States who should pronounce ten or fifteen long
-orations daily and who should in each discourse show
-himself the perfect orator according to the rules of
-Cicero or Quintilian! The day when classical culture<span class="pagenum" id="Page_235">235</span>
-ceased to be an official school of literary taste, on that
-day it was condemned to die; and scientific philology,
-which we have sought to set up in its place, can only
-serve to bury its corpse. No longer models for posterity,
-the books of the ancient authors have become
-like any others, and are less interesting for
-the majority of readers than the works of modern
-literatures.</p>
-
-<p>It is the fashion nowadays to discuss the crisis which
-threatens all the arts. We must, however, remember to
-preserve a distinction. We must divide the arts into
-two categories: those which serve to amuse men by
-helping them to pass the time agreeably, like music,
-the theatre, and, to a certain degree, literature; and
-those which serve to beautify the world, like architecture,
-sculpture, painting, and all the decorative arts.
-It is patent that the crisis which we are considering is
-much more serious among the arts embraced by the
-second category. No epoch has spent so much money
-in beautifying the world as has our own; no age has
-supported so formidable an army of architects, sculptors,
-decorators, and cabinet-makers; no age has built
-so many cities, palaces, monuments, bridges, plazas,
-and gardens. In the midst of lavish plenty, why are
-we so discontented with the results obtained; why have
-not Americans, in view of the enormous sums which
-they have spent to beautify their cities, succeeded in
-building a St. Mark’s or a Notre Dame? They have all
-the materials,—money, artists, the desire to create<span class="pagenum" id="Page_236">236</span>
-beautiful things. What then do they lack? They
-lack one single thing—time.</p>
-
-<p>One day, in New York, I was praising an example
-of American architecture to an American architect of
-great talent. “Yes, yes,” he answered with a touch
-of satire, “my fellow countrymen would willingly spend
-a hundred million dollars to build a church as beautiful
-as St. Mark’s in Venice, but they would command
-me, as a condition of my undertaking the work, to
-finish it within eighteen months.”</p>
-
-<p>That is a significant phrase. How is it possible to
-beautify a world which is incessantly in transformation,
-wherein nothing is stable, and which wishes to multiply
-everything it possesses—buildings, as it would furniture?
-To create beautiful palaces, to construct beautiful
-furniture, to attain the distant ideal of perfection,
-time is essential—time and wise deliberation, reasonable
-limitation of the multiplicity of human demands,
-and a certain stability in taste. No one could have
-built St. Mark’s or Notre Dame in eighteen months,
-and France could not have created her famous decorative
-styles of the eighteenth century if public taste had
-been so fickle as ours, and if everybody at that time
-had wished every ten years to change his furniture.</p>
-
-<p>The crises in classical studies and in the decorative
-arts are, however, still relatively slight in comparison
-with the general intellectual and moral confusion into
-which the doctrine of Quantity has plunged men’s
-minds, by substituting a standard of Quantity in place<span class="pagenum" id="Page_237">237</span>
-of the traditional standard of Quality. If my phrase is
-obscure, examples may possibly elucidate what I say.
-We all know, for instance, that, in recent years, the citizens
-of the United States have waged a bitter campaign
-against the trusts, the great banks, the railroads, and
-insurance companies; in fact, against all the vast powers
-of money. In newspaper articles, in public speeches,
-and in whole volumes filled with accusations, these trusts
-have been charged with being centres of corruption,
-instruments of a new despotism not less odious than the
-political despotism of old. They are decried as scandalous
-conspiracies to despoil honest men of the legitimate
-fruits of their labour. The campaign has
-penetrated to the very heart of the nation; but in the
-face of the enormous indignation of the masses, there
-has been exhibited both in America and Europe the
-Olympian calm of economists and men of great affairs,
-who have denounced this movement of protest as a return
-to Mediæval ideas, and who in the face of a vast
-outcry have paid enthusiastic homage to modern
-finance, its enormous enterprises, and its tremendous
-organisation.</p>
-
-<p>How can there be so vast a difference of opinion in
-an age so intelligent and educated as ours? Is half the
-world struck blind to-day, and is sight given to the
-other half alone? No, there is neither incurable blindness,
-nor sight vouchsafed only to a few. The sole
-reason for the confusion is that men employ different
-standards in measuring the same thing, and for this<span class="pagenum" id="Page_238">238</span>
-reason find it impossible to understand each other. If
-one accepts the quantitative standard, if one admits
-that the supreme object of life is to produce an enormous
-pile of riches as rapidly as possible, the economists
-are right. The injustices and cruelties denounced by
-the adversaries of high finance are merely negligible
-inconveniences in a régime of economic liberty of which
-the modern world is naturally proud, for it is to this
-liberty that the modern world owes most of its wealth.
-Yet we must remember that the idea of leaving the
-wages of each individual to be determined by the
-blind play of economic forces was foreign to all the
-civilisations that preceded our own. They always
-sought to correct the principles of business in order to
-keep them in accord with the principles of charity and
-justice. To carry out this policy, they did not even
-hesitate to limit the development of industry and
-business, for example, by forbidding interest on money.
-Former ages subordinated economic development to an
-ideal of moral perfection; they placed Quality above
-Quantity. If, however, one applies this standard of
-qualitative measure to the modern world, it is these
-detractors of high finance who have the right on their
-side. Many methods employed by modern finance,
-useful as they are from an economic point of view, are
-for the above-mentioned reason none the less repugnant
-to a moral and slightly sensitive conscience. Detractors
-and defenders may dispute to the end of time.
-They will never understand each other, for they start<span class="pagenum" id="Page_239">239</span>
-from different premises, which never can be reconciled
-to each other.</p>
-
-<p>It is this continual confusion between quantitative
-and qualitative standards which prevents the modern
-world from steering a true course amid the gravest
-moral questions. Take, for example, the question of
-progress. Is there an idea more popular to-day, or a
-word more often repeated, than “progress”? And yet
-if to every person who pronounces this word we were to
-put the question, “What do you mean by progress?”
-few indeed would be able to answer with precision.
-There is a thing still stranger. In this century of
-progress, the whole world deplores ten times a day the
-decadence of all things. How can such a contradiction
-be explained? The answer is simply that the same act
-may be judged as a phenomenon of progress or of
-decadence, according as it is viewed from the standpoint
-of Quality or of Quantity. Set an architect and a
-locomotive builder to disputing about the modern
-world. The former will maintain that the world is
-reverting to barbarism because it multiplies cities, and
-hastily and hideously constructed villages without
-being able to create a single one of those marvellous
-monuments which are the glory of the Middle Ages.
-The latter will reply that the world moves forward,
-because the population, number, and size of the cities,
-the amount of cultivated land, the extension of railroads,
-increase without cessation. The interlocutors
-will never come to understand each other, just as two<span class="pagenum" id="Page_240">240</span>
-men who look at the world through spectacles of different
-colours can never agree on the colour of their environment.
-The riddle of America, which for some time
-past has bothered Europe so much, is merely another
-example of this permanent confusion of standards which
-characterises the age in which we live.</p>
-
-<div class="tb">* * * * *</div>
-
-<p>America is neither the monstrous country where men
-think solely of making money, nor the country of marvels
-boasted by her admirers. It is the country where
-the principles of Quantity, which have become so
-powerful during the last one hundred and fifty years,
-have achieved their most extraordinary triumph. An
-active, energetic, vigorous nation has found itself
-master of an enormous territory, portions of which were
-very fertile and other portions very rich in mines and
-forests, at the very moment when our civilisation finally
-invented the machine which makes possible the exploitation
-of vast countries and the swift creation of
-wealth: the steam-engine.</p>
-
-<p>Less cumbered by old traditions than the elder
-nations, and with a vast continent in front of her,
-America has marched along the new roads of history
-with a rapidity and an energy for which there is no
-precedent. Ten, fifteen, thirty times in a single century
-has she multiplied her population, her cities, and
-all the wealth coveted by man. She has created, in
-careless and prodigal profusion, a society which has
-subordinated all former ideas of perfection to a new<span class="pagenum" id="Page_241">241</span>
-ideal; ever building on a grander scale and ever building
-more swiftly. No, it is not true that America is indifferent
-to the higher activities of mind, but the effort
-which she spends upon the arts and sciences is, and will
-long remain, subordinate to the great historic task of
-the United States, the intensive cultivation of a huge
-continent. Intellectual things will remain subordinate,
-although very many Americans of the upper classes
-would wish that it were otherwise.</p>
-
-<p>In just the same way, it is not accurate to say that,
-in contrast to American barbarism, Europe reaps the
-harvest of civilisation; just as it would be unfair to say
-that the Old World is done for, exhausted by its petrifying,
-inevitable routine. The ancient societies of Europe
-have likewise entered into the quantitative phase of
-civilisation. The new demon has also got hold of them.
-In Europe, as well as in America, the masses of people
-long for a more comfortable existence; public and private
-expenses pile up with bewildering speed. Thus
-in the Old World also the production of wealth must be
-increased, but this enterprise is far more difficult in
-Europe than in America. The population of Europe is
-much more dense than that of the New World; a portion
-of its lands is exhausted; the great number of political
-subdivisions and the multiplicity of tongues increase
-enormously the difficulties of conducting business on a
-great scale. Traditions handed down from the time
-when men toiled to produce slowly and in small quantities
-things shaped toward a far-distant ideal of perfection<span class="pagenum" id="Page_242">242</span>
-are still strong among its people. Europe, then,
-has the advantage over America in the higher activities
-of the mind, but she cannot help being more timid,
-more sluggish, and more limited in her economic
-enterprises. America and Europe may each be judged
-superior or inferior to the other according as the critic
-takes for his standard the criteria of Quality or of
-Quantity. If a civilisation approximates perfection in
-proportion to the rapidity with which she produced
-riches, America is the model to be followed; if, on the
-contrary, perfection is expressed by the measure of the
-higher activities of the spirit, Europe leads the way.</p>
-
-<div class="tb">* * * * *</div>
-
-<p>The riddle, then, seems solved, but the reader may
-object that it is solved only by admitting that we dwell
-in a perpetual condition of misunderstanding; that the
-modern world is a sort of Tower of Babel where men
-speak a tongue which others cannot understand. If
-this agreeable news were the only thing brought back
-by the historian of antiquity from his two voyages to
-America, he might better perhaps have spared himself
-the trouble! Such might well be the conclusion of this
-long argument! Nevertheless, it is indisputable that
-the modern world demands two contradictory things,
-speed and perfection. We wish to conquer the earth
-and its treasures with all possible haste. To this end,
-we have created tremendous machinery and have
-uncovered new forces in nature. It is a huge task, no
-doubt, but to accomplish it we must renounce almost<span class="pagenum" id="Page_243">243</span>
-all the artistic and moral perfections which used to be
-at once the torment and joy and pride of our forefathers.
-It is a painful necessity indeed, against which our age
-revolts, and from which it seeks in vain every possible
-channel of escape.</p>
-
-<p>Let us strip off the last shred of illusion. Deterioration
-must ever continue amongst the ideals of perfection
-which our ancestors worshipped, so long as population
-multiplies and the demands and aspirations of all
-classes, as well as all expenses, public and private,
-continue to increase on the scale and with the momentum
-with which they are increasing at this moment.
-Even if this formidable revolution should slacken a
-trifle, the ideal of Quantity must spread its empire over
-the earth, morality and beauty must of necessity be
-subordinated to the prime necessities of constructing
-machines ever increasing in speed and power, of expanding
-cultivated land, and of working new mines. Art,
-like industry, agriculture, like literature, will be compelled
-to increase their production to the continuous
-deterioration of their quality, and our secret discontent
-will grow in proportion as our triumphs increase. Unable
-ourselves to decide between Quality and Quantity,
-we shall never know whether the great drama of the
-world at which we are looking is a marvellous epoch of
-progress or a melancholy tragedy of decadence.</p>
-
-<p>From this singular situation, there is only one possible
-way of escape; a method which has no precedent in
-the world’s history. It is that very method, however,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_244">244</span>
-which men will not hear spoken of. It would be absolutely
-essential to create a movement of public opinion
-through religious, political, or moral means, which
-should impose upon the world a reasonable limit to its
-desires. To the age in which we live, it seems impossible
-to express an idea seemingly more absurd than this.
-The material situation of every one of us is to-day
-bound up with this formidable movement, which drives
-men ceaselessly to increase the making and spending of
-wealth. Think what an economic crisis there would be
-if this movement were to slow down. All the moral
-systems which governed the world down to the French
-Revolution forced upon men the belief that they would
-grow more perfect as they grew simpler. When religion
-and custom were not sufficient to teach men to set
-limits to their needs and desires, then these old moral
-systems had recourse to sumptuary laws. In direct
-contrast to this, the nineteenth century affirms that
-man grows more perfect in proportion as he produces
-and consumes. So confusing are the definitions of
-legitimate desires and vices, of reasonable expenses and
-inordinate luxury, that in this century it is almost
-impossible to differentiate between the one and the
-other.</p>
-
-<p>A vast revolution has been brought into being, the
-greatest, perhaps, which history can show; but if the
-new principles which our century has borne to the front
-should be developed until they insured the ultimate and
-supreme triumph of Quantity, would it be possible to<span class="pagenum" id="Page_245">245</span>
-escape what would amount to the demolition of the
-whole fabric of the glorious civilisation bequeathed to
-us by the centuries; religious doctrines and the principles
-upon which morality is based, as well as all the
-traditions of the arts?</p>
-
-<p>History knows better than do we the dusky roads of
-the future, and it is idle for us to wish to see the way
-along them; but in spite of our ignorance of the future,
-we have duties toward the past and toward ourselves,
-and is it not one of these duties to call the attention of
-our generation to the possibility of this catastrophe,
-even if our generation likes to turn its face away from
-it? Very often during my travels in America, I used
-to ask myself whether men of various intellectual interests
-might not find in this duty something to strengthen
-their conscience for the part which they must play in
-the world.</p>
-
-<p>If we except medicine, which aims to cure our bodily
-ills, those sciences which are concerned with discoveries
-useful to industry, and those arts which entertain the
-public, all other branches of intellectual activity are
-to-day in dire confusion. Is there a pious clergyman
-who has not asked himself in moments of discouragement
-what good it is to preach the virtues of the Christian
-faith in a century whose dynamic power springs
-from an exaltation of pride and an emancipation of
-passion which amount almost to delirium? What
-intelligent historian is there who does not now and then
-ask himself why he persists in telling over again the<span class="pagenum" id="Page_246">246</span>
-events of the past to a generation which no longer looks
-ahead, and which rushes violently on the future, head
-down like a bull? What philosopher is there who, as
-he pursues his transcendental preoccupation, does not
-feel himself sometimes hopelessly adrift, like a being
-fallen upon the earth, from another planet, in an age
-which no longer is passionately interested in anything
-except economic reality? What artist is there who
-seeks not only to make money, but to reach the perfection
-of his ideal, who has not cursed a thousand times
-this frenzied hurly-burly in the midst of which we live?</p>
-
-<p>From time to time, it is true, there seems to be a
-genuine revival of the ancient ideal; men suddenly
-appear who seem to interest themselves afresh in the
-progress of religion, in the future of morality, in the
-history of the past, in the problems of metaphysics, in
-the artistic records of civilisation long since dead.
-These are, however, only passing phenomena, and they
-are not enduring enough to give artists and philosophers
-the definite consciousness of playing a well-thought-out
-and useful part.</p>
-
-<p>If all intellectual activities of to-day tend to become
-either lucrative professions or government careers; it is
-because nowadays such careers aim either at the acquisition
-of money or the attainment of social position, and
-no longer find their end in the careers themselves.
-And yet—how many times as he travelled across the
-territory of the two Americas, watching all day fields
-of wheat and rye, or plantations of maize or coffee,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_247">247</span>
-extending to the very edge of the solitary horizon, how
-many times has the historian of antiquity brooded over
-those fragments of marble wrought by the Greeks in
-such perfection, which we admire in our museums, and
-pondered upon the fragments of the great Roman
-system of jurisprudence preserved in the “<i xml:lang="la" lang="la">Corpus
-juris</i>.” Did not the Greeks and Romans succeed in
-reaching this marvellous perfection in the arts and laws
-because there came a time when they were willing to
-cease extending the limits of their empire over the earth
-and all the treasures it contains? Have we not conquered
-vast deserts with our railroads just because we
-have been able to renounce almost all the artistic and
-moral perfections which were the glory of the ancients?</p>
-
-<p>In the light of this idea, the historian felt that he had
-come to understand all the better ancient civilisation
-and our own, and that his eyes were able to pierce more
-deeply into the shadowy depths of human destiny. A
-civilisation which pursues its desire for perfection
-beyond a certain limit ends by exhausting its energy in
-the pursuit of an object at once too narrow and impossible
-of attainment. On the other hand, a civilisation
-which allows itself to be intoxicated by the madness
-of mere size, by speed, by quantity, is destined to end
-in a new type of crass and violent barbarism. But the
-point where these two opposing forces of life find their
-most perfect equilibrium changes continually from age
-to age; and any epoch approaches more or less near this
-point according to the degree of activity of the two<span class="pagenum" id="Page_248">248</span>
-forces struggling within it. The artist, the priest, the
-historian, the philosopher, in moments of discouragement,
-when they feel themselves assailed by the temptation
-to think only of a career or of money, may well
-find new strength in the idea that each of them is working
-in his different way to preserve an ideal of perfection
-in men’s souls—it may be a perfection of art or of
-morality, of the intellect or of the spirit. Let them
-remember that this ideal, limited as it may seem, serves
-as a dike to prevent our civilisation from being engulfed
-in an overwhelming flood of riches and from
-sinking in an orgy of brutality. This task is so great
-and so noble that those who strive for it ought surely to
-feel that they do not live in vain.</p>
-
-<hr />
-
-<div class="chapter">
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_249">249</span></p>
-
-<h2 class="nobreak part" id="Part_IV"><span class="smcap">Part IV</span><br />
-
-<span class="subhead"><span class="smcap">Politics and Justice in Ancient Rome<span class="pagenum" id="Page_251">251</span></span></span></h2>
-</div>
-
-<hr />
-
-<div id="toclink_251" class="chapter">
-<h2 class="nobreak" id="IV-I">I<br />
-
-<span class="subhead">THE TRIAL OF VERRES</span></h2>
-</div>
-
-<p class="drop-cap"><span class="smcap1">In</span> the early days of the year 70 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span>, a deputation
-from the cities of Sicily arrived at Rome and
-sought an interview with a young Senator, who was already
-famed for his eloquence, by name Marcus Tullius
-Cicero. What could be the object of the Sicilians’
-visit to Rome and to the modest house of the young
-Senator, whose strict probity and modest means made it
-impossible for him to receive his visitors in a sumptuous
-palace? Justice was the object of their visit. For
-three years, from 75 to 73 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span>, Sicily had been governed
-by a young pro-prætor, a scion of an illustrious house,
-who had powerful friends amongst the party in power:
-Caius Cornelius Verres. Daring, imprudent, covetous,
-fond of art and its products and of the pleasures of life,
-emboldened by a rapid and fortunate career, the
-young pro-prætor had certainly much abused his
-power in the provinces and had too readily turned to
-account the corrupt notions of the times in the amassing
-of a huge fortune by all the means, licit and illicit, which
-a pro-prætor could use and abuse, though in doing so<span class="pagenum" id="Page_252">252</span>
-he had offended the interests and susceptibilities of
-others, and had made a great number of enemies. That
-is the only conclusion to be drawn from the fact that,
-after his departure, the cities, accustomed though they
-were to insolent and overbearing governors, decided
-in this instance to present an indictment and had
-recourse to the young Senator who five years before
-had been quæstor in Sicily, and who had left behind
-him in the island a great reputation for culture, generosity
-and honesty. When he left the island, this young
-Senator had himself said to the Sicilians in a speech
-delivered at Lilybæum: “If at any time you have
-need of me, come and fetch me.”</p>
-
-<p>The Sicilians had remembered this promise. The
-laws of ancient Rome allowed any citizen to cite in the
-courts any other citizen whom he suspected of having
-broken the laws. Would Cicero cite Verres in Sicily’s
-behalf? The proposal of the Sicilian cities was a proof
-of remarkable confidence, but it was at the same time
-a dangerous honour. Verres was a rich man; he was
-powerful and had any number of helpers and supporters
-among the party in power. Of even greater assistance
-to Verres than the friendship of the influential was the
-feeling of community of interest amongst the dominant
-faction. This faction was the faction of Sulla, that is
-to say, the more conservative portion of the nobility,
-which, after a terrible civil war waged against the
-Democratic party, had succeeded in seizing the reins
-of government of the Republic. It was a faction<span class="pagenum" id="Page_253">253</span>
-composed of widely differing ingredients. It comprised
-not a few honourable and upright men, who would
-naturally wish the provinces to be governed humanely
-and uprightly. But great though the desire might be
-that the Empire should be governed well, still greater
-was the desire to preserve, together with the constitution
-imposed by Sulla on the Empire, the power bequeathed
-by him. At this juncture, the opposite party
-had been conquered but not destroyed, and its survivors
-were restlessly alert for every opportunity of injuring
-the dominant faction with all the arms provided by the
-constitution, amongst which one of the most dangerous
-was precisely the initiation of scandalous charges
-against prominent persons. Consequently, legal proceedings
-and scandals intended to discredit the State
-had, since Sulla’s time, been looked on with much
-disfavour by the dominant party, even honourable
-members of which, faced with the choice between the
-harm which one of these processes caused to the party
-and to the authority of the State and the injury to
-justice resulting from the escape of a powerful culprit
-unpunished, nearly always preferred the second.</p>
-
-<p>In fact, for years past, the dominant party had
-strained every nerve to prevent these processes, thus
-encouraging the less honourable governors to abuse
-their authority. The result had been the rise in the
-public conscience of a feeling of uneasiness, discontent,
-and irritation, which the stories, often exaggerated, of
-the cruelty and violence of the governors served only<span class="pagenum" id="Page_254">254</span>
-to accentuate. And by none at that moment was this
-uneasiness more acutely felt than by Cicero. Cicero
-belonged to a family of equestrian rank—middle-class
-we should call it—from Arpino. He was a <i xml:lang="la" lang="la">homo novus</i>,
-a self-made man, to use a modern expression, because
-he was the first of the family to become a member of
-the Senate. He was not very rich and, though a man
-of intelligence and vigour, he was somewhat lacking
-in courage. Consequently, he was not the man to
-dare open defiance of the wrath, or a frontal attack
-on the interests, of the dominant caste; rather were
-these violent and terrible accusations so repugnant to
-his nature that he had never brought himself hitherto
-to assume the rôle of prosecutor in any action. He had
-always preferred the more humane part of defender.
-He was, however, an honourable man, with small
-affection—like all the equestrian order—for the faction
-and government formed by Sulla; and he was fully
-conscious of the obligation imposed on him by the
-promise which he had made so solemnly to the Sicilians.
-Besides, he was young—only thirty-six years old—and
-was still a man of secondary importance. A case of
-great public interest, which set all Italy talking, and
-in which he was the popular protagonist, might be of
-great service to his lofty and legitimate ambitions. In
-addition, things had been moving fast recently, to the
-detriment of the party in power, who were accused on
-all sides of outrage and corruption. The consuls for
-that year were Pompey and Crassus, who, though<span class="pagenum" id="Page_255">255</span>
-members of the Sullan party, had come forward as
-candidates with a Democratic programme, promising
-no less than that they would restore to the tribunes of
-the <i xml:lang="la" lang="la">plebs</i> those powers of which Sulla had stripped
-them. There was a feeling in the air which seemed to
-promise that just for once the infamies of a governor
-might receive condign punishment from outraged
-public opinion.</p>
-
-<p>The young advocate realised that the decisive moment
-of his life had come. He agreed to prosecute Verres.
-But what crime or crimes should he lay to his charge?
-At this point emerges the first strange feature in the
-history of this strange case. The budget of charges,
-recriminations, and denunciations against Verres,
-which the Sicilians lodged with Cicero, comprised
-enough and to spare of crimes of every sort, some of
-which were actually of a capital nature. For instance,
-Verres was accused of having ordered Roman citizens
-to execution—which was a capital offence. But what
-did Cicero do? He carefully singled out the least
-serious charge and persuaded the Sicilians to lay an
-indictment <i xml:lang="la" lang="la">de pecuniis repetundis</i>—to demand, that
-is to say, that Verres should be condemned to pay one
-hundred million <i xml:lang="la" lang="la">prezzi</i> (twenty-five million francs)
-as a penalty for having levied unauthorised taxes.
-How are we to explain this forbearance? Cicero in his
-speeches against Verres denounces him as a monster
-and a wild beast. He launches the most terrible
-invectives against his villainies. There is no need,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_256">256</span>
-however, to interpret too literally his glowing periods.
-Not even Cicero could forget, while he was accusing
-Verres, that he himself and the man he was accusing
-belonged to the same class, and were members
-of the same aristocracy, which controlled the vast
-Roman Empire. However keen might be the indignation
-aroused by the misdeeds of Verres, not even
-the strictest section of the aristocracy would have
-approved too relentless a line of attack, or one which
-involved the accused in too serious danger. Personal
-hatred was a less powerful factor than the sentiment of
-caste and the interest each man felt in securing a mitigation
-of the severity of the laws in favour of his fellows,
-in anticipation of a similar privilege for himself when
-occasion might arise. Therefore Cicero acted wisely
-in his clients’ interests when he chose that charge
-which promised the least danger to the defendant;
-for he knew that otherwise the latter would have an
-easier task in escaping conviction.</p>
-
-<p>The weakness of the attack, however, as always
-happens, emboldened the accused. Verres did not
-hesitate one moment to make a political matter of his
-case. He had recourse to all the most influential
-members of his party. He begged Q. Hortensius, who
-was the greatest orator and the cleverest advocate of
-the day, to defend him. In every possible way, he
-tried to enlist in his support party interests and caste
-consciousness. He represented the indictment as a
-machination of the Democratic party, of the opposition,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_257">257</span>
-to bring obloquy on the party which had been
-restored to power by Sulla. He, Verres, was the victim,
-in whose person it was hoped to strike a blow at the
-whole of the Conservative aristocracy, and at Sulla’s
-life work! This view of the matter was at this juncture
-not unconvincing, so that Verres, when he began the
-struggle, found himself supported by powerful friends.</p>
-
-<p>His first move had for its object the elimination of
-Cicero as prosecutor. The Roman law, though it
-allowed anyone to constitute himself accuser of a
-citizen who had violated the laws, did not permit an
-unlimited number of people to get up and accuse a
-single individual. For, in that case, the law would
-have worked oppressively, cruelly, and unconscionably.
-The accusation had to be lodged by a single person;
-and if several persons asked to be allowed to accuse an
-individual, it was the duty of the authority to choose
-one of them as the accuser. Verres accordingly tried
-to find a rival for Cicero. A certain Quintus Cecilius
-Negro, a Roman citizen, but of Sicilian origin and a
-Hebrew by religion, who had been Verres’s quæstor
-in Sicily, appeared before the Prætor, declaring that
-he wished to prosecute Verres, and demanding the
-privilege over Cicero on the pretext that he had been
-insulted by Verres in Sicily. As a matter of fact, there
-had been a violent quarrel between them about a
-certain Agonis, a freedwoman of the temple of Venus
-at Eryx, who practised the profession reserved in the
-ancient world for the slaves of the temples of Venus.</p>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_258">258</span></p>
-
-<p>So a preliminary trial was necessary to decide which
-should be the accuser, Cecilius or Cicero, and this
-trial took place in the early months of the year 70.
-Cicero made a powerful speech in which he clearly
-insinuated that Cecilius was playing a part with the
-connivance of Verres; that the former, if he were
-chosen to be the accuser, would conduct the prosecution
-in the way best calculated to secure Verres’s
-acquittal. He added in more precise terms that the
-case was of the greatest political importance, inasmuch
-as it was bound to prove definitely to the provinces
-whether there was or was not justice to be had in Rome;
-whether the subjects of Rome might expect to find
-their rights impartially defended in the courts of the
-Republic, or whether—as the enemies of Rome and the
-adversaries of the dominant party were repeating on
-all sides—the aristocracy were nothing but a corrupt
-and rapacious association without bowels of mercy
-for the victims whom they tortured.</p>
-
-<p>Cicero was successful in this first skirmish. He
-obtained recognition from the court as the prosecutor
-of Verres, and was granted one hundred and ten days
-in which to proceed to Sicily to collect the proofs of
-his accusation. He started at once.</p>
-
-<p>At Rome, the struggle between the party with the
-purse and the Democratic opposition, encouraged by the
-support of the two all-powerful Consuls, waxed furious.
-Pompey and Crassus induced the Senate to restore to
-the Tribunes their ancient powers. They re-established<span class="pagenum" id="Page_259">259</span>
-the censorship and by the instrumentality of the two
-newly elected Censors, they ejected from the Senate
-many of the more contemptible of Sulla’s partisans.
-Marcus Aurelius Cotta proposed a reform of the courts
-which would have removed the latter almost entirely
-from the influence of the dominant party.</p>
-
-<p>Naturally, these discussions, these laws, and these
-proposals served only to increase the general excitement;
-and of this excitement Verres took advantage
-to identify still further his own cause with that of the
-party in power. He placed at the disposal of the party
-the wealth he had well or badly earned in his province
-as well as his influence and his personality. The party
-on their side chose as candidates for the consulship
-Q. Hortensius, his defending counsel, and Quintus
-Metellus, who was a great friend of Verres; for the
-prætorship, Marcus Metellus, a brother of Quintus
-and no less than Quintus a friend of Verres. They
-opposed with all their force the law proposed by Cotta,
-which would have transformed the courts in a manner
-most unfavourable to Verres’s interests. The Democratic
-party in their turn took the Sicilians’ cause
-under their protection, to the extent of choosing Cicero,
-their illustrious advocate, as candidate for the ædileship.</p>
-
-<p>Thus the elections of the year 70 promised to be
-bound up in the trial of Verres. They seemed likely
-to be the means by which the two parties would
-endeavour to influence public opinion in favour of the<span class="pagenum" id="Page_260">260</span>
-prosecution or of the defence. Unfortunately, when
-Cicero, after an absence of about two months returned
-to Rome from Sicily, with abundant matter in the
-shape of documents and proofs, he found the situation
-of the popular party, and consequently his action
-against Verres—for its fate was bound up in that of the
-party—gravely compromised by a rupture which had
-arisen between the two Consuls. There was no love
-lost between Pompey and Crassus. Each was jealous
-of the other. In putting themselves at the head of the
-Democratic party, they had been guided by ambition
-and political calculations. But they were both too rich,
-and had too many ties with, and friendships among,
-the dominant party—from which both of them came—to
-be able to infuse much zeal and sincerity into their
-services to the opposition. As a result, each had ended
-by attacking the other; and these attacks, after some
-months of activity, had paralysed the Democratic
-party, and restored boldness and confidence to the
-Conservative party, which was now resolved to wreck
-the law of judicial reform and to obtain Verres’s acquittal,
-the two triumphs at which it aimed.</p>
-
-<p>When Cicero returned, the elections were imminent,
-and because of their imminence everyone was in a state
-of preoccupation and uncertainty. It would not have
-been prudent for either party to incur the risk of the
-trial before the elections. So the trial was postponed
-without any difficulty or opposition. It was the month
-of June; and, in the following July, the elections would,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_261">261</span>
-as usual, take place. Those for the consulship and
-prætorship were a great triumph for Verres. Quintus
-Hortensius and Quintus Metellus were elected Consuls;
-Marcus Metellus was elected Prætor. Verres had
-conquered all along the line! The evening of the day
-on which the Consuls were elected, Verres was publicly
-congratulated on the result near the Arch of Fabius
-by several members of the aristocracy; and one of them,
-Caius Curion, told him in so many words that “the
-<i xml:lang="la" lang="la">comitia</i> had acquitted him.” Cicero was naturally
-much upset; but he did not lose heart. He discontinued
-for some time working up his case, and devoted
-himself entirely to his election to the ædileship. The
-Democratic party had realised that, after their want
-of success in the elections to the consulship and the
-prætorship, a further failure in the shape of Cicero’s
-non-election would seriously compromise their chances
-in the prosecution of Verres. In fact, Verres and his
-friends were working like demons against Cicero, using
-against him all the resources of money, intrigue, and
-calumny. Those were days of anxiety and turmoil
-for Cicero, the days of the struggle, but, thanks to the
-energetic support on this occasion of Pompey, Cicero
-was elected.</p>
-
-<p>The elections over, attention was again directed to
-the trial, the opening of which was fixed for the 5th of
-August; and the two parties began to sharpen their
-weapons for the decisive and supreme issue. There
-were two phases to a Roman trial; in the initial phase,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_262">262</span>
-the prosecutor had the first word, opening his case, and
-the defendant replied; the witnesses also were heard.
-Then followed a suspension of the proceedings, after
-which the prosecutor once more spoke and the defendant
-once more replied. Then the jury—for the Court
-was composed of a jury drawn by lot from the body
-of Senators and presided over by the Prætor—gave its
-verdict. Those in favour of acquittal wrote an A
-(<i xml:lang="la" lang="la">absolvo</i>) on the waxed tablet, those in favour of conviction
-wrote a C (<i xml:lang="la" lang="la">condemno</i>). Cicero’s intention was to
-abbreviate his opening statement as much as possible;
-then to bring forward a large number of witnesses whom
-he had brought from Sicily and collected in Rome, so
-as to make a complete history of the whole of Verres’s
-political life and administration. The charge against
-Verres was that he had extorted forty million <i xml:lang="la" lang="la">sestertii</i>
-from the provincials. But it would not satisfy Cicero
-to prove only this point. He wanted to show that
-Verres had been guilty of the countless rascalities
-which the popular voice attributed to him, beginning
-from the time of his first occupation of the office of
-quæstor; in short, to reconstruct with the help of witnesses
-and documentary evidence the whole of his
-public and private life. To strengthen the impression
-made by his case, he intended to bring the witnesses
-forward in groups corresponding to the different
-charges, and to introduce one group after the other,
-prefacing the introduction of each group with a short
-explanatory speech, in such a way as to focus the<span class="pagenum" id="Page_263">263</span>
-attention of the public each time on a definite and
-precise episode in Verres’s career.</p>
-
-<p>This method of procedure on the part of the prosecution
-may seem to us barbarous and inhuman. We
-should think it atrocious if, even against the greatest
-of scoundrels, the prosecution instituted an inquiry
-into the whole of his life in order to punish him for,
-and to convict him of, a single offence. Against such
-methods, we should not expect anyone, however innocent,
-to be able to defend himself. And yet, so greatly
-do feelings and ideas change in the world—Verres and
-most of his friends had hopes of finding their best line
-of defence in this relentless prosecution. An all-embracing
-accusation, such as Cicero intended to make,
-might, it is true, annihilate a man; but it required much
-time, days and days of discussion. Now, time was the
-ally on which Verres and his friends counted most
-confidently. The trial began on the 5th of August;
-the 16th to the 31st of August were the dates fixed
-for the celebration of the games which Pompey had
-promised for years past in memory of his victories over
-Sertorius. During this interval, the trial would have
-to be suspended. Further suspensions would be
-necessary from the 4th to the 19th of September,
-because of the Roman games; from the 26th of October
-to the 4th of November because of the games of Victory;
-from the 4th to the 17th of November because of the
-<i xml:lang="la" lang="la">ludi plebei</i>. Thanks to this abundance of games, then,
-there was a prospect, especially when Cicero’s wish to<span class="pagenum" id="Page_264">264</span>
-amplify the indictment was taken into account, that
-the discussion would be unduly prolonged. Other
-pretexts for postponement would surely not be wanting.
-In the meantime public interest would flag;
-and, if one could look forward to the new year,
-the presidency of the jury would pass to the new
-Prætor, Marcus Metellus, who was an intimate friend
-of Verres. With his connivance, it would be easy to
-find a way of bringing the prosecution to an end with
-a convenient acquittal. In fact, Hortensius advised
-Verres to let Cicero call as many witnesses as he wished,
-and to let them talk freely, without contradicting them
-and without being drawn into a discussion with them,
-but listening to them in austere and contemptuous
-silence.</p>
-
-<p>The doubtful and decisive point, then, of this great
-struggle was this: whether greater success would attend
-Cicero in his efforts to move the public with his tenacious
-and insistent accusations, or Verres and his friends
-in their efforts to tire out that public with their passive
-resistance. At last, on August 5th, the trial, the
-preparations for which had occupied so many months,
-began. The public expectations and curiosity were
-immense. The struggles and intrigues of the parties
-had by now converted the trial into a political event.
-The Democratic opposition wanted Verres to be convicted,
-so as to inflict a humiliation on the dominant
-party and to be able to accuse it of countenancing the
-pillage of the provinces. The Conservative party<span class="pagenum" id="Page_265">265</span>
-wished for Verres’s acquittal so as to be able to assert
-that these accusations of misgovernment, like so many
-others that had been launched on previous occasions
-against other governors, were calumnies concocted by
-the Democratic party, and noxious calumnies to boot,
-inasmuch as they jeopardised the prestige of the Empire
-amongst its subjects. Rome was, during these weeks,
-full of Italians from the North and South, who had come
-for the elections, the games, and the new census; hence
-the trial gained in general interest and importance.
-During the days of waiting for the Pompeian games to
-begin, this great trial, in which Hortensius and Cicero,
-the Conservative aristocracy and the Popular party,
-were to be pitted against each other, promised to
-be an interesting way of passing the time for all those
-strangers who had nothing to do. In ancient Rome,
-as in all parts of the world nowadays, trials were a
-gratuitous spectacle much to the taste of the public.
-Thus, on that morning of the 5th of August, an immense
-crowd thronged the Forum, round the benches on which
-the judges, the prosecution, the defendant, and his
-supporters were to take their seats.</p>
-
-<p>Verres showed a proud and resolute bearing, and
-appeared surrounded by a crowd of influential friends.
-Cicero had the first word, and made a short speech,
-in which he did not refer to any of the facts to which
-his witnesses were expected to testify, saying that he
-would let them speak for themselves. He preferred
-to deal generically with the political and moral importance<span class="pagenum" id="Page_266">266</span>
-of the trial. He said that the provinces, nay,
-the whole Empire was anxiously following the proceeding
-which would tell whether there were judges
-and any hope of justice in Rome. He concluded with
-a dexterous reference to the suspicions of corruption
-which were flying about, and to the boasts that Verres
-was supposed to have made of his ability, with the help
-of his money, to flout with impunity every court of
-justice. It was for Hortensius to reply to Cicero’s
-speech; but he complained that it had been so vague
-and generic that it contained no single point which he
-could seize and demolish.</p>
-
-<p>Then began a long procession of witnesses, and a
-fierce and venomous lot they were, with terrible tales
-for the ears of the judges and the public! In order to
-secure Verres’s conviction and sentence to a fine of one
-hundred million <i xml:lang="la" lang="la">sestertii</i>, under the <i xml:lang="la" lang="la">lex de pecuniis
-repetundis</i>, Cicero produced witnesses who accused
-him of every sort of crime; of having committed acts
-of sacrilege, of having gone shares with the pirates
-whom he ought to have harried and destroyed, of
-having been guilty of numberless acts of peculation
-and malversation, and of having condemned Roman
-citizens to death! To prove these charges, Cicero had
-unearthed hundreds of witnesses from every class of
-society, of both sexes, and of all ages, who, carefully
-coached and prepared beforehand, entered the witness-box
-to add their quota to the fierce attacks on Verres.
-It is difficult to judge how much of these impassioned<span class="pagenum" id="Page_267">267</span>
-and violent stories was true, and how much pure
-invention, as we have no documentary evidence relating
-to this trial other than the speeches for the prosecution.
-Besides, Verres, as we have said, did not avail himself
-of the right of cross-examination which the law allowed
-him. He allowed the avalanche of charges to slide
-unchecked down the slope, and to hurl itself into the
-valley, hoping that it would stop of its own accord.
-However, it is not improbable that the evidence contained
-no small number of exaggerations. A Sicilian
-friend of mine, an eminent politician and a man with a
-profound knowledge of his native island, is constantly
-reminding me that, even at the present day, the Sicilians
-throw so much passion into their political struggles
-that great circumspection is required in sifting the
-accusations hurled by one side against the other, when
-rivalry and party animosity come into play. “Only
-imagine,” he says, “how it must have been in ancient
-times.” Besides, everyone who reads Cicero’s speeches
-cannot help feeling, from time to time, that the list of
-villainies he enumerates is really too long even for the
-greatest villain that ever lived.</p>
-
-<p>Although we to-day can pass a dispassionate judgment
-on the events of twenty centuries ago, their
-contemporaries, embroiled in the turmoil of unbridled
-passions, were not capable of so great detachment.
-At this point, a phenomenon occurred which neither
-Cicero, Hortensius, nor Verres had foreseen. Public
-opinion, which had been grumbling for a long time at<span class="pagenum" id="Page_268">268</span>
-the excesses of the oligarchical government, and which
-was ready to extend blind credence to such charges as
-the subtle propaganda of the democratic opposition
-devised, gave birth to one of those formidable and
-unexpected movements which no human force can
-resist. Day by day, as the evidence of the witnesses
-spread from the Forum through the city, was digested,
-embroidered, exaggerated from mouth to mouth,—in
-those days, conversation performed the function of
-newspapers, with the same defects, imprecision, and
-exaggeration, as the latter,—an ungovernable wave of
-indignation against Verres swept over Rome. No one
-set himself to sift the evidence dispassionately, or by
-subtle analysis to separate the true from the legendary.
-The weightier and the more terrible the charges against
-Verres, the more readily they found credence. Each
-succeeding day saw an increase in the public indignation
-and fury, as well as in the crowd that filled the Forum.
-On the day on which a witness deposed that Verres had
-condemned to death a Roman citizen who had in vain
-cried, “<i xml:lang="la" lang="la">Civis Romanus sum</i>,” such a hubbub and commotion
-arose among the public that the Prætor was
-obliged to close the sitting in hot haste, for fear of
-some great calamity if the case proceeded. For five,
-six, seven, even for ten days, Verres and his defenders
-faced the storm, hoping that the wind would shift,
-that, after the first burst of passion was spent, public
-opinion would veer round, regain self-control, and re-enter
-a state of calm, conducive to reasoning and discussion.<span class="pagenum" id="Page_269">269</span>
-Each morning saw the inexorable figure of
-Cicero at the head of a new handful of witnesses, who
-came to re-kindle the public indignation by revelations
-of new crimes and villainies, real or imaginary.</p>
-
-<p>When, after fourteen days of discussion, the first
-phase of the case came to an end and there was a suspension
-of proceedings pending the second phase,
-Verres, his defenders, and his friends, were obliged to
-hold a council of war. The situation was desperate.
-The hope of tiring out public opinion with the length of
-the proceedings had proved a vain illusion. There was
-no longer room for hope that the court might acquit
-Verres. Even if every one of the judges had been convinced
-of the entire and complete innocence of Verres,
-they would not have dared to acquit him in face of
-the excited state of public opinion, for fear of being
-suspected of corruption. Rome, Italy, the Empire,
-would have declared with one voice that the judges
-had absolved Verres because they had been bought
-with the gold which he had extorted in such quantities
-from the Sicilians. The public clamoured for their
-victim. Besides, even supposing that the judges
-had the inconceivable courage to acquit Verres, his
-political career, after such a scandal, was at an end.
-What use was it then to persist with the struggle,
-when the battle was already irretrievably lost? It was
-best to give in. Verres had better not show himself
-further at the trial, and had better go into voluntary
-exile. In that case, he was sure to be fined much less<span class="pagenum" id="Page_270">270</span>
-heavily, and to save his patrimony from the wreck
-of his political fortunes.</p>
-
-<p>Verres bowed his head to destiny, which had chosen
-him to be, in the eyes of Italy and the Empire, the
-victim sacrificed to expiate the misdeeds and the outrages
-committed by all the Roman governors since the
-restoration of Sulla. When the trial began again,
-for the second and decisive phase, he did not put in an
-appearance. He had already gone into exile. Such
-was the delight of the judges that, by declaring himself
-guilty, he had spared them the unpleasant and
-responsible task of doing so themselves, that they
-inflicted upon him the lightest of punishments. They
-condemned him to pay, not <em>one hundred</em> millions, as
-the Sicilians demanded, but only <em>three</em> millions of
-<i xml:lang="la" lang="la">sestertii</i>. A fine of three million <i xml:lang="la" lang="la">sestertii</i> was the judicial
-imprimatur on a trial, in the course of which a member
-of the Roman aristocracy had been accused by a host
-of witnesses of the greatest atrocities and outrages,
-some of which, if true, would have sufficed to bring
-him to the scaffold.</p>
-
-<p>When we read the violent speeches which Cicero
-wrote after the trial, and which he would have pronounced,
-if it had continued into its second phase,
-in order to sum up and point the moral of the terrible
-evidence which had been given against Verres; when we
-compare these speeches and the charges which they
-formulate, annotate, and tabulate with the lenient and
-light penalty inflicted, we can, at first blush, only feel<span class="pagenum" id="Page_271">271</span>
-surprise. The historian asks himself whether the
-whole of this trial—which is certainly one of the most
-famous in the history of the world—was not a sort of
-comedy played by actors of great skill for the benefit
-of an ignorant and ingenuous public. Such a judgment
-would, however, be too severe. Cicero was an honourable
-and upright man, and defended the cause of his
-Sicilian clients with sincerity and loyalty. No, this
-trial was not simply a judicial episode. It was a
-political drama, and, like all political dramas, was overlaid
-with phenomena which to a certain extent hide
-its real nature and essence from the eyes of posterity
-as it hid these from those of its contemporaries. It
-must not be forgotten that all the actors in this trial,
-the accused, the prosecutor, the defending counsel, and
-the judges, belonged to the same aristocracy. At a
-certain moment this aristocracy had found itself
-compelled, by intestinal quarrels and by a complex
-political situation, to sacrifice, in a trial at law, one of
-its members in order to satisfy public opinion, Italy,
-and the Empire; in order to prove that it was not true,
-as a whole party was busy whispering about Rome,
-that the Roman governors, provided they belonged to
-the Conservative aristocracy, were allowed to do what
-they liked in the provinces and that their subjects were
-abandoned defenceless to their caprices and their
-greed. But the particular member of the aristocracy
-whom it was found necessary to sacrifice, whether he
-were or were not so great a villain as his enemies<span class="pagenum" id="Page_272">272</span>
-asserted, had friends, protectors, and supporters who
-exerted an influence sufficiently great amongst the
-dominant party to admit of too ruthless an attack
-being made upon him.</p>
-
-<p>Cicero himself who apparently attacks Verres with
-such fury, in reality endeavours to do him as little
-harm as possible. At every stage of his comments on
-the serious evidence of the witnesses, he says that, if
-Verres is not convicted under the <i xml:lang="la" lang="la">lex de pecuniis
-repetundis</i>, he will accuse him of a greater crime, as
-though to persuade him that the prosecution has had
-the utmost possible regard for him. In short, the
-trial and the condemnation of Verres were a twofold
-satisfaction which the Roman aristocracy was forced
-to offer to the public opinion of Italy and to the
-provinces; but, while offering it, she tried, in every
-possible way, to temper the blow to the predestined
-victim. In fact, Verres, though forced to renounce
-every political ambition, was able to live the life of a
-<i xml:lang="fr" lang="fr">grand seigneur</i> quietly in Italy. And that is actually
-what he did, devoting himself especially to the collection
-of those works of art for which he had such a passion.
-After the trial, there is no mention of him in Roman
-history. He disappears; and, after the year 70, his
-name does not reappear till more than twenty-seven
-years later as one of the victims of the famous proscriptions
-organised in 43 and 42 by Antonius, Lepidus,
-and Octavianus: the same proscriptions in which
-Cicero, his accuser, perished. Inasmuch as Verres<span class="pagenum" id="Page_273">273</span>
-had been for the elapsed twenty-seven years but an
-obscure spectator of the political struggles of Rome,
-it is clear that he must have been included in the lists
-of the proscribed because his riches excited the cupidity
-of the Triumvirs.</p>
-
-<p>The famous trial, while it cut short Verres’s political
-career, brought Cicero’s to the heights of success. The
-trial of Verres made of Cicero, who up to that time
-had been a promising young man, one of the foremost
-political figures in Rome. The Conservative aristocracy
-recognised in him an orator whose eloquence
-might be terrible. The Democratic party was grateful
-to him for the humiliation which he had inflicted on
-the dominant party. Italy and the provinces welcomed
-in him the honourable Senator, the disinterested advocate,
-the intrepid defender of down-trodden justice,
-the man who had publicly affirmed, at no small risk
-to himself, that Rome owed it to her own honour to
-govern with equity and uprightness the immense
-empire of which fortune had made her mistress.
-Assuredly, Cicero deserved such admiration, even
-though his attack on Verres had not been so bitter
-as the public supposed.</p>
-
-<p>The trial of Verres is the first great page in Cicero’s
-history. Who could, however, have prophesied to
-him, in 70, that history would write the name of Verres
-beside his own yet once again, but on the last page,
-that of a tragic and glorious death? How life teems
-with strange coincidences! These two men who confronted<span class="pagenum" id="Page_274">274</span>
-each other in one of the most famous legal
-duels in history, who separated with faces turned
-towards such diverse destinies—the conqueror to find
-glory and power, the conquered to find obscurity and
-seclusion—were fated to meet once more in life, at the
-last hour, on the brink of the same abyss.</p>
-
-<hr />
-
-<div id="toclink_275" class="chapter">
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_275">275</span></p>
-
-<h2 class="nobreak" id="IV-II">II<br />
-
-<span class="subhead">THE TRIAL OF CLODIUS</span></h2>
-</div>
-
-<p class="drop-cap"><span class="smcap1">In</span> December of the year 62 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span>, the festival of the
-<i xml:lang="la" lang="la">Bona Dea</i> was being celebrated as usual in Rome.
-This goddess was one of Rome’s strangest deities. She
-represented fertility; and the object of the December
-ceremonies was to move the goddess to grant that all
-the fountains of fertility which nourish the life and
-prosperity of a nation might flow copiously throughout
-the year. Women only were admitted to the festivities,
-which were due to take place at night in the house
-of the Consul or of the Prætor. The wife of the Prætor
-or of the Consul presided; the lady members of the
-aristocracy took part; but the master of the house, with
-all the male slaves, was required to absent himself.
-It was popularly believed that the man who dared to
-take part in the mysteries of the <i xml:lang="la" lang="la">Bona Dea</i> would be
-immediately struck blind.</p>
-
-<p>In that particular year, the ceremonies took place in
-the house of Julius Cæsar, who was Prætor at the time,
-under the presidency of his wife, Pompeia, and his
-mother, Aurelia. Cæsar had left the house, which had<span class="pagenum" id="Page_276">276</span>
-been decorated as the rites required. All the ladies
-of the aristocracy had assembled there, and the mysterious
-ceremonies were being carried on through the
-night, as usual, when in one of the rooms a slave
-belonging to Cæsar’s mother encountered a musician
-who seemed to have lost her way in the huge house, and
-not to know what she ought to do or where to go. The
-slave asked the stranger whom or what she was looking
-for. The musician did not answer. The slave, her
-suspicions aroused by the other’s silence, persisted
-with her questions. The musician was driven at last
-to say that she was looking for one of Pompeia’s slaves,
-by name Abra. But Aurelia’s slave was horror-struck
-when she heard the musician’s voice. It was the voice
-of a man! At once, with loud screams, she gave the
-alarm. A man, a man disguised as a woman, was
-present at the sacred rites of the <i xml:lang="la" lang="la">Bona Dea</i>! The
-musician bolted. Cæsar’s mother, a dignified and
-energetic woman, suspended the ceremonies, immediately
-ordered all the doors to be shut, and, followed by
-all the matrons, searched the house thoroughly from
-top to bottom. At last the musician was found hidden
-in Abra’s room; and several of the ladies present
-believed they recognised in her a young Roman patrician,
-famous in Rome for the blueness of his blood,
-and for his extravagance: Publius Clodius. He was
-expelled from the house, and the meeting broke up.</p>
-
-<p>Next day, all Rome knew that Publius Clodius had
-dared to try to profane the mysteries of the <i xml:lang="la" lang="la">Bona Dea</i>;<span class="pagenum" id="Page_277">277</span>
-and the news created an immense sensation. Publius
-Clodius was the youthful descendant of one of Rome’s
-most ancient, illustrious, and famous patrician houses.
-His father, his grandfather, his great-grandfather, and
-his great-great-grandfather had all been Consuls.
-Thus he belonged to one of those families which impersonated
-in the eyes of Italy the glory, the power, and the
-virtue of Rome. That the youthful scion of one of
-these venerated families should have dared to commit
-such a sacrilege was a thing which would have made
-a painful impression in Rome at any time. But the
-moment was a critical and uncertain one. The impression
-made by the conspiracy of Catiline was still lively
-and fresh. Everywhere, especially in the more respectable
-section of society, a feeling of disgust mingled
-with fear prevailed. The public was in favour of
-severe measures. All seriously minded people gave it
-as their opinion that the prevailing licence of manners,
-and especially the effrontery of the young men, must
-be curbed, if the Empire was not to crumble into decay.
-If matters had come to such a pass that a Claudius, a
-man whose name had for so many centuries spelt to the
-Romans all the austere and traditional virtues of the
-Roman citizenship of old, dared profane the most
-sacred rites of religion, what might not be feared at
-the hands of a creedless, dissolute, corrupt youth,
-which was preparing to invade, with the new generation,
-the official posts of the Republic?</p>
-
-<p>Great, therefore, was the public indignation; and the<span class="pagenum" id="Page_278">278</span>
-strict party, captained by Cato, a small party but
-active and powerful in the Senate, perceived that now
-was the moment to make an example. That Clodius
-had, up to that time, served the Conservative party,
-the aristocratic community which Sulla had restored
-to power; that in the conspiracy of Catiline he had
-zealously helped Cicero and defended the cause of
-the order, counted for little, nay, rather was it all to the
-good. It was necessary to show the people that the
-aristocracy could still, as in the good old times, bring
-themselves to strike at their own members, when they
-failed in their most sacred duties.</p>
-
-<p>The tales which soon spread among the public as to
-the reasons for the sacrilege only served to fan the
-flame of indignation. It was whispered that Clodius
-was the paramour of Pompeia, Cæsar’s wife; and that
-he had endeavoured, with the connivance of Abra,
-Pompeia’s slave, to gain an entrance into the festivities,
-for the purpose of an assignation with her! The sacrilege,
-therefore, was twofold. The rites of the <i xml:lang="la" lang="la">Bona
-Dea</i> were intended to assure the prosperity of the
-people. It was infamous that a young aristocrat should
-have dared to take advantage of them to further an
-intrigue of gallantry. An example must be made;
-this was for several days the general chorus throughout
-Rome. The most sacred things of the Republic could
-not be left a prey to this corrupt and depraved youth.
-The cynicism of a few dissolutes must not be allowed to
-expose the Republic to the wrath of the gods!</p>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_279">279</span></p>
-
-<p>An example must be made—certainly! But how?
-The law contained no provision applying to such an act
-as Clodius had committed. Anyone desirous of prosecuting
-him would not have known what law to invoke
-in order to hale him before the judges. The case was
-unprecedented; and it had never occurred to anyone to
-write it down a crime, with a definite legal imprimatur
-attached. The ancient code was extremely formal, especially
-in questions of rites and religion, and so Clodius’s
-deed remained a wicked, impious, and shameful one,
-which was calculated to cover him with infamy, but
-which could not be punished by the law. Sensible,
-cautious, and prudent people, in the Senate, and out of
-it, lost no time in convincing themselves on this point;
-while Clodius, his friends, and his family, which was a
-most influential one, began to intercede, to pray, and to
-intrigue. It was true that Clodius had committed an
-act of unpardonable levity, which would ruin his political
-career for all time. But it was an act for which
-there was no punishment, save the reprobation of all
-good citizens.</p>
-
-<p>So colourless a solution was, however, not at all to
-the taste of the public, which was deeply moved by the
-sacrilege, and roused to fury against these great families
-who abused their power in so scandalous a way. The
-public demanded a severer punishment. The small
-Pietist party, feeling itself backed by public opinion,
-brought the matter before the Senate, by the mouth
-of an obscure Senator named Quintus Cornificius.<span class="pagenum" id="Page_280">280</span>
-Cornificius proposed that the College of Pontiffs be
-consulted, and their opinion asked as to the gravity and
-character of the crime committed by Clodius. The
-proposal was an ingenious one. According to ancient
-ideas, it was incumbent on the State itself to take
-precautions that the gods should have no motive for
-losing their tempers with the people and the city,
-and thereupon wreaking vengeance upon Rome. With
-the public thrown into such a state of fear and commotion
-by Clodius’s sacrilege, the Senate could not
-refuse to consult the Pontiffs, to learn from them
-whether this act constituted an outrage against the
-gods, and, if so, an outrage of what gravity. The
-College of Pontiffs answered that the act was <i xml:lang="la" lang="la">nefas</i>—the
-technical expression which indicated the gravest of
-delinquencies towards the divinity. Their answer
-could not have been otherwise. Nevertheless, however
-<i xml:lang="la" lang="la">nefas</i> the act might be, there was no law which
-punished it.</p>
-
-<p>So when the answer of the College of Pontiffs reached
-the Senators, the latter found themselves confronted
-with the following situation. A very grave and
-scandalous crime had been committed by one of the
-best-known members of the aristocracy. This crime
-had stirred the public indignation to its depths, and had
-been declared <i xml:lang="la" lang="la">nefas</i> by the College of Pontiffs. Yet
-there was no way of punishing it, because the arsenal
-of the law did not provide the weapons necessary for
-its punishment. The danger inherent in this state of<span class="pagenum" id="Page_281">281</span>
-affairs was obvious. The public, infuriated and dismayed,
-would never believe that Clodius could not be
-punished—because the laws had never even imagined
-that such an abomination could ever be committed by a
-Roman. The public would declare that Clodius had
-escaped his richly-deserved punishment because he
-belonged to one of the most conspicuous and influential
-families in Rome. The aristocracy was superior to the
-law; it could even provoke with impunity the wrath of
-the gods against the city! What was to be done?
-Public opinion, in its agitated state, kept egging on the
-Senate; and the Pietist and ruthless party, profiting by
-the popular agitation, attempted a daring move, proposing
-to the Senate that it should invite the Consuls to
-make a special law, which should have retrospective
-force, and should declare Clodius’s act on a plane with
-the crime of incest,—make it equivalent, that is, to the
-seduction of a vestal virgin, a crime which, according
-to ancient law, was punishable with death, and which
-fell to be judged by the College of Pontiffs. Nevertheless,
-no one, not even Cato, could delude himself
-into thinking that the College of Pontiffs would condemn
-Clodius to death. Consequently, the law proposed
-to constitute a special tribunal,—which would
-not be that of the Pontiffs, nor the usual jury, chosen by
-lot. The Prætor would himself constitute it, choosing
-it from the panel of judges. It was hoped in this way to
-contrive a Court which would condemn Clodius at
-least to exile.</p>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_282">282</span></p>
-
-<p>It is not difficult to realise how daring and dangerous
-it was to propose such a <i xml:lang="la" lang="la">privilegium</i>, as the Romans
-used to call exceptional laws, in times of uproar like
-those, and in the midst of the fierce discords which already
-for so many reasons were splitting up the Roman
-aristocracy. But the indignation and commotion of
-the public, superstitious and fearful as it was, were too
-lively. Cæsar himself had felt the necessity of throwing
-a sop to the public by divorcing Pompeia; and the Senate
-dared not reject the rash proposal, even though
-many wise men, like Cicero, thought that it would be
-more prudent to let Clodius fry in his own grease.
-The two Consuls were invited to draft the law and to
-get it approved by the people.</p>
-
-<p>From this moment, however, difficulties began; and,
-in a few weeks, the prosecution of Clodius assumed a
-new aspect. It became a political matter. That the
-act he had committed was an abominable one, no one in
-Rome denied; but that in order to secure his punishment
-a law should be passed which would not only be a
-special one, but—most important point of all—would
-introduce the principle of the selection of judges by the
-Prætor,—no, to this the Popular, Democratic party
-could not consent. Always concerned not to leave in
-the hands of Sulla’s party, which was still so powerful in
-the Senate and throughout the Republic, too many
-weapons to employ against their enemies, the Popular
-party had recently taken to demanding with the utmost
-emphasis the most rigorous observance of legal forms,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_283">283</span>
-especially in proceedings in the law-courts, which were
-such a convenient means, in the hands of the preponderant
-party, of getting rid of the latter’s adversaries. In
-fact, at that moment the Popular party had begun an
-agitation against the illegalities committed in the
-course of the repression of Catiline’s conspiracy.
-This law, therefore, sounded like a challenge. As a
-matter of fact, of the two Consuls whose duty it was to
-bring it forward, one, Marcus Pupius Piso, though he
-had not dared resist the proposal openly in the Senate,
-was opposed to it; and, while he made a show of obeying
-the orders of the Senate and actually did, with his
-colleague, propose the law, he busied himself behind
-the scenes to secure its rejection. The other Consul,
-Marcus Valerius Messala, on the other hand, was an
-enthusiastic supporter of the law; but it was whispered
-about that a tribune of the <i xml:lang="la" lang="la">plebs</i>, if the law was brought
-forward, would veto it. Clodius and his relations
-worked away vigorously. All the wise and prudent
-men, even Cicero, held themselves in reserve, keeping
-an eye on the progress of events without compromising
-themselves too far; so that Cicero, writing at the end of
-January, 61, to Atticus, could give him to understand between
-the lines that the law would never be passed, and
-that the whole business would be brought to a stand-still
-by the fizzing away of the public anger. For the
-rest, this was the secret wish of all level-headed citizens,
-who, like Cicero, feared dreadful calamities, if the business
-were allowed to assume more serious proportions.</p>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_284">284</span></p>
-
-<p>But all the wiseacres reckoned without Cato and the
-Pietist party, and without the obstinacy of Messala,
-who, irritated by the stolid opposition of his colleague,
-countered it with a determined effort to get the law
-passed. Between them all, they worked and spoke
-with such effect that they succeeded in obtaining the
-support of Pompey, and in bringing the law before the
-<i xml:lang="la" lang="la">comitia</i> in the first fortnight of February. Piso, however,
-was no less resolutely determined than Messala
-that the law he had proposed should not be passed, and,
-as it was his turn to preside over the meeting, he had
-recourse that day to every sort of subtle device to
-prevent the law being passed. He even went so far as
-to distribute to the voters only that tablet which they
-would use in rejecting the law. When the heads of the
-Conservative party, Cato, Hortensius, and Favonius,
-heard of this extraordinary intrigue, they hurried to the
-<i xml:lang="la" lang="la">comitia</i> and began to address the people. Cato distinguished
-himself by a virulent attack on Piso. The
-speeches were effectual in preventing the law from being
-put to the vote, and therefore from being, as it assuredly
-would have been, rejected. They could not, however,
-procure its approval, which, from Clodius’s point of
-view, and for the moment at any rate, came to much the
-same thing.</p>
-
-<p>Men’s passions began to get the better of them. The
-<i xml:lang="fr" lang="fr">amour propre</i> of the two small factions came more
-prominently into play the more the case assumed a
-political aspect. Inasmuch as the opposition of one<span class="pagenum" id="Page_285">285</span>
-of the two Consuls who had proposed the law was the
-greatest impediment to the approval of the law, means
-must be found for getting rid of Piso. The Pietists
-thought of exerting pressure upon him by means of the
-Senate. They summoned a meeting of the Senate on
-urgent business, and proposed a motion inviting the
-Consuls once more to join in recommending the law to
-the popular vote; in other words, intimating to Piso
-that he had better abandon his attitude of obstruction.
-A lively discussion ensued. The friends of Clodius
-opposed the motion with great energy; but it was
-carried by four hundred votes to fifteen. A truly
-crushing majority! Clodius’s act was so offensive to the
-public that few Senators dared openly to side with
-him, even though they were conscious that the law
-which was meant to bring him to book was fraught
-with danger.</p>
-
-<p>Piso, however, did not allow this vote of the Senate
-to influence him. The discontent of the Popular party
-was increasing, and the public agitation, not in favour
-of Clodius, but against the law, was gathering force,
-being focussed on that particular provision which
-undoubtedly was the most dangerous, namely, the
-authority given to the Prætor to choose the judges
-from the panel of jurors instead of entrusting the choice
-to the fortune of the lot. The law, it is true, established
-this procedure only for the purposes of the action
-against Clodius. But was not the precedent a dangerous
-one? Would it not be possible, after this first<span class="pagenum" id="Page_286">286</span>
-experiment, to try to apply the same method to other
-cases? That would result in putting into the hands of
-the preponderant party a formidable weapon for the
-destruction of its adversaries: the giving to the Prætor
-in office the power to choose the judges who should be
-summoned to decide the numberless cases by means of
-which that party sought to deprive their rivals of their
-most influential leaders.</p>
-
-<p>So the struggle waxed fiercer and fiercer. Piso
-would not give way, and the Popular party supported
-him, never mentioning Clodius, but asserting that the
-law was unjust, dangerous, and deadly—that the
-death-blow would be given to the Republic on the day
-on which a magistrate, elected by, and bound by ties to,
-one party, was invested with the power to choose the
-judges for every law-suit. The Pietist party, supported
-by the majority of the Senate, and by the Sullan
-association, adopted the opposite tactics. It made
-light of the provisions of the law and the dangers
-anticipated and denounced by the Popular party. It
-protested that Clodius had committed a horrible
-sacrilege, and could not be allowed to go unpunished
-without compromising still further in the eyes of the
-disgusted and affrighted masses the waning authority
-of the State. Intrigues and plots thickened on this side
-and on that. Both sides endeavoured to influence public
-opinion, but in this attempt the Popular party was
-the more successful. For that party, by dint of dogged
-and dexterous efforts, and without paying any regard<span class="pagenum" id="Page_287">287</span>
-to the votes of the Senate, which was almost unanimously
-favourable to the opposite party, succeeded in
-persuading the public that the law was immoderate,
-tyrannical, and dangerous, especially in the matter of
-the powers entrusted to the Prætor.</p>
-
-<p>The day arrived when the more enlightened men of
-the Conservative party realised that the law, in the form
-in which it had been drafted, would never be approved.
-Piso by himself, helped by the Popular party and by the
-growing mistrust of public opinion, sufficed to checkmate
-the majority of the Senate and the party in power.
-It was necessary, therefore, to devise a compromise.
-And the man who devised it was Hortensius, the great
-orator who ten years before had been Verres’s defending
-counsel. He proposed that the two Consuls should
-abandon their law; and that Fusius Calenus, who was
-tribune of the <i xml:lang="la" lang="la">plebs</i>, should bring forward another, in
-which the first part of the preceding law, that which
-made of Clodius’s act an incest, should be retained,
-but the second part should be modified in such a way
-that the judges summoned to administer it should not
-be the College of Pontiffs but the ordinary jury, chosen
-in the ordinary way, that is to say, by lot, and not, as
-the law of the two Consuls proposed, by the Prætors.
-By this equable compromise Hortensius hoped to
-satisfy all parties—he disarmed the opposition of the
-Popular party, which would not dare, now that the
-law had been purged of the provision which aroused
-the greatest mistrust in the public, to persist in its<span class="pagenum" id="Page_288">288</span>
-opposition, and to risk appearing too openly to desire
-the protection of Clodius. He gave a sop to public
-opinion, which was deeply stirred and offended by the
-scandal. He gave satisfaction to the <i xml:lang="fr" lang="fr">amour propre</i>
-of the Conservative party, by presenting them with the
-head of Clodius. As a matter of fact, he thought—and
-this was the argument he used to persuade the most
-recalcitrant of the Pietist party—that it was not
-necessary to alter the mode of choosing the judges.
-Clodius’s guilt was so evident that it was quite impossible
-to imagine that a court of law, however corrupt,
-could acquit him.</p>
-
-<p>The first of Hortensius’s anticipations quickly came
-true. The law, thus modified, passed without difficulty.
-At once, several citizens hastened to indict Clodius
-of incest. Matters had not gone far, however, before
-everyone perceived that Hortensius’s second anticipation,
-that the conviction of Clodius was inevitable,
-would not be realised so easily. Months had passed;
-the first impression of horror made on the public had
-faded. The Conservative party—the same that had
-made such efforts to save Verres—was too deeply
-committed to obtaining the conviction of Clodius at
-whatever cost, for the Popular party not to take Clodius
-under its protection, though it did so covertly and
-without compromising itself too far. Crassus and
-Cæsar in particular, without appearing on the scene,
-were disposed to do whatever they could, to help
-Clodius, and to procure him, if it were possible, an<span class="pagenum" id="Page_289">289</span>
-acquittal, an outcome which in no less a degree than
-the conviction of Verres, would have been a rebuff for
-the party which Sulla had installed in the government,
-and which, notwithstanding all the reverses which it
-had undergone in recent years, was still so powerful.
-Clodius on his side worked with the energy of despair
-to escape conviction, which would have shattered his
-political career irreparably and forever.</p>
-
-<p>The trial took place at the beginning of May, in the
-midst of a curiosity and excitement which may be easily
-imagined. The two parties had by now decided to face
-each other once again, as in Verres’s time, in the confined
-arena of a law-court. The judges were chosen by
-lot, and the defendant especially availed himself of the
-right which the law conceded to both sides, of challenging
-a certain number of them. Nobody was surprised
-at this, as everyone knew that the struggle would be a
-fierce one, or rather a hopeless one, for the accused.
-Indeed, how could Clodius escape conviction, when his
-guilt was so manifest? In declaring his act to be
-<i xml:lang="la" lang="la">incestum</i>, the law had already condemned him in
-anticipation. When, however, the jury had been
-impannelled, and the trial opened, an unexpected and
-dramatic incident occurred. Clodius defended himself
-by saying that the matrons present at the feast
-in honour of the <i xml:lang="la" lang="la">Bona Dea</i> had been deceived. They
-had mistaken somebody else for him. On that day he
-was actually not in Rome, but at Iteramna (Terni)!</p>
-
-<p>Just at first, this alibi made the public laugh. Nobody<span class="pagenum" id="Page_290">290</span>
-took it seriously. It seemed to everyone that
-Clodius was joking and wished to make fun of the Court,
-or that he was trying a desperate coup. But here, too,
-they were wrong. Clodius intended that his point be
-taken quite seriously, and had prepared his defence
-much more cleverly than his adversaries, emboldened
-by the certainty of victory, supposed. People were
-not slow to realise this, as the trial went on and on,
-without producing that proof of Clodius’s guilt which
-everybody thought so easy and certain, and without
-destroying his daring alibi. The first step was to put
-Clodius’s slaves to the torture,—a step which was
-allowed in a case in which “incest” was imputed. This
-procedure was, however, barren of results. Clodius
-had sent the five slaves of whose evidence he was
-particularly afraid, partly to his brother in Greece, and
-partly to a distant property of his in the Alps. Then
-came Cæsar, who had been cited as a witness, and by
-whose evidence also the enemies of Clodius set great
-store. Had he not divorced his wife immediately after
-the scandal? This divorce clearly indicated that
-Cæsar considered his wife guilty; a state of mind which
-gave ground for hope that he would revenge himself
-by charging Clodius. Cæsar, however, had too great an
-interest in pleasing Crassus, whose desire to give the
-Democratic party the satisfaction of procuring the
-acquittal of Clodius was growing keener and keener.
-So Cæsar deposed under examination that he knew
-nothing and could say nothing, as, in conformity with<span class="pagenum" id="Page_291">291</span>
-religious precepts, he was out of the house that evening.
-Great was the irritation and disappointment of the
-prosecutors, one of whom thereupon, in order to put
-Cæsar in a difficulty, asked Cæsar for what reason, if he
-knew nothing and could say nothing, he had divorced
-his wife immediately after the scandal had broken out.
-Cæsar then, assuming a solemn air, pronounced the
-famous phrase: “Because Cæsar’s wife must be above
-suspicion,” a phrase which historians have proceeded to
-quote as a proof of his precocious monarchical ambitions
-and of his masterful temperament. On the
-contrary, the phrase was merely a <i xml:lang="fr" lang="fr">boutade</i>, devised to
-elude an embarrassing question in a political trial,
-which none of those who heard it took too seriously, and
-in saying which Cæsar himself knew quite well that
-nobody would take him at his word. In fact, the public
-smiled at the idea of the elegant and debt-laden demagogue,
-who was known to all for his somewhat free
-opinions and customs, having become all at once so
-jealous of the spotless reputation of his house.</p>
-
-<p>At any rate, as a loophole the answer was a clever one;
-and the prosecutors could not press the question. So
-Julia, Cæsar’s sister, and Aurelia, his mother, came
-forward. Both deposed that, on the night on which
-the mysteries of the <i xml:lang="la" lang="la">Bona Dea</i> were celebrated, a man
-had been surprised in Cæsar’s house; but that they
-could not say with certainty that the defendant was the
-man. We should be doing an injustice to the memory
-of the two noble dames if we suspected that this evidence<span class="pagenum" id="Page_292">292</span>
-was not candid, but prompted by concern for the political
-interests and friendships of their brother and son.
-Is it not probable that, in the confusion and disorder of
-the just-discovered scandal, neither may have scrutinised
-the man in female disguise with so much attention
-and particularity as to be able to recognise him subsequently
-in court, where Clodius denied the identity
-with so much assurance? Therefore this evidence
-also was in Clodius’s favour; for there was nobody who
-could affirm positively that the man surprised in the
-middle of the rites of the <i xml:lang="la" lang="la">Bona Dea</i> was the accused.</p>
-
-<p>Next came the evidence adduced by Clodius, to
-prove his alibi. It took the form of a certain C.
-Causinius Schola, who deposed frankly and resolutely
-that the gentlemen of the jury might take it from him
-that at a certain hour on the day of the mysteries of
-the <i xml:lang="la" lang="la">Bona Dea</i>, he had conversed with Clodius at Iteramna,
-which was ninety thousand <i xml:lang="la" lang="la">passi</i> distant from
-Rome. This evidence, after that of Cæsar, Julia, and
-Aurelia, made the acquittal of Clodius inevitable.
-Certain proofs of his guilt there were none. The
-improbable alibi, which at the beginning nobody had
-taken seriously, threatened to triumph owing to the
-doubts and scruples of a few witnesses, the adroit
-reticence of others, and thanks to the subterranean
-workings of Clodius’s friends, backed by Crassus’s gold.</p>
-
-<p>Then came a second and even more unexpected surprise.
-At the very moment when Clodius seemed to
-have emerged victorious, there appeared to destroy his<span class="pagenum" id="Page_293">293</span>
-alibi.... Who? Cicero himself. Cited as witness,
-Cicero deposed that on the day of the mysteries, three
-hours before the hour at which Causinius declared that
-he had spoken to Clodius at Terni, Clodius had come
-to call on him at his house in Rome! What had happened?
-Cicero had up to that time adopted a distinctly
-reserved attitude, making it clear that he, who since
-the suppression of Catiline’s conspiracy had become
-one of the leading figures in the State, had no wish to be
-mixed up in so trivial and stupid an affair. For what
-reason did he thus hurl himself all at once, at the close
-of the trial, into the thick of the fight, and opposing his
-evidence to that of Causinius, seem to challenge the
-jury to choose between his word—the word of a man of
-consular rank, the word of one of the three or four most
-famous men in the Empire—and that of this obscure
-and probably corrupt witness? Had he yielded to the
-pressure of the Conservative party, which, realising that
-the prey was slipping from their grasp, had wished to
-make a supreme attempt to destroy the alibi which
-had been so adroitly prepared by Clodius? Had he,
-upright and honourable man as he was, yielded to his
-disgust at seeing a comedy, which had been staged with
-such ability, completely successful? Or had he yielded
-to pressure and to considerations of the sort of which
-Plutarch speaks? Plutarch says that Cicero’s wife,
-Terentia, was jealous of Clodia, Clodius’s sister, whom
-she suspected of having cast eyes upon Cicero; and had
-so much worried Cicero, by harping upon the subject,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_294">294</span>
-and accusing him of sparing Clodius out of regard for
-the sister, that Cicero, in order to convince her that her
-jealousy was groundless, gave the evidence he did.</p>
-
-<p>Which of these suppositions is the true one we do not
-know, and we never shall know. What, however, is
-certain is that Cicero’s evidence appeared at once to be
-the death-blow to Clodius. Clodius’s defenders perceived
-this so clearly that they all rose in their seats,
-hurling threats and insults at Cicero, hoping to intimidate
-him and to obliterate the impression made by his
-evidence. Cicero retorted in the same key. One
-section of the public, that favourable to Clodius,
-supported the advocates. An uproar ensued. The
-judges rose from their seats, and formed a circle round
-Cicero, as if to defend him. It seemed for one moment
-that the partisans were coming to blows. In short,
-the whole affair was a scandal, but one which made
-Clodius’s position even more grave. Everyone realised
-that he considered himself lost. Was it, in truth,
-possible that the jury should hesitate between Cicero’s
-asseveration and that of Causinius? Clodius himself,
-as soon as the uproar had quieted down, realised that
-he could not accuse Cicero, a man of such authority, of
-lying. Indeed, he did not deny that the fact was as
-stated; but he said that after having spoken with
-Cicero he had immediately left Rome for Terni. To
-which it was easy to reply that in three hours one cannot
-cover a distance of ninety thousand <i xml:lang="la" lang="la">passi</i>; and this
-reply did not admit of answer, confutation, or sophistication.<span class="pagenum" id="Page_295">295</span>
-The falseness of the alibi was the gravest of
-proofs against Clodius, and that which was bound to
-compromise his cause most gravely in the opinion of the
-public and of the judges.</p>
-
-<p>On the evening of the day on which Cicero gave his
-evidence, there was not a soul in Rome who did not
-think that the great orator had dealt the youthful and
-turbulent patrician his <i xml:lang="fr" lang="fr">coup de grâce</i>. But Cicero’s
-evidence, the tumult and threats which had succeeded,
-the self-assurance of the Conservatives, who were now
-confident of securing a conviction, only intensified the
-bitterness of public feeling. Strange rumours and
-whispers began to circulate through Rome, originating
-no one knew where. It was said that, on the day the
-verdict was given, blood would flow amid scenes of
-terrible violence. Some of the judges took fright and
-asked the Senate for the protection of an armed bodyguard,
-which the Senate gave them. Round Cicero the
-Conservative party organised a kind of permanent
-demonstration, arranging that he should be accompanied
-everywhere by a number of friends ready to defend
-him. The idea was to persuade the public in
-every possible way that Clodius intended to sneak away,
-or even to use violence, so sure was he of conviction,
-to shackle the free judgment of the Court. That
-conviction was a certainty was the general opinion. In
-the midst of these rumours, fears, and suspicions the
-case drew rapidly to a close. In the crowded Forum,
-surrounded by the swords of the bodyguard supplied<span class="pagenum" id="Page_296">296</span>
-by the Senate for the protection of the judges, the
-Court finally pronounced its verdict—but how
-different it was from that which was universally
-expected. By thirty-one votes to twenty-five Clodius
-was acquitted!</p>
-
-<p>The surprise, the scandal, the jubilation, the amusement,
-according to each man’s disposition and party,
-were great in Rome when this result was announced.
-In truth, whoever, after the lapse of so many centuries,
-reads the history of the trial will find no difficulty in
-believing Cicero when he accuses Crassus of having
-secured Clodius’s acquittal by the exercise of pressure
-and corruption. In no other way can be explained
-the fact that a Roman Court of law, forced to choose
-between Cicero and Causinius, believed Causinius.
-Nevertheless, it is certain that Clodius was much helped
-in this struggle by the political mistakes of the Conservative
-party, by their blind relentlessness, and
-by the obstinacy with which they had endeavoured
-for so long to bring about, to the detriment of Clodius,
-a change in the method of choosing the judges. At this
-epoch, justice in Rome was much too much exposed to
-the influence of politics. If, however, the times were
-disturbed, if the parties were divided by acute discord
-and men’s minds inflamed by the memories of a terrible
-civil war, the sense of justice was, nevertheless, not yet
-so much blunted by party passions as to allow the
-dominant party to abuse their own power beyond a
-certain point. Clodius might be a man little deserving<span class="pagenum" id="Page_297">297</span>
-of public interest; but there were many persons in
-Rome to whom it was repugnant that, even for the
-purpose of punishing a sacrilege, recourse should be
-had to means so unusual, revolutionary, and extreme.</p>
-
-<p>So the Popular party, with the support of the
-general sentiment of legality, had succeeded in checkmating
-the Conservative party, the Sullan association.
-The checkmate in itself was, however, not a serious
-one, because the trial of Clodius had not been so
-important and complex that his acquittal could seriously
-weaken the strength of the Conservative party.
-The indirect consequences, on the other hand, were
-most serious. The first was that Clodius went over
-body and soul to the Popular party, and became the
-boldest and most violent of its leaders. If the Conservative
-party had followed Cicero’s advice and
-abandoned Clodius to the infamy which his act must
-have brought upon him, there would have been an end
-of Clodius. The man who had profaned the mysteries
-of the <i xml:lang="la" lang="la">Bona Dea</i> would not have dared to show himself
-any more in public. By persecuting him as it did,
-and by giving him the chance of posing before the
-public as the victim of its persecutions, this unpopular
-party saved his career, or at least helped to enable him
-to continue to play a part in the political world of Rome,
-and a part fraught with danger to the State. Clodius,
-realising that, after the trial, he could no longer hope
-for anything from the Conservative party in which he
-had grown up and in whose ranks he had fought, turned<span class="pagenum" id="Page_298">298</span>
-to the Popular party; and, in order to make that party
-forget his origin, his relations, and the <i xml:lang="la" lang="la">Bona Dea</i>
-scandal, became the most violent and turbulent of its
-chiefs. It is this trial which has made of Clodius the
-famous demagogue of whom history tells, who in a few
-years contributed so much, with his agitations, his
-laws, his violent acts, and his enmities, to the destruction
-of the little order and concord that were left in
-the Republic. The most violent of his enmities was
-that which he entertained for Cicero. From this trial
-dates the deadly enmity between the two, which was
-not the least of the causes of the great disorder into
-which the Republic fell, which gave birth to the civil war.</p>
-
-<p>The trial of Clodius is, then, one of the events which
-paved the way for the catastrophe of the Republic.
-What an object lesson it is for political parties! In the
-excitement of the struggle, such parties reck nothing,
-while they deal each other slashing blows, of the hatred
-and rancour which they sow broadcast. But this
-hatred and rancour undermine in men’s minds the sentiments
-of concord, loyalty, moderation, tolerance, and
-equity, without which the social order cannot in the
-long run subsist; it is one of the most potent causes of
-the great catastrophes of history. A revolution is
-usually only the ultimate effect of a long succession
-of violent acts, affronts, and injustices which have
-exasperated the public mind, in which feelings of
-rancour accumulate and ferment until one day they
-explode.</p>
-
-<hr />
-
-<div id="toclink_299" class="chapter">
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_299">299</span></p>
-
-<h2 class="nobreak" id="IV-III">III<br />
-
-<span class="subhead">THE TRIAL OF PISO</span></h2>
-</div>
-
-<p class="drop-cap"><span class="smcap1">Nearly</span> a century had passed since the trial of
-Verres, and more than eighty years since the
-trial of Clodius. The quarrels of the Roman aristocracy,
-which had given birth to those two extraordinary
-and sensational trials, had kindled the spark of two
-dreadful civil wars, in the course of which the Empire
-had narrowly escaped complete dissolution. Gradually,
-however, order had been re-established. From
-the midst of the discords of the aristocracy, one family
-had emerged and succeeded in acquiring preponderating
-influence: the family of the Cæsars. First, Augustus
-for forty-two years, and, for the three years succeeding
-his death, his stepson and adopted son Tiberius, had
-governed the State as <i xml:lang="la" lang="la">principes</i>, or life-presidents,
-accumulating in their own hands powers of the most
-diverse kinds—the supreme command of the legions,
-the presidency of the Senate, the high-priesthood, the
-surveillance of the most important provinces—and at
-the same time making every effort to keep the ancient
-machinery of republican government working with as<span class="pagenum" id="Page_300">300</span>
-little friction as possible under such widely different
-conditions and in control of an empire of so much
-vaster extent. No law had laid it down that this power
-should be hereditary; but the force of circumstances—the
-exhaustion of the ancient nobility, the weakness
-of the Senate, the dying out of all the parties and
-all the powerful cabals which for centuries had bulked
-so large in the Republic—made of this family, little
-by little, the mistress of the Empire’s destinies.</p>
-
-<p>If, however, the violent disputes of parties no longer
-raged in the Senate; if blows were no longer exchanged
-in the Forum when the election of the magistrates or
-the discussion of the laws was toward; if the threat of
-civil war no longer hovered continually over the heads
-of all, concord was not, for all that, re-established in
-the ranks of the aristocracy which surrounded Cæsar’s
-family and which ought to have helped that family to
-govern the immense Empire. Men’s feelings were as
-much divided as ever, though for different motives.
-Tiberius, the second <i xml:lang="la" lang="la">princeps</i> in three years chosen by
-the Senate as successor of Augustus, was hated by one
-section of the Roman aristocracy, which judged him too
-old-fashioned—too closely bound to the traditions of
-the old nobility and of his family, the Claudii; too stern,
-hard, and rigid; too much out of sympathy with the new
-customs and new refinements that were beginning to
-flow from Egypt into Italy; too close-fisted and too keen
-a professor of a scrupulous and strict financial policy;
-worst of all, too cautious in his foreign policy.</p>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_301">301</span></p>
-
-<p>An old warrior, who had passed the best years of
-his life fighting on the Rhine and the Danube against
-the barbarians, a consummate diplomat, head and
-shoulders above all his contemporaries in matters
-of war and diplomacy, Tiberius had convinced himself
-that Rome had not strength enough to extend her
-empire beyond the Rhine and the Danube, and that,
-therefore, she ought to rest content with the empire
-which she had already won, which was, after all, vast
-enough for a tiny aristocracy like that which was
-seated at Rome. The malcontents, however,—and
-there were many of these, especially among the younger
-generation,—not only did not recognise Tiberius’s
-wisdom, but imputed this sagacious prudence of his
-to inexperience, to fear, or to envy of the young and
-brilliant Germanicus.</p>
-
-<p>The son of Drusus, the brother whom Tiberius had
-so much loved, the adopted son of Tiberius, who had
-been enjoined by Augustus to adopt him, intelligent,
-brilliant, generous, well-educated, handsome, affable,
-inclined to be light-headed and casual like most youths
-who are fortune’s favourites, Germanicus was the idol
-of all the enemies of Tiberius. He was, and he was
-conscious of being, their idol, and, without assuming too
-openly an attitude of opposition, he willingly let himself
-be worshipped and extolled by the faction opposed to
-his adoptive father, which faction was strong enough to
-exercise an effective pressure on the Senate and throughout
-the State. In fact, Germanicus, who after the<span class="pagenum" id="Page_302">302</span>
-death of Augustus had been sent by Tiberius to take
-command of the legions of the Rhine, had dared to
-follow a policy of his own, differing from that of Tiberius,
-on the Rhine, crossing the great river on his
-own initiative, and making a long and hazardous incursion
-into the territories abandoned by Rome after
-the defeat of Varus.</p>
-
-<p>This incursion—the first step taken by Rome to
-avenge Varus and his legions, which had been betrayed
-and butchered in the great forest—had evoked such
-enthusiasm in Rome and in Italy; Germanicus was so
-popular; the expansionist party, always strong and
-now reinforced by all the enemies of Tiberius, had made
-so much of the daring act of the young general,
-that Tiberius had not dared to intervene, to repress,
-or to moderate the dashing initiative of his young
-nephew and adopted son. So he let Germanicus go
-on. On no account and at no cost would Tiberius,
-however, again begin beyond the Rhine a dangerous
-and expensive policy of provocation and expansion.
-Therefore, after having allowed Germanicus to cover
-himself with glory through his expedition, to collect and
-to bury in the great forests the bones of the butchered
-legions, and to lay waste the territories of the tribes
-which had taken part in the war against Rome, he
-called him back, in order to send him—in the year 17
-of the Christian era—to the East, complications and
-difficulties having arisen in Cappadocia and Armenia.
-He was not prepared to leave this ambitious, active,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_303">303</span>
-bold youth, the tool of his own enemies, too long at
-grips with the warlike German tribes. He was afraid
-that the all-powerful craving for glory might lead
-Germanicus to provoke in the end some great and
-dangerous war. In Rome, the party which favoured
-the reconquest of Germany was still powerful. Tiberius
-did not want to reconquer that region. In the
-East, amongst unwarlike nations, the danger was less
-urgent.</p>
-
-<p>So Germanicus was sent to the East—but, by way of
-compensation for his recall, he was given unusually large
-powers. When the time came to approve the decree
-which conferred these powers upon him, the party of
-his friends in the Senate proposed and carried a motion
-giving him power overriding that of all the governors of
-the separate provinces of the whole East; the result
-being that he was constituted a sort of governor-general
-or even viceroy. Whether Tiberius was personally in
-favour of this decree, which placed half the Empire
-in the absolute power of a young man of little more than
-thirty years of age, or not, we do not know. The
-probability is that he was not, and that on this occasion
-also Tiberius was the victim of the intrigues and cabals
-of the party which favoured his nephew and adopted
-son. It was very difficult for him to oppose laws which
-heaped honours on the public darling, Germanicus,
-because the public imputed his opposition to base
-motives, such as jealousy, envy, or the fear of opposition.
-What is certain, at any rate, is that, after this<span class="pagenum" id="Page_304">304</span>
-decree, Tiberius suddenly changed the governor in
-Syria, the most important province in the East, the
-choice of whose governors rested with him. He replaced
-the mediocre person who then occupied the post
-by a first-rate man, Cneius Piso, a descendant of one of
-the most noble Roman families, of a family which had
-distinguished itself in the civil wars by its aversion to
-the Cæsarian party; of a family, in short, which was
-aristocratic, traditionalist, and conservative to the
-core. Cneius Piso himself was a determined, conservative,
-and energetic man, a firm partisan of the old
-policy with which Rome had kept in subjection and
-governed so many nations for hundreds of years.</p>
-
-<p>Tiberius’s idea is quite clear to anyone who examines
-it impartially. He did not wish to leave the East at the
-mercy of Germanicus, who was intelligent and good, but
-still young, inexperienced, and not always deliberate,
-and who was easily influenced by light-headed, irresponsible,
-and often vicious and corrupt flatterers.
-He wished to place, at Germanicus’s elbow in the
-East, a serious, mature, energetic, and cautious man;
-a man who could, so to speak, counterbalance him,
-retrieve his more serious mistakes, keep an eye on everything
-he did or said, and in every case warn him in time
-of the more grave eventualities. Can we label such a
-device a crime? Or the sinister expression of a morbid
-jealousy, as Tacitus would have us do? Was it not rather
-the wise precaution of a cautious statesman, who did
-not wish to rob an intelligent youth of the opportunities<span class="pagenum" id="Page_305">305</span>
-of distinguishing himself and of becoming proficient
-in the government of a world which would, perhaps,
-one day devolve upon him, though Tiberius was at the
-same time anxious that the other’s inexperience should
-not involve too much danger to the Empire and to
-himself? But the wisest precautions are on occasions
-the seed of disasters of the first magnitude.</p>
-
-<p>And so they were in this case. In the year 18 <span class="allsmcap">A.D.</span>,
-Germanicus and Piso started, one after the other, at a
-short interval of time, for the East, but they lost no
-time in coming to loggerheads. The first incident
-occurred at Athens, which first Germanicus, and then
-Piso, made a stage in the journey. Germanicus, who
-was an ardent admirer of Greek culture, had wished to
-do honour in every possible way to the great city in
-which the fire of ancient culture had burned with the
-most dazzling brightness. He had entered Athens
-almost like a private person, with only one lictor in
-attendance; and had exchanged the most flowery and
-amiable speeches with the magistrates of the city.
-This attitude, however, had seemed too affable to a
-Roman of the old stamp, like Piso, who considered that
-the representative of the power of Rome ought never
-to repose too great authority and confidence in the
-subject nations and cities, even if they called themselves
-Greece and Athens, and could pride themselves on
-having listened to Socrates and on having been the first
-to applaud the tragedies of Sophocles and Euripides.
-So Piso also stopped at Athens, but with the object<span class="pagenum" id="Page_306">306</span>
-of cancelling by a brusque and harsh demeanour the
-impression which might have been made by the imprudent
-affability of Germanicus. He, in his turn, made a
-speech, full of stern reproof and almost veiled threats
-to the Athenians, which seemed to everybody to be a
-disavowal of the speeches of Germanicus; as if Piso
-intended to convey to the people of Athens that Germanicus
-had spoken on his own account and not in the
-name of the Roman government.</p>
-
-<p>Germanicus was an impressionable young man, but
-really kind-hearted and conciliatory. He did not take,
-in bad part, the kind of disavowal which Piso had inflicted
-on him, all the more because he knew that Piso
-was the mouthpiece of a perhaps harsh version of the
-admonitions of Tiberius’s experienced wisdom. Round
-Germanicus, however, there stood a large party of
-flatterers and intriguers who had fixed on him as the
-future emperor—Tiberius was already an old man—;
-also, Germanicus had to wife Agrippina, a virtuous and
-highly educated woman, who loved and admired him
-intensely, but was at the same time very ambitious,
-passionate, and uncritical, prone to mistake for just
-and wise everything which appeased her ardent and not
-ungenerous passions. Piso was accompanied to the
-East by his wife, Plancina, a great friend of Livia,
-Tiberius’s mother, and a great enemy of Agrippina.
-The interested flatteries of friends, the fiery temperament
-of Agrippina, her blind love for her husband, and
-her hatred for Plancina, in a short time transformed<span class="pagenum" id="Page_307">307</span>
-into a violent personal conflict what Tiberius had
-intended to be a discreet collaboration between a man
-of ripe age and experience, and a young man full of
-good intentions but at times lacking in ballast.</p>
-
-<p>For the rest, the matters which Germanicus and Piso
-had been sent to the East to settle were complicated
-and difficult, and therefore afforded countless opportunities
-and pretexts for quarrels. Rome found herself
-involved in a grave difficulty in the East. Some years
-before, the Parthians, left without a king, had sent to
-Italy for Vonones, a son of their old King Phraates, who
-had been educated in Rome at the house of Augustus.
-To have at the head of the Parthian Empire a king who
-had been educated on the banks of the Tiber was a
-stroke of luck for Rome. The Parthians, however,
-very soon discovered that Vonones had become too
-much Latinised at Rome, and had forgotten too completely
-the ideas and customs of his nation. Consequently,
-they had turned him out and elected in his
-stead Artabanus. Vonones had fled to Armenia, and
-had succeeded in getting elected King of the Armenians.
-But Artabanus, not wishing his predecessor to become
-king of a vast empire marching with his own, from
-which he might retrieve in due course the crown of the
-Parthians, had succeeded also by means of various
-intrigues and threats in getting Vonones expelled from
-Armenia.</p>
-
-<p>The difficulty which Tiberius had charged Germanicus
-and Piso to study and resolve on the spot was<span class="pagenum" id="Page_308">308</span>
-actually this: whether Rome should or should not give
-ear to Vonones’s clamour and replace him on the throne
-of Armenia. The difficulty was a serious one, as each of
-the two opposing courses promised grave dangers. By
-replacing Vonones on the throne of Armenia, Rome
-might implicate herself in serious quarrels, and perhaps
-in a war, with the King of the Parthians, who was
-opposed to Vonones’s restoration. By not replacing
-him, Rome appeared to sacrifice to the hatred of the
-Parthian King this faithful client of hers, whose only
-fault was that he had been educated in Rome; to be
-inclined to recognise that a prince who had been too
-thoroughly Romanised could not govern an Oriental
-state,—a confession which certainly would not encourage
-the protected sovereigns of Asia, great and small,
-to bring themselves too closely into touch with the
-affairs, ideas, and customs of the protecting state. In
-point of fact, Germanicus and Piso, who were already
-embittered against each other by the incidents at
-Athens, came into open conflict on this point. Germanicus
-and his supporters were in favour of sacrificing
-Vonones to the resentment of the King of the Parthians
-and to the national susceptibilities of the East; while
-Piso, more loyal to the authoritative traditions of
-the old Roman policy, which were faithfully reflected in
-his own more cautious judgment, decided to defend
-Vonones. Rome must not abandon the cause of this
-her faithful servant in the East!</p>
-
-<p>Germanicus had, by virtue of a decree of the Senate,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_309">309</span>
-supreme powers in the East; as a result his opinion
-carried the day, notwithstanding all the efforts that
-Piso made to prevent his sacrificing Vonones, whom
-Piso by way of compensation entertained, treated with
-honour, and openly took under his protection. Towards
-the middle of the year 18, Germanicus crowned Zenon
-King of the Armenians in Artaxata, a son of Polemon,
-King of Pontus. When, however, Germanicus asked
-Piso to send into Armenia a section of the legions placed
-under his command, to make an armed demonstration
-in favour of the new sovereign, Piso refused. Theoretically
-and by virtue of the decrees of the Senate, Germanicus
-had the right to give orders to Piso, and Piso
-ought to have obeyed them. On the other hand,
-Piso represented Tiberius; and with Germanicus, as
-with every other human authority, it was not enough
-to possess the power, there was needed also the hardihood
-to use it. In the face of Piso’s energy and the
-authority of Tiberius, who stood behind Piso, Germanicus
-did not dare to insist.</p>
-
-<p>It is easy, however, to picture the fury and rage of
-Germanicus’s friends and flatterers, to whom this
-kind of surveillance to which Germanicus was subjected
-became more intolerable, the more it limited
-indirectly their own authority. In their fury, they
-determined to have their revenge, and they were not
-long in finding an opportunity, though it cost them dear.
-Artabanus, the King of the Parthians, encouraged by
-the pliability of Germanicus, sent to ask him to forbid<span class="pagenum" id="Page_310">310</span>
-Vonones to live in Syria, on the ground that, as that
-province bordered on his Empire, Vonones could easily
-use it as a base from which to intrigue against him. In
-view of the fact that Vonones was in Syria as the guest
-of Piso, the Parthian King was asking Germanicus in
-so many words to forbid Piso to protect him. The
-demand was, in truth, excessive and somewhat humiliating
-for Rome; but Germanicus’s <i xml:lang="fr" lang="fr">entourage</i> saw in this
-demand a means of humiliating Piso, and worked and
-talked to such effect that Germanicus conceded to it
-and shut Vonones up in a city in Cilicia. A checkmate
-had been inflicted on Piso, but the price of it was a
-humiliation for Rome. Piso and his party had good
-reason for accusing Germanicus and his <i xml:lang="fr" lang="fr">entourage</i>
-of compromising with singular levity the prestige of
-Rome in the East.</p>
-
-<p>At the end of the year 18, then, the conflict between
-Germanicus, invested by a decree of the Senate with
-the general governorship of the East and supported
-by a numerous party of Tiberius’s opponents, and Piso,
-who, as charged by Tiberius with the governorship
-of Syria, the most important province in the East,
-represented in the East the will of the Emperor, had
-become so acute and violent as to upset in a most
-dangerous manner the whole Eastern policy of Rome.
-The conflict became still more grave in the following
-year. At the beginning of the year 19, Germanicus,
-who was an enlightened young man, and therefore
-desirous of travelling and seeing the famous spots, the<span class="pagenum" id="Page_311">311</span>
-monuments, and the customs of various nations, made
-with Agrippina an extensive trip through Egypt, impelled
-by curiosity to visit that ancient and celebrated
-country, which even then exercised so mysterious a
-fascination on the minds of the peoples of the West.</p>
-
-<p>While he was on his way to see the Pyramids, however,
-was interrogating the mysterious smile of the
-Sphinx, and was cleaving the sacred stream of the Nile,
-Piso profited by his absence to avenge himself for the
-checkmate which he had suffered the year before on
-Vonones’s account. Either on his own initiative, or, it
-may be, because he had meanwhile received instructions
-from Tiberius, Piso abolished or modified many of the
-dispositions which Germanicus, by virtue of his extraordinary
-powers, had made for Syria, the year before.
-Imagine the fury of Germanicus, of Agrippina, and of
-his friends and flatterers, on his return! Was this then
-all the deference Piso paid to the decrees of the Senate
-and of the authority conferred by them on Germanicus?
-Did Piso think himself lord of the East, because he was
-the friend and representative of Tiberius? On Germanicus’s
-return there were some violent altercations
-between him and Piso. This time, Germanicus,
-impelled by passion, by the incitements of his flatterers,
-and also by the fear of losing all authority in the eyes of
-the province if he should yield once more, plucked up
-courage to resort to extreme measures. In the exercise
-of his extraordinary powers, he ordered Piso to give up
-the governorship of the province which Tiberius had<span class="pagenum" id="Page_312">312</span>
-entrusted to him. This step, in view of the fact that
-Piso was the representative of Tiberius, was a bold one,
-but it was quite a legal one. In disobeying it, Piso was
-obliged to assume an attitude of open defiance of the
-laws. Since Germanicus had dared to make use of this
-power, and on this occasion showed that he meant
-business and was determined to carry the matter
-through, it was Piso’s duty to give way and obey,
-subject to the right of protest to Tiberius and of
-obtaining from him just compensation for the affront
-he had received.</p>
-
-<p>Piso resigned his office and left the province; and
-travelled at an easy rate in short stages towards Italy.
-When he arrived at Seleucia, he was overtaken by the
-news that Germanicus was seriously ill at Antioch. He
-halted, waiting for new and more authentic news; which
-arrived in a few days, and announced to him the young
-man’s death. What was his illness? We do not know.
-Untimely deaths were frequent in the family of
-Augustus. It seemed as if many of the younger members
-had not the strength to stand the life of drudgery
-and fatigue to which he compelled them, by way of
-preparation for the government of the Empire. However
-that may be, Piso no sooner knew that Germanicus
-was dead than he returned to Syria with the object of
-re-occupying the province. How great, however, was
-his surprise to learn that it had been decided
-amongst the friends of Germanicus, after the latter’s
-death, to entrust the command of the legions and the<span class="pagenum" id="Page_313">313</span>
-government of the province to one of themselves,
-Gnæus Senzius!</p>
-
-<p>This nomination of Senzius was illegal—there can be
-no doubt about that. With the death of Germanicus,
-the extraordinary power by which he had momentarily
-removed Piso from the province, himself assuming
-its government, came to an end; therefore the province
-and the command of the armed forces re-devolved
-on Piso. The friends of Germanicus had no right or
-power to nominate a substitute for him. But for what
-reason had they arrived at so grave a decision? Germanicus
-was surrounded in the East by many friends,
-many admirers, and many flatterers, who had placed
-their hopes in him, as the future emperor. His death
-was, therefore, a disaster for the ambitions and aspirations
-of many. On the other hand, it had been sudden,
-unforeseen, and mysterious; a fact which, in times when
-the causes and symptoms of illness were much less
-easily recognised than they are at present, readily lent
-itself to the engendering of suspicions, especially the
-suspicion of poisoning, then so common and so easy.
-Before the corpse of Germanicus had been burnt,
-Agrippina and all the <i xml:lang="fr" lang="fr">entourage</i> of the dead man’s
-intimates were persuaded, and were stating openly,
-that Germanicus had been poisoned,—and poisoned by
-Piso in revenge. Hence arose the necessity of their
-preventing Piso, even at the cost of a breach of the laws,
-from re-occupying his province, in which they wished to
-be left supreme, so as to be able to collect the proofs of<span class="pagenum" id="Page_314">314</span>
-the crime of which Germanicus was the reported
-victim. For instance, they imprisoned an old woman
-called Martina, who was said to be an intimate friend
-of Plancina, a witch by profession. Her they accused
-of having supplied the poison, and of having sent it
-to Rome.</p>
-
-<p>When Piso first heard of the accusation, he did not
-take it very seriously, and tried to force a re-entry into
-the province from which his adversaries were illegally
-excluding him. Perhaps he hoped that when he, the
-legitimate pro-consul, presented himself, the oppositions,
-which the others pretended to be ready to make,
-would fade away. In this he was disappointed. Gnæus
-Senzius resisted, a few insignificant skirmishes took
-place, and a civil war on a small scale was about to
-begin. The prospect, however, frightened both sides,
-and, not wishing that so small a matter of principle
-should result in a real civil war, both parties—Piso, Senzius,
-and the friends of Germanicus—agreed to go in a
-body to Rome and to submit the question to the
-Emperor. And so they did.</p>
-
-<p>When, however, they arrived, they found Italy and
-Rome in an incredible state of agitation. Germanicus
-was most popular, not only because he was really
-attractive to a great many people, but because everybody
-in his admiration and sympathy for him vented
-the discontent and repulsion which the rough character
-and iron policy of Tiberius inspired in one. The
-popular voice had gone so far as to say that Germanicus<span class="pagenum" id="Page_315">315</span>
-had made up his mind to restore, when he became
-Emperor, the republic of ancient times in every detail,
-and that Tiberius on this account suspected and hated
-him! Not only, then, was his premature death bitterly
-lamented by everybody; but the explanation which his
-friends gave of it—that Germanicus had died of poison
-by the contrivance of Piso—was immediately accepted
-as true, evident, and proved. Even at the present day,
-the masses are easily convinced of tales of crimes and
-poisonings. Imagine how it must have been in those
-days! And the desire for vengeance followed hard on
-the general feeling of grief and horror. The wish was
-expressed on all sides that Piso should be given an
-exemplary punishment; it was impossible to allow so
-execrable a crime to go unpunished. Would some
-noble friend of Germanicus, then, arise and revenge his
-death? At the same time, other rumours, no less
-fantastic, were being whispered from ear to ear. No;
-the trial would never take place. Piso was secretly
-protected by Tiberius, and Plancina by Livia. Nobody
-would dare attack them!</p>
-
-<p>The arrival of Agrippina, who, at the end of 19 <span class="allsmcap">A.D.</span>,
-reached Brindisi with Germanicus’s ashes; the transportation
-of the ashes to Rome in the midst of the most
-moving demonstrations of grief on the part of the
-Italian cities; the solemn celebration of the funeral rites
-in Rome, made the situation still more serious. Public
-exasperation increased, not only against Piso, but also
-against Tiberius. Tiberius and Livia had not taken<span class="pagenum" id="Page_316">316</span>
-part in the funeral ceremonies for Germanicus at Rome;
-the latter because she was too old and infirm, the former
-because he had avoided recently as much as possible
-investing family ceremonies with superfluous official
-importance. The public, however, began to accuse
-these two of not being at all displeased at the death of
-Germanicus. Of course, that young man had always
-given umbrage to Tiberius. Had not the latter recalled
-him from Germany, so that he should not cover himself
-with too much glory?</p>
-
-<p>It was not long before even graver charges began to be
-whispered about. Piso had arrived at Rome by way of
-the Tiber, disembarking near the Tomb of the Cæsars,
-the resting-place of the ashes of his victim, and with a
-large retinue of friends had made an ostentatious
-progress to his house above the Forum, where he had
-given a great banquet. It was clear, then, that he had
-no fears. He defied public opinion and the Courts.
-And his attitude was justified, for he had acted on the
-orders of Tiberius, and possessed a letter from him in
-which these orders were given. That letter was his
-shield of defence against every danger! In point of
-fact, public suspicion was by now being diverted from
-Piso against a higher target. It was being directed
-straight against Tiberius and Livia. And Agrippina,
-whom grief was robbing of the little sense which nature
-had given her, added fuel to the enmities and suspicions
-in the public and the Senate through her
-lamentations, her recriminations, and her accusations,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_317">317</span>
-which were as vehement as they were unfounded.</p>
-
-<p>When at last, therefore, certain persons,—Fulcinius
-Trio, Vitellius, and Veranius,—incited by public opinion,
-by the friends of Germanicus, who cried for vengeance,
-and by Agrippina, who would hear of no mercy,
-decided to accuse Piso and Plancina of poison, as well as
-Piso and his son Marcius of having tried to stir up civil
-war, Tiberius found himself in a most grave dilemma.
-It seems that trials such as these, involving persons of
-the highest rank and acts of a political character, could
-not be set in motion without the approval of the
-Emperor, who had the additional privilege of deciding
-whether the case should come before the ordinary tribunal,—the
-jury, as in trials of Verres and Clodius,—or
-whether he ought to entrust it instead to the Senate.
-Tiberius did not believe in the imputation of poison,
-which was the only really grave charge brought against
-Piso,—the other charge, that of civil war, being more
-in the nature of a second string. He did not believe in
-the poison charge, just as no sensible and impartial
-man believed in it, just as Tacitus, years later, did not
-believe in it, even though, with his usual malice, he has
-done all he could to induce posterity to accept it as
-true. Tiberius did not believe in it, for not only was
-there no proof of the charge itself, but it was in itself
-absurd. In fact, the accusers, when forced to explain
-when and in what way Piso had poisoned Germanicus,
-had found themselves reduced to asserting that, at a
-banquet to which Germanicus had invited Piso, and at<span class="pagenum" id="Page_318">318</span>
-which Piso was seated at a considerable distance from
-Germanicus, Piso, at a moment when Germanicus was
-looking in another direction, had poured the poison into
-his wine, actually in the midst of his host’s numerous
-servants and in the presence of the guests! This story
-may be taken as a sample of the whole accusation.
-Tiberius then knew that the charge was a romance,
-created and magnified by the political and partisan
-enmities which amongst the Roman nobility were so
-violent, by the credulity of the public, by the unreasoning
-hatred the people felt towards himself and the
-supreme authority with which he had been invested.
-He would, therefore, gladly have cut the trial short at
-the very beginning.</p>
-
-<p>Could he do so, however? This Emperor, whom so
-many inexperienced historians have represented as a
-terrible despot, was in reality possessed of much less
-power as head of the State than his present-day detractors
-suppose. He was obliged to take into account
-public opinion, however obtuse and mad it might be.
-He was vaguely suspected of having prompted Piso
-to poison Germanicus, or at least of having willingly
-shut his eyes to the crime. If he prevented the charge
-being brought, would not this be the strongest confirmation
-of this mad calumny? Would not the whole
-populace murmur in their anger that the unfortunate
-Germanicus had been robbed, first of life, and then of
-vengeance,—and by the man who was his adoptive
-father? This, in the eyes of the ancients, constituted<span class="pagenum" id="Page_319">319</span>
-the gravest dereliction of family obligations. The trial
-was a satisfaction which the public demanded; and
-the Emperor—that pretended despot, lord of the whole
-State—had not power enough to refuse it.</p>
-
-<p>So Tiberius was forced to consent to the trial. Being,
-however, a wise and level-headed man, he remitted it
-to the Senate, the one of the two tribunals which might
-be expected with greater reason to be enlightened and
-serene. The other—the <i xml:lang="la" lang="la">quæstio</i>, or, as we should say,
-the jury—was too closely in contact with public
-opinion, and not likely to be able to exercise calm
-judgment in a case in which public opinion was so
-much excited and prejudiced against the principal
-defendant. The Senate, on the contrary, was the
-gravest body in the Republic, and might be expected
-to rise superior to popular passions in the exercise of its
-judicial functions. Nevertheless, even in the Senate,
-the friends of Germanicus and the enemies of Tiberius
-were to be found in force. Not only this, but a fierce
-antipathy divided the ancient from the new nobility.
-During the fifty years which followed the end of the
-civil wars, many recently ennobled families had entered
-the Senate. Amongst these, the families of ancient
-nobility, those whose glory dated back to the grand era
-of the Republic, at this time formed only a small yet
-haughty minority, which lived apart, despised the new
-nobility, and kept aloof as far as possible. Now Piso
-belonged to one of these ancient families, and to one of
-the most glorious of them. The constitution of the<span class="pagenum" id="Page_320">320</span>
-Senate as the tribunal, meant, therefore, entrusting
-the decision of the case to the new, upstart nobility,
-which was full of blind rancour against the haughtiness
-of the old families.</p>
-
-<p>In any case there was no other tribunal; and between
-the two evils, Tiberius could only choose the lesser.
-However, he realised so clearly the gravity of the
-dangers which surrounded the course of justice, in the
-midst of so many frenzied passions, in this trial which
-had been engineered by insensate hatreds and rancours,
-that when, as president of the Senate, he had to open
-the sessions, he made a speech, the gist of which Tacitus
-has preserved for us. Whoever reads it cannot help
-recognising the spirit of profound wisdom and equity
-which inspires it. Tiberius explained quite clearly to
-the Senate that the charge of poisoning levelled against
-Piso, if true, would be an extremely serious matter.
-He reminded them, however, that Piso was a prominent
-man, who had rendered eminent services to the Republic
-and belonged to one of the most ancient and noble
-families in Rome. They must, therefore, bring the
-most serene impartiality to bear on their judgment,
-forgetting who was the accused, if they found him
-guilty, forgetting who was the victim, if they found him
-innocent. However great his affection for Germanicus
-might be, nothing would induce him to wish for the
-sacrifice on the latter’s tomb, of an innocent man, for
-the satisfaction of the insensate mania for revenge
-which had taken possession of the public.</p>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_321">321</span></p>
-
-<p>The speech was a wise and humane one; but what
-could sober words, even from an Emperor’s mouth,
-avail when passions are aroused? The Senate allotted
-two days to the prosecution, three to the defence.
-There was to be an interval of six days between the
-two sections of the trial. For two whole days, the
-accusers talked, reconstructing, as Cicero had done
-in Verres’s case, the whole history of Piso’s life. They
-went so far as to accuse him of having misgoverned the
-previous provinces he had had; they went minutely into
-the history of his government in Syria, and repeated
-the fantastic story of the poisoning. Tacitus himself
-recognised that the charges were very weak, especially
-the accusation of poisoning, which was the only serious
-one. Accordingly, the first impression made by the trial
-was very uncertain. The public was prejudiced in
-favour of the prosecution; in the Senate there was a
-strong party hostile to Piso. After all, however, the
-Senate was a great political body, and many of its
-members could not but recognise that the charges were
-slender ones. Everybody felt that the issue depended
-on Tiberius, who could, according as he showed himself
-favourable or the reverse, weigh down the scales on the
-side of acquittal or of conviction. Everybody, therefore,
-looked towards him, with hope or with anxiety.
-But Tiberius listened to the prosecution without moving
-an eyelid, as impassive as a statue, without allowing a
-glimpse into his secret thoughts on the subject. Could
-he act otherwise? If he had shown himself favourable<span class="pagenum" id="Page_322">322</span>
-to Piso, he would have been accused of shielding the
-murderers of Germanicus, through hatred of his adopted
-son or even through actual complicity in the crime.
-He could not and would not attach himself, however, to
-the mob which cried for Piso’s head, innocent or guilty.
-He was too haughty and too serious a man to descend to
-such baseness. Recognise that public opinion was a
-force of which account must be taken,—this he was
-prepared to do; pander to it like a slave, at the cost of
-honour and justice,—no.</p>
-
-<p>Rarely had a Roman Emperor found himself placed,
-by the suspicions of the public, by the mad passions of
-the people, by the perfidious malevolence of the cabals
-and <em>coteries</em>, in a more difficult position. The six days
-that elapsed between the prosecution and the defence
-must have been thorny days for Tiberius. Inasmuch
-as a nod from him could weigh down the scales, both
-parties tried to influence him. Piso and his friends
-worked to induce him and Livia to make up their minds
-to intervene openly in the Senate on behalf of outraged
-innocence. The other side endeavoured to frighten
-him. They accused Tiberius <i xml:lang="la" lang="la">sotto voce</i> of having
-favoured Piso unjustly in his speech to the Senate, in
-which he had already assumed the charge of poisoning
-to be untrue. They circulated the story of the compromising
-letter in Piso’s possession which the latter
-threatened to read in the Senate, if Tiberius did not
-help him. Meanwhile Agrippina was filling Rome
-with her lamentations and imprecations, and the<span class="pagenum" id="Page_323">323</span>
-public agitation was increasing. Cries were heard on
-every side that Germanicus must be avenged. Piso’s
-position was tragic. But Tiberius would not depart
-from the line of conduct, that of impartiality, which
-he had marked out for himself—hoping, perhaps, that
-the trial would furnish him sooner or later with an
-opportunity of preserving justice without laying himself
-open to suspicions of too debasing a nature. He
-allowed Livia, however, to interest herself openly in
-behalf of Plancina against whom also charges were
-levelled; and Livia’s intervention might be indirectly
-of service to Piso, as it made it clear, to those who cared
-to see, that Germanicus’s own grandmother did not
-believe in the charge of poisoning.</p>
-
-<p>Piso was an energetic man. Confident in the justice
-of his case, he reappeared in the Senate when, after
-the lapse of six days, the sessions again began; and
-defended himself in a clever, energetic, and resolute
-speech. He seems to have been especially happy in the
-way in which he shattered the charge of poisoning.
-He demanded that his own slaves, and those belonging
-to Germanicus who had been present at the famous
-banquet at which it was suggested that he had put
-poison in the dead man’s wine, should be put to the
-torture. The speech made a lively impression, and
-would probably have saved Piso, had not serious disorders
-broken out in Rome while he was speaking in the
-Senate. An immense popular demonstration invaded
-the precincts of the Senate, while he was speaking,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_324">324</span>
-howling for his execution, and crying that, if the Senate
-acquitted him, they had serious thoughts of avenging
-Germanicus by lynching the judges. A section burst
-into the Forum, overturned the statues, and made as if
-to drag them away to the Gemoniæ and to break them
-in pieces. It was found necessary to send Piso to his
-house with an escort of soldiers, in order to save him
-from violence.</p>
-
-<p>What was the origin of these demonstrations? Were
-they the natural explosion of popular passion, fed by the
-ready credulity of the masses? Were they stirred up by
-the enemies of Tiberius and Piso, to impress the hesitating
-section of the Senate? We shall never know.
-All that is certain is that, by the evening of the day on
-which these demonstrations took place, nobody in Rome,
-least of all the accused, was any longer under the delusion
-that Piso could be acquitted of the charge, however
-absurd and unjust it might be. The Senate, weakened by
-so many internal dissensions and by so many civil wars,
-was no longer a strong enough assembly to dare resist
-this mad fury on the part of the masses. By evening,
-Piso had lost all heart and had already made up his
-mind to give up the struggle. But his sons gathered
-round him and put into him fresh courage. Renewed
-efforts were made to induce Tiberius to oppose his
-authority to the torrent of calumny and insensate hate.
-Had Tiberius left room for one glimmer of light? or did
-Piso’s sons and friends delude themselves and delude
-him? It is certain that next day Piso again plucked up<span class="pagenum" id="Page_325">325</span>
-courage and returned to the Senate, where he continued
-his defence, parrying and countering fresh attacks,
-with his eyes ever fixed on Tiberius, the man who more
-than anyone else was persuaded of his innocence, and
-from whom a word might be so useful to him. Tiberius,
-however, did not dare pronounce that word. Surrounded
-as he was by so many enemies and suspicions,
-not even he—the lord of the world, as the historians
-call him—felt himself strong enough to engage in open
-duel with the public opinion of Rome and the majority
-in the Senate. So, when he perceived that Tiberius
-himself could not or would not help him, Piso abandoned
-the struggle. Returning home that evening,
-he anticipated his certain conviction by committing
-suicide during the night.</p>
-
-<p>The public had gained their victim, to comfort them
-in their grief for the premature loss of Germanicus.
-The enemies of Piso were, however, not content, and
-proposed that the name of Piso be erased from the
-<i xml:lang="la" lang="la">fasti</i>, and that the half of his goods be confiscated; that
-his son Marcus be imprisoned for ten years, only
-Plancina, out of regard for Livia, being allowed to go
-unpunished. But Tiberius judged that the blood of
-Piso was expiation enough for a crime which nobody
-had committed; and, since the public had had their
-bloody satisfaction, he intervened openly, and, by
-virtue of his authority, prevented the erasure of Piso’s
-name from the <i xml:lang="la" lang="la">fasti</i>, as well as the confiscation of his
-goods and the condemnation of his son.</p>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_326">326</span></p>
-
-<p>The trial of Piso was one of the most savage of all the
-judicial dramas in Roman history. The trial of Clodius
-had been a comedy, that of Verres a tragi-comedy, that
-of Piso was pure tragedy and terrible tragedy. For it
-was an episode in the gradual extermination of the old
-and glorious Roman nobility, which was being brought
-about by the new social forces which, during the years
-of peace, had grown up under the shadow of the imperial
-authority. How sad a spectacle are these trials which
-from time to time recur in history! The penal law
-ought to be the sacred instrument of justice, which
-punishes the wrong-doers, and defends and comforts the
-good citizens. The world is, however, full of wicked
-passions; and wicked passions find fertile soil in political
-parties, social classes, and public opinion—that vague
-power which has come so much to the fore in the last
-hundred years. These evil passions, from time to time,
-seize hold of the instruments of justice, and convert
-them into instruments of torment and persecution for
-the torture, the defamation, and the extermination of
-the innocent, for whom there is no way of escape, no
-refuge, and no pity.</p>
-
-<p>These trials prove one thing,—a truth which perhaps
-the modern world, in which the power of public opinion
-has increased so much, ought always to bear in mind.
-And that is, that the stronger public opinion is in a
-state, the more necessary it is for that state to have an
-unperturbed, independent, enlightened judicature,
-armed with a vigorous and clear doctrine of justice,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_327">327</span>
-backed by a powerful government, which can hold its
-own against the most violent gusts of public opinion,
-and execute real justice in the teeth of the crooked
-malevolence of the masses. Otherwise justice can only
-too easily degenerate into a kind of tragic farce.</p>
-
-<hr />
-
-<div class="chapter">
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_329">329</span></p>
-
-<h2 class="nobreak part" id="Part_V"><span class="smcap">Part V</span><br />
-
-<span class="subhead"><span class="smcap">The Limit of Sport</span></span></h2>
-</div>
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_331">331</span></p>
-
-<hr />
-
-<div id="toclink_331" class="chapter">
-<h2 class="nobreak" id="THE_LIMIT_OF_SPORT1">THE LIMIT OF SPORT<a id="FNanchor_1" href="#Footnote_1" class="fnanchor smaller">1</a></h2>
-</div>
-
-<p>“Αριστον ὕδωρ,” says Pindar. “Water is good,” as
-it is often translated. But why should a hymn in
-honour of a victor in the games begin with a sentiment
-which would be much better suited to an anti-alcoholic
-league? ὕδωρ here does not mean water;
-it is the corresponding word to the Latin <i xml:lang="la" lang="la">sudor</i>, which
-means sweat,—the symbol of the physical effort made
-by the athlete. “Excellent is sweat,” that is to say,
-the effort made by the victor in training himself and in
-winning an arduous victory.</p>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_1" href="#FNanchor_1" class="fnanchor">1</a> Speech delivered at the opening of the Congress of the Psychology
-of Sport at Lausanne, May 6, 1913.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<p>Αριστον ὕδωρ, then, says the clarion voice of one of the
-noblest sons of Greece, the great poet who, in honour
-of the sport of his times, has clothed in lyric poetry the
-dazzling myths of Hellenic polytheism. The motto
-has travelled down the ages, and we, too, are assembled
-here to interpret it after the fashion of our times. Is
-it not inevitable that the speech I have to make should
-be merely a development of this undying theme,
-ἄριστον ὕδωρ? And yet you would be justified in
-asking why this task should devolve on this occasion<span class="pagenum" id="Page_332">332</span>
-upon a man who spends his whole life in plying a tool—the
-pen—which is too light to convince him of the
-truth of Pindar’s apothegm. It is true that there was a
-time when he who has the honour of addressing you was
-not yet an examiner of historical documents nor a
-student of philosophical problems; when he was, on the
-contrary, an ardent gymnast. I will even confess to
-you that the first time his name appeared in the newspapers,
-it was in the accounts of gymnastic and athletic
-meetings, in connection with which some amiable reporters
-thought it proper to comment on his squirrel-like
-agility. But those times are, alas! long past.
-The over-violent passion for physical exercises which
-was his between the ages of ten and fifteen years obliged
-him suddenly to drop them. He has allowed his
-muscles gradually to be invaded and eaten up by that
-physical laziness which enervates so many thinkers
-of the present day, and which upsets the balance of
-their bodily forces.</p>
-
-<p>You see, then, that these far-distant memories
-cannot give me authority to claim a right, however
-small, to address you on this occasion. I am a stranger
-in this world of sport, which has developed so rapidly
-in the last thirty years. I have followed only at a
-distance the movement which has given it birth, and I
-should find myself in great difficulties if I had to
-discuss in its details one of the numberless questions
-attaching to this form of contemporary activity.
-What authority, then, have I for addressing you on this<span class="pagenum" id="Page_333">333</span>
-occasion? None. And the kindness which Baron de
-Coubertin has shown in honouring me with an invitation
-to address you, though most flattering to me, cannot
-fill the void left by manifest incompetence for the
-task. You will tell me that I should have done better
-to remember the wise advice Homer gave the cobbler,
-and to refuse this honour of which I was not worthy.
-And you will be right. But I would excuse myself by
-telling you first of all that it is difficult to refuse anything
-to so distinguished and amiable a man and to so
-ardent an advocate of the causes he makes his own as
-M. de Coubertin. Secondly, if I am a sportsman who
-long ago has made his final exit, I am also a man who
-tries, as far as his feeble wits will allow him, to understand
-that life outside himself in which he can take no
-immediate and direct part.</p>
-
-<p>Is not that the rôle, and in a certain sense the obsession,
-of the historian? The historian must understand
-all the forms and phenomena of life; crimes, intrigues,
-battles, wars, revolutions, loves, hatreds, perfidies,
-the hidden weaknesses of great men, the blind impulses
-of the masses, the noblest and the basest sentiments
-which actuate the human mind. If we were required
-to have experienced everything that we are required to
-understand, the profession of historian would be
-the most difficult and the most dangerous in the
-world; for, in order to qualify, a man would have at
-least to run the risk of the galleys or of the
-scaffold. Without a doubt, this necessity of understanding<span class="pagenum" id="Page_334">334</span>
-all the forms of the life outside is also one of
-the great weaknesses of historians. Often they make
-mistakes; even more often, the picture they give of
-things seems but pale by contrast with the living reality,
-to those who have actually lived that reality. I am
-quite sure that this will be my fate, if I talk to you about
-things which you know better than do I. That, however,
-is the inevitable drawback of the profession, and
-I shall go through with my task, relying on your kind
-indulgence.</p>
-
-<p>I shall talk to you, then, about sport in modern life
-as a man who has considered it from outside. I shall
-philosophise awhile about sport, if you will allow me;
-for to philosophise about a thing is often a polite way
-of talking about a thing regarding which the speaker
-has little knowledge to people whose knowledge regarding
-it is considerable. And I will ask myself this
-question: What is and what ought to be the function
-of sport in modern society? What is its rôle, and what
-are its limits? Put thus, the question is but a particular
-form of a more general question which philosophers
-have long been asking themselves: What is the
-mutual and reciprocal rôle of the different human
-activities? It is a well-known truth that with the
-advances of civilisation social life undergoes an inward
-process of differentiation. Commerce separates from
-industry, industry from war, war from government,
-government from the intellectual activities, which in
-their turn become specialised,—art, science, religion,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_335">335</span>
-etc. We get professions, corporations, institutions, and
-classes corresponding to all these different activities;
-men, that is to say, who have passions, ambitions,
-desires, needs, and interests, and who quickly come into
-conflict with one another. What parts ought to be
-allowed to all these different activities? Which is
-the most necessary, the most noble, and the most
-exalted? Which ought to be surrounded with the
-greatest respect, covered with the greatest honours,
-and recompensed with the most considerable rewards?</p>
-
-<p>Men have answered this question in countless different
-ways. It is, however, easy to discover in many of
-these answers a common tendency that is a proneness
-to consider as first and all-important the corporation,
-profession, or institution to which each inquirer belongs.
-A savant is easily convinced that the end of life is the
-search after the truth. In his eyes, the universe must
-exist only in order that men of science may discover its
-laws and its secrets. For artists, on the other hand,
-the world has been created to enable them to adorn it
-with pictures, statues, or buildings. For the soldier
-war is the end of existence, while the merchant sees in
-commerce the beneficent force which makes the world
-go round. And so on. All these theories seem sober
-fact to those who formulate them; unfortunately the
-others, those who belong to a different class or profession,
-reject them as absurd and ridiculous errors.</p>
-
-<p>How are the various views to be reconciled? A certain
-number of philosophers have tried to raise themselves<span class="pagenum" id="Page_336">336</span>
-above these too narrow or too biassed points of
-view, and to find solutions of general value. Many
-have been proposed; now is not the time to discuss the
-principal ones. So I will confine myself to expounding
-to you that one of these theories which seems to me
-the simplest, the most ingenious, and the most useful
-for the resolution of the problem which we have set
-ourselves in connection with sport. It is the theory
-of the limits. All human activities ought to be
-reciprocal limits.</p>
-
-<p>Take art and morality for instance: What relation
-ought they to bear to each other? The question has
-been discussed with ardour. Artists, and many of
-their friends, have tried to postulate a violent schism
-between the two, proclaiming that art has the right to
-search for beauty wherever she can find it, without
-bothering herself about morality. Super-moralists, on
-the contrary, have tried to make art the slave of
-morality, asserting that the former ought to be always
-ready to obey its orders and to sacrifice herself to its
-demands. But would it not be more reasonable and
-more human to say that art and morality are reciprocal
-limits? Morality is one of art’s limits; without wishing
-to make her its slave, it can and must prevent her from
-seeking beauty in certain subjects and certain incidents
-which would be dangerous to morals or to the pure-mindedness
-of the public. The forms of beauty are so
-numerous. Why should not art refrain for moral reasons
-from seeking for some of them? But art on her side<span class="pagenum" id="Page_337">337</span>
-is a limit of morality; she is in no way anxious to dominate
-it, but she can and must prevent morality from
-going astray in its search for perfection. Those who
-are familiar with history know that a spice of artistic
-taste has always been the best remedy for the
-most dangerous or the most repugnant excesses of
-asceticism.</p>
-
-<p>Let us take another example. A question which has
-much exercised men’s minds is whether art and science
-ought to set before themselves practical ends, or whether
-they are in themselves ends. There are people who
-would like to subordinate the rest of the world to art
-and to science. This entails requiring of art and
-science that they should seek beauty and truth without
-having in view any utilitarian end, without troubling
-themselves to ask whether they are useful or hurtful to
-man. Others again propose to subordinate art and
-science to the rest of the world, asserting that every
-art and every science which does not serve practical
-ends is a waste of time and trouble. Here, too, it
-seems to me that it would be more human to say that
-science and art seek truth and beauty, not utility.
-Utility, then, is not the end of art and of science;
-but it is one of their limits. The truths which the
-human mind can discover, like the forms of beauty
-which it can create, are infinite.</p>
-
-<p>Is it strange, then, that man, unable to discover all
-the truths or to create all the forms of beauty, should
-choose for preference those which, in addition to conferring<span class="pagenum" id="Page_338">338</span>
-intellectual or æsthetic pleasure, help him to
-live? Can anyone see anything absurd in this? If a
-man set to work to build edifices with the sole object of
-pleasing the eye through harmonious lines, he could
-build them as fancy prompted him; there would be no
-limit either to the variety of forms or to the number of
-different constructions. Will anybody be found to
-maintain that art has the right to fill the world with
-beautiful edifices which are of no use for anything?
-No, practical considerations have their claim. Even
-the epochs in which architecture flourished most bravely
-built edifices which, while beautiful to look at, served
-also definite ends; and nobody has ever protested
-against the limitations which this practical consideration
-imposed.</p>
-
-<div class="tb">* * * * *</div>
-
-<p>Similarly sport must, in my opinion, be considered
-as a limit; the limit necessary to the excesses of an
-intellectual and sedentary civilisation, which exposes
-the nervous system to formidable trials. M. de Coubertin
-has analysed this aspect of modern life so well in his
-<i xml:lang="fr" lang="fr">Essais de psychologie sportive</i>, that I beg leave to quote
-one of the numerous fine passages from that book:</p>
-
-<div class="blockquot">
-
-<p xml:lang="fr" lang="fr">La vie moderne n’est plus ni locale ni spéciale; tout y
-influe sur tout. D’une part la rapidité et la multiplicité
-des transports ont fait de l’homme un être essentiellement
-mobile, pour le quel les distances sont de plus en plus insignifiantes
-à franchir et sollicitent, par conséquent, de fréquents
-changements de lieu; d’autre part l’égalisation des points
-de départ et la possibilité d’élévations rapides vers le pouvoir<span class="pagenum" id="Page_339">339</span>
-et la fortune ont excité les appétits et les ambitions
-des masses à un point inconnu jusqu’ ici.... Ce double
-élément a transformé de façon fondamentale l’effort
-humain. L’effort d’autre-fois était régulier et constant; une
-certaine sécurité résultant de la stabilité sociale, le protégeait.
-Surtout, il n’était pas cérébral a un degré excessif.
-Celui d’aujourd’hui est tout autre. L’inquiétude et
-l’espérance l’environnent avec une intensité particulière.
-C’est que l’échec et la réussite ont dé nos jours des conséquences
-énormes. L’homme peut à la fois tout craindre
-et tout espérer. De cet état de chose est née une agitation
-que les transformations de la vie extérieure encouragent et
-accroissent. Au dedans et au dehors le cerveau est entretenu
-dans une sorte d’ébullition incessante. Les points de
-vue, les aspects des choses, les combinaisons, les possibilités,
-tant pour les individus que pour les collectivités, se succèdent
-si rapidement qu’il faut pour en tenir compte et les utilises
-au besoin se tenir toujours en éveil et comme en une
-mobilisation permanente.</p>
-</div>
-
-<p>This picture of modern life is perfect. Never has
-man lived in such a state of permanent and growing
-excitement. If the men of the ancient world could
-come to life again, their first impression, you may be
-sure, would be that mankind had gone mad. It is this
-excitement which has produced the formidable explosion
-of energy that we are witnessing on our little planet,
-which for ages had lived in comparative tranquillity.
-But has not this formidable tension of the world-soul
-itself need of limits? Can we conceive its being allowed
-to increase indefinitely until the time when the nervous
-system breaks down as inevitably it must? Can we
-conceive our perpetual agitation being left without any<span class="pagenum" id="Page_340">340</span>
-limit save exhaustion, insanity, or death? The question
-answers itself. The limits to the over-excitement of
-our nerves raise one of the most serious problems of our
-epoch; a problem with a thousand different aspects,
-which involves morals as well as hygiene, politics as
-well as the intellectual life. Now sport may be one of
-these limits, if it be practised—again I borrow from M.
-de Coubertin—with calmness, “<span xml:lang="fr" lang="fr">s’il devient cet empire
-du Matin Calme d’où les deux vampires de notre
-civilisation—la hâte et la foule—sont chassés</span>”; if it
-be made, not one more in the long list of causes of
-excitement and exhaustion, but a health-giving diversion,
-a beneficent force capable of spraying the nerves
-with that divine ambrosia, now so rare and so precious—healthy
-sleep and peace of mind. No one who is
-convinced of the supreme necessity for limits can doubt
-that this conception of sport is the truest, worthiest,
-and most beneficial; indeed, the only one that is in its
-turn susceptible of a limit and runs no risk of losing itself
-in excesses,—those excesses of sport, in its quality
-of spectacle for the masses, whose brutalising and
-corrupt effects are notorious.</p>
-
-<p>A balancing force, a counterpoise to the intellectual
-excesses of a sedentary, nervous civilisation which is
-agitated by a perpetual excitement, that is what sport
-ought to be. I hasten to add that I cannot claim the
-credit for this definition, not that it is in itself a very
-striking discovery. An opponent might even say that
-it is almost a platitude; a special application of that<span class="pagenum" id="Page_341">341</span>
-principle which is as old as the hills, and which the
-Greeks expressed in their formula, μηδὲν ἅγαν, nothing
-in excess. Granted; but it is sometimes a good
-thing to repeat platitudes, for human wisdom is not
-an inexhaustible mine of ever-new principles and ideas.
-Its treasure-house is stored with platitudes, which have
-only become such because man is always requiring their
-repetition. Besides, when questions touching moral
-and social life are under discussion, the intellectual
-point of view is not by any means the most important.
-Those principles of wisdom which seem the easiest
-and simplest to announce are not those which are always
-the simplest in practice, and the easiest to carry into
-execution. μηδὲν ἅγαν—nothing in excess—has been
-to men the cry of wisdom since the beginning of time.
-Is it not the clearest and the simplest of principles?
-Need one be a profound philosopher to understand that
-moderation in the use of everything, even of good things,
-is necessary? This truth is indeed one which the
-simplest mind is capable of understanding. Yet life
-is but an eternal struggle against excesses of all sorts, to
-which man is continually tempted to give way. Why?
-Because though the precept be clear and evident, to
-apply it man has to struggle with his passions, with his
-own interests, and those of others, and with the illusions
-and errors that assail him on all sides. Consequently,
-he must be under no illusion.</p>
-
-<p>You are at one in a conception of sport which is the
-noblest and wisest possible, because it regards sport<span class="pagenum" id="Page_342">342</span>
-as a balancing force between the diverse elements of
-social life. You band together and join forces in order
-to popularise this conception. It is a useful and a wise
-task; but it will expose you to wearisome struggles, and
-you must be prepared for many a bitter disappointment.
-In every epoch, those who have wished to
-introduce equilibrium into life have had to struggle
-against this mysterious force which drives men into
-every excess. But in no epoch and in no civilisation
-perhaps has this struggle been so difficult and wearisome
-as it is in contemporary civilisation. It is a
-phenomenon which few people nowadays take clearly
-and precisely into account; but which is, nevertheless,
-the keystone of the greatest difficulties by which our
-civilisation is beset. Yes, there is no doubt about it, we
-are living at an extraordinary crisis in history. Man
-has never been so powerful, so wise, so rich, so sure of
-himself and of his future. He has dared to lift his eyes
-and gaze steadily at the sombre mystery of things,
-before which he had for so many centuries bowed his
-head in trembling. He has conquered the world and
-torn from it its most recondite treasures. He has cast
-aside all the supports which sustained our ancestors in
-their toilsome march through life—traditions, religions,
-beliefs, all the principles of unquestioning obedience.
-He had succeeded to a certain degree in conquering
-space and time. All the civilisations which preceded the
-French Revolution seem, if we compare them with ours,
-small, limited, timid, poor, and inadequate.</p>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_343">343</span></p>
-
-<p>Yet modern man does not seem to have any very
-distinct and sure consciousness of his actual greatness.
-He may be elated by an occasional fit of glowing pride,
-but as often as not he is discontented. He grumbles;
-he sincerely deplores the vices and imperfections of his
-day. A broad and deep current of pessimism flows
-through the fabulous wealth and the wonders of our
-times. Why? Because our civilisation is by the very nature
-of its constitution unable to thrive save on excesses;
-and it can thrive only on excesses because it has acquired
-so much power by overturning nearly all the limits within
-which previous civilisations had confined themselves.</p>
-
-<p>How marvellous an epic, but how disquieting in its
-novelty and its grandeur, is this gradual awakening of
-human daring and pride, of which the history of the last
-four centuries is full! For its first appearance dates
-back to the great geographical discoveries of the
-fifteenth century, and to that which was the greatest
-of all those discoveries—America.</p>
-
-<p>A few years later saw the astronomic revolution.
-Ancient thought, after long deliberation, had decided to
-enclose the universe in a confined system, with established
-limits. Copernicus took no notice of these limits,
-and launched out in thought into the infinite. The
-impression produced on the men of the sixteenth century
-by these two great events was profound. The
-bold spirits who had dared to cross the two limits considered
-insuperable on earth and in the sky had come
-back with a rich booty of land and stars.</p>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_344">344</span></p>
-
-<p>Was the world then greater and man more powerful
-than the ancients had thought, and had the ancients
-been wrong in seeking to limit the efforts of human
-genius so strictly? Gradually, during the seventeenth
-and eighteenth centuries, the effort of the human spirit
-to free itself from the ancient limits continued, increased,
-and became bolder and more methodical. Subtle and
-ingenious philosophies delivered masked but clear
-attacks on the limits which marked the bounds of
-Good and Evil, Truth and Error; on tradition, on
-century-old institutions, on authority in all its forms.
-They pretended to wish to ascertain whether the limits
-were solidly planted in the right place; but in reality
-they undermined their foundations. Little by little an
-idea crept into men’s minds, an idea which was the
-negation of all the limits within which the world had
-lived until then; an idea which was bound to upset the
-conception of social and moral life; the idea of liberty,
-applied to religion, culture, and politics. At the same
-time, by means of science and fire, man sought very
-timidly, if not to free himself from, at least to enlarge,
-the limits which nature seemed to have set to his forces.
-The strata of coal began to be discovered and
-exploited. Men set themselves to invent machines
-more complicated and more rapid than those of which
-their fathers made use; the steam-engine, the fountainhead
-of all the formidable agitation which has
-invaded the world, made its appearance; the great
-era of iron and of fire began. And lo! finally a<span class="pagenum" id="Page_345">345</span>
-formidable cataclysm, of which man had never seen
-the like in a few years, upset traditions, and wrought
-havoc amongst states, institutions, and old-established
-laws. To the strains of the <i xml:lang="fr" lang="fr">Marseillaise</i>, on
-the ruins of the Bastile, on the fields of Marengo and
-Austerlitz, the work sketched out by Columbus and
-Copernicus, continued by Galileo, Descartes, Voltaire,
-Rousseau, and Kant, was completed. Man arose,
-tore up, and overturned all the ancient limits and
-planted the new ones with his own hands, at his own
-good pleasure, not only for himself but also for the
-authorities of Heaven and earth, who had until then
-imposed their limits upon him.</p>
-
-<p>Then began the extraordinary drama of which we
-are the spectators. Rich, wise, and free, armed with
-fire and science, mistress of a large part of the earth
-and, in particular, of a continent so vast and rich as
-America, irked no longer by any limit, not by extent
-nor by weight nor by matter and its laws which it has
-conquered, thanks to discoveries and to machines, nor
-by God, whom it has banished to the infinite, itself
-usurping His earthly throne, our civilisation expanded
-in every direction, as it were, carried away by the intoxication
-of the unlimited. Man rose erect like a giant,
-to face nature and the past; and like a giant whom
-none can resist he swept on and conquered the world.</p>
-
-<p>Like a giant, indeed, but like a giant who totters at
-every step. This civilisation of ours has become so
-powerful because it has overturned all the limits; but<span class="pagenum" id="Page_346">346</span>
-just because it has overturned nearly all the limits, it
-has become increasingly difficult for it to limit itself
-in the good as well as in the bad; I mean to say, that the
-bad tends to become worse, and the good to become bad.
-If the strength of the forces of creation and initiative is
-in our epoch greater than ever it was in any previous
-epoch, the same may be said of the weakness of the forces
-of equilibrium, whose function it is to check the most
-dangerous exaggerations and excesses. What an
-interesting comparison might be made between the
-present and the past from this point of view; and how
-many instances could be cited in proof of this assertion!
-I shall instance just one, a simple and homely,
-but clear, one. Once delivered from all the bonds which
-limited his efforts of yore, man has succeeded in the
-last century in creating an abundance of material
-goods such as the world had never thought possible
-even when it dreamed of the Terrestrial Paradise, the
-Golden Age, and the Garden of the Hesperides; all of
-them myths in which man had been pleased, during
-centuries of the life of struggle, to objectify his most
-ardent desires. It is all very well for men of the present
-day to complain that life is difficult and full of struggles.
-Those who know the difficulties which beset preceding
-centuries will feel a strong temptation to laugh at their
-complaints. The modern world has contrived abundance
-in everything; in the necessities of life, such as
-bread, and in things which become very dangerous
-when they are over-abundant, like alcoholic drinks,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_347">347</span>
-tobacco, and all stimulants. Many are the reproaches
-hurled against our epoch on the score of the increase in
-alcoholism; many are the remedies devised for this evil.
-But would not the only and the simplest remedy be
-that adopted by our ancestors, the limitation of the
-production of liquors? The masses would no longer
-be able to poison themselves when the quantity of
-these liquors was scarcely sufficient—as it used to be—for
-the requirements of a moderate consumption.
-The world, on the contrary, will continue to get gloriously
-drunk, so long as the production of wine, beer,
-and spirits increases. Now why is it that this, the
-only efficacious remedy, is just the one which our
-epoch cannot bring itself to apply? Why do we see
-everywhere governments taking measures of more or
-less efficacy against alcoholism and at the same time
-contributing, directly or indirectly, to the increase in
-the production of alcoholic drinks?</p>
-
-<p>The reason is, that nothing is more difficult for our
-civilisation than to impose a limit on anything. Its
-impetus carries it too far in everything. It is almost
-a law of its constitution. We have, to a great extent,
-lost the sense of just measure, because we have weakened
-or destroyed nearly all the authorities and moral
-forces which used to make the limits respected. Our
-greatness and our power are partly due to disequilibrium;
-and often enough we are called on to pay the
-tragic penalty for this at the moment when we least
-expect the call.</p>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_348">348</span></p>
-
-<p>This is, however, a long digression, and you may with
-reason ask me to return to the matter which interests
-us. I have not lost sight of it; for this digression has a
-very close connection with our subject.</p>
-
-<p>This epoch which misuses everything, misuses and
-will misuse sport. It will make it—it has already
-begun to make it—one more of the elements of excitement,
-of competition, and of exhaustion, already alas!
-only too numerous. No illusions are possible on this
-score. It might even be said that sport is one of the
-things of which our epoch will probably make the
-greatest misuse. History justifies us in this fear, for
-it proves to us that even those civilisations, like the
-Greek and Roman, which succeeded in limiting themselves
-in everything else, misused games. Is it likely
-that our civilisation, which misuses toilsome activities
-like work, will easily preserve a just measure in amusements?
-Besides, you have only to look round you to
-see interests forming groups, coalitions, and organisations
-for the purpose of exploiting, in this field also,
-the morbid need for excitement which has taken hold
-of the masses; their desire for amusements and distractions
-and even their incorrigible weakness for
-games of chance. Those, then, who wish to purge sport
-of its elements of haste and crowd, to transform it—I
-borrow once more M. de Coubertin’s happy phrase—into
-the “Empire du Matin Calme,” will have a
-singularly difficult task before them. If, however, the
-task is difficult, it is for that all the nobler. The<span class="pagenum" id="Page_349">349</span>
-modern world has need, great and urgent need, of balance,
-measure, and harmony, if it is not to run the risk
-of being stifled by the excess of its energy. Do not let
-yourselves be deceived by its assurance, its pride, the
-blind confidence in its powers which it affects, the
-haughty challenge it so often throws to the humble
-wisdom of past generations. We are richer, wiser, more
-powerful than were our grandfathers. But because we
-have discovered America and invented railways we
-have not become demi-gods; we are still only men.
-All the weaknesses of human nature which the moralists
-of olden times discovered and analysed so subtly still
-subsist in us, and still distract us; we must pay nature,
-the great equaliser, the price for the advantages secured
-to us by the sum of the work of preceding generations;
-and many are the forms in which that payment is made.
-Nervous illnesses, insanity, and suicides are on the
-increase. Sterility is spreading, especially in the
-peoples and countries that have been most highly
-favoured by the development of modern civilisation.</p>
-
-<p>A discontent as deep as it is unreasonable seems to
-pervade the world, with each improvement in the
-conditions of every class. One might say that man has
-become insatiable. The more blessings are heaped
-upon him, the more he complains. The more he
-possesses, the more he thinks himself poor and needy.
-The fewer are the causes for grief and the dangers
-around him, the more wretched he feels. These
-apparent paradoxes, these inexplicable contradictions<span class="pagenum" id="Page_350">350</span>
-are only the warnings life utters to remind men of the
-μηδὲν ἅγαν of ancient wisdom. The modern world suffers
-from the excesses to which it abandons itself,
-even if it will not acknowledge this fact. Those who
-try to recall the modern world to a more harmonious
-ideal of life do it a service whose usefulness is most
-strikingly proved by the attitude of resentment it
-assumes towards their efforts.</p>
-
-<p>Ladies and Gentlemen: I feel somewhat ashamed
-that my contribution to your work must be merely
-these few general considerations. Dissertations on
-the ends to be aimed at are easy enough to concoct,
-but the task is apt to be a theoretical one
-of little enough utility. The important thing in all
-the great social problems is the means of attaining
-those ends. That is the point upon which all our
-efforts, all our intelligence, all our wills, must converge.
-I cannot be of any use to you in that, by
-reason of my incompetence. I can only attend this
-congress as an onlooker anxious to learn, come not to
-purvey information but to convey it away. I must
-then confine myself at the conclusion of my speech to
-wishing your task and your labours all the success
-which your energy, your enthusiasm, and your faith
-deserve. But this wish of mine, though sterile in
-itself, owing to my inability to take an active part in
-your work, is none the less cordial. By birth, by
-natural tendencies, and by education, I belong to a
-culture which has always tended to harmony, moderation,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_351">351</span>
-and equilibrium. I have passed a portion of my
-life in studying the ancient civilisations which created
-so many beautiful and profound things because they
-succeeded in limiting themselves. I have visited and
-studied also those vast new civilisations on the other
-side of the Atlantic, which seem to be aiming at
-the realisation of the perfect type of the unlimited
-civilisation.</p>
-
-<p>It is not possible to have been born in Italy, to have
-studied ancient civilisations, and to have examined
-at first hand the tendencies of modern civilisation in
-Europe and America, without being convinced that our
-epoch is allowing itself to be seduced by too material
-and gross a conception of progress. Progress cannot be
-merely the accumulation of wealth, accelerated by the
-inventions and great discoveries of science, nor the
-hurried transformation of everything, the perpetual
-change which is the mania of our epoch. There is,
-there must be, another conception, more lofty than
-this conception of progress; a conception of progress as
-the accumulated effort of generations. Is it not true
-that each generation creates forms of beauty, and
-discovers new truths and virtues? Can we not say that
-generations really do show progress, if they succeed in
-preserving the creations of preceding epochs, and in
-erecting on them as a basis more complex and elevated
-creations of their own?</p>
-
-<p>Often and often, reflecting on the differences between
-the ancient world and our epoch, have I said to myself<span class="pagenum" id="Page_352">352</span>
-that the history of the world would be able to chronicle
-a great step forward on the day that we succeeded in
-uniting in modern sport the æsthetic sense of the
-Greeks, the modesty and decency for which Christianity
-is responsible, and the democratic, practical,
-and active spirit of our epoch. Is that simply the
-dream of an ignoramus who does not know what is
-possible and what is not? You may say so. But if
-your congress can bring our civilisation any nearer to
-this ideal, it will have done something for real progress,
-a work which will merit the approbation of all those
-who wish to see man’s every effort concentrated on the
-betterment of the spiritual life. I give you then, my
-good wishes for your success in your efforts in this
-direction; and I hope that you will not take my good
-wishes amiss, even though they come from a writer
-who is not competent to appraise at its true value the
-full worth of your noble efforts.</p>
-
-<p class="p2 center">THE END</p>
-
-<div class="chapter"><div class="transnote">
-<h2 class="nobreak" id="Transcribers_Notes">Transcriber’s Notes</h2>
-
-<p>Punctuation, hyphenation, and spelling were made
-consistent when a predominant preference was found
-in the original book; otherwise they were not changed.</p>
-
-<p>Misspellings of non-English words have been retained.</p>
-
-<p>Simple typographical errors were corrected; unbalanced
-quotation marks were remedied when the change was
-obvious, and otherwise left unbalanced.</p>
-</div></div>
-
-<div style='display:block; margin-top:4em'>*** END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK ANCIENT ROME AND MODERN AMERICA; ***</div>
-<div style='text-align:left'>
-
-<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'>
-Updated editions will replace the previous one&#8212;the old editions will
-be renamed.
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'>
-Creating the works from print editions not protected by U.S. copyright
-law means that no one owns a United States copyright in these works,
-so the Foundation (and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United
-States without permission and without paying copyright
-royalties. Special rules, set forth in the General Terms of Use part
-of this license, apply to copying and distributing Project
-Gutenberg&#8482; electronic works to protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG&#8482;
-concept and trademark. Project Gutenberg is a registered trademark,
-and may not be used if you charge for an eBook, except by following
-the terms of the trademark license, including paying royalties for use
-of the Project Gutenberg trademark. If you do not charge anything for
-copies of this eBook, complying with the trademark license is very
-easy. You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose such as creation
-of derivative works, reports, performances and research. Project
-Gutenberg eBooks may be modified and printed and given away--you may
-do practically ANYTHING in the United States with eBooks not protected
-by U.S. copyright law. Redistribution is subject to the trademark
-license, especially commercial redistribution.
-</div>
-
-<div style='margin:0.83em 0; font-size:1.1em; text-align:center'>START: FULL LICENSE<br />
-<span style='font-size:smaller'>THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE<br />
-PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK</span>
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'>
-To protect the Project Gutenberg&#8482; mission of promoting the free
-distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work
-(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase &#8220;Project
-Gutenberg&#8221;), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full
-Project Gutenberg&#8482; License available with this file or online at
-www.gutenberg.org/license.
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block; font-size:1.1em; margin:1em 0; font-weight:bold'>
-Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project Gutenberg&#8482; electronic works
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'>
-1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg&#8482;
-electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to
-and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property
-(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all
-the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or
-destroy all copies of Project Gutenberg&#8482; electronic works in your
-possession. If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a
-Project Gutenberg&#8482; electronic work and you do not agree to be bound
-by the terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the person
-or entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8.
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'>
-1.B. &#8220;Project Gutenberg&#8221; is a registered trademark. It may only be
-used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who
-agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few
-things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg&#8482; electronic works
-even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See
-paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project
-Gutenberg&#8482; electronic works if you follow the terms of this
-agreement and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg&#8482;
-electronic works. See paragraph 1.E below.
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'>
-1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation (&#8220;the
-Foundation&#8221; or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection
-of Project Gutenberg&#8482; electronic works. Nearly all the individual
-works in the collection are in the public domain in the United
-States. If an individual work is unprotected by copyright law in the
-United States and you are located in the United States, we do not
-claim a right to prevent you from copying, distributing, performing,
-displaying or creating derivative works based on the work as long as
-all references to Project Gutenberg are removed. Of course, we hope
-that you will support the Project Gutenberg&#8482; mission of promoting
-free access to electronic works by freely sharing Project Gutenberg&#8482;
-works in compliance with the terms of this agreement for keeping the
-Project Gutenberg&#8482; name associated with the work. You can easily
-comply with the terms of this agreement by keeping this work in the
-same format with its attached full Project Gutenberg&#8482; License when
-you share it without charge with others.
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'>
-1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern
-what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are
-in a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States,
-check the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this
-agreement before downloading, copying, displaying, performing,
-distributing or creating derivative works based on this work or any
-other Project Gutenberg&#8482; work. The Foundation makes no
-representations concerning the copyright status of any work in any
-country other than the United States.
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'>
-1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg:
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'>
-1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other
-immediate access to, the full Project Gutenberg&#8482; License must appear
-prominently whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg&#8482; work (any work
-on which the phrase &#8220;Project Gutenberg&#8221; appears, or with which the
-phrase &#8220;Project Gutenberg&#8221; is associated) is accessed, displayed,
-performed, viewed, copied or distributed:
-</div>
-
-<blockquote>
- <div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'>
- This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and most
- other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions
- whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms
- of the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online
- at <a href="https://www.gutenberg.org">www.gutenberg.org</a>. If you
- are not located in the United States, you will have to check the laws
- of the country where you are located before using this eBook.
- </div>
-</blockquote>
-
-<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'>
-1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg&#8482; electronic work is
-derived from texts not protected by U.S. copyright law (does not
-contain a notice indicating that it is posted with permission of the
-copyright holder), the work can be copied and distributed to anyone in
-the United States without paying any fees or charges. If you are
-redistributing or providing access to a work with the phrase &#8220;Project
-Gutenberg&#8221; associated with or appearing on the work, you must comply
-either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 or
-obtain permission for the use of the work and the Project Gutenberg&#8482;
-trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'>
-1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg&#8482; electronic work is posted
-with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution
-must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any
-additional terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms
-will be linked to the Project Gutenberg&#8482; License for all works
-posted with the permission of the copyright holder found at the
-beginning of this work.
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'>
-1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg&#8482;
-License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this
-work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg&#8482;.
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'>
-1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this
-electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without
-prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with
-active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project
-Gutenberg&#8482; License.
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'>
-1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary,
-compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including
-any word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access
-to or distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg&#8482; work in a format
-other than &#8220;Plain Vanilla ASCII&#8221; or other format used in the official
-version posted on the official Project Gutenberg&#8482; website
-(www.gutenberg.org), you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense
-to the user, provide a copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means
-of obtaining a copy upon request, of the work in its original &#8220;Plain
-Vanilla ASCII&#8221; or other form. Any alternate format must include the
-full Project Gutenberg&#8482; License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1.
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'>
-1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying,
-performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg&#8482; works
-unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'>
-1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing
-access to or distributing Project Gutenberg&#8482; electronic works
-provided that:
-</div>
-
-<div style='margin-left:0.7em;'>
- <div style='text-indent:-0.7em'>
- &#8226; You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from
- the use of Project Gutenberg&#8482; works calculated using the method
- you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is owed
- to the owner of the Project Gutenberg&#8482; trademark, but he has
- agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the Project
- Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments must be paid
- within 60 days following each date on which you prepare (or are
- legally required to prepare) your periodic tax returns. Royalty
- payments should be clearly marked as such and sent to the Project
- Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the address specified in
- Section 4, &#8220;Information about donations to the Project Gutenberg
- Literary Archive Foundation.&#8221;
- </div>
-
- <div style='text-indent:-0.7em'>
- &#8226; You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies
- you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he
- does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg&#8482;
- License. You must require such a user to return or destroy all
- copies of the works possessed in a physical medium and discontinue
- all use of and all access to other copies of Project Gutenberg&#8482;
- works.
- </div>
-
- <div style='text-indent:-0.7em'>
- &#8226; You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of
- any money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the
- electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days of
- receipt of the work.
- </div>
-
- <div style='text-indent:-0.7em'>
- &#8226; You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free
- distribution of Project Gutenberg&#8482; works.
- </div>
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'>
-1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project
-Gutenberg&#8482; electronic work or group of works on different terms than
-are set forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing
-from the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the manager of
-the Project Gutenberg&#8482; trademark. Contact the Foundation as set
-forth in Section 3 below.
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'>
-1.F.
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'>
-1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable
-effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread
-works not protected by U.S. copyright law in creating the Project
-Gutenberg&#8482; collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg&#8482;
-electronic works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may
-contain &#8220;Defects,&#8221; such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate
-or corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other
-intellectual property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or
-other medium, a computer virus, or computer codes that damage or
-cannot be read by your equipment.
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'>
-1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the &#8220;Right
-of Replacement or Refund&#8221; described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project
-Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project
-Gutenberg&#8482; trademark, and any other party distributing a Project
-Gutenberg&#8482; electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all
-liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal
-fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT
-LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE
-PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE
-TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE
-LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR
-INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH
-DAMAGE.
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'>
-1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a
-defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can
-receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a
-written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you
-received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium
-with your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you
-with the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in
-lieu of a refund. If you received the work electronically, the person
-or entity providing it to you may choose to give you a second
-opportunity to receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If
-the second copy is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing
-without further opportunities to fix the problem.
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'>
-1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth
-in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you &#8216;AS-IS&#8217;, WITH NO
-OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT
-LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE.
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'>
-1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied
-warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of
-damages. If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement
-violates the law of the state applicable to this agreement, the
-agreement shall be interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or
-limitation permitted by the applicable state law. The invalidity or
-unenforceability of any provision of this agreement shall not void the
-remaining provisions.
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'>
-1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the
-trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone
-providing copies of Project Gutenberg&#8482; electronic works in
-accordance with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the
-production, promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg&#8482;
-electronic works, harmless from all liability, costs and expenses,
-including legal fees, that arise directly or indirectly from any of
-the following which you do or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this
-or any Project Gutenberg&#8482; work, (b) alteration, modification, or
-additions or deletions to any Project Gutenberg&#8482; work, and (c) any
-Defect you cause.
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block; font-size:1.1em; margin:1em 0; font-weight:bold'>
-Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg&#8482;
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'>
-Project Gutenberg&#8482; is synonymous with the free distribution of
-electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of
-computers including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It
-exists because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations
-from people in all walks of life.
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'>
-Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the
-assistance they need are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg&#8482;&#8217;s
-goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg&#8482; collection will
-remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project
-Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure
-and permanent future for Project Gutenberg&#8482; and future
-generations. To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary
-Archive Foundation and how your efforts and donations can help, see
-Sections 3 and 4 and the Foundation information page at www.gutenberg.org.
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block; font-size:1.1em; margin:1em 0; font-weight:bold'>
-Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'>
-The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non-profit
-501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the
-state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal
-Revenue Service. The Foundation&#8217;s EIN or federal tax identification
-number is 64-6221541. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg Literary
-Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent permitted by
-U.S. federal laws and your state&#8217;s laws.
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'>
-The Foundation&#8217;s business office is located at 809 North 1500 West,
-Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887. Email contact links and up
-to date contact information can be found at the Foundation&#8217;s website
-and official page at www.gutenberg.org/contact
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block; font-size:1.1em; margin:1em 0; font-weight:bold'>
-Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'>
-Project Gutenberg&#8482; depends upon and cannot survive without widespread
-public support and donations to carry out its mission of
-increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be
-freely distributed in machine-readable form accessible by the widest
-array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations
-($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt
-status with the IRS.
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'>
-The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating
-charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United
-States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a
-considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up
-with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations
-where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To SEND
-DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any particular state
-visit <a href="https://www.gutenberg.org/donate/">www.gutenberg.org/donate</a>.
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'>
-While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we
-have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition
-against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who
-approach us with offers to donate.
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'>
-International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make
-any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from
-outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff.
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'>
-Please check the Project Gutenberg web pages for current donation
-methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other
-ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations. To
-donate, please visit: www.gutenberg.org/donate
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block; font-size:1.1em; margin:1em 0; font-weight:bold'>
-Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg&#8482; electronic works
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'>
-Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project
-Gutenberg&#8482; concept of a library of electronic works that could be
-freely shared with anyone. For forty years, he produced and
-distributed Project Gutenberg&#8482; eBooks with only a loose network of
-volunteer support.
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'>
-Project Gutenberg&#8482; eBooks are often created from several printed
-editions, all of which are confirmed as not protected by copyright in
-the U.S. unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not
-necessarily keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper
-edition.
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'>
-Most people start at our website which has the main PG search
-facility: <a href="https://www.gutenberg.org">www.gutenberg.org</a>.
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'>
-This website includes information about Project Gutenberg&#8482;,
-including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary
-Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to
-subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks.
-</div>
-
-</div>
diff --git a/old/66901-h/images/cover.jpg b/old/66901-h/images/cover.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 65876fc..0000000
--- a/old/66901-h/images/cover.jpg
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ